text:
Trouble with Lichen

Trouble with Lichen (published 1960) is a science fiction novel by British writer John Wyndham.

Plot summary
The plot concerns a young female biochemist who discovers that a chemical extracted from an unusual strain of lichen can be used to slow down the ageing process, enabling people to live to around 200–300 years. Wyndham speculates how society would deal with this prospect.

The two central characters are Diana Brackley and Francis Saxover, two biochemists who run parallel investigations into the properties of a specific species of lichen after Diana notices that a trace of the specimen prevents some milk turning sour.

She and Francis separately manage to extract from the lichen a new drug, dubbed Antigerone, which slows down the body's ageing process. While Francis uses it only on himself and his immediate family (without their knowledge), Diana founds a cosmetic spa, and builds up a clientele of some of the most powerful women in England, giving them low doses of Antigerone, preserving their beauty and youth. When Francis finds out about the spas, he erroneously assumes that Diana's motive is profit. Diana's aim, however, is actually female empowerment, intending to gain the support of these influential women, believing that if Antigerone became publicly known, it would be reserved only for the men in power.

After a customer suffers an allergic reaction to one of Diana's products, the secret of the drug begins to emerge. Diana tries to cover up the real source of the drug, since the lichen is very rare and difficult to grow, but when it is finally discovered she fakes her own death in the hope of inspiring the women of Britain to fight for the rights she tried to secure for them.

Francis realises that Diana may not really be dead, and tracks her down to a remote farm where she has succeeded in growing a small amount of the lichen. Diana plans to rejoin the world under the guise of being her own sister, and continue the work she left off.

Adaptations
The BBC Home Service broadcast a 90-minute radio adaptation by Archie Campbell on 26 November 1962, with Rosalie Crutchley as Diana Brackley and Hugh Latimer as Francis Saxover.

A five-part abridged reading of the novel read by Joanna Tope was broadcast on BBC Radio 7 from 29 October to 2 November 2007, and later re-broadcast in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2017, 2019, 2021 and most recently 2022.

title: Trouble with Lichen


text:
Anglian

Anglian may refer to:

 * Anglian, meaning "of the Angles", a Germanic people who settled in Britain in the post-Roman period
 * Anglian, a group of dialects of Old English
 * Anglian automobile, an English tricar manufactured from 1905 to 1907
 * Anglian College London, a college of further and higher education in Woolwich, England
 * Anglian Combination, an English football league in Norfolk and northern Suffolk
 * Anglian Home Improvements, a British home improvement company
 * Anglian Sovereign, a 2003 large sea-going tugboat
 * Anglian stage, the name used in the British Isles for a middle Pleistocene glaciation
 * Anglian Tower, an Early Medieval tower on the city walls of York, England
 * Anglian Water, a water company that operates in the East of England
 * East Anglia, an area in the East of England
 * Royal Anglian Regiment, an infantry regiment of the British Army

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

title: Anglian


text: Category:Finnish Navy

title: Category:Finnish Navy


text:
Alfa Yaya of Labé

Alfa Yaya Diallo Maudo, was a 19th-century ruler of Labé, one of the nine provinces of the Imamate of Futa Jallon (a muslim state ruled by Fula leaders), in present-day Guinea.

Alfa Yaya Diallo was born in the mid-19th century in the village of Fulamori, Guinea. His father was Alfa Ibrahima Diallo, then leader of Labé and a central figure during the siege of Kansala, the capital of the kingdom of Kaabu.

Alfa Yaya rose to power as the French began pushing into the interior of Guinea. He adopted a favorable stance toward the French, using them to enhance his own power. After the French defeated Futa Jallon in 1896, Alfa Yaya signed an accord with them on 10 February 1897 giving him control over a then independent Labé.

Alfa Yaya's relationship with the French went downhill in 1904, when French ceded part of Labé to the control of Portuguese Guinea, effectively taking away part of Alfa Yaya's territory. The government of what was then French Guinea arrested Alfa Yaya the following year and deported him to the French colony of Dahomey in 1905. Though released in 1910, he was again arrested in 1911 and taken to Port Etienne, where he died of scurvy the following year, on 10 August 1912. In 1968 his remains were returned to Guinea. His tomb is at the Camayanne Mausoleum, situated within the gardens of Conakry Grand Mosque.

title: Alfa Yaya of Labé


text:
Talk:Bulgarian vocabulary/Old history

This page holds the history of Bulgarian vocabulary from before a cut-and-paste page move from Bulgarian lexis. The associated talk page is located at Talk:Bulgarian lexis

title: Talk:Bulgarian vocabulary/Old history


text:
Kitchen Confidential

Kitchen Confidential: Adventures in the Culinary Underbelly is a New York Times bestselling nonfiction book written by American chef Anthony Bourdain, first published in 2000. In 2018, following Bourdain's death, it topped the New York Times non-fiction paperback and non-fiction combined e-book and print lists.

In 1999, Bourdain's essay "Don't Eat Before Reading This" was published in The New Yorker. The essay, an unsolicited submission to the magazine, launched Bourdain's media career and served as the foundation for Kitchen Confidential. Released in 2000 to wide acclaim, the book is both a professional memoir and an unfiltered look at the less glamorous aspects of high-end restaurant kitchens, which he describes as unremittingly intense, unpleasant, hazardous, and staffed by misfits. Bourdain believes that the kitchen is no place for dilettantes or slackers and that only those with a dedication to cooking will remain undeterred.

Synopsis
Structured as a loose collection of humorous anecdotes, Kitchen Confidential is equal parts confessional narrative and industry commentary on the cooking trade. Bourdain has cited George Orwell's Down and Out in Paris and London (1933), with its behind-the-scenes examination of the restaurant business in 1920s Paris, as an important influence on the book's themes and tone. He details some of his personal misdeeds and weaknesses, including drug use. He explains how restaurants function economically and warns consumers of the various tricks of restaurateurs. For example, he famously advises customers to avoid ordering fish on a Monday as it is likely left over from the weekend or earlier. He also suggests avoiding well-done beef, since cheaper cuts are often substituted for the top-quality meat used for rarer orders.

TV series
In 2005, the book was adapted into a television show of the same name, starring Bradley Cooper as a fictionalized Bourdain. The series was cancelled partway into its first season, and only 13 episodes were produced.

Subsequent work
A follow-up work, Medium Raw, was published in 2010.

In 2017, amidst the Me Too movement, Bourdain expressed remorse that Kitchen Confidential "celebrated or prolonged a culture that allowed the kind of grotesque behaviors we're hearing about all too frequently".

title: Kitchen Confidential


text:
User talk:193.167.132.66

Notability of Ashfield (webcomic)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Ashfield (webcomic), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Ashfield (webcomic) is an article about a certain website, blog, forum, or other web content that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Ashfield (webcomic), please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 13:30, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Ashfield (webcomic)
A tag has been placed on Ashfield (webcomic) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on |the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Jfire (talk) 07:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Ashfield (webcomic)
I have nominated Ashfield (webcomic), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Ashfield (webcomic). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Trusilver 07:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dixon Hill
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Dixon Hill, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. --EEMIV (talk) 11:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Article notability notification
Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote recently, Starfleet Corps of Engineers, has been tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources:. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 02:44, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Data disk listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Data disk. Since you had some involvement with the Data disk redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 01:17, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Dixon Hill listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dixon Hill. Since you had some involvement with the Dixon Hill redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --EEMIV (talk) 02:12, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Powermasters for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Powermasters 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/Powermasters until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. TTN (talk) 02:06, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Scorponok for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Scorponok 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/Scorponok until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 14:46, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Graphics BASIC

The article Graphics BASIC has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Only found primary source or trivial mention of the subject. Lacks significant coverage to pass WP:GNG."

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

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

Please consider improving the page 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. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 16:44, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

title: User talk:193.167.132.66


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noria Shiraishi

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP. —Korath (Talk) 05:49, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Noria Shiraishi
Not notable - possible vanity - and too much Japanese in it for my liking. Would this be better suited in the Japanese wiki? Brookie 14:29, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Successful singer in music games, with songs in various internationally successful games. I find Japanese names for Japanese things rather useful. Kappa 19:54, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems to be notable. Wincoote 23:21, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable - 120 Google hits with a fair slab of them on blogs. Megan1967 00:04, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Googling for 白石のりあ gives 1,300 hits... DopefishJustin (・∀・) 08:58, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. A search for +noria +beforu gets over a thousand hits. somehwat popular in the J-pop industry. DaveTheRed 01:38, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable J-pop artist.  —RaD Man (talk) 02:30, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Seems notable. --JuntungWu 19:39, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge with BeForU. --SPUI (talk) 08:43, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, as she seems pretty notable to me. Not sure if she meets the Notability and Music Guidelines or not. Tuf-Kat 04:30, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. --Kitch 05:46, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Please assume good faith. Radiant! 10:42, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, and keep the Japanese text. Having it there makes it easier to cut, paste and search for further information. --iMb~Mw 02:09, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep The Recycling Troll 09:38, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: I've removed two personal attacks on the moderator from this discussion. Please assume good faith and let's keep this civil.  Gamaliel 21:33, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

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


text:
3C 48

3C48 is a quasar discovered in 1960; it was the second source conclusively identified as such.

3C48 was the first source in the Third Cambridge Catalogue of Radio Sources for which an optical identification was found by Allan Sandage and Thomas A. Matthews in 1960 through interferometry. In 1963 Jesse L. Greenstein and Thomas Matthews found that it had a redshift of 0.367, making it one of the highest redshift sources then known. It was not until 1982 that the surrounding faint galactic "nebulosity" was confirmed to have the same redshift as 3C48, cementing its identification as an object in a distant galaxy. This was also the first solid identification of a quasar with a surrounding galaxy at the same redshift.

3C 48 is one of four primary calibrators used by the Very Large Array (along with 3C 138 and 3C 147, and 3C 286). Visibilities of all other sources are calibrated using observed visibilities of one of these four calibrators.

title: 3C 48


text:
Talk:Hatton Garden, London

This page was voted on for deletion at Hatton Garden, London. dbenbenn | talk 14:35, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Hatton Garden, London


text:
User talk:Sneaky

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Jayjg (talk) 14:38, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Where should discussion go?
Discussion about article content should generally go on the Talk: page for that article. It usually works best if you propose article changes in Talk: first before making them. Also, the convention is that new discussion goes on the bottom of Talk: pages, not on the top. Finally, critical policies to remember include NPOV, No original research, and Cite your sources; it's extremely helpful if you make every edit with these in mind. Jayjg (talk) 14:38, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

History of Lebanon
Seems like we're doing concurrent edits, so I'll wait for you to finish - I don't want to run over your stuff. Doug 04:53:00 March 3, 2005 (UTC)

Seems like User:Kaisershatner is attempting to chop up the History of Lebanon article into sub articles. I sort of like it being in a central page for readability, but then I have the bias of contributing a lot to this article. I'm not happy that he lauched into this without any prior discussion. Feel free to comment in the article's discussion page. Doug March 3, 2005 17:13:32 (UTC)

Can you look at my comment in Talk:History of Lebanon regarding the dates for the civil war to be used in headings, etc? I haven't seen any source that claims that the civil war ended in October 1976, regardless of the deterence force (Syria) arriving on the scene. Every textbook or news source I have talks about Taif (October 1989) and the following 2 years as the end. The BBC for example refers to 1990 as the end, though I think they're doing it to simplify the 1990-1992 events. I agree that the problem with writing a wiki on this is that three or more events happened during the civil war - Operation Litani (1978), Lebanon War (1982), Multinational Force (1983-1984), War of the Camps (1985-1989) all happen within this context. Doug Mar 4 03:55:50 UTC 2005

Well, if you look at most main news media (BBC, CNN, NYTimes, etc) they'll refer to 15-16 years of civil war 1975-1990/91 in their coverage of Lebanon and Syria. But university textbooks such as The Middle East: A History (Sydney Nettleton Fisher & William Ochsenwald) both refer to the civil war as having raged for that period. I'm have no idea why Smith would claim it was over in 1976 - you state it's a good history text so I'm a bit confused about the motivation. As for OnWar - I assume they don't do their own research and may be using a source such as Smith. Does it have to do with falsifying Syria's role from an active promoter of the instability to a peacekeeping force? Dunno. I don't mean to be snarky, I just find that to be odd, especially considering how fierce the 1985-1989 fighting was. After all it brought a lot of pressure in the Arab world on Syria to actually behave like a peacekeeping force rather than just a backer of one or two militias of its choosing (again, see the Taif Agreement). Doug Mar 4 05:59:34 UTC 2005

Not too happy about the rush to edit either, but we can recover by diff comparing versions. The history will retain all of the changes we've made so we can use that. Doug Mar 4 08:56:12 UTC 2005

Hi, I will again state (to Doug) that no offense was intended. I breezed into this when the Main Page had "in the news" info about the current crisis, and found the History of Lebanon and Lebanese Civil War articles to be (1) very very long, and (2) basically one long paragraph. IMO the sections make the information much more accessible, but that is of course my POV. OTOH, most long articles on the WP do seem to use section breaks, I assume for this reason. WRT whether to designate the time period of the Civil War as 75-76 or 75-90, I'm no expert. To me it seems easy enough to add to the opening para that some people use the term to describe the period demarcated by October 1976, but it is also commonly held to include the subsequent periods entitled by the other sections, and including Litani, Operation PFG, etc. Finally, my edits are 100% well-intended and I haven't been (consciously) editing to change the POV. Some examples of what I changed, specifically two huge paragraphs on the internecine conflict between Arafat and Abu Nidal and the PFLP and all that, as well as two huge paras on the intra-Cabinet wrangling in Israel over the various operations and the implications for Sharon's career, just obviously don't have direct bearing on the details of either the History of Lebanon or the Civil War, and accordingly I moved them away while preserving them in their entirety. Kaisershatner 15:41, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Sneaky, thanks for the followup. I can certainly understand being invested in how a page looks and wary of people messing around with it, and I'm glad you noticed I'm not messing with the content, so no offense taken. See the talk: page over there at Lebanon, I'm going to propose we start a new page about the current crisis, moving too fast to keep up, isn't it? Kaisershatner 13:22, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

As I've explained quite clearly to you, I will not engage in meaningful discourse with you until you apologize for your abusive comments to me. Jayjg (talk) 15:17, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Request for Support
I've filed a complaint against user Jayjg for abuse of Admin powers and Anti-Arab bias. The link [] will take you there. I see that you too have been subject to Jayjg's treatment, and I would appreciate any additional evidence you can provide.A.Khalil 02:46, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Your apology
Thank you, I appreciate that. I'm sure we'll be able to work together amicably and collegially in the future. Jayjg (talk) 05:02, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I am satisfied with the current status of the History of Lebanon article; User:Doug Danner has effectively dealt with the issues your edits created. No further dialogue is required there at the moment, as the purpose of Talk: pages is to resolve current issues with article content.  I will respond on the Norman Finkelstein page to your latest comment there. Jayjg (talk)  06:51, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you are looking for. I disagreed your proposed edits for a number of reasons already outlined.  I have no issues with the current state of the History of Lebanon article, since User:Doug Danner NPOVd your edits.  I have presented my position on the Arbitration page, and an Arbitration page is not the place for long back and forth debates about whose position is correct.  You disagree with my edits, and have essentially stated that I both edit in bad faith, and have lied about my comments.  That is your prerogative.  I also believe that your three questions are, in fact, leading questions that contain inherently false assumptions, of the "have your stopped beating your wife" kind.  If you still have issues with me, as you appear to, the next logical step in dispute resolution a Request for Comment, or if you think our issues need more personal resolution, a Request for Mediation. Jayjg (talk)  15:23, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I am disappointed, but not surprised, to find that your apology was not made in good faith, but rather in the expectation of some sort of quid pro quo. It is clear to any impartial observer why your questions are leading; your protestations that you cannot see why they are leading suggests a number of possibilities, none of them positive.  That you close your latest comment to me with yet another leading question is the nail in the coffin.  You seem to want to pursue some sort of disagreement with me, over what I am not sure any more, except that you don't seem to like me, and have appointed yourself as some sort of judge or inquisitor over me.  Well, Wikipedia is not a debating forum or a soapbox, nor is it your private courtroom, and I'm not interested in personality disputes; I'd prefer to use the Talk: pages for their intended purpose, that is, discussion of proposed article content, since I see no possible positive outcome from any other kind of dialogue with you. I look forward to collaborating with you on article content at some point in the future; until then, I hope you find your future Wikipedia experiences to be positive and enriching. Jayjg (talk)  16:04, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * I've explained my reasoning quite clearly on a number of occasions, including my explanation of why I reverted your POV edits, my quite clear explanation as to the purpose of Talk: pages, and my belief in the futility of further discussion on this matter. Your crusade to get explanations for things which have already been explained, and to "resolve" article content issues which have already been resolved, is, at this point, verging on harassment.  Please focus your future attentions on improving Wikipedia articles, not on me. Jayjg (talk)  14:56, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

A few final comments. Anyone who takes the time to review your "explanations" will realize the absurdity of these recycled falsehoods; I have personally explained the absurdity of these and other claims elsewhere. As I suggested there, "on the Arbitration Policy page, I see the following as one possible 'Outcome': an 'Arbitration Decree' stating 'User X, refrain from editing this group of articles'. I think there is plenty of evidence on this page to substantiate a Decree stating 'User Jayjg, refrain from editing articles pertaining to the Middle East'." Given the poor enforcement mechanisms available for policing fraudulent editors such as yourself, it's not worth my time to pursue this any further. However, perhaps my posts on your talk page will be of use to editors in the future who wish to hold you accountable for the sort of inappropriate and harmful practices I have documented. Again, interested parties should view Jayjg's talk page (heading "Concern about the quality of your edits"). sneaky 03:36, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)

Arab Israeli conflict
I've just reread your post on my talk page. True to your pesudonym there are quite a few propagandist tricks in there like your claims to not have any particular bias, but then to use little 'subliminal' biased bits like comparing Israel to South Africa vis-a-vis the ANC and the US vis-a-vis American Indians.
 * I'm not trying to be sly with those analogies. I'm talking about recently established states that achieved statehood partially through the use of terror and subsequently found themselves protecting their borders against "terrorists" using bases in neighboring territory.  Can't see how that's biased. sneaky 05:22, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

Also to claim that Chomsky is a Zionist (ludicrous claim at best) or the use of leading questions. It's peculiar how the tactics of all adherents of the Chomsky are the same.
 * (1) Back in the day, Chomsky was among "those elements in the Zionist movement that stood outside the ideological consensus but were nonetheless comimtted to some version of Zionism. Generally speaking, what attracted these dissidents to Zionism was its cultural dimension; politically, they favored a bi-nationalist resolution of the Palestine conflict, in which the 'total equality of political rights of the two peoples' would be recognized."  I'm quoting from Norman Finkelstein, Image and Reality, pp. 11-12.  (Whatever you may think of Finkelstein's political views, he is an expert on Zionism.)  You can read a representative essay from this perspective in Chomsky's Towards a New Cold War.  So it's not so "ludicrous" - Zionism is quite diverse.  (2) It's peculiar how you insist on conflating standard critical perspectives on Israeli history with Chomsky, and assume that the "adherents of Chomsky" who promulgate these perspectives use the same Chomskyan "tactics" in their anti-Israel crusades. sneaky 05:22, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

Another Chomsky thing is to try to overwhelm your opponent with the word mill. As opposed to the previously mentioned tenured professor who does little research any more and devotes his time to leading the anti-American and anti-Israeli offensive in the academic world, I thought you actually had a day job.
 * I do have a day job. I'm there now.  And sorry for my verbosity - I do prefer to err on the side of thoroughness.  Uncle Noam taught me that. sneaky 05:22, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

No kidding, it'll take me quite a while to answer the whole post, as I have no intention of doing it bit by bit. Again, I pledge to respond to the lot.
 * Adversarial comments aside, I genuinely appreciate your pledge. For me, the fun of Wikipedia is largely in exchanges such as these.  Look forward to your responses. sneaky 05:22, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

In the meanwhile I've decreased my wikipedia addiction to just keeping History of Lebanon up to date with current events and some odd tiny edits. Finally, after I respond to your post we need to get back to editing History of Lebanon and the satellite articles. Right now I'm not really looking forward to the amount of work necessary. User:Doug Danner Mar 15 04:47:50 UTC 2005

RE: Jayjg arbitration comments
Actually, I am not that familliar with the innerworking of the dispute resolution and/or content dispute policies (I just know what Arbitration isn't), which is partially why I chose not to respond to your comment at the Arbitration page (I also felt I had written enough for what, technically, was clearly a bogus arbitration case). I, myself, presently have an AMA advocate to aid and advise me on such matters for an ongoing case I'm currently involved in. Hope that helps.

Regards, El_C 21:53, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sneaky


text:
Nitrene

In chemistry, a nitrene or imene (R\s:Ṅ*) is the nitrogen analogue of a carbene. The nitrogen atom is uncharged and monovalent, so it has only 6 electrons in its valence level—two covalent bonded and four non-bonded electrons. It is therefore considered an electrophile due to the unsatisfied octet. A nitrene is a reactive intermediate and is involved in many chemical reactions. The simplest nitrene, HN, is called imidogen, and that term is sometimes used as a synonym for the nitrene class.

Electron configuration
In the simplest case, the linear N–H molecule (imidogen) has its nitrogen atom sp hybridized, with two of its four non-bonded electrons as a lone pair in an sp orbital and the other two occupying a degenerate pair of p orbitals. The electron configuration is consistent with Hund's rule: the low energy form is a triplet with one electron in each of the p orbitals and the high energy form is the singlet with an electron pair filling one p orbital and the other p orbital vacant.

As with carbenes, a strong correlation exists between the spin density on the nitrogen atom which can be calculated in silico and the zero-field splitting parameter D which can be derived experimentally from electron spin resonance. Small nitrenes such as NH or CF3N have D values around 1.8 cm−1 with spin densities close to a maximum value of 2. At the lower end of the scale are molecules with low D (< 0.4) values and spin density of 1.2 to 1.4 such as 9-anthrylnitrene and 9-phenanthrylnitrene.

Formation
Because nitrenes are so reactive, they are not isolated. Instead, they are formed as reactive intermediates during a reaction. There are two common ways to generate nitrenes:
 * From azides by thermolysis or photolysis, with expulsion of nitrogen gas. This method is analogous to the formation of carbenes from diazo compounds.
 * From isocyanates, with expulsion of carbon monoxide. This method is analogous to the formation of carbenes from ketenes.

Reactions
Nitrene reactions include:
 * Nitrene C–H insertion. A nitrene can easily insert into a carbon to hydrogen covalent bond yielding an amine or amide. A singlet nitrene reacts with retention of configuration. In one study a nitrene, formed by oxidation of a carbamate with potassium persulfate, gives an insertion reaction into the palladium to nitrogen bond of the reaction product of palladium(II) acetate with 2-phenylpyridine to methyl N-(2-pyridylphenyl)carbamate in a cascade reaction:

 * NitreneAmidation2.png

 * A nitrene intermediate is suspected in this C–H insertion involving an oxime, acetic anhydride leading to an isoindole:

 * NitreneOximeReaction.png

 * Nitrene cycloaddition. With alkenes, nitrenes react to form aziridines, very often with nitrenoid precursors such as nosyl- or tosyl-substituted [N-(phenylsulfonyl)imino]phenyliodinane (PhI=NNs or PhI=NTs respectively)) but the reaction is known to work directly with the sulfonamide in presence of a transition metal based catalyst such as copper, palladium, or gold:

 * NitreneTransferReactionsCatalyzedbyGoldComplexes.png

 * In most cases, however, [N-(p-nitrophenylsulfonyl)imino]phenyliodinane (PhI=NNs) is prepared separately as follows:

 * Preparation of PhINNs.png

 * Nitrene transfer takes place next:

 * Copper catalyzed aziridination.png

 * In this particular reaction both the cis-stilbene illustrated and the trans form (not depicted) result in the same trans-aziridine product, suggesting a two-step reaction mechanism. The energy difference between triplet and singlet nitrenes can be very small in some cases, allowing interconversion at room temperature. Triplet nitrenes are thermodynamically more stable but react stepwise allowing free rotation and thus producing a mixture of stereochemistry.

 * Arylnitrene ring-expansion and ring-contraction: Aryl nitrenes show ring expansion to 7-membered ring cumulenes, ring opening reactions and nitrile formations many times in complex reaction paths. For instance the azide 2 in the scheme below trapped in an argon matrix at 20 K on photolysis expels nitrogen to the triplet nitrene 4 (observed experimentally with ESR and ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy) which is in equilibrium with the ring-expansion product 6.

 * NitreneRingContraction.png

 * The nitrene ultimately converts to the ring-opened nitrile 5 through the diradical intermediate 7. In a high-temperature reaction, FVT at 500–600 °C also yields the nitrile 5 in 65% yield.

Nitreno radicals
For several compounds containing both a nitrene group and a free radical group an ESR high-spin quartet has been recorded (matrix, cryogenic temperatures). One of these has an amine oxide radical group incorporated, another system has a carbon radical group.

 * NitreneTriRadical.svg

In this system one of the nitrogen unpaired electrons is delocalized in the aromatic ring making the compound a σ–σ–π triradical. A carbene nitrogen radical (imidyl radical) resonance structure makes a contribution to the total electronic picture.

In 2019, an authentic triplet nitrene was isolated by Betley and Lancaster, stabilized by coordination to a copper center in a bulky ligand.

title: Nitrene


text:
Doug Henwood

Doug Henwood (born December 7, 1952) is an American journalist, economic analyst, author, and financial trader who writes frequently about economic affairs. Until 2013, he published a newsletter, Left Business Observer, that analyzed economics and politics from a left-wing perspective. Henwood and Phillipa Dunne co-own and co-edit The Liscio Report, a newsletter focusing on macroeconomic analysis. Henwood is a contributing editor at The Nation.

Early life and education
Henwood was born to Harold and Victorine Henwood in Teaneck, New Jersey, and grew up in Westwood, New Jersey. As a youth, he was acquainted with Marxism, but he briefly self-identified with conservatism toward the end of high school. According to Henwood: "Sometime late in high school, I fell under the spell of Milton Friedman and Bill Buckley, and about the first thing I did when I got to college was join the Party of the Right (POR). I got tired of all the pompous rituals, and political sanity returned, bringing me back to the left from which I'd started."

Henwood received a B.A. in English from Yale University in 1975. After college, he worked as secretary to the chair of a small Wall Street brokerage firm headed by a former Bell Labs physicist who used quantitative analysis techniques in the mid-1970s, predating the later widespread adoption of similar methods on Wall Street.

From 1976 to 1979, Henwood pursued a doctorate in English with a focus on British and American poetry and critical theory at the University of Virginia, but left before completing his dissertation. He then worked for two years as a copywriter and assistant to a medical publisher in New York.

Writing
In September 1986, Henwood launched Left Business Observer (LBO). Topics he has covered include:
 * income distribution and poverty in the U.S. and elsewhere in the First World
 * the globalization of finance and production
 * the worldwide attack on pensions
 * Third World debt and development
 * the International Monetary Fund and World Bank
 * the media business and media economics
 * the influence of foundations on politics and culture
 * "what it means to be a leftist in a world that seems to have forgotten what that means"

In 1992, Henwood worked with John Liscio on The Liscio Report on the Economy, a financial advisory agency that publishes proprietary research. The newsletter is widely followed in the investment community. In 2000, after Liscio's death, Henwood and Phillipa Dunne, a business partner, inherited The Liscio Report and continue to publish it using the research techniques Liscio pioneered.

Henwood has written four books. His first, The State of the USA Atlas (1994), is a social atlas of the U.S. in the Pluto Press atlas series. This was followed in 1997 by Wall Street (Verso Books), in which Henwood describes the workings of high finance, and then by After the New Economy (The New Press, 2003), an analysis of the 1990s boom and bust. Henwood's most recent book is My Turn: Hillary Clinton Targets the Presidency (Seven Stories Press, 2016).

His articles have appeared in The Nation, Harper's Magazine, Grand Street, The Village Voice, Newsday, the Los Angeles Times, The Guardian, and Extra!. He is a contributing editor at The Nation.

Radio and other media
Henwood began hosting the weekly radio show and podcast Behind the News in 1996. It is produced at KPFA and, formerly, WBAI. Henwood had been a regular contributor to Samori Marksman's show starting in 1989. Behind the News features interviews with activists, intellectuals, and academics, preceded by a summary of recent economic headlines. Notable guests include Noam Chomsky, James K. Galbraith, Christopher Hitchens, Lewis H. Lapham, George McGovern, Joseph Stiglitz, Gore Vidal, Yanis Varoufakis, and Slavoj Žižek.

On November 11, 2010, Henwood announced that his retirement from Behind the News in its current form, instead broadcasting from another venue and on his website. This change arose from an interim producer's decision to reschedule Henwood's show to Saturdays and reduce its airtime to twice a month despite Henwood's having raised substantial funds during the network's previous fund drive, conditions that Henwood found unacceptable.

Henwood occasionally interviews on other radio and television programs. He appeared in Lapham's dramatic documentary film The American Ruling Class.

Personal life
Henwood is married to journalist Liza Featherstone; they live in Brooklyn with their son. He is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America.

Books
Henwood has written four books and is working on a fifth.
 * State of the U.S.A. Atlas (1994), ISBN 978-0-671-79696-9
 * Wall Street (1997), ISBN 0-86091-670-7
 * After the New Economy (2003), ISBN 1-56584-770-9
 * My Turn: Hillary Clinton Targets the Presidency (2015), ISBN 978-1-682190-32-6

title: Doug Henwood


text:
User talk:John Anderson

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

Johan Magnus 14:46, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC) :-))

Babel
Could you consider adding this template to your userpage? It is very helpful in case translators are needed and such.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 15:13, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

 * OK, done. John Anderson 13:44, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

The host nation should be highlighted in a different color.
Hi, on the Olympic conventions page, you voted to oppose this measure, but on the Wikipedia talk:Olympic conventions page, you voted to support it. The voting from the project page have been merged into the talk page, and this was the only case where someone had voted different ways on each page. I have changed the vote to neutral for now. Can you please go here and change your vote to the way you would like it? Wikipedia_talk:Olympic_conventions Thanks. --Josilot 03:04, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I do want to apologize for changing your vote, I can see by the comment you left that it upset you, and I'm sorry that it happened. The only reason I did it was because, like I said, you had voted two different ways in the same poll (why the two were worded differently, and why voting was allowed in both of them at the same time, I don't know).  Also, the comment you made got me thinking.  You support highlighting the host country, but not in blue as it is now.  Perhaps you can suggest to me what color you think it should be?  I highly doubt that there will be a followup resolved after this one passes that says "ok, now that we've decided to go with a highlight, we need to pick a color".  The wording may be confusing, but by supporting the measure you are supporting leaving the 2006 table as is, with the highlight applied in a darkish blue.  Anyway, I just wanted to clear up some things and let you know that I'm sorry for the confusion.--Josilot 20:57, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Apology accepted. My idea is, the highlight should be an only slightly darker shade of grey. The dark blue is too much, I think. If my vote will be interpreted as supporting, I will change it. John Anderson 21:54, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: List of stars on the Hollywood Walk of Fame
Hi John, I made the change (which you are welcome to revert) to reduce the scrolling needed to reach letters further down the alphabet and to reduce the waste of space, unaware that there was a discussion about the format of the page. On that discussion (which I have now seen), I think that adding more information would be a good idea to make the list more encyclopaedic. mattbr30 12:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the list should be alphabetical with the category of star, year of award and the address. I'm not sure the nationality of the person is needed as this can be found from the main article. I don't think adding a show/hide bar is a good idea either. As a side note, I am working through the list to add the category to articles that don't have it already and checking the official website before I add it, but there are some names which are not on the official site but are on the list, such as Aaron Carter and Adam Sandler, is the website definative in these cases? mattbr30 15:17, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, I know I would rather trust the official website than the list here, unless I had acctually seen a certain star on the Walk of Fame myself (which I haven't, I've never been to California). John Anderson 09:18, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Just to let you know I have made a change. See my comment on the talk page. mattbr30 09:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Name changes
You're moving article names without respecting consensus. Please discuss issues like these before making the moves. Preferably at Talk:Skåne. Your choice of "Scania (region)" is also not a particularly good one. If the article is to be moved it should be to "Scania".

I would also recommend that you revert the name changes in articles that you have made.

Peter Isotalo 15:09, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

 * What consensus? It is called Scania in English, no consensus can change that. I can't move it to Scania, because that is a disambiguation page. I will not revert any changes, rather I would prefer to continue changing links to go to Scania rather than "Skåne". John Anderson 10:51, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

 * The consensus at Talk:Skåne is not in favor of your actions. Please revert your changes until you've actually read up on the matter. You're only going to provoke minor reverting contests by unilateral edits based on personal experience rather than neutral arguments and sources.
 * Peter Isotalo 11:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

 * I see. I did not know a consensus in a discussion on Wikipedia could change the common usage of the English language. But I'll take a look at that talk page. John Anderson 11:22, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Hi, John! I've just learnt from Olessi that you did make an official request of moving Skåne → Scania on October 10, but didn't comply with the rest of the procedure.  I'm sure this was an oversight; you really didn't hide your wish for a request; but until the "steps 2 and 3" were completed, we others didn't understand that THE OFFICIAL request was ongoing.  (Please see the end of the Skåne talk page, and the description of the procedure at WP:RM!)
 * Well, no trouble this time - except that I still think we should take part of the Naming conventions (geographic names) discussion first, that is - but please make all three steps the next time you request a move! It makes the world a little, little easier to understand :-) JoergenB 01:34, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Discussion of name change of Skåneland
Please see Talk:Skåneland to discuss a possible name change. -  AjaxSmack    00:39, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Tony Blair - The Queen
I haven't seen it myself either. If you think it should go off the list, I won't object. --Lenin and McCarthy |  (Complain here) 14:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Go-Go Boots Change
I like the changes. Kudos! --Joel Lindley 03:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks! John Anderson 10:56, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

List of real people appearing in fictional context
Thanks for the note on the DRV. If you want I'm happy to email you the version that was deleted, if you are interested in trying to continue that project on some other site. However, please do not "start over" unless the DRV allows it -- sometimes an article concept is rejected by the community, and if that's the case, ignoring the community and recreating the article is disruptive and will just lead to WP:CSD deletions anyway. Mango juice talk 18:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Well, after my original outburst, I have been given it thought and acctually considered the same thing even before you suggested it here, that is, publish and continue working on the list on some other page. I think it would be better, given that it is a list of less useful facts, more of curiosities. However, I was under the impression the article has to be undeleted to retrieve the contents of it? John Anderson 16:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Hey -- sorry I didn't notice this earlier but I usually expect responses on my own talk page. Anyway, I can email you the deleted contents, but you have to either email me (using the email this user link) or specify an email address so I can email you.  Mango juice talk 12:19, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Ah. Whoops.  Anyway, no need to look up my email address.  Just go to my user page and click "E-mail this user".  Mango juice talk 16:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

European Championship
Thanks for the thumbs up! I've really enjoyed working on it. Readro 15:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Ice hockey at the 2006 Winter Olympics
I don't want to make a big deal of this, so lets keep it as Trivia then if you insist. And another thing, had the Finns acted differently regarding this, the Swedes COULD have lost their gold medals. It's not at all certain that that would have been the case. But let's keep it as Trivia.

Bandy
Hi, Very nice that you have done so much in bandy related articles lately. Actually Rolf Käck stepped down from the possition as secretary general at the meeting arround the World Championships this year. Unfortunatly the international federations home page is not updated often enough, so these sort of things might slip through. Sveriges Radio has a short article about this, for example. Linkan 12:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Do we have a new Secretary General? Anyway, I'll remove that line again. John Anderson 12:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * New Secretary General will be appointed after the summer. (I moved your comment here since I prefer discussions held in one place). Linkan 12:35, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Recent F1 results for Ferrari
Hi John. Congratulations on taking on the challenge of adding Ferrari's F1 results to the article. I have a question - do you have access to fastest lap information? It occurs to me that it would probably be good to add in the fastest laps "as we go" rather than going through and adding them all afterwards. DH85868993 09:22, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Boot fetish redirect
I redirected the Boot Fetish article to the Garment fetishism article because it lacks any attribution at all. I left a small blurb on its existence without making any real assertions about it because of that lack of attribution. If you feel that it would be better integrated into the shoe fetish article that would be something I wouldn't mind mulling over. How about a "Footwear fetish" article that could integrate both and assit with attribution? Hope to hear your thoughts either way. NeoFreak 15:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Bandy World Cup
Yes, I could have corrected the grammar on that sentence. However, it interrupted the flow of the article - the sentences both before and after are about the tournament as a whole, not the timing of individual matches. The fact that some matches are played at night seems like trivia at best since that's not unique to this sport, if the sentence belongs at all, it does not belong in such a prominent place in the article. Obviously, I didn't say all this in my edit summary, it would have been much too long, so I just mentioned it was ungrammatical, not out of place (with no good place to put it), insignificant, and probably unneccessary. Edward321 15:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Democratic Party clean up
Recently you deleted a bunch of parties from the Democratic Party disamb. Fair enough. But you deleted both parties for the Australian listing. I can understand why you dropped the "Liberty and Democracy Party" because you wouldn't be aware that they also call themselves the "Liberal Democratic Party"; but you also deleted the "Australian Democrats", yet left other parties called "democrats". Was there a reason you deleted Australia? -- PaulxSA (talk) 17:07, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:F1 Newsletter Issue 1
Hey! I thought that you should recieve our first F1 WP newsletter. Please resopnd if you would like to keep having it!LB22 (talk) 21:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

fantastic!
Thanks for subscribing! I now know that my newsletters will get noticed! I am really happy! Also, if you would ever like to help me make parts of the newsletter, don't be afraid to approach me!

Sincerely,

LB22 (talk) 18:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

That is a question. Would you like to re-subscribe for the Newsletter? LB22 sadly retired so the job's been left to me and Diniz we have finally overcome the great climb after thinking we were good when we were missing the point but that doesn't matter. I can't seem to find your name on the list so I hope that you would like to reconsider. I'm having trouble with finding recruitment. I was the first official recipient of the Newsletter so I hope that someone who wanted it before me might just want to see what has changed. Sorry for driveling on like this. Chubb enna  itor  20:23, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Triple Crown
There has never been a Triple Crown trophy, nor have there been any rules. It's a concept introduced by journalists - often enough that I suppose it is worth an article, though there isn't absolute consistency about what it would be. I have never seen any reference to a Constructors' Triple Crown, so I think we'd be venturing into WP:OR discussing that without a cite - interesting though the discussion might be. We'd also be opening the gates to all kinds of other extensions to the idea. Start a discussion on the talk page if you disagree strongly, though. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 13:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: User:Hammarby IF
The page User:Hammarby IF was deleted because there is no user registered with that name (see Special:ListUsers). (This criterion of speedy deletion policy.) If you register the name or would like the page restored and moved to an appropriate location, I'd be happy to oblige. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I was just waiting on you to tell me what you wanted. : - ) I've restored and moved the page to User:John Anderson/Hammarby IF and I've corrected the link on your user page. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of comics spin-offs
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of comics spin-offs, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Duggy 1138 (talk) 12:36, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

AfD
FYI, it's now an AFD. Duggy 1138 (talk) 08:36, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Questions
Duggy 1138 (talk) 12:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * There is still a link from the Spin-off page because no one has removed the link on that page.
 * List of Television Spin-offs hasn't been deleted because no one has proposed that it be deleted. I looked at it when I proposed the deletion of the comic book page, and most of the problems I had with the comics page aren't there.  There isn't the sheer number of potential additions to the list, spin-offs are rarer, citable and don't contain as much original research.    It certainly doesn't have the title/character screw-up that the comics list had.  It has problems but not insurmountable ones like the comics one has.
 * As to why the page was deleted, that should be well covered in the AfD discussion. Duggy 1138 (talk) 00:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I didn't delete the page.
 * It wasn't a bad page, it was a page that didn't - and couldn't - work properly. No amount of work was going to fix that I'm afraid.  Others seemed to agree.
 * I looked at the television spin-off list when I proposed the deletion of the comic book page, and most of the problems I had with the comics page aren't there. There isn't the sheer number of potential additions to the list, spin-offs are rarer, citable and don't contain as much original research.    It certainly doesn't have the title/character screw-up that the comics list had.  It has problems but not insurmountable ones like the comics one has.  However, you certainly can propose the deletion of that page if you think that it has the same problems that comics-page had.

Flatwater Racing World Championships renaming
I am planning on changing the Flatwater Racing World Championships to the ICF Flatwater World Championships. Any objections? Chris (talk) 14:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I was looking at the ICF website and seeing what they actually called it. I wanted to make certain that it was called what it was supposed to be called and list it as accurately as possible. Chris (talk) 13:00, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

August 2008
Hello. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Otherwise, people might consider your edits to be vandalism. Thank you. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Floorball
Zadora13 (talk) 03:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

2009 "Standings after the race" tables
Hi John. I have started a discussion at WP:F1 about the changes you recently made to the "Standings after the race" tables in 2009 Singapore Grand Prix, 2009 Italian Grand Prix and 2009 Japanese Grand Prix. I invite you to contribute to the discussion. DH85868993 (talk) 09:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Nps-parka-uniform.jpg
A tag has been placed on File:Nps-parka-uniform.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  Ja Ga  talk 19:10, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello John Anderson! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:05, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Jürgen Barth -

Formula One sponsorship liveries
Hi John. I meant to leave a message on your talk page regarding my reversion of your edit but I got distracted and forgot to do it - apologies for that. I personally don't have strong feelings either way about whether the page should be split; I reverted your change because your original edit summary (and your comment on User:Abdul Qayyum Ahmad's talk page) suggested that you were unaware of the new page and thought the information had just been completely deleted. FYI, I've added a link at WT:F1 to the discussion you started at Talk:Formula One sponsorship liveries, to gather opinion from those who may not have the article on their watchlist. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 20:59, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi John. Do you have any more edits to make before I start the merge? DH85868993 (talk) 12:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

BMW Sauber links
BMW Sauber mentions should link to Sauber, as that article is now about the Sauber team all the way from 1993 to the present day, as it was agreed by most that they are the same team. BMW in Formula One was intended as a solution to those who said that BMW's participation would be ignored if the merger took place. It was not intended as simply a new name for the BMW Sauber article, as that acheives nothing really. If you like, you could link them like this: BMW Sauber. Please do not link them as BMW Sauber. There is a link to the BMW article in the BMW section of the Sauber article, for those who want it. BMW were only a really manufacturer in their own right during the 1950's and 1960's, as detialed by the new article. During recent years, they simply owned an existing, established team. Thank you. - mspete  93  15:20, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It was never agreed that 2006-09 should link to BMW. You suggested it some time after the discussion had pretty much been settled. I'll raise it at WT:F1 and see what the project thinks. For now, you may as well save yourself some time and effort and leave the links as they are until there is a settlement. The whole of the old BMW Sauber article has been merged into Sauber so there is not much point in links going anywhere other than there. - mspete  93  15:26, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * FYI, we are still showing the team as BMW Sauber, as that is what they are called, regardless of the lack of input from BMW. Links should direct to Sauber, but show as BMW Sauber until the team name is changed. This should either be achieved by BMW Sauber or BMW Sauber . Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:14, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * If you read what I write, I'm saying that yes, it should link to Sauber, but it should show as BMW Sauber. That is not in question anywhere, to my knowledge. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:32, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That is not what the discussion is about. I can provide any number of sources to verify that the team is called BMW Sauber. Revert your changes, please, you are in error. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:38, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Why is it still listed as BMW Sauber in the season article then? There is no policy to rename this team arbitrarily, going against the team itself, the FIA and all reliable sources. Again, I urge you to revert yourself. Or find this so-called consensus. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:43, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The question is not how we display the team name - we have no choice how to display the team name. The discussion is about which articles the name links to. That is entirely different. There has never been a discussion about changing the displayed team name to "Sauber", unless you can find it. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:45, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * What are you talking about? We don't get to change the team name. I am still waiting for you to produce the consensus where it was agreed that we do not mention BMW in the team name. It is you who is making edits without discussion, no-one else. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:55, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * If there's such a consensus for this, how come you are the only editor making this change anywhere? All the 2010 articles displayed the team name as BMW Sauber until you changed them all. Why aren't you discussing this on the relevant article talk page? Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Be very careful about who you are describing as ridiculous. You have made changes to articles with no consensus, reverted in a way that suggests an edit war, and have so far failed to discuss this on the relevant talk page. I have asked you to provide evidence of this discussion where it was decided to arbitrarily "shorten" the team name of BMW Sauber, and you have so far been unable to do so. The burden is on you, since all articles displayed BMW Sauber until recently, when you changed them all. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:02, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Both de la Rosa's and Kobayashi's articles show the entrant/constructor as BMW Sauber. The designation of the chassis, i.e. the C29, is not at question here. In race articles, what is displayed is the constructor-engine, in this case, BMW Sauber-Ferrari. Constructor - BMW Sauber. Chassis - Sauber C29. You appear to have not noticed, but I am discussing this (currently on my own) at Talk:Sauber - where else would you like me to discuss it? Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Relevant article talk pages override wikiproject talk pages, but I will highlight it at the WP. And no, making a suggestion to which nobody replies is not a consensus. Is that all you've got? There is no consensus, is there? Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No it isn't - so, with no input from anyone else whatsoever, you claim a consensus? For a start, I disagree, so it's not a consensus. The consensus for my point of view lies in the fact that all articles read "BMW Sauber" until you changed them, and all outside sources refer to them as such, without exception - a fact you have not quibbled with. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:38, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One shows a consensus to keep the name displayed as BMW Sauber. I don't know why you did not contribute to that discussion. I have reverted the relevant articles. It also appears to be very clear that there was no consensus at any point to back up your edits, making your reverts very obstructive. Please read Consensus - an unanswered suggestion on your part does not constitute a consensus, let alone one that can be used vigorously as a basis for reverting two other editors. That you then described my attitude as ridiculous is, in my opinion, very poor form. What a waste of time this all was. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Another editor has suggested that you did not have enough time to contribute to the discussion, and of course it is still open for you to contribute, but given that there was no consensus for your edits in the first place, the original versions of the articles should stand until any consensus for change is achieved, as per WP:STATUSQUO. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:08, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As I've said, the discussion is still open for you to contribute, but in the meantime, the articles should be reverted to their original versions, as per the guideline I quoted. The procedure is that if you want to make a change to the established versions, you discuss it and try to build a consensus. It is not correct procedure for you to change the articles then demand that I build a consensus for the original versions. Bretonbanquet (talk) 11:13, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * a) If you want to make a change to the status quo, it is up to you to build a consensus once it is clear that there is resistance to your change, which there was in this case, not only from me but from the IP whom you reverted. b) There is a considerable consensus now at the wikiproject page, currently 5:0. Including the two IPs who have edited to that effect, and adding you as well, it is 7:1. In fact, nobody has agreed with you yet, and it has been two days. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:14, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not hiding behind anything and I'm not looking for anything. No prior discussed consensus is required, I don't know why you can't understand that. A discussion to build consensus is only required when there's a disagreement about something. We don't go around arguing the toss over every tiny thing. It was always the general practice of all editors to retain BMW in the constructor title. Everyone was happy with that, and nobody tried to change it - there is the consensus. There was no consensus for your change, and so if you can't build one, the change won't happen. If you don't read the guidelines, then it's hard for you to understand how it works, I guess. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I haven't changed my opinion at all. I assumed you were familiar with the guidelines. I've been here a while and I've always worked this way, because it's how editors are supposed to work. I do agree with the boldness principle but you have clearly never read BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. When someone reverts your change, you discuss it - you don't just keep reverting to your version as that is clearly edit-warring. You don't make your change and challenge the opposer to provide a consensus. You also don't claim that there was a consensus for your change on the project page when there patently was no such thing. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:44, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Again, I'm sure you are trying to remain civil here. I know you thought there was a consensus, although it did take me a little while to grasp the interesting notion that you thought your unanswered suggestion on the project page constituted a consensus. It doesn't, as I am sure you are now aware. Given that you had no consensus, and I knew it, I was nowhere near an edit war, particularly as I only reverted you once on each article within a 24hr period. I accept that you thought you were right, but you don't seem to accept that you were in fact wrong. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:59, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm familiar enough with the discussions that go on to have been sure there was no consensus. You seem to suggest I'm lying when I say that. I said to you at the start that there was never a discussion about it, and there wasn't. I asked you to produce the consensus you said existed, but that does not mean I wasn't sure whether it existed or not. I am at least smart enough to have gone back to look for it when you said it existed. It wasn't there (anywhere), so I knew. Your unanswered suggestion absolutely does not constitute a consensus or any agreement. There was no hint that anyone agreed to it. Nowhere anywhere does any Wikipedia guideline suggest that. I am happy to leave it there, as I do not wish flog a dead horse every night. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:50, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (April)
Welcome. – Cs-wolves  (talk)  20:35, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Norrøna

The article Norrøna has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * No indication of how this might meet notability guidelines. Lacks citations to significant coverage in reliable sources.

While all 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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RadioFan (talk) 20:11, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Norrøna
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Norrøna. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Norrøna. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:10, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Defaultsort
Ok, a couple of points. Firstly, all of those teams, with the possible exception of Torro Rosso and Ferrari, are commonly known as "Scuderia xxx", therefore they should sort to "Scuderia xxx". So actually I disagree with all your alterations, I just reverted the particularly odd ones. Secondly, it is bad manners to simply revert a reversion, that way revert wars lie. The established practice is WP:BRD. If you are unfamiliar with this you really should read it, as an editor of your standing really can't do what you just did without looking petulant.  Pyrop e  13:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

 * Because we are a general interest encyclopedia and I argue that as the word "Scuderia" is Italian most English-speaking people see the team name as one whole entity. Your choice of Bayern Munich is actually fairly poorly chosen, as not only are the team not commonly referred to as FC Bayern, they also aren't known as "Muenchen" (or München) to anyone in the English-speaking world. The football project have always been a bit odd, and I suspect that their numbers have a large percentage of non-English native speakers. Regardless, this is the discussion we should have been having before you hit undo.  Pyrop e  13:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

 * That's not the way that BRD works and never has been. It is incumbent on the party wishing to change the status quo to justify that action. Anyway, as we seem to be the only two that it matters to I'd prefer to work it out between us than litter WP:F1 just yet. Besides, thi is a fairly esoteric point of order, rather than a world-changing deviation in policy! My point is mainly that the word "scuderia" is, for most teams, an integral part of the name. It isn't just equivalent to an English team appending "Team" to its name. The actual Italian word for "team" is "squadra" (Alfa Romeo used to use this now and again in the days of Alfa Corse.) "Scuderia" means "stable" (the equine sort) and is an affectation rather than a true description, hence it is an important part of the teams' names; names by which they are widely known even to those of us who have followed F1 since being able to focus.  Pyrop e  17:32, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

 * "Should have" was used because you are an established editor who has been contributing regularly for five years. This means that I assume a more than passing familiarity with the conventions and etiquette of Wikipedia. The fact that you seem unaware of BRD is surprising as it has been around for as long time. I have been on both ends of the BRD process on quite a few occasions in the past and it works well. Most importantly, it lays out in black and white how two editors with different opinions can sort things out without descending to each simply reverting the other's edit, as your logic would do. As for knowing what "scuderia" means, why then did you assert that it meant "team"? It doesn't. You chose to misrepresent a term and my charitable interpretation was that you were misinformed. If you are telling me now that your presentation of that argument was intentional then that puts a different spin on it.  Pyrop e  21:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

 * And by asking an Italian you show why detaching the word scuderia from a team's common name is problematic... you need to fully understand Italian or have a good working knowledge of the conventions of Formula One. Scuderia is an affectation that the rather aristocratic early Italian motor racing pioneers borrowed directly from horse racing (sport of kings, and all that) rather than descend to the bourgeois term squadra or another alternative. Its usage in this context isn't widespread even in Italy (take a look at Category:Italian auto racing teams ), and is almost solely limited to auto racing where it is used. Take motorbikes for example: Ducati's SBK team is Ducati Corse; Aprilia use "Racing Team"; and MV Agusta, the venerable MV Agusta, they never bothered with anything beyond the company name. You are assuming that people using an English language site are just as comfortable and knowledgeable with Italian as they are in English, and that they know that Italian auto racing teams sometimes style themselves scuderia even though it doesn't mean team. Making those sorts of assumptions about the end users isn't justified for a general interest English-language encyclopedia, where we should be assuming no prior knowledge of the subject area or of any language beyond English.  Pyrop e  21:49, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

 * Resorting to sarcasm already? Surely you have something more impressive than that in reserve, don't you? I'm just pointing out a pattern that I can't find an exception to. If you can, please let me know. As for Ecurie, that too has been used and again I'm struggling to find examples that don't involve four wheels or hooves.  Pyrop e  22:05, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Survey
Hi John,

I am a PhD student at the Open University of Catalonia. I am currently preparing a research project about the governance processes in online collaborative communities, and I would like to kindly ask for your collaboration based on your experience in Wikipedia. Interested in participating? Please drop me a note in my talk page. This would take around 20 of your time.

Thanks! Aresj (talk) 09:31, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

 * I see you declined the invitation. No problem. Thank you anyhow for replying. Aresj (talk) 10:30, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (May)
– Cs-wolves  (talk)  18:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 05:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Linking of "Pts" in F1 driver/team results tables
Hi John. I notice that recently you've linked the "Pts" column heading in several F1 driver/team results tables to List of Formula One World Championship pointscoring systems. Are you planning to do this for all WDC drivers and teams? If so, you may care to discuss your intention at WP:F1, (a) to check that there is consensus in favour of the change (although I can't imagine why there wouldn't be) and (b) to see whether anyone else wants to help out with the task (or maybe it could even be done by a bot?) I've been through and updated every WDC driver article manually in the past and believe me, it takes a long time. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 02:40, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (June)
– Cs-wolves  (talk)  18:30, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Sauber Petronas Engineering
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Sauber Petronas Engineering, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://wikicars.org/pl/Sauber. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 08:35, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Theleftorium (talk) 11:50, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (July)
– Cs-wolves  (talk)  22:44, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Skåne
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Skåne County. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. The same goes for Skåne Regional Council and List of governors of Skåne County. In this case, their official names in English are clearly spelled out on their websites, and uses the form "Skåne". Please do not move articles to incorrect names without checking sources. Thank you. Tomas e (talk) 10:38, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

 * There is a concensus here that the exonym Scania is used when writing about the traditional historical province with the endonym Skåne. Scania is a latin form and has been used for the province since many hundred years. When it comes to Skåne län and Region Skåne, they are administrative and municipal entities created some ten years ago. They are far too new to have got exonyms. They are almost always referred to in English using the endonym Skåne as shown here: http://www.skane.se/default.aspx?id=54721 and here http://www.lansstyrelsen.se/skane/Om_Lansstyrelsen/In+English/contact.htm. --Muniswede (talk) 07:48, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Stop it NOW!!!!!!--83.226.154.15 (talk) 21:01, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Skåne County, you may be blocked from editing. Tomas e (talk) 12:14, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at List of governors of Skåne County, you may be blocked from editing. Tomas e (talk) 12:14, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Skåne Regional Council, you may be blocked from editing. Tomas e (talk) 12:14, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * ...and so on for your related disruptive editing of templates etcetera. Tomas e (talk) 12:22, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (August)
– Cs-wolves  (talk)  15:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (September)
-- Midgrid  (talk)  20:06, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Mongolia national bandy team for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Mongolia national bandy team, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Mongolia national bandy team until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Shirt58 (talk) 10:45, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Hungary national bandy team for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Hungary national bandy team, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Hungary national bandy team until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Shirt58 (talk) 10:56, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Canada national bandy team for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Canada national bandy team, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Canada national bandy team until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Shirt58 (talk) 10:59, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Belarus national bandy team for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Belarus national bandy team, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Belarus national bandy team until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Shirt58 (talk) 11:08, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Netherlands national bandy team for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Netherlands national bandy team, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Netherlands national bandy team until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Shirt58 (talk) 11:11, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Russia national bandy team for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Russia national bandy team, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Russia national bandy team until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Shirt58 (talk) 11:21, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Kazakhstan national bandy team for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Kazakhstan national bandy team, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Kazakhstan national bandy team until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Shirt58 (talk) 11:29, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (October)
– Cs-wolves  (talk)  18:59, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Skåne County
The exonym Scania County for the Swedish administratve subdivision Skåne län is very seldom used. Google gives 98,300 hits for "Skåne County" and just 4,310 hits for "Scania County". Even the Swedish name "Skåne län" gives more hits in English then "Scania County". I have now written a section called "Endonym and exonym" in which I try to explain the different usages. --Muniswede (talk) 12:04, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (November)
-- Midgrid  (talk)  00:17, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2010
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war  according to the reverts you have made on Saab 37 Viggen. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. BilCat (talk) 00:10, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

 * Don't be like that, you're part of it since you're the one who is reverting my changes all the time. John  Anderson   (talk) 01:25, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

WPF1 Newsletter (December)
– Cs-wolves  (talk)  18:37, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy 10th Anniversary of Wikipedia!
 Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia! Hey Bzuk  (contribs) has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. Bzuk (talk) 16:28, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Block
Since you're already blocked on svwp I don't really see the point but rules are rules. I've asked for a block on your account here on enwp as well as the one already in place on svwp. GameOn (talk) 12:53, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011
Checkuser at Swedish Wikipedia has confirmed that you are violating sock puppetry policy, very probably as a subaccount of User:E.G.. Based on this and verification that your accounts have been used to violate multiple account practices on English Wikipedia, this account has been indefinitely blocked. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:20, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Premier Division

The article Premier Division has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * No sources, not notable. No updates in 2 years since guideline notice put up

While all 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. Львівське (говорити) 01:46, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Hockey on the ice listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Hockey on the ice. Since you had some involvement with the Hockey on the ice redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ( talk ) 19:03, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:John Anderson


text: Category:Cities in Colombia

title: Category:Cities in Colombia


text:
Talk:Phonological history of English t

This should really redirect to the disambiguation page for Flap. -- Hobart 14:51, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * I've moved the old content there. And I've moved the content formerly at Intervocalic t/d merger here, because the phenomenon described there is universally known to linguists as "flapping". That page now redirects here. --Angr 20:32, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

re: assimilation
Hi.

I am thinking of flapping as a type of assimilation in that the [-continuant] feature of /t/ & /d/ is assimilating to the [+cont] feature of the surrounding vowels. So, something like the "openness" of the vowels is influencing the duration of the closure and the strength of the tongue articulatory movement. Perhaps not assimilation in a canonical sense, but still seems rather so to me. Thoughts? — ishwar  (S PEAK )  18:49, 2005 Mar 31 (UTC)

 * The problem is that is probably still [-cont] (that's the most likely distinction between it and, which is [+cont]). If flapping is caused by spreading a feature, the only possible feature would be [+sonorant], but since that's a major class feature, most theories of feature geometry won't allow it to spread except in total assimilation. I think it's preferable to treat flapping as a kind of lenition in a weak metrical position. --Angr 19:58, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Hmm. That's interesting. Thanks for the note. Cheers! — ishwar  (S PEAK )  23:44, 2005 Mar 31 (UTC)

For other uses, see flap
I don't understand this. What is this supposed to mean? For other uses of what? Voortle 03:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * It dates back from a time when this page (or a part of it) was called Flapping. People looking for a different meaning of "flap" or "flapping" might wind up here by mistake, so the point was to redirect them to a page where other uses of the word "flap" are discussed. Angr (talk) 06:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I've changed flapping to redirect to flap and removed the note from this page. Voortle 20:30, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I've reverted, because if you look at "What links here" for "Flapping" you'll see every link is about the process described on this page. We can improve the hatnote instead. Angr (talk) 20:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Other Ts?
I think that, as part of this article, there should be at least a passing mention of how generic t phonologically differs from English t. In other words, the universal definition of t, upon which t glottal stop and flap/tap are modifications, is what? And, for that matter, what are common phonological modifications of t which are NOT present in English? Naturally the latter should be especially brief, since it's not under the direct purview of the article, but it still has enough direct relevence to be worth passing mention. --Kaz 17:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think there is such a thing as "generic t" or a "universal definition of t" other than voiceless alveolar plosive. User:Angr 19:41, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Glottalisation
I think whoever wrote the section on glottalisation of /t/s has gotten glottalisation mixed up with loss of audible release. eg i'm not american but i think the /t/ is generally pronounced as [t̚] ([t] with no audible release) before syllabic /n/s. eg [ɹɪt̚n̩], not [ɹɪʔn̩]. my point is furthered by the fact that this article makes no mention of the unreleased /t/.

 * I agree with you to some extent, in that when in my Utahn American accent, saying "written" my tongue hits the alveolar ridge immediately after the vowel and well before I pronounce the nasal. However, I can clearly feel  and hear glottal involvement while my tongue is held there for the pronunciation of [n].  An example of unreleased /t/ to me would be more often one at the end of a word---something like the /t/ in "Hey Pat."

 * I agree with both of you. As far as I know, glottalization of /t/ before /n/ is specific to Connecticut.  I'll look for references to support that.  Confiteordeo 17:19, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm a native of Alberta, Canada and I use glottal stops for /t/ before vocalic /n/. The article on glottal stops was less helpful than this one about usage outside of Britain. Not a creation of JK Rowling 23:08, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Phonological history of English t