text:
Congaree National Park

Congaree National Park is a 26692.6 acre American national park in central South Carolina, 18 miles southeast of the state capital, Columbia. The park preserves the largest tract of old growth bottomland hardwood forest left in the United States. The lush trees growing in its floodplain forest are some of the tallest in the eastern United States, forming one of the highest temperate deciduous forest canopies remaining in the world. The Congaree River flows through the park. About 15,000 acres are designated as a wilderness area.

The park received its official designation in 2003 as the culmination of a grassroots campaign that began in 1969. With 145,929 visitors in 2018, it ranks as the United States' 10th-least visited national park, just behind Nevada's Great Basin National Park.

Pre-park
Resource extraction on the Congaree River centered on cypress logging from 1898 when the Santee River Cypress Logging Company began to operate in the area of what is now the park. Owned by Francis Beidler and Benjamin F. Ferguson of Chicago, the company operated until 1914; subsequently, Beidler and his heirs retained ownership of the area. In the 1950s Harry R. E. Hampton was a member of the Cedar Creek Hunt Club and co-editor of The State. Hampton joined with Peter Manigault at the Charleston The Post and Courier to advocate preservation of the Congaree floodplain. Hampton formed the Beidler Forest Preservation Association in 1961. As a result of this advocacy a 1963 study by the National Park Service reported favorably on the establishment of a national monument.

Monument establishment
No progress was made in the 1960s. Renewed logging by the Beidlers in 1969 prompted the 1972 formation of the Congaree Swamp National Preserve Association (CSNPA). The CSNPA joined forces with the Sierra Club and other conservation organizations to promote federal legislation to preserve the tract. South Carolina Senators Strom Thurmond and Ernest F. Hollings introduced legislation in 1975 for the establishment of a national preserve. On October 18, 1976, legislation was passed to create Congaree Swamp National Monument. An expansion plan was introduced by Hollings and Thurmond in 1988, expanding the monument to 22200 acre.

Conversion to a national park
Over two-thirds of the national monument was designated a wilderness area on October 24, 1988, and it became an Important Bird Area on July 26, 2001. Congress redesignated the monument Congaree National Park on November 10, 2003, dropping the misleading "swamp" from the name, and simultaneously expanded its authorized boundary by approximately 4,576 acre. As of December 31, 2011, approximately 26,021 acre of the park are in federal ownership.

Environment
The park preserves a significant part of the Middle Atlantic coastal forests ecoregion. Although it is frequently referred to as a swamp, it is largely bottomland subject to periodic inundation by floodwaters.

It has been designated an old growth forest and part of the Old Growth Forest Network. The park also has one of the largest concentrations of champion trees in the world, with the tallest known examples of 15 species. Champion trees include a 167 ft 361-point loblolly pine, a 157 ft 384-point sweetgum, a 154 ft 465-point cherrybark oak, a 135 ft 354-point American elm, a 133 ft 356-point swamp chestnut oak, a 131 ft 371-point overcup oak, and a 127 ft 219-point common persimmon.

Large animals possibly seen in the park include bobcats, deer, feral pigs, feral dogs, coyotes, armadillos, turkeys, and otters. Its waters contain interesting creatures like amphibians, turtles, snakes, and many types of fish, including bowfin, alligator gar, and catfish.

Amenities and attractions
In addition to being a designated wilderness area, a UNESCO biosphere reserve, an important bird area and a national natural landmark, Congaree National Park features primitive campsites and offers hiking, canoeing, kayaking, and bird watching. The park is also a popular spot for watching firefly displays on summer evenings. Primitive and backcountry camping are available. Some of the hiking trails include the Bluff Trail (0.7 mi), Weston Lake Loop Trail (4.6 mi), Oakridge Trail (7.5 mi), and King Snake Trail (11.1 mi) where hikers may spot deer, raccoon, opossum, and even bobcat tracks. The National Park Service rangers have current trail conditions which can be found in the Harry Hampton Visitor Center. Along with hiking trails, the park also has a 20 mi marked canoe trail on Cedar Creek.

Most visitors to the park walk along the Boardwalk Loop, an elevated 2.4 mi walkway through the swampy environment that protects delicate fungi and plant life at ground level. Congaree boasts both the tallest (169 ft) and largest (42 cubic meters) loblolly pines (Pinus taeda) alive today as well as several cypress trees well over 500 years old. The Harry Hampton Visitor Center features exhibits about the natural history of the park, and the efforts to protect the swamp.

Monthly volunteer-led hikes are offered on some of the longer trails to give visitors an opportunity to get off the boardwalk and up close to nature.

Climate
According to the Köppen climate classification system, Congaree National Park has a Humid subtropical climate (Cfa).

Geology
The park resides entirely within the Congaree River Floodplain Complex with flood deposits of sand, silt, and clay. Muck and peat are the products of vegetation decay. The meander of the river has produced distinctive oxbow lakes. North of the park is the NE-SW regional trending Augusta Fault and the Terrace Complex consisting of Pliocene fluvial terraces. South of the park is the Southern Bluffs, which have been eroding since the Late Pleistocene. West of the park is the Fall Line and Piedmont.

Documentary
In 2008, South Carolina Educational Television (SCETV) produced a documentary on the history of the Congaree National Park titled Roots in the River: The Story of Congaree National Park. The documentary featured interviews with people involved in the movement that eventually led to the area's U.S. National Monument status, and observed the role the park plays in the surrounding community of the Lower Richland County area of South Carolina. The program first aired on the SCETV network in September 2009.

title: Congaree National Park


text:
User:Maho~enwiki

Maho's Page

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

title: User:Maho~enwiki


text:
Feud (professional wrestling)

In professional wrestling, a feud is a staged rivalry between multiple wrestlers or groups of wrestlers. They are integrated into ongoing storylines, particularly in events which are televised. Feuds may last for months or even years; conversely, they may be resolved with implausible speed, perhaps during a single match. WWE's terminology discouraged the use of the term along with the word "war".

Definition
Feuds are often the result of the friction that is created between faces (the heroic figures) and heels (the malevolent, "evil" participants). Common causes of feuds are a purported slight or insult, although they can be based on many other things, including conflicting moral codes or simple professional one-upmanship such as the pursuit of a championship. Some of the more popular feuds with audiences involve pitting former allies, particularly tag team partners, against each other. Depending on how popular and entertaining the feud may be, it is usually common practice for a feud to continue on for weeks, usually building toward a match in a supercard.

Due to the complexity of modern wrestling storylines, some feuds lack the traditional ‘face vs. heel’ narrative. Many feuds take place between two faces, while some involve characters that don’t fit either traditional role, often called tweeners. Feuds between two heels are rare, but may take place, especially if one or more of the wrestlers in the feud are particularly popular with fans.

One of the longest feuds of all time was the feud between Ric Flair and Ricky Steamboat, estimated by Flair to comprise more than 2,000 matches, though he admits that most of those matches were "confined to those in the arena".

Traditionally, most promoters wanted to "protect the business" by having wrestlers act in character in public, and thus further convince the live audience that the feuding wrestlers really did hate each other and were looking to outdo each other. During the days when wrestling territories were more regionally based, some feuds lasted for years, and if the feuding wrestlers were shown to really be friends, or were associating as friends in public, it would break the illusion of their feud, and undo all the work to promote it up to that point.

title: Feud (professional wrestling)


text:
Agile software development

Agile software development is an umbrella term for approaches to developing software that reflect the values and principles agreed upon by The Agile Alliance, a group of 17 software practitioners in 2001. As documented in their Manifesto for Agile Software Development the practitioners value:

 * Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
 * Working software over comprehensive documentation
 * Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
 * Responding to change over following a plan

The practitioners cite inspiration from new practices at the time including extreme programming, scrum, dynamic systems development method, adaptive software development and being sympathetic to the need for an alternative to documentation driven, heavyweight software development processes.

Many software development practices emerged from the agile mindset. These agile-based practices, sometimes called Agile (with a capital A) include requirements, discovery and solutions improvement through the collaborative effort of self-organizing and cross-functional teams with their customer(s)/end user(s).

While there is much anecdotal evidence that the agile mindset and agile-based practices improve the software development process, the empirical evidence is limited and less than conclusive.

History
Iterative and incremental software development methods can be traced back as early as 1957, with evolutionary project management and adaptive software development emerging in the early 1970s.

During the 1990s, a number of lightweight software development methods evolved in reaction to the prevailing heavyweight methods (often referred to collectively as waterfall) that critics described as overly regulated, planned, and micromanaged. These lightweight methods included: rapid application development (RAD), from 1991; the unified process (UP) and dynamic systems development method (DSDM), both from 1994; Scrum, from 1995; Crystal Clear and extreme programming (XP), both from 1996; and feature-driven development (FDD), from 1997. Although these all originated before the publication of the Agile Manifesto, they are now collectively referred to as agile software development methods.

Already since 1991 similar changes had been underway in manufacturing and management thinking derived from Lean management.

In 2001, seventeen software developers met at a resort in Snowbird, Utah to discuss lightweight development methods. They were: Kent Beck (Extreme Programming), Ward Cunningham (Extreme Programming), Dave Thomas (PragProg, Ruby), Jeff Sutherland (Scrum), Ken Schwaber (Scrum), Jim Highsmith (Adaptive Software Development), Alistair Cockburn (Crystal), Robert C. Martin (SOLID), Mike Beedle (Scrum), Arie van Bennekum, Martin Fowler (OOAD and UML), James Grenning, Andrew Hunt (PragProg, Ruby), Ron Jeffries (Extreme Programming), Jon Kern, Brian Marick (Ruby, TDD), and Steve Mellor (OOA). The group, The Agile Alliance, published the Manifesto for Agile Software Development.

In 2005, a group headed by Cockburn and Highsmith wrote an addendum of project management principles, the PM Declaration of Interdependence, to guide software project management according to agile software development methods.

In 2009, a group working with Martin wrote an extension of software development principles, the Software Craftsmanship Manifesto, to guide agile software development according to professional conduct and mastery.

In 2011, the Agile Alliance created the Guide to Agile Practices (renamed the Agile Glossary in 2016), an evolving open-source compendium of the working definitions of agile practices, terms, and elements, along with interpretations and experience guidelines from the worldwide community of agile practitioners.

Values
The agile manifesto reads:

''We are uncovering better ways of developing software by doing it and helping others do it. Through this work we have come to value:''

That is, while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left more.

Scott Ambler explained:
 * Tools and processes are important, but it is more important to have competent people working together effectively.
 * Good documentation is useful in helping people to understand how the software is built and how to use it, but the main point of development is to create software, not documentation.
 * A contract is important but is no substitute for working closely with customers to discover what they need.
 * A project plan is important, but it must not be too rigid to accommodate changes in technology or the environment, stakeholders' priorities, and people's understanding of the problem and its solution.

Introducing the manifesto on behalf of the Agile Alliance, Jim Highsmith said, "The Agile movement is not anti-methodology, in fact many of us want to restore credibility to the word methodology. We want to restore a balance. We embrace modeling, but not in order to file some diagram in a dusty corporate repository. We embrace documentation, but not hundreds of pages of never-maintained and rarely-used tomes. We plan, but recognize the limits of planning in a turbulent environment. Those who would brand proponents of XP or SCRUM or any of the other Agile Methodologies as 'hackers' are ignorant of both the methodologies and the original definition of the term hacker."

Principles
The values are based on these principles:
 * 1) Customer satisfaction by early and continuous delivery of valuable software.
 * 2) Welcome changing requirements, even in late development.
 * 3) Deliver working software frequently (weeks rather than months).
 * 4) Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers.
 * 5) Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted.
 * 6) Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (co-location).
 * 7) Working software is the primary measure of progress.
 * 8) Sustainable development, able to maintain a constant pace.
 * 9) Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design.
 * 10) Simplicity—the art of maximizing the amount of work not done—is essential.
 * 11) Best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams.
 * 12) Regularly, the team reflects on how to become more effective, and adjusts accordingly.

Iterative, incremental, and evolutionary
Most agile development methods break product development work into small increments that minimize the amount of up-front planning and design. Iterations, or sprints, are short time frames (timeboxes) that typically last from one to four weeks. Each iteration involves a cross-functional team working in all functions: planning, analysis, design, coding, unit testing, and acceptance testing. At the end of the iteration a working product is demonstrated to stakeholders. This minimizes overall risk and allows the product to adapt to changes quickly. An iteration might not add enough functionality to warrant a market release, but the goal is to have an available release (with minimal bugs) at the end of each iteration. Through incremental development, products have room to "fail often and early" throughout each iterative phase instead of drastically on a final release date. Multiple iterations might be required to release a product or new features. Working software is the primary measure of progress.

A key advantage of agile approaches is speed to market and risk mitigation. Smaller increments are typically released to market, reducing the time and cost risks of engineering a product that doesn't meet user requirements.

Efficient and face-to-face communication
The 6th principle of the agile manifesto for software development states "The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation". The manifesto, written in 2001 when video conferencing was not widely used, states this in relation to the communication of information, not necessarily that a team should be co-located.

The principle of co-location is that co-workers on the same team should be situated together to better establish the identity as a team and to improve communication. This enables face-to-face interaction, ideally in front of a whiteboard, that reduces the cycle time typically taken when questions and answers are mediated through phone, persistent chat, wiki, or email. With the widespread adoption of remote working during the COVID-19 pandemic and changes to tooling, more studies have been conducted around co-location and distributed working which show that co-location is increasingly less relevant.

No matter which development method is followed, every team should include a customer representative (known as product owner in Scrum). This representative is agreed by stakeholders to act on their behalf and makes a personal commitment to being available for developers to answer questions throughout the iteration. At the end of each iteration, the project stakeholders together with the customer representative review progress and re-evaluate priorities with a view to optimizing the return on investment (ROI) and ensuring alignment with customer needs and company goals. The importance of stakeholder satisfaction, detailed by frequent interaction and review at the end of each phase, is why the approach is often denoted as a customer-centered methodology.

Information radiator
In agile software development, an information radiator is a (normally large) physical display, board with sticky notes or similar, located prominently near the development team, where passers-by can see it. It presents an up-to-date summary of the product development status. A build light indicator may also be used to inform a team about the current status of their product development.

Very short feedback loop and adaptation cycle
A common characteristic in agile software development is the daily stand-up (known as daily scrum in the Scrum framework). In a brief session (e.g., 15 minutes), team members review collectively how they are progressing toward their goal and agree whether they need to adapt their approach. To keep to the agreed time limit, teams often use simple coded questions (such as what they completed the previous day, what they aim to complete that day, and whether there are any impediments or risks to progress), and delay detailed discussions and problem resolution until after the stand-up.

Quality focus
Specific tools and techniques, such as continuous integration, automated unit testing, pair programming, test-driven development, design patterns, behavior-driven development, domain-driven design, code refactoring and other techniques are often used to improve quality and enhance product development agility. This is predicated on designing and building quality in from the beginning and being able to demonstrate software for customers at any point, or at least at the end of every iteration.

Philosophy
Compared to traditional software engineering, agile software development mainly targets complex systems and product development with dynamic, indeterministic and non-linear properties. Accurate estimates, stable plans, and predictions are often hard to get in early stages, and confidence in them is likely to be low. Agile practitioners use their free will to reduce the "leap of faith" that is needed before any evidence of value can be obtained. Requirements and design are held to be emergent. Big up-front specifications would probably cause a lot of waste in such cases, i.e., are not economically sound. These basic arguments and previous industry experiences, learned from years of successes and failures, have helped shape agile development's favor of adaptive, iterative and evolutionary development.

Adaptive vs. predictive
Development methods exist on a continuum from adaptive to predictive. Agile software development methods lie on the adaptive side of this continuum. One key of adaptive development methods is a rolling wave approach to schedule planning, which identifies milestones but leaves flexibility in the path to reach them, and also allows for the milestones themselves to change.

Adaptive methods focus on adapting quickly to changing realities. When the needs of a project change, an adaptive team changes as well. An adaptive team has difficulty describing exactly what will happen in the future. The further away a date is, the more vague an adaptive method is about what will happen on that date. An adaptive team cannot report exactly what tasks they will do next week, but only which features they plan for next month. When asked about a release six months from now, an adaptive team might be able to report only the mission statement for the release, or a statement of expected value vs. cost.

Predictive methods, in contrast, focus on analysing and planning the future in detail and cater for known risks. In the extremes, a predictive team can report exactly what features and tasks are planned for the entire length of the development process. Predictive methods rely on effective early phase analysis and if this goes very wrong, the project may have difficulty changing direction. Predictive teams often institute a change control board to ensure they consider only the most valuable changes.

Risk analysis can be used to choose between adaptive (agile or value-driven) and predictive (plan-driven) methods. Barry Boehm and Richard Turner suggest that each side of the continuum has its own home ground, as follows:

Agile vs. waterfall
One of the differences between agile software development methods and waterfall is the approach to quality and testing. In the waterfall model, work moves through software development life cycle (SDLC) phases—with one phase being completed before another can start—hence the testing phase is separate and follows a build phase. In agile software development, however, testing is completed in the same iteration as programming.

Because testing is done in every iteration—which develops a small piece of the software—users can frequently use those new pieces of software and validate the value. After the users know the real value of the updated piece of software, they can make better decisions about the software's future. Having a value retrospective and software re-planning session in each iteration—Scrum typically has iterations of just two weeks—helps the team continuously adapt its plans so as to maximize the value it delivers. This follows a pattern similar to the plan-do-check-act (PDCA) cycle, as the work is planned, done, checked (in the review and retrospective), and any changes agreed are acted upon.

This iterative approach supports a product rather than a project mindset. This provides greater flexibility throughout the development process; whereas on projects the requirements are defined and locked down from the very beginning, making it difficult to change them later. Iterative product development allows the software to evolve in response to changes in business environment or market requirements.

Code vs. documentation
In a letter to IEEE Computer, Steven Rakitin expressed cynicism about agile software development, calling it "yet another attempt to undermine the discipline of software engineering" and translating "working software over comprehensive documentation" as "we want to spend all our time coding. Remember, real programmers don't write documentation."

This is disputed by proponents of agile software development, who state that developers should write documentation if that is the best way to achieve the relevant goals, but that there are often better ways to achieve those goals than writing static documentation. Scott Ambler states that documentation should be "just barely good enough" (JBGE), that too much or comprehensive documentation would usually cause waste, and developers rarely trust detailed documentation because it's usually out of sync with code, while too little documentation may also cause problems for maintenance, communication, learning and knowledge sharing. Alistair Cockburn wrote of the Crystal Clear method: "Crystal considers development a series of co-operative games, and intends that the documentation is enough to help the next win at the next game. The work products for Crystal include use cases, risk list, iteration plan, core domain models, and design notes to inform on choices...however there are no templates for these documents and descriptions are necessarily vague, but the objective is clear, just enough documentation for the next game. I always tend to characterize this to my team as: what would you want to know if you joined the team tomorrow."

Methods
Agile software development methods support a broad range of the software development life cycle. Some methods focus on the practices (e.g., XP, pragmatic programming, agile modeling), while some focus on managing the flow of work (e.g., Scrum, Kanban). Some support activities for requirements specification and development (e.g., FDD), while some seek to cover the full development life cycle (e.g., DSDM, RUP).

Notable agile software development frameworks include:

Agile software development practices
Agile software development is supported by a number of concrete practices, covering areas like requirements, design, modeling, coding, testing, planning, risk management, process, quality, etc. Some notable agile software development practices include:

Method tailoring
In the literature, different terms refer to the notion of method adaptation, including 'method tailoring', 'method fragment adaptation' and 'situational method engineering'. Method tailoring is defined as:

"A process or capability in which human agents determine a system development approach for a specific project situation through responsive changes in, and dynamic interplays between contexts, intentions, and method fragments."

Situation-appropriateness should be considered as a distinguishing characteristic between agile methods and more plan-driven software development methods, with agile methods allowing product development teams to adapt working practices according to the needs of individual products. Potentially, most agile methods could be suitable for method tailoring, such as DSDM tailored in a CMM context. and XP tailored with the Rule Description Practices (RDP) technique. Not all agile proponents agree, however, with Schwaber noting "that is how we got into trouble in the first place, thinking that the problem was not having a perfect methodology. Efforts [should] center on the changes [needed] in the enterprise". Bas Vodde reinforced this viewpoint, suggesting that unlike traditional, large methodologies that require you to pick and choose elements, Scrum provides the basics on top of which you add additional elements to localize and contextualize its use. Practitioners seldom use system development methods, or agile methods specifically, by the book, often choosing to omit or tailor some of the practices of a method in order to create an in-house method.

In practice, methods can be tailored using various tools. Generic process modeling languages such as Unified Modeling Language can be used to tailor software development methods. However, dedicated tools for method engineering such as the Essence Theory of Software Engineering of SEMAT also exist.

Large-scale, offshore and distributed
Agile software development has been widely seen as highly suited to certain types of environments, including small teams of experts working on greenfield projects, and the challenges and limitations encountered in the adoption of agile software development methods in a large organization with legacy infrastructure are well-documented and understood.

In response, a range of strategies and patterns has evolved for overcoming challenges with large-scale development efforts (>20 developers) or distributed (non-colocated) development teams, amongst other challenges; and there are now several recognized frameworks that seek to mitigate or avoid these challenges.

There are many conflicting viewpoints on whether all of these are effective or indeed fit the definition of agile development, and this remains an active and ongoing area of research.

When agile software development is applied in a distributed setting (with teams dispersed across multiple business locations), it is commonly referred to as distributed agile software development. The goal is to leverage the unique benefits offered by each approach. Distributed development allows organizations to build software by strategically setting up teams in different parts of the globe, virtually building software round-the-clock (more commonly referred to as follow-the-sun model). On the other hand, agile development provides increased transparency, continuous feedback, and more flexibility when responding to changes.

Regulated domains
Agile software development methods were initially seen as best suitable for non-critical product developments, thereby excluded from use in regulated domains such as medical devices, pharmaceutical, financial, nuclear systems, automotive, and avionics sectors, etc. However, in the last several years, there have been several initiatives for the adaptation of agile methods for these domains.

There are numerous standards that may apply in regulated domains, including ISO 26262, ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO/IEC 15504. A number of key concerns are of particular importance in regulated domains:

 * Quality assurance (QA): Systematic and inherent quality management underpinning a controlled professional process and reliability and correctness of product.
 * Safety and security: Formal planning and risk management to mitigate safety risks for users and securely protecting users from unintentional and malicious misuse.
 * Traceability: Documentation providing auditable evidence of regulatory compliance and facilitating traceability and investigation of problems.
 * Verification and validation (V&V): Embedded throughout the software development process (e.g. user requirements specification, functional specification, design specification, code review, unit tests, integration tests, system tests).

Experience and adoption
Although agile software development methods can be used with any programming paradigm or language in practice, they were originally closely associated with object-oriented environments such as Smalltalk, Lisp and later Java, C#. The initial adopters of agile methods were usually small to medium-sized teams working on unprecedented systems with requirements that were difficult to finalize and likely to change as the system was being developed. This section describes common problems that organizations encounter when they try to adopt agile software development methods as well as various techniques to measure the quality and performance of agile teams.

Internal assessments
The Agility measurement index, amongst others, rates developments against five dimensions of product development (duration, risk, novelty, effort, and interaction). Other techniques are based on measurable goals and one study suggests that velocity can be used as a metric of agility. There are also agile self-assessments to determine whether a team is using agile software development practices (Nokia test, Karlskrona test, 42 points test).

Public surveys
One of the early studies reporting gains in quality, productivity, and business satisfaction by using agile software developments methods was a survey conducted by Shine Technologies from November 2002 to January 2003.

A similar survey, the State of Agile, is conducted every year starting in 2006 with thousands of participants from around the software development community. This tracks trends on the perceived benefits of agility, lessons learned, and good practices. Each survey has reported increasing numbers saying that agile software development helps them deliver software faster; improves their ability to manage changing customer priorities; and increases their productivity. Surveys have also consistently shown better results with agile product development methods compared to classical project management. In balance, there are reports that some feel that agile development methods are still too young to enable extensive academic research of their success.

Common agile software development pitfalls
Organizations and teams implementing agile software development often face difficulties transitioning from more traditional methods such as waterfall development, such as teams having an agile process forced on them. These are often termed agile anti-patterns or more commonly agile smells. Below are some common examples:

Lack of overall product design
A goal of agile software development is to focus more on producing working software and less on documentation. This is in contrast to waterfall models where the process is often highly controlled and minor changes to the system require significant revision of supporting documentation. However, this does not justify completely doing without any analysis or design at all. Failure to pay attention to design can cause a team to proceed rapidly at first, but then to require significant rework as they attempt to scale up the system. One of the key features of agile software development is that it is iterative. When done correctly, agile software development allows the design to emerge as the system is developed and helps the team discover commonalities and opportunities for re-use.

Adding stories to an iteration in progress
In agile software development, stories (similar to use case descriptions) are typically used to define requirements and an iteration is a short period of time during which the team commits to specific goals. Adding stories to an iteration in progress is detrimental to a good flow of work. These should be added to the product backlog and prioritized for a subsequent iteration or in rare cases the iteration could be cancelled.

This does not mean that a story cannot expand. Teams must deal with new information, which may produce additional tasks for a story. If the new information prevents the story from being completed during the iteration, then it should be carried over to a subsequent iteration. However, it should be prioritized against all remaining stories, as the new information may have changed the story's original priority.

Lack of sponsor support
Agile software development is often implemented as a grassroots effort in organizations by software development teams trying to optimize their development processes and ensure consistency in the software development life cycle. By not having sponsor support, teams may face difficulties and resistance from business partners, other development teams and management. Additionally, they may suffer without appropriate funding and resources. This increases the likelihood of failure.

Insufficient training
A survey performed by VersionOne found respondents cited insufficient training as the most significant cause for failed agile implementations Teams have fallen into the trap of assuming the reduced processes of agile software development compared to other approaches such as waterfall means that there are no actual rules for agile software development.

Product owner role is not properly filled
The product owner is responsible for representing the business in the development activity and is often the most demanding role.

A common mistake is to fill the product owner role with someone from the development team. This requires the team to make its own decisions on prioritization without real feedback from the business. They try to solve business issues internally or delay work as they reach outside the team for direction. This often leads to distraction and a breakdown in collaboration.

Teams are not focused
Agile software development requires teams to meet product commitments, which means they should focus on work for only that product. However, team members who appear to have spare capacity are often expected to take on other work, which makes it difficult for them to help complete the work to which their team had committed.

Excessive preparation/planning
Teams may fall into the trap of spending too much time preparing or planning. This is a common trap for teams less familiar with agile software development where the teams feel obliged to have a complete understanding and specification of all stories. Teams should be prepared to move forward with only those stories in which they have confidence, then during the iteration continue to discover and prepare work for subsequent iterations (often referred to as backlog refinement or grooming).

Problem-solving in the daily standup
A daily standup should be a focused, timely meeting where all team members disseminate information. If problem-solving occurs, it often can involve only certain team members and potentially is not the best use of the entire team's time. If during the daily standup the team starts diving into problem-solving, it should be set aside until a sub-team can discuss, usually immediately after the standup completes.

Assigning tasks
One of the intended benefits of agile software development is to empower the team to make choices, as they are closest to the problem. Additionally, they should make choices as close to implementation as possible, to use more timely information in the decision. If team members are assigned tasks by others or too early in the process, the benefits of localized and timely decision making can be lost.

Being assigned work also constrains team members into certain roles (for example, team member A must always do the database work), which limits opportunities for cross-training. Team members themselves can choose to take on tasks that stretch their abilities and provide cross-training opportunities.

Scrum master as a contributor
In the Scrum framework, which claims to be consistent with agile values and principles, the scrum master role is accountable for ensuring the scrum process is followed and for coaching the scrum team through that process. A common pitfall is for a scrum master to act as a contributor. While not prohibited by the Scrum framework, the scrum master needs to ensure they have the capacity to act in the role of scrum master first and not work on development tasks. A scrum master's role is to facilitate the process rather than create the product.

Having the scrum master also multitasking may result in too many context switches to be productive. Additionally, as a scrum master is responsible for ensuring roadblocks are removed so that the team can make forward progress, the benefit gained by individual tasks moving forward may not outweigh roadblocks that are deferred due to lack of capacity.

Lack of test automation
Due to the iterative nature of agile development, multiple rounds of testing are often needed. Automated testing helps reduce the impact of repeated unit, integration, and regression tests and frees developers and testers to focus on higher value work.

Test automation also supports continued refactoring required by iterative software development. Allowing a developer to quickly run tests to confirm refactoring has not modified the functionality of the application may reduce the workload and increase confidence that cleanup efforts have not introduced new defects.

Allowing technical debt to build up
Focusing on delivering new functionality may result in increased technical debt. The team must allow themselves time for defect remediation and refactoring. Technical debt hinders planning abilities by increasing the amount of unscheduled work as production defects distract the team from further progress.

As the system evolves it is important to refactor. Over time the lack of constant maintenance causes increasing defects and development costs.

Attempting to take on too much in an iteration
A common misconception is that agile software development allows continuous change, however an iteration backlog is an agreement of what work can be completed during an iteration. Having too much work-in-progress (WIP) results in inefficiencies such as context-switching and queueing. The team must avoid feeling pressured into taking on additional work.

Fixed time, resources, scope, and quality
Agile software development fixes time (iteration duration), quality, and ideally resources in advance (though maintaining fixed resources may be difficult if developers are often pulled away from tasks to handle production incidents), while the scope remains variable. The customer or product owner often pushes for a fixed scope for an iteration. However, teams should be reluctant to commit to the locked time, resources and scope (commonly known as the project management triangle). Efforts to add scope to the fixed time and resources of agile software development may result in decreased quality.

Developer burnout
Due to the focused pace and continuous nature of agile practices, there is a heightened risk of burnout among members of the delivery team.

Agile management
Agile project management is an iterative development process, where feedback is continuously gathered from users and stakeholders to create the right user experience. Different methods can be used to perform an agile process, these include scrum, extreme programming, lean and kanban. The term agile management is applied to an iterative, incremental method of managing the design and build activities of engineering, information technology and other business areas that aim to provide new product or service development in a highly flexible and interactive manner, based on the principles expressed in the Manifesto for Agile Software Development. Agile project management metrics help reduce confusion, identify weak points, and measure team's performance throughout the development cycle. Supply chain agility is the ability of a supply chain to cope with uncertainty and variability on offer and demand. An agile supply chain can increase and reduce its capacity rapidly, so it can adapt to a fast-changing customer demand. Finally, strategic agility is the ability of an organisation to change its course of action as its environment is evolving. The key for strategic agility is to recognize external changes early enough and to allocate resources to adapt to these changing environments.

Agile X techniques may also be called extreme project management. It is a variant of iterative life cycle where deliverables are submitted in stages. The main difference between agile and iterative development is that agile methods complete small portions of the deliverables in each delivery cycle (iteration), while iterative methods evolve the entire set of deliverables over time, completing them near the end of the project. Both iterative and agile methods were developed as a reaction to various obstacles that developed in more sequential forms of project organization. For example, as technology projects grow in complexity, end users tend to have difficulty defining the long-term requirements without being able to view progressive prototypes. Projects that develop in iterations can constantly gather feedback to help refine those requirements.

Agile management also offers a simple framework promoting communication and reflection on past work amongst team members. Teams who were using traditional waterfall planning and adopted the agile way of development typically go through a transformation phase and often take help from agile coaches who help guide the teams through a smoother transformation. There are typically two styles of agile coaching: push-based and pull-based agile coaching. Here a "push-system" can refer to an upfront estimation of what tasks can be fitted into a sprint (pushing work) e.g. typical with scrum; whereas a "pull system" can refer to an environment where tasks are only performed when capacity is available. Agile management approaches have also been employed and adapted to the business and government sectors. For example, within the federal government of the United States, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is employing a collaborative project management approach that focuses on incorporating collaborating, learning and adapting (CLA) strategies to iterate and adapt programming.

Agile methods are mentioned in the Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide 6th Edition) under the Product Development Lifecycle definition:

"Within a project life cycle, there are generally one or more phases that are associated with the development of the product, service, or result. These are called a development life cycle (...) Adaptive life cycles are agile, iterative, or incremental. The detailed scope is defined and approved before the start of an iteration. Adaptive life cycles are also referred to as agile or change-driven life cycles."

Applications outside software development
According to Jean-Loup Richet (research fellow at ESSEC Institute for Strategic Innovation & Services) "this approach can be leveraged effectively for non-software products and for project management in general, especially in areas of innovation and uncertainty." The result is a product or project that best meets current customer needs and is delivered with minimal costs, waste, and time, enabling companies to achieve bottom line gains earlier than via traditional approaches.

Agile software development methods have been extensively used for development of software products and some of them use certain characteristics of software, such as object technologies. However, these techniques can be applied to the development of non-software products, such as computers, medical devices, food, clothing, and music. Agile software development methods have been used in non-development IT infrastructure deployments and migrations. Some of the wider principles of agile software development have also found application in general management (e.g., strategy, governance, risk, finance) under the terms business agility or agile business management. Agile software methodologies have also been adopted for use with the learning engineering process, an iterative data-informed process that applies the learning sciences, human-centered design, and data informed decision-making to support learners and their development.

Agile software development paradigms can be used in other areas of life such as raising children. Its success in child development might be founded on some basic management principles; communication, adaptation, and awareness. In a TED Talk, Bruce Feiler shared how he applied basic agile paradigms to household management and raising children.

Criticism
Agile practices have been cited as potentially inefficient in large organizations and certain types of development. Many organizations believe that agile software development methodologies are too extreme and adopt a hybrid approach that mixes elements of agile software development and plan-driven approaches. Some methods, such as dynamic systems development method (DSDM) attempt this in a disciplined way, without sacrificing fundamental principles.

The increasing adoption of agile practices has also been criticized as being a management fad that simply describes existing good practices under new jargon, promotes a one size fits all mindset towards development strategies, and wrongly emphasizes method over results.

Alistair Cockburn organized a celebration of the 10th anniversary of the Manifesto for Agile Software Development in Snowbird, Utah on 12 February 2011, gathering some 30+ people who had been involved at the original meeting and since. A list of about 20 elephants in the room ('undiscussable' agile topics/issues) were collected, including aspects: the alliances, failures and limitations of agile software development practices and context (possible causes: commercial interests, decontextualization, no obvious way to make progress based on failure, limited objective evidence, cognitive biases and reasoning fallacies), politics and culture. As Philippe Kruchten wrote:

"The agile movement is in some ways a bit like a teenager: very self-conscious, checking constantly its appearance in a mirror, accepting few criticisms, only interested in being with its peers, rejecting en bloc all wisdom from the past, just because it is from the past, adopting fads and new jargon, at times cocky and arrogant. But I have no doubts that it will mature further, become more open to the outside world, more reflective, and therefore, more effective."

The "Manifesto" may have had a negative impact on higher education management and leadership, where it suggested to administrators that slower traditional and deliberative processes should be replaced with more "nimble" ones. The concept rarely found acceptance among university faculty.

Another criticism is that in many ways, agile management and traditional management practices end up being in opposition to one another. A common criticism of this practice is that the time spent attempting to learn and implement the practice is too costly, despite potential benefits. A transition from traditional management to agile management requires total submission to agile and a firm commitment from all members of the organization to seeing the process through. Issues like unequal results across the organization, too much change for employees' ability to handle, or a lack of guarantees at the end of the transformation are just a few examples.

title: Agile software development


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dismemberment

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled Dismemberment.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was deletion due to copyright violation.

It's just a dictionary definition and it's not clear that it could ever be more. Also may be a copyright violation. If not, move it to wiktionary?

 * Move to wiktionary. Alcarillo 19:55, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, there's excellent potential for an article here. The...history of dismemberment...uh, dismemberment in cultures around the world...ah, who am I kidding? Move to Wiktionary. Lord Bob 20:07, May 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * You forgot the infinite musical possibilities. For example, "try to dismember that time in September."  Eww.  Move to Wiktionary as patently icky. - Lucky 6.9 21:23, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Copyvio from M-W.com . List on Copyright problems, do not transwiki. -- Cyrius|&#9998 01:10, May 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Listed as copyvio. Article can be rewritten at Dismemberment/Temp or Dismemberment. --Zigger 13:01, 2004 May 7 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate up to the point of deletion and is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the new method of assessing voting, should be placed on other relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Alfred North

Alfred North may refer to:

 * Alfred John North (1855–1917), ornithologist
 * Alfred North (water polo) (1906–1988), British water polo player
 * Alfred North (jurist) (1900–1981), President of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand

title: Alfred North


text:
Talk:Harriet Munroe

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled Harriet Munroe.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to redirect to the correct spelling, Harriet Monroe.

The entry is a tweak, making fun of people who misspell the Poetry editor's name, and yet there is no entry on Harriet Monroe. An article on Monroe is called for (and I will try my hand at it, if no one else does), but the tweak entry is not. User:Geogre
 * Good idea. In the meantime, could you, Geogre, wikify it with a sentence about this person? (I've no idea who she is, otherwise I would). Alcarillo 19:57, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Done, although now I'm going to get on a Poetry Magazine bender, and I will have to make it better than it is now. Geogre
 * Delete unless Harriet Monroe is written. In that case, redirect. -- Cyrius|&#9998 01:07, May 7, 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate up to the point of deletion and is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the new method of assessing voting, should be placed on other relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

title: Talk:Harriet Munroe


text:
X League (women's football)

The Extreme Football League (X League) is a women's semi-professional indoor American football league operating in the United States. The league was originally founded in 2009 as the Lingerie Football League (LFL), and later rebranded as the Legends Football League in 2013.

On December 13, 2019, the league announced that it would not be holding a 2020 season and that it had instead restructured under its current name, placing new teams mostly in the same locations as the 2019 LFL season. The league also did not operate during 2021, amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The X League's eight-team 2022 season spanned June to September, concluding with the restructured league's inaugural championship, the X Cup, won by the Chicago Blitz.

Since 2021, the league is owned by Mike Ditka, a former National Football League (NFL) player and an inductee of the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Samantha Gordon was also named an owner in May 2022.

The league is scheduled for return in 2025, in a hybrid format of tackle and flag football.

2009–2012
The concept of the league originated from an alternative Super Bowl halftime television special called the Lingerie Bowl, a pay-per-view event broadcast opposite the Super Bowl halftime show.

In 2009, league chairman Mitch Mortaza expanded the concept from a single annual exhibition game to a ten-team league, branded as the Lingerie Football League, or LFL. The league operated on a similar schedule to the National Football League (NFL), playing in fall and winter and played most of its games indoors with similar rules to indoor football. Many of the teams were coached by former NFL players and coaches who were already well known in their respective cities. Many of the LFL players had a background in other competitive athletics at the college and semiprofessional level, as well as some experience in tackle football from playing in other semiprofessional leagues.

The initial uniforms consisted of shoulder pads, elbow pads, knee pads, performance wear, and ice hockey-style helmets with clear plastic visors in lieu of face masks. The original uniforms of the Lingerie Football League consisted of an athletic bra and underwear that were more revealing than protective, as well as added lace, ribbons, and garters as decoration. While these uniforms were routinely criticized by media, players' reactions were typically mixed on the use of the uniforms, comparing the similarities in coverage to track and field uniforms or beach volleyball bikinis.

Expansion and rebranding: 2012–2019
After three seasons, the league announced it was adding a companion league in Canada that began play in August 2012. It then pushed back the US season to 2013 on a spring and summer schedule, mirroring other indoor football leagues.

During the hiatus, the league announced it would change its name to the Legends Football League, retaining the LFL initials, on January 10, 2013. The league also announced that the athletes would wear "performance apparel" instead of lingerie, but the uniforms look very much the same as before. In addition to the new uniforms, redesigned shoulder pads were introduced to provide more protection for players. Other league changes included eliminating images of sexy women from team logos and changing the league tagline from "True Fantasy Football" to "Women of the Gridiron". Along with the rebrand of the league in 2013, the league also began changing the uniforms as the originals were too heavy on sex appeal, initially dropping the ribbons and garters. The league designed new ones for the 2014 season closer to more traditional activewear, resembling uniforms similar to volleyball players, replacing the ribbons with shoelaces on the front of the top and bottom.

The LFL then began looking into a Latin American league with six franchises throughout Mexico, Brazil, and Argentina. On September 16, 2013, the LFL postponed the entire 2013 LFL Canada season until 2014 with plans to merge the US, Canada, and Mexico teams into a single league called LFL North America.

The LFL then formed another league in Australia in December 2013 and played one season. LFL Australia's debut season in the beginning of 2014 marked the debut of the new performance wear uniforms. The LFL planned to launch a fourth global league – LFL Europa – in 2015 with teams in Dublin (Ireland), Manchester (England), Düsseldorf and Hamburg (Germany). Barcelona (Spain) and Frankfurt (Germany) had previously been mentioned as potential franchise cities. With four global leagues, the league announced intentions to compete in a LFL World Bowl in São Paulo in 2015. By July 2014, the league planned a three leagues: LFL Americas, LFL Europa, and LFL Oceania. On June 10, 2015, the LFL announced that there would be no international play through at least 2017 with sole focus on growing the league in the US, the exception being international exhibition games to introduce prospective countries to the league.

The LFL announced new uniforms with new colors for the 2016 season. Numbers and logos were printed on the uniform as opposed to previously being sewn on. In addition, the league also announced that teams would have a choice of camouflage or black alternates. In 2017, the league also added a long pants uniform in lieu of the regular bikini bottom for the final home games.

Hiatus and restructuring: 2020–present
On December 13, 2019, the league announced that it would not be producing a 2020 season and would re-evaluate markets in the future. Four days later, the LFL was restructured into the Extreme Football League, which was announced to begin play in April 2020. The league size remained at eight teams, which initially were all in the same markets as the former LFL teams, but under new team identities. The Nashville Knights were the only team listed in the X League announcement to not change names, but they were replaced by the Kansas City Force in January 2020. As part of the league restructuring, it began offering ownership stakes to its players and coaches based on the individuals contributions and commitment to the organization, as well as revenue distribution program for merchandise featuring an individual player's likeness. The league also said it was to use 70-yard fields in a press release, although this was never implemented. The league implements a new uniform with full pads.

The league's first season was postponed to a scheduled start in June 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In May, it had been announced that it was postponed again to April 2021. During the hiatus, the league announced Mike Ditka had been named owner and chairman of the league, with plans on expanding into 24 US markets. The season was ultimately cancelled on May 18, 2021, pushing the league's relaunch to the summer of 2022 due to the pandemic.

The 2022 season began on June 10 with the Chicago Blitz facing the Kansas City Force. After a nine-week regular season with a total of seven games, four teams advanced to the playoffs, with the Blitz capturing the first X Cup title on September 10 when they defeated the Atlanta Empire.

The league did not announce plans for a 2023 season and later updated their website with plans to announce a 2024 schedule in October 2023. This was later updated again to indicate a 2025 schedule, to be announced October 15, 2024

Rules
Playing style is full-contact and similar to other indoor football leagues. There are seven players from each team on the field during play. The field is 50 yards between end zones, 30 yards wide, and the end zones are 8 yards deep, roughly the same as other indoor leagues. Many fields are just over 28 yards wide, as games are often played in converted National Hockey League-sized rinks (85 feet wide), with the plexiglass removed, dasher boards padded, and ice surfaces covered with artificial turf.

There are no kickoffs, except the option for an on-side kick should the game be close near the end, nor field goals; halves and after scores begin on team's own 15-yard line. Kicking off after every scoring drive was added before the 2013 Pacific Cup, but was removed shortly after the first game of the LFL Australia season. A team must attempt to get a first down on every fourth down, or they risk a turnover. After a touchdown, a team can attempt a one-point conversion from the one-yard line, or a two-point conversion from the three-yard line. Since 2015, teams are given the option to punt if within their own 10 yard line; the ball is placed on the 15 or wherever it went out of bounds if the punt is not returned.

A game consists of four ten-minute quarters and a 12-minute halftime (30-minute halftime in championship). In the event of a tie, an extra 8 minute sudden death period is played; whoever scores first wins the game. If still tied, the game ends as a draw, and counts as tie for both teams in the standings. In postseason games, multiple 10-minute sudden deathovertime  periods are played until one team scores, which wins the game and advances to the next round or wins the championship. Teams get two timeouts per half or overtime period.

Reception
The league was met with criticism throughout its existence. Critics say the league degrades female athletes through "pernicious objectification". The uniforms received extensive criticism for their revealing nature. In an ESPN article, Sarah Spain, the co-host of espnW, wrote, "After watching these women play, I can honestly say I respect the heck out of them as athletes, but I'll still never respect the Lingerie Football League, no matter what name they give it."

LFL players with experience in track and field competitions noted that the typical LFL uniform is comparable to other uniforms, with Elizabeth Govrick of the Minnesota Valkyrie stating she "ran track and I was wearing, you know, stuff if not close to almost smaller than what I'm wearing out on the football field. You take beach volleyball, you take volleyball, you take other sports where it's pretty much the same thing." Adrian Purnell of the Jacksonville Breeze said that the outfits were only for marketing purposes. Heather Furr, a quarterback for the Chicago Bliss said "I think with little girls watching the game ... if they can see past the uniform and see us as role models, then that's what I want." Abbie Sullivan of the Cleveland Crush stated, "Just because we play in the LFL does not mean we promote promiscuity. We are smart females. We are athletes who take care of our bodies. We are the total package." Similarly, Toledo Crush player Marija Condric stated, "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Sit down and watch. You'll forget what we are wearing and you will be thinking about how hard that girl got hit on that last play."

Other players are quoted as viewing the uniforms as a necessary evil, with one saying, "Maybe one day, girls won't have to wear lingerie to get people interested [in women's football]." Liz Gorman, a player with the Jacksonville Breeze, stated she would rather wear a conventional uniform: "I mean, I don't like it. You'd rather wear full clothing. I have a bunch of scrapes on me."

The league was accused in its earlier years of fining players for wearing too many clothes, as well as not paying medical bills for injured players. However, the league responded by claiming that fines were given because the equipment worn was in direct conflict with the league's sponsored gear.

The league also prohibited players from commenting on personnel matters, a rule that prompted the vast majority of the Toronto Triumph, including team captain Krista Ford, to quit in protest in October 2011. Originally a professional league with players receiving a cut of net revenue, Mortaza stopped paying his players beginning in the 2011 season and converted the league into an amateur organization; players must also pay for their own health insurance. League founder Mortaza admitted at one point the league was marketed toward "mostly beer-drinking college students aged 21 and up."

Safety
The league received many complaints from players in regards to safety. Since the uniforms covered very little skin, the players are more susceptible to injury. Ex-lingerie football player Nikki Johnson was one of the many players who experienced injuries in her time in the league including injuries sustained from hard hits and a broken wrist that required surgery.

Current
† The Red Devils were scheduled to debut during the 2022 season, but did not compete.

2009–2010
Ten teams played in the inaugural 2009–2010 LFL season. The league schedule ran from September 4, 2009, to January 29, 2010, with one game each Friday. Teams played one game each against the other four teams in their conference. The top two teams in each conference advanced to the conference championship games held on February 4, 2010, in Miami, and the conference champions played in Lingerie Bowl VII on February 6, 2010. The Western Conference Los Angeles Temptation defeated the Eastern Conference Chicago Bliss by the score of 27–14.

2010–2011
For the 2010–2011 season, the LFL added new franchises in Orlando and Baltimore, while the New York Majesty and Denver Dream suspended operations. The 2011 Lingerie Bowl was held in Las Vegas, Nevada, on February 6, 2011. The Western Conference champion Los Angeles Temptation defeated Eastern Conference champion Philadelphia Passion, 26–25.

The 2011 All-Fantasy Game was held in Hamilton, Ontario, on July 30, 2011, at Copps Coliseum. Trailing 18–6 in the second half, the Eastern Conference rallied to win, 24–18, over the Western Conference. Anonka Dixon, quarterback for the Orlando Fantasy, was awarded offensive MVP for her 3 touchdown passes and game-winning rushing touchdown, while Liz Gorman, a safety with the Tampa Breeze, was named defensive MVP.

2011–2012
The LFL accepted five expansion franchises – the Cleveland Crush, Green Bay Chill, Las Vegas Sin, Minnesota Valkyrie, and Toronto Triumph, while the Dallas Desire, San Diego Seduction, and Miami Caliente suspended operations. The season kicked off on August 26, 2011, and culminated with Lingerie Bowl IX on February 4, 2012. The LFL Eastern and Western Conference championship games were played back-to-back on January 28, 2012, at Citizens Business Bank Arena in Ontario, California. For the second straight year, the Los Angeles Temptation won the Western Conference championship while the Philadelphia Passion won the Eastern Conference championship, setting up a rematch in the 2012 Lingerie Bowl of the previous year's championship game. The 2012 Lingerie Bowl was played at Orleans Arena in Las Vegas, in the afternoon prior to the start of Super Bowl XLVI. The Los Angeles Temptation won its third consecutive Lingerie Bowl with a 28–6 victory over Philadelphia Passion. The Temptation's Ashley Salerno and Amber Reed were co-MVP's, with Salerno throwing three touchdown passes and Reed scoring two rushing touchdowns.

In 2012, the LFL expanded its annual "All-Fantasy" game into a three-game international series, with one game in Mexico and two games in Australia. The Mexico All-Fantasy Game took place on May 5, 2012, at the Palacio de los Deportes in Mexico City; the Western Conference defeated the Eastern Conference, 37–7. The second match of the "2012 LFL All-Fantasy Tour" took place in Brisbane, Australia, on June 2, 2012, at the Brisbane Convention & Exhibition Centre; the Western Conference again emerged victorious, this time by a 45–36 score. The Western Conference took a 3–0 series sweep with a 31–24 victory in the third and final "All-Fantasy" match in Sydney, Australia, on June 9, 2012, at Allphones Arena. Queensland native and wide receiver for the Los Angeles Temptation Chloe Butler served as the ambassador of LFL Football coming to Australia and captained the Western Conference squad. The LFL then helped found the Ladies Gridiron League in Australia to serve as a minor league for the announced LFL Australia expansion.

2012 Canada
For the 2011–12 LFL United States season, the All-Fantasy Game was played in Hamilton, Ontario. This was due in part to the league's announcement that in 2012 there would be a Canadian Lingerie Football League. LFL Canada was originally scheduled for a twelve-week season with teams in six markets.

On September 28, 2011, it was announced that, in addition to the Toronto Triumph who began play in LFL United States, LFL Canada's other five markets would consist of Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Quebec City, and Montreal; ironically, none of those five markets would actually get an LFL franchise. On February 9, 2012, the LFL announced that Abbotsford, British Columbia, would be the next Canadian city to host a team in the League. The franchise played its home games at the Abbotsford Entertainment & Sports Centre and competed in the Western Division of LFL Canada. On February 20, 2012, the LFL announced that the franchise would be named the BC Angels following the results of an online fan vote. The decision for Abbotsford to host a team sparked some controversy, including expressed concern from at least one city councilor, as "Abbotsford is a deeply religious agricultural community."

On February 22, 2012, the LFL announced that Regina, Saskatchewan, would be the next Canadian city to host a team in the League. Home games would be played at the Brandt Centre. On March 6, the LFL announced that the franchise would be named the Regina Rage after an online fan vote.

Six days later, on February 28, the LFL announced that Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, would join Regina as LFL Canada's second team in the Wheat Province. Home games would be played at the Credit Union Centre. Upon releasing the Saskatoon Sirens' logo and colors, the league announced that LFL Canada was set at four teams for the 2012 season, with the league playing an eight-game schedule, scheduled to end with Lingerie Bowl I Canada the week before the Grey Cup.

The 2012 LFL Canada season began on August 25, 2012, and culminated with Lingerie Bowl Canada I on November 17, 2012, between the Saskatoon Sirens and the BC Angels at the Abbotsford Entertainment & Sports Centre in Abbotsford, British Columbia. The BC Angels won the inaugural championship game 25–12 with BC Angels' quarterback Mary Anne Hanson and receiver Aleesa Garcia named as the game's MVPs.

On December 15, 2012, the first annual Pacific Cup was played between the Seattle Mist of LFL US and the BC Angels of LFL Canada. Dubbed the 'Border War', the game was hosted by the Seattle Mist at the ShoWare Center in Kent, Washington, with home venues alternating each season.

2013 season

The league delayed the next LFL US season from fall/winter 2012 to April 2013 in order to shift to a spring/summer schedule and to focus on the 2012 LFL Canada season.

On June 27, 2013, the 2013 LFL Canada schedule was released. LFL Canada accepted one proposed expansion team, the Calgary Fillies; their home games would be played at the Stampede Corral. Meanwhile, the Toronto Triumph suspended operations for the 2013 season, bringing the number of LFL Canada teams back to four. On September 16, 2013, the LFL then postponed the entire 2013 LFL Canada season until 2014.

However, the BC Angels were expected to participate in the second-annual Pacific Cup, an exhibition game between the Angels and LFL US's Seattle Mist scheduled for December 2013. On October 3, it was announced that the Angels would be replaced in the game by the LA Temptation, citing not enough preparation. The Pacific Cup was played at ShoWare Center on December 6, 2013. Several key players from the Angels joined the Mist while a few key players from Las Vegas Sin joined the Temptation.

2013–14 Australia
Following the two All-Fantasy games held in Australia in 2012, LFL Australia premiered in December 2013. Prior to the playing a game, the LFL's deal with the Ladies Gridiron League (LGL) fell through and the LGL no longer served as a minor league to the LFL. The New South Wales Surge, Queensland Brigade, Victoria Maidens, and Western Australia Angels participated in the inaugural 2013–14 LFL Australia season. The LFL Australia Legends Cup was played on February 8, 2014, at nib Stadium in Perth, Western Australia.

On March 23, 2014, LFL Australia accepted one proposed expansion team, the Adelaide Arsenal, with home games to be played at the Coopers Stadium. However, on September 29, the 2014–2015 season was cancelled due to the lack of a broadcast partner with competition planned to resume in 2015–2016 including an expansion into New Zealand.

In February 2015, it was revealed that the players and coaches had actually left after disputes and issues with LFL management, namely commissioner Mortaza. Players and coaches left and joined the Ladies Gridiron League, originally a subsidiary of the LFL now operating as its own league.

2014 season
In the 2013 offseason, the LFL announced that the Philadelphia Passion and Minnesota Valkyrie had suspended operations for the 2014 LFL US season.

It was also announced that the Cleveland Crush were moving to Toledo, Ohio, and play its home games at the Huntington Center.

2016 season
On September 16, 2015, Austin, Texas, received an expansion team for 2016 to play at the Cedar Park Center and the name was announced as the Austin Acoustic. On November 2, it was announced that Dallas, Texas, would rejoin the league in 2016 after being on hiatus since the end of the 2010–2011 season, retaining the Dallas Desire name, at Dr Pepper Arena. The Las Vegas Sin then suspended operations. A team was also added for New England bringing the league's total to eight teams.

During the season, New England was forced to forfeit its final game as injuries caused the team to have below the minimum number of players needed to field a team. Seattle won a three-way tie with Dallas and Los Angeles for the best record in the Western Conference while Chicago had the best record in the Eastern Conference. Chicago and Atlanta advanced to the playoffs in the East while Seattle and Dallas advanced in the West. Chicago and Seattle won their Conference Championships and advanced to the Legends Cup in a rematch of both the previous championship and a meeting earlier in the season though with the opposite result of those two prior matches. The season ended on August 27, 2016, with the Chicago Bliss defeating the Seattle Mist 31–26 to win their third Legends Cup. The championship game was played at WestWorld in Scottsdale, Arizona.

2017 season
The 2017 season began with new teams at Pittsburgh and Denver replacing New England and Dallas. Three teams (Chicago, Los Angeles, and Seattle) completed the regular season with perfect 4–0 records, a first in LFL history. Chicago and Atlanta advanced to the playoffs from the East while Seattle and Los Angeles advanced in the West. Atlanta upset Chicago in the Eastern Conference Championship, their first victory against the Bliss following seven consecutive defeats. In a war of unbeatens, Seattle bested Los Angeles in the Western Conference Championship. The season ended on September 3, 2017, as the Seattle Mist beat the Atlanta Steam 38–28 in the Legends Cup, played at the Citizens Business Bank Arena in Ontario, California, to cap off their perfect 6–0 season to go with their second LFL title.

2019 season
The 2019 season was the tenth and final season of the Legends Football League. It began April 5 and concluded on August 10.

2022 season
Following a regular season reduced to two games per team, the Chicago Blitz defeated the Atlanta Empire in the first X Cup championship game, 19–12.

2023-2024
Initially, the league's website stated tickets would be "on sale October 2023" and "2024 schedule released October" but in October these were changed to "December 2023". In December 2023 they would again be changed, this time to "Coming soon" instead. In February 2024, the league announced it has pushed back its restart from the 2024 season until May 3, 2025, with the schedule to be announced in October 2024.

Broadcasts
In 2010, MTV2 licensed the broadcast rights to 20 regular season and two conference playoff games and aired highlights of those games on a program entitled LFL Presents: LFL, Friday Night Football on MTV2. For the 2011–12 season, MTV2 also broadcast the championship game, in addition to presenting the games in their entirety and broadcasting them live at 9:00 PM ET.

In 2013, the league began airing their games exclusively online on a week-delayed basis, releasing their games every Saturday on YouTube. Games are shot in 1080i.

At the start of the 2013–2014 Australia season, LFL signed an agreement with 7mate in Australia to broadcast games every Saturday night.

In 2015, Fuse became the exclusive broadcaster of LFL games in the United States. Games are broadcast on a week-delay basis on Saturday nights, and are later uploaded to YouTube on Fridays. In the Fall, Oxygen premiered the reality series, ''Pretty. Strong.'', which focuses on the lives and careers of the Chicago Bliss. The show was produced by Relativity Television.

For the 2016 season, games were broadcast in select markets on affiliates of The CW and MyNetworkTV as well as Regional sports networks on a week-delayed basis.

In 2017, Super Channel became the exclusive Canadian broadcaster of all LFL games through the 2019 season. Super Channel used the LFL to launch its "Super Channel SPORTS" sub-brand for all sporting and events and sports-themed programming. Meanwhile, Eleven Sports Network acquired the broadcast rights to the LFL in the United States.

In May 2022, the league announced on Twitter that it would be launching a new subscription service called "Fan Pass" to directly stream games live and on-demand.

Fantasy football
In 2011, the Legends Football League partnered with Fantazzle Fantasy Sports to present a fantasy football game for the LFL. It was relaunched in 2013 as "LFL PartyDeck".

Video game
In 2012, the Legends Football League teamed with Japanese-based Yuke's Co. Ltd to design and develop an official LFL game.

title: X League (women's football)


text:
Talk:1873

[Untitled]
I have made some layout proposals which would affect this page (although for pre 1900 the change which would be putting the year in topic into the "see also" box used on many years consistently)is fairly minor. If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --BozMo 18:56, 6 May 2004 (UTC)(talk)

DDT
"DDT is first synthesized."

DDT says "First synthesized in 1874, DDT's"

A similar game
"December – Major Walter Clopton Wingfield designed and patented a similar game" ... Similar to what? --Thegooseking (talk) 10:42, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:1873


text:
Talk:1872

Untitled
I have made some layout proposals which would affect this page (although for pre 1900 the change which would be putting the year in topic into the "see also" box used on many years consistently)is fairly minor. If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --BozMo 18:57, 6 May 2004 (UTC)(talk)

Untitled 2
1872 was the last two years of the American Revolution — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.182.66 (talk • contribs) 23:20, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Untitled 3
February 17. In 1872 New Spain had disappeared — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.227.73.176 (talk) 17:01, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Untitled 4
The article Uluru agrees with July 19 as the date for Gosse's discovery of Uluru but states the year as 1873. Vaughan Pratt (talk) 02:53, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:1872