text:
Talk:Australian megafauna

New UNSE Research
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130506181711.htm Will this change the information on this page at all? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.102.158.22 (talk) 03:10, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Scope of article
Bah - think I've been mixing in pre-"megafauna" fauna. E.g. Dromornis was probably extinct 4 MY ago? and Palorchestes even earlier?

Should 'megafauna' be defined as species which survived to the last ice age? And became extinct maybe 40,000 years ago? Then would need to split page into 'megafauna' and 'pre-megafauna'?
 * 'megafauna' means 'big animals', basically. Dinosaurs were megafauna. If you want to narrow down the definition, you might use geologic era/epoch/age as a signifier. Or, maybe a particular animal family or order, such as 'mammalian megafauna'. --Leperflesh 21:23, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

A quick google shows every reference to "Australian megafauna" refers to pleistocene fauna, not miocene fauna or dinosaurs. I think this usage should be followed. Qemist (talk) 06:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

As is cited in the article, and as Leperflesh simply put it; Megafauna are "often defined as species with body mass estimates of greater than 30 kilograms, or equal to or greater than 30% greater body mass than their closest living relatives." T.carnifex (talk) 08:42, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

 * You're saying the article should talk about dinosaurs and no living species. That would be a rather different article. Qemist (talk) 11:52, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

 * No, I'm saying it should encompass animals of mass greater than 30 kilograms in the case of extant (and extinct) species, and in the case of extinct species 30% larger than their closest living relative, as it already does. The only thing that would need expansion in this case are the lists, to include Australian dinosaurs. The introduction already provides a definition then briefly discusses the most recent mass extinction of the megafauna in the Pleistocene. I also think the lists regarding the extinct megafauna should only include the genus (such as the case with Sthenurus) and people can follow the link there and explore the individual species, except in the case where only one or a few species from a genus are extinct. T.carnifex (talk) 12:35, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Adopting that definition would put the article in contradiction with the one in Megafauna. Can the use of a special definition in the Australian context be verified?

 * Note nearly all the examples in Megafauna are from the Pleistocene. Similarly dinosaurs are noticeably absent from List of Central and South American megafauna, List of African megafauna, List of Arctic megafauna, List of Eurasian megafauna, List of North American megafauna etc. I think it is safe to say that in Wikipedia the term megafauna is typically used to refer to extant species and Pleistocene species.

 * I suggest that if pre-Pleistocene fauna are to be included it should be made clearer which period each animal came from. References to non-megafauna such as the Broad-faced Potoroo should be removed. Qemist (talk) 23:35, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Really, it wouldn't be in contradiction with Megafauna, which states that the "definitions of what constitutes 'large' vary." For the use of the definition stated in the Australian megafauna article, see Mammalian responses to Pleistocene climate change in southeastern Australia. I also noticed in the lists in Megafauna the Bluff Down Euryzygoma, a large diprotodontid marsupial which lived in the early Pliocene and Taniwhasaurus, a mosasaur of the late Cretaceous. Perhaps a reference to the animals period would be a good idea, however perhaps not necessary, as it would be in the animals actual article anyway. I agree with removing references to non-megafauna. A recent edit changed the "Post 1788 extinctions" list to "Extinctions (non-megafauna) post 1788." I think that the correct course would have been to remove the non-megafauna animals in the list, rather than change the title. They belong in a different list in a different article. - T.carnifex (talk) 23:57, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

 * The smallest body mass listed in Megafauna is 40kg, so going lower than that makes the concept even less specific and wikipedia less clear. Your preferred definition is not supported by the paper you cite (it confines the term to extinct mammals). A parenthetical gloss of a term in a paper about something else is not a suitable source for an authoritative definition. That paper is not specifically about megafauna, it is not a foundational or review article focusing on megafauna. Your preferred definition does not respect the normal meaning of the word; it would include, for example, extinct species of insect weighing a few grams that happened to be more than 30% heavier than their nearest living relative. The statement that this definition is used "often" is misleading. Every other paper I checked that actually had the words "Australian" and "megafauna" in the title used a different criterion (45kg seems popular).

 * As to the examples, I did say "nearly all the examples in Megafauna". That page is exceptional in having any pre-pleistocene megafauna listed. If dinosaurs etc are included there should be hundreds of such species listed. We should strive for consistency. Qemist (talk) 21:38, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

From Mammalian responses to Pleistocene climate change in southeastern Australia, "megafauna (extinct species with body mass estimates of >30 kg or attaining estimates of ≥30% greater body mass than their closest living relatives)..." In this context it is referring to extinct species, but extant species such as Macropus rufus are generally accepted as surviving megafauna. Although the Megafauna article does not agree specifically with this definition, it doesn't refute it when it states that that the definition is unclear. Could you please place links to some of these articles? I'm short of time, so I'll return later to discuss age constraints (feel free to reply in the mean time) - T.carnifex (talk) 23:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * On the subject of age constraints, the article Megafauna states the term refers to "large animals, both to extant species and, more often, those that have become extinct in the geologically recent Quaternary period." Having thought about it, that seems quite correct. I have heard the term megafauna applying to animals prior to the Pleistocene, but not much earlier than the Pliocene (sometimes Miocene). Having Dromornis in the article the article, or other Pliocene animals, isn't a contradiction within Wikipedia, or in literature. - T.carnifex (talk) 05:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

 * I think the answer is to make this article about all terrestrial megafauna that ever existed in Australia (e.g., cassowary, marsupial lion). With only extant species, this article does not have much worth. The question that defines this article is: When did Australia (the continent) properly come into existance? StevePrutz (talk) 08:50, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Role of man
Everywhere that man appeared outside of Africa, there were large scale extinctions. I really wonder why man's role is so debated. IMHO, it is quite obvious, and it is still going on.--Wiglaf 09:08, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The issue is that, scientifically, correlation is not causation. Clearly the spread of humanity worldwide is positively correlated with the decline and extinction of megafauna worldwide. However, actual evidence for human-caused extinction is lacking. We know humans in North America hunted and ate Mastodons, but we cannot prove that this caused or even assisted their extinction. I think it's reasonable to guess that humanity caused many or most megafauna extinctions, but it is not a factual statement to say that this is true. See the Pleistocene megafauna page for a good example of how to accurately represent this correlation without overstating it.--Leperflesh 21:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Just a slight correction: correlation is, in essence, causation when the other variables are accounted for. Not all other variables have been accounted for everywhere, but they're increasingly being narrowed down. Esn 06:53, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Science is not about proving things. The said correlation is pretty damn good evidence of what we've done.  I don't wonder, though, why this is so debated.  Admission of guilt leads to the expectation that we change our ways.  Changing of our ways leads to the reduction of our profits. Jɪmp 07:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Nobody should debate the role in MODERN times about the wildlife extinction, indeed. But Here we talk about the ancient Australia. What about the 'blitzkrieg' theory, if the old Aussies were there not 45,000 years ago, but let's say, 60,000, as some argue? This is a very open question, and the blabla about men kills the megafauna are just like are said, CORRELATION, not PROOF. Show me massive killings of big game in Australia or USA or Europe. The only really 'massive' are those about buffalo cliffs. Incidentally, buffalos are still alive. So what?

Just as animals can pass diseases and viruses to man, it is possible for man to pass them to animals. As the European brought small pox to the North American natives and decimated the native populations by as much as 90%, maybe the same happened to the large animals man came into contact with. --Zarcom (talk) 09:36, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
 * not all the human diseases can harm animals and vice-versa. And when and how the mammuth would have been killed by human diseases? Even an huge salmon became extinct in North America, FWIW.
 * Not obvious at all, as the 'humanist' are trying to spin the animal extinction dates to their agenda numbers. Just see, OTOH, this one http://www.pnas.org/content/110/22/8777.full and tell me, what is 'obvious'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.11.0.22 (talk) 00:15, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

PC
How about with the arrival of man instead of Aborigines. Aborigines in this context doesn't make sense to me. freshgavin TALK   03:03, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The context should have been dabbed to Australian Aborigines anyway, but I think you're right - man works better in context. --Scott Davis Talk 06:22, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
 * PC - Polite and correct.  I'm changing it.  Fred.e 13:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Pleistocene megafauna
Should this page fold in to, or be related to or in a heirarchy with, Pleistocene megafauna? --Leperflesh 00:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * This page is mentioned on Pleistocene megafauna.--Peta 00:54, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Extinct species list
The linkification of species listed is inconsistent: in many cases, the exact species is linked, while in others, only the genus is linked. Obviously this has been done to create operating links, where no species page has been created: however, the inconsistency is bad, and one cannot know if a given species page will be created in the near future. I think we should either link to the genus in all cases, or to the species in all cases, or both (a link for each of the two words), consistently. --Leperflesh 22:58, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Maybe at the genus level would surfice. Only if the article becomes too big do we start on the species level. I have also expanded the mammals list according to Flannery. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 08:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Marsupial Lion
Great show on Nova (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/bonediggers/thylacoleo.html) about Thylacoleo carnifex. It should be added to this page. --Leperflesh 22:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Megafaunal Extinction in Australia
Should a new section relating to Megafaunal Extinction in Australia be added to this article? It woud make a some sense, since Australia lost 90% of its megafaunal species in the Pleistocene. I'm rather new to the world of Wikipedia, so I'm not sure on how to work on a new section, but I would propose a few people collaborating to write the new section, corresponding via email, rather than simply posting a poorly prepared brief section. I would happily contribute my time to writing the section, but I'm a bit short of time at the moment, as I am currently completing tear 12. I would also be wary about posting on a such a hotly disputed topic without expert contribution. Is there an Australian paleontologist in the house?

T.carnifex (talk) 10:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think such a section would be fine. but please add good references.--Altaileopard (talk) 14:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I have access to several journal articles reating to the subject. Finding reliable references should be no trouble. A few of them are already referenced for various other reasons. T.carnifex (talk) 23:20, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Contradiction of Australian archaeology article
This article contradicts the Australian archaeology article which makes the unqualified assertion that "It is proven that that Megafauna existed in Australia alongside Aborigines until about 6,000 years ago". Qemist (talk) 06:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

 * There does indeed appear to be a contradiction, but I think the problem lies in the Australian archaeology page. No reference is cited on the archaeology page, however, on the megafauna page, I direct you to New Ages for the Last Australian Megafauna. T.carnifex (talk) 08:30, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanks for that reference. Other sources vary, but I couldn't find anything close to the archaeology page's 6000 years BP. The fault lies with the archaeology page, but the tag should remain until it is fixed. Qemist (talk) 12:06, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Fair enough. T.carnifex (talk) 12:20, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Hard to be sure since the 6kya statement was not cited in the Australian archaeology article, but it might possibly be referring to results reported in the 1980s of disarticulated Diprotodon remains dating to the Holocene or ca. 6500 BP, at sites such as Trinkey, Lime Springs and Tambar Springs on the Liverpool Plains. See for eg. James Kohen, Aboriginal Environmental Impacts 1995 p.51, and Mulvaney & Kamminga Prehistory of Australia 1999, p.124. David Horton & Richard Wright (no relation!) were the original investigators, I believe.

 * In any case, AFAIK these and other late-extinction dates obtained from other sites (Cuddie Springs, Kangaroo I, Lancefield) are generally open to challenge, and have been much debated. At least, there would be plenty of researchers who would not agree that Megafaunal survival to such a late date is in any way 'proven'. So I've removed the statement & rewritten the para.

 * I also removed the statement "...but exact dates for their extinction have been lacking until recently" from the lead of this article. I don't think we can say that we now have 'exact dates', since there is still considerable variation in dates and opinion on the matter. Also all of these "dates" are in reality date ranges, the confidence intervals are usually measured in 1000s of years. As the Roberts, Flannery et al. article cited in the lead notes, "The timing and causes of these extinctions remain uncertain." The whole set of questions surrounding Australian megafauna —just when they became extinct, how it was differentiated across the continent, what if any anthropogenic causes there were—is still an active and at time contentious research area. I would suggest that this article should try more to describe this debate and the competing proposals, rather than single out any one recently published result as representing any sort of consensus. --cjllw ʘ  TALK 07:21, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree, also because the 'bliztkriegist' are growning often forgetting to link the datas that they don't like. It's really incredible that the megafauna in Australia is dated as 'ultimate' appareance, between 46 and 7 k years ago. But the wiki-editors have no much doubts about the 'real' causes of the extinction. They sentenced and pressed for humans, nothing else despite there are source like this that disagrees: http://www.pnas.org/content/110/22/8777.full — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.11.0.22 (talk) 23:29, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Extinctions
Why is there a section of post-1788 non-megafauna extinctions? This article is about Australian megafauna. Can we please eliminate the section? Joelito (talk) 02:43, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

 * Deleting the section makes sense... any objection? MurfleMan (talk) 05:14, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

 * I agree, and would go further to suggest that we could delete the "Other Large Australian Species" since they're beyond the scope of the article. They might well be interesting fauna, but it's superfluous. T.carnifex (talk) 12:40, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Done. MurfleMan (talk) 03:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

First sentence is very badly worded
I can think of three or four different intended meanings for the very awkward phrase: "equal to or greater than 30% greater body mass than their closest living relatives". The most likely is "130% or more of the body mass of their closest living relative", but there are other possibilities. What should it actually say? Luwilt (talk) 22:08, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd like some clarity here as well. I am inclined to think the body mass of at least 130% of their closest living relative is correct because they are supposed to be large. Coralshin (talk) 18:10, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Endemism ? and geological scope
The scope of the article appears to be about endemic megafauna, but this is not explicitly stated, the article uses the preposition "in" rather than "of". So what about the huge number of introduced species including of course humans "in" Australia ?? Then a huge number of significant sea-based megafauna found in Australian waters. For example the dugong and a number of whale, dolphin and seal species listed here List of marine mammals of Australia, List of placental mammals introduced to Australia along with sharks and big fish found there. Also, what about dinosaurs ? I suggest renaming to Continental Australian Megafauana of the Quaternary Period --EvenGreenerFish (talk) 02:41, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Australian megafauna. 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/20071114003012/http://acl.arts.usyd.edu.au/research/cuddie/cuddie.html to http://acl.arts.usyd.edu.au/research/cuddie/cuddie.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070901122642/http://www.parks.sa.gov.au/naracoorte/about/index.htm to http://www.parks.sa.gov.au/naracoorte/about/index.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Too unbalanced (NPOV) article devoted to the human made extinctions
Pay attention to not exceed in the man-did-it theories. As example, the infamous Genyornis eggs, the 'smoking gun' of that bird extinction, were found to be no Genyornis egg at all. See https://theconversation.com/a-case-of-mistaken-identity-for-australias-extinct-big-bird-52856  And this was the best 'documented' extinction megafauna animal by australians. It seems that many wiki-contributors and scientist are a bit too afraid to show the 'man fault' in the megafauna extinction, despite the lack of any direct proof about it. That Flannery is quoted, is also quite disturbing as he, frankly speaking, could be a lot better in this field. See Wroe http://www.pnas.org/content/110/22/8777.full as example. This article seems to ignore largely anything that don't say 'man did it'. And this is common in wikipedia, i admit, even if there are a lot of open question about it. Just see Clovis first theory (and blitkrieg model made by Martin and quoted and supported by Flannery) and its total and final demise. 62.11.0.22 (talk) 00:13, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Australian megafauna. 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/20110927111457/http://www.control.com.au/bi2008/299megafauna.pdf to http://www.control.com.au/bi2008/299megafauna.pdf

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) 05:30, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Contradictory statements
"The cause of the extinction is an active, contentious and factionalised field of research where politics and ideology often takes precedence over scientific evidence, especially when it comes to the possible implications regarding aboriginals (who appear to be responsible for the extinctions).[4] It is hypothesised that with the arrival of early Australian Aboriginals (around 70,000~65,000 years ago), hunting and the use of fire to manage their environment may have contributed to the extinction of the megafauna.[5] Increased aridity during peak glaciation (about 18,000 years ago) may have also contributed, but most of the megafauna were already extinct by this time.

New evidence based on accurate optically stimulated luminescence and uranium-thorium dating of megafaunal remains suggests that humans were the ultimate cause of the extinction of megafauna in Australia.[6][7] The dates derived show that all forms of megafauna on the Australian mainland became extinct in the same rapid timeframe — approximately 46,000 years ago[1] — the period when the earliest humans first arrived in Australia."

The original theory of "Humans come, Megafauna go. Coincidence? I think not!" is absolutely rubbish. The first paragraph literally states it. The second paragraph is an outdated conclusion on outdated data that should be removed in its entirety. It does not add anything the previous paragraph did not. The second is that we really are determined to blame human habitation for the loss of animals. We've gone from "It's not a coincidence." to "It must have occurred over a longer period of time"

We now have a better understanding of the timeline of a long gradual decline is more up to date and more realistic in terms of a small human population getting ready to expand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.2.162.114 (talk) 12:48, 28 July 2017
 * This whole section is a mess and needs to be reviewed and updated. TheDragonFire (talk) 15:50, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

 * Hmmm. So it's 'absolute rubbish' is it? Ha ha. Well, here are some serious scientists who don't think so, but what do they know? https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14142 Varnebank (talk) 20:36, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * , sorry for pinging you 2 years later, but I think the IP user has a point, suggesting that "The cause of the extinction is an active, contentious and factionalised field of research where politics and ideology often takes precedence over scientific evidence, especially when it comes to the possible implications regarding aboriginals" is a contentious POV insertion from a contentious book (see this review) citing it without any supporting evidence is massively inappropiate. The Sporomiella abundance as a megafauna proxy is unreliable, see . Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:08, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

i honestly dont understand the massive objection to the idea that humans are a factor in the extinction of mega-fauna Clone commando sev (talk) 03:22, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

 * The issue has become politicized in Australia (and New Zealand, and elsewhere), in part because members of indigenous cultures have been held up as positive role models for environmental custodianship.  To take one example, from The Conversation:
 * https://theconversation.com/to-address-the-ecological-crisis-aboriginal-peoples-must-be-restored-as-custodians-of-country-108594
 * First Peoples have a relationship with Country that is loving, reciprocal and engaged. This “kincentric” relationship includes custodianship obligations – often lacking within non-Indigenous views of Country. Instead of being seen as kin – something to be cared for, listened to, deeply respected and nurtured – Country is seen by many non-Indigneous people as a resource to be exploited and controlled.
 * It's impossible to reconcile that view (Rousseau's myth of the noble savage, retold for modern environmentalist sensibilities) with the knowledge that indigenous land management practices, especially fire-stick farming and hunting, profoundly changed the flora and fauna of Australia, leading to the extinction of all of our remaining megafauna. (I don't mean to criticize those practices.  In fact, they were phenomenally effective, allowing the first Australians to live for tens of millennia in a country that routinely killed early European settlers from drought, famine, flood, and fire.)
 * The politicization is further exacerbated by the well-documented history of institutional and individual racism towards those indigenous people, and in at least one case (Tasmania) outright genocide. So any criticism of indigenous history is fraught; and as environmentalism treats extinction as a moral issue, stating that indigenous people caused mass extinctions is very fraught. Duncan bayne (talk) 06:58, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Order
I find the order of the sections very odd. Wouldn't it make more sense to describe the megafauna first, then discuss the reasons for extinction? Putting the reasons for extinction first leaves the reader with no background as to what has become extinct and introduces a specialized topic (since it does not involve the extant megafauna) first. I suggest moving that section to follow the sections on the living and extinct megafauna.Bill (talk) 02:34, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Australian megafauna


text: Category:Descendents albums

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

title: Category:Descendents albums


text: User talk:209.42.150.217

title: User talk:209.42.150.217


text:
Southland Plains

The Southland Plains is a general name given to several areas of low-lying land in the South Island of New Zealand, separated by the rise of the Hokonui Hills in the north. It forms a sizeable area of Southland region and encompasses its two principal settlements the city of Invercargill and the town of Gore. The Southland Plains include some of New Zealand's most fertile farmland.

Geography
The Plains extend from the Waiau River in the west to the Mataura River which forms the border with the Otago region to the east. It can be divided into three broad areas: the Southland plain proper, the Waimea Plains and the lower Waiau plain to the west near the Waiau river.

The Southland and Waimea Plains are separated by the uplands of the Hokonui Hills, which lie to the west of Gore. The Southland plain lies to the north of the city of Invercargill, and is formed by several large rivers, the Aparima, the Ōreti, and the Makarewa. They stretch inland for over 45 kilometres from the coast of the Foveaux Strait, and cover an area of close to 1500 km2.

To the northeast of Invercargill, the Waimea Plains of the Mataura River and its tributary the Waimea River stretch inland as far as the town of Gore. At their southern extreme they become the Awarua Plain, a large area of marshy land which stretches from near Bluff to the foot of the Catlins in the far east. Between them, the lowlands around the Awarua Plain and Mataura River cover a further 2000 km2.

To the west lies the lower Waiau plain which is situated around the mouth of the Waiau River. This smaller region is wedged between the Longwood Range to the east and Fiordland to the west.

title: Southland Plains


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tabatha Jordan

Tabatha Jordan was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was CONSENSUS NOT REACHED

MaximusNukeage 03:28, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC) Brief stub about an exotic dancer. Was created by an anon, speedy-deleted by User:DavidWBrooks (although I'm not sure it was a valid speedy candidate), recreated by the anon, then blanked by another anon. —Stormie 06:12, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC) Keep in the weakest way. However, even if her breasts are her most notable feature, I'm not sure "Tabatha Jordan is an exotic model with big breasts" does it for me.Dr Zen 06:19, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * if the terms yiff, and pocket packs are listed this should. plus all it needs is alittle more info and a pic to be totally ligit.
 * Appears to be, shall we say, "notable." Google gives over 100,000 hits. Alexa rank is 61,692. I give it a weak keep, although the article needs some work. --Slowking Man 06:17, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * I think any web search is going to be rather biased in favor of nude models. Postdlf 07:13, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: pr0ncruft. Wile E. Heresiarch 13:50, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: I've said it every time: we can't chase down nude performers.  There are tens and tens of thousands, and each makes movies at a pace that makes you fear for their reproductive health, and then they're gone, all in about 3 years, with only the medical bills remaining.  Furthermore, the porn industry has attempted to create a soap opera-like following for its actresses and studios, so "fans" will have a lot of irrelevancy to say about each actress/model.  Good luck to the lady in med school, and the author in his darkness, but not encyclopedic. A physical attribute is not an achievement.  Geogre 13:53, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Keep and cleanup. Radman1 16:22, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's my understanding that he internet is full of women who will show off their large breasts. Can't see anything that makes her more notable than any of the others. Besides, do we need to promote porn sites here (ie, the link to her homepage)? -R. fiend 20:34, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree that porn-related searches and site rankings are highly misleading. That said, I only get 26,000 for "Tabatha Jordan"--33,000 for another randomly picked porn name "cynara fox". A willingness to be publically nude doesn't alone seem particularly encyclopedic. Niteowlneils 00:09, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Cynara? Cynara is a porn name? Oh, say it ain't so... I have forgot much, Cynara! gone with the wind, Flung roses, roses riotously with the throng, Dancing, to put thy pale, lost lilies out of mind; But I was desolate and sick of an old passion, Yea, all the time, because the dance was long: I have been faithful to thee, Cynara! in my fashion. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 01:23, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC) P. S. And I like artichokes, too.
 * Delete. Indrian 00:11, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 01:23, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. --Improv 07:37, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mikkalai
 * Err on the side of caution and keep — siro  χ  o  14:21, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. we cant list every big boobed actress. -- Chris 73 Talk 10:07, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup. I was surprised that there was not a more detailed and professional entry for Tabatha Jordan. There are many less worthy candidates (in various fields) that have not been called for deletion. Is there maybe a bias (POV) against Tabatha Jordan's profession creeping in? Because there is no size limit on Wikipedia I feel that, "we can't list every (item) of a particular (category)" is not a valid reson for deletion. (For instance, towns with just 100 people: Toyah, Texas). Definately notable - but then not everyone has heared of everyone else who is notable ;-) Zik-Zak 13:47, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Learning to Flinch

Learning to Flinch is a live solo acoustic album by American singer-songwriter Warren Zevon, recorded at various venues in the United States, Europe, New Zealand, and Australia and released in early 1993.

Zevon's second live album, it featured three new songs ("Worrier King," "Piano Fighter" and "The Indifference of Heaven").

Track listing
All tracks composed by Warren Zevon, except where indicated.
 * Side one
 * 1) "Splendid Isolation" – 4:20 – Bogarts, Cincinnati
 * 2) "Lawyers, Guns and Money" – 3:22 – Paradise, Boston
 * 3) "Mr. Bad Example" (Jorge Calderón, Zevon) – 3:08 – The Loft, Berlin
 * 4) "Excitable Boy" (LeRoy Marinell, Zevon) – 2:41 – Tipitina's, New Orleans
 * 5) "Hasten Down the Wind" – 3:41 – The Town Hall, New York
 * 6) "The French Inhaler" – 4:22 – Town & Country, London
 * 7) "Worrier King" – 4:05 – Gluepot, Auckland
 * 8) "Roland Chorale" (David Lindell, Zevon) – 1:30 – Gluepot, Auckland
 * 9) "Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner" (Lindell, Zevon) – 11:18 – Sentrum, Oslo
 * Side two
 * 1) "Searching for a Heart" – 3:05 – Burswood Casino, Perth
 * 2) "Boom Boom Mancini" – 3:18 – The Flood Zone, Richmond
 * 3) "Jungle Work" (Calderón, Zevon) – 4:53 – St. Mary's Leagues Club, St. Mary's
 * 4) "Piano Fighter" – 4:08 – The Cambridge Hotel, Newcastle
 * 5) "Werewolves of London" (Marinell, Waddy Wachtel, Zevon) – 4:10 – Town & Country, London
 * 6) "The Indifference of Heaven" – 4:12 – Biskuithalle, Bonn
 * 7) "Poor, Poor Pitiful Me" – 9:38 – Big Ticket, Adelaide
 * 8) "Play It All Night Long" – 3:49 – Park West, Chicago

Personnel

 * Warren Zevon – guitar, keyboards, vocals, harmonica

Production
Producers: Warren Zevon, Duncan Aldrich

title: Learning to Flinch


text:
User:Lady1raven

Lady1Raven

Vicki

Vicki was born April 21, 1984. She chose the AOL screen name "lady1raven" in 1999, and has since used that screen name with several other services, including LiveJournal, Flickr, Del.icio.us, and Wikipedia. She went by the name Raven for many years, but when her best friend Heather introduced her as Vicki to the players of the City of Demons roleplay in 2002, she dropped the pseudonym. She does not, however, give out her full name online, and goes by Vicki Cadae.

At age eleven, Vicki was diagnosed with depression, and later with social anxiety disorder and agoraphobia. She has been treated for these since then, seeing several psychologists and psychiatrists, and taking several kinds of medication. She left normal school in eighth grade, and examed out of high school at age sixteen with the California High School Proficiency Exam. At age nineteen she went on Social Security disability.

Vicki considers herself a decent editor, and her main reason for joining Wikipedia is that she hoped to rewrite articles to make them easier to read, and to expand on stubs.

title: User:Lady1raven


text: Talk:Learning to Flinch

title: Talk:Learning to Flinch


text:
Collins Street

Collins Street or Collins St. may refer to:

Places of worship

 * Collins Street Baptist Church, a church in Melbourne, Australia
 * Collins Street Independent Church, a church in Melbourne, Australia

Skyscrapers

 * 101 Collins Street, a skyscraper in Melbourne, Australia
 * 120 Collins Street, a skyscraper in Melbourne, Australia
 * 555 Collins Street, a proposed skyscraper in Melbourne, Australia
 * 568 Collins Street, a skyscraper in Melbourne, Australia

Thoroughfares

 * Collins Street, Hobart, a street in Hobart, Australia
 * Collins Street, Melbourne, a street in Melbourne, Australia
 * Little Collins Street, a street in Melbourne, Australia

Other

 * Collins St., 5 pm, a painting by John Brack

title: Collins Street


text: File:Warren Zevon - The Wind.jpg

title: File:Warren Zevon - The Wind.jpg


text:
Chakravarti

Chakravarti may refer to:

 * Chakravartin, Sanskrit term for an ideal for an emperor in ancient India
 * Bharata chakravartin, legendary emperor of India
 * Chakravarti (surname) (including list of people with the name)
 * Chakravartin Ashoka Samrat 2015 Indian historical drama serial about the Indian emperor Ashoka

title: Chakravarti


text:
Propylhexedrine

Propylhexedrine, commonly sold under the brand name Benzedrex, is an alkylamine primarily utilized as a topical nasal decongestant. Its main indications are relief of congestion due to colds, allergies, and allergic rhinitis. Propylhexedrine was first used medically in 1949, with the release of Benzedrex by Smith, Kline & French, and it has been used, primarily within the United States, since then.

Medical use
Propylhexedrine is used to treat acute nasal congestion related to the common cold, allergies and hay fever. For nasal congestion, the dosage is listed as four inhalations (two inhalations per nostril) every two hours for adults and children 6–12 years of age. Each inhalation delivers 0.4 to 0.5 milligrams (400 to 500 μg) in 800 millilitres of air. Use is not to exceed three days.

Historically, it has also been used for weight loss in oral tablet preparations at a dose of 25 milligrams. No medications containing propylhexedrine are currently approved for weight loss in any country since roughly 1976.

Contraindications
Propylhexedrine should not be used if a MAOI has been used in the past 14 days or is currently in use by a person.

Unlike other topical decongestants, propylhexedrine is not required to carry a warning against use in individuals with hypertension.

Propylhexedrine is not recommended in individuals younger than six years of age. There is at least one case of reported accidental poisoning resulting from child access to a propylhexedrine product.

Adverse effects
When used as an inhaler, the most common adverse effects warned about for propylhexedrine are temporary discomfort (e.g., stinging or burning sensations) or rebound congestion. The sharing of propylhexedrine inhalers may spread infection. The occurrence of these adverse effects is uncommon as propylhexedrine is generally recognized as safe and effective. However, the use of propylhexedrine products in manners not intended by their labeling can result in severe adverse effects not typically encountered in therapeutic settings. The outcomes of improperly using propylhexedrine products can include hospitalization, disability, or even death. Public health agencies such as the FDA have advised propylhexedrine products only be used in the manners directed on their label.

Overdose
Reports of overdoses from propylhexedrine have been documented, but they are uncommon. Most instances of overdoses attributed to propylhexedrine have been the result of improper use of a propylhexedrine product in a manner not intended by its labeling for (non-medical) recreational purposes. As noted by the FDA, the most common symptoms of propylhexedrine overdose are the following: "...[R]apid heart rate, agitation, high blood pressure, chest pain, tremor, hallucinations, delusions, confusion, nausea, and vomiting." The use of propylhexedrine products in manners inconsistent with their labeling has proven fatal in some cases. Propylhexedrine products are considered to be safe and effective if used as intended. Regardless, medical attention should be sought in the case of suspected overdose.

Interactions
Most of propylhexedrine's interactions with other medications have to do with its ability to constrict blood vessels. Propylhexedrine’s most serious interaction is with monoamine oxidase inhibitors, which are contraindicated. Monoamine oxidase inhibitors are used, albeit uncommonly, as an antidepressant. Nonetheless, caution should be exercised when administering propylhexedrine concurrently with other medicines.

Mechanism of action
Propylhexedrine works mainly as an adrenergic agonist, when used at therapeutic doses in an inhaler dosage form. This restricts the blood vessels in the nose and reduces swelling; thereby, it relieves nasal congestion. At higher doses, propylhexedrine affects the central nervous system as a norepinephrine–dopamine releasing agent. Propylhexedrine likely exerts such effects in a manner similar to related alkylamines such as cyclopentamine, methylhexanamine, and tuaminoheptane. In addition, propylhexedrine further releases monoamines through TAAR1 agonism and VMAT2 inhibition. Propylhexedrine also exhibits antihypotensive effects.

Pharmacokinetics
Propylhexedrine undergoes metabolism via N-demethylation, C-oxidation, N-oxidation, dehydrogenation, and hydrolysis to form various metabolites such as norpropylhexedrine, cyclohexylacetoxime, cyclohexylacetone, and 4-hydroxypropylhexedrine.

Chemistry
Freebase propylhexedrine is a volatile, oily liquid at room temperature. The slow evaporation of freebase propylhexedrine allows it to be administered via inhalation. The evaporation of the freebase also accounts for the limited shelf-life of propylhexedrine inhalers. Many of the salts of propylhexedrine are stable, clear to off-white crystalline substances that readily dissolve in water.

Propylhexedrine is similar in chemical structure to phenylethylamines. Phenylethylamines and substituted phenethylamines are found in the core of many trace amines and sympathomimetic drugs. The main difference is the presence of an alicyclic cyclohexyl group instead of the aromatic phenyl group of a phenethylamine.
 * CycloalkylamineSim.svg

Propylhexedrine is a chiral compound. The active ingredient contained in Benzedrex inhalers is racemic (RS)-propylhexedrine as the free base. (S)-Propylhexedrine, also known as levopropylhexedrine, is believed to be the more biologically active isomer of the two. The dextrorotatory counterpart, which is mainly unused, is dextropropylhexedrine.

Synthesis
Propylhexedrine can be synthesized from cyclohexylacetone through the reductive amination of an intermediary imine over an aluminum-mercury amalgam in the presence of a hydrogen source.
 * Propylhexedrine synthesis from cyclohexylacetone.svg

However, propylhexedrine is more commonly prepared by the catalytic hydrogenation of methamphetamine over Adams' catalyst. This transforms methamphetamine's phenyl ring to a cyclohexyl moiety.
 * Propylhexedrine synthesis.svg

Detection in bodily fluids
Due to its structure, administration of propylhexedrine can lead to false positives for phenethylamine derivatives on urinalysis panels. Propylhexedrine can be differentiated upon further analysis.

History
Propylhexedrine's medical use as a decongestant evolved from desires to find safer alternatives to previous agents. After searching for such an agent, Dr. Glenn E. Ullyot patented propylhexedrine as a decongestant in 1948. This patent was issued for benefit of Smith, Kline & French. Before it was sold nationally in the United States, propylhexedrine underwent market trials in California. These market trials began on July 15, 1949. Propylhexedrine (under the brand name Benzedrex) was first introduced into interstate commerce on August 4, 1949. Approval for use in the United Kingdom soon followed in 1956. Later, approval for use in Canada was granted in 1998. In 2023, B. F. Ascher & Co. decreased the amount of propylhexedrine in the Benzedrex inhaler from its historic 250 milligrams down to 175 milligrams.

Barbexaclone, an anticonvulsant containing propylhexedrine, was used in Turkey until its withdrawal from the market in 2009. Barbexaclone's former niche in Turkish medicine is now largely occupied by levetiracetam.

Manufacturing
The manufacture of propylhexedrine products for therapeutic use is typically performed based on guidelines established in government regulations and pharmacopeia monographs.

The illicit manufacture or diversion of propylhexedrine by clandestine chemists for use as a recreational drug has been documented in academic literature. Similar to when opioids are manufactured clandestinely for recreational use, it is unlikely that propylhexedrine produced by clandestine chemists adheres to the standards for purity, identity, and strength required of therapeutic products.

International control
Propylhexedrine was placed under international control by the Convention on Psychotropic Substances in 1985. This action was reversed in 1991.

Australia
Propylhexedrine is an S4 substance in Australia.

Brazil
Propylhexedrine is a Class B1 substance in Brazil.

Canada
Propylhexedrine was long reported to be a Schedule V substance in Canada. In 2022, this status changed and propylhexedrine has since been removed from control under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

Germany
Propylhexedrine is regulated as a prescription medicine in Germany. Initially, propylhexedrine products (namely Obesin) were available over-the-counter. However, this changed in the 1970s and propylhexedrine is now regulated as a prescription product in Germany.

United Kingdom
It was formerly a Class C substance in the United Kingdom, but was deregulated in 1995. Propylhexedrine was used recreationally during a brief period in the 1970s after increased government regulation on earlier decongestants due to misuse.

United States
On the 4th of April 1988, propylhexedrine was designated a controlled substance (Schedule V) in the United States. This was done to satisfy U.S. compliance with an international treaty. However, in 1991, this action was reversed and propylhexedrine was removed from control under the Controlled Substances Act. This was based on the opinion of the Drug Enforcement Administration that propylhexedrine did not warrant control. The substance has remained unregulated under the Controlled Substances Act in the United States ever since. Furthermore, pursuant to DEA regulations, certain Benzedrex inhalers are specifically exempt from the Controlled Substances Act. Propylhexedrine remains regulated under the laws of several U.S. states. These states include the states of Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, and Rhode Island.

Recreational use
Multiple public health agencies (most notably within the United States) have warned against the recreational use of propylhexedrine and advised for its use only as directed by a product's labeling; nonetheless it has been reported, through the literature as early as 1959, that propylhexedrine products have been used for recreational purposes. Recreational use is potentially fatal, its risks are magnified when administering the substance through injection means, and the adverse effects of recreational propylhexedrine are more severe when compared to related substances. The undesirable side effects of propylhexedrine at recreational doses are less tolerable compared to other substances that produce similar effects; consequently, propylhexedrine is less desirable for recreational use. The fact that propylhexedrine is less potent than comparable substances has also limited recreational use. Even in areas with prevalent substance use, the use of propylhexedrine was reported as non-significant. The recreational use of nasal decongestant, anorectic, and anticonvulsant preparations have all been reported. The recreational use of propylhexedrine products has been on the rise since the early 2000s.

In 2021, the United States Food & Drug Administration issued the following warning in regard to recreational use of propylhexedrine products in manners inconsistent with their labeling:

"'...[T]he abuse and misuse of the over-the-counter (OTC) nasal decongestant propylhexedrine can lead to serious harm such as heart and mental health problems. Some of these complications, which include fast or abnormal heart rhythm, high blood pressure, and paranoia, can lead to hospitalization, disability, or death....Propylhexedrine is safe and effective when used as directed.'"

That same year, the Indian Health Service issued the following statement in reference to the recreational use of propylhexedrine products:

"'Only use propylhexedrine according to the instructions on the package label. Do not use it in ways other than inhalation. Seek medical attention immediately for by calling [emergency services] or Poison Control...for anyone using propylhexedrine who experiences [the following.] [These following reactions are] [s]evere anxiety or agitation, confusion, hallucinations, or paranoia[,] [r]apid heartbeat or abnormal heart rhythm[,] [or] [c]hest pain or tightness[.]'"

A year later, in 2022, the U.S. Army published the following guidance on propylhexedrine. The guidance states that recreational use of propylhexedrine is not permissible by service-members, can open its participants up to disciplinary action, and carries potentially fatal risks:

"'When disciplining a member for suspected use of any drug, it is important to consult [legal counsel] on how to proceed, [according to the Office of Drug Demand Reduction]...This is especially important when the evidence supporting discipline consists of scientific reports and data that may require special assistance in their interpretation. In cases involving [propylhexedrine], legal consultation is highly recommended.'"

Put briefly, the Food & Drug Administration, Indian Health Service, and U.S. Army all advise individuals not to use propylhexedrine products for recreational purposes.

Economics
Propylhexedrine, under the brand name Benzedrex, is sold online by retailers such as Amazon, eBay, and Walmart. Propylhexedrine has been sold in some countries as an anorectic or as part of an anticonvulsant preparation; however, such products are not sold freely to consumers and require a physician's prescription.

Benzedrex inhaler
Propylhexedrine, as a nasal decongestant, is currently marketed under the trade name Benzedrex. The name Benzedrex was initially trademarked by Smith, Kline & French in 1944. The brand was passed onto Menley James Laboratories (through a subsidiary, NuMark Laboratories) in 1990, and was finally acquired by B. F. Ascher & Co. in 1998.

Dristan inhaler
Propylhexedrine was also sold in inhaler form by Whitehall Laboratories (Wyeth) under the Dristan brand name as an inhaler. In January 1966, propylhexedrine replaced mephentermine as the active ingredient in the product. The Dristan inhaler has since been discontinued. Furthermore, Wyeth was acquired by Pfizer in 2009. All products currently sold under the Dristan brand are manufactured by Foundation Consumer Brands; Foundation Consumer Brands acquired the Dristan brand in 2020. Foundation Consumer Brands is itself owned by Kelso & Company.

Obesin
Propylhexedrine has also seen use in Europe as an appetite suppressant, under the trade name Obesin. Obesin has been referenced in literature dating back to the 1950s. Obesin was manufactured by Fahlberg-List in East Germany from 1958 to around 1976. The discontinuation of Obesin was the result of increased regulatory restrictions on over-the-counter anorectics. These restrictions began to be imposed in 1974. Fahlberg-List itself dissolved in 1995.

Maliasin
Propylhexedrine is a component in the anticonvulsant preparation barbexaclone. Its S-isomer (levopropylhexedrine or L -propylhexedrine) is bonded with phenobarbital for the purpose of offsetting the barbiturate-induced sedation. Barbexaclone has been known under the brand name of Maliasin, manufactured by Abbott Laboratories, as early as 1965. Maliasin has also been manufactured by Knoll Pharmaceuticals; Knoll is a company acquired by Abbott Laboratories. In 2010, Abbott discontinued sale of its barbexaclone preparation in many countries.

Eventin
Levopropylhexedrine (the more active optical isomer of propylhexedrine) has been used as an appetite suppressant under the brand name Eventin. Eventin's use has been documented as early as 1958.

title: Propylhexedrine


text:
Tortoise Matsumoto

Tortoise Matsumoto (トータス松本 Tōtasu Matsumoto, born December 28, 1966, as 松本敦 Atsushi Matsumoto) is the lead singer of the Japanese guitar group, Ulfuls. He has also had a couple of acting roles in TV dramas, starting with Namida o Fuite (涙をふいて) in 2000.

Trigun character Nicholas D. Wolfwood is modeled after him.

On July 11, 2018, Matsumoto, Tamio Okuda, Kazuyoshi Saito, Yohito Teraoka (Jun Sky Walkers), Takashi Hamazaki (Flying Kids) and Yo-King (Magokoro Brothers) announced the formation of a supergroup called the Curling Sitones (カーリングシトーンズ). Each member is a multi-instrumentalist with all of them at-least being able to provide vocals and guitar and, like the Traveling Wilburys, each uses a pseudonym featuring "Sitone". They formed for a concert on September 23, 2018, at Zepp Tokyo celebrating Teraoka's 25th anniversary as a musician.

Albums

 * TRAVELLER (2003)
 * FIRST (2009)
 * Myway Highway (2010)
 * NEW FACE (2012)
 * TWISTIN' THE NIGHT AWAY (2012)

Singles

 * "Hatsu Koi no ⁓What'sGoing On⁓ (LITTLE feat. Tortoise Matsumoto)" (2005)
 * "OhayoJAPAN (RYO the SKYWALKER & Tortoise Matsumoto)" (2007)
 * "Namida o todokete" (2008)
 * "Hana no you ni Hoshi no you ni" (2008)
 * "Boku ga tsuiteru" (2009)
 * "Myoujou" (2009)
 * "Straight (Tortoise Matsumoto song)|Straight" (2010)
 * "Clear!" (2010)
 * "Clear!/Dore dake no asa to yoru o ⁓shuarii samudei⁓" (2010)
 * "Happy Hour" (2010)
 * "Myway Highway - Single" (2009)
 * "Waimokun ekaki uta" (2011)
 * "Ue o muite arukou" (2011)
 * "Buranko" (2012)
 * "Waa!/Charidaa" (2014)
 * "L-O-V-E (Fuyumi Sakamato & Tortoise Matsumoto)" (2015)
 * "Main Street (Ringo Sheena & Tortoise Matsumoto)" (2017)

title: Tortoise Matsumoto


text:
Talk:Lease purchase contract

Hire purchase
Is "Hire Purchase" another name for Lease Purchase contract?

Syd1435 06:22, 2004 Oct 25 (UTC)

I may be a little late, but no, "Hire Purchase" is not another name for Lease Purchase contract.

Jeff_B 12:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Lease option
A lease purchase is NOT the same as a lease option. A lease purchase requres a purchase at the end of the terms, a lease options allows an option to purchase at the end of the terms. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.71.226.111 (talk) 18:14, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Financing lease
What's the difference between financing lease and lease purchase contract? Are the two synonyms? 69.159.16.214 (talk) 00:43, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lease purchase contract


text:
Awarua Plains

The Awarua Plain is a large area of wetland to the east of Bluff, New Zealand. Covering an area of around 600 km², the plain stretches for 35 kilometres along the coast of Foveaux Strait. This stretch of coast includes the peninsula of Tiwai Point, Awarua Bay, the Waituna Lagoon, and Toetoes Bay. The Mataura River is the major river responsible for the presence of the Awarua Plain; along with the Ōreti River, it is a remnant of the rivers from the Ice Ages that formed the Southland Plains (Murihiku). In addition, several small streams enter Foveaux Strait along this stretch of coast, mainly via Awarua Bay and Waituna Lagoon.

The New Zealand Ministry for Culture and Heritage gives a translation of "two streams" for Awarua.

Demographics
The Awarua Plains statistical area covers 409.10 km2 within Southland District. It had an estimated population of as of  with a population density of  people per km2.

Awarua Plains had a population of 1,020 at the 2018 New Zealand census, a decrease of 6 people (−0.6%) since the 2013 census, and an increase of 57 people (5.9%) since the 2006 census. There were 360 households, comprising 531 males and 489 females, giving a sex ratio of 1.09 males per female. The median age was 32.3 years (compared with 37.4 years nationally), with 267 people (26.2%) aged under 15 years, 195 (19.1%) aged 15 to 29, 471 (46.2%) aged 30 to 64, and 87 (8.5%) aged 65 or older.

Ethnicities were 81.5% European/Pākehā, 13.2% Māori, 1.8% Pasifika, 11.8% Asian, and 3.2% other ethnicities. People may identify with more than one ethnicity.

The percentage of people born overseas was 17.1, compared with 27.1% nationally.

Although some people chose not to answer the census's question about religious affiliation, 51.2% had no religion, 39.7% were Christian, 0.3% had Māori religious beliefs, 0.6% were Hindu, 0.9% were Muslim, 0.6% were Buddhist and 1.2% had other religions.

Of those at least 15 years old, 117 (15.5%) people had a bachelor's or higher degree, and 150 (19.9%) people had no formal qualifications. The median income was $40,500, compared with $31,800 nationally. 120 people (15.9%) earned over $70,000 compared to 17.2% nationally. The employment status of those at least 15 was that 462 (61.4%) people were employed full-time, 150 (19.9%) were part-time, and 15 (2.0%) were unemployed.

Radio facilities
The Awarua Plain is suitable for radio facilities, due to low distant skylines, high ground conductivity and distance from sources of radio interference. An expedition seeking 'an extensive area of flat lands [producing] the best results' first scouted the area for radio purposes in 1911.

Radio-related facilities here are:
 * Unwin Radar of La Trobe University
 * Awarua Tracking Station of the European Space Agency

Awarua Radio
Awarua Radio (callsign VLB or ZLB) was New Zealand's main receiving and transmitting coast radio station providing worldwide radiotelegraph and voice communications with ships at sea. Some facilities were built by Telefunken of Germany. It was operated from 18 December 1913 by the New Zealand Post Office (to 31 March 1986) then by NZPO successor corporation Telecom New Zealand until the station closed on 30 August 1991.

The site was selected following an expedition in 1911 led by Mr J Orchiston, head of the New Zealand Telegraph Department, Captain Gard'ner of the New Zealand Artillery and representatives of Australian Wireless, seeking 'an extensive area of flat lands [producing] the best results'.

title: Awarua Plains


text:
Kapap

Kapap (קפ"פ, ), often written KAPAP, a Hebrew acronym for Krav Panim el Panim (lit. face-to-face combat), is a close-quarter battle system of defensive tactics, hand-to-hand combat and self-defense.

History
The Kapap system was developed in the late 1930s, within the Jewish Aliyah camps as part of preparatory training before their arrival in Mandatory Palestine. It was primarily considered a practical skill set that was acquired during the training period of the Palmach and Haganah fighters. The main focus was to upgrade the physical endurance, to elevate and strengthen the spirit, and to develop a defensive and offensive skill set. It included cold weapon practical usage, boxing, judo, jujutsu, karate, as well as fighting with knives and sticks.

In the 1930s, Maishel Horovitz, the leader of HaMahanot HaOlim youth movement, developed a short stick fighting method in order to deal with the British policemen who were armed with clubs. Later, his method became one of the main components of hand-to-hand combat training for all the Haganah fighters, therefore making a major contribution to the development of Kapap. According to the historian Noah Gross, however, Horovitz did not even know that his stick-fighting system was taught to the soldiers until 1959.

Chaim Pe'er is the President and founder of the International Kapap Federation. He is recognized internationally as a Soke – founder of the modern Kapap system.

Kapap Europe
Kapap Europe is organized and headed by Kapap Level 4 instructors, Sam Markey and William Paardekooper. Sam and William are the highest-ranking members of the International Kapap Federation in Europe. Markey holds monthly seminars in the United Kingdom to train and develop the European Kapap Instructor Team. Paardekooper holds courses in mainland Europe.

Sam Markey met Avi Nardia in the USA. He introduced Kapap to the United Kingdom and he was the first person authorized by Major Avi Nardia and Lt. Col. Chaim Pe'er to open an authorized Kapap training center.

Kapap Asia
Kapap Federation Asia is headed by Master Teo Yew Chye (Kapap Level 3 Instructor) and his training team on behalf of Major Avi Nardia and Lt. Col. Chaim Pe'er.

title: Kapap


text:
List of unsolved problems in computer science

This article is a list of notable unsolved problems in computer science. A problem in computer science is considered unsolved when no solution is known, or when experts in the field disagree about proposed solutions.

Computational complexity

 * P versus NP problem
 * What is the relationship between BQP and NP?
 * NC = P problem
 * NP = co-NP problem
 * P = BPP problem
 * P = PSPACE problem
 * L = NL problem
 * PH = PSPACE problem
 * L = P problem
 * L = RL problem
 * Unique games conjecture
 * Is the exponential time hypothesis true?
 * Is the strong exponential time hypothesis (SETH) true?
 * Do one-way functions exist?
 * Is public-key cryptography possible?
 * Log-rank conjecture

Polynomial versus nondeterministic-polynomial time for specific algorithmic problems

 * Can integer factorization be done in polynomial time on a classical (non-quantum) computer?
 * Can the discrete logarithm be computed in polynomial time on a classical (non-quantum) computer?
 * Can the shortest vector of a lattice be computed in polynomial time on a classical or quantum computer?
 * Can the graph isomorphism problem be solved in polynomial time?
 * Is graph canonization polynomial time equivalent to the graph isomorphism problem?
 * Can leaf powers and $k$-leaf powers be recognized in polynomial time?
 * Can parity games be solved in polynomial time?
 * Can the rotation distance between two binary trees be computed in polynomial time?
 * Can graphs of bounded clique-width be recognized in polynomial time?
 * Can one find a simple closed quasigeodesic on a convex polyhedron in polynomial time?
 * Can a simultaneous embedding with fixed edges for two given graphs be found in polynomial time?
 * Can the square-root sum problem be solved in polynomial time in the Turing machine model?

Other algorithmic problems

 * The dynamic optimality conjecture: do splay trees have a bounded competitive ratio?
 * Can a depth-first search tree be constructed in NC?
 * Can the fast Fourier transform be computed in $o(n log n)$ time?
 * What is the fastest algorithm for multiplication of two n-digit numbers?
 * What is the lowest possible average-case time complexity of Shellsort with a deterministic, fixed gap sequence?
 * Can 3SUM be solved in strongly sub-quadratic time, that is, in time $O(n^{2−ϵ})$ for some $ϵ>0$?
 * Can the edit distance between two strings of length $n$ be computed in strongly sub-quadratic time? (This is only possible if the strong exponential time hypothesis is false.)
 * Can X + Y sorting be done in $o(n^{2} log n)$ time?
 * What is the fastest algorithm for matrix multiplication?
 * Can all-pairs shortest paths be computed in strongly sub-cubic time, that is, in time $O(V^{3−ϵ})$ for some $ϵ>0$?
 * Can the Schwartz–Zippel lemma for polynomial identity testing be derandomized?
 * Does linear programming admit a strongly polynomial-time algorithm? (This is problem #9 in Smale's list of problems.)
 * How many queries are required for envy-free cake-cutting?
 * What is the algorithmic complexity of the minimum spanning tree problem? Equivalently, what is the decision tree complexity of the MST problem? The optimal algorithm to compute MSTs is known, but it relies on decision trees, so its complexity is unknown.
 * Gilbert–Pollack conjecture: Is the Steiner ratio of the Euclidean plane equal to $$2/\sqrt 3$$?

Programming language theory

 * POPLmark
 * Barendregt–Geuvers–Klop conjecture

Other problems

 * Is the Aanderaa–Karp–Rosenberg conjecture true?
 * Černý Conjecture: If a deterministic finite automaton with $$n$$ states has a synchronizing word, must it have one of length at most $$(n-1)^2$$?
 * Generalized star-height problem: Can all regular languages be expressed using generalized regular expressions with a limited nesting depth of Kleene stars?
 * Separating words problem: How many states are needed in a deterministic finite automaton that behaves differently on two given strings of length $$n$$?
 * What is the Turing completeness status of all unique elementary cellular automata?


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Priessnitz

Non-notable, as far as I can tell, and not very explanatory. Either expand beyond substub or delete.

Keep. There are pages on bands that no one has ever heard of and you want to get rid of one on what seems to be a fairly popular band in its market? Yes it's not a great article but isn't that the point? They start out not so great and then together we make them brilliant!Dr Zen 06:33, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Almost 300 hits for Priessnitz Hexe, including at least one that links to where you can buy their work along side other artists, which doesn't seem too bad for a subject in a small, non-English speaking country with relatively low (~25%) Internet penetration. Other than the lack of formatting, this actually has more content than many initial record album articles that have been contributed. Niteowlneils 22:16, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Eight albums.  Delete only if it turns out that the band "released" the albums themselves, making 50 copies of each. JamesMLane 02:46, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)


text:
ITAA

ITAA may refer to the following:

 * Income Tax Assessment Act 1997
 * Income Tax Assessment Act 1936
 * Information Technology Association of America
 * International Transactional Analysis Association
 * Internet and Technology Addicts Anonymous, a self-help group for people suffering from internet addiction disorder

title: ITAA


text:
User talk:Mackensen/Archive1

Hey, just looking at your changes to the Disraeli page. If you want to go and change all the peer references in the cabinet lists, go ahead, but when I made them, I was using an informal "Lord Name" for all Barons, Viscounts, Earls, and Marquesses, which is correct, but not the formal way of referring to them. (Dukes are always Dukes, oddly). Also, be careful about it - you changed the reference to the 15th Earl of Derby in Disraeli's second government from "Lord Derby" to "Lord Stanley" - in fact, he succeeded his father as Earl of Derby in 1869, I think. john 03:07, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC) Just to clarify something, regarding your comment on the WikiProject Peerage page. The current Earl of Derby page doesn't look like the version that it shown on the WikiProject page anymore. Mintguy 20:52, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC) Hi. Good call on adding the table at the top, but if you look at the later Prime Ministers you will see that they all have both types of table (they serve different purposes). This is the same the US Presidents.
 * I was working from Lord Blake's bio, and opted for the formal title when possible. I forget why Dukes always keep the formal title. Yes, you're quite correct about Stanley, I've no idea why I did that. I'll fix it immediately, if you didn't already. My bad.
 * Extending the PM tables to earlier PMs sounds good to me...although finding pictures of them all would be nice... john 07:36, 30 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Be careful with putting in links to cabinet members - on the Palmerston edit there were a couple that linked to the wrong person. john 01:50, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC) I would say make the Sir George Grey page redirect to George Grey. Make that into a disambig page between the two George Greys. The British one should probably be George Grey (British politician). john 05:11, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC) The "unambiguous, commonly used name" rule seems to be kind of a holy writ, and most people just don't understand the peerage very well. As I was telling Lord Emsworth, I think that even if we lose this vote, we can probably still get most of what we want just by narrowly construing to what extent exceptions can be made. As seen from the current vote, we have nearly enough votes to get the full "all peers be referred to by highest title" rule implemented. All we need to do is pry off a few people to get a fairly restrictive rule that only exempts a small number (e.g. 20th century prime ministers, Robert Walpole, Castlereagh, and Bertrand Russell) of people, and do what we want with the rest. Ah well. This weekend was a bad time for this. Between all the being at school with no school yet, and the extraordinarily cold weather, all I seem to be doing is checking Wikipedia...sigh... john 06:52, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC) P.S. It would appear that we both came to the same conclusion at the same time, that we're probably okay for most of the lower profile cases. I mean, I doubt any of these people will be coming and arguing that Philip Cunliffe-Lister, 1st Earl Swinton should really be at Philip Lloyd-Greame, or whatever. As I feared, though, we seem to have gotten too ambitious, and are being punished for it. I actually think that having multiple choices on one question would have been better - we would all have voted for the full peerage rule, and the other people would have split their votes among other options. Ah well, it's too late now. john 06:55, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC) I have never been able to find out why Lloyd-Graeme changed his name to Cunliffe-Lister (or was it the other way round?). Does anyone know? Adam 07:01, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * In order to inherit his wife's family property iirc.Alci12

Considering the absolutely awful situation of the voting, I beg to ask you if you know of any users likely to be swayed to our side. -- Lord Emsworth 12:44, Jan 11, 2004 (UTC) Hi Mackenson, the reason I deleted the page with the really long title was that Wik moved it to the Wikipedia: namespace and nothing was left behind but a redirect. Since you intended the article to be deleted anyway I deleted the redirect. The article is at. If I delete the one in the main namespace will you avoid creating it again? Thanks, silsor 03:10, Jan 12, 2004 (UTC) An article on Morley is indeed overdue. Although mightn't it perhaps be better put at John Morley, 1st Viscount Morley? Of course, compared to our coverage of, say, French, or German, 19th and early 20th century politicians, our coverage of Britain is absolutely superb...There's still not an article on Bülow, for instance, and a great number of the French PM articles are total stubs I set up just to go through the table. john 02:53, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC) Hey, as someone who's done work on 19th century German stuff, check out the dispute over at Talk:Prussia and Talk:Brandenburg-Prussia. I am becoming exasperated with this nonsense. john 22:59, 24 Jan 2004 (UTC) I have absolutely no knowledge of the stewards of the chiltern hundreds, unfortunately. john 06:41, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Seems to have re-appeared... Mrdice 03:12, 2004 Jan 12 (UTC)
 * I didn't catch the comment before I restored it. Sorry about that. You people move too fast for me...
 * Thanks, I deleted it again. silsor 03:14, Jan 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * Reading the article, it sounds as though the office is technically held by the individual until the next resignation, despite being a completely theoretical office. john 07:38, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Merging of office sucession tables
The problem with merging the sucession tables of different offices is that they are not generally related; merging is a special case that applies to titles merely because they generally have a common sucessor (e.g., a former title and a new creation, &c.). I admit that the Churchill page looks a bit odd right now, but merging them together looks worse, really. James F. (talk) 22:01, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Prussian Foreign Ministers
Mackensen, Prussian ministers and German state secretaries are quite different. There was no German cabinet before 1918. Just the Chancellor and whatever state secretaries he wanted to assist him in his policy, including a state secretary for foreign affairs. Prussia, however, had its own cabinet, as did the various other German states within the Empire. In Prussia, at least, that cabinet included a foreign minister (as it had before 1871). That Foreign Minister was normally also the Minister-President of Prussia after 1871 (except not during the Minister-presidencies of Roon, Eulenburg, and Hohenlohe), and also normally the Imperial Chancellor (except not during the Chancellorship of Hohenlohe). There is already an article listing the State Secretaries at Foreign Minister of Germany. The Prussia article should list the Prussian foreign ministers, even if these happen to also be the Imperial Chancellors. As far as I am aware, the list I have there (which is from that "Governments of the World" book - I'll look for the exact cite tomorrow) of Prussian foreign ministers before 1871 is also accurate. john 04:56, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mackensen/Archive1


text:
Finsch's wheatear

Finsch's wheatear (Oenanthe finschii) is a wheatear, a small insectivorous passerine that was formerly classed as a member of the thrush family, Turdidae, but is now more generally considered to be an Old World flycatcher of the family Muscicapidae.

This 15–16 cm long bird breeds in semi-desert and stony hillsides from Turkey east to Afghanistan and western Pakistan. It is a short-distance migrant, wintering in Egypt, Cyprus and the Greater Middle East. The nest is built in a rock crevice, and 4-5 eggs is the normal clutch. In summer the male Finsch's wheatear is a white and black bird. The white crown, central back and belly contrast with the black face, throat and wings. The tail and rump are white, with an inverted black T giving a pattern like eastern black-eared wheatear, but with a uniformly wide terminal band.

The female is brown-grey above, becoming dirty white below. The tail pattern is similar to the male's.

Finsch's wheatear feeds mainly on insects. Its call is a whistled tsit, and the song is a mix of clear notes with whistles and crackling.

The common name and scientific name commemorate the German ethnographer, naturalist and colonial explorer Friedrich Hermann Otto Finsch (8 August 1839 – 31 January 1917, Braunschweig).

title: Finsch's wheatear


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bawlf, Alberta

Bawlf, Alberta
A place with 370 people isn't notable, unless something notable happened there. Shane King 06:32, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Shane, there are literally thousands of American localities with much smaller populations that have been botted in. Would you suggest they should all be deleted?Dr Zen 06:40, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Keep. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:57, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes. Shane King 07:42, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Get to it then, son. You've a big task ahead of you!Dr Zen 08:29, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * If that's the consensus, then they'd be deleted in time, there's no rush to have them all deleted right away. I just think a town of 370 people is really not any more notable than most of the pages about people or websites that get deleted for being vanity. I personally desire consistency more than any particular policy. Shane King 10:05, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * I daresay you're right, Shane. It would be a pity to cut Bawlf out though. I visited their website, and it turns out it was formerly quite an important town.
 * I'm not sure though what makes a place "notable". Some people think it's okay to include entries for schools! Personally, I don't think it does any harm to include entries for any locality that someone might want to know about. But I accept that YMV.Dr Zen 10:16, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Keep BUT was copyvio from Village of Bawlf Official Site: I've rewritten it, and NPOV. I too believe that constituted towns, no matter the size or notability, are worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is now only 4 years old: it's not in the least out of line to see us 20 years from now as having good geographical information about every place on earth (does anyone remember "Virtual Tourist" from the first days of the Web back in 92 or so? This time, it's going to take, and Wikipedia is prolly the place where it'll happen.) — Bill 12:02, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. No[[User_talk:norm|rm]] 13:22, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep older ≠ wiser 13:27, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. If this were a fictional Middle-earth town there would be a huge influx of keep-voters. -R. fiend 15:43, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. NeoJustin 16:20 Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Radman1 16:24, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. There's no reason a user who wants information about Bawlf, Alberta (or any other small town) should come up with nothing if we already have some information about it. Remember, Wikipedia is not paper. [[User:Livajo|力伟|☺]] 17:32, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Nadavspi | talk 17:43, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep all real places. RickK 21:32, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. A city is not a school, and should not be horribly deleted as such. Incidentally, I've been to Bawlf, and it's a hole. Lord Bob 23:38, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, obviously. Sarge Baldy 01:29, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Even the smallest town is notable.  Very Verily  02:59, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Mayoral elections must be fun!Dr Zen 03:26, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Abstain. Note that deleting would set a precedent of undoing all of the census data import. Not that that would be a bad thing -- how the heck will we maintain it? At next import, nuke all changes since? --Improv 07:39, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I hope that, following the next census (which won't be released until 2012), that somebody will do as Rambot did, and write a bot to take care of the data. RickK 19:58, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - real places with real people living there are encylopedic. Capitalistroadster 08:01, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * C'mon now, Keep. — siro  χ  o  08:19, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Now if there was an article on the elementary school in the town, that's another kettle of fish. RedWolf 17:11, Nov 6, 2004 (UTC)