text:
Arjen Lucassen

Arjen Anthony Lucassen (born 3 April 1960) is a Dutch singer, songwriter, multi-instrumentalist musician and record producer best known for his long-running progressive metal/rock opera project Ayreon. Lucassen started his career in 1980 as the guitarist and backing vocalist of Dutch band Bodine as Iron Anthony, before joining Vengeance in 1984. After eight years he left the band, wanting to go into a more progressive direction, and released two years later an unsuccessful solo album entitled Pools of Sorrow, Waves of Joy under the nickname Anthony.

In 1995, Lucassen released an album uncredited to any artist called Ayreon: The Final Experiment, in which he sang, wrote every song and played most of the instruments. The album led to the creation of Ayreon; despite being relatively unknown at first, the project gained notable attention and praise with the release of its third album Into the Electric Castle, establishing Lucassen as a notable composer of rock operas. Following Ayreon's success, Lucassen has been involved in many other projects: he is the creator, composer and current guitarist/keyboardist of Star One, Guilt Machine, and The Gentle Storm, and the creator and former guitarist of Ambeon and Stream of Passion. He composes and writes most of his songs, but leaves the lyrics to his musical partners in some of his projects.

Lucassen plays a wide variety of instruments: his main instruments are guitar and keyboards, however he also plays bass, banjo and many others. Overall, in his career and including all his bands and projects (as principal instrumentalist/creative force or as a member), Lucassen has released twenty-six studio albums, four live albums, two EPs and seventeen singles. He has also made many minor participations alongside various artists including Shadow Gallery, After Forever, Within Temptation and Avantasia, and appears in over 50 albums.

Since the creation of Ayreon, Lucassen progressively made a name for himself under rock and metal reviewers, with many critics calling him a "genius",  and praising his composition abilities and originality. In his review of 01011001, AllMusic reviewer Cosmo Lee stated "Music this over the top almost defies criticism. Reviewing it is like reviewing the world's tallest building. It doesn't care; it just goes on and on."

Career
Lucassen's love of music was sparked in the 60s, when he became a big fan of The Beatles. He decided to learn guitar when he heard Ritchie Blackmore playing in Made in Japan. One of his first bands was called Mover, which he joined around the age of 18.

Bodine (1980–1984)
In 1980, Lucassen joined Bodine via their drummer Gerrard Haitsma, who was also the drum teacher of Mover's drummer. Under the nickname Iron Anthony, he was featured on their second album, Bold as Brass (1982), and their third and final album, Three Times Running (1983).

Lucassen later recalled about his years with Bodine: "on one side they were good musicians, extremely good musicians, the best drummer in Holland (Gerard Haitsma), an incredible guitar player and a very steddy [sic] bass player (Armand van der Hoff). And I actually learned how to play there, how to play very tight, how to play in tune, you know, to play solo not just fast but to play one note and do it good. But on the other hand, they were kind of boring guys, they were all 10 years older than me, they didn't like partying and stuff. And in those days I was young, I was 20, after the girls and after the party, you know. So it was a bit boring. And another problem in that band was that they didn't like melody, they were in love with AC/DC and stuff like that. And I always liked melodic music, already in those days I was into prog music. So I didn't like to be there, I wrote songs but they were just a little part of me."

In 1984, Lucassen left Bodine to join Vengeance; they disbanded shortly after.

Vengeance (1984–1992)
In 1984, the newly created band Vengeance played as supporting act for Bodine. When Lucassen, who had been impressed by their performance, was later contacted by the band to ask if he knew any potential replacement for their guitarist who had just left, he proposed himself and joined the band, leaving Bodine.

Regarding their original self-titled album released in 1984, Lucassen stated in a 2002 interview that the album was "horrible", adding "The songs were mostly finished when I joined the band. I think I wrote just two songs for that album and it was recorded very cheap, the sound is bad and the songs are not that good. So it's not a very strong album although you can already hear the potential". The band later established themselves as one of the most successful bands of the Netherlands at the time. He also recalled a concert in Germany cancelled at the last moment because "after the first night Vengeance wrecked the hotel, it was like $10,000 damage. We were not allowed to leave Germany, they took our equipment... so that was really sex, drugs and rock'n'roll!"

In 1989, the band was forced to fire their lead vocalist Leon Goewie, who was, according to Lucassen, "really crazy on stage. The only problem was that he was also crazy offstage. But he also liked to have a stiff drink now and then, if you know what I mean". Vengeance found little success with their new vocalist Ian Parry, and disbanded in 1992 after a surprisingly successful farewell tour.

While Lucassen pursued his solo career, Vengeance's label released The Last of the Fallen Heroes, promoted as a new studio album but actually a compilation of unfinished demos, in 1994. Goewie, who was heavily struggling as a musician after being fired from the band, later contacted Lucassen, asking him to write him songs. Lucassen wrote two songs, which were later featured on a new Vengeance album, Back from Flight 19, in 1997; despite participating to this new album, Lucassen did not re-join Vengeance. He later stated about Back from Flight 19 "I'm not so proud of that album. There's a couple of good songs but it's definitely not Vengeance."

Solo debuts (1992–1995)
After his departure, Lucassen first tried to create a new band, Planet Nine. However, according to his words in The Final Experiment book, "nobody even wanted to touch it". He released his first solo album, Pools of Sorrow, Waves of Joy, under the name "Anthony" in 1994. It was a commercial flop; according to Lucassen, "people didn't understand it. It wasn't hard rock, it wasn't prog or something. People thought, 'What's that he is doing now? He must be crazy!'"

Remembering this period, Lucassen stated "it was the period in my life when my girlfriend broke up with me, Vengeance broke up and I had no more record deal. So it was a horrible time".

Ayreon's debut and fame (1995–2000)
After his first unsuccessful solo album, Lucassen began recording The Final Experiment, which was released in 1995 as Ayreon: The Final Experiment on a small Dutch label, Transmission Records, with no artist noted. The album featured a wide array of musical styles, ranging from folk to progressive metal. It was soon followed by Ayreon's first single, "Sail Away to Avalon".

One year later, Lucassen decided to continue the project started with The Final Experiment, using Ayreon as the project's official name, and released a second album titled Actual Fantasy. The album later became the exception in Ayreon's discography, as the only Ayreon release that does not feature a single overarching story concept. The single "The Stranger from Within" from this album was also released. It was a relative commercial failure. Lucassen decided to make one more album, and to stop Ayreon if this one did not become a commercial success.

The same year, Lucassen, tired after the complexity of Ayreon, decided to do "something really simple, like punky or heavy versions of 1960s songs" and released Strange Hobby, a cover album without artist name or any personnel credited at the idea of the record company to make people curious about the record. According to Lucassen, "it didn't work because people knew how it was and they weren't so interested, so it was another flop. But I think it's good. Maybe the songs are too much alike, too short and after 10 songs you think, 'Oh, that's it?!' But I do like that album and I'm not ashamed that I did it.'"

In 1998 the commercially successful and critically acclaimed Ayreon album Into the Electric Castle was released. It is still currently considered one of the best albums in Lucassen's career. The good reception to the album made Lucassen decide to continue the project Ayreon.

The next two Ayreon albums, Universal Migrator Part 1: The Dream Sequencer and Universal Migrator Part 2: Flight of the Migrator, considered as two parts of the same story, were released simultaneously on 20 June 2000. The two sold well and were received positively, despite Part 1 being considered superior to Part 2 by most critics. "Temple of the Cat" from Part 1 was released as a single the same-year, and again the following year in an acoustic version.

First side projects; Ambeon and Star One (2000–2003)
In 2000 Lucassen created Ambeon, his first side-project since the creation of Ayreon, to explore a softer style of his music. The band consisted of him as composer and principal instrumentalist and then 14-year-old Astrid van der Veen as singer and lyricist. They released their only album Fate of a Dreamer in 2001, along with the single "Cold Metal". The album had a limited success. Ambeon's atmospheric sound draws from a wide variety of influences, including celtic, gothic, progressive music, and dark ambient. The songs on Fate of a Dreamer were mostly composed of different remixed pieces of songs from Ayreon albums. The name of the band was a play on the words ambient and Ayreon. The album went out of print shortly after its release and was considered rare, until Lucassen re-released it in December 2011, with the addition of a bonus CD containing previously unreleased tracks. Lucassen was not satisfied with the final result, stating "it's a bit cold for me. It's too electronic, a bit too much computers... And I didn't know how well Astrid could sing for I didn't know her and she didn't know me".

Van der Veen retired from music after the release of Fate of a Dreamer, leading to Lucassen stating that there'd most likely be no future Ambeon albums, despite the fact he would have liked it. Van der Veen eventually released a new record for herself in 2012 after a long battle with depression and addiction, but does not seem to intend on performing actively anymore.

In 2002, Lucassen created another side-project, entitled Star One; the only side-project to date he made more than one studio album with. Star One focused on four singers: Dan Swanö, Russell Allen, Floor Jansen and Damian Wilson; Lucassen played guitar, keyboards and hammond organ. Their first album Space Metal was released in 2002. The album also had limited success, although it was more successful than Ambeon. Live on Earth, the first live album in Lucassen's career which also included Ayreon songs, was released one year later.

The Human Equation and 01011001, Stream of Passion (2003–2008)
Four years after Universal Migrator, Lucassen released Ayreon's sixth album, The Human Equation. It was a commercial success, going No. 7 in the Dutch album charts, and some critics considered the album as Lucassen's best since Into the Electric Castle. )

Special editions of all Ayreon albums were released in 2004 when Lucassen switched label from Transmission to InsideOut Records; The new edition of The Final Experiment featured a bonus disc of newly recorded, semi-acoustic versions of songs from the album, while Actual Fantasy was entirely remixed and partially re-recorded, with the new version being titled Actual Fantasy: Revisited.

In 2005, Lucassen created Stream of Passion to make a more conventional progressive metal band with symphonic and gothic inspirations. He also wanted to showcase the talents of his friend and Mexican female vocalist Marcela Bovio, who also sang on The Human Equation and who had won a contest on Lucassen's website.

He recruited second guitarist Lori Linstruth (his future girlfriend), keyboardist Alejandro Millán (Bovio's then-boyfriend), bassist Johan van Stratum (Bovio's future husband), and drummer Davy Mickers, and started the band. As with Astrid van der Veen for Ambeon, Lucassen was in charge of composing the music, while letting Bovio write the lyrics. They released the album Embrace the Storm in 2005. Like Lucassen had done with Star One, Stream of Passion toured and released a live album, Live in the Real World, in 2006. Also like Star One, the tour featured many Ayreon songs, as well as songs from the album. He finally left the band in 2007, as he had planned beforehand. The band continued successfully without him: They subsequently released three studio albums, The Flame Within, Darker Days and A War of Our Own, before amicably disbanding in 2016.

In 2008, Lucassen released a new Ayreon album, 01011001, which achieved commercial success, reaching No. 2 in the Dutch album chart.

The album was meant to be the conclusion of the Ayreon storyline, and after its release Lucassen decided to temporarily stop Ayreon, because he was not inspired to continue and also because many critics (despite the album being well reviewed) noted that there was nothing new being offered on 01011001; he believed that he might make more Ayreon albums in the future, but that they would not follow the same storyline.

Ayreon hiatus, focus on other projects (2008–2012)
In February 2009 Lucassen announced on his website his new side-project: Guilt Machine. The project features a very limited line-up compared to other Lucassen side projects: himself on many instruments and backing vocals, Jasper Steverlinck (Arid) on lead vocals, Chris Maitland (ex-Porcupine Tree) on drums and Lori Linstruth (ex-Stream of Passion) on lead guitar. Their first album On This Perfect Day, released the same year, received a very good critical reception but was Lucassen's least commercially successful album in many years.

In 2010, Lucassen reunited the six other members of Star One, inactive since 2003, and released the band's second studio album Victims of the Modern Age. The album received critical acclaim and was a big commercial success. In December 2011 the Ambeon album Fate of a Dreamer, like the older Ayreon albums, was re-released with bonus tracks.

At the same time as that the Ambeon album was re-released, Lucassen was already busy composing and recording his next project. On 23 April 2012, Lucassen released Lost in the New Real, his first solo album since Pools of Sorrow, Waves of Joy 18 years before. On this album Lucassen sang all leading vocals, wrote all lyrics and played almost all instruments. Also, he asked the Dutch actor Rutger Hauer to provide narration between the tracks. Artwork for this album was done by Claudio Bergamin.

Ayreon revival and The Gentle Storm (2012–2017)
On 23 August 2012, Lucassen published on his YouTube channel that he started composing "a new project". On 9 October 2012, he revealed it via YouTube again to be a new Ayreon album, planned for 2013.

Responding to fan comments on his website, Lucassen stated on 12 October that it would probably take a year before the album was completed. He also stated that the album would be the start of a new story apart from the previous Ayreon albums, and confirmed the presence of Ed Warby as usual.

On late 2012, Tobias Sammet announced that Arjen would make some guest lead guitar works in his new Avantasia album, The Mystery of Time. This marked the second time both musicians have worked together, the first having been the Ayreon EP Elected, on the title-song, in which Tobias sang guest vocals.

On 26 March 2013, Lucassen revealed the name of the next Ayreon's album, The Theory of Everything. This album was released on 25 October and received positive reviews.

On 22 April 2014, Lucassen revealed that his new project would be a collaboration with Dutch singer Anneke van Giersbergen, who previously collaborated with him in Ayreon albums Into the Electric Castle and 01011001. He described it as "an epic double concept album, a combination of 'classical meets metal' and 'acoustic folk'." Lucassen's most recurrent collaborator Ed Warby was featured once again on drums, and it was his very first album featuring double bass among the instruments. He confirmed that Johan van Stratum from his former band Stream of Passion would play bass on the album. Also, due to "unforeseen problems", Warby had to re-record all his drums part in one day only.

On 2 September 2014, Lucassen revealed that his collaboration with van Giersbergen was actually a new band, called The Gentle Storm. A cover EP entitled The Gentle Storm Exclusive Tour CD, and their first album, The Diary, were both released in 2015, with van Giersbergen writing all the lyrics and him composing the music. The band toured in 2015, without him; however he was featured on a few acoustic shows by the band in the Netherlands.

Between 18 and 20 September 2015, a live version of The Human Equation, directed by Lucassen's former manager Yvette Boertje and featuring most of the original album's singers and musicians, took place for four shows. Although he was not involved in the creative process, Lucassen appeared at the end of each show, and acted as producer and mixer for the DVD/live album, entitled The Theater Equation and released on 17 June 2016.

On 6 October 2016, Lucassen's next project was announced to be a new Ayreon studio album. After revealing the cast one by one during the following months, he revealed its cover art and title, The Source, on 19 January 2017. The album was released on 28 April 2017 and was a commercial success, topping the albums charts in the Netherlands at its release.

Focus on Ayreon live performances (2017–present)
In November 2016, Lucassen announced the first ever official Ayreon concerts for September 2017, entitled Ayreon Universe. The show featured 16 singers and 11 instrumentalists, all of which had previously worked together with Lucassen on his studio albums. Unlike The Theater Equation, it consisted of unrelated songs from Ayreon performed after each other as in a traditional concert, with a few songs from Star One featured as well. One of the performances was released as a live album/DVD on 30 March 2018, titled Ayreon Universe – The Best of Ayreon Live.

On 7 December 2017, Lucassen stated that a new Ayreon concert would take place on 22 June 2018 at Graspop Metal Meeting, where they would headline the Marquee stage. It featured the same instrumentalists as the Ayreon Universe shows and most of its vocalists, along with Simone Simons, Barry Hay and Tom S. Englund, who had never performed live with Ayreon before, and Mark Jansen, who had never collaborated with Lucassen before; Lucassen himself also performed a few songs.

Between 13 and 15 September 2019, the album Into the Electric Castle was performed in Tilburg in its entirety similarly to The Theater Equation in 2015, this time as official Ayreon performances. Fish, Anneke van Giersbergen, Damian Wilson, Edward Reekers, Edwin Balogh, and George Oosthoek returned from the original cast, alongside Ed Warby and flutist Thijs van Leer, who also performed on the original album. Simone Simons and Mark Jansen of Epica, Praying Mantis singer John Jaycee Cuijpers, Marcela Bovio, Bovio's husband and VUUR bassist Johan van Stratum, and Ex Libris members Dianne van Giersbergen and Bob Wijtsma were also featured, with actor John de Lancie acting as narrator. It was released as the live album Electric Castle Live and Other Tales on 27 March 2020.

Ayreon was supposed to headline the Night of the Prog Festival in Germany on 18 July 2020 to perform Into the Electric Castle once again, however the event was cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

On 8 May 2020, Lucassen revealed on his YouTube channel that his next album would be an Ayreon album, titled Transitus and to be released the same year; the album has been released alongside a tie-in comic book on 25 September 2020.

Beginning 9 February 2021 on his Facebook page, Lucassen began teasing a new Star One album, On 6 October 2021 he revealed that it would be titled Revel in Time. The album was released on 18 February 2022 on different formats, followed by re-releases of Star One (11 March 2022) and Victims of the Modern Age (1 April 2022).

On 19 January 2023, it was announced that Lucassen had formed a new band called Arjen Lucassen's Supersonic Revolution. On 19 May 2023, they released the 1970s influenced album Golden Age of Music. Lucassen later collaborated with Simone Simons on her debut solo album Vermillion, which is set to be released on 23 August 2024.

Personal life
Lucassen stated that to him, "Music is everything. Both listening and creating. Even if I wouldn't be successful I would be creating music. Music chose me, I didn't choose music. I have no choice in the matter whatsoever!"

According to Lucassen, his self-made motto is "the meaning of life is to give life meaning", a sentence which he included in the Ayreon song "The Sixth Extinction" from 01011001, and considers himself "a very rational man. I believe in science".

Family and relationships
Lucassen has an older brother, Gjalt, who speaks through a megaphone on the song "I'm The Slime" from his solo album Lost in the New Real. Every Lucassen album contains a "Gjalt joke" in its booklet, in which he refers to his brother. This is, at times, done in both a joking and/or mocking fashion, as for years he and Gjalt have had a rocky relationship and haven't always gotten along. He was married to Jolanda Verduijn, who appeared as bassist on The Final Experiment, until they divorced in 2006/2007.

Lucassen is currently in a relationship with American guitarist and lyricist Lori Linstruth, who left Sweden to move in with him. She is his former bandmate from both Stream of Passion and Guilt Machine, and was featured in several Ayreon albums. Despite retiring as an active performer in 2010, she still acts as his manager, a role she has held since 2007, and is responsible for various other tasks on his albums; she notably co-wrote the story and lyrics of the Ayreon album The Theory of Everything. According to Lucassen, Linstruth supervises the making of all his works, notably his lyrics as English is her native language, and she is also an English teacher.

Health issues
During the recordings of The Human Equation from 2003 to 2004, Lucassen suffered from "increasing lower back problems". The Doctors gave him an MRI examination revealing he was suffering from a hernia; he had his examination filmed in order to use it for a video shoot, "as the 'Me' character [from The Human Equation] would also have needed a scan after his car accident".

Lucassen has suffered from permanent anosmia since 2007. The same year, he sank into a depression which required medical help, due to the disease, his constant work over the last years, and his recent divorce with Verduijn resulting in him living on his own.

On 3 September 2012, he revealed on his Facebook page that he had been suffering from an incurable tinnitus for the past two months.

Discography

 * Solo
 * Pools of Sorrow, Waves of Joy (1994)
 * Lost in the New Real (2012)

 * Ambeon
 * Fate of a Dreamer (2001)

 * Ayreon
 * The Final Experiment (1995)
 * Actual Fantasy (1996)
 * Into the Electric Castle (1998)
 * Universal Migrator Part 1: The Dream Sequencer (2000)
 * Universal Migrator Part 2: Flight of the Migrator (2000)
 * The Human Equation (2004)
 * 01011001 (2008)
 * The Theory of Everything (2013)
 * The Source (2017)
 * Transitus (2020)

 * Bodine
 * Bold as Brass (1982)
 * Three Times Running (1983)

 * The Gentle Storm
 * The Diary (2015)

 * Guilt Machine
 * On This Perfect Day (2009)

 * Star One
 * Space Metal (2002)
 * Victims of the Modern Age (2010)
 * Revel in Time (2022)

 * Stream of Passion
 * Embrace the Storm (2005)

 * Supersonic Revolution
 * Golden Age of Music (2023)

 * Plan Nine
 * The Long Lost Songs (2024)

 * Vengeance1
 * Vengeance (1984)
 * We Have Ways to Make You Rock (1986)
 * Take It or Leave It (1987)
 * Arabia (1989)
 * The Last of the Fallen Heroes (1994)2

 * Uncredited
 * Strange Hobby (1996)

1 Lucassen also contributed to the 1997 album Back from Flight 19, but was not credited as band member. 2 Despite being considered by Lucassen as a compilation of unfinished demos, the album was released as a new studio album with Lucassen credited as band member.

title: Arjen Lucassen


text: User talk:80.75.190.108

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

title: User talk:80.75.190.108


text:
Talk:Kaman SH-2 Seasprite

Need for editing
This page needs to be edited to comply with WikiProject Aircraft page content guidelines. This also means the page needs to be cross-linked from "Kaman Seasprite" to be consistant with the Manufacturer-Aircraft_Name format preferred by the project, although the page name is consistant with the entries for other U.S. armed forces aircraft. --Ray Trygstad 19:47, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC) Cross link done (not quite 2 years later :-) - Winstonwolfe 01:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the category U.S. ASW aircraft 1950-1959 from this page as the H-2 was not used in an ASW role until 1971; consequently this is an incorrect categorization. --Ray Trygstad 21:22, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

I did some minor reorganization for readability. BillCJ 01:52, 24 August 2006 (UTC))

Major revamp
I have been attempting a major restructuring of the article to comply with WikiProject Aircraft page content guidelines. These changes include:
 * 1) Adding the Infobox Aircraft template; still needs dates added. This replaced the old specs infobox, which is now under the Specifications section for info purposes.
 * 2) Added the current Aircraft specifications template to replace the old text-only template, which is also still included on the page. Data needs to be added to the new template, which can be copied from the old one. The old ones will be removed once the new specs are completed. Will probably split the History section into Development and Service, or something like that, after adding more info.
 * 3) Add more info on service of the pre-ASW models (HH and UH) covering the 1960s in more detail. I do not currently have a detailed source, so it may be awhile on this one.
 * 4) Add more info on the upgrade and use of the SH-2G. Article currently makes it seem as the SH-2F was the last variant in USN service.
 * 5) Add information on Egypt's use of the type. Please don't delete its sub-heading at this time.
 * 6) The text still may have errors/typos; I am correcting them as I find them, but some areas will need a major rewrite.

This is just a plan, so I welcome any other suggestions for improvement.

Any assistance is welcome, but please don't undo a major change without discussing it here first. If you know how to hide the old specs while leaving them in the article, that would be fine. Thanks. -- BillCJ 17:09, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

 * from 2006 .. and most of the requests is still unnoticed !!! Dr B2 (talk) 12:44, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Most not?? 1, & 2 have been done. Development info related to 3 was added.  4 & 5 are covered at SH-2G Super Seasprite. 6 has to be be done or nearly so. Operational history is still lacking. -Fnlayson (talk) 19:11, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Australia
I added a new comment that has emerged on the 15th May 2006, that the Australian government is now considering scrapping the entire fleet, rather than trying to fix the main problems that exist. lturner80, 15th May 2006.

5 March 2008 - the scrapping of the fleet has been announced. : http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/Fitzgibbontpl.cfm?CurrentId=7480 203.36.107.146 (talk) 06:17, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Hmmm. Not surprising, as the new government seems intent on undoing everything the previous government did, especially if it involves breaking contracts and paying large fees to do it. Say goodbye to new Super Hornets, and goodbye to old F-111Cs as they start falling from the sky in a few years. I at least hope the ejection seats still work by then. If they keep breaking contracts like this, they'll may find that all the good manufacturers won't want to deal with them anymore. - BillCJ (talk) 06:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Well, the F-111s will still have younger airframes than the Seasprites. I'm not certain that the article makes it clear enough that the problems were related to the software rather than to the aircraft as such. Re-read it and see what you think. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Your comments are a bit rich don't you think, BillCJ? I for one do hope that the Super Hornet contract is cancelled. It is an overpriced multi-role airplane, that no other country outside the US has chosen (yet - at the time of me writing this) to buy. Maybe Australia could follow the Royal Singapore Air Force in purchases for Strike Eagle derivatives which IMHO are much more superior to the Super Hornet. As for the F-111, well, there's still alot of spare parts from AMARG that the RAAF can use, in addition to the already designated hulks that are currently used for reclaimation purposes. As with everything it is a question of funding. Probably the best aircraft that is cost effective while yielding more returns is the long range bomber; it can conduct long range land attacks against any target with a large ordnance load and, as evidenced by such types as the B-52, can also be used as a maritime interdictor. The service longevity and ability to accept new avionics/weapons as demonstrated by these kind of aircraft is also a plus, as again, proven by the B-52 and TU-95/142 Bear. Yes I know there are no western long range bombers currently in production but the USAF is trying to get a new design into service by 2018. However the purchase of such aircraft for Australia would see little likelihood of going ahead due to initial purchasing costs and political considerations, as well as clearance by the US Congress. With regards to your comment about breaking contracts, well, I'd rather not have contractors holding a gun to my head and say "Buy my stuff or else"! If the contractors do not deliver on promised items then it is quite right that they be given the boot. Are you suggesting otherwise? Too much taxpayers money has been wasted on the Seasprite program already, and the fact that it never will comform to requirements set by the customer means the customer in the end won't get what they payed for, obviously. In light of the govt.'s realisation of this the termination of the Super Seasprite program was the right decision. Manufacturers should be held accountable for the products they peddle, and they'll never snub anyone (mostly) if there's money to be made; We are talking MONEY! After all, it's all part of business. Signal Buster (talk) 13:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Signal Buster, are you kidding? Do you honestly think that the Aussie Government would even consider using the Boneyard after this debacle? I certainly hope not! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aussie Observer (talk • contribs) 04:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Specs errors
A rate of climb of 631 m/s, whilst impressive, is certainly incorrect. 203.36.107.146 (talk) 06:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanks for spotting that. My printed sources don't list the m/s, so I just removed it. ALso, there were several other errors in the specs that I've fixed, including one that caused the engine info not to show.

631 FEET per second sounds better is someone could verify

631 M/S is faster than most fighter jets (My calculations say about 1,000 M.P.H (I know of planes can beat that, but not too many... and not one heli that goes about 200 Knts) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.168.241.112 (talk) 21:26, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Political spin removed
I've removed the following section:

"In a media release, the new Minister for Defence, Mr Joel Fitzgibbon said that the Government was left with little option. "The decision taken by the Rudd Labor Government is one that should have been taken by the Leader of the Opposition, Brendan Nelson, when he had the opportunity last year, but his Government decided to put its own political interests ahead of the national interest. Consequently, the responsibility of cleaning up the mess they created falls to us.""

It's far too long, and really adds nothing about the article that's not already covered. Instead, it's mostly political spin and lashing out at a previous government. Political leanings aside, it has no place here. Perhaps it belongs in the RAAF or ADF page, but certainly not here. - BillCJ (talk) 08:37, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

 * I've replaced it with a shorter comment that to the effect that the minister has announced that the project has been cancelled. The article should cite the official announcement. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I was actually planning to keep the announcement, and then I read it! There's really nothing of substance there at all, and that honestly surprised me. Official or not, I don't think that's something we should link to. Two alternatives: One is to find a good, balnced news story covering the issue from a neutral point of view, and then remove the official link.. The other is to post a link to the opposition's statement on the issue. I haven't looked for one yet, but after reading what the minister said about them, I'm sure there is one. - BillCJ (talk) 08:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

 * This has been big news here today but the first internet stories are just rehashes of the Minister's announcement. So give me 24 hours to obtain one. Tomorrow's papers should contain good articles. Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

 * The Liberal Party's statement is at: . In it they support the cancellation and confirm that the then-defence minister (and now opposition leader) wanted to axe the program last year but was over-ruled by cabinet. Of course, this is their own political spin: at the time most neutral observers thought that the project was a disaster and the government was throwing good money after bad by trying to make it work, and that as a result Cabinet made a poor decision. --Nick Dowling (talk) 09:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

 * I certainly agree the whole program's been a disaster, and that cancellation was inevitable at some point. My major objection here was that including what amounts to a political statement in an article about a helicopter is irrelevant to the helicopter or even the section. Also, I really don't buy the criticism that the refurbished airframes are the root of the problem here, as new avioncis are integrated into old airframes all the time without such extreme difficulties. The choice of avionics themselves seems to be the source of the problems, and weren't those chosen by Australia, not Kaman? Anyway, though are just my observations, and my analysis could be wrong. - BillCJ (talk) 18:04, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

 * The article quietly contrasts New Zealand, which bought five brand new Seaprites and has been operating them successfully for years, with the Australian experience. Mick Roche decided that the aircraft would be much cheaper to operate if they had a crew of two instead of three. This required new avionics. Because only airframes were required, refurbished ones were chosen but this was the least of their problems. The new avionics required new computer software to integrate them and this is where the real problems began. The software subcontractor, Litton, was unable to deliver and ultimately walked away from the deal. The software subcontract was then awarded to an Australian company, CSC, which found it easier to start over. However, problems with the software continued. Kaman delivered the helicopters but they were not flyable. In one sense, Kaman has done well out of the project, as it also had the contract to maintain the helicopters and this can be done very cheaply when the helicopters are not being flown. Kaman's loss is less financial than the damage done to the reputation of the company and the helicopter. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:10, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Government scraps $1b Seasprite deal Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That lines up with what my gut instinct has been on this deal. Poland and Egypt have SH-2Gs also, with few problems, though the WP article is unclear as to whether they are rebuilt or new models. (I'll try to clear that up soon.) Nothing in life is ever perfect, and the Austrailian exprerience is proof of that! And I'll give the Rudd governemt its due in that they don't seem to be shooting at Kaman for the all mistakes here, when that would also be the politically-easy thing to do. One other thing not mentioned as yet: THe Seasprite is a small airframe, and even with modern miniturization, I'm sure that was a top limit on exactly what could be done with the avionics. - BillCJ (talk) 00:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Requested move
SH-2 Seasprite → H-2 Seasprite — How about moving this site and renaming it H-2 instead of SH-2, as there were originally only UH-2s, then also HH-2s and finally SH-2s! — Cobatfor 22:50, 10 March 2008 (UTC) refactored by Born2flie (talk) 13:53, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

 * [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px]] Opposed. See comment below --Born2flie (talk) 14:02, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Opposed - SH-2 is the most common designation for the Seasprite. -Fnlayson (talk) 15:32, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Opposed - "SH-2 Seasprite" seems to be the most common title in English-language printed references, and so is most probably the primary title readers will be looking for. I have no problem including the alternate designations in the title filed of the infobox, as is common in such situations on other articles. Also, the Lead should probably be rewitten to at least mention the earlir variants. - BillCJ (talk) 16:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:

 * Comment: The aircraft is better known by the SH-2 designation and it appears to be the most common designation, including export versions. --Born2flie (talk) 14:02, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Retired in USN service?
If this aircraft has been retired in US service, shouldn't that be mentioned in the intro table? Unless there are other variants the USN is still operating. 69.208.228.193 (talk) 17:51, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

LAMPS - Cart before the horse?
In the Development section, the paragraph that introduces the LAMPS program says that it was started up in 1972, but the first operation of LAMPS aircraft is listed at the end of the paragraph as being December 1971. Is the article intending to say that LAMPS was started in fiscal year (FY) 72, is there a discrepancy in the dates, or just in how it is presented in this paragraph? --Born2flie (talk) 14:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like that date is wrong. Per 2 of my sources the SH-2D was selected for the interim LAMPS platform in 1970. -Fnlayson (talk) 14:59, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Corrected/clarified the wording there. -Fnlayson (talk) 13:23, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

SH-2G split?
While the SH-2G is no doubt important, its coverage dominates the article at present. The UH/HH/SH-2 existed for 25 years before the arrival of the SH-2G, and I do think there is plenty material available to cover those variants adequately. However, I don't want to do so at the expense of the current G coverage, especialy that of the RAN. So, I'd like to make an informal proposal to split off the SH-2G to SH-2G Super Seasprite. This will also enable us to add specs for the earlier variants, including the single-engine A/B models, and the twin F also. While perhaps we could cheat the guidelines and have 2 specs sections, 3 would be hard to get away with. Thoughts? - BillCJ (talk) 06:27, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

 * I guess I'm leaning against article splits these days. But I can see the justification here.  The Dev section should have more on the G-model (and older ones too).  I think we ought to work on that first, then look at splitting off the SH-2G.  By the way, I read a article a while back that Kaman was looking for a buyer for the SH-2Gs that were returned. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:13, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

 * I support this proposed split. Alternately, there are more then enough sources available to support an article on the SH-2G(A) variant - huge numbers of articles have been published in Australian newspapers and defence magazines on this fiasco and it had some minor political importance and, obviously, major lessons for how Australia buys military hardware (the current Defence Minister often refers to the Sea Sprites as an example of Defence at its worst). Nick-D (talk) 22:54, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

 * On the SH-2G(A), I think an article on the "issues", rather than the variant itself, would probably work best. (Sorry if that is what you meant.) Both would probbly be the best solution, as I do think the Gs need their of aircraft article, but as you said, there are probably lots of info on the fiasco out there. Also, care needs to be taken to be neutral in this, as there are many factors that led to the problems. - BillCJ (talk) 23:40, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

 * The article would probably need to cover both the aircraft and the program which attempted to develop it. There's a general consensus that one of the key problems with the whole program was that the RAN and Kaman tried to get more out of the Sea Sprite airframe than was practical. The end result was an aircraft which was both unsafe and incapable of doing what was required. Nick-D (talk) 02:38, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * The thing is, the airframe of all the Gs is pretty much identical, meaning the specs are about the same. I don't see the need to cover the exact same airframe and role in two places. Would you agree to start with an article on all the Gs, and add the info on the Australian fiasco we think is necessary? At some later point we can discuss what would be the best way to go, be it creating a separate aircraft article, or just one for the controvery itself. - BillCJ (talk) 02:55, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * That sounds good to me, especially as the Australian program can easily be summarised if a few paras. AFAIK, the only difference between the G(A)s and the other Gs was the avionics equipment and the other performance characteristics were pretty much the same. Nick-D (talk) 03:15, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

SH-2F users
So far, I've only been able to confirm that the NZ operated SH-2Fs before receiving the G. Did the RAN use any Fs at any time? I've also found a source,, which states that Pakistan had ordered 6 SH-2Fs during the 1990s(?), but these were embargoed, and apparently never delivered.- BillCJ (talk) 16:58, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * Several of the Brooke and Garcia class Frigates were leased to Pakistan from about 1989 to 1994. - Know fact, but zero mention of that within English Wikipedia. With that - also obtaining some SH-2F seems appropriate. To my recollection, when the lease ran-out the US did not offer or listen regarding renewal- Pakistani situation/leadership/ politics had changed a lot. Wfoj2 (talk) 16:57, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

 * I'll check my sources today. The Eden book was published in 2004 and should have this type info.  I'll change the specs here to the SH-2F also. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I can't find any info on pre-G model export users. :( The Eden book only cover SG-2G exports.  The Frawley directory is the only other one I have with operators listed and you have that. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:44, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * No, the RAN didn't use Fs. NZ used a few of them to provide a bridging and training capability while they were waiting for their G to be delivered, but the RAN bet the house on the G(A)s. Nick-D (talk) 22:21, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Nick. I just wanted to be certain. Jeff, I went ahead and added specs on the UH-2A and SH-2F, though some need conversions to nmi/kts, and some fields are blank. Also, we'll need to double-check the specs for the G, in Frawley and elsewhere, because some of them seem way off. In some places, the US customary units seem like they're for the G, but the metrics match the F specs, or vice versa! I doubt Frawley is that far off, but I'm not in the room with it right now, so I can't double-check them myself tonight. Thanks. - BillCJ (talk) 06:09, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

 * I think I got the specs fixed here. I'll check the SH-2G specs some more later.  I may have a little bit more info in my books that I can add here.  I can add some basic info to the SH-2G as well. Anything else to do here related to the split?  Let me know if there's any issues with the specs... -Fnlayson (talk) 03:21, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Corrected number of NZ SH2Fs with reference. To date the NZDF has actually had 15 Seasprite airframes. The RNZN had 4 and aimed to keep 2 operational - when these were replaced by S2Gs 3 were returned to Kaman but the fourth was gifted to the RNZAF Museum after being badly bent in a crash landing, in the mean time 6 non flying examples were obtained for ground training. 5 SH2Gs replaced the SH2Fs... though teh 2 Frigates that originally were to operate them have been joined by 3 other Seasprite capable vessels. If the 11 Australian airframes are purchased for spares, that will end up being 26 NZ Seasprites, (replacing 19 Westland Wasp airframes... strangely the RNZN is also frequently listed as having only had 2 Wasps too :-). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.153.96.151 (talk) 06:34, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I've decided after some thought to propose merging together the SH-2 Seasprit and SH-2G Super Seasprit articles together. I've noticed that we're the only language Wikipedia in which these articles have been divided into two such sections; a number of external sites also appears to deal with them as one and the same topic. It is my thinking that a merge isn't necessary but that, due to numerous places dealing with them as the same topic, they may actually be better served by being dealt with together as well. Size alone doesn't provoke me to believe the topics ought to be merged; but neither will the size issue suffer if they are dealt with together. Thoughts, both in support and opposing the motion, are welcomed. Kyteto (talk) 00:39, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

 * The reasons for the split is covered in the section(s) above. The main one is all the coverage of the cancellation of the Australian order overwhelming everything else. I don;t think I support merging it back here. -Fnlayson (talk) 01:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

 * I may have formats/means incorrect. But I am against a re-merger. The SH-2G article is a pretty specific and documented article. AS Aircraft with the US Navy, the Sh-2G suffered some bad timing, some upgrades, but LAMP-III/ SH-60B were getting mature, then the end of the Cold War and US Military draw-down. For the SH-2 plain article - That aircraft had 2 phases of live- original/ utility functions; then became the platform for LAMPS-I. -- Actually if we had enough material I would suggest two articles there. However weh do not, and I find the SH-2 general article of lower quality/content/ rating. I cannot say I ever read compare other languages of Wikipedia. I could live with the SH-2G article, getting relabeled as a article on the Non-US Navy user of the H-2 and their history instead of purely about the SH-2G. Merging the article might improve the Current SH-2 article of quality/content/ rating; but also make article seen awkward with so much material on just the SH-2G/ no-US users.  Wfoj2 (talk) 16:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

 * I also oppose the merge. Given the volume of material in the SH-2G article and the long history of the H-2 in U.S. Navy service prior to that, it would place FAR too much emphasis on a model that is honestly more of a footnote than anything else. Hardly anyone flies them and they are pretty damned insignificant in the big picture of the H-2 SeaSprite overall. Ray Trygstad (talk) 18:52, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Doesn't haveing an entire article dedicated to what is in your own words "model that is honestly more of a footnote than anything else. Hardly anyone flies them and they are pretty damned insignificant in the big picture of the H-2 SeaSprite overall" an even-greater over emphasis of the type, over placing it into a merged context? In my view, they are of such limited numbers, that they don't justify a whole article onto themselves, and that it's undue weight. I can understand it was originally seperated due to the phenominon of WP:Recentism - recent and ongoin events get amplified out of all proportion in comparison to historial events, but I have taken some signficiant redevelopment since your comment to balance the level of content, particularly in trying to give the US Navy a better coverage (Considering they're the main operator of the type, it should have always been this way!). Kyteto (talk) 22:02, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I do have some thoughts based on this feedback - firstly that the proposal is unpopular, and secondly, why - it appears to be widely held that a merged article would put too much emphasis on the later G model. I have previously understaken some corrective editing to take out some of the excesses and ramblings of the G's article as it is. If I were to undertake a program to increase the amount of content here on the non-G models, to make it more balanced, would that lessen the issue? I certainly feel that there could be more detail given here, it was my original intention to make those improvements in the merged article, but as that seems to be publically regarded as putting the cart before the horse, that requires some rethinking. Useful. Kyteto (talk) 15:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Today I've carried out some expansion work on the article, which I think has improved the standing of the inadequite history on the United Station's operational history, and done some good for the throughness of the citations as well. I've decided to create a mockup of what the merged article would look like, combining sigificant elements from both of the current articles - it can be viewed via this link. I've tried to address the stated concerns, in my view, the Australian controversy doesn't look as if it'll dominate the History now, although the US Navy's use still needs growth and development in the long term. Kyteto (talk) 20:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Oppose Merge - For the time being at least. One of the major reasons we have so many variant articles is that WP:AIR/PC recommends only one specs chart for each military type article. The SH-2 combined sandbox doesn;t show the SH-2 G specs, whoch would make three spaces charts if we added that one. Perhaps we need to address that issue at WP:AIR first. It might mean a major revamp of how we do specs on military aircraft articles. - BilCat (talk) 13:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose merge I agree with Bill; there's enough stand-alone material on the "G" variant to justify its own article (the saga around the failed Australian acquisition of these helicopters would also warrant an article in its own right) Nick-D (talk) 09:01, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Links for wings
Here are some links for the winged experiments. TGCP (talk) 19:54, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kaman SH-2 Seasprite. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060311030748/http://www.kamanaero.com/helicopters/seasprite.html to http://www.kamanaero.com/helicopters/seasprite.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:19, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Need to revise characteristics and performance on the SH-2F
I have a set of characteristics and performance on the aircraft that differ quite a bit from the ones on the page. Mine came from the Navy Public Affairs Library Navy Fact File 1996 but I will try to find my SH-2F NATOPS Manual to get the "book" values and enter them here. (I have 2000+ hours in model so I know I have my NATOPS somewhere.) Ray Trygstad (talk) 03:08, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kaman SH-2 Seasprite. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160624002805/https://www.uss-hornet.org/visit-hornet/aircraft/sh-2-seasprite/ to http://www.uss-hornet.org/visit-hornet/aircraft/sh-2-seasprite

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:42, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kaman SH-2 Seasprite


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lawrin Armstrong

Lawrin Armstrong was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete

Lawrin Armstrong
This is a strange entry for me to make...User:Christofurio wrote it because he came across something Armstrong wrote and thought he was notable for inclusion. However, completely coincidentally, Armstrong is one of my professors, and I'm not sure he's really notable enough to include in an encyclopedia. Assuming that random academics will have to have done something to make them notable outside of their own fields (otherwise why not write about every professor?), I will have to vote delete. Adam Bishop 19:47, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC) Since I didn't ask to be included in Wikipedia in the first place, I don't really care whether I'm deleted from its pages or not. Like most professional historians, my published work is admittedly very specialized and 'esoteric,' although I hope this dosn't prevent me from making observations of more general value. Indeed, in all of my work I try to address an audience beyond the academy and to make technical historical problems--and their current relevance--open to non-specialists. Therefore I'm particularly gratified by Christofurio's comments: as a writer himself he knows that nothing is more satisfying to a writer than to learn he's being read. Perhaps the other contributors to this discussion should give it a try: they might even find that Renaissance banking is as interesting as the US civil war or Shakespeare. Lawrin Armstrong
 * Delete: I'm sure he's a strong professor, but it's a bit esoteric a field, and the redlink of the whole book and both editors? Not known outside of his field nor the sole headliner above others in it. Geogre 20:23, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, in my opinion he's definitely more notable than pokemon characters, but then I'd vote delete for pokemon characters. Associate Professor and Associate Director, Centre for Medieval Studies - hmm, if those associates weren't there, I'd be tempted to vote keep, but my feeling is there isn't quite enough note yet for an article. Average Earthman 20:51, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: U. Toronto's Center for Medieval Studies is pretty much the finest medievalist center in North America.  However, being head of it might be (often is) a rotating departmental thing.  The Centre is one of the few really cool places to be for medieval stuff (U. Washington, U. North Carolina, and Kalamazoo are others).  Geogre 22:58, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete I was thinking the same thing, the associates are my only block. Wyss 22:53, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete Spinboy 02:30, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I won't vote -- I can see which way this is going. When I google Armstrong's name, I get a respectable although not dramatic number of "hits," over a hundred. Let me explain a bit about why I put this article up there. I'm a finance reporter, and both for general background information and for possible use in an article I recently wanted to research Renaissance-era banking. Its hardly as "esoteric" a field as Geogre seems to think. After all, the success of the Medici family in this activity helped create the material preconditions for the Renaissance! Banking in many respects that still prevail today (including double-entry bookkeeping) was invented in Renaissance Italy. So it's an important field, and a complicated one. When I researched it, I found Armstrong's writings to be remarkable in their clarity. Without dumbing it down at all, he made complicated material palatable to non-experts and non-historians such as myself. But if that's not enough to make him notable ... so be it. I'll express my gratitude some other way. Maybe just a thankyou e-mail! ;-) --Christofurio 21:26, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * I stand by my characterization. General knowledge of the subject isn't all that out of the way, but detailed scholarship on the subject is restricted to a very small number of experts.  Edmund Spenser is well known, but Spenser scholarship is esoteric:  it's pretty rarified when you get into Spenser Quarterly territory, and the number of scholars gets remarkably small.  The point I was trying to make was that being a leader among Ren. banking experts is not like being the #1 Shakespeare expert or the #1 US Civil War expert, and therefore being really notable within that specialty was not enough to overcome the general difficulty of its being scholarly.  Geogre 04:16, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
User talk:Kestenbaum/List of Republican celebrities of the past

Source listings
By numbering the sources with a "#" in front of them someone can insert a source between one of the lines and all the sources from that point on will be thrown off.

I can't waste my time check to see if every source is the proper one everytime someone edits this page. The way I had it the first time made the most sense I think by having a source withe the number being the source. That way there is no way for the number and the source being seperated. Pitchka 23:29, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * I've added a note at the top of the Sources section, urging that new sources be added only to the bottom of the list. MisfitToys 23:22, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that was good thinking! Pitchka 03:48, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

From VfD
See Votes for deletion/List of Republican celebrities for the reasons. This list has all the same faults as that one, including the same worthlessly loose criteria. Tuf-Kat
 * Yep, delete this one too. Same reasons as the other list. -R. fiend 20:05, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Good heavens! Is this a Hollywood inferiority complex or a hitlist of people whose products one shouldn't support?  (Only one group seems to want to burn the CD's of members of the other group.  Hmm.)  Geogre 20:24, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete Besides, listing someone's presumed political affiliation out of context is just lame: Were they moderate, radical, quasi-independent, rabid? Wyss 22:50, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete poorly-conceived, non-encyclopedic list.. Cdc 00:47, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Same reasons as posted for other list. MisfitToys 01:00, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep: I just edited the criteria for inclusion on this list to bring it in line with the revised criteria on List of Republican celebrities--see the VFD page for that article for my reasons why we should keep this article --Szyslak 02:46, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless proof and context is provided. - SimonP 03:26, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Lets purge all these lists of republicans and then start again form the beginning if any list over republican celebrities really si necessary. Jeltz 21:16, 2004 Dec 7 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think this article is interesting. -- Judson 19:07, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - There is nothing wrong with the list. -- Crevaner 19:42, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable subject. -- Old Right 19:44, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete Pedant 00:39, 2004 Dec 11 (UTC)
 * Delete - garbage. And yes, it'd be garbage if it were a list of Democrats too. Or Libertarians. Or monster raving looneys. -- Cyrius|✎ 00:58, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * KEEP Pitchka 19:17, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's not about Republicans after all, it's about US Republican Party celebrities.  Now if it had been about Republican celebrities I might have voted keep.  As it is, if it's kept it will need renaming.  Noisy | Talk 00:55, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

_________

How many of these individuals were members of the Republican Party and how many just happened to be supporters of a particular Republican candidate? Sinatra supported both Democratic and Republican candidates.

Sinatra started out as a Democrat, but after 1968 he switched to the Republicans, attending the RNC for the first time in 1972 and performing at the White House for President Nixon in 1973.


text: Category:Cemeteries in Missouri

title: Category:Cemeteries in Missouri


text:
Talk:Joseph Grew

Untitled
Readers,

The article on Joseph Grew has a serious historical error with regard to his status in Tokyo, Japan beginning on the afternoon of December 8, 1941, after the bombing of Pearl Harbor and a state of war existed. The error consists of the statement that Ambassador Grew was subsequently INTERNED, then later released.

Joseph Grew tells his own story of the period of detention in Tokyo between December 8, 1941 and June 25, 1942 in two books:1) "Report from Tokyo, a Message to the American People", published in 1942, and 2) in his 1944 book "Ten Years in Japan". The final part of this latter book consists of diary entries for the six months of confinement to the embassy.

It would be clear to any reader of these works that Ambassador Grew and the diplomatic staff were placed under what is fairly described as "house arrest". They could not leave the embassy compound. No hands were laid upon the ambassador or diplomatic staff, no one was placed in bonds and removed to a prison or interrogation facility. After initial search of the embassy grounds and confiscation of radio equipment, the ambassador and others were unmolested. Grew's diary suggests, in fact, that they were treated quite curteously. On approximately June 18, 1942 they were escorted to Yokohama Harbor and placed aboard the MS Gripsholm, a ship under neutral registry and bearing wartime immunity. There followed seven days of diplomatic negotiations regarding exchange of Japanese citizens in the USA. On June 25, 1942 the Gripsholm weighed anchor and departed Japan.

There are an unknown number of secondary and tertiary sources that make the erroneous claim that Ambassador Joseph Grew was interned. They are all wrong. Every last one of them. I have attempted to correct the article but my changes have been removed.

Trylon 02:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Broken Link
The link to the nuclear history database is broken, and should be replaced with. That is, unless my computer is acting funnily. 128.208.60.138 (talk) 01:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Citation Found!
I have found a citation for the sentence "If surrender could have been brought about in May, 1945, or even in June or July, before the entrance of Soviet Russia into the war and the use of the atomic bomb, the world would have been the gainer.": (Chicago format) Grew, Joseph C., Turbulent Era: A Diplomatic Record of Forty Years, 1904-1945, Volume 2 (Cambridge: The Riverside Press, 1952), 1425. 128.208.60.88 (talk) 05:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Atomic bomb dilemma
This section has no citation, and also stands out as highly inaccurate. Specifically the sentence "Grew knew how important the emperor was to the Japanese people and believed that the condition could have led to Japanese surrender without using the atomic bombs." A check of historical resources, like the book "Japan's Longest Day" or even the Wikipedia article on the surrender, will show that it mattered very little what the Japanese people at large thought with regard to surrender negotiations. What mattered was the opinion of the six people on the Supreme War Council (Anami, Suzuki, Togo, etc) along with the opinion of the emperor and his close advisors. It is true that these half-dozen leaders could have been influenced by a Potsdam declaration that maintained a "constitutional monarchy". But to ascribe influence to the Japanese people at large is to make the mistake of viewing Japan as democracy with freedom of speech, which it was neither. --Westwind273 (talk) 22:21, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Good point. Keep in mind that the Supreme War Council was still evenly split AFTER both A-bombs had been dropped! Half still opposed surrender. President Truman had to bluff that the USA had more than two bombs! (It didn't.) This is what required the emperor's direct intervention (and Imperial Rescript, in which he never mentions the word "surrender" by the way), as the tie-breaker. Starhistory22 (talk) 21:39, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joseph Grew. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090428055829/http://japan.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-20050408-71.html to http://japan.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-20050408-71.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:19, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Joseph Grew


text:
User talk:MacGyverMagic/Archive 2

Kissinger
I never said that Kissinger was arrested or tried. He hasn't been. I said that people have accused him of war crimes, a fact that VV himself does not dispute.

I'm not trying to "attack" VV; I'm just trying to have an impossible person controlled who insists on turning Wikipedia into a one-man POV forum. Shorne 22:17, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Update on mediation request with User:VeryVerily
The section /*Request mediation with User:VeryVerily*/ at Requests for mediation was moved to Requests for mediation/VeryVerily due (only) to the size of this section. Please continue all discusion there.

Thanks, 22:03, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Reply notification
Hi, I've replied to your comment at User talk:Matt Crypto. — Matt 15:08, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Cell (biology)
All your ideas are good, just be bold and go with it. I've just got in from work, am knackered and have arachnophobia so today is not a good day to be looking at talk pages... -- Graham ☺ | Talk 14:37, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The Makers
I've never heard of them, which makes me think they're not awfully well known. It seems like a non-notable band that has a member who previously played in a very notable band (Split Enz). Ambi 06:12, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Duck and Cover
I listed D&C on WP:FAC a while back, and you had an objection. Revisions have been made in an attempt at getting closer to NPOV; your opinion on them would be valued. -Litefantastic 02:21, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The Makers
If it was formed by form Split Enz band members, then it's notable. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:18, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Lake Burley Griffin FAC
Martyman has made a bunch of changes, and I've subsequently changed my vote to Support. Would you be prepared to reconsider yours? It'd be nice to get another Australian article featured. Ambi 04:15, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I've moved one of the pictures that was in the wrong section, and Martyman and I both agree that it looks better to have the Carillion picture beside the lead section than the map. As to the references - I don't think either of us are quite sure what the problem is, so some feedback would be good if you'd like them to be improved. Ambi 09:04, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I see your point, but I'm not quite sure of how to go about it - IMO, dividing the references section up looks really ugly - TBSDY tried that on Cyclone Tracy and ended up reverting it. Ambi 09:16, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * In between which references? Ambi 10:50, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ultras
I've been writting offline an article to place on Ultras movement, but noticed You already contributed on Ultras. I've took a few things from the article to complete, so could you please have a look on the article and check if there's anything you think it's vital I've left outside from your article ? \ wolfenSilva / 07:25, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Sesame Street
A week or two ago, you opposed Sesame Street becoming a featured article. If you wouldn't mind looking at Sesame Street again, seeing how I've improved the character lists and the merchandising sections, to your original criticisms of the article. Then, please head on over to FAC, and vote for (preferably) or against the article. -- user:zanimum

Magic (illusion)
I found the image on the U.S. Marine photo gallery, they have some great pictures unrelated to anything military, but still in the Public Domain, very useful! The image description said not much more than the current caption, he is a professional magician. I think it's a fancy image though and fits the article, until someone finds something better, maybe a bigger illusion as you suggested. This is more a cantrip I suppose. -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 18:31, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

Mafia (game)
Thanks for your kind note. I tried, unsucessfully, to vfd "A village murder mystery game" after merging it, but simply creating a redirecet was a far better solution (which I had forgotten about). I also created a redirect from "Village murder mystery game" to "Mafia (game)". Thanks again. --L33tminion 20:54, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)

Dispute resolution
Mgm, thank you very much for offering to help. The current dispute is at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Jguk has posted a poll without dealing with the issues first in a discussion. All I am asking now is to have the appropriate discussion first.

There is a related post from him immediately above yours on my talk page. His post followed an inqiry from me at his talk page. I will compile some other material.

I probably would have been satisfied to let this dispute run the natural course, but it seems like every time I think something is settled with him, something else goes wrong. Maurreen 12:41, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * My communication and problems with jguk began at Talk:September_11,_2001_attacks/Title & comma archive, after I added a comma to the article’s title.

 * You can see comments related to that at User talk:Jongarrettuk, mainly under “Sept. 11 attacks,” and on User talk:Maurreen, mainly under “Re: Vote on Sept. 11,” and at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers).

 * In Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style--Draft Trim discussion archive, jguk said: “Where we can, we should avoid using language that marks it out as being US/UK or as preferring one particular style of writing words over another.” He has made similar or stronger statements in the Village Pump and all or most of these other pages I list.

 * But to my knowledge, he has not started a discussion on this specific point on a policy page, and little or no other agreement has been shown by other users.

 * Other related comments are on Talk:Style guide and Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style, mainly under “Deletion from Misc. section” and “Reversion.”

 * I would prefer that he take a more deliberative approach, especially with policy matters. Thank you if you can help. Maurreen 13:41, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm quite happy with the difference between majority and consensus. I also don't see what's objectionable about a well publicised poll to get an idea of how fellow wikipedians view an issue. Those who want to ignore it will. Those who choose to voice an opinion will get it heard. I'm more than puzzled by Maurreen's objections. Talk:September 11, 2001 attacks seems to have poll after poll launched by Maurreen despite not obtaining consensus to hold a poll. None of which have any hope of gaining consensus; and none of which state the terms under which they will be decided. Regrettably she seems to oppose everything I do, and life is too short to spend it arguing with Maurreen. jguk 18:56, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Opposition to poll
My opposition is less a matter of being opposed to a given poll (especially when it's not out of the blue) than an an accumulation of frustration. jguk has deleted my comments on a talk page, although he later restored them. He made substantive changes to the W

WP:LCOTW
Filiocht 10:39, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

did you know
I'm really pounding through the requested mythology/folklore category, it's just my goal to get everything in there done. - Lifefeed 15:21, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

Did you know
I'm not sure wether you're familiar with the section, but I'd like to ask you to check Template talk:Did you know. You updated just one fact when there was whole list of ones waiting to be included. No obligations, of course, just to let you know. I've taken the liberty of updating the other 3 facts. [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 18:01, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Oh, wow, I didn't know. Is this recent, or have people just not bothered to let me know in the past? Thanks. -- user:zanimum

King levitation
I almost listed it on VfD, but there were several hits on Google, so that's why I put it on Cleanup and asked all those questions. RickK 20:40, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)

Zuiderzee Works
After comparing the picture to the article, I've decided to use the map instead. It's not great, but it should suffice. Now, the introduction to Zuiderzee Works needs some expansion, so would you please do the honors? →Raul654 04:10, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)

Ray Davis (general)
Thanks for the promotion to Did you know...! A quibble, however: the lead-in paragraph should cite Davis as General Raymond Gilbert (Ray) Davis rather than general Raymond Gilbert (Ray) Davis, much as one would write President Richard M. Nixon. Ground 21:21, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I guess I can edit Template:Did you know myself (I thought only admins were able). Never mind =] Ground 21:24, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

WikiMagic
Thank you for your invitation to join your WikiMagic project. I haven't been on Wikipedia for a while, so I apologise my late reply. Magic is a hobby for me so am not into it in a big way, and as such can only contribute where I can. I have made some small contributions/edits along the way, and I hope to carry on doing this as time goes on. TonyW 02:08, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Re: FAC
Hi MGM,

Indeed, I frequently comment on FA candidates, and I often object at first, simply because many fail to comly with the standards. Then again, there have also been many that I do agree with "on first sight". Dig into the FAC-history if you will to see which ones. Jeronimo 08:55, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Protected News
I agree and wanted to remove the oldest news entry, the news template was protected because of vandalism, see my comment here: Template_talk:In_the_news. Luckily it has been unprotected at last! -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 10:51, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Main
Hey there, we meet again ;) I think the none tag is always used on the Featured Article of the day for a reason, here your version looks very akward as actual white space appears in the image, I'm not sure what the cause of it is, but I think we should stick to the none tag, as the placement is done with the div tags anyways. -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 12:50, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

You can't revert Talk:Main Page because I already did :) Happens to me sometimes, when you try to revert a second after someone else already has. If you want the FA of the day template changed you might want to start a discussion here: Today's featured article. For now I think we should stick with the format, it looks ok here. I also checked the table thing on the anniversaries, I can't see the difference, maybe that's just me. -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 12:56, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

FOTD
I had actually noticed it already from your talk page, I think it's a splendid idea and I will surely try to find time to contribute to the project. -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 13:14, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)
 * I've add the project here: Goings-on, to get it some exposure. -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 13:20, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Template:In the news
Yes, it's supposed to be freely editable. But I protected it last night (with a note to unprotect as soon as possible) after a blitz of vandalism. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 15:30, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Admin
I don't really aspire to be an admin as there's so much that can be done on WP without admin powers, and by personal WP todo list has only been growing recently. I am currently also very busy school-wise and an admin nomination would probably only increase my Wikipediholism! Thank you for your kind words though, it is much appreciated. -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 16:11, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Magic project?
I'd like to discuss some issues with your magic project. Are you a magician? I ask this because if you are it will make it easier to discuss, if you aren't, there are some things you should know about magicians... that your project seems to ignore. Are you open to some criticism? If so, please contact me on my talk page.Pedant 17:38, 2004 Nov 15 (UTC)
 * ok, since you are a hobby magician, (and I am probably in the same category, since I couldn't call myself a professional magician any more) to me that means you are a magician. If that's the case, you must be familiar with some form of the magicians oath?  I assume that you are, since you edited an article that refers to it.  If you are, have you taken the Oath?  If so... etc.  you know where I'm going with this?  I'd like to reconcile the Oath with the content of articles describing magic, and since you have started the magic project, I thought I'd start with you and see if we can come to some agreement as to what's right, then spread that around as a policy for editors working on performance magic articles.  comments?Pedant 20:23, 2004 Nov 15 (UTC)
 * No, I haven't taken the oath personally, but I try to live by it. This means that I'm trying to be careful with exposure. There is stuff like, say palming, that's familiar to most people, and described in almost any magic book out there. So I don't really have a problem with entering that in the pedia. The Balducci levitation is harder nut to crack, and then there's stuff I won't even think about when it comes to exposure (for example: Two card monte). That's why I brought up copyright in some other discussion. Effects are copyrighted and revealing them, means breaking that law. Go ahead, and try if you can get more people in on the act. And feel free to contact me again if I haven't been too clear. [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 20:31, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)
 * ok, here's my proposal, a template for magic revelations like
 * The following section reveals secrets of a magical illusion. This section is for magicians only, and fall under the Magician's Oath of Secrecy.  Do not reveal the secret of these illusions to non-magicians without a vow of secrecy:  "I promise to never reveal the secret of a magical illusion to a non-magician without swearing them to the Oath of Secrecy" -- The magician's oath
 * or something similar. It won't protect illusions at all, but still keeps the tradition, and is better than the 'spoiler' notice... if we can come up with a good wording for the template.  comments?Pedant 20:18, 2004 Nov 17 (UTC)

 * Mgm. I saw you are editing card magic. You might found a few pictures I took for the equivalent hebrew entry useful. http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%97%D7%AA_%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%AA%D7%9E%D7%A9:Gloomy#card_back_palm

Re:
See reply @ User_talk:Sam_Spade. Sam [Spade] 12:54, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Wikinews demo up and running
Hi!

I'm writing to let you know that the Wikimedia Board of Trustees has approved the first stage of the Wikinews project. There's now a fully operational English demo site at demo.wikinews.org. This will be used for experimenting with various review models and basic policies before the site is launched officially in about a week. demo.wikinews.org will become the English version later. You voted for the Wikinews project, so I'm asking for your participation now. Everything is open, nothing is final. What Wikinews will and can be depends in large part on you. There already is a global Wikinews mailing list for discussing the project. If you are interested at all, please subscribe -- coordination is of key importance. There's also an IRC channel #wikinews on irc.freenode.net. Realtime discussion can help to polish up articles. If you're looking for something to do, check out the articles in development and articles in review. Or start a new story in the Wikinews workspace, or ignore the proposed review system - it's up to you. I hope you'll join us soon in this exciting experiment.--Eloquence* 01:58, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

Zuiderzee Works
I implemented your suggestion, I think it's about ready to be featured on the Main page. -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 12:17, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

Sweepstake (or sweepstakes for that matter)
Well. It seems this is more complicated than I thought. "Sweepstake" is undoubtedly a word, and my guess is that it is the original form (though I can't verify that). However, you're right, "sweepstakes" exists as a synonym as well as a plural. Deb 17:10, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the input, Mgm! I put my thinking about the origin on the page. But I didn't find where it was "featured on the main page" (of Template:Did You Know; can you point me? I found it at [], though. --Dhartung 22:07, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

List of Magic Venues
It's there now. There's only one item on the list, but hopefully that will start the ball rolling. — Brim 00:16, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)

Thank You!
Thank you for noticing me that. Which admin is responsible for adding new articles to "Did you know?" section? Maybe I'll open a good wine, it's really great. I'm enjoying it right now. I started 84 articles, but it's my first time it's been added to main page. So, thanx! Darwinek 00:58, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)

Inorganic chemical substances
Inorganic substances

Thank you for the welcome message. As I am new to Wikipedia, I wanted to get your advice and suggestions. I am a chemistry professor (British but working in the US), so I am mainly putting up info on chemistry. I would like to add several new pages on particular chemical compounds, both inorganic and organic. I have a few thoughts on improvements to the organisation, and I wondered how I should proceed with these. I noticed that you edited one of my chemistry submissions (thanks!) and judged that you might be someone who could advise me and give your opinion on how to proceed.

1. There seem to be two separate strands of chemical substance information- for example if one wants information on a particular inorganic compound such as copper(I) oxide. One strand is found (through categories) after a tedious set of clicks going from the main page --> science --> chemistry --> chemicals --> chemical compounds --> inorganic compounds --> oxides. The other strand is the listing on the List of compounds page, which I stumbled upon. Many things listed on one page are not listed on the other and vice versa, and there is no link between them. Is there some better way of organising this information?
 * The categorization system is not meant to find stuff, but to properly place it within a context . So having chemistry as a subsection of science isn't all that bad. However, to have both the categories chemicals and chemical compounds present seems a bit too much. I'd prefer to cut one of the 2 and while "chemical compounds" might be the proper name, I expect people to remember to include "Chemicals". Wikipedia:Categorization for more info on that. What kind of categorization did you have in mind?

2. I think the "categories" hierarchy currently leaves a lot to be desired. For a start, you shouldn't need to go through so many subcategories to reach a particular substance. Also, the word "chemicals" may be used as a noun in the vernacular, but the more official word used by chemists would be "chemical substances". I would propose that the categories approach should go main page --> science --> chemistry --> chemical substances --> inorganic compounds --> oxides It may be possible to also list compounds by element- by including a link to the Periodic table (standard). Many of the subcategories listed are wierd- why should there be a subcategory for "arsenides" (which make up perhaps one in 100 000 inorganic compounds) whereas there is no category for halides (which probably make up about 20% of this category!). Also, "alloys" are listed as inorganic compounds- my understanding is that alloys should not be classed as compounds at all, rather as mixtures. Could I add some more categories to these sections? If so, how?
 * Oh, I see. I guess that could work, but it'll mean an awful lot of work. Categories can be made by adding to the bottom of an article, which automatically adds the article to that category. You can write an intro to that category, by clicking its link and editing the page. So add a category for "halides" and if you know a better place to put alloys then go right ahead.

3. I notice inconsistency in the way metal compounds are named. For example you can find both copper(I) oxide and copper (II) oxide versions of the nomenclature. This can be a problem if no redirection is given, since a search under one name may fail to find the substance listed under the other name. When I checked up on the IUPAC convention, I confirmed for myself that the former version of the name (no space between metal and the first parenthesis) is the correct version. See the section on oxidation number at http://www.chem.qmul.ac.uk/iupac/bioinorg/MO.html#62 I have checked about a dozen modern books- both research and teaching texts- and all list the name in this fashion. I would like to get agreement from people to use this system for naming inorganic compounds, and to allow the pages to be edited to the correct name if the wrong name is used. So far when editing I have just left the original version of the name.
 * There's a move button at the top of your screen if you use the monobook skin. Carefully type the real name and the page automatically gets moved, with a redirect left in the old place. Just don't forget to discuss it with the local editors if it's a popular article, or you might make them angry.

4. I also notice inconsistency between elements. Could we perhaps have all elements' "home pages" include a list of all of the compounds of that element that are on the site? For example neodymium has an extensive list of compounds (listed by formula), most of which have no article, whereas cerium (a similar metal) has no such list.

5. Is there some kind of chemistry discussion group that deals with these kinds of issues? I think it would be good to get some kind of consensus from all of the regular contributors in this category, so people don't start editing wars and wasting everyone's time. I think it could really clean things up and help people find the right article and the most useful links. Do you even have topic-based discussion groups on Wikipedia outside the village pump?

 * What can I say? They're all good ideas. Maybe you should head over to the WikiProject Chemistry to ask for support...

Thanks for your help, Martin A. Walker Walkerma 23:25, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Please help me
Dear MacGyverMagic, please, If you can help me in the case "forgotten password", do it. I tried already to use the service "send me a new password", but it doesn´t work. What I can do? To remain "an anonym 194.228.18.42", or to register as a new user? The best would be, If I could receive a new password, in spite of not provided any password at my sign up (probably). Otherwise it could be because of cookies (bad or non - cookies I do not understand), but my logging in at Czech wiki is OK, for example. Can you set for me a new password? Pls see my e-mail here *http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedista:Jan and here *http://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikipediisto:Jan Thank you very much, JanJosef --194.228.18.42 07:21, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JanJosef

Yo Mac!
Yo Mac! Whats up? Thanks for letting me know about your administrationship vote. Otherwise It might have gone unnoticed to me.

Anyways I voted for you to be an adm. based on the quality of person you are and the quality of your contributions.

Thanks and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, "Antonio Heart of Glass Martin"

Re:Did you know has been updated
Hi Magic, Which article are you referring to? And in which part of the 'Did you Know' page was it mentioned? Thank you for informing me. Yours -- Xaxerian|(talk)

Original quote- And an article you created recently has made the line up and is now featured on the main page. Enjoy! -- Mgm|(talk) 09:11, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:MacGyverMagic/Archive 2


text:
Pyramiden

Pyramiden (Пирами́да; literally 'The Pyramid') is an abandoned Soviet coal mining settlement on the Norwegian archipelago of Svalbard which has become a tourist destination. Founded by Sweden in 1910 and sold to the Soviet Union in 1927, Pyramiden was closed in 1998 and has since remained largely abandoned with most of its infrastructure and buildings still in place, the cold climate preserving much of the infrastructure left behind.

Since 2007, there have been efforts to make it a tourist attraction; the town's hotel was renovated and reopened in 2013. In the summer, there is a population of six caretakers.

History
Pyramiden was founded by Sweden in 1910 and sold to the Soviet Union in 1927. It lies at the foot of the Billefjorden on the island of Spitsbergen and is named after the pyramid-shaped mountain with the same name adjacent to the town. The nearest settlements are Svalbard's capital, Longyearbyen, some 50 km to the south, Barentsburg approximately 100 km southwest and the small research community of Ny-Ålesund, 100 km to the west. In Soviet times, the population was mostly Ukrainian, consisting of miners from the Donbas and staff from Volyn.

Owned by the state-owned Russian mining company Arktikugol, which also owns the settlement of Barentsburg, Pyramiden once had over 1,000 inhabitants. Among its amenities were a cultural centre with a theater, a library, art and music studios; a sports complex; and a cantina open 24 hours a day. It also had a primary school. The northernmost monument to Vladimir Lenin and the northernmost swimming pool were also found here.

In 1996, a charter flight for Arktikugol crashed on the approach to Svalbard Airport with the loss of 141 lives.

Between 1955 and 1998, as much as nine million tonnes of coal were extracted from the mine. Mining ceased on 31 March 1998 and the settlement closed that same year. The last permanent resident departed on 10 October, leaving Pyramiden as a ghost town.

Until 2007, the former settlement remained uninhabited and largely untouched. The buildings' interiors remained largely as they were when the settlement was abandoned. In 2012, Aleksandr Romanovsky became the first person to return to live in Pyramiden. He has since been joined by five others. Romanovsky, a musician and tour guide in the settlement, has called himself the "world's most northern head-banger". Romanovsky has lived for years on his own in this abandoned town.

On 27 August 2019, the world's northernmost film festival was held in Pyramiden, dedicated to the 100th anniversary of Soviet cinema.

Preservation
Pyramiden is accessible by boat or snowmobile from Longyearbyen, either as part of a guided tour or independently. There is also the Pyramiden Heliport. There are no restrictions on visiting Pyramiden, but visitors are not allowed to enter any buildings without permission even if they are open. While most buildings are now locked, breaking into the buildings, vandalism and theft of artefacts have become a serious threat to Pyramiden as it contributes to the accelerating deterioration of the buildings.

Pyramiden is maintained as a tourist destination by Arctic Travel Company Grumant, a division of Arktikugol. Tours through many buildings are available upon request at the Pyramiden Hotel. The movie theatre has been restored to fully functioning, and movies may now be booked on request. An archive of over 1000 Soviet films is preserved in the storerooms on the site.

Since 2007, Arktikugol has been renovating the hotel and upgrading the infrastructure, including building a new power station with diesel generators, in order to accommodate tourists in the old settlement. Up to 30 workers have been living in the settlement year round to maintain the facilities and guide tourists visiting from Longyearbyen.

, the Pyramiden hotel has been reopened and it is possible to stay overnight in Pyramiden. The hotel also houses the Pyramiden Museum as well as a post office and a souvenir shop. There was a small hotel built of old shipping containers near the harbour, but this has closed since the hotel is now renovated and open for guests. There are no plans to renovate and reopen the whole settlement.

title: Pyramiden


text:
HMS Arrow

Seven ships of the Royal Navy have been named HMS Arrow, after the projectile:

 * HMS Arrow (1796), a 20-gun sloop launched in 1796 that the French frigates FRENCH FRIGATE Incorruptible and FRENCH FRIGATE Hortense captured near Gibraltar on 4 February 1805; she sank the same day
 * HMS Arrow (1805), a 14-gun cutter launched at Deptford Dockyard on 7 September 1805, and converted to a breakwater in May 1815. Broken up in May 1828.
 * HMS Arrow (1823), a 10-gun cutter launched at Portsmouth on 14 March 1823 and broken up in January 1852.
 * HMS Arrow (1854), a 477-ton Arrow-class gunvessel wooden screw dispatch vessel launched at Leamouth on 26 June 1854 and sold on 19 May 1862.
 * HMS Arrow (1871), an Ant-class iron gunboat launched at Greenwich on 22 April 1871 and sold on 1 March 1922.
 * HMS Arrow (H42), launched 1929, was an A-class destroyer (1929) destroyer that served in World War II and was damaged beyond repair in Algiers harbour in 1944 when an ammunition ship exploded. The hulk was broken up in May 1949.
 * HMS Arrow (F173), launched 1974, was a Type 21 frigate that served in the Falklands War. She was sold to Pakistan in 1994 and renamed PNS Khaibar.

The Royal Australian Navy 146-ton patrol boat HMAS Arrow (P 88) was launched on 17 February 1968 and was wrecked on 25 December 1974 at Darwin, Australia during Cyclone Tracy.

Battle honours
Ships named Arrow have earned the following battle honours:
 * Copenhagen, 1801
 * Cape Tenez, 1805
 * San Sebastian, 1813
 * Crimea, 1854−55
 * Norway, 1940
 * Atlantic, 1940−43
 * North Sea, 1942
 * Libya, 1942
 * Malta Convoys, 1942
 * Sicily, 1943
 * Falkland Islands, 1982

title: HMS Arrow