text:
Talk:List of animal welfare organizations

Animal rights vs. animal welfare
There are important differences between animal rights and animal welfare (see discussion on AW page). I don't think the two types of groups should have been merged. Rosemary Amey 18:56, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

--wayland 11:40, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I agree. These two lists shouldn't have been merged. Also, merging them has caused the need for explanation at the head of the page to say what the difference is between them. A similar explanation is already on both the "animal welfare" and the "animal rights" pages so this is not only duplication but triplication.

 * I only just saw these comments, nearly two years after the fact! Don't let anyone say we're unresponsive. ;-D

 * I've split the lists into animal welfare, on the one hand, and animal rights on the other, as the two are indeed very different and often work in direct opposition to one another. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Hi 2A02:CE0:2801:D6B:6DB7:8000:6847:978D (talk) 15:29, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

mystery groups
I deleted one group that wasn't googleable, and one that is --

 * Wah Yan College Cats

There is a web page but it loads very slowly. I think it is probably a student organization from one of the Wah Yan Colleges, but I don't read Chinese so I'm not certain. While I don't want to discourage any nascent animal welfare, I think we also need to keep this page encyclopedic. So please, if you know something about the Wah Yan College Cats, create that page & document it.--Jaibe 19:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

A few more links to Animal welfare groups.
Hi, I added a few more links to this page, the list of animal welfare groups, including internal links as well as links to their websites.Beakymouse (talk) 00:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I removed the external links, leaving just links to resources on how to find groups. Rockpock  e  t  00:32, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Group Comparisons?
I'd like to find information on the relative effectiveness of each group and at least a general breakdown of how their contributions are spent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.165.20 (talk) 04:13, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

'Anti-vivisection' groups
'Vivisection' is a loaded term that animal rights activists use to attack animal research. If you look at some of the 'anti-vivisection' groups in the animal welfare list, they include ones like the National Anti-Vivisection Society, which includes answers like this one on their FAQ:

"It can be argued that no animal used in research is treated humanely, simply because they are forced to live in an artificial environment. These “laboratory” animals have been forever denied their ability to live their lives as nature intended, whether in the wild, as in the case of monkeys and chimpanzees, or in a home, as in the case of cats, dogs, rabbits and guinea pigs. . ."

http://www.navs.org/site/PageServer?pagename=answers663b

Putting the incoherence of the idea that 'nature intended' for some animals to be domesticated and put into houses aside, for the claim that animals should be returned to the wild to be an animal welfare claim requires that animals would be better off with its concomitant exposure to disease, starvation, parasitism, etc. I think it is much more likely that an animal rights group has inserted themselves into this list as an attempt at outreach, and that they should be moved or removed, as appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.160.168.250 (talk) 02:56, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Definition of "animal welfare" seems misleading?
I think it could be argued that many of the animal welfare organisations in this list are specifically opposed to "the responsible use of animals to satisfy certain human needs" and I certainly don't hear any animal welfare organisations arguing for the responsible use of lions, tigers or bats, except in the context of a wider remit to try and support responsible ecotourism. I'm also concerned about the inclusion in this list of a wildfowling organisation such as Ducks Unlimited; this is a conservation group at best, not an organisation dedicated to animal welfare, and the shooting of wildfowl is primarily viewed as a sport by members of this organisation (motto: "Conservation Today, Wetlands For Tomorrow") and not as a means of keeping bird populations in check to the benefit of other wildlife. Only one organisation in this list would conceivably support the taking of animal lives (Compassion in World Farming) and yet the definition seems to suggest otherwise. N Withnall (talk) 20:14, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Introduction section
I completely agree with N. Withnall that the definition of animal welfare groups is misleading. I know of no animal welfare group that advocates the use of animals for medical research, sport, etc.

This is the current content of the introduction section: "Animal welfare groups endorse the responsible use of animals to satisfy certain human needs. These range from companionship and sport, to uses which involve the taking of life, such as for food, clothing and medical research. Animal welfare means ensuring that all animals used by humans have their basic needs fulfilled in terms of food, shelter and health, and that they experience no unnecessary suffering in providing for human needs. Unlike animal rights groups, animal welfare groups do not argue that animals should never be used, or kept as property, by human beings. Nor do any animal welfare groups advocate violence. These groups tend to seek legal, social and financial strategies.

"The following is a list of animal welfare groups. These must not include more advanced animal rights groups, such as PETA or The Humane Society of the United States. For animal rights, see the list of animal rights groups. Note that more comprehensive listings (over 17,000 groups) are available via the World Animal Net directory (see external links below)."

I note that there is no definition or introduction at all in the List of animal rights groups.

I think all that needs to be done is to mention that there is a distinction between the two lists. Here's my take on it:

An animal welfare group is concerned with the health, safety and psychological wellness of animals. It may be an animal rescue group which helps individual animals in distress.

The category is distinct from an animal rights group. Although some groups may belong to both categories, an animal rights group goes beyond the welfare of individual animals to advocate for the rights of animals to be treated in a certain way, such as not to be abused, or used for medical research, sport, food, or clothing.

I'm confident enough in the change to go ahead and do it. Always open to feedback and discussion.

Canadianknowledgelover (talk) 06:52, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

"See also" section
Right now the "see also" section has a link to the animal portal and the list portal. I went to both links and don't see them as helpful to readers interested in animal welfare groups. I'm going to add instead links to the articles of animal rights group and animal rescue group, which are more pertinent.

In case anyone is very attached to the portals I'm deleting, the code for it is this (oh well, you can't see it but I can retrieve it here if need be).

Canadianknowledgelover (talk) 07:26, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Categories for location and type of animal served
I think the list would have more utility if people can see a group that serves their specific location. I would like to see categories by country, with worldwide reach starting it out. Within each country if there are smaller locations like states or provinces they could be subheadings.

Eventually it would be nice to see further subheadings by the type of animal served. At the same time, I'd like to keep it simple. I'm not sure of the value of having groups in alphabetical order, as they are now listed, and that might be scrapped. I'll try to dig into the rearranging of the existing groups and then add others.

Re the groups themselves, if there is a Wikipedia page for the group, that reference should be sufficient. People can link to the website for the group from the page. I changed a couple of groups in this manner to simply provide the link to the Wikipedia page.

On the flip side, if the organization doesn't have a page, the website can be linked when the name of the group is mentioned, rather than including the website as a reference (footnote). For example, Buddha Society for Animal Welfare.

I've been going through the listings, and found Animal Chaplains doesn't refer to a specific organization. I found information about animal chaplains and added that to the page called Chaplains. They serve people moreso than animals, although animal welfare is an interest. But this is a list of organizations. All I could find were a couple of people with websites who are animal chaplains. I deleted it from this list at this point. I may add it back in later on when the revised listing comes out. **** revisited later, added the two organizations back in the newly organized list under USA.

Canadianknowledgelover (talk) 07:33, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Have been making good progress. It's time-consuming, as I'm researching the area served by each organization and putting it in a list of places, beginning with Worldwide and moving to continents, countries, and states/provinces. Canadianknowledgelover (talk) 07:38, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

I've completed going through the list as it now sits, and organizing them all by location. Done! Saved the new list, and for now keeping the old A-Z listing at the bottom. Wherever there was a website rather than just a wikipedia page, I linked the website directly rather than using a footnote. The A-Z listing doesn't have that feature throughout.

There were a few changes I made to the existing list.
 * Citizens Lobbying for animals in zoos is an old organization, not really in use now so I left it out.
 * Party for the animals USA - this is a personal blog written in Japanese, perhaps was about animals at one time but it isn't anymore.
 * Society for Animal Protective Legislation - now called Animal Welfare Institute.

I also added a number of other organizations that I learned about ... with or without wikipedia pages ... there are still many pages out there that I would like to see added for more completeness, but it seemed a good idea to publish the organized list now rather than wait till it was more comprehensive. You may note there are US states that aren't mentioned because there were not organizations attached to them yet, so I left the state out until there is an organization mentioned. Enjoy! Canadianknowledgelover (talk) 05:11, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Removal of groups/external link policy
I noticed that some groups were recently removed from the list, and have some concerns about these removals. An issue was also raised about external links.

(1) deleted three groups for the reason that they were "clear animal rights groups": Animal Defenders International, Born Free Foundation (wildlife), and Humane Society International.

Animal Defenders International's website describes that it "campaigns across the globe on animals in entertainment, providing technical advice to governments, securing progressive animal protection legislation, drafting regulations and rescuing animals in distress... ADI rescues animals all over the world and educates the public on animals and environmental issues." While there is a focus on animal rights, in my view, their work in animal rescue and promoting animal welfare through changes in legislation shows animal welfare is integral to their work.

Born Free Foundation's page states "The Born Free Foundation undertakes animal welfare, conservation and public awareness campaigns to prevent animal abuse and to keep wildlife in its natural habitat."

Humane Society International is the international division of the HSUS, an animal welfare organization.

I don't believe the distinction ultimately has too much significance in any event. Even a group that is mainly an animal rights organization is doing their work because they are concerned about animal welfare. I also note that none of the above groups are yet listed in the page, List of animal rights groups. I would rather be inclusive than exclusive. Thoughts of others?

(2)  deleted some organizations from the list for the U.K., stating it was done "per WP:EL and convert possibly notable ones to redlinks - if they're notable, write the article".

This user kindly found a page for Retired Greyhound Trust, and replaced the organization's website link with the page.

Two organizations without pages, that were linked by their website previously, were changed to list the name only with a "redlink" to a page yet to be written, but now had no information even by way of reference, to the website of the organization. These were European Society of Dog and Animal Welfare and Scottish Animal Welfare.

Two organizations were removed altogether: Save Me (foxes, badgers) and Team Badger. I found a Wikipedia page for Save Me (animal welfare) talking about both the Team Badger effort and the Save Me organization. I will add that page to the list. I also found a lot of independent references to Team Badger, but it looks like it is well covered with the Save Me page.

I appreciated the link to Wikipedia's External Link guidelines. As I mentioned above, when reorganizing & cleaning up the page, I've been taking the approach that external links are more efficient than references. It appears that Wikipedia guidelines discourage long lists of external links, which may result. It would be great if we all had time to write the pages for the notable organizations that are listed here (presumably they were added here because they are notable). Until that happens, is it not ok to continue listing external links to their official websites, or is it preferable to create footnotes for each official website for organizations that don't yet have their own pages? It can be done but is tedious, and references seem to fit better for things like articles that discuss the organization. I don't care to delete active organizations just because they don't have a page yet. A lot of people in the past linked information about certain organizations that didn't have pages; I checked to make sure they were currently in operation and removed those that were no longer. To me it is more consistent with the advancement of knowledge that we provide information than that we omit it.

For the time being, I'm going to put my efforts more on adding pages than links to groups without pages. I'll add references to the "redlinked" organizations in the UK and add the Save Me page.

Canadianknowledgelover (talk) 00:46, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the explanation. I think that the general notability guidelines (WP:NOTE and WP:V) come in to play here.  Basically, a list page like this should really only cover articles that are either in Wikipedia already, or which are notable enough to be in Wikipedia if someone wrote an article about them - which includes the requirement that there is plenty of unbiased third party reporting of them (not just their own website or PR).  Per WP:REDLINK, it's fine to include a red link to a page that doesn't exist yet if it is likely to be notable enough, but don't be surprised if some of those get culled, especially on a subject like this where there are literally thousands of groups even in a single country.  I'm a bit concerned that this article is already a bit too long to be useful, and some thought may need to be given to subdividing some country sections, and thinking about what constitutes notability for some of these organisations.  Many local ones will not be notable enough for Wikipedia. OwainDavies (about)(talk) edited at 08:18, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

 * I respectively disagree about including all organizations that have a Wikipedia article. As more and more organizations have articles written about them, we will end up with zillions of names here. I live outside Chicago, in a western suburb.  There are two humane societies in my town plus nine more in the county south of us.  And what about local and county pounds?  Many of these provide the same or similar services that humane societies do.  The county next to ours has a no-kill policy.  They provide extensive animal welfare programs including humane education, adoptions. lost/found services and provide low-cost spay/neuter surgery -- which is almost exactly what the no-kill humane society where my husband and I volunteer does. Rissa, Guild of Copy Editors  (talk) 21:07, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, this is helpful. I am going through some locations now and really checking if the organizations are notable enough to be included, some are being pared down. I will link the website in a footnote if there isn't a page already. I am also adding columns so the page reads more clearly - a column section for Worldwide, one for the US, for Canada, for the UK ... basically larger sections where keeping a list in columns will make some sense.

I'm going to take out this group, which was listed in the Worldwide category; I had an extensive footnote addressing that it may not be operational: Greyhound Protection League

I think it is also time to remove the A-Z listings which are now not being kept up to date, and needlessly lengthen the article. I won't do that in the same edit in case someone is really attached to the A-Z list.

Canadianknowledgelover (talk) 01:30, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Well, I had plans to edit more extensively with footnotes for websites, but those edits were lost when there was an editing conflict. I did pare down some of the organizations that I had added after reviewing more closely for notability. Canadianknowledgelover (talk) 02:11, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

 * References

Links
I have removed nearly all of the links to outside organizations and many of the organizations that have Wikipedia articles, some of which are specific to breed or type of animal. Every state has at least one state-wide organization (eg, the state branch of the ASPCA of HSUS) that should be included, but adding local humane societies or private organizations, many of which deal with only one type of animal, is way too big a job for this article. And, as someone else noted, contact information about these organizations can be obtained through other sources.

I have been in the humane society biz since 1990, both as an employee and a volunteer. I am willing to collect information on each state's key humane organizations and put that here.

This may take a week or so -- please be patient. Rissa, Guild of Copy Editors (talk) 21:34, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Worldwide or Serving Multiple Countries
The "Worldwide or Serving Multiple Countries" section needs weeding, too. The first name on that list is the "Albino Squirrel Preservation Society," hardly what one thinks of as a major worldwide animal welfare organization. I have already removed Alley Cat Allies from this list as it operates only in the US. Rissa, Guild of Copy Editors (talk) 21:20, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge from Humane society and SCPA
The articles Humane society and Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals are content forks and should be merged into List of animal welfare organizations. The page should then have a redirect hatnote about the British Royal Humane Society (which is not an animal charity), but no other mention of that society is needed on the page. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:54, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The article Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is essentially a list of organizations that have the phrase in their names and includes a brief introduction about the genericness of the phrase. It should be retained and turned into a disam page for readers to find the specific organization they are looking for when they search for that generic phrase. The groups in the list should also be included in List of animal welfare organizations -- some of them are already in that list and the rest should be included too. The article Humane society is not a list, it's a full prose article about the history and attributes of humane societies and therefore is not redundant to -- and would not merge well into -- a list article like List of animal welfare organizations.  Sparkie82 ( t • c ) 23:57, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Agree with Sparkie that neither page should merge and agree with the argument. However, I suggest that Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals should not be a disambiguation page, but rather a set index article, because it is a list article about a set of items of a specific type that also share the same (or similar) name. Klbrain (talk) 00:20, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I have switched the article to an SIA. Klbrain (talk) 21:48, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Another NGO ?

 * Social Compassion in Legislation ? --Lamiot (talk) 09:51, 7 September 2019 (UTC) (french)
 * Society of Animal Welfare Administrators


text:
Figueira da Foz

Figueira da Foz, also known as Figueira for short, is a city and a municipality in the Coimbra District, in Portugal. Practically at the midpoint of the Iberian Peninsula's Atlantic coast, it is located at the mouth of the Mondego River, 40 km west of Coimbra and sheltered by hills (Serra da Boa Viagem), sharing about the same latitude with Philadelphia, Baku and Beijing. The population of the municipality in 2011 was 62,125, in an area of 379.05 km2. The city of Figueira da Foz proper has a population of 46,600. It is the second largest city in the district of Coimbra.

It is a coastal city with several beaches, summer and seaport facilities on the Atlantic Ocean coast. As a tourism city, it plays an important part in the centre of the country. A zone of legal gambling, one can find in Figueira one of the biggest casinos of the Iberian Peninsula – the Casino Figueira.

History
According to the legend, the place's name is due to a fig tree, which stood at the quay of Salmanha, where the fishermen used to tie up their boats. Foz means "place of discharge", often used at the point a river meets another body of water, specially where there is a clear energy or water flow clash. Some historical traces show that people were settling in this region since the Neolithic age. The oldest known document, however, dates from the year 1096. In this, an abbot named Pedro donates estates, which belonged to the church of S. Julião, to the cathedral Sé Velha of Coimbra.

Knowing the great importance rivers had in the development of cities and of ancient civilizations, the mouth of the Mondego must have played a central role in the fixation of men in this region and for the formation of settlements, which were the beginning of the city of Figueira da Foz. Figueira da Foz had a huge development during the 18th and 19th centuries due to the immense port movements and the expansion of the shipbuilding and cod drying industry, supplying the city with new communication routes, housing and other facilities. It was elevated to vila (small town) on 12 March 1771 and turned city (cidade) on 20 September 1882. Discovered as a sea resort by the end of the 19th century, it gained a great reputation in the 1920s and 1930s. The city had the Portuguese nickname of Rainha das Praias (Queen of the Beaches).

The municipality has some noted landmarks like the Sotto Mayor Palace, the old fishing village of Buarcos, the Serra da Boa Viagem – a small forested mountain by the Atlantic Ocean, several beaches, and its large seaside promenade paved with typical Portuguese pavement. Figueira da Foz has several Churches, many of them in the rich Baroque style, a Municipal Museum with the archaeological, ethnographic and artistic collection, the Santa Catarina Fort and the old Buarcos Fortress, the Relógio Tower by the main sandy beach, several archaeological vestiges throughout the municipality, several Palaces and Manor Houses (like the Sotto Mayor Palace), as well as several green spaces and small gardens like those in the area of Abadias.

Economy
The city is an important industrial centre, producing wood pulp and paper (Navigator, formerly and still commonly known as Soporcel, and Celbi, part of Altri) and glass (Verallia, part of Saint-Gobain). It also has notable naval construction and fish industries. Until the turn of the 21st century, a factory of the CIMPOR Group was installed in the Mondego Cape (Cabo Mondego). The seaport and the fishing harbour are also important for its economy.

With its old and renowned casino (Casino da Figueira), the marina, several hotels, restaurants and other tourist facilities, Figueira is actually a very important Atlantic beach resort, in the center of Portugal's Silver Coast/Costa de Prata tourism region. A generally windy coastal area, its relatively cold seawaters are particularly renowned as a surf and kitesurf hotspot in the same fashion as other places throughout the west coast of Portugal, such as Nazaré, Peniche or Ericeira. In July and August, its main beaches are usually packed with beachgoers too.

Education
The city has well-equipped kindergartens, schools and high schools. It had two private universities: the Catholic University of Portugal (Figueira da Foz branch) and the Internacional University (Figueira da Foz branch) but they were closed in 2009 due to lack of funds and academic integrity. The municipality of Figueira da Foz is served by the ancient University of Coimbra and the Polytechnic Institute of Coimbra located 40 kilometers to the east of the city, in the district capital Coimbra.

Parishes
Administratively, the municipality is divided into 14 civil parishes (freguesias):

 * Alhadas
 * Alqueidão
 * Bom Sucesso
 * Buarcos
 * Ferreira-a-Nova
 * Lavos
 * Maiorca
 * Marinha das Ondas
 * Moinhos da Gândara
 * Paião
 * Quiaios
 * São Pedro
 * Tavarede
 * Vila Verde

Geography
Figueira is about 40 kilometers west of Coimbra by the Atlantic Ocean and less than 200 kilometers to the north of Lisbon, on the mouth of the Mondego River and at the foothills of the Serra da Boa Viagem (mountain). The Cabo Mondego (cape) is inserted in the context of the Lusitanian Basin and is located on the western edge of the Serra da Boa Viagem (latitude 40º 11´ 3´´ N, longitude 08º 54´34´´W), approximately 6 km to the northwest of the city of Figueira da Foz proper. Classified as a Natural Monument since 2007, the cape is one of the most important testimonies for understanding the geological history of Portugal; represents, in a particularly complete way, some of the most important episodes in the history of the Earth that occurred during the Jurassic, for a time interval that is, approximately, between 185 and 140 million years, which justifies, at international level, the relevance of its classification, conservation and dissemination. The outcrop comprises a series of marine and fluvial-lake sediments that extend from the Upper Toarciano to the Titonian. This record, on some levels, is particularly continuous and rich in paleontological, sedimentological and paleomagnetic information, which are associated with exceptional observation conditions. It includes levels with the oldest footprints of megalosaurs (bipedal and carnivorous dinosaurs) described in Portugal and whose first reference dates from 1884.

Climate
Figueira da Foz has a warm-summer Mediterranean climate (Köppen: Csb) characterized by mild, rainy winters and dry, warm summers. The annual average temperature is around 15 °C and the annual average rainfall is about 600 mm. The sea surface temperature varies from 14 - 15 C in January and February to 18 - 19 C in August and September. On summer afternoons moderate to (occasionally) strong north-westerly winds are common. Subtropical Storm Alpha, notable for being the only tropical or subtropical cyclone to make landfall in Portugal on record, made landfall at peak intensity in the general vicinity of the city on 18 September 2020. Figueira da Foz was, however, particularly hit hard when Storm (Hurricane) Leslie made landfall in mainland Europe right within the city on 13 October 2018.

Beaches of Figueira da Foz

 * Praia da Figueira da Foz – Relógio – Praia da Bola de Nivea (Europe's widest urban beach)
 * Praia da Gala – Figueira da Foz (Cova Gala)
 * Praia da Murtinheira – Figueira da Foz
 * Praia do Cabo Mondego – Figueira da Foz
 * Praia da Leirosa – Figueira da Foz
 * Praia da Costa de Lavos – Figueira da Foz
 * Praia da Orbitur – Figueira da Foz
 * Praia da Cova – Cova Gala (Figueira da Foz)
 * Praia do Cabedelo – Figueira da Foz (Cova Gala)
 * Praia da Claridade – Figueira da Foz
 * Praia de Buarcos – Tamargueira (Figueira da Foz) e Plataforma (Figueira da Foz)
 * Praia do Vale do Emide – Figueira da Foz
 * Praia de Quiaios – Figueira da Foz (Quiaios)

Sports
Figueira da Foz is home to Associação Naval 1º Maio, best known for its football team which spent six seasons between 2005 and 2011 in the national top tier, the Primeira Liga. The city is also the home of the basketball department of Ginásio Clube Figueirense which competes in the Portuguese basketball league, adding rowing and swimming to their more notorious activities.

The Tennis Club da Figueira da Foz was founded in 1917 and is still located next to the Santa Catarina Fort at the mouth of the Mondego River today.

The city hosted the Mundialto international beachsoccer tournament from 1997 to 2004.

International surf competitions frequently take place in Figueira like the World Surf Championship 2010 or the IFCA Slaloms Worlds 2008.

Road
Figueira da Foz is accessed by motorways A14, linking it to Coimbra and A1, and A17, linking it to Aveiro and A25 (reaching Spain) to the north and Leiria and A8 to the south. As an alternative to tolled motorways, it is served by routes EN109, linking Leiria to Gaia (near Porto), and EN111, linking Figueira da Foz to Coimbra and IC2 (Portugal), the toll-free alternative to A1. There are intercity bus services to Lisbon, Porto, Leiria, Aveiro and Viseu. There are also regional bus services to Coimbra and places in between.

Rail
The city is served by its own railway terminus, Figueira da Foz railway station, with suburban trains linking it to Coimbra and some regional trains running along the Western Line, although there is no direct railway service to Lisbon or Porto. The closest station to be served by intercity railway services is Alfarelos railway station, at the Northern Line, 18 km to the east. Coimbra-B, 36 km to the east, is the closest station serving high-speed Alfa Pendular trains. Both have scheduled links to Lisbon, Porto and other major cities across Portugal. Pombal railway station, slightly closer at 32 km to the southeast, also serves Alfa Pendular trains, but there is no direct railway link between the two cities.

Water
Figueira da Foz has its own seaport, Port of Figueira da Foz along river Mondego, featuring a marina, a container terminal and naval shipyards. In addition, there are facilities for watersports, in particular rowing.

Air
The city does not have its own airport. The closest international airport to Figueira da Foz is Porto Airport (OPO), located 120 km to the north and offering several international destinations primarily in Europe, although Lisbon Airport (LIS), located 155 km to the south, offers more intercontinental destinations, in particular to North America, South America and Africa. The closest aerodrome handling private flights is Bissaya Barreto Aerodrome (CBP) in Coimbra, 32 km to the east, where the Aeroclube da Figueira da Foz is based. The closest runway capable of handling widebody aircraft is at Monte Real Air Base in Leiria, some 40 km to the south, but it is home to the Portuguese Air Force's jet fighter aircraft, making it difficult to convert the airbase to commercial aviation due to its strategic position in Portugal's defence system.

An international airport in Figueira da Foz, the Silver Coast International Airport, was planned in the early 1990s, which was to be located in Lavos, 7 km south of the city centre—it has never been built.

International Relations
Figueira da Foz is twinned with:

 * 🇲🇿 Angoche, Nampula, Mozambique
 * 🇪🇸 Ciudad Rodrigo, Castile and León, Spain
 * 🇫🇷 Gradignan, Gironde, France
 * 🇵🇹 Mortágua, Viseu, Portugal
 * New Bedford, Massachusetts, USA
 * 🇨🇻 Praia, Santiago, Cabo Verde
 * 🇺🇦 Yevpatoria, Crimea, Ukraine

Notable people

 * Lucrécia de Arriaga (1844–1927), the wife of Manuel de Arriaga, the first President of Portugal, thus the first First Lady of Portugal, 1911 to 1915
 * David de Souza, (Wiki PT) (1880–1918), composer, conductor and cellist
 * Luís Wittnich Carrisso (1886–1937), a botanist, professor at the University of Coimbra
 * Carlos Galvão de Melo (1921–2008), a Portuguese Air Force officer and politician
 * João César Monteiro (1939–2003), film director, actor, writer and film critic.
 * João Mário Grilo (born 1958), a film director, author and professor.
 * Afonso Cruz (born 1971), a Portuguese novelist, animator, illustrator and musician
 * Nuno Camarneiro (born 1977), a Portuguese novelist.
 * Marco Mendes (born 1978), a Portuguese artist and comic author.
 * Susana Guerra (born 1980), stage name Suzy, singer, rep. for Portugal in Eurovision Song Contest 2014
 * Rita Camarneiro (born 1988), TV presenter, actress and comedian.

Sport

 * José Bento Pessoa (1874–1954), a Portuguese record-winning cyclist.
 * Alves Barbosa (1931–2018), a Portuguese professional road cyclist.
 * Ticha Penicheiro (born 1974), a sports agent and former WNBA basketball player
 * Rui Cordeiro (born 1976), rugby union footballer
 * Sérgio Grilo (born 1983), a retired footballer and coach with over 300 club caps.
 * Hugo Almeida (born 1984), a former footballer with 409 club caps and 57 for Portugal

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

title: Figueira da Foz


text:
Talk:Fossil collecting

I originally wrote this article in 1998 and published it on the Web....

It need links to other articles.

Dlloyd 18:57, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I mentioned a well know manufacturer of geological hammers in this article. It is not an advertisement.

Dlloyd 19:11, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Portions of this text are :

"Copyright © 1995-1997 The Fossil Company Ltd. © 1997-1999 The British Fossil Company Inc. and licensed by the owner under the terms of the Wikipedia copyright." Please contact me if you need further clarification on this.

Dlloyd 00:38, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Edit

 * This article needs a complete re-write if most of this has been copied fro another source. I suggest deleting all. 62.254.237.150 15:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Ok I am rewriting the article, but needs peer review. Enlil Ninlil 23:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Tone
The tone of this article does not sound encyclopadic. Examples include: "Always refill any holes dug" and "please be considerate". These do not belong in an encylopaedia, in my opinion.--Thorwald 20:44, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

It could do with more history about fossil collecting and the value of fossils, which is quite large Franny-K (talk) 18:49, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Fossil collecting. 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/20120403072414/http://www.vertpaleo.org/Content/NavigationMenu/TheSociety/StatementsandGuidelines/OntheSaleofVertebrateFossils/default.htm to http://www.vertpaleo.org/Content/NavigationMenu/TheSociety/StatementsandGuidelines/OntheSaleofVertebrateFossils/default.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090303214207/http://mookychick.co.uk/lists/how_to_go_fossil_hunting.php to http://www.mookychick.co.uk/lists/how_to_go_fossil_hunting.php

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) 00:16, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Fossil collecting


text:
User talk:Kot Behemot

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

Here are some tips to help you get started:

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

Good luck!

title: User talk:Kot Behemot


text:
Concord River

The Concord River is a 16.3 mi tributary of the Merrimack River in eastern Massachusetts, United States. The river drains a small rural, suburban region northwest of Boston. As one of the most notable small rivers in U.S. history, it was the scene of an important early battle of the American Revolutionary War and was the subject of a 19th-century book by Henry David Thoreau.

Description and early history
The river begins in Middlesex County, formed by the confluence of the Sudbury and Assabet Rivers at Egg Rock, near the Concord town center. It flows generally north, from eastern Concord (along the northwestern edge of the Boston metropolitan area), joining the Merrimack River from the south on the eastern side of Lowell. It is a gently flowing stream with little variation in topography along most of its route. Its drainage basin stretches into Worcester County and includes 36 towns within Massachusetts.

Native Americans called it the Musketaquid or "grass-grown" river because its sluggish waters abound in aquatic or semi-aquatic vegetation and its banks are fringed with wild grasses and sedges which stretch for miles along both sides of this placid stream. This creates an ideal environment for a variety of fish, including bass, shad, alewife (river herring), pickerel, carp and American eel. Native Americans wove sticks in intricate designs to trap alewives and other migrating fish at the mouths of rivers throughout this region.

By 1635, settlers from England began to arrive, giving the river its current name. On April 19, 1775, the Old North Bridge over the river in the town of Concord was the scene of the famous Battle of Concord (occurring on the same day when the first shots of the Revolutionary War were fired at nearby Lexington). The current version of the bridge (a reproduction) is preserved by the National Park Service.

Henry David Thoreau wrote his first book, A Week on the Concord and Merrimack Rivers, in 1849 while living at nearby Walden Pond. His book recounted a seven-day boat trip on the rivers with his brother John, who had since died. Thoreau recounted his exploration of the natural beauty of the river, and his accompanying thoughts on such eternal themes as truth, poetry, travel and friendship. Despite the development of suburbs near the river, it remains a popular canoeing destination today. The last mile of the river in Lowell is serious class 3+/4 whitewater.

Dams cause fish population to decrease
Dams were built along the Concord River to increase crop production and also to provide a source of power for operating mills. As a result, by the 19th century, the native fish populations of shad and alewife became extinct because the dams prevented the mature fish from returning upstream to spawn. Alewife and other anadromous fish are migratory. They hatch in freshwater, make their way to the sea to mature, then return as adults to freshwater to spawn, usually near where they had hatched. This instinct is imprinted within the fish when it is born. When the route upstream became blocked, this cycle was broken and the fish were unable to survive without it. The Faulkner Dam in North Billerica is just one of many blockages that caused the alewife population to collapse on the Concord River. Water was later diverted north to Lowell and south to Charlestown to run the Middlesex Canal.

Effects of pollution
During the 19th century, the Concord River was a hub of industrial activity during the US Industrial Revolution. This led to environmental challenges as industrial wastes, untreated sewage, and other organic waste were dumped into the river. Industrial development peaked in the 1920s, contributing to the pollution of the river. By the 1960s, the Merrimack River into which the Concord River empties, was considered one of the top 10 most polluted waterways in America.

Following the passage of the Clean Water Act in 1972, the United States initiated efforts to enhance the quality of America's water bodies. This legislation imposed more stringent regulations on point source discharges into rivers and other navigable waters. As a result, three wastewater treatment plants were constructed along the banks of the Concord River: one in Concord and two in Billerica. These facilities played a crucial role in preventing further degradation of the river ecosystem by operating within federally mandated limits.

Pollutants such as heavy metals and PCBs continue to be trapped in the sediment of the Sudbury River and downstream into the Concord River. As a result, fish consumption is prohibited in such areas, due to the presence of mercury-laden sediment originating from the Nyanza Superfund site and other sources.

In August 2004, Perchlorate was detected in the Concord River. Initially, it was believed that explosives used in nearby road and building construction may have caused this contamination. However, an investigation by the town of Billerica eventually determined that the source was a local company that produced surgical and medical materials. The company had been using 220 gallons of perchloric acid per month in a bleaching process, with the rinse water being discharged into the sewage system. Following this investigation, the company voluntarily ceased operations until it could install ion exchange equipment to comply with environmental regulations.

In May 2007, Billerica faced legal action and was fined $250,000 for releasing pollutants into the Concord River. This action was taken by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) due to the town exceeding allowable effluent limits for phosphorus, fecal coliform bacteria, pH, and ammonia nitrogen. Additionally, the town was charged with failing to submit discharge monitoring reports, complying with monitoring requirements, and failing to submit infiltration and inflow reporting. The EPA stated that Billerica's phosphorus discharges resulted in an excess of nutrients released in the river, leading to harmful excessive growth of aquatic plants.

Diadromous fish recovery effort
In May 2000, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Massachusetts Riverways Program, and volunteers from the Sudbury Valley Trustees (SVT) released 7,000 adult alewives into the Concord River. They were transferred from the Nemasket River so that they could lay their eggs and spawn upstream. This imprinted the young alewives with the Concord as their new home river. The experiment did not succeed, as too few fish returned to the base of the first dam on the Concord River. A feasibility study published in 2016 is again exploring steps necessary for returning diadromous fish to the Concord River, and farther upstream, to the Sudbury and Assabet Rivers.

title: Concord River


text:
Auckland Island merganser

The Auckland Island merganser (Mergus australis) (Miuweka), also known as the New Zealand merganser, was a typical merganser that is now extinct.

Description
This duck was similar in size to the red-breasted merganser (Mergus serrator). The adult male had a dark reddish-brown head, crest and neck, with bluish black mantle and tail and slate grey wings. The female was slightly smaller with a shorter crest.

History
The Auckland Island merganser was known from the Auckland Islands archipelago, part of the New Zealand Subantarctic Islands. The only historical records are from Auckland Island and Adams Island. Holocene bones were found on Enderby Island. The last specimens were apparently a pair shot on 9 January 1902, and the species is now extinct. It was not found in a 1909 search, and a thorough 1972/1973 exploration of possible habitat concluded that it was long extinct. Its decline was caused by a combination of hunting and predation by introduced mammals.

The closely related Chatham Island merganser (Mergus milleneri) is known from Holocene bones found on Chatham Island, New Zealand. The species identity of merganser bones from mainland New Zealand - North, South, and Stewart Islands - is unresolved.

title: Auckland Island merganser


text:
User:Deragon

Software consultant and extremely small Wikipedia contributor.

title: User:Deragon


text: User talk:198.104.63.140

title: User talk:198.104.63.140


text:
InfraGard

InfraGard is a national non-profit organization serving as a public-private partnership between U.S. businesses and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The organization is an information sharing and analysis effort serving the interests, and combining the knowledge base of, a wide range of private sector and government members. InfraGard is an association of individuals that facilitates information sharing and intelligence between businesses, academic institutions, state and local law enforcement agencies, and other participants dedicated to preventing hostile acts against the United States.

History
InfraGard began in the Cleveland, Ohio, Field Office in 1996, and has since expanded to become a national-level program, with InfraGard coordinators in every FBI field office. Originally, it was a local effort to gain support from the information technology industry and academia for the FBI's investigative efforts in the cyber arena, but it has since expanded to a much wider range of activities surrounding the nation's critical infrastructure.

The program expanded to other FBI Field Offices, and in 1998 the FBI assigned national program responsibility for InfraGard to the former National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC) directed by RADM James B. Plehal and to the FBI's Cyber Division in 2003. Since 2003, InfraGard Alliances and the FBI said that they have developed a TRUST-based public-private sector partnership to ensure reliability and integrity of information exchanged about various terrorism, intelligence, criminal, and security matters. It supports FBI priorities in the areas of counterterrorism, foreign counterintelligence, and cybercrime.

Information sharing
InfraGard chapters participate to assure that the critical infrastructure owners and operators—estimated at 85% private sector—are engaged and represented in local and regional planning efforts. Working on all 16 critical infrastructure sectors, the organization provides resources and information not only on prevention, but also on building resilience and response capabilities.

Training
InfraGard chapters around the nation also provide cyber and physical security training sessions that focus on the latest threats as identified by the FBI. Sessions include threat briefings, technical sessions on cyber and physical attack vectors, response training, and other resources to help CISOs and CSOs protect their enterprise. InfraGard approaches threats to critical infrastructure from both a tactical and strategic level, addressing the needs of those on the front lines of security as well as those decision makers tasked with assessing their enterprise's vulnerabilities and allocating resources to protect it.

The information sharing between the organization and government has been criticized by those protecting civil liberties, concerned the membership would be surrogate eyes and ears for the FBI. The group has also been the subject of hacking attacks intended to embarrass the FBI. Local chapters regularly meet to discuss the latest threats or listen to talks from subject matter experts on security issues, with membership open to U.S. citizens at no cost. As of July 2012, the organization reported membership at over 54,677 (including FBI).

Civil liberties
Partnership between government agencies and private organizations has its critics. Concerned about civil liberties, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) warned that there "is evidence that InfraGard may be closer to a corporate TIPS program, turning private-sector corporations — some of which may be in a position to observe the activities of millions of individual customers — into surrogate eyes and ears for the FBI". Concluding that "any program that institutionalizes close, secretive ties between such organizations raises serious questions about the scope of its activities, now and in the future." While others describing Infragard state "the architecture of the Internet—and the many possible methods of attack— requires governments, corporations, and private parties to work together to protect network security and head off threats before they occur." Responding to the ACLU criticism, Chairwoman Kathleen Kiernan of the InfraGard National Members Alliance (INMA) denies that InfraGard is anything but beneficial to all Americans stating "It's not an elitist group in any way, shape or form," she says. "We're out there trying to protect everybody. Any U.S. citizen on the planet is eligible to apply to InfraGard."

LulzSec attacks
In 2011, LulzSec claimed responsibility for attacking chapter websites managed by local members in Connecticut and Atlanta, in order to embarrass the FBI with "simple hacks". The group leaked some of InfraGard member e-mails and a database of local users. The group defaced the website posting the following message, "LET IT FLOW YOU STUPID FBI BATTLESHIPS", accompanied with a video. LulzSec has posted the following message regarding the attack:

"It has not come to our unfortunate attention that NATO and our good friend Barrack Osama-Llama 24th-century Obama [sic] have recently upped the stakes with regard to hacking. They now treat hacking as an act of war. So, we just hacked an FBI affiliated website (Infragard, specifically the Atlanta chapter) and leaked its user base. We also took complete control over the site and defaced it[.]"

2022 breach
On December 10, 2022, a member of BreachForums identified by the screen name "USDoD" posted a thread offering the sale, for $50,000, of a database containing the information of over 80,000 members of InfraGard. The individual claimed to have obtained access to the portal through a social engineering attack in which they pretended to be the CEO of an unknown U.S. financial corporation, applying for InfraGard membership to both Infraguard members and the FBI who later granted the hacker InfraGard membership and access to the InfraGard portal. Once granted access the hacker, used a script to obtain the InfraGard database information.

The FBI has not commented on the hack but was aware of the false account in the InfraGard portal. The hack occurred roughly one year after the 2021 FBI email hack.

On 24 March 2023, the United States Department of Justice announced the arrest of Conor Brian Fitzpatrick, the alleged administrator of BreachForums, by the FBI. Fitzpatrick was initially charged with conspiracy to commit access device fraud. After the execution of a search warrant, he was additionally charged with possession of child pornography. Fitzpatrick was freed on a $300,00 bond, but was subsequently re-arrested on 2 January 2024 after allegedly violating the conditions of his bail. On 16 January 2024, Fitzpatrick pled guilty to conspiracy to commit access device fraud, solicitation for the purpose of offering access devices and possession of child pornography. He was sentenced by a federal judge to 20 years of supervised release and is required to register as a sex offender.

In May 2024, working in-conjunction with domestic and international law enforcement partners, the Department of Justice seized the BreachForums website.

title: InfraGard


text:
User talk:Smiller933

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

Here are some tips to help you get started:

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

Good luck!

WikiProject Iowa
Hello, I noticed that you edited an article related to, or expressed interest in Iowa. Therefore, I was wondering if you would be interested in joining (proposed) WikiProject Iowa? If so, please add your name to "Interested Wikipedians" at Proposed WikiProject Iowa --Tim4christ17 03:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

column formation
Done. (redirects are cheap) --Philip Baird Shearer 18:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Pinhole camera
Re. your comments on above, I thought you might find this ref info of use. Tyrenius 00:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Guide to referencing
Click on "show" to open contents. {| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: center; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em; font-size: 100%; " ! style="background-color: #f90;" | Using references (citations)
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" style="text-align: left;" |
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" style="text-align: left;" |

I thought you might find it useful to have some information about references (refs) on wikipedia. These are important to validate your writing and inform the reader. Any editor can removed unreferenced material; and unsubstantiated articles may end up getting deleted, so when you add something to an article, it's highly advisable to also include a reference to say where it came from. Referencing may look daunting, but it's easy enough to do. Here's a guide to getting started.

Good references
A reference must be accurate, i.e. it must prove the statement in the text. To validate "Mike Brown climbed Everest", it's no good linking to a page about Everest, if Mike Brown isn't mentioned, nor to one on Mike Brown, if it doesn't say that he climbed Everest. You have to link to a source that proves his achievement is true. You must use Reliable sources, such as published books, mainstream press, authorised web sites, and official documents. Blogs, Myspace, Youtube, fan sites and extreme minority texts are not usually acceptable, nor is Original research, e.g. your own unpublished, or self-published, essay or research.

Simple referencing
The first thing you have to do is to create a "Notes and references" section. This goes towards the bottom of the page, below the "See also" section and above the "External links" section. Enter this code:

 * ==Notes and references==

The next step is to put a reference in the text. Here is the code to do that. It goes at the end of the relevant term, phrase, sentence, or paragraph to which the note refers, and after punctuation such as a full stop, without a space (to prevent separation through line wrap):

Whatever text you put in between these two tags will become visible in the "Notes and references" section as your reference.

Test it out
Copy the following text, open the edit box for this page, paste it at the bottom (inserting your own text) and save the page:

 * ==Reference test==

 * This is the text which you are going to reference.

 * ==Notes and references==

(End of text to copy and paste.)

Information to include
You need to include the information to enable the reader to find your source. For a book it might look like this:

An online newspaper source would be:

Note the square brackets around the URL. The format is [URL Title] with a space between the URL and the Title. If you do this the URL is hidden and the Title shows as the link. Use double apostrophes for the article title, and two single quote marks either side of the name of the paper (to generate italics).

The date after The Guardian is the date of the newspaper, and the date after "Retrieved on" is the date you accessed the site – useful for searching the web archive in case the link goes dead. Wikilinks (double square brackets which create an internal link to a wikipedia article) function inside the ref tags. Dates are wikilinked so that they work with user preference settings.

Citation templates
You may prefer to use a citation template to compile details of the source. The template goes between the ref tags and you fill out the fields you wish to. Basic templates can be found here: Template messages/Sources of articles/Citation quick reference

Same ref used twice or more
The first time a reference appears in the article, you can give it a simple name in the

The second time you use the same reference in the article, you need only to create a short cut instead of typing it all out again:

You can then use the short cut as many times as you want. Don't forget the /, or it will blank the rest of the article! A short cut will only pick up from higher up the page, so make sure the first ref is the full one. Some symbols don't work in the ref name, but you'll find out if you use them.

Example
You can see refs in action in the article William Bowyer (artist). There are 3 sources and they are each referenced 3 times. Each statement in the article has a footnote to show what its source is.

Next step
When you become familiar with the process, the next step is to have one section, "Footnotes", with links embedded in the text, and another, "References", which lists all of your references alphabetically with full details, e.g. for a book:

 * Lincoln, Abraham; Grant, U. S.; & Davis, Jefferson (1861). Resolving Family Differences Peacefully (3rd ed.). Gettysburg: Printing Press. ISBN 0-12-345678-9.

If you're ready to go into it further, these pages have detailed information:
 * Citing sources
 * Citing sources/example style
 * Citation templates
 * Footnotes

I hope this helps. If you need any assistance, let me know.

Tyrenius 00:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * }

Re: Block of User talk:68.156.47.66
No it is not. I used to warn every vandal that was blocked, but, when it adds up, it is very time consuming, and it is source of misunderstanding when blocks expire and IPs are shared. I always warn the users I indef block, and I blank the talk pages of IPs I block for a long time (> 6 months). I usually warn users when I block them, to be sure they get the message. But most IPs do hit and run, and I believe the error message is enough to send the word home. I hope that helps! -- lucasbfr  talk 18:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Tags
When putting deletion tags on redirects, as you did at User_talk:66.244.215.212/Archive1, place them above the #redirect so they are visible without viewing the source. —Random832 20:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Edit to Maverick
It absolutely DOES matter that Mavericks are not Mustangs. If people want to read about Mustangs, they can look up Mustangs on Wikipedia. There is absolutely NO reason to have Mustang notes on a Maverick article. In fact, it's ridiculous, and it just clutters up the page. I am not a vandal. I just hate seeing information listed which does not pertain to the subject...

Re: Current revision...
Those notes contain more than just sales figures for the Mustang compared to the Maverick. They contain irrelevant data regarding current production Mustangs. I would appreciate if you would stop re-listing such irrelevant data... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Streetavenger (talk • contribs) 21:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I forgot source?
Have you ever been to  Nebraska? well... I haven't either... but it's pretty much general knowledge t hat us IOwans are superior and  taller  love --67.55.135.211 (talk) 19:55, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

btw, I need a source for it but can't find one so do you ave like a pesonal website to post it on? cuz I don't. tahnks

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Smiller933


text:
Selfridge

Selfridge or variation may refer to:

People

 * Andy Selfridge (1949–2019), American former National Football League player
 * Harry Gordon Selfridge (1856–1947), American-born founder of Selfridges Department Store
 * John Selfridge (1927–2010), American mathematician
 * Oliver Selfridge (1926–2008), English computer scientist, a pioneer in artificial intelligence and grandson of Harry Gordon Selfridge
 * Peter A. Selfridge (born 1971), United States Chief of Protocol (2014–2017)
 * Rose Selfridge (1860–1918), American heiress and wife of Harry Selfridge
 * Thomas Oliver Selfridge (1804–1902), United States Navy admiral
 * Thomas Oliver Selfridge Jr. (1836–1924), United States Navy admiral and son of Thomas O. Selfridge
 * Thomas Selfridge (1882–1908), US Army lieutenant and the first person to die in a powered airplane crash

Places

 * Selfridge, North Dakota, USA; a town
 * Selfridge High School
 * Selfridge Public School
 * Selfridge Air National Guard Base, Michigan, USA; named for Thomas Selfridge
 * Battery Selfridge, Fort Kamehameha, Pearl Harbor, Honolulu, Hawaii; an artillery battery
 * Selfridges Building, Birmingham, England, UK; of the Selfridges department store chain; an award winning architectural design
 * Selfridges, Oxford Street, London, England, UK; of the Selfridges department store chain; a listed building

Ships

 * USS Selfridge, a U.S. Navy ship name
 * USS Selfridge (DD-320), a United States Navy destroyer named for Thomas O. Selfridge
 * USS Selfridge (DD-357), a United States Navy destroyer named for Thomas O. Selfridge and Thomas O. Selfridge Jr.

Other uses

 * Selfridges (aka Selfridge's), a chain of four department stores in the United Kingdom
 * Selfridge Prize, a prize awarded for the best paper at the Algorithmic Number Theory Symposium

title: Selfridge


text:
User:Hemanshu

hi:%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%A6%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF:Hemanshu

My contributions to Wikipedia may be freely translated and I release them from GFDL requirements as far as translations are concerned.

title: User:Hemanshu


text:
Barometric formula

The barometric formula is a formula used to model how the pressure (or density) of the air changes with altitude.

Pressure equations
There are two equations for computing pressure as a function of height. The first equation is applicable to the atmospheric layers in which the temperature is assumed to vary with altitude at a non null lapse rate of $$L_b$$:

$$P = P_{b} \left[ 1 - \frac{L_{M,b}}{T_{M,b}} (h - h_{b})\right]^{\frac{g_{0}' M_{0}}{R^{*} L_{M,b}}}$$ The second equation is applicable to the atmospheric layers in which the temperature is assumed not to vary with altitude (lapse rate is null):

$$P = P_b \exp \left[\frac{-g_0 M \left(h-h_b\right)}{R^* {T_{M,b}}}\right]$$ where:
 * $$P_b$$ = reference pressure
 * $$T_{M,b}$$ = reference temperature (K)
 * $$L_{M,b}$$ = temperature lapse rate (K/m) in ISA
 * $$h$$ = height at which pressure is calculated (m)
 * $$h_b$$ = height of reference level b (meters; e.g., hb = 11 000 m)
 * $$R^*$$ = universal gas constant: 8.3144598 J/(mol·K)
 * $$g_0$$ = gravitational acceleration: 9.80665 m/s2
 * $$M$$ = molar mass of Earth's air: 0.0289644 kg/mol

Or converted to imperial units:

 * $$P_b$$ = reference pressure
 * $$T_{M,b}$$ = reference temperature (K)
 * $$L_{M,b}$$ = temperature lapse rate (K/ft) in ISA
 * $$h$$ = height at which pressure is calculated (ft)
 * $$h_b$$ = height of reference level b (feet; e.g., hb = 36,089 ft)
 * $$R^*$$ = universal gas constant; using feet, kelvins, and (SI) moles: $89,494.596 lb·ft^{2}/(lb-mol·K·s^{2})$
 * $$g_0$$ = gravitational acceleration: 32.17405 ft/s2
 * $$M$$ = molar mass of Earth's air: 28.9644 lb/lb-mol

The value of subscript b ranges from 0 to 6 in accordance with each of seven successive layers of the atmosphere shown in the table below. In these equations, g0, M and R* are each single-valued constants, while P, L, T, and h are multivalued constants in accordance with the table below. The values used for M, g0, and R* are in accordance with the U.S. Standard Atmosphere, 1976, and the value for R* in particular does not agree with standard values for this constant. The reference value for Pb for b = 0 is the defined sea level value, P0 = 101 325 Pa or 29.92126 inHg. Values of Pb of b = 1 through b = 6 are obtained from the application of the appropriate member of the pair equations 1 and 2 for the case when h = hb+1.

Density equations
The expressions for calculating density are nearly identical to calculating pressure. The only difference is the exponent in Equation 1.

There are two equations for computing density as a function of height. The first equation is applicable to the standard model of the troposphere in which the temperature is assumed to vary with altitude at a lapse rate of $$L_b$$; the second equation is applicable to the standard model of the stratosphere in which the temperature is assumed not to vary with altitude.

Equation 1: $$\rho = \rho_b \left[\frac{T_b - (h-h_b) L_b}{T_b}\right]^{\left(\frac{g_0 M}{R^* L_b}-1\right)}$$

which is equivalent to the ratio of the relative pressure and temperature changes

$$\rho = \rho_b \frac{P}{T} \frac{T_b}{P_b} $$

Equation 2: $$\rho =\rho_b \exp\left[\frac{-g_0 M \left(h-h_b\right)}{R^* T_b}\right]$$

where
 * $${\rho}$$ = mass density (kg/m3)
 * $$T_b$$ = standard temperature (K)
 * $$L$$ = standard temperature lapse rate (see table below) (K/m) in ISA
 * $$h$$ = height above sea level (geopotential meters)
 * $$R^*$$ = universal gas constant 8.3144598 N·m/(mol·K)
 * $$g_0$$ = gravitational acceleration: 9.80665 m/s2
 * $$M$$ = molar mass of Earth's air: 0.0289644 kg/mol

or, converted to U.S. gravitational foot-pound-second units (no longer used in U.K.):
 * $${\rho}$$ = mass density (slug/ft3)
 * $${T_b}$$ = standard temperature (K)
 * $${L}$$ = standard temperature lapse rate (K/ft)
 * $${h}$$ = height above sea level (geopotential feet)
 * $${R^*}$$ = universal gas constant: 8.9494596×104 ft2/(s·K)
 * $${g_0}$$ = gravitational acceleration: 32.17405 ft/s2
 * $${M}$$ = molar mass of Earth's air: 0.0289644 kg/mol

The value of subscript b ranges from 0 to 6 in accordance with each of seven successive layers of the atmosphere shown in the table below. The reference value for ρb for b = 0 is the defined sea level value, ρ0 = 1.2250 kg/m3 or 0.0023768908 slug/ft3. Values of ρb of b = 1 through b = 6 are obtained from the application of the appropriate member of the pair equations 1 and 2 for the case when h = hb+1.

In these equations, g0, M and R* are each single-valued constants, while ρ, L, T and h are multi-valued constants in accordance with the table below. The values used for M, g0 and R* are in accordance with the U.S. Standard Atmosphere, 1976, and that the value for R* in particular does not agree with standard values for this constant.

Derivation
The barometric formula can be derived using the ideal gas law: $$ P = \frac{\rho}{M} {R^*} T$$

Assuming that all pressure is hydrostatic: $$ dP = - \rho g\,dz$$ and dividing this equation by $$ P $$ we get: $$ \frac{dP}{P} = - \frac{M g\,dz}{R^*T}$$

Integrating this expression from the surface to the altitude z we get: $$ P = P_0 e^{-\int_{0}^{z}{M g dz/R^*T}}$$

Assuming linear temperature change $$T = T_0 - L z$$ and constant molar mass and gravitational acceleration, we get the first barometric formula: $$ P = P_0 \cdot \left[\frac{T}{T_0}\right]^{\textstyle \frac{M g}{R^* L}}$$

Instead, assuming constant temperature, integrating gives the second barometric formula: $$ P = P_0 e^{-M g z/R^*T}$$

In this formulation, R* is the gas constant, and the term R*T/Mg gives the scale height (approximately equal to 8.4 km for the troposphere).

(For exact results, it should be remembered that atmospheres containing water do not behave as an ideal gas. See real gas or perfect gas or gas for further understanding.)

title: Barometric formula


text:
Lorcan Cranitch

Lorcan Cranitch (born 28 August 1959) is an Irish actor.

Born in Dublin, Lorcan Cranitch became involved in drama while a student. In 1980 he moved to London, where he trained at RADA.

Career
His first major role on British television was as Tim Healy in the 1991 BBC drama series Parnell and the Englishwoman. It was as the troubled DS Jimmy Beck in Cracker (1993-1995) that he became a familiar face to viewers.

Following Cracker he returned to the BBC in a part specially written for him, as Sean Dillon in Ballykissangel. In 2001 he starred in the short-lived drama series McCready and Daughter, taking on a role originally intended for his former Ballykissangel co-star, Tony Doyle, who died shortly before the series was due to be filmed. He appeared in several other British television dramas, including Deacon Brodie (with Billy Connolly), Shackleton (as Frank Wild) with Kenneth Branagh, Omagh, Hornblower (with Ioan Gruffudd), The Street, Waking the Dead, Spooks, Silent Witness and New Tricks. In 2005 he took a villainous role in the HBO/BBC production of Rome, as the underworld baron Erastes Fulmen. In the 2009 BBC drama Best: His Mother's Son, he played Dickie Best, the father of footballer George Best. He also appeared in The Bill playing DCI Frank Keane.

Lorcan briefly appeared as DI Littlejohn in the Sky Atlantic series Fortitude.

On film he has appeared in Dancing at Lughnasa with Meryl Streep, The Playboys and Titanic Town.

He played Melvin in "New Tricks" "Communal Living" (S5:E7), 2008. In 2011 he appeared as Liam Cullen in “The Gift of Promise”, (S5:E4) of Lewis. He appeared in the BBC series Death in Paradise (S5:E7), 2016. In 2017 he played Assistant Chief Constable Nicholls in the first part of the final series of the BBC drama Inspector George Gently, (S8.E1)

He has combined this with stage work with The Royal National Theatre, The Royal Shakespeare Company, Donmar West End, The Abbey and The Gate Theatre in Dublin.

In February 2021, Cranitch took a lead role as Detective Chief Superintendent Jackie Twomey in the BBC crime drama series Bloodlands.

Personal life
Cranitch attended secondary school at Terenure College. Cranitch was married to Susan Jackson, a journalist and newsreader with RTÉ. They adopted an Ethiopian child in 2010. The couple separated in 2016. His sister, Ellen Cranitch, is a regular presenter on Lyric FM, RTÊ's classical music station.

title: Lorcan Cranitch


text:
Talk:Big Brother (British TV series)

Naming of various Big Brother articles
Hi! I started a discussion over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Big Brother about aligning all the various versions and seasons of Big Brother (franchise) with the guidelines of Naming conventions (television). I created a table showing all the different various naming conventions currently in use and recommended article names based on my understanding of WP:NCTV. I'm posting this notice to all applicable areas for a broad discussion. Thank You!  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  20:26, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Big Brother
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Big Brother.   Alucard 16  ❯❯❯ chat?    09:29, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 April 23
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 April 23.   Alucard 16  ❯❯❯ chat?    21:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Big Brother (Belgian TV series) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:35, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Big Brother is also on ITV1
This page needs editing to include the fact the show is also broadcast on ITV1. The launch, the live evictions and the live final are shown across ITV. Broadcast on ITV1 & ITV2. Celebrity Big Brother 2024 will be shown on ITV1 predominantly. 82.1.86.17 (talk) 09:50, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

 * The viewership needs to also be changed to ITV1.
 * The show has been a huge success and to be upgraded to ITV1 and simulcast on both networks is big news. 82.1.86.17 (talk) 09:53, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Happy St Patrick's day on Sunday louis
Have a wonderful day 86.128.34.124 (talk) 21:21, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Big Brother (British TV series)


text:
Kąkolewo, Leszno County

Kąkolewo is a village in the administrative district of Gmina Osieczna, within Leszno County, Greater Poland Voivodeship, in west-central Poland. It lies approximately 5 km south of Osieczna, 10 km east of Leszno, and 61 km south of the regional capital Poznań. It was formerly in Leszno Voivodeship (1975–1998).

title: Kąkolewo, Leszno County


text:
Wikipedia talk:Editing Weekend

Suggestion
Excellent idea, I'm all for it. Though I don't live in a giant urban centre, I'm close enough to Toronto to make it to an event there. I would also suggest a venue: the Toronto Reference Library, which has piles of useful resources and would be an excellent place for a Toronto-area Edit Weekend (or Day).

Radagast 19:11, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * I would be interested as well, since I am moving to a place near Toronto fairly soon. Andris 08:09, Jul 29, 2004 (UTC)

I shudder at the thought of a small group of self-proclaimed experts getting together for a weekend of "fact checking", i.e. checking Wikipedia content against what can be found in the traditional encyclopaedias we originally set out to beat. Apart from the fundamental questions that have already been raised (Cui bono? -- Who might profit from a "frozen" edition of Wikipedia?), a number of follow-up questions have not even been asked (let alone answered), at least to my knowledge:

(1) Who chooses what articles for fact-checking? On the other hand, what articles are right from the start not considered for inclusion?

(2) What if during the editing weekend someone actually detects discrepancies (mistakes?) between Wikipedia and some printed reference book? Is the printed book by default the higher authority?

(3) How are potential weekend editors planning to replace the debates on the talk page that are a regular feature of the online (and so far, only) version?

As always, these are not rhetorical questions. All the best,  22:12, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Crikey, you seem a little hostile about this — can you really be objecting to fact-checking, or is there something else you're worried about? Regarding your questions, I can't speak for other editors, but for me: 1) Ultimately I choose what I fact-check, although I'm happy to accept suggestions. 2) Depends. If there's a discrepancy between Wikipedia and a reference book, I would flag it for further investigation, preferably consulting primary sources. 3) I don't understand, why would weekend editors want to replace the Talk: page debates? — Matt 23:14, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm never hostile, and I'm certainly no one's enemy here at Wikipedia. I just don't like the idea of a special, five star edition of Wikipedia, and all I do is take the liberty to say so. But it's only little old me, so you go ahead and plan your editing weekend, and I sincerely wish you all the best.

 * I presume, by "five star edition", you mean a print edition / Wikipedia 1.0, or some such? If so, I'd point out that even if you don't like the idea, fact-checking will only improve the accuracy of the online edition. — Matt 01:23, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Concerning my/your questions:

 * In some way I do object to the kind of fact-checking proposed here because peer review, which is already being performed 24/7, is really all we need. You never know beforehand what will happen if you deliberately introduce a hierarchical structure where there has been none (or let's say hardly any).

 * I don't see hierarchy here, just intensity. When a Featured Article hits the front page, it's typically edited quite a bit more than normal; I expect an editing weekend will produce the same kind of effect, particularly in the realm of checking facts. — Matt 01:23, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * (1) If each editor decides him/herself what he/she is going to check does this mean it's a question of sheer luck if a particular article gets closer attention (and is eventually included) or not? So many pieces of information are contentious -- Editor A likes AIDS Kills Fags Dead and the article passes the test whereas Editor B would be shocked and omit the text?

 * So you worry that in these weekends, some articles will get more attention than others, and that may differ according to the whims of the editors involved? How is that different from how Wikipedia is normally edited? — Matt 01:23, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * (2) I hate the idea of our "ordinary" expert, for example a college student, having access, via his/her professor, to state-of-the-art information while Editor C, fact-checking what our student has written, consults a 1994 reference book, deletes up-to-date information and replaces it with older facts.

 * Again, how is this different to someone doing fact-checking online, by themselves, as part of, say, Wikipedia:Peer Review, or WP:FAC? There's a greater risk that some Editor "D" will replace the state-of-the-art information with some data from a website, which is typically more likely to be inaccurate than a reference book. Regardless of where it takes place, every editor should be careful when "correcting" information; it's often wise to query on the Talk: page first, depending on the context. — Matt 01:23, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * (3) I'm talking about the time factor here: It often takes weeks, if not months, until someone replies to a question on a talk page. Hardly feasible for a weekend or a Saturday I guess.

 * I'm not sure why any of this is problematic. Weekend editor Bob finds that Encyclopedia Britannica, as well as three other reference works and a primary source, disagrees with Wikipedia on some Fact, so he corrects the article and drops a note on the Talk: page, citing his source. Of course, another editor may take weeks or months to read the note, but does that matter? And again, how is that different from normal Wikipedia editing? — Matt 01:23, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Anyway, I hope your editing weekends will be a success!  23:51, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Okay, I give up. I don't know what it is that makes people here at Wikipedia tell me they don't understand what I'm saying. And I'm actually tired from/of repeating the same thoughts again and again. While reading your reply two more questions occurred to me: How will you handle the sheer number of tiny pieces of information, each of which will cry out simultaneously, "Please check me first!"? And what precautions will you take so that no one reverts to earlier versions of an article or changes it in any other way -- will you protect them from being edited once they have been checked?

 * However, I don't expect an answer, and I'm certainly not going to continue this discussion. Have a nice day, and good luck,  02:21, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm sorry that you feel frustrated that you're not being understood. The best remedy is to carefully explain your line of argument. You still haven't given any indication of what makes "weekend fact-checking" particularly problematic compared to "traditional, distributed fact-checking"; all of your problems seem to apply to both scenarios. Accordingly, my personal conclusion is that you're not really opposed to fact-checking, but that you're against a print edition of Wikipedia (or some such), and you feel that an "Editing Weekend" is part of that process. I can only hope that the thought of a push for improved correctness in Wikipedia doesn't continue to make you "shudder". — Matt 03:06, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia talk:Editing Weekend


text:
Chrysler 2.2 & 2.5 engine

The 2.2 and 2.5 are a family of inline-4 engines developed by Chrysler Corporation originally for the Chrysler K- and L-platforms cars and subsequently used in many other Chrysler vehicles. After its launch in 1981, it became the basis for all Chrysler-developed 4-cylinder engines until the Chrysler 1.8, 2.0 & 2.4 engine family was released in 1994. It was the first Chrysler engineered four cylinder engine since the Chrysler flathead four cylinder was discontinued in 1933.

2.2
The first version of this engine family was a normally aspirated 2.2 L unit. Developed under the leadership of Chief Engineer – Engine Design and Development Willem Weertman and head of performance tuning Charles "Pete" Hagenbuch, who had worked on most of Chrysler's V-8 engines and the Chrysler Slant-6 engine, it was introduced in the 1981 Dodge Aries, Dodge Omni, Plymouth Horizon and Plymouth Reliant, and was produced until 2000.

The 2.2 has an undersquare 87.5 mm bore and 92 mm stroke, which gives it a displacement of 2213 cc. It is a siamesed engine: there are no coolant passages between cylinders. The bore spacing is 96 mm, limiting the potential for increased bore diameter. All 2.2 engines have cast iron blocks, use a timing belt, and are non-interference engines. The earliest version used a two-barrel carburetor, but fuel injection was introduced in 1984 on both turbocharged and normally aspirated models (it is used on all 2.5 liter engines). Fuel injection was standard on some higher end models such as the Chrysler E-Class, Laser, and New Yorker, and the Dodge 600 and Daytona. In 1985 fuel injection became optional on the lower end models (Dodge Omni/Plymouth Horizon, Dodge Aries/Plymouth Reliant), eventually replacing the carbureted variant across the board.

The initial carbureted 2.2 initially produced 84 hp, but the output was increased to 96 hp and 119 lbft. Later versions were fuel-injected and produced 93 hp to 99 hp and 122 lbft, and a High-Output version for the Dodge Charger produced 110 hp and 129 lbft.

Four series of turbocharged 2.2 and 2.5 liter engines were produced, normally referred to as Turbo I, Turbo II, Turbo III, and Turbo IV. The primary difference between these engines was the use of an intercooler (in all except Turbo I). The Turbo III, ironically developed after the Turbo IV, pioneered returnless fuel injection, and was coupled to high-performance, four-valve-per-cylinder heads, bringing 224 hp from the 2.2 liter engine. The Turbo IV pioneered the use of variable nozzle technology to minimize lag.

The 2.2 was made at Chrysler's Trenton Engine plant in Trenton, Michigan. In 1995 Chrysler sold much of the machining equipment as well as the license to the design, to First Auto Works of China, after negotiations which had begun in the mid-eighties. The Trenton plant largely switched to the new Chrysler 3.3 engine production, while FAW continues to build the 2.2, which they used in their version of the Audi 100. In 1982, Chrysler also signed an agreement with Perkins Engines to build a dieselized version of the 2.2 (and of the 3.7-liter inline-six) in Windsor, Ontario. Design work on the six had started in 1975, with the 2.2 added to the program in 1980, but due to labor unrest in Canadian automobile manufacture and the collapse of the diesel market in North America, Lee Iacocca suddenly and unilaterally cancelled these plans in 1983.

 * 1983–1984 Chrysler E-Class
 * 1983–1986 Chrysler Executive
 * 1984–1986 Chrysler Laser
 * 1982–1990 Chrysler LeBaron (fuel-injected after 1985)
 * 1985–1988 Chrysler LeBaron GTS
 * 1981–1982 Dodge 024
 * 1982–1983 Dodge 400
 * 1983–1988 Dodge 600 (fuel-injected after 1984)
 * 1981–1989 Dodge Aries (fuel-injected after 1985)
 * 1984–1987 Dodge Caravan
 * 1983–1987 Dodge Charger
 * 1987–1988 Dodge Dakota
 * 1984–1990 Dodge Daytona
 * 1981–1990 Dodge Omni (fuel-injected after 1987)
 * 1985–1989 Dodge Lancer
 * 1982–1984 Dodge Rampage
 * 1987–1994 Dodge Shadow
 * Hongqi CA 1021U3, CA5020XJB police car, CA7202, CA7220A9E, CA7220A9E parade car, CA7220A9EL1/L2 cabrio-coach/L2 parade car, CA7220A9EL2A2 parade car, CA7220EL1, CA7226L
 * 1985–1988 Plymouth Caravelle
 * 1981–1990 Plymouth Horizon (fuel-injected after 1987)
 * 1981–1989 Plymouth Reliant (fuel-injected after 1985)
 * 1983 Plymouth Scamp (Dodge Rampage twin)
 * 1987–1994 Plymouth Sundance
 * 1981–1982 Plymouth TC3
 * 1983–1987 Plymouth Turismo
 * 1984–1987 Plymouth Voyager

High Output
The 1983 and 1984 Dodge Shelby Charger was more of a handling package, but the regular 2.2 L engine was modified somewhat. This High Output 2.2 used a revised camshaft to boost output to 110 hp and 129 lbft, and the block was decked to increase the compression ratio. These modifications allowed the Shelby Charger to hit 50 mph in 5.5 seconds and cover the quarter mile (402 m) in under 16 seconds. The 1985 Dodge Charger Shelby used the 2.2 Turbo I engine instead, so this high output 2.2 was made an option on regular Dodge Chargers that year.

Applications of the High Output 2.2L included the 1983–1984 Dodge Shelby Charger, the 1985 Plymouth Turismo (L-body), the 1984-1985 Dodge Omni GLH and the 1985–1987 Dodge Charger. This High Output version of the 2.2L could be easily recognized by its chrome valve cover and tighter timing cover.

Turbo I
Chrysler's first turbocharged engine was the 1984 Turbo I. It used a Garrett T03 turbocharger with a mechanical wastegate to limit boost to 7.2 psi, and was rated at 142 hp and 160 lbft, a substantial increase in power over the standard 2.2 engines. Changes included a lower compression ratio, special pistons, high-strength valves, higher-pressure springs (to avoid float), better-sealing rings, a special cam, select-fit bearings, a special exhaust manifold, and a diecast aluminum cylinder head cover.

For 1985, a computer-controlled wastegate was substituted which, with the use of a knock sensor, allowed 9 psi of temporary overboost. Output was rated at 146 hp and 168 lbft. A Mitsubishi TE04H turbo and new intake manifold were used for 1988.

 * 1984 Chrysler E-Class
 * 1984–1986 Chrysler Executive
 * 1984–1986 Chrysler Laser
 * 1984–1988 Chrysler LeBaron
 * 1985–1988 Chrysler LeBaron GTS
 * 1984–1987 Chrysler New Yorker
 * 1988 Chrysler New Yorker Turbo
 * 1984–1988 Dodge 600
 * 1985–1988 Dodge Lancer
 * 1984–1986 Dodge Omni GLH
 * 1985–1988 Plymouth Caravelle
 * 1985–1987 Dodge Charger Shelby
 * 1988 Shelby CSX-T
 * 1984–1986 Dodge Daytona Turbo
 * 1987 Dodge Daytona Shelby Z with Automatics

Turbo II
The Turbo II designation was applied to a turbocharged, intercooled version of the 2.2. This Turbo II designation was first used in the 1986 Shelby GLH-S and the 1987 Shelby Charger GLH-S. Shelby Automobiles modified a stock Turbo I engine by swapping several pre-production pieces from the Turbo II inline-four engine. These changes included an intercooler and other changes to produce 175 hp (130 kW) and a flat 175 ft·lbf (237 N·m) torque curve. Not included were any of the durability changes to the short block (forged crank, full floating pin, stouter connecting rods, etc.) of the 1987 Chrysler Turbo II engine that was produced by the factory the following year. Shelby installed the factory produced Turbo II in his Shelby Lancer and Shelby CSX. Chrysler's strengthened version of this engine, with a forged crankshaft and connecting rods, was used in the Shelby Z package of the 1987–1989 Dodge Daytona and other cars. Output of the production Turbo II was 175 hp and 200 lbft with 12 psi of boost when mated to the stronger A520 5-speed manual transaxle.

A similar, one-piece version of the special two-piece intake manifold used on the Turbo II, minus the air charge temperature sensor, was added to the Turbo I for 1988. The next year, the new common block was introduced; it was used for all subsequent versions of the 2.2 and 2.5, including the 2.2 L Turbo II, which then continued unchanged through 1990.

 * 1986 Shelby GLH-S (Omni)
 * 1987 Shelby Charger Turbo
 * 1987 Shelby GLHS (Charger)
 * 1985–1993 Consulier GTP
 * 1987–1989 Dodge Daytona Shelby Z
 * 1987–1988 Shelby CSX
 * 1987 Shelby Lancer
 * 1988–1989 Dodge Lancer Shelby
 * 1988–1989 Chrysler LeBaron GTS hatchback
 * 1987–1989 Chrysler LeBaron coupe / convertible GTC
 * 1989 Dodge Daytona C/S

Turbo III
The Turbo III used a Lotus-made DOHC 16-valve head. Output was 224 hp and 217 lbft. This engine was used in 1,399 Dodge Spirit R/T and several hundred Dodge and Chrysler Daytona IROC R/T models in the US, Canada, and Europe, plus models including the Chrysler Spirit R/T and Phantom R/T in Mexico.

Cars using the 2.2T3 engine include:
 * 1991–1992 Dodge Spirit R/T (North America)
 * 1991–1994 Chrysler Spirit R/T (Mexico)
 * 1992–1993 Dodge Daytona IROC R/T (North America, Europe)
 * 1992–1993 Chrysler Phantom R/T (Mexico)
 * 1991–1993 Consulier GTP (USA)

Turbo IV
The Turbo IV was a turbocharged SOHC intercooled version with variable nozzle turbo (VNT) technology. This system reduced turbo lag. Used in the 1989 Shelby CSX, then regular production 1990 Dodge Shadows, Daytonas, and Chrysler LeBarons. Production on this engine was limited to around 1250 units..

 * 1989 Shelby CSX (500 built-498 to the public)
 * 1990 Dodge Shadow ES (141 built)
 * 1990 Dodge Shadow Competition (27 built)
 * 1990 Dodge Daytona Shelby (536 built)
 * 1990 Dodge Daytona C/S Competition (21 built)
 * 1990 Chrysler LeBaron GTC (255 built, 123 coupes 132 convertibles)

TC
The Chrysler TC, developed with Maserati, used a special turbocharged 2.2 engine. This version was related to the Turbo II but used a special 16-valve head — not the same as that used in the Turbo III — pistons, connecting rods, intake manifold, crankshaft and other components. No parts are interchangeable with other versions of the engine.

The 2.2 TC engine was an international effort: The cylinder head was cast in England by Cosworth and finished in Italy by Maserati using a cam over bucket design. The pistons are forged and came from Mahle in Germany, and a Japanese turbocharger was sourced from IHI. The camshafts were designed by Florida-based Crane but were constructed by Maserati in Modena. The rods are forged Casar units and use a unique rod bearing size. The crankshaft is also forged and weighs 53 pounds. Only 501 Chrysler TCs were produced with the DOHC 16-valve head. This engine shares essentially only the front and rear main seals, oil pan seal, intermediate shaft and bearings, main bearings (only, rod bearings are unique), and distributor with any other Chrysler 2.2/2.5. This head was also used in IMSA racing, but not in turbocharged form.

2.5
In 1986, Chrysler increased the displacement of the engine to 2.5 L and added counterrotating balance shafts to smooth out the vibrations and harsh harmonics normally produced by long-stroke 4-cylinder engines. The increased displacement came from a raised deck and longer 104 mm stroke, making the 2.5 engine even more undersquare and tuned for low-end torque rather than high-RPM power. This engine replaced the Mitsubishi 2.6 engine Chrysler had been using. In normally aspirated form, the 2.5 produced 100 hp and 136 lbft. In 1989 there was a redesign of the 2.5 to permit both it and the 2.2 to use a common cylinder block. The crankshaft, connecting rods and pistons are completely different in the common-block 2.5 compared to the previous 2.5. This engine competed with Ford Motor Company's HSC engine, which was increased from 2.3 L to 2.5 L for use in the 1986 to 1991 Taurus. The Chrysler 2.5 was retired in 1995.

 * 1986–1993 Chrysler LeBaron
 * 1986–1987 Chrysler New Yorker
 * 1986–1988 Dodge 600
 * 1986–1989 Dodge Aries
 * 1987½–1995 Dodge Caravan
 * 1989–1995 Dodge Dakota
 * 1986–1993 Dodge Daytona
 * 1988–1993 Dodge Dynasty
 * 1986–1989 Dodge Lancer
 * 1987–1994 Dodge Shadow
 * 1989–1995 Dodge Spirit
 * 1989–1995 Plymouth Acclaim
 * 1986–1988 Plymouth Caravelle
 * 1986–1989 Plymouth Reliant
 * 1987–1994 Plymouth Sundance
 * 1987½–1995 Plymouth Voyager

Turbo I
The 2.5 engine was offered in a Turbo I form starting in 1989. This engine had multipoint fuel injection and was rated at 150 hp and 180 lbft. In some models the 2.5 Turbo I was available in a "High Torque" version, which put out 152 hp and 210 lbft by allowing higher boost pressures at low rpms.

 * 1989–1992 Chrysler LeBaron
 * 1989–1990 Dodge Caravan
 * 1989–1992 Dodge Daytona
 * 1989–1992 Dodge Shadow
 * 1989–1992 Dodge Spirit
 * 1989–1992 Plymouth Acclaim
 * 1989–1991 Plymouth Sundance
 * 1989–1990 Plymouth Voyager
 * 1989-Dodge Lancer

Turbo II
In the Mexican market, a 2.5 Turbo II engine with intercooler and intake charge temperature sensing was available, rated at 168 hp and 175 lbft to 188 lbft.

Carbureted
In the Mexican market, 1986 through 1990 vehicles used versions of the 2.2 and 2.5 engines operating on leaded gasoline, equipped with a carburetor, a tubular exhaust header, and electronic control of ignition timing. This induction and ignition system used technology and components very similar to those employed in Chrysler's US-market Lean Burn emission control systems of the late 1970s. This configuration was discontinued in favour of electronic fuel injection for the 1991 model year, when exhaust emission regulations took force in Mexico.

FFV
From 1993 to 1995, a 107 hp multipoint fuel injected non-turbo version of the 2.5 engine was installed in flexible-fuel Dodge Spirits and Plymouth Acclaims. This engine and its fuel supply and computerized management system were specially modified to run on fuel containing up to 85% Methanol. Most of the MPFI system was common with the Mexican-market 2.5 MPFI engine. Modifications included upgraded seal and gasket materials, chrome piston rings, stainless-steel fuel system components, sion fuel injectors internally plated with nickel, and fuel composition sensors.

MPFI
From 1991 to 1995 in the Mexican market, multipoint fuel injected, non-turbo version of the 2.2 and 2.5 were installed in many Chrysler Corporation vehicles. This version of the 2.5 was rated at 113 hp, and in most cases lacked the balance shafts used in all other versions of the 2.5. The MPFI system gave better driveability, performance and fuel economy, and cleaner emissions, but was nevertheless not used elsewhere than the Mexican domestic market and Chrysler de Mexico's export markets.

Engine computers
Various kinds of Engine Control Units were used with the 2.2 and 2.5 engines. From 1984 to 1987, the ECU was divided into the Logic Module (LM), which was inside the passenger cabin, and the Power Module located near the battery on the left front fender. The LM used a Motorola 6803U4 processor operating at 1 MHz, with 256 bytes of RAM and either two 8K EPROMs or one 16K EPROM. From 1988 to 1989, a SMEC (Single Module Engine Controller) was used. This was a complete redesign of the older system, using modern CAD for board design, and higher density SMD components. The processor was a 68HC11 operating at 2 MHz with 256 bytes of RAM and a 32K EPROM. Functionally, the SMEC was the combination of the earlier Logic and Power modules into one unit. Starting in 1990, a more advanced SBEC (Single Board Engine Controller) was used, which integrated the earlier two board computer into a single board.

title: Chrysler 2.2 & 2.5 engine