text:
Talk:Zoophilia/Archive 12

(NOTE: this is an archive of older material from Talk:Zoophilia)

Update to page and ArbCom
1) Page: I have added summaries of some research on the subject, and reorganised it a bit more than a "list of subjects". Its a delicate subject with a tricky balance, I'm a bit jittery at having added such material but I know its bona fide. I'd really appreciate a careful read, detailed feedback and comments if this has done good and if theres NPOV issues arising or any wording that make it sound advocating or inappropriate. Thanks.  FT2 00:35, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

2) Opposing views: Should there be a section "views against zoophilia" for NPOV? If so what belongs in it? Can we get contributions which show that side fairly without getting into edit wars with people who dont understand wikiquette? FT2 00:35, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't think so. There isn't a strong enough opposition to zoophilia, there isn't more than occasional persecution. A few words about social status of zoophilia would, of course, be relevant, but a whole section... There simply wouldn't be much to write about there. The only time the public "opposes" zoophilia is when a guy has sex with goat in front of a train full of people and gets busted by the police, i.e. when it's in the news. Even then, most people don't feel strongly about it either way. Paranoid 01:00, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Are you serious? Do you really think most people are ok with bestialty? A lot of people are hot and bothered about letting two men marry, but they're ok with having sex with your dog? The only reason its not discussed that much is because most people already think its wrong so they feel there's no need to argue about it. --Ciz 22:24, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, I still think enough people would have the same response that it's worth taking note of. Whether this is important enough to deserve its own section, I don't know. Zetawoof 03:18, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm fairly sure enough people have a view against it, and would feel the article didn't represent that view fully, to be cautious. Individually a lot of people may not care much but collectively I'm sure there is a big "against" view as well. Can we be that sure we are representing it fully as is? FT2 04:08, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * I definitely think we should have some kind of "Arguments Against" or "Opposition to Zoophilia" section. What article is complete without an opposing view, because there certainly is one. Your average Joe thinks zoophilia is wrong. Your average religion agrees. Your average law does too. There's lots of views against it, we should include them [[User:Premeditated Chaos| P M  C ]] 07:19, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * "Common views against zoophilia"? "Common perceptions of zoophilia"? "Arguments against zoophilia"? I'm thinking if we add such a section, it can be done cleanly by having paragraphs for each main "kind" of argument (thus, religious, consent, distaste, human dignity...). Would be categorise them by "view", or by "line of argument"? They aren't quite the same, which one will be better for NPOV?  I'm tempted to go for "argument" because its a harder word which doesnt downplay the fact these are arguments not just odd opinions. FT2 07:49, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * Then let's use "Arguments Against" for the title and following that, organize by "line of argument". [[User:Premeditated Chaos| P M  C ]] 20:58, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

3) Tag: For the same reason, I've switched the tag from Controversial2 ("discussed and consensus reached") to Controversial3 ("some have reached a consensus and some may be disputed"). This is not because I am aware of any dispute.  Its just a lot of research has been added and I don't want to unilaterally assert it's still good consensus for a while.  If it becomes obvious there is not problem in a while, we can switch it back to Controversial2, but I just feel safer and more sure of respecting NPOV this way. FT2 00:35, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

4)  ARBCOM : With a 9-0 vote and most of the major contributors and sysops for this page having voted, I have started drafting an ArbCom brief User:FT2/Arbitration re Ciz. If supportive please (a) research the history of the article and talk page, adding clear evidence and details as needed to make it clear to the ArbCom why editors feel as they do, and (b) add a statement to the "people in favour" section too.  Any comments or discussion, on the related talk page. Thanks. FT2 00:35, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

5) To Ciz: I have left a section for Ciz in the ArbCom post, but I suggest he waits to see what he is replying to, and thinks VERY carefully about how he replies, using this as a final opportunity to show that he can understand Wiki policies, ettiquette, and can rebut points logically and to the point without ad hominem attacks or non sequiturs, and read instructions. The first instruction is - do not edit anyone elses words, or add comments to the case itself. You have your own section to say whatever you like, and that is your space only. FT2 00:35, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

Introduction: Zoosexuality "has been" condemned, "is often" condemned or "is often strongly" condemned? to say it "has been" implies it mostly isnt now, which isnt the case. FT2 13:12, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)
 * "is often". No need for "strongly", because "condemned" on its own is a very strong word. [[User:Premeditated Chaos| P M  C ]] 20:58, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sonic
And as for Sonic the Hedgehog; the Sonic series is not related to furries at all --Ciz 22:27, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Bias
This article is becoming more and more in support of 'zoophilia.' --Ciz 17:54, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Ciz - If you feel this is a personal attack then I'm sorry. That said, your conduct and general manner here, suggests that you are probably very unlikely to understand bias, because you yourself are unable to see outside it. FT2 22:11, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
 * You biased in support of it. Im biased against it. The only thing is, the topic is something that is illegal and is larglely considered to be animal abuse. --Ciz 01:30, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Ah ah, Ciz, watch the personal attacks. None of this, "You want neutrality so you must be a zoophile," stuff. Act like a real contributor and we'll stop treating you like a troll. [[User:Premeditated Chaos| P M  C ]] 01:41, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * All I said was that he was biased too. He is certainly not neutral.--Ciz 01:49, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Biased against what? Ignorance? Vandals? Trolls? Honestly, Ciz. [[User:Premeditated Chaos| P M  C ]] 05:46, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * No, by being pro-zoo apologia. --Ciz 12:07, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Uh... would this be connected with the VfD you created? Zetawoof 22:15, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Length
The article's >32KiB. Any ideas on how we can split it up to bring the size down a bit? The research sections seem an obvious target. Zetawoof 22:15, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Split the research into Zoophilia research perhaps? It is a valid fork, I think. [[User:Premeditated Chaos| P M  C ]] 00:56, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I dont see a problem. I dont see any new major areas likely to be added, and whats there is appropriate. Many articles are >32. Leave it, unless it bloats, Id say. FT2 08:50, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

Incorrect with DSM-IV
The article says that like homosexuality, zoophilia was removed from the paraphilias in DSM-IV. That's incorrect. Zoophilia is specifically listed as an example of "Paraphilia Not Otherwise Specified," DC 302.9. It does not have its own, separate DC because it is relatively rare and it was felt that not every rare paraphilia deserved its own separate listing. --Ciz 01:51, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * No, the article says that, like homosexuality, zoophilia was downgraded from a disease requiring treatment (like - for example - depression or a phobia) to a paraphilia with a severity on the level of (for example) a foot fetish. (Disclaimer: I'm running off second- and third-hand knowledge; can someone with copies of DSM-III and DSM-IV verify this?)

 * Congratulations, you're almost making useful edits now. Zetawoof 06:41, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * No. DSMIV does not regard homosexuality as a paraphilia at all anymore. It still lists zoophilia, but it did not have its own listing because 'it is relatively rare and it was felt that not every rare paraphilia deserved its own separate listing.' Thats it. --Ciz 12:10, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I can't find zoophilia at http://www.behavenet.com/capsules/disorders/paraphilias.htm. --Conti|✉ 13:41, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

 * http://www.emedicine.com/med/topic3127.htm "The most rare paraphilia is zoophilia." --Ciz 17:13, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * That's interesting. Is there some official source or list? These are all websites that could be wrong (or not). However, the article states: "As with BDSM and homosexuality, the activity is no longer classified as a pathology by DSM-IV when taken by itself", this seems to be true in any case. It is "only" a paraphilia, like Masochism is one as well, at least officially.. --Conti|✉ 17:30, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

Trouble is, that this conflicts with whats already very well known information elsewhere, namely that zoophilia is not rare. My question trying to make sense of that is, was this information based (for example) upon people admited into care, or a quote from some other paper, as opposed to practitioners?

I have therefore looked deeper into where that statement came from. It appears that quote is in fact a direct "lift" from another paper, and may be inaccurate. I will do some digging and find out more shortly. FT2 18:23, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

The looks like a fun talk page, I think I'll contribute. After reading the relevant sections of the DSM III, III-R, IV, and IV-TR as well as the accompanying publications (such as case books and pure diagnostic manuals), this is what I've found:

Zoophilia is listed under "Paraphilias: NOS" in the current (IV-TR) version of the DSM. It has been there since DSM III-R. In the DSM III, zoophilia had its own section (as section 302.10), but was moved for DSM III-R and was retained in its new position for all subsequent editions of the DSM. In the new versions it is grouped with paraphilas such as urophilia, coprophilia, partialism, klismaphilia, telephone scatologia and necrophilia. While most of these are rather innocuous acts (as innocuous as a paraphilia can be, at any rate), the inclusion of necrophilia and telephone scatologia in the list would seem to contradict Zetawoof's claim that zoophilia is considered no more severe than a foot fetish. Further, a summary book accompanying the DSM III-R notes that zoophilia was moved because it was a rare disorder, and that very little research had been done on it - mirroring what Ciz claims.

However, for someone to be classified as a pathological zoophile, two criteria must be met. The individual must have had strong, sexual feelings towards animals for an extended period of time (the DSM IV-TR diagnostics manual suggests six months as a minimum for paraphilias - but does not discuss zoophilia in particular) and the individual must feel distressed by these feelings, or by the acts (if any are being performed) or these feelings/acts must be interfering with that individual's normal functioning. That someone has an attraction to animals, or is undertaking any form of sexual relations with them, is not enough for classification as pathological zoophilia according to the DSM. Even the DSM III makes this distinction, giving alternate criteria for diagnosis as "nonpathological zoophilia".

This may explain the problems surrounding claims about the rarity of the disorder noted by FT2. If some people count all instances of fixation with animals as zoophilia, ignoring the second criterion (distress or interference with functioning), they will undoubtably get a higher count than the APA, which only counts cases matching both criteria.

It is also interesting to note that, in the case book which accompanies the DSM III (both the first edition and III-R), the only example concerning zoophilia ends with the rejection of the diagnosis of zoophilia despite the patient's long history of sexual activity with animals. No examples concerning zoophilia can be found in the case book accompanying the DSM IV-TR. I cannot comment on the DSM IV case book as I don't have access to a copy.

Ciz is correct that zoophilia is classified as a paraphilia in the DSM. However the edit removing the claim that "As with BDSM and homosexuality, the activity is no longer classified as a pathology by DSM-IV when taken by itself" (emphasis on "when taken by itself") removed a statement which is paritally supported by the current version of the DSM. Perhaps it would be beneficial to note the specific situation under which zoophilia is still considered pathological, in addition the the current statement in the article. Maybe something like this in the current statement's stead: "The activity is not classified as a pathology under the DSM IV-TR unless it is accompanied by distress in the individual or causes interference with the individual's normal functioning ..." Tachusvelox 19:33, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Wow. That's way more information than I expected to get, thanks! I agree with your changes of the text in the article. It might be also noteworthy that BDSM is still in the list (as "sadism" and "masochism"), but with the same criteria as zoophilia (it has to be accompanied by distress or cause interference with the "normal" functionig). --Conti|✉ 20:24, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

Ciz had posted in a web based bulletin board I also participate in. I was the one who originally made the comment about DSM-IV, and Ciz adopted it. I don't know Ciz, and do not in any way support misbehavior by him. But I would strongly prefer having the current statement replaced-- possibly as Tachusvlox has suggested: "The activity is not classified as a pathology under the DSM IV-TR unless it is accompanied by distress in the individual or causes interference with the individual's normal functioning ..." BenAlias 03:00, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Arbitration re Ciz
Further to previous matters and continuing vandalism (, also see Requests_for_arbitration

Ciz has been notified as required. FT2 22:34, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

 * Now moved to Requests_for_arbitration/Ciz Zetawoof 09:42, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

2-8%?
How do you arrive at these figures for people who have sex with animals? It's suggested they are a "reasonable estimate". Reasonable in whose view? I think they're entirely unreasonable. Most estimates for homosexuality are lower than 8%. You are suggesting that it's a reasonable guess that more people have sex with dogs than with people of the same sex? I'm not saying whether they do or do not -- I have no idea. What I am saying is that "reasonable" is in the eye of the beholder, IOW, highly POV, and this should be thoroughly sourced.Dr Zen 01:24, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Fantasies
"Sexual fantasies about bestiality seem to be relatively frequent." What are you basing this on? I think "seem to be" is the worst sort of weasel word. From my POV, I think they are entirely infrequent, actually nonexistent, and I don't know of anyone in my acquaintance who has expressed an interest.

"In some cases the human partner or family is aware of animal partners." This is entirely POV. The suggestion that an animal "partner" is on a par with a human "partner" is preposterous, not just extremely biased.

Where are the long quotes from the studies that do not support your POV? They exist, you note they exist (although you slag them off) but you do not quote them. It is extremely unusual for an NPOV article to only give one side of an argument in such detail. Note also that the studies do not seem to be investigative, so that the arguments you make against the earlier studies apply equally to these. They all give the impression of simply being discussions of a priorly held POV rather than discussions of the outcomes of any actual "research".

"there does not appear to be found any credible, serious, peer reviewed research into zoophiles per se - as opposed to offenders and animal abusers" Why are "animal abusers" not "zoophiles per se"? It is precisely the line of the antizoophiles that zoophiles abuse animals!

"sexual interest (whether fantasy or reality) is highly controversial and for many people an emotive topic bound up with many deep social traditions" This is extremely POV. It makes antizoophiles, who are, you ought to be reminded, very much the majority, sound like hysterical sheeple who cannot think for themselves.

"Privately, as with many sexual matters, views vary more widely." And yet the only evidence you proffer for this view is a 30-year-old study. I'd suggest anecdotally that in fact privately people are equally as condemnatory. I wouldn't write this into an article, though.

"In addition there are strong "double standards" over animals (as utilities and property vs. as independent living beings worthy of respect)" This is not a "double standard" at all. It's two different standards held by different people. Most people who believe that animals are utilities do not believe they are worthy of respect. Were this the only reason you gave for opposition to zoophilia, this would be a point. Since it wasn't, it isn't, and should be struck out. In any case, it's perfectly possible to believe an animal is a utility, and one's property, without that necessarily entailing that one can be cruel to it. For those who believe animal sex is cruel, clearly this view does not involve a double standard.

"so often people are unconvinced that animals can consent, enjoy or understand sex in a meaningful way." This is entirely a nonsequitur. It doesn't follow from your "double standard". Animals cannot consent to sex in the same way as humans, that's obvious. You must assume they do. Is that "meaningful"? It's at least arguable that it isn't. Whether an animal is enjoying it is entirely moot. Does a dog "understand" sex? I don't think it's possible to even begin to claim it does but if you do, you need to be citing research into dog psychology. I can't see that it will show an understanding of sex that is in any way similar to our own, particularly for bitches for the obvious reasons.

"Psychological and sexology research concludes beyond this, that far from being "profoundly disturbed behaviour", zoophilic feelings and relationships are common, latent in many people, and can be authentic, relational, and genuine." Nancy Friday put an ad in the paper, put all the racy ones in her book and binned the rest. Nancy includes interracial sex in her bestiality chapter! Ahem.Dr Zen 01:57, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Zoophilia/Archive 12


text:
User:Sgeo/vpwl/publicwatchlist

 * News
 * Policy
 * Technical
 * Proposals
 * Assistance
 * Miscellaneous

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

title: User:Sgeo/vpwl/publicwatchlist


text: User:Sgeo/vpwl

title: User:Sgeo/vpwl


text:
User talk:Eric Qel-Droma

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Paul A 03:02, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Cheerleading
You said: "Why were 66.82.9.87's edits reverted? It seems to me that a slightly more thorough discussion of cheerleaders' stereotypical status as "sex symbols" would be more NPOV than the blunt statement "Cheerleaders are often viewed as sex symbols."  66.82.9.87's edits might not have been the best writing in the world, but it is NOT "nonsense.""

 * Inherently point-of-view. The backbone of the sports team?  "...supercedes the sexual overtones"?  It may be true, but I have seen no evidence that this is how they are generally perceived, and some of my friends are cheerleaders.  That change could certainly stay if cited appropriately but it just didn't ring true.  I've never heard anyone describe cheerleaders as the backbone of the sports team, for example.  --Yamla 19:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I Would Die 4 U
Hiya. Noticed your edit for the Prince song I Would Die 4 U. You said that in recent concerts, Prince has substituted the lyric He's your messiah for the original I'm your messiah. While this is true, it is not something he's only recently started doing. He had been doing this, fairly regularly, even as far back as 1984 - and very regularly many years before he became a JW. Lianachan 00:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Eric Qel-Droma


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magnus Bakke

Magnus Bakke
Current article describes a 20-year old "Alchochemist", ''Most famous for his little sentences of truth. "Give the youth alcohol before sports gets the better of them" "You will only have as much fun as you drink"''. The name gets a lot of hits, but many are lists with no additional details, and/or aren't in English. There seem to be three possibly notable people by this name (two skiers and a painter), but I can't find anything to write more than Magnus Bakke was a skier (or painter)., let alone determine if/how notable they may be. If someone knows if one of these other people are notable and can replace the current contents, great. But if not, I think Wikipedia is better off without the info about the Alchochemist. Niteowlneils 03:10, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Forgot to mention--the anon's only other contrib is to add the name to List of Norwegians. Niteowlneils 03:11, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete it a lot. --Korath会話 03:02, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Strong delete - Andre Engels 09:33, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. utcursch 10:00, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. Magnus Bakke is a common Scandinavian name, but no notable persons there has that name, and certainly not this guy. Shanes 08:01, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)


text:
Maraldi

Maraldi may refer to:
 * Maraldi (lunar crater)
 * Maraldi (Martian crater)
 * Mons Maraldi, a mountain on the Moon
 * Maraldy (lake), Pavlodar Region, Kazakhstan

People with the surname

 * Giacomo Filippo Maraldi (1665–1729), French-Italian astronomer and mathematician
 * Giovanni Domenico Maraldi (1709–1788), Italian astronomer, grandson of Giacomo Filippo

title: Maraldi


text:
2004 United States presidential election in Georgia

The 2004 United States presidential election in Georgia took place on November 2, 2004. Voters chose 15 representatives, or electors to the Electoral College, who voted for president and vice president.

Georgia was won by incumbent President George W. Bush by a 16.60% margin of victory. Prior to the election, all 12 news organizations considered this a state Bush would win, or otherwise a red state. Bush performed almost five points better than he did in 2000. He also won a wide majority of the counties and congressional districts. The results of the state were similar to other states in the South, such as Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Louisiana. Like those states, the exit polling showed racial polarization as Bush dominated among white voters, which made up almost 70% of the vote, and Kerry dominated among African American voters, which made up 30% of the state's population. Software engineer and talk show host Michael Badnarik (L-TX) would finish third in the popular vote in Georgia, getting 0.56% of the vote, one of his best statewide performances in the nation.

In this election, Georgia voted 14.14% to the right of the nation at-large.

As of 2020, this remains the last time that Georgia has been decided by a double-digit margin in a presidential election, and the last time it voted to the right of Tennessee, Louisiana, West Virginia, and Arkansas. Georgia was one of 10 states that George W. Bush won twice which had only backed George H. W. Bush once. This was the first time that Georgia voted Republican three elections in a row. Bush is the only Republican in history to carry Georgia twice.

Primaries

 * 2004 Georgia Democratic primary

Predictions
There were 12 news organizations that made state-by-state predictions of the election. Here are their last predictions before election day.

Polling
Bush won every single pre-election poll and won each by a double-digit margin of victory and with over 50% of the vote. The final 3 polls averaged Bush leading 56% to 41%.

Fundraising
Bush raised $6,656,076. Kerry raised $2,282,977.

Advertising and visits
Neither campaign advertised or visited this state during the fall election.

Analysis
Like other Deep South states during the 2004 election, the political demographics of Georgia was based more around the racial majority in each county, with white Georgians voting more Republican and black Georgians voting more Democratic. Democratic dominance in the state occurred in mostly black-majority counties in the region as well the urban center of the city of Atlanta (located mostly in central Fulton County) along with its core suburban counties of Clayton and DeKalb. Athens-Clarke County, home of the University of Georgia, also supported Kerry's bid, largely as a consequence of being a college town with traditionally left-leaning political views. Since just about every other part of Georgia had a majority white population, Republican dominance occurred in just about every other part of the state including suburban Atlanta where a significant portion of the state's population resides. Suburban Atlanta also includes northern Fulton County (the former Milton County area) which despite being part of this heavily urban and majority-minority county, is predominantly-White, suburban, and perhaps the most affluent area in the state of Georgia. This area also voted heavily in favor of Republican presidential incumbent George W. Bush.

In other down ballot races, Republicans gained Georgia's Class III U.S. Senate seat which was then held by Zell Miller (D) with Johnny Isakson's (R) victory in the open seat race to succeed him and also gained control of the Georgia House of Representatives, and thus control of both houses of the Georgia General Assembly (having already gained control of the Georgia State Senate in 2002), for the first time since Reconstruction. However, despite these achievements, Democrats gained one of Georgia's U.S. House seats with John Barrow's (D) victory over incumbent Representative Max Burns (R).

, this is the last election in which the Metro Atlanta counties of Douglas, Rockdale, and Newton—now Democratic strongholds—voted Republican. This is also the last time the Black Belt counties of Baldwin, Sumter, and Washington voted Republican and the last in which Webster County voted Democratic, as well as the last election in which Georgia was decided by a double-digit margin.

Results
(*Tancredo was not the Republican Party's nominee in 2004.)

By county
[[File:Georgia County Flips 2004.svg|thumb|County Flips:

Democratic {{legend|#92c5de|Hold}} {{legend|#0671b0|Gain from Republican}}

Republican {{legend|#f48882|Hold}} {{legend|#ca0120|Gain from Democratic}} ]]

Counties that flipped from Democratic to Republican

 * Burke (largest municipality: Waynesboro)
 * Chattahoochee (largest municipality: Cusseta)
 * McIntosh (largest municipality: Darien)
 * Meriwether (largest municipality: Manchester)
 * Mitchell (largest municipality: Camilla)
 * Peach (largest municipality: Fort Valley)
 * Telfair (largest municipality: McRae-Helena)
 * Washington (largest municipality: Sandersville)
 * Wilkinson (largest municipality: Gordon)

Counties that flipped from Republican to Democratic

 * Chatham (largest municipality: Savannah)

By congressional district
Bush won 9 of 13 congressional districts, including two held by Democrats.

Electors
Technically the voters of Georgia cast their ballots for electors: representatives to the Electoral College. Georgia is allocated 15 electors because it has 13 congressional districts and 2 senators. All candidates who appear on the ballot or qualify to receive write-in votes must submit a list of 15 electors, who pledge to vote for their candidate and his or her running mate. Whoever wins the majority of votes in the state is awarded all 15 electoral votes. Their chosen electors then vote for president and vice president. Although electors are pledged to their candidate and running mate, they are not obligated to vote for them. An elector who votes for someone other than his or her candidate is known as a faithless elector.

The electors of each state and the District of Columbia met on December 13, 2004, to cast their votes for president and vice president. The Electoral College itself never meets as one body. Instead the electors from each state and the District of Columbia met in their respective capitols.

The following were the members of the Electoral College from the state. All were pledged to and voted for George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

 * 1) Anna R. Cablik
 * 2) Fred Cooper
 * 3) Nancy N. Coverdell
 * 4) James C. Edenfield
 * 5) Karen Handel
 * 6) Donald F. Layfield
 * 7) Carolyn Dodgen Meadows
 * 8) Sunny K. Park
 * 9) Alec Poitevint
 * 10) Joan Ransom
 * 11) Nardender G. Reddy
 * 12) Jame Raynolds
 * 13) Norma Mountain Rogers
 * 14) Eric Tanenblatt
 * 15) Virgil Williams


text:
List of presidential appointees to the Council of State (Ireland)

The President of Ireland has the right to appoint a maximum of seven members of the Council of State, which advises the President in exercising certain reserve powers. As well as the seven (or fewer) appointees, the Council has seven ex officio members and a variable number of life members by right of former office. An appointed member's term ends when the President's term ends, although a new or re-elected President may re-appoint members. If an appointed member accedes to one of the positions conferring ex officio membership of the Council, this creates a vacancy which the President may fill via another appointment.

History
The first President, Douglas Hyde, who took office in 1938, did not nominate members till the Council first met in January 1940; all six nominees were Oireachtas members, and not members of the Fianna Fáil government party.

For long, Presidents included senior serving politicians on the Council. Éamon de Valera said during the 1937 debate on the proposed Constitution, "this Council of State ... will ordinarily contain the leaders of the big Parties in the Dáil." Upon Richard Mulcahy's 1971 death, de Valera invited Fine Gael leader Liam Cosgrave to join but Cosgrave declined. Fine Gael objected in 1991 that Mary Robinson had become the first President not to have the Leader of the Opposition in the Council. Robinson had promised to appoint two representatives of the Opposition, but the practice of including the Leader was not a fixed rule. In early 1995, after the Fianna Fáil-led government was replaced by a Fine Gael-led government without a general election, Mary Robinson asked Monica Barnes of Fine Gael to resign from the council of state to allow Mary O'Rourke of Fianna Fáil to be appointed instead to increase the Opposition voice. The Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution issued a 1998 report dealing with the Presidency, which recommended that the President be "empowered to nominate two members of the Dáil who belong to parties other than the party or parties that form the government for the life of that government".

Early Presidents included one or two representatives of minorities; there were several of Anglo-Irish, Protestant, or ex-Unionist backgrounds, and the Jewish Bob Briscoe. In campaigning in the 1990 presidential election, Mary Robinson promised to reform the Council of State. She criticised it for consisting "mainly of senior or retired politicians" and promised to make it "truly representative of the community as a whole". Prior to 1990, Presidents generally reappointed members from the previous term; new members were appointed only when a vacancy arose by a previous appointee's death or accession to ex-officio membership. Patrick Hillery considered new appointees upon assuming office in 1976, and was advised there was no precedent for informing former Councillors of their exclusion; Hillery decided "it would be too hurtful to drop any of the members". Robinson abandoned this practice by appointing seven new members; Mary McAleese did likewise at both her first and second terms. Michael D. Higgins appointed six first-timers and Catherine McGuinness, who had served under Patrick Hillery. For his second term he appointed seven first-timers.

During the 2011 presidential election campaign, candidate Mary Davis, best known for her Special Olympics activism, pledged to nominate a person with intellectual disability to the Council. This proposal attracted some criticism as tokenism, but was endorsed by Fergus Finlay. During a debate on The Late Late Show, candidates were later asked whether they thought Denis O'Brien would be "a suitable person to be on the Council of State". After the victory of Labour Party candidate Michael D. Higgins, the party denied that its leader Eamon Gilmore had suggested nominees to Higgins.


text:
File:Project Delivery Methods.png

A graphical representation of the conceptual differences between project delivery methods.

title: File:Project Delivery Methods.png


text:
Talk:Killing vector field

Inconsistent notation
Please fix the notation for consistency. You start with the Killing vector field "X", then switch to "K", then back to "X", then back to "K".

Positive Ricci curvature

 * If the Ricci curvature is positive, then a Killing field must have a zero.

May I ask how come? I had some idea that the Hopf fibration defines a nonvanishing vector field on S3, and that this field acts by isometries, but I might be wrong... (too tired to do the calculations tonight :/ ) Someone here who can help me, please? (A google on "killing field" + Hopf gave me e.g. this paper...see section III) \Mikez 03:06, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hmm, that seems right to me. Writing the metric on S3 as
 * $$ds^2 = d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta \;d\xi_1^2 + \cos^2\theta \;d\xi_2^2$$

one sees that the vector field
 * $$\frac{\partial}{\partial \xi_1} + \frac{\partial}{\partial \xi_2}$$

which generates the U(1) action in the Hopf fibration, is a Killing field which has norm 1 everywhere (and hence is nonvanishing). -- Fropuff 07:11, 2005 Jan 9 (UTC)

 * I have now removed that statement. \Mikez 18:58, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Awesome!
Killing Field??? Maths is awesome!!! 130.195.2.100 03:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * We kill vectors there. actually, at the Killing horizon. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 05:08, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

What?
Is there anyway this article could be edited so somebody without a degree in math can know what the flying flip it is talking about. I would really like to know, but the article is filled with so much math specific jargon it is impossible without first reading 90 other articles. 88.154.199.46 08:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

 * It would be a pretty difficult to understand what a Killing field is without knowing what a Riemannian metric is at least. Most people who know that would have or be studying for a degree in mathematics or physics. There is no jargon in the article that I can see but it does rely on specialist terminology. Fortunately this is wikipedia so you can at least click on the links.Billlion 20:17, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Wondering who wrote that and was surprised to find it was me! Another answer is to understand what an isometry is eg in Euclidean space a cylinder and  a sphere then a Killing vector field is an infinitesimal isometry. That is a way to give some kind lay explanation. Billlion (talk) 14:33, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Interesting name
This article does have an interesting name. 88.154.243.24 08:03, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

results only for Riemannian spaces?
The lead makes it sound like the article is going to discuss both Riemannian and semi-Riemannian space, but there are some results in it that I don't think are true for a non-Riemannian signature. "Negative Ricci curvature implies there are no nontrivial (nonzero) Killing fields." I think this is false for semi-Riemannian spaces. E.g., I think general relativity has cosmological solutions with negative Ricci curvature, but these solutions do have Killing vectors such as spatial rotations.--75.83.69.196 (talk) 05:30, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

 * Yeah, some of those claims feel smelly. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 05:00, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Relation to the fundamental vector field
Is there any difference between the generalized Killing vector field (see [] and the fundamental vector field? 89.135.20.50 (talk) 09:04, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

 * Yes, theres a difference. They're more or less unrelated. Killing fields are isometries, fundamental fields are just the action of a Lie group mapped out onto a manifold. They are not really related in any kind of naive, direct sense. I guess there is some weird deeper relationships for symmetric spacess but that's getting off the mark. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 05:04, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Illustration

A Killing field is a function of the metric. What is the metric that defines the Killing field in the picture? I assume there may be many different metrics defined on a sphere, and they will all have different Killing fields. Bartosz (talk) 16:51, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

 * Yes, and that one is clearly not a Killing field of the standard metric of the sphere, so I think it shoud be removed, for it can cause some confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChicoCaramello (talk • contribs) 07:09, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I was wondering the same thing. The text below the (full-size) picture reads as follows:

 * "A Killing vector field K = sin(phi)*e_theta + cot(theta)*cos(phi)*e_phi and its integral curves of the S2 (minus the poles) with induced metric. Created with POVRAY."

 * It is signed with "Mrfister - Own work" — but the Mrfister is in red so I don't know if he can be reached to ask him what he was thinking.

 * Since the "induced metric" is never explained and, for me at least, not easily guessable: I agree that the illustration should be removed — immediately. Ideally it will be replaced soon by a more understandable one.Daqu (talk) 17:13, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

 * I've removed the image. Can you come up with any ideas for what would make an appropriate illustration? (I'm thinking a sphere could work with the natural metric, and with the two killing vector fields in different colours. But maybe something completely different would be better?) Cesiumfrog (talk) 22:36, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

 * Thank you, Cesiumfrog !

 * Sure, here's a possibility: Just draw a vector field on the unit sphere tangent to rotational motion, of constant angular velocity ω, about some fixed axis of the sphere. I would "not" put two Killing vector fields on the same picture of a sphere; in fact, they are all so similar to one another that one example should suffice.

 * E.g., for rotation about the vertical axis, at any point (x,y,z) of the sphere (i.e., such that x2 + y2 + z2 =  1), at angular velocity ω, the vector V(x,y,z) at the point (x,y,z) would be

 * (*)         V(x,y,z)   =  ω sqrt(x2 + y2) (-y, x, 0).

 * For a more typical example, I would pick an axis that is not vertical. Ideally, an axis a whose projection P(a) to the web page makes the same angle with the vertical direction on the page as the angle that its direction in space makes with the vertical direction in space.

 * For example, suppose the projection to the page is just the orthogonal projection to the y- and z-axes of space. Then I would use the rotation in space about the axis that is 15° from the z-axis and 75° from the positive y-axis (which after projection points to the right on the page). This could be obtained by applying the rotation by -15° = -π/12, about the positive x-axis in space, to the vector field defined above at (*).

 * More specifically, this would be the vector field W defined at the point (x,y,z) in space via

 * 1) rotate (x,y,z) by +15° about the positive x axis, to get

 * (x',y',z') = (x, cos(π/12)y -sin(π/12)z, sin(π/12)y + cos(π/12)z).

 * Then
 * 2) evaluate the vector field (*) V at this point (x',y',z') to get

 * (x", y", z") =  V(x',y',z')  =  ω sqrt(x'2 + y'2) (-y', x', 0).

 * Finally,
 * 3) apply the rotation about the positive x-axis of angle -π/12 to get the vector field of the

 * W(x,y,z) =  (x", cos(-π/12)y" -sin(-π/12)z", sin(-π/12)y" + cos(-π/12)z")

 * i.e.,

 * W(x,y,z) =  (x", cos(π/12)y" sin(π/12)z", -sin(π/12)y" + cos(π/12)z").

 * Of course, this requires choosing an angular velocity ω.Daqu (talk) 17:24, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

 * Fair enough, I guess a single killing field on a sphere does seem pedagogically uncluttered (and I was already thinking moderately off-axis myself). It might be good to have a second example also, with something other than rotation of a volume of revolution. I suppose only global rotations/translations work for surfaces embedded in 3D (e.g. no poloidal winding of a torus), so I think a helical vector field on the curved surface of a stout cylinder would be good. (A third possible example would be to emphasise that it is not a global concept and hence the field need not be extendible to cover all the manifold, for example it might only cover one side of a cube or one flat surface of an annular-washer-with-rectangular-crosssection, and on that subregion it could again be a combination of translation with rotation but with the origin or axis of rotation displaced away from the centroid of the surface and volume.) Cesiumfrog (talk) 23:33, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

 * Nice idea, to provide another illustration in 3-space. Incidentally, to show the Killing vector field that generates a one-parameter group of screw-translations — as you suggest — it is not necessary to use a cylinder. You could alternatively take a peanut-shaped Oval of Cassini curve, given by say |z-1| |z+1| = 1.02 for z in the complex plane — and then creating the surface obtained by translating this curve up and down in the z direction while simultaneously rotating it about the z-axis by an angle proportional to z (say z).Daqu (talk) 15:49, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

To answer Bartosz original question, the metric is the plain-old-every-day bog-standard sphere metric $$g=d^2\Omega = d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta d\phi^2$$. That illustration is based on equations for the Killing fields that appear explicitly in Schwarzschild coordinates, and in various other locations over the net. (I've yet to check my paper textbooks) I plugged them into $$L_xg=0$$ and turned the crank and and verified that they are zero. However, I really hate that picture, there is something very misleading about it. From what I can tell, the choice of $$\partial_\phi$$ as one of the fields is fine, in that its normalized to unit length. But if you want to draw 3D pictures, you have to stick a $$\sin^2\theta$$ in front of it. ... and that changes the angles on everything. That is, you have to use $$\sin^2\theta\partial_\phi$$ to draw the picture ... so, yeah, that picture is just ... wrong... coordinate craziness ... I patched up the article mostly, but its still garbagey with some coordinate craziness in it. ... anyway, it's late at night, so that's all for now. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 07:19, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

 * I fixed it up so that it is whole, complete and "makes sense". It turned out to be a small thesis, instead of the 3 short sentences I had hoped to write. Bummer about that. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 20:37, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Killing vector fields on the 2-sphere
The paragraph about killing vector fields on 2-fields mentions the two "obvious" fields

 * $$U= \partial_\phi$$
 * $$V=\partial_\theta.$$

This is not what I find on this physics forum thread If someone has the book mentioned in another thread (General Relativity Demystified, McMahon) could double check this paragraph for errors in the (incomplete) calculation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.215.103.183 (talk) 12:55, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Souldn't the Lie bracket of coordinate vectors vanish?
The "Killing fields on a 2-sphere" subsection in the article sounds informative but this line is difficult for an uninitiated reader (like myself), confusing or perhaps imprecise:

However, moving off of the equator, the two vector fields $$\partial_\phi$$ and $$\partial_\theta$$ are no longer orthonormal, and so, in general one has $$\left[\partial_\phi, \partial_\theta\right] \ne 0$$ for a point $$(\theta, \phi) \in S^2$$ in general position.

I agree the two vector fields are not orthonormal in general position, but that does not imply the Lie bracket gives non-zero values, and I would think it should vanish where the two vector fields in question are defined. How could it be possible that the Lie bracket of coordinate vectors should be non-vanishing? 240F:7C:CFB3:1:CF39:4DD5:6DD7:4D5C (talk) 03:49, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

 * You're right, the bracket vanishes since the basis $$\{\partial_\theta, \partial_\phi\}$$ is coordinate induced. The article is incorrect. The incorrect statement is that $$\partial_\theta$$ is a Killing field. It can be verified that the $$\phi\phi$$ component of the Killing equation is non-zero. In fact, there's an intuitive view of why this doesn't conserve lengths: if we flow all points in the $$\theta$$ direction, they move from the north pole to the south pole. This means the points spread out from the north pole, stretching and distorting the metric there.Zephyr the west wind (talk) 21:27, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Killing vector field


text: File:Ysh poster.jpg

title: File:Ysh poster.jpg


text:
Alexander Hislop

Alexander Hislop (1807 – 13 March 1865) was a Free Church of Scotland minister known for his criticisms of the Catholic Church. He was the son of Stephen Hislop (died 1837), a mason by occupation and an elder of the Relief Church. Alexander's brother was also named Stephen Hislop and became well known in his time as a missionary to India and a naturalist.

Alexander was born and raised in Duns, Berwickshire. He was for a time parish schoolmaster of Wick, Caithness. In 1831 he married Jane Pearson. He was for a time editor of the Scottish Guardian newspaper. As a probationer he joined the Free Church of Scotland at the Disruption of 1843. He was ordained in 1844 at the East Free Church, Arbroath, where he became senior minister in 1864. He died of a paralytic stroke in Arbroath the next year after being ill for about two years.

He wrote several books, his most famous being The Two Babylons: Papal Worship Proved to be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife, which is discredited by many historians.

The Two Babylons
This book, initially published in 1853 as a pamphlet, was greatly revised and expanded and released as a book in 1858.

In the book, Hislop argued that the Catholic Church was a Babylonian mystery cult and pagan, but Protestants worshipped the true Jesus and the true God. He believed that Catholic religious practices are pagan practices that were grafted onto true Christianity during the reign of Constantine. Then, the merger between the Roman state religion and its adoration of the mother and child was transferred to Christianity, merging Christian characters with pagan mythology. The goddess was renamed Mary, and Jesus was the renamed Jupiter-Puer, or "Jupiter the Boy".

Hislop believed that the goddess, in Rome called Venus or Fortuna, was the Roman name of the more ancient Babylonian cult of Ishtar, whose origins began with a blonde-haired and blue-eyed woman named Semiramis.

According to Hislop, Semiramis was an exceedingly beautiful woman, who gave birth to a son named Tammuz, was instrumental as the queen, and wife of Nimrod the founder of Babylon, and its religion, complete with a pseudo-Virgin Birth. Later, Nimrod was killed, and Semiramis, pregnant with his child, claimed the child was Nimrod reborn.

Hislop attempted to show that the cult and worship of Semiramis spread globally, her name changing with the culture. In Egypt she was Isis, in Greece and Rome she was called Venus, Diana, Athena, and a host of other names, but was always prayed to and central to the faith which was based on Babylonian mystery religion. According to Hislop, Constantine, though claiming to convert to Christianity, remained pagan but renamed the gods and goddesses with Christian names to merge the two faiths for his political advantage.

Constantine's endorsement of the tradition was a turning point for Early Christianity. In 313, Constantine issued the Edict of Milan legalizing Christian worship. The emperor became a great patron of the Church, and set a precedent for the position of the Christian Emperor within the Church and the notion of orthodoxy, Christendom, and ecumenical councils that would be followed for centuries as the State church of the Roman Empire.

Books by Alexander Hislop
(Sources of information include [http://copac.ac.uk COPAC)
 * Christ's Crown and Covenant: or national covenanting essentially connected with national revival (Arbroath and Edinburgh, 1860)
 * Infant Baptism, according to the Word of God and confession of faith. Being a review, in five letters, of the new theory of Professor Lumsden, as advocated in his treatise entitled, "Infant baptism: its nature and objects." (Edinburgh, 1856)
 * The Light of Prophecy let in on the dark places of the Papacy (exposition of 2 Thess 2: 3–12) (Edinburgh, 1846)
 * The Moral Identity of Babylon and Rome (London, 1855)
 * The Red Republic; or Scarlet Coloured Beast of the Apocalypse (Edinburgh, 1849)
 * The Rev. E.B. Elliott and the "Red Republic" (Arbroath, circa 1850)#
 * The Scriptural Principles of the Solemn League and Covenant: in their bearing on the present state of the Episcopal churches (Glasgow, 1858)
 * The Trial of Bishop Forbes (A lecture delivered in East Free Church, Arbroath) (Edinburgh, 1860)
 * Truth and Peace (in reply to a pamphlet, entitled "Charity and mutual forbearance" by "Irenicus") (Arbroath, 1858)
 * The Two Babylons; or, the Papal Worship proved to be the worship of Nimrod and his wife (Edinburgh, 1853 & 1858)
 * Unto the Venerable the General Assembly of the Free Church of Scotland: the petition of the undersigned (relates to James Lumsden on "Infant Baptism": Hislop was head signatory of this petition) (Edinburgh, 1860)

title: Alexander Hislop


text:
23rd Division (United Kingdom)

The 23rd Division was an infantry division of the British Army raised in 1914 in the Great War as part of Kitchener's Army. The division was sent to France in August 1915 under the command of Major-General Sir James Melville Babington C.B. C.M.G. During the war the division fought on the Western Front until October 1917 when it moved to the Italian Front. It remained in Italy and was disbanded by March 1919.

Formation and training
The division formed part of Kitchener's third New Army, with concentration of units beginning on 16 September, the 68th Brigade at Bullswater and the 69th and 70th brigades, together with Royal Engineers companies at Frensham. It was commanded by Maj. Gen. James Melville Babington, who was at first hampered by a lack of clerks, cooks and a means of communicating orders, other than verbally. Together with other New Army divisions, uniforms of any description were not received until mid October, by which time many of the civilian clothes the men wore were reduced to rags. Division artillery began to be formed in early November. Initial weapons training was carried out with small numbers of Lee-Metford rifles and French 90mm guns. The division was concentrated at Aldershot in January 1915, where the division train was formed. Khaki uniforms were received at the end of February and the division moved to the Shorncliffe area in March and continued training. In May the division moved to Borden where 18-pounders and 4.5 inch howitzers were issued to the division artillery and in June the Infantry received its rifles. On 16 August the division was inspected by the King and next day received its orders for embarkation.

France
On arrival in France the division was concentrated near St Omer with the Guards and the 24th divisions, forming XI Corps, where it continued training. In early September the division was transferred to III Corps and in mid September took over part of the front line in the nursery sector of Armentières where, because of the high water table, much of the front line was defined by breastworks.

The 103rd and 105th Artillery brigades were lent to the 8th Division for a diversionary attack in support of the Battle of Loos in late September and won the division's first bravery awards, the rest of the division provided a smoke barrage.

In early October the 70th Brigade was exchanged with the (regular army) 24th Brigade of the 8th Division, with two battalions in it being exchanged with battalions in the other brigades (the 2nd East Lancashire Regiment going to the 68th Brigade, the 1st Sherwood Foresters to the 69th Brigade and the 13th Durham Light Infantry and the 10th Duke of Wellington's Regiment replacing them in the 24th Brigade, a similar process happening in the 8th Division). This not only gave the service battalions the benefit of the regulars experience but also gave the regulars a boost in morale by association with fresh troops.

"They (the 23rd) were never happier unless they were patrolling No Man's Land, sniping or arranging some special 'hate' in the form of trench mortaring or rifle-grenading. They also introduced the 8th Division to the Lewis gun, and we were greatly impressed with its usefulness."

The division's first V.C was won on 4 November by Pte Thomas Kenny of 13th D.L.I., rescuing an officer in heavy fog after a patrol was ambushed. On the night of the last day of the year the division launched its first trench raid with 116 officers and men of the 10th Northumberland Fusiliers and a party of Royal Engineers.

1916
In late February the division was relieved by the 34th Division, and after a short rest was sent to the front near Souchez, south of Lens. Here the division's artillery was used to support the 47th (1/2nd London) Division in early April as a feint and again in late May to counter a German advance. In mid June the division was relieved by the 47th Division and by the end of the month was in reserve at Rainneville behind the Somme front.

Somme
Ordered to relieve the 34th Division the 23rd entered the Somme battle on 3 July, and subsequently advanced toward and captured Contalmaison by 10 July. The divisions second V.C. was won by 2nd Lt Donald Bell of the 9th Yorkshire Regiment on 5 July when he and two others (who both won the D.C.M.) rushed a machine gun nest. The division was relieved on 11 July, except for the 68th Brigade which joined the 34th Division on 11 July and took part in an abortive attack on Pozières on the night of 16/17 July, the artillery remained in action supporting the 1st Division. Indicative of the high morale of the division, the sick list for 14 July was one man. By 20 July the division once again had its three original brigades, the 70th Brigade returning from 8th Division where it had suffered heavy losses in the first day of the Somme battle and the 68th returning from the 34th Division.

On 25 July the division began to relieve the 1st Division east of Contalmaison, and began with each brigade in turn fighting along a trench called "Munster Alley" towards Martinpuich. The division's third V.C was won by Pte William Short of 8th West Yorkshire Regiment on 5 August. The division was relieved on 8 August by the 15th Division, and was sent to the relatively quiet sector of Ploegsteert Wood near Armentières.

Returning to the Somme in mid-September, the division was placed in reserve for the early part of the Battle of Flers-Courcelette, and over 18/19 September relieved the 15th Division and took over part of the 50th Division's line. Here they held the line and conducted raids, until advancing on 25 September at the request of the Canadians on the division's left to support their advance. The position, a trench called '26th Avenue' was occupied by 70th Brigade on 27 September after a German withdrawal, after an earlier attack failed when it was occupied, the subsequent advance and occupation of Destremont Farm on 29 September just outside the village of Le Sars was heavily contested. On 3 October in the initial advance on Le Sars, the division's fourth V.C. was won by 2nd Lt Henry Kelly. The village and positions around it, were captured by 68th and 69th brigades on 7/8 October, earning praise from III Corps, 50th and 15th division commanders. On 9 October the division was relieved by 15th Division, and was transferred to X Corps in the Ypres Salient.

Arriving at Ypres between 17 and 20 October, the division relieved the 2nd Australian Division around Sanctuary Wood and the Menin Ridge Road. While there they conducted patrols and trench raids and were in turn subjected to occasional artillery bombardments. On 10 December 1916 the division was required to execute one its commissioned officers, 2/Lt. Eric Poole, of the 11th (Service) Battalion, West Yorkshire Regiment, who had been sentenced to death by a court martial for desertion from his unit during the Somme Offensive. The division was relieved by the 38th Division in the Ypres sector on 25 February 1917.

1917
While out of the line the division was rested and trained, returning to the Ypres front line between 6 and 8 April and taking over positions held partly by the 38th and 47th divisions, south of where it had been previously. On 9 April the Germans launched an intense bombardment followed by an infantry assault which fell on the 70th Brigade. The division was quickly withdrawn from the line on 28 April, replaced by the 19th Division and given special training for the upcoming battle to improve the positions around Ypres.

Messines Ridge
The division returned to the front line on 10 May in the region of Hill 60 and began preparations for the attack. These preparation were observed by the Germans on the higher ground who assaulted the line on 13 May, which was repulsed, this attracted counter raiding by the 70th Brigade on 16 and 20 May. During this time the division's easily observed artillery attracted heavy German counter battery fire with serious casualties resulting. The division was to form the left flank of the advance on a front ~2000 yards wide, with its furthest advance ~1400 yards deep. After the artillery bombardment and the detonation of 19 mines on 7 June, the 69th and 70th brigades (the 69th reinforced with the 11th Northumberland Fusiliers and 12th Durham Light Infantry) advanced over the ridge and down each side of the valley on the southern flank of the Klein-Zillebeke spur, with fresh battalions leap-frogging the others when the second phase line had been reached. The new line was held until the 24th Division relieved them on 13 June.

The division returned to the line between 26 and 28 June in the area of Battle wood and Mt Sorrel and began preparations for the next phase of the planned assault. During a German raid on 7 July the division's fifth V.C. was won by 2nd Lt. Frederick Youens. The division was relieved in the line by 24th Division by 23 July.

Third Battle of Ypres
The battle to deny the Germans the heights east and north of Ypres began on 31 July, while the division was still in training. On 23 August the division was placed in reserve, with the 70th Brigade briefly reinforcing the 14th Division after a German attack until 30 August when the division was relieved. From 3 September the division began to make preparations for its attack due east, at first along either side of the Menin Road, and then north of it, on a front 1,000 yards wide with the objective up to 2000 yards away. The division moved into the line on 15 September. The attack began on 20 September with the 68th and 69th brigades advancing, one battalion of each brigade was to secure each of the three phase lines with the fourth as a reserve. The first line was captured within the hour, the advance to the second faced resistance from pill-boxes and dug-outs as did the advance to the third. The division held this line under German artillery fire until 25 September, relieved by the 33rd and 39th divisions. In this attack the division had lost 397 killed, 1,724 wounded and 179 missing, it had captured 596 prisoners.

Relief was short-lived, as on 27 September the division returned to the front to reinforce the 33rd Division, which had been counterattacked after its arrival. The 69th and 70th brigades fought off further attacks, while the division artillery suffered Mustard Gas attacks, the halting of one determined counterattack on 1 October earning the thanks of the Second Army Commander. The division left the front line on 3 October when relieved by the 5th Division, only to return on 8 October to relieve 7th Division in front of Polygon Wood. Required only to hold the line the division was subject to heavy shelling and lost 275 killed and 954 injured before relief on 14 October.

On 28 October the division was ordered to make ready to move by rail, and on 31 October the destination was confirmed as Italy.

Italy
The division arrived in Italy and concentrated around Mantua, South of Verona as part of XIV Corps on 11 November, 16 days after the Battle of Caporetto. From here on 19 November the division marched out to the front line, with the 69th and 70th brigades relieving the 70th Italian Division on the western part of the Montello and the adjoining plain South of the Piave River from 2–4 December. They immediately began to reorganise the defences to the standard defence in depth pattern used in Flanders and began patrols. Relief by the 41st Division, which like the 23rd had also been sent to Italy, began on 13 February 1918, by which time the division had suffered 38 dead and 136 wounded mostly due to artillery and air attack, comparatively small numbers compared to Flanders.

1918–1919
The relief was short-lived as the 5th and 41st divisions were withdrawn from Italy to meet the impending German spring offensive (the Germans had also withdrawn six of their divisions from Italy), the division returned to the Montello from 24 to 26 February, and by 8 March patrolling was impossible due to the height of the Piave river. The division was quickly relieved by the 51st Italian Division and by 16 March was out of the line.

The Asiago Plateau
It was quickly redeployed to the hills south of, and overlooking the Asiago plain, with its back to the edge of the Asiago plateau, some 3500 feet above the coastal plain, another different environment to Flanders, the 68th and 70th brigades taking over from the 11th Italian Division. Patrolling and raids were once again possible in spite of the cold and snow, and there was very little fire from the Austrian artillery. Relieved by the 48th Division on 23 April the division went into reserve around Trissino.

It was planned to return the division to the plateau on 19 May, for an offensive timed for mid June, on the march back men began to fall sick with influenza, which swept through the division over the next few weeks. Back on the plateau, early June saw raiding of the Austrian lines, when it was learned that the Austrians planned their own offensive for 14 June. After bombarding only the front lines, the Austrian advance was stopped on the 68th Brigade front after three hours by rifle and machine gun fire, here Lt. Jack Youll of 11th Northumberland Fusiliers won the V.C. securing the junction between the 23rd and 48th divisions. To their left the 70th Brigade's front line was partly overrun, it was restored by headquarters details and some Italian trench mortar-men led by Lt. Col. Charles Hudson of the 11th Sherwood Foresters for which he received the V.C. Further Austrian assaults were broken up by artillery.

In late July the division was relieved by the 48th Division after having further reinforced the front and reserve lines and conducted trench raids against the Austrians. On 19 August the division returned to the plateau for a planned attack, relieving the 48th Division, and began to conduct trench raids. One of these consisting of over 360 officers and men of 10th Duke of Wellington's Regiment failed to achieve surprise and was strongly opposed, despite this, 70 prisoners were taken for the loss of 2 dead, 48 injured and 6 missing. In September the reorganisation that had been applied to divisions in France in March was now applied in Italy, and each brigade lost one of its battalions. The 13th Durham Light Infantry, 9th Yorkshire Regiment and the 11th Sherwood Foresters left the division on 11 September, eventually to form the 74th Brigade of the reconstituted 25th Division.

News was received that the division was expected to return to France, and relief of the division from the plateau completed by 27 September by 20th Italian division, and training in open battle commenced around Costa Bissara then Trissino. Since arriving on the plateau the division had taken over 700 prisoners and deserters.

Vittorio Veneto
The planned move to France was cancelled and an attack on the Piave front was to be mounted in its place with the 7th and 23rd British divisions, for which the training remained appropriate. The division took its place in the line on the right bank of the Piave river on 21 October, where the river runs in braided channels over one mile wide around an island, Grave di Papadopoli, which the Austrians used as a post in front of their main line. On the night of 25–26 October the 8th Yorkshire Regiment captured the northern part of the Grave, troops from the 7th division the southern part. The 68th and 69th brigades crossed the river on 27 October, and the planned 3000 yard advance was achieved in spite of the division's left flank being unsupported by the 58th Italian division which could not cross the river. The Austrians were, however, demoralised and were retreating behind a rear-guard. The next day the divisions advance of 3,500 yards was done by mid afternoon, during which Pte. Wilfred Wood of the 10th Northumberland Fusiliers won the V.C. for subduing a machine gun nest. Early on 28 October the river Monticano was crossed by the 69th brigade, and in securing the bridgehead (amongst other actions) Sgt William McNally of the 8th Yorkshire Regiment won the division's ninth and last V.C.. Stiffening resistance meant the day's advance was much less than expected. By the afternoon of 31 October the 69th brigade was in the town of Sacile some 15 miles from the Piave, where the last shot was fired by the division. The advance continued through the remains of Austrian columns attacked by aircraft, until the armistice signed on 3 November came into effect the next day, by which time the division was east of the river Tagliamento.

The division remained in Northern Italy while its men were demobilised, with the division finally disbanded in early March 1919.

During the war the division had suffered 23,574 men killed, wounded and missing.

Order of battle
The following units served in the division:

68th Brigade
 * 10th (Service) Battalion, Northumberland Fusiliers
 * 11th (Service) Battalion, Northumberland Fusiliers
 * 12th (Service) Battalion, Durham Light Infantry
 * 13th (Service) Battalion, Durham Light Infantry (left September 1918)
 * 68th Machine Gun Company (formed March 1916, moved into 23rd Battalion Machine Gun Corps M.G.C. March 1918)
 * 68th Trench Mortar Battery (formed June 1916)

69th Brigade
 * 11th (Service) Battalion, Prince of Wales's Own (West Yorkshire Regiment)
 * 8th (Service) Battalion, Alexandra, Princess of Wales's Own (Yorkshire Regiment)
 * 9th (Service) Battalion, Alexandra, Princess of Wales's Own (Yorkshire Regiment) (left September 1918)
 * 10th (Service) Battalion, Duke of Wellington's (West Riding Regiment)
 * 69th Machine Gun Company (formed March 1916, moved into 23rd Battalion M.G.C. March 1918)
 * 69th Trench Mortar Battery (formed June 1916)

70th Brigade

(Between October 1915 and July 1916 the brigade transferred to the 8th Division, swapping with the 24th Brigade.)
 * 11th (Service) Battalion, Sherwood Foresters (left September 1918)
 * 8th (Service) Battalion, King's Own Yorkshire Light Infantry
 * 8th (Service) Battalion, York and Lancaster Regiment
 * 9th (Service) Battalion, York and Lancaster Regiment
 * 70th Machine Gun Company (formed July 1916, moved into 23rd Battalion M.G.C. March 1918)
 * 70th Trench Mortar Battery (formed June 1916)

24th Brigade

(Between October 1915 and July 1916 the brigade joined from the 8th Division, exchanging with the 70th Brigade.)
 * 1st Battalion, Worcestershire Regiment
 * 2nd Battalion, East Lancashire Regiment
 * 1st Battalion, Sherwood Foresters
 * 2nd Battalion, Northamptonshire Regiment
 * 24th Machine Gun Company (formed February 1916)
 * 24th Trench Mortar Battery (formed June 1916)

Division Troops
 * 8th (Service) Battalion, Leicestershire Regiment (left 8 April 1915)
 * 9th (Service) Battalion, Leicestershire Regiment (left 8 April 1915)
 * 9th (Service) Battalion, South Staffordshire Regiment (converted to divisional pioneer battalion in April 1915)
 * 194th Machine Gun Company (joined 16 December 1916, moved into 23rd Battalion M.G.C. March 1918)
 * 23rd Battalion M.G.C. (created 1 April 1918 absorbing brigade MG companies)
 * 100th (Warwicks and South Notts Yeomanry) Machine Gun Battalion (joined 2 October 1918, left 19 October 1918)
 * Division Mounted Troops
 * Regimental HQ, MG Section, C Squadron, Duke of Lancaster's Own Yeomanry (joined June 1915, left April 1916)
 * 23rd Divisional Cyclist Company, Army Cyclist Corps (formed in January 1915, left April 1916)
 * 23rd Divisional Train Royal Army Service Corps
 * 190th – 193rd Companies,
 * 35th Mobile Veterinary Section Army Veterinary Corps (joined 20 June 1915)
 * 223rd Division Employment Company (formed June 1917)

Royal Artillery
 * CII Brigade, Royal Field Artillery (R.F.A.)
 * CIII Brigade, R.F.A.
 * CIV Brigade, R.F.A. (left February 1917)
 * CV (Howitzer) Brigade, R.F.A. (broken up 3 September 1916, redistributed to CII and CIII Brigades)
 * 23rd Heavy Battery Royal Garrison Artillery (left 15 September 1915)
 * 23rd Divisional Ammunition Column
 * V/23 (Heavy) Trench Mortar Battery (formed from Division artillery March 1916, disbanded September 1917)
 * X/23 Trench Mortar Battery (joined early 1916)
 * Y/23 Trench Mortar Battery (joined early 1916)
 * Z/23 Trench Mortar Battery (formed March 1916, broken up March 1918, redistributed to X/23 and Y/23 Batteries)

Royal Engineers
 * 89th, 90th Field Companies (left January 1915)
 * 101st, 102nd Field Companies (joined February 1915)
 * 128th Field Company (joined April 1915)
 * 23rd Divisional Signal Company

Royal Army Medical Corps
 * 69th, 70th, 71st Field Ambulance
 * 40th Sanitary Section, R.A.M.C. (joined August 1915, left April 1917)

Battles
See
 * Battle of the Somme
 * Battle of Albert
 * Battle of Pozières
 * Battle of Flers-Courcelette
 * Battle of Morval
 * Battle of Le Transloy
 * Battle of Messines
 * Third Battle of Ypres
 * Battle of the Menin Road Ridge
 * Battle of Polygon Wood
 * First Battle of Passchendaele
 * Battle of the Asiago Plateau
 * Battle of Vittorio Veneto

Awards
Between 1915 and 1918 the officers and men of the division won the following:

Battle insignia
The practice of wearing battalion specific insignia (often called battle patches) in the B.E.F. began in mid 1915 with the arrival of units of Kitchener's Armies and was widespread after the Somme Battles of 1916. The patches shown were worn by the division during 1917. There was no overall division scheme for the battle patches, they were adopted gradually from mid 1916.

Related formation
The 23rd (Northumbrian) Division was a 2nd Line Territorial Army duplicate of the 1st Line 50th (Northumbrian) Infantry Division that was formed shortly after the outbreak of the Second World War and was disbanded in July 1940 after suffering heavy losses in France before the Battle of Dunkirk.

title: 23rd Division (United Kingdom)


text:
Zhang Jiaxiang

Zhang Jiaxiang (30 October 1932 – 29 December 2019), also known as Chia-Hsiang Chang, is a Chinese astronomer affiliated with Purple Mountain Observatory, Chinese Academy of Sciences, and president of the Minor Planet Foundation at that observatory.

He discovered 5384 Changjiangcun, an inner main-belt asteroid of the Hungaria family at the Purple Mountain Observatory in 1957 named after the village near Zhangjiagang, China. It is his only discovery credited by the Minor Planet Center under the name "C.-H. Chang".

Biography
Zhang Jiaxiang was born on 30 October 1932 in Nanjing, Jiangsu, Republic of China. In 1951, he first joined the Purple Mountain Observatory as a technician, supervised by director Zhang Yuzhe.

In 1957, Zhang Yuzhe and Zhang Jiaxiang published a paper discussing the orbit of artificial satellites. From 1965 to 1972, Zhang led the project of orbit determination of the first Chinese artificial satellite and thereafter the systematic studies of the orbit of Chinese synchronous satellite. His group discovered more than 150 new minor planets and four comets. In the 1990s, he accurately predicted a series of collision times between 19 comet nuclei and Jupiter, based on his self-established numerical model of the Solar System dynamics. He then served as the chief scientist for the construction of the Near Earth Object Telescope.

In recognition of his contributions, the Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian named the asteroid 4760 Jia-xiang after him.

Zhang died on 29 December 2019, aged 87.

title: Zhang Jiaxiang


text: User talk:68.63.244.145

title: User talk:68.63.244.145


text:
User talk:Wiese

Hi. Regarding the iTunes audio plugin, or non-existence thereof - I recall studying the headers for this plugin API, so they must have existed at one time. I guess it's possible that they were quietly dropped at some point since I can't find them on Apple's site now. But also, there are a few audio plugins available that change the sound - "enhancers" and the like - how do they work? Graham 03:12, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Wiese


text:
Return of the Joker

Return of the Joker may refer to:

 * Batman: Return of the Joker, a 1991 platform video game
 * Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker, a 2000 American direct-to-video animated film

title: Return of the Joker


text:
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Vermont

Talk:Abortion in Vermont discussion
There is a content dispute at Talk:Abortion in Vermont that would benefit from greater editor involvement. 129.67.118.6 (talk) 12:53, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

UVM and Middlebury Articles: Importance
I wanted to suggest reconsidering the importance of the University of Vermont and Middlebury College articles. Looking at Wikipedia pageview statistics, these are some of the most viewed articles related to Vermont. I propose bumping them from High to Top. HeyTomek (talk) 22:31, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

 * I made the bold edit on both. HeyTomek (talk) 04:17, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a class parameter to WikiProject banner shell, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to WikiProject banner shell, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass WPBannerMeta a new custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 22:20, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Content assessment
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Content assessment, which is within the scope of this WikiProject.  This WikiProject received this message because it currently uses "Current" and/or "Future" class(es). There is a proposal to split these two article "classes" into a new parameter "time", in order to standardise article-rating across Wikipedia (per RfC), while also allowing simultaneous usage of quality criteria and time for interest projects. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:18, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Mary Fletcher
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mary Fletcher that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 07:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Vermont


text:
EMD E-unit

EMD E-units were a line of passenger train streamliner diesel locomotives built by the General Motors Electro-Motive Division (EMD) and its predecessor the Electro-Motive Corporation (EMC). Final assembly for all E-units was in La Grange, Illinois. Production ran from May 1937, to December, 1963. The name E-units refers to the model numbers given to each successive type, which all began with E. The E originally stood for eighteen hundred horsepower (1800 hp = 1300 kW), the power of the earliest model, but the letter was kept for later models of higher power.

The predecessors of the E-units were the EMC 1800 hp B-B locomotives built in 1935. These had similar power and mechanical layouts to the E-units, but in boxcab bodies on AAR type B two-axle trucks.

EMC also introduced the TA model in 1937, selling six to the Rock Island. This had similar carbody styling, but otherwise had more in common with UP M-10001, M-10002, and M-10003 to M-10006, in that it was a 1,200 hp (900 kW), single-engined unit on B-B trucks instead of the E-units' A1A-A1A wheel arrangement. It is not part of the E-unit series.

The EMD F-units followed the basic B-B truck design of the TA model, but with a V-16 EMD 567 prime mover generating 1350 hp as introduced in 1939.

E-units standardized the two engine configuration for passenger locomotives to maximize power and, while the less-reliable Winton Diesel prime movers were in use, faced a less severe loss of power should one of the engines become disabled. While E-units were used singly for shorter trains, longer trains needed multiple locomotive units; many railroads used triple units. E-units could be purchased with or without cabs; units with a cab are called A units or lead units, while cabless units are called B units or booster units. B units did contain hostler controls, but they could not be so controlled on the main line. The locomotive units were linked together with cables which enabled the crew in the lead unit to control the trailing units. Railroads tended to buy either ABA sets (two cab-equipped units facing in opposite directions with a booster in between) or ABB sets (a single cab with a pair of boosters). The former did not need to be turned to pull in either direction, but B units were less expensive than A units and gave a smoother line to the train.

As locomotives of EMC's own standardized design produced in-house, expandable to meet various power requirements, the E-units marked the arrival of Diesel power benefiting from economies of scale and were adequate for full-sized consists, a significant threshold in the viability of Diesel motive power as a replacement for steam in passenger service.

Development
The EA/EB, E1, and E2 models were powered by twin 900 hp Winton 201A V-12 engines in each power unit. They were standardized mechanically and in overall design. Union Pacific's E2 cab unit was distinguished from the slant-nosed EA and E1 units by its bulbous nose, round porthole style windows, and stainless steel ornamentation on the pilot and nose. The "E" designation originated to denote the locomotive units' Eighteen hundred horsepower, as opposed to the Twelve hundred horsepower "T" units but was later used to refer to all carbody constructed twin-engine mainline passenger locomotives units produced by EMC. Their twin V-12 diesel engine layout, Blomberg A-1-A trucks, and 57 ft wheelbase would become the standard for all future E models. EMC/EMD has built all of its major components since 1939.

The E3, E4, E5, and E6 had the new GM-EMC 567 purpose-designed locomotive engines, for a total of 2000 hp. They had the sharply raked "slant nose", and square windows on the sides (with the exception of Union Pacific orders with porthole style windows). Production stopped in 1942. The E5 designation was used for Chicago Burlington and Quincy's stainless steel clad locomotives in keeping with their Zephyr theme.

The EA/EB, E1, E2, E4, and E5 model names reflected EMC's early convention of assigning a model name for each individual customer order. EMC started to change that convention with the multiple-customer E3 model and the new naming convention was fully incorporated with the E6 model.

The E7 was introduced in 1945, and became the best selling E model. It had the improved 567 "A" engine, and the F style "bulldog nose".

The E8 and E9 were the final E models. The E8 had 12-V567B engines (2250 hp total), while the E9 had uprated 12V-567C engines (2400 hp total). They both used the same body style, with a grille along the top of the sides the length of the loco, and several "porthole" windows below it.

Model descriptions are as originally built; EMC/EMD locomotives are often rebuilt to newer standards.

Engines
While there were some cosmetic differences between E-unit models, the major line of development was technological, and largely that of increasing power. The first model, the EA/EB, was rated at 1800 hp (1300 kW), then the E3 was rated at 2,000 hp. The last model, the E9, was rated at 2,400 hp (1800 kW).

Early models (EA/EB through E2) used the Winton 201-A engine that had been developed in the early 1930s by the partnership of General Motors and Winton. While this engine represented a breakthrough in power-to-weight ratios and output flexibility for Diesel engines, it was a compromise between marine and locomotive requirements and wasn't well suited to the sustained full throttle operation often needed in railroad service. It was not unusual for heavy repairs to be done en route on one engine while the other engine propelled the train at reduced speed. The 201-A engines used in E-units were 900 hp (700 kW) V12s. Experience with the 201-A, which was the first two-stroke Diesel engine in operational use, was invaluable in the development of the next-generation Diesel engine, the EMD 567, a purpose-designed engine that achieved a factor-of-five improvement in piston life for locomotive use.

The E3 introduced the 567 series engine, which would power all later E units, the 567 being a mechanically aspirated two stroke 45 degree V-type with 567 cuin displacement per cylinder, a total of 6804 cuin per engine. Models E3 through E9 used the EMD model 567 engine, named after its engine displacement in cubic inches per cylinder. The 567 model had been developed by EMD specifically for locomotive use, and exhibited excellent performance and reliability in high speed passenger train service. The 567 had a greater displacement per cylinder than the 201-A and ran at a higher maximum rpm, elements which when combined gave greater engine output. The 12V-567 V12 model used in the E3 through E6 developed 1000 hp (750 kW). The E7 model used the 12V-567A rated at 1000 hp (750 kW). The E8 used the more advanced 567B unit, with improved exhaust manifolds and other enhancements to give 1,125 hp each. More development resulted in the 1200 hp (900 kW) 567C engine used in the E9.

Trucks
All E-units used the same EMD passenger truck design by engineer Martin Blomberg. This was an A1A-A1A truck, with the outer axles powered and the center axle unpowered. Like the well-known two-axle Blomberg B trucks, these trucks had outside spring hangers between the wheels for better cushioning of side-to-side motion. Also like the Blomberg B, there were no drop equalizers between the axles. Two direct current generators powered four traction motors, two on each truck, in an A1A-A1A arrangement. This truck design was used on all E units and on CB&Q 9908 and MP 7100 power cars. The success of the design is shown by the few changes to it over the years.

Styling
The EA and E1 had sloping noses with recessed headlights, while the E2 had a more bulbous "bulldog" nose. Models E3 through E6 had a sloping nose but with a protruding headlight, while models E7 through E9 used a less sloped (closer to vertical) style like the freight F-units. A patent of 1937 signed by several EMC engineers defined the styling.

Many older E-units were updated to newer styles. The E8 introduced the one-piece stamped Farr stainless-steel side grilles that made a continuous band from front to rear just below the roof, but these were often retrofitted to earlier units. Side windows were half-rounded on the EA/EB, square on the E1, round on the E2, square on most E3 through E7 units, and rounded portholes again on the E8 and E9, but again many railroads updated older locomotives.

The E5 units were unique, produced for the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad in all stainless steel with fluted lower carbody sides, to match the railroad's Zephyr passenger trains.

Other changes
Other improvements occurred independently of the change in engine design. The E8, for example, was the first model to incorporate electric cooling fans, and offer dynamic braking as an option.

Surviving E-units
A number of E-units survive, many are in good running order. Several railroads retain sets that haul passenger specials, management inspection specials, etc. Others survive in museums or on short lines.

The Illinois Railway Museum in Union, Illinois has one of the largest collections of operable and preserved E's including CB&Q E5 9911A and WSOR 102, one of the few remaining operable B units.

The Southeastern Railway Museum in Duluth, Georgia has Southern Railway #6901, an E8 that once powered the Southern Crescent.

title: EMD E-unit


text:
Talk:Psychoactive drug

Determinants of effects
I respect that there are mentions of Timothy Leary in this article, since he was one of the most important figures regarding drugs in general, but this specific chapter (regarding set and setting) is inappropriate in this article since it has to do with psychedelic drugs specifically, not psychoactive drugs generally (that defines a major difference between the two actually, since your set/setting don't matter when you seek your desired effects by biological means (i.e. by using non-psychedelic drugs) but are tremendously important when using psychedelic, which have subjective effects and are not biologically euphoriant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.207.135.35 (talk) 20:53, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The last sentence states the model can be applied to other drugs than psychedelics. It is sourced to a book I do not have access to so I cannot verify its accuracy. One might reasonably see that set and setting have much lower weight compared to dose for non-psychedelics so the model would still be valid. Sizeofint (talk) 22:09, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Picture
Where did the person who took the picture at the top right of the page get the drugs in question? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.25.94 (talk) 08:49, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You would have to ask User:Thoric as he is apparently the original uploader. Sizeofint (talk) 11:09, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I took the photo at an acquaintance's apartment over ten years ago. They had a wide variety of substances in their collection at the time, so I got them to organize them onto a piece of paper so that I might take a picture of it for this article. I've lost track of this person, and I'm fairly certain they are no longer in possession of any of this stuff as it was so long ago. --Thoric (talk) 17:38, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

I updated the picture as it appears the image itself has the correct listing, but the page contains "alcohol" as the first in the list, while alcohol does not appear in the image at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.173.13.60 (talk) 19:45, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Psychotropic medicine?
We have one link Psychotropic medicine. To be redirected here?--Estopedist1 (talk) 13:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Psychoactive vs. psychotropic
Is it the case that all psychoactive drugs are psychotropic and vice versa? Psychotropic redirects here. User:Jonwilliamsl(talk|contribs) 17:32, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

 * All psychotropic (subclass) substances are psychoactive (superclass), but not all psychoactive substances are psychotropic. The term "psychotropic" is generally used in medical settings. ElectronCompound (talk) 11:56, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Technically psychotropic drugs noticeably affect mood and/or cognition, and psychoactive drugs include any drug which crosses the blood-brain barrier, but most people use these two terms interchangeably. "Tropic" means changes, and "active" means cause activity within. The difference is subtle, and the implication is that psychotropic drugs are intended to improve mood or cognition, and this would be different from any psychoactive drug which might be considered more likely to stupefy or depress (i.e. alcohol). Thoric (talk) 19:33, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Hallucinogen vs Pseudo-Hallucinogen
I'm afraid the definition of many substances as "hallucinogens" is incorrect. Only few drugs cause actual hallucinations, most are pseudo-hallucinations. 2003:CD:6724:B500:99A2:507E:38DC:3A9C (talk) 14:50, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Psychoactive drug


text:
Watertown Regional Airport

Watertown Regional Airport, formerly Watertown Municipal Airport, is two miles northwest of Watertown in Codington County, South Dakota, United States.

The National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems for 2015-2019 categorized it as a non-primary commercial service facility. Federal Aviation Administration data says it had 4,348 passenger boardings (enplanements) in calendar year 2013, a decrease of 30.5% from 6,254 enplanements in 2012.

History
During World War II, the airfield was used by the United States Army Air Forces as a Second Air Force cold weather bomber training base as an auxiliary to Sioux Falls Army Air Field, and by Air Proving Ground Command.

B-17 Flying Fortress and B-24 Liberator units underwent advanced training before going overseas. One unit that trained here was the 702d Bombardment Squadron of the 445th Bombardment Group.

Facilities
The airport covers 919 acres (372 ha) at an elevation of 1,749 feet (533 m). It has two runways: 12/30 is 6,898 by 100 feet (2,103 x 30 m) concrete and 17/35 is 6,893 by 100 feet (2,101 x 30 m) concrete.

In the year ending December 31, 2022 the airport had 12,276 aircraft operations, average 34 per day: 89% general aviation, 6% airline, and 5% air taxi. 52 aircraft were then based at the airport; 43 single-engine, 4 multi-engine, 3 jet, and 2 glider.

From 2012 to 2018, runways 17/35 and 12/30 were overhauled using concrete, replacing worn out asphalt on both runways.

The airport opened its new, state-of-the-art passenger terminal August 10, 2022. The new terminal has two levels, two gates and a movable jet bridge.

The airport has free parking.

Notable visitors
President Barack Obama landed at the airport twice, first in 2008 during his presidential campaign, and on May 8, 2015, to address the graduating class of 2015 from Lake Area Technical Institute. Both times, President Obama arrived on a Boeing 757, during his campaign, on a chartered North American Airlines 757, and as president, using a smaller version of Air Force One (the Boeing C-32).

Airlines and destinations
Air service to Watertown is provided by Denver Air Connection using 50-seat Embraer ERJ-145ERs, with daily flights to Chicago and Denver.

Historical airline service
Airline flights at Watertown started about 1935, with a local company, Watertown Airways, operating scheduled service between Minneapolis–St. Paul International Airport and Watertown. This route continued through South Dakota with additional stops in Huron, Pierre, Phillip, Rapid City, and Spearfish. By 1938, Mid-Continent Airlines was operating a route from Minneapolis-St. Paul to Omaha, Nebraska, with Watertown as one of the intermediate stops. Upon the 1952 acquisition of Mid-Continent by Braniff International, Braniff took over the operation of this route until 1959. North Central arrived in 1957 and successor Republic left in 1985. The first jet flights were North Central DC-9s in 1968.

Mesaba Airlines, operating as Northwest Airlink, and later, Delta Connection, served Watertown for years, with daily Saab 340s to Minneapolis/St. Paul. When Delta quit using the Saab 340 in December 2011, and announced the end of air service to Watertown, flights from Minneapolis temporarily used Delta's Canadair Regional Jet 200, until Great Lakes Airlines took over 4 months later.

Great Lakes Airlines offered daily non-stop 19-seat (later 9-seat) Beechcraft 1900Ds to Minneapolis/St. Paul, until city officials voted to end the service, citing unreliability of the airline. Great Lakes ended service to the airport on September 30, 2015.

On August 15, 2016, Aerodynamics, Inc. (later California Pacific Airlines) began flying to Watertown with daily service to Denver, via Pierre, using Embraer 145 jet aircraft. However, the airline suspended all operations nationwide and ended flights to Pierre and Watertown on January 17, 2019.

Air service to Watertown resumed on April 3, 2019, with SkyWest Airlines operating as United Express, using 50-seat Canadair Regional Jet 200s. $3.24 million (or $44.44 per seat) of annual funding from the Essential Air Service program for flights to Denver ended on June 30, 2021. Denver Air Connection was selected for a new contract starting July 1, 2021; at that time, SkyWest also announced their intentions to remain in the Pierre and Watertown markets. SkyWest ended service to Watertown in January 2022.

Sun Country Airlines flew several seasonal charter Boeing 737-800s to Laughlin/Bullhead City International Airport in Arizona, known as "casino or gamblers' flights," in coordination with travel agencies in Watertown. These trips ended in 2015.

Other sources

 * Essential Air Service documents (Docket OST-2001-10644) from the U.S. Department of Transportation:
 * Order 2003-7-4 (July 8, 2003): selects Mesaba Aviation, Inc. d/b/a Northwest Airlink, an affiliate of Northwest Airlines, to provide subsidized essential air service (EAS) for a two-year period at Watertown, South Dakota, at an annual rate of $1,871,825.
 * Order 2005-9-9 (September 14, 2005): re-selecting Mesaba Aviation, Inc. d/b/a Northwest Airlink, to provide subsidized essential air service (EAS) for the two-year period beginning August 1, 2005, at Watertown, South Dakota, at an annual rate of $1,211,589.
 * Order 2007-8-19 (August 20, 2007): re-selecting Mesaba Aviation, Inc., d/b/a Northwest Airlink, to continue to provide subsidized essential air service (EAS) at Watertown, South Dakota, for the two-year period beginning August 1, 2007. Service will consist of 14 nonstop round trips per week at an annual subsidy rate of $1,189,606, with flights originating and terminating at Pierre and operated with 34-seat Saab 340 aircraft as Northwest Airlink.
 * Order 2009-7-15 (July 16, 2009): re-selecting Mesaba Aviation, Inc. d/b/a Delta Connection, to continue providing subsidized essential air service (EAS) at Watertown, SD, for the two-year period beginning August 1, 2009, at the annual subsidy rate of $1,338,321.
 * Order 2011-6-6 (June 7, 2011): re-selecting Mesaba Aviation, Inc., operating as Delta Connection, to provide essential air service (EAS) at Watertown, South Dakota. Mesaba will provide two daily nonstop round trips (14 a week) to Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport (Minneapolis) using 34-seat Saab 340 aircraft for a short-term contract period beginning August 1, 2011, through October 31, 2011, for an annual subsidy of $1,769,019, pro-rated at $450,736 for the contract period.
 * Order 2011-9-5 (September 13, 2011): prohibiting suspension of service and requesting proposals.
 * Order 2011-11-30 (November 23, 2011): selecting Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd., to provide essential air service (EAS) at six communities at the following annual subsidy rates: Brainerd, Minnesota, $959,865; Fort Dodge, $1,798,693; Iron Mountain, $1,707,841; Mason City, $1,174,468; Thief River Falls, Minnesota, $1,881,815; and Watertown, $1,710,324, for the two-year period beginning when Great Lakes inaugurates full EAS at all six communities
 * Order 2014-4-17 (April 18, 2014): reselecting Great Lakes to provide EAS at Watertown, South Dakota using 19 (reconfigured to 9) passenger Beech 1900D aircraft with non-stop service to Minneapolis for 2 round trips each weekday and weekend and one-stop service to Denver for one daily round trip, for a total of 19 per week, for the two-year term from June 1, 2014, through May 31, 2016, for an annual subsidy of $2,847,284.
 * Order 2014-4-17 (April 18, 2014): reselecting Great Lakes to provide EAS at Watertown, South Dakota using 19 (reconfigured to 9) passenger Beech 1900D aircraft with non-stop service to Minneapolis for 2 round trips each weekday and weekend and one-stop service to Denver for one daily round trip, for a total of 19 per week, for the two-year term from June 1, 2014, through May 31, 2016, for an annual subsidy of $2,847,284.

title: Watertown Regional Airport