text:
Mile High

Mile High is a British television drama based on the lives of the cabin crew members of Fresh!, a budget airline based in London. The name of the show is a reference to the Mile High Club. The show was broadcast on Sky1 from 2003 to 2005 and then aired again on Sky Three. In 2012, CBS Drama obtained the rights to the series.

Background
A Hewland International production, Mile High is a mix of drama, sex and comedy. The show is based around the flight crew of a young budget airline, in and out of uniform, in the air and on the ground. The series follows the flight crew as they travel and live in the London home they share.

Cancellation
In August 2005, shortly after the series two finale, Sky 1's controller announced that the show would not return for a third series.

In an interview with Digital Spy, executive producer and creator Jane Hewland said, "Then finally, to make things worse, the policy at Sky changed 180 degrees right as we were in the middle of the 19 ep series. The previous boss had been pushing us to be more sexually explicit. That was the message. Sky had had lots of programmes like Naked in Westminster and Ibiza Uncovered which had done very well by being quite raunchy. Suddenly that went out of fashion. This wasn't anyone's fault. Times just change. I don't think the audience was ever comfortable with the more explicit things we did. It's not what people want in their living rooms. But the whole show got branded as tacky – the title MILE HIGH does encourage that. By now everybody but us had lost faith. I really enjoyed making the final episodes. I thought we'd come back and found our way again. But creatively I was knackered from having had to produce 58 hours of drama in a single year."

Filming locations
Although the airline flies all over the world, the show was filmed in two airports: London Stansted Airport and the Palma de Mallorca Airport. Also used in filming on location were London and Spain.

Scenes featuring the 'fresh centre' and the airport check-in desks were filmed at the ExCeL London centre on custom-built sets. The exteriors of the crew flat were the Clementina Court Building on Copperfield Road, Bow, London. The interiors and balcony scenes were filmed at 3 Mills Studios in Bow London.

Airline
Mile High revolves around a fictional budget airline, Fresh!, that operates Boeing 737 aircraft to destinations across Europe and North Africa.

In series 2, Fresh! merges with long-haul airline Goldstar resulting in two subsidiaries – ''Fresh! Europe and Fresh! Global'' which operates a Boeing 747-200. The merger causes distress to workers, especially those from Goldstar. The original blue Fresh! uniform is retained for all crew, rather than the Goldstar crew's mustard colour uniforms.

The airline's main base is London Stansted Airport, sometimes referred to as London Airport, where the airport's external and interior shots are filmed. Other destinations mentioned in the series include Leeds Bradford, Belfast, Manchester, Cardiff, Edinburgh, and Newcastle domestically. Internationally, destinations include Palma de Majorca, Amsterdam, Paris, Split, Brussels, Helsinki, Kos, Alicante, Faro, Málaga, Milan and Monastir. Destinations incorporated after the merger with Goldstar include Toronto, Dubai and Bahrain.

Episodes
Series one consisted of 13 episodes. Series two consisted of 7 episodes followed by 19 in series three.

Series two was the shortest series due to a compressed time scale for filming. Series two was a major success and as a result a further series of 19 episodes was commissioned. Episodes 14–20 and 21–39 were shown in four separate batches. Although episodes 21–39 were commissioned as a third series, episodes 14–20 and 21–39 were combined to create one large series classified as series two.

Charlotte Taylor (Sarah Farooqui) departed after series two, causing her character to disappear without explanation in series three when it was combined with series two. This is one major difference between the series.

Series one (2003)
Series one follows the lives of Emma Coyle (Emma Ferguson), K.C Gregory (Sarah Manners), Jason Murdoch (James Redmond), John Bryson (Matthew Chambers), Janis Steel (Jo-Anne Knowles), Lehan Evans (Naomi Ryan), Marco Bailey (Tom Wisdom) and Will O'Brien (Adam Sinclair). The main storyline for series one is the love triangle between Emma Coyle, John Bryson and Emma's husband Ian. In episode one it is the eve of Emma's wedding day and she has a one-night stand with John. Later in the series it is revealed that Emma is pregnant with John's baby whilst married to Ian. Janis reveals the truth to Ian causing their marriage to end and Emma to have a breakdown. Another major storyline in this series is the complicated relationship between Janis and Marco.

The characters Jason Murdoch, K.C Gregory, Emma Coyle and John Bryson depart the show at the end of this series.

Series two (2004–2005)
Series two introduces Poppy Fields (Stacey Cadman), Jack Fields (John Pickard), Charlotte Taylor, Nigel Croker (Christopher Villiers), Lorna Newbold, Rachel Potter, Dan Peterson (Luke Roberts) and Ed Russel (Scott Adkins) to the show. Janis Steel (Jo-Anne Knowles), Lehan Evans (Naomi Ryan), Marco Bailey (Tom Wisdom) and Will O'Brien (Adam Sinclair) were the only returning cast.

The main storyline in series two is the merger between Fresh! and GoldStar. The storyline of Janis' and Marco's complicated relationship continues this series with the addition of Poppy and Nigel. Poppy is a new love interest for Marco and Nigel is a new love interest for Janis. Series two has the main storyline of Nigel and his love interests. It is revealed that Nigel is a habitual cheater and has dated many women in the time in which he was married to his wife Denise. This storyline continues throughout the series until the series finale where all his love interests get revenge.

The series finale sees some of the staff at Fresh! lose their contracts, leaving Ed and Poppy out of a job. The series finale also shows Lehan Evans (Naomi Ryan) dying in a plane crash caused by Nigel's heart attack upon landing. As a result of his girlfriend's death, Dan Peterson descends into alcoholism. Ed and Poppy move to Minsk, Belarus and have a child. Janis Steel and Will O'Brien leave the airline to open their own bar named 'Mile High' on a Spanish beach.

The last episodes of the second season were broadcast on Finnish station MTV3 before British channel Sky One aired them.

Home media

 * Series one, two, and the complete series are available in the UK.
 * The complete season one seven-disc boxset was released in Australia on Region 4 DVD in November 2006. The complete season two boxset was released on 21 March 2007.
 * Season one 1 was released in the US by Koch Vision on 13 March 2007, with season two volumes 1 and 2 being released later in 2007.

Unlike the broadcasts, the DVD episodes do not include recaps of the storyline and the music is replaced by a different soundtrack.

Theme song

 * Mile High's theme song is "The World Is Mine" by Belgian band Hooverphonic.

title: Mile High


text:
Laser rangefinder

A laser rangefinder, also known as a laser telemeter, is a rangefinder that uses a laser beam to determine the distance to an object. The most common form of laser rangefinder operates on the time of flight principle by sending a laser pulse in a narrow beam towards the object and measuring the time taken by the pulse to be reflected off the target and returned to the sender. Due to the high speed of light, this technique is not appropriate for high precision sub-millimeter measurements, where triangulation and other techniques are often used. It is a type of scannerless lidar.

Pulse
The pulse may be coded to reduce the chance that the rangefinder can be jammed. It is possible to use Doppler effect techniques to judge whether the object is moving towards or away from the rangefinder, and if so, how fast.

Precision
The precision of an instrument is correlated with the rise time, divergence, and power of its laser pulse, as well as the quality of its optics and onboard digital signal processing. Environmental factors can significantly reduce range and accuracy: In good conditions, skilled operators using precision laser rangefinders can range a target to within a meter at distances on the order of three kilometers.
 * Humidity, snow, dust, or other airborne particulates will diffuse the signal.
 * Higher temperature and higher pressure (lower elevation) slightly decrease the speed of light through air.
 * Smaller and less reflective targets return less information.

Range and range error
Despite the beam being narrow, it will eventually spread over long distances due to the divergence of the laser beam, as well as due to scintillation and beam wander effects, caused by the presence of water droplets in the air acting as lenses ranging in size from microscopic to roughly half the height of the laser beam's path above the earth.

These atmospheric distortions coupled with the divergence of the laser itself and with transverse winds that serve to push the atmospheric heat bubbles laterally may combine to make it difficult to get an accurate reading of the distance of an object, say, beneath some trees or behind bushes, or even over long distances of more than 1 km in open and unobscured desert terrain.

Some of the laser light might reflect off leaves or branches which are closer than the object, giving an early return and a reading which is too low. Alternatively, over distances longer than 360 m, if the target is in proximity to the earth, it may simply vanish into a mirage, caused by temperature gradients in the air in proximity to the heated surface bending the laser light. All these effects must be considered.

Calculation
The distance between point A and B is given by
 * $$D=\frac{ct}{2}$$

where c is the speed of light and t is the amount of time for the round-trip between A and B.

 * $$t=\frac{\phi}{\omega}$$

where φ is the phase delay made by the light traveling and ω is the angular frequency of optical wave.

Then substituting the values in the equation,

 * $$D=\frac{1}{2} ct = \frac{1}{2} \frac{c \phi}{\omega} = \frac{c}{4 \pi f} (N \pi + \Delta \phi) = \frac{\lambda}{4}(N+ \Delta N)$$

In this equation, λ is the wavelength $c⁄f$; Δφ is the part of the phase delay that does not fulfill $\pi$ (that is, φ modulo π); N is the integer number of wave half-cycles of the round-trip and Δ N the remaining fractional part.

Technologies
Time of flight - this measures the time taken for a light pulse to travel to the target and back. With the speed of light known, and an accurate measurement of the time taken, the distance can be calculated. Many pulses are fired sequentially and the average response is most commonly used. This technique requires very accurate sub-nanosecond timing circuitry.

Multiple frequency phase-shift - this measures the phase shift of multiple frequencies on reflection then solves some simultaneous equations to give a final measure.

Interferometry - the most accurate and most useful technique for measuring changes in distance rather than absolute distances.

Light attenuation by atmospheric absorption - The method measures the attenuation of a laser beam caused by the absorption from an atmospheric compound (H2O, CO2, CH4, O2 etc.) to calculate the distance to an object. The light atmospheric absorption attenuation method requires unmodulated incoherent light sources and low-frequency electronics that reduce the complexity of the devices. Due to this, low-cost light sources can be used for range-finding. However, the application of the method is limited to atmospheric measurements or planetary exploration.

Military

Rangefinders provide an exact distance to targets located beyond the distance of point-blank shooting to snipers and artillery. They can also be used for military reconnaissance and engineering. Usually tanks use LRF to correct the direct shoot solution.

Handheld military rangefinders operate at ranges of 2 km up to 25 km and are combined with binoculars or monoculars. When the rangefinder is equipped with a digital magnetic compass (DMC) and inclinometer it is capable of providing magnetic azimuth, inclination, and height (length) of targets. Some rangefinders can also measure a target's speed in relation to the observer. Some rangefinders have cable or wireless interfaces to enable them to transfer their measurement(s) data to other equipment like fire control computers. Some models also offer the possibility to use add-on night vision modules. Most handheld rangefinders use standard or rechargeable batteries.

The more powerful models of rangefinders measure distance up to 40 km and are normally installed either on a tripod or directly on a vehicle, ship, jet, helicopter or gun platform. In the latter case the rangefinder module is integrated with on-board thermal, night vision and daytime observation equipment. The most advanced military rangefinders can be integrated with computers.

To make laser rangefinders and laser-guided weapons less useful against military targets, various military arms may have developed laser-absorbing paint for their vehicles. Regardless, some objects don't reflect laser light very well and using a laser rangefinder on them is difficult.

The first commercial laser rangefinder was the Barr & Stroud LF1, developed in association with Hughes Aircraft, which became available in 1965. This was then followed by the Barr & Stroud LF2, which integrated the rangefinder into a tank sight, and this was used on the Chieftain tank in 1969, the first vehicle so-equipped with such a system. Both systems used ruby lasers.

3D modelling

Laser rangefinders are used extensively in 3D object recognition, 3D object modelling, and a wide variety of computer vision-related fields. This technology constitutes the heart of the so-called time-of-flight 3D scanners. In contrast to the military instruments, laser rangefinders offer high-precision scanning abilities, with either single-face or 360-degree scanning modes.

A number of algorithms have been developed to merge the range data retrieved from multiple angles of a single object to produce complete 3D models with as little error as possible. One of the advantages offered by laser rangefinders over other methods of computer vision is in not needing to correlate features from two images in order to determine depth-information like stereoscopic methods do.

Laser rangefinders used in computer vision applications often have depth resolutions of 0.1 mm or less. This can be achieved by using triangulation or refraction measurement techniques unlike to the time of flight techniques used in LIDAR.

Forestry

Special laser rangefinders are used in forestry. These devices have anti-leaf filters and work with reflectors. Laser beam reflects only from this reflector and so exact distance measurement is guaranteed. Laser rangefinders with anti-leaf filter are used for example for forest inventories.

Sports
Laser rangefinders may be effectively used in various sports that require precision distance measurement, such as golf, hunting, and archery. Some of the more popular manufacturers are Caddytalk, Opti-logic Corporation, Bushnell, Leupold, LaserTechnology, Trimble, Leica, Newcon Optik, Op. Electronics, Nikon, Swarovski Optik and Zeiss. Many rangefinders from Bushnell come with advanced features, such as ARC (angle range compensation), multi-distance ability, slope, JOLT (Vibrate when the target is locked), and Pin-Seeking. ARC can be calculated by hand using the rifleman's rule, but it's usually much easier if you let a rangefinder do it when you are out hunting. In golfing where time is most important, a laser rangefinder comes useful in locating distance to the flag. However not all features are 100% legal for golf tournament play. Many hunters in the eastern U.S. don't need a rangefinder, although many western hunters need them, due to longer shooting distances and more open spaces.

Industrial production processes
An important application is the use of laser rangefinder technology during the automation of stock management systems and production processes in steel industry.

Laser measuring tools

Laser rangefinders are also used in several industries like construction, renovation and real estate as alternatives to tape measures, and was first introduced by Leica Geosystems in 1993 in France. To measure a large object like a room with a tape measure, one would need another person to hold the tape at the far wall and a clear line straight across the room to stretch the tape. With a laser measuring tool, the job can be completed by one operator with just a line of sight. Although tape measures are technically perfectly accurate, laser measuring tools are much more precise. Laser measuring tools typically include the ability to produce some simple calculations, such as the area or volume of a room. These devices can be found in hardware stores and online marketplaces.

Price
Laser rangefinders can vary in price, depending on the quality and application of the product. Military grade rangefinders need to be as accurate as possible and must also reach great distances. These devices can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. For civilian applications, such as hunting or golf, devices are more affordable and much more readily accessible.

Safety
Laser rangefinders are divided into four classes and several subclasses. Laser rangefinders available to consumers are usually laser class 1 or class 2 devices and are considered relatively eye-safe. Regardless of the safety rating, direct eye contact should always be avoided. Most laser rangefinders for military use exceed the laser class 2 energy levels.

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

title: Laser rangefinder


text:
Talk:Medallion signature guarantee

Source
I created this page by pasting the material from www.state.gov site, thus no copyviolation. Please expand it! Irpen 03:00, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Medallion signature guarantee


text:
User talk:Marcus22

''Please note: Vandalism or messages that ignore WP:CIVIL will be removed. So will anything else once I am bored seeing it. Rather like that old tree stump in the field... only, actually, erm, I still haven't gotten around to that... ''

TDVision
This company is notable. For the past 60 years humans have been watching television in 2D. Now along comes a company that can enable 3D broadcast with no loss of resolution or frame rate and no side effects. The citations are very notable and within the stereoscopic community even more so. 3dtech 01:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Charles I of England
Nice work on the personal rule/tyranny area - any plans to follow up with further (major anyway) changes to the article? I think I must have been recording a spoken version of the article at the same times as you were changing the very words I was reading. :) That's the major downside to the recordings and part of why I'm hoping screen readers get more advanced in the near future - they get out of sync with the article so easily! Thanks. Moulder 16:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

re Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Services: Science, Management, and Engineering
Yeah, I know. I'm worried that someone might take it to WP:DRV, in which case it would probably be overturned. This is first time I've gone against the vote total to that degree. I do try to be a Fair Witness and just try to ascertain community consensus, really. But in this case: So I think that the close was reasonable, although admittedly arguable. Herostratus 12:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It had already been relisted once, so I didn't want to relist it again. The fact that articles have to be relisted (and quite a few others come close) might mean that the numbers of AfD commentors are not up to handling the number of articles listed. Relisting articles might tend to exaberate this, leading to a snowball effect. I will relist a discussion a second time if I think it's necessary, useful, and important enough, but I'm very reluctant to do so.
 * I consider a "quorum" to be at minimum three commentors (plus the nominator). That is just my personal standard. Less then three commentors, I almost always relist. There was a quorum, but not by whole lot. When the numbers are low, raw vote total make less of an impression on me. 4-1 is not nearly as statistically significant as 8-2, in my opinion.
 * I look at strength of arguments as well a raw vote totals. In my opinion, the Delete arguments were not strong. Two were just "per nom", which could indicate that the commentor was just breezing through, and made a quick vote, releying on trust of the nominator, in the interest of making a quorum and avoid a second relisting. It doesn't necessarily indicate this, but there's no way to tell. (Don't get me wrong, the commentors were being helpful, and it usually is helpful.) I didn't give a lot of weight to those comments. If one discounts these entirely, which is arguable, you end up with 2-1 Delete, which is statistically insignificant.
 * The other two Delete voters' comments were better, but not very strong, while the one Keep voter was pretty strong, he seemed to know something about the subject and provided a link. I think this one comment was strong enough that one could say that the Keep arguments were somewhat the stronger overall.
 * Finally, although I'm not supposed to do this and usually don't, I did consider the encylopedic value of the article, and it seemed to have enough merit I was quite reluctant to delete the article.

 * Sorry, I must have misread the page history. Herostratus 04:03, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Changes in the UK Conservative Party article
Hi. Please see my comments on the article's discussion page regarding three of those changes.... --longlivefolkmusic 23:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/List of people with hepatitis C
Would you consider revisiting this discussion? Current opinions run 10-4 in favor of keeping the article and I think all the serious concerns have been addressed. Respectfully,  Durova  20:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

AFDs and "vanity"
Just a note regarding AFDs. The use of WP:VANITY and "vanity" in AFD discussions is now discouraged. Please instead use "conflict of interest" per WP:COI. Cheers and happy editing! Jpe|ob 04:31, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

 * OK, thanks. Marcus22 09:02, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: Vandal revert
No prob! Happy to have a chance to test out Popups. Good luck with the vandal. :)

Ma x  i  m  illi, 23:14, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

BNP
Sorry been very busy over the last couple of days and haven't had much time to spare to go into detail on the subject, hence my lack of reply. Just to clarify I've nothing against anyone trying to improve the article, just as it's a controversial subject it's better to talk first as there are multiple editors involved. I'll post some opinions later tonight. Thanks. One Night In Hackney 18:01, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Just replied. Sorry again about the delay, hope we can move forward from here.  Thanks. One Night In Hackney 02:46, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Would you mind giving some input into the current discussion please? Emeraude and I seem to have reached some kind of consensus, but more opinions would be welcome.  Thanks. One Night In Hackney 05:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

BNP again
May I suggest that your edit to the article British National Party was perhaps a little unwise. As you are well aware, this is a very controversial topic and the discussion regarding the introduction seems far from over so it would probably be better to discuss changes on the talk page before making them. Otherwise, you risk your edits being reverted. I note that you have "no desire to enter into a revert war" but I fear this is what may result from making such drastic changes of the article. Adambro 12:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment. I more or less agree with what you say. The version I have put in can readily be reverted and if it is I shan't change it again. For a while at least. Hence, rest assured, no edit war. (But the discussion, to which you refer, as far as I can tell, was going nowhere. Certain editors are stretching the bounds of debate for their own reasons; redefining Wiki norms to suit and not agreeing to give a little or even at all. It amounts to no more than sophistry.  And I want no part in such an endless and thus pointless debate). Marcus22 14:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Survey Invitation
Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 18:57, 9 March 2007 (UTC)talk to me

Please keep an eye on BNP
Copies of this message are being sent to: User: Adambro, User:Fethroesforia, User:Lucy-marie, User:Marcus22, User:One Night In Hackney, User:Robdurbar,   User:VoluntarySlave, User:WGee

I am writing to you because over the last few months you have all played a significant part in editing and debating the article BNP. Even though we have not always all seen eye-to-eye, it is the case that all of you have shown an interest in producing an article that is accurate and representative of the subject within WIkipedia policies. The purpose of this message is to alert you to a potential threat to the article and to ask for your help in keeping a watchful eye on it over the next few weeks. I am going to be away from home with only occasional access to a slow dial-up connection.

On 1 June, I added to the BNP infobox the descriptor 'fascist', with appropriate references (as had been discussed a few weeks back - see archive discussion). I was happy for anyone to question this in the usual way and, indeed, had other references available if necessary. Almost coincidentally, an anonymous editor User:86.146.242.233, began making a series of edits without justification. On the talk page, he referred to previous editors (i.e. you) as "the many militant liberals and communists" and indicated that he was "also going to be going through the whole article because I notice most of it is either liberals or nationalists posting their points of views". I asked him to identify his position and was told "You're fucked up, leave the god damn article alone" and he told me to "stop trolling the BNP article". He also made inappropriate comments on the user pages of other editors to the BNP article and, for no reason I can fathom, did this to the user page of a 14 year old: [].

User talk:86.146.242.233 shows he received several warnings and was eventually banned from editing (having only recently, it seems, been released from an earlier ban). This might have been the end of the matter, but the following day a new editor appeared with the name User:Evianmineralwater and proceeded to make identical edits to BNP and some related articles. I reported my suspicions that 86.146.242.233 and Evian were identical to adminUser:Anthony.bradbury who agreed it seemed to be the same person but told me had been banned again. In fact, he was banned for using a trade name and returned almost immediately as User: Mineralwaterisgreat. (I had misunderstood what the admin had told me and assumed he had been banned for vandalism and so reverted his edits on that basis, earning a rebuke from another admin for my mistake.) Mineral has made the following statements, among others.

 * Wikipedia is "corrupt piece of shit populated with idiots". Rebuked by an admin, he replied, "Wikipedia IS corrupt AND populated by idiots."
 * On the references I had provided: "I'm not reading the references because they are obviously left wing and I'm not buying a god damn book."
 * About me: "This guy wants to keep adding fascism to describe the BNP when it has been refused on both the disambiguation page and the main page. Isn't it clear to see he's just a troll without the best interests of the article in mind?" (I'm not sure what he means by being refused.)

Elsewhere, he has said he is a BNP member and that he intends to edit the article to remove anything he regards as anti-BNP bias.

Now I can deal with personal attacks or ignore them as the mood takes me, but this user is clearly setting out with a POV agenda that we have, I believe, worked hard to keep out of the article. (And, yes, it has sometimes been heated but I still think we have done a good job between us.) I am even happy to debate with BNP members and supporters if they use rational arguments and respect the views of others. (An honourable mention here to Fethroesforia.) I would hate to see the good work we have done go to waste, so I ask that you keep an eye on the article and ensure that edits are made in the correct wikipedian spirit, backed up with sources as appropriate and discussed in the talk page where necessary. It is highly likely that this person could reappear under other names.

(Incidentally, it is ironic that this person has chosen to attack me so vehemently given that, apart from regularly removing the BNP ARE WANKERS type of vandalism and correcting references, the only edit I can recall ever having made to the actual article is to add 'fascism' to the infobox.) Sorry to go on, and I know you are all busy with other projects. Thanks for taking the time to read this. Emeraude 10:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Project European Union
Hello, you are member of the project European Union. I try to create a new project page for the project. You can see it at here Because this should be the project page for all it´s members, please tell me, what you think about it. Please leave your comments on the talkpage of the project.--Thw1309 11:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Edward III of England
Marcus, could you have another look at your recent edit to this article. Aside from a significant portion of info towards the end of the article that appeared to be simply lopped off without explanation, the References section is fragmented - so not sure if all that was what you intended... Cheers, Ian Rose 13:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm glad to see the References are back, but the edit is still far to radical and unilateral. Keep in mind that the article was promoted to FA-status by consensus of the community, but currently it is nothing like the way it was then. It was promoted with a total of 45 footnotes, now it has 15! I would agree that the "Chivalry and national identity"-section was too listy, that happened after the promotion, but that doesn't warrant its removal. "Assessment and character" is absolutely vital. Being bold is alright, but this is just blatant disregard for community consensus. Lampman 20:07, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

 * erm.. calm down. Marcus22 22:15, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Response about possible sock puppet
I just saw your comment on my talk page and it seems you are onto something about the possible sock puppet. I put a "suspected sock puppet" message on his talk page and filed a request for an IP check. I will also try to repair some of the damage he has done to articles.Spylab 16:47, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Malvern Fringe Festival
Hi,

Thanks for the edits to the Malvern Fringe Festival page, it was getting a little untidy and I hadn't the time to clear it up. I only have one query - you altered a sentence that said: "Throughout its history Malvern Fringe featured an impressive array of performers, many of whom have gone on to become international stars. ", citing that it was a dubious fact.

Malvern Fringe has actually hosted a number of these performers before they became houshold names. For example, Lee Evans appeared before he won the Perrier award at Edinburgh, and Eddie Izzard appeared in about 1990 or 91. Hence, I feel our claim was justified, however poorly cited.

As we have a number of old Fringe programmes, could you recommend a good way to cite performances, so that we can maintain our initial claim? We would rather keep the list as it is, discriminating by genre, rather than by date - see the Perrier Comedy Award page for an example of this, as it best shows off the range of acts that we've put on.

Thanks,

Janus 18:23, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

 * For my part I think you could put back the original claim if it is true as you suggest. (It's just that sometimes claims like these are installed by overenthusiastic editors and are not really based in fact).  Hard to see how you could use old programmes as sources unless they are readily available to the public.  So I'd just go ahead and put it back.  Apologies for deleting it in the first place!  Marcus22 19:37, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

celine dion - all by myself

 * Hello. I don't want to start an argument but I totally disagree with your removal of certain information on the Celine dion section of the All by myself article.  First of all, you claim that the information is not relevant and should be included on an article about Celine Dion rather than on that song.  You are totally wrong because most of the information you removed pertains to the recording of that particular song, NOT Celine's general career.  So in fact the information is 100 percent relevant and in fact serves to improve wikipedia in terms of offering extensive information on the recording of that particular song (celine's version).  you dont honestly believe that all the information for the recording of each and every particular song should be included on the article of the artist themself?  Please take a look at other artist pages, and note that they are general biographies with significant mentions of highs and lows in their career - but only glossing generally over such points, with links to articles which discuss more extensively each specific song-album-video, etc.

If you would look at pages for other songs that have been remade often - you will notice a similar pattern - as the information about Celine follows the same format as other artists.

You not only extensively reduced the section on celine's recording of the song, you even removed the ongoing single-chronology of Celine which was extremely important. Many artists on wikipedia who have a devoted fanbase that has added extensive information for them have included the extremely resourceful "single chronology" which provides link for each preceding (and following) single on each page of that artist's single.

I didn't even restore all the information on that page - simply the bit pertaining to the single chronology which is essential and completely follows the preset format on wikipedia thus far. I am simply messaging you to ask you to stop removing relevant information. Celinefanatictocorrector (talk) 09:40, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

 * The polite way to address such a matter is to say something like "You've done a good job at tidying up the Celine Dion section in blah blah blah.... but I feel it is best to put back the (bits you have put back)". As it is, I have no problem with your re-inserting that piece, if you feel it is needed.  But before I drastically edited that section it was a right mess.  The article IS now much better than it was.  regards  Marcus22 (talk) 22:46, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, thanks a lot for coming to a compromise. :) Celinefanatictocorrector (talk) 00:44, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Infobox - hi again
Hello. I noticed that you again removed the infobox including Celine Dion's singles chronology on the all by myself page. First off I'm well aware of the edit dispute you're having with Max24, which I don't want to get into. I just want to say that regardless of your different feelings regarding the issue - while you might have a point that the article is not about Celine, however you should not remove the infobox involving her singles chronology as that is an established practice on wikipedia.

First, please take a look at Wiki Project Songs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Songs

This is a huge collaborative project and the singles infobox follows exactly the established format and if you looked around at a lot of major artists' pages it's exactly the same.

Please take a look at artist pages from artists that are still big such as Mariah Carey and Madonna to diminished artists such as Brandy. This isn't a case of Celine Dion fans like me and Max24 taking our idolizing to a bad level, it's a case of continuing an established practice on wikipedia. Most major artists have singles chronologies on wikipedia as a resourceful piece of information.

Please take a look at an example such as Mariah Carey's Love Takes Time or Madonna's Ray of Light (song). You'll notice on the right there is an infobox which shows the following AND preceding single. Thus that infobox serves as a necessary continuation of the singles chronology.

Now I'm sure you'll ask about remakes. In the case of Mariah for example, she covered "I'll be there" from the Jackson 5, and thus if you follow on the infobox on the right from one single to the other you'll eventually get to the I'll be there page which has infoboxes for ALL of the artists who released that song as a single (both Mariah Carey and Jackson 5).

It may seem like I'm only giving examples for artists I may know of but I assure you this is an established practice on wikipedia that has taken a huge collaborative effort from many. So I invite you to visit many famous song pages which have been remade and released as a single by many artists to realize that the infobox is necessary for the singles chronoly of Celine and is only part of the established practice on wikipedia. If you take it off the page - it totally disrupts the chronology thus someone on the page for the single preceding "All by myself" will not have a link to follow for the next single.

Again, I'm well aware of the dispute you're having with Max24 in which you feel he's adding excessive information. Even when I first restored the infobox and left a comment on your page I only re-added the infobox and not all the other info Max24 added. My point is that I'm not going to get into this dispute with you guys but since you had agreed earlier to at least keep the infobox, please - when you revert his edits at least keep the infobox. I believe this is reasonable because it is NOT in my bias for Celine Dion as a fan but just continuing established practice on wikipedia for any major artist. Again I invite you to visit the pages of other major songs recorded and released as singles by other popular artists. Everything from Endless Love (song), Right Here Waiting or How Do I Live among the multitudes. Even a Celine Dion song which has been covered by another artist and RELEASEd as a single has the same separate infobox for that artists' singles chronology (The Prayer (Celine Dion and Andrea Bocelli song). Note that not all artists who covered a song get their own infobox by wiki standards - many artists covered certain extremely popular standards, and only get brief mentions on wikipedia - however if you see the common practice on wikipedia, only those who cover the songs AND release them as a commercial single get their own infobox as that covered song has thus become part of their singles chronology.

In fact, if anything All by myself would need another infobox for Eric Carmen's version himself that would go before Celine's as it is the original. But it would only appear as if his fans have not made a singles chronology at all for him yet. Thank you. Celinefanatictocorrector (talk) 20:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

The adventures of Robinson Crusoe (TV Series)
I removed the speedy-delete tag that someone else applied and replaced it with an underconstruction tag, which lets other editors know you're still working on the article. It's a good idea to start with this when you begin a new article, especially if you start with just a bit an add on a little at a time. Simply remove the tag when you're done, and everything's cool. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 21:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for that. Much appreciated. There seem to be some trigger happy people around tonight. But thanks anyway! Marcus22 (talk) 21:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Patience
Thank you. I will try to be more considerate in the future. Monkeytheboy (talk) 21:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Limousin
I removed the wiki blog page from Limousin because it didn't seem to add anything. While wiki technology may have been used to construct this blog, I don't think there is anything magic about all wikis, per se. That is, we have maybe half a dozen Wikis that are "trustworthy" within the Wikipedia "family" as it were. But not all the rest, including literally hundreds of others that are established for other reasons than encyclopedic ones. Just a means of getting online with a format and rules of mutual participation, I believe. But they all have different rules and conventions many of which do not blend with our encyclopedia, as I understand it.

Also, there didn't seem to be any content at all when I was looking at it. This is pretty much the standard for WP:EL - they have to add something today that won't ever be added to the article. I didn't see that. Did you? Student7 (talk) 23:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

 * Hi, thanks for taking the time out to explain your view. I understand what you are saying but, whilst it may be a small and amateur Wiki, it's certainly not a blog and it does have some content in it (not much admittedly). I can also quote you two other rules akin to WP:EL: one is, 'ignore all rules'  and the other is 'WP is not paper'.  This is not a business advertising itself, not a blog and not a spam link. And it is relevant to the article. It stays for me.  regards Marcus22 (talk) 11:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

 * I take it you agree that all wikis aren't eligible per se just by virtue of calling themselves "wikis"?

 * If so, I was wondering if you can point to a particular fact that appears in this wiki today that can not or will not ever be in the article (as per WP:EL and that would be useful to a researcher? Thank you. Student7 (talk) 12:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

 * First off, apologies for taking so long to get back to you. As to your comments, firstly, I agree with you, I dont think all Wikis are necessarily eligible per se. If a Wiki site has been set up to no benefit for anyone, then it definitely does not belong.  But on the second point, I'm puzzled: it's surely self-evident that a local regional Wiki has the potential (and the space) to contain hundreds of pages of information that just could not - for reasons of space if nothing else - make it into the Wikipedia article?  For the substantial English population of the Limousin region, the Wikipedia article may provide an introduction, but it would be the local Wiki which gave the detail.  Seems to me that that is what External Links are for.  regards Marcus22 (talk) 12:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

 * Please take a look at External links #13. It just occured to me that one of the more highly developed wikis, WikiTravel, is never given as an external reference. I figured that there had to be a reason why. Student7 (talk) 23:41, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment removed. See note at top regarding civility before re-adding. (Hint: the first step is to sign any comment if you wish to be considered a polite user). Thanks. Regards Marcus22 (talk) 18:32, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Edit war
I understand fully your a europhile bastard who thinks its accpetable for an unklected commission to run our country and for the government to lie to the people and to give £100,000 a minute to the EU, what more can we expect from a socialist. You keep reverting the edit that UKIP is Libertarian, im a member of Young Independence, and a party member for 4 years, and i know better than most that UKIP is libertarian, how about googleing it you europhile. Oh you wont because the truth wil be reveals, and the EU hate free speech and the truth. The EU's days are numbered, the people are the greatest weapon.

UKIP —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freedom4korea (talk • contribs) 20:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

 * What does unklected mean? (Oh, and btw, there are two 'l's in will.  And the verb reveal - in form passe composée - is 'revealed' not 'reveals').  Marcus22 (talk) 20:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Freedom4korea
I reported him/her here WP:AIV so we will see what happens. Another time you could do it yourself, if you liked! --Slp1 (talk) 15:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I may have misunderstood, but no need to report to AIV this time. He has been blocked already.--Slp1 (talk) 16:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

OK. I understand. Thanks again. Marcus22 (talk) 16:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

wikidot.com spam war
The website you've added to a dozen or more articles ( .wikidot.com) looks suspiciously like spamming. The web site appears to be a wiki so points 1 and 11 of WP:LINKSTOAVOID apply. You've made no attempt to justify any link, either with an edit summary, nor any talk page discussion attempts. The edit war you're having with puts you in violation of the spirit of WP:3RR, and close to the literal meaning. Am I missing something? —EncMstr 07:33, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

 * Hi, thanks for the comments. Yes, I think you are missing a good deal. 1. I have edited Wikipedia for around 4 years or so and made several thousand edits: none of which are spam.  Ask yourself this - why would I start now?  The fact is - and I have made this point elsewhere on at least two separate talk pages contrary to what you say or have been told - I happen to find those links perfectly good; the sites seem well-maintained, they offer useful information of both a practical and educational nature to the substantial English communities in those regions many of whom speak no French and would find links to "official" sites such as Tourist Board sites, utterly unusable.  2. Why is an unnamed user - with a vested commercial interest and who makes no other edits to Wikipedia - so set on making this claim? Has he/she investigated these links as I have? Have you, for that matter? 3. May I ask what you mean by "The web site appears to be a wiki so points 1 and 11 of WP:LINKSTOAVOID apply". I seem to see the words "normally to be avoided" in the paragraph you refer to. I understand that to mean that such links are normally to be avoided unless there is good reason to include them.  Which, after reviewing the sites, I consider such a good reason to exist.  In brief, if I thought they were spam I would not add them. I think they are good links which is why I have added them.  I have made this reply elsewhere. The unnamed user continues to ignore what I have said as far as I can see and merely quotes "rules" - which, in fact are guidelines and NOT rules - to justify their repeated deletion. OK, I think that about covers it.  As you - unlike that other user - are a registerd and long-standing user with a good edit record I will await your reply before re-adding the links.  I will not offer that user the same courtesy. Regards Marcus22 (talk) 16:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

 * I do apologize. I noticed you had an extensive history, and therefore didn't take any action pending your input.  Based on your comments, I explored at depth beginning at http://charente.wikidot.com/ (chosen randomly) to find the value you speak of, but I couldn't find much—other than a few advertisements.  With difficulty, I found the site map and tried about half of the entries.  Maybe 80% are unfilled frameworks; the rest are business advertisements.  Perhaps this department is a poor example?  What value do you perceive the site adding?  —EncMstr 06:56, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanks for that and for taking some time out to check a site. I'm not sure I fully agree with your assessment and I'll give you my reasons: I do agree that the business listings would be lost on, or may appear rather "thin", to anyone not living in rural France and renovating an old property. Having once been in that postion, however, I'm confident that even those links could prove invaluable to the English (as in English only speaking) communities.  (Of which there are now a great number).  But I accept that this point could be viewed either my way or as you see it.  On other pages, I disagree and I think there are some good regional info pages - little out of the way tourist sites, brief descriptions of towns and the like. These look good to me. (But I agree that it would be nice if there were more of them). The reason I have added these links is simple: "Official" French sites are often of a very limited use - even to a French speaker! - and I think these sites could prove useful to the English community.  They give some education, some information and seem reasonably well-maintained.  To my mind they are an exception to the rule of not-including open Wikis. I'll await any reply. regards Marcus22 (talk) 18:01, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

 * Either the website is organized in a way which is completely non-obvious to me, or there is little actual content. I tried to think of things which would be very popular to post or look for in an effort to find the best developed pages.  I came up with things like Normandie pubs, Normandie carpenters, Bretagne apartments, and Bourgogne doctors.  These specific pages are almost useless.
 * I agree that this would be a great resource for someone moving to one of these departments, if only there was useful content. It would have to be extensive to fill the intent of the external link policy so that it provides information which Wikipedia will never have.  The content would have to be reliable, so most advertising would not qualify, but customer feedback could appear, so the reliability of this site might be okay.
 * As it stands though, the *.wikidot.com sites don't appear to help. Perhaps the best of these pages might change my mind:  do you know which that would be? —EncMstr 21:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

 * Well I`m happy to stick to the site you first mentioned.
 * 1. If I look at the contents page Contents - Charente site, which looks a fair size, straight away - the second listing in fact - I find information which could be very useful to any English speaker in the region and which also offers something that "provides information which Wikipedia will never have". (It`s a page offering translation and administration help). Without looking any further I`m sure other, similar, pages probably exist.  Perhaps not in great quantity - and I agree with you that I would like to see more - but, even agreeing that, I don`t necessarily read a quantitative figure in the intent of external link.
 * 2. A second kind of page appears to be of this nature: Angles sur Anglin. There are quite a few of these pages. They appear well written and informative. This information is not yet on Wikipedia nor, in this slightly non-NPOV version, could it ever be. Other examples, seem to me to be informative and yet, arguably, would not find themselves in Wikipedia -, - in any case, once again, the information is presented in a different manner to the way it might be presented here.  To my mind, that also satisfies the important point - these sites "provide information which Wikipedia will never have".
 * 3. OK, so what about pages such as those you mention above? This one - Normandie carpenters - I disagree with you again. It is certainly not "almost useless". If I lived in Normandy and I found myself renovating, this could be very useful. (This one, by contrast - Bourgogne doctors - I do agree with you. As this page stands it is "almost useless"). So, overall, these pages are a `mixed bag`.
 * Well, that`s my view and I am aware of yours. (I`m not trying to cut off any reply you might want to make - it`s just that I`m sure we both have better and more pressing issues to deal with. But do reply to my points if you wish). These links certainly cannot be called "spam" and I think they offer good and/or useful information. The nub of the matter is, what to do about it. I intend to re-add the links as I see value in them: as I hope I have now explained. But I can`t see how an "edit war" with an unnamed one-off user can be avoided? (The problem is that even if you and everyone else saw these sites as being as valid - this person can persist in deleting them). Marcus22 (talk) 18:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

3RR reports
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~slakr/3rr.php can be used to help prepare the report. But it looks as if both of you have violated 3RR on the article. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 00:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

 * A quick study shows that the other guy hasn't been warned, with, say, so it's unlikely he would be sanctioned. You, on the other hand, are obviously aware of 3RR, so, you might be blocked.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 00:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

 * What the devil does this mean? "The other guy hasn't been warned, with, say, so it's unlikely he would be sanctioned": Am I supposed to know that this needs to be done? And, in any case, unlike the "other guy" I have repeatedly asked for the matter to be discussed on the talk page - only to get no response. Furthermore, neither have I asked for any "sanctions", only for help in stopping a casual, unregistered user from altering an agreed position on an article. Marcus22 (talk) 08:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

 * [[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|30px|]] You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. . You and Eblackwood have made 9 reverts each in the last 24 hours! --Faith (talk) 07:14, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

 * How utterly ludicrous. Some casual user changes an agreed position on an article and refuses to discuss the change. I repeatedly ask him to do so and tell him to discuss it and he still refuses. And the best you can offer is this "use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus". THAT is precisely what I have been asking the other user to do! If that's the way you understand the system, damn well block me then! Marcus22 (talk) 08:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I saw your 3RR while reporting a similar circumstance, but the point is that you also violated the 3RR, rather than reporting the user for his violations. You might want to reconsider your attitude, which won't help your case like pointing out his nonsense edits might. Faith (talk) 08:12, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Just who the hell do you think you are talking to? YOU reconsider YOUR attitude. Marcus22 (talk) 08:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You are obviously angry, not realising I am trying to help you. I'm trying to suggest if you point out Eblackwood's nonsense edits to an administrator, while keeping a cool head, might go a long way toward showing you were reverting vandalism rather than just reverting to a preferred version.  I'm not an administrator, and you can take my advice or leave it, but it was offered from a position of kindness to help you present your case, not rudeness. Faith (talk) 08:18, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * If you will note, my assistance in reporting the diffs for you resulted in Eblackwood being blocked for 24 hours for 3RR (and I feel for vandalism, as well); therefore, I did help you. Faith (talk) 12:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

 * I'm afraid it's noted on both WP:3RR and WP:AN/3, users must be warned before a 3RR block is made. I acttually don't see a consensus on the talk page, only that you outshouted the opposition without making new arguments.  (On the other hand, most of the other contributors to the discussion seem to be single purpose accounts, so I may be misreading the consensus.  On the gripping hand, they claim to be libertarian, so there should be some mention of it in the infobox, even if it were a lie.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 13:53, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

France-related wikis on wikidot.com

 * Spam domains:
 * contact us link
 * Compare the text of that wiki's 17 Dec 2008 entry on Robert Motherwell with our 6 December version
 * Note this discussion: Talk:Artist
 * Meta discussion: meta:Talk:Interwiki map (permanent link)

 * Related domains
 * Compare our 15 December 2008 version of Gene Davis (painter) with the blog's 9 February 2009 entry on the painter.
 * Compare our 15 December 2008 version of Gene Davis (painter) with the blog's 9 February 2009 entry on the painter.

 * This was spammed to simple.wikipedia but not here
 * This was spammed to simple.wikipedia but not here

Google Adsense ID: 9359000462991404
 * contact us link
 * contact us link
 * contact us link
 * contact us link
 * contact us link
 * contact us link

 * Accounts:
 * User talk:Marcus22
 * User talk:Marcus22
 * User talk:Marcus22

 * simple:Special:Contributions/90.231.2.252
 * simple:Special:Contributions/90.231.2.252
 * simple:Special:Contributions/90.231.2.252

 * simple:Special:Contributions/Jon-Peter
 * simple:Special:Contributions/SparassinII

-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 14:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Reference:
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam (permanent link)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Marcus22


text:
Shelly Kagan

Shelly Kagan (born 1956) is Clark Professor of Philosophy at Yale University, where he has taught since 1995. He is best known for his writings about moral philosophy and normative ethics. In 2007, Kagan's course about death was offered for free online, and was very popular. This led to him publishing a book on the subject in 2012. Kagan was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2016.

Education and career
A native of Skokie, Illinois, Kagan received his B.A. from Wesleyan University in 1976 and his Ph.D. from Princeton University in 1982. He taught at the University of Pittsburgh from 1981 until 1986, and at the University of Illinois at Chicago from 1986 until 1995, before taking a position at Yale.

Philosophical work
In his 1984 book Reasons and Persons, Derek Parfit credited Kagan as the "person from whom I have learnt the most", noting that Kagan's comments on his draft were half the length of the draft itself.

In 1989, Kagan's first book, The Limits of Morality, was published. It is an extended critique of two key assumptions underlying what Kagan calls "ordinary morality": the "common‐sense moral view that most of us accept". Specifically, the book questions the assumption that morality rules out certain actions (such as harming innocent people) even in situations where doing so might create greater good, and the assumption that we are "not required to make our greatest possible contribution to the overall good". According to Kagan, these two assumptions are indefensible, despite their widespread appeal.

In 1997, Kagan published a textbook, Normative Ethics, designed to provide a thorough introduction to the subject for upper-level undergraduate or graduate students. In 2007, his Yale course "Death" was recorded for Open Yale Courses, and his book Death is based on these lectures. In 2010, Yale University reported that Kagan's "Death" course had made him one of the most popular foreign teachers in China.

Kagan also explored desert, the concept of what people deserve, in his 2012 book The Geometry of Desert. According to Kagan, people differ in terms of how morally deserving they are and it is good for people to get what they deserve. The book attempts to reveal the hidden complexity of moral desert.

Kagan has served as a member of the editorial board of the journal Ethics. In 2016, he was made a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

Debate with William Lane Craig
Kagan debated the topic "Is God necessary for Morality" with analytic philosopher, theologian and Christian apologist William Lane Craig at Columbia University.

Randal Rauser, a Canadian Baptist theologian and professor of historical theology, rated this debate Craig's worst performance, saying, "it wasn't simply because Kagan was himself a surprisingly good debater with an undeniably charming folksy incredulity. It was that Craig's arguments were shown to be mere emotive talking points based on highly dubious premises". Richard Carrier, an author and activist whose works focus on the historicity of Jesus, atheism and empiricism, cited this debate as one of Craig's two biggest losses, along with one with physicist Sean M. Carroll.

After the debate, Craig wrote, "the view Kagan defended in the debate was not his [Kagan's] view at all". Instead, Craig wrote, Kagan is a radical consequentialist. Craig also wrote: "I did respond briefly to Prof. Kagan's view, Alexander, but I didn't press the point because our hosts with the Veritas Forum had made it very clear to me that they were not interested in having a knock-down debate but a friendly dialogue that would foster a warm and inviting atmosphere for non-believing students at Columbia. The goal was simply to get the issues out on the table in a congenial, welcoming environment, which I think we did."

title: Shelly Kagan


text:
User:Markaci/monobook.js

// // This script is at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Markaci/monobook.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s

// Signature fix. function sigFix { document.getElementById("toolbar").innerHTML=document.getElementById("toolbar").innerHTML.replace('--' + '','~⌈Mar\\\'\\\'\\\'ka\\\'\\\'\\\'\\\'\\\'ci\\\'\\\'⌋ -- T Z '); }

// Add the purge tab to pages. // function addPurgeButton { // var href = document.location.href; // if ( href.search( /^http:\/\/en\.wikipedia\.org\/wiki\// ) == 0 ) { //   var historyHref = document.getElementById( "ca-history" ).firstChild.href; //  var div = document.getElementById( "p-cactions" ); //   var ul = div.getElementsByTagName( "ul" )[0]; //   var newLi = document.createElement( "li" ); //   var newA = document.createElement( "a" ); //   newA.setAttribute( "href", historyHref.replace( "=history" , "=purge" ) ); //   var text = document.createTextNode( "purge cache" ); //   newA.appendChild( text ); //   newLi.appendChild( newA ); //   ul.appendChild( newLi ); // } //}

function reformatMyPage { sigFix; // addPurgeButton; }

if (window.addEventListener) window.addEventListener("load",reformatMyPage,false); else if (window.attachEvent) window.attachEvent("onload",reformatMyPage); //

title: User:Markaci/monobook.js


text:
53rd Street Line

53rd Street Line may refer to:
 * IND 53rd Street Line, an underground line of the New York City Subway in Manhattan and Queens
 * 53rd Street Line (surface), a former surface transit line in Manhattan, New York City

title: 53rd Street Line


text:
Cà Mau province

Cà Mau is a province of Vietnam, named after its capital city. It is located in the Mekong Delta of southern Vietnam, and is the southernmost of Vietnam's 63 provinces. It is bordered to the north by Kiên Giang and Bạc Liêu provinces, to the west by the Gulf of Thailand, and to the south and east by the South China Sea.

Economy
Being surrounded by water on three sides, fishing is an important industry in Cà Mau province. An extensive network of canals also supports a strong agricultural sector, as well as providing a popular means of transport. The U Minh biosphere reserve and Mũi Cà Mau, the southernmost point of Vietnam, serve also as important tourist destinations. The Mũi Cà Mau National Park is located at Mũi Cà Mau.

Administrative divisions
Cà Mau is subdivided into nine district-level sub-divisions:

8 districts:

 * Cái Nước
 * Đầm Dơi
 * Năm Căn
 * Ngọc Hiển
 * Phú Tân
 * Thới Bình
 * Trần Văn Thời
 * U Minh

1 provincial city:
 * Cà Mau (capital)

They are further subdivided into nine commune-level towns (or townlets), 82 communes, and 10 wards.

Typhoon Linda (1997)
In November 1997, the Cà Mau Peninsula was struck by Typhoon Linda (Openg). Thousands of people were killed, and an estimated 200,000 homes were destroyed, along with much of the Cà Mau fishing fleet.

title: Cà Mau province


text:
Category:Brazilian physicians

Biographical articles on physicians who were born or naturalized in Brazil.

title: Category:Brazilian physicians


text:
Markup (legislation)

Markup (or mark-up) is the process by which a U.S. congressional committee or state legislative session debates, amends, and rewrites proposed legislation.

In the House of Representatives
The process of marking up bills and resolutions in committees of the House of Representatives generally resembles, but does not perfectly replicate, the process of amending measures on the House floor.

At the beginning of a markup, committee members often make opening statements, usually not exceeding five minutes apiece. The first reading of the text of the bill to be marked up can be waived, either by unanimous consent or by adopting a non-debatable motion. The bill then is read for amendment, one section at a time, with committee members offering their amendments to each section after it is read but before the next section is read. By unanimous consent only, the committee may agree to dispense with the reading of each section, or to consider a bill for amendment by titles or chapters instead of by sections. Also by unanimous consent, the committee may consider the entire bill as having been read and open to amendment at any point.

Each amendment must be read in full unless the committee waives that reading by unanimous consent. Committees debate amendments under the five-minute rule. A committee can end the debate on an amendment by ordering the previous question on it, or by agreeing to a motion to close debate on it. A committee also can order the previous question or close debate on the entire bill, once it has been read or that reading has been waived by unanimous consent. However, the committee can only close debate, not order the previous question, on individual sections (titles, chapters) of the bill. The various kinds of amendments, as well as most of the other motions, that are in order on the House floor are in order in committee as well.

Committees do not change the texts of the bills they mark up. Instead, committees vote on amendments that their members want to recommend that the House adopt when the House considers the bill on the floor. The committee concludes a markup not by voting on the bill as a whole, but by voting on a motion to order the bill reported to the House with the amendments that the committee has approved. A majority of the committee must be present when this final vote occurs. For all other stages of markups, committees may set their own quorum requirements, so long as that quorum is at least one-third of the committee's membership.

Like the Speaker of the House, committee chairs are responsible for maintaining order and for enforcing proper procedure, at their own initiative or by ruling on points of order that other committee members make. Chairs also frequently respond to questions about procedure in the form of parliamentary inquiries.

A committee may report a bill back to the House without amendment, with several amendments, or with an amendment in the nature of a substitute that proposes an entirely different text for the bill. Alternatively, a committee may report a new or "clean" bill on the same subject as the bill (or other text) that it has marked up.

In other form
State governments and various kinds of municipalities also markup legislation and the process varies by locality. In some, the legislative branch marks up the legislation (or budget since it is a piece of legislation) by deleting parts and adding sections, etc.

title: Markup (legislation)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shelly Kagan

 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. -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:03, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Shelly Kagan
Non-notable? Bart133 (t) 03:05, 3 Feb 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.
 * Comment: About ten minutes after the VfD notice, the original author tried to blank this article, and about ten minutes after the revert, the original author tried to blank it again. I don't know if this means it's a candidate for speedy deletion, but FWIW, "Shelly Kagan" gets about 850 Google hits, most of which appear to be about a Professor at Yale University. --Deathphoenix 05:43, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Lean towards keep. Probably pretty notable, though the current article doesn't say why. He used to be on the faculty of the University of Pittsburgh, which is in the running for being the top philosophy department in the US. He left there because he is married to a midwife, who couldn't practice in Pennsylvania at that time. Then he was at University of Illinois at Chicago before taking his current endowed chair at Yale. To be honest, I don't know his work, but I went to college with him (Wesleyan University) and he was one of the sharpest people I knew as an undergrad. Given that and that his career trajectory has been duly impressive, I'd be surprised if a little research would not demonstrate notability. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:53, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * I actually couldn't find that much biographical information on the web, and could substantiate only the UIC connection and not even the Pittsburgh one. Anyway, forgot to vote, so keep. JuntungWu 09:44, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I can attest to that from personal acquaintance -- I visited him there -- but I don't have written sources. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:56, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Clearly very notable. A five-minute look at JSTOR brought up several journal articles (not just reviews) written on aspects of his work, and even a "mini symposium" on Kagan's The Limits of Morality consisting of three papers published together in the journal Ethics in 1994. However, the present article reads just like an entry in a university directory, and I can't see the value of keeping it unless it is expanded. OTOH it was slapped with the VfD-notice two minutes after creation, which may have frustrated and confused some newbie planning to do just that. I don't like subsubstubs like this, but it should probably have been given a chance for a few days before being VfDed. I wish there were a way to suspend voting in a case like this, to make the author understand that keeping the article is entirely a matter of filling it with content and that the work is not going to be wasted if it is done. / up+land 07:02, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. No worse now than lots of other stubs, and there is no doubt that Kagan deserves an article. /up+land 16:48, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I'll try cleanup. JuntungWu 07:05, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Holding an endowed chair at an Ivy on its own clears the average professor test, exceeding most university presidents, politicians, executives, athletes, actors... Definite keep and expand. Samaritan 07:29, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This philosophy professor at Yale is well-known.  It is too bad we can't remove the VfD tag now, and let the person who was going to write the article get on with it.  Biographies need to establish notability, but lets not swoop in with the VfD tag minutes after an article is started, unless there is good reason to think the author is up to no good.  Assume good faith. --BM 15:53, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep this highly notable individual. —RaD Man (talk) 20:03, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable. Jayjg (talk)  22:50, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable, article needs expansion. Megan1967 01:09, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. Notable philosopher with a couple of significant books to his credit. Capitalistroadster 08:43, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * keep'. notable.  Yuckfoo 01:04, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)


text:
Léo Cadieux

Léo Alphonse Joseph Cadieux (, ; May 28, 1908 – May 11, 2005) was a Canadian politician.

A newspaper journalist and publisher who was born in Saint-Jérôme, Quebec, Cadieux was first elected to the House of Commons of Canada as the Liberal Member of Parliament for Terrebonne, Quebec in the 1962 election.

In 1965, he was appointed to the Cabinet by Prime Minister Lester Pearson as Associate Minister of National Defence. In 1967, he was promoted to Minister of National Defence (and the first Francophone to hold the post), and remained in that position under Pearson and then Pierre Trudeau until he retired from politics in 1970.

On his retirement from Parliament, he was appointed Canada's Ambassador to France. He remained Canada's envoy until 1975.

During Cadieux's tenure as Defence Minister, Canada cut its troop commitment to Europe from 10,000 to 5,000 troops and ended Canada's commitment to send re-enforcements to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's Central Front following a review of Canadian defence priorities. In Cabinet debates on Canada's attitude towards nuclear deterrence, Cadieux argued in support of the doctrine. He also oversaw the reorganization of the Canadian Emergency Measures Organization, Canada's civil defence agency.

In 1974, he was made an Officer of the Order of Canada.

title: Léo Cadieux


text:
Mangahao River

The Mangahao River is located in the North Island of New Zealand. The headwaters are in the Tararua Ranges. The river flows northeast feeds into the Manawatu River south of Woodville.

There are two dams on the river which tunnel water, via a third reservoir on the Tokomaru River, to the Mangahao Power Station located on the Mangaore Stream near Shannon.

Geology
Within the last 10,000 years the upper 30 km of the river has been captured at Kakariki from the Hukanui Stream, which feeds the Mangatainoka River. The crush zone of the Wellington Fault probably assisted the capture.

The capture has deepened the gorge cut into the Mesozoic greywacke and argillite of the Tararuas, which in places is over 100 m deep.

title: Mangahao River


text: User talk:62.167.92.50

title: User talk:62.167.92.50


text:
De Vaux

The De Vaux was an automobile produced by the De Vaux-Hall Motors Company of Grand Rapids, Michigan, and Oakland, California. It was founded by Norman de Vaux and Elbert J. Hall. The company was incorporated on December 15, 1930. The company sold automobiles under the "DeVaux" brand from April 1931 until February 1932, when the company went into receivership.

Founding
Norman de Vaux (1876-1964) was a famed cross country cyclist and had become a successful Cadillac dealer by 1903 and a west coast distributor for Buick. Forming a personal relationship with General Motors president William C. Durant, he followed with him professionally when he established Chevrolet and again when he formed Durant Motors. De Vaux grew wealthy by gaining distribution rights for several western states during these years and selling his shares in Chevrolet for $4 Million. De Vaux continued to work as an executive of Durant until its dissolution.

Elbert J. Hall was renowned for building motors and race cars which gained him financial backing and wealth through Hall-Scott Motor Car Company, which was founded in 1910.

In1930, De Vaux purchased control of Durant. Using the assets of Durant, De Vaux partnered with Hall and incorporated the DeVaux-Hall Motors Corporation as a new company on December 15, 1930.

Production
Heavily based on the 1930 Durant, production began with the 1931 model year. Bodies for the cars were built by Hayes Mfg. Co. of Grand Rapids, which had leased a plant next to its own to De Vaux for initial manufacture. Bodies were delivered to De Vaux by using a bridge between the plants. Later, a smaller number of De Vaux cars were built in a former Durant plant in Oakland, California.

The cars were powered by an inline-six engine designed by Elbert J. Hall, a partner in the venture, and built by the Continental Motors Company of Muskegon, Michigan. The De Vaux engine was a modified Continental 22-A engine, most of the changes being made to the block, manifolds, and carburetor, and it developed 70 or.

The De Vaux was offered in one model only, the 6/75, and rode on a 113 in wheelbase. Bodies were essentially the same as the defunct Durant, but got a minor facelift from Russian-born stylist Alexis de Sakhnoffsky. Sakhnoffsky designed for other automakers including Cord, Auburn, Nash, Packard, and American Bantam. The company frequently mentioned the "de Sakhnoffsky styled" body in its ads. Offered were a Coupe and a Sedan in Standard trim or Custom trim, priced at $595 and $795, respectively. A $545 Phaeton is occasionally mentioned, but may not have been produced. A few 1932 Custom convertible coupes survive.

Production began in Grand Rapids on April 1, 1931, and the company claimed to have over 8,000 orders in hand. Firm orders were far fewer, so production at the two plants was reduced. Oakland was second of the two plants to begin production and the first to close.

Insolvency
De Vaux-Hall filed for bankruptcy in February 1932, unable to pay its creditors (including Continental). De Vaux produced 4,808 vehicles (maybe including production until January, 1932). Days after De Vaux-Hall announced its bankruptcy, Continental Motors Corporation announced it would buy the Michigan assets of De Vaux-Hall; De Vaux-Hall owed the engine maker nearly a half million dollars. The new owner renamed the company Continental-De Vaux Company. Their cars were then called Continental De Vaux (sometimes vice versa). There were few changes and only 1,358 were built (sources differ).

Continental came out in the 1933 model year with their own cars, not based on the Durant/De Vaux cars. It renamed the company Continental Automobile Company in November 1932. It built three models: the 4-cylinder Beacon, on a shorter chassis, and the 6-cylinder Ace and Flyer, both based on the De Vaux. For 1934, only the Beacon remained, renamed the Red Seal Four. After producing approximately 4,200 vehicles during the 1933 and 1934 model years, Continental gave up. Remaining assets were repurchased by Norman De Vaux who hoped to restart production. His plans never materialized and he sold his California plant to General Motors in 1936.

title: De Vaux


text: Category:Oceanography stubs

title: Category:Oceanography stubs


text: User talk:66.41.212.250

title: User talk:66.41.212.250


text:
Rob Kampia

Rob Kampia is an American activist who is the co-founder of the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), co-founder of Decriminalize Sex Work (DSW), and founder of the Marijuana Leadership Campaign.

In 1988 Rob Kampia was arrested for growing marijuana for personal possession while attending Penn State University and served three months in prison. This experience led him to become a marijuana legalization activist. In 1993, Kampia moved to Washington D.C. to work with NORML (National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws). He then formed MPP with Chuck Thomas and Mike Kirshner "when his relationship with NORML director Richard Cowan soured."

He served as MPP's executive director from 1995 until 2017, when he stepped down amid increasing public scrutiny of men accused of sexual misconduct and harassment. After resigning from MPP, in 2018, Kampia founded the Marijuana Leadership Campaign and co-founded DSW. Kampia continues to be a director at both organizations. Kampia "came out" as a client of sex workers to the Washington Examiner in 2019, saying "It's important, like the gay rights movement. ... If everyone knows someone who is gay, maybe being gay shouldn't be a hassle or a crime," Kampia said. "With this, anyone who has been engaged in paid sex, on the provider or the client side, should speak up and out themselves. I just outed myself to a reporter for the first time here."

Early years and education
Kampia grew up in Harleysville, Pennsylvania, a small suburban town 30 mi northwest of Philadelphia. Kampia was valedictorian of his 300-person graduating class at Souderton Area High School in 1986, served three months in prison from November 1989 to February 1990, for growing cannabis for personal use at Penn State University, and was elected student body president two years later at that same school. Three days after graduating with honors from Penn State in 1993 with a bachelor's degree in engineering science (a multidisciplinary honors program) and minor in English, he moved to Washington, D.C., for the purpose of ending the government's war on marijuana users.

Marijuana Policy Project
Rob Kampia co-founded MPP in 1995. MPP has a lobbying branch, an educational branch, and a political action committee and is based in Washington, D.C. MPP employs approximately 40 staffers, as well as consultants to pass statewide ballot initiatives and lobbyists to pass legislation through state legislatures.

Kampia has been quoted in almost every major newspaper in the U.S., discussed the cannabis issue dozens of times on local and national radio, appeared on national TV more than a dozen times, and has testified before Congress on two occasions.

Sexual misconduct allegations (2009)
In August 2009, seven MPP staffers quit over an alleged incident of sexual misconduct by Kampia involving a female subordinate after an office happy hour. According to former employees, department heads at the organization unanimously asked Kampia to move into a different position than executive director over the incident. Following his statement that he was "hypersexualized," Kampia was "encouraged" by the MPP board of directors to take a three-month leave of absence and his return is subject to "convincing the board he has dealt with his issues." This reportedly resulted in a cancellation of the MPP's annual fundraiser at the Playboy Mansion, with MPP's acting director indicating that "the PR ramifications of holding the event right now are probably obvious." Kampia likened the incident to the Monica Lewinsky scandal, saying he could remain in charge just as Bill Clinton did.

In February 2018, "NCIA's Board of Directors voted to remove Rob Kampia in accordance with our bylaws after an ethics committee review surfaced a pattern of behavior unbecoming of a board member." Kampia labeled his ouster as a "coup" in an attempt to save face and spin some sort of public sympathy. This occurred soon after prominent NCIA board member Kayvan Khalatbari had resigned, in part, because the organization hadn't moved to reject Kampia sooner.

Arizona controversy
In March 2015, Rob Kampia threatened Gina Berman, an emergency room doctor and operator of The Giving Tree Wellness Center, a licensed medical marijuana dispensary in Phoenix. A leaked email stated that he would spend $10,000 to pay people for 1,000 hours of time to distribute literature outside of her front door that would not portray her favorably. This was triggered by philosophical differences regarding the 2016 legalization campaign between Kampia's organization and marijuana dispensary operators in Arizona. Berman issued a public response stating that if Kampia pursues the threat, "it is very likely that both MPP as an organization and you as an individual will be liable for tortuously interfering with business expectancies."

Decriminalize Sex Work
Kampia co-founded DSW in 2018 with lawyer Melissa Broudo, social worker Crystal DeBoise, and activist and comedian Kaytlin Bailey. Initial funding was provided by Scott and Cyan Banister. In 2019, DSW filed a ballot initiative to decriminalize prostitution in Washington D.C., but pulled the initiative after push back from local sex worker activists who objected to collaborating with DSW and Kampia. "We know that this ballot initiative can be won, but we cannot and do not want to do it when local activists are not interested in collaborating with our organization," DSW said in a statement. In 2021, DSW supported the city initiative to remove prostitution related language from Burlington, Vermont's city charter, and funded the Ishtar Collective, a local sex worker activist organization. In New York state, DSW supported two legislative actions that were signed into law. One expands the ability of survivors of human trafficking to expunge their criminal records. The other abolished the "Walking While Trans" law. People can no longer be arrested for "loitering for the purpose of engaging in a prostitution offense," which DSW says "was used by police overwhelmingly to target trans persons of color." With support from DSW, New Hampshire and Vermont both enacted so-called "Good Samaritan" laws, which protect sex workers from arrest should they seek police protection from assault. In Rhode Island, DSW encouraged the House of Representatives to create a legislative study commission to review how laws impact sex workers.

Notable appearances
In March 2001, Kampia testified before a subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives on the medical cannabis case that was pending before the U.S. Supreme Court at the time. As the only witness to advocate for the removal of criminal penalties for cannabis-using patients, Kampia was questioned intensely by all Republican subcommittee members in attendance, including Chairman Mark Souder (R-IN), who told Kampia, "You're an articulate advocate for an evil position." The hostile exchange between Kampia, Souder, and other members of Congress made national news.

On April 1, 2004, as an expert witness, Kampia testified before the US House Government Reform Subcommittee on "Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources". The hearing was titled "Marijuana and Medicine: The Need for a Science Based Approach". Kampia told congress "...current federal policies are not based on science; rather, they are based on myths and lies. Worse yet, the federal government is currently blocking scientific inquiry into the therapeutic benefits of marijuana. This collusion in support of delusion is an outrage and must be stopped. State medical marijuana laws must be respected, and research into the therapeutic benefits of marijuana must be allowed to proceed expeditiously." Kampia attacked the federal government's medical cannabis policies, as well as subcommittee chairman Mark Souder (R-Ind.) – one of the House's most vehement opponents of medical cannabis. Kampia was the only anti-prohibitionist to testify at the hearing.

Kampia has debated the cannabis issue on national TV against then White House Deputy Drug Czar Andrea Barthwell, then-Congressman Bob Barr (R-GA) (who subsequently lobbied for MPP ), then DEA administrator Asa Hutchinson, then California Attorney General Dan Lungren, and other prohibitionists.

Kampia has also discussed the cannabis issue on National Public Radio's Justice Talking with Margot Adler and – more recently in January 2006 – on NPR's All Things Considered.

Electoral politics
Kampia ran for Washington D.C.'s congressional seat in 2000, as a member of the Libertarian Party. He was defeated by Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC). He supported former Congressman Bob Barr in the 2008 presidential election, saying that Barr was "the only presidential candidate who is in favor of reducing the size of the federal government while also supporting civil liberties."

title: Rob Kampia


text:
One-Way Ticket to Mombasa

One-Way Ticket to Mombasa (Menolippu Mombasaan) is a 2002 Finnish film directed by Hannu Tuomainen.

Plot
Pete (played by Antti Tarvainen) is a seventeen-year-old boy who loses his consciousness while playing in a pop band. The diagnosis of cancer is harsh and the doctor cannot say for sure whether Pete will celebrate his 18th birthday. Hospitalized, he meets Jusa (Joonas Saartamo), a "tough guy", cancer patient too. They eventually become friends, after a first moment of clash. One night, encouraged by the vodka on Jusa's 18th birthday, Pete confesses his love to Kata (Johanna Rönnlöf), his dream girl since high school. Jusa and Pete travel to Lapland where Kata has a summer job at her uncle's hotel. In Jusa's wild company, Pete experiences something which he never felt before as they decide to take a trip to Mombasa via Lapland, together with Kata, as this is Jusa's last wish before his inevitable death.

Jusa has sex with Kata to whom he loses his virginity. Pete acquiesces and stays in the red convertible while Jusa and Kata are having a sexual intercourse in a barn. Afterwards Pete joins them and the three spend the night together sleeping in the barn. Jusa will never see the dreamed beach of Mombasa: he dies in the company of Kata and Pete in Finland on the beach by the shiny blue Baltic Sea.

The movie's theme song is "Mombasa" performed by the band Denigrate. The song is a remake of the eponymous 1975 hit performed by Taiska, which is the original Finnish cover of the Italian song "Ibo-le-le".

title: One-Way Ticket to Mombasa


text:
Líneas Aéreas Azteca

Líneas Aéreas Azteca was an airline based in Mexico City, Mexico. It operated domestic scheduled services and international services to the USA. Its main base was Mexico City International Airport, with a hub at General Abelardo L. Rodríguez International Airport, Tijuana.

The airline's operations were suspended by the government in March 2007 due to safety problems, and in October 2007 the Mexican government permanently revoked its air operator's certificate because the company hadn't solved those problems. It was fined USD $417,000 for failing to correct the problems or refund airfare for canceled flights to consumers.

History
The airline was established on 9 May 2000 and started operations on 1 June 2000, operating domestic services with Boeing 737 aircraft. It started up after TAESA closed down and some of the staff and assets were taken over.

Under the name Azteca Airlines, the airline was a member of the Airlines Reporting Corporation. Líneas Aéreas Azteca actively sought to expand international routes into the United States. In 2003, Azteca contributed a small amount to traffic through Ontario International Airport, California, constituting ~0.5% of passenger traffic in each of January and October.

During the first two months of 2007, the airline transported 113,592 passengers, or 2.3% of total passengers in Mexico.

Operations suspension
Following weeks of speculation about the airlines' financial situation, on 26 March 2007, the Secretariat of Communications and Transport of Mexico (SCT) issued a 90-day operations-desist claim that immediately halted the airline's operations, in order for it to respond to its financial credit, personnel training, and aircraft maintenance issues. Following an inspection from 5 to 23 March 2007 that revealed problems with safety procedures and employee training, the airline's operators certification was suspended.

Following the suspension of operations, on 27 March 2007 the International Air Transport Association (IATA) also suspended Líneas Aéreas Azteca from its worldwide Billing and Settlement Plan (BSP).

Routes operated by Azteca were covered by 13 other airlines.

End of operations
On 10 October 2007, the General Civil Aeronautics Directorship (DGAC) of Mexico's Communications and Transport Secretariat permanently revoked Líneas Aéreas Azteca's air operator's certificate, because the airline did not have a sound financial statement after the previous suspension.

Mexico

 * Acapulco
 * Aguascalientes
 * Cancún
 * Chihuahua
 * Ciudad Juárez
 * Culiacán
 * Guadalajara - Focus city
 * Hermosillo
 * Mexico City - Hub
 * Mexicali
 * Monterrey - Focus city
 * Morelia
 * Oaxaca
 * Puebla
 * Puerto Vallarta
 * Tijuana - Hub
 * Toluca
 * Uruapan
 * Zacatecas

United States

 * California
 * Oakland
 * Ontario
 * New York
 * New York City
 * Texas
 * Laredo
 * El Paso

Fleet
The Líneas Aéreas Azteca fleet consisted on the following aircraft:
 * 3 Boeing 737-700 - XA-AEP, XA-AEQ, XA-TWF
 * 6 Boeing 737-300 - XA-AAU, XA-AAV, XA-CAS, XA-TWG, XA-UCL, XA-UCP

title: Líneas Aéreas Azteca


text:
Lawrence Pennell

Lawrence T. Pennell, (March 15, 1914 – August 9, 2008) was a Canadian lawyer, politician, and jurist.

Early life, education and military service
Born in Brantford, Ontario, the youngest of six children of English immigrants John and Agnes Pennell, Pennell grew up on a farm near Smithville, Ontario. After graduating from Smithville High School, he worked at Dofasco for two years before attending McMaster University where he majored in political science and economics. After graduating in 1938, he studied law at Osgoode Hall Law School.

He married Anne Andrews, a registered nurse, in 1943.

During World War II, he served in the Royal Canadian Air Force first as an instructor at the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan in Edmonton, Alberta, and then hunting for submarines in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, based in Scotland, and in the west coast of Africa.

After the war, he was called to the Ontario Bar and practiced law in Brantford.

Politics
Pennell was first elected to the House of Commons of Canada as Liberal Member of Parliament for Brant—Haldimand in the 1962 election.

From 1964 to 1965, he was the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance.

In 1965, he was appointed to the Cabinet by Prime Minister Lester Pearson as Solicitor General of Canada.

He retired from politics in April 1968 and was appointed to the Supreme Court of Ontario where he served until 1985.

After retiring, he served on the Ontario Mental Health Review Board and on an Ontario commission of inquiry on municipal government.

In 1946, he co-founded the Brantford Red Sox baseball team.

From 1971 to 1977, he was Chancellor of McMaster University.

title: Lawrence Pennell