text:
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/WikiUser

(WikiUser | talk | contributions)

Statement of the dispute
WikiUser has persistently and willfully engaged in a pattern of personal attacks and other deliberately disruptive behavior, including repeated reversions of articles, refusal to abide by Wikipedia policies and Wikiquette, and making strongly POV edits. He consistently refuses to compromise and refuses to enter into civilized dialogue with other editors with whom he disagrees. He also constantly accuses others of making personal attacks, including that they are "Nazis", "racists", "stalkers" and "fascists" and are guilty of "discrimination" against him. He spends most of his time complaining about his supposed wrongful treatment or attacking editors in often crude personal terms. He has repeatedly made legal threats against users and the "Wikipedia Foundation" (sic) and has made several frivolous attempts to invoke mediation and arbitration procedures against users who have questioned his conduct. He has been temporarily banned on several occasions and his conduct criticised by many editors and administrators, including Jimbo himself, but his conduct does not appear to have been improved in the process.

 * NB: This matter is now the subject of a request for arbitration.

Description
WikiUser first appeared on Wikipedia on 18 June 2004 to make a number of contentious edits on England. His first edits set the pattern for what was to follow - the introduction of unsupported, highly contentious POV statements without debate, repeated reversions of the article and the posting of personal attacks on the related Talk page. This included claims that other editors were Nazis and that he was being discriminated against, viz.:

 * !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HEAR THIS SCUM OF WIKIPEDIA I HAVE A RIGHT TO USE THIS SITE IN MY OWN CUNRY AND TO BE A BRITISH JEW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOUI ARE BREAKING THE DATA PROTECTION ACT AND THE RACE RELATIONS ACT BY USING TGHE TRASH WIKIPEDIA SITE TO RACIALL Y HARRASS ME ON THE GROUNDS THAT I DON@@T HAVE THE RIGHT TO BR BRITISH AND JEWISH!!!!!!!!!!!! GOT ITT ME FINE WKIK TEENY GODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

After being reverted by a number of editors, including myself, he declared his intention of going to arbitration within 4 days of his acquiring a Wikipedia account (is this a record?). He eventually posted a frivolous request for arbitration against User:Fred Bauder on 4 August 2004, asking that Fred and User:Guanaco be banned. He also made legal threats to sue "The Wikipedia and any ISP or server owner that carries it" (sic). The request was dismissed but as the record will show, he has continued to abuse Wikipedia procedures to start frivolous proceedings against other users.

During a period which he largely spent campaigning for and (mostly) against candidates in the Arbitration Committee Elections December 2004, he came into conflict with User:Neutrality, who banned him for 24 hours for "editing in bad faith, personal attacks". In response, WikiUser posted a bizarre rant to the WikiEN-l mailing list, asking "to have the viscious abuser "Neutrality" booted off The Wikipedia permanently; for mis-using his position, and the $50,000 donated, and therefore (officially acting as The Wikipedia Foundation's agent) breaking a Federal law due to his corruptly mis-using these funds." Needless to say, this got short shrift from other contributors ("Can someone please block this delusional nutjob from posting to WikiEN-l?").

Jimbo was also not impressed, commenting that a "user [who] has a long history of calling people Nazi, and accusing people of being "racist against the English" for the flimsiest of reasons and so on" was "taking advantage of our boundless good will." In response, WikiUser posted a personal attack to Jimbo's user talk page, accusing him of corruptly misusing "the $50,000 recently donated".

At the end of 2004, WikiUser took a step forward - creating new articles for the first time - but immediately took two steps back, attacking editors for editing and "sabotaging" "his" articles. Ironically, although he frequently attacks people for "putting in spelling and grammar mistakes", very often people are correcting WikiUser's own errors. After he broke the 3RR in two separate instances, he was asked by User:Violetriga, and myself, User:ChrisO, to follow the rules and not break the 3RR. We both chose not to ban him even though we had an argument for doing so, prefering to give him a warning. In response, he posted rants to the talk pages of Violetriga and myself. WikiUser also posted a rant to the talk page of User:Evil Monkey, who pointed out that his edits did not comply with the Wikipedia manual of style and apparently offended WikiUser by editing one of "his" articles. In each case, he has accused editors of "TARGETTING ME FOR ABUSE" and threatening them with pursuing "all the complaint actions possible on the wikipedia against yer".

WikiUser has since posted a frivolous request for mediation against Violetriga, without going through a request for comment as required by the dispute procedure, and despite being advised that his complaint of "discrimination" is not appropriate for mediation. There is simply no factual dispute here: WikiUser is, in effect, complaining that an administrator has asked him to abide by the 3RR.

WikiUser appears to believe that he is being "stalked" by other editors, when in fact this is a case of editors correcting his articles and asking him to desist from his disruptive behaviour. He also claims that he is suffering "discrimination" on the grounds that he is English/Jewish/disabled (delete as applicable). He posts crude personal abuse against other editors, including that they are "Nazis", "racists", "stalkers", "vandles" (sic) and "fascists", refuses to post any corroboration of these assertions and refuses to retract them when challenged. He also appears to believe that his status as an English/Jewish/disabled person means that he is free to disregard extant Wikipedia policies to which his attention has repeatedly been drawn, as listed in "Applicable policies" below. He claims that he is treated differently from everyone else, but has offered no explanation of why he should be given an exemption from policies that everyone else is obliged to follow.

WikiUser has also edited anonymously from the IP address 217.204.65.210. Although he always signs his comments when posting under his own name and takes some trouble to do so (e.g. going back to add his signature when he forgets to do so), he has never signed a single comment posted anonymously. This suggests that he is using the anonymous IP address as a sock puppet account, though he has not denied that he was behind its usage.

In summary, WikiUser is a continually disruptive user who is consistently unwilling to abide by the basic rules of civility or Wikipedia policy. Jimbo referred to the Wikipedia community's "boundless good will" in tolerating WikiUser's conduct for this surprisingly long time, but there comes a point - in my opinion, now - when we have to show that good will towards abusive users does indeed have a limit.

Uncategorized personal attacks

 * WikiUser consistently demonstrates a hypersensitive personal hostility towards anyone who edits his articles in ways that he doesn't like, or asks him to abide by policies or style standards. See e.g. . This is one of many, many examples from his edit history. He appears to be incapable of interacting with other users without assuming that they are being hostile towards him.
 * Hostile personal attacks against User:Imaglang on that user page.

Uncategorized false accusations against other users

 * False accusations of racism against User:Tagishsimon, User:Fred Bauder, User:Morwen, User:ChrisO and others, and refusal to retract said accusations when challenged:, , ,

 * False accusations that Wikipedia is "in the control of corrupt people who use it to internet stalk and racially hassle users that are English and Jewish"

 * False accusations that other users, including User:Evil Monkey, User:MykReeve and User:ChrisO are guilty of "vandalism" and "taking all my articles and sabotaging them by putting in spelling and grammar mistakes" (in this instance, fixing WikiUser's own mistakes and non-conformance with established style):, ,

 * False accusations that other users are personally abusing WikiUser (this appears to be his stock response to requests and polite criticism):, , and passim

 * False accusations that User:Violetriga is misusing her administrator status in asking WikiUser to abide by policy and standards:

 * False accusations of corrupt misuse of Wikimedia donations (made against Jimbo, of all people, as well as User:Neutrality): ,

 * False accusations of stalking (see edit summary):

 * False accusations that User:Tagishsimon and User:Violetriga have tried to block him from editing his user talk page (WikiUser apparently doesn't understand why edit conflicts happen): ,

 * False accusations that User:MykReeve has tried to block him from editing Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board (also due to edit conflict):

 * False accusations that other editors are mounting group "attacks" against him (specifically referring to User:ChrisO, User:Evil Monkey and User:Violetriga:, ,

 * Claims that multiple users, including User:Michael Snow and User:Raul654, are guilty of being "nazis" and of perpetrating "anti-semitism":

 * Legal threats:

Violation of three-revert rule
Edit history at Secondary modern school (4 reverts in under 24 hours, warned not blocked):
 * Revision as of 18:07, 25 Jan 2005 - reverted linking Labour Party and two years, changed quotemarks to single quotes
 * Revision as of 20:49, 25 Jan 2005 - reverted linking of Labour Party and changed quotemarks to single quotes
 * Revision as of 21:12, 25 Jan 2005 - reverted quotemarks to single quotes
 * Revision as of 21:57, 25 Jan 2005 - reverted slight rewording and linking of Labour Party

Edit history at List of United Kingdom nations by population (4 reverts in over 24 hours):
 * Revision as of 21:42, 25 Jan 2005 - "nations" --> "countries"
 * Revision as of 17:13, 26 Jan 2005 - "nations" --> "countries"
 * Revision as of 17:54, 26 Jan 2005 - "nations" --> "countries"
 * Revision as of 20:44, 27 Jan 2005 - "nations" --> "countries"

Edit history at England (8 reverts in total, closest to violation is 4 reverts in 24 hours and 3 minutes):
 * Revision as of 19:15, 4 Aug 2004 - Edit summary "Removed well known factual error which is also of course racist against the English", changing entry on official language of England
 * Revision as of 19:53, 4 Aug 2004 - Edit summary "Mended vandalism-source for change already given in great detail on discussion page despite claim of anti-Jewish stalkers", changing entry on official language of England
 * Revision as of 20:20, 4 Aug 2004 - No edit summary, changing entry on official language of England
 * Revision as of 20:06, 5 Aug 2004 - No edit summary, changing entry on official language of England and removal of national anthem
 * Revision as of 17:14, 6 Aug 2004 - No edit summary, changing entry on official language of England and removal of national anthem
 * Revision as of 17:26, 6 Aug 2004 - No edit summary, changing entry on official language of England and removal of national anthem
 * Revision as of 20:09, 6 Aug 2004 - No edit summary, changing entry on official language of England and removal of national anthem
 * Revision as of 20:33, 7 Aug 2004 - No edit summary, changing entry on official language of England and removal of national anthem

Possible sockpuppetry

 * Use of IP address 217.204.65.210 to make hostile and abusive anonymous posts & edits. All comments are unsigned (clearly deliberate, as WikiUser is careful to sign whenever he is logged in).  (edit summary)

 * Use of IP address 217.204.65.210 to make a hostile comment, that was within ten minutes expanded and signed under the name WikiUser. and

 * Use of IP address 217.204.65.210 to vandalise Welcome, newcomers with personal abuse against User:Netoholic, who had made edits on Requested moves with which WikiUser disagreed.
 * This same IP address vandalized dozens of pages on the Simple English Wikipedia (contribs), where WikiUser also has been editing. simple:User:WikiUser confirmed that he is the same person, with this post and this one.

 * Use of IP address 217.204.65.210 to personally insult Jimbo Wales and ChrisO along with spamming the link to a certain 247news story – , resulted in a 24 hour block by Violetriga.

Frivolous abuse of Wikipedia procedures

 * Frivolous request for arbitration after only 12 days' editing ("Please don't waste my time with nonsense about earlier steps") and despite being told beforehand that it was inappropriate - , speedily deleted following legal threats -

 * Frivolous request for mediation after being asked to follow the 3RR:

POV editing

 * Deletion of supposed "racist" listing of the UK's four nations:
 * Repeated deletion of supposedly "racist" material from England: (one of numerous examples)
 * Deletion of supposed "fantasy referenda" (anticipated future refedendums) from Referendums in the United Kingdom:
 * Various UK-related articles - repeated deletion without discussion of the term "nations" in reference to the UK's constituent elements, even where the article titles refer to "nations" - e.g. ,
 * Removed Category:Jazz saxophonists from Benny Green, writing in the edit summary that "i am British damaging wiki to list benny Green as this when not known as it He was a leading JOURNALIST AND BROADCASTER and THAT is what he is known for."

Claims of being driven to suicide

 * Claims of being driven to suicide on his talk page and an article talk page: "And I want The Wikipedia Foundation to note that this discrimination, insult and abuse is driving me towards considering suicide.", "You are driving me to suicide with your continual abuse of me. <LEAVE ME ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Attempts to log in as another user

 * User:Violetriga received 30 new passwords after unsuccessful attempts by 217.204.65.210 to log in using that username.
 * User:ChrisO received fifteen new passwords on 26 Feb 2005 after unsuccessful attempts on by 217.204.65.210 to log in using that username.
 * User:Sannse reports receiving multiple new passwords after unsuccessful attempts on by 217.204.65.210 to log in using that username.

Applicable policies

 * 1) Civility
 * 2) Neutral point of view
 * 3) No legal threats
 * 4) No personal attacks
 * 5) Staying cool when the editing gets hot
 * 6) Three revert rule
 * 7) Wikiquette

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute
A number of different editors have attempted to resolve disputes with WikiUser on article and personal talk pages. These have all, without exceptions, ended in failure as WikiUser takes a consistently hostile and defensive attitude towards even the mildest criticism and requests to abide by the rules. He has responded to administrators' warnings in an even more hostile vein. On more than one occasion, he has simply deleted other users' comments and requests rather than answer them. Very often, WikiUser attempts to sidestep any dispute resolution by making strawman accusations of "discrimination" and bizarre allegations that people are claiming that he has "no right to edit" (actually, he doesn't, it's a privilege not a right - but it's not one that people have tried to take away from him yet). Examples:

 * 19:04, 30 Jan 2005 - Request to conform to style guidelines is rejected:
 * 18:14, 28 Jan 2005 - Request to discuss changes to articles receives a threat to invoke mediation for "claiming I have no right to edit the pages and you do":
 * 15:11, 26 Jan 2005 - Request to abide by MOS guidelines and the 3RR produces angry rants:
 * 13:52, 26 Jan 2005 - Reminder that WikiUser doesn't own articles produces a threat to pursue "all the complaint actions possible on the wikipedia against yer":
 * 13:48, 26 Jan 2005 - Request to "show me where I have made spelling and grammar mistakes" in a number of articles produces accusations of "targetted abuse and trashing articles":
 * 20:17, 6 Aug 2004 - Instruction to desist from posting legal threats is replied to with "Try banning the letters I'll send to sue ythew nazois who OWN wikipedia, |YOU filthy NMazi!!!!!!!!!!Q"
 * 19:14, 5 Aug 2004 - Request to abide by Wikiquette and Civility is deleted: "Deleted latest hassle by nazi stalkers"

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

 * 1) I have compiled and certify the evidence set out in this RfC. -- ChrisO 08:44, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) I certify the basis for this dispute. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:58, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Certified.  Looks good to me. humblefool® 05:36, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Certified from participant. violet/riga (t) 10:02, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Certified from participant - MykReeve 12:53, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Certified from participant - Evil Monkey∴Hello? 09:54, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Well, I'd have to recuse myself from any Arbitration case anyway, so I might as well voice my support for action against "WikiUser," who's a bad-faith belligerent troll. If this behavior continues, WikiUser ought to be the subject of a request for arbitration. We've got plenty of evidence that could simply be copied and pasted. Neutralitytalk 01:38, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) I tried to be nice. -- Netoholic @ 22:26, 2005 Feb 11 (UTC)

Other users who endorse this summary

 * 1) --fvw *  01:44, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
 * 2) — Dan | Talk 02:08, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 09:28, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Disagreeable fellow. Excellent, well-written summary. Entertaining dispute. -Ashley Pomeroy 18:28, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC) (you wait... time passes) (shortly after I wrote this line, a British-based chap using User:62.254.0.38 vandalised my user page  - however, judging by the replies below, this was probably not WikiUser at all). -Ashley Pomeroy 20:21, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I think that will be a coincidence - doesn't appear to be WikiUser's style, to me, and the edits don't match up with anything he's worked on previously. violet/riga (t) 22:49, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Plus a (very cursory) examination of this IP's other edits reveals what appears to be a reasonable history. This IP belongs to NTL, so it's probably a proxy used by multiple people, maybe even including WikiUser. HTH HAND --Phil | Talk 14:56, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Definitely not WikiUser. His Internet access appears to be courtesy of the Easy Internet Cafe Glasgow, judging by his anon IP edits. -- ChrisO 00:13, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) My encounters with WikiUser (which included him requesting arbitration against me, as I recall) have shown me a user who is relentlessly hostile (often irrationally so) and antagonistic.  This site gains nothing from his contributions, and loses much. Jwrosenzweig 23:59, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Having now been at the sharp end of this guy's temper, Francs2000 | Talk 23:59, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

... from Noisy | Talk
I have not been involved in any of the interactions that are attested to above. I have been aware of some of the events described. (Hard to miss, given the range of articles that I monitor.) I had an off-site role in one of them, in which I exchanged emails with WikiUser. This concerned the election of User:Neutrality to the ArbCom, where WikiUser approached me privately. I expressed the opinion to him that while I agreed with the views stated, I wasn't going to get involved, and that he should moderate his attitude if he was to achieve any sort of influence.

There are three views that can be taken of WikiUser's attitude:
 * 1) WikiUser is a troll, deliberately setting out to undermine Wikipedia
 * 2) WikiUser's attitude is genuine, but represents someone who doesn't have the skills to interact with such a diverse community. (Not having any medical experience, I am not going to jump in and lable this behaviour.)
 * 3) WikiUser has been goaded to these actions by the reaction of those who he interacts with.

My belief is that most people would plump for a combination of the first two, but I am of the opinion that it is a combination of the last two. In particular, I think that if some of WikiUser's first interactions involved Neutrality, then I can well understand why WikiUser would develop a mistrust of other Wiki users who carry their 'authority' like an axe to be wielded.

We have to deal with all sorts of folk on this project. Yes, WikiUser is (very!) difficult to deal with, and we are not all skilled in dealing with such personalities, but we've got to try. Abuse and invective are not very easy to take, and do warrant a reaction and censure, but in doing so, we should recognise that this is probably just someone who can't interact in a way that we may lable as 'normal'. When in doubt, fall back on Civility and Assume good faith on our part.

Noisy | Talk 19:25, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)

 * Not entirely sure how you can say the third point mentioned there. While I've not known WikiUser for any particular length of time I can say that virtually all reactions to him have been appropriate and inoffensive.  He makes outrageous claims against users that have done nothing wrong in any way. violet/riga (t) 22:03, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Offensive behavior directed at someone does not justify them responding with invective in turn. If he was goaded into it, he should have filed the RfC before responding in kind. --kizzle 02:02, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)

 * I think he simply didn't know about such measures. He recently learned of the mediation process and has been asking everyone in a content dispute to engage in mediation. IMO, this can show either of two things: (1) That he is willing to engage in mediaion or some other form of dispute resolution after learning about it, or (2) That he is combative, and sees mediation as a type of weapon to wield. I'm inclined to go with (1). If he sees it as a weapon, he'd be threatening people with RfArbs left, right, and centre.

 * For the record, I don't think WikiUser is a troll (Noisy's 1), I think a combination of Noisy's 2 and 3 (but more 2 than 3) is closer to the truth. I pointed him towards the dispute resolution page when he asked for information on the mediation process, but haven't been involved with him beyond that. I've looked over his talk pages, and as an outsider, I think WikiUser is earnest and loves to contribute. I think that he sees his contributions (article creation and edits) as belonging to him, and takes it personally when people edit or revert his contributions. --Deathphoenix 15:50, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * WikiUser's first interactions on Wikipedia were with respect to England and the question of whether it has a national anthem. Neutrality was not involved in any form, and WikiUser quickly got angry and abusive on the talk page, with precious little provocation that I can tell. After a couple polite messages on his talk page, WikiUser then resorted directly to a request for arbitration, with more invective, which was quickly dismissed. More people left messages trying to calm him down, again doing their best to be polite and bend over backwards to assume good faith. This also seemed to have no effect, and things don't seem to have improved much since. In sum, I don't believe that being goaded, or some personality conflict with Neutrality, is much of an explanation for WikiUser's conduct at all. --Michael Snow 22:53, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Michael is entirely right -- Noisy, I don't know how you got the impression of WikiUser's arrival that you did. When he arrived, ChrisO notified him of the 3 revert guideline (all it was at the time was a guideline), and then I made these two comments  .  WikiUser deleted them both, calling them "vandalism", and hastened to the Help Desk  claiming that: he was being abused; I was refusing to settle the dispute despite his sincere desire to do so; I was, in fact, following him around and lying about him; and that he needed arbitration for protection from other users.  Anyone who actually takes the time to look at these links and some of the other evidence provided should have no doubt in their mind as to WikiUser's responsibility for his completely irrational behavior.  To suggest our interactions with him "goaded" him into misbehavior is so insulting that I have to assume Noisy hadn't looked at the evidence.  Noisy, I hope you will take the time to look it over, and consider altering your position.  I, for one, would very much appreciate it. Jwrosenzweig 00:17, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm sad that you didn't take the opportunity to read what I wrote, because I think you may have found it useful. Instead, you seem to have read what you wanted to, because everyone is 'against' Wikiuser.  I didn't respond immediately, because I thought you might have wanted to temper your words.  I'll try again.

 * I don't condone anything that Wikiuser has done. All I say is that there may be reasons for his actions which cannot be understood by interacting with him over the Internet.  If this is the case, then I say "assume good faith".

 * When I write "WikiUser has been goaded to these actions by the reaction of those who he interacts with" you seem to assume I mean everyone that he interacts with. Patently that is nonsense, but there are many thin-skinned people on Wikipedia (and I don't exclude myself) who jump in feet first.  It only takes a couple of interactions with people like this before you become wary of everyone.

 * Please read my words again. I'm not involved – thankfully – but it is obvious that if he is not capable of defending himself in a reasonable manner then there may be some reason for it: all I'm doing is giving the outside view that this section is for.  He requested an advocate, but the one response I saw didn't seem to understand what the role of an advocate is.  It's not a role that I care to take on, but I thought that there were things that needed saying, that only DeathPhoenix (and ChrisO to some extent) seem to have listened to.  Noisy | Talk 17:49, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)

 * I think Jwrosenzweig and Michael Snow have it exactly right. I agree that WikiUser is keen to contribute; the problem is that he appears to want to contribute only on his own terms, is dismissive of any pre-existing standards, opposes any attempt by others to implement them by altering "his" articles and is relentlessly hostile towards anyone who asks him to abide by them. This doesn't constitute "goading"; it's simply unwillingness or inability to work with the community. Looking back on this dispute, I don't think there's anything we as editors could have done to avoid it. WikiUser's contentious edits would have been reverted and his violations of the 3RR would have been called out wherever happened. He chose to respond as he did, and that was entirely his responsibility. -- ChrisO 09:09, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * ChrisO provided an excellent summary of the situation. I think WikiUser's "ownership issues" combined with his inability to work in a community are what caused this dispute. --Deathphoenix 15:09, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Although the comment is directed more at Noisy than me, I would like to point out that I think that 2>>>>3. That is, it wouldn't take much "goading" to set him off. Like Noisy, I wouldn't presume to put a label on this behaviour because I don't have any medical experience either. I'm not sure how to deal with someone like that. I apologise if my early agreement offended other parties, but then, I was never involved in these disputes. --Deathphoenix 01:02, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * "To suggest our interactions with him "goaded" him into misbehavior is so insulting..." - my thoughts exactly. violet/riga (t) 15:34, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/WikiUser


text: User talk:207.235.66.3

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

title: User talk:207.235.66.3


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pope hat

 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 REDIRECTED. dbenbenn | talk 23:57, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Pope hat
Unnecessary disambig page. Is anyone really going to search for this exact term? -- Francs2000 | Talk 01:29, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The thing is, I think they will actually. I was thinking of suggesting it be redirected to mitre, but I hadn't thought of the crown thingy. Keep . --fvw *  03:14, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
 * Having read the discussion below I agree that this shouldn't be the location of the dab article. Move to some apropriate name for this dab and redirect pope hat there. --fvw *  23:25, 2005 Feb 4 (UTC)
 * Keep. I've heard the term used before. --Goobergunch|? 05:32, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, agree with Francs. Megan1967 05:36, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, many protestants have never heard the word "mitre," but know that the pope wears one. Gazpacho 06:11, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Interesting. JuntungWu 06:48, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Samaritan 06:56, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't personally find it interesting. However, we have articles turned into redirects for (reasonable) spelling mistakes and for miscapitalizations, and the usual argument is "Well, someone obviously actually made this mistake.".  It seems likely that someone might think that there would be an article under Pope's hat.  However, I'm less convinced that someone would expect an article to be entitled Pope hat.  History doesn't show this as being a duplicate article that someone turned into a disambiguation page.  This started off as a disambiguation page, and so the "somebody actually made this mistake" argument isn't supported.  Move to Pope's hat then Redirect to Pope.  No Merge is necessary, as the disambiguation is already there, in the first paragraph of the Regalia and insignia section. Uncle G 13:11, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
 * You might be surprised at this Google search which includes results for both "Pope hat" and "Pope's hat", where "Pope hat" actually seems slightly more commonly used. — Ливай | ☺ 17:56, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Perfectly good disambig. sjorford// 16:09, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Pope, for reasons stated above. There probably should be a similar redirect for Pope's hat. --TenOfAllTrades 17:17, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think it could use a rewording, though. —Mar·ka·ci 18:17, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
 * Delete or rename, rename to like Headresses of the Pope or something like that. --User:Boothy443 | comhrÚ 18:22, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, like Gazpacho said. Beta_M talk, |contrib ( Ë-Mail )
 * Delete. This is just silly. Gamaliel 19:55, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, useful and non-trivial. A bit too small, though. Pope's garments of papal garments would be a better collection. Mikkalai 21:15, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * What would it say that isn't already in the Regalia and insignia section of pope? Uncle G 13:14, 2005 Feb 4 (UTC)
 * When you edit Pope, you get "Please consider condensing the page" message. Why don't we cut the Papal regalia and insignia and redirect this hapless hat there? Mikkalai 22:17, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Works for me. Gazpacho 22:19, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Fine by me. My vote was Redirect already.  I'm not bothered by whether it redirects to Pope or to an article broken out of it. Uncle G 18:19, 2005 Feb 5 (UTC)
 * Odd little disambig page, ain't it? I can honestly imagine someone typing "pope hat" into the search window if they were unsure of the proper terms.  Weak keep. - Lucky 6.9 22:53, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Typing that into the search form and pressing the "Search" button yields pope as the third article title match. Wikipedia's cough idiosyncratic search form design, where the default action is "Go", might cause some confusion. But should we have an article title for every possible search term, such as "pope hat" for example, just because Wikipedia's user interface is badly designed? Uncle G 13:14, 2005 Feb 4 (UTC)
 * Keep Why would anyone think this could harm Wikipedia? Philip 02:33, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Responding to Gazpacho - are you really even sure that that many Roman Catholics know what a mitre is? - RedWordSmith 05:47, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong keep--this article is extremely useful. I'd have no idea what to search for, if this didn't exist. Meelar (talk) 06:12, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Come now! You'd have a vague inkling that pope might have something to say on the subject, surely? Uncle G 13:14, 2005 Feb 4 (UTC)
 * True, but I'd just as soon not have to skim through the bulk of Pope. Best, Meelar (talk) 19:26, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Extreme keep. For the love of God.  I mean, really now.  Come on.  —RaD Man (talk) 22:25, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Case closed. I made it into a redirect to Papal regalia and insignia, which actually makes much more sense about papal hats than the two separate articles (Mitre is actually an episcopal hat). Mikkalai 00:41, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree with redirect. — Ливай | ☺ 17:56, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep What the hell.  I was raised as an Presbyterian, and even I know about papal regalia. Jeez.  Edeans 04:10, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree with redirect. —Korath (Talk) 07:28, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Good move. That's also a perfect way to have addressed Uncle G's concerns. - Lucky 6.9 17:01, 7 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:
Talk:List of colleges in Ontario

Untitled
Shouldn't this be an article and not a list? The introductory material seems long enough, and requires only minor alterations to become an article. --Calton 01:31, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Why did PhilthyBear remove the references to colleges that are Institutes of Technology and Advanced Learning ? Jcampsall (talk) 19:19, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Ontario also has private colleges. Should a section be added for those? Or perhaps the title of the article should be "list of public colleges in Ontario" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.117.217.33 (talk) 22:04, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of colleges in Ontario. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080912040341/http://www.collegework.ca/ to http://www.collegework.ca/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:27, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:List of colleges in Ontario


text:
Category:Counties of the United Kingdom

.

title: Category:Counties of the United Kingdom


text:
Dune (disambiguation)

A dune is a hill of sand.

Dune or dunes may also refer to:

Places and buildings

 * Düne, Heligoland, Germany
 * Dunes, Tarn-et-Garonne, France
 * Dune (crater), on the Moon
 * Dunes (hotel and casino), Paradise, Nevada, US
 * Dunes Hotel and Casino (Atlantic City), US, unbuilt

Science fiction
Dune (franchise) of novels, films, and games:
 * Dune (novel), a 1965 novel by Frank Herbert
 * Arrakis or Dune, a fictional planet
 * Dune (1984 film), a 1984 film directed by David Lynch
 * Frank Herbert's Dune, a 2000 television miniseries
 * Frank Herbert's Children of Dune, a 2003 television miniseries
 * Dune (2021 film), a 2021 film directed by Denis Villeneuve
 * Dune: Part Two, the 2024 sequel to Villeneuve's 2021 film
 * Dune: Prophecy, an upcoming television series
 * Dune (board game) (1979)
 * Dune (1984 board game), see List of games based on Dune
 * Dune (Virgin Interactive / Westwood Studios) video game series, see List of games based on Dune
 * Dune (video game) (1992)
 * Frank Herbert's Dune (video game) (2001)
 * Dune (card game) (1997)
 * Jodorowsky's Dune, documentary about an attempted film

Soundtracks

 * Dune (1984 soundtrack), the soundtrack to the 1984 film
 * Music of Dune (2021 film), the various soundtracks to the 2021 film
 * Dune: Part Two (soundtrack), the soundtrack to the 2024 film sequel

Bands and musicians

 * Dune (band), a German progressive trance/hardcore group
 * Dúné, a Danish rock band
 * Brothomstates or Dune, Finnish IDM musician

Albums

 * Dune (Dune album) (1995)
 * Dune (Klaus Schulze album) (1979)
 * Dune (L'Arc-en-Ciel album) (1993)
 * Dunes (album), an album by Garden & Villa
 * Dune by David Matthews (1977)

Songs

 * "Dune", a song by Susumu Hirasawa from Water in Time and Space
 * "Dune", a song by Zion I from Deep Water Slang V2.0
 * "Dunes", a 1975 tune by Keith Jarrett from Arbour Zena
 * "Dunes", a song by Scale the Summit from Carving Desert Canyons
 * "Dunes", a song by the Alabama Shakes
 * "Dune", a 2023 song by Ateez from their EP The World EP.2: Outlaw
 * "DUNE", a 2017 song by Hachi

People

 * Chris "Dune" Pastras (b. 1972) - American skateboarder, artist, and company owner

Other uses

 * Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE), at Fermilab, United States
 * Dune (mathematics software), for solving partial differential equations using grid-based methods
 * Dunes (stamps), a series of (now worthless) collector's editions of stamps from the Trucial States (now the United Arab Emirates)
 * Dune London, a British shoe manufacturer and retailer

title: Dune (disambiguation)


text: User talk:65.93.172.32

title: User talk:65.93.172.32


text:
Category talk:Law enforcement in Germany

Untitled
I suggest that the category be divided in two: "Law Enforcement in the Federal Republic of Germany" and "Police and Security in the Third Reich" for historical clarity.
 * Then we would also have to have categories for East Germany, Imperial Germany, the Holy Roman Empire and each individual pre-Unification German state. Otherwise it would be inconsistent. That seems a bit complicated. -- Necrothesp 14:00, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)


text: User talk:69.84.106.48

title: User talk:69.84.106.48


text:
Talk:Leonid Kuchma

Untitled
I am almost certain that Kuchma's platform was stronger ties with Russia. Granted, he didn't badmouth the West; but he was appealing strongly to people who felt the severing of econ relations with Russia post-'91 was responsible for Ukraine's economic downturn. --GenkiNeko 01:33, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * You're absolutely right. It was an erroneus edit from some amateur. I just can't find time for editing those Ukrainian-political pages professionally. And can't catch between partisan comtributions :) AlexPU

190205 Slight reshuffling. Removed Baikonur - it was a part of his Yuzhmash job, not a separate one. To be continued. AlexPU

Yushchenko
The following text is POVed and hardly relevant in its current form:

 * President Kuchma, along with Viktor: Medvedchuk, then the Vice Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada, is believed to have played a key role in sacking the Cabinet of Viktor Yushchenko on April 26, 2001.

Sacking Yushchenko is definitely neither a crime nor even a guilt. Moreover, it has been at President's will intil Jan 1, 2006. Medvedchuk is irrelevant in terms of public/official politics: he wasn't the one who voted.

Most important: sacking Yushchenko was hardly the main event in Kuchma's career.

Needs rephrasing. Ukrained 22:04, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Now
It says he left the country. Where he lives now? Luka Jačov 14:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Don't worry, he's still here with us :)). Ukrained 14:38, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Bias
I removed a bit in the opening about improving the economy and improving ties with Russia. The way it is stated is as if the writer triers to dismiss the fact the man was heavily corrupt. Not to mention they give no proof. 174.114.231.69 (talk) 19:48, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Jewish???
Is Kutchma or his ancestors Jewish? I mean, he has close ties to Jewish oligarchs, and his daughter married one, so I was wondering if his family was originally Jewish. Thanks in advance to anybody who knows. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.98.149.164 (talk) 15:48, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Leonid Kuchma. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140419000000/http://www.lrp.lt/lt/prezidento_veikla/apdovanojimai/apdovanojimai_256/p40.html to http://www.lrp.lt/lt/prezidento_veikla/apdovanojimai/apdovanojimai_256/p40.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140914220852/http://www.brama.com/news/press/991130kuchmainaugural.html to http://www.vremya.ru/2005/43/13/120564.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:28, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leonid Kuchma. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.mosnews.com/news/2005/10/09/caseagainstkuchma.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110811135314/http://antiaids.org/en/about/publications/440/831 to http://antiaids.org/en/about/publications/440/831

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:34, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leonid Kuchma. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.engology.com/eng5kuchma.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120315172736/http://e-qanun.az/print.php?internal=view&target=1&docid=3878&doctype=0 to http://e-qanun.az/print.php?internal=view&target=1&docid=3878&doctype=0

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:54, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:53, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Kuchma delivering an address on Liberation Day.jpg

Should Kuchma's decision to participate in the invasion of Iraq be mentioned under foreign policy.
Here's a source; https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jul/03/iraq — Preceding unsigned comment added by ConfusedAndAfraid (talk • contribs) 05:09, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Invasion of Iraq?
Is it correct to say Ukraine took part in the 2003 invasion of Iraq? As I understand it, they did not take part in the invasion but in the later security/peacekeeping operations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.205.157.181 (talk) 19:43, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:06, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Портрет 2-го президента України Леоніда Кучми.jpg

title: Talk:Leonid Kuchma


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Locke and Bass

 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. jni 14:34, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Locke and Bass
Non-notable web comic --LeeHunter 01:34, 2 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.
 * Delete. "It is not updated on a regular basis because the creators are too lazy to update." They said it. --bainer 01:56, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, bainer said it. Inter 12:34, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable, short-lived webcomic.   — Gwalla | Talk 00:03, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Xezbeth  06:40, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)


text:
Green–Kubo relations

The Green–Kubo relations (Melville S. Green 1954, Ryogo Kubo 1957) give the exact mathematical expression for a transport coefficient $$\gamma$$ in terms of the integral of the equilibrium time correlation function of the time derivative of a corresponding microscopic variable $$ A $$ (sometimes termed a "gross variable", as in ):

 * $$\gamma = \int_0^\infty \left\langle \dot{A}(t) \dot{A}(0) \right\rangle \;{\mathrm d}t.$$

One intuitive way to understand this relation is that relaxations resulting from random fluctuations in equilibirum are indistinguishable from those due to an external perturbation in linear response.

Green-Kubo relations are important because they relate a macroscopic transport coefficient to the correlation function of a microscopic variable. In addition, they allow one to measure the transport coefficient without perturbing the system out of equilibrium, which has found much use in molecular dynamics simulations.

Thermal and mechanical transport processes
Thermodynamic systems may be prevented from relaxing to equilibrium because of the application of a field (e.g. electric or magnetic field), or because the boundaries of the system are in relative motion (shear) or maintained at different temperatures, etc. This generates two classes of nonequilibrium system: mechanical nonequilibrium systems and thermal nonequilibrium systems.

The standard example of an electrical transport process is Ohm's law, which states that, at least for sufficiently small applied voltages, the current I is linearly proportional to the applied voltage V,

 * $$ I = G V, $$

As the applied voltage increases one expects to see deviations from linear behavior. The coefficient of proportionality is the electrical conductance which is the reciprocal of the electrical resistance.

The standard example of a mechanical transport process is Newton's law of viscosity, which states that the shear stress $$ S_{xy} $$ is linearly proportional to the strain rate. The strain rate $$ \gamma $$ is the rate of change streaming velocity in the x-direction, with respect to the y-coordinate, $$ \gamma \mathrel\stackrel{\mathrm{def}}{=} \partial u_x /\partial y $$. Newton's law of viscosity states

 * $$ S_{xy} = \eta \gamma.\, $$

As the strain rate increases we expect to see deviations from linear behavior

 * $$ S_{xy} = \eta (\gamma )\gamma.\, $$

Another well known thermal transport process is Fourier's law of heat conduction, stating that the heat flux between two bodies maintained at different temperatures is proportional to the temperature gradient (the temperature difference divided by the spatial separation).

Linear constitutive relation
Regardless of whether transport processes are stimulated thermally or mechanically, in the small field limit it is expected that a flux will be linearly proportional to an applied field. In the linear case the flux and the force are said to be conjugate to each other. The relation between a thermodynamic force F and its conjugate thermodynamic flux J is called a linear constitutive relation,

 * $$J = L(F_e = 0)F_e. \,$$

L(0) is called a linear transport coefficient. In the case of multiple forces and fluxes acting simultaneously, the fluxes and forces will be related by a linear transport coefficient matrix. Except in special cases, this matrix is symmetric as expressed in the Onsager reciprocal relations.

In the 1950s Green and Kubo proved an exact expression for linear transport coefficients which is valid for systems of arbitrary temperature T, and density. They proved that linear transport coefficients are exactly related to the time dependence of equilibrium fluctuations in the conjugate flux,

L(F_e = 0) = \beta V\;\int_0^\infty {\mathrm d}s \, \left\langle J(0)J(s) \right\rangle _{F_e  = 0}, \, $$

where $$\beta = \frac{1}{kT}$$ (with k the Boltzmann constant), and V is the system volume. The integral is over the equilibrium flux autocovariance function. At zero time the autocovariance is positive since it is the mean square value of the flux at equilibrium. Note that at equilibrium the mean value of the flux is zero by definition. At long times the flux at time t, J(t), is uncorrelated with its value a long time earlier J(0) and the autocorrelation function decays to zero. This remarkable relation is frequently used in molecular dynamics computer simulation to compute linear transport coefficients; see Evans and Morriss, "Statistical Mechanics of Nonequilibrium Liquids", Academic Press 1990.

Nonlinear response and transient time correlation functions
In 1985 Denis Evans and Morriss derived two exact fluctuation expressions for nonlinear transport coefficients—see Evans and Morriss in Mol. Phys, 54, 629(1985). Evans later argued that these are consequences of the extremization of free energy in Response theory as a free energy minimum.

Evans and Morriss proved that in a thermostatted system that is at equilibrium at t = 0, the nonlinear transport coefficient can be calculated from the so-called transient time correlation function expression:

L(F_e ) = \beta V\;\int_0^\infty {\mathrm d}s \, \left\langle J(0)J(s) \right\rangle_{F_e}, $$

where the equilibrium ($$ F_e = 0 $$) flux autocorrelation function is replaced by a thermostatted field dependent transient autocorrelation function. At time zero $$ \left\langle J(0) \right\rangle_{F_e} = 0 $$ but at later times since the field is applied $$ \left\langle J(t) \right\rangle_{F_e} \ne 0 $$.

Another exact fluctuation expression derived by Evans and Morriss is the so-called Kawasaki expression for the nonlinear response:

\left\langle J(t;F_e ) \right\rangle = \left\langle J(0)\exp \left[ -\beta V\int_0^t J(-s)F_e \, {\mathrm d}s \right] \right\rangle _{F_e}. \,$$

The ensemble average of the right hand side of the Kawasaki expression is to be evaluated under the application of both the thermostat and the external field. At first sight the transient time correlation function (TTCF) and Kawasaki expression might appear to be of limited use—because of their innate complexity. However, the TTCF is quite useful in computer simulations for calculating transport coefficients. Both expressions can be used to derive new and useful fluctuation expressions quantities like specific heats, in nonequilibrium steady states. Thus they can be used as a kind of partition function for nonequilibrium steady states.

Derivation from the fluctuation theorem and the central limit theorem
For a thermostatted steady state, time integrals of the dissipation function are related to the dissipative flux, J, by the equation

 * $$ \bar \Omega _t =  - \beta \overline J _t VF_e.\, $$

We note in passing that the long time average of the dissipation function is a product of the thermodynamic force and the average conjugate thermodynamic flux. It is therefore equal to the spontaneous entropy production in the system. The spontaneous entropy production plays a key role in linear irreversible thermodynamics – see de Groot and Mazur "Non-equilibrium thermodynamics" Dover.

The fluctuation theorem (FT) is valid for arbitrary averaging times, t. Let's apply the FT in the long time limit while simultaneously reducing the field so that the product $$ F_e^2 t $$ is held constant,

\lim_{t \to \infty, \, F_e \to 0}\frac{1}{t} \ln \left( \frac{p\left(\beta \overline J _t = A\right)}{p\left(\beta \overline J_t = -A\right)} \right) = -\lim_{t \to \infty, \, F_e  \to 0} AVF_e,\quad F_e^2 t = c. $$

Because of the particular way we take the double limit, the negative of the mean value of the flux remains a fixed number of standard deviations away from the mean as the averaging time increases (narrowing the distribution) and the field decreases. This means that as the averaging time gets longer the distribution near the mean flux and its negative, is accurately described by the central limit theorem. This means that the distribution is Gaussian near the mean and its negative so that

\lim_{t \to \infty, \, F_e \to 0} \frac{1}{t} \ln \left( \frac{p\left(\overline J _t\right) = A}{p\left(\overline J _t\right) =  -A} \right) = \lim_{t \to \infty, \, F_e  \to 0} \frac{2A\left\langle J \right\rangle_{F_e}}{t\sigma_{\overline J (t)}^2 }. $$

Combining these two relations yields (after some tedious algebra!) the exact Green–Kubo relation for the linear zero field transport coefficient, namely,

L(0) = \beta V\;\int_0^\infty {\mathrm d}t \, \left\langle J(0)J(t) \right\rangle_{F_e = 0}. $$

Here are the details of the proof of Green–Kubo relations from the FT. A proof using only elementary quantum mechanics was given by Robert Zwanzig.

Summary
This shows the fundamental importance of the fluctuation theorem (FT) in nonequilibrium statistical mechanics. The FT gives a generalisation of the second law of thermodynamics. It is then easy to prove the second law inequality and the Kawasaki identity. When combined with the central limit theorem, the FT also implies the Green–Kubo relations for linear transport coefficients close to equilibrium. The FT is, however, more general than the Green–Kubo Relations because, unlike them, the FT applies to fluctuations far from equilibrium. In spite of this fact, no one has yet been able to derive the equations for nonlinear response theory from the FT.

The FT does not imply or require that the distribution of time-averaged dissipation is Gaussian. There are many examples known when the distribution is non-Gaussian and yet the FT still correctly describes the probability ratios.

title: Green–Kubo relations


text:
Talk:Loyalty

hello
This is verity and i'm new to this, but i changed some things around, most notably the rearrangement of the headings (Social and Culturali love you the page was too focused on this) and also adding a "personal" touch to what loyalty means. You might want to check things out and touch some things yourself if it doesn't make any sense. Good day.

Suggested Changes
I would say the strongest part of this article is the etymology section, but it would benefit greatly from a citation. As for the philosphy section, none of these philosophers deserves such off-hand mention. Either cut this section, or greatly expand it. An expansion of the comments concerning Plato are especially necessary as they are rather cryptic in their current form. Might I suggest a section on how the concept of loyalty relates to the concept of love - especially filial love? Also how it relates to the concept of authority (as it is, there is a strong anti-authoritarian bias which, considering the subject, is rather perverse)... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.110.220.141 (talk • contribs) 2005-05-12 15:14:30
 * It was in fact cited in the original version of the article (q.v.). This is now clearer, with the citation concerned cross-linked to the text.  I've looked for sources that could clarify which of the many things that Plato said is being referenced here.  But the only sources that match, attribute the statement to this very Wikipedia article.  So I've removed it.  It should be clear in any case, from the now expanded article, that philosophy treats the subject of loyalty at length.   Plato's actual views on the subject can be put in when a source that has read Plato, rather than Wikipedia, turns up.  ☺  Uncle G (talk) 13:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Loyalty to a cause
According to my awareness and perception the concept of loyalty does always refer to a person, and never to a cause. I agree with the description given here: http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Loyalty. This site is no longer in action. Why do you think that it can refer to a cause, too? Austerlitz 13:23, 14 July 2006 (UTC) ***** There are very important causes that one can be loyal to, such as helping a person, thank you very much.

Jeffrey Masson about loyalty
Loyalty to oneself -- 88.72.14.121 21:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I liked the idea of representing nobody but myself. No affiliation, no ties, no loyalties.

Emotion?
Is loyalty an emotion? -- Sharkface217 23:41, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

♥ A friend never talks behind your back or bails,leavs you out♥ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.197.60.231 (talk) 03:44, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That rather suggests that people should fulfill some ethical criteria to be worthy of being given loyalty. 89.241.44.96 (talk) 11:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Loyalty (Family)
I am finding myself questioning and always since I was a child to long for loyalty. Loyalty as a child has brought to me as a since of belonging and edification. When that did not occur for me as a child I promised myself that I would give it to my children. I think I have but keep running in to it with my own siblings and mother for a since of family and loyalty. And for some reason they seem to never come through. Loyalty I give to them but loyalty is never returned. Today I feel a need to write this and it may mean nothing to no one but for me I really needed to get it out. Loyalty! Lynn Posey —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lhposey41 (talk • contribs) 02:18, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you mean love rather than loyalty. 89.241.44.96 (talk) 11:51, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Loyalty is corrupting
Being loyal to a corrupt person makes you corrupt, so loyalty is not simply a good thing. I would like more about this aspect in the article. There is an important dicotomy of business or organisational cultures being either fact-based or loyalty-based - with the later seeming superficially to give an excellent performance without anyone doing much work, as people are assessed on their lip-service, until it crashes disastrously. Unless they have such powerful defences to criticism that they are never found out. It can be corrupt to be loyal to a family member if you know, for example, that they are a murderer and do not report it to the police out of loyalty. The (former?) President of Zimbabwe had lots of loyal followers, but the country metaphorically crashed and burned and many people seemed to die as a result of their loyalty. On the other hand loyalty to a family member who becomes ill and needs caring, rather than just walking away, is a good thing. 89.241.44.96 (talk) 11:46, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

a link to add?
 *
 *

"In my experience, psychoanalysis demanded loyalty that could not be questioned, the blind acceptance of unexamined "wisdom". It is characteristic of religious orders to seek obedience without scepticism, but it spells the death of intellectual enquiry. All variants of "because I say so," or because the Koran says so, or the Bible says so, or the Upanishads say so, or Freud says so, or Marx says so, are simply different means of stifling intellectual dissent. In the end they cannot satisfy the inquisitive mind or still the doubts that naturally arise when such a mind is confronted with authoritative statements about human behavior." (pages 209, 210)

Does loyalty to a cause or a person mean that one has to hide one's own intellectual dissent?
 * Austerlitz -- 88.75.74.240 (talk) 10:13, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Bible

 * "6:24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." Why not quote all of it?

 * Austerlitz -- 88.75.203.240 (talk) 15:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

A 'new' definition of loyalty...
There have been many weighty and learned tomes written about what constitutes loyalty and I have no doubt they are all correct. After all, they are all far cleverer than I. However, until the work below, we had never seen a pragmatic business headline describing what exactly loyalty is. So after many hours of cogitation and discussion this is what emerged. I know it appears a ‘blinding glimpse of the obvious’ but, like so many simple things, it is carefully crafted and has a definition that can be used in any business whilst conveying the key messages - albeit subliminally. The definition of loyalty is:

“When a person chooses to do business with your company over all others time after time."

Let me explain why it is as it is. A few observations (more like facts of life really):

 * Loyalty can only exist between people. Just think of the last time you recommended.  I can tell you it was based on how you were made to feel by an individual NEVER by the company.
 * Companies do not do business. People from one company do business with people from another.  Regardless of medium, it is people that design and manage interactions.  So, what comes through is the personality of the individual or the collective and that’s the thing you hang your hat on.
 * People always have a choice. At the very least, people have a choice whether to or not.  More often today they have more choice than ever about who might supply them.
 * Long term loyalty, advocacy, can only come from continually delivering complete satisfaction. Single/individual instances do not constitute loyalty as trust and confidence are essential ingredients of loyalty and these can only be built over time.

ListysDad (talk) 13:43, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

 * This is another instance of confusion with the vernacular meaning of the word, specifically "customer loyalty". 92.29.116.249 (talk) 10:57, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Case study of why loyalty is a bad thing
See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-11500370 MC uses a carrot-and-stick approach to maintain and develop loyalty.

It is a bad thing where loyalty replaces altruism. 92.29.116.249 (talk) 10:55, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Fundamental flaw of this & related articles
A simple illustration. Any proposals to delete, revise, or merge these articles will be considered. Weeb Dingle (talk) 06:21, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * "Faithfulness is the concept of unfailingly remaining loyal…"
 * "Loyalty is a devotion and faithfulness…"
 * "Fidelity is the quality of faithfulness or loyalty."

The lede needs oversight. Specifically, claims made at the beginning of an article don't need to cite a source… but MUST be clearly substantiated within the main body. That does not exist here.

Entire sections over-rely on a sole source, Nathanson being an obvious example.

Though perhaps not a critical flaw, caution MUST be exercised when referring to someone in the present tense. Name-dropping their post can be awkward if they retired two decades ago, moreso if they've been dead that long. The article ages much better if past tense (said; wrote; stated; claimed) is preferred. Weeb Dingle (talk) 16:18, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Loyalty
Loyalty is an important part of brand strategy 175.176.68.120 (talk) 04:28, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Loyalty


text:
User:JulesBeaujolais

I was born in Hungary, grew up in Vienna, Austria, and went to a French school there. I first studied Psychology at the University of Vienna, then Finno-Ugristics in Munich, Germany. I then lived five years in Rome, and six years in Barcelona, Spain. I finally settled down in California, where I now have been living for over ten years.

I have worked as a translator from French, Italian, and Spanish to German;  as a language teacher; and as a free-lance journalist for German-speaking media.

You will not be surprised to hear that one of my main areas of interest are languages, and that is the field where I hope to contribute to this Wikipedia project.

title: User:JulesBeaujolais


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Douglas Miller

Jonathan Douglas Miller is a vanity page, I have rolled back his adding his name to other pages. Someone who does this should work with him to become a useful contributor.

 * delete dml 01:36, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)


text:
Raoul Hurtubise

Joseph Raoul Hurtubise (July 1, 1882 – January 31, 1955) was a Canadian politician. He represented the riding of Nipissing in the House of Commons of Canada from 1930 to 1945. He was a member of the Liberal Party.

Before entering politics, Hurtubise was a surgeon.

He left electoral politics in 1945, when he was appointed to the Senate. He sat as a senator until his death in 1955.

title: Raoul Hurtubise


text:
User talk:Otoolend

Welcome to my talk page. I'm a student in Trinity College, Dublin.

A welcome from Sango123
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
 * Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Simplified Ruleset
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Wikipedia Glossary

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy editing!

-- Sango  123   (talk)  20:50, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

title: User talk:Otoolend


text:
California State Route 35

State Route 35 (SR 35), generally known as Skyline Boulevard for most of its length, is a mostly two-lane state highway in the U.S. state of California. It runs along the ridge of the Santa Cruz Mountains from the high point of State Route 17 near Lexington Reservoir in Santa Clara County to State Route 1 just south of Daly City in San Mateo County, where it crosses SR 1 and loops around Lake Merced to become Sloat Boulevard in San Francisco. SR 35 then continues along Sloat Boulevard until it reaches its terminus when it meets SR 1 again at 19th Avenue.

Because of its high elevation and location, it is one of the few places on the southern portion of the San Francisco Peninsula from which the San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean are both visible at the same time. It also provides scenic views of the Silicon Valley metropolitan area.

It was originally designated State Route 5 (SR 5), but this had to be changed with the creation of Interstate 5 (I-5) in 1964 to avoid confusion between the two roads.

Route description
The highway begins at the junction of Summit Road and State Route 17, at Patchen Pass. While SR 17 traverses the pass outright, SR 35 primarily is on the ridgeline. The portion of SR 35 from SR 17 to Bear Creek Road is called Summit Road. The highway then merges with Bear Creek Road for a few miles before becoming Skyline Boulevard. It bears the name Skyline Boulevard for a majority of its route along the ridge of the Santa Cruz Mountains to the west of Silicon Valley, passing by cities such as San Jose, Saratoga, and Palo Alto. The southern portion of the road, starting at Highway 17 and ending at Black Road, is mostly a narrow and winding country road without a double-yellow line. However, the road has been upgraded to 2 lanes beginning at Black Road, and remains in this configuration until it merges with Interstate 280 north of California State Route 92. The road reaches its highest elevation near Sanborn Skyline County Park at about 3,000 ft (914 m). The road passes through the small community of Sky Londa where it intersects State Route 84. The ridge that the road follows forms the border between Santa Cruz and Santa Clara counties. However, the boundary is so irregular that the road weaves in and out of the two counties.

The ridgetop portion of the route ends at the junction with State Route 92, because this northern area of the Santa Cruz Mountains is a protected watershed owned by the San Francisco Water Department. Highway 35 is co-routed with SR 92 for 2 miles (3 km) east, descending towards Crystal Springs Reservoir, which it crosses on a causeway, and then joins Interstate 280 northbound for 6 miles (10 km). However, on the southbound side, Route 35 exists as a separate road to the west of the freeway between Bunker Hill Dr. and Route 92, as there is no connector road between 280 South and 92 West.

Route 35 departs from 280 at the southern end of San Bruno, running to the west of the freeway, regaining the ridgetop separating South San Francisco and Daly City from Pacifica.

It crosses State Route 1 in Daly City and in San Francisco, Skyline Boulevard ends and the highway briefly continues along Sloat Boulevard until it reaches its terminus when it intersects Highway 1 again at 19th Avenue.

SR 35 is part of the California Freeway and Expressway System, but is not part of the National Highway System, a network of highways that are considered essential to the country's economy, defense, and mobility by the Federal Highway Administration. SR 35 is eligible for the State Scenic Highway System; however, only the portion from the Santa Cruz–Santa Clara County line to the SR 92 junction is officially designated as a scenic highway by the California Department of Transportation, meaning that it is a substantial section of highway passing through a "memorable landscape" with no "visual intrusions", where the potential designation has gained popular favor with the community.

Recreational use
Because of its scenic views and winding roadway, Skyline Boulevard and surrounding roads see substantial recreational motoring and bicycling use. Many sports cars and motorcycles can be found congregating near the intersections with State Route 9 and State Route 84, particularly on weekends. Mountain bikers are also commonly found at the many trailheads along the road.

Several public open spaces border on Skyline Boulevard, including Sanborn County Park, Windy Hill, and the Purisima Open Space; both the latter are parts of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. Numerous hiking trails originate from parking lots off Skyline in these open spaces.

Whenever there is snow on the road's higher elevations, many people take their families up to see and play in the snow, and therefore, many of the parking lots at regional parks are packed with cars.

Other landmarks
For most of the route, State Route 35 offers vistas of both San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean. The route passes through or by several Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District preserves and other parks, from south to north:
 * Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve
 * Sanborn-Skyline County Park (Santa Cruz county)
 * Castle Rock State Park
 * Saratoga Gap Open Space Preserve
 * Long Ridge Open Space Preserve
 * Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve
 * Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
 * Coal Creek Open Space Preserve
 * Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve
 * Windy Hill Open Space Preserve
 * La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve
 * Wunderlich County Park (San Mateo county)
 * El Corte de Madera Creek Open Space Preserve
 * Huddart County Park (San Mateo county)
 * Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve
 * Miramontes Ridge Open Space Preserve

A number of streams originate near Skyline Boulevard, flowing to both Pacific Ocean and the Bay. Among the bayside streams are San Francisquito Creek, Redwood Creek, and San Bruno Creek.

History
The original road called State Route 35 was located in southern California and ran north to south from State Route 22 (Garden Grove Boulevard) in Orange County to U.S. 99 (Garvey Avenue), first along Los Alamitos Boulevard going north which, after entering Los Angeles County, turns into Norwalk Boulevard. Route 35 continued west on Centralia Street and then north along Pioneer Boulevard until hitting San Antonio Drive at Rosecrans Avenue. San Antonio Drive would turn back into Norwalk Boulevard and continue with that street name until turning into Old Mill Road at Beverly Boulevard. Route 35 would wind through Rose Hills and Avocado Heights as Workman Mill Road and would then turn into Puente Avenue at Valley Boulevard where it would continue to its end at U.S. 99 (which was concurrent with U.S. Routes 60 and 70) at the border of Baldwin Park and West Covina.

The current State Route 35, Skyline Boulevard, was originally designated State Route 5. The number was changed in the 1964 renumbering in California. On February 10, 2017, a huge washout washed away a 220-foot stretch of SR 35 about five miles south of the junction with State Route 9. Repairs were completed and the section of road re-opened January 9, 2018.

title: California State Route 35


text:
Anna Magdalena Bach

Anna Magdalena Bach (née Wilcke; 22 September 1701 – 27 February 1760) was a German professional singer and the second wife of Johann Sebastian Bach.

Biography

Anna Magdalena Wilcke was born at Zeitz, in the Duchy of Saxe-Zeitz. While little is known about her early musical education, the family was musical. Her father, Johann Caspar Wilcke (c. 1660–1733), was a trumpet player, who had a career at the courts of Zeitz and Weißenfels. Her mother, Margaretha Elisabeth Liebe, was the daughter of an organist.

By 1721, Anna Magdalena was employed as a soprano singer at the princely court of Anhalt-Cöthen. Johann Sebastian Bach had been working there as Capellmeister (director of music) since December 1717. Johann Sebastian, 36, married the 20-year-old Anna Magdalena on 3 December of that year, seventeen months after the death of his first wife, Maria Barbara Bach. Later that month, the couple's employer, Prince Leopold of Anhalt-Cöthen, married Frederica Henriette of Anhalt-Bernburg. Bach believed the princess' lack of interest in music caused the musical life at the court to decline, although there is evidence that other factors were involved. There were budgetary constraints of which Bach may have had limited knowledge, as it's unlikely that the prince would have discussed his financial problems with Bach. In May 1723, the Bachs moved to Leipzig, where Johann Sebastian had been appointed Cantor of the Thomasschule and music director of the town.

Anna Magdalena continued to sing professionally after her marriage. In one notable example of her continuing involvement with music, she returned to Köthen in 1729 to sing at Prince Leopold's funeral.

Her husband brought four children into the marriage. Between 1723 and 1742, she gave birth to the following children: Christiana Sophia Henrietta (⁕spring 1723 †29 June 1726); Gottfried Heinrich (⁕26 February 1724 ⚰12 February 1763); Christian Gottlieb (〰14 April 1725 †21 September 1728); Elisabeth Juliana Friderica, called "Liesgen", who married Bach's pupil Johann Christoph Altnickol (〰5 April 1726 †24 August 1781); Ernestus Andreas (〰30 October 1727 †1 November 1727); Regina Johanna (〰10 October 1728 †25 April 1733); Christiana Benedicta (〰1 January 1730 †4 January 1730); Christiana Dorothea (〰18 March 1731 †31 August 1732); Johann Christoph Friedrich, called "Friedrich", the 'Bückeburg' Bach (⁕21 June 1732 †26 January 1795); Johann August Abraham (〰5 November 1733 †6 November 1733); Johann Christian, called "Christel", the 'London' Bach (⁕5 September 1735 – †1 January 1782); Johanna Carolina (〰30 October 1737 †18 August 1781) and Regina Susanna (〰22 February 1742 †14 December 1809)

As can be seen from the dates, seven of her 13 children died before reaching adulthood. Only during the ten weeks from June to August 1732 were five of the couple’s children younger than 10 years of age living in the household. Otherwise, there were four or less. Anna Magdalena was seriously ill seven months before the birth of her last daughter Regina Susanna, and it is not known whether this was related to the pregnancy.

With the marriage Anna Magdalena became Frau Capellmeisterin Bach, because she had the right to bear the title of her husband. It was not the job of a lady of her standing to cook, clean the apartment or do the washing. There were service personnel for this. Infants were nourished by wet nurses. Together with her husband, Anna Magdalena Bach commanded a household to which not only the children belonged, but also private students and servants. In this household the livelihood was earned with music. As a musician herself and the daughter of a court trumpeter, Anna Magdalena had the abilities and experience to monitor and participate in the activities. In the Bach family household works composed by Johann Sebastian were copied and prepared for performance. Performances were rehearsed, music was traded, private students taught, instruments rented out and sold. Anna Magdalena cooperated in all these areas. When her husband was away examining organs or for other reasons, she was responsible for running the business. The entire household could also have been organised such that she could accompany him. After the death of her husband a cantata for the council election was commissioned from her – proof that she was capable of organising such a performance. Several copies of her husband’s compositions made by her have survived. Some of these are of high musicological significance as many of his own manuscripts are lost. Apart from music, Anna Magdalena was interested in flowers.

Johann Sebastian Bach died on 28 July 1750. As he left immature children, a will naming his wife as sole heir would have been invalid. In the case of the Bach family a committee of executors from Leipzig University ensured that these children were given their share of the inheritance. Anna Magdalena Bach took on the administration of these shares. During the distribution of the estate, she found herself in a position to cover the debts of her sister and paid the other heirs a sum equivalent to a year’s salary of a fully trained miner in Electoral Saxony. In 1751 she supported a mine with at least the equivalent of a week’s pay of such a miner. The widow Anna Magdalena took responsibility for her two youngest daughters, aged 8 and 12 years on their father’s death, and her 26-year-old mentally handicapped son Gottfried Heinrich. She moved with them to the Neuer Kirchhof in Leipzig. The only child that left home was Johann Christian who moved to his half-brother Carl Philipp Emanuel in Berlin for his further education.

While her husband was alive the family had an income many times higher than a craftsman. The widowed Anna Magdalena was not able to maintain her previous standard of living. She therefore received support from various institutions. She also worked for her living. With the distribution of the estate, she enabled herself to rent out furnished accommodation. There is evidence for her music trading activities. Among others she sold copies of the Art of Fugue, which she had published together with her sons, as well as the textbook The True Art of Playing the Keyboards by Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, her stepson with whom she stayed in contact until the end of her life. As she also possessed manuscripts from her husband, she was able to offer copies of these works. How her life developed in the subsequent years, especially during the seven years’ war, is not known. She died on 27 February 1760 and was buried on 29 February in St. John’s cemetery in Leipzig.

Dismissed claim of composership

Recently, it has been suggested that Anna Magdalena Bach composed several musical pieces bearing her husband's name: Professor Martin Jarvis of the School of Music at Charles Darwin University in Darwin, Australia, claims that she composed the famed six cello suites (BWV 1007–1012) and was involved with the composition of the aria from the Goldberg Variations (BWV 988) and the opening prelude of The Well-Tempered Clavier. These ideas were also made into a TV documentary Written by Mrs Bach.

These claims have been virtually unanimously dismissed by Bach scholars and performers. Christoph Wolff said: When I served as director of the Leipzig Bach Archive from 2001 to 2013, I and my colleagues there extensively refuted the basic premises of the thesis, on grounds of documents, manuscript sources, and musical grounds. There is not a shred of evidence, but Jarvis doesn't give up despite the fact that several years ago, at a Bach conference in Oxford, a room full of serious Bach scholars gave him an embarrassing showdown.

Writing in The Guardian, cellist Steven Isserlis said, "I'm afraid that his theory is pure rubbish," and continued, "How can anybody take this shoddy material seriously?"

Bach scholar Ruth Tatlow has written a refutation at length, centred on the TV documentary, in the journal Understanding Bach, where she calls Jarvis's claims "flawed and untenable".

title: Anna Magdalena Bach