text:
Wikipedia talk:Send in the clones

Is there any way each page a clone adopts can have built in a message to the effect that if the punters want the most up to date version they will have to look at Wikipedia? I am tracking some of the stuff I have written in recent weeks and apart from Google itself which can be fairly quick, these clones are often weeks out of date, which for fast-moving stuff is not very good.Apwoolrich 15:20, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * No, we have not control over what the clones have to put on their pages. Demanding they put such a message would be called demanding an "invariant section" in the terminology of the GNU FDL. Wikipedia has no invariant sections, and can not introduce them now because it would not be backwards compatibile with previous submissions. Thus we are relying on good faith for clones to point back to Wikipedia saying "hey; these are the good guys". Unfortunately this sort of good faith is incompatible with the clones' commercial aspirations. Pcb21| Pete 15:53, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia clones and search engine ratings
Originally at the village pump

I've started a page at Send in the clones to discuss this. Any comments? -- The Anome 14:06, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Say what you will, but two wrongs don't make a right. Much of what passes as SEO is really just plain Googlebombing. If you're talking about real SEO, that'd involve things like correct page structure, etc. which I believe we already have. Besides, if we play dirty, there's a chance Google will later demote us in search rankings. Overall, optimise only if its legal, and doesn't involve some dirty trick. Johnleemk | Talk 14:13, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I wonder if there are any problems for the google crawler going through our site. I usually check for the google rating of some of the articles I have created. For example monthon it recently had the article in the top 10 of google hits, before it had the link only without a cached version (and much below top 10), and now it seems to have disappeared again. But the mirrors are all present. Does the google bot run into any traffic throttleling, or the measures to block mirroring by sucking all pages? It's of course impossible to guess what is really going on at google... andy 18:25, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

We've had this problem ever since Google redid its PageRank criteria in order, according to them, cut down on Googlebombing. If anything the opposite seems to have happened. But I would not push Google on this issue until we have a good handle on our finances/server situation. --mav 07:53, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Google bombs work
Apparently some Wikipedians have already engaged in the questionable (at best) practice of googlebombing Wikipedia entries to the top. See "Accomplished Googlebombs", or do a google search for "Jew". anthony (see warning) 12:22, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Discussion of whether or not it was Wikipedians that did the googlebombing: anthony (see warning) 14:19, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * It wasn't Wikipedians who did that googlebombing. Pcb21| Pete 12:50, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Why do you think that? anthony (see warning) 12:59, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Do some research before you make allegations. Long story short: the Jew Watch website used to be top, some Jewish people didn't like this, and thought our Jew article was a decent alternative. Ambi 13:02, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * I stand by my allegation that apparently this was done by Wikipedians. Do you have any evidence that the people who did it weren't Wikipedians?  If so I'd like to see it, and we should add it to the googlebomb article, because right now the article makes it sound like it was done by Wikipedians. anthony (see warning) 13:06, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Remove Jew Watch launched a petition to "get Google.com to remove jewwatch.com from their search engine.". Other people have tried to have different sites rank higher for the term Jew . An ADL director stated :

 * Jonathan Bernstein, regional director of the Anti-Defamation League, noted that one can stumble across plenty of Holocaust denial Web sites by simply typing "Holocaust" into Google.

 * "Some responsibility for this needs to rest on our own shoulders and not just a company like Google. We have to prepare our kids for things they come across" on the Internet, he said.

 * "This is part of the nature of an Internet world. The disadvantage is we see more of it and our kids see more of it. The advantage is, we see more of it, so we're able to respond to it. ... I'm not sure what people would want to see happen. You couldn't really ask Google not to list it."
 * Which is in just one article linked from Google bomb. What evidence do you have that Wikipedians had anything to do with this? Ambi 13:13, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I clarified the Googlebomb article. Pcb21| Pete 13:19, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * As did I. That article you gave doesn't say anything about whether or not Wikipedians were involved.  In any case, my research on the subject shows that Daniel Sieradski (who runs Jew Watch) was the one who started the whole campaign.  I have no idea whether or not he's a Wikipedian. anthony (see warning) 13:38, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm Daniel Sieradski and I run Jewschool.com, not Jew Watch (which is run by Frank Weltner) and I am an infrequent Wikipedia contributor. Mobius1ski 16:52, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

And then the conversation breaks down into the inane: anthony (see warning) 14:15, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * About time you admit you were wrong then and apologize to me and Ambi? Pcb21| Pete 13:52, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I wasn't wrong about anything, and I certainly didn't do anything wrong against you or Ambi. Perhaps you just need to look up the word apparent: "Appearing as such but not necessarily so". anthony (see warning) 13:55, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * "Do you have any evidence that the people who did it weren't Wikipedians? If so I'd like to see it..."
 * Sounds pretty accusatory to me... especially given that there is no discussion anywhere on Wikipedia about attempting a Googlebomb for that word, in fact no evidence any where at all that it was Wikipedian-inspired and no-one but yourself even claiming that it was. I know you like to hang on to your positions tenaciously Anthony, but sometimes it aint worth it. Pcb21| Pete 14:06, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * It wasn't meant to be accusatory. I really wanted to see any evidence one way or the other.  The fact that I immediately went searching for evidence I think shows that.  I never claimed that it was Wikipedian-inspired.  I said that seemed to be the case.  I'm sorry you took my comment as accusatory. anthony (see warning) 14:13, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

A sneaky idea for page rank giving credit to authors
Ok, this is sneaky, this is awesome. Everyone's been complaining for various reasons about how many wikipedia mirrors do not link back to wikipedia's articles properly. One of the most upsetting features of this is that other websites get higher google page ranks than us.

How about this sneaky way of avoiding that. Why not automatically embed a link back to the article, somewhere in the article? It could be an automatic thing without the arrow. Most mirrors won't take the time to remove it from each article, and we'll have the link we want for the page rank. Its not at all dishonest, after all, they are required to link back.

Anyways, I just thought I'd throw it out there.

— siro χ  o  00:24, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)

 * You could set a piece of code in the article that when it's viewed from en.wikipedia.org it doesn't show it. Or in some other way to not be intrusive upon our readers but still "fool" the page rank. Overall, it's a nice idea.  —  Ilγαηερ   (Tαlκ)  00:30, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Before we do this, has anyone tried emailing Google? --Golbez 00:30, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)

 * I bet someone has. I mean, it'd be like if we were looking for a phone and nobody tried looking on the hook.  —  Ilγαηερ   (Tαlκ)  00:46, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * 1) There is no requirement to link back in the GFDL.
 * 2) Google doesn't get involved in these kinds of politics.
 * 3) If this is going to be done, it has to go into the DB, and it has to go into every single row of the cur table. That's the only way it's going to get incorporated into the forks.
 * 4) If the message is so intrusive that we must set a piece of code to hide it in en, then you should expect forks to do the same.

 * anthony (see warning) 00:52, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Re "google doesn't get involved in these kinds of politics" - Oh, really? Then why do they have selected providers for dictionary definitions? Why can't the same consideration be given to providers of encyclopedia entries as well? --Golbez 01:15, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)

 * Somehow I doubt google would give a free link to an encyclopedia which can be edited by anyone in the same way they gave the link to a dictionary definition provider, which most likely cost a good deal of money. But go ahead and ask. anthony (see warning) 13:57, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * There's not a requirement to link back in the GFDL, per se, but there are few practical alternatives, since they have to give credit to all original authors. I agree that Google shouldn't be involved in this at all. The message should be added to every article when the downloadable dumps are created. And if you think that they'll go out of their way to remove all these messages, especially considering it saves them the trouble of adding stuff to comply with the license, I think you underestimate the laziness of forks. Derrick Coetzee 00:57, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Linking back does not give credit to the original authors. I for one consider merely linking back to be a violation of my copyright.  As for my estimation of the laziness of forks, I run a fork, and I'm not going to insert any links beyond what I already have, unless Wikipedia does the same.  It's not fair to put forks on a different playing field.  Wikipedia doesn't own the copyright, the individual authors do. anthony (see warning) 14:01, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm not privy to the intricacies of the PageRank system, but I wonder if a self-terminating anchor () in each article would do it. If not, perhaps the usual syntax with null text () would.  It's something to consider, anyway.  Austin Hair 01:19, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)

I think this is a bad idea all around. Why is it such a big deal that the higher-ranked Google hits are Wikipedia content on some other site, rather than marginally more up-to-date Wikipedia content on Wikipedia itself? It's not like we profit from users coming here rather than our mirrors (aside from the influx of new contributors - and interested potential contributors will likely find their way here anyway). Tricking search engines merely to achieve a higher page ranking is sneaky and dishonest, and I don't think Wikipedia should participate in such tactics. If we do make alterations to various meta tags, it should be to help people get relevant search results, not just to win a race to #1 Google Hit. -- Wapcaplet 02:10, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * The entire point is not about page rank, the sites are supposed to link back to the articles anyway, or find some other way to provide credit to the authors. Its certainly not dishonest to encourage mirrors to follow copyright law.  — siro  χ  o  02:15, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)

 * First of all, the sites are not supposed to link back. That's not a requirement under the GFDL.  Secondly, if we want the mirrors to follow copyright law, we need to follow it ourselves.  A link is fine, so long as it is a link which is paletable enough for Wikipedia to put in its own pages.  A link which is meant to be added only to the forks and not to Wikipedia is not fine. anthony (see warning) 14:05, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I have no view on the validity of the scheme, but my first thought is that whatever one tries to do it would not be too difficult to strip it out in an automated way, using some kind of find and replace process, though without replacing with anything. But I'm not technical, so perhaps I overestimate what can be done. --[[User:Bodnotbod| bodnotbod  »  .....TALK Q uietly  )  ]] 02:30, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)

 * Anything we do is technically alterable, but given the fact that few of our pseudo-mirrors are competent enough to even disable page editing effectively, it doesn't seem likely that they'll circumvent this—especially if the result is effected by some Mediawiki keyword present in the database but transparently filtered in editing. This is not to say that I support the idea, but I don't think it would be difficult to implement.  Austin Hair 02:45, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)

 * The mirrors which don't even disable page editing by and large are the ones which do not have a good page rank. The mirrors Wikipedia should be working with are the better ones which do take the time to create a good image.  These are the mirrors which Wikipedia should want to be associated with in the first place.  But these mirrors are probably also the ones who would object to being pawns in some googlebombing scheme. anthony (see warning) 14:09, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Marginally up to date? I've seen mirrors with my userpage from June or July of 2003 and with vandalism preserved for a looooong time. So, I'd like to know your definition of Marginally.  —  Ilγαηερ   (Tαlκ)  05:54, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

apologies if i am wiki'ing poorly. anyway, there are several ways to make the self-link invisible to humans. and it doesn't matter if even 75% of the illegit forks stripped it, since the other 25% would be enough to put you at #1. please implement this suggestion. i ran into this problem today actually and did not appreciate the illegitimate mirror.

 * Embedding invisible links to increase pagerank directly violates google guidelines. If the parsers determine that this is being done you can expect your pagerank to go down, not up.  anthony (see warning) 14:15, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Complete agreement with Anthony. If we want to boost our Google presence (and our traffic seems to be doing ok, thank you) then the only way is to talk to Google. Apparently Jimbo has some contacts there, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn if he doesn't want to do that any time soon. Pcb21| Pete 16:20, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't get how a mirror can be considered illegitimate. About the only ways somebody could violate our license are:
 * forcing users to subscribe or otherwise pay to use their site
 * not having a website at all

 * If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, do not submit it. --Eequor 17:50, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Even those wouldn't really be violations. There's nothing in the GFDL saying you can't charge money for content licensed under it, and not having a website at all (say, if someone took Wikipedia and produced print versions for sale) would be fine, as long as modifiable ("transparent") versions are also made available. The only real violations I can think of would be: not giving contributors credit; relicensing under a GFDL-incompatible license. -- Wapcaplet 19:30, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I mean, having subscriptions as the only means of access. It might be possible, somehow, to provide the modifiable source in some other form, but distributing the entire database in that manner would mean lots of CDs or DVDs.  --Eequor 20:48, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure what in the GFDL would preclude having subscriptions as the only means of access. anthony (see warning) 15:45, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Police the licence
I LOVE the idea of a self-linking link in each article - put it in the bit that says "From Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia"! Irregardless of the Google issue, it REALLY helps with ensuring mirrors have a link to attribution of authors (necessary for not violating GFDL/p*ssing us all off). Plus, it helps the Google ranking issue (big time I suspect - probably will ensure we are always no. 1). And we do need to be no. 1, for all those non-cautious people who click "I'm feeling lucky". It's a lot preferable for people to go here rather than a static or slowly updated mirror. Any "snapshop" of Wikipedia can conceivably (and probably does) have "trapped" vandalism (that is probably going to be fixed right after) - even possibly on major articles. Such things bring Wikipedia into disrepute. zoney ▓ █ ▒ talk 13:06, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I think a better idea would be to help the mirrors by making it easier for them to download the list of authors themselves. Help us by allowing us to easily determine when an article needs to be updated.  A better mirror provides better exposure for Wikipedia, and this is where we should be focussing, not on sneaky googlebombing techniques designed to subvert search engines. anthony (see warning) 14:20, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * 1) There is no reason to suppose that there is any more or less vandalism at the instant the snapshot is taken than at any other time.
 * 2) The would-be mirrorer could easily strip such a link. Note that mirrorers have historically not given a toss about Wikipedia by and large. In general they obfuscate links as much as possible. Pcb21| Pete 16:13, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Pete, the problem is that on Wikipedia the vandalism is fixed quickly, but on some of the mirrors there are year-old vandalisms that still haven't been replaced.  —  Ilγαηερ   (Tαlκ)  16:25, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, but vandalism is *created* equally quickly... so although the mirrors will have *old* vandalism they won't have the new vandalism. If the amount of vandalism on WP stays roughly constant over the time, then all mirrors and this site will have the same amount. Pcb21| Pete 17:10, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I think that the "From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" could be a link to itself (the current article page) with a css thing for no underline and black text. Therefore it looks like a normal text.  —  Ilγαηερ   (Tαlκ)  16:25, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * That isn't in the database, though. anthony (see warning) 20:17, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * It should be.  —  Ilγαηερ   (Tαlκ)  22:37, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Seems like it'd be a pain to code, but if done it would be the best solution. anthony (see warning) 02:29, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Let's try some googlebombing. we could use the talk pages. e.g. by putting encyclopedia to try to get the top hit for encyclopedia. we could also go through all the web directoryes and sort them out. Dunc_Harris|☺ 21:54, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery
Rather than attacking other websites for copying our content, Wikipedia should be grateful to them for making the encyclopedia ubiquitously visible. How do mirrors threaten Wikipedia? They are not wikis. They are completely dependent upon Wikipedia for their content. Their response to criticism of inaccuracies in "their" content must be to immediately blame Wikipedia, and if they have any interest in self-preservation, they will tell the critic how to fix the error.

Wikipedia provides a valuable service for free to anyone, with almost no restrictions on how anyone might use the content. Don't be surprised when everyone copies Wikipedia in every way possible. It is extremely short-sighted, ingrateful, selfish, greedy, and juvenile to suggest restrictions for our mirrors. --Eequor 18:15, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * No - the GFDL does not mean they can grab all the content, and only list "Wikipedia" as the source. The authors of the text must be listed (providing a link to the "real" article with history is one solution for them). I for one object to my work being NICKED. zoney ▓ █ ▒ talk 18:44, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * It isn't "your work", and you implicitly gave permission for the entire world to use and modify, in almost any way, anything you submitted to Wikipedia. Please see Standard GFDL violation letter for the two requirements Wikipedia places on mirrors.  --Eequor 19:16, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * It isn't "your work" - Dead wrong. You retain the copyright on it, even if you give others a license to use it (in this case, the GFDL). Zoney is quite correct - the GFDL says ''"You may copy and distribute the Document... provided that... the

copyright notices... are reproduced in all copies"''. In our case, we have a fairly lenient intrepretation -- we allow them to link to our article, which contains the page history. If mirrors want to be GFDL compliant, they have to link to the source article. →Raul654 00:47, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * You're both wrong. As you said, I retain the copyright on my work.  So your "lenient interpretation [sic]" is meaningless.  Linking to the source is neither necessary nor sufficient for GFDL compliance.  And since there are no copyright notices in the original, there is no need to reproduce any in the copies. anthony (see warning) 02:19, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Exactly Eequor, we require the clones to link back to the original article, to provide the credit for our work, just as the page you linked to states: "we'd like to point out that when using content from Wikipedia you should include a link back to the source Wikipedia article."  (I suppose that if they bothered to make their own list of authors, that would be fine too, but I've never seen any citation of wikipedia that listed all authors of any article).   — siro  χ  o  00:32, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)

 * Aside from the politics of it all, it really is a shame that the world gets this free dictionary crap as 7th on a Google search for Kelly Holmes when our (now) far better article doesn't make it into the top 100. --[[User:Bodnotbod| bodnotbod »  .....TALK Q uietly  )  ]] 17:59, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)

 * So, am I right in thinking this is non-compliant... I wrote all, or the overwhelming majority, of our article David Quantick, which is now available here at something called Wikiverse.org.  The site's home page links clearly to us, but not the article page itself.  There appears to be no advertising, so I wonder if it's a mirror - but then, if it is, I wonder why they redesign the look of it.

 * I've gone and read the copyright stuff, but it's too confusing for me - I'll probably understand it much better if someone can clarify based on this example. --[[User:Bodnotbod| bodnotbod  »  .....TALK Q uietly  )  ]] 22:25, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)

 * Bod, each article is required to link directly to the originating article (or provide the authors in a different way, technically, but thats never been done), so Wikiverse is not in compliance. — siro  χ  o  22:31, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)

No, no, no. This is not true. Linking back to the article is one way of crediting the copyright holder, but it is a bit of an odd one. There is no need to link back so long as you credit the copyright holder... 195.158.19.248 08:59, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Bod, wikiverse.org is discussed here.  ←Hob 23:14, 2004 Sep 6 (UTC)

Anthony DiPierro: I've seen numerous comments from you to the effect that linking back to the WP article is not a sufficient way to credit the authors. Apparently, this is because you don't think Wikipedia's History feature serves this purpose either, and that WP itself is therefore non-GFDL-compliant. I'm sure I've missed much of this discussion, but I don't recall seeing you back up this opinion with citations; since you've repeated your conclusion here several times, would you mind a brief recap of your reasoning or an explanatory link? Thanks. (I'm guessing that you don't count History because it's not on the same page and therefore not literally part of the article, but that's just a guess.) Also, are you really trying to say that WP shouldn't/can't demand better compliance from clones until it changes its own policies to your liking? If so, I find that odd. ←Hob 23:14, 2004 Sep 6 (UTC)

Images
Is there an issue where a mirror is using images which seem to be hosted on wikipedia severs? http://www.sciencedaily.com/encyclopedia/ seems to do so. There is presumably a bandwidth issue. --Henrygb 13:43, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * This should be fixed with technical means. Instead of serving the image, readers of those sites should be detected with http referer and directed to a single image containing the text "Please read the original wikipedia on wikipedia.org.  You are currently reading a bad clone.  Please complain to your search engine.".  Mozzerati 14:18, 2004 Oct 24 (UTC)
 * LOL, I love that idea. The bigger and more annoying the message the better. DopefishJustin (・∀・) 23:57, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * Developers can prevent this, and have done so in the past for at least one site. Try reporting it at Non-compliant site coordination if you feel it's a problem. Angela.

Search -wikipedia
On some subjects, the clones are making finding non-wikipedia content harder to find. The obvious answer is to put -wikipedia in the search box. But even that does not work for all cases: for example Google "as a pedestrian tunnel and is now occupied by" -wikipedia chooses a phrase which does not occur anywhere else and (today) turns up: In some cases it seems the link back to wikipedia.org uses javascript to prevent the word appearing in the source code. A real pain.--Henrygb 14:15, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com
 * wikiverse.org
 * namweb.com.na
 * goobig.org (wordiq.com)

And "planned to merge the county back into Hampshire" -wikipedia: --Henrygb 13:32, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * webster-dictionary.org
 * ipedia.com
 * masterliness.com
 * freeglossary.com

Comment
We should not be so competitive with other wikis.--Arceus fan 20:54, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

We should try to work on wikia instead of google because I think that the search engine was developed for wikimedia.--Arceus fan 20:58, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia talk:Send in the clones


text: Category:Armstrong County, Texas

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

title: Category:Armstrong County, Texas


text:
User talk:TheFireCheese

Bias
I'd like your opinion at Requests for arbitration. Thanks. Chameleon 12:11, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:TheFireCheese


text:
Barbara Wright (Doctor Who)

Barbara Wright is a fictional character in the British science fiction television series Doctor Who and a companion of the First Doctor. She was one of the programme's first regulars and appeared in the bulk of its first two seasons from 1963 to 1965, played by Jacqueline Hill. Prior to Hill being cast the part had originally been offered to actress Penelope Lee, who turned the role down. Barbara appeared in 16 stories (74 episodes). In the film version of one of the serials, Dr. Who and the Daleks (1965), Barbara was played by actress Jennie Linden, but with a very different personality and backstory, which includes her being a granddaughter of "Dr Who".

Television
Barbara Wright first appears in the first Doctor Who serial, An Unearthly Child (1963), where she is teaching history at Coal Hill School in London in 1963, working with science teacher Ian Chesterton (William Russell). They are curious about their student Susan Foreman (Carole Ann Ford), who shows an unusually advanced knowledge of science and history, but a rudimentary knowledge of other subjects. In an attempt to learn more about Susan, Barbara and Ian follow her home to a junkyard, where they hear her voice coming from what appears to be a police box. During a confrontation with her grandfather, the Doctor (William Hartnell), Barbara rushes in to the police box, only to discover that its exterior hides the much larger interior of the TARDIS. After the Doctor reveals to Barbara and Ian that he and Susan are aliens exiled from their own planet, he tells them he cannot risk their revealing information about the TARDIS to their contemporary world, and dematerialises the craft against Susan's protests. At this point in the series the Doctor had no control over where or when it would land, making a return to London in 1963 impossible to co-ordinate. They are transported back in time to 100,000 BCE Earth, where they are captured by a prehistoric tribe seeking the secret of fire. Once they escape back to the TARDIS, their second trip takes them to the planet Skaro, where they encounter the Daleks for the first time. At the end of the first episode of that serial, Barbara becomes separated from her fellow travellers and is threatened by an unseen creature with a metal arm, marking the first appearance of a Dalek.

In the subsequent story, The Edge of Destruction, tensions between the TARDIS crew reach the point of overt conflict when he accuses them of trying to sabotage the TARDIS in an attempt to return to 1963. Barbara remains level-headed and logical, allowing the Doctor to trace the source of the distress to telepathic influences from the TARDIS (which is trying to warn them of a major failure). Seeing that Barbara has been hurt by his accusations, the Doctor apologises and begins to realise he can rely on the two teachers, sealing a friendship which lasts until their eventual departure from the TARDIS. Although mutually respectful and increasingly affectionate, the relationship between the Doctor and Barbara is often tested by their opposing viewpoints. In The Aztecs, Barbara is mistaken for the reincarnation of a high priest, Yetaxa, after they find her in possession of his bracelet. Barbara seizes this opportunity to change the course of history, and tries to persuade the Aztecs to abandon human sacrifice, so that by the time Hernán Cortés – who overthrew the Aztec empire – lands he will find a glorious civilisation. The Doctor warns Barbara that she cannot rewrite history, but his protests fall on deaf ears. Barbara fails and, although she has influenced some Aztecs, history remains on course.

Angry at Ian, the Doctor tries to take him and Barbara home, but in The Reign of Terror they end up in the French Revolution, where Barbara and Susan are captured and nearly guillotined. In the second season opener, Planet of Giants (1964), the TARDIS crew are miniaturised and Barbara becomes infected by a deadly insecticide. Barbara sees the departure of Susan and aids in the rescue of the abandoned orphan Vicki (Maureen O'Brien), who takes Susan's place on the TARDIS. In the subsequent adventure, The Romans, Barbara is sold off as a slave and ends up as a servant in Nero's palace; due to his interest in her, Nero's wife Poppaea tries to poison her. Barbara and Ian leave in The Chase (1965). After the Daleks who have been pursuing the TARDIS have been destroyed, Barbara suggests to Ian they use the abandoned Dalek time machine to get home. The Doctor is furious and tries to persuade them to stay with him by suggesting the journey might kill them, but the two teachers had made up their minds. After an emotional farewell to the Doctor and Vicki, Barbara and Ian are returned to London, albeit two years after their disappearance. Back on the TARDIS, the Doctor uses the time-space visualiser to check they have returned safely, and tells Vicki how much he will miss them.

Following her departure in The Chase, Barbara has been name-checked in the series on four subsequent occasions. She was mentioned by Vicki in episode one of The Time Meddler; by the first Doctor in episode four of The Massacre, by his third incarnation on Spiradon in episode one of Planet of the Daleks and again by the seventh Doctor, who intoned her name amongst a list of former companions to ward off the haemovore attack in The Curse of Fenric. Barbara was also mentioned in episode one of the 1993 Children In Need charity special Dimensions In Time and again in Death of the Doctor, a two part story in the fourth series of The Sarah Jane Adventures transmitted in October 2010. After meeting Jo Grant and the Eleventh Doctor, Sarah Jane Smith reveals that she has researched the lives of some of the Doctor's Earth-bound companions and discovered that Ian and Barbara have married each other, become professors, live in Cambridge and are rumoured to have not aged since the 1960s.

This non-aging rumour however, has been seemingly contradicted by an elderly Ian Chesterton’s appearance in the 2022 episode story, The Power of the Doctor

In the 2016 spin off Class, the refurbished Coal Hill Academy contains a building called "The Barbara Wright Building".

Other media
Since 1994, the character has appeared in several Doctor Who novels from Virgin Publishing and BBC Books. In the BBC Books novel, The Face of the Enemy by David A. McIntee (1998), the story of Ian and Barbara, now married to each other, is picked up in the early 1970s. In this book, they have a young son named John. Barbara also appears in several Big Finish Productions audio dramas, which are narrated by surviving cast members Carole Ann Ford or William Russell. Actress Jemma Powell, who played Jacqueline Hill and Barbara in the docudrama An Adventure in Space and Time, also voiced the character in Big Finish audio dramas.

In the novelisation of The Daleks, Doctor Who in an Exciting Adventure with the Daleks by David Whitaker, Barbara and Susan have just been in a car accident when they first meet Ian. After entering the TARDIS, the remainder of the story largely follows the events of The Daleks.

In issue #456 of Doctor Who Magazine, the Eleventh Doctor investigates strange psychic metal and finds Ian and Barbara inside, who believe they are teaching several classes for a wide range of students. In the following issues the two help the Doctor investigate a conspiracy that stretches through the years they knew 'their' Doctor and beyond. At the end, Ian and Barbara are married.

Film version
In the film Dr. Who and the Daleks (1965), Barbara (portrayed by Jennie Linden) is one of Dr. Who's granddaughters and the girlfriend of Ian Chesterton. Barbara does not appear in Daleks' Invasion Earth 2150 A.D. (1966) being replaced by Louise, Dr. Who's niece, with no mention as to her fate.

Comics
The character also appears in the Dell comic strip adaptation of the film and the short story The House on Oldark Moor by Justin Richards.

In Dr. Who and the House on Oldark Moor, Barbara met an ancient Roman legion in 64 A.D., and travelled to Oldark Moor and met Count Tarkin. Barbara was absent during two of Dr. Who and Susan's subsequent adventures, as was Ian, with Susan believing that she eventually stopped seeing, though she had not actually gotten over him.

In Doctor Who 3 - The Third Motion Picture, partway through the Scriptwriter's typing the script of the third Dr. Who film which would have featured Barbara rekindling her relationship with an increasingly, literally clownish Ian, Susan realised that she and all her family were fictional constructs; she reached out into the real world and killed the Scriptwriter by staking him through the heart.

Reception
In a review of Meglos (1980), in which Hill was cast as the villain, Radio Times Mark Braxton wrote that Barbara "will always be one of the great companions", speculating that her "magnificently haughty turn" as Yetaxa in The Aztecs was why she was cast in Meglos. Gavin Fuller of The Daily Telegraph named Barbara the sixth best female Doctor Who companion. Will Salmon of SFX listed the departure of Ian and Barbara as the eighth best companion departure. In 2010, readers of Radio Times voted Barbara as the 26th greatest companion, out of 48 options.

title: Barbara Wright (Doctor Who)


text:
Smell-O-Vision

Smell-O-Vision is a system that released odor during the projection of a film so that the viewer could "smell" what was happening in the movie. Created by Hans Laube, the technique made its only appearance in the 1960 film Scent of Mystery, produced by Mike Todd Jr., son of film producer Mike Todd. The process injected 30 odors into a movie theater's seats when triggered by the film's soundtrack.

Roughly similar concepts integrating odor experiences into entertainment performances date back at least to 1868 for live theatre, with the first film usage in 1906. Other approaches include General Electric's "Smell-O-Rama" in 1953 and the rival "AromaRama" system in 1959. In cheeky homage to this era, John Waters enhanced his 1981 film Polyester with an "Odorama" scratch-n-sniff card.

History
In 1868, a novel effect was used at the Alhambra Theatre of Variety in London when Rimmel scent was sprayed into the theatre during the Magic Dance of The Fairy Acorn Tree. The use of scents in conjunction with film dates back to 1906, before the introduction of sound. In this first instance, a 1958 issue of Film Daily claims that Samuel Roxy Rothafel of the Family Theatre in Forest City, Pennsylvania, placed a wad of cotton wool that had been soaked in rose oil in front of an electric fan during a newsreel about the Rose Bowl Game. However, between 1903 and 1915, there were no games held, so it is unknown what the newsreel was about, although the Rose Parade (which has been held annually since 1890) seems likely. In 1916, the Rivoli Theatre in New York was equipped with the ability to pump scents into the theatre for the short film Story of the Flowers.

During the screening of the film Lilac Time in 1929 at the Fenway Theatre in Boston, Massachusetts, the manager poured a pint of lilac perfume into the plenum chamber of the theatre's ventilation system so that the audience would smell lilac when the film's title appeared. The same year, during the showing of The Broadway Melody, a New York City theater sprayed perfume from the ceiling. Arthur Mayer installed an in-theater smell system in Paramount's Rialto Theater on Broadway in 1933, which he used to deliver odors during a film. However, it would take over an hour to clear the scents from the theater, and some smells would linger for days afterward.

All of these early attempts, however, were made by theater owners and not part of the films themselves. The audience could be distracted by the scents instead of focusing on what the film director intended. Furthermore, because of the size of the theaters, large amounts of perfume had to be released to reach all members of the audience. This caused another problem: the human nose has a difficult time transitioning between smells until the molecules that triggered one smell are completely cleared from the nose, and with that volume of perfume, the scents would mix, becoming muddled.

Walt Disney was the first filmmaker to explore the idea of actually including scents with his 1940 film Fantasia, but eventually decided against pursuing this for cost reasons.

Laube's technique, which he initially dubbed "Scentovision", was introduced during the 1939 New York World's Fair. The system connected pipes to individual seats in theaters, so that the timing and amount could be carefully controlled by the projectionist using a control board. The first feature length film using the process was the 35-minute Mein Traum which was screened during the fair on October 10, 1940. The New York Times reported in 1943 that Scentovision "is said to have produced odors as quickly and easily as the soundtrack of a film produces sound", but Laube, a Swiss national, returned to Europe in 1946, unable to interest any film or television studios in his invention.

Further attempts with releasing scents timed to key points in a film happened at the Vogue Theatre in Detroit, Michigan in 1940 with Boom Town and The Sea Hawk.

General Electric developed a system in 1953 that they called Smell-O-Rama. They demonstrated its potential by exhibiting a three-dimensional image of a rose accompanied by floral scents.

In 1955, Laube, with financing from the Stanley Warner Corporation, set up a working model of his system at the Cinerama-Warner Theatre in New York to show a ten-minute pilot film. In November 1957, the system, owned by Laube and Bert S. Good, was patented in the United States.

Competition with AromaRama
In September 1958, an announcement was made about a film called Screen Scent No. 1 to be filmed in March 1959 using a fragrance process called "Weiss-Rhodia Screen-Scent" to be produced by a company headed by Charles H. Weiss, a public relations executive. The film was described as a "kaleidoscope of comedy, drama and travelogue". The process had been developed over two years by Rhodia, Inc., a subsidiary of Rhône-Poulenc.

In October 1959, it was reported that Walter Reade Jr. was rushing to release The China Wall, an Italian-made travelogue through China at the Palace Theatre in New York City. The system to be used for the film was different to that of Smell-O-Vision as it sent scents through the air-conditioning system of a theater.

The particular technique was invented by Charles Weiss, who stated in a 1959 appearance on CBS's television programme To Tell the Truth:"I ... have invented a process to make movies smell. I call the process AromaRama. After more than two and a half years of work, our picture Behind the Great Wall will open December 2 at the Mayfair Theater in New York. In addition to seeing the action and hearing the dialogue, our audiences will be able to smell the scenes. More than 100 different aromas will be injected into the theater during the film. Among these are the odors of grass, earth, exploding firecrackers, a river, incense, burning torches, horses, restaurants, the scent of a trapped tiger and many more. We believe, with Rudyard Kipling, that smells are surer than sounds or sights to make the heartstrings crack."

The film was eventually released as Behind the Great Wall on December 9, 1959 at the (recently renamed) DeMille Theatre in New York, just a month ahead of Scent of Mystery, and the competition between the two films was called "the battle of the smellies" by Variety. The film was directed by Carlo Lizzani with the "AromaRama" process conceived and directed by Charles Weiss. The film was accompanied by a range of 72 smells that included incense, smoke, burning pitch, oranges, spices and a barnyard of geese.

Besides the slightly earlier release date, the name AromaRama itself made fun of Todd Sr.'s Cinerama process, and the choice of film was also deliberate, as travelogues were one of Cinerama's specialties.

An alternate explanation of the provenance of the word "AromaRama" was provided by Weiss: "Screenwriter Henry Myers (Destry Rides Again) came up with the name "AromaRama" because the process was to the sense of smell what Cinerama was to the sense of sight. AromaRama echoed Cinerama rather than made fun of it. Behind the Great Wall was chosen because distributor Walter Reade felt many of the scenes would be even more impressive with scents added. Because it had won major awards in Europe, it was expected to be well received in America – and it was.

The film received scathing treatment from The New York Times reviewer Bosley Crowther, who called it a "stunt" that had an "artistic benefit" of "nil". The accuracy of the odors was described as "capricious ... elusive, oppressive or perfunctory and banal ... merely synthetic smells that occasionally befit what one is viewing, but more often they confuse the atmosphere". By contrast, the film itself, which was not made with AromaRama in mind, received high praise. Further negative reviews came from The New Yorker.

Not all reviews were unfavorable. The New York Herald Tribune, in its review titled "AromaRama Premieres Here: Audience Smells What It Sees and Hears in Movie", the uncited critic writes: "With a few minor exceptions, the audience last night pronounced the succession of smells a total success from the start, which consisted of an opening from Chet Huntley, television commentator, who demonstrated what was about to happen by slicing an orange while the odor track suffused the theatre with a smell of oranges being sliced." A follow-up article in the December 13, 1959 Sunday Herald Tribune said: "Curiously enough, they do not give the impression of being blown in or wafted from any specific direction (although they are said to be linked to the airconditioning system.) Actually the individual smells simply appear in the nostrils without any effort being made to sniff or strain for them. And what is more remarkable, each individual odor disappears promptly when the image smelled leaves the screen ... There is no question about its effectiveness in creating illusions of reality."

The Sunday News awarded the film $3 1/3$ stars out of a possible 4 stars in its review titled Behind Great Wall' Puts Smell on Screen". Reviewer Dorothy Masters wrote, "Several wise men anticipated the birth of AromaRama, the major prophet being Charles Weiss, a public relations executive, who journeyed afar to enlist the support of a chemical company, an electronic air-filter plant, a camera equipment firm and an industrial timer organization. Together they devised a workable system for coordinating the picture of an orange with the smell of an orange."

The December 21, 1959 edition of Time Magazine stated in its review of "Behind the Great Wall", "The AromaRama process itself, developed by a public relations executive, Charles Weiss, is fairly ingenious. The film carries a 'scent track' that transmits cues to an electronic 'trigger' that fires a salvo of scent into the theatre through the air-conditioning ports. The AromaRama people claim that they can reach every nose in the house within two seconds and remove the odor almost as fast. The perfumes are built up on a quick-evaporating base (Freon) and as the air is drawn off for filtering it is passed over electrically charged baffles that precipitate the aromatic particles."

The film's poor reception threatened to derail the debut Scent of Mystery before it even opened, as the cinematic press now expected the odor release system to be poor.

In its first week in New York it grossed $33,400 from 29 performances.

Charles Weiss continued to experiment with motion pictures and aromas, adding fragrances to classic black and white films to demonstrate how smells might be used in the future.

Scent of Mystery
Todd Sr. had staged a series of musical films at the 1939 World's Fair and met Laube during this time. Fifteen years later, Todd and his son were thinking of ways they could enhance their film Around the World in Eighty Days. They remembered Laube's invention and although they decided not to use it for this film, Todd Jr., after his father's death, was intrigued enough to sign Laube to a movie deal.

Laube's system, which was renamed "Smell-O-Vision" by Todd, had been improved in the intervening time. Now, instead of the scents being manually released, it used what he called a "smell brain", which was a series of perfume containers linked in a belt, arranged in the order that they would be released. The belt was then wound around a motorized reel. As the film threaded through the movie projector, markers on it would cue the brain. Needles would pierce membranes on the containers, releasing the scents, which would then be blown by fans through the pipes to individual vents underneath the audience members' seats. The cost of outfitting a theater to accommodate the system was anywhere from US$15,000 at Chicago's Cinestage theater to $1,000,000 elsewhere ($0 to $0 today).

Both Laube and Todd understood that the system had aesthetic limitations. For example, a heavy drama was not the sort of film that could employ it well. Thus, the system was to be deployed with the mystery-comedy Scent of Mystery, which would be the first film in which smells revealed certain plot points to the audience. For example, one character is identified by the smell of pipe tobacco.

Reception
Smell-O-Vision did not work as intended. According to Variety, aromas were released with a distracting hissing noise and audience members in the balcony complained that the scents reached them several seconds after the action was shown on the screen. In other parts of the theater, the odors were too faint, causing audience members to sniff loudly in an attempt to catch the scent. These technical problems were mostly corrected after the first few showings, but the poor word of mouth, in conjunction with generally negative reviews of the film itself, signaled the end of Smell-O-Vision. A 2000 Time reader survey listed Smell-O-Vision in the "Top 100 Worst Ideas of All Time".

Scent of Mystery was shown with an animated short titled Old Whiff, which was about a bloodhound who had lost his sense of smell; the dog's voice was provided by Bert Lahr.

Legacy
In homage to Smell-O-Vision, American film director John Waters released an enhanced "Odorama" version of his film Polyester in 1981. Waters included scratch and sniff cards that the audience could use while watching the movie. Each card contained ten numbered spots that were scratched when that number flashed in the bottom right corner of the screen. Although this approach solved the problems inherent in previous attempts at this technology, it did not gain widespread usage for other films. The idea, however, was duplicated four times: firstly in the UK by ITV in June 1985 when an edition of science programme The Real World and Saturday morning children's programme No. 73 were both aired in "Aromavision" with accompanying "Aromapack" scratch and sniff cards distributed with listings magazine TVTimes; the second time in the mid-1980s when MTV aired Scent of Mystery in conjunction with a convenience store promotion that offered scratch and sniff cards; the third time was the 2003 animated film Rugrats Go Wild, the makers of which claimed it was a homage to Waters. The fourth time was with the fourth installment of the Spy Kids movie series, in which scratch n' sniff cards were given to movie goers, who were instructed to scratch the number as it came up on screen.

Walt Disney World and the Disneyland Resort currently make use of this idea, in their 3-D films and other attractions. Disney's Animal Kingdom's It's Tough to Be a Bug! releases an unpleasant odor coinciding with a stink bug on-screen, causing an audience reaction; similarly Mickey's Philharmagic at the Magic Kingdom and Disney California Adventure produces pie scents. Soarin' Over California, Soarin', and Soarin' Around the World include orange blossoms, pine forest, sea air fragrances, grass, and cherry blossoms as the scenery flies below the passengers. Monsters, Inc. Mike & Sulley to the Rescue! briefly takes riders through a ginger scented sushi house. It is unknown, however, if the technology behind this is the same or a derivative of Laube's work.

In 2006, NTT Communications, a Japanese telecom giant, developed a new way to display odors during the release of Terrence Malick's The New World. During seven key moments throughout the film, scents were emitted by an internet server that was linked to the reel of film, effectively downloading the scent. The scents used were supposed to evoke from the audience the emotions that were trying to be expressed in the film. Scents included floral for romance scenes, peppermint, and rosemary for tear-jerking moments; orange and grapefruit for joyful sequences; and eucalyptus, tea tree, and herbs for angry scenes.

In 2010, the Norwegian film Kurt Josef Wagle And The Legend of the Fjord Witch by director Tommy Wirkola was released to cinemas with scratch and sniff cards that the audience could use while watching the movie. One year later, the American film Spy Kids: All the Time in the World by director Robert Rodriguez used the same idea, advertised as "4D Aroma-Scope".

There have been further attempts to develop similar systems for the use with television or advertising screens using gel pellets or inkjet printers to spray small amounts of scent.

Regal Cinemas launched a new theater type, called 4DX, which incorporates smells into the movie experience. Other off-screen features are incorporated into 4DX as well, including motion enabled chairs, fog, strong scents, and water and air to simulate wind and rain. Regal currently operates 18 theaters with 4DX.

Scents were included along with haptic sensations in the 2023 4D film Postcard from Earth.

April Fools' joke
In 1965, BBC TV played an April Fools' Day joke on their viewers. The network aired an "interview" with a man who had invented a new technology called "Smellovision" that allowed viewers at home to experience aromas produced in the television studio. To demonstrate, the man chopped some onions and brewed a pot of coffee. Viewers called in to confirm that they had smelled the aromas that were "transmitted" through their television sets.

In television
The 1944 Merrie Melodies cartoon The Old Grey Hare includes a newspaper article which reads "Smellovision replaces television" seen by Elmer Fudd after he apparently visits in the distant future of the year 2000. However, another part of the article which was not read out loud by Elmer hints criticism from then-Merrie Melodies music composer and former Walt Disney colleague Carl Stalling, stating that "Carl Stalling Sez It Will Never Work!"

Steve Urkel invents a helmet-based smellovision device on an episode of the sitcom, Family Matters and convinces Carl Winslow to try it out. As usual, however, the device quickly goes haywire, burning Carl's hair in the process.

On the animated sitcom Futurama in the episodes "The Honking" and "That's Lobstertainment!", Smell-O-Vision has successfully taken off. In the latter episode, Harold Zoid, a washed up movie actor, comments he flopped after they invented "Smell-O-Vision". In the former episode, there is also a reference to the system when the logo is shown at the start of the episode. It reads at the bottom "Now in Smell-O-Vision" and another has the sentence "Smell-O-Vision users insert nostril tubes now". In addition, the episode "A Big Piece of Garbage" introduces the Smelloscope, a telescope-like device that allows people to smell distant cosmic objects.

In 1995, the BBC's Children in Need brought scratch and sniff smell-o-vision to the masses. Through the Saturday evening family show Noel's House Party, viewers could experience various odors to complement their television experience. A similar event called "Smelly Telly" for Cartoon Network's Cow and Chicken animated series involved scratch and sniff cards as well, lasting from April 26 to 30, 1999.

title: Smell-O-Vision


text:
User talk:Halo20

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

Here are some tips to help you get started:

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

Good luck!

title: User talk:Halo20


text:
Talk:Rubella

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lafe tc5598.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:25, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

What
What about some information on why it is sometimes called "German" measles? anon

 * Well, you can research this question yourself and add it to the article! JFW | T@lk  14:02, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Liberty Measles? Was this some sort of WWI/WWII thing, where everything German got renamed, like Liberty Cabbage? --[[Image:jsonitsacsig.gif]]  talk to me    crimes against humanity  02:24, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Heh. JFW | T@lk  10:53, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

 * The explanation for "German" differs between the English and Simple English pages. English says it actually has to do with Germany, while Simple English says it does not. English has several sources, though. Should the Simple English page be changed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.181.156.194 (talk) 22:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes. The text on the Simple English page is similar to that on this page a while back. I researched the name and concluded that the previous text was a result of improbable folk etymology. Colin°Talk 22:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

It's german as in germane, i.e similar to, measles. That's why it's latin name is a diminutive of rubeola. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.176.105.56 (talk) 17:28, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Rosr-rash
I have redirected rose rash here. IF I'm wrong please fixit. Rich  Farmbrough 13:52, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

 * rose rash of infants appears to be Sixth disease. Rich  Farmbrough 14:00, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

The Rubella Umbrella
One of my vague early-childhood memories is of TV ads or program segments featuring "The Rubella Umbrella", part of some sort of nonprofit campaign to do something about this disease. This would be around the late '60s or early '70s, in the New York area. *Dan T.* 17:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC) In 1970 New York City TV channel WPIX aired a "Rubella Umbrella" commercial to educate the public on the new vaccine (source: http://www.nytimes.com/1970/06/14/archives/citys-rubella-drive-on-tv-sells-children-on-need-for-shots.html?_r=0 and my memory). Actor Hugh Marlowe voiced a man asking an animated girl carrying a polka-dotted "Rubella umbrella". "Hey, little girl, what's that you're carrying? -That's my Rubella umbrella...". source: Hugh Marlowe was my uncle. I can't find another source for this, and I can't find a recording of the 1-minute commercial. http://www.nytimes.com/1970/06/14/archives/citys-rubella-drive-on-tv-sells-children-on-need-for-shots.html?_r=0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loribbb (talk • contribs) 15:21, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Rubella apparently not eradicated in the US
Vodcaster Cali Lewis/Luria Petrucci (of GeekBrief.TV) was diagnosed with rubella recently, as is mentioned on her webpage.130.49.36.140 00:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You are right. The US has only eliminated native cases (last one was in 2000). Eradication is some way off. Colin°Talk 07:58, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

There is a distinct difference between eradication and elimination of a disease. Elimination refers to the absence of endemic transmission. It is defined (by the CDC) as "the lack of existence of any continuous U.S.-acquired chain of transmission that persists for >12 months in any defined geographic area". One case, or even a dozen cases, does not negate the elimination. Mrs. Lewis could have contracted it overseas, or from a vaccination. No-chain of transmission = absence of endemic rubella = elimination. Period.

Eradication on the other hand means the total elimination of all cases. Only one disease has ever been eradicated (that's smallpox).

Further, even if enough information were given about this case (where did she contract rubella, had she been vaccinated, ect..) since a podcast is not verifiable nor is a blog a reliable source. Unless the elimination declaration is rescinded (by the CDC) we should stick with the terms and conclusions outlined by the CDC.--DO11.10 22:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Adoption
I am adopting this important article. I checked the History to see if I need to tell a major contributor; but there does not seem to be one. My long term plan is to combine Rubella virus with this article. I know the virology of this subject quite well, but I will eventually need to call upon my Wiki project for medicine pals to provide input regarding the clinical, (ie. dealing with infected persons' worries).--Graham Colm Talk 21:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

 * I've just noticed that both "articles" direct to the same page. It's getting late. Sorry about his.--Graham Colm Talk 22:26, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

 * I wish all my long term plans were resolved so quickly! Glad you're tackling this short article. I did some research into the name "German measles" a while back, which resulted in a correction to the article combined with a silly number of citations. An old "Notes and Queries" journal from 1878 had one writer speculating the origin and conducting folk etymology about "germanus". Several responses pointed out the actual association with Germany. I can dig those out if you want them. Always meant to look up the big OED somewhere to find out what they thought... Colin°Talk 01:17, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I remember now that I also did some work on the history section. It would be great if you could check the facts and expand this. Colin°Talk 14:42, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Merger suggestion
I think it would benefit both articles if Rubella is merged with Congenital rubella syndrome. The latter is only a stub and there will be a lot of overlap if these two artcles are developed independantly.--Graham Colm Talk 09:44, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * As it stands, the other article contains so little. An expanded Rubella would be expected to say at least as much in a section on the syndrome. However, I see some problems with the merge:
 * The syndrome is a distinct disease. Looking at the InfoBox, it has its own ICD codes and associated medical articles.
 * It would be possible to expand CRS according to WP:MEDMOS as a distinct article with its own sections (Signs, causes, pathophysiology, diagnosis, prevention, treatment, prognosis, etc.). It might not be a large article, but many of the suggested sections are appropriate. This isn't just a symptom or long-term consequence of a person's own rubella—it is a distinct condition in the child.
 * Searching PubMed for '"Congenital rubella"[TI]" finds 689 journal articles with that phrase in the title. Admittedly, the number of new articles is likely to be already on the way down, but there's plenty information out there for someone to mine.
 * There are about 50 article links to Congenital rubella syndrome (though many of those links are coming via the template "Certain conditions originating in the perinatal period"). These would then link (via a redirect) to Rubella, which isn't nearly as useful if someone is interested in the congenital issues alone.
 * The vaccine was created to prevent CRS rather than rubella, which is pretty mild.
 * The statistics for the number of cases of CRS in the 1960s is quite shocking. There are still be a lot of people around who are affected with this condition. So many, I read somewhere, that the US had to build new schools for the deaf to cope with the surge.
 * However, the two conditions are so intertwined that I agree some overlap would occur. And epidemics of CRS are completely associated with epidemics of Rubella so it would be very hard to discuss one but not the other. I can't make up my mind whether a merge would be good or bad. Colin°Talk 14:54, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

 * I too am unsure about this merge. I think that point four is of particular importance here. Based on my experiences, I suspect that when this article becomes fuller you will find that the CRS material is ported back to a separate article anyway. If you find when you get into it that the main Rubella article is lacking without the CRS material then I would support a merge. It would indeed be very nice if the CRS article could be expanded, since this form is of particular importance with respect to complications and has defined social implications. Just my $0.02.--DO11.10 (talk) 21:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

 * O.K. guys, I suggest that I work on the two articles as separate entities and that we re-consider a merger further down the road. In the meantime I will, hopefully, with you approval, remove the merge template. (just my £0.02 response) ;-) --Graham Colm Talk 22:42, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

 * I am against the proposed merger. CRS is a topic in itself that could be discussed in detail on its own page.--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 16:10, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

"german" measles
I had a look at the german version of this page, and it has no mention of the fact that we call this disease "German measles". Someone who can write better German than me may wish to inform them of this odd fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.197.21.34 (talk) 23:22, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The original term was measles germanus (Latin: similar to measles). I have never heard of the german physician explanation. Sydoc (talk) 03:20, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I've removed the eMedTV "explanation" as it isn't a reliable source and has no foundation. The origin of "German measles" is somewhat shrouded, as one might expect of a lay term that just comes into use (as opposed to some Latin term you might expect to find in a medical text). Notes and Queries columns from the late 19th century also discussed this, so the problem of its origins has been around for over 100 years. What is clear is that the word "German" has always been spelled with an upper-case G. The "germanus" explanation appears to be a false or folk etymology. Perhaps has access to better sources? Colin°Talk 08:40, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Source dump
I'm cleaning up promotion at March of Dimes and here are some formatted sources: Thanks. Jesanj (talk) 19:18, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Rubella in Portuguese
The article included the following text:

 * The name rubella is sometimes confused with rubeola, an alternative name for measles in English-speaking countries; the diseases are unrelated. In some other European languages, like Portuguese or Spanish, rubella and rubeola are synonyms, and rubeola is not an alternative name for measles.

I have removed the mention to Portuguese, leaving only "like Spanish," as the word rubella does not exist in Portuguese (in fact, double "L" has been removed from Portuguese spelling since 1943, except in foreign and some personal and family names). The disease is known in Portuguese simply as rubéola, not as rubella (or even rubela), with major Portuguese-language dictionaries such as Houaiss or Aurélio also listing the rarely used synonyms sarampo alemão (literally, "German measles") and roséola epidêmica. --UrsoBR (talk) 21:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Reassuring...
"Rubella is a common childhood infection that can sometimes be fatal usually with minimal systemic upset..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.185.147 (talk) 03:59, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Togaviridae
On the article Togaviridae, it says, “Diseases associated with this family include: Alphaviruses: arthritis, encephalitis; Rubiviruses: congenital rubella syndrome.” I think the words “congenital rubella syndrome” should be shortened to just “rubella”; any rubella virus infection may cause rubella, but only those in pregnant women, or women about to get pregnant, will cause CRS. It will be understood that “rubella” also means, by extension, CRS.--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 18:01, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Dermatology link is wrong!
The derm/259 link in the fact box to the right is wrong. It goes to measles (rubeola) instead of to dermatology for rubella. The article it should refer to is the following, but I don't know how to find a link on the form derm/xxx for it. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1133108-overviewMick3 (talk) 12:53, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

 * Found it and fixed it. it's derm/380. Mick3 (talk) 00:05, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Also, the peds/2025 link in the fact box is dangling. It should probably go to the following page, but I don't know how to find a peds/XXX link for it. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/968523-overview Mick3 (talk) 12:57, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

 * Fixed it. It's ped/2025 rather than peds/2025. Mick3 (talk) 00:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Conflicting stats
In one section it says....."During the epidemic in the U.S. between 1962–1965, rubella virus infections during pregnancy were estimated to have caused 30,000 stillbirths and 20,000 children to be born impaired or disabled as a result of CRS."

In a following section it says....."In the years 1964–65, the United States had an estimated 12.5 million rubella cases. This led to 11,000 miscarriages or therapeutic abortions and 20,000 cases of congenital rubella syndrome. "

Which number of stillbirths etc is correct? 30,000 or 11,000? 96.40.115.189 (talk) 04:03, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Stillbirth and miscarriage are not the same thing. Ruslik_ Zero 20:32, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Rubella & "hard measles"
First, I grew up in a time in the US when children suffered thru a series of "childhood" diseases: rubella, chicken pox, & mumps. It was an accepted fact of life, once contracted a person never came down sick with the illness, & AFAIK children rarely if ever died of them. (As barbaric as this might sound today, my generation at least did not have to fear contracting polio, as my mother's generation did.) One benefit of having rubella, I was told, is that the acquired immunity to re-contracting rubella also made one immune to the "hard" measles. (Likewise, IIRC contracting chicken pox made one immune to small pox.)

So is this a fact? If so, this article should include this. I suspect this is one reason rubella did not receive priority for prevention & cure. -- llywrch (talk) 07:18, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Chickenpox and smallpox are not even closely related viruses, smallpox in an orthopox virus and chickinpox is a herpes virus, same with measles and rubella, rubella is a togavirus while measles is a paramyxovirus, this sounds like a strange myth to me. Tornado chaser (talk) 12:36, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It's what I remember being told, & it was common knowledge at the time; in fact I seem to remember seeing some of these assertions repeated in my grade school text books. The frustrating thing is that I had performed a Google search before posting & could find nothing about it. -- llywrch (talk) 03:29, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I have never heard of such a thing and I am quite certain it is not true. I was an antivaxer for a time before I realized they were all wrong, and I am sure this would have been one of their talking points were it true but I never read or was told this anywhere. Tornado chaser (talk) 03:36, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ping. Tornado chaser (talk) 03:41, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rubella


text:
Compression lift

In aerodynamics, compression lift refers to the increased pressure under an aircraft that uses shock waves generated by its own supersonic flight to generate lift. This can lead to dramatic improvements in lift for supersonic/hypersonic aircraft. Clarence Syvertson and Alfred J. Eggers discovered this phenomenon in 1956 as they analyzed abnormalities at the reentry of nuclear warheads.

The basic concept of compression lift is well known; "planing" boats reduce drag by "surfing" on their own bow wave in exactly the same fashion. Using this effect in aircraft is more difficult, however, because the "wake" is not generated until supersonic speeds are reached, and is highly angled. Aircraft have to be carefully shaped to take full advantage of this effect. In addition, the angle of the shock waves varies greatly with speed, making it even more difficult to design a craft that gains significant lift over a wide range of speeds.

Higher speed designs using compression lift, waveriders, remain an interesting possibility for hypersonic vehicle designs, although only testbed models have been flown. The Boeing X-51 (Waverider) also uses compression lift.

title: Compression lift


text: Category:Atascosa County, Texas

title: Category:Atascosa County, Texas


text:
Susan Foreman

Susan Foreman (also known as Susan Campbell in spin-off media) is a fictional character in the British science fiction television series Doctor Who. The granddaughter of the Doctor and original companion of their first incarnation, she was played by actress Carole Ann Ford from 1963 to 1964, in the show's first season and the first two stories of the second season. Ford reprised the role for the feature-length 20th anniversary episode "The Five Doctors" (1983) and the 30th anniversary charity special Dimensions in Time (1993).

Conception and development
The earliest scripts for the series had a completely different origin for the character of Susan, that of an alien princess named Suzanne – saved by the First Doctor from a world different from his own. Carole Ann Ford recalled that she was told her character would be "an Avengers-type girl – with all the kapow of that – plus she would have telepathic powers. She was going to be able to "fly the TARDIS" as well as [the Doctor] and have the most extraordinary wardrobe". However, none of this happened, as it was decided that the character would be more of an "ordinary" teenager, giving younger viewers a figure to identify with.

While the original outline for the series did not intend the pair to be related, writer Anthony Coburn created the family tie that Susan was the Doctor's granddaughter. According to founding producer Verity Lambert, "Coburn felt there was something not quite proper about an old man travelling around the galaxy with a young girl for a companion." Ford felt that the Doctor and Susan's relationship was different from that of later characters who had been branded as "companions" because she was also the Doctor's granddaughter.

Ford has stated that little background information on Susan's character or history was provided to her by the production team, and so to inform her performance, she would often discuss and invent ideas about Susan with her co-star William Hartnell. They established that the Doctor had "done something to annoy his own people" that had caused his and Susan's exile. Ford also points out that suggestions that Susan was not the Doctor's natural granddaughter were first put forward in the 1990s. However, in 2013, she revealed that the producers had initially insisted that Susan did not refer to the Doctor as her grandfather in "The Five Doctors" special. Ford recalled, "They said, 'We don't really want people to perceive him as having had sex with someone, to father a child.' I just screamed with hysterical laughter and said, 'In that case, I'm not doing it.'" The script was changed to include references to the characters' relationship.

Media historian James Chapman has written that the way Susan was written made her limited, because "she was required to fill the role of the 'screamer' and often had little to do beyond looking pretty and frightened". Ford was similarly displeased with her character, sometimes finding her "pathetic" and frustrating because she was not allowed to develop. In addition, Ford found the series too repetitive. Susan became the first companion to leave the programme, after just 51 episodes. Ford felt that Susan was allowed to develop more in the Big Finish audio dramas.

Television
Susan is introduced in the first Doctor Who story, An Unearthly Child (1963), with the first episode focusing on her as an unusual teenager with an advanced knowledge of history and science. This catches the attention of her teachers at Coal Hill School, Ian Chesterton (William Russell) and Barbara Wright (Jacqueline Hill), who follow her home to a junkyard owned by an unseen proprietor named I. M. Foreman. It is implied within the story that Susan took the surname "Foreman" from this junkyard sign as an alias for use at the school, for when her chemistry teacher assumed that her grandfather was "Doctor Foreman" the Doctor replied, "Doctor who? What's he talking about?", indicating that he was unfamiliar with the surname. It is revealed that she and her grandfather, the Doctor (William Hartnell), are exiles from their own people in "another time, another world" and have been travelling through space and time in a machine she named the TARDIS from the acronym "Time and Relative Dimension in Space". As Ian and Barbara have gained this knowledge, the Doctor whisks them away in the TARDIS against their will, but he cannot accurately fly the machine.

Susan continues to travel with the Doctor and her two teachers until the 1964 serial, The Dalek Invasion of Earth. During the events of that story, Susan falls in love with David Campbell (Peter Fraser), a young freedom fighter in the 22nd century. However, Susan feels that she has to stay with and take care of her grandfather. The Doctor, realising that Susan is now a grown woman and deserves a future away from him, locks her out of the TARDIS and leaves after a tearful farewell. Ford reprised the role of Susan on television in the 20th anniversary special "The Five Doctors" (1983), but no mention of David, or what became of him, was made on screen. In the novelisation of the same story, they are still married. Ford also reprised her role for the 1993 charity special Dimensions in Time.

In The Curse of Fenric, the Seventh Doctor states that he does not know if he has any family. In "The End of the World", the Ninth Doctor states that his home world has been destroyed and that he is the last of the Time Lords. Although Susan is not mentioned by name, the Ninth Doctor says in "Father's Day" that his "whole family" died, and in "The Empty Child", Doctor Constantine remarks he has been a father and grandfather, but now he is neither, to which the Doctor replies, "I know the feeling." In "Fear Her", the Tenth Doctor states, "I was a dad once," but does not elaborate on this revelation. In "The Doctor's Daughter", the Doctor tells Donna Noble "I've been a father before... I lost all that a long time ago, along with everything else", admitting, "I can see them. The hole they left, all the pain that filled it". In "The Rings of Akhaten", the Eleventh Doctor recounts the occasion that he travelled with his granddaughter to the rings of the planet Akhaten. The 2013 episode "Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS" contains audio from the scene in An Unearthly Child where Susan explains how she named the TARDIS. A brief glimpse of Susan, played by an unidentified body double, is seen in the opening scene of "The Name of the Doctor", which depicts the Doctor and Susan leaving Gallifrey in a TARDIS.

Following the revelation in the 2013 specials, "The Day of the Doctor" and "The Time of the Doctor", that the Time Lords were not, as originally believed, wiped out by the Doctor's hand,  Susan's fate after "The Five Doctors" remains ambiguous. In "Death in Heaven" (2014), the Twelfth Doctor's (Peter Capaldi) companion Clara Oswald (Jenna Coleman) pretends to be the Doctor in order to confuse the Cybermen and buy herself time to escape; she describes the Doctor's children and grandchildren as "missing and, I assume, dead." In the Class episode "For Tonight We Might Die", Susan's name is displayed on the roll of honour at Coal Hill Academy, along with Clara Oswald and Danny Pink. A photograph of Susan is seen on the Doctor's desk in a university where he is lecturing in 2017's "The Pilot", beside a photograph of River Song. When the Fifteenth Doctor visits 1963 with his companion Ruby Sunday ("The Devil's Chord"), he mentions that his younger self is currently living with Susan in Shoreditch, but he subsequently speculates that Susan is almost certainly dead now after the genocide of the rest of the Time Lords.

Other media
Susan's character has been expounded upon in spin-off media. In 1983, Doctor Who's then-script editor Eric Saward wrote a short story dealing with the Doctor's departure from Gallifrey for the Radio Times Doctor Who 20th Anniversary Special. This story, "Birth of a Renegade", depicts Susan as a descendant of Time Lord founder Rassilon and the last surviving member of Gallifrey's royal family, unrelated to the Doctor. A later script editor, Andrew Cartmel, had another explanation of Susan's origins. This account, part of the "Cartmel Masterplan", was not used in the programme, but was used as background for several of the Virgin New Adventures novels, most notably Lungbarrow by Marc Platt. In this version, Susan is the granddaughter of the mysterious Gallifreyan founder known as the Other, who may have been reincarnated as the Doctor. The Doctor had travelled back to the dawn of Time Lord civilisation and rescued Susan, who recognised him as her grandfather.

The character has also appeared in several licensed novels. She makes a cameo appearance in the 1994 New Adventures novel All-Consuming Fire and stars in the 1995 Virgin Missing Adventures novel The Sorcerer's Apprentice. She appears in three Past Doctor Adventures novels set within her time on the television programme, The Witch Hunters (1998), City at World's End (1999) and The Time Travellers (2005). The latter explains why the Doctor left Susan. During the events of that novel, the Doctor becomes involved in the British Army's time travel experiments, which risk him being noticed by the Time Lords. He then resolves to begin looking for a place where Susan can be safe and content so that if he is ever apprehended by their people, she will still be free. Susan reappears in the 1998 Eighth Doctor Adventures novel Legacy of the Daleks by John Peel, which takes place after the events of The Dalek Invasion of Earth. At the end of that novel, Susan comes into possession of the Master's TARDIS after he tries to capture her, and is once again able to roam time and space. The 2001 Telos novella Time and Relative takes place just prior to An Unearthly Child and involves Susan and several of her classmates from Coal Hill School trying to survive an alien invasion of Earth by a race of ice beings called the Cold and at the same time convince the Doctor to stop the attack. In the 2003 Telos novella Frayed, which also takes place prior to the serial An Unearthly Child, Susan's name was given to her from a young girl in a besieged human medical facility on another planet, after the girl's mother. The Eighth Doctor Adventures novel Sometime Never... depicts the Doctor's adoptive granddaughter Zezanne as an alien princess who would later travel to a junkyard in 1963 with a man who resembled the First Doctor. In the 2017 novel A Brief History of Time Lords, an image of Susan is shown as one of the things that the Doctor took with him when leaving Gallifrey, although she is listed as the President's daughter.

Susan also appears, played by Ford, in the Companion Chronicles audio drama series from Big Finish. Quinnis (2010) takes place before the television series, when the Doctor and Susan were traveling alone. In the Big Finish bonus release An Earthly Child (2010), Susan is reunited with the Doctor in his eighth incarnation (Paul McGann), and has a son named Alex (Jake McGann). She appears in the Eighth Doctor Adventures audio plays in Relative Dimensions (2010) and Lucie Miller / To the Death (2011). In the later Short Trip "All Hands on Deck", Susan decides to leave her life on Earth and join the Time War, with the box set Susan's War depicting her service in the War. She helps the Time Lords form an alliance with the Sensorites to gain the aid of their telepathic circuits- also recruiting Ian to act as a diplomat in the process- ("Sphere of Influence") and later missions including capturing a Dalek agent on Florana ("The Uncertain Shore") and preventing a plan to configure the vortex-dwelling Orovix as a weapon against the Daleks as Susan recognised that they were too dangerous ("Assets of War"). She was briefly manipulated by a Dalek agent to go back to 1963 to try and help them retrieve the Hand of Omega before the Hand could be used to destroy Skaro, but she and the Eighth Doctor are able to trick the Daleks into taking a fake Hand without alerting the Renegade Daleks of that era to the presence of the Time War Daleks ("The Shoreditch Intervention").

Ford also played an alternate version of Susan in Big Finish's Doctor Who Unbound audio plays Auld Mortality (2003) and A Storm of Angels (2005), in which Susan has become President of Gallifrey. In the 2003 Doctor Who Unbound play Exile, an alternative Doctor, whose latest regeneration was female (played by Arabella Weir), settles on Earth in 2003 using the identity and 1963 school records of Susan Foreman.

On 9 July 1994, BBC Radio 4 broadcast Whatever Happened to Susan Foreman?, a humorous investigation into Susan's background. Susan was portrayed by Jane Asher. In the 2013 BBC drama An Adventure in Space and Time, which told the story of the first three years of the show, Claudia Grant played Carole Ann Ford. Grant then went on to play Susan herself in a series of First Doctor stories for Big Finish.

In the short story, '"Press Play", the Thirteenth Doctor discovered a message in the TARDIS left for her by Susan informing her that before she had "activated the TARDIS record mode" before she left in The Dalek Invasion of Earth.

Film version
In the films Dr. Who and the Daleks (1965) and Daleks' Invasion Earth 2150 A.D. (1966), Susan (portrayed by Roberta Tovey) is one of Dr. Who’s granddaughters, she is depicted as a more brave and resourceful child than her timid, teenage television counterpart.

Comics
The character also appears in the Dell comic strip adaptation of the film, the Doctor Who Magazine comic strip stories Daleks Versus the Martians and Dr. Who and the Mechonoids, and the short story The House on Oldark Moor by Justin Richards.

In Dr Who and the House on Oldark Moor, she and the others encountered an ancient Roman legion in 64 A.D., and subsequently travelled to Oldark Moor and met Count Tarkin.

In Doctor Who 3 - The Third Motion Picture, Susan realized that she and the others were only fictional constructs created by the Scriptwriter, and managed to reach out and pierce the Scriptwriter through the heart with a stake while the Scriptwriter was scripting a third Dr. Who movie, putting an end to the franchise and freeing herself from fictionality.

Other appearances
Roberta Tovey reprised the role of Susan for a minisode in the documentary More than... 30 Years in the TARDIS.

In the Dalek-infested London of the 22nd century, the Black and Red Dalek and two Robomen walk past a sign reading: ″IT IS FORBIDDEN TO DUMP BODIES IN THE RIVER″, as well as an inconspicuous police box, not recognising it as Tardis. After the Daleks have gone past, the doors open to reveal Susan, grinning at her successful stealth.

In an interview following the skit, Tovey harboured hopes of a follow-up to the two Cushing films centering on an adult version of her Susan, having taken on her grandfather's mantle as an adventurer in time and space, these plans never materialised.

title: Susan Foreman


text:
Radegast

Radegast is a small town in the district of Anhalt-Bitterfeld in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany. It is the smallest town in Saxony-Anhalt and is located about 13 km south of the district capital of Köthen. Since 1 January 2010, it is part of the town Südliches Anhalt.

Geography
Radegast is located midway between the cities of Köthen (Anhalt), Wolfen, Bitterfeld and Dessau.

Geographical Situation
The area of Radegast borders on the national park "Cösitzer Teich" in the southeast and on the conservation park "Fuhneaue" in the south.

Geology
Radegast is situated at the margin of the Köthen culture plain. Here it ascends from the Fuhne valley, so the difference in height is about 6 m on a short distance. The town is situated right in the middle of a former swampland. The upper level of this swamp has been quite fertile for a long time. The official Radegast Chronicle says, "the lower level of the soil in this area is not bad, but its value is lowered because it is too damp." The upper level to a depth of about 0.3 m is meadowland with a lush vegetation of grasses and swampland, which is very fertile and became very calcareous, too because of the stagnant water. This is followed by peat, which was cut for being used as peat coal in former times. The upper level is bordered by an impermeable stratum of clay. At shallow depth large boulders can be found from ice age deposits. The quality of the soil became a lot better because of its agricultural use. It offers perfect conditions for cultivating sugar beets and wheat.

Neighbouring towns and villages
The neighbouring village in the north of Radegast is called Weißandt-Gölzau, in the east it is the village Zehbitz, in the south there is the town of Zörbig and in the west Radegast is bordering on Cösitz, which is a now part of Zörbig.

City structure
The town encloses the historical town centre and a housing estate formerly named "Siedlung Heimat", built in the early 1930s.

History

The first written document mentioning "Frates de Radegiz" dates from 1244. In the following centuries, the ownership changed a few times, which was mentioned in some documents. In 1612, Radegast became a princely office. In 1727 the village received market and city rights from Prince Leopold of Anhalt-Dessau, but the city rights were not exercised until 1852. From 1685 to 1688, a dam was built in the lowland of the river Fuhne between Radegast and Zörbig, which created an important trade-route between the cities of Magdeburg and Leipzig. In 1688 a boundary stone named the "Theure Christian" was set at this route. It marked the boundary between the former countries of Saxony and Anhalt-Dessau. In 1702 Radegast became a market-town, and in the same year the building of Radegast's first church began. The church-tower collapsed in 1752 and was rebuilt subsequently. Two historical guesthouses were built at that time; both of them exist today.

From 1780 on a counterfeiter named Ziervogel did his foul work in the town, until he was imprisoned in 1786. In 1820 the imperial post office was opened. In the first years of its existence it was a simple post station for the town of Radegast and the villages Wehlau, Lennewitz, Riesdorf, Cosa, Fernsdorf, Station Weißandt, Priesdorf and Cösitz. In 1929 a telephone exchange was installed. The post office was closed on April 6, 1999.

In the following years the town expanded. The number of inhabitants was 885 in 1867. Already in 1859 a liqueur factory was founded, followed by a sugar-refinery in 1860, where up to 120 people worked at its best times. In 1930 the refinery was closed and most of the buildings were pulled down, but some of them exist until today.

In 1871 an oak tree was planted at the market-place as a symbol for the end of the war between Germany and France, which lasted from 1870 to 1871. The tree called "Friedenseiche" ("oak of peace") is a mark of Radegast today and a natural landmark. Two years later, in 1873, the fire-brigade of Radegast was founded. In 1874 the nave of the church was rebuilt. The tower of the church was raised to a height of 35 m.

A railway was opened in 1897 and extended in the following years, but at the end of World War II the railway history of Radegast came to an end because the railway was disassembled as reparation payment to the Soviet Union. Since 1939 it had transported goods but no more passengers between the towns of Radegast and Zörbig.

Culture developed in the small town: In 1911 a football team named "Britannia" was founded, followed by a gardeners' club in 1919. In 1925, 911 people lived in the town. Also in this year a new town hall was established. In 1934 the construction work on a new school house started. Only one year later the new school was inaugurated. Students were taught here until the late 1990s.

After World War II ended, a new sector of the economy was opened up, as the horse-breeding started at the Radegast domain in 1951. The Radegast stud farm created a lot of prize-winning, successful saddle and sports horses in its history which is rich on tradition. From 1991 on the stud farm was called "Landgestüt des Landes Sachsen-Anhalt" ("official stud farm of Saxony-Anhalt"), but in 1997 the farm was closed, and the "Landgestüt" moved to Prussendorf. In 1999 the Radegast stud farm was sold to private owners.

On April 1, 1994 Radegast joined the "Verwaltungsgemeinschaft Gölzau-Görzig", which was renamed to "Anhalt-Süd" on the same date. Since January 1, 2005 it is called "Verwaltungsgemeinschaft Südliches Anhalt".

Coat of Arms
The coat of arms of Radegast has a silver background and shows a red tower on the right side. Nearby the tower there is an ascending red wall with a closed golden gate. Upon the wall there walks a black bear with a crown on its head and a collar around the neck. By giving Radegast the market and city rights, Prince Leopold of Anhalt-Dessau also gave the town this coat of arms, which is similar to that of Bernburg. Older versions of the Radegast coat of arms seem to be reversed, because they showed the tower on the left side and the wall on the right.

Culture and Tourism
Culture in Radegast bears the imprint of club and society activities until today. The Radegast society for local history and traditional costumes takes care of the traditions.

Museums
In Radegast there is a little parlour for local history where visitors can experience how people lived in Anhalt in the old days. The town also has a new-built false coinery. New coins with historical motives of Radegast are made for collectors every year.

Important historical buildings
One of the eldest verifications of Radegasts town history can be found at the former connection road between Radegast and Zörbig. It is an architectural monument, called the "Theure Christian". But there are a lot of other historical buildings in Radegast as well: There are the two old guesthouses "Prinz von Anhalt" ("Prince of Anhalt") and "Das weiße Ross" ("The White Horse"). Other historical monuments are the former imperial post station and the old railway station. The typical homogeneous method of constructionwhich was uses in old Anhalt, can be seen at the historical market place until today.

Parks
The "Bürgerpark" can be found at the settlement. Also the meadow of the river Fuhne and the near national park “Cösitzer Teich” invite wanderers and friends of mother nature.

Natural Monuments
The "Friedenseiche" in the middle of the market place – about 135 years old – is a natural monument. It is also a symbol for the end of war between Germany and France in the years 1870 to 1871.

Institutions
In Radegast can be found several institutions:
 * a fire-brigade
 * a savings bank
 * a centre for leisure-time activities
 * a police station
 * a kindergarten
 * a primary school and
 * a teen's club house

Honorary citizens

 * Louis Hecht (November 11, 1841 – January 11, 1931) – He was a miller and the mayor of Radegast from 1891 to 1925. He had to leave his position as mayor of the town because of his old age. The town thanked him for his good job and made and appointed him honorary citizen. After his death he was buried at the Radegast graveyard.

Famous sons and daughters

 * Horst Caspar (January 20, 1913 – December 27, 1952) – He was born in Radegast as son of an army officer and became a famous actor in films and in theatres in the 1930s and 1940s.

Important inhabitants

 * Franz Paul Baege (November 25, 1876 – December 1, 1938 – Baege was a teacher, regional poet and archaeologist. He wrote the dialectal novel book "Die Helden vom Dideldei" ("Heroes of the Dideldei" to some extent) and worked in Radegast as a teacher and as headmaster of the school from 1908 to 1933. He was buried at the Radegast graveyard, too.
 * Franz Ebert (May 1, 1877 – December 21, 1936) – He worked as a bricklayer and was a representative of the social democrats in the Radegast town council. Ebert founded the gardener's club in 1919 and fought for the rights of the poor. He was buried at the Radegast graveyard, too. Today there is a street called "Franz-Ebert-Straße" in the town.

title: Radegast


text: Category:Potato dishes

title: Category:Potato dishes


text:
User:Richard Harris/monobook.css

/* make a few corners round, only supported by moz/firefox/other gecko browsers for now */ -moz-border-radius-topleft: 1em; -moz-border-radius-topright: 1em; } -moz-border-radius-topleft: 1em; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 1em; } div.pBody { -moz-border-radius-topright: 1em; -moz-border-radius-bottomright: 1em; }
 * 1) p-cactions ul li, #p-cactions ul li a {
 * 1) content {

/* same following the css3 draft specs, any browsers supporting this? */ border-radius-topleft: 1em; border-radius-topright: 1em; } border-radius-topleft: 1em; border-radius-bottomleft: 1em; } div.pBody { border-radius-topright: 1em; border-radius-bottomright: 1em; }
 * 1) p-cactions ul li, #p-cactions ul li a {
 * 1) content {

title: User:Richard Harris/monobook.css


text: Category:Thai cuisine

title: Category:Thai cuisine


text:
User:Arno S.~enwiki

Hi !

my name is Arno and I'm french, I don't speak english very well but I'm here in order to read and not to write article!! I study in France in physics and I'm in my second years!!

Bye

title: User:Arno S.~enwiki


text:
User talk:Arno S.~enwiki

If you want speak with me, you must be cool because I'don't speak english very well!! thanks...

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Arno S.. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Arno S.~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 22:09, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 10:38, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Arno S.~enwiki


text:
RWD

RWD may refer to:

 * Real world data, medical data derived from multiple sources and heterogeneous patient populations in real-world settings
 * Rear-wheel drive, method of propulsion in an automobile
 * Rear window defogger, a system to defog/defrost glass in a vehicle's rear window
 * Responsive web design, a methodology for designing web sites that can adapt to a range of screen sizes and device types
 * Ringwood railway station, Melbourne
 * RWD (aircraft manufacturer), Polish aircraft manufacturer
 * RWD Magazine, a British-based music magazine

title: RWD