text:
Mark Kac

Mark Kac (Polish: Marek Kac; August 3, 1914 – October 26, 1984) was a Polish American mathematician. His main interest was probability theory. His question, "Can one hear the shape of a drum?" set off research into spectral theory, the idea of understanding the extent to which the spectrum allows one to read back the geometry. In the end, the answer was generally "no".

Early life and education
He was born to a Polish-Jewish family; their town, Kremenets (Polish: "Krzemieniec"), changed hands from the Russian Empire (by then Soviet Ukraine) to Poland after the Peace of Riga, when Kac was a child.

Kac completed his Ph.D. in mathematics at the Polish University of Lwów in 1937 under the direction of Hugo Steinhaus. While there, he was a member of the Lwów School of Mathematics.

After receiving his degree, he began to look for a position abroad, and in 1938 was granted a scholarship from the Parnas Foundation, which enabled him to go work in the United States. He arrived in New York City in November 1938.

With the onset of World War II in Europe, Kac was able to stay in the United States, while his parents and brother, who had remained in Kremenets, were murdered by the Nazis in mass executions in August 1942.

Cornell University
From 1939 to 1961, Kac taught at Cornell University, an Ivy League university in Ithaca, New York, where he was first an instructor. In 1943, he was appointed an assistant professor, and he became a full professor in 1947.

While a professor at Cornell, he became a naturalized US citizen in 1943. From 1943 to 1945, he also worked with George Uhlenbeck at the MIT Radiation Laboratory. During the 1951–1952 academic year, Kac was on sabbatical at the Institute for Advanced Study.

In 1952, Kac, with Theodore H. Berlin, introduced the spherical model of a ferromagnet, a variant of the Ising model, and, with J. C. Ward, found an exact solution of the Ising model using a combinatorial method.

In 1956, he introduced a simplified mathematical model known as the Kac ring, which features the emergence of macroscopic irreversibility from completely time-symmetric microscopic laws. Using the model as an analogy to molecular motion, he provided an explanation for Loschmidt's paradox.

Rockefeller University
In 1961, Kac left Cornell and went to The Rockefeller University in New York City.

He worked with George Uhlenbeck and P. C. Hemmer on the mathematics of a van der Waals gas. After twenty years at Rockefeller, he moved to the University of Southern California where he spent the rest of his career.

In his 1966 article, "Can one hear the shape of the drum", Kac asked whether the geometric shape of a drum is uniquely defined by its sound. The answer was negative, meaning two different resonators can have identical set of eigenfrequencies.

Human rights
Kac was the co-chair of the Committee of Concerned Scientists. He co-authored a letter, which publicized the case of the scientist Vladimir Samuilovich Kislik and a letter which publicized the case of the applied mathematician Yosif Begun.

Awards and honors

 * 1950 — Chauvenet Prize for 1947 expository article
 * 1959 – member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
 * 1965 – member of the National Academy of Sciences
 * 1968 – Chauvenet Prize (and 1967 Lester R. Ford Award) for 1966 expository article
 * 1969 – member of the American Philosophical Society
 * 1971 – Solvay Lecturer at Brussels
 * 1980 – Fermi Lecturer at the Scuola Normale, Pisa

Books

 * Mark Kac and Stanislaw Ulam: Mathematics and Logic: Retrospect and Prospects, Praeger, New York (1968) 1992 Dover paperback reprint. ISBN 0-486-67085-6
 * Mark Kac, Statistical Independence in Probability, Analysis and Number Theory, Carus Mathematical Monographs, Mathematical Association of America, 1959.
 * Mark Kac, Probability and related topics in the physical sciences. 1959 (with contributions by Uhlenbeck on the Boltzmann equation, Hibbs on quantum mechanics, and van der Pol on finite difference analogues of the wave and potential equations, Boulder Seminar 1957).
 * Mark Kac, Enigmas of Chance: An Autobiography, Harper and Row, New York, 1985. Sloan Foundation Series. Published posthumously with a memoriam note by Gian-Carlo Rota. ISBN 0-06-015433-0

title: Mark Kac


text:
Nationalization

Nationalization (nationalisation in British English) is the process of transforming privately-owned assets into public assets by bringing them under the public ownership of a national government or state. Nationalization contrasts with privatization and with demutualization. When previously nationalized assets are privatized and subsequently returned to public ownership at a later stage, they are said to have undergone renationalization. Industries often subject to nationalization include telecommunications, electric power, fossil fuels, railways, airlines, iron ore, media, postal services, banks, and water (sometimes called the commanding heights of the economy), and in many jurisdictions such entities have no history of private ownership.

Nationalization may occur with or without financial compensation to the former owners. Nationalization is distinguished from property redistribution in that the government retains control of nationalized property. Some nationalizations take place when a government seizes property acquired illegally. For example, in 1945 the French government seized the car-maker Renault because its owners had collaborated with the 1940–1944 Nazi occupiers of France. In September 2021, Berliners voted to expropriate over 240,000 housing units, many of which were being held unoccupied as investment property.

Economists distinguish between nationalization and socialization, which refers to the process of restructuring the economic framework, organizational structure, and institutions of an economy on a socialist basis. By contrast, nationalization does not necessarily imply social ownership and the restructuring of the economic system. Historically, states have carried out nationalizations for various different purposes under a wide variety of different political systems and economic systems.

Political support
Nationalization was one of the major mechanisms advocated by reformist socialists and social democrats for gradually transitioning to socialism. In this context, the goals of nationalization were to dispossess large capitalists, redirect the profits of industry to the public purse, and establish some form of workers' self-management as a precursor to the establishment of a socialist economic system.

Although sometimes undertaken as part of a strategy to build socialism, more commonly nationalization was also undertaken and used to protect and develop industries perceived as being vital to a nation's competitiveness (such as aerospace and shipbuilding), or to protect jobs in certain industries.

Nationalization has had varying levels of support throughout history. After the Second World War, nationalization was supported by social democratic and democratic socialist parties throughout Western Europe, such as the British Labour Party. In the United States, potentially nationalizing healthcare is often a topic of political disagreement and makes frequent appearances in debates between political candidates. A 2019 poll found that about half of residents support the measure.

A re-nationalization occurs when state-owned assets are privatized and later nationalized again, often when a different political party or faction is in power. A re-nationalization process may also be called "reverse privatization". Nationalization has been used to refer to either direct state-ownership and management of an enterprise or to a government acquiring a large controlling share of a publicly listed corporation.

According to research by Paasha Mahdavi, leaders who consider nationalization face a dilemma: "nationalize and reap immediate gains while risking future prosperity, or maintain private operations, thereby passing on revenue windfalls but securing long-term fiscal streams." He argues that leaders "nationalize extractive resources to extend the duration of their power" by using "this increased capital to secure political support."

Economic analysis
Nationalization can have positive and negative effects. In 2019 research based on studies from Greenwich University found that the nationalization of key services such as water, bus, railways and broadband in the United Kingdom could save £13bn every year.

Conversely, a 2019 assessment from the Institute for Fiscal Studies found that the Labour Party's proposed policies for nationalization would add at least £150bn to the national debt and make it harder for the United Kingdom to hit its climate change targets. This analysis was based on the assumption that the UK Government would have to pay the market rate for these industries.

Nationalization can produce adverse effects, such as reducing competition in the marketplace, which in turn reduces incentives to innovation and maintains high prices. In the short run, nationalization can provide a larger revenue stream for government but can cause the industry to falter in the longer run. The collapse of the Venezuelan oil industry, due to government mismanagement, is a case in point.

Expropriation
Expropriation is the seizure of private property by a public agency for a purpose deemed to be in the public interest. It may also be used as a penalty for criminal proceedings. Expropriation differs from eminent domain in that the property owner is not compensated for the seized property. Unlike eminent domain, expropriation may also refer to the taking of private property by a private entity authorized by a government to take property in certain situations.

Due to political risks that are involved when countries engage in international business, it is important to understand the expropriation risks and laws within each of the countries in which business is conducted in order to understand the risks as an investor in that country.

Trends
Studies have found that nationalization follows a cyclical trend. Nationalization rose in the 1960s and 1970s, followed by an increase in privatization in the 80s and 90s, followed again by an increase in nationalization in the 2000s and 2010s.

Marxist theory
The term appears as "expropriation of expropriators (ruling classes)" in Marxist theory, and also as the slogan "Loot the looters!" ("грабь награбленное"), which was very popular during the Russian October Revolution. The term is also used to describe nationalization campaigns by communist states, such as dekulakization and collectivization in the USSR.

However, nationalization is not a specifically socialist strategy, and Marxism's founders were skeptical of its value. As Engels put it: "Therein precisely lies the rub; for, so long as the propertied classes remain at the helm, nationalisation never abolishes exploitation but merely changes its form — in the French, American or Swiss republics no less than in monarchist Central, and despotic Eastern, Europe."

Nikolai Bukharin also criticised the term nationalisation, preferring the term statisation instead.

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

title: Nationalization


text:
User talk:Peritus~enwiki

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkTroll 23:11, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Peritus. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Peritus~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 02:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:33, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Peritus~enwiki


text:
User talk:Ian-Miller

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkTroll 23:11, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ian-Miller


text:
Talk:Lima Locomotive Works/to do

 * Add more narrative on the company's history
 * Find the exact dates that events in the timeline occurred
 * Add a photo or two of Lima-built locomotives.
 * Discuss the company's later years and construction of cranes and other equipment
 * Discuss the company's experiments with "superpower" steam engines
 * Expand the Shay reference into an article on its own. (already existed)

title: Talk:Lima Locomotive Works/to do


text:
User talk:Kabulwu

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkTroll 23:13, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Observatory
Sorry, my mistake. I meant to move it to Cincinnatti Observatory (right spelling, capital O, capital C), but committed a typo. Thanks for catching that--I'll move it now. If you catch another typo, you can feel free to correct it yourself--we appreciate it when you're bold in editing! Best wishes, [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 02:31, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)

Women's studies
You ask on Talk:Women's studies, "Why is more than half the article devoted to criticisms of Women's Studies, and why so many critical entries in 'Further Reading'? Seems blatantly one-sided." Assuming that the question is not just rhetorical, the answer seems to be simple: because someone (or more than one someone) hostile to women's studies has taken the time to write some dubious, opinionated content, and because no one more sympathetic to the field has made it a priority to write what should be the core of the article. Feel more than free to be the one to remedy this.

By the way, when adding your comments to a talk page, the tradition here is to add them to the bottom. Since we archive talk from the top, putting your coments at the top may mean that they are gone before much anyone sees them. I've moved your comment down. - Jmabel | Talk 17:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kabulwu


text:
User talk:Carpediem

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkTroll 23:13, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Cocoabeach.jpg

The file File:Cocoabeach.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "orphaned image, no encyclopedic use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:03, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

title: User talk:Carpediem


text:
Talk:Milwaukee Road

Why was this page moved?
"Milwaukee Road" is a much more common name for this railway, especially considering the many name changes that happened over the years. I think this page should be moved back to that name. —User:Mulad (talk) 17:57, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * I moved it; it had this name for a long time before the end. Milwaukee Road still redirects here, and you can still link to that. The only thing that changes is the official title, which I feel should be the official name in most cases. Eh, if you want to be inconsistent, feel free to move it back. Have fun changing all the redirects. --SPUI 18:08, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Another comment - we don't, for example, have Central Railroad of New Jersey at Jersey Central Lines, or New York Central Railroad at Water Level Route. If you want to find information in a historical database or book, like Moody's or Poor's, you look it up under the official name, not the nickname, however common. For instance, if you search (which is based on Poor's, Moody's, and other official and semi-official sources) for Milwaukee Road, it says "See Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad". Soo Line isn't even covered, with only one entry, simply having "Soo Line Railroad" in the railroad field. --SPUI 18:14, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, all I'm saying is that Wikipedia is different than a reference manual, usually using the common name rather than the official name, at least when there is a significant difference in recognition between the two (for example, the article for Julius Caesar is not named "Gaius Julius Caesar"). Anyway, I'm putting it to a vote at Requested moves.   —User:Mulad (talk) 22:47, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad → Milwaukee Road
Much more well known as the Milwaukee Road. (The railroad also went through multiple name changes in its lifetime.)   —User:Mulad (talk) 22:47, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Leave at official title, redirect as is. Cburnett 22:55, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Suppport - Milwaukee Road is clearly the more well known name of this, which is what our Naming conventions tell us to use (Google: 52000 to 800). We only use official titles as a slight preference when no one use is the predominant one. -- Netoholic @ 23:09, 2005 Jan 11 (UTC)
 * Oppose: As long as both names are mentioned in bold in the first paragraph and Milwaukee Road is a working redirect, I'd rather leave it at the official name, for consistency. —Morven 23:17, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support if that'd the common name. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 23:19, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Naming conventions prescribe using the commonest name, except where slangy or inaccurate; that is, George W. Bush, but not Ole Miss. ADH (t&m) 23:23, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * comment You just made the "slangy and inaccurate" thing up. Actually it prescribes, in pretty strong terms: "Use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things."
 * Jimmy Carter is at Jimmy Carter, although his name is James Earl Carter Jr, Bill Gates is at Bill Gates although his name is William Henry Gates III, William Henry Gates III KBE to give him the title the Queen Elizabeth gave him (and who's going to argue with a chick who has a whacking great sword and used to own half the world?) For heaven's sake (or whatever you hold sacred) let's just have article where people expect to find them. Bill Gates, Jimmy Carter, wherever people will look for this article. Just don't go out of your way to piss people off by making up Wikipedia policy that doesn't exist. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:20, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Leave it official. By the way, I noticed that Britannica calls their article "Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company". —Mike 04:20, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * weak oppose. I recently moved it from Milwaukee Road, but this truly is a borderline case, nowhere near as clear-cut as say Central Railroad of New Jersey vs Jersey Central Lines or on the other side Consolidated Rail Corporation vs Conrail. --SPUI 07:27, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Naming conventions (common names). Proteus (Talk) 16:26, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Neutralitytalk 21:35, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

This is a comment after the fact. I still do not like this current name, especially as Netoholic pointed out that his Google test had shown a 65:1 ratio between the common name and the official title. I often don't like using the Google test to determine page title, but when the ratio is so overwhelming, it is hard to ignore. Whatever, I guess. —User:Mulad (talk) 21:24, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

I just noticed that the todolist wasn't migrated with the main page, so I've just moved it into the proper place for the article's current name. slambo 14:09, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

SP&P
The St. Paul and Pacific Railroad plays an interesting role in the life of Knute Nelson, and a link is made to this article from his in WP. It might be interesting to include more information about the extension that so preoccupied the Minnesota legislature in the mid-1870s. --Leifern 17:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think the St. Paul and Pacific Railroad mentioned in that article later became the Great Northern Railway (U.S.), under the organization of James J. Hill. The Milwaukee Road didn't even build their extension until about 1905, according to this article, whereas the St. Paul and Pacific Railroad was struggling to build its extension to Alexandria and Winnipeg in the mid-1870s. I have a book of Minnesota history at home that explains more about this; I'll look up the information and look into adding it into the Knute Nelson article. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 19:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I made that one correction, but further edits to the Knute Nelson article would be great. It's looking to be a long article, and I'm writing as I do the research. --Leifern 19:20, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

rail distance size
The Milwaukee Road designed the tracks, and cars wheels, to have a slightly smaller than the standard distance between them This enabled their cars to run on other companies' tracks but prevented others from using their tracks. Their wheels would run on the inside portion of the tracks of other companies. When other companies tried to use the Milwaukee Road's tracks, their cars' wheels would ride on the outside of the rails and frequently would derail.

 * What???

 * This is egregious nonsense, but apparently it needs to be made plain. (And I am rather surprised that no one has commented on this in the past year and a half.) For starters, referring to what is properly the track gauge as "rail distance size" ("the standard distance between them") is a strong indication that this editor is unfamiliar with both the term and the topic. That a novel and even unlikely suggestion is made without any kind of citation seriously undercuts credibility of both the suggestion and the editor. Failure to sign the edit (which the history shows was done anonymously from 76.229.213.77) further suggests an inexperienced and naive editor.

 * Even if all the above objections were notwithstanding, the suggestion is nonsensical on its face. I doubt that such a ploy would even work as suggested. And quite pointless: why would any railroad want to increase the liklihood of derailments on their own trackage? It would be senseless. Which is a strong enough argument (lacking any contrary examples or evidence) to support a conclusion that no main-line railroad ever attempted such a stunt. J. Johnson (talk) 21:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Folks, what does the logo say?
If I may reopen the article name discussion, I'd like to point out what their logo, viewable at File:Chicago Milwaukee St. Paul and Pacific Herald.png, said. It seems pretty clear that The Milwaukee Road was the common name and not a slang name and should be the name of the article. It isn't like the other examples given above that weren't/aren't formally used. Jason McHuff (talk) 23:11, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from:. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Mackensen (talk) 15:19, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Pacific Extension profitability
I'm unconvinced by the claim cited to the Aberdeen American News that the Pacific Extension was actually profitable in the 1970s. Scribbins doesn't repeat it, and my sense is that if this was actually the case someone would have stepped in to operate it. The conventional wisdom, backed by most published sources, is that the Pacific Extension was a drain on the company and at the root of multiple bankruptcies. The ICC claim feels tantamount to a conspiracy theory and I think we either need a better source or we should remove it. Mackensen (talk) 18:57, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I have read in a Trains Magazine article that loses on eastern lines were being hidden by assigning then to the Pacific Extension. This was only clearly understood when the extension was abandoned. Too late the directors found all the eastern lines losing more after the abandonment, which hastened the end of the road. Many inaccurate accounting practices were tolerated in the years when the merger with CNW was a goal. When that fell through the directors were replaced and the new directors took the bookkeeping at face value and, based on that decided to kill the extension which did not give the result they expected.Corumplex (talk) 02:47, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Which article was this? There have been articles in Trains in the last few years which touched on the Pacific Extension but didn't repeat that claim. Mackensen (talk) 14:31, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

It was likely at least 4 years ago. I wish I could tell you more. If I come up with info I will let you know.Corumplex (talk) 03:52, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad. 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/20031225084404/http://www.mpl.org:80/File/hum_milwroad_info.htm to http://www.mpl.org/File/hum_milwroad_info.htm#History
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080120162714/http://www.usps.com/images/stamps/99/all_aboard.htm to http://www.usps.com/images/stamps/99/all_aboard.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110710161123/http://e-d-and-i.com/GeneHLawsonCollection.html to http://e-d-and-i.com/GeneHLawsonCollection.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:24, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Ploss
I confess I wasn't familiar with Thomas Ploss before this edit:. Apparently he was a lawyer with the Milwaukee Road who was discharged and wrote a book in anger. The Nation Pays Again is self-published. There's no absolute rule against self-published sources (WP:SPS) but to use Ploss we need reviews attesting either to the book's credibility or his status as an expert. The canonical example within rail transport history is probably Thomas Taber's three volumes on the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad. In the alternative, something like "Former Milwaukee Road lawyer Thomas H. Ploss wrote a book claiming...", but if no one else made that claim it might amount to undue weight. Mackensen (talk) 12:21, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Corporate Conspiracy
I read something about how the company was sabatoged to decouple its assets from the company. Does this hold any merit? ( SailingOn (talk) 18:17, 3 December 2017 (UTC))
 * There's a number of conspiracy theories surrounding the ultimate demise of the Milwaukee Road but I've yet to see any of them substantiated in a reliable source. Mackensen (talk) 18:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

"… and Puget Sound"
I don't have anything particularly citable but apparently another name that is at least a d.b.a was "Chicago, Milwaukee and Puget Sound", which presumably deserves a mention. Here's a photo showing use of that name: File:Office of the Chicago, Milwaukee and Puget Sound Ry, located at 2nd Ave and Cherry St, in the Butler Building, Seattle (CURTIS 1007).jpeg. - Jmabel | Talk 21:47, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That was the wholly-owned subsidiary which built the Pacific Extension. It was probably merged or consolidated with the corporate parent after the extension was opened. I'll need to dig around. It's worth mentioning in the body where we discuss the extension. Mackensen (talk) 22:00, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 7 April 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: Page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 03:07, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad → Milwaukee Road – Clear WP:COMMONNAME by a factor of multiple hundreds, thousands even, during the peak of the railroad itself. See here just for ngram stats alone. We're talking about real major issues of failing the recognizability criteria for all except subject matter experts. The fact that "Milwaukee Road" already redirects here shows that we expect someone searching for the name to be looking for this railroad, and with it clearly being the far most dominant name in common use, there's really no justification for keeping it at a technical name that was and remains largely unused by reliable sources. oknazevad (talk) 00:35, 7 April 2021 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support per nom. By the way, I find the 2005 RM discussion amusing. No such user (talk) 08:16, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. All reliable sources call it this. It's the common name by a mile. The intro should still use the legal name first, as it does now. Mackensen (talk) 11:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. It seems like the common name by a huge margin. JackFromReedsburg (talk | contribs) 19:08, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Milwaukee Road


text:
Talk:Milwaukee Road/to do

 * Add a photo or two of Milwaukee Road trains
 * Add a system map

 * Get rid of that C&O style cupola caboose repaint and find a photo of a real Milwaukee bay window caboose Steeplecab (talk) 12:18, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:Milwaukee Road/to do


text:
File:The Doors - L.A. Woman.jpg

Licensing
sr:Датотека:The Doors - L.A. Woman.jpg

title: File:The Doors - L.A. Woman.jpg


text:
User talk:Duaine M

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

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

[[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]]

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

title: User talk:Duaine M


text:
Talk:Monon Railroad/to do

 * Expand the narrative on the railroad's route
 * Add narrative to describe the history of the railroad in more detail
 * Add the railroad's logo
 * Add a photo or two of Monon trains in action
 * Add notes about the two Monon museums in former Monon stations at Linden and Salem, IN.
 * Add a list of Monon Railroad presidents.
 * Replace the current herald (logo) with one that uses the correct typeface

title: Talk:Monon Railroad/to do


text:
Walled garden (disambiguation)

A Walled garden is a planned place of flora surrounded by walls.

Walled garden may also refer to:

 * Walled garden (technology), a closed or exclusive set of information services provided for users
 * Walled Gardens, a memoir by Annabel Davis-Goff

title: Walled garden (disambiguation)


text: User talk:66.91.137.14

title: User talk:66.91.137.14


text:
Talk:NTrak/to do

 * Add photos of NTrak modules
 * Add more details on the module standards
 * Add more information on the standard's history
 * Add diagrams of some NTrak layouts
 * Discuss record-setting layouts such as those managed by Northern Virginia NTrak
 * Discuss operations on NTrak layouts
 * Discuss alternate standards that have recently arisen (e.g. BendTrak, oNeTrak, etc.)

title: Talk:NTrak/to do


text:
Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake

Naval Air Weapons Station (NAWS) China Lake is a large military installation in California that supports the research, testing and evaluation programs of the United States Navy. It is part of Navy Region Southwest under Commander, Navy Installations Command, and was originally known as Naval Ordnance Test Station (NOTS).

The installation is located in the Western Mojave Desert region of California, approximately 150 mi north of Los Angeles. Occupying land in three counties – Kern, San Bernardino, and Inyo – the installation's closest neighbors are the city of Ridgecrest and the communities of Inyokern, Trona, and Darwin.

China Lake is the United States Navy's largest single landholding, representing 85% of the Navy's land for weapons and armaments research, development, acquisition, testing, and evaluation (RDAT&E) use and 38% of the Navy's land holdings worldwide. In total, its two ranges and main site cover more than 1100000 acre, an area larger than the state of Rhode Island. As of 2010, at least 95% of that land is undeveloped. The roughly $3 billion infrastructure of the installation consists of 2,132 buildings and facilities, 329 mi of paved roads, and 1801 mi of unpaved roads.

The 19600 sqmi of restricted and controlled airspace at China Lake makes up 12% of California's total airspace. Jointly controlled by NAWS China Lake, Edwards Air Force Base and Fort Irwin, this airspace is known as the R-2508 Special Use Airspace Complex.

A 7.1 magnitude earthquake on July 5, 2019, whose epicenter was within the boundaries of NAWS China Lake, resulted in the facility being temporarily evaluated as "not mission capable" due to damage.

Location
The installation is located in the Western Mojave Desert region of California, approximately 150 mi north of Los Angeles. Occupying land in three counties – Kern, San Bernardino, and Inyo – the installation's closest neighbors are the city of Ridgecrest and the communities of Inyokern, Trona, and Darwin.

Armitage Field
All aircraft operations at NAWS China Lake are conducted at Armitage Field, which has three runways with more than 26000 ft of taxiway. More than 20,000 crewed and uncrewed military sorties are conducted out of Armitage by U.S. Armed Forces each year.

Foreign military personnel also use the airfield and range to conduct more than 1,000 test and evaluation operations each year.

Tenant commands
The 620 active duty military, 4,166 civilian employees and 1,734 contractors that make up China Lake's workforce are employed across multiple tenant commands, including:

 * Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division
 * Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 9 (VX-9)
 * Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 31 (VX-31)
 * Marine Aviation Detachment
 * Explosive Ordnance Disposal Mobile Unit 3 Detachment
 * Explosive Ordnance Disposal Testing and Evaluation Unit 1
 * Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southwest Detachment
 * Naval Construction Training Center Port Hueneme (Seabees)

History
China Lake is a dry lake. Its name comes from Chinese prospectors harvesting borax from the lake bed, approximately 1.5 mile south of Paxton Ranch. The operation was known locally as "The Little Chinese Borax Works".

Naval Ordnance Test Station (NOTS)
Amid World War II, adequate facilities were needed by the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) for test and evaluation of rockets. At the same time, the Navy needed a new proving ground for aviation ordnance. Caltech's Charles C. Lauritsen and then U.S. Navy Commander Sherman E. Burroughs worked together to find a site that would meet both their needs.

In the early 1930s, an emergency landing field had been built by the Works Progress Administration in the Mojave Desert near the small town of Inyokern, California. Opened in 1935, the field was acquired by the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) in 1942. In November 1943, it was transferred to the Navy, which established China Lake as the Naval Ordnance Test Station (NOTS).

The NOTS mission was defined in a letter by the Secretary of the Navy as ".... a station having for its primary function the research, development, and testing of weapons, and having an additional function of furnishing primary training in the use of such weapons." Testing began within a month of the Station's formal establishment. The vast and sparsely populated desert, with near-perfect flying weather and practically unlimited visibility, proved an ideal location for test and evaluation activities and a complete research and development establishment.

During 1944, NOTS worked on the development and testing of the 3.5-inch, 5-inch, HVAR and 11.75-inch (Tiny Tim) rockets.

Manhattan Project funding was used to construct a new airfield at NOTS, with three runways, 10000 ft, 7700 ft and 9000 ft long, each 200 ft wide to accommodate the Boeing B-29 Superfortress bomber. Fuel storage was provided with a capacity of 200000 usgal of gasoline and 20000 usgal of oil. The airfield was opened on June 1, 1945, and named Armitage Field after Navy Lieutenant John Armitage, who was killed while testing a Tiny Tim rocket at NOTS in August 1944.

Work done by Caltech at NOTS for the Manhattan Project - particularly the testing of bomb shapes dropped from B-29s - was included as part of codename Project Camel.

In 1950, NOTS scientists and engineers developed the air-intercept missile (AIM) 9 Sidewinder, which became the world's most used and most copied air-to-air missile. Other rockets and missiles developed or tested at China Lake include the Mighty Mouse, Zuni, Shrike, HARM, Joint Stand-Off Weapon (JSOW) and Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM). In June 1963, President John F. Kennedy visited NAWS China Lake for an air show and to see the Michelson Lab.

Naval Weapons Center
In July 1967, NOTS China Lake and the Naval Ordnance Laboratory in Corona, California, became the Naval Weapons Center. The Corona facilities were closed, and their functions transferred to the desert in 1971. In July 1979, the mission and functions of the National Parachute Test Range at Naval Air Facility El Centro were transferred to China Lake.

Naval Air Weapons Station
In January 1992, the Naval Weapons Center and the Pacific Missile Test Center Point Mugu were disestablished and joined with naval units at Kirtland AFB in Albuquerque and at the White Sands Missile Range at White Sands, NM as a single command - the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division (NAWCWD) of the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR). At the same time, the physical plant at China Lake was designated as a Naval Air Weapons Station and became the host of the NAVAIR Weapons Division, performing the base-keeping functions.

In 1982, the community area of China Lake, including most of the base housing, was annexed by the City of Ridgecrest. In 2013, Congress reserved China Lake's acreage for an additional 25 years for military use.

In 2014, U.S. Representative Kevin McCarthy of California introduced a bill to permanently designate Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake property for military use, arguing it would save taxpayer money and enhance the base's mission. The bill would add 25000 acre, including about 7500 acre that were part of a bombing range in San Bernardino County, as well as 19000 acre along the station's southwest boundary. The Bureau of Land Management said that DoD needs could change in future decades and that it is a popular recreation area with trail riding, campsites, and hunting, and an important wildlife corridor, especially for the threatened desert tortoise.

In July 2019, two large earthquakes struck Southern California; both had epicenters within the NAWS boundaries. The first, on July 4, a 6.4 magnitude quake, caused no injuries at NAWS, and the initial reports showed that all buildings were intact. The second, a 7.1 magnitude earthquake on July 5, resulted in the facility being evaluated as "not mission capable". The report shows that officials assessed all buildings, utilities, and facilities — 3,598 structures in all — for 13 days after the earthquakes and found damage totaled $5.2 billion. Replacing buildings alone would cost $2.2 billion, but officials also must replace or repair specialized equipment, furniture, machine tools, telecommunication assets and other facilities.

Weapons developed at China Lake

 * AAM-N-5 Meteor
 * AIM-9 Sidewinder
 * AGM-45 Shrike
 * AGM-62 Walleye
 * BOAR (rocket)
 * China Lake Grenade Launcher
 * CL-20
 * Gimlet (rocket)
 * Holy Moses (rocket)
 * Hopi (missile)
 * LTV-N-4
 * Ram (rocket)
 * RUR-4 Weapon Alpha
 * SLAM-ER
 * Terasca
 * Tiny Tim (rocket)
 * Tomahawk (missile family)

Other notable projects

 * Glowstick
 * NOTS-EV-1 Pilot

Wildlife
The majority of the land at NAWS China Lake is undeveloped. It provides habitat for more than 340 species of wildlife, including feral horses, feral burros (donkeys), bighorn sheep and endangered animals, such as the desert tortoise, Mojave ground squirrel and Mojave tui chub. The Mojave tui chub was introduced to China Lake's Lark Seep in 1971. Lark Seep is fed by the water outflow from a wastewater treatment plant located at China Lake. The tui chub population has since grown and expanded to a population of around 6,000 in 2003. The desert on which the installation is built is home to 650 plant types.

Petroglyphs

The area was once home to the Native American Coso People, whose presence is marked by thousands of archaeological sites; the Coso traded with other tribes as far away as San Luis Obispo County, California. This locale was also used by European miners and settlers whose cabins and mining structures are extant throughout the Station.

The Coso Range Canyons are home to the Coso Rock Art District, an area of some 99 sqmi which contains more than 50,000 documented petroglyphs, the highest concentration of rock art in the Northern Hemisphere.

The precise age of the petroglyphs is unknown. A broad range of dates can be inferred from archaeological sites in the area and some artifact forms depicted on the rocks. Archaeologists disagree on their age, but it is generally believed that most petroglyphs are between one and three thousand years old. Designs range from animals to abstract to anthropomorphic figures. Opinions vary widely on whether the petroglyphs were made for ceremonial purposes, whether they tell stories to pass along the mythology of their makers, or whether they are records of hunting hopes or successes, clan symbols, or maps.

Declared a National Historic Landmark in 1964, the rock art in Little Petroglyph Canyon provides insights into the cultural heritage and knowledge of the desert's past. Everything in the canyon area is protected, including the obsidian chips and any artifacts or tools, as well as the petroglyphs and native vegetation and wildlife.

Little Petroglyph Canyon contains 20,000 documented images. It is open to the public for tours.

Monorail
Remains of the Epsom Salts Monorail are signposted and visible within the site. The central rail, on which mining tractors pulled minerals from a mine to the nearest railway siding, was supported on wooden A-frames of a low trestle.

Coso Geothermal Field
The Coso Geothermal Field is within China Lake boundaries. The geothermal power plants located there began generating electricity in 1987 and were the Navy's first foray into producing clean power from the earth's thermal energy (heat). The plant's nameplate capacity is 270 megawatts, with a total annual electricity production from the field of 1,175 gigawatt-hours.

title: Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake


text:
Ickleford

Ickleford is a large village situated on the northern outskirts of Hitchin in North Hertfordshire in England. It lies on the west bank of the River Hiz and to the east of the main A600 road. The population at the time of the 2011 census was 1,833.

Etymology
Its name is derived from it being a ford, that is a way to cross a river, along the Icknield Way. Another village, Ickford, shares the same etymology.

Governance
The modern parish of Ickleford includes areas that were historically detached parts of Shillington and Holwell, both of which were in Bedfordshire. The Shillington exclave was transferred to Hertfordshire by the Counties (Detached Parts) Act 1844. The Holwell exclave was transferred to Hertfordshire in 1897.

Ickleford Parish Council was established under the Local Government Act 1894.

Notable buildings
St Katharine's church, set amid cedar trees, has a 12th-century Norman nave and blocked north doorway with beautifully carved zigzag arches, and a south aisle and chapel added by Sir Giles Gilbert Scott in 1859. The east window has some fine stained glass of 1860. It is the burial-place of Henry Boswell, "King of the Gypsies", who died in 1760, at the advanced age of 90; the remains of his wife and granddaughter are likewise interred here.

Transport
The Icknield Way Path passes through the village on its 110-mile journey from Ivinghoe Beacon in Buckinghamshire to Knettishall Heath in Suffolk. The Icknield Way Trail, a multi-user route for walkers, horse riders and off-road cyclists also passes through the village. The Bedford to Hitchin Line used to pass through the village, remnants of which can still be seen in places such as Gerry's Hole where parts of the old bridge and embankment are still present. The local Parish Council attempted to raise public awareness of the village through its Parish Plan in 2006–07.

Facilities
Ickleford has a primary school (Ickleford Primary School), village hall, general store and a unisex hairdresser

There are two public houses: The Old George and The Plume of Feathers.

The large Sports and Recreation ground also contains a playground and a licensed bar. The Sports and Recreation Ground caters for several sports, including cricket, football, squash and pétanque, and is home to the Ickleford Cricket Club, whose symbol represents two crossed farmers pitchforks. The club was founded in 1947 and in 2006 won promotion to Division 3 of the Saracens Herts League, and was promoted to Division 2 in 2010. Since 2006, the cricket club's first team has used the nickname "The Tigers". Outside the Recreation Ground towards the school there is a newly built cemetery.

Ickleford also has a Scout troop (the 1st Ickleford (9th Hitchin)) with active sections of Beavers, Cubs and Scouts for both boys and girls.

title: Ickleford


text:
Xingyi

Xingyi may refer to:

 * Xingyiquan, one of the major internal Chinese martial arts
 * The Oath (Singaporean TV series), a 2011 TV series

Places in China

 * Xingyi, Guizhou, a county-level city in Guizhou
 * Xingyi, Chongqing (兴义), a town in Fengdu County, Chongqing
 * Xingyi, Hebei (邢邑), a town in Dingzhou, Hebei
 * Xingyi, Sichuan (兴义), a town in Xinjin County, Sichuan

title: Xingyi


text:
Burton Kramer

Burton Kramer (born 1932) is a Canadian graphic designer and artist who lives and works in Toronto.

Early life and education
Kramer was born in 1932 in New York City. He graduated with a BSc From The Institute of Design, Chicago in Visual Communication and an MFA in Graphic Design from Yale University.

Career
Kramer began working in the late 1950s for Will Burtin, then as Assistant Art Director of "The Architectural Record", for Geigy Chemical and Pharmaceuticals In Ardsley, New York, and then as Art Director at the Erwin Halpern advertising agency in Zurich, Switzerland. He moved to Toronto in late 1965 and his work was prominent at Expo 67, where he designed the map - directory system, among other contributions. His work from this period shows the influence of Op Art. He has pieces featured in the Smithsonian Institution and the Library of Congress. He has archives of his work in the collections of the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, and the Vignelli Center at Rochester Institute of Technology.

He is well known for designing the distinctive 1974 Canadian Broadcasting Corporation logo, consisting of a stylized letter "C" (for Canada) radiating in all directions, representing broadcasting. In 1966-67, he was Director of Corporate Design for Clairtone, redesigning their logo and many other aspects of their graphic identity.

In late 1967 he founded Kramer Design Associates Limited, a multi-media firm specializing in corporate I.D. Programs, signage systems and print. Kramer was a professor at the Ontario College of Art and Design (part-time faculty) for 21 years, lectured at universities in Mexico, Canada, the US and Switzerland. He has been a member of AGI. Alliance Graphique Internationale and an Academician of the Royal Canadian Academy of Art since 1974. He is listed in Who's Who in American Art, Canadian Who's Who, Who's who in The World, and many others. Kramer is currently active as an artist, showing his geometric abstractions at galleries in Canada and abroad.

Honours
Kramer was awarded GDC Fellowship in 1975. He was made a member of the Order of Ontario in 2002, the first graphic designer to be inducted into the order. He received an honorary Doctorate (D.Des.) from the Ontario College of Art & Design in 2003. In 2015 he was awarded the Art Directors and Designers of Canada Usherwood Lifetime Achievement Award. In 2018 he received The Order of Canada C.M.

title: Burton Kramer


text: File:Better Than Ezra Deluxe.jpg

title: File:Better Than Ezra Deluxe.jpg


text:
Talk:Bristol Harbour

19th century improvements
There is no mention in this section of the railway being built along many of the parts of the harbour. I'd guess the railway came to the centre section of the floating harbour (via the Portbury line (B&E?) from the west and from Temple Meads (GWR?) from the east) in the 1860s? I think the the Midland railway also had a much smaller rail terminal around Temple Quay. The Bristol Harbour Railway still runs on the south side of the harbour and along the Welsh Back.

Also there is no mention of the various cranes (some of which still exist) that would have greatly increased the speed and capacity of handling loads. Some of these cranes were last updated in the mid 20th century. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.99.20 (talk) 15:08, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

 * There is a link to Bristol Harbour Railway in the "today" section but some of this info could be added in the 19th century section. Many of the cranes etc are described in Bristol Industrial Museum but again more could be added.— Rod talk 15:37, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Bristol Industrial Museum closed in 2006. To keep up with the times, the reference to the "old industrial museum" on the harbour map should more accurately refer to M Shed museum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.195.93 (talk) 22:39, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Cannons Marsh Bonded Warehouse Demolition
There is a picture of the "Cannons Marsh Bonded Warehouse Demolition", but no reference to this in the text. Can someone who knows about it add something, please? Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 10:36, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Locks or lock
The final sentence of the lede says "At Hotwells, the floating harbour rejoins the tidal River Avon, via a series of locks, and flows into the Avon Gorge." Looking at it in Google Earth, there is just one lock there, not a series of locks. I propose changing this sentence, unless someone can convince me I am wrong. Maproom (talk) 22:36, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

 * There were four locks there at one time, now there are two. I don't know what you mean by "one lock", whether you're referring to the North outer lock (which is clearly visible on Google Maps, as the gates are closed) or to Cumberland Basin itself. Cumberland Basin is more of a half tide dock than a lock. Either way, both of the North locks are still operational. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:54, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 * (ec) There are currently two locks (others are no longer operative). One is between the main harbour and the Cumberland Basin (shown as 10 on the map) and there is another after the Cumberland Basin where it opens into the Avon Gorge. If you look at the photo in the article of the Cumberland Basin (1st photo on the left of the Construction... section) this is looking east and the swing bridge which is over the first lock can be seen in the distance (Lat (WGS84) N51:26:53 (51.448028), Long (WGS84) W2:37:05 (-2.618053), LR ST571722). The photo of "A Tall ship in Cumberland lock..." is of the outer larger lock which is close to the Plimsol bridge at Lat (WGS84) N51:26:57 (51.449124), Long (WGS84) W2:37:24 (-2.623263), LR ST567724. There is also Netham Lock at the other end of the harbour, but that is probably not significant to this discussion.— Rod talk 22:57, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your answers. Thank you, Rod, in particular for your precise coordinates, which make it clear exactly what you are talking about (it would solve many problems in my life if everyone were as precise). I understand my mistake now. Google Earth shows things at high tide, and both sets of gates of the lock at W2:37:05 (which someone there has called the "Pump House Lock") are open, making it inconspicuous until I zoom in far enough to see the lock gate housings. Maproom (talk) 10:09, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The tide is not the key factor. That lock (the old pump-house which provided hydraulic power is next to it - but is now a pub) is left open most of the time enabling Cumberland basin to be refilled from the main harbour - which itself is filled from the River Avon at Netham Lock - which itself is left open most of the time.— Rod talk 18:30, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Original Course
Are there any old maps showing the original course that could be added to this article? It'd help with the opening description, as it's rather difficult visualizing the course between the Feeder Canal and the New Cut at Netham Lock. Where did the current original course meet the current original course? I guess it's more of a question of where the New Cut begins. --Criticalthinker (talk) 18:31, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

 * Jessop's plan map shows it fairly well. The old course is still pretty much the course of the harbour, the new part is the New Cut (the current river) to the South.  The only part which has disappeared is the old river course through what is now Totterdown Basin and part of the canal. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:47, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

 * Thanks, so the original course of the harbor met the original course of the river at Totterdown Basin. I think that map would be very helpful somewhere in this article.  I guess what has me confused is that the sparse description on the Bristol Feeder Canal doesn't mention the western end of the canal, and if you're just looking at an aerial or map, part of the original course beyond Totterdown Basin actually looks as straight as the feeder canal all the way up to about Castle Park.  So it isn't readily apparent upon aerial inspection where the canal was dug to from Totterdown Basin.  Thanks, again. --Criticalthinker (talk) 18:59, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

 * BTW, something else which I'm unclear about is whether the Cumerbland Basin or the New Cut was built first. The page for the Cumberland Basin reads that the Avon originally didn't flow through the Cumberland Basin.  I'm still wondering, also, whether the New Cut was built pe rimarily for navigation or flood control.  The New Cut would have diverted a lot of traffic away from the heart of Bristol had it been built for navigation, though.  How do the Cumberland Basin and New Cut relate? --Criticalthinker (talk) 19:07, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

 * First of all, the original harbour moved around a bit! The Avon doesn't have quite the tide of the Severn this far inland, but it was still enough to make it wander by erosion of the soft mud, and its deep channel in particular, around the bottom of the harbour. As much as anything about the height, this sideways movement made building good quays difficult. The medieval port was at the inland end of the current harbour (St Augustine's Quay and Welsh Back) and the narrower, firmer channels. The wide mudflats around Hotwells weren't used much other than for timber, loaded by 'deal runners' who carried loads from beached ships at low tide, rather than from hard quaysides. A similar thing happened with the River Taff in Cardiff, leading Brunel to move the river westwards, control its channel and use the money from the sale of the recovered land to pay for it all (which also removed an insalubrious and insanitary part of the town).
 * Before Jessop, the river flowed through what's now the Underfall Yard, then into a tight curve rightwards and into the Gorge. Jessop dammed straight across this to make the first depth control spillway. Building the Cumberland Basin where it is also allowed this corner to be cut off, which became increasingly important with longer ships - although there wasn't much deliberate foresight here. The SS Great Britain needed stonemasons to take the kerb stones off the basin before it could get out. Brunel also built the Southern lock of the basin, but this was later abandoned as too small and now only the enlarged Northern lock is in use. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:36, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bristol Harbour


text:
Deluxe (Better Than Ezra album)

Deluxe is a studio album by the alternative rock band Better Than Ezra. It has been released by two labels: the original version in 1993 by Swell Records, and the 1995 version by Elektra Records. This is the group's best known album and contains their biggest single, "Good". It is also their debut major label record, as Surprise was entirely self-released and sold.

Track listing
All songs written by Kevin Griffin, except "Heaven" by Kevin Griffin and Tom Drummond.
 * 1) "In the Blood" – 4:33
 * 2) "Good" – 3:05
 * 3) "Southern Gürl" – 4:05
 * 4) "The Killer Inside" – 4:50
 * 5) "Rosealia" – 4:39
 * 6) "Cry in the Sun" – 5:19
 * 7) "Teenager" – 4:18
 * 8) 　  　  　  　 – 1:36
 * 9) "Summerhouse" – 2:37
 * 10) "Porcelain" – 3:57
 * 11) "Heaven" – 4:18
 * 12) "This Time of Year" – 4:05
 * 13) "Coyote" – 6:14
 * 14) * "Der Pork und Beans" (a.k.a. "Streetside Jesus") – This hidden industrial metal song begins playing at the 4:20 mark of track 13, 1 minute and 9 seconds after the end of "Coyote."

Personnel

 * Kevin Griffin – Guitar, Vocals
 * Tom Drummond – Bass
 * Cary Bonnecaze – Drums, Vocals

Additional Personnel

 * Lili Haydn – Violin
 * Melanie Owen – Vocals
 * Dan Rothchild – Vocals, Additional Guitar and Various Instruments
 * Walt Thompson – Hammond Organ
 * Martin Tillman – Cello

Rosealia
"Rosealia" was the third single from this album. Written by singer and guitarist Kevin Griffin, the song is about a woman in an abusive relationship. The single peaked at #71 on the Billboard Hot 100. During a concert in Albuquerque on Monday, September 21, 2009, Kevin Griffin explained to the audience that while living for a short time in Santa Fe, NM he had a job waiting tables at The Pink Adobe restaurant. The restaurant's owner was a woman named Rosalea Murphy, and he wrote this song as a tribute to her.

title: Deluxe (Better Than Ezra album)


text:
Talk:Deluxe (Better Than Ezra album)

Fair use rationale for Image:Better Than Ezra Deluxe.jpg
Image:Better Than Ezra Deluxe.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Deluxe (Better Than Ezra album)


text:
User talk:Mr. Ibrahim

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer! ere are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a lo[[Media:Example.ogg]] at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.nt of w|neutral point of view]]!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Wikipeda:Citeur sources
 * erifiability]e
 * Wikiped:Pages neding attention
 * Peer e pump
 * Wikipeia:Boilrplate text

Feel free to ask have fun!

[[User:Clockwork

title: User talk:Mr. Ibrahim


text:
User talk:Fox1

 Currently on hiatus - Messages may not be answered in a timely fashion

 * Old and/or general archived Talk
 * Schiavo-related Talk archive
 * USMC/Military related Talk archive
 * Smart-related Talk

I like to keep a tidy Talk page, but every message is kept in an archive above. Also, obviously, in this page's history. Please post new messages at the bottom of existing text on this page.

Minnesota meetup
A meetup of Wikipedians in Minnesota is proposed: please stop by the discussion page if interested. Jonathunder 01:57, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Reminder: Meetup October 29, one o'clock, Mall of America. Jonathunder 20:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Audi Quattro
You made a good argument about the Quattro page maybey I should stick to info on things I know more about so I'll be posting more on Lancia's. HFintegrale69 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hfintegrale69 (talk • contribs).

Smart Arbcom
I know you withdrew from the travesty that is the Smart page some time ago, but I thought you should know that the case has finally received a sympathetic hearing at Arbcom, so if you still have the stamina, now would be the time to make a serious and lasting impact on the page and wikipedia policy in general. All the old debates are still in play: RS, EL, etc. If you'd rather just forget about it that's fine too. Cheers. --Beaker342 06:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

List of Supercars
Just thought you would like to know that List of supercars is up for deletion. You expressed interest in deleting it on the talk page so I'm notifying you of Articles for deletion/List of supercars. Thanks, James086 Talk  05:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Minnesota Meetup
 Minnesota Meetup Sunday, 2007-10-07, 1:00 p.m. (13:00) Pracna on Main 117 Main SE, Minneapolis, Minnesota Map Please pass this on! RSVP here.  Spam delivered by Jonathunder 16:56, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

NowCommons: Image:US DLI crest.jpg
Image:US DLI crest.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Kazimierz rynek.JPG. Commons is a repository of free media that can be used on all MediaWiki wiki's. The image(s) will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 11:07, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Rice rocket
An article that you have been involved in editing, Rice rocket, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Dbratland (talk) 23:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Minnesota Meetup
 2009 Proposed date: Saturday, October 10. Details under discussion. Please share this with anyone who may be interested.  Delivered by Jonathunder (talk) 22:29, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Fox1


text:
User talk:SkepticalContrarian

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

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

[[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]]

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

Your edit on Pakistan
Thank you for outlining your proposed changes on the talk page. The most recent changes are much more acceptable because they are neutral. Green Giant 12:44, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:SkepticalContrarian


text:
Khlebnikov (firm)

 Khlebnikov was an Imperial Russian jewelry firm, founded ca. 1867 by Ivan Khlebnikov in Saint Petersburg, but transferred to Moscow in 1871.

The business was highly successful and received the Imperial Warrant, producing work of originality and highest quality using decoration in the traditional Russian style on many pieces. Enamel was a speciality, especially plique-à-jour, but also cloisonné. Demand for its work was high and in 1882 it employed 200 craftsmen. The business succumbed at the time of the Russian Revolution.

title: Khlebnikov (firm)


text: User talk:63.159.205.25

title: User talk:63.159.205.25


text:
Nudelman-Rikhter NR-23

The Nudelman-Richter NR-23 is a Soviet autocannon widely used in military aircraft of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact. It was designed by A. E. Nudelman and A. A. Richter to replace the wartime Nudelman-Suranov NS-23 and Volkov-Yartsev VYa-23, entering service in 1949.

The NR-23 is a single-barrel, short recoil-operated 23 mm (0.90 in) cannon. It was similar to the NS-23 but mechanical improvements increased its rate of fire by more than 50%. Its theoretical rate of fire was 850 rounds per minute, although United States Air Force tests of captured weapons achieved an actual rate of fire of only 650 rounds per minute.

The NR-23 was later replaced by the Afanasev Makarov AM-23 automatic cannon which had a higher firing rate. The AM-23 was used in turreted installations for bombers. It was a gas-operated weapon, weighed 43 kg (95 lb) and was capable of a substantially higher rate of fire (1,200–1,300 rounds per minute).

The People's Republic of China manufactures copies of both versions of this weapon as Norinco Type 23-1 (NR-23) and Type 23-2 (AM-23), respectively.

Applications
The NR-23 was used on fighter aircraft, including the MiG-15, Lavochkin La-15, MiG-17, and some models of the MiG-19. In addition, it was also used on the Ilyushin Il-28 and Beriev Be-6. The AM-23 was used in the defensive turrets of the Antonov An-12B, Myasishchev M-4, Tupolev Tu-14, Tupolev Tu-16, Tupolev Tu-95/Tu-142, and the Tupolev Tu-98 prototype.

The NR-23 is also the only cannon to have been fired in space. Published accounts state that a Nudelman-Richter gun was installed on Almaz 2 space station. On the final day of the Almaz 2's deployment, the cannons were tested by firing a total of 20 rounds. The details of this test and its results remain classified.

In the mid-1960s the cannon was replaced in Soviet service by the twin-barrel Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23L.

The mechanism of the NR-23 was scaled up to produce the more powerful NR-30 30 mm gun used in the MiG-19 and some marks of the MiG-21.

title: Nudelman-Rikhter NR-23


text:
Kay Panabaker

Stephanie Kay Panabaker (born May 2, 1990) is an American zoologist and retired actress. She is known for her roles as Jenny Garison in the 2009 reboot of Fame, Debbie Berwick on Phil of the Future, and Nikki Westerly on Summerland. She is the younger sister of actress Danielle Panabaker.

Early life
Panabaker was born in Orange, Texas, to Donna (née Mayock) and Harold Panabaker. Following in older sister Danielle's footsteps, she started acting at various community theatres in Chicago, Philadelphia, and Atlanta. In Naperville, Illinois she attended Crone Middle School for sixth grade, and moved to Los Angeles at the start of seventh grade.

Between projects, Panabaker focused on academics. She graduated from high school as the valedictorian when she was 13 years old. Kay received two academic scholarships from Glendale Community College, where she studied acting and was on the Dean's list. She graduated with an associate degree with honors when she was 15. She was accepted by the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), History Program as a junior and completed her Bachelor of Arts in history before she turned 18.

Career
Panabaker has guest-starred in several television dramas and soap operas. She portrayed Alice Brand in 7th Heaven, Melissa Rue in ER, Sara in Port Charles, Carrie Bauer in The Brothers García, Ellisha in Medium, and Lindsey Willows in CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, to name a few. At 21, she was completely convincing as a 14-year-old runaway forced into prostitution on Law & Order: Special Victims Unit. In film, she appeared in Dead Heat as Sam LaRoche; and did some voice work in the Disney/Pixar film, Monsters, Inc.. Panabaker's breakout role came when she starred in The WB's Summerland as Nikki Westerly, in the 2004–05 season. She also appeared as George in Nancy Drew (2007) alongside Emma Roberts and Amy Bruckner.

Panabaker had a recurring role in Phil of the Future as strait-laced Debbie Berwick, a friend of and foil to Pim Diffy (played by Amy Bruckner). She starred in Life Is Ruff as Emily Watson alongside Kyle Massey and Mitchel Musso. In July 2006, she starred in the Disney Channel Original Movie Read It and Weep (based on the book How My Private Personal Journal Became a Bestseller), in which her sister Danielle also stars. In 2006, Panabaker was in the first Disney Channel Games, on the Red Team with Zac Efron, Anneliese van der Pol, Moises Arias, Dylan Sprouse, and Shin Koyamada as part of the Disney Channel's So Hot Summer!. Her films include Moondance Alexander and The Prince and the Pauper with Dylan and Cole Sprouse. Panabaker starred in the remake of Fame as Jenny, an actress; the film was released in theaters on September 25, 2009. She also played the teenaged Kitty Walker on Brothers & Sisters.

Panabaker starred in the ABC sci-fi drama series No Ordinary Family, which ran for a single season ending in 2011 after 20 episodes. In 2011, Panabaker played Samantha Caldone in the ABC Family film Cyberbully.

After playing Rosa in Beverly Hills Chihuahua 3: Viva la Fiesta in 2012, Panabaker retired from acting. She went on to study zoology at UCLA, and as of 2016 works as a zookeeper at Disney's Animal Kingdom in Walt Disney World.

Personal life
On February 6, 2022, Panabaker announced that she had married Yoni Yates.

Awards and honors
Panabaker previously held a Seat on the National Board of the Coalition for Quality Children's Media. As of 2020 this was no longer the case.

title: Kay Panabaker


text:
Talk:Project for the New American Century/Survey/Archive

Definitely version 2.

 * This is just a draft for the survey, to work out what the question should be. Please don't start voting yet. Bryan 02:11, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I would also add that VV is absolutely correct when he suggests that most critics of PNAC have not sat down to read the documents, all public domain information, and instead prefer to have their own personal analysis of PNAC spoon-fed to them. TDC 01:53, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)

 * Ha ha ha! This is the TDC who wrote "I dont know where people get this, but the "new pearl harbor" phrase is not found in any of PNAC's documents."  Sir, you are not qualified to criticise others for not reading the documents. CK 17:18, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Is this in reference to VV pointing out that the document in question doesn't actually mention Iraq? I hate to sound like a broken record, but version 1 above doesn't mention Iraq either. It refers to "PNAC's agenda" without specifying what it actually is. Bryan 02:11, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * The fact that many of the critics who deceptively quote RAD do mention Iraq is notable, if this tabloid criticism is at all. V V 08:33, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Erm, why are we having a "vote" as to which version is better?

It seems to me that both versions have some problems, but would not be too difficult to merge. Ambi 01:57, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * By all means, propose a merged version. There's been a great deal of aimless argument in the main talk page over this issue, I'd love to have others participating and making alternate suggestions. Bryan 02:06, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * CK could have proposed some sort of merge, just like I did. But instead he chose to revert me repeatedly.  And so here we are. V V  07:49, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * VeryVerily is lying, as an examination of the edit history of the PNAC page will reveal. CK 18:19, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Alternately, it would be nice if we could work out what the underlying issues are that are causing this disagreement over which version is better and put those to the vote instead. Bryan 02:21, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I'll start. Underlying issue #1: CK's version makes no logical sense. V V  07:49, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Discussion
The question is fine, but I was expecting multiple questions.

There's currently not a lot of contributors to the PNAC article, I'm not sure that we'll have a meaningful sample size unless we somehow get more people. Kevin Baas | talk 15:48, 2004 Oct 2 (UTC)

 * Once the survey questions and format were worked out it would be announced on Current surveys, which would hopefully garner some more outside participation. Bryan 18:33, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I would appreciate if VV could remove his excessively long nonsens and start a discussion rather engage in cynism. Why do we need to quote at all? It could just be written: Critics have suggested that the PNAC's agenda influenced the cynical exploitation of the September 11 attacks by the Bush administration for aggression. There is a heavy debate about interpretation of certain passages in PNAC documents that some see as evidence for this view.
 * It is not encyclopedia style to use words like "partisan and ill-informed" or to address the reader like "can be found at..." or "readers may find it more enlightening to examine the document directly". Get-back-world-respect 16:42, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

How about addressing some specifics to get a more thorough survey of opinion? Perhaps a question like: "Which of the following are pov?", and put in some phrases from each version. Some examples might be:

 * "frequently quoted out of context"
 * "Conspiracy theorists argue"
 * "going so far as to"
 * "incorrectly claim"
 * "Critics of the PNAC have suggested"
 * "Supporters of the PNAC say"
 * "has proved particularly controversial"

Kevin Baas | talk 17:59, 2004 Oct 2 (UTC)

 * Yeah, that's the main issue I have with version 2 myself - along with the issue of whether this is specifically about the invasion of Iraq or about the PNAC agenda in general instead. That should probably also be a question too. I'm going to be offline for the rest of the day, BTW, so I hope nobody's holding off on editing the draft question waiting for me to do it. Feel free to rip out the existing one and try out a new version. I just ported over what was being argued on talk: at the time. Bryan 18:33, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Those survey questions are ridiculous. Here, I'll add my own. V V 21:29, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I do not think these questions should be on the survey. They are all sarcastic/rhetorical or loaded; they are not serious questions. Kevin Baas | talk 23:28, 2004 Oct 3 (UTC)

 * My point is, I feel the other questions are similarly loaded, and was illustrating this. V V 00:58, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree, those were on the same order of silliness as the original question for the Sysop Accountability Policy survey. By which I mean, like that one, the answers are all utterly obvious and so also utterly useless when it comes to actually solving this argument. Bryan 00:09, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * VV, you are welcome to change the three last bullets in the section of pov sentence fragments, to sentence fragments in the 1st version that you feel are pov. You are also welcome to add as many such sentence fragments as you like. Kevin Baas | talk 03:13, 2004 Oct 4 (UTC)

 * Are sentence fragments fine enough? Maybe we should go word by word.  Is theorists POV?  In fact, is the letter q POV? V V  06:36, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Although it is, I'm sure, clear to everyone how certain sentence fragments can be inherently pov, I do not see how letters can be inherently pov. I think this is a misapplication of the idea of being specific and concrete in disputes.  Although letters certainly are specific and concrete, the dispute is not over spelling, but the presentation of information in a neutral matter. Kevin Baas | talk 20:51, 2004 Oct 4 (UTC)

This is becoming a bit of a mess
There's been a rather dramatic proliferation of survey questions focusing on some rather fine minutiae, and furthermore the discussion of those questions has started turning into a straight-out argument about exactly the issues that the survey was supposed to be addressing by vote. I'm going to make an attempt to salvage this later tonight unless anyone objects, by paring down the question count somewhat (merging similar questions where possible) and possibly moving some more of the discussion onto the main talk: page. Bryan 23:44, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * A request: Please don't waste everyone's time by making flagrantly loaded questions. Very Verily 11:39, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Such as these, for example? Bryan 02:12, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Exactly. Very Verily 07:00, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I've done a bit of cleanup work now (a day late, but this is just a hobby after all :). I'm also considering removing the "Which, if any, of the following fragments are inherently POV?" question because it seems too focused on context-sensitive minutiae to be of much long-term use in settling this and because it's rather long. "Do the statements, taken together, constitute a "reasonable" criticism?" is also probably redundant with the previous question asking about individual statements, IMO. Any objections so far? Bryan 02:24, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * You seem to have basically restored KB's loaded/strawman questions. Very Verily 07:08, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I didn't restore any questions, I deleted the ones I pointed out above and moved some discussion over to the main talk page. Bryan 07:40, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Hence restored. E.g., who said "most critics"?  Not I. Very Verily  07:43, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * As in the question "The paragraph should say that most critics of PNAC believe the paper in question was proposing the invasion of Iraq"? I added that one when I first added questions beyond the "which version do you prefer?" starting issue. Bryan 07:47, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, that one. It's a transparent strawman. Very Verily  08:13, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Your preferred version of the paragraph has the line "Many also incorrectly claim that this "new Pearl Harbor" is stated to be needed to justify war on Iraq." If we were to change the wording from "most" to "many", would it cease to be a transparent strawman in your estimation? Bryan 23:04, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, it would be a confusing strawman then. Also, I'm reluctant to dignify those types with the word critic. Very Verily  11:18, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I just can't believe you people are for real. This isn't The National Enquirer. Very Verily  07:44, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure why you think I think it is (assuming I'm included in "you people"). Bryan 07:47, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, you are. If you don't know why I think that, you did not familiarize yourself with my objections. Very Verily  08:13, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * To clarify, I mean yes you are included in "you people", not that yes you are sure. Very Verily 22:39, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, I'm going to have to ask you to explain a little more explicitly, then. What did I do that makes it seem like I think this is the National Enquirer? You agreed that the questions I removed were "flagrantly loaded," and the only other thing I did was to move some discussions that had gone off the topic of this survey and onto the topic of what the correct result of the survey should be. Bryan 23:04, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Let me be the first to respond to Bryan, and defend the two questions: pov fragments - they are not context-sensitive. For example "incorrectly claim" - the issue is whether it is npov to endorse a pov by saying that a claim is made "correctly" or to attack it by saying it is made "incorrectly", and whether in fact this obviates the entire point of using "claim" for npov.  Notice that my description never once brought in context.  This is a case in point against the argument that these sentence fragments are inherently context-dependant, which is the purported fundamental (and sole) justification for their disqualification.

 * Well, I suspect I can think of contexts where any of those fragments could be POV and any would be NPOV, but I guess that will just mean I won't vote for any of them. :) If you feel strongly that this is a reasonable question I won't push for its removal, I'm just worrying a bit about how many questions there are still. Bryan 23:04, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * This "inherent POV" talk is a crock. "The 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica incorrectly claims that Lincoln was killed by an air-to-air missile" is not POV. Very Verily  23:09, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, that's just one particular example. The sentence fragment could also be used like this: "Joseph Smith, Jr. incorrectly claims that he translated the Book of Mormon from inscriptions on gold plates." That is very POV. However, it's only POV in context; the sentence fragment itself is meaningless on its own. Mark your calenders, everyone, for on this very day VV and I have agreed on something - though we nevertheless shouldn't really be discussing it here, that's what voting is going to be for :) Bryan 23:49, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Voting is a fallback. Discussion is the real deal.  Voting is just a way to trounce a minority who have facts and logic on their side.  And your Joseph Smith example is off-topic; my point is that "incorrectly claim" is not inherently POV (that is, it can not be POV, not that it never is). Very Verily  00:33, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, it's a fallback for when discussion has failed. Which I believe it has - you're now apparently arguing with my agreement with you on this "inherent POV" issue. Bryan 00:55, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Okay, then if we agree that "inherently POV" is a bogus issue, we can strike that question from our "survey". Very Verily 03:36, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * No, because apparently Kevin considers it a serious question. This debate isn't over what the answer to it is, it's over whether it should be included in the survey. If someone seriously supports it, I think it should be left in. Bryan 05:04, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Then we're taking a survey on changing the NPOV policy? Very Verily 23:33, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * How about we add "none of the above" and/or "sentence fragments cannot be inherently POV" options to that poll question? If enough people disagree with that, then we can bring that particular issue up separately on the NPOV policy talk page. "none of the above" should probably be added to the other multi-part question too, to allow people to distinguish between opposition and abstention. Bryan 18:39, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * It's hard for me not to laugh. Very Verily 11:21, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Regarding the "taken together" question - that was actually the original question. It was in response to someone disputing the reasonableness of a criticism, and thus whether that criticism should be included. (on the apparent logic that "unreasonable" criticisms ipso facto don't deserve mention.)  The question before that was a decomposition of the criticism, so that the issue can be fleshed out and the nature and origin of any confusion or discrepancy be made clear. Kevin Baas | talk 17:11, 2004 Oct 8 (UTC)

 * I have visions of those questions ending up with everyone either voting "yes" for all of them or "no" for all of them down the board, but I guess I should try to be more optimistic. I won't push for the removal of these either, though perhaps we could make the survey at least seem a little shorter by adding the "do all these statements taken together etc." question to the end of the numbered list rather than making it a standalone header? Bryan 23:04, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

We've been hashing out the questions for about a week now, I think it's about time to get this survey started. An last-minute minor tweaks or objections remaining? Bearing in mind that nothing in life is perfect, nor does it have to be. :) Bryan 18:39, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Last-minute minor tweaks? I didn't realize there were any tweaks at all.  This list looks suspiciously like Kb's initial set of loaded, irrelevant, strawman questions.  Maybe can we just get back to reverting each other?  That was much more rewarding than this unidirectional conversation. Very Verily  11:16, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Five out of the current eleven questions were originated by me, actually, and I'm about to merge two of the others so that'll make it five out of ten. Also, I have never reverted you; I stopped the revert war. Please try to pay closer attention to the bases of your accusations. Bryan 20:11, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * The English word we can be both inclusive and exclusive. Very Verily 08:01, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I've been gone for a while - I agree with Bryan's suggested changes. for the pov fragment section, how about something like "in the context of the disputed paragraph" or "in most cases" or "has a relatively high potential to be"?

On the second question, I also think it would be reasonable for someone who put all yes's for the former question, to, by logic, put yes for the latter. But I don't assume that much from people anymore. In any case, i think it's a good idea to subsume the latter question under it's former. Kevin Baas | talk 13:29, 2004 Oct 11 (UTC)

 * I'll add those tweaks, then, and this evening I'll start the survey rolling. Bryan 20:11, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * If you start a survey with these questions, you know of course that I will never, ever accept its results. But I guess that's the goal, isn't it? Very Verily  08:06, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * You've said that since I first proposed the survey, let alone started working out questions for it, so although it's not my goal I guess it's hardly unexpected. You've had over a week now to propose new questions or modifications to existing ones, were these really the best you could come up with? I've no sympathy, you clearly had no interest in constructive participation. Bryan 08:27, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * No, I was more receptive before this whole comedy got really rolling. I thought there was a chance of at least getting relevant and appropriate survey questions. And I have stated here my opposition to several of the questions, but there they are.  I'd also be more motivated to participate if there was any indication my issues were being taken seriously. Or that there was even an interest in fair questions. Guess we have a date with the ArbCom in about a week. Congratulations. (Oh, and I noticed you removed my new slew of questions; are you the surveymaker here?) Very Verily  09:05, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

(Re-adding the previous comment after it was repeatedly removed by the vandal Shorne below. See page history. Very Verily  18:13, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC))

 * Please proceed. He is only here to make trouble, as everyone knows. Perhaps you and I can combine our requests for arbitration against this impossible troublemaker. Shorne 11:12, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Oh, one other thing; should I move this rather lengthy discussion into an archive sub-subpage when the survey begins? A lot of it refers to stuff that's changed, and the length will likely make things complicated for the voters. There would of course be a prominent link to it from here. Bryan 20:17, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, please archive this rubbish. It only clutters up the survey. As can be seen from VeryVerily's behaviour, the discussion was of no value anyway. Shorne 21:50, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Archive please. Kevin Baas | talk 22:14, 2004 Oct 12 (UTC)

BTW, I'm moving the following discussion down here and changing the question's wording to reflect Kevin's clarification: Bryan 20:11, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Is it important to have the full quote, rather than only part of it?
I think this is the winner for sheer comedic value. What constitutes a "full quote"? All 80+ pages of RAD? Considering it is quoted wholly out of context, one might think that would be the only way to be "fully" sure. But no it means that Kb gets the word transformation in there, so he can spin his cute, pretty little deception. Then it's a full quote! Oh, it makes perfect sense. Very Verily 11:32, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * By "full quote" is meant the sentence.

 * BTW, you could have simply asked "What is meant by 'full quote'?" The derogatory ranting was completely unneccessary. Kevin Baas | talk 13:14, 2004 Oct 11 (UTC)

 * The derogatory ranting underscored the tricksy nature of the question. Very Verily 20:58, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Derogatory ranting does not exist where good faith is the rule. In other words, I don't think you are operating in good faith.  Anything that appears to me as sarcasm or what have you, I nonetheless respond to as if it was serious, regardless of how ridiculous the response may sound to me or others.  I always act as if the others are serious in what they say, and always am serious in what I say, because no progress can be made in discussion if the parties are not seriously trying to communicate. Kevin Baas | talk 01:26, 2004 Oct 12 (UTC)

 * I do not believe the questions you formulated were in good faith. My evidence for this is pretty substantial. Very Verily  07:59, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)