text:
Tsavo East National Park

Tsavo East National Park is a national park in Kenya with an area of 13747 km2. It was established in April 1948 and covers a semi-arid area previously known as the Taru Desert. Together with the Tsavo West National Park, it forms an area of about 22,000 square kilometers. The Tsavo River flows west to east through the national park, which is located in the Taita-Taveta County of the former Coast Province.

Geography
Tsavo East National Park is generally flat, with dry plains across which the Galana River flows. Other features include the Yatta Plateau and Lugard Falls. Inside Tsavo East National Park, the Athi and Tsavo rivers converge to form the Athi-Galana-Sabaki River. Most of the park consists of semi-arid grasslands and savanna.

The Yatta Plateau, the world's longest lava flow, runs along the western boundary of the park above the Athi-Galana-Sabaki River. Its 290 km length was formed by lava from Ol Donyo Sabuk Mountain. The Mudanda Rock is a 1.6 km inselberg of stratified rock that acts as a water catchment that supplies a natural dam below. It offers an excellent vantage point for the hundreds of elephants and other wildlife that come to drink during the dry season. Lugard Falls, named after Frederick Lugard, is a series of white water rapids on the Athi-Galana-Sabaki River. Aruba Dam was built in 1952 across the Voi River. The reservoir created by the dam attracts many animals and water birds.

Tsavo West National Park is more mountainous and wetter, with swamps, Lake Jipe and the Mzima Springs. It is known for birdlife and for its large mammals. It is also home to a black rhino sanctuary.

Archaeology and history
Although a few Early Stone Age and Middle Stone Age archaeological sites are recorded from ground surface finds in Tsavo, there is much evidence of thriving Late Stone Age economy from 6,000 to 1,300 years ago. Research has shown that Late Stone Age archaeological sites are found close to the Galana River in high numbers. The inhabitants of these sites hunted wild animals, fished, and kept domesticated animals. Because of the sparse availability of water away from the Galana River, human settlement in Tsavo focused on the riparian areas and in rock shelters as one moves west.

Swahili people traded with the inhabitants of Tsavo for ivory, catskins, and probably slaves as early as 700 AD (and probably earlier). There is no evidence for direct Swahili "colonization" of Tsavo. Instead, trade was probably accomplished by moving goods to and from the Swahili Coast via extended kin-networks. Trade goods such as cowry shells and beads have been recovered from archaeological sites dating to the early Swahili period.

19th century British and German explorers document people we now refer to as Orma and Watha during their travels through the "nyika" ("bush" or "hinterland") and generally viewed them as hostile toward their interests. Beginning in the late 19th/early 20th century, the British began a concerted effort to colonise the interior of Kenya and built a railway through Tsavo in 1898. Two Tsavo Man-Eaters terrorised the construction crews led by John Henry Patterson who eventually shot the pair but not before they had killed one hundred and thirty five Indians and local workers. The railway was eventually completed through to Kisumu on Lake Victoria.

Tsavo remained the homeland for Orma pastoralists and Watha hunter-gatherers until 1948, when it was gazetted a national park. At that time, the Orma with their livestock were driven off and the aboriginal population of the Watha people was forcefully relocated to Voi and Mtito Andei as well as other locations within the nearby Taita Hills. Following Kenyan independence in 1963, hunting was banned in the park and management of Tsavo was turned over to the authority that eventually became the Kenya Wildlife Service.

Wildlife
Tsavo East National Park is considered one of the world's biodiversity strongholds, providing undeveloped homes to vast numbers of animals.

Mammals
Famous are the Tsavo lions, a population whose adult males often lack manes entirely. As of 2006, there were about 675 lions in the Amboseli-Tsavo ecosystem.

Some of the many mammals found in the park include:
 * Aardwolf
 * Yellow baboon
 * African buffalo
 * Senegal bushbaby
 * Bushbuck
 * Caracal
 * African wildcat
 * Southeast African cheetah
 * African civet
 * Kirk's dik-dik
 * African wild dog
 * African dormouse
 * Blue duiker
 * Bush duiker
 * Harvey's red duiker
 * Common eland
 * African bush elephant
 * Bat-eared fox
 * Northern greater galago
 * Grant's gazelle
 * Rusty-spotted genet
 * Common genet
 * Gerenuk
 * Giraffe
 * African savanna hare
 * Springhare
 * Coke's hartebeest
 * Hunter's hartebeest
 * East African hedgehog
 * Spotted hyena
 * Striped hyena
 * Yellow-spotted rock hyrax
 * Southern tree hyrax
 * Impala
 * Black-backed jackal
 * Side-striped jackal
 * Klipspringer
 * Lesser kudu
 * African leopard
 * Lion
 * Banded mongoose
 * Dwarf mongoose
 * Egyptian mongoose
 * Marsh mongoose
 * Slender mongoose
 * White-tailed mongoose
 * Vervet monkey
 * Sykes' monkey
 * Fringe-eared oryx
 * Clawless otter
 * Ground pangolin
 * Crested porcupine
 * Cane rat
 * Giant rat
 * Naked mole rat
 * Honey badger
 * Bohor reedbuck
 * Black rhinoceros
 * Serval
 * Elephant shrew
 * Bush squirrel
 * Red bush squirrel
 * Striped ground squirrel
 * Unstriped ground squirrel
 * Suni
 * Common warthog
 * waterbuck
 * Plains zebra
 * Grevy's zebra

Birds
Over 500 bird species have been recorded in the area, including ostriches, kestrels, buzzards, starlings, weaver birds, kingfishers, hornbills, secretary birds and herons.

Threats
Between 2001 and 2006, more than 100 lions, elephants and other wildlife have been killed in the Amboseli-Tsavo ecosystem. Most of them have been speared by young men. The poachers usually do not face serious consequences. In contrast, the game scouts who arrested offenders have been punished by the community.

title: Tsavo East National Park


text:
Talk:Calvin and Hobbes/Archive 1

Untitled
'''DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.'''

This archive page covers edits made between 10 August 2001 and 18 July 2004.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary. Please add new archivals to Talk:Calvin and Hobbes/Archive3. (See How to archive a talk page.) Thank you.

Sleigh rides
A nice page, but I changed the bit about the sleigh rides. They do not always end in a crash and are not always on philosophy, unless you include political philosophy. In one strip the two were having a discussion about how it seems senseless to get involved sometimes; the series of course featured Hobbes in his capacity as Ironic Observer. But since the message wasn't blatantly obvious, I think people with opposite points of view probably both walked away saying "exactly!" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koyaanis Qatsi (talk • contribs) 06:53, 10 August 2001 (UTC)

Public domain
I think the section about C & H passing into the public domain needs to be edited - while the maximum recorded human lifespan may be 122 it is _highly_ unlikely that Watterson will live that long!

PMelvilleAustin 15:52 Apr 6, 2003 (UTC)

 * Don't just talk about it, do it! If someone objects, they'll simply restore it. Consider it taken care of.
 * fvincent 20:45, Nov 27, 2003 (UTC)

links
Why did User:Paul A remove the see also link cartoon characters named after people ? Jay 07:16, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * He didn't. He moved it to the bottom of the article, just above "External links", which is the usual place for see also links. —Paul A 01:44, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Oh ok ! I missed that one. However there are 2 kinds of "See also"s: one thats relevant to a section or para and one thats relevant to the entire article. I wonder if cartoon characters named after people is relevant to the entire article. Jay 09:26, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

last strip
I may be crazy, but I thought I remembered that the last strip was on Jan. 1 1996, not Dec. 31 1995. And the official site does say: "The strip, first syndicated in 1985, was carried in more than 2,400 newspapers when it ceased publication January 1, 1996." On the other hand, that might just mean it was the first day they didn't publish, I don't know. Everyking 05:05, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * The last strip was a large-format Sunday strip. December 31 1995, as noted in the article, was a Sunday. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty confident the last strip was on December 31 1995. --Paul A 03:30, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, you must be right, Dec. 31 1995 was indeed a Sunday, and I remember the last strip was on a Sunday. Should've looked that up to begin with. Thanks. Everyking 03:33, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Main section wording

 * Perhaps some of the main section here could be edited to not sound so much like it is parroting the 50th anniversary C&H treasury. Not that the info is bad, but maybe some wording could be changed?

User:tofor

Necessary books
Could someone who has all the books (or who knows anyway) add to the article a section with the books necessary to buy if one wants all the strips ever released, preferably in chronological order. Some of the books appear to be compilations on themes, and I don't want those. I know they're releasing an anthology, but I'd prefer to have the original books first. Thanks!--[[User:HamYoyo|HamYoyo| TALK ]] 09:14, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)

 * There's a guide on Amazon on this subject: . It would be useful to work some of this info into the books section. --Taak 20:26, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Excellent, thanks. Maybe books should be listed categorically (Book, Treasury, Compilation) rather than chronologically. Or not.--[[User:Bendzh|Bendž

 * Ť ]] 10:12, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)

 * I think it would make sense/be more readable to put them in a big table with all the info laid out that way. --Taak 19:15, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Breaking walls?
"Sometimes, however, Hobbes breaks the fourth wall or does things that Calvin cannot possibly have witnessed or imagined himself to witness." Huh? When? Everyking 20:07, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Not that I can remember. Waterson never goes into fantasy outside of Calvin's mind.--[[User:Bendzh|Bendž

 * Ť ]] 10:12, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)

 * I swear this is true but I can't back it up. Will try to find some examples. Morwen - Talk 15:23, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * There are strips where Hobbes is shown stalking Calvin even when Calvin is unaware of this. Does that help? [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 15:25, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * That's the sort of thing I'm thinking about. Also, Hobbes addressing the reader sardonically, with Calvin off-screen.  ISTR this sort of thing happening quite rarely though.  Sadly I don't think I have the books (unless i forgot to give them back).  Morwen - Talk 15:29, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Likewise. I know they exist, however. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 15:33, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

User:Anville has put in some nice examples, but I doubt if that is what is meant by fourth wall. But it should have some other term if not the fourth wall. Calvin always comes home from school dirty and scathed, and he imagines its because Hobbes pounces at him from behind the door and throws him into the slush. Calvin does have to do something in real life to get that dirty !

Also I've noticed one particular frame involving Calvin and Susie where Hobbes is not a stuffed tiger. Thats because Susie is looking away from Hobbes. Wonder what that is called. Jay 15:35, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Yea, I remember that happening as well. --Taak 19:15, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Likewise, I recall a story where C & H have released the parking brake on the car and it begins to roll downhill and ends up across the street in a ditch. Calvin's Mom is seen thinking aloud in the kitchen, and in the window behind her are Calvin and Live Hobbes chasing the car. TrbleClef 04:37, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * The one I remember was with C & H on a toboggan about to hit Susie. --Taak 06:09, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Calvin's Last Name
The strips do not disclose Calvin's last name. Actually, If I recall, in one series of strips where Calvin enters a contest involving safety posters, he imagines the newspaper headings and one of them is "Classmates shamed by Wunderkind's Incredible talent." Do you suppose "Wunderkind" is Calvin's last name? --33451 15:14, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Lol! Certainly not. Wunderkind means "child prodigy" in German. Lupo 15:18, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Image Copyvio
I have removed the individual character images because they are likely violations of copyright. I regret this because they add a great deal to the article, but Watterson's work is pretty well protected so it's a tricky matter to find a fair use illustration for a Calvin and Hobbes article. These particular images were taken from the ucomics.com website though, and it's pretty clear that they are copyrighted. As nice as it is to have them, it's far better to respect Watterson's rights. Alanyst 15:44, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * For a more direct link of the original images, go to . - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 15:49, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)

Personal pronouns
Is it ok to have personal pronouns like 'we' in the article ? Jay 22:36, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Changed 'we' to 'the reader' throughout when not in quotes. Alanyst 01:35, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Is there a reason why it wouldn't be OK? I think it's fairly obvious in this context that the "we" really means "the audience" or "the reader".

You can always replace these kinds of statements like "We rarely see Calvin's mom gardening" with some passive voice equivalent like "Calvin's mom is rarely seen gardening." However, all that does is imply the "we" -- it's still there, it's just unstated. Calvin's mom is rarely seen gardening by whom? It's just left out.

To use a contrasting example, say "Terrorism is a major problem we have". Here the "we" is clearly POV. The equivalent without the "we" is "Terrorism is a major problem", which is equally POV, because the POV'd "we" is implied but still present -- terrorism is a major problem for whom?

In our case, the "we" implies "the reader" or "the audience" or "the perceiver" and that's POV that's simply unavoidable. You couldn't write an article about any particular object without the POV of someone able to perceive it. You also couldn't say "Calvin's mom likes gardening" because we can't perceive that, we can only report on observables of her behavior. So, you're stuck with the "we" problem, it's just a matter of whether you want to leave it implied or not.

But I don't know, is there a policy on this somewhere?

--Taak 02:18, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Social commentary
I think a lot can still be said about Watterson's social commentary in Calvin and Hobbes. But, I think it would make the article too long. What does everyone think about creating an article just on this subject? I'd welcome volunteers to give it a first cut, as I'm short on time to devote to it right now. Alanyst 01:39, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The "recurring themes" section right now is really "recurring plot themes". We could also have something like "general themes" such as friendship, growing up, mischief, imagination, etc. --Taak 01:45, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I suppose we could, but I'm concerned that the article could get waaay too long if we started covering the various themes that C&H dealt with over ten years. This is why I'm leaning towards a separate article. Alanyst 01:53, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Just start writing in the main article and if it gets too big we'll break it up. Better than having a plethora of stubs leading from the page.--[[User:Bendzh|Bendž

 * Ť ]] 22:31, Jul 8, 2004 (UTC)

Removal of Trivia stub section
I removed the Trivia section because it was very stub-like. It read:

==Trivia== Calvin, Hobbes, and his parents appeared in a Superman comic book in the 1990s.

If anyone can add more information about this bit of trivia (which issue? why did they appear?  who was the artist?  did Watterson approve of it?), it should go back in. As it stands now, though, it's too brief to stand alone as a section.

The section could also go back in if more trivia items were added. I'm not sure it would really add to the article, though. I'd much rather see some discussion on social and political themes Watterson touches upon in the strip. I'm thinking of adding some material on that topic myself... when I get some more free time. Alanyst 20:32, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Relocated images
I have relocated the images to various locations in the article where they seemed to be appropriate: the book cover shown has some connection with the article text, whether it's a direct mention of the book or just some similarity between the action on the cover and the description in the text. When I got to the end I had omitted only two books (The Days are Just Packed and There's Treasure Everywhere), so I stuck them in just for completeness. If anyone feels that the images overwhelm the article or are too confusing in the order presented, you're welcome to try different arrangements. I was mostly responding to the suggestions on the featured article page; many people seemed to feel that having the images crammed down at the bottom of the article didn't work very well. If my work is no improvement, though, go right ahead and fix it. Alanyst 06:34, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I thought the idea was to have the book covers close to the listing of the individual books? Mortene 08:38, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * How does actually in the table look? — Matt 09:30, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I think that looks excellent, good job. Mortene 15:07, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Article should be broken up
This article is too long and should now be broken up into pieces, or at least, some of the longer sections should be set apart as separate articles. It's simply too long and too much to wade through. Revolver 10:33, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * No. Please do not break up the article, except maybe moving the section "Calvin and Hobbes books", together with "Around the world" onto a separate page (but not on two separate pages!). While it is true that the article has some length and requires more than a 20-second attention span, I do not think anything is to be gained by scattering this article and placing its bits and pieces onto different pages here and there. Lupo 11:23, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Hold your horses. I didn't do anything. My judgment that the article should be broken up isn't based on people having short attention spans. It's based partly on the fact that it becomes very difficult to find anything. It's also based partly on the fact that some of the subsections go into more detail than necessary for the main article. The main article on CH does not have to have involved descriptions of a dozen minor characters. It's not that I don't enjoy this section -- it's just on another level. Certainly, descriptions of major characters should stay, but a link to descriptions of minor characters would unclutter things. This happens a lot in lengthy subsections -- the main subsection eventually gets moved and replaced by a significant but scaled-back subsection in the main article. We should be reading this article from the potential POV of someone who knows little of comic strips and nothing of CH. These people will want the main points to take away about the strip. In general, descriptions of 25 characters (or however many) is not what they're looking for. Revolver 22:33, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * We should be reading this article from the potential POV of someone who knows little of comic strips and nothing of CH.

 * Why? (Updated to add: ) What I mean is, should this POV take precedence?--Taak 02:43, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Sorry, it's not so much a POV, really. It's more just asking "what information are we trying to get across?", the article (like most articles that don't involve technical or specialised terms or knowledge) can't assume the reader knows anything about the subject already. It's just getting a handle on what the scope and depth of this particular article should be, it's not really a "POV" issue at all. BTW, the article (when I checked last) was 40K, which is well over the "recommended maximum" of 32K, so this is not just my opinion, it's a semiformal policy. Revolver 07:08, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Probably the resistance to breaking up the article would come because a lot of people have worked hard to make this a featured article. And since this is a featured article already it means a lot of people have reviewed and okayed it to be featured on the Main page. I don't know however if there is a maximum page size limit for an article to be featured. There should be one. Jay 13:07, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Simply being a featured article is a poor justification to offer. I still think the characters and recurring themes sections are the ones that push it over, esp. the recurring themes could easily be an article on its own. The recurring themes themselves could be mentioned with a link. Same for discussion of all characters. But, whatever. Obviously, I'm in the minority. (??) Revolver 00:42, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I get the feeling that people feel I'm advocating censorship or something. It's just organisation; I'm not saying any content has to be reduced or changed at all. It's just that 40K is easier to read from, learn from, and navigate, if it's arranged in articles of 25K, 10K, and 5K, instead of one long 40K article. That's all. Revolver 00:46, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Grammar
If we use the word "is", we can at least make it unambiguous. When you write, "CH is a comic strip written by BW", the grammar of this sentence seems to imply that BW is currently writing the comic strip NOW. At the very least, most people will interpret it this way. This is why I added "which was" which makes it clear. I suppose the choice of tense maybe reflects whether the creation is a "discrete" or "continuous" (real-time) event -- i.e. most "discrete" art, (books, movies, paintings, etc.) use the present tense because it's clear once they're done, they're done. But "continuous" art (comic strips, television shows, magazines, etc.) which by nature is made over a period of time, usually use the past tense, in order (I assume) so that people don't mistakenly assume it's still going on (if it's not). Substitute any other kind of thing for "CH" and "BW" and see how the sentence reads -- it's almost impossible (without knowing the subject matter) not to interpret it in the present tense. Maybe someone from the grammar police who knows more than me on this can offer something. Revolver 23:02, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * And I like it much better the way you put it now. Nice job.  Alanyst 03:01, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Calvin and Hobbes
(Uncontested -- Jul 5)

Self-nomination, though the best work is done by others. Images are of book covers so they fall under fair use. Alanyst 06:11, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Pretty good article, but something needs to be done with the organization of the cover images. Everyking 06:24, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I think I managed to do something nicer with them; it's actually really cool to have all of them in the article. (Nominator/uploader should tag them with fair use and rationale though) [[User:Sverdrup|❝Sverdrup❞ ]] 15:43, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Oppose, for several reasons. Image overkill. Possibly too short, if you take out the images. Thirdly, if it stopped being syndicated in 1995, why? Ambivalenthysteria 06:27, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Good points. I'll try to add some more background on the strip's history, Watterson's issues with syndication, etc.  I have concerns about copyvio for some of the images added recently, so unless we can get those resolved I might have to withdraw the nomination.  Alanyst 23:39, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I have resolved the copyvio concerns and the article is longer with more information on syndication. Ambivalenthysteria, can you revisit your objection to see if it still holds?  Thanks. Alanyst 02:22, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * It's looking much better. It's a much more interesting read now. I've changed my vote, but still two small suggestions. Firstly, the "Needed to have complete collection" header overlaps with the picture column in my browser (Firefox), and it looks icky. Secondly, how about spreading the images throughout the article, rather than having them in a heap at the bottom? Anyway, these are just small gripes, and I'm supporting this nomination now. Ambivalenthysteria 15:43, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * All intro, no article. There's several paragraphs of text and a pile of images and lists. Where's the article? - David Gerard 13:52, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * In all fairness, there's not terribly much that can be said about the topic, so I think that's a bit harsh. Still, it's not quite up to feature standard. Ambivalenthysteria 13:54, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Surely there is. A vastly popular cartoon strip that ran for many years? I want to read the article I'd like to see ;-) - David Gerard 14:01, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * It could do with a bit more analysis as to whether Hobbes is real. ISTR he was sometimes seen doing stuff that Calvin couldn't possibly have witnessed. Morwen - Talk 14:43, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I've reorganised things, which I think helps a lot, but I I didn't add much contetn. Morwen - Talk 20:50, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * David Gerard, do you see any improvement in the content now? I've added quite a bit more on the background of the strip.  Is this the article you'd like to see?  Alanyst 08:40, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I do think it is. Thank you :-) - David Gerard 00:26, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Oppose. While I think that this article has grown considerably, I have copyright concerns about all of the new images.  I don't think that fair use can just be thrown around to justify use of any images, particularly considering that Bill Watterson has been very diligent in prosecuting copyright violations of Calvin's image in the past. If the images' copyright status are cleared up or if alternate images can be found I will change to support. - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 15:07, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * "Any" images is a bit strong; after all, the book covers certainly seem to fall under fair use. I have removed the individual character images because I think they were indeed copyright violations.  As of right now, I believe the article is in compliance.  Alanyst 15:56, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I misspoke, I just meant any of the new images. I'm changing to a support, but I wouldn't mind some more content.  C&H was kick-ass.  - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 21:14, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Neutral for now. Oppose, a number of subsections are short and list-like. -Sean Curtin 21:53, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Could you be a bit more specific: which subsections? how should they be improved? Just because they're short and list-like doesn't necessarily mean they're bad; a list of concisely written items can often be much more readable than lengthy prose.  I'm not sure your objection is actionable at this point; please enlighten me.  Alanyst 02:20, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * The lists of characters are recurring themes really don't need to be sections - microsections like that for Coach Lockjaw ("Runs the school baseball team. Rarely seen.") don't need to be flagged up from the table of contents. Rearranging some of the subsections like that of the "Calvin's Alter-Egos" section would help in that regard. Also, the history and style sections would make the article flow better if they were moved to the beginning. -Sean Curtin 17:49, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I've combined the less frequently seen supporting characters under one section per your suggestion, and it does seem better. I've also re-ordered the sections to put history and style at the front of the article.  I think it makes the continuity better.  Any more objections? Alanyst 19:48, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * The use of "we" should probably instead say "the reader" or something similar. -Sean Curtin 01:10, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Done. Alanyst 01:26, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Suppose. With all the work that's been done since this was nominated, it deserves featured status. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 23:41, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, it can still be unworthy of featured status no matter how much work has been done, but I appreciate the sentiment. Am I to understand that you meant to say "support" rather than "suppose," or were you being purposely ambivalent? :-) Alanyst 02:20, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Support after the recent changes. Anarion 08:40, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Strongly object - TOC is overwhelming (even at 1600 x 800 I couldn't see see the body until I replaced some heads with ; ), lead section is way too short for an article this size (3 good sized paras needed), and the article triggers a page size warning (but that is probably OK due to the size of the books table). Many of the sections are also stubs - there is little reason to give each paragraph a title (the result is rather inflexible and jarring). Instead I suggest combining many of the stub sections into larger sections (of say several paragraphs). The ==Recurring themes== section needs this badly. --mav 07:26, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I fixed the Recurring Themes section so the sub-heads are definition-style. The TOC is much more manageable at this point.  I also added to the intro section.  I will work on the more stub-like sections to address that objection. Alanyst 00:07, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Better - enough for my mild support. --mav 02:03, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Object (easily resolved though) - In the opening paragraph, Intellectual and witty, the strip changed the way Americans viewed comic strips is not backed up by anything in the prose. How did it change the way Americans viewed comic strips? It sounds ethnocentric, too - did it not change the way anyone else in the world viewed comic strips? Is the fact that it was (sometimes) intellectual and (often) witty a first in American comic strips? (I'm sure Garry Trudeau and Berke Breathed would have something to say about that). Delete the whole phrase, IMHO. Mention the wit and cleverness some other way. -- mjb 07:44, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I've removed it for now. It didn't really add much.  Will look for an attributable quote to describe it.  I suppose what we want is comic book artists saying it had an influence on their work.    Morwen - Talk 17:17, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Looks good to me. -- mjb 08:58, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. A fine article about a superb comic strip. I still miss 'em. Denni ☯ 22:15, 2004 Jul 11 (UTC)
 * Object; 1) agree with User:Maveric149 that the lead section is too short. 2) However, I think most of the "stub sections" are probably OK, because they're in a "definition" style, but that "Style and influences" and "Trivia" are too short to warrant an entire section to themselves. 3) I think we have too many images; the "Calvin and Hobbes books" section suffers for it, and they don't really add anything that just one or two images wouldn't convey. 4) In the "Calvin and Hobbes books" table, the month dates are red links; are we linking to the right place for these? — — Matt 17:45, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I have addressed (1); I'll work on the others in the next few hours. Alanyst 00:07, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's a great lead. — Matt 00:13, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * The others, (2) thru (4), are now addressed. Better?  Alanyst 08:05, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks; I've squeezed the images back into the "Calvin and Hobbes books" table more neatly than before, undoing your "spreading out" work from before — I hope you agree that it's an improvement.

Assessment comment
Substituted at 20:17, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Calvin and Hobbes/Archive 1


text:
Soyuz TM-20

Soyuz TM-20 was the twentieth expedition to the Russian Space Station Mir. It launched Russian cosmonauts Aleksandr Viktorenko, Yelena Kondakova, and German cosmonaut Ulf Merbold.

Mission highlights
The flight carried 10 kg of equipment for use by Merbold in ESA's month-long Euromir 94 experiment program. During automatic approach to Mir's front port, the spacecraft yawed unexpectedly. Viktorenko completed a manual docking without additional incident.

title: Soyuz TM-20


text:
Talk:Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria

I've
I've been diagnosed with PNH but I think that many of my symptoms point to a G6PD deficiency.

 * Well, your haematologist should surely be able to disentangle your haemolysis. Flow cytometry results? JFW | T@lk  14:39, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Eculizumab
- eculizumab works. Worth putting this in? JFW | T@lk  14:39, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Work
I'll be expanding this article with the consensus statement in Blood 1 Dec 2005. JFW | T@lk  21:45, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Acclaim
Excellent article, and is easy to read...great for a second year medical student.

 * I hope it is understandable also to those without a medical background. Feel free to show it to your tutors & encourage them to improve it. It's a wiki! JFW | T@lk  22:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Chromosome 12 mutations underlying clonality
It has been unclear why PNH is a clonal bone marrow disorder. gives data from 2 PNH patients with chromosome 12 abnormalities leading to ectopic expression of HMGA2 in bone marrow. I don't think we should cite this until the findings have been replicated in larger cohorts of PNH patients. JFW | T@lk  05:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Lethal
An anonymous editor insists that PNH is life-threatening. I disagree. Parker et al state clearly that there are subclinical variants of PNH, and obviously these are not life-threatening at all. I have asked to justify further changes of this kind. JFW | T@lk  22:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

 * The trolling is getting tiresome. JFW | T@lk  22:37, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Update
lists a host of symptoms I don't normally associate with PNH. Hoping to get the fulltext to update this article. JFW | T@lk  21:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

give classic case scenario for medical students
even if it often doesn't present with classical symptoms you should still give the classic presentation to help with medical students on exams, some are too lazy to go and research it on their own and need such help.

 * The classic presentation is mentioned. JFW | T@lk  12:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Clonality
The following reference was listed to support some of the pathophysiology data:

However, it actually addresses the more unusual point that many healthy people have small PNH clones but that they have polyclonal PIGA mutations as opposed to "real" PNH patients, whose PIGA mutations are monoclonal. We need to reconsider the relevance of this study before reinserting it into the article. JFW | T@lk  12:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Some sources
Argh, I need to give a case presentation on this subject on Friday! Some sources I've found are the following; we could use them to expand the article.
 * Narrative review Ann Intern Med http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/148/8/587
 * From the same author: http://asheducationbook.hematologylibrary.org/cgi/content/full/2006/1/24
 * Blinded RCT of eculizumab (NEJM)
 * Thrombosis risk is also reduced in Soliris http://bloodjournal.hematologylibrary.org/cgi/content/full/110/12/4123
 * Recent developments: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2141.2007.06554.x

Wonder how this will go. JFW | T@lk  07:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

 * http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=27qcOn07USkC - entire book on PGI & PNH. ISBN 0127729402. JFW |  T@lk  15:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Removed
Animal studies suggest that infusing membrane-targeted CD59 might restore protection against complement-mediated lysis, and is being developed further for use in patients.

 * Animal studies. Yah. JFW | T@lk  16:50, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Eculizumab again
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2141.2008.07183.x - anaemia and fatigue improve beyond improvement in transfusion requirements. JFW | T@lk  22:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

 * "new drug class" article in Lancet about eculizumab. JFW | T@lk  19:48, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * just a note re the cost of this drug, which is produced by one company only. A recent CBC new item mentioned that the drug costs perhaps $70 per vial to produce; each vial costs $6,700 in Canada (I assume $Cdn). The company separately negotiates price with each country, with Canada having to pay the highest amount. Given that the drug's development was based on publicly funded research in public universities and hospitals, there's a serious question as to the ethics of the company's exorbitant price structure.184.145.22.3 (talk) 17:18, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Canada has a specific cost max formula. So that would be unusual that it is the most here. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 21:24, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

nocturnal?
Just curious why "nocturnal" is part of the disease name. The article doesn't seem to mention any reason why. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.130.191.235 (talk) 22:29, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I've added some details. --Arcadian (talk) 01:47, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

''The "nocturnal" refers to the tendency of the intravascular hemolysis to occur at night. It has been suggested that this may be because the condition is exacerbated by acidosis, and during sleep the blood becomes more acidic, which in turn is caused by the mild hypoxia of sleep. Another theory is that the hemolysis does not increase at night, but that the urine produced after sleep is more concentrated, which makes the blood more apparent. ''

This is all very nice but the sources are hardly WP:MEDRS and I have therefore moved this here until we find a better source for it. JFW | T@lk  23:49, 7 March 2010 (UTC) I would actually support the inclusion of this text as it is offering two quite possible theories as to why the nocturnal feature of the haemoglobinurea is noted. I was actually thought this in college and i believe it was in either Immunology by Janis Kuby or Immunobiology by Abbas and Litmann. Also decreased breathing rate of sleep or rest will invariably result in pH lowering of the blood, this is fairly basic physiology and should need no citation, the more concentrated urine due to lack of fluid intake during sleep is also fairly self evident Jimmy joe joeseph (talk) 15:33, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Mesenteric Ischemia?
Seems like occlusion of the Inferior Mesenteric Vein should cause Ischemic Colitis, not Mesenteric Ischemia, right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.205.173 (talk) 19:38, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

inherited disorder?
the article describes when an aquired gene mutatition occurs to for the specific enzyme involved that when absent removes whatever protection the red cells with lineage from that stem cell have against the complement system. what i would be intrested to know is why this condition occurs at all when a typical adult has around 1000 pleuripotential stem cells 999 of which could be unaffected and producing normal red cells, is this particular gene/locus more vunerable than others in normal stem cells that it affects a significant number of them, or does anyone know of reasearch questioning whether there could be a genetic suseptability to this mutation. or could the pathogenisis be explained more clearly to explain how this mutation is typicaly aquired by a significant number of stem cells.

or is there a growth advantage or resistance to apoptosis to thee abnormal causitive stem cell 87.198.229.90 (talk) 18:14, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

ok ive sort of answered my own question here, according to Dunn et al. in 1999 "the basis of this relation is unknown". Ann Intern Med September 21, 1999 131:401-408 im assuming it is still unknown now 87.198.229.90 (talk) 18:44, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

 * It is still unknown how GPI mutations are acquired in those with conditions such as aplastic anaemia, where resistance to complement-mediated destruction is obviously a survival advantage. It is not known to exist as an inherited condition, although of course inherited GPI mutations will lead to a very similar phenotype. Perhaps it's lethal if present during embryogenesis. JFW | T@lk  07:53, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Most recent hypothesis that I have seen (reviewed nicely by Parker in Curr Opin Hematol, 2012) use the incredibly high co-incidence of aplastic anemia with PNH to explain that most PNH is probably the result of mutated heme-stem cells gaining a competitive advantage in the setting of immune-mediated aplastic anemia. In other words, a significant proportion of PNH pts probably have underlying aplastic anemia, with "breakthough" mutant-PIGA stem cells providing a resistant and imperfect source of hematopoiesis. I will have to read a bit more before adding about this to the article. Dr G (talk) 04:54, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Thrombosis
Review in JTH about thrombosis in PNH: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2011.04562.x JFW | T@lk  07:54, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

 * And Blood 10.1182/blood-2012-09-31138. You'd think PNH is common. JFW |  T@lk  18:55, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Strange edits
An anonymous editor has been alluding to the possibility that PNH may be inherited rather than acquired, as well as mentioning prolonged survival (30 years). Neither of these facts are sourceable to Parker, and no attempt has been made to provide an alternative source. I have left a message on the IP's talk page, seeing that it appears fixed. JFW | T@lk  18:18, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

RA101495
I'm not sure if there's a convention regarding how far a drug needs to be in clinical trials for it to be mentioned here, but it's probably worth mentioning that RA101495 recently passed Phase 2 and is a subcutaneous treatment that worked for patients with an inadequate response to eculizumab. It got >95% C5 inhibition at only 0.3 mg/kg. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180212005448/en/Ra-Pharmaceuticals-Announces-Completion-Dosing-Phase-2 129.10.29.29 (talk) 02:22, 20 March 2018 (UTC)


text:
Friedrich Heer

Friedrich Heer (10 April 1916 – 18 September 1983) was an Austrian historian born in Vienna.

Early life
Heer received a PhD at the University of Vienna in 1938. Even as a student, he came into conflict with pan-German historians as a staunch opponent of National Socialism.

He was arrested for the first time on 11 March 1938 by the Austrian Nazis. He founded a small Catholic resistance group and sought to amalgamate into one organised band the Christians, communists and trade unionists against the Nazis. As a soldier, he later came into contact with the resistance group "Soldatenrat".

Career
From 1946 to 1961, he was the editor of the weekly magazine Die Furche [The Furrow], and in 1961, he was appointed chief literacy to the Vienna Burgtheater. He taught at the University of Vienna. Most of his books have been translated into several languages. He contributed The Medieval World: 1100-1350 (pub. 1962) to the Weidenfeld and Nicolson History of Civilisation series.

Later life
In 1967, he became the first winner of the Martin Buber-Franz Rosenzweig Medal, awarded by a group of forty-four German societies for Christian and Jewish understanding, for his achievement with God's First Love.

He died in Vienna.

Decorations and awards

 * 1949: City of Vienna Prize for Humanities
 * 1968: Award of the German Coordinating Council of Societies for Christian-Jewish Cooperation first ever "Buber Rosenzweig Medal" (with the Protestant theologian Friedrich-Wilhelm Marquardt) (Presentation: March 17, 1968)
 * 1972: Grand Austrian State Prize (Presentation: 21 December 1972)
 * 1976: Medal of the capital Vienna in gold for important journalistic and academic achievements (council decision of 21 May 1976)
 * 1977: Austrian Cross of Honour for Science and Art, 1st class (awarded May 4, 1977)
 * 1981: Donauland Nonfiction Book Award

Publications

 * 1947: Die Stunde des Christen
 * 1949: Gespräch der Feinde
 * 1949: Aufgang Europas (2 Bände)
 * 1950: Der achte Tag (Roman, erschienen unter dem Pseudonym „Hermann Gohde“)
 * 1952: Die Tragödie des Heiligen Reiches
 * 1953: Europäische Geistesgeschichte
 * 1953: Grundlagen der europäischen Demokratie der Neuzeit
 * 1960: Die dritte Kraft
 * 1961: Mittelalter – von 1100 bis 1350 (The Medieval World: 1100-1350, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1962)
 * 1964: Europa – Mutter der Revolutionen (The Intellectual History of Europe, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1966)
 * 1967: Das Heilige Römische Reich (The Holy Roman Empire, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1968). Abridged translation reprinted by Phoenix Press, 1995
 * 1967: Gottes erste Liebe. Die Juden im Spannungsfeld der Geschichte. ISBN 3-548-34329-5 (God's First Love: Christians and Jews Over Two Thousand Years, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1967). Reprinted by Phoenix Press, 1999
 * 1968: Der Glaube des Adolf Hitler. Anatomie einer politischen Religiosität. ISBN 3-548-34598-0
 * 1974-75: Kindlers Kulturgeschichte des Abendlandes
 * 1975: Charlemagne and his World (Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1975)
 * 1978: Warum gibt es kein Geistesleben in Deutschland?
 * 1981: Der König und die Kaiserin (Gegenüberstellung Friedrich II. und Maria Theresia)
 * 1981: Der Kampf um die österreichische Identität

title: Friedrich Heer


text:
Andrew Loomis

William Andrew Loomis (June 15, 1892 – May 25, 1959) was an American illustrator, writer, and art instructor. His commercial work was featured prominently in advertising and magazines. However, Loomis is best known as the writer of a series of instructional art books printed throughout the 20th century, and also as the inventor of the "Loomis method". Long after his death, Loomis's realistic style has continued to influence popular artists.

Early life
Loomis was born on June 15, 1892, in Syracuse, New York. Loomis grew up in Zanesville, Ohio, and spent much of his working life in Chicago, Illinois. He studied at the Art Students League of New York under George Bridgman and Frank DuMond when he was 19. Loomis then went back to Chicago to work at an art studio and study at the Art Institute of Chicago.

Career
After military service in World War I, Loomis worked for a couple of advertising agencies before opening his own studio in downtown Chicago in 1922. From that time until the late 1930s Loomis produced advertising paintings for many large companies such as Coca-Cola, Studebaker, Palmolive, Quaker Oats, Munsingwear, and Kellogg's. He was the official portrait painter of the Dionne quintuplets, and he created Jack and Bingo for the cover of the Cracker Jack box. In 1932, Loomis created paintings for the advertisements that would introduce 3 Musketeers. One of those paintings was a portrait of a Mars chemist, Frances Herdlinger. Herdlinger was one of three women chemists working regularly with Forrest Mars Sr. on the development of the new candy bar.

In the 1930s, he taught at the American Academy of Art. It was during this time that his teaching techniques were compiled for his first book, Fun With a Pencil (1939).

Loomis would go on to release several more books in the coming decades, including one of his most popular, Figure Drawing for All It's Worth (1943). Many of the books exhibit his own personally crafted techniques – such as the "ball and plane" method of head drawing – guided by Loomis's humorous dialogue. Many of the titles gained strong appeal for their academic value and went through several printings during the 20th century. Loomis died in 1959, but his final book, The Eye of the Painter and the Elements of Beauty (1961), was printed posthumously.

The Loomis method
The Loomis Method is a drawing technique that uses grids to represent the human head from various angles accurately. This technique was developed by Loomis in the 1940s, and was first described in his book Drawing the Head and Hands. The Loomis method for the construction of the head is very popular because it is easy to learn and remember and can be applied to any drawing of the head.

Influence and legacy
Titan Books reissued the Andrew Loomis titles in facsimile editions between 2011 and 2013. Prior to that, the books had been out of print for decades, available only as excerpts by Walter Foster Publishing. Some of Loomis's books are currently being published in Japanese via Maar Sha Co., Ltd. Early prints have become highly collectible, sought by art enthusiasts and practitioners.

title: Andrew Loomis


text:
Noah (gaur)

Noah was the name of the first cloned gaur. He was cloned and gestated in the womb of a cow named Bessie. Gaurs are listed as a vulnerable species on the IUCN Red List. Noah was delivered on January 8, 2001, but he died within just 48 hours of dysentery on January 10, 2001. Noah's condition was monitored by Dr. Jonathan Hill and his teammates in Iowa. The process used to clone Noah was nuclear transfer.

title: Noah (gaur)


text:
Talk:Pedophile movement/Archive 2

[N.B. -- The history of this page is truncated. If anyone knows how that could happen or if it can be restored, I would appreciate a message.] Herostratus 13:10, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Unnamed section
The point of view outlined in this (very good!) article is seriously missing in paedophilia. Someone should expand that article to include at least a mention of this.
 * The article was moved from boylover, deleting that articles history and talk page. User: Zanthalon repeatedly deleted without explanation links to organizations that help "child lovers" and children who were "loved" alike. Get-back-world-respect 22:15, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * The changes to the external links that you have made were not supported by other people who have been involved in editing the page. Your troll-like vandalism is not appreciated. The links you are adding are already on the child sexual abuse page where they belong. Pedophilia and child sexual abuse are not the same thing. Please desist from trying to blur the distinction. --Zanthalon 22:18, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Right, not every "childlover" becomes a child abuser. Some can be helped, e.g. by Stop it now A campaign to prevent Child Sexual Abuse by calling on potential abusers to seek help.
 * Some children that were "loved" can find help as well: Male Survivor - Overcoming sexual victimization of boys and men.
 * Please do not restrict links from here to pages where theses aspects are neglected. Get-back-world-respect 23:10, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Incidentally, the discussion of the boylover is still there. Talk:Boylover --Zanthalon 22:20, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * You should have move talk and history with the rest of the page. Get-back-world-respect 23:10, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The Difference Between Pedophilia and Child Sexual Abuse
Links that relate to abuse recovery and the sexual victimisation of children do not belong on this page. Pedophilia by itself does not imply any action on the sexual attraction at all. Whether it is a paraphilia or not, pedophilia is not an action in and of itself; therefore it does not have any victims. I am removing once again the links that are already appropriately placed on the child sexual abuse page. Zanthalon 23:33, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * The links do not only relate to abuse recovery and sexual victimisation of children. Just read. One focusses on helping pedophiles to deal with their paraphilia, so this is exactly the right article to have it. Also note that many who were once "loved" by a "childlover" have severe problems with that experience later, so the other link is equally appropriate. Get-back-world-respect 23:41, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Pedophilia and Talk:Child_sexual_abuse for more discussion on this same topic.

Requests for Comment
Both the links in question and the behaviour of Get-back-world-respect have been submitted to Requests_for_comment. If you wish to comment on this issue, please do so here: Requests_for_comment/Get-back-world-respect. --Zanthalon 14:44, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Boylover
The term boylover was not invented by pedophiles, but probably comes from pederast and is a neutral term.Wildt 01:19, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * While I understand that this maye be intended as a neutral term as used by some as such, it doesn't sound that neutral to me. In fact, the entire article seems like a page promoting "childlovers" rather than an NPOV article on a subject. Just my $0.02. BCorr | Брайен 20:03, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I can understand how this might seem to be a page promoting a particular point of view. The goal, however, is to present the issue objectively. I believe that this page has evolved out of a need to address the social movement of minor-attracted adults who seek societal and legal acceptance for their sexual attraction. This is not properly addressed in Pedophilia which focuses more on the clinical definitions and history of pedophilia. --Zanthalon 21:58, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * If that's the goal, I'd suggest that the article should directly address the social movement, rather than the difference between the definition of pedophiles and that of childlovers. It should talk about 1) How there are generally defined, 2) how they define themselves, 3) What the goals and work of the movement are and 4) How they are organized, what they have achieved to date. Thanks, BCorr | Брайен 22:02, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Presenting an issue objectively cannot mean taking the view of a partisan group, using their definitions and advertising their websites. Wildt, who used the term if not pedophiles? Usually foreign terms are used when talking about paraphilia, I do not believe that the league of the dyslexic fought for the new term. Zanthalon, paraphilias are not legally forbidden. Abusing children is forbidden. It can be prevented by proper treatment. Get-back-world-respect 23:50, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * In Danish there is Drenge-kærlighed (boylove) which is a translation of pederasty. I belive I have seen older British newspapers calling pedophiles childlovers. Vern Bullough mentions that pedophilia used to be called "knabenliebe". But I see now that the article doesn't say the term was invented by pedophiles.

 * BTW this article is 37KB long. Wildt 18:25, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't know if the moderators (or how are they called here?) look at the pages in question, but the last revisions (especially after the changes made by 'neutrality' and some others), seem to indicate a very biased view, which is currently 'anti'. While the feelings may be understandable, in all other issues that have a dichotomy in feelings and arguments, the wikipedia solves the matter by representing both views equally. Why isn't this done here? - mass

The Childlove Movement
I have recrafted this article, using BCorr's excellent suggestions as a basis for doing so. The article now focuses on the childlove movement and its history rather than on a semantic discussion of the terminology used.

While I understand the concerns of Get-back-world-respect regarding the issues of the prevention of child sexual abuse, treatment of offenders and recovery for victims, I still do not think that this article is the place to put links to the organizations he is supporting. Several leading pedophilia experts, including Dr. Fred Berlin of the National Institute for the Study, Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Trauma at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, and Dr. John Bradford, a psychiatrist specializing in pedophilia at the University of Ottawa have concluded that most exclusive type pedophiles, ie, those whose primary sexual attraction is to children do not abuse. Their data shows that the majority of sexual abuse is perpetrated by so-called situational offenders, people whose primary attraction is not to children, but who turn to children for sexual purposes due to adverse factors in their lives or an inability to attract sexual partners within their primary attraction group.

 * This article is interesting and probably useful in conveying attitudes among a segment of the population. However, it cannot possibly be viewed as NPOV when it uses terms like "consensual" to describe sexual relations with a minor, and especially a pre-pubescent minor. A relationship between an adult and a child is never an equal one and this article presents the issue only from the adult's point of view. Let us suppose that we use the term "childlover" only to describe non-violent pedophiles. Now suppose any of these children grows up with an altered view of relationships, perhaps has difficulty relating sexually and emotionally to peers, and perhaps most significantly feels, as an adult, that they were coerced, that they felt pressured and intimidated to engage in "consensual" acts, and that they were taken advantage of. But the adult member of that "relationship" thinks it was consensual. What recourse should that now-adult child have against his "lover."

 * Another flaw of the article is that, after acknowledging the descriptive difference between pedophiles and ephebophiles, it never again bothers with the distinction. A relationship between a non-peer and a teenager is at least biologically appropriate if of tainted equality, but a relationship with a prepubscent child is not even biologically appropiate. In this article, they are all "childlovers." If an objective of the movement is to change people's perception of pedophilia, I fail to see anything in this article which makes any move in that direction. -- Cecropia | Talk 03:46, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Interesting observations. I have made some additional edits to reflect these observations. In particular, I have mentioned that childlovers argue that children are capable of consent. I have also added a paragraph pointing out that ephebophiles have some different issues and that they argue that sexual maturity and adulthood begin with puberty.

 * I also point out that most childlovers claim not to advocate penetrative intercourse with pre-pubescent children.

 * You wrote: If an objective of the movement is to change people's perception of pedophilia, I fail to see anything in this article which makes any move in that direction. The object of the article is not to argue the case of childlovers but to provide information about what they believe and advocate. --Zanthalon 04:19, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I didn't say that was the object of the article but the article says it is an objective of the movement, and I didn't see anything in the descriptions of the movement in the article which would encourage empathy toward the movement or its members. Thanks for your response. -- Cecropia | Talk 04:25, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Logical questions raised by assertions
I appreciate your efforts to clarify the article, but the clarifications in themselves raise logical questions. I've interspersed some comments:

 * The primary misconceptions that childlovers usually seek to dispel are that they seek only a sexual relationship with the child and that they seek to engage in sexual activities that could be physically harmful to the child. They argue in the first case that the physical relationship is simply a manifestation of the emotional and spiritual love that exists between the participants, rather than being the raison d'etre of the relationship. Once again, the adult's (controlling individual's) POV. If anything this emphasizes the inequality of the relationship. In the second case, many childlovers wish to point out that they do not seek penetrative sexual relations with pre-pubescent children, but only to engage in what they would consider to be age-appropriate activities such as snuggling, kissing, fondling or oral sex. Fondling? 'Oral sex'? Age appropriate? Maybe for a 16 or 17 yo. Again no acknowledgment of the inherent difference between pre- and post-pubesence. And again, by specifying what the "childlover" does or doesn't seek, and what they consider age-appropriate emphasizes their sense of control and actual control of a "consensual" relationship.

 * Childlovers point out that there is ample scientific and medical evidence that shows quite clearly that children are sexual from a very early age. And that they wish to engage in sex with adults? I think you'd better give some citations other than advocacy websites. Therefore, they believe that there is no harm in a child engaging in sexual activities as long as there is informed consent. What makes consent with a child "informed"? "Let's take off our clothes? OK?" "Is it OK if I touch you there? Does that feel good? I won't hurt you. OK?" "This is our secret, right? Most childlovers do not support age of consent laws None at all? 12 years? 6 years? 6 months?, arguing that with proper sexual education who will be writing that curriculum?, children can be capable of consenting to intimate physical activities.

 * Ephebophiles are also largely opposed to consent legislation. They argue that in former times, puberty was considered to be the threshold of adulthood in many societies and that it is a natural indication that the body is sexually mature. They believe that ages of consent are legal definitions that are both arbitrary and discriminatory. So they are empowered substitute their own judgment? Why?

 * There are also a number of efforts underway to define the ethics of childlove and to create an ethical framework in which consensual adult-child relationships could take place. They had better address the legal issues in tandem, unless we are creating an ethical basis of violating widely accepted law. Otherwise it can simply be viewed as the age-old efforts of criminals to justify criminality. Much of these efforts are based upon the works of Frans Gieles and Gerald Roelofs. The primary efforts have taken place under the auspices of IPCE, the Human Face of Pedophilia and CLogo.
 * -- Cecropia | Talk 04:50, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * This article urgently needs a section Criticism. Get-back-world-respect 07:05, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * An article about a controversial person or group should accurately describe their views, no matter how misguided or repugnant. It is not usually necessary to also describe opposing views. Retrieved from Guidelines for Controversial Articles --Zanthalon 18:43, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I would rather integrate this article into pedophilia. See my suggestion on Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Get-back-world-respect --Moonlight shadow 20:19, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * No article on Wikipedia is entitled to present debatable views without rebuttal. I think GBWR's proposal to have a Criticism section is generous. And that they "believe" that children can form their own relationships is arguable under at least three grounds: (1) that they objectively believe this rather use this as a rationale for their desires; (2) it is legally insupportable as parents have the right by law to determine the appropriateness of children's relationships--what standing has a pedophile to challenge this?; (3) a pedophile's belief about a child's maturity is a legal nullity. -- Cecropia | Talk 20:03, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I do not think that the form this article is currently taking makes it appropriate for inclusion in the pedophilia article. Of course, the whole issue is open for discussion, but I have moved this article in the direction of discussing the childlove movement per se, while leaving the pedophilia page to deal with the clinical and historical issues of pedophilia.

 * While I agree with Cecropia's assertion that childlovers do not have a legal basis as parents have a right to determine the appropriateness, I do not think that this is an issue for this page. This is a youth rights issue. The article already mentions that many childlovers are also supporters of youth rights.

 * The issue of a child's maturity is an issue for age of consent legislation, and this article already mentions that most childlovers have problems with current consent legislation.

 * Bearing that in mind, I am continuing to work to address the issues and concerns you brought up yesterday. But it is not likely to happen overnight; I do have a life outside the Internet to lead as well. :) --Zanthalon 20:59, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree that this should redirect to pedophilia where it could have its own paragraph. In my eyes the term "childlover" for pedophile is an offense to every mother and every father who loves his child while not being sexually attracted to it. And presenting the fight of paraphiles for the legality of sex with children as a youth rights issue would be called sick by an overwhelming majority of the population, even though not the majority of the users who find such an "encyclopedia article". Get-back-world-respect 21:45, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Get-back-world-respect shows bias and prejudice in the assertion that that the term "childlover" is offensive. Should you be editing this section when you can't leave your bias behind? Who says that your points of view are more valid than that of "child lovers?" Furthermore, nobody objects to the use of "survivor" for those who have been sexually abused. "Child lover" is a term that pedophiles apparently give themselves, like those who choose to call themselves "survivors."  Why is the chosen terminology of pedophiles offensive, but that of others not?  Whether or not you find the way they frame their objectives sick or not, it isn't your place to edit or censor.  If this is supposed to be balanced and objective, then both points of view must be presented. Madeline

 * The term "childlover" as used here is offensive as it implicates that only people who are sexually attracted to children really love them. The term "survivor" is only used in an external link, and many abused children commit suicide, so those who do not are indeed survivors, even if it would be as inappropriate to call them so in an encyclopedia article as it is unacceptable to call pedophiles "childlovers". Interesting to see that "Madeline"'s only contribution to wikipedia is in defense of pedophiles. Get-back-world-respect 03:35, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Pedophiles have never claimed that the term "child lover" applies only to them. They use it as a defense against the loaded term "pedophile" and it accurately reflects their true feelings and intentions.  You're wrong on that count; pedophiles certainly don't claim a monopoly on the ability to love children.  "Many abused children commit suicide?"  Perhaps about 0.01% of them?  Where are the figures, GBWR?  You might also be interested to know that many non-abused children also commit suicide.  You'd surely be interested to compare the rates of suicide to a control group.  If it is inappropriate to use the label "survivors" give themselves, only then it is inappropriate to use the label "child lovers" give themselves. Your remark about my only contribution to wikipedia is wrong, GBWR.  As it happens I've made dozens of contributions to other areas before I registered my username, so you might want to have a think about your pithy remarks before using them.

Offensive links
I do not think that wikipedia should link to grossly offensive pages, not even for reasons of "documenting". Links to communities of people who propagate sex with children or child pornography, which are both crimes in most countries, in my eyes fall under that category. At the article Anti-French sentiment in the United States a link "Fuckfrance.com" was added. Such a title is totally unacceptable for a website, and we should not advertise such things under any condition. What would you say if we listed crap like FuckUSA.org or FuckIsrael.com? At both George W. Bush and John Kerry even all "critical" links were deleted. I do not see why there should not be a limit of indecency for link lists of other controversial articles as well. What do others think? I ask the same question at Talk:anti-American sentiment, Talk:anti-Semitism and Talk:List of self-identified pederasts and pedophiles. Get-back-world-respect 22:08, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Zanthalon readded such links without explanation even within the article as if they were wiki-links. Check Wikipedia_talk:External_links, this clearly should not be done, amongst others for the obvious reason that it makes it difficult for the reader to distinguish between wikipedia links and external links. He also removed without justification a comment that the term "childlover" is seen as a euphemism. Get-back-world-respect 22:10, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * This was an oversight on my part. I noted your earlier comment to this effect, but copied in the new text to the wrong window, which edited the wrong version of the document. Thank you for pointing this out. I have now added the links in question to External Links. --Zanthalon 22:44, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Ok. Get-back-world-respect 22:52, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * The trouble with deleting links because we find them offensive is that offensive is subjective. What you may find offensive, others may not. I might not be as offended by a 'fuckusa.org' site as you might think, since I tend to have a somewhat anti-American point of view. There are a lot of links on Wikipedia that I find offensive, such as links to skinhead and neo-Nazi organizations. That being said, I fully support that they are there. Deleting them and pretending they are not there is not going to make them go away. I am not familiar with the debates in anti-American Sentiment or in anti-French Sentiment in the United States so I cannot comment at all on why these links were deleted.
 * There are laws that define a lot of what those groups propagate as crimes. That can objectively said, and I am not even sure if it is legal to willingly link to such sites. Get-back-world-respect 22:52, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * While what these groups advocate are considered illegal in many jurisdictions, talking about them is not. Smoking pot is illegal but telling people how to do it or grow marijuana is not illegal. Blowing up buildings with bombs is also illegal under most circumstances, but having a website telling people how to make bombs from household chemicals is not illegal. As far as I know, none of these groups are encouraging anybody to actually break the law. They are advocating changing the law and discussing ethics on the basis of a society where the laws were different than they currently are. If any of these groups were actively inciting people to break the law, you would have a very valid point in asking for them to be deleted. --Zanthalon
 * Child pornography is prohibited. Some of the groups you listed are known for spreading it. And I do not think you are as shameless as saying that these groups do not use to encourage pedophiles to practice their paraphilia. Which other reason would there be to delete links to organizations that help pedophiles? Get-back-world-respect 23:13, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Could you please point out to me which of these groups are known for spreading [child pornography]? Could you provide proof of this allegation? As far as I know, none of these groups are engaged in or facilitating any illegal activities at all. --Zanthalon 23:17, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * So you have never gotten copies of the magazines with nude children - all "over the age of consent"? Ask NAMBLA then. Get-back-world-respect 23:35, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I have never received any magazines of nude children at all. Furthermore, since I am not a member of NAMBLA, I am wholly unfamiliar with any printed products they may sell. But I take it you have received their literature? Then perhaps you are in a better position to tell us what was inside? --Zanthalon 23:50, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Do a google search and find out what people who still have contact to the real world found out about NAMBLA. Get-back-world-respect 00:59, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * The reason to delete the links would be that the sites are not helpful for the article reader and provide no valuable information. The fact that the organisations maintaining these sites might have also distributed child porn is irrelevant. They don't do it on these sites, so why should we care? Paranoid 05:39, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I think that the definition of childlover in the first two paragraphs is sufficiently detailed. I do not think that adding the word 'euphemism' adds to the definition at all. --Zanthalon 22:34, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * As you wrote that an article about a controversial group does not need to cover the view of the majority, it still does have to prominently point out the controversy. Get-back-world-respect 22:52, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I think that the controversy surrounding this page is sufficiently attested to in the notation at the top that the neutrality of the article is in dispute. --Zanthalon 23:53, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * No, neutrality tags are meant to be temporary while the content is worked out on the talk page. Then they get removed. Rmhermen 01:17, Jul 14, 2004 (UTC)

 * My point precisely. Some of us here are collaborating to make this article neutral, whilst others are resorting to being as obstructionist as possible. I believe that a consensus can be reached about this article in such a manner that the neutrality notice can be removed. --Zanthalon 01:24, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * If there is controversy, please at least point out an external source claiming that there is. Your assertion is not sufficient. Paranoid 05:39, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I want to include external links that show that there is a controversy, but a certain interest group is blocking it. Cecropia's comments show I am not alone with my view, and if you still have some contact to the real world you know that this article is extremely biased for those who call themselves "boylovers". By the way, a simple google search shows that "boylove" is the only term frequently used. Get-back-world-respect 00:59, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * If you want to include external links, then present them for discussion here. You have already included your external links on a number of other pages, and the page here links to those pages. So I do not see any further need to include them here. But if you really think so, then try to provide logical arguments rather than your own biased point of view.

 * Is this article biased in favour of boylovers? I was unaware of that. I for one am not a boylover at all. So I have no reason whatsoever to write an article biased in favour of boylovers. But if you really think so, present your arguments and we can discuss it further. --Zanthalon 01:16, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I insist that a page about people who are pedophiles but in no way harmful because non-violent and caring for consensus with children who are easily influenced by them needs external links to organizations that help pedophiles by offering them to help with psychological treatment. This article nearly completely disregards the common opinion that "childlover" is a euphemist term people use for decriminalizing the crime of child abuse. And if you are not a pedophile, why are pedophilia related topics the only ones that show up in your contribution list and why do you try to  edit all those article such that they shed a positive light on pedophiles? Get-back-world-respect 02:25, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Text moved from Talk:Boylove below
A little more to the article. And the two have been made into one.

I know that this has been discussed before. However I still vote for integration with the article on pedophilia. As with most terms there is no one and only definition of pedophilia. Just as heterosexuality and homosexuality it is not only about making love, but also falling in love. It depends on the individual pedophile, whether he considers sex important to him and morally acceptable. Defining girllovers and boylovers as "non-sadistic" is not very specific either. I believe that most situational offenders are not sadistic, even if the sex is not fully consensual. --Moon light shadow 09:30, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Pedophilia seems something apart from boylover / girllover. I think the reason this article is so small is that no one has taken the time to build it up because of the nature of the topic.

 * Anyone feeling adventerous and want to goto the Nambla website to research their arguements as to why man boy love should be accepted? :)--ShaunMacPherson 05:22, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * This discussion should go to child sexual abuse section "Motivation for outlawing sex with children", because not all offenders are pedophiles. What would you consider the difference between Pedophilia and girl/boy love? I think it is not acceptable to declare girl and boy lovers as good guys by definition. Most pedophiles actually love children and do not want to harm them and in many cases do not perform sexual acts with children at all. However just like with heterosexuality and homosexuality there are a few rapists and sadists, although most cases of child sexual abuse by force (and also overall) are committed by situational offenders, who consider children acceptable victims rather than prefering them. The problem is that all these acts are blamed to pedophilia in the public perception and consensual acts are considered impossible. -- Moon light shadow 09:34, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

--

''Some researchers have considered girllovers attracted to children not real pedophiles, because often they are not as fixated on their deviant sexuality as boylovers, and more often curable. Also boylovers more frequently relapse after treatment. Boylovers statistically prefer children a little older.''

I took this section out for discussion here. This is quite a claim, I'd want the names of the major proponents of these ideas, and the counter arguements (science is very rarely one sided) as to this claim that homosexual pedophilia is more 'deviant' then heterosexual pedophilia. As well this term of 'curable' is more then a little vague, and suggests bias since I'd surmise that boy and girl lovers do not think they are in need of curing. --ShaunMacPherson 05:22, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * "Also boylovers more frequently relapse after treatment." This is already said in more detail in Pedophilia. -- Moon light shadow 09:34, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * I cannot seem to find the relevant information in pedophilia indicating that homosexual pedophiles are any less reponsive to treatment than heterosexual pedophiles. Give me one more hint?

 * Sorry, I was not quite right. It actually does not give more details, when comparing girl lovers to boy lovers, but only says the same. At the beginning of section "Underage sex": "The probability is much higher for boylovers compared to girllovers." However it includes the percentage of delinquent pedophiles who relapse. --Moon light shadow 15:10, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

--

Page Name: I think that this page needs to be either re-named "Boylovers and Girllovers" or that we need to stop the Girllover redirect and put real content there. Alternatively, we could use the generic term "Childlovers" as the page title and redirect both the "Girllover" and "Boylover" pages to it.

--

This article has improved drastically since I commented on it last. Very good work to all involved! --ShaunMacPherson 14:58, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

boylover, pedophile, child molester
These two paragraphs are flawed. However I can not fix easily them.
 * The term boylover is taken as a contrast with the terms pedophile or child molester. Many boylovers consider pedophile to be the more general term; that is, all boylovers are pedophiles, but not all pedophiles are boylovers. This is because pedophile would also include girllovers and child molesters, whereas boylovers differentiate themselves from the former and distance themselves from the latter.

 * A boylover is not a child molester. To assume that all boylovers are child molesters is equally fallacious as to assume that all heterosexuals are rapists. The fact that one expresses a sexual preference does not mean that that person is willing to break the law or harm others merely to achieve sexual gratification. Boylovers condemn child molesters and rapists of children as vehemently as any other sector of the population.

They try to make two many distinctions at once (boylover <-> girllover, pedophiles and child abusers overlap). The term child molester is not used in the common way, but to refer only to those persons, who have sexual contacts to children in a way, that child lovers consider unacceptable. This should be made clear in the article. --Moon light shadow 19:30, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I have created a new page, Childlover that encompasses both boylovers and girllovers and redirected the boylover page to it. This is more accurate, rather than talking about girllove-specific issues on a boylove page. Zanthalon

title: Talk:Pedophile movement/Archive 2


text: Category:South African World War II divisions


text: Category:British World War II divisions

title: Category:British World War II divisions


text: Category:British armoured divisions

title: Category:British armoured divisions


text:
Forrestfield, Western Australia

Forrestfield is a suburb of the City of Kalamunda in Western Australia. It lies 15 kilometres to the south-east of Perth at the base of the Darling Scarp and the southern border of Perth Airport.

The suburb is split by Roe Highway into a southern residential area and a northern industrial area. The suburb is adjacent to Wattle Grove, Cloverdale and Kalamunda.

Rail
The industrial area contains a major rail hub. The 241 hectare Forrestfield Marshalling Yard was built adjacent to the Kwinana railway line opening in stages between 1968 and 1973 in conjunction with the nearby Kewdale Freight Terminal as a replacement for the Perth marshalling yard and two other inner Perth yards. Within the confines of the yard, separate depots were built for locomotive, carriage and wagon maintenance.

It was previously used by the Western Australian Government Railways, Westrail and Australian Railroad Group. As at January 2018, Aurizon, SCT Logistics and Watco Australia use the yard. Aurizon closed its terminal in late-2017 as part of the closure of its intermodal business. Gemco Rail also has a facility.

Bounded by Dundas Road to the east, the Tonkin Highway to the south and Perth Airport to the west, some of the land was no longer required for railway by in the late 1990s and rezoned for industrial use. A combined 102 hectares was sold to the CBH Group, LandCorp and Specialised Container Transport.

CBH Group's Metro Grains Centre was completed in 1998. In mid-2005 BlueScope constructed a large warehouse on former Westrail land. Kenworth DAF Trucks also relocated from Guildford to a new complex on Abernethy Road in 2005.

Infrastructure
On November 3, 2016, construction commenced on the Airport line, which opened on October 9, 2022. The line has three stations: Redcliffe, Airport Central, and High Wycombe.

The Western Australian Government has prompted the City of Kalamunda to investigate the possibility of business and infrastructure opportunities arising from the completion of the new link for Forrestfield and its surrounding areas. The completion of the Airport Link is expected to facilitate the continuing growth of Perth Airport as a nationally integral part of employment, commerce and international trade.

Forrestfield's northern and eastern outskirts are home to the majority of the areas industrial enterprise. The area is host to a wide range of commercial business-to-business industries. Some of the most notable occupants include Grace Removals, Improvid and the Super Retail Group.

History
Settlement of the area dates from the late 1800s. Population was minimal until the early 1900s, with growth during the interwar period. Significant development did not occur until the post-war years, with rapid growth from the 1950s into the 1970s. The population has been relatively stable since the early 1990s, a result of some new dwellings being added to the area, but a decline in the average number of persons living in each dwelling.

There is authority to suggest it is named after John Forrest, Western Australia's first Premier, or his brother Alexander. However, local folklore suggests that the name comes from Charles Hale, who settled in the area in 1902 and planted crops amongst the native forest bushland, hence Forrestfield. In 1921 a Forrestfield Progress Association was formed, and the name was shown on plans in 1944.

Shopping
Located on the corner of Hale Road and Strelitzia Avenue, the Forrestfield Forum and Marketplace comprises 52 shops including Coles and Woolworths supermarkets. It is owned by the Hawaiian Group.

Cumberland Road has a Foodworks supermarket, a newsagency, a hairdresser, some dining and fast-food venues. There are a range of other retail establishments scattered throughout Forrestfield, including taverns, liqueur shops, a nursery, and various delis.

Educational facilities
Forrestfield contains the following educational institutions:

 * Darling Range Sports College, formerly Forrestfield Senior High School
 * Dawson Park Primary
 * Forrestfield Primary
 * HillSide Christian College, formerly Forrestfield Christian School
 * Woodlupine Primary
 * Tabor College

Demographics
In the, Forrestfield recorded a population of 13,181 people: 50.0% male and 50.0% female. The median/average age of the Forrestfield population is 38 years.

Amenities
Hartfield Park Recreation Centre: This complex includes an indoor stadium as well as playing fields for cricket, rugby, Australian rules football, hockey, soccer (football), an 18-hole golf course, an equestrian centre plus support facilities for each. There is also a nature conservation park and a lake. Discovery Park - Perth Airport Caravan and Holiday Park on Hale Road just off of Tonkin Highway.

Bus

 * 270 High Wycombe Station to Elizabeth Quay Bus Station – serves Hawtin Road and Hale Road
 * 271 High Wycombe Station to Forrestfield – serves Berkshire Road, Bougainvillea Avenue, Dawson Avenue, Hicks Street, Cypress Road, Hale Road, Anderson Road, Lewis Road, Jubilee Road, Cumberland Road and Edinburgh Road
 * 280 High Wycombe Station to Westfield Carousel – serves Berkshire Road and Hale Road
 * 281 Darling Range Sports College to Lesmurdie Senior High School – serves Berkshire Road and Hale Road
 * 293 High Wycombe Station to Redcliffe Station – serves Abernethy Road

title: Forrestfield, Western Australia