text:
Talk:Coronary catheterization

Complication Rate
I am not a doctor. I don't even play one on TV.

The article on Coronary catheterization states "significant complication rates typically in the less than 0.0003% range". This is orders of magnitude lower than other figures I've seen (Noto, TJ, Johnson, LW, Krone, R, et al. Cardiac catheterization 1990: A report of the registry of the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1991; 24:75.). Which states "the mortality for diagnostic procedures has remained remarkably constant (0.11%)". I don't know what could be more significant than mortality.

I'm not familiar with Wikipedia's policies, but citing sources would seem the norm. I don't know if I can believe one word in the article.

 * Most of the article is correct. The question is which part. If you come accross unreliable or poorly cited information, just add fact as a faux reference. Other readers will understand there is no source yet, and will take the statement with the proverbial grain of salt. WP:CITE is indeed a key Wikipedia policy. JFW | T@lk  22:08, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

The above comment is correct, 0.1% is the rate quoted to patients at the time of consent for cath. Mortality today continues to be about 0.1%, and the other complications are higher. There should be a detailed discussion of the complications: not limited to dissection, MI, Death, stroke, urgent CABG, groin hematoma, hemorrhage, etc. Dlodge 00:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Unnecessecary limited article
Why only coronary catheterization? We do alot of procedures for other reasons! --Ekko 19:00, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

 * This is an extremely common procedure and it definitely deserves an article on its own. JFW | T@lk  22:06, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

History
In the history section, mention was made on a physician performing an angiogram on himself. I could find no source for this assertion, and other historical articles simply provide a more convincing narrative. JFW | T@lk  22:06, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

 * This is correct. The first heart cath was performed by a German who threaded a catheter into his own heart and walked up the stairs to the x-ray dept. and shot film of the catheter in place.  Dlodge 00:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

 * And of course, we even have an article on him: Werner Forssmann --WS 13:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * ...which has a reference that says Forssman walked downstairs with 30 cm of catheter already in his arm, and then stood in front of a fluoroscope, saw (via a mirror) that the cath was at his shoulder as he expected, pushed it the full 60 cm in, and only then saw that the cath was now in his right ventricle. Then they exposed film.  (I am relying on the cited reference; perhaps in Forssmann's original 1929 German report he says he walked upstairs...  end of nitpick)LM6407 (talk) 06:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

The article begins by naming Antonio Egas Moniz as the first to perform angiography, in 1927. According to the eponymous article, that is true, but the only angiographic work cited in that article is cerebral angiography, for which Egas Moniz was nominated twice for a Nobel Prize but did not win. Since the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine was awarded in 1956 jointly to Forssman, Cournand, and Richards for their development of coronary angiography, if Egas Moniz had preceded those winners in developing coronary angiography even in the least, it is hard to believe that the Nobel Committee would have ignored him in 1956. Egas Moniz is properly credited in Wikipedia with cerebral angiography, but he deserves no more than that. I have so edited the article.LM6407 (talk) 05:43, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I further edited the article by removing a paragraph that had an inline, non-footnoted reference about a minor development in 1953 which was claimed to be a "first". Given the extensive work being done in multiple sites in Switzerland and in the USA during and after World War II, it is likely that others deserve the claimed credit for lighting up the left coronary arteries nonspecifically from the aorta. (See the Forssman article referenced above, which reports on his visit to a cath lab in Zurich in or before 1951. Nonspecific angiography was all that was being done at that time.)LM6407 (talk) 06:19, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I lastly copied over the paragraph from History of Invasive and Interventional Cardiology re the Nobel Prize for Forstmann, Cournand, and Richards that really belongs in this article as long as it stands alone. There certainly is multiple overlapping content in this topic area. IMHO the most complete article is History of Invasive and Interventional Cardiology; the rest of these similar topics should be merged into that article, which could then get a new title.LM6407 (talk) 06:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

More specificity and possible merge
I would be interested in seeing a better description of the diagnostic aspects, particularly the distinction between a right heart cath and a left heart cath plus the left ventriculogram. Also, there is short wiki page for cardiac catheterization which could either be merged or redirected to this one as this one is much more extensive (though I've always heard it called a cardiac cath which is why I found that page first).--209.7.195.158 15:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. It doesn't make much sense that the owerview article cardiac catheterization is so much shorter than this, about a much more limited field. I suspect an age bias, and a volume bias. (Coronary cathetherization is done in a great volume on the middle aged.) --Ekko 13:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

History: Role of Melvin Paul Judkins
Needs mention of the role of Melvin Paul Judkins. -- Fyslee (talk) 06:23, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Coronary angiography vs. coronary catheterization
I am not a doctor, but I believe that the term "coronary catheterization" is broader than "coronary angiography". However, the term "coronary angiography" is redirected to this page. The term "coronary angiography" is not even mentioned in this article, or even "angiography". Something is wrong here. Thomas.Hedden (talk) 20:39, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

 * The picture is of a coronary angiogram and it is mentioned again in the diagnostic procedures section. The truth is that these procedures are called by many different terms, Cath, cardiac cath, angiogram, angiography, PCI, PTCA and others. Also many times the exact procedure that is going to be done isn't known till it starts. It may start as an angiogram but end up as an intervention or vice-versa. Dan D. Ric (talk) 20:52, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Article by Willis is about leg arteries not heart
The paper quoted is about leg (femoral) arteries and not heart (coronary) arteries. "To overcome these difficulties it was decided to study the femoral and popliteal arteries by serial arteriography."

Results did not conclude Vitamin C cured lesions in arteries. Once again it must be pointed out that the series is small and that final conclusions must await studies carried out for a longer time with more cases added. This is being done, and the present review is to be considered as a preliminary report".

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Carnifex2000 (talk • contribs) 10:37, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Alternative approaches
I changed the name of the "Advantages and disadvantages" section, only because as it stood the focus was not on catheterization's advantages and disadvantages per so (although it mentions some), but rather on CT angiography as an alternative. I also made some stylistic mods, only because I suspect the original author wasn't native English-speaking and some of what was there wasn't idiomatic.

I have, however, tried to leave the meaning unchanged, because I'm not a specialist in this field (or even a medic). So it would be good if that original author -- or anyone else of enough experience -- would give my changes a once-over to make sure I haven't inadvertently changed some meaning. 70.114.180.201 (talk) 18:24, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Coronary catheterization. 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/20130511054812/http://www.ct-angiogram.com:80/Angiogram_vs._CT_Catscan_Angiogram_2273.htm to http://www.ct-angiogram.com/Angiogram_vs._CT_Catscan_Angiogram_2273.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101018180232/http://www.businessweek.com:80/news/2010-09-09/abbott-dissolving-stent-may-be-next-revolution-.html to http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-09-09/abbott-dissolving-stent-may-be-next-revolution-.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:52, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Overlapping articles?
"Cardiac catheterization" is an article. But "Cardiac Catheterization" redirects to Coronary catheterization. David notMD (talk) 12:31, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ - thanks --Iztwoz (talk) 17:04, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Merge Angiocardiography into coronary catheterization
Angiocardiography is essentially the same thing as "coronary catheterization" and I'm not sure there's much utility in maintaining a stub at angiocardiography. Cburnett (talk) 04:25, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Though you could make the same case about Percutaneous coronary intervention and

Angioplasty.Ploversegg (talk) 21:33, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree to merge angiocardiography into coronary catheterization. No point in having two articles on the same subject. Spyder212 (talk) 00:52, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ Klbrain (talk) 04:50, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Radiation dose
I want to add a short section on the radiation dose to the patient, and to the operators, at some point. I have a fair sense of the numbers for diagnostic angiography - say 3msv to the patient with modern equipment, but interventional case is more complicated. Exposure to the operator appears to be about 4msv a year.Ploversegg (talk) 17:30, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Did angiography case. Need 2nd section for interventional case. When I get time I'll figure that out.Ploversegg (talk) 22:29, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Reworded the 1st sentence to make clear the risk being addressed. This new section overlaps with 'Diagnostic procedures' which also discusses minimizing the exposure time. --Wire723 (talk) 09:35, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Maybe, in retrospect, I should have just augmented that section. I was in the pattern of adding an extra section after doing Coronary calcium scan. Ploversegg (talk) 23:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Coronary catheterization


text:
User talk:Apyule

Helmholtz Coils
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Your editing of Helmholtz Coils prompts some comments:

 * Under Wikipedia conventions found at Manual of Style, the c in coil in the article title should be lower-case, and the word coil in the title should be singular. Since there was already an article titled Helmholtz coil, with a lower-case c and singular title, the one with the plural and the capital C should be a redirect page pointing to the one with the lower-case c and the singular coil.  Knowing these conventions is a way of avoiding the problem of needing to merge two similarly titled articles on the same subject.  After the information from your new article gets incorporated into the other article, the new one should become a redirect page.

 * Conventionally one highlights the title word or title phrase at its first appearance, thus: Helmholtz coils are named in honor of Hermann von Helmholtz etc., etc., etc.

Happy editing!

Michael Hardy 20:51, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Nikki Hemming
I have rewritten her article in order to establish notability. I would be grateful if you could have a look at the page and see what you think. Capitalistroadster 05:06, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

German WMD
The article Germany and weapons of mass destruction has been mostly rewritten and I think it is a good, NPOV article though slightly stubbish. I was wondering if you would reconsider your vote at its VFD, since the POV issues seemed to be a major reason for your vote to delete. Thanks. Christopher Parham (talk) 19:11, 2005 August 14 (UTC)

Harrow Football
Following your comments last week, I've had a go at writing the rules for Harrow Football. Take a look and tell me what you think! Thanks --Jamesedmo 21:30, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Apologies. You already have! --Jamesedmo 21:32, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Alleged causes of Hurricane Katrina
I realize that there were strong feelings on both sides with respect to the outcome of the AfD for this article, now located at Alternative theories regarding Hurricane Katrina. I would like to assure those who expressed concerns about the content, tone, and potential for degradation of this article that I intend for it to continue to exist only as long as is necessary to draw the contributions of fringe theorists away from the more substantial Hurricane Katrina articles. Once interest in this topic dies down, I'll quietly trim and merge this information into the appropriate general-topic articles. In the interim, I will carefully watch this page to prevent it from being abused, and I will continue to work towards making this article NPOV, properly sourced, and useful to those seeking an accurate record of the hysterics that so often follows catastrophe. Cheers. -- BD2412 talk 00:55, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Talk pages
I'm sure this was well-intentioned but generally one does not change other people's texts on talk pages, not even to improve them. It's not an iron-clad rule, but I thought I'd let you know someone might get angry over an edit like this: some people are very touchy about it. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:23, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up, I'll make sure that I'm more careful which namespace I'm in in the future. --Apyule 07:57, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Jack Sarfatti
Hi, thanks for your help on this. Unfortunately, Jack did go ballistic, as I feared he might (I've dealt with him before). What do you think of this threat he place on my user talk page? This is the first time I've had to deal with something like this, so any advice would be appreciated. (Please reply on my user talk page).---CH (talk) 00:07, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Please see my response to your message. Uncle Ed 13:31, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Jornbarger
Hello, I noticed you tagged Jornbarger as an A7 WP:CSD deletion. A7 only applies to people, not to anything else, unfortunately. Jornbarger will, sadly, just have to go through AfD. Yours, --Blackcap | talk 05:07, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I listed it under A7 because I contend that it is about a person. Looking more closely though, a redirect to Jorn Barger might be better. --Apyule 05:46, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but it doesn't actually say that, so it can't be speedied under A7. It can, however, and has been, speedied under A6, the attack page clause, for being an attack page of Jorn Barger, whom I didn't realize existed. Either way, it dies, and I'm satisfied :). Take care, --Blackcap | talk 16:20, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Brain Teasers/Trivia:
Hi, I'm just posting a friendly notice stating that I have got Brain Teasers/Trivia on my user page that you're welcome to have a go at. Will post new questions one day after they have been answered. Thanks... Spawn Man 09:36, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

My RFA
I do more than just remove vandalism. But that is the main thing I do. Is there a reason that I cant be an admin that mainly removes vandalism? -- ☺ A  d a m 1213  ☺ | talk  06:51, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * No, there is no reason that an admin can't focus on vandalism. However, when most of a users edits are reverting vandalism it is hard to tell much about them as an editor. --Apyule 06:58, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

a heads-up on the List of Guantanamo Bay detainees
Greetings,

Since you voted to keep the article List of Guantanamo Bay detainees I thought I would give you a "heads-up". A copyright violation was filed against the article, on October 11th. It was filed by someone who had voted to delete the article on October 5th.

I believe that the copyright violation is entirely bogus. I believe it is bogus because, as explained in Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service, lists of facts, like lists of names, cannot be copyright. This Feist v. Rural case went all the way to the US Supreme Court, which made the possibly counter-intuitive ruling that the amount of effort someone put in to compiling a list plays no role in determining whether that list is eligible for copyright protection.

Even if alphabetic lists of names could be copyright, I believe the wikipedia list would not be violating copyright since the list was compiled from various sources.

Yes, I have considered that this user invoked a bogus copyright violation to achieve a result that failed in the {AfD}. Yes, I asked them to terminate the copyright violation process, in light of Feist v Rural. They declined. The backlog in the administrators dealing with copyright violations seems to be on the order of a month long.

Anyhow, I wanted the people who had shown interest in the article to not freak out, or feel betrayed, by seeing the copyright violation tag. -- Geo Swan 11:21, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks. :-)  --  Geo Swan 15:09, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you on deletion
I agree with you on deletion. My first encounter with an {AfD} was three weeks ago. Since then I have had almost a dozen {AfD}s filed on articles I started, all of them articles that touch on the "global war on terror". -- Geo Swan 11:21, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

White Boy Accuses Brown Boy of White Wash
Your commentsabout me notwithstanding, why not take a look at the following articles and tell me if I "whitewashed" the issue as you put it. Is the final product better? If not, feel free to revert to the last Geo Swan edit. For example, Clive Stafford Smith, Gareth Peirce Benyam Mohammed. As I posted on Geo Swan's talk page, e.g. have edited Benyam Mohammed to cure the obvious POV issues and have added basic facts for any bio, such as date of birth, full name, the dates of events. The problem, Geo Swan is that when you create these hundreds of politically motivated stubs, for the sole purpose of getting more hits on Google, that you forget to include the basic information.

For the record, my position is numerous poorly written articles about Guantanamo does not vitiate. Joaquin Murietta 16:15, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Your comments on my talk page notwithstanding...
I have very little respect for bigots. So, let's talk about what you meant by "white wash" and then we'll address Geo Swan and Cactus Flower's comments about Mexicans, Mexican Bandits and Right Wing Cubans. Joaquin Murietta 07:57, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

 * You seem to be engaged in an active political campaign trying to remove content that is potentially damaging to the current government of the USA. Examples of this include the AfD for Bush on the Couch and the copyvio on List of Guantanamo Bay detainees. While we're at it, before this gets any further please read this very carefully. --Apyule 11:49, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, I am not, nor did I did not send this to fifty  people, including you.  My goal is to write well written articles. Joaquin Murietta 12:47, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Please comment on Jamal Kiyemba
Jamal Kiyemba is one of the many Geo swan articles that I sought to improve. Please tell me if you object to the final product. Joaquin Murietta 16:37, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Whaling
Hi Apyule,

Having a wee bit of difficulty understanding why you reverted the whaling article (rv POV vandalism). Alleging that Japan is operating under a "guise" of scientific research is a POV .. I could just as easily allege that Greenpeace is an NGO that operates under a "guise" of environmental activism when in actual fact, they are simply in it for the money ;)- both are extreme POV´s ..

In addition, the NGO interference in the IWC leading up to the 1982 moratorium and beyond is reasonably well documented. Not only does it provide a counterpoint to the obvious anti-whaling bias that pervades the article, it specifically shows that "vote buying" is not restricted to the Japanese - or do you disagree? SammytheSeal 12:08, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I do disagree. Dealing with the points that you raise:
 * There are strong arguments that the Japanese whaling program is of very little scientific value compared to its commercial/social value.
 * Your comment about Greenpeace is a position that, while hard to refute, has little basis in reality.
 * Buying votes at the International Whaling Commission is difficult to analyse objectively as there are so many facets to international relations, but there is a very close relation between countries receiving aid from Japan and joining the IWC
 * I will add sources and references to the whaling articles as soon as I have time. It would be great if you would do the same. --Apyule 13:09, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

No worries, it looked like a mistake, but it looks like there is a few clashes of opinion on the whaling articles just now, so we need to be careful to work well with each other, Thanks. Pcb21| Pete

voting on afd
It maybe that articles on which I have voted to delete have been based on reliable sources but I think the burden of citing sources lies with the creating editor. Verifiability is a policy whcih I believe is an absolute must for all articles. I hope that any afd closers would disregard my vote if reliable sources are added to articles after my vote and before closure — I will try to modify my votes to make this clearer. -- red stucco 09:29, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Scott base & erebus.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Scott base & erebus.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Canley 07:55, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Beer categories.
Hi Apyule, I hope you're sober. It has been suggested by User:BrianSmithson that the Beer and brewery categories should be renamed. The proposal has been supported by User:Syrthiss, and supported and expanded by myself. The notion is that the regional categories should follow the format of "Beer and breweries in Africa" /Europe/Asia/North America/South America/Oceania. "Brewers and breweries" could also be renamed "Beer and breweries by region". And all the countries should also be renamed (and merged if needed) as, for example, "Beer and breweries of Germany", "Beer and breweries of Britain", "Beer and breweries of Poland". The word in each case would be beer rather than beers to allow for general articles on beer culture in each region as well as individual beers.

Comments, suggestions, objections and simple votes to Wiki Beer Project SilkTork 15:07, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

User conduct RfC on Brian G. Crawford
Thought you might be interested in this:Requests_for_comment/Brian_G._Crawford. -- backburner001 16:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. --Apyule 14:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. Hopefully, something good will come of this. -- backburner001 16:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Poll
Your vote/opinion on brewery notability is requested here: Sober up and come and vote! SilkTork 12:10, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Stub-Sorting
No problem! Just trying to find something to do on a boring Tuesday morning.StvnLunsford 14:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Ivory Coast move
Since you participated in previous discussions on Ivory Coast, you might be interested in the requested move at Talk:C%C3%B4te_d%27Ivoire. —  AjaxSmack     08:46, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Don't bite the newbies
Do you have any specific examples? A really vague statement like this makes it hard for me to know exactly what you're talking about. Wibbble 12:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't see anything wrong with that - my edit comment was perfectly reasonable, and it wasn't a correction since as far as I'm aware, Nokia say that the N95 doesn't actually support SDHC. I don't check the number of edits a user has made before I revert what is, AFAIK, incorrect information, and I don't think that saying 'if the N95 supports SDHC cards, please cite the Nokia reference, then it can be added to the article' is in any way biting the newbie. It was a polite request for sources, in case I was mistaken about the SDHC support Wibbble 17:33, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

AfD notification
First off I apologise if this is considered an attempt to "vote-stack", but I think it's a slightly different issue since you already" voted to keep the article George W. Bush pretzel incident back in March...it's now back on the AfD list, despite'' it's earlier "Keep" verdict - and I'd appreciate an extra voice if your opinions are unchanged. It is at Articles for deletion/2002 George W. Bush pretzel incident (2nd nomination), much thanks. Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead) 04:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

CMSimple
A template has been added to the article CMSimple, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with db-author. Jackaranga 21:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Serene on stand.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Serene on stand.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Serene on stand.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:Serene on stand.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free image with no fair use rationale uploaded after May 4, 2006 which has been tagged as not having a rationale for more than 7 days.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on |the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DJBullfish (talk) 07:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fred Ajudua
Hi. I saw you did some edits on this article, and you expressed doubt about whether the guy deserved an article. I came across the article in the AfD list, at which time it had been stripped down to one line. I was curious enough to check for sources and then expand to a more complete version - the guy really does seem to be a notable con artist. Then I had second thoughts. Is this the kind of subject an encyclopedia should contain? I suppose there are truly notable criminals like Jack the Ripper and Ponzi that do belong, but I don't know about Ajudua. The AfD has just been closed with "keep". Maybe a mistake, even though I voted for that. This is to ask you, if you care to, to keep watching the article and if I don't get there first to revert any unsourced edits. This one gives me a very queasy feeling. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 03:28, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Melbourne Meetup
Hi there. Just inviting youmto the Melbourne meetup this Sunday at 11am, to celebrate our 11th anniversary. Details on that page. Hope to see you there! SteveBot (talk) 01:42, 11 January 2012 (UTC) (on behalf of Steven Zhang)

February Melbourne Meetup
Hi All. Just letting you know that we have another meetup planned for Melbourne, on Sunday, 26th February at 11am. More details can be found at the meetup page. Pizza will be provided. Look forward to seeing all of you there :-) SteveBot (talk) 22:47, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Melbourne meetup
Hey all, just a reminder that there's a meetup tomorrow at 11am in North Melbourne. There are more details at the meetup page. Hope to see you tomorrow! SteveBot (talk) 03:41, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Meetup invitation: Melbourne 26
Hi there! You are cordially invited to a meetup next Sunday (6 January). Details and an attendee list are at Meetup/Melbourne 26. Hope to see you there! John Vandenberg 04:54, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in Victoria)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Penguin Liberation Front

The article Penguin Liberation Front has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
 * software article of unclear notability, lacking independent references, tagged for refs since 2011

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dialectric (talk) 12:08, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:PLF logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:PLF logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:19, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Fair Use in Australia discussion
As an Australian Wikipedian, your opinion is sought on a proposal to advocate for the introduction of Fair Use into Australian copyright law. The discussion is taking place at the Australian Wikipedians' notice board, please read the proposal and comment there. MediaWiki message delivery MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:08, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

This message has been automatically sent to all users in Category:Australian Wikipedians. If you do not wish to receive further messages like this, please either remove your user page from this category, or add yourself to Category:Opted-out of message delivery

"Sedevacantist Antipope" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Sedevacantist Antipope and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 7 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 00:46, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Apyule


text:
Talk:Message authentication code

When is a MAC secure?
This article needs to contain a succinct statement of the properties a MAC function needs to have to be considered secure. The text describes only one property, resistance to "existential forgery under chosen-plaintext attacks", which appears to be strictly easier to satisfy than collision resistance for hash functions. However, if that was the whole requirement, the function $$f_k(M) = H(M)$$ where $$H$$ is a good hash function and $$f_k(M)$$ ignores $$k$$ (!), would be a good MAC, which is not the case. Thus there must be more requirements. What are they, exactly? Henning Makholm 20:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

 * The attacker has access to an oracle which produces a valid MAC tag given a message. They make q queries of the oracle, then they output a (message, tag) pair and exit.  They succeed if the pair is valid and not one that was produced by the oracle. — ciphergoth 11:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

 * That makes sense. I have attempted to edit the article accordingly. Did I get it approximately right? –Henning Makholm 19:02, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Resisting existential forgery
The article implies that security from existential forgery means that two different messages should not produce the same tag. However, existential forgery[] actually means that an attacker is able to produce a valid message-tag pair, and does not have to show a collision.

Abejohnny 00:12, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Yes, this is definitely an error. — ciphergoth 11:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

MIC actually needs "Confidentiality Protection" or Encryption
The claim that a MIC is like a MAC but needs to be "encrypted" seems highly dubious and I would need a citation or two to believe this claim was even made in good faith. It doesn't seem to pass an obviousness or giggle test -- in order to not be forgable the code must have been made using a secret the attacker lacks or the attacker will use the same technique to create their forgery. I can see how encryption could help if the encryption included integrity protection - but that wouldn't really be just encryption would it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.52.84.194 (talk) 21:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

 * In all the cases I know, MIC is used instead of MAC for the one simple reason: MAC abbreviation is overloaded and, in particular, in communications it means Media Access Control. I have posted a request for citations. If none are provided, I am planning to revert to the old text stating that MIC and MAC are interchangeable. Dimawik (talk) 23:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

 * The text in the article is baloney. A MIC does not get secure just by encrypting it (think of known-plaintext under stream cipher encryption). Also, it is not valid to say that a MIC is less reliable than a MAC, because both can provide the same reliability in protection against accidental, unintentional modification. If you want to protect against intentional modification (forgeries), you have to use a keyed hash function (a MAC).
 * As I said below, the article is really bad, and is in need of a major rewrite.
 * Nageh (talk) 12:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Integrity/Authentication
I don't agree with the sentence "MICs do not use secret keys and, when taken on their own, are therefore a much less reliable gauge of message integrity". I don't think that using a MIC is less reliable about integrity checking. Nevertheless, if I understand correctly, a MIC doesn't provide authentication as a MAC would do. —Shiningfm (talk) 22:59, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

 * That's true. MICs only allow for verifying whether a message was correctly transmitted from its origin to its receiver, but it does not allow for verifying its origin, which is acheived by MACs. The sentence you quoted compares apples with oranges. MICs and MACs serve for different purposes. If you want to verify integrity, MICs are enough (although MACs are fine). If you want to verify the origin, you need MACs.
 * Maybe the writer of that sentence meant to say that under the assumption that the MIC was not modified itself, it proves origin.
 * This is the case if the channel over which the MIC is sent is authenticated. Also it might seem improbable to the writer of the sentence that a MIC be forged even on an unauthenticated channel so it seems to be relatively "reliable". But it doesn't prove its origin so you can not really rely on it in this case.
 * 132.231.1.241 (talk) 10:58, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 132.231.1.241 (talk) 10:58, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

 * OK I agree with what you said. Nevertheless, I think that it should be explicitly explained in the article.
 * Anyway, if you only deal with MICs, we can assume that cases exist where we don't care much about who made the message. In such cases, wether a message is authenticated or not is not important, and so, an unauthenticated message is not less reliable than an authenticated one. Even if such cases don't exist, this is not the point here. Discussing this implies discussing the purpose of MICs, which is not the point here.
 * --Shiningfm (talk) 23:24, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * In all the cases I know, MIC is used instead of MAC for the one simple reason: MAC abbreviation is overloaded and, in particular, in communications it means Media Access Control. Cryptographers use MAC, communication engineers use MIC - but is is the same thing. For example, the IEEE 802.11 standard states, "3.84 message integrity code (MIC): A value generated by a cryptographic function. If the input data are changed, a new value cannot be correctly computed without knowledge of the cryptographic key(s) used by the cryptographic function. This is traditionally called a message authentication code (MAC), but the acronym MAC is already reserved for another meaning in this standard."
 * I have posted a request for citations. If none are provided, I am planning to revert to the old text stating that MIC and MAC are interchangeable. Dimawik (talk) 23:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

 * It also means Mandatory Access Control but I don't think that it is a good reason to state that one expression may be used instead of the other.
 * For example you could use md5 to check integrity of a file. In such a case, no key is used in the calculation. You don't check (and don't mind) about who produced the file.
 * On the other hand, when you use md5 in SSL, you use it with a key, to produce a HMAC. In such a case the MAC provides authentication of the one that produced the message.
 * There may exist some situations where one could use either one word or the other but I think that the article should make the difference between them.--Shiningfm (talk) 23:16, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think that it is a good reason to state that one expression may be used instead of the other - Well, it is used interchangeably in publications - and I have provided a source (and can provide more). Do you know of a source that defines the MIC and the MAC as two different things? Sorry for me being slow, but I did not understand the MD5 example. Without a secret key, the hash is just a checksum - not much different from, say, CRC32 (obvious advantages of a good hash over CRC32 notwithstanding) Dimawik (talk) 08:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

 * I think you are right. What I was taught is that a MIC is a checksum produced by a hash function. And a MAC is the same but using a key in the calculation. I can find this definition in some sites that make difference between MACs and MICs. But in the definitions of protocols, MIC is always employed where we could use MAC and I can't find a source (except crypto courses) where they are different things.
 * I think you could reverse.Shiningfm (talk) 11:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * A quote from a pretty reputable source (Fred B. Schneider) has been provided, so I have modified the text to reflect both positions. Dimawik (talk) 01:33, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The article is not correct in saying that MIC is frequently used as a substitute for MAC. In correct terminology, it refers to an (unkeyed) hash function. Outside of the cryptographic community, either MIC or ICV is sometimes used to avoid mixture with other meanings. Btw, for the 802.11 reference given, MIC was really a MIC in the beginning (a CRC in the WEP protocol). Put aside, I wouldn't give credit to 802.11 sources in cryptographic questions after their WEP debacle.
 * (Btw, this article is horrible, needs a complete rewrite... don't know when I'll have time to do that, though.)
 * Nageh (talk) 21:47, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, (1) MIC was not used in WEP terminology; ICV was used instead (2) The term MIC was coined by the 802.11i group, that produced the WPA and included quite a few well-known cryptographers (Niels Ferguson, Doug Whiting and Phillip Rogaway are among the ones I personally talked to regarding encryption for WiFi). (3) For obvious reasons the cryptographic meaning of MAC is being avoided in all communications standards that I know; either MIC or T is used instead. I agree that the article needs a rewrite, but please do not omit the fact that MIC is almost always just a MAC, it makes sense to mention also about the T notation (from the "Tag", as the MAC result is occasionally called too). Dimawik (talk) 21:30, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I never mentioned which version of the 802.11 standard I was referring to. ;) But thanks for pointing out.
 * I think you've got a good point regarding the rationale of using the term MIC. But then I would rather say that in practice it almost always refers to a MAC, while in theory MIC is intended as a more general term, encompassing MACs, but possibly also digital signatures etc.
 * Tag is probably common, too, though I don't remember the T notation. Anyway, in contrast to MIC, tag is a more restrictive term in that it refers to the output of a MAC, only.
 * For those asking for references on guidelines/practice using the term MAC, also take a look at RFC 4949, item "Message Authentication Code".
 * Nageh (talk) 22:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * An example of the T notation can be found, for example, in the original GCM mode submission to NIST and most of the standards that were derived from it. I think that this article can be a good place to clear the meaning of confusing notations abound elsewhere. Dimawik (talk) 07:42, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That is what I first meant and what I was taught in university... But do you know any references to entail that ? Except my personal notes I don't know any... —Shiningfm (talk) 22:43, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * What do you mean? Almost every book that covers classical cryptographic theory gives definitions on MIC/MDC vs. MAC... see the online HAC (Handbook of Applied Cryptography), chapter 9, for example: http://www.cacr.math.uwaterloo.ca/hac/
 * Regarding re-interpretation of acronyms, you can check various (wireless) protocol standards (MIC), or Internet RFCs (ICV).
 * Oh, and just to avoid (or add to the) confusion: a MIC/MAC refers to either the function, or the output (tag), while ICV only refers to the output.
 * Nageh (talk) 10:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Great ! I should have searched more... Well, for sure the article needs rewriting ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shiningfm (talk • contribs) 09:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:Cryptography vs. Category:Cryptographic algorithms vs. Category:Message authentication codes
Category:Message authentication codes is itself a category within Category:Cryptographic algorithms which is in turn is a category within Category:Cryptography. — Robert Greer (talk) 14:43, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Roly1305 Hoangcuong95 (talk) 21:55, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Code modification
Once the executable code modification is possible, any symmetric encryption (including MAC) that uses software is not useful anymore. This is very trivial and not MAC specific, and I do not think it should be mentioned here - perhaps, on a more generic page? Dimawik (talk) 04:37, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

 * Definitely not! Cryptography is about securing the communication channel, not the communication entities. If you can compromise such entity (through code exploits, stealing keys, whatever) security is trivially void. No need to mention that. Nageh (talk) 09:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Bad SVG -> PNG thumbnail generation
The MAC.svg appears correctly formatted, but the auto-generated thumbnail (MAC.svg.png) is not. Dallasvaughan (talk) 16:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

encrypt-and-authenticate
It would help to have a discussion of the issues around combining MACs and encryption. For example, sign-then-encrypt vs encrypt-then sign. See for example http://world.std.com/~dtd/sign_encrypt/sign_encrypt7.html, which mostly discusses the asymmetric signature-and-encryption case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 17.209.4.116 (talk) 19:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

There's a long discussion at "Should we MAC-then-encrypt or encrypt-then-MAC?". Could some of the sources mentioned in that discussion could be used a references for this Wikipedia article? --70.177.124.19 (talk) 13:23, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

 * No otp or code or verify 2404:3C00:353E:E6E0:6CC1:F68F:7DA2:F3A1 (talk) 02:36, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Message authentication code. 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/20061020212439/http://www.rsasecurity.com/rsalabs/node.asp?id=2177 to http://www.rsasecurity.com/rsalabs/node.asp?id=2177

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) 13:03, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Message authentication code


text:
Talk:Quantum key distribution

BB84 protocol
I think that the sentence "the protocol is designed with the assumption that an eavesdropper (referred to as Eve) can interfere in any way with both [channels]" is a too strong statement. I think it's okay for Eve to do anything with the quantum channel and to eavesdrop classical channel but if she could intercept and resend the classical channel when they comapre they measurements she could ruin everything. Panina-manina (talk) 12:28, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's laughable that the classical channel has to be secure beforehand to establish secure quantum communications. Bright☀ 19:44, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Intercept & Resend
I believe the chance of being noticed is 1-(1/2)^n as Alice & Bob will only be comparing bits where their bases match, therefore Eve had a 50% chance of guessing the right basis in this situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.176.3.122 (talk) 14:34, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Wrong statement regarding QKD detecting interception
in "Future" it is said that "The major difference of quantum key distribution is the ability to detect any interception of the key, whereas with courier the key security cannot be proven or tested". This is plain wrong considering MITM. An interception can only be detected if you are perfectly sure that the photons arriving are the very same you have send. The only real difference is that, if only eavesdropping has occurred on the very same photons which still arrive, the QKD key will be automatically trash, while classically distributed keys must be manually trashed. Key interception in general (in terms of MITM) must be independently detected for both, QKD and classic key distribution, unlike the above quote hints. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arrobbe (talk • contribs) 10:57, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Bruce Schneier's remark is factually incorrect and should be removed
One of the premises of Schneier's remark, appearing very early on in the cited text, is

"The idea behind quantum crypto is that two people communicating using a quantum channel can be absolutely sure no one is eavesdropping. "

This is not the idea behind quantum key distribution (QKD). The idea is that provided that the protocol has been executed correctly the users may upper bound correctly any leaked information. They may then use classical privacy amplification algorithms to distill a secret key or start over if too much information has leaked. The role of quantumness is to guarantee that the upper bound is correct.

A second mistake in this premise is that the users will not use the quantum channel for communication. The classical channel will be used for communication and the quantum channel merely facilitates the sharing of the secret key that will be used to encrypt the classical messages.

I will proceed to remove the sentence quoting Schneier's remark soon if I don't hear otherwise.2001:14BA:A701:79A4:0:0:0:1 (talk) 09:55, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

 * I think you are right about him being wrong. Although, it is a citation from a very prominent cryptographer, and should not be removed, but rather contradicted by another citation. Or just left there, as a quote, and let the reader decide for itself whether it is true or not. To be more clear, the statement "in relation to QKD this famous guy said this-and-that" is true, despite that "this-and-that" might be false. (Wikipedia probably have multiple policies about removing cited stuff, but by inaction, i am willing to break those policies, since I think your version is more pedagogic.)
 * Second, a quantum channel could be used to carry the data. Why not. For example, using superdense coding. Although during this century, humanity will likely be using classical data channels ;) In other words, the statement that the ciphertext messages then are transmitted over only classical channels is false. · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 14:53, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Quantum Information Science and Engineering
— Assignment last updated by Za49 (talk) 05:31, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Quantum key distribution


text:
User talk:Jmootz20

Balls (Guttermouth album)
I tagged Balls (Guttermouth album) as needing context back in June, and since it still doesn't have any sentences or indication of notability, I've proposed it for deletion. If no one objects to the deletion within five days, the article may be deleted without further discussion. NickelShoe (Talk) 05:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

ACDs
JMootz, do you own that ACD in the pic, with the terribly pretty markings on its face, the cocked tail and all that feather round its butt? Is that really how they breed ACDs in the US? It's too cute for words! I'm glad to see you keep it on a chain like a real dog. Unfortunately, if you don't, they have a tendency to help themselves to chicken dinners

--Amandajm 09:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

That's actually my parents' dog, Squirt, that they have on their farm. She's a troublemaker, she loves to go for rides on any sort of vehicle- ATV, tractor, pickup truck, anything. They have to chain her up when they leave for somewhere, else she'll follow them a mile down the road :)

She's so small and fine-featured that they had to ask the guy they bought her from about it. He said she was 100% pure bred, she's just little. They're usually much more stocky. She's quick as a cat too, and loves to torment all the farm cats.

Here's a few more, one after eating a snack, and the other when she was a puppy, taking a nap on the tailgate of the truck: --jmootz20 18:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Snack
 * Taking a Nap

Image copyright problem with Image:Heinrich_Muller.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Heinrich_Muller.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 06:02, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gmalbumlp.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Gmalbumlp.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Blueheeler_squirt.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Blueheeler_squirt.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 20:33, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Drip Torch.JPG

The file File:Drip Torch.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

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

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

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

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jmootz20


text:
Talk:Cryptographic protocol

Name
I would suggest this would be better named "Security protocol" than "Cryptographic protocol", as the latter is about ten times more common in a Google search. Any objections? — Matt Crypto 17:52, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Both works fine for me. Although for me "Security protocol" has a wider meaning and might include soft human issues etc. --David Göthberg 21:18, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

I suggest the following definition for a cryptographic protocol. A cryptographic protocol employs cryptographic methods and message passing to allow agreement on values by participants in the presence of an adversary. For example, an authentication protocol allows agreement on the identity of some participants, and a confidentiality protocol allows agreement on a shared secret. Ramsdell (talk) 02:09, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

It is the name used in the literature and publications because it is the field of modern cryptography in conjunction with distributed computing (O. Goldreich, �Cryptography and cryptographic protocols,� Distributed Computing, vol. 16, no. 2-3, pp. 177�199, 2003.) Mohammad Al-Aggan (talk) 02:44, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Relation to cryptographic schema
I have read that a cryptographic scheme is the sum of algorithms to: - create a secret private key (or shared password) and the associated public key - Deliver public keys to involved parties - Encrypt with the secret a payload or sign such payload. - Decrypt the encrypted payload or verify the signature. Isn't in this sense a cryptographic scheme the same that a cryptographic protocol? Or a protocol is the sum of many schemes? (Looks to me this is the correct answer). Does a protocol always refer to something related with two (or more) remote (physically distant) parties or does it applies to maybe a local protocol to encrypt a file and decrypt (locally) later on?

title: Talk:Cryptographic protocol


text: User talk:65.166.162.2

title: User talk:65.166.162.2


text:
Brother, Can You Spare Two Dimes?

"Brother, Can You Spare Two Dimes?" is the twenty-fourth and final episode of the third season of the American animated television series The Simpsons (and the de facto season four premiere). It originally aired on Fox in the United States on August 27, 1992. It was originally slated to air as the season premiere for the next season, but Fox decided to air it earlier to promote the series premiere of Martin.

In the episode, Homer is awarded US$2,000 in compensation after radiation from the Springfield Nuclear Power Plant causes him to become sterile. Homer's half-brother, Herb, now poor and homeless, hatches a plan to regain his wealth. Homer loans him $2,000 to develop a new product that translates baby babbling into speech that parents can understand. Herb's invention is hugely successful, allowing him to regain his fortune.

The episode was written by John Swartzwelder and directed by Rich Moore. Danny DeVito guest starred as Herb, with Joe Frazier making a cameo as himself. "Brother, Can You Spare Two Dimes?" was the second time Herb appeared on the show; he had previously appeared in the season two episode "Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?", in which Homer designing an overpriced monstrosity as the new car of Herb's company bankrupts Herb. The producers decided to create this episode in part because many fans were unhappy about the sad ending to "Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?".

"Brother, Can You Spare Two Dimes?" received positive reviews from critics and DeVito was praised for his guest performance.

Plot
A routine physical exam at the Springfield Nuclear Power Plant reveals that Homer is sterile after being exposed to radiation. Fearing a lawsuit, Mr. Burns gives $2,000 prize in exchange for signing a legal waiver freeing the plant of all liability. Homer is suspicious; Burns hastily explains that he is awarding Homer the inaugural Montgomery Burns Award for Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence, complete with an extravagant ceremony hosted by Joe Frazier.

Homer plans to buy a vibrating chair as a replacement for the living room couch, which Bart and Lisa have broken while goofing off. Homer's half-brother Herb, broke and homeless because of Homer, learns of the prize Homer has won and stows away on a train to Springfield, planning to persuade Homer to lend him the money. Upon seeing Homer in person, Herb punches him in the face out of anger over the loss of Herb's company. After hearing a baby's cries, Herb devises a plan to regain his wealth by designing a device that can translate baby talk into coherent speech so parents can respond to their infants' needs. His invention is an instant success that makes him rich again.

Herb repays Homer's loan and buys several gifts for the Simpsons, including a new washer and dryer for Marge, an NRA membership for Bart, and a monthly book club subscription for Lisa. Herb forgives Homer for ruining him earlier and buys him the vibrating chair to reward his faith and generosity, and the Simpsons use the original $2,000 to replace the broken couch.

Production
The episode was written by John Swartzwelder and directed by Rich Moore. The reason for the late broadcast on August 27, 1992 (the season usually ends in May) was because the Fox network decided to add an additional episode to the season and show it during the summer to become "the biggest network" on television. As a result, the writers, animators, and producers had to work longer hours than normal to be able to finish the extra episode, which became "Brother, Can You Spare Two Dimes?" The idea for the scenes involving the Spinemelter 2000 originated when one of the writers bought a vibrating chair to relax after working 20 hours a day on the episode.

The decision to make another episode with Herb was reached due to many viewers being unhappy about the sad ending to the previous episode "Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?" (season two, 1991), in which Homer causes Herb to become bankrupt. It was decided that an episode would be created in which he regains his fortune. Originally the producers were going to end the original Herb episode with Herb saying "I have an idea!" at the end of it, but they decided to flesh this out into a full story, which resulted in "Brother, Can You Spare Two Dimes?". In addition, the producers decided that they enjoyed Danny DeVito's guest starring as Herb in "Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?", so they brought him back. Cast member Hank Azaria noted that DeVito was less enthusiastic in his second performance as Herb: "Some people come in and you can tell they kind of regretted doing it. The second time, Danny DeVito was like 'Yeah, yeah, yeah, let's get it over with.' He did a great job, but he didn't enjoy the process."

In part because the writers had so many ideas for what Herb would invent, the original script of "Brother, Can You Spare Two Dimes?" ended up being too long at fifty-three pages. During the same time as the voices were being recorded, the writers cut some of the material. One of the cut scenes featured Herb running after a train in order to ask which Springfield it was going to; the writers, however, decided to include a similar scene in a later episode, "Burns, Baby Burns" (season eight, 1996). There was originally a joke in the script that predicted the breakup of the Soviet Union; however, as the Soviet Union already broke up between the writing of the script and the air time, the joke was scrapped.

Boxer Joe Frazier guest starred in the episode as himself. Show runner Al Jean has stated that Frazier was hard to record, especially him saying the word "excellence" in the title of Mr. Burns' award. George Meyer, who directed Frazier, commented that he got the pronunciation right after almost 20 takes. The original script for "Brother, Can You Spare Two Dimes?" included a scene in which town drunk Barney Gumble knocked out Frazier, who was a former world heavyweight champion. Frazier's son, however, objected to this scene: "Yes, I suggested that they change that. [Frazier] was a world champion, and a world champion does not get knocked out. My dad has only been knocked down twice, and that was by George Foreman." Originally, the producers wanted Foreman to appear instead of Frazier, but he was unavailable.

The award that Homer received was based on the Emmy Award, but with a statue of Burns instead. At some point during the season, Todd Flanders's role as the younger brother was switched; before, he had been the smaller of the two, but since this episode, he has been the elder. The scene in which Homer flips on the switch that turns on the Christmas sign was, in contrast to the rest of the episode, created via Animatics. For several years, The Simpsons used a series of flashbacks to reflect on the scene in which the character is presently talking about. For instance, in this episode, when Marge talks about getting a new washing machine, the camera cuts to the washing machines vibrating wildly. However, when Family Guy began imitating the same style, the producers stopped the idea soon after. The scene where Homer bemoans Herb's treatment of him to Marge in bed was taken from another episode because they decided to explain the plot a bit more.

Cultural references
The title of the episode and the plot, to a certain extent, is a reference to the common expression "Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?", a song of the Great Depression that has been recorded multiple times by artists since. Charlie Chaplin's Little Tramp can be seen among the bums. He is eating a shoe, a reference to a scene in The Gold Rush (1925). A bum mutters to Herb: "Yeah, I used to be rich. I owned Mickey Mouse Massage Parlors, then those Disney sleazeballs shut me down." Another hobo says he was responsible for New Coke. While Homer relaxes in the Spinemelter chair at the store he sees images in his head that are a reference to the penultimate scenes of 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). In one scene, Homer reminisces about sitting on his old couch while watching Dallas, Hands Across America, the fall of the Berlin Wall and Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C.. Lisa mentions seeing an ad for "The Great Books of Western Civilization" in New Republic For Kids: "Each month a new classic will be delivered to our door: Paradise Regained, Martin Chuzzlewit, Melville's twin classics Omoo and Typee." The last scene, where Herb presents the Simpsons family with gifts for their trust in him is a reference to The Wizard of Oz (1939), in which the Wizard presents Dorothy, the Lion, the Scarecrow, and the Tin Man with gifts. Herb gets Lisa that subscription to The Great Books of Western Civilization, telling her "You'll receive a new one every month,, from Beowulf to Less than Zero", starting with Edith Wharton's Ethan Frome. She enthuses: "Finally, a copy of Ethan Frome to call my own."

Reception
In its original American broadcast, "Brother, Can You Spare Two Dimes?" finished 31st in the ratings for the week of August 24–30, 1992, with a Nielsen rating of 10.7, equivalent to approximately 9.76 million viewing households. It was the second highest-rated show on the Fox network that week following the 44th Primetime Emmy Awards.

Since airing, the episode has received mostly positive reviews from television critics. The authors of the book I Can't Believe It's a Bigger and Better Updated Unofficial Simpsons Guide were positive of the episode, particularly praising the scenes involving Homer's fixation for vibrating chairs and Maggie speaking to the family through the baby translator. The Guardian ' s David Eklid said episodes such as "Brother, Can You Spare Two Dimes?", "Lisa's Pony" and "Stark Raving Dad" make season three "pretty much the best season of any television show, ever." The episode's reference to 2001: A Space Odyssey was named the 27th greatest film reference in the history of the show by Total Film ' s Nathan Ditum. Herb's reappearance was praised by reviewers of the episode. Nate Meyers of Digitally Obsessed stated that Herb is "a perfect sibling for [...] Homer, with the two characters having a harmonious give-and-take comedic style. Indeed there isn't a great deal of substance in John Swartzwelder's script, but it is a great deal of fun with plenty of laughs to more than make up for this flaw. There is also a humorous cameo by Joe Frazier that puts a nice accent on the show."

Bill Gibron of DVD Verdict gave "Brother, Can You Spare Two Dimes?" a near-perfect score of 99/100, praising it for "the jokes about what the money could be spent on (including one of the best bits ever in a Simpsons episode—Homer sitting on a high-tech vibrating chair) and a good impetus to reintroduce Herb."

Several critics have praised DeVito's appearance. DVD Movie Guide's Colin Jacobson said he enjoyed seeing what happened to Herb, "and DeVito's performance helps make the show more successful; they really need to bring him back one of these days." Tom Adair of The Scotsman considers "Brother, Can You Spare Two Dimes?" to be a classic episode of the show, in part because of DeVito's performance. Gibron also liked the choice of DeVito as the voice of Herb as he is "almost the antithesis of everything Dan Castellaneta does with Homer vocally." Nate Ditum ranked DeVito's performance as the tenth best guest appearance in the show's history.

title: Brother, Can You Spare Two Dimes?


text:
User talk:Üvercin

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)]] 20:52, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Üvercin


text:
Khajjiar

Khajjiar is a hill station, near the town of Chamba in Chamba district, Himachal Pradesh, India, located approximately 24 km from Dalhousie. It lies on a small plateau with a small stream-fed lake in the middle. The hill station is surrounded by meadows and forests. It is about 6500 ft above sea level in the foothills of the Dhauladhar ranges of the Western Himalayas.It is part of the Kalatop Khajiar Sanctuary.

Khajiar can be reached from Dalhousie, the nearest major town. It has a rare combination of three ecosystems: lake, pasture, and forest.

Mini Switzerland
On 7 July 1992, Swiss Envoy Willy P. Blazer, Vice-Counsellor and Head of Chancery of Switzerland in India brought Khajjiar on the world tourism map by calling it "Mini Switzerland". He also put a sign of a yellow Swiss hiking footpath showing Khajjiar's distance from the Swiss capital Bern: "6194 km. Khajjiar is among the 160 locations in the world that bear a topographical resemblance with Switzerland. The counsellor also took a stone from Khajjiar which will form part of a stone collage around the Swiss Parliament to remind the visitors of Khajjiar as a "Mini Switzerland of India".

Accommodation
There is a hotel and some cottages run by HP Tourism in Khajjiar where the tourists can stay. Besides that, there are two rest houses, one each of P.W.D. and Forest Department. A couple of private hotels have also come up, which do not match the above places in terms of location and amenities.

Travel
Most tourists travel to Khajjiar by private or rented vehicles. Bus service to and from Khajjiar is limited and timing changes according to local demands.

Places of interest
The best entertainment in Khajjiar is to walk around the lake or to go for long walks in the thick pine forests. In winter there is snow which can be up to 3 ft of height. Children enjoy this place because of the freedom of movement and the sloped terrain which permits them to roll down to the lake without getting hurt. Some other attractions include horse riding and paragliding. There is a huge Hanuman Statue and a park.

Dauladhar mountains
Dense deodars, pines and lush green meadows are characteristics of Khajjiar. Since Khajjiar is situated at the base of the Dauladhar mountains, the tourists here can get panoramic views of the mountains.

Kalatop Khajjiar Sanctuary
The Kalatop Khajjiar Sanctuary is a wildlife sanctuary which has a wide variety of flora and fauna. It is densely covered with deodar and fir forest. The place is a favourite spot for picnics and trekking.

Khajjiar Lake
Khajjiar Lake is a small lake, surrounded by a saucer-shaped lush green meadow and a floating island. The dense growth of weed called vacha has made its earth spongy. Now the banks stand covered by a thick layer of earth, formed by the years of dust settling down on the weeds.

Khajji Nag temple
A little away from the lake is the temple of Khajji Nag belonging to the 12th century CE made by the king of Chamba, Prithvi Singh. The temple has a golden dome which is also known as Golden Devi Temple. In the mandapa of the temple one can see the images of the Pandavas and the defeated Kauravas hanging from the roof of the circumambulatory path. The sanctum of the temple has been carved from wood. This temple is dedicated to snake (Nāga) worship and there are some snake idols inside. The temple also houses idols of Shiva and the Goddess Hadimba.

Trekking
Khajjiar offers numerous trekking opportunities. Khajjiar to Dainkund is a 3.5 km easy to moderate trek. The trek starts 6 km from Khajjiar on the Dalhousie-Khajjiar road and ends at Pholani Devi Temple at Dainkund. This trek with a well-defined trail and moderate ascent is an excellent trek for beginners and children. The trek offers excellent views and a beautiful camping site.

title: Khajjiar


text:
King Edward VI Camp Hill School for Boys

King Edward VI Camp Hill School for Boys, also known as Camp Hill Boys, is a highly selective grammar school in Birmingham, United Kingdom. It is one of the most academically successful schools in the United Kingdom, currently ranked third among state schools. The name is retained from the previous location at Camp Hill in central Birmingham. The school moved to Vicarage Road in the suburb of Kings Heath in 1956, sharing a campus with its sister school (King Edward VI Camp Hill School for Girls), also formerly located in Camp Hill. Since September 2021 the current headmaster is Russell Bowen (a former Deputy Headteacher at Bishop Vesey's Grammar School). It is a school which specialises in Science, Mathematics, and Applied Learning. In 2006, the school was assessed by The Sunday Times as state school of the year. A Year 9 student was the 2011 winner of The Guardian Children's Fiction Page and the Gold Award in the British Physics Olympiad was won by a King Edward VI Camp Hill student in September 2011. Camp Hill has also sent a boy to the International Chemistry Olympiad for 4 years in a row (2019, 2018, 2017, 2018 2016 ). In the 2019 Chemistry Olympiad, Camp Hill received the second most gold certificates, coming second to St Paul's School, London.

Ofsted inspections classify Camp Hill as an Outstanding Provider.

History
The school was founded in January 1883 and operated for two terms on the New Street site of King Edward's School. It opened at its intended site at Camp Hill in Birmingham, near the city centre in September 1883, and moved to its current location, adjacent to Kings Heath Park, in 1956. Camp Hill Boys celebrated its 50-year jubilee in 2007 with a concert at Symphony Hall and the burial of a time capsule to be opened in another 50 years' time. It celebrated its House Centenary in 2007–8, with special events throughout the year that are not normally part of the house competition e.g. 5-a-side football.

Admission
Admission to Camp Hill is based upon success in the 11+ exam along with consideration of proximity to the school. It is also guaranteed that at least 25% of students admitted will be "Pupil Premium Pupils", which are pupils whose families will have received free school meals at some point in the six years prior to application. Those living outside the catchment are able to attend Camp Hill, but only if they achieve a very high score in the 11+, and the quota for catchment pupils is not filled. This admissions policy replaced the previous one for admissions starting in 2020. Previously, no weight was attached to proximity to the school, and the quota for Pupil Premium Pupils was 20%.

Admissions controversy 2020
For the academic year starting in 2020, changes were made to admissions criteria by the Foundation of the Schools of King Edward VI, the body which oversees the running of Camp Hill and the other King Edward schools in Birmingham. These changes were praised by some but proved controversial, with only 27% of those consulted supporting the plans. The changes increased admissions of Pupil Premium students to 25%, and due to the implementation of new catchment areas, admissions were restricted almost exclusively to a small area of city wards surrounding the school. Previously, applications were open to any UK citizen. In public consultation, many concerns were raised about the catchment areas, including that they may be designed to increase applications to the private school of King Edward's School in Edgbaston, overseen by the same body, and that students from the wider West Midlands county, in areas such as Solihull, would find it near impossible to gain entry if not part of the Pupil Premium quota. These concerns were brushed aside by the Schools of King Edward VI, which explained them as affluent parents outside Birmingham being disappointed at their loss of entitlement to a grammar school place. The BBC and others published articles on the changes, but all largely ignored the concerns about the catchment area, focussing instead on the issue of increased admission of deprived pupils, and the perceived class struggle. Additionally, the 11+ entry score, which used to be different for each grammar school (with Camp Hill having the highest entry score) was lowered and made the same for every King Edward VI grammar school in Birmingham, which many say is a way of decreasing the school's quality. In a FOI request to The King Edward Schools, release of the consultation responses, and information regarding reasons for the catchment plans, was refused. A complaint regarding conflicts of interest and concerns raised in the consultation was also brushed aside.

Sports
The sports played at Camp Hill are seasonal: rugby, and hockey in the Winter and Spring term, and in the Summer term: cricket, athletics and tennis are the main sports. Other sports include basketball, fitness, handball and football. In their games afternoon, Seniors (Years 11–13) especially the sixth form have the opportunity to play a wide variety of sports, including football, hockey, rugby, cricket, athletics, basketball, badminton, volleyball, table tennis, swimming, squash and tennis. All students are required to take part in certain house events (known as Standards) - cross-country, swimming and athletics. Other off-curriculum sports include fencing, swimming, and rugby and cricket training after school.

Notable alumni

 * Stanley Barnes, neurologist, former Dean from 1931-42 of the University of Birmingham Medical School, and fourth President from 1931-2 of the Association of British Neurologists
 * Mark Billingham, author, crime fiction
 * Keith Campbell member of the team that cloned Dolly the sheep
 * Fintan Coyle, co-creator of TV gameshow "Weakest Link"
 * Roger Cotterrell, Anniversary Professor of Legal Theory since 2005 at Queen Mary, University of London
 * Alan Dedicoat, BBC announcer and newsreader
 * Reginald Eyre, Conservative MP for Birmingham Hall Green from 1965–87 and Chairman of the Birmingham Heartlands Development Corporation from 1987–98
 * Clifford Grey (real name Percival Davis), composer who wrote If You Were the Only Girl (In the World), and won Olympic gold medals in 1928 and 1932 for the USA bobsleigh team
 * Nicholas Green (judge) QC, High Court Judge, Queen's Bench Division 2013, UK Permanent Representative to the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe from 2000-2 and Vice-Chairman of the Bar Council of England and Wales
 * Robin Grimes, materials scientist, Foreign Secretary to the Royal Society
 * Frank Heaven
 * Masud Husain FMedSci Professor of Neurology & Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Oxford
 * Harry Jephcott, President of the Royal Institute of Chemistry from 1953–5, and Chairman of Glaxo Group from 1950–64y
 * John Light, actor.
 * Richard Mottram GCB, former Permanent Secretary in the UK civil service, and Chairman of Amey plc since 2008
 * Charles Talbut Onions CBE, lexicographer, contributed to the history of the Oxford English Dictionary
 * Ronald Pearsall, author
 * Robert Pickard, Vice-Chancellor of the University of London from 1937–9, Director of the British Cotton Industry Research Association from 1927–43, and President of the Royal Institute of Chemistry from 1936–9
 * Edward William Salt, Conservative MP for Birmingham Yardley from 1931–45
 * Dave Wakeling, singer and songwriter, founder of ska band The Beat
 * David Wheeler, helped invent the subroutine and some encryption algorithms, and Professor of Computer Science at the University of Cambridge from 1978–94
 * Frank Wilson, Merton Professor of English Literature at the University of Oxford from 1947–57, President of the Malone Society from 1960-3 and the Bibliographical Society from 1950-2
 * Conor Woodman, broadcaster and author.


text:
User:Jmootz20

This "wikipedia" thing kept popping up in numerous google searches I was doing, so I decided to take a closer look and find out what it was all about. The whole concept is very interesting, and I decided I'd like to help out and do what I can.

I currently live in Des Moines, Iowa, USA. I am a database programmer for a state agency. Outside of work, my main areas of interest are European history, especially of Germany and Russia, World War II, and I am a hobbyist woodworker.

My Contributions

title: User:Jmootz20