text:
Talk:Wildcat

"North American wildcat"
The North American wildcat is not mentioned, either in terms of existence or range? North America and Central America have an animal by this name, as well as, of course, lynxes, pumas, and panthers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geogre (talk • contribs) 15:55, 3 June 2004

 * Those other felines are not in the genus Felis. see this link. The subspecies are generally reckoned to be three, not two. The first domestication of F. s. catus comes after the development of agricultur of course, a point that should be mentioned, as it's more important than an actual date, like the fanciful 8000 BCE mentioned in the entry. --Wetman 10:32, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Articles
Shouldn't the Silvestris and Lybica have deffrent articles?Sitenl 16:28, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

 * silvestris and lybica are genrally considered a single species, hence a single article. Note: Some clasifications of the genus Felis group silvestris and lybica as separate species, and group ornata as a sub-species of lybica. Most seem to consider them a single species of Felis silvestris containing several subspecies groups, i.e. silvestris, lybica, ornata and catus. Some examples of these conflicting classifications can be seen at The Cyber Zoomobile, Felis and Linnean Classification of the Order Carnivora --Sonelle 13:53, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes, the silvestris and lybica are the same species, though they look different -- George cowie

Article needs to be moved
This article needs to be moved to Wildcat (animal) or some such, and the spelling changed throughout. The current name of the article violates Wikipedia conventions by capitalizing the second word. And it shouldn't be two words, but one. "Wild cat" means "any species of cat that is wild, other than the great cats"; "wildcat" refers specifically to the animals in this article. E.g.: "The Asian leopard cat is a wild cat" is a correct statement, while "the Asian leopard cat is a wildcat" is an incorrect one. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] - 05:44, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. Would also be a good time to fix redirects. It is not that much work, shall we do it immediatly? --KimvdLinde 05:48, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

"African wildcat"
It is incorrect to say an extant species is the ancestor of another extant species. So it should read that they share a common ancestor. --LGao 3:38, 26 May, 2006
 * Well, not exactly, as for example in the case of parapatric speciation, which could be seen as the way domestication has occured. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 19:47, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Neither the African wildcat nor the domestic cat is a species. Both are subspecies of Felis silvestris. 75.76.213.106 (talk) 03:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

not easily mistaken?
The article says that wild cats would not normally be mistaken for domesitic cats. Yet all three pictures in the article look just like house cats to me. Perhaps they are not a good selection of pictures? Strait 01:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't comment about European wild cats, never having seen one, but growing up I had a house cat that looked exactly like the African wild cat I photographed. --Sonelle [[User_talk:Sonelle|(talk)]] 17:39, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Its difficult to tell the difference sometimes expecially if there is nothing to measure the size against. Also there is a lot of interbreeding with feral cats going on (in Scotland) so there are fewer true wildcats around. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.206.163.179 (talk) 14:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I suspect there is some cultural bias going on in this article. Wildcats are wild animals and should not be considered domesticatable, but domestic housecats are indistinguishable from these animals, as many have already mentioned. I'm sorry, but this differentiation doesn't sound very scientific to me.Jarhed (talk) 03:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

'Wildcats are wild animals and should not be considered domesticatable.' They are domesticatable, and some of them had already been domesticated, they are now most numerous carnivorans in the world. cat — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.123.130.53 (talk) 11:48, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

domestic/wild interbreeding as "threat" to wild populations
In the setion on european wild cats, the interbreeding of wild and domestic cats is mentioned in a couple of places as a potential threat to wild populations, but the nature of this threat is not discussed. If anything, I'd think the wild populations might benefit from a wider gene pool. Genes from domestics that impact positively on survival could be expected to proliferate in the wild population, and those with a detrimental effect would presumably remain rare.

If it's only the "purity" of the wild population that's threatened and not the survival of the cats themselves, maybe the problem has more to do with our way of thinking about the cats than with it has to do with the actual cats themselves. If someone has an alternate theory, I'm interested to hear it. --Eloil 09:52 & :57, 10:09 & :35, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Given that domestic cats and European wildcats are the same species, I don't see how interbreeding can be considered a "threat". Felis silvestris is still Felis silvestris, regardless of the subspecies. It's normal for animals of different subspecies to interbreed when they come into contact; the main thing that causes subspecies to develop is simple physical separation. Remove that and the fact that they're still all the same species will come into play. 75.76.213.106 (talk) 03:56, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

 * One clear case of it being detrimental to the wild population is in bringing in genes that code for characteristics that have a negative impact on survivability. For example, it's easy to imagine that if a persian cat was to breed with a wild one the offsprings would risk having hair that mat easily, a face that make eating difficult and colours that do not blend well in it's environment. In general, a domesticated specie diverge genetically from it's wild cousin on many characteristics that make it unfit to live in the wild. Domestic/wild breeding is especially a threat if the wild population has low numbers in comparison with it's domesticated relative because there is a risk of having most litters being miss-adapted to the environmental conditions.Myric (talk) 15:14, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Survivability? Cats, especially when partially domesticated, have extremely adaptable, and healthy cats, except for a few breeds, hunt as well as "wild" wildcats. Editor abcdef (talk) 10:59, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Upper case vs. lower case
Suggestion: rather than reverting each others' edits repeatedly, a discussion here on the talk page would be a better choice. Mmm (talk) 20:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The discussion is on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mammals. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:51, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * See also Talk:Bobcat. Beyazid (talk) 17:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Self-domesticating
I read the reference, and it says nothing about "self-domesticating", as well it should not. Let's take the 9500 years ago figure for domestication of felids as a given. Imagine yourself back then living on a farm or ranch in the Near East, working to provide for your family and your community. There are desert cats all around, and they find it beneficial to move into your barn where the rats live. You are an animal husbantry expert, and you have children that you know would love a kitten. So instead of you, the wildlife expert of your era, trapping and domesticating a desert cat, the cat domesticates you. Come on, "self-domesticating"? Would someone please provide a more authoritative link? Either that, or rid this article of this intellectual BS?? Have a great day!!!Jarhed (talk) 03:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You should check out Scientific American [June 2009]. It has an excellent article about the evolution of the domestic cat. It pretty much explains why humans had little to do with their domestication and also why cats are still cats and were never bred into something else (e.g. Pekinese vs wolf).  It seems cats found an easy way to get three squares a day and a roof over their heads without having to work for it.  It's nice to think that humans have the cats under control but Douglas Adams words might be considered "The fact that once again man completely misinterpreted this relationship was entirely according to these creatures' plans." NSapollo (talk) 18:06, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * ''Of the 2 following unsigned contribs,
 * '' the earlier stood for about 40 months (in which extensive substantive discussion of various topics drew edits to the page), was not (auto- or otherwise) signed until this edit by me, and was a bit less on-topic than the end of the July 2009 contrib just above it. IMO, it was not sufficiently off-topic to justify removal (and it is reasonable to construe a durable, if tacit, consensus that it could stand);
 * '' the later one (placed below the earlier)
 * '' * stood for less than a month (in which talk-page activity involved only anon vandalism, auto-signing, and reversions of those),
 * was at best cryptic as to its relevance, mentioning toxoplasmosis -- a disease primarily of felids but transmissible to humans via felid feces -- but failing to make clear the supposed chain of causation, and
 * compounded the impression of incoherence by being left to offer the impression that the light (if potentially valuable) servant/master point was a single discussant's preliminary to the second point, about toxoplasmosis.

--Jerzy•t 08:59, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * '' Both contribs were removed at 02:12, 6 January 2012 by a clearly well-meaning colleague who likely thot they were a single, recent BJAODN. I see every reason to believe the removing colleague was the victim of a series of preceding sub-optimum edits and lack of timely corrections, and if i am mistaken, i argue that my restoration at worst makes feasible adequate consideration of what turns out to be a non-trivial decision on removal of discussion.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.50.177.101 (talk) 08:22, 22 September 2009
 * And as they say, "Dogs have masters. Cats have servants".
 * This discussion completely ignores the role of toxoplasmosis in domesticating humans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.71.2.189 (talk) 23:53, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Asserting only 5 subspecies is questionable
The claim that there are only 5 subspecies is a questionable one that does not appear to be supported by the cited reference. This reference only lists the 5 subspecies from which the samples of the wild population were drawn for comparison to the domestic cat and does not appear to make any direct claims about other populations.

Other articles refer to 5 clades to which all populations belong and identify these as covering the same geographical areas as the subspecies referred to in this article. I suggest that the author has erred in assuming that these clades are represented by a single subspecies.

Until such time as as each population is identified as belonging to a definite subspecies I suggest that that they be listed as putative subspecies.--Daffodillman (talk) 12:54, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

National Cancer Institute
Why would the National Cancer Institute do a study on cats? Seems like vandalism to me.--Shanoman (talk) 21:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * They do studies on animals, as diseases in other animals can be used as a model for human disease. Here is the website for the project in case you are interested . Calathan (talk) 20:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Species list contradiction
should we update this article to reflect the consensus in Felidae/Felinae, i.e., with the domestic cat as Felis catus instead of F. sylvestris catus, and the Chinese mountain cat as Felis bieti instead of F. s. bieti? i know that, despite genetic evidence of their close relation, these are separated out due to cladistic concerns. what say ye? Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 17:30, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * What are the current thoughts from science? I know that we had originally set things up to be consistent with MSW3. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

all i was concerned about was reflecting scientific consensus, i guess. it's just, from a genetic point of view, F. bieti falls squarely into the Wildcat clade. but then, what to do with the Domestic cat, which descends directly from the African Wildcat? the present article isn't inaccurate, per se, it's just out of agreement with MSW3/Felida/Felinae et al. Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 16:19, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Taxon name for (western) house cat
Refs are given for both the names Felis catus and Felis silvestris catus, but not for what is implied, that there is one taxon (whether species or sub-species). (In fact, the cladistic discussion suggests to me that the two names actually reflect f. catus being a mis-conceived [non-]taxon, since western house cats and f.lyb. are more closely related to each other than either is to the Tibetan domesticated cats.) My impression (contrary i guess to Metanoid's) is that we need It sounds as if a significant aspect has been botched, by leaving some serious bio-science to ignoramuses twd the same end of the scale that i live near. --Jerzy•t 09:35, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) separate articles on
 * 2) f.sylv., and
 * 3) the largest taxon that includes Tibetan house cats and excludes f.sylv.,
 * 4) an article Cat discussing the practice and/or phenomenon of domestication of felids, and any behavior differences between those two taxa.

 * For what it's worth, Handbook of the Mammals of the World volume 1 (Wilson & Mittermeier 2009) supports the claim that domestic cats are a distinct taxon, adding that recent phylogenetic analysis suggests that F. s. catus is the "sister group" to F. s. libyca. That's only one source, and it's not immediately clear to me what primary research they are referring to, but it is, nonetheless a source. On the other hand, Driscoll et al. 2007 (cited in the article) implies that F. s. catus is paraphyletic within a monophyletic Near Eastern wildcat/domestic cat clade. It seems, from an internet search, that F. catus is still in wide use, however, even within the technical literature, although F. s. catus is also common. It may be worth noting that, even if domestic cats are rejected as a taxonomic unit (which they don't seem to be), the correct name for the lybica/catus clade would still be F. s. catus, since that has taxonomic priority. Anaxial (talk) 10:39, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Removal of Heptner page numbers
I must say, I am puzzled by the sudden modification of the "Mammals of the Soviet Union" source. I can honestly say I do not see any point or improvement in such a move for the following reasons:

 * 1) The previous one included page numbers.
 * 2) The previous one included a link to an online version which, combined with the page numbers, could be instantly verifiable.
 * 3) Seeing as a large chunk of this article stems from "Mammals...", I find it odd that such a source should be removed from the bibliography and simply lumped into the same category as the secondary sources.

I was tempted to just revert everything (on this specific topic), but I thought I'd hear the editors out first. Cheers. Mariomassone (talk) 19:12, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

 * I can't see the reason for it myself either, and note that page numbers have been removed from a number of other sources as well. This all strikes me as somewhat counter-productive, although I'm sure it's being done in good faith. Hopefully the editor concerned can explain his reasoning, and we can come to a consensus. Anaxial (talk) 20:12, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Dear both: first of all, I was impressed by the wealth of info added to this article since beginning of May!

I highly appreciate Mammals of the Soviet Union. You may have noticed that I have used this valuable source in other cat-related articles as well. So I trust that those wikipedia authors who use this source, cite the info correctly. The more so as citing from this source is more tedious and time consuming than just copying text from "second-hand" sources such as journalistic articles and websites. Note that I did not delete the link to the online version, but merely changed it to the chapter about wildcats, i.e. to page 398.

Just like you, I prefer using "first-hand" sources. At the same time, I find the method of citing specific page numbers more complicated than using the "ref name=/" tag throughout an article; whereas the first requires grappling with the template beforehand (and thus is an obstacle), the latter tag can easily be used again by other authors who are not familiar with this template. So I did certainly not intend to be counter-productive, but to facilitate using this source. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 12:42, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

 * First off, thank you for your timely and civil reply. That the edits were done in good faith is now above doubt. However, I'm afraid the logic behind the changes still doesn't convince me, as it seems to have been undertaken primarily for the benefit of inexperienced users unfamiliar with more advanced citation methods. At the risk of sounding calous to the more inexperienced users, their ignorance is their own problem. The fact of the matter remains that the original citation method, heavy as it was, could be verified at a keystroke, whereas now, curious readers have to make do with browsing the entire book. Surely this in itself is far more time consuming and inconvenient than knowing the exact page number beforehand? I shall await further response from other parties before making any decisions. Mariomassone (talk) 18:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I use tags myself for most citations, so I certainly wouldn't blame someone for doing that. The alternative method is more complicated to implement, but, in this case, the hard work had already been done by someone else, so I can't really see the grounds for undoing all their effort. Doubly so when the result, albeit easier from the coding perspective, makes it more difficult for those reading and seeking to verify the article. Sure, I wouldn't insist that someone use this method for citing sources in a new article, because I wouldn't do it myself, but when it's already there, why undo it? I also note that WP:CITEVAR says "Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style merely on the grounds of personal preference" and that editors should avoid "removing citation templates from an article that uses them consistently." It seems to me that these two clauses apply here, at least absent an expressed consensus to the contrary. Anaxial (talk) 19:17, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Communication
Does the communication table just seem plain outlandish to anyone else? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.57.94.61 (talk) 22:54, 9 June 2012 (UTC) --Jerzy•t 01:46, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, the table in . Not to me. Maybe to no one else -- but 3 weeks is but a moment in the eye of Many Eyes.

 * It seems rather silly and Cat-Fancyish to me. It also seems excessively subjective, depending as it largely does on one writer's descriptions and interpretations.  Do we have corresponding sections about the noises and bodily gestures that, say, goats, otters, or iguanas make?  I have tagged the section with a "One Source" template.  If wildcat communication has been reliably studied, as, e.g., wolf communication apparently has, perhaps somebody will add some depth by citing other sources.  J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 20:29, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Pre-anal vs. preanal
None of my dicts have either spelling. (That would usually mean "all 3", but just for laughs i included Dorland's this time; yup, looks like you would need a veterinary dict: the word is not needed to describe my or your anatomy. Wiktionary recognizes both spellings, but at a glance, looks to me like the hyphenated one was an afterthot. Google test is way off-scale numerically for the hyphen, but the first ten hits searching for either are in the same ballpark for each, so that may be a search-spec artifact. Among WP titles, there are only a singular and plural Rdr each for Pre-anal sucker; internal search gives only some lower bounds on "pre-anal" but "Results 1–69 of 69 for Preanal" actually includes both spellings, which at a glance suggest the no-hyphen version predominates somewhat in our articles.  I regard "pre-anal" as far more suitable for WP: Anyway, for now i'm using the hyphen for clarity on the part of users, and not trying to start for that purpose a word article, nor a preanal anatomies or preanal gland one (which i'd bet somebody smart could write, covering in part why secretion of scents occurs in proximity to organs of excretion). --Jerzy•t 00:46, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Everything that anyone understands from "preanal" will also be understood from "pre-anal", while preanal will sometimes (often?) be read as 2 syllables preen'l, and for some may get tangled up with "pineal".
 * 2) The evident rarity of the word in dictionaries suggests it deserves some kind of special-case treatment. It's not directly comparable to epicene for several reasons, but nevertheless, know that it's an article that started out as a dict def 3.5 years after WP's start, and is now clearly an article whose topic is the word. Does preanal present a similar case? Well, i asked my language informant, "What about epicene as another example of an obscure but valuable word?" Informant: "'Effeminate', right?" Me: "I think so." M-W Collegiate: That's the second general-purpose (non-technical) sense; the first is "having characteristics of both sexes". (Extra credit: i think there was at least one more sense even beyond a grammatical one, what fun!)

Body length
At, in the second sent, we have
 * The tail is long, and usually slightly exceeds one-half of the animal's body length.

My impulse is to read "body length" as "tip of nose to tip of tail", but i'm not confident that the as-yet-unidentified editor meant than, and i am sure some readers will take it to mean "base of neck to base of tail" -- which i would describe as the "trunk" of a human, tho i do not know without research whether, shall we say, an elephant has two trunks or, instead, most quadrupeds have none, and tho i am sure some people would write "all their extremities were ripped from their body". We should get clear whether tail length is 50-some % of total length, or more like, say, 29% (leaving, say, 57% for collar-to-anus, and 14% for head and neck). Then we should say it in a way that leaves no doubt in the minds of the hurried or young what we mean by what we (so far) call "body length". I was about to tag vague because of that, but i see that the stats later in the section are likely to suffice to clarify the intent. That clarifying calc should be done (along w/ more research if the result is ambiguous), and clearer wording chosen on that basis, so that users need not do the numbers to learn what we mean by our current "body length" wording. (And a prudent editor will probably display their reasoning in this talk section.) --Jerzy•t 02:56, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

The cool norths
OK, i came to the accompanying article bcz a recent edit dropped a preposition in adding info, but among other things, i found that the same edit may have butchered the syntax. The relevant phrase
 * in areas of Europe and Middle Asia.

became
 * in cool, Northern areas of Europe such as Scotland or Scandinavia and areas of Middle Asia such as Mongolia, Manchuria and Siberia.

The degree of parallelism suggests (as IMO geography does) the intention for "cool, Northern" to modify both "areas of Europe ..." and areas of Middle Asia ...", but the repetition of "areas" (if not inconsistent with that intention) at least creates subliminal confusion: It asks (probably demands) to be read
 * in
 * cool, Northern areas of Europe ...
 * and
 * [nondescript] areas of Middle Asia ....

but one suspects the editor was trying for something in the same direction as
 * in cool, Northern areas of
 * Europe ...
 * and
 * areas of Middle Asia ....

or
 * in cool, Northern areas
 * of Europe ...
 * and
 * areas of Middle Asia ....

I'm editing with that assumption, tho the colleague, who will know his intentions better than i can, may find reason to undo my next edit (and perhaps show us something i've failed to spot about their intentions). --Jerzy•t 05:55, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

--Jerzy•t 06:22, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, kept my attention on syntax above, ignoring the erroneous upcasing of "northern" which i fixed in the article. And then i carelessly referred to "The cool norths", in titling this section, yet may have been implying "the North of Asia and the North of Europe"; hmm, i may need to consult a reference to straighten out my reasoning.[blush]

Indigenous names
Why do we have a long list of indigenous names for this animal? I don't see anything similar on most other articles, and it doesn't appear to be conveying any encyclopaedic (rather than dictionary) information. If it said something like "the name in language X means 'little tiger' and reflects belief Y about the animal", than that would be useful, but all we have now is effectively an ever-growing list of trivia. What's the point of it? Anaxial (talk) 21:10, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

 * I agree that the list of "indigenous names" is trivial and pointless, not to mention its being of doubtful accuracy and virtually impossible for any one editor to check. I have accordingly deleted it.  J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 19:16, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Names
I am German. Wilde Katze not means wildcat. It's only a description for cats which, lives in the wild (domestic cats, which lives in the wild or wildcats, tigers, lions, ...). It's the same with Graue Katze, what means a cat, which is grey, (can be a feral cat, a wildcat, a Palla's cat, ...). Baumritter is only poetic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.187.106.137 (talk) 10:22, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Domestic cats
Should the domestic cat be added in the subspecies section of the page, or at least include a mention of the domestication of felis silvestris lybica in the subspecies section? The domestic cat is sometimes referred to as felis silvestris catus, and several other languages of Wikipedia do include a mention on the Wildcat page. --Schvass (talk) 01:14, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

European wildcat photo.
The photograph of the European wildcat used in this article's info box http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildcat#mediaviewer/File:Felis_silvestris_silvestris_Luc_Viatour.jpg is excellent. Has it ever been nominated as a featured photograph? If not, it should be. Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 22:24, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is a featured photograph, and was also Picture of the Day for 14th August this year, and a nominee for Picture of the Year in 2013. Anaxial (talk) 22:57, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

 * Good! And thank you, Wordreader (talk) 01:16, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

The hiss.
Under Communication, the "hiss" is included in the list of sounds produced by these animals, but it's meaning isn't given. I know what it means when my domestic short hairs hiss - 'warning! extreme defensive or offensive action is imminent and claws will be involved!' - but does it mean the same with these guys? (The image is a good addition and captures the action well.) Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 01:15, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Subspecies
Should we use Mammal Species of the World, which uses old sources, or a recent up to date phylogeographical analysis by IUCN, in my opinion the latter is by far more reliable than the former, and should catus be listed as a subspecies? As lybica is closer to catus than to other subspecies, which means if catus isn't a wildcat, lybica isn't. Editor abcdef (talk) 12:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

— SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  07:02, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Use newer sources, of equal or better weight, of course. We have a problem, however, that the modern reclassifications (mostly by way of merger) are controversial. We can't simply delete the info that's already present, since people are going to come here asking "what is F. s. grampia?", etc. The solution is going to be to group the old-system names into clusters under the new-system ones. But taxonomic names mostly have worked – historically anyway – on a basis of precedent, not what is "more wild", or what the genetically parent population is.  This is why so many in the field want to make the species name catus, as the senior synonym.  But zoologists don't seem to be as hard-core about that as botanists, so there's a lot of push-back from others who want the naming system to better reflect relationships between populations.  Unless something just changed when I wasn't looking, the European wildcat is F. s. silvestris, and the African is F. s. lybica, with the domestic being F. s. catus, and known to descend primarily from F. s. lybica.  There are always arguments that the domestic could just be classified as a non-subspecies clade within F. s. lybica (which re-opens the synonym seniority question again). Some alleged subspecies like F. s. grampia for the Scottish population were merged back into F. s. silvestris, and so on.  In the much longer term, "post-modern taxonomy" will be mostly about haplogroups, and these subspecies names won't matter much. I think this may be the undoing of lot of fine but arbitrary, confusing, and less-and-less-supportable infraspecific classifications in botany, eventually, as well, since so many of them are based on non-genetic description.  Anyway, however F. s. catus is classified today and tomorrow won't have any impact on whether F. s. lybica, as presently defined (the African wildcat) "is a wildcat".

Should European wildcat be merged into this article?
The European wildcat article seems to substantially overlap with this one (Wildcat). Both appear to be discussing the same subject. Would it make sense to merge them? The Parson's Cat (talk) 08:22, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

 * I think European wildcat actually stands well on its own, focusing more on local conservation issues and subspecies distinction, but could do with quite a bit more linking to Wildcat, to make sure the reader is aware that there's more and wider material there.-- Elmidae  (talk) 08:31, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep it separate. If anything, it could eventually split further, since there is more and more information about the Scottish and the "giant" Iberian populations all the time, but very little else of note coming up about other populations. Given the amount of verbiage we devote to domestic breeds, and to rather random populations of animals that are not actually very distinct, e.g. the Kiger mustang, itself just a subtopic of mustang horse, in turn a subtopic of the domestic horse and of feral horse, we can afford to develop wild felid articles more, not mash them together and blur over natural and cultural distinctions.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  06:30, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the 2 should be linked, so that the user knows that there is more information at hand.50.159.100.251 (talk) 23:24, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The European wildcat itself is a strong site, and I don't we should mash it up. But we should add more links, and give a brief summary in the Wildcat page, it will have more people coming, and help gain more information and European wildcat, and Wildcat; will grow  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.159.100.251 (talk) 23:29, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * It should definitely NOT be merged! The articles do not discuss the same subject. The person who suggested merging did apparently not understand this. Above argument -- info overlapping with article on wildcat -- speaks more for carving out the differences. Since to date, no other contributor agreed to merging, I suggest to delete the "merge from" templates in both articles. BhagyaMani (talk) 09:20, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Agree.-- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 09:35, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Agree - it's perfectly appropriate to have separate articles for the species and the subspecies. In the same way, we presently have separate articles for chimpanzee and Western chimpanzee. 86.20.106.10 (talk) 10:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

 * I also agree that there is no need to merge, and since it's been seven months, with six editors all saying the same thing and only one (the proposer) against, I have removed the Merge templates on the grounds that consensus has surely been reached. Anaxial (talk) 12:57, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Scottish Wildcat
The Scottish Wildcat is the object of conservation efforts in the British Isles, however, if not only in name, but in historical research there is much confusion. Not least whether there is any genuine difference between the wildcat in Scotland, and the European Wildcat. There also appears a desire to promote one view without scholarly references, instead relying on promotional (and so political in this context) material. There is a good case for the history of wild felines of all species in the British Isles, and could do with a fair write up. A useful properly referenced scholarly resource is this ; http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2008/04/21/european-cats-part-iii/ An example of a lobbyist brochure can be found here : http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/publications/naturallyscottish/wildcats.pdf (which among other problems confuses the history of Lynx with that of the European Wildcat). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.153.196.167 (talk) 20:23, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Toxoplasma gondii
The section Wildcat does not mention the T. gondii. Now this parasite has been rather noted for causing toxoplasmosis in human and other animals, and the possibility to get it from the domestic cat is discussed now and then. I therefore should find it interesting to know to what extent it is or is not present in wildcat populations. Does anybody know if anything is known about this? If it indeed has been found more than rather occasionally infecting wildcats, then I think this information should be added to this section. JoergenB (talk) 05:44, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Wildcat
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Wildcat's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "MSW3": From Brown bear:  From Striped polecat:  From Cheetah:  From Ictonyx:  From Hyena:  From Kinkajou: </li> <li>From Hog badger: </li> <li>From Narrow-striped mongoose: </li> <li>From Monk seal: </li> <li>From Nasua: </li> <li>From Jaguar: </li> <li>From Yellow-necked mouse: </li> <li>From List of mammals of North America: * </li> <li>From American badger: </li> <li>From Black-footed cat: </li> <li>From Caracal: </li> <li>From Felidae: </li> <li>From Polar bear: </li> <li>From Northern viscacha: </li> <li>From Northern three-toed jerboa: </li> <li>From List of mammals of Europe: </li> <li>From Leopardus: </li> <li>From Tiger: </li> <li>From South American coati: </li> <li>From Pantanal cat: </li> <li>From Jungle cat: </li> <li>From Eupleridae: </li> <li>From Ring-tailed mongoose: </li> <li>From Crab-eating mongoose: </li> <li>From Catopuma: </li> <li>From Yellow mongoose: </li> <li>From Cougar: </li> <li>From Felinae: </li> <li>From African golden wolf: </li> <li>From Brown palm civet: </li> <li>From Sulawesi palm civet: </li> <li>From Leopard: </li> <li>From Edible dormouse: </li> <li>From Lesser grison: </li> <li>From Jaguarundi: </li> <li>From Serval: </li> <li>From Meles (genus): </li> <li>From Paradoxurus: </li> <li>From European water vole: </li> <li>From Ferret-badger: </li> <li>From Aonyx: </li> <li>From Striped hyena: </li> <li>From Fossa (animal): </li> <li>From Lion: </li> <li>From Coati: </li> <li>From Eastern falanouc: </li> <li>From Japanese badger: </li> <li>From Dhole: </li> <li>From Bassaricyon: </li> <li>From White-nosed coati: </li> <li>From Javan ferret-badger: </li> <li>From Slender mongoose: </li> <li>From Patagonian weasel: </li> <li>From African golden cat: </li> <li>From Lontra: </li> <li>From Galidictis: </li> <li>From Procyonidae: </li> <li>From Malagasy civet: </li> </ul>

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:31, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

 * Found and corrected the orphan. It was neither of above, but id=14000057. Although you are 'just a simple computer program', do you understand compliments? If not, pass them to your writer! -- BhagyaMani (talk) 09:53, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Typo in paraphyletic group
Maybe a small thing to nitpick, but "Binomial name" on the page is spelt as "bionomial," which is not a word. I might be overlooking something but I can't find any place to fix the error within editing. Wizardmeat (talk) 00:27, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

 * Indeed. Looks like there's a typo in paraphyletic group or something deeper. It's beyond my knowledge of where to fix it, or I would. If you can show me how, I'd do it. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 11:13, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Fixed. That error has been there for years. I can't believe I missed it. — <span style="font-family:Arial;background:#d6ffe6;border:solid 1px;border-radius:5px;box-shadow:darkcyan 0px 1px 1px;"> Jts1882 | talk 11:22, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
 * No worries about missing it. Thanks for the fix! Much appreciated. Wizardmeat (talk) 18:34, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Wildcat


text:
User:Tietew/monobook.css

@import "http://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E5%88%A9%E7%94%A8%E8%80%85:Tietew/monobook.css&action=raw&ctype=text/css";

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

title: User:Tietew/monobook.css


text:
User:Tietew/monobook.js

document.writeln( '<' +  '/script>');

title: User:Tietew/monobook.js


text:
Category talk:National Hockey League players

What say ye? I think that maybe we should not put the "Category:NHL players" for individual players and instead put the categories for the teams they played on? Seems like the number of articles in this category could get huge.

Kevin Rector 16:03, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

OK, nobody has responded, so I'm going to go through and remove the NHL players tag from the individual players and make sure they are listed under the categories for their teams.

Kevin Rector 03:44, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)


text:
Life of Galileo

Life of Galileo (Leben des Galilei), also known as Galileo, is a play by the 20th century German dramatist Bertolt Brecht and collaborator Margarete Steffin with incidental music by Hanns Eisler. The play was written in 1938 and received its first theatrical production (in German) at the Zurich Schauspielhaus, opening on the 9th of September 1943. This production was directed by Leonard Steckel, with set-design by Teo Otto. The cast included Steckel himself (as Galileo), Karl Paryla and Wolfgang Langhoff.

The second (or "American") version was written in English between 1945–1947 in collaboration with Charles Laughton, and opened at the Coronet Theatre in Los Angeles on 30 July 1947. It was directed by Joseph Losey and Brecht, with musical direction by Serge Hovey and set-design by Robert Davison. Laughton played Galileo, with Rusty Lane as Barberini and Joan McCracken as Virginia. This production opened at the Maxine Elliott's Theatre in New York on 7 December of the same year.

In 1955 Brecht prepared a third version. A production, by the Berliner Ensemble with Ernst Busch in the title role, opened in January 1957 at the Theater am Schiffbauerdamm and was directed by Erich Engel, with set-design by Caspar Neher. The play was first published in 1940.

The action of the play follows the career of the great Italian natural philosopher Galileo Galilei and the Galileo affair, in which he was tried by the Roman Catholic Church for the promulgation of his scientific discoveries. The play embraces such themes as the conflict between dogmatism and scientific evidence, as well as interrogating the values of constancy in the face of oppression.

Versions of the play
After immigrating to the United States from Hitler's Germany (with stopovers in various other countries in between, among them the USSR), Brecht translated and re-worked the first version of his play in collaboration with the actor Charles Laughton. The result of their efforts was the second, "American version" of the play, entitled simply Galileo, which to this day remains the most widely staged version in the English-speaking world. This version differed in tone from the original, as Brecht felt that the optimistic portrait of the scientific project present in the first version required revision in a post-Hiroshima world, where science's harmful potential had become more apparent. This second version formed the basis for Losey's 1975 film adaptation for American Film Theatre under the title Galileo with Topol in the title role.

In September 1947, Brecht was subpoenaed in the US by the House Un-American Activities Committee for alleged communist connections. He testified before HUAC on 30 October 1947, and flew to Europe on 31 October. He chose to return to East Germany and continued to work on the play, now once again in the German language. The final German version premiered at Cologne in April 1955.

Matej Danter offers a readily-accessible and detailed comparison of the early, the American, and the final German versions.

In 2013 the Royal Shakespeare Company performed a new version of the play based on a "pared down" translation by Mark Ravenhill; the Swan Theatre production received a favorable review from the veteran theater critic Michael Billington.

Synopsis
Galileo, an eminent professor and scientist in Padua, a city in the 17th century Venetian Republic, is short of money. A prospective student, named Ludovico Marsali, tells him about a novel invention, the telescope ("a queer tube thing"), that is being sold in Amsterdam. Afterwards, the procurator of Padua University enters and informs Galileo that he cannot approve his application for a raise unless Galileo can produce inventions with practical applications. When Galileo protests that he will be unable to pursue his theoretical research into astronomy if he focuses on business pursuits, the procurator points out that his research into astronomy would be deemed heretical in other parts of Italy and that Venice provides greater academic freedom to scientists because Venetian merchants and industrialists seek to profit from the scientific advances.

Galileo realizes that he must appease his sponsors, replicates the Dutch telescope invention, and presents it to the leaders of Venice as his own creation. Galileo's daughter, Virginia, and Ludovico congratulate Galileo on his "invention" which Galileo claims is much improved from the Dutch version and Ludovico wryly responds that Galileo's is red rather than green. After presenting the telescope, Galileo receives an increase in his salary from the University and the procurator tells Galileo that the financial incentive was necessary to elicit inventions, but within a short time, the procurator discovers Galileo's ruse and is upset to have been publicly made a fool.

Galileo then uses the telescope for careful observations of the Moon and the planets, and he discovers the moons orbiting Jupiter. He makes plans to seek the sponsorship of the Medici Court in Florence where he hopes to be able to focus more on his writing and research, but his close friend and colleague, Sagredo, pleads with him not to leave Venice since the rest of Italy is dominated by clerics. His astronomical observations strongly support Nicolaus Copernicus' heliocentric model of the Solar System, which is counter to popular belief, Aristotelian physics and the established doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. When doubters quote scripture and Aristotle to him, Galileo pleads with them to look in his telescope and trust the observations of their eyes; they refuse.

Virginia's years long engagement to Ludovico Marsali, a wealthy young man whom she genuinely loves, is broken because of Galileo's reluctance to distance himself from his unorthodox teachings. He furthermore publishes his views in vernacular Italian, rather than traditional scientific Latin, thus making his work and conclusions more accessible to the common people, enraging the Church. Galileo is brought to the Vatican in Rome for interrogation by the Inquisition. Upon being threatened with torture, he recants his teachings. His students are shocked by his surrender in the face of pressure from the church authorities.

Galileo, old and broken, now living under house arrest with a priest monitoring his activities, is visited by one of his former pupils, Andrea. Galileo gives him a book (Two New Sciences) containing all his scientific discoveries, asking him to smuggle it out of Italy for dissemination abroad. Andrea now believes Galileo's actions were heroic and that he just recanted to fool the ecclesiastical authorities. However, Galileo insists his actions had nothing to do with heroism but were merely the result of self-interest.

Historical background
The play stays generally faithful to Galileo's science and timeline thereof, but takes significant liberties with his personal life. Galileo did in fact use a telescope, observe the moons of Jupiter, advocate for the heliocentric model, observe sunspots, investigate buoyancy, and write on physics, and did visit the Vatican twice to defend his work, the second time being made to recant his views, and being confined to house arrest thereafter.

One significant liberty that is taken is the treatment of Galileo's daughter Virginia Gamba (Sister Maria Celeste), who, rather than becoming engaged, was considered unmarriageable by her father and confined to a convent from the age of thirteen (the bulk of the play), and, further, died of dysentery shortly after her father's recantation. However, Galileo was close with Virginia, and they corresponded extensively.

Allusions
There are a number of allusions to Galileo's science and to Marxism which are not further elaborated in the play; some of these are noted below.

The discussion of price versus value was a major point of debate in 19th century economics, under the terms exchange value versus use value. Within Marxian economics this is discussed under the labor theory of value.

More subtly, Marx is sometimes interpreted as advocating technological determinism (technological progress determines social change), which is reflected in the telescope (a technological change) being the root of the scientific progress and hence social unrest.

Questions about motivations for academic pursuits are often raised, with Galileo seeking knowledge for knowledge's sake and his supporters focused on monetizing his discoveries through star charts and industry applications. There is a tension between Galileo's pure love of science and his sponsors who only fund and protect his research because they wish to profit from it.

The mention of tides refers to Galileo's theory that the motion of the Earth caused the tides, which would give the desired physical proof of the Earth's movement, and which is discussed in his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, whose working title was Dialogue on the Tides. In actuality Galileo was wrong. Kepler correctly believed that the Moon's gravity caused the tides.

The bent wooden rail in scene 13 and the discussion that the quickest distance between two points need not be a straight line (though a straight line offers the shortest path, the fastest descent of a rolling ball in fact follows a curve) alludes to Galileo's investigation of the brachistochrone (in the context of the quickest descent from a point to a wall), which he incorrectly believed to be given by a quarter circle. Instead, the brachistochrone is a half cycloid, which was only proven much later with the development of calculus.

title: Life of Galileo


text:
User:Praveer

Techie. Product Manager. Traveller. Guitarist. Father.

title: User:Praveer


text:
Peter Wheeler (rugby union)

Peter John Wheeler, CBE (born 26 November 1948) is a former  international rugby union player who played hooker and was Chief Executive of Leicester Tigers.

Early life
Wheeler attended Brockley County Grammar School and went on to play for Old Brockleians Rugby Club and Kent for three seasons.

Playing career
Wheeler was considered a tough and technically proficient hooker and was integral to Leicester's innovative and expansive style of play. Wheeler captained Leicester Tigers to three consecutive wins in the John Player Cup from 1979 to 1981 and played 349 games for the club from 1969 to 1985.

He was an early advocate of league rugby in the 1980s.

He made his England debut on 1 February 1975 against France, and his last appearance on 17 March 1984 against Wales, gaining 41 caps in between, including 5 as captain.

He went on the 1977 British Lions tour to New Zealand and the 1980 British Lions tour to South Africa.

Rugby administration
Wheeler coached Tigers in the inaugural league season which ended with them as champions. He then joined the Tigers organising committee.

When open professionalism was declared in 1996 he was appointed the Chief Executive of Leicester Tigers and held the position until 2010 when he was appointed "Rugby Director", though this saw little change to his day to day role. He retired in 2015 and was made a life member of Leicester, who he had served in various roles over 40 years.

title: Peter Wheeler (rugby union)


text:
Juno Online Services

Juno Online Services, also called simply Juno, is an Internet service provider based in the United States. It originated as a free email service and later expanded its offerings. Juno is a subsidiary of United Online, which in turn is a subsidiary of investment bank B. Riley Financial. United Online is also the parent of NetZero and BlueLight Internet Services.

History
Juno was founded in May 1996 by Charles Ardai, Brian Marsh and Clifford Tse, with equity capital provided by the D. E. Shaw Group and headquarters in the same Midtown Manhattan building as Shaw. In August 1996, it began a free e-mail service — a customer would install the proprietary Juno client which would allow them to send and receive email of about 35 kilobytes in size. Version 1 did not offer attachments or other features. The user could write emails with the Juno client and would periodically sign in by dial-up. Upon doing so, the Juno client would upload any emails the user had written, download any new incoming emails in the online mailbox, and download targeted advertisements, which were displayed in the client. This was similar to "QWK" and similar less automated offline readers that had been used for years by BBSes to save phone line connect time.

In June 1998, Juno expanded its service to offer premium support for paying subscribers, and added the ability to browse the web in addition to use of email. In December 1999, Juno began to offer the same service (without technical support) for free, provided the user ran the Juno client, which displayed a bar containing advertisements for the majority of the time that the user was online. Juno later imposed limits on how much usage could be made of its free Internet service in a single month. Free service was limited, as of the middle of July 2015, to a maximum of 10 hours per month.

With the collapse of the 1990s Dot-com bubble, Internet advertising revenues declined and the company shifted emphasis to offering discount Web and mail services similar to large ISPs, but at half the price.

Juno stock began trading on NASDAQ in May 1999, under the symbol JWEB. In June 2001, Juno and NetZero, which also traded on NASDAQ but under the symbol NZRO, announced a merger. The two had been in litigation over the patent which NetZero held to provide free Internet access by using an Ad bar. Though NetZero held the said patent, Juno had six million members, and thus was far larger. Eventually, they chose to merge rather than continue to fight in court. By September 2001, the two companies were merged into the present-day United Online, and both JWEB and NZRO were delisted.

Juno released, along with NetZero, a service that purported to make web browsing faster. It displayed pictures at lower resolutions, thereby speeding page loads.

In 2001, Juno enacted a new version of their privacy policy. By continuing to use the service, customers implicitly agreed to allow Juno to harvest any unused CPU cycles. The plan was to assemble a quasi supercomputer using customers processors and sell computing services to private companies. This additional revenue was intended to keep the company afloat after the dot-com bubble. Most customers did not notice the change of terms. Though a customer for the Juno Virtual Supercomputer service was announced, it remained unclear, as of the middle of July 2015, whether the company followed through on this plan.

Proprietary client
The Juno client software icon. The client software was updated many times in the late 1990s. Version 1.49 was final for Windows 3.1, except for a date problem that was fixed in version 1.51. Versions 4.0.11 and 5.0.33 were final for Windows 95 and later. Version 4 had attachments and a spell checker, and displayed fonts and colors. For old messages, it had storage folders, each stored in a separate file containing up to 1000 messages.

Version 5 added an ineffective integral twit/spam filter and the ability to write messages in chosen fonts and colors with inline images. It stored its old messages in a different format, with one large file for all messages. When disk free space was not several times larger than the message file, it often suffered "folder collapse" in which all messages returned to the "Inbox" or disappeared.

As of December 1, 2004, use of an e-mail client such as the Juno client, Microsoft Outlook Express, or Eudora had ceased to be free. Users who wished to use an e-mail client instead of Juno's web-based e-mail interface were required to pay for either Juno Platinum or Juno Megamail.

The Juno client software's version 5.0, build 33, would not work with Internet Explorer 7. However, by the time Microsoft released the final version of IE7, Juno had released Juno 5.0 build 49, which resolved the issues with IE7 and made it compatible with Windows Vista.

Version 8, compatible with Windows 7, was released in 2009. The proprietary mailers were only slightly supported in the 21st century, and the service supported POP3 standard mail clients.

No version of Juno's offline mail reader was made to use third party utilities to scan for viruses or clean out E-mail spam among messages that had already been downloaded. Versions 5 and 8 could weed downloaded email messages individually by exact email address matches; however, there were no wildcards, boolean exclusion-filters, or routing features to facilitate this. The company opened a spamdesk to help screen spam at the servers, thus minimizing the amount of spam received by the Juno client.

While the Juno client software could back up e-mails and addresses, it did not support exporting these to other clients, nor did other clients support importing from Juno. Only a handful of third-party utilities were made that could do anything with the proprietary message storage format; instead, users were forced to use third party applications to convert and export the data, principally juno5bdb for messages (which Juno stored in a Berkeley DB), and Dawn for addresses.

Development centers
Juno also opened an offshore development center at Hyderabad, India, which it called United Online Software Development India Pvt. Ltd.

title: Juno Online Services


text:
John Brown (Pennsylvania politician)

John Brown (August 12, 1772 –October 12, 1845) was an American mill owner and statesman from Lewistown, Pennsylvania. He represented Pennsylvania in the U.S. Congress from 1821 to 1825.

Biography
John Brown was born on August 12, 1772, near Lewistown in the Province of Pennsylvania. He attended and received his education from the common schools and moved to Lewistown in 1800. Brown became involved in the gristmill and sawmill businesses and was elected to the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, where he served from 1809 to 1813.

Brown was elected as a Republican to the United States House of Representatives for the 17th Congress in 1820. He was reelected in 1822 to the 18th Congress as a Jackson Republican. After departing the House of Representatives in 1825, Brown resumed his former business interests. He subsequently moved to Buncombe County, North Carolina in 1827, where he participated in the agriculture and real estate businesses.

Brown died in Buncombe County, North Carolina, near Skyland, on October 12, 1845. He was interred in Riverside Cemetery in Asheville, North Carolina.

title: John Brown (Pennsylvania politician)


text:
Reykjahlíð

Reykjahlíð is a village situated on the shores of Lake Mývatn in the north of Iceland. It is the seat of the municipality of Skútustaðahreppur. It has 227 inhabitants as of 2021.

Overview
During the so-called Mývatn fires, caused by the eruption of the nearby volcano Krafla in 1729, the village was destroyed by a lava stream. However, the inhabitants were saved when the lava flow stopped in front of the village church on higher ground, allegedly as the result of the prayers of the village priest. The church is still there, although the present building dates from 1972.

Main sights
From Reykjahlíð, it is possible to go to many sights in the area, most notably Krafla. The volcano last erupted in 1984, but the vapour of a warm lava field and of sulphur springs can still be seen. Not far from there is the crater Víti (meaning "hell" in Icelandic), but looking today rather harmless with a blue lake at its bottom. Its apparent tranquility belies the fact that its last eruption was as recent as 1976.

Other interesting places are on the lake itself, like the volcano Hverfjall, the pseudo-craters of Skútusstaðir and Dimmuborgir (a strange lava formation).

A local airport provides sightseeing during the summer.

A plant for extraction and processing of diatomite was a main point in local economy until 2004 when it was shut down.

Mývatn Nature Baths opened on 30 June 2004.

Climate
Reykjahlíð features a tundra climate (Köppen climate classification: ET), bordering on a subarctic climate (Köppen climate classification: Dfc). Summers are typically cool with crisp nights while winters are very long and cold, but not severely cold.

Extreme temperatures ranged from -31.2 C on March 7, 1998 to 28.2 C on August 10, 2004.

title: Reykjahlíð


text:
Northwood Hills tube station

Northwood Hills is a London Underground station on the Metropolitan line in Northwood in North West London between Northwood and Pinner stations and is in Travelcard Zone 6.

History
The station opened on 13 November 1933. There was a competition for the name and Northwood Hills, suggested by a woman from North Harrow was the winning entry. The area is lower than Northwood, despite the name.

Services
In the northbound direction, the station is served by trains to Watford (4tph), Amersham (2tph) and Chesham (2tph) trains (at peak times, 'fast' trains do not stop at stations between Harrow-on-the-Hill and Moor Park). In the southbound direction, off-peak services generally run 2tph to Wembley Park, 4tph to Baker Street, and 4tph to Aldgate.

Connections
London Buses routes 282, H11 (alighting at Northwood Hills Circus) and H13 serve the station.

title: Northwood Hills tube station


text:
Talk:List of active Royal Netherlands Navy ships

Comments
This page has been around for awhile - it's been on my watchlist - but its history seems to have vanished and it's reported as a new article. Stan 16:13, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

As explicated on ship prefix, the correct prefix in English is HNLMS, not Hr.Ms. Stan 15:41, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Submarine list - can anyone clean up?
The submarine list has an issue with links to boat-specific pages - two of them go to disambigs, one to the wrong ship, and one page doesn't exist. Unfortunately they're all linked through a template I don't understand and I don't know how to fix them. Can anyone fix these, or advise me how to proceed? I'm sure there used to be a "Templates used on this page" somewhere, but somehow I can't spot it right now. Cfmdobbie (talk) 10:25, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

 * Never mind - I worked out how to locate the template! It's a bit clunky to use, given the duplicated pennant numbers for different boats, and it means we can't have the pennant number in the link.  Not sure how to resolve that at the moment, but I've managed to normalize the links so they go where they should be going. Cfmdobbie (talk) 10:45, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of active Royal Netherlands Navy ships. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131101161657/http://www.defensie.nl/english/subjects/materiel/ships/ to http://www.defensie.nl/english/subjects/materiel/ships/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:39, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Checked. Redalert2fan (talk) 12:47, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:37, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * ETV Guardian.jpg


text:
User:AgentSeethroo/About

= The AgentSeethroo DVD  =

AgentSeethroo - Now Playing
Hiya. I'm AgentSeethroo. I'm in the U.S. Air Force, where I have what is best described as a fairly cushy desk office job. I have fun there, and work out the budgets for some of the Air Force's projects. I don't like it when people try to say the military isn't necessary, or is stupid. No, I do not know what's in Area 51. If you want to know more about the military, feel free to ask in the DVD commentary section.

I love Homestar Runner, and have been using it until recently in the office to relieve boredom. Then, the Air Force banned the site from our computers. That's why I'm now facing a small crisis. If anyone could help, that'd be great.

I think that's all I have to say for now. This is AgentSeethroo, signing out.

Return to the AgentSeethroo DVD.

title: User:AgentSeethroo/About


text:
Wikipedia:Historical archive/WikiReader

WikiReaders are collections of articles from Wikipedia on a certain topic, in the form of PDFs published for download and intended to be printed, and also to be sold in printed form.

Their intention is to start a revision process on this topic and clarify the current state of this topic.

The state of the WikiReader project for other languages is at WikiReader.

Currently, the German Wikipedia has three WikiReaders for sale, and several to download. The German Wikipedians are thus the pioneers of printing Wikipedia material. If you know German, read de:Wikipedia:WikiReader, and help us catch up and become "published".

Mirror of WikiReaders (mostly German now, since the other languages have to catch up first)

Stable versions has the most appropriate articles for use in print.

Frankfurt

 * Details: WikiReader/Frankfurt
 * Scope - Frankfurt, Germany
 * Editor - Qoop
 * Release date - August 4, 2005
 * Printed: This Wikireader is being printed by Qoop.com for Wikimania.

Decade Volcanoes

 * Details: WikiReader/Decade Volcanoes
 * Editor: Worldtraveller
 * Scope: Decade Volcanoes - those identified as the most hazardous and worthy of particular study
 * v1.2 released 2 June 2006. PDF file [[Media:WikiReader Decade Volcanoes.pdf|here]] (1.60Mb).  Please comment and give feedback!
 * Printed: ?

Free Software and Free Contents

 * details and TOC: WikiReader/Free Software and Free Contents
 * current editor: User:TomK32
 * release date: final PDF in August 2004.
 * current preview-PDF: PDF (660kB)

Australian Gold Coast

 * Details: WikiReader/Gold Coast
 * Editor: Nathannoblet
 * Scope: Just about the gold coast
 * Release date: Begun 2006.10.13. Close to first draft ready 2006.11.23.

2004 U.S. presidential election controversy and irregularities

 * Details: WikiReader/2004 U.S. presidential election controversy and irregularities
 * Editor: Kevin Baas
 * Scope: well 2004 U.S. presidential election controversy and irregularities and sub-pages for starters. Also relevant laws, history, etc.
 * Release date: Begun 2006.02.26. No release date.

Solar System

 * Details: User:Worldtraveller/Solar System WikiReader
 * Editor: Worldtraveller
 * Scope: Objects within the Solar System
 * Release date: As soon as possible!
 * Status: Getting the articles on the contents list up to scratch - several are featured, most have plenty of content, but general copyediting and polishing is required.

Spoiler Warning: A Wikipedia reader's digest

 * Details: WikiReader/Spoiler Warning
 * Editor: Stbalbach
 * Scope: The best of Wikipedia Spoiler Warnings
 * Release date: project begun May 2005, no release date.
 * Status: Looking for articles to be included!
 * Note: Reader's Digest® is a registered trademark for a magazine and various books published by the company of the same name in the United States, and it will need a different name.

A History of the 20th Century

 * Details: WikiReader/A History of the 20th Century
 * Scope - Essentially Modern History, with a hopefully far broader scope than World War II wikireader.
 * Editor - Mark Lewis
 * Release date - ?
 * PDF - demo, with pics

Cetacea / Whales

 * Details: WikiReader/Cetacea
 * Scope: A collection of all articles concerning Cetacea (Species, Taxa, General)
 * Editor(s): Achim Raschka
 * Release date: 2005 (maybe printed)
 * Status: at the beginning, a German Reader as a "template" exists

Methods of Molecular Biology

 * Details: WikiReader Methods of Molecular Biology
 * Scope - Methods of Molecular Biology.
 * Editor - Magnus Manske
 * Release date -

Poetries: National and International

 * Details: WikiReader/Poetries National and International
 * Scope: A book of the articles describing and analysing 'poetries national and international', including the significant British, French, Irish, Urdu and Japanese categories within Wikipedia, as well as various lesser-known international poetries and poets.
 * Editor: EuropracBHIT
 * Release date: March 14 2005 (putatively).

Software Engineering

 * Details: WikiReader/Software Engineering
 * Scope:
 * Languages: English, German
 * Link collection: here
 * Article improvement drive: here
 * Editors: Hans-AC, ...
 * Release date: unknown (end of 2005?)

The Best of Wikipedia: Featured Articles, February 2004 - March 2004

 * Details: WikiReader/Best of Wikipedia Feb-March 2004
 * Scope: Comprising each of the featured articles from the time period listed above.
 * Editor: Lyellin
 * Release date: None Set.

Twentieth-Century Hollywood

 * Details: WikiReader/Twentieth Century Hollywood
 * Scope: Locates Hollywood in time and space (Part 1), talks about the people (Part 2-1 roles such as actors, directors, producers and cinematographers, while Part 2-2 concentrates on biographical data about the figures), the institutions (such as Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, Paramount, MGM and Dreamworks) and the films that have made and shaped 20th century Hollywood, including Best Pictures editorially selected, as well as B-films and certain genres.
 * Editor: User:EuropracBHIT
 * Release date: Putatively, October 1st 2004. See Details for a more detailed timeline.

William Shakespeare

 * Details: WikiReader/William Shakespeare
 * Scope: About Shakespearan life and authorship and influence, as well as coverage of his most famous work
 * Editor: ✏ Sverdrup[[Image:U-Svdp.png|Sverdrup]]
 * Release date: Unknown

World War II

 * Details: World War II wikireader
 * Scope - World War II-related topics - people, events, projects, devices.
 * Editor - Raul654
 * Release date - Postponed/no set date

History of Latin America

 * Details: History of Latin America Wikireader
 * Scope - History of the 19 countries of Latin America
 * Editor - Youssef
 * Versions - [[Image:AL 0.2.pdf|0.2 in pdf]] not publishable, 186 pp all included
 * Release date - Postponed/no set date

Taipei

 * Details: WikiReader/Taipei
 * Scope - Taipei related topics
 * Editor - Students of National Taiwan University Computer Science and Information Engineering Department.
 * Release date - Wikimania 2007

The Simpsons

 * Details: WikiReader/The_Simpsons
 * Scope - The Simpsons related articles
 * Editor - cast_unshaken_kiloherz
 * Release date - Postponed/no set date

Suggestions

 * A compilation of Wikipedia's best unusual articles - suggested content list: WikiReader/Encyclopaedia of the unusual
 * A compilation of some of the best articles that have arisen from current events.
 * A compilation of different sub categories from the Portal:Business and Economics (please move if wrong place Cryptonit)
 * A compilation of articles related to The Beatles

OpenOffice.org
OpenOffice.org is a free application that has been used for the first wikireaders to create PDFs.

There is an OpenOffice.org Template for German WikiReaders and there is a (unofficial) template in English. The English version is basically a copy (layout) of the German one.

Wiki -> PDF
The German Wikipedia project used Gynecology Reader use WIKI->PDFSkript to make a reader. This service was taken down in August 2005 because of software bugs, and has not been reactivated.

What worked:

 * Basic formatting: bold, italics,
 * Headers,
 * Wiki-links and external links,
 * Lists and indentation

What the script couldn't yet handle:

 * Images
 * Tables
 * Templates

Other

 * Scribus is also a free text editor with PDF-export possibilities.
 * The Eclipse Wikipedia Editor with PDF Exporter (proof-of-concept) uses iText, a free Java PDF library for converting HTML to PDF.

title: Wikipedia:Historical archive/WikiReader


text:
Alexander Obolensky

Prince Alexander Sergeevich Obolensky (Александр Серге́евич Оболенский; 17 February 1916 – 29 March 1940) was a Rurikid prince of Russian aristocratic descent who became a naturalised Briton, having spent most of his life in England, and who went on to represent England in international rugby union. He was, and remains, popularly known as "The Flying Prince", "The Flying Slav", or simply as "Obo" to many sports fans.

Biography
A member of the Rurik dynasty, Obolensky was born at Petrograd (now Saint Petersburg) on 17 February 1916, the son of Prince Sergei Alexandrovich Obolensky, an officer in the Tsar's Imperial Horse Guards and his wife Princess Lyubov Obolenskaya (née Naryshkina). The family name derives from the ancient Russian city of Obolensk; they fled Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 and settled in Muswell Hill, London.

Obolensky was educated at The Ashe Boys' Preparatory School, Etwall and Trent College, Long Eaton, both in Derbyshire, before going up to Brasenose College, Oxford in Michaelmas 1934, where he held a college exhibition and read Politics, Philosophy and Economics; he graduated with a Fourth Class degree (BA (Oxon)) in 1938. He was also appointed a Knight of St John in 1938.

At Oxford he won two rugby blues representing Oxford University RFC as a wing/three-quarter. Having previously played for Chesterfield RFC whilst still at school, he played for Leicester Tigers between 1934 and 1939, as well as Rosslyn Park FC; his selection for England caused a stir because he was not a British subject, although he was naturalised British in March 1936.

On 4 January 1936. Obolensky scored two tries on his England debut in a 13–0 victory over the All Blacks, the first time England had beaten New Zealand. Aided by Pathé News footage of the game, his name has entered into legend, since the first try, beating several All Blacks in a run of three-quarters of the length of the field, was widely regarded as the greatest try of the time, and one of the greatest tries ever scored by England.

Prince Obolensky won three England caps later that year (against Wales on 18 January, Ireland on 8 February and Scotland on 21 March), but scored no further tries. He was selected as a member of the touring party for the 1936 British Lions tour to Argentina. He also played seven games for the "invitation only" Barbarian F.C. between 1937 and 1939, scoring three tries.

On 12 August 1939, Obolensky was commissioned as an Acting Pilot Officer in 615 Squadron (Royal Auxiliary Air Force (RAuxAF)), being stationed at RAF Kenley and at the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939, he joined RAF 504 Squadron.

Death
On 29 March 1940, a day after being recalled to the England squad to play Wales, Pilot Officer Obolensky was killed during training when his Hawker Hurricane Mark 1 overshot the runway at Martlesham Heath Airfield, Suffolk. His aircraft, reference number L1946, dropped into a ravine at the end of the runway during landing, breaking his neck. Aged 24, Obolensky was buried at Ipswich New Cemetery.

Legacy

 * The "Obolensky Lecture" is given annually on the subject of rugby football, and at Twickenham there is a suite named Obolensky's in his honour.
 * In February 2008 a project was launched in Ipswich to erect a permanent memorial, resulting in a £50,000 statue being unveiled on 18 February 2009 by his niece, Princess Alexandra Obolensky; the statue by Harry Gray stands on Cromwell Square in the town.
 * A building is named in his memory at his former school, Trent College.
 * The "Prince Obolensky Award" is presented annually by the Prince Obolensky Association at Rosslyn Park F.C.

title: Alexander Obolensky


text:
Federal subjects of Russia

The federal subjects of Russia, also referred to as the subjects of the Russian Federation (субъекты Российской Федерации) or simply as the subjects of the federation (субъекты федерации), are the constituent entities of Russia, its top-level political divisions. According to the Constitution of Russia, the federation consists of republics, krais, oblasts, cities of federal importance, an autonomous oblast, and autonomous okrugs, all of which are equal subjects of the federation.

Every federal subject has its own head, a parliament, and a constitutional court. Each subject has its own constitution or charter and legislation, although the authority of these organs differ. Subjects have equal rights in relations with federal government bodies. The subjects have equal representation – two delegates each – in the Federation Council, the upper house of the Federal Assembly. They differ in the degree of autonomy they enjoy; republics are offered more autonomy.

Post-Soviet Russia formed during the history of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic within the USSR and did not change at the time of the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. In 1992, during the so-called "parade of sovereignties", separatist sentiments and the War of Laws within Russia, the Russian regions signed the Federation Treaty (Федеративный договор), establishing and regulating the current inner composition of Russia, based on the division of authorities and powers among Russian government bodies and government bodies of constituent entities. The Federation Treaty was included in the text of the 1978 Constitution of the Russian SFSR. The current Constitution of Russia, adopted by federal referendum on 12 December 1993, came into force on 25 December 1993 and abolished the model of the Soviet system of government introduced in 1918 by Vladimir Lenin and based on the right to secede from the country and on unlimited sovereignty of federal subjects (in practice secession was never allowed), which conflicts with the country's integrity and federal laws. The new constitution eliminated a number of legal conflicts, reserved the rights of the regions, introduced local self-government and did not grant the Soviet-era right to secede from the country. In the late 1990s and early 2000s the political system became de jure closer to other modern federal states with a republican form of government. In the 2000s, following the policies of Vladimir Putin and of the ruling United Russia party, the Russian parliament changed the distribution of tax revenues, reduced the number of elections in the regions and gave more power to the federal authorities.

The Russian Federation was composed of 89 federal subjects in 1993. Mergers reduced the number to 83 by 2008. Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014, with the Russian government claiming Sevastopol and the Republic of Crimea to be the 84th and 85th federal subjects of Russia, a move that is not recognized internationally. During the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, four Ukrainian oblasts were annexed by Russia, though they remain internationally recognized as part of Ukraine and are only partially occupied by Russia.

Terminology
An official government translation of the Constitution of Russia from Russian to English uses the term "constituent entities of the Russian Federation". For example, Article 5 reads: "The Russian Federation shall consist of republics, krais, oblasts, cities of federal significance, an autonomous oblast, and autonomous okrugs, which shall have equal rights as constituent entities of the Russian Federation." A translation provided by Garant-Internet instead uses the term "subjects of the Russian Federation".

Tom Fennell, a translator, told the 2008 American Translators Association conference that "constituent entity of the Russian Federation" is a better translation than "subject". This was supported by Tamara Nekrasova, Head of Translation Department at Goltsblat BLP, who said in a 2011 presentation at a translators conference that "constituent entity of the Russian Federation is more appropriate than subject of the Russian Federation (subject would be OK for a monarchy)".

Types
Each federal subject belongs to one of the following types:

Statistics of federal subjects

 * List of federal subjects of Russia by GRP
 * Armorial of Russia (Coat of arms of Russian federal subjects)
 * List of federal subjects of Russia by incidence of substance abuse
 * List of federal subjects of Russia by GDP per capita
 * List of federal subjects of Russia by murder rate
 * List of federal subjects of Russia by life expectancy
 * List of federal subjects of Russia by population
 * List of federal subjects of Russia by total fertility rate
 * List of federal subjects of Russia by Human Development Index
 * List of federal subjects of Russia by unemployment rate
 * Regional parliaments of Russia
 * List of current heads of federal subjects of Russia
 * Forest cover by federal subject in Russia
 * ISO 3166-2:RU

Mergers, splits and internal territorial changes
Starting in 2005, some of the federal subjects were merged into larger territories. In this process, six very sparsely populated subjects (comprising in total 0.3% of the population of Russia) were integrated into more populated subjects, with the hope that the economic development of those territories would benefit from the much larger means of their neighbours. The merging process was finished on 1 March 2008. No new mergers have been planned since March 2008. The six territories became "administrative-territorial regions with special status". They have large proportions of minorities, with Russians being a majority only in three of them. Four of those territories have a second official language in addition to Russian: Buryat (in two of the merged territories), Komi-Permian, Koryak. This is an exception: all the other official languages of Russia (other than Russian) are set by the Constitutions of its constituent Republics (Mordovia, Chechnya, Dagestan etc.). The status of the "administrative-territorial regions with special status" has been a subject of criticism because it does not appear in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. In addition to those six territories that entirely ceased to be subjects of the Russian Federation and were downgraded to territories with special status, another three subjects have a status of subject but are simultaneously part of a more populated subject: With an estimated population of 49348 as of 2018, Chukotka is currently the least populated subject of Russia that is not part of a more populated subject. It was separated from Magadan Oblast in 1993. Chukotka is one of the richest subjects of Russia (with a Gross Regional Product [GRP] per capita equivalent to that of Australia) and therefore does not fit in the pattern of merging a subject to benefit from the economic dynamism of the neighbour.
 * Nenets Autonomous Okrug (2010 population of 42090) has been a subject since 1993, but is also, according to its Constitution, part of Arkhangelsk Oblast
 * Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug obtained autonomy in 1977, but is also part of Tyumen Oblast
 * Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug obtained the status of subject in 1992 (after obtaining autonomy in 1977), but is also part of Tyumen Oblast.

In 1992, Ingushetia separated from Chechnya, both to stay away from the growing violence in Chechnya and as a bid to obtain the Eastern part of Northern Ossetia (it did not work: the Chechen conflict spread violence to Ingushetia, and North Ossetia retained its Prigorodny District). Those two Muslim republics, populated in vast majority (95%+) by closely related Vainakh people, speaking Vainakhish languages, remain the two poorest subjects of Russia, with the GRP per capita of Ingushetia being equivalent to that of Iraq. According to 2016 statistics, however, they are also the safest regions of Russia, and also have the lowest alcohol consumption, with alcohol poisoning at least 40 times lower than the federal average.

Until 1994, Sokolsky District, Nizhny Novgorod Oblast was part of Ivanovo Oblast.

In 2011–2012, the territory of Moscow increased by 140% (to 2511 km2) by acquiring part of Moscow Oblast.

On 13 May 2020, the governors of Arkhangelsk Oblast and Nenets Autonomous Okrug announced their plan to merge following the collapse of oil prices stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic. The process was scrapped on 2 July due to its unpopularity among the population.

title: Federal subjects of Russia


text:
John Troyer

John Troyer (3 February 1753 – 28 February 1842) was a farmer, businessman, medical practitioner, and exorcist in the Norfolk County, Ontario region.

Troyer and family emigrated from southeastern Pennsylvania in 1789 and settled in Ontario, Canada, near Long Point on Lake Erie on a farm. The farm is still known as Troyer's Flats. This Amish family appears to have been successful in their economic pursuits with a gristmill and boat construction in addition to the farm. He became well known for his medical abilities although he had no formal training. He was locally famous for his herbal remedies.

Local legends abounded concerning witches and other paranormal activities where Dr Troyer was involved. He was known to have had exaggerated fears of witches. Examples of his witch traps (modified bear traps) can be seen in the Eva Brook Donnelly Museum in Norfolk County, Ontario. One story focused on his attempts to find a stash of gold, dumped in the area the previous century by a fur trader named David Ramsay. Another, recorded in the book Tales of Long Point, tells of Troyer following several witches to where they kept their broomsticks, then stealing one of the broomsticks for himself, and flying through the air to view a meeting of witches held at a distant location.

title: John Troyer


text:
Yaroslav of Tver

Yaroslav III Yaroslavich (Ярослав Ярославич; 1230–1271) was the first Prince of Tver from 1247, and Grand Prince of Vladimir from 1263 until his death in 1271. All the later princes of Tver descended from him.

Yaroslav and his son Mikhail presided over Tver's transformation into one of the greatest centres of power in medieval Russia which would compete with Moscow.

Life
Yaroslav was a son of Yaroslav II and a younger brother of Alexander Nevsky. In 1247, he received from his uncle the town of Tver.

In 1252, Yaroslav and his brother Andrey seized Alexander's capital, Pereslavl-Zalessky. Reinforced by Tatar units, Alexander presently fought it back, taking prisoner Yaroslav's children and leaving his wife as a casualty on the field of battle.

Yaroslav fled to Ladoga, and in 1255, he became the prince of Novgorod after Alexander's son Vasily was expelled; Alexander returned to the city to dismiss the posadnik and by the next year, Vasily was sent back to reign. In 1258, he visited the khan's capital in Sarai, and two years later led the Novgorod army against the Teutonic Knights.

Upon Alexander's death in 1263, Yaroslav quarrelled with Andrey as to who should become Grand Prince next. They went to the Golden Horde for arbitration, which was in favour of Yaroslav. The latter, however, settled in Novgorod and married a daughter of one local boyar. Various Novgorodian factions still conspired against him and sought to place his brother Vasily of Kostroma or Alexander's son Dmitri of Pereslavl on the throne.

In 1270, the armies of three princes stood for a week near the town of Staraya Russa, ready for battle. The metropolitan, however, managed to reconcile them. Yaroslav, on surrendering Novgorod to his nephew, accompanied him to Sarai. He died on his way back to Tver on 9 September 1271 and was succeeded in Tver by his eldest son Svyatoslav and then by Mikhail.

title: Yaroslav of Tver