text:
Designated marksman

A designated marksman (DM), squad advanced marksman (AD) or squad designated marksman (SDM) is a military marksman role in an infantry squad. The term sniper was used in Soviet doctrine although the soldiers using the Dragunov SVD were the first to use a specifically designed designated marksman rifle. The analogous role in the Israel Defense Forces is sharpshooter.

The DM's role is to supplement the attached squad by providing accurate fire upon enemy targets at distances up to 600 m. Due to the need for repeated effective fire, the DM is usually equipped with a scoped semi-automatic rifle called a designated marksman rifle (DMR). Like snipers, DMs are trained in scouting and precise shooting, but unlike the more specialized "true" sniper (who often operate independently), they operate as an intrinsic part of an infantry fireteam and are tasked to lay down accurate support fire at valuable targets as per tactical necessity, thus extending the reach of the fireteam.

The growth of the DM rifle can be attributed to two main influences; the near-universal adoption of intermediate cartridges, such as 5.56×45mm, 5.45×39mm, and 7.62×39mm for standard service rifles, which limit the typical effective range of a standard infantryman to within 200 - 300 m; and the increasing specialization over the last 15 years (mid-2000s to late 2010s) of Western sniper rifles and their employment of more powerful rounds, such as .300 Winchester Magnum and .338 Lapua Magnum, which are more suitable for targets beyond 600 m. These two influences have left a gap in the firepower of the rifle platoon that a more accurate optic-equipped service rifle derivative can usefully fulfill, especially in theaters such as Afghanistan where the shortcomings of standard 5.56mm service rifles at ranges over 300 meters became apparent.

DM/sniper differences
The DM role differs significantly from that of a specially trained sniper. A sniper is a specialist highly trained in fieldcraft, who carries out a range of ISTAR-specific missions independent of others, and more specialized than standard infantry tasks. In contrast, a DM is a soldier who has received additional marksmanship training. Within a fireteam, the DM's role is to provide an additional capability to the infantry platoon, which is the ability to engage targets at greater ranges than the other members of the squad or section.

The DM operates as an integral member of the infantry platoon, providing a niche capability contributing to the overall firepower of the platoon in the same way as a grenadier with a rifle-mounted grenade launcher, allowing the team to engage more numerous targets and vehicles; or the automatic rifleman who employs the squad/section machine gun to lay down suppressing fire for area denial to the enemy. The DM weapon provides a capability to the infantry platoon in the shape of increased precision at a greater range than that provided by the standard infantry rifle, by virtue of its sighting system and/or larger caliber. By comparison, the sniper role is much more specialized, with very comprehensive selection, training and equipment.

Snipers are ordinarily equipped with specialized, purpose-built bolt-action or semi-automatic sniper rifles or anti-materiel rifles; while DMs are often equipped with accurized battle rifles or assault rifles fitted with optical sights and heavy barrels.

Snipers are mainly employed for targets at ranges from 600 m up to more than 2000 m. In the UK, US, and other Western countries over the last 15 years, sniper rifles chambered for standard military calibers, such as 7.62×51mm, have been replaced with those that employ larger, more specialized rounds, such as .300 Winchester Magnum or .338 Lapua Magnum, which give better accuracy at longer ranges than the standard military rifle calibers. An example of this is the British Army's replacement of the Accuracy International L96A1 in 7.62×51mm with the similar but larger and more powerful Accuracy International L115A3 rifle chambered in .338 Lapua Magnum.

DMs are utilized for targets at ranges between approximately 300 - 600 m using a rifle chambered with standard-issue rifle ammunition, usually either 5.56×45mm or 7.62×51mm. While snipers often take a fixed strategic position and camouflage themselves (e.g. with a Ghillie suit), a DM will tactically move with his unit and is otherwise equipped in the same way as other members of the infantry platoon.

Rifles
The designated marksman is intended to fill the gap between the typical infantry rifle and longer-range sniper rifles. The typical service rifle is intended for use at ranges up to a maximum of 300 meters, while sniper rifles are generally optimized for ranges of 600 meters and greater. Designated marksman rifles are designed to fill this gap, typically being employed at ranges of 300 - 600 m.

In some cases, the designated marksman rifle is simply an accurized version of the standard service rifle, such as the Mk 12 SPR (which is built on an M16 platform), while in other cases the rifle is a larger caliber rifle design, such as the British L129A1, Soviet SVD, or US rifles based on the M14, AR-10, or HK417.

Whether a modified existing service rifle or a specific design, the DM rifle will be chambered for a round already used in the infantry battalion, such as 5.56×45mm or 7.62×51mm, and it will retain semi-automatic firing capability with a magazine capacity of 10, 20, or 30 rounds, depending on the firearm in question.

Sidearm
Designated marksmen will carry whichever service pistol is specified in their unit's TOE for their billet or Military Occupational Specialty (MOS), if one is specified or available at all.

Australian Army

A typical Australian Army fireteam of four soldiers will include a scout employing an F88S Austeyr (5.56 NATO) fitted with an enhanced optic device, usually either an ACOG or ELCAN C79. Additionally, 7.62 mm marksman rifles (SR-25s) are employed by the maneuver support teams in the platoon. However, HK417 rifles have been procured by the Army as a substitute for the F88S during operations in Afghanistan and possibly thereafter. The SASR also uses the Mk 14 EBR amongst its four-man infantry sections.

British Army
Recently, the L86A2 Light Support Weapon was used in the designated marksman role due to its longer barrel compared to the standard L85A2 service rifle, which gives an increased range of up to 1000 m (1094 yd) while also capable of giving accurate automatic fire; the automatic fire role is now usually delivered by the Minimi. The Parachute Regiment, Royal Marines and United Kingdom Special Forces also use the HK417 rifle in the designated marksman role.

On 28 December 2009, the UK Ministry of Defence announced the adoption of the L129A1 Sharpshooter rifle made by Lewis Machine and Tool Company of the US for use as a semi-automatic DM rifle, firing the 7.62×51mm NATO round, providing accurate fire of up to 1000m as an urgent operational requirement (UOR) in Afghanistan.

Indian Army
The Indian Army uses a locally manufactured licensed variant of the SVD Dragunov in the Designated Marksman role. The Dragunov is used in conjunction with the INSAS family of weapons to give flexibility and striking power, in short to mid range firefights, to Indian Army infantry units engaged with opposing forces.

Israel Defense Forces (IDF)
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) implemented significant changes to sharpshooting doctrine in the 1990s. Doctrine, training program, and courseware were completely rewritten and snipers were issued the bolt-action M24 SWS instead of the M14 rifle. A major change was the introduction of a new battle profession – the designated marksman (קלע סער, "kala sa'ar" in Hebrew) – intended to improve the accuracy and firepower of an infantry platoon and compromise between the role of a sniper and an assault rifleman. These soldiers were generally called "squad snipers" to describe their role. They are armed with SR-25 rifle and sharpshooter variations of the IMI Tavor TAR-21 (STAR-21), M16A2E3 and M4 carbine.

United States Marine Corps
The U.S. Marines use M14s that have been rebuilt at Marine Corps Base Quantico and designated as Designated Marksman Rifles, which are being replaced by the M39 Enhanced Marksman Rifle. The Corps also utilizes two different adaptations of the M16 assault rifle: the Squad Advanced Marksman Rifle (SAM-R), and the Mk 12 Mod 1 SPR. They also utilize the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle.

United States Army
The United States Army 101st Airborne Division recognized the need for a Squad Designated Marksman when they encountered fires beyond the 300-600m range. In 2004, they began issuing M14s to specially trained soldiers for Designated Marksman work. The 82nd Airborne Division deployed with designated marksmen, trained on the M-4 using ACOGs with great success out to 600m, some 82nd Airborne units were issued M14s. The 3rd Infantry Division saw limited use of a modified M16, which was accurized in a manner similar to the U.S. Marines SAM-R, unofficially designated the AMU Squad Designated Marksman Rifle (SDM-R). This rifle was designed for engagements up to 1000m.

The U.S. Army DM also uses the predecessor of the M16 rifle, the M14, in certain infantry line units. These are commonly equipped with Leupold optics, a Sage stock and are designated the M14SE Crazy Horse.

United States Navy
The United States Navy SEAL Teams employs SDM rifles in roughly the same manner as the Marine Corps and Army, although there is no specific "Designated Marksman" role in a SEAL platoon. Known used weapons include, but are not limited to, the Mk 14 Mod 0 Enhanced Battle Rifle, M110 Semi-Automatic Sniper System, MK11/SR-25, the MK12 Mod X, the "SEAL Recon Rifle" and in some cases even regular M14 Rifles fitted with optical scopes.

The United States Navy Naval Expeditionary Combat Command employ Expeditionary Designated Marksman to support COCOM / DOD tasking as required. Known used weapons are the Mk 14 Mod 0 Enhanced Battle Rifle or M4 Rifle with fitted optical scopes. Previously, Designated Marksman assigned to NECC's Helicopter, Visit, Search, and Seizure teams were equipped with the M21 (SWS) w/ Leupold Mk4 LR/T after training with the USMC, US Army, and training organizations to deploy the rifle from various platforms (helicopter, ship, ground).

Soviet snipers
Although referred to as "snipers", the Soviet Union and its allies have since World War II employed specially-equipped and trained "sharpshooting" soldiers at a section ("squad") and platoon level to increase the range of their section to 1000 m. This is commonly accepted as the first example of what came to be known as a designated marksman as opposed to a true sniper.

Since 1963, these soldiers have been equipped with the Dragunov SVD rifle that shares all the characteristics typical of a designated marksman rifle (Semi-automatic fire, telescopic sight, chambered for standard military rifle cartridge).

title: Designated marksman


text:
JPATS

JPATS may refer to:

 * Joint Primary Aircraft Training System
 * Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System

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

title: JPATS


text:
Talk:ACT UP

Name
Kimiko, you recently edited the page so that all "ACT UP"s read "ACT-UP", which I've seen to be the most common spelling (in the news and such), but the ACT UP/New York site does not use this spelling. What do we do?-Hyacinth 20:35, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Actions introduction
I think the following paragraph should just be deleted, because it's obvious and to the extent that it's not obvious it's unencyclopedic. Please reinsert with explanation if you disagree.

 * Actions
 * Because ACT UP and its affinity groups organized so many diverse actions in a relatively short period of time, it is difficult and perhaps counter-productive to classify them in any particular way. As such, the actions are presented chronologically with no particular weight given. Accounts of the actions are drawn from Douglas Crimp's history of ACT UP as well as the ACT UP Oral History Project.

Aroundthewayboy 15:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Article organization
So, I just added "Stop the Church" under actions - I think this is an appropriate place for it b/c it was a major action taken by the organization. Now, though, there's duplicate info in this new section and "Criticisms and controversy". Perhaps, the best bet is to merge info from the Criticisms section into the Stop the Church section and add new, more inclusive text to the Criticisms section, as that section currently really only speaks of criticism of the one action. What do ya think? Zue Jay (talk)  20:09, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Some material is repeated, and avoiding/minimizing a "Criticisms" section or the like, while incorporating the relevant content, is a good thing. I would try to incorporate other criticisms into other sections in an integrative fashion.  Baccyak4H (Yak!) 19:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I just did this; the protest is coming back into the public eye because of the Moscow Pussy Riot trial, where, alas, they are facing a lot more than community service.

Critisism
The criticism section mentions ACT-UP saying something about some protest with a wafer, yet none is mentioned. 72.93.215.79 (talk) 02:57, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I am confused as to why we do not have an established section of this article that gives some background knowledge on Larry Kramer's creation of and later involvement with ACT UP instead of just a small portion in the introduction.Cwarner-haag (talk) 03:14, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Life site news
I don't think Lifesitenews qualifies as a reliable source, and I can find no other source for the claim that activists threw used condoms at the altar. Plus, it's a throw-away line in an unrelated article almost twenty years later, so I’ve taken that out and replaced it. -- Irn (talk) 04:33, 2 February 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://williamapercy.com/pub-Outing.htm
 * In Don't ask, don't tell on 2011-03-17 13:39:20, 404 Not Found
 * In Ernst Burchard on 2011-03-18 08:26:11, 404 Not Found
 * In Gerry Studds on 2011-03-19 23:23:39, 404 Not Found
 * In Gerry Studds on 2011-03-22 05:01:29, 404 Not Found
 * In Harden–Eulenburg Affair on 2011-03-22 21:23:19, 404 Not Found
 * In AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power on 2011-06-20 00:33:18, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:34, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

longevity drugs as part of treatment
There are published studies of longevity improving drugs. Deprenyl, metformin, resveratrol, rapamycin There are also a number of popular articles on longevity science at Scientific American.

What is the right way to suggest to the Treatment Action Group that all hiv persons should be prescribed a longevizing drug as a standard part of their treatment. The "psychology" of this is that if hiv changes lifespan a longevity drug restores full lifespan as a kind of treatment right.

Some longevity drugs that have been published as effective at two or more mammal species. The medical rationale to prescribe experimental drugs that are unapproved is they they may save a persons life. The many years of life saved per person on a longevity drug then may have similar "quantity of life years gained" that goes with a person being cured of cancer, justifying the prescription of only partially researched preFDA longevity compounds to hiv patients.

further, the voluntary use of longevity drugs among hiv persons screens these drugs to benefit everybody.

from a wikipedia perspective the Treatment Action Group should have an online link to treatmentactiongroup.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.223.120.163 (talk) 21:50, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

"Stop the Church"
I've redirected the Stop the Church article here for now. This isn't meant to be a vote against having it, just that it's not big enough at the moment to be worth bothering. The version I redirected, and some previous versions, have a few minor bits in them that are unsourced but perhaps worth looking into at some point, but for now I think it's more productive just to look for new sources directly. Wnt (talk) 16:23, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Requested 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: Move. Cúchullain t/ c 16:27, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power → ACT UP – Act up/ACT UP already redirect here and most sources refer to the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power almost exclusively as ACT UP, sometimes not even mentioning the backronym. Individual chapters are named ACT UP/x, making it the WP:COMMONNAME. Relisted. BDD (talk) 21:37, 19 September 2012 (UTC)   Gobōnobo  + c 13:03, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose per MOS:TM and WP:ALLCAPS. The current title is in use (not creating a new one), so I see no reason to move. --Labattblueboy (talk) 13:50, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:COMMONNAME. The ostensible name "AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power" is merely a backronym, and is obscure and unfamiliar.  Similar to Patriot Act, where we have the title at the name that is in actual use, not the highly contrived backronym "Uniting (and) Strengthening America (by) Providing Appropriate Tools Required (to) Intercept (and) Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001" or "USA PATRIOT". — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 16:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * There is nothing in the article to indicate that this is a backronym. Can you provide a reliable source to this affect?--Labattblueboy (talk) 17:26, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Seems self-evident. Regardless, it's not worth debating this point, since the actual policy-based argument is WP:COMMONNAME. In particular, the common name is well-known and official name is highly obscure. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 22:09, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * There may be cases where a name is self evident, this however is not one of them. No shortage or news hits on the current title and a google search of the current title, with wikipedia removed (search term "AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power" -wikipedia) produces 180K hits. No doubt ACT UP may produce more hits but its still an acronym, still in all caps. Further, We only use an acronym for a page name when its almost exclusively known by that name (WP:ACRONYMTITLE), and that's obviously not the case here.--Labattblueboy (talk) 02:26, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I am not saying "the name is self-evident" (whatever that means), only that it seems like an obvious backronym. You are misquoting WP:ACRONYMTITLE, which does not say we should only use an acronym for a title if it is almost exclusively known by that title. Nothing there is inconsistent with WP:COMMONNAME. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 05:07, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose as long as Act-up and ACT-UP both redirect here I see no reason to change this international group's title. And I don't know where the backronym is coming from unless the claim, which isn't presently in the article, is that "ACT UP" preceded AIDS Coalition To Unleash Power, which I think is false. My understanding is that a call went forth to create a direct action group and by consensus the title was chosen knowing the acronym would be used by the media and at events. In reporting I generally see both presented. In short renaming is a very bad idea that does not serve our readers. Insomesia (talk) 17:40, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "the title was chosen knowing the acronym would be used" is exactly the meaning of backronym. --JBL (talk) 15:13, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe backronyms can be thought of at the same time, this doesn't supersede the name of the group. Insomesia (talk) 21:49, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

 * Support as the common name -- it's self-evident that this is the name that was intended to be used, and indeed it's the one by which the organization is commonly known. --JBL (talk) 15:18, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
 * No, the name of the group has always been the AIDS Coalition To Unleash Power, the acronym has also been used since the beginning. I see no benefit in this move at all, especially as the two common acronyms already direct here. Insomesia (talk) 21:49, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Support as the most common and widely known name of the organization. Yes, it is an initialism but ACT UP itself usually used/uses ACT UP and not AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power. FWIW I've had a look in about a dozen books I own that are used across Wikipedia as reliable sources and none of them refer to ACT UP by the spelled out name on first usage, and that includes ACT UP co-founder Larry Kramer in his Reports from the Holocaust. Buck Winston (talk) 19:32, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.

Removed some sourced text
I just removed the following sourced text, added by another editor:

 * Eric Pollard, founder of the Washington D.C. branch of ACT UP, asserted that "some of us" in ACT UP used Adolph Hitler's autobiography Mein Kampf as a "working model" for their protests and direct actions.

It was not on-topic in the section "Structure of ACT-UP". I'm also skeptical about including a citation like this: why source to what seems to be essentially an attack piece rather than to the original Blade op-ed (which unfortunately I can't find online)? Also, does anyone happen to know if Linacre Quarterly is a WP:RS? (I've not heard of it before, and I was curious whether it's been discussed anywhere.) --JBL (talk) 21:03, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on ACT UP. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060221073017/http://williamapercy.com:80/pub-Outing.htm to http://williamapercy.com/pub-Outing.htm

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 05:10, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on ACT UP. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151017032241/http://www.glhalloffame.org/index.pl?page=inductees&todo=year to http://www.glhalloffame.org/index.pl?page=inductees&todo=year
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090117015600/http://www.sfweekly.com/content/printVersion/306128 to http://www.sfweekly.com/content/printVersion/306128
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://gay.com/news/article.html?2003%2F08%2F06%2F1

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Anarchist/leaderless
In a paragraph, it is said that ACTUP was "organized as a leaderless and effectively anarchist network." This is not true and it contradicts the next paragraph which says "Leadership changed hands frequently and suddenly", so I have added a citation needed tag. 184.8.99.138 (talk) 09:01, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * And did you read any of the words between those two sentences, which give a detailed description of the leadership structure, including a complete resolution of this contradiction? --JBL (talk) 13:08, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Edit warring over neutrality of lede
As tiresome as this may be, two successive reverts calls for talk page discussion, before we get to WP:3RR. The revert in question is this. I changed the lede sentence from "an international direct action advocacy group working to impact..." to "an interest group that describes itself as taking direct action to impact...". My reason is severalfold. First, direct action is a method, not a type of group, so it makes no sense to describe the organization as such; one could say, e.g. "a group that engages in direct action." Second, the language of the lede is a paraphrase of the language of the organization, and its sole reference is to ACT UP's own website. This constitutes WP:PEACOCK and is precisely why we have the template Cherry-picked. Can you please provide your explanation for why these issues I've identified are not the case?  Ergo Sum  19:44, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Seeing no response, I am reinstating the initial edit I made. I would also remind you that it is a violation of Wikipedia's policy to use Twinkle to revert good-faith edits without an appropriate edit summary during a content dispute.  Ergo Sum  01:56, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * "Seeing no response" after six hours during which I was logged off, you decided the discussion was over? Oy vey.
 * On the substantive questions:
 * While the grammatical argument seems silly to me (I do not think any native English speaker could fail to understand its meaning), I have no objection to a change that would cause it to parse as a noun rather than an adjective. (Or to move it into a separate sentence.)
 * The phrase "interest group" is substantively vacuous and mildly pejorative (at least in American English).
 * The description in the current lead sentence is factual and to the point. The idea that WP:PEACOCK is relevant here is absurd.
 * In general the sourcing for this article could be better, but that is not a good reason to replace a clear and accurate description of the group with a less clear and less informative description.
 * --JBL (talk) 18:47, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

 * I'm at a bit of a loss. You haven't provided a reason for your claims, you've just reiterated them.
 * 1) Interest group: Reiterating my edit summaries, it is certainly news to me that "interest group" is pejorative in the English language; I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any evidence to that effect. Vacuous? Hardly; it's a common descriptor of this sort of organization.
 * 2) Adjective vs. noun: I wouldn't call it silly. It's just logical, and not a very big point.
 * -- Ergo Sum  20:21, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

 * As I said above, if you would like to begin by making an edit related to the grammar of "direct action", I have no objection to that.
 * You have given no argument in favor of the farcical idea that WP:PEACOCK is relevant to the current first sentence of the article, so there is nothing substantive to discuss on that point at present.
 * Setting aside the question of whether the phrase "interest group" is pejorative: its substantive content is to say that the group advocates for a [political] position. This is slightly less vacuous than if the article began, "ACT UP is an organization made up of people", but what it does functionally is obscure rather than inform.  By comparison, the present first sentence tells the reader what are the positions that the group advocates for.  Not that one couldn't write a better such sentence, but there's no way the phrase "interest group" will be part of it.  --JBL (talk) 23:54, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It appears that a resolution is unlikely here without additional input. I've listed this discussion at Third opinion.  Ergo Sum  01:58, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. --JBL (talk) 02:20, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

3O Response: I Googled "direct action advocacy group" and about 75% of the first 50 hits were related to the subject (ACT UP), which makes it seem a bit like branding. I personally find it a little ambiguous, whether they are advocating that people take direct action or they advocate through direct action, though this may be a subtle difference. As an alternative, how about: is an international advocacy group working to impact the lives of people with AIDS (PWAs) and the AIDS pandemic, encouraging direct action to bring about and so on. Would that be an acceptable compromise? – Reidgreg (talk) 21:08, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks Reidgreg for your input. Your proposal is acceptable to me.  In answer to your question about ambiguity, what ACT UP is famous (infamous?) for is taking direct action, not advocating that others do so.  So perhaps this could be refined further.  As a separate issue, I suggest dropping "(PWAs)", since this abbreviation is never used again in the article.  --JBL (talk) 21:33, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * In that case, maybe more like: is an international advocacy group which takes direct action to impact the lives of people with AIDS and the AIDS pandemic You should be able to find RSS in a Google News search of "act up" "direct action".  Here:  NPR, The Advocate, Boston Review, I'm sure there are better ones out there but that's a quick look, afraid I don't have time to be thorough. – Reidgreg (talk) 21:52, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the input. "to impact the lives" is still too self-promotional for my tastes. It is not generally regarded as appropriate on Wikipedia to describe an organization in the voice of the encyclopedia in terms of its mission statement. That's why many advocacy groups and political organizations are described self-referentially (as I suggest above) or with different language altogether.  Ergo Sum  23:12, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok, the more we talk the better I understand your position. There is lots of possible room for compromise around the following principle: the first sentence should say what ACT UP is.  The problem with "ACT UP describes itself as ..." is that it doesn't say what ACT UP is.  But it would certainly be possible to move away from the self-description while staying inside the world of description.  --JBL (talk) 01:07, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Comment: PWA / "People with AIDS" is an incredibly common initialism from the time frame of ACT UP, and in all the relevant documentation in the '80s and on. There is nothing controversial about its inclusion, and it is easily sourced by any number of sources that are already in the article. ACT UP has historically provided the space for organizing direct action, as well as produced resources to enable others to form their own direct-action groups, so both descriptions apply. The groups Queer Nation, Lesbian Avengers, and others that do not have WP articles but were active in that era, all were formed by people who came out of ACT UP and its interrelated groups. How well-documented this is, I'm not sure. For some of it we have to rely on internal documents and zines, but some of these materials are archived at library collections. - CorbieV  ☊ ☼ 00:45, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not controversial, it's just unnecessary: if GMHC were only mentioned once then it would also not be worth including the abbreviation, and if the abbreviation "PWA" were used elsewhere in the article then it might make sense to have it in the lead. --JBL (talk) 01:02, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

"Smoothing" caused problems
This edit was really problematic. It suggests that ACT UP engages in "legislation, medical research, treatment and advocacy, and changing public policies", but this is untrue, since ACT UP does not write legislation, perform medical research, or render treatment. (The not-wrong terms are also kind of redundant -- "advocacy" is just a catch-all term that adds nothing when one is already explaining in detail the nature of the advocacy.) I am inclined just to move it back to how it was before, but other suggestions would be good, too. --JBL (talk) 11:27, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:ACT UP


text:
Need for Speed

Need for Speed (NFS) is a racing game franchise published by Electronic Arts and currently developed by Criterion Games (the developers of the Burnout series). The series generally centers around illegal street racing, and tasks players to complete various types of races while evading the local law enforcement in police pursuits. Need for Speed is one of EA's oldest franchises not published under their EA Sports brand.

The series' first title, The Need for Speed, was released in 1994. The most recent game, Need for Speed Unbound, was released on December 2, 2022. Additionally, a free-to-play mobile installment released in 2015, Need for Speed: No Limits, is actively developed by Firemonkeys Studios (the developers of Real Racing 3).

The series titles have been overseen and developed by multiple notable teams over the years; including EA Canada, EA Black Box, Slightly Mad Studios, and Ghost Games. Several Need for Speed games have been well-received critically, and the franchise has been one of the most successful of all time, selling over 150 million copies. The franchise has expanded into other forms of media, including a film adaptation and licensed Hot Wheels toys.

History
The Need for Speed series was originally developed by Distinctive Software, a video game studio based in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Prior to Electronic Arts' purchase of the company in 1991, it had created popular racing games such as Stunts and Test Drive II: The Duel. After the purchase, the company was renamed Electronic Arts (EA) Canada. The company capitalized on its experience in the domain by developing the Need for Speed series in late 1992. EA Canada continued to develop and expand the Need for Speed franchise up to 2002, when another Vancouver-based developer, named Black Box Games, was acquired by EA and contracted to continue the series with Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit 2. Meanwhile, Slightly Mad Studios would develop the 2009 sim racing title, Need for Speed: Shift, and its 2011 sequel, Shift 2: Unleashed.

The UK-based Criterion Games would develop the 2010 Hot Pursuit title; a successor to 1998's Need for Speed III: Hot Pursuit. The game introduced a social platform, titled Autolog, which allows players to track game progress, view leaderboards, share screenshots with friends, among other features. The 2010 Hot Pursuit game would be well-received; a remastered version was released ten years later in 2020. As a result of Hot Pursuit's critical success, in-contrast to the mixed reception of the Black Box-developed installments since 2007's Need for Speed: ProStreet, Criterion would become the lead developer of the franchise going forward. At E3 2012, Criterion Games vice president Alex Ward announced that random developers would no longer be developing NFS titles. Ward wouldn't confirm that all Need for Speed games in the future would be developed entirely by Criterion, but he did say the studio would have "strong involvement" in them and would have control over which NFS titles would be released in the future.

In August 2013, following the downsizing of Criterion Games, EA Swedish developer Ghost Games would become the main studio for the franchise, and oversee its future development. At the time, 80% of Ghost Games' work force consisted of former Criterion Games employees. From 2013 to 2019, Ghost Games would develop Need for Speed Rivals, the 2015 franchise reboot, 2017's Need for Speed Payback, and 2019's Need for Speed Heat. While Rivals was positively-received, the 2015 reboot and its follow-ups received more mixed reviews.

In February 2020, Criterion regained oversight of the franchise, with its first release since then being 2022's Need for Speed Unbound. Meanwhile, several past entries (namely Need for Speed: Carbon, Need for Speed: Undercover, Shift, Shift 2 and Need for Speed: The Run), with the exception of 2010's Hot Pursuit, and 2012's Need for Speed: Most Wanted, became delisted from online stores. Their respective online servers were shut down on August 31, 2021.

Gameplay
Almost all of the games in the NFS series employ the same fundamental rules and similar mechanics: the player controls a race car in a variety of races, the goal being to win the race. In the tournament/career mode, the player must win a series of races in order to unlock vehicles and tracks. Before each race, the player chooses a vehicle and has the option of selecting either an automatic or manual transmission. All games in the series have some form of multiplayer mode allowing players to race one another via a split screen, a LAN or the Internet. Since Need for Speed: High Stakes, the series has also integrated car body customization into gameplay.

Although the games share the same name, their tone and focus can vary significantly. For example, in some games the cars can suffer mechanical and visual damage, while in other games the cars cannot be damaged at all; in some games, the software simulates real-car behavior (physics), while in others there are more forgiving physics.

With the release of Need for Speed: Underground, the series shifted from racing sports cars on scenic point-to-point tracks to an import/tuner subculture involving street racing in an urban setting. To date, this theme has remained prevalent in most of the following games.

Need for Speed: Shift and its sequel took a simulator approach to racing, featuring closed-circuit racing on real tracks like the Nürburgring and Laguna Seca, as well as the fictional street circuits in various cities like London and Chicago. The car lists include a combination of exotics, sports cars, and tuners in addition to special race cars.

Most of the games in the franchise include police pursuits in some form or other. In some of the games featuring police pursuit (e.g. Need for Speed III: Hot Pursuit), the player can play as either the felon or the cop. The concepts of drifting and dragging were introduced in Need for Speed: Underground. These new mechanics are included in the tournament/career mode aside from the regular street races. In drift races, in games like Underground and Need for Speed (2015), the player must defeat other racers by totaling the most points, earned by the length and timing of the drift made by the player's vehicle. In drag races, the player must finish first to win the race, though if the player crashes into an obstacle or wall, the race ends. In Need for Speed Payback, the player has to earn a certain number of points to win; increase their multiplier based on how many points they get, whilst passing through a limited number of checkpoints.

The concept of car tuning evolved with each new game, from focusing mainly on the mechanics of the car to including how the car looks. Each game except Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit has car tuning which can set options for items like ABS, traction control, or downforce, or for upgrading parts like the engine or gearbox. Visual tuning of the player's car becomes important in tournament/career mode after the release of Need for Speed: Underground 2, when the appearance is rated from zero to ten points. When a car attains a high enough visual rating, the vehicle is eligible to be on the cover of a fictional magazine.

Like all racing games, the Need for Speed series features a list of cars, modeled and named after actual cars. Cars in the franchise are divided into four categories: exotic cars, muscle cars, tuners, and special vehicles. Exotic cars feature high performance, expensive cars like the Lamborghini Murciélago, Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren, Chevrolet Corvette and the Ford GT; muscle cars refer to the Ford Mustang, Dodge Challenger and the Chevrolet Camaro; while tuner cars are cars like the Nissan Skyline and the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution. The special vehicles are civilian and police cars that are available for use in some games, such as the Ford Crown Victoria in Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit and garbage trucks, fire engines and taxis in Need for Speed: Carbon.

Originally the series took place in international settings, such as race tracks in Australia, Europe, and Africa. Beginning with Underground, the series has taken place in fictional metropolitan cities. The first game featured traffic on "head to head" mode, while later games traffic can be toggled on and off, and starting with Underground, traffic is a fixed obstacle. Most of the recent Need for Speed games are set in fictional locations of our world, in a number of different time periods. These include, but are not limited to, Olympic, Bayview, Rockport, Palmont City, Tri-City Bay, Seacrest County, Fairhaven City, Redview County, Ventura Bay, Fortune Valley, Palm City and Lakeshore City.

The Need for Speed (1994)
The original Need for Speed was released for 3DO in 1994 with versions released for the PC (DOS) (1995), PlayStation and Saturn (1996) following shortly afterwards. The Need for Speed and its Special Edition were the only games in the series to support DOS, with subsequent releases for the PC running only on Windows (excluding Need for Speed: Carbon which was also released on Mac OS X).

The first installment of The Need for Speed was the only serious attempt by the series to provide a realistic simulation of car handling elements through the direct collaboration of Staff members from Road & Track. Electronic Arts left the handling dynamics tuning with the automotive magazine's seasoned drivers to match vehicle behavior including realistic over and understeer that remains impressive decades later, as well as sounds made by the vehicles' gear control levers and other functions. The game contained vehicle data with spoken commentary, several "magazine-style" images of each car, and short video clips highlighting the vehicles set to music. Most cars and tracks are available at the beginning of the game, and the objective is to unlock the remaining locked content by winning tournaments. This version featured chases by police cars, a popular theme throughout the series.

Another version called The Need for Speed: Special Edition, was released only for the PC in 1996. It featured support for DirectX 2 and TCP/IP networking, two new tracks, but dropped the ever-popular flip and go in favor of the more generic scene reset after an accident, a portents of the arcade-style gaming that would dominate the series ever after.

Need for Speed II (1997)
Need for Speed II (NFS II) featured some rare and exotic vehicles, including the Ford Indigo concept vehicle, and featured country-themed tracks from North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. A new racing mode was also introduced, dubbed "Knockout", where the last racers to finish laps will be eliminated. In addition, track design was more open-ended; players could now "drive" off the asphalt, and cut across fields to take advantage of shortcuts. Need for Speed II: Special Edition includes one extra track, extra cars, and support for Glide. The PlayStation port of NFS II also took advantage of the NeGcon controller, and the Dual Analog and DualShock controllers as well.

Need for Speed III: Hot Pursuit (1998)
Need for Speed III: Hot Pursuit added Hot Pursuit mode, where the player either attempted to outrun the police or be the cop, arresting speeders. NFS III took advantage of the multimedia capabilities by featuring audio commentary, picture slideshows, and music videos. This game was the first in the series to allow the downloading of additional cars from the official website. As a result, modding communities sprang up to create vehicles. The PC version was also the first game in the series to support Direct3D hardware.

Need for Speed: High Stakes (1999)
High Stakes, developed by EA Canada and EA Seattle, was released in 1999. The game features more realistic elements than its predecessors and introduced a damage system that allows cars to take damage when colliding with objects, affecting their appearance and performance. It also introduced a series of economy-based tournaments, awarding players with a cash prize that can be spent on repairing, purchasing, or upgrading cars for subsequent races. The game's Hot Pursuit mode, which was introduced in Hot Pursuit, was expanded with more options, allowing players to control police pursuits attempting to stop racers.

Need for Speed: Porsche Unleashed (2000)
Porsche Unleashed (North America and Latin America title), Porsche 2000 (European and Australian title), or simply Porsche (in Germany) is different from the previous versions because it featured only Porsches.

The vehicle handling in the PC version was said to be the most realistic in any NFS game, but the PSX (PS1) version had very simplified arcade handling that fell woefully short of the hallmark handling offered in the first game. The player had to win races to unlock cars in chronological order from 1950 to 2000. Porsche Unleashed also featured a Factory Driver mode, where the player had to test Porsches to move forward in the game and did not feature a split-screen mode.

Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit 2 (2002)
Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit 2 was the debut NFS title from EA Black Box, and the first NFS for the sixth generation consoles. Different versions of the game were produced for each platform. The Xbox, GameCube, and Microsoft Windows versions were developed by EA Seattle, while the PS2 version was developed by Black Box Games in Vancouver.

Hot Pursuit 2 draws primarily from the gameplay and style of NFS III, putting emphasis on evading the police and over-the-top tracks. Although the game allowed players to play as the police, the pursuit mode was less realistic than preceding versions of NFS; players merely needed to "tap" a speeder to arrest them, as opposed to using simulated police tactics to immobilize a speeding vehicle. This was the first version since the start of the series not to feature an "in the driving seat" (cockpit) camera view, transitioning EA from realistic racing to arcade street racing. It was the last game in the series for the PC version to feature the split-screen two-player mode introduced in Need for Speed II. For the multiplayer mode of the PC version, GameSpy's internet matchmaking system was used in place of Local Area Network (LAN) play. Hot Pursuit 2 was the first NFS game to use songs sung by licensed artists under the EA Trax label.

Need for Speed: Underground (2003)
Need for Speed: Underground was developed by EA Black Box and released in 2003. On PC, this was the first NFS game to require Hardware Transform and Lighting in graphics cards. Most of the new elements in Underground became defining marks of later installments in the Need for Speed series.

Underground shifted from semi-professional racing and isolated circuits to the street racing style of other arcade racing series: all circuits became part of a single map, Olympic City, except for drifts. Underground introduced two new play modes (Drag and Drift) and more tuning options than in the earlier High Stakes. Underground was also the first game in the series to feature a story, told via pre-rendered videos. Underground features tuner cars and has a wide variety of tuning options such as widebody kits, bumpers, spoilers, as well as performance upgrades such as engines and nitrous. City street racing is the primary focus of the game. There are no police in Underground and Underground 2, which drew criticism as police had been an important part of previous titles.

Need for Speed: Underground 2 (2004)
Need for Speed: Underground 2, was developed by EA Black Box and released in 2004. A demo of the game was placed as a bonus in copies of the EA/Criterion collaboration Burnout 3: Takedown.

In Underground 2, the story mode continued, but there were new racing modes such as Underground Racing League and Street X, more tuning options, and a new method of selecting races. Also included was an "outrun" mode where a player can challenge random opponents on the road (similar to Tokyo Xtreme Racer). Underground 2 also introduced several SUVs, used to race against other SUVs. The most significant change vs. the original Underground was the introduction of its open world (free roam) environments, setting the tone for numerous NFS games to come. This was also the publisher's most marketed feature at launch. In addition, the game featured actresses/models Brooke Burke and Kelly Brook as in-game characters to help guide the player through the campaign.

The customization features were significantly expanded on modifications that did not affect vehicle performance. Players were required to customize their car to a certain numerical value in order to be offered DVD and magazine covers, the only way to advance to higher game levels. The game featured more extensive product placement for companies with no connection to auto racing. This game also had extensive customization options in the form of suspension upgrades, nitrous systems, and engine mods.

Need for Speed: Underground Rivals was the first Need for Speed game released on the PlayStation Portable. Different from Need for Speed: Underground 2 as it had no free roam and the cars were very limited, it was released in 2005.

Need for Speed: Most Wanted (2005)
Need for Speed: Most Wanted was developed by EA Black Box, released in 2005, and was one of the first games released for the Xbox 360. The PlayStation Portable port of Most Wanted is titled Need for Speed: Most Wanted 5-1-0.

Police chases represent a significant body of the gameplay, and includes the free-roaming aspect of Underground 2, but with less extensive vehicle customization features. The story mode is a different style from Underground, with CGI effects mixed with live-action. The game featured the Blacklist, a crew consisting of 15 racers that the player must beat one-by-one to unlock parts, cars, tracks, and to complete career mode. The player had to meet certain requirements before they could take on the next Blacklist rival, such as races completed, milestones achieved, and bounty earned.

A special Black Edition of Most Wanted was also released, featuring additional races, challenges, and a few bonus cars; it also included a behind-the-scenes DVD. Both versions were available for the PlayStation 2, Xbox, and Windows-based PCs, while only the standard edition was available for GameCube, Nintendo DS, and Xbox 360.

Most Wanted had extremely positive reviews and received universal acclaim from reviewers in many gaming websites and magazines, praising the graphics, sound effects, and general gameplay. With 16 million copies sold worldwide, Most Wanted is the best-selling game in the franchise. A game, also named Need for Speed: Most Wanted, was released in 2012 with British developer Criterion Games responsible for the development.

Need for Speed: Carbon (2006)
Need for Speed: Carbon was developed by EA Black Box in 2006. It was the first NFS game for the PlayStation 3 and the Wii and the last NFS game for the GameCube, the Game Boy Advance, and the Xbox. Carbon's handheld port is known as Need for Speed: Carbon – Own the City. The Wii port lacked online but made full use of the Wii Remote and Nunchuk.

NFS: Carbon continued the story from Most Wanted, but the game has far less emphasis on the police. Carbon saw the return of nighttime-only racing, with a selection of cars similar to that of Most Wanted. Carbon introduced a new feature wherein the player is allowed to form a "crew" that aids the player in races. Drift events returned to the series in Carbon. Drag racing was removed from the series, but a new type of race called "Canyon Duel" was added, where the closer the player is to the leader, the more points they accrue. If the player overtakes the leader and remains in front for 10 seconds, they win automatically. Another new feature is "Autosculpt", which allows players to custom-fabricate their own auto parts.

The Collector's Edition features three new cars, ten specially tuned cars, six new races, and a bonus DVD with behind-the-scenes footage on the making of the game.

Need for Speed: ProStreet (2007)
Need for Speed: ProStreet, developed by EA Black Box, was released in 2007. Key features of the game included realistic damage, a return to realistic racing, modeling, and burnouts. The game lacked the free roam mode found in earlier releases, instead, all of the races were on closed race tracks that took place on organized race days. The game consisted of drag races, speed challenges (essentially sprint races and speed traps), grip races (circuit racing), and drift races.

Need for Speed: Undercover (2008)

Need for Speed: Undercover, developed by EA Black Box, was released in 2008. The game had a significantly longer development cycle than previous games, taking 16 months to develop. EA ported Undercover to various mobile devices. It was the last Need for Speed game for PlayStation 2. EA Games president Frank Gibeau stated that since sales of ProStreet did not live up to EA's projections, the franchise would go back to its "roots". However, the game received lower scores on aggregate than ProStreet.

The game focused on tuning and police chases, featured over 50 cars, and took place in a fictional city called Tri-City Bay. The player's role was as an undercover cop, trying to stop street racers. Containing live-action cutscenes that feature the actress Maggie Q, the game also featured a damage system where parts could break off after a crash.

The Collector's Edition for PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 added another five new cars, twelve new circuits, and sprint and checkpoint track configurations. Also included were specially tuned versions of ten existing cars, plus 35 exclusive vinyls for adding a unique visual style.

Need for Speed: Shift (2009)
Need for Speed: Shift, developed by Slightly Mad Studios, was released in 2009. It features over 60 cars and 19 tracks, some of which are licensed tracks while others are fictional. The improved driving simulation was accompanied by an adaptive difficulty, while it reintroduced a cockpit view. NFS: Shift focused on racing simulation rather than the arcade racing of previous titles.

NFS: Shift received better reviews than the prior three games in the series. The Special Edition contained a specially-tuned BMW M3 GT2, and an Elite Series track. Two items of downloadable content were released for the game.

Need for Speed: Nitro (2009)
Need for Speed: Nitro is the first NFS game made exclusively for Nintendo DS and Wii, featuring arcade-style gameplay and targeting a casual audience, released in 2009. Need for Speed: Nitro was also available as a social multiplayer game on Facebook.

Need for Speed: Nitro-X (2010) is a newer installment for use with the DSi/XL and the 3DS system. Essentially the original release, it was updated with several updates: 18 licensed vehicles; new police units; custom tags; 16 updated tracks; a revised career mode; local multiplayer matches for up to four players; and new rewards and unlockables. The game was released as a digital download only, released in 2010.

Need for Speed: World (2010)
Need for Speed: World was a free-to-play MMO racing game for Windows-based PCs. It took on the gameplay style of Most Wanted and Carbon, focusing on illegal street racing, tuning and police chases, and adding classic MMO elements to the mix. World incorporated almost exact replicas of the cities of Rockport and Palmont, the cities of Most Wanted and Carbon respectively, into its map design. World was originally scheduled for an Asian release in the summer of 2009, but the game was not released at that time and it was released worldwide in 2010. The game was in public beta-testing limited to residents of Taiwan in October 2009

Need for Speed World closed its servers in July 2015. They soon after removed the ability to create new accounts for the game and began winding down their support for it. Leading up to closure, there were several "end of the world" promotions and in-game events held.

Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit (2010)
Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit was developed by British games developer Criterion Games and published by Electronic Arts in 2010. It focuses on racing and police chases rather than car customization. The game won many awards at the E3 2010, including "Best Racing Game", becoming the first game in the NFS series since the original Hot Pursuit to win an E3 award.

There were over 60 cars, most available to both racers and cops, but a few were exclusive to either side. Unlike previous NFS titles, there was no customization, and the game takes place in a fictional rural area called Seacrest County, which the "free roam" feature lets you explore. Hot Pursuit allows play as either police or racer. The game also features many weapons, with some exclusive to the cops or racers. The biggest feature introduced was Autolog, which tracked player progressions and recommended events to play. In addition to its statistical system, Autolog also features Facebook-like speedwalls where players can post their comments and photos while in the game. Hot Pursuit has received some of the best reviews of the series.

The Limited Edition gives players exclusive access to the Alfa Romeo 8C Competizione and Ford Shelby GT500. Various downloadable content was released for the game.

A remastered version of the game, Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit Remastered, was released in November 2020 for PlayStation 4, Xbox One, Nintendo Switch, and Microsoft Windows. It features cross-platform multiplayer, enhanced visuals, quality-of-life improvements, all main DLC from the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 versions, the return of Autolog, and 4K support for PlayStation 4 Pro, Xbox One X, and Windows.

Shift 2: Unleashed (2011)
The sequel to Need for Speed: Shift, Shift 2: Unleashed was developed by Slightly Mad Studios, and released in 2011. Shift 2 includes the Autolog feature introduced in Hot Pursuit. It also includes features such as night racing, an in-helmet camera, and a more in-depth career mode. Shift 2 features more than 140 vehicles available for racing and tuning, a smaller number compared with other racing games such as Forza Motorsport 3 and Gran Turismo 5. There are also 40 real-world locations including Bathurst, Spa-Francorchamps and Suzuka as well as fictional circuits.

The Limited Edition features three unlocked cars, and an additional 37 career race events. Two downloadable contents were released for Shift 2.

Need for Speed: The Run (2011)
Need for Speed: The Run was developed by EA Black Box, and released in 2011. The game continued the street-racing gameplay of Black Box's previous titles, with a story based on a race across the United States from San Francisco to New York.

The game featured quick time events with the player, for the first time in NFS history, exiting their car and traveling on foot. The Run was powered by DICE's Frostbite 2 engine, making the game the first non-shooter and one of the first console titles to use the engine. Additionally, the NFS Autolog was also used in the game.

The Run employs a large range of real-world vehicles, which can be altered with visual upgrades. An XP (Experience points) system is used for unlocking cars and events. The Limited Edition features three exclusive cars and five exclusive challenges with bonus rewards and achievements.

Need for Speed: Most Wanted (2012)
Need for Speed: Most Wanted was developed by British games developer Criterion Games, and released in 2012. The game picked up on the Most Wanted IP, as opposed to the Hot Pursuit extension. This was the first game made subsequent to Criterion Games taking over the NFS series from Black Box.

It features open-world racing, and most of the cars in the game are available from the start, hidden in different locations. It also features a blacklist of 10 instead of 15, and there is no story or visual customization for the game. It is powered by Autolog 2.0. Performance upgrades are available for all the cars in the game, such as chassis, tires, nitrous, and bodywork. Milestones and achievements are unlocked through a variety of ways, e.g. completion of races and breaking through billboards.

Need for Speed Rivals (2013)
Need for Speed: Rivals was developed by Ghost Games (formerly EA Gothenburg) in association with Criterion Games, and was released in 2013 for the PlayStation 4, Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, and Xbox One. It runs on DICE's Frostbite 3 Engine. It has the same basic concept as Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit, but with new features like the AllDrive system, and several pursuit techs.

Need for Speed: No Limits (2015)
Need for Speed: No Limits was released in 2015 for iOS and Android, and a mobile installment in the Need for Speed video game series, developed by Firemonkeys Studios and published by Electronic Arts. It is the franchise's first original title made exclusively for mobile devices, unlike past mobile games in the series that were simply adaptations of various Need for Speed games.

Need for Speed (2015)
A full reboot of the franchise developed by Ghost Games, the game was released in 2015 for PlayStation 4 and Xbox One, with a release for Microsoft Windows via Origin in 2016.

Set in Ventura Bay, the game has five different gameplay styles in which points are collected in order to progress through five overlapping storylines, in addition having a redesigned 'Wrap Editor' and body car modifications.

The PC version was released in 2016 via Origin in two different editions. The Standard Edition is the base edition, whereas the Deluxe Edition has the styling pack, performance pack, tricked-out starter car, exclusive wraps, unique identifying stickers, VIP icons, and a lifetime discount on all items using the in-game currency.

Need for Speed Payback (2017)
EA and Ghost Games released Need for Speed Payback in 2017 for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 4, and Xbox One. The game has an offline single-player mode unlike the previous title. Payback is set in Fortune Valley. The game is focused on "action driving" and has three playable characters (each with different sets of skills) working together to pull off action movie-like sequences, in addition having a 24-hour day-night cycle.

Need for Speed Heat (2019)
Need for Speed Heat was released in 2019 for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One. The game is set in Palm City. Unlike the previous title, which featured a full day-night cycle, the time of day can be switched when needed between a day and night period, with each period offering different races and payouts. Heat is similar to other titles and features a "Heat" system in which players earn rep when participating in police pursuits, with greater amounts offered during night than in the day. This was the last title released by Ghost Games before its dissolvement in 2020, after which Criterion took full creative oversight of the franchise.

Need for Speed Unbound (2022)
Revealed by EA in October 2022, Need for Speed Unbound is developed by Criterion with assistance from Codemasters. The game features a cel-shaded art style for its characters and vehicle effects while retaining the photo-realistic look of the cars from previous games. The map is based in a fictional city inspired by Chicago called Lakeshore City. The game was released on the PlayStation 5, Xbox Series X/S and PC on December 2, 2022. American rapper ASAP Rocky appears as a character in the storyline, driving a modified Mercedes 190E.

Need for Speed: V-Rally (1997)
When V-Rally was released in 1997, it was developed by Infogrames Multimedia and had no connection with the Need for Speed games. Electronic Arts acquired the rights to publish the PlayStation version of the game in the United States in order to help sales of the game, due to the fact that rally racing held little support in the U.S. The game was not originally intended to be part of the Need for Speed series; neither the game's development was done by Electronic Arts Canada (which at the time was the primary developer of the Need for Speed series), nor was it developed in as association with Electronic Arts in any way. Later versions of the game were solely published by Infogrames and were released under their original names.

Need for Speed 64 (canceled)
In the late 1990s, EA Canada partnered with Paradigm to work on an entry in the series for the Nintendo 64. It was described in the Next Generation magazine as having exclusive tracks and vehicles, Rumble Pak support and the series' trademark gameplay mechanics. The game was ultimately canceled between late 1998 and early 1999. Electronic Arts had signed a deal with Volkswagen to make a game around the New Beetle, thus altering the Need for Speed 64 project into Beetle Adventure Racing.

Need for Speed: V-Rally 2 (1999)
Much like with the original V-Rally, EA purchased the rights to publish the PlayStation version of V-Rally 2 in North America. Infogrames published the Dreamcast version of the game in North America as Test Drive: V-Rally. Later games in the series would have no connections to either Need for Speed or Test Drive.

Need for Speed: Web Racing (2001)
Need for Speed: Web Racing was an online-only conversion of Need for Speed III: Hot Pursuit made available in 2001 as part of EA.com's Platinum service. 11 cars and various courses from Need for Speed III were included, as well as one course from the first Need for Speed. Single-player and Multiplayer modes were made available.

Motor City Online (2001)
Originally conceived as part of the Need for Speed series under the title Need for Speed: Motor City, during development all single-player elements would be discarded in favor of an online-only model. The result, Motor City Online, was a racing MMO game released by EA on October 29, 2001. The point of the game was to buy classic cars, tune them, and race them against other players. The game went offline less than two years later to enable EA to focus on The Sims Online. Later, EA would develop a new online racing game, called Need for Speed: World.

Need for Speed: Top Speed (2002)
Need for Speed: Top Speed was an online-only promotional racing game released on October 1, 2002, as part of EA Pogo and America Online's online-only AOL Games' First Play programming initiative. Made to promote both MacGillivray Freeman's 2002 IMAX film Top Speed and the then-new Porsche Cayenne Turbo, the game uses three existing courses from Porsche Unleashed renamed to refer to Canadian locations due to the sponsorship of Travel Alberta Canada.

Need for Speed 10: TerrorFive (canceled)
Need for Speed 10: TerrorFive was a concept pitched to Electronic Arts around 2008. The portfolio page of a former presentation director of EA Black Box says the "goal" of the game was to answer the question "How can large scale street races take place in a post 911 US city?" Concept art depicts a group of street racers named "TerrorFive", alongside a mockup of gameplay in which players seemingly hack into police cars.

Need for Speed: Millionaire (canceled)
Need for Speed: Millionaire was a canceled online-only entry developed by Criterion Games, which started development around 2008 after the release of Burnout Paradise and Need For Speed: Undercover. It would have seen the player and friends go on adventures after a lottery win and the purchase of many supercars, described by Criterion director Alex Ward as "Freeburn meets Top Gear challenges". The game was worked on for six months and had a playable version, but was canceled in favor of Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit.

Need for Speed: Edge (canceled)
Need for Speed: Edge was a free-to-play MMO racing game developed by EA Spearhead (formerly EA Korea) and published by Nexon from South Korea and Tencent Interactive Entertainment (known as Need for Speed Online) from China. It is the third free-to-play game in the franchise overall, along with being the only free-to-play racing game that runs on the Frostbite 3 game engine. The PC version is based on the 2013 title Need for Speed Rivals, while the mobile version (sometimes referred to as Need for Speed: Duel) is based on Need for Speed: No Limits. The open beta was released on December 10, 2017. Nexon shut down the game on May 30, 2019.

Need for Speed Mobile (2024)
Need for Speed Mobile (known as Need for Speed: Assemble in China, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau) is an upcoming free-to-play Open world racing mobile game developed by TiMi Studios and published by Electronic Arts for worldwide and Tencent Interactive Entertainment for China and Garena for Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau. The game runs on the Unreal Engine 4, this is the first and also only game runs on the Unreal Engine in the series. The game will released on July 11, 2024 in China, and worldwide released on Fall 2024.

Film adaptation
EA worked with DreamWorks Pictures to create a film version of Need for Speed starring Aaron Paul as Tobey Marshall, a mechanic and street racer who was framed by a wealthy business associate. The movie was released by Disney's Touchstone Pictures on March 14, 2014, months before the franchise's 20th anniversary. Despite receiving negative reviews, the film ended up grossing over $200 million at the worldwide box office.

In April 2015, a sequel was reported to be produced by China Movie Channel, Jiaflix, and 1905.com in association with EA Games.

title: Need for Speed


text:
Axiomatic semantics

Axiomatic semantics is an approach based on mathematical logic for proving the correctness of computer programs. It is closely related to Hoare logic.

Axiomatic semantics define the meaning of a command in a program by describing its effect on assertions about the program state. The assertions are logical statements—predicates with variables, where the variables define the state of the program.

title: Axiomatic semantics


text:
Official scorer

In the game of baseball, the official scorer is a person appointed by the league to record the events on the field, and to send the official scoring record of the game back to the league offices. In addition to recording the events on the field such as the outcome of each plate appearance and the circumstances of any baserunner's advance around the bases, the official scorer is also charged with making judgment calls that do not affect the progress or outcome of the game. Judgment calls are primarily made about errors, unearned runs, fielder's choice, the value of hits in certain situations, and wild pitches, all of which are included in the record compiled. This record is used to compile statistics for each player and team. A box score is a summary of the official scorer's game record.

Newspaper writers initially performed this function in the early days of Major League Baseball (MLB). As the importance of baseball player statistics increased, teams began to pressure writer-scorers for favorable scoring decisions for their players in games played at home stadiums, and a home team scoring bias was perceived by many coaches, players, and writers. Controversies related to perceived bias or errors in scoring have led to questions about important baseball records, including several no-hitters and Joe DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak of 1941. By 1979, many major newspapers decided to ban their writers from scoring baseball games due to conflict-of-interest concerns, and in 1980 MLB began to hire independent official scorers.

Since 1980, some reforms have been suggested to improve the performance of official scorers. In 2001, MLB formed a scoring committee to review their performance, and by 2008 the committee was given the authority to overturn scoring decisions. This authority was used by the scoring committee three times during the 2009 season. In 2006, an academic study seemed to confirm the historical existence of a home-team bias in scoring decisions, but this measurable bias decreased after 1979.

History
Henry Chadwick is generally credited with the invention of scorekeeping in baseball. Chadwick was also the inventor of the modern box score and the writer of the first rule book for the game of baseball. Since baseball statistics were initially a subject of interest to sportswriters, the role of the official scorer in Major League Baseball (MLB) in the early days of the sport was performed by newspaper writers. A judgment call that is required by the official scorer does not alter the outcome of a game, but these judgments impact the statistical records of the game. As the subjective scoring decisions which are used to calculate baseball statistics began to be used to determine the relative value of baseball players, MLB began to require approval from the league before a writer-scorer could be assigned to produce the scoring report for a game. By the 1970s, writers who were willing to score games for MLB were required to have attended 100 or more games per year in the prior three years and to be chosen by the local chapter chairman of the Baseball Writers' Association of America (BBWAA). Qualified candidates for scoring were submitted to the leagues for approval.

Early controversies
It's always safer to call it a hit. The batting team is happy, and the fielding team can be ambivalent ... But you have to make the proper call. Baseball writer-scorers usually worked at the games played at the home stadium of the team which they covered for their newspaper. The writer-scorers were tasked with making objective decisions that could impact the statistics of the team they were writing about. Because of this affiliation, the official scorer was often presumed by the baseball players and managers to favor the home team when making the required judgment calls during the course of a game.

Criticism of scoring decisions date to the earliest days of the game. Some historians claim that Joe DiMaggio's record 56-game hitting streak in 1941 was made possible by several generous rulings at Yankee Stadium. In 1953, Al Rosen narrowly missed being recognized for achieving a rare "triple crown" in hitting after a questioned error caused him to finish the season one hit short of winning the American League batting title.

Although scoring decisions were widely believed to favor the hitter over the defense, many players believed this bias shifts in favor of the pitcher when he carries a no-hitter (where a pitcher throws a complete game without giving up a hit) into the late innings. Infielder Davey Johnson said, "I've been involved in five or six no-hit games, and all of them were suspected of being helped by hometown scoring." One of the last controversies of the writer-scorer era was seen in a 1978 game at St. Louis. In that game, St. Louis pitcher Bob Forsch was pitching a no-hitter in the 8th inning against Philadelphia when a hard ground ball hit into the hole between shortstop and third was narrowly missed by third baseman Ken Reitz. The official scorer Neal Russo (who was a writer for a local newspaper) judged the play to be an error rather than a hit, and Forsch went on to pitch the first no-hitter of the 1978 season.

Newspaper reaction
A player's baseball statistics can increase or reduce the leverage which he may have in future contract negotiations. Many players also have monetary incentives written in their contracts which are based on statistical measurements, and official scorers have the option to reverse a scoring decision within 24 hours of the conclusion of a game. Because of this, baseball writer-scorers were often subject to pressure from the players they were covering in their newspaper. After a game in 1962, infielder Jerry Adair asked for a meeting with local writer Neal Eskridge after learning that he was the scorer for the game. Angry about an error he had received in the game, Jerry "cursed [Neal] thoroughly and imaginatively, and told him, 'Never talk to me again. They reportedly did not speak to each other for almost four years. In the early days of baseball, a disagreement over a scoring decision occasionally led to physical altercations between the player and the writer. Confrontational incidents decreased after 1974 following a warning from MLB.

The pressure and the perceived conflict of interest faced by the baseball writers who scored games for MLB eventually led many major newspapers to end the practice for their employees. In 1958, The Washington Post prohibited their writers from scoring baseball games. Over the next two decades other major newspapers joined in the writer-scorer ban, including The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, The Boston Globe, and the major daily newspapers published in Atlanta, Detroit, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, and Philadelphia. In 1980, MLB resolved the conflict by directly hiring official scorers for each stadium.

After 1980
Today, the MLB commissioner's office directly employs the official scorers who are responsible for producing score reports, although most scorers are hired on the recommendation of the public relations directors of baseball teams. Official scorers are typically retired writers, coaches, and umpires. Unlike umpiring teams, MLB official scorers do not typically travel between stadiums. Each official scorer is assigned to a stadium for the season, with each stadium having one or more scorers. Scorers now have access to replay video from different angles which they can review before making a decision. As of 2012, MLB official scorers earned $150 per game. Official scorers are not required to meet the old BBWAA requirements, and are also no longer required to pass a written test, which was once administered by the National League before it was phased out in the mid-1990s. Potential scorers are generally required to briefly apprentice under an existing scorer before they are allowed to work alone.

Official scorers are only occasionally terminated, but there have been cases when a scorer was replaced after making decisions which displeased the home team. In 1992 the Seattle Mariner players signed a petition to have their official scorer replaced, and in 2001 the management of the Boston Red Sox ordered that a rookie scorer not be allowed to score another game after pitcher Hideo Nomo lost a no-hitter on a close play in right field that was ruled a hit rather than an error.

In 2001, MLB formed a scoring committee to evaluate the performance of official scorers. In 2008, the scoring committee was given the authority to enforce the portion of rule 10.01(a) which allows the league to change a scoring decision that is "clearly erroneous". The committee has used this authority on a few occasions, having overturned three scoring decisions in the 2009 season. The scoring committee came under some scrutiny after a game on August 31, 2008. Milwaukee pitcher CC Sabathia threw a disputed 7–0 one-hit shutout against Pittsburgh. Milwaukee manager Ned Yost argued that the hit recorded by Pittsburgh should have been recorded as an error by the pitcher, but Pittsburgh official scorer Bob Webb disagreed. Yost commented, "That's a joke. That wasn't even close. Whoever the scorekeeper was absolutely denied major league baseball a nice no-hitter right there." The official scorer had argued that the batter was too close to first base to be put out by a clean play. Milwaukee appealed the ruling to the scoring committee, but on September 3 the committee reviewed the footage and supported the ruling by Webb, saying the ruling was not "clearly erroneous" as required by rule 10.01(a).

Outside MLB
Official scorers in the minor leagues are generally hired by the teams to score games at their stadium. Some minor league scorers have a history or connection with the team, including former players, former coaches, and local writers. Official scorers for international baseball competitions are generally selected by the organizer of the competition.

Analysis and proposed changes
Baseball players, managers, and writers have speculated about bias by the official scorer for decades, but this subject has been objectively studied only recently. In 2006, the rate at which errors have been recorded in MLB by the official scorer was investigated under many situations. The rate at which errors are called is higher when the quality of fielding is suspect and is lower when playing conditions are better, but these factors do not fully explain variations in error rate. After other known factors are accounted for, evidence was found that official scorers are biased toward the home team, but that this bias was reduced after the end of the writer-scorer era in 1979. Further, errors are significantly more likely to be called in the National League than in the American League.

Changes have been proposed over the years to reduce possible inconsistencies between scorers and possible mistakes made by the official scorer, especially as the end of the writer-scorer era began to seem likely in the late 1970s. The BBWAA and professional baseball umpires have suggested the creation of a "fifth umpire". Four-man umpire crews rotate officiating responsibilities after each game, and travel to several stadiums per year. This new fifth umpire would travel with the umpiring crew to score games and take his turn on the bases, but MLB has been reluctant to incur the increased cost. More recently, there have been suggestions to move the official scorer out of the press box and closer to the field behind the plate to get the best view of the game. MLB has conceded that this could be a good idea, but it is not currently feasible because of the design of most stadiums in the league.

Responsibilities
The rules which govern the official scorer are spelled out in Rule 10 of the official rules of baseball. The fundamental responsibilities of the official scorer are explained in rule 10.01.

Rule 10.01
The rules of baseball require that the official scorer views the game only from the press box, for two basic reasons. First, this ensures that every scorer has nearly the same perspective of the game. One of the intentions of this rule is to improve consistency in scorekeeping decisions between different official scorers working on different games at the same stadium, and between scorers in different stadiums. Second, the press box is the most neutral position within the stadium. Seated in the press box, the official scorer is surrounded by writers and broadcasters who are ostensibly neutral, and the scorer is less likely to be unduly influenced by the players, the coaches, and the crowd.

Rule 10.01 states that the scorer is never allowed to make scorekeeping decisions that conflict with the official rules governing scorekeeping. The official scorer is permitted to view available replays and to solicit the opinions of others, but the official scorer is given the sole authority to make the judgment calls that are required in the score report. When a judgment call is made, the official scorer is obligated to immediately communicate that decision to the media in the press box and to the broadcasters, usually through a microphone. The official scorer has up to 24 hours to reconsider or reverse a judgment call that was made during the game. In rare circumstances, MLB's scoring committee may reverse a scoring decision that is "clearly erroneous".

Finally, within 36 hours of a game's conclusion (including the conclusion of a suspended game), the official scorer is required to create a summary of the game using a form established by the league. This task is performed for each game that is scored, including called games which must be completely replayed at a later date, and games that end in forfeit. The information in the score report includes the date, location of the game, the names of the teams, the names of the umpires who officiated the game, the final score, and the data that is required in rule 10.02.

Judgment calls
Most plays in the game are resolved in such a way that the scorer is not given multiple choices when recording the outcome of the play, but several types of plays are open to the interpretation of the official scorer. In any judgment call where the official scorer is required to decide whether to credit a hit to the batter, the scorer is guided by rule 10.05. This rule directs the official scorer to "give the benefit of the doubt to the hitter when the scorer believes that the decision to credit the batter with a hit is equally valid to an alternative scoring decision". In a similarly difficult judgment call where the official scorer believes that an earned run or an unearned run are equally valid scoring decisions, rule 10.16 directs the official scorer to "give the benefit of the doubt to the pitcher".

Errors
The decision to charge an error to the defense is the most well-known responsibility of the official scorer. Some situations automatically call for an error to be charged to the defense, but most charged errors are the result of a play that requires a judgment call. Broadly speaking, an error is charged to the defense when an "ordinary effort" by the defense would have either recorded an out or prevented a runner from advancing, but the defense fails to do so. When an error is charged, the official scorer must charge the error to one of the fielders who were involved in the play. Errors are primarily discussed in rule 10.12.

One exception in this rule occurs when the defense makes at least one out and attempts to complete a double play or triple play. An error is not charged in that situation if a wild throw allows the runner to reach safely. If a wild throw allows the runner to advance an additional base, an error may then be charged for the additional advance. However, if an accurate throw is made in time to complete a double play or triple play, but the fielder on the base fails to make the catch, an error may be charged.

Rule 10.12 also states that an error should not be charged for a "mental mistake" by the defense. Rather, errors are charged when the defense attempts to make a logical play against the offense, but fails to record an out or prevent an advance due to a mechanical misplay. There is one rare exception to this rule against charging an error for a "mental mistake". If a fielder fails to tag the runner, batter, or a base in a force situation in time to record an out when he could have done so, that fielder is charged with an error.

The most common judgment call involving an error occurs when the defense fails to put out a batter-runner who puts the ball in play. If the out is not recorded and the official scorer believes that an "ordinary effort" by the defense would have resulted in an out, the defense is charged with an error, and the batter is not credited with a hit. Other common situations requiring a judgment call include unintentionally dropped foul balls that allow the batter to continue his at-bat, and poor throws to the next base when a runner attempts to advance.

One of the most controversial and poorly understood situations related to the charging of an error occurs when an outfielder misjudges the flight of a ball and allows the ball to drop out of his reach. This is usually considered to be a "mental mistake" by the outfielder, so the batter is usually credited with a hit. On that topic Bill Shannon, who was an official scorer for the New York Yankees, said "That's a base hit whether we like it or not. As a practical matter, we don't charge errors on those plays. No one says that baseball is entirely fair." Outfielders are generally charged with an error on a fly ball when they arrive at the ball's destination with sufficient time to make a catch with an ordinary effort, but simply miss the catch or drop the ball.

Unearned runs
Earned runs are runs that are directly attributable to a pitcher's efforts without a lapse by the defense. An unearned run does not adversely impact a pitcher's earned run average (ERA), and is only possible when an error (including catcher's interference) or a passed ball occurs earlier in the inning. Unearned runs are primarily discussed in rule 10.16 and often require a judgment call by the official scorer.

At the conclusion of an inning during which runs are scored after an error or passed ball, the official scorer attempts to recreate the events of the inning without the errors or passed balls. If in the official scorer's opinion a run would not have scored without the defensive lapses, then the run is unearned. If the scorer believes that a run would have scored anyway, the run is earned and charged to the pitcher. In one basic example, if the first batter reaches by an error, the second batter hits a home run, and the next three batters strike out, then one of the two runs scored was unearned. There are rules and restrictions which govern this general guideline.

When reconstructing an inning without errors or passed balls:

 * Potential outs that were not recorded because of an error are presumed to be an out when the inning is reconstructed by the official scorer.
 * Intentional walks which were issued are still presumed to be walks.
 * Runs that are scored after what should have been the third out are automatically considered to be unearned.
 * When the batter is given first base because of catcher's interference or obstruction, the official scorer does not presume that an out would have been recorded on that runner, but if that runner later scores the run is unearned.
 * A run scored by a runner who advances due to an error or passed ball is unearned, unless it would not have made a difference in the reconstruction of the inning.

Most of the above rules are straightforward, but some judgment is required by the official scorer when a baserunner advances due to a defensive lapse and later scores. In this situation, the official scorer must decide what would have happened if the runner had not advanced. This is often an easy decision, but it can occasionally be difficult. In one difficult example with a runner on first and two outs, the batter hits a single but a defensive error allows an advance by the lead runner from second to third, and a soft run-scoring single is hit followed by an out. In that situation, the offense "should" have had runners on first and second with 2 outs when the run-scoring single was hit. Since the next batter was put out, the official scorer must decide based on the hit, the speed of the baserunner, and the positioning of the defense whether the runner would have been able to score from second in the reconstruction of the inning without the error.

Fielder's choice
In the rules of baseball, aside from the rare case of interference or obstruction, a batter who puts a ball into play and safely reaches first base is ruled to have reached in one of three possible ways: a hit, an error, or by fielder's choice. Fielder's choice is primarily discussed in rules 10.05 and 10.06, and it generally occurs when it is judged that a batter-runner would have been put out had the defense chosen to do so.

Most judgment calls made by the official scorer under this rule occur in three situations: when an infielder, pitcher, or catcher attempts to put out an unforced preceding runner who is attempting to advance one base, when any fielder attempts and fails to put out a forced preceding runner, and when any fielder attempts and fails to put out an unforced preceding runner who returns to their original base. In these situations, the official scorer is required to determine whether the batter-runner would have safely reached first base if the defense made an ordinary effort to put him out. If the defense could not be reasonably expected to make the play, the batter is credited with a hit, otherwise he is ruled to have reached by fielder's choice. If an error is made on the attempt to put out a preceding runner, that has no impact on this decision. It is instead noted to have occurred in addition to the hit or fielder's choice.

In some cases the official scorer is not given the discretion to decide between awarding a hit to the batter or ruling that he safely reached first base by fielder's choice. If a preceding runner is forced out or if an unforced preceding runner is put out while attempting to return to their original base, a hit is automatically not credited and the batter by rule is judged to have reached by a fielder's choice. In some situations this rule may appear unfair to the batter. For example, if the batter is a fast runner, the ball is slowly hit to the third baseman, and an unforced runner from second realizes (too late) that he can not safely advance, the batter-runner will lose the potential hit on a fielder's choice by the third baseman. This occurs regardless of whether the batter-runner would have reached first base with an ordinary effort to put him out.

Value of hits
In cases where a batter indisputably gets a hit and is able to safely advance past first base on the play, the value of that hit may be adjusted by the official scorer because of an error or a fielder's choice.

If the defense attempts to put out a preceding runner during the play, the official scorer must determine whether the batter would have reached second or third base safely had the defense attempted to limit the batter's advance. For example, if a runner on second attempts to score after a soft hit to center field and the center fielder chooses to throw to home while the batter advances to second, the official scorer must decide the value of the hit. In this situation, the scorer may either choose to credit the batter with a double, or the scorer may rule that the batter hit a single with an advance to second by fielder's choice. This is often referred to as "an advance on the throw".

If an error occurs during the play when a batter records a hit, the official scorer must determine whether the batter would have advanced as far as he did had the error not occurred. For example, if a batter hits a ball into an outfield gap, the ball is badly misplayed by an outfielder attempting to retrieve and throw the ball back into the infield, and the batter is able to reach all four bases to score, then the official scorer must decide whether an error should be charged to the outfielder. If no error is charged, then the batter would be credited with an "inside the park" home run. If an error is charged to the outfielder, then the batter would likely be credited with either a double or triple.

Wild pitch
When a baserunner is able to advance after a pitch is not caught or controlled by the catcher, the official scorer must determine whether the advance was due to a wild pitch or a passed ball. The pitch is never considered to be an error. If a pitch is thrown so high, wide, or low in relation to the strike zone that a catcher is not able to catch or control the ball with ordinary effort before a runner can advance, the advance is ruled to have occurred by a wild pitch. Any such pitch which strikes the ground before it reaches home plate is automatically considered to be a wild pitch. However, a pitch is not a wild pitch merely because it is off-target. If the official scorer determines that the catcher should have been able to control the pitch and prevent an advance with ordinary effort, then the catcher is charged with a passed ball on the advance.

One exception to this rule occurs when a baserunner attempts to steal a base. If the runner "starts for the next base" before the pitcher delivers the pitch, the runner is credited with a stolen base and a wild pitch or passed ball is not charged. If a wild pitch or passed ball allows a runner to advance beyond the base that is stolen, the scorer may rule that the further advance occurred by a wild pitch or passed ball.

Other judgment calls
Some relatively uncommon situations may also require a judgment call by the official scorer.

When a defensive player has the ball and can end the play by preventing further advance, but fails to do so because of a mental mistake (not an error) and a runner subsequently scores, the official scorer must decide whether to credit the batter with a run batted in (RBI). If the runner recognized the mistake after slowing or pausing his advance, an RBI is not credited. If the runner was oblivious to the mistake or runs home without slowing, the batter is credited with an RBI.

If a runner advances because the defense does nothing to try to stop the advance, the scorer may rule that the advance was due to defensive indifference and no stolen base is credited. However, a throw is not required for a stolen base. If a fielder begins to visibly make an attempt to prevent an advance but then elects not to throw, the advance is not due to defensive indifference.

When a batter attempts a sacrifice bunt and the resulting bunt is so well-placed that he safely reaches first base, the official scorer may elect to credit the batter with a hit instead of a sacrifice if there is no error on the play and an ordinary effort by the defense would not have recorded an out.

Finally, when the starting pitcher of the winning team does not qualify for the win under rule 10.17, and the relief pitcher who would otherwise qualify for the win pitches "ineffectively" in a "brief appearance", the official scorer may choose to credit a "succeeding relief pitcher" with the win.

title: Official scorer