text:
Formula One racing

A Formula One Grand Prix is an auto racing event which takes place over three days (usually Friday to Sunday), with a series of practice and qualifying sessions prior to the race on Sunday. Current regulations provide for two free practice sessions on Friday, a morning practice session and an afternoon qualifying session held on Saturday, and the race held on Sunday afternoon or evening, although the structure of the weekend has changed numerous times over the history of the sport. Historically, the Monaco Grand Prix held practice on Thursday rather than Friday (up to and including ), and the whole schedule for the Las Vegas (starting from its inaugural event in ), Bahrain and Saudi Arabian Grands Prix (in only) is brought forward by one day. At most Formula One race weekends, other events such as races in other Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA) series, such as Formula 2 or Formula 3, are held.

Free practice
Since 2006, three free practice sessions (often abbreviated to FP1, FP2, and FP3) are held before the race. The first is held on Friday morning and the second on Friday afternoon, while the third session is on Saturday morning. From, all sessions last for one hour; prior to this, the Friday sessions were 90 minutes in length and the Saturday session was one hour in length. In addition in 2021, cars are now put under parc fermé conditions after the third practice session instead of qualifying. Private tests are now heavily restricted, but a third driver (such as a reserve, test, or junior driver) is permitted to take part in the first Friday free practice session in the place of a regular driver. The second practice session for the Bahrain, Singapore and Abu Dhabi Grands Prix takes place in the evening, as these races are run at night. All practice sessions for the Las Vegas Grand Prix were held at night.

Qualifying
A qualifying session is held before each race to determine the order cars will be lined up in at the start of the race, with the fastest qualifier starting at the front and the slowest at the back. Drivers who could not set a time for any reason are also relegated to the back.

Historical methods
Traditionally before, qualifying was split into two one-hour sessions; the first was held on Friday (Thursday at Monaco) afternoon from 13:00 to 14:00 local time, with the second held on Saturday afternoon at the same time. The fastest time set by each driver from either session counted towards their final grid position. Each driver was limited to twelve laps per qualifying session.

In 1996, qualifying was amended with the Friday qualifying session abolished in a favour for a single qualifying session held on Saturday afternoon. As previously, each driver was limited to twelve laps with the inclusion of a 107% rule to exclude drivers with slow lap times. This was calculated by using the time of the driver on pole position and adding on 7% to create a cut-off time. This format remained until the conclusion of the 2002 season. Between and, the qualifying session was run as a one-lap session and took place on Friday and Saturday afternoon with the cars running one at a time. In 2003, the Friday running order was determined with the leader of the Drivers' Championship heading out first. The Saturday running order was determined by times set in Friday afternoon qualifying with the fastest heading out last and the slowest running first. No refuelling was allowed between the start of Saturday qualifying and the start of the race, so drivers qualified on race fuel. The lap times from the Friday afternoon session did not determine the grid order.

In 2004, the Friday session was moved to Saturday. The running order for the first session was now based on the result of the previous race. At first both sessions were held back-to-back, but the first session was later moved earlier in the day. At the start of 2005, the sessions were held on Saturday afternoon and Sunday morning. Lap times from both sessions were counted to give the overall aggregate position. From the 2005 European Grand Prix onwards, the Sunday morning session was dropped for a single run on Saturday afternoon having proved unpopular with drivers, teams and broadcasters. The running order was the reverse of the previous race result.

Current format
Since, qualifying takes place on Saturday afternoon in a three-stage "knockout" system. One hour is dedicated to determining the grid order, divided into three periods with short intermissions between them. Since 2010, the first qualifying period (Q1) is eighteen minutes long, with all twenty cars competing. At the end of Q1, the five slowest drivers are eliminated from further qualification rounds, and fill positions sixteen to twenty on the grid based on their fastest lap time. Any driver attempting to set a qualifying time when the period ends is permitted to finish their lap, though no new laps may be started once the chequered flag is shown. After a short break, the second period (Q2) (15 minutes long) begins, with fifteen cars on the circuit. At the end of Q2, the five slowest drivers are once again eliminated, filling grid positions eleven to fifteen. Finally, the third qualifying period (Q3) (12 minutes long) features the ten fastest drivers from the second period. The drivers are issued a new set of soft tyres and have twelve minutes to set a qualifying time, which will determine the top ten positions on the grid. The driver who sets the fastest qualifying time is said to be on pole position, the grid position that offers the best physical position from which to start the race.

Drivers may complete as many laps as they choose within the permitted qualifying session's time. As of the 2022 season, all drivers are permitted to start the race on the tyre of their choice regardless of their grid position, whereas previously it was required for the drivers starting in the top 10 grid positions to start on the same tyre as the one that they set their fastest lap time within the second qualifying session. Generally, a driver will leave the pits and drive around the track in order to get to the start/finish line (the out-lap). Having crossed the line, they will attempt to achieve the quickest time around the circuit that they can in one or more laps (the flying lap or hot lap). This is the lap time which is used in calculating grid position. Finally, the driver will continue back around the track and re-enter the pit lane (the in-lap); however, this is merely strategy, and no teams are obliged by the rules to follow this formula, as drivers may elect to set several flying laps before returning to the pits. For the first two races of the 2016 season, a modified format was used where drivers were eliminated during the sessions rather than just at the end and only eight drivers progressed to the final session. Qualifying reverted to the previous format from the 2016 Chinese Grand Prix onwards.

Sprint qualifying
Following the decision to make sprints standalone from 2023 onwards, sprints were given a dedicated qualifying session, dubbed in 2023 "sprint shootout" and "sprint qualifying" in 2024. The format of sprint shootout is the same as qualifying, but with the three segments (dubbed "SQ1", "SQ2" and "SQ3" instead of "Q1", "Q2" and "Q3") being shorter at 12 minutes, 10 minutes and 8 minutes, instead of 18, 15 and 12 minutes. Initially, new tyres were mandatory for each phase, with mediums for SQ1 and SQ2, and softs for SQ3. This was changed for the 2023 Austrian Grand Prix to allow teams the ability to use any set of soft tyres, be it new or used, for SQ3, after Lando Norris could not run in SQ3 at the 2023 Azerbaijan Grand Prix, after exhausting his allocation of soft tyres.

Qualifying requirements
As of, ten teams are entered for the Formula One World Championship, each entering two cars for a total of twenty cars. The regulations place a limit of twenty-six entries for the championship. At some periods in the history of Formula One the number of cars entered for each race has exceeded the number permitted, which historically would vary from race to race according to the circuit used; Monaco, for example, for many years allowed only twenty cars to compete because of the restricted space available. The slowest cars excess to the circuit limit would not qualify for the race and would be listed as 'Did not qualify' (DNQ) in race results.

Historical pre-qualifying
There had been pre-qualifying sessions in the late 1970s, but during the late 1980s and early 1990s the number of cars attempting to enter each race was as high as thirty-nine for some races. Because of the dangers of having so many cars on the track at the same time, pre-qualifying sessions were re-introduced for the teams with the worst record over the previous twelve months, including any new teams. Usually, only the four fastest cars from this session were then allowed into the qualifying session proper, where thirty cars competed for twenty-six places on the starting grid for the race. The slowest cars from the pre-qualifying session were listed in race results as 'Did Not Pre-Qualify' (DNPQ). Pre-qualifying was discontinued after the 1992 Hungarian Grand Prix when many small teams withdrew from the sport.

107% rule
As the number of cars entered in the world championship fell below twenty-six, a situation arose in which any car entered would automatically qualify for the race, no matter how slowly it had been driven. The 107% rule was introduced in to prevent completely uncompetitive cars being entered in the championship. If a car's qualifying time was not within 7% of the pole sitter's time, that car would not qualify for the race, unless at the discretion of the race stewards for a situation such as a rain-affected qualifying session. For example, if the pole-sitter's time was one minute and forty seconds, any car eligible for racing had to set a time within one minute and forty-seven seconds.

The 107% rule was removed in since the FIA's rules indicated previously that 24 cars could take the start of a Formula One race, and a minimum of twenty cars had to enter a race. In, the qualifying procedure changed to a single-lap system, rendering the rule inoperable. However, there were concerns about the pace of the new teams in the 2010 season. As the qualifying procedure had been changed since the 2006 season to a three-part knockout system, the rule could now be reintroduced. As such, the 107% rule was reintroduced in the 2011 Formula One season. Currently, cars eliminated in Q1 have to be within 7% of the fastest Q1 time in order to qualify for the race.

Since the rule was re-introduced, only twice have cars failed to qualify for a Grand Prix – both times involving Hispania Racing cars and both times occurring at the Australian Grand Prix, namely in 2011 (Vitantonio Liuzzi and Narain Karthikeyan) and 2012 (Karthikeyan and Pedro de la Rosa). At their discretion, stewards may permit a driver who fails to set a qualifying time within the desired 107% span to enter the race; for example, at the 2018 British Grand Prix, Lance Stroll and Brendon Hartley both failed to set times within 107%, but were permitted to race on the grounds of satisfactory lap times in free practice. After eleven drivers failed to set satisfactory Q1 times at the 2016 Hungarian Grand Prix due to inclement weather, the regulations were amended in 2018 so that wet sessions were not subject to the 107% rule.

Grid penalties
Drivers or cars may be issued penalties against their starting positions, commonly for exceeding component limits, or sporting offences in free practice, qualifying, or a previous race. This can lead to the starting grid being significantly different from the qualifying order.

Sprint
During the 2021 Formula One World Championship, Formula One trialed a "sprint qualifying" system at three Grands Prix – Britain, Italy, and São Paulo – in which the grid for the race on Sunday was determined by a 100 km sprint on Saturday. On a race weekend with sprint qualifying, the sessions on Friday, instead of regular two practice sessions, consisted of one practice session and a traditional qualifying session, which was limited to soft tyres and which set the grid for sprint qualifying. Only the winner of the sprint qualifying was considered to have taken pole position for the main Grand Prix, and they received a trophy similar to the pole position trophy awarded at other race weekends. The top three finishers in sprint qualifying in 2021 received World Championship points in a 3–2–1 scoring system. Formula One stuck with having sprints at three events, after initially planning to increase it to six events. These plans were abandoned after teams failed to agree on the cost-cap considerations for additional sprint events.

For 2022 season, "sprint qualifying" was renamed to "sprint". The weekend format remained unchanged from 2021 and was run at the Emilia Romagna, Austrian, and São Paulo Grands Prix with points now awarded to the top eight finishers rather than the top three finishers as was the case in 2021. Unlike the 2021 season, the driver who set the fastest time in qualifying was credited as the official pole-sitter (unless penalised), with the winner of the sprint continuing to have the right to start the main race from the first-place grid position.

From 2023, standalone sprint events were implemented, meaning that the outcome of the sprint race would no longer set the grid for the main race. These plans were approved a few days before the 2023 Azerbaijan Grand Prix – the first of the six events on the 2023 calendar to feature the sprint format. The format for sprint events in 2023 featured Friday consisting of a single practice session followed by the qualifying session which set the starting grid for the main race on Sunday; while Saturday featured a special qualifying session, named the sprint shootout, which set the grid for the sprint race (called the "sprint") which was also held later on Saturday. The structure of the sprint weekends was changed again for 2024, with the goal of rationalising sprint events and separating them from the rest of the Grand Prix weekend. The sprint shootout, which sets the starting grid order for the sprint race, was moved to Friday afternoon after the weekend's only practice session. The sprint will then be the first session to take place on Saturday, followed by qualifying for the main race. The Grand Prix itself remains on Sunday. For the first three seasons of the sprint format, there was a single parc fermé period starting from Friday's Grand Prix qualifying session all the way through to the start of the Grand Prix. However, for 2024, there are two separate parc fermé periods: the first lasts from the start of sprint qualifying to the start of the Sprint and the second lasts from Saturday's Grand Prix qualifying to the start of the Grand Prix itself. This is intended to allow teams to fine tune their cars between the end of the sprint and the start of Grand Prix qualifying.

Race

The race itself is held on Sunday afternoon, with the exception of night races at Singapore, Bahrain, Qatar, Las Vegas, and Saudi Arabia and a day/night race for the season finale in Abu Dhabi. The Las Vegas Grand Prix was held on a Saturday, with the Bahrain and Saudi Arabian Grands Prix provisioned to move to a Saturday in 2024; prior to that, the last race not to take place on a Sunday was the 1985 South African Grand Prix, which took place on a Saturday.

Race start
Thirty minutes prior to race time, the cars take to the track for any number of warm-up laps (formally known as reconnaissance laps), provided they pass through the pit lane and not the grid, after which they assemble on the starting grid in the order they qualified. At the hour of the race, a green light signifies the beginning of the relatively slow formation lap during which all cars parade around the course doing a final tyre warmup and system checks. The cars then return to their assigned grid spot for the standing race start. The starting light system, which consists of five pairs of lights mounted above the start/finish line, then lights up each pair at one-second intervals. Once all five pairs are illuminated, after a random length of time between 0.2 and 3 seconds, the red lights are turned off by the race director, at which point the race starts. The race length is defined as the smallest number of complete laps that exceeds 305 kilometres (the Monaco Grand Prix is the sole exception with a race length of 78 laps / 260.5 km), though occasionally some races are truncated due to special circumstances. The race can not exceed two hours in length—if this interval is reached, the race will be ended at the end of the next full lap—unless the race is halted by a red flag, in which case the total time including the red flag stoppage must not exceed three hours, and the total time excluding the red flag stoppage may not exceed two hours. At the 2021 Belgian Grand Prix, the three hour countdown was stopped with force majeure being cited.

Pit stops
Each driver is also required to use two different types of dry compound during a dry race, and so must make a mandatory pit stop. Timing pit stops with reference to other cars is crucial—if they are following another car but are unable to pass, the driver may try to stay on the track as long as possible, or pit immediately, as newer tyres are usually faster. Prior to the 2010 season, drivers used to make pit stops for fuel more than once during a race, as the cars on average traveled two kilometres per litre (approximately five miles per gallon). Nowadays this figure is higher, due to changes in engines from 2014, and as a result refuelling has been forbidden during a race since. If a driver starts the race using intermediate or wet tyres, they are not mandated to make a pit stop.

Podium ceremony
At the end of the race, the first, second and third-placed drivers take their places on a podium, where they stand as the national anthem of the race winner's home country and that of their team is played. Dignitaries from the country hosting the race then present trophies to the drivers and a constructor's trophy to a representative from the winner's team, and the winning drivers spray champagne and are interviewed. The three drivers then go to a media room for a press conference where they answer questions in English and their native languages.

Historical methods
Historically, the races were scored on the basis of a five-place tally: i.e. via an 8–6–4–3–2 scoring system, with the holder of the fastest race lap also receiving a bonus point. In 1961, the scoring was revised to give the winner nine points instead of eight, and the single point awarded for fastest lap was given for sixth place for the first time the previous year. In 1991, the points system was again revised to give the victor 10 points, with all other scorers recording the same 6–4–3–2–1 result. In 2003, the FIA further revised the scoring system to apportion points to the first eight classified finishers (a classified finisher must complete 90% of race distance) on a 10–8–6–5–4–3–2–1 basis.

At certain points between 1950 and 1990, drivers' points for the season would be tallied based on their best results across the World Championship, which varied from 4 to 11 in a season, and during the late 1960s and 1970s points would be tallied based on their best results from each half of the season, which varied from four to seven. This was done in order to equalise the footings of teams which may not have had the wherewithal to compete in all events. With the advent of the Concorde Agreements, this practice has been discontinued, though it did feature prominently in several world championships through the 1970s and 1980s, primarily in 1988 when Alain Prost scored a total of 105 points to Ayrton Senna's 94, but due to only the best 11 results counting towards the World Championship, Senna won, with the final points tally being 90–87.

Current system
Points are awarded to drivers and teams based on where they finish in a race. The winner receives 25 points, the second-place finisher 18 points, with 15, 12, 10, 8, 6, 4, 2 and 1 points for positions 3 through 10, respectively. One additional point is awarded to the driver and team with the fastest lap of the race, but only if this driver finishes in the top 10 positions. In a dead heat, prizes and points are added together and shared equally for all those drivers who tie. The winner of the annual championship is the driver (or team, for the Constructors' Championship) with the most points. If the number of points is the same, priority is given to the driver with more wins. If that is the same it will be decided on the most second places and so on.

title: Formula One racing


text:
User talk:Hi541

Stop editing other people's User pages, and stop adding nonsense articles to Wikipedia. RickK 04:19, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

Create the nonsense again and you will be blocked from editing. RickK 04:22, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Hi541


text:
Gonadotropin-releasing hormone

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) is a releasing hormone responsible for the release of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH) from the anterior pituitary. GnRH is a tropic peptide hormone synthesized and released from GnRH neurons within the hypothalamus. The peptide belongs to gonadotropin-releasing hormone family. It constitutes the initial step in the hypothalamic–pituitary–gonadal axis.

Structure
The identity of GnRH was clarified by the 1977 Nobel Laureates Roger Guillemin and Andrew V. Schally:

pyroGlu-His-Trp-Ser-Tyr-Gly-Leu-Arg-Pro-Gly-NH2 As is standard for peptide representation, the sequence is given from amino terminus to carboxyl terminus; also standard is omission of the designation of chirality, with assumption that all amino acids are in their L- form. The abbreviations are the standard abbreviations for the corresponding proteinogenic amino acids, except for pyroGlu, which refers to pyroglutamic acid, a derivative of glutamic acid. The NH2 at the carboxyl terminus indicates that rather than terminating as a free carboxylate, it terminates as a carboxamide.

Synthesis
The gene, GNRH1, for the GnRH precursor is located on chromosome 8. In mammals, the linear decapeptide end-product is synthesized from an 89-amino acid preprohormone in the preoptic anterior hypothalamus. It is the target of various regulatory mechanisms of the hypothalamic–pituitary–gonadal axis, such as being inhibited by increased estrogen levels in the body.

Function
GnRH is secreted in the hypophysial portal bloodstream at the median eminence. The portal blood carries the GnRH to the pituitary gland, which contains the gonadotrope cells, where GnRH activates its own receptor, gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor (GnRHR), a seven-transmembrane G-protein-coupled receptor that stimulates the beta isoform of Phosphoinositide phospholipase C, which goes on to mobilize calcium and protein kinase C. This results in the activation of proteins involved in the synthesis and secretion of the gonadotropins LH and FSH. GnRH is degraded by proteolysis within a few minutes.

GnRH activity is very low during childhood, and is activated at puberty or adolescence. During the reproductive years, pulse activity is critical for successful reproductive function as controlled by feedback loops. However, once a pregnancy is established, GnRH activity is not required. Pulsatile activity can be disrupted by hypothalamic-pituitary disease, either dysfunction (i.e., hypothalamic suppression) or organic lesions (trauma, tumor). Elevated prolactin levels decrease GnRH activity. In contrast, hyperinsulinemia increases pulse activity leading to disorderly LH and FSH activity, as seen in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). GnRH formation is congenitally absent in Kallmann syndrome.

Control of FSH and LH
At the pituitary, GnRH stimulates the synthesis and secretion of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH). These processes are controlled by the size and frequency of GnRH pulses, as well as by feedback from androgens and estrogens. Low-frequency GnRH pulses are required for FSH release, whereas high-frequency GnRH pulses stimulate LH pulses in a one-to-one manner.

There are differences in GnRH secretion between females and males. In males, GnRH is secreted in pulses at a constant frequency; however, in females, the frequency of the pulses varies during the menstrual cycle, and there is a large surge of GnRH just before ovulation.

GnRH secretion is pulsatile in all vertebrates, and is necessary for correct reproductive function. Thus, a single hormone, GnRH1, controls a complex process of follicular growth, ovulation, and corpus luteum maintenance in the female, and spermatogenesis in the male.

Neurohormone
GnRH is considered a neurohormone, a hormone produced in a specific neural cell and released at its neural terminal. A key area for production of GnRH is the preoptic area of the hypothalamus, which contains most of the GnRH-secreting neurons. GnRH neurons originate in the nose and migrate into the brain, where they are scattered throughout the medial septum and hypothalamus and connected by very long >1-millimeter-long dendrites. These bundle together so they receive shared synaptic input, a process that allows them to synchronize their GnRH release.

The GnRH neurons are regulated by many different afferent neurons, using several different transmitters (including norepinephrine, GABA, glutamate). For instance, dopamine appears to stimulate LH release (through GnRH) in estrogen-progesterone-primed females; dopamine may inhibit LH release in ovariectomized females. Kisspeptin appears to be an important regulator of GnRH release. GnRH release can also be regulated by estrogen. It has been reported that there are kisspeptin-producing neurons that also express estrogen receptor alpha.

Other organs
GnRH is found in organs outside of the hypothalamus and pituitary, and its role in other life processes is poorly understood. For instance, there is likely to be a role for GnRH1 in the placenta and in the gonads. GnRH and GnRH receptors are also found in cancers of the breast, ovary, prostate, and endometrium.

Effects of behavior
GnRH production/release is one of the few confirmed examples in which behavior influences hormones, rather than the other way around. Cichlid fish that become socially dominant in turn experience an upregulation of GnRH secretion whereas cichlid fish that are socially subordinate have a down regulation of GnRH secretion. Besides secretion, the social environment as well as their behavior affects the size of GnRH neurons. Specifically, males that are more territorial have larger GnRH neurons than males that are less territorial. Differences are also seen in females, with brooding females having smaller GnRH neurons than either spawning or control females. These examples suggest that GnRH is a socially regulated hormone.

Multiple neuronal regions in the limbic system send signals to the hypothalamus to modulate the amount of GnRH production and the frequency of pulses. This provides a possible explanation for why psychic influences typically affect female sexual function.

Medical uses
Natural GnRH was previously prescribed as gonadorelin hydrochloride (Factrel) and gonadorelin diacetate tetrahydrate (Cystorelin) for use in treating human diseases. Modifications of the decapeptide structure of GnRH to increase half life have led to GnRH1 analog medications that either stimulate (GnRH1 agonists) or suppress (GnRH antagonists) the gonadotropins. These synthetic analogs have replaced the natural hormone in clinical use.

Its analogue leuprorelin is used for continuous infusion, to treat breast cancer, endometriosis, prostate cancer, and following research in the 1980s by researchers, including Dr. Florence Comite of Yale University, it was used to treat precocious puberty.

A Cochrane Review is available which investigates whether GnRH analogues, given before or alongside chemotherapy, could prevent damage to women's ovaries caused by chemotherapy. GnRH agonists appear to be effective in protecting the ovaries during chemotherapy, in terms of menstruation recovery or maintenance, premature ovarian failure and ovulation.

Animal sexual behavior
GnRH activity influences a variety of sexual behaviors. Increased levels of GnRH facilitate sexual displays and behavior in females. GnRH injections enhance copulation solicitation (a type of courtship display) in white-crowned sparrows. In mammals, GnRH injections facilitate sexual behavior of female display behaviors as shown with the musk shrew’s (Suncus murinus) reduced latency in displaying rump presents and tail wagging towards males.

An elevation of GnRH raises males’ testosterone capacity beyond a male's natural testosterone level. Injections of GnRH in male birds immediately after an aggressive territorial encounter results in higher testosterone levels than is observed naturally during an aggressive territorial encounter.

A compromised GnRH system has adverse effects on reproductive physiology and maternal behavior. In comparison to female mice with a normal GnRH system, female mice with a 30% decrease in GnRH neurons are poor caregivers to their offspring. These mice are more likely to leave their pups scattered rather than grouped together, and will take significantly longer to retrieve their pups.

Veterinary use
The natural hormone is also used in veterinary medicine as a treatment for cattle with cystic ovarian disease. The synthetic analogue deslorelin is used in veterinary reproductive control through a sustained-release implant.

Other names
As with many hormones, GnRH has been called by various names in the medical literature over the decades since its existence was first inferred. They are as follows:
 * Gonadotropin-releasing factor (GnRF, GRF); Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH, GRH)
 * Follicle-stimulating hormone-releasing factor (FRF, FSH-RF); Follicle-stimulating hormone-releasing hormone (FRH, FSH-RH)
 * Luteinizing hormone-releasing factor (LRF, LHRF); Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LRH, LHRH)
 * Follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone–releasing factor (FSH/LH-RF); Follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (FSH/LH-RH)
 * Luteinizing hormone and follicle-stimulating hormone–releasing factor (LH/FSH-RF); Luteinizing hormone and follicle-stimulating hormone-releasing hormone (LH/FSH-RH)
 * Gonadorelin (INN for pharmaceutical form)
 * Gonadoliberin

title: Gonadotropin-releasing hormone


text:
Mariposite

Mariposite is a mineral which is a chromium-rich variety of mica, which imparts an attractive green color to the generally white dolomitic marble in which it is commonly found. It was named for Mariposa, California, United States, though it can be found in several other places in the Sierra Nevada. It is also found in Marblemount, Washington, in the North Cascades, as well as in a few locations in Newfoundland, Canada, where it is called virginite, and in Europe.

It is not an officially classified mineral, but is a chromium-rich phengite, which is a high silica variety of muscovite. It is the chromium that gives it its distinctive green color.

The term "mariposite" also refers to the stone in which the green mica is found. This stone is metamorphic rock, containing varying amounts of dolomite and quartz. Larger proportions of quartz give it a more attractive, translucent appearance. It is used as a decorative construction material, in walls, monuments, and bridges. It is also made into jewelry.

Chemical composition
The chemical formula of mariposite is K(Al,Cr)2(Al,Si)4O10(OH)2.

title: Mariposite


text:
User talk:Delmond~enwiki

Why are you editing User:!T-Rex!? RickK 04:29, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Delmond. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Delmond~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:24, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 12:02, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Delmond~enwiki


text:
Mount Carleton

At 820 m, Mount Carleton, in Mount Carleton Provincial Park is the highest peak in the Canadian province of New Brunswick, and the Maritime Provinces. It is one of the highlights of the Canadian portion of the International Appalachian Trail. It is also part of the eighth and final section of the Nepisiguit Mi'gmaq Trail. The mountain was named after Thomas Carleton, New Brunswick's first lieutenant governor, and forms part of the Notre Dame Mountains chain, which is visible on Map 24 of the NB Atlas.

Before aerial surveillance was extensively used, a hut was maintained on the summit for fire-spotting in the remote north-central part of the province. A very similar hut was maintained on Big Bald Mountain. Triangulation among these huts and other fire towers allowed the locations of wildfires to be determined quickly and easily.

Mount Carleton is a monadnock, an erosional remnant of resistant igneous rocks that remained after an ancient Mesozoic peneplain surface was uplifted in the Cenozoic to form a plateau, and subsequently dissected via millions of years of erosion by wind, water and glacial ice. It consists of 400 million-year-old rhyolitic and basaltic volcanics.

title: Mount Carleton


text:
Talk:Mount Carleton

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mount Carleton. 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/20090207222912/http://geonames.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php to http://geonames.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e.php

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) 17:30, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mount Carleton


text:
Talk:Qurratu'l- Ayn

Note: I know I'm not logged in right now. I forgot my password, and it seems to be taking forever for it to show up in my e-mail, so I got tired of waiting.

The recent change was made by me

title: Talk:Qurratu'l- Ayn


text:
User talk:Moink/archive110704

Old talk archives:
 * May 10, 2004: User talk:Moink/archive100504
 * Mar 16, 2004: User talk:Moink/archive160304

Deletion of Redirects
Can I delete a redirect page? If yes, how?

If no, could you delete these: so that Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore can be moved to Indian Institute of Science Rajasekaran Deepak 22:59, 2004 May 13 (UTC)
 * 1) Indian Institute of Science
 * 2) Indian Institute of Science, Bang
 * 3) Indian Institute of Science Bangalore

 * I answered you at User talk:Rajasekaran Deepak. moink 23:03, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. Could you delete the redirect Indian Institute of Science Bangalore also? Rajasekaran Deepak 23:08, 2004 May 13 (UTC)

There are too many ways to separate Indian Institute of Science from "Bangalore". Using a comma followed by space is standard. There are many non-standard ways: only hyphen; only space; and hyphen surrounded by space. Providing redirects for non-standard names complicates the situation.

I moved another redirect to it while trying to remove the redirect (about an hour ago). So, there will not be any external links to it. There are no internal links to it. So it is safe to delete it. Rajasekaran Deepak 23:29, 2004 May 13 (UTC)

IITs and IIMs
There are 7 IITs and 6 IIMs, and each is identified by the acronym and city of location. The IIT and IIM brands are well-known in many countries. I suggest moving
 * 1) Indian Institutes of Technology to IIT
 * 2) Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati to IIT Guwahati
 * 3) Indian Institutes of Management to IIM

photo
your photo looks like it should be inside one of those edward gorey silent books... "the rugate scaffold" or some such. +sj+ 18:24, 2004 May 17 (UTC)

 * The Fatal Lozenge! The Green Beads, The Blue Aspic, Dancing Cats and Neglected Murderesses!  You'd fit right in.  (:  You don't happen to be from a moor, manor, or marsh, do you?  +sj+ 20:07, 2004 May 17 (UTC)

Welcome back
Did you miss the wikipedia? --Ben Brockert 00:01, May 25, 2004 (UTC)

Come back from a vacation the same time as me eh? Coincidence or is the universe responding again in an unimportant and vague way...Ho-hum. Welcome back. GrazingshipIV 00:22, May 25, 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks to both of you. Did I miss it... err... a little, I guess.  Universe being vaguely responsive.. possible.  moink 02:35, 25 May 2004 (UTC)

Thanks
Sometimes I sit and ponder what it is I've done to receive the accolades of fine editors such as yourself. I reflect on my time here and can't find many truly noble or noteworthy moments in my editing...mostly fixing sentence style and contributing the odd article about medieval authors or baseball players from the early 1900s. Yet obviously there is something of value in my contributions, and I am grateful always to get kind comments such as yours. I hope your time here is going well, and wish you happy editing in whatever corner of this expansive place you find yourself -- keep up the fine work, and know that you have more than earned my respect and admiration for the work you do here. :-) Jwrosenzweig 17:55, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

snarky who/whom comment
With regard to the Toronto Star and weblog, you ask "On the other hand, what's with the (sic)? Is the author picking on the 'who' vs 'whom' distinction?"

 * Yes, that's exactly what he's doing. As you point out, he's misattributed both the quotation and the grammatical error. The only way I can think of to avoid such things is to stick our own snarky little "[sic]" into the quote, or avoid that part of the quotation. - Nunh-huh 22:11, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * I think he was pretty obnoxious too....I think the current solution (changing it to [whom] in brackets) is a good solution, less repulsive than the sic which I believe is an abbreviation for "I know more than he does" . - Nunh-huh 04:17, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Great editing
Many thanks! I'm just trying to get some stuff done before leaving... I will be gone from the 'pedia for about two months, and I'm trying not to leave anything half-finished. Tuf-Kat 05:22, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)

The dropping of eaves
Good for you! No apology needed for the dropping of eaves, it's expected, and I'm happy to have an answer from any quarter. -- Nunh-huh 22:50, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Re: Identity
To comment on your note at User talk:Dwindrim, actually, a conversation I've had recently explained everything quite nicely to me. Solipsism is our solution. The only question we've left to decide is which of us is an extension of the other's self....today, I'm feeling mostly figmented, so I'll assume for the time being that you are the mind that has constructed the universe. I don't know why you brought Wik into existence, but then, mysterious are your ways, O moink. :-) Have a great day. Jwrosenzweig 16:27, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * I feel strangely compelled to thank you for your note. ;-) I am very pleased to finally finish my degree -- I am now ready to go corrupt the high school minds of Western Washington (in my interview, they were most impressed when I responded to the technology question that I was an administrator for an online encyclopedia project....I think I may be dragging classes through here soon, as if I haven't found enough stress here in recent weeks! :-). I had no idea anyone paid attention to my user page updates but me -- nice to know someone notices. I've been thinking of moving my "brag sheet" to a subpage, but it's handy to have there, and it makes it easy to find things I worked on once and forgot about.  Does it seem too prideful to have it there on the main user page?  Please be honest. :-) Jwrosenzweig 18:08, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Admin recommendation
Moink - I have to tread lightly; I'm not prepared to respond to this suggestion. Wikipedia, for me, has been primarily a place to provide outlet for my passion for teaching. I approach a suggestion of adminship much as an active and enthusiastic field agent might approach an offer to fly a desk, with trepidation and the fear of being tied up by petty disputes, sub-sub-subclause bylaw issues, and phonecalls from superiors and subordinates who have chosen to yell at each other through you.

I truly appreciate your nomination, and would be willing to accept if it allows me to rub virtual shoulders with some whom I rank as gods and goddesses (being non-theistic, that's not as impressive as it might sound). But at the same time, I need the freedom to do what I most love, which is to write.

It would seem that the only way to test the temperature of the water is to get in. I do believe I have the option of stepping out if I feel I cannot fulfil the role. So I accept your offer of support, and await the next set of directions.

(BTW, as a fellow Western Canadian, I hold your recommendation above all others. Anyone who can survive a Burnaby winter and then move to Toronto will be an important contributor to the gene pool after a major environmental event : )   )

Denni ☯ 08:29, 2004 Jun 24 (UTC)

Thanks for the help at RD
I do enjoy a nice amusing comment at the reference desk as much as the next person, but I think it may irritate the questioner, and certainly the answers are not always obvious. To an arts major like me, C did not jump out as "carbon" as much as it should have, and so I'm left floundering, trying to offer information where I am woefully incapable of informing. Thanks for providing a clear and accurate response! Jwrosenzweig 22:48, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

beans
aw poo, seems like you edited my edit

Nunh-huh is a giant with the ability to shoot blue flames out of his nipples, credited for rediscovering the art of making home made plastic explosives out of rodents and microscopic jelly fish his true claim to fame came when he saved four baby tree imps while battling the forces of evil with nothing more than a tooth pick and a bottle of armor all

 * I'm available for weddings and bar mitzvahs. -- Nunh-huh 05:56, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * It's just as well. The blue flames are extra, anyway. -- Nunh-huh 06:00, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Governor General
"Governor General", like "Attorney General" or "court martial", is in noun-adjective form, rather than the standard English adjective-noun form, because it's a borrowing from the French (which language uses the noun-adjective form). It's a part of the English language because of the Norman Conquest of England; the Norms were French speaking descendent of Vikings, and used French as the language our the (royal) court and the law courts even after conqueringthe English. orthogonal 19:03, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It might be an idea to say that the boring Liberal MPs are liberals in the article, rather than just boring MPs, if you see what I mean. Secretlondon 03:29, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Protection
I know I should know this but where do I go to request that National Socialism be protected? WHEELER is trying to change it from a disambig page to an article despite the fact that his attempt to write an article Early National Socialism/draft is on the verge of being deleted. I can't protect it since I've previously been reverting WHEELER on that page. Do I simply ask a fellow admin to protect it or is there a formal request page? Thanks AndyL 19:36, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for fixing my Ed Wood Jr. Image. I love you!

Vandalism
You stated on User talk:205.188.116.23 that if anonymous continues to vandalise pages he or she "will be prevented from editing Wikipedia." How would that be done? Hyacinth 05:09, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Re:Requests for comment/Raul654
Just thought I'd let you know that your support of Anthony's RFC on me was incorrectly placed. As per the page instructions - because you did not attempt to settle the dispute, you cannot certify the RFC (IE, "Users certifying the basis for this dispute"). Instead, you should have signed under "Other users who endorse this statement". As this this is the case, and since no one but anthony has actually come forth to certify it after 48 hours, it's invalid and should be deleted. Just thought I'd let you know. →Raul654 19:34, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)

Mediation Committee membership
Congratulations, Moink! You're now a member of the Mediation Committee! Please add an email address where people can reach you to the list here.

Also, please read the following pages carefully if you haven't yet done so: Dispute resolution, Mediation, What Mediation is not (including the links at the bottom of that page), Incivility, and Requests for mediation.

And last, but not least, please register at the Wikimedia bulletin board here and familiarize yourself with the mediation section (sometimes it's a bit dodgy, but refreshing the pages usually does the trick there).

And thanks so much for agreeing to help with the work of the committee and of dispute resolution at Wikipedia.

Peace, BCorr | Брайен 16:01, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Welcome to the committee Moink. Could you please confirm here that it was you who registered the id "moink" at the bulletin board.  Many thanks -- sannse (talk) 16:49, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, that was me. moink 17:55, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks moink. I've enabled full access -- sannse (talk) 19:24, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Theresa -- it was great to get to meet you on Saturday! I'm just stopping by to thank you for taking the initiative on the latest mediation request and to inform you that User:Danny has been nominated by Angela to be co-chair of the committee at the bulletin board.

Thanks, BCorr | Брайен 20:00, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Congrats and thanks
First of all, I was apparently absent (both in body and mind) when you came up for candidacy for the MC -- congratulations on your new position! I would have written something glowing about you, and feel a little badly that I failed to do so, but obviously your excellence was well known to the committee members without any additional evidence from me. :-) The other thing I wanted to say is that, when I came here to leave this note, I noticed your mediation notice -- thank you, sincerely.  I am touched to be considered a friend (especially considering your obviously high standards, if I'm the only person whose friendship would preclude your mediation), and I hope you know I hold you in the same high regard.  Best of luck to you in mediation -- should I become an arbitrator (a prospect I must admit I doubt will become a reality), I hope our friendship helps build a more natural and close bond between the MC and AC, respectively.  Once again, you have my congratulations and my honest thanks.  Jwrosenzweig 20:36, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Please, don't have any worries at all about philosophical differences. I admit, I smiled in perhaps mild surprise at open marriage and polyamory, since I hadn't been aware of your connections to those subjects -- I am, however, friends with several people who have practiced (or are practicing) polyamory, and I haven't found it make me any less their friend.  I do find the concept a little confusing (a friend of mine is living with 5 people, and is in relationships with 4 of them -- I can't figure out how that works, emotionally), but not abhorrent certainly.  To quote one wise Wikipedian's user page, "My faith does require me to believe certain truths about the universe, but that doesn't mean I'm here to impose them upon you or to interact with you based on my limited human perception of how well your life aligns with those truths."  So to put it short, open marriage and polyamory don't fit my perception of the universe's ultimate grand design, but if someday I reach that higher plane and am told I was dead wrong on the subject, I will be nothing but delighted.  Had you supported legalized murder or something, well, that would be harder to overcome. :-)  And given my stay in Canada and my overall outlook on government and personal rights, your attachment to the NDP, environmentalism, and feminism, for example, do but confirm that we generally share a political perspective.  And I wasn't familiar with attachment parenting (and am unsure if I would personally adopt all its prescriptions), but certainly I see the wisdom in much of it, and as someone who was homeschooled from cradle to college, it sounds very much like the family environment I grew up in and value.  So I don't come away from it with any worries or tension -- much to the contrary. :-) And I hope my personal affinity for closed marriage and monogamy isn't offensive to you at all. Peace to you, Jwrosenzweig 21:21, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Mediation
Hi. Would you be willing to take on a rather challenging case of mediation? RK v. DanKeshet and Zero0000? I am also asking Neutrality, so if tempers flare, you can each represent one party and work it out between you. Please answer me on my Talk page. Thanks Danny 00:47, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I guess we can begin the mediation. Please contact Neutrality and teh various parties. Good luck, and if you have any questions, please let me know. Danny 23:05, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Mediation team
Danny assigned us to work put mediation between RK, et al. How should we proceed? Neutrality 00:00, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Moink/archive110704