text:
User talk:Mjk2357

Hurufism and Lettrism
Please see my comments on the Hurufi talk page and explain your deletions. Fanx

Deletion
I am a member of an organization (Cardinales) for which you've requested deletion. Let's discuss because none of the members are happy about your request. What qualifications do you have to make such a request? The members want to know.

 * While I'm sure that the Cardinales are a fine bunch of guys, that doesn't mean your organization belongs in an encyclopedia. An entry on Wikipedia should have some academic, historical or current events interest. So while Skull & Bones would qualify, unfortunately I don't believe that your group does. Maybe if you sign up a few Presidents as members...

 * Some tips: Sign your comments, and if you post something on a talk page, it should go at the bottom. Thanks!
 * Mjk2357 00:22, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Anti-intellectualism
Mjk2357: While your enthusiasm for improving the anti-intellectualism article is commendable, as an editor it is very difficult to follow your changes when you make so many edits to a single article. You may wish to consider copying the article into an outside editor and changing everything in one pass. Just a little piece of advice to save everyone a little strife. Cheers and welcome to Wikipedia! Semiconscious ·  talk  19:54, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I didn't think I was going to make so many edits, but every time I thought I was done I saw another 1,000-word rant or weird reference added by that anon guy... guess I should read through the whole article first! Mjk2357 05:40, 21 January 2006 (UTC) Mjk2357 15:28, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey man, no worries; I liked you edits a lot, so don't get the wrong idea. It was just hard to follow them all, you know? It's a tough article to work on really, because it is inherenytly POV in a sense. Your edits were very well done. Semiconscious  ·  talk  10:16, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks... I think the article needs to be divided up into subarticles... too lazy to do it right now though.

Image copyright problem with Image:Mixcoatl.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mixcoatl.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me or ask for help at Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. Thank you. -- Carnildo 10:46, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

No personal attacks
Please do not make any personal comments attacking other editors, such as by calling them "LaRouchoids" and "LaRouche troll". Sure, some editors make problem edits, but we should keep our focus on the behavior, not on the persons. Let's all stay friendly. Cheers, -Will Beback 09:48, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

The unknown masters
You royal bastard! That was supposed to be my article! I even had the extract from Morning of the Magicians copied into my userspace so I could use it as a source. Damn you! --maru (talk) contribs

 * Actually I didn't see your To Do list until after I'd created the article, so it's not really a poach! Anyway, there's still a lot of work to be done on it. Quite an interesting legend - I always thought it would make a good beach novel a la the "Da Vinci Code."
 * Mjk2357 06:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Doomsday

 * Please read "Doomsday" ISBN 1841932388 MapleTree 21:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:728x90B.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:728x90B.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 22:04, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't spam
Please don't spam Spam. I am advising you to no longer post any more messages to my user talk page, if you do I will report you to the admins. Thank you MapleTree 10:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I didn't post messages - I reverted to show a critical message that you had deleted, which you have now deceptively reproduced here to make it look like it was intended for me, not you. I'd report you except I know a bunch of users already have. Stop wasting people's time. Mjk2357 15:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Advameg
Thanks very much for the information about Advameg. It's interesting that the site may have a right-wing bias; I wouldn't have guessed that from the spam I removed. I haven't removed all their spam yet, and some of their links actually provide useful content (such as faqs.org). ―Wmahan. 14:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

 * An admin told me he wants to delete the Advameg page. He didn't really give a good argument as to why. If you could, please monitor the page and if it goes up for AfD vote for its inclusion. I'll help you get rid of their spam if I have the time. Thanks! Mjk2357 16:26, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Advameg
You deleted an article that is the subject of an ongoing AfD debate. This is a clear violation of policy. Please contribute to the AfD debate instead of deleting the article unilaterally. Mjk2357 03:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Actually, I deleted the page because it appears to have been created primarily to disparage its subject. Please read WP:CSD G10. Pages which meet Categories for Speedy Deletion do not warrant an AfD. Best, Firsfron of Ronchester  03:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Funny, milliseconds before you deleted it someone else said it should be deleted because it was advertizing for Advameg! Really it's sad that Wikipedia has gotten to the point where you're so scared of getting sued anything negative is getting deleted. By your logic I should go delete the Enron article too. Mjk2357 03:28, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The article begins with "Advameg is an Illinois- or possibly Indiana-based internet company and a known spammer of Wikipedia." If the opening sentence begins with an attack, there is no reason for it on Wikipedia, per WP:CSD G10. Happy editing! Firsfron of Ronchester  03:34, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually that was an old version I mistakenly restored after someone else had bypassed AfD and nuked the article. The original sentence was changed after complaints. Would you object to the article being restored with a different starting sentence and going through normal AfD? Considring other people have messaged me saying the article is too pro-Advameg (???) I think there's some debate here. Mjk2357 03:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I certainly don't object to recreating the article, as long as the elements which led to its demise are not included in the new article. We can include both positive or negative observations, provided they are sourced and presented with a WP:NPOV. If you're willing to work out the kinks, I will certainly restore. Best, Firsfron of Ronchester  03:42, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I will restore with the changed first sentence. Personally I think every company that holds a top-5000 Alexa domain should have at least a stubby article. There are a ton of city-data.com links on Wikipedia - there's debate as to whether or not they are legit or spam. Users should know about the company behind them to make their own decicions. Mjk2357 03:46, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Good luck on the re-write. :) Firsfron of Ronchester  03:50, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Sigh... endless Advameg debate
By creating the Advameg attack article (currently deleted) this user has violated all three main Wikipedia principles: Neutral point of view, Verifiability, and No original research. Afterwards, this user has violated the Wikipedia rule of not-recreating articles deleted by admins three separate times: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=Advameg. This user has been banned from the city-data.com's forums (city-data.com/forum/), where he used the username mjk1093, for multiple rules violations (IPs have been provided to the Wikipedia administrators to verify that this is the same person) and decided to use Wikipedia to get his revenge on the company that owned the site. The company he attacked is the first ever officialy recorded benefactor of the Wikimedia Foundation - http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Benefactors. The article he created was full of inaccuracies, unverifiable assertions, and personal attacks and was quickly deleted by various administrators. If this user is not banned by an administrator reading this, please be warned of all his future actions, as it has been proven that he has a malicious intent. 67.184.73.22 10:09, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Um.... I have not been banned from city-data, I just logged in there. If you don't believe me I'll give you my password. I don't post there anymore but I wasn't banned. See my conversation with the administrator above. He agreed to let the article go through regular AfD. I am a long-established user. You are an anonymous IP address. Please identify yourself! Mjk2357 11:44, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Also, check the city-data form and you will see I am far from the only user with complaints, unless you've deceptively deleted those messages too. There are numerous racist messages on your boards. Anti-racist responses are deleted. Given it's made so many people mad I'll live with the article deletion but the borderline-fraudulent activities of your company will come to light - though not here, apparently. Mjk2357 11:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Actually I checked and now they have banned me. But my other comments stand. I was not banned until I said something negative about the company on another website. Not exactly best practices. Mjk2357 12:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * 67.184.73.22 has left negative messages on User:Wmahan's page. Wmahan has been instrumental in fighting Advameg's spam. Draw your own conclusions. I am living with the article delete but I will still delete their spam where I see it. Mjk2357 13:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * You were banned from the forum before, you just were able to log in (and as you stated in the attack article your messages were not visible, so you knew that you were banned). Thank you for admitting that you were a member of city-data.com/forum/. This is the proof that you have KNOWINGLY created an attack piece in revenge and that you violated all three principles multiple times: neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research, and that you have violated rules on not-recreating deleted articles. As a previous Wikipedia contributor you have been aware of these rules, so your intent was to maliciously damage the company (and by your comment here, it still is). People like you should be prevented from being to able to edit any articles, because you damage the reputation of the whole community by abusing your privileges. Unrelated to the main point, one of the rules that is followed on that forum is that "Racism or hate speech of ANY sort will NOT be tolerated." 67.184.73.22 17:46, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Still you have not identified yourself or who you are associated with. If I was trying to hide my identity I wouldn't have chosen such similar names! And no, my messages were still visible to me but only when I was logged in. When I wasn't logged in - only then did my messages mysteriously dissapear. When I logged back in they were back. Obviously they were visible only to me so that I wouldn't know action had been taken against my posts. This is deceptive and borderline fraudulent.

 * If you are deleting racist messages now, I'm glad. You certainly weren't doing that before. The Google Cache will provide verifiability if anyone cares enough about this nonsense to check. You know that I am far from the only one with complaints about your company. There is a reason Advameg is listed in the Wikipedia anti-Spam campaign! I did not list it - it was listed longe before I knew who your company was. So if that was original research it wasn't by me. As for NPOV I tried to include the fact that not ALL of the sites held by Advameg appear to be racist. It tried to be balanced but frankly there is not much good to say about your company. If you have some good things to say it would have been better to add them to the article than engage in a deletion war which you have won because of clueless users who actually thought I worked for Advameg and was promoting your comapny and that the page should be deleted because your company's HQ is uncertain (??) Mjk2357 18:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * One last thought: If you would not treat your users so shabbily, I never would have done a WhoIs on city-data and I never would have found out about your (shabbily-received) sweepstakes and your spamming. A lesson in customer relations, perhaps. Because of, in my opinion, users ignorant of guidelines, you have won the delete war. But talk pages are for free discussion, as is my blog, as is Reddit, so don't think you can get away with deceptive behavior and spamming w/o someone calling you on it. Like I said, I'm far from the first person to complain about Advameg. You were listed on the anti-Spam campaign a long time before I found out who you were.
 * (Since your IP is Naperville, IL I assume you are Advameg or a rep of the company.) Mjk2357 18:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * You're trying to distract from the main issues, which are your multiple content rules violations, multiple article-recreation rules violations (there is no such thing a deletion war, unless one user violates the rules - it was you who did it), lies, and attempting to use Wikipedia to get revenge. I'm sure no veteran Wikipedia reader will be swayed by complaints about "racist" or "disgruntled" users among 10,000s registered users on city-data.com's forum, because the very same users are the bane of Wikipedia and any other popular site that allows user contributions. Also, your usernames on both sites were chosen before you decided to start your attacks, so you couldn't change them. And please identify your full name, since you had no problem listing that information about Advameg and since some random username is obviously meaningless and provides less identification than even the IP. 67.184.73.22 19:00, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * So your goons can harrass me in real life? No thanks. You provide your full name since you represent a company. I believe I was not in violation of the rules. However I will let the article be deleted as I said since I was outvoted. Since you are new to Wikipedia you don't know but there is very much a thing as a deletion war. Also, promoting commercial websites via Wikipedia is also forbidden. According to the anti-Spam campaign (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2006_Archive_Sep#Advameg) you have done this. But since you obviously know something about the Internet you should know it is very easy to create a new user name if you want to do anonymous attacks - you can even buy established user names easily on eBay if you want to create a "history." Obviously I have not done that.

 * If you can explain to me: 1.) Why your company is listed in the anti-spam campaign (not by me), and 2.) Why my messages were visible only when I was logged in, we can both go back to more important things like life! Mjk2357 19:05, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * It was you who whined about the IP being used, while hiding behind a much more anonymous username and it is you who is obsessed with Advameg. Do you deny that you violated the rules to get revenge? This has been proven without any doubt - admins have said that recreating deleted articles is against the rules and you have broken all three main content rules. If you have any pride left, you should take your own suggestion and get a new username, because your username's reputation is now non-existent. Did you read about Advameg's contributions to the Wikimedia Foundation in August 2004? You're the one that's new here and banning you for breaking the rules, as you were on city-data.com (you were banned using the "Tachy Goes To Coventry" vBulletin banning option, look it up) is a good option. However, a better option might be to leave this profile up as a hall-of-shame example to all abusers of Wikipedia editing privileges. 67.184.73.22 22:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikpedia is not for sale to spammers!
At last some honesty - you admit I was banned in a way to make my posts invisible but so that I didn't know I was banned. This is deceptive and fraudulent. You also admit your association with Advameg, which hardly makes you neutral. I believe you're so worked up over this because we anti-spammers are threatening your revenue stream. You didn't deny your violation of the rules - promoting a commercial website through linkspan. Why? Because you did it. After conversations with admins I have agreed to leave the article deleted, though I deny that it should have been.

And, as a (purported) newcomer (I think you are really Zdrv - who was warned for sockpuppeting), I'll let you know that a donation to Wikimedia by one of your front companies is not a bribe that allows you to violate the Wikipedia rules. Wikipedia is not for sale to spammers. To quote an admin on your own talk page: "I'd be suspcious of an anon IP whose only posts are requests to block another user." You're not going to get me banned or hurt my reputation. I am proud of this thread - it shows I have stood up to spammers and their bullying tactics. Once again, had you not been deceptive on City-data I would never even have found out about your spamming, so you only have yourself to blame. Mjk2357 23:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * You're not answering any of the questions raised about your deceptive and revengeful behavior. You're trying to make some outrageous claims that half the Wikipedia conspired to get Advameg's very high quality long-established sites listed. Why should you not be banned? You have been exposed and you're trying to divert attention once again. Your attack article was full of lies, you couldn't even get the simplest facts like the name of the company or the websites owned correct. Sample statement from your "article" that will be obviously incorrect to anyone that knows anything about how popular ad-supported websites make money: "Its business model is unknown but is believed to involve sweepstakes." Such behavior should not be tolerated anywhere. I think this will be clear to any impartial observer and they will now know to watch out for you. 67.184.73.22 23:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm not saying some of your sites were not listed legitimately. Even the anti-Spam campaign says: "Some of these sites were listed by long-established users." But certainly not all of them. Any listed by Zdrv or one of his sockpuppets (i.e. - you!) can be deleted under policy. As far as my being banned, the admins disagree with you. The admins are usually pretty fair. I had a debate with a Nobel prize winner on Wikipedia (look it up!) and I won. What chance do you have? I'd give it a break. Why are you so worked up if I'm just a random nutcase as you claim? The anti-spam campaign is threatening your "business model," (such as it is). That's why you're sitting here a 8 PM arguing with me instead of out doing something useful like creating good articles. Why don't you make an Advameg article yourself? Oh that's right, spammers don't like to draw attention to themselves.

 * Also, where are the ads on city-data? I don't see any. There aren't any on the forum at least. All I see are fishy sweepstakes offers. I know sweepstakesratings.com rates your sweepstakes on the low end, that's all. I've made no other accusations about your sweepstakes.

 * I will end this discussion as useless unless you answer the following questions:

 * 1. Explain how you got listed as a spammer by several long-established users, including User:Wmahan, as a sockpupetter by User:Petaholmes and as a "suspicious IP" by User:NawlinWiki if your behavior here has been legit.

 * 2. Explain why you think, as an anon IP, you can block a long-established user who has accepted the decision of the admins?

 * If you are not willing to dialogue on these points I will ignore you as User:Firsfron has already suggested we do. Mjk2357 00:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

 * You are still trying to divert attention from your actions when the facts are clear and indisputable: the only reason you created the false Advameg attack article was to get revenge after being banned from the city-data.com's forum. Your weak attempt to align yourself with some anti-spam campaign and to change the subject won't fool anybody. Why aren't you answering any of the questions about your malicious actions? It's not a surprise you can't see ads, since you couldn't even see the right name of the company or the sites it owns. Your obsession with the company was shown when you continually tried to bring the article back and had to be put in your place by admins. Using an IP is much less anonymous that using a username. You're digging your own hole with your every attempt to tarnish the company and I love the fact that your statement about "fraudulent" activities will be archived by Wikipedia for future use... 67.184.73.22 01:15, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

 * One last time, this is how it went: I was treated deceptively on city-data, which you yourself have admitted. So I did a WhoIs on your company to see what the deal was. I then found out you'd been listed as a spammer on Wikipedia. I researched some more and created the article. Yes the article has been deleted but the admins have also referred to you as "suspicious" and have told me to beware of you and not give you any personal info. Why do you think that might be?

 * You also lied to the admins in saying you'd deleted the "worst" of my posts when in reality they'd all been effectively deleted through the Bad-Faith Coventry method, which by the way good admins don't use. As you know I have experience as a moderator and an admin on other sites. When we block people we tell them.

 * You have not denied linkspamming, because you have done it. You do not deny being a sockpuppet, because you are one. You're too smart to lie but you keep dodging the issue yourself. Go away you are starting to smell very very socky. Make some real contribs to Wikipedia like I have then maybe I'll waste time with you - that is if you don't get banned for the 14th time for being a sockpuppet. Mjk2357 01:24, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Once again, stop changing the subject. I also note that you deceptively changed the heading of this section on your user talk, which was about banning you from Wikipedia for multiple rules violations. Please explain this action. Your worst posts have indeed been deleted through a regular method, so that's another lie. Here are the undisputed facts for any person that will view your talk page:
 * 1. Mjk2357 has been banned from city-data.com's popular forum for multiple rules violations and in revenge created an Advameg attack page on Wikipedia.
 * 2. The attack page has contained numerous unsupported lies and inaccuracies. It has violated neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research.
 * 3. After the attack page was deleted by admins four times, Mjk2357 has recreated it three times, violating Wikipedia rules.
 * 4. Mjk2357 has shown absolutely no remorse for rule breaking and in fact has continued to attack the company on Wikipedia.

 * Mjk2357, do you dispute any of these four statements? If not, then the matter is settled and Wikipedians will judge your actions on their own merits. 67.184.73.22 02:05, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

<--Since I was not banned, nor will I be, and this conversation is mainly about Advameg, the change was legit. It is my talk page. The mirror discussion on your talk page you may title as you wish. '''Now I am doing you the favor of responding to your points. If you don't then respond to mine above, this conversation is done.''' Here are my responses.:

1. Yes, I was banned - without anyone telling me. As for my "worst" posts, I'd love for you to reproduce them here and the Wikipedia community can judge how bad they were. But wait, you can't, you deleted them. In contrast other users warning of "black gangs taking over" and non-existent "race riots" in schools that never had riots and all did not have their posts deleted. If you don't think that is racist than we'll have to agree to disagree.

2.There were no lies an inaccuracies. Unless you are doing more deceptive deleting, anyone can check the city-data form and see the racist posts that were not deleted. That also covers verifiability. No I am not a fan of Advameg (obviously), but I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt with qualifiers like "possible" and "allegations." I also said some of the other domains you held did not appear to be racist and in fact presented a positive view of African-Americans.

3. Two of the deletions were not by admins - and one of the times I had placed a "hold on" tag which is supposed to stop deletions until an admin can review it. A regular user deleted the article for the weird reason that the HQ of Advameg was uncertain. Another regular user deleted it because he thought the article was pro-Advameg, believe it or not. Once I read my messages from the admins I let the article stay deleted. Have you stopped your spamming after being contacted by admins? No, you've used sockpuppets.

4.I will never have remorse about attacking spammers. That having been said, unlike you, I accept admin decisions. Talk pages are not part of official Wikipedia article content. Users are allowed to express their feelings freely on talk pages - which we both have done.

Now that I have answered your points please answer mine:

1. Are you the user Zdrv or have you ever used sockpuppets? Are you responsible for the nearly 100 instances of linkspam attributed to Advameg by User:Wmahan?

2. Did you lie to the admins when you said only my worst posts had been deleted, keeping in mind a Conventry action is an effective deletion - that is not disputed anywhere.

3. '''Have you promoted your own business on Wikipedia? This is a clear rule violation.'''

4. '''If you are acting in good faith, why have the admins called you "suspicious" (User:NawlinWiki) a "spammer" (User:Wmahan) a "sockpuppeteer" (User:Petaholmes) and warned me not to give you any info about myself? (User:Firsfron)''' Mjk2357 02:29, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

 * The change of the title is a perfect example of your dishonest attempt to redirect the debate from your lies. How many times have you tried to put out some lie that was subsequently squashed and proven false without anymore comments from you regarding it? I can list many such examples: "business model believed to involve sweepstakes", "I have not been banned from city-data", "I am a long-established user. You are an anonymous IP address," while hiding under a username that is much more anonymous than an IP and while knowing that Advameg contributed to Wiki before you, complaining about "racist" messages when the forum rules specifically state that they are not allowed and knowing that these are user messages (just like on Wikipedia, where no other users are responsible for your attack page), "because a large part of their traffic comes from their Wikipedia links" - another lie. Even worse are your debate skills: "Have you stopped your spamming?" Your attempts to redirect the debate from your disgraceful actions will be as futile as your attempts to tarnish the company's reputation by creating an attack article. You did not address any of the points raised:
 * 1. You say "Yes, I was banned" when the main part of the original statement was "and in revenge created an Advameg attack page on Wikipedia." Did you miss it somehow?
 * 2. Yes there were lies and inaccuracies. For lies you had incorrect and unsupported accusations of political agenda, accusations about inability by people with complaints to reach the owners ("About the Forum" has numerous answers by the Administrator and Moderators to people with complaints), and previously mentioned lies about "business model believed to involve sweepstakes." For inaccuracies, you had the wrong company name, wrong registrant name, wrong location, and a website listed as owned that is not. Please answer how these not violate all three principles: neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research.
 * 3. Yet again, you try to do your best to miss the point. Is the recreation of articles against the rules or not? Did you do it or not?
 * 4. Another evasion of the question. The point was that you have shown no remorse about repeatedly and knowingly breaking Wikipedia rules to get your revenge for being banned.

 * Please answer the questions directly without evading them this time. This is a discussion about your actions and you're not helping your cause by attempting to change the subject. 67.184.73.22 03:52, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

 * You have not answered my questions so you are the one changing the subject. I am allowed to do what I want with titles on my talk page, as you are with yours. My status as a long-established user shows that I am not in the habit of violating rules. Once the admins informed me I was violating the rules I stopped. You, on the other hand, have not stopped spamming, sockpuppeting, or, evidently, trolling.

 * I asked for my comments to be moved to the "About the Forum" section! - but instead they were deleted. There should be records of this on your site. According to GoDaddy.com, city-data.com is registered to Advameg. If it is inaccurate take it up with them, not me. Once again, not original research on my part. If you are not Advameg it's quite suspicious your ISP is right next to their headquarters.

 * I don't know what your business model is. I believed it to involve sweepstakes because that's all I could find out about Advameg. Where are these ads you speak of? I can't find them on city-data, at least not in the forum.

 * One more thought... If Advameg is a long established user, where is your long-established account? Answer - nowhere, because you have used at least 14 sockpuppets to cover up your spamming! Admit it, you've been warned far more than I have.

 * Anyway, you are not engaging in a two-way dialogue. The position of the admins is clear - the article cannot be recreated by me, but also your behavior is "suspicious" and I get the benefit of the doubt as a long-established user. Case closed. If you don't want to answer my questions as I answered yours, then this conversation is over 67.whatever, or should I say Zdrv. Night! Mjk2357 04:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

 * You have not just tried to change the subject, you literally did it with your replacing of the subject heading. Could it be because your actions are indefensible and you're trying to deflect the issue? I'm sure most Wikipedians will see right through how a self-described "long-established user" was somehow unaware of all three main content rules and of the deletion rules and of not-creating an attack page rule and had to be "informed" about violations by admins after committing them repeatedly. I doubt anyone reading this is interested in internal workings of city-data's forum, but it is obvious that posts in the wrong forum and other posts may be moved or deleted as needed. Ads are displayed under the first post of a thread in the vast majority of threads. If you admittedly have no idea what the business model is, why did you attempt to include it in the article? And why did you try to include some imagined political leanings of the company? The only inaccuracy you decided to argue (note that I didn't count it as a deliberate lie) was using the wrong name of the company, which was noticed by another user and subsequently corrected. It is very interesting how you're suddenly "tired" of the issue after being exposed as a disgruntled banned poster, when you were obviously not too tired to create an article with more errors than sentences and to attempt to resurrect it multiple times, while arguing with others about it, when that fact wasn't known. You seem to be unable to debate the issue without personal attacks: "That's why you're sitting here a 8 PM arguing with me instead of out doing something useful" or calling the company "racist" and "fraudulent" and without grade-school debate tactics such as "Have you stopped your spamming?" or "So your goons can harrass me in real life?" after asking for the identification yourself. The admins have tried to warn you not to dig your own hole, but you've already done it with these accusations. 67.184.73.22 09:07, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I never started threads so I guess I never saw the ads. Sorry about that. But, as you offer sweepstakes, the phrase, "your business model includes sweepstakes" is indeed accurate. Funny how sensitive you are about sweepstakes! Wonder why? Furthermore, no admins have contacted me since the AfD. Mjk2357 11:15, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Incorrect. Sweepstakes can not produce any revenue for a U.S. entity that runs them and in fact cost money for prizes: Sweepstakes. This can be confirmed by reading the rules on city-data's sweepstakes page. Ads are visible when simply reading threads (unless some sort of an ad-blocker is used), there is no need to start threads to see them. 67.184.73.22 05:35, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Resolution
My Final Word: Zdrv, you have been banned and/or warned for spamming multiple times. Me? Zero. I'll let that speak for itself. If anyone is interested in this thread (unlikely!) they can research the debate for themselves. Mjk2357 11:15, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

 * My Final Word: The facts of Mjk2357's actions are displayed for everybody to judge for themselves, so I won't be writing here anymore (unless some strange reverts start happening...). 67.184.73.22 05:47, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Good, I'm glad this is resolved. I will not recreate the Advameg article if that's what you mean by "strange reverts." However I reserve the right to delete your linkspam. If you do not believe the links to your own company that you and your sockpuppets have created to be linkspam, please read the policy. It clearly is spam. You could also take up the issue with User:Wmahan who has listed you as a Spammer. Mjk2357 11:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

10 which means more people approved of my posts than disapproved. Mjk2357 20:38, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Advameg article
Hi Mjk,

Thanks for your notes on my page. However, I removed the last few, as they did not appear to be addressed to me. For the record, the Speedy Deletion of an attack page listed on AFD does not violate policy: pages which meet therequirement for Speedy Delete can be deleted at any time. You have thousands of good edits to Wikipedia, so this one incident certainly doesn't warrant a block: just please don't create articles with POV slants and which appear to attack the subject of the article. You are certainly right not to give out your personal information (to an IP!), and what you did or didn't do on another site has no bearing on Wikipedia. I recommend that you disengage this conversation, and go back to what you were doing before: editing articles. Best, Firsfron of Ronchester  19:41, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, this "mysterious" IP (aka Advameg) has not addressed the legitimate points I have raised, so I consider the conversation to be unproductive. However I would not like the "last word" on your talk page to be an attack on me by an anon IP, so please either add your two cents or let me add my response. However, it's your talk page in the end.

 * I do not believe the article met the criteria for speedy delete. The criteria listed given for the three deletions were as follows 1.) Article was anti-Advameg (debatable - I included some good points and some caveats). 2.) Article was pro-Advameg (contradicts #1) 3.) Company's HQ was uncertain (that one just stumps me!). However I don't plan to waste all my time battling this company. Given the petty scale of their operations (to date) it doesn't seem worth it. However I do reserve the right to remove their spam where I see it.

 * As this IP has revealed itself as a rep of Advameg I am requesting a warning or a block because Advameg is in clear violation of policy - promotion of commercial websites via linkspam. Obviously they are attacking me in part because a large part of their traffic comes from their Wikipedia links. They seem like the suing type so no way am I giving out my name!

 * P.S. - this IP is the probable operator of the sockpuppets at IPs: 67.163.18.29 69.217.59.174 24.14.148.207, 82.210.185.92, and 208.54.95.129. The spam project also refers to a page called "suspected sockpuppets of Zdrv" but this has been deleted (wonder why??) Mjk2357 20:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for telling!
Xizes 02:24, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

 * You're welcome. Happy editing. Mjk2357 03:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

WHAT???
What is Neotribalism? Please reply Xizes 00:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC).

 * Read the article! Neo-Tribalism Mjk2357 12:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Read it AstroBoy 01:42, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Survey Q
Have you ever been to the southern hemisphere, click here to reply.AstroBoy 01:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC) Deadline for entries is December 15th

evolutionary psychology reference
In the "neo-tribalism" article you have stated that recently some supporters of neo-Tribalism have put forth the argument that their ideas have been scientifically proven by the discipline of evolutionary psychology. Do you have any examples/sources of that? I would appreciate it if you could provide some for me. Cheers.

I did not find a source from an evolutionary psychologist. Do you know of any renowned authors from this field that endorse neo-tribalism? Also, I was more looking for "radical neo-tribalism" references, rather than the moderate type. Thnaks for the references. I will also check the David Ronfeldt author.Maziotis 21:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:100front.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:100front.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 01:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

nom fr cfd
thought should inform you, have nominated Category:Emergent_philosophy for cfd at Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_June_11. ⇒ bsnowball 16:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Currency Image:100front.jpg
Hi, To assist global anti-counterfeiting efforts you may wish to consider marking images of banknotes you upload as "Specimen" in some way, if those banknotes represent legal tender.ShakespeareFan00 15:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Producerism.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Producerism.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Geology of Susquehanna River
Hi, ages ago - to be precise on October 4 2005 - you added the geologic history of the Susquehanna River (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Susquehanna_River&diff=prev&oldid=24683142). Can you please name a source for that? We are trying to confirm the article on de-WP and can't find anything on that issue online. Can you recommend some printed sources? TIA --h-stt !?  13:27, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I saw it on local TV a few times here in the US. Here is an online reference: http://www.lgreal.org/ppl20022.html. There is another from a local paper | here

but you have to pay to get it
 * Found both of them - The Sunday News article is available on Lexis-Nexis. And unfortunately none is a decent source be our standards. Thanks for your effort, I'll try to get literature on the geology of the area myself, as there seems to be nothing good online. Have a nice weekend. --h-stt !?  05:48, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

 * There is a local TV program on air every now and then here in America that talks about the geology of the river, but I forget the exact name. It is a PBS (Public Broadcasting) program - maybe you can look that up. It aired on WVIA recently. Mjk2357 (talk) 03:56, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. here (p.4) is a source for the Early Cretaceous age (110 million years ago) which admits that is is speculative. But I was unable to find anything academic that goes beyond that. The Sunday News article too calls it not that established, albeit a "classic explanation". Let's see, I'll put the Sunday News article in for a start and try if I get anywhere further. Thanks again for your help. --h-stt !?  11:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Posthumanism
I've been working on improving the Posthumanism article. Your comments would be appreciated on its talk page. --Loremaster (talk) 23:54, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Biased editing of Technological Utopianism by Loremaster.
Biased editing of Technological Utopianism by Loremaster.

Due to your past contribution to Technological utopianism, you may currently want to help editing the Technological utopianism article because currently only one editor is contributing to the article. The Singularitarianism Article could also benefit from your help.

I feel Loremaster is editing Singularitarianism and Technological utopianism in a biased manner in accordance with his Save The Earth propaganda. Loremasters's ideology seems to verge towards Neo-Luddism. Here are the damming facts Loremaster has stated in discussion:

 * Loremaster says he is:

 * Loremaster wants people to:

 * Loremaster sees his editing as a 'fight' and he states:

81.151.135.248 (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2010 (UTC)JB

--Loremaster (talk) 00:49, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * LOL
 * 1) Despite the fact that I openly admit to being a technorealist who is critical of techno-utopianism in all its forms, I have let never this point of view influence any of my edits or reverts of the Technological utopianism or Singularitarianism articles. On the contrary, I am the person most responsible for expanding the former article with content some would argue is “pro-techno-utopian” (i.e. passages from James Hughes' book Citizen Cyborg).
 * 2) I find it disgusting that 81.151.135.248 would take comments I made out of context to falsely make it seem I see my editing of any article as part of my fight for the environment.
 * 3) In light of this outrageous act of bad faith, I will do everything in my power to get this jerk banned from Wikipedia.

Syncretic politics
Hello Mjk2357. You edited the Syncretic politics article at at 20:40, 31 October 2005 to argue that “some have attempted to achieve centrist goals (i.e. modest health-care reform) using radical methods (such as destroying the two-party system.” Could you provide an example of the people who attempted to do this? --Loremaster (talk) 02:32, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Glykon-statuette.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Glykon-statuette.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 20:41, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Economic disasters has been nominated for discussion
Category:Economic disasters, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:49, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

File:728x90B.gif listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:728x90B.gif, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:35, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mjk2357


text:
Li Xiaopeng

Li Xiaopeng is the name of the following Chinese people:

 * Li Xiaopeng (politician) (born 1959), Minister of Transport
 * Li Xiaopeng (banker) (born 1959), Chinese banker, chairman of China Everbright Group Co., Ltd.
 * Li Xiaopeng (footballer) (born 1975), professional soccer player
 * Li Xiaopeng (gymnast) (born 1981), Olympic gymnast

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

title: Li Xiaopeng


text: User talk:131.177.4.185

title: User talk:131.177.4.185


text:
Talk:Allspice

Untitled

 * It's as hot as peppers between 100 and 500 su

Interesting question. This article needs more information on the biology and commercial cultivation of the plant itself. I think this would be useful because public knowledge of how crops grown in small amounts is rather limited, in my opinion. Are there any Jamaican allspice farmers out there who could help?--ChrisJMoor 01:39, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

I think that statement needs a citation to back it up. Looking at the scoville scale page, I see pimento listed as 100-500 SHU, but in that case it's talking about the pepper used to stuff olives, not the spice also called allspice. 68.227.185.194 02:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I've never thought of allspice as being hot. And I'm pretty sensitive to heat. Is cinnamon considered to be hot? I'd guess allspice to be similar to cinnamon, although I have no idea how these things are measured. In any case, I see a solicitation to cultivation information here. I've not farmed allspice myself. However, I grew up in San Cristobal, Alta Verapaz, where allspice is a major crop, so I updated the article slightly. In my Guatemalan home town, allspice trees are about as tall as any other canopy tree, I'd say at least 10 meters, although I don't have any reference to back that up. I certainly think characterizing it as a small tree is absurd. The allspice trees serve two main functions. The primary function is to provide shade for the coffee trees, which can't tolerate full sunlight. It takes a long time for the trees to achieve this size, so they are generally planted by one generation for the next generation (of people) to harvest the fruit. The fruit grow in clusters and are picked by hand. Men climb up the trees with long poles to knock the clusters down from the trees. The clusters are gathered and the fruit dried on mats in the street along with the coffee beans. Victor Engel (talk) 00:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Allspice translations
Does anyone know where on the internet I can find the translation for "ALLSPICE" in other languages?--Kataquaz (talk) 07:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Try clicking on the links on the bottom left side of the article. They'll take you to the equivalent page in other languages, with the name translated of course. If that's not enough, try searching for the latin name (Pimenta dioica) with search results limited to language you're looking for. DBlomgren (talk) 05:36, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * In Czech, the plant species is called "pimentovník pravý", but the spice is called "nové koření" (literally "new spice") - on the Czech Wikipedia, these two have separate articles. --Maatyn (talk) 06:58, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

It is called 'ziele angielskie" in Polish, which translates as "the english herb" or "the english spice" 95.40.199.156 (talk) 22:06, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Removed the translation for Urdu " كباب چيني (Kabab Cheeni, 'kebab sugar')" cause it refers to Cubeb (Piper cubeba). Burman (talk) 11:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)purple monkey dish washer

German translation: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piment 2A02:8108:7C0:988B:CCEB:2E58:66A4:678B (talk) 20:12, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Picture
A picture of the grown tree/shrub would help the perspective of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.6.239.73 (talk) 22:49, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Could someone fix the links to other languages?
Could someone fix the links to other languages? I'm afraid I can't figure out how to do it.

For some reason, most languages treat allspice as 'Pimenta dioica' whereas in English the main article is here at 'Allspice', with links to only three other languages.

For a full set of links -- there are well over 40 of them -- go to the Chinese page at https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%A4%9A%E9%A6%99%E6%9E%9C'

66.181.191.68 (talk) 02:23, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Middle Eastern cuisine
"Allspice is also indispensable in Middle Eastern cuisine" - this is a bit too strongly worded. Drsruli (talk) 07:07, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Allspice


text:
Talk:Poly-Play

What?
I hate to be a killjoy, but does anyone understand what this article is about? What exactly is a Polyplay? The article, in its current state, doesn't explain it at all. It sounds somewhat techy, but that's about it. Can someone help out here? — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:08, Aug 13, 2004 (UTC)

 * According to Pac-Man, it is a Soviet pirate Pac-Man cabinet. Boffy b 23:29, 2004 Aug 14 (UTC)

Babelfish?
I presume the article was ported from the German wikipedia using some kind of automated translation. I have gone through it and I think I'v figured what most means, but am still puzzled by: any ideas? Boffy b 23:29, 2004 Aug 14 (UTC)
 * "Whereby one generally assumed that, which is to a very large extent tolerated this."
 * "the crush was then very high"

i mean: sorry my english is not best. can you my Picture here upload? i have here not account. thx -Ash-
 * "everyone tolerated those 1Pfennig-Cheaters, because the machine was not commerce"
 * "only if too many played at the automat (10Player and more) the InsertCoin re-activated"
 * Thank you, it makes sense now. I got most of it first time round, and anyway, your English is a lot better then my German! And a picture is always welcome, where is it from? What is the copyright status of it? I see it is from MAME, did you take it yourself?
 * yes a I liked more Popeye, Mr. Do und Pacman, Centipede and Gigas ;] The copyright status ist 100% free, because the country is away and the enterprise also. Many say the Wolf ate it. -Ash-
 * I am not sure about it. I researched a little bit for my VEB Polytechnik article, and it seems like the legal successor of the company is the Polytechnik Frankenheim GmbH. Or at least they got the overhead projector business.. I don't know what happened to intellectual property rights of the GDR companies after the german unifcation. --Tjansen 13:02, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Break it up!
I suggest breaking up the screenshots into 4 seperate images. A polyimage, such as that one, are not standard practice. It'd also give the added benefit of being able to make out the images in the thumbnail size. As it is, you have to click on the image in order to make anything sensible out of it. Just MHO... — Frecklefoot | Talk 17:51, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * Done! Although i only presumed the objective is to shoot the moose/ducks, has anyone here played on one of these? It's included in MAME, apparently. Boffy b 23:06, 2004 Aug 22 (UTC)

 * I have all played, when you make 2000 Points in Hase und Wolf or 50 Hits in Hirschjagd, you may call yourself professional ;) those are there deer, no moose. -Ash-

 * I offer you my sincerest apologies sir(or madam?), my resident deer/moose expert is on a business trip. You seem not to have an account, yet on this article at least, you are very active. Why not sign up? Join us, it won't hurt. Was it you who added the extra screentshots. The really complete the article(as much as anything's ever complete on a wiki), thank you. Boffy b

Name
Most of the online sources I have found call this machine 'Poly Play', two words. A photograph of the machine in Swindon's Music of Computing supports this: - User:Ashley Pomeroy:Ashley Pomeroy

 * Go ahead and move the article then (be sure to use the "Move this page" button). Also, please sign your posts (I added your sig to your post above).  You can do this with 3 or 4 tildes (  or  ).  The latter is preferred, however, as it also adds a timestamp. :-)   — Frecklefoot | Talk 22:12, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

External links section
I have had to place the external links section above the games table, as I could not get it to go at the bottom, is this a bug in the table or in Mediawiki? Boffy b 13:06, 2004 Dec 12 (UTC)

 * Fixed. It was missing the opening and ending   tags.   — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:14, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)

More Poly Play exists
I just changed some Information on the page regarding existing machines. We have two working machines in my club RetroGames e.V in South-Germany. I will try to make some Photos of the machines. --Lenno 08:34, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Not Public Domain
The claim that Poly Play is in the public domain is false. According to German copyright law, copyright can't get lost, since it's tied unchangeably to the author. So if some legal successor should be missing (which I doubt), copyright has fallen back to the authors themselves. That at the time and place of authorship there was a different jurisdiction does not change anything about that. Copyright has not been lost. Please don't spread the false rumor. --Rtc 20:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Who's the author? --Golbez 20:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I can't say, but it's irrelevant. Obviously it has been created by a human or several humans, and copyright will last until 70 pma of the last surviving one. "who would sue?" is a good question, but that the rights holder might be unclear is not really important. It's a matter of fact that some rights holder exist, be it the authors, be it a legal successor of the company, and thus it cannot be in the public domain. --Rtc 20:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Please don't call things "harmful". Harmful to who? The anonymous East German who has never seen a cent for his work? --Golbez 20:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

It is harmful if somebody sells the piece of work because he believed what he read, if the author or rights holder discovers about that (I mean he won't have forgotten that he created it) and then sues the seller. BTW, the author is most likely not an anonymous author in a legal sense (not that it would matter much), since there are clearly records somewhere about his identity. That's enough. The bottom line is that "Current rights holder perhaps unclear" is NOT the same as "public domain". --Rtc 20:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

"After the collapse of the GDR, the remains of VEB Polytechnik were rescued in a new company called Polytechnik Frankenberg GmbH" according to VEB Polytechnik. So they are the current rights holder, simple as that... --Rtc 20:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The same article says "The new company was also closed in 2006." Now who owns this? --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 00:14, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * If the rights were not transferred to someone else (given that Polytechnik owned the rights at all), the rights are owned by the people who created the games, whoever they are. --Grandy02 (talk) 12:00, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Polyplay5.png
Image:Polyplay5.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Main image
Wouldn't the photo of the arcade machine be more meaningful as the expressionless game select screen in the infobox? Plus, there are currently nine fair-use images in this article, I don't think that many are allowed. --Grandy02 (talk) 12:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Different Versions
According to what I could find out, there had been 2 different hardware version, called ESC1 and ESC2 (Elektronischer SpielComputer). ESC1 could accomodate 8 games, ESC2 10 games. They cabinets were different from another and there are photos of one other different (whitish) cabinet floating around.

http://www.robotrontechnik.de/index.htm?/html/computer/polyplay.htm This source explains all of this in more detail.

Games
The games "DER GAERTNER" and "HAGELNDE WOLKEN" do exist. And there is a video of an alternate version of "HAGELNDE WOLKEN" in circulation, called "UFO". "UFO" has a different title screen with background story. Video of "HAGELNDE WOLKEN": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtw7fIKACRs Video of "UFO": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-4AE-SgtVc Picture and price listing of der Gärtner (and other games) http://www.robotrontechnik.de/index.htm?/html/computer/polyplay.htm

title: Talk:Poly-Play


text:
Paul Hamm

Paul Elbert Hamm (born September 24, 1982 in Washburn, Wisconsin) is a retired American artistic gymnast. He is the 2004 Olympic all-around champion, a three-time Olympic medalist, and the 2003 World all-around champion. Hamm is the most successful American male gymnast in history, one of only two American gymnasts (along with Simone Biles) to win the all-around title at both the Olympics and the World Championships, and the only male American gymnast to do so.

Personal life
Hamm is the son of Sandy and Cecily Hamm. His twin brother, Morgan Hamm, is also a gymnast and Olympic medalist. His older sister, Elizabeth (Betsy), is a former member of the USA Gymnastics Senior National Team.

Career
Hamm is a three-time, consecutive U.S. National all-around champion, winning the titles from 2002–2004. In 2003, he became the first American man to win the all-around title at a World Championships. At the 2000 Summer Olympics in Sydney, Hamm competed alongside his twin brother Morgan Hamm and finished 5th in the team competition and 14th in the individual all-around competition.

2004 Summer Olympics
Hamm competed at the 2004 Summer Olympics in Athens once again with his twin brother Morgan Hamm. He won the silver medal in the team competition and won the gold medal in the all-around. He also nearly won the gold medal on high bar but was awarded the silver medal after a tiebreaker.

In the all-around competition, Hamm was in good position after the first three rotations, but a disastrous fall on the vault, in which he nearly fell into the judges' bench, dropped him to 12th place and he looked to be completely out of the running for a medal of any sort. Indeed, had a judge and the bench not been able to break Hamm's fall, he might have fallen from the podium and sustained injury. However, numerous faults by the other gymnasts, combined with Hamm's performance on the parallel bars, returned him to fourth place after the fifth rotation. His high bar routine in the final rotation earned a score of 9.837, winning him the gold medal by a margin of .012, the closest in Olympic gymnastics history. His scores on the six disciplines were:

 * Floor: 9.725 (1st)
 * Pommel Horse: 9.700 (4th)
 * Rings: 9.587 (8th)
 * Vault: 9.137 (12th)
 * Parallel Bars: 9.837 (1st)
 * Horizontal bar: 9.837 (1st)
 * Overall: 57.823 (1st)

Gold medal controversy
Almost immediately after the competition, Hamm's gold medal in the all-around was called into doubt due to a scoring issue.

The International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) ruled that South Korean bronze medalist Yang Tae Young was incorrectly given a start value of 9.9 instead of 10.0 in the parallel bars event during the all-around final. The 0.100 point omitted from Yang's start value in parallel bars, determined by the difficulty of the routine, was because the judges believed Yang had performed a move called a "morisue" instead of a "belle" during his routine. The difference in difficulty between those two moves—the 0.100 point—was the difference between third and first, and, therefore, between the bronze medal and the gold medal. The FIG suspended three judges but said the results would not be changed. The long-standing "Rules of Play" doctrine has prohibited sports officials from later changing the decisions of officials during the competition.

Adding to the news headlines, when the FIG ruled Yang's start value was incorrect, the entire crowd began booing the judges, and the booing lasted for about ten minutes.

The USOC also argued that changing scores after the fact was a violation of the rules of the competition (under which gymnastic scores must be disputed immediately—before the gymnasts move to the next piece of equipment, and certainly before the medals are awarded) and that second-guessing scores set a harmful precedent in that the judges at the event had to make the decisions and nothing would ever be finalized if second guessing and video review of entire competitions after they ended were permitted. Hamm supporters also pointed out that Yang's routine included 4 'hangs' instead of the 3 allowed, an error that, if caught, would have resulted in a penalty of .2 points, removing Yang from medal contention.

Hamm supporters contended that it would be like changing a two-point basket before the first half of a basketball game into a three-point shot based on a video review after the game that showed the shooter was behind the three-point line, thereby deciding that the shooter's team would be awarded the win because the game was tied at the end of regulation. If the extra point had been awarded when it was scored, the opponent would have changed its end-game strategy to account for the opponent's additional score.

Others argued that this deduction had not been taken when other gymnasts had exceeded the required number and therefore ought not to apply in this case. Hamm supporters also contended that Hamm had earned the right to be the last gymnast to compete based on his performance on the initial night of the competition and knowing what he needed to earn a gold, silver, or bronze medal, he had adjusted his high bar routine accordingly. If Yang Tae Young had been awarded an additional 0.100 point, Hamm would have been able to adjust his routine to take account of that fact, and might have earned a higher score on the high bar, the final piece of equipment.

Eventually, Bruno Grandi, President of the FIG, stated that the FIG would not change the results of the all-around. However, the FIG sent a letter to Hamm in care of the United States Olympic Committee, stating:

"If, (according to you [sic] declarations to the press), you would return your medal to the Korean if the FIG requested it, then such an action would be recognised as the ultimate demonstration of Fair-play by the whole world. The FIG and the IOC would highly appreciate the magnitude of this gesture."

In the letter, Grandi stated that Yang Tae Young was the "true winner" of the competition.

For the complete text, see this link.

The USOC was outraged by the FIG's request and refused to deliver the letter. In a response letter to the FIG, the USOC stated:

"The USOC views this letter as a blatant and inappropriate attempt on the part of FIG to once again shift responsibility for its own mistakes and instead pressure Mr. Hamm into resolving what has become an embarrassing situation for the Federation. The USOC finds this request to be improper, outrageous and so far beyond the bounds of what is acceptable that it refuses to transmit the letter to Mr. Hamm."

In the letter, the USOC also noted that the International Olympic Committee ("IOC") and its president, Jacques Rogge, opposed FIG's efforts to pressure Hamm in this manner, in direct contradiction to an implication made in the FIG's letter.

For the complete text of the USOC's response, see this link.

Yang then filed an official appeal with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), seeking to have his score changed and be awarded the gold medal. On September 27, 2004, Hamm and the USOC appeared before the court in Lausanne, Switzerland during a hearing that lasted eleven and one-half hours. Nearly one month later, on October 21, 2004, a three-judge CAS panel announced that the results from the Olympics would remain and that Paul Hamm would get to keep the gold medal. The verdict was final and could not be appealed. (See this link for the complete text of the decision.)

When asked whether or not he still deserved the gold medal by a news reporter, Hamm replied that he "shouldn't even be dealing with this." He later went on to say, "I do understand and feel the disappointment that Yang Tae Young has been subjected to, and I hope he understands what I have been through as well."

Effects of controversy
Immediately following the Olympics, General Mills announced which U.S. Olympians would appear on individual boxes of Wheaties cereal: swimmer Michael Phelps, gymnast Carly Patterson, and sprinter Justin Gatlin. Hamm was in talks to appear on a box, but the talks were dropped after the controversy.

Sullivan Award
Hamm was the James E. Sullivan Award winner for 2004 as the outstanding amateur athlete in the United States. He was the second gymnast to receive this honor after Kurt Thomas.

Comeback attempt for 2008 Olympics
Paul and Morgan Hamm took some time off after the 2004 Olympics to focus on school at Ohio State University. They announced in February 2007 that they would return to competitive gymnastics, starting at the 2007 U.S. Championships, also known as the Visa Championships, after their title sponsor. In March 2008, Paul won the American Cup held in New York City. This was the first time he won this competition and performed with a strong showing.

On May 22, Paul competed on the first day of the 2008 U.S. Championships, but was forced to withdraw after day one after injuring his hand. During his routine on the parallel bars he fractured the fourth metacarpal of his right hand. Orthopedic surgery five days later placed a titanium plate and nine screws in his hand and Paul was not cleared to return to gymnastics until July 3. After sitting out the Olympic Trials, he was named to the 2008 Olympic Team on a provisional basis depending on his recovery. On July 19 he secured his spot on the 2008 team by participating in an intersquad meet and performed in all six events, only slightly modifying his routines to prevent aggravation of his injury.

On July 28, Paul announced his withdrawal from the United States Olympic gymnastics team due to persistent pain in his right hand and a new injury to his left shoulder from his accelerated recovery efforts. He was replaced on the team by Raj Bhavsar. He has indicated that he will permanently retire from the sport.

Comeback attempt for 2012 Olympics
Paul Hamm retired from gymnastics and ended his run to make the 2012 Olympic team. Paul stated, "The years of training have taken a toll on my body and training at an Olympic level is no longer sustainable."

On December 15, 2015, it was announced that Hamm had been inducted into the 2016 class of the USA Gymnastics Hall of Fame.

Sasuke
Hamm also competed on the popular Japanese television show, Sasuke (in America/UK: Ninja Warrior). He and his brother Morgan took part in three tournaments (#14, 15, and 16). Paul made it to the second stage of the 14th competition but missed completing it by inches (he cleared the last obstacle, the "Wall Lifting", but forgot to hit the red button before time ran out). In the 15th, he was unable to pass the First Stage obstacle, the "Warped Wall". In the 16th he made it to the second stage again but failed on the obstacle known as the "Metal Spin".

Arrest
On September 3, 2011, Hamm was accused of assaulting an Ohio taxi driver, damaging that taxi's window and refusing to pay his fare. He was arrested, and while in custody threatened the arresting officers. Hamm was charged with assault and two other misdemeanors. On September 9, Hamm was fired from his coaching position at Ohio State.

On Thursday, February 23, 2012, Hamm pleaded no contest to a reduced set of two misdemeanor charges in an Upper Arlington court in suburban Columbus. A misdemeanor assault charge was dismissed.

A magistrate suspended a sentence of 90 days in custody on each count, provided that Hamm completes a year of probation, pay the cab fare, plus court fees, and must sit with a counselor for an alcohol assessment.

title: Paul Hamm


text:
Talk:List of storms in the 1994 Atlantic hurricane season

Retirement of Gordon
Just a comment, but I find it very odd that Gordon wasn't retired. --Golbez 15:10, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Golbez, I noticed the same thing. I read that article that the WMO put out describing the reasons why they didn't retire it. When I finished, I was steaming with rage. They said that because Haiti's warning system stunk that it negated the thousands of deaths that occured there. I found this to be a severe disrespect to those lost. I still get upset whenever I think about it. You should have seen me the day I read the article. I was absolutly livid. It's disgusting to think that they could completly disregard 1145 men, women and children who lived in a poor, poverty-ridden country and were just washed away. They expected this country to have all this high-tech warning gear that costs a fortune. OOOh, how I want to beat those senile desk-rats. No respect. I could rant on for days about this but I'll spare you the berating.

-E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast (Squawk Box)

 * Agreed. Even if the death toll was moderately high (like 100), I'd see some logic in not retiring it since it could be mistaken for a non-tropical rainstorm (which often kill dozens, occasionally hundreds, in Haiti - such as in May 2004). But 1,145? No excuse. Damage was probably in the billions as well if a calculation can be made...Not that I wish harm on anyone, but if there is a name I want in the dustbin after 2006, it is Gordon. Just find somewhere that can be done without any loss of life. CrazyC83 04:24, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

 * That's kind of hard to do, Crazy C. It's got to kill somebody if it does anything to be retired. Every retired storm has killed a bunch of people, that's just a fact. It needs to be retired comemorativly, like Carol and Edna from 1954. The WMO can redeem themselves that way.

 * E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 22:48, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Not every storm. Elena only killed one, indirectly. I, too, share equal hatred towards the particular members of the WMO who decided not to retire Gordon. Another reason to retire it is for sheer weirdness. Gordon, IMO, (and I'm sure in a lot of other peoples opinions) took one of the freakiest paths in history. I fear Gordon will be another harsh storm this year. Maybe even a cat 5. I also fear it will strike Florida.   →Cyclone    1 → 03:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I was wrong. →Cycl   one1 → 20:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Subtropical storm
Is there any data to support that statement? I've never heard of that storm. It is not listed in UNISYS or the best track. If acceptible data can't be found, I'm removing the statement.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 22:48, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Here's the best I could find: http://www.intellicast.com/Almanac/Northeast/December/content.shtml and http://marine.rutgers.edu/cool/weather/historic.html.

 * I also found this from USA Today's page on the Fujiwhara effect: "One final example shows how the storms don't necessarily have to be tropical. Just before Christmas, 1994, a large coastal storm formed off Florida's east coast. The storm seemed to become tropical, developing an eye, almost like a late season hurricane. As the storm moved northward along the Eastern Seaboard a very large upper-level storm formed in its wake over Florida. This upper level storm was huge with a wide circulation spreading northward. It seemed to reach out and grab the first storm only to slingshot it on a northwestward path into New England.

 * "When this first storm came ashore nearly over New York City early on Christmas Eve it blew down trees all over Southern New England with winds clocked as high as 99 mph in Westport Harbor, Mass. The storm cut power to 130,000 in Connecticut as it dumped nearly 5 inches of rain on the area."

 * Here's an image of the storm. I have a feeling it will be upgraded in post-analysis. Hurricanehink 21:30, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Then wouldn't you think the same about the Blizzard of 2006? Icelandic Hurricane 01:23, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Ooh, good point. It could be the same, then. Does anyone know if the Christmas storm caused warmer temperatures or tropical moisture? Well, we'll find out in a few years when the Hurdat Re-analysis gets there. Hurricanehink 01:28, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I moved mention of the nor'easter into the "other storms" section, and removed speculation about re-analysis. — jdorje (talk) 01:56, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Images for Each Storm
I am trying to get an image for each storm, like 2005. I have started uploading ones that aren't on Wikipedia yet, and they are listed below. If you find a better image, feel free to replace it.

 * Tropical Storm Alberto- I know there is an image of Alberto already, but I personally like this one better than one in article
 * Tropical Storm Beryl
 * Hurricane Chris
 * Tropical Storm Debby
 * Tropical Storm Ernesto
 * Hurricane Florence

I didn't include the depressions, so this means every storm has their own image. Now that they're all here, what should we do with them? Hurricanehink 02:12, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I uploaded the tracks for all the named storms. Jdorje 21:17, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

button bar
If you really must add the button bar, you need to put it in a template. Jdorje 03:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Subtropical storms?
The "subtropical storm" described in the article (from the HPC) is also mentioned in Jack Beven's summary. A couple of excerpts from them: "This system seems to have been a hybrid low with features of both tropical cyclones and frontal lows." and "Based on the available data, the peak intensity of this system is estimated at 45-50 kt."--Nilfanion (talk) 20:44, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

And in addition the nor'easter is also described and closes with "The National Hurricane Center is currently evaluating this storm to see if it should be included in the 1994 list of tropical and subtropical cyclones."--Nilfanion (talk) 20:47, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Oddly enough, they're still evaluating it. Thegreatdr (talk) 18:20, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Timeline
I'm working on the timeline now, should be up later today. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. =)  Thegreatdr (talk) 20:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, the timeline will be delayed for a while, my computer crashed before I finished it so I lost all the data. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 18:26, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Merge List of storms in the 1994 Atlantic hurricane season
Ditto with what happened in 2002, 2006, and 2009. The season and this article are both redundant, covering the same info with only different formats. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 15:06, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, go ahead and merge. YE  Pacific   Hurricane  14:24, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I was recently putting in some significant edits on this article. That was because there were several MoS errors and I didn't want you to repeat what you did with the 2002 AHS. I am talking about when you "jeopardized the FA status of the 2002 Atlantic hurricane season article". Anyway, I support the merge, because this is probably be my last choice (out of all that were created) to create a separate list article for the season.--12george1 (talk) 14:46, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry :( But thanks for doing those edits. They'll be clutch when this is merged. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 15:02, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * BTW, I am still considering creating the main and separate list article for the 1995 AHS. Do you still agree with me doing that or should I just forget about it?--12george1 (talk) 20:40, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Personally, I don't think both formats should be used for any season. There is just too much redundancy. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 20:51, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

So would anyone like to do this? ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:06, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You're the merge guy, you do it, lol. It was agreed that this format should not be around anymore several years ago. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 16:21, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge - this format has since been disappreciated. Unnecessary separate list of storms for a very small selection of storms creates redundancy between the main and list articles. They're the same, but just in different formats. Merge.  TheAustinMan (Talk·Works) 16:24, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It is now merged. There is now a split history for the article though, which I have noted on the talk page for 1994 Atlantic hurricane season. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 17:11, 20 October 2012 (UTC)


text:
Portofino

Portofino (Portofin ) is a comune located in the Metropolitan City of Genoa on the Italian Riviera. The town is clustered around its small harbour, and is known for the colourfully painted buildings that line the shore. Since the late 19th century, Portofino has attracted tourism of the European aristocracy and it is now a resort for the world's jet set.

History
Pliny the Elder (AD 23 – AD 79) referred to Portus Delphini (Port of the Dolphin) as on the Ligurian coast between Genoa and the Gulf of Tigullio.

The village is mentioned in a diploma from 986 by Adelaide of Italy, which assigned it to the nearby Abbey of San Fruttuoso di Capodimonte. In 1171, together with the neighbouring Santa Margherita Ligure, it was included in Rapallo's commune jurisdiction. After 1229 it was part of the Republic of Genoa. The town's natural harbour supported a fleet of fishing boats, but was somewhat too cramped to provide more than a temporary safe haven for the growing merchant marine of the Republic of Genoa.

In 1409, when Charles VI of France was Doge of Genoa, he sold Portofino to the Republic of Florence. When Charles was ousted from Genoa, the Florentines gave it back. In the 15th century it was a fief of families such as the Fieschi, Spinola, Adorno, and Doria.

In 1815, it became part of the Kingdom of Sardinia and, from 1861, of the unified Kingdom of Italy.

In the late 19th century, first British, then other Northern European aristocratic tourists began to visit Portofino, which they reached by horse and cart from Santa Margherita Ligure. Aubrey Herbert and Elizabeth von Arnim were among the more famous English people to make the area fashionable. Eventually, more expatriates built expensive holiday houses, and by 1950, tourism had replaced fishing as the town's chief industry, and the waterfront was a continuous ring of restaurants and cafés.

Main sights

 * Statue of Christ of the Abyss, placed underwater on 29 August 1954 in the inlet at a depth of 17 m. This statue was placed to protect fishermen and scuba divers and in memory of Dario Gonzatti, the first Italian to use SCUBA gear, who died in 1947. Sculpted by Guido Galletti, it represents Christ in the act of blessing while looking towards the sky with open arms in a sign of peace.
 * Castello Brown (16th century).
 * Divo Martino, Portofino (12th century).
 * San Giorgio, Portofino, housing some saints' relics.
 * Oratory of Santa Maria Assunta, in Gothic style.

Restriction on photography
In 2023, the municipality introduced zones where tourists are forbidden to linger to take photographs, which was causing congestion. Fines of up to €275 could be imposed on those infringing the regulations.

In popular culture

 * The Enchanted April, a 1922 best-selling novel by Elizabeth von Arnim based on the author's stay in Castello Brown, is credited with making Portofino fashionable. The novel was the basis of a 1991 feature filmed in the Castello, with a cast including Joan Plowright, Miranda Richardson and Alfred Molina. The film was nominated for three Oscars.
 * Daphne i Portofino 1948 SLSA 1150 foto 999.jpg Daphne in Portofino in 1948]]Portofino was visited by Finland Swedish writer Göran Schildt and his ketch Daphne in 1948 on the start of his travels on the Mediterranean Sea.
 * Portofino is often thought to be the inspiration for Sir Clough Williams-Ellis' Italianate village named Portmeirion, built between 1925 and 1975, in north Wales. However, this was repeatedly denied by the architect. He stated only that he wanted to pay tribute to the atmosphere of the Mediterranean. He did, however, draw on a love of the Italian village, stating "How should I not have fallen for Portofino? Indeed its image remained with me as an almost perfect example of the man-made adornment and use of an exquisite site."
 * In 1959, Dalida released the song "Love in Portofino", written by Leo Chiosso and composed by Fred Buscaglione. With lyrics in French and Italian language, it became a hit and was later iconised alongside the village's name. It also spawned several international covers, including Andrea Bocelli's in 2013 which was followed by a concert recorded and issued on DVD.
 * Portofino is the eponym of Frank Schaeffer's Portofino: A Novel (1992). It was the first of Schaeffer's Calvin Becker Trilogy.

 * Portofino is one of the shooting locations of the 1995 Antonioni/Wenders film, Beyond the Clouds.
 * There is a full-scale replica, in authentic detail, of Portofino Bay at Universal Orlando Resort in Orlando, United States, which opened in September 1999.
 * Portofino inspired in 2001 a recreation of the seaside town in the Mediterranean Harbor area at Tokyo DisneySea in Chiba, Japan. It also served as the namesake for the restaurant Cafe Portofino.
 * Portofino was featured in 2008 in the BBC television series Top Gear. Richard Hammond, in a Ferrari Daytona raced James May in a carbon fibre powerboat from Portofino to St Tropez in France.
 * Ferrari named one of their sports cars the Ferrari Portofino in 2017. In 2018, the Scuderia Ferrari Club Portofino was founded.
 * In the 2021 Disney-Pixar animated film Luca, the fictional town of Portorosso is based on Portofino, as well as other villages in the Italian Riviera.
 * The 2022 six-episode period drama television series Hotel Portofino, set in the 1920s, was created by Matt Baker in 2020, filmed principally on location in Portofino in 2021, and is being shown on Britbox, PBS, and other television networks. The show was renewed for a second season.

Notable residents

 * King Richard I of England (1157–1199), in 1190
 * Pope Gregory XI (1330–1378), in 1377
 * Henry Herbert (1831–1890), British politician
 * Guy de Maupassant (1850–1893), French writer
 * Guglielmo Marconi (1874–1937), Italian engineer, inventor of radio
 * Giuseppe Amisani (1879–1941), Italian painter
 * Michele Cascella (1892–1989), Italian painter
 * Rex Harrison (1908–1990), English actor
 * Lilli Palmer (1914–1986), German actress, wife of Rex Harrison

Twin towns

 * 🇮🇪 Kinsale, Republic of Ireland
 * 🇪🇸 Palma, Spain
 * 🇫🇷 Cassis, France
 * 🇺🇸 Belvedere, California, United States

title: Portofino


text:
Hodge cycle

In differential geometry, a Hodge cycle or Hodge class is a particular kind of homology class defined on a complex algebraic variety V, or more generally on a Kähler manifold. A homology class x in a homology group

 * $$H_k(V, \Complex) = H$$

where V is a non-singular complex algebraic variety or Kähler manifold is a Hodge cycle, provided it satisfies two conditions. Firstly, k is an even integer $$2p$$, and in the direct sum decomposition of H shown to exist in Hodge theory, x is purely of type $$(p,p)$$. Secondly, x is a rational class, in the sense that it lies in the image of the abelian group homomorphism

 * $$H_k(V, \Q) \to H$$

defined in algebraic topology (as a special case of the universal coefficient theorem). The conventional term Hodge cycle therefore is slightly inaccurate, in that x is considered as a class (modulo boundaries); but this is normal usage.

The importance of Hodge cycles lies primarily in the Hodge conjecture, to the effect that Hodge cycles should always be algebraic cycles, for V a complete algebraic variety. This is an unsolved problem, one of the Millennium Prize Problems. It is known that being a Hodge cycle is a necessary condition to be an algebraic cycle that is rational, and numerous particular cases of the conjecture are known.

title: Hodge cycle


text:
Baffie

Baffie (Auvergnat: Bèfia) is a commune in the Puy-de-Dôme department in Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes in central France.

title: Baffie