text:
User talk:Quintin3265

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! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, you can post to the help desk or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Flockmeal 05:08, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Speedy deletion
Hey, I'd like to welcome you again to Wikipedia. I see that you have decided to help with tagging articles for deletion. That's good news, since we need help is this area, and I encourage you to keep it up. However, I would like to direct your attention to this item in the WP:CSD:
 * An article about a real person that does not assert that person's importance or significance. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to VFD instead. For details, see Deletion of vanity articles.

Unfortunately, this means that we sysops cannot speedy delete an article if there is a claim to notability. Even patently false claims are sent to VfD. Please keep this in mind, and happy tagging! --Ryan Delaney talk 13:39, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Image:Spanier.jpg
This image you uploaded doesn't provide sufficent source or license information. If you hold the copyright please indicate so! We're in the process of deleting nosource images, so if you get this notice too late, and it really was your image to upload (or you can get it under a sufficently free license) please reupload it with the correct tagging. Let me know if you need help. --Gmaxwell 11:30, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

WP:CP
Hi, you've reported copyright infringements to WP:CP in the last week, a new measure was recently passed to allow the speedy deltion of new pages that are cut and paste copyvios. Please follow these instructions if you come across this type of copyvio. Thanks. --nixie 23:57, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Image source/licensing for Image:Blackwell.jpg
This message notification has been automatically sent by NotificationBot managed and run by AllyUnion. Please leave comments regarding bot operations at AllyUnion's talk page. Please direct all comments regarding licensing information at Wikipedia talk:Images for deletion. --NotificationBot 12:33, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

SHC
Hi Quintin; just saw your edit to SHC that first year students get $3500 -- according to, it's actually $2500. Do you have a source for the $3500 scholarship? --Spangineer (háblame)  21:37, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Those cheapskates! They've only been giving me $2500, but then, I started in 2002.  But it's extremely weird that they haven't updated any of their websites (,, and that brochure all say $2500).  Maybe I'll drop in and ask someone there what the deal is. --Spangineer  (háblame)  03:08, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

PSU wikiproject
Hi Quintin, just thought I'd let you know that I've restarted the Penn State WikiProject. If you see a PSU article that needs improvement or would like to help out improving Wikipedia's articles on Penn State, feel free to drop in! —Spangineer[es] (háblame)  05:16, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Ha, I just noticed that you already found it. What license are you using for all those pictures? Are they all GFDL? If so, we can upload them to the commons and then people on other language wikipedias can use them also. —Spangineer[es]  (háblame)  05:23, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've just uploaded one of your Beaver Stadium pictures (after cropping out that guy's head) to Wikimedia Commons. They accept free license images (GFDL, PD, CC-BY-SA, etc.) and then make it possible for all the wikipedias to use them.  It's at Image:Beaver_Stadium_inside.jpg. —Spangineer[es]  (háblame)  21:41, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about the homecoming parade. It should probably be incorporated into another article, because probably every university in the country has a homecoming parade similar to the one at PSU.  That is to say, there probably isn't very much that's special about it.  However, it might make sense to put a mention of it in the main PSU article or in an article covering the relationship between University Park and State College or the like.  We just need to proceed with a bit of caution—the people who hang out at WP:AFD wouldn't appreciate it if we created an article for every building on campus, or on every faculty member, or on every event that Penn State students participate in.  But mentioning the homecoming parade or the USG elections or the Mifflin streak or whatever in a more general article would be fine. —Spangineer[es]  (háblame)  22:15, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Ross Jeffries
I must disagree with your removal of the edit to Ross Jeffries, speed seduction is not a medical progam, and Ross is not a licensed doctor. Masssiveego 21:52, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:Symbol keep vote.svg
Hello. I noticed that you've used the "vote" symbol on AfD. Could I persuade you to not do that? While it often looks like a vote, it's not. Emphasising the binary/counting nature makes the discussion appear less important, when in fact it's the whole point. Thanks. brenneman {L}  13:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:KingOfPrussia.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:KingOfPrussia.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 193.248.39.109 22:28, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:39, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Deangelo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Deangelo.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 23:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Graham Spanier
I just wanted to let you know the proper procedure to follow after page move vandalism for the future, as your attempt to undo the damage actually made it worse. When a page is moved, it moves all the history along with it, so by copy/pasting the article back over the redirect, it gets rid of all the history, and also makes it so so someone is no longer able to simply click "rollback" to revert the vandalism, as you had an intervening edit. We want the history to be preserved, so tagging the article with the vandalized name as speedy would have actually deleted all the history. The proper procedure would have been to simply rollback the page move, and tag the vandalism page name (which would be a redirect at this time) for speedy. It is complicated to follow, but I wanted to let you know in case you encounter such a situation again. Thanks, VegaDark (talk) 15:10, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Deangelo.jpg
Hi Quintin3265!

We thank you for uploading Image:Deangelo.jpg, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation. This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 17:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of David DeAngelo
An article that you have been involved in editing, David DeAngelo, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/David DeAngelo (2nd nomination). Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Sticky Parkin 13:52, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

July 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Video game music culture do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Wyatt Riot (talk) 19:57, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Articles_for_deletion/Check_Game is currently up for deletion, along with this and 94 other Price is Right games
You are welcome to comment in this deletion discussion. You are being contacted because you participated in the first AFD in 2007. Ikip (talk) 21:48, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Pemigewassett covered bridge.jpg missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Pemigewassett covered bridge.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:13, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Beaver Stadium (2006).jpg needs authorship information.
Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:Beaver Stadium (2006).jpg appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided),authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

 * If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: will produce an appropriate expansion, or use the own template.

 * If this is an old image, for which the authorship is unknown or impossible to determine, please indicate this on the file description page.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:10, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:JordanCenter 2.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:JordanCenter 2.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:48, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:RodneyErickson.png
Thanks for uploading File:RodneyErickson.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:23, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:UNHGrad.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:UNHGrad.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sreejith K (talk) 12:39, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

November 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=583569769 your edit] to CryptoLocker may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:58, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * paying the ransom was the only way to recover files from CryptoLocker in the absence of backups in particular, offline backups that are inaccessible from the network.<ref

Chain crew
We are discussing your edit, and I have concurred with at Talk:Chain crew that you ought to show where you came up with your assertion. Spike-from-NH (talk) 01:58, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Buble2.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Buble2.jpg, which you've attributed to http://www.shoemakervillage.org/pennstate. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:53, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Buble3.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:Buble3.JPG, which you've attributed to http://www.shoemakervillage.org/pennstate. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:53, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Super Bowl LII gallery
I do not feel that I am a deletionist, I am merely following the guidance of WP:IG, which discourages large, indiscriminate collections of photos in gallery format; some of them just felt more like "vacation photos" rather than actually showing useful things (that photo of the reporters, if you know their names, could be useful on WLNE-TV's article, for one, and one or more of those images could work well on NFL Experience). Commons is better-suited for showcasing larger curated selections of images.

In addition, I was looking at the image quality, especially the in-game photos (one has a person's head in the way), and on the halftime show. On the latter, low-light concert photography is pretty hard, but I think the Prince scene was probably the more "iconic" moment of this halftime show (alongside Lady Gaga's drone flag and either Katy Perry's lion, sharks, or shooting star finale). I do not intend to demean your efforts (they were quite admirable, and I'm sure you enjoyed the experience), but it just felt like the article was being overloaded. ViperSnake151  Talk  19:42, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:I87mile100.jpg

The file File:I87mile100.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Orphaned file with no clear encyclopedic purpose."

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

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ajpolino (talk) 05:46, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello! Just wanted to leave a note to explain the above. I'm going through and transferring your uploaded files to Wikimedia Commons where they can be used by other wikis! At the same time, if any of your uploads are no longer used and don't seem likely to be used, I'm proposing them for deletion (which you're welcome to contest as noted above). That said, thanks for your interesting uploads! Happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 05:49, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Spanier2.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Spanier2.jpg, which you've attributed to Christopher Sokolowski.. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:09, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Quintin3265


text:
User:Gofeel

ko:User talk:Gofeel

gofeel is Korean.

Because I have poor english, I'm just doing edit interwiki and editing wrong information of Korea-related topics in en.wikipedia. :) If U wanna say something to me,Please come to my talk page in ko.wikipedia. --Gofeel 05:09, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

title: User:Gofeel


text:
List of peers 1120–1129

Peerage of England

 * Earl of Chester (1071)||Richard d'Avranches, 2nd Earl of Chester||1101||1120||Died; Title extinct
 * Earl of Northampton (1080)||Simon Saint-Lis, 2nd Earl of Northampton||1109||1153||
 * Earl of Albemarle (1081)||Stephen de Blois, 2nd Earl of Albemarle||1090||1127||Died; Title extinct
 * Earl of Surrey (1088)||William de Warenne, 2nd Earl of Surrey||1099||1138||
 * Earl of Warwick (1088)||Roger de Beaumont, 2nd Earl of Warwick||1119||1153||
 * Earl of Buckingham (1097)||Walter Giffard, 2nd Earl of Buckingham||1102||1164||
 * Earl of Leicester (1107)||Robert de Beaumont, 2nd Earl of Leicester||1118||1168||
 * rowspan=2|Earl of Chester (1121)||Ranulph le Meschin, 1st Earl of Chester||1121||1129||New creation; Died
 * Ranulph de Gernon, 2nd Earl of Chester||1129||1153||
 * Earl of Gloucester (1121)||Robert, 1st Earl of Gloucester||1121||1147||New creation
 * Earl of Buckingham (1097)||Walter Giffard, 2nd Earl of Buckingham||1102||1164||
 * Earl of Leicester (1107)||Robert de Beaumont, 2nd Earl of Leicester||1118||1168||
 * rowspan=2|Earl of Chester (1121)||Ranulph le Meschin, 1st Earl of Chester||1121||1129||New creation; Died
 * Ranulph de Gernon, 2nd Earl of Chester||1129||1153||
 * Earl of Gloucester (1121)||Robert, 1st Earl of Gloucester||1121||1147||New creation
 * Ranulph de Gernon, 2nd Earl of Chester||1129||1153||
 * Earl of Gloucester (1121)||Robert, 1st Earl of Gloucester||1121||1147||New creation
 * Earl of Gloucester (1121)||Robert, 1st Earl of Gloucester||1121||1147||New creation
 * Earl of Gloucester (1121)||Robert, 1st Earl of Gloucester||1121||1147||New creation

Peerage of Scotland

 * Earl of Mar (1114)||Ruadrí, Earl of Mar||1115||Abt. 1140||
 * Earl of Dunbar (1115)||Gospatric II, Earl of Dunbar||1115||1138||
 * Earl of Angus (1115)||Dufugan, Earl of Angus||1115||1135||
 * Earl of Atholl (1115)||Máel Muire, Earl of Atholl||1115||Abt. 1150||
 * Earl of Buchan (1115)||Gartnait, Earl of Buchan||1115||Abt. 1135||
 * Earl of Fife (1115)||Beth, Earl of Fife||1115||1120||Died
 * Earl of Strathearn (1115)||Máel Ísu I, Earl of Strathearn||1115||Abt. 1140||
 * Earl of Fife (1120)||Causantín, Earl of Fife||1120||1128||Died
 * Earl of Fife (1129)||Gille Míchéil, Earl of Fife||1129||1139||
 * }
 * Earl of Fife (1115)||Beth, Earl of Fife||1115||1120||Died
 * Earl of Strathearn (1115)||Máel Ísu I, Earl of Strathearn||1115||Abt. 1140||
 * Earl of Fife (1120)||Causantín, Earl of Fife||1120||1128||Died
 * Earl of Fife (1129)||Gille Míchéil, Earl of Fife||1129||1139||
 * }
 * Earl of Fife (1129)||Gille Míchéil, Earl of Fife||1129||1139||
 * }
 * }
 * }

title: List of peers 1120–1129


text:
2001 Berlin state election

The 2001 Berlin state election was held on 21 October 2001 to elect the members of the 15th Abgeordnetenhaus of Berlin. Prior to the election, Mayor Klaus Wowereit had led a minority government of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) and The Greens since June, which had replaced a coalition between the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and SPD which collapsed in June. The SPD–Green government made gains, but remained short of a majority. The SPD first sought to form a traffic light coalition with the Free Democratic Party (FDP) and Greens, but were unsuccessful. They subsequently agreed to a government with the Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS).

Parties
The table below lists parties represented in the 14th Abgeordnetenhaus of Berlin.

Issues and campaign
The 2001 election was an early election. In June 2001, the grand coalition under Mayor Eberhard Diepgen (CDU) broke down following a scandal involving CDU's leader in the Abgeordnetenhaus of Berlin,. Landowsky, who served as the CEO of a public mortgage bank (later Landesbank Berlin Holding), had financed a risky deal between two men who were donors to the local CDU branch. The cost the city several billion euros. The SPD subsequently left the coalition, which had governed Berlin since 1990, and formed an interim minority government with the Greens supported by the PDS. Klaus Wowereit became Mayor after a constructive vote of no confidence against Diepgen on 15 June. The House of Deputies then voted to dissolve itself, triggering a new election.

The campaign was strongly influenced by the bad state of the public finances and the bank scandal. The CDU nominated 35-year-old Frank Steffel as their top candidate, and played on fears of potential PDS involvement in government. They also focused on security issues, especially after September 11 attacks.

The regional broadcaster Sender Freies Berlin accompanied the election campaign on its website with a "Wahltest" app, marking the first time in Germany that a Voting Advice Application was used.

title: 2001 Berlin state election


text:
George R. Lawrence

George Raymond Lawrence (February 24, 1868 – December 15, 1938) was an American commercial photographer of northern Illinois. After years of experience building kites and balloons for aerial panoramic photography, Lawrence turned to aviation design in 1910.

Life
The Lawrences are descended from John Philip Lorenz, who had emigrated from Germany in 1748. George was born in Ottawa, Illinois, on February 24, 1868. He was the eldest of six children of Margaret Othelia Tritley and Michael B. Lawrence. Michael was a LaSalle County farmer and a carpenter. Within a few years, the family moved sixty miles east to a Kankakee County farm. George went to school through the eighth-grade in the nearby town of Manteno, Illinois. He also attended St. Joseph's Roman Catholic Church in Manteno.

Around 1890, he moved to Chicago and began working at the Abbott Buggy Co. factory in Auburn, Illinois. There, he invented a method of attaching iron rims on wooden wheels. In 1890, Lawrence married Alice Herenden and they had two children: Raymond W. Lawrence and George Lee Lawrence. In 1891, he opened The Lawrence Portrait Studio at the corner of Yale Avenue and 63rd Street, sharing the space and expenses with fellow photographer Irwin W. Powell.

In the mid-1890s, Lawrence perfected the use of "flashlight photography", which was the norm until flashbulbs were invented years later. In 1900, he built the world's largest camera to take a photograph of the Alton Limited Train, owned by the Chicago & Alton Railway. The camera weighed 1400 pounds (640 kg) and used a 4.5′ × 8′ glass-plate negative. The photograph was taken for the 1900 Exposition Universelle (Paris Exposition of 1900) in Paris, France and won "The Grand Prize of the World". He also made innovations in areas of aerial photography such as ballooning and camera–carrying kites.

San Francisco photo
One of Lawrence's world-renowned photographs is of the ruins of San Francisco, California after the 1906 earthquake. It is a 160-degree panorama from a kite taken 2000 feet (600 m) in the air above the San Francisco Bay that showed the entire city on a single 17-by-48-inch contact print made from a single piece of film. Each print sold for $125 and Lawrence made at least $15,000 (US$ 0 in 2024) in sales from this one photograph. The camera used in this photograph weighed 49 pounds (22 kg) and used a celluloid-film plate.

In 2006, Juneau-based photographer Ronald Klein built a working replica of Lawrence's camera and used it to rephotograph San Francisco from about the same location (but from a helicopter, not a kite), 100 years after the earthquake. The rephotograph was actually taken by Mark Walsh, George R. Lawrence's great grandson, who rode in the helicopter, held the camera, and clicked the shutter.

Marriage, remarriage, and death

In 1909, while he was away on an expensive and frustrating adventure attempting to take aerial photographs of wild animals in British East Africa, his wife found that he had been having an affair with one of his secretaries. Upon his return, he fled to California, taking his sons with him. He then turned from photography to aviation, building an aircraft at a factory in Chicago. He would be granted nearly a hundred patents for aviation-related devices.

He divorced his first wife, Alice Herendeen, in 1913 (with whom he had had two children, Raymond Welcome Lawrence and George Lee Lawrence), and married Adele Frances "Della" Page in 1916. She was born in St. Louis, Missouri and was the daughter of Henry J. Page, an architect. George Lawrence was 48 years old and Della was 22 years old when they married. They had four daughters: Clara Antoinette, Virginia Lee, Ruth Adele, and Martha "Louise" Lawrence.

Lawrence's aircraft company folded in 1919. He died in 1938, aged 70, and funeral services were held at St. Gertrude's Roman Catholic Church in Chicago. He was buried at St. Joseph's Cemetery in Manteno, Illinois.

Timeline

 * 1900 Photograph Chicago & Alton Railway's Alton Limited Train
 * 1906 San Francisco, California earthquake ruins
 * 1908 Reconstruction pictures of San Francisco, California

title: George R. Lawrence


text:
Human security

Human security is a paradigm for understanding global vulnerabilities whose proponents challenge the traditional notion of national security through military security by arguing that the proper referent for security should be at the human rather than the national level. Human security reveals a people-centred and multi-disciplinary understanding of security which involves a number of research fields, including development studies, international relations, strategic studies, and human rights. The United Nations Development Programme's 1994 Human Development Report is considered a milestone publication in the field of human security, with its argument that ensuring "freedom from want" and "freedom from fear" for all persons is the best path to tackle the problem of global insecurity.

Critics of the concept argue that its vagueness undermines its effectiveness, that it has become little more than a vehicle for activists wishing to promote certain causes, and that it does not help the research community understand what security means or help decision-makers to formulate good policies. Alternatively, other scholars have argued that the concept of human security should be broadened to encompass military security: 'In other words, if this thing called 'human security' has the concept of 'the human' embedded at the heart of it, then let us address the question of the human condition directly. Thus understood, human security would no longer be the vague amorphous add-on to harder-edged areas of security such as military security or state security.'

In order for human security to challenge global inequalities, there has to be cooperation between a country's foreign policy and its approach to global health. However, the interest of the state has continued to overshadow the interest of the people. For instance, Canada's foreign policy, "three Ds", has been criticized for emphasizing defense more than development.

Origins
The emergence of the human security discourse was the product of a convergence of factors at the end of the Cold War. These challenged the dominance of the neorealist paradigm's focus on states, "mutually assured destruction" and military security and briefly enabled a broader concept of security to emerge. The increasingly rapid pace of globalization; the failure of liberal state-building through the instruments of the Washington Consensus; the reduced threat of nuclear war between the superpowers, and the exponential rise in the spread and consolidation of democratization and international human rights norms opened a space in which both 'development' and concepts of 'security' could be reconsidered.

At the same time, the increasing number of internal violent conflicts in Africa, Asia and Europe (Balkans) resulted in concepts of national and international security failing to reflect the challenges of the post Cold War security environment whilst the failure of neoliberal development models to generate growth, particularly in Africa, or to deal with the consequences of complex new threats (such as HIV and climate change) reinforced the sense that international institutions and states were not organized to address such problems in an integrated way.

The principal possible indicators of movement toward an individualized conception of security lie in the first place in the evolution of international society's consideration of rights of individuals in the face of potential threats from states. The most obvious foci of analysis here are the UN Charter, the UN Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and its associated covenants (1966), and conventions related to particular crimes (e.g., genocide) and the rights of particular groups (e.g., women, racial groups, and refugees).

UNDP's 1994 definition
Mahbub ul Haq first drew global attention to the concept of human security in the United Nations Development Programme's 1994 Human Development Report and sought to influence the UN's 1995 World Summit on Social Development in Copenhagen. The UNDP's 1994 Human Development Report's definition of human security argues that the scope of global security should be expanded to include threats in seven areas:
 * Economic security – Economic security requires an assured basic income for individuals, usually from productive and remunerative work or, as a last resort, from a publicly financed safety net. In this sense, only about a quarter of the world's people are presently economically secure. While the economic security problem may be more serious in developing countries, concern also arises in developed countries as well. Unemployment problems constitute an important factor underlying political tensions and ethnic violence.
 * Food security – Food security requires that all people at all times have both physical and economic access to basic food. According to the United Nations, the overall availability of food is not a problem, rather the problem often is the poor distribution of food and a lack of purchasing power. In the past, food security problems have been dealt with at both national and global levels. However, their impacts are limited. According to the UN, the key is to tackle the problems relating to access to assets, work and assured income (related to economic security).
 * Health security – Health security aims to guarantee a minimum protection from diseases and unhealthy lifestyles. In developing countries, the major causes of death traditionally were infectious and parasitic diseases, whereas in industrialized countries, the major killers were diseases of the circulatory system. Today, lifestyle-related chronic diseases are leading killers worldwide, with 80 percent of deaths from chronic diseases occurring in low- and middle-income countries. According to the United Nations, in both developing and industrial countries, threats to health security are usually greater for poor people in rural areas, particularly children. This is due to malnutrition and insufficient access to health services, clean water and other basic necessities.
 * Environmental security – Environmental security aims to protect people from the short- and long-term ravages of nature, man-made threats in nature, and deterioration of the natural environment. In developing countries, lack of access to clean water resources is one of the greatest environmental threats. In industrial countries, one of the major threats is air pollution. Global warming, caused by the emission of greenhouse gases, is another environmental security issue.
 * Personal security – Personal security aims to protect people from physical violence, whether from the state or external states, from violent individuals and sub-state actors, from domestic abuse, or from predatory adults. For many people, the greatest source of anxiety is crime, particularly violent crime.
 * Community security – Community security aims to protect people from the loss of traditional relationships and values and from sectarian and ethnic violence. Traditional communities, particularly minority ethnic groups are often threatened. About half of the world's states have experienced some inter-ethnic strife. The United Nations declared 1993 the Year of Indigenous People to highlight the continuing vulnerability of the 300 million Aboriginal people in 70 countries as they face a widening spiral of violence.
 * Political security – Political security is concerned with whether people live in a society that honors their basic human rights. According to a survey conducted by Amnesty International, political repression, systematic torture, ill-treatment, or disappearance was still practised in 110 countries. Human rights violations are most frequent during periods of political unrest. Along with repressing individuals and groups, governments may try to exercise control over ideas and information.

Since then, human security has been receiving more attention from key global development institutions, such as the World Bank. Tadjbakhsh, among others, traces the evolution of human security in international organizations, concluding that the concept has been manipulated and transformed considerably since 1994 to fit organizational interests.

Freedom from Fear vs Freedom from Want and beyond
In an ideal world, each of the UNDP's seven categories of threats (and perhaps others as a broader discussion might prioritize) would receive adequate global attention and resources. Yet attempts to implement this human security agenda have led to the emergence of two major schools of thought on how to best practice human security – '"Freedom from Fear"' and '"Freedom from Want"'. While the UNDP 1994 report originally argued that human security requires attention to both freedom from fear and freedom from want, divisions have gradually emerged over the proper scope of that protection (e.g. over what threats individuals should be protected from) and over the appropriate mechanisms for responding to these threats.

 * Freedom from Fear – This school seeks to limit the practice of Human Security to protecting individuals from violent conflicts while recognizing that these violent threats are strongly associated with poverty, lack of state capacity and other forms of inequities. This approach argues that limiting the focus to violence is a realistic and manageable approach towards Human Security. Emergency assistance, conflict prevention and resolution, and peace-building are the main concerns of this approach. Canada, for example, was a critical player in the efforts to ban landmines and has incorporated the "Freedom from Fear" agenda as a primary component in its own foreign policy. However, whether such a “narrow” approach can truly serve its purpose in guaranteeing more fruitful results remains to be an issue. For instance, the conflicts in Darfur are often used in questioning the effectiveness of the "Responsibility to Protect”, a key component of the Freedom from Fear agenda.
 * Freedom from Want – The school advocates a holistic approach in achieving human security and argues that the threat agenda should be broadened to include hunger, disease and natural disasters because they are inseparable concepts in addressing the root of human insecurity and they kill far more people than war, genocide and terrorism combined. Different from "Freedom from Fear", it expands the focus beyond violence with emphasis on development and security goals.

Despite their differences, these two approaches to human security can be considered complementary rather than contradictory. Expressions to this effect include:

 * Franklin D. Roosevelt's famous Four Freedoms speech of 1941, in which "Freedom from Want" is characterized as the third and "Freedom from Fear" is the fourth such fundamental, universal, freedom.
 * The Government of Japan considers Freedom from Fear and Freedom from Want to be equal in developing Japan's foreign policy. Moreover, the UNDP 1994 called for the world's attention to both agendas.
 * Surin Pitsuwan, the Secretary-General of ASEAN in 2008-2012 cites theorists such as Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau and Hume to conclude that "human security is the primary purpose of organizing a state in the beginning.". He goes on to observe that the 1994 Human Development Report states that it is "reviving this concept" and suggests that the authors of the 1994 HDR may be alluding to Franklin Roosevelt's Four Freedoms speech without literally citing that presentation.

Although "freedom from fear" and "freedom from want" are the most commonly referred to categories of human security practice, an increasing number of alternative ideas continue to emerge on how to best practice human security. Among them:
 * Paul James. James asks two apparently simple questions: Firstly, why, if 'the human’ as a category by definition encompasses all considerations of governance, the state and the military, does military security continue to be treated as prior, more significant, or even equal to human security. By contrast, "when children play ‘category’ games", he says, "they implicitly understand such issues of ordering". Secondly, why does human security get narrowly defined in terms of liberal notions of 'freedom': freedom from want and freedom from fear? In response to these two questions, he provides the following alternative definition, with human security encompassing military security:
 * Human security can be defined as one of the foundational conditions of being human, including both (1) the sustainable protection and provision of the material conditions for meeting the embodied needs of people, and (2) the protection of the variable existential conditions for maintaining a dignified life. Within this definition, it then makes sense that the core focus of human-security endeavours should be on the most vulnerable. It makes sense that risk management should be most responsive to immediate events or processes that have both an extensive and intensive impact in producing material and existential vulnerabilities of people in general or a category of persons across a particular locale.

 * G. King and C. Murray. King and Murray try to narrow down the human security definition to one's "expectation of years of life without experiencing the state of generalized poverty". In their definition, the "generalized poverty" means "falling below critical thresholds in any domain of well-being"; and it is in the same article, they give a brief review and categories of "Domains of Well-being". This set of definitions is similar to "freedom from want" but more concretely focused on some value system.
 * Caroline Thomas. She regards human security as describing "a condition of existence" which entails basic material needs, human dignity, including meaningful participation in the life of the community, and an active and substantive notion of democracy from the local to the global.
 * Roland Paris. He argues that many ways to define "human security" are related to a certain set of values and lose the neutral position. So he suggests to take human security as a category of research. As such, he gives a 2*2 matrix to illustrate the security studies field.

The first university textbook of human security, edited by Alexander Lautensach and Sabina Lautensach, appeared in open access form in 2020. According to their Four Pillar Model, human security rests on the four pillars of sociopolitical security, economic security, environmental security and health security. Because of its focus on the long term as well as on immediate needs, the environmental pillar of human security assumes prime significance. It necessitates our attention to the utter dependence of human welfare on the integrity of ecological support structures.
 * Sabina Alkire. Different with those approaches seek to narrow down and specify the objective of human security, Sabina Alkire pushes the idea a step further as "to safeguard the vital core of all human lives from critical pervasive threats, without impeding long-term human fulfilment". In a concept as such, she suggests the "vital core" cover a minimal or basic or fundamental set of functions related to survival, livelihood and dignity; and all institutions should at least and necessarily protect the core from any intervention.
 * Lyal S. Sunga. In 2009, Professor Sunga argued that a concept of human security that is fully informed by international human rights law, international humanitarian law, international criminal law and international refugee law, and which takes into account the relevant international legal norms prohibiting the use of force in international relations, will likely prove more valuable to international legal theory and practice over the longer term, than a concept of human security which does not meet these conditions because these fields of law represent the objectified political will of States rather than the more subjective biases of scholars.

Relationship with traditional security
Coined in the early 1990s, the term human security has been used by thinkers who have sought to shift the discourse on security away from its traditional state-centered orientation to the protection and advancement of individuals within societies. Human security emerged as a challenge to ideas of traditional security, but human and traditional or national security are not mutually exclusive concepts. It has been argued that, without human security, traditional state security cannot be attained and vice versa.

Traditional security is about a state's ability to defend itself against external threats. Traditional security (often referred to as national security or state security) describes the philosophy of international security predominance since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 and the rise of the nation-states. While international relations theory includes many variants of traditional security, from realism to liberalism, the fundamental trait that these schools share is their focus on the primacy of the nation-state.

The following table contrasts four differences between the two perspectives:

Relationship with development
Human security also challenged and drew from the practice of international development.

Traditionally, embracing liberal market economics was considered to be the universal path for economic growth, and thus development for all humanity. Yet, continuing conflict and human rights abuses following the end of the Cold War and the fact that two-thirds of the global population seemed to have gained little from the economic gains of globalization, led to fundamental questions about the way development was practiced. Accordingly, human development has emerged in the 1990s to challenge the dominant paradigm of liberal economy in the development community. Human development proponents argue that economic growth is insufficient to expand people's choices or capabilities, areas such as health, education, technology, the environment, and employment should not be neglected.

Human security could be said to further enlarge the scope for examining the causes and consequences of underdevelopment, by seeking to bridge the divide between development and security. Too often, militaries didn't address or factor in the underlying causes of violence and insecurity while development workers often underplayed the vulnerability of development models to violent conflict. Human security springs from a growing consensus that these two fields need to be more fully integrated in order to enhance security for all.

The paper "Development and Security" by Frances Stewart argues that security and development are deeply interconnected.
 * Human security forms an important part of people’s well-being, and is therefore an objective of development. An objective of development is “the enlargement of human choices”. Insecurity cuts life short and thwarts the use of human potential, thereby affecting the reaching of this objective.
 * Lack of human security has adverse consequences on economic growth, and therefore development. Some development costs are obvious. For example, in wars, people who join the army or flee can no longer work productively. Also, destroying infrastructure reduces the productive capacity of the economy.
 * Imbalanced development that involves horizontal inequalities is an important source of conflict. Therefore, vicious cycles of lack of development which leads to conflict, then to lack of development, can readily emerge. Likewise, virtuous cycles are possible, with high levels of security leading to development, which further promotes security in return.

Further, it could also be said that the practice of human development and human security share three fundamental elements:

 * First, human security and human development are both people-centered. They challenge the orthodox approach to security and development i.e. state security and liberal economic growth respectively. Both emphasize people are to be the ultimate ends but not means. Both treat humans as agents and should be empowered to participate in the course.
 * Second, both perspectives are multidimensional. Both address people's dignity as well as their material and physical concerns.
 * Third, both schools of thought consider poverty and inequality as the root causes of individual vulnerability.

Despite these similarities, the relationship with development is one of the most contested areas of human security. "Freedom from fear" advocates, such as Andrew Mack, argue that human security should focus on the achievable goals of decreasing individual vulnerability to violent conflict, rather than broadly defined goals of economic and social development. Others, such as Tadjbakhsh and Chenoy, argue that human development and human security are inextricably linked since progress in one enhances the chances of progress in another while failure in one increases the risk of failure of another.

The following table is adopted from Tadjbakhsh to help clarify the relationship between these two concepts.

Relationship with human rights
Human security is indebted to the human rights tradition (the ideas of natural law and natural rights). The development of the human security model can be seen to have drawn upon ideas and concepts fundamental to the human rights tradition. Both approaches use the individual as the main referent and both argue that a wide range of issues (i.e. civil rights, cultural identity, access to education and healthcare) are fundamental to human dignity. A major difference between the two models is in their approach to addressing threats to human dignity and survival. Whilst the human rights framework takes a legalistic approach, the human security framework, by utilizing a diverse range of actors, adopts flexible and issue-specific approaches, which can operate at local, national or international levels.

The nature of the relationship between human security and human rights is contested among human security advocates. Some human security advocates argue that the goal of human security should be to build upon and strengthen the existing global human rights legal framework. However, other advocates view the human rights legal framework as part of the global insecurity problem and believe that a human security approach should propel us to move above and beyond this legalistic approach to get at the underlying sources of inequality and violence which are the root causes of insecurity in today's world.

Relationship with non-governmental organizations
See also: Non-governmental organization

The term NGO (Non-Government Organisation) cannot be simply defined due to complexities surrounding its structure, environment and complex relations it shares with its internal factions; being its organisational mission, membership and sources of funding, and external factors such as the relationship it shares with actors; detailing the economic, political and societal constructs they may be bound by. A generic understanding of the term may refer to the actions taken in the interests of independent, voluntary contributors which exist independently from governments and corporations, designed to represent and provide a collective voice to individuals regarding issues. These issues cover contributions to the fields and industries of human development, health and nutrition, human rights and education, and environmental concerns; all of which influence and affect human security.

The traditional roles of NGOs may be classified into three components, in accordance with Lewis:

-	Implementer: refers to the mobilisation of resources in order to aid the provision of goods and services, such as the act of service delivery.

-	Catalyst: refers to the emotional and psychological aspect of the NGOs ability to inspire, facilitate or contribute to spur action or thinking.

-	Partner: refers to the NGOs relationships shared with external actors such as governments, donors or the private sector players through joint activities, or projects with communities, with the purpose to strengthen the relationship between the NGOs and these partners in a mutually beneficial fashion.

The expansion of these roles have culminated in assisting the creation of a society where NGOs serve as important players in the global arena in regards to maintaining human security. Due to this increasing influence and the emergence of growing natural and man-made disasters, NGOs now are contracted by governments in order to adequately respond to crises, as well as assist individual or collectivised groups of citizens in lobbying their interests; thus culminating in the ability to enact, influence and change government agendas. However, NGOs are still largely dependent on certain levels of government funding, hence critics may argue that NGOs pose the ability to potentially damage issues of human security due to this financial dependence. Despite these critiques, the focus, expertise and infrastructure developed by NGOs through their activities linked with human development and human rights allow them to make unique contributions to human security provision.

Relationship with the environment
Comprehensive human security attempts to unify environmental security together with social (societal) security. A great number of intertwined environmental and social components together create the framework for comprehensive human security under the assumption that neither of those two categories is attainable in the long run without synergy between the two. That is to say that the trends in environmental, resource, and population stresses are intensifying and will increasingly determine the quality of human life on our planet and as such are a large determining factor of our social security.

Arthur H. Westing posits that the two interdependent branches of comprehensive human security can be broken down into a series of subcomponents to better achieve optimal environmental and social security. Environmental security is composed of two subcomponents: (a) Rational resource utilization, that is resource use that “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Social security can be simplified to components of (a) Established political safeguards, (b) Economic safeguards, (c) Personal safeguards, and (d) Military safeguards.

The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) states that a major goal of comprehensive human security is to “transmit practical recommendations to policy-makers on how to strengthen human security through better environmental management and more effective natural resource governance.” The overreaching goal being a pervasive global mindset that recognizes the interdependent natures of the natural environment and our collective social security.

Gender and human security
Human security focuses on the serious neglect of gender concerns under the traditional security model. Traditional security's focus on external military threats to the state has meant that the majority of threats women face have been overlooked. It has recently been argued that these forms of violence are often overlooked because expressions of masculinity in contexts of war have become the norm. By focusing on the individual, the human security model aims to address the security concerns of both women and men equally. However, as of recent conflicts, it is believed that the majority of war casualties are civilians and that "such a conclusion has sometimes led to the assumptions that women are victimized by war to a greater extent than men, because the majority of adult civilians are women, and when the populations of civilian women and children are added together, they outnumber male combatants. Furthermore, in the post-war context women survivors generally outnumber men and so it is often said that women as a group bear a greater burden for post-war recovery". Women are often victims of violence and conflict: they form the majority of civilian deaths; the majority of refugees; and, are often the victims of cruel and degrading practices, such as rape. Women's security is also threatened by unequal access to resources, services and opportunities. The UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women, as of 1995, suggested that the problem is not just a social one, but requires evaluation of the political institutions which uphold the unequal system of domination. Women's rights are neglected especially in the Middle East and Southeast Asian regions where customary practices are still prevalent. Although there are different opinions on the issue of customary practices, it infringes upon human security's notion that women and men are innated with equal human rights. Attempts to eradicate such violent customary practices require political and legal approaches where human security in relation to gender should be brought up as the main source of assertion. Such cruel customary practices as honor killing, burning brides and widows, child marriage are still in existence because of women's vulnerability in economic independence and security. Human security in relationship to gender tries to overthrow such traditional practices that are incompatible to the rights of women. Also, human security seeks to empower women, through education, participation and access, as gender equality is seen as a necessary precondition for peace, security and a prosperous society.

Rape as a weapon of war theory
During times of conflict, certain varieties of masculinity come to be celebrated by the State, and these varieties of behaviors can influence how a population's combatants come to behave, or are expected to behave during crises. These behaviors range from acting aggressively and exemplifying hyper-masculine behaviors, to playing upon the rise of "nationalist or ethnic consciousness" to secure "political support for the cause and to undermine "the Other". Overtly militaristic societies have utilized rape and other sexually violent acts to further their gains within the context of war, but also by using such practices of violence as rewards to the (often male) combatants. This tactic undermines the enemy's morale, as they are seen as "unable to protect their women".

The category of human
Recent feminist critiques of Human Security often find difficulties with the concept and categorization of "Human". This categorization is made under the influence of certain value systems which are inherently exclusive by their nature. For instance, the liberal definition of "human" is: someone that is independent and capable of making decisions for themselves. This definition is problematic because it excludes persons who are not independent, such as persons with disabilities, from human security rights. If Human Security was to be entirely inclusive it would need to challenge the current definition of "human" on which it operates and acknowledge that different abilities also require rights.

Eurocentrism
The concept of human security has developed out of the precepts put forth by the United Nations, wherein there has been a critique of Human Security's focus on what is deemed acceptable behaviors. Human security perspectives view practices such as child marriage and female genital mutilation as a threat to human (more specifically female) security and well-being in the Global North, while it is more common that these events occur predominately in the Global Southern states. Thus it is seen by states with a traditional human security outlook, to see it as their duty to intervene and perpetuate this eurocentric ideal of what human security looks like, and what is best to protect the familiar concept of women. This can be seen as an infringement on the traditional practices found within some sovereign states of the Global South, and a threat to ways of life and processes of development.

Prevent, react, and rebuild
Human security seeks to address underlying causes and long-term implications of conflicts instead of simply reacting to problems, as the traditional security approach is often accused of doing. "The basic point of preventive efforts is, of course, to reduce, and hopefully eliminate, the need for intervention altogether," while an investment in rehabilitation or rebuilding seeks to ensure that former conflicts do not breed future violence. The concepts of prevention and rebuilding are clearly embraced as the “responsibility to prevent” and well elaborated in "The Responsibility to protect report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty."

Relationship with humanitarian action
In several senses there is a natural fit between human security concepts and humanitarian principles. The concern with the protection of people or individuals is a core humanitarian value as well as of human security. In this sense it shares human security's merging of development and security and the casting of the protection of life as the referent object.

Human security and humanitarian action also shared a similar process of evolution. The rise of the human security discourse in the 1990s paralleled an equally rapid expansion in humanitarian roles and a broadening in the objectives of humanitarianism that was labeled the ‘new humanitarianism’. Humanitarian assistance, once encompassing a narrow set of emergency-based life-saving interventions conducted by a small group of relatively independent actors, became ‘an organising principle for intervention in internal conflicts, a tool for peacebuilding and the starting point for addressing poverty, as well as a palliative in times of conflict and crisis.’ It also merged with development concerns such as the promotion of social justice and societal cohesion.

The human security discourse was also used as a tool to resist aid policies becoming hijacked by narrow security concerns. States, such as the Republic of Ireland, promoted the Human Security concept as a way to ensure a more balanced approach to security and development issues both nationally and within the EU.

Despite the sense of a natural fit between human security concepts and humanitarian principles, they have enjoyed a difficult relationship. Human security perspectives have the potential to interfere with the traditionally apolitical nature of humanitarianism in conflict situations, leading to a blurring of the boundaries between politico-military interventions and those designed primarily to reduce suffering. In another sense the emphasis on human security has legitimised the idea of armed international intervention as a "moral duty" if states are deemed incapable or unwilling to protect their citizens. Similarly, the adoption of 'holistic' security and development strategies within UN Integrated peacekeeping missions is viewed by some as having the potential to compromise humanitarian principles.

Authors such as White and Cliffe drew attention to the way in which the 'broadening of aid objectives from pure survival support towards rehabilitation, development and/ or peace-building' led to the 'dilution of commitment to core humanitarian principles'. Furthermore, many humanitarian organisations have sought to develop rights-based approaches to assistance strategies which challenge the apolitical approach of traditional humanitarianism. Rights-based approaches view poverty and vulnerability as rooted in power relations – specifically, the denial of power, which is itself related to the denial of human rights. Hence rights-based approaches to humanitarian action relate the achievement of security for marginalized people to the realization of their human rights and often to broader social change. Multimandate humanitarian organisations that seek more inclusive and participatory forms of citizenship and governance and the achievement of broader social rights outcomes, therefore, risk enmeshing apolitical humanitarian responses in advocacy programmes that push for broader social changes.

Practice
While there are numerous examples of the human security approach in action, two notable global political events with direct ties to the human security agenda include the development of Responsibility to Protect (R3P) principles guiding humanitarian intervention and the passage of the Ottawa Treaty banning anti-personnel landmines.

Humanitarian intervention
The application of human security is highly relevant within the area of humanitarian intervention, as it focuses on addressing the deep-rooted and multi-factorial problems inherent in humanitarian crises, and offers more long-term resolutions. In general, the term humanitarian intervention generally applies to when a state uses force against another state in order to alleviate suffering in the latter state (See, humanitarian intervention).

Under the traditional security paradigm, humanitarian intervention is contentious. As discussed above, the traditional security paradigm places emphasis on the notion of states. Hence, the principles of state sovereignty and non-intervention that are paramount in the traditional security paradigm make it difficult to justify the intervention of other states in internal disputes. Through the development of clear principles based on the human security concept, there has been a step forward in the development of clear rules of when humanitarian intervention can occur and the obligations of states that intervene in the internal disputes of a state.

These principles on humanitarian intervention are the product of a debate pushed by United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan. He posed a challenge to the international community to find a new approach to humanitarian intervention that responded to its inherent problems. In 2001, the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) produced the "Responsibility to protect", a comprehensive report detailing how the “right of humanitarian intervention” could be exercised. It was considered a triumph for the human security approach as it emphasized and gathered much needed attention to some of its main principles:

 * The protection of individual welfare is more important than the state. If the security of individuals is threatened internally by the state or externally by other states, state authority can be overridden.
 * Addressing the root causes of humanitarian crises (e.g. economic, political or social instability) is a more effective way to solve problems and protect the long-term security of individuals.
 * Prevention is the best solution. A collective understanding of the deeper social issues along with a desire to work together is necessary to prevent humanitarian crises, thereby preventing a widespread absence of human security within a population (which may mean investing more in development projects).

The report illustrates the usefulness of the human security approach, particularly its ability to examine the cause of conflicts that explain and justify humanitarian intervention. In addition, it could also act as a paradigm for identifying, prioritizing and resolving large transnational problems, one of the fundamental factors that act as a stimulus for humanitarian intervention in the first place. However, human security still faces difficulties concerning the scope of its applicability, as large problems requiring humanitarian intervention usually are built up from an array of socio-political, cultural and economic problems that may be beyond the limitations of humanitarian projects. On the other hand, successful examples of the use of human security principles within interventions can be found.

The success of humanitarian intervention in international affairs is varied. As discussed above, humanitarian intervention is a contentious issue. Examples of humanitarian intervention illustrate, that in some cases intervention can lead to disastrous results, as in Srebrenica and Somalia. In other cases, a lack of clarity as to the rules of when intervention can occur has resulted in tragic inaction, as was witnessed during the Rwandan genocide. One example of a successful humanitarian intervention and also of humanitarian principles being applied is East Timor which, prior to its independence, was plagued with massive human rights abuses by pro-Indonesian militias and an insurgency war led by indigenous East Timorese against Indonesian forces. A peacekeeping mission was deployed to safeguard the move to independence and the UN established the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET). This not only dealt with traditional security priorities, but also helped in nation-building projects, coordinated humanitarian aid and civil rehabilitation, illustrating not only a successful humanitarian intervention but also an effective application of human security principles.

Anti-personnel landmines
In contrast to the traditional security discourse which sees security as focused on protecting state interests, human security proponents believe that Anti-personnel mines could not be viable weapons of war due to the massive collateral damage they cause, their indiscriminate nature and persistence after conflict. In particular, they argue that anti-personnel mines differ from most weapons, which have to be aimed and fired since they have the potential to kill and maim long after the warring parties have ceased fighting. The United Nations has reckoned that landmines are at least ten times more likely to kill or injure a civilian after a conflict than a combatant during hostilities. The effects are also long-lasting. The ICBL estimates that anti-personnel mines were the cause of 5,751 casualties in 2006. Whereas traditionally, states would justify these negative impacts of mines due to the advantage they give on the battlefield, under the human security lens, this is untenable as the wide-ranging post-conflict impact on the day-to-day experience of individuals outweighs the military advantage.

The Ottawa Convention, which led to the banning of anti-personnel landmines, is seen as a victory for the Human Security agenda. The Ottawa Convention has proved to be a huge step forward in the 'Freedom from Fear' approach. In Ottawa, the negotiations were moved outside traditional disarmament forums, thus avoiding the entrenched logic of traditional arms control measures. According to Don Hubert, an advocate of Human Security from the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs, the main reason for its success was a multilateral focus. While INGO's like the UN and the ICRC remain the key players along with middle power states like Norway and Canada, its actual power and push comes from the involvement of a host of civil society actors (NGOs) and the general public. Human Security proponents believe that this treaty has set new standards in humanitarian advocacy and has acted as a landmark in international lawmaking for a more secure world.

Critics of the treaty, however, caution against complacency on its success. Many states, they point out, have neither signed nor ratified this convention. They include China, Russia and the United States who are major contributors to the global weapons trade. Second, even though there were a diverse group of civil society actors, the real influence on the treaty came from the ones in the 'global north'. Third, cynics may argue that the success of this campaign stems from the fact that these weapons were outdated and of limited military value and this treaty just helped to accelerate a process that would have happened anyway.

Criticism
In making an assessment of the pros and cons of the human security concept, Walter Dorn includes several additional criticisms. In particular, he asks whether it is in fact as radical a departure in foreign policy terms as is sometimes claimed. Dorn argues that the international community has been concerned with issues of human safety since at least the time of the establishment of the International Committee of the Red Cross in the 1860s. Stuart Gordon argues that Canada, one of its principal adherents, has in many ways simply recast its traditional Pearsonian foreign policy in the language of human security. Dorn also questioned whether the concept was really necessary ‘since all the initiatives in the human security agenda were already advancing before the advent of the concept.’ Finally, he suggests ways that the concept may be counterproductive. In their effort to fortify against ‘virtually limitless UN interventionism’ governments may repress ‘their populations into servility." Still, he sees an important role for the concept.

Richard Jolly and Deepayan Basu Ray, in their UNDP report, suggest that the key criticisms of human security include: Human security does not have any definite boundaries, therefore anything and everything could be considered a risk to security. This makes the task of policy formulation nearly impossible; Human security, when broadened to include issues like climate change and health, complicates the international machinery for reaching decisions or taking action on the threats identified; Human security risks engaging the military in issues best tackled through non-military means; Human security under the UN risks raising hopes about the UN's capacity, which it cannot fulfil.

Other authors, such as Roland Paris, argue that human security is not such a fundamental recasting of the security debate in terms of a central struggle ‘between Realist, traditional, state-based, interest-based, approaches and new, Liberal cosmopolitan, de-territorialised, values-based approaches, which focus on individual human needs. ‘ Rather, he suggests that the talk of two radically different ‘paradigms’ has been much exaggerated.

Formulation of a Human Security Index and an environment for discussing same
As if to answer the points above, a Human Security Index was prototyped and released in 2008. Project coordinator D. A. Hastings notes that "if one were challenged to create an index on the condition of people-centric Human Security, such as the authors of the Human Development Index faced in 1990 and expanded qualitatively in 1994, one could now begin to do so – at least for the sake of discussion and resultant improvements." The release document and a United Nations Bangkok Working Paper publish and discuss the original approach, which is based partly on:
 * The original Human Development Index of the United Nations Development Programme, made more geographically complete (to 230+ countries) as described in a report issued by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific.
 * The essay on Human Security in the 1994 Human Development Report.
 * An Equitability/Inclusiveness Enhanced Human Development Index – in which each of the components of the HDI (education, health, and income) are modified by an indicator of equitability in an attempt to adjust, for example, for the gap between the indicator of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Per Capita (adjusted for purchasing power parity) and the desired measure of financial resources "in the pocket" of a typical person in a country. In that index some countries with relatively equitable ratings compared to their Human Development Index (such as Iceland, the Slovak Republic, and Estonia) do relatively well, whereas some countries with relatively inequitable ratings compared to their HDI (such as Ireland, Greece, and the USA) do less well.
 * A Social Fabric Index which enumerates human security with respect to the environment, diversity, peacefulness, freedom from corruption, and info empowerment. This was blended with the Human Development Index to form the prototype Human Security Index.

A 2010 enhancement to the HSI recast the composite index around a trinity of Economic, Environmental, and Social Fabric Indices. The result is thus conceptually similar to the Triple Bottom Line of Corporate Social Responsibility as described by John Elkington, as well as to the stated goals of the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress. The release note of HSI Version 2 also notes efforts to balance local and global context, individual and society concerns, left-right political issues, east-west and north-south cultural and social issues. Current Version 2 of the HSI ingests about 30 datasets and composite indicators, and covers 232 countries and dependencies. It is released at HumanSecurityIndex.org.

Considerable differences in national ratings and standings have been noted between the HSI and indicators such as GDP per capita or the Human Development Index. Several small island countries plus Bhutan, Botswana, and some central-eastern European countries do considerably better in the HSI than they do in GDP per capita or HDI. Conversely, Greece and some Eurozone peers such as Ireland and Spain, several countries in the Gulf, Israel, Equatorial Guinea, the US and Venezuela do worse in the HSI than in GDP per capita or HDI. Influential factors vary (as is viewed in the data and discussions on the HumanSecurityIndex.org Website), but include diversity and income equality, peacefulness, and governance.

title: Human security


text:
Category:Vermivora

This category is for birds in the genus Vermivora

title: Category:Vermivora


text:
Talk:List of UNESCO Biosphere Reserves in China

Untitled
Hi Lexor. I agree with the general intent of removing caps on non-proper nouns, but here "Biosphere Reserves" is not used in the generic sense but is indeed a proper noun, referring to the official UNESCO conservation designation. I suggest reverting to the old title. (See World Network of Biosphere Reserves.) Lawrence Lavigne 05:19, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)


text:
Tribulus terrestris

Tribulus terrestris is an annual plant in the caltrop family (Zygophyllaceae) widely distributed around the world. It is adapted to thrive in dry climate locations in which few other plants can survive.

It is native to warm temperate and tropical regions in southern Eurasia and Africa. It has been unintentionally introduced to North America and Australia. An aggressive and hardy invasive species, T. terrestris is widely known as a noxious weed because of its small woody fruit – the bur – having long sharp and strong spines which easily penetrate surfaces, such as bare feet or thin shoes of crop workers and other pedestrians, the rubber of bicycle tires, and the mouths and skin of grazing animals.

Names
Like many weedy species, this plant has numerous common names according to the world region, including goathead, bull's head, caltrop, cat-head, devil's eyelashes, devil's-thorn, devil's-weed, puncturevine, and tackweed.

Description
Tribulus terrestris is a taprooted herbaceous plant that grows as a summer annual in temperate climates.

Growth pattern
The stems radiate from the crown to a diameter of about 10 cm to over 1 m, often branching. They are usually prostrate, forming flat patches, though they may grow more upwards in shade or among taller plants.

Leaves and stem
Stems branch from the crown and are densely hairy. Leaves are opposite and pinnately compound. Densely hairy leaflets are opposite and up to 3 mm long.

Inflorescence
The flowers are 4–10 mm wide, with five lemon-yellow petals, five sepals, and ten stamens. In Southern California, it blooms from April through October, where it is highly invasive in waste places and disturbed sites.

Fruit
After the flower blooms, a fruit develops that easily falls apart into five burs. The burs are hard and bear two to four sharp spines, 10 mm long and 4-6 mm broad point-to-point. These burs strikingly resemble goats' or bulls' heads, characteristics which give the bur its common names in some regions. The "horns" are sharp enough to puncture bicycle tires and other air-filled tires. They can also cause painful injury to bare feet and can injure the mouths of livestock grazing on the plant.

Within each bur, seeds are stacked on top of each other, separated by a hard membrane. As an adaptation to dry climates, the largest seed germinates first, while the others may wait until more moisture is available before germinating. The bur spines point upward, where they stick into feet and fur of animals, serving the purpose of seed dispersal. This causes damage to domesticated livestock and degrades wool.

Range and habitat
T. terrestris is now widespread throughout the world from latitudes 35°S to 47°N. It is distributed across warm temperate and tropical regions of southern Europe, southern Asia, throughout Africa, New Zealand, and Australia. It is also present across southern North America and in Central and South America. Over the 20th century, it appeared in California and became distributed northward, eventually appearing in British Columbia, Canada where it is classified as a noxious weed.

A network of fine rootlets arise from the taproot allow the plant to survive in arid conditions. It grows in almost any soil, but thrives in dry, loose, sandy soils, and even in sand or in deserts. It can prosper in heavier soils, especially if fertile or moist, and on compacted soils along roadsides.

Etymology
The Greek word, τρίβολος meaning 'water-chestnut', translated into Latin as tribulos. The Latin name tribulus originally meant the caltrop (a spiky weapon of similar shape), but in Classical times the word already meant this plant as well.

Cultivation
The plant is widely naturalized in the Americas and also in Australia south of its native range. In some states in the United States, it is considered a noxious weed and an invasive species. It is a declared plant (infestations described under "caltrop") in South Australia.

Uses
The leaves and shoots are eaten in East Asia. The stems have been used as a thickener, added to diluted buttermilk to give it the appearance of undiluted buttermilk. There is some evidence that T. terrestris was used in traditional medicine.

Dietary supplement
Although its extract has been used as a dietary supplement since the 1980s in belief that it increases testosterone levels to aid body building or sexual enhancement in men, T. terrestris did not consistently affect testosterone levels in controlled studies, has not been proven to be safe, and may adversely interact with prescription drugs. High-quality research on T. terrestris extract has not been conducted, and no reviews indicate that it has strength-enhancing properties, or anabolic steroid effects for use as a bodybuilding supplement or sexual enhancement. The Australian Institute of Sport discourages athletes from using T. terrestris supplements.

T. terrestris is used as a tonic and is supposed to enhance potency. This effect was demonstrated in laboratory studies in rats. The animals also gained weight. Further research showed an increase in androgen receptors in the rat brain.

Phytochemistry
Phytochemicals of T. terrestris include steroidal saponins.

Eradication
In areas where it is an invasive species, T. terrestris is often sought to be eradicated. However, T. terrestris is considered a hardy plant, and its seeds remain viable for up to three years, making complete eradication difficult. T. terrestris grows well in barren and disturbed soil, but does not thrive in soil that is already colonized by a vigorous ground-cover. Preventing a new outbreak of T. terrestris is the most effective strategy. In barren, compacted soil, cultivate the soil and plant ground-cover to exclude T. terrestris. Cover disturbed soil with a barrier that will keep seeds from being deposited. Where ground-cover is newly planted, diligently monitor to ensure no T. terrestris seeds have sprouted in the area.

Physical eradication
T. terrestris can be cleared manually by using a multi-year removal and suppression strategy. Removing the plant should be done before or during flowering to prevent seed formation (late spring and early summer in many areas). Removal can be entire, by gripping the plant at the top of the taproot and pulling upward; or partial, by using a hoe to cut the plant off at the taproot. Partial removal will allow regrowth, but may be the only option in compacted soil; in this case, repeated cutting will exhaust the plant's energy storage. This will greatly reduce the prevalence of the weed the following year. An effective multi-year strategy consists of continuing to pull or cut T. terrestris over the course of at least three years, preventing any new seeds from forming, and allowing the oldest viable seeds in the seed bank to sprout. To avoid recolonization, the area should be planted with a quality ground-covering plant that will block light and access to bare soil, and develop a root structure able to exclude or compete with T. terrestris.

Aerating compacted sites and planting competitive desirable plants, including broad-leaved grasses such as St. Augustine, can reduce the effect of T. terrestris by reducing resources available to the weed.

In June 2014, the town of Irrigon, Oregon, announced it would pay a bounty of one dollar for each large trash bag of puncturevine.

Chemical
When working to eradicate large areas of T. terrestris, a mix of manual and chemical removal is most effective. Chemical control poses risks to other plants, soil chemistry and biology, water quality, and animals; it should only be utilized if manual control is insufficiently effective. Pre-emergent chemicals can be most effective in combination with manual control; it prevents the annual seeds of T. terrestris from sprouting to make new plants. This, in combination with removal of existing plants, can swiftly exhaust the seed-bank. Products containing oryzalin, benefin, or trifluralin will provide partial control of germinating seeds. These must be applied prior to germination (late winter to midspring).

After plants have emerged from the soil (postemergent), products containing 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), glyphosate, and dicamba are effective on T. terrestris. Like most postemergents, they are more effectively maintained when caught small and young. Dicamba and 2,4-D will cause harm to most broad-leaved plants, so the user should take care to avoid over-application. They can be applied to lawns without injuring the desired grass. Glyphosate will kill or injure most plants, so it should only be used as a spot treatment or on solid stands of the weed. A product from DuPont called Pastora is highly effective but expensive and not for lawn use.

Biological
Two weevils, Microlarinus lareynii and M. lypriformis, native to India, France, and Italy, were introduced into the United States as biocontrol agents in 1961. Both species of weevils are available for purchase from biological suppliers, but purchase and release is not often recommended because weevils collected from other areas may not survive at the purchaser's location.

Microlarinus lareynii is a seed weevil that deposits its eggs in the young burr or flower bud. The larvae feed on and destroy the seeds before they pupate, emerge, disperse, and start the cycle over again. Its life cycle time is 19 to 24 days. Microlarinus lypriformis is a stem weevil that has a similar life cycle, excepting the location of the eggs, which includes the undersides of stems, branches, and the root crown. The larvae tunnel in the pith where they feed and pupate. Adults of both species overwinter in plant debris. Although the stem weevil is slightly more effective than the seed weevil when each is used alone, the weevils are most effective if used together and the T. terrestris plant is moisture-stressed.

Toxicity
Toxic compounds in the plant are known to cause liver damage when ingested at harmful dosages. When ingested, phylloerythrin accumulates in the blood as a byproduct of chlorophyll degradation; however, adverse reactions have not been confirmed in humans. In sheep, consumption of T. terrestris causes tribulosis, also known as 'geeldikkop', which is a type of photodermatitis. Two alkaloids that seem to cause limb paresis (staggers) in sheep that eat Tribulus terrestris are the beta-carboline alkaloids harman (harmane) and norharman (norharmane). The alkaloid content of dried foliage is about 44 mg/kg.

title: Tribulus terrestris