text:
Esk, Queensland

Esk is a rural town and locality in the Somerset Region in South East Queensland, Australia. In the, the locality of Esk had a population of 1,641 people.

Geography
Esk is approximately 64 km northwest of Ipswich on the Brisbane Valley Highway. It was named after the River Esk in Scotland and England. It is the administrative centre of the Somerset Region.

The town of Esk is contained in the Queensland electoral district of Nanango.

History
Jagara (also known as Jagera, Yagara, Yugarabul, Yuggera and Yuggerabul) is one of the Aboriginal languages of South-East Queensland. There is some uncertainty over the status of Jagara as a language, dialect or perhaps a group or clan within the local government boundaries of Ipswich City Council, Lockyer Regional Council and the Somerset Regional Council.

Esk formed part of the southern border of the Garumga clan of the Dalla tribe.

The land around Esk was first explored by Captain Patrick Logan in 1830. The town was established to service the short-lived copper mines of Eskdale and Cressbrook Creek. Settlers moved into the region during the 1840s.

Mount Esk Post Office opened on 1 February 1874 (a receiving office had been open from 1873) and was renamed Esk by February 1881.

Mount Esk State School was opened on 1 November 1875 and was renamed Esk State School in 1887.

On Sunday 25 November 1883, the Esk Primitive Methodist Church was opened with services conducted by the Reverend Willian Little. It was a timber church, 18 by 30 ft. It became the Esk Methodist Church after the amalgamation of Methodist denominations in 1902. A new church was constructed in 1907.

In 1886, the Brisbane Valley railway line reached Esk from Lowood. Several sawmills were built and in 1904 a butter factory opened. The timber industry declined in the 1920s.

St Agnes' Anglican Church was dedicated on Monday 28 October 1889 by Bishop William Webber.

On 30 November 1920, Dr Graham Butler laid the foundation stone of the Esk War Memorial. The finished memorial was unveiled by General Lachlan Chisholm Wilson on 27 August 1921. The memorial records the names of 462 Shire residents who enlisted during the First World War. It also contains bronze honour rolls bearing the names of 83 local men who died during the war. Four commemorative plaques have subsequently been added to the structure. The war memorial stands in Esk Memorial Park, which also contains a memorial to Captain Logan, who was murdered while exploring the Brisbane Valley in 1830.

In July 1941, a Lutheran church was opened.

Dairying slowed from the 1960s onwards, which has eventually led to the decline of the town's importance as a major rural centre.

The Esk Library opened in 2009.

The Caboonbah Homestead was destroyed by fire on 10 May 2009.

During the 2010–11 Queensland floods, the centre of Esk was flooded when Redbank Creek burst its banks for the first time in recorded history.

Demographics
In the, the town of Esk had a population of 1,166 people.

In the, the location of Esk had a population of 1,755 people.

In the, the locality of Esk had a population of 1,698 people.

In the, the locality of Esk had a population of 1,641 people.

Heritage listings
Esk has a number of heritage-listed sites, including:
 * Esk War Memorial, Ipswich Street (-27.2401°N, 152.4214°W):
 * St Agnes Anglican Church and Rectory, Ipswich Street
 * St Andrews Presbyterian Church, Ipswich Street

Economy
The small town serves as a centre for a rich farming area.

Education
Esk State School is a government primary (Prep-6) school for boys and girls at 49 East Street (-27.2475°N, 152.4263°W). In 2017, the school had an enrolment of 172 students with 15 teachers (13 full-time equivalent) and 9 non-teaching staff (6 full-time equivalent).

There are no secondary schools in Esk. The nearest government secondary school is Toogoolawah State High School in Toogoolawah to the north. Other government secondary schools in the area are Lockyer District High School in Gatton or Lowood State High School in Lowood.

Amenities
The Somerset Regional Council operates a public library at 19 Heap Street.

The Esk branch of the Queensland Country Women's Association meets at 5 Heap Street.

Esk Uniting Church is at 78 Ipswich Street (-27.2421°N, 152.4234°W). It is part of the Brisbane Valley Uniting Church.

Esk Post Office is at 97 Ipswich Street (-27.2398°N, 152.4219°W).

Esk township is also serviced by a local Hospital and racecourse and plans are underway for a retirement village.

Attractions
Nearby attractions include Lake Somerset and Lake Wivenhoe, both lakes created by dams which provide a number of camping areas with facilities and opportunities for water-based recreational activities including boating, canoeing, fishing and skiing and Ravensbourne and Crows Nest National Parks.

The historic Bellevue Homestead is located in the area. Also close by are the peaks Glen Rock and Mount Esk.

Media
Esk is serviced by a Christian radio station on FM 87.6 MHz.

Notable people from Esk

 * Douglas Berry (1907–1957), butcher and Liberal MP in the 1950s
 * Roderic Dallas (1891–1918), First World War fighter ace
 * The Kransky Sisters, a comedy musical trio who claim to be "from Esk, in Queensland" before every show
 * Henry Newton (bishop) (1866–1947), Anglican colonial bishop

title: Esk, Queensland


text:
Talk:Megascale engineering

[Untitled]
Perhaps this should be merged with the "megastructure" entry? --Christopher Thomas 14:41, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Unknown megastructures?
What about oil pipelines, powerlines, highways? These are structures that stretch for many, many megameters in length. [26-Jan-2005]

 * Good point! But they don't fit the "self-supporting" critera. - Beowulf314159 02:07, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Space Elevators
The article tags space elevators as possible with current technology.

Is this correct?

My understanding is that while material science can produce the single crystal carbon filaments that would be required to produce an "orbital elevator" on Earth, it can only so so in very small amounts, and only short lengths (or at least not length of 10s of 1000s of miles length - my impression was of a few inches only).

I remember reading an article that said that a 'lunar orbital elevator is possible, as kevlar fibers have the tensile strength needed for such a structure in lunar gravity - but I've seen nothing about any material that can be produced in industrial quantities by current technology being sufficient for a Terran orbital elevator.

Is this article in error, or is my information out of date? Beowulf314159 15:21, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Whether it's currently technically possible or not is debatable as it's never been tried and is such a radical idea that it's difficult to say if it will ever be possible. However, this is not entirely important; if there's no reference supporting that claim in this article it is at the very least original research and needs to be corrected. siafu 16:33, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Oh, I think it's safe to say that the article is poorly referenced - however I don't think anyone who has been reading in any field that touches on exploratory engineering can say that it's "original research" - the concepts and structures expressed in this article have been around for a long time, and have been mentioned in many places. When I grab a spare moment I may have to slip some of the references in.

 * A space elevator for Earth would require a material with a minimum tensile strength of between 30 and 60 GPa, depending on how much tapering you were willing to tolerate. Carbon nanotubes have a theoretical tensile strength on the order of 120 GPa, and macroscopic laboratory samples have been measured to have a tensile strength in excess of 60 GPa. The problem is one of developing a suitable mass-fabrication technology, as opposed to any question of whether materials of the required strength are possible. More information is at carbon nanotube. As for documentation of the elevator concept itself, ample references exist, mostly cited at space elevator. --Christopher Thomas 20:16, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

 * The documentation/reference requested is not for the space elevator itself, or even any conceptual or exploratory engineering design, but some support for the claim that the project can be completed with existing technology, as stated in Beowulf314159's original objection. siafu 20:40, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

 * That information is at carbon nanotube, as mentioned above. We have macroscopic lab samples *right now* that have about twice the needed tensile strength. Nanotube composites are being produced, again right now, in large quantites, though the types of composite that are being mass-produced do not (yet) have the needed tensile strength. This is solely a matter of growing tubes long enough that London forces between the tubes and the binding material are strong enough to transfer stress between nearby nanotube fibers. See composite material. Nobody in the field doubts that this can be done. If you want a link for some of the work on composites, a sampling of papers are listed on Prof. Baughman's page at the University of Texas in Dallas's nanotech group. Many researchers at other universities are also contributing to the field; this group is just the one that's demonstrated the largest-scale fabrication to date. --Christopher Thomas 21:31, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I think you may be confusing me with someone whose making an argument about the veracity of the claim; I am not. I was just indicating that without a citation this claim was at best not researched and at worst original research. siafu 21:41, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Per my original response, you can find all the citations you want at carbon nanotube and space elevator. Copy appropriate ones here if you feel they must be in this article too. --Christopher Thomas 22:19, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Indeed - the material is covered in the space elevator article, quite thoroughly. This article only claims that the current engineering technquies are sufficient - and think that is probably true. I wasn't asking if the materials were possible - that I knew. I was questioning the implication that we could take current technology and start building tomorrow if we have a few USD trillion to spare. This isn't quite true - we can't create nanotubes in industrial quantitues - but it's also not what the article claimed. I think it's easy to misread the article though, so I tried to make what was being said less easy to confuse. Beowulf314159 21:44, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Dyson swarms
Dyson swarms could be lots of smaller individually build structures. Build over a long time, with population growth along the way, self-replicating machines wouldn't be necessary.(though unlikely that self-replication wouldn't exist in this scenario..) Each individual structure could be anything basically, so could be something within current possibilities.88.159.68.164 (talk) 00:44, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Megascale engineering. 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/20050429234835/http://www.pp.bme.hu/so/2004_1/pdf/so2004_1_06.pdf to http://www.pp.bme.hu/so/2004_1/pdf/so2004_1_06.pdf

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) 20:04, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Megascale engineering, macro-engineering, and megastructures
This article starts off using macro-engineering as a synonym for megascale engineering, but it links to the separate article on [macro-engineering] which contradicts that:

 * Macro-engineering, or mega-engineering, is distinct from megascale engineering which deals with projects on a planetary or stellar scale. Where macro-engineering is currently practical, mega-scale engineering is still within the domain of speculative fiction.

I suspect that what's going on is that both terms are used inconsistently. After all, one is a relatively recent field of study with only a handful of institutions teaching or researching it, and the other isn't even at that stage. But the articles need to actually say that, rather than claiming they're synonyms and then contradictorily explaining why they're completely different things without addressing the contradiction.

I'm not sure how to write this. Something like this:

 * Megascale engineering (sometimes called macro-engineering, although that more often refers to [macro-engineering|a less-speculative field of engineering])…

… seems way too verbose for the lead. But removing it from the lead and adding it as a paragraph of its own breaks the guideline that synonyms should appear in bold as early on the page as possible.

Maybe the best solution is to just merge. If people do frequently use "macro-engineering" in a way that includes megascale engineering, even though other people distinguish the two, a single article about both the emerging field studying things like the Panama Canal and more speculative future extensions to things like space elevators and Dyson spheres could make sense, and it would just take a minor variation on the existing paragraph to explain that they're often distinguished as separate fields. --157.131.246.136 (talk) 19:53, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Megascale engineering


text:
Talk:Harry Greenwood

Untitled
I've changed A/Lieutenant-Colonel to “acting Lieutenant-Colonel”. That's a guess, and if I've completely misunderstood, please let me know or edit my mistake. Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 14:42, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Blue Plaque
I've placed a couple of images on the Commons of the Blue Plaque. I've inserted one image in the article for editorial consideration and removed the link to a very general web page which did not properly show the plaque. Additional context for the plaque is shown in the image below with the Grenadier Guards stationed in Windsor in 2006. WyrdLight (talk) 20:04, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Harry Greenwood. 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/20110926225007/http://www.victoriacross.org.uk/lonswest.htm to http://www.victoriacross.org.uk/lonswest.htm

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) 17:22, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Harry Greenwood. 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://archive.is/20121224051833/http://www.windsor.gov.uk/things-to-do/blue-plaque-for-lt-col-harry-greenwood-v-c-p308241 to http://www.windsor.gov.uk/things-to-do/blue-plaque-for-lt-col-harry-greenwood-v-c-p308241

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) 17:37, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Harry Greenwood


text:
User:Brookie/Favourite Stuff

Brookie's Favourite Stuff

 * Mrs Brookie - see picture

 * Mini Brookies (x2)  - see picture

 * Books

 * An Instance of the Fingerpost
 * The Quincunx
 * Catch-22

[| Catch-22 quotes]
 * The Magus

 * Films

 * What%27s_Up%2C_Doc%3F_%281972_film%29
 * Downfall

 * Heroes

 * Lord Alanbrooke
 * Guy Gibson
 * Edwin Lutyens

 * Beer

 * Leffe
 * Abbot Ale
 * Old Speckled Hen

 * Words I dislike

 * Regular (as for a volume)
 * Bap

 * Websites

 * [Marshman & Co.]

title: User:Brookie/Favourite Stuff


text:
Talk:Agit-Prop Records

Untitled
I've reversed the rediecrt from Agit Prop Records as I've just checked and there is definately a hyphen betwen the 'Agit' and the 'Prop' quercus robur 14:43, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Chumbawamba insight
I've e-mailed Chumbawamba's main e-mail address asking for some more info... Who knows if they'll respond, though. --Smooth Henry 23:11, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Agit-Prop Records. 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/20050204194903/http://www.chumba.com:80/_faquestions.htm to http://www.chumba.com/_faquestions.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Agit-Prop Records


text:
Talk:Anderson Serangoon Junior College

Making the article more neutral
The article was obviously written as an advertisement, like it was copied out of the school brochure. I've tried to make the tone more neutral by cutting out unnecessary parts, but many sections are in desperate need of love, especially the section on Achievements. Anyone with solid information on the school's past principals and CCA achievements, please contribute! - Ngch89 (talk) 15:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Removed invalid and un-cited statement
I have taken out the part on AJC being a leading academic institution since they have dropped to 10th out of 19 in national ranking by 2014.

Neutrality of sections
Hi I have placed these 2 sections here for discussion, on whether they can be further neutralised and made relevant. It seems that these items are directly placed in the article without filtering. Lyg 2001 (talk) 10:05, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

CCA achievements
The Basketball team has been successful since its formation in the mid-1980s, and is successful in the National 'A' Division. The Boys' team achieved a historical three-peat, winning the Championship in 1987, 1988 and 1989. It remained in the national top four for ten consecutive years from 1999 to 2008, with four National Final appearances in 2006, 2008, 2010 and 2012. Point guard Tee Chai Sim was named Most Valuable Player of the tournament in 2012. Most recently, the team achieved a National 3rd placing in 2016. The Volleyball team is similarly dominant in the National 'A' Division. The Boys' team won the Championship in 2006, and made a finals appearance alongside the Girls' team in 2007. Both teams have hence come up in top four positions since the 2008 Championships and recently, the Boys' team achieved a 2nd in the 2011 Championships. The Wushu team has consistently been ranked in the top four positions for the National Inter-School Wushu Championships. In 2008, the Boys' team came in 3rd, while the Girls' team came in 4th. In 2011, both teams came in 4th in the championships. The Shooting team has frequently been awarded top four positions in Inter-School Pistol and Air Rifle Shooting Competitions. In 2011, the team attained 2nd and 3rd positions in various Inter-School team competitions and 1st and 2nd positions in various Inter-School individual competitions. StAJeWorks, the English drama group, received Singapore Youth Festival (SYF) Gold Awards in 2006 and 2008 for its performances of 'X-Country' and 'Offering', respectively. Both plays were devised with the performers and written by Bryan Tan, an alumnus who is a playwright and director. The group's drama instructor is Mohamed Fita Helmi, an actor, director and lighting designer. [citation needed] The Chinese Orchestra is led by its conductor, Ng Seng Hong. 2007 marked the 4th consecutive year that the Chinese Orchestra received an SYF Gold Award, and in 2009, it received an SYF Gold with Honours Award. The Symphonic Band achieved 2nd place in the NBC Open Category in 2008, and received an SYF Gold with Honours Award in 2009. The Debating and Oratorical Society (AJDOS) has been ranked in the top eight schools since 2007 in the core national debating championships (MOE Invitational Debating Championship, formerly known as JCDCs). The Tamil Literary Debate Drama Society (TLDDS) is an Indian Cultural Society participating in SYF Indian Dance, SYF Tamil Drama and Inter JC/CI Tamil Debate competitions and performing exceptionally well in them also. It won Gold with Honours for SYF Indian Dance in 2011 with 2nd Runners Up for Debate as well. It holds a biennial, inter-jc/ci competition, Agni which showcases Dance, Impersonation and Singing.

College Awards
Parts of this article (those related to 2012 onwards) need to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (March 2016)

Special Awards
Singapore Quality Class Award 2004, 2009 People Developer Standard (PDS) 2004, 2007, 2010 School Distinction Award 2006, 2009 MOE-HPB Joint CHERISH Award (Gold) 2008, (Silver) 2010

Level Two Awards
Best Practice Award (Staff Well-Being) 2006, 2009 Best Practice Award (Teaching & Learning) 2004, 2009 Best Practice Award (Student All Round Development) 2011 Sustained Achievement Award (Aesthetics) 2008, 2009, 2010 Sustained Achievement Award (Physical Fitness) 2008, 2009

Level One Awards
Achievement Award (Academic Value Added - Silver) 2008, 2009, (Bronze) 2011 Development Award (Character Development) 2006, 2009,2011 Development Award (National Education) 2006, 2009,2011 Model School Tuckshop Award 2007, 2009 1 Star Excellent Service Award 2009, 2010

title: Talk:Anderson Serangoon Junior College


text:
Portsmouth Compact

The Portsmouth Compact was a document signed on March 7, 1638 that established the settlement of Portsmouth, which is now a town in the state of Rhode Island.

History
The document was written and signed by a group of Christian dissidents who were seeking religious freedom from the governmental oversight of the Massachusetts Bay Colony by moving to Aquidneck Island to set up a new colony. Among this group was Anne Hutchinson, who had been banished from Massachusetts Bay following the Antinomian Controversy there.

The purpose of the Portsmouth Compact was to set up a new, independent colony that was Christian in character but non-sectarian in governance. It has been called "the first instrument for governing as a true democracy."

Text
The text of the Portsmouth Compact:

 * The 7th Day of the First Month, 1638.
 * We whose names are underwritten do hereby solemnly in the presence of Jehovah incorporate ourselves into a Bodie Politick and as He shall help, will submit our persons, lives and estates unto our Lord Jesus Christ, the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, and to all those perfect and most absolute laws of His given in His Holy Word of truth, to be guided and judged thereby.

In the margin are the following Bible citations:

It was signed by 23 men:
 * William Coddington
 * John Clarke
 * William Hutchinson (husband of Anne Hutchinson)
 * John Coggeshall
 * William Aspinwall
 * Samuel Wilbore
 * John Porter
 * John Sanford
 * Edward Hutchinson, Jr.
 * Thomas Savage
 * William Dyre (husband of Mary Dyer)
 * William Freeborn
 * Phillip Shearman
 * John Walker
 * Richard Carder
 * William Baulston
 * Edward Hutchinson, Sr.
 * Henry Bull X his marke
 * Randall Holden
 * Thomas Clarke (brother of John)
 * John Johnson
 * William Hall
 * John Brightman

The last four names show erasure marks or strikethroughs for unknown reasons: Thomas Clarke, John Johnson, William Hall, and John Brightman. The first three of those four were among the first settlers of Newport, arriving in 1638, and the same may be true of John Brightman. William Hall's name may have erasure marks due to his disagreement with Portsmouth authorities soon after the town's establishment. Hall is said to have stated, "A pastor is not needed to figure out one's religion as I can read the bible for myself" and "one's deeds and action ye are known in Heaven."

Compact of Loyalty
The Compact of Loyalty [4] was written and signed April 30, 1639.

"We whose names are underwritten do acknowledge ourselves the legal subjects of His Majesty King Charles, and in his name do hereby bind ourselves into a civil body politic, unto his laws according to matters of justice."

Signatories
 * William Hutchinson
 * Samuell Gorton
 * Samuel Hutchinson
 * John Wickes
 * Richard Maggson
 * Thomas Spiser
 * John Roome (his mark)
 * John Sloffe (his mark)
 * Thomas Beddar (his mark)
 * Erasmus Bullock
 * Philip Sherman
 * Ralph Earle
 * Robert Potter
 * Nathanyell Potter
 * Wm Heausens
 * George Cleare
 * George Lawton
 * Anthony Payne (his mark)
 * Jobe Haukins
 * Richard Awards
 * John More
 * Nicholas Browne
 * William Richardson
 * John Trippe
 * Thomas Layton
 * Robert Stainton (his mark)
 * John Briggs (his mark)
 * James Davice

The names of the signatories above were copied verbatim from the Compact of Loyalty. Note that the only name in common with the signatories of the Portsmouth compact is that of William Hutchinson.

title: Portsmouth Compact


text: User talk:203.164.207.56

title: User talk:203.164.207.56


text:
Talk:Water vapor/Archive 3

Cloud Effect Complexity
I changed "complex" to "warming and cooling," because that made the paragraph more readable. Is that accurate? I suppose clouds also add a lot of heat capacity, so perhaps "warming, cooling and buffering" might be appropriate. If at all possible, I think it's best to avoid "complex" and to be explicit, even if only about the generalities. 168... 01:23, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC)

 * Actually, "complex" is correct. Clouds, not only shield (mostly), they also blanket (mostly). Heat capacity?? No, the thermal energies are moved vertically and clouds are formed, thus adding more complexity.  RadarCzar 06:36, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC)

 * Actually, if you read me closely, you'll see that I didn't ask whether "complex" is correct. In effect I asked if it's avoidable, or if their isn't some explicit generality or net effect that couldn't be said as well. "Complex" doesn't convey anything concrete to the reader, whereas "blocking" and "insulating" do. Your statement about thermal energies is unintelligible to me. 168... 15:05, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC)

 * Actually, if you re-read yourself more closely, I was answering your question more closely than the unintelligle response you have given. Especially, concerning the article matter of the time.  And complex is absolutely corrrect.  So why change it, for idiomatic rhetorical purposes?  RadarCzar 05:54, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)

On "reflection"
(William M. Connolley 20:31, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC)) The "atmos water" section is very poor. Fortunately, its so obviously poor that it won't confuse too many people. But who reverted to longwave radiation being *reflected* from the earths surface, please don't do this again, its not reflected, its emitted. Good grief.

 * Good grief indeed. Have you really never heard of "albido" or of "reflectivity"? Do you think the big blue marble that astronauts see when they look back from space is lit by a giant lightbulb beneath Earth's mantle? Well, a good way to avoid planting that idea in the minds of school kids is to avoid using "emitted," especially when there's nothing wrong with "reflected." 168... 01:24, 30 Aug 2003 (UTC)

 * Sigh. I've heard of Albedo, yes. But the Albedo for longwave radiation is so low that for all practical purposes its zero, for the earths sfc. Hence, upwelling LW radiation is *emitted* not reflected. SW radiation is (partially) reflected.

Well, I can believe you've heard how to spell albedo, since you've taught me I spelled it wrong, but I can't figure out what this "upwelling" is that you're talking about. I associate it with weather, but I'm sure that's not it, so you'd have to tell me more. I doubt you're talking about black body radiation from Earth's interior, because I wouldn't have lumped that in with the greenhouse effect, which I understood to be the subject of the sentence in question. So if it isn't geothermic radiation that you want to talk about being retained by atomspheric water, I assume it must be (as I was talking about) energy that arrived on Earth just moments earlier from the sun. I can't figure out why you don't want to call the space-ward motion of this radiation a "reflection" from the Earth, even if the bounce occurred deep beneath the surface. And anyway, isn't the peak of solar energy in the visible range of wavelengths? I'm prepared to believe that the "greenhouse effect" extends to very long wavelengths, but it seems to me the meat and potatoes has to pertain to the incident visible rays. Am I wrong about that? Else, why do the climate modellers fuss about snow and clouds and things that reflect in the visible?168...

 * (William M. Connolley 19:00, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)) In fact in my first draft I included "I've heard of it and can even spell it" but decided that would be too gratuitously offensive, esp since I make numerous typos :-). Anyway. You seem to be fairly sure that you don't know wahts going on, and thats a good start. This is an odd place to write an atmospheric radiation primer, but here goes: short wave (SW) radiation arrives from the sun. Some is relfected from the atmos; some absorbed by it. The rest hits the earths surface. Some is again reflected, some absorbed. The absorbed fraction warms the surface directly (more heat comes from long wave (LW) radiation from the atmos; geothermal is trivial). The sfc, being a warm body, emits LW radiation appropriate to its temperature (planck (sp?), etc). But the LW radiation emitted by the sfc is *not* just the SW reflected; it is absorbed, then (later) re-radiated at a different frequency, etc. To speak of it as the SW reflected is quite wrong. The SW albedo varies, up to 0.9 for fresh snow. AFAIK the LW albedo is always very close to 0. I hope thats clear.

Yes, very clear, and thanks. It sounds like our issue is that you don't like the word "reflection" being applied to what a physicist would call the inelastic scattering of a photon.

 * (William M. Connolley 09:29, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)) Because it isn't. The photon is absorbed. It warms the surface. It sits around for an indeterminate period of time and then something that cannot meaningfully be traced back to the original photon is emitted as LW, probably not even by the same molecule as absorbed the original photon. Its unphysical and unhelpful to call it reflecting.

 * (William M. Connolley 13:54, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)) Hmm, I may have allowed my enthusiasm to run past my certain knowledge above. Let me rephrase it: in terms of upwelling (ie, going upwards; nothing to do with geothermal, thats negligible) radiation, at the earths surface, there is reflected SW radiation and there is emitted LW radiation. The SW is thermal radiation from the sun. The LW is thermal radiation from the earth, and corresponds to a (nearly) black body at the sfc temperature. Thus, it is most physically useful to describe the LW up at the sfc in terms of emitted black body radiation.

 * What you call the "reflected SW" I expect we're both happy to ignore as irrelevant to the greenhouse effect, because it's no more filtered heading back out towards space than it was coming in, being the same wavelength as ever. I take your point about the "indeterminate period of time" and how that makes "reflection" seem inapt. Your point "the LW ... corresponds to a (nearly) black body at the sfc temperature" registered only on a second read, but I find that hard to resist--maybe even harder to resist than the wrongness I would feel in saying that a fluorophore can "reflect." So your intuition (and/or "knowledge") may be right.

 * OK, good. We are in agreement at last! [WMC]
 * Well, strictly, one would have to read farther to reach the point of agreement (I'm not sure about the above line of reasoning), but overall yes. 168...

 * Regarding energy bouncing around before being emitted, that doesn't bother me so much. Perhaps it should. It seems conceivable to me, if we're talking about a material like sand (which I assume doesn't absorb nearly so broad a range of energies as a pure metal), that the rate at which energy is conducted away from Earth's surface nonradiatively may be insufficient to prevent saturation of the excited states of either a) the atoms/molecules that are absorbing the incident photons or b) the atoms/molecules that are absorbing the less energetic photons the initial absorbers absorb. In that case, at steady state, while on the one hand you will be getting BB radiation in accordance with the steady state temperature, you will also be getting a kind of "rejection" of photons and energy that wouldn't be rejected out of steady state, such as when the clouds first part above a cold patch of Earth. I don't think I'd mind say that was "reflection."

 * But maybe these points are too fine to bear on the rightness of "reflection." On rereading it occurred to me that in this discussion I was conflating (as you sensed) the (unarguable) reflection of SWs that gives astronauts their blue-marble image of Earth with the (dubiously titled) "reflection" of LWs  that is retained by the atmosphere. The two reflections are obviously different processes, as you say, and I think I wouldn't want to conflate them in the article. 168... 20:57, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)

It's been my intuition all along that a physicist would not mind this application, but not being one, I can't say for sure.

 * Don't trust your intuition until you know some of the facts. And not even then.

 * "Intuition" is a word I sometimes use in place of "know" when it's been a long time since I learned pertinent facts. I don't "trust" it, but I often put stock in it--especially when there's little else to go on that looks authoritative. Since you caught yourself speaking beyond what you were later prepared to claim to know for a fact, I'd say you too are prepared to put stock in your intuitions at times. Good for you. 168... 21:10, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, I know I wouldn't want to say that a fluorescent material "reflects" the incident light it absorbs--probably because it seems to miss the point about fluorescence (whereas the point is a different one in the greenhouse-effect context). But it's true that fluorescence lifetimes are long, which makes me hesitate to say "reflect," and yet I suspect it wouldn't be incorrect to do so in the right context. I'm sorry I didn't I realize until just before your latest post that you probably thought I was talking about absorption and emission of the same wavelength (elastic scattering). Maybe my invocation of albedo was misleading. I don't know that it applies to situations where light is absorbed and reemitted at a longer wavelength. I assumed it did apply, because for most things with less than perfect albedo, I assume they're reemitting part of what they absorb at longer wavelengths. 168... 23:55, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I've been trying to find evidence on the Web to support my intuition that "reflectance" includes inelastic backscatter (not being able to find an unambiguous definition of reflectance), because I think that suggests the verb "reflect" would be O.K. to apply to inelastically backscattering photons. Haven't had a whole lot of luck, but did find this:

 * "The analytic oceanic reflectance model is based on the work of Sathendranath and Platt (1998). ... the model is based on several assumptions ...(iii) VRS contributes to the wavelength of interest through various source wavelengths... (v) only first order VRS is computed."

where "VRS" they seem to define as "inelastic Vibrational Raman Scattering (VRS)" That's from "Inelastic scattering in ocean water and its impact on trace gas retrievals from satellite data. M. Vountas, A. Richter, F. Wittrock, and J. P. Burrows. 2 June 2003"

To me that 'suggests' "reflectance" includes fluorescence and other inelastic backscatter, but I dunno. Clearly it's at least rare to use the word "reflect" in the context of inelastic scattering. But then how much spectroscopy gets written for popular consumption? 168... 00:43, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)

But you don't know? Then why are you trying to copy edit here?? "Clearly"?? On what basis?? RadarCzar 05:57, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Complexity of WV and article
Complex would be best but, sigh, warm or cool will do. There are some really weird bits in the thunderstorms section that deserve to die. I've noted one.

I've tried to avoid using terms like CAP, boundary layer, Skew-T sounding, Theta-E, convergence, dynamic lifting, but tried to justify the difference between a dry updraft and a moisture laden updraft--ie. all the thunderstorm inits. Even with all of these variables in favorable condition, if no water vapor exists at the surface (below the boundary layer), then no thunderstorm can be produced. These should be better explained in a thunderstorm article. However, Theta-E would actually fit best into that section since it is related to heat and moisture in an air parcel.....and is good in figuring atmospheric instability......hmmm....but it is, itself, a complex calculation/derivation... RadarCzar 01:35, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Important point: I have to give one reason why not to discuss the above variables in detail. That is to preserve some sense of public safety as this is open discussion forum. Since, knowing all of the details of the variables required (not all listed above or discussed) does not give license to a person to understand the dynamics of the situation or the possible situations. Which if not understood, a person could put themselves into accidental peril. I think for the sake of argument, that perfect clarity of variables need not be addressed here. RadarCzar 01:59, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC)

 * "Peril"?! That sounds interesting. Or are you being facetious? Anyway, even if you get a high off the complexity, I think it was a good choice not to turn the article into a textbook chapter or vocabulary lesson. Actually, I think you pushed it just a little in that direction with the order in which you chose to present some of your points, so I moved them around a bit. 168... 00:10, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Too much meteorology
(William M. Connolley 19:49, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC)) There is far too much meteorology in the atmos water vapour section. This is no place for the discussion of thunderstorms or a whole pile of other stuff that is there: there is a meteorology page with links to thnuderstorms: why have it here. Someone braver than I feel tonight should delete it from here and move anything of value across.

 * (SEWilco 06:01, 27 Aug 2003 (UTC)) Yes, there are things wandering far afield. The "Evaporation" and "Sublimation" sections probably should be under water or in the existing articles for those topics.  Several other issues also such as the triple point which is already in water.  You mentioned thunderstorm, and there are other issues which could be in articles related to meteorology.  I think we agree that WV is significant in many ways.

-

(William M. Connolley 22:54, 27 Aug 2003 (UTC)) I've made some fairly major hacks at this article, principally in the atmos water sections.

Water vapor dissipates    RadarCzar 04:17, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * Water doesn't *dissolve* in the air
 * Thunderstorms and much else have gone.
 * Why would supersaturated air expand?
 * The dew point is the temperature to which you have to cool a given parcel of air to get it to condense.
 * Etc

Anyway, since I've deleted large amounts of other peoples text I won't be too surprised if people revert. But I believe the current version is more accurate than previous ones. And shorter, too :-)

RadarCzar 02:09, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC) THANK YOU! I like the CCN section...needs to stay...around 40C sounds right. Yes, dew point is a temperature. It can be reached two ways, temperature change, and pressure change....at constant temperature, etc. etc... Also see Theta-e calculation. Hmmm...this whole article can be shortened to 8 words... ; )

REVERT, NEVER! Just get it right the first time.... :O

I've just made a lot of iterative changes, beginning with a matter of accuracy regarding steam but afterward mostly with the goal of improving the structural logic and readability. 168... 23:36, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)

- Atmospheric water vapor is water vapor. RadarCzar 03:32, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)

-

Phase Transition
The definition at the beginning of the article is physically elusive. Actually, it defines an astable state. It is incorrect because entropy will not allow it to remain. So it is safe to say that all water vapor is not at 100 ° C. That is actually a boundary condition, and does not reflect a stable state in all cases.

After leaving the boundary conditions as prescribed in the text, the laws of physics take over. Therefore, water vapor exists at the temperature of the surrounding atmosphere. That becomes the stable state.

Thus leaving it as is, is in fact wrong. RadarCzar 03:46, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * I'm sorry to say I don't understand you. For reference, I'm going to paste the text in question here so we can refer to specific words or sentences:

 * Water vapor is the gas phase of water. It arises either through evaporation of liquid water or sublimation from solid ice. By the reverse processes of condensation and deposition, the vapor converts to water or ice. Although two or more phases may coexist in equilibrium, above 100 °C (212 °F) and below sea-level pressure, most water molecules assume the vapor phase.

 * Besides the pure gas, "water vapor" also refers to water molecules in air and other mixed gases. Humid air is sometimes, imprecisely, said to "contain" water vapor in some percentage, for example.

 * My first guess of what you're talking about is that you are reading the first paragraph as if it means "water vapor" in a sense different than it does, i.e. what it's actually about is 100% pure water, and I think you are saying that what it says is incorrect about air that contains water in some percentage. But that's just a guess. If I'm wrong, you'll have to do a little more work if you want me to understand your point, which I'd like to. 168... 06:13, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * Just to make my own first move in the direction of explicitness, my disconnect with what you wrote is that a)I think it can only be about the words "above 100 °C (212 °F) and below sea-level pressure, most water molecules assume the vapor phase" b) that's not a state or a single boundary condition, but just a couple parameters consistent with a whole continuum of distinct conditions or "states", depending how you mean the word, and c)I can't for the life of me, no matter how you mean the word, see what's false about that particular piece of text. 168... 06:29, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * No! 100 degrees celsius is a boundary condition at 1 atm, as per the discussion warrants.  Boiling point is a boundary condition.  That boundary condition is variable with atmospheric pressure.  Again, considering the fact that this is the nature and locality of this discussion.  Where is the problem??

Why are you writing legalese? You wrote "a state" twice. The sentence is not about "a state," and so you confused me. Still you leave me clueless as to why you are bringing up boundary conditions. 168... 15:27, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * So you are arguing what? RadarCzar 05:37, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)

...and while you are thinking about what you are arguing...throughout this entire article and discussion, you have been confusing yourself with thermodynamically stable states and thermodynamically unstable states

 * "Although two or more phases may coexist in equilibrium, above 100 °C (212 °F) and below sea-level pressure, most water molecules assume the vapor phase" is wrong!! It is nonsense, it does not reflect the physics available on this planet in an open atmosphere, it is misleading and inaccurate.  RadarCzar 03:43, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Why are you talking about an open atmosphere? Obviously the paragraph is about a closed system of pure water. It's the second paragraph that brings up the other usage of "water vapor" to refer to water mixed with air. 168... 15:27, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * What premise are you fantacizing about? There's no mention of that premise anywhere.  Thusly, completely an unprovable statement by you.  RadarCzar 05:37, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * So that's it then. A misunderstanding that could have been a one or two word fix--throw in the word "pure"--and which I offered as an explanation for our disagreement many times, but you consistently ignored, and chose instead to call me ignorant and insult me and to drag this on forever. Boy, I'm so glad we've had this discussion. 168... 07:33, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)

- As far as "reductio ad absurdum" is considered, only a fool would make that mistake of tagging me with that term. Mainly, I would use reductio ad absurdum when evidence of a scientific/logic process is not available during an explanation of another scientific/logic process. But, and however, as I re-read this, I find no examples of reductio ad absurdum. So, surely you must have been kidding? right. RadarCzar 04:03, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * A fool? What kind of person would think a sentence constructed like that one is O.K. around here, where there's a policy against calling people names? Anyway, from the way this "reductio ad absurdum" business seems to have irked you, I think you still must not understand why I invoked the term. You had made edits that added an amount of technical detail that I sincerely thought _anybody_ would regard as patently absurd for this kind of article; i.e. such that you too must have realized they were absurd. "Why did he make this absurd edit?" I asked myself. "He's frustrated by the process of trying to argue his point on the talk page (the point that something--I can't remember what--represented more detail than was apt for the article) and so he's making his point by example," I thought. "See," he's tryiing to show, "see how unreadable an article this would be if we open the door to the level of detail you're asking for?" That's a reductio ad absurdum argument. I meant nothing derogatory by it whatsoever. In fact, I was paying you a compliment by assuming that you hadn't made those edits in seriousness. 168... 06:13, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)

-

Gas Law Expansion
From WMC's previous question:

 * Why would supersaturated air expand?

Supersaturated condition is also an astable state. One could try to argue the probability of a stable supersaturated condition, but it would in fact become a circular argument for an open atmosphere. Sure, in a closed jar expansion is impossible (unless abrupt). But the question stems from an open type environment.

Why would it expand?  In a locality, the air can become supersaturated (by whatever means). This implies one of a few things have happened.
 * i) More molecules have dumped into the local atmosphere and more energy has been dumped into the local atmosphere (with the water vapor). So more energy and more molecules means pressure must rise.  But since this is not a closed container, expansion occurs.  Dissipation is also a key factor, especially at the boundaries of this supersaturated locality.

 * ii) The overall temperature or pressure has quasi-statically (slowly) dropped so that the actual number of water molecules remains the same (no precip or condensation) in a localized atmosphere. The interesting thing is, this example has the same answer as i).  But, the extra energy that you are trying to account for comes from the heat capacity of water.  So, the locality has a higher energy with a supersaturation condition than the surrounding atmosphere, and expansion occurs.

But, expansion will stop when the supersaturation is dissipated. Also, this follows an analysis of steam and why it is a gas. RadarCzar 04:48, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Ideal Gas Law
$$\begin{matrix}P \cdot V = n \cdot R \cdot T \\ P = \mbox{pressure} \\ V = \mbox{volume} \\ n = \mbox{number of molecules} \\ R = \mbox{constant} \\ T = \mbox{temperature} \end{matrix}$$

By inspection of the above Gas Law, when more molecules n are added to the system, P or V must increase also. But, again, since this is the open air case, we know that pressure P remains the same, so only the volume increases...expansion.

Just to further complicate things, water vapor is also dissipating away from the saturation while the expansion is going on. Add this factor into the dynamics, it also implies a cooling of the water vapor. So!! water vapor doesn't stay at 100 degrees celsius in the atmosphere. Only!! steam is at 100 degrees celsius, and it is still a gas. RadarCzar 03:34, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

But!!, I should clarify that only that steam has come from boiling water at 1 atm!! RadarCzar 03:34, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)  Whew!

- ''Ref. Section 1.1 of the WV article''

Different (water) clouds are composed of: i) microscopic ice crystals suspended in air.    ii) microscopic water droplets suspended in air. iii) combinations of i) and ii).    iv) water droplets of varying size, bigger than microscopic. v) ice, hail, etc.    vi) snow. vii) any or all combinations of the above.

Water vapor is usually less visible than all of the above examples of cloud compositions. Steam is a gas. A better (more complex) defintion of steam is: A supersaturated water vapor core at 100 degrees celsius, surrounded by a pseudo-condensation cloud whose temperature varies from 100 degrees celsius to room temperature and whose relative humidity varies from 100% to room humidity.  RadarCzar 04:17, 27 Oct 2003 (UTC)

What is a pseudo-condensation cloud? Google seems never to have heard of it in this context. Are you saying there aren't real droplets of water in steam? What are we looking at then? 168... 05:57, 27 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * You really don't know what you are talking about or questioning. I believe you are nowhere near expert enough to have been editing this article.  I am right, aren't I.  RadarCzar 02:50, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

So you're suggesting that I should regard you as an expert? Why on Earth should I, when you avoid questions and seem unable to express a clear idea? Anyway, as for who is entitled to edit this article, it wouldn't matter if you had won a Nobel Prize for discovering water vapor if you have no skill or patience for explaining. 168... 03:09, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

You are right, 100%. I refuse to be trapped in a battle with a person to whom I have explained thoroughly the physics of things. You have illegitamately reverted good text by others with your poor excuse for english grammatical usage, poor excuse for scientific language, and poor excuse for article style. And complete lack of knowledge of subject matter. PEOPLE ARE NOT HERE TO TEACH YOU HOW TO RE-WRITE THIS ARTICLE IN YOUR POORLY SELECTED WORDS!!!

Others have been painfully patient with you...oh booo-hooo...I have no need to be. You have made the dire mistake of insulting an expert on the subject matter from the start...oh but then you gleefully say later...that you were joking. I say "Get Lost!"  RadarCzar 03:54, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * Huh? When did I insult an expert and when did I say I was joking or anything remotely like that? And do please remind me the last time I felt glee in connection with this discussion. If I ever did it's an all too distant memory. 168... 15:52, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

And for information to all those involved with this article. I can tell the various levels that everyone is at. And I am not here to absolutely walk all over everyone's good ideas and contributions. But, 168..., you have erred. RadarCzar 04:00, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

FYI, definition 1b of "water vapor" in the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th edn is "A mist of cooling water vapor," and many readers of this article will be speakers of the English language. 168... 04:10, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Point 1: You have just contradicted yourself by reciting that definition, concerning the "analysis" of steam THAT you have mangle, pushed, and mangled some more into this article.

Point 2: We are not here to re-write, summarize, paraphrase, nor plagerise the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th edn.

Point 3: The quote you have given from American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th edn is not really applicable, other than an example of its usage in a sentence fragmant, it is completely irrelevant.

Point 4: You really make me laugh. I really do get where you are coming from, and it really makes me laugh. Are you trying to get school credit for this or something??

Point 5: Too many people have explained too much scientific study for you to be anything near capable of expert enough on the subject matter to be a copy editor of the subject matter.

Point 6: Your copy edits are i) irrelevant.                   ii) grammatically incorrect. iii) scientifically twisted.                   iv) bullish. v) lacking in articulate style.

Point 7: Why do people here have to teach YOU anything?? I really think thats a passive-aggresive tool and attempt to keep people from copy-editing your junk out.

RadarCzar 05:37, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)

It's hard to have a conversation with someone who ignores questions and hurls insults. Pardon me if I treat your points with the respect that they deserve. 168... 07:23, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Lets add a Header for ease of editing
(William M. Connolley 21:01, 2 Nov 2003 (UTC)) I've reverted the para on measuring atmos water. Becuase:

 * a device that measures atmos water vapour *is* generically a hygrometer, by definition. Like things measuring air pressure are baromoters. Not typically, but by definition. Its minor point, but since we can be accurate, why be blurred.

 * the point about the mirror was that cn's don't have to be obvious "nuclei" shaped objects.

 * dep pt is the temperature at which it *begins* to condense.

ps: this page is too long. Would some brave soul care to archive the old talk?

I did indeed get that it is a generic term, I just didn't think the word "generic" was necessary to convey generic-ness. I left it out again in the latest paragraphs I've proposed, but hopefully hammered the generic-ness a little more. Also I've elaborated on measurement, because I thought the mirror remark was too big and distracting for parantheses, and because we seemed to have devices coming up twice. I added that dew forms on surfaces, which somehow I forgot in reading the paragraphs as they were written before, even though this is the very essence of dew (I think I forgot because reading "nuclei" I picture them floating in space--things on surfaces I call "nucleation sites"). What bothered me when I ran into that paragraph in the first place is that it takes the subject of the article from water vapor to appliances without transition or warning. Since the article title is "water vapor" and since it seemed very easy to recast the paragraph in question so that water vapor was its subject (grammatically/syntactically), it seemed the right kind of change to make.168... 02:16, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * (William M. Connolley 09:38, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC)) I've reverted the para, for the moment, because you introduced inaccuracies. Elegance is a splendid thing, but doesn't supercede correctness. Specifically: (a) "The propensity with which dew forms depends on the surface onto which water vapor is condensing." isn't a sentence; (b) "For a given surface, the "dew point" of the air around it is..." dew point isn't dependent on the surface, its a property of the atmos (c) "Many measuring devices deduce the humidity of air from the temperature at which dew forms on a standard mirror..." I'm not sure that "many" is correct, really only one class of instrument does this.

O.K., I tweaked it again. I take it as proof that the original was unclear that my extrapolations about nucleation went so far afield. I can't figure out what your issue with the "propensity" sentence is (and wouldn't count not being a sentence as an inaccuracy if I did), but anyway it's a non-issue as I've rewritten the paragraph. I've corrected the potentially inaccurate "many" to the unquestionably spot-on "some." 168... 05:29, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * (William M. Connolley 09:32, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)) Well, thinking a bit harder you might realise that if you're "extrapolating" about nucleation it means you're writing about something you don't understand. Hey ho, I dislike your current formulation, but will give up for the time being.

title: Talk:Water vapor/Archive 3


text:
Zhang Dai

Zhang Dai (張岱; pinyin: Zhāng Dài, courtesy name: Zongzi (宗子), pseudonym: Tao'an (陶庵)) (1597–1684) was a Chinese essayist and historian. He was a gentleman essayist who was a biographer of his own privileged aristocratic family, a historian of the Ming Dynasty, and a biographer of notable virtuous figures. He wrote his own obituary which included the lines : ''He loved pretty maidservants, he loved handsome serving boys. . . he loved perfect food. . . he loved paintings of flowers and birds.''

Zhang was a prolific writer, having penned more than thirty books covering literature and history; however only a few of Zhang's numerous works remain extant today.

Zhang Dai's most famous books are:

 * Tao An Meng Yi (陶庵夢憶 Reminiscences in Dreams of Tao An), written ca. 1665.
 * Xi Hu Meng Xun (西湖夢尋 Search The West Lake in Dreams)

Life
Zhang Dai was born in Ming Dynasty Wanli 25th year (1597 AD) in Shanyin (山陰), now Shaoxing of Zhejiang province, China. His ancestors came from Sichuan

Zhang Dai never passed the Imperial examinations which led to the Ming civil service, instead he became a private scholar and aesthete. His family's wealth allowed him to develop his aesthetic tastes in such pursuits as Moon watching festivals, Chinese lantern design, the sponsorship of dramatic troupes, appreciation of tea, and garden and landscape aesthetics. His writing tries to convey the sensuality and subtlety of these pursuits.

His inwardly focused mind did not see the coming collapse of the Ming in 1644–1645. When anarchy and war broke over his beloved landscape in the Yangtze delta he was forced to flee to the mountains where he hid as a Buddhist monk. When he returned in 1649 all his property was gone and he lived as a tenant in the ruins of one of his beloved gardens. It was here he completed his history of the Ming Dynasty, in part to explain its collapse.

For a period of time, he was the sole source of income for more than 20 of his family members. Hard physical works became a part of his daily routine. However, this time period and his culmination of literary production overlapped.

He died in 1684 around the age of 88.

Works by Zhang Dai
Zhang Dai was a prolific writer/author. By the age of 50, he had completed more than ten literary works. During his later years, nothing prevented him from writing more on what he found to be a worthy subject. He was a notable author of the xiaopin, a form of short literary essay.

Notable works:
 * 張岱 Zhang Dai: 陶庵夢憶 Tao An Meng Yi, 1986 edition, Golden Maple Publishing House, Taiwan
 * 張岱 Zhang Dai: 西湖夢尋 Xi Hu Meng Xun, Search The West Lake in Dreams. ISBN 957-763-132-0

Full list:
 * The Biographies of Five Unusual People – Eight biographies of distant family members.
 * Book of the Stone Casket – History of the Ming Dynasty completed in the 1670s.
 * Historical Gaps – Study of deliberate omissions in Chinese history
 * The Night Ferry 夜航船 – A Compendium of Knowledge to aid conversations between strangers
 * Portraits with Commentary of the Imperishable Worthies of the Shaoxing Region in the Ming – (with Xu Quin) Collection of portraits of worthy figures – incomplete.
 * Profiles of Righteous and Honorable People Through the Ages – Collection of 400 compact biographical studies of worthy people from the second millennium BC to the 1360s.
 * Sequel to the Book of the Stone Casket – Describing the fall of the Ming dynasty and apportioning blame.
 * Tracing Westlake in a Dream 西湖夢尋 – Memories of his beloved West Lake in the city of Hangzhou. A beautiful lake surrounded by villas and gardens, later destroyed in the war following the fall of the Ming.
 * The Dream Recollections of Taoan 陶庵夢憶 – Flashes of memories of his earlier life that came to Zhang Dai whilst in hiding as a Taoist monk following the fall of the Ming.
 * Langhuan Wenji 嫏嬛文集 – The Paradise of Langhuan. Description of an imagined landscape of gardens, lakes, rivers, trees, mountain views, shrines, and halls.
 * The Lean Nags of Yangzhou 揚州瘦馬 – On the concubine market in the town of Yangzhou.
 * On Matteo Ricco – Comments on the Chinese work of a westerner, the Jesuit Matteo Ricci.
 * On Putuo Shrine – Essay on his journey to the island of Putuo, one of the most sacred Buddhist sites in China.
 * "Rhyme Mountain" - Reflections on the unpublished work of his grandfather.
 * Letter to the Prince of Lu – Letter to the leader of the southern Ming known as the Prince of Lu following the fall of the dynasty, encouraging him to restore the dynasty to China.
 * Ice Mountain 冰山 – Operatic play about the rise and fall of the eunuch Wei Zhongxian.
 * Self Written Obituary

Poems:
 * For Dr Lu
 * For the Gējì Wang Yuesheng
 * New Year's Day
 *  Pounding Rice
 *  For Qi Biaojia
 * Rebuttal of Qi Biaojia

Books on Zhang Dai

 * Spence, Jonathan D. (2007). Return to Dragon Mountain: Memories of a Late Ming Man. Viking, 332 pages. ISBN 978-0-670-06357-4
 * Kafalas, Phlip A. (2007). In Limpid Dream: Nostalgia and Zhang Dai's Reminiscences of the Ming. East Bridge, 286 pages. ISBN 978-1-891936-63-0

Translations

 * Zhang Dai, Souvenirs rêvés de Tao'an, translated by Brigitte Teboul-Wang, 1995
 * Vignettes from the Late Ming: A Hsiao-P'in Anthology, by Yang Ye, University of Washington Press; (March 1999) ISBN 0-295-97733-7

Excerpt
Elderly Min Tea 閔老子茶 Chou Me-Nong bragged about Min Vin-sui's tea to me over and over. In the ninth month of 1638, I went to the City of Liu. After landing, I visited Min Vin-sui at Peach Leave Ferry. It was afternoon, and Vin-sui was out. He came back late, and I saw a grumpy old man. No sooner than introduction, he suddenly exclaimed "I forgot my cane at some one's home !" then out he went. I said to myself " I cannot afford to waste a whole day". I called again. When Vin-sui returned, it was already evening. He glanced at me, and said "Is the guest still here ? What are you here for?" "I have long heard your reputation, I will not leave here unless I get to drink Vin-sui tea" I replied. Vin-sui was pleased, and set up stove and brew tea himself, as swiftly as wind and storm. He led me into a room with bright windows and clean desk and filled with Thorn Brook tea pots and Chen Shuen Kiln porcelain cups. What an exquisite collection! Under the lamplight, the color of tea looked the same as the porcelain cups, but the tea had an aggressive aroma, I exclaimed with amazement and ask Vin-sui "Where do you obtained this tea?" "It was from the Garden of Liang" he replied. I sipped again, and said "Don't fool me, this tea was indeed made according to Liang Garden recipe, but it doesn't tasted so" "Do you know where the tea was from?" asked Vin-sui, hiding his smile. I sipped again, and said "How come it tasted so much like Lu Gie tea?" "Odd, odd!" said Vin-sui, sticking out his tongue. I ask Vin-sui what kind of water he used. "Hui Spring water" "Don't fool me, Hui Spring water travelled thousands of miles how come the water moves but not the pebbles?" "I am not going to hide the truth any more. When one fetch Hui Spring water one must dig a well, and wait in a silent night for new water to arrive, then bucket it up quickly. Mountain pebbles would line the bottom of the jar. A boat will not move without the wind, so still water creates no pebbles......" " Odd, odd!" said he, sticking out his tongue. No sooner he uttered this words, out he went. He soon returned with a kettle and pour me a full cup of tea, and said "please try this" "It has an intense aroma and rich taste. Is this spring tea? The one I tasted before was Autumn pick" Vin-sui laughed heartily and said "In seventy years of my life, I have never met a single connoisseur like you!" We became friends.

From Book III, "Dream and Remininscence of Tao An", translated by Gisling

title: Zhang Dai


text:
YEV

YEV may refer to:

 * YEV - Jewish Autonomous Oblast situated in the far eastern federal district of Russia.
 * YEV - the IATA code for Inuvik (Mike Zubko) Airport.

title: YEV


text:
Talk:Tonsure

Christian only?
I think this article needs a reference to Tonsure undertaken by Buddhist monks and nuns in Japan. I'd do it myself, but I know too little about it (whether it was specific to Japan or generally Buddhist practice, for instance). --82.110.178.158 14:50, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Hey, tonsures are also undertaken by Hindu devotees (esp. in South India). One temple famous for tonsure is the one in Tirumala. Even the article on that temple should mention it IMHO.

I'd say the intro. shouldn't state it's Christian-only. The intro. should talk about tonsure in diff. religions, and later each religion must be dealt with sequentially. -- Paddu 12:24, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Alternate View of Celtic Tonsure
The commonly accepted description of the Celtic tonsure referenced in this article has undergone some question recently. It is very possible, even likely, that the tonsure described here is a secular hairstyle, and that the Insular (Celtic) tonsure was quite different. See the article "On The Shape Of The Insular Tonsure" in Celtica 24, pp.140-167, available online at http://www.celt.dias.ie/publications/celtica/c24/c24-140-167.pdf (requires pdf reader, obviously).

Skeptical of Tonsure
is it just me, or does this tradition just look like male-pattern baldness? i mean, let's say that St Peter went bald around the top of his head. Then, some of his more zealous followers decided they wanted to look like him...and so they did. and the various types of tonsures just copied different men.... i don't really see any other reason to do it, except to be recognised: "oh, you follow Paul, because you're both bald." 206.80.23.226 22:45, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Then there's The Monks: http://www.the-monks.com/ JS

Eh. It joins a long list of devotionary practices of dubious origin that were no less verified at some point. Celibacy (for one). Horse hair garments, vows of poverty, self flagellation, monastic (seclusioned) life. Etc.

It does follow (somewhat vaguely) male pattern baldness. But in truth- it doesn’t. Make pattern baldness has a very specific pattern. And this isn’t it. This seems to be a perfect ring. While male pattern baldness produces cul de sacs and wings. Depending on stage.

Gizmo.AT (talk) 14:13, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

A quick review of the typical baldness patterns - which you will see you are familiar with- are similar but not exactly the sams Gizmo.AT (talk) 14:14, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Ancient tonsure
If tonsure can simply mean shaving the head, the article could include something on "tonsure" in ancient Sumer. Sumerian priests are shown with shaved heads, e.g. the Uruk Vase; the Tell Asmar "worshipper" figures. Shulgi 10:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Umbrella Term?
Seems that 'tonsure' is used as an umbrella term for any hair cutting that bears religious significance - or even not exactly religious. If Hindu widows and even the punished women are referred to, why not refer then to the ancient Greek practice of hair cutting as a token of mourning? I personally feel that the entry should be restricted to Christian matters, since 'tonsure' is a Christian term related to monks or clerics. In medieval Europe, lay people had their hair routinely cut off as disgrace or punishment (and they indeed still have in modern jail), yet this was not (and in the case of today's jail, is not) called 'tonsure'.188.123.240.127 (talk) 20:05, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

would it include military organizations that shave heads at boot camp? Pyrlights (talk) 18:45, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Swastika
That picture appears to be an interloper. Does anyone have a different picture? User:14abrir 12:41 PM (US Eastern Time) February 10, 2015 — Preceding undated comment added 17:42, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

 * It's legitimate. Hitler got the swastika from that religious symbol (it was used by the Aryans); read the Swastika article. Vincent J. Lipsio (talk) 19:30, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

 * I raised the flag because I feel that reclamation of previous meanings of this symbol is impossible and fruitless to attempt. (And, frankly, do we really want to bury this one? Some scars should not be allowed to heal.) Continuing to use the symbol as if this is not the case is either extremely naïve or morally objectionable. I would ask that someone please find an alternative image. Thank you. 14abrir (talk) 13:58, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Retitle and reorganize?
There is a choppiness to the style from section to section owing to the enormous expansion of the article from when first created 15 years ago. Question -- should "Tonsure" be pared down and made part of a larger article on hair and religion?

Cutting hair has religious significance in many religions. But it is stretch to lump it all under the specific term "Tonsure", which instead should be considered a more narrow subset specific to removal of hair on the head. For example, the Judaic practice of "... ritual shaving on the metzorah's entire body except for the afflicted locations" clearly is not tonsure. On the other hand there is but one line about Buddhist practices which are probably as long and complex as the Christian / Catholic practices -- for which this article has pages.

GeeBee60 (talk) 16:53, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Electromagnetic sensitivity
It is possible, though little research has been done, that shaving the head made the brain more sensitive to the subconscious detection of electromagnetic fields or waves, causing the person to feel more 'aware' --Dr zoidberg590 (talk) 22:55, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tonsure. 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/20110726153144/http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/liturgics_averky_e.htm to http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/liturgics_averky_e.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927185722/http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/pictures/5brisbane_4.jpg to http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/pictures/5brisbane_4.jpg
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071012123509/http://russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/eng2006/11enmunich.html to http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/eng2006/11enmunich.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) 20:13, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

In Judaism
This section has no sources attributed, and there are a couple of dubious points. "the parents take the baby to Mount Meron" -- true, many who happen to be in Israel go there, but it's not at all essential and people do this ceremony anywhere, including in the US. The proposal that "Khalake" comes "From the [Hebrew] work "Khalak", meaning smooth or shaved" is very unlikely, since Hebrew has other words for 'haircut', and the final sound -e wouldn't be typical of Hebrew. It's more likely that the word comes from the Arabic word for haircut, ħlaqa, probably via 19th-century Palestinian Yiddish, which included a lot of Arabic words. (If I had access, I would consult Arabic Elements in Palestinian Yiddish by Kosover.) The Hebrew Wikipedia article says it's from Arabic (https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%97%D7%9C%D7%90%D7%A7%D7%94), and the Hebrew spelling חלאקה itself shows that it's not from khalak חלק meaning 'smooth'. The idea that it's from the Hebrew word khalak is most likely folklore, not etymology. --Linguistatlunch (talk) 20:34, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Trichotillomania
I find it some what dubious that Trichotillomania is derived from tonsure. Do we have a source on this.

Tricho- would be hair I believe. Common Latin borrow word in medicine. And mania - is as in madness.

‘Tillo’ unsure. Maybe some form of pull or something. As in the English ‘Till’.

I don’t see tonsure or any roots in common though the two could possibly share a distant common root.

I don’t have citations - just anectdotal evidence from my own education in Latin and medicine. But the way it’s appended to the end makes me think someone thought this *might* be true and insubstantiated the “fact” on the spot.

If we have a reputable citation - OED or something - I’ll give over. But this sounds fanciful. Gizmo.AT (talk) 14:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Tonsuring in Shiva and Vishnu temples
Tonsuring is not at all done in major Shiva and Vishnu temples in Tamil Nadu. But it is done at Murugan shrines across Tamil Nadu. Can someone explain why this is so? If tonsuring was a Hindu religious ritual then should not the procedure be followed in all Hindu temples irrespective of the primary deity? Thanks in advance. Nittawinoda (talk) 10:28, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tonsure


text:
Talk:Homebrewing

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2019 and 21 March 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tsnow03, Calhoun92.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Starting a merge
People have been talking about merging for some time. The task perhaps looks harder than what it is. I am starting the merge now, and generally tidying up the article as I go along. The only real concern about the merge would be the weight given to beer homebrewing as compared to other homebrewing - and I will look into that as I do the merge. However, it's looking as though the bulk of the Homebrewing beer article is dealing with material that belongs in Brewing. I will bring in here what looks useful and appropriate, and start discussions on material that I'm not sure about.  SilkTork  *YES! 12:52, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

It seems that it may be best to split the homebrewing of beer from the rest of the material on this page, since it is quite distinct and there is a lot of information. I think that it would also be beneficial to have a more detailed section on the homebrewing processes, specifically where they differ from commercial brewing. There are several different techniques that could be discussed. --Nyqlas (talk) 08:25, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

History
The general history of homebrewing is better in this article (Homebrewing) than in the Homebrewing beer article. I see nothing useful to merge.  SilkTork  *YES! 13:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I brought over some details on US prohibition.  SilkTork  *YES! 13:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Beer styles
I'm not entirely convinced that a section on beer styles is needed in an article on homebrewing (beer or otherwise). We have an article on beer style, and a sentence such as "Homebrewers can make beers in a variety of styles", linking people to the article should be sufficient. There is also some discussion on varieties of beer in the main Beer article. I feel this homebrewing article should deal with homebrewing rather than general comments about beer or brewing or wine or cider which are better dealt with in the parent articles. However, other people may think differently.  SilkTork  *YES! 13:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Ingredients
The basic ingredients for homebrewing beer are the same as for commercial beer, so I have linked to Brewing with this sentence: "Homebrewers can select from ingredients identical to those used in commercial brewing."  SilkTork  *YES! 13:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

"torrified barleys" The explanation/definition of torrefied grains used in brewing is more detailed and informative on the Torrefaction page (relating to biomass/energy), where it gives more specific reasons and results in brewing, simply as an aside. I don't know what the etiquette is here, but can you use that in this article? There is no citation for that info, but it is information brewers could use in making a decision about ingredients. Zlama (talk) 22:43, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Brewing
This section - Homebrewing_beer - is a bit trickier. Essentially homebrewing is brewing, so a link to that article should be enough. However, there are differences, and there is material within that section that can be brought over as useful to a general article on homebrewing.  SilkTork  *YES! 13:45, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Home winemaking
This article claims to be about making wine at home in the same way as beer, although wine gets very little attention. An obvious remedy would be to write about home winemaking in this article, but I question whether the two topics belong in the same article. There is probably sufficient information for two articles (Homebrewing for beer and Home winemaking for wine). Does anyone feel strongly one way or the other?

For example, take the opening sentence: "Homebrewing is the brewing of beer, wine, cider and other beverages, both alcoholic and non-alcoholic...". In my view, homebrewing isn't necessarily the brewing of beer, as in most of the kits no actual brewing is involved (they come pre-brewed). Further, wine and cider are never brewed. In this sense, homebrewing is a misnomer when applied to beer kits and any beverages that aren't brewed like wine or cider. Rename? Split? Better opening paragraph explaining (with references) the term? Eb.eric (talk) 06:55, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

 * The fact that the "beer homebrewer" and the "home winemaker" use much of the same equipment, retailers, and processes tells me that these should definitely be in an article together. Clifsportland (talk) 22:16, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

 * As someone who has been engaged in home winemaking, I question why Home Winemaking is redirected to Homebrewing. While they are similar, they are not the same. WeeCub (talk) 20:05, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Tone
I've added a tone tag to the homebrew kit section, as it uses a lot of opinion language relating to quality, and is also very UK centric. - super βεε cat 01:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

 * That section was bothering me too. I've rewritten it with more organization, removed sources that were businesses and added clarity. Unfortunately, now it is poorly sourced. Help by adding sources please. Cliff (talk) 20:09, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Credible references
The article cites sources from self-published webpages of commercial suppliers who sell equipment who's contents are not research based. Neutrality is also questionable. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 10:41, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Fixing a Pervasive Myth
A pervasive myth/falsehood exists on the Internet that somehow in 1933 something was done that caused beer to be treated differently than wine. The pervasive myth goes something like:

"The 18th Amendment to the US Constitution, enacting prohibition in 1919, made homebrewing in the USA illegal. When the 21st Amendment repealed prohibition in 1933, language legalizing home beer making was mistakenly left out (home wine making was legalized at that time)."

Something very similar was in this article and may very well be the source of the myth. This article attributed it to a "clerical error".

First of all, the 21st amendment simply states that the 18th amendment is repealed. There is no language legalizing home wine making or home beer making. In fact there was nothing for any cleric to make any error about.

Second, the different treatment of home wine making and home beer making appears to stem from a 1920 IRS ruling that allowed higher alcohol content for fuit juice and cider but not for beer. See the Wikipedia article on the Volstead Act.

We need to stomp down this myth because it is simply nonsensical and creates a lot of confusion around the history. I have edited the section in question.

 * The last paragraph in the history section still alludes to the illegality of homebrewing until 1978. This doesn't fit with what you have written and corrected. Any ideas about how to correct that paragraph? Clifsportland (talk) 16:16, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Percentages.
Anyone with time should begin to check this article for percentages. All percentages should be marked as "percent by weight" or "percent by volume". For instance, a beer that is 3.2% alcohol by weight (ABW) has the same alcoholic content as a 4% alcohol by volume (ABV) beer. These are equivalent amounts of alcohol, and cause some confusion. I have appended the correct measure to the percentage in the section referring to the legality of homebrewing in Japan. Other percentages should be marked as well. Clifsportland (talk) 21:58, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Brew on premises
I was just reviewing the Australian links and sources. They have a provision for what they call "brew on premises" sites. see here. I have seen sites like these in the US too. We should make a section that discusses the process and availability of such facilities for "homebrewing". Cliff (talk) 19:46, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

This reference discusses brew on premise shops in Japan. already a reference on the article.  Cliff (talk) 20:00, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

British v. American spelling
WP states that there is no general rule, but that each page should be consistent within itself. This page is certainly not. We need to decide which spellings this article will use. Since I'm from the States, I'm biased in that direction. The page seems evenly split at this point. If no dissenters, I will change it all in a few months. Cliff (talk) 20:45, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

 * The WP:ENGVAR guideline (specifically the MOS:RETAIN part) states that the variant of English to be used should be whatever was established early on in the article's history. If that's British English, then we should modify the article accordingly.

 * So let's examine the history.

 * This article was created in 2002 by an IP address geolocated to Willamette, Oregon in the United States. From there the article grew and its content stayed rather US-centric for years, until an external link appeared in July 2006 with a description using British spelling. Even so, the article remained US-centric, and was even tagged as such until 10 October 2006, when a bunch of UK content and British spelling was introduced to the article body for the first time. Since then, there has been a mixture.

 * Therefore, one can safely say that this article was established and existed for years using US spelling, and it should be made consistent with that spelling. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:57, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

 * OK then. I'll start changing what I see to the American variants. Cliff (talk) 23:35, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Bad Reference
This externally linked reference does not point to the place it's supposed to. I tried to find the indicated bill on the Library of Congress website, but was unable to. (H.R. 1337 points to something about greece). Anybody know which bill was signed by Jimmy Carter? Cliff (talk) 19:28, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Eponymous-Archon (talk) 00:53, 24 August 2011 (UTC) No, it points exactly to where it's supposed to: the Thomas citation of the 1978 bill signed by Pres. Carter. There's nothing on Greece in there. Does anyone else not have this link work? Maybe some other Congress has an HR 1337 that refers to Greece.

Eponymous-Archon (talk) 01:04, 24 August 2011 (UTC) OK, upon further examination the problem is that wikipedia doesn't like links that end with a colon. So I've changed the URL to that of the bill's summary instead of the bill's main page. (Surely there's a way to encode the colon, but I don't know what that is and haven't found it in a quick google search.)

 * You encode a colon as %3A as in http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d095%3AH.R.1337%3A — hope that helps. ~Amatulić (talk) 01:38, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Brewing isn't distilation
There is a lot of various information regarding the legality of distillation in this article. I'm planning on removing all of it, because this is an article about homebrewing, not distillation. Also, I take issue with some of the Citation Needed tags regarding homebrew kits... does this article really need to source the fact that some homebrew kits come with yeast, while others don't? It is extraordinarily difficult to find quality 3rd party sources (other than linking to an actual homebrew kit for sale's contents) - super βεε cat 01:09, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

 * I would keep the distillation stuff, and trim that material a bit. Distillation is a natural final step in the homebrewing process. It is a closely related subject since many homebrewers use their fermented products to produce rakia or brandy. Homebrewing isn't all about beer, after all. The topic probably isn't yet large enough for a separate legality of home distilling article, so it would be a shame to lose adequately sourced material provided here.

 * Regarding homebrew kits, I'd remove any citations that merely link to places that exist for the purpose of selling products. There's no need to mention that some kits contain yeast. It's irrelevant. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:28, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

 * There is moonshine. — goethean ॐ 18:54, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * But that's specific to illegal distillation. The point of discussion here is more about the legality of homebrewing, and whether the article should say when that legality extends to home distillation. It's an interesting point that I think should be retained. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:59, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree that it's an interesting point, and at least tangentially related. Perhaps there is a bit much of it? I think other than to say it is or isn't is sufficient; the more details, the less focused on, well, homeBREWing the article becomes. I'll leave it be for now, but perhaps a wikipedian interested in the home distillation of spirits could start a new article? Or, perhaps a larger article called something like home alcohol production that homebrewing and home distilling link to? - super βεε cat 23:32, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe the section could be converted to a table, with columns for country, legality of homebrewing, and legality of distillation. Some cells, of course, would be blank. Cells could contain a short description of the legal issue. That format may be less unwieldy than it is now. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:47, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I just reformatted it as a table without removing any content or paying attention to alphabetization. See how that looks, revert if you don't like it. ~Amatulić (talk) 01:19, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I like it MUCH better. Great work! - super βεε cat 02:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Homebrewing Process
This section is a mess. I propose lifting summaries from the relevant parts of the main Brewing article, and linking for an in-depth discussion. While the equipment is (somewhat) different, the chemical changes are identical- there's no reason to retread the same ground. The section should be divided into something like: Milling, Mashing, Lauter (and sparge), Boil, Cooling, Fermentation, and Serving. These sections should include examples of the most common equipment used to accomplish each step. - super βεε cat 02:41, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

In addition, a graphic would be useful- with the aforementioned categories, and where the extract brewer starts in the process, to visually show the differences in the major types of homebrewing; extract, partial mash, and all-grain. - super βεε cat 02:45, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Legality.
The recently added citation for Ireland's brewing laws made me think. There seems to be some conflated ideas about legality and taxation on the page. Should we rewrite to discern between when brewing requires taxation and when brewing is outright illegal? Cliff (talk) 18:43, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure. Generally taxation applies only to homebrew products that are sold, not brewed for personal use. The citation regarding Ireland seems pretty clear that homebrewing beer with ABV of 0.5% or less is legal for personal use, but it is illegal to sell the product. There may be more to the laws of Irland that impose a tax on homebrewing for higher alcohol content, but I don't see it from that citation (and it would be tough to enforce anyway if it's all made for personal use, so I doubt it). ~Amatulić (talk) 22:51, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

 * My understanding was that it is not illegal to sell the beer, but that any beer sold must be subject to taxes and tax laws (which may require obtaining a license or something). It may be a minor distinction between illegal to sell, and illegal to sell without paying taxes, but I think it may be worth exploring. Am I reading the source incorrectly? Cliff (talk) 05:03, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

 * I think you're correct... but, as in most(?) countries, selling it within the licensing and tax laws moves it from a 'homebrew' to a 'microbrew'. 66.87.0.82 (talk) 18:28, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Citation tag
At this point can we remove the tag citing a lack of citations? It would seem that this article has been cited fairly well. Fallbrews (talk) 03:00, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Chinese Prohibition
The bit about the 41 periods of homebrew prohibitions in China comes from history of alcoholic beverages where it was unsourced. Seemed worth mentioning in the history section here, though. If you find a cite for the claim, kindly add it over there as well. — Llywelyn II   11:15, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Request For Comment
I've been working on the article BeerXML and have been faced with two users who have tried a variety of different approaches to getting it deleted. I would appreciate any help with the charge that the article is not on a notable topic at the deletion page Articles_for_deletion/BeerXML. I have been forced into a request for comment at the BeerXML talk page and would very much appreciate any comments there so that the case for retaining and improving the article can be made Talk:BeerXML

I am also interested in whether a section on the variety of different recipe formulation applications available on computers/tablets/phones etc and the emergence of recipe sharing web sites would merit inclusion here. Thanks -- Devils In Skirts! (talk) 21:32, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Homebrewing. 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/20110322160613/http://www.craftbrewing.org.uk/bc/bcpdf/BC2002-Oct.pdf to http://craftbrewing.org.uk/bc/bcpdf/BC2002-Oct.pdf

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) 05:34, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Homebrewing