text:
The Demon-Haunted World

The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark is a 1995 book by the astrophysicist Carl Sagan. (Four of the 25 chapters were written with Ann Druyan). In it, Sagan aims to explain the scientific method to laypeople and to encourage people to learn critical and skeptical thinking. He explains methods to help distinguish between ideas that are considered valid science and those that can be considered pseudoscience. Sagan states that when new ideas are offered for consideration, they should be tested by means of skeptical thinking and should stand up to rigorous questioning.

Themes
Sagan explains that science is not just a body of knowledge, but is a way of thinking. Sagan shows how scientific thinking is both imaginative and disciplined, bringing humans to an understanding of how the universe is, rather than how they wish to perceive it. He says that science works much better than any other system because it has a "built-in error-correcting machine". Superstition and pseudoscience get in the way of the ability of many laypersons to appreciate the beauty and benefits of science. Skeptical thinking allows people to construct, understand, reason, and recognize valid and invalid arguments. Wherever possible, there must be independent validation of the concepts whose truth should be proved. He states that reason and logic would succeed once the truth were known. Conclusions emerge from premises, and the acceptability of the premises should not be discounted or accepted because of bias.

Dragon in my garage
As an example of skeptical thinking, Sagan offers a story concerning a fire-breathing dragon who lives in his garage. When he persuades a rational, open-minded visitor to meet the dragon, the visitor remarks that they are unable to see the creature. Sagan replies that he "neglected to mention that she's an invisible dragon". The visitor suggests spreading flour on the floor so that the creature's footprints might be seen, which Sagan says is a good idea, "but this dragon floats in the air". When the visitor considers using an infrared camera to view the creature's invisible fire, Sagan explains that her fire is heatless. He continues to counter every proposed physical test with a reason why the test will not work.

Sagan concludes by asking: "Now what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true."

Continuing with concepts relevant to the 'dragon in my garage' story, Sagan writes about a patient of John Mack who claimed to have scars on her body which were from encounters with aliens. Sagan writes that if the patient is asked what her scars look like, she is unable to show them because, unfortunately, they are located in the private areas of her body.

Baloney detection kit
Sagan presents a set of tools for skeptical thinking that he calls the "baloney detection kit". Skeptical thinking consists both of constructing a reasoned argument and recognizing a fallacious or fraudulent one. In order to identify a fallacious argument, Sagan suggests employing such tools as independent confirmation of facts, debate, development of different hypotheses, quantification, the use of Occam's razor, and the possibility of falsification. Sagan's "baloney detection kit" also provides tools for detecting "the most common fallacies of logic and rhetoric", such as argument from authority and statistics of small numbers. Through these tools, Sagan argues the benefits of a critical mind and the self-correcting nature of science can take place.

Sagan provides nine tools as the first part of this kit.

Sagan suggests that with the use of this "baloney detection kit" it is easier to critically think and find the truth.
 * 1) There must be independent confirmation of the facts given when possible.
 * 2) Encourage debate on the evidence from all points of view.
 * 3) Realize that an argument from authority is not always reliable. Sagan supports this by telling us that 'authorities" have made mistakes in the past and they will again in the future.
 * 4) Consider more than one hypothesis. Sagan adds to this by telling us that we must think of the argument from all angles and think all the ways it can be explained or disproved. The hypothesis that then still hasn't been disproved has a much higher chance of being correct.
 * 5) Try your best to not purely stick to a hypothesis that is your own and become biased. Sagan tells us to compare our own hypothesis with others to see if we can find reasons to reject our own hypothesis.
 * 6) Quantify. Sagan tells us that if whatever we are trying to explain has numerical value or quantitative data related to it, then we'll be much more able to compete against other hypotheses.
 * 7) If there is a chain of argument, every link in that chain must be correct.
 * 8) The use of Occam's razor, which tells us to choose the hypothesis that is simpler and requires the least amount of assumptions.
 * 9) Ask if a given hypothesis can be falsified. Sagan tells us that if a hypothesis cannot be tested or falsified then it is not worth considering.

Logical fallacies
There is a second part to the kit. This consists of twenty logical fallacies that one must not commit when offering up a new claim.

 * 1) Ad hominem. An arguer attacks the opposing arguer and not the actual argument.
 * 2) Argument from authority. Someone expects another to immediately believe that a person of authority or higher knowledge is correct.
 * 3) Argument from adverse consequences. Someone says that something must be done a certain way or else there will be adverse consequences.
 * 4) Appeal to ignorance. One argues a claim in that whatever has not been proved false must be true, and vice versa.
 * 5) Special pleading. An arguer responds to a deeply complex or rhetorical question or statement by, usually, saying "oh you don't understand how so and so works."
 * 6) Begging the question. An arguer assumes the answer and makes a claim such as, this happened because of that, or, this needs to happen in order for that to happen.
 * 7) Observational selection. Someone talks about how great something is by explaining all of the positive aspects of it while purposely not mentioning any of the negative aspects.
 * 8) Statistics of small numbers. Someone argues something by giving the statistics in small numbers, which isn't very reliable.
 * 9) Misunderstanding of the nature of statistics. Someone misinterprets statistics given to them.
 * 10) Fallacy of inconsistency. An arguer is very inconsistent in their claims.
 * 11) Non sequitur. This is Latin for "it doesn't follow." A claim is made that doesn't make much sense, such as "Our nation will prevail because God is great."
 * 12) Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Latin for "it happened after, so it was caused by." An arguer claims that something happened because of a past event when really it probably didn't.
 * 13) Meaningless question. Someone asks a question that has no real meaning or doesn't add to the argument at all.
 * 14) The excluded middle. An arguer only considers or mentions the two opposite extremes of the conversation and excludes the aspects in between the two extremes.
 * 15) Short-term vs. long-term. A subset of the excluded middle, but so important it was pulled it out for special attention.
 * 16) Slippery slope, related to excluded middle (e.g., If we allow abortion in the first weeks of pregnancy, it will be impossible to prevent the killing of a full-term infant. Or, conversely: If the state prohibits…)
 * 17) Confusion of correlation and causation. The latter causes the former
 * 18) Straw man. Caricaturing a position to make it easier to attack. This is also a short-term/long-term fallacy
 * 19) Suppressed evidence, or half-truth.
 * 20) Weasel word. Talleyrand said: "An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public."

Sagan provides a skeptical analysis of several examples of what he refers to as superstition, fraud, and pseudoscience such as witches, UFOs, ESP, and faith healing. He is critical of organized religion.

In a 2020 interview for Skeptical Inquirer, when Sagan's wife Ann Druyan was asked about the origin of the phrase "baloney detection kit", she said that

"It didn't really come from Carl. It actually came from a friend of mine named Arthur Felberbaum who died about forty years ago. He and Carl and I once sat down for dinner together. His politics were very left wing, so Carl and Arthur and I were trying to find common ground so that we could have a really good dinner together. And at one point, Arthur said, 'Carl, it's just that I dream that every one of us would have a baloney detection kit in our head.' And that's where that idea came from."

Misuse of science
Sagan indicates that science can be misused. Thus, he is highly critical of Edward Teller, the "father of the hydrogen bomb", and Teller's influence on politics, and contrasts his stance to that of Linus Pauling and other scientists who took moral positions.

Sagan also discusses the misuse of science in representation. He relates to the depiction of the mad scientist character in children's TV shows and is critical of this occurrence. Sagan suggests an addition of scientific television programs, many of which would take a look at believed hoaxes of the past and encourage viewers to engage in critical thinking to better represent science on popular television.

Misuse of psychiatric authority
Sagan indicates that therapists can contribute to the growth of pseudoscience or the infusion of "false stories". He is critical of John Mack and his support of abduction cases, which were represented in his patients.

Sagan writes about the story of Paul Ingram. Ingram's daughter reported that her father had sexually abused her. He was told that "sex offenders often repressed memories of their crimes." Ingram was eventually able to have a foggy visualization of the claimed events, and he suggested that perhaps "a demon might be responsible." Sagan describes how once Ingram started remembering events, so did several other individuals and family members. A "memory recovery" technique was performed on Ingram, and he confessed to the crimes. A medical examination was done on his daughter, where none of the scars she described were actually found. Sagan writes that Ingram later tried to plead innocence once "away from his daughters, his police colleagues, and his pastor."

Hoaxes
Hoaxes have played a valuable role in the history of science by revealing the flaws in our thinking and helping us advance our critical thinking skills. One of Sagan’s examples is the "Carlos hoax" by James Randi that revealed flaws in reporting by news media. Carlos was described as an ancient spirit that supposedly possessed José Alvarez and provided Alvarez with advanced knowledge about the universe. Many news outlets assumed this was true and reported it as such, which spread misinformation.

Sagan also cites crop circles as hoaxes.

Reception and legacy
The book was a New York Times bestseller. The contemporary skeptical movement considers it an important book. The Demon-Haunted World has been criticized (in Smithsonian magazine and The New York Times) for not incorporating certain information relevant to the items he discusses in his book. The Smithsonian article by Paul Trachtman argues that Sagan relates issues of government choices and declining scientific thinking skills to pseudoscience topics like astrology and faith healing but ignores other issues that may be causing governmental bodies and other individuals to turn away from science. One such issue is consequences of pouring governmental money into cancer research. Trachtman writes, "it is not because of such beliefs that Congress now approaches the NIH budget with an ax. In fact, billions of dollars spent on years of research in the war on cancer have spawned growing professional bureaucracies and diminishing medical benefits." Trachtman argues that Sagan does not include problems like growing bureaucracies and diminishing medical benefits as reasons for a lack of scientific attention. In his review for the New York Times, James Gorman also argues for an unaddressed issue in Sagan's book, saying Sagan fails to emphasize the idea that scientists should take a more active role in reaching science to the public, while he does mention the failures of the education system to do so.

The review in the Smithsonian magazine and a review in the New York Review of Books provide a range of opinions on Sagan's attitude towards religious ideas. Per the New York Review article, "when it comes to the Supreme Extraterrestrial he is rather circumspect." The Smithsonian article suggests Sagan was very clear about his religious beliefs in the book, for he "splits his universe in two, into science and irrationality." The Smithsonian goes on to say that Sagan's defined religious views fall within the area of an untestable claim, a type of claim he argues against in The Demon-Haunted World.

The article in the New York Review also claims that Sagan includes something in The Demon-Haunted World which he also is arguing against in that same text. The article mentions how Sagan discusses a natural predisposition people have towards science; but, the article says, "He does not tell us how he used the scientific method to discover the "embedded" human proclivity for science." Sagan heavily discusses the importance of using the scientific method in his book, and this article claims he strays away from his own message by not including a description of his use of the scientific method on this topic.

An article in the Los Angeles Times describe Sagan's book positively. The Los Angeles Times describes Sagan's book as "a manifesto for clear thought", with the main issue being the length of eight chapters. This lengthy discussion is also addressed in the archived New York Times article, which relates to the book as having areas which repeat themselves.

The Demon-Haunted World has been defined in more current sources as still relevant. An article in The Guardian, 2012, suggests the still current relevance of The Demon-Haunted World. Another article from The Verge in 2017 also supports this relevance. The latter article mentions a disconnect between what is proven by science to be the best answer and what is chosen to be done by governmental bodies. Carl Sagan covers this concept as a prominent issue in his book (1995), and this article outlines it as a problem still occurring in 2017.

Relevance
The Demon-Haunted World provides many arguments about our society that will always remain relevant. Sagan mainly argues for increased education among younger populations regarding critical thinking and scientific literacy. First, he explains that scientific literacy and critical thinking are essential for democracy, especially in the United States. Democracy allows people to share their beliefs, but with this come many different perspectives and arguments. Critical thinking is required to determine which are true or false. Scientific literacy provides similar tools and benefits to critical thinking; Sagan asserts science allows us to participate in the most significant method of understanding our Universe. Science is constantly evolving and is intertwined with our democracy, so to fully participate in democracy, you must be able to understand science. Sagan explains that science can be used to escape poverty, aid us in determining how to preserve our world, and to understand our origin and place in the Universe, “Without science and democracy, we risk being a nation of suckers.” Science can also be a valuable tool in examining a community’s social, political, and economic systems to reveal flaws and provide methods of improvement. Sagan asserts all individuals should have the ability to recognize errors.

Sagan insists that "there are no stupid questions" because asking questions is how we advance scientific knowledge. Denying that any questions are stupid also encourages children to develop critical thinking skills. Some examples Sagan provides include “Why is the grass green?” and “Why do we have toes?” Both of these help answer questions about biology, evolution, and the human body. Discouraging anyone from asking these questions and instead just accepting that these are facts of life may contribute to flaws in thinking patterns in the future. Being used to accepting the way things are just because is exactly what Sagan is attempting to fix, encouraging everyone to remain skeptical and question everything. He also places emphasis on using the “Baloney Detection Kit” to spot flaws (see above).

In the decade or so prior to the publication of The Demon-Haunted World, alien abduction accounts were common. Sagan provides concrete examples for why we shouldn’t assume things are true and instead use tools such as Occam's razor to seek more reasonable, science-based explanations.

title: The Demon-Haunted World


text:
User talk:Ma sivakumar

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We're very glad to have you with us. In fact, we'll even offer you a tour.

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Wikipedia Policies and guidelines

If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask around on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~

Fennec 18:04, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Ma sivakumar


text:
Heinrich von Stephan

Ernst Heinrich Wilhelm von Stephan (born Heinrich Stephan, January 7, 1831 – April 8, 1897) was a general post director for the German Empire who reorganized the German postal service. He was integral in the founding of the Universal Postal Union in 1874, and in 1877 introduced the telephone to Germany.

Biography
Stephan was born in Stolp (Słupsk), Pomerania, in the Kingdom of Prussia. He began his career as a local postal clerk in the service of the Prussian post in 1849. In 1866 he was put in charge by the Prussian government of federalizing the postal service that had long been privately run by the noble Thurn und Taxis family. In 1870 he was named director of postal services for the North German Confederation. Stephan's career then moved quickly up the ranks, as he was named Postmaster General of the German Empire in 1876, the Undersecretary of State in charge of the post office in 1880, and the Minister of Postal Services for Germany in 1895.

When Stephan began his work as a postal worker, Germany was divided into 17 independent states, each with its own separate policies and fees. He worked early on to establish a uniform postage rate throughout Germany, to facilitate easier mailing. His general goal of standardization and internationalization is evident in his work to combine the postal service with the telegraph service in Germany, and in his efforts to organize the International Postal Conference in Bern in 1874, in which the Universal Postal Union was established. He introduced the postcard (which he had initially suggested in 1865) to Germany after Chancellor Otto von Bismarck promoted him in 1870: the postcard came into widespread use in the subsequent Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71 as a method of communication between units in the field. He is also credited with having introduced the telephone to Germany.

Stephan died in 1897 in Berlin, having made a profound impact on the standardization of mail service worldwide. He was also actively engaged in cultivating purely Germanic terminology for the field of telecommunication and postal services. The German-speaking afterworld thus gained terms such as "Fernsprechapparat" (distance-speaking-device) for telephone, "Wertzeichen" (value-sign) for stamp, "postlagernd" (post-office-stored) for poste restante and "Anschrift" (towards-lettering, analogous to "Ansprache" or "Anrede" for addressing a person or a salutation) for address. The word creations mandated by von Stephan in the 1870s gained circulation at post offices and among its workforce, but many times the Greek or French original term was retained by German speakers. Thus at home people would say "frankieren" for putting stamps on a postcard or letter envelope (Briefumschlag) among themselves, but switch to "freimachen" (absolve from stamp-debt, thus permitting delivery) when at the post office. Or at home they would say "Telefon" in everyday speech, although the arcane official term was "Fernsprecher" (remote speaker) or Fernsprechapparat. His achievements in the field of postal services far outweigh this pedantic purism and it was his proposal to have the Siemens company manufacture telephones which led to the development of an entirely new business segment for the famous German company in 1878.

German honours

 * Iron Cross 2nd Class, on Black Band (1870) (Prussia)
 * Knight 2nd Class of the Order of the Red Eagle, with Oak Leaves, 1873; with Star, 26 October 1874; Grand Cross with Oak Leaves, 27 January 1894 (Prussia)
 * Knight 1st Class of the Royal Order of the Crown, 18 January 1880 (Prussia)
 * 1885 Ennoblement by Kaiser Wilhelm I, King of Prussia
 * Commander's Cross and Star of the Royal House Order of Hohenzollern, 1 February 1892 (Prussia)
 * Grand Cross of the House Order of Albert the Bear, 1881 (Anhalt)
 * Grand Cross of the Order of the Zahringer Lion, 1882 (Baden)
 * Grand Cross of the Order of Merit of Saint Michael, 1872 (Bavaria)
 * Grand Cross of the Saxe-Ernestine House Order (Ernestine duchies)
 * Grand Cross of the Order of Merit of Philip the Magnanimous, 25 August 1880 (Hesse and by Rhine)
 * Honour Cross 1st Class of the House Order of Lippe (Lippe-Detmold)
 * Grand Cross with Crown in Gold of the House Order of the Wendish Crown (Mecklenburg)
 * Grand Cross of the House and Merit Order of Duke Peter Friedrich Ludwig, 8 April 1873 (Oldenburg)
 * Grand Cross of the Order of the White Falcon, 1889 (Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach)
 * Grand Cross of the Albert Order, 1883 (Saxony)
 * Honour Cross 1st Class (Schwarzburg)
 * Member 1st Class of the Order of Merit (Waldeck-Pyrmont)
 * Grand Cross of the Friedrich Order, 1873 (Württemberg)

Foreign honours

 * Knight 3rd Class of the Imperial Order of the Iron Crown, 1861 (Austrian Empire)
 * Grand Cross of the Imperial Austrian Order of Franz Joseph, 1872 (Austria-Hungary)
 * Grand Cross of the Austrian Imperial Order of Leopold, 1891 (Austria-Hungary)
 * Commander of the Order of Leopold (Belgium)
 * Commander of the Imperial Order of the Rose (Brazil)
 * Grand Cross of the Order of the Dannebrog, 2 November 1874 (Denmark)
 * Grand Officer of the National Order of the Legion of Honour (France)
 * Commander of the Order of the Crown of Italy (Italy)
 * Grand Cordon of the Order of Meiji (Japan)
 * Grand Cross of the Order of the Oak Crown (Luxembourg)
 * Grand Cross of the Order of the Netherlands Lion (Netherlands)
 * Member 1st Class of the Order of Osmanieh (Ottoman Empire)
 * Grand Cross of the Royal Military Order of Our Lord Jesus Christ (Portugal)
 * Grand Cross of the Order of the Crown of Romania (Romania)
 * Knight 1st Class of the Imperial Order of Saint Stanislaus (Russia)
 * Grand Cross of the Most Noble Order of the Crown of Siam (Siam)
 * Commander 2nd Class of the Royal Order of Isabella the Catholic (Spain)
 * Commander 1st Class of the Royal Norwegian Order of Saint Olav, 6 February 1869 (Sweden-Norway)
 * Commander Grand Cross of the Royal Order of the North Star, 14 January 1875 (Sweden-Norway)

Works

 * Geschichte der Preussischen Post von ihrem Ursprunge bis auf die Gegenwart: nach amtl. Quellen. Berlin 1859. Reprint 1987, ISBN 3-7685-3686-6.

title: Heinrich von Stephan


text:
Talk:Main Page/Archive 16

Main Page/Classic
I created Main Page/Classic so that it can be maintained and updated. The new Main Page system is a 30-day trial. It has not yet been approved. And we need to maintain the Classic version through this time period. Kingturtle 01:20, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Huh? Where did you get the idea that the new Main Page is on a 30-day trial?—Eloquence 01:26, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)

 * That is how it was presented to me. Let me try to dig up where I read it. Kingturtle 01:28, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I sure hope not. 30 days is way too long to keep this crap. Anthony DiPierro 01:31, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

The text-only link I can see the usefulness of. The table-free version link I can barely tolerate. But a link to a version which is clearly inferior yet uses the same layout elements (i.e. there's no technical reason to keep it alive) is simply not acceptable. Wikipedia operates on a consensus model. There have been some objections, and we have tried to work together to overcome these concerns. But the vast majority of comments have been highly positive. This is a continuing development process. If you are so unhappy with this page that you think it cannot be improved for you to accept it, then you can of course campaign for a vote. I suggest that we work together to find ways to make this page more acceptable to everyone instead.—Eloquence 01:34, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)

 * Hmmm. I cannot find where I got the 30-day notion. Am I the only one who remembers that? It is unlikely me to mis-remember something like that.

 * As for my rationale behind creating the Classic page and linking it to the Main Page....it was not because I am unhappy with the Main Page. It was because I thought it was a trial period. And I didn't want the other version to get out of date. Kingturtle 02:00, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC) P.S. I have removed the Classic page link from the Main Page because I cannot find anything written to support what I perceived.

 * Thank you for removing the link. I don't think a trial period makes sense here, but as I said, anyone who has strong negative feelings about this page can call for a vote. I predict there would be overwhelming support for the current page, though.—Eloquence 02:01, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)

 * There already is a vote. The old version is winning. At the very least you should take out the font resizing.  It looks like crap on my computer with the font resizing, and 90% is almost the same as 100% anyway. Anthony DiPierro 05:55, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, lets have a vote to find out whether there is consensus to replace the old page with the proposed one. Jamesday 08:51, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * One week after starting the poll, the old one is still the most popular choice. Jamesday 21:54, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I for one continue to see the new changes as a tremendous improvement. I'm actually reading much of the posted material (something I've not done for awhile), which raises, for me, a question for the naysayers.  Clearly the presentation is a vast improvement—more attractive, more professional looking, anyway you look at it. However, it may well contain many inconveniences for some (links too far down, pictures slow to load, navigation not what you are used to)—but get real. If you are a regular here, you go right away to your login, then off to your tasks. The main page is not for you; never has been, never will be. It is for people coming here to get an  encyclopedia. It has to be attractive to them—100%. The rest of us can use it, but do not need it. I see no vote of the mass of editors as having much relevence.  It is the anonymous users that need to decide these questions of acceptability. Keep tweaking it; but always in the direction of simplicity and wow! for the public, not the editors - Marshman 05:19, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * This is probably obvious, but I think it's worth mentioning now that there is hardly any content in the source of the Main Page (it's all in the MediaWiki namespace), editors can create alternate "main pages" customized for their tastes; people can create summary pages with Anniversaries, In the News, etc. all on one page, and just plug the msg: thingies into whatever formatting they want. This is pretty cool, and I think some people have already done this. -- Merphant 05:34, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

The old page is not winning the straw poll. It was supposed to consider variations in the design of the new page as we tried to compact things down. If you combine all the votes for the different new versions, they outnumber the votes for the old version. The simple old vs. new question should be handled separately. --Michael Snow 00:14, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

The old page has the most votes. And people can vote for multiple pages. Ergo, the old page is winning. Anthony DiPierro 03:15, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Hardly. Right now it's 11 to 8 in favor of the new version in some form, counting only unique users (and counting you as a voter for the old page, even though you've also voted for new versions). Not to mention two voters down below who apparently also favor the new version. --Michael Snow 19:21, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * What's the count after excluding those who developed the new one? With either count, do you come up with a consensus or something close to a consensus that the new one is an improvement and should be used? It's clear that it's going to take changes, based on the feedback which has been given, before that consensus arrives. Jamesday 21:59, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Main page/image confusion
Is it too much to ask to only bold items on the main page which are depicted in images? Often it's difficult to tell what the image refers to, and all of the bold text amidst all of the short lines and links makes the text difficult to read. - Seth Ilys 05:54, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree, there is too much arbitrary bolding of words. I'm not sure why van bomb exploded is bold and not World Trade Center, or Luftwaffe and not Hitler.  Also, as Seth Ilys points out, there are no picture captions, so it's not clear what's referring to what.  I happened to recognize the picture of Ferdinand Marcos, but I'm sure there were plenty of folks who were wondering "Who's dat?"  See my comments also at: MediaWiki talk:Dih Fuzheado 06:17, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * The bold always means: Where can I read more about this specific item, rather than any subtext thereof. I think it's a good idea to bold the links to the main article for each item to make sure we have a main article for each item. I agree a better solution needs to be found for images, e.g. a) image always refers to top item, b) supersmall caption below image, c) some nice vertical spacing etc.—Eloquence 06:30, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree, except I tend to prefer captions since the aniv section rotates its images. But there is no easy way to add captions. IMO annotation text should become caption text for all images, not just thumbnails. This in fact was noted as the expected behavior when the new image code hit the streets. --mav 00:44, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * It is always possible to float your mouse cursor over the image to see the ALT title, which should be named after the topic of the image. Ancheta Wis 20:18, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Get a real forum
Why dont you guys get a real forum instead of this?

cuz we don't like to talk to each other Lirath Q. Pynnor

 * Once you get the rhythm and put in the time, you will see that TALK pages have many advantages over forums. Join Wikipedia and start your own watch list. :) Kingturtle 06:39, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Watchlists start to lose their usefulness after the first few thousand articles have been added to them. : \ Lirath Q. Pynnor
 * As a matter of fact, we do have a vbulliten (php) forum, and it does have advantages over talk pages. Perl 22:28, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Great job!!!!
Great job w the front page, I think your going to attract ALOT more people w this format than the last one, its awesome! Woo-hoo! Sam Spade 08:57, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Recent deaths
Excuse me for not wading through all the previous discussion, but what happened to recent deaths? Does it belong under the news now? --Jiang 09:25, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes - but in both cases only the most well-developed articles are featured. Note the the first item in that section is a recent death (although it is very event-like). --mav

That is NOT! Hermann Göring!!! It's Gerhard Schröder

That's true; Hermann Göring never has been the chancellor of Germany. You'd better changed that.

 * Fixed. --mav

50%/50%
I suggest that a sysop change the tables so they are both he same size. There used to be more on the left than on the right, but this has now changed with the removal of "obituaries". Perl 21:07, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)~

 * I strongly disagree - such a layout would be visually boring. We already had this discussion over a year ago when the last Main Page went was developed. --mav

[Idea] Wikilary - A multilingual vocabulary
It would be great make a vocabulary like www.wordreference.com or www.babylon.com, but free. Is it possible? Sounds interesting to you?

 * Have a look at Wiktionary. -- Merphant 22:35, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Today's front page
The thing about the spacewalk is wrong. The entire Russian crew of Mir would routinely go on spacewalks together. Perhaps "a craft's entire" should be changed to "the craft's entire"

Re this: "that U.S. President LBJ once battered Canadian Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson over Canada's Vietnam War policy?"
 * Lyndon Johnson should be refered to by his name, not the acronym LBJ.
 * What does "battered" mean? Did Johnson cover Pearson with batter? Did he pummel him with his fists? Are there other definitions of "batter" I am unaware of? Adam 01:21, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * See Template:dyk page history for explanation of the change. jengod 01:26, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * Well that's very interesting but doesn't alter the fact that the usage of "battered" is wrong and should be corrected, and that many people won't know who "LBJ" was. Adam 02:21, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * I saw battered and wondered the same thing. Did LBJ beat the Canadian Prime minister?  Wouldn't this be illegal? Perl 02:23, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Apparently he grabbed him by the collar and slammed him into a wall. That is a physical assault, but it is not "battery", which means "striking repeatedly with the fists." (And, yes, it probably is illegal).
 * For the love of god, if you don't like it, just go change it and stop moaning! Please. :) jengod 03:08, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * The main page is a protected page. Adam 04:00, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Adam, the main page has been broken up into little MediaWiki chunks that normal users can edit. However, this needs to be documented much better, as it's very hard to figure out. Also, the names like MediaWiki:dih are quite cryptic. Fuzheado 04:02, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * It's called security by obscurity.—Eloquence
 * Which, as everyone knows, is a really bad security design. :-) Evercat 04:07, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I was the one who made the sections into mediawiki msgs. Yes, it is definately not a perfect system and it is hard to figure out, but its better than not being able to edit it at all. There will be a problem, however, with looking at "snapshots" (old versions) of the main page—you will have to also find the old versions of each mediawiki msg. I don't know if there will be a way to allow only selected users to edit the main page in the future. Thats up to the developers to decide. Perl 14:17, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Title of main page
Could I suggest that Main Page is a rather dull and obvious title for our front window to the world? What about Welcome to Wikipedia or something a bit more zippy? Adam 09:11, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm not advocating a change, but editing MediaWiki:Mainpage does that. That also changes the Main Page link in the sidebar and on the bottom of every page. 'Welcome to Wikipedia' would be a bit long for those areas. --mav

Yes I have to agree with that. It's a pity the title of the main page is linked to the name of the links on all the other pages, which I agree ought to say Main page. Is there no way they can be delinked? Adam 11:36, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't think there is. When I changed Main Page in WikiBooks:MediaWiki:Mainpage to Wikibooks the links in the side and footer bars changed. --mav

The McEncyclopedia
The front page has a distinctly "USA Today" look and feel. "Did you know?" WTF? It reads like a placemat at a Chuck E. Cheese, or something one would expect from World Book, not Britannica. Marteau

 * Did you look at the Britannica frontpage? It has a similar selection: "Biography of the Day", "This Day in History", "Britannica Highlights", "What's New?", "Monthly Focus". Theirs are ridiculously small and narrow, but the basic idea is the same.—Eloquence 15:43, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * Which Chuckie Cheese location has "...that industrialist Nazi Party member John Rabe saved more than 50,000 Chinese nationals from the Rape of Nanking?" or "...that the Palau Congressional Library was founded in 1981, and has a staff of two?" or "...that because of an effort to curb the spread of STDs, prostitution in Germany has been legal since the 1920s?" -- user:zanimum

 * The comparison with World Book is not one to avoid, IMO. Wikipedia has more popular appeal than academic appeal.    If there is a stated goal to evolve Wikipedia towards a Britannica-like format, I must have missed it.  (I only recall scope comparisons, say gross numbers of articles, comparisons). - Bevo 16:22, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Opening paragraph overloaded
I think the opening paragraph has a tad too many links in it, which make it too overloaded, and I think people might just skip reading it. How about just:
 * Welcome to Wikipedia, a multilingual, free-content encyclopedia. We started in January 2001 and are now working on articles in the English version. To learn how you can edit any article right now, visit the Community Main Page or experiment in the sandbox.

I'm taking the extreme position here, but seriously, how many people do you think will click and read on all those links. Dori | Talk 15:54, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * I tend to agree. It's the fit-everything-in syndrome.—Eloquence 15:59, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree with both Dori and Eloquence, which is that people tend not to click on links in text while they are in "reading mode" and too many links just makes them glaze over. So in that respect we should cut them down in the paragraph.  But that also means it is problematic, in that we provide fewer entry points to have them discover our community and the revolution part of Wikipedia, the editability. The quickbar link might help (see below) but it's still a weakness of the current design. Fuzheado 00:14, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Other Languages
With the new layout, the links to other language versions (and anything below it) is impossible to see (at least for me) Is it possible to fix this? ---Fern 22:34, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Have you tried increasing your browser font size?—Eloquence

We need to have a button on the quickbar for the Community Page.
We need to have a button on the quickbar for the Community Page. Kingturtle 23:15, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Agreed. jengod 23:22, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm thinking about various solutions that do not take additional vertical space.—Eloquence

 * IMHO, there is enough space for one more button on the sidebar. It makes complete sense (to me) to have a Community Page button above the Recent Changes button. If you are looking for other solutions, how about this....make it so clicking on the Wikipedia-icon takes the user to the Community Page. Kingturtle 23:31, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, this is one of the solutions I am considering. The problem is that in "floating" mode, the sidebar is not scrollable, so if it gets too long, the stuff at the bottom gets invisible and unreachable on low screen solutions (possibly including the quite common 800x600).—Eloquence

 * Also, I'd be willing to have current events removed and community page added. I never ever click on that current events button. Kingturtle 23:44, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * The current events button is very important and I'm pretty sure that it won't be removed. Perl 23:51, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * How about related changes? :) Kingturtle 23:52, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Please see a moderately-lengthy discussion of this very point at Wikipedia_talk:Main_Page. :) Jwrosenzweig 00:19, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * By "this very point" I mean a previous discussion of this general idea, not cutting related changes....which is of course a bad idea, in my opinion. :) Jwrosenzweig

 * The sidebar is overall too-flooded with links. I'd like to throw out a bunch of them. Until then I don't think we should have the CMP link there too, even though I agree that it should be there somewhere in time.

 * My nominations of links to cut:
 * My contributions
 * Current events
 * Related Changes
 * Special pages
 * I understand that there is a certain group of users that will defend each of these items, but.. this is my opinion. There is another alternative, and that is to refactor the sidebar and bottom and top links totally. Do we need some of the links in both places? Maybe we should keep MP, RC, Edit, Disc, PH in the top/bottom toolbars only and rethink (a little) our sidebar? — Sverdrup (talk) 00:24, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I read some of those posts JW referenced. I don't want to be forced to see the main page when I don't want to. I'll review the main page when I want to, not because I am forced to. I want to go directly to items which USED TO BE ON the main page, but are no longer there. It should be one-click to get there. How can such a simple request take so long to figure out. Kingturtle 00:27, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Re: Sverdrup's remarks, I completely disagree....except for perhaps Special pages, all of those suggestions need to stay. I use two of them frequently, and a 3rd (current events) has a very loyal group of users who are frequent clickers of it.  Re: Kt, I agree that we need a direct link, but I don't think there's any need to become upset (you seem upset, anyway).  We've had this new page less than a week.  It'll take time to sort these things out.  I do feel like we're close to consensus, though -- maybe we can add the link somehow over the weekend? Jwrosenzweig 00:32, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am a bit upset. I cannot find resources quickly right now. And I don't like having to poke around. With all the bold moves being made to the main page, I am just surprised the quickbar is being treated so sacredly. I'll be ok. :) Kingturtle 00:39, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I want to see numbers about the "loyal group of users" on Current Events. It was never done well before, it is not a core competency of Wikipedia, and I'm surprised it is being treated as a sacred cow over what should be crucial information - how to edit a page, welcome newcomers, FAQ, etc. Fuzheado 00:43, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Fuzheado, I have no idea what the numbers are, but that page has recently been taking a pretty stready stream of 30-50 edits a day....seems like it's important to a lot of people, if you ask me. :) Jwrosenzweig 00:49, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * It gets edits so that people can update the main page news; since it's linked on the main page, that should be enough. In my opinion, Current Events and/or Special Pages can be replaced with the Community Main Page. --Michael Snow 00:52, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I believe a button for the Community Main Page would be a great improvement over the directories and backlinks User:168... created. I tried to clean those out, but 168... reverted me. If you have an opinion, see Wikipedia talk:Main Page. --Michael Snow 00:55, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I'll add a poll to Wikipedia talk:Main Page.—Eloquence 01:13, Feb 28, 2004 (UTC)

A rare plea
I have a form of dyslexia. The Main Page/Main Page and Talk:Main Page/Wikipedia talk:Main Page is really blowing my mind up. I am getting very confused at which is which. When my brain gets crossed up like this for long periods of time, I get headaches and I get frustrated. I should get used to the difference eventually. But I may just keep getting headaches. Is there any way we can rename "Wikipedia:Main Page" to something else that doesn't so closely resemble "Main Page"...anything, I don't care, as long as it isn't so similar? Kingturtle 00:45, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't have dyslexia, and I find it confusing as well. Especially since the naming conventions turns "namespace:foo" into "namespace talk: foo".  It could be fixed simply by turning Wikipedia:Main Page into Wikipedia:Community Page or something like that. But I agree it's confusing, and I get confused looking at my watchlist as to which conversation is which. Fuzheado 01:04, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree - it is confusing. Community home page would be better. --mav 05:10, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I heartily endorse this sentiment. -- Infrogmation 18:47, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Re this, allow me to re-float my suggestion from above that Main Page is a very boring name for our front page and should be renamed something more welcoming. That would also end the confusion KT refers to. Adam 02:28, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Something welcoming like "Welcome" would be good. And while we are at it, how about a "Community" link in the left panel, under "Current events" - Gaz 13:21, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I'm glad everyone agrees, because so do I. :-) I've moved it to Community Portal. — Timwi 13:45, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks! Much easier for me! Kingturtle 18:26, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

wow
The Main Page is so much cooler than the previous Main Page. Thank you, it makes Wikipedia make really professional. RickK 07:26, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

"Selected anniversaries"
Selected anniversaries strikes me as still a little strange. Why not have it be something nice and general like "In history..."? ekips

 * I agree. Now that the content switches automatically, "This day in history" would work well.—Eloquence 00:21, Feb 29, 2004 (UTC)

 * Not even "This day" -- just "In history..." It's highly flexible, you could list events for maybe the past two or three days since there is no date specified, and it doesn't seem quite as awkward as "Selected anniversaries" strikes me. (I don't know why, but it just seems misplaced.) Ekips 00:29, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Holidays also go in that section now, so "In history" and esp "This day in history" do not work. --mav

 * If holidays go in now, then how does "Selected anniversaries" work? Presidents' Day is not exactly an anniversary.  Nor is Valentine's Day, or Labor Day, or Memorial Day, or Thanksgiving for that matter.  (Just to cover US holidays) Ekips 05:12, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Consult your dictionary:

1. The annual return of the day on which any notable event took place, or is wont to be celebrated; as, the anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.
 * See also List of historical anniversaries. --mav

 * I never said anything about Independence Day. There are some holidays that are plainly not anniversaries.  Independence Day is not one of them, certainly. Ekips 18:19, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Read the definition - the example is just an example. Now what holidays are not anniversaries? If it happens once a year at a predetermined date, then it is an anniversary. --mav

The spacewalk was not the first spacewalk ever involving the crafts entire crew -- the Russians have been doing this for years. It is the first America spacewalk ever involving the crafts entire crew. Lirath Q. Pynnor
 * If you find a problem with it, fix it. Thats what the wiki is all about! Perl 03:21, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Images
The image for the periodic table is an example of what I mentioned fearing before we instituted this version of the Main Page. The graphic, in my opinion, looks silly, and doesn't give any impression of "the periodic table". Perhaps a thumbnail that merely showed the square for Hydrogen (or some element) would be better. My point in general would be, I think no image would be classier than a thumbnail that is no longer remotely recognizable. We need to consider how to do this more tastefully (or agree that, some days, there won't be a picture for the featured article....which would be no disaster, in my opinion). Any thoughts? Jwrosenzweig 04:01, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

is a direct resize of the actual table in the article. I think it works rather well.—Eloquence

 * Agreed; anyone who's ever taken a chemistry class (or been introduced to the concept of chemistry in generic "science!" classes) in their entire life will recognize that image. --Brion 05:02, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, as someone who has taken said science classes (and who feels a trifle insulted by Brion's comment, though I assume it wasn't intended), it wasn't immediately obvious, and I don't think it adds anything to the main page as it stands. If everybody disagrees with me (not a new situation in my life), that's fine.  I just don't care for the image: I think a number of well-educated individuals won't instantly recognize it, and that the image when recognized still looks odd.  My larger point, though, still stands: what do we do when no picture or recognizable-when-small picture is available?  Are we willing to go pictureless? Jwrosenzweig 05:04, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Clarification--the image Eloquence shows and which is now on the main page is, in fact, more recognizable, and far more satisfactory to me. It is not the image I originally objected to (I looked again, said "hey, that's not so bad", and checked) (the image was [[Image:-TableImage.svg|100px|Periodic table of elements]])
 * -- I'll drop the issue re: this image, though again I'm concerned on a more general level. Jwrosenzweig 05:06, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I'd prefer not to go pictureless. Pictures are a good way to entice the reader into following the links. But we should not discriminate against articles where pictures are notoriously hard to come by. So we might come up with some more generic drawings and pictures - icons, really - to use for mathematics, chemistry etc. articles. There would only be for the Main Page, of course. Theresa Knott has created some great drawings for Wikibooks, maybe she would be willing to do some for us.—Eloquence
 * Erik, this sounds good. I was concerned about the kind of articles you mention, and hope we can find a good solution.  Perhaps now that the trolls are mostly driven away from Theresa, she can do as you suggest. If not, I hope we can find a similar solution from elsewhere. Jwrosenzweig 05:11, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Okay, [[Image:-TableImage.svg|100px|Periodic table of elements]] definitely is less recognizable, since it is not the conventional form of the table that most people would be exposed to. That version was not on the Main Page when I made my above comment. I do stand by my comment in reference to [[Image:Ptable-MainPage.png]]; if you really can't recognize it, I'd be rather surprised. If so, could you show me what the periodic table layout you're familiar with looks like? --Brion 05:15, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Not going to fight you on this one, Brion. :-) I responded to your comments quickly (you had my dander up a bit, I admit) and didn't scrutinize the picture to notice that it had been changed. The first one looked like a blob to me...once I read "periodic table" I figured it out, but initially it looked like an error.  The current picture is just fine, yes, and looks like what I remember from the days I was awake. ;-)  Sorry if I was brusque.  At least we agree now. :-) Jwrosenzweig 05:17, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

may not be conventional, but it is the more accurate form of the table. is used more often only due to the fact that the true form of the table is a bit wide, so the f-block is arbitrarily thrown down below the other blocks - that is a distortion of reality. --mav

 * Bah. We should use images that people recognize, like the conventional form of the table. Mav, none of the tables are reality in any way, they are just two different systematic schemes, none of them "better". (this is a no-matter now, as the article moved away from the main page for a long time) — Sverdrup (talk) 13:00, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * The wide version is a better representation of the table - See period 6 element and period 7 element. Just because people are ignorant doesn't mean we should perpetuate that ignorance when it makes sense not to. Since both images fit, it was better to have the more correct one. --mav

The centering looks kinda silly
Sorry to whine, but I think we should revert the centering of the first paragraph. screenshot — Sverdrup (talk) 15:13, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The "cache purging" thing
According to the IRC cabal, it's necessary to make some kind of edit to force the MSG's which are most of the main page to update. Maybe one of the Maintenance tasks should be to make sure an edit is made every 1-2 hours, especially when the UST date changes? Pakaran. 15:18, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * It's only the client-side caching that is affected. If you hit shift+reload on the Main Page, you get a fresh copy, and so does any first-time viewer. So it's not really that important to "purge" the MP, but if you make any significant edits, it's probably a good idea. Ideally the page timestamp of all pages using a MediaWiki text should be updated whenever the MediaWiki text is updated.—Eloquence 15:25, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)

 * Do you want me to add that last to the SF feature requests page, or will you? Pakaran. 15:28, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Realistically, User talk:Tim Starling is probably a better place ;-). He coded the MediaWiki stuff.—Eloquence

President Aristide did not flea but was kidnaped by US troops from Haiti. I hope someone will change the rhetoric of the blurb on the front page. — ALC 1 Mar, 2004
 * I havent heard any reports of him being kidnapped. Perl 17:48, 1

Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * I have, but they're controversial. The President is claiming he was kidnapped, the US is claiming he was helped to flee for his own security. Best to avoid the controversy altogether. Toby W 11:54, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * The Story is still changing as of this morning, Aristide is claiming a group of Haitians and Americans forced him out and not US Marines. I do not doubt that there could be CIA involvement, but, Aristide has been known for streching the truth a bit. They may have made him realize that they would leave him to any fate that the Haitian mob would inflict on him if he didn't have to good sense to leave. That has been in the headlines. Perhaps we should leave it to the fact that he is gone, and let his kidnapping story change a few more times before spreading the rumor. Dominick 12:31, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

movie poster art, do we have rights to display it, in general?
The current Main page has a recent movie's poster art displayed. Under what reasoning is it OK to display this image here in the Wikipedia? - Bevo 21:07, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Bevo: Yes, we do, under the fair use provisions of US copyright law. See fair use. -- Seth Ilys 02:17, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * For extensive discussion of this, see Do fair use images violate the GFDL?. Basically, the answer is that the site is hosted in the US and in the US, if a use is fair use, the right to that use was never granted to the initial copyright holder and it remains in the public domain, which is compatible with the GFDL. The images are also not part of the document but are instead associated documents with their own independent history. It's still far from ideal to use fair use images on the main page. Good enough for now but we really do want to be moving away from it. Jamesday 23:54, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

copyrighted images on the Wikipedia Main page
I guess I'm just annoyed that Wikipedia's main page is using a copyrighted image, justly or not. Doesn't seem to fit the openness that is elsewhere so evident here. - Bevo 02:22, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I think Bevo has a good point. I haven't had time to formulate my own opinion on the issue. Perl 02:30, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Copyrights is in line with my thinking. - Bevo 02:34, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree, this is problematic. Fuzheado 02:52, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * The trend is not good! Now two of the three images on the Main page are under copyright (not public domain).  I'm glad some others here see the incongruity with the Wikipedia guidelines for contributors to regular articles (that strongly encourage the use of public domain images, with only very infrequent use of copyrighted images under "fair use" privileges) -and- the composition of recent Main pages. - Bevo 22:25, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Is that time magazine image really only fair use? I would think that it is a new creation and should be considered the work of the person who used photoshop. Perl 22:31, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Bevo - everything new we submit here is copyrighted. It is not an evil thing. --mav
 * Bevo has a good point. I don't know why you felt the need to insult him.  Your comment seems arrogant and rude. Perl 23:50, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * All the images I submit to Wikipedia are under copyright, and so is everything both you and I write (under the GFDL). Bevo either thinks that that is a bad thing - that only stuff in the public domain is good - or Bevo is confused about what "copyrighted" means. But I changed my post anyway. --mav

 * All I've said was not with regards to anything I think about the issue. I just wanted to point out what was stated Wikipedia policy (see yesterday's content at Copyrights ).  I see Jamesday has modified it today to not talk of our goals to promote "free content".  If that edit stands (I don't plan to edit it), then our Main page practice is now in concert with that Wikipedia guideline.  But, it took that edit to get there, and it was not the policy when I first started this thread of discussion. - Bevo 00:28, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * The original Time images were used as fair use, so the derivative work itself can only be as free as fair use. It is a straightforward case of fair use and is one example of how extremely useful fair use is, being relied on very heavily in news-oriented reporting like this item. Jamesday 23:59, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree - we really should be showcasing free content as much as possible. While fair use is OK, we strongly prefer free content and our main page should reflect that and where we want to end up! Jamesday 23:37, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Font size
What is the reason for the 90% font size of the introductory paragraph? It draws the reader's attention away from the basic of explanation of what Wikipedia is in the first place. Yet that is what makes Wikipedia different from other online encyclopaedias. Without that paragrph, the user might as well just go back to Britannica! The size keeps getting reduced again (sometimes to 90%, sometimes to 80%), but I've never seen anybody explain why this is a good thing. -- Toby Bartels 21:16, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Toby, I completely agree. This is my big issue with the current redesign -- it does not make it obvious and clear why Wikipedia is anything other than yet another encyclopedia.  It should trumpet the fact that it is open content, that anyone can edit, and how they can do it, now.  If we had this front page at the time I first discovered Wikipedia, I don't think I would be aware of why it's so revolutionary. Fuzheado 02:56, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Locking images on the main page
This hasn't happened yet, but it probably will eventually. Someone will vandalize one of the images on the main page. I recommend that the images be locked for the time they are on the main page to prevent this. I suppose we could wait for it to happen first, but why risk it?

-- Nohat 00:29, 2004 Mar 2 (UTC)

 * As long as we allow people to edit the MediaWiki for the main page, protecting the images doesn't really do anything, because the vandal could just link to a different image instead of vandalizing the protected image. --Michael Snow 01:00, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * It isn't possible to protect images. You can protect the image description page, but that doesn't prevent the image being changed. (It also makes the image appear in the Protection log). Angela. 01:22, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)

 * If vandalism does become an issue for MediaWiki pages, maybe we could limit edits to all MediaWiki pages to logged-in users - just like uploads. --mav 01:24, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Thats a very good idea mav! Perl 01:29, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * As was pointed out above, I very, very much doubt that an anonymous user would go to the trouble of figuring out how to vandalize the mediawiki articles or to upload images. It'd be much easier just to vandalize the featured article. As my security prof said - you're house doesn't have to be Fort Knox, just a little safer than your neighbor's house. →Raul654 00:22, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, since it hasn't been a problem yet, I can see that we don't need to do anything about it yet. However, don't be surprised to find me doing the "I told you so" song and dance when it does become a problem. :-) Nohat 03:03, 2004 Mar 3 (UTC) I wanted to add that there was a user, I don't remember who it was now, who was subsequently banned after he moved the Main Page. This security hole was promptly fixed. I would suggest, that even if we don't use it right away, that we create the ability to protect images, so that the number of people who can deal with image vandalism is the entire set of admins, not just the developers. Nohat 03:04, 2004 Mar 3 (UTC)
 * I remember reading that buddahinside moved the page. Perl 14:58, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Main page and NPOV content
Where should I post my opinions about the rhetoric used on the front page to describe what is happening in the news? I feel that the summary on Haiti and Aristide is very problematic and one-sided. How can this be addressed??

 * Doesn't seem to be anything about Haiti on the Main Page at the moment... Evercat 00:27, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm guessing the anon was referring to the blurb from yesterday about Aristide announcing that he was essentially kidnapped by the US military. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 01:40, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I was surprised by the non-NPOV wording, as well. Also, apparently there is no history kept of the Main page revisions, although there is a "Page history" page for it that should contain links to prior revisions.  - Bevo 01:48, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * The history is here: and the relevant edit is here: . The wording reflected Aristide's claim, which, admittedly, lacked a certain perspective. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 01:51, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I see. You have to consider the templates from which the page is constructed.  You do lose the archive of the total composition. In some ways that's regretable.  Like not having an archive of covers of magazines, or front pages of newspapers.  Oh, well.  I guess it's unavoidable.  (I suppose that this carries over into regular pages that carry tag expansions as well.) - Bevo 02:01, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Also, check the Reuters article that was the source for the blurb on the main page, it is linked to from the Current Events page, but I'll reprint it here to: . --Dante Alighieri | Talk 01:57, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

DYK & Safari
On Safari right now, the DYK text is slammed all the way to the left border of the left column. Any ideas on why? jengod 05:24, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)

Growth
Just wanted to point out that we reached 200,000 on Feb 2, and 218,000 on Mar 3, which works out to 600 articles per day. Its nice to see en: growing fast again. If the growth curve is linear we will reach 400,000 in 10 more months, if it is exponential we will get there in seven months. -- Arvindn 06:21, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I wonder what the average size of an article is (say, number of words per article, or characters per article), and what the trend has been over the past year of that average. - Bevo 11:01, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Statistics: more stats than you can shake a stick at -- Arvindn 12:35, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I miss the new articles section. Can we have it back? Exploding Boy 14:48, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)

 * What content did it have? There is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Newpages that lists all the new articles. - Bevo 15:44, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Wow. All your base are belong to us is our feature article. -- user:zanimum

 * Expect the end of the world shortly. Not that I mind. -- Itai 15:08, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Hehe. When I decided to feature it, I thought it would be an interesting choice :) →Raul654 16:03, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)

Main page composition
FWIW, which is little, I think the current Main page is horrible. It looks like a cross between a magazine portal and a current news site. It does not look like an encyclopaedia. The encyclopaedia stuff is scrolled way down the page. Bring back the old version. -- SGBailey 14:51, 2004 Mar 4 (UTC)

 * I'd like to see the "In the news" portion of the Main page dropped, or at least reduced to a simple link to Current events. See What Wikipedia is not, especially #16 ... " [Wikipedia is not] A news report. Wikipedia should not offer news reports on breaking stories..." - Bevo 16:48, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * "But of course creating encyclopedia articles on topics currently in the news is an excellent idea. See current events for some examples. (However, the Wiki process lends itself to collaborative, up-to-the-minute construction of current events of historical significance, as long as these are written as encyclopedia articles.)" The In the news section encourages those updates. This is also the major difference between us and dead tree encyclopedias. --mav

 * Certainly not the major difference. None of these dead tree encyclopedias were wikis! ^_^ -- Toby Bartels 19:10, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * True - but that is process, I was talking about product. --mav

 * Two comments. :-) One, I like the new format, and think that the combination of encyclopedic approach and immediacy is what makes Wikipedia most distinct among encyclopedias online (how long will it be before EB updates its Aristide article?  Longer than we take, I guarantee it).  Two, "In the news" is distinguished by (a) a focus on encyclopedic type news (we don't list "box-office smashes" or things of that nature) and (b) the fact that we aren't linking to some brief current event, but an article that gives as much as we've got of the entire history.  Someone jumping to Aristide doesn't just see the last 24 hours...they see a more holistic approach.  I think if people used us like a news site, they'd be much better informed. :-)  So I don't mind a news-ish look, even though I think the look we have is an excellent hybrid. Jwrosenzweig 19:16, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

London congestion charge ?
London congestion charge is the featured article in today's Main page. An article on a municipality fee is the best showcase article that Wikipedia has today? Are we becoming competition for the Drudge Report? - Bevo 15:33, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Now I see that Current Events is actually using the Drudge Report as a source for the Ashcroft's medical condition! - Bevo 15:43, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for being so unthinkingly offensive. How many of your articles are on featured articles? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 15:51, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I was not feeling so much to giving offence, as to questioning the role of the featured article in this encyclopedia.   Obviously, I'm not good at wording these comments to convey my sentiments.   I am "thinking".  I an thinking about what the world thinks about this encyclopedia, as marketed by the Main page.  And, at least you read my mind in thinking that any comparisons with Wikipedia and the Drudge Report should be taken as unflattering to the Wikipedia. - Bevo 16:05, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't understand, are you criticising the article as not worthy of being a featured article, or are you criticising displaying a featured article on the front page? And I really don't understand the analogy with the Drudge report... why on earth would the Drudge Report on a congestion charge????? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 16:12, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * You are correct. I think it is worthy of being a featured article.  I just feel that the Main page's "best" featured article should be one that has less "current events", and more long-term appeal.   And, the overlap with the Drudge Report goes to the controversial nature (or even the novelty) of that fee. - Bevo 16:25, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * The Charge has been in place for over a year, so isn't really novel or a current event. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 17:42, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Main Page/Archive 16


text:
List of Wisconsin state parks

Map of State Parks of Wisconsin ''Hold cursor over locations to display park name; click to go to park article.''

A Wisconsin state park is an area of land in the U.S. state of Wisconsin preserved by the state for its natural, historic, or other resources. The state park system in Wisconsin includes both state parks and state recreation areas. Wisconsin currently has 51 state park units, covering more than 60570 acres in state parks and state recreation areas. Each unit was created by an act of the Wisconsin Legislature and is maintained by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation. The Division of Forestry manages a further 471329 acres in Wisconsin's state forests.

Several Wisconsin state parks contain resources that have been recognized on a national level. Chippewa Moraine State Recreation Area, Devil's Lake State Park, and Interstate State Park are units of the Ice Age National Scientific Reserve, while the Wyalusing Hardwood Forest in Wyalusing State Park is a National Natural Landmark. Two Wisconsin state parks contain National Historic Landmarks, both of which are Native American archaeological sites: Aztalan and Copper Culture. 15 state parks contain a total of 23 separate listings on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). These are the two previously mentioned National Historic Landmarks, plus Lake Farms Archaeological District at Capital Springs State Recreation Area, Copper Falls State Park, six individual buildings at Heritage Hill State Historical Park (Baird Law Office, Cotton House, Fort Howard Hospital, Fort Howard Officers' Quarters, Fort Howard Ward Building, and Tank Cottage), High Cliff Mounds at High Cliff State Park, the Seth Peterson Cottage in Mirror Lake State Park, the Raddatz Rockshelter at Natural Bridge State Park, Stonefield partially within Nelson Dewey State Park, Eagle Bluff Lighthouse in Peninsula State Park, the Roche-a-Cri Petroglyphs in Roche-a-Cri State Park, the shot tower in Tower Hill State Park, Whitefish Dunes-Bay View Site in Whitefish Dunes State Park, Wyalusing State Park Mounds Archaeological District in Wyalusing State Park, and four listings in Rock Island State Park: the Pottawatomie Lighthouse, Rock Island Historic District, Thordarson Estate Historic District, and a water tower.

History
Wisconsin became the first state to have a state park in 1878 when it formed "The State Park". The park consisted of 760 sqmi in northern Wisconsin (most of present-day Vilas County). The state owned 50631 acre, which was less than 10% of the total area. There were few residents in the area. Lumber barons were powerful in the area, and they purchased 2/3 of the state's land at $8 per acre. This defeated the purpose of the parks for it didn't save the land from the ax.

In 1895, the state legislature created an act which authorized the state governor to examine some land in Polk County at the Dalles of the St. Croix River to become a state park. In 1899, the legislature approved the purchase of Interstate State Park and it was established on September 20, 1900. Architect John Nolen was hired in 1907 to draft a feasibility plan for a Wisconsin State Parks System and State Parks for Wisconsin was released later that year. The report was the guideline used to set up the state park system. It recommended the creation of four state parks: Dells of the Wisconsin River, Devil's Lake, Door County's Fish Creek (now Peninsula State Park) and the confluence of the Mississippi and Wisconsin Rivers (now Wyalusing State Park). Three became state parks, and the fourth became Dells Natural Area in 2005. A State Conservation Commission was formed in 1915 by combining the State Park Board, the State Board of Forestry, the Fisheries Commission, and the state Game Warden Department.

title: List of Wisconsin state parks


text:
Good Morning, Miami

Good Morning, Miami is an American sitcom created by David Kohan and Max Mutchnick. The series ran on NBC from September 26, 2002, to December 18, 2003, and centered around the personal and professional life of Jake (Mark Feuerstein), the executive producer of an incredibly low-rated morning show in Miami, Florida. The series was one of the first on NBC to be fully originated in high definition.

The series was launched as a part of the network's highly-rated "Must See TV" lineup, where it struggled in the ratings when compared to other sitcoms in the lineup, such as Kohan and Mutchnick's own Will & Grace. Midway through the second season, NBC pulled the series after Kohan and Mutchnick sued the network. The series never returned, and the final nine episodes were ultimately left unaired. These episodes were later shown on TG4 in Ireland and Channel 4 in the United Kingdom.

Synopsis
Wunderkind producer Jake Silver decides to accept the job leading the lowest-rated morning show in Miami. He falls in love with the show's beautiful, down-to-earth hairdresser, Dylan. The carnival of clowns at the station includes pompous and insulting on-air host Gavin; Jake's sardonic assistant, Penny; and highly insecure station manager, Frank.

Early in the first season, Gavin's morning co-host was Lucia, and Sister Brenda was the station's nun/weather-girl. Eventually, Jake's foul-mouthed grandmother, Claire, becomes the on-screen co-host. Both Lucia and Sister Brenda were written out early in the series as the producers were still searching for the "center" of their program.

During the second season, Jake and Dylan begin a relationship, even considering relocation to New York together. Victoria Hill, a new station boss, took over the show to get higher ratings, and Gavin struggled to warm up to her. A new weather girl, Joni, was also introduced—much to Gavin's dismay.

The series ended with Gavin and Penny deciding to start a relationship (as Penny is pregnant with his baby), Frank marrying Gavin's mother as a publicity stunt, and Jake and Dylan agreeing to go their separate ways (Jake leaves the station and goes to produce at NBC in Manhattan, while Dylan returns to her home state of Omaha, Nebraska).

Main

 * Mark Feuerstein - Jake Silver
 * Ashley Williams as Dylan Messinger
 * Matt Letscher - Gavin Stone
 * Constance Zimmer - Penelope "Penny" Barnes Barrington
 * Jere Burns as Frank Jennifer Alfano
 * Tessie Santiago as Lucia Rojas-Klein, Gavin's morning co-host (episodes 1-11)
 * Brooke Dillman as Sister Brenda Trogman, a nun who is also the station's weather girl (episodes 1-11)
 * Suzanne Pleshette as Claire Arnold, Jake's grandmother (season 1)

Recurring

 * Stephon Fuller as Robby
 * Tiffani Thiessen as Victoria Hill, a new station boss in season two
 * Jillian Barberie as Joni, the station's new weather girl in season two
 * Bob Clendenin as Carl, a station camera man
 * Tracy Vilar as Stacey
 * Edward James Gage as Tiny, the station helicopter pilot

Guest Stars

 * Andrea Savage as Cindy, Dylan's best friend
 * Bess Armstrong as Louise, Dylan's Mother
 * Tom Poston as Lenny
 * Fran Drescher as Roberta, the new talent agent
 * Nick Offerman as Officer Nick, a police officer
 * Mary Lynn Rajskub as Hollis
 * John Aylward as Mr Fowler
 * Carrie Fisher as Judy, Jake's Mother
 * Hal Holbrook as Jim Templeton
 * Curtis Armstrong as Carl, a jewelry store owner
 * Valerie Mahaffey as Sara, Frank's ex-wife
 * Joanna Cassidy as Catherine, Gavin's Mother
 * George Wyner as Larry, Jake's network boss

Production
The sitcom was filmed at CBS Studio Center's Stage 16. The theme song, entitled "Once in a Lifetime", is played by John Rzeznik of the Goo Goo Dolls. In the second season, exterior footage of NBC affiliate WPTV-TV's studio complex in West Palm Beach, Florida, was used to portray the exteriors of the fictional Good Morning, Miami studios.

In the original, unaired test Pilot the part of Gavin was played by actor Burke Moses. The part of Penny was played by an uncredited actress and the character was completely different.

Series overview
During the original run of the series, the first episodes were broadcast out of intended production order by NBC as the series struggled in the ratings. First, completely discarding the episode titled, "It Didn't Happen One Night," then failing to run the Christmas themed episode until the second week of January, after first running another new episode during the first week of January.

Despite renewing the series, only half of the second season was ever broadcast in the United States by NBC. The entire series was aired on TG4 in Ireland several times in a daily morning time slot. Channel 4 UK also broadcast the entire series.

title: Good Morning, Miami


text:
Carbanion

In organic chemistry, a carbanion is an anion in which carbon is negatively charged.

Formally, a carbanion is the conjugate base of a carbon acid:

 * R3CH + B− → R3C− + HB

where B stands for the base. The carbanions formed from deprotonation of alkanes (at an sp3 carbon), alkenes (at an sp2 carbon), arenes (at an sp2 carbon), and alkynes (at an sp carbon) are known as alkyl, alkenyl (vinyl), aryl, and alkynyl (acetylide) anions, respectively.

Carbanions have a concentration of electron density at the negatively charged carbon, which, in most cases, reacts efficiently with a variety of electrophiles of varying strengths, including carbonyl groups, imines/iminium salts, halogenating reagents (e.g., N-bromosuccinimide and diiodine), and proton donors. A carbanion is one of several reactive intermediates in organic chemistry. In organic synthesis, organolithium reagents and Grignard reagents are commonly treated and referred to as "carbanions." This is a convenient approximation, although these species are generally clusters or complexes containing highly polar, but still covalent bonds metal–carbon bonds (Mδ+–Cδ−) rather than true carbanions.

Geometry
Absent π delocalization, the negative charge of a carbanion is localized in an spx hybridized orbital on carbon as a lone pair. As a consequence, localized alkyl, alkenyl/aryl, and alkynyl carbanions assume trigonal pyramidal, bent, and linear geometries, respectively. By Bent's rule, placement of the carbanionic lone pair electrons in an orbital with significant s character is favorable, accounting for the pyramidalized and bent geometries of alkyl and alkenyl carbanions, respectively. Valence shell electron pair repulsion (VSEPR) theory makes similar predictions. This contrasts with carbocations, which have a preference for unoccupied nonbonding orbitals of pure atomic p character, leading to planar and linear geometries, respectively, for alkyl and alkenyl carbocations. However, delocalized carbanions may deviate from these geometries. Instead of residing in a hybrid orbital, the carbanionic lone pair may instead occupy a p orbital (or an orbital of high p character). A p orbital has a more suitable shape and orientation to overlap with the neighboring π system, resulting in more effective charge delocalization. As a consequence, alkyl carbanions with neighboring conjugating groups (e.g., allylic anions, enolates, nitronates, etc.) are generally planar rather than pyramidized. Likewise, delocalized alkenyl carbanions sometimes favor a linear instead of bent geometry. More often, a bent geometry is still preferred for substituted alkenyl anions, though the linear geometry is only slightly less stable, resulting in facile equilibration between the (E) and (Z) isomers of the (bent) anion through a linear transition state. For instance, calculations indicate that the parent vinyl anion or ethylenide, H2C\dCH−, has an inversion barrier of 27 kcal/mol, while allenyl anion or allenide, H2C\dC\dCH− ↔ H2C−\sC\tCH), whose negative charge is stabilized by delocalization, has an inversion barrier of only 4 kcal/mol, reflecting stabilization of the linear transition state by better π delocalization.

Trends and occurrence
Carbanions are typically nucleophilic and basic. The basicity and nucleophilicity of carbanions are determined by the substituents on carbon. These include
 * the inductive effect. Electronegative atoms adjacent to the charge will stabilize the charge;
 * the extent of conjugation of the anion. Resonance effects can stabilize the anion. This is especially true when the anion is stabilized as a result of aromaticity.

Geometry also affects the orbital hybridization of the charge-bearing carbanion. The greater the s-character of the charge-bearing atom, the more stable the anion.

Carbanions, especially ones derived from weak carbon acids that do not benefit sufficiently from the two stabilizing factors listed above, are generally oxygen- and water-sensitive to varying degrees. While some merely degrade and decompose over several weeks or months upon exposure to air, others may react vigorously and exothermically with air almost immediately to spontaneously ignite (pyrophoricity). Among commonly encountered carbanionic reagents in the laboratory, ionic salts of hydrogen cyanide (cyanides) are unusual in being indefinitely stable under dry air and hydrolyzing only very slowly in the presence of moisture.

Organometallic reagents like butyllithium (hexameric cluster, [BuLi]6) or methylmagnesium bromide (ether complex, MeMg(Br)(OEt2)2) are often referred to as "carbanions," at least in a retrosynthetic sense. However, they are really clusters or complexes containing a polar covalent bond, though with electron density heavily polarized toward the carbon atom. The more electropositive the attached metal atom, the closer the behavior of the reagent is to that of a true carbanion.

In fact, true carbanions (i.e., a species not attached to a stabilizing covalently bound metal) without electron-withdrawing and/or conjugating substituents are not available in the condensed phase, and these species must be studied in the gas phase. For some time, it was not known whether simple alkyl anions could exist as free species; many theoretical studies predicted that even the methanide anion CH3– should be an unbound species (i.e., the electron affinity of •CH3 was predicted to be negative). Such a species would decompose immediately by spontaneous ejection of an electron and would therefore be too fleeting to observe directly by mass spectrometry. However, in 1978, the methanide anion was unambiguously synthesized by subjecting ketene to an electric discharge, and the electron affinity (EA) of •CH3 was determined by photoelectron spectroscopy to be +1.8 kcal/mol, making it a bound species, but just barely so. The structure of CH3– was found to be pyramidal (C3v) with an H−C−H angle of 108° and inversion barrier of 1.3 kcal/mol, while •CH3 was determined to be planar (D3h point group).

Simple primary, secondary and tertiary sp3 carbanions (e.g., ethanide CH3CH2–, isopropanide (CH3)2CH−, and t-butanide (CH3)3C− were subsequently determined to be unbound species (the EAs of CH3CH2•, (CH3)2CH•, (CH3)3C• are −6, −7.4, −3.6 kcal/mol, respectively) indicating that α substitution is destabilizing. However, relatively modest stabilizing effects can render them bound. For example, cyclopropyl and cubyl anions are bound due to increased s character of the lone pair orbital, while neopentyl and phenethyl anions are also bound, as a result of negative hyperconjugation of the lone pair with the β-substituent (nC → σ*C–C). The same holds true for anions with benzylic and allylic stabilization. Gas-phase carbanions that are sp2 and sp hybridized are much more strongly stabilized and are often prepared directly by gas-phase deprotonation.

In the condensed phase only carbanions that are sufficiently stabilized by delocalization have been isolated as truly ionic species. In 1984, Olmstead and Power presented the lithium crown ether salt of the triphenylmethanide carbanion from triphenylmethane, n-butyllithium and 12-crown-4 (which forms a stable complex with lithium cations) at low temperatures:

 * TriphenylmethaneAnion.png

Adding n-butyllithium to triphenylmethane (pKa in DMSO of CHPh3 = 30.6) in THF at low temperatures followed by 12-crown-4 results in a red solution and the salt complex [Li(12-crown-4)]+[CPh3]− precipitates at −20 °C. The central C–C bond lengths are 145 pm with the phenyl ring propellered at an average angle of 31.2°. This propeller shape is less pronounced with a tetramethylammonium counterion. A crystal structure for the analogous diphenylmethanide anion ([Li(12-crown-4)]+[CHPh2]−), prepared form diphenylmethane (pKa in DMSO of CH2Ph2 = 32.3), was also obtained. However, the attempted isolation of a complex of the benzyl anion PhCH2− from toluene (pKa in DMSO of CH3Ph ≈ 43) was unsuccessful, due to rapid reaction of the formed anion with the THF solvent. The free benzyl anion has also been generated in the solution phase by pulse radiolysis of dibenzylmercury.

Early in 1904 and 1917, Schlenk prepared two red-colored salts, formulated as [NMe4]+[CPh3]− and [NMe4]+[PhCH2]−, respectively, by metathesis of the corresponding organosodium reagent with tetramethylammonium chloride. Since tetramethylammonium cations cannot form a chemical bond to the carbanionic center, these species are believed to contain free carbanions. While the structure of the former was verified by X-ray crystallography almost a century later, the instability of the latter has so far precluded structural verification. The reaction of the putative "[NMe4]+[PhCH2]−" with water was reported to liberate toluene and tetramethylammonium hydroxide and provides indirect evidence for the claimed formulation.

One tool for the detection of carbanions in solution is proton NMR. A spectrum of cyclopentadiene in DMSO shows four vinylic protons at 6.5 ppm and two methylene bridge protons at 3 ppm whereas the cyclopentadienyl anion has a single resonance at 5.50 ppm. The use of ^{6}Li and ^{7}Li NMR has provided structural and reactivity data for a variety of organolithium species.

Carbon acids
Any compound containing hydrogen can, in principle, undergo deprotonation to form its conjugate base. A compound is a carbon acid if deprotonation results in loss of a proton from a carbon atom. Compared to compounds typically considered to be acids (e.g., mineral acids like nitric acid, or carboxylic acids like acetic acid), carbon acids are typically many orders of magnitude weaker, although exceptions exist (see below). For example, benzene is not an acid in the classical Arrhenius sense, since its aqueous solutions are neutral. Nevertheless, it is very weak Brønsted acid with an estimated pKa of 49 which may undergo deprotonation in the presence of a superbase like the Lochmann–Schlosser base (n-butyllithium and potassium t-butoxide). As conjugate acid–base pairs, the factors that determine the relative stability of carbanions also determine the ordering of the pKa values of the corresponding carbon acids. Furthermore, pKa values allow the prediction of whether a proton transfer process will be thermodynamically favorable: In order for the deprotonation of an acidic species HA with base B− to be thermodynamically favorable (K > 1), the relationship pKa(BH) > pKa(AH) must hold.

These values below are pKa values determined in dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO), which has a broader useful range (~0 to ~35) than values determined in water (~0 to ~14) and better reflect the basicity of the carbanions in typical organic solvents. Values below less than 0 or greater than 35 are indirectly estimated; hence, the numerical accuracy of these values is limited. Aqueous pKa values are also commonly encountered in the literature, particularly in the context of biochemistry and enzymology. Moreover, aqueous values are often given in introductory organic chemistry textbooks for pedagogical reasons, although the issue of solvent dependence is often glossed over. In general, pKa values in water and organic solvent diverge significantly when the anion is capable of hydrogen bonding. For instance, in the case of water, the values differ dramatically: the pKa in water of water is 14.0, while the pKa in DMSO of water is 31.4, reflecting the differing ability of water and DMSO to stabilize the hydroxide anion. On the other hand, for cyclopentadiene, the numerical values are comparable: the pKa in water is 15, while the pKa in DMSO is 18.
 * {|align="center" class="wikitable collapsible" style="background: #ffffff; text-align: center;"

!Name !Formula !Structural formula !pKa in DMSO
 * +Carbon acid acidities by pKa in DMSO. These values may differ significantly from aqueous pKa values.
 * Cyclohexane
 * C6H12
 * Cyclohexane simple.svg
 * ~60
 * Methane
 * CH4
 * Methane-2D-dimensions.svg
 * ~56
 * Benzene
 * C6H6
 * Benzol.svg
 * ~49
 * Propene
 * C3H6
 * Propylene skeletal.svg
 * ~44
 * Toluene
 * C6H5CH3
 * Toluol.svg
 * ~43
 * - style="background: lightgray;"
 * Ammonia (N–H)
 * NH3
 * Ammonia dimensions.svg
 * ~41
 * Dithiane
 * C4H8S2
 * 1,3-dithiane structure.svg
 * ~39
 * Dimethyl sulfoxide
 * (CH3)2SO
 * DMSO-2D-dimensions.png
 * 35.1
 * Diphenylmethane
 * C13H12
 * Diphenylmethane.png
 * 32.3
 * Acetonitrile
 * CH3CN
 * Structural formula of acetonitrile.svg
 * 31.3
 * - style="background: lightgray;"
 * Aniline (N–H)
 * C6H5NH2
 * Aniline.svg
 * 30.6
 * Triphenylmethane
 * C19H16
 * Triphenylmethane.png
 * 30.6
 * Fluoroform
 * CHF3
 * Fluoroform.svg
 * 30.5
 * Xanthene
 * C13H10O
 * Xanthen.svg
 * 30.0
 * - style="background: lightgray;"
 * Ethanol (O–H)
 * C2H5OH
 * Ethanol-2D-skeletal.svg
 * 29.8
 * Phenylacetylene
 * C8H6
 * Phenylacetylene.svg
 * 28.8
 * Thioxanthene
 * C13H10S
 * Thioxanthene.png
 * 28.6
 * Acetone
 * C3H6O
 * Aceton.svg
 * 26.5
 * Chloroform
 * CHCl3
 * Chloroform displayed.svg
 * 24.4
 * Benzoxazole
 * C7H5NO
 * 1,3-benzoxazole numbering.svg
 * 24.4
 * Fluorene
 * C13H10
 * Fluorene.png
 * 22.6
 * Indene
 * C9H8
 * Indene.png
 * 20.1
 * Cyclopentadiene
 * C5H6
 * Cyclopentadiene.png
 * 18.0
 * Nitromethane
 * CH3NO2
 * Nitromethane.svg
 * 17.2
 * Diethyl malonate
 * C7H12O4
 * Diethyl-malonate.png
 * 16.4
 * Acetylacetone
 * (H3CCO)2CH2
 * Acetylacetone.png
 * 13.3
 * Hydrogen cyanide
 * HCN
 * Hydrogen-cyanide-2D.svg
 * 12.9
 * - style="background: lightgray;"
 * Acetic acid (O–H)
 * CH3COOH
 * Acetic-acid-2D-skeletal.svg
 * 12.6
 * Malononitrile
 * C3H2N2
 * Malononitrile.png
 * 11.1
 * Dimedone
 * C8H12O2
 * Dimedone.png
 * 10.3
 * Meldrum's acid
 * C6H8O4
 * meldrum's acid.png
 * 7.3
 * Hexafluoroacetylacetone
 * (F3CCO)2CH2
 * Hexafluoroacetylaceton.svg
 * 2.3
 * - style="background: lightgray;"
 * Hydrogen chloride (Cl–H)
 * HCl
 * HCl (g)
 * −2.0
 * Triflidic acid
 * HC(SO2CF3)3
 * Triflidic acid.png
 * ~ −16
 * }
 * Note that acetic acid, ammonia, aniline, ethanol, and hydrogen chloride are not carbon acids, but are common acids shown for comparison.
 * Malononitrile.png
 * 11.1
 * Dimedone
 * C8H12O2
 * Dimedone.png
 * 10.3
 * Meldrum's acid
 * C6H8O4
 * meldrum's acid.png
 * 7.3
 * Hexafluoroacetylacetone
 * (F3CCO)2CH2
 * Hexafluoroacetylaceton.svg
 * 2.3
 * - style="background: lightgray;"
 * Hydrogen chloride (Cl–H)
 * HCl
 * HCl (g)
 * −2.0
 * Triflidic acid
 * HC(SO2CF3)3
 * Triflidic acid.png
 * ~ −16
 * }
 * Note that acetic acid, ammonia, aniline, ethanol, and hydrogen chloride are not carbon acids, but are common acids shown for comparison.
 * Triflidic acid.png
 * ~ −16
 * }
 * Note that acetic acid, ammonia, aniline, ethanol, and hydrogen chloride are not carbon acids, but are common acids shown for comparison.
 * Note that acetic acid, ammonia, aniline, ethanol, and hydrogen chloride are not carbon acids, but are common acids shown for comparison.

As indicated by the examples above, acidity increases (pKa decreases) when the negative charge is delocalized. This effect occurs when the substituents on the carbanion are unsaturated and/or electronegative. Although carbon acids are generally thought of as acids that are much weaker than "classical" Brønsted acids like acetic acid or phenol, the cumulative (additive) effect of several electron accepting substituents can lead to acids that are as strong or stronger than the inorganic mineral acids. For example, trinitromethane HC(NO2)3, tricyanomethane HC(CN)3, pentacyanocyclopentadiene C5(CN)5H, and fulminic acid HCNO, are all strong acids with aqueous pKa values that indicate complete or nearly complete proton transfer to water. Triflidic acid, with three strongly electron-withdrawing triflyl groups, has an estimated pKa well below −10. On the other end of the scale, hydrocarbons bearing only alkyl groups are thought to have pKa values in the range of 55 to 65. The range of acid dissociation constants for carbon acids thus spans over 70 orders of magnitude.

The acidity of the α-hydrogen in carbonyl compounds enables these compounds to participate in synthetically important C–C bond-forming reactions including the aldol reaction and Michael addition.

Chiral carbanions
With the molecular geometry for a carbanion described as a trigonal pyramid the question is whether or not carbanions can display chirality, because if the activation barrier for inversion of this geometry is too low any attempt at introducing chirality will end in racemization, similar to the nitrogen inversion. However, solid evidence exists that carbanions can indeed be chiral for example in research carried out with certain organolithium compounds.

The first ever evidence for the existence of chiral organolithium compounds was obtained in 1950. Reaction of chiral 2-iodooctane with s-butyllithium in petroleum ether at −70 °C followed by reaction with dry ice yielded mostly racemic 2-methylbutyric acid but also an amount of optically active 2-methyloctanoic acid, which could only have formed from likewise optically active 2-methylheptyllithium with the carbon atom linked to lithium the carbanion:

 * ChiralcarbanionsI.png

On heating the reaction to 0 °C the optical activity is lost. More evidence followed in the 1960s. A reaction of the cis isomer of 2-methylcyclopropyl bromide with s-butyllithium again followed by carboxylation with dry ice yielded cis-2-methylcyclopropylcarboxylic acid. The formation of the trans isomer would have indicated that the intermediate carbanion was unstable.

 * ChiralcarbanionsII.png

In the same manner the reaction of (+)-(S)-l-bromo-l-methyl-2,2-diphenylcyclopropane with n-butyllithium followed by quenching with methanol resulted in product with retention of configuration:

 * ChiralcarbanionsIII.png

Of recent date are chiral methyllithium compounds:

 * [[File:PhosphatePhosphonateRearrangement.png|none|500px|Chiral oxy[2H1]methyllithiums. Bu stands for butyl, i-Pr stands for isopropyl.]]

The phosphate 1 contains a chiral group with a hydrogen and a deuterium substituent. The stannyl group is replaced by lithium to intermediate 2 which undergoes a phosphate–phosphorane rearrangement to phosphorane 3 which on reaction with acetic acid gives alcohol 4. Once again in the range of −78 °C to 0 °C the chirality is preserved in this reaction sequence. (Enantioselectivity was determined by NMR spectroscopy after derivatization with Mosher's acid.)

History
A carbanionic structure first made an appearance in the reaction mechanism for the benzoin condensation as correctly proposed by Clarke and Arthur Lapworth in 1907. In 1904 Wilhelm Schlenk prepared [Ph3C]−[NMe4]+ in a quest for tetramethylammonium (from tetramethylammonium chloride and Ph3CNa) and in 1914 he demonstrated how triarylmethyl radicals could be reduced to carbanions by alkali metals The phrase carbanion was introduced by Wallis and Adams in 1933 as the negatively charged counterpart of the carbonium ion

title: Carbanion