text:
Talk:Tabernacle Choir

Cremaster irrelevant
Why is the mention of the 2nd Cremaster film considered irrelevant? --203.26.206.130

 * Because it's an incredibly obscure film. It looks like you linked it just to prevent the article from becomming an orphan.  Nowhere does The Cremaster Cycle article mention the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, so they couldn't have played a key role in the film.  And from the description of the series, it doesn't sound like they'd appear in it willingly.  The choir has been featured in scores of other much more widely seen movies (knowingly and willingly, such as Mr. Krueger's Christmas), but the article doesn't mention those films.  The art film is just too obscure to merit mention.  If you want to make a case, state it here.  We can talk about it. :-)   — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:12, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)

I think the very obscurity of the film is what makes the fact that the Mormon Tabernacle choir participated interesting. And the reader of this article will not be left wondering 'what is the second film of the cremaster cycle' - there's a hypertext link to the Cremaster article. On this encyclopedia, we have the opportunity to be as comprehensive as possible. Other projects involving this choir are noted on the page, such as work with orchestras etc. therefore why not list all film appearances or soundtrack mentions just for the sake of accuracy and offering as much information as possible? I added the Cremaster reference because it was interesting to me that a religious choir would be involved in a film such as Barney's. The film is set in the Salt Lake Valley, hence the inclusion. Maybe a reference to the choir should be added to the Cremaster page? And the phrasing should probably be changed from 'This choir also features...' to 'This choir also appeared in...'

 * Did the MoTab participate or were they merely included? I highly doubt that the MoTab would actively participate in a movie named after testicle muscles, no matter how artistic it was.  Including them is one thing, having them perform for the film is another.

 * Being comprehensive is one thing, but mentioning every fleating relationship is another. For example, should we mention that John Cusack appeared in The Player even though his participation was by chance and he was onscreen for about 3 seconds?

 * So, yes, if you think it is that interesing, include the information on the Cremaster page.

 * And please sign your posts. You can do this with 3 or 4 tildes (  or ~ ).  The latter form adds a timestamp.  Peace. :-)   — Frecklefoot | Talk 21:23, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)

They were included on screen. I suppose what this comes down to is the division between information and trivia. 203.166.57.11 01:08, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Craig Jessop steps down as director, Mack Wilberg appointed interim director
The Church announced today that Craig Jessop, Choir director for the last ten years, is stepping down to enjoy family time, resume teaching, and work on personal projects. Mack Wilberg will serve as interim director until a new director is chosen. See the following sources for verification. Consequently, this article should be changed to reflect newest information. Jessop stepping down as director of Mormon Tabernacle Choir Choir's Jessop is resigning Tabernacle Choir Director Jessop resigns Hope this information is helpful to you. --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 00:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, he is doing a fantastic job which you can see on TV/BYU Channel. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 20:00, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

YouTube spamming
Do we really need all those links to YouTube at the bottom of the article? I can understand a few, just to give interested readers some example, but do we need like a dozen? Anyone competent with a web browser can just search YouTube for more examples if they're interested. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 19:51, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree. Let's just leave one for now, so the novice YouTube users can at least find others easily if needed. --Eustress (talk) 03:23, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Improvement
The History section needs to be expanded substantially considering the Choir's longevity. With whom they have performed, where they have performed, the beginnings and evolution of the choir, etc. It would also be nice to integrate the tour lists into some kind of prose. I'll also look for more pictures. --Eustress (talk) 03:26, 11 January 2009 (UTC) I am distressed to see the non-journalistic style of this article, and that it is locked to prohibit editing. This platform, Wikipedia, is intended to be third-person unbiased and omniscient. I got this far: "The LDS Church has considered music a vital part of worship from the beginning of its history. Early headquarters of the Church in Kirtland, Ohio and in Nauvoo, Illinois both had standing choirs. It was no surprise then..." and cringed at the clearly copy/paste from LDS promotional material. Better stated as "The LDS Church has involved music in its worship from the church's inception. Early headquarters in Kirtland, Ohio, and Nauvoo, Illinois, both had standing choirs." DELETE "It was no surprise then..." as totally first-person editorializing, totally inappropriate. -- Editor-at-large Sept 13 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.8.114.253 (talk) 17:52, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Discography
The discography could really use dates on all of the albums. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johncolton (talk • contribs) 18:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Here are the ones I tracked down just now, from information on their website. I found the search function here to be very useful, although browsing for the CDs did not hardly work at all. http://www.mormontabernaclechoir.org/products/search A Christmas Gloria - 1998 Choose Something Like A Star - 2005 Christmas With The Mormon Tabernacle Choir - 1993 Consider the Lilies - 2003 Copland: Old American Songs - 1987 Live in Jerusalem - 1993 Love is Spoken Here - 2005 Handel: Messiah (complete, conducted by Sir David Willcocks) - 1995 More Greatest Hits 18 Best-Loved Favorites - 1995 O Divine Redeemer - 1992 Peace Like a River - 2004 Ring Christmas Bells - 2009 Showtime! Music of Broadway and Hollywood - 2007 Spirit of America - 2003 The Sound Of Glory - 2001 Johncolton (talk) 18:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I can work on that!71.202.132.106 (talk) 23:40, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

How is the choir used during services?
There is no discussion of how the choir participates in services at the Tabernacle, assuming it does so. Given that this is a religious choir, some discussion of its religious role is warranted. --Bruce Hall (talk) 12:16, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The Choir has its own weekly broadcast "Music & The Spoken Word." It also customarily provides music for at least 3 of the 5 general conference sessions held in the Conference Center. Unless I'm mistaken, all of that is mentioned in the article. If you could provide specifics to clarify what you mean, we might be able to help you more. --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 01:27, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Good Q/A. Services are in ward chapels, stake centers, and mission field buildings; sessions and ordinances are in temples; and the Tabernacle and Conference Center are for musicals, world broadcasts, and ETC. Hope this helps, Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 20:08, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Ref/Citations : Bare URLs
I am working to resolve the Bare URLs in Ref/Citations. Bear with me for a little while as it is a work in progress. Peaceray (talk) 02:56, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The references you added look great! Thanks for doing all that research and finding these sources. If you find any others that might be helpful, please feel free to post them as well. Thanks again for your great work! --Jgstokes (talk) 03:08, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * All done! I removed the   template. Just to be clear, I did not do the research or find the sources, except for replacing an irretrievable source. What I did do was to go to each URL & use the information (page info in Firefox, properties in IE) & the information from the web pages/sites to gather the info for the    &   . I also added wikilinks to the publisher & newspaper when available, & added the ISSN & OCLC #'s when I could find them. Peaceray (talk) 06:28, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

No book citations? Well, here's some possibilities.
There are no book citations in this article! There seems to be a number of books written about the Choir.

To begin with, here is what is online, ten books as of this moment.:

Here is the list of all books in OCLC (Worldcat), about 292 books or editions in all formats:

Here is a link to the Cite book template. At a minimum, one should be able to list the author last & first name, title, year & location of publication, the publisher, & an OCLC #. If they are available, please include a url for eBooks, the ISBN available, & an authorlink if there is an article on the author.

I did some work cleaning up bare URLs & the SLTrib citations; I am moving on to other articles. Happy editing!

Peaceray (talk) 06:55, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Church abbreviation keeps getting deleted
In the lead section, why do you keep removing "(LDS Church)" after "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"? Recent examples:, ,. "LDS Church" is used later on in the article, so the first time the church is mentioned, we use the full name and establish an abbreviation that will be used throughout the article. "LDS Church" is the recommended Wikipedia abbreviation used per WP:MOSLDS. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:40, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree WP:MOSLDS is clear. This is the way it is supposed to be.--- ARTEST4ECHO (talk) 20:51, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
 * It happened again. please comment here to discuss rather than just repeatedly removing it. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:15, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

MoTAB ?
I grew up in the Salt Lake City area, sang in ward choirs, high school choirs, BYU (five choirs, including tours to Las Vegas and Canada) and University of Utah choirs (including representing western states in Hawaii), and never heard the Tabernacle Choir referred to as the Mo TAB. I did, however, when I started college choirs, hear them referred to as the Tab Choir: "Come on, [sing right]; you are not the tab-choir", Kirt Weinsinger told BYU University Chorale my freshman year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charles Edwin Shipp (talk • contribs)
 * Is the intent here to explore whether MoTab is appropriately included in the opening as a colloquially-used nickname? Though this is no more scientific or reference-based than anything else might be, I have heard it referred to as the MoTab for many years and in many locations. ChristensenMJ (talk) 16:54, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I've found quite a few recent references to "MoTab" in media: eg, Daily Herald (Utah County), Salt Lake Magazine, and BYU TV. (Notably, it's often used in an article headline, no doubt to save space.) I've also found a few, though not as many, uses of "Tab Choir", most of them from the Daily Herald: eg, . So it seems to me that both are likely legitimate short forms. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:18, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi! I grew up in Provo, and often heard the choir referred to as the MoTab, and now that the names been changed, TabCaTS (though tbh only from people in music). this is my first time editing a post, apologies for no sources beyond word-of-mouth Pocketstitched (talk) 05:07, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Status (amateur or what)
I think that the status of the choir needs to be mentioned for clarification. I don't like "all-volunteer" because that makes being a choir member sound like an unpleasant job that someone had to do. It also sounds slightly boastful on the part of whoever requires people to volunteer (COJCLDS in this case). Amateur is technically correct, but another editor thinks it has a negative connotation. I think the way it has been handled at the Huddersfield Choral Society seems a good way (I need to remove some peacockery there before you look). Does anyone else agree?. Op47 (talk) 16:48, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
 * peacockery removed now. Op47 (talk) 16:54, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

I am personally of the opinion that "all-volunteer" is a and necessary and clarifying phrase. I know of some religious choirs I've heard of that have a system whereby they are compensated in ways for their service, whether such compensation is monetary or otherwise. Far from being negative, the phrase is necessary for that reason. And I don't appreciate the edit war, however minor, being waged over this issue. There's nothing "unpleasant" I can see about the phrase, unless anyone chooses to see it that way. And the fact that this so-called "peacockery" was unilaterally removed by you after just six minutes without allowing proper discussion to take place and a consensus to be reached first is a blatant breach of Wikipedia's policies regarding consensus. Since the phrase was added by consensus after much discussion, it would take such a consensus to sanction its removal or edit. I am therefore reverting, and would strongly encourage you not to revert again until sufficient discussion has taken place and a consensus has decided to retain or remove it. I always in these cases prefer to assume good faith, but this knee-jerk reaction on your part is not a good idea. Take it from someone who has done similarly in the past and been called out for it. --Jgstokes (talk) 08:55, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

When I said Peacockery removed, I was talking about the Huddersfield Choral Society, not the MTC. The change that I removed after 6 minutes was tha addition of world renowned. Bahooka removed the word amateur from the description and I agreed with him, if you had read the edit summary and I removed a similar phrase from the lede. I am not having an edit war, which you would know if you read my edit descriptions, and I resent that you are saying different. I have removed any hint of amateur and all volunteer so that a concensus may be reached. I note that your main interest is LDS articles and that you are an LDS. You need to be careful as this could be seen as having a conflict of interest. Your response is an example of why that may be a problem. My motive is to make this article neutral and I consider the implication to the contrary to be uncivil. Op47 (talk) 22:24, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Tour 2012 western us
In 2012, the Mormon Tabernacle Choir traveled to Ephraim, Utah for a concert at Snow College to celebrate the dedication of the Pioneer Heritage Gardens in nearby Manti, Utah.

https://www.lds.org/church/news/pioneer-heritage-center-and-gardens-dedicated-in-manti-utah?lang=eng — Preceding unsigned comment added by HiJolly (talk • contribs) 18:40, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mormon Tabernacle Choir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130329063236/http://www.mormontabernaclechoir.org/faq to http://www.mormontabernaclechoir.org/faq
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141028015404/http://www.mormontabernaclechoir.org/articles/press-release/2014-emmy?lang=eng to http://www.mormontabernaclechoir.org/articles/press-release/2014-emmy?lang=eng

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:18, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mormon Tabernacle Choir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141010045351/http://ssh.ldsliving.com/story/76939-mormon-tabernacle-choir-fashion-1888-now to http://ssh.ldsliving.com/story/76939-mormon-tabernacle-choir-fashion-1888-now

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:34, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Audio clip is wrongly titled
First time writing for Wikipedia. The audio clip for the christmas concert is titled "Angels we have heard on high". This is incorrect. The actual title for this song (whose chorus is very similar to "Angels we have heard on high") is "Angels From The Realms Of Glory". It is a different song — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:40E:8005:1BB0:910D:651:E0E:F87F (talk) 06:12, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mormon Tabernacle Choir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140513201606/http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/entertainment2/55409965-223/boe-concert-choir-tabernacle.html.csp to http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/entertainment2/55409965-223/boe-concert-choir-tabernacle.html.csp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141007165610/http://www.mormontabernaclechoir.org/about/newsroom/faqs?lang=eng to http://www.mormontabernaclechoir.org/about/newsroom/faqs?lang=eng

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:10, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 22 October 2018

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus not to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 17:04, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Mormon Tabernacle Choir → The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square – As noted and cited in the article, this choir has been renamed as part of a global effort by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to deprecate the use of the term "Mormon" by the church and its members. Media outlets not affiliated with the church are using the new name (for example, The Salt Lake Tribune). While the change is recent, it is becoming the usual common name of this group, so (per WP:UCN and Reasons for moving a page), the article should be renamed, with the current name as a redirect (that is, the inverse of the situation now, in which the new name is a redirect). The previous attempt to move the page was reverted due to lack of discussion, so this is obviously controversial. Thus, I am making this request to provide a forum for necessary discussion. GeoGreg (talk) 16:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Upon reflection Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square might be the appropriate title (no "The"). Please discuss. GeoGreg (talk) 17:29, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Mormon Tabernacle Choir → The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square --Speaking for the legal entity that is now known as "The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square" we concur with this recommendation based on the above, namely that the new page be named "The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square" ("The" included as part of the name and the T capitalized) with a redirect from the page "Mormon Tabernacle Choir." Scobarut (talk) 17:18, 23 October 2018 (UTC) scobarut — Scobarut (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. Known all over the world as the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:29, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose Getting tired of all these COI move requests relating to Mormonism. We have not had enough time to see if the common name usage has changed. Sources since the name change have been mixed. AusLondonder (talk) 11:53, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose: It will be very difficult to change the generally known common name of this group, which is widely known to the general public outside the Mormon community. People paying attention to recent news might know there has been some news about removing "Mormon" from the official name, but practically none of them would know or recognize the new official name. —BarrelProof (talk) 14:45, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Let’s wait until the new name catches up in terms of common usage. In any case, WP is not the platform through which to enforce corporate identity (“Always include ‘The’, with a capital T.”) —ThorstenNY (talk) 18:21, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose this specific move at this time; the official change happened this month and it's unclear what the common name will be. It seems likely that the unadorned Tabernacle Choir will be the common name. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 21:58, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose Rreagan007 (talk) 22:56, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Name of the Choir
It says in the main title that they are still the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, they changed their name last October to the Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square. Raymond.berger4 (talk) 21:34, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

 * Raymond.berger4, please see the talk category just above this. Consensus is to wait until the common usage is addressed. ChristensenMJ (talk) 22:05, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Time passes, usage changes
All of the objections raised by editors above are gone now. The new name “Tabernacle Choir” is more commonly used in media than “Mormon Tabernacle Choir”. Using a google search, it’s clear to see that most articles about this entity are written by Deseret News or Salt Lake Tribune, both of which adhere to the new style. Using “at Temple Square” seems less common.

Many editors in the above consensus cited WP’s common name procedure, but “Tabernacle Choir” is more concise than “Mormon Tabernacle Choir” and is equally precise and recognizable, which are the main criteria we evaluate on.

The excuses for opposing the name change are running out, and it’s looking like only plain old bigotry is keeping it from changing now. Brirush (talk) 12:30, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 11 August 2019

 * 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: not moved.  Calidum   14:20, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Mormon Tabernacle Choir → The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square – The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square does not go by the Mormon Tabernacle Choir anymore. The media uses the new name, the app has the new name the website has the new name. The old name is no longer used.It has been called The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square for almost a year now and needs to be changed. PWHIT66 (talk) 00:02, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * My two cents: common usage has changed as a result of the name change, so any prior objections to the change are surely moot at this point. If the consensus is in favor of this name change, I will gladly add my voice to agree. But if for any reason anyone has any objections to the suggested move, I'd say those would need to be addressed before the change is implemented. --Jgstokes (talk) 02:08, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I support the name change. So long as WP:COMMONPLACE has changed, let's get it moved. changing to oppose following other's views. Rollidan (talk) 02:23, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

 * Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. A Google search restricted to the previous month yields 3,450 results for "Mormon Tabernacle Choir" and 2,270 for "The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square". The current title still appears to the the most common name. Try back in another year or two. Rreagan007 (talk) 02:41, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose. No, it doesn't need to be changed. The common name in the broad community has not changed. This is a very well known institution, and the proposed name is much less recognizable. Steven Georgiou became Yusuf Islam more than 40 years ago, but he's still Cat Stevens to most of us, and Stokely Carmichael became Kwame Ture about 50 years ago. Rebrandings don't always catch on among the broad public. —BarrelProof (talk) 05:15, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment This name change is not a "proposed" change. It is one that has already happened. From the moment this change was originally covered in the mainstream media following the announcement of the change, the weekly broadcast has used the new name. The new name has been widely covered in the mainstream media, and the fact that the majority of sources available through the Google search noted by Rreagan007 in the above comment uses the new name vs. the old name suggests more that old habits die hard, and that in some cases, certain outlets have been unwilling to embrace the name change. But the inescapable fact is that, like it or not, the organization's name has changed, and if you go further into the references to the old name, you will find that those references are outdated, some of which may, on further review, be found to be biased on this issue. Yes, it has been less than a year since the name change was announced, and yes, it may take some time for all sources to embrace the new name of this organization, but the question I keep coming back to is whether the coverage using the old name should be seen as more meritorious, credible, relevant, or on point as the coverage using the new name. My answer to that at this time would be a resounding "no." Just some additional thoughts from me, for what they may be worth to the continued discussion. --Jgstokes (talk) 00:23, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Nothing has changed since the last RM. Still its common name throughout the world. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:47, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 27 April 2020

 * 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: not moved. There is a clear consensus that the COMMONNAME has not changed. – bradv  🍁  04:15, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Mormon Tabernacle Choir → The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square – This article title should be changed to "The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square". Since last discussed, things have changed, and the new moniker better meets Wikipedia's 5 naming criterias WP:NAMINGCRITERIA. The main objection has been WP:COMMONNAME, which is no longer the case. Recognizability – Besides being referred to as "The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square" by the news media, Google Searches indicate that the common usage has shifted to "The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square. If you google "Mormon Tabernacle Choir", Google will link to Wikipedia, but replace our title with "The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square", a clear indication that Google's algorithms believe that a shift has happened. Additionally, "Mormon Tabernacle Choir" may no longer NPOV.  Anecdotally, I can affirm that using "Mormon" elicits a quite visceral response from a large section of the "Mormon" population. If widespread, per WP:NPOVNAME, the current name would be a violation of Wikipedia policy.  Epachamo (talk) 16:14, 27 April 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. buidhe 23:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Epachamo, while I agree that the standard common usage has changed, and that this article's name should be changed to reflect that, your comment on what was said by President Nelson may not be correct. The actual quotation to which you were referring states: "To remove the Lord’s name from the Lord’s Church is a major victory for Satan." If Wikipedia is truly meant to be neutral on topics covered and statements made, then it seems a bit disingenuous, IMHO, to mention the "major victory for Satan" as a rationale for changing the name on a Wikipedia article. Aside from that qualm with your comment, at this time, I would have no objection to changing the name of this article, especially if the move has sufficient support by consensus. --Jgstokes (talk) 19:49, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Jgstokes, you make some good points. My point I was trying to make was that it is considered offensive to a segment of society, and therefore against the NPOV ideal of Wikipedia. It was directly after President Nelson's talk that the name of the Tabernacle Choir was changed, so I do think it somewhat relevant. We don't take marching orders from President Nelson on Wikipedia, but it is evidence of a particular point of view.  Regardless, point taken, and I have removed the mention of "major victory of Satan" and tried to moderate the language. Epachamo (talk) 20:29, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

 * Oppose. It was last discussed less than a year ago. Nothing has changed. Srnec (talk)
 * Comment. If this page is moved, I think it should be moved to just The Tabernacle Choir per WP:CONCISE and WP:COMMONNAME. I wouldn't think that the average person would refer to it by the full official name and would usually just refer to it as "The Tabernacle Choir". Even on the official website (www.thetabernaclechoir.org), they often refer to themselves as simply "The Tabernacle Choir", and where "at Temple Square" is included, it's usually included in lower-size font. Rreagan007 (talk) 21:00, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I would be fine with the name "The Tabernacle Choir". The WP:CONCISE makes sense to me. Epachamo (talk) 03:48, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

 * Comment. Srnec, I'd disagree with you that nothing has changed. Epachamo has described how the algorithms on Google searches now redirect Mormon Tabernacle Choir to Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square. If that is true for other search engines (which it may or may not be), then the name yielding the highest such results on more than one major search engine should be an indicator that the name needs to shift somehow. Rreagan007, I'd concur with your suggestion that a more concise name for this page to "Tabernacle Choir" would likely be appropriate, given the new symbol that has been released for the Choir. There is a lot to consider here as far as whether or not to change the name of this article, and again, in general, I am willing to accept the consensus on this matter, whatever that decision might be. Thanks again, everyone! --Jgstokes (talk) 23:07, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't know what Epachamo is talking about. When I Google "Mormon Tabernacle Choir", the link to Wikipedia comes after the official website and it displays as Mormon Tabernacle Choir. Try this. Looks to me like Epachamo is juicing the stats by comparing a search term with a search topic. Srnec (talk) 23:24, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Srnec, Maybe some good faith WP:AGF? When you google "Mormon Tabernacle Choir", google's AI connects that phrase with the topic, "Tabernacle Choir on Temple Square".  I was referring to the topic box on the right in a browser, or right at the very top in a mobile browser.  As far as my 'juicing the stats', that is definitely not the case.  Their is no topic "Mormon Tabernacle Choir" but there is one for "Tabernacle Choir on Temple Square", which further proves my point.  Incidentally, the search term "Tabernacle Choir" beats "Mormon Tabernacle Choir".  Try this.  Regardless, if they are even remotely close, "Mormon Tabernacle Choir" is still controversial. Epachamo (talk) 03:45, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't see how what Google calls the topics is at all relevant. People do not search for "Tabernacle Choir on Temple Square". Because they've never heard of it. You wrote that Google Searches indicate that the common usage has shifted, but they indicate no such thing. Srnec (talk) 11:57, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Google is in it to make money. Choosing the most relevant name for their topics helps them make more money.  Google spends billions to get their algorithms right.  Google thinks "Tabernacle Choir on Temple Square" is the most relevant name. Furthermore:
 * There have been over 14000 page views of this article in the last month. When this was discussed a while ago, there were purportedly google search result numbers of '3,450 results for "Mormon Tabernacle Choir" and 2,270 for "Tabernacle Choir on Temple Square"' (which is not a 'significant majority' anyway). If this is true, then people are almost 3 times more likely to use Wikipedia than Google. Wikipedia's name choice could be skewing what people search for, limiting the effectiveness of naked google search numbers in the first place.
 * There are two reasons why the name should be changed that I mentioned, either one of which is a valid reason. "Mormon Tabernacle Choir" is no longer a WP:NPOVNAME, and elicits a visceral response.  If there is a 'significant majority' that use the moniker, Wikipedia will use the NPOV name anyway.  I see no indication that a 'significant majority' exists. Epachamo (talk) 14:28, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

 * Oppose. Repeating this same move request again seems like just trying to wear out the opposition. My impression is that the common name in the broad community has not changed. This is a very well known institution, and the proposed title is much less recognizable to most people. Steven Georgiou became Yusuf Islam more than 40 years ago, but he's still Cat Stevens to most of us, and Stokely Carmichael became Kwame Ture about 50 years ago. Rebrandings don't always catch on among the broad public. The Choir itself used this name for a long time (roughly 150 years?) that is how it is primarily known to the general public. —BarrelProof (talk) 22:36, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I repeated the move request again because times have changed since the last request. Your examples of the Cat Stevens and Stokely Carmichael only extend so far. I argue that a better example would be Cassius Clay changing his name to Muhammad Ali.
 * A good indicator of which it is, is Google. If you google Cassius Clay, Google links it to a topic it has titled "Muhammed Ali".  If you google Yusuf Islam, you are linked to a topic titled "Cat Stevens".  If you google "Mormon Tabernacle Choir", you are linked to a topic google has titled, "The Tabernacle Choir on Temple Square".  If google has caught on, and major media outlets have caught on, its a pretty good indicator that the name has entered into common vernacular.  I personally haven't heard the phrase "Mormon Tabernacle Choir" from friends and neighbors in probably over a year.
 * I would agree that "Mormon Tabernacle Choir" is still recognizable, and maybe in some regions of the country, more recognizable. If it is not absolutely clear that a 'significant majority' uses a particular name, why not go with the name that is more precise and the organization doesn't find offensive?
 * The first time the request was made, I myself would have been in the oppose camp. The request the last time was hardly unanimous, and I'm surprised it was closed out after just a week (three users voted to keep the name, two voted to change it, and one person changed his vote from yes to no).  Times are changing. Epachamo (talk) 04:15, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

 * Support. The points which the nominator made are sound. I will also add that the new name is used in regular news articles, see Salt Lake Tribune, LA Times, and others. While there are some articles that use the old name, that is usually referring to events prior to the name change, i.e. "I was part of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir back when ...". Point is that if the media is changing its language on the choir, then the general public is too.Rollidan (talk) 23:36, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Not again! Nothing has changed. Still WP:COMMONNAME. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Please clarify. You say nothing has changed.  Is that your opinion or do you have a reference?  What about the NPOV objection?  Please address that. Writing "Not again!" in an exasperated way does not demonstrate good faith. Epachamo (talk) 16:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The sort of good faith that is demonstrated by re-nominating an article for moving so soon after the last RM failed, you mean? And where does NPOV come into it? Given it's been the common name for donkey's years and we have an article titled Mormons? I reiterate, nothing whatsoever has changed since the last RM. Or the one less than a year before that. This appears to be just an attempt to carry on nominating until the name gets changed. And that is against the spirit of RM. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:47, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: Necrothesp, I might see more merit in your comment if the renaming proposals were being repeatedly made when nothing had truly changed in relation to the article's topic. Since the last such discussion, as outlined, more media outlets are independently opting to use the new name in reference to the choir. I haven't run the percentages here, but it appears as though the amount of mention by old name vs. new name is not nearly as significantly leaning towards usage of the former.
 * That being said, if there is indeed a determination to wait and see how things unfold in that respect going forward, I think a reasonble suggestion would be to wait to open a discussion like this for yet another time after around 8-10 months have passed. If, as appears to be the case, more sources covering the organization in question do wind up using the new name instead of the old, that would, I feel, be a reasonable indication that it is time at that point to revisit this again. And I say that as one who is doing the best he can on his end to assume good faith on the part of all participating here, and in an effort to be sufficiently neutral in my own conveyed opinion on a personal level.
 * In fact, based on the give and take here thus far, it may be reasonable to evaluate the comments up to this point, close up the discussion for the time being, and revisit it again anywhere from 6-10 months from now when things have gotten back to normal following the COVID-19 situation, because by that point, with life normalized to any degree, the coverage of the Choir by its' prior or current name may be easier to analyze at that time than it may now be in view of the pandemic. Just some additional thoughts from me, for whatever they might be worth to those who read them here. --Jgstokes (talk) 03:37, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Necrothesp, you say that nothing has changed, but I think evidence shows differently. This is the very first time I have requested a name change or even participated in the discussion, so to say that my purpose and intent is to wear down the opposition is unfounded.  The below table shows that quite a bit has changed, even since the last time it was proposed.  If you feel like I am showing bad faith and cherry picking the data, by all means please add media outlets to this list. Epachamo (talk) 14:14, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

 * Oppose, for all the reasons given above by the Oppose side. The Support side is cherry-picking sources close to the CoJCoLDS (is there truly no simpler name?), this doesn’t reflect common usage throughout the world. —ThorstenNY (talk) 23:54, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't understand how the sources above are cherry picked. Even if one were to take out the sources affiliated with the church (Deseret News, KSL, KSLTV), that would leave some 17 sources using the new name, versus 7 using the old name. As has previously been said, if there more secondary sources which could be added, they are welcome to be added, but I am unaware of any. Regarding the common usage, I see Tabernacle Choir as more commonly used than the old name or the full official name. See this as well.Rollidan (talk) 00:43, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Wow, again with the bad faith accusations WP:AOBF. If you feel I am cherry-picking the data, I encourage you to find a source I missed with the table. Most sources simply don't cover the Tabernacle Choir.  I couldn't find anything in the New York Times, Washington Post, or several others I searched. Epachamo (talk) 03:08, 18 May 2020 (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.

Record of Name Usage
I have moved this table out of the "closed" discussion as a living record to provide a metric of how the media refers to the article subject over time, to assess changes in Common Usage. Editors are encouraged to add or challenge any source. Epachamo (talk) 14:36, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

 * No other institution that actually went through an actual name change would we even have a discussion. The above is a sign of very clear bias and enmity against The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The continued insistence on this depricated name is a clear case of wrongful bigotry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnpacklambert (talk • contribs) 20:17, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

 * Why does the left column report combined statistics for two different names? Also, I notice that nearly all of those linked sources appear to be affiliated and promotional in nature – not really independent. I see a logo adopted last year that is also featured at the top of the article. The logo relegates the "at Temple Square" to micro-font obscurity.  — BarrelProof (talk) 00:40, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

 * Feel free to split out the left column, I would not be offended. You say, "nearly all of those linked sources appear to be affiliated and promotional in nature – not really independent." Please elaborate.  The only one of those sources that is owned by the LDS Church is the Deseret News. I don't understand how you could say that any of the others like the LA Times, PBS or especially the Salt Lake Tribune is not independent. Even if it were all promotional, it still goes through an independent editor before being published (editors who are interested in making sure their readers can connect with the best information, btw).  This meets the requirements of Wikipedia for independence. Even if none of them were independent, it is still a valid point of evidence demonstrating shifts in common name usage. Epachamo (talk) 14:25, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Even when published in third-party sources, puff pieces that promote particular events should not really carry much weight (especially, e.g., when PBS is promoting an event that will be broadcast on the PBS television system). — BarrelProof (talk) 18:05, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 25 January 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 Tabernacle Choir  (t · c)  buidhe  10:50, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Mormon Tabernacle Choir → Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square – Every time a university changes its name we immediately change our article name, we do not insist on showing that the new name reflects common usage. Above people have actually demonstrated that the most common usage is now the respect the name given it by the institution and follow that in reporting. This is a depricated name, and not showing respect for an institutions own decision to change its name here when we show immediate respect in almost all cases where a name change actually occurs is highly disrespectful John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:24, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Move to Tabernacle Choir. If this article is eventually moved, I think it would be better to move it to just Tabernacle Choir, which already redirects here, per WP:CONCISE. Sources often refer to them as just the "Tabernacle Choir" and even on their own website, the "at Temple Square" part is shown in smaller font, and there are multiple places on their own website where they just refer to themselves as "The Tabernacle Choir" such as here. Rreagan007 (talk) 22:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Rename to Tabernacle Choir. Per WP:CONCISE, as well worded by Rreagan007. gidonb (talk) 01:23, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree. (I would also agree to just The Tabernacle Choir.) After 2.5 years, it's time to rename. All of the choir's products now use the new name, as does advertising, even by third parties, an example here. Keeping the old name is becoming NPOV. There is some recent precedent from June 2020 when Lady Antebellum renamed their group to Lady A and the Dixie Chicks renamed their group to The Chicks and within days both Wikipedia articles were renamed to reflect the changes.--Beneathtimp (talk) 02:01, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Rename to Tabernacle Choir. This would match common usage a bit better than the full, official name. The current name is probably still the most common, though. I can see why there would be an adherents-based effort to change the name on Wikipedia, given that the LDS Church is trying to get away from uses of "Mormon" and "LDS". I don't think whether to rename or not has anything to do with "respect", as suggested, it's more about choosing the name that is best recognized as identifying the organization. ("Not showing respect ... is highly disrespectful" is, of course, circular reasoning.) I think "Tabernacle Choir" is a decent compromise. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose move to official name, support Tabernacle Choir, which is a fine name, known in the world, without "The", without "Mormon". I just linked to it that way yesterday (on my talk). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:26, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Support Tabernacle Choir. Of the five criteria in the article titles page, it is just as recognizable, precise and natural as the current name, and is more concise. In addition, it is consistent with name changes of other significant institutions such as the Willis Tower or Elliott Page.Brirush (talk) 14:42, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Support 'Tabernacle Choir', but not the full name with "at Temple Square" per WP:CONCISE and WP:COMMONNAME. --JonRidinger (talk) 17:39, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Support 'Tabernacle Choir' per WP:CONCISE and WP:COMMONNAME. I would not have supported the name change the first time it was suggested, but it is clear now that the name has changed and become the more common, is adopted by most news outlets, search engines, etc., and is unlikely to change back. Epachamo (talk) 14:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. There is another Tabernacle Choir. Srnec (talk) 01:14, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Is there a Wikipedia article about it? (I see there is Brooklyn Tabernacle, which has a Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir, but this article is about the church as whole, not just the choir.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:19, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Quite true, but "tabernacle choir" definitely seems to favor the Salt Lake City based group over the Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir in terms of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. If there is a concern about ambiguity, a hatnote will be sufficient. --JonRidinger (talk) 02:12, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Presidents of the Choir
Hello again, everyone! It has been somewhat traditional for the administrative side of concerts, tours, and other functions at which the Choir has performed to be handled by a president who is not otherwise connected to the Choir. Although I don't have a complete history of those who served as president, we do know that in the 1990s-2000s, Mac Christensen filled that role. In 2012, Brother Christensen was replaced by Ron Jarrett. And this year, Ron Jarrett has been replaced by former Utah Governor [[Mike Leavitt], with his wife called to assist him in that assignment. But the announcement of the new president noted that two counselors and their wives will also be assisting Brother Leavitt. Within the last 24 hours, the Newsroom noted that the two counselors assigned to assist Brother Leavitt were sustained during an evening devotional for the Choir. The two counselors are L. Whitney Clayton, an emeritus General Authority Seventy, and Gary B. Porter, who has filled administrative roles with the Church'a business entities. Would it be helpful to include information about the choir presidents in this article? I know that for a brief period in the 1970s and 1980s, part of the Church's Sustaining of Church Officers always included the leadership of the choir. That being said, I'm not sure how much information is available on past choir presidents, or whether the changes made with the latest announcements (a 3-man presidency serving with their wiives) are sufficiently notable for Wikipedia purposes. Any feedback any of you might have on this would be appreciated. Thanks. --Jgstokes (talk) 04:50, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tabernacle Choir


text:
Immunotoxin

An immunotoxin is an artificial protein consisting of a targeting portion linked to a toxin. When the protein binds to that cell, it is taken in through endocytosis, and the toxin kills the cell. They are used for the treatment of some kinds of cancer and a few viral infections.

Design
These chimeric proteins are usually made of a modified antibody or antibody fragment, attached to a fragment of a toxin. The targeting portion is composed of the Fab portion of an antibody that targets a specific cell type. The toxin is usually an AB toxin, a cytotoxic protein derived from a bacterial or plant protein, from which the natural binding domain has been removed so that the Fv directs the toxin to the antigen on the target cell.

Sometimes recombinant fusion proteins containing a toxin and a growth factor are also referred to as recombinant immunotoxins, although they do not contain an antibody fragment. A more specific name for this latter kind of protein is recombinant fusion toxin.

Production
They were originally produced by attaching the antibody to the toxin using a chemical linker. They are now made using recombinant DNA techniques, are produced in bacteria like E. coli called recombinant immunotoxins.

Function
The antibody (or other targeting moiety) binds to an antigen on the target cell and the toxin then enters and kills the cell.

Clinical application
The best clinical success has been achieved in treating patients with refractory hairy cell leukemia. These patients were treated with the recombinant immunotoxin which targets the CD22 cell surface receptor on these leukemic cells. In two uncontrolled clinical studies, about half of participants achieved a complete response after BL22 treatment. This therapeutic has been superseded by HA22, a slightly modified version.

A recent Phase I study of Resimmune found an 89% response rate in a subgroup of nine patients with cutaneous T cell lymphoma. This subgroup was Stage IB-IIB with mSWAT scores of less than 50. The complete response rate was 50% (two of which are over 72 months duration and could represent cures).

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

title: Immunotoxin


text:
SS Palo Alto

SS Palo Alto was a concrete ship built as a tanker at the end of World War I. Completed too late to see war service, she was mothballed until 1929, when she was intentionally grounded off Seacliff State Beach in the Monterey Bay, becoming part of a pleasure pier entertainment complex. Palo Alto was damaged by the sea, leading her to be stripped and used only as a fishing pier. Subsequent decades have seen her be further broken by the sea, but large sections of her wreck remain somewhat intact.

History

SS Palo Alto was built by the San Francisco Shipbuilding Company at the U.S. Naval Shipyard in Oakland, California. She was launched on 29 May 1919, too late to see service in the war. Her sister ship was the SS Peralta.

Palo Alto was mothballed in Oakland until 1929, when she was bought by the Seacliff Amusement Corporation and towed to Seacliff State Beach in Aptos, California. A pier was built leading to the ship in 1930, and she was sunk in a few feet in the water so that her keel rested on the bottom. There she was refitted as an amusement ship, with amenities including a dance floor, a swimming pool and a café. The company went bankrupt two years later during the Great Depression, and the ship cracked at the midsection during a winter storm. The State of California purchased the ship, and she was stripped of her fittings and left as a fishing pier. She was a popular site for recreational fishing, but eventually she deteriorated to the point where she was unsafe for this purpose, and she was closed to the public in 1950. Following an attempt at restoration in the 1980s, she reopened for fishing for a few years, then closed again. The fishing pier opened to foot traffic once again in the summer of 2016, but later closed for repairs.

Nicknamed the "Cement Ship", Palo Alto serves as an artificial reef for marine life. Pelicans and other seabirds perch on the wreck, sea perch and other fish feed on algae that grow in the shelter of the wreck, and sea lions and other marine mammals visit the wreck to feed on the fish.

In the spring of 2005, oil found on wildlife nearly two years earlier, killing dozens of seabirds, was traced back to the ship, whose fuel tanks had cracked and were leaking fuel oil. In September 2006, a clean-up project was started that cost an estimated $1.7 million, approximately the same as the estimated $1.5 million cost of the original construction of the ship in 1919. During the clean-up, workers pumped 500 U.S. gallons (416 Imperial gallons; 1,893 liters) of oil from the ship and discovered the carcasses of 200 more birds and two harbor seals inside the wreck.

The ship continued to deteriorate after the clean-up. While she had over the decades been broken into four roughly segmented pieces, winter storms in February 2016 pushed the wreck onto her starboard side and broke her rear half open. On 21 January 2017, another winter storm tore the stern off the ship. On 5 January 2023, yet another winter storm destroyed portions of the pier leading to the ship.

title: SS Palo Alto


text:
Ras Dashen

Ras Dashen (Amharic: ራስ ዳሸን rās dāshn) or Ras Dejen is the highest mountain in Ethiopia. Located in the Simien Mountains National Park in the North Gondar Zone of the Amhara Region, it reaches an elevation of 4,550 metres (14,930 ft).

The English form "Ras Dashen" is a corruption of its Amharic name, "Ras Dejen", the term used by the Ethiopian Mapping Authority (EMA) that alludes to the traditional head or general who fights in front of the Emperor.

Overview
According to Erik Nilsson, Ras Dashen is the eastern peak of the rim of "an enormous volcano, the northern half of which is cut down about [a] thousand metres by numerous ravines, draining into the Takkazzi River." Its western counterpart is Mount Biuat (4,437 meters), separated by the valley of the Meshaha River. The mountain often sees violent snowfalls during the night, but given that day and night temperatures vary greatly, the snow is almost completely melted in a few hours (during the hottest period of the year), for the temperature may be over 5 degrees Celsius by midday. In winter snow falls normally, since the majority of Ethiopia's yearly rainfall is in the summer, but if it does it usually lasts for weeks or months.

The first recorded ascent by a European was in 1841, by French officers Ferret and Galinier. There is no verifiable evidence of earlier ascents by locals, but the summit climate and conditions are relatively hospitable, and there are nearby high altitude pastoral settlements. A small fort is still partially standing at around 4,300 metre SRTM data.

title: Ras Dashen


text:
User talk:GHoosdum

Welcome
--Slowking Man 05:19, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)

Admin cabal
Hi, I saw your comment at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Rangerdude/Evidence. I'm an admin here, so I'm probably part of the cabal. :D

I just wanted to correct one misperception—the usernames in red aren't blocked. Red links on Wikipedia just indicate links to pages that don't yet exist. In the case of red usernames, the users in question haven't gotten around to creating user pages for themselves.

To check if a user has been blocked (a relatively rare thing!) you can check the blocking log. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 01:11, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks very much for the clarification - I knew that red links were nonexistent pages, but I didn't know that user pages didn't exist by default. I was assuming (incorrectly) that the red links on user names were users that didn't have user pages because they no longer existed as a user. Again, thanks for letting me know. And I didn't mean to imply that all admins DO have a POV, I was just illustrating my example with a worst case scenario that most probably will never even come close to happening. Thanks! GHoosdum 02:18, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Now that Requests for arbitration/Rangerdude and the closely related Requests for arbitration/Nobs01 and others are drawing to a close, it appears that your concerns about an "Institutional POV" were highly justified. The way that the Institutional POV is enforced is through a series of double standards, where bad conduct by users with the right POV goes unpunished, while bad conduct by users with incorrect POV is severely sanctioned. In tandem with these methods, editing controversial articles will be the province of those with the approved POV, while those with incorrect POV are prohibited from doing so. --HK 21:20, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Important WikiProject Automobiles Discussion
Hello! As a WikiProject Automobiles member, I just thought you might want to input your opinions on an important discussion we're currently having about whether articles regarding similar vehicles should be merged into one or split by brand. If you would like to comment or read further, please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles. Thank you in advance for your thoughts and feedback. Airline 23:40, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Response to your AnandTech and Tom's Hardware edits
While Short-Media may cover computer hardware, it is not similar in credibility to sites such as AnandTech or Tom's Hardware. Anandtech 's current traffic rank is 1,151 according to Alexa.com. Tom's Hardware's current traffic rank is 1,055. Short-media's current traffic rank is 25,865. I also notice that "GHoosdum" is the same user name that wrote the past two articles for Short-Media.com . Please note that wikipedia is not a place to promote your own personal interests, as this is considered a violation of the wikipedia spam policy. This includes external links.--PabloMartinez 20:24, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I have responded on your own talk page, however I feel that I must respond here by saying that I am in no shape or form a spammer. I am highly offended by the accusation. To be honest, I'm beginning to lose faith in the Wikipedia system in general. To reiterate, I did not write any articles for Short-Media, I am merely a contributor of news stories from other websites, and that is what you saw. 72.44.13.26 02:08, 17 June 2006 (UTC) - Sorry, I responded before logging in. GHoosdum 02:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject Automobiles Notification
Hi GHoosdum, you were on the list of members at WikiProject Automobiles and we are introducing a new way of listing members, as the old list was becoming too long. Our new method involves having all of our members in a category.

To add yourself to the category just add the userbox to your user page by putting   where you want the userbox. Alternatively if you don't like the userbox you can add   to your userpage.

If you no longer wish to be a member of the project, simply don't add the userbox or category, there's no pressure. Thanks for your time, James086Talk 05:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:GHoosdum


text: Category:1551 deaths

title: Category:1551 deaths


text: Category:1490 births

title: Category:1490 births


text:
User:Tim Barsness/classes/calculus

The following is an attempt at solving the problems in James Stewart's fifth edition Calculus Early Transcendentals book from McMaster University. I have posted the solutions to these problems here for three reasons:

 * 1) To give me a reason to do my calculus homework
 * 2) Hopefully someone else will find this work useful
 * 3) Learn about formatting wikipedia articles and mathematical formulas

Chapter 1

 * 1) Four Ways to Represent a Function
 * 2) Mathematical Models: A catalog of Essential Functions
 * 3) New Functions from Old functions
 * 4) Graphing Calculators and Computers
 * 5) Exponential Functions
 * 6) Inverse Functions and Logarithms
 * Chapter 1 Review

Chapter 2

 * 1) The Tangent and Velocity Problems
 * 2) The Limit of a Function
 * 3) Calculating Limits Using the Limit Laws
 * 4) The Precise Definition of a Limit
 * 5) Continuity
 * 6) Limits at Infinity; Horizontal Asymptotes
 * 7) Tangents, Velocities, and Other Rates of Change
 * 8) Derivatives
 * 9) The Derivative as a Function
 * Chapter 2 Review

title: User:Tim Barsness/classes/calculus


text: Category:Economic history

title: Category:Economic history


text:
Daai Yuk

Daai Yuk was a Chan Buddhist master who is credited with teaching Southern Dragon Kung Fu, or Lung Ying 龍形拳, to Lam Yiu Gwai. He was a monk at Wa Sau Toi, one of the many temples on the sacred mountain Luofushan.

title: Daai Yuk


text:
Mount Foraker

Mount Foraker is a 17400 ft mountain in the central Alaska Range, in Denali National Park, 14 mi southwest of Denali. It is the third highest peak in the Alaska Range, and the third highest peak in the United States. It rises almost directly above the standard base camp for Denali, on a fork of the Kahiltna Glacier also near Mount Hunter in the Alaska Range.

Its north peak was first climbed on August 6, 1934, and its higher south peak was climbed four days later on August 10, by Charles Houston, T. Graham Brown, and Chychele Waterston, via the west ridge.

Name
Mount Foraker was named in 1899 by Lt. J. S. Herron after Joseph B. Foraker, then a sitting U.S. Senator from Ohio.

The Koyukon native peoples in the Lake Minchumina area had a broadside view of the mountains and thus gave distinctive names to both Foraker and Denali. According to Hudson Stuck, the Koyukon had two names for Mount Foraker: Sultana meaning "the woman" and Menlale meaning "Denali's wife". The Denaʼina of the Susitna River valley called the mountain Be'u meaning his wife (Denali) and the Lower Tanana Athabascans to the north are reported to have had the same name (Denali) for Mt. Foraker as they had for Denali (previously Mount McKinley), and it appears that the names were not applied to individual peaks but instead to the Denali massif. The mountain, along with Denali, was called Bolshaya Gora ("big mountain") in Russian.

Notable ascents

 * 1934 West Ridge FA of Mount Foraker by Charles Houston, T. Graham Brown and Chychele Waterston.
 * 1963 Southeast Ridge. 2nd ascent. July 7. By Jim Richardson and Jeff Duenwald. Expedition led by Adams Carter.
 * 1968 Talkeetna Ridge, South Ridge FA by Alex Bertulis, Warren Bleser, Hans Baer and Peter Williamson (US). The summit was reached on July 26, 1968. 4th ascent of peak.
 * 1974 Southwest Toe of Southeast Ridge, variation to the South Ridge, ascent by Peter Reagan, Joe Davidson, Bob Fries, Jim Given, Mark Greenfield, Pippo Lionni, Eric Morgan and Frank Uher.
 * 1975 Archangel Ridge, the north ridge, FA by Gerard and Barbara Roach, Brad Johnson, David Wright, Stewart Krebs and Charles Campbell. Summit reached on July 14, 1975. Subsequently skied.
 * 1976 French Ridge, the South/Southeast Ridge, FA by Henri Agresti, Jean-Marie Galmiche, Gerard Creton, Herve Thivierge, Isabelle Agresti (all France) and Werner Landry (US). Summit reached on June 3 and 4, 1976.
 * 1977 Infinite Spur, on the south face by Michael Kennedy and George Lowe. Ascent time 6 days.
 * 1977 Southwest Ridge, Nancey Goforth, Erik LeRoy, Chris Liddle, and Murray Marvin. The summit was reached on June 25, 1977, after 47 days spent on Mount Foraker.
 * 1984 Pink Panther Route Daniel Vachon, Jean Francois Gagnon, Julien Dery (Canada)and Graham Sanders (Australia). Climbing the obvious S-shaped couloir in the middle of the East face to reach directly above the buttress and straight up to the S.E. ridge. Summit reached on May 25, 1984. From May 21 to May 27.
 * 1989 Infinite Spur, second ascent or route by Mark Bebie and Jim Nelson (US). Summit reached on June 24, 1989, after 13 days on the mountain.
 * 1990 False Dawn, on the southeast face, first ascent by John Phelan (US) and David Sharman (UK). Summit reached on May 27, 1990, after 5 days on the mountain.
 * 2016 Infinite Spur, first solo ascent and fastest ascent to date, by Colin Haley. Ascent time was 12:29 from the bergschrund to summit. The descent was completed in a whiteout via the Sultana Ridge over the ensuing 48 hours.

title: Mount Foraker


text:
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Micronation Collaboration of the Week

Micronation Collaboration of the Week
obvious trolling. Gzornenplatz 05:31, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * Applies by extension to WP:MnCOTW, Template:IsMnCOTW, Template:CurrentMnCOTW, and Template:MnCOTWcandidate.

 * Kill it. Kill it now.  RickK 05:57, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Tuf-Kat 06:01, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * A poor choice for a collaboration project, as micronations are an extremely limited subject (they are micronations, after all). Judging from the page, it appears to have been created by Brick Wall to advance his micronation. Delete. --Slowking Man 06:30, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm going against trend here, and saying keep. If micronations are a valid topic for Wikipedia, why aren't they a valid topic for expansion?
 * Forgot to sign. Lord Bob 06:34, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. The number of self proclaimed 'micronations' that even deserve the slightest bit of consideration is so small that this 'collaboration project' is utterly pointless. I suspect it is intended merely for self promotion. Average Earthman 11:47, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - as witness to a lynching of a micronation that I belonged to, and realising just now what RickK meant as he drove nails into its coffin, and agree with his and others' thinking. I wholeheartedly sign this death warrant. DeusExMachina 13:26, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Additional related templates and shortcut should also be deleted. --Michael Snow 18:15, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * DELETE! And WP:BJAODN. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 20:46, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Useless self-promotion.   — Gwalla | Talk 22:02, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete and don't BJAODN it, that just encourages them. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 23:44, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete unless the aim of the project is changed into improving existing articles rather than creating new ones. If changed then my vote is Keep.  Shard 01:16, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete with prejudice. -Sean Curtin 03:06, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete before MnCOTW declares itself to be a sovereign nation within Wikipedia. • Benc • 05:02, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * The article doesn't appear to be obvious trolling to me, but it may be that I'm just not familiar enough with the concept of micronations. Many of the people participating in this discussion seem to have strong opinions on the topic — could you explain the problem to me? Factitious 05:37, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * I haven't been too closely following the micronation discussions (and there are many) either. The gist is that sometimes people declare themselves an independent country.  For example, my hometown of Frederick, Maryland could be declared a sovereign state by myself at any time.  The government of the US is highly unlikely to recognize this declaration as valid; for various reasons, the governments of every other country are just as unlikely to recognize it.  In facts, hundreds or thousands of people have done just that -- declared some region, from their own bedroom to vast swaths of territory, independent.  These states are not recognized; recognition is the most important component of what makes a "state" a "state".  Thus, without recognition, these self-declared states are not states.  There are extremely small states, like San Marino, which are recognized, and are thus real states; there are other unrecognized "micronations", like Sealand, which have importance which makes them worthy of an article in spite of not being states.  Nevertheless, the vast majority of "micronations" are self-declared and only known because the Internet allows them to make a lot of publicity.  They have no effect on the lives of more than a handful of people, and are thus not worthy of an article at all. There are probably no more than a dozen articles, from micronation to Sealand to Emperor Norton 1, on micronations, which actually deserve an article; thus, a collaboration of the week will not help significantly, but will encourage people to write articles about their pet micronations as though they were "real" in any meaningful sense of the term.  Tuf-Kat 07:02, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a landfill. Wetman 07:10, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete: Micronations in a microUN. (Oh, and we in Baltimore have the rest of the state wanting us to be a separate nation.  How does that work?)  Geogre 18:06, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Keep. First of all the person who VFD'd this is a known anti-micronationist. See the pathetic edit wars he has done on various Micronation articles. I also realise that Micronations are a taboo topic in Wikipedians, so it is only natural for them to ignorantly vote delete.  Micronations are only a subject of taboo because of their repressed status and the fact that there are people with no lives who try to repress them. I say keep and ban Gzgornenplatz for nominating this. Wikipedia will be a better encyclopedia once factual and infromative information about micronations are produced. Emperor George II 22:44, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * This account is a troll account; see the user's page. Samboy 23:29, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete. Antandrus 23:04, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete. Obvious trolling. Further to which, Emperor George II is a sockpuppet and vandal --Gene_poole 23:06, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ambi 04:14, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: silliness. Wile E. Heresiarch 20:04, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. This isn't a blog page or private website.  Emperor George's comment is out of line as well.  Gzornenplatz was well within his rights to nominate this.  Given his inclusionist tendencies (and I say that respectfully) and Gene Poole's usual defense of all things micronational, that's all the more reason to vote delete. - Lucky 6.9 04:39, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: Just in case my comments above do not make it clear enough already, Emperor George II is not me. It is a sockpuppet set up by persons as yet unknown specifically to vandalise one article. This sockpuppet/vandal was quickly identified by others soon after it first appeared, and subsequently had its attempts at vandalism reverted and listed on Vandalism in Progress.--Gene_poole 05:06, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Gene_poole is right here; "Emperor George II" is a troll account. Samboy 23:29, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for self-promotion and all that. Samboy 23:29, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)


text:
User:Crawldaddy888

marker

title: User:Crawldaddy888


text:
Foraker

Foraker may refer to:

Places

 * Mount Foraker, Alaska
 * Foraker, Indiana, an unincorporated community
 * Foraker, Kentucky, an unincorporated community
 * Foraker, Ohio, an unincorporated community
 * Foraker, Oklahoma, a town

Other uses

 * Foraker (surname)
 * Foraker Act, United States federal law
 * Foraker Formation, a geologic formation of limestone and shale in Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma

title: Foraker


text:
French River, Ontario

French River, also known as Rivière-des-Français, is a municipality in the Canadian province of Ontario, in the Sudbury District. The municipality had a population of 2,662 in the Canada 2016 Census. It was formed in 1999 through the merger of the Township of Cosby, Mason and Martland and surrounding unincorporated portions of the Unorganized North Sudbury District. It was named after the French River, which flows through the municipality.

The borders of the municipality are composed of Highway 69 to the west (the French River Trading Post and French River Inn properties are also included within the municipal boundary), West Arm to the north on Highway 535 (just east of Shaw Rd.), the end of Wolseley Bay Rd to the east (Highway 528) and the community of Monetville to the northeast.

Along with the municipalities of St. Charles, Killarney, and Markstay-Warren, it is part of the region known as Sudbury East. These communities partner together on several ventures, including the Sudbury East Planning Board, Sudbury East Municipal Association, Manitoulin-Sudbury District Services Board (MSDSB) and Sudbury East Board of Trade.

Communities
The municipality comprises the communities of Alban, Bigwood, Chartrand Corner, Delamere, Dokis First Nation, French River Station, Happy Landing, Jamot, Monetville, Noëlville, North Monetville, Ouellette, Rutter, Sucker Creek Landing and Wolseley Bay.

Alban
The community of Alban was originally established in 1907 as Rutter, named for the nearby railway station in 1907, but in 1937 the community was renamed for Rev. J. Alban Filiatrault. In 1934, the Parish of Notre-Dame-de-Lourdes was created. Jean-Baptiste Rochon donated several acres of land to the people of Alban to erect a church. During the night of February 6, 1953, the church burned to the ground. The following Sunday, Father Oliva Campeau proposed the immediate reconstruction of the church. This time, it was to be constructed with brick and the walls of plaster instead of wood.

Monetville
Originally known as Martland, the community was first settled in 1895 by Cyrille Monette (né Alexandre Boisvert) and four other pioneers. It became a municipality in 1906 and adopted the name Monetville. Monetville is divided into two areas; North Monetville and Monetville. "South" Monetville is generally from Dokis Road south to Bear Lake and Shanty Bay (Baie des Chantiers) of Lake Nipissing. North Monetville extends generally from Dokis Road north to the West Arm of Lake Nipissing and Chapel Island, which Highway 64 crosses on the West Arm. North Monetville was settled by the Douglas Family, the Mercer Family and the Purcell family in the early 1900s.

On August 27, 2020, the West Nipissing Historical Society held an unveiling ceremony for the erection of a stone cairn monument in recognition of Cyrille Monette as the founder of Monetville and the first pioneer to the area. The monument bears two plaques, one in English, one in French, briefly describing M. Monette's contributions to the development of the area. This project was funded by the Society and several sponsors and donors who helped to make it possible. Cyrille Monette's original and real name was apparently 'Alexandre Boisvert', a name which he would have relinquished between 1863 and 1871 (Le lien entre Louis Riel et le Nord de l'Ontario) after participating in the Red River uprising with Louis Riel. Approximately 80 people attended the unveiling, about half of whom were descendants of the Monette family. Mayor Gisele Pageau of the Municipality of French River and Mayor Joanne Savage of West Nipissing were among the presenters. Elder Richard Meilleur of the Métis Nipissing Families shared a tobacco ceremony to honour the ancestors. The Monette Monument is located at 5690 Highway 64 in Monetville (Municipality of French River) Facebook: West Nipissing Historical Society

Noëlville
Noëlville, originally known as Cosby, was founded in 1905 with the arrival of settlers in the region. Noëlville families travelled by boat, to the south-west end of Lake Nipissing, to establish themselves between Lake Nipissing and the French River. To pay homage to Noël Desmarais, the village's first merchant and the first businessman of the region, the town of Cosby became Noëlville in 1911. Desmarais is a grandfather of businessman Paul Desmarais. Noël Desmarais was one of the first to start his family business in Noëlville.

North Monetville
The North Monetville area straddles the municipal boundary between French River and West Nipissing. Designated in the 1970s to aid the delivery of supplies to the Monetville Public School, which was located several kilometers north on Highway 64 from the signposts designating the town of Monetville. Sucker Creek Landing and Chapel Island are both considered to be part of North Monetville, with Highway 64 crossing Chapel Island and bridging the West Arm Narrows of Lake Nipissing at both ends of the island. Most residents of North Monetville simply state their address as "Monetville" even if they do live in the north end of the village.

The Community of Christ cemetery, 339 East Road, has a Canadian World War II hero buried there. Sgt. Wallace Edmond Firlotte, who served with the Lincoln and Welland Regiment during the war, was bestowed six war decorations. Firlotte was one of only a very few Canadians that was bestowed the Order of the Bronze Lion for heroism from the Crown of the Netherlands. This award is presented for "Deeds of extreme bravery and leadership in battle favouring the Netherlands". The Prince personally presented this Order to Sgt. Firlotte by Royal Decree on December 8, 1945.

Government
The municipal office is located at 44 St-Christophe St in Noëlville. The council is composed of the mayor and six councillors. The current mayor is Gisèle Pageau.

French River utilizes the mail-in balloting system for municipal elections rather than polling stations. Voter turnout in the 2010 elections was 62%. The 2019 operating budget for French River was approximately $8 million. The municipality employs approximately 30 staff and has 20 volunteer firefighters.

Demographics
In the 2021 Census of Population conducted by Statistics Canada, French River had a population of $2,828$ living in $1,367$ of its $2,098$ total private dwellings, a change of NaN% from its 2016 population of $2,662$. With a land area of 717.91 km2, it had a population density of in 2021.

title: French River, Ontario


text:
Talk:Mount Foraker

Heading text
Wrong photograph --Flyby678 (talk) 14:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Is it the view fom Mount Foraker? Or just completely unrelated? —hike395 (talk) 14:55, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

 * Both photos definitely show Mt. Foraker, so I'm not sure what Flyby is referring to. Zaereth (talk) 21:06, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

 * This is in fact a photo of Mckinley. Compare to this shot of mckinley from the north.

http://www.free-desktop-backgrounds.net/Nature-landscapes-wallpapers/Mountains-wallpapers/Aerial-view-mountain-McKinley-Alaska.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigphishy56 (talk • contribs) 01:27, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Why is Foraker described here as the third highest peak in the Alaska Range?
Sure looks, from every published list and studying maps, that it's the second-highest in the range. Anyone know what was meant, or was this simply a mistake due to it being the third-highest in the state? 2600:1700:A644:6000:75DD:70EC:14B9:476B (talk) 17:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

 * I would guess it's because Denali has two peaks. The south peak is the highest (and most climbed) at over 20,000 feet, while the north peak is just over 19,000 feet. Then Foraker at just over 17,000 feet. Zaereth (talk) 18:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mount Foraker


text:
Cliffhangers (TV series)

Cliffhangers is an American drama television series that aired on NBC from February 27 to May 1, 1979. It attempted to revive the genre of movie serials in a television format. Each hour-long episode was divided into three 20-minute segments: a mystery, Stop Susan Williams; a science fiction/Western hybrid, The Secret Empire; and a horror story, The Curse of Dracula.

Series overview

 * Stop Susan Williams was a take-off of the old serial The Perils of Pauline. It starred Susan Anton as globetrotting newspaper photographer Susan Williams, who is investigating the mysterious death of her brother Alan, and stumbles across a vast international conspiracy.
 * The Secret Empire was a pastiche of the Gene Autry movie serial The Phantom Empire, detailing the 1880s Wild West adventures of Marshal Jim Donner (Geoffrey Scott) who stumbles upon the futuristic underground city of Chimera, which is run by aliens. Scenes on the surface were sepia-toned, while the scenes in Chimera were shown in color.
 * The Curse of Dracula revolved around a young woman's quest to avenge her mother against Count Dracula (Michael Nouri), who is living undercover as a college teacher in San Francisco.

To add to the "in-progress" feeling of the proceedings, all three series started with different chapter numbers (although this was the first broadcast for all of them). "Stop Susan Williams" began at Chapter II, "The Secret Empire" started with Chapter III, and "The Curse of Dracula" with Chapter VI.

Cliffhangers was an expensive production due to three simultaneous production units being required. The hope was that if one of the serials caught on, it could be spun off into its own series, however the show aired opposite Happy Days and Laverne & Shirley, the #1 and #2 most popular shows in television at the time. The show was cancelled after only 10 episodes had aired, by which point only The Curse of Dracula had reached its conclusion. However, one unaired episode (which did air overseas) featured the two concluding chapters of The Secret Empire as well as the final part of Stop Susan Williams. American viewers later got a chance to see the concluding part of Stop Susan Williams when its eleven installments were re-edited into a single two-hour television movie The Girl Who Saved the World. Curse of Dracula was also re-edited as two television movies, Dracula '79 and World of Dracula.

Cast and characters

 * Stop Susan Williams
 * Susan Anton as Susan Williams
 * Ray Walston as Bob Richards
 * Marj Dusay as Jennifer Selden (eps. 2–11)
 * Michael Swan as Jack Schoengarth
 * and Albert Paulsen as Anthony Korf (eps. 2–11)
 * The Secret Empire
 * Geoffrey Scott as Marshal Jim Donner
 * Carlene Watkins as Millie Thomas
 * David Opatoshu as Hator (eps. 3–5, 7–11)
 * Mark Lenard as Emperor Thorval
 * Diane Markoff as Princess Tara
 * The Curse of Dracula
 * Michael Nouri as Count Dracula
 * Carol Baxter as Mary Gibbons
 * Stephen Johnson as Kurt Von Helsing
 * Bever-Leigh Banfield as Christine
 * Louise Sorel as Amanda Gibbons (eps. 5–10)

title: Cliffhangers (TV series)


text:
Talk:Sabrina Sabrok

{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|1=

Untitled
The entry is just getting shorter and shorter, and the history of edits don't even reflect the currentl loss of several sentences. Wiki is a public resource, not a forum for "offical" edits by her company.

58.110.172.178 (talk) 11:09, 25 May 2010 (UTC)Her "official" user keeps re-editing the site in bad English. Any effort to add factual material is edited.

Why was her picture removed? -MaximusNukeage 05:39, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry about that! —tregoweth 22:01, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)

there are many official pictures of her on her site, can't one of those be linked?130.245.212.227

Photo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.164.201.145 (talk • contribs)

from her site:  Birth Date: March 4th Height: 5' 9" Measurements: 52MMM - 21 - 38 Hair Color: Platinum Blond (Red Hair) Eyes: Light Brown (Honey) Skin Color: White Marital Status: Married

which year? how old is she? by flo 12/5/6

I think her plan to have the world's largest breasts is a bad idea. Maybe she is unaware of how big they would have to be. There are women with natural breasts that measure over 70 inches! Of course, it's all a matter of taste, but it doesn't look good to me much over 48 inches. JO753 08:10, 27 March 2007 (UTC)JO 753

Flo: She was born 1971, which would make her 34/35. Her official site has a photo in the press section saying she was 18 in 1989.

I'm so annoyed this isn't a free-content image: http://static.flickr.com/58/173204949_90e66ca0d1.jpg - before and after - David Gerard 20:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Blond Hair?
There is no way her real color is blond. Look at her roots in the pic. Where is the ref for this? Bluetd (talk) 16:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sabrina Sabrok


text:
User:Cdegough

marker

title: User:Cdegough


text:
ROOT

ROOT is an object-oriented computer program and library developed by CERN. It was originally designed for particle physics data analysis and contains several features specific to the field, but it is also used in other applications such as astronomy and data mining. The latest minor release is 6.28, as of 2023-02-03.

Description
CERN maintained the CERN Program Library written in FORTRAN for many years. Its development and maintenance were discontinued in 2003 in favour of ROOT, which is written in the C++ programming language. ROOT development was initiated by René Brun and Fons Rademakers in 1994. Some parts are published under the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) and others are based on GNU General Public License (GPL) software, and are thus also published under the terms of the GPL. It provides platform independent access to a computer's graphics subsystem and operating system using abstract layers. Parts of the abstract platform are: a graphical user interface and a GUI builder, container classes, reflection, a C++ script and command line interpreter (CINT in version 5, cling in version 6), object serialization and persistence.

The packages provided by ROOT include those for
 * Histogramming and graphing to view and analyze distributions and functions,
 * curve fitting (regression analysis) and minimization of functionals,
 * statistics tools used for data analysis,
 * matrix algebra,
 * four-vector computations, as used in high energy physics,
 * standard mathematical functions,
 * multivariate data analysis, e.g. using neural networks,
 * image manipulation, used, for instance, to analyze astronomical pictures,
 * access to distributed data (in the context of the Grid),
 * distributed computing, to parallelize data analyses,
 * persistence and serialization of objects, which can cope with changes in class definitions of persistent data,
 * access to databases,
 * 3D visualizations (geometry),
 * creating files in various graphics formats, like PDF, PostScript, PNG, SVG, LaTeX, etc.
 * interfacing Python code in both directions,
 * interfacing Monte Carlo event generators.

A key feature of ROOT is a data container called tree, with its substructures branches and leaves. A tree can be seen as a sliding window to the raw data, as stored in a file. Data from the next entry in the file can be retrieved by advancing the index in the tree. This avoids memory allocation problems associated with object creation, and allows the tree to act as a lightweight container while handling buffering invisibly.

ROOT is designed for high computing efficiency, as it is required to process data from the Large Hadron Collider's experiments estimated at several petabytes per year. ROOT is mainly used in data analysis and data acquisition in particle physics (high energy physics) experiments, and most experimental plots and results in those subfields are obtained using ROOT.

The inclusion of a C++ interpreter (CINT until version 5.34, Cling from version 6.00) makes this package very versatile as it can be used in interactive, scripted and compiled modes in a manner similar to commercial products like MATLAB.

On July 4, 2012 the ATLAS and CMS LHC's experiments presented the status of the Standard Model Higgs search. All data plotting presented that day used ROOT.

Applications
Several particle physics collaborations have written software based on ROOT, often in favor of using more generic solutions (e.g. using ROOT containers instead of STL).

 * Some of the running particle physics experiments using software based on ROOT
 * ALICE
 * ATLAS
 * BaBar experiment
 * Belle Experiment (an electron positron collider at KEK (Japan))
 * Belle II experiment (successor of the Belle experiment)
 * BES III
 * CB-ELSA/TAPS
 * CMS
 * COMPASS experiment (Common Muon and Proton Apparatus for Structure and Spectroscopy)
 * CUORE (Cryogenic Underground Observatory for Rare Events)
 * D0 experiment
 * GlueX Experiment
 * GRAPES-3 (Gamma Ray Astronomy PeV EnergieS)
 * H1 (particle detector) at HERA collider at DESY, Hamburg
 * LHCb
 * MINERνA (Main Injector Experiment for ν-A)
 * MINOS (Main injector neutrino oscillation search)
 * NA61 experiment (SPS Heavy Ion and Neutrino Experiment)
 * NOνA
 * OPERA experiment
 * PHENIX detector
 * PHOBOS experiment at Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider
 * SNO+
 * STAR detector (Solenoidal Tracker at RHIC)
 * T2K experiment
 * Future particle physics experiments currently developing software based on ROOT
 * Mu2e
 * Compressed Baryonic Matter experiment (CBM)
 * PANDA experiment (antiProton Annihilation at Darmstadt (PANDA))
 * Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE)
 * Hyper-Kamiokande (HK (Japan))
 * Astrophysics (X-ray and gamma-ray astronomy, astroparticle physics) projects using ROOT
 * AGILE
 * Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS)
 * Antarctic Impulse Transient Antenna (ANITA)
 * ANTARES neutrino detector
 * CRESST (Dark Matter Search)
 * DMTPC
 * DEAP-3600/Cryogenic Low-Energy Astrophysics with Neon(CLEAN)
 * Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope
 * ICECUBE
 * HAWC
 * High Energy Stereoscopic System (H.E.S.S.)
 * Hitomi (ASTRO-H)
 * MAGIC
 * Milagro
 * Pierre Auger Observatory
 * VERITAS
 * PAMELA
 * POLAR
 * PoGOLite

Criticisms
Criticisms of ROOT include its difficulty for beginners, as well as various aspects of its design and implementation. Frequent causes of frustration include extreme code bloat, heavy use of global variables, and an overcomplicated class hierarchy. From time to time these issues are discussed on the ROOT users mailing list. While scientists dissatisfied with ROOT have in the past managed to work around its flaws, some of the shortcomings are regularly addressed by the ROOT team. The CINT interpreter, for example, has been replaced by the Cling interpreter, and numerous bugs are fixed with every release.

title: ROOT


text:
User talk:Cdegough

Hi and welcome

I've reverted your minor edit to banana. In European English, the first letter of herb is not silent as in the USA, so it's a herb, not an herb. jimfbleak 05:44, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Cdegough


text: Category:Electronics engineers

title: Category:Electronics engineers


text:
User:Tim Barsness/classes/calculus/section1.1/

Four Ways to Represent a Function
1. a) f(-1) = -2 b) f(2) ~= 3.8 c) f(x) = 2 when x = 1 or x = -3 d) f(x) = 0 when x ~= -2.5 or x ~= .4 e) domain: -3 <= x <= 3     range: -2 <= y <= 3 f) f is increasing on the interval (-1,3) 2. a) f(-4) = -2   g(3) = 4 b) f(x) = g(x) when x = -2 and x = 2 c) f(x) = -1 when x ~= -3 or x ~= 4 d) f is decreasing on the interval (0,4) e) domain of f: [-4, 4]   range of f: [-2, 3] f) domain of g: [-4, 3] range of g: [.5, 4] 3. Vertical ground acceleration range $$(cm/s^2)$$: [-75, 125] East-West ground acceleration range $$(cm/s^2)$$: [-200, 200] North-South ground acceleration range $$(cm/s^2)$$: [-300, 450] 4. 1) My paycheck is a function of the amount of time I worked   2) My test scores are a function of the amount of time spent studying 3) The amount of time I spent studying is a function of the amount of time I wasted playing video games   1) The domain of my paycheck is between 0 and 40 hours. The range is from 0 to 400 dollars. 2) The domain of my test scores is between 0 and 1 hours spent studying (short attention span) and the range is between 0 and       100 percent.    3) The domain of the amount of time I spent studying is from 0 to 80 hours playing video games. The range of time spent studying is from 0 to 1 hours. 5. Not a function of x because there is more than one y value for a single x value (it fails the vertical line test). 6. This function is a function of x.   Domain: [-2, 2] Range: [0, 3] 7. This function is a function of x.   Domain: [-3, 2] Range: $$[-3, 2)\cup[-1,3]$$ 8. This is not a function of x because there is more than on y value for integer values of x (it fails the vertical line test). 9. As a general trend, the person is gaining weight over time. They gain weight most rapidly in the first 20 years of their     life.  They went on a diet at age 30 and lost 20 and kept it off for 5 years.  When the person stopped dieting, they quicky     gained the weight back and continued their increasing weight trend into their 70's.


text:
Talk:List of pornographic performers by decade

Did the earth run out of talent?
Only one notable porn actor debuted in the 2020s? What happened?--Maxaxa (talk) 11:27, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I believe that the changes in the pornographic industry in recent years have made it very hard for a notable pornographic performer to emerge, notable in the sense of sustaining an article with encyclopedic value~(and Reliable sources).Guilherme Burn (talk) 17:37, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * What changed in the porn industry? Maxaxa (talk) 19:16, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * In summary, we can say that the industry has migrated from very professional studios to "tube sites" and 2.0 content sites. Please, see this Request for Comment (RfC) about pornstars bio.Guilherme Burn (talk) 00:45, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I saw that Request for Comment shortly after it was closed. It was a long discussion with the pre-determined decision to delete all pages of active porn actors by means of impossible notability threshold. It coincides with the 2019 Instagram campaign of mass deletion of porn actors’ accounts. Very professional studios did not cease to exist in 2019. Maxaxa (talk) 01:26, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * But can you name any talent debuted in the 2020s? Award-winning and unanimous performances debuted in 2010s like Emily Willis, Gianna Dior, Adriana Chechik and Lana Rhoades can't sustain an article, I don't see how more a recent talent could. I linked this discussion on related Wikiprojects.Guilherme Burn (talk) 16:15, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * They may become more notable as performers are getting better at cross-promotion like Riley Reid and Angela White. I wasn't even aware that we had a notable 2020s debut performer. Morbidthoughts (talk) 17:45, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I cannot name, I stopped watching porn a decade ago. My interest is ranking. I created Popular pages with subcategory for people born in the 3rd millennium. I followed the debut of millennial athletes headed by Erling Haaland. For years I was waiting for the debut of porn starlets. This groups is with explosive potential to cumulate views. Just as the millennial ladies reached the age of consent (2019), the consensus blocked all of them from the race. Devastating. Maxaxa (talk) 15:13, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

 * A few things
 * Decline of journalism - There used to be multiple industry publications and syndicated journalists covering news and conferences. Now those no longer exist. For example, Playboy used to be a serious journalism venue. There is nothing comparable now.
 * Personal brands - models have their own social media accounts now rather than industry profiles. Studios are much less likely to have long term exclusive relationships with individual models, and consequently, there is less opportunity for Wikipedia to connect with a studio for a scalable collaboration.
 * No industry collaboration - See Category:Erotic events for some of the big industry conferences, most of which are defunct. The big websites at Category:Erotica and pornography websites are not publicly visible, and for example, do not share data or have public presentations like other media platforms.
 * If anyone has ideas for connecting Wikipedia to any adult entertainment company, especially one which would discuss a technology partnership, then let me know. In 2018 Grindr sponsored an LGBT+ Wikipedia editing event and I appreciate that, but the relationship did not advance. There are some activist reasons why Wikipedia needs collaborations with a company in this space, including for maintaining rules for our media collections, human rights, and sexual health education. When Wikimania was in Montreal a few years ago I tried to connect with PornHub about attending but failed.  Bluerasberry   (talk)  19:13, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

 * Propose move I think this discussion would be better at WikiProject Pornography for more visibility. Right now a pointer from there goes here, and I think the positions should reverse. Move?  Bluerasberry   (talk)  19:15, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

There have been some recent inclusions of performers debuting in 2020s, all performers from Onlyfans. Which raises two questions for me: 1. Within the scope of this list, what is considered a "pornographic performer"? 2. Will the standard reference continue to be iafd.com and adultfilmdatabase.com? Guilherme Burn (talk) 19:09, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

(no title)
What happened to Trinity Loren? 2603:8001:CD40:3E06:9506:4ABF:7FE4:A62D (talk) 17:58, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The Trinity Loren Wikipedia article was deleted in 2017 for lack of coverage by reliable sources. The list entry was removed shortly afterward. • Gene93k (talk) 21:00, 11 July 2024 (UTC)