text:
Triplanetary (board game)

Triplanetary is a science fiction board wargame originally published by Game Designers' Workshop in 1973. The game is a simulation of space ship travel and combat within the Solar System in the early 21st Century.

First edition
Triplanetary was designed by Marc W. Miller and John Harshman, loosely based on novels and short stories from the Golden Age of Science Fiction, particularly the Future History works of Robert Heinlein. Triplanetary was originally conceived as the first part of a proposed series of games that was to be named "The Stars! The Stars!" As Miller related, a late-night session of Lensman with Harshman using blank hex-grid battle board combat "inspired the design for Triplanetary, with its image of our solar system and use of vector movement".

In 1976, GDW released Triplanetary Variant V/2, an expansion of the suggested "Prospecting" scenario that was part of the original Errata sheets.

Second edition
GDW published a second edition of the game in 1981. The packaging was changed from the cardboard tube to a standard box. The paper map and acetate overlay were replaced by a plastic-coated map, but players still plotted their vectors using a supplied grease pencil. A few changes were made to the rules, mainly from the originally published errata sheet. Several changes were made to the scenarios: two were dropped, four were added and the other four were modified; the total number of scenarios increased from six to eight. This edition had a box cover by Rich Banner.

Third edition
In 1989, Steve Jackson acquired the rights to the game, with ambitions to release a new version of the game in 1991 that would tighten up a number of rules to improve play. After various delays, the third edition was finally released by Steve Jackson Games in 2018.

Contents
The game was originally packaged in a square cardboard tube, which contained a 16-page book of rules (with four pages of errata and clarifications that included two additional scenarios); a hex map of the inner Solar System; a clear acetate overlay for the map, a grease pencil, a set of cardboard counters representing the various spaceships, and a 6-sided die. The map included the Sun, Mercury, Venus, Earth and the Moon, Mars, two of the largest asteroids in the Asteroid belt as well as a hex for a secret asteroid base, and Jupiter, along with the four largest Jovian moons. For game play purposes, the placement of the Earth's Moon and the Jovian moons were not to scale.

Gameplay
The clear acetate overlay allowed each player to plot the movement vectors of their ships. Each ship could accelerate during the turn, which then modified the vector one hex in any direction. The ships continued to follow their current vector from turn to turn, which could only be modified by acceleration or by entering the "gravity field" of a planet. For simplification purposes, this gravity field consisted of the six hexes surrounding the planet. Moons had a weaker gravity that only affected a course when ships pass through two adjacent hexes Acceleration consumed part of a ship's fuel supply, and players were required to track the current fuel remaining on each ship. If all the fuel was consumed, a ship would be unable to accelerate. Ships could refuel by landing on friendly planets, orbiting a base, or passing slowly through an asteroid base. They could also refuel by matching speed with another ship (such as a tanker) and transferring fuel.

Each game was played in a series of turns that alternated between each of the players. Each turn a player followed a sequence of five phases:

 * 1) Astrogation — plot the movement vector of each ship.
 * 2) Ordnance — launch mines and torpedoes from ships.
 * 3) Movement — follow plotted course to new location.
 * 4) Combat — attack enemy ships in range, including using mines and torpedoes; roll for space hazards.
 * 5) Resupply — perform various logistical activities, as well as looting and rescue.

Ship counters displayed the vessel silhouette, an identifier number, the combat rating, fuel capacity, and the cargo capacity. The counters were printed in several colors to represent different sides in each conflict.

Combat used a damage table that was based on the ratio of the attacker ship combat strength to that of the defender. The odds ranged from 1:2 to 4:1. A six-sided dice roll was used to determine the results of an attack, with one subtracted from the roll for each hex of range between the ships. Before the results are applied, the ship being attacked can optionally fire upon its attackers. The results of an attack are expressed in a number of turns the ship is disabled, or, for high odds and a favorable roll, the ship is destroyed. Higher dice rolls resulted in more damage. If the cumulative damage to a ship required more than 5 turns to repair, the ship was destroyed. Torpedoes and mines also had their own combat damage tables that were used when the course of a mine or torpedo intersected a ship. There were also damage results for ramming attacks, as well as for moving too rapidly through asteroid hexes.

Some scenarios use hidden counters, so that ships and planets could only identify enemy vessels that came within range. Planets could detect ship types up to five hexes away, while ships could scan a distance of three hexes.

Scenarios
The game came with six scenarios:
 * Grand Tour — A multi-player race about the planets, to familiarize the players with the vector movement system.
 * Escape — One player attempts to escape a tyrannical government by fleeing the Solar System, while the other tries to stop the escape.
 * Lateral 7 — Pirates try to nab a wealthy liner while avoiding the navy.
 * Interplanetary War — Earth colonies rebel from the rule of the mother planet.
 * Alien Invasion — Terran forces try to stop an invading fleet of alien barbarians.
 * Piracy — Pirates try to loot merchant transports while Space Patrol tries to neutralize their efforts.

The errate sheet also listed two more suggested scenarios:
 * Prospecting — Economic scenario of mining asteroids.
 * Retribution — Follow up to the Escape scenario.

Reception
In the December 1974 issue of Airfix Magazine, Bruce Quarrie gave a positive review of the game and its mechanics, concluding, "Since it is our experience that the majority of wargamers enjoy science fiction and vice-versa, we can see this game catching on in quite a big way. Great fun!"

Two reviews of the original game and its variant appeared in 1976 issues of The Space Gamer. In Issue 4, Scott Rusch gave the original version of Triplanetary a very positive review, saying, "It's quite a flexible game, and it's fun. It's even fairly accurate, which is something most tactical space games can't claim. I heartily recommend it." Several months later, in Issue 9, Kelly Moorman gave a strong recommendation to the Triplanetary Variant V/2, saying, ""I would recommend this variant to anyone interested in a very realistic space-economic-tactical game."

In his 1977 book The Comprehensive Guide to Board Wargaming, Nicholas Palmer thought the game had "a relatively realistic scope [...] the system is not difficult, though it takes a little getting used to." He noted that the scenarios provided "a long and intricate game."

In the July 1981 edition of Dragon, Tony Watson welcomed the return of Triplanetary as one of the best SF games on the market. He admitted that the game wasn't perfect, especially the messy map caused by continuously adding grease pencil trails during a long scenario. And although the vector movement system was accurate, Watson pointed out that the planets never move, although they should be orbiting around the Sun. "The designer has apparently decided to sacrifice this bit of realism for the sake of playability, and it seems to make a great deal of sense." He concluded, "Triplanetary is a marvelously well conceived game that plays well and is a lot of fun. It is varied and interesting, and fairly dripping with the feel of the old-style SF novels many of us grew up with. Even eight years after its initial appearance, [it] compares favorably with the plethora of other SF titles on the market."

In the July 1981 edition of The Space Gamer (Issue No. 41), William A. Barton reviewed the 1981 edition of Triplanetary, and noted the disappearance of two scenarios from the original list, "Invasion" and "Piracy". Barton felt the editing of the new rules in was not clean, stating, "GDW should release an errata sheet."

title: Triplanetary (board game)


text:
Category:Schools in East Sussex

Schools located in the county of East Sussex.

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

title: Category:Schools in East Sussex


text: User talk:63.231.227.71

title: User talk:63.231.227.71


text:
Tellico Dam

Tellico Dam is a concrete gravity and earthen embankment dam on the Little Tennessee River that was built by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) in Loudon County, Tennessee. Planning for a dam structure on the Little Tennessee was reported as early as 1936 but was deferred for development until 1942. Completed in 1979, the dam created the Tellico Reservoir and is the last dam to be built by the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Unlike the agency's previous dams built for hydroelectric power and flood control, the Tellico Dam was primarily constructed as an economic development and tourism initiative through the planned city concept of Timberlake, Tennessee. The development project aimed to support a population of 42,000 in a rural region in poor economic conditions.

Referred to as a pork barrel, the Tellico Dam is the subject of several controversies regarding the need of its construction and the impacts the structure had on the surrounding environment. Inundation of the Little Tennessee required the acquisition of thousands of acres, predominantly multi-generational farmland and historic sites such as the Fort Loudoun settlement and several Cherokee tribal villages including Tanasi, the origin of Tennessee's name. Most of the acreage around the final lakeshore, originally seized through eminent domain, was sold to private developers to create retirement-oriented golf resort communities such as Tellico Village and Rarity Bay.

The Tellico Dam project was also controversial because of the risk it was believed to pose to the endangered snail darter fish species. Environmentalist groups took the TVA to court as a means to halt the project and protect the snail darter. The court action delayed the final completion of the dam for over two years. In the 1978 case Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill heard by the Supreme Court of the United States, the court ruled in favor of the environmental groups and declared that the completion of Tellico Dam was illegal. However, the dam was completed and filling of the reservoir commenced in November 1979, after the project was exempted from the Endangered Species Act with the passing of the 1980 public works appropriations bill by the United States Congress and President Jimmy Carter.

Preliminary planning and Timberlake initiative
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is a federally owned electric utility company created by U.S. Code Title 16, Chapter 12A, the Tennessee Valley Authority Act of 1933. Despite its shares being owned by the federal government, TVA operates like a private corporation, and receives no taxpayer funding. The TVA was formally established in 1933 as part of programs under the New Deal.

The agency was initially tasked with modernizing the Tennessee Valley region, using experts in economic development, engineering, planning, and agriculture. Nonetheless, the TVA focused primarily on electricity generation, flood control, and combatting human and economic problems.

In 1936, TVA began studies for hydroelectric dam sites as part of its Unified Development of the Tennessee River (UDTR) plan. Early TVA plans suggested the construction of a dam along the Little Tennessee River at its mouth at the Tennessee River adjacent to Bussell Island. This later became known as the Fort Loudoun Extension, an expansion of the adjacent Fort Loudoun Dam. However, the project was canceled on October 20, 1942, due to a lack of federal funding resulting from financial constraints imposed by US involvement in World War II.

In 1959, the TVA reapproved development of the Fort Loudoun Extension, now called the Tellico Project. The justification for the project was to improve the economic conditions of the Little Tennessee watershed, through land and recreational development. This project, which encompassed acreage in Loudon, Blount, and Monroe counties, became known as the City of Timberlake Plan, named for journalist Henry Timberlake who explored the Cherokee villages that once occupied the area. Timberlake, the TVA's ambitious attempt at creating a city from scratch, had a projected population of 42,000. The project was promoted as a demonstration of economic development for the rural poor, transforming the Little Tennessee Valley into a thriving urban center. The Tellico Dam would provide a large reservoir for recreation and for freight transport to proposed industrial sites with access to the Tennessee River through a canal. The dam would not produce electricity, but the canal would enable an additional 23 MW of power generation at the Fort Loudon Dam by diverting flow from the Little Tennessee River. The Timberlake project was initially supported with congressional aid and investment from the American aerospace manufacturing company, the Boeing Corporation. In 1974, the Tennessee state legislature unsuccessfully proposed a bill seeking to incorporate the Timberlake area into a city. Boeing determined that the project was not economically feasible and withdrew in 1975; the plans never fully materialized.

Property acquisition and eminent domain
The Tellico Dam project required the acquisition of nearly 38000 acres of property for its development. The reservoir created by the dam was forecast to extend over 16500 acres with an extra 2900 acres in flood control reserves. For the remaining area, TVA allocated 16500 acres for residential, recreational, and industrial development as part of the proposed Timberlake planned city project. The remaining land served as buffer zones between development areas and the reservoir. When the TVA began to approach property owners in the Lower Tennessee Valley for the development of Tellico Dam, several communities that TVA sought to "modernize" through this project were at the time in touch with most of the modern Appalachian society that TVA had contributed to since the 1930s. Members of the river shed communities least impacted by modernization reacted most positively to TVA's plans, compared with the more modern communities. Historians of the project have suggested that most TVA personnel did not understand the complexity of the communities that they were intruding into with the Tellico project, leading to more heated opposition.

The Tellico Project was revealed to the public as early as 1960, with reactions similar to previous TVA projects. Public meetings commenced throughout the Little Tennessee Valley in the mid-1960s at civic spaces in Loudon, Blount, and Monroe counties to address concerns raised by citizens about the Tellico and Timberlake projects. At the time, TVA officials did not expect that the Tellico Project would be met with anything more than token opposition. In 1963, small clusters of Little Tennessee Valley landowners and businesspeople formed a community group known as the Fort Loudoun Association opposing the Tellico project. Extensive local opposition emerged at a public forum on September 22, 1964, at Greenback High School in the town of Greenback, located on the proposed eastern shore of the Tellico reservoir. Four hundred residents attended with over 90% reporting strong opposition. Attendees grew hostile, perceiving the Tellico project as an intrusion. One month after the contentious meeting at Greenback High School, anti-Tellico individuals formed a larger opposition group, the Association for the Preservation of the Little Tennessee River. This move showed that project opposition was not one that "would easily buckle and roll over before the mighty presence of the Tennessee Valley Authority".

The property acquisition phase of the project required the use of eminent domain, a statutory right granted to TVA at its establishment by Congress in 1933. This legal authority allowed TVA to take ownership of private property for uses the TVA deemed to be for public benefit. Many property owners concerned about seizure of land reported that TVA personnel provided "taking lines" about the extent of private land acquisition that was planned. Many viewed these actions as TVA overreaching their authority, provoking more public opposition to the project. Compared with TVA's early hydroelectric projects, the documentation of residents to be relocated was poorly executed. TVA officials did not document the exact number of families that were affected, even after the property acquisition process had started in 1963. Initial estimates suggested the removal of 600 families, whereas the actual number was closer to 350 families. The individuals in each of these 350 families were not recorded. Most of the families who were required to move complied, but three unwilling property owners were evicted by U.S. Marshals and watched their houses being demolished as they were evicted. The Tellico project also had a significant impact on farming, with 330 farms along the Little Tennessee River lost following inundation. In total, $25.5 million was spent by the TVA for land acquisition.

Engineering and construction
The engineering design of the Tellico Dam project consisted of a 600 ft by 129 ft concrete gravity dam with flood gates, a 2500 ft earthen dam, and an 850 ft, 500 ft navigable canal connecting the Tellico Reservoir impoundment to the Fort Loudoun impoundment of the Tennessee River. The dam itself created the Tellico Reservoir impoundment of the Little Tennessee River. The Tellico Reservoir with a full pool water capacity of 467600 acre feet, a drainage basin of 2627 mi2, and a water surface area of 14200 acre. Along the shoreline of the proposed reservoir, roughly 23600 acre would be acquired to be cleared and graded for future residential, commercial, industrial, and recreational area development.

Construction on the Tellico Project began on March 7, 1967, with clearing work for the main dam structure. Work on the concrete structure of the dam was complete by October of the next year. Other portions of the dam constructed with earth fill were complete by August 1975, with the river flow from the original Little Tennessee soon forced via pump through the completed sluice gates of the main concrete dam. Around this time, work on coffer dams to assist with the main dam were complete. By the time of the forced closure of construction, work on the Tellico Project was nearly 90% complete, aside from final land clearing, recreational facility preparation, and a highway system that was nearly finished.

In total, $63 million was endowed for the construction of the concrete dam and spillway, the main earth dam, coffer dams, roadway and railroad facilities, reservoir clearing, utility relocations, access roads, a canal with access to the Tennessee River, public use facilities, and general yard improvements. Most of this funding was used for the dam, over 65 mi of state, county, and local access roads, and three large-scale bridge replacement projects. The TVA also invested another $3.6 million for two major road projects scheduled for initial work starting after the completion and opening of the Tellico Dam structure. Officials with the Tennessee Department of Transportation expressed doubt about the completion of the Tellico Parkway (State Route 444), one of these major road projects.

The TVA received nearly $665,000 in revenue as the project was underway. Timber cleared for the project provided $99,000 and farmland and housing seized by the agency was leased with a revenue close to $566,000. Labor costs for the project totaled $24.7 million, with most of this associated with the construction of the main Tellico Dam structure. Engineering, planning, and administrative services for the project cost $14.7 million.

Environmental impacts and legal action
Prior to any construction work, the Tennessee Fish and Game Commission addressed concerns to TVA personnel that the construction of Tellico Dam would bring the demise of trout fishing on the Little Tennessee.

TVA attempted to control and defuse local controversy regarding the Tellico Project with the formation of local group known as the Little Tennessee River Valley Development Association (LTRVDA) in 1963. However, within a year, the LTRVDA was unable to control local opposition. Citing the loss of prime farmland, in December 1964 the Tennessee Farm Bureau Association passed resolutions protesting the completion of Tellico Dam. One year later, delegates from the Cherokee Nation filed a petition protesting the desecration of their ancestral lands that were proposed to be flooded for the Tellico Dam. This petition was sent to the office of Supreme Court Associate Justice William O. Douglas, who forwarded the petition to President Lyndon B. Johnson.

In 1971, University of Tennessee, Knoxville (UTK) economics professor Keith Phillips criticized TVA's plans for Tellico Dam in a reappraisal of the project. Phillips found fault with the cost and benefits evaluation conducted by the TVA, and suggested that the agency's officials on the project were technically incompetent.

Following continued press of TVA's excessive and "abusive" power regarding the agency's property acquisition methods for the Tellico Project, Republican Governor Winfield Dunn wrote in a 1971 letter of dissent to TVA chair Wagner to stop construction of Tellico Dam, stating that the TVA should recognize "that the Little Tennessee as it now exists is a waterway too valuable for the State of Tennessee to sacrifice." TVA rejected Dunn's request in a letter of response one year later.

Finding an opportunity, Little Tennessee Valley farmers and environmentalists formed a joint activist group known as the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) in 1972. The EDF brought suit against TVA under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), claiming that no environmental impact statement (EIS) had been made, violating the NEPA. In court, TVA personnel presented an EIS completed prior to the lawsuit by the EDF. The case was dismissed, allowing construction to continue without disruption.

Discovery of the snail darter
On August 12, 1973, a group of students led by UTK biology professor David Etnier conducted a study for possible endangered species via snorkeling in the Little Tennessee River during construction operations on Tellico Dam. Prior to the expedition, Etnier predicted up to ten endangered species occupied the proposed Tellico Reservoir basin. In the Coytee Springs shoal area of the Little Tennessee, Etnier identified several snail darters, to which in a later interview with the Knoxville News Sentinel suggested he "knew nobody had ever seen it before." Four months later, the Nixon administration passed the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), providing federal protection for endangered species from potential habitat destructions. By this point, the dam was well under construction and already over US$53 million (equivalent to $ in ) had been spent on the construction work, requiring an injunction to stop the building from continuing and the flooding to happen. On November 10, 1975, the snail darter was placed on the Endangered Species list by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).

Litigation to protect the snail darter
Seeking to protect the snail darter, UTK law student Hiram "Hank" Hill, in collaboration with David Etnier, filed the case Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill, 437 U.S. 153 in federal court, citing that the TVA was in violation of the ESA. District Court Judge Robert Taylor declined an injunction to order the cessation of construction work on Tellico Dam on May 25, 1976.

However, on January 31, 1977, the District Court's decision was reversed and construction on the dam was ordered to stop, following an injunction from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The TVA then petitioned the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to remove the snail darter as an endangered species on February 28. The FWS denied this request in December. On behalf of the TVA, the United States Department of Justice filed an appeal against the decision of the 6th Circuit regarding Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill on January 25, 1978, to the Supreme Court of the United States. In Hill, the Supreme Court affirmed, by a 6–3 vote, the injunction issued by the 6th Circuit Appeals Court to stop construction of the dam. Citing explicit wording of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to ensure that habitat for listed species is not disrupted, the Court said "it is clear that the TVA's proposed operation of the dam will have precisely the opposite effect, namely the eradication of an endangered species."

Aftermath of Supreme Court decision

In the ensuing controversy over the snail darter, the Endangered Species Committee (also known as the "God Squad") was convened to issue a waiver of ESA protection of the snail darter. In a unanimous decision, the Committee refused to exempt the Tellico Dam project. Charles Schultze, the chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers, later cited economic assessments concluding that, despite the Tellico Dam being 95% complete, "if one takes just the cost of finishing it against the benefits and does it properly, it doesn't pay, which says something about the original design." Following publication of a story by The New York Times (NYT) regarding the death of nearly 100 snail darters during an October 1977 translocation operation, the TVA Director of Information John Van went on damage control in a subsequent NYT editorial, directing the blame towards the lack of adequate netting by the FWS.

Intervention by Carter, exemption from ESA
After a long battle, Congress exempted the Tellico Dam from the Endangered Species Act by adding a rider clause to an unrelated public works bill. On September 25, 1979, President Jimmy Carter signed the bill exempting the Tellico project from the ESA. Carter had previously and publicly opposed the completion of the dam, but administration officials speculated that an attempt to veto the bill would result in legislative retaliation against Carter's plans for revising treaties for the Panama Canal Zone's ownership, and the establishment of a federal department for educational affairs, two issues the Carter administration prioritized for passing.

Flooding of Cherokee native land
In 1979, three Cherokee individuals and two Cherokee bands/organizations filed suit against the TVA to restrain the flooding of sacred homeland in Sequoyah v. Tennessee Valley Authority, to no avail. Archeological surveys and salvage excavations were conducted in some areas because this area was known to have contained numerous 18th-century Overhill Cherokee towns. But the sites of Tanasi, Chota, Toqua, Tomotley, Citico, Mialoquo and Tuskegee were all flooded by the reservoir behind the dam. Some of these had been occupied by ancestors of the Cherokee for up to 1,000 years, based on the earthwork platform mounds built at their centers by people of the South Appalachian Mississippian culture. In their succeeding long occupancy, the Cherokee had built councilhouses on top of the mounds. In addition, other prehistoric sites, dating to as early as the Archaic period, were flooded.

Other impacts
The town of Morganton and its port was submerged by the Tellico reservoir. The British colonial Fort Loudon was relocated from its original site by excavation of soil required to raise the site by 17 ft, and the fort was reconstructed into a state park.

Translocation of snail darters
Remnant populations of the snail darter were later removed from the Little Tennessee River and translocated into other streams. In total, 219 snail darters were removed from the Tellico basin. Most of these were transferred to the Hiwassee River in Polk County in southeast Tennessee, and were established by 1982. The Holston, French Broad, Nolichucky rivers of central East Tennessee have also been established as habitats for the snail darter.

Completion and recent history
Tellico Reservoir began filling on November 29, 1979, after the gates were closed on the dam.

Still intent on development projects to improve the economic conditions of the Little Tennessee Valley, TVA began sales on lakefront acreage that the agency seized through eminent domain. Many impacted landowners were unable to qualify to bid on their former properties. Respective analysis of TVA's acquisition methods with the Tellico Project have been cited as abuse of property rights.

In April 1982, the Tellico Reservoir Development Agency (TRDA) was established by the Tennessee state legislature with state and TVA funding, to promote economic development initiatives in the Tellico region. The TRDA assisted in the creation of several industrial parks for corporate investment seeking to reduce local unemployment. In September of the same year, the TVA proposed constructing toxic waste dumps on Tellico-acquired sites. One of these development sites known as the Tellico Peninsula, was billed as the prime site in the Tellico area. Despite several attempts, the Tellico Peninsula site has remained largely undeveloped since site preparation work was completed in the 1980s, aside from a Christensen Shipyards facility which closed following the Great Recession in 2011. In 2017, proposals were announced for the site to be redeveloped into a mixed-use community.

Resort development
The residential component of the failed Timberlake project was relaunched in late 1984 with the purchase of roughly 4800 acres along the western shore of the Tellico Reservoir by Cooper Communities Inc. (CCI), a real estate firm based out of Bella Vista, Arkansas. The development became a planned retirement community known as Tellico Village that officially opened in March 1986. CCI promoted Tellico Village and the Tellico Reservoir at golf and boat conventions across the Midwestern United States. Since the development of Tellico Village, the Tellico area has drawn retirees from the Midwest and Florida, initiating a retirement-oriented real estate boom in the area.

By the late 1990s and into the 2000s, the TVA was pressured by private development groups to release additional acreage that had been seized via eminent domain along the shoreline of several reservoirs. The intention was for predominantly golf course-based residential resorts. In 1995, a 960-acre community known as Rarity Bay was constructed, including an equestrian center and 18-hole golf course. Mike Ross, the developer behind Rarity Bay built several additional resort developments on TVA's shoreline property, before being charged in federal court with mail fraud and money laundering in 2012.

In 2002, the TVA board of directors approved the sale of preserved land on the eastern shore of Tellico Reservoir for a $750 million golf-course community known as Rarity Pointe. In 2012, Rarity Pointe was purchased by WindRiver Management LLC, leading to expansion of the site and the renaming of the community from Rarity Pointe to WindRiver.

Snail darter post-Tellico
The snail darter was removed from the Endangered Species list by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service on August 6, 1983. The fish was still classified as a threatened species because the Hiwassee River, where the snail darters from the Little Tennessee had been translocated, had a previous history of acid spills from freight train accidents. By 2021, the snail darter was removed as a threatened species, with the FWS reporting the snail darter population had recovered from any risk of endangerment.

Aftermath of the Tellico project
As at 2022, the Tellico Dam remains the last dam to be built by the TVA. Until the events of the Tellico Project, the moral and economic value of building a dam was rarely questioned; dams were widely considered to represent progress and technological prowess. Throughout the 20th-century, the United States had built thousands of dams, often to generate hydroelectric power and provide flood control. By the 1950s, most of the adequate dam sites in the United States had been used, and it became increasingly difficult to justify new dam projects. Government agencies such as TVA, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Army Corps of Engineers continued to construct new dams, often at the behest of congressional representatives of impacted areas such as in the case of Tellico Dam. However, by the 1970s, the era of dam-building effectively ended in the U.S. with the Tellico Dam case illustrating changing attitudes. Retrospective analysis of the Tellico Dam case has referred to the project as a pork barrel.

From 1933, with the beginning of the pivotal Norris Project to the end of the Tellico project in 1979, TVA had forcibly removed more than 125,000 residents of the Tennessee Valley. The removal of people remains a controversial talking point on the methods and morality of TVA's dam projects. In the 1980s, TVA attempted the construction of a $83 million dam with an intent similar to Tellico, for tourism and economic development on the Duck River near the city of Columbia, Tennessee. The Columbia project resulted in failure, and the 1999 demolition of the unfinished dam as a result of environmental concerns and the escalating costs of completing the project. In 2001, the 13,000-acre area set aside for the project was transferred for public use to the state of Tennessee.

title: Tellico Dam


text:
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange/Archive 1

Article categories
I reduced the # of list of article categories because once we look through all the content and copy it over we can easily regenerate a list of all PM entries and/or updates. There may be other good reasons for having additional categories and keeping them categorized for the long term that I'm not thinking of, though. CryptoDerk 18:06, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

 * So, are you planning to auto-generate a list of all Planet math articles (say, by region of math)? That should be a starting point. By the way, I am not sure an entry needs to be deleted from the list after being copied over. It never hurts to actually keep a map and a comparison between each PM article and WP articles. Especially since both places are dynamical, later some more transfers of info/comparisons could be made. Oleg Alexandrov  | talk 18:28, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Sure, if I generate the list I can break it up by subject. Maybe someone with some scripting ability would be better for generating such a list, though, as my natural inclination is to hack it out in C, heh.  See http://planetmath.org/browse/objects/ for the classification system on PM.  If we decide not to delete then we will definitely need an article that contains articles that have already been processed.  CryptoDerk 18:37, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

 * Having a list somewhere of already processed articles may help reduce duplication - e.g. people "helpfully" adding more pages to be merged/moved when in fact this has already been done. Of course, this depends a bit as to how many pages are involved here.  If we are talking 1000+ pages then it may be more efficient to work in batches (move analysis over, then algebra, then geometry, etc.) Terry 18:43, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * OK, let me try one more time. Probably this is not the way to go, but I just think I am being misunderstood. Say we are talking "Functional analysis", where there are say 300 articles (a resonable number). What I have in mind, is one single master list, of 300 entries. The first thing for each entry should be the Planet math article, the second one the corresponding Wikipedia articles if any (all these need to be links). The third one should be the status of the given entry. So, anybody can always take a look at this list, see if any given article was looked upon, if yes, if anything was done, if there is any opinion about what should be done, and so on. To me, it looks much better than adding and deleting things all the time. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 18:58, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Example:

 * PM: Potential theory -- WP: Potential theory -- Status: I just copied this over from there. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 19:01, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * PM Symmetric polynomial -- WP: symmetric polynomial -- Status: As of now, the Wikipedia article is more complete. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 19:01, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * PM antichain -- WP: ???? -- Status ????

 * Works for me. CryptoDerk 19:03, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

Well, this is just one idea. Many other ways can be better, I don't know. Now that I made myself clear, looking forward to other suggestions, so that whatever is decided, is eventually community supported. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 19:09, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Attempt at generating automated links to Planet Math articles
To manually create a list of entries of all topics of Planet Math is impossible, they have more than 4000 of them. I tried to automatically create a list of all articles in Functional analysis. See here User:CryptoDerk/planetmathproject/test_Functional_analysis (Note: newer version now at: WikiProject_Mathematics/PlanetMath_Exchange/46-XX_Functional_analysis. Paul August ☎ 15:55, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)) for the result. Things are not pretty, chiefly because they use PNG images in article titles, but those do not become good links. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 03:02, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't think that looks too bad. The graphics in the title seem like semi-rare occurrences.. and as long as things are categorized and we have a link, they'll be looked at by users just the same, I imagine.  CryptoDerk 03:39, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm quite impressed with that output. So it doesn't come out perfectly; so what?  That's what us users are for! :)  It provides an amazing catalogue of things to check for -- as chosen by a (semi-) independent group with similar goals.  If that could be included in the output, finding the relevant article should become easier.  Nice work!  PS: I'm sure this is easily fixed, but the links use the text &amp; instead of &, and thus don't work.  PPS: I take it back; I think PM must have had an error when I clicked on one of its links, and I jumped to a conclusion about the cause after changing the &amp; to &, but they are working fine now.  Ben Cairns 07:48, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC).

 * I think your list is great. Paul August ☎ 19:12, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't quite understand what If that could be included in the output, finding the relevant article should become easier means. My code can of course be modified to include whatever other info is available in those PlanetMath pages.

 * So, if somebody has some other ideas, suggestions, they are welcome.

 * If we eventually decide that the machine generated version is the way to go, more thought needs to be given to where these lists need to be put, and how to tell people of their purpose. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 21:59, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * I realized I could include the alt of each image in the article title. Since the alt of a PNG which came from a math formula is the LaTeX code for the formula, now we know what each link is about.

 * This has its own problems. Wikipedia refuses to make a thing like this

 * hi {there}

 * into a link (no, the above was not in nowiki tags, it just refused to become a link. But oh, well, I will think more of this.

 * Also, below, some thoughts on the project name are needed. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 04:18, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Re: my indecipherable comment -- sorry, that was from an earlier version and I neglected to remove it. Now struck-through.  Regarding usage, I think a brief explanation at the top of such a list would be sufficient, and then it's just a matter of starting to use it.  People will get the hint.  If anyone goes too far wrong, they can always be set straight.  As it develops, more detailed explanation can go on the project page.  Cheers,  Ben Cairns 04:25, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC).

 * I went through the first five articles on WikiProject_Mathematics/PlanetMath_Exchange/46-XX_Functional_analysis, added some comments there, and now I would like to share my thoughts resulting from this. Firstly, I was rather skeptical about spending time on the WP/PM exchange but I have to say that it seems a good way to fill some gaps in WP and review some of the articles. On the list generated by Oleg: note that almost all articles occur multiple times; this leads to the risk that people comment on the same PM article in different places. Furthermore, what to do about the proofs in PM? I don't think it's useful to have them in WP. Of course, it wouldn't hurt to copy the proofs over, especially if they are put on separate pages, but I guess it should be low priority. -- Jitse Niesen 13:32, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * On WikiProject_Mathematics/PlanetMath_Exchange/46-XX_Functional_analysis, I reformatted Jitse Niesen's comments, for what I think is better readability. I made them as indented lines following the item commented upon, leaving the status field for just a status entry, like:
 * needs to be copied
 * copied
 * needs to be merged
 * merged
 * WP article more complete
 * Not needed on WP

 * What do people think about this? Paul August  ☎ 14:50, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * Good idea. -- Jitse Niesen 15:24, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and updated the Planetmath Instructions template to reflect the above. I also rewrote them a bit. If anyone doesn't like it feel free to change it back. Paul August  ☎ 17:38, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * I think the multiple occurrence of items in the list is a problem. Do they also appear in multiple categories? How should we deal with this? Paul August ☎ 15:09, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok I've done a bit of research on PM. Each article can, of course, have multiple "classifications" and so can appear multiple times within each top level category as well as appear in multiple top level categories. Should we rethink our organization scheme for our lists? Or should we deal with this manually, by asking individual editors who work on an article to check the PM article's classification, which appears at the bottom the PM page (perhaps this could be added to the auto-generated lists?) and if there are multiple classifications, and hence multiple entries in our lists, then, for example, pick one entry as "primary" and for every other entry, add a pointer to the "primary" entry?  Paul August  ☎ 15:47, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

Attempt at generating automated links (2)
You are right, an article show up multiple times because they put each article in several categories. My perl script could be taught to randomly pick one instance of the article and declare it primary, and make the other ones point ot it. But of course any automated generation can go only that far. Any other ideas? Oleg Alexandrov | talk 16:05, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * I think a randomly generated "primary" entry would probably be ok. Can your script keep track of duplicates across lists, as well as within lists? For an example of how I see a manual entry working/looking see the entry I made here: WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange/46-XX Functional analysis. Paul August ☎ 16:24, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * I think that you needn't be bother with generating the links, as it would be quite okay to only use the first MSC class and disregard the other classes. For instance, the "T_f is a first order distribution" article would be listed under 46F05 and not under 46-00. -- Jitse Niesen 16:31, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes using just the "first" entry listed in the PM article and omitting the rest would probably be ok. Although I could see some uses for having the other entries as well, since it would allow editors to approach the entries form different starting points, especially if this can be automated. Paul August ☎ 17:12, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * I understand Jitse's suggestion. But teaching my script to keep track of duplicates is quite easy, and can also work across lists, not only within them. So I will follow Paul's suggestion. I will get to this tonight, Los Angeles time. Then I will complete all the red links too, and not touch Functional analysis (whatever duplicates show up there I will fix by hand). Oleg Alexandrov | talk 17:44, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

planetmath template
The template: As it currently works, requires a "title" field, which is used as the title of the PM article, as well as to construct a link to the PM article in the form of [http://planetmath.org/encyclopedia/.html. But since the "title" in the link needs to have the spaces and punctuation removed, this means that the title of the PM article will also have punctuation and spaces missing. For example for Potential theory, the template produces the following:

Can anything be done about this? Paul August ☎ 19:04, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC) This has now been changed see below. Paul August ☎ 02:39, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

What about changing the template so that the link is generated using the object id of the PM article (like those given in User:CryptoDerk/planetmathproject/test Functional analysis) instead of the name.html link now used? Paul August ☎ 19:16, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

 * Feel free to change it. I was tentatively going for something with one variable instead of two, but I fully expected it to be changed by the time all was said and done.  CryptoDerk 20:04, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I've now changed the template and its instructions for use, to include two variables, "id" which is the PlanetMath pages's "object id" (which can be found at the bottom of the PlanetMath page, or in the PlanetMath links listed here: User:CryptoDerk/planetmathproject/test Functional analysis), and "title", which is the PlanetMath page's title. So now produces:

 * Much better. Now in the auto generation of them the ID should be displayed as well.  CryptoDerk 05:17, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

Project name
Time to think for an official name for the project. I would suggest:

 * The Wikipedia-PlanetMath exchange project

This for two reasons:

(a) I hope things will go both ways, once there is a nice list of correspondences, with comments comparing the two articles.

(b) This will make both projects stronger, not one a clone of the other. So like a synergy. The two web sites will never coincide, because they have very different purposes and philosophies. So there will be very very much content which is not shared. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 03:34, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * I think those are good reasons, and a good name. So, WikiProject PlanetMath Exchange would seem an appropriate location for the project.  That said, why not just create the page and we can make a start on the project proper? :)  Ben Cairns 04:34, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC).

 * Since this is a rather localized project in terms of scope, wouldn't it be advantageous to have it as a subproject of the WikiProject in math? I suppose either way we will link to it from the WikiProject in math.  Oh, also what about the template name?  Template:pm would be good, cause it's short, although Template:planetmath might also be good since it's unlikely to collide with someone who may want to use "pm" as a template in the future.  CryptoDerk 05:15, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

 * I think it is important to make it a subproject of WikiProject in math. And Template:planetmath could indeed be better, for the reason mentioned. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 05:45, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * OK. I moved the template into the template namespace Template:planetmath.  I doubt anything's going to change with that.  I made some changes to the planetmathproject page based on how the list you auto-generated looks.  I also moved the page to WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange which seems like a place and name that everybody agrees on.  I'll put a note at the top saying that it's not "live" yet.  CryptoDerk 15:39, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

We need to bring this to Mathematics project talk page
I think, we need to bring this discussion to Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Mathematics. So as to include all the members/readers of the Mathematics project in these discussions. Something should be announced there about what has been accomplished and "decided" so far. Paul August ☎ 16:35, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

 * It has been linked to from there, and has been discussed there a bit too :/ I'll post another notice though.  CryptoDerk 16:47, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Paul August ☎ 17:27, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

I would further propose posting a summary of these discussion there as follows: Some of the things which have been discussed (here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange) and tentatively agreed upon and/or accomplished are:
 * 1) We should go forward with this project.
 * 2) The project name should be: "PlanetMath Exchange".
 * 3) It should be a subproject of this project with the project page at: WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange. A first draft of that page now exists there.
 * 4) There should be an auto-generated list of all PlanetMath articles. The first auto-generated list of PlanetMath articles has been created here: WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange/46-XX Functional analysis.
 * 5) There should be a template created to facilitate the creation of a link to the appropriate PlanetMath  article in any newly created WP article based on a PM one. Such a template has been created: Template:planetmath.

Please comment on the above, either here, are on the talk page.

Is this agreeable? Paul August ☎ 17:56, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

 * Sounds fine to me. Since Oleg is apparently working on the list now, why not wait a bit so we can provide a link to that list instead of the test one?  CryptoDerk 19:52, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

 * So, now that we have a permanent home, I need to do some work, as you guys mentioned. Tonight I will generate the list of mathematical topics which will be on the main page. I will also generate a list of articles, but just for one topic, to see again the feedback. So hold on, I will get to it in 2 or 3 hours or so. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 00:37, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This all seems good to me. Oleg: did you see CryptoDerk's rquest to have the PM "Object ID" included in the list? This might facilitate using the Planetmath template, which now uses an id variable. Paul August ☎ 00:46, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, I noticed the request. Actually, when I get to it (soon today), I will do a trial run, and ask for another round of feedback. Then I will generate the final version. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 00:57, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Done! I put a list on the main WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange page, and created just one article in that list, namely "Functional analysis". I will do no more until all people express their opinions about the format, and what else is needed. Who will announce our project on WikiProject Mathematics? Oleg Alexandrov | talk 02:33, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Looks good. I made a couple of small fixes to Template:Planetmath instructions.  The actual list looks fine though, as far as I can tell.  Regarding putting it on the main page it doesn't matter so much who as where.  I think it best fits under scope — what do other people think?  CryptoDerk 04:25, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't know. The list is long. Some instructions need to be before the list. Indeed, what do other people think?

 * I think you noticed that all elements in the list are red links, except for "Functional analysis", which is like a sample. I did this on purpose. I want more feedback before I commit myself to filling in all pages, because I did generate all the listings automatically, but clicking inside of each link and pasting the content in, still needs to be done by hand. So again, looking for feeback before final comittment.

 * You're the boss. Could you announce the project on the talk page of WikiProject Math as Paul August suggested? Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 04:39, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * I looked at both the PM Exchange main page and the Functional analysis page and both looked fine to me. Feel free to wait a while to get more opinions, though.  I'll write something up about the Exchange and post it on the main WikiProject in math page.  The project has been mentioned several times on the talk page, but when all the lists are filled in we should mention it again. CryptoDerk 04:49, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * So basically you want me to complete the lists first, right? No problem, I can do that tomorrow. But then there is no turning back. It will be quite painful to revisit around 100 pages again. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 05:11, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying I don't have any issues with the lists.  You may want to wait for other input though.  CryptoDerk 06:32, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

Oleg: Before you go to the trouble of generating all the lists, It might be good if we made the "announcement" I suggested above first, to make sure anyone who hasn't been following the discussion here, and wants to comment on it gets a chance to. Paul August ☎ 05:49, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 06:03, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Crypto, do you concur? Paul August ☎ 06:07, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

Ok. Oleg, has made an announcement on the Mathematics project talk page, and I have and Crypto have added to it. Paul August ☎ 07:01, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

Oleg: Also, I don't know what's involved, but perhaps some of us could help you generate all those lists. I'd be willing to help if I could. Paul August ☎ 06:07, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * Generating the lists is as easy as typing the name of the perl script. Then I just need to click on each red link and paste the content in. It is the latter one which is kind of annoying, as there are many red links. So, I did not want to do this more than once.

 * See my comment in the "Attempt at generating..." section about the multiple occurnce of an item problem. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 16:08, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Usage of Template:planetmath etc.
I was thinking that while in many circumstances the template for acknowledging PlanetMath will be a necessary addition to updated or new pages with PM content, in some cases it would NOT be necessary. For example, if someone sees something on PM that they think would go well in a WP article, but edit it into WP entirely in 'their own words', then I don't see any copyright purpose to including the template. After all, I'm sure people have been doing this all along. So, I'd propose the following recipe: I think guidelines for this should be established early on, because it would be a great pain to change these things later. Working out what came from where a long time after the fact could be quite difficult (unless the precise copied text is kept somewhere). Keeping a copy of the original text should also facilitate actual 'exchange' between the two projects. What do you think? Ben Cairns 00:09, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC).
 * 1) If any text is copied from PM to WP and re-edited, then the template should be added to the bottom of the page. The template for should include a reference to the GFDL.  This gives appropriate credit and satisfies copyright requirements.  Furthermore, the copied text should be saved in its original form to (say) Talk:Article Name/PlanetMath Exchange .  A WP-ready version can be assembled there from the original PM TeX.
 * 2) If a PM article 'inspires' the addition of content to a WP article but no actual text is transfered (even informally), then I propose that a link to the PM article under 'External References' is sufficient (perhaps using the web reference template or a new one specifically for PM references). Since the concepts (in contrast to the text that presents them) are not covered by copyright, it seems to me that this would give credit without attributing unnecessary copyrights to the text of the WP article.

 * Linking back to PM even if the text isn't used is what I'd hope people would be nice/smart enough to do in the first place, heh. Regarding the template, it can be changed to read "This article is based on whatever from PlanetMath, which is under the terms of the GFDL".  Someone can probably think of a better wording there, so I'll hold off on changing it for now.  As for the copying of the text into a subpage of the article, is that really necessary?  We could provide a link back to the history of the article on PM.  CryptoDerk 01:07, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * I think we should not get obsessed about things. Anybody can take a look at the page history for older versions, that's all. Not even an explicit link to the history should be necessary. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 01:52, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Right. I think linking back to the article itself is sufficient — I was just presenting a link to the history as an alternative in case people overwhelmingly felt like linking back to it was a good idea.  CryptoDerk 01:56, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, of course, people should be crediting and citing sources for all sorts of good reasons, but there's no need to attribute copyrights (even under the GFDL) when they are not present. Regarding the addition of the original text: fair enough.  I thought it might be getting a little elaborate, but also thought that I'd put the idea out since at times it might be nice to know what exactly had been added.  Ben Cairns 03:23, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC).

Planetmath reference to planetmath ref
It's a relatively minor thing, but I think that Template:Planetmath reference should be at Template:Planetmath ref. It's User:Bjcairns creation, so I didn't want to move it outright, plus I wanted to get some more opinions. I think a redirect would work as well. CryptoDerk 05:19, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't mind; as they say, be bold. I went with 'reference' over 'ref' because of Template:Web reference, and I figured I could live with typing 'reference' in full once in a while.  Ben Cairns 06:31, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC).

 * OK. Just didn't want to step on your toes.  I won't move it until some other people chime in, though.CryptoDerk 06:33, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

Copying text from PlanetMath to Wikipedia
In the section "Converting text from PlanetMath to Wikipedia formats", the instructions say:
 * PlanetMath generates pages from a LaTeX source. To copy the contents of an article, just select the article text with the mouse, copy, and paste in a Wikipedia article (then each image will be replaced with its alt text, that is the formula which generated the image).

However when I try to copy the text, I don't seem to get any of the "images". For example see my attempt at copying Cauchy sequence to here: User:Paul August/Subpage 11. Am I doing something wrong? Paul August ☎ 20:05, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * Good point. I guess it depneds on what browser you use. It works for me, with Firefox on Linux, see my additions to your page. I will modify the instructions accordingly. Oleg Alexandrov | talk 20:44, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Ok I had tried it using both Safari, and IE on Max OSX and they both did the same thing. I didn't think to try FireFox. When I did try FireFox, it worked fine, just as it did for you. I don't think this much of an issue though, although it might confuse people like it did me ;-) Paul August ☎ 21:15, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * So I changed the wording back to saying one needs to go to the LaTeX source, and mentioned in parantheses that for some browsers copying straight from the page will work too. We can remove the latter part altogether, or reword it, what do you think? Oleg Alexandrov | talk 23:02, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * If Firefox works, might as well mention that... IE certainly doesn't in a Win2K environment.  Otherwise, I think it's fine as it is for now, or just reword as you see fit.  As I see it, these things can be expanded on as necessary when the project goes 'live'.  Ben Cairns 23:38, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC).

 * I added Firefox and reworded it. CryptoDerk 23:56, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

This all seems fine now. Paul August ☎ 00:57, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

Shortcut
I created a shortcut at WP:PMEX for the project page. CryptoDerk 00:49, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

Upload files status
I uploaded all the files now. The duplication notice seems to work, even across lists. One problem I noticed is that foreign accents on words did not get represented well (some encoding issues I guess). But I don't have any experience with that, so did not attempt to fix it. One we need to see if there are no bugs (if there are, I will do the uploads again, I think there is a way to automate that). Oleg Alexandrov | talk 03:15, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * The special (accented) character problem seems to be one of encoding. The English Wikipedia is apparently in the (non-Unicode) ISO-8859-1 encoding (see m:Help:Special characters.  They appear correctly when I force Unicode encoding (in IE), and can possibly be copied and saved this way since ISO-8859-1 appears to have common characters like é as native.  Other than that, the Probability list seems pretty good -- no apparent bugs.  Excellent work!  Ben Cairns 04:52, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC).

 * Yes well done Oleg! Paul August ☎ 05:09, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

 * Excellent job. I'll post a notice over on WP:VP.  CryptoDerk 05:19, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

Talk pages
I'm going to redirect all talk pages of the article lists here. It seems unfair to ask people to keep all the list pages on their watchlists, and the conversation generated in one might be applicable to all the lists, the subproject, or the WikiProject in mathematics. Case in point, the comment that Ben Cairns posted in category 60 that I moved below... and yes I have all the lists on my watchlist (shut up!). CryptoDerk 15:30, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)


text:
User:Kralcniloc

I am Colin.
This is my page. I like my page. I can prove that it is my page because I wrote it, and who would know better who wrote this article better then the author of the article, which is me. Well, anyway, this is me and I like this page. I like to fly radio controlled airplanes and i am pretty good at it. i love these things. i also love playing really cool games like candyland, and go fish. i think they are really difficult games. they are really fun.

Cool

title: User:Kralcniloc


text:
Talk:Microlensing

There really should be an independent article on this important subject and not just a re-direct to Gravitational lens. Could an outline be: --Vinter 21:24, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * A quick outline
 * Short introduction to the mathematics (the Paczynski curve)
 * Deviations from the Paczynski curve: Parallax/xallarap, finite source effects, binary lens/source.
 * What can it be used for - and by whom:
 * OGLE
 * MicroFUN
 * MOA
 * MACHO
 * PLANET
 * EROS (although they don't exist anymore)

title: Talk:Microlensing


text:
Yali Falls Dam

The Yali Falls Dam is the second largest dam in Vietnam, located in Gia Lai and Kon Tum provinces on the Krong Poko, a tributary of the Sesan River, in the Central Highlands of Vietnam, about 70 km upstream of the Cambodian border. The 69 m-high dam was begun in 1993 and sealed in 1996, with the 64.5 km2 reservoir filled by 1998. It aims to generate 720 MW of hydropower.

Like many large dam projects, it has been highly criticised, for causing flooding, damaging fisheries and for the lack of consultation with Cambodian authorities. Amongst those opposing the dam are the Sesan-Srepok-Sesong Protection Network (3SPN), organising 59 villages in northeast Cambodia to promote the environment in the three river basins and supported by Oxfam.

title: Yali Falls Dam


text: User talk:70.49.226.185

title: User talk:70.49.226.185


text:
Category:Schools in Essex

Schools located in the ceremonial county of Essex (including Southend-on-Sea and Thurrock).

title: Category:Schools in Essex


text:
Arthur Herbert, 1st Earl of Torrington

Admiral Arthur Herbert, 1st Earl of Torrington (c. 1648 – 13 April 1716) was an Anglo-Welsh Royal Navy officer, peer and politician. Dismissed by King James II of England in 1688 for refusing to vote to repeal the Test Act, which prevented Roman Catholics from holding public office, he brought the Invitation to William to William of Orange at The Hague, disguised as a simple sailor. As a reward he was made commander of William's invasion fleet which landed at Torbay in Devon on 5 November 1688, which initiated the Glorious Revolution.

Early life
Born the son of Sir Edward Herbert and Margaret Smith, daughter of Thomas Smith, Herbert joined the Royal Navy in 1663. He was appointed a lieutenant in the third-rate HMS Defiance and saw action at the St. James's Day Battle in July 1666 during the Second Anglo-Dutch War.

Promoted to post-captain in 1666, he was given command of the fifth-rate HMS Pembroke in April 1667, of the fourth-rate HMS Constant Warwick in September 1668 and of the fourth-rate HMS Dragon in May 1672.

He went on to captain the third-rate HMS Dreadnought in spring 1672 and commanded her at the Battle of Solebay in May 1672 during the Franco-Dutch War. After that he took command of the third-rate HMS Cambridge in October 1673 and was severely injured while commanding her at the Battle of Schooneveld in June 1673. He commissioned the third-rate HMS Rupert in February 1678, and then commanded a squadron tasked with defending Tangier from the Moors in December 1679.

Flag officer
Herbert was appointed Rear-admiral of England in 1683 and Master of the Robes in 1685. These employments brought him in £4,000 a year. However, when King James II required him to promise that he would vote for the repeal of the Test Act, which prevented Roman Catholics from holding public office, his answer was "that his honour and conscience would not permit him to give any such pledge". The King replied: "Nobody doubts your honour, but a man who lives as you do ought not to talk about his conscience". To this reproach (which came from a bad grace from the lover of Catherine Sedley) Herbert replied: "I have my faults, sir; but I could name people who talk much more about conscience than I am in the habit of doing, and yet lead lives as loose as mine." The King immediately dismissed him from all his offices.

Herbert went to Holland in June 1688, carrying the Invitation to William, and offered his services to the Prince of Orange at The Hague. The Prince appointed him commander-in-chief of the fleet which would take him to England. Following the Glorious Revolution, Herbert became Lord High Admiral and then, when the post of Lord High Admiral had been put into commission, he became First Lord of the Admiralty and Senior Naval Lord on the Board of Admiralty in March 1689. He was raised to the peerage by the new King William III as Earl of Torrington and Baron Herbert of Torbay in May 1689, following on his command of the English squadron at the Battle of Bantry Bay. He was credited with being the first to use the expression, "fleet in being". He proposed avoiding a set battle, except under very favourable conditions, until the arrival of reinforcements: by maintaining his fleet in being, he would force the French to remain in the area and prevent them from undertaking other operations.

Herbert commanded the English and Dutch fleets at the Battle of Beachy Head in July 1690, a serious defeat for the allied fleet, in the Nine Years' War. He was imprisoned in the Tower of London and was court-martialed for failing to support the Dutch van squadron against the French, but was acquitted. Nevertheless, he lost his position as First Lord of the Admiralty, and took no further part in public life. The stories that Torrington was not a popular commander, because of his reputation of being a drunk and his habit of taking several prostitutes with him to sea, have been discredited.

In 1696, he acquired Oatlands Park, an estate forfeited by his brother, Sir Edward Herbert, who had followed King James II into exile. He died on 13 April 1716 without children, rendering his titles extinct, and was buried in Westminster Abbey.

Marriages
Torrington married twice, but had no issue by either wife:
 * Firstly to Anne Hadley, from whom he later separated;
 * Secondly to the twice widowed Anne (dowager Lady Crew), daughter and co-heiress of Sir William Armine, 2nd Baronet.

title: Arthur Herbert, 1st Earl of Torrington


text:
Talk:Roberto Weiss

Untitled
I have gathered a lot of this information for this article from family resources (he is my grandfather). The family has letters to Roberto Weiss from John Buchan. He is clearly notable in his own right.Squiquifox 21:28, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I have put the debate about Roberto Weiss here for interest. I do not feel the fact I was his grandson had anything to do with whether he should be in Wikipedia, as articles should stand or fall in their own right, and not because of who wrote them, but it did feel best not to vote on the deletion. Great that it has been expanded, and his place here confirmed. --SqueakBox 18:23, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)

from VfD
While probably a very good UCL professor, his own grandson was unable to write enough about him to expand the article beyond a stub. A.D.H. (t&m) 21:02, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC) Contrary to my expectations, this article has been expanded into a brief but informative biography. In light of this, and given current consensus, I'm removing the VFD notice. A.D.H. (t&m) 19:59, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Roberto Weiss was an important scholar who published several influential books and many articles on the renaissance and humanism. He was a member of numerous academies and held the professorhip of Italian at UCL for 23 years. Have you tried searching for information on Weiss before making this nomination? / up land 22:31, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * There are thousands of university professors and even more published academics—my own family is not without its share—and these accomplishments do not automatically imply encyclopedic notability. The article, a series of single-sentence factoids, is "fluffed" to begin with, and yet still does not exceed a single paragraph.  A.D.H. (t&m) 22:54, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * The current policy on academics on Wikipedia is the professor test: "If the individual is more well known and more published than an average college professor, they can and should be included". Roberto Weiss clearly meets that requirement. / up land 14:36, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * This is not current policy. Please read the linked page you cite. It is a proposal. It has never received consensus. Please do not attempt "proof by repeated assertion." And it is not not a test "for academics," but one proposed measure of notability for inclusion of any biography. Dpbsmith (talk) 15:06, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Fine, it is not current policy then, but is the best we have until people agree on something. A policy is needed. Judging the notability of academics by voting in each case is difficult and puts them at a disadvantage compared to pop-culture celebrities and sportspeople (and slashdot trolls, for that matter). / up land 16:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * That's true, but this isn't the forum for discussing it. I suppose Village pump would be the best place to raise it and start a discussion. Let me know if you do. Mattley 17:41, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * very weak keep. Borderline for sure but the article is nicely done (overlinked, though). Search on "The Renaissance discovery of classical antiquity" yields 180 hits, virtually all relevant. The book is in print, in a paperback edition that Amazon can ship within a couple of days, but only has a sales rank of 1,216,577 (my personal rule-of-thumb is the rank should be higher than 200,000). The John Buchan connection is mildly interesting. www.abebooks.com turns up 31 used copies books by him; interestingly enough there are many other titles besides "The Renaissance discovery of classical antiquity." My local public library doesn't have any books by him but the local library interloan network has "Humanism In England During The Fifteenth Century." and "The spread of Italian" humanism. I'm being inconsistent because I've voted to delete roughly comparable academics, but, hey, Ralph Waldo Emerson, right? I think I'm being swayed by the snapshot. Note that if the article is voted for deletion, this would be very appropriate material for User:Squiquifox's user page—and Wikipedia user pages are indexed by Google. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:05, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm not especially keen on people writing articles on family members but this man seems more than significant enough for inclusion. It is a specialised field but he seems to have been a very big contributor, with books still in print and widely referenced on university reading lists, and collections established by him in use at several institutions. Note, incidentally, that a Professor at a university in the United Kingdom is what Americans would call a full professor. Mattley 00:27, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't think the fact it was written by his grandson is actually relevant, the article should improve with expansion and some rewording to remove POV. --nixie 02:02, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, though it's rather bad form to write about one's family. James F. (talk) 02:34, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, cleanup and expand, notable. Megan1967 04:34, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. Notable scholar in his field. Capitalistroadster 10:53, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This article passed its Afd. It appears that User:Hagiographer hates the person who started this article and wants to attack the person, harming the wikipedia in the process. See his contributions as I have and the personal attack ban on this user

User:Hagiographer
Hagiographer has bemirsched this article based on a personal vendetta, as I was informed earlier this evening. The deletion vote was so clear and it appears that Hagiographer has been pursuing a personal vendetta by setting troll bait in order to get a banned user, SqueakBox from braking his ban. What behaviour! I hope we wont see a repeat performance as such behaviour from a user who is forbidden by arbitration committee decree from making personal attacks against this userRelator 00:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Why WP:AGF isn't followed? I've not seen the VfD discussion in the talk page. Why don't you tell me that in my talk page? I've followed the proposed for deletion process honestly. Why this persecution? Hagiographer 06:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

TYhese latest edits by Hagiographer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/BlackApe show him to be a highly rascist individual beyond any possibility of redemption. 18:55, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Deathdate
This has now been sourced from his The Times obituary, SqueakBox 16:59, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Date of Birth
Oxford DNB gives his d.o.b. as 22 Jan. 1906, not 21. Any clarification? Hostiensis (talk) 14:58, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Italian Title
In Barbara Pym's Some Tame Gazelle Weiss is referenced as being a "real-life count". Was he, in fact?Thomas Peardew (talk) 16:37, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

COI tag
You need to come here and explain your actions re COI, User:Cavarrone. I trust you are aware that Harassment is not tolerated here and yet you seem to be editing articles based on what you have read on my user page. You need to explain why youthink the COI tag is deserved. Unlesyou do so it will be removed. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 01:46, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Are you denying you are the nephew of the subject (yes, I read it in your UP) as well as the creator and major editor of the article? Sorry, but the COI tag here is OBVIOUS. Especially considering the hagiographic tones of the article. My best, Cavarrone 01:54, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Nephew? Nope. Grandson who barely knew him? Yes. The problem with theb hagiographic tones is they were probably inserted by other authors, but I do agree witht hat judgement and will work to remove it. So what I want is you to proved some diffs as to my COI here because I think you are fishing. I am certainly not the major editor of the article. And you appear to be wikistalking me because you are angry with me because of my BLP enforcement on porn articles at the weekend. I advise you to be careful in your interactions with me both on and off wikipedia because I will not tolerate being harrassed and wiki harrassment is a blockable offence if it is persistent. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 02:20, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Wikihounding? I just read in your UP your connections with Weiss and TV Genius; I was curious to check these two articles and then... TA DAAA you were the creator and the major contributor (yes you are) of both, and both the articles have clear and obvious problems.  I was frankly surprised there was actually no COI tag. About this one, it almost enterely consists of original research (and your very first version was even worst, wholly unsourced ), consists of things you probably know are true but that are actually unverifiable, and of a large puffery. Sorry, this is COI (read the text of the template: A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view).  --Cavarrone  02:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Exactly my point re houndin, you got these articles from my user page. What you havent admitted though is your huge anger towards me for BLP enforcement in porn lists. Critciziing me for edits I made years ago when wikipdia sourcing culture was very different are not helpful and actually most things in this article are sourced. That you are criticizing me for edits I mmade years ago makes me think that I am the problem and not the articles. Just remember that since the weekend you also have a COI relationship with me where you appear to be very angry and here you are editing articles you picked out from my user page. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 02:56, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * There is nothing retaliatory here, nor a bad faith edit, nor a wikihounding pattern, just a valid COI tag in an article about a person you are connected and which consists of hagiographic tones unsupported by reliable sources. You take things too personally. Discuss the article, not your conspiracy theories. Cavarrone 03:07, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It doesnt look that way to me, given TV Genius but at this stage I am just giving you a friendly word of advice to make sure your obvious rage at me for the weekend does not turn into a pattern. I have said I will edit the article and meanwhile I await the diffs I asked you for. Nothing to talk about till I see those diffs or work on the sycophantic tone, which we both agree exists and shouldnt. And a conspiracy takes 2, so I havent made any such theories, sigh! Ciao for now. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 03:20, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * 1 taking two articles from a user page is not harassement. If you want people don't check them then remove them from your user page. This is "a correct use of an editor's history" which "includes (but is not limited to) fixing unambiguous errors or violations of Wikipedia policy, or correcting related problems on multiple articles", such as your conflict of interests in this case. Harassing wikihounding include "tendentiousness, personal attacks or other disruptive behavior" and there is nothing similar in the tags. 2 I have ZERO "rage" against you. Especially after the AFD fiasco and the restoration of the page, and its actual improvements. 3 What diffs do you want? I posted you the very first version of the article and it was a disaster from the beginning! I posted you a most recent second difference when you added unsourced claims about your family. It would need a complete rewriting, starting from verifiable sources and from a neutral point of view, otherwise all the original research should go away. 4 I invite you to follow WP:COIU, just edit the article to "remove spam and revert unambiguous vandalism, remove content that unambiguously violates the biography of living persons policy, fix spelling and grammatical errors, revert or remove their own COI edits, make edits where there is clear consensus on the talk page (though it is better to let someone else do it), and add reliable sources". All the rest is better handled by other, uninvolved editors. Cavarrone 03:50, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Err, telling me what I should not put on my user page is not helpful, and besides there are many ways a wikihounder can work but without sockpuppets it becomes a tricky business and then even more so, because everyone can see what the wikihounder is doing, specially if they are not particularly smart, not that I am implying you would ever use a sockpuppet of course There is no conflict of interest that I can see here, or not until you actually provide the diffs to back up your statements, otherwise it is based on your rather obvious hostility towards me since the weekend. So either provide some diffs or edit the article or something. And I will also edit the article to address some of the issues you pointed out and to help ensure it is entirely reliably sourced. After all he is my grndfather anmd I would not want nything les for him. So I expect to see some positive ediitng from you here, please. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 04:28, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 *  There is no conflict of interest that I can see here? There is "obvious" conflict of interest, please read WP:COI, your denial means that you have a guilty conscience or you simply don't understand the COI page. Writing an unsourced article to celebrate a member of your family and to promote your family's company IS patently editing in conflict of insterest. Eg, where are the sources for your family loaning a large collection of Renaissance medals to the Fitzwilliam Museum? Where are the evidences it is true and not just puffery? As you are asking me to edit the article, I will not be bold even if I could, I will add some tags, feel free to source the sentences by verifiable reliable sources, otherwise in a couple of week or so I will remove them. Cavarrone  05:01, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I hav not written an usnourced article, thouygh. It has sources, please dont claim it didnt. This article is nnot celebrating anybody and it flew through its afd, as I am sure you are aware. Please provide the diffs about the family loans. And if you dont like it delete it. If I start to revert your removal of unsourced material THEN you might be justified in COI claims. What I wont put up with is you trying to use this page to pursue a vendetta and if you continue in this vein you will be talking to yourself from now on. Bu do edit the article if you have any concerns, better that than start to blame me without any diffs, and dont expect me to justify any pre 2013 edits, for the record. This sint about me it is about nthe article and if you try to make it about me that will just cause trouble that nobody wants as your contribs are the evidence of your fury towards me last weekedn and here you are sniffing around me like a hound. Or is it just that you live in the city he was born in? ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 05:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I actually posted two links, one showing you wrote an unsourced article, the second showing you edited the family loans story without providing any source as well. Just look above. I also added the tags to the article. Please provide the sources and drop the stick with all this fuss about fury, rage and similar. It does not help your cause. Cavarrone  05:18, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Your motives are abundantly clear, as the various diffs and other evidences make clear, ie you were furious at me and then came straight here. When the article was written wikiepdia had different values and I will not discuss edits I made more than a couple of years ago. All I want from you is a path whereby we can remove the COI tag. What do you propose is necessary. And denying this wont help your cause, whatever that may be. Here my interest is in getting a good article. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 00:00, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I am active against COI editing for years, I am a member of WP:WPINTEGRITY from its birth, it is easily verifiable I posted dozens of COI tags before these two. I noticed you wrote two articles in blatant conflict of interest and I properly tagged them, end of the story. PS, do you have started other articles which have potential COI-problems? Frankly you are acting as someone who has some shameful secret to hide . About your excuse that you do not want discuss edits made more than a couple of years ago, what happened two years ago? I was here and rules were substantially the same. WP:COI exists since 2004. WP:V, a policy that is widely not observed here, since 2003. About the "path", I already wrote I was giving you (and others) enough time to source the unreferenced stuff before cleaning up the articles. And if you want avoid further COI problems, for now and for the future, per WP:COIU you are welcome to "remove spam and revert unambiguous vandalism, remove content that unambiguously violates the biography of living persons policy, fix spelling and grammatical errors, revert or remove their own COI edits, make edits where there is clear consensus on the talk page (though it is better to let someone else do it), and add reliable sources", especially the latter, all the rest is COI editing. Cavarrone  06:06, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
 * You refuse to enage in mediation with me and here you are yet again engaging in bad faith accusations. Given I admit all COI interests on my talk page I will put your bad faith accusation down to frustration at not getting your way in trying to ignore BLP when it comes to people who work in the porn industry. Sad that this article shoulñd suffer from your frustration though. You basically seemt o be arguing that people should not reveal their COI on their user page because you will be there to "police" their honest assertions, especially when you have conflicts in other areas with said users. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 23:07, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Revisting COI tag
A few months down the line it is time to remove this tag. You only placed it there because honestly revealed any possible COI issues on my user page and that is not an appropriate use of said tag. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 19:24, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * With respect, a COI editor, who has an history of bans for promotional and COI editing, is the last person who can remove a valid COI tag from articles he wrote about his family members and his companies! --Cavarrone 20:35, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * You edit warring wont solve this though. I suggest you seek out other opinions, and I dont mean from your porn-editing friends. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 23:27, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The one who seem obsessed from porn is you, I edit very rarely such articles! And yours is not a justification. Cavarrone 23:38, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Roberto Weiss


text:
Category:Schools in Gloucestershire

This lists the schools located in the county of Gloucestershire.

title: Category:Schools in Gloucestershire


text: User talk:24.186.206.118

title: User talk:24.186.206.118


text:
Talk:Richard Wilhelm (sinologist)

Enlarge
Does anyone have any more info on Wilhelm? He was obviously a remarkable man. A close friend of Jung's and someone who was clearly very in with Chinese Esoteric circles despite being a devout Western Christian. This guy helped open up Chinese Mystical Culture to us - The I Ching, the Tao Te Ching & The Secret Of The Golden Flower - and yet he gets barely a few lines here! The very fact that he was allowed to get hold of a copy of the Golden Flower is worth talking about. Surely someone knows something about him! ThePeg 20:34, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Carl Jung included a chapter on Wilhelm in Memories,_Dreams,_Reflections. Some of it may be useful. Rgdboer (talk) 05:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

The Chinese teacher
Richard Wilhelm's education in China consistently credits Xuan, but variously as Lau Nui Suan, Lao Nai-hsuan, and Lao Naixuan. His years are given as 1843 to 1921 in Wilhelm's article in the German WP. As this teacher provided through Wilhelm a bridge between cultures, more detail of his life would be appreciated. Rgdboer (talk) 03:30, 19 January 2022 (UTC) This article is cited by M Lakner (1999), view through JSTOR. Rgdboer (talk) 03:48, 19 January 2022 (UTC) The article is by a professor at Southern_Illinois_University_Carbondale and not Wilhelm's teacher. Rgdboer (talk) 05:01, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Liu Shuxian (1971) "Religious impact of Confucius philosophy", Philosophy East and West 21: 157 to 175.

title: Talk:Richard Wilhelm (sinologist)


text:
Category:Schools in Hampshire

This lists the schools located in the county of Hampshire.

title: Category:Schools in Hampshire


text: User talk:206.45.15.81

title: User talk:206.45.15.81


text:
Category:Schools in Hertfordshire

This lists the schools located in the county of Hertfordshire.

title: Category:Schools in Hertfordshire