text:
User talk:Lexor/Archive 2003

Misc discussion from Apr-May 2003
On VFD you said "Sorry for the inconvenience, still getting my wikipedia legs". No problem -- I know it's not easy finding your way around when you start off. Most of the maintenance pages (Pages needing attention, Vandalism in progress, Votes for deletion, etc.) have some sort of policy attached. Deletion is one of the more complicated ones, not to mention the fact that all the sysops (me included) have a different idea of how it should be done. -- Tim Starling 03:00 Apr 23, 2003 (UTC)

Hi there. Thanks for cleaning up my spelling. I want to expand the Manchester related stuff at some point so I'll probably bump into you again :-) Are you from around these parts? Alex

 * Actually I've never been to Manchester, just a follower/fan of the music from the late 80s/early 90s, but I did live in London for a while in the mid 90s.  I'm trying to strictly stick to what I know about the music, I wouldn't know about the city itself. -- Lexor 18:30 May 14, 2003 (UTC)

Genetic drift discussion
Around 22:02-22:07 I worked on the genetic drift article, and 168 reverted my changes. I really think he misunderstands "drift" but I am about to leave my office. When you have a chance, could you check my last version, and his changes, and make sure the article is still communicating what "drift" is? Thanks, Slrubenstein

 * I'll try and do that. Genetic drift is a tricky concept to explain, and their are elements of both of your versions of the articles that are useful, getting the mix of intuitive and statistical descriptions is a tricky thing.  I've been teaching a class on population genetics this semester and "genetic drift" is one of the more difficult concepts to convey, and the notion of random sampling of gametes does play a heavy role.  We have students run simulations of drift for populations of various sizes (for neutral and non-neutral cases) which helps tune the student's intuition.  When the students see variance in allele frequency outcome decreasing as population size increases and then finally see that drift goes to zero for idealized "infinite" populations, that they finally "get" that drift is a "sampling" phenomenon, and therefore described by statistics. I think will try generating some graphs from these simulations of alleles wandering to fixation (or loss) and install them in a later version of the article. -- Lexor 01:22 20 May 2003 (UTC)

I just did a major overhaul in which I tried to reintroduce the population genetics perspective, as well as some colloquial examples, without deleting anything 168 put in. I really appreciate your work on this and look forward to your comments on this version, Slrubenstein 17:59 20 May 2003 (UTC)

Lexor, I just made a change to the genetic drift article I’d like you to review. I changed this paragraph – which I think may have been written by 168, but I am not sure:

 * Mating with a particularly fertile partner, which tends to make a trait or allele more common, also represents random sampling for most alleles. Because the selection is random, on average alleles will be picked in proportion to how common they are. But because the sample size, the population size and the number of carriers of an allele are finite, deviations from the average or mean will occur. The "frequency" of an allele (how common or rare it is) drifts to the extent that deviations up or down over successive generations do not exactly balance out.

I think this paragraph is mixing up sexual selection, natural selection, and drift, and I think that the real issue may be the relationship between independent assortment and drift. I replaced it with this paragraph:
 * The principle of independent assortment may also be involved in drift. According to this principle, during gamete formation many traits combine randomly.  Thus, an individual may inherit alleles that increase fitness along with alleles that are neutral (that neither increase nor decrease fitness).  Natural selection favors the alleles that increase fitness, but the associated neutral alleles will also increase in frequency, as an accidental byproduct.

but I am concerned that I may have misunderstood the former paragraph, or may not be clear or fully accurate in the latter paragraph. Slrubenstein

 * I think what you are referring to is actually the process of drift causing linkage disequilibrium (LD) (another article I am in the process of wikifying) which is the non-random association of alleles (i.e. deviation from independent assortment). This is again a subtle issue, and probably deserves an article to itself.  You also refer to associated alleles increasing in frequency, and that process is genetic hitchhiking and results when there is a linkage disequilibrium.  Here's an explaination and bit of ASCI art, that helps me (I will use it in my LD article):

 * If selection acts directly on one loci (A) and there is linkage disequilibrium between that loci and another locus (B), then selection will alter the allele frequencies at B even though it is not directly under selection.

 * e.g. population in linkage disequilibrium:

+-+ ++           ++ +-+                 | AB  |  |            |	         |    AB      | |     | +-+ |            |	         ++ |     |               +-+  |    aB      |   ======> |            | | aB  | |    |  |            |   	 |            | |     |                 | Ab  |  |            | selection |    Ab      | |     | |    |  ++  for A    |            | +-+ |    |  |    ab      |	         |            | | ab  | +-+ ++	         ++ +-+

 * note that frequency of b *increases* (and B *decreases), because it is in greater association of with A (haplotype Ab) i.e. than you would expect if the loci assorted independently

 * population in linkage equilibrium:

+-+ ++           ++ +-+                 |     |  |            |	         |            | |     |                 |     |  |            |	         |            | |     |               | AB  |  |    aB      |   ======> |    AB      | | aB  | |    |  |            |   	 |            | |     |                 |     |  |            | selection |            | |     | +-+ ++    for A  ++ +-+ | Ab |  |    ab      |	         |    Ab      | | ab  | +-+ ++	         ++ +-+

 * note that frequency of b *stays constant* despite an increase in the frequency of A.

 * On a meta-note, I really think that the genetic drift article is getting a bit long and "drifting" (sic) somewhat, and tackling issues that are sort of related to drift, but aren't quite the main point (the "sampling effect''). -- Lexor 02:45 21 May 2003 (UTC)

 * I appreciate your feedback, and your opinion in general. I am not committed to the paragraph I wrote -- but I wasn't satisfied with the previous form of that paragraph.  I hope sometime soon you will reappear at that article, and perhaps offer a way out of the logjam between myself and 168. He and I have been going back and forth tediously over a variety of issues, and I am getting tired of it -- and I would defer to any suggestion you make. Slrubenstein

I provided basic content to Founder's effect -- could you please go over it and make any necessary changes? Thanks, Slrubenstein

I (as a reader) should take this opportunity to thank you for the outstanding work you have been doing. When you have a chance, please take a look at the article Selection. Personally, I think it is very poorly written, and I think at points misleading. You can guess why I will not even try to do anything. Just one thing that caught my eye is this:

 * Also, selection is not a guarantee that advantageous traits or alleles will come to predominate within a population. Through genetic drift, such traits may become less common or even disappear. In the face of selection, even so-called "deleterious" alleles may become universal among the members of a species.

I know from arguments between Dobzhansky and Mayr that the way drift and natural selection interact is pretty complicated and frankly I am not up to taking this on. At the very least I think the discussion can be presented more clearly. Anyway, just check it out when you have time, Slrubenstein

Also, when you have a chance please check the article Allele frequency; 168 made a link in the The modern synthesis page, and I put in a stub. Slrubenstein

Lexor, Lexor, we need you. Won't you please come back to our sandbox and at least weigh in on the matters of scientific fact? The neutral theory article has changed a fair amount since you last checked in, and the discussion around it has changed a whole lot. While I seem to have succeeded in making a point, I'm not sure how valid a point it is, or that it couldn't be improved in the article. Incidentally, since you mention teaching pop gen, I can't help wondering: Are you a population geneticist? If you don't want to compromise your anonymity by answering that, I'll understand. 168... 21:22 27 May 2003 (UTC)

 * Sorry folks, I'm on vacation right now, and far away from my books and study. I will try and weigh in when I'm back at work in a week or so.  It's safe to say that pop-gen is one of the areas I'm involved in. -- Lexor 03:54 28 May 2003 (UTC)

Evolution article discussion
Lexor, I am concerned that our articles on science are being used bypeople with certain religious and/or political beliefs. (And as a person who has his own religious beliefs, this is not meant as an ad homenim attack against anyone. I simply don't think that it is appropriate or justifiable to let oen's religion or politics color their contributions to articles on science.) At the moment I am concerned with the article on biological evolution, which is pretty good. (And I appreciate your hard work on this article.) Unfortunately, someone set up a parallel article called Theory of evolution; it seems to me that this violates Wikipedia NPOV policy. This alternate evolution article isn't creationist, but it is very problematic. When you get a chance, please see the note I added in there: Talk:Theory of evolution. RK 23:11 12 Jul 2003 (UTC)~

Also, I am concerned when I see some people change links in science articles, which takes people away from the article on evolution, and instead directs them to a page that is non-scientific. For instance, speciation is obviously a technical scientific topic in evolutionary biology. This article requires a link to our article on biological evolution. So why does User:Anthere insist on removing the link to evolution, and replacing it with a link to the problematic theory of evolution article? That latter article is missing most of the science and details, and replaces science with religion and mysticism and Gaia theory. This makes no sense to me. When people want to learn about a very technical genetics and evolution topic such as speciation, we can assume that they do not want to study the mystical views of a Jesuit Christian priest from a century ago! Such a link seems, to me, to mislead encyclopedia readers for the purpose of promiting a certain political or religious agenda. Any thoughts? RK 23:11 12 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * It's a tricky issue, and I need to give it some more thought. I'm travelling again, so I will try and weigh in more when I get back in a few days.  I'm not opposed to more general views of evolution as a concept being presented (e.g. Teilhard de Chardin's stuff is interesting and has influenced thinkers on evolution, even if it's not part of the modern synthesis), I'm more concerned with labelling it as such.   I think a merger would be appropriate, but I think we should be careful to preserve other non-mainstream ideas in some form (either in another article or in a subsection of the main article).

 * As for whether the term "theory of evolution" as opposed to "evolution" is OK, I think it is, because although "theory" is often considered to be tentative in everyday parlance, in science we often talk about the "quantum mechanical theory" or "thermodynamic theory". Unfortunately when people hear "theory", the are really confusing it with "hypothesis".   A theory is what you get after a period of "hypotheses" when you have a really solid body of fact from many different angles backing up the hypothesis (or more normally the "set" of hypotheses, as the theory of evolution, for example, is composed of more than one specific hypothesis, which is why it rests on a firm foundation).   Talking about "evolutionary theory" rather than "theory of evolution" would make this distinction clearer.  "Evolutionary theory" is the combination of the body of mathematical population genetics, quantitative genetics, molecular biology and so on that makes it possible to predict from the current genotypes in a population of organisms, the genotypes in the next generation given knowledge of migration, selection and drift parameters. -- Lexor 04:31 13 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Misc discussion from July-Dec 2003
re "(autopoietic -> autopoietic, should avoid redirects where possible.)" - why do you think we should do this? Martin

 * I guess I wasn't proposing it as a wikipedia policy, but it's certainly my policy when writing articles. I note that Piped_link actually lists a redirect as a valid alternative to a piped link.  My thought was (and I don't know how much cost this inccurs on the database to know the scale of this is actually a problem) that redirects are probably going to inccur a greater cost on the database than a direct link, since it has to look up the other page.  On the other, I think it's good to have redirects to pages, so that serendiptious linking works, but once the connection is made, in articles that I have edited I have a habit of changing the link so that it points directly to the article, but I keep the redirect page around.  I've seen several others doing this systematically too, so I figured it might be good practice in terms of database performance. -- Lexor 10:23 17 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Another closet Aussie? Consider adding yourself to Wikipedians/Australia. -- Tim Starling 00:51, Aug 5, 2003 (UTC)

Hi, Lexor, thanks for your praise of my changes to the self-organization article. I don't think it qualifies as "new", does it? -- Miguel

 * Not strictly, I suppose, but it's sort of "new" in it's current incarnation, less than a few weeks old. I looked at some of the current "new" pages and they are newer than I thought (i.e. 2 or 3 days at most).  Oh well, just an idea. -- Lexor 21:45, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)

-- Yes. Jimbo said it is OK so go ahead and use the Nupedia articles under development under the GNU FDL. It was the intent of the authors anyway to have their work under the GNU FDL, so I don't see a problem so long as proper credit is given. --mav

Hey, I like that box you put in the History of Australia section -- so much so, I'm going to steal it and put it in the History of Animation section. :) --Modemac 13:12, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * It seems to be an emerging standard in the History articles, otherwise I wouldn't have used it (I definitely don't want create an ad-hoc "standard"). Look at the History of Italy, History of Germany, History of the United States.  Don't know whether the template is documented anywhere, let me know if it.   It's definitely good to be consistent across the 'pedia! --Lexor 13:31, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Adam Carr discussion
Lexor, thanks for your comments. What is your opinion of the etiquette of what I have said at Talk:Adolf Hitler and the creation of Adolf Hitler 2? Dr Adam Carr 12:19, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * Adam. Your comments on the actual page are fine, but wikipedia really needs to have one page ultimately.  Eventually somebody will redirect your page to the old one, or you can replace the current one.  In terms of a temporary page for comment, I suggest doing what I said your talk page, which is create a temporary one in your namespace, and then discuss it on the current Talk Hitler page.  One way or another there will eventually be one page, wikpedia forces tend towards avoiding page "forks" and towards consensus eventually.

 * By the way, best to post to User talk:Lexor rather than User:Lexor, that way I get a nice little "You have new messages" on the top right hand corner of my screen when I login, which I don't get if you post directly to my user page. Thanks --Lexor 12:37, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * Oops sorry, that's what I meant to do - I am still finding all these pages a bit confusing. Dr Adam Carr 12:40, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * No problem, it can take a while to get used to thinks. I always monitor "My watchlist" carefully and set my preferences so that I "watch" any page I have edited, that way I can see what's updating etc, and it means there's a "Talk" link next to any user who has made that edit (you also have this in the "Edit history" page).

(later) OK, now I have seen the comments on Hitler you left in my talk page. I am still not clear on whether I am allowed to simply install my Hitler article over the top of the old one, or, if that is considered arrogant or discourteous (which it would be), what is the process to go through to get agreement on making that change. Dr Adam Carr 12:37, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

 * I would post the page as I suggested in your namespace and then announce your intentions on the (current) Talk page, linking back to your temporary page and see what discussion ensues. If somebody feels strongly about re-adding a section back, then they'll do it, and you can argue your case.  Once you've posted your page, it's not really "yours" anymore in any case (an exception being pages in your own namespace, since they're clearly your pages, not wikipedia's).  The only section I can imagine people might add back would be the "Cultural depictions" section, because wikipedia is full of people with heads for pop trivia.  If you object to this, you could suggest a companion page like Cultural depictions of Hitler or somesuch and simply link it.

 * In any case, whether you completely replace it, and then stuff gets added back or you merge the current version with yours, at some stage in the future there will be a merge of sorts. Remember wikipedia stores the entire edit history, so it's all raw material that goes into the mill, so any page can be resurrected and/or reconfigured from any combination of that raw material, whether you replace or merge. --Lexor 12:55, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Misc discussion from October 2003
Thank you for the well written article on Tierra. --JackH 13:32, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Re MHC, yeah, I had to go back to work, didn't have time to beat on the redirs. Thanks for doing those! Now to add all the other MHCs... :-) Stan 02:17, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Tnx for the MacArthur pages edits. I think the nagging disatisfaction with having to settle for a single column kept me thinking HTML (as if i knew how to get 2 or 3 columns out of it!) and neglecting wiki.

You're quick at getting on an edit; that's nice! Tnx for the help getting something proper out there. --Jerzy 09:16, 2003 Oct 25 (UTC)

 * No problems. Sometimes I don't want to think too hard so I go fix some markup. ;-)  You can use HTML   s, it's OK since there's no equivalent as yet.  They are also working on some wiki markup for tables over on http://test.wikipedia.org if you're interested. --Lexor 09:26, 25 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Misc discussion from November 2003
please, have it easy on me. It is a bit stupid, but I somehow temporary left the french wikipedia yesterday. I wanted to finish that french article, which is not entirely done, but I have already worked for hours on it; I wanted it to be translated within a day or two. Several people, such as also Angel and Brian have said they would help me to do so, but the article is not entirely done yet. And I was too tired yesterday at 5h30 am to fix everything; The article on ecology have been so poor for now nearly 2 years I have been there, I do not think a couple of more days will be horrible. More horrible that any article on which there is an edit war anyway :-) Anthere

 * It's OK, I just would have thought that the Talk:Ecology page would be the place to do it. I actually think that using HTML comments works the best, because all the text is in place, in the article, but the reader is hidden from the messiness, plus it means that a complete edit history is kept.  Just be careful to keep some of the existing material in some (edited) form.  I would suggest adding the new sections, and then leaving it, and coming back to write up date the intro and existing text after you've added the new material.  Just my $0.02. --Lexor 14:00, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hello. Do you have an opinion about Ed addition at Gaia theory (science) ? Anthère

hi, I just wanted to say that I put the french text visible because Brian said he could do some translation tonight. It is much easier to show someone the paragraph in question by having it visible (I know not if you noticed, that edit section does not work with commented out text). I also told him I would hide them back when he would be done doing anything. I am very much behind schedule. Too many problems with our favorite vandal Papotages, and someone leaving, wanting to be anonymised :-( Anthère 00:25, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * Well, you can see it, when you edit the entire page, perhaps you could put a message at the start of the comment in caps, so he can easily spot it, like: THIS IS THE SECTION TO TRANSLATE, ADDED: 2003-11-15. I think it's more important to make things convenient for readers than editors (who after all, can easily spot the text in the edit window).  I mean, this is what Talk pages are all about, to hide all that back channel stuff, we defeat the purpose of Talk when we display meta and discussion in the article. --Lexor 00:36, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * On the other hand...(though I fondamentally agree with you), there is something in the gfdl that is about authors, their responsability and their "ownership", so I think the french additions should appear in the article history itself. If they only appear in talk pages (that may disappear), then the original authorship of an article is not respected by gfdl principles. Anthère

We've had a long and heated discussion about scientific method which the quotes are related to. For me they are crucial to the compromise we have reached. The problem is that "scientific method" can refer a) to what scientists actually do, b) to some set of abstract steps such as "observation, hypothesis, etc, etc" or c) both, if you believe that the abstract steps capture the essence of science. Many people have heard or been taught to believe it, and so sense "c" tends to be automatic, and if one doesn't explicitly squelch it, without ever saying so one is insinuating, by the slipperiness of the term, that it not only truly captures the essence of science but that it is some real concrete thing out in the world. At the same time, one sets the stage for readers to regard the many critics of method (who I think are in the majority in science studies) as denying the obvious.168... 16:25, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi, Lexor.

Thanks for your RMS edit and your explanation.

Just a data point: Google for "open source" and the first page and all bar one on the second page come up with "Open Source" rather than "open source". I'd always thought of this and "Free Software" as being at least as studly (titular? highlit? initially-capped?) as, say, Christian Democrats or Women's Liberation.

It's true, however, that the "pages of reference" for these movements seem to be confused about caps. Capitalization is all over the place on the OSI page (21 "Open Source" vs 9 "open source"). However, "Free Software" beats "free software" 7-1 on the gnu.org site. I can't help wondering, do these "movements" deserve acronyms (OSS, FSF) if their advocates can't even be bothered to lean on the shift key every once in a while? I say: back to World Domination (or should that be "world domination"?) 101 with both of them ;) chocolateboy 03:06, 26 Nov 2003

 * Well in Wikipedia, redirects will get all the folks who Google for "Open Source" or "Free Software", but there's a pretty strong consensus on reserving the use of caps for "true" proper nouns: names, companies, trademarks, locations etc. Putting caps on concepts or ideas that are more amorphous looks out of place and reminds me of old papers from the 19th Century that talk about Science and Truth.   We can also put both in the slug line which generally keeps people happy, i.e.:

 * Open source (also Open Source) is a software methodology...

 * but it's safer to use the lowercase forms in the inline and titles, otherwise it sticks out and seems to add a kind of unwarranted authoritativeness to a term for which many have different meanings to different people. For example Women's Liberation should definitely be Women's women's liberation, as there are many people affiliated with that movement, but it is not one central organization, but the Christian Democrats may be a particular political party (or parties) in different countries, so one should cap those for each one, e.g. Christian Democrats, Germany or whatever. --Lexor 03:26, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi again.

I respectfully disagree on the "Women's Liberation" thing: "women's liberation" (lib), maybe. But why capitalize just "Women"? Totally agree about caps overkill in bygone books: <cough>John Bunyan (473K)</cough>...

 * Oops! I meant women's liberation, I was actually thinking of the page title (because all Wikipedia page titles are always initial capital).  Thanks for spotting that! ;-)

Re: Christian Democrat - I was thinking of a more generic use, as in: "Tony Blair may still call himself New Labour, but, really, his government is what the Germans would call Christian Democrat, a party of the centre right." Although, to be fair, this is the first thing Google comes up with: "Tony Blair is a christian democrat"!

 * How about Christian democrat? Should Christian always be initial caps, hmm, not sure.  Since Muslim is regularly spelled muslim, but Islam is always Islam, never islam.  For every rule there's always an exception, I suppose...

But I respect (and have spotted before with mild initial-capitalist pangs ;) the Wikipedia consensus, and appreciate your notes on the redirects. Thanks for your help! chocolateboy 04:14, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * No problems. ---Lexor 07:07, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Article on "Race"
Dear Lexor - Thanks for your welcoming message on Nov 4. I tried to email you but that failed, and it was only recently that I realized this is an alternative way to communicate.

We seem to have some common interests and perspectives, so I was wondering whether you could offer some advice regarding two individuals who keep on reverting changes that several critics of the article on "Race" have attempted to make. I posted a brief summary focusing on the single POV issues at http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review#NPOV_dispute_on_article_about_Race

But there's much more at issue than what's mentioned there.

Thanks again. Peak 06:19, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * Peak, I haven't really followed the debate, but, given the topic, I'm not surprised that NPOV issues have arisen, which is why I have largely avoided the page. I'll try and have a look, but I can't promise I'll get to it any time soon. --Lexor 09:03, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

One-sentence paragraphs
Lexor, while I agree that these are to be avoided in general, I think they have an important function as the first sentence in an article, especially perhaps the biological articles - they give a simple statement of what the creature is, and the succeeding paras then expand on that. It also provides a sensible place where the ToC will go when an article expands to the point of needing one. So I am putting such header sentences in in more or less all the articles I am doing nowadays. seglea 03:00, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * Seglea, I agree that for some articles it may be appropriate. Although, I tend to find that the introduction to an article is best summarised in 2-3 sentences (because in one sentence one can barely define a term) and after that point is the point to break for the ToC.  I agree it varies on the article, so I'm not dogmatic about it, but I think it's looks somewhat telegraphic and dictionary-like if you make it a policy on all biology articles.  I like to define in the first sentence, and describe what's interesting in the second, and maybe say who discovered in the third at that point it's ready to be expanded.  Then you have a short, but complete, introduction. For an example, see Black widow spider.  I prefer to follow News style which puts the main points in a few sentences in the first paragraph, then break for the details. --Lexor 08:36, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Misc discussion from December 2003
Re;life/exobiology -- its a valid point. Ive edited the text to remove some speculation which is best discussed at the exobiology article. Lirath Q. Pynnor

Dear Lexor: A while back, when I was a newbie, you kindly left some welcoming messages on my User_talk:Peak page. (There's a note of thanks above.) Since then, I've made some progress on various fronts, but some of my worst fears are proving to be well-founded. I notice, for example, that User:Lir seems to quite well-intentioned, but that many of the changes he or she is making to articles on biological topics are for the worse. Please note that I am only talking about changes that Lir has made to the work of others besides myself. It's a shame, because all the articles that I've looked at that Lir has touched were really very good. My wiki-energy has recently been flagging, and in any case, I just don't have the time to deal with this kind of problem. Perhaps you could keep an eye on the biological articles Lir is trampling on? Or is this is a case for the Wiki Volunteer Fire Brigade? Peak 06:20, 25 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * I do generally try and keep up with changes to the biol articles I've contributed, and in general I haven't found too many problems with Lir's changes, but I'll keep a lookout. --Lexor 11:01, 31 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * Dear Lexor: Regarding CAC vs Krebs — this seems to be another case of someone's good intentions causing more harm (in this case, taking up other people's time) than good. There are some really neat things that can be done with CAC graphics. Even spending the time to secure permission to copy difficult-to-reproduce interactive graphics to Wikipedia would be a better investment of time.
 * As for the specific issue about naming, can you tell me more about "Wikipedia policy"? I was surprised that User:Angela changed "English as a second language" (ESL) to "English as an alternative language" (EAL). She did so in part because she believes the trend is towards EAL. This may be true in England, but I haven't seen much evidence of it elsewhere. I mention this in part because I was wondering if you know if the trend to CAC is universal. If so, it seems a bit unfair to poor old Hans! Peak 05:36, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, I think the trend is pretty universal (see citation stats on Talk:Citric acid cycle). I don't really care that much, but it was stable at CAC for a while, and people have mostly been linking to CAC, so many redirects would have to be changed, and the article itself uses CAC in preference to Krebs, and the article should be internally consistent.  It was a stable organized article with that title which had emerged over almost 2 years and the rename should be discussed.  I agree, that it would be time better spent securing permissions to release nice graphics under the GFDL on wikipedia. --Lexor 09:02, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * FYI, User:168... has resorted to reverting Lir's changes (e.g. at DNA and elsewhere). Peak 09:17, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Hi Lexor. Thanks belatedly for your interest in recruiting me to signal transduction. Although I may be too late to participate in the way you wanted, I will try to take a look at it in the not too distant future. Sorry for not responding to your call. Right around when you issued it I had to quit wiki-ing cold turkey for a while, and now I am trying to avoid piling up my wiki plate again too high or too quickly.168... 19:50, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Lexor/Archive 2003


text:
Celtic Warriors

The Celtic Warriors (Y Rhyfelwyr Celtaidd) were a rugby union team from Wales, who played in the 2003–04 Celtic League and the 2003–04 Heineken Cup following the introduction of regional rugby union teams in Wales. They were effectively a temporary merger of Pontypridd RFC and Bridgend RFC. The Celtic Warriors played just one season before disbanding.

History
The Celtic Warriors were one of the five original Welsh regional rugby sides. They were established in the summer of 2003 when the Welsh Rugby Union (WRU) controversially elected to reduce the top tier of professional rugby in the country from nine clubs to five regions, attempting to mirror the successful formats of rugby union in Ireland, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand. Officially representing the Mid Glamorgan area, including Merthyr Tydfil, Aberdare, Pontypridd, Caerphilly, Maesteg and Bridgend, as well as south Powys, in practice the Celtic Warriors were a combination of two Welsh Premier Division clubs: Pontypridd RFC and Bridgend RFC. With Bridgend RFC having clinched the 2002–03 Welsh Premier League title and Pontypridd RFC performing consistently well in domestic rugby, the Warriors were considered one of the strongest line-ups of the five Welsh regions.

However, problems dogged the region from the very start, as they similarly did with the other merged regions of the Neath–Swansea Ospreys and the Newport Gwent Dragons. Discussions and arguments abounded about the team name, colours and home grounds for most of the summer of 2003. The team originally adopted the name "RCT Ravens", reflecting the region's primary location in the county of Rhondda Cynon Taf (RCT) and Bridgend RFC's nickname, the Ravens; however, this name was rejected due to the fact that Bridgend is not in Rhondda Cynon Taf and Pontypridd supporters objected to the inclusion of Bridgend's nickname. That name was dropped in June 2003, and other names, including "Crusaders", "Glamorgan Gladiators" and "Glamorgan Celts", were also rejected, before settling on the Celtic Warriors name in July 2003. In response to the branding issues, as well as the structure of the region's board, Bridgend RFC owner Leighton Samuel resigned as chairman of the Warriors board.

Originally, the team decided to play an equal number of games at Bridgend's Brewery Field and Pontypridd's Sardis Road, ahead of plans to build a new stadium for the Warriors in either Treforest or Llantrisant, financed by the sale of Brewery Field. However, Pontypridd RFC went into administration in October 2003 with debts of £670,000, leading to the sale of their half of the Warriors to Samuel, which he in turn gave to the WRU. In November 2003, they also made the decision to play all future Warriors games at Brewery Field, due in part to the extra revenue brought in by the 16 hospitality boxes at the Bridgend ground, though they did play one more game at Sardis Road at the start of April 2004.

Financial difficulties at the Warriors led to talks of a merger with the Cardiff Blues, but these were quashed in January 2004. In March 2004, Samuel announced that he would be withdrawing his financial backing for Bridgend RFC to focus entirely on the Warriors. Two months later, it emerged that Samuel had agreed to sell his remaining 50% share of the Warriors to the WRU; however, on 19 May 2004, Samuel claimed that he had withdrawn the offer to sell the region, after the WRU missed his deadline of 14:00 to complete the purchase. The WRU counter-claimed that no deadline had been set and that the funds had been transferred to Samuel by 14:45 that day, making them 100% shareholders of the Warriors. Samuel ultimately accepted that the WRU had bought his share of the team, but that he would be challenging the sale on the basis that the WRU had misrepresented their intention to keep the Warriors going. Despite claims that the team would continue for at least another season, it was expected that the union would dissolve the Warriors, following a review by WRU chief executive David Moffett, leaving just four regional sides in Wales. The Warriors' players were then divided among the four remaining teams, and the club was put into liquidation on 1 June 2004.

Samuel first brought his legal challenge against the WRU in October 2004, also claiming that he was owed £1.75 million from the sale and in repayment of a "significant financial contribution" made by his company Décor Frame Ltd, and proceedings began in the High Court in April 2005. That June, Samuel was accused of making a death threat against a WRU lawyer, but no case was ever brought. In July 2005, the WRU wrote to Bridgend RFC, threatening to sue for over £200,000 owed by the club if they lost the Warriors case; however, the case was ultimately settled in October 2006 without having to go to court.

Aftermath
With the demise of the club, players' contracts were effectively torn up as they were pushed around to fill positions in the other four regional sides. A number simply chose to turn their back on the Welsh game and moved to teams in England and France. This left the ex-Warriors' fans feeling alienated from the professional game.

In the aftermath of the demise of the Warriors, a new rugby league club Celtic Crusaders was formed and played at Brewery Field. They were funded by Leighton Samuel, who claimed that they were the reincarnation of the Warriors franchise. The club lasted four seasons in Bridgend before relocating to Wrexham under new ownership.

Home ground
The Warriors used both Brewery Field and Sardis Road for their home games.

Squad

 * Arwel Thomas and Caleb Ralph both agreed terms to join the Celtic Warriors for the 2004–05 season, as the region was disbanded before their contracts began, neither player represented the region.

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

title: Celtic Warriors


text:
User talk:Lexor/Archive Jan-Mar 2004

Discussion with 168... regarding user conflicts
In case you would like to say something one way or the other and haven't noticed the couple general notices I posted, I thought you might like to know that I have raised the question of whether Lir does anything around Wikipedia to deserve the continued liberty to post. A couple users besides me have responded at Problem_users, but so far none that I've actually seen discussing things with Lir on biology pages have offered opinions. To my mind, the testimony of cool heads with a good track record would most help people to draw a conclusion--not that a conclusion is likely to be drawn ever--and so I think it would be great if you were to weigh in. To my mind, Wikipedia culture encourages us to tolerate an unlimited amount of uncivilized behavior, and I think this is ridiculous. As I think of it, this project is nothing nearly so grave as running a nuclear power plant or distributing life-saving drugs. I see it more or less like a club, and I think it would be crazy for us not to kick out people who make our lives miserable and pay no dues. You may not find these criteria pertinent to Lir, but they are ones I would love to win people over to (and I've tried to stimulate discussion about it at Wikipedia talk:Bans and blocks). 168... 07:04, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Caveat: I've been reading Wikipedia talk:Bans and blocks and discovered there's actually been a lot of fairly discussion I wasn't aware of (I actually made my post to the Village Pump and only discovered the bans and blocks page when someone transported it there). It may just be I have not invented a new philosophy....168... 08:05, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * I understand the frustration in general, but I think the best strategy in most cases is to walk away from the conflict for a while and work on something else. I still think it's possible to work with Lir.  Some users draw energy from the fight, if you add yours then it can get worse (I've been guilty of it myself once or twice, I admit).  But eventually if you do nothing people will get bored and you can fix it later. --Lexor 09:10, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I take your point and recognize that what you describe might be the best approach in the current political climate here. Re: you finding it possible to work with Lir, I think that represents a valuable way to look at this issue, but my perspective is to ask "what is the point of this work?" After all, it's work--it's not easy, it's often not fun. Is this work for a purpose I am happy to pledge my energies to? I think walking away from a fight is in effect to answer "no." So actually, if you have ever walked away from a fight, I would say that you do not find everybody possible to work with. What makes a person impossible to work with? Are these qualities present at the times the person is just barely possible to work with? From interactions with Lir, for example, I have formed an idea of what these qualities are, and they make me dislike the prospect of having to work with such a person ever. It's obvious that Wikipedia's embodiment of a certain idealogy is a large part of what attracts people to participate here. If libertarianism, all-inclusiveness and anarchy are crucial elements of that idealogy, then we have to be willing to work with absolutely anybody anyhow. I am just a little surprised to find how strongly people cling to these elements given how marginally they are represented by the political parties of English-speaking democracies. Sure, I agree that they would be cool if they worked, I would like to see them work, and I like that Wikipedia provides a low-risk environment for trying them out, but I think we all have evidence that that they don't work, or at least that they now are working far from perfectly. I guess it's just less important to me to pursue this social experiment to the point of absolute conclusiveness than it is to produce a reasonable encyclopedia. I think producing an encyclopedia would be really cool too. At this point I would be happy to get there by a less than totally pure and simplistic ideological route.168.150.238.72 16:46, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Misc discussion from January 2004
Thanks for helping with Goa trance music, I was at a complete loss how to word that. - Hephaestos 08:52, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * No problem. The article could still use some more work, I think. --Lexor 09:10, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

History of Computing
Good job on reorganizing by date, intead of I and II ... I was thinking of doing it myself. Fuzheado 10:32, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks. I was wondering how to handle History of computing hardware, should we leave it as is, or should it be History of computing hardware (until 1960s), for symmetry?  Ideally we would mirror the History of the United States and have a top-level "History of computing hardware" (or history of computing), and then sections for each era, like the table to the right.  What do you think?  Because History of computing hardware is linked from many places, it would be lot work to fix all redirects (esp to avoid dbl redirects) that I wasn't game to retitle that page just yet. --Lexor 10:58, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * For the moment maybe a compromise would be this. --Lexor

Artificial Intelligence
Thank you for improving my contribution. Your small edits are evidently very carefully thought out and make a real difference. Psb777 09:58, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)

well, I just had a quick look, and that sure seemed weird. I had access to two pages on the web site, and then my computer blew up...I will look better later, but frankly, not only is that weird, but that seems quite wrong to me. Will see... Anthere

Please vote
At Talk:DNA Peak 06:14, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Thanks
Since I'm not a member of the Fire Brigade, I'm assuming that your message is primarily meant as a "heads up". I'll certainly watch out for changes that the user in question makes on pages that are on "My watchlist". Thanks! Peak 07:20, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Er, I guess you're not actually in the list, but yes, I was thinking more in a generic sense of a Fire Dept as a heads up. --Lexor|Talk 09:28, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

"spliceome"
From User_talk:Dmb000006:
 * Did you just invent this "spliceome" term? Stewart Adcock 22:51, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Actually I have heard it (but it should be spelled spliceosome) used in bioinformatics, it gets Google hits if it's correctly spelled [1]. It perhaps doesn't warrant a complete article to itself, however. --Lexor|Talk 23:01, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

From the new spliceome article, he seems to be refering to something quite different from spliceosome (which, of course, I've heard of). Anyway, I've listed the new article on VfD -- Stewart Adcock 23:38, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

hi lexor
I don't think we've really had a chance to meet on wikipedia before. I am glad you've shown some interest in the indie music idea. I'd enjoy discussing ideas with you. I am also curious about what sparked your interest. Sincerely, Kingturtle 03:43, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Hi, Kingturtle. I'm interested in all kinds of independent music.  My interests tend to be in the direction of electronica, IDM (I've done a fair amount of work in organizing the electronic music series, although I haven't yet felt a need for a WikiProject for that genre), but I like much in the areas of post-rock, and indie music (Stereolab, Tortoise and the like).   Like you, I find it sometimes frustrating that bands that are more independent get sidelined on wikipedia.

 * However, I still think there should be some kind of threshold test, i.e. a band that formed two months ago in somebody's garage or bedroom probably doesn't deserve a mention, but a band (or group of musicians) that has been around for 4 or 5 years, never achieving much in the way of sales, MTV coverage or mainstream press, but is still considered influential or well-known within a style, community or region (e.g. Kid 606 is well known in the Bay Area and in IDM, but probably not elsewhere), does deserve to be covered by wikipedia. If a band makes it into allmusic.com it's  pretty good (but certainly nowhere near absolute) test that it ought to be in wikipedia for almost all genres and styles in the United States and to a lesser extent, the United Kingdom (although, I hasten to add that the converse is not necessarily true: omission in allmusic shouldn't warrant omission from wikipedia).  For other European countries, Africa, Asia, Japan, South America and Australia, it's unlikely to be found there, but should be in wikipedia nevertheless, and with our truly worldwide contributor base we should be able to better allmusic in these regions. --Lexor|Talk 07:15, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hi, Lexor. I see you've added the nifty msg:genetics doohickeys. Did you create the series? I'm curious where you got the idea. I'm wondering if it's a case of parallel discovery or if my WikiCivics series has inspired other series.168...|...Talk 06:06, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Yep, I did create both that and the Genomics series. Actually I've been maintaining a few such Article series already.  I did the Electronic music series and the History of Australia series (this was before the new MediaWiki msg stuff came into existence, and I've switched the music series to use the new series, but not the hist. of Aust. series to use it yet).  I think there is certainly a role for using these series to bring some order to the unruly beasts of proliferating sub-articles on similar subjects, without merging too many pages (which often upsets people).  I'd like to make the overview articles be reasonably lengthy overviews of the subject (with copious links to relevant Main articles:) such as Anthere has done very nicely with ecology.  I recommend using the article series judiciously to unite series like Genomics and Genetics, where a subject like genetics has split into many sub-disciplines, in this way, Wikipedia will begin to feel more like a "real" encyclopedia, where there are long articles on major topics, and shorter (or sometimes longer) articles on specialist topics.  I checked out the way other encyclopedias organized them, and they often have a longer articles on genetics and biology, for example, than we currently have, and I am working to try and get the balance right without either too much splitting or too much agglomeration. --Lexor|Talk 07:50, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hi Lexor, Thanks for fixing the mess after my intervention in the von Bertalanffy article. I'm sorry. I got the message and now I know how to deal with such problems in the future. Arnejohs

Hello, Lexor. Oops, I was asking you about changes to Escape From Noise, but now I realize you'd changed Negativland instead. Sorry if I caused any confusion. :-) --LarryGilbert 21:33, 2004 Mar 6 (UTC)

Lexor, I will take it that you were just correcting a typo. But please, do not edit the first two paragraphs of DNA. Thanks in advance. SweetLittleFluffyThing

 * I saw that, but it couldn't just be left with that typo as it was. Between me clicking the page to edit it another anonymous IP contributor actually deleted some content: see the diff to see what I mean:, I actually meant to revert it, but I thought the mistake happened earlier in the editing reversion. --Lexor|Talk 14:17, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, you were correct to do that. Best to avoid letting mistakes :-)

Bird and the Brain

 * More information regarding this affair is available at User talk:Bird/Brain and stuff. He has since tried to blank it, however, as well as the links to it on his user page. Fennec 13:53, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Lexor, can you do something to prevent the current vandalism. I'm fairly new to wikipedia, and don't want to exacerbate the situation by doing or saying the wrong thing (that's why I'm not commenting on the talk brain, or bird's own talk page). I'm tempted to wait until the whole thing cools down... But fixing all these changes will not be that easy. Bird is not just undoing his own work here. Washington irving 15:38, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Yeah, it's all very strange. It appears he left in a huff, and won't tell us exactly why.  Seem awfully trivial to get so worked up about. --Lexor|Talk 16:35, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I honestly think his contributions were very valuable. There were one or two things that I thought were questionable, but overall a huge effort, and very worthwhile. I was hesitant to query his content as I thought I detected a sensitive ego in the manic energy of his edits, and the absence of any summaries. Maybe we all read to much into these kind of things. I note his talk page had (about the time he first signed up) he rejected (rather abruptly) an apparently friendly welcome to wikipedia, saying he was not a new user and "offense is a way forward". This was one thing that made me worried about querying his content, didn't want to stir things up. Seems I have succeeded though. Washington irving 16:46, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree, which makes it all the more strange. Perhaps there were already signs.  I simply tweaked some image positions, he reverted and I left the way they were, just using wiki syntax.  But there are some disturbing things on his talk page, and User talk:Fennec's page, which seem to imply that this was all intentional, i.e. to try and test the wikipedia community by appearing to be a real contributor, but it's so hard to tell what's going on. --Lexor|Talk 16:54, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I've protected a whole slew of pages involved in the Bird dispute, and if possible they need to be fact checked and/or listed for deletion. David Newton 20:51, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Well, I'm glad you doctors have bird diagnosed. That's it: Bird is sick. We don't hate bird, we feel sorry. irving, you could have edited any article any time and you have no basis for claiming that your intuitive wisdom about bird's ego held you back. You didn't write about the funciton of the hypthalmic pituitary axis and create articles to provide context for people learning about what are the real roots of stress because you don't care. It is your over inflated ego that drove this episode, because you did not know how to react in the face of conflict.

All you need to do is stand back and let Bird question whatever bird wants to question about what Bird has written, pick up where you left off, and move on. But it appears several people would rather play hero than recognize that writers often have changes of opinion and allow writers to openly discuss their opinion of their prior work. You are prohibiting writers from developing thier thoughts apparently out of your desire to be part of what you percieve as a successful project.

Since you opened the door to calling people sick by alleging you have diagnosed Bird as manic, I feel it fair to say you, Lexor David and others who have made sport of this editorial affair are some real sick puppies. 172.194.9.172 01:54, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * To whomever (or Bird, if this is indeed Bird), for the record I have never called anybody manic or sick. I am, however, confused and I honestly don't understand what Bird was talking about on Bird's Talk page before contributions ceased from Bird.  I am more than happy to have writers reassess their earlier work, I do the same myself sometimes.  I'm simply trying to understand what might have happened here when a contributor had a sudden change of heart, and whether there is something we have done or can do as a community, or whether there is a systematic issue that we need to deal with.  I'm not taking this as "sport", I'm just trying to understand and learn what lead to Bird's decisioin.  However, if Bird doesn't want to contribute anymore or explain Bird's reasonings, I can accept that.  Thanks to Bird for the contributions, I'm sorry it hasn't worked out for Bird, but I wish Bird well.  Hopefully this closes the endeavour, we will pick up and move on from now. --Lexor|Talk 02:38, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Although I did use the word "manic" above this was in the general sense (given by the New Collin's Concise Dictionary as "obsessional enthusiasm or partiality"), and not in the sense of manic depression. I'll continue to try and refrain from name-calling, but this can be difficult when one is under attack. Washington irving 09:58, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Have a nice wikibreak Lexor. Hope to see you back here soon. Don't let yesterday's events get you down. Angela. 08:34, Mar 9, 2004 (UTC)

-

Lexor... I think I suddenly have an understanding of what you meant two days ago on IRC. I hesitate to follow this to its latest end. But I fear you were right :-( FirmLittleFluffyThing 07:36, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Lexor/Archive Jan-Mar 2004


text:
Aksyonov (surname)

Aksyonov (Аксёнов; masculine) or Aksyonova (Аксёнова; feminine), alternatively spelled Aksenov/Aksenova, is a Russian surname. Variants of this surname include Avksentyev/Avksentyeva (Авксе́нтьев/Авксе́нтьева), Aksanov/Aksanova (Акса́нов/Акса́нова), Aksentyev/Aksentyeva (Аксе́нтьев/Аксе́нтьева), Aksentsev/Aksentseva (Аксе́нцев/Аксе́нцева), Aksentsov/Aksentsov (Аксенцо́в/Аксенцо́ва), Aksyutin/Aksyutina (Аксю́тин/Аксю́тина), Aksyanov/Aksyanova (Акся́нов/Акся́нова), and Oksyonov/Oksyonova (also spelled Oksenov/Oksenova) (Оксёнов/Оксёнова).

All these surnames derive from various forms of the Christian male first name Avksenty (from Greek auxanō, meaning to increase). The following people share this surname:
 * Aleksandr Aksyonov (disambiguation), several people
 * Aleksey Aksyonov (born 1987), Russian sprint athlete
 * Alisa Aksyonova (Алиса Аксёнова) (born 1931), Russian museum director
 * Alyona Aksyonova, Uzbekistani shooter participating in the 2004 Summer Olympics
 * Anastasia Aksenova (Anastasiya Aksyonova) (born 1990), Russian swimmer
 * Antonina Aksyonova, adopted child of Yevgenia Ginzburg, Soviet dissident writer
 * Grigoriy Aksenov (Grigory Aksyonov), Kazakhstani participants in the second heat of the 2005 Asian Athletics Championships – Men's 800 metres
 * Anastasia Aksenova (Aksyonova) (born 1990), Russian swimmer
 * Boris Aksenov (Boris Aksyonov), bass guitarist, one of the original members of Zemlyane, a Soviet/Russian rock band
 * Igor Aksyonov (born 1977), Russian association football player
 * Irina Aksyonova (born 1962), Soviet Olympic swimmer
 * Lyubov Aksenova (Lyubov Aksyonova), Soviet participant in Heat 3 of the 1971 European Athletics Championships – Women's 400 metres
 * Lyubov Aksyonova, name of Russian philologist Lyubov Sova after 1979
 * Lyudmila Aksyonova (born 1947), Soviet athlete
 * Maksim Aksyonov (disambiguation), several people
 * Nikolay Aksyonov (born 1970), Russian Olympic rower
 * Nikolay Aksenov, Soviet participant in the Continental Final at the 1970 Individual Speedway World Championship
 * Ogdo Aksyonova (1936–1995), Dolgan poet, founder of the Dolgan written literature
 * Oleksandr Aksyonov (born 1994), Ukrainian association football player
 * Pavel Aksyonov, second husband of Yevgenia Ginzburg, Soviet dissident writer and father of writer Vasily Aksyonov
 * Pyotr Aksyonov, founder of the Court of Auditors, a historical predecessor of the modern Accounts Chamber of Russia
 * Sergei Aksenov (Sergey Aksyonov) (born 1971), Russian politician
 * Sergey Aksyonov (born 1972), Prime Minister of Crimea
 * Vasily Aksyonov (1932-2009), Soviet/Russian writer
 * Vladimir Aksyonov (born 1935), Soviet cosmonaut and double Hero of the Soviet Union
 * Yana Aksenova, one of the theremin performers invited to perform songs included into the Teen Age Message, a series of interstellar radio transmissions
 * Yekaterina Aksenova, maintainer of the Russian Gov-Gov webblog, a part of Government 2.0
 * Yuri Aksenov (Yury Aksyonov) (born 1973), Kazakhstani association football player

title: Aksyonov (surname)


text:
User:Guybrush/Lawrence Miles draft

(Now defunct; I have submitted the rewrite as a replacement for the main Lawrence Miles article.)

title: User:Guybrush/Lawrence Miles draft


text:
Carl Theodor Albrecht

Carl Theodor Albrecht (August 30, 1843, Dresden, Kingdom of Saxony – August 31, 1915) was a German astronomer.

He studied mathematics and natural sciences at the TU Dresden and the Universität Berlin. During his time in Dresden, he helped founding Polyhymnia, the fraternity that later became the German Student Corps Altsachsen. He specialized in geodesy, to which he devoted much of his career. He also worked on the problem of variation of latitude, building upon the work of Seth Carlo Chandler who discovered the variation, known as the Chandler wobble. In 1882, Carl Theodor Albrecht was elected as member of the German Academy of Sciences Leopoldina.

Obituaries

 * AN 201 (1915) 269/270
 * MNRAS 76 (1916) 282

title: Carl Theodor Albrecht


text:
Victoria (British Columbia federal electoral district)

Victoria is a federal electoral district in British Columbia, Canada, that has been represented in the House of Commons of Canada from 1872 to 1904 and since 1925.

The riding was originally chartered as Victoria District for the special byelections held in 1871 upon the province's entry into Confederation. Like the other B.C. ridings with that appellation, however, the "District" was dropped once the temporary ridings were ratified and made "permanent" for the general election of 1872; this was the first in which the Victoria riding (by that name) appeared. From 1905 up until the 1925 election, Victoria was represented by the riding of Victoria City.

Demographics
Ethnic groups (2006): 85.54% White, 4.05% Chinese, 3.07% Aboriginal, 1.26% South Asian, 1.22% Japanese, 1.15% Filipino, 1.09% Black

Languages (2011): 83.93% English, 2.92% Chinese, 1.79% French, 1.40% German

Religions (2001): 35.36% Protestant, 15.05% Catholic, 3.94% Other Christian, 1.62% Buddhist, 40.52% No religion

Median income (2005): $24,022

Geography
It covers the entire city of Victoria, the municipality of Oak Bay and the southeastern portion of the municipality of Saanich. It also includes the University of Victoria.

History
This electoral district was created in 1872 when Victoria District riding was abolished. It elected two members to the House of Commons of Canada through Block voting. Of the two it elected in 1872, one (Henry Nathan Jr.) was the first Jewish MP of Canada; the other (William Alexander "Amor De Cosmos" Smith) served as MP while also serving as premier of British Columbia.

In 1878, Sir John A. Macdonald was parachuted into the riding, as he was unelectable in eastern Canada, in the wake of the Pacific Scandal. Macdonald, previously the MP for the Marquette riding in Manitoba, had to run in a by-election as he had been appointed to the cabinet (to serve as prime minister). He chose Victoria, which had not yet held its portion of the 1878 Canadian federal election. Victorians voted for him enthusiastically, as he promised to finally bring about the construction of what became the Canadian Pacific Railway. He did not run for re-election in Victoria, instead securing a safe seat in Ontario in 1882.

It was abolished in 1903, and its territory was divided between the new single-member ridings of Victoria City and Nanaimo.

It was re-created in 1924 from the Victoria City riding, electing one member to the House of Commons.

A redistribution in 1966 trimmed the size of the riding slightly, removing parts of Saanich west of Cedar Hill Road and north of Cedar Hill Cross Road.

Victoria was one of two electoral districts in British Columbia that saw no changes to its boundaries proposed following the 2012 federal electoral boundaries redistribution.

Members of Parliament
This riding has elected the following members of Parliament:

{| class="wikitable" ! Parliament ! Years ! colspan="2" | Member ! Party ! colspan="2" | Member ! Party Riding created from Victoria District''' Riding re-created from Victoria City
 * - bgcolor="CCCCCC"
 * bgcolor="#F0F0F0" colspan="8" align="center" | '''Victoria
 * bgcolor="#F0F0F0" colspan="8" align="center" | '''Victoria
 * bgcolor="whitesmoke" align="center" | 2nd
 * 1872–1874
 * Henry Nathan, Jr.
 * Liberal
 * rowspan="3" |
 * rowspan="3" | Amor De Cosmos
 * rowspan="3" | Liberal
 * bgcolor="whitesmoke" align="center" | 3rd
 * 1874–1878
 * Francis James Roscoe
 * Independent Liberal
 * bgcolor="whitesmoke" align="center" | 4th
 * 1878–1882
 * John A. Macdonald
 * Liberal–Conservative
 * bgcolor="whitesmoke" align="center" | 5th
 * 1882–1887
 * rowspan="7" |
 * rowspan="2" | Noah Shakespeare
 * rowspan="7" | Conservative
 * rowspan="8" |
 * rowspan="3" | Edgar Crow Baker
 * rowspan="8" | Conservative
 * rowspan="3" bgcolor="whitesmoke" align="center" | 6th
 * align="center" | 1887
 * 1888–1889
 * rowspan="5" | Edward Gawler Prior
 * 1889–1891
 * rowspan="5" | Thomas Earle
 * bgcolor="whitesmoke" align="center" | 7th
 * 1891–1896
 * bgcolor="whitesmoke" align="center" | 8th
 * 1896–1900
 * rowspan="2" bgcolor="whitesmoke" align="center" | 9th
 * 1900–1902
 * 1902–1904
 * George Riley
 * Liberal
 * bgcolor="#F0F0F0" colspan="8" align="center" | Riding dissolved into Victoria City and Nanaimo
 * bgcolor="#F0F0F0" colspan="8" align="center" | '''Victoria
 * bgcolor="whitesmoke" align="center" | 7th
 * 1891–1896
 * bgcolor="whitesmoke" align="center" | 8th
 * 1896–1900
 * rowspan="2" bgcolor="whitesmoke" align="center" | 9th
 * 1900–1902
 * 1902–1904
 * George Riley
 * Liberal
 * bgcolor="#F0F0F0" colspan="8" align="center" | Riding dissolved into Victoria City and Nanaimo
 * bgcolor="#F0F0F0" colspan="8" align="center" | '''Victoria
 * George Riley
 * Liberal
 * bgcolor="#F0F0F0" colspan="8" align="center" | Riding dissolved into Victoria City and Nanaimo
 * bgcolor="#F0F0F0" colspan="8" align="center" | '''Victoria
 * bgcolor="#F0F0F0" colspan="8" align="center" | '''Victoria
 * bgcolor="#F0F0F0" colspan="8" align="center" | '''Victoria

Current member of Parliament
The current member of Parliament for Victoria is Laurel Collins. She was first elected in 2019. She is a member of the New Democratic Party. Previously, she was a sociology instructor at the University of Victoria and served on Victoria City Council.

1925–present
The Victoria riding name was re-established as a one-member seat in 1924.

1872–1902
The Victoria riding was abolished in 1903. Successor ridings were Victoria City and, for western parts of the riding, Nanaimo. This riding elected two members to parliament.

General

 * Expenditures – 2004
 * Expenditures – 2000
 * Expenditures – 1997
 * Expenditures – 1997


text:
Varning för Jönssonligan

Varning för Jönssonligan (Beware of the Johnson Gang) is a Swedish film about the gang Jönssonligan made in 1981.

It was the first Swedish adaptation of one of the original Danish Olsen-banden movies. Somewhat ironically, it was based on the sixth Olsen Gang movie, Olsen-bandens sidste bedrifter, which was intended as the last one when it was made.

title: Varning för Jönssonligan


text: Category:Peerage

title: Category:Peerage


text:
Talk:Nick Adams (actor, born 1931)

Change Title and Give this Title to Dab page?
"Hollywood" and "gay" are words to conjure with, as the voluminous discussion here and in the existing archive proves. Nevertheless,
 * "Nick Adams stories"

has 25K Ghits, all of which may be presumed to focus on Nick Adams (character) while
 * "nick adams " Rebel OR dean

(which differs by about 2% from e.g.
 * "nick adams " Rebel OR dean OR Hondo OR "wild wild west"

and thus can be presumably be counted on to capture virtually all of the pages that would focus on the actor) has only 46K. Perhaps someone who's read the actor's bio thru can construct a more compelling G-srch, but barring that, IMO the actor and the Hemingway stories are close enuf in significance that readers would be better served by more equal Dab'n than by letting the actor keep the unsuffixed title. --Jerzy•t 18:16, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. Gwen Gale 11:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Shall we rename the article Nick Adams (hustler)?
In this edit, demurely summarized as some minor changes and additions, User:Onefortyone adds about three kilobytes, notably a lengthy section on "Adams's sexuality" and another on "Adams's off-screen dates with actresses". In other words, stonking great bucket-loads of steaming tittle-tattle. Mmm, fragrant!

But I'm disappointed by megastars such as James Dean (a cultural icon who also died tragically young). For one thing, the word legendary is missing, yet the article needs that to satisfy the Hello!-consuming "demographic". Can't we rephrase this bit as gigastars such as James Dean (a legendary cultural icon who also died tragically young)? (Though actually I've always thought that for Dean, as for Mr Vicious, early death was a sage career move.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:45, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I do not think that we should rename the article "Nick Adams (hustler)", though a special subsection concerning Adams's and Dean's activities as street hustlers may be included in the Hollywood section. As for the Sexuality section, it was already there but wrongly entitled. The other interesting section on "Adams's off-screen dates with actresses" had been removed by User:Gwen Gale. I only reincluded it, as it throws much light on the studio-arranged dates of the time, of which Nick Adams was part of. By the way, I am happy with most of Gwen's recent edits, as they are indeed improvements. Onefortyone (talk) 04:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey Onefortyone, on this topic, I think it's more than ok to mention these tabloid sources about Nick Adams but since a) they're all 2nd and 3rd hand hearsay with no confirmation and b) they have little or nothing to do with his notability as an actor, I am going to put them back into their own section at the end of the article, citing context worries which would be more or less covered by WP:WEIGHT along with WP:RS. I do strongly support the inclusion of this published material in the article and will help you in any way I can to keep it there, in its own section. I would also support a new article called Nick Adams (sexuality) but dealing with these sources in their own section here is, IMHO, as helpful. Please feel free to bring up anything meaningful to you about all this here on the talk page and all the best to you! Gwen Gale (talk) 12:14, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Onefortyone, when I much expanded and rewrote the article a few weeks ago, I mistakenly rm'd the Natalie Wood text. I've rs'd this to the gossip section (since it's supported by citations of gossip/tabloid sources), thanks for bringing it up. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Wow, Gwen, I hadn't realized this -- are you saying it's really OK to write "encyclopedia" articles out of "gossip/tabloid sources"? I may have to rethink my approach here. I mean, my assiduous reading of the "Street of Shame" and other pages within Private Eye had given me the impression that the British tabloids (or redtops, as the Brits call them) were only suitable for amusement, and that their respect for facts was close to zero. Am I wrong? Or is this tattlopedia we're writing here? -- Hoary (talk) 16:25, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Haha! Thanks for putting it that way! I do so thoroughly agree with the spirit of how you put it.

Not that we as editors care at all about what he did along these lines, but the article must follow Wikipedia sourcing policies, first because that's how this wiki is meant to work and second, so readers will not be misled a) into thinking these rumours have anything to do with verfiable information about Nick Adams (unlike say, Liberace, Rock Hudson or Sir Derek George Jacobi or whomever) or b) that there are no rumours.

Now, the thing is (as you imply), these tabloid sources only barely meet WP:V if at all, given WP:V (which says sources which "rely heavily on rumors... should only be used in articles about themselves") and do not meet WP:RS. As it happens WP:WEIGHT also has something to say about how we might deal with this.

Meanwhile these rumours are widely published on the Internet and elsewhere, so the article would be very lacking not to address them somehow.

A wholly separate section called Later gossip is more or less as much about the sources "themselves" as it would be about Nick Adams, following WP:V above, which makes their inclusion ok under WP policy (while the policy specifies these sources can only be cited in "articles about themselves" I think it's ok to apply this as "wholly separate section about themselves" if other editors are ok with it too) and moreover (IMHO), encyclopedic since the sources themselves are being discussed separately as a cultural thing which has shown up decades after his death. Hence, I think editors can be a bit more open-minded with Onefortyone about what kinds of sources he wants to put there and I mean it when I say I strongly support the inclusion of this stuff, in its own section.

Lastly, if a consensus of editors were to show up and rm these sources altogether from the article (I don't think this will happen) it looks to me like Onefortyone would be wholly supported by WP policy if he put these sources in a new article called Nick Adams (sexuality rumours) and linked it back to the "see also" section of this one. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:47, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Unsubstantiated gossip, especially about Elvis Presley, who was NOT gay or bi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.100.37.137 (talk) 04:06, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I just can't believe a Wikipedia article would have anything in it by Larry Quirk or Albert Goldman. Chandler75 (talk) 21:35, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nickadamsmars.jpg
Image:Nickadamsmars.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 23:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I've replied on the image page. Gwen Gale (talk) 00:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nickadamsrebel.jpg
Image:Nickadamsrebel.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 23:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I've replied on the image page. Gwen Gale (talk) 00:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nickadamsmars.jpg
Image:Nickadamsmars.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 00:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe this notice is mistaken. Rationale has been provided and I believe it is wholly in compliance, please restate the objection with more specificity relating to Nick Adams, if need be, thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nickadamsrebel.jpg
Image:Nickadamsrebel.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 00:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The objection seemed to related to the image being linked to multiple articles, which was inaccurate, the image is linked only to this article and a full fair use rationale was already provided. However, please restate the objection if need be, thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 00:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Unsourced episode description
This was added by an IP, it's a plot synopsis which in this form is inappropriate for this biographical article. Gwen Gale (talk) 03:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Fun and Games
In March of 1964, viewers of the innovative (and short-lived) dark science fiction anthology series The Outer Limits witnessed one of Adams' most affecting performances. In the episode Fun and Games, Adams portrays Mike Benson, an emotionally wounded ex-boxer, conditioned to expect the worst from life. He is offered a chance for redemption: he can save Earth from being destroyed-- cataclysmically over a period of several years -- for the entertainment of a jaded extraterrestrial audience, but only if he will provide alternative entertainment by joining a female human in battling to the death two primitive aliens, who are likewise fighting to save their own distant world. Benson is a character whose best impulses lie buried beneath layers of fear and defensive cynicism, and Adams persuasively brings him to life. Initially refusing to take up the alien's challenge, Benson revels in the possibilities of hedonism open to a man who knows that the world is just a few years from utter destruction, noting that there would be "enough time" for "just about everything a man could enjoy". When Laura (Nancy Malone), the other human facing the aliens, bitterly asks him if that includes raising a child, Adams lends understated emotional conviction to Benson's distant reply: "I don't think I'd enjoy that...my Dad always said it was a lot of trouble." Fun and Games is, as critic David Schow notes "in terms of emotional impact and existential honesty, one of The Outer Limits finest hours." ref: http://www.davidjschow.com/limits/ol_episodes2.html#fun This is due, in no small part, to the depth of Adams' characterization.

Having read the Outer Limits review at the URL in the text, the IP's phrase "This is due, in no small part, to the depth of Adams' characterization," is placed to imply that it is supported by the linked review but it is not, it's WP:OR. However, I have added two sentences to the text which are supported by the review. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:19, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Removal of "verifiable content" (or just tittle-tattle and trivia)
Gwen sez: please don't remove verifiable content without first discussing it on the talk page.

Allow me to open the discussion.

I find the splendidly named Red Pen of Doom's deletions to be very well thought out, because — pace one of the most vigorous writers of this article (and I do not have Gwen in mind) — WP purports to be a general purpose encyclopedia rather than a compendium of tittle-tattle and trivia. Here's just one part of Red Pen's version:
 * On the night of February 7 1968 his lawyer and friend, ex-LAPD officer Erwin Roeder, drove to the actor's house in Beverly Hills to check on him after a missed dinner appointment. Seeing a light on and his car in the garage, Roeder broke through a window and discovered Adams in his upstairs bedroom.

Version after restoration of "verifiable content":
 * On the night of February 7 1968 his lawyer and friend, ex-LAPD officer Erwin Roeder, drove to the actor's house at 2126 El Roble Lane in Beverly Hills to check on him after a missed dinner appointment. Seeing a light on and his car in the garage, Roeder broke through a window and discovered Adams in his upstairs bedroom, slumped against a wall and wearing a shirt, blue jeans and boots, his eyes open in a blank stare, dead. He was 36 years old.

Whether he was wearing blue jeans, green jeans, or women's panties seems immaterial. That his eyes were open does too: while I'm no coroner, I'd have thought that any implication that open eyes might have would have been pointed out by the "Coroner to the Stars". If the stiff's eyes were open they'd presumably be motionless; how could they be in other than a blank stare?

All of this may suit the kind of paperback whose tackily designed cover says it has spent so many weeks on the "New York Times bestseller list" (battling the latest fad diet books or whatever) but it has no place here that I can see. (And as it happens the example above isn't sourced either.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:36, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * And from the lede we also have "Adams' untimely death".-- The Red Pen of Doom  03:55, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh but that could have been "untimely passing". (Incidentally, if you want to see some crap WP bios, try searching for such golden cliches as "tender age". I think I once even came across "for all intention [sic] purposes".)
 * Anyone care to defend the stuff that Red Pen deleted? -- Hoary (talk) 04:07, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Why is there a WHOLE section of speculation? None of these are even reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Golly58 (talk • contribs) 22:11, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Your Nick Addams Bio is too negative
I never cared for Addams, I'm not a fan. But I feel your bio of him is too negative. Even if all the negative input is 100% true, its irrelevant. The man is long dead, what matters is his career, his legacy as an actor, not that Elvis Presley's mother didn't like him, or that he was a pool hustler. He only has a biography because of his movie and television career, without that he would be long forgotten. I'm gay, and I don't care if Addams was gay, bi, or whatever. The time when it was headline news if a celebrity was gay is long past. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:924F:8300:BCBD:7A2D:DFCF:EC81 (talk) 16:44, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

 * I agree that the section on his sexuality is excessively large, and is undue emphasis. Figureofnine (talk • contribs) 15:05, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Article issues and classification

 * I think this article was prematurely -- or -- bot wrongly-assessed. There is a multitude of "unsourced statements" (citation needed) from 2011, 2014, 2019, and July and August 2022, as well as balance issues
 * The B-class criteria #1 states; The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited., and #4, The article is reasonably well-written.
 * Reassess the article to C-class. --  Otr500 (talk) 00:54, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

This article is so bizarre
This is so bizarre. It seems to belong to something like Cracked.com rather than in an encyclopedia. Montju (talk) 05:58, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Nick Adams (actor, born 1931)


text:
Framland

Framland was a hundred in north-east Leicestershire, England, roughly corresponding to today's borough of Melton. It was recorded in the Domesday Book as one of Leicestershire's four wapentakes.

The name remains in use as a deanery of the Diocese of Leicester in the Church of England.

The original meeting place of the hundred was at Great Framland.

title: Framland


text:
Parent bug

Elasmucha grisea, common name parent bug, is a species of shield bugs or stink bugs belonging to the family Acanthosomatidae. The term parent bugs includes also the other species of the genus Elasmucha and some species of the family Acanthosomatidae.

Subspecies
Subspecies within Elasmucha grisea include:
 * Elasmucha grisea cypria Josifov, 1971
 * Elasmucha grisea grisea (Linnaeus, 1758)

Distribution
Elasmucha grisea is a rather common and widespread species present in most of Europe.

Description
Elasmucha grisea can reach a length of 6.5 - 8.8 mm. Males are smaller than females. These medium-sized shield bugs are usually brown-reddish, but there are also gray (hence the Latin species name grisea) and green-brown specimens. The connexiva are black and white. The upper side is covered with several dark dots. The scutellum usually shows an evident black patch. The ventral face is largely punctuated with black. The lateral corners of the pronotum are simply beveled. The front corners of the pronotum show a more pronounced tooth. Antennae are blackish in the male, dark brown in the female.

This species, like other parent bugs, possesses metathoracic and abdominal glands, which discharge a foul smelling secretion. This secretion is used to deter potential enemies and is sometimes released when the bug is disturbed.

Life cycle
Adults of E. grisea can be found all year around. In fact this species overwinters as an adult. Mating occurs in the spring and new adults can be found in August. These shield bugs feed on various woody plants, preferably on birch (Betula sp.), but also on alder (Alnus sp.), beech (Fagus sp.), holly (Ilex sp.), spruce (Picea sp.), etc. Like most shield bugs, E. grisea and other parent bugs suck plant sap and require symbiotic bacteria for their digestion. They obtain symbionts at an early age: the mother covers her eggs with bacteria so that the nymphs ingest them as they feed on the egg case. Both adults and nymphs readily feed on developing seeds, and breeding individuals can be observed on host plants with many young catkins. However, they seem to avoid trees with a high predation risk.

Parental care
The common name of "parent bug" comes from the relatively rare insect behaviour of prolonged caring for eggs and juveniles, exhibited by females of this species. Predators, such as bugs, beetles, earwigs and ants, can eliminate all the offspring of the parent bug if there is no maternal care. The repertoire of female defensive behaviours includes wing fanning, body jerking, tilting towards the enemy and, finally, releasing of 'nasty' odours from the scent glands,

After oviposition, the parent bug female stands over the egg batch and shields it throughout egg development. Predation appears to limit the clutch size in E. grisea. Experiments have shown that large females lay larger egg clutches than small females. However, when the clutch size was manipulated, small females protecting large clutches lost significantly more eggs than large females guarding small clutches or females in the control groups (guarding clutches of optimal size).

After hatching, larvae of the parent bug remain in a tight aggregation, feeding on their empty egg shells. When any larva tries to abandon the aggregation, the female tilts her body, stretches her antennae to reach the larva and pushes the larva back to the aggregation. During the second and third instar they move, for food, towards catkins then back to the leaf with the female in close attendance. The female keeps a lookout for the larvae constantly and manages them with touches of her antennae. Finally, larvae form smaller groups and disperse at the end of the third instar, at which point the female leaves them.

It has been noted that, in E. grisea, moultings during the early instar stages can be asynchronous. While some larvae are still at the first instar stage, others have already moulted to the stage of second instar larvae and abandon the brood leaf for food. Under such circumstances, the female is no longer able to provide effective protection for all her larvae. The offspring of different females make contact with each other and form mixed groups. There is no kin-recognition in this species. Both single and joint guarding females provide parental care for their own larvae or other females' offspring. Larvae are likely to benefit from 'kindergartens', when their mothers disappear or die. Moreover, joint-guarding females defend the egg clutches much more successfully than single females.

The tachinid fly, Subclytia rotundiventris, is a specialist endoparasite of the parent bug females. The parasite inserts a single egg through the upper prothorax of an E. grisea female and, after hatching, the larva feeds on its host. At the beginning the parasite feeds only on the non-vital parts of the bug, but finally it kills it and pupates outside the host. The larva ‘permits’ the parent bug to continue caring for the juveniles until their third stage. In experiments, the wing-fanning (regarded as the most effective defensive behaviour of the parent bug) did not differ significantly between parasited and non-parasited females until the nymphs were at the second instar stage. However, with older nymphs, females were much less effective in their defensive behaviour and often died before the end of maternal care. Considering that the older nymphs are more mobile and may escape from predators, some offspring of the parasited females of the parent bug probably survive and may also be potential hosts for the new generation of the parasite.

title: Parent bug


text:
Dave Bronconnier

David Thomas Bronconnier (born October 7, 1962) is a Canadian politician who served as the 35th Mayor of Calgary, Alberta.

Personal life
A fourth-generation Calgarian (his great grandmother was born in Calgary in 1895), he grew up in the southwest community of Glenbrook and attended Viscount Bennett High School. Bronconnier enrolled at the University of Calgary but left after a short while to pursue work opportunities. He worked for the City of Calgary Electric System and for Alberta Government Telephones and then in 1983, started a small construction company. In 1987, Bronconnier and his business partner founded First General Services, a company which specializes in various types of insurance restoration in buildings. The firm has grown substantially since then. Dave is married to Cindy Bronconnier, with whom he has four children; Adam, Weston, Leslie and Grant.

Political career
Bronconnier served on Calgary's city council as the alderman for Ward 6 for nine years. He was first elected in 1992 and then served 3 terms before deciding to run for mayor. In 1997, Bronconnier ran in the federal election as the Liberal candidate for Calgary West. Bronconnier was defeated by a landslide in this election by Reform Party candidate Rob Anders. Long serving and very popular mayor Al Duerr was retiring leaving the position open. Bronconnier narrowly defeated Bev Longstaff, Duerr's protégé, winning the mayoralty race of 2001. He became Calgary's 35th mayor.

Bronconnier was re-elected in 2004 with nearly 80% of the votes. Only 18% of the population voted, making it the lowest voter turnout for a municipal election in Western Canada. He campaigned for re-election in the 2007 Calgary municipal election and was re-elected with 61% of the votes.

On February 23, 2010, Bronconnier announced that he would not seek reelection in the 2010 municipal election. He was among the finalists for the 2010 World Mayor prize.

In November 2011, Bronconnier was named by Premier Alison Redford to be Alberta's trade commissioner in Washington, D.C. for a nine-month term.

Environmental leadership
Mounting international, domestic, and celebrity criticism   of Alberta's underdeveloped green technology infrastructure prompted former Premier Ed Stelmach's government to commit 4 billion CAD to a province-wide green capital projects plan in 2009.

In 2009 Bronconnier and Pembina Institute was awarded at the "UN Climate Change Summit" with the 'Reaching Out to Global Energy Award'  for the technical and engineering collaboration with Calgary's 'Greening the Grid program'. city consulted with Pembina for technical advice. Pembina scholars compiled the Options for Reducing GHG Emissions in Calgary to advise the city on how to implement infrastructure projects for environmental protection. The city acted on these recommendations through city-owned company Enmax decided on a series of public works facilities such as the 'Shepard Energy Center', and a 12-turbine wind farm that supplies wind power for Calgary Transit's C-trains, and the District Energy Centre, a heat capture energy plant providing heat and energy for the downtown core. The city publication of the 'Greening the Grid' was entitled 'Calgary Climate Change Action Plan: Target (down arrow) 50' (Target Minus 50)

The 'Greening the Grid' program's objectives are to empower city facilities by renewable sources by 2012. Calgary Transit's C-trains' electrical needs were partially provided by wind power in 2001, by 2009 the inception year of 'Greening the Grid', the C-train were fully empowered by 'Ride the Wind' a program launched by Enmax and wind power engineers 'Vision Quest Windlectric. committed 250 million CAD on the 'Greening the grid' program.

title: Dave Bronconnier


text:
Sukhoi Su-47

The Sukhoi Su-47 Berkut (Сухой Су-47 Беркут) (NATO reporting name Firkin ), also designated S-32 and S-37 (not to be confused with the twin-engined delta canard design offered by Sukhoi in the early 1990s under the designation Su-37) during initial development, was a Russian experimental supersonic jet fighter developed by the JSC Sukhoi Company. A distinguishing feature of the aircraft was its forward-swept wing which gave the aircraft excellent agility and maneuverability. While serial production of the type never materialized and the configuration was not further pursued, the sole aircraft produced served as a technology demonstrator prototype for a number of advanced technologies later used in fourth-generation fighter Su-35 and fifth-generation fighter Su-57.

Development
Originally known as the S-37, Sukhoi redesignated its advanced test aircraft as the Su-47 in 2002. Officially nicknamed Berkut (Беркут) (the Russian word for the golden eagle), the Su-47 was originally built as Russia's principal testbed for composite materials and sophisticated fly-by-wire control systems, as well as new airframe technologies.

TsAGI has long been aware of the advantages of forward-swept wings, with research including the development of the Tsibin LL and study of the captured Junkers Ju 287 in the 1940s. At high angles of attack, the wing tips remain retracted allowing the aircraft to retain aileron control. Conversely to more conventional rear-swept wings, forward sweep geometrically creates increased angle of incidence of the outer wing sections when the wing bends under load. The wings experience higher bending moments, leading to a tendency for the wings to fail structurally at lower speeds than for a straight or aft-swept wing.

The project was launched in 1983 on order from the Soviet Air Force. But when the USSR dissolved, funding was frozen and development continued only through funding by Sukhoi. Like its US counterpart, the Grumman X-29, the Su-47 was primarily a technology demonstrator for future Russian fighters such as the Sukhoi Su-57. The forward-swept wing configuration was ultimately not pursued because it was mainly advantageous at transonic speeds while an aft-swept wing was superior at supersonic speeds.

The Su-47 is of similar dimensions to previous large Sukhoi fighters, such as the Su-35. To reduce development costs, the Su-47 borrowed the forward fuselage, vertical tails, and landing gear of the Su-27 family. Nonetheless, the aircraft includes an internal weapons bay, and space set aside for an advanced radar.

Like its immediate predecessor, the Su-37, the Su-47 is of tandem-triple layout, with canards ahead of wings and tailplanes. The Su-47 has two tailbooms of unequal length outboard of the exhaust nozzles, carrying rearward-facing radar and a breaker-chute.

Maneuverability
The Su-47 has extremely high agility at subsonic speeds, enabling the aircraft to alter its angle of attack and its flight path very quickly while retaining maneuverability in supersonic flight.

The forward-swept gives the Su-47 an unconventional appearance. The inner portion of the wing generates a substantial part of the lift. This lift is not restricted by wingtip stall and the lift-induced wingtip vortex generation is thus reduced. The aileron remain effective at the highest angles of attack, and controllability of the aircraft is retained even in the event of airflow separating from the remainder of the wings' surface.

A disadvantage of such a forward-swept wing design is that it twists when under load, resulting in greater stress on the wing than occurs with a similar straight or aft-swept wing. This requires the wing be designed to twist as it bends—opposite to the geometric twisting. This is done by the use of composites wing skins laid-up to twist. The aircraft was initially limited to Mach 1.6. Because the forward sweep was primarily beneficial at transonic speed while losing out to aft-swept wing at supersonic speed, it was not further pursued.

Thrust vectoring
The thrust vectoring (with PFU engine modification) of ±20° at 30°/second in pitch and yaw would have greatly supported the agility gained by other aspects of the design.

Stealth
According to some sources, the Su-47 was treated with radar absorbent material (RAM) in order to reduce its radar signature. However, the airframe itself has no specific features characteristic of true stealth aircraft that would more significantly reduce its radar cross-section.

title: Sukhoi Su-47