text:
Vieta (crater)

Vieta is a lunar impact crater that lies due north of the walled plain Schickard, in the southwestern part of the Moon. About half a crater diameter to the southeast is the smaller Fourier, and to the north-northeast lies Cavendish.

The outer rim of this crater has undergone some impact erosion, and small craters lie along the northeast, south, and north-northwestern sides. The inner walls are irregular, with incised bases in some locations. A chain of small craters lies across the northern half of the interior floor, following a line towards the east-northeast. The floor is nearly level, but with some uneven areas in the south and by the crater chain.

Satellite craters
By convention these features are identified on lunar maps by placing the letter on the side of the crater midpoint that is closest to Vieta.

title: Vieta (crater)


text:
John Montgomery (Continental Congress)

John Montgomery (1722 – September 3, 1808) was an Irish-American merchant from Carlisle, Pennsylvania. He was a delegate to the Continental Congress for Pennsylvania from 1782 until 1784. Montgomery was one of the founders of Dickinson College, serving as a trustee from 1783 until his death in 1808. He died at home in Carlisle.

His son (also John) would represent Maryland in the U.S. Congress.

His father Beauford Montgomery II helped found and develop the land along the Susquehanna River, now known as Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

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

title: John Montgomery (Continental Congress)


text:
User talk:Ryoung122

I have returned after 5 1/2 years! Ryoung 122 19:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Sockpuppet investigations/Ryoung122 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Canadian  Paul  19:14, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

 * Your biased, POV-pushing editing makes Wikipedia a worse place, and less-informed, CP. Considering the history you have shown against me, certainly you should have considered recusing yourself from such an investigation.

Again, your edits make Wikipedia a worse place and the Wikipedia reader less-informed. Have a nice day. Ryoung 122 16:26, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

September 2012
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for repeatedly evading your topic ban by editing while logged out, as established at Sockpuppet investigations/Ryoung122. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. T. Canens (talk) 00:54, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

 * Comment to Courcelles:
 * Once again, Wikipedia shows the failings of humans, who rule with emotion, not logic. My argument was not "baseless" (that is an opinion). You did not address the issues I raised. I will be requesting a second review from someone else. Ryoung 122 18:42, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the vacation, everyone! I can certainly find more uses of my time than donating it here. With just one update on the GRG or GWR website, Wikipedes will make the updates that need to be made, whether I donate my time here personally or not.
 * Jgordon, no need to say "nonsense". The argument I made was a good one, and your comment shows that, once again, Wikipedia is "policed" by people who act in a way that is not cordial. Robots without emotion, run by logic, would be preferable.
 * Have a nice day.
 * Ryoung 122 21:28, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

 * You too. And perhaps, you can, in the future, figure out a better way for us to say, "You're obviously and unambiguously lying"; it's really kinda hard to be cordial when faced with falsity. Robots incapable of lying would be preferable. --jpgordon:==( o ) 01:06, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

 * Not admitting guilt is not the same as "lying". Ryoung 122 01:23, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

It is when one is, in fact, guilty. Despite Ryoung122's plaints above that his inquiries were ignored re lifting his topic ban, he in fact received extensive and (given his history) amazingly encouraging guidance on how he might constructively approach that issue. He made use of that advice by doing... nothing -- except to continue knowingly violating his topic ban, just as he had been violating his topic ban before, and even during, the discussion just linked. I feel the record should to reflect all this since Ryoung122's comments above suggest that he plans to continue disrupting WP through meatpuppets and it's best that people know with what they're dealing from the moment trouble starts again. EEng (talk) 21:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Looking over my contributions to this talk page, I see I offered Ryoung122 some helpful advice multiple times, including suggesting going to WP:AE to get his topic ban lifted. Was this ever done? Just curious. It would have been a more fruitful avenue than trying to circumvent the ban. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:30, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

 * No, I don't think he did. I'm pretty sure that I told him to file an appeal as well, but he didn't.  A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 00:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

 * Comment Since there are those who feel the need to salt the Earth a little more, I must respond appropriately to misconceptions.
 * First off: EEng, again, I state, I do NOT plan to "disrupt" Wikipedia. I was referring to the fact that if I decide to make changes to reliable sources that Wikipedia tends to mirror, those changes tend to happen on Wikipedia, whether I edit there or not. I don't need to "edit through Wikipedia" in order to get the changes made that should be made. In fact, this has been a learning experience for me that has been most-useful: using the appropriate behind-the-scenes machinations to effect the outcome I want does NOT mean that I need to "send meatpuppets to Wikipedia". I can make those changes through (oh wait, I'm not allowed to talk about that subject...moving on).
 * Second, taking the fifth is not "lying". Your comment and those of others concerning that issue border on personal attack, and is irrelevant to the discussion. My moral value is secure in that area.
 * Third...I have tried to work constructively to have the Feb 2011 topic ban either lifted or changed from "indefinite" to a time frame, but I got no response for several months from anyone.
 * Fourth...my edits using the Ryoung122 respected the topic ban applied to Ryoung122.
 * Fifth, if you check the record of user 69.515whatever, you'll see that the account use was only occasional and generally not in regard to large controversies.
 * Sixth...you may recall that, in fact, the last dispute involved JJBulten pushing religious fundamentalist viewpoints on what were intended to be articles written from a scientific viewpoint. It appears that last "edit war" has NOT re-ignited, and was "over" more than a year ago. In short, I don't foresee any major issues even if my topic ban were lifted. I was serving "defense," not pushing POV editing.
 * Seventh, I note that the edit user 69.515 made was not even reverted by CanadianPaul...because the issue for CanadianPaul was not the content of the edit but who might have been making the edit. That goes against the Wikipedia policy guidelines that blocks are "not to punish" but to protect Wikipedia. If the edit made was not a problem, then how was a a ban or block protecting Wikipedia? Clearly, it wasn't. Furthermore, I find it patently unfair that the most recent block/ban came without hearing from my side of the story first, and the punishment seems disproportionate to the alleged "offense". I could serve less time being arrested in real life for possesion of a controlled substance (not that that has happened, as in reality my rap sheet is clean...not a day in real-life jail). Finally, I am well-aware of Wikipedia's "whack-a-mole" strategy of admin enforcement:
 * http://www.groundreport.com/Opinion/Wikipedia-Examines-its-Dispute-Resolution-Process-/2948088
 * The solution for many seems to be the speed of the result, rather than considering what is a fair result to all parties involved.
 * Have a nice evening.
 * Ryoung 122 00:48, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

 * What's sad, EEng, is your continued "cabalism". I attempted to request an unblock in Oct 2011, but you sabotaged that effort.
 * Also, we have clear evidence from your own editing of you picking/choosing the same usual suspects...you made comments on the talk pages of DavidinDC, CanadianPaul, and Blade of Northern Lights. This fits in with my description of Wikipedia as akin to a "World of Warcraft" virtual reality video game, where one builds alliances, obtains social credits, and plans attacks on perceived "enemies":
 * 02:04, 16 September 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+224) . . User talk:The Blade of the Northern Lights  (→:(: Never mind)
 * 02:02, 16 September 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+222) . . User talk:David in DC  (→Like a bad penny...: Never mind) (top)
 * 01:56, 16 September 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+289) . . User talk:David in DC  (→Ryoung122 Talk Page: thoughts?)
 * 01:40, 16 September 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+1,388) . . User talk:The Blade of the Northern Lights  (→:(: ?)
 * 23:43, 15 September 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+164) . . User talk:The Blade of the Northern Lights  (→:(: new section)
 * 23:41, 15 September 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+2,088) . . Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ryoung122  (→Comments by other users: What do you call a medical imposter?)
 * Blade of Northern Lights, actually, has grown more amenable over the past two years, and DavidinDC has moved on. I don't see why you, EEng, are continuing to "beat a dead horse".
 * Some FACTS that you seem to be overlooking:
 * 1. Look at the past 1 1/2 years since the Feb 2011 "topic ban," and you'll see that my contributions to Wikipedia have been varied across many subjects, not too intense (WP:OWN issues), and stayed away from "longevity" COI issues.
 * 2. I consider my over 13,000+ edits across a myriad of fields to be a major contribution to Wikipedia, not a detriment.
 * 3. I have learned how Wikipedia is and to modify my behavior...however, Wikipedia continues to change and morph in its structure over time. Do you realize, EEng, that when Wikipedia was in its infancy, they actually recruited "experts" to write articles on subjects, much like Citizendium does now? Certainly, the early influence of Larry Sanger has died out over time, as Wikipedia focused instead on building feudal fiefdoms of editorial power and admin control, which is clearly evident from the above examples. Justice in pure form is blind and does not cater to past whims. Jury pools are supposed to be of peers who do not have a COI, yet we see you bring the latest "Wiki-storm" on my talk page to the attention of editors who may have had a personal bias on the subject in the past.
 * 4. The two main issues that I have been involved with in the (oh wait, I can't talk about that...).
 * The bottom line is this: I'm being punished for what happened long ago, mostly...an "indefinite block" is way disproportionate punishment to the edits I have made recently, which in fact did not seem to cause trouble. The problem seemed to be that "old foes" wanted to pile on from what happened in the past. Yes, I am the victim here, as is Wikipedia.
 * Never mind.
 * Ryoung 122 01:27, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I should not have said that you plan to disrupt Wikipedia; I should have said that you plan to do things whose effect will be to disrupt Wikipedia. And this, in all sincerity, is root cause of Wikipedia's inability to make use of your potential contributions, valuable though those may be in the abstract: good intentions can mitigate bad effects, but only where there's hope that the doer can recognize why his behavior is unacceptable and so improve that behavior. Once that hope is exhausted, intentions don't matter anymore -- only effects.

After all these years you still seem not to comprehend that it doesn't matter how noble you think your cause to be, or how correct you are certain your views to be, you must still obey the rules. And while there's lots of debate all over the place about exactly what the rules mean and how they should be applied, once Arbcom rules on how they apply to you, you absolutely, positively have to abide by that ruling. By evading your topic ban -- and not only that, continuing to deny that you did so, even while insisting that it was OK for you to do it! -- you've shown that you don't understand even that.

Since the constructive effects of your presence here are decisively outweighed by the destructive ones, and since by rejecting the idea that what you've done is wrong you remove the possibility that your behavior will ever improve, it no longer matters (I repeat) what your intention is in being here, but only what the effect is of your being here. You've thereby worn out Wikipedia's resevoir of hope for you, and that is why you have have been indefinitely blocked -- not because of what others have done, but because of what you have done.

As much as you piss me off, I know this must feel awful. You will find other outlets for your talents, and this too will pass. Good luck to you.

EEng (talk) 03:21, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

RY, I've only just now seen your email to me (via WP's "Email this user"). I hope you understand from the closing of my message above that I do -- I really do -- regret the pass to which things have come, but you need to understand that this is because of what you have done, not anyone else. CanadianPaul may have filed the SPI, and I supplied additional evidence, but it was only a matter of time before someone else would have done it, and the outcome would have been exactly the same.

You wrote to me, "The Ryoung122 editor identity has stayed away from edits on 'longevity'-related material." Actually that's not true -- you slipped up a few times and did edit longevity-related stuff while logged in as Ryoung122. And you see, even if "Ryoung122" the account were clean, R.Y. the person was not. Arbcom may have said the "Ryoung122 is topic banned" but surely you understand that the meaning is "The person behind the account Ryoung122 is topic banned" -- we all know who you are in real life (you've chosen to reveal it many times) but in general no one has any way of referring to the various inmates in the Wikipedia asylum other than by their account-name avatars. You personally were to stay away from longevity, and you didn't. There's no getting around that.

The train has come to the end of the line, and you have to get off now. I really am sorry. Please, think over what I've said here for at least 48 hours before posting again. And please remove the wikibreak template from your Talkpage. You're not on a break -- you're indefinitely blocked and there's no use pretending otherwise. Go with grace.

EEng (talk) 11:53 pm, 18 September 2012, Tuesday (15 days ago) (UTC−4)

 * "my edits using the Ryoung122 respected the topic ban applied to Ryoung122." This has been explained plenty here, topic bans apply to the person not an account.  There is no legitimate way you can continue to misunderstand what you did.  Since you're doing nothing but intentionally making false arguments and continuing old squabbles, I've removed your ability to edit this page. Courcelles 04:23, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite Block Counter

 * It has been 4304 days days since Ryoung122's most recent indefinite block was instituted.

How long is "indefinite"? is the question. Ryoung 122 18:33, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

 * It's up to you. Wikipidia has rules - regardless of whether you personally agree with them or not - that must be followed.  If you can demonstrate that you're willing to abide by the rules, then an admin might be inclinded to unblock you.  But that's a big 'if'. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 19:45, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

 * Just a small favor, could you make an "automatic block-day counter" that automatically updates the day count once a day? I'm not sure if some understand, but the block at the moment actually feels like a vacation.

Thanks!!! Ryoung 122 19:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * would probably be what you're looking for. The Blade of the Northern Lights  ( 話して下さい ) 19:52, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

OK, we can end this now at 1974 days...ironic...I was born in 1974! Ryoung 122 01:57, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Request on behalf of Ryoung122 about vandalism; other comments by CalvinTy
I'm CalvinTy. First, let me put any COI concerns aside: Ryoung122 is a colleague of mine at Gerontology Research Group (GRG). That's one of the reasons why I have not had any time for Wikipedia since summer 2011; been quite busy myself (both with GRG, which is my volunteer job, and my actual day job as a network administrator). I learned about the ArbCom thing back in early 2011 after it had taken place so I was not involved with that at all. Of course, some people tried to drag everyone involved with longevity (my field of interest) so that's when I vehemently defended myself and knew that I was best suited to just offer ideas for consensus or resolution. I have worked with some of the administrators such as A Quest for Knowledge, The Blade of the Northern Lights, SirFozzie among others (I think they are still admins, LOL). I have been told, online and offline, that I have the knack of being neutral and being a mediator as needed.

With that said, let me mention my reason for my presence at this time. Second, Ryoung122 asked me to see why and who apparently vandalized his talk page with this diff. I see that IP editor 68.230.178.54 has never made any other edits before except to solely edit Ryoung122's talk page about the so-called wikibreak. Normally, I would simply rollback and mark that as vandalism (particularly that it's on a user's own talk page) but thought I'd bring this into light here. I had not seen Ryoung122's talk page in ages, so I am not going to comment on his behavior here as I can understand both sides; that is not why I'm here (originally). I see that an administrator, Courcelles, have blocked Ryoung122 from even editing this talk page on September 22, 2012. At least, it would stand to reason that nearly two months have elapsed and that a Wikipedia editor (not outright banned -- only topic-banned) should be able to comment in his own talk page. Ryoung122 has not asked me to request that to be lifted, but to me, that's a logical next move. Can that be done?

Third, related to the 'vandalism', I show that IP editor 68.230.178.54's ISP is Cox Communications in the DC Metro area and geographically located in Annandale, Virginia (pretty close to where I live). That editor seem to mirror exactly what EEng had said on the same day, November 2, 2012. EEng had edited Ryoung122's user page out-of-blue after several weeks of inactivity on the user page, apparently. His edit summary explained his fair rationale, but apparently had an opposite effect, for several hours later, someone (without jumping into conclusions on who it can be) then edited Ryoung122's talk page regarding the wiki-break comment made by EEng on September 18, 2012 here. From my neutral standpoint, I'm uncertain why either EEng or the IP editor had to make an edit on November 2nd when this had died down after the administrator (Coucelles)'s edit on September 22nd.

Fourth, in general, it looks like, no matter what, people would expect the worst from Ryoung122 as EEng aptly stated: "good intentions can mitigate bad effects, but only where there's hope that the doer can recognize why his behavior is unacceptable and so improve that behavior. Once that hope is exhausted, intentions don't matter anymore -- only effects." In short, EEng has decided that "there is absolutely no hope for Ryoung122" because EEng has decided that Ryoung122 has exhausted all hope and should never be allowed to edit on Wikipedia again (paraphrasing EEng, mind you). That's a really very strong statement from a non-administrator (I don't think EEng is an administrator, is he? Although I have seen that username for ages). I fear that EEng may have an agenda and/or would never be impartial when it comes to Ryoung122. I forget the exact link to find out someone's rights but not important right now. However, forgive me, EEng, but I request an administrator to check to see if the IP editor 68.230.178.54 is somehow associated with EEng and/or any other person in the DC area (such as a former dissident, "DavidinDC"). I'm sure I should be doing this process somewhere like uhhh ANI or whatever the correct process is -- but perhaps not necessary if an administrator can read what I said & do a 'simple check' nonetheless.

As always, I'm a chatterbox but will close now with this: I don't know what is the best resolution for Ryoung122's "indefinite topic-ban" as both sides have made valid points -- I only see one flaw about when someone comments something like "if you can demonstrate that you have learned from the topic-ban...", I find that to be a Catch-22 comment. If the person cannot edit in his field of interest, such as longevity, how can the person demonstrate the ability to show to the administrators and/or ArbCom that he should be allowed to edit again in that field? Editing in other field of interest would help, but then the administrators would point out that they don't know what will happen once the ban is lifted and they would not rely on contributions in other topics to influence their decision-making process now, would they? Instead, if someone requests a topic ban to be lifted after a reasonable amount of time, that should take serious consideration and should be allowed to happen. I'm an administrator at several online forums and I usually advocate allowing banned members to return -- my rationale is this: "I'm giving them a CHANCE despite the perception the member may have given to date -- because once that person slips up again big time, there's no turning back for real." In short, I'm suggesting Ryoung122 to be lifted from his indefinite topic-ban. If he continues to be combative or not following policies/guidelines, then the administrators here have more ammo to use against Ryoung122. Right now, neither side have any ammo because it's a stalemate -- no true activity to demonstrate improvement (for Ryoung122) / evaluate behavior (by administrators/ArbCom). That's just my personal opinion in this matter. Cheers, Calvin  Ty  06:39, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I have known Robert Young since 2007 and he is an expert and brilliant genius when it comes to Supercentenarians. He has met many Supercentenarians and know there facts. Researching supercentenarians can be like a full-time job with difficult challenges along the way, I know I've done it since I was 12 years old. Robert Young knows facts from fiction when it comes to those things like supercentenarians and he has known Calvin Ty and Dr. Coles for years. I just don't know why this brilliant man is blocked from wikipedia. This is not my website no I cannot say anything but I think he knows his stuff. One thing I do know is that Robert Young would never vandalize anything in his life or even sockpuppet. Kegejoeco (aka Plyjacks) (talk) 22:49, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts
Randykitty (talk) 15:35, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Appealing a topic-ban & unblocking your talk page
Robert (the real "ryoung122"),

As you know by now, there have been an impersonation of you in a recent SPI investigation (see above section). To begin, for benefit of any administrators who may read this, they need to know that we know each other in real life and that I'm only here to guide you in being able to respond to any SPI, or being able to use your talk page again, and/or to request a lift of your current topic-ban (in longevity areas only as originally intended by ArbCom).

First, I see that administrator "Courcelles" prevented you from editing your talk page on 22 September 2012 because Courcelles stated: "This has been explained plenty here, topic bans apply to the person not an account. There is no legitimate way you can continue to misunderstand what you did. Since you're doing nothing but intentionally making false arguments and continuing old squabbles, I've removed your ability to edit this page. Courcelles 04:23, 22 September 2012 (UTC)"

Second, I see that I had made a plea in November 2012 in where nobody responded to, particularly to the comments in where I said, "I don't know what is the best resolution for Ryoung122's "indefinite topic-ban" as both sides have made valid points -- I only see one flaw about when someone comments something like "if you can demonstrate that you have learned from the topic-ban...", I find that to be a Catch-22 comment. If the person cannot edit in his field of interest, such as longevity, how can the person demonstrate the ability to show to the administrators and/or ArbCom that he should be allowed to edit again in that field? Editing in other field of interest would help, but then the administrators would point out that they don't know what will happen once the ban is lifted and they would not rely on contributions in other topics to influence their decision-making process now, would they?"

I also stated, "Instead, if someone requests a topic ban to be lifted after a reasonable amount of time, that should take serious consideration and should be allowed to happen. I'm an administrator at several online forums and I usually advocate allowing banned members to return -- my rationale is this: "I'm giving them a CHANCE despite the perception the member may have given to date -- because once that person slips up again big time, there's no turning back for real." In short, I'm suggesting Ryoung122 to be lifted from his indefinite topic-ban. If he continues to be combative or not following policies/guidelines, then the administrators here have more ammo to use against Ryoung122. Right now, neither side have any ammo because it's a stalemate -- no true activity to demonstrate improvement (for Ryoung122) / evaluate behavior (by administrators/ArbCom). That's just my personal opinion in this matter."

Third, since more than a year has passed, I thought I'd just guide you, "ryoung122", in following the guidelines in appealing a topic-ban (or at least getting you to be able to edit your talk page so administrators can monitor your new activity).
 * Go to this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks. In particular, note this: "that the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you are blocked for, you will not do it again, and you will make productive contributions instead;"
 * Also, since you were framed for the most recent SPI as well as several others in the past, you should comment on this because you were not allowed the ability to respond to this SPI: "that your conduct (under any account or IP address) is not connected in any way with the block (this can happen if a block is aimed at resolving a separate situation and you are unintentionally blocked as a result because you use the same IP range)"
 * A reminder about this: "In complicated situations, the reviewing administrator may not want to spend a long time reading your whole talk page and all of your contributions. Information and evidence not in your unblock request may not be read."
 * This is what apparently happened to you in September 2012: "If you make repeated invalid or offensive unblock requests, your talk page access may be revoked which makes it even more difficult to request unblocking."

Fourth, I want to mention a few tips that is mentioned in point #3 above.
 * Understand what you did and why you have been blocked
 * Give a good reason for your unblock
 * Stick to the point
 * Talk about yourself, not others
 * Agree to follow Wikipedia community customs

Fifth, if you do all of the above, that should guide you in having your topic-ban lifted.

In the meantime, I'll see where the appropriate place is to allow you to be able to edit your talk page at least. Administrators, if you happen to see this, can you consider this request for Robert Young "ryoung122" the ability to at least be able to edit his own talk page here? Cheers, Calvin  Ty  15:50, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Clarification motion
A case (Longevity) in which you were involved has been modified by which changed the wording  of the discretionary sanctions section to clarify that the scope applies to pages, not just articles. For the arbitration committee -- S Philbrick (Talk)  15:53, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:Unverified supercentenarians
Category:Unverified supercentenarians, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 00:16, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Robert Young (longevity claims researcher) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert Young (longevity claims researcher) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Robert Young (longevity claims researcher) & until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 23:18, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Gladys Swetland for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gladys Swetland is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Gladys Swetland & until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ricky81682 (talk) 22:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Cruz Hernández for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cruz Hernández is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Cruz Hernández until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:10, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Raymond Cambefort for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Raymond Cambefort is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Raymond Cambefort until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ricky81682 (talk) 23:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Konrad Fuchs for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Konrad Fuchs is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Konrad Fuchs until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ricky81682 (talk) 04:19, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Goux, Fernand listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Goux, Fernand. Since you had some involvement with the Goux, Fernand redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:51, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Emma Tillman for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Emma Tillman is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Emma Tillman until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ricky81682 (talk) 09:03, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Lucy d'Abreu for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lucy d'Abreu is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Lucy d'Abreu until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ricky81682 (talk) 09:10, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Longevity claims
Category:Longevity claims, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 22:23, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Alberta Davis for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alberta Davis is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Alberta Davis until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:33, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Hanna Barysevich for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hanna Barysevich is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Hanna Barysevich until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. EEng (talk) 05:05, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Elsa Tauser for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elsa Tauser is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Elsa Tauser until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ricky81682 (talk) 21:04, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Antonio Pierro for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Antonio Pierro is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Antonio Pierro until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ricky81682 (talk) 00:02, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Fannie Greenberg for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fannie Greenberg is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Fannie Greenberg until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ricky81682 (talk) 09:42, 20 January 2016 (UTC) --UTRSBot (talk) 06:15, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Apparent Impersonation?
Dear all,

I would like to draw attention to the following account: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Robert_Young_GRG_1974_to_2017. Although I understand Mr Young has been indefinitely blocked from this site, I do not feel we should be encouraging our community to get away with faking someone's death - I am sure an IP-trace will reveal that this new account is no sockpuppet of Mr Young's. As I couldn't find any "report" button on the site, I have posted a message here. Sincerely, Fiskje88 (talk) 16:28, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Someone tried to impersonate RY a few years ago via an IP. Given the unblock request apparently now pending, incident should probably be brought to the attention of the UTRS team.  E Eng  19:37, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

CheckUser shows that it was Timothy McGuire (this time):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Timothy_McGuire#Blocked

Note that he also has made quite a bit more sockpuppet/troll accounts, and I believe he was also "Deaths in 2013". Update: confirmed, although this may be a "rename" rather than a sockpuppet: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Deaths_in_2013&redirect=no

The 2014 vandal who impersonated me was Pieter Nel of South Africa, a different person, and not as persistent as this current vandal is. Ryoung 122 23:40, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

P.S. I would like to ask Wikipedia to re-name accounts that falsely state that I have passed away, when I have not. Thanks for your consideration. Ryoung 122 23:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, I would like to mention that impersonator Timothy McGuire was reported to the FBI in April 2018 for stalking/gun threats. Ryoung 122 18:17, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Fresh start
It has been agreed with checkuser that a Community discussion can take place, if you wish, to consider whether to grant you a fresh start. Should you want to enable this the first stage is to post your unblock request on this page. You can follow these instructions. Please note that this page must not be used for proxy editing, commenting on articles or their content, commenting on other users or their edits or commenting on any matter not relevant to your appeal. Any such off-limits comments will immediately result in your access to this page being revoked. blocking admin. Just Chilling (talk) 02:20, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Just want to note, directly in this thread so appropriate officials will see it, that there was an apparent impersonation of RY recently . I don't think this has anything to do with anything, but those in higher pay grades than mine might want to make sure of that.  E Eng  04:57, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Greetings,

Thanks for the Fresh Start, "Just Chilling".

Thanks for the note of concern, EEng.

Please note that I am a "D-lister"...not super-famous but still someone who is known to "fans", as I am the Senior Consultant for Gerontology for Guinness World Records. Sometimes, fans of "the world's oldest persons" are, unfortunately, not persons with the best of intentions: this field attracts, on a positive side, those who love the super-elderly and wish to care for those most frail of persons who need help with activities of daily living. On a negative side, however, this field also attracts "deathpoolers", who wish to make money by betting "who dies first." Sometimes, these deathpoolers make hoax reports on Wikipedia, so that they can cash in on their bet before the person handing over the money realizes that they have been had. This is a misuse/abuse of the system. In 2014, someone on Wikipedia from South Africa made a fake death report for L. Stephen Coles, founder of the GRG, using a fake account. By making it look like I did it, the hoax gained credibility. In that particular case, however, the motivation may have been something else: a 110 Club member had been passed over for a promotion to Admin, so that may have been that particular hoax motivation. There are actually quite a few supercentenarian death hoaxers out there: it has become a problem. I'm looking to help Wikipedia limit the damage these trouble-makers are doing by reporting suspects.

My main concern, first and foremost, with my most recent request was to have my "talk page" unblocked, so that I can respond to problems such as the "impersonation/death threats" directed towards my person...including Wikipedia sockpuppet accounts of User:Deaths in 2013...that falsely indicate (and explicitly state) that I died...which is not the case. I can do a lot with just the ability to talk on my talk page that I cannot do with the unblock ticket request system. So, I appreciate that restoration as a "first step."

I will also take up your offer on the next steps...a fresh start...but not right at the moment. Before, I have a matter of urgency involving a particular individual who has both made up fake/death hoaxes for at least 19 persons...including one of me:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Robert_Young_GRG_1974_to_2017&diff=prev&oldid=770674758

An IP address search should trace the above sockpuppet account to Deaths in 2013, a recently-banned 110 Club member who also had an account on Wikipedia. This member was banned for making up hoax death dates. You can see from the above account 18 supercentenarian hoaxes, plus a hoax of my own death.

I realize that this talk page is the place to, first and foremost, discuss Wikipedia issues concerning my editing. But having others impersonate me, pretending to be me so that they can make up fake death dates for their ill-advised plans, is not something that I agree with, and I am sure that we can work together to stock this kind of vandalism to Wikipedia.

So, I thank you for unblocking my talk page and allowing me to edit here.

I will have more to say later tonight. I have a dinner that I'm scheduled to attend at the moment.

Sincerely, Robert Douglas Young 1974-I'm alive!

Update: I am working on my unblock appeal. I realize that it does not include undoing the topic ban that I am under at this time. Instead, my appeal will focus on gradually getting me back to editing such things as articles on botany, geography, etc. I do not plan to "come back in full bore" but rather return as a tree cut down, growing a new shoot from the stump. Yes, I am humbled. Ryoung 122 22:48, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Greetings,

I plan to file an unblock appeal on or around June 15 2017. I have a science conference coming up before then and I need to focus on work first. Thank you for your consideration. Ryoung 122 15:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Update: my conferences in Germany were successful. At this time, I do plan to file an appeal. I think Sept 16 2017 (five years after my block) would be a good time for this, as I have several book chapters I'm working on at the moment and thus I do not have the time at the moment. Thank you for your consideration. Ryoung 122 21:08, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Greetings,

Greetings, my apologies but I didn't see any messages from you. I see some messages below from T Canens and TonyBallioni but that's it. Where should I see your messages at...is there a link? Ryoung 122 20:27, 9 February 2018 (UTC) Update: I see the comment below. I certainly have time to discuss this now. Since the checkuser showed that I no longer have edited while "logged out" for many years, I would like to request an unblock again.

Note: I am on the internet seven days a week. I was not aware that there was a time limit to respond, so I'm requesting an unblock again. One of my areas of interest that I feel I can make a contribution here is botany. There are quite a few articles on plant species that are under-developed. For example, the article on ravenea rivularis doesn't even mention that it is a tree that can grow to 98 feet tall. Ryoung 122 20:33, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

 * - As the original blocking admin, do you have any thoughts regarding unblocking? SQL Query me!  03:44, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * This was an ordinary socking block (though with a previous arb case twist) before it was upgraded to a CU block. Assuming that there were no recent socking, I'm not opposed to unblocking. Note that the longevity topic ban would still be in effect. T. Canens (talk) 00:29, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * - would these terms be acceptable to you? - would anyone mind checking to see if there's been recent socking please? (I hope I'm not misusing that template!) Additional opinions on this unblock would be very welcome as well from anyone following RFU.  SQL Query me!  03:21, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * No evidence of socking.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:17, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * , I would suggest this be copied to AN for the community to review given the length of the block. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:20, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I'm just requesting an unblocking for the "sock block", not for the topic ban. Ryoung 122 20:25, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

. May I? -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 21:43, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I offered the user to take their appeal to the Community, last year, here but they indicated that the time was not right. I am happy either with a Community review or even a straight unblock since I am convinced by their good intentions and am prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt. Just Chilling (talk) 01:20, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll differ to Just Chilling as they've dealt with this user in the past. I have no objections to an unblock, and commented above as had asked for more feedback. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:24, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Just to respond to the timeframe point - there is no set time that we'll wait for an editor to respond. I tend to wait about a week after I've asked a question if I'm considering unblocking. That being said, as you've agreed to the terms in the section above - I'd support a straight unblock. SQL Query me!  02:52, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! Like a tree cut down that grows a new trunk from the roots, Ryoung122 2.0 will be a different editor at Wikipedia. Ryoung 122 19:12, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Da Man

The article Da Man has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Non-notable Indonesian men's magazine. Article has no independent sources.World's Lamest Critic (talk) 22:56, 4 September 2017 (UTC)"

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 22:56, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not paper and it's clear that the magazine exists, and Wikipedia generally considers magazines sufficient for their own article. While sources appear limited, it may be a language issue and its likely that there's much more coverage in languages used in Indonesia. Ryoung 122 23:39, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * restored per WP:refund -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:40, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't start the article just to start it...I started it because I came across a promotional story about a third-party subject that was in it and I did feel the need for an internationalized view. I do realize that the article isn't of high or great importance but the fact that the magazine has continued to exist for over a decade in the fourth-most populous nation on Earth is enough to keep it, in my view. Ryoung 122 21:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of L. Stephen Coles for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article L. Stephen Coles is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/L. Stephen Coles until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  DGG ( talk ) 04:54, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Manjekia

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Manjekia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. TheRealWeatherMan (talk) 17:42, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

The above nomination really makes no sense. The article was just started less than 30 minutes ago. Have you tried to do something with it first..you know, like add material? Ryoung 122 17:49, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Manjekia for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Manjekia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Manjekia until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TheRealWeatherMan (talk) 17:49, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Florrie Baldwin for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Florrie Baldwin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Florrie Baldwin& until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — JFG talk 17:50, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Annie Knight for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Annie Knight is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Annie Knight until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — JFG talk 17:56, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Emmeline Brice for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Emmeline Brice is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Emmeline Brice until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — JFG talk 17:57, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Lucy d'Abreu for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lucy d'Abreu is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Lucy d'Abreu& until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — JFG talk 18:02, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eva Morris.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Eva Morris.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:37, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Centenarians who almost made it
Good evening, I'm seeking someone who can transfer the missing cases over to the Gerontology Wiki's version. Mine is much larger. Thank you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Timothy_McGuire#Centenarians_who_almost_made_it_to_110

Timothy McGuire (talk) 04:20, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Someone please block this PERSISTENT TROLL whose misbehavior and threats (such as killing people with an 'axe') are so bad, he has been reported to the FBI. Ryoung 122 15:49, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Adonidia merrillii, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Miami Open ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Adonidia_merrillii check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Adonidia_merrillii?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:08, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Rafael Verga

The article Rafael Verga has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 18:49, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Rafael Verga for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rafael Verga is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Rafael Verga until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 23:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

"Flossie Page" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Flossie Page. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 11 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. —Bagumba (talk) 13:31, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Chamaedorea seifrizii
Hello, Ryoung122. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Chamaedorea seifrizii, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:03, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Chamaedorea seifrizii

Hello, Ryoung122. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Chamaedorea seifrizii".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 00:38, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

March 2022
Sorry for trolling your page, but now you have lost the trust of everyone (but exclude Waclaw Jan, he is excessive your fan). Please leave from longevity-related community eternally and please resign the Gelontorogy wiki administrator. Thanks.--Putinofthe110club (talk) 18:09, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

 * Hi Coward, so you come here to cause trouble that has no relation to Wikipedia issues. Be a man and stop hiding behind fake troll accounts. Ryoung 122  00:24, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Chamaedorea seifrizii (April 10)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Johannes Maximilian was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Chamaedorea seifrizii and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Chamaedorea seifrizii, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "Db-g7" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Chamaedorea_seifrizii Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Johannes_Maximilian&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Chamaedorea_seifrizii reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 18:15, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Jack Teixeira
fyi, there is a discussion about WP:BLP policy on the article Talk page related to the birth date. This may need to be addressed at the BLP Noticeboard, but in the meantime, it would be appreciated if you could review the Talk discussion and consider undoing your recent WP:BLPPRIMARY-based edit. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 00:40, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics
You have recently made edits related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. This is a standard message to inform you that post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Contentious topics. Beccaynr (talk) 00:44, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ryoung122


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BC Sweet

 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 MERGE and REDIRECT to Sweet (band). —Korath (Talk) 12:34, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

As the merge is nontrivial and I do not consider myself knowledgeable enough in this area to judge how much of a merge is appropriate, I have only placed {{merge}} and {{mergefrom}} templates on the relevant articles. —Korath (Talk) 12:34, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

BC Sweet
Yet another band plugging their Web site. In this case, they are a tribute band based upon a moderate band of the 1960s and 1970s. Wikipedia is not a place for unknown bands to advertise. Delete.--Modemac 16:54, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Seems to be the remnant of the band that Brian Connolly of the original Sweet was actually touring with at the end of his career (and life). Make NPOV and merge with Sweet (band) would be my suggestion. / u p p l a n d 20:11, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * merge per above, or keep. Notable people's bands are all encyclopedic Kappa 02:13, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, possible band vanity. Megan1967 23:30, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge into Sweet or Brian Connolly or something. Meets WikiProject Music/Notability and Music Guidelines. Tuf-Kat 02:36, Feb 23, 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:
Garrano

The Garrano is a Portuguese breed of small horse. It is equivalent to the Faco Galego of Galicia in north-western Spain.

History
The horse is believed to be an ancient breed, with Northern Iberian Paleolithic cave paintings depicting horses with similar profiles. The similarities between the breed and the depicted animals lead to the conclusion that the breed's appearance has remained stable. There is genetic evidence that the horse originates in Celtic regions, with additional research suggesting the later introduction of males for breeding from north Europe. In the 20th century, the breed was infused with Arab blood.

The breed's numbers have been depleted by wolf predation, as they are a preferred prey. They have also declined as they have become less attractive for agricultural work, as a result of which they have been crossbred with other species for meat. As of 2010, the population of Garrano was estimated at approximately 2,000, with a sex ratio of one stallion to 13 mares.

Characteristics

Members of the breed are usually bay, brown or dark chestnut in color, with a straight or concave facial profile, and stand on average 1.3 m. They are hardy and quick gaited breed and at one time were raced.

title: Garrano


text:
Craighouse

Craighouse (Taigh na Creige ) is the main settlement and capital of the Scottish Inner Hebridean island of Jura, in Argyll and Bute. In 1971 it had a population of 113. The village is situated on the sheltered east coast of the island at the southern end of Small Isles Bay.

Since 2007, a passenger-only ferry service between Craighouse and Tayvallich on the Scottish mainland has operated during the summer months. This service was resurrected by the community after several decades without a direct mainland ferry.

Vehicular access to the island now via a small ferry between Feolin on Jura (8 mi south of Craighouse via road) and Port Askaig on neighbouring Islay.

Facilities in Craighouse
Today Craighouse is the social centre of the island and is home to:

 * Jura Community Shop, (Post Office, provisions, general goods)
 * The Jura Hotel
 * The Antlers Cafe
 * Community run diesel and petrol pumps
 * Whisky Island Gallery (photography)
 * Deer Island Distillery, producing Jura's only rum
 * Camella Crafts (local crafts)
 * Jura Distillery, producer of Isle of Jura Single Malt Whisky
 * Jura Service Point (archives, oral history recordings, photocopying, printing, meeting rooms)
 * Small Isles Primary School
 * Jura Parish Church
 * The Village hall

History
The name "Craighouse" means "The house by the rock".

title: Craighouse


text:
User:Metheso

I'm a student at the Ohio Methodist Theological Seminary.

title: User:Metheso


text: Category:Languages of Montenegro

title: Category:Languages of Montenegro


text:
Udorsky District

Udorsky District (Удо́рский райо́н; Удора район) is an administrative district (raion), one of the twelve in the Komi Republic, Russia. It is located in the west of the republic. The area of the district is 35800 km2. Its administrative center is the rural locality (a selo) of Koslan. As of the 2010 Census, the total population of the district was 20,400, with the population of Koslan accounting for 11.2% of that number.

History of the name
The name Udoria in the full official title of the Russian Tsars refers to Udora in the East of Komi, a salient into Arkhangelsk Oblast of Russia in the basin of the Vashka and Mezen Rivers.

Administrative and municipal status
Within the framework of administrative divisions, Udorsky District is one of the twelve in the Komi Republic. It is divided into three urban-type settlement administrative territories (Blagoyevo, Mezhdurechensk, and Usogorsk), nine selo administrative territories, and three settlement administrative territories, all of which comprise fifty-two rural localities. As a municipal division, the district is incorporated as Udorsky Municipal District. The three urban-type settlement administrative territories are incorporated into three urban settlements, and the twelve remaining administrative territories are incorporated into twelve rural settlements within the municipal district. The selo of Koslan serves as the administrative center of both the administrative and municipal district.

title: Udorsky District


text:
User talk:Metheso

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! — BanyanTree 16:59, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

title: User talk:Metheso


text:
Oecus

Oecus is the Latinized form of Greek oikos, used by Vitruvius for the principal hall or salon in a Roman house, which was used occasionally as a triclinium for banquets.

When of great size it became necessary to support its ceiling with columns; thus, according to Vitruvius, the tetrastyle oecus had four columns; in the Corinthian oecus there was a row of columns on each side, virtually therefore dividing the room into nave and aisles, the former being covered over with a barrel vault. The Egyptian oecus had a similar plan, but the aisles were of less height, so that clerestory windows were introduced to light the room, which, as Vitruvius states, presents more the appearance of a basilica than of a triclinium.

Vitruvius distinguishes four types of oecus:

 * 1) Tetrastylos: with four columns;
 * 2) Corinthian: with a row of columns supporting an architrave topped with a cornice and a vaulted ceiling;
 * 3) Egyptian: particularly magnificent form of the oecus, with columns running all around, which support a gallery also provided with columns;
 * 4) Cycicene (κυζίκηνοι from Cyzicus, an ancient city in Mysia): a very spacious, north-facing garden oecus common among the Greeks.

title: Oecus


text:
Wolmaransstad

Wolmaransstad (Afrikaans for "Wolmarans City") is a maize-farming town situated on the N12 between Johannesburg and Kimberley in North West Province of South Africa. The town lies in an important alluvial diamond-mining area and it is the main town of the Maquassi Hills Local Municipality. Town 245 km south-west of Johannesburg and 56 km north-east of Bloemhof. It was laid out on the farms Rooderand and Vlakfontein in 1888, and proclaimed a town in 1891. Named after Jacobus M. A. Wolmarans, then member of the Executive Council.

Wolmaransstad originated in 1891 on the banks of the Makwasi River (San word for a type of wild spearmint) and takes its name from J. M. A. Wolmarans, a volksraad councilman.

Wolmaransstad serves a large community and is an important diamond buying center.

The Dutch Reformed church building was designed by Gerard Moerdijk.

Tourist attractions

 * Broadbent Mission Station
 * Digger's Diamond route
 * Makwassierante Conservation Area
 * Wolwespruit Dam Nature Reserve

Notable native

 * Bernardus Gerhardus Fourie (also known as Brand Fourie; 1916–2008), South African politician

title: Wolmaransstad


text:
File:Coppertone.jpg

Classic Coppertone girl ad

Source: The Coppertone Girl was painted by Joyce Ballantyne Brand in 1959 for the Grant Advertising agency. The Coppertone brand is currently owned by the Schering-Plough Corporation. A copy of the painting can be found it this article.

Fair Use in Coppertone girl

 * This is an iconic advertising image. Painted in 1959, it is still in use today.
 * This image shows the pinup style of the 1960s.
 * This older image shows more of the girl's buttocks than the current advertisements.
 * This low resolution copy will not prevent Schering-Plough Corporation from selling sun tan lotion.

title: File:Coppertone.jpg


text:
User:Martinjakubik

About me
I am a Canadian, born in Poland, and now living in France. I graduated from the University of Waterloo, with a Bachelor of Math degree. I have also finished an amount of English literature courses through the University of Waterloo's Distance Education program.

Likes and dislikes
This is a stupid way to write things about myself, but here goes.

I like writing and reading. I write fiction and editorial-style articles. Both mediums attract me because they seem to help me organise my thoughts. I read classical and modernist literature, and any novels.

I like drawing.

I dislike not finishing things, which I do almost continuously.

I neither like nor dislike programming, but I do quite a bit of it to try to increase my output of writing and drawing. The programming takes up so much time that I have none left for the writing and drawing whose output it was supposed to increase.

Webpage
http://www.supertitle.org

fr:User:Martinjakubik pl:User:Martinjakubik

title: User:Martinjakubik


text: User talk:207.162.108.18

title: User talk:207.162.108.18


text:
Talk:Drumline

Move
I do not think the articles "drumline" and "marching percussion" should be merged. The "marching percussion" article seems to be a description of the actual instruments used in various types of drumlines, while "drumline" is a more broad description.

I also think that the content of the article needs adjusted, particularly the description of a bass drum unit as consisting of "4-6" drums. The WVU Marching band's drumline (an organization in which I played bass drum for 4 years, and am intimately familiar with) is a very accomplished college drumline, and has marched 7 bass drums for at least the last 15 years. I'm not sure if any other drumlines have this many, but it's a very appropriate number of drums in the 40+ member drumline, and as a part of the 350+ member band. I'm also aware of several smaller high school drumlines that march only 3 bass drums, so it seems that that description should be changed to "3-7" drums.

Comment to above: The Purdue University Drumline has 8 Bass drums of different pitch (not including the Big Bass Drum), therefore it should be at least 8 as the max.

 * I disagree, this article should stay the way it is. Drumline is a unique term referring to the percussion section of a marching band. It MUST NOT be merged with 'Marching Percussion', as a very large part of the drumline (the pit) does not march! Keyboards and auxillary instruments are part of the drumline too. 'Marching Percussion' is not interchangable with 'drumline'. Also- about making this article about the movie and totally more the 'Drumline' article to some other name. NO. I am sure that most people who look up 'drumline' are looking for the actual musical term, not that movie. If you looked up 'Pearl Harbor' would you want the main article to be about the event or the movie?

In conclusion, drumline = pit and battery. Marching percussion = battery. Front ensemble = pit. Move? No.

Kirsten

Agree that the information in this article should be merged with "Marching Percussion". Brad Halls 03:51, 21 April 2006 (UTC)Brad Halls
 * This articles should cover the movie, but most definitely have a "This article refers to the movie drumline. For the drum section of marching bands, see Marching percussion" or something similar. Evan Seeds (talk) 04:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

 * I disagree. Marching percussion should refer to just the instruments that the performers play.  You can't call a drumline a marching percussion, or vice versa.  The drumline refers to the group of performers rather than the musical instruments.  A drumline is also comprised of more than a marching battery.  There is also the front ensemble, which does not march at all, but is stilla very important part of the drumline.  Drumline can be synonymous to percussion ensemble, but not marching percussion. Also, the movie drumline is not an accurate interpretation of what an actual drumline is.  It is merely a fiasco pulled by movie-makers in search of money.  The sounds produced by the drumline in that movie is also not a valid representation of what a drumline is capable of playing.  Once again, the articles Drumline and Marching Percussion should not be merged. Wallaby  (Will continue discussion when further argument is presented).

 * While I definitely agree that the movie Drumline is a gross misrepresentation of true drumming, I believe Marching Percussion and Drumline should be merged similar to how Percussion and Percussion Instrument are merged. Perhaps there could be individual articles for each marching instruments (or Marching Snares added to the Snare Drum article, Marching Basses added to the Bass Drum article, etc). Although, I think Front Ensemble should be given an article separate from Marching Percussion, as while they are both parts of drumlines, they are quite separate in music and technique. Evan Seeds (talk) 15:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Maybe the article for "Drumline" as a performing group can be renamed to "Percussion Ensemble" which is probably a more proper term than drumline. This is proving to be a tough decision.  Because there is field percussion, and then indoor percussion (marching and concert).  Both are refered to as drumlines. Maybe by combining it all under Percussion Ensemble, there can be subsections of the different types of ensembles and also describe the instrumentation of each.  We can't always call it marching percussion because there are standstill Indoor lines. Maybe that can be how the two are merged?  The battery and front ensemble both usually exist with each other, except in concert percussion ensembles.  The battery rarely exists on its own, even though there are popular recordings of songs/exercises just for battery.  I like your suggestion about adding marching instruments to the articles on their concert counterparts.  But what will we do about the marching tenors? Wallaby 14:33, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, there already is a tenor drum article (which needs cleanup), which touches on both single tenors and multi-tenors. I agree with the idea of merging all the separate ensembles into Percussion ensemble (which already has a small article). Also needing merging into that article would be Indoor percussion ensemble which has a somewhat developed article already. Although, for the record, I've rarely, if ever, heard the concert percussion section referred to as a drumline. Evan Seeds (talk) 03:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree with the move. These two articles are very similar and present almost identical information. A drumline and marching percussion are basically the same thing. (I know what I'm talking about; I play snare in a drumline). User:BenRig811 21:12, 11 may 2006 (UTC)

 * I play snare on a competing high school drumline, and I disagree with the move. Drumline is just a small part of Marching percussion.  Drumline generally only consists of snare drums, bass drums, tenors, and cymbals, while marching percussion generally consists of pit percussion and other forms of percussion is a marching band or drum corps.  The best option would be to create an entire category for Marching Percussion, which consists of drumline, all of the instruments on a drumline, pit percussion, and other articles that fit the description. Superdude1112

 * Drumline refers to both the battery and the front ensemble while marching percussion only refers to the battery. Therefore I believe the articles should stay separate. Drumline Enthusiast '11

I disagree that it should be moved....and if it is it should not be moved to percussion ensemble. If it must be moved then it should be moved to marching percussion ensemble because percussion ensemble generally does not refer to marching instruments. It usually refers to the percussion section of a concert unit. As for the bass drum thing most high school march around 4 -6 basses. Yes, sometime there may be as few as even 2 but typically watching any unit high school or DCi the average is between 4 - 6.Brehale (talk) 07:00, 13 May 2010 (UTC)Bre

New Content/needs merging
Killkhan recently (as his first and so far, only, edit) added a section on the Battery. While the content isn't horrible (although needs cleanup), someone needs to merge the information we already have on battery into the new sectionalized version, as well as adding a section on the Pit/Front Ensemble, focusing on the types of music, i'd say, as the instruments themselves should have their own article. Evan S e eds (talk) 15:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I've played in a very successful highschool drumline for four years, and I know a thing or two about marching percussion. I'm also very interested in DCI. I totally disagree with the move. Anyone who knows anything about marching percussion knows that there is a BIG difference between the drumline and the percussion front. Merging Drumline into the more broad Marching Percussion would be analagous to merging the Trumpet article with the Horns article. Trust me on this one.Stevetremblay

History
This article desperately needs a history section. There are sources out there. Unfortunately I don't have the time to look them up. —M (talk • contribs) 14:01, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Seconded - I was interested to see how this developed. Is it a modern phenomenon? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.200.210.132 (talk) 11:01, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

"Drum line"
I don't believe "drum line" is a correct term for this situation. MS Word, Firefox, and many other spell checkers always mark "drumline" as being spelled incorrectly and suggest "drum line." However, as drumlines as such a niche activity, the word's omission from spell checkers can be understandable.Dlwebmaestro (talk) 12:56, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:Drumline


text:
Tianguis Cultural del Chopo

The Tianguis Cultural del Chopo is a Saturday flea market (tianguis in Mexican Spanish) near Mexico City downtown, known locally as El Chopo. It is named after its original location which was near the Museo Universitario del Chopo, an art deco building with a couple of towers designed by Bruno Möhring. Depending on the affiliation one has with this event, it has been referred to as "The Punk Market", "The Metal Market", or "The Goth Market". Since the end of the 1980s, the Tianguis del Chopo has been at a location very near subway station Metro Buenavista in the street of Aldama in the Colonia Guerrero neighborhood.

Originally, the Tianguis was a place for hippies to trade 1960s memorabilia including not only records but also clothing, magazines, books and other collectibles. Eventually, the Tianguis has also given place to more recent musical styles like metal, goth, punk, grunge and ska, among others. Almost always, some local and touring bands play live gigs at the back of the market, where can also be found the casual traders standing and looking up for that rare and collectable record or CDs. The market is also an opportunity to enrich the local alternative scene as well as to come dressed in authentic subculture styles.

On the northern end of the market at Aldama and Camelia is an area called Espacio Anarcho-punk. Vendors in this part of El Chopo sell mostly books, movies, and other materials that have an anarchist or radical perspective. Many of the Espacio Anarcho-Punk vendors contribute to a weekly zine of the same title addressing local social issues and radical politics.

title: Tianguis Cultural del Chopo


text:
Talk:Arctic Cooling

This looks like a commercial advertisement to me. Is it, though?! Brequinda 17:04, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, it does resemble a fan-made advert, but with a little brushing it will be okay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iulian28ti (talk • contribs) 21:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

 * I tried trimming away the marketing fluff a bit. --Joffeloff (talk) 19:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Slightly edited the fan section to mention the rubber mounts: the old version just said the fans "floated" as if they were using anti-gravity or something. 89.242.215.237 (talk) 16:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I adjusted a bit as well, change to the new logo, update the website, remove a wrongful affiliation...Memes11 (talk) 06:47, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Arctic Cooling


text:
John Montgomery (Maryland politician)

John Montgomery (1764 – July 17, 1828) was an American lawyer from Baltimore, Maryland. He represented the sixth district of Maryland in the U.S. Congress from 1807 until 1811. He served as the Attorney General of Maryland from 1811 to 1818 and Mayor of Baltimore from 1820 to 1822 and 1824 to 1826.

Early life
Montgomery was born in Carlisle in the Province of Pennsylvania in 1764. He was the son of John Montgomery, a member of the Continental Congress during the American Revolution.

Montgomery was educated in Carlisle, studied law, was admitted to the bar in 1791 and moved to Harford County, Maryland to begin a practice.

Career
A Democratic-Republican, Montgomery served in the Maryland House of Delegates from 1793 to 1798. From 1793 to 1796 he was Harford County's State's Attorney.

In 1806, Montgomery was a successful candidate for Congress. He won reelection in 1808 and 1810, and served in the 10th, 11th, and 12th Congresses, holding office from March 4, 1807 until he resigned on April 29, 1811.

Montgomery resigned from Congress and relocated to Baltimore in order to accept appointment as Attorney General of Maryland. He served from April 29, 1811 to February 11, 1818.

During the War of 1812 Montgomery was appointed a captain in the militia and commanded the Baltimore Union Artillery, and he took part in the Battle of North Point.

Montgomery served again in the House of Delegates in 1819. He was Mayor of Baltimore from 1820 to 1822 and again in 1824 to 1826.

Personal life
Montgomery was married first to Mary Hanes or Harris, also called Polly. In 1809, he married Maria Nicholson (1775–1868). Maria was the daughter of Commodore James Nicholson and was the sister of Catherine "Kitty" Nicholson (wife of William Few), Hannah Nicholson (wife of Albert Gallatin), Frances "Fanny" Nicholson (husband of Joshua Seney), James Witter Nicholson (husband of Ann Griffin, daughter of Isaac Griffin), and Jehoiadden Nicholson (wife of James Chrystie). His children included sons John and James Nicholson Montgomery.

He died in Baltimore on July 17, 1828. He was buried in the cemetery of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the Bel Air hamlet of Emmorton. This cemetery is also known as Mount Carmel Cemetery, Bel Air Methodist Episcopal Church Cemetery, and Mount Carmel Methodist Church Cemetery.

title: John Montgomery (Maryland politician)


text:
Erba-Odescalchi

The House of Erba-Odescalchi and the House of Odescalchi are branches of an Italian noble family formed by the union of the Erba and Odescalchi families. The Odescalchi family was, since the election of Benedetto Odescalchi as Pope Innocent XI in 1676, part of the highest Roman aristocracy.

Odescalchi family

The Odescalchi family were entrepreneurs from the minor nobility of Como. They trace their family line to Giorgio Odescalchi of Como, born around 1290.

Pietro Giorgio Odescalchi was Bishop of Alessandria (1598–1610) and then Bishop of Vigevano (1610–1620).

In 1619, Benedetto's brother and three uncles founded a bank in Genoa, which grew into a successful money-lending business. After completing his studies in grammar and letters, the 15-year-old Benedetto moved to Genoa to take part in the family business as an apprentice. The family established lucrative financial transactions with clients in major Italian and European cities, such as Nuremberg, Milan, Kraków, and Rome.

Benedetto Odescalchi reigned as Pope Innocent XI from 1676 until 1689. His male-line nephew Livio Odescalchi was granted by his uncle the Duchy of Ceri. After his participation to the 1683 Battle of Vienna, he was granted the Duchy of Syrmia (around Ilok Castle, now divided between Serbia and Croatia) and the dignity of prince of the Holy Roman Empire by Leopold I. He also brought the Duchy of Bracciano from the Orsini family. Livio Odescalchi died in 1713 without a male line heir and all this titles and estate went to his cousin Baldassare Erba Odescalchi.

Erba family
Innocent XI's sister, Lucrezia Odescalchi, had married Alessandro Erba in 1621. The Erba family is allegedly descended from Enrico Erba, Imperial vicar of Milan around 1165. Their son Antonio Maria (1624-1694)was granted the title of marquess of Mondonico in 1684. He had three sons : Alessandro, founder of the Erba Odescalchi line, Baldassare, founder of the Odescalchi line, and Benedetto, a cardinal.

Erba Odescalchi line
The Erba Odescalchi line, though senior, did not inherit the bulk of the Odescalchi inheritance. They inherited the title of prince of Monteleone (in Calabria) from the Piatti family in 1749.

Antonio Maria Erba-Odescalchi, Pope Innocent's great-grandnephew and Cardinal Benedetto Erba-Odescalchi's nephew, was a Doctor in Civil and Canon Law (Milan 1733), which allowed him to pursue a career in the Papal Court in Rome as a church lawyer. He became a Protonotary Apostolic in 1737 and a Referendary (Judge) of the Two Tribunals of Justice and Grace in 1739. He was named a cardinal in 1759 and given the office of Vicar-General of the Pope for the City of Rome. He died in 1762.

The Erba Odescalchi of Monteleone emigrated in Hungary in the early 19th c. and went extinct in 1924. Their titles were inherited by the Cech Erba Odescalchi family, extinct in 1979.

Odescalchi line
The titles of Livio Odescalchi (prince Odescalchi of the Holy Roman, Empire, Duke of Syrmia, Ceri and Bracciano) were confirmed in 1714 to Baldassare Erba, who took the name Odescalchi. His descendants settled in Rome as part of the highest rank of pontical nobility.

Roman Line
The Pope's grand-nephew Cardinal Benedetto Erba Odescalchi held a doctorate in Civil and Canon Law (Pavia, 1700), and was Papal Nuncio in Poland from 1712 to 1714. He was named Archbishop of Milan in 1712 (resigning in 1736 after a stroke), and was created a cardinal in January 1714. He died in Milan on 13 December 1740.

Carlo Odescalchi, S.J., was the son of Prince Baldassare Erba-Odescalchi, and Valeria Caterina Giustiniani. His family was in exile in Hungary during his youth, having fled the French forces of First Consul Bonaparte. He obtained a Doctorate in Civil and Canon Law. Pope Pius VII sent him on several minor diplomatic missions to Hungary. He became Auditor (Judge) of the Sacred Roman Rota in 1815, and joined the restored Society of Jesus in 1818. He was promoted Auditor of His Holiness and Canon of the Vatican Basilica. On 10 March 1823 Odescalchi was created a cardinal and named Archbishop of Ferrara; he resigned the diocese in 1826 to pursue a higher career in the Papal Curia as Prefect of the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars. He was named Bishop of Sabina in 1833; he resigned in 1838 to return to the Jesuits. He died in Modena in 1841.

The head of the family now is the representative of several noble titles, but none are recognized in Italy : Prince Odescalchi (papal nobility and nobility of the Holy Roman Empire), Duke of Syrmia (hungarian nobility with the former dignity of Magnate), prince of Bassano and Duke of Bracciano (italian nobility, formerly with the dignity of Grandee of Spain). The family owns the Palazzo Odescalchi in Rome and the Orsini-Odescalchi Castle in Bracciano, as well as large estates in Italy. The castle in Bracciano was originally an Orsini family fortress until it was sold to pay debts.

The family is currently represented by Carlo Odescalchi (b.1954), whose heir is his son Baldassare Odescalchi (b.1993).

Hungarian line
A junior member of the house, prince Augusto Odescalchi (1808-1848) settled in Hungary. His descendants were integrated in the Hungarian nobility. In the 20th century, Prince Karoly Odescalchi and his son, Prince Paul, were members of the Hungarian resistance to Nazism, as well as Communism.

title: Erba-Odescalchi


text:
File:Just William.jpg

Just William

Image from internet altered by Tobymarshman.

title: File:Just William.jpg