text:
Sex, Ecology, Spirituality

Sex, Ecology, Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution is a 1995 book by American integral theorist Ken Wilber. Wilber intended it to be the first volume of a series called The Kosmos Trilogy, but subsequent volumes were never produced. The book has been both highly acclaimed by some reviewers and harshly criticized by others.

Content
Published in 1995, the book is a work in which Wilber grapples with modern philosophical naturalism, attempting to show its insufficiency as an explanation of being, evolution, and the meaning of life. He also describes an approach, called vision-logic, which he finds qualified to succeed modernism.

Wilber's project in this book requires nothing less than a complete re-visioning of the history of Eastern and Western thought. There are four philosophers that Wilber finds to be of the highest importance:
 * Plotinus, Neo-Platonic philosopher, who introduced the first nondual philosophy to the West
 * Nagarjuna, Buddhist philosopher, who did the same in the East
 * Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling, German Idealist who created the first evolutionary nondual philosophy in the West and
 * Sri Aurobindo, Hindu yogi and philosopher who did the same in the East

Wilber argues that the account of existence presented by the Enlightenment is incomplete—it ignores the spiritual and noetic components of existence. He accordingly avoids the term cosmos, which is associated with merely physical existence. He prefers the term kosmos to refer to the sum of manifest existence, which harks back to the usage of the term by the Pythagoreans and other ancient mystics. Wilber conceives of the Kosmos as consisting of several concentric spheres: matter (the physical universe) plus life (the vital realm) plus mind (the mental realm) plus soul (the psychic realm) plus Spirit (the spiritual realm).

Structure and theses
In the introduction, Wilber describes the deeply dysteleological perspective of contemporary philosophical naturalism as "the philosophy of 'oops'". He describes the spiritual inadequacies of philosophical naturalism as the source of the contemporary world's menacing ecological crisis. He describes his methodology as outlining "orienting generalizations"—points on which agreement can be found that will reveal a shared world-space.

Book One
In the first chapter, "The Web of Life", Wilber uses Arthur Lovejoy's account of the Great Chain of Being to show how the mechanistic, materialistic modern worldview triumphed over the West's traditional, holistic, hierarchical view. The prevalence of pathological, dominating hierarchies throughout history has given hierarchy a bad name. But hierarchy is ultimately inescapable. Thus, we should concentrate on discovering which hierarchies actually do exist and on healing them.

In the second chapter, "The Pattern That Connects", Wilber uses Arthur Koestler's account of holism and holarchy and Ludwig von Bertalanffy's General Systems Theory to describe approximately twenty tenets of all holons. Wilber calls the holistic version of the Great Chain of Being the "Great Nest of Spirit", because this account emphasizes that higher levels include as well as transcend lower ones.

In the third chapter, "Individual And Social", Wilber describes Erich Jantsch's account of co-evolution and self-organizing systems.

In the fourth chapter, "A View From Within", Wilber describes what he calls two fundamental aspects of existence: the "Left-hand path" (interiority) and the "Right-hand path" (exteriority). Gross reductionism—atomism, for example—consists of reducing a whole to its parts. Subtle reductionism—systems theory, for example—consists of reducing the interior to the exterior. Charles Taylor's work is used to show that the Enlightenment paradigm suffers from both gross and subtle reductionism. When Individual and Social spheres are added to the Interior and Exterior aspects of existence, four quadrants emerge.

In the fifth chapter, "The Emergence Of Human Nature", Wilber uses Jean Gebser's account of the development of human consciousness to show how the West progressed from the magic to the mythic to the rational mentalities. This acknowledgment that all of existence is in development adds a third fundamental dimension—depth, or verticality—to Wilber's model of consciousness.

In the sixth chapter, "Magic, Mythic And Beyond", Wilber uses Jean Piaget's theory of developmental psychology to describe the individual development of the contemporary human being. The "Pre/Trans Fallacy" is described. This is Wilber's term for "romantic" approaches, like deep ecology and ecofeminism, that often mistake earlier and more exclusivist modes of being for more mature, more inclusive modes.

In the seventh chapter, "The Farther Reaches Of Human Nature", Wilber uses Jürgen Habermas' account of socio-cultural development to describe collective human development. Wilber describes vision-logic, a non-dominating, global awareness of holistic hierarchy, in which the pathological dissociations of Nature from Self, interiority from exteriority, and creativity from compassion are transformed into healthy differentiations. The validity claims of mystics are compared to Thomas Kuhn's account of scientific paradigms.

In the eighth chapter, "The Depths Of The Divine", Wilber uses the accounts of four mystics to describe the possibilities for further individual spiritual development: the Transcendentalist Ralph Waldo Emerson on nature mysticism, the Christian saint Teresa of Avila on deity mysticism, Meister Eckhart on formless mysticism, and the Hindu guru Ramana Maharshi on nondual mysticism.

Book Two
In the ninth chapter, "The Way Up Is The Way Down", Wilber describes Neo-Platonist Plotinus' nondual metaphysics. "Ascending" philosophies are those that embrace the One, or the Absolute. "Descending" philosophies are those that embrace the Many, or Plenitude. Both ascent (driven by Eros, or creativity) and descent (driven by Agape, or compassion) are indispensable for a healthy, whole view. Plato's metaphysics, which also included both ascending and descending drives, is described. Plotinus' attack on Gnosticism is described in order to trace differences between healthy and pathological approaches to ascent.

In the tenth chapter, "This-Worldly, Otherworldly", Wilber describes various attempts to repair modernism's fractured and flattened worldview, especially Schelling's existential idealism.

In the eleventh chapter, "Brave New World", Wilber describes the liberating advantages as well as the spiritually crippling disadvantages of the modern, scientific mentality.

In the twelfth chapter, "The Collapse Of The Kosmos", Wilber uses Taylor's account of the effects of the Enlightenment paradigm to show how vertical depth was collapsed into horizontal span and how the ascending drive was dissociated into the "Ego camp" (Immanuel Kant's and Johann Gottlieb Fichte's Transcendent Ego) and the "Eco camp" (Baruch Spinoza's deified Nature). Utilitarianism is described as mistaking sensory pleasure for Spirit, which ultimately resulted in a fixation on hedonism and sex in modern society.

In the thirteenth chapter, "The Dominance Of The Descenders", Wilber describes how the West tried to embrace the Many through science, but failed to embrace the One through mysticism. The result was the rise of Thanatos (Sigmund Freud's death drive), and Phobos (existential fear), which are the respective pathological versions of Agape and Eros.

In the fourteenth chapter, "The Unpacking Of God", Wilber describes aspects of particular historical nondual views that could possibly heal the noetic fissures in the West, especially spiritual practice as understood by Zen and Dzogchen.

The afterword, "At The Edge Of History", includes a meditation on Emptiness as the ground of Being in which all entities are ontologically healed.

Reception
In a review of the book, Esalen co-founder and writer Michael Murphy described it as one of the four most important books of the 20th century (the others being Aurobindo's The Life Divine, Heidegger's Being and Time, and Whitehead's Process and Reality).

The cultural historian William Irwin Thompson harshly criticized Wilber's project, contending that systematic "theories of everything" were inherently misguided. He also dismissed Wilber's scholarly achievements as "undergraduate generalizations". A Publishers Weekly reviewer criticized the book as disorganized and wrote that Wilber “has unfortunately tried too hard to cram everything possible into this massive undertaking. The result is that even the hundreds of pages of notes (sometimes useful, sometimes merely repetitive) become a mass of ideas and names.”

title: Sex, Ecology, Spirituality


text:
List of civil parishes in Buckinghamshire

This is a list of civil parishes in the ceremonial county of Buckinghamshire, England. There are 221 civil parishes.

Buckinghamshire (unitary authority area)
Part of the former High Wycombe Municipal Borough is unparished. Population figures are unavailable for some of the smallest parishes.

Milton Keynes
The whole of the borough is parished.

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


text:
Talk:Ganglati

I removed the following editing note from the main article:

"Note: I have not confirmed that last sentence, source was below)

External Sources

 * http://www.geocities.com/cas111jd/norse/norse_forseti_gylfi.htm"

BlankVerse 15:25, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ganglati


text:
User talk:80.222.96.251

Rather than copy information from one page to another, it is possible to simply form a redirect to that page by having a page's content as " #REDIRECT Page name ". This saves time, as well as server load. I hope that you continue to contribute to Wikipedia. - Estel (talk) 15:26, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)

Father of the Nation
I am of the opinion the article should be reduced radically to ensure NPOV and readability and sticking with facts. I put on it and added section to its Talk page. Pavel Vozenilek 19:30, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:80.222.96.251


text:
Navajo Wars

The term Navajo Wars covers at least three distinct periods of conflict in the American West: the Navajo against the Spanish (late 16th century through 1821); the Navajo against the Mexican government (1821 through 1848); and the Navajo against the United States (after the 1847–48 Mexican–American War). These conflicts ranged from small-scale raiding to large expeditions mounted by governments into territory controlled by the Navajo. The Navajo Wars also encompass the widespread raiding that took place throughout the period; the Navajo raided other tribes and nearby settlements, who in return raided into Navajo territory, creating a cycle of raiding that perpetuated the conflict.

Spanish period
Facundo Melgares, the last Spanish governor of New Mexico before independence in 1821, conducted two unsuccessful expeditions against the Navajo, who were attacking the New Mexican settlers. In October 1821 he sued for peace.

Timeline

 * 1582: Espejo-Beltrain "found here peaceful Indian mountaineers" called Querechos. This party did not linger around Acoma because the Querechose who carried on trade with the Pueblo were known to come to their aid in times of conflict
 * 1630: Fray Benevides arranges a peace between the Tewas and Navajo.
 * 1638: Governor Luis de Rosa encourages Navajo to raid the missions of his political enemy the Franciscan friars.
 * 1641–1642: Franciscan friars mount a military campaign against Navajo, burning corn, taking prisoners, and killing some.
 * 1644–1647: Spanish fight Navajo living along the San Juan River.
 * 1659: Bernardo Lopez sends 40 Spanish soldiers and 800 allies into Navajo land.
 * 1661: Lopez sanctions killing and capture of Navajo as slaves who came to Tewa to trade.
 * 1669: Spanish attack Navajo near Acoma.
 * 1677–1678: Navajo actively raiding Spanish pueblos. Spanish mount three different scorched earth and slave gathering campaigns.
 * 1680: Navajo probably join Pueblos. Start of Great Southwestern Revolt against Spanish.
 * 1691: Navajo alert Pueblos and Apaches that Spanish force was on its way.
 * 1696: Navajo said to be inciting other tribes, combined with Texas in revolt.
 * 1698–1699: End of Great Southwestern Revolt; Spanish boundaries remain constant.
 * 1705: Francisco Cuervo y Valdés sends Roque Madrid with about 100 Spanish soldiers and ordinary citizens together with some 300 Pueblo Indian allies to attack the Navajo in northern New Mexico, in August of that year.

Mexican period
Melgares's successor, Governor José Antonio Vizcarra met Navajo leaders at Paguate on 12 February 1823. His terms essentially stated that the Mexicans would settle the Navajo in pueblos and energetically convert them to the Catholic religion. The Navajo were not interested in either of these proposals. They rejected the treaty and renewed the fight. Six New Mexicans were killed at Socorro in April and eight more at Sabinal in May. On 18 June 1823, Vizcarra led 1,500 troops in a 74-day expedition against the Navajo of western New Mexico. His route took him through the Chuska Mountains to the Hopi mesas in what is now Arizona, then north towards Utah, reaching Oljeto Creek in what is now San Juan County, Utah. Thirty-three Navajo were killed, of whom eight were women, and about 30 were captured. The expedition reached Canyon de Chelly in what is now eastern Arizona.

In retaliation for Vizcarra's expedition, the Navajo raided Socorro again, and attacked Tome, Albuquerque, and reached the outskirts of Santa Fe. The 1823 raid marked the start of a long period of raids and counter raids lasting until 1848 as New Mexicans took Navajo captive to work as slaves, and as Navajo raided to recover their people and to obtain livestock.

American period
The U.S. military assumed nominal control of the southwest from Mexico by 1846. And raids continued between the Navajo and the New Mexican civilians.

1846: Bear Springs Treaty
Following an invitation from a small party of American soldiers under the command of Captain John Reid who journeyed deep into Navajo country and contacted him, Narbona and other Navajo negotiated a treaty of peace with Colonel Alexander Doniphan on November 21, 1846 at Bear Springs, Ojo del Oso (later the site of Fort Wingate). The treaty was not honored by young Navajo raiders who continued to steal stock from New Mexican villages and herders.

1849: Washington Expedition
On August 16, 1849 the US Army began an expedition into the heart of Navajo country on an organized reconnaissance to impress the Navajo with the might of the U.S. military. They also mapped the terrain and planned forts. Col. John Washington, the military governor of New Mexico at the time, led the expedition. Forces included nearly 1000 infantry (US and New Mexican volunteers), hundreds of horses and mules, a supply train, 55 Pueblo scouts, and four artillery guns. On August 29–30, 1849, Washington's expedition needed water, and began pillaging Navajo cornfields. Mounted Navajo warriors darted back and forth around Washington's troops to push them off. Washington reasoned he could pillage Navajo crops because the Navajo would have to reimburse the U.S. government for the cost of the expedition. Washington still suggested to the Navajo that in spite of the hostile situation, they and the whites could "still be friends if the Navajo came with their chiefs the next day and signed a treaty." This is what they did.

The next day Chief Narbona came to Canyon de Chelly for a "talk peace", along with several other headmen. In the treaty the Navajo acknowledged the jurisdiction of the United States and allowed forts and trading posts in Navajo land. The United States, on its part promised "such donations [and] such other liberal and humane measures, as [it] may deem meet and proper". After reaching an accord, a scuffle broke out when a New Mexican thought he saw his stolen horse and tried to claim it from the Navajo. (The Navajo held that the horse had passed through several owners by this time, and rightfully belonged to its Navajo owner). Washington sided with the New Mexican. Since the Navajo owner took his horse and fled the scene, Washington told the New Mexican to pick out any Navajo horse he wanted. The rest of the Navajo also left. At this, Col. Washington ordered his soldiers to fire. Seven Navajo were killed in the volleys; the rest ran and could not be caught. One of the dying was Chief Narbona, who was scalped as he lay dying by a New Mexican souvenir hunter. This massacre prompted the warlike Navajo leaders such as Manuelito to gain influence over those who were advocates of peace.

1851–1860
Col. Edwin Sumner conducted a campaign against the Navajo in 1851. He delegated Maj. Electus Backus to build Fort Defiance in the middle of Diné bikéyah (Navajo territory). Col Sumner entered Canyon de Chelly but Navajo harassment attacks caused him to withdraw.

In 1855 a treaty was signed at Laguna Negra by Manuelito and Zarcillos Largos for the Navajo and Henry L. Dodge (Indian agent), Governor Merriweather, and General John Garland. Two years later a severe drought hit the Navajo and decimated their livestock and agricultural resources, causing a famine in the winter of 1857-1858. A time of social disruption ensued. Surrounding tribes gradually increased their attacks on the weakened Navajo. The Navajo demanded in 1858 that Fort Defiance stop grazing their livestock on prime Navajo land. Soldiers shot 48 cattle and 8 horses belonging to Manuelito. Navajo warriors killed a servant of the commanding officer in retaliation for the killing of their people's livestock without compensation. The United States military demanded the murderer be brought to them, or they would begin a war. The Miles Campaign was sent against them, leaving Fort Defiance on September 9.

1860: Second Battle of Fort Defiance
In 1860 the U.S. military, Mexican-Americans, Zunis, and Utes all raided Navajo land. The Navajo killed four soldiers from Fort Defiance in January. On April 29, Manuelito, Barboncito and 1,000 Navajo attacked the US army in the Second Battle of Fort Defiance. Meanwhile, others raided sheep near Santa Fe. 400 New Mexicans under Manuel Antonio Chaves formed a militia and raided Navajo land, followed by independent raids by citizens to take captives. In retaliation for the attack on Fort Defiance, Canby's Campaign set out in early October. Over the next several months seven army expeditions killed 23 Navajo and destroyed Navajo stock and crops.

In 1861, another treaty was signed at Fort Fauntleroy (later Fort Wingate). Ft. Defiance was decommissioned on February 24. Raiding continued between groups of citizens and Navajo warriors. A dispute arose in August from allegations of cheating at a horse race between Navajo & New Mexican Volunteers forces at Fort Wingate, and Manuel Antonio Chaves of the New Mexico Volunteers ended up ordering his men to fire into the Navajo. This incident incensed the Navajo, and they raided the New Mexicans.

1862: Civil War
The Confederate forces pushed up the Rio Grande into New Mexico in 1862, But they were driven back into Texas by Union forces, of the Colorado Volunteers, assisted by some New Mexican Volunteer militia units. With the arrival of the California Volunteers under the command of General James H. Carleton, Fort Wingate was re-established at Ojo del Oso (formerly Fauntleroy). The Navajo took advantage of the distraction caused by the Confederate movements to step up their raids. The citizens complained to the government that Navajo and Apaches stole 30,000 sheep in 1862.

1863: Carson's Campaign
In 1863, as raids continued between the Navajo and the New Mexican militia, the New Mexico District Military Governor, General James Henry Carleton, told 18 Navajo chiefs that they must surrender by July 20, 1863, and move to Fort Sumner, at the Bosque Redondo. In July, under orders from Gen. Carleton, Col. Kit Carson began a simultaneous campaign against the Mescelaro Apache and Navajo. In a series of raids and skirmishes Carson's troops began rounding up Navajo and Apache and sending them to Bosque Redondo.

Between September 1863 and January 1864, Carson and his men chased the Navajo, killing and capturing a few. Crops were burned, stock was confiscated, hogans were burned. Carson attempted to capture a Navajo stronghold in the Battle of Canyon de Chelly. Although the army missed destroying the entire force, they destroyed much Navajo property as part of a scorched-earth policy.

1864: The Long Walk
Without food or shelter to sustain them through the winters, and continuously chased by the U.S. Army, groups of Navajo began to surrender.

Starting in January 1864, many bands and their leaders—Barboncito, Armijo, and finally in 1866 Manuelito—surrendered or were captured and made what is called the "Long Walk" to the Bosque Redondo reservation at Fort Sumner, New Mexico.

One Navajo elder said of the Long Walk:

"By slow stages we traveled eastward by present Gallup and Shush Bìtó, Bear Spring, which is now called Fort Wingate. You ask how they treated us? If there was room, the soldiers put the women and children on the wagons. Some even let them ride behind them on their horses. I have never been able to understand a people who killed you one day and on the next played with your children ..."

title: Navajo Wars


text:
Alexander Hegius von Heek

Alexander Hegius von Heek (?1433/1439/1440? – 7 December 1498) was a German humanist, so called from his birthplace Heek (located near Ahaus, then in the Duchy of Westphalia).

Hegius learned, likely in Emmerich, Greek from Rodolphus Agricola. In 1474 he settled down at Deventer in the Netherlands, where he either founded or succeeded to the headship of a school, which became famous for the number of its distinguished alumni. First and foremost of these was Erasmus; others were Hermann von dem Busche and Murmellius, the missionaries of humanism, Conrad Goclenius (Gockelen), Conrad Mutianus (Muth von Mudt) and Frans van Cranevelt.

His writings, consisting of short poems, philosophical essays, grammatical notes and letters, were published after his death by his pupil Jacobus Faber. They display considerable knowledge of Latin, but less of Greek, on the value of which he strongly insisted.

Hegius's chief claim to be remembered rests not upon his published works, but upon his services in the cause of humanism. He succeeded in abolishing the old-fashioned medieval textbooks and methods of instruction, and led his pupils to the study of the classical authors themselves. His generosity in assisting poor students exhausted a considerable fortune, and at his death he left nothing but his books and clothes.

title: Alexander Hegius von Heek


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick lucking

 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 delete. -- AllyUnion (talk) 12:51, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Nick lucking
Notability not established. The web site cited has an opening page that seems to have nothing to do with Nick Lucking at all, and is otherwise empty (apart from a flash animation). Google searches reveal student home pages. Uncle G 15:28, 2005 Feb 5 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. jni 16:15, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as borderline spam. Wyss 21:21, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Vanity (borderline ad) RJFJR 22:05, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Vanity which reads a lot like an ad. --Marcus22 22:29, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable - 26 Google hits, vanity. Megan1967 03:07, 6 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.


text:
Ultra Boy

Ultra Boy (Jo Nah) is a superhero appearing in DC Comics, primarily as a member of the Legion of Super-Heroes in the 30th and 31st centuries. He gained his powers after being eaten by a whale-like beast in space and being exposed to large amounts of radiation while inside. His real name is derived from the Biblical figure Jonah, who also survived being swallowed by a "large fish" (often interpreted as a whale).

Publication history
Ultra Boy first appeared in Superboy #98, and was created by Jerry Siegel and Curt Swan.

Pre-"Crisis"
Ultra Boy first appeared in Superboy #98 (1962), in which he was sent back in time to Superboy's home town of Smallville to prove himself worthy of joining the Legion by learning Superboy's secret identity. In his first adventure he only demonstrated his vision powers, known as "penetra-vision". It was implied he had malicious intentions in learning Superboy's secret identity. Later, in Adventure Comics #316, he explained that he could channel his ultra-energy to provide him other powers, though only one at a time. Later he was romantically linked for many years with fellow Legionnaire Phantom Girl. He was considered one of the Legion's 'big 3' (along with Superboy and Mon-El) and served two terms as leader.

The names of his parents are Crav and Mytra Nah. His girlfriend on Rimbor before he joined the Legion was An Ryd; she is later murdered by Pulsar Stargrave, who frames Ultra Boy for the crime.

Ultra Boy is a skilled actor; this, combined with his rough background on Rimbor and social standing, helps him infiltrate criminal groups when he appears to "go bad". This skill also makes him a valuable member of the Legion Espionage Squad; he is the only member without overt "spy" powers.

Legion of Super-Heroes (vol. 4)
Between volumes 3 and 4 of the Legion of Super-Heroes, a five-year gap in the chronology occurred, during which the team disbanded. During this period Ultra Boy proposed to Phantom Girl, but she was apparently killed in an accident. Now known simply as Jo Nah, he had become a smuggler and an outlaw on his homeworld of Rimbor. He rejoined the Legion after assassins destroyed an entire apartment building trying to kill him.

A later storyline in the Volume 4 Legion of Super-Heroes (vol. 4) Annual #1 showed his acting skills. It was shown that for years Ultra Boy had played "dumber" than he was, to not give away any advantage to his foes. When the time sorceress Glorith began manipulating Legion history, she figured only the smarter legionnaires might notice her manipulations, and thus acted to neutralize ones like Brainiac 5. She never suspected Ultra Boy would figure out her plan, which involved provoking a battle between the Legion and Mordru at the zenith of his power, which would destroy or weaken both, allowing her to pick up the pieces. Realizing what this would mean, Ultra Boy first (in a fake diplomatic blunder) prevented the Legion from attacking Mordru, then, in disguise, visited Mordru and instead provoked him into attacking Glorith. This proved successful, leaving both Mordru and Glorith severely weakened. Years later Glorith finally figured out who was responsible and in revenge sent Phantom Girl into the past, leaving Ultra Boy believing her dead. Later still the Legion found themselves on the wrong side of the law and Ultra Boy adopted a new identity as Emerald Dragon.

During the "Five Year Gap" following the Magic Wars, Earth fell under the covert control of the Dominators, and withdrew from the United Planets. A few years later, the members of the Dominators' highly classified "Batch SW6" escaped captivity. Originally, Batch SW6 appeared to be a group of teenage Legionnaire clones, created from samples apparently taken just prior to Ferro Lad's death at the hands of the Sun-Eater. Later, they were revealed to be time-paradox duplicates, every bit as legitimate as their older counterparts. After Earth was destroyed in a disaster reminiscent of Krypton's destruction over a millennium earlier, a few dozen surviving cities and their inhabitants reconstituted their world as New Earth. The SW6 Legionnaires—including their version of Ultra Boy—remained.

Post-"Zero Hour"
In the continuity that follows the 1994 Zero Hour: Crisis in Time! storyline, Ultra Boy's background is very similar to the original. He was a gang leader on Rimbor (running a gang called the Emerald Dragons, a reference to his Five Years Later identity), before being eaten by an Ultra Energy Beast and gaining his powers from eating the creature's flesh. He initially does not join the Legion but instead joins a rival group called the Workforce, and is briefly romantically linked to Spider Girl (Sussa Paka) before meeting and falling in love with Apparition, the post-Zero Hour incarnation of Phantom Girl, when the Workforce and Legion are stranded on Planet Hell, a prison complex located inside the sun. Eventually Ultra Boy leaves the Workforce and becomes a member of the Legion.

Ultra Boy and Apparition eventually marry and have a son named Cub, just before the Legion's reality was rebooted for the second time.

2005 reboot
The Legion was rebooted again in 2005. Ultra Boy in this version seems much the same as his previous versions but does not have a romantic link with Phantom Girl; he is in a relationship with Shadow Lass. Trained by Karate Kid in a more responsible and tactical use of his superpowers, it's known by at least Triplicate Girl that on Rimbor, "he is charged for a crime he never committed", but refuses to say more on the question. He is later cleared of this crime (revealed to be Vehicular Homicide) when Legion business manager M'rissy discovered evidence that led to his innocence. Kinder and mellower than his gruff exterior may express, he's the first one to sense Imra's displeasure and insecurities for being constantly neglected by her boyfriend, Lightning Lad. This however leads to a brief affair with the Titanian girl.

Post-"Infinite Crisis"
The events of the 2005–2006 "Infinite Crisis" storyline have apparently restored a close analogue of the Pre-Crisis on Infinite Earths Legion to continuity, as seen in "The Lightning Saga" story arc in Justice League of America and Justice Society of America, and in the "Superman and the Legion of Super-Heroes" story arc in Action Comics. Ultra Boy is included in their number.

In the "Watchmen" sequel "Doomsday Clock", Ultra Boy is among the Legion of Super-Heroes members that appear in the present after Doctor Manhattan undid the experiment that erased the Legion of Super-Heroes and the Justice Society of America.

Powers and abilities
Ultra Boy's source of power comes from exposure of the radiation inside the Ultra-Energy Beast, and is not dependent on yellow-sun radiation. In the Legion of Super-Heroes (vol. 4) Annual #1, his power is described as his body having absorbed the "ultra-radiation", which then adapted to an invulnerable state (a default position). When he shifts the energy to his muscles, it increases his strength, or optical powers if he concentrates the energy on his eyes.

Ultra Boy has the powers of superhuman strength, flight, penetra-vision (similar to Superboy's x-ray vision, except penetra-vision allows him to see through lead), flash vision (similar to heat vision), invulnerability, and ultra-speed, although he has never been shown having super hearing. All of these abilities seem to be at Kryptonian power levels. Whereas Superman's heat vision is usually depicted as red beams, Ultra Boy's flash vision is usually blue.

Ultra Boy's principal weakness is that he can only use one power at a time, i.e., if he is invulnerable, he is not super-strong or able to see through objects. This makes him open to sudden attacks if he is unable to shift from one power to another in time. He cannot use his ultra speed to break the "time barrier" since the stress would destroy his body. He is also vulnerable to "X-radiation", which affects him as much as Kryptonite harms Kryptonians.

Ultra Boy is an exceptional actor and has used his skills on many Legion adventures. It has been useful combined with his rough exterior to have his fellow Legionnaires think him less smart than he is. This is the reason that although his powers don't lend themselves to espionage such as Shrinking Violet, Chameleon Boy and Invisible Kid he is a valuable member of the Legion Espionage Squad.

Along with the skills mentioned above, he has twice been elected as leader of the Legion, and has served several terms as deputy leader.

Equipment
As a member of the Legion of Super-Heroes, Ultra Boy is provided a Legion Flight Ring, which allows him to fly and protects him from the vacuum of space and other dangerous environments. Although he has the equivalent innate abilities, the ring allows him to forgo them and leave another of his powers available for use.

Television

 * Ultra Boy makes a cameo appearance in the Superman: The Animated Series episode "New Kids In Town".
 * Ultra Boy appears in the Justice League Unlimited episode "Far From Home" as one of several Legionnaires under the Fatal Five's mind control.
 * Jo Nah / Ultra Boy appears in Legion of Super Heroes, voiced by James Arnold Taylor. Introduced as a civilian in the episode "Champions", he competes in the Intergalactic Games before helping fellow contestant Matter-Eater Lad and the Legion fend off an attack by the Fatal Five. As of the two-part episode "Sundown", Jo Nah has become Ultra Boy and was recruited into the Legion to help them defeat the Sun-Eater.

Miscellaneous

 * Ultra Boy serves as inspiration for Champions's "Ultra Slots".
 * Ultra Boy appears in Adventures in the DC Universe #10.
 * Ultra Boy appears in the one-shot comic Batman '66 Meets the Legion of Super-Heroes.

title: Ultra Boy


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teen Forums

 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 delete. -- AllyUnion (talk) 12:52, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Teen Forums
Wikipedia is not a web directory. Uncle G 15:28, 2005 Feb 5 (UTC)
 * delete nor does it offer anything unique, there are lots of sites that offer this either by design or not. Thryduulf 15:45, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. jni 16:15, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, yet another non-notable web community. — Ливай | ☺ 17:50, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nn. Carrp | Talk 20:13, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, ad for a website, say no more. Wyss 21:20, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 475-odd members and 7 active people on as I write this = Delete. humblefool® 23:36, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 'Delete, nn. --Idont Havaname 01:05, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * delete. ComCat 15:28, 10 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.


text:
Max Zorin

Maximillian Zorin is a fictional character and the main antagonist in the 1985 James Bond film A View to a Kill. He is portrayed by Christopher Walken.

Biography
Zorin was born in Dresden around the end of World War II, after which Dresden became part of East Germany. He later moved to France and became a leading businessman through energy trading, eventually transitioning into the electronics industry and operating on the microchip market. According to a briefing by M and Frederick Gray, Zorin is outwardly a staunch anti-communist with high influence in the French government. However, it is revealed later in the movie that he was the product of Nazi medical experimentation during the war, in which pregnant women were injected with massive quantities of steroids in an attempt to create "super-children." Most of the pregnancies failed. The few surviving babies grew to become extraordinarily intelligent—but also psychopathic. After the war, Dr. Hans Glaub (alias Dr. Carl Mortner), the German scientist who conducted the experiments, was spirited away by the Soviet Union, where he continued his experiments with steroids. It is strongly implied that the young Zorin was raised by Mortner as his own father, who was one of Zorin's closest allies in the movie, and explicitly stated that Zorin was trained by and long-affiliated with the KGB. Among other activities, Mortner organizes a doping programme for Zorin's thoroughbred race horses, allowing Zorin to win horse races with ease by activating illegal horse steroids by means of implanted microchips; since the drugs are 'administered' during the race, they do not show up on blood tests taken beforehand, and the dose is so minute that they dissolve into the system before tests can be taken afterwards.

Despite Zorin's longtime KGB affiliation, his outside activities draw attention that the KGB sees as unwelcome, and at a meeting between Zorin and KGB head General Gogol, Gogol rebukes him. Zorin responds by telling Gogol that he no longer considers himself a KGB employee.

Zorin is completely ruthless and displays a near-total lack of loyalty to his own men, as shown when he oversaw the execution of a Soviet spy who attempted to sabotage his oil well operations and when he personally massacres dozens of his own mine workers with a 9mm Uzi submachine gun to ensure the success of his own plans. Despite his long-standing and intimate relationship with his right-hand woman May Day, he willingly sacrifices her for the sake of his plans, although this betrayal would backfire on him later on.

Zorin forms a plan to destroy his only competition in Silicon Valley by triggering a massive earthquake in the San Andreas Fault at high tide, causing the valley to flood. Such a disaster would effectively wipe out all computer companies competing against Zorin in the world microchip market and leave him as the leading supplier of microchips; it would also kill millions of people. He plans to use his vast resources to set off a super-earthquake in both the San Andreas Fault and Hayward Fault by flooding them both with water from San Andreas Lake and then breaking the geological lock that forbade both faults from moving simultaneously. To accomplish this, Zorin mines underneath the lakes and plans to blast through the lake beds in order to flood the fault, further exacerbating it by pumping water into them via a vast system of oil wells. Once the floodwaters came in, he would set off the explosives necessary to break the lock.

Zorin's plan is foiled by Bond and Zorin's former lover and henchwoman May Day, who joins Bond's side after Zorin attempts to kill her. She pushes a trailer carrying the explosive detonator out of the valley and into open air, sacrificing her own life in the process.

Bond and Stacey Sutton both witness the explosion, which infuriates Zorin and makes him even more determined to get revenge on Bond. When leaving the valley in his airship with Scarpine and Mortner, he captures Stacey and makes away with her, only for Bond to grab hold of a mooring rope as the airship heads for the Golden Gate Bridge. Zorin attempts to kill Bond by flying him into the framework of the bridge, but Bond manages to hold on and bring the airship to a halt by mooring it to the framework. Stacey attacks Zorin and in the scuffle both Scarpine and Mortner are knocked out. She escapes onto the bridge with Bond, and Zorin attempts to attack them both with an axe, but in the scuffle he loses his grip of the framework and falls to his death into San Francisco Bay. Witnessing Zorin's death, Mortner fires his gun at Bond and Stacey, missing them, he retreats into the airship and retrieves some dynamite, lights it and attempts to throw it at Bond, however, Bond takes the axe and severs the mooring cable attaching the airship to the bridge. Now that the airship is free, it flies away from the bridge, while Mortner and Scarpine lose their balance while trying to throw out the dynamite, however time runs out and the dynamite detonates, destroying the airship and killing both Scarpine and Mortner.

Behind the scenes
The role was initially offered to David Bowie, who turned it down, saying, "I didn't want to spend five months watching my stunt double fall off cliffs." Rutger Hauer also turned down the part, before Christopher Walken signed on.

Legal problems arose before the film's release when producers became aware there was a pre-existing similarly named Zoran Corporation which made microchips. The Zoran Corporation threatened to sue for defamation. Pre-production crew had neglected to do a trademark search prior to filming. The parties came to an agreement and, because of this, A View to a Kill is the first 007 film with a legal disclaimer inserted at the beginning.

Henchmen

 * May Day (formerly) – changed sides and sacrificed herself to remove the master bomb from Zorin's mine
 * Scarpine – blown up in zeppelin explosion
 * Jenny Flex (formerly) – killed in the mine flood
 * Pan Ho (formerly) – killed in the mine flood
 * Dr. Hans Glaub/Carl Mortner – blown up in zeppelin explosion

Other appearances

 * Zorin is a playable multiplayer character in the 2002 video game, James Bond 007: Nightfire.
 * In the 2004 video game, James Bond 007: Everything or Nothing, it is revealed that Zorin had an apprentice named Nikolai Diavolo (voiced by Willem Dafoe), who plans to use nanobots to commence the rebirth of the Soviet Union. Diavolo also wishes to kill Bond in order to exact vengeance for Zorin's death.

title: Max Zorin


text: File:RobertLairdBorden.jpg

title: File:RobertLairdBorden.jpg


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paniq

 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.

The votes were 14 delete or userfy, 19 keep. dbenbenn | talk 22:07, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Paniq
Apparent self-promotion. — Dan | Talk 15:30, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: This individual continuously receives awards for his music at demoparties, effectively the analagous equivalent to film festivals but focused on electronically-created animations, graphics and music. It's definitely worth noting that in the last 3 music competitions that paniq entered in 2004 (that I've discovered so far),  he received 1st place each and every time.     Furthermore, removing major demoscene news portals as a way to manipulate Google hit counts is a disgusting display of biased deletionism.  —RaD Man (talk) 19:57, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Add this information to the article. Notablity should be established there not in the VfD pages. Thryduulf 21:18, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Huh? Which part should I add to the article?  That biased deletionists are manpulating Google hit counts, or that demoparties are analogous to film festivals?  If you checked the article you'd know I'm in the process of porting over the documented achievements of this artist this very moment.  —RaD Man (talk) 21:30, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * My appologies. I was referring to the awards you mentioned above, but it seems I wasn't viewing a fully up-to-date version of the article page. Thryduulf 22:01, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I haven't yet voted on this VFD, but the article has certainly improved, so I vote a weak keep. Incidentally, I'd like to know where I "remov[ed] major demoscene news portals as a way to manipulate Google hit counts", since it appears the above comment was directed at me. — Dan | Talk 00:28, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Dan, this was in response to certain individuals attempting to lowball the Google hit count coming from well established demoscene news sites and portals. My apologies if you thought this was directed towards you, as it most certainly was not.  —RaD Man (talk) 00:44, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

As of 08:16, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC), the votes are as follows: 20 keep, 14 delete, 1 neutral, 3 suspect votes from brand new user accounts. Any vote of "userfy" was counted as a delete. If you add or change your vote please update this section accordingly

 * I did not put the article here, but I am updating it from time to time. the article exists since almost a year and has been enhanced as part of the demoscene section. oh yes: against userfy Keep since the article turns out to become quite good now -- Paniq 15:40, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * A google search for Leonard Ritter paniq (to distinguish from a Canadian toxicologist and a retired US Brigadier) gets 110 google hits, many of which appear to be user profiles for sites he is a member of. Delete or move to user space. Thryduulf 15:58, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * "A google search for ... gets 110 google hits." wow. Well, a search for fr-06: black 2000 (one of his works) results in ~890 Google hits and ~1400 MSN hits. Google is not allmighty. /MadenMann/ 2005/02/08/18/20/00 UCT
 * I see only 190 on Google (40 displayed). How did you get 890? —Korath (Talk) 19:48, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * As stated below, a search for paniq +demoscene on Google results in over 3200 hits, all of which are relevant. —RaD Man (talk) 20:26, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know how many paniq +demoscene gets. You know very well that I do, having called me disgustingly biased for pointing out that some three thousand of them come from just six sites.  I was not, however, replying to that, as I have already done so below.  I was replying to the claims of this anonymous edit.  My reply helpfully appears directly beneath it. —Korath (Talk) 21:11, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * an MSN search for fr-06: black 2000 as an inexact phrase does get nearly 1400 results. None on the first two pages are relevant (the first two are from the Internet Engineering Task Force website for example). An msn search for ""fr-06: black 2000" as an exact phrase  returns only 10 results, although these do all seem to be related to the demoscene world. No change of vote. Thryduulf 21:35, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Userfy. Uncle G 16:04, 2005 Feb 5 (UTC)
 * I cant do anything about google collecting my user profiles. These days, it is common for internet artists to be listed on google in all possible ways. Do I have to be dead or inactive to be listed here? Keep the article then and delete the user account. -- Paniq 16:09, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Userfy. jni 16:16, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as self-promotion is all . Ok, weak Keep Wyss 21:19, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I repeat that I did not create the article. Auto-biography does not mention any policy collision with maintaining an autobiography. In case you find NPOV-critical terms in the article, you are free to edit it. Promotive articles need editing, not deletion. -- Paniq 21:32, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Granted it's not self-promotion as such, but as Thryduulf stated, most of 100 or so Google hits are for profiles you've made. No, it's not your fault that Google lists them, but that's not the issue, it's the point that there's not a whole lot else listed. That just suggests to me a degree of non notability. If there's evidence to prove otherwise, I'm more than happy to listen to it. Until then, userfy. --Lawlore 21:42, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * I see. A cause for above results might be that in the demoscene, realnames are traditionally detached from scene names which means that demosceners seldom appear with their realnames mentioned, neither next to their productions, nor to any articles published about them - with the exception of user pages where the entry of a realname is mandatory. That means you will not find as many hits for a realname AND an artist name as you will find for group and artist name, where you wont find a lot about group and realname. Additionally, collaborative releases are more common and informations about those often omit member names. Therefore searches for the group itself are most fruitful. It is obvious from such results that, especially in the demoscene, a directory of artists associating them with their reallife identities is needed. There is virtually no place on the net where you can find out about those people. -- Paniq 22:20, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete It's vanity! --Marcus22 22:34, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: The account User:Marcus22 is one week old and has very few edits. —RaD Man (talk) 20:36, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Punish me. -- Paniq 22:35, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Just delete or userfy as the voting goes, and tell Paniq to stop being so offended. humblefool® 23:38, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Give him a reason not to be offended and he won't be... // Gargaj 02:58, 2005 Feb 6 (UTC)
 * delete and userfy. Yuckfoo 01:23, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC) keep with recent edits. Yuckfoo 23:58, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * As much as I would love to vote, I'd call a neutral on this one due to being subjective - since I happen to know the person in question. His notability is questionable among "normal people" - among demosceners, however, he's a well-renowned artist, who developed skills in both programming, graphics and, most importantly, music. His works usually recieved very good reviews among critics, which isn't easy to achieve - if you don't believe me, take a try. I know that all this alone does not imply a Wikipedia entry. Then again, the line is thin. And Google searches are definetely the silliest way of defining notablity; if something produces only a few hits on Google, it means that the information about it is vague, and must be extended somehow - Wikipedia is a good place to do this. Or do I have to put up a load of pages of something to prove it notable? No. (edit: Oh and I just can't wait to get the Conspiracy page to get VfD'd...) // Gargaj 02:58, 2005 Feb 6 (UTC)
 * Delete, vanity. Megan1967 03:10, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep . This person is a notable figure within the demoscene. —RaD Man (talk) 03:20, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * EXTREME KEEP. For those with a Google dependency, why not try a search that actually makes sense?  For example, "Paniq +demoscene"  results in over 3,200 hits returned.  All relevant.   —RaD Man (talk)
 * To clarify, as I'm a self-confessed Google junkie, that search does return over 3,100 hits, yes, but with only 83 different sites, including several of the aforementioned profiles set up yourself . For comparison, searching demoscene +farbrausch turns up similar numbers (just under 3,300 hits), but with a much wider spread of results (almost 500 different sites). On that basis, sorry, but I stand by the point that Farbrausch are notable enough to merit an entry, but paniq is not. --Lawlore 13:04, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * (edit: would appear I goofed with the search for farbrausch, as the figures are way off. My apologies to all concerned) --Lawlore 13:31, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

 * KEEP yet another myopic vfd where "not notable" == "never heard of him" and god forbid we try to educate users on topics their unfamiliar with... they might learn something *GASP*!  ALKIVAR ™[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 03:32, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Radman's google work. Kappa 08:47, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete or Userfy, sorry this does clearly belong to the personal page. --Qdr 09:10, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm not as much a fan of Paniq's as many people active in the demoscene are, but the fact remains that, within the demoscene, Paniq is one of the more notable musicians and designers of the past two/three years, and an inspiration source for many. Also, the fact that he did not start the page, and merely corrected and updated it, means a lot. I fail to see why an influential artist, within his community, has to be dead to deserve being written about. This isn't personal, I never actually talked to Paniq.Skrebbel 12:21, 2005 Feb 6 (UTC)
 * This is User:Skrebbel's only edit. Thryduulf 08:16, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Excluding six sites (www.scenemusic.net, www.scenemusic.org, scenemusic.net, scenemusic.org, nectarine.ojuice.net, nectarine.ojuice.org) cuts the 3100 hits in RaD Man's search to 136. I have no idea how many hits would be notable for a demoscener, though, so no vote from me . —Korath (Talk) 15:11, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Since I'm a disgustingly biased deletionist, delete. Anyone truly notable would have a reasonable number of hits outside his field. —Korath (Talk) 20:57, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Cutting those the primary news sites for the demoscene would be like cutting The New York Times, CNN, and Fox News out of the picture when doing a google check on a news story.  ALKIVAR ™[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 22:33, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Our usual criterion for the notability of musicians is whether their works have been recorded and published, which turns out to be a very low threshold.  I don't see evidence of that.   Releasing your own pieces on-line on download sites isn't very impressive, even if you do release a lot of them.  Google hits for someone who is active in on-line forums is not very telling, either, and anyway it looks like most of the hits are due to intense activity on a few demoscene sites.   Notability within an Internet subculture might qualify but the threshold should be pretty high, In other words he would have to be among the handful of most famous demoscene people, and I can't tell if that is so.   Otherwise the Wikipedia will become a Directory of On-line Personalities.   By the way, the article as it stands is verging on puffery.   Notability not established.  Incidentally, if the article is retained, the title should be changed to Leonard Ritter, with 'paniq' as a redirect, not the other way round, as it is now. --BM 15:25, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Excuse me? And I quote from you, "In other words he would have to be among the handful of most famous demoscene people, and I can't tell if that is so."  In other words, you have no clue what you're talking about and should refrain from voting in the context of the demoscene.  I happen to host a radio show about various underground scenes and know for a fact that this is a highly notable musician within his field.  If I were the person weighing the votes here I would discount your vote or weigh it as commentary from an obvious layperson.  If you feel something is on the verge of puffery try the button called EDIT THIS PAGE.  It exists for a reason.  —RaD Man (talk) 19:05, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * For biographies, my opinion is that they should establish notability in a verifiable way so that a person reading them can determine whether the person is notable. The authors should be given some time to do this -- we shouldn't jump on an article and nominate it for VfD within minutes or hours of its creation.  But it shouldn't be many days, either.  It is not my responsibility when voting to go out and do research to determine whether the subject of an article is notable.   If you are an expert on this, then edit the article to include verifiable information that paniq is one of the 4-5 most notable in the demoscene world, and I will reconsider my vote.  Verifiable information means facts. It doesn't just mean your say-so.  I don't trust your opinion, because (1) every editor on Wikipedia is a nameless nobody, including me, and in principle nobody's opinion here is to be taken on authority; and (2) given the tone of your comments, I particularly don't trust you.  For example, if you are saying he is one of the demoscene people with the most radio-play, lets have some proof of that.  As for the puffery comment, it is not the basis of my vote.  It was an aside, and if the article is not deleted, I probably will try to edit it out, as I have in many other cases. --BM 20:08, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * "Our usual criterion for the notability of musicians is whether their works have been recorded and published, which turns out to be a very low threshold. I don't see evidence of that. Releasing your own pieces on-line on download sites isn't very impressive, even if you do release a lot of them." Well excuse me too, but I am not very impressed with you having that opinion. What is the goal of a free encyclopedia if it doesnt also support real free music? I really dont understand why you cant count that. regards - Sandro Manke
 * I can't imagine a single reason why anybody should be impressed with my opinions.  I'm a nameless nobody.  So are you.  Wikipedia is an encyclopedia created by nameless nobodies.  This is why opinions don't matter much here, only verifiable information.  Nobody is expected to believe something just because "BM" said so.  Who the heck is "BM"?  Who the heck is anybody here?  That is all beside the point, anyway.  The issue is whether the subject of this article, who happens to be a relatively popular Wikipedia editor, is notable enough to have an article about him.  You see, he doesn't get an article about himself just because he's a nice guy and we all hang out together on the Wikipedia.   Maybe that is how other sites you hang out on work, but this is not just another site. We are trying to build an encyclopedia. I am asking for verifiable information as to notability within the demoscene community.  If the demoscene community hasn't established any way for the world to determine who their notables are, that is not my fault. The world is not going to accept that they are all notables, and they have reason to be skeptical if someone from that scene is claimed to be notable.  If you don't have anything to contribute on that question, who cares what you think?   --BM 01:10, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * What is the goal of a free encyclopedia if it doesnt also support real free music? —  The goal of an encyclopaedia is to be an encyclopaedia, not an advertising platform. Wikipedia is neutral.  It does not "support" causes.  Uncle G 03:18, 2005 Feb 7 (UTC)
 * Delete. This belongs on a user page. Carrp | Talk 15:30, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, does not meet WikiProject:Music's guidelines for inclusion. Change to keep because information has been added to the effect of satisfying requirements 7 and 3. Tuf-Kat 17:02, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Its only partially about music. Where are the guidelines for manifolds and demosceners? I understand that maintaining a new kind of encyclopedia is a hard task, especially because it is not completely defined what it is. The net has opened new ways of understanding culture, and the demoscene is rather young, on its way to climb out of the pit of subcultures, in its own a redefinition of what art is about. While this is happening, the music industry is going down the drain and additively defaces itself as a pusher of taste, obfuscating the spectrum of musical quality with bruteforce marketing and top tens that are primarily constructed from sales results. It is indeed a controversial topic, so I understand that an article about me comes rather early. Your decision defines what this place is about. I'll always love wikipedia and in case this article goes, it might be back in a few years (I hope). -- Paniq 20:26, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Paniq, I hope you appreciate that this isn't personal.  The demoscene obviously isn't (yet) the royal road to notability.   What criteria would you suggest for high notability in that world?  --BM 20:38, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Notability is subjective, so I'd say: Democracy. This page decides this articles notability given the facts, opinions and informations that have been mentioned here. The fate of this article is actually telling me something about myself. High notability in the demoscene is usually accompanied by top placement in various competitions on large demoparties (placement is democratic as well, the audience votes the winner) and high activity over a longer period of time. See breakpoint 2004 results, evoke 2004 results, breakpoint 2003 results, evoke 2003 results, tum'04 results, tum'03 results, tum'02 results, mekka/symposium 2002 results ("failed preselection" = not played to the audience, thus the low rating), mekka/symposium 2001 results -- Paniq 20:44, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I must respectfully disagree with you TUF-KAT, paniq does verifiably and concretely meet point number seven of the Notability and Music Guidelines for the WikiMusic project. —RaD Man (talk) 15:25, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and be careful with those scissors. GRider\talk 17:11, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. "Notability is subjective". Is it? Surely it is one of the few things which is not subjective?  Agreed, one can be notable in a quasi-subjective sense: in that, for example, a small group of people may consider a person to be notable.  But, ultimately, it must be objectivity which defines notability: if we remove the notion of objectivity from notability we are really talking about something else.  My point being?  You seem to think that people on here are subjectively deciding whether or not you are sufficiently notable.  I disagree.  People on here who are saying 'delete' or 'userfy' are saying so on the objective basis that you are not, in fact, notable regardless of what persuasive arguments or points may be raised.  And it is on that, objective basis, that I still do not consider you to be "notable".  (Seems terrible rude to say that, I'm sorry.  Please don't take it personally!!!) --Marcus22 20:30, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * No problem. I have yet to encounter true objectivity. Even the article about objectivity seems to be unable to define it sufficiently in an objective way, which is a rather amusing observation, contradicting your statement. "People say" is subjective judgement of notability at its best. I doubt that, unless one rests among the spirits and thus is above all material things, one is able to produce any "objective" results at all. Do I understand your point correctly as "People who disagree to keep the page have an objective basis"? Does that mean that solely people who vote for keeping the page are subjective? If yes, we should call this Marcus' Law and apply it to elections. I regard such an action to be of great fun for all parties. -- Paniq 02:20, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Let me introduce myself: I'm scamp/vacuum, active member of the demoscene, and I know Paniq for years now. I'm also the main organizer of the Breakpoint party where paniq won competitions at. I highly respect paniq for his work. That being said: I also respect Wikipedia, and I think it should be free from self promotion. This article clearly is. And sorry, "I did not put the article here, but I am updating it from time to time." is a blatant lie. The article was originally created from the IP 212.202.50.46 which resolves to port-212-202-50-46.dynamic.qsc.de and traces to Frankfurt/Germany, and paniq right now is online on IRC at 212.202.50.103, which resolves to port-212-202-50-103.dynamic.qsc.de. Also back in 2004 he told everyone on IRC how funny it was to create his own entry about himself on Wikipedia. While I really welcome recent efforts from RadMan1 and others to add articles about the demoscene to Wikipedia, I don't think it makes sense to now add each and every scener to Wikipedia - and well, the list of people more "important" (and therefore would need to be added first) to the scene than paniq is quite long (though that list for RaD Man would be much, much longer ;) - Delete or Userfy -- SKissel
 * User is a sockpuppet or brand new. 2 edits in total... both on this VfD.  ALKIVAR ™[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 07:11, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Are you kidding me? Who should I be a sockpuppet of being against keeping this article? Also I've already pointed out above that I'm the main organizer of the biggest demoscene party world-wide, which already should give me some credibility regarding demoscene related topics, right? I also know paniq personally for years, and what's more - YOU even know me, you've joined a group I was a member of - UCF. Sorry, but if you wish to do votefaking on this topic, please come up with something less stupid :) SKissel 21:38, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Scamp if thats who you REALLY are (stands to be verified still) you should read the rules and know that new users votes are discounted on VfD, get a few edits on articles under your belt (that are not just on VfD) if you wish to influence a vote in the future.  ALKIVAR ™[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 23:04, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Apparent personal attack against User:Alkivar removed. Please see No personal attacks Thryduulf 21:59, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Thryduulf please in the future, dont bother defending me, I can do it for myself thanks.  ALKIVAR ™[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 23:04, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments. Please log in and sign your comments in order for your vote to be fairly counted upon the closing of this discussion.  —RaD Man (talk) 23:55, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The article had been here before as I was told later on, but got flagged for deletion. It is true that I reopened it. It is true that I posted the articles URL on IRC as I do with all stuff that is covering my lowness. It is not true that I "told everyone on IRC how funny it was", however I was surprised that the article remained, thus it seemed to own a certain right to be there. I agree with scamp that there are a lot of people who should be added here first. My lifeline is rather young, so there is not much to mention here yet. I am quite confident that the article will be reopened in a few years. -- Paniq 02:20, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I actually read through all this! Listening to both sides, in the end I come down to Delete.  I could equally well put my resumé up here (different field entirely), and make it sound as if I had really accomplished a lot/impacted many lives.  Which I have, but it doesn't entitle me to a Wikipedia entry -- I have just been living my life, doing my job.  Which is what Paniq has been doing.  If he was an avid stamp collector, and had won 'democratic' awards for his stamp albums, would we be having this debate?  There is nothing inherently magical about music (which, by the way, I love).HowardB 07:11, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * :D -- Paniq 16:09, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Honestly, if you were the number one stamp collector in the realm of stamp collecting, YES, I would say you were entitled to an entry on Wikipedia. We're not running out of disk space here any time soon and I don't feel that would over saturate this home to many articles for real and imagined Pokemon characters.  Meanwhile, I continue to expand the article for paniq as I believe it should stay and conceivably benefits future visitors who want to know about this notable and highly decorated musician/artist. —RaD Man (talk) 07:29, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * quite notable and decently decorated. total domination is still far away. -- Paniq 16:09, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * If Hagen Kleinert's autobiography gets thru I ahve no problem with this. It might need cleanup, but Keep. Notability is clearly established in terms of awards etc.--ZayZayEM 09:15, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Paniq +"Leonard Ritter" isn't a good metric for someone known in his field of notability almost exclusively as Paniq alone, and commercial album release does not appear to be a good notability bar for the demoscene now and, with the shape of commercial album releases, possibly ever. I've edited the article a bit to remove the one glaring vanity-like element (the link to homo universalis), and to otherwise conform with my best understanding of Wikistyle. Samaritan 23:06, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - verifiable, passes the Pokemon Comparative Notability Test (just) - David Gerard 00:23, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Has released multiple albums and won multiple awards among other things. Obviously notable.--Centauri 00:57, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I think it's interesting how Paniq's being compared to Jason Kottke. It seems like those who voted Keep in the Kottke VfD discussion were being directed to this article. Is this normal Wikipedia practice for users to solicit practically everyone that might possibly support their position? Or is this just an attempt to make it seem that more people would be interested in having the article in the encyclopedia? That being said, by looking at the article, it seems that Paniq is notable in his field; however, the question is, is the field itself notable enough for his inclusion? Blogging is notable enough, IMHO, and Kottke is a top blogger. And that's why I voted Keep for Kottke. German demoscene? Personally, I'd classify it at about the same level as the Canadian trivia scene -- and I had an article about myself run through VfD and deleted. Delete. --OntarioQuizzer 01:10, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * You misunderstand what the "demoscene" is, its not a strictly german thing, or a swedish thing, or an american thing. It is a global computer hobby subculture, much as Dungeons & Dragons is a fantasy hobby subculture, both involve some level of creativity and artistic talent. If it were strictly a cultural thing I would likely join you in a delete vote, but its not and I urge you to reconsider your vote.  ALKIVAR ™[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 02:01, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * If the subject has an article (Demoscene) its main figures should be wiki-worthy too.--ZayZayEM 06:22, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Trivia is a global subculture. SmartAsk. Reach For The Top. Quizbowl. By the extension of that logic, the top people in these areas should have pages. But they don't. Ken Jennings only has a page because he has managed to transcend the genre. I stand by my vote. --OntarioQuizzer 08:19, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Farbrausch have their own article, as they should, as wiki-worthy main figures of the genre. However, when even THAT doesn't establish that paniq has any individual importance, I'm going to remain unconvinced. The bare truth is that outside of Farbrausch, there has been no evidence presented that paniq has done anything to warrant a separate entry for himself. I'm sorry, it's nothing personal, but that's how it stands. Everyone knows Google hits can be manipulated either way to promote or upset popularity, but at the base level, on the most basic of searches, paniq turns up 3,200 hits from only 80 sites. In my mind, that's not diverse enough, especially for a topic based around computers. --Lawlore 11:01, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * "Blogging is notable enough", but the demoscene is not... also, interesting view on the notability of the german scene (you might want to wonder why the "non-notable german demoscene" gets slashdotted every once in a while)... maybe you shouldn't confuse "not notable" with "I don't bother to care"... // Gargaj 08:04, 2005 Feb 10 (UTC)
 * Userfy or delete. —Ben Brockert (42) 01:18, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. This has been one of the best debates on a VfD that i've seen in my brief time at Wikipedia.  I've been re-reading it all, plus the new entries -- and I have been tempted to change my delete vote above, just based on the amount of discussion it has generated.  Plus I've come to like paniq! Having spent more time checking out the Wiki entries around the subject and checking out a few web sites, however, I realise that my emotional side is predominating here, so I have to stay with my original vote HowardB 14:17, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * No. I don't HAVE to do that at all. When I think about many of the entries I have seen that I have not yet summoned up the energy to put up for VfD, this one has far more justification for being there.  Maybe someone in 5 years will successfully VfD it because paniq sinks into obscurity without leaving a true heritage, (I hope not, paniq ) but until then I'm going to change my vote to Keep, Keep (the two of them because I don't know how to strike thu my old vote, and don't have the time right now to find out, so one delete plus two keeps should equal a YES HowardB 14:21, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I promise howard, I wont disappear. I have some plans that should make a lot of people happy, once those have reached the neccessary amount of realization, and those will be really worth a wikipedia entry. There is virtually no chance that I might fail because the idea is so good, nobody understands it fully, not even myself ;) -- Paniq 22:09, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * That also isn't very flattering to paniq, is it: "OK, paniq, you're in. We decided you have to be more notable than Machinedramon".  That seems like a race to the bottom.  It is saying that since we don't seem to be able stop non-notable subjects from becoming Wikipedia articles as fast as they come in, we might as well give up.   Let's put up a big sign: "Write an article on anything you want.  Who are we to tell you what might be important?   As long as your article is factual and not too opinionated and it looks like someone, somewhere, might want to read it, its fine by us.  But if the subject is youself, get your friend to write it for you, pal, because we don't want vanity."  --BM 19:01, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * You're finally starting to get it! Almost, but not quite.   Seriously, who are you to tell me what is and is not important?  Wikipedia: the home of group think.  —RaD Man (talk) 19:48, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Inclusionism! It may save Wikipedia. --Jscott 19:51, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I thought I was parodying it, guys. On Wikipedia, people can edit articles and if they write something that is not true, muddled, irrelevant, POV-pushing, etc, some other editor can delete or modify it.   Within an article, the collective efforts of editors determine the final result, sometimes after a lot of wrangling.   Above the level of an article, though, where you are deciding what articles should exist and how a large subject should be divided up between multiple articles, that changes dramatically. Anybody can create any article, and according to your logic, nobody else can question it, provided the new article doesn't fall into a small number of categories of recognized badness.    If we allow anyone to edit at the infra-article level, why do we have such different rules to edit at the supra-article level?   That is what VfD is basically about: editing the Wikipedia at the supra-article level.  If I put a new section into an article about a sub-topic that the other editors think is irrelevant or not sigificant enough to take up the space, they will delete it.    But if I put the material into a separate article, nobody can touch it.  It can only be cleaned up.    The more extreme inclusionists seem to be saying that nobody should try to edit at the supra-article level, that an article-creation decision should never be challenged and the structure of the Wikipedia should not be planned and should simply left to accretion, as article-creators come along at random and create new articles.   By that view, except in the rare cases of vanity, original research, and patent nonsense, any attempt to undo an article-creation decision is "deletionism" and is beyond the pale. If that view prevails, the result will be that Wikipedia will have no coherent structure above the article level.  --BM 23:19, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * keep. ComCat 15:29, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I fail to understand what harm exists in keeping this article, especially when the alternative is necessarily harmful if we are wrong: deleting a possibily good article. People who do not want to know about this person/topic won't find it.  People who do will find it. --ShaunMacPherson 18:06, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * A pretty clear keep. Good to see that the deletionists are still listing stuff on VfD just because they haven't heard of it/them ;) Dan100 19:12, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry to say it, but delete or userfy. The demoscene is a hobby, paniq is just a hobby musician. A demoscener who for example later have worked in (commercial) game development would fit nicely on Wikipedia, i could name some notable demosceners but they are not many. paniq hasn't done anything notable yet, getting some good results at German demoparties isn't enough. bbx 04:01, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree. Other projects im working on have not yet matured to be seen as fully notable. Thats why I said that I think the article is rather early. -- Paniq 10:17, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * STRONG DELETE I'm sick and tired of this being compared to Kottke. ral315 15:47, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep. I don't really see wht the deleters have against it from a Wikipedia point of view (except the usual bleat of “I haven't heard of him, I'm not interested, so he's not notable”.  If only we could use notability as a criterion for editorship...).  I find the topic utterly uninteresting, but so what?  In the context of an encyclopaedia which finds room for the census details for every U.S. village and city suburb, this person seems to be positively stellar. Far more people are likely to look up Paniq than Royal Oak, Michigan or Merton, Wisconsin.  Why should the bar for people be set so much higher than  the bar for places? Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 17:38, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Because places don't suffer from vanity, and they are reasonably permanent. dbenbenn | talk 22:07, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Everything that Μελ Ετητης has said. Keep Beta_M talk, |contrib ( Ë-Mail )
 * Keep. Notability of person in question has been established. No reason to not vote keep. =) --Andylkl 19:10, Feb 11, 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.

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paniq


text:
Rolls-Royce Armoured Car

The Rolls-Royce Armoured Car is a British armoured car developed in 1914 and used during the First World War, Irish Civil War, the inter-war period in Imperial Air Control in Transjordan, Palestine and Mesopotamia, and in the early stages of the Second World War in the Middle East and North Africa.

Production history
The Royal Naval Air Service (RNAS) raised the first British armoured car squadron during the First World War. In September 1914 all available Rolls-Royce Silver Ghost chassis were requisitioned to form the basis for the new armoured car. The following month a special committee of the Admiralty Air Department, among whom was Flight Commander T. G. Hetherington, designed the superstructure which consisted of armoured bodywork and a single fully rotating turret mounting a regular water-cooled .303 in (0.303 in) Mk I Vickers machine gun.

The first three vehicles were delivered on 3 December 1914, although by then the mobile period on the Western Front, where the primitive predecessors of the Rolls-Royce cars had served, had already come to an end. Later in the war they served on several fronts of the Middle Eastern theatre. Chassis production was suspended in 1917 to enable Rolls-Royce to concentrate on aero engines.

The vehicle was modernized in 1920 and in 1924, resulting in the Rolls-Royce 1920 Pattern and Rolls-Royce 1924 Pattern. In 1940, 34 vehicles which served in Egypt with the 11th Hussars regiment had the "old" turret replaced with an open-topped unit carrying a .55 (0.55 in) Boys anti-tank rifle, .303 in (0.303 in) Bren light machine gun, and smoke-grenade launchers.

Twenty Rolls-Royce armoured cars in service with No. 2 Armoured Car Company RAF in Egypt and Iraq received new chassis from a Fordson truck and became known as Fordson Armoured Cars. Photographs show them as equipped with what appear to be turrets fitted with a Boys anti-tank rifle, a machine gun and twin light machine guns for anti-aircraft defence.

In addition to RNAS and Tank Corps-supplied armoured cars, the RAF had Rolls-Royces built to equip its armoured car companies. This was done independently of the War Office. They were designated Car, Armoured, Rolls-Royce Type A. Shaped like the 1914 RNAS car, they were fitted with the 1920 turret.

Combat history

Six RNAS Rolls-Royce squadrons were formed of 12 vehicles each: one went to France; one to Africa to fight in the German colonies and in April 1915 two went to Gallipoli. From August 1915 onwards these were all disbanded and the materiel handed over to the Army which used them in the Light Armoured Motor Batteries of the Machine Gun Corps. The armoured cars were poorly suited to the muddy trench filled battlefields of the Western Front, but were able to operate in the Near East, so the squadron from France went to Egypt.

Lawrence of Arabia used a squadron in his operations against the Turkish forces. He called the unit of nine armoured Rolls-Royces "more valuable than rubies" in helping win his Revolt in the Desert. This impression would last with him the rest of his life; when asked by a journalist what he thought would be the thing he would most value he said "I should like my own Rolls-Royce car with enough tyres and petrol to last me all my life".

In the Irish Civil War (1922–1923), 13 Rolls-Royce armoured cars were given to the Irish Free State government by the British government to fight the Irish Republican Army. They were a major advantage to the Free State in street fighting and in protecting convoys against guerrilla attacks and played a vital role in the retaking of Cork and Waterford. Despite continued maintenance problems and poor reaction to Irish weather, they continued in service until 1944, being withdrawn once new tyres became unobtainable. Twelve of the Irish Army examples were stripped and sold in 1954.

At the outbreak of the Second World War, 76 vehicles were in service. They were used in operations in the Western Desert, in Iraq, and in Syria. By the end of 1941, they were withdrawn from frontline service as modern designs became available. Some Indian Pattern cars saw use in the Indian subcontinent and Burma.

Variants

 * 1920 Pattern Mk I – thicker radiator armour and new wheels.
 * 1920 Pattern Mk IA – commander's cupola.
 * 1924 Pattern Mk I – turret with commander's cupola.
 * 1921 Indian Pattern – based on the 1920 Pattern. Had extended hull armour to provide extra space and a domed turret with four ball mounts for machine guns.
 * Fordson – based on a 1914 Pattern. Some vehicles in Egypt received new chassis from Fordson trucks.

A single experimental vehicle had the turret removed and replaced by a one-pounder automatic anti-aircraft gun on an open mounting. Some cars had Maxim machine guns instead of the Vickers gun.

Survivors

 * ARR-2, Sliabh na mBan, 1920 Pattern Rolls-Royce was retained by the Irish Army and is generally accepted to be the car that was accompanying the Commander-in-Chief of the National Army, General Michael Collins, on the day he was killed. It is the world's oldest serving armoured vehicle and one of only two original Rolls-Royce armoured cars still running today. It is regularly aired during parades and open days, often being driven under its own power. It has recently undergone a complete refurbishment, which involved a complete strip down and rebuild. It is maintained by the Irish Defence Forces Cavalry Corps in the Curragh Camp.
 * A Rolls-Royce 1920 Pattern Mark I is on display at The Tank Museum in Bovington, England. The vehicle is displayed in the museum's inter-war years gallery. David Wiley, curator of the museum, called it "one of the best exhibits we have"
 * One of the 12 sold (ARR-1 Danny Boy/Tom Keogh) survives with a collector in England. This vehicle carries replica bodywork.
 * A 1920 pattern Rolls-Royce armoured car is displayed in sand colour at the RAF Regiment Heritage Centre at RAF Honington. It had previously been on display at the RAF Museum at Hendon. The armour is a facsimile of the original, built on an original Rolls-Royce chassis in the 1960s.
 * A Rolls-Royce armoured car replica is on display at Eaton Hall, Cheshire, home of the Duke of Westminster, and can be viewed at charity open days of the Hall.
 * A Rolls-Royce 1921 Indian Pattern is on display at Cavalry Tank Museum at Ahmednagar, India.
 * Haynes Motor Museum has a 1914 pattern Rolls-Royce with replica bodywork, restored to resemble the Desert Rolls that accompanied Lawrence of Arabia.

title: Rolls-Royce Armoured Car


text:
Francesco Marchisano

Francesco Marchisano (25 June 1929 – 27 July 2014) was an Italian Cardinal who worked in the Roman Curia from 1956 until his death.

Biography
Born in Racconigi, he was ordained a priest in Turin by Cardinal Maurilio Fossati in 1952.

He studied in Rome where he was offered his first Curial appointment by Cardinal Giuseppe Pizzardo. Rising through the Vatican dicastery (then the Sacred Congregation for Seminaries and Universities, now the Congregation for Catholic Education), he served as its Undersecretary from 1969 to 1988. He was also advanced to monsignor, becoming a Papal Chamberlain in 1961 and a Prelate of Honour in 1971.

On 6 October 1988, Pope John Paul II named him titular bishop of Populonia and consecrated him on 6 January 1989. He later served as president and Secretary of various Vatican organs. He was raised to archbishop on 9 July 1994.

His positions included:
 * President of the Pontifical Commission for Sacred Archeology (1991–2004)
 * President of the Pontifical Commission for the Cultural Heritage of the Church (1993–2002)
 * President of the Artistic-Cultural Commission of the Grand Jubilee Year 2000

On 24 April 2002 he was named to succeed Cardinal Virgilio Noè as Archpriest of the Patriarchal Vatican Basilica, Vicar General for Vatican City, and President of the Fabric of Saint Peter. At the next consistory in 2003 he was made Cardinal-Deacon of Santa Lucia del Gonfalone. He was later named President of the Permanent Commission for the Care of the Historical and Artistic Monuments of the Holy See, serving from 8 March 2003 to 3 July 2009.

He passed the normal retirement age of 75 for Curial positions in 2004, though this is frequently waived. After the death of Cardinal Jan Pieter Schotte, Cardinal Marchisano was named on 5 February 2005 to succeed him as President of the Labour Office of the Apostolic See, retaining his other positions, while Archbishop Angelo Comastri was named to the unusual position of Coadjutor Archpriest of Saint Peter's and as Marchisano's successor Vicar General for the State of Vatican City, and President of the Fabric of Saint Peter.

Cardinal Marchisano was one of the cardinal electors who participated in the 2005 papal conclave that selected Pope Benedict XVI. In a funeral Mass for Pope John Paul II celebrated the day after his funeral, Cardinal Marchisano revealed that he had been cured of an illness of the throat after the late pope had prayed and touched him.

On 31 October 2006, Pope Benedict named Angelo Comastri to succeed Cardinal Marchisano as Archpriest of St Peter's Basilica. On 3 July 2009, Marchisano resigned as president of the Labour Office of the Apostolic See and as president of the Permanent Commission for the Custody of Historical and Artistic Monuments of the Holy See.

Following the conclave that elected Pope Francis, Marchisano was one of the six cardinals who made the public act of obedience to the new pope on behalf of the College of Cardinals at the papal inauguration ceremony. Having served 10 years as a cardinal-deacon, he was promoted to cardinal-priest by Pope Francis on 12 June 2014.

Marchisano died in Rome on 27 July 2014 at the age of 85. At the 28 June 2018 consistory, Pope Francis assigned the diaconate church of Santa Lucia del Gonfalone which Marchisano previously held to Aquilino Bocos Merino.

title: Francesco Marchisano


text:
Albanian Airlines

Albanian Airlines MAK Sh.p.k (trading as Albanian Airlines) was an airline based in Tirana, Albania. It operated scheduled international services. Its main hub was Tirana International Airport Nënë Tereza. On 11 November 2011 Albania's Civil Aviation Authority revoked the license of Albanian Airlines.

History
The airline was initially established in May 1991 using Tupolev Tu-134 aircraft and operated under the name of Arberia Airlines. This was the private airline of politicians for communist Albania. The airline was later renamed to Albanian Airlines in May 1992 and started open operations to the public on 20 June 1992. The renamed airline was formed as a joint venture between the Albanian state-owned Albtransport and Tyrolean Airways of Austria. Albanian Airlines operated a single Austrian registered, De Havilland Canada Dash 8-102 (MSN 242, OE-LLI), flown by Canadian pilots and maintained by Canadian Engineers. Tyrolean opted out of the relationship in 1997, taking back the single Dash 8.

Privatisation
Albanian Airlines was privatised in the same year and sold to Kuwait-based M.A. Kharafi & Sons Group. As a result, it was restructured in 1997 when its operations were based on a single Airbus A320 aircraft leased from Shorouk Air of Egypt. By 2001 it operated a fleet of four Tupolev Tu-134 aircraft on scheduled services from Tirana to Bologna, Frankfurt, Istanbul, Pristina, Rome and Zürich. In July 2001, Albanian Airlines started upgrading its fleet by gradually removing its Tupolev aircraft and acquired its first BAe 146. Two more BAe 146 were added in 2003 and 2004. This upgrading process allowed the company to expand to new strategic markets such as Belgium and Germany.

Advanced Construction Group (ACG) Sh.p.k.
In August 2008, Albanian Airlines was purchased by the Advanced Construction Group (ACG) Sh.p.k. in Tirana, Albania, by the President Yahia Farwati, who purchased 100% of capital from the Kuwaiti-based M.A. Kharafi & Sons Group.

On 14 August 2009, it was announced that Albanian Airlines had been sold to Turkish Even Group, which was purchased by Evsen Group 93% and 7% retained by the Advanced Construction Group.

In March 2012, the 93% of Albanian Airlines shares was returned with a court decision to Advanced Construction Group (ACG) with owner Yahia Farwati. Now, Advanced Construction Group (ACG) owns 100% of its shares.

With this investment came a new logo, addition of destinations, and an addition of aircraft to the existing fleet. In 2009, the carrier saw the addition of aircraft, two Boeing 737 as well as one Boeing 757, all of which were leased from Air Slovakia.

On 9 October 2009, it was announced that Albanian Airlines would soon open new destinations to Paris, Amsterdam, Milan, Rome, Athens, Jeddah, Beijing and later the United States of America. Along with lower rates of travel, the addition of more Fokker 100, and scheduled use of the Boeing 747, such claims fell through due to financial problems, including the repossession of all leased aircraft from Air Slovakia.

Fleet
In October 2011, the Albanian Airlines fleet consisted of the following aircraft with an average age of 22.5 years:

title: Albanian Airlines


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baseball fielding positions redundant images (moved)

 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 moved to WP:IFD -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:45, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Do redundant images go here?
Or should I leave them for some sort of "orphaned image" collection? Replaced by Image:80px-Baseball_fielding_positions_tiny.png Ojw 23:17, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC) Replaced by Image:Baseball_cf.png Ojw 23:09, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC) Replaced by Image:Baseball_rf.png Ojw 23:10, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC) Replaced by Image:Baseball_2b.png Ojw 23:09, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC) Replaced by Image:Baseball_ss.png Ojw 23:10, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC) Replaced by Image:Baseball_3b.png Ojw 23:09, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC) Replaced by Image:Baseball_1b.png Ojw 23:13, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC) Replaced by Image:Baseball_p.png Ojw 23:13, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC) Replaced by Image:Baseball_c.png Ojw 23:09, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC) Replaced by left centre right 1st 2nd 3rd shortstop pitcher catcher Ojw 23:09, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Votes for deletion/Baseball fielding positions text.jpg
 * Votes for deletion/Baseball_fielding_positions_lf.jpg
 * Votes for deletion/Baseball_fielding_positions_cf.jpg
 * Votes for deletion/Baseball_fielding_positions_rf.jpg
 * Votes for deletion/Baseball_fielding_positions_2b.jpg
 * Votes for deletion/Baseball_fielding_positions_ss.jpg
 * Votes for deletion/Baseball_fielding_positions_3b.jpg
 * Votes for deletion/Baseball_fielding_positions_lb.jpg
 * Votes for deletion/Baseball_fielding_positions_p.jpg
 * Votes for deletion/Baseball_fielding_positions_c.jpg
 * Votes for deletion/Baseball_fielding_positions.xcf
 * They should all go on the Images and media for deletion page. RickK 23:33, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, moved. Replaced VFD with IFD on each image page, but I haven't done anything about those VFD subpages above Ojw 00:21, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Since this has been placed on IFD, I am removing all those subpages with the text content copied here. Except for Votes for deletion/Baseball_fielding_positions_lf.jpg, which was already deleted. -- AllyUnion (talk) 15:33, 5 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.


text:
Parintins Folklore Festival

Parintins Folklore Festival (Festival Folclórico de Parintins), or often also called Festival do Boi-Bumbá, Bumba Meu Boi, or simply Festival, is a popular annual celebration during three days in late June held in the Brazilian city of Parintins, Amazonas. It is one of the largest annual festivals in Brazil; only the Carnival festivities in Rio de Janeiro and Salvador draw more participants. The festival is recognized as a Cultural Heritage of Brazil by the National Institute of Historic and Artistic Heritage.

The festival celebrates a local legend about a resurrected ox. It is also a competition where two teams, Garantido and Caprichoso, compete in extended retellings of the story, each team attempting to outdo the other with flamboyant dances, singing, and parade floats. Each team has to complete its show within two and a half hours. A team that does not follow this time limit is subjected to points penalties. Each nightly performance is largely based on local Amazonian folklore and indigenous culture, but also incorporates contemporary Brazilian rhythms and themes. The place where the teams present themselves is called "Bumbódromo", a round, grounded stage. The "Bumbódromo" supports 35.000 people in the audience.

Despite the importance of the celebration to the Amazonas region of Brazil, this festival was not widely known in other parts of the country until the musical group Carrapicho released the hit Tic Tic Tac - Bate forte o tambor in 1996. The Parintins Folklore Festival was also responsible for the release of other songs that became known in Brazil, such as Vermelho and Parintins Para o Mundo Ver, among others. It is common for local people to tell the visitors that Parintins is the only place in the World where Coca-Cola ads are blue. While it is true that within the Bumbódromo there are Coca-Cola ads in both red and blue, there are other instances of Coca-Cola ads reflecting the colors of sporting teams. During the 2011 Festival do Boi-Bumbá, Coca-Cola was available throughout Amazonas region in special edition cans that were half red, half blue.

title: Parintins Folklore Festival


text:
Category:Airlines of Albania

See Also: List of airlines and List of defunct airlines

title: Category:Airlines of Albania