text:
Vote counting

Vote counting is the process of counting votes in an election. It can be done manually or by machines. In the United States, the compilation of election returns and validation of the outcome that forms the basis of the official results is called canvassing.

Counts are simplest in elections where just one choice is on the ballot, and these are often counted manually. In elections where many choices are on the same ballot, counts are often done by computers to give quick results. Tallies done at distant locations must be carried or transmitted accurately to the central election office.

Manual counts are usually accurate within one percent. Computers are at least that accurate, except when they have undiscovered bugs, broken sensors scanning the ballots, paper misfeeds, or hacks. Officials keep election computers off the internet to minimize hacking, but the manufacturers are on the internet. They and their annual updates are still subject to hacking, like any computers. Further voting machines are in public locations on election day, and often the night before, so they are vulnerable.

Paper ballots and computer files of results are stored until they are tallied, so they need secure storage, which is hard. The election computers themselves are stored for years, and briefly tested before each election.

Despite the challenges to the U.S. voting process integrity in recent years, including multiple claims by Republican Party members of error or voter fraud in 2020 and 2021, a robust examination of the voting process in multiple U.S. states, including Arizona (where claims were most strenuous), found no basis in truth for those claims. The absence of error and fraud is partially attributable to the inherent checks and balances in the voting process itself, which are, as with democracy, built into the system to reduce their likelihood.

Manual counting
Manual counting, also known as hand-counting, requires a physical ballot that represents voter intent. The physical ballots are taken out of ballot boxes and/or envelopes, read and interpreted; then results are tallied. Manual counting may be used for election audits and recounts in areas where automated counting systems are used.

Manual methods
One method of manual counting is to sort ballots in piles by candidate, and count the number of ballots in each pile. If there is more than one contest on the same sheet of paper, the sorting and counting are repeated for each contest. This method has been used in Burkina Faso, Russia, Sweden, United States (Minnesota), and Zimbabwe.

A variant is to read aloud the choice on each ballot while putting it into its pile, so observers can tally initially, and check by counting the piles. This method has been used in Ghana, Indonesia, and Mozambique. These first two methods do not preserve the original order of the ballots, which can interfere with matching them to tallies or digital images taken earlier.

Another approach is for one official to read all the votes on a ballot aloud, to one or more other staff, who tally the counts for each candidate. The reader and talliers read and tally all contests, before going on to the next ballot. A variant is to project the ballots where multiple people can see them to tally.

Another approach is for three or more people to look at and tally ballots independently; if a majority agree on their tallies after a certain number of ballots, that result is accepted; otherwise they all re-tally.

A variant of all approaches is to scan all the ballots and release a file of the images, so anyone can count them. Parties and citizens can count these images by hand or by software. The file gives them evidence to resolve discrepancies. The fact that different parties and citizens count with independent systems protects against errors from bugs and hacks. A checksum for the file identifies true copies. Election machines which scan ballots typically create such image files automatically, though those images can be hacked or be subject to bugs if the election machine is hacked or has bugs. Independent scanners can also create image files. are known to be available for release in many parts of the United States. The press obtained copies of many ballots in the 2000 Presidential election in Florida to recount after the Supreme Court halted official recounts. Different methods resulted in different winners.

When manual counts happen
The tallying may be done at night at the end of the last day of voting, as in Britain, Canada, France, Germany, and Spain, or the next day, or 1–2 weeks later in the US, after provisional ballots have been adjudicated.

If counting is not done immediately, or if courts accept challenges which can require re-examination of ballots, the ballots need to be securely stored, which is problematic.

Australia federal elections count ballots at least twice, at the polling place and, starting Monday night after election day, at counting centres.

Errors in manual counts
Hand-counting can be boring, so officials lose track, or they fail to read their own tally sheets correctly at the end of the process.

A 2023 test in Mohave County, Arizona, used 850 ballots, averaging 36 contests each, from logic & accuracy tests, so they had been machine-counted many times. The hand county used 7 experienced poll workers: 1 reader with 2 watchers, 2 talliers with 2 watchers. There were 46 errors in contest totals which were not noticed by the counting team, including:
 * "Caller called the wrong candidate and both watchers failed to notice the incorrect call;
 * Tally markers tried to work out inconsistencies while tallying;
 * Tally markers marked a vote for an incorrect candidate and the watchers failed to notice the error;
 * Caller calling too fast resulted in double marking a candidate or missed marking a candidate;
 * Caller missed calling a vote for a candidate and both watchers failed to notice the omission;
 * Watchers not watching the process due to boredom or fatigue;
 * Illegible tally marking caused incorrect tally totaling;
 * Enunciation of names caused incorrect candidate tally; and
 * Using incorrect precinct tally sheets to tally ballots resulted in incorrect precinct level results."

Some of these tallying errors were also reported in Indiana and Texas elections. Errors were 3% to 27% for various candidates in a 2016 Indiana race, because the tally sheet labels misled officials into over-counting groups of 5 tally marks, and officials sometimes omitted absentee ballots or double-counted ballots. 12 of 13 precincts in the 2024 Republican primary in Gillespie County, TX, were added or written down wrong after a handcount, including two precincts with seven contests wrong and one with six contests wrong. These Texas errors were caught and corrected before results were final. The Indiana ones were not. Average errors in candidate tallies in New Hampshire towns were 2.5% in 2002, including one town with errors up to 20%. Omitting that town cut the average error to 0.87%. Only the net result for each candidate in each town could be measured, by assuming the careful manual recount was fully accurate. Total error can be higher if there were countervailing errors hidden in the net result, but net error in the overall electorate is what determines winners. Connecticut towns in 2007 to 2013 had similar errors up to 2%.

Errors were smaller in candidate tallies for precincts in Wisconsin recounted in 2011 and 2016. The average net discrepancy was 0.28% of the recount tally in 2011 and 0.18% in 2016.

India hand tallies paper records from a 1.5% sample of election machines before releasing results. For each voter the machine prints the selected candidate on a slip of paper, displays it to the voter, and drops the slip into a box. In the April–May 2019 elections for the lower house of Congress, the Lok Sabha, the Election Commission hand-tallied the slips of paper from 20,675 voting machines (out of 1,350,000 machines) and found discrepancies for 8 machines, usually of four votes or less. Most machines tally over 16 candidates, and they did not report how many of these candidate tallies were discrepant. They formed investigation teams to report within ten days, were still investigating in November 2019, with no report as of June 2021. Hand tallies before and after 2019 had a perfect match with machine counts.

An experiment with multiple types of ballots counted by multiple teams found average errors of 0.5% in candidate tallies when one person, watched by another, read to two people tallying independently. Almost all these errors were overcounts. The same ballots had errors of 2.1% in candidate tallies from sort and stack. These errors were equally divided between undercounts and overcounts of the candidates. Optical scan ballots, which were tallied by both methods, averaged 1.87% errors, equally divided between undercounts and overcounts. Since it was an experiment, the true numbers were known. Participants thought that having the candidate names printed in larger type and bolder than the office and party would make hand tallies faster and more accurate.

Intentional errors hand tallying election results are fraud. Close review by observers, if allowed, may detect fraud, and the observers may or may not be believed. If only one person sees each ballot and reads off its choice, there is no check on that person's mistakes. In the US only Massachusetts and the District of Columbia give anyone but officials a legal right to see ballot marks during hand counting. If fraud is detected and proven, penalties may be light or delayed. US prosecution policy since the 1980s has been to let fraudulent winners take office and keep office, usually for years, until convicted, and to impose sentencing level 8-14, which earns less than two years of prison.

Data in the table are comparable, because average error in candidate tallies as percent of candidate tallies, weighted by number of votes for each candidate (in NH) is mathematically the same as the sum of absolute values of errors in each candidate's tally, as percent of all ballots (in other studies).

Time needed and cost of manual counts
Cost depends on pay levels and staff time needed, recognizing that staff generally work in teams of two to four (one to read, one to watch, and one or two to record votes). Teams of four, with two to read and two to record are more secure and would increase costs. Three to record might more quickly resolve discrepancies, if 2 of the 3 agree. Typical times in the table below range from a tenth to a quarter of a minute per vote tallied, so 24-60 ballots per hour per team, if there are 10 votes per ballot. One experiment with identical ballots of various types and multiple teams found that sorting ballots into stacks took longer and had more errors than two people reading to two talliers.

Mechanical counting
Mechanical voting machines have voters selecting switches (levers), pushing plastic chips through holes, or pushing mechanical buttons which increment a mechanical counter (sometimes called the odometer) for the appropriate candidate.

There is no record of individual votes to check.

Errors in mechanical counting
Tampering with the gears or initial settings can change counts, or gears can stick when a small object is caught in them, so they fail to count some votes. When not maintained well the counters can stick and stop counting additional votes; staff may or may not choose to fix the problem. Also, election staff can read the final results wrong off the back of the machine.

Electronic counting
Electronic machines for elections are being procured around the world, often with donor money. In places with honest independent election commissions, machines can add efficiency, though not usually transparency. Where the election commission is weaker, expensive machines can be fetishized, waste money on kickbacks and divert attention, time and resources from harmful practices, as well as reducing transparency.

An Estonian study compared the staff, computer, and other costs of different ways of voting to the numbers of voters, and found highest costs per vote were in lightly-used, heavily staffed early in-person voting. Lowest costs per vote were in internet voting and in-person voting on election day at local polling places, because of the large numbers of voters served by modest staffs. For internet voting they do not break down the costs. They show steps to decrypt internet votes and imply but do not say they are hand-counted.

Optical scan counting

In an optical scan voting system, or marksense, each voter's choices are marked on one or more pieces of paper, which then go through a scanner. The scanner creates an electronic image of each ballot, interprets it, creates a tally for each candidate, and usually stores the image for later review.

The voter may mark the paper directly, usually in a specific location for each candidate, either by filling in an oval or by using a patterned stamp that can be easily detected by OCR software.

Of the voter may pick one pre-marked ballot among many, each with its own barcode or QR code corresponding to a candidate.

Or the voter may select choices on an electronic screen, which then prints the chosen names, usually with a bar code or QR code summarizing all choices, on a sheet of paper to put in the scanner. This screen and printer is called an electronic ballot marker (EBM) or ballot marking device (BMD), and voters with disabilities can communicate with it by headphones, large buttons, sip and puff, or paddles, if they cannot interact with the screen or paper directly. Typically the ballot marking device does not store or tally votes. The paper it prints is the official ballot, put into a scanning system which counts the barcodes, or the printed names can be hand-counted, as a check on the machines. Most voters do not look at the paper to ensure it reflects their choices, and when there is a mistake, an experiment found that 81% of registered voters do not report errors to poll workers.

Two companies, Hart and Clear Ballot, have scanners which count the printed names, which voters had a chance to check, rather than bar codes and QR codes, which voters are unable to check.

Timing of optical scans
The machines are faster than hand-counting, so are typically used the night after the election, to give quick results. The paper ballots and electronic memories still need to be stored, to check that the images are correct, and to be available for court challenges.

Errors in optical scans
Scanners have a row of photo-sensors which the paper passes by, and they record light and dark pixels from the ballot. A black streak results when a scratch or paper dust causes a sensor to record black continuously. A white streak can result when a sensor fails. In the right place, such lines can indicate a vote for every candidate or no votes for anyone. Some offices blow compressed air over the scanners after every 200 ballots to remove dust. Fold lines in the wrong places can also count as votes.

Software can miscount; if it miscounts drastically enough, people notice and check. Staff rarely can say who caused an error, so they do not know whether it was accidental or a hack. Errors from 2002-2008 were listed and analyzed by the Brennan Center in 2010. There have been numerous examples before and since.

 * In a 2020 election in Baltimore, Maryland, the private company which printed ballots shifted the location of some candidates on some ballots up one line, so the scanner looked in the wrong places on the paper and reported the wrong numbers. It was caught because a popular incumbent got implausibly few votes.
 * In a 2018 New York City election when the air was humid, ballots jammed in the scanner, or multiple ballots went through a scanner at once, hiding all but one.
 * In a 2000 Bernalillo County (Albuquerque area), New Mexico, election, a programming error meant that straight-party votes on paper ballots were not counted for the individual candidates. The number of ballots was thus much larger than the number of votes in each contest. The software was fixed, and the ballots were re-scanned to get correct counts.
 * In the 2000 Florida presidential race the most common optical scanning error was to treat as an overvote a ballot where the voter marked a candidate and wrote in the same candidate.

Researchers find security flaws in all election computers, which let voters, staff members or outsiders disrupt or change results, often without detection. Security reviews and audits are discussed in Electronic voting in the United States.

When a ballot marking device prints a bar code or QR code along with candidate names, the candidates are represented in the bar code or QR code as numbers, and the scanner counts those codes, not the names. If a bug or hack makes the numbering system in the ballot marking device not aligned with the numbering system in the scanner, votes will be tallied for the wrong candidates. This numbering mismatch has appeared with direct recording electronic machines (below).

Some US states check a small number of places by hand-counting or use of machines independent of the original election machines.

Recreated ballots
Recreated ballots are paper or electronic ballots created by election staff when originals cannot be counted for some reason. They usually apply to optical scan elections, not hand-counting. Reasons include tears, water damage and folds which prevent feeding through scanners. Reasons also include voters selecting candidates by circling them or other marks, when machines are only programmed to tally specific marks in front of the candidate's name. As many as 8% of ballots in an election may be recreated.

Recreating ballots is sometimes called reconstructing ballots, ballot replication, ballot remaking or ballot transcription. The term "duplicate ballot" sometimes refers to these recreated ballots, and sometimes to extra ballots erroneously given to or received from a voter.

Recreating can be done manually, or by scanners with manual review.

Because of its potential for fraud, recreation of ballots is usually done by teams of two people working together or closely observed by bipartisan teams. The security of a team process can be undermined by having one person read to the other, so only one looks at the original votes and one looks at the recreated votes, or by having the team members appointed by a single official.

When auditing an election, audits need to be done with the original ballots, not the recreated ones.

Cost of scanning systems
List prices of optical scanners in the US in 2002-2019, ranged from $5,000 to $111,000 per machine, depending primarily on speed. List prices add up to $1 to $4 initial cost per registered voter. Discounts vary, based on negotiations for each buyer, not on number of machines purchased. Annual fees often cost 5% or more per year, and sometimes over 10%. Fees for training and managing the equipment during elections are additional. Some jurisdictions lease the machines so their budgets can stay relatively constant from year to year. Researchers say that the steady flow of income from past sales, combined with barriers to entry, reduces the incentive for vendors to improve voting technology.

If most voters mark their own paper ballots and one marking device is available at each polling place for voters with disabilities, Georgia's total cost of machines and maintenance for 10 years, starting 2020, has been estimated at $12 per voter ($84 million total). Pre-printed ballots for voters to mark would cost $4 to $20 per voter ($113 million to $224 million total machines, maintenance and printing). The low estimate includes $0.40 to print each ballot, and more than enough ballots for historic turnout levels. the high estimate includes $0.55 to print each ballot, and enough ballots for every registered voter, including three ballots (of different parties) for each registered voter in primary elections with historically low turnout. The estimate is $29 per voter ($203 million total) if all voters use ballot marking devices, including $0.10 per ballot for paper.

The capital cost of machines in 2019 in Pennsylvania is $11 per voter if most voters mark their own paper ballots and a marking device is available at each polling place for voters with disabilities, compared to $23 per voter if all voters use ballot marking devices. This cost does not include printing ballots.

New York has an undated comparison of capital costs and a system where all voters use ballot marking devices costing over twice as much as a system where most do not. The authors say extra machine maintenance would exacerbate that difference, and printing cost would be comparable in both approaches. Their assumption of equal printing costs differs from the Georgia estimates of $0.40 or $0.50 to print a ballot in advance, and $0.10 to print it in a ballot marking device.

Direct-recording electronic counting

A touch screen displays choices to the voter, who selects choices, and can change their mind as often as needed, before casting the vote. Staff initialize each voter once on the machine, to avoid repeat voting. Voting data and ballot images are recorded in memory components, and can be copied out at the end of the election.

The system may also provide a means for communicating with a central location for reporting results and receiving updates, which is an access point for hacks and bugs to arrive.

Some of these machines also print names of chosen candidates on paper for the voter to verify. These names on paper can be used for election audits and recounts if needed. The tally of the voting data is stored in a removable memory component and in bar codes on the paper tape. The paper tape is called a Voter-verified paper audit trail (VVPAT). The VVPATs can be counted at 20–43 seconds of staff time per vote (not per ballot).

For machines without VVPAT, there is no record of individual votes to check.

Errors in direct-recording electronic voting
This approach can have software errors. It does not include scanners, so there are no scanner errors. When there is no paper record, it is hard to notice or research most errors.
 * The only forensic examination which has been done of direct-recording software files was in Georgia in 2020, and found that one or more unauthorized intruders had entered the files and erased records of what it did to them. In 2014-2017 an intruder had control of the state computer in Georgia which programmed vote-counting machines for all counties. The same computer also held voter registration records. The intrusion exposed all election files in Georgia since then to compromise and malware. Public disclosure came in 2020 from a court case.  Georgia did not have paper ballots to measure the amount of error in electronic tallies. The FBI studied that computer in 2017, and did not report the intrusion.
 * A 2018 study of direct-recording voting machines (iVotronic) without VVPAT in South Carolina found that every election from 2010-2018 had some memory cards fail. The investigator also found that lists of candidates were different in the central and precinct machines, so 420 votes which were properly cast in the precinct were erroneously added to a different contest in the central official tally, and unknown numbers were added to other contests in the central official tallies. The investigator found the same had happened in 2010. There were also votes lost by garbled transmissions, which the state election commission saw but did not report as an issue. 49 machines reported that their three internal memory counts disagreed, an average of 240 errors per machine, but the machines stayed in use, and the state evaluation did not report the issue, and there were other error codes and time stamp errors.
 * In a 2017 York County, Pennsylvania, election, a programming error in a county's machines without VVPAT let voters vote more than once for the same candidate. Some candidates had filed as both Democrat and Republican, so they were listed twice in races where voters could select up to three candidates, so voters could select both instances of the same name. They recounted the DRE machines' electronic records of votes and found 2,904 pairs of double votes.
 * In a 2011 Fairfield Township, New Jersey, election a programming error in a machine without a VVPAT gave two candidates low counts. They collected more affidavits by voters who voted for them than the computer tally gave them, so a judge ordered a new election which they won.
 * A 2007 study for the Ohio Secretary of State reported on election software from ES&S, Premier and Hart. Besides the problems it found, it noted that all "election systems rely heavily on third party software that implement interfaces to the operating systems, local databases, and devices such as optical scanners... the construction and features of this software is unknown, and may contain undisclosed vulnerabilities such trojan horses or other malware."

Interpretation, in any counting method
Election officials or optical scanners decide if a ballot is valid before tallying it. Reasons why it might not be valid include: more choices selected than allowed; incorrect voter signature or details on ballots received by mail, if allowed; lack of poll worker signatures, if required; forged ballot (wrong paper, printing or security features); stray marks which could identify who cast the ballot (to earn payments); and blank ballots, though these may be counted separately as abstentions.

For paper ballots officials decide if the voter's intent is clear, since voters may mark lightly, or circle their choice, instead of marking as instructed. The ballot may be visible to observers to ensure agreement, by webcam or passing around a table, or the process may be private. In the US only Massachusetts and the District of Columbia give anyone but officials a legal right to see ballot marks during hand counting. For optical scans, the software has rules to interpret voter intent, based on the darkness of marks. Software may ignore circles around a candidate name, and paper dust or broken sensors can cause marks to appear or disappear, not where the voter intended.

Officials also check if the number of voters checked in at the polling place matches the number of ballots voted, and that the votes plus remaining unused ballots matches the number of ballots sent to the polling place. If not, they look for the extra ballots, and may report discrepancies.

Secure storage to enable counts in future

If ballots or other paper or electronic records of an election may be needed for counting or court review after a period of time, they need to be stored securely.

Election storage often uses tamper-evident seals, although seals can typically be removed and reapplied without damage, especially in the first 48 hours. Photos taken when the seal is applied can be compared to photos taken when the seal is opened. Detecting subtle tampering requires substantial training. Election officials usually take too little time to examine seals, and observers are too far away to check seal numbers, though they could compare old and new photos projected on a screen. If seal numbers and photos are kept for later comparison, these numbers and photos need their own secure storage. Seals can also be forged. Seals and locks can be cut so observers cannot trust the storage. If the storage is breached, election results cannot be checked and corrected.

Experienced testers can usually bypass all physical security systems. Locks and cameras are vulnerable before and after delivery. Guards can be bribed or blackmailed. Insider threats and the difficulty of following all security procedures are usually under-appreciated, and most organizations do not want to learn their vulnerabilities.

Security recommendations include preventing access by anyone alone, which would typically require two hard-to-pick locks, and having keys held by independent officials if such officials exist in the jurisdiction; having storage risks identified by people other than those who design or manage the system; and using background checks on staff.

No US state has adequate laws on physical security of the ballots.

Starting the tally soon after voting ends makes it feasible for independent parties to guard storage sites. Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) policy calls for independent foreign officials to sleep with ballots, and allows parties to do so: Turkish opposition sleeping with balllots: Republicans guarded warehouse of voted ballots in 2000 in Florida and had state police lock up ballots in New Mexico:

Secure transport and internet
The ballots can be carried securely to a central station for central tallying, or they can be tallied at each polling place, manually or by machine, and the results sent securely to the central elections office. Transport is often accompanied by representatives of different parties to ensure honest delivery. Colorado transmits voting records by internet from counties to the Secretary of State, with hash values also sent by internet to try to identify accurate transmissions.

Postal voting is common worldwide, though France stopped it in the 1970s because of concerns about ballot security. Voters who receive a ballot at home may also hand-deliver it or have someone else to deliver it. The voter may be forced or paid to vote a certain way, or ballots may be changed or lost during the delivery process, or delayed so they arrive too late to be counted or for signature mis-matches to be resolved.

Postal voting lowered turnout in California by 3%. It raised turnout in Oregon only in Presidential election years by 4%, turning occasional voters into regular voters, without bringing in new voters. Election offices do not mail to people who have not voted recently, and letter carriers do not deliver to recent movers they do not know, omitting mobile populations.

Some jurisdictions let ballots be sent to the election office by email, fax, internet or app. Email and fax are highly insecure. Internet so far has also been insecure, including in Switzerland, Australia, and Estonia. Apps try to verify the correct voter is using the app by name, date of birth and signature, which are widely available for most voters, so can be faked; or by name, ID and video selfie, which can be faked by loading a pre-recorded video. Apps have been particularly criticized for operating on insecure phones, and pretending to more security during transmission than they have.

title: Vote counting


text:
User:Hackerjack/To Do List

To Do List
''Please do not edit this section. You may request a change by putting it in this section.''

Sports

 * Rugby Union
 * Oganisations
 * Welsh Rugby Union - Done
 * Rugby Football Union - Expand
 * Competitions
 * Celtic League
 * 2001/2002 - League Only
 * 2002/2003 - League Only
 * 2003/2004 - League and Cup
 * European Rugby Cup
 * 1995/1996 - Done
 * 1996/1997 - Done
 * 1997/1998 - Done
 * 1998/1999 - Done
 * 1999/2000 - Done
 * 2000/2001 - Done
 * 2001/2002 - Done
 * 2002/2003 - Done
 * 2003/2004 - move from 2003-4 Heineken Cup and standardise
 * Clubs / Regions
 * Wales
 * Cardiff Blues - Done
 * Celtic Warriors - Defunct - Done
 * Gwent Dragons - Done
 * Llanelli Scarlets - Done
 * Neath-Swansea Ospreys - Done
 * Aberavon RFC
 * Abertillery RFC
 * Bedwas RFC
 * Bridgend Ravens RFC - Priority
 * Caerphilly RFC - Priority
 * Camarthen RFC
 * Cardiff RFC - Priority
 * Cross Keys RFC
 * Ebbw Vale RFC - Priority
 * Glamorgan Wanderers
 * Llandovery RFC
 * Llanelli RFC - Priority
 * Llanharan RFC
 * Neath RFC - Priority
 * Newbridge RFC
 * Pontypool RFC - Priority
 * Pontypridd RFC - Done
 * Swansea Sharks RFC - Priority
 * Treorchy Rhondda Zebras RFC
 * Scotland
 * Edinburgh Rugby
 * Glasgow Rugby
 * The Borders
 * Ireland
 * Connacht Rugby
 * Leinster Lions
 * Munster Rugby
 * Ulster Rugby

Places

 * Llanwynno

Requests
Llanhyfryddawelllehynafolybarcudprindanfygythiadtrienusyrhafnauole

An interesting tale, but technically not entirely true I think.

Communities in the UK do not have the right to give themselves any name they wish - or at least they can put up whatever placename boards the like, but the Ordnance Survey, the Post Office, and the Department of Transport (or ODPM as it is now) have to recognise the changes if you really want the new name to be used on letters, maps, and road signs.

It is vanishingly unlikely that a nme adopted as a protest would win such recognition. Its also a tediously long process and requires a high degree of unanimity from all local authorities before it has a chance of going through. I know because my own town (Letchworth Garden City) just did this and it took AGES!

Llanfynydd has no more right to its claim than the previous attempt to take Llanfair PG's record - Gorsafawddacha'idraigodanheddogleddollônpenrhynareurdraethceredigion (a station on the Fairbourne & Barmouth Miniature Railway which is longer than "Llanhyfryddawelllehynafolybarcudprindanfygythiadtrienusyrhafnauole"!)

So - while its a nice story, Llanhyfryddawelllehynafolybarcudprindanfygythiadtrienusyrhafnauole lacks a claim to being even the longest unofficial place name, leave along the longest official one.

I suggest you amend the entry accordingly.

Bold textBridgend RFC official site is www.bridgendravens.co.uk I have changed a few would appreciate you altering any you come accross Thanks

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

title: User:Hackerjack/To Do List


text:
Category talk:Prehistoric mammals

Ummm.... where did the list go? All the articles assigned to this category have vanished. Any theories? The Singing Badger 15:13, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * All categories are broken at the moment. See Village_pump... Anárion 15:23, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thoughts on the Prehistoric mammals category
My personal opinion is that while it is good to have the distinctions between the different Epochs, the category of prehistoric mammals should still be included as many in the general public are unaware of which specific Epoch their mammal was from. Essentially, it would be like having two card catalog references. I agree that the Epoch distinctions are more accurate and if I had to chose one or the other, that would be the one I would keep. But I think there is still value in maintaining it. Or perhaps prehistoric mammals could become just a list of, provided all of hte current mammals ended up on the list. Any thoughts?

--aremisasling 20:55, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I think every prehistoric mammal should get four category designations, taxonomy, prehistoric (taxonomy), Epoch(s) known from, Epoch extinction. Logically, users should be able to get to a prehistoric mammal, but looking up mammals by taxonomy, prehistoric mammals by taxonomy, animals known from given Epochs, and animals separated by extinctions.
 * Ground sloth should therefore be cat:Xenarthrans, cat:Prehistoric mammals, cat:Oligocene mammals (as well as Miocene, Pliocene, and Pleistocene), and cat:Recent extinctions. As more subcategorizing happens and new categories are made, cat:Xenarthra will be switched to cat:Sloths, and cat:Prehistoric mammals will be switched to cat:Prehistoric xenarthrans.
 * Now that I've thought that through, I'm worried I may have reverted some of your edits in this regard. I think that's what you've been doing.  My apologies if that's the case.  If this receives agreement, we should post it on the category talk page.  --Aranae 21:08, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Hey, no worries. I've just been starting the extensive task of tracking down all of the prehistoric critters (starting arbitrarily with mammals) and giving them Epoch cats.  The intent is to eventually make it universal for all living things.  I was mostly posting to head it off at the pass and get some consensus so we could keep it all fairly universal.  My only hesitation is that in some of the more long-lived critters, the cat list may get pretty cumbersome.

 * The other thing I was considering was the higher clad levels on the Tree of Life. Genus and species durations are usually only a few Epochs long, which is easily handleable.  But the higher clads like Class and Order can stretch over entire Eras.  Especially if, like I had originally hoped, groups such as stromatolites (several billion years old) are included.  I had an Order, I think it was, that went from the Cretaceous to the modern day.  On the one hand, it's unquestionably useful information to have.  On the other, that's a lot of Epochs to include.

 * I had also considered, and fully support, the four-category system, though I hadn't thought it out quite as thoroughly. I noticed some lack of cleanliness in the taxa end, especially with some of the proto-Cetaceans.  Unfortunately with the task of trying to tackle the Epochs dragging on a bit, I just made a mental note of it and kept on plugging.  Again, the only reservation is the number of Epochs.  I'm not aware of any specific Wiki policy on quantity of categories, so I'm looking, perhaps, for a more experienced editor to advise me a bit on it.

 * Also, I think it may be useful to do a navigational boilerplate template for the epoch, era, and eon categories. I think it would really bring it all together.  This can probably wait until other decisions are out of the way, and the framework is mostly laid.

 * Those are the thoughts I had.

--aremisasling 21:47, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a broader category for the Tertiary, Cenozoic, etc. that would somehow imply that it was found throughout the time period? --Aranae 21:54, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think that might do it. The only catch would be that the species would no longer be placed next to contemporaries in each Epoch.  Although I think that it would be a perfect option for the higher clads.  I'm not sure which way I like better for the species.  --aremisasling 22:00, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

title: Category talk:Prehistoric mammals


text:
Toyota Technological Institute

The Toyota Technological Institute (豊田工業大学) (commonly referred to as TTI) is a university located in Nagoya, Japan. Founded in 1981 by a large endowment from Toyota Motor Corporation, it originally only accepted students with some industrial work experience.

TTI has a School of Engineering, a Master's Program, and a Doctoral Program. The programs consist of three areas of coursework: Mechanical Systems Engineering, Electronics & Information Science, and Materials Science & Engineering.

In 2003 Toyota also opened the Toyota Technological Institute at Chicago, jointly with the University of Chicago. This campus is mainly for Ph.D students, studying Machine Learning, Algorithms & Complexity, Computer Vision, Speech Technologies and Computational Biology.

TSU ranked TTI as the 5th best Japanese university in 2010 and 4th in 2011. In this ranking, TTI has a best employment rate among all Japanese Universities.

In 2012, TTI was ranked 1st in Asia in terms of average number of publication per faculty by the QS World University Rankings.

title: Toyota Technological Institute


text:
Talk:Pontryagin class

Stable homotopy
The article says that the Pontryagin classes generate the stable homotopy of $$BO(k)$$, I really don't see how that can be possible as they are cohomology classes and not homotopy classes. I understand how the Pontryagin classes are a stable cohomology class in that they pullback from $$BO(k+1)$$, so I think this is probably what was meant. --137.205.233.136 (talk) 12:15, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree that this was intended, however it's only true modulo 2-torsion. See Milnor+Stasheff page 179.

Normalization
The old Chern-Weil formula was incorrect. For instance, it lacked the necessary factors of $$\pi$$. I computed the current formula myself. I'm fairly confident that it's correct, but someone else ought to verify it.

Definition
The entry starts by saying "Given a real vector bundle E over M...", but it doesn't say what M is supposed to be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.189.157.194 (talk) 11:05, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Topological Invariants
It is not correct, that Pontryagin numbers are topological invariants. For example, an orientation reversing self-diffeomorphism changes the sign of any Pontryagin number. Also it is not clear to me, why Pontryagin numbers should be integrally invariant under orientation preserving homeomorphisms, when the Pontryagin classes are not. Rationally this should be correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:1398:9:FB03:B46A:C6B4:FBF8:3E6E (talk) 11:12, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Pontryagin class


text:
User:Amortize

I live in Birmingham. These are my contributions so far.

title: User:Amortize


text:
Locrian mode

The Locrian mode is the seventh mode of the major scale. It is either a musical mode or simply a diatonic scale. On the piano, it is the scale that starts with B and only uses the white keys from there. Its ascending form consists of the key note, then: half step, whole step, whole step, half step, whole step, whole step, whole step.

History
Locrian is the word used to describe the inhabitants of the ancient Greek regions of Locris. Although the term occurs in several classical authors on music theory, including Cleonides (as an octave species) and Athenaeus (as an obsolete harmonia), there is no warrant for the modern usage of Locrian as equivalent to Glarean's Hyperaeolian mode, in either classical, Renaissance, or later phases of modal theory through the 18th century, or modern scholarship on ancient Greek musical theory and practice.

The name first came to be applied to modal chant theory after the 18th century, when it was used to describe the mode newly-numbered as mode 11, with final on B, ambitus from that note to the octave above, and with semitones therefore between the first and second, and fourth and fifth degrees. Its reciting tone (or tenor) is G, its mediant D, and it has two participants: E and F. The final, as its name implies, is the tone on which the chant eventually settles, and corresponds to the tonic in tonal music. The reciting tone is the tone around which the melody principally centres, the mediant is named from its position between the final and reciting tone, and the participant is an auxiliary note, generally adjacent to the mediant in authentic modes and, in the plagal forms, coincident with the reciting tone of the corresponding authentic mode.

Modern Locrian
In modern practice, the Locrian may be considered to be a minor scale with the second and fifth scale degrees lowered a semitone. The Locrian mode may also be considered to be a scale beginning on the seventh scale degree of any Ionian, or major scale. The Locrian mode has the formula:

 * 1, ♭2, ♭3, 4, ♭5, ♭6, ♭7

The chord progression for B locrian is Bdim, C, Dm, Em, F, G, Am. Its tonic chord is a diminished triad (Bdim in the Locrian mode of the diatonic scale corresponding to C major). This mode's diminished fifth and the Lydian mode's augmented fourth are the only modes of the major scale to have a tritone above the tonic.

Overview
The Locrian mode is the only modern diatonic mode in which the tonic triad is a diminished chord, which is considered dissonant. This is because the interval between the root and fifth of the chord is a diminished fifth. For example, the tonic triad of B Locrian is made from the notes B, D, F. The root is B and the fifth is F. The diminished-fifth interval between them is the cause for the chord's dissonance.

The name "Locrian" is borrowed from music theory of ancient Greece. However, what is now called the Locrian mode was what the Greeks called the Diatonic Mixolydian tonos. The Greeks used the term "Locrian" as an alternative name for their "Hypodorian", or "Common" tonos, with a scale running from mese to nete hyperbolaion, which in its diatonic genus corresponds to the modern Aeolian mode. In his reform of modal theory in the Dodecachordon (1547), Heinrich Glarean named this division of the octave "Hyperaeolian" and printed some musical examples (a three-part polyphonic example specially commissioned from his friend Sixtus Dietrich, and the Christe from a mass by Pierre de La Rue), though he did not accept Hyperaeolian as one of his twelve modes. The usage of the term "Locrian" as equivalent to Glarean's Hyperaeolian or the ancient Greek (diatonic) Mixolydian, however, has no authority before the 19th century.

Usage
"In practical terms it should be said that few rock songs that use modes such as the phrygian, Lydian, or locrian actually maintain a harmony rigorously fixed on them. What usually happens is that the scale is harmonized in [chords with perfect] fifths and the riffs are then played [over] those [chords].

...[Slipknot's] track 'Everything Ends' uses an A locrian scale with the fourth note sometimes flattened."

There are brief passages in works by Sergei Rachmaninoff (Prelude in B minor, op. 32, no. 10), Paul Hindemith (Ludus Tonalis), and Jean Sibelius (Symphony No. 4 in A minor, op. 63) that have been, or may be, regarded as being in the Locrian mode. Claude Debussy's Jeux has three extended passages in the Locrian mode. The theme of the second movement ("Turandot Scherzo") of Hindemith's Symphonic Metamorphosis of Themes by Carl Maria von Weber (1943) alternates sections in Mixolydian and Locrian modes, ending in Locrian. "In Freezing Winter's Night", the ninth movement in Benjamin Britten's A Ceremony of Carols, is in Locrian mode.

English folk musician John Kirkpatrick's song "Dust to Dust" was written in the Locrian mode, backed by his concertina. The Locrian mode is not at all traditional in English music, but was used by Kirkpatrick as a musical innovation.

The song "Gliese 710" from King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard's 2022 album Ice, Death, Planets, Lungs, Mushrooms and Lava is in Locrian, following the album's theme of basing each song around one of the Greek modes.

It is used in Middle Eastern music as Maqam Lami

title: Locrian mode


text:
Azekah

Azekah (עֲזֵקָה, ʿazēqā) was an ancient town in the Shephela ("lowlands of Judea") guarding the upper reaches of the Valley of Elah, about 26 km (16 mi) northwest of Hebron.

The current tell (ruin) by that name, also known as Tel Azeka (תל עזקה, ʿtel azēqā) or Tell Zakariya, has been identified with the biblical Azekah, dating back to the Canaanite period. Today, the site lies on the purlieu of Britannia Park.

According to Epiphanius of Salamis, the name meant "white" in Hebrew. The tell is pear shaped with the tip pointing northward. Due to its location in the Elah Valley it functioned as one of the main Judahite border cities, sitting on the boundary between the lower and higher Shfela. Although listed in Joshua 15:35 as being a city in the plain, it is actually partly in the hill country, partly in the plain.

Biblical history
In the Bible, it is said to be one of the places where the Amorite kings were defeated by Joshua, and one of the places their army was destroyed by a hailstorm. It was given to the tribe of Judah. In the time of Saul, the Philistines massed their forces between Sokho and Azekah, putting forth Goliath as their champion. Rehoboam fortified the town in his reign, along with Lachish and other strategic sites. In a clay tablet inscribed in Assyrian script Azekah is mentioned as being a fortified town, during the time of Sennacherib's military excursion in the country. Lachish and Azekah were the last two towns to fall to the Babylonians before the overthrow of Jerusalem itself. It was one of the places re-occupied by the people on the return from the Captivity.

Identification
Although the hill is now widely known as the Tel (ruin) of Azekah, in the early 19th-century the hilltop ruin was known locally by the name of Tell Zakariyeh. J. Schwartz was the first to identify the hilltop ruin of Tell-Zakariyeh as the site of Azekah on the basis of written sources. Schwartz's view was supported by archaeologist William F. Albright, and by 1953, the Government Naming Committee in Israel had already decided upon giving the name "Tel Azekah" to Khirbet Tall Zakariya.

In 1838, British-American explorer Edward Robinson passed by the site of Tell Zakariyeh, which stood to the left of the modern village bearing the same name (Az-Zakariyya, which was depopulated in 1948 and later settled by the moshav Zekharia). French explorer Victor Guérin thought another "Beit Zecharias" to be the village mentioned in the Book of I Maccabees (6:32), and which he locates further to the east at a place called Beit Zakaria (Beit Skaria), a view also held by C.R. Conder who thought the site of the battle between Judas Maccabeus and the Grecian army was in none other than the more easterly Beit Skaria. C.W.M. van de Velde who visited the site between 1851-1852 held the view that this Tell Zakariya and its adjacent Kefr Zakariya are not the same as Josephus' Beit Zacharia, where Judas Maccabeus engaged the invading Grecian army. The matter, however, remains disputed.

"As for Azekah," Guérin writes, "it has not yet been found with certainty, this name appearing to have disappeared." Scholars believe that the town's old namesake (Azekah) can be seen in its modern-day corruption, "az-Zakariyeh". In contrast, Conder of the Palestine Exploration Fund had strong reservations about connecting the site Tell Zakariya with the biblical Azekah.

In the mosaic layout of the Madaba Map of the 6th century CE (ca. 565 CE), the site is mentioned in conjoined Greek uncials: Το[ποθεσία] του Αγίου Ζαχαρίου, Βεθζαχαρ[ίου] (= [The] site of St. Zacharias, Beth Zachar[ias]). Epiphanius of Salamis writes that, in his day, Azekah was already called by the Syriac name Ḥǝwarta.

Modern Israeli archaeologists have noted that, because of the existence of an adjacent ruin now known as Khirbet Qeiyafa, and which is situated opposite Socho, not to mention the site's "unusual size and the nature of the fortifications," that there are good grounds to suggest that the site in question may actually point to the biblical Azekah.

Non-Biblical mention
Azekah, known to have been built on a mountain ridge, is mentioned in two sources outside of the Bible. A text from the Assyrian king Sennacherib describes Azekah and its destruction during his military campaign.
 * (3) […Ashur, my lord, encourage]ed me and against the land of Ju[dah I marched. In] the course of my campaign, the tribute of the kings of Philistia? I received…
 * (4) […with the mig]ht of Ashur, my lord, the province of [Hezek]iah of Judah like […
 * (5) […] the city of Azekah, his stronghold, which is between my [bo]rder and the land of Judah […
 * (6) [like the nest of the eagle? ] located on a mountain ridge, like pointed iron daggers without number reaching high to heaven […
 * (7) [Its walls] were strong and rivaled the highest mountains, to the (mere) sight, as if from the sky [appears its head? …
 * (8) [by means of beaten (earth) ra]mps, mighty? battering rams brought near, the work of […], with the attack by foot soldiers, [my] wa[rriors…
 * (9) […] they had seen [the approach of my cav]alry and they had heard the roar of the mighty troops of the god Ashur and [their] he[arts] became afraid […
 * (10) [The city Azekah I besieged,] I captured, I carried off its spoil, I destroyed, I devastated, [I burned] with fire…

Azekah is also mentioned in one of the Lachish letters. Lachish Letter 4 suggests that Azekah was destroyed, as they were no longer visible to the exporter of the letter. Part of the otracon reads:
 * "And inasmuch as my lord sent to me concerning the matter of Bet Harapid, there is no one there. And as for Semakyahu, Semayahu took him and brought him up to the city.  And your servant is not sending him there any[more -], but when morning comes round [-].  And may (my lord) be apprised that we are watching for the fire signals of Lachish according to all the signs which my lord has given, because we cannot see Azeqah."

Tell Zakariya
Conder and Kitchener, citing Sozomenus (Rel. Pal., p. 753), mention the non-biblical site of Caphar Zachariah being in the region of Eleutheropolis, and conclude that this would point to the village Zakariya near Tell Zakariya. Theodosius, archdeacon and pilgrim to the Holy Land, produced a Latin map and itinerary of his travels in Palestine, entitled De Situ Terrae Sanctae ca. 518-530, in which he wrote: "De Eleutheropoli usque in locum, ubi iacet sanctus Zacharias, milia VI" [= "From Beit Gubrin, as far as to the place where lies the holy [prophet], Zechariah, there are 6 milestones"]. Israeli archaeologist Yoram Tsafrir has identified this "resting place of the holy Zechariah" with the nearby Arab village of the same name, Az-Zakariyya, north of Beit Gubrin. Tsafrir notes that Theodosius' location corresponds with the "Beth Zechariah" inscribed on the Madaba Map, and which site is placed alongside of Saphitha (now Kh. es-Safi). J. Gildemeister reasons that one can ask whether it (Kefar Zakariah) is the same place that appears in distorted forms (e.g. Beit Zachariah) in other writings. Robinson thought that Zakariyeh, as applied to a village, referred here to the site of the Caphar Zechariæ mentioned by Sozomen in the region of Eleutheropolis. Most scholars point to the other Khirbet Beit Zakariyyah, towards the east (grid 1617.1190), as the burial place of the said Zachariah, having been found there the ruins of a Byzantine church now turned mosque, and which church is thought to be featured in the Madaba Map.

Archaeological findings

PEF researcher, C.W. Wilson, concluded in 1899 that Tell Zakariya was occupied at an early pre-Israelite period, and that it was probably deserted soon after the Roman occupation. The wall which encircles the old ruin shows signs of having been several times rebuilt. In cut and design, the stones appear to have been of Maccabean construction.

PEF surveyors, Conder and Kitchener, described the ruin in their magnum opus, the Survey of Western Palestine, saying that they noted on the south-side of the summit an ancient olive-press, among other ruins.

Excavations by the English archaeologists Frederick J. Bliss and R. A. Stewart Macalister in the period 1897-1900 at Tel Azekah revealed a fortress, water systems, hideout caves used during Bar Kokhba revolt and other antiquities, such as LMLK seals. The principal areas of excavation were on the summit's southwestern extremity, where were found the foundations of three towers; the southeastern corner of the tell, where the fortress was located and built primarily of hewn stones; and at an experimental pit located in the center of the summit. Azekah was one of the first sites excavated in the Holy Land and was excavated under the Palestine Exploration Fund for a period of 17 weeks over the course of three seasons. At the close of their excavation Bliss and Macalister refilled all of their excavation trenches in order to preserve the site. The site is located on the grounds of a Jewish National Fund park, Britannia Park.

In 2008 and 2010, a survey of the site was conducted by Oded Lipschits, Yuval Gadot, and Shatil Imanuelov, on behalf of Tel-Aviv University's Institute of Archaeology.

The Lautenschläger Azekah Expedition, part of the regional Elah Valley Project, commenced in the summer of 2012. It is directed by Prof. Oded Lipschits of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University, together with Dr Yuval Gadot of TAU and with Prof. Manfred Oeming of Heidelberg University. and is a consortium of over a dozen universities from Europe, North America, and Australia. In its first season 300 volunteers worked for six weeks and uncovered walls, installations, and many hundreds of artifacts. As part of the Jewish National Fund park, whenever possible structures will be conserved and displayed to the public.

title: Azekah


text:
User talk:Ktwsolo

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Follow the Simplified Ruleset
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

title: User talk:Ktwsolo


text:
User talk:Kbh3rd

You can use this link to add comments to the bottom of the page. And please be kind.

 * Archive of this page from the start to 2005-05-24
 * Archive of this page from 2005-06-01 to 2005-12-31
 * Archive of this page from 2006-01-01 to 2006-03-31
 * Archive of this page from 2006-04-01 to 2007-03-19
 * Archive of this page from 2007-04-10 to 2007-09-25
 * Archive of this page from 2007-10-10 to 2007-12-29
 * Archive of this page from 2008-02-16 to 2008-12-31
 * Archive of this page from 2009-01-01 to 2009-12-31
 * Archive of this page from 2010-01-01 to 2010-12-31
 * Archive of this page from 2011-01-01 to 2011-12-31
 * Archive of this page from 2012-01-01 to 2012-12-31
 * Archive of this page from 2013-01-01 to 2012-13-31
 * Archive of this page from 2014-01-01 to 2012-14-31
 * Archive of this page from 2015-01-01 to 2012-15-31
 * Archive of this page from 2016-01-01 to 2018-01-31
 * Archive of this page from 2018-02-01 to 2023-12-31

Administrators' newsletter – January 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Clovermoss
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Dennis Brown
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Julia W · Marasmusine · PBS

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Aoidh · HJ Mitchell · Sdrqaz · Spicy · ToBeFree · Vanamonde93 · Z1720
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Maxim
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Enterprisey · Izno · SilkTork

Oversighter changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Aoidh · Firefly · Sdrqaz · ToBeFree · Z1720
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Maxim
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Enterprisey · Izno · SilkTork

Arbitration
 * Following the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee:, , , , , , ,.
 * Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee rescinded the restrictions on the page name move discussions for the two Ireland pages that were enacted in June 2009.
 * The arbitration case Industrial agriculture has been closed.

Miscellaneous
 * The New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in January 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,000 unreviewed articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

US Primary Copper Production Chart
Good day Kbh3rd

I appreciate the effort you went to in putting together that 'US Primary Copper Production' chart on the 'Copper mining in the United States' article on Wikipedia, as I have found it to be quite interesting. I have a question in relation to this chart, though.

Assuming you have a free moment, I was wondering if you could point me to where exactly you sourced the figures from in the USGS site?

I noticed on the chart that the source is named as being the United States Geological Survey, however, when I visited that site, I wasn't able to work out exactly where the annual copper production data is housed on the site.

If you could point me in the right direction, that would be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance for your attention, Inchiquin (talk) 23:49, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

 * I'm sure they changed that page and the location of the data in the several years since I made that chart. I'll look around this weekend and let you know if I can find the latest data.
 * --Kbh3rdtalk 12:51, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Following the Commodities link on that page I found this page that has lots of documents. I don't yet see data there for the missing years prior to 2018, but more digging might turn up something. --Kbh3rdtalk  20:57, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Administrative permissions and inactivity reminder
This is a reminder that established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. You are receiving this annual reminder since you have averaged less than 50 edits per year over the last 5 years.Inactive administrators are encouraged to reengage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to be engaged with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:32, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Red-tailed hawk · Robertsky
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Ameliorate! · Ancheta Wis · Anthony Bradbury (deceased) · Cobi · Ev · Moondyne · Worm That Turned

Bureaucrat changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Worm That Turned

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Wugapodes

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Enterprisey · Izno

Guideline and policy news
 * An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news
 * Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size.

Arbitration
 * Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
 * Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

Miscellaneous
 * Voting in the 2024 Steward elections will begin on 06 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 27 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
 * A vote to ratify the charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open till 2 February 2024, 23:59:59 (UTC) via Secure Poll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia community have the opportunity to either support or oppose the adoption of the U4C Charter and share their reasons. The details of the voting process and voter eligibility can be found here.
 * Community Tech has made some preliminary decisions about the future of the Community Wishlist Survey. In summary, they aim to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resource allocation, and communication regarding wishes. Read more
 * The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in February 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with Unreferenced. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:02, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Custom signature fix needed
Hi there! You have a custom signature set in your account preferences. Changes to Wikipedia's software have made your current custom signature invalid.

The problem: Your signature contains a syntax error or obsolete HTML tags.

The solutions: You can reset your signature to the default, you can fix your signature, or you can do nothing.

Solution 1: Reset your signature to the default: Solution 2: Fix your custom signature: Solution 3: Do nothing:
 * 1) Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
 * 2) Uncheck the box (☑→☐) that says "Treat the above as wiki markup."
 * 3) Remove anything in the  text box.
 * 4) Click the blue "" button at the bottom of the page.  (Do not click the red "" button, which will reset all of your preference settings, not just the signature.)
 * 1) Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
 * 2) Click the  button next to the error to learn how to fix the error.
 * 3) Update your signature to fix the error.
 * 4) Click Save to update to your newly fixed signature.
 * 1) In accordance with a recent request for comment, all invalid signatures will be changed to the default, which looks like "Example (talk)", one month from now. If you have followed these instructions and still want help, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Signatures. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

 * Done! --Kbh3rd 05:47, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Sdkb · The Night Watch
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg East718 · Isabelle Belato · Mzajac · Staecker · Stan Shebs · Sugarfish · Tamzin

Bureaucrat changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg SilkTork

Guideline and policy news
 * Phase I of the 2024 RfA review is now open for participation. Editors are invited to review, comment on, and propose improvements to the requests for adminship process.
 * Following an RfC, the inactivity requirement for the removal of the interface administrator right increased from 6 months to 12 months.

Technical news
 * The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages.

Miscellaneous
 * The 2024 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Doǵu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, MdsShakil, Minorax, Nehaoua, Renvoy and RoySmith as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
 * Following the 2024 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Ajraddatz, Albertoleoncio, EPIC, JJMC89, Johannnes89, Melos and Yahya.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Kbdank71 · Kosack · NrDg · TLSuda

Guideline and policy news Technical news Arbitration Miscellaneous
 * An RfC is open to convert all current and future community discretionary sanctions to (community designated) contentious topics procedure.
 * The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes.
 * An arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".
 * Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:48, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2024).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Nyttend
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg JohnOwens · Killiondude · MelanieN · Nihonjoe

Bureaucrat changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Nihonjoe

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Joe Roe

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news
 * Phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship review has concluded. Several proposals have passed outright and will proceed to implementation, including creating a discussion-only period (3b) and administrator elections (13) on a trial basis. Other successful proposals, such as creating a reminder of civility norms (2), will undergo further refinement in Phase II. Proposals passed on a trial basis will be discussed in Phase II, after their trials conclude. Further details on specific proposals can be found in the full report.

Technical news
 * Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531

Arbitration
 * The arbitration case Conflict of interest management has been closed.

Miscellaneous
 * This may be a good time to reach out to potential nominees to ask if they would consider an RfA.
 * A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 15,000 articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!
 * Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 9 May 2024. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2024).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Graham Beards
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Deskana · Mets501 · Staxringold

Bureaucrat changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Deskana · Warofdreams

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news
 * Phase II of the 2024 RfA review has commenced to improve and refine the proposals passed in Phase I.

Technical news
 * The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration
 * The arbitration case Venezuelan politics has been closed.
 * The Committee is seeking volunteers for various roles, including access to the conflict of interest VRT queue.

Miscellaneous
 * WikiProject Reliability's unsourced statements drive is happening in June 2024 to replace citation needed tags with references! Sign up here to participate!

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2024).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Elli · HouseBlaster · Pickersgill-Cunliffe
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Brianga · De728631 · Georgewilliamherbert · Hyacinth (deceased) · ProveIt · The Night Watch

Technical news
 * Local administrators can now add new links to the bottom of the site Tools menu without using JavaScript. Documentation is available on MediaWiki.

Miscellaneous
 * The Community Wishlist is re-opening on 15 July 2024. Read more

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kbh3rd


text:
Creem

Creem (often stylized in all caps) is an American rock music magazine and entertainment company, founded in Detroit, whose initial print run lasted from 1969 to 1989. It was first published in March 1969 by Barry Kramer and founding editor Tony Reay. Influential critic Lester Bangs served as the magazine's editor from 1971 to 1976. It suspended production in 1989 but attained a short-lived renaissance in the early 1990s as a tabloid. In June 2022, Creem was relaunched as a digital archive, website, weekly newsletter, and quarterly print edition.

The magazine is noted for having been an early champion of various heavy metal, punk rock, new wave and alternative bands, especially bands based in Detroit. The term "punk rock" was coined in the May 1971 issue of Creem, in Dave Marsh's Looney Tunes column about ? and the Mysterians. That same issue is sometimes credited with having originated the term "heavy metal" as well; in fact, the term had been used earlier, though Creem did help to popularize the term throughout the 1970s.

History
In the winter of 1969, Barry Kramer owned the Detroit record store Full Circle, as well as Mixed Media, a head shop/bookstore, and was an unsuccessful concert promoter and band manager. After the local alternative paper rejected a concert review he had written, he decided to start publishing his own paper. Tony Reay, a clerk at Kramer's record store, became its first editor, and came up with its name, a tribute to his favorite band, Cream. Charlie Auringer became the photo editor and designer, and Dave Marsh joined soon after at age 19. The first issue was distributed only in Detroit, as a tabloid-sized newspaper, but then a deal was struck with a distributor. Many copies were ordered by porn shops who were confused by the faintly suggestive title, and who displayed it next to the similarly sized Screw magazine. Richard "Ric" Siegel became circulation director, Creem become a glossy color magazine sized for newsstand distribution, and within two years had secured a national distribution deal.

For the magazine's first two years, its offices were at 3729 Cass Avenue in Detroit. An armed robbery of the offices prompted Kramer to move the operation to a 120-acre farm in Walled Lake, Michigan, at 13 Mile and Haggerty Roads. Just before the move, Lester Bangs was hired, originally to write a feature on Alice Cooper. He had been fired from the rival music magazine Rolling Stone by publisher Jann Wenner for "disrespecting musicians" after a particularly harsh review of the group Canned Heat. Bangs fell in love with Detroit, calling it "rock's only hope", and remained there for five years.

Many of the staff members lived in the Walled Lake farmhouse, where there were occasional physical altercations between writers. One day, Marsh, who objected to Bangs' poorly housebroken dog, placed the dog's dung on Bangs' typewriter. This resulted in a fistfight that gave Marsh a gash on his head. Eventually, the magazine was successful enough to move to editorial offices in downtown Birmingham, Michigan. In 1971, Bangs became editor, and in 1976 he left the magazine; he never wrote for it again. On January 29, 1981, Kramer died of an accidental overdose of nitrous oxide. A year later, on April 30, 1982, Bangs died in New York City of an accidental Darvon overdose.

The magazine's offices were geographically separated from most of the entertainment industry in the United States, which was then primarily based in Hollywood and New York City. It was known for its irreverent, deprecatory and humorous tone, and became famous for its comical photo captions, which poked fun at rock stars, the industry, and even the magazine itself. The magazine dubbed the tall Plexiglas pyramid that was presented to the winner of the annual American Music Award "the Object From Space", and said it was endowed with the power to force celebrities to look ridiculous while holding it. Because of the magazine's location, it was among the first national publications to provide in-depth coverage of many popular Detroit-area artists, such as Bob Seger, Mitch Ryder, Alice Cooper, The MC5, The Stooges, Iggy Pop, and Parliament-Funkadelic, as well as other Midwestern acts such as Raspberries and Cheap Trick.

Influence
By the mid-1970's Creem had a circulation of over 200,000, making it the second largest rock magazine after Rolling Stone. Creem picked up on punk rock and new wave movements early on. Creem gave exposure to artists like Lou Reed, David Bowie, Roxy Music, Blondie, and The New York Dolls before the mainstream press. In the 1980s, it provided early coverage of upcoming rock bands such as R.E.M., The Replacements, The Smiths, The Go-Go's and The Cure. It was also among the first to praise metal acts like Motörhead, Judas Priest, and Van Halen. It also focused on Detroit acts.

Melvins guitarist Roger "Buzz" Osborne taught Kurt Cobain about punk by loaning him records and old copies of Creem.

Alice Cooper referenced the magazine in his song "Detroit City" – "But the Riff kept a Rockin', the Creem kept a-talkin', and the streets still smokin' today". Thurston Moore of Sonic Youth said: "Having a certain sense of humor in the rock'n'roll culture – CREEM nailed it in a way that nobody else was. It informed a lot of people's sensibilities."

Staff
Publishers, editors and writers for Creem included Barry Kramer, his partner (later his wife) Connie Warren Kramer, Lester Bangs, Dave Marsh, Billy Altman, Bob Fleck, John Morthland, Ben Edmonds, Ed Ward, Richard Riegel, Ric Siegel, Robert Christgau, Richard Meltzer, Nick Tosches, Greil Marcus, Jeffrey Morgan, Richard C. Walls, Rob Tyner, Patti Smith, Peter Laughner, Cameron Crowe, Trixie A. Balm (a.k.a. Lauren Agnelli), Laura Levine, Judy Adams, Jaan Uhelszki, Penny Valentine, Susan Whitall, John "The Mad" Peck, John Mendelsohn, Mike Gormley, Sylvie Simmons, Gregg Turner, Chuck Eddy, Mark J. Norton, Alan Niester, Robert Duncan, Alan Madlane (as Alan Madeleine), Judy Wieder, Colman Andrews, Jim Esposito, Dave DiMartino, Bill Holdship and John Kordosh. These last three edited the final versions of Creem in the 1980s.

The magazine moved its office to Los Angeles in January 1987. Holdship and Kordosh were both involved in Creem's move to Los Angeles after it was purchased by Arnold Levitt, but both had already left the magazine before its move to New York City after Levitt licensed the name to a publisher there, and its ultimate demise. Before licensing Creem to the New Yorkers, Levitt made Judy Wieder editor-in-chief of a heavy metal version of Creem, called Creem Metal, which was originally edited by DiMartino, Holdship and Kordosh and which sold well.

A young female audience-targeted spinoff, Creem Rock-Shots, was also published, as were countless special editions throughout the 1980s. Former William Morris agent, musician and journalist Mark J. Petracca (aka Dusty Wright) became the editor during its New York residence over 1992–93. Chris Nadler was the last editor before the magazine was shut down. Steve Peters and David Sprague were the final members remaining in the original editorial chain that reached back to 1969.

Graphic design
The Creem logo was designed by Bob Wilson, who also wrote a regular comic strip, "Mike and Barney". The "Mr. Dream Whip" and "Boy Howdy" icons were designed by underground cartoonist Robert Crumb. Both appeared on the cover of the second issue as a black and white drawing titled Detroit 1969. For the December 1971 issue, Wilson colored the drawing, which appeared in every following issue in a Creem's Profiles, a parody of the then-popular  Dewar's Profiles, featuring musicians and bands holding cans of "Boy Howdy" beer.

Change of ownership and disputes
Ownership of the magazine, trademark and intellectual property has changed hands numerous times since the death of publisher Barry Kramer in 1981, and the magazine's subsequent bankruptcy.

Arnold Levitt bought the rights to the magazine in 1986 from Connie Kramer, and added titles including one devoted exclusively to metal along with numerous monthly special editions, before shutting down in 1989. In 1990, he licensed it to a group of Florida investors who published a bimonthly glossy tabloid version, but it was not successful either.

The release of writer and director Cameron Crowe's semi-autobiographical film Almost Famous in 2000, and Philip Seymour Hoffman's portrayal of editor Lester Bangs, rekindled interest in Creem and rock journalism of the era. Former Creem photographer Robert Matheu formed Creem Media in 2001 with his cousin Jason Turner and Michigan businessman Ken Kulpa. They negotiated a five-year licensing deal with Levitt, with the option to purchase the magazine's intellectual property rights for $100,000. There was talk about a quarterly print publication in 2011. They launched a website and generated new content, primarily to maintain the brand.

As the five-year deadline of the licensing deal approached, Matheu sought investors, and got a $52,500 investment from Los Angeles disk jockey Chris Carter and Barry Kramer's son J.J. Kramer. Matheu provided the balance of the $100,000.

 * Carter and Kramer claim that they were verbally promised one-third of Creem Media for their investment by Matheu.
 * Turner and Kulpa claim they were never consulted about the deal, and never approved it.
 * Matheu claims he never promised Carter and Kramer such a large share for their investment.

In 2007, Kramer sued in New York County and won, as the Court ruled that Creem Media could take no action without the approval of Carter and Kramer.

Creem Media was sued by T.A. Riggs Licensing LLC in 2010 for breach of contract. Creem Media lost that suit, and Riggs was awarded $575,000. Creem Media was either unable or unwilling to pay. In November 2011, Creem Media attempted to have the judgment set aside, but in January 2012, the Court upheld the Judgment. In February 2012, the Court appointed a Receiver to seize all of Creem Media's assets to help satisfy the outstanding judgment. The Receiver then transferred all of the Intellectual Property from Creem Media, Inc to Riggs. CREEM International, Inc purchased the assets from Riggs to become the new successor company with all rights of ownership.

Matheu tired of the legal battle and resigned from the board of Creem Media in 2009. Creem Media, Inc. became defunct shortly thereafter.

In 2017, a group headed by Kramer acquired the Creem brand and its archives.

Creem documentary
In 2019, the Kramer-led Boy Howdy Productions, in partnership with Muse Production House and New Rose Films, wrapped production on a Creem documentary entitled CREEM: America's Only Rock 'n' Roll Magazine, which world premiered at SXSW 2019 to rave reviews. In February 2020, the film was acquired by Greenwich Entertainment and subsequently released online through paid virtual cinema streaming rental in August 2020.

2022 relaunch
Following years of litigation, the relaunch of Creem was announced on June 1, 2022, by JJ Kramer, an IP attorney and son of founder Barry Kramer. Management includes former Vice publisher John Martin as CEO, VP of content Fred Pessaro (Vice, Revolver, BrooklynVegan), former Entertainment Weekly copy chief Dan Morrissey as executive editor and original staffer Jaan Uhelszki as editor-at-large.

The relaunched Creem includes digital archives of all 224 issues of the original magazine, a website and weekly newsletter called Fresh Creem, and a quarterly oversized glossy print edition, which commenced publication in the fall of 2022, on a subscription-only basis, with no newsstand sales.

title: Creem


text:
Dominicus Gundissalinus

Dominicus Gundissalinus, also known as Domingo Gundisalvi or Gundisalvo (c. 1115 – after 1190), was a philosopher and translator of Arabic to Medieval Latin active in Toledo, Spain. Among his translations, Gundissalinus worked on Avicenna's Liber de philosophia prima and De anima, Ibn Gabirol's Fons vitae, and al-Ghazali's Summa theoricae philosophiae, in collaboration with the Jewish philosopher Abraham Ibn Daud and Johannes Hispanus. As a philosopher, Gundissalinus crucially contributed to the Latin assimilation of Arabic philosophy, being the first Latin thinker in receiving and developing doctrines, such as Avicenna's modal ontology or Ibn Gabirol's universal hylomorphism, that would soon be integrated into the thirteenth-century philosophical debate.

Life
Born presumably in the Iberian Peninsula around 1115–1125, Gundissalinus received his education in Chartres, supposedly following the teaching of William of Conches and Thierry of Chartres. Since 1148, Gundissalinus is in Castile: the capitular archives of Segovia refer to him as archdeacon of Cuéllar, a small town not far from Segovia, where he presumably spent around 14 years, regarding which almost no information is available. Following Ibn Daud's request to the archbishop of Toledo, John II, to start a series of translations into Latin of Avicenna's Kitab al-Shifāʾ, Gundissalinus moved to Toledo in 1161–1162, where he worked with Ibn Daud on the translation of Avicenna's De anima, realised before 1166.

Gundissalinus remained in Toledo for twenty years, collaborating with Abraham Ibn Daud and Johannes Hispanus to the realisation of around twenty translations of Arabic works into Latin. In the Castilian capital, Gundissalinus also wrote his philosophical treatises. The Toledan chapter names Gundissalinus for the last time in 1178 but he presumably remained in Toledo at least until 1181, when a document written in Arabic mentions his name.

The last record witnessing Gundissalinus alive is the report of a meeting between the chapters of Segovia and Burgos, held in Segovia in 1190. It is probable that the last years of Gundissalinus's life were spent in that Castilian town, and he died sometime after 1190.

Translations of Gundissalinus
Together with Avendauth, that is, Abraham ibn Daud, and Iohannes Hispanus, Gundissalinus translated around twenty philosophical works from Arabic to Latin, which decisively marked the passage from Platonism to Aristotelianism typical of Latin speculation of the 13th century. Translations traditionally attributed to Gundissalinus are:

Alexander of Aphrodisias, De intellectu et intellecto al-Farabi, De intellectu et intellecto al-Kindi, De intellectu Avicenna, De anima seu sextus naturalium Avicenna, De convenientia et differentia subiectorum al-Farabi, Exposición del V libro de los Elementa de Euclide pseudo al-Kindi, Liber introductorius in artem logicae pseudo al-Farabi, De ortu scientiarum Isaac Israeli ben Solomon, Liber de definitionibus Avicenna, Logica Avicenna, De universalibus Al-Ghazali, Logica Avicena, Liber de philosophia prima Avicena, Liber primus naturalium, tractatus primus Avicenna, Liber primus naturalium, tractatus secundus al-Ghazali, Metaphysica Avicebron, Fons vitae Pseudo-Avicena, Liber caeli et mundi al-Farabi, Liber exercitationis ad viam felicitatis al-Farabi, Fontes quaestionum Avicenna, Prologus discipuli et capitula Avicenna, De viribus cordis

Works
Dominicus Gundissalinus also wrote five philosophical works, in which he embraces the ideas of Avicenianna and al-Gabirol, combining them with the Latin philosophical tradition, and particularly Boethius together with some authors of his time, such as the philosophers of the School of Chartres or Herman of Carinthia. Gundissalinus' treatises show his deep knowledge of Arabic-Hebrew philosophy, and there are the three philosophical disciplines that characterize his thought: metaphysics, epistemology and psychology. The five treatises of Dominicus Gundissalinus are:

 * De divisione philosophiae – is an epistemological treatise in which Gundissalinus proposes his division of philosophy into various scientific disciplines, structured hierarchically. In this work, Gundissalinus combines the divisions of al-Farabi and Avicenna with the classifications of knowledge of Isidore of Seville and Boethius. It had a prolific diffusion and reception in Latin land.
 * De scientiis – this is a Gundisalvian revision of al-Farabi's work of the same name, very similar to De divisione, although the latter manifests a higher level of philosophical analysis and critical reception of Latin sources.
 * De anima – De anima is a treatise on psychology in which Gundissalinus mainly welcomes Avicenna's De anima, often modifying the speculative results that could be problematic for Latin reflection, and ibn Gabirol's Fons Vitae.
 * De unitate et uno – brief metaphysical and ontological treatise where Gundissalinus examines the onto-metaphysical and theological doctrine of the One, following the Arabic-Hebrew and Latin Neoplatonic tradition, and in particular the perspective of ibn Gabirol.
 * De processione mundi – work of maturity, here Gundissalinus analyzes the generation of creation from the prima cause, following the various logical-ontological distinctions that are specified in the progressive unions of matter and form, until the generation of sentient creatures. In this treatise, the doctrine of universal hylemorphism inherited from ibn Gabirol and of which Gundissalinus is one of the main supporters, plays a fundamental role.

In addition to these five treatises, on which scholars agree, the De immortalitate animae has also been traditionally attributed to Gundissalinus, a text that the majority of the academic community nevertheless attributes to William of Auvergne. Gundissalinus' works were well received. both in the Latin philosophical field, and in the Hebrew.

title: Dominicus Gundissalinus