text:
User talk:Corax/archive

Welcome
I just wanted to take a moment to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. If you have been around for a while, but not contributing, then welcome to contributing. Your contributions to articles will always be appreciated.

Since one of your first articles was one that falls within the realm of a Project I manage, I thought I would alert you to it. It is called the United States Supreme Court Case Article Improvement Project. Your contributions to Roe v. Wade are helpful in the development of the Project and I thank you for them. If you get a chance, check out the project page at the Wikilink above and think about helping out with the Project.

Thanks again and welcome to Wikipedia!

Wikipedia is knowledge. Knowlegde is power.

Skyler 04:03, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! I see you talking to GBWRespect, and you are doing a wonderful job of sticking to the matter at hand, POV, not debating child sexuality with him. You have an excellent attitude and I welcome you here and I very much hope you will stay. Please contact me if you have any trouble. --ShaunMacPherson 10:11, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Nambla
Thanks for setting the record straight in the NAMBLA article and very clearly defending your position. Get-back-world-respect clearly has a bias in this area, but usually he listens to arguments when they are made in a rational and calm manner. BTW, it helps keep track of the discussion if you sign your edits on the talk pages by using tildes (see How_to_edit_a_page). Paranoid 21:32, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree with you paranoid, GBWR is very POV on this issue by arguing things not having to do with the issue at hand - the NPOV of the article. Excellent work on the article Corax, I am observing the  situation and will submit some wording changes also.  As well, I think some of GBWR's comments towards you crossed the line, words like 'twisted' are not generally tollerated.  --ShaunMacPherson 10:11, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Rind, et al.
Hi. Thank you for your comments regarding my transplanting of a section from the Childlove Movement article to the Rind, et al. article. I apologize for not being more thorough in ensuring that there was not an overlap of data. I did not see that there was, as the article I dropped in was somewhat different from what is in the Critics section of the existing document. At the same time, I am not an expert in the debate about this study. I simply took on good faith what another editor mistakenly put into an article where it does not belong and put it where it seemed more appropriate.

Perhaps, rather than simply reverting the edit, you might have taken a look to see if there was anything substantive there that could be kept? Or at the very least, visit Childlove movement since I clearly stated that was where it had come from, to shed your expert opinion on the information about this study that people editing that article are trying to pass of as objective content.

I would appreciate your comments on this. All the best, --Zanthalon, 04:53, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * I am preparing to revise and extend the content of the Rind article. What I reverted out will be reincorporated and presented in balance with the rebuttals of Rind, et al.  Regards Corax 05:27, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Image:Campdavid.jpg
I notice that you have listed this as a PD image. I have looked through the NARA (National Archives) online gallery and it doesn't seem to come from there. Why do you think this is public domain photo rather than a press photo? Regards, Thuresson 10:13, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Asking again...
You've been active on the talk page since I asked this question there, so for the sake of clarity I will ask it again here on your talk page: Why did you delete my comment on the NAMBLA talk page? · Katefan0(scribble) 12:04, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

 * Which comment? Corax 17:08, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * I checked back and noticed what had happened. At the time I was using the lynx text browser under unix console, and was preparing to make an edit beneath yours.  Somehow that line of text was deleted when I cleared out and reinstated the current version.  I apologize.  Regards, Corax 19:42, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Talk page
Thank you so much for the nice note you left on my talk page, and the Barnstar, for which I'm very appreciative, but not sure I am deserving. Nevertheless, I am grateful. I have tried hard to be neutral with the NAMBLA article, though I am sure you can probably guess that I don't particularly care for the group itself (have had some personal experience with a member -- or rather, an ex-boyfriend did). Anyway, so it's been particularly difficult for me to take a broader view -- still, even articles you personally disagree with deserve to strive for NPOV. So thank you again and my regards · Katefan0(scribble) 17:50, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)

I suppose it is a strange twist of irony that you would take a more objective approach to authoring an article on NAMBLA than an Australian gay man would. Heh. But the point is that you have been extremely objective, always insisting on sources and making reasonable judgment calls. For that reason, combined with the nature of the article, you are more than deserving of the Barnstar.

As an aside, I am not nor nor have I ever been a member of NAMBLA (like you, I wasn't even alive at the time the group formed). I am an "advocate" only insomuch as I have a low tolerance for people making blatant misrepresentations of what the group does and believes -- which I guess counts as an advocate in Adam's book.

I am sorry that your ex-boyfriend had a negative experience, but you have to remember most members of a group like that are probably the most radical and asshole-ish. The group represents a set of ideals more than it does their particular subsection of the gay coummunity as a whole. Corax 19:10, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oh, no, I totally agree. In my ex-bf's case, it had much less to do with the man being gay and much more with him looking for some fucked up kid to take advantage of. If it had been NAMGLA it would've been no less objectionable to me. Actually, I am queer myself so I definitely don't paint all gay people with the same brush. Things seem to have calmed down quite a bit. · Katefan0(scribble) 00:32, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

changing article titles
There's a right way and a wrong way to change article titles. The right way is to use the "Move this page" link. The wrong way is to cut and paste. Please don't make any further edits until we can get it fixed. Thanks, -Willmcw 22:44, May 9, 2005 (UTC)

Democratic peace theory
Is caught in an edit war on a question of structure. I have created a discussion section here: Talk:Democratic_peace_theory. Please comment, and if any of its other former editors would be interested, do let them know. Septentrionalis 28 June 2005 23:49 (UTC)

There is a RfC on Ultramarine []. I commented at some length on his behavior on DPT and cited your comments on his PoV. Septentrionalis 00:29, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

 * DPT has been drastically shortened, and so improved, by a new user; do have a look. But I have had to file an RfAr against Ultramarine. Septentrionalis 17:47, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

 * You may wish to have the look soon; Ultramarine has a bad habit of starting edit wars and then asking for page protection with "his" version showing. Septentrionalis 23:37, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Notification to user from "70.182.219.158"
Any further attempts at vandalism will be reported to an administrator, and you will be blocked from further participation on Wikipedia.

regarding evidence
Just to inform you, citing diffs as evidence should only be done with one pair of brackets, not two, since they are external links (although they are really not, but in terms of diff citation, it is as such). This makes it neater. -- Natalinasmpf 23:49, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding NAMBLA
I assume this was directed at User:PSYact who wrote this comment and not at me? —  F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  17:03, Dec. 30, 2005

 * You are correct. Corax 17:06, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok, technically "attraction to teenagers" is not pedophilia, but rather "ephebophilia", but that word has significantly less currency. In today's world, "Pedophilia" is most commonly used to refer to any attraction to anybody below the age of consent. I'm not implying that NAMBLA condones the molestation of 5-year-olds, because I don't know this to be true. But rather, NAMBLA is considered "pedophile" by the currently accepted definition of "pedophile". I agree that this usage of the word is bogus. —  F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  22:57, Jan. 7, 2006

Corax, you wanted an article that discussed the difference between homosexual and gay. Men who have sex with men touches on the concept and this article from the American Journal of Public Health does, too. If you want to do a little more reading, your best bets are going to be researching the phenomenon of men "on the down-low," or straight-identified (usually African American) men in relationships with women who have sex with other men. Few if any publications classify these men as gay or even bi, but they are clearly engaging in homosexual acts. Dave 01:22, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Teens?
You said "NAMBLA...seeks to end the oppression of relationships between teenage males and adult men". The article says the want to repeal all age-of-consent laws. So where does the "teens" come from? They're NAMBLA, not NAMTLA. I guess a pedophile is going to feel more comfortable in an assoc. which advocates "Man/Boy Love", than in the Republican party. I'd guess that the percentage of pedophiles in NAMBLA would be rather higher than that in the GOP. Camillus (talk) 22:53, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

 * At the time (1970s) and place (meetings of Boston's gay community) NAMBLA was formed, "boy" did not mean toddler or prepubescent kid, it meant a teenager. The original intent of the organization was to end the oppression of what they saw as consensual relationships between men and teenage boys.  To accomplish this, they advocated eliminating AOC laws.  They did not, however, at any time assert that prepubescent kids could consent to sex.  And they did not claim that sex with prepubescent children would not still be prosecutable under rape laws, even if they weren't still prosecutable under regressive AOC laws.  Corax 22:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Well if the terminology has changed, maybe they should change their name, which is a clear magnet for pedophiles.

If all AOC laws were abolished, how could anyone be charged with having sex with a minor? Wouldn't this mean that pedophilia was in fact, legalised? Therefore, advocating repeal of all AOC laws = advocating pedophilia. Camillus (talk) 23:18, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

 * The same way we charge men who rape women. Or charge men who have sex with profoundly retarded women.  The case would presumably be adjudicated on the basis of the young person's opinion of the relationship, in addition to how informed he is about the consequences of the relationship.  Under this standard (which is used, by the way, in cases involving individuals whose mental health is called into question, whether by illness, old age, or retardation), prepubescent would almost certainly not be able to consent.  And neither would people be denied certain rights based solely on the issue of age.  I believe that was NAMBLA's point in opposing AOC laws.  Corax 23:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

The rules on categorisation are quite clear. All subcategorisation is being systematically deleted from articles. No page can declare that the categorisation rules do not apply there. The same categorisation rules apply on all articles. It does not matter if 100% of users vote to break the categorisation rules. Admins and those working on categories will simply delete subcategories automatically on all pages where they have been added without exception. That process has been going on for months and will continue to do so. It is a standard process and not open to a vote. All subcategories are being deleted. It is that simple. FearÉIREANN \(caint) 23:30, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Under WP guidelines Articles should not be in both a category and its subcategory, for example Microsoft Office is in Category:Microsoft software, so should not also be in Category:Software.

The exception does not fit the current debate. As the central issue is pederesty, that is the category that goes on to the page. LGBT is a subcategory of that in this instance and so is not included. It does not fit the rare exceptions where a subcategory and category co-exist, which largely cover people. Admins and those organising the categorisation system are systematically removing categories from articles where they are already linked through the article through a subcategory of an existing category. In the last few weeks hundreds of articles have been so edited. No matter what any vote on the page says, the LGBT category, as a subcategory of an existing directly relevant category, will be deleted. You can try to play King Canute and attempt to stop it, but given that large numbers of users and admins are engaged in this process, that subcategorisation will be deleted by someone. FearÉIREANN \(caint) 23:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm sorry, but I don't see where LGBT organizations is a subcategory listed under Pederasty of vice versa. Can you draw my attention to where this is the case? Corax 23:54, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Nambla on pedophilia advocacy article
You'll probably have to explain yourself on the talk page, editors of this article tend to take people in bad faith, unfortuntely. The article tends to take pederastry and pedophilia as the same thing, perhaps you could help us clear this up? Anyway, thanks for helping edit this enormous and rather inaccurate article, wikipedia needs more people who do. Lotusduck 22:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I guess NAMBLA isn't an LGBT org after all.--69.243.48.190 03:00, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

 * According to a member of the mediation committee it is. He may have removed it, from what I understand, because NAMBLA being classified correctly upset too many people.  But that's irrelevant.  This is going to mediation, then perhaps arbitration.  You should also note that the final tally for whether NAMBLA belongs in LGBT organization is 15-11 in FAVOR.  Corax 04:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Corax, you are me knight in shining armour! Ta to your effort in defending the rightness on categorisation of NAMBLA. Now that gap in FAVOR has extended and Adam Carr has long vamoosed. Hooray! MarkBeer 04:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
I really like your style. You argue rationally and reasonably. This whole categorisation issue is getting bloody ridiculous, but you always manage to make your points succinctly. Kudos Natgoo 01:07, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your kind words. Corax 01:08, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

NAMBLA
Well I realise this is a a very controversial topic, I would ask that you avoid attacking the votes of persons who happen to vote against own preferences. I would also ask that you withdraw your allegation that my vote is a "personal favour" for Jtdirl. This is both an unwarranted personal attack on Jtdirl and I, and is completely unfounded. My vote is clearly accompanied by a short statement of my reasoning, which I regard as a sufficient explanation.

Any messages between myself and Jtdirl are free to view on both our discussion pages. Not once have we communicated with regards to the NAMBLA article. It is no coincidence that we both have communicated in the past over various issues given we are both long standing members of the project, and have a tendency to edit in some of the same subject areas. Your rather paranoid interpretation of this is no basis for a personal attack on either of us. Astrotrain 22:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

 * First, I haven't attacked anybody. I simply expressed how odd I thought it was that, after this issue about categorization has dragged on for weeks, a person inexplicably decides to show up and vote who has said absolutely nothing about the issue previously, offers no basis for his vote, and who votes immediately after the vote of another person with whom he seems to be in frequent communication.

 * Second, if you want to start a campaign against personal attacks, you should begin by reprimanding your friend user:jtdirl who has not only made personal attacks (calling people homophobic), but has also wikistalked another user, trolling a completely different article to which he was contributing. Corax 22:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Vandal blocked indefinitely
I have blocked indefinitely the user who posted grotesque personal allegations about you. If you want to have the allegations removed from the archives, contact a developer and they will delete them so that no-one will ever see them and they won't show up in searches. Developers regularly delete such allegations when they are made. If they return using another identity and try it again let me know and I'll block them under any other identity also. FearÉIREANN \(caint) 01:48, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Thank you very much. I don't mind if they remain, as I do not violate any laws and have nothing to hide. Corax 01:52, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

No Problem. Glad to help. I don't doubt you have nothing to hide. Remember though that in years to come historians will no doubt research the development of WP and will read the archives of talk pages. If the comments are still in the records and they can access them they may quote examples of such allegations being made and some users find the idea that such comments, however untrue, are buried in their records, a bit unnerving. No-one would think you are trying to hide something if you decided to have them deleted. Similar allegations made against other users, against Jimbo and against George W. Bush have been deleted in the past. Some talk page comments can also show up in google searches. It is a long shot but again some users don't feel comfortable about their usernics potentially matching them up against such allegations.

Whatever you decide to do, no-one on WP takes the slightest head to such allegations. WP does have a policy of taking ruthless action against anyone posting such claims. I was one of those who indefinitely blocked scores of users for posting such comments against other users when a handful of vandals laid siege to the same group of pages and posted the comments openly in edit summaries. The standard block in those cases is indefinite. In reality an indefinite block against an IP does expire, but it lasts long enough to tell the vandal to fuck off. As I said, if someone else appears to post the same abuse, let me know and I'll block them immediately. Sometimes the same user tends to try to visit the same page and post the same abuse over and over again. If someone does that repeatedly in rapid succession, have your talk page either sprotected or protected temporarily. When they get the message that they cannot do the vandalism they usually go away and find somewhere else to play. FearÉIREANN \(caint) 02:06, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Corax/archive


text:
Epimer

In stereochemistry, an epimer is one of a pair of diastereomers. The two epimers have opposite configuration at only one stereogenic center out of at least two. All other stereogenic centers in the molecules are the same in each. Epimerization is the interconversion of one epimer to the other epimer.

Doxorubicin and epirubicin are two epimers that are used as drugs.

Examples
The stereoisomers β- D -glucopyranose and β- D -mannopyranose are epimers because they differ only in the stereochemistry at the C-2 position. The hydroxy group in β-D-glucopyranose is equatorial (in the "plane" of the ring), while in β-D-mannopyranose the C-2 hydroxy group is axial (up from the "plane" of the ring). These two molecules are epimers but, because they are not mirror images of each other, are not enantiomers. (Enantiomers have the same name, but differ in  D  and  L  classification.) They are also not sugar anomers, since it is not the anomeric carbon involved in the stereochemistry. Similarly, β- D -glucopyranose and β- D -galactopyranose are epimers that differ at the C-4 position, with the former being equatorial and the latter being axial.

In the case that the difference is the -OH groups on C-1, the anomeric carbon, such as in the case of α- D -glucopyranose and β- D -glucopyranose, the molecules are both epimers and anomers (as indicated by the α and β designation).

Other closely related compounds are epi-inositol and inositol and lipoxin and epilipoxin.

Epimerization
Epimerization is a chemical process where an epimer is converted to its diastereomeric counterpart. It can happen in condensed tannins depolymerization reactions. Epimerization can be spontaneous (generally a slow process), or catalysed by enzymes, e.g. the epimerization between the sugars N-acetylglucosamine and N-acetylmannosamine, which is catalysed by renin-binding protein.

The penultimate step in Zhang & Trudell's classic epibatidine synthesis is an example of epimerization. Pharmaceutical examples include epimerization of the erythro isomers of methylphenidate to the pharmacologically preferred and lower-energy threo isomers, and undesired in vivo epimerization of tesofensine to brasofensine.

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

title: Epimer


text:
Talk:Joseph Smith/to do

Per discussions with experienced Wikipedians in preparation for FAC: * Trim article size to 45-50 kB (readable prose) * Remove or integrate most/all efn's - high quality writing that I hate to lose, can we move them to subarticles in many cases? * Research and resolve concerns from Hog Farm on the Missouri section * Prune references that no longer have citations based on them

title: Talk:Joseph Smith/to do


text:
BDU

BDU may refer to:

Airports

 * Bardufoss Airport (IATA code: BDU), northern Norway
 * Boulder Municipal Airport (FAA LID: BDU), Colorado, United States

Universities

 * Bahir Dar University, Ethiopia
 * Baku State University, Azerbaijan
 * Bharathidasan University, Tamil Nadu, India

Other

 * B.D.U, a South Korean boy band
 * Battle Dress Uniform, historical United States military camouflage clothing
 * Befehlshaber der U-Boote, head of the German Navy's U-Boat arm in WWI and WWII
 * Bizkaia–Durango, a cycling team based in Spain
 * Broadcast distribution undertakings, the legal term for Canadian multichannel television providers
 * Brown Debating Union, a student society at Brown University, Rhode Island, United States
 * Oroko language of Cameroon (ISO 639 code: bdu)
 * Data Security Threats Database (known as BDU in Russian), a Russian national software vulnerability database

title: BDU


text:
User talk:Savabore

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:Savabore


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Torch The Bridge

Torch The Bridge
I just don't feel this page is notable. Alexa rank is 66,000. Hope the community will decide on whether this is encyclopedic. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 04:09, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)

On second thought, it doesn't really belong in Wikipedia. Oops. [[User:Tezkah|Tezkah (talk)]] 04:16, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Haven't checked the notability of the site, but the article is currently non-encyclopedian POV lamer speak. jni 06:51, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete The article is more or less nonsense. Just if someothing appeared on Slashdot doesn't make it exactly noteable... --Asmodai 12:38, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: "Mentioned on Wikipedia" should not be the next notch on their war stick. Geogre 14:42, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable website, mostly nonsense and irrelevant forum politics.   — Gwalla | Talk 16:06, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete Not worthy of inclusion MarkS 19:50, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete Tezkah fucking sucks anal toe lol 20:33, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Not that it matters, but the above is an anon user: 4.34.136.138 (func(talk) 04:08, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC))

 * Delete. Torch this article. Gamaliel 06:36, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Postdlf 07:08, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)


text: User talk:68.55.134.242

title: User talk:68.55.134.242


text:
Computational photography

Computational photography refers to digital image capture and processing techniques that use digital computation instead of optical processes. Computational photography can improve the capabilities of a camera, or introduce features that were not possible at all with film-based photography, or reduce the cost or size of camera elements. Examples of computational photography include in-camera computation of digital panoramas, high-dynamic-range images, and light field cameras. Light field cameras use novel optical elements to capture three dimensional scene information which can then be used to produce 3D images, enhanced depth-of-field, and selective de-focusing (or "post focus"). Enhanced depth-of-field reduces the need for mechanical focusing systems. All of these features use computational imaging techniques.

The definition of computational photography has evolved to cover a number of subject areas in computer graphics, computer vision, and applied optics. These areas are given below, organized according to a taxonomy proposed by Shree K. Nayar. Within each area is a list of techniques, and for each technique one or two representative papers or books are cited. Deliberately omitted from the taxonomy are image processing (see also digital image processing) techniques applied to traditionally captured images in order to produce better images. Examples of such techniques are image scaling, dynamic range compression (i.e. tone mapping), color management, image completion (a.k.a. inpainting or hole filling), image compression, digital watermarking, and artistic image effects. Also omitted are techniques that produce range data, volume data, 3D models, 4D light fields, 4D, 6D, or 8D BRDFs, or other high-dimensional image-based representations. Epsilon photography is a sub-field of computational photography.

Effect on photography
Photos taken using computational photography can allow amateurs to produce photographs rivalling the quality of professional photographers, but as of do not outperform the use of professional-level equipment.

Computational illumination
This is controlling photographic illumination in a structured fashion, then processing the captured images, to create new images. The applications include image-based relighting, image enhancement, image deblurring, geometry/material recovery and so forth.

High-dynamic-range imaging uses differently exposed pictures of the same scene to extend dynamic range. Other examples include processing and merging differently illuminated images of the same subject matter ("lightspace").

Computational optics
This is capture of optically coded images, followed by computational decoding to produce new images. Coded aperture imaging was mainly applied in astronomy or X-ray imaging to boost the image quality. Instead of a single pin-hole, a pinhole pattern is applied in imaging, and deconvolution is performed to recover the image. In coded exposure imaging, the on/off state of the shutter is coded to modify the kernel of motion blur. In this way motion deblurring becomes a well-conditioned problem. Similarly, in a lens based coded aperture, the aperture can be modified by inserting a broadband mask. Thus, out of focus deblurring becomes a well-conditioned problem. The coded aperture can also improve the quality in light field acquisition using Hadamard transform optics.

Coded aperture patterns can also be designed using color filters, in order to apply different codes at different wavelengths. This allows to increase the amount of light that reaches the camera sensor, compared to binary masks.

Computational imaging
Computational imaging is a set of imaging techniques that combine data acquisition and data processing to create the image of an object through indirect means to yield enhanced resolution, additional information such as optical phase or 3D reconstruction. The information is often recorded without using a conventional optical microscope configuration or with limited datasets.

Computational imaging allows to go beyond physical limitations of optical systems, such as numerical aperture, or even obliterates the need for optical elements.

For parts of the optical spectrum where imaging elements such as objectives are difficult to manufacture or image sensors cannot be miniaturized, computational imaging provides useful alternatives, in fields such as X-ray and THz radiations.

Common techniques
Among common computational imaging techniques are lensless imaging, computational speckle imaging, ptychography and Fourier ptychography.

Computational imaging technique often draws on compressive sensing or phase retrieval techniques, where the angular spectrum of the object is being reconstructed. Other techniques are related to the field of computational imaging, such as digital holography, computer vision and inverse problems such as tomography.

Computational processing
This is processing of non-optically-coded images to produce new images.

Computational sensors
These are detectors that combine sensing and processing, typically in hardware, like the oversampled binary image sensor.

Early work in computer vision
Although computational photography is a currently popular buzzword in computer graphics, many of its techniques first appeared in the computer vision literature, either under other names or within papers aimed at 3D shape analysis.

Art history

Computational photography, as an art form, has been practiced by capture of differently exposed pictures of the same subject matter, and combining them together. This was the inspiration for the development of the wearable computer in the 1970s and early 1980s. Computational photography was inspired by the work of Charles Wyckoff, and thus computational photography datasets (e.g. differently exposed pictures of the same subject matter that are taken in order to make a single composite image) are sometimes referred to as Wyckoff Sets, in his honor.

Early work in this area (joint estimation of image projection and exposure value) was undertaken by Mann and Candoccia.

Charles Wyckoff devoted much of his life to creating special kinds of 3-layer photographic films that captured different exposures of the same subject matter. A picture of a nuclear explosion, taken on Wyckoff's film, appeared on the cover of Life Magazine and showed the dynamic range from dark outer areas to inner core.

title: Computational photography


text:
Category talk:Ancient peoples

there is an alias Category:Ancient Peoples, prays for merge. Mikkalai 04:22, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Agreed! This must be one of the most obvious cases for categories to be merged. Saga City 20:45, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)

 * Merge completed after consensus reached on CFD. See discussion. RedWolf 04:09, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

How?
I was wondering how I could add another name to this list of Ancient peoples? If someone could help me that would be great.--Moosh88 21:21, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * In order for an article to appear in this category listing, they are not added here directly. Instead, you need to edit the article itself, and simply put in the article. By convention, this should be placed at the bottom of the article, just before any links to other wikis. See Categorisation_FAQ for more details.--cjllw |  TALK  04:27, 2005 Jun 17 (UTC)

I WAS JUST WONDERING... IF CIVILIZATION STARTED IN AFRICA (ACCORDING TO WIKI WHICH I HAPPEN TO BELIEVE) AND IF THE EGYPTIANS CONSIDER THEMSELVES A RACE ALL THIER OWN, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY ANCIENT AFRICANS AFRIKANS ARENT LISTED HERE. JEWS AND OTHER TYPES OF ANCIENT PEOPLES ARE LISTED BUT THE AFRICANS ARE MISSING, I WOULD ADD IT MYSELF BUT THERE WAS AN ARTICLE I EDITED AND I MUSTVE MISSED SOME OF THE VANDELISM BUT WIKI THOUGHT IT WAS ME SO I AVOID EDITING.

SINCERLY AN AVID WIKI READER

title: Category talk:Ancient peoples


text:
User talk:Hotpeppers

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).

Capsicum, Chilli pepper
Now you've demerged them, we're back to the situation before the merge, with considerable duplicated content in the two articles. Do you propose to address this? Gdr 13:21, 2004 Oct 12 (UTC)

 * Yes, I do. See my comments posted last month in the Capsicum Talk page for how this could be done.

 * I also plan on adding considerable additional unique content to the Chilli Pepper article, which should also alleviate this. I am also considering content which might best be located in the Capsicum article, such as regarding the numerous undomesticated species; pepper ancestry; and the search for the "mother pepper".  --Hotpeppers 11:34, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Hotpeppers


text:
User talk:Yayati

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:Yayati


text:
Nutley

Nutley may refer to:

People

 * Ben Nutley (born 1992), English rugby union player
 * Bobby Nutley (1916–1996), Scottish football (soccer) player
 * Colin Nutley (born 1944), English director
 * Danny Nutley (born 1974), Australian former rugby league footballer
 * Molly Nutley (born 1995), Swedish actress
 * Richard Nutley (1670–1729), Irish judge
 * Zara Nutley (1926–2016), British television actress

England

 * Nutley, East Sussex, a village
 * Nutley Windmill, in the above village
 * Nutley, Hampshire, a village and civil parish

United States

 * Nutley, New Jersey, a township in the United States
 * Nutley Public Schools, a public school district in the above township
 * Nutley High School, in the above school district
 * Nutley Street, a road in Fairfax County, Virginia

title: Nutley


text: User talk:66.31.89.49

title: User talk:66.31.89.49


text:
T. P. Kailasam

Tyagraj Paramasiva Iyer Kailasam (Kannada: ತ್ಯಾಗರಾಜ ಪರಮಶಿವ ಐಯ್ಯರ್ ಕೈಲಾಸಂ, 29 July 1884 – 1946), was an Indian playwright and prominent writer in the Kannada literature. Literary criticism in Kannada literature is said to have started for the first time by Kailasam in his works.

His contribution to Kannada theatrical comedy earned him the title Prahasana Prapitamaha (ಪ್ರಹಸನ ಪ್ರಪಿತಾಮಹ; the great-grandfather of humorous plays). He was later often revered "the one and only Kailasam for Kannada" (ಕನ್ನಡಕ್ಕೆ ಒಬ್ಬನೇ ಕೈಲಾಸಂ).

Life
Kailasam was born in a Tamil Iyer brahmin family in Mysore, Kingdom of Mysore (now Karnataka). He belonged to the Mangudi Brahacharanam subsect. His father, T Paramasiva Iyer, was a revenue collector in the Government of Mysore who later became the Chief Justice of Mysore High Court. His father's brother, Sir T. Sadasiva Iyer, was a Chief Justice of Travancore High Court. Sir C.V. Raman is his father's cousin on the paternal side.

Kailasam received a good education. He was supported by Maharaja Krishnaraja Wadiyar IV to study geology at the Royal College of Science, London. His close friends and classmates included K. V. Iyer and V. Seetharamaiah. Kailasam repeated several courses to have an excuse to extend his stay in England. He spent seven years in school there to complete his fellowship, participating in theatre whenever possible.

Soon after his return, he joined the geology service in Mysore government. He became disillusioned with a government job and quit to write plays and live a bohemian life. His father's failed ambitious plan that he would become the Director General of the Department of Geology led him to stop talking to him.

Playwright
Kailasam's life was dedicated to local theatre and his contributions revolutionised it. His humour left an impression on Kannadigas. He opposed the company theatre's obsession with mythology and stories of royalty and shied away from loading his plays with music. Instead, he introduced simple, realistic sets. Kailasam chaired the Kannada Sahitya Sammelana held at Madras in 1945. A chainsmoker, he spent almost ten years at an apartment in Chamarajapuram which he called "Nook". Reputedly a notoriously filthy place, he loved it and wrote many dramas in there. He dictated his stories to his students at the Nook, usually starting after 10pm.

Kailasam was initially criticised for modern use of the Kannada language in his plays at a time when the language was used under strict linguistic syntax and semantics. But soon after, his works became very popular and are considered among the best in Kannada theatre, known for wit and satirical commentary on society.

Kannada

 * ToLLu Gatti or MakkaLiskool Manelalwe? [ಟೊಳ್ಳು ಗಟ್ಟಿ]
 * Poli Kitti, The Story of a born scout [ಪೋಲಿ ಕಿಟ್ಟಿ]
 * Bahishkara [ಬಹಿಷ್ಕಾರ]
 * HomeRoolu [ಹೋ೦ರೂಲು ]
 * Gandaskatri [ಗಂಡಸ್ಕತ್ರಿ]
 * Vaidyana Vyadhi [ವೈದ್ಯನ ವ್ಯಾಧಿ]
 * TaLikattokkooline? [ತಾಳಿಕಟ್ಟೋಕ್ಕೂಲಿನೇ]
 * Huttadalli Hutta (Waels Within Weals) [ಹುತ್ತದಲ್ಲಿ ಹುತ್ತ]
 * BandvaLvillada Badayi [ಬಂಡ್ವಾಳ್ವಿಲ್ಲದ ಬಡಾಯಿ]
 * Ammavra Ganda [ಅಮ್ಮಾವ್ರ ಗಂಡ ]
 * Seekarne Saavitri [ಸೀಕರ್ಣೆ ಸಾವಿತ್ರಿ]
 * Sattavana Santhaapa [ಸತ್ತವನ ಸಂತಾಪ]
 * AnukoolakkobaNNa [ಅನುಕೂಲಕ್ಕೊಬ್ಬಣ್ಣ]
 * Namkampni [ನಮ್ ಕಂಪನಿ]
 * NamkLabbu [ನಮ್ಕ್ಳಬ್ಬು]
 * NammBramhaNkay [ನಮ್ಮ್ ಬ್ರಾಹ್ಮಣ್ಕೆ]
 * SooLe (Murder O' Mercy) [ಸೂಳೆ]

English

 * Fulfilment
 * Purpose
 * The Brahmin's Curse
 * Simply Kailawesome (film)

title: T. P. Kailasam


text:
Amazo

Amazo is a supervillain appearing in American comic books published by DC Comics. The character was created by Gardner Fox and Mike Sekowsky and first appeared in The Brave and the Bold #30 (June 1960) as an adversary of the Justice League of America. Since debuting during the Silver Age of Comic Books, the character has appeared in comic books and other DC Comics-related products, including animated television series, trading cards and video games. Traditionally, Amazo is an android created by the villain scientist Professor Ivo and gifted with technology that allows him to mimic the abilities and powers of superheroes he fights (usually the Justice League), as well as make copies of their weapons (though these copies are less powerful than the originals). His default powers are often those of Flash, Aquaman, Martian Manhunter, Wonder Woman, and Green Lantern (the Justice League founding members that he first fought). He is similar and often compared with the later created Marvel android villain Super-Adaptoid (introduced 1966).

In the New 52 timeline of DC Comics, Amazo begins as the A-Maze Operating System and then becomes an android capable of duplicating superhuman powers. Later on, a sentient Amazo Virus infects research scientist Armen Ikarus and takes over his mind. With Ikarus as a host, the Amazo Virus infects other people, granting them super-powers and controlling their minds before they die within 24 hours.

In live-action media, multiple Amazo robots appeared in the Arrowverse crossover event Elseworlds.

Publication history
Amazo first appeared in a one-off story in The Brave and the Bold #30 (June 1960) and returned as an opponent of the Justice League of America in Justice League of America #27 (May 1964) and #112 (August 1974), plus a briefer appearance in #65 when another antagonist weaponized Amazo and other items from the JLA trophy room. Other significant issues included an encounter with a depowered Superman in Action Comics #480-483 (February – May 1978), and in Justice League of America #191 (June 1981) and #241-243 (August – October 1985). Amazo also battles a fully powered Superman in Superman Special #3 (1985).

A different Amazo model featured in Justice League Quarterly #12 (Fall 1993) and battled the hero Aztek in Aztek: The Ultimate Man #10 (May 1997) before being destroyed in Resurrection Man #2 (June 1997). An advanced version debuted in a one-off story in JLA #27 (March 1999), while another appeared in the limited series Hourman, specifically issues #1, #5-7, #17, and #19-21 (April 1999 – December 2000).

Amazo's origin is revealed in Secret Origins of Super-Villains 80-Page Giant #1 (December 1999). Another version is discovered to be part of a weapons shipment in Batman #636-637 (March – April 2005) and during the Villains United storyline in Firestorm vol. 2 #14-16 (August – October 2005), Villains United #5-6 (November – December 2005), and the Villains United: Infinite Crisis Special (June 2006).

Amazo's consciousness returned in Justice League of America #1-5 (October 2006 – March 2007), planted in the body of fellow android the Red Tornado. Ivo also created Amazo's "offspring" in JLA Classified #37-41 (June – October 2007). A story continuing the first Red Tornado storyline featured in Justice League of America vol. 2 #21-23 (July – September 2008).

Writer Mike Conroy noted: "Amazo was a persistent thorn in the JLA's side... although his programming and own sentience have displayed no ambition towards world conquest... His very existence is a hazard to all of humanity".

Fictional character biography
The android Amazo was created by Professor Anthony Ivo, a scientist with expertise in multiple fields who is obsessed with immortality. The original Justice League of America (Green Lantern, Flash, Aquaman, Wonder Woman, and the Martian Manhunter) discover their powers are being drained and somehow then being used by a thief who is after animals known to have long lifespans. While attempting to discover the perpetrator, the League is confronted and defeated by Amazo, who has duplicated their powers thanks to "absorption cell" technology created by Ivo. Amazo brings the team to Ivo, who reveals he has created a means of extending his life span courtesy of the data obtained from studying the creatures Amazo captured. The League then defeats Ivo and the android. Ivo's immortality results in his body becoming monstrous in form, and the android is stored in the League trophy room.

The android is temporarily re-activated twice to assist the League in regaining lost abilities. In these and subsequent stories, the android's duplication of powers don't make others feel their powers being drained. When red sun radiation reaches Earth, Amazo reactivates and engages in an extensive battle with Superman involving time-travel, only to be defeated before it can murder Ivo and the League. Later, the super-villain called the Key, having been shrunken in size, re-activates the android in a failed bid to restore his original height. The League defeats Amazo and then new team member Zatanna restores the Key to his former state.

After the Justice League of America disbands and reforms as a small team of mostly new heroes based in Detroit, Ivo reactivates Amazo to attack this less experienced, "weaker" League. The android defeats all the new members but is finally stopped by Justice League founding members the Martian Manhunter and Aquaman.

A different Amazo model is later activated and battles the superhero team the Conglomerate. This updated Amazo searches for Ivo and encounters the hero Aztek, who succeeds in reasoning with the android rather than overpowering it. This Amazo model also briefly battles the Resurrection Man before finally being destroyed. Before his destruction, the second model of Amazo is summoned into the future by the android hero Hourman, who wishes to meet his "ancestor". This Amazo copies Hourman's time-warping "Worlogog" artifact, becoming "Timazo" in the process. Timazo wreaks havoc with his new ability to manipulate time, but is defeated by Hourman and returned to his place in the past so his history can run its course. Another, similar model of Amazo later has several more encounters with Hourman.

Another model of Amazo is activated that can wield multiple powers at once and is programmed to automatically upgrade its abilities to match those of all active Justice League members. Initially not understanding this upgrade, the Justice League calls in reserve members to help defeat Amazo, which only results in its power increasing. On the Atom's advice, Superman (active team chairman at the time) announces the League is officially disbanded. Programmed only to mimic the powers of active members, this Amazo is suddenly depowered and easily deactivated. Years later, Batman and Nightwing discover a partially built Amazo android in a weapons shipment and destroy it.

Another Amazo participates in a massive attack by a group of villains on the city of Metropolis, but is destroyed by Black Adam.

It is eventually revealed that after perfecting Amazo's absorption cells, Ivo combined this technology with human ova and DNA to create a "son" of Amazo who grows up as Frank Halloran, unaware of his heritage. Years later, Frank is a philosophy student dating a young woman named Sara when his powers are awakened prematurely. Rather than emulate his villainous "father", Frank hopes to be a hero called "Kid Amazo". Slowly becoming mentally unstable, Kid Amazo discovers Sara is Ivo's daughter and was instructed to monitor Frank by posing as a girlfriend. Kid Amazo goes on a rampage. Batman deduces Kid Amazo has not only the powers of the Leaguers but also their contrasting personality traits. This is later used to cause greater internal instability, destroying Kid Amazo.

Later, Ivo downloads Amazo's programming into the body of the Red Tornado, the android villain-turned-hero created by Professor T.O. Morrow, another enemy of the Justice League. The League battles an army of Red Tornado androids before discovering that the villain Solomon Grundy intends to transfer his mind into the original android Tornado's body. Although this plan is defeated, the Amazo programming asserts itself and attacks the League until member Vixen destroys it. A new body is created to house Red Tornado's consciousness but the Amazo programming inhabits it instead, battling Justice League before he's defeated by being teleported into the gravity well of the red star Antares.

The New 52
As part of The New 52, the new origin story of the Justice League references the "A-Maze Operating System" and "B-Maze Operating System" designed by Anthony Ivo. The League later battles an android equipped with a corrupt version of this operating system.

During the Forever Evil storyline, the New 52 Amazo appears as a member of the Secret Society of Super Villains.

During the "Amazo Virus" storyline, a biotech pathogen is created based on the android's absorption cells. The first person to be infected by this virus is former Lexcorp research scientist Armen Ikarus, whose mind becomes corrupted in the process and replaced by the virus's will. Now possessing power and driven to infect others, Ikarus's personality is replaced by the new Amazo. The Ikarus Amazo infects others, granting them super-powers based on desires and personality traits, but killing them within 24 hours. The Ikarus Amazo, able to enhance infected humans and control them through a "hive-mind" connection, is defeated by the Justice League. Young Reggie Meyer and his family are also affected. Influenced by technology from the original Amazo android, Reggie becomes Kid-Amazo.

DC Rebirth
In the storyline Outbreak, Amazo is one of the villains recruited by an A.I. named Genie, created by the daughter of computer technician James Palmer. His technology cells are later hacked and he briefly joins the Justice League's side.

Amazo later appeared as a member of the Cabal, alongside Per Degaton, Doctor Psycho, Queen Bee, and Hugo Strange. Amazo re-appeared in the pages of Batman/Superman: World's Finest #16 with Metamorpho abilities labeled NewMazo with aide by Dr. Will Magnus of the Metal Men. It also created an ally in the form of Ultra-Morpho.

Dawn of DC
During the "Absolute Power" event, Amanda Waller and Failsafe create an army of Amazos to steal the powers of metahumans around the world.

Amazo (Android)
Amazo is an advanced android built using Professor Anthony Ivo's "absorption cell" technology. This technology (later indicated to involve nanites) allows Amazo's cells to mimic the physical structure and energy output of organic beings he encounters, empowering him to mimic physical and energy-based abilities (such as the strength of Superman, the speed of the Flash, or the fighting skill of Batman). Amazo's internal energy source provides power for these abilities, so it does not matter what source of power is used by the superhuman he is mimicking (such as Wonder Woman's speed being based on magical empowerment and Superman's speed being a result of Kryptonian cells fueled by solar radiation). After his first story, many Amazo models retain the powers of the first five founding Leaguers he met as a default power set, absorbing new abilities based on other Leaguers they encounter. The models are usually only able to access a single target's unique attributes at a time. Some models have internally possessed the powers of many Justice League members, not just founding members, in their internal database and can summon them at will, but again only utilizing one person's powers at a time. Some later Amazo versions are upgraded to use and mimic multiple powers at once from any superhuman they come in contact with or anyone it identifies as a Justice League member. Several Amazo models can create duplicates of weapons as well, such as the power ring of Green Lantern, the metal mace of Hawkgirl, or the lasso of Wonder Woman. These copied weapons are more limited in power than the original products.

At times, Amazo is a simple minded android, capable of basic strategies and possessing average intelligence but with narrow focus. Some models of Amazo have demonstrated advanced analysis and tactics in battle, helping them maneuver to apply their stolen powers effectively to defeat opponents. In most incarnations, Amazo takes on a person's weaknesses simultaneously when mimicking their powers (as an example, becoming vulnerable to kryptonite radiation while using Superman abilities). Multiple stories have also indicated that his android body, designed to emulate the form and function of a human being, also possesses the pressure points and stress spots the average human body possesses.

Amazo (Ikarus)
Arman Ikarus is a former scientist and researcher at Lexcorp who is the first to be exposed to the Amazo Virus outbreak. This version of Amazo is driven to infect others with the Amazo virus, causing them to develop psychoactive superhuman abilities based on inherent desires and characteristics before dying within 24 hours. The Ikarus Amazo could emulate technology and super-powers he encountered by crudely modifying his genetic structure and biological structure. The Ikarus Amazo can remotely augment the physical abilities of anyone infected with the Amazo virus and influence their behavior through establishing a mental "hive-mind" connection. Initially, Ikarus's body seemed to degenerate from the strain of the virus altering his biology, but later his form stabilized and evolved into the appearance of the classic Amazo android.

Other versions
A funny animal-inspired counterpart of Amazo called "Amazoo", a robotic chimera of a dozen different animal body parts and abilities, from "Earth-C-Minus" appears in Captain Carrot and His Amazing Zoo Crew! #14-15.

Television

 * Amazo appears in series set in the DC Animated Universe (DCAU), voiced by Robert Picardo:
 * First appearing in the Justice League two-part episode "Tabula Rasa" and initially referred to simply as the "Android", this version is a gray, blank humanoid capable of accessing several replicated abilities simultaneously and gradually removing weaknesses. While looking for Professor Ivo to help him fix his battle suit, Lex Luthor finds Amazo and uses him to steal the Justice League's abilities and the parts he needs to fix his suit. After absorbing J'onn J'onzz's abilities however, Amazo takes on a gold coloration and flies off into space to find the meaning behind his existence.
 * As of the Justice League Unlimited episode "The Return", Amazo has attained godlike power and the ability to teleport. He intends to kill Luthor for using him, but eventually gives up this quest after fighting Doctor Fate and is given sanctuary in the Tower of Fate to find his purpose. In the episode "Wake the Dead", Amazo attempts to defeat the recently empowered and resurrected Solomon Grundy, but the latter drains some of Amazo's energy. Realizing he is putting the League at risk, Amazo teleports away.
 * Amazo appears in the Young Justice episode "Schooled", voiced by Peter MacNicol.
 * Amazo appears in the Batman: The Brave and the Bold episode "Triumvirate of Terror!", voiced by Roger Rose. This version is a member of the Legion of Doom.
 * Amazo appears in the Justice League Action episode "Boo-ray for Bizarro", voiced by Thomas Lennon. In addition to replicating a target's skills, powers, and personal tools, this version is also able to replicate mental prowess. He captures the Justice League in an attempt to replicate their powers, only to be overloaded and rendered catatonic by Bizarro's backwards mentality.
 * A.M.A.Z.O. (Anti Metahuman Adaptive Zootomic Organism) appears in the Arrowverse crossover "Elseworlds". This version is an android built by Ivo Laboratories for A.R.G.U.S. to replicate the natural skills and special abilities of any extraordinary, metahuman, and extraterrestrial individual it comes across. After Dr. John Deegan's attempts to alter reality cause Oliver Queen and Barry Allen to switch lives instead, the former unknowingly activates A.M.A.Z.O. while thwarting a robbery at Ivo Laboratories. Upon learning of what happened and receiving help from Cisco Ramon, Supergirl, and Superman, Queen and Allen defeat the android. After eventually and successfully altering reality, Deegan revives A.M.A.Z.O. to assist him, but it is destroyed by Brainiac 5.

Film

 * Amazo appears in Batman: Under the Red Hood, voiced by Fred Tatasciore. This version has the same weak points as a human being.
 * Amazo appears in Injustice. This version was built by Ra's al Ghul ostensibly to help Superman enforce global peace, but with the secret goal of killing Superman after replicating his powers. After becoming violent in its quest to maintain order, Superman and his allies join forces with Batman's resistance to fight Amazo. It kills Hawkman and Cyborg before Plastic Man destroys it from the inside.
 * Amazo appears in Justice League: Crisis on Infinite Earths – Part One, voiced by Nolan North.

Video games

 * Amazo appears in Justice League: Chronicles.
 * Amazo appears as a character summon in Scribblenauts Unmasked: A DC Comics Adventure.

Miscellaneous

 * Amazo appears in DC Super Friends #18.
 * Amazo appears in the Injustice 2 prequel comic.  After being forced by the League of Assassins to build Amazo, Professor Ivo sells him off to a terrorist initiative led by Ra's al Ghul and Solovar.
 * Amazo and his alternate universe counterpart Amazo-II appear in Justice League Infinity. The latter is a version of him who fused with the Anti-Life Equation before being cleansed by the main universe Amazo, after which they leave to travel the multiverse together.

title: Amazo


text:
Talk:Al Mezan Center for Human Rights

Untitled
Stalking my edits again like a vulture? Human rights organizations like the Red Cross also seemed very partisan to the Nazis, for obvious reasons. Alberuni 04:29, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * You're mixing metaphors here; vultures don't stalk. And your second sentence is a non sequitur. Jayjg 04:48, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * What kind of organism perceives human rights to be a partisan issue? Do you consider B'Tselem partisan? Amnesty International? Human Rights Watch? Yet, to you, Al-Mezan must be partisan because they are located in a refugee camp created by your beloved Jewish state. Alberuni 05:02, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Their location isn't the issue; their predominant focus on Israeli activities, and the highly partisan language used to describe them, is. Jayjg 05:10, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * It is you who are extremely partisan so from your perspective, human rights groups seem partisan. Your blind spot to Israeli military occupation is glaring. Give an example of partisan language describing "Israeli activities" to justify your mocking edits. Alberuni 05:21, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * If you can't stick to discussing the article itself, rather than me, for even one comment, then there is little point in discussion. Let me know when you're interested in continuing following the rules of civility, one of Wikipedia's core values, and in avoiding any ad hominem statements. Jayjg 05:26, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * So does that mean you couldn't find any examples to back up your edit? Alberuni 05:33, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Al Mazen uses the term "Israeli Occupation Forces" and inflammatory rethoric . It is clearly taking side here and not even trying to keep neutrality or a shade of it, so it can't be considered non-partisan. Moreover, the asseration in the article that Al Mezan is non-partisan is made by Al Mezan itself. MathKnight 17:57, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * The term Israeli Occupation Forces is not partisan. It is the generally accepted term by everyone (except Israelis). Your assertions about inflammatory rhetoric include no examples. Al-Mezan strives to be a non-partisan human rights organization by investigating Palestinian abuses as well as Israeli ones but they admit that the crisis of the Israeli occupation and the violence of the current conflict forces them to focus on protection of immediate and vital human rights, such as the right of civilians and children to not be killed by the current Israeli military offensive against the refugee camp. Alberuni 19:07, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * It is. The term IOF used only by pro-Palestinian sites and radical Muslim sites. Human rights group (such as HRW) uses the official name "Israeli Defence Forces" or "IDF". MathKnight 00:10, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Is it any more partisan than the generally accepted "multinational occupation of Iraq, 2003-2004"?
 * Israeli army, or Israeli Defense Forces, or IDF, or Tsahal are the "generally accepted terms" for the Israeli army; "Israeli Occupation Forces" is partisan propaganda which creates a false distinction. If a soldier in the IDF is stationed in Tel Aviv, is he part of the "Israeli Occupation Forces"? Jayjg 21:16, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I think IDF is more generally accepted than IOF, I agree, but it is still accurate to describe the Israeli soldiers who enforce the Israeli military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip as occupation forces. I do not think that an IDF soldier stationed in Israel would be referred to as an occupation force because the term is used to describe the soldiers in the Occupied Territories. I suspect that the members of the Al Mezan Center who live under military occupation understand the situation more clearly than people who are assessing the situation from a safe distance and who have never lived under military occupation.Alberuni 01:05, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * The name "Israeli Occupation Forces" is a twisting of the IDF official name and not merely a descripition as you claim. It is POV term and it is used only in Arab\Muslim or pro-Palestinian website. There is no reputable and reliable news source that uses IOF - not CNN, not BBC, not CBS, not AP, not Reuters and even not AFP. As you might notice, I'm trying not to go through the argument over the status of the WB and GS though I totaly disagree you, since this Talk page doesn't need more flames. MathKnight 11:08, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I'm an outsider who knows next to nothing about whether al-Mezan is non-partisan or not. (That seems to be the bulk of the disagreement.) So help me out here. Alberuni, (or anyone else), why do you think al-Mezan is non-partisan? Jayjg, (or anyone else), why do you think it isn't?   – Quadell (talk) (help)   18:51, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * al-Mezan is partisan because a) it claims its goal is to focus on Human Rights issues in the West Bank and Gaza, but in practice it focuses only on the Human Rights "abuses" of Israel, ignoring those of the Palestinian Authority, and b) because it uses non-partisan language - as a simple example, it refers to the IDF (Israel Defence Forces - the official English name) as the IOF (Israel Occupation Forces). In contrast, other human rights groups mentioned, such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International and B'Tselem, while mostly criticizing human rights abuses by Israel, still do manage to occasionally criticize human rights abuses of Palestinians and the Palestinian Authority, and have no trouble referring to various organizations like the IDF by their official names; see for example  and  . Jayjg 19:05, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Just so you're aware, unlike the persistent claim that I re-directed a page of Alberuni's, I have never done so. Also, you'll have to look very hard in that document to find any al-Mezan complaints about PA human rights abuses; on the other hand, the Israeli abuses are front and center. al-Mezan spends most of its efforts on the "Palestinian" side trying to get a look at the PA budget.  Jayjg 20:13, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * So now you are backtracking on your claim (a) above but complain that it was too hard for you to find. Did you note the sections where al-Mezan investigates PA abuse of prisoners? At what point do you just admit you are wrong and cease editing the article based on your opinion instead of facts presented? (As an aside, this is an organization is dealing with massive oppression against millions of refugees by the Israeli military occupation. To expect them NOT to focus on the Israeli abuses is absurd. Did Jewish human rights groups in WWII complain about the abuses of Jewish partisans in Palestine or was their attention focused on the Nazis?) Alberuni 20:27, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your interest Quadell. There are plenty of examples of al-Mezan investigating Palestinian Authority abuses in their annual report. Jayjg doesn't know anything about this group. He's just a knee-jerk proponent of an extreme Zionist POV. He found this al-Mezan page by stalking my edits and then he disputed its objectivity/non-partisan mission without even knowing a thing about it - just because it is highly critical of the Israeli occupation, which Jayjg hates to see criticized anywhere. He thinks he is on a mission from God to protect the Jewish state on Wikipedia. Al-Mezan refers to "Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT)" so I created a page to reference it. Jayjg immediately redirected it, then listed it for deletion. The reason he is hounding me is because we argued over whether Hamas being labelled a terrorist organization is NPOV on the Hamas talk page and we argued about other issues on Arab-Israeli, israel, and other pages. He got so offended that he went on a passive/aggressive witch-hunt against me. Jayjg began looking up all my edits and page creations and began undermining the ones that offend his Zionist perspective. His behavior is ridiculously abusive. I try to take him to the Talk page but he just bull-headedly assumes that his view is the only valid view. It is nearly impossible to communicate with him. I noticed that User:Blankfaze previously noticed his abusive behavior too. I am learning about the Dispute Resolution procedures and have started instituting them. Alberuni 19:46, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Jayjg you have not made your case, why do you persist in your petty edit war
You backtracked on your mocking claim (a) above that this human rights organization is partisan even though you complained that it was too hard for you to bother reading their annual report to find evidence that they investigate abuses impartially. Yet, you persist in trying to neutralize their legitimacy simply because your Zionist POV is offended that a human rights organization is critical of Israelis for their atrocities against Palestinians. Alberuni 01:03, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hasbara is a technique, Human Rights Organization is an office
Don't mix apples and oranges. You did a good job on the hasbara article. Hasbara means advocacy/propaganda. Al Mezan is a specific organization, not a propaganda technique or practice. Human Rights campaigners are not equivalent to hasbara. You can compare Al Mezan with B'Tselem or Amnesty International or human rights watch. You can compare Hasbara International with a group like Palestine Solidarity. Comparing human rights groups with propaganda is so POV that it defies logic. Should we label all human rights organizations, like Jewish anti-Holocaust groups, with the category Propaganda? Get serious. Alberuni 02:42, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Copyrights violation
This entire article is copied from this page: http://www.mezan.org/site_en/about_mezan/index.php. Not only it is a copyright violation, its has serious ethical problems ("about us" page as an objective article?). MathKnight 17:40, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm sure your motives were entirely devoted to concern for copyright protections and not designed to censor reference to a human rights organization critical of the Israeli atrocities in Jabalia. The article has been rewritten to obviate your copyright concerns. Alberuni 18:48, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Attacking me and attacking Israel for no reason won't help you and won't be productive for this page. Please keep civility and discuss ad issue not ad huminem. So far you havn't answer the copy rights issue. MathKnight 18:53, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Who is attacking whom? Please try to read more carefully before hurling accusations. There are no attacks against you on this page; just simple thanks for your diligent efforts at protecting the intellectual property rights of the Al Mezan Center. I'm sure they would express their gratitude themselves if they weren't so busy with more urgent matters at the moment.Alberuni 19:48, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, no doubt they are busy with more urgent matters like writing partisan propaganda pieces. Jayjg 21:16, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Is this the "propaganda" that you find offensive? The slaughter of children in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) must stop now
 * "Al Mezan Center for Human Rights gravely condemns the killing of Palestinian children by the Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF). The Center demands effective protection by the international community to stop the killing and severe injury of children, which cannot be justified by military necessity under any circumstances whatsoever. At approximately 11am today, Tuesday 12 October 2004, the IOF shot 10-year-old Ghadeer Jaber Mkhemar, from Khan Younis. Witnesses said IOF troops opened fire from Neve Dekalim settlement towards the UNRWA Al Khalidyeh Primary School, which is located in Khan Younis refugee camp. The schoolgirl sustained critical wounds in the chest while she was inside her classroom(*). Earlier on 22 September 2004, an 11-year-old girl, Raghda Al Assar died from wounds she sustained on Tuesday 7 September, 2004, from a live bullet in the head when she was in her classroom in Khan Younis. In Rafah, in the south of the Gaza strip, Israeli soldiers killed 13-year-old Iman Samir Darweesh Al Hams near a military post. Fifteen bullets were extracted from her body. Eyewitnesses, including Israeli soldiers from the unit that killed her, said the unit's commander opened his automatic rifle at her at close range after she had been identified as a child and therefore not a threat(**) . Numerous other children have been injured inside their classrooms in UNRWA schools in the Gaza Strip from IOF fire over the past two years."
 * I agree, the slaughter of children by Palestinians must stop, especially the children they train as suicide bombers. For some reason, the Al Mezan website has chosen to turn a blind eye to the innocent victims of Palestinian brainwashing.  Thankfully, Israel goes out of their way to save Palestinian children like Abdullah Quran and Husam Abdo while Al Mezan ignores their fate.  Your search - Abdullah Quran site:mezan.org - did not match any documents...Your search - Husam Abdo site:mezan.org - did not match any documents.  Now, why am I not surprised? --Viriditas 04:59, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Al Mezan operates from Jabalia in the Gaza Strip, not Nablus in the West Bank, for one thing. Why are you not surprised? It may have something to do with your severely jaundiced POV. Alberuni 15:15, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Al Mezan may operate from Gaza, but that doesn't stop them from covering human rights issues in the West Bank. In fact, they covered the deportation of Palestinians from the West Bank and accused Israelis of war crime on their web site while ignoring the human rights of children like Abdullah Quran and Husam Abdo.  Al Mezan also covered the execution of Palestinians in Nablus by the Palestinian Authority.  One would think that a human rights organization would call for an end to such executions, but the most Al Mezan could manage was to claim that such executions were an ineffective measure against crime.  Sadly, nothing was said by Al Mezan about Palestinian Authority-ordered executions being a violation of basic human rights.  And yet, nothing from Al Mezan about the Palestinian children being forced to blow themselves up in Nablus.  Surpisingly, Al Mezan managed to find the time to write a letter to the EU which mentions the damage in Nablus from continued fighting, but nothing about the human rights of Palestinian children who are being forced to act as suicide bombers.  In the midst of the deprivation of basic human rights for Palestinian children by the Palestinian Authority, Al Mezan found the time to write a press release desscribing a resident of Askar near Nablus, who was delayed on her way to the hospital.  Of course, I could go on with many examples which refute your contention that Al Mezan doesn't cover human rights violations in the West Bank, but what would be the point?  Is it a "severely jaundiced POV" that leads to these factual observations? Is it POV to observe that Al Mezan, an alleged human rights organization, spends more time issuing press releases accusing Israel of war crimes than actually focusing on real human rights issues facing the Palestinian community? The recruitment and use of child soldiers by Hamas, Fatah and Islamic Jihad is a serious human rights issue that Al Mezan is not willing or able to acknowledge.  --Viriditas 11:29, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What aspect of neutrality is disputed in this article?
I think everything has been addressed. Al Mezan Center for Human Rights also investigates human rights abuses by the Palestinian Authority so it cannot be said to be partisan. the use of terms like "Israeli Occupation Forces" is not innacurate and in and of itself does not make them a partisan organization although it probably does reflect the fact that they are not an Israeli right-wing organization. Advocating that children in the refugee camp where they are located should not be murdered is a valid human rights position regardless of your political persuasion. Please correct me if I am giving humans too much credit. Alberuni 01:21, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Alberuni behave like an adult! 7 minutes ago you reverted edits on the partisanship issue and now you ask which aspect of the neutrality is disputed? The tag has the simple and straightforward meaning that some Wikipedians disagree that its NPOV. That's all. No place for fancy interpretations. Gadykozma 01:32, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Please tone down the volume. There are two issues here. One is that disputes about neutrality belong on the Talk page and not in the article. If Wikipedians are disputing whether Al Mezan is partisan that is not an issue for the article. Is there any evidence that someone outside of Wikipedia is disputing the non-partisan nature of this human rights organization? I don;t think so. Therefore the dispute belongs in Talk not in the article. The second issue is the multiple typographical, spelling and factual mistakes in the existing version. For instance, "The center calims to be non-partisan. This claim is in dispute due to its use of inflammatory rhetorics and focusing on actions of Israel." Also, "Swiss Agnecy for Development and Cooperation (SDC)"

 * The rhetoric of Al Mezan is not inflammatory. It is factual. Amnesty International also references the Israeli Occupation and the Occupied Territories. Israel and the Occupied Territories. I am sorry if this is offensive from some points of view that prefer to see the territories described as "disputed" but that does not make the use of the term inflammatory. Furthermore, Al Mezan also investigates abuses by the Palestinian Authority as has been discussed. Are there any other reasons to dispute the neutrality of this article? Alberuni 02:02, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * "Factual rhetoric" is a propagandistic oxymoron. There are many reasons to dispute the neutrality of this article, and they are being dealt with, one at a time. --Viriditas 05:14, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Discussions of neutrality belong in the talk page, but the NPOV tag belongs on the main page as long as these discussions haven't been resolved. As for your arguments, they were disputed above, at least find new ones. Gadykozma 02:24, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Perhaps we are having a problem with "translation"! I am not disputing the neutrality of the article and I have answered and refuted the accusations that the article is not neutral and that Al Mezan is partisan. I am asking whoever disputes the neutrality of this article to provide their reasons. If there are no reasons to dispute the neutrality of this article then the NPOV tag will be removed. Alberuni 02:32, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Alberuni, perhaps bold will help as long as there are Wikipedian who do not agree that the article is NPOV, the NPOV tag has to stay. This has nothing to do with whether or not you answered. You think A they think B, therefore there is a dispute. Gadykozma 02:56, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I am asking "what is B?". What is it that some Wikipedian believes is not neutral in this article? I am trying to resolve the unfounded claims that this article lacks neutrality. Alberuni 03:09, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * B is "this center is partisan". A number of people expressed this opinion. None of them retracted it explicitly. The norm for implicit retraction on Wikipedia is about a week. In other words: if in a week noone else raises objections on the contents of this article, you will be free to remove this notice. Gadykozma 04:07, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Totally Disputed
The opening paragraph claims that Al Mezan is a non-partisan group. Nothing could be farther from the truth. According to to NGO Monitor, Al Mezan is a front organization that exists to promote anti-Israel propaganda. Additionally, the NGO Monitor claims that Al Mezan completely ignores Palestinian terrorism, and instead focuses on charging Israel with "war crimes" when Israel attempts to defend itself from terrorist attacks. According to NGO Monitor, Al Mezan has a long record of identifying the Palestinians as victims and labeling Israel as the aggressor, all the while ignoring the actions of its own suicide bombers who target Israeli civilians. In fact, there is not one single mention of suicide bombers on its entire web site. According to news reports, Al Mezan was quick to condemn the terrorist attacks in 2001 but the group refuses to sign a pledge certifying that funds given to their organization will not go to terrorist groups. Ironically, the article also states, Al Mezan was charted "to promote, protect and prevent violations of human rights in general." The author forgot to add, "except for Israeli civilians." --Viriditas 11:11, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Viriditas, here is the correct tag. What is in dispute is an interpretation the article brings (that the center is non-partisan), not any particular fact. Therefore it is wrong to claim that the factual accuracy of the page is in dispute. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 * BTW, thanks for the link to NGO Montior, it will be better to put it in the article than to use weasel words.Gadykozma 12:46, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * For the time being, I will defer to your expertise on this matter. I apologize for any problems I may have caused. --Viriditas 05:05, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Haha, NGO Monitor is published by Israeli Ambassador [Dore Gold], a leading apologist for Likud policies and the Sharon government. Now there's a partisan NGO. And they criticize human rights organizations like Al Mezan for being biased? What a mockery of justice. But that's Israel for you. Now I accept that the neutrality of Al Mezan is disputed beyond Wikipedia's borders, albeit by an Israeli government mouthpiece, but you could at least use correct spelling and grammar in the NPOV disclaimer. Alberuni 14:52, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Nobody claimed the NGO Monitor is non-partisan. Of course they are. Now, as for the embassador, please supply a link to the connection between him and the organization (you cannot actually "publish" an organization. Perhaps he is heading it? Founded it? Owns the web site?). Thanks. Gadykozma 15:09, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Dore Gold, Publisher Alberuni 15:50, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

(Former) Ambassadore Dore Gold
Please don't return the information about Dore to this article. This article is not about NGO Monitor, it is about Al Mezan. NGO Monitor is just an example of an opinion about this center and as such it receives way too much space even before you expand it with various details about Dore. Do you find it reasonable that half the page about Al Mezan is about Israeli organizations' opinions about Al Mezan? Does that strike you as reasonable proportions? Gadykozma 20:59, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

As User:Pir wrote (paraphrasing), "If you are going to smear a human rights organization, it's important to attribute the source." So, yes, I think if people object to Al Mezan's label of non-partisan status then is it is important to document the source of the allegations so the reader can decide how much credence to place in it. Alberuni 21:09, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * So just write "right-wing Israeli organization". Why give so many irrelevant details? Why is B'Tselem's view so important it deserves a whole paragraph plus a quotation which is obviously just a rephrase of the quotation from Al Mezan itself cited above? What is the topic of this page? Gadykozma 21:12, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * "Right-wing" is POV and unacceptable. The B'Tselem quote is not vitally necessary but it adds balance by showing that not all Israelis are against human rights groups. Alberuni 21:17, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Your distortion of evidence is truly astounding. There aren't any Israelis against human rights groups.  There are, however, people who object to front groups masquerading as rights groups, while funneling money to terrorists.  Do you understand the difference?  If you do, then why does Al Mezan refuse to sign a pledge that certifies they will not give money to terrorist groups?  Why would anyone, Palestinian or not, have any objection to signing such a pledge? --Viriditas 05:08, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * You can take up your many issues of concern with Al Mezan directly. What does your question have to do with improving the NPOV of the article? Alberuni 15:43, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * If Al Mezan has indeed refused to sign such a pledge, then it should be included in the article in relation to whether or not they are non-partisan. Jayjg 06:42, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree that such information should be added, but only together with Al Mezan's explanation for not doing so. Although I have not been able to find what their reasoning is, I feel there may be legitimate reasons, and the intended implication (that they have "something to hide") is probably questionable. - pir 10:43, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Pir, I have the links to their reasons, and I'm going to post them for you. Al Mezan seemed to feel that the pledge itself was illegal.  And yes, if you frame the question in a different way, the implication borders on ad ignorantiam.  We can't conclude that Al Mezan is funneling money to terrorists merely because they refuse to sign a pledge against it.  We agree that's fallacious. I phrased the question in terms of the reasons for their objection, rather than the implication itself.  But, it should also be noted that the issue of charity groups supporting terrorism is a real concern, and my question is relevant in that context.  --Viriditas 08:55, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * It adds imbalance between the important parts of the page (what is this center? What does it do? Who are its sponsors?) and the unimportant parts of this page (Zaki Nakhmias from Petah-Tikva thinks it stinks). If both two paragraphs were removed the page would be much better off. Gadykozma 21:21, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, I agree that the B'Tselem description adds some imbalance to the flow of the article. It would be better at the top. It adds a lot of vital information about their activities, at least a hint about what their kind of ideology might be, where they put their priorities etc. Plus it's from a source which I regard as more credible than most. However, to have two references to B'Tselem in such a small article would be excessive too, and I fear that if we summarise "address the needs of the marginalized population, suffering most profoundly from a lack of basic human rights, on a grassroots level. The Center aims to encourage the protection, promotion and respect of human rights in the Occupied Territories, especially economic, cultural and social rights, through a wide range of activities" in our own words, it will quickly be removed by those who try to smear them as liars, anti-Israel propagandists and apologists for terrorism. But maybe we can shorten it a bit. - pir 21:55, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It's a minor point so I won't insist that you recognize that once a person is an Ambassador, they always retain the title. Yes, he is the former Israeli Ambassador to the UN but his title is still Ambassador Dore Gold. It's right there in the first line of his bio: "Ambassador Dore Gold is President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs." Can the NPOV warning be removed? Does the article now satisfy everyone's demands for neutrality? Alberuni 21:01, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Alberuni, once again, Wikipedia standard is that this label stays until there are no comments on the talk page for at least a week. Not seven minutes — seven days. Man, I bore myself. Gadykozma 21:14, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I was asking if anyone had any remaining objections. I wasn't intending to remove the NPOV notice. Alberuni 21:17, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Give people time to breath. The article is in a constant state of flux. Some people are on other time zones. Some people have day jobs. Wikipedia has been here since 2001. The NPOV notice can wait a few more days. Gadykozma 21:23, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * No problem. I said I WAS NOT intending to remove the NPOV notice. Alberuni 21:36, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Is this still an issue? While it is possible that Ambassadors retain the title as an honorific even after they have left the post, nevertheless Dore Gold is the former Israeli Ambassador to the U.N., as he no longer serves in the capacity of Ambassador, nor is he employed by the Israeli government. Jayjg 06:42, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Gaza Strip is accurate
The Al Mezan Center does not operate in both the West Bank and Gaza Strip; rather, it's activities are restricted to the Gaza Strip. The continual insertion of "Occupied Palestinian Territories" in place of Gaza Strip is not only POV, but inaccurate. Jayjg 02:48, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Irrelevant material by NGO Monitor has been moved to NGO Monitor page
Because Jayjg made the case that revisionist critique of extermination camps doesn't belong on the "Jew" page but rather the page on Holocaust revisionism, it was suggested that NGO Monitor material should also be moved to the appropriate page. It has been done.

 * The material relating to the Al Mezan Center should be here, where it talks about the Al Mezan Center. NGO Monitor reports on dozens of NGOs, we can't include descriptions of every single investigation it has done in the article. Jayjg 06:27, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Sure you can, and you will. The criticisms by Zundel don't belong on Jew page.They belong on Holocaust (revisionism). Same here. The criticisms of Dore Gold don;t belong here.  Clean up the hypocrisy of your arguments and get back to me. --Alberuni 06:47, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * NGO monitor monitors NGOs; its reports on them are relevant for the various NGO pages. If you can find evidence that NGO monitor is some kind of Holocaust denial group, or any other criticisms of NGO monitor, feel free to include them on the NGO monitor page.  Please stop damaging Wikipedia by relentlessly pushing a virulently anti-Israel POV. Jayjg 06:53, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * The Israeli Ambassador Dore Gold's front group, NGO Monitor, criticizes claims of non-partisanship by Palestinian NGOs who complain about Israeli atrocities and human rights abuses. Holocaust revisionists criticize claims of Jews about the Holocaust atrocities and human rights abuse. You insist that revisionists' critiques do not belong on the Jew page but on their own page. Likewise, NGO Monitor critiques do not belong on Palestinian NGO pages but rather on NGO Monitor's page. I will not bother to explain this to you again.--Alberuni 06:59, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC) Quoting NoOne Jones from my Talk page: You've proved your point about Jayjg's insertion of opinions from Likudnik propaganda sites into articles on humanitarian organizations. Having done so, you should consider stopping. It would be more helpful to use the point you've established to address the editing of the articles that you really care about; for example, you could handle the NGO Monitor attacks by collating them in the NGO Monitor article, and you might handle the IDF's self-exculpation on Muhammad al-Durrah by citing reports that reached a different conclusion. Your current campaign is only going to turn people against you; it's already irked at least one user who was previously sympathetic, and continuing will probably have similar effects. —No-One Jones (m) 04:08, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Dore Gold is a former Ambassador, no longer employed by the Israeli government. Do you have any evidence that NGO Monitor is a "front group"?  Also, your "revisionist" analogy fails: NGO Monitor does not deny the "abuse" claims of the various NGO groups in question, does it? Rather, it points out that the NGOs are not "non-partisan" as they claim, and that at least one is headed by an anti-Semite, and it provides detailed evidence for its statements.  Are you saying that NGO monitor's statements are false? If so, why? Jayjg 07:10, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ignoring 3 revert rule?
In what way am I ignoring the 3 revert rule? Jayjg 06:54, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Remove POV tag?
There hasn't been a substantive PoV edit or talk on this page for several months. If there are no prompt objections tag s/b removed FRS 21:34, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Bias
I think it's worth mentioning in the article that the al-Mezan center uses inherently anti-Israeli terms such as 'Israeli Occupation Force', and presents disputed claims as fact (e.g. the claim that the Gaza beach blast was carried out by the IDF). I propose making an 'accusations of bias' section instead of the international reactions, which cannot encompass the above. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 15:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old POV template with a dormant discussion, per the instructions on that template's page:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

If editors are continuing to work toward resolution of any issue and I missed it, however, please feel free to restore. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:19, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Al Mezan Center for Human Rights. 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/20140327191313/http://www.mezan.org/en/messege.php?view=messageen to http://www.mezan.org/en/messege.php?view=messageen

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:02, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Al Mezan Center for Human Rights


text:
Sam Edwards (physicist)

Sir Samuel Frederick Edwards (1 February 1928 – 7 May 2015) was a Welsh physicist. The Sam Edwards Medal and Prize is named in his honour.

Early life and studies
Edwards was born on 1 February 1928 in Swansea, Wales, the son of Richard and Mary Jane Edwards. He was educated at the Bishop Gore School, Swansea, and Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, the University of Manchester, and at Harvard University, in the United States. He wrote his thesis under Julian Schwinger on the structure of the electron, and subsequently developed the functional integral form of field theory.

Academic research
Edwards's work in condensed matter physics started in 1958 with a paper which showed that statistical properties of disordered systems (glasses, gels etc.) could be described by the Feynman diagram and path integral methods invented in quantum field theory. During the following 35 years Edwards worked in the theoretical study of complex materials, such as polymers, gels, colloids and similar systems. His seminal paper came in 1965 which "in one stroke founded the modern quantitative understanding of polymer matter." Pierre-Gilles de Gennes notably extended Edwards's 1965 seminal work, ultimately leading to de Gennes's 1991 Nobel Prize in Physics.

Edwards invented what is known as the replica trick or replica method to evaluate the disorder-averaged free energy of glassy systems, which has been successfully applied to spin glass and to amorphous solids. His seminal 1971 paper was the first paper to introduce the replica trick and Edwards' seminal work led ultimately to Giorgio Parisi's 2021 Nobel Prize in Physics.

The Doi-Edwards theory of polymer melt viscoelasticity originated from an initial publication of Edwards in 1967, was expanded upon by de Gennes in 1971, and was subsequently formalized through a series of publications between Edwards and Masao Doi in the late 1970s.

Administrative activities and professional recognition
He was Chairman of the Science Research Council 1973-1977 and between 1984 and 1995 was Cavendish Professor of Physics at Cambridge University. He was a member of the Board of Sponsors of The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and Past President of Cambridge Society for the Application of Research.

Edwards was knighted in 1975. Awards presented to him include the Davy Medal (1984) and the Royal Medal (2001) of the Royal Society, the Boltzmann medal of the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics (1995), and the Dirac Medal of the International Centre for Theoretical Physics (2005). He was also a Founding Fellow of the Learned Society of Wales and he held an honorary degree (Doctor of Science) from the University of Bath (1978).

Personal life
In 1953 Edwards married Merriell E.M. Bland, with whom he had three daughters and a son. His relaxations were gardening and chamber music. Edwards died in Cambridge on 7 May 2015.

title: Sam Edwards (physicist)