text:
User talk:Nichalp/Archive 2

To see the old archive: Nichalp/Archive 1

Uploading files
Renaming files isn't possible unfortunately. Work on redesigning the form is underway. See Test:Special:Upload. Angela. 19:46, 29 May 2004 (UTC)

Newdow
I don't see anything in the current event spot to suggest that Newman was interested in atheism. The word "god" is not used even once in the Constitution, nor is their any implicit reference to anything of a religious character, except for in the bill of rights ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or abridging the free exercise thereof."). If god was mentioned in the constitution, the constitution would invalidate itself, being it, then, a law respecting an establishement of religion. I've never heard the expression "God save America" before. Christmas is not an American national holiday. Thanksgiving is not a religious celebration.

A secular government is where religious institutions are completely separated from state institutions; i.e. neither has any power to affect, interfere with, or in any way "be in" the other's business. The first and most commonly used meaning of the word secular is "Worldy rather than spiritual." A state cannot believe in god, regardless of whether or not it is secular. A state is an abstract idea. In a perfectly secular government, the offficers of government would not let religion influence their decisions. If religion influenced their decision such that they would not have decided that way had it not, then the result of that decision, de facto, respects an establishment of religion. In effect, when a politician in a so-called secular government is playing the role of statesman, they should not be religious. Kevin Baas 00:09, 2004 Jun 16 (UTC)

"From what I make of the case, the fact is" is a contradiction in terms. of it is your 'making of the case', then ipso facto it is not a 'fact'. A fact is something that is indisputable and is directly evidenced. I am not aware of any attempts to get publicity by Newdow, nor of any resource suggestive of this. Kevin Baas 00:17, 2004 Jun 16 (UTC)

Loyalties
Interesting question. I would fight for Bhaarat were a war between the States and India to break out. But in any other case, I'd side with the U.S. I'm a citizen.--LordSuryaofShropshire 19:37, Jun 22, 2004 (UTC)

Soccer
What is the use of the center circle?

-- It marks 10 yards from the centre spot which is how far away the opposing players must be at a kick off.

Are there any major uses to the inner penalty box and the 'D' semicircle?

-- the "inner penalty box" is usually called the goal area or 6 yard box, it is the area from within which goal kicks must be taken. You will occasionaly hear that the goalkeeper has a right to the ball in this area but there is nothing like that in the rules. The D marks 10 yards from the penalty spot which is how far away all players must be when a penalty kick is taken.

-- Hope this helps Bob Palin 00:20, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Indirect kicks are awarded for minor offenses of a technical nature, things like offside or obstruction, direct kicks are awarded for more serious offenses. You cannot score a goal directly from an indirect kick, you will notice that the referee will keep his arm raised until another player has touched the ball after such a kick to make sure there is no confusion.

Bob Palin 15:43, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

-- Each team has "home" and "away" colours, England are white at home and red away. The tournament organizers decide which team is the home team for each match by some formula and thus the colours are decided. I don't know what formula was used in Euro 2004 but it is interesting that England were the away team in the 1966 WC final in England! Personally I wish England would wear red at home, it seems so much more attractive. Bob Palin 04:00, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Cricket
You have put the GFDL tempalte on the two images image:Shots.jpg and image:Positions.jpg. Firstly where did you get these images from? Are they public domain? Did you create them? Secondly, you should use slightly more descriptive names for images (Cricket_shots.jpg etc.). Ed g2s 19:11, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Oh good. Images can't be renamed. Do you mind if I clean it up a bit, remove the grey background, crop properly etc.? Or could you make some better versions (preferrable png's, so without the grass effect)?
 * What would be ideal is if you could give me the template and the overlays as separate files, but if not don't worry. Ed g2s 19:42, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Sure - or drop it in my email EJSanders at gmail dot com Ed g2s 19:51, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Got it - thanks. Ed g2s 20:16, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I just asked Ed g2s if he could edit the fielding positions image to move the gully back behind point and closer to the slips where it should be, and also remove the sweeper and move deep midwicket there instead. He said I should clear it with you before he makes the changes. Do you have any objections to those changes? --dmmaus 23:20, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Very much so, should I implement the changes suggested? Ed g2s 22:10, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * By "behind point" I mean move the gully backward of point, not deeper. Essentially it should end it between point and slips. No objectoin to keeping sweeper if the deep midwicket is moved closer, or made the same even. Thanks for doing this, both of you! --dmmaus 00:44, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Good job in India
Hi Nichalp,

You are doing a good(but unenviable:-)) job watching over the India page! I tried following it for 3-4 days, but it is too much for me. Everyone wants to keep adding their two cents worth. I don't want to get embroiled and waste my time over it. However, sometimes I feel guilty(like now) and try to contribute in maintaining a balance.KRS 14:51, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Have added more to the history section in India:-), see my comments in the talk page. Regarding your queries, let's just say I am involved in the field of architecture in some way(which is an obvious observation) and leave it at that!:-) And yes, I am from South India. KRS 18:41, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Indian Coast Guard
Is the Indian Coast Guard page a copyvio, or do you have permission to use the stuff from their homepage? Note that even if you are planning on changing the page, if this stuff is a copyvio it is going to have to be removed from the page's history.

Also IMHO, its bad practice to leave messy pages (esp. near-orphans) scattered around wikipedia. At least Wikify stuff if you are going to throw it up, and mark it as a stub if necessary. Thats my opinion at least (

—siroχo 12:20, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * I've marked Indian Coast Guard as a copyvio, and copied your new version to Indian Coast Guard/Temp, I believe it will be merged back in as soon as the copyvio is deleted, then. —siroχo 02:01, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)

India and vocabulary
You wrote: I noticed that you removed the words antediluvian, nascence & paroxysms. I use Wordweb as my electronic dictionary. Antediluvian literaly means "before the Deluge." In terms of years, it translates to before 1500 BC. Although it is derived from the great flood, it also means ancient. Nascence means birth. Paroxysms mean sudden attack (generally used for fits). The reason why I am mentioning you this is that I have improved my vocabulary thanks to wikipedia. A simple English page is a feature of Wikipedia, so if anyone has a difficulty in understanding high english, he can refer to the article there. I had put up these words so that other wikipedians could benefit. Nichalp 20:06, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC) (Re: on my talk)

 * I'm happy that you have been able to improve your vocabulary thanks to Wikipedia. Nonetheless, I think the word choices sounded a little odd. I meant no offense, I was just trying to make the english read a little less awkward. Words can have a dictionary definition which may be appropriate to a particular situation, and yet they also can have connotations which make them sound odd when used in other contexts. Any composition instructor can describe the pitfalls of misusing a thesaurus to find substitute words, which may have similar meanings, have connotations which limit their literal substitution for one another. Good luck. Also, I just noticed a careless mistake I made with paleolithic. older ≠ wiser 20:48, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Cricket Images
Hi, I just taled with Ed g2s about the new cricket positions image he suggested I talk to you (since the new image is based on your work.) I wanted to know what are the blue dots in Image:Cricket_positions.png are those not fielding positions? --Ankur 06:18, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hijra (India)
To: User:Chancemill, User:Sundar, User:Harikishoreaj, User:Nichalp, User:KRS, User:Ambarish, User:Arvindn

The Hijra article needs some help/comments. If you know more on the subject, please feel free to comment at Talk:Hijra (India). Thanks. --Rrjanbiah 04:26, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Fundamentalists
1) While you may dislike RSS, VHP and other such groups as Hindu radicals, it is also a well-known fact that there are thousands of small fundamentalist Muslim groups that work independently and in concert across the Indian subcontinent; most bombings in the country (including the railway bombings in Maharashtra) have been perpetrated by widespread Muslim groups; Muslim fundamentalism, while not bearing a single-face like the VHP, is no less prominent

2) Christian fundamentalists are well-known trouble-makers for peaceable Hindus in the North-East and in the South. THey have repeatedly destroyed temple iconography and created unrest. They are not free of blame for the secessionist movement now agitating in Nagaland and Mizoram based solely on religion. They're very much hurting Indian peace.

3) The media you speak of has also been known to be extremely Hindu-bashing in its effort to present a secular face, much like the laughable separate-but-equal codes.

4) While a Hindu fundamentalist killed Gandhi, his life is no less valuable than those lost in the bombings perpetrated by Muslims in Mumbai a couple of years ago. If we are to privilege high-profile cases (like Babri and Gandhi), done by Hindus, over the multitudinous deaths of common Hindus and Muslims in Kashmir or Bombay bombings committed by Muslims, or harrassment, vandalism and bigotry of Christians in Christian-majority towns all over the North East of India, we are being not only prejudiced but blind.

Lastly, as a brief epilogue to my points, made in only response to yours, I should add that I distance myself from rabid Hindu fundamentalism. I dislike the new-age reincarnation of McCarthyism that allows anyone who criticizes traditional Indian government or non-majority practices as 'Hindutvadi' just as much as I hate the branding of Muslims in India as fanatic pseudo-Pakistanis or of Christians as neo-British colonialists. These are silly, myopic and communalist viewpoints and should be abandoned as childish. Rather, we need to take a realistic look at these things. Maybe the India page should address this instead of presenting itself as a glorified haven of perfection and we can speak about the fearful dynamic of religion in the Indian subcontinent. Recall that demographic arguments citing oppressive 83% Hindu majorities in India are quite illogical, being that India is known as an extremely state and province-centered group, and that Pakistan and Bangladesh figure into the equation as well. It's not so simple. As I've mentioned, there are areas across India where in Hindu-dominated states one can find Muslim-majority villages. Kolkata, did you know, is 30% Muslim in population. Thus, it's not so simple as an overbearing umbrageous Hindu fundamentalism gripping the country's next. Unfortunately, it involves pockets of fundamentalists who claim adherence to many faiths, the most notable being Islam and Hinduism. Let's keep it real. --LordSuryaofShropshire 20:47, Jul 10, 2004 (UTC)

A post-script: I should add that most Christians, Hindus and Muslims are the model of harmonious co-existence and that Muslim weavers in Benares, Christian and Parsee enclaves in major cities (like Bombay or Delhi) and a mess of mixed communities across the country, South and North, have none of these problems. --LordSuryaofShropshire 20:51, Jul 10, 2004 (UTC)

 * To your responses, I say this: you have not countered the commonly-held charge that the media is extremely biased and simply insist that they speak naught but truth, a strange belief to hold about media, which is known around the world to be but one face of the prism of reality. Secondly, attributing secessionist ideas to the North East to underdevelopment is silly. Bihar is heavily underdeveloped, the worst state in the 28, and yet it does not seek separation. The Christian secessionist groups are not agitating for princely state histories but because they want a Christian country, and this is well-attested to. It is clearly based on religion. Also, the legality of Hindu groups like VHP and RSS doesn't say anything about the share of blame between Hindus and Muslims for religious unrest in India. You cannot numerically apportion blame between Hindu and Muslim groups and have one come out any better than the other. THe many Muslim groups have just as much of a combined presence as the two or three Hindu groups. I was also not calling you a bigot though your comments smack of a deeply-held conviction that any religious unrest in India today is solely on account of Hindu fundamentalists, which is the most ludicrous and baseless statement a person could make (if that is what you believe even in part). THe dynamic is much more varied than a big Hindu group bearing down on Muslims. It's very provincial, as I mentioned earlier. --LordSuryaofShropshire 21:28, Jul 10, 2004 (UTC)

 * By the way, the minority of Panjab Khalistani-wallahs were agitating for secession for a land that was one of the most prosperous in the country. So I disagree strongly with your assertion that seccessionist movements globally can be charted on underdevelopment, though that is obviously a factor, since it is part of a greater equation most often based on ethnicity, language and religion, as was the case both in the short-lived "Khalistaan" movement and the on-going Nagaland and Mizoram insurrections which are both being spear-headed solely by fundamentalist Christian groups.--LordSuryaofShropshire 21:32, Jul 10, 2004 (UTC)

 * Oh, as for the CHristian groups in the North East... police have confirmed extortion attempts by NLFT in Tripura, horrific harrassment of minority Hindu groups there, etc. Also, the Mizoram gov't head Zoramthanga is blatantly breaking with secular ethics by planning to send 1,00,000 missionaries across India to convert wildly. Lastly, the Nagaland insurrectionists are demanding a new 'Christland,' which leads me to believe that the Christian terrorists in the North East care less about princely dominion than separatist Christian terrorism.--LordSuryaofShropshire 21:42, Jul 10, 2004 (UTC)

Worthlessness of this discussion
Nichalp: all you're doing is listing hindu radical offenses; I'm not interested in listing christian or muslim crimes and then weighing them. The dynamic is far more complicated than you portray, and unfortunately your sweeping statements about the nature of rebellions landed you in a trap of inconsistent arguments. You can talk about Christian principals and Staines, but others will respond with smashed Hindu temples by Christians and Staines' molesting recent converts (anyone ask why he was killed?). Jews and Parsees have had safe asylum in India for centuries, so claiming Hindu oppression is a one-sided and myopic idea. It's more complicated than 'Hindus' and the rest of India. You are stuck in your ideas and I am stuck in mine, though, while this is obviously my own opinion, it seems you're giving a lot less thought to this and are simply interested in indicting Hindus and absolving Muslims and Christians of their part in national dissolution. Frankly, you can keep cluttering my pages with laundry lists, but the reverse can be done using different creedal groups, and I'm not interested in what is a discussion doomed from the beginning. Peace --LordSuryaofShropshire 19:00, Jul 14, 2004 (UTC)

My Final Word
You may call my reports balderdash and revel in another string of self-aggrandizing pronouncements, but I too follow the news (though I read enough to keep my eyes of the TV screen) from several sources, Indian and otherwise. My reports are accurate and come not only from personal experiene and family living across India, but friends of different cultural backgrounds residing there. I'm not going to dally with your indictments of VHP movements which are obviously fundamentalists, because the more you cite them, the more you ignore the other side of the picture. You're blind in one political eye since you only seem to see the defects of Hindus and no one else. Anyway, you can respond to this message, which I'm sure you will, but I'm done with this. You're intent on defending pre-established ideas without a base and your only responses two me are to 1) list more offenses by Hindus and 2) tell me my news sources are wrong. Neither of these are the arguments of someone who's rationally approaching the issue. Your view of Indian politics is of someone who's, as I said before, hell-bent on showing all of India's problems to have stemmed from Hindu fundies, whereas much communal hate has also been shared by supposed 'SECULARISTS' (i.e. Sikh killings in the 80s) or Muslims (bombings galore; thank you LeT and family) or Christians (multiple temple destruction incidents across India). I'm not telling you that Hindu fundies don't screw up the country's face, or act irrational, but I'm also not buying your hogwash about how one can attribute or even a majority of the blame to them. I'm not even going to talk about the religious demographics of the Indian underworld, because that would just ruin your argument. Aum Shanti --LordSuryaofShropshire 21:22, Jul 14, 2004 (UTC)

I disagree wholeheartedly with your response. I do not equate Hindus and Hindu fundamentalists, and they were Islamic bombers. What you did was not to mention Hindu fanatics in a single incident, but to attribute all of India's unrest to Hindu fundamentalists in the India society section. There's a big difference there buddy. As for Zoramthanga, he's easily found in any newspaper and was quoted. The woman Staines molested came out in India so this is no secret. I'm not justifying his death, nor those of his children, but I am saying that this is not a simple 'hindus hate christians' deal. Nor is the dynamic as singular as you want it to be. Lastly, Islamic terrorist groups from Pakistan, though foreign they may be, have plenty of support in India. The origin of a group makes no difference in its activity in India. I'm done talking with you, because you're set and I'm set, and this is a worthless conversation. Just don't fill the India page with nonsense about how all of India's unrest can be attributed to Hindu radicals. --LordSuryaofShropshire 16:23, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)

 * You seem only to be interested in conspiracy theories that support your own views. You accuse me of insulting those who don't tow my line, but apparently your idea of an 'insult' is when I disagree with you. lies you sound like angry and dismissive, dismissive of anything contrary to your own ingrained beliefs. Do some research and swallow the bitter pill of truth. You fling one argument at me, find it discredited, go to another, and then accuse of lying or say I'm being lied to. You're the one avoiding true debate. You're the one creating all the fanciful ideas about Hindu fundies being India's sole problem. Apparently, you're not able to separate your background from intelligent conversation. Try to stop insulting me and actually work out your own deeply-set issues, since you really have problems handling reality. If you actually read the India page, you'd realized your edits, while squeezing it, have also choked all the life out of the page and made it boring and unrealistic, especially with ill-chosen words like 'antediluvian' and 'eructation.' P.S. "Badinage" is light talk or playful banter, which was certainly not what I was making. Maybe you meant something different. --LordSuryaofShropshire 20:38, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)

Getting Lame
Hindu fundies are responsible "FOR MOST OF INDIA's ILLS IN SOCIETY": that is the most retarded statement I've ever heard. You're evidently quite unable to face the reality of multicultural India and Congress blunders through Nehru and Indira Gandhi, who were both self-professed secularists.

"You[r] hea[r]t may be in India but your body certainally isn't and that what counts to all of us 'Indian' editors. < That is once again an indication not of reason or intelligence but of childishness. If that's all that counts to you people then it's no wonder that your edits are so unrealistic and myopic. The ability to write intelligently about a place has nothing to do with the physical placement of a body.

Your charges of 'lack of evidence' are not at all objective. None of what you've said stands up to scrutiny either, especially your bold statements attributing 'most' of India's ills to Hindu fundamentalists. I hope you're not going into political science or governance, or India will really be screwed. --LordSuryaofShropshire 21:10, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)

Schooling
My father's transferable job (bank CEO) landed me in Mumbai from '93 to '97. I play the violin. Anything these questions are leading to?--LordSuryaofShropshire 20:58, Jul 10, 2004 (UTC)

Bold words in India
The bolding of a particular word is certainly POV, especilly when there is a link from there. For example, you had made Delhi Sultanate and Tajmahal bold, which gives someone who does not know much about India a not so subtle hint that they are more important than the rest of the links. Which is not true at all. However, the bolding of words such as Hindustan, Bharat and India in the first para is okay right now when there is no link from there.(Even if there were links, it may be okay because all three names are given equal importance). I haven't come acros this type of bolding in any pages I have seen in wikipedia. KRS 06:18, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Reply
You seem to be a very curious person:-) I belong to the female gender if thats what you mean.KRS 14:44, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

India
Thanks for your expression of support and the healthy discussions with reference to our differences in India related edits. On my part, I don't want to waste my time in talk pages with people who don't see reason. Hope to manage with edit summaries alone. KRS 02:28, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Criteria for news items, re: fire in India
The central reason for removing the link about the fire in India is that, in order to qualify for listing on the 'In the news' section (see In_the_news_section_on_the_Main_Page), an "article must be updated to reflect the new information and a have a recent date linked". Wikipedia "is not an online newspaper", the items in the 'In the news' section are more like a place that notes encyclopedic information that is relevant to current events, as it happens. The secondary, or subordinate, reason is that I do not think that this fire warrants inclusion in the article on the region of "Tamil Nadu" or the country "India" article, it's not important enough in the context of those things, in toto. It would warrant inclusion in an article on the school itself, or maybe on the town, but I have no obligation to create or update those articles--which would be a large task to do it properly--and the presence of that information is prerequisite to inclusion on the 'In the news' section. - Centrx 17:56, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Nicholas
Regarding all the talk about politics, let's leave this topic alone, since it is doing nothing but raising blood pressures on both sides and spurring harsh words; we've come to the impasse of set opinions and nothing's going to budge. Nothing constructive's being accomplished. So let's leave it at this and do our separate edits, working minor differences in articles (i.e. India) as they come. Shanti to you.--LordSuryaofShropshire 22:50, Jul 19, 2004 (UTC)

Arab
Hi, It is not allowed in the rules to make edits to protected pages except in very unusual circumstances. You should write your comment on the Talk page and then it can be incorporated when the page is unprotected. --Zero 23:17, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Redirects
Those redirects you created recently were not working - you put a blank between the # and the word REDIRECT. To make it working it needs to be exactly like this: #REDIRECT target. But no big deal, I already fixed them :-) andy 20:08, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks for informing me :) ¶ nichalp | [[User talk:nichalp| Talk ]] 20:22, Jul 20, 2004 (UTC)

Info needed on wiki specifics
Thanks ¶ nichalp 20:35, Jul 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * I need to know how to edit the boilerplate links eg {India}} ?
 * I once came across some wikipedia user statistics showing the most active contributors, and other such data. Where do I find it?
 * The Snow article contains records which seem to be US records? Are these the world records or US records? If the latter, can corrections be undertaken by someone?

 * Boilerplate text accessed by is in Template:India, and so on. Marnanel 20:38, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * List of Wikipedians by number of edits lists data and also links to several relevent pages, although the data listed on the current page may not be accurate. Acegikmo1 21:10, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I moved the above from the village pump in case you hadn't seen the replies yet. Angela. 15:14, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I had already got them, thanks ¶ nichalp | [[User talk:nichalp| Talk ]]

title: User talk:Nichalp/Archive 2


text:
Blading (professional wrestling)

In professional wrestling, blading is the practice of intentionally cutting oneself to provoke bleeding. It is also known as "juicing", "gigging", or "getting color". Similarly, a blade is an object used for blading, and a bladejob is a specific act of blading. The act is usually done a good length into the match, as the blood will mix with the flowing sweat on a wrestler's brow to make it look like much more blood is flowing from the wound than there actually is. The preferred area for blading is usually the forehead, as scalp wounds bleed profusely and heal easily. Legitimate, unplanned bleeding which occurs outside the storyline is called "juicing the hard way".

Origin
Prior to the advent of blading, most storyline blood in wrestling came from one wrestler deliberately splitting the flesh over their opponent's eyebrow bone with a hard well placed and forceful punch. In his third autobiography, The Hardcore Diaries, Mick Foley cites Terry Funk as one of the few remaining active wrestlers who knows how to "bust an eyebrow open" in this way. However, on a very rare occasion, in the 2012 Extreme Rules event, Brock Lesnar caused John Cena to bleed without blading with a vicious elbow to his head and further hard strikes to Cena's body, though Cena ultimately won the match, and the match was critically acclaimed. The forehead has always been the preferred blading surface, due to the abundance of blood vessels. A cut in this area will bleed freely for a length of time and will heal quickly. A cut in this location will allow the blood to mix in with the sweat on the wrestler's face, giving them a "crimson mask" effect.

Contemporary history
Popularity of blading declined during the mid-2000's. The wrestler always runs the risk of cutting too deeply and slicing an artery in the forehead. In 2004, Eddie Guerrero accidentally did this during his match with JBL at Judgment Day, resulting in a rush of blood pouring from the bladed area. Guerrero lost so much blood because of the cut that he felt the effects from it for two weeks.

In the past North American professional wrestling, blading was almost exclusively performed by and on male performers. However in promotions that allow blading in the 2020s such as All Elite Wrestling (AEW), women have bladed as well. For example, in a match between Britt Baker and Thunder Rosa in 2021, Baker underwent excessive bleeding because of blading during the match.

Some wrestlers like Abdullah the Butcher, Dusty Rhodes, New Jack, Bruiser Brody, King Curtis Iaukea, Carlos Colón Sr., Perro Aguayo, Devon Hughes (Brother Devon/D-Von Dudley), Steve Corino, Tarzan Goto, Balls Mahoney, Kintaro Kanemura, Jun Kasai, Villano III, Ian Rotten, Sabu, The Sheik, and Manny Fernandez, have disfiguring scars on their heads from frequently blading throughout their careers. According to Mick Foley, the scars in Abdullah's forehead are so deep that he enjoys holding coins or gambling chips in them as a macabre party trick.

Presently, blading is a lot less popular than in the past, due to the prevalence and heightened awareness of AIDS and hepatitis. In the 1980s, the willingness to blade was seen as an advantage for new wrestlers. From July 2008 onward, due to its TV-PG rating, WWE has not allowed wrestlers to blade themselves. In most cases, any blood coming from the wrestlers is unintentional. To maintain their TV-PG rating, when a wrestler bleeds on live television, WWE tends to attempt to stop the bleeding mid-match or use different camera angles to avoid showing excessive blood. During repeats of said footage, WWE television programs often shift to black-and-white.

Impact Wrestling, formerly known as Total Nonstop Action Wrestling (TNA), used blading frequently until adopting a new no-blood policy in 2014. Wrestlers Abyss and Raven were famed for their matches involving a lot of blood in TNA before the new policy in 2014.

In the past several years, however, All Elite Wrestling has used blading semi-frequently by way of specific wrestlers like Jon Moxley and Adam Page. AEW also has been known for promoting hardcore and death matches involving barbed wire, thumbtacks, and broken glass, giving more of an incentive for the wrestlers to blade to give the appearance of being wounded by the various weapons. One infamous instance involved Nick Gage cutting Chris Jericho's forehead with a pizza cutter during a picture-in-picture advertisement that coincedentally was promoting Domino's Pizza at the same time.

Examples
One of the most famous such incidents was a bladejob performed by Japanese wrestler The Great Muta in a 1992 match with Hiroshi Hase; the amount of blood Muta lost was so great that many people to this day judge the severity of bladejobs on the Muta Scale.

Extreme Championship Wrestling (ECW) was famous for their hardcore style wrestling employing excessive usage of blading. By far the most controversial incident relating to blading was the Mass Transit incident at an ECW house show on November 23, 1996. During a scheduled tag team match between the team of Axl Rotten and D-Von Dudley versus the team of New Jack and Mustafa Saed, Axl Rotten could not make the show and was replaced by 17-year-old fan Erich Kulas, who lied about both his age (claiming to be 21) and wrestling experience. Before the match, Kulas asked New Jack, who was notorious for his stiff hardcore wrestling style and for shooting on opponents, to blade him, since he never had done it himself, and New Jack agreed. New Jack bladed Kulas with a surgical scalpel but cut too deeply and severed two arteries in Kulas' forehead. Kulas screamed in pain, then passed out as blood poured from his head, and was later hospitalized. The incident generated much negative publicity and a lawsuit by Kulas's family, where New Jack was charged but the Jury dropped all charges as the blading was done per Kulas's request and Kulas had lied about his age. Erich Kulas later died on May 12, 2002, but no connection was made between his death and the incident.

During an interview on Jimmy Kimmel Live!, Mickey Rourke spoke about his experience with gigging himself for a scene in the 2008 movie The Wrestler. Rourke agreed to gig at the initial request of director Darren Aronofsky in hopes that he would revoke the demand come production time. Indeed, later during filming, Aronofsky admitted that Rourke needn't actually gig; however, by his own will, Rourke decided to go through with it anyway. In the film itself, Rourke's character is seen preparing for a match by wrapping a razor blade inside his wrist tape.

There is one notable incident of blading in association football. In 1989, Chile national team goalkeeper Roberto Rojas bladed himself to prevent a loss, by blaming the injury on fireworks thrown by opposing fans. FIFA saw through the ruse and ended up banning Rojas for life and banning Chile from the 1994 FIFA World Cup. Rojas's ban was lifted in 2001.

Canadian wrestler Devon Nicholson pressed charges against Abdullah the Butcher, claiming that he contracted hepatitis C after Abdullah bladed him without consent. An Ontario court ruled in favor of Nicholson and ordered Abdullah to pay $2.3 million.

During their King of the Road match at Uncensored 1995, Dustin Rhodes and The Blacktop Bully bladed, which was against the policy of World Championship Wrestling (WCW) at the time, and they were both fired as a result.

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

title: Blading (professional wrestling)


text:
Janjaweed

The Janjaweed (جَنْجَويد; also transliterated Janjawid ) are an Arab nomad militia group from the Sahel region that operates in Sudan, particularly in Darfur, and eastern Chad. They have also been speculated to be active in Yemen. According to the United Nations definition, Janjaweed membership consists of Arab nomad tribes from the Sahel, the core of whom are Abbala Arabs, traditionally employed in camel herding, with significant recruitment from the Baggara.

Janjaweed nomads were initially at odds with Darfur's sedentary population due to competition over natural grazing grounds and farmland, a conflict exacerbated by dwindling rainfall and drought. The Janjaweed were a major player in the Darfur conflict between 2003 and 2020, in opposition to the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army and the Justice and Equality Movement rebels. In 2013, the Rapid Support Forces grew out of the Janjaweed.

Etymology
The origin of the word Janjaweed is unclear. It may derive from the Arabic words jinn (جِنّ) and ʾajāwīd (أَجاويد), and thus has been translated into English by some sources as "devils on horseback". Other sources suggest it may derive from the Persian word jangavi, or a portmanteau of three words: جَن (jan) from English "gun"; jinn; and ʾajāwīd.

History
In Darfur, a western state in Sudan, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi supported the creation of the Tajammu al-Arabi (Arab Gathering) militia, which was described by Gérard Prunier as "a militantly racist and pan-Arabist organization which stressed the 'Arab' character of the province". The Arab Gathering shared members and a source of support with the Islamic Legion, and the distinction between the two is often ambiguous.

The nearly continuous cross-border raids contributed to a separate ethnic conflict within Darfur that killed about 9,000 people between 1985 and 1988. The Janjaweed leadership has some background in Gaddafi's mercenary forces.

The Janjaweed first appeared in 1988 after Chadian president Hissène Habré, backed by France and the United States, defeated the Libyan army. Gaddafi's Chadian protégé, Acheikh Ibn-Oumar, retreated with his partisan forces to Darfur, where they were hosted by Sheikh Musa Hilal, the newly elevated chief of the Rizeigat Arab tribes of north Darfur. Hilal's tribesmen had earlier smuggled Libyan weapons to Ibn-Oumar's forces. A French-Chadian incursion destroyed Ibn-Oumar's camp, but his weapons remained with his Mahamid hosts.

Throughout the 1990s, the Janjaweed were Arab partisans who pursued a local agenda of controlling land, and were tolerated by the Sudan Government. The majority of Darfur’s Arabs, the Baggara, became involved in the war over grazing territory. In 1999–2000, faced with threats of insurgency in Western and Northern Darfur, Khartoum’s security armed the Janjaweed forces. As the insurgency escalated in February 2003, spearheaded by the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army and the Justice and Equality Movement, the Sudanese government responded by using the Janjaweed as its main counter-insurgency force. Janjaweed forces were ordered to attack and recover the rebel-held areas of Darfur, conducting a campaign against rebels in Darfur. In 2004, the U.S. State Department and others named leading Janjaweed commanders, including Musa Hilal, as genocide suspects. By early 2006, many Janjaweed had been absorbed into the Sudan Armed Forces including the Popular Defense Forces and Border Guards. Meanwhile, the Janjaweed expanded to include some Arab tribes in eastern Darfur who were not historically associated with the original Janjaweed. A political base was also reestablished in Chad as part of the United Front for Democratic Change (FUC) coalition.

By October 2007, only the United States government had declared the Janjaweed killings in Darfur to be genocide, since they had killed an estimated 200,000–400,000 civilians over the previous three years. The UN Security Council called for the Janjaweed to be disarmed. On 14 July 2008, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court filed genocide charges against Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir, accusing him of masterminding attempts to wipe out African tribes in Darfur with a campaign of murder, rape and deportation.

In 2013, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) were formed from the Janjaweed to fight against rebel groups in Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile.

2023 rebellion
In 2023, international diplomats insisted that the RSF merge into the Sudanese Army as part of the Sudanese transition to democracy. By April 2023, power struggles developed between Sudan's de facto national leader, army commander Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the leader of the RSF, Hemedti. On 15 April 2023, clashes between RSF and army forces erupted across the country. By the second day of the conflict, 78 people had been reported killed. Among the dead were three World Food Programme (WFP) workers, triggering the organization to suspend its work in Sudan, where it had been a principal force in alleviating hunger. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres demanded immediate justice for the killings and called for an end to the conflict.

Diplomats from the African Union and Saudi Arabia mediated a three-hour humanitarian ceasefire to permit the evacuation of the injured. Despite this, the battles continued, as both sides claimed to have seized control of key sites in and around the capital city.

title: Janjaweed


text:
Bernd and Hilla Becher

Bernhard "Bernd" Becher (20 August 1931 – 22 June 2007), and Hilla Becher, née Wobeser (2 September 1934 – 10 October 2015), were German conceptual artists and photographers working as a collaborative duo. They are best known for their extensive series of photographic images, or typologies, of industrial buildings and structures, often organised in grids. As the founders of what has come to be known as the 'Becher school' or the Düsseldorf School of Photography, they influenced generations of documentary photographers and artists in Germany and abroad. They were awarded the Erasmus Prize and the Hasselblad Award.

Biography
Bernd Becher was born in Siegen. He studied painting at the Staatliche Akademie der Bildenden Künste Stuttgart from 1953 to 1956, then typography under Karl Rössing at the Kunstakademie Düsseldorf from 1959 to 1961. Hilla Becher was born in Potsdam. Prior to Hilla's time studying photography at the Kunstakademie Düsseldorf from 1958 to 1961, she had completed an apprenticeship as a photographer in her native Potsdam. Both began working as freelance photographers for the Troost Advertising Agency in Düsseldorf, concentrating on product photography. They got married in 1961. The German-American photographer Max Becher (born 1964) is their son.

Work
Meeting as students at the Kunstakademie Düsseldorf in 1957, Bernd and Hilla Becher first collaborated on photographing and documenting the disappearing German industrial architecture in 1959. The Ruhr Valley, where Becher's family had worked in the steel and mining industries, was their initial focus. They were fascinated by the similar shapes in which certain buildings were designed. After collating thousands of pictures of individual structures, they noticed that the various edifices – of cooling towers, gas tanks and coal bunkers, for instance – shared many distinctive formal qualities. In addition, they were intrigued by the fact that so many of these industrial buildings seemed to have been built with a great deal of attention toward design.

Together, the Bechers first photographed with a 6x9cm camera and then (after 1961) mostly with a large format Plaubel Peco 13x18-centimeter (5x7-inch) monorail camera. They photographed these buildings from a number of different angles, but always with a straightforward "objective" point of view. The adjustable standards of the monorail camera enabled them perspective control to maintain parallel lines in their photographs. They used a range of optics from 90mm wide-angle lenses to 600mm telephoto lenses to make similar subjects appear similarly sized despite not being able to always photograph from the same distances. They chose to work in black and white both because of its capacity to capture three-dimensional volume without the distraction of color, and its reliability and cost in relation to the sensitized color materials at the time. After working with 13x18-centimeter glass photographic plates, they shifted to 25 ASA film speed negative sheet film around 1970. They typically made two exposures for each view, with a range of exposure times from 10 seconds to a minute. The Bechers shared darkroom tasks, with Bernd developing the negatives, and Hilla making the prints. To make the sky appear white in their prints, they often photographed on overcast days but optimized their lighting for each subject (using a blue filter when the sky was blue), or photographed early in the morning during the seasons of spring and fall. Their subjects included framework houses (timber framing), barns, water towers, coal tipples, cooling towers, grain elevators, coal bunkers, coke ovens, oil refineries, blast furnaces, gas tanks, storage silos, and warehouses. At each site the Bechers also created overall landscape photographs of the entire plant, which set the structures in their context and show how they relate to each other. They excluded any details that would detract from the central theme and instead set up comparisons of viewpoint and lighting through which the eye is led to the basic structural pattern of the images being compared. This principle, which is allied to the philosophy underlying the New Topographics movement, is most obvious in the two published series, Anonyme Skulpturen: Eine Typologie technischer Bauten and Typologien, Industrieller Bau, 1963–1975, in which the images are contrasted in groups of three. Another early project, which they pursued for nearly two decades, was published as Framework Houses (Schirmer/Mosel) in 1977, a visual catalog of types of structures, an approach that characterized much of their work.

In drawing attention to the cultural dimension of industrial architecture, their work also highlighted the need for preservation of these buildings. On the couple's initiative the Zollern II/IV Colliery at Dortmund-Bovinghausen in the Ruhr, a historicism structure with the exception of the machine hall (Art Nouveau), was designated a protected landmark.

The Bechers also photographed outside Germany, including from 1965 buildings in Great Britain, France, Belgium and later in the United States. In 1966, they undertook a six-month journey through England and south Wales, taking hundreds of photographs of the coal industry around Liverpool, Manchester, Sheffield, Nottingham and the Rhondda Valley. In 1974, they traveled to North America for the first time, touring sites in New Jersey, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and southern Ontario, depicting a range of industrial structures, from coal breakers to wooden winding towers.

The Bechers exhibited and published their single-image gelatin silver prints, grouped by subject, in a grid of six, nine, or fifteen. By the mid-1960s the Bechers had settled on a preferred presentational mode: the images of structures with similar functions are then displayed side by side to invite viewers to compare their forms and designs based on function, regional idiosyncrasies, or the age of the structures. The Bechers used the term "typology" to describe these ordered sets of photographs. The works' titles are pithy and captions note only time and location. In 1989–91, for an exhibition at the Dia Art Foundation in New York, the Bechers introduced a second format into their oeuvre: single images that are larger in size — twenty-four by twenty inches — and presented individually, rather than as gridded tableaux.

In 1976, Bernd Becher started teaching photography at the Kunstakademie Düsseldorf (policy matters prevented Hilla's simultaneous appointment), where he remained on the faculty until 1996. Before him, photography had been excluded from what was largely a school for painters. He influenced students that later made a name for themselves in the photography world. Former students of Bernd's included Andreas Gursky, Thomas Ruff, Thomas Struth, Candida Höfer, Axel Hütte and Elger Esser. Bernd died in Rostock.

After Bernd Becher's death, his widow Hilla continued to reassemble their works, mostly using existing photographs.

Exhibitions
The Bechers had their first gallery exhibition in 1963 at the Galerie Ruth Nohl in Siegen. Their work became better known in the United States with the publication of their book Anonyme Skulpturen (Anonymous Sculptures) in 1970. The Bechers were shown at the George Eastman House and in solo exhibitions at Sonnabend Gallery, New York, in 1972. In 1974, the Institute of Contemporary Arts, London, organized an exhibition of their work, which toured the United Kingdom. The couple was invited to participate in Documenta 5, 6, 7, and 11 in Kassel in 1972, 1977, 1982 and 2002, and at the Bienal de São Paulo in 1977. The Stedelijk Van Abbemuseum, Eindhoven, organized a retrospective of the artists' work in 1981. In 1985 the artists had a major museum exhibition, which traveled to the Museum Folkwang, Essen, Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris, and Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Liège, Belgium. In 1991 the artists won the Leone d'Oro award for sculpture at the Venice Biennale. The Venice installation was reworked later in 1991, in a retrospective exhibition at the Kölnischer Kunstverein, Cologne. The Typologies installation was exhibited in 1994 at the Ydessa Hendeles Art Foundation, Toronto, and at the Westfälisches Landesmuseum für Kunst und Kulturgeschichte in Münster. Other retrospectives of the couple's work have been organized by the Photographische Sammlung/SK Stiftung Kulture in Cologne (1999 and 2003), Centre Georges Pompidou in Paris (2005) and Museum of Modern Art in New York (2008).

In 2014, Hilla Becher curated "August Sander/Bernd and Hilla Becher: 'A Dialogue at Bruce Silverstein Gallery in New York. Unlike previous displays, the Bechers' architectural images were displayed as singular "portraits" while Sander's photographs of people were represented as typological grids. In 2022, the Metropolitan Museum of Art held a major retrospective of their photographic oeuvre, which received "blockbuster" reviews from major art critics.

Legacy
The Becher school has influenced a number of (mainly) German photographers including Andreas Gursky, Thomas Struth, Thomas Ruff, Candida Höfer, Laurenz Berges, Bernhard Fuchs, Axel Hütte, Simone Nieweg, and Petra Wunderlich. The Canadian photographer Edward Burtynsky also drews inspiration from the duo and works in a similar mode. Aside from its vital documentary and analytical qualities, the Bechers' long-term project has also had a considerable impact on Minimalism and Conceptual Art since the 1970s.

The highest price reached by one of the duo's works was when Water Towers (1972), a grid of nine photographs, sold by $441,940, at Sotheby's Paris, on 15 November 2015.

Public collections
The Bechers' work is held, among others, in the following public collections: • Art Institute of Chicago, Chicago

• Cleveland Museum of Art

• Dallas Museum of Art

• Harvard Art Museums

• J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles

• Kunstmuseum Basel

• Los Angeles County Museum of Art

• Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

• Milwaukee Art Museum

• Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth

• Museum of Contemporary Art Chicago

• Museum of Fine Arts, Boston

• Museum of Modern Art, New York

• National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.

• Peggy Guggenheim Collection, Venice

• San Francisco Museum of Modern Art

• Guggenheim Museum, New York

• Tate galleries, London

Awards

 * 1985: The Cultural Award from the German Society for Photography (DGPh)
 * 2002: Erasmus Prize awarded to the Bechers in recognition of their roles as professors at the Kunstakademie Düsseldorf.
 * 2004: Hasselblad Award from the Hasselblad Foundation awarded to the Bechers.
 * 2014: Großer Kulturpreis, sponsored by the Sparkassen-Kulturstiftung Rheinland, awarded to Hilla Becher.

Books by Bernd and Hilla Becher

 * Industriebauten 1830–1930 : Eine fotografische Dokumentation, München, Die Neue Sammlung, 1967, 34 p., 103 ill.,.
 * Anonyme Skulpturen : Formvergleiche industrieller Bauten [Anonymous Sculptures : Form comparisons of industrial buildings], Düsseldorf, Städtische Kunsthalle Düsseldorf, 1969, 36 p., 21 ill., ISBN 978-3-92122-408-3.
 * Anonyme Skulpturen : Eine Typologie technischer Bauten [Anonymous Sculptures : A typology of technical buildings], New York, Düsseldorf, Wittenborn & Co., Art Press, 1970, 216 p., 194 ill., ISBN 978-3-92122-408-3.
 * Fotografien 1957 bis 1975, Köln, Rheinland-Verlag, 1975, 167 p., 124 ill., ISBN 978-3-79270-249-9.
 * Fachwerkhäuserdes Siegener Industriegebietes [Framework Houses], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 1977, 356 p., 350 ill., ISBN 978-3-88814-005-1 [eng. ISBN 978-3-88814-013-6].
 * Fördertürme [Chevalements, Mineheads], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 1985, 220 p., 196 ill., ISBN 3-88814-173-7.
 * Wassertürme [Châteaux d'Eau, Water Towers], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 1988, 240 p., 223 ill., ISBN 978-3-88814-255-0 [fr. ISBN 978-3-88814-520-9, eng. ISBN 978-0-2620-2277-4].
 * Hochöfen [Blast Furnaces], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 1990, 272 p., 319 ill., ISBN 3-88814-352-7 [eng. ISBN 978-3-88814-352-6, fr. ISBN 978-3-88814-558-2].
 * Tipologie – Typologien – Typologies : Katalog der 44. Biennale Venedig 1990, München, Schirmer-Mosel, 1990, 64 p., 321 ill., ISBN 3-88814-417-5 | 1999 : ISBN 3-88814-593-7.
 * Pennsylvania Coal Mine Tipples [Pennsylvanische Kleinbergwerke], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 1991, 136 p., 99 ill., ISBN 3-88814-408-6 [engl. ISBN 3-88814-416-7].
 * Gasbehälter [Gas Tanks], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 1993, 120 p., 102 ill., ISBN 3-88814-493-0 [engl. ISBN 3-88814-681-X].
 * Grundformen [Basic Forms], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 1993, 160 p., 64 ill., ISBN 3-88814-704-2 | 1999 : coll. Meister der Kamera ISBN 3-88814-959-2 [engl. ISBN 3-88814-400-0] | 2014 : ISBN 978-3-82960694-3.
 * Fabrikhallen [Industrial Façades], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 1994, 276 p., 264 ill., ISBN 3-88814-730-1.
 * Fördertürme [Mineheads], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 1997, 200 p., 190 ill., ISBN 3-88814-803-0.
 * Serien Bernd & Hilla Becher, Mainz, Hermann Schmidt, 1998, 134 p., ill., ISBN 978-3-8743-9460-4.
 * Zeche Hannibal [Coal Mine Hannibal], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 2000, 124 p., 170 ill., ISBN 978-3-88814-937-5.
 * Festschrift : Erasmuspreis 2002, München, Schirmer-Mosel, 2002, 168 p., 128 ill., ISBN 978-3-8296-0064-4.
 * Industrielandschaften [Industrial Landscapes], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 2002, 272 p., 180 ill., ISBN 978-3-8296-0003-3.
 * Typologien industrieller Bauten [Typologies of Industrial Buildings], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 2003, 276 p., 1.528 ill.,ISBN 978-3-8296-0092-7.
 * Grundformen industrieller Bauten [Basic Forms of Industrial Buildings], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 2004, 144 p., 61 ill., ISBN 978-3-8296-0150-4 [engl. ISBN 978-3-8296-0173-3].
 * Kühltürme [Cooling Towers], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 2005, 244 p., 236 ill., ISBN 978-3-8296-0192-4.
 * Getreidesilos [Grain Elevators], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 2006, 256 p., 246 ill., ISBN 978-3-8296-0256-3.
 * Zeche Concordia, Linz, Oberösterreichisches Landesmuseum Linz, 2007, 55 p., ill., ISBN 978-3-8547-4166-4.
 * Bernd and Hilla Becher at Museo Morandi, München, Schirmer-Mosel, 2009, 48 p., 173 ill., ISBN 978-3-8296-0406-2.
 * Bergwerke und Hütten [Coal Mines and Steel Mills], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 2010, 188 p., 154 ill., ISBN 978-3-8296-0467-3 [engl. ISBN 978-3-8296-0474-1].
 * Zeche Hannover – Hannover Coal Mine, München, Schirmer-Mosel, 2010, 280 p., 237 ill., ISBN 978-3-8296-0468-0.
 * Steinwerke und Kalköfen [Stonework and Lime Kilns], München, Schirmer-Mosel, 2013, 256 p., 232 ill., ISBN 978-3-8296-0576-2.

Books about Bernd and Hilla Becher

 * Bernd & Hilla Becher speak with Moritz Neumüller. Madrid: La Fábrica / Fundación Telefónica, 2005. By Moritz Neumüller. ISBN 978-84-96466-04-3.
 * Bernd and Hilla Becher: Life and Work. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2006. By Susanne Lange. ISBN 0-262-12286-3.
 * Bernd & Hilla Becher. (Catalogue in conjunction with the 2022 exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum of Art) New York, New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 2022. By Jeff L. Rosenheim. ISBN 978-1-58839-755-3.

title: Bernd and Hilla Becher


text:
Talk:Mozilla (version)

For a September 2004 deletion debate see Votes for deletion/Mozilla (version)

Mozilla 1.7 release date
Where have u found May 21 for Mozilla 1.7 release date? Mozilla 1.7 Release Status ]indicates an rc3 on June 3 and the final only on June 10. - Martani

it changes now and then, tehy are usally alwyas ove rthe expected date.

Why does this page exist?
I don't understand why Wikipedia needs a version history for any piece of software, even Mozilla. I like mozilla as well as the next guy (I even wrote the original Mozilla FAQ), but it just doesn't seem right for Wikipedia to duplicate this information when it's easily found elsewhere, needs to be updated frequently, and is of little encyclopedic interest. In my opinion, this page should be deleted.

title: Talk:Mozilla (version)


text:
6to4

6to4 is an Internet transition mechanism for migrating from Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) to version 6 (IPv6) and a system that allows IPv6 packets to be transmitted over an IPv4 network (generally the IPv4 Internet) without the need to configure explicit tunnels. Special relay servers are also in place that allow 6to4 networks to communicate with native IPv6 networks.

6to4 is especially relevant during the initial phases of deployment to full, native IPv6 connectivity, since IPv6 is not required on nodes between the host and the destination. However, it is intended only as a transition mechanism and is not meant to be used permanently.

6to4 may be used by an individual host, or by a local IPv6 network. When used by a host, it must have a global IPv4 address connected, and the host is responsible for encapsulation of outgoing IPv6 packets and decapsulation of incoming 6to4 packets. If the host is configured to forward packets for other clients, often a local network, it is then a router.

Most IPv6 networks use autoconfiguration, which requires the last 64 bits of the address for the host. The first 64 bits are the IPv6 prefix. The first 16 bits of the prefix are always :, the next 32 bits are the IPv4 address, and the last 16 bits of the prefix are available for addressing multiple IPv6 subnets behind the same 6to4 router. Since the IPv6 hosts using autoconfiguration already have determined the unique 64 bit host portion of their address, they must simply wait for a Router Advertisement indicating the first 64 bits of prefix to have a complete IPv6 address. A 6to4 router will know to send an encapsulated packet directly over IPv4 if the first 16 bits are, using the next 32 as the destination, or otherwise send the packet to a well-known relay server, which has access to native IPv6.

6to4 does not facilitate interoperation between IPv4-only hosts and IPv6-only hosts (for that, see NAT64). 6to4 is simply a transparent mechanism used as a transport layer between IPv6 nodes.

Due to the high levels of misconfigured hosts and poor performance observed, an advisory about how 6to4 should be deployed was published in August 2011. Due to unsolvable operational problems using the 6to4 anycast prefix, that part of the standard was deprecated in 2015.

How 6to4 works
6to4 performs three functions:

 * Assigns a block of IPv6 address space to any host or network that has a global IPv4 address.
 * Encapsulates IPv6 packets inside IPv4 packets for transmission over an IPv4 network using 6in4.
 * Routes traffic between 6to4 and "native" IPv6 networks.

Address block allocation
For any 32-bit global IPv4 address that is assigned to a host, a 48-bit 6to4 IPv6 prefix can be constructed for use by that host (and if applicable the network behind it) by appending the IPv4 address to.

For example, the global IPv4 address has the corresponding 6to4 prefix. This gives a prefix length of 48 bits, which leaves room for a 16-bit subnet field and 64 bit host addresses within the subnets.

Any IPv6 address that begins with the prefix (in other words, any address with the first two octets of 2002 hexadecimal) is known as a 6to4 address, as opposed to a native IPv6 address which does not systematically use transition technologies.

Note that using a reserved IPv4 address, such as those provided by, is undefined, since these networks are disallowed from being routed on the public Internet. For example, using as the router's WAN address would be invalid since a return packet would not be able to determine the destination IPv4 address of the actual sender.

Encapsulation and transmission
6to4 embeds an IPv6 packet in the payload portion of an IPv4 packet with protocol type 41. To send an IPv6 packet over an IPv4 network to a 6to4 destination address, an IPv4 header with protocol type 41 is prepended to the IPv6 packet. The IPv4 destination address for the prepended packet header is derived from the IPv6 destination address of the inner packet (which is in the format of a 6to4 address), by extracting the 32 bits immediately following the IPv6 destination address's prefix. The IPv4 source address in the prepended packet header is the IPv4 address of the host or router which is sending the packet over IPv4. The resulting IPv4 packet is then routed to its IPv4 destination address just like any other IPv4 packet.

Routing between 6to4 and native IPv6
To allow hosts and networks using 6to4 addresses to exchange traffic with hosts using "native" IPv6 addresses, "relay routers" have been established. A relay router connects to an IPv4 network and an IPv6 network. 6to4 packets arriving on an IPv4 interface will have their IPv6 payloads routed to the IPv6 network, while packets arriving on the IPv6 interface with a destination address prefix of will be encapsulated and forwarded over the IPv4 network.

There is a difference between a "relay router" and a "border router" (also known as a "6to4 border router"). A 6to4 border router is an IPv6 router supporting a 6to4 pseudo-interface. It is normally the border router between an IPv6 site and a wide-area IPv4 network, where the IPv6 site uses co-related to the IPv4 address used later on. On the other hand, a "relay router" is a 6to4 router configured to support transit routing between 6to4 addresses and pure native IPv6 addresses.

To allow a 6to4 host to communicate with the native IPv6 Internet, it must have its IPv6 default gateway set to a 6to4 address which contains the IPv4 address of a 6to4 relay router. To avoid the need for users to set this up manually, the anycast address used to be allocated. It could be assigned to any number of 6to4 relay routers, so that IPv4 routing would take care of routing the encapsulated IPv6 packets to the one closest-by for forwarding onto IPv6 Internet. Due to unsolvable operational problems, this use has been deprecated.

Packets from the IPv6 Internet to 6to4 systems must be sent to a 6to4 relay router by normal IPv6 routing methods. The specification states that such relay routers must only advertise and not subdivisions of it to prevent IPv4 routes polluting the routing tables of IPv6 routers. From here they can then be sent over the IPv4 Internet to the destination.

For a 6to4 host to have fast and reliable connectivity with a host natively using the IPv6 Internet, both the 6to4 host and the native IPv6 host must have a route to a fast, reliable and correctly configured relay server. The 6to4 host's ISP can ensure that outgoing packets go to such a relay, but they have no control over the relay used for the responses from the native IPv6 host. A variant called IPv6 rapid deployment ("6rd") uses the same basic principles as 6to4 but uses a relay operated by the 6rd user's ISP for traffic in both directions. To achieve this an address block allocated by the user's ISP is used instead of.

Reverse DNS delegation
When a site using 6to4 has a fixed global IPv4 address, its 6to4 IPv6 prefix is also fixed. It is then possible to request reverse DNS delegation for an individual 6to4 48-bits prefix inside the  DNS zone from the Number Resource Organization at 6to4.nro.net. The process is entirely automatic.

Security considerations
According to, 6to4 routers and relays should ensure that:

 * either or both the source and destination addresses of any encapsulated packet is within the 6to4 IPv6 prefix ,
 * if the source IPv6 address is a 6to4 IPv6 address, its corresponding 6to4 router IPv4 address matches the IPv4 source address in the IPv4 encapsulation header,
 * similarly, if the destination IPv6 address is a 6to4 IPv6 address, its corresponding 6to4 router IPv4 address matches the IPv4 destination address in the IPv4 encapsulation header,
 * any embedded 6to4 router IPv4 address is global unicast.

Microsoft Windows
6to4 has been default disabled since the Anniversary Update. It is no longer being actively supported and might be removed in a future release.

title: 6to4


text:
James Tuchet, 5th Baron Audley

James Tuchet, 5th Baron Audley, 2nd Baron Tuchet (c. 1398 – 23 September 1459) of Heleigh Castle was an English peer.

James Tuchet, 5th Baron Audley, son of Elizabeth Stafford and her husband John Tuchet, 4th Baron Audley, was a distinguished veteran of the Hundred Years' War. In the opening phase of the Wars of the Roses he raised troops from his estates in Cheshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire and Derbyshire and commanded the Lancastrian force that moved to block the Yorkist Earl of Salisbury's route to Ludlow where he intended linking up with the rest of the Yorkist army.

The two forces clashed in the Battle of Blore Heath on 23 September 1459 and Audley was killed by Sir Roger Kynaston of Stocks near Ellesmere (Kynaston incorporated emblems of the Audley coat-of-arms into his own). Audley's Cross still stands on the battlefield marking the spot where he died.

Audley was buried in Darley Abbey, north of Derby, about 40 mi away from Blore Heath. The Abbey no longer stands, so his final resting place is no longer marked.

Marriages and children
Audley married twice:
 * Firstly, having obtained a marriage licence dated 24 February 1415, to Margaret de Ros (c. 1400 - before 14 February 1430), daughter of Margaret FitzAlan (D'Arundel) and her husband William de Ros, 6th Baron de Ros. They were granted a Papal Dispensation for being related in the 3rd and 4th degrees of kindred.   Together they had three children:
 * John Tuchet, 6th Baron Audley (c. 1426 - 26 September 1490),  son and heir.
 * Elizabeth Touchet (c. 1420 - before 8 November 1464), who married Edward Brooke, 6th Baron Cobham.
 * Anne Touchet (c. 1424 - 1503), who married Sir Thomas Dutton, who died at the Battle of Blore Heath (1459) along with his father-in-law.
 * Secondly, having obtained a marriage licence on 14 September 1430, he married Eleanor de Holland, an illegitimate daughter of Edmund Holland, 4th Earl of Kent and his mistress Constance of York, daughter of Infanta Isabella of Castile and Edmund of Langley, 1st Duke of York. They too were granted a Papal Dispensation, as they were related in the 3rd and 3rd degrees of affinity.  With Eleanor de Holland he had a further seven children as follows:
 * Sir Humphrey Touchet (c. 1434 - 6 May 1471), who married Elizabeth Courtenay, widow of Sir James Luttrell (1426/7-1461) of Dunster Castle in Somerset, feudal baron of Dunster,  (who died fighting for the Lancastrian cause at the Battle of St Albans in 1461) and a daughter of Sir Philip Courtenay (1404–1463) of Powderham in Devon. Like his father, he supported the House of Lancaster. He was taken prisoner at the battle of Tewkesbury and tried before Richard, Duke of Gloucester and the Duke of Norfolk. Executed with other Lancastrian leaders in the Market Square he was buried under the pavement in the Chapel of St Nicolas, in the Abbey Church of St Mary the Virgin.
 * Thomas Touchet (c. 1440 - June 1507),   who married a certain Catherine.
 * Edmund Audley (c. 1443 - 23 August 1524), who served successively Bishop of Rochester, Bishop of Hereford and Bishop of Salisbury.
 * Margaret Touchet (c. 1431 - before 2 February 1481), who at some time before 12 January 1459  married Richard Grey, 3rd Earl of Tankerville, son of Sir Henry Grey, 2nd Earl of Tankerville and Antigone Plantagenet.
 * Constance Touchet (born c. 1432), who in 1464 married (as his second wife) Sir Robert Whitney (born 1436 - aft. 1467), an active participant in the Wars of the Roses, son of Eustace Whitney and Jennet Trussell  and widower of Alice Vaughn, daughter of Thomas Vaughn.
 * Eleanor Touchet (born circa 1442), who married Humphrey Grey, son of Sir Henry Grey, 2nd Earl of Tankerville and Antigone Plantagenet, in 1460.
 * Anne Touchet (born circa 1446), who married Sir Richard Delabere.

title: James Tuchet, 5th Baron Audley


text:
List of settlements in Achaea

This is a list of settlements in Achaea, Greece:

 * Achaiko
 * Agia Marina
 * Agia Varvara, Akrata
 * Agia Varvara, Tritaia
 * Agios Konstantinos
 * Agios Nikolaos Kralis
 * Agios Nikolaos Spaton
 * Agios Nikolaos
 * Agios Stefanos (Peristera)
 * Agios Stefanos Saravaliou
 * Agios Vasileios
 * Agiovlasitika
 * Agrampela
 * Agridi
 * Agrilia
 * Aigeira
 * Aiges
 * Aigio
 * Akrata
 * Aktaio
 * Alestaina
 * Alissos
 * Alepochori
 * Alsos
 * Ampelokipoi
 * Ampelos
 * Amygdalea
 * Anastasi
 * Ano Achaia
 * Ano Diakopto
 * Ano Katsaiteika
 * Ano Kastritsi
 * Ano Kleitoria
 * Ano Lousoi
 * Ano Mazaraki
 * Ano Soudenaiika
 * Ano Thomeika
 * Ano Vlasia
 * Ano Zachlorou
 * Apideonas
 * Arachovitika
 * Araxos
 * Argyra
 * Arla
 * Armpounas
 * Aroania
 * Arravonitsa
 * Avgereika
 * Chaikali
 * Chalandritsa
 * Charavgi
 * Chatzis
 * Chiona
 * Chovoli
 * Chrysanthio
 * Chrysopigi
 * Dafnes
 * Dafni
 * Damakini
 * Demesticha
 * Desino
 * Diakopto
 * Didacheika
 * Digeliotika
 * Dimitropoulo
 * Doukanaiika
 * Doumena
 * Drepano
 * Drosato
 * Drosia
 * Drymos
 * Elaiochori
 * Elaionas
 * Elekistra
 * Eliki
 * Elliniko
 * Erymantheia
 * Exochi
 * Fares
 * Filia
 * Flampoura
 * Fostaina
 * Fragka
 * Galanaiika
 * Gkaneika
 * Gkraika
 * Glastra
 * Goumenissa
 * Grigori
 * Isoma
 * Kagkadi
 * Kalamaki (Charmpileika)
 * Kalamias
 * Kalanistra
 * Kalanos
 * Kalavryta
 * Kalentzi
 * Kalfas
 * Kallifoni
 * Kallithea
 * Kalousi
 * Kamares
 * Kamenianoi
 * Kaminia
 * Kandalos
 * Kareika
 * Kastelli
 * Kastria
 * Katarraktis
 * Katholiko
 * Kato Achaia
 * Kato Alissos
 * Kato Kastritsi
 * Kato Katsaiteika
 * Kato Lousoi
 * Kato Mazaraki
 * Kato Thomeika
 * Kato Vlasia
 * Kato Zachlorou
 * Kerpini
 * Kertezi
 * Keryneia
 * Kleitor
 * Kleitoria
 * Komi
 * Korfes
 * Kouloura
 * Koumari
 * Kouneleika
 * Kounina
 * Kouteli
 * Krathio
 * Krini Aigaleias
 * Krini
 * Krinofyta
 * Krinos
 * Kritharakia
 * Kryoneri
 * Krystallovrysi
 * Lagovouni
 * Lakka
 * Lakkomata
 * Lakkopetra
 * Lapanagoi
 * Lechouri
 * Lefkasio
 * Leontio
 * Limnochori
 * Livartzi
 * Longos
 * Lousika
 * Lykouria
 * Mageiras
 * Mamousia
 * Manesi Patron
 * Manesi
 * Mataragka
 * Mavriki
 * Melissia
 * Mesorrougi
 * Metochi
 * Michoi
 * Mikros Pontias
 * Mintilogli
 * Mirali
 * Mitopoli
 * Moira
 * Monastiri
 * Monodendri
 * Myrovrysi
 * Myrtos
 * Nasia
 * Neo Kompigadi
 * Neo Souli
 * Neos Erineos
 * Nerantzies
 * Niforeika
 * Nikolaiika
 * Oasi
 * Ovria
 * Pangrati
 * Paos
 * Paralia Platanou
 * Paralia
 * Paraskevi
 * Patras
 * Pefko
 * Peristera (Agios Stefanos)
 * Peristera Kalavryton
 * Perithori
 * Petas
 * Petrochori
 * Petroto
 * Petsakoi
 * Pititsa
 * Plaka
 * Planitero
 * Platani
 * Plataniotissa
 * Platanos
 * Platanovrysi
 * Poimenochori (Boudoureika)
 * Porovitsa
 * Portes
 * Priolithos
 * Profitis Ilias
 * Psathopyrgos
 * Psofida
 * Pteri
 * Rakita
 * Rio
 * Riolos
 * Rizomylos
 * Rodia
 * Rododafni
 * Rogoi
 * Roitika
 * Roupakia
 * Sageika
 * Salmeniko
 * Santomeri
 * Saravali
 * Seires
 * Seliana
 * Selianitika
 * Selinountas
 * Sella
 * Sigouni
 * Sinevro
 * Skepasto
 * Skiadas
 * Skotani
 * Skouras
 * Souvalioteika
 * Souvardo
 * Spartia
 * Starochori
 * Stasi Kerpinis (Rallia)
 * Stavrodromi
 * Sylivainiotika
 * Temeni
 * Thea
 * Theriano
 * Toumpa
 * Tourlada
 * Trapeza
 * Trechlo
 * Tsoukalaiika
 * Valimi
 * Valimitika
 * Valta
 * Vasiliko
 * Vela
 * Velimachi
 * Velitses
 * Verino
 * Vilivina
 * Voutsimos
 * Vrachnaiika
 * Vrachni
 * Zachloritika
 * Zarouchla
 * Ziria
 * Zisimeika

title: List of settlements in Achaea


text:
Fuck (band)

Fuck is an American indie rock band, formed in Oakland, California in 1993. It consists of Timothy Prudhomme, Geoff Soule, Kyle Statham and Theodore Ellison. They have recorded for a number of labels including Matador Records and Homesleep Records of Italy.

History
Fuck was formed in Oakland, California in 1993. The members met while stuck in a police holding cell over the weekend, and wrote a few songs while in jail. They released a self-titled cassette called Fuck, and a single, MonkeyBeautyShotgun on their own imprint, Rhesus Records, in 1994. (The songs from the cassette would eventually find their way onto later releases. ) They released their second full-length album, Pretty...Slow, in 1996. It was subsequently released on three different labels. Their third album, Baby Loves a Funny Bunny, was also released in 1996.

They then signed to Matador Records, who released the albums Pardon My French in 1997 and Conduct in 1998. According to Timothy Prudhomme, a Matador marketing director told them that they needed to change the band's name, but they refused.

After Conduct, the band left Matador and drifted between labels. In 2001, they released two albums on two different labels: Cupid's Cactus, on Steve Shelley's independent label Smells Like Records; and Gold Bricks, on Homesleep Records in 2001. Those Are Not My Bongos was released in 2003 on both Homesleep and Future Farmer Records; the latter re released it the U.S. in 2004.

The song "Laundry Shop" from Conduct was featured (uncredited) in a 2006 episode of the CBS sitcom How I Met Your Mother.

In November 2008, the band participated with other similarly named bands, including Holy Fuck, Fucked Up, and Fuck Buttons in the Festival of the Fuck Bands music festival in the village of Fucking, Austria.

In 2018, Fuck released The Band, their first LP in 14 years.

To date, Fuck has performed over 400 live shows and recorded on nine labels. Prudhomme currently lives in Memphis and the rest of the band lives in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Albums

 * Fuck (cassette) – Rhesus – 1994
 * Pretty...Slow (CD) – Rhesus – 1996
 * Baby Loves a Funny Bunny (CD) – Rhesus – 1996
 * Pardon My French (CD) – Matador – 1997
 * Conduct (LP/CD) – Matador – 1998
 * Cupid's Cactus (CD) – Smells Like Records – 2001
 * Gold Bricks (CD) – Homesleep Records – 2001
 * Those Are Not My Bongos (CD) – Homesleep Records – 2003
 * The Band (LP/CD) - Vampire Blues - 2018

Singles and EPs

 * "MonkeyBeautyShotgun" (7") – Rhesus – 1994
 * "LikeyouButterflySomewheres" (7") – Rhesus – 1995
 * "Fish or Fry" (7") – Academy of Chess and Checkers – 1996
 * "TetherFuckmotel" (7") – Jagjaguwar – 1997
 * "Tocotronic" (7") – Rhesus – 1998
 * "Moxie" (7") – Rhesus – 1998
 * "Yuppie Flu" (7") – Rhesus – 1999
 * "BlindbeautyMadeup" (7") – Speakerphone Recordings – 1999
 * "Mumble and Peg" (7") – Vaccination Records – 1999
 * Split with Pee – Cool Beans Records – 2000
 * "Homesleep Singles Club No. 4" (CD) – Homesleep Records – 2003

title: Fuck (band)


text:
Conway's LUX method for magic squares

Conway's LUX method for magic squares is an algorithm by John Horton Conway for creating magic squares of order 4n+2, where n is a natural number.

Method
Start by creating a (2n+1)-by-(2n+1) square array consisting of and then exchange the U in the middle with the L above it.
 * n+1 rows of Ls,
 * 1 row of Us, and
 * n-1 rows of Xs,

Each letter represents a 2x2 block of numbers in the finished square.

Now replace each letter by four consecutive numbers, starting with 1, 2, 3, 4 in the centre square of the top row, and moving from block to block in the manner of the Siamese method: move up and right, wrapping around the edges, and move down whenever you are obstructed. Fill each 2x2 block according to the order prescribed by the letter:

 * $$\mathrm{L}: \quad \begin{smallmatrix}4&&1\\&\swarrow&\\2&\rightarrow&3\end{smallmatrix} \qquad \mathrm{U}: \quad \begin{smallmatrix}1&&4\\\downarrow&&\uparrow\\2&\rightarrow&3\end{smallmatrix} \qquad \mathrm{X}:\quad \begin{smallmatrix}1&&4\\&\searrow\!\!\!\!\!\!\nearrow&\\3&&2\end{smallmatrix}$$

Example
Let n = 2, so that the array is 5x5 and the final square is 10x10.
 * {| class="wikitable" style="text-align: center"

 * L||L||L||L||L
 * L||L||L||L||L
 * L||L||U||L||L
 * U||U||L||U||U
 * X||X||X||X||X
 * }
 * U||U||L||U||U
 * X||X||X||X||X
 * }
 * }

Start with the L in the middle of the top row, move to the 4th X in the bottom row, then to the U at the end of the 4th row, then the L at the beginning of the 3rd row, etc.

 * {| class="wikitable" style="text-align: center"

 * width="10%" | 68
 * width="10%" | 65
 * width="10%" | 96
 * width="10%" | 93
 * width="10%" | 4
 * width="10%" | 1
 * width="10%" | 32
 * width="10%" | 29
 * width="10%" | 60
 * width="10%" | 57
 * 66 || 67 || 94 || 95 || 2 ||  3 || 30 || 31 || 58 || 59
 * 92 || 89 || 20 || 17 || 28 || 25 || 56 || 53 || 64 || 61
 * 90 || 91 || 18 || 19 || 26 || 27 || 54 || 55 || 62 || 63
 * 16 || 13 || 24 || 21 || 49 || 52 || 80 || 77 || 88 || 85
 * 14 || 15 || 22 || 23 || 50 || 51 || 78 || 79 || 86 || 87
 * 37 || 40 || 45 || 48 || 76 || 73 || 81 || 84 || 9 || 12
 * 38 || 39 || 46 || 47 || 74 || 75 || 82 || 83 || 10 || 11
 * 41 || 44 || 69 || 72 || 97 ||100 || 5 ||  8 || 33 || 36
 * 43 || 42 || 71 || 70 || 99 || 98 || 7 ||  6 || 35 || 34
 * }
 * 37 || 40 || 45 || 48 || 76 || 73 || 81 || 84 || 9 || 12
 * 38 || 39 || 46 || 47 || 74 || 75 || 82 || 83 || 10 || 11
 * 41 || 44 || 69 || 72 || 97 ||100 || 5 ||  8 || 33 || 36
 * 43 || 42 || 71 || 70 || 99 || 98 || 7 ||  6 || 35 || 34
 * }
 * 41 || 44 || 69 || 72 || 97 ||100 || 5 ||  8 || 33 || 36
 * 43 || 42 || 71 || 70 || 99 || 98 || 7 ||  6 || 35 || 34
 * }
 * }

title: Conway's LUX method for magic squares


text:
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/172 vs VeryVerily

User:VeryVerily and User:Cadr refuse to back down (and even accept my offer of a compromise footnote) following an overwhelming poll result defeating their position that a version of the intro asserting U.S. backing for the Chilean coup in 1973 without any weasel terms ("many people believe...") is 'misleading' and 'controversial'.

Rather than accepting the poll results (as User:TDC accepted a similarly overwhelming result on Talk:Fascism), VeryVerily in particular is preceding to impugn the credibility of the users who disagree with him on the poll. It is clear his barrage of personal attacks (and now attacks on the credibility of Wikipedia-- see his latest comments on Talk:Augusto Pinochet) is the last stand of his desperate attempts to keep Augusto Pinochet protected indefinitely.

This page needs to be unprotected, with Augusto Pinochet/intro (succinct version) replacing the current, emphatically rejected, weasel term intro. If VeryVerily continues to revert the page over and over again, perhaps measures should be taken to prevent him from vandalizing the page and refusing to accept the addition of indisputably factual content to the article. 172 13:08, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

 * It would be helpful for anyone curious about this to consult those who had to suffer through this process. Several users spent weeks working together to develop an intro which addressed everyone's concerns.  172 then showed up out of the blue, erased and rewrote it entirely including adding inflammatory POV content, dismissed the previous discussion as "partisan bickering", and refused to alter it by even one word, systematically reverting edits by four or five users.  His supposed "compromise" by adding a 1 is not a compromise at all, but a way to prevent any changes.  As has been pointed out variously by Michael Snow, Cadr, Ed Poor, and me, the poll is non-binding by policy, was not as phrased about which intro is better, and was overwhelming only b/c 172 campaigned on chosen user pages for it, bringing in people who had had no part of the debate.  (See talk page for more on this.)  The "barrage of personal attacks" has in fact been directed against me by 172, who has called my edits "bullshit" and "gibberish" and called me a "little bitch" living in a "fantasy world" - well, listing all his personal attacks would be impossible, but suffice it to say I have refrained from such behavior.  172 has been lying about the history and events on all manner of discussion pages.  This is his latest gambit. VV 14:35, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I now realize that I should complement User:TDC for his contrastingly and refreshingly honorable response to the poll results at Talk:Fascism. VV should learn something from TDC. 172 15:18, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

I support this request for arbitration, and ask the arbitration committee to consider as part of it the long-running interpersonal dispute between 172 and VeryVerily, which has led to three quickpolls and revert wars on many different articles. I don't know if the Arbitration Committee will consider it appropriate to make decisions about the content of Augusto Pinochet or any other article, but the personal conflict between 172 and VeryVerily is wasting an incredible amount of other people's energy and interfering with the progress of numerous articles.

There have been several attempts to resolve this dispute by other methods. As stated, there have been three quickpolls involving these two users, one of which was for a request for mediation. At the time, the community rejected the idea of "forcing" the parties into mediation, and other efforts to encourage 172 and VeryVerily to use the mediation process have not been successful. A previous attempt to use Requests for comment simply led to a revert war and had to be abandoned. At this point, I feel that the dispute is ripe for the use of arbitration as a last resort. If the Arbitration Committee would like to see additional information about the dispute to decide whether it warrants their attention, I plan to start collecting evidence of that, but this will take considerable time. --Michael Snow 16:28, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Michael Snow, I am not interested in a personal fight. Let's keep the focus on this article, alright. 172 01:26, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

I would like to chime in stressing the importance of arbitration here. RfC pages have been started about each of them, and, at least from the outset, it looks like the community is polarizing and picking sides, and trying to argue that this case deserved the 50-reversions that either VV or 172 gave it, because the other is just too incompitent to edit, etc, etc, etc. I would not support mediation on article content here, but on user conduct - to clarify whether there is ever a situation where 50 reversions of the same text in a half an hour is acceptable behavior, for an admin, for a user, or for anyone. Snowspinner 13:08, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

I request that the conduct of 172 be reviewed by the arbitrators, with his lengthy history and large number of edits with the project being ample evidence and reason for reflection on him, and the best way for him to interact with the community. Because he is an administrator, it seems to me that it is important for him to meet minimum standards of conduct. I see him as being indicative of a wider tendency for quality editors to become rude, unable to accept when they are wrong (or POV), and behave in a manner that is generally unbecoming. This is in my eyes a meta-issue whose arbitration presents the opportunity for significant improvement in obedience of Civility/Wikiquette, as much as Revert. I think that there is a need for clarifying these policies and the enforcement suitable for them thru means other than arbitration as well, but arbitrating this matter may help greatly in setting precedent. Sam [Spade] 04:21, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

Renewal?
If indeed 172 is withdrawing is request, then I would like to renew it myself, requesting arbitration vis-a-vis 172's conduct on Augusto Pinochet. Those that were present during the bulk of it - me, Cadr, Cantus, Eloquence, AstroNomer, and perhaps Ed Poor and Michael Snow - have all witnessed his belligerent, rude, intransigent, bullying, and dishonest behavior and his repeated failure to discuss content issues. This continues unabated as of this writing. VV 04:55, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I find his attempts to make this into a black and white battle between innocent and guilty duplicitous and deceitful. We are both equally guilty of violating the three revert rule, although I admit that and justify that on the basis of the changes made to articles, not on the basis of villifying VeryVerily. 172 06:16, 26 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm sorry, but that's how I see it. I also justify my work on articles and my increasingly severe actions to protect that work.  By "vilifying" you (seeking 3rd party help) I am taking measures to curb your destructive behavior, as other means have failed.  Part of that must be bringing said behavior to light. VV 08:12, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Quit trying to make yourself sound like a saint. People here fall for a lot, but they're not so stupid that they won't figure out what you're up to at some point. You know very well that I could pile up a list of charges myself and call it "taking measures to curb your destructive behavior, as other means have failed." I could say that part of that must be bringing said behavior to light as well. The only difference is that I'm not nearly bored enough to waste my time thinking about you more than I have to. You're safe so long as I'm in a position in which I'm just sick of dealing with you, not in which I have to counter-attack. So, please, for your own sake and mine, watch out. If you start a witchhunt against someone, don't be surprised if he has to start up his own witchhunt to defend himself. I can leave you alone forget/shut up about all the bullshit you've made me suffer through if you too can leave me alone. 172 09:00, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
 * You already made such an attempt to "pile" (Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/172); it was not persuasive. And if this last month was being "safe", well, I'm not worried about unsafety.  Believe me, I have no desire to deal with you either, but I have a yet greater desire to not be steamrolled. VV 09:36, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
 * As this discussion was going on, you reverted every one of my changes to My Lai Massacre without explanation. Hypocrite! 172 11:13, 26 May 2004 (UTC)

Let me just make clear what my request is, since some observers may be unsure what is going on based on the content of 172's withdrawn request and VeryVerily's renewal. I am requesting arbitration regarding both 172 and VeryVerily, not just one or the other. I had been considering making this request for some time, as their dispute has a lengthy history, and given both parties indication of this. I was finally prompted to make this request by 172's initial request, as well as their recent revert war on Augusto Pinochet and History of the Soviet Union (1927-1953).

I maintain this request, and I consider it independent of any requests that 172 and VeryVerily may or may not be making. I am fully satisfied that so far, in considering whether to accept this case, the arbitrators have clearly understood the nature of this request. --Michael Snow 20:43, 26 May 2004 (UTC)

Discussion and votes by arbitrators
On 172's request:

 * 1) Recuse. Fred Bauder 16:16, May 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) I'm going to say reject to 172's request. 172's requested remedy appears chiefly to be that the page be unprotected - but this is a matter for requests for page protection, not for this committee. Martin
 * 3) Reject, too. Direct content disputes such as this one, other than the way in which the protagonists behave towards one another and anon, are somewhat beyond the scope of Arbitration. James F. (talk) 10:19, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

On Michael Snow's request:

 * 1) I'm going to provisionally accept Michael Snow's request that the committee investigate "the long-running interpersonal dispute between 172 and VeryVerily, which has led to three quickpolls and revert wars on many different articles", as emphasised by Snowspinner. I say provisionally accept, because if 172 and VeryVerily do not wish this matter to go into arbitration, they can seek mediation instead, which would likely be more productive. See also Requests for comment/VeryVerily, Requests for comment/172. Martin 23:31, 22 May 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) I accept as well. But since I've been involved with trying to resolve some of these conflicts before (such as at Congo Free State) in a non-partisan way I will recuse myself if either 172 or VV asks me to. --mav 14:49, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) Accept on the grounds that VV and 172 seem unwilling to go to Mediation; if they so wish to do so, reject. James F. (talk) 10:19, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) Recuse Fred Bauder 11:19, May 24, 2004 (UTC)

It should be noted that I consider this a request by Michael Snow, not 172, so 172's withdrawal does not effect my acceptance. Martin 22:29, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

Withdraw request
I'd like to withdraw my request for arbitration. I'm not interested in personal disputes. I was only seeking a resolution with respect to the content of the introduction in the Augusto Pinochet page and the results of Talk:Augusto Pinochet when I was making this request.

This page is really at the root of the contention between VeryVerily and me. IMHO, he just has a tendency to pass judgment, explain and interpret the behavior of anyone who disagrees with him in a disparaging manner, attack back relentlessly when someone gets in his way, and refuse to respectfully disagree with me. But even so, all the other edit wars with him were really his retaliations against me born out of my involvement on the Pinochet page. (For example, I think this explains this.) I'm not bringing this up because I am asking for action to be taken against him, but rather to emphasize that the Pinochet page (and all the related behavioral dispute pages) is at the root of all this acrimony, given that the Pinochet page really has become a zero-sum struggle (VeryVerily refuses to back down on his stance that U.S.-backing for the 1973 coup is a controversial assertion, while I ardently reject this stance, along with 15~ users on Talk:Augusto Pinochet).

But on other pages, I have been able to get him off my back. So, I'm pretty certain that once the situation on the Pinochet stabilizes I'll be able to avoid him-- hence my preference to deal with the substantive dispute on the Pinochet article and avoid this user, as opposed to all the mudslinging going on in the margins.

In short, I'm against a personal arbitration here and only intervention pertaining to the Pinochet edit war. 172 00:50, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

 * It would be redundant to explain again the absurdity of saying of me that I "interpret the behavior of anyone who disagrees with him in a disparaging manner, attack back relentlessly when someone gets in his way, and refuse to respectfully disagree with me", but I at least want to deny it and repoint to the extensive documentation of 172's misbehavior. The Pinochet page is not "at the root" - 172 harassed me on several other pages before that - but it is the one in which I am at present most invested, as I object strongly to his wording (as do others) and was offended by his unilateral erasure of our (I and others) previous collective work and his reverting thereafter.  It is true that while the page was locked I turned my attention to other cases where 172 has squashed my edits in the past, ready to be more assertive this time.  Those have not gone too badly, as he seems less revert-happy (172 characterizes this as getting me "off his back", as though they're "his" pages), but the Pinochet page remains at a standoff because of 172's intransigence.  So, I don't see why he is withdrawing his request for arbitration on that page, unless he hopes it kills Michael Snow's as well. VV 02:23, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Re: "So, I don't see why he is withdrawing his request for arbitration on that page, unless he hopes it kills Michael Snow's as well." In case you haven't noticed, I'm trying to curb this conflict and keep it contained to the Pinochet article. I loath dealing with you-- and to be honest I think that you're a lying, manipulative, juvenile, pigheaded, passive aggressive, hypocritical, tattletale prick (**this is not a personal attack** but only an expression of my feelings)-- and I want to do so less often. I can quit launching salvos at you if you can. If you quit picking fights with me and pushing me into situations where you know I will respond with a revert war (e.g., Muammar Gaddafi, Origins of the American Civil War, and George W. Bush)-- and quit tattletaling to teacher and lying about what I am doing-- then I'll be able to (and happy to) avoid you. 172 03:27, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I can't believe that an adult, or anyone over the age of 12, would seriously use the term "tattletale" in an argument. - Nat Krause 18:23, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Your own actions have damned you, not my statements. What you call "tattletaling" (which you are happy to do) is seeking third-party intervention in our dispute, to try to "curb this conflict".  Anyway, your list of adjectives is just amusing.  If you want to avoid me, a good start would be to stop stalking me. VV 03:51, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I consider you a stalker too. And I could "tattletale" about you just as often-- I just don't care to do so. If we quit trying to prove the same point-- that the other person is a piece of shit and I'm innocent-- this will stop. Now, shut up and leave me alone. 172 04:07, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's coincidence that you started attacking Augusto Pinochet soon after I began working on it. Nor do I not suspect the timing of your appearances at FOX News, Torture and murder in Iraq, State terrorism, and so on.  "Leave me alone" - hah!  VV 05:02, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Attacking Augusto Pinochet? Don't you remember losing a poll on that page 2-15, 12% to 88%? 172 05:24, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * It was after the fact, but no, I didn't even vote in your bogus and irrelevant "poll". VV 05:34, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, okay, if you had voted, the results would've been 83% saying that U.S. backing isn't a controversial and misleading assertion, not 88%. Regarding state terrorism and torture and murder in Iraq and my admin interventions during edit wars between you and Lance/Hector/Richard/Hanpuk/etc. a couple of months ago, at the time I had no idea that you were the tendentious character that I'd ever deal with. I now know that I'd rather go to a place like Abu Ghraib than spend so much time dealing with you again. 172 05:43, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Reverting all my edits and calling it a "temper tantrum" when I restore them, that's "admin intervention"? Or are you referring to calling my edits "ridiculous", "lame", and "rubbish", without explanation?  It's hard to know.  And I'm glad to see you express a newfound interest in leaving me the hell alone. VV 06:29, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Still on the attack, aren't you? Quit talking at staw men. 172 07:21, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * You mean directly quoting you? VV 07:36, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, out of context, as ususal. 172 07:41, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * A new defense! - but no better. Is there a proper context for direct insults? VV 07:42, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * You were not quoting insults but rather criticisms of edits to articles. And wes, we are allowed to criticize the content of articles, which is what I was doing. 172 07:45, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * So, how is this "out of context" when I specifically said "my edits"? And "lame" and "rubbish" are, well, certainly not constructive criticisms, even if "allowable" (a weak standard). VV 08:04, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Even if that's the case, those comments were in response to changes that were not constructive. 172 08:16, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

I would like to reiterate that I would still like to see this matter arbitrated, so as to determine the acceptability of these particular editing practices. Snowspinner 04:04, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I agree. Even with the original person asking for arbitration withdrawing their request, it seems like issues need to be resolved in some fashion. --Ben Brockert (:talk:) 21:45, May 24, 2004 (UTC)

 * As I see it, Arbitration is not contingent on the co-operation of those involved (though it's IMO in their best interests to attempt a defence, to draw our attention to certain points). 172's "withdrawl" of support is unfortunate, but not a show-stopper.
 * James F. (talk) 22:34, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

I have not been involved in the Pinochet page, but credible evidence of the US backing has been presented. Still the cadre of right-wing conspirators wants to re-write history to reflect their vision of what it should have been. This is lying by omission, by conveniently leaving out those truths that would embarass that vision. In the My Lai article the rightists support the term Viet Cong (VC) instead of the more neutral National Liberation Front (NLF), all to suggest that those who were defending their country were wrong to resist an overseas bully. They insist on using "American" instead of the more precise adjectival "United States", in complete disregard of the sensitivities of those in the other Americas over being associated with that particular piece of US criminality. I've been criticized before for using the term "American artist" instead of "United States artist", and that was not in a particularly controversial context. The armed land force is officially the "United States Army", not the "American Army". In the Soviet Union article they favour wordings persist in reminding us of their POV that communism is necessarily evil. This kind of attitude detracts from any kind of objective criticism of Stalin's very evident excesses. The antics of this Klannish cabal is the most destructive inluence extant againt achieving any kind of Neutral encyclopedia.

The three-revert rule settles nothing, nor for that matter would a 50-revert rule. No party produces that many reverts without there being as many contrary reverts. Such a rule may bring temporary respite, but it solves nothing if the article remains frozen in one or the other POV. Demanding references for disputed comments would be a lot more constructive, even if it has to be on a word by word basis. Eclecticology 08:46, 30 May 2004 (UTC)


text:
List of Norwegian television series

This is a list of Norwegian television series produced and broadcast in Norway.

title: List of Norwegian television series