text:
Persistent world

A persistent world or persistent state world (PSW) is a virtual world which, by the definition by Richard Bartle, "continues to exist and develop internally even when there are no people interacting with it". The first virtual worlds were text-based and often called MUDs, but the term is frequently used in relation to massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) and pervasive games. Examples of persistent worlds that exist in video games include Battle Dawn, EVE Online, and Realms of Trinity.

A persistent world can be achieved by developing and maintaining a single or dynamic instance state of the game world that is shared and viewed by all players around the clock. The persistence of a world can be subdivided into "game persistence", "world persistence" and "data persistence". Data persistence ensures that any world data is not lost in the event of computer system failure. World persistence means the world continues to exist and is available to players when they want to access it. Game persistence refers to the persistence of game events within the world (a Groundhog Day MUD is a virtual world where the entire (game) world is reset periodically). When referring to a "persistent world", world and game persistence are sometimes used interchangeably. The persistence criterion is the trait that separates virtual worlds from other types of video games.

Pervasive games
The real world is persistent. The game world of a pervasive game takes place in the real world and so pervasive games are also persistent. In other words, pervasive games share the persistence trait with virtual worlds. An example of a pervasive game that makes heavy use of a virtual world is Can You See Me Now?, where street runners exist in a virtual world while simultaneously running around the real physical world; the game was persistent during play, as well as the virtual world.

Simulated persistence
To give the illusion that the game world is always available, persistence can be simulated. This can be achieved by scheduling when players are allowed to play, around times when the world is offline, or as in the Animal Crossing series, having the game generate events that could have happened during the period of inactivity. Aside from virtual worlds, the simulation of a persistent world is also possible in single player games. In Noctis, players are advised to turn off the game while refueling because it takes so long. In addition, if a player who has landed on a planet stops playing and then after a while resumes, he or she can see visible changes in the sea level or the daytime/nighttime cycle.

A form of simulated persistence referred to as "pseudo-persistence" has been used in both video games and pervasive games. Pseudo-persistence means making relevant world data available when the relevant players reconnect to the world instance. In a mobile game, a virtual world might exist on a distributed collection of mobile devices. If a player reconnects to a device they previously connected to, they find that their relevant world data is still present. In the video game Destiny, a World Server provides the persistent world data for the game instances (called "bubbles"), which are created on demand as a number of players are matched to play the game together.. The term 'persistent world' is frequently used by players of Neverwinter Nights (2002) and Neverwinter Nights 2 (2006) to refer to MMORPG-like online environments created using the toolkit.

First virtual worlds
The first multi-player game to demonstrate on-line persistence was the text-based MUD1 written in 1978 by Rob Trubshaw and Richard Bartle. Initially only available for a few hours in off-peak time at Essex University, UK, it featured a world reset every 105 minutes. Nevertheless, it persisted independent of players logging in for the time it was running. The subsequent decade saw many on-line worlds clone this template, but all featured variations on timed resets and reboots or did not allow players to retain objects within the game other than running point totals such as treasure or experience points as a marker of progress.

Avalon: The Legend Lives can be considered the first game to introduce a true persistent state world in 1989. Avalon pioneered the ability for items to be retained by the player whilst offline while the Avalon realm at large continued 24/7 with only a morning backup to mark the world pausing briefly. It is currently the longest running online virtual world.

title: Persistent world


text:
File:LoveandHuman.jpg

Non-free/fair use media rationale
Although this image is subject to copyright, it is covered by US fair use laws because:
 * 1) The image is only being used in the article about the book (Unidentified Human Remains and the True Nature of Love) for informational and educational purposes.
 * 2) Use of the book cover visually identifies the book and its author in a manner that mere prose cannot, and meets all criteria in WP:NFCC.
 * 3) This image enhances the article in which it's displayed, as it provides an immediate relevance to the reader more capably than the textual description alone.
 * 4) The image is not replaceable with an uncopyrighted or freely copyrighted image of comparable educational value.
 * 5) The image is the primary means of visual identification of the article topic.
 * 6) The image is a low resolution image of the book cover, in an inferior graphics format (JPEG).
 * 7) The image is only a small portion of the commercial product.
 * 8) The use of this image will not affect the value of the original work.
 * 9) The use of this image will not limit the copyright holder's rights or ability to distribute or make a profit from the original. In particular, copies could not be used to make illegal copies of the book.

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

title: File:LoveandHuman.jpg


text: User talk:207.190.162.140

title: User talk:207.190.162.140


text:
Walter LaFeber

Walter Fredrick LaFeber (August 30, 1933 –March 9, 2021) was an American academic who served as the Andrew H. and James S. Tisch Distinguished University Professor in the Department of History at Cornell University. Previous to that he served as the Marie Underhill Noll Professor of History and a Stephen H. Weiss Presidential Fellow at Cornell.

LaFeber was one of the United States' most distinguished scholars of the history of U.S. foreign policy, and a leading member of the "Wisconsin School" of American diplomatic history. He was known for providing widely read revisionist histories of the Cold War with views like William Appleman Williams but more subtle; the label "moderate revisionist" has been applied to him.

LaFeber's teaching abilities led to his longstanding undergraduate "History of American Foreign Relations" class at Cornell gaining a reputation as one of the university's best and most popular courses. A number of his students went on to prominent positions in the U.S. government and academia. In 2006 LaFeber gave a farewell lecture before nearly 3,000 colleagues and former students at the Beacon Theatre in New York City.

Early life and education
LaFeber was born in Walkerton, Indiana, a town of around 2,000 people in the northern part of the state, outside South Bend, on August 30, 1933. His father, Ralph Nichols LaFeber, owned a local grocery store; his mother, Helen (Liedecker), was a housewife. LaFeber worked at his father's store from age eight through the end of college. He became a lifelong fan of the Chicago Cubs.

At Walkerton High School, the 6 ft LaFeber was a star basketball player. In one game during his senior year for the Indians, he scored 35 points, approaching the single-game record for most points scored in the South Bend sectional of the Indiana High School Boys Basketball Tournament. He graduated high school in 1951.

LaFeber attended Hanover College, a small Presbyterian liberal arts college in the southern part of Indiana. LaFeber played varsity basketball for the Hanover Panthers, as a reserve forward during his sophomore year. He also played some during his junior year. He sang in the Hanover College Choir, which provided voices for Sunday morning Presbyterian services and also gave concerts around the state, was co-chair of a "Religion in Life" Week program at the college, and was on the Hanover Board of Student Affairs, which directed extracurricular affairs on campus. He belonged to the Beta Theta Pi social fraternity, the Alpha Phi Gamma national honor society for journalism, and Hanover's own Gamma Sigma Pi honor society for academic performance. He received his BA from there in 1955.

LaFeber met Sandra Gould while at Hanover. They married in 1955 and the couple had two children.

He then went to Stanford University, gaining an MA in 1956. There, he studied under Thomas A. Bailey, and would be influenced by Bailey's lively writing style. Contrary to some later accounts, LaFeber has said he got along well with Bailey. At the time LaFeber was not dissatisfied with U.S. foreign policy, having supported the presidential candidacies of Robert A. Taft in 1952 and Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956.

At this point LaFeber went to the University of Wisconsin. In doing so he followed the advice of one of his college professors and declined an offer from Harvard University, taking advantage of what he later said was "the best professional advice I have ever received." The study of history at Wisconsin had a heritage going back to the time of Frederick Jackson Turner, and the intellectual atmosphere at the school encouraged people to think differently. At Wisconsin, LaFeber, and several future colleagues and co-authors, initially studied with Fred Harvey Harrington. In an era when the realistic theory of international relations predominated, LaFeber was influenced by Harrington's inductive methodology in seminar teaching, sense of irony, and suggestions that the economic interpretations of Charles A. Beard, whose work by then had largely fallen out of favor, should perhaps not be so overlooked. After Harrington moved into university administration, he replaced himself with William Appleman Williams, for whom LaFeber and fellow students Lloyd C. Gardner and Thomas J. McCormick became teaching assistants and with whom they would strike up a close bond (the four of them would become the core of what became known as the Wisconsin School of diplomatic history).

LaFeber was also influenced at Wisconsin by Philip D. Curtin, who developed LaFeber's interest in the British Empire, as well as by the early American scholar Merrill Jensen and the intellectual historian Merle Curti. During his dissertation research at the Library of Congress, LaFeber found himself at the same table as historian Ernest R. May of Harvard, with both working on the same period but with very different interpretations of it. The more established May helpfully supplied LaFeber with documents he had found, which LaFeber took as an object lesson on how two fair-minded scholars can reach differing conclusions from the same sources. With his dissertation titled "The Latin American Policy of the Second Cleveland Administration" being accepted, LaFeber received his PhD from Wisconsin in 1959.

Scholarship
Cornell University hired LaFeber as an assistant professor in 1959. He became an associate professor in 1963. LaFeber found an engaging environment with a number of other up-and-coming figures in the history and government departments, including Allan Bloom, Theodore J. Lowi, and Joel H. Silbey among others.

LaFeber's The New Empire: An Interpretation of American Expansion, 1860–1898, published in 1963, was a greatly expanded revision of his dissertation. It received the Beveridge Award of the American Historical Association; in fact the award was given based on the book having been read in manuscript form before publication. The work established LaFeber as a prominent scholar, and has remained a popular choice in academic circles for several decades.

Historian Irwin Unger, writing in 1967, did not find much to like of Williams or the Wisconsin School overall, but did praise LaFeber as the best of them, a "sophisticated and urbane historian" who was "not a crude polemicist". Unger found it particularly notable that LaFeber did not vilify the people he identified as being behind much of American foreign policy. Indeed, in the preface to The New Empire, LaFeber writes: Finally, I must add that I have been profoundly impressed with the statesmen of these decades. ... I found both the policy makers and the businessmen of this era to be responsible, conscientious men who accepted the economic and social realities of their day, understood domestic and foreign problems, debated issues vigorously, and especially were unafraid to strike out on new and uncharted paths in order to create what they sincerely hoped would be a better nation and a better world. All this, however, is not to deny that the decisions of these men resulted in many unfortunate consequences for their twentieth-century descendants.

LaFeber's publication did meet with some criticism. One later accounting of the Wisconsin School notes that in The New Empire, "LaFeber's arguments were sometimes questionable or overdrawn, and he acknowledged that he had passed by episodes that did not fit his pattern."

LaFeber's next work, America, Russia and the Cold War, 1945-1966 (1967), would end up going through ten editions (the last, America, Russia, and the Cold War, 1945-2006, in 2006), a rarity for a book that is not explicitly a textbook. The book emerged after the initial wave of Cold War revisionist theories had already been published and debated. Eliot Fremont-Smith of The New York Times described it as part of a succeeding wave of books that tried to refine those insights in a firmer historical grounding. Fremont-Smith praised LaFeber's work for being a "penetrating account" that was especially strong in sorting out the chronology of events and tracing the impact of domestic politics in each of the countries involved.

The relationship between the scholarship of LaFeber and William Appleman Williams has been characterized by one later historiographic survey this way: "Williams' best-known student, who has surpassed the master in the quantity and quality of his historical output while continuing to promote the line of interpretation laid down by Williams, is Walter LaFeber." However, not all have agreed; a broadside against Cold War revisionists was published by historian Robert H. Ferrell in 2006, who criticized their reliance on a monocausal theory. In particular he charged LaFeber with overusing the papers of Bernard Baruch, whom Ferrell said lacked real influence in determining American foreign policy.

LaFeber's later scholarly works received praise within academic and other circles. His 1978 work, The Panama Canal: The Crisis in Historical Perspective, has been attributed with influence over elite opinion regarding the history of Panama–United States relations and with helping the United States Senate decide to ratify the Panama Canal Treaty. A revised edition in 1990 was critical of U.S. policy since then. In the wake of the United States invasion of Panama in 1989, LaFeber appeared on television frequently as an expert, and in an interview at the time, said the invasion was "an admission of failure to work out a diplomatic solution to get rid of a third-rate dictator that we had created." Inevitable Revolutions: The United States in Central America (1984, revised 1992) received the Gustavus Myers Outstanding Book Award; in it, LaFeber formulates a variant of dependency theory, called neo-dependency theory, that examines corporate interests as part of explaining the relationships between the countries involved, but still looks at the role of U.S. government policy and other factors as well.

The American Age: United States Foreign Policy at Home and Abroad Since 1750 (1989, revised 1994) encompasses some of what was in LaFeber's famous course. In The Clash: U.S.-Japanese Relations Throughout History (1997), LaFeber turned toward East Asia, surveying the breadth of the American engagement and conflict with Japan from the nineteenth century through the 1990s. While a New York Times review called it a "dense chronological account...not for the fainthearted," The Clash received both the prestigious Bancroft Prize in American History and the Ellis W. Hawley Prize of the Organization of American Historians. LaFeber then shifted focus and returned to his youthful interest in basketball, examining the effect of modern sports and communication empires in his book, Michael Jordan and the New Global Capitalism (1999, revised 2002), which analyzes the rise in popularity of basketball, Michael Jordan, Nike, and cable satellite networks and their relation to, and metaphor for, globalization.

Overall, LaFeber's career has been characterized as having "imbibed the Wisconsin lessons of empiricism, criticism, and a suspicion of power."

Teaching
LaFeber became the first recipient of the Clark Distinguished Teaching Award at Cornell in 1966; the award was created to honor junior faculty members who were involved in the teaching of undergraduates.

He attained the rank of full professor in 1967, then was named to the Marie Underhill Noll Professor of History chair in 1968. By 1969, The New York Times was characterizing LaFeber as "one of most respected members of the faculty" at Cornell.

LaFeber's undergraduate History of American Foreign Relations class achieved a reputation as one of the toughest and most popular courses on campus. This was especially so during the turbulent times of the Vietnam War, when students were seeking answers for why their country was involved in that conflict and in other foreign interventions. LaFeber's lectures were considered "events"; classes met Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, with the last of these being in front of even more people than the weekday ones, because students brought their friends to listen. Even students who never took the course or went to a lecture were aware of its existence and renown.

LaFeber, who was known for being "old school" in his appearance and demeanor, always wearing a coat and tie to class, was lauded by Cornell's in-house newspaper for his simplistic approach to presentation, with a style that has been characterized as "anti-razzle-dazzle". He began classes by writing an outline of only a few points on the chalkboard and then talking without notes (lecturing from memory was a technique his mentor Harrington had used). At its peak, the course attracted more than 400 students and lectures were sometimes held in the large Bailey Hall to accommodate them. He spoke softly for whatever room he was in, so as to force students to be absolutely quiet in order to hear him. While other revisionists focused more on ideological or institutional forces, LaFeber made his scholarship and his lectures memorable by stressing the role of individuals, from his narrative hero John Quincy Adams to a few Cornell-related figures such as Willard Straight. Throughout his career LaFeber was concerned with teaching students critical thinking skills in historical analysis rather than gaining converts to his viewpoint, and accordingly even those who did not always agree with the markets-oriented interpretations advanced in his lectures still found them compelling. LaFeber's classes typically ended to pronounced ovations.

In 2013, the American Historical Association would write of this course that, despite his publishing achievements, "LaFeber might be even more distinguished as a teacher: one for whom the overworked adjective 'legendary' is entirely fitting. Without eyewitnesses, would we trust accounts that his upper-division lecture course regularly drew 300-plus students each Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday? ... Or that he continued running discussion sections and grading papers for that huge class when he could have easily avoided it?"

In May 1976, during the year of the United States Bicentennial, Cornell University broke with an over-100-year-old tradition: Instead of the university president or another administrator delivering the commencement address, LaFeber became the first faculty member to give it. Cornell president Dale R. Corson later explained the reason: "It was the bicentennial. I felt that something significant should be said by someone who could say it with authority." In his address at Schoellkopf Field, LaFeber highlighted the similarities of Cornell founders Ezra Cornell and Andrew Dickson White to the founders of the nation, saying they shared a common passion in the belief of the power of ideas, but stressed that Cornell and White were part of the expanding of human rights to groups the founders had excluded, thus leading the university to take on the role of "midwife when revolutionary ideas enter an un-revolutionary society."

LaFeber switched to half-time teaching in 1989, giving classes in the fall but reserving the spring for researching and writing. He began doing less than that in the 1990s, but then was offered the Andrew H. and James S. Tisch Distinguished University Professor post, which brought him back to teaching. The Tisch position is considered Cornell's highest faculty distinction.

In another prominent occasion, Cornell president Hunter Rawlings chose LaFeber to give a commemoration address on the Arts Quadrangle following the September 11, 2001 attacks.

His colleague at Cornell, professor and administrator Glenn Altschuler, praised LaFeber's overall contribution to the university, saying "He is Midwestern mensch - the best thing that's happened to Cornell in the last half century." Another colleague, Mary Beth Norton, has said that "No other member of the department has commanded the same respect as Walt in the 35 years I have known him."

The devotion of past students towards LaFeber and his course has often been noted; many, regardless of what occupation they went into, have used the word "awe" to describe their recollection of his lectures. Historian and former student Richard H. Immerman has been quoted as saying, "Those of us who took that course enjoyed a learning experience that we can probably never adequately describe or praise. In a number of specific instances, like my own, it changed lives." Other future academics have said much the same, including Andrew J. Rotter, and a number of female students inspired by LaFeber later attained success, including Nancy F. Cott, Susan A. Brewer, Lorena Oropeza, and others.

Prominent former students of LaFeber in areas outside academia have included: U.S. Representative Thomas Downey, U.S. National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, and Undersecretary of Defense and U.S. Ambassador Eric S. Edelman; media critic Eric Alterman, businessman Andrew Tisch, Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fried, Ambassador and Assistant Secretary of State William Brownfield, and U.S. National Security Advisor Sandy Berger; Ambassador Dwight L. Bush Sr. and Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Derek Chollet; and Jeffrey P. Bialos, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Industrial Affairs.

LaFeber's influential students were found working for both parties in Washington and had a diversity of viewpoints. Especially noticeable in this regard were Hadley and other members of "The Vulcans", an informal name for George W. Bush's foreign policy advisory team, who gained their passion for foreign affairs from LaFeber. Indeed, LaFeber has said, "I didn't try to instill anything in anybody. I've never cared about having disciples. [Another professor] did, but he was very convinced he was right. I'm often not." To LaFeber, the most important thing was not necessarily the conclusions one drew from history, but the importance of studying it. Alterman has said, "To me, Walter represents the ur-notion of what it means to be a disinterested scholar. There's a willingness to follow the scholarship wherever it leads, even if it's in politically inconvenient directions." Nonetheless, LaFeber has sometimes stated his views quite publicly, especially his prediction that the 2003 invasion of Iraq would end up poorly, saying that the Bush Administration's foreign policy belief that an invasion would help democracy spread throughout the Middle East "flies in the face of everything we know about Iraqi history."

Academic positions and honors
By early 1966 LaFeber was publicly critical of U.S. strategy in the Vietnam War, saying that the country's policy reflected "the dilemma of American liberalism" with policy objectives that were contradictory and paradoxical. In general, LaFeber was in sympathy with many of the student causes of the 1960s, including opposition to the war, the quest for racial justice, and the desire for a political system that better represented democratic ideals. He later said that "academic freedom means the freedom, indeed means the requirement (otherwise what is tenure for?) to criticize American society when evidence accumulates that society has gone off in the wrong direction."

But the occupation of Willard Straight Hall by African American students, who eventually became armed, as well as some other physical and verbal threats made against university officials and faculty at the time, greatly dismayed him. Many of the younger and more progressive faculty members on campus supported the actions of the campus Afro-American Society and considered that traditional notions of academic freedom were secondary to larger questions of human rights and that a university's greatest responsibility was to eradicate racial and other injustices. But LaFeber was one of only a few liberal professors who strongly disagreed with that stance. To LaFeber, academic freedom was paramount; decades later, he reiterated his view: ... what a university is all about is rational discourse. What these people were doing was essentially raping the major principle of the university. Once you introduce any kind of element of force into the university, you compromise the institution. To me, that is totally unforgivable. ... We have to make a distinction between procedure and politics. What I am talking about is procedure. I'm a relativist in terms of object and conclusion. I don't think I am necessarily right. What I am absolutist about is the procedure you use to get there. Which means the university always has to be open and it cannot be compromised."

Following the actions on campus, in which the university president, James Alfred Perkins, agreed to some of the students' demands as they departed the Straight, LaFeber resigned his position as chair of the history department. On a trip to New York City with a few other professors to meet with university trustees, LaFeber marshalled the arguments against the actions of Perkins. LaFeber publicly announced that he would not return to Cornell if Perkins remained. LaFeber's stance was one of the more influential in leading to Perkins' resignation at the end of the semester.

In 1971, LaFeber was named to the American Historical Association's seat on the Department of State Historical Advisory Committee, as part of an effort to give revisionist historians a voice during the selection and production of the important Foreign Relations of the United States book series. LaFeber became chair of that committee by 1974, and served on it until 1975.

He was selected as a Guggenheim Fellow in 1989. He gave titled lectures at many universities, and made a number of appearances on radio and television. He also served on several scholarly editorial boards, including that of Political Science Quarterly.

LaFeber was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. LaFeber served as president in 1999 of the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations.

LaFeber's career as a scholar, teacher, and public figure was celebrated with a Festschrift-like issue in the journal Diplomatic History in 2004. The editor-in-chief of the journal wrote in an introductory note that "Professor LaFeber has been a commanding presence in the field of the history of American foreign relations for more than four decades."

Later life
LaFeber retired in 2006 after 46 years on the Cornell faculty. His farewell lecture on April 25, 2006, billed as "A Special Evening With Cornell's Walter LaFeber: A Half-Century of Friends, Foreign Policy, and Great Losers" was given to a nearly 3,000-person, capacity gathering of former students, Cornell alumni, and colleagues at the Beacon Theatre in New York City. (The event had been moved from the originally scheduled American Museum of Natural History venue due to overwhelming demand for tickets. ) The lecture, which was centered in part around the origins and implications of Wilsonianism, was in his style delivered without notes and once again met with a standing ovation. Hunter Rawlings, the president of Cornell, noted that the event evinced an "intellectual passion, a group catharsis of the first order," not by any manifestation of popular culture or the information age, but by nothing more than "a lecture on diplomatic history".

In 2013, LaFeber was given an American Historical Association's 2013 Award for Scholarly Distinction, a lifetime achievement award for what the association said was for being "one of the scholars who re-invented the study of American foreign relations in the 1960s: not only transforming many specific debates, but lastingly changing our sense of what this field could be. ... An exceptionally visible and valuable public intellectual, Professor LaFeber has managed to reach broad audiences without sacrificing academic rigor."

The influence of LaFeber was again a topic in 2016 at Zankel Hall in New York City, when he and several prominent students discussed the influence of Cornell on American diplomacy.

LaFeber died on March 9, 2021, at an assisted living facility in Ithaca, New York. He was 87.

Later that month, Cornell created the Walter F. LaFeber Professor seat, based on a gift from Andrew H. Tisch (who had audited LaFeber's course as an undergraduate in 1970–71). Thomas B. Pepinsky was named the inaugural holder of the professorship.

Works
Sources:
 * Books
 * The New Empire: An Interpretation of American Expansion, 1860–1898 (Cornell University Press, 1963; 35th anniv. ed., 1998) ISBN 9780801485954
 * John Quincy Adams and American Continental Empire: Letters, Papers and Speeches (Quadrangle Books, 1965) [editor] ISBN 9780812960259
 * America, Russia and the Cold War, 1945–1966 (John Wiley & Sons, 1967; succ. eds. longer timespan, concluding 10th ed. 1945–2006, McGraw-Hill, 2006) ISBN 9780471511311
 * America in the Cold War: Twenty Years of Revolution and Response, 1947–1967 (John Wiley & Sons, 1967) [editor] ISBN 9780471511328
 * The Origins of the Cold War, 1941–1947 (John Wiley & Sons, 1971) [editor] ISBN 9780471511403
 * Creation of the American Empire: U.S. Diplomatic History (Rand McNally, 1973; rev. ed. 1976, also available in two volumes) [co-author with Lloyd C. Gardner and Thomas J. McCormick] ISBN 9780528663468
 * The American Century: A History of the United States Since the 1890s (John Wiley & Sons, 1975; succ. eds., concluding 7th ed. M. E. Sharpe, 2013, also available in two volumes) [co-author with Richard Polenberg, later editions add co-author Nancy Woloch) ISBN 9780765634849
 * America in Vietnam: A Documentary History (Doubleday, 1985) [co-editor with William Appleman Williams, Thomas McCormick, and Lloyd Gardner] ISBN 9780385197526
 * The Panama Canal: The Crisis in Historical Perspective (Oxford University Press, 1978; upd. ed., 1990) ISBN 9780195059304
 * Inevitable Revolutions: The United States in Central America (W. W. Norton & Co., 1983; 2nd. ed., 1993) ISBN 9780393309645
 * The American Age: United States Foreign Policy at Home and Abroad since 1750 (W. W. Norton & Co., 1989; 2nd ed. 1994, also available in two volumes) ISBN 9780393026290
 * Behind the Throne: Servants of Power to Imperial Presidents, 1898–1968 (University of Wisconsin Press, 1993) [co-editor with Thomas J. McCormick] ISBN 9780299137403
 * The American Search for Opportunity, 1865–1913 (Cambridge University Press, 1993), Volume II of The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations (rev. ed. 2013, Volume II of The New Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations)
 * The Clash: U.S.-Japanese Relations Throughout History (W. W. Norton & Co., 1997); excerpt; also see online review by Jon Davidann ISBN 9780393318371
 * Michael Jordan and the New Global Capitalism (W. W. Norton & Co., 1999; exp. ed., 2002) ISBN 9780393323696
 * The Deadly Bet: LBJ, Vietnam, and the 1968 Election (Rowman & Littlefield, 2005) ISBN 9780742576254

 * Selected articles and chapters

 * "United States Depression Diplomacy and the Brazilian Revolution, 1893–1894", The Hispanic American Historical Review, Vol. 40, No. 1 (February 1960)
 * "A Note on the 'Mercantilistic Imperialism' of Alfred Thayer Mahan", Mississippi Valley Historical Review, Vol. 48, No. 4 (March 1962)
 * "The Third Cold War: Kissinger Years and Carter Years" (Charles Edmondson Historical Lectures, 1979–1980; Baylor University Press)
 * "Liberty and Power: U.S. Diplomatic History, 1750-1945" in Eric Foner, ed., The New American History (Temple University Press, 1990)
 * "The Post September 11 Debate over Empire, Globalization, and Fragmentation", Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 117, No. 1 (Spring, 2002)
 * "Some Perspectives in U.S. Foreign Relations", Diplomatic History, Vol. 31, No. 3 (June 2007)

title: Walter LaFeber


text:
Sergio Frusoni

Sergio Frusoni (August 10, 1901 – May 29, 1975) was a poet and promoter of the Cape Verdean Creole language.

Biography
Sérgio was born in Mindelo on the island of São Vicente, the son of Italian immigrants Giuseppe Frusoni and Erminia Bonucci. At the age of 24, he began to work at the Western Telegraph Company and changed later on to Italcable. In 1947, he managed the O Café Sport in Mindelo, the main city of São Vicente, where he presented poems and anecdotes in Crioulo. After that he went back to work for Italcable. In the 1960s, he conducted the theatre group Theatro do Castilho in Mindelo. For a number of years, he was chronicler at the radio Barlavento, where he produced the program Mosaico Mindelense in Crioulo.

Sérgio wrote many short stories and poems in the Creole of São Vicente (Criol d' Soncente). He died, aged 73, in Lisbon. He is well known in Cape Verde, but almost unknown outside the island.

On June 7, 2005, Capeverdean president Pedro Pires paid homage to Sergio Frusoni and declared him as one of the greatest Crioulo poets.

Corsino Fortes described Frusoni in Paralelo 14 (Parallel 14)

Legacy
Some of his poems would be a part of the Tertúlia collection which featured poems made by other poets. In 2004, it was performed in a play at the 10th Mindelo Theatrical Festival.

Chronicles in Crioulo

 * Mosaico Mindelense ("Mindelense Mosaic")

Short stories in Crioulo

 * Contrabónde (short story) in Miscelânea luso-africana
 * Na Tribunal
 * Dum Bóca pa ôte
 * Mute convérsa pa nada

Poems in Creole

 * Contrabónde
 * Pracinha
 * Era um vêz um coquêr
 * Presentaçôm
 * Pa diante ê qu’ê camin
 * Flôr de Béla Sómbra
 * Fonte de nha Sôdade, Lembróme
 * Mnine d' Sanvicente
 * Programa para meninos
 * Marí Matchim
 * Diante de mar de Sanvicente
 * Sanvcênte já cabá na nada
 * Sê Brinque
 * Carta d'Angola
 * Nha Chica
 * Temp’ d’ Caniquinha (Um vêz Sanvcênt era sábe),
 * Sonnet in crioulo dedicated to Dr. Francisco Regala

Poems in English

 * Sonnet

Poems in Portuguese

 * In Mortis
 * À Sogra
 * Na Hora X
 * A Marmita

Theatre

 * Cuscujada - de Sérgio Frusoni

Articles and columns

 * Two poems (crioulo of São Vicente) in the literary journal ´ 'Claridade-Revista de Arte e Letras' no.9-1966: Fonte de nha Sodade'  and Tempe Felix''
 * Textos Crioulos Cabo-Verdianos, published in the book Miscelânea luso-africana, edited by Marius F. Valkhoff, (1975)
 * Short story Contrabónde in Miscelânea luso-africana
 * A Poética de Sérgio Frusoni: Uma Leitura Antropológica, a collection of Poems in the crioulo of São Vicente with Portuguese translation, collected by Mesquitela Lima, (1992)

Books

 * Vangêle Contód d'nôs Móda, a translation of Bartolomeo Rossetti's Roman dialect New Testament into the Crioulo of São Vicente (1979)

title: Sergio Frusoni


text:
Talk:Mesoproterozoic

Untitled
Why is their not much of information on Mesoproterozoic? We need this people/scientists.....for projects....~duh???? send fast peeps — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.98.67 (talk • contribs) 17:13, 3 December 2004 (UTC)

Reading this article, particularly the subdivisions section, there seems to be a lot of filler-type material, which on initial reading I found confusing (e.g. why are the Changhsingian and Induan suddenly mentioned? Re-reading I understand that this is to demonstrate the impact of the dating errors,but its a little abrupt in presentation). Is this a suitable place to discuss the dating errors and the consequent impact? I'd be inclined to remove most of it and leave a sentence summing up the problem, which I'll do if there are no objections. Therizinosaurian (talk) 19:58, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Just had a quick look for sources and it looks like the lead at least relies heavily on http://www.redorbit.com/education/reference_library/earth/geology/1112717562/mesoproterozoic/ to the point where the first couple of lines are identical. I'm going to go ahead and try to re-write them (And cite!)Therizinosaurian (talk) 20:21, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mesoproterozoic


text:
Hovet

Hovet (formerly known as Johanneshovs Isstadion or, in English: Johanneshov Ice Stadium) is an arena located in the Johanneshov district of Stockholm (Stockholm Globe City) which is mainly used for ice hockey, concerts and corporate events. It was opened in 1955 as an outdoor arena, however a roof was added in 1962, and the arena interior has also been a subject to major renovation in 2002. The arena's main tenants are ice hockey clubs AIK and Djurgårdens IF. The official capacity is 8,094 spectators for ice hockey events and 8,300 during concerts.

History
The arena was officially inaugurated on 4 November 1955 with an ice hockey game between Sweden and Norway, which Sweden won 7–2. The original designer was Swedish architect Paul Hedqvist. A roof was added for the 1963 World Ice Hockey Championships. During the autumn of 2002, every chair was replaced and a restaurant area was added at one of the short ends.

Other than AIK and Djurgårdens IF, Hovet has been the regular home arena in different periods for IK Göta, IFK Stockholm, Stureby SK, Mälarhöjden/Västertorp, Brinkens IF, AC Camelen, and Hammarby IF. Since its inaugural year in 2008, Bajen Fans IF, renamed Hammarby IF after the former club, plays one game annually at Hovet. The 2015 Summer European League of Legends Championship Series finals were played at the Hovet.

In May 2016 Hovet was used as the press centre for the 2016 Eurovision Song Contest, which was taking place next door in Globen. The flat ice rink area was covered making way for the press working area, accredited fan zone, filming and radio studios, and a press conference arena.

Future
In early 2016, plans were announced for a demolition of the arena in 2020 or later, and a renovation of Globen to better adapt to ice hockey, and to create wider space for residential buildings. The decision to demolish was made by SGA Fastigheter on 8 November 2017. On 20 June 2022, Stockholm Municipality finally announced that the arena will be demolished, as well as plans to refurbish the Avicii Arena. The ice hockey arena is expected to be demolished in 2025, and in its place an underground ice hockey rink is expected to be built.

title: Hovet


text:
User talk:Batguano

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

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * To sign your posts (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).
 * 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)]] 22:14, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Batguano


text:
User talk:Tarakananda

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

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * To sign your posts (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).
 * 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)]] 22:15, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

Why do you make an external link section in ashram without adding an external link? That makes no sense to me. I will revert. Andries 22:56, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Ornamental-Om-small.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ornamental-Om-small.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 19:07, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Om Yoga Meditation
Got your message. It's a little more complicated than that. First, the numbered instructions on "Om Yoga Meditation" are not encyclopedic. An encyclopdia is supposed to be a summary about the topic, not an instruction manual. Second, on the copyright issue, that is also more complicated. By putting something in WP, the author is not only giving permission to WP, but to anyone else who wants to modify and use the material. Because of this, there is a formal process where the author themself has to email the appropriate persons at WP and give that permission directly. It is not allowed for an editor to simply claim that they have permission. Finally, unless there are books besides the eBooks on your site which use the term "Om Yoga Meditation", then this is simply a term invented by the author of those ebooks and not an appropriate title for an encyclopedia article. Please show where this term is used in published books. I think it is simply a made-up term for "meditation on om" which belongs in the Aum and meditation articles, but should not have its own article. —Hanuman Das 23:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, you may have a point about a separate article. I think the best name is Pranava yoga so I have moved it there and fixed all the links. My recommendation is to go through the quotes and remove the ones that are just about Om and not about meditation on Om as long sections of quotes are discouraged on WP. You might move them to the Aum article. The more they seem to focus on the meditation or yoga practice, the more acceptible they will be. Also consider changing "Om" to "Aum", at least outside the quotes as that is the spelling that appears to be the consensus on WP; at least, that is what the article is named. I will look into how to provide the copyright permission if you want, but it is probably better to rewrite that short section in your own words. If the author gives permission, his whole article could be put into Wikisource. That's probably preferable if he wants it to get around.... —Hanuman Das 05:16, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

June 2012
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. - SudoGhost 02:40, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Upanishads. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. - SudoGhost 02:48, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

New message!
At least one new reply has been posted here: Talk:Om -- Tito Dutta  ✉  14:21, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * At least one new reply has been posted! -- Tito Dutta  ✉  04:24, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tarakananda


text:
August von Pelzeln

August von Pelzeln (10 May 1825, Prague – 2 September 1891 in Oberdöbling) was an Austrian ornithologist. He was a grandson to novelist Karoline Pichler (1769-1843).

He studied at the University of Vienna, later working as an assistant under helminthologist Karl Moriz Diesing (1800-1867) in the Hof-Naturalien-Cabinet (from 1851). In 1857 he acquired curatorial duties formerly held by Johann Jakob Heckel (1790-1857), and subsequently became in charge of the bird (1857) and mammal (1869) collections. He worked on the birds collected by Johann Natterer in Brazil (343 species).

He was forced to retire from the museum due to ill health, and died at Oberdöbling near Vienna.

Some birds described by Pelzeln are the orange-breasted thornbird, the spot-winged antbird, the red-legged tinamou, the white-throated tinamou, the short-billed leaftosser, the yellow-margined flatbill and the New Zealand rockwren.

His name is associated with Pelzeln's tody-tyrant (Hemitriccus inornatus). Gustav Hartlaub (1814-1900) named the Madagascar grebe (Tachybaptus pelzelnii) in his honor; Otto Finsch (1839-1917) named the Pohnpei starling (Aplonis pelzelni) after Pelzeln.

Works

 * Bemerkungen gegen Darwin's Theorie vom Ursprung der Spezies. Vienna: A. Pichler Witwe & Sohn (1861).
 * Zur Ornithologie Brasiliens, Resultate von Johann Natterers Reisen in den Jahren 1817 bis 1835, Johann Natterer, Wien, A. Pichler's Witwe & Sohn (1868- 1870 3 volumes). BHL
 * Beiträge zur Ornithologie Südafrikas (1882) - Contributions to the ornithology of southern Africa.
 * Many papers in "Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien" (usually abbreviated Sitz.K.Akad.Wiss.Wien).

title: August von Pelzeln


text:
Uniforms and insignia of the Sturmabteilung

The uniforms and insignia of the Sturmabteilung (SA) were Nazi Party paramilitary ranks and uniforms used by SA stormtroopers from 1921 until the fall of Nazi Germany in 1945. The titles and phrases used by the SA were the basis for paramilitary titles used by several other Nazi paramilitary groups, among them the Schutzstaffel (SS). Early SS ranks were identical to the SA, since the SS was originally considered a sub-organisation of the Sturmabteilung.

Origins of SA titles (1921–1923)
The brown shirted stormtroopers of the Sturmabteilung gradually come into being within the Nazi Party beginning in 1920. By this time, Adolf Hitler had assumed the title of Führer of the Nazi Party, replacing Anton Drexler who had been known as the more democratically elected Party Chairman. Hitler began to fashion the Nazi Party on fascist paramilitary lines and, to that end, the early Nazis of the 1920s would typically wear some sort of paramilitary uniform at party meetings and rallies. The most common of these were World War I uniforms with full medals. Also common were uniforms of the Freikorps as well as uniforms of veteran groups such as Der Stahlhelm. Nazi Party members would also mix components from all three types of uniforms with little to no standardisation except a swastika armband worn on the left arm.

By 1921, the Nazi Party had taken its "Sports Detachment", consisting mostly of bodyguards Hitler used for his own protection, and had formed the Nazi stormtroopers, or the "Storm Detachment", which was shortened to be known as the SA. It was at this point that the very first SA titles came into being, although there were no established uniforms or insignia except a swastika armband worn on a paramilitary uniform. At the start of the group's existence, the SA had four primary titles:
 * Oberster SA-Führer (Supreme SA-Leader)
 * SA-Oberführer (SA-Senior Leader)
 * SA-Führer (SA-Leader)
 * SA-Mann (SA-Trooper)

In 1923, the SA was disbanded after the failed Munich Beer Hall Putsch. The group was re-founded two years later in 1925.

Early SA rank insignia (1924–1929)
From 1923 to 1925, the SA did not officially exist since Hitler had been imprisoned for his actions in the Munich Putsch and the Nazi Party banned in Germany. Underground cells of SA men did continue to meet in secret, including one run by an SA leader named Gerhard Roßbach. It was Roßbach who effectively invented the "Nazi brownshirt" uniform since, during Roßbach's Austrian exile in 1924, a large store of military surplus brown denim shirts intended for tropical uniforms in East Africa, which were originally bought in 1921, was taken over by the Schill Youth in Germany. The "Schill Sportversand" then became the main supplier for the SA brown shirts.

In 1925, the SA was re-founded as part of the new Nazi Party which Hitler had put together following his release from prison. The reborn SA then received its first formal uniform regulations and also began using the first recognisable system of rank insignia.

Along with a brown shirt uniform, SA members would wear swastika armbands with a kepi cap. Originally, the SA used its pre-1923 rank titles, but this changed in 1926 when local SA units began to be grouped into larger regiment sized formations known as Standarten. Each SA regiment was commanded by a senior SA officer called a Standartenführer. At the same time, to differentiate from the SA rank and file, senior SA officers began to wear oak leaves on their collars to signify their authority. Under this system, a Standartenführer wore one oak leaf, an Oberführer two oak leaves, and the Supreme SA Commander wore three. The lower ranks of SA-Führer and SA-Mann still wore no insignia.

In 1927, the officer rank of SA-Führer became known by the title of Sturmführer and a higher officer rank known as Sturmbannführer was created to be held by battalion formation commanders directly subordinate to the Standartenführer. In 1928, an expansion of SA enlisted ranks was required in response to the growing rank and file membership of the SA troopers. These new titles and ranks were denoted by an insignia system which consisted of silver pips pinned to a wearer's collar. The pip system was adopted from the Stahlhelm veteran's group which was closely connected to the SA both in dual membership and ideological design.

A further change in 1928 was the creation of the rank of Gruppenführer. This rank used the three leaf collar insignia previously reserved for the Supreme SA Commander and the rank was held by the senior most SA commanders in Germany who led division sized formations of several SA-Standarten. By this time, the SA had also begun to use unit insignia for its junior members which consisted of a numbered collar patch, showing both battalion and regiment affiliation, worn opposite the badge of rank. This unit insignia patch was worn by those holding the rank of Sturmbannführer and below; the higher officer ranks wore oak leaf insignia on both collars.

By the end of the 1920s, the SA rank system had solidified into the following titles:

SA uniforms under Ernst Röhm (1930–1933)
The next major change in SA uniforms and insignia occurred in 1930 when Ernst Röhm was appointed as Chief of Staff of the SA. Röhm's appointment was as the result of Hitler personally assuming command of the SA as the Oberster SA-Führer. Hitler would hold this title until the fall of Nazi Germany in 1945 and, after 1930, it was the SA Chief of Staff who was the effective leader of the organisation.

Röhm undertook several changes to the SA uniform and insignia design, the first being to invent several new ranks in order for the SA rank system to mirror that of the professional military. The rank expansion took place gradually between 1930 and 1932, with the final addition being the creation of a rank of SA-Obergruppenführer, which Röhm appointed to himself as well as senior SA-generals of the SA command staff. The new ranks used the same collar pip and oak leaf system as before, but with the addition of corded shoulder boards worn on the right shoulder for the officers. Further, the officers wore right shoulder cord of either gold or silver. In contrast, the enlisted men wore piping cords shaped as shoulder straps on the right shoulder.

In 1933, when Hitler became Chancellor of Germany, Röhm made his title of SA-Chief of Staff into an actual rank. The insignia for Röhm's new rank (known as Stabschef) consisted of a wreathed star which was designed after that of a Bolivian general, due to Röhm's previous military experience as a military adviser in Bolivia.

Ranks and insignia
This table contains the final ranks and insignia of the SA, which were in use from 1942 to 1945.

Right collar patch contains the number and type of unit (ascending up to "Obersturmbannführer" in the SA and SS, and "Oberstaffelfuehrer" in NSMC): ... Left collar patch contain the rank insignias (from ascending "Standartenführer" both sides).
 * Remarks

Waffenfarben
Prior to 1932, when the Schutzstaffel wore the same uniform as the SA, black uniform colours also indicated membership in the SS; however, SS men wore all-black kepis and neckties, and (from 1929) black breeches and boots.

It was also during the 1930s that the SA began using uniform colours to denote an SA member's Gruppe (Division) to which the SA member belonged. The unit colour was worn on the front of the kepi cap as well as rank and unit collar patches. The marking system - patches/kepi colour combined with gold or silver buttons/pips - would eventually expand to cover these SA divisions; as of 1937:
 * Crimson and Gold: SA Chief of Staff
 * Carmine and Silver: SA Supreme Command and Standarte Feldherrnhalle
 * Crimson and Silver: SA Group Staff
 * Dark Maroon and Gold: Ostland Group (East Prussia and Free City of Danzig)
 * Dark Maroon and Silver: Westfalen Group (Westphalia and Lippe)
 * Black and Gold: Niederrhein Group (northern part of Rhine Province)
 * Black and Silver: Berlin-Brandenburg Group (Berlin and western part of Brandenburg)
 * Pink and Gold: Ostmark Group (Eastern part of Brandenburg)
 * Apple Green and Gold: Pommern Group
 * Apple Green and Silver: Thüringen Group
 * Dark Brown and Gold: Westmark Group (parts of Rhine Province and Saar territory)
 * Dark Brown and Silver: Niedersachsen Group (eastern part of Province of Hanover and Brunswick)
 * Emerald and Gold: Sachsen Group
 * Emerald and Silver: Nordmark Group (greater part of Schleswig-Holstein)
 * Yellow Orange and Gold: Mitte Group (Province of Saxony and Anhalt)
 * Yellow Orange and Silver: Südwest Group (Württemberg and greater part of Baden)
 * Sulphur Yellow and Gold: Franken Group (parts of Northern and Western Bavaria)
 * Sulphur Yellow and Silver: Schlesien Group
 * Light Blue and Gold: Bayerische Ostmark Group (parts of Eastern and Northern Bavaria)
 * Light Blue and Silver: Hochland Group (parts of Southern and Western Bavaria)
 * Steel Green and Gold: Nordsee Group (Western part of Province of Hanover, Oldenburg, and Bremen)
 * Steel Green and Silver: Kurpfalz Group (including parts of Hesse and Baden)
 * Navy Blue and Gold: Hansa Group (Hamburg, Mecklenburg, southern part of Schleswig-Holstein)
 * Navy Blue and Silver: Hessen Group (Hesse-Nassau and parts of Hesse)

Final pattern SA uniforms (1934–1945)
A slight alteration to the rank and insignia system of the SA occurred in July 1934 after the Night of the Long Knives. Viktor Lutze did away with Röhm's special insignia for the rank of Stabschef and instead adopted a collar patch in much the same design as that of Reichsführer-SS, a rank which Heinrich Himmler now held.

Special uniforms
Even before the fall of Röhm, the SA had adopted a more formal appearance to its uniforms in an effort to make the group appear as an actual military formation rather than a group of street fighters. To this end, the SA had created a formal "office" type uniform which consisted of a brown coat worn over the basic brown shirt uniform.

Special uniforms also existed for corps of the SA, such as the motorised SA, the SA Alpine troops, and the SA-Marine, considered an auxiliary of the Kriegsmarine. It was the SA-Marine that expanded its uniforms almost to a level unto themselves, with special nautical insignia which no other unit of the SA displayed.


text: User talk:69.141.240.188

title: User talk:69.141.240.188


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CheeseDreams

Case Closed on 12 January 2005

Please do not edit this page directly if you are not a participant in this case. Comments are very welcome on the Talk page, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.

Arbitrators will be working on a proposed decision at /Proposed decision.

The parties
Complaint by User:Snowspinner against User:CheeseDreams. Additional complaints were filed by User:Cool Hand Luke and User:Slrubenstein and possibly others, see talk page.

Snowspinner
Since the other arbitration request is utterly unclear on who's asking who for what, I'll make this simple. I request arbitration against User:CheeseDreams for total failure to edit with any Wikiquette, repeated POV warrioring, personal attacks, and generally making the Wikipedia a harder place to edit.

A great deal (Probably more than any sane person wants to read) of information is at Requests for comment/CheeseDreams, but I'll throw some pertinant edit links here.

He is prone to inflammatory edit summaries such as. He puts dispute tags on articles without discussion and without any effort to fix the problems, often doing so on articles he has never edited prior to dispute tagging, such as. He has engaged in vandalism on talk pages as in (He changes "tastes" to "testes." He engages in POV warrioring such as trying to move the page Cultural and historical background of Jesus to Historical reconstruction of the sort of person Jesus would be, which implies that Jesus was not a real person - an inappropriate implication for an article title.

I specifically request a temporary injunction that will block CheeseDreams from edits to religion-related articles at the very least, if not from all articles until the conclusion of this case.

I believe mediation will prove fruitless in this case based on the discussion on Talk:Cultural and historical background of Jesus, specifically in the "Status of Mediation" section in which he declares a mediator biased basically for failing to totally agree with him, and withdraws from the mediation process. (This was not a formal mediation process, but it still does not bode well for mediation.) Furthermore, CheeseDreams is engaging in this behavior over far too many articles with far too many users to consolidate into a mediation case - to do so would only put out one or two fires when there's a lot more that needs to be kept under control. Snowspinner 04:56, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)

To clarify, I am making a general request for arbitration against CheeseDreams for widespread and problematic editing and conduct. Since one of the reasons for rejection or abstention in the previous arbitration request regarding CheeseDreams was that the case was too confusingly laid out, I am specifically avoiding drenching the arbcom in evidence. I have moved all requests that were ammended to mine to User:Snowspinner/CheeseDreams where they can sit until they are adapted for Evidence, or where an arbitor can look at them if so inclined. However, I'd like to keep this case request simple and direct. Snowspinner 19:09, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)

Cool Hand Luke

 * Also consider CheeseDreams' wasteful and uncertified RfCs. User appears to submit RfCs before attempting to resolve problems with other Wikipedians directly.
 * Requests for comment/Theresa knott (deleted, uncertified)
 * Requests for comment/Eequor (likewise)
 * Requests for comment/Jwrosenzweig
 * Requests for comment/Slrubenstein
 * Requests for comment/John Kenney
 * Cool Hand Luke  05:47, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Slrubenstein
I (Slrubenstein) would like to add a request for arbitration, specifically concerning two articles: Cultural and historical background of Jesus, and a set of articles entitled Jesus in a cultural and historical background and Historical reconstruction of the sort of person Jesus would be.

Concerning the first article The first article was originally a section of Jesus ; when the Jesus article became too long it was made a daughter article. I am one of several editors who has worked on it. In late October or early November CheeseDreams began working on the article. I questioned many of her edits, which I believed were inaccurate or unverifiable; she began reverting my changes. During this period she often called for votes -- in my opinion, substituting votes for discussion (there is a clear pattern, when a vote supports her view she demands that the vote be considered established consensus; when the vote does not support her position she explains that votes do not determine the truth). By November 2 we were in a revert war. Many of the differences between our versions were stylistic, but some were substantive: CheeseDreams refered to the area as "Palestine" although at the time in question Romans and Jews refered to Judea and the Galilee separately; CheeseDreams insisted that there were many messianic groups, among them Mandeanists, but there is no evidence for this and when I asked CheeseDreams to verify her claims, she refused. Here are the two versions:. On Nov, 3 the page was protected. On Nov. 18 it was unprotected, and a new editor, FT2, revised the article and attempted to incorporate as much material from the discussion as possible. I felt that FT2's version was a good start given the previous conflicts on the talk page, but was poorly organized and included many claims that were inaccurate; moreover FT2's article had explicit gaps where FT2 did not know the appropriate information. Striving to keep as much material from FT2's version as possible, I revised the article:. I spent the better part of the day Nov. 19th working on the article and made over 50 edits, using the edit summary for each one to explain what I was doing. During this period CheeseDream periodically reverted all of my edits without any explanation. On Nov. 20th FT2 made a series of edits which I believe left the artice in even worse condition -- very poorly organized, and replete with factual inaccuracies. I posted a list of over a dozen problems with FT2's version on the talk page, went back to my last version, and spent the better part of the 22nd working on the article making substantial additions of verifiable and NPOV content, leading to this version. At that point, CheeseDreams and Amgine took turns reverting my work -- with the effect of deleting much content I had added -- and without any explanation or justification. They did not respond to my list of problems with FT2s version, and did not post any specific criticisms of my version (Amgine did provide some explanations/examples of problems at one point). Here is John Kenney's analysis of the revert war:. Fundamentally, FT2s version was replete with inaccurate and unverifiable information; I have done considerable research and added verifiable, accurate content which CheeseDreams and others kept reverting. Theresa Knott protected the article on Nov. 23. Since that time, I have continued to try to suggest substantive, verifiable, relevant changes to the article (e.g. and ). CheeseDream simply rejects every edit I have made or proposed. CheeseDream never provides any substantive reason for rejecting my work (she simply doesn't like it), and CheeseDream refuses to justify her changes to me, or to provide evidence or sources. In short, FT2 and I simply disagree about organization (he prefers topical, I prefer chronological), but most other contributors prefer my organization. CheeseDream rejects any work I do and reverts it.

On November 14 I requested mediation in my conflict with CheeseDreams, Amgine, and FT2. Amgine and CheeseDream would nat accept anyone I nominated as mediator. They choose Llywrch. Llywrch attempted mediation, but Amgine and CheeseDream expressed dissatisfaction and then rejected him as mediator. By this time I was communicating more constructively with Amgine and FT2, but still could not communicate with CheeseDreams. I made a second request for mediation, but no one volunteered to be mediator, and CheeseDream (who had stated that she would not accept anyone I nominated) did not nominate anyone. Llywrch suggested we go to arbitration. CheeseDream has often suggested arbitration, as has John Kenny.

I would like CheeseDreams banned from the article. I can find no good contribution to the article by her -- she has never improved the clarity of the prose, and has never added verifiable content; she only disrupts mine and others' attempts to improve the article.

Concerning the talk page of the first article Wikipedia talk pages often get too long. Wikipedia policy is to archive material. We archived a good deal of the discussion. CheeseDreams summarized this discussion and placed it back into the article. This is bad for two reasons: first, her summary is biased; she rewrites what others said and condenses arguments to support her views. Second, her summaries are very long and defeat the purpose of archiving. I archived her summary. Over the past several days she continues to move archived material back into the article; I put it back in the archive; she puts it back in the article. This defeats the purpose of the archives, and makes the talk page excessively long (160 kilobytes long!).

Concerning the other two articles In the second article, CheeseDream simply copied the first (protected) article and gave it a new title, Jesus in cultural and historical background. Someone put in a redirect to the original page Cultural and historical background of Jesus. CheeseDream reverted that and eight other attempts to redirect it. When I redirected and protected the redirect, CheeseDream accused me of abusing my sysop powers. At the request of another editor I unprotected it. CheeseDream reverted it and instituted a complaint at RfC against me. See, and. John K. redirected and protected the page, and CheeseDream created a new namespace (Historical reconstruction of the sort of person Jesus would be) with the same old article content that is Cultural and historical background of Jesus. I redirected and protected the page. She claims that this creation of two or three separate namespaces for the same article content is in the spirit of compromise, and I believe that this is laughable on its face. Presumably, the compromise would be that the original article (Cultural and historical background of Jesus) would be reverted to the form she likes, leaving me to enjoy the form I like. There are three reasons why this is not a good-faith compromise. First, I know of no example in wikipedia where a conflict over an article was resolved by having two versions of the article. Our goal should be one verifiable NPOV article for one topic or issue, not several articles on the same topic, different only in representing the views of a different editor. This smacks in the face of everything Wikipedia stands for and is a bad precedent. Second, CheeseDreams' move is disingenuous because she added all sorts of tags (neutrality and accurcacy under dispute) to the second copy of the article. In other words, she simply wishes to continue the arguments she has had with me over the original article, at a second space. Third, the article she favors is still, in the mind of me and several other editors, deeply flawed and will continue to be questioned and worked on.

I do not know if this is a bannable offense -- it certainly is in my opinion trolling. I believe it requires some sort of strong disciplinary action. Slrubenstein

Ta bu shi da yu

 * Please note that this seciton has been removed by CheeseDreams. . - Ta bu shi da yu 00:12, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * It appears that she was right to do this. I am placing this in a seperate request for arbitration. - Ta bu shi da yu 10:43, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Statement by affected party
My response to the above and other accusations can be seen at this diff

I may tidy it up and present it seperately at a later moment. CheeseDreams 14:17, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Response to Fred Bauder
Jesus and koan - : has 15700 hits

 * "third epistle to the corinthians" only has 116, despite its existance being historical fact.

 * So the number of google hits hardly demonstrates validity.

CheeseDreams 18:03, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Summary -
 * The summary is lengthy only because the discussion was
 * The summary exists to prevent repetition of the same points
 * The summary exists to be able to see issues "at a glance"
 * The summary exists to prevent obfuscation of information by verbose editors
 * The summary is only objected to by Slrubenstein+cronies, the ex-mediator (Llyrwch) expressed a different opinion (as stated on the talk page)

Personal attacks -
 * You have taken the comment out of context, which is unfair and biased
 * See
 * I consider such a statement to be in the fascist mould - YOU WILL NOTE THIS - my view is right, and you will obey
 * I feel that a comparison of such a style of discussion to nazi fascism wholly appropriate

 * One user, probably a sockpuppet has already been blocked for making personal attacks against me, , ,

, note my restraint

Response to Slrubenstein
CheeseDreams 16:35, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Asking for bans is a serious violation of Civility
 * Slrubenstein is serially uncivil to editors who disagree with him (see evidence presented by Amgine for a small selection of this)
 * Slrubenstein trys to pack the house to win votes
 * If I am to be blocked from editing Cultural and historical background of Jesus, then I cannot see why Slrubenstein should not be blocked as well.

Additional comments
Please see the top of the talk page for extended comments by many users.

Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (4/0/2/0)

 * Accept Fred Bauder 18:48, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Accept. →Raul654 19:32, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Accept. --the Epopt [[TINC| of the Cabal ]] 21:19, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Recuse. Jwrosenzweig 21:42, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Accept. Delirium 23:24, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Recuse. Theresa Knott (The snott rake) 22:33, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Temporary injunction
1) Pending a final decision in this matter CheeseDreams is banned from editing all articles which relate to Christianity. This ban is based on aggressive POV editwarring as illustrated by the edit history of Historicity_of_Jesus.

 * Passed 9 to 0 and enacted on 6 January 2005

Final decision
All numbering based on /Proposed decision (vote counts are there as well)

Customary practices
1) Certain customary practices used on Wikipedia are not written down, but can be ascertained by communication with other users.
 * Passed 8-0.

Archiving of talk pages
2) It is the practice on Wikipedia when a talk page becomes too long for convenient editing to move older material to archives linked from the main page.

 * Passed 11-0.

Refactoring talk pages
4) Talk pages may be refactored in order to improve their usability, brief, unbiased summaries of past discussion may be useful, especially for new editors, see Refactoring.
 * Passed 11-0.

Avoiding personal attacks
4) Wikipedia users are required to avoid personal attacks.
 * Passed 11-0.

Three revert rule
5) Wikipedia editors may not revert an article more than three times in a 24 hour period. This rule is based on individual users, not on a group of users who are reverting the same material (CheeseDream's "tag team" concept).

 * Passed 11-0.

Modification of other user's edits of Arbitration page
6) Users who modify other user's edits of arbitration pages, inserting peripheral material, and especially deleting them or portions of them will be heavily penalized.

 * Passed 11-0.

Disruption
7) Don't disrupt Wikipedia to prove a point.
 * Passed 8-0.

Koan in Jesus
1) A major issue in this matter is the attempt of CheeseDreams to insert language which relates to Koan, generally considered a Zen Buddhist teaching method, into the Jesus article.

 * Passed 10-0.

Googling for koan and Jesus
2) A google search for "jesus", "koan" and "new testament" returns a little over a thousand hits, including the customer reviews of The Zen Teachings of Jesus at the top.

 * Passed 10-0.

Summaries on Talk:Cultural_and_historical_background_of_Jesus
3) CheeseDreams has on Talk:Cultural_and_historical_background_of_Jesus repeatedly inserted lengthy summaries of prior material from the talk page archive despite strenuous objections of other editors involved in the article.

 * Passed 10-0.

Personal attacks by CheeseDreams
4) CheeseDreams has made personal attacks on other users.
 * Passed 9-1.

Other accounts of CheeseDreams
5) CheeseDreams also edits under the username User:Cheesedreams and under the IP 81.156.93.151.

Modification by Ta bu shi da yu of material by CheeseDreams
6) Ta bu shi da yu has modified an edit in Requests_for_arbitration/CheeseDreams by CheeseDreams to insert a portion of his complaint, see

 * Passed 11-0.

Deletion of request for temporary injunction
7) CheeseDreams removed a request for a temporary injunction in this matter from Requests for arbitration/CheeseDreams
 * Passed 11-0.

Vandalism of a user page
8) CheeseDreams vandalized User:Ta bu shi da yu by adding several dispute tags.

 * Passed 6-0.

Disruption
9) CheeseDreams has acted in a way to cause disruption, either to make a point or to force through her preferences. This includes tagging over large numbers of pages with dispute notices, , , ,  without discussion; and recreating disputed pages under new titles (Cultural and historical background of Jesus recreated as Jesus in a cultural and historical background and Historical reconstruction of the sort of person Jesus would be).
 * Passed 7-0.

Problems centre on articles related to Christianity
11) The above difficulties have centred on articles relating to Christianity or issues arising from disputes that started on articles relating to Christianity.
 * Passed 6-0.

Disruptive tagging
4) For tagging over 50 articles with disupted headings [and other disruptive actions], CheeseDreams is banned for one week.
 * Passed 8-0.

Vandalizing other users' pages
5) For vandalizing User:Ta bu shi da yu, CheeseDreams is banned for 1 day.
 * Passed 8-0.

Reversion
3) CheeseDreams may not revert any page more than twice in any 24-hour period, except for simple vandalism. Should she do so, any administrator may block her for a length of time up onto and including 24 hours, with the block length doubling for each violation. Administrators are authorized to determine what constitutes a reversion at their discretion.

 * Passed 7-0.

Christianity-related articles
4) Cheesedreams is banned from editing all Christianity-related articles for the period of one year. Administrators are given discretion in determining what articles are "Christianity-related" and may enact blocks of up to one week for each edit. This does not apply to talk pages [but does apply to templates used in, or designed for use in, Christianity-related articles]

Civility
5) If Cheesedreams can demonstrate a pattern of editing with civility, and without serious conflict, for the next six months, she can apply for a lifting of the above ban on editing Christianity related articles.
 * Passed 7-0.