text:
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources

AI-written citations?
I was adding an event to an article (Special:Diff/1220193358) when I noticed that the article I was reading as a source, and planning to cite, was tagged as being written by AI on the news company's website. I've looked around a bit, skimmed Using neural network language models on Wikipedia, WP:LLM, WP:AI, WP:RS and this Wikimedia post, but couldn't find anything directly addressing whether it's ok to cite articles written by AI. Closest I could find is here on WP:RS tentatively saying "ML generation in itself does not necessarily disqualify a source that is properly checked by the person using it" and here on WP:LLM, which clearly states "LLMs do not follow Wikipedia's policies on verifiability and reliable sourcing.", but in a slightly different context, so I'm getting mixed signals. I also asked Copilot and GPT3.5, which both said AI-written citations neither explicitly banned nor permitted, with varying levels of vaguery.

For my specific example, I submitted it but put "(AI)" after the name, but I wanted to raise this more broadly because I'm not sure what to do. My proposal is what I did, use them but tag them as AI in the link, but I'm curious to hear other suggestions.

I've put this on the talk pages in Using neural network language models on Wikipedia and Reliable sources. SqueakSquawk4 (talk) 11:36, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

 * For me it comes down to a case by case basis. If AI is being used as part of the process, but ultimately the article is from a real person and editor then it's probably fine. The issue comes from articles completely written by AI with little or no oversight. The site has an AI disclaimer where they say they only use AI in the first way, not the latter. So on that point I would think it should be ok. -- LCU A ctively D isinterested  «@» °∆t° 13:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @SqueakSquawk4, do you absolutely need that source? If you can find a better one, then I suggest using the better one instead. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * A) I kinda do, it's the only citation I found with everything in the same place. If I took it out I'd have to put in 2 or 3 seperate citations to not leave something uncited.
 * B) I was going trying to ask more generally, with the one I found as just an example rather than really the focus of what I was asking.
 * C) @ActivelyDisinterested Thanks, didn't spot that. SqueakSquawk4 (talk) 12:32, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

 * AI = NO Considering the 'hallucination" issue that LLMs have, and, in fact, considering how they are constructed at a base logic level, I would categorically treat any "AI" source as intrinsically non-reliable. If a news agency is found to be using "AI" constructed articles on a regular basis then that source should be deprecated. Simonm223 (talk) 12:42, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Simon, I think black-and-white rules are easy to understand, but hallucination is only an issue when it appears. AI sometimes generates false claims.  If it's writing something you know to be true and non-hallucinated (e.g., because you've read the same claim in other sources, or because it's the kind of general, non-controversial knowledge that the No original research says doesn't require a citation, like "The capital of France is Paris"), then that problem is irrelevant.
 * @SqueakSquawk4, editors might accept this source, especially in light of what AD says. However, if the content is important to you, you might consider using the three other sources instead of (or in addition to) this one, to make it harder for someone to remove it on simplistic "all AI is wrong and bad" grounds.
 * As a tangent, we've never defined reliable sources. Unlike an article, which would doubtless begin with a sentence like "A reliable source is...", this guideline begins with "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published sources".  I suggest that the actual definition, in practice, is "A reliable source is a published source that experienced Wikipedia editors accept as supporting the material it is cited for".  Some editors strongly oppose AI-generated sources, and we can usually expect that some editors won't take time to understand the nuances behind using AI as a convenience vs using AI unsupervised to generate content wholesale.[*]  Therefore, I'm uncertain whether it would considered reliable if it were ever seriously disputed.
 * [*] This is happening in the real world, with a student accused of plagiarism without any evidence except Turnitin thinking it was AI-generated, so it'll happen on wiki, too. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:10, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I read on some AI-test tool I tried a caveat, something like "don't use this to punish students." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * IF you have double checked the AI generated source, and it a) actually exists, b) is reliable and c) directly supports the information in the article… then it doesn’t really matter how the source was “generated”. The key is that a human has checked it. Blueboar (talk) 12:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

This may be a crazy thought, but...
Can we assemble a master list of all sources used throughout all articles in the encyclopedia? With ~7,000,000 articles, some with no references or one reference, but others with hundreds of references, I would guess that there are about 50,000,000 references in Wikipedia. I would further guess that some of those (particularly databases) are heavily used, and could be normalized to a greater degree in some way (e.g., via templates). BD2412 T 17:53, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: Articles with the most references lists the most referenced ~875 articles/lists, with a total of ~543,000 references for that outlier group. BD2412  T 17:59, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Curious… what do you mean by “normalized”? Blueboar (talk) 17:59, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I mean that if the same source is used as a citation in hundreds of articles, the citation should present the same across those hundreds of articles (and could even be reduced to a template, kind of like the IMDb name template often used in external links). BD2412  T 18:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Maybe not exactly the same, as the same source might be cited with a different page number, or a different excerpted quote. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 21:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * One editors normalisation is another editors CITEVAR. I could see lots of discontent if references are normalised across articles with different established referencing styles. -- LCU A ctively D isinterested  «@» °∆t° 19:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * My foremost interest is in gathering the data, which we do not have at all. It may well be that there are links appearing as bare URLs in some articles (which is never preferrable) and nicely formatted in citations in others, or that there are sources where things like the date of the source or the spelling of the author's name are different across different articles, indicating that at least one of them is erroneous. BD2412  T 20:46, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * You could get one of the dumps, parse the XML to extract the element for each article, and then apply further parsing to get:
 * all elements
 * anything that uses a recognised template
 * anything that looks like a URL.
 * I expect there will be some niche citation styles that may not fit into the above, and some false positives like URLs mentioned in the infobox of an article about a website.
 * It's probably a perl oneliner... if you start sufficiently far to the left. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 21:33, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That's Greek to me. BD2412  T 23:15, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That sounds like something WikiCite might have been interested in. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I'll mention WP:JCW here, thought it's not quite what the OP asked.   Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:05, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think that @Ocaasi made a list of the most popular domain names. See Vaccine safety/Reports. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I see. I gather that this list is for sources used in vaccination-related articles. Perhaps the exercise can be scaled up. BD2412  T 16:42, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

 * This idea makes me very nervous… I worry that as soon as we compile a “list of sources” it will turn into “THE list of (approved) sources”. I understand that this isn’t the intent here, but we have seen something similar happen with RSP. That page was first intended as nothing more than a quick reference aid (of sources that are frequently discussed). However, it has evolved into something else - a lot of editors think it is where you go to “vet” sources, and that it is a list of approved (and, more importantly, disapproved) sources.
 * Data collection is all fine and dandy, but it can be misused in ways not originally intended. Blueboar (talk) 17:55, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree that "a list" has a risk of turning it into "the list of approved sources". It will also result in WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS claims (if it's okay to cite Twitter in tens of thousands of other articles, then why not this one?) and in inappropriate removals (since it's not okay to cite this in article A, so I will dedicate my life to removing it from all articles everywhere!).
 * But I think there are things we could do to reduce this. One is to have a comprehensive list (all sources, not just the most popular).  Of course we would want to have a description at the top that explains that it's just a list of everything, not a list of good or approved sources.  Another is to give it a title that makes it sound more boring and technical.  Something like Citation formatting/Data dump?  Or Citation templates/Mismatched formatting?  Alternatively, its visibility could be reduced by storing it off wiki (e.g., at Wikimedia Cloud Services, where it could be automatically regenerated on a set schedule). WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:30, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

 * Well, whatever the risks, I would say, it is better to know what "we" are doing than not (and that is even so, as it seems the "risk" is someone will say, it is used all over Wikipedia, so needs no evaluation here, (eg., it is somewhat curious that any news source is used for vaccinations, but at least we can now look and see how and whatnot.) Alanscottwalker (talk) 18:04, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Two possible additions
Under Scholarship, the bullet point Reliable scholarship should consider that books on academic subjects are often reviewed in journals covering the appropriate academic discipline. These can often highlight the value of any particular book. Since some academic publishers seem to be less reliable on the quality of their output than they once were, this is a useful verification of the content of a book (versus a properly peer-reviewed paper).

In rare instances, a review may be so damning that we would probably all see the book in question as not being a suitable source. (See for an example of such a review). Other reviews actually turn out to add to the content of an academic book by giving a second supporting opinion on some content. (See for an example – search for "observations that may not be widely-understood and accepted, but are nevertheless accurate" to see this in action. This example also shows how a review might highlight the strengths and weaknesses of a work, so further helping the editor in how to use a source.)

Therefore I suggest the "Reliable scholarship" paragraph should have added:
 * Books are often reviewed in academic journals that cover their subject – these reviews may help an editor understand the strengths and weaknesses of the work in question.

The second suggestion is more concise. The last sentence of Citation counts should be expanded to say
 * The number of citations may be misleading if an author cites themselves often, or if a work is frequently cited by those who disagree with or disprove it.

Generally, to disagree with the work of others, you have to cite them. This obviously increases the citation count, especially if a lot of other authors publish in disagreement. ThoughtIdRetired TIR 15:14, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Hiding conflict of interest? You've been unilaterally removing Schaffer from Wikipedia for a very very long time based on that single review, in your ongoing WP:TENDENTIOUS edits against a very specific topic that you decided you do not like. - OBSIDIAN  †  SOUL  02:39, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

 * ThoughtIdRetired on 15 June 2024 added "Some books on academic subjects are reviewed in peer-reviewed journals, so giving additional information on the reliability of their contents." Obsidian Soul on 21 June 2024 reverted. ThoughtIdRetired on 29 June 2024 re-inserted. I believe that re-inserting reverted PAG insertions, without getting consensus, should generally be opposed. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 14:08, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

 * My own interpretation this, but the edit by Obsidian Soul (OS) was part of a rather unpleasant dispute which has resulted in them, for the present, retiring from Wikipedia. I have encountered ample support for the example raised (Shaffer) not being an RS, for instance, together with at least one instance of thanks when I removed Shaffer as a reference (with a full explanation and links to the review in the edit summary) on some articles not of interest to OS.
 * The more important point on the sentence added is that reviews in academic journals can highlight the strengths of a potential source. This can be particularly useful. This really uses the concept mentioned in WP:HISTRS (or more precisely, WP:HSC. The real example of usefulness is the second example I give, where not only the book but the review itself could be used as a source for the comparative merits of square rig and fore and aft rig in the late 18th and 19th centuries.
 * Do you think that the added sentence is bad advice in any way? If so, please explain your thinking. ThoughtIdRetired TIR 15:53, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think that this is limited to academic publishers or to reviews in academic journals. It's no different than any other source.  You have found a source, and you want to know whether it's any good.  How can you do this?
 * 'Source' means three things on wiki: author, publisher, and document.  Consider the author.  Consider the publisher.  Consider the document.  How do you do that last step?  If it's a book, look for book reviews.  If it's a peer-reviewed paper, look for citations and commentary/letters about it.  If it's in a non-scholarly periodical, look for the kinds of sources we would use to write about their reputation and scope.  And so forth.  This is just ordinary "introduction to evaluating your source" work.  It is not special to the academic press. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks User:WhatamIdoing. For the specific example of Shaffer, see On the point raised here, whether the added sentence should or should not be included, do you think it is helpful? For an editor who, perhaps, is not trained in assessing sources, it may not occur to them that academic books are reviewed in academic journals. As above, the concept comes from WP:HISTRS, but, in my view, the advice of checking for reviews in academic journals deserves greater prominence. It is certainly a practice I try and follow. ThoughtIdRetired TIR 07:35, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think that most editors explicitly research the sources they're using. At least twice in the last year, I have accidentally cited a Wikipedia mirror (some company makes a business of printing books of Wikipedia articles and selling them), which I'd never have done if I researched the book.  All I was looking at was the source's contents, not its provenance.  I had a reasonable belief that the Wikipedia article was already correct.
 * I think that review work primarily happens when a source has been contested on a talk page or at RSN. That's when it's useful to know how to determine a source's (or in my case, a publisher's) reputation. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Wow, I didn't realise that I was that unusual. I often check for academic reviews of books before using them as a source. That may be because I live a long way from a decent library, so it is often cheaper to buy a book rather than travel to a library – but I wish to avoid spending money on something that is not worth having. (Strange that the same argument would apply to the cost of travelling to a library to use the same source, but it does not have the same emotional impact.) I find some reviews enormously useful as they can add to the content of the reviewed book. I also keep an eye on book reviews in academic journals to see if any cover subjects of potential interest – often finding things that you would otherwise never discover. Incidentally, I sometimes check the sources in sources, which brought to light an academic paper that took information and the sources from a Wikipedia article (uncredited) where the sources should have been flagged as "failed verification". (The basic fact was wrong.) Another example of circularity, like the Wikipedia mirror case. ThoughtIdRetired TIR 22:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I think it depends on what kind of editing you're doing. If you're deeply invested in an article, it's worth finding the best sources you can, and it would be disappointing indeed to put a lot of time, effort, or money in a source that you ultimately had to discard.  But if you're just trying to get rid of a fact for an uncontroversial claim, then (almost) any old source will do.
 * BTW, I hope you have been mining The Wikipedia Library. I put some time into looking around in it a couple of months ago, and there are literally so many (tens of thousands!) of university press and similar books available for free that I was having trouble figuring out which ones to use.  Look under Brill, Perlego, Wiley for starters.  Several other publishers are in their systems, so it's not just the ones with their own imprint. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes books are often reviewed, yes reviews may help an editor, but an editor is likely to know that already. So I maintain that the sentence is useless, but alas I can't think of a rule against uselessness. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 12:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * That rule is at Avoid instruction creep. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:35, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks but unfortunately that's an essay. I have, though, finally seen that WP:PAG says "Avoid needless words." and "Expect editors to use common sense. If the spirit of the rule is clear, say no more." On that basis I have reverted the re-insertion. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 14:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Audit Bureau of Circulations, UK
In a nutshell, the Audit Bureau of Circulations is some sort of gold standard for auditing media in the United Kingdom, so I do not feel like I need to discuss its reliability at WP:RSN. However, I thought that, in this page and possibly elsewhere, there would be a complete database of reports and certificates for historical publications. I know the Informationsgemeinschaft zur Feststellung der Verbreitung von Werbeträgern has a website that keeps records of such with pages like this for example. With the British Audit Bureau of Circulations, I am not sure where to look. That is a shame, because it makes finding a newspaper's or magazine's dominance in the British media market difficult. The numbers are perhaps not the most important aspect of the publications by a long shot, but occasionally, they do get noted. Does ABC in fact keep such records, and if so, where does one look, or does one have to be a registered member to view them?  Free Media  Kid$  14:51, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

 * @FreeMediaKid!, are you looking for something like this line:
 * May 2024 – Daily Mail  – 688,783 – Avg Circulation Per Issue
 * except for now-defunct magazines? WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:43, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, something like that.  Free Media  Kid$  17:31, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Historical magazines from what I have seen were usually good about posting the numbers, but occasionally the only way to find out about them during a certain time period was to look elsewhere. I have seen one such magazine that stopped publishing the numbers in its imprint early on, yet I was able to uncover one of them in Benn's Media Directory.  Free Media  Kid$  17:53, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't know if they have them, but they probably have a sales/contact address, which could tell you. There's even a small chance that if you explain that it's for Wikipedia, they could give you a free trial account so you can look up the numbers you want.  On our end, as long as the material is available to anyone/the general public (WP:PUBLISHED) who is willing and able to pay for it (WP:PAYWALL), then it's a valid source, even if it's not a popular source or a free one. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:59, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Conference papers
It's not stated explicitly here, but I would just like to check whether conference papers published by academically respectable conferences count as reliable sources. It seems to me that the answer must be yes based on the WP:RS criteria, because they are both published (sometimes in book form), and have been through a peer review process in order to be added to that publication. What constitutes an academically respectable conference is of course debatable, but I would define this as being a conference organized by, and substantially attended by, researchers from mainstream academic institutions with a record of having papers published elsewhere. This would not include predatory conferences, or conferences organized by crank organizations.

I'd be interested in hearing opinions from others on this. — The Anome (talk) 07:40, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

 * See Reliable_sources/Noticeboard.
 * In general, (legitimate) conference proceedings are bottom tier references. They're often used to present in-progress work, very few are peer-reviewed (most are moderated) because the point of the conference is to get present the state of current research and get feedback on it. I heard that in computer science, conferences are often preferred to journals because it's very much of an applied field. Whereas for most sciences, the opposite is true.
 * Fake/sponsored conferences are not even worth considering.   Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 08:02, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Agreed about fake/sponsored conferences. Computer science is exactly the field I have in mind, where conference papers do indeed seem to be preferred to journal publication. — The Anome (talk) 08:15, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * reliable source--yes. and I agree they are not as good as journal articles. Rjensen (talk) 08:25, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * OK. Let me make the narrower claim that in computer science, published conference papers from academically respectable conferences are WP:RS, but published papers are to be preferred where possible. Otherwise, we risk not being able to write anything about significant fields of computer science, for lack of citable material. Does this sound reasonable? — The Anome (talk) 09:04, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Clearly there are good conference papers and bad conference papers. Deciding on their quality is comparable to deciding whether a book is an RS. If the paper is published in book form, who published it? Are there favourable reviews in appropriate academic journals? Citations (checking that they are not disagreeing with the content). What else have authors published and how well recieved was that? I can point to some that are definitive (e.g. Jones, Evan Thomas; Stone, Richard G (eds.). The world of the Newport medieval ship: trade, politics and shipping in the mid-fifteenth century. Cardiff: University of Wales press. ISBN 978-1-78683-263-4.) and others that are more at the forefront of thinking (e.g. The global origins and development of seafaring. Cambridge, UK : Oakville, CT: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of Cambridge ; 2010. ISBN 978-1-902937-52-6., with a review such as presenting a reasonable summary of its strengths and weaknesses – strengths including mapping out what we do and don't know, which is of great value to a wikipedia editor in the subject.) Some conference papers present more than one paper on a topic presenting differing views, so the typical google books limited view could easily mislead an editor into misunderstanding the academic consensus. So an editor needs a bit of subject knowledge and some common sense – just like any other reference decision. ThoughtIdRetired TIR 12:01, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks; I'll take it from there, in the narrow field of computer science, by considering conference papers as conditional RS, with the added requirement for judging papers by their merits, rather than just dredging at random; however, it's usually pretty obvious what the seminal papers are in a field, — The Anome (talk) 16:45, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * A late chimein. I am not a computer scientist (CS), but I have been on tenure and promotion committees where CS faculty have been reviewed. The point was always made by both the Dean & the CS Chair about the importance of conference papers in that field. Apparently sometimes the acceptance rate is low, I seem to remember 10%. Hence in this specific case I believe conditional RS is appropriate. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:21, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Bias and Reliability
I would like to start a conversation to clarify how and when political/cultural Bias affects the reliability of sources (and particularly, news sources). I think there is consensus that it can… but we are less clear about the details… how, when and where source bias does impact on reliability. Blueboar (talk) 12:07, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Bias in news sources often is about the things that you don't say. I read an example of this the other day:  During WWII, the BBC tended not to report good news as coming from the actions of "the Americans" or "the Soviets".  Instead, the visible actors were the UK (e.g., "the RAF") and "our allies".  They also didn't report bad news, or minimized it.  So they're biased, but I'm not sure that this requires a lot of clarification.  This is hardly surprising during a war, and it's not that difficult to work around (assuming it's a current event, because of course we prefer scholarly books for WWII instead of news outlets).
 * It's a similar thing in the modern era. For international conflicts, we expect national news to give us a pro-national slant on the events of the day.  Even for 'culture war' stuff, we expect this; the only difference is that the borders aren't geographical.  I expect that right-wing anti-LGBT news sources run many more articles about 'those dangerous others ' than LGBT+ media outlets.  This is due to bias on both sides.  It doesn't really make either side unreliable for the facts they actually do report. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:59, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

RfC on the language on tertiary sources
There exists an opinion in WP:Identifying and using tertiary sources which to me makes a lot of sense. However, it is an opinion and there is no corresponding statement in the policy, WP:PSTS, which states that: "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources, and to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources." Except in special cases I would consider tertiary sources as below primary, albeit balance is needed. Sometimes tertiary sources are too simple and hence misleading, the lie to children phenomenon. I think the language should be changed to be clearer.

I propose adding to the end of the policy statement at WP:Tertiary the sentence.
 * Secondary sources are always preferred over tertiary ones.

Ldm1954 (talk) 05:07, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

 * This proposal, to me, would codify the preference towards secondary sources. I can support this. SWinxy (talk) 18:38, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support, tertiary sources are often merely indexes or summaries of a secondary source, and in many cases may not even source or link back to the original. Secondary sources should always be used when available, and this would help reinforce that. SmittenGalaxy (talk) 07:33, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Absolute statements like "secondary sources are always preferred over tertiary ones" will have exceptions, so are not usually suitable for policies. In this case, it wouldn't even be good enough for a guideline. For one thing, there is no clear line between a secondary source and a tertiary source. Most sources we think of as secondary cite at least a few other secondary sources, so technically they're tertiary. Also, some tertiary sources are excellent and some secondary sources are not so great. But Ldm1954 asserts this never happens.
 * As for preferring primary sources over tertiary sources, if I were evaluating a paper written by a professional or high-level student, in a field where I had access to the relevant sources, I'd agree. But in Wikipedia the editor choosing sources often has no expertise in the field, and the reader often does not have access to the sources. I don't think there should be a preference for primary sources over tertiary sources in the Wikipedia environment. Jc3s5h (talk) 14:19, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I think LDM1954's proposal if WP:PSTS was more like what "Primary Sources at Yale" says: "Secondary sources typically reference or summarize primary sources and other secondary sources. Examples of secondary sources include scholarly works, textbooks, journal articles, histories, and biographies." But our WP:PSTS makes no mention of secondary sources citing other secondary sources, and classifies lower-division university textbooks as tertiary sources.
 * Another problem is that when a scholar or serious student is writing a paper to be read by others who are competent in the field, there is no need to cite well known information. But there are lot of editors who's primary activity at Wikipedia seems to be slapping Citation needed all over the place. Finding secondary sources to support these well-known facts would be a needless burden. Jc3s5h (talk) 14:40, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Oppose I agree with everything said about absolute statements making for bad policy and the boundary between secondary and tertiary being fuzzy. I'll only add that, wikipedia often covers the same topic at different levels of detail in different articles, and different kinds of sources may accordingly be appropriate. For example, hypothetically:
 * A tertiary source, say a standard university textbook, may be be the best source to use to add a sentence about a 15th c treaty in the respective countries' articles
 * A few secondary sources, say scholarly articles, may be ideal to add a para about the same treaty in articles about the concerned period in the countries' history
 * The treaty itself, a primary source, may be quoted (with care!) in the wikipedia article about the treat
 * The appropriate sourcing depends upon the context and it would be misguided IMO to convert the general advice to use published secondary sources, and to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources into secondary sources are always preferred over tertiary ones. Abecedare (talk) 15:17, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Both Abecedare & Jc3s5h make good points. I am not trying to say that tertiary should never be used, which is why I used preferred. The background to my suggestion is an editor who quotes (very) tertiary sources such as Oxford Dictionary of Physics to counter other editors (plural) using graduate level books as sources, secondary texts which have their own Wiki pages. The claim is that the tertiary sources are within Wiki policy so equally valid, which currently they are. Ldm1954 (talk) 17:45, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ldm1954, it appears that this question is premised upon a misunderstanding. Tertiary sources are not "equally valid" "within Wiki policy".  Specifically, see WP:PSTS (that's the primary source of policy around the primary/secondary/tertiary thing), which begins this way:
 * "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources, and to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources." WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:02, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * WhatamIdoing, I completely agree with you about them not being "equally valid". However, an editor says that since there is no such specific statement in any Policy, the use of tertiary sources rather than primary or secondary is fine. Below is the current wording which has, IMO, wiggle room.
 * Policy: Reliable tertiary sources can help provide broad summaries of topics that involve many primary and secondary sources and may help evaluate due weight, especially when primary or secondary sources contradict each other. Some tertiary sources are more reliable than others. Within any given tertiary source, some entries may be more reliable than others. Wikipedia articles may not be used as tertiary sources in other Wikipedia articles, but are sometimes used as primary sources in articles about Wikipedia itself (see Category:Wikipedia and Category:WikiProject Wikipedia articles).
 * If there is wiggle room an editor will (one has) exploit it. Ldm1954 (talk) 17:22, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * There should be wiggle room, because sometimes a given tertiary source is more reliable than a given secondary source.
 * If this is about Nonmetal, it sounds like you all might be talking at cross purposes. I can find an excellent source that says Cancer is a disease.  I can find an equally gold-plated academic source that says Cancer is a character in a Greek myth.  We don't have to prove that one source is 'wrong' to figure out which subject we want to put at a given title.   WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The context is much wider than that. Going fully public, the context involves statements/edits by Sandbh in talk pages of Nonmetal, Nonmetallic material, Talk:Metal, WT:WikiProject_Physics. and the currently open RfC at WT:WikiProject_Physics. The main 4 people who have an opposite view are Ldm1954 (me), Johnjbarton, Double sharp, Headbomb, although there are several others who also have opposed the view of Sandbh at WT:WikiProject Physics, and YBG has perhaps decided to move on. There has been little to no movement by Sandbh towards a concensus, and he rejected an early attempt by YBG.
 * One specific pair of statements in WT:WikiProject_Physics is what made me raise the issue here
 * :Please note, The Oxford Dictionary of Physics is a tertiary source and as such should be avoided or used with great care, see this essay (with thanks to @HansVonStuttgart for pointing out the information.) Ldm1954 (talk) 09:47, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[ reply]
 * :: @Ldm1954: That essay is neither Wikipedia policy nor guidance. For WP policy, there is WP:PSTS, which states that: "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources, and to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources. --- Sandbh (talk) 12:53, 26 June 2024 (UTC) Ldm1954 (talk) 18:32, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Tertiary sources do not have to be avoided or used with great care. Also, the community does not have a clear understanding of what counts as a tertiary source, so even if we did, it wouldn't necessarily help you.  Someone would claim that the Oxford Encyclopedia, despite the name, isn't really tertiary, and that the other sources really are.
 * The specific dispute really ought to be resolved before trying to change the policies and guidelines, because otherwise we have a significant risk of preventable drama about Gaming the system. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * N.B., the disagreement is not really Cancer as a disease versus a character. It is whether "blue" is everything light/dark/navy or only color code #0000FF. Ldm1954 (talk) 23:07, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Using my analogy, we struggle with discussions about whether "cancer" is everything (carcinoma/sarcoma/lymphoma) or only malignant carcinomas. What you need is to have a discussion that says "We need a global article, and we need some specific/sub articles, and then let's sort out which one gets which name".  What we usually get is "Noooooo, the one with this name is about this subject, so we have to totally change the contents of this page to put 'sub topic 1' on it right now, and put all this stupid general-subject global article content over at [Other page] right now!!!!11!!".  Someone reading through some of these could be forgiven for thinking that none of us knew how to use Special:MovePage. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:13, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with you. We have 4+ votes for a 'general article', and 1 for 'sub topic 1'. The $64,000 question is when/how/if to just WP:BEBOLD, move and have an edit war. (Edit skirmishes already). Ldm1954 (talk) 23:39, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I can easily imagine situations where a tertiary source is a better than a secondary one. This proposal says 2ary sources are not just preferred but always preferred. This means that any use of 3ary sources could be challenged because a 2ary source says something slightly different. The existing policy is appropriately nuanced IMO and should not be tinkered with. If @Ldm1954 wishes to resolve his dispute with @Sandbh by appealing to WP:PSTS, better to make the case using the existing policy rather than seeking to adjust the policy to match the desired outcome. Changing a policy to resolve a single dispute seems unwise indeed. YBG (talk) 02:10, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This proposal does not correspond to actual reliability. Some tertiary sources are written by serious experts while some secondary sources are not. The secondary-tertiary reliability distinction is simply not uniform enough to give an absolute rule. Cases have to be considered on their individual merits. Zerotalk 05:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

 * Oppose. Consistent with the well-considered commentaries of Jc3s5h; Abecedare; WhatamIdoing; YBG; and Zero, I oppose the proposed policy change for several reasons:
 * No immediate nor longer term necessity — There's no burning house nor high risk fire zone that necessitates a policy change.
 * Variable reliability — Tertiary sources can sometimes be more reliable than secondary sources.
 * Ambiguous boundaries — The distinctions between secondary and tertiary sources are often not clear-cut.
 * Citation practices— Most secondary sources cite other secondary sources, which could categorize them as tertiary.
 * Contextual appropriateness — Wikipedia often covers topics at various levels of detail across different articles, requiring different types of sources as appropriate.
 * Contextual sourcing — The appropriateness of a source depends on the specific context and purpose within the article.
 * Reliability concerns — The proposal does not accurately reflect the nuances of source reliability.
 * In light of these points, the existing policy, which allows for nuanced use of sources, remains the most appropriate approach. — Sandbh (talk) 06:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I am going to withdraw the proposal. I remain convinced that WP:Identifying and using tertiary sources matters, and lie to children is real and important. To me a source such as Oxford Dictionary of Physics should not be considered as even close to equal to graduate texts such as Ashcroft and Mermin, which was my original intent. While it relates to an ongoing WP:1AM disput, I proposed it for it's own merits. However the consensus opposes. Ldm1954 (talk) 09:02, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Sideshow comments
I note that in the discussion, Ldm1954 imputes or refers to out-of-context actions I am supposed to have taken, or out-of-context actions I have taken. I regard such content as irrelevant to this discussion and its inclusion as WP:INCIVIL. Thanks to YBG for your comment:
 * "If @Ldm1954 wishes to resolve his dispute with @Sandbh by appealing to WP:PSTS, better to make the case using the existing policy rather than seeking to adjust the policy to match the desired outcome. Changing a policy to resolve a single dispute seems unwise indeed."

Wise words indeed. — Sandbh (talk) 06:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Masters dissertations and theses
"Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence." Why is this? Why are MS theses considered unreliable? Volcanoguy 21:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Also, how can MS dissertations and theses be shown to have had significant scholarly influence? Volcanoguy 21:12, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * What if an MS is used in a reliable source? Volcanoguy 21:33, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

 * There is a recent discussion at Village_pump_(idea_lab) that outlines some of the problems with (some) theses. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:06, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Clarification on reliability and sponsored / promotional content
WP:SPONSORED notes that such sources are "generally unacceptable", but could they still be used for statements of basic fact? For instance could a promotional piece about an individual be used to verify their date and place of birth, and other such non-promotional details? The same for sources that use superlatives, for instance could "They were the greatest artist of all time" be used to verify that they were an artist? I've instinctively thought of the answer to these questions as being 'yes', but I unsure that necessarily matches policy/guidance. -- LCU A ctively D isinterested  «@» °∆t° 10:58, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

 * In the first instance I'd say maybe, depending on the specific case. WP:ABOUTSELF can be argued to apply, but would it be good enough for WP:DOB? IMO, not necessarily. In the second instance I'd say no. If a sponsored source is the best source calling someone an artist, that's not good enough reason WP should. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:23, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * In the second instance what if the source wasn't sponsored but did contain very promotional language? -- LCU A ctively D isinterested  «@» °∆t° 11:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Well for example, while looking for sources for a draft yesterday, a review in The Stage said of my subject "some of the fastest comic juggling you are ever likely to see." I'd absolutely take that as a RS that he's a juggler, if I needed it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:38, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes that the sort of source and issue I meant. -- LCU A ctively D isinterested  «@» °∆t° 11:51, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources


text:
Talk:Daiei

This picture is going here until I can do a rewrite of the article. Mike H 08:44, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Daiei


text:
Apollo 440

Apollo 440 (also known as Apollo Four Forty or @440) are a British electronic music group formed in Liverpool in 1990. The group has written, recorded, and produced five studio albums, collaborated with and produced other artists, remixed as Apollo 440 and as ambient cinematic alter-ego Stealth Sonic Orchestra, and created music for film, television, advertisements and multimedia. They notched up ten UK top 40 singles with three top-tens, and had a chart presence worldwide.

Its name comes from the Apollo program and the frequency of concert pitch — the A note at 440 Hz, often denoted as "A440", and the Sequential Circuits sampler/sequencer, the Studio 440. They changed the writing of their name from Apollo 440 to Apollo Four Forty in 1996, though they switched back for their latest album. To date, Apollo 440's remixes range from U2, P. Diddy/Jimmy Page, Jean-Michel Jarre and Ennio Morricone. Among their Stealth Sonic Orchestra remixes are a series of Manic Street Preachers singles.

History
Apollo 440 were formed by the brothers Trevor and Howard Gray with fellow Liverpudlians Noko and James Gardner. Trevor, Howard and Noko all attended the same school, Old Hall High School in Maghull, in the mid to late 1970's. Gardner left after the recording of the first album. All members sing and add a profusion of samples, electronics, and computer-based sounds.

After relocating to the Camden area of London, Apollo 440 recorded in 1994 with their debut album, Millennium Fever, and released it on 30 January 1995 on their own Stealth Sonic Recordings label (distributed by Epic Records). Their combination of rock, breakbeat, and ambient music has been successful on the record charts as well as on the dance floor.

The band had been most known for its remixes until the release of Liquid Cool in the UK. However, it was not until the success of the singles "Krupa" and "Ain't Talkin' 'bout Dub" that their own musical efforts were brought to international attention – particularly the latter single contributed to pushing Apollo 440 into the spotlight.

In 2007, the band played a tribute gig to the late Billy Mackenzie.

Apollo 440's fifth album, The Future's What It Used To Be, became available for download on the iTunes Store from 23 March 2012.

Collaborators over the years have included Jeff Beck, Jean Michel Jarre, Billy Mackenzie, Ian McCulloch and Tomoyasu Hotei.

Currently, the band resides in Islington, London, having once again moved its headquarters.

Current members

 * Howard Gray - production keyboards, samples, programming (1990–present)
 * Trevor Gray - production, keyboards, samples, programming (1990–present)
 * Noko - production, vocals, guitars, keyboards, samples, programming (1990–present)

Former members

 * James Gardner - bass, keyboards, programming, samples (1990–1993)

Current touring members

 * Cliff Hewitt - drums, programming (1994-present)
 * Mary Byker (Ian Hoxley) - vocals. raps (1997-present)
 * Harry K - turntables, samples, vocals (1997-present)
 * Ashley Krajewski - keyboards, samples, backing vocals (2007-present)
 * Michael Cusick - bass, backing vocals (2008-present)
 * Ewan MacFarlane - vocals (2007-present)

Former touring members

 * MC Stevie Hyper D - raps (1994)
 * Rhoda Dakar - vocals (1994-2004)
 * Paul Kodish - drums, programming (1997-2000)
 * Rej ap Gwynedd - bass (1997-2008)
 * Jonathan "Stan" White - bass (2004)

EPs

 * Rumble EP (1993)
 * A Deeper Dub EP (2011)

Media appearances
Over 50 different Apollo tracks have featured in movies, trailers, TV, games and ads worldwide, the latter including globally branded cars, beers, soft drinks, phones, audio and software. They have also written two entire soundtracks for the Sony PlayStation and provided the themes for ITV World Cup '98 and Formula 1 2000 to 2002 coverage as well as Liverpool F.C.'s Official 2006 FA Cup song.

Video games

 * 1996 Adidas Power Soccer (PlayStation version) - Rumble/Spirit of America
 * 1997 Rapid Racer (Turbo Prop Racing), format: PlayStation CD (Audio CD plus game data track). The soundtrack was also available as an extra CD, as part of the limited edition double CD single release of "Carrera Rapida"
 * 1999 FIFA 2000 - Stop the Rock
 * 1999 Gran Turismo 2 (NTSC version) - Cold Rock the Mic
 * 2000 Spider-Man (2000), featured a remix of "Spider-Man theme song"
 * 2001 ATV Offroad Fury - Yo! Future
 * 2001 Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec (NTSC version) - Stop the Rock (Mint Royale Mix)
 * 2002 F1 2002 (PS2 and PC versions) - Blackbeat
 * 2003 SX Superstar - Cold Rock the Mic
 * 2004 EyeToy: AntiGrav - ???
 * 2004 EyeToy: Groove - Hustler Groove (instrumental)
 * 2004 Gran Turismo 4 - Start the Car
 * 2004 Gran Turismo 4 - Hold the Brakes
 * 2007 Forza Motorsport 2 - SolidRockRazorSteel
 * 2007 Forza Motorsport 2 - Rollin' Down the Highway
 * 2007 Cars Mater-National Championship - Stop The Rock
 * 2012 LittleBigPlanet Karting  - Odessa Dubstep (Instrumental)

Music in film

 * Spawn (1997) the soundtrack : "This Is Not A Dream" (UK Mix), with Mark Sandman of Morphine on vocals
 * Spawn Bonus Track (#15-16)
 * Club Hits 97/98 (1997), (soundtrack to music used during Sky Sport's coverage of Premiership football), featured "Ain't Talkin' 'bout Dub"
 * Species II (1998), featured "Carrera Rapida"
 * Lost in Space (1998), featured "Lost In Space (Theme)"
 * Charlie's Angels (2000), featured a remix of the Charlies Angels theme song
 * Boys and Girls (2000), featured "Stop the Rock" in a club scene
 * Cut (2000), featured "Stop the Rock"
 * Gone in 60 Seconds (2000), featured "Stop the Rock"
 * Driven (2001), features "Stadium Parking Lot" in a montage of several songs during a chase scene
 * Spider-Man (2002), featured "Altamont Super-Highway Revisited" in one of the trailers
 * Resident Evil (2002), featured "Wall Of Death"
 * S.W.A.T. (2003), featured "Time Is Running Out"
 * Eurotrip (2004), featured "Make My Dreams Come True"
 * Chasing Liberty (2004) featured "Stop the Rock"
 * Disaster Movie (2008), featured "Stop the Rock" in the teaser trailer
 * The Sopranos, in "Whoever Did This" (2002) "The Man with the Harmonica" played over the end credits
 * Victoria's Secret Fashion Show 2007, featured "Stop the Rock" in the segment "Sureally Sexy"

Vocalists
Apollo 440 has a history of working with various vocalists. Whilst their debut album, Millennium Fever, was sung almost exclusively by Noko, he has since withdrawn from his vocalist status in the band to make way for various guest appearances, including, but not limited to:
 * Billy Mackenzie on "Pain In Any Language" on Electro Glide in Blue, the last song he recorded.
 * Ewan MacFarlane on "Electro Glide in Blue" on Electro Glide In Blue and numerous tracks on the Dude Descending a Staircase album - currently performing live.
 * Xan on "Something's Got to Give" on Dude Descending a Staircase
 * Jalal Nuriddin on "Children of the Future" on Dude Descending a Staircase
 * The Beatnuts on the title track of Dude Descending a Staircase
 * Elizabeth Gray on "Christiane" on Dude Descending a Staircase and "Stealth Mass" on Electro Glide in Blue
 * Mary Byker (Ian Hoxley) on "Ain't Talkin' 'bout Dub", "Raw Power" on Electro Glide in Blue and "Stop The Rock" on Gettin' High On Your Own Supply - performed as live vocalist until 2004.

Jean Baudrillard
The album, Millennium Fever, is a tribute to the French philosopher Jean Baudrillard. Since the release of that album, other references to Jean Baudrillard's works have popped up.
 * The track, "Astral America", references Baudrillard's book America, where the term originates.
 * The track, "The Perfect Crime", references Baudrillard's book of the same name.
 * The lyrics of "Stealth Requiem" reference the Baudrillardian concept of hyperreality. At one point a female voice says, "Ravishing hyperrealism ... Mind blowing", and later quotes directly from America (1988): "The exhilaration of obscenity; the obscenity of obviousness; the obviousness of power; the power of simulation."

Marcel Duchamp
The title and cover art of the album Dude Descending a Staircase are parodies of Nude Descending a Staircase, No. 2 by Marcel Duchamp.

Alcor
The song "Liquid Cool" (released as a B-side in 1993, as a single in 1994, and featured on the Millennium Fever album) is a tribute to Alcor, a company focused to pursue research into and the organization of cryonization. The topic is also referenced in the title-song "Millennium Fever", which includes the line, '"I've been dreaming of freezing my mind in California'" where Alcor was based until 1994. Contact details for Alcor subsequently appeared on the sleeve of the single "(Don't Fear) The Reaper", a cover of the Blue Öyster Cult song.

Omega Point
The song "Omega Point" references the religious concept of the same name, and features a quote from Barrow and Tipler's "The Anthropic Cosmological Principle".

Krupa
Their 1996 song is a homage to the Polish-American drummer Gene Krupa and his improvised style of drumming.

Charles Bukowski
On the album Electro Glide in Blue, track 6 called "Tears of the Gods" (6:18) features audio quotes from the 1970s video performance "Bukowski at Bellevue". The quotes are all taken from a piece entitled "Soup, Cosmos, and Tears." (A transcription of the video can be found at the Blithering Savant blog.)

Slavoj Žižek
The song "Love is Evil", on the album The Future's What It Used to Be, contains samples from the Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek.

title: Apollo 440


text:
Reivilo

Reivilo is a town situated 100 km southwest of Vryburg on the Ghaap Plateau in North West Province of South Africa. Large scale lead and zinc mining took place in the district.

History
The town was established in 1883 and at first named Cathcart West (to distinguish it from Cathcart, Eastern Cape). The name was then changed in 1890 to Klein Boetsap, and then finally it was renamed after Rev AJ Olivier (Olivier reversed is Reivilo).

Economy
Reivilo is a traditional farming communinity. The main farming business is cattle, this is dictated by the geology of the area, because there is not enough arable soil for agriculture. Bedrock exists right to the ground surface, being an ancient and hard dolomite, with extraordinary stromatolitic features, representing life forms more than 2 billion years old. There was a successful cheese factory in Reivilo for many years.

In the very early 1980s Shell South Africa (Pty) Ltd developed a lead and zinc mine near Reivilo called Pering. It operated successfully for about 18 years and then closed down. Shell mined about 18 million tonnes of ore, containing perhaps 750,000 tonnes of zinc and lead metal from the Pering Mine during that time. At present there is no mining taking place near Reivilo.

The town today includes the Reivilo golf course to the north of the town, and a small aeroplane landing strip, to the north-west.

title: Reivilo


text:
User talk:Aguy likeme

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

 * Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try How to edit a page.
 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use 	 ~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type (3 tildes).
 * You can experiment in the test area.
 * You can get help at the Help Desk
 * Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines, Neutral point of view, Civility, What Wikipedia is not
 * If you made IP edits before creating a user account, you can attribute your IP edits to your account at Changing attribution for an edit.

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop a note at New user log.

-- Utcursch | Talk to me

LOTD
Welcome, and thanks for working on LOTD. I wanted to explain my last edit. Per WP:NOT and WP:MOSDAB, disambiguation pages shouldn't list every possible abbreviation, only abbreviations that have an encyclopedia article should be listed.

On the other hand, wiktionary is a dictionary, and to some extent they allow for lists of abbreviations (for example, see BF). I'm not familiar enough with their policy there, but for some reason, they also don't usually have the sort of extensive listings that TheFreeDictionary does. Anyway, on wikipedia, it's best to keep to entries that have (or are likely to have) encyclopedia articles. --Interiot 17:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Speedy delete notice
A tag has been placed on Kapal Bhati Pranayama, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Buddhipriya 08:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Anulom Vilom Pranayama, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Buddhipriya 18:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Bhastrika Pranayama, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Buddhipriya 18:29, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Toor

The article Toor has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * Fails WP:GNG. In all my years of looking, the only sort-of reliable source I have found which mentions this community is this, which is basically a passing mention in a list. According to that source, it isn't even a major gotra but rather a sub-gotra. Redirecting to Banjara won't really work because I am sure that, as a sub-gotra, the thing does exist across various castes rather than just one (yes, this is WP:OR but it is based on a lot of experience).

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sitush (talk) 06:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Toor for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Toor is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Toor until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sitush (talk) 08:09, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Aguy likeme


text:
User talk:Dunhelmian

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

 * Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try How to edit a page.
 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use 	 ~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type (3 tildes).
 * You can experiment in the test area.
 * You can get help at the Help Desk
 * Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines, Neutral point of view, Civility, What Wikipedia is not
 * If you made IP edits before creating a user account, you can attribute your IP edits to your account at Changing attribution for an edit.

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop a note at New user log.

-- Utcursch | Talk to me

title: User talk:Dunhelmian


text:
Frankfurt (disambiguation)

Frankfurt am Main is a major city in Hesse, Germany.

Frankfurt may also refer to:

Germany

 * Frankfurt (Oder), Brandenburg, on the Polish border
 * Bezirk Frankfurt, a district of the German Democratic Republic (1952–1990)
 * Frankfurt, a village in Markt Taschendorf, Bavaria
 * Frankfurt, a settlement in Wanzleben, Saxony-Anhalt

Frankfurt am Main

 * Free City of Frankfurt, (until 1806) within the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation
 * Grand Duchy of Frankfurt (1810–1813)
 * Free City of Frankfurt, (1815–1866) an independent city-state and member of the German Confederation
 * Frankfurt Parliament (German National Assembly founded during the revolutions of 1848)
 * Rural district of Frankfurt, a rural district (Landkreis) in the Prussian province of Hesse-Nassau (1885–1910)
 * Frankfurt Urban Environs Authority (Umlandverband Frankfurt) (1975–2001); See Kelsterbach
 * Frankfurt Airport
 * Frankfurt Stock Exchange
 * Eintracht Frankfurt, a German sports club
 * FSV Frankfurt, another German sports club
 * Frankfurt School, of social theory and research and of philosophy

People

 * Akiva Frankfurt (d. 1597), German poet and rabbi
 * Harry Frankfurt (1929–2023), professor of philosophy at Princeton University
 * Suzie Frankfurt (1931–2005), American interior decorator
 * Wilhelmina Frankfurt, American ballerina

Other uses

 * SMS Frankfurt, a German light cruiser warship
 * SS Frankfurt, a German steamship
 * Frankfurt am Main (A1412), a Berlin-class replenishment ship of the German Navy
 * Frankfurt (icebreaker), an inland icebreaker built for the German waterways and shipping office
 * Frankfurt plane, a special plane in the human skull
 * Cocktail frankfurt, a miniature saveloy sausage
 * Frankfurt Seamount, a seamount named after the German steamship

title: Frankfurt (disambiguation)


text:
Four Days in September

Four Days in September (O Que É Isso, Companheiro?) is a 1997 Brazilian thriller film directed by Bruno Barreto and produced by his parents Lucy and Luiz Carlos Barreto. It is a dramatized version of the 1969 kidnapping of the United States Ambassador to Brazil, Charles Burke Elbrick, by members of Revolutionary Movement 8th October (MR-8) and Ação Libertadora Nacional (ALN).

It was nominated as Best Foreign Language Film at the 1998 Academy Awards.

Background
The film is "loosely based" on the 1979 memoir O Que É Isso, Companheiro? (in English: What Was That, Man?), written by politician Fernando Gabeira. In 1969, as a member of Revolutionary Movement 8th October (MR-8), a student guerrilla group, he participated in the abduction of the United States ambassador to Brazil, negotiating to gain release of leftist political prisoners. MR-8 was protesting the recent takeover of Brazil by a military government and seeking the release of political prisoners. But, the military increased its repression of dissent, MR-8 and ALN members were tortured by the police, and democracy was not re-established in Brazil until 1985.

Gabeira later became a journalist and politician, elected as congressman from the Green Party.

Plot
The film is a fictionalized version of the dramatic events of the abduction of the American ambassador Charles Burke Elbrick (played by Alan Arkin). Elbrick was kidnapped in Rio de Janeiro by the Revolutionary Movement 8th October (MR-8) with the help of the Ação Libertadora Nacional. Gabeira (played by Pedro Cardoso and named Paulo in the film) as a student joins the radical movement after Brazil's military overthrew its government in a 1964 coup. In 1969, he and his comrades decide to kidnap the American ambassador to protest the Brazilians' coup; the film busies itself with the group's conspiring and execution of the crime. Paulo is portrayed as "the most intelligent and uncertain of the kidnappers."

The film explores Paulo's love affair with Andréia, the guerrilla leader. It suggests a kind of friendship developing between Paulo and Elbrick. The ambassador is portrayed as a decent man who shares some of his kidnappers' frustrations regarding the Brazilian military dictatorship, and one who fulfills his duty to his own government.

Cast
The main characters include:
 * Paulo / Fernando Gabeira (Pedro Cardoso) - member of the MR-8 guerrilla group and one of the kidnappers.
 * Andréia / Maria (Fernanda Torres) - the beautiful and tough MR-8 guerrilla-group leader who falls in love with Paulo/Fernando.
 * Charles Burke Elbrick (Alan Arkin) - the American ambassador, who forms a bond with Paulo/Fernando.
 * Jonas / Virgílio Gomes da Silva (Matheus Nachtergaele) - member of ALN guerrilla group
 * Marcão / Franklin Martins (Luiz Fernando Guimarães) - second in command to the MR-8 guerrilla group and one of the kidnappers.
 * Renée / Vera Sílvia Magalhães (Cláudia Abreu) - member of the MR-8 guerrilla group and one of the kidnappers.
 * Toledo / Joaquim Câmara Ferreira (Nélson Dantas) - member of ALN guerrilla group. He's a Spanish expatriate in Brazil that fought the dictatorship of Francoist Spain
 * Henrique (Marco Ricca) - former Navy enlistee and member of the National Intelligence Service of Brazil
 * Brandão (Maurício Gonçalves) - member of the National Intelligence Service of Brazil
 * Júlio / Cid Benjamin (Caio Junqueira) - member of the MR-8 guerrilla group and one of the kidnappers.
 * César / Oswaldo (Selton Mello) - member of the MR-8 guerrilla group, arrested prior to the kidnapping of the Ambassador.
 * Dona Margarida / Elba Souto-Maior (Fernanda Montenegro)
 * Lília (Alessandra Negrini) - wife of Henrique
 * Mowinkel (Fisher Stevens)

Critical response
The film had mixed reviews, in part because of its fictionalizing Brazilian history, and its uneasy portrayal of terrorist activities by student radicals. Four Days in September has an approval rating of 59% on review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, based on 17 reviews, and an average rating of 6.5/10.

Stephen Holden of The New York Times wrote, "Four Days in September is an uneasy hybrid of political thriller and high-minded meditation on terrorism, its psychology and its consequences." He noted that the film suggests the kidnapping was followed by worse political events, with increased repression, and torture of MR-8 members. He describes Cardoso as the most complex character.

Roger Ebert gave it two stars, saying the film was marked by a "quiet sadness" and the "film examines the way that naive idealists took on more than they could handle." He suggests that the film tries to humanize both sides but seems muddled. Ebert writes, "The point of view is that of a middle-age man who no longer quite understands why, as a youth, he was so sure of things that now seem so puzzling."

Awards
Internationally, the film was nominated for many awards, including Best Foreign Language Film by the Academy Awards. Brazil entered it into the 47th Berlin International Film Festival.

title: Four Days in September


text:
Stella, South Africa

Stella is a cattle farming town situated in North West Province of South Africa between Vryburg and Mafikeng.

The large salt pan on the outskirts of town, especially well known for the number of lions in the area, was visited by a number of early European travellers, including David Livingstone and Robert Moffat.

The first white people settled in the area in 1882, and the following year a fight broke out between the baTlhaping and the Korana under David Mossweu. A large number of white mercenaries fought on both sides of the conflict, and when the war ended they were given land to farm in return for their services. Under their leader, Van Niekerk, they proclaimed their area the Republic of Stellaland, after a comet which had been visible while the fighting was going on. Electricity was introduced only in 1973.

The Stella Beesfees (Cattle Festival) is held every year during October. The town has a high school, but this also houses the nursery and primary pupils.

title: Stella, South Africa


text:
User talk:^Syke^

E-bomb
Great contributions so far! With only one hang-up; according to Copyrights (under Contributors' rights and obligations), we should: Never use materials that infringe the copyrights of others. This could create legal liabilities and seriously hurt the project. If in doubt, write it yourself. Note that copyright law governs the creative expression of ideas, not the ideas or information themselves. Therefore, it is perfectly legal to read an encyclopedia article or other work, reformulate it in your own words, and submit it to Wikipedia.

I hate to bring this up -- the e-bomb article has been badly needing cited sources for a while now, and you've done a really good job on expanding the article -- but by merely copying the text, you run the risk of the information being deleted before it gets transformed into a form that is usable on Wikipedia for the long term.

I'll see if I can rephrase some of the text later this week, so that we don't lose the great info you've given us. You should try to do some of the same. (c; - Eric Herboso

See also: Contributing FAQ, Talk:E-bomb

 * Sorry about accidentally spamming your user page. I meant to put the content here, and didn't realize it until just now.  My mistake.  Next time I should get some much needed sleep before editing like that.... - Eric Herboso  08:55, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:^Syke^


text:
User talk:Rbphd2009/Viperball

On 15 Feb 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. See Votes for deletion/Viperball for a record of the discussion. Rossami (talk) 08:40, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rbphd2009/Viperball


text:
Collet

A collet is a segmented sleeve, band or collar. One of the two radial surfaces of a collet is usually tapered (i.e a truncated cone) and the other is cylindrical. The term collet commonly refers to a type of chuck that uses collets to hold either a workpiece or a tool (such as a drill), but collets have other mechanical applications.

An external collet is a sleeve with a cylindrical inner surface and a conical outer surface. The collet can be squeezed against a matching taper such that its inner surface contracts to a slightly smaller diameter, squeezing the tool or workpiece to hold it securely. Most often the collet is made of spring steel, with one or more kerf cuts along its length to allow it to expand and contract. This type of collet holds the external surface of the tool or workpiece being clamped. This is the most usual type of collet chuck. An external collet clamps against the internal surface or bore of a hollow cylinder. The collet's taper is internal and the collet expands when a corresponding taper is drawn or forced into the collet's internal taper.

As a clamping device, collets are capable of producing a high clamping force and accurate alignment. While the clamping surface of a collet is normally cylindrical, it can be made to accept any defined shape.

Collet chucks for machine tools

Generally, a collet chuck, considered as a unit, consists of a tapered receiving sleeve (sometimes integral with the machine spindle), the collet proper (usually made of spring steel) which is inserted into the receiving sleeve, and (often) a cap that screws over the collet, clamping it via another taper.

For machining operations, such as turning, chucks are commonly used to hold the workpiece. The table below gives a functional comparison of the three most common types of chuck used for holding workpieces.

Collets have a narrow clamping range and a large number of collets are required to hold a given range of tools (such as drills) or stock material. This gives the disadvantage of higher capital cost and makes them unsuitable for general usage in electric drills, etc. However, the collet's advantage over other types of chuck is that it combines all of the following traits into one chuck; making it highly useful for repetitive work.

Metalworking
There are many types of collet used in the metalworking industry. Common industry-standard designs are R8 (internally threaded for mills) and 5C (usually externally threaded for lathes). There are also proprietary designs which only fit one manufacturer's equipment. Collets can range in holding capacity from zero to several inches in diameter. The most common type of collet grips a round bar or tool, but there are collets for square, hexagonal, and other shapes. In addition to the outside-holding collets, there are collets used for holding a part on its inside surface so that it can be machined on the outside surface (similar to an expanding mandrel). Furthermore, it is not uncommon for machinists to make a custom collet to hold any unusual size or shape of part. These are often called emergency collets (e-collets) or soft collets (from the fact that they are bought in a soft (unhardened) state and machined as needed). Yet another type of collet is a step collet which steps up to a larger diameter from the spindle and allows holding of larger workpieces.

In use, the part to be held is inserted into the collet and then the collet is pressed (using a threaded nose cap) or drawn (using a threaded drawbar) into the body which has a conjugate taper form. The taper geometry serves to translate a portion of the axial drawing force into a radial clamping force. When properly tightened, enough force is applied to securely clamp the workpiece or tool. The cap or drawbar threads act as a screw lever, and this leverage is compounded by the taper, such that a modest torque on the screw produces an enormous clamping force.

The precise, symmetric form and rigid material of the collet provide precise, repeatable radial centering and axial concentricity. The basic mechanism fixes four of the six degrees of kinematic freedom, two locations and two angles. Collets may also be fitted to precisely align parts in the axial direction (a fifth degree of freedom) with an adjustable internal stop or by a shoulder stop machined into the internal form. The remaining sixth degree of freedom, namely the rotation of the part in the collet, may be fixed by using square, hexagonal, or other non-circular part geometry.

ER collets
The "ER" collet system, developed and patented by Swiss manufacturer Rego-Fix in 1972, and standardized as DIN 6499, is the most widely used tool clamping system in the world and today available from many producers worldwide. The standard series are: ER-8, ER-11, ER-16, ER-20, ER-25, ER-32, ER-40, and ER-50. The "ER" name came from an existing "E" collet (which were a letter series of names) which Rego-Fix modified and appended "R" for "Rego-Fix". The series number is the opening diameter of the tapered receptacle, in millimetres. ER collets collapse to hold parts up to 1 mm smaller than the nominal collet internal size in most of the series (up to 2 mm smaller in ER-50, and 0.5 mm in smaller sizes) and are available in 1 mm or 0.5 mm steps. Thus a given collet holds any diameter ranging from its nominal size to its 1-mm-smaller collapsed size, and a full set of ER collets in nominal 1 mm steps fits any possible cylindrical diameter within the capacity of the series. With an ER fixture chuck, ER collets may also serve as workholding fixtures for small parts, in addition to their usual application as toolholders with spindle chucks. Although a metric standard, ER collets with internal inch sizes are widely available for convenient use of imperial sized tooling. The spring geometry of the ER collet is well-suited only to cylindrical parts, and not typically applied to square or hexagonal forms like 5C collets.

Autolock collets
"Autolock" collet chucks (Osbourn "Pozi-Lock" is a similar system) were designed to provide secure clamping of milling cutters with only hand tightening. They were developed in the 1940s by a now defunct UK company, Clarkson (Engineers) Limited, and are commonly known as Clarkson chucks. Autolock collets require cutters with threaded shank ends to screw into the collet itself. Any rotation of the cutter forces the collet against the collet cap taper which tightly clamps the cutter, the screw fitting also prevents any tendency of the cutter to pull out. Collets are only available in fixed sizes, imperial or metric, and the cutter shank must be an exact match.

The tightening sequence of Autolock collets is widely misunderstood. The chuck cap itself does not tighten the collet at all, with the cap tight and no tool inserted the collet is loose in the chuck. Only when a cutter is inserted will the collet be pressed against the cap taper. The back of the cutter engages with a centering pin and further turning drives the collet against the chuck cap, tightening around the cutter shank, hence "Autolock".

The correct installation sequence as per the original specification is:
 * 1) Insert the collet and hand tighten the chuck cap (collet free to float)
 * 2) Insert the tool and hand tighten (tool engaged with rear pin and collet engaging cap taper)

As the tool is used further rotation tightens the collet and the centering pin ensures that tool extension and alignment remain unchanged. A spanner is only required to release the locked collet.

While threaded shank "Autolock" tools may be gripped by plain collets, such as ER, plain shank tools should never be used in an "Autolock" collet as they will not be properly clamped or aligned.

R8 collets

R8 collets were developed by Bridgeport Machines, Inc. for use in milling machines. Unusually, R8 collets fit into the machine taper itself (i.e. there is no separate chuck) and tools with integral R8 taper can also be directly fitted. R8 was developed to allow rapid tool changes and requires an exact match between collet and tool shank diameter.

R8 collets have a keyway to prevent rotation when fitting or removing, but it is the compressed taper and not the keyway that provides the driving force. Collets are compressed by a drawbar from behind, they are self releasing and tool changes can be automated.

5C collets
Unlike most other machine collet systems, 5C collets were developed primarily for work holding. Superficially similar to R8 collets, 5C collets have an external thread at the rear for drawing the collet closed and so work pieces may pass right through the collet and chuck (5C collets often also have an internal thread for workpiece locating). Collets are also available to hold square and hex stock. 5C collets have a limited closing range, and so shank and collet diameters must be a close match. A number of other C-series collets (1C, 3C, 4C, 5C, 16C, 20C & 25C) with different holding ranges also exist.

A collet system with capabilities similar to the 5C (originally a proprietary system of Hardinge) is the 2J (originally a proprietary system of Sjogren, a competitor of Hardinge, and which Hardinge later assimilated).

355E Collets
The SO Deckel tool grinders use these. Sometimes called U2 collets.

Watchmaker collets
Watchmaking at Waltham, Massachusetts led to the invention of collets. Watchmakers' lathes all take collets which are sized by their external thread. The most popular size is 8 mm which came in several variations but all 8 mm collets are interchangeable. Lorch, a German Lathe maker, started with 6 mm collets and the first Boleys used a 6.5 mm collet. 6 mm collets will fit into a 6.5 mm lathe but it is a poor practice. Another popular size is the 10 mm collet used by Clement and Levin. For work holding, collets are sized in 0.1 mm increments with the number on the face being the diameter in tenths of a millimetre. Thus a 5 is a 0.5 mm collet.

Watchmaker collets come in additional configurations. There are step collets which step inward to hold gear wheels by the outer perimeter. These typically were made in sets of five to accommodate a range of different size gear wheels. These, like straight rod-holding collets, close on the outer taper. Ring collets also come in sets of five and hold work from inside a hole. They open as they are tightened by an outside taper against the outer taper of the lathe headstock.

Watch collets also include taper adapters and wax or cement chucks. These collets take an insert, usually brass, to which small parts are cemented, usually with shellac.

The book The Modern Watchmaker's Lathe and How to Use it contains tables of makers and sizes; note that it refers to basic collets as split wire chucks.

DIN 6343 dead length collets
These collets are common especially on production machines, particularly European lathes with lever or automated closers. Unlike draw-in collets, they do not pull back to close, but are generally pushed forward, with the face remaining in place.

Multi-size collets
Collets allowing a wider range of workholding by means of springs or elastic spacers between jaws; such collets were developed by Jacobs (Rubberflex), Crawford (Multibore), and Pratt Burnerd, and are in some cases compatible with certain spring collet chucks.

Morse taper collets
The Morse taper is a common machine taper frequently used in drills, lathes and small milling machines. Chucks for drilling usually use a Morse taper and can be removed to accommodate Morse taper drill bits. Morse taper collet sets usually employ ER collets in an adaptor to suit the Morse taper. The adaptor is threaded to be held in place with a drawbar. They can be used to hold strait-shanked tooling (drills and milling cutters) more securely and with better accuracy (less run-out) than a chuck.

Woodwork
On a wood router (a hand-held or table-mounted power tool used in woodworking), the collet is what holds the bit in place. In the U.S. it is generally for 0.25 or bits, while in Europe bits are most commonly 6 ,. The collet nut is hexagonal on the outside so it can be tightened or loosened with a standard wrench, and has threads on the inside so it can be screwed onto the motor arbor.

Craft hobbies
Many users (hobbyists, graphic artists, architects, students, and others) may be familiar with collets as the part of an X-Acto or equivalent knife that holds the blade. Another common example is the collet that holds the bits of a Dremel or equivalent rotary tool.

Semiconductor work
In semiconductor industry, a die collet is used for picking a die up from a wafer after die cutting process has finished, and bonding it into a package. Some of them are made with rubber, and use vacuum for picking.

Internal combustion engines
Most internal combustion engines use a split collet to hold both the inlet and exhaust valves under constant valve spring pressure which returns the valves to their closed position when the camshaft lobes are not in contact with the top of the valves. The two collet halves have an internal raised rib which locate into a circular groove near the top of each valve stem, the outer side of the collet halves are a taper fit into the spring retainer (also known as a collar), this taper locks the retainer in place and the raised rib that sits in the circular groove on the valve stem also locks the collet halves in place to the valve stem. To remove the valves from a cylinder head a 'valve spring compressor' is used to compress the valve springs by exerting force on the spring retainer which allows the collets to be removed, when the compressor is removed, the retainer, spring and valve can then be removed from the cylinder head. It may be realized that the retainer does not budge when the valve spring compressor is used, this is due to a buildup of carbon which over time has locked the retainer and collets slightly. A slight sharp tap on the backside of the valve spring compressor above the valve stem should free the retainer allowing the springs to be compressed whilst retrieving the split collet. On reassembly it is difficult to keep the split collets in place whilst the compressor is released, by applying a small amount of grease to the internal side of the split collets will keep them in place on the valve stem whilst releasing the compressor, then as the spring retainer rises it locks the tapered split collets in place.

Firearms
The Blaser R93 (and related models) use a unique bolt locking system that employs an expanding collet. The collet has claw-like L-shaped segments that face outward from the axis of the barrel. The multiple claws give a large contact area to distribute load. As the breech is closed, the collet expands, extending the claws to engaging with an annular groove in the barrel just behind the chamber; locking the bolt closed.

title: Collet


text:
Hiragana Times

Hiragana Times (ひらがな タイムズ) is a magazine published in Japan; its audience is foreigners residing in Japan. The Hiragana Times is unique in that all the articles are written in both English and Japanese, with no bias between the languages. It has been published monthly in English and Japanese since 1986.

Background and profile
The name of Hiragana Times was inspired by the fact that all kanji in the magazine have hiragana translations adjacent to it. This is known as furigana, and it allows more novice readers to comprehend the articles in both languages.

The magazine is published monthly and contains articles of cultural importance to its readers, focusing on Japanese language and culture with bilingual content in Japanese and English.

title: Hiragana Times


text:
Wallington, Hampshire

Wallington is a village in Hampshire, part of the borough of Fareham. It is situated between Portsmouth and Southampton near where the River Wallington enters Portsmouth Harbour.

The name Wallington probably means 'settlement of the Welsh' (or Britons) – Weala-tun / Walintone (Old English) and not 'walled town' as might be inferred.

Industry
The village is now an affluent residential suburb of Fareham, but was once a separate entity with a brewery and tannery as its main industries. Wallington was also important in brickmaking and pottery. The bricks known as "Fareham reds" were made locally – the most famous use of which is the Royal Albert Hall. Wallington also boasts the largest collection of Fareham pots – chimney pots.

Fort Wallington
In the 1860s the Royal Commission on the Defences of the United Kingdom recommended that a line of forts be built along Portsdown Hill. The western end of this line was Fort Wallington. Building of the fort was started in 1861 and completed in 1874. Following its sale to Mr J. Sullivan of the Southern Counties Trading Company the fort has been used as an industrial depot, and much of the old fort has been demolished – little now remains. What remains is now a Grade II Listed Building.

Wallington Village Community Association
The WVCA is an organisation based in the Village Hall. It is involved in many areas of village life. It began in the late 1970s initially in response to the threat of demolition to the bridge over River Wallington as it was seen as the cause of flooding.

2012 River Wallington Flood
In December 2012, Wallington made national headlines after residents were ordered to evacuate by the Environment Agency due to potential heavy flooding from a breakdown in flood defences. The breakdown of flood defences (according to the BBC) has led to heavy flooding in the area leading to six people so far having to be rescued by Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service from submerged vehicles in addition to two persons who had to be rescued by a Police Community Support Officer (PCSO) from their submerged car which had become stranded in a ford in Sway, Hampshire.

Noted Person
Jerold Wells

title: Wallington, Hampshire


text:
Charles Burke Elbrick

Charles Burke Elbrick (March 25, 1908 – April 12, 1983) was a United States diplomat and career foreign service officer. During his career, he served three ambassadorships: in Portugal, Yugoslavia and Brazil, in addition to numerous minor postings.

Elbrick spoke Portuguese, Spanish, French and German, and was regarded as an expert on Iberia and Eastern Europe after World War II.

Early life and education
Elbrick was born in Louisville, Kentucky, the son of Charles Elbrick and his Irish wife Lillian Burke, and raised as a Roman Catholic. Transferring after a freshman year at the University of Notre Dame, he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree from Williams College in 1929, narrowly missing selection for a Rhodes Scholarship. He had aimed to begin a career in publishing in New York, but the Wall Street Crash of 1929 persuaded him to work instead for the US Government. He therefore studied languages to prepare for a career with the United States Department of State.

Foreign service career
Commissioned into the United States Foreign Service in 1931, Elbrick was initially appointed Vice Consul in Panama, and then Southampton, England. He next served as Third Secretary at Port-au-Prince, Haiti, before transferring in that rank to Warsaw, Poland in 1937. In 1939, Elbrick followed the Polish government into exile after the invasion by the German Nazi army. While leaving Warsaw in convoy, the diplomatic convoy was strafed by German planes, and Elbrick had to leap to cover in a roadside ditch. He joined the Polish government-in-exile at Angers, France. When the German blitzkrieg smashed into France in the spring of 1940, Elbrick had to flee again, this time to Spain. He spent most of World War II as an embassy official in Lisbon, and as consul in Tangier. During this time he added Portuguese to his other foreign languages, which were German, French and Spanish.

After the war, Elbrick returned to Poland in June 1945 to reopen the US Embassy, then went to the State Department as assistant chief of the Division of East European Affairs. He served as Counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Havana from 1949 to 1951. In 1951 and 1952, he served respectively as Counselor of the US Embassy in London and then in Paris and as a delegate to the North Atlantic Council.

From 1953 to 1957 Elbrick was deputy assistant secretary of State for European affairs, and was promoted to Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs in 1957. Thereafter, Ambassador Elbrick was variously the representative of the United States to Portugal (1958), Yugoslavia (1964), and Brazil (1969).

In August 1968, when Soviet-led forces invaded Czechoslovakia, Elbrick, then Ambassador in Belgrade, was summoned by Marshal Tito and asked about United States policy toward Yugoslavia. "The same as always", Elbrick said. "To support Yugoslav independence and integrity. Do you need any help?" "Not now", said Tito, thanking Ambassador Elbrick for inquiring.

1969 kidnapping in Brazil
A year later, while stationed in Brazil, Elbrick was kidnapped from a road-block on September 4, 1969, and held for 78 hours by the Revolutionary Movement 8th October (MR-8) in Rio de Janeiro. The ambassador's driver was released unharmed with a note demanding the release of 15 unnamed political prisoners and the publication of a three-page manifesto from Revolutionary Movement 8th October. If the demands were not met within 48 hours, MR-8 threatened to carry out 'revolutionary justice', by executing Elbrick. The ambassador was released in exchange for the government's release of fifteen political prisoners. The kidnapping occurred as a means to bring media attention to the repression, imprisonment and torture of Brazilian citizens by the Brazilian military regime. Ambassador Elbrick remarked, "Being an ambassador is not always a bed of roses."

In 1969, Ambassador Elbrick was honored by the President of the United States with the rank of Career Ambassador, the highest in the Foreign Service, in recognition of especially distinguished service over a sustained period. Following his retirement in 1973, Elbrick was awarded the Foreign Service Cup by his fellow Foreign Service officers. He resided in Washington, DC, and Gilbertsville, New York. Ambassador Elbrick received an honorary doctorate from Hartwick College in Oneonta, New York.

Family
Elbrick married Elvira Lindsay Johnson (1910–1990) at St. Matthew's Cathedral, Washington DC, on July 27, 1932. Elvira was the daughter of Hannah Cox Harris (descendant of Thomas Harris, addressee of the Rhode Island Royal Charter of 1663), and Alfred Wilkinson Johnson, later a Vice Admiral in the US Navy. Elvira's mother was a direct descendant of Abijah Gilbert, the founder of Gilbertsville, New York (1787). Her father was the son of Commodore Philip Carrigan Johnson, by her namesake Elvira Lindsay Acevedo of Talcahuano (Chile), and nephew of celebrated painter and co-founder of the Metropolitan Museum, Eastman Johnson.

Elbrick and Elvira had two children: Alfred (born 1938) and Valerie (born 1942). Elbrick was survived by his wife, children, and six grandchildren: Tristan, Sophie, Alexia, and Xanthe, and brothers Burke and Nicholas Hanlon.

Honors
Elbrick was appointed a Knight Grand Cross of the Order of Prince Henry. He was knighted in the Sovereign Military and Hospitaller Order of St. John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta (Sovereign Military Order of Malta) by the Prince and Grand Master, Fra' Angelo de Mojana di Cologna. He was also knighted in the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre (Order of the Holy Sepulchre) by the Grand Master Maximilian, Cardinal de Furstenberg.

Elbrick's honors and decorations included:

Representation in popular culture

 * The events of Ambassador Elbrick's abduction in Brazil were recounted by Fernando Gabeira in his 1979 memoir, O Que É Isso Companheiro? (in English: What's This, Comrade?). The former member of revolutionary cell MR-8 had become a journalist and elected congressman in Brazil's Green Party.
 * The 1997 Brazilian film, Four Days in September, was based on Gabeira's memoir. It was directed by Bruno Barreto, featuring Alan Arkin as Ambassador Elbrick, with Pedro Cardoso and Fisher Stevens.

Death
Elbrick died April 15, 1983, aged 75, at Georgetown University Hospital in Washington, D.C. His funeral was held at St. Matthew's Cathedral, Washington D.C. His obituary in The New York Times described him as "a tall, slender man of suave demeanor in exquisite suits...[who]...showed dash and bravery in moments of crisis". The Washington Post recorded that "He was tall, meticulously dressed and soft-spoken. Colleagues said he looked like a diplomat, but one of them, the late ambassador James W. Riddleberger, was quick to add, [Elbrick] has plenty of guts. He is a very sturdy fellow."

title: Charles Burke Elbrick


text:
Taung

Taung is a small town situated in the North West Province of South Africa. The name means place of the lion and was named after Tau, the King of the Barolong. Tau is the Tswana word for lion.

Taung skull fossil site
In 1924, a skull (later named the Taung Child) was discovered by a quarry-worker in the nearby Buxton-limestone quarry. It was described by Raymond Dart in 1925 as the type specimen of Australopithecus africanus after he received a shipment of mostly fossil baboons, but also containing the skull and face of the child. Surprisingly, it would be many years before Dart would visit Taung to determine the exact location of the find. By that time, lime-mining had destroyed much of the area. Later in-situ excavations were conducted under the direction of Phillip Tobias and Jeffrey McKee of the University of the Witwatersrand, who worked at the site from approximately 1989 until 1993. Although they failed to find additional hominid specimens, they did recover many important fossil baboons and increased the understanding of the Taung geology and taphonomy significantly.

Unlike the dolomitic caves near Johannesburg, South Africa and the site of Makapansgat, the Taung fossil sites are found in caves formed in a gigantic tufa flow coming off the dolomitic bedrock of the Kalahari escarpment.

The Taung Child is among the most important early human fossils ever discovered. It was the first hominid to be discovered in Africa, a species later named Australopithecus africanus, supporting Charles Darwin's concepts that the closest living relatives of humans are the African apes. It furthermore demonstrated significant differences between reality and the fake skull of a proposed human ancestor from England known as the Piltdown Man or Eoanthropus. The little skull is hypothesized to be from an approximately three- to three-and-a-half-year-old child. The cast of the brain is preserved by the filling of the skull with limestone breccia. The skull is housed at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa.

The Taung Child was at first proposed to have been killed by other hominids as part of Raymond Dart's Osteo-Dento-Keratic Culture hypothesis. However, later work by C.K. "Bob" Brain demonstrated that the child was probably killed by some sort of mammalian carnivore such as a leopard. Recently, however, studies of the associated baboons by Ron Clarke and Lee Berger, and identification of specific marks on the Taung Child skull have demonstrated that the Taung Child may have been killed and eaten by a large bird of prey.

title: Taung