text:
First Blood

First Blood is a 1982 American action film directed by Ted Kotcheff and co-written by and starring Sylvester Stallone as Vietnam War veteran John Rambo. It co-stars Richard Crenna as Rambo's mentor Sam Trautman and Brian Dennehy as Sheriff Will Teasle. It is the first installment in the Rambo franchise, followed by Rambo: First Blood Part II.

The film is based on the 1972 novel First Blood by David Morrell, which many directors and studios had unsuccessfully attempted to adapt in the 1970s. In the film, Rambo is a troubled and misunderstood Vietnam veteran who must rely on his combat and survival skills when a series of brutal events results in him having to survive a massive manhunt by police and government troops near the small town of Hope, Washington.

First Blood was released in the United States on October 22, 1982. Initial reviews were mixed, but the film was a box office success, grossing $125 million and becoming the 13th highest grossing film at the domestic box office and the seventh highest grossing film worldwide. In 1985, it also became the first Hollywood blockbuster to be released in China, holding the record for the largest number of tickets sold for an American film until 2018. Since its release, it has been reappraised by critics, with many highlighting the roles of Stallone, Dennehy and Crenna, and recognizing it as an influential film in the action genre.

Its success spawned a franchise, consisting of four sequels (co-written by and starring Stallone), an animated television series, a comic books series, a novel series and several video games.

Plot
Vietnam War veteran John Rambo goes to a lake house looking for an old comrade, only to learn his friend died of cancer over a year earlier, brought on by exposure to Agent Orange during the war. He offers his condolences to the soldier's widow for her loss and gives her a photo of the pair and the rest of their unit, Baker Team.

Continuing his travels, Rambo reaches the town of Hope, Washington. The sheriff, Will Teasle, heads him off and drives him to the outskirts of town, explaining that he considers it his job to keep drifters out of Hope. Neglecting the sheriff's warning, Rambo returns to Hope, prompting Teasle to arrest Rambo on charges of vagrancy, resisting arrest, and possessing a concealed knife. Led by the sadistic chief deputy Art Galt, Teasle's deputies abuse Rambo, triggering flashbacks of the torture he endured in Vietnam. When they try to dry shave him with a straight razor, Rambo snaps, fights his way out of the sheriff's station, regains his knife, and flees on a motorcycle into the woods. Teasle organizes a search party with rifles, dogs, and a helicopter.

Defying Teasle's orders, Galt attempts to shoot Rambo from the helicopter. Cornered on a high cliff, Rambo leaps into a tree, injuring his right arm. With Galt still shooting at him, Rambo throws a rock at the helicopter, cracking its windshield and causing the pilot to briefly lose control. Losing his balance, Galt falls to his death on the jagged rocks. Rambo tries to surrender to Teasle, reasoning that Galt's death was an accident and that he wants no more trouble, but the deputies shoot at him, and he flees. Other deputies warn Teasle that Rambo is a Green Beret, war hero, and Medal of Honor recipient, but Teasle swears revenge and continues the search.

Using guerilla tactics, Rambo non-lethally subdues all the deputies. With his deputies incapacitated, Rambo corners Teasle, holds a knife to his throat and threatens war if he does not give up the pursuit, before retreating further into the woods. The Washington State Patrol and Washington National Guard are dispatched to assist Teasle, along with Rambo's mentor and former commanding officer, Colonel Sam Trautman. Trautman advises that Rambo should be allowed to escape to the next town to defuse the situation, then be permitted to surrender peacefully later, but Teasle, confident that Rambo is hopelessly outnumbered, refuses. Teasle allows Trautman to contact Rambo to persuade him to surrender, but Rambo refuses, condemning Teasle and his deputies for their abuse and citing that they 'drew first blood.'

At the entrance of an abandoned mine, a National Guard detachment corners Rambo. Ignoring Teasle's instructions to wait for his arrival, the guardsmen fire a rocket launcher, collapsing the mine entrance and seemingly killing Rambo. However, Rambo survives, escapes the mine through a ventilation shaft, and hijacks a military truck carrying an M60 machine gun and ammunition and returns to Hope to cause as much damage as possible. In an effort to distract the authorities, Rambo blows up a gas station, cuts power to most of the town, destroys a sporting goods store, and shoots up the sheriff's station. Trautman, understanding that Teasle is outmatched, tries again to convince him to leave Rambo be. Teasle, seeing Rambo's rampage as a personal attack, ignores Trautman's orders and tries to hunt for Rambo on the station's roof, but Rambo manages to shoot and wound Teasle after a brief exchange of gunfire.

As Rambo prepares to kill Teasle, Trautman appears and warns Rambo that he will be killed unless he surrenders, reminding him that he is the last survivor of Baker Team. Rambo vents about the horrors of war and his traumatic experiences—watching his friends die in Vietnam, being treated poorly when returning home, being unable to hold a job, and being forgotten despite his sacrifices—and breaks down crying as he recounts how a good friend was killed by a Viet Cong child soldier using a shoeshiner box wired with explosives. After being comforted by Trautman, Rambo surrenders and is taken into federal custody, while Teasle is taken to a waiting ambulance for transport to the hospital.

Development
In 1972, Lawrence Turman at Columbia Pictures bought the film rights to First Blood for $175,000. Richard Brooks was slated to direct, and intended to have the film be an allegory on differing American perceptions of World War II and Vietnam War veterans, with Sheriff Teasle portrayed more sympathetically than in the novel. The film would have ended with Teasle ordering his men to drop their guns to try to reason with Rambo, who would have then been fatally shot by an unknown assailant. Brooks planned to start shooting First Blood in New Mexico in December 1972. The film did not proceed because the Vietnam War was still underway and Brooks left the project.

Afterward, John Calley purchased the rights at Warner Bros. Pictures for $125,000 with the thought of casting either Robert De Niro or Clint Eastwood as Rambo. A screenplay was written by Walter Newman with Martin Ritt intended to direct. The film would have criticized American military culture and portrayed Colonel Trautman as the film's villain, ending with both Rambo and Teasle dying. Sydney Pollack and Martin Bregman also considered directing the film, with Bregman hiring David Rabe to write a script. After Bregman departed Mike Nichols considered directing Rabe's script.

William Sackheim and Michael Kozoll wrote the screenplay that would be the basis of the final film in 1977, originally intending for John Badham to direct. Producer Carter DeHaven purchased Sackheim and Kozoll's script from Warner Bros. for $375,000. DeHaven secured the Cinema Group as a financer and hired John Frankenheimer as director with production to begin in Georgia. This was also the first version of the script in which Rambo survived the film. However, the project stalled again after the distributor Filmways was acquired by Orion Pictures.

After Mario Kassar and Andrew G. Vajna of Anabasis Investments read the book, they got interested in doing an adaptation as the first production of their studio Carolco Pictures funded by "in-house sources". They purchased the film rights from Warner Bros. for $375,000 and Sackheim and Kozoll's script for $125,000 in 1981. Ted Kotcheff, who had been involved in the project in 1976, returned after Kassar and Vajna offered to finance one of his projects. Kotcheff offered the role of John Rambo to Sylvester Stallone, and the actor accepted after reading the script through in a weekend.

Various scripts adapted from Morrell's book had been pitched to studios in the years since its publication, but only Stallone's involvement prompted its production. The time since the end of the Vietnam War and Stallone's star power after the success of the Rocky films enabled him to rewrite the script to make the character of John Rambo more sympathetic. Morrell's book has Rambo kill many of his pursuers, and Kozoll and Sackheim's draft had him killing sixteen people, but in the movie Rambo does not directly cause the death of any police or national guardsmen. Stallone also decided to let Rambo survive the film, unlike in the book. A suicide scene was filmed but Kotcheff and Stallone opted to have Rambo turn himself in at Trautman's urging. Stallone did an estimated seven revisions of the script. Kotcheff requested further work be done on the script, which was performed by Larry Gross and David Giler.

Casting
Brooks originally wanted to cast Bette Davis as a psychiatrist and either Burt Lancaster or Lee Marvin as Sheriff Teasle. When the project was purchased by Warner Bros., Robert De Niro and Clint Eastwood were each considered for the role of Rambo. Ritt intended to cast Robert Mitchum as Teasle and Paul Newman as Rambo. Pollack considered Steve McQueen but then rejected him because they considered him too old to play a Vietnam veteran from 1975. James Caan, Burt Reynolds and Robert Redford were also considered.

Rabe developed his screenplay with Al Pacino in mind for the role and had several conversations with the actor, who wanted to portray Rambo as a force of nature after seeing the film Jaws. However, Pacino decided not to be involved because he found the story too dark and also after his request that Rambo be a lunatic was dismissed by the producers. When Badham was considered as director he wanted to cast John Travolta as Rambo, George C. Scott as Trautman, and either Gene Hackman or Charles Durning as Teasle. Frankenheimer considered Powers Boothe, Michael Douglas, and Nick Nolte as Rambo before casting Brad Davis because of his role in Midnight Express. Dustin Hoffman was offered the role of Rambo but turned it down.

For the role of Sheriff Teasle, Kassar and Vajna approached Academy Award winners Hackman and Robert Duvall but both turned the part down. Marvin, another Oscar winner, turned down the part of Colonel Trautman. James Mason and Richard Jaeckel were also considered. Kirk Douglas was eventually hired, but just before shooting began, Douglas quit the role of Colonel Trautman over a script dispute; Douglas wanted to retain the novel's original ending of Rambo and Teasle fatally wounding each other, Trautman finishing Rambo with a kill shot, then sitting with the dying Teasle for the sheriff's final moments. Douglas also wanted Trautman to have more screentime. Rock Hudson was approached as a replacement but was soon to undergo heart surgery and had to pass up the chance to work with Stallone. Richard Crenna was quickly hired as a replacement; the role of Trautman became the veteran character actor's most famous role, a performance for which he received much critical praise.

Filming
The film was shot in the Fraser Valley of British Columbia on a $15 million budget beginning on November 15, 1981, and continuing until April 1982. The town scenes in the movie were shot in Hope and the nearby Coquihalla Canyon Provincial Park, called Chapman Gorge in the film, while the rest of the movie was shot in Capilano Canyon, Golden Ears Provincial Park and Pitt Lake in Pitt Meadows. During the production Buzz Feitshans replaced producer Ed Carlin, who suffered a heart attack.

The locations chosen for the film initially experienced unseasonably warm and sunny weather during the filming, which posed challenges since the crew had counted on an overcast setting. However, a period of heavy snowfall beginning in January 1982 delayed the production by two months. Other delays were caused by injuries to the cast during stunts, including Stallone sustaining a serious back injury and several broken ribs, in particular, due to performing his own stunt of dropping off a cliff and into a tree. Since the production ran over schedule, Crenna's role in the film was cut in order to avoid having to pay him higher fees as specified in his contract.

The firearms used in the film had to be imported into Canada because of the country's firearms regulation. In January 1982 over $50,000 worth of firearms—including fourteen M16 rifles, three Remington shotguns, two .44 Magnum revolvers, and eleven Colt AR-15 rifles—were stolen from the set. Although the guns had been modified to shoot blanks, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police claimed that they could be easily modified to fire live ammunition. After the incident the set was guarded by the Canadian Army, whose soldiers also served as extras in the film.

Post-production
The first rough cut of the film was between three and three-and-a-half hours long. According to Sylvester Stallone, it was so bad that it sickened his agent and him. Stallone wanted to buy the movie and destroy it thinking that it was a career killer. After heavy re-editing, the film was cut down to 93 minutes; this version was ultimately released in theaters. The ending used in the finished film was shot in March 1982, after the original one was deemed unsatisfactory.

Kassar and Vajna sought either Warner Bros. 20th Century Fox, or Paramount Pictures as a distributor, displaying an 18-minute promotional reel to studios. Although they secured international distributors, they were unable to locate a domestic distributor to the film until they sent a longer 55-minute reel to the American Film Market. After Warner Bros. and Paramount expressed interest, Orion Pictures agreed to the domestic distribution of the film.

Music
The film's score was composed and conducted by Jerry Goldsmith, whose theme "It's a Long Road" added a new dimension to the character, and featured in the film's three sequels and animated spin-off. The soundtrack was originally released on LP by the Regency label, although it was edited out of sequence for a more satisfying listen. The album was reissued on CD with one extra track ("No Power") twice, first as one of Intrada Records's initial titles, then as an identical release by Varèse Sarabande. The complete score was released by Intrada in a 2-CD set, along with a remastered version of the original album (with the Carolco logo [previously released on La-La Land Records's Extreme Prejudice album] and the Rambo: First Blood Part II trailer music added), on November 23, 2010, as one of their MAF unlimited titles.

 * CD 1 – Complete Original Soundtrack
 * 1) "Theme from First Blood" (pop orchestra version)
 * 2) "Home Coming"
 * 3) "My Town"
 * 4) "Under Arrest"
 * 5) "The Razor"
 * 6) "A Head Start"
 * 7) "Hanging On"
 * 8) "Over the Cliff"
 * 9) "A Stitch in Time"
 * 10) "Mountain Hunt"
 * 11) "No Truce"
 * 12) "First Blood"
 * 13) "The Tunnel"
 * 14) "Escape Route"
 * 15) "The Truck"
 * 16) "No Power/Night Attack"
 * 17) "Hide and Seek"
 * 18) "It's a Long Road" (instrumental)
 * 19) "It's a Long Road (Theme from First Blood)" (vocal: Dan Hill)

 * CD 2 – Original 1982 Soundtrack Album
 * 1) "It's a Long Road (Theme from First Blood)" (vocal: Dan Hill)
 * 2) "Escape Route"
 * 3) "First Blood"
 * 4) "The Tunnel"
 * 5) "Hanging On"
 * 6) "Home Coming"
 * 7) "Mountain Hunt"
 * 8) "My Town"
 * 9) "The Razor"
 * 10) "Over the Cliff"
 * 11) "It's a Long Road" (instrumental)
 * 12) "It's a Long Road" (recording session piano/vocal demo)
 * 13) "Carolco Logo"
 * 14) "Rambo" (Special Summer 1984 trailer)

Home media
Author Morrell recorded an audio commentary track for the First Blood Special Edition DVD released in 2002. Actor Stallone recorded an audio commentary track for the First Blood Ultimate Edition DVD released in 2004. This edition also includes a "never-before-seen" alternate ending in which Rambo commits suicide— a fate more in line with the original novel's ending— and a "humorous" ending tacked on afterwards. A brief snippet of the suicide ending appears in a flashback in the fourth movie. Lionsgate also released this version on Blu-ray. Both commentary tracks are on the Blu-ray release.

Momentum Pictures released an HD DVD version of First Blood in the United Kingdom in April 2007. Lionsgate also released First Blood as a double feature on February 13, 2007, along with 2004's The Punisher.

The film was re-released as part of a 6-disc box set, which contains all four films in the series, on May 27, 2008. However, the box set is missing the David Morrell commentary, even though the packaging clearly states it is included. In anticipation of the release, the film was shown back in theaters for one night, May 15, 2008, through Fathom Events; the alternate ending was shown after the main feature.

First Blood was released on 4K UHD Blu-ray on November 9, 2018.

Box office
First Blood topped the U.S. box office for three weeks in a row, and its $6,642,005 opening weekend was the best October opening at the time. The film ended as a significant financial success, with a total gross of $51 million domestically, the highest-grossing film of the fall, and the 13th highest-grossing film of the year.

The film grossed $125 million worldwide, against a $15 million budget. It was notably the first major Hollywood blockbuster to be released in China, where it was released in 1985. It sold 76 million tickets in China, the highest for a foreign Hollywood film up until 2018.

Critical response
The film received mixed to positive reviews from critics, and three lead actors received praise for their performances. In his review, Roger Ebert wrote that he did not like the film's ending, but added it was "a very good movie, well-paced, and well-acted not only by Stallone ... but also by Crenna and Brian Dennehy." He commented, "although almost all of First Blood is implausible, because it's Stallone on the screen, we'll buy it," and rated the film three out of four stars. The New York Times film critic Janet Maslin described Rambo as a "fierce, agile, hollow-eyed hero" who is portrayed as a "tormented, misunderstood, amazingly resourceful victim of the Vietnam War, rather than as a sadist or a villain." Maslin also praised the film's story for its "energy and ingenuity". Conversely, Variety called the film "a mess" and criticized its ending for not providing a proper resolution for the main character. First Blood has been considered as belonging to the vetsploitation subgenre.

In 2000, BBC film critic Almar Haflidason noted that Stallone's training in survival skills and hand-to-hand combat gave the film "a raw and authentic edge that excited the audiences of the time."

Film.com and Filmsite regard First Blood as one of the best films of 1982, and in 2008 it was named the 253rd greatest film ever by Empire magazine on its 2008 list of The 500 Greatest Movies of All Time.

On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an 86% approval rating based on 49 reviews, with an average rating of 7.20/10. The site's critics consensus reads, "Much darker and more sensitive than the sequels it spawned, First Blood is a thrilling survival adventure that takes full advantage of Sylvester Stallone's acting skills." On Metacritic, the film has a weighted average score of 61 out of 100 based on 15 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".

James Berardinelli of ReelViews called the film "a tense and effective piece of filmmaking". He noted that the film's darker tone, somber subtext, and non-exploitative violence allowed the viewer to enjoy the film not only as an action/thriller but as something with a degree of intelligence and substance. On Stallone's performance, he wrote "it seems impossible to imagine anyone other than Stallone in the part, and his capabilities as an actor should not be dismissed". In the 2010 edition of his Movie Guide Leonard Maltin gave the film one-and a half stars out of four, saying that it "throws all credibility to the winds about the time [Rambo] gets off with only a bad cut after jumping from a mountain into some jagged rocks".

Legacy
First Blood received the most positive reception of the Rambo franchise. The next four sequels received mixed or average reviews.

In a 2011 article for Blade Magazine, by Mike Carter, credit is given to Morrell and the Rambo franchise for revitalizing the cutlery industry in the 1980s due to the presence of the Jimmy Lile and Gil Hibben knives used in the films. In 2003, Blade Magazine gave Morrell an industry achievement award for having helped to make it possible.

Sequel
A sequel titled Rambo: First Blood Part II, was released in 1985.

Video game
In 2014, Rambo: The Video Game was released, based on the first three Rambo films.

Statue
On August 14, 2020, a cedar wood statue of Rambo was unveiled in Hope, Canada, 38 years after the film's release. Mayor Peter Robb, Canadian Member of Parliament Mark Strahl, and the statue's sculptor, Ryan Villers, attended the ceremony.

In popular culture

 * Son of Rambow, a British comedy film inspired by First Blood
 * In 2017, "It's A Long Road" was used in the video game South Park: The Fractured but Whole. It appears when the player is killed and receives a game over.

title: First Blood


text: User talk:63.227.180.81

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

title: User talk:63.227.180.81


text:
User talk:Orthogonal/Snowspinner's evidence against Avala

Below is the original version of Snowspinner's "evidence" against Avala. I was in IRC at #wikipedia when Snowspinner announced there that he had compiled this evidence, and invited those of us in IRC to comment on it (my IRC nick is "earHertz"):

[7/28/2004 4:21 PM]  Fennec: You'd better appreciate the length of evidence I'm collecting on Avala for the arbcom. :-P . . . [7/28/2004 6:19 PM]  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Snowspinner/Avala_Evidence [7/28/2004 6:19 PM]  Comments? :) . . . [7/28/2004 6:21 PM]  Snowspinner: what's this evidenc eof? [7/28/2004 6:22 PM]  Against Avala [7/28/2004 6:22 PM]  ys, I get that. [7/28/2004 6:22 PM]  ear: It's the supporting evidence for a request for arbitration regarding Avala. [7/28/2004 6:22 PM]  But is it evidence of treason, murder, piracy, what? [7/28/2004 6:23 PM]  For personal attacks, disregard of Wikipedia policy and convention, and excessively provocative edits. . . . [7/28/2004 6:25 PM]  Snowspinner, part of your evidence is that he opposed you nomination and supported somebody else [7/28/2004 6:25 PM]  ear: No. My evidence is that he opposed my nomination for a reason that is obviously out of line with the procedures of RfAs. . . . [7/28/2004 6:27 PM]  Snowspinner: at least expand all those damned TLAs [7/28/2004 6:27 PM] and I'm sorry I wasn't around for the Kucan/Drnovsek thing [7/28/2004 6:27 PM] zocky: if you don't like the arbcom request, don't support/endorse it. stop whining about it here though [7/28/2004 6:27 PM]  Hmm [7/28/2004 6:27 PM]  Snow, perhaps Mediation? [7/28/2004 6:27 PM]  zocky: The offense is refusal to engage in Wikipedia policy and community. As for the grammar, again, that's not the offense. The offense is nominating an article with non-existant grammar for FAC. [7/28/2004 6:28 PM]  ear: TLA? [7/28/2004 6:28 PM] <earHertz> Three Letter Abbreviation [7/28/2004 6:28 PM] <_Kate> Acronym [7/28/2004 6:28 PM] <Snowspinner> ear: They're well enough known. With the possible exception of ASB, all of those are common WP shorthands. [7/28/2004 6:28 PM] <Snowspinner> Well, and NATO, but I think that's beside the point. :) [7/28/2004 6:29 PM] <earHertz> Snowspinner: perhaps to the more politicized wikipedians. For the rest of us, it's so much alaphabet soup. How about doing us a favor? [7/28/2004 6:29 PM] <Snowspinner> blank: Yeah, well, I felt obliged to beat my total for Lir, which was 61. :) [7/28/2004 6:29 PM] <Snowspinner> ear: The evidence page is for the arbcom. They know those abbreviations. [7/28/2004 6:29 PM] Snowspinner, the evidence is for everybody, not just arbcom [7/28/2004 6:29 PM] <earHertz> Snowspinner: you asked us in here to read it for you. [7/28/2004 6:29 PM] arbcom must be judged by ordinary users [7/28/2004 6:30 PM] <Snowspinner> ear: Yes. With the target audience in mind, I'd have hoped. [7/28/2004 6:30 PM] <Snowspinner> zock: All the same... they're common enough acronyms. The point of developing them was to use them.

The portion of the evidence I objected to was (empasis orthogonal's):

 * Avala also regularly demonstrates a lack of understanding of Wikipedia conventions, policy, making spurious listings or votes on ViP, RFA, and FAC. When called on these listings, he responds with the hostility described above.

 * Examples of this include his opposition to User:Snowspinner’s nomination on RFA, which was on the grounds that User:GeneralPatton had supported the nomination. This can be found at [[35] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship&diff=4850996&oldid=4850953) with further explanation and comments at [36] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship&diff=4873009&oldid=4872960) and [37] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship&diff=4852495&oldid=4852132).

 * Similarly, his nomination for User:Nikola Smolenski demonstrated a lack of understanding of what people look for in an administrator. When users pointed to edit wars Nikola had engaged in, he maintained that this should be ignored in the face of Nikola’s edits and promotion of Wikipedia. Although, certainly, these things should be weighed, the seeming disregard for concerns as towards Nikola’s judgment seems further symptomatic the described lack of awareness of normal Wikipedia conventions and procedures. Evidence of this can be found at [38] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship&diff=4872340&oldid=4872281), as well as [39] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship&diff=4873104&oldid=4873051) (Which was linked to above).

as given here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User:Snowspinner/Avala_Evidence&oldid=4893810

(Frankly, the sentence "his nomination [...] demonstrated a lack of understanding of what people look for in an administrator" sounds to my ears like something straight out of a Stalinist show trial. Avala's nomination of User:Nikola Smolenski may or may not have been foolish, but how can we sanction anyone at ArbCom for engaging in the political process, such as it is, on wikipedia? What "crime" does Snowspinner hope to sanction here, stupidity or disagreement with Snowspinner 's Party line? How can any of us feel welcome here if nominating a user for an office can be sanctioned if we make the wrong guess about what nominee might be in favor?)


text: User talk:210.18.213.2

title: User talk:210.18.213.2


text:
General Motors Epsilon platform

Epsilon is General Motors' mid-size front-wheel drive automobile platform. The architecture was a multi-division project of GM North America, Opel and Saab, and debuted in the 2002 Opel Vectra and 2003 Saab 9-3. Since this platform falls squarely in the center of the worldwide automobile market, GM plans to produce a great many Epsilon vehicles with over a dozen variations. , it was GM's highest volume worldwide platform. Even after the dissolution of the GM/Fiat partnership, both companies retain the rights to continue developing Epsilon-derived models.

A total of 16 different models have made use of the GM Epsilon platform, some of which remain in production 19 years after the platform debuted.

Features
GM's Epsilon platform replaced the N platform in the US, and replaced the GM2900 platform elsewhere. Vehicles of this platform generally carry the symbol "Z" in the fourth digit of their VINs.

When the platform debuted, there was talk of an "Epsilon Wide" derivative, which was supposed to have provided the underpinnings for the Buick LaCrosse and Saab 9-5. However, the program was cancelled and the LaCrosse was put on the W platform, and the 9-5 was given a quick refresh for the 2006 model year. The Epsilon platform is a midsize front-driver promising a 200 percent improvement in rigidity, with aluminum suspension components—MacPherson struts in front and a four-link independent arrangement in the rear, and four-wheel disc brakes. Many of the Epsilon vehicles use the Ecotec Inline-four engines and both the High Value and High Feature V6 engines.

The refreshed 2008 SAAB 9-3 debuted with an advanced version of all-wheel-drive it dubbed XWD, finally giving a definitive answer to rumors about the platform's ability to support AWD, which had been around since the debut of the platform.

The Lambda and Theta Premium crossover platforms are derived from Epsilon.

Vehicles
Vehicles based on the Epsilon I platform:
 * Regular
 * 2002–2009 Opel Vectra C saloon and liftback
 * 2002–2009 Vauxhall Vectra saloon and liftback
 * 2002–2009 Holden Vectra
 * 2002–2009 Chevrolet Vectra
 * 2003–2011 Saab 9-3
 * 2010–2012 Saab 9-5
 * 2004–2007 Chevrolet Malibu
 * 2006–2009 Cadillac BLS

Cancelled vehicles which would have used this platform:
 * 2006 midsized Buick

Epsilon II
A new version of the Epsilon, dubbed Epsilon II, debuted in 2008. It is adaptable for front and all-wheel drive applications. In long wheelbase format, Epsilon II supports US EPA Large Cars, allowing GM to replace the G and W platforms. The architecture was developed by Opel in Rüsselsheim, Germany. Many safety features and AWD fitment modifications were done by Saab.

Current and announced vehicles built on Epsilon II:
 * SWB
 * 2008–2017 Opel Insignia, Vauxhall Insignia, Holden Insignia VXR, Buick Regal, Chevrolet Vectra (saloon, hatchback, estate) (SWB)
 * 2012–2016 Chevrolet Malibu, Holden Malibu (SWB)
 * SL LWB
 * 2010–2016 Buick LaCrosse/Alpheon (SL LWB)
 * 2010–2012 Saab 9-5 (SL LWB)
 * 2012–2019 Roewe 950 (SL LWB)
 * EL LWB
 * 2012–2019 Cadillac XTS (EL LWB)
 * 2014–2019 Chevrolet Impala (EL LWB)

E2XX
E2XX is a moderately updated version of Epsilon 2 platform, consistent with other platform revamps, such as the D2XX based on Delta II.

The E2XX platform targets weight reductions and longer wheelbases.

Vehicles
Vehicle built on E2XX:
 * 2016–present Chevrolet Malibu
 * 2017–2022 Opel/Vauxhall Insignia, Buick Regal 2018–present (since 2020 China only), Holden Commodore (ZB) 2018–2020
 * 2019–present Cadillac XT4
 * 2021–present Buick Envision
 * 2023–present Cadillac GT4

P2XX
P2XX is the longer variant of the E2XX platform.

Vehicle built on P2XX:
 * Buick LaCrosse

C1XX
C1XX is the crossover variant of the E2XX platform, replacing the Theta Premium and Lambda platforms.

Vehicles built on C1XX:

Two-row mid-size:

 * 2017–present Cadillac XT5
 * 2019–present Chevrolet Blazer

title: General Motors Epsilon platform


text:
Seattle Public Schools

Seattle Public Schools is the largest public school district in the state of Washington. The school district serves almost all of Seattle. Additionally it includes sections of Boulevard Park and Tukwila. As of the 2021-2022 academic year, 106 schools are operated by the district, which serve 51,650 students throughout the city.

Governance
The board of directors for Seattle Public Schools is an elected body representing seven geographical regions, known as Districts, within the City of Seattle. The length of the term is four years. Board meetings are generally held twice monthly. For the 2019–2020 school year (until COVID-19 disruptions), board meetings were scheduled for the first and third Wednesdays of each month, at 4:15 p.m., with some exceptions. Its headquarters are in the John Stanford Center for Educational Excellence.

History
Thomas E. Peiser photographed a 1905 historical marker commemorating the site of Seattle's first school. According to the marker: On this spot the first school in Seattle was taught by Mrs Catherine P. Blaine in January 1854. This tablet was erected by the Washington University State Historical Society November 13, 1905. Eagle Brass Fdy (foundry) Seattle.

Like most city school systems, the district has had to face controversy dealing with problems concerning racial tension, student population assignments, and administrative scandal; such incidents include a student boycott in 1966 and using "racial tie-breakers" which led to a 2007 supreme court case.

Early schools
When the University of Washington was founded as the Territorial University in 1861, its initial class offerings were not at a level that would now be considered those of a college or university. Its first class offering was a primary school (elementary school) taught by Asa Mercer, and for some years it was jointly supervised by the newly formed Seattle School Board its own Board of Regents. It functioned as Seattle's first public school.

In 1867, the public school moved to what was then the County Building on Third Avenue between James and Jefferson, the site of today's Prefontaine Fountain. A year later, the school moved to Yesler's Pavilion (later Yesler's Hall) at present-day First and Cherry. A year later the school moved again to a temporary building (called Bacon's Hall after its first teacher, Carrie Bacon) located at the site of the present King County Court House. In 1870 the first "permanent" school building, the Central School, opened on Third Avenue between Madison and Spring Streets. It originally had two classrooms; a third was built in its attic in 1881.

Meanwhile, in 1873 the two-room North School opened at Third and Pine, and in 1875 the school district had purchased 1.4 acre at 6th and Madison, where the Sixth Street School, also known as Eastern School, opened promptly in a temporary building and grew into successively larger and better-built buildings in 1877 and 1883. The latter, an "elegant wooden building" with an imposing "French mansard roof, clock tower, and tall central belfry" superseded the old Central School as well as the North School. From 1884, it was known as the Central School. Classes extended through 12th grade, and the first class graduated from 12th grade in 1886. However the school burned in 1888.

The district had, in this period, started a number of other schools, including the even more imposing Denny School on Battery Street between 5th and 6th Avenues in Belltown, opened 1884. Described as "an architectural jewel... the finest schoolhouse on the West Coast," it was demolished in 1928 as part of the Denny Regrade project. When the Central School burned in 1888, its high school and first grade classes were parcelled out to the Denny School, other classes to the former downtown building of the university, with other classes going to temporary facilities, some of which also burned, in the Great Seattle Fire.

A new brick Central School opened in 1889 at Seventh and Madison, and was repeatedly expanded with annexes and extensions. After Seattle High School opened in 1902, the Central School was briefly known in 1903 as the Washington School before returning to its older name. The Central School functioned as an elementary school until 1938, and then until 1949 as the Central Branch of the Edison Technical School. The building was fatally damaged by the 1949 earthquake and razed in 1953; its site is now under Interstate 5.

20th century
In 1919, there were 64 grammar schools, six high schools, two parental schools (comparable to today's youth detention centers), a school for the deaf, and nine "special schools... for pupils who do not progress normally in regular classes."

In the early 20th century, Seattle Public Schools were "exemplary" under the leadership (1901–1922) of superintendent Frank B. Cooper and a series of "civic-minded progressives" who served on the Seattle school board.

21st century
In 2005, it was revealed that a teacher at Broadview-Thomson Elementary had been serially molesting children at the school for a period spanning several years. The teacher, Laurence E. "Shayne" Hill, had been molesting children for at least four of the twelve years he worked at the school, according to the Seattle Weekly. The article also said that several school officials had known of the inappropriate touching and did nothing to stop it, drawing outrage from concerned parents. Hill is serving his sentence as of December 2, 2005 and is facing anywhere from five years to life.

In June 2006, Andrew J. Coulson of the Cato Institute wrote a column in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer taking the district to task for a page on "equity and race relations" on its website that indicated, in his words, that "only whites can be racist in America" and which, among other things, stated that "Emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology" and that this and preferring a "future time orientation" were forms of "cultural racism." The page was removed from the site the same day.

In June 2007, the United States Supreme Court decided the case of Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, where they rejected Seattle Public Schools longstanding use of "racial tie-breakers" in assigning students to schools. The decision prohibited assigning students to public schools solely for the purpose of achieving racial integration and declined to recognize racial balancing as a compelling state interest. In a fragmented opinion delivered by Chief Justice John Roberts, five justices held that the School Boards did not present any "compelling state interest" that would justify the assignment of school seats on the basis of race. Chief Justice Roberts wrote that "the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy filed a concurrence that presented a more narrow interpretation, stating that schools may use "race conscious" means to achieve diversity in schools but that the schools at issue in this case did not use a sufficient narrow tailoring of their plans to sustain their goals. Four justices dissented from the Court's conclusions.

In January 2013, the entire teaching body of Garfield High School refused to administer the standardized Measures of Academic Progress, or MAP, which is administered system-wide, three times per year. The teachers called the tests useless and a waste of instructional time. The American Federation of Teachers has endorsed the school's boycott of the tests. Garfield's boycott of the test quickly expanded to other Seattle schools and drew national attention. In May 2013 Superintendent Jose Banda announced that the Seattle School District will no longer require MAP tests at city high schools.

Historic architecture
Several former Seattle Public Schools buildings are on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP):

Notable schools

Elementary Schools, Grades K–5
 * B.F. Day
 * Graham Hill
 * John Stanford International

Middle Schools, Grades 6–8
 * Denny International
 * Eckstein (Self-Contained Spectrum Program Offered)
 * Aki Kurose

High Schools, Grades 9–12
 * Ballard
 * The Center School
 * Chief Sealth Int'l
 * Cleveland
 * Franklin
 * Garfield (Citywide Highly Capable Cohort Pathway [AP])
 * Nathan Hale
 * Ingraham Int'l (Citywide Highly Capable Cohort Option Site [IBx])
 * Lincoln
 * Middle College
 * Nova
 * Rainier Beach
 * Roosevelt
 * South Lake
 * West Seattle

Demographics
As of 2022-2023, the enrollment figures for the district are:

Total students: 51,542

By ethnicity:

Caucasian: 45.5%

Black or African American 14.6%

Asian 12.3%

Hispanic 13.9%

Multiracial 12.7%

Native American/American Indian 0.4%

Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 0.5%

By gender:

Male: 51.4%

Female: 47.5%

Gender X: 1.1%

As of the 2020-2021 school year, 32.1% of students are eligible for the free or reduced price meal programs.

title: Seattle Public Schools


text:
Category:Acetanilides

Acetanilides are compounds based on acetanilide, or N-phenylacetamide.

title: Category:Acetanilides


text:
User talk:Orthogonal/Gzornenplatz's vote against Snowspinner's RfA

Gzornenplatz's vote against Snowspinner's RfA, as found here (emphasis orthogonal's): http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship&oldid=4935553#User:Snowspinner_.2862.2F9.2F3.29_Ends_17:06.2C_31_July_2004

 * I don't think Snowspinner has enough editing experience. Yes, he has over 2,600 edits, but looking at his last 100 contributions there are only about seven edits to articles. He may only have a few hundred article edits altogether. Paradoxically, this appears to be the very reason he has received so much support as opposed to the other nominees on this page - at least I can find no other explanation (if I'm wrong, maybe some who supported Snowspinner but not the others can explain their voting) other than that he is simply better known, and this is because the average "Wikipedia:" page is more widely read than the average article (and article edits are not signed). I find it troubling, however, that this way we tend to create a class of "professional sysops" who are merely supervising the actual editors who work on the articles. And I note that Snowspinner is already running for the Arbitration Committee, which I don't see as a good sign. Everyone here should be an editor in the first place, and the administrative tasks should be shared among editors, not entrusted to a separate class who does little else but administrating. Gzornenplatz 13:54, Jul 31, 2004 (UTC)

 * For comparison, at the time of this message, orthogonal's last 100 edits have 19 to articles, including such dramatic changes as changing "Bible" to "Christian Bible," making a year into a Wikilink, and a reversion. Snowspinner 02:28, Aug 14, 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, I have nearly three times the edits to article namespace in my last 100 as you did when running for admin, but no, I'm not running for admin. And it wasn't me who pointed this out, it was Gzornenplatz. And minor edits and reverts to articles are still more important to writing a dictionary than proposing policies and policing user pages. -- orthogonal 06:31, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Orthogonal/archive 18 Jun 2004 - 28 Jul 2004

Jacek Kuroń
Thanks very much for corrections in Jacek Kuroń article. The good think in Wikipedia is any entry from person not fully fluent with English will be immediatelly corrected by some helpful soul. Przepla 10:15, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * My pleasure; thank you for adding to Wikipedia the facts about Kuroń, a true hero. orthogonal 01:26, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

He's still the vicar
I love the fact that you created the page. My own specialty is really 1660-1745, and in particular that knotty bit of cultural history that entangled every author worth reading (IMO). My problem is likely to be going on too long on the subjects of the annotation. This is one reason why I've created relatively few 18th century pages: I have trouble remaining disciplined enough not to go long (see my A Tale of a Tub for an example of what I do when I don't restrain myself). I'll be happy to add to the annotations, but I regard you as author, so feel free to cut down mercilessly, if you think any information is extranneous. Geogre 19:15, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm frankly unconcerned about nearly any article being too long, so long as it is well written and well organized; with a well organized article the reader can skip the details that don't interest him. More annotation is better, especially given that, in the Bray case, the issues are rather abstruse, especially for 21st Century readers. By knotty bit of cultural history, you mean what? orthogonal 19:23, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Oh, by that I meant the whole confusion that occurred when, 1) the official religion changed (per our article now), 2) the print revolution really occurred (because presses got cheap, paper got cheap, the Interregnum prohibitions were lifted), 3) science as we recognize it now began to happen, 4) the mercantile economy meant that the rich and the noble weren't the same, 5) Parliament essentially elected a king, thereby throwing political theory into flux for everyday people, 6) philosophy exploded. In other words, it's a period in which more happens in less time than in any era, IMO, until 1945-2000. Things were very important to them but extremely political, so we have no access to them. It's not just that it's a time of freedom by law, but freedom in culture, because they couldn't figure out what rules they wanted to live by. By 1750, they've pretty much figured out the rules they wanted, and the world in England settles down (until 1789, but that's a different kind of chaos). Most people who read in English history either get all the way into this period or kind of speed by it. Geogre 21:44, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Voigt
Out of curiosity, what about the material you removed from the Voigt article struck you as POV? -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽ 20:19, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * What I removed was
 * "Voigt breaks somewhat from her densely realistic and contemporary style for these"
 * and
 * "While the world is invented, however, it is realistic in its construction, and resembles"

 * The style very much apes a certain type of safely conventional book review, and indeed I'd not be surprised to find it on a local or college newspaper's review page. Unfortunately, book reviews inherently show a "Point of View", wherein the reviewer explains what he likes or dislikes about the book, its author, or literature in general.
 * That POV shows up in the phrase "densely realistic", which is clearly a value judgment, and (admittedly to a lesser extent) in "contemporary style" -- "contemporary" being rather a matter of judgment, and indeed more a matter of judgment than an adjective more settled by passage of years, such as "Elizabethan" or even "Post-Modern". Similarly, "it is realistic", is the reviewer's opinion of the veracity of Voigt's fictional world. While I'm sure your opinion is well-founded, it remains "mere" opinion and therefore POV. But please don't allow me to discourage you; again, I think your effort would be well received, by, say, your local newspaper or as a web "blog" entry. orthogonal 21:40, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * ::laughs:: Wow, dude. That is one of the most tortured analyses of language I've ever seen. The material you removed simply pointed out that the vast majority of Voigt's work is set in the contemporary world and obeys the basic rules of reality, and that while some of her work differs on the first point and not on the second--as would be obvious on any serious reading. However, I'll happily clarify the language and reinsert. -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽ 22:15, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm glad you agree with me that the "English 101 essay" language lacked clarity, but is re-inserting it essential to the article? Rather than immediately re-insert, and give the impression that it's an ego-driven issue for you, why not allow it to lie fallow until some independent others can have a look at the article? orthogonal 22:25, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * ::sigh:: I have no special interest in going twelve rounds with you over this, particularly when you're in an abusive mood. I'm re-inserting the material because it's pertinent, it's accurate, and Wikipedia isn't paper. If "independent others" have concerns with it at some later juncture, well, this is Wikipedia and they can join the editing and discussion party. BTW, I hope you weren't offended at my VfD'ing your "Annotated lyrics" page; it's not that I'm against the information, but I do try to observe the guidelines about what goes where. Nothing personal. -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽ 22:32, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * No, I'm not offended. But you do seem to be taking this personally. Since Voigt is so important to you -- and indeed, you already to have re-inserted your text before making your comment above saying that you would re-insert it -- please re-insert with my blessings. orthogonal 22:48, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Governor General
Thanks. That was way more information than I needed. :) moink 19:17, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * So you're saying I'm a wikipedia natural? ;) orthogonal 19:32, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Absolutely. It's just too bad I can't think of a good place for your knowledge trivial.  moink 19:35, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Ha! I almost didn't get your joke -- for about twenty seconds I kept thinking, "knowledge trivial" sounds like a line from Gilbert & Sullivan, and then I realized it sounded like that because it's in noun-adjective form, just like Governor General! Nicely done sir, nicely and subtly and self-referentially done! orthogonal 22:55, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The Vicar...
You are likely to be right on pudding time if you have any sources. I just know what the phrase meant in the 19th century, and since there was no annotation I wrote it. Although I've known the song for ages, I hadn't ever really thought about this phrase in the song until I saw it marked for a note and lacking one. -- Jmabel 15:57, Jun 29, 2004 (UTC) Ok, so here goes.
 * Hey, breaking in here. Sorry about the intrusion, but when I saw "vet" on the history, I figured it was my "pudding time" that was involved.  I was afraid of that, too.
 * 1. "Pudding" as an insult was current in the 18th c. It's pretty nuanced, but calling someone a pudding was to call someone thick (a meaning still current), but, more particularly, to call someone a 'heterogenous mixture of ingredients.'  That hardly seems insulting now, but it was then.  Why?  Well, it's complicated, but the Tory satirists, at any rate, weren't fond of things that were neither fish nor foul ("these damned amphibians," as Pope said), and Swift was responsible for making the "olio, fricasee" a particular object of loathing.
 * 2. Did anyone call George I a pudding? Well, not directly.  One daren't.  Anyone dumb enough to call him a pudding in print was in gaol the next day, if he could be found.  Therefore, there is a lot of code going on.  Vin Caretta's The Snarling Muse, as well as the venerable The Canker'd Muse, talk about how these codes get formed.  You either use a substition (Jacobites called George I "The Captain"), or you introduce an elaborate metaphor for the state where you can leave an unattached allegorical element that readers will add up.  In this context, George I's court was often referred to as a pudding (well, "often" is relative).  This was a double whammy.  It meant that you could say that he is a bad king because he's foreign and that he's doomed because he's made a pudding of his court, and it allowed you to hint that he was stupid.

As for whether "pudding time" was supper or not, I'd have to look it up. I'm better at political slander 1660-1745 than truth. :-) Geogre 01:57, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * That's always a useful specialty. Especially in a election year. Let's come up with the words to "The Vicar of DOJ". As the the indented bit, it that your original work or is indented because it's a quote? If it's yours, add it to Annotated Vicar. I figured there had to be more to the Pudding stuff, and this is great stuff. -- orthogonal 02:01, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Yep, everything from "Sorry" to "Geogre" was me. Anyway, I was worried that expanding on pudding would be a bit much.  It's really interesting, though, reading all that stuff from an era when they were debating democracy (which they concluded was "mob rule"), and seeing a nation find itself able to really dish out the dirt for the first time.  The print revolution was huge, and very, very much like the WWW explosion now.  They had the same problems:  for a little money, anyone could print up his opinions.  Similarly, there were armies of "index" people (like Cliff's Notes of the 18th c., but on scientific matters).  Similarly, there were hundreds of pamphlets of "dark matter" proving that anyone you want was the Anti-Christ.  It was an information riot.  Anyway, they also had different eyes from us.  They didn't like mixtures, didn't see much call for pluralism (but they were well aware of it), and wanted stability at the same time that they demanded "liberty" (no doubt the word of the century).

As for the "Attorney General of Bray (not dead)," I've been at a loss with this administration. The man's so much of a boob that he had to put a bra on Justice. He lost an election to a dead man. There is no parody one can think up that these people won't do in earnest. It used to be a joke to say, "I'd better stop, or they'll take me to Gitmo." That it isn't now is so frightening that satirists need to all stop hurling insults and begin hurling bricks (metaphorically). Geogre 03:41, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

My Pet Goat (book)
Hiya.. I think the identification of that book as My Pet Goat is incorrect.. see. —Stormie 01:36, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)

Interesting points -- and precisely the kind of article I was looking for when I was writing the Wiki entry. Could you add that to the Wiki page? Maybe we'll change the name later, although I suspect that, even if that's not the actual name of the book, it's the name by which it's best known now -- and therefore the entry under which Wikipedia readers will look for it. (Hmm -- an article on famous misapprehensions would be a good addition to Wikipedia.) -- orthogonal 01:42, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Certainly, if it doesn't end up at My Pet Goat (book), then there should be redirects from there, My Pet Goat, The Pet Goat, etc. to wherever the story lands. I might leave the rewrite to someone who has seen Fahrenheit 9/11 though - I haven't, it doesn't open here in Australia for some weeks yet. —Stormie 01:47, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)

 * Yeah, ok, I can buy that. Are you able to boil down the doubts about the book title and add them to the article? -- orthogonal 02:03, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Hiya, that Goat looks fine now.. I was going to give it a polish when I got a chance but you did it first. I certainly don't have any factual dispute with it now. Cheers! —Stormie 23:07, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)

 * Actually, Meelar did most of the polishing, and a good job of it too.

Beholder
Well, the intro sentence does start off with "In the [D&D] fantasy role-playing game...". I think that this is a sufficient indicator that it's fictional. As it was, the text you inserted wasn't grammatical and disrupted a well-flowing lead sentence that already made clear it was fictional. Thus, I removed it. Best wishes, [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 12:53, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Correct me if I'm wrong, but both real (donkeys, horses, dogs) and mythological (dragons, griffons, harpies) appear in D&D, so saying the beholder also appears leaves it ambiguous, no? So, I've grammatically inserted "fictional" into the well-flowing lead. I hope you find this a reasonable compromise. -- orthogonal 13:20, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * The difference being that horse does not start out as saying "In the fictional D&D RPG...". An intro like that is a tipoff. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 13:23, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Please see my (rather long and tedious) plea for the reader on the Beholder talk page. -- orthogonal 14:39, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

"Join the discussion" links
Thanks for weighing in on the Willmore VfD. But i noticed you made many contributions on the VfD page, where they need to be moved before the votes will get counted.

I'm unsure whether you're confused abt how to vote, or just find the repeated reloads of VfD too onerous. If the second, may i recommend right-clicking & selecting "Open in new window", or equivalently, Shift-RClicking. (Assuming you use MS IE; others probably offer a similar facility.) If you're not following me, let me know.

In any case, i'm about to use that technique to transfer the six votes i spotted on
 *

to their articles.

(I'm confused about the Ted Kennedy article, which doesn't sound like you started it but does look like it; you may want to check to be sure i didn't screw that one up.

--Jerzy(t) 03:25, 2004 Jul 1 (UTC)

 * Jerzy, thanks for pointing this out to me. I'd been hitting the "[edit]" links to edit just that section of the page. I had no idea that meant the vote ended up somewhere else -- and I confess I'll still not clear where it did end up, as I saw my text on the VfD page after submitting the edit. If you care to, please explain to me where what I wrote went, and why I saw it on the VfD page but you were able to tell it wasn't "really" there. and please, explain it small simple words, as I'm thoroughly confused. ;) -- orthogonal 21:48, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Saddam Picture
In the edit summary for Donald Rumsfeld, you said that: "Rumsfeld meeting the Eritrean President is not noteworthy for an encyclopedia; meeting Saddam is. 100 years hence, only the latter will be relevant. Thus, the change is POV. Therefore, revert."

On the Jacques Chirac talk page, they said:

 * Donald Rumsfeld's page also has a photograph of him shaking hands with Saddam Hussein. David.Monniaux 06:16, 25 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia is not suppose to balance one article with another, but to be neutral in every single article. So let's remove both pictures. Mentioning Chirac's former links with Saddam in the "Political contention with the United States" section is sufficient. Thbz 09:38, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

Therefore, do you propose that the Saddam Hussein picture be removed from the Donald Rumsfeld page, or that the Saddam Hussein be added to the Jacques Chirac page? 69.111.79.123 04:17, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I propose neither, you're proposing a false dichotomy. I propose rather that it's evidence of POV when we attempt to "balance" unflattering information in one entry with "corresponding" unflattering information in another entry. The photo of Rumsfeld meeting Hussein is pertinent to the Rumsfeld page; whether a photo of Chirac meeting Hussein is or is not germane to the Chirac page is an unrelated, independent, one night even say orthogonal question, which should be made by those -- not me -- best informed about Chirac. -- orthogonal 22:01, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Annotation precedent
Too late a random link sent me to On First Looking into Chapman's Homer. It's a Keats sonnet, of course, but the article annotates it, though all inline and in a narrative. Makes it very confusing to read (and the annotations are nowhere near complete, but, since the Romantics are my natural enemies, I'm not going to add more). Thus, there is precedent for a non-Wikibooks explication. Geogre 13:33, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I think our format is more useful: the reader can click those links or footnotes for whatever is unfamiliar to him. I wish that copyright allowed us to similarly annotate some of Tom Lehrer's songs. Have you seen the (inaptly named) Major General's Song? I a big Gilbert & Sullivan fan, so seeing it was a treat. On another subject, I googled yet failed to find the lyrics of Lilliburana (I spelled that wrongly, didn't I?). Can you provide a link, by any chance?

Heading in templates
If you understand why an unbalanced hdg (more =-signs at start than end) produces a broken heading & succeeding broken section-edit links, you're in a position to make about as exact a guess as i about why it's a problem, and i think the problematic effect is an exact parallel. (If you don't already understand, just say so & i'll write a short 'graph on that.)

We had a problem from it when we first used transclusion on VfD, perhaps first time it was observed. I don't know that this hasn't been fixed, nor that transcluding a talk page is equivalent in this aspect to a template, but i assume so until told otherwise (and even then suspect a mistake). Appreciate your interest. [smile] --Jerzy(t) 05:26, 2004 Jul 13 (UTC)

Absolute Sex
It is my understanding that when the article was originally listed it contained nothing but a title and two links to Unification Church websites or articles: ''Moonie substub. It doesn't say anything, but it links to two Unification Church sites. Geogre 17:45, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)''. When I came to assess whether the article needed deletion or not it had grown to include other material, by the original poster (Uncle Ed) that was added after all but one of the delete votes had been made. Therefore the article had been added to after consensus had been reached.

I try to clear off old debates from Votes for deletion/Old because I do not believe that having them hanging around there gains anything at all. Following the guideline from Deletion policy The page will also remain if it has been improved enough since the initial listing that the reason for listing no longer applies. and from Deletion guidelines for administrators When in doubt, don't delete. I felt that the best course of action in this case was to remove the page from vfd with every expectation that it could be re-listed at any time, hence the comment that if you believe this was incorrect please discuss this after the archived debate (below) or you are free to renominate the article for deletion. on Talk:Absolute sex.

In my opinion I was acting in the best interests of the community and the only 'abuse' (a word used to describe my actions by -- orthogonal on my talk page) here is to omit to sign my name on Talk:Absolute sex, for which I apologise.

Graham ☺ | Talk 08:34, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I have taken certain parts from your reply on my talk page rather than copy and paste the whole lot, for ease of reading:

 * Thank you for getting back to me so promptly. You have me slightly at a loss, as I don't know if you prefer to be called Francs2000 or Graham?

 * Either is fine; I have an appalling memory so Francs2000 is what I use on any website where I create a log-in, my real-life name is Graham.

 * Since when is hagiography and POV improvement?

 * I hadn't seen improvement in that sense. I have nothing to do with the Unification Church and wouldn't know Sun Myung Moon if he jumped out from behind a bush at me.  That said I am now thinking that perhaps re-listing the nomination myself considering the later additions would have been the best course of action; I still don't think I should have deleted the article because the additions were made after most people had made their vote.

 * you overrode a majority vote

 * That is a matter of opinion. As stated above additions had been made to the article following consensus being reached, therefore in my opinion making that consensus invalid.  As I have already stated my best course of action at that point would have been to have relisted the article; because I didn't do this I admit that I was at fault.

 * allows less well-intentioned sysops to point to what you did as cover for their rescuing their favorite pages from deletion

 * I would never support this course of action and believe that sysops should act as objectively as possible when doing sysop things.

 * democratic process (vast majority of this paragraph snipped for brevity)

 * The problem with this is that Wikipedia policy allows for this to happen. Had I not read in Deletion policy that The page will also remain if it has been improved enough since the initial listing that the reason for listing no longer applies then I would have followed a different course of action.  The matter for debate here is the whole notion of "improved" which is why I should have relisted the nomination to get others' opinions on the matter.

 * Did you consult any other sysop when you made your decision?

 * No. I have no access to other sysops most of the time because, being English, I make most of my edits while America sleeps and I do not have access to #wikipedia or other such IRC channels.  I have asked the question (informally only) before about whether people should be allowed to act as sysops when they have little or no access to these 'backstage' discussions and no firm decision was made, however if it were to be discussed in open forum my opinion is that it shouldn't make a difference.

 * Did you consult anyone at all?

 * No. My interest was merely to clear up a back log on the Old page.

 * Graham ☺ | Talk 13:27, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

IRC
I'm trying out the IRC now, keeping a weather eye out for your logon. It's really easy, and I can see the criminal danger of it. :-) Such a disappointment, though, to see a general discussion running along the lines of, "I like sex." "Yeah." "Sex is fun." "I like sex too!"  Gee, folks, lets surprise ourselves with the news.  Sheesh. Geogre 00:27, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Cuba
Hi Orthogonal, Yes "dissident", "reactionary", "opponent of the revolution" are not identical and have slightly different implications. Since it's a very serious allegation, it's important to get the term right. I suggest we look at what kind of people were executed before we make further edits, preferably from sources that are not partisan. I'll put my comment on the article's talk page, please reply there.pir 12:09, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[Copied from Talk:Cuba]
 * I have no idea who was executed for what immediately after Castro came to power; I reverted on the assumption that the original author who used "dissidents" had a better idea than either the Old Bolshie who maintained that "dissidence" is by definition impossible (immediately) after a revolution, and that Pir's well-meaning attempt at reconciliation could be (I don't know if is is) technically wrong, as "dissident" does not necessarily equate to "opponent of the revolution". (And shouldn't it be capitalized "Revolution" here, as we're referring to a particular Revolution, in this case Castro's?) Again, my intent was simply to revert to a previous author who presumably had a better idea what he meant to write. I have no dog in this fight, and will accept whatever the consensus opinion agrees on, as I have no inclination to research the matter. -- orthogonal 12:23, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Konrad Henlein (Everyking)
That certainly was hostile. My edits were spelling fixes, minor grammar improvements and such -- pretty noncontroversial stuff, so I don't think I need my own web page for that. You edited over my changes to the article, so I restored them, because I didn't want the article riddled with the same problems I had already spent several minutes fixing. You're the one responsible for merging the edits, not me. Everyking 00:07, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, it was hostile. I think you'll find in life that when you act in a hostile manner, you will receive a hostile response. I replaced your minor improvements with what I thought were improvements as good, or better -- and saw no reason to retain yours. I frankly felt the changes were roughly equivalent, and didn't realize you'd be so personally attached to your own prose.

 * Now, in the face of that, you could have high-mindedly merged back in any changes of your you felt really were superior, or mentioned to me on a talk page that you felt slighted, or in a fit of pique, you could choose to behave hostility and revert. That you chose the latter course, rather than one more moderate or conciliatory, speaks either to an essential lack of maturity or an excessive attachment to your own edits.

 * In either case, it's evidence of a hastiness to anger and a tendency for precipitous action that calls into question your fitness to continue as a wikipedia administrator. If you can so quickly and so easily turn what should be two people both trying to improve an article into a potential edit war because the only response that comes to your mind is to revert with a hostile message, I can't see how you be expected to defuse conflicts between other editors, or be trusted to ban users.

 * If you can't better channel your anger, perhaps it is time for you to reconsider your role on wikipedia. -- orthogonal 13:38, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * What are you talking about? You restored spelling mistakes and removed wikification! Everyking 13:47, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * If I did, I didn't notice. Had you pointed that out on a talk page, I'd have humbly apologized and immediately endeavored to correct that. But that is not what you did. Instead, apparently deciding that two wrongs might actually make a right, you wiped out my improvements with a revert with an attached snarky comment. Was that the best way you could see to handle the problem, or were you just being lazy and throwing your weight around?

 * Is that why we elevated you to adminship, to allow you to impose your arbitrary will wherever you feel slighted? To create more hostility because you prefer to begin edit wars rather than discuss matters politely? This is rapidly going beyond the article in question, as you continue to demonstrate an unwillingness to compromise or even consider the possibility of error on your part, to call into question your fitness for the role you play on wikipedia. -- orthogonal 13:57, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Maybe you didn't notice, but you just edited over me with disregard for the standard etiquette that whoever receives the edit conflict should merge the two versions. Anyway, it looked like all you did was split up some paragraphs, which I had already done to a lesser degree, while simultaneously restoring a bunch of problems I had spent several minutes working on. I wouldn't have reverted it if you had actually added content. And I don't see what being an admin has to do with anything, considering I used a standard revert and not a rollback. This seems like much ado about nothing. You're welcome to go back and do whatever work you did over again, as long as you don't restore any bad spelling or remove any useful wikification. Everyking 14:12, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Again, had you said that at the time, I wouldn't have taken issue with your actions. This has to do with your being an admin because the principal duty of an admin is to prevent conflict, not to start personal conflicts. That requires a certain maturity, which you insist on not demonstrating. You make this even more clear with your arrogant and dismissively words: " You're welcome to go back and do whatever work you did over again, as long as you,", as long as it's done subject to your conditions. You seem to have some idea that you own wikipedia, or have some right to give commands to other users. I think at minimum you should undo your revert and merge both changes, rather than telling me what I am "welcome" to do. That you think this is "much ado about nothing" simply suggests that your arrogant and bullying conduct is "business as usual" for you. -- orthogonal 14:35, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Surely you don't expect me to say you are welcome to restore all the problems? Because you aren't. Edit like a civil wikipedian and adhere to customary ettiquette, please. And don't angrily insult people if they don't like to see their work undone. I think you are just trying to pick a fight with me for some reason, and I don't have any interest in discussing this further. Everyking 14:45, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I didn't suggest that I wanted to "restore all the problems", and for you to claim that I did is frankly disingenuous, a intentional misunderstanding on your part. I expect you to say you'll correct the problem you created with your hasty and hostile revert. I have no interest in picking a fight with "everyking" -- but I have no interest in seeing an arrogant bully who is unwilling to compromise throw his weight around. As you're unwilling to discuss this further -- or discuss it without disingenuousness --, I won't waste my time on you. But having had my attempts at discussion rebuffed, you leave me no choice but to take other measures to address your conduct. -- orthogonal 14:58, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Motor Trend

I don't agree with the thinning of the links section. Many external links on Wikipedia point to commerical sites, and product placement is after all in the eye of the beholder. If one is interested in researching Motor Trend, access to its history volume and a source for back issues is highly relevant. The company's endorsement of car care products simply illustrates the somewhat absurd lengths to which its brand extension has gone, and is unlikely to deceive the reader into believing that Wikipedia is pushing fabric deodorizer. IMHO, we should aim for every Wiki article to provide access to too much information rather than too little, and leave the user to determine how much of it he/she really needs. RivGuySC 04:03, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Editorial direction
I went back and re-read Car and Driver and Motor Trend's reviews of the Lincoln Blackwood and was surprised with their uniformity. I have to agree that MT has become more skeptical as C&D has become less so lately. Any observer should have called Lincoln on that truck in the harshest terms, and yet few did. However, older (late-80s) issues of MT and C&D are striking - MT never says anything bad about anything, and C&D never likes anything but BMWs! Opinions? --SFoskett 18:53, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)

motor trend is a very good magazine, but the magazine don't accurate or modern, like auto motor.

Influence of Auto Mrs on Editorial Awards?
Has there been any investigations re auto mfr influencing magazine's editors in their car of the year picks? It would seem there is lots of financial incentive for fraud or bias which makes me wonder how it has been avoided if it has.

You Bet
When you look at the choices for car of the year over the years your point is well taken. And why the bias against Ford products? Chevy Citation, Vega and 1983s choice of A.M.C. Renualts, who is kidding who? randazzo56 23:32, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Change to MotorTrend?
It seems that the company and its publications are currently styled without a space as MotorTrend Group and MotorTrend Magazine. I’d like to gather feedback on whether the relevant articles should be updated to reflect this before making the change.

Thanks! Polyglottalstop (talk) 16:54, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

 * The Motor Trend Group haven't decided which way they want themselves. Their websites seem to be 50/50 with/without the space. Eg, see https://www.motortrendgroup.com/terms/ Better we wait a bit.  Stepho  talk 12:22, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. I agree that we should wait and see.

Polyglottalstop (talk) 21:35, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Motor Trend


text: Talk:Orion (Constellation program)

title: Talk:Orion (Constellation program)


text:
Complex

Complex commonly refers to:

 * Complexity, the behaviour of a system whose components interact in multiple ways so possible interactions are difficult to describe
 * Complex system, a system composed of many components which may interact with each other
 * Complex (psychology), a core pattern of emotions etc. in the personal unconscious organized around a common theme such as power or status

Complex may also refer to:

Arts, entertainment and media

 * Complex (English band), formed in 1968, and their 1971 album Complex
 * Complex (band), a Japanese rock band
 * Complex (album), by Montaigne, 2019, and its title track
 * Complex (EP), by Rifle Sport, 1985
 * "Complex" (song), by Gary Numan, 1979
 * "Complex", a song by Katie Gregson-MacLeod, 2022
 * "Complex" a song by Be'O and Zico, 2022
 * Complex Networks, publisher of the now-only-online magazine Complex

Biology

 * Protein–ligand complex, a complex of a protein bound with a ligand
 * Exosome complex, a multi-protein intracellular complex
 * Protein complex, a group of two or more associated polypeptide chains
 * Species complex, a cluster of very similar species difficult to delimit
 * Pre-Bötzinger complex, a cluster of interneurons in the ventral respiratory group of the medulla of the brainstem

Chemistry

 * Coordination complex, a central atom or ion and a surrounding array of bound molecules or ions
 * Chelate complex, a coordination complex with more than one bond

Mathematics

 * Complex number, an extension of real numbers obtained by adjoining imaginary numbers
 * Complex polytope, a generalization of a polytope in a complex Hilbert space
 * Complex analysis, the study of functions of complex numbers
 * Complex, an element of a field of sets
 * Chain complex, an algebraic structure
 * Simplicial complex, a kind of topological space
 * CW complex, a kind of topological space
 * Line complex, a 3-dimensional family of lines in space

Geology

 * Complex (geology), a unit of rocks composed of rocks of two or three types
 * Complex crater, a type of large impact crater morphology
 * Volcanic complex, a group of volcanoes
 * Complex volcano, a volcano of mixed form
 * Accretionary complex, a fossil accretionary wedge

Other uses

 * Building complex, a group of inter-related buildings
 * Housing complex, specifically residential
 * Market complex, group of stores or business firms in a marketplace having common walkway(s), usually enclosed within a boundary or situated under one roof
 * UCL Centre for Mathematics and Physics in the Life Sciences and Experimental Biology (CoMPLEX), part of UCL Faculty of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, London, UK

title: Complex


text: User talk:24.188.66.213

title: User talk:24.188.66.213


text:
Bruce Kent

Bruce Kent (22 June 1929 – 8 June 2022) was a British Catholic priest who became a political activist in the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), and held various leadership positions in the organisation.

Early life
Born on 22 June 1929 in Blackheath, Southeast London, Kent was the son of Molly (Marion) and Kenneth Kent. He was educated in Canada before attending Stonyhurst College. He served as an officer in the Royal Tank Regiment from 1947 to 1949, and read Jurisprudence at Brasenose College, Oxford, from 1949 to 1952. In 1952, he began a six-year course studying for the priesthood at St Edmund's seminary in Ware, Hertfordshire.

Priesthood
In 1958, Kent was ordained as a Roman Catholic priest for the Diocese of Westminster and between 1958 and 1987 served in several London parishes, latterly becoming secretary to Cardinal John Heenan. Between 1966 and 1974, he was the Catholic chaplain to the University of London. He was chairman of the charity War on Want from 1974 to 1976.

In 1987, Kent retired from active ministry. In 1992, he was a candidate for the Labour Party in the constituency of Oxford West and Abingdon, where he came third. Had he been elected, he would at the time have been prevented, as an ordained priest, from taking his seat in the House of Commons. Sitting Member of Parliament and Conservative minister John Patten, also a Catholic, retained his seat.

Activism
In 1960, Kent joined the Christian Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, a specialist section of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND). He was CND's general secretary from 1980 to 1985 and its chair from 1987 to 1990, and later held the honorary title of vice-president. In the 1980s, he led resistance to the deployment of the BGM-109G Ground Launched Cruise Missile at RAF Greenham Common.

From 1985 to 1992, Kent succeeded Seán MacBride as president of the International Peace Bureau. In 1997, he took part in the Musa Anter peace train to Diyarbakır, which aimed for a solution for the Kurdish-Turkish conflict. In a ceremony held on 19 October 2019, Kent was honoured with its MacBride Peace Prize.

Kent was a patron of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign.

In April 2021, the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby awarded the Lambeth Cross for Ecumenism jointly to Kent and to his wife Valerie Flessati "for exceptional, tireless and lifelong dedication to the Christian ecumenical search for peace, both individually and together."

Among his heroes was Franz Jägerstätter, the Austrian farmer who was executed in 1943 for refusing to fight in Hitler's army. As recently as 15 May 2022, Kent took part in the annual ceremony in Tavistock Square, London, to honour conscientious objectors throughout the world.

Personal life and death
Kent married Valerie Flessati on 4 July 1988 and lived in Harringay, North London.

Kent died on 8 June 2022, at home, at the age of 92. At the time of his death, Bruce Kent was a Vice-President of CND, a Vice-President of Pax Christi, and Emeritus President of the Movement for the Abolition of War.

title: Bruce Kent


text:
Category talk:Explosives

talk items
yes, these are all chemicals, as all matter is made up of chemicals, and explosives are all matter. Gentgeen 04:07, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * So, in other words, you think that we should go put the articles of every thing in the category of Chemicals? Should we also put everything that is on the planet Earth in the category Earth or maybe everything should go in the category Universe. That's clearly not useful, and is not quite what is meant by the word, for it denotes some use in chemistry. While a substance may be made of chemicals, it does not mean that the article should be classified according to its molecules. Instead, the useful thing to do is to make a subcategory we might call Explosive chemicals, which will be under both the categories Explosives and Chemicals. The field of explosives is more vast than you seem to think, and even if you adhere to this absurd notion of "All matter goes in the category Chemicals", there are theories and processes in the field of explosives that are ideas rather than things. - Centrx 06:45, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This question has just come back up (beginning of 2006); the distinction now being a question of whether materials which are by themselves (a single pure material) are explosives or explosive chemicals or both, and what to do with materials which are mixtures of other materials, following some cleanup effort with a separatist bent by User:Uthbrian. I am going to for now replace the Explosives categorization in articles Uthbrian removed it from and open discussion here for public review etc. I am wondering if we should create additional categories (explosive mixtures, binary explosives, etc), or consider a complete recategorization. For example, Cooper in Explosives Engineering uses the terminology pure explosives and use forms of explosives. Georgewilliamherbert 21:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Sorry about that. I think any of your suggestions is a good idea.  My intention was to leave only articles about general topics (such as Explosive booster, Explosive detection, Low explosive, Misznay-Schardin effect, etc.) in Category:Explosives, while sub-categorizing all explosive compounds & mixtures into appropriate categories.  --Uthbrian (talk) 21:24, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Nothing to be sorry about; you're trying to help clean up some category stuff which is arguably from both a strict technical sense and a naive wikipedia browser sense confused / muddled right now. If we had to wait for category professional experts or serious hobbyists to start such cleanups everywhere that we need them, it would take forever.  I don't know how long it would have taken me to get around to deciding to put some effort in on this question absent someone else starting the process, for example.
 * As we move forwards, I think we need to think of two goals in the improvements... one is improving the technical accuracy from a professional's standpoint, and the other is improving the comprehensibility from a naive user's viewpoint. From the naive users viewpoint, they'll get confused if we take stuff out of the category:Explosives.  Though technically it's overbroad, practically/from a user standpoint I think that's unavoidable.
 * What I think we can do which probably achives both goals safely is to add some additional categories, perhaps Category:Pure explosives and another for mixtures/binaries/use forms etc. I am interested in your and anyone else's feedback on these ideas and issues; if we can hash it out some here and come to consensus on a policy and implimentation it should help make the actual updates easier and more consistent.   Georgewilliamherbert 21:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your idea of adding additional categories to clarify if the explosive is a pure compound or a mixture, etc. By the way, I've noticed some possibly redundant categorization:
 * Category:Bombs is listed under Category:Explosives and category:Explosive weapons (which is a sub-cat of cat:Explosives). I'm considering if we should drop the Category:Explosives from the Category:Bombs.
 * Worth considering. Georgewilliamherbert 23:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Category:Exploding animals is listed under Category:Explosives and Category:Unusual explosions (another sub-cat of cat:Explosives). I think we should drop Category:Explosives from Category:Exploding animals, since it doesn't deal directly with explosives.
 * Agree. Georgewilliamherbert 23:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Completed. --Uthbrian (talk) 23:02, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Category:High explosives is only filled with the main article high explosive, which is a redirect to Explosive material.
 * Let me take a look at this and get back to the discussion... Georgewilliamherbert 23:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

--Uthbrian (talk) 22:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. This hasn't gone anywhere for six weeks. Unfortunate. Let me reread some stuff. Georgewilliamherbert 09:33, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

liquid explosives
Liquid explosives are in the news today. Where should the category liquid explosives go? --Gbleem 12:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

title: Category talk:Explosives


text:
Kate Vaiden

Kate Vaiden (1986) is the 6th novel by American author Reynolds Price. The novel focuses on the life of a white woman from the American South who, after a teenage pregnancy, abandons her son shortly after giving birth to him and who does not get in touch with him for four decades.

Plot summary
Kate Vaiden is the first person narrator of the novel. When she sets out to tell the story of her life, she is a 57-year-old single woman. Having been diagnosed with cervical cancer seems to have changed her attitude to the family she left when she was seventeen without so much as writing them a letter—ever. Accordingly, she does not even know whether her son Lee, who must now be approaching 40, is still alive or not. In the final part of the book, which is set in 1984, she meets one of the last surviving members of her family, her cousin Swift, in a local nursing home. Swift eventually informs Kate that her son is alive and well but abroad with the US Navy.

Kate's story
Kate is born in 1927 and grows up as an only child in Greensboro, North Carolina with her young parents Dan and Frances Vaiden. Her happy childhood is suddenly interrupted when, in 1938, for reasons she can never quite fathom, her father shoots her mother and then himself, leaving her to be raised by her aunt and uncle, Caroline and Holt Porter. The Porters, whose grown-up sons no longer live at home, reside in Macon, and Kate takes some time to get used to living in a small village. As they are not farmers, Kate does not have to work for them after school or during the holidays. Over the years, Noony Patrick, the Porters' African American household help, becomes her only friend and confidante.

Kate has her first sexual encounter surprisingly early in life—at the age of twelve, without having had any sex education. One summer afternoon down by the Roanoke River, Gaston Stegall, the neighbours' boy, shows her his erection, and she gives him a handjob, without really knowing what she is doing.

"Gaston said "He hurts me."

I said "How did you figure out it's a boy?" I stepped back a little.

But he said "Oh don't. You can help me out."

With all its faults, my family were not known for turning down pleas that deep from the heart. I moved back closer than I'd been before and said "Show me how."

...

In maybe twenty seconds the job was over. I'd brought a bandanna and cleaned myself, though I liked the smell and imagined it for days. By then he had got his legs still again, but his eyes were closed. I knew the answer but I said "Did it help?""

When she tells Noony, the sheer extent of Kate's ignorance becomes clear:

""You didn't get it on you? -- nowhere on your body."

I said "My hand. You said you could tell."

Noony said "On your privates. Keep it way off them; one drop of that stuff is good as a carload."

"For what?"

"Babies, fool." But she said it kindly.

I'd suspected as much and, as I've said, heard rumors at school; so I let Noony tell me all she knew."

At 13, Kate finally has sexual intercourse with Gaston. ("When Gaston said he didn't have a rubber, I swear I wondered what he needed to erase.") The lovers enjoy each other's company undisturbed by the outside world for a few years, but when the United States enters World War II Gaston enlists in the army and is killed in a Marines camp before he can actually go to war.

At 16, Kate escapes her surroundings and everything that might remind her of Gaston by stealing off to Norfolk, Virginia, where her cousin, Walter Porter, is living with his orphaned "friend," Douglas Lee, from back home. Having been ostracised from Macon, the two friends—whether they are actually a homosexual couple or not does not become clear—have never returned to their home town. However, Walter, who has a good job, promised Kate on the death of her parents that, whatever happens, she would always be welcome at his place. Now Kate takes him up on his word and is glad to see she is in no way regarded as an intruder.

Walter also takes care of Kate's education and sends her to a Catholic school for girls—even though she is a Methodist. The trio get on very well with each other, but, with Walter frequently away on business trips, Kate starts a secret affair with Douglas—without being truly in love with him. When she gets pregnant—while abortion is never a serious option for her—she starts wondering what her future life will be like but in fact is unable to decide on any course of action.

While Walter is making plans for her to stay, Kate and Douglas secretly plan to move to Raleigh, North Carolina and live there as a family. They actually get on a train to Raleigh, but when it stops at Macon while Douglas is at the toilet, Kate gets out without saying good-bye to him. On the spur of the moment, she decides to spend the last months of her pregnancy at her aunt and uncle's without the father of the child. In 1944, everyone has to get used to a young woman expecting an illegitimate child, but then Lee Vaiden is born and, as he is a strong, healthy boy, everything seems to be turning out fine.

However, Kate's maternal instinct fails her soon after she has given birth:

"Considering how I was soon to behave, I have to wonder if I ever really loved him. I'd shown most other human instincts till then. Why did mothering fail me? In the months I knew him, I can honestly say I enjoyed his company. Nobody gets a long-term kick out of dirty diapers and spit-up milk, but Lee Vaiden more than made up for his faults.

I'd tend him all day, bathe, feed him, enjoy him. Then about sundown I'd start feeling like he was Caroline's and Holt's -- and Noony's. They were glad to take over, in perfect silence."

Also, it occurs to Kate that a life without a man is not the right thing for her:

With Gaston and Douglas I'd used my body more ways than any white girl my age I'd read about or known. And for all the harm I'd caused the world, nothing convinced me my body was wrong and ought to be curbed. ... I couldn't just maim that much of myself by bolting doors on the wide green world and camping-down forever in a house with no man near me under sixty years old.

One day, Kate decides to join Douglas in Raleigh and to leave her son in her aunt's care. In Raleigh, unable to find Douglas, she makes the acquaintance of a young blind man called Whitfield Eller, who works as a piano tuner. Realizing that sooner or later she will have to take a job, Kate teams up with Eller, driving the blind man's car to get him safely and on time to his customers. All the time, her plans to fetch the baby are somewhere at the back of her mind.

Without ever seeing his son, Douglas, who used to be Eller's driver before Kate, commits suicide in Eller's bathroom, obviously because of the high debts he has run up. When Eller proposes to Kate, the latter, who has turned out to be a quitter, once again leaves everything behind her and moves on—this time to Greensboro, where she joins her former teacher, Miss Limer. It is now that she finally abandons her son. She starts working in a library, becomes involved with Jay Mabry, a war veteran, but again backs out when he wants to get married. She spends the next decades as a single woman working in a lawyer's office, never more than a two-hour drive away from her old home and, accordingly, easy to track down. We never learn why exactly it is that she is never contacted.

Critical reception
Kate Vaiden was awarded the National Book Critics Circle Award.

title: Kate Vaiden


text:
Ford DEW platform

The Ford DEW platform (or DEW98) was Ford Motor Company's midsized rear-wheel drive automobile platform. The D/E nomenclature was meant to express an intermediate size between D- and E-class vehicles, while the W denoted a worldwide platform. The platform was developed by both Ford and Jaguar engineers, and debuted in the Lincoln LS sedan. Its de facto predecessor in Europe was the DE-1 platform which underpinned the 1985 Ford Scorpio, however this vehicle was cancelled in 1998 without a direct replacement as in the European market, buyers were increasingly turning away from executive class cars manufactured by mainstream manufacturers.

Ford's use of the platform ended in 2006, but Jaguar continued to use DEW98 after Jaguar was sold to Tata Motors in 2008, building the XF on it. Jaguar's use of the platform ended in 2015 with the introduction of the second-generation XF using the Jaguar Land Rover iQ[Al] (D7a) modular platform.

Vehicles
This platform was used in these vehicles:
 * 1999–2008 Jaguar S-Type
 * 2000–2006 Lincoln LS
 * 2002–2006 Ford Thunderbird
 * 2008–2015 Jaguar XF

Cancelled vehicles that were to use this platform:
 * 2004 Ford Fairlane
 * 2004 Lincoln D310 - became the CD3-based Lincoln Zephyr
 * 2005 Ford Mustang - used the D2C platform instead

title: Ford DEW platform


text:
Talk:Killing spinor

I'm prepared to say that this is too vague to be useful. Charles Matthews 04:18, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

What about something like:

 * A Killing spinor on a manifold M is a spinor field $$\phi$$ which satisfies

 * $$\nabla_X\phi=\lambda X.\phi$$

 * for all tangent vectors X, where $$\nabla$$ is the spinorally covariant derivative and $$\lambda$$ is a constant, called the Killing number. If $$\lambda=0$$ then the spinor is called a parallel spinor.

 * Uses:
 * Physics - supergravity and string theory (in particular used for finding solutions which preserve some supersymmetry)
 * Mathematics - ?

Dmr2 14:28, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

What $$\lambda X.\phi$$ means?

Tosha 16:17, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The dot in $$X.\phi$$ means Clifford multiplication. Just removed

 * The Killing equation is analogous to Maxwell's equations, but abstracted to higher dimensions.

from the main page. I don't think the Killing equation has anything to do with Maxwell's equations. Dmr2 09:59, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Killing spinor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041107222740/http://www.math.tu-berlin.de/~bohle/pub/dipl.ps to http://www.math.tu-berlin.de/~bohle/pub/dipl.ps

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:59, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Killing spinor


text:
Richard P. Brent

Richard Peirce Brent is an Australian mathematician and computer scientist. He is an emeritus professor at the Australian National University. From March 2005 to March 2010 he was a Federation Fellow at the Australian National University. His research interests include number theory (in particular factorisation), random number generators, computer architecture, and analysis of algorithms.

In 1973, he published a root-finding algorithm (an algorithm for solving equations numerically) which is now known as Brent's method.

In 1975 he and Eugene Salamin independently conceived the Salamin–Brent algorithm, used in high-precision calculation of $\pi$. At the same time, he showed that all the elementary functions (such as log(x), sin(x) etc.) can be evaluated to high precision in the same time as $$\pi$$ (apart from a small constant factor) using the arithmetic-geometric mean of Carl Friedrich Gauss.

In 1979 he showed that the first 75 million complex zeros of the Riemann zeta function lie on the critical line, providing some experimental evidence for the Riemann hypothesis.

In 1980 he and Nobel laureate Edwin McMillan found a new algorithm for high-precision computation of the Euler–Mascheroni constant $$\gamma$$ using Bessel functions, and showed that $$\gamma$$ can not have a simple rational form p/q (where p and q are integers) unless q is extremely large (greater than 1015000).

In 1980 he and John Pollard factored the eighth Fermat number using a variant of the Pollard rho algorithm. He later factored the tenth and eleventh Fermat numbers using Lenstra's elliptic curve factorisation algorithm.

In 2002, Brent, Samuli Larvala and Paul Zimmermann discovered a very large primitive trinomial over GF(2):
 * $$x^{6972593} + x^{3037958} + 1.$$

The degree 6972593 is the exponent of a Mersenne prime.

In 2009 and 2016, Brent and Paul Zimmermann discovered some even larger primitive trinomials, for example:
 * $$x^{43112609} + x^{3569337} + 1.$$

The degree 43112609 is again the exponent of a Mersenne prime. The highest degree trinomials found were three trinomials of degree 74,207,281, also a Mersenne prime exponent.

In 2011, Brent and Paul Zimmermann published Modern Computer Arithmetic (Cambridge University Press), a book about algorithms for performing arithmetic, and their implementation on modern computers.

Brent is a Fellow of the Association for Computing Machinery, the IEEE, SIAM and the Australian Academy of Science. In 2005, he was awarded the Hannan Medal by the Australian Academy of Science. In 2014, he was awarded the Moyal Medal by Macquarie University.

title: Richard P. Brent