text:
Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Rex071404

In response to Cecropia's outside view, I humbly disagree. It does span multiple articles, because of his repeated harrassment of users who disagree with him. That's where it goes beyond an article dispute, and becomes a user dispute. I'd also suggest that his continued ranting on Talk:John Kerry makes it a user dispute.

I've tried repeatedly to discuss the article with Rex, and I've usually received a half-shouting reply suggesting that how dare I disagree with him. As I said to Cecropia earlier, and also on Talk:John Kerry, I don't disagree that the current article has POV problems, but Rex's version was far worse, and reflected his stated hatred of Kerry.

While he may have apologised for his rude behaviour on Cecropia's user page, he has not done the same for mine, or any of the numerous other users mentioned in this RfC. I would also disagree that the examples given take the form of "we're right and you're wrong, so get with the program." Two of the three examples (both of which were completely ignored) are from people from outside of the parties to this dispute, warning him in relation to his behaviour here - Sam Spade and Karada.

Furthermore, I question what Cecropia is trying to prove with the section from Neutrality's talk page. At this point, I'd spent several days dealing with this user, and getting absolutely nowhere. As had numerous other editors, as mentioned in the RfC itself. With that comment on his user page, I was simply inquiring of the other parties to the dispute as to whether that was the best course of action. They agreed that it was, and thus, here we are.

That said, I do agree that we need to set up a temp page to hash this out - preferably with some outside assistance, and someone prepared to do extensive research into Kerry's whole involvement with VVAW. We need to find a middle ground between the current version, which at times reads like "other people allege this, but it's all a load of rubbish", and Rex's, which distinctly implied that Kerry had something to do with, or implicitly supported, a plan to assassinate US senators, and had a pervasive anti-Kerry bent right through it.. Ambivalenthysteria 08:31, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I think more effort should be made to engage Rex to bring him in line. My comment about Neutrality's talk page wasn't to dispute your posting, but the "bring it on" response. I don't see any indication that editors on Kerry have done anything substantial in terms of Rex's comments, except to revert, with the exception that they replaced the section on VVAW, which was a short shrug-off with a long and detailed shrug-off.

 * I am also conscious that Neutrality has behaved similarly on George W. Bush and then brought up VeryVerily on charges. So far on that "user" dispute, most agree with my summary.

 * As to the article itself, I am not an active editor and don't have a strong feeling about a specific solution except that it should be a lot more NPOV than it is now. As to needing an "outside person," this wouldn't be necessary if anyone had simply followed the links I suggested or Neutrality's own Google search beyond the first page. We don't have to come to a "bottom line" (was-wsn't) but report fairly what mainstream newspapers have reported. This isn't rocket science. -- Cecropia | Talk 08:45, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Despite the best efforts of Cecropia and Rex to paint Rex as a poor innocent country boy victimized by us cynical city folk, the record is clear on Talk:John Kerry and the talk pages of myself, Neutrality, Ambivalenthysteria, Gzornenplatz, etc. Both of them throw out accusations of bias, lying, whitewashing, etc., impugning our motives and then accuse us of baiting them. We've been accused of ignoring discussion and merely reverting repeatedly, but this is simply a lie. Look at the edit history, every single edit I've made to the disputed section is different as I repeatedly tried to craft a compromise version, efforts dismissed with a wave of the hand and accusations from them of bias.

A recent comment by Rex on Talk:John Kerry encapsulates this nicely I think: "You do search corpses for empty roecket launchers if you are a phoney opportunist who expects to be going home real soon and you are trophy hunting..." I think it's clear that Rex is not interested in neutrality, balance, and compromise but instead wants to shout down those who disagree as loudly as he can. Gamaliel 16:20, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * You think that because you want to think that. Have you bothered to try to look at the core of this dispute which is my frustration that the pro-Kerry squad keeps reverting on a wholsale basis, 100% factual, well sourced links to items about Kerry, simply because they don't want them in the article.... What's the matter, can't you handle the truth? Where is the NPOV in that?
 * Rex071404 17:08, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Are you saying that anything which is 100% factual and well sourced ought to be in the article? There are many grounds to object to something's inclusion beyond whether or not it is true. In this case, relevance would be the motivating factor. john k 17:21, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Oh I see, from your perspective, 100% true information that indicates serious flaws in the character and truthfulness of a man who is a leading candidate for President, is not relevant. But endless minutae about his personal life and his abbreviated four month tour of duty in Vietnam, is?.....
 * Rex071404 17:31, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * John Kenney: Are you saying that anything which is 100% factual and well sourced ought to be in the article?  Are you honestly serious? You concede this may be 100% factual and well-sourced and you think it can be left out? The VVAW was Kerry's key to political recognition. It launched his political career. Before VVAW he was an unknown. Less than a decade after he left, he was a United States Senator. The circumstances of his leaving the organization (when and how) are obviously of importance.

I'm not painting Rex as poor innocent anything. He needs to learn how we deal with others on Wikipedia. I've defended other editors I've been at odds with personally. Obviously, I've defended Get-back-world-respect who even recently has followed me around on some pages to question my motives but that I've seen gradually get with the program to become a valued editor. I also have in mind a prominent, long-term and very good editor (172-Abe Sokolov) who has been in disputes with many, including me. There was a movement among a lot of other good editors to ban him as punishment for his behavior. I thought that was counterproductive and said so. 172 has tightened up quite a bit and we've retained one of our most prolific and intelligent editors.

In the instant case, this isn't a matter of defending Rex personally. I don't know him as he is brand new and he may or may not turn out to be a good editor or even stay on Wikipedia. I have no personal stake in Rex. I have explained why the VVAW is relevant and I get shrugged off also. I'm protesting what I see as an increasing tendency to "own" articles by a partisan few and shrug off other perspectives with reverts and now with user actions. How about if we try to make this an article dispute first with input from those not close to the Kerry article and then, if Rex doesn't learn to discuss with a greater degree of calmness and collegility (and others respond in like fashion) we can talk user dispute. -- Cecropia | Talk 18:13, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * The problem is that Rex refuses to compromise in the least bit. The primary issue for most of the "Kerry sycophants" (as he has described anyone who disagrees with him on this) is primarily the relevance of including copious details about a meeting some 30 odd years ago that Kerry may or may not have attended in an organization that he quit at about the same time anyway. Secondarily, it is about how such facts should be presented in the article. Certainly there are some facts that could be presented, but Rex seems intent on forcing an interpretation that is as negative as possible for Kerry. Other editors have tried to compromise and include some mention of the meeting with what little actual facts are known, but Rex seems to be intent on drawing out the trail of circumstantial evidence to damn Kerry by association. Rex continually presents his argument as "irrefutable facts" and refuses to acknowledge that he is spinning a story just as much as anyone involved. His spin is to attribute the absolutely worst, most base motives to Kerry as the explanation for any inconsistencies in Kerry's many years of public life. And the main reason this is worth consideration at RFC is that he uses derogatory labels for anyone who disagrees with his version (labels which certainly border on, and which perhaps are explicitly, personal attacks--but which are definitely contrary to the spirit of Wikiquette). older ≠ wiser 19:02, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * The truth on the Kerry meeting is in between. Absent the sound and fury the editors insisting on shrugging off the event are every bit as biased and stubborn as Rex. By making this all about Rex we are allowing a whitewash of an incident as important as many old incidents in the Bush article. -- Cecropia | Talk 19:47, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, but there is a difference between disagreeing about the substance and bad behavior (and I agree that some on the other side of this disagreement have not always displayed exemplary behavior). Even though many dismiss the event as insignificant, several have been willing to include some mention of it and have tried to work towards an acceptable wording. But from what I have seen, Rex refuses to accept anything other than his version. And dismissing any expression of disagreement with Rex's self-proclaimed "100% truth" as a whitewash is unfair. I am not familiar with the past edits and discussions of the Bush articles, but simply because there may have been unfair edits in that article does not excuse uncivil behavior or unfair edits in this article. older ≠ wiser 20:12, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Please be aware, I have not commented on the substance of Rex's "100% truth" when talking about whitewash. I am talking about the version he was protesting, and the new expanded version, which is also a whitewash. -- Cecropia | Talk 20:17, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * From my vantage point, it appears that the editors who keep deleting my 100% accurate facts about Kerry, have in mind a form of "compromise" which madates that links to mainstream, verified, accurate (albeit, not positive for Kerry) news reports MUST be deleted. This logic is absurd! If Kerry were an ax-murderer, would we be forced to remove links about this, simply because it's not nice? The simple fact remains that NOT ONE of the persons complaining has made even the SLIGHTEST effort refute the true facts I have posted from ABC News and NY Times about Kerry. Is everyone here so fixated with "process" (ie; "users") that they can't recognize true "content" (ie; "pages")?
 * Rex071404 19:56, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * No, if Kerry were an ax-murderer, it would stay, because the content would be much more directly relevant. However, if a friend of a friend of Kerry's was an ax murderer twenty years ago then it would not. No one is disputing, I believe, that there was a meeting and that stuff was said. Many people are disputing, however, what relevance, if any, this has to Kerry. Ambivalenthysteria 20:04, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * However Kerry is, I am persuaded, an obfuscating waffler who dissembles and changes his story over time to suit the current state of his career. I have followed his career close up for many years (I am in Massachusetts) and I am NOT a Republican. Rather, I am an Independant (in the parlance of MA, it's called "unenrolled", ie; no party affiliation - simply am registered to vote). The pro-Kerry people only THINK I am biased against him due to politics. I am not biased and not due to politics. Rather, it's Kerry hideous waffling and dissembling over the years that concerns me and the few points in his BIO which I have focused on, if presnted factually, allow anyone who cares to look with an open mind the oppotunity to see that as well. It's regrettable you ddon;t see that... Rex071404 20:32, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

How do you expect a full spectrum of people to want to participate in (or even read) this Wiki if all the long-timers do is leap to conclusions about how to hound new people who disagree with them into leaving.

Before you leap to conclusions about revelancce, please lay out some criteria for measuring it. If not, you are just giving us your opinion. That is how we arrived at paragraph after paragraph of glowing BIO information about Kerry.

But everyone is jumping on me for drawing attention to the FACT that Kerry keps changing his story about notable episodes in the timeline of his life. So them since some off you still don't get it, here it is again:

For a Presidential Candidate (Kerry) whose whole raison d'etre in this race is to save USA from (as Kerry tells us, ad nauseum) the "lies" of GWB, the the fact that Kerry has a verifiable track record of changing his story about controverial issues is very germane to the current situation in America. If people want glossed over BIO's, let them go to CNN or WAPO. People come to the Internet for better control over their information flow. What good is it if you people keep censoring it? Rex071404 20:50, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Response to Cecropria
Four points:
 * This RfC is not about me, it is about Rex. Go start another RfC if you want to complain about me, or take it up with Arbcom. I will be happy to respond to any charge you bring aganist me.
 * This user has harassed me and others, and has spammed/insulted me and others on multiple talk pages, yet others continue to believe that all users involved in an edit dispute have equal validity to their claims, and that all trolls are equivalent to established users. I understand the importance of not biting the newcomers, but Rex has been warned repeatedly by MANY users.
 * Even when I called a vote, and tried to nail down what specific part of the article you disagreed with, you refused to give a single suggestion or specificity.
 * Also, note that I was not the one who started this RfC nor the second, third, or even fourth certifier, and yet Cecropria continues to portray me as the originator behind the dispute. S/he points to the George W. Bush dispute as "proof" that I am some type of "POV warrior." Not only is this irrelevant to the John Kerry article, it is also misleading. I did nothing wrong, and only reverted the wholesale changes that VeryVerily made against clear consensus that was voted on at Talk:George W. Bush.--Neutrality 21:15, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Counterpoints to Neutrality

 * I am not taking a position that Rex's behavior is appropriate, but I see the use of user actions as an inappropriate way of avoiding dealing with a biased article. In addition to his rantings, Rex also presented extensive material in support of his rants, and those points have all been shrugged off. The current section is ridiculous.
 * As a question, what do you hope to accomplish by this RfC. Everyone agree Rex is bad? Chase him away? What?
 * I point out again, I have not been active in this article or GWB for quite some time. I have a special interest in Kerry vis-a-vis the VVAW because I was a Vietnam Vet who happened to be at the 1971 march (but not as a member), and took an interest in Kerry because of it. I know how he was viewed and am well aware of the zeitgeist of the era. I presented a number of links to follow in the hope other editors would correct the article, as well as specific reasons why this is an important issue. I am sorry to have allowed myself to be drawn into this and don't want to have to continue to repeat the same points over and over to have them ignored.
 * I am sorry to have to repeat once again that consensus is useless in dealing with factual material when the bulk of the editors on Wikipedia are anti-Bush and pro-Kerry as indicated by the thrust of each article. The national consensus is almost painfully evenly divided between Bush and Kerry on substantive issues (75% of US voters recently said that the outcome of the election will make a big difference no matter who they prefer) and this is hardly represented here. Unless half the voters are fools Bush isn't so obviously bad and Kerry so obviously good as the articles suggest.
 * To ask why I don't bring you up on RfC shows you don't acknowledge my point at all. I think RfC is the wrong way to deal with users. I think you (Neutrality) have the makings of a fine editor, but I think you give your feelings too much free rein in article space. I thought you were correcting that, but now I have my doubts. -- Cecropia | Talk 22:09, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Second Response to Cecropia

 * "In addition to his rantings, Rex also presented extensive material in support of his rants, and those points have all been shrugged off."
 * What do you think about this proposal for the disputed section: John Kerry/Neutrality? What exactly is wrong with that section?
 * It's too long. It's too wishy-washy. It softens this up too much.
 * Rex071404 02:37, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * As a question, what do you hope to accomplish by this RfC. Everyone agree Rex is bad? Chase him away? What?
 * To establish some sort of community agreement on the matter, and if needed, to present this to ArbCom at a later date.
 * I point out again, I have not been active in this article or GWB for quite some time. I have a special interest in Kerry vis-a-vis the VVAW because I was a Vietnam Vet who happened to be at the 1971 march (but not as a member), and took an interest in Kerry because of it. I know how he was viewed and am well aware of the zeitgeist of the era. I presented a number of links to follow in the hope other editors would correct the article, as well as specific reasons why this is an important issue. I am sorry to have allowed myself to be drawn into this and don't want to have to continue to repeat the same points over and over to have them ignored.
 * This is an important issue. Many users want to take the entire section out, and I disagree with them. I want an unbiased section, too.
 * I am sorry to have to repeat once again that consensus is useless in dealing with factual material when the bulk of the editors on Wikipedia are anti-Bush and pro-Kerry as indicated by the thrust of each article. The national consensus is almost painfully evenly divided between Bush and Kerry on substantive issues (75% of US voters recently said that the outcome of the election will make a big difference no matter who they prefer) and this is hardly represented here. Unless half the voters are fools Bush isn't so obviously bad and Kerry so obviously good as the articles suggest.
 * The political opinions of Wikipedias are irrelevant. They weren't voting on who they think would be a President, but on which version they thought was the most NPOV.
 * To ask why I don't bring you up on RfC shows you don't acknowledge my point at all. I think RfC is the wrong way to deal with users. I think you (Neutrality) have the makings of a fine editor, but I think you give your feelings too much free rein in article space. I thought you were correcting that, but now I have my doubts. -- Cecropia | Talk 22:09, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * My feelings do not own me. I wrote an unbiased piece on the medal controversy, I wrote an unbiased piece on George W. Bush's popularity, I wrote an unbiased piece on the Kerry's military service, and if Rex will let me, I can write an unbiased piece on this. But it seems nobody is interested in compromise or voting, but only on branding people.--Neutrality 22:27, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Counterpoint to Neutrality
Even the mere fact that you so doggedly insist that your writing (and only your writing) on these disputed sections has been "unbiased" shouts out loudly as to how profoundly biased you indeed are.

But since you want to write, why don't you write a sample 'Medal Toss' one and a sample '1971 VVAW'and post them here. I will do the same and we will see if we can merge them into something we all can accept.

Further, if you were to reflect on this and also your immediately above comments; the ones wherein you imply that I am a "troll" and that you are somehow more 'equal' because you are established, I suggest that therein is the crux of why you have kept at the task of deleting my posts to those sections, even though at one point in the middle of this your talk page said you were going to stop... the crux of this is that your pride has been wounded by me, the new guy who trampled on your flower bed of fulsome praise for Kerry.

The simple truth remains that I have delivered a rational summary of documented facts. The only bona-fide dispute is than certain people don't like my editorial tone. It is incontrovertable that ABC News and NY Times did in fact report those stories which I have linked to.

You aren't telling me that you feel your mind is too weak to craft a truthful article that you'd accept, but one which does indeed referrence to my links, are you?

If so, perhaps you are not up to the task of having reversion power and/or being an editor. Perhaps you would be more comfortable reverting yourself to troll status.

That is what you implied I am, is it not?

Rex071404 22:48, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Ok everybody, even the current VVAW web site seems to strongly imply that Kerry did NOT quit in July, 1971
In fact, the VVAW themselves could be properly interpreted to back up PRECISELY what I have been saying which is: Kerry was still active with VVAW sometime into 1972.

FYI: Read this!

Rex071404 02:25, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * It says "by 1972" Kerry had moved on. I would normally parse that as equivalent to "at some point before 1972". It's essentially ambiguous phrasing.67.180.24.204 03:25, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * And this is why the word "by" was carefully chosen, If they were willing to say what you are now thinking, they would have said it. However, they did not, because they know it's not true. Kerry left no sooner than Jan. 26th, 1972 as evidenced by a NY Times article I have linked to in the disscusion which is going on (and also linked to below). Remember, it's also true to say that by 1970, the Beatles had broken up. Of course it was Dec 31st, 1970 that McCartney sued the other three for dissolution of the group and that was the beginning point of the final break up. Same with Kerry, it's not enough that he simply drifted away from VVAW, what matters is when he actually stopped saying he was with them. Kerry was still saying to NY Times on 1/26/72 that he was a VVAW leader. Rex071404 07:30, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Just out of curiousity, can someone locate for me where to find the policy behind this statement that's on the top of the project page -- I can't seem to track it down:
 * In order to remain listed at Requests for comment, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute, not different disputes. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~ . If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 07:24, 27 Jul 2004), the page will be deleted.

Thanks, BCorr | Брайен 12:23, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)


text:
Ikeda, Fukui

Ikeda (池田町) is a town located in Fukui Prefecture, Japan. , the town had an estimated population of 2,628 in 943 households and the population density of 14 persons per km2. The total area of the town was 194.65 sqkm.

Geography
Ikeda is located in the Imadate District, of central Fukui Prefecture, bordered by Gifu Prefecture to the south, Shiga Prefecture to the south and surrounded by mountains on all sides. Mount Kanmuri is the highest elevation at 1256 meters. The Asuwa River flows through the town. Ikeda consists mostly of narrow agricultural plains and small villages between steep, 1000–1500 m mountains in a main north-south valley and several branch valleys. The setting of the town, the old shrine in the town center, and a beautiful waterfall on the lower road to Ono are all local landmarks and are praised for their beauty, and occasionally attract tour buses from as far away as Osaka. Ikeda endures heavy snowfall in the winter, and access to neighboring towns, over mountain passes except to the north, can be difficult. The mountain roads leading east to Ono and south from Ikeda to Imajo and the especially dramatic road to Kinomoto in neighboring Shiga Prefecture are officially closed from November to May.

Neighbouring municipalities

 * Fukui Prefecture
 * Fukui
 * Echizen
 * Ōno
 * Echizen (town)
 * Sabae

Climate
Ikeda has a Humid climate (Köppen Cfa) characterized by warm, wet summers and cold winters with heavy snowfall. The average annual temperature in Ikeda is 13.0 °C. The average annual rainfall is 2362 mm with September as the wettest month. The temperatures are highest on average in August, at around 25.7 °C, and lowest in January, at around 1.2 °C. Parts of the town are located within the extremely heavy snowfall area of Japan.

Demographics
Per Japanese census data, the population of Ikeda has declined by more than half over the past 50 years.

History
Ikeda is part of ancient Echizen Province. During the Edo period, the area was mostly part of the holdings of Sabae Domain under the Tokugawa shogunate. Following the Meiji restoration, and the establishment of the modern municipalities it was organised into part of Imadate District in Fukui Prefecture. Ikeda was formed on March 31, 1955 by the merger of the two former villages of Kami-Ikeda and Shimo-Ikeda.

Education
Ikeda has one public elementary school and one middle school operated by the city government. The town has one public high school operated by the Fukui Prefectural Board of Education, which is scheduled to close in 2019.

Railway
Ikeda has no public passenger railway service.

Local attractions

 * Ryūsō Falls, one of "Japan’s Top 100 Waterfalls",
 * Asuwagawa Dam

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

title: Ikeda, Fukui


text:
Imadate District, Fukui

Imadate (今立郡) is a district located in Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

Demographics
As of October 1, 2005, the district has an estimated population of 3,405 with a density of 17.49 persons per km2. The total area is 194.72 km2.

Municipalities
The district consists of one town:

 * Ikeda

 * Notes:

History
Fukui Imadate-gun.png:

]]
 * yellow - areas formerly within the district borders during the early Meiji period

Recent mergers

 * On October 1, 2005 - The city of Takefu absorbed the town of Imadate to form the new city of Echizen.

title: Imadate District, Fukui


text:
Nanjō, Fukui

Nanjō (南条町) was a town located in Nanjō District, Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of 2003, the town had an estimated population of 5,819 and a density of 109.67 persons per km2. The total area was 53.06 km2.

On January 1, 2005, Nanjō, along with the town of Imajō, and the village of Kōno (all from Nanjō District), was merged to create the town of Minamiechizen. As of this merger, the town of Nanjō no longer exists as an independent municipality.

People
Nanjō is a rural town consisting of small villages spread out over the Nanjō area. Each village has unique qualities and you will find that many people from the same village share the same surname. The people tend to be shy to foreigners but are friendly if they are spoken to or greeted in Japanese.

Nanjō Football Club
Nanjō F.C. is one of the oldest sporting establishments in the town. The club has been running for over 30 years and was established by Don Inoue. The club consists of underage teams and two adult teams. Nanjō FC play in the Fukui Prefectural 1st Division and are generally made up of towns people from the ages of 18 to 30. They have had great success in the Fukui Prefectural league but in recent years have been struggling with under strength teams. Nanjō Hastericks are the second adult team in the village and consist of former Nanjō FC players over 30 years old. They have been playing in the Fukui Prefectural 2nd Division over the last 7 years which is a great credit since the other teams in the division are made up of much younger players.

title: Nanjō, Fukui


text:
Imajō, Fukui

Imajō (今庄町) was a town located in Nanjō District, Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of 2003, the town had an estimated population of 4,846 and a density of 20.08 persons per km2. The total area was 241.30 km2.

On January 1, 2005, Imajō, along with the town of Nanjō, and the village of Kōno (all from Nanjō District), was merged to create the town of Minamiechizen. As of this merger, the town of Nanjō no longer exists as an independent municipality.

Education
Imajō has a number of kindergartens, one Elementary School and Junior High School. Imajō Jr. High School consists of about 150 students and 20 faculty.

title: Imajō, Fukui


text:
Kōno, Fukui

Kōno (河野村) was a village located in Nanjō District, Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of 2003, the village had an estimated population of 2,114 and a density of 42.72 persons per km2. The total area was 49.48 km2.

On January 1, 2005, Kōno, along with the towns of Imajō and Nanjō (all from Nanjō District), was merged to create the town of Minamiechizen. As of this merger, the town of Nanjō no longer exists as an independent municipality.

title: Kōno, Fukui


text:
Nanjō District, Fukui

Nanjō (南条郡) is a district located in Fukui, Japan.

As of October 1, 2005, the district has an estimated population of 12,273 with a density of 35.69 persons per km2. The total area is 343.84 km2.

Municipalities
The district consists of one town:

 * Minamiechizen

History
Fukui Nanjyo-gun.png:

]]
 * yellow - areas formerly within the district borders during the early Meiji period

Recent mergers

 * On January 1, 2005 - The towns of Imajō and Nanjō, and the village of Kōno were merged to form the town of Minamiechizen.

title: Nanjō District, Fukui


text:
Asahi, Fukui

Asahi (朝日町) was a town located in Nyū District, Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of 2003, the town had an estimated population of 9,463 and a density of 208.12 persons per km2. The total area was 45.47 km2.

On February 1, 2005, Asahi, along with the town of Ota, and the village of Miyazaki (all from Nyū District), was merged into the expanded town of Echizen to create the new town of Echizen, and no longer exists as an independent municipality.

title: Asahi, Fukui


text:
Miyazaki, Fukui

Miyazaki (宮崎村) was a village located in Nyū District, Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of 2003, the village had an estimated population of 4,033 and a density of 121.99 persons per km2. The total area was 33.06 km2.

On February 1, 2005, Miyazaki, along with the towns of Asahi and Ota (all from Nyū District), was merged into the expanded town of Echizen to create the new town of Echizen, and no longer exists as an independent municipality.

title: Miyazaki, Fukui


text:
Echizen, Fukui (town)

Echizen (越前町) is a town located in Fukui Prefecture, Japan. , the town had an estimated population of 20,709 and the population density of 140 persons per km2. The total area of the town was 153.15 sqkm.

Geography
Echizen town is located in the Nyū District of central Fukui Prefecture, bordered by the Sea of Japan to the west. Parts of the coastal area of the town are within the borders of the Echizen-Kaga Kaigan Quasi-National Park.

Neighbouring municipalities

 * Fukui Prefecture
 * Fukui
 * Echizen
 * Sabae
 * Minamiechizen

Climate
Echizen has a humid climate (Köppen Cfa) characterized by warm, wet summers and cold winters with heavy snowfall. The average annual temperature in Echizen is 14.3 °C. The average annual rainfall is 2398 mm with September as the wettest month. The temperatures are highest on average in August, at around 25.9 °C, and lowest in January, at around 3.7 °C. Parts of the town are located within the extremely heavy snowfall area of Japan.

Demographics
Per Japanese census data, the population of Echizen was relatively stable throughout the late 20th century but has declined in the 21st.

History
Echizen is part of ancient Echizen Province. During the Edo period, the area was mostly part of the holdings of Fukui Domain under the Tokugawa shogunate. Following the Meiji Restoration, and the establishment of the modern municipalities it was organised into part of Nyū District in Fukui Prefecture. The villages of Shirosaki and Shikaura were founded on April 1, 1889. Shikaura was raised to town status on August 1, 1946. The town of Echizen was formed on March 1, 1955 by the merger of Shikaura and Shirosaki. On February 1, 2005 the towns of Asahi and Ota, and the village of Miyazaki, all from Nyū District, were merged into Echizen.

Economy
The economy of Echizen town is mixed, with commercial fishing and agriculture prominent. Echizen is known for its production of high quality crab, rice, pottery, and daffodils.

Education
Echizen town has eight public elementary schools and four middle schools operated by the city government. The town has one public high school operated by the Fukui Prefectural Board of Education.
 * Nyu High School
 * Echizen Junior High School
 * Asahi Junior High School
 * Miyazaki Junior High School
 * Ota Junior High School

Railway
Echizen town has no public passenger railway service.

Sister cities

 * 🇺🇸 - Montevallo, Alabama (USA), since 2008
 * 🇯🇵 - Miyama, Fukuoka (Japan)

Friendship cities

 * - Yeongdeok County (South Korea)
 * 🇯🇵 - Nishio, Aisho (Japan)

Local attractions

 * Echizen-Kaga Kaigan Quasi-National Park
 * Echizen ware ceramics

title: Echizen, Fukui (town)


text:
Koshino, Fukui

Koshino (越廼村) was a village located in Nyū District, Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of 2003, the village had an estimated population of 1,793 and a density of 116.81 persons per km2. The total area was 15.35 km2.

On February 1, 2006, Koshino, along with the town of Shimizu (also from Nyū District), and the town of Miyama (from Asuwa District), was merged into the expanded city of Fukui.

title: Koshino, Fukui


text:
Talk:Geography of association football

Argentina
Argentina has an unusual system. They play the whole season in two halfs. The 'Apertura (opening) is the first half. A championship title is awarded when this finishes. The points are then reset and they play for the Clausura, in the second half of the season. After that finishes another championship title is awarded. Mintguy (T) 08:48, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Views on some proposed changes
For me, this is currently a very useful article, containing links to nearly everything I might want so good work so far.

I want to propose a few additions and changes however:

 * Firstly, would anyone object if I added every nation from around the world? This is certainly what I'd expect to see if I viewed this page. I understand some nations don't have a national league, for example, but this can easily be left blank and we'll have a more complete table?

 * Also at the moment entries tend to link to the highest league within a nation, but wouldn't it make more sense to link to the general system? For example English football league system instead of two separate links to the Premiership and Football League, Chilean football league system instead of just the highest league, and so on.

 * Next, could international football competitions be listed also? At the moment only domestic ones are. So, the European Championships, or African Champions League could be listed under the relevent headings.

 * Lastly, a very small point, what is the convention on linking years, like 2004? It makes more sense, and looks nicer, not to, in my opinion and I'd have thought there'd be some kind of convention on it.

Anyway I'd be interested in hearing any views on the above. Iae 18:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

One problem with merging is that the resulting page would be quite large. This would be a detriment to users on public systems with limited bandwidth or individual systems with slow dial-up connections. Perhaps the tabular and visual information could be combined on a single page and the narratives left as they are, with links to combined data where appropriate?

74.109.12.135 (talk) 02:38, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Merge FIFA lists
Currently there are three articles giving a subset of fields for each country:
 * 1) Association football around the world:
 * 2) *flag, country, overview, national_team, club_list, FA, league(s), cup(s), super_cup
 * 3) List of FIFA country codes
 * 4) *flag, national_team, trigram
 * 5) List of FIFA Member Associations
 * 6) *meaningless_number, flag, national_team, trigram, FIFA_name_in_English, _French, _Spanish, _German, FA_founded, FA_affiliated, Confederation

I propose having a single table, sortable, and not split by confederation, with the following columns:
 * flag, FIFA_name_in_English, overview/trigram, Confederation, FA, FA_founded, FA_affiliated, national_team/trigram, club_list, league(s), cup(s), super_cup

Two sample rows as follows:

Some notes on this proposal:
 * 1) I don't really propose that the trigram should be used for both the overview and the national team; just pointing out that the trigram doesn't need a row to itself, and can be used to save space in another row.
 * 2) Sortable by Confederation is more efficient than having separate sections per confederation
 * 3) Some other columns might be left unsortable: FA, league(s), cup(s), super_cup
 * 4) List of FIFA country codes has several sections:
 * 5) FIFA members
 * 6) Non-FIFA member codes used by FIFA or confederations
 * 7) Irregular codes
 * 8) Obsolete country codes
 * 9) FIFA and IOC differences
 * 10) FIFA and ISO differences
 * Of these, #1, #2, and #3 could be combined into this table, with footnotes for entries in #2 and #3 (which would have no "Joined FIFA" date) ; #4 could be a separate table (like now, but hopefully with references); #5 and #6 could just delegate to Comparison of IOC, FIFA, and ISO 3166 country codes.

jnestorius(talk) 18:21, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

 * I wholeheartedly support this merger. The association football around the world article doesn't even fit with its title, and the List of FIFA Member Associations contains three columns that are irrelevant to the English language Wikipedia (i.e. the French, Spanish and German country names). IMO, the articles should be merged to List of FIFA member associations, but unfortunately that does leave the NF Board teams out in the cold a bit. If we could find some way of including the NF Board teams, that would be a perfect scenario. – PeeJay 18:49, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

 * I don't see any problem with the title Association football around the world. Or how about something like Association football overview by country? jnestorius(talk) 20:27, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "Association football around the world" implies to me that the article gives an appraisal of the reception of association football on a global scale and in individual regions/countries. Since this article is a list, it should begin "List of...", and the title should actually convey what is contained within the list, hence "List of FIFA member associations". – PeeJay 23:19, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * In any case, the name of the page is a separate issue. Since the association football around the world page is the biggest and has the longest history, it should be the target of the merge for the other two, even if the merged page ends up having some other name. jnestorius(talk)

 * I also like the idea. My suggestion would be to remove the "easter egg" wikilinks from the trigrams (leaving one instance, unlinked) and instead have one (unsortable) column with three navigations links (e.g. Overview National team |List of clubs .  (Also use  instead of &nbsp; Foo .)  — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 19:04, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Some countries have nonstandard names (e.g. Republic of Ireland) or flag (e.g. Chinese Taipei). I think flag and/or flagcountry should be able to handle that. Maybe a variant of these templates could provide the three-in-one you suggest. Should be straightforward to code since most relevant articles have standardised names. jnestorius(talk) 20:27, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Support, including improvements suggested (not going to get into details; just use good judgement). One detail I will get into: It's important that the trigrammes have their own column so they are sortable, and because trigrammes don't have anything to do with "overviews" whatever those might be; don't mix apples and oranges. Maybe whatever is in them should instead move to a "Notes" column at the end. The trigrammes are very important (thus their being subject to an entire list article of their own so far). Further, as I brought up at the talk page of the list of member associations, we should not be giving columns of Spanish, French and German names, this being the English Wikipedia. This was done in as misunderstanding response to a requests for addition of country names in the majority native language of the country in question, if different from English name. E.g.: . That would actually be useful. —  SMcCandlish    Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ  Contribs. 05:23, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

 * This merge proposal is now OVER THREE YEARS OLD. There really hasn't been much discussion here, and not much opposition. If the editor that proposed it still cares, then I suggest being WP:BOLD and WP:JUSTDOIT. But I will remove the merge tag now. WTF? (talk) 02:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Non-FIFA associations
I removed from the list Barawa, Bougainville, Kurdistan and Tibet, since are out of criteria applied in the introduction of the section. From the same introduction I also removed "...stateless populations...", if we apply also this criterion then we should add a lot of other Football Associations, not only Barawa or Tibet (moreover, this cluster was already included in "Regional" sub-section). Our guideline should be our page List of sovereign states and dependent territories by continent, obviously referring to those permanent inhabited only. Following this principle I added to the list Transnistria, and I also added as a note the absence of a FA for Akrotiri and Dekhelia, Pitcairn Islands and Svalbard. SouLFlamE (talk) 10:52, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Geography of association football


text:
Ota, Fukui

Ota (織田町) was a town located in Nyū District, Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of 2003, the town had an estimated population of 5,194 and a density of 132.43 persons per km2. The total area was 39.22 km2.

On February 1, 2005, Ota, along with the town of Asahi, and the village of Miyazaki (all from Nyū District), was merged into the expanded town of Echizen to create the new town of Echizen, and no longer exists as an independent municipality.

title: Ota, Fukui


text:
User talk:The Anome/archive 4

The Anome

I dont appreciate your 'Politically-Correct-tion' or the artical on Rwandan History which i researched well before writing (writinh virtually all of it). Eliminating "racially congoid" is trying to project your (and my) mentality concerning race onto historical groups people who didn't share in that mentality. Is your descendant going to go through all the wikipedia articles 400 years from now and remove not of the fact that some poeple were "black" or "caucasion" or whatever? The fact is the genetically carried physical differences between many Hutus and Tutsis are NOT reducable to a common difference in height. Your whitewashing of the article commits ends up in removing part of the reason the two groups have often held each other in contempt. "Taller"? give me a break. You and I both know that "racially congoid" is in fact a pseudo scientific term in many senses, but in the sense meant, it is necessary and irreplaceable. Why didnt you get rid of "Pygmy" too? tridesch

 * Please do a Google search and see who is currently using the term "congoid", and in what context, and whether they are representative of scientific or even general popular thought. As you say, "You and I both know that "racially congoid" is in fact a pseudo scientific term in many senses". I agree with you. So out it goes.

 * "Taller", on the other hand is exactly correct: the Tutsis are on average, significantly taller than the Hutu. -- The Anome 16:22, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

-

The Anome-

I have been working to mediate the disputes of all on Slashdot, Slashdot trolling phenomena, Slashdot subculture, Trolltalk, and GNAA (Slashdot). It has been a continuing challenge to balance useful information with that which is admittedly trollish and vanity-driven. Through a campaign of agressive editing while conceding certain troll subculture points, we've been able to strike a pretty good balance to make informative articles. It seems that you find much of the content pejorative and offensive. I find them offensive myself, however I recognize the need to know. I can certainly see a situation where someone would read at -1 on Slashdot and then come to Wikipedia to find out what the meaning and history is about some of the posts that are most often seen.

Originally, there was a single page for all of it, Slashdot trolling phenomena, which had as you can imagine quite a bit of trollishness in it. I evetunally separated the genuine subculture items this page and created Slashdot subculture. Unfortunately, this created quite a bit of vanity-troll content on the trolling phenomena page, so I later created Trolltalk as a way to move it off. Even later I found that there was some usefull content to the Trolltalk article, so I moved all the remaining vanity-troll content to GNAA (Slashdot). Then, I put the page up for deletion, so the community could decide on the merits of it. Granted, this page is a troll magnet, but I'd rather police one page where all the trolls are contained than have to clean up troll material from all the other Slashdot articles.

Bearing this history in mind, I invite you to join with me in debate any content in these articles, and participate in discussion on them. Although I read Slashdot frequently, I'm not involved with any of these trolls, and there are a substantial number of people that are not trolls either that edit and discuss these pages on a sporadic but ongoing basis, and I think we've come up with some pretty good stuff, especially on the trolling phenomena and subculture pages. I would appreciate that major changes be discussed on the talk pages of the articles in question, so we can together come up with content that is both comprehensive and objective.

Thanks, Brian --ZeLonewolf 14:01, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, Brian. My primary point is that Wikipedia is not a vanity webhosting site. The overwhelming majority of content related to the alleged GNAA consists of vanity postings from "members" of this "organization"; as far as I can see, eligibility for "membership" seems to consist only of repeating their slogan. A bit of digging finds that there seem to be only a few people involved, and none of them appear, contrary to their own claims, to be of African descent. They seem to have an insignificant effect on Slashdot; I was unaware of their existence prior to reading about them on Wikipedia although I have read Slashdot for years. But then I read Slashdot at the default threshold.

So, in summary, this material is:
 * infantile
 * not of encylopedic importance
 * false content: claims made in their own articles are false; members are not African-American gays as claimed
 * vanity content
 * idiosyncratic -- the first six hits in a Google search for "GNAA slashdot" are the Wikipedia pages created by these morons, or their own websites: Wikipedia is not a web directory, or we'd have 50,000,000 entries, one for every site.

You'll notice that I have not deleted all reference to them: a sentence in Slashdot trolling phenomena and a couple of other references remain, but there is no longer a trellis of interlinked articles. However, I think this is being generous. If they start to write themselves back in, I will strongly advocate deletion of all mention of them from Wikipedia. After all, we delete other posts from children saying "scott is a fag"; this is on the same level.

-- The Anome 14:27, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

 * You make many valid points. Particularly that much of the trollspew is infantile or is vanity content, which I've been trying to eliminate as much as possible.  The false conent point is very interesting, although I always assumed that that wasn't the case, but in any case, it should be mentioned in the context of something like "although they that to be a member...in actuality, ...".

 * What I do disagree with is that I think there is some (though not a whole lot) of encyclopedic content. There's a valid debate as to whether it merits a paragraph in Slashdot trolling phenomena or it's own article.  Admittedly, a group such as this one by itself is not worthy of mention on Wikipedia, however, the degree to which it pollutes the water at Slashdot warrants it SOME mention.  Let me see if I can come up with a compromise STP paragraph. --ZeLonewolf 14:59, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Ok, here's what I have:

 * One of the more persistent homosexual- and racism-oriented trolls is the "GAY NIGGER" troll. This troll is perpetrated by a group calling themselves the "GNAA", which encourages people to join by first watching the 1992 Danish low-budget movie Gayniggers From Outer Space.  The name GNAA itself is a parody of industry associations such as the MPAA and RIAA.  The group distributes pre-formatted troll postings which users can paste into Slashdot.  Although the group claims that membership requirements include, in their own words, that one be a "GAY NIGGER", it is understood that its members are neither homosexual nor of African-American descent.  It is not known how large the group is, though it is widely belived to be small.

 * We can replace the paragraph about it in STP with the paragraph above. This gets all the useful information from GNAA (Slashdot) into one place.  Perhaps then a VfD would be appropriate, seeing as the GNAA article wouldn't add anything to what's in the paragraph.  I'm somewhat against redirecting it to Slashdot trolling phenomena on as it tends to attract the trolls too much and would vastly prefer outright deletion.

 * --ZeLonewolf 16:15, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Putting that para into STP would be fine. -- The Anome 21:25, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

-

Thanks for dropping in on the User:Bird situation. This is my first big dispute as a sysop, so I would appreciate knowing if you think I went about things correctly and with the correct level of forcefulness. David Newton 21:48, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Dude -- thanks for the IP lookups. BCorr ¤ Брайен 23:46, Mar 9, 2004 (UTC)

 * You're welcome. -- The Anome 23:51, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thank You!
I want to thank you DEEPLY for your support in the vote to promote me to a sysop. I promise to do my best to be as helpful, sensible, and neutral as possible. Your friend, Ryan.

Yes, he seems to be systematically -- and cleverly -- removing all Billy Bragg songs from the Song Lists. And a moment ago he just stepped on another -- this time a Midnight Oil song.

Earl Manchester 01:14, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

(Moved comment from user page.)

What's a "second-wave Wikipedian"? —Noldoaran (Talk) 04:03, Mar 20, 2004 (UTC)

New articles on books deletions
Thanks for deleting IBM Webshere Application Server Complete Reference. Can you please also delete ISBM Webshere Application server Complete Reference? Can you please also reveiw all the new book articles created by User:Fruti. Samw 17:16, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Developer
Hello there, Anome.

Without the benefit of your invitation to do so, I nominated you for "developer access" at Developer access. I did this in an effort to broaden the "developer" role beyond the present group of people who are highly active in Wikipolitics. Besides, given your lengthy edit history and, AFAK, lack of involvement (or at least culpability) in controversy, I thought it appropriate.

I am puzzled by the reaction of others. Can you offer any explanation?

UninvitedCompany 20:52, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I'm not really interested in Wikipolitics per se; except for occasional anti-vandalism activities, I'm more interested in editing. But thank you for the nomination! -- The Anome 22:24, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Stop deleting my Divine Truth. Ioannis G. Tsatsaris is the only living true prophet. I will defend his divine teachings to the best of my ability. He will save the world. Do not delete the article. Jt3 15:18, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Unfortunately Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, that is, a record of well-known human knowledge. Please can you wait until your prophet becomes famous or well known? 44 Google hits, mostly his own website, or to sites promoting his book, does not indicate that he is well known. -- The Anome 15:22, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Richard/Hanpuk/etc.
Thanks for contributing to the discussion on Richardchilton and his incarnations, including the newest Hanpuk; I laid out a similar case as you on Requests for comment/Richardchilton, where mav moved your comments to. I of course have a stake in this now because 172 has begun a vicious campaign against me, primarily based on disingenuously calling my vigilance vis-a-vis these accounts "ideological edit wars" (when of course 172's own support of R/H/etc. is transparently ideological). I have been bothered by the hitherto relative silence and seeming lack of support by the community about what I've had to deal with and who "Hanpuk" really is and what his motives are. As of this writing, Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot are protected because of this user, and 172 and Hanpuk are piling up accusations against me, and now even targetting Adam Carr. -- VV 21:34, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)

As annoying as GNAA are, they are a crucial part of the history of Slashdot over the last year. I ask you to reconsider your deletion. I agree the current form was self-advertising, but there is a lot of information that could be put on there to explain GNAA's role within Slashdot culture. Over 500,000 people a day have some contact with GNAA whilst browsing Slashdot, I think something with exposure that large deserves an article explaining it. Crculver 20:43, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Fine. A subsection in Slashdot trolling phenomena should do it nicely. In fact, there's one already. -- The Anome 21:13, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm afraid that GNAA subculture is simply too large to fit within the Slashdot trolling phenomena article. Besides, GNAA has grown beyond Slashdot and is now active at many other sites. It needs its own article. Crculver 13:55, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing the way to Gaucher's. Of course, if I weren't so easily distracted by Recent Changes, I'd get less edit conflicts. - Nunh-huh 14:50, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hello,

I made a change to the BNP article last night which you have reverted, (although another user has "re-added" the link to the BNP website article). I did introduce myself on the talk page and asked for any comments. As you didn't respond there, could you please tell me here (or back on the talk page :-) what was wrong with my edit. Obviously if I make a change and it simply gets reverted without comment, I have no idea what the problem is. As I said on the talk page, I'm new in wikipedia land, so your comments would be appreciated.

James

LEO I
Why did you move/rename the article LEO I? // Liftarn

 * There were several different models of LEO: this was a prelude to expanding the article to cover them. -- The Anome 10:16, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Frame dragging
The article on Frame-dragging that you wrote (almost entirely) recieved a full-force slashdotting tonight. Congrats. →Raul654 02:42, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)

Down Syndrome
Thanks for the Down move. Hope it sticks. And keep that "i" out of your name! jaknouse 16:19, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for getting that Viking vandal. I blocked him in a couple of other places already. Danny 01:41, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Name conventions
Thanks for the response and the voting link. -- Alcarillo 18:35 26 Apr 2004, UTC

Alcarillo again: any indication when a decision will be made on this? -- Alcarillo 23:05 26 Apr 2004, UTC

Cryptology v Cryptography
Anome,

I've finally tumbled to some understanding of what 'anomebot' is. If I'd been as with it as little green apples it wouldn't have taken so long. Sigh.

Anyway, this is a note to inform you that the cryptology article has been subsumed in cryptography, and tagging should be done to crypography, not cryptology. See the Wikipedia Project on Cryptography for some information on the current status of work in the 'crypto corner'.

ww 15:49, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

''Denni, you have added some material which seems to be from the Canadian Mental Health Association into clinical depression: has this material been licenced to Wikipedia under the GFDL by the Canadian Mental Health Association? If not, we can't use it: we cannot, for example, use material given to Wikipedia for Wikipedia use alone; only full GFDL grant from the copyright owner or public domain are acceptable. See Wikipedia:Copyright for the full details on this. Regards, The Anome 22:49, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC) ''

 * I used an old CMHA publication with no copyright info as a guide for this article; I called them when the article was complete to ask permission to use some of their material specifically, as some has been incorporated into the article. They said they would get back to me after discussing it. I asked them if they wanted me to pull the article; they said no, but at the same time, did not want CMHA specifically noted, as I did, at the top of the text. I can pull it and archive it if you wish; I can also rewrite it without the CMHA material, though I would much rather be able to leave it, so that I could give them credit. Your call. Denni 00:25, 2004 Apr 29 (UTC)

Hello
Hello, The Anome, i'm very interested why do trace people's IP pins, is because you don't beleave people have a right to privacy? also do like to sit there and see who the person is?--131.216.163.43 04:13, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * IP tracing can be useful for administrative purposes. -- The Anome 09:56, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

-

Moved message from 195.188.152.16 from my user page:

 Message for The Anome (I hpe this is where I should paste it)

User Chris 73 has alleged 195.188.152.16 Made a number of edits to musician sites, mainly adding a link to [5] and subpages, and removing some probably valid information from the pages.

'''This is a serious allegation of removing some probably valid information. He should substantiate it.'''

I do admit (stupidly and I regret) replacing modemacs page after he reversed all the edits that I had taken a long while (and carefully) to add, which are informative and useful, and which are not in violation of any wiki-pedia guidelines that I can discover.

My contributions also cover several topics (as anyone can check).

He is unsuitable for admission until he substantiates his words, and until he stops taking a God-like approach to other caring contributors.

He caught no vandal !

 * I stand by my opinion that the profanity of user:195.188.152.16 (now user:olive) on the User:modemac page were vandalism. However, this does not mean that this user will be a vandal in the future, and his latest actions look good to me (apoligizing to User:modemac, getting a login). A detailed answer can be found on User talk:Olive, or a copy thereof on User talk:chris 73. -- Chris 73 | (New) Talk 15:25, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

MedlinePlus
You're absolutely right, those MedlinePlus images I've been uploaded are indeed copyrighted. I had originally read the "Government information at NLM Web sites is in the public domain" message on their copyright page and hastily uploaded a few images. In my haste, I failed to read a subsequent message that Adam.com holds the copyright to text and images on the MedlinePlus encyclopedia. I'm now in the process of removing those images I used, and am also simultaneously seeking permission from Adam.com in hopes that the 'pedia can still benefit from use of a few of their images. Thanks for the heads-up! --Diberri | Talk 21:32, May 4, 2004 (UTC)

Protoself
Hi, just wondering why you put the VFD message at the top of Protoself. I couldn't find any discussion of it on Votes for deletion. Thanks! Wmahan. 21:43, 2004 May 4 (UTC)

Cambodia
If you are still about, I could use some help from someone familiar with the Cambodia articles mess; "Hanpuk" is at it again. (Articles being Pol Pot, Khmer Rouge, Cambodia, and History of Cambodia. - VV 21:40, 6 May 2004 (UTC)) -- VV 21:36, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

Smart quotes
Please notice more carefully that my browser replaces someone's else's "smartquotes" by some other brand. So it is not me who is the initial troublemaker IMO. Mikkalai 22:35, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

 * My apologies. You are right, you are not to blame for this. The smartquotes were already there: your browser was only converting them to (perfectly valid) HTML numeric entities. At least now we can see the wretched things more easily in the source. -- The Anome 22:46, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

CPA
Howdy, thanks for assisting with Chronology Protection Agency - I wasn't quite sure if enough material existed for a replacement article. There was I about to submit a meagre attempt at a stub when lo - you'd beaten me to it ;) I've merged mine with yours, hope this suits.  - TB 09:56, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

Diamond
Thanks for the good link to the letter by Milton Diamond added to the article introducing him. P0M 13:45, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

Warning in Prison
Hi there! Did you mean to take out the warning about the pictures on the Iraqi prison page? If so, can you explain why? I thought it was reasonable to mention that they are there. Thanks, Mark Richards 22:07, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Don't worry: I'm refactoring the page into three, and the warning is kept on the appropriate page. -- The Anome 22:08, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Cheers! I was being too hasty! Thanks! Mark Richards 22:09, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

Prison Breakout
Thanks for the fabulous job on refactoring Abu Ghraib. The article on the prison scandal is now as good and as balanced as anything I've seen on the subject. +sj+ 22:47, 2004 May 12 (UTC)

Blank County Maps for US States
Hi, Anome. I've been talking with Seth Ilys about his Dot Project. I thought it might be helpful if I would generate blank county maps (no county highlighted) for each US state. Seth and others have created a few blank maps by taking some county map for each state, and unhighlighting the county. That's what I plan on doing for each state, but it occurred to me that perhaps the blank maps are already available from you or someone else. If so, can we create a place, perhaps WikiProject_U.S._Counties/blankmaps, or something like it, to store them? If the blank maps aren't available, I can create them as described above, but would still need a storage place. Is the above place acceptable, or might there be a better place? I'd like to know your thoughts.

Of course, this is all academic if they're out there somewhere already. Thanks. --Brian Rock 02:23, May 13, 2004 (UTC)

---

''Hi. In the absence of another way to contact you, it was suggested by someone at Wikipedia that i leave you a note here... Your accusation that i have created multiple logins for Wikipedia is in error. I have only one ID, this one, and have posted ONLY using that ID. There have been at least 3 members of our project team who have tried to update the tmxxine page, and i assure you we are separate people, in separate countries. More info at the talk section for my ID. Thank you... Best regards, joyce''--Knowmystery 14:56, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

To The Anome:

You reverted everything I spent quite a bit of time looking at and carefully writing...on more than one subject in the Hitler article...just as if it all was nothing but vandalism. A blanket revert, and no reason given on the talk page.

I made a short factual statement on the Hitler page, citing it carefully and factually to the work of a German Professor of History, and in no way implying that work was the truth, but simply stating it was his view, relevant as he is an expert in the field. Complete adherance to NPOV, unlike a lot of the article which is in violation. I also put a message on the talk page explaining this edit.

And you revert it. Just as if it was vandalism. Not a word of explanation.

Not only that, but in the process, you reverted the changes I made elsewhere in the article. Which I also made only after carefull thought. But it is all trash to you.

I went to the policy pages. They state that it is not the Wikipedia policy to revert edits wholesale like that, and without comment. If nothing else, for the simple reason that it doesn't give the other person the slightest clue why the material has been deleted. For all I know you didn't even read it. Or what was in your mind when you edited it. Perhaps you didn't like the way I spelled "Geli" for all I know.

I gather from the material on the talk page that you, or the people that use this account, are quite high in the Wikipidia scheme of things, you are at least an admin, and possibly a sysop or whatever the advanced terms are. Well, I have to say to you, that you are driving away a person who has been a productive contributor.

When I came to the Wikipedia, the article on Paul Morphy was short and looked like it had been written by eighth-graders. I worked on it, using reference works not availible to most people, as they are out of print. I turned that article into a featured page.

But, it seems you feel my work is on the level of vandalism. So be it. I had plans to do the Geli page the same as the Paul Morphy page. But, I do have better things to do than spend hours on something that you feel is trash, and that you can make simply go away, without following any of the policies about reverting things.

So, you win. I won't contribute, and you need not revert my work ever again. But I will say, the Wikipedia loses, and you are doing it no service at all. ChessPlayer 13:41, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

 * My apologies for reverting a whole series of your edits; I had only intended to revert a single edit (which removed a sentence that I felt should stay in the article), but I didn't check the edit history to see if it was part of a series. As a result, the reversion software rolled back all of your series of edits in one hit, which was not my intention. This was entirely my fault. I would like to offer my sincere apologies for this, and I hope that you are not put off from editing Wikipedia because of it. -- The Anome 14:14, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I had no idea as to how it could have been done by mistake. Thank you for your explanation of what happened, and your apology. I accept your apology, and feel much better about contributing again. I am still miffed though on another issue, but only a little by comparison. I am miffed over your reverting my last edit without saying why. When you just revert without comment, what am I to do? You arn't replying to my stated objection, so, in effect, you are saying, "Tough, its going to stay like it was, I don't care about your stated objection, I'm not discussing it, and there is nothing you can do about it." Whereas, if you had given me something to reply to, anything at all, such as, "Doesn't seem POV to me" or something, then I know what our disagreement is, and I can either agree with you, decide to let it go, or research material to persuade you to change your mind. But I can only do that if you give a reply of some kind. Am I wrong here? ChessPlayer 16:19, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

 * The reason for the lack of an edit comment is this: admins have access to a special "one-click revert" feature in the software. This automatically reverts the most recent set of edits on a given article, all the way back to the last edit by a user other than the user who made the most recent edit. It also generates an automatic comment which just states what it did. Given that I intended only to restore the sentence you deleted with your last edit, and anything else, I thought the edit would be self-explanatory (implicitly: "I think this sentence belongs in the article"; I might have written "rv" or "stet" if I was adding a comment), and used the one-click revert feature. -- The Anome 16:46, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the further education about the admin software. Since you are being helpful and explaining things, could you tell me the customary way to conduct this sort of dialog on user talk pages? Do we keep it all on one page, or do I post my replies on yours, and you on mine? How does it work? I'll post this reply on both so I know you will see it. As for the issue about the deletion, obviously you are saying you want it there, by reverting. The question is, but what about the objection I made, the reason I gave when I deleted it? By not replying, you are telling me there is no dialog, you are just insisting the material remain. I don't think you really want to send that message, given your fairness and willingness to discuss things as evidenced by our chat. ChessPlayer 17:34, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Usually, you carry out the conversation on the talk page where the first comment was made. You can add that page to your watchlist using the "Watch this page" feature, and it will appear when you click on "my watchlist". I originally replied to both your talk page and mine because I was concerned that you should be as likely as possible to see my original reply.

 * Regarding your point on content, I think the ironic "twelve-year Reich" point makes a good endpoint to that section: it makes clear the hubris of Hitler's ambitions. As with most content discussions, we should discuss this on the page's own talk page. -- The Anome 17:50, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Ok, transfering the discussion to the Hitler page now. ChessPlayer 17:59, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

Canadian electoral district names
Re: your note on User_talk:Earl_Andrew, it's important to note that Canadian electoral district names contain both hyphens and mdashes, and it's important to maintain a distinction between the two. If the hex 97 in the names has to be converted, it should be changed to "--", not just "-".

You mentioned you had already renamed some pages... is there a log of renamed pages that we could check to see how this was done.

By the way, the hex 97 does work for both Internet Explorer and Linux Mozilla, so this might not really be an issue.

-- P.T. Aufrette 18:50, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

Yes, hex 97 works for both browsers as a character in articles. However, it will give erratic/incosistent results as a character in article titles, as the English-language Wiki code only supports the ISO 8859-1 character set, in which hex 97 is not a printing character. The fact that it might work most of the time (thanks to the browsers being friendly to the Windows-1252 character set, where hex 97 is a printing character) makes these bugs even more difficult to track down. All these issues may go away soon when the English Wikipedia goes to UTF-8 encoding, but then we'll want to have Unicode-encoded emdashes (which won't work either at the moment) -- The Anome 19:32, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

 * UTF-8 page titles would be good. Any timetable for this?  If this is happening "soon" as you say, we should put off changing the hex 97 to double-hyphen, in favor of going directly to mdash, since the hex 97 "more or less" works for the time being.

 * Note the Canadian parliament website uses double-hyphen, but printed material such as Hansard debate transcipts uses the mdash.  And the Elections Canada website uses mdash .  So mdash is definitely the standard.  If double-hyphen versions are needed, they could redirect to the mdash versions.

 * In any case, for the pages you said you moved, do you recall if you converted hex 97 to single-hyphen or double-hyphen? It would be good to go and fix this if necessary, but I couldn't find anything in your last 500 user contributions.

 * To clarify the original point by the way, there are electoral districts such as Rivière-du-Loup?Montmagny that contain both hyphens and mdashes, due to the French-language standard of using hyphens in place names (for instance, "St. Louis" in English is "St-Louis" in French). So in French, if you wanted to combine the equivalent of, say, "Dallas-Fort Worth", it would need to be "Dallas--Fort-Worth" to preserve the fact that "Fort Worth" is one entity.

 * -- P.T. Aufrette 20:56, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

Possible Massive Copyvio
Please see my note on User talk:Ahoerstemeier about this. Burgundavia 09:45, May 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * Andy and I chatted at the above talk page. I am in the middle of compiling the list of copy vios(most of his plc stuff as I had thought). However, the matter remains of 3 pages, now rewritten as to not be copyvio's but still have the copy vio in their history. How is this dealt with? The are Allied_Domecq_plc, BAA_plc, and Carnival plc. Burgundavia 10:18, May 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking my work. It is 4 am here and I am headed to bed. Burgundavia

Calexico (Talk) 10:59, 18 May 2004 (UTC) - Is there anything I can do to help, concerning the enormous amount of cleaning-up work I seem to have caused?
 * Sorry if this sounds rude, see above comment about time in the morning. I just spent 1 and 1/2 hours cleaning up your mess. A couple of things. 1.DONT DO IT AGAIN!! (Please!)(Check your sources, and ask permission, some websites/organizations will give it) 2.Please check to make sure all my posted urls are correct for the copy vio. 3. Rewrite the articles at the rewrite pages with some good info. Night all. Burgundavia 11:03, May 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * Oh, kind of important too. If I missed any please fix by added the copy vio notice. Burgundavia 11:04, May 18, 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:The Anome/archive 4


text:
Shimizu, Fukui

Shimizu (清水町) was a town located in Nyū District, Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of 2003, the rural town had an estimated population of 10,333 and a density of 243.19 persons per km2. The total area was 42.49 km2.

On February 1, 2006, Shimizu, along with the village of Koshino (also from Nyū District), and town of Miyama (from Asuwa District), was merged into the expanded city of Fukui.

title: Shimizu, Fukui


text:
Nyū District, Fukui

Nyū (丹生郡) is a district in Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of 2005, the district has an estimated population of 23,995 with a density of 157 persons per km2. The total area is 152.83 km2.

Municipalities
The district consists of one town:

 * Echizen

History
Fukui Nyu-gun.png:

]]
 * yellow - areas formerly within the district borders during the early Meiji period

Recent mergers

 * On February 1, 2005 - The towns of Asahi and Ota, and the village of Miyazaki were merged into the expanded town of Echizen.

 * On February 1, 2006 - The town of Shimizu and the village of Koshino, along with the town of Miyama (from Asuwa District), were merged into the expanded city of Fukui.

title: Nyū District, Fukui


text:
Mikata, Fukui

Mikata (三方町) was a town located in Mikata District, Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of 2003, the town had an estimated population of 9,026 and a density of 93.47 persons per km2. The total area was 96.57 km2.

On March 31, 2005, Mikata, along with the town of Kaminaka (from Onyū District), was merged to create the town of Wakasa (in the newly created Mikatakaminaka District).

title: Mikata, Fukui


text:
Mihama, Fukui

Mihama (美浜町) is a town located in Fukui Prefecture, Japan. , the city had an estimated population of 9,643 in 3175 households and the population density of 63 persons per km2. The total area of the town was 152.35 sqkm.

Geography
Mihama is located in southwestern Fukui Prefecture, bordered by Shiga Prefecture to the south and the heavily indented ria coast of Wakasa Bay of Sea of Japan to the north. Parts of the town are within the borders of the Wakasa Wan Quasi-National Park.

Neighbouring municipalities

 * Fukui Prefecture
 * Tsuruga
 * Wakasa
 * Shiga Prefecture
 * Takashima

Climate
Mihama has a Humid climate (Köppen Cfa) characterized by warm, wet summers and cold winters with heavy snowfall. The average annual temperature in Mihama is 15.0 C. The average annual rainfall is 2196.2 mm with December as the wettest month. The temperatures are highest on average in August, at around 27.0 C, and lowest in January, at around 4.3 C.

Demographics
Per Japanese census data, the population of Mihama has declined in recent decades.

History
Mihama is part of ancient Wakasa Province. During the Edo period, the area was part of the holdings of Obama Domain. Following the Meiji restoration, it was organised into part of Mikata District in Fukui Prefecture. With the establishment of the modern municipalities system on April 1, 1889, the villages of Kitasaigō, Minamisaigō, Mimi, and Santō were established. The four villages merged to form the town of Mihama on February 11, 1954.

On August 9, 2004, a non-radioactive steam leak killed five and burnt twelve others in the nearby Mihama Nuclear Power Plant; the high-pressure steam pipe lost 85% of its wall thickness and failed five days before its first inspection since 1976.

Economy
The economy of Mihama, previously dependent on commercial fishing and agriculture, is now very heavily dependent on the nuclear power industry. The closure of the Mihama Nuclear Power Plant since the 2011 Fukushima Nuclear Disaster has crippled the local economy.

Education
Mihama has three public elementary schools and one public middle school operated by the town government. The town does not have a high school.

Railway

 * JR logo (west).svg JR West - Obama Line
 * Mihama, Higashi Mihama

Highway

 * JP Expressway E27.svg Maizuru-Wakasa Expressway

International relations

 * - Shimen District, New Taipei City, Taiwan, friendship city

Local attractions

 * Wakasa Wan Quasi-National Park
 * Mikata Five Lakes, a Ramsar site
 * Lake Suigetsu

title: Mihama, Fukui


text:
Mikata District, Fukui

Mikata (三方郡) is a district located in Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of October 1, 2005, the district has an estimated population of 11,023 with a density of 72.37 persons per km2. The total area is 152.32 km2.

Municipalities
The district consists of one town:

 * Mihama

 * Notes:

History
Fukui Mikata-gun.png:

]]
 * yellow - areas formerly within the district borders during the early Meiji period

Recent mergers

 * On March 31, 2005 - The town of Mikata merged with the town of Kaminaka (from Onyū District), forming the new town of Wakasa (in the newly created Mikatakaminaka District).

title: Mikata District, Fukui


text:
Kaminaka, Fukui

Kaminaka (上中町) was a town located in Onyū District, Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of 2003, the town had an estimated population of 8,270 and a density of 100.76 persons per km2. The total area was 82.08 km2.

On March 31, 2005, Kaminaka, along with the town of Mikata (from Mikata District), was merged to create the town of Wakasa (in the newly created Mikatakaminaka District).

title: Kaminaka, Fukui


text:
Natashō, Fukui

Natashō (名田庄村) was a village located in Onyū District, Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of 2003, the village had an estimated population of 2,818 and a density of 19.59 persons per km2. The total area was 143.83 km2.

On March 3, 2006, Natashō was merged into the expanded town of Ōi (in Ōi District).

title: Natashō, Fukui


text:
Onyū District, Fukui

Onyū (遠敷郡) was a district located in the Wakasa Region of Fukui Prefecture, Japan until 2005.

The time before the dissolution, the district had an area of 143.83 km2 with an estimated population of 2,747 with an area of 1,088 and a density of 49.08 persons per km2. The total area is 225.91 km2.

Municipalities
Prior to its dissolution, the district consisted of only one village:

 * Natashō

 * Notes:

History
Fukui Onyu-gun.png:

 * yellow - areas formerly within the district borders during the early Meiji period]]

Recent mergers

 * On March 31, 2005 - The town of Kaminaka was merged with the town of Mikata (from Mikata District) to create the town of Wakasa (now in Mikatakaminaka District). (1 village)
 * On March 3, 2006 - The village of Natashō was merged into the expanded town of Ōi (in Ōi District). Onyū District was dissolved as a result of this merger.

title: Onyū District, Fukui


text:
Takahama, Fukui

Takahama (高浜町) is a town located in Fukui Prefecture, Japan. , the town had an estimated population of 10,490 in 4278 households and a population density of 63 persons per km². The total area of the town was 72.40 sqkm.

Geography
Takahama is located in the far southwestern corner of Fukui Prefecture, bordered by Kyoto Prefecture to the west and the heavily indented ria coast of Wakasa Bay of Sea of Japan to the north. Parts of the town are within the borders of the Wakasa Wan Quasi-National Park.

Neighbouring municipalities

 * Fukui Prefecture
 * Ōi
 * Kyoto Prefecture
 * Ayabe
 * Maizuru

Climate
Takahama has a Humid climate (Köppen Cfa) characterized by warm, wet summers and cold winters with heavy snowfall. The average annual temperature in Takahama is 14.8 °C. The average annual rainfall is 1930 mm with September as the wettest month. The temperatures are highest on average in August, at around 27.3 °C, and lowest in January, at around 3.7 °C.

Demographics
Per Japanese census data, the population of Takahama has declined slightly over the past 30 years.

History
Takahama is part of ancient Wakasa Province. During the Edo period, the area was part of the holdings of Obama Domain. Following the Meiji restoration, it was organised into part of Ōi District in Fukui Prefecture. With the establishment of the modern municipalities system on April 1, 1889, the village of Takahama was established. Takahama was elevated to town status on April 1, 1912. On February 11, 1955, Takahama annexed the neighbouring villages of Aonogō, Wada and Uchiura.

Economy
The economy of Takahama, previously dependent on commercial fishing and agriculture is now very heavily dependent on the nuclear power industry. The partial closure of the Takahama Nuclear Power Plant since the 2011 Fukushima Nuclear Disaster has adversely affected the local economy.

Education
Takahama has four public elementary schools and one public middle school operated by the town government. The town does not have a high school.

Railway

 * JR logo (west).svg JR West - Obama Line
 * Wakasa-Wada, Wakasa-Takahama, Mitsumatsu, Aonogō

International relations

 * - Boryeong, South Chungcheong, Korea, friendship city since November 3, 1990

title: Takahama, Fukui


text:
Ōi, Fukui

Ōi (おおい町) is a town located in Fukui Prefecture, Japan. , the town had an estimated population of 8,102 and a population density of 63 persons per km2. The total area of the town was 212.19 sqkm. It is one of the few Hiragana towns in Japan.

Geography
Ōi is located in the far southwestern corner of Fukui Prefecture, bordered by Kyoto Prefecture to the south, Shiga Prefecture to the southeast and the heavily indented ria coast of Obama Bay (within Wakasa Bay) of Sea of Japan to the north. Parts of the town are within the borders of the Wakasa Wan Quasi-National Park.

Neighbouring municipalities

 * Fukui Prefecture
 * Obama
 * Takahama
 * Shiga Prefecture
 * Takashima
 * Kyoto Prefecture
 * Ayabe
 * Nantan

Climate
Ōi has a Humid climate (Köppen Cfa) characterized by warm, wet summers and cold winters with heavy snowfall. The average annual temperature in Ōi is 14.9 °C. The average annual rainfall is 1949 mm with September as the wettest month. The temperatures are highest on average in August, at around 27.34 °C, and lowest in January, at around 3.9 °C.

Demographics
Per Japanese census data, the population of Ōi has declined over the past 30 years.

History
Ōi is part of ancient Wakasa Province. During the Edo period, the area was part of the holdings of Obama Domain. Following the Meiji restoration, it was organised into part of Ōi District in Fukui Prefecture. With the establishment of the modern municipalities system on April 1, 1889, the villages of Saburi, Ōshima, and Hongō were established. These villages merged to form the town of Ōi on January 15, 1955. On March 3, 2006, the village of Natashō, from Onyū District, was merged into Ōi, which is since written with hiragana instead of kanji. Before the merger the town was written 大飯町.

Economy
The economy of Ōi, previously dependent on commercial fishing, forestry and agriculture is now very heavily dependent on the nuclear power industry. The partial closure of the Ōi Nuclear Power Plant has since the 2011 Fukushima Nuclear Disaster has adversely affected the local economy.

Education
Ōi has four public elementary schools and two public middle schools operated by the town government. The town does not have a high school.

Railway

 * JR logo (west).svg JR West - Obama Line
 * Wakasa-Hongō

Highway

 * JP Expressway E27.svg Maizuru-Wakasa Expressway

Sister cities
🇹🇼Tamsui District, Taiwan

Local attractions

 * Obama Domain Battery Sites, a National Historic Site

title: Ōi, Fukui


text:
Ōi District, Fukui

Ōi (大飯郡) is a district located in Fukui Prefecture, Japan.

As of 2003, the district had an estimated population of 18,680 with a density of 133.18 persons per km2. The total area is 140.26 km2.

Municipalities
The district consists of two towns:

 * Ōi
 * Takahama

 * Notes:

History
Fukui Oi-gun.png:

]]
 * yellow - areas formerly within the district borders during the early Meiji period

Recent mergers

 * On March 3, 2006 - The village of Natashō (from Onyū District) was merged into the expanded town of Ōi.

title: Ōi District, Fukui


text:
Soothsayer

Soothsayer may refer to:

 * One practicing divination, including:
 * Fortune-telling
 * Haruspex
 * Oracle
 * Prophet
 * Precognition

Music

 * Soothsayers (band), a London-based Afrobeat and reggae group
 * The Soothsayer, an album by Wayne Shorter, 1979
 * "Soothsayer", a song by Amorphis from The Beginning of Times, 2011
 * "Soothsayer", a song by Buckethead from Crime Slunk Scene, 2006
 * "Soothsayer", a song by Hallucinogen, 1995
 * "Soothsayer", a song by the Mars Volta from The Bedlam in Goliath, 2008
 * "Soothsayer", a song by Of Monsters and Men from Fever Dream, 2019

Other uses

 * Soothsayer (horse) (1808–1827), a British Thoroughbred racehorse and sire
 * Soothsayer (moth) or Graphiphora augur, a moth in the family Noctuidae
 * Soothsayer, a 1991 science-fiction novel by Mike Resnick

title: Soothsayer


text:
Talk:Area 7 (novel)

Untitled
Whoever wrote this, extending on from my page about Matthew Reilly, Ice Station and Temple... this isn't a fan site. A book description should not be written in colloquial terms, it should have correct spelling and it DEFINETELY shouldn't give away every surprise in the book - it shouls pique the reader's interest in reading the book. For the same reasons I am removing your comments about the SAS from the Matthew Reilly page, the British attack is one of the biggest surprises in that novel. I am also replacing this page with the blurb from Area 7. It's not great, but it's better than what you've written. - edgeworth 13:39, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC) Added expansion tag; I don't believe that there is enough information on this page --Stretch 05:05, 17 February 2006 (UTC) I think that we should put the whole informaiton, including the suprises, up on the page. This page isn't in the same format as the rest of the pages on Matthew reilley's books. This is an information page; not a place to advocate the book and not tell anyone what it is actually about. Comments anyone? MichaelHenley 01:53, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Jeez, could the Synopsis be any longer? Can someone condense?
 * While we do need a synopsis, I agree the authour went overboard. I'd work on it, but I have sero time at the moment. --Stretch 06:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Area 7.jpg
Image:Area 7.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) 06:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Plot summary
I've trimmed some 32kb off this article, comprising a ridiculously long blow-by-blow account of the plot and a compendious list of characters. I've restored an older synopsis which could probably do with a little expanding. The synopsis comes from an old revision. --Tony Sidaway 21:38, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

 * And I've removed the 'overly long plot summary' tag that was lingering on the page. If you check the revision history, what's on there now is way better than what it used to be. MichaelHenley (Talk-Contribs) 13:13, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:Area 7 (novel)


text:
Action for Children

Action for Children (formerly National Children's Home) is a UK children's charity created to help vulnerable children and young people and their families in the UK. The charity has 7,000 staff and volunteers who operate over 475 services in the UK. They served a total of 671,275 children in 2021 and 2022. Action for Children's national headquarters is in Watford, and it is a registered charity under English and Scottish law. In 2017/2018, it had a gross income of £151 million.

History

The first 'Children's Home', a renovated stable in Church Street, Waterloo, was founded in 1869 by Methodist minister Thomas Bowman Stephenson, who had been moved by the plight of children living on the street in London. The first two boys were admitted on 9 July 1869. In 1871 the home was moved to Bonner Road, Victoria Park, and girls were admitted. The home was approved by the Wesleyan Methodist Conference in the same year. A year later, in 1872, a second home opened in Edgworth, Lancashire.

The homes were divided into small family units run by a 'house mother' and 'house father', which was in marked contrast to the large institutions and workhouses common at the time. Training was also an important aspect. A childcare course was set up in 1878, and the graduates of this programme—who were called 'the Sisterhood' or 'the Sisters of the Children'—went on to work in the home.

An industrial school at Milton, Gravesend, was taken over in 1875, and a children's refuge in Ramsey on the Isle of Man was established in 1882. With the opening of the Princess Alice Orphanage in Birmingham the home was renamed 'Children's Home and Orphanage'.

Further properties in Alverstoke, Hampshire; Chipping Norton, Oxfordshire; Frodsham, Cheshire; and Bramhope near Leeds were acquired, and, by 1908, the charity had grown to become the 'National Children's Home and Orphanage'.

In 1913, work began on a large site in Harpenden, which became home to over 200 children, with a print works for apprentices. It subsequently became the charity's head office.

Many other new branches and schools were founded, including the first residential nursery branch in Sutton Coldfield in 1929 and the first Scottish branch in Glasgow in 1955. The charity became an adoption agency in 1926.

The Rev. Gordon Barritt, who became the head of NCH in 1969, started the process of closing the organisation's children's homes and starting to offer support to keep children with their families.

In 1994, the charity changed its name to 'NCH Action for Children'. Fourteen years later, in September 2008, it became 'Action for Children'. The changes were part of the shift away from providing children's homes (most of which have now closed) to a wider range of services.

In December 2016, Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, succeeded The Queen as patron of the organisation.

Child migration
The NCH set up a child emigration scheme in 1873, and a branch in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, opened. This programme of sending children to Canada, where they were called Home Children, has been criticised, and children have been found to have been abused following migration. The NCH itself has said that "the experience of migration was profoundly damaging to significant numbers of the children concerned". NCH is estimated to have sent 3,500 children to Canada between 1873 and 1931 and a small number of children to Australia in the 1930s and early 1950s. The Independent Inquiry found that some children were sent by the NCH without their parents' consent, and that some children who wanted to come back to the UK were not allowed by the NCH to do so. The inquiry concluded that, although the NCH's principles of care had been ambitious for the time, some children were placed in "harsh conditions":

"The NCH put more measures in place than other institutions to monitor the care being afforded to child migrants. This allowed them to appreciate the poor care being provided to some child migrants in Australia. They then took the commendable decision to halt migration promptly in light of the concerns raised.

Nevertheless, we consider that NCH’s failure during the migration period to ensure that it received more regular reports from the receiving institutions meant that it could not be properly satisfied about some aspects of the care provided. This included the quality and number of staff, and the punishment regimes in place.

The Inquiry also finds that, although the NCH stopped migrating children due to concerns about the adverse conditions, it did not bring back to the UK those children previously migrated.

In these respects, the NCH failed to take sufficient care to protect child migrants from the risk of sexual abuse."

The organisation continues to offer an information and record-access service to people who were sent overseas as children under its auspices.

Projects and services
Action for Children works in partnership with statutory bodies to deliver services for children, young people, and their families in five main areas:

Family support
Action for Children is a major provider of family support services and works in partnership with local authorities across the UK. The aim is to facilitate early intervention and then offer long-term help so families can stay together if possible. This is provided through children's and family centres, parenting programmes, and targeted intervention initiatives, often with the hardest-to-reach groups in the community.

Disability
Action for Children runs specialist projects for disabled children and those with learning and behavioural difficulties. These include residential care, short breaks and respite care services, keyworker support for families and carers, and advocacy work to help young disabled people transition into adulthood.

Children in care
Action for Children is a registered adoption agency and delivers fostering programmes. The charity also runs a number of small residential units for children and young people, as well as supporting young care leavers moving into independent living.

Support for young people
Action for Children works with vulnerable and disadvantaged young people. Issues these young people may face include alcohol and substance misuse, anti-social behaviour, homelessness, and unemployment. Other services offer support for young carers, teenage parents, victims of sexual abuse, and those leaving young offenders institutions. This support is provided through a range of services, which offer counselling, help with housing and benefits, access to training and education, basic skills tuition, mediation, and mentoring.

Education
Action for Children runs a number of schools for children and young people with disabilities, profound and multiple learning difficulties (PMLD) and challenging behaviour (including social or emotional problems). The charity's aim is to offer a secure environment in which to facilitate educational, social and personal development adapted to pupils' individual abilities. The schools offer both residential placements and day care.

Research
Action for Children carries out and commissions research into issues around children, young people and families.

The charity also produces a yearly Impact Report, which details research findings on the outcomes and cost effectiveness of its work supporting children and young people.

Campaigning

Action for Children campaigns and lobbies governments on behalf of vulnerable children and young people and their families.

One of the charity's current campaigns, 'Best Start in Life', seeks to address the issue of children – particularly those from poorer backgrounds – struggling to receive the right early years support. The campaign calls on the government to take urgent action so that children under five do not fall behind, either due to cuts in vital services or unequal access to opportunities.

Action for Children is a member of the Disabled Children's Partnership alongside 27 other charities, working towards better health and social care for disabled children, young people and their families.

The charity also leads the children and families work of the Jo Cox Commission on Loneliness and is a partner of End Child Poverty.

Action for Children is a founding member of Fostering Through Social Enterprise (FtSE), a consortium of voluntary and non-profit fostering agencies that advocate for children in respect of regulation, as well as representing its membership at central government level.

Fundraising
Action for Children raises money through corporate partnerships, fundraising events (such as sponsored runs) and through its partnership with the British Methodist Church.

The charity is also involved with several large fundraising events, including Byte Night – an IT industry event which raises money to prevent youth homelessness – and Never Mind The Business, a music-based quiz night for business people.

In 2018, Action for Children launched its Secret Santa fundraising campaign. The campaign encouraged the public to become a Secret Santa for a vulnerable child, donating £10 or more to support children in the UK at Christmas.

Because of its links to the Methodist Church, which opposes gambling, before 2003 Action for Children did not accept National Lottery funding.

In 2000 and 2002, the organisation was criticised, including by its own staff, for accepting funding from BAE Systems, an arms manufacturer.

title: Action for Children