text:
Talk:Kākāpō

Click here to edit the number of living Kakapo rather than having to update it on multiple pages.

the kakapo voice
Can someone upload to wikipedia audio/video file of kakapo? thanking you in advance, 88.153.140.32 13:31, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think that any such free material exists. There are plenty of videos of the Kakapo around, but they're all non-free, and thus unusable for this article.  function msikma( const U, T : Float ) : Float { to my page. } ; 20:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * actually, i've recently published recordings of a booming kakapo on my blog, and i'm willing to put them under a free license. the problem is that the files are in mp3-format, and converting them directly to .ogg will reduce quality (right?). it's going to take some time to edit and re-encode from the original, but it's on my to-do-list. --Mnolf 18:46, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Technically, doing conversion from one lossy format to another will always cause the loss of quality. But the loss will be a negligible amount, if you simply use the appropriate bitrate. I'm willing to do it for you if you mail the MP3 to me, you can send it to [mailto:michiel@thingmajig.org michiel@thingmajig.org] if you want me to.  function msikma( const U, T : Float ) : Float { to my page. } ; 09:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * email was sent. have fun :) and thanks. --Mnolf 13:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Classification out of lead
I'm thinking the sentences on classification may be better in a section down the page than on the lead (about own genus etc.) and expanded a bit later. I'm not sure they add anything to the lead as such. Cas Liber 10:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I see you've moved them down. They do seem to be better off down there than in the lead. —msikma (user, talk) 06:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, on second thought, it does seem like the section this has created is too small. I think that this should be moved back to the lead unless the "classification" section can be increased in size with important information. It current seems like it's just used to contain some minor remarks. —msikma (user, talk) 19:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm working on it - the molecular stuff is interesting and the info is needed to balance the article which otherwise is loaded towards conservation (not surprising really given the history). Maybe a bit large to go back in the lead.Cas Liber 20:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

 * The molecular stuff is unfortunately contradicted by another (earlier) molecular paper (Miyaki et al, see here). More severely, the 2005 scenario is virtually prohibited by the fossil record. Were the spindlin phylogeny true, one would have to assume that all the traits that distinguish living parrots from e.g. the Pseudasturidae (see ) in shirt, the parrot morphotype - evolved twice (at least) identically, that Dyck texture was present in all psittaciform ancestors 80+ mya or developed in even more lineages independently but not in the cockatoos, etc. The "review" of the fossil record is probably the lowest point of the 2005 paper (which is otherwise nice); see . All the bare facts therein were available one year earlier too; not Mayr & Daniels 1998 but Mayr 2002 (see DOI above) would have been the paper to consider, and that would have shown that the Fig.7 in the 2005 paper is, as far as anyone can currently tell, utter fiction. Dysmorodrepanis 05:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Bulk changes in the Conservation section
In attempt to save this page from de-featured, I have trimmed the section quite markedly. Disscussion is here: Featured article review/Kakapo. — Indon ( reply ) — 16:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Taxonomy
Currently, the Kakapo is said to be in the family Psittacidae, and the subfamily Psittacinae. I'm currently reading through "A parrot apart: the natural history of the kakapo (Strigops habroptilus), and the context of its conservation management", and its chapter on taxonomy states that it is in the subfamily Strigopinae. Verbatim, "[...] but Smith (1975) used anatomical, morphological and ethological characters to place it in the endemic New Zealand subfamily Strigopinae, which has usually been followed since (Turbott 1990)." It then goes to explain the similarities between the Kea and the Kaka, and does not actually state the Psittacinae subfamily. I'm wondering about this: at the very least, it seems that a bit more discussion on the taxonomic groups this bird belongs to would be well-placed. —msikma (user, talk) 06:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * This is the case with alot of birds where the new taxonomic stuff shows a marked difference with current accepted practice. Best to leave a note on WP Birds and discuss it there. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's a good idea since I'm confused now and there don't seem to be too many people actively monitoring this article anymore. I'll try there. Thanks! —msikma (user, talk) 19:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Scientific name for kakapo
Currently there're two scientific name using right now, one is from BirdLife & IUCN:Strigops habroptila, and the other one is widely used everywhere even in our article:Strigops habroptilus, which one is correct ?--Lokionly (talk) 01:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * According to ITIS Strigops habroptila is correct. Something to do with the gender of Strigops. Explained here. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  02:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Lifespan?
The only mention of the birds' lifespan is "Because Kakapo are quite long-lived, they tend to have an adolescence before beginning breeding." But how long-lived are they??
 * (doesn't know how to type a whistling sound) According to BirdLife International's Rare Birds Yearbook, 90 on average, with the maximum estimated at 120. I'll put it on in. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 01:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Seems awfully generous, considering that a span of 90–120 years would make it the world's longest-living bird! AnAge and ADW have more coservative estimates of up to 60 years. Yet perhaps the high estimate isn't altogether unreasonable: many parrots are long-lived and larger species tend to live longer than smaller ones – and Kakapo is the world's largest parrot. One must wonder, though, how justified or accurate that estimate can really be. The oldest undisputed age for a bird was 78+ years for an Andean Condor named Kuzya of the Moscow Zoo (arrived with adult plumage in 1892, died in 1964), also, Thaao (b. 1930) of Connecticut's Beardsley Zoo was still alive at at least 77. Guinness accepts a claim of an 80-year-old Sulphur-crested Cockatoo named Cocky (d. 1982 at the London Zoo), but the 24 first years of its life are unaccounted for. The oldest age for a parrot featured in AnAge (as far as I know) was 65.8 years for a captive Moluccan Cockatoo. And Charlie is simply a fraud. --Anshelm '77 (talk) 21:11, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Sirocco the Kakapo - worth a mention?
Hi - I'm new to Wikipedia so my apologies if I get anything wrong! I work for the Department of Conservation in New Zealand, and work closely with the Kakapo Recovery Team. I also manage our social media presence, a lot of which is focussed on Sirocco, the kakapo featured in Last Chance to See.

I added a brief paragraph to the Wikipedia kakapo article, as I often get messages from people asking why Sirocco isn't mentioned. The programme is still being shown around the world, so we'll get bursts of people signing up to Sirocco's Facebook page from, most recently for example, Iceland then Norway.

My paragraph was removed, but I'm not really sure why? I've seen the discussion earlier on this page about whether or not Sirocco should be mentioned, and there's a suggestion that 'internet fame' isn't enough (which is a fair point). However, Sirocco is starting to be recognised around the world through the TV programme, and people want to find out more about him. The fact that he was named 'Official Spokesbird for Conservation' by NZ Prime Minister John Key earlier this year may also be something worth mentioning? Some may see it as a joke, but the role has brought a lot more people closer to the plight of the kakapo, and endangered species in general.

My main point though is that people want to find out more about Sirocco, and ask me why he's not on Wikipedia. Personally I thought I was justified in adding one paragraph because of this - I'd be interested to hear other's thoughts!

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Pitt (talk • contribs) 21:49, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I argued above that such a trivial incident was not appropriate to include in the article, but I am no longer sure of that. If the incident is still receiving coverage a year later, as shown through signups to his Facebook page, and if this is now one of the most widely known portrayals of kakapo, then it should be covered in the article.- gadfium 22:37, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Are there third party sources still covering it? Active Banana    (bananaphone  20:17, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Would Sirocco warrant a separate article rather than risk adding what is in effect an "In popular culture" section to this article? Kahuroa (talk) 20:29, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I am unsure about the best procedure: the recent attempt to add information about Siroco is clearly very different from the rash of excited commentary when the incident first occurred, yet it is rarely helpful to include what is essentially trivia in a science article. In particular, the link http://www.facebook.com/siroccokakapo is difficult because it does not satisfy the external link guidelines, and it is not a reliable source and so cannot be used as a reference for information added to the article. The article probably needs a little restructuring with the long "The conservation of the Kakapo..." paragraph in the lead being replaced by a much shorter summary, with the content from the existing paragraph moved to a new section under "Conservation" (perhaps 4.5 "Public recognition"). I would be happier with a brief statement about Siroco if it were not in the lead of the article. The idea of making a separate article would be ideal if there is sufficient sourced material to satisfy the notability requirement. Perhaps Chris Pitt would like to comment on the new article idea (which would be mentioned in this article under "See also"). The Facebook link would be suitable on an article dedicated to Siroco, but the article would have to follow normal encyclopedic guidelines (it couldn't be chatty in the style of the Facebook page). Johnuniq (talk) 22:36, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sirocco's page at the Kakapo Recovery Programme website would be usable I think. Kahuroa (talk) 00:57, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone for their comments...it's amazing what goes on behind the scenes of Wikipedia, who would have thought! So - it looks like two options are emerging - either re-instating a paragraph or so about Sirocco in the main article, but in a new section; or creating a new page dedicated to Sirocco. I'm happy to do either of those - I'll leave this for a couple of days to allow other thoughts/preferences, then will get on with it! Many thanks. Chris Pitt (talk) 04:18, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * If you choose a new article, I suggest starting with a list of reliable sources that you could use. Post that list somewhere (perhaps here, or on your talk page, and add a link here to your talk page, like this example). That is, do not bother with an article draft until you let a couple of experienced editors comment on the sources – that would save a lot of trouble, because without sources acceptable by Wikipedia standards any new article would be deleted. Johnuniq (talk) 06:16, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi - thanks again for the advice. Okay, for the article on Sirocco, I'd base the bulk of the information on Sirocco's 'biography' on the Kakapo Recovery Team website, which is the authority on all things kakapo: Kakapo Recovery Team website. There are various news sites which have covered Sirocco's 'rise to fame', and these could be added as links. For example the London newspaper Metro covered Sirocco's appointment as official Spokesbird to the NZ Government Sirocco as Spokesbird Metro; plus there's a strong and quite touching piece about Sirocco, and his 'rock star' appearance at Auckland Zoo in 2009 on the respected NZ news magazine programme Campbell Live: Sirocco on Campbell Live. There are other links I could use on a similar theme, but I think these cover the basic details both about Sirocco himself, and his 'fame'. I'd welcome feedback on these suggestions before I attempt to write the article! Thanks again, Chris Pitt (talk) 01:34, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * They look fine, especially as you are basing the article on a reliable source. A couple of others to consider as links (there's no shortage) include Stuff and DOC's Conservation Blog Kahuroa (talk) 02:03, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Yes, it looks good. If you want to take it slowly (probably a good idea), you could start a draft in your userspace (for example, click this redlink User:Chris Pitt/Sirocco the Kakapo and enter some text, preview and save). When ready, the page should be moved (not copied) into article space (if wanted, ask for help). I don't think you need to be told that the problem will be keeping enthusiastic gossip out of the page, but there is no need to be overly coy in describing the incident. To be kept, the article will have to satisfy notability. The best procedure is to add information from several different sources (but not all describing the same thing); there will need to be more coverage than just the mating incident (and it would be interesting if you could find a reliable source offering explanations for that incident). Johnuniq (talk) 03:08, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi all - okay, the page is written! I've moved it, and it's now here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirocco_the_Kakapo. I checked my first draft and received advice about putting more references in, and I've done that. Hopefully now it's in shape! Any thoughts will be welcome; also, when/how does the page become visible in the Wikipedia (and external) search engines? Do I need to do something? Many thanks as ever, Chris Pitt (talk) 03:07, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good. I added some categories, and linked to it from a few other articles. You can use Special:WhatLinksHere/Sirocco (Kakapo) to see links. You might also be interested in the number of page views, but it will take a few days before the tallies show up.

 * This would probably qualify for an entry in the Did you know section of the front page. Could someone more experienced than me in making such nominations please consider this.- gadfium 07:33, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

 * I've nominated it here. --Avenue (talk) 01:06, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

 * As a regular with DYKs, I can tell you that it's an excellent contribution for that page. But technically, the nomination has been left too late (it needs to be nominated within 5 days of an article appearing in mainspace, and it's been 7). Technically, it should have been nominated under the heading 22 October, and not 28 October (for future reference). A way out of this is the additional rule D9. I'll comment on DYK and bring it to other editor's attention, as the additional rules aren't widely known.  Schwede 66  02:23, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

 * This has already been sorted out on the DYK page, but briefly, it was not too late because it was only moved from userspace to mainspace on 28 October. (See additional rule D8.) --Avenue (talk) 23:44, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Great; the article is about to go onto the homepage and Sirocco is the lead hook. As it's a rather interesting hook, and given that the lead hook is accompanied by a photo, it's almost a given that it will attract sufficient views (i.e. over 5,000) to be added to the DYK statistics page.  Schwede 66  18:36, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

 * It's scheduled to go live at midnight UK time, or 8pm in New York, and will only be up for six hours, so the timing might not be ideal for lots of views. I guess we'll see. --Avenue (talk) 03:50, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

And in case you wonder, that's 1 pm to 7 pm New Zealand time on Sunday.  Schwede 66  04:35, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

 * It gathered over 10,000 views yesterday, compared to around 30 in each of the preceding days - not bad. I've added it to the DYK stats page. --Avenue (talk) 00:15, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Kakapo versus Kākāpō
I'm wondering whether Kakapo is the right name for this article. Shouldn't it be Kākāpō, according to the New Zealand naming convention for Māori words?  Schwede 66  05:28, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No. Macrons might be appropriate if the thing was known by its English name and we were giving it its Maori name as well, (for example the The New Zealand Pigeon or kererū ) but the widespread English name for the species is Kakapo, not Kākāpō. I fully support using Maori words in English (particularly when the words are nicer than the English words, which they often are for birds) and the promotion of te reo, but WikiProject New Zealand's insistence that Maori loanwords keep macrons seems inconsistent with general usage in NZ. Also Wikiproject Birds avoids any diacritical marks (following the convention set by the IOC world bird list) except in the case of patronyms (example Böhm's Bee-eater). Sabine's Sunbird  talk  06:15, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, there are conflicting guidelines at play here. I think the cited sources predominantly omit macrons, which is another factor supporting that approach, although DoC now seems to prefer macrons. --Avenue (talk) 14:55, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The position has changed greatly since 2010, and macrons are now used widely. The NZ Geographic Board has applied macrons to more than 300 placenames. I see that macron policy in Wikipedia is a considerable issue in itself. --Hugh7 (talk) 08:54, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, high time this was moved to Kākāpō. Common usage has shifted. The Guardian is using the macronised form . See also Stuff ; RNZ ; the Natural History Museum, London ; and The New Zealand Herald for some other recent examples. Paora (talk) 00:45, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * , we now have an "evidence template" developed by . Shall we start a move request?  Schwede 66  02:23, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I would certainly support that. The template is here.—Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 02:36, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Who cares what the Guardian is doing? I actually looked this up because of the Guardian. There are no such accents in English. 100.34.46.136 (talk) 14:31, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Isn't this article supposed to be in English?
 * https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/kakapo
 * There are no such marks in English. 100.34.46.136 (talk) 14:30, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of English terms with diacritical marks, such as many loanwords in New Zealand English. --Canley (talk) 04:05, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Assuming there are no other topics with the same name, the diacritics are rarely used BilledMammal (talk) 10:06, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The article's in New Zealand English, which regularly uses macrons on Māori loanwords, as established in the discussion below, in which it was established kākāpō was the common spelling in reliable sources. That discussion is resolved, I believe.—Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 10:41, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Strigops habroptilus after all
It's true that the Greek word ops is feminine, so one should expect Strigops habroptila.

But the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature doesn't care:

"30.1.4.3. A compound genus-group name ending in -ops is to be treated as masculine, regardless of its derivation or of its treatment by its author."

*shrug* Strigops habroptilus it is, then (I'll go change it), and Triceratops horridus stays as well.

David Marjanović (talk) 21:11, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Done. I hope someone can fix Wikimedia Commons and Wikispecies as well without disrupting all links. David Marjanović (talk) 21:17, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Edited two typos in my original comment. David Marjanović (talk) 17:33, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Parasites
I noticed this article about the kakapo tapeworm. I was wondering whether there ought to be a mention of it in the article. Ambrosia10 (talk) 18:06, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Strigops habroptilus is the correct name
I'm revising and updating this article with the assistance of the Department of Conservation Kākāpō Recovery Team, and the first thing to establish is the correct Latin name. Because the species epithet habroptila appears in the IOC World Bird List and the IUCN Red List, amongst others, the article has gone back and forth a few times over the years. Summarising and expanding on a couple of previous Talk page comments, here's the argument for S. habroptilus being the correct name.

 * 1) Gray originally chose habroptilus as the specific epithet in 1845 (thanks, )
 * 2) A few years back there was a suggestion that the name be feminised to agree with Strigops; as ITIS puts it, "Mandatory correction for gender concordance" (thanks, ).
 * 3) However, according to  this section of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, "30.1.4.3. A compound genus-group name ending in -ops is to be treated as masculine, regardless of its derivation or of its treatment by its author.  So according to the ICZN code, Strigops is masculine (thanks, ). But in 1955, Hemming officially declared Strigops was to be regarded as feminine, and this has to abided by subsequently, with David and Gosselin (2002b) claiming the feminine habroptila should be used.
 * 4) But in fact "habroptilus" isn't an adjective; it's treated as a noun in apposition (ICZN Art. 31.2.2), and so it need not agree in gender with the genus name, and so (ICZN 34.2.1) the original spelling should never have been changed (thanks to Andrew Digby for passing this on). David and Gosselin (2002a) state this clearly, but then contradict themselves in their subsequent publication.
 * 5) Nevertheless, being the "correct" form isn't sufficient; what matters is what's in common use (WP:COMMONNAME). From the WikiProject Birds naming conventions: "Wikipedia article titles may diverge from the IOC list when the most common name in reliable sources is different from the IOC name."
 * 6) "Strigops habroptilus" is by far the most common form in use in the scientific literature: 1,830 results in Google Scholar compared with 162 for "Strigops habroptila". In addition, all the most recent kākāpō publications in this Scholia list (based on the Wikidata item, not the Latin name) use "habroptilus". Finally, habroptilus is what's used in the official NZ Checklist, authorised by the Ornithological Society of New Zealand (readable via NZ Birds Online), which is the final word on nomenclature of NZ birds.

So, based on both the ICZN rules and WP:COMMONNAME, the specific epithet in the article should be habroptilus. Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 23:59, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * More power to you if you have this kind of overview :) No concerns from me. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:51, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Not a dig at you mate; just saw that this had come up a couple of times over the last few years so thought it would be worthwhile sorting it out properly. —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 20:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * You wrote you'll explain the situation surrounding the specific name in a footnote, but I think it's significant enough to discuss in the taxonomy section of the article body (which is pretty short anyway). I also wonder if it would be nice to have a cladogram in there... FunkMonk (talk) 20:31, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Happy with name fix as suggested and agree with FunkMonk about where to put discussion Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:18, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

 * I can't find evidence that habroptilus is a noun. (Frankly I think Gray meant it to mean "with delicate feathers" and confused Greek ptílos, meaning "suffering from a certain disease of the eyelids", with Latin pilosus, meaning "hairy". In any case, both are adjectives.) But Article 30.1.4.3 does not mention any exceptions for works like Hemming's. I don't know how old the Article is, but wouldn't be surprised if it's younger than 1955 and therefore simply overrides that work. David Marjanović (talk) 19:42, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * According to several sources, such as Brown's classic work, "ptilon" is the Greek noun for feather, "ptilos" is the noun for plumage, and "ptilotos" is the adjective for feathered. Latinized versions are "ptilum", "ptilus", and "ptilotus", respectively. You will find some folks who will argue, on a grammatical basis alone, that latinized Greek suffixes that are nouns can still be treated as adjectives depending on the prefix. There are problems with this interpretation: (1) the ICZN Code nowhere indicates that prefixes are to be taken into account when determining whether a word is a noun or an adjective; Article 31.2 does in fact specifically state that gender agreement applies only "if it is or ends in a Latin or latinized adjective". In the present case, "habroptilus" demonstrably is not a Latin adjective, nor does it end in a latinized adjective. (2) Article 31.2.1 says gender agreement is not used when a word "is a simple or compound noun (or noun phrase)" - and, again, in the present case, "habroptilus" can certainly be considered a noun phrase or compound noun meaning "delicate plumage". (3) Under Article 31.2.2, even if you allow the pedantic argument that in Greek, the term "habroptilos" could potentially be interpreted as adjectival, the point remains that when there is a debate in which one side can argue that a word is a noun and the other side can argue that the word is an adjective, then the default is to assume that it is a noun unless the original author specifically stated otherwise. That is in fact the purpose of Article 31.2.2 - to settle "academic disputes" like this. Dyanega (talk) 17:28, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Good news from Kakapo recovery programme: 2019 even better than 2016
'''Kākāpō Recovery 17 h · We currently have a total of 181 eggs having been laid so far this season and 34 chicks currently alive. Second round mating is continuing on both islands.'''

https://www.facebook.com/KakapoRecovery/

So it's better (by far) than the 122 eggs made in 2016, and the season is still going on with another bunch of eggs coming soon. Maybe we will see over than 250-300 eggs this year, the only bad news is the vaste % of unfertile eggs. But, atleast for now, we have almost 50% more eggs than the 2016 season.

Had the eggs fertiles, with this season the number of kakapo would easily double or even triple. We will see how far they will go in the next months. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.11.3.98 (talk) 14:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Update graph? And some etymology
Fascinating and comprehensive article. However, the graph showing kakapo numbers versus year needs to be updated; currently it seems to end around 2015. On another note entirely, the Maori translation of 'kaka' (parrot) and 'po' (underground or underworld) is cognate with the word cockatoo. This comes from the Malay kaka - tua meaning 'bold parrot'. The Maori equivalent is virtually identical: kaka-tu. All of which shows the persistence and preservation of certain words throughout the Malayo-Polynesian language family.
 * I've updated the population chart to 2019 (it hadn't been updated since 2011). --Canley (talk) 06:10, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 7 October 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Kākāpō. (non-admin closure) Invinciblewalnut (talk) 23:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Kakapo → Kākāpō – Adding macrons per recent usage. Recent usage almost exclusively uses macrons, including from multiple media sources (Newshub / Stuff / The Guardian / The NZ Herald / TVNZ / RNZ / Newsroom), as well as international sources such as the Natural History Museum, the Smithsonian magazine and Italian media. Macrons are also heavily used for kākāpō across academic sources. Turnagra (talk) 09:21, 7 October 2021 (UTC) — Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) sign the (guestbook) 04:26, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

 * support as consensus in NZ is to do so. IOC doesn't use macrons but we can assume IOC is just common name stripped of macrons for IOC purposes Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:10, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Support Article clearly states that New Zealand English should be used. YorkshireExpat (talk) 15:26, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Support as per parallel cases recently discussed. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:59, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

 * per nom's sourcing finds. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 03:22, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

—Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 04:28, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Support, as the use of macrons for New Zealand species with Māori loanword names in New Zealand English has been established in several other proposals (see discussions there):
 * 1) Kōwhai
 * 2) Wētā (see Talk)
 * 3) South Island takahē
 * 4) Kākāriki
 * 5) Kōkako
 * 6) Katipō (see Talk)
 * 7) Kererū (see Talk)
 * 8) Tūī (see Talk)

 * relsiting comment: although there is a clear consensus in the discussion above, concerns were raised in this discussion. I am undoing the my previous close, and relisting the discussion for further input. The page is currently at "Kākāpō". Pinging everyone involved:, and from the other discussion: —usernamekiran (talk) sign the (guestbook) 04:26, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. While "Kākāpō" is used, "Kakapo" appears to still be the commonname; a review of sources finds a wide number from media sources both widely read and of more narrow interest that continue to use "Kakapo" (New Scientist, Otago Daily Times, ABC, CNN, Hindustan Times, Washington Post, Australian Geographic, Straits Times, National Geographic, Reuters, Canberra Times etc) as well as academic sources doing the same (Nature (plus many other from elsewhere in the "Nature Group", though Nature in general is a little inconsistent), Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Biological Conservation, Animal Conservation, Ecology and Evolution etc). It is also relevant to note that there is a presumption towards "Kakapo"; WP:FAUNA tells us that if the common name is not readily identifiable, we should defer to international zoological nomenclature authorities, which in this case seems to be the IOC/IOU, who hold the name is Kakapo.
 * It is also of some relevance that the use of the term in Google searches is overwhelmingly towards "Kakapo", and though there is a barrier to the use of the macrons that can explain much of this - namely, that they are not readily available on most keyboards - the sheer disparity in use is somewhat indicative, as can be seen when you contrast it to terms that are in common use with the macron such as Māori.
 * Finally, thank you usernamekiran for being willing to relist this despite the slightly unusual reason. BilledMammal (talk) 04:54, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:FAUNA actually says "When what is the most common name in English, or the veracity of that most common name, is so disputed in reliable sources that it cannot be neutrally ascertained, prefer the common name most used (orthography aside) by international zoological nomenclature authorities over regional ones." Emphasis added to show that the presumption is not in favor of diacritic-free. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 05:06, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * That is a fair point; I should have read the policy more closely rather than skimming over the parenthesis. However, I believe that point is to settle more substantial differences; for instance, if 30% of naming societies had it at "Kakapo", 30% had it at "Kākāpō", and 40% had it "Owl Parrot", then the policy is telling us to ignore the "vote-split" caused by the orthographical differences and put it at some variant of Kakapo, and the general principle still applies as a reasonable way of settling the matter.
 * In any case, I note your previous position ("Support per nom's sourcing finds") was based on the notion that recent coverage overwhelming uses "Kākāpō", I was wondering if you had reconsidered now that this appears to not be the case? BilledMammal (talk) 05:19, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * First, I love "owl parrot". Second, I don't know enough about the reasoning behind WP:FAUNA to agree or disagree with your interpretation. I think the text as-is helps neither side. Third, I am certainly reconsidering. Your sourcing is enough to disprove OP's "almost exclusively", but not enough to demonstrate a COMMONNAME. Comparing quantity of usage in RS has been challenging. Even sources that exclusively use diacritics seems to show up on searches that also look at URLs, which always include the diacritic-free version. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 05:27, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Alas, Owl Parrot does not appear to be an option.
 * Worth noting that Ngrams doesn't list anything for "Kākāpō", but I understand that it has problems with macrons - though having just looked into it, I note that the corpus does include words such as "Kitāb", so perhaps we shouldn't rely on this assumption? In any case, I'm going to try and find a corpus based on news results, but I'm not confident that I'll succeed.
 * For the moment, I've gone and obtained some more sources; hopefully they will help a little. Please note that I have been less careful about which sources I pick, though I have omitted unreliable sources such as blogs: Bird Guides, The Economist, DW, The Atlantic, Living on Earth, Futurity, Treehugger (I am equally surprised that they appear to be reliable), Al-Awsat, Wired, Quartz, ZD Net, Analytics India Magazine, India Times, New York Times, Forbes, Newsweek BilledMammal (talk) 06:37, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I think the fact that ngrams didn't find anything at all for "Kākāpō" should be fairly clear signal that it doesn't work for macrons - I'm sure that even with your belief that it's not the common name, you'd agree that Kākāpō is used at least once in a source that would be picked up by Ngrams. Turnagra (talk) 08:27, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Ngrams prunes words that occur below a certain frequency in order to keep the database at a manageable size; its possible that Kākāpō falls into this category, particularly since per the example I provided Ngrams does function with macrons for some words; I can provide many more if you wish? BilledMammal (talk) 08:42, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Many of those sources you've listed have also used the macron: New Scientist, Otago Daily Times (2 3 4 and another 18 at least), ABC, CNN, BirdGuides, DW, Forbes (multiple times), NewsWeek.

 * I also couldn't help but notice that - with the exception of the Otago Daily Times - you completely ignored New Zealand sources. These include widespread usage across all media outlets - Radio NZ (~1,370 articles with the macron), Scoop (~470 articles), Stuff (~300 articles), The Spinoff (~55 articles), TVNZ, Newsroom (~45 articles each), and Newshub (~40 articles), but also the Department of Conservation, every university (Otago, Auckland, Canterbury, Victoria, AUT, Massey, Waikato and Lincoln), New Zealand Geographic, electricity companies, Auckland and Wellington zoos, books, the Royal Society / Te Apārangi, Predator free NZ, Te Papa, Canterbury museum and Otago museum. Given that the article explicitly states to use New Zealand English, the usage in New Zealand - which is overwhelmingly in favour of macron usage, especially in recent sources (per WP:AGE MATTERS and WP:NAMECHANGES) - should take precedent.

 * Outside New Zealand, there is also Audubon, the British National History Museum, USA Today, Cosmos, the Smithsonian magazine, BirdWatching Daily, the World Parrot Trust, Planeta.com, EMBL and Re:Wild all use the macron too. Not to mention the hundreds of academic sources which also use kākāpō.

 * As another user has stated and previous moves have reiterated (see Talk:Kererū), we don't need to follow IOC when there's a different common name used. IOC also doesn't use any forms of diacritics as a matter of overall policy, which means they're not a reliable source as to whether a specific bird should have diacritics. Keeping this page at the new title of Kākāpō is consistent with the relevant conventions and guidelines, and re-opening a unanimous move request for what should be an uncontroversial move is frankly a waste of everyone's time. Turnagra (talk) 08:27, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not certain your WP:ENGVAR argument applies here, dealing as it does with diacritics rather than general spelling varieties. Instead, I would think WP:DIACRITICS would be the appropriate policy, which requires common use. And globally, I believe the common word continues to be Kakapo, based on the sources I have found - I believe with the exception of OTD, most of the exceptions to my sources that you have found are uncommon digressions, rather than common use.
 * I would also disagree that reopening was a waste of time; at the very least, we have proven that you are incorrect about "recent usage almost exclusively uses macrons", and the number of objections on the technical move request suggests that this is worth taking a little longer to consider. In any case, no point debating that now. BilledMammal (talk) 08:42, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Do sources from New Zealand have more weight, returning to my point on the article stating New Zealand English? YorkshireExpat (talk) 19:50, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

 * Support. Per Naming conventions (New Zealand) – "Māori words, when they appear as the title of articles, are usually written with macrons indicating long vowels". This orthographic convention was decided on many years ago (although implementing it has been surprisingly gradual). The common name itself is not in question – it is (with varying orthography) Kakapo / Kākāpō / Kaakaapoo / Kaka-po etc. I don't usually comment on move requests to add macrons to common nouns of Māori origin – I take it as a given that they will be added. Nurg (talk) 08:50, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure we can rely on that aspect of the guidelines; it was implemented in this revision, when the guideline was still a draft. The guideline was marked historical here, but that was immediately removed and the guideline template added. As far as I can tell, no discussion occurred for this; as such, I am not certain we can classify any of it (except for the section on using macrons for place names, which does not apply to fauna) as reflecting a "generally accepted standard". BilledMammal (talk) 09:12, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * A guideline that has stood for 14 years must be considered generally accepted, regardless of any informality of process back in 2006–07. Nurg (talk) 10:41, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The most we can say is that it has not been objected to - and even that is dubious, for all we know someone did so only to be told that "a guideline that has stood for 1/4/7/10 years must be considered generally accepted". In any case, the use of the word "usually" means it is a suggestion at most. BilledMammal (talk) 12:30, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, there have always been editors who disagreed with that clause. Like many WP policies and guidelines, it does not have unanimous support. However, it has had support to the level of being rough consensus or generally accepted. Unless and until the guideline is changed, we should follow it. Nurg (talk) 22:11, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The usually is because some dialects opt for double vowels instead of macrons, primarily Waikato-Tainui. For example, they spell the town of Ngāruawāhia as Ngaaruawaahia, and kīngitanga as kiingitanga. It's not because of people incorrectly omitting macrons. At any rate, the use of macrons is in keeping with the common name of the bird and is consistent with many other articles that use macrons as required (see Tūī, Wētā, Kākā, Kererū, Pā, Hapū, Te Puni Kōkiri, Kī-o-rahi, most iwi, every article with Māori in the title, and hundreds of place names. Given the meaning of Kaka without macrons, the use of macrons here is even more important than most. Turnagra (talk) 18:30, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

 * Support. Kākāpō is now the most common spelling in use in reliable sources in New Zealand English.

 * 1) The article is in New Zealand English, which includes loanwords taken from te reo Māori. Māori loanwords in New Zealand English are increasingly being spelled with the macrons that indicate long vowels, because these change the meaning of words.
 * 2) The spelling kākāpō means parrot (kākā) of the night (pō) in Māori, so macrons are required to indicate both pronunciation and meaning.
 * 3) Despite what was asserted above, accented characters are commonly used for loanwords in English Wikipedia: éclair, jalapeño, Béla Bartók. (WP:DIACRITICS)
 * 4) Because widespread macron usage has only happened since about 2015, we're required to give extra weight to recent NZ sources (WP:NAMECHANGES).
 * 5) The spelling Kākāpō is now the commonly-used spelling in reliable sources written in New Zealand English: "major…organisations, major English language media outlets, quality encyclopedias…major scientific bodies." – see the numerous examples of NZ media etc given above. (WP:COMMONNAME)

I'm surprised this RfC was reopened, as consensus in favour on exactly the same issue has already been reached in several articles, after much the same discussion: for example Wētā, Katipō, Kererū, Tūī.

—Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 21:01, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

 * Support. All of the above arguments from . Kākāpō just feels more correct, and we should aim for correctness, even if the (non-New Zealand) literature is doing a poor job of reflecting that. YorkshireExpat (talk) 21:38, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Fat land parrot" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Fat land parrot and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 14 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed,Rosguill talk 18:05, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

"Turkey parrot" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Turkey parrot and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 15 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed,Rosguill talk 16:09, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Evaluation
Article starts with a very detailed and thorough lead section. The content does focus a lot on conservation efforts, but still includes important information about the spices history, behavior, anatomy, ect. Article is well balanced and has un unbiased tone throughout. Many sources are current though most focused on the rehabilitation of Kākāpō. Whole article was very well organized and well written, but did have a few small spelling errors. There where many helpful figures, graphs and nice images that supported the writing well. Overall the article was very well written and included a lot of well sourced information and article seems very compete. Some improvements would be another round of proofreading. Dominowenz11 (talk) 07:49, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

WP:URFA/2020
The "Ecology and behaviour" section is largely unsourced. File:Kakapohist.svg is also unsourced. A455bcd9 (talk) 15:04, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Betcha that the majority of the reference-trailing sentences are actually sourced to those references (an error often made by novice editors), and that you didn't go to the trouble of checking that... right...? -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi @Elmidae,
 * I didn't check them all but here are a few examples:
 * I cannot see anything related to Every individual kākāpō receives an annual health check and has their transmitter replaced in the previous reference.
 * Same for During the winter of 1981, only females lighter than 1.5 kg (3.3 lb) were given supplementary feeding to avoid raising their body condition, and the sex ratio results in 1982 were close to parity, eliminating the male-biased sex ratios in the unrestricted feeding (the previous source actually mentions something similar during the 2001 winter?).
 * The source before One of its last refuges was rugged Fiordland. There, during the 1930s, it was often seen or heard, and occasionally eaten, by hunters or roadworkers. By the 1940s, reports of kākāpō were becoming scarce isn't available (even the archive)
 * The source before Kākāpō feeding grounds almost always host manuka and yellow silver pine (Lepidothamnus intermedius) scrubs." does mention these two species but adds "Likewise a bias may have occurred when determining the vegetation types kakapo preferred to feed in
 * While they are curious toward humans, kākāpō are not social birds.: nothing related in the source before
 * A455bcd9 (talk) 16:54, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not imputing that it's anyone's in particular job to sort out all of these, but it's worth keeping in mind when mass-tagging these dangling statements. E.g. Mating occurs only approximately every five years, with the ripening of the rimu fruit. In mating years, males make "booming" calls for 6–8 hours every night for more than four months is in the immediately preceding ref; and of this, but the species was not exclusively forest-dwelling. All kākāpō that were transferred to predator-free islands in the last decades have adapted well to any changes in environment and food plants the first statement belongs to the preceding ref. (I'll fix those) -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:43, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Got it, thanks! A455bcd9 (talk) 17:55, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * By the way, the source says "Males may persist in calling activity throughout the hours of darkness (and occasionally also by day), on consecutive nights for up to four months throughout late summer/autumn. The intensity and length of the calling period varies considerably from year to year." I think that's a bit different from In mating years, males make "booming" calls for 6–8 hours every night for more than four months. At least we could add "may" before "make". A455bcd9 (talk) 17:57, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Even if that were the case, it still does not meet FA citation requirements, so the notice was entirely appropriate imv. I hope that the referencing is fixed so the article does not need FAR. (t · c)  buidhe  23:49, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅: found the source of the historical range map. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 22:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Ecology and behaviour section - citations needed tags
Citations needed tags: Marshelec (talk) 00:01, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) The first sentence in the section. My initial reaction is that this sentence is not essential to the article and could be deleted. I did find this source that discusses evolutionary diversification in New Zealand and mammals.  (on the second page, numbered page 29). However, on its own it is not a sufficient source. Should this sentence just be deleted ?
 * 2) The second tag in this section is for the sentence: "While they are curious toward humans, kākāpō are not social birds". It is partly supported by the source cited immediately prior, but does not mention the content in that same source that says females and young birds have been observed playing in small groups. How about rewriting to include this ? A possibly useful source that compares play behaviour between kākāpō, kākā and kea is here:
 * 3) The third tag is for the last sentence. This largely duplicates the first sentence of the last paragraph, and is not essential, given that threats and conservation are discussed elsewhere. I suggest it is deleted.

Proposal to change habroptilus to habroptila to follow IOC (and all other lists)
Notwithstanding discussion above I believe that we should use the feminine form habroptila for the specific epithet. On English Wikipedia we follow the IOC list which has habroptila.(see the IOC here) may well be correct that habroptilus should be considered as a noun in apposition - but this represents original research and we follow reliable taxonomic sources (in this case the IOC). I notice that David and Gosselin (2002) in their article cited above state that habroptilus is an adjective on p. 273 and list Strigops habroptila on p. 181. The IOC is not alone in using habroptila. All major taxonomic lists appear to use the feminine form of the epithet: Authors associated with the Kākāpō Recovery Team use habroptilus such as here, here and here. These authors are not taxonomists. Other authors use the feminine form habroptila such as here and here
 * Dickinson & Remsen (2013) H&M4 Vol 1 p 353 have Strigops habroptila. The epithet is flagged as a variable (v). In a footnote they cite the ICZN Direction 26 (1955). See here. H&M4 is very influential.
 * Bird Life International/IUCN here
 * Clements Checklist here
 * Cornell's Birds of the World here
 * ITIS here
 * eBird here
 * New Zealand Birds Online here (this page appears to have been updated since the earlier discussion above and now has habroptila!)

- Aa77zz (talk) 17:00, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

 * The overwhelming scientific consensus in actual published papers on kākāpō is S. habroptilus (approximately 10:1 ratio). Unfortunately the 2022 edition of the official NZ Checklist, put out by the Ornithological Society of New Zealand—which is the reliable taxonomic source in this instance, not the IOC—changed habroptilus to habroptila, citing Hemming (1955); incorrectly, in my and several others' opinions. I was actually approached to co-author a response to establish habroptilus as the correct specific epithet! But until that is published, for the purposes of this article we are indeed obliged to stick with the (erroneously) feminised species name. Ah well. Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 07:57, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. I've now changed the epithet to habroptila and cited some sources - including the 2022 edition of the Checklist of the Birds of New Zealand - thanks for the link - Aa77zz (talk) 10:27, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kākāpō


text:
Slanted and Enchanted

Slanted and Enchanted is the debut studio album by American indie rock band Pavement, released on April 20, 1992, by Matador Records. It is the only Pavement album to feature drummer Gary Young.

The album received critical acclaim and is seen as a landmark for indie rock, with Rolling Stone ranking it 199th on its 2020 edition of The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time. As of 2007, the album had sold 150,000 copies. In 2022, Alex Ross Perry adapted the album into a rock opera titled ''Slanted! Enchanted!''

Background
Slanted and Enchanted was distributed to critics as early as 1991, months before its official release; the original distribution did not feature the entire band, as several members joined during its production. The recording sessions were split between South Makepeace Studios in Brooklyn, New York (recorded December 24, 1990) and Louder Than You Think Studios in Stockton, California (recorded January 13–20, 1991).

Singles
The album’s first single, "Summer Babe", appeared in August 1991. It was Pavement’s last release of new material for the Chicago-based Drag City label before the band moved to Matador Records. The single contained the B-sides "Mercy Snack (The Laundromat)" and "Baptist Blacktick" that were included on Japanese versions in the CD, and later on the deluxe version of the album. A different mix of "Summer Babe," entitled "Summer Babe (Winter Version)," became the first track on the album. The song would go on to be ranked by Rolling Stone magazine as number 286 in its 2004 list of the 500 greatest songs of all time, and as number 292 in the 2011 update of the list.

The album’s second single, "Trigger Cut", was first released in the UK by Big Cat Records on July 13, 1992, before appearing in the US market through Matador the following month.

Album
Slanted and Enchanted was officially released on April 20, 1992, to critical acclaim, originally reaching a peak of number 72 on the UK Albums Chart. As of 2007, the album had sold 150,000 copies.

Packaging
The title Slanted and Enchanted is taken from the title of a cartoon made by Silver Jews frontman David Berman. Its cover art was created by appropriating that of an existing album, Ferrante & Teicher's Keyboard Kapers.

Slanted and Enchanted: Luxe and Reduxe
In 2002, Matador released Slanted and Enchanted: Luxe & Reduxe, a compilation containing Slanted and Enchanted in its entirety, as well outtakes and other rarities from the same era. Matador Records released Luxe & Reduxe on October 20, 2002, alongside the Slow Century DVD. It features 48 songs, including the entire original disc and, in addition, 3 outtakes of which one is an unreleased song and the other two are alternate takes, plus the B-sides from the "Summer Babe" and "Trigger Cut" singles, 5 songs from two different John Peel sessions, the 4-track EP Watery, Domestic, and 13 tracks of a live performance of the band held at the Brixton Academy in London on December 14, 1992.

Luxe & Reduxe reached number 5 in the US Billboard Top Independent Albums and number 152 in the US Billboard 200 charts.

Critical reception
Slanted and Enchanted received critical acclaim. In a contemporary review of the album, Robert Christgau of The Village Voice was highly positive, writing that Pavement are "always good at both tune and noise" and that the music on Slanted and Enchanted yields "a message complex enough to offer hope ... that the lyrics will catch up". Erik Davis of Spin designated Slanted and Enchanted as the magazine's "Platter du Jour" for March 1992, describing the album as "so fine it occasionally seems too perfect."

Legacy
"I think Slanted and Enchanted probably is the best record we made, only because it's less self-conscious and has an unrepeatable energy about it."Since its release Slanted and Enchanted has appeared on many critics' best-of lists and is frequently cited as being among the most influential indie rock albums of the 1990s. AllMusic's Stephen Thomas Erlewine cited the album as "a left-field classic" and "one of the most influential records of the '90s". In 2002, Pitchfork awarded the album their maximum grade of 10.0/10.0 in a review of the album's reissue and ranked it as the fifth greatest album of the 1990s in 2003. Rolling Stone called Slanted and Enchanted "the quintessential indie rock album" and placed it on the magazine's list of the 500 greatest albums of all time In 2017, Billboard called it a "slacker masterpiece" and "the definitive indie rock album".

Accolades
(*) designates unordered lists.

Personnel
Pavement Additional Personnel
 * Stephen Malkmus – lead vocals, lead and rhythm guitar
 * Scott Kannberg – bass guitar, lead and rhythm guitar, backing vocals (tracks 1–2, 4–5), lead vocals (track 10)
 * Gary Young – drums
 * Cy Jameson – engineer (track 9)

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

title: Slanted and Enchanted


text: Category:Military of Morocco

title: Category:Military of Morocco


text:
User talk:Hyacinth/Identity

__NONEWSECTIONLINK__

Cooperation
I appreciate your gentle, thoughtful and patient remarks. For example:

 * As the creator of the page in question (History of heterosexuality), I would approve a merge with Human sexual behaviour for both Same-sex sexual practices (SSSP) and Different-sex sexual practices (DSSP). Both would made great sections of a larger article. The DSSP article is no longer "little more than a crude rewrite" of SSSP, its now a crude rewrite with extra paragraphs tacked on.Hyacinth 05:28, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC) In light of the continued debates are this subject, I propose we (wikipedia) create a Naming convention.Hyacinth 06:45, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC) See: User:Hyacinth/Style guide

What do you think is the best place for the information in the "Is homosexuality a choice?" article? --Uncle Ed 12:38, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * I think that the best place to deal with the questions/topics homosexuality is a choice or no one chooses to be gay is as (a) section(s) of Causes of sexual orientation. This article already exists, putting both opinions/subjects together at a more general article decreases redudancy, and is a more neutral title. Plus, it is easier to NPOV things when the "other side(s)" are right there on the page. In fact, the causes of sexual orientation article, as stands, could use a discussion of the moral/political implications of causes.Hyacinth 15:59, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

delete talk page only?
What do u mean by posting Talk:History of heterosexuality in the VfD? do u mean to delete the talk page only, or the article History of heterosexuality? --Yacht 02:13, Apr 8, 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete the talk page only, as the "article" History of heterosexuality is a redirect and thus does not need to be deleted.Hyacinth 17:37, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Heterosexualism
Hiya, would you care to voice an opinion on the dispute on the talk:heterosexuality page (at the bottom re: heterosexualism)? I'd like to get this page unblocked and up and running again. Exploding Boy 03:20, Apr 17, 2004 (UTC)

LGBT-msg
Hello Hyacinth! I saw that you made some edits to thas msg. Are you aware of a project page for it? There should be one, I think, and if there is none yet, it should be set up. At the very least so that there is a place where its content can be discussed, although it would be a good thing to have a full-scale project. -- AlexR 22:43, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Hey, glad to see you getting into the project game. :) I think the closest currently in existence is WikiProject Sexology and Sexuality. Snowspinner 22:47, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Don't misunderstand me - I want there to be a project because the box is already there, and if it is there it ought to have a place where it can be discussed. In its current state, it is extremely random, and therefore even less useful than other article series boxes. I also doubt that LGBT belongs there; T does definitely not, and LGB is more a question of identity than one of sex, too, in my opinion. I also wonder whether Hyacinths user page is the proper place to discuss that; Hyacinth, if you don't like that, just say so. -- AlexR 06:37, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

Created by me, for the record. I added the LGBT message to the list of short term projects(?). Hyacinth 23:02, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your revision to R & H. It really helps when we correct each other like that. :-) --Uncle Ed 22:00, 6 May 2004 (UTC) Sorry, I didn't mean to be rude - I only corrected what I considered a mistake. As you can see I made an effort to not just revert your edit, but preserve the wikilink to groove that you inserted. I relied on you in checking it, but afterwards clicked it myself and discovered it linked to the wrong article. So I corrected that too. What does this have to do with Assume the best about people whenever possible?

Btw it doesn't show much respect for other people's work when you don't even read such a small entry before you edit it (no, you don't need "unlimited time" for that) and insert information which is already there. Saying "I don't have time, so spend yours to clean up my mistakes" also isn't very polite. But please, let's not get too upset about unimportant things. If my edit comments offended you, I apologize. Keep up the good work. Regards, High on a tree 01:59, 14 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Since you're asking: I was referring to the entry Riddim (which is short enough to be read in its entirety before editing it) and the content you had inserted was (A riddim is ...) often known elsewhere as a groove, while the next paragraph contained In other musical contexts a riddim would be called a groove. So I concluded that you hadn't read the second paragraph. Btw I also reverted your Sometimes a melody is associated with the riddim. back to Often a melody is associated with the riddim. - the vast majority of riddims have melody lines too. (The patois term is a bit misleading nowadays.) Regards, High on a tree 02:33, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

I'm posting this here instead of your Wikibooks talk page, since you seem to be here much more often...just to let you know, I started writing the music theory wikibook, tentatively titled Tonal Music Theory. I decided to move it to "Music" instead of "Music Theory" in order to match the namespace I wanted to use. You will probably find I have a different idea of how I want the book to go, so, if you wish, you might want to reconcile your ideas with mine before the foundation I have laid gets too "cemented". :) I'm learning much of the material while I write it, so my writing is kind of jumbled at the moment and may contain some inaccuracies. Feel free to fix it up however you like. :)

--Furrykef 10:47, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

Category:Heterosexuality
I'm not sure I see this category really ever going anywhere. May I ask what your rationale for its creation is? Snowspinner 05:19, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC)

Hi
I just wanted you to know I was being silly / genuine here, and not to get offended or upset or whatever. No harm intended. Cheers, Sam [Spade] 22:33, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I ment that I largely accepted what you were saying. Not things like "exploiting the complicatedness of the issue to POV the article" but things like "modern chic lifestyle" "attempts to legitimize" and "disallows even the mention of any other conception of sexuality". My POV is that alternate sexualities should not be discussed on Heterosexuality, and that alternate sexualities are deservedly marginalized by their fluidity and counter-cultural nature. I know enough about history and sociology to know that while homosexuality has occurred in nearly every society and era, the current circumstance of a "gay community" is nearly unique, with similar precedent to be found in other decadent, overpopulated societies. I have seen research where overpopulation in lab rats was shown to result in, among other things, increased violence and male homosexuality. I don't feel that an article on a subject as consistent as heterosexuality (which has by necessity been an important feature of every mammalian society in known history) should be allocating half its article space on the subject of alternative sexualities or paraphilia. There are other articles for that. Cheers, Sam [Spade] 23:16, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I again find myself largely agreeing w your summary of my reasoning, minus the fiat part.

 * I am interested however in how you would define heterosexuality differently from "procreation".

 * Of course sterile people can be happily married, but arn't they psychologically living out the societal norms brought about by reproduction? The fact that some people choose to behave in ways which don't facilitate reproduction could well be of benefit, I would assume it is. But that doesn't in any way diminish the over-riding importance of reproduction, and the heterosexuality which has traditionally brought it about.

 * Without heterosexuality nearly none of us would exist, and we can't possibly diminish its signifigance in stature when compared to alternative sexualities, however Pop science it may be to do so. Sam [Spade] 00:50, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Essentialist no, ahistorical of course not. I will agree with Objective, but only loosely. Too keep it simple, self-reporting is a poor methodology for scientifically investigating much of anything. While some researchers would be perfectly happy with allowing your friend to choose her own label, I am quite familiar w the failings of this method having been a sociological researcher myself. The problem your friend presents with her subjective labeling are only the tip of the iceberg, I assume for example she isn't even attempting to be deceptive (some do, or are shy, etc...)! I'm all about the bottom line, does she have sexual intercourse w males, and/or would she in some circumstances. If yes to either, I check the heterosexual box ;) How would you quantify and qualify heterosexuality if not by that? Sam [Spade] 02:12, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Unfortunately there isn't alot more I can do for the (Heterosexuality) article, not generally being a writer of bulk content here (on the wiki). I will take another look however, and perhaps you will find something noteworthy regarding that. As far as your more recent statements I don't very well understand the references to "ahistorical" or this:

 *  You yourself have described heterosexuality with outside of the, "does she have sexual intercourse w males, and/or would she in some circumstances," box. For instance, you're invoking of sterile married couples living the heterosexual norm. In fact, even the addition of "norm" to heterosexual goes beyond the box.

 * and I'm not entirely certain how to respond regarding your apparently mixed feelings regarding our conversation. I will mention that I avail myself of the opportunity to discuss a variety of intellectual and political matters w a variety of persons, few of them entirely in agreement with myself (much to their respective misfortunes ;). In any case I appreciate your thoughtful and polite nature, and have been glad to become aware of the benefit it brings to the wikipedia as a whole. Cheers, Sam [Spade] 04:56, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hyacinth article(s)
Hi Hyacinth. As you may have noticed, I split the Hyacinth article in two separate articles: Hyacinth (mythology) and hyacinth (flower). I hope I changed all the links to the appropriate articles. I didn't know which one you want your user page to link to though. You'll have to do that yourself. -- Kimiko 09:59, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Chinese
It doesn't matter. :D Are you learning Chinese? Do you know how to write them in Chinese characters(esp the Ts'ai-nü)? Romanized Chinese makes little sense to me anyway.... :( --快艇 (Talk)☺ 06:03, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * No, I don't even know which romanization they are.Hyacinth 06:15, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Gay cartoons
Hey, I am thinking about List of gay cartoons, any ideas? I would like to know some super gay heroes like that in spiderman or superman. ^_^ --Yacht (Talk)Q 02:58, Jan 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * I suggest List of gay comics.

Yo
If you have a problem with me, and expect to recieve any sort of satisfaction thru policy, you have to talk to me and stuff. The guidelines actually say 2 people have to have contacted me about the problem, and I fail to be persuaded to stop violating policy. Not only was there so little in the way of policy violations that nobody commented on the comments page (what did I do, anyways? Those quotes don't violate policy) but even if I had violated policy, you would need to have complained to me directly about it first. I'm actually not such a scary fellow, just take a look at my talk page archive, you'll see that I'm known both for my candor and wit, as well as my engaging manner and thoughtful attentions :) I will warn you tho, if you read too much between my lines, you might find some things I didn't even say ;) This is a habit of those who get upset alot, I have found. Cheers, Sam Spade 00:35, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Policy #1: Avoid bias Policy #3: Respect other contributors

 * The terms "gay" and "straight" are biased terms. Paraphiliac is a clinical term, which is quite different. Jargon refers to terms specialized to a given community, which are relatively useless for use when attempting to communicate with those outside of said community. These terms are also not NPOV, but rather attempt to suggest that homosexuality is a happy condition, whereas heterosexuality is rigid and conformist. Therefore these terms are clearly unacceptable to many.

 * taking personally, other contributors as horrors.

 * I have not referred directly to any contributors as horrors, nor did I intend to. Rather I was referring to genital mutilation. The article suggests that society at large encourages transexualism. I made it clear elsewhere on that page that no matter how bizarre your paraphilia, mutilating your genitals is not the answer. Yes, I do find the concept of "heteronormativity" personally offensive, and yes I do dispute the accuracy and neutrality of that article. There is no policy violation in being either offended, nor in critiquing a particularly dubious article, as I continue to do. I will agree that this particular sentence could have been clearer, and that it is best to avoid topics that are offensive to me personally, which I have been trying to do, BTW. The requests for comment etc? is ment to bring in other editors, and I have long since removed the page from my watch list, although this is due mainly to the low level of debate on the talk page, and the innapropriate usage of reversion by some editors (you personally are not included in these complaints).

 * spelling

 * This is irrelevant, and if you think it is indicative of any general flaw in my reasoning or premises, that would be an ad hominem.

 * In conclusion, no, I did not find your communication on my talk page to be overly sassy nor distressing, spelling correction not withstanding. Feel free to contact me with further questions or concerns. I have made sure to put this thru a spell checker, for your convenience. A good day to you.

 * Sam Spade 19:33, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Sure, gay and straight are biased terms, as is paraphiliac and all other clinical terms. Clinical does not equal true or accurate. Clinical does not equal neutral. Neutrality is not being engaged in any dispute or fight between these terms and their proponents (us and others). Whatever bias I may have, you're blanket urge to rid wikipedia of certain terms is not even attempting to avoid bias. (By the way, I don't think that "straight" is meant to imply rigid, it actually is meant to imply "straight and narrow" as in correct moral non-sinful.)

 * Refering to sex reassignment surgery as genital mutilation is inaccurate, refering to transsexualism as a paraphilia is inaccurate, and refering to transsexualism as a bizarre paraphilia is disrespectful, with a clear implication that transsexual people are bizarre.

 * Many people have commented on your "horrors" comment, I would request that you refrain from making such comments in the future. I would ask that you not cut true and accurate content, but rather, if you have objections, edit it so as to neutralize it. I would ask that you not try to impose your terminology and definitions on wikipedia. Having asked, I may now consider examples of the last two actions as vandalism. Hyacinth 21:32, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure how you find the term/concept of heteronormativity offensive as it seems the only way to do so would be if one believed that no one ever disregarded gay people and same-sex sexuality and that no one ever thought that gay people and same-sex sexuality were wrong or unnatural. Notice one can't actually believe this is unnatural oneself, as one would then have to grant that heteronormativity is correct, and thus nonoffensive. Hyacinth 21:32, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I reject your conclusions. Your definition of vandalism is very far from the consensus, and I suggest you try listing me on Vandalism in progress if you think I am mistaken. Your dismissal of clinical terms as POV suggests to me that an encyclopedia, or other sources of learning are not compatible w your unusual POV. I certainly will impose clinical and other precise terminology upon the wikipedia. This statement "I would ask that you not cut true and accurate content, but rather, if you have objections, edit it so as to neutralize it" is too strange for me to be able to respond to. Your understanding of the ramifications of the concept of heteronormativity fail to take into account the whole of what has been said on that page, and thus commit the Fallacy of composition. Overall you strike me as confused/mistaken, and I advise you to review Policy Library. Sam Spade 22:27, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

That one as adorable as Hyacinth should be gay-bashed at Wikipedia is truly deplorable. If Australia wasn't so far from Montana I'd do something serious about it. Also, why does Hyacinth have bits of the Darwin family tree at hsi user page? Adam 11:29, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

Damn. Here was I thinking User:Hyacinth was a female (owing to a character on a British comedy show) when really you are this hot guy. I really should look at user pages more... - Mark 02:21, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

Wikihate
It's a shame about that, it really is. I had a bit of a confusing run-in with someone when I attempted to put Grace Kelly in Category:Gay icons. While I wasn't called a faggot, I was mildly insulted and it's a shame that it has to happen here; you'd think people would be more open-minded, eh? Mike H 20:50, Jun 23, 2004 (UTC)

Anon IP
I was in the process of adding a link in Response to the stuff I posted on the talk page. I had it under control, you know. Mike H 19:45, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Great. Hyacinth 19:48, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * :-/ Mike H 19:48, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Oh, good, that wasn't sarcastic. My bad. I had always thought you didn't care for me that much. Mike H 19:51, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)

 * Jesus! YOU thought HE never cared for you much?  Mike, I think you overanalyze EVERYTHING that EVERYONE says to you, and always (possibly subconciously) look for malice in others' remarks to you.  You sure did this when I questioned your reasoning for considering my Misdemeanor Elliott edits biased.  The two of you (you & Hyacinth) have been backing each other up, sometimes ridiculously, on a number of different feuds with different people!  It's a mystery why you'd think Hyacinth dislikes you!  You two seem awfully buddy-buddy, IMO too much so!205.188.116.23 00:51, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Luckily, I haven't been vandalized that much. I got one hit on my talk page, and I archived that, even though there were posts that suggested that my friend Jennifer (in the picture on my user page) was a transvestite and my gay lover. Mike H 19:56, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)

 * LOL! I was the one who made the comment about your girl friend being your gay lover.  It's called irony--"ironically" enough, just today, a friend of mine who's in California pointed out that iron, sarcasm, and the like is not understandable in certain parts of the country.  I was not aware of this.  Maybe you live in a place where sarcasm is not used, and that's why you've had problems with people for stupid reasons.

 * I called your friend your "gay lover" because you suggested that Rienzo's comment about "your 'friend' ;)" was some sort of "gay bashing". Unless the girl's a transvestite (which she does not appear to be, but, hey, ya never know), then harassing "your 'friend' ;)" cannot be considered some sort of homophobic slur, as you've alleged against Rienzo.  That was my point--I guess you just have a culture where some of this stuff is lost on you, for whatever reason.  I should be more patient.205.188.116.23 00:51, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * It hardly seems worth putting a picture up if it isn't JUST you (and most of my pictures aren't). BTW, you seem very intelligent, and both you and your boyfriend are very attractive individuals. Mike H 20:30, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)

I hope you're not trying to flatter him to win his approval.205.188.116.23 00:51, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Anon, please do not post personal attacks on my talk page. Hyacinth 05:25, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Again, I don't know what the hell you mean by "personal attacks". What in my comments above is a personal attack and whom is this "attack" being directed at?  I am honestly stumped.  Either you, too, are misunderstanding my writing--I thought I offered a more-than-sufficiently-clear explanation of my sarcastic comments above, legimitate comments that Mike is attempting to write off as "gay bashing".  Explain yourself!  You have the right to dictate what can and cannot be posted at your own page, yes, I agree; as I have my right to dictate what is stated on my pages (a right that some people here seem insistent on violating).  However, I also have the right to defend myself from slander or libel wherever it occurs.  As Mike has misrepresented--giving him the benefit of the doubt, I'll say "misunderstood"--comments of mine, I am standing up for myself against Mike's apparent confusion.  Now, are you still confused, or are you simply going out of your way to create trouble with me?68.36.175.254 16:34, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

All users
Please do not carry on conversations with other users on my talk page. That is why you all have talk pages. Thanks! Hyacinth 21:01, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

OK. But please explain your accusations against me. Where's there a "personal attack" on this page?172.130.99.47 22:38, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Waiting for an explanation--my so-called "personal attack" against Mike H was given as reason for one of my many unsubstantiated bannings. I am pissed!205.188.116.23 17:01, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Please see your talk pages: Thanks, Hyacinth 21:01, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC).
 * User talk:68.36.175.254
 * User talk:172.130.99.47
 * User talk:205.188.116.23

Attacks against my person
I don't understand why the guy is so bent out of shape. From what I've read, he got angry when I didn't acknowledge his apology. I read it and thought it was very nice of him. I don't understand which flaws he wanted me to admit to, though. Can you make heads or tails of it? Mike H 17:21, Jul 8, 2004 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration
Consensus, including among members of the Arbitration Committee, seems to be that since that IP has been making death threats, the user can be safely hard banned. Which makes your request for arbitration both redundant and a magnet for him to keep attacking and vandalizing. So if you want to delete it, you should. Snowspinner 02:44, Jul 8, 2004 (UTC)

On intercourse

 * "All vaginal intercourse is sexual intercourse, but not all sexual intercourse is vaginal."

Yes, that's how I originally meant to deal with that section of Sexual slang, but in my latest edit(s) I forgot, since 'Anal intercourse' was not a subtopic of 'Sexual intercourse'. I'm going to make these changes:
 * Sexual intercourse
 * brief preamble here
 * Vaginal intercourse
 * all current 'Sexual intercourse' terms here
 * Anal intercourse
 *  ' Anal intercourse' terms here

- dcljr 04:53, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hey, BTW, Hyacinth: might I suggest you move the quote "merged 'Sexual intercourse' and 'Vaginal intercourse': no difference!" underneath the Intercourse heading on Talk:Sexual slang? I think that would make more sense to readers. As it stands now, it (initially) looks like an isolated quote with no comment or attribution; it's only after one reads the next section that one realizes why it's there. Oh, and thanks for your remarks about my edits. I kinda went wild on it yesterday... - dcljr 00:49, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hyacinth, I think if you check the Talk:Sexual slang edit history you'll find that something went terribly wrong in your latest edits. I have reverted that page to the version that was current when I posted the message on this page immediately above this one. (My first-ever revert!) I also switched the quote and 'Intercourse' heading (not sub-heading) as I was talking about above. I do think that's best. Finally, I included your latest comments about the term sex-worker. As they were not signed in your edit, I left them unsigned. I hope this all meets with your approval. - dcljr 06:00, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Talk:Effeminacy
a bit of help, if you will. Sam [Spade] 18:38, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * ope, didn't mean to make you miss your bus, sorry. Sam [Spade] 21:12, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Anonymous
Anonymous, you have previously stated I should have control of my user pages, please do not edit them except to leave messages to me on my talk page without insults. Hyacinth 05:05, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Preventing anon from editing
Hi Hyacinth. Administrators have the power to block anonymous IPs who commit obvious vandalism from editing, as per the policy at Bans and blocks. If you want to get an administrator's attention to deal with a vandal, you can list the IP at Vandalism in progress. moink 05:45, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

two-spirit page
Check out the link mentioned in Talk, http://www.nwtwospiritsociety.org/history.html Looks well sourced.. Ronabop 12:51, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

ahistorical blinders
I of course object to both of these terms, and it is fairly clear we are not communicating very well. I get the impression you might have misunderstood me, and that I might be misunderstanding you. I strongly suggest that you avoid using value judgements about my ability to assess data, and instead concentrate on specific points and counterpoints. My point is very simple, and undeniably correct: in traditional society, most people marry partners of the opposite sex. Nobody marries a partner of the same sex. Homosexual (and beastiality, etc...) acts do occur, but are cast in a profoundly different light that in the western world today. For example, in sociology class I remember a particular tribe, where after a successful raid on a neighboring village, the victorious chief sodomized one of his henchmen in front of his victorious war party. This was not shown to be atypical, but rather an acceptable sign of dominance and submission. Also there is the ancient greek system of "pedagogary" or whichever, where it was common for men to have (by todays standards) quite deviant relationships w preteen boys. I could go on and on, the information is abundant. One thing that did not occur however was "gay" marraige, gay culture, etc.. The whole concept of a gay community is almost entirely ideosyncratic, particularly in the proportions seen today. Sam [Spade] 03:06, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Don't worry
One way or another you have been impressively polite considering the sensitivity and personal nature of the topics we have been discussing. For whatever reason I have a tendancy to offend certain persons, which is unfortunate, and unintended. I would like to think I have avoided offending you. Cheers, Sam [Spade] 06:38, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Category:Gay people

 * laughs* Very nice. :) - UtherSRG 23:14, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You may be interested in looking at the deletion debate for Category:Gay, lesbian or bisexual people. Guanaco 19:16, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Category:Gay writers
Hey, I noticed your delete vote on Category:Gay people and realized I had just added the category Gay writers without even considering that some people might not appreciate it, and was wondering what your thoughts on the matter were. I was thinking it would be useful to anyone researching or interested in gay contributions to literature - I mean, there are college courses on the subject, ya know? I was also considering adding Category:Black writers for the same reasons, but now I'm pretty hesitant. -Seth Mahoney 23:26, Aug 12, 2004 (UTC)

Comma abuse
Hi Hyacinth,

Comma abuse like your recent contributions to Effeminacy is distinctly in opposition to WP style guidelines. Please be moderate and careful with your comma placement in such seminal articles. Thanks! +sj + 02:19, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Re:
See my reply @ User_talk:Spleeman/Sam_Spade. Sam [Spade] 22:46, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Super Cute Thanks
Thanks for gettin' my back RE: transgenderism in the RuPaul/talk page. When you grow tired of your specs, can I have them? xxxoo, Pacian 07:39, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Foucault
Hello there, hope you are well. I just wanted to say that I jacked a bit with the Foucault section in the Power (social) article and I revised your last sentence in the big paragraph. As wording these ideas can be tricky, I was hoping you could read it and see if it makes sense and doesn't alter the meaning you meant for it. Thanks. --DanielCD 19:42, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Over-reaction
If you dispute one of my edits to List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual people and feel a revert is necessary, that's understandable, but deliberately reverting my other addition as well, was inappropriate... either clumsy or spiteful. Howard Cruse is unquestionably gay, and famous enough in his field; he belongs on the list. Tverbeek 23:53, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Queer theory
I created headings on the queer theory page, and moved your comment about Teresa de Lauretis there. I then a bit more information. If you could check it out and let me know how it looks, that would be great. Voyager640 16:00, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Request to expand hate group about gay bashing
I received a complaint that the article hate group is unbalanced with too much focus on NRMs. Because of your interest in the homophobia article, I wondered whether you could expand on this with regards to gay bashing. Thanks in advance. Andries 20:03, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Faggot on list of sexual slurs
Sorry for not replying on your talk page before. Although I've been casually editing Wikipedia for some time I've never really got involved in the discussion/community side, so I didn't know it was usual to do so. Seems a little weird to me (there's no context here, for instance) but hey, when in Rome... --Pete

Yeah, on re-reading my edit summary I see what you mean. I stand behind the content of it (I don't think either of those etymologies are genuine, particularly the "gathering sticks") but I really should have phrased it better. Sorry. --Pete

Gay Template
Please vote your opinion of template:gay. Thanks. Apollomelos 19:34, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

One Question
Are you a fan of Keeping Up Appearances, i just had to ask.--User:Boothy443 | comhrÚ 11:24, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Ahh i see, no gay connotation indented, i figured it was either that or the flower/bush, i am not to well versed in mythology that far off the surface. Well anyway, mind the pedestrian.--User:Boothy443 | comhrÚ 11:36, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Digital Gay Bashing
The digital gay bashing you've received is shameful. Where do these people find the time for their hatred? --AStanhope 17:46, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hello
You’re not the only one to get bashed on Wikipedia. Check out my new evil twin Apollomelos2 who is apparently communist, courtesy on Noah Peters. lol Later  Apollomelos 00:57, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Gay templates
Heya...do you think there's anything in Template:Gay that can be usefully reorganized and put into Template:LGBT sidebar instead? It strikes me that they have a very high potential of duplicating or competing with each other. I'm all for gay topics on Wikipedia, being in the club myself and all, but I also think Template:Gay, viewed objectively, does a pretty lousy job of what it's trying to do. On merit, LGBT is definitely the much better of the two...and the more appropriately titled, for that matter.Bearcat 19:57, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

VfD
Please take a look at Votes for deletion/Gay Friendly level. Mikkalai 02:33, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

LGBT categories
Sorry to hear of your current woes. Are you aware of what is happening to all the LGBT categories? Check out: Categories for deletion/Log/2005 April 24. This has me pretty upset. It worries me that people's work can be deleted like this so quickly without an easy way to restore it. I didn't notice the discussion until after it happened. There is still discussion about this at Categories_for_deletion. -- Samuel Wantman 08:25, 7 May 2005 (UTC) See also: Wikipedia talk:Categories for deletion --Samuel Wantman 22:44, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Hello, Hyacinth. I encourage you to visit Categories for deletion/Log/2005 May 7. (Wikipedia really needs a GLBT noticeboard for stuff like this.) Jonathunder 05:10, 2005 May 8 (UTC)

 * Inspired by Jonathunder's idea, I have created a LGBT noticeboard. Please take a look.  -- Samuel Wantman 07:02, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

I know that Bernhard von Bülow was accused of homosexuality, but this is the first I've heard that he actually was homosexual. What's your source? Mackensen (talk) 22:29, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Right, I remember that Brand accused him. I just wasn't aware if there was consensus that Brand was actually telling the truth. Mackensen (talk) 14:50, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Twink (Internet slang)
May I ask why you moved 'Twink (Internet slang)' to 'Twink (internet slang)'? I understood that the Internet is a proper noun which is always capitalised? Is it because such games are played over internets as much as they are played over the Internet? Fibula 11:25, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Hyacinth/Identity


text:
Xicheng, Beijing

Xicheng is a district of the city of Beijing. Its 32 km2 cover the western half of the old city (largely inside the 2nd Ring Road; the eastern half is Dongcheng District), and has 1,106,214 inhabitants (2020 Census). Its postal code is 100032. Xicheng is subdivided into 15 subdistricts of the city proper of Beijing. The former Xuanwu District was merged into Xicheng in July 2010.

The Xidan commercial district, Beijing Financial Street, Beihai Park, Jingshan Park, Shichahai, and Zhongnanhai are all within its jurisdiction. The popular Houhai bar area is also in Xicheng Precinct. Before the 1911 Revolution, most royalty and aristocrats resided in the precinct. The oldest Catholic church in Beijing, the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception is located in Xicheng.

Administrative divisions
There are 15 subdistricts in the district:

Economy
COSCO has its headquarters in the Ocean Plaza building in Xicheng. The Xinhua News Agency has its headquarters in the Dacheng Plaza (大成大厦 Dàchéng Dàshà) in Xicheng.

In addition Bank of China, China Construction Bank, the State Grid Corporation of China, China National Nuclear Corporation, and Taikang Life Insurance also have their headquarters in Xicheng.

Government
The Chinese Ministry of Education is headquartered in Xidan, Xicheng District.

The Chinese Academy of Sciences is headquartered in Xicheng District.

The China Food and Drug Administration is headquartered in Xicheng District.

The Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office headquarters is in Xicheng District. The Office of the Government of the HKSAR in Beijing is in Xicheng District.

Important areas in Xicheng District

 * Imperial City
 * Beijing Financial Street
 * Zhongnanhai
 * Beihai Park
 * Jingshan Park
 * Shichahai
 * Drum Tower and Bell Tower
 * Prince Gong's Residence (Gongwang Fu)
 * Xinjiekou
 * Xidan
 * Xisi
 * Qianmen
 * Dashilar
 * Liulichang (an ancient antiques market since Qing Dynasty)
 * Beijing Zoo
 * Fayuan Temple
 * Huguang Guild Hall
 * Miaoying Temple
 * Niujie Mosque

Metro
Xicheng is served by seven metro lines of the Beijing Subway:
 * - Muxidi, Nanlishilu,, Xidan , Tian'anmen West
 * - Guloudajie, Jishuitan, Xizhimen , Chegongzhuang , Fuchengmen, , Changchunjie,  , Hepingmen
 * BeijingMTRicon.svg - Xizhimen, , Ping'anli , Xisi, Lingjing Hutong, Xidan ,  , Caishikou , Taoranting
 * - Chegongzhuang West, Chegongzhuang, Ping'anli , Beihai North
 * - Wanzi, Daguanying, Guang'anmennei, Caishikou, Hufangqiao
 * -, Guloudajie , , ,
 * - Xizhimen

Suburban Railway
Xicheng is served by one commuter line operated by Beijing Suburban Railway (BCR).
 * - Beijing North railway station

Primary and secondary schools
The High School Affiliated to Beijing Normal University is in Xicheng; it was located in Xuanwu District before Xicheng absorbed Xuanwu. Beijing No.4 High School is also in Xicheng District.

One school in Niujie, the Beijing Xuanwu Huimin Elementary School (S: 北京市宣武回民小学, P: Běijīng Shì Xuānwǔ Huímín Xiǎoxué), serves the Hui people living in the area. It used to be in Xuanwu District.

The Beijing Municipal Commission of Education, the local education authority, used to be headquartered in Xicheng District.

Post-secondary schools

 * People's Public Security University of China
 * Central Conservatory of Music is based in Xicheng, near Fuxingmen and Changchunjie stations.

title: Xicheng, Beijing


text:
East-West Airlines (India)

In 1990-91 the entry of private airlines began, after the de-regulation of the Indian Civil Aviation sector. Private airlines were given permission to operate charter and non-scheduled services under the ‘Air Taxi’ Scheme. East West Airlines, head-quartered in Trivandrum was the first national level private airline in India to operate after almost 37 years.

History
East West Airlines was promoted by Thakiyudeen Abdul Wahid, a native from Varkala Trivandrum district. The airline began operations in early 1992 when the Indian Government reformed the industry by its "open skies policy" that gave rise to numerous private air charter operators that serviced India. The airline established offices in Trivandrum in 1995, New Delhi, Madras (now named Chennai) and Mumbai.

It started, as per government stipulations, with three aircraft, all Boeing 737-200s. In 1992, to counter the impact of a crippling Indian Airlines pilot strike, the then-Civil Aviation minister, Madhavrao Scindia asked the airline to bring in more aircraft. East West went on to acquire four more, taking its count to seven Boeing 737s. The Indian Government granted scheduled domestic airline status to nine private air charter operators, including East West, in 1994.

On 13 November 1995 the company's managing director Thakiyudeen Wahid was shot dead near his Mumbai office. The airline owed 3.3 million dollars to PLM Equipment - an American company from which it had leased three Boeings. PLM Equipment first appealed to the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to deregister the aircraft and then went to court. The Delhi high court ordered East West to pay up or return the aircraft. The three aircraft were then grounded.

In May 1996 the airline sought and was given DGCA permission to stop flying trunk routes due to a shortage of aircraft. By June 1996 it had decided to fly only from Mumbai to non-trunk destinations such as Calicut, Trivandrum and Cochin. Finally, on 8 August 1996, East West Airlines ceased all operations.

Destinations

 * South Asia
 * 🇮🇳 India
 * Trivandrum (Trivandrum International Airport)
 * Ahmedabad (Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport)
 * Kolkata (Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose International Airport)
 * Mumbai (Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport)
 * Bangalore (Bangalore Airport)
 * Belgaum (Belgaum Airport)
 * Mangalore (Mangalore Airport)
 * New Delhi (New Delhi Airport)
 * Goa (Goa Airport)
 * Chennai (Chennai Airport)
 * Madurai (Madurai Airport)
 * Visakhapatnam

Fleet
East West operated a total fleet of eleven aircraft, comprising eight leased Boeing 737-200s and three Fokker F27s. After the airline shut down operations, the Boeings were returned to their lessors; while two Fokkers were stored at Mumbai Airport until 2006, when they were auctioned off by AAI to recover some of the fees it was owed by way of parking and landing charges.

Accidents and incidents
On 1 July 1995, an East West Airlines Fokker F27, registered VT-EWE, was engaged in a touch-and-go landing training exercise at Vadodara Airport when the aircraft's left main landing gear failed on touchdown. The aircraft continued moving forward on its belly and skid to a halt on the runway. There was no fire and no injury to persons on board the aircraft. Poor maintenance was cited as a contributory factor in the accident. The aircraft was written off.

That very year, the owner of East-West airlines was murdered by thugs as he left work for home.

title: East-West Airlines (India)


text: User talk:68.39.136.21

title: User talk:68.39.136.21


text:
Category:Military of Canada

__NOGALLERY__

title: Category:Military of Canada