text:
Talk:Alternative medicine/Archive 7

Back to Basics
PS, for everybody: Using Word as Photoshop, with a revenge, desperatingly expecting others to correct her own mistakes, while writing here above that she has plenty of time to lose, hmm, shall I continue?

An editor and a sysop writing anything but alternative medicine on the alternative medicine page is a troll. She prevents real job being done, she turns Wiki into a market where volunteers lose their time contributing and cops like she is lose everybody's time policing. Not to be continued, let alone reccommended. Just let her laugh all the time - for her own enjoyment (perhaps she needs it badly, judging from her venting alleged charms on the market place :O). Message for Theresa: get a life, dear! While John here is the only one doing the the real work, to his honor, just let us all HELP him or at THE VERY LEAST let him REST unharassed, and hey, alternative medicine, anyone ? :O) - irismeister 14:31, 2004 May 17 (UTC)

Reverts without explanation
MNH: in the interests of article editing without reversion wars and working well with others of different viewpoint to yourself, it would greatly help if, should you feel a revert is the only possible sensible edit, to put a suitable explanation in the edit summary. And on the talk page. Thanks! - David Gerard 14:41, May 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * AM has been stable for quite a long time. DG in talk archive 6 declared his intentions to unilaterally vandalize AM. DG's changes go far beyond adding a stupid quote! -- John Gohde 19:53, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I certainly do not wish to vandalise an article. I do wish to reinsert points of view that you, with no doubt the best of intentions, have tried to remove from any mention in the article, using a style guide you wrote yourself as your justification. While it certainly explains your edits, it doesn't constitute authority as such in itself - David Gerard 20:10, May 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * AM has been stable for quite a long time. You are the person deliberately puting controversey back into AM. Remember that time is on my side. If anybody is too afraid to edit, that is their problem. AM has been stable for quite a long time. You are the person deliberately puting controversey back into AM. -- John Gohde 05:35, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

 * MNH that's the second time you reverted the article today. Again without an explanation. Why are you doing it? theresa knott 21:41, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Oh, Theresugar, you become a real embarassment for the Wiki community - go troll your brand new shining Wikicop boots elsewhere, for we don't have much time for you today honey. Incidentally, please admit you are only a brutal WikiCop policewoman who only messes around here - or prove your good will by answering my EIGHTH request to remove the fight or flight, most stupid unexplained addition. Ya know, that disgraceful POV you cared to lay like a rotten egg, on top of the other AM article. Prove you can behave without messing around or attracting all attention to you, away from whatever we do. Prove your grown up charms - intellectually, if you can. Like answering eight due questions before caring to ask yourself yet another stupid question. Then go draw some Word jpegs elsewhere, willya, baby ? kiss kiss - irismeister 07:04, 2004 May 18 (UTC)

 * I assume that you can Read TK? And, please Theresa (as in pleading) don't forget about the voting in the Irismeister matter about you refraining from making personal attacks or harrassing me (4.2 Decree A. & B.) in response to my above comments. -- John Gohde 05:30, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

David, before you bother John any more, please note Theresa harasses him in editing, after a long history of conflicts, bannings and disruptions. She is becoming a pain for the Wiki community. I will reflect on the appropriate procedure and count on you for serious admonitions for her delirious behavior. Just watch her systematic, childish, and recently sexual harassment on the iridology pages and in these pages - last archives. There is a pattern of Theresa attacking and smearing the AM and I articles. This is hostile behavior, abuse of sysop powers, harassment at large and more than her previous libel. I mean business, David! Drop your aggressive insinuations, and contribute sensible content - or leave and let us work here. You disrupt our work and do nothing new. An area where you CAN do something is to police the policewomen. Do it! It will help. Try to be really helpful for once. Quies custodies ipsos custodes ? irismeister 17:21, 2004 May 17 (UTC)

Let me remind you what you did to the iridology page: Here's what you found as an ersatz of explanation: "I would have more faith in your good intentions if they didn't involve posting your own name or your own website as an authority on the validity of iridology. - David Gerard 21:23, Mar 30, 2004 (UTC)" And here is what vox clamantis in deserto were (what I preached in the desert for you), David: David, what you reverted on grounds of "self-promotion" was only good information. Please see the iridology talk page for details. We must not hunt POVs and delete them. We must only mark them as such, and explain them seriously. NPOV is a measure of central tendency in a wide field where all POVs are spread eagle. NPOV editing is not some innate or recessive trait of some uebermenschen - it's only a grand mean of all POVs expressed as such - and especially freely. Your insistance in automatic reversion did not help you see the fact: For two months, the iridology page was frozen on the good version. You reverted to the wrong one. Here we go again ! - irismeister 22:53, 2004 Mar 29 (UTC)

 * sexual harrasment? You like it! You know you do! You called me baby for months despite my asking you not to because i found it offensive. Now you going to go running to get "serious admonitions"? Don't be so bloody daft. You mention my name in every other post you make. You post rubbish on my talk page despite my not having spoken to you in weeks. You are obsessed with me, and you know it.You call me a police woman cause you fantasize about me in the uniform -especially the boots. It's no good crying to mama now, you shouldn't start things you won't finish. it's not my fault you can't handle me. Kiss kiss. theresa knott 18:31, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Theresa honey you are delirious. You are in the AM page, here. And in Wiki. And in public. If you want to show me something, or discuss my sexual preferences, you can still dream on about using Wiki for that purpose. You and me, baby, we can arrange a private meeting, you know. Just what does this have to do with our work here in AM ? Can't you tell the difference between our work (you don't know what it is) and your play (the only thing you do with your Word image editor? If you want, I'll be in London on June 5th, like Jim and David. Perhaps they can introduce you to me. In the mean time, please refrain from spilling your alleged charms, and save them for the real meeting. Kiss kiss :O) - irismeister 19:16, 2004 May 17 (UTC)

 * Irismeister I'm not coming on to you. I'm ridiculing you. Taking the piss, laughing at you. Do you understand now? There is no point in asking for a private meeting, it'll never happen. I'd rather eat my mother in law's cooking. You won't come to London and you know it Waniek, just like you didn't take me to court when i pointed out your lies. You're all talk. Think about it, how are you going to insist you're not Waniek when we can see your face? Eh? You never thought of that did you? theresa knott 20:23, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * You only ridicule your hyperinflated self, honey. Wiki does not want to hear what baby baby did to the potty potty, wiki wiki. Not interesting. There is a special section where you can teach WikiCop habits, special English or drawing "Word jpegs". This is for medical articles, honey, a place for grown-ups. Now be the good girl we all know you are and save Wiki from the embarassment you cause. You are the fastest growing Wikipain and rapidly becoming a Wiki institutional trolling trademark. Today we have little time for you. As for my face, just face it dear, and bare with me - it's none of your business, as, I'm afraid, is editing per se. You belong to the Royal Wikipolicewomen Constabulary - and we'll see each other in London, only stupid as you are, you won't recognize me sugar. My name is Jipa, TK. And my face has long turned away from yours, a long time ago when I realized you were only the medical articles troll you are. If you are not stupid, prove it by removing the embarassing "fight for flight" explanation you found for iridology and added as a POV to the other AM article you destroyed - irismeister 07:17, 2004 May 18 (UTC)

 * Oohh diaper fetishism kinky! theresa knott 08:21, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Shutup dear, you are off topic again! Go do your homework! Cauz we work here, theresugar, and have no time whatsoever for your dirty DIVERTING imagination! Try answering my ten questions or at the very least only ONE single question related to the subject matter or go troll and police other pages ! TENTH SUCH REQUEST - are you deaf or only BADLY MANNERED ? You are disqualified HERE in Wiki, with no credibility and no serious pretention to come here again, except for trolling, as demonstrated above. Moving boxes to harass John does not a serious person make ! End of Theresa story :O) What a shame that a wonderful place like Wiki obliges serious contributors lose NINETY percent of their time policing the Wikicops ! What a shame ! - irismeister 11:43, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

"Standards Of Quality Guidelines"
These may be a matter of some controversy, in that MNH is treating them as absolute hard incontrovertible Wikipedia rules when it's actually a style guide suggestion list written entirely by MNH. So therefore informed only by his point of view, no opposing points of view. I hope, MNH, you can see how this might lead to it not being considered absolute hard incontrovertible Wikipedia rules by others, but rather as a long essay on your point of view. To this effect, I've added a relevant notice, which I certainly hope MNH would not silently remove while controversy remains. Because he's not like that - David Gerard 14:56, May 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * More lies? See the big fat notice above.  The QSG's have been well advertised with many requests made for public comments.  Nobody is stoping you from either commenting or joining the project. -- John Gohde 20:04, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Nevertheless, they're your personal style guide, not policy. You've formed a personal project and claimed a list of articles, many existing, as your own; but that doesn't mean your style guide is hard policy and it doesn't mean your personal project owns the articles it claims. Wikipedia is, essentially, a single project. I hope you would have more wikilove than to call me a liar when I am acting in only the best of faith. I don't call you a liar. I would hope you wouldn't act in an antisocial manner. - David Gerard 20:10, May 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * More lies? Nevertheless, you do not have a clue as to what you are talking about. I on the other hand made the project operational within 2 weeks.  Keep on dreaming.  Phase I has been offically completed.  Phase II: the complaince audits will begin within a week or two, regardless of your above comments.  The results of ours audits will be posted on the respective talk pages in order to expose the light of day to your nonsense.  I know this, becuase I know what I am doing regardless of your above comments. To the next revert which wont be very far into the future. AM needs to recover from your vandalizing AM with your unnecessary additons of controversy. -- John Gohde 05:47, 18 May 2004 (UTC)~

 * It wasn't "stable," in that you've been substantially trimming content as per your personal style guide, Wikipedia:Wikiproject:Alternative Medicine/Standards of Quality (though there's nothing at all wrong with that, as long as you realise that declaration of a Project doesn't automatically make it in any way binding upon others). What you mean is there was an absence of edits you didn't like. I don't see how this precludes future edits you don't like - could you please explain? Also, please point out in the history where you think this period of stability was. Thanks! Also, are you claiming that these "audits" will have more standing than just being your personal opinion as set out in your style guide? If so, I'd be very interested in details of how that works. Thanks! - David Gerard 10:36, May 18, 2004 (UTC)

 * MNH: I'm still waiting for details on this island of stability you say you see in the history. Thanks! - David Gerard 10:22, May 25, 2004 (UTC)

Mr NH refactored the above comment by David claiming that David was making a personal attack. I disagree that the above is a personal attack so I restored it. theresa knott 15:36, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Before we lock horns for the next session, just give us a break David! I can't see anything relevant in what you do on this page, except for a pattern of disruption. Hang on buddy, leave John work in peace, and I mean business ! Drop your aggressive insinuations and contribute sensibly, if you can. If not, leave, cauz' you bring nothing new, or interesting here, related to the debate. Nothing AT ALL, capisci ? irismeister 17:24, 2004 May

 * I have no intention to "lock horns," as you put it. I fully intend to work with the finest Wikilove known to mankind. Yes, even for you, Dan. I certainly hope you would not look at work on this article in any other terms. As per the admonitions of that page: "try to actually understand what the other side has to say." I shall even try to understand you. "Respect other contributors." Do you feel respectful, Dan? - David Gerard 18:41, May 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Not towards you David. You didn't earn it. I respect people who don't bully their way into sysophood and then waste other people's time. If you want to go beyond your declarations, go, and we'll see. Too many beautiful words and too many diversions, plus your history of iridology page reversals do not make you a good candidate for my list of Wiki people I respect. You are on Theresa's list, with other Wikicops. Who Wikiloves and Wikitolerates the Wikiwolf, is VERY cruel to the Wikilamb, the only one I respect for modesty, humble, day to day contribution to the accumulation of Wikiknowledge and the cause of truth. Wiki people are of course aware of the growing list of Wikicops doing nothing but traffic regulation and gesturing. We have an example of misplaced outburst of strip tease and alleged teasing, as if Wikicops like Theresa were intrinsically more attractive than, or in lieu of the very article they were supposed to "contribute" to. Alas, they aren't. As for your Wikilove, a love that's told with bad intent, beats all the hate you can invent :O) - irismeister 19:25, 2004 May 17 (UTC)

 * See! There you are mentioning my name again. You really are obsessed with me. I never offered striptease, you are letting you imagination get carried away waniek. theresa knott 20:23, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

I never offered striptease
 * Good. For it would have been yet another embarassment, honey!

you imagination
 * That would have worked miracles for it would have supplanted the mess you are. For you have nothing to show, except for the potty potty, have you? Try this for a change (NINETH such request): REMOVE the "fight for flight" POV of yours on how iridology "works", for it only "works" for you this way. If you feel you have some time or competence left for the AM article, or only for the iridology article, try a simpler one: what is the mean, the median and the mode, as well as the analysis of variance for the processi dentati counts so far, as related to the iris? It will take some time to fool around the Google garbage ballot where you "find" your iridology explanations. Be happy for the great Wiki achievment you can boast with - removing me from editing what I know better, via your superiors in Wikicommittees. For "iridology" in Wiki will remain an article only you can take credit for :O) In the mean time, go police, troll and destroy other articles than medical, will ya ? - irismeister 07:30, 2004 May 18 (UTC)

"and animals"
Under ==Regulation==: "This can be a particular issue in the treatment of children and animals." Why "and animals"? - David Gerard 13:36, May 18, 2004 (UTC)

 * Because animals can't make there own descitions about healthcare. The UK legal system (the one I'm fermilia with) also has stronger legisation for animals than human aduldts (only a qualified vet can treat animals). Geni 14:25, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Perhaps a note to that effect (the legal system bit)? It confused me in an article ostensibly about human medicine - David Gerard 14:31, May 18, 2004 (UTC)

On MNH's personal style guide
Note to MNH: "personal style guide" isn't meant in any derogatory way. User:David Gerard contains mine, for example. Yours is a perfectly respectable personal ideal. I merely maintain that it is not and cannot be binding on others merely by declaration - David Gerard 16:17, May 18, 2004 (UTC)

A serious question to MNH

 * So you admit what you do here is not serious. Hmmm :° - irismeister 14:47, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

How on earth does asking you if your style guide for your Alternative Medicine project is just your personal style guide or something more constitute a "personal attack"? I really don't see it - David Gerard 16:35, May 18, 2004 (UTC)

 * Let me explain it to you David, while John does some real AM work unimpeded by your DIVERTING questions. We are here to improve CONTENT, not your imagination !!!!! If you can't see how on earth as you put it, or something more constitute a "personal attack"?  go try your friend Theresa and tell her that the troll she is does PERSONALLY and REPEATEDLY TROLL, DESTROY, DIVERT ANY PAGE and ATTACK any EDITOR of the medical articles except for those who know nothing about the matter sub judice - and her own Wikicops for that matter. How's that for an answer, David, the selective feigned inintelligent editor and contributor ? And how about selective tunnel vision and your own style, my endlessly nice talking Wikilover and REGULATING Wikicop ? Are you now trying to supplant the tiring lady TK as yet another Wikicop ? What on earth have your own diverted visions and POVs to do with the subject of AM ??? FOCUS, EDITOR, FOCUS - we discuss CONTENT not CHARACTERS ! PUT A STICKER ON YOUR SCREEN BEFORE YOU "CONTRIBUTE" AGAIN HERE in this lovely way of yours ! - irismeister 11:57, 2004 May 19 (UTC)- irismeister 11:57, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

You know, this whole temper tantrum of yours is really juvenile and just plain stupid.

 * LOL now irismister is talking to Mr Natty Health thinking he is me. This just gets funnier and funnier. Oh unless MR NH is you lover? That would be cool!theresa knott 12:10, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Theresa dear you are again interfering like a fly into a honeypot just waiting there for you :O) But you only jump to conclusions like the Wikicop you are, spilling anything but honey in the process :O) Shut up! Go back your homework. There is that Word thing waiting for you, for yet another Word jpg :O) This is to say nothing about the world at large craving for yet anotherone of your Wikicop gems (I have the full official Theresa collection waiting for the right editor :O). If you want to really help with other "contributions" than for my own entertainment, as a premium for my time lost in Wiki policing the policewomen, then try answering my question for a change (11th such request) Requalify :O). Don't throw the towel yet! You are young and you can learn. In time, a difference will arise :O) Don't jump over the queue and insert your own agenda, again, sugar. Or do you just think of yourself as beyond those mortals, you know, decent non-Wikicop authors, to bother yourself with something else than with your tampon drawing "contributions" ? - irismeister 13:23, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

 * What tampon drawing contributions would that be then? If your going to attack me for my drawing skills you should pick a diagram that I made rather than one someone else did don't you think? Are are you so obsessed with me you think that i made every single diagram that has ever been put up on wikipedia. Also you should note that diagrams are png not jpg. Jpegs are fo photo's. theresa knott 13:43, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

If your going to attack me
You are attacking yourself, dear, with lack of focus. The same as you please yourself, by avoiding answering questions related to the article you "edit". This is fooling around, turning in circles, and indeed intellectual masturbation. By definition, you need not be helped for that since you help yourself so well, feigning to disregard you are not alone. This is also exhibitionism. Well, if it pleases you, by all means don't stop :O) irismeister 14:47, 2004 May 19 (UTC)~

Jpegs are fo photo's. No, you are :O)  And you are politically incorrect! ' We, in Wiki, value the tampon png expert as much as we love the contributors to dozens of medical other articles on their lifetime experience. This is called freedom :O) We only resent little nasty trolls like the one you are :O) Now, as a proof, and for the 13th time, what do you intend to replace your "contribution" with, and what is the mean number of processi dentati in humans (downgrading the questions as per Wikilove rules :O) - irismeister 14:47, 2004 May 19 (UTC) ~

Question time for Theresa
(interpolation as a Wikicop tactic learned in long Wikibattles for truth :°) I am willing, as above, and as a sign of good will, to  downgrade  my 13 questions for Theresa,  at my 14th kind request for her to focus on what she edits , as per Wikilove rules. Probably vox clamantis in deserto anyway - for Wikicops only answer to Wikisuperintendents :O) - irismeister 14:47, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

End of Question time for Theresa
(continued)

The SQGs when finished are for the benefit of all editors. Any editor will be able to quote these guidelines by number in order to point out precisely what is wrong with the latest edit on any CAM article, without having to resort to personal attacks, such as yours. In CAM, there are more restrictive requirements than just NPOV, such as the controvsey notice above which your quote totally ignored. They are not my invention as your lies are trying to say. The SQG is a complication of direct quotes on what other editors have written on the subject.

I simply tested them out, once, on one stupid quote, which just so happens to have failed 6 out of the 12 guidelines or 50%. That fact alone, should tell you who exactly the trouble maker here is. It certainly is not me. You better get use to them, as you will be seeing them in the future on virtually all of my edit summaries and talk comments.

There is no personal style guide existing in this project.

Furthermore, the SQGs have no direct bearing upon the compliance audits. The CAs will be based on a master list of key questions that are derived from the SQGs. Again, the SQGs will allow editors to objectively talk about what is wrong with the latest edit without resorting to personal attacks.

DIVERSION - FOCUS DAVID, FOCUS and let us work for we don't have time for your DIVERSIONS, can you hear ? - irismeister 11:57, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

I am tired of having to point out the totally obvious, to people like you, who are intent upon totally disrupting the normal stable editing process of Wikipedia. The days of the kooks bickering over endless nonsense is rapidly coming to an end. -- John Gohde 17:32, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I'll personally take care and see that happens, John, if it's the last thing I do here in Wiki - take my word for it :O) - irismeister 15:49, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

 * (question moved to Sam [Spade] 00:32, 19 May 2004 (UTC))

Osteopathy is still being attacked as alternative medicine.
Osteopathy in it's orginal form is and always will be alt med (or quackery depending on where you draw the line between the two) DO's don't really practice osteopathy any more which is why they have the same status (pretty much) as MD's. In my country osteopaths pratices something far closer to the orginal form and as such are very defintly alt med. There are also a number of people who practice the orginal form of osteopathy who are definetly in the alt med catigopry. As such the point is meaningless.

from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Clinical medicine

 * The disambiguation is fine. One thing, though.  In the United States, I think those that go to osteopathic schools get a Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (D.O.) degree and practice medicine without an M.D. degree.  If so, Doctor of Medicine should be rephrased a bit (not all physicians in the United States have an M.D.).  Please correct me if I'm wrong. Ksheka 17:37, May 18, 2004 (UTC)

The point is far from meaningless as you have just attacked osteopathy as quackery even though osteopathy is conventional medicine. Speaks to the credibility of the attacker. -- John Gohde 10:45, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I didn't say that. Kindly do not missrepsent what I say. I stated that in it's orginal form it is alt med or in the view of some poeple some people quackery. If you read on you will find that I defined Osteopathy both in it's orginal form and how it is praticed in the uk as alt med.No would you be kind enough to adress my orginal points?Geni 11:00, 19 May 2004 (UTC)~

No personal attacks
Kindly review at length, and respond accordingly. Sam [Spade] 14:13, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree. Geni needs to stop making personal attacks. -- John Gohde 17:57, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I can't seem to remeber making any personal attcksGeni

Checked, Sam. The only trouble is that when sysops become trolls, Wikiconstruction is not a matter of avoiding them, but a matter of policing the Wikipolice. There is an old Roman adage, quies custodiet ipsos custodes - referring to the logical mess Wiki now becomes. Indeed, this is what happens when we are in a "milking mentality". By taking anything it can grab from articulate, competent, patient volunteer idealists, the likes of John, while banning them, taking their time, insulting them with theresa-branded stuff, we are not doing a service to the cause of quality in Wiki. We are only making it a sixth-grade nonsense somewhere down the sink, towards the general direction of the Web's red shift :O) And on a more general tone, putting ten cops, like a pack of wolves feigning to cry wolf for every new ingenious author, is little short of disgraceful. Therefore, I'm afraid Wikipolice is not the Wikisolution, but the Wikiproblem. We, in Wiki are not running about killing value. We are for increasing it!

So, Sam, I'm afraid we shouldn't hide ourselves behind rewiews. There is only one logical issue when Wikipolice is nasty - the issue from above :O) Appreciate your tone, though :O) - irismeister 14:55, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

Emergency, Mayday, Wiki Wiki Mayday! Dear Sam, the WikiRepublic is in danger! Wikipolice make their coup d'êtat! Please add your voice and come help John  here  wiki wiki. He is subject not only of personal attacks, this he is getting used to, but to a seven-months full blown campaign of character assasination - by SYSOPS. Look what they say  here ! If you stand by your principles, man, it's time to act now. Thank you ! - Yours, - irismeister 17:25, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

With regard to the sentence:

 * Since critics of alternative medicine are still attacking osteopathy as quackery the credibility of all the criticisms shown above should be seriously questioned.

I fail to see why the fact that some critics attack osteopathy damages any other criticisms levelled at other fields of alternative medicine. This inference is as illogical as dismissing all alternative medicine practices as meaningless because the benefits of (for example) homeopathy remain unproven. - MykReeve 21:14, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Let me explain it to you in plain English, MykReeve: You see only what you want to see. I wrote the criticism of Conventional Medicine working to add hard data for three months. It was dismissed with one second gesture. Do you think I am some idiot to work and see the work treated like this ? CM is beyond criticism, as are Wikicops, as are Wiki admins, as are all self-inflated people messing around with nonsense questions like yours. AM is criticized by the same people who attack osteopathy, capisci ? Let me see: How shall I put it for you to grasp the concept ? Let's try: If you get a criticism of say, your dumbness, by me, a monkey, who criticizes Darwinism, you dismiss my criticism on grounds of my alleged incompetence, for I also rejected Darwin en bloc with your own dumbness. Need more logic ?

 * PS I assume you can read English in the above explanation. - irismeister 21:21, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

 * My comment has nothing to do with your "criticism of Conventional Medicine", I was referring to a specific sentence that is illogical for the reason that I give above - the fact that osteopathy is criticised by anyone has no implications for the validity of other criticisms of alternative medicine.

 * Really ? Explain yourself ! It does not hold water! - irismeister 21:58, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

 * Since, as the article states, "osteopaths are fully-licensed physicians in all fifty states of the United States", I would be surprised if criticism of osteopathy were as widespread among critics of alternative medicine as you suggest here.

 * So what on Earth does this surprise of yours have in common with the subject of our alleged discussion ? Admitting, reductio ad absurdum, that criticism of osteopathy were less intense by those criticizing AM. Would that mean that AM critics were more legitimate par voie de conséquence. You must be into double standards and fuzzy logic. Sorry for French interpolations - it's Theresa who inspired me so much this evening :O) - irismeister 21:58, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

 * I have no desire to discuss the other issues you mention, which are irrelevant to my point. - MykReeve 21:46, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Sans blague! Oh, now I do remeber you - you are the pathetic contributor of those lousy iris "photos" for illustrations. Now I see. Good for you to refrain your interest in AM, discussions or good logic then. I forgot we are, in your mindset at least, into downgrading credentials, quality and communication in this "talk" then :O) - irismeister 21:58, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

 * Also, I believe your example to be an ad hominem argument. I would not dismiss any suggestion that anyone made on the assumption that they were incompetent... Each assertion should be considered on its own merits. Just because you got one thing wrong, that doesn't mean that you are incompetent, and I would be naive to assume so. - MykReeve 21:55, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Yeah, sure, what has competence has to do with it? We have one and only one yardstick, which is the least common denominator of our mutual, common, cherished and indeed idolatrously revered incompetence. By this we judge the merit of competence. And by this same own merit you just plain square don't care some people work for three months and others for only one click ! Take John who's ill because of TK's innocent clicks after his own months of work here! This says a lot about your values, pal, too! I need to vomit. Excuse me - I will then have some real work to do. Use your yardstick and help Theresa build a better Wiki - for you two are the future of the project :O) - irismeister 21:58, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

 * I am sorry if I have offended you. I merely wished to debate the sentence in the section currently subject to an edit war. My personal belief is that criticism of alternative medicine is not weakened by the fact that some people continue to attack osteopathy - to me, it seems that it would also be an ad hominem argument to say that because someone criticises osteopathy, we must also dismiss any other arguments that they make. You disagree, as is your right... but I believe that you are wrong on this issue.

 * I do not believe that I have been "downgrading [your] credentials", or that my choosing not to comment on your "criticism of Conventional medicine" means that I was dismissing it. I believe that I have been civil to you throughout, and regret that you have not been able to extend the same courtesy. - MykReeve 22:12, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Answer already given. Stressed: This is not about me, this is about quality Wiki AM project and articles - irismeister 22:19, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

Three reversions
You are playing the games of three, Geni ? Calling this an argument ? Com'on Geni, be serious, will you ? This is Wiki, not Theresa's playground. Besides it's you who did the third reversion :O) Tsk tsk ! - irismeister 22:19, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

I've tried to be serius I will try and contine to do so. If you deal with my point on the talk page I will have no objections to that section. Untill then I'm going to keep removing it/editting it into a compramise version if I can think of one.Geni

Theresa, stop your petty edit wars - you are not impressing anyone anymore
WARNING - and second such request. I mean business! No go cry wolf and say I am a menace! Oh dear, what a pain you are, what a waste :O) - irismeister 21:33, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

Request for Comments on Theresa Knott
Requests for comment/Theresa Knott has been created as structured way to gather support in the Wikipedian community for action to be taken against Theresa Knott for her consistent use of aggressive editing tactics that are counter productive to the development of high quality encyclopedic articles. Now, is your chance to voice your grievances against Theresa Knott. Please take a few minutes of your time to air your comments. Feel free to expand the list of problem areas by adding problems or grievances of your own. -- John Gohde 04:10, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

In an attempt at compromise, I have maintained TK's version of criticism and MNH's of support. I suggest that each user avoid editing the other section, as this has led to extreme POV in the past
In an attempt at compromise, I have maintained TK's version of criticism and MNH's of support. I suggest that each user avoid editing the other section, as this has led to extreme POV in the past.

Most honest people call it a revert. Sorry, to hear tha you don't! You are not remotely interested in getting rid of extreme POV. You just want to continue Tk's pollution. Do you think that I am stupid?

The good thing about reverts is that there are 24 hours in the day to get rid of the garbage. TK's version of criticism is not acceptable to the alternative position on health, period. It belongs in the trash can. We have reached agreement with WikiDoc's, but TK represents nobody, nor is her position in alignment with well established Wikipedian policy. TK's position is not acceptable, period. -- John Gohde 13:25, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

 * It's a shame that you think everyone is out to get you John. Calling Snowspinners attempt at compromise garbage, isn't very nice now is it? BTW I'm glad that you are feeling better. theresa knott 13:32, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

The plural of anecdote still isn't data
How on Earth are newspaper testimonials encyclopaedic? - David Gerard 19:26, May 21, 2004 (UTC)

 * It is called attributing your assertions with a footnote. A real world physician is a better source of valid information than any stuffy grossly out of date academic in my opinion.

 * I told you what would happen once you open the door to quotes in AM. I can and might add a 1,000 valid qotes.

 * You have your stupid quote up front. Keep it! We, now have a even better quote for a knock-out blow you wont recover from. Followed by another great gem. I found them on my first hit in Google.  Gee, I wonder what was in the second hit? -- John Gohde 19:42, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Richard Dawkins who is a respected (if not by you) scientist and - the reason for the quote being of any significance - famous as a prominent sceptic, versus a newspaper quote you proudly proclaim you picked at random off Google. One of these things is not quite of comparable stature to the other. Again: how is this encyclopaedic? - David Gerard 20:52, May 21, 2004 (UTC)

 * ???? To somebody who does not know what they are doing searching on Google may indeed appear random. But, if you know what you are doing you use advance search options to structure your search to find precisely what you are looking for on the first hit.  I got precisely what I wanted on the first hit.

 * In short, I did not proclaim I found it at random. In fact, I proudly proclaimed I knew precisely what I was doing by finding it on my first hit. -- John Gohde 15:45, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

 * David, let him have his newspaper quotes. Never underestimate the intelligence of the readers. You see an article that presents two sides of a story.One side is supported by quotes from respected and famous scientists, The other is supported by quotes from the tabloids. What do you think most readers will think? If MNH wants to ruin the credibility of his own POV let him. We can always fix the article later.theresa knott 21:27, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I am sure MNH, being a person of good will, can explain how putting in a quote specifically picked as the first random return by Google increases the encyclopaedic quality of the article rather than constituting abuse of an article for point-scoring on the talk page, because I'm sure he's more interested in the quality. I look forward to being enlightened by his detailed explanation - David Gerard 21:47, May 21, 2004 (UTC)

 * Dr. Russell Greenfield, says: "I tell them 'I'm one of you' and that we have the data - we have the studies, we're not making this up."  My question to you is:  What is your problem?  Is your information 30 to 40 years out of date? -- John Gohde 07:27, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I've tried to make the paragraph in question read less like advocacy in the text surrounding the quotes. It read like an advertisement before - David Gerard 12:01, May 23, 2004 (UTC)

Move references if you must, don't just delete them
MNH: I noticed you'd deleted six critical references from the article altogether , despite your edit summaries for each change saying "External links belong in the External Links section". As you obviously wouldn't just try to wipe out a point of view you don't like, this must have been an error. I've restored them for you.

I couldn't think of a good way to put these in the references at the end. If we can't sensibly list them in the references at the end of the article, we should leave them inline, as is the case with a tremendous number of other Wikipedia articles. Thanks! - David Gerard 12:01, May 23, 2004 (UTC)

 * Slow people generally take a while to figure things out. I am really impressed at your speed, David.  Keep up the good work.  Maybe there is hope for you yet.  Great job, David! -- John Gohde 16:13, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

Anecdotal evidence headers
A newspaper report quoting two people is in fact "anecdotal evidence." I don't see how it could be described as anything else. Placing the words "Anecdotal evidence of criticism", apart from it being a phrase that doesn't actually make any sense, above the Dawkins quote as some sort of "tit-for-tat" (which, btw, shows insufficient wikilove on your part), is meaningless.

If it isn't, can you please explain how the phrase "Anecdotal evidence of criticism" means anything usefully.

I shall assume that it's a problem of definition. What definition are you using of "anecdotal evidence"? Mine is "evidence from anecdotes." What's yours? - David Gerard 09:07, May 24, 2004 (UTC)

ALargeElk: I prefer "====Anecdotal evidence in support of CAM====" to "====Some conventional doctors support CAM====" because to me it feels like using sentences, rather than descriptive phrases, in section headers gets didactic and is inappropriate for an NPOV encyclopedia article - David Gerard 16:18, May 24, 2004 (UTC)

Other Issues
I'm curious about the six questions listed here:

 * 1) What is the method of treatment utilized?
 * 2) What are its therapeutic effects?
 * 3) What medical conditions does it effectively treat?
 * 4) What modes of action could plausibly account for these therapeutic effects?
 * 5) What, if any, can possible forms of damage be a result of this treatment?
 * 6) Is a more dangerous alternative treatment, or the safer version of complementary medicine, being used?

Where have these six questions come from - I don't see any footnotes. Not that I think they are a bad way to look at AM treatments, but they seem like original research.

Also, I'm struggling to understand what question 6 means at all. It seems to be asking whether the treatment is a replacement for conventional medicine (more dangerous) or additional to conventional medicine (safer) - is that right?--ALargeElk 09:49, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

 * In the absence of a response, I've removed the following:

 * When exploring the individual branches of alternative medicine six questions need to be answered. The answers to these question will reveal whether or not each branch of alternative medicine is mostly quackery or something that the public should seriously consider using.
 * What is the method of treatment utilized?
 * What are its therapeutic effects?
 * What medical conditions does it effectively treat?
 * What modes of action could plausibly account for these therapeutic effects?
 * What, if any, can possible forms of damage be a result of this treatment?
 * Is a more dangerous alternative treatment, or the safer version of complementary medicine, being used?

 * I'm happy to engage in any constructive dialogue as to how to make this encyclopaedic, or to reinstate it with appropriate references. --ALargeElk 10:55, 25 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Until the server problem is fixed for real, this will be my last post to any talk page. I have have better things to do with my time. -- John Gohde 17:39, 25 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Of course, his MNH summary said "Becuase you deleted the collective work of many different editors who do not show up ever day. Some people actually have a life!" Except that the list was put in by him. And rather than defend it, he posted the above. Therefore I can only assume he has no interest in discussing his changes - David Gerard 20:30, May 25, 2004 (UTC)

 * I developed numbers 1 - 4. Numbers 5 and 6 came from other people.  I have a great deal of confidence that given enough time these editors will eventually add back this section. -- John Gohde 19:42, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your confirmation that this is indeed original research - it's nice to know that I was correct to remove it.--ALargeElk 08:39, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

 * AM still favors the support side. It will be like this for ever.  Just thought that you might want to know.  Your arguments still look second rate.  Just my opinion, but I am right as usually. -- John Gohde 19:42, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

Mr NH's latest edit summary
MNH has just made the following comment in the edit summary "(I found these quotes. I wrote the argument. I added them to the text. This is the original intro that I want for this argument.)"

John you don't seem to understand how this project works. You simply can't say "I want it like this". anyone can edit your text at anytime. understand that you feel you have ownership over the stuff you add to an article but your feelings are not important to this project (niether are mine or anyone elses) It's hard I know to see you work editted without restraint but you have to either accept it, or leave wikipedia for a different, non collaborative type of project. Having said that I have no objection to the edit you made to the article. Your intro looks fine to me. It's your edit summary that has me worried. theresa knott 14:44, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

Weird commit messages
"AM still favors the support side. It will be like this for ever. Just thought that you might want to know. Your arguments still look second rate."

What is that supposed to meant? David.Monniaux 06:33, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

 * It seems to me (though I always hesitate to put words in people's mouths, and would invite correction if I'm wrong) that it's an admission by MNH that this article is POV and he intends to keep it that way.--ALargeElk 08:39, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Pardon my broken English, but it seems to me that you guys are simply admitting that you are nothing but trolls trying to waste other people's time. -- John Gohde 15:49, 28 May 2004 (UTC)~

 * Speaking from a personal POV I'm trying to create the best damn encylopedia the world has ever seen. MNH has stated on his talk page that he does not intend bothering with AM or iridology anymore.I think that is a wise decision. I suggest we take him at his word, respect his wishes, and stop asking him any more questions. Assuming he doesn't edit this page, ot the article page in the next few days, I suggest we archive the talk, start again and work to get the article as good as we possibly can so that we get some stability. theresa knott 16:10, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

 * My how the tolls manage to babble on so! TK this is not a newsgroup.  Get a life!  If I were to visit London, UK you would be the very last person on the planet that I would want to spend time with. -- John Gohde 16:58, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Having claimed he's not posting here any more and is not interested in mediation, MNH is continuing to post personal attacks and in fact maintains his own personal page thereof (and another). Should I put in a mediation request anyway? - David Gerard 17:55, May 28, 2004 (UTC)

 * That would be pointless IMO. I've already tried mediation. Our mediator called the process off. it is unlikely IMO that we would find another person willing to act as a mediator. No since MNH has already got as far as Arbitration before, I think asking the arbitration committee to reevalute MNHs behaviour to see if their previous ban reformed him in they way they had hoped. - theresa knott 18:19, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Alternative medicine/Archive 7


text:
Nashorn

Nashorn (, German for "rhinoceros"), initially known as Hornisse (German "hornet"), was a German Panzerjäger ("tank hunter") of World War II. It was developed as an interim solution in 1942 by equipping a light turretless chassis based on the Panzer III and Panzer IV tanks with the 8.8 cm Pak 43 anti-tank gun. Though only lightly armoured and displaying a high profile, it could penetrate the front armour of any Allied tank at long range, and its relatively low cost and superior mobility to heavier vehicles ensured it remained in production until the war's end.

Development

After the first German experiences with the newer Soviet tanks like the T-34 medium tank or the Kliment Voroshilov heavy tank during Operation Barbarossa, the need for a Panzerjäger capable of destroying these more heavily armoured tanks became clear.

In February 1942, the Alkett (Altmärkische Kettenwerke GmbH) arms firm of Berlin designed a tank destroyer using their recently developed Geschützwagen III/IV chassis which, as its name indicated, used components of both the Panzer III and Panzer IV medium tanks. The 8.8 cm Panzerjägerkanone 43/1 L/71 (PaK 43/1) a long-barreled anti-tank gun (also used, as the 8.8 cm KwK 43, for the main armament of the Tiger II tank) was mounted on the rear of the chassis complete with its gun shield, and an open-topped superstructure was built up around the gun to give the crew some protection. The gun had the same traverse and elevation as if it had been on its carriage: 15° to either side and between -5° and +15° elevation. To accommodate the long and heavy gun, the hull had to be lengthened and the engine moved from the rear to the centre of the chassis. The amount of armour provided for the crew compartment was limited. The shielding provided was adequate to protect the crew from blast and small arms, but not armour-piercing rounds. Thus, like the Marder series, the vehicle was not intended to engage in tank fights, but to provide mobility to a powerful anti-tank gun.

This model was presented for approval to Adolf Hitler in October 1942 and entered production in early 1943. It had numerous official designations, such as 8.8 cm Pak 43 (L/71) auf Fahrgestell Panzerkampfwagen III/IV (Sf) or 8.8 cm Pak 43 (L/71) auf Geschützwagen III/IV (Sd. Kfz. 164), though it was also known as the Panzerjäger Hornisse (in English "tank-hunter Hornet")

During the first half of 1943, a new model of the Hornisse was introduced into production. This model altered the driver's front armour plate, along with other minor differences. This model and its predecessor, the few early production vehicles, were almost indistinguishable. It was renamed Nashorn by Hitler in 1944.

Total production of the Nashorn amounted to some 494 vehicles, most of which were built in 1943. In January 1944, Hitler favored production of a newer, fully-casemated tank destroyer, the Jagdpanzer IV, which had a much lower silhouette, thicker frontal armor (60 mm frontal plate), and an effective though less powerful 7.5 cm gun. Though still primarily an ambush weapon, this vehicle was better built for armoured engagements. Production of the Nashorn continued into 1945, although at a slow pace.

Combat service

The Hornisse/Nashorn was issued to the heavy anti-tank battalions (Schwere Panzerjäger-Abteilungen); six would eventually be equipped: Schwere Panzerjäger Abteilung 560, 655, 525, 93, 519 and 88. Each battalion was equipped with 45 Nashorns. Most of theNashorns in these units fought either on the Eastern Front or in Italy, few having been sent to Western Europe.

The Nashorn's gun was a variant of the Pak 43, closely related to guns used later for the Ferdinand/Elefant, Tiger II and Jagdpanther. Its tungsten carbide–cored round, the ''Pzgr. 40/43'', was capable of penetrating 190 mm of rolled steel armour at a 30° angle of impact at a distance of 1 km. The gun's performance enabled Nashorns to penetrate the front armour plating of any Allied combat vehicle and to engage enemy units while staying out of range themselves, thanks to its combination of excellent gunsights, optics, and accuracy.

The Hornisse/Nashorn made its debut during the Battle of Kursk in 1943, where it performed extremely well. The ability to engage the enemy at long distances negated the disadvantages of its light armour, lack of a roof and a large profile, and revealed that the weapon was well suited to the open and flat steppes that made up much of the landscape of the western Soviet Union. In Italy, however, the generally hilly terrain was not as favourable to the harnessing of the Nashorn's full ability at accurate long-range fire against enemy forces as in Russia.

On 6 March 1945, a US Army M26 Pershing heavy tank was knocked out by a Nashorn in the town of Niehl near Cologne, at a close range of under 300 yd (270 m).

Survivors
There are two Nashorns on display in military museums: one in the U.S. Army Armor & Cavalry Collection and at the new Patriot Park military museum in Moscow, Russia (it was formerly on display in Kubinka Tank Museum).

A third privately owned Nashorn with the hull serial number 310163 has been restored to running condition in the Netherlands. The hull and a number of the parts came from Kaliningrad. In 2019, this third surviving vehicle had reached the stage where it was driveable when it suffered severe damage after being caught in an accidental garage fire. The restoration has made this Nashorn operational again. The engine and steering system are not original due to cost. The engine is a Deutz FL12814 V12 while the steering system was taken from an FV432. The tracks were originally of World War II vintage but they proved too brittle and have been replaced with newly manufactured tracks.

Technical data

 * Tracks: single pin, 400 mm wide
 * Ground contact length: 3.80 m
 * Shoes(links)/track: 104
 * Ground pressure: 0.85 kg/cm2
 * Obstacle performance
 * Vertical obstacle: 0.6 m
 * Trench: 2.3 m
 * Fording: 0.8 m
 * Gearbox: synchromesh manual with six forward and one reverse gear
 * Clutch: Fichtel & Sachs La 120 HDA dry, triple disc
 * Primary gun sight: Selbstfahrlafetten-Zielfernrohr 1a, 5× magnification and 8° field of view
 * Indirect fire sight: Aushilfsrichtmittel 38, 3x magnification and 10° field of view
 * Radio: FuG Spr. f

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

title: Nashorn


text:
Talk:Snowman

Untitled
This page has been vandalized with a variety of things in the history section. I'm not sure what the original content was. Shoofle (talk) 05:58, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Rapidconfusion Is the Snowmen Gallery really neccessary... i think that it should be removed... and more information about the structure of snowmen, their construction and other info added

Image:Small snowman.jpg I don't think this photo has sufficient focus on the snowman --Jeff 11:58, 30 May 2004 (UTC)]]

User:Silsor has Image:Snowman-and-me.jpg on zir userpage, which might come in useful here too. Marnanel 21:43, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Removed from article page
In Cement Industry, A snowman is the formation of Clinker as a heap which falls out of a hot Kiln into a cooler compartment.

Removed by  UTSRelativity (Talk)  02:50, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Ought there perhaps to be a blurb on the difference between eastern and western depictions of snowmen? I've noticed that in japanese-made videogames and tv shows and what-not, snowmen tend to have two body segments, bucket hats, no nose, and small arms like round mittens.. while western snowmen almost always have 3 segments, top hats, a carrot nose, and branch arms. this is probably not ubiquitous, but it's notable innit?

History of snowmen
hi..um.. i have to do a visual project and i chose my topic "history of a snowman" the only problem is anywhere ive been they only talk about how to make a snowman and frosty the snowman.. maybe could you put some history on here?? please? signed, desperate

I, too, am looking for the history of the snowman but find information on the structure. While it is of interest to know the differences of structure among the snowmen of differing cultures, I would like to know more of its origin. Thank you, an educator 168.103.116.51 20:12, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

☃
☃ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.35.13.76 (talk) 18:20, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * For those of you just tuning in, that is a unicode character, U+2603 SNOWMAN in the Miscellaneous Symbols block, Weather and astrological symbols group. --Random832 (contribs) 02:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

international
Hi, I just wonder... Is the snowman a pure phenomenon of western culture or did other cultures invent it as well seperately, In Asia for example? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.44.71.127 (talk) 00:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Also, building a snowman with only 2 tiers is fairly common in Europe, at least in the UK, where snowfall is relatively uncommon and sometimes there isn't very much. All the snowmen I've ever built were two tier. I don't think it's necessary for snowmen in Europe and north america to be 3 tier. 79.67.107.57 (talk) 14:20, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Top Hats
Do snowmen usually have top hats? Is this a defining trait of a snow man? I think of top hats as a defining trait of snowmen but some people argue that they're too expensive to be used much to make snowmen, especially by children who can't afford such things. 99.224.137.2 (talk) 15:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That's why the Frosty kids used an old top hat they found. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:37, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Unusual_snowman.jpg may be deleted
I have tagged File:Unusual_snowman.jpg, which is in use in this article for deletion because it does not have a copyright tag. If a copyright tag is not added within seven days the image will be deleted. -- Chris  10:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

 * More free use images are needed. Any good artists? 99.224.137.2 (talk) 14:02, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

"usually made with..."?
I've never actually seen a snowman made with a carrot nose and coal eyes, although the article says that they're 'usually made' with these items. I think the original author confused traditional snowman imagery with common snowman building practices. Maybe I'm wrong though. Any thoughts? 214.13.82.22 (talk) 22:30, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I used a carrot in my snowman days, but charcoal, not coal. If you want yours to come to life, gotta play by the book, best as possible. Hard to tell what the neighbours used, just by looking. I didn't go around squeezing the eyes or staring into them. Could have been dog poop. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:35, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Unicode Subheading
Should the Unicode subheading be removed? Is it of noteworthy mention? --Bananasoldier (talk) 03:54, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Main Snowman Image
The opening paragraph talks about snowmen having carrot noses, smiles, hats and scarves. I have taken a photograph of a snowman fitting that description that I think would be better fitting for the main picture in the article. GutMaze (talk) 02:00, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

I can agree that that image is better suited to accompany the opening paragraph. After reading over the comments here, I think that perhaps there should be more information on the differences between snowmen in reality and the classical westernized concept of a snowman. Any thoughts? --Raptorrage (talk) 03:03, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

I think that's a nice idea. The snowman in my photo has most of the characteristics of a classical stereotypical snowman, while people use all sorts of things to decorate their snowmen in real life. I'm re-posting my photo here. --GutMaze (talk) 03:32, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

East Asia
I doubt that building a snowman with three spheres in Japan or anywhere is considered strange. The famous snowman army picture taken in Japan consists of snowmen with two spheres because it's easier and faster. The claim that snowmen in East Asia are usually built with two spheres is not supported by any source and should therefore be removed. --2.245.215.101 (talk) 21:06, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The original statement was solely about Japanese snow sculptures ( in 2008 by User:Namazu-tron), which even then wasn't cited, so I removed it. DMacks (talk) 19:53, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

A source
We should use this source somehow.

Mini Snowman in a Box By Nancy Armstrong, Running Press http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=k3CSEKfYW3sC&oi=fnd&pg=PA4&dq=Snowman+contruction&ots=slMC_TvDiR&sig=Y_aSzMkau5LXy37Y-0L1MdypyVQ#v=onepage&q=Snowman%20contruction&f=false

--Mr. Guye (talk) 04:19, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Large gap
In my opinion, the large gap between the 'History' and 'In popular culture' sections should be reduced as it makes the article look untidy in my opinion. Xboxsponge15 (talk) 18:29, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

1511 woodcut apparently fake
I'm removing this image, which we had soberly captioned as "People dancing around a snowman – woodcut from 1511". However, according to a discussion here, this image comes from Eckstein's A History of the Snowman (referenced in our article) where it's intended as a joke (or hoax). The motto at the bottom is "Ik ben de sneeuwman, goob, goob j'goob", clearly a reference to the Beatles song "I Am the Walrus" ("I am the walrus, goo goo g'joob"). The image file at Commons doesn't have any real source, it simply says it came from Ukrainian Wikipedia, and the file at Ukrainian Wikipedia has no source information. —Mahāgaja · talk 11:02, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The author's caption underneath the "woodcut" reads: The Winter Festival of 1511 might have been reported by a chronicle like this. — © 2007 Bob Eckstein. So it is just tongue-in-cheek; there was no intention to fool the reader. --Lambiam 15:02, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Here is a link to uk-wiki in a possible case the file is removed from Commons soon as a copy-vio: CiaPan (talk) 18:37, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * uk:File:Snowman 1511.JPG

title: Talk:Snowman


text: User:BradK

title: User:BradK


text: User talk:62.179.100.101

title: User talk:62.179.100.101


text:
Talk:Hellenic Football League

Why is it called Hellenic?
Some link with Greece? Equinox ◑ 01:38, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Hellenic Football League


text:
St Stephen's College (Hong Kong)

St Stephen's College is a Christian Direct Subsidy Scheme co-educational secondary school in Stanley, Hong Kong. With an area of about 150,000 m2 (15 hectares), the college is the largest secondary school in Hong Kong, and is one of the very few boarding schools in the territory. Many buildings in the campus are listed in the list of historic Buildings and Declared Monuments by the Antiquities Advisory Board. When the college was founded in 1903, there were only six boarders and one day student; in the academic year 2014–2015, there were approximately 910 students studying in the college. The current principal is Mrs Julie Ma, commencing duty since 2023. St Stephen's College uses English as the medium of instruction except for Chinese-based subjects. St Stephen's College is the first school in the territory having its own Heritage Trail in the school campus. The college's oldest building, the School House, was declared a monument in 2011, being one of the few schools in Hong Kong to own a Declared Monument in its campus.

History
The establishment of the college dates back to 1901. A group of prominent Chinese businessmen approached the Church Missionary Society to administer a school for their sons. The inspiration came from Sun Yat-sen. The aim was to achieve a standard of teaching and level of equipment comparable to the best public schools in England. In 1903, St Stephen's College was officially established on Bonham Road in Western District. In the 1920s, the government granted the school 37 acre on the Stanley Peninsula in recognition of outstanding contributions to education. The foundation stone was laid in April 1928 by the Governor of Hong Kong, Sir Cecil Clementi, and in May 1929, the college was fully functional in its new buildings, many of which are still in use today.

During the Battle of Hong Kong in the Second World War, heavy fighting took place around the college, which was among the last British strongholds to surrender to the Imperial Japanese Army. Shortly after the surrender, the Imperial Japanese Army broke into the college (which served as a military hospital during the battle) and murdered wounded soldiers of the Allied forces, in what would be known as the St. Stephen's College massacre. The Japanese later merged the college with part of Stanley Prison to form the Stanley Internment Camp.

The college reopened after the war and a chapel was built in 1950 to remember those who died during the Japanese occupation.

Originally a private school, St Stephen's College became a government-funded public school during the late 1900s. Since the 2008–2009 academic year, the college has become a Direct Subsidy Scheme (DSS) school, which is a historic change to the college as it freed the school from the centralised funding system that currently administers secondary education in Hong Kong. Students enrolled in the 2002 Primary 1 class at St Stephen's College Preparatory School, also based in Stanley, were the first group of students to enter the DSS system. In order to upgrade the school administrative level, this is the first secondary school in Hong Kong to employ a registered professional housing manager on its staff to manage and handle all property and facilities-related issues for and on behalf of the school.

School principal

 * 1903–1914: The Ven E. J. Barnett
 * 1914–1915: The Revd. A. D. Stewart
 * 1915–1928: The Revd. W. H. Hewitt
 * 1928–1953: Canon E. W. L. Martin
 * 1956–1958: Mr. C. T. Priestley
 * 1958–1965: Mr. J. R. F. Melluish
 * 1965–1973: The Revd. R. B. Handforth
 * 1973–1974: Ven. W. N. Cheung (Acting)
 * 1974–1999: Mr. Luke J. P. Yip (葉敬平先生)
 * 1999–2005: Mr. D. R. Too (朱業桐先生)
 * 2005–2010: Dr. Louise Y. S. Law (羅懿舒博士)
 * 2010–2023: Ms. Carol C. Yang (楊清女士)
 * 2023–: Mrs. Julie M. W. Ma (馬李敏慧女士)

Houses
St Stephen's College has a house system and divides its students into six houses with six different colors. Some names of the houses came from the names of the first few principals of the college:

 * Barnett House (Orange) - The Ven. E. J. Barnett;
 * Stewart House (Purple) - The Revd. A. D. Stewart;
 * Hewitt House (Red) - The Revd. W. H. Hewitt;
 * Martin House (Blue/White ) - Canon E. W. L. Martin;
 * Priestley House (Green) - Mr. C. T. Priestley;
 * College House (Yellow )

Curriculum
Before the 2009–2010 academic year, as a local school in Hong Kong, the college had been providing three years of junior secondary, two years of senior secondary and two years of matriculation education under the English 3223 education system.

After the educational system reform was launched by the government, the college has started providing three years of senior secondary education from Form 4 since the 2009–2010 academic year under the New Senior Secondary 334 Scheme. Meanwhile, the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme (IBDP) had also commenced in the academic year of 2014–2015. The IBDP is a two-year curriculum and is monitored under the International Baccalaureate Organization rather than the Education Bureau of Hong Kong. Since IBDP is two years long, the college will provide a one-year IBDP bridging course to help student adapt to the essay and discussion emphasized IBDP education mode.

Publications
Many different publications are made by the college, including:
 * Official School Magazine
 * Chimes (鐘聲) (Biennially or triennially published since 1909 ) (Published in years ending in 2, 4, 7 and 9)
 * Student Magazine
 * E (biannually published since 2016)
 * Parent-Teacher Association
 * Newsletter (會訊) (Triannually published since 1996 )
 * Students' Association (SA)
 * Choi Choi/Choi Tsz (采茞) (Halted)
 * Stephen's News (提聞) (Quarterly published by SA 2010-2011 (Alpha) in 2010 to 2011)
 * Paper Two Pieces (紙兩張) (Quarterly published by SA 2011-2012 (SOAR) in 2011 to 2012)
 * Echo (回聲) (Semi-annually published by SA 2012-2013 (ECHO) in 2012 to 2013)
 * Chinese Society
 * 思藻 (Quarterly published since 2010)
 * English Society
 * St Stephen's College Times (Semi-annually published since 2008)
 * Mathematics Society
 * Mathematics Challengers Paper (2010 to 2011)
 * Music Society
 * MUSO Monthly (2012)

Preparatory school
St. Stephen's College Preparatory School is the preparatory primary school of St Stephen's College. St. Stephen's College Preparatory School was founded in 1938 with only one building for classrooms, boarding house and dining hall. During the Second World War, the preparatory school was used for guard quarter by the Japanese. The preparatory school re-opened in 1947, with a new building. Another building of dormitory was built in the 1950s. The preparatory school has started to give boarding places for girls in the 1960s. The preparatory school has 21 classes of more than 600 students.

Filming of TV shows and movies
St Stephen's College was used for filming advertisements, TV shows, movies and MVs.

TV shows

 * Shine On You (TVB Drama, 2004)
 * HK ARTchitecture (《香港築跡》) (TVB Documentary, 2010)
 * (《保育好風光》) (RoadShow Documentary, 2012)
 * Pleasure & Leisure (《都市閒情》) (TVB Show, 2013)
 * Hong Kong Stories (《香港故事 - 百年樹人》(Episode 24 of Hong Kong Stories))(RTHK Documentary, 2013)

Movies

 * 失業生 (1982)
 * Whatever Will Be, Will Be (1995)
 * 天作之盒 (2004, 2006)
 * Echoes of the Rainbow (Mei Ah Entertainment, 2010)
 * Sara (2015)

Politics

 * Fu Bingchang (傅秉常), Nationalist Chinese and Taiwanese politician.
 * Hon. Chee-chen Tung (董建成), SBS, JP - member of the College Council of St Stephen's College, chairman and chief executive of Oriental Overseas International Limited, independent non-executive director of Cathay Pacific; younger brother of the first chief executive of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Tung Chee Hwa, GBM who is a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference and vice-president of Olympic Council of Asia.
 * Timothy Fok Tsun-ting (霍震霆), GBS, SBS, JP - former member of the Legislative Council of Hong Kong, member of the International Olympic Committee, chairman of the Sports Federation & Olympic Committee of Hong Kong, China, son to the vice-chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference of the China Dr. Henry Fok Ying-tung.
 * The Hon. Albert Chan Wai-yip (陳偉業) - member of the Legislative Council of Hong Kong (New Territories West).
 * Erica Yuen Mi-ming (袁彌明) - chairlady of People Power, participated in the 2012 Legislative Council Election and gained enough votes for Raymond Chan (Slow Beat), who ranks at the top of the list, for being elected.
 * Bhichai Rattakul - former deputy Prime Minister of Thailand.

Business

 * Dr. Raymond Chi'ien Kuo Fung (錢果豐), GBS, CBE, JP - non-executive chairman of MTR, chairman of Hang Seng Bank, director of HSBC, director of The Wharf Ltd., chairman of CDC Corporation, chairman of the college Council of St Stephen's College.
 * Peter Woo Kwong-ching (吳光正), GBM, GBS, JP - chairman of Wheelock and Company Limited, chairman of The Wharf Holdings Limited.
 * Raymond Chow Man-Wai (鄒文懷), OBE, GBS - founder of Golden Harvest.
 * Richard Eng (伍經衡) - founder, shareholder of and teacher at the large-scale tutorial school Beacon College (遵理學校); brother of artiste Christine Ng Wing-mei (伍詠薇).
 * Sir Sik-nin Chau (周錫年爵士) CBE, JP - first Chinese doctor of ear, nose and throat in Hong Kong, ex-senior unofficial member of Legislative Council and Executive Council, ex-chairman of Kowloon Motor Bus, ex-chairman of Dairy Farm, ex-chairman of Federation of Hong Kong Industries, ex-chairman of HKTDC; brother of another alumnus Tsun-nin Chau.
 * Sir Tsun-nin Chau (周埈年爵士) CBE, JP - former chairman of Canton Trust and Commercial Bank, former unofficial member of the Executive Council of Hong Kong, former unofficial member of the Legislative Council of Hong Kong; brother of another alumnus Sik-nin Chau.

Entertainment

 * Erica Yuen Mi-ming (袁彌明), politician, actress, and presenter
 * Sammy Leung (森美), actor and radio presenter
 * Ellen Wong (王愛倫) - second runner-up in the 1985 Miss Hong Kong Pageant.
 * Brian Tse Lap-man (謝立文), writer
 * Henick Chou (周漢寧), actor

Sports

 * Ip Man (葉問) - martial arts Wing Chun master, martial arts teacher of Bruce Lee, attended school in 1917 at the age of 18.
 * Kin-yee Wan - track and field sprint athlete who competes internationally for Hong Kong, 6 record breaker of Hong Kong; wife of another alumnus Kwok-wai Pak.
 * Royden Lam - professional dart player in Hong Kong, winner of various international dart cups.

title: St Stephen's College (Hong Kong)


text:
HMS Nelson (28)

HMS Nelson (pennant number: 28) was the name ship of her class of two battleships built for the Royal Navy in the 1920s. They were the first battleships built to meet the limitations of the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922. Entering service in 1927, the ship spent her peacetime career with the Atlantic and Home Fleets, usually as the fleet flagship. During the early stages of World War II, she searched for German commerce raiders, missed participating in the Norwegian Campaign after she was badly damaged by a mine in late 1939, and escorted convoys in the Atlantic Ocean.

In mid-1941 Nelson escorted several convoys to Malta before being torpedoed in September. After repairs she resumed doing so before supporting the British invasion of French Algeria during Operation Torch in late 1942. The ship covered the invasions of Sicily (Operation Husky) and Italy (Operation Avalanche) in mid-1943 while bombarding coastal defences during Operation Baytown. During the Normandy landings in June 1944, Nelson provided naval gunfire support before she struck a mine and spent the rest of the year under repair. The ship was transferred to the Eastern Fleet in mid-1945 and returned home a few months after the Japanese surrender in September to serve as the flagship of the Home Fleet. She became a training ship in early 1946 and was reduced to reserve in late 1947. Nelson was scrapped two years later after being used as a target for bomb tests.

Background and description
The Nelson-class battleship was essentially a smaller, 23 kn battleship version of the G3 battlecruiser which had been cancelled for exceeding the constraints of the 1922 Washington Naval Treaty. The design, which had been approved six months after the treaty was signed, had a main armament of 16 in guns to match the firepower of the American Colorado-class battleship and Japanese Nagato-class battleshipes in the battleline in a ship displacing no more than 35000 LT.

Nelson had a length between perpendiculars of 660 ft and an overall length of 709 ft, a beam of 106 ft, and a draught of 30 ft at mean standard load. She displaced 33300 LT at standard load and 37780 LT at deep load. Her crew numbered 1,361 officers and ratings when serving as a flagship and 1,314 as a private ship. The ship was powered by two sets of Brown-Curtis geared steam turbines, each driving one shaft, using steam from eight Admiralty 3-drum boilers. The turbines were rated at 45000 shp and intended to give the ship a maximum speed of 23 knots. During her sea trials on 26 May 1927, Nelson reached a top speed of 23.6 kn from 46031 shp. The ship carried enough fuel oil to give her a range of 7000 nmi at a cruising speed of 16 kn.

Armament and fire control
The main battery of the Nelson-class ships consisted of nine breech-loading (BL) 16-inch guns in three turrets forward of the superstructure. Designated 'A', 'B' and 'C' from front to rear, 'B' turret superfired over the others. Their secondary armament consisted of a dozen BL 6 in Mk XXII guns in twin-gun turrets aft of the superstructure, three turrets on each broadside. Their anti-aircraft (AA) armament consisted of six quick-firing (QF) 4.7 in Mk VIII guns in unshielded single mounts and eight QF 2-pounder (40 mm) guns in single mounts. The ships were fitted with two submerged 24.5-inch (622 mm) torpedo tubes, one on each broadside, angled 10° off the centreline.

The Nelsons were built with two director-control towers fitted with 15 ft rangefinders to control the main guns. One was mounted above the bridge and the other was at the aft end of the superstructure. Each turret was also fitted with a 41 ft rangefinder. A back-up director for the main armament was positioned on the roof of the conning tower in an armoured hood. The secondary armament was controlled by four directors equipped with 12 ft rangefinders. One pair were mounted on each side of the main director on the bridge roof and the others were abreast the aft main director. The anti-aircraft directors were situated on a tower abaft the main-armament director with a 12-foot high-angle rangefinder in the middle of the tower. A pair of torpedo-control directors with 15-foot rangefinders were positioned abreast the funnel.

Protection
The ships' waterline belt consisted of Krupp cemented armour (KC) that was 14 in thick between the main gun barbettes and thinned to 13 in over the engine and boiler rooms as well as the six-inch magazines, but did not reach either the bow or the stern. To improve its ability to deflect plunging fire, its upper edge was inclined 18° outward. The ends of the armoured citadel were closed off by transverse bulkheads of non-cemented armour 8 and 12 in thick at the forward end and 4 and 10 in thick at the aft end. The faces of the main-gun turrets were protected by 16-inch of KC armour while the turret sides were 9 to 11 in thick and the roof armour plates measured 7.25 in in thickness. The KC armour of the barbettes ranged in thickness from 12 to 15 in.

The top of the armoured citadel of the Nelson-class ships was protected by an armoured deck that rested on the top of the belt armour. Its non-cemented armour plates ranged in thickness from 6.25 in over the main-gun magazines to 3.75 in over the propulsion machinery spaces and the secondary magazines. Aft of the citadel was an armoured deck 4.25 in thick at the level of the lower edge of the belt armour that extended almost to the end of the stern to cover the steering gear. The conning tower's KC armour was 12 to 14 in thick with a 6.5 in roof. The secondary-gun turrets were protected by 1 - 1.5 in of non-cemented armour.

Underwater protection for the Nelsons was provided by a double bottom 5 ft deep and a torpedo protection system. It consisted of an empty outer watertight compartment and an inner water-filled compartment. They had a total depth of 12 ft and were backed by a torpedo bulkhead 1.5 inches thick.

Modifications
The high-angle directors and rangefinder and their platform were replaced by a new circular platform for the High Angle Control System (HACS) Mk I director in May–June 1930. By March 1934, the single two-pounder guns and the starboard torpedo director were removed and replaced by a single octuple two-pounder "pom-pom" mount on the starboard side of the funnel. It was provided with a Mk I director mounted on the bridge roof. In 1934–1935, Nelson was fitted with a pair of quadruple mounts for Vickers 0.5 in anti-aircraft machine guns that were positioned on the forward superstructure. The ship was also fitted with a crane to handle a Supermarine Seagull biplane amphibian aircraft carried for test purposes; the crane was retained after the end of the trials. Sometime in 1936–1937, she received her portside "pom-pom" and its director. In addition gun shields were fitted to the 4.7-inch guns although they were removed by March 1938. During her refit from June 1937 to January 1938, Nelson had her high-angle director tower reinforced and enlarged to accommodate a pair of HACS Mk III directors and new non-cemented deck armour was installed. Like the aft deck armour, it was at the level of the bottom of the armour belt, and extended forward from the front of the citadel almost to the bow; ranging in thickness from 4 in close to the citadel to 2.5 in near the bow.

While under repair from January–August 1940 after being mined in December 1939, Nelson had her aft 6-inch directors replaced by a pair of octuple 2-pounder "pom-pom" mounts and another was added on the quarterdeck. She was also fitted with a Type 279 early-warning radar. Gun shields were reinstalled on the 4.7-inch guns and a pair of four 20-tube 7 in UP rocket launchers were mounted on the roofs of 'B' and 'C' turrets. These changes increased the size of her crew to 1,452.

During her repairs after being torpedoed in October 1941, Nelson had her torpedo tubes and UP rocket launchers removed and an octuple 2-pounder "pom-pom" mount was installed on the roof of 'B' turret. A pair of 20 mm Oerlikon AA guns were installed on the roof of 'C' turret and eleven more were mounted in various places on the superstructure; all of which were in single mounts. The existing "pom-pom" directors were replaced by Mk III models and three additional directors were fitted. Each of these directors was equipped with a Type 282 gunnery radar. The HACS directors received Type 285 gunnery radars while the forward main-armament director was fitted with a Type 284 gunnery radar. The ship was also equipped with a Type 273 surface-search radar and four Type 283 radars for using the 16- and 6-inch guns in barrage (anti-aircraft) fire. Another Oerlikon gun was added to the roof of 'C' turret during a refit in September–October 1942. The 0.5-inch Vickers machine guns were removed and 26 single Oerlikon guns were added in May–June 1943; five of which were on the roof of 'C' turret and the other were mounted on the deck and the superstructure.

While refitting in the United States in late 1944 to prepare her for operations in the Pacific Ocean, her anti-aircraft armament was augmented with 21 more Oerlikon guns for a total of 61 weapons. The back-up director and its armoured hood were replaced by a new platform for a pair of quadruple mounts for 40 mm Bofors AA guns; another pair of quadruple mounts were added abaft the funnel. Most of the "pom-pom" directors were replaced by four Mk 51 directors for the Bofors guns. These additions increased the ship's deep displacement to 44054 LT and her crew to 1,631–1,650 men.

Construction and career
Nelson, named after Vice-Admiral Horatio Nelson, was the third ship of her name to serve in the Royal Navy. She was laid down on 28 December 1922 as part of the 1922 Naval Programme at Armstrong Whitworth's Low Walker shipyard in North Tyneside, Newcastle upon Tyne and was launched on 3 September 1925. After completing her preliminary sea trials, she was commissioned on 15 August 1927 at a cost of £7,504,055. The Nelson-class ships received several nicknames: Nelsol and Rodnol after the Royal Fleet Auxiliary oil tankers with a prominent amidships superstructure and names ending in "ol", The Queen's Mansions after a resemblance between her superstructure and the Queen Anne's Mansions block of flats, the pair of boots, the ugly sisters and the Cherry Tree class as they were cut down by the Washington Naval Treaty. Nelson's trials resumed after she was formally commissioned and continued in October; the ship entered service on 21 October as the flagship of the Atlantic Fleet (renamed as Home Fleet in March 1932) and remained so, aside from refits or repairs, until 1 April 1941. Prince George, the fourth son of King George V and Queen Mary, served aboard her as a lieutenant on the Admiral's staff until his transfer to the light cruiser HMS Durban in 1928. In April 1928, the ship hosted King Amanullah of Afghanistan during exercises off Portland.

On 29 March 1931, she collided with the steamship SS West Wales, of Cardiff, Wales, in foggy conditions off Cape Gilano, Spain, although neither vessel was badly damaged. Nelson's damage was repaired in July. In mid-September, the crew of Nelson took part in the Invergordon Mutiny when they refused orders to go to sea for an exercise, although they relented after several days when the Admiralty reduced the severity of the pay cuts that prompted the mutiny. On 12 January 1934, she ran aground on Hamilton's Shoal, just off Southsea, as she was about to depart with the Home Fleet for the spring cruise in the West Indies. After removing some supplies and equipment, the ship floated off during the next high tide, undamaged. The subsequent investigation did not find any of the ship's officers at fault, attributing the incident to her poor handling at low speed. Nelson participated in King George V's Silver Jubilee Fleet Review in Spithead on 16 July 1935 and then King George VI's Coronation Fleet Review on 20 May 1937. After a lengthy refit later that year, the ship visited Lisbon, Portugal, together with her sister HMS Rodney (29) in February 1938.

Second World War
When Great Britain declared war on Germany, on 3 September 1939, Nelson and the bulk of the Home Fleet were unsuccessfully patrolling the waters between Iceland, Norway and Scotland for German blockade runners and then did much the same off the Norwegian coast from 6–10 September. On 25–26 September, she helped to cover the salvage and rescue operations of the damaged submarine HMS Spearfish (69S). A month later, the ship covered an iron ore convoy from Narvik, Norway. On 30 October, Nelson was unsuccessfully attacked by the GS U-56 (1938) near the Orkney Islands and was hit by two of the three torpedoes fired at a range of 870 yd, none of which exploded. After the sinking of the armed merchant cruiser HMS Rawalpindi off the coast of Iceland on 23 November by the German battleships GERMAN BATTLESHIP Scharnhorst and GERMAN BATTLESHIP Gneisenau, Nelson and her sister participated in the futile pursuit of them. On 4 December 1939, she detonated a magnetic mine (laid by GS U-31 (1936)) at the entrance to Loch Ewe on the Scottish coast and was under repair in HM Dockyard, Portsmouth, until August 1940. The mine blew a 10 by hole in the hull forward of 'A' turret which flooded the torpedo compartment and some adjacent compartments. The flooding caused a small list and caused the ship to trim down by the bow. No one was killed, but 74 sailors were wounded.

After returning to service in August, Nelson, Rodney and the battlecruiser HMS Hood (51) were transferred from Scapa Flow to Rosyth, Scotland, in case of invasion. When the signal from the armed merchant cruiser HMS Jervis Bay that she was being attacked by the German heavy cruiser GERMAN CRUISER Admiral Scheer on 5 November was received by the Admiralty, Nelson and Rodney were deployed to block the gap between Iceland and the Faroe Islands, although Admiral Scheer headed for the South Atlantic afterwards. When the Admiralty learned that Gneisenau and Scharnhorst were attempting to break out into the North Atlantic to resume commerce raiding operations, Nelson, Rodney and the battlecruiser HMS Renown (1916) were ordered on 25 January 1941 to assume a position south of Iceland where they could intercept them. After spotting a pair of British cruisers on 28 January, the German ships turned away and were not pursued.

Nelson became a private ship on 1 April and she was detached to escort Convoy WS.7 from the UK to South Africa, visiting Freetown, Sierra Leone, on the 4th. On the return voyage, she and the aircraft carrier HMS Eagle (1918) passed the GERMAN AUXILIARY CRUISER Atlantis at a range of 7000 m during the night of 18 May in the South Atlantic without spotting the German ship. After the Battle of the Denmark Strait on 24 May, the GERMAN BATTLESHIP Bismarck was spotted two days later heading for France and Nelson and Eagle were ordered to join the pursuit from their position north of Freetown. Bismarck was sunk the following day well before Nelson and her consort could reach her. On 1 June, the battleship was assigned to escort Convoy SL.75 to the UK. After the German supply ship Gonzenheim was able to evade the armed merchant cruiser HMS Esperance Bay on 4 June, Nelson was detached to intercept the German ship, which was scuttled by her crew when they spotted Nelson approaching later that day. After arriving in the UK, the ship rejoined the Home Fleet.

Mediterranean service
On 11 July, the ship was assigned to escort Convoy WS.9C that consisted of merchantmen that were to pass into the Mediterranean to deliver troops and supplies to Malta. Once they passed Gibraltar, the escorts were designated as Force X and they were to be reinforced by Force H while in the Western Mediterranean. The ships entered the Mediterranean on the night of 20/21 July and they were attacked by Italian aircraft beginning on the morning of the 23rd. Nelson was not engaged and joined Force H later that day as the merchantmen and their escort continued onwards to Malta. The cruisers from Force X rejoined them two days later and the combined force arrived back in Gibraltar on 27 July. On 31 July–4 August, Force H provided distant cover to another convoy to Malta (Operation Style). Vice-Admiral James Somerville, commander of Force H, transferred his flag to Nelson on 8 August. Several weeks later, the ship participated in Operation Mincemeat, during which Force H escorted a minelayer to Livorno to lay its mines while HMS Ark Royal (91)'s aircraft attacked Northern Sardinia as a diversion. On 13 September, Force H escorted Ark Royal and the aircraft carrier HMS Furious (47) into the Western Mediterranean as they flew off 45 Hawker Hurricane fighters to Malta.

As part of a deception operation when Operation Halberd, another mission to convey troops and supplies to Malta, began on 24 September, Somerville's flag was transferred to Rodney while Nelson and some escorting destroyers departed Gibraltar heading westwards as if the former ship had relieved the latter. Rodney and the rest of Force H headed eastwards with Nelson and her escorts joining the main body during the night. The British were spotted the following morning and attacked by Regia Aeronautica (Royal Italian Air Force) aircraft the next day. A Savoia-Marchetti SM.84 torpedo bomber penetrated the screen and dropped a torpedo at a range of 450 yd. It blew a 30 by hole in the bow, wrecked the torpedo compartment and caused extensive flooding; there were no casualties amongst the crew. Although she was down at the bow by 8 ft and ultimately limited to a speed of 12 kn to reduce the pressure on her bulkheads, Nelson remained with the fleet to so that the Italians would not know that she had been damaged. After emergency repairs were made in Gibraltar, the ship proceeded to Rosyth where she was under repair until May 1942.

Nelson was assigned to the Eastern Fleet after she finished working up and departed 31 May, escorting Convoy WS.19P from the Clyde to Freetown and its continuation WS.19PF to Durban, South Africa, en route. She was recalled on 26 June to participate in Operation Pedestal, a major effort to resupply Malta. Reaching Scapa Flow exactly a month later, she became the flagship of Vice-Admiral Edward Syfret, commander of the operation, the following day. The convoy departed the Clyde on 3 August and conducted training before passing through the Strait of Gibraltar on the night of 9/10 August. The convoy was spotted later that morning and the Axis attacks began the following day with the sinking of Eagle by a German submarine. Despite repeated attacks by Axis aircraft and submarines, Nelson was not damaged and made no claims to have shot down any aircraft before the convoy's capital ships turned back before reaching the Skerki Banks between Sicily and Tunisia late in the day on the 12th. The ship returned to Scapa Flow afterwards.

She was transferred to Force H in October to support Operation Torch, departing on the 30th and she arrived in Gibraltar on 6 November. Two days later, Force H provided cover against any interference by the Regia Marina for the invading forces in the Mediterranean as they began their landings. Syfret, now commander of Force H, hoisted his flag aboard Nelson on 15 November. Force H covered a troop convoy from Gibraltar to Algiers, French Algeria, in January 1943. Syfret temporarily transferred his flag to the battleship HMS King George V (41) in May as Nelson returned to Scapa Flow to train for Operation Husky, the invasion of Sicily. The ship departed Scapa on 17 June and arrived at Gibraltar on the 23rd.

1943–1949
On 9 July, Force H, with Nelson, Rodney and the carrier HMS Indomitable (92), rendezvoused in the Gulf of Sirte with the battleships HMS Warspite (03), HMS Valiant (1914) and the carrier HMS Formidable (67) coming from Alexandria, Egypt to form the covering force for the invasion. The following day, they began patrolling in the Ionian Sea to deter any attempt by the Regia Marina to interfere with the landings in Sicily. On 31 August, Nelson and Rodney bombarded coastal artillery positions between Reggio Calabria and Pessaro in preparation for Operation Baytown, the amphibious invasion of Calabria, Italy. The sisters covered the amphibious landings at Salerno (Operation Avalanche) on 9 September with Nelson using her main guns in "barrage" mode to deter attacking German torpedo bombers. The Italian armistice was signed between General Dwight Eisenhower and Marshal Pietro Badoglio aboard the ship on 29 September.

Nelson departed Gibraltar on 31 October for England to rejoin the Home Fleet. She provided naval gunfire support during the Normandy landings in June 1944, but was badly damaged after hitting two mines on the 18th. Temporarily repaired in Portsmouth, the ship was sent to the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard in the United States on 22 June for repairs. She returned to Britain in January 1945 and was then assigned to the Eastern Fleet, arriving in Colombo, Ceylon, on 9 July. The ship became the fleet flagship three days later. Nelson was used on the western coast of the Malayan Peninsula for three months, taking part in Operation Livery. The Japanese forces there formally surrendered aboard her at George Town, Penang, on 2 September 1945. Ten days later, the ship was present when the Japanese forces in all of South-east Asia surrendered in Singapore.

Nelson was relieved as flagship on 20 September and departed for home on 13 October. She arrived at Portsmouth on 17 November and became the flagship of the Home Fleet a week later. King George V replaced her as flagship on 9 April 1946 and Nelson became a training ship in July. When the Training Squadron was formed on 14 August, the ship became flagship of the Rear-Admiral that commanded the training battleships. She was relieved as flagship by the battleship HMS Anson (79) in October and became a private ship. Nelson was slightly damaged by a collision with the submarine HMS Sceptre (P215) in Portland on 15 April 1947. The ship was placed in reserve on 20 October 1947 at Rosyth and was listed for disposal on 19 May 1948. From 4 June to 23 September, she was used as a target ship for 2000 lb armour-piercing aerial bombs to evaluate their ability to penetrate the ship's armoured deck. Nelson was turned over to the British Iron & Steel Corporation on 5 January 1949 and was allocated to Thos. W. Ward for scrapping. The ship arrived at Inverkeithing on 15 March to begin demolition.

title: HMS Nelson (28)