text:
User talk:Zoney/Archive07

Hello, this is the seventh of my archive pages (see also my other archives). Please leave responses even to this page, on the main talk page where I and others will see them! Thanks! zoney ♣ talk 13:35, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the warm welcome
as the headline says.... but thats kind of typical irish, isn't it?

I also took the wikiaddict test thingy..and got 81 points straight on I'm trying to improve my english in this way, and so started right on with the Sister Fidelma article..

Lectonar 12:03, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Culture of Greece
Culture of Greece is this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.

Econ of Ireland
This is a whole can of worms, I'm afraid (see my comments on the talk page. It would be a pity if the article failed of FAC because of the title, but really Republic of Ireland is not quite right. What do you think we should do? Filiocht 12:41, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * Yeah, I know. It's getting messy. Still, at the end we should have at least one article available to get featured. There's some work/organisation to be done though. zoney ♣ talk 13:20, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * For the moment I'd say leave things as you have rearranged them for now and hope that nobody questions the status of the Republic. If we make ith 20th century, all the N Ireland stuff would have to be addressed. Then the bigger EoI article can be addressed later. Filiocht 13:43, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * Maybe we need to ask CGorman about this? Filiocht 14:12, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * I've apologised for dragging up such a mess, although I think I can blame the page move for instigating the whole thing! zoney ♣ talk 16:09, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * It seems a bit hasty, right enough, in hindsight. Still, it's a good article in search of a title. Filiocht 16:15, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the warm welcome (yes, another one!)
hey!

Just wanted to thank you for the warm welcome. Really appreciated it. Very Irish.

Slan go foill,

Ice.

VfD

 * I certainly don't blame you for voting Keep. I expect that some folks will want more kept than I do.  What my comment concerned was the entrenched warfare that has broken out, over and over again, on VfD.  You've not been one to participate, but the lines are well drawn.  Anthony's reappearance on VfD has probably set a lot of jaws and a lot of teeth on edge, because he does vote "Keep" to everything, regardless.  The bad thing that deleters do is call keepers immature or fans.  The bad thing that keepers do is imply (as Anthony states) that anyone who wants to delete is some kind of monster who is interested in destroying information, plus the hopes and dreams of innocent contributors.  When you said "no need for all this delete delete delete," I only wanted to gently suggest that we all try not to fall back into that.
 * I vote delete more often than keep, because most of the people who nominate articles have done a proper job: the articles they nominate fail the deletion guidelines. Where I get irritated is where some people have gone so far as to suggest that the mere nomination of an entry is wrong.  Unless the nomination is real persecution (user wars, e.g.), it's not wrong to make a nomination.  I almost wish more mistakes were made in nomination so that I could vote "keep" more often.

I also have a little irritation, personally, when people suggest that failing to exert an heroic rescue attempt is bad faith or bad character. I think it's great when people figure out new ways to redirect, when people find new stuff to supply wants, but I also think those are ancillary efforts. Where possible (e.g. my suggestion on the Exploding Wales thing), it should be done, but no one should be accused of being a monster for not doing so. I thought your comment crossed from saying that a helpful thing could be done to suggesting that other people were somehow bad for not doing it. That's what I meant by being respectful of one another.
 * In the past, I was not one who had a problem with Anthony, either, but I'm getting convinced that he actually is trolling, that his purpose is to rile up folks. His first words are often "blatant abuse of": that's the kind of language intended to elicit a violent response.  That said, I have tried to be respectful even when describing him to a new user on the VfD page.  I hope I can do better than that, and I hope we all can, and I certainly don't want to label anyone any way.  Forgive me if it seems that I have done so.  I meant only to "lash the vice and not the man" and only that once.  Geogre 00:49, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Train toilets
'''Posted on User:ClockworkTroll

Hi there,

I recently rewrote the passenger train human waste disposal, I'm not sure if you saw this before posting to the talk page. It now does not go into specifics for the US, merely noting that the traditional method (i.e. dump on the tracks) is still used in most of the world (except for newer stock). While it's hard to discern the exact situation in the Western world (without checking each country), some Western countries definitely still have it (certainly here in Ireland we have "dump it" trains, I presume Britain also), so along with the developing world, the traditional method is still used in most of the world (I'd actually be reasonably confident in saying most of the Western world, but that is less certain).

zoney ♣ talk 23:01, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * You're right - I didn't see your changes (which were excellent, I might add). Similarly, when you wrote on my talk page, I had already retracted my hasty remarks. It looks like our thoughts crossed in th email. :) ClockworkTroll 23:13, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

ICTOW
Hi Any ideas what to do about this week's ICTOW? Filiocht 13:10, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

 * AoI is fine by me. Filiocht 15:06, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

RfA
Zoney, thanks for your "yes" vote on my RFA. I'm looking forward to helping the other admins in keeping things tidy here. Joyous 00:11, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

Architecture
Hi Zoney, I see the Irish fraternity have Architecture of Ireland as this weeks collaboration, I've made the odd tweak, but as I'm in no way Irish don't like to really touch it; but you might find Richard Cassels of use. I'm planning to expand it, but have only just put it on the site, it probably wants a copy-edit too, but I've looked at it for too long to see what's in front of me, so need to leave it alone for an hour. Good luck with the collaboration. Giano 15:10, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Wow, thanks! That should prove useful! zoney ♣ talk 15:14, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Irish Universities
Regarding the Irish universities list i have two points to raise:
 * 1) MIC - this "college of education" should, i believe, not be placed under UL because whilst their is an agreement between the college and university the two are legally separate institutions like many colleges of education in Ireland (who because of the religious nature want to be legally distinct from essentially secular universities) and the list should maintain this distinction otherwise most of the colleges of education and some other colleges will have to be placed under the universities list growing it to an excessive and misleading lenght.
 * 2) The "Limerick School of Art and Design" is this not "LIT School of Art and Design" and therefore as such a faculty or school of the college, again not a distinct legal entity in its own right - if this is true then the school should not be listed in this page - the article is the right place for it - in the case of CIT the school and college are - and where previously - legally distinct entities - read the RTC Act that the article links to.

 * Just want to keep it consistant - Djegan 20:42, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * An interesting point regarding the college (why do colleges and universities always attempt to make themselves much older than immediately apparent) - as if age is more important than quality. It might be better to include a list of "defunct institutions" - which could be very appropriate, my point with Cork is that the school and college were distinct before the merger and maintained this distinction after the merger with the institute. Djegan 22:43, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * I am not so sure that their can be an independent institution within a institute of technology without special legislation, it might well be marketed as differently with different signage but this is quite distinct from been legally independent - a special point was made of Cork (Cork School of Music & Crawford College of Art & Design) in the Regionaal Technical Colleges Acts - their has never been an order for a designating a "School of Art and Design" in Limerick in any capacity within the RTC system (or NCEA/HETAC) theirfore I conclude that the school must be an integral part of the institute as distinct from an indepedent college within it.

 * The strange thing about LSAD (as you call it) is that it is does not appear in www.irishstatutebook.ie which up to date until 2002 and pretty definitive, nor does it appear on www.cro.ie - I am not trying to be awkward or difficult - if the school is independent - legally - then by all means portray it as such else when in doubt (leave it out). My rational toward asking for additional "proof" is that occassionally their is a tendency (or tempation) in Wikipedia to include something for the sake of it - for instance how many improper spellings (often obvious) of Irish words - because the way in which wiki feeds into so many projects it is too easy to poison the web with incorrect facts deliberate or otherwise. Djegan 23:25, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

St. Mary's Cathedral
Hi there,

I would like to know as to why you saw fit to move this page to Limerick Cathedral? It is not, nor ever has been, referred to as such. For one thing, Limerick also has a second cathedral, St. John's Cathedral. Please do not move this page again.

zoney ♣ talk 15:51, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Because it's not wikipedia standard to name cathedrals only by the saints they are dedicated to (you can surely see why doing so would be problematic?). If there are two Limerick cathedrals, the page should be named "St Mary's Cathedral, Limerick".  (By the way, the dot in the abbrev of saint is also generally dropped, though this isn't strictly enforced it makes things easier.) Joe D (t) 15:56, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * (it's not "wikipedia standard" to name cathedrals at all - usually those who built the cathedral name it!) zoney ♣ talk 16:55, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm refering to the page name, as I'm sure was obvious. With the regards to appending the city name, I'm aware that it's only used for diambiguation only, and that's why it should be named as such.  There were three St Mary's Cathedrals on the Irish list alone, there must be many throughout the world, and people may be searching for any one of them, not just the one in Limerick. Joe D (t) 17:46, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Bias
I'd like your opinion at Requests for arbitration. Thanks. Chameleon 12:23, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

River Lee (Ireland)
Thanks for having edited all the links (again). It occurred to me that would have been a better name for the (non-existant) page, but only after I'd already done all bar about two of them and I so didn't have the energy to go back and do it all again. Thank you. :o) — OwenBlacker 15:30, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks!!
Hi there. Thanks for the welcome (and the subsequent edits :-)). I'm just dipping my toes into this stuff & am still finding my feet. I'll try not to screw up! - Pcassidy

Style guide
Zoney, thanks for fixing the template. Maurreen 13:43, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Zoney, thanks for your comments about references. Can you clarify for me whether you meant anything other than the quotation near the beginning? Maurreen 08:27, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Rail map
Zoney

You need to move Farranfore to between Killarney and Tralee rather than Killarney and Mallow as now.

cheers

MarkD

STV
Thanks for the explanation. I appreciate your attitude, which seems to be one of what I would characterise as "healthy scepticism". I, too, have seen commissions whose purpose is to rubberstamp what has already been determined to be "The Way It Shall Be" by "The Powers That Be" and "Those In the Know", and am not suprised that this would be another one. Anything that can improve any system of voting should be followed up on IMO; that way we have no more "Florida 2000s", or current Ukraines. Rlquall 03:19, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Irish Physical Map
You created the physical map of Ireland, right?

Aran Island (Donegal) is Arranmore according to everyone but British map makers :-). Arainn Mhór in Irish, Arranmore to us natives. Only the Brits call it Aran Island, and insist on doing so usually till someone in the pub tells them not to on their first night on the island

Kiand 23:23, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * I'll fix it :-) when I get a chance! zoney ♣ talk 00:10, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

St. Johns
Nice photo of st. Johns. Did you take it yourself? Seabhcán 13:58, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Yep. It's not ideal - the sky came out perfect with the building under-exposed. I did some photo-shopping - but it's only barely acceptable and the lighting is now somewhat false (I did avoid washing out the sky though!).
 * zoney ♣ talk 14:02, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Irish cats
Hope my little intervention helps. Filiocht 08:37, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
 * I have emptied Category:Transportation in Ireland by moving everything to Category:Transport in Ireland. I guess there needs to be a Category:Transport companies of Ireland to replace Category:Transportation companies of Ireland? Nice work on the Transport in Ireland intro. I take it you agree with the page move? Filiocht 12:08, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

EU map on ga.wikipedia.org
Hi Zoney! I just noticed that the excellent map you uploaded at ga:An tAontas Eorpach has An Úkráin for Ukraine - the correct word is An Úcráin. Would you be able to change it? --Kwekubo 22:53, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar
Don't know what to say, really. I think you do tons more than I: the towns of Ireland project stunned me. Filiocht 08:26, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

Hurley
Regarding your addition a while back to Hurley (stick) - you said people mostly buy hurleys from local craftsmen. I'm not posing as an expert, but I would have thought most people (like myself) would buy them from sports shops. Am I wrong? J OHN C OLLISON [ Ludraman] 20:54, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the " " template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace " " with "  ". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. – Ram-Man (comment) (talk)  14:11, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

Money copyright status
Zoney, yes, I understand. Euro bills have a copyright notice. But the general copyright status of money images is in dispute right now. I'm tagging all money graphics as so that the copyright status can be determined and changed in one location, instead of on hundreds of different images. (Right now, there are hundreds of untagged money pics, since no one is quite sure how they should be tagged. If they are all tagged, then once we agree on the status, we can set that in one place.)

You can weigh into the debate here or here, or you can change the template's wording here. – Quadell (talk) (help)  15:55, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

 * Okay, what do you think the money template should say? How should these images be tagged?   – Quadell (talk) (help)   18:51, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

Ashgabat???
Hi. I don't know how often you visit the List of European cities with alternative names these days, but there has been a controversy on its talk page for the past ten days or so, and I was wondering if you would care to review it and possibly intervene. Thank you. Pasquale 18:19, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

EU map
hey, the map of the EU you uploaded shows the whole of Cyprus as being in the EU rather than just the Greek bit. Is this an accident, or do i not understand euro politics very well (probably the later). The bellman 03:17, 2004 Dec 18 (UTC)

 * It's deliberate. Officially speaking, to everyone except Turkey, the Republic of Cyprus (Greek Cypriot) is the only official government for the island. The northern occupation, though a de-facto self-governed territory, is not recognised internationally. It's all a bit hairy, but the simplest solution is to draw the whole island in as EU territory - it won't keep everyone happy but the alternative is more controversial. zoney ♣ talk 03:23, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Irish places
Hi there,

I notice you've made a group of edits to Irish location articles. I would suggest that the "stub" format for external links and see also is retained on those articles which are stubs. You will find it is an accepted option, and one that we use for Irish location article which aren't well developed (it looks tidier when there are no other sections/headings).

Also, as regards Northern Ireland... By and large, Irish topics are treated apolitically on Wikipedia thus far. Certainly as far as geographic articles are concerned, the island is treated as a whole. After all, the current partition is only a modern political development, and the region, while part of the United Kingdom, it physically/geographically, culturally, etc. remains Irish (the culture aspect is certainly trickier, some aspects are "simply British", many are most definitely truly Irish, and others are fudged as "Northern Irish", though that is a somewhat contrived term).

In summary, I would suggest you rename the UK geo-stub to GB geostub.

It does not make sense to distinguish the separate jurisdictions in Ireland when referring to things in an apolitical geographic sense.

Thanks, zoney ♣ talk 17:00, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * The heading format may be accepted, but it seems the Ireland places are the only articles that actually use the format. Which looks tidier is highly subjective, and I prefer the standard heading format.
 * As for the towns, these are not entirely geographic and apolitical: in an encyclopedia article the country which a town is in is just as relevant and important as its physical location, and these stubs rightly mention the political geography in the article. Using either stub 'plate would be factually correct, but IMO following political boundaries is more useful in the case of categorising stubs (we may differ on this because I use the templates in order to categorise the articles, while you may be more intrested in the text they add to the article).  I am particularly against using Great Britain as an area, as it has no political meaning whatsoever, and excludes all those other little islands that make up the UK, and belong on this category.
 * Perhaps this is one of those cases where Northern Ireland does derserve its own boilerplate: one that includes both categories? Joe D (t) 17:24, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

EU map - Thanks!
Thanks for help in answering my queries on the current EU map. The US CIA has recently added an entry about the EU to it's World Factbook. See it here:.

I don't know if it can be any use to Wikipedia, but hey, it's worth a shot. - Hoshie 10:46, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Zoney/Archive07


text: Category:Determinants

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

title: Category:Determinants


text:
Howie Epstein

Howard Norman Epstein (July 21, 1955 – February 23, 2003) was an American musician best known as a bassist with Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers.

Early life
Epstein was born in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. He grew up in a musical household. Epstein's father, Sam, was a top local record producer who worked with various rock and roll and soul groups in the 1950s and 1960s. Epstein graduated from Nicolet High School in Glendale, Wisconsin. He was Jewish.

Career
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Howie played mostly rhythm guitar or mandolin and sang in a number of both rock and roll and country Milwaukee bands that were regionally popular, including MHB Experience, Egz, Winks, Forearm Smash, and The Craze. When he felt he had gone as far as he could go in Milwaukee, Epstein decided to move to New York City, but before he could pack his gear, he was lured to the West Coast by a drummer friend to play bass in a new band that singer-songwriter John Hiatt was forming in Los Angeles. He stuck with Hiatt for two years and two albums (Slug Line and Two Bit Monsters).

The Heartbreakers
While playing on a Del Shannon album that Tom Petty was producing (Drop Down And Get Me), Epstein impressed Petty with his ability. Consequently, when Ron Blair, who had been bassist with Tom Petty and The Heartbreakers since the band's inception in 1976, announced that he was quitting due to burnout, Epstein was recruited to replace him. Epstein joined the band in 1982.

Epstein found a natural style, which he said emphasized "simplicity, playing in the pocket, getting into a steady groove. I've always considered myself a good team player and that's the way that the Heartbreakers operate. Everyone listens to what everyone else is doing musically." On September 1, 1982, Epstein made his live debut at the Santa Cruz Civic Auditorium in Santa Cruz, California, on the tour to promote the album, Long After Dark.

In 1990, Petty made the following comments about Epstein:

"You gotta love him, I don't know if I ever tell him how good he is. Tonight, there was a line early in the show I could just barely sing. I was having to work harder than I normally do to make it, I was getting really close on the mic. I was thinking, 'Oh boy, I hope I can do this ... ' I got to it and I heard Howie singing it with me over his mic. It sounded great, it sounded like a double track. I just looked at him, he caught my eye like 'Yeah!' It made me feel great, 'cause I know he was thinking the same thing, 'I know he's tired, I'll cover him. Wham! Got it!' That's what a great band's all about. That's what it's all about."

In 2002, Epstein was fired from the band due to his substance addiction. He was replaced with the returning Ron Blair. He made his final appearance with the Heartbreakers when the band was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in March 2002. In later interviews, Petty admitted that Epstein's behavior had become unpredictable: "He was just degenerating on us to the point where we thought keeping Howie in the band was actually doing him more harm than getting rid of him. His personal problems were vast and serious".

Collaborations
Epstein played bass on recordings by Eric Andersen, Bob Dylan, Carlene Carter, Johnny Cash, John Hiatt, Stevie Nicks, Roy Orbison, Carl Perkins, John Prine, Linda Ronstadt, Del Shannon, The Textones, The Village People and Warren Zevon.

Epstein earned acclaim as a songwriter and a producer. Epstein produced two albums for John Prine, 1991's The Missing Years, which won a Grammy Award for Best Contemporary Folk Recording, and Lost Dogs and Mixed Blessings.

Personal life and death
Epstein formed a creative and personal partnership with Carlene Carter, the daughter of country music stars June Carter Cash and Carl Smith and stepdaughter of country music star Johnny Cash, following her divorce from the English singer-songwriter Nick Lowe. Epstein produced Carter's hit album I Fell in Love (1990) and co-authored the title track with his longtime collaborator, Milwaukee songwriter Perry M. Lamek. Epstein and Carter were romantically involved as well.

In 2001, Epstein and Carter were "arrested in New Mexico with black tar heroin and a large amount of drug paraphernalia". At Petty's urging, Epstein later entered a drug rehabilitation center.

On February 23, 2003, Epstein died from complications related to drug use. MTV News reported that Epstein's death was caused by a heroin overdose. He was 47. Investigators were told Epstein had been using heroin. On the day of his death, Epstein was driven to St. Vincent Hospital in Santa Fe, New Mexico, by his girlfriend, who described him as "under distress". Epstein was taking antibiotics for an illness and had recently suffered from influenza, stomach problems, and an abscess on his leg, friends said.

In response to Epstein's death, Petty wrote the following in an article for Rolling Stone: "...there's a great sadness, because Howie was never not a Heartbreaker. He just got to where he couldn't do it anymore... It's like you got a tree dying in the backyard. And you're kind of used to the idea that it's dying. But you look out there one day and they cut it down. And you just can't imagine that beautiful tree isn't there anymore."

Epstein was survived by his brothers, Craig and Bradley Epstein, and by his daughter, Jamie Leffler. He was interred at Second Home Cemetery in Greenfield, Wisconsin.

title: Howie Epstein


text:
Talk:Tertiary education fees in Australia

/Rewrite

Commonwealth Supported Places - Permanent Residents
The article says Commonwealth supported places are available to citizens of Australia and New Zealand and some Australian permanent residents.

It is my understanding that commonwealth supported places are available to all Australian permanent residents, however HELP is only available to Australian citizens and permanent residents who hold an humanitarian permanent residency visa. New Zealand citizens and all other classes of permanent resident have no access to HELP (meaning that they have to pay the student contribution up front).

(The exception is people who are permanent residents, and somehow manage to not be resident in Australia while undertaking the units for which they are claiming a commonwealth contribution). —Preceding unsigned comment added by P1mason (talk • contribs) 06:41, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Link is here

If nobody has any objections, I'll change the word some to all in the next few days.

P1mason (talk) 06:33, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: Move to Higher Education Loan Programme
I was under the impression HECS and HELP were two different entities.

Has this changed.

The last leaflet I was mailed before finishing seemed to suggest that things had not gone quite this far. --ZayZayEM 13:40, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * "From 2005, eligible students will have access to deferred payment arrangements through the Higher Education Loan Programme (HELP). :The HELP scheme consists of three loans:

 * HECS-HELP
 * FEE-HELP
 * OS-HELP (only available to undergraduates)."

 * I wish it wasn't true either... We need to go into HECS-HELP vs FEE-HELP and OS-HELP, I don't quite have the time. The page is here:

 * -- Aaron Hill 04:54, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)

 * Meh, I got out just in time it seems. And I'm skipping the country =P --ZayZayEM 13:30, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * UPDATE

HECS are now HECS-HELP. HECS-HELP refers to Commonwealth supprted places, OS is for Australian students overseas, and FEE-HELP (formerly PELS) are for postgraduate students. HECS-HELP can consist of an optional upfront payments for a discount. This is not to be confused with Full-Fee places, wich take the full amount upfront (for lower entrance requirements).

There should also be some discussion about the new 8 year full-time and 16-year part time limit on HECS-HELP loans, and cap on PELS/Fee-Help loans.

Students can only study for a MAXIMUM of 8 years (ft) under HECS based/Commonwealth Supported Places (CSP), and then are no longer entitled to CSP courses.

There are PELS (FEE-HELP) loans for post-graduate/honours courses, but not every university offers PELS places at the post graduate level, leaving only the possibility of full-fee places.

FEE-HELP has now been limited to a lifelong maximum of $50,000 (when it was formerly unlimited).

Updated the main page. --Ozguy 01:29, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * FEE-HELP is available for undergraduate courses also. - Aaron Hill 13:02, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks, I never realised it was also for undergrad, given most are HECS-Based. There's also a 20% loan fee associated with using FEE-HELP for undergraduate degrees. Should I include this in the article? - Ozguy 08:33, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

History improvements
I seem to recall that there was always the option of paying HECS up front at a discounted rate. This should be mentioned if it's true.

The article says "When introduced it was a fee charged to all university students of $1,800" -- what was the basis of the fee? Per-subject? Did part-time students pay the same as full-time students? From my limited time at uni, I seem to recall it being based on class hours or credit points or something. It then goes on to say "When first introduced, your HECS was roughly AU$2000 per year of full-time study, irrespective of course or institution." so these should be made consistent

Shermozle 17:26, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

According to the Universities Australia website the discount when HECS was first introduced in 1989 was 15%, it was then increased to 25% in 1993 and dropped back to 20% in 2005.

The annual rate of $1,800 was for a standard full time student, so those studying more or less than full time are charged pro rata. I'll try and write some of this up properly when I have a little more time.

Krisgesling (talk) 04:58, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I might also add quick bit on the introduction of the Higher Education Administration Charge (HEAC) in 1987, more recently called the General Service Charge (GSC), and then its removal through Voluntary Student Unionism, though I'm sure VSU has its own article and hence won't go into detail.

Krisgesling (talk) 05:14, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

What does this mean?
"HECS-HELP (formerly HECS) maintains the same principles of HECS, however have since undergone major changes."

I'm not quite sure what this is trying to get at. HECS-HELP was an intermediate plan that followed HECS and has now undergone major changes to become HELP? (I don't live in Australia so I'm not up on the latest wranglings over this.) Shermozle 17:35, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

It's not that difficult. HECS-HELP is the same as the HECS payment system, it still maintains the same method of deferring university tuition, the main difference is the large 25% increase in tuition costs, and the government's decision to limit access to education after only 8 years. Hope that helps. -- PSYCH 12:29, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * HECS did not become "HELP" it is just now called HECS-HELP. I don't know why someone changed it the first place! I'll change it back to the correct title of HECS-HELP. -- PSYCH 08:50, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Howard's 40% increase
Howard increased HECS by an avergage of 40% & introduced a three tier system. So, how is this average taken? Is each tier given equal weighting? Or is it the average taken over the total amount of HECS paid? User:Jimp 16Jul05

compulsory repayment for 2006-07 year
I received my HELP statement with the new threshold for compulsory repayment. I will update the table.

cheers Visik 13:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Limits on Education
What happened to all information about the limitations to education? There is now no mention on the maximum 6 year (12 full-time semester maximum) entitlement to study. Quite a serious limitation, I don't know why it was removed. Someperson203 13:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Seeing as how no one responded, I'll revert that section to add the facts. If anyone objects, discuss it here. 08:32, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

TAFE is Tertiary too
There are many tertiary courses that aren't covered by the schemes mentioned. The history of tertiary education in Australia goes back to the Mechanics Institutes that predate the Universities. matturn 01:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That's a good point. University-centric people (like me) probably tend to think of universities when they hear the term "tertiary education". However, tafes are obviously also tertiary education institutions. In fact, I would say the term 'tertiary education' is only really useful because it includes universities and other institutions like tafes (if we only want to talk about universities, then we can just say 'university education'). This article (as it is now) is really only about university education fees. Maybe the best way to go is to use the language of the schemes that the article is talking about - ie: "higher education". Then again, this is not very clear language. I guess the best way to go would be to leave the article as being about "tertiary education fees", and include material about tafes, etc. -- DonkeyKong64 (Mathematician in training) 16:31, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Problems with HECs/HELP
I'm currently a uni student, VP of the North in the TUU and there's nothing on this article about the problems with the HECS/HELP scheme even though it's much talked about among uni students in Australia particularly among student council reps. There should be something on here about how many students don't pay off their HECs debt, going overseas or even dying before their HECs can be paid off. This should be on here, it's a serious issue. I'll try and put something together. Katana  Geldar  09:02, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

In Watts, M., (1997) 'Gender Segregation in Higher Educational Attainment in Australia 1978-94' in Higher Education Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 45-61, it states that:

"It has been calculated that, on the basis of their expected graduate incomes, women, on average, will have paid back 77% of their (Labor Government) HECS by the age of 65, whereas the corresponding male figure is 93% (Chapman 1996, p. 44)."

Unfortunately it doesn't provide a proper reference for Chapman but I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to track down. Again I'll write it up properly when I get a chance.

Krisgesling (talk) 05:06, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Removal of Domestic Undergraduate Full Fee places
In the introductory paragraph it talks about domestic unsupported students paying up to $100,000 however it was my impression that the Rudd Government removed Domestic Undergraduate Full Fee (DUFF) places. When I get a chance I'll track down some reference and perhaps add it to the history.

Krisgesling (talk) 05:10, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Non-Bachelors courses
Current content is excessively skewed toward undergraduate Bachelors courses. Besides non-university education (TAFE), there are also shorter university courses (Diplomas?) and more advanced university courses (Masters, PhD) that should be covered. —DIV (2002:6575:32AB:0:0:0:6575:32AB (talk) 07:09, 1 June 2014 (UTC)) N.B. This signature should have read, "101.117.50.171 (talk) 09:15, 1 June 2014 (UTC)".

Please help this article
I work in a university but got confused by the end of the second para of the lede. Could someone who really knows this stuff please sort the article out? Particularly by separating (a) review of the history from (b) setting out what a student needs to know right now. If the 2014 Budget proposals go through and are then simply incorporated here, I fear that the article will be of little use to anybody. Wikiain (talk) 02:45, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The current fees are at http://studyassist.gov.au/sites/studyassist/helppayingmyfees/csps/pages/student-contribution-amounts#2014 TRS-80 (talk) 13:58, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Tertiary education fees in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100220001154/http://www.goingtouni.gov.au:80/Main/FeesLoansAndScholarships/Undergraduate/CommonwealthSupportForYourPlaceAndHECS-HELP/WhatYouPay.htm to http://www.goingtouni.gov.au/Main/FeesLoansAndScholarships/Undergraduate/CommonwealthSupportForYourPlaceAndHECS-HELP/WhatYouPay.htm#T5

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 19:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tertiary education fees in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090514185952/http://www.goingtouni.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/833E6C74-1D77-4088-ABA2-5B39647F1734/0/pre2005_brochure.pdf to http://www.goingtouni.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/833E6C74-1D77-4088-ABA2-5B39647F1734/0/pre2005_brochure.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090709105109/http://www.goingtouni.gov.au/Main/FeesLoansAndScholarships/Undergraduate/FullFeesAndFEE-HELP/Default.htm to http://www.goingtouni.gov.au/Main/FeesLoansAndScholarships/Undergraduate/FullFeesAndFEE-HELP/Default.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090709105109/http://www.goingtouni.gov.au/Main/FeesLoansAndScholarships/Undergraduate/FullFeesAndFEE-HELP/Default.htm to http://www.goingtouni.gov.au/Main/FeesLoansAndScholarships/Undergraduate/FullFeesAndFEE-HELP/Default.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:22, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Clear up the history
The history section seems to focus too much on certain details while leaving the major policy implications unmentioned. For example there's a lot of text devoted to the "SLE" and other limits but not much talk of changes to the discount system or valuation of courses or the repayment system. There were lots of changes in the 90s.

I've found a really good source for this info here

--Zyzzek (talk) 02:31, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

2020 Australian University Fee Adjustments
I'm not fit to edit myself, but thought it important to mention that this year, 2020, the fee structures for Commonwealth Supported Places in the HECS scheme has been overhauled, with STEM & agricultural fields being subsidised dramatically more and humanities fields dramatically less:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-23/what-university-fees-increasing-how-funding-works/12381362

~Angus Small

Rates change every year. New rates are at https://www.dese.gov.au/higher-education-loan-program/approved-hep-information/funding-clusters-and-indexed-rates ~chris w — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wongcr (talk • contribs) 00:25, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Abolition of University Fees
This section is currently fairly subjective and should at least have a reference to an economic paper for increased university participation increasing future government tax revenue that is sufficient to pay off the debt incurred at the current participation rate. In particular, whether the increased tax revenue is always tenable subject to interest rate and if the probability of brain drain out of the country would impact on such an argument.

At the very least, the subjective sentence at the end of the section should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:79A0:A400:EC08:165:A408:B786 (talk) 04:31, 7 February 2021 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Eason Jordan

Untitled
Does the use of quotation marks imply that somebody is being quoted? Otherwise, what's up with the scare marks around the phrase taken down here? Either use a phrase that stands without quotes, or say who the source is, please. --Christofurio 13:43, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)

Another interesting angle has to do with Marianne Pearl, widow of Daniel Pearl, a Wall Street Journal reporter murdered in 2002 by jihadists in Pakistan. Rumors that Eason is 'involved' with Ms Pearl may have helped persuade the CNN honchos to escort him out the door. Might such an involvement have impacted his coverage -- i.e. led him to see journalist-martyr-murdervictims in the Daniel Pearl mode where, on cool reflection, he has had to acknowledge that there isn't evidence of anything more than wartime accidents? --Christofurio 13:54, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)

Although it was old, I added the link to Jordan's 1996 bio because it included information not found elsewhere. Randy 03:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

NPOV???
What's with the new NPOV alert? I can certainly understand if some of this seems heavy-handed, but you're supposed to indicate specific objections on the talk page so that we can all follow what needs to be addressed. The NPOV notice even refers to this. The "scare quotes" comment seems to have been handled a long time ago. -- Randy2063 02:36, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * "Mainstream media's refusal to run the story," and the like. This article reads like a collection of quotes taken straight from the right-wing blogosphere, as opposed to an article covering it.  When did "the mainstream media" refuse to cover something, and who is their spokesperson? Shem (talk) 19:41, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Actually, for all its heavy-handedness, this article was well documented. If you check the last reference you'll see that the Washington Post's media critic gives credit to the bloggers for driving the story. If you doubt that the media wasn't covering it, you're welcome to contribute sources of your own. I may add one correction later: It wasn't just the "right-wing" of the blogosphere. There were moderates and liberals who joined in as well. -- Randy2063 21:01, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The article says "right-wing of the blogosphere"; I used its wording. Nor did I say it was not covered (despite that it was, for a week on FoxNews.com), I said I take issue with a Wikipedia article stating that the mysterious "mainstream media" refused (key verb) to cover something.  I'd be interested in seeing the moderate-to-liberal blogs who "joined in" on Eason as well, though.  I rather enjoy keeping tabs on the FoxNews-CNN-CBS media war, but didn't keep track of the blogs who covered Mr. Jordan here.  Again, the wording makes this article read like, as Glenn Reynolds said in the WaPo link, a "right-wing of the blogosphere scalping."  I did not insert the the tag as an "NPOV alert," I inserted it because I read POV language, and assumed that was the proper protocol. Shem (talk) 23:51, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I understand what you mean about the wording. I'll have to look at that later. I wasn't referring to your comment when I said about "right-wing" -- I knew it was in the article. I just don't have time to source it properly for a correction. But the only others I can think of right now are Andrew Sullivan, Mickey Kaus and Jeff Jarvis who I'd really call moderates. I thought there were outright liberals too, and I'll keep looking.

I don't know when FoxNews.com (the website) got into it, but the cable network was surprisingly late. From my quick scanning right now (from Reynolds), it looked like it began slowly spilling out of the blogosphere after February 4th and 5th. Kaus was still talking about their silence on the 4th. I don't think FoxNews got into it yet by that time either. -- Randy2063 00:39, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Iraq War Logs & Johnson's Claims
I noticed this article ends at 2005. In 2010, Wikileaks published the Iraq War Logs, which confirm US military actions against journalists in Iraq in intelligence reports between 2004 and 2009. There was significant controversy when Johnson claimed journalists were killed by American forces in 2005. Is it worth adding a hyperlink between these pages given their relationship? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:41:200:52C0:A5C8:5AE7:E4CD:8CEA (talk) 15:05, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Eason Jordan


text:
Category:Approximation theory

In mathematics, approximation theory is concerned with how functions can be approximated with other, simpler, functions, and with characterizing in a quantitative way the errors introduced thereby.

title: Category:Approximation theory


text:
Euler's three-body problem

In physics and astronomy, Euler's three-body problem is to solve for the motion of a particle that is acted upon by the gravitational field of two other point masses that are fixed in space. This problem is exactly solvable, and yields an approximate solution for particles moving in the gravitational fields of prolate and oblate spheroids. This problem is named after Leonhard Euler, who discussed it in memoirs published in 1760. Important extensions and analyses were contributed subsequently by Lagrange, Liouville, Laplace, Jacobi, Le Verrier,  Hamilton, Poincaré, Birkhoff  among others.

Euler's problem also covers the case when the particle is acted upon by other inverse-square central forces, such as the electrostatic interaction described by Coulomb's law. The classical solutions of the Euler problem have been used to study chemical bonding, using a semiclassical approximation of the energy levels of a single electron moving in the field of two atomic nuclei, such as the diatomic ion HeH2+. This was first done by Wolfgang Pauli in his doctoral dissertation under Arnold Sommerfeld, a study of the first ion of molecular hydrogen, namely the hydrogen molecule-ion H2+. These energy levels can be calculated with reasonable accuracy using the Einstein–Brillouin–Keller method, which is also the basis of the Bohr model of atomic hydrogen. More recently, as explained further in the quantum-mechanical version, analytical solutions to the eigenvalues (energies) have been obtained: these are a generalization of the Lambert W function.

The exact solution, in the full three dimensional case, can be expressed in terms of Weierstrass's elliptic functions For convenience, the problem may also be solved by numerical methods, such as Runge–Kutta integration of the equations of motion. The total energy of the moving particle is conserved, but its linear and angular momentum are not, since the two fixed centers can apply a net force and torque. Nevertheless, the particle has a second conserved quantity that corresponds to the angular momentum or to the Laplace–Runge–Lenz vector as limiting cases.

The Euler three-body problem is known by a variety of names, such as the problem of two fixed centers, the Euler–Jacobi problem, and the two-center Kepler problem. Various generalizations of Euler's problem are known; these generalizations add linear and inverse cubic forces and up to five centers of force. Special cases of these generalized problems include Darboux's problem and Velde's problem.

Overview and history
Euler's three-body problem is to describe the motion of a particle under the influence of two centers that attract the particle with central forces that decrease with distance as an inverse-square law, such as Newtonian gravity or Coulomb's law. Examples of Euler's problem include an electron moving in the electric field of two nuclei, such as the hydrogen molecule-ion H2+. The strength of the two inverse-square forces need not be equal; for illustration, the two nuclei may have different charges, as in the molecular ion HeH2+.

In Euler's three-body problem we assume that the two centres of attraction are stationary. This is not strictly true in a case like H2+, but the protons experience much less acceleration than the electron. However, the Euler three-body problem does not apply to a planet moving in the gravitational field of two stars, because in that case at least one of the stars experiences acceleration similar to that experienced by the planet.

This problem was first considered by Leonhard Euler, who showed that it had an exact solution in 1760. Joseph Louis Lagrange solved a generalized problem in which the centers exert both linear and inverse-square forces. Carl Gustav Jacob Jacobi showed that the rotation of the particle about the axis of the two fixed centers could be separated out, reducing the general three-dimensional problem to the planar problem.

In 2008, Birkhauser published a book entitled "Integrable Systems in Celestial Mechanics". In this book an Irish mathematician, Diarmuid Ó Mathúna, gives closed form solutions for both the planar two fixed centers problem and the three dimensional problem.

Constants of motion
The problem of two fixed centers conserves energy; in other words, the total energy $$E$$ is a constant of motion. The potential energy is given by

V(\mathbf{r}) = - \frac{\mu_1}{r_1} - \frac{\mu_2}{r_2} $$

where $$\mathbf{r}$$ represents the particle's position, and $$r_1$$ and $$r_2$$ are the distances between the particle and the centers of force; $$\mu_1$$ and $$\mu_2$$ are constants that measure the strength of the first and second forces, respectively. The total energy equals sum of this potential energy with the particle's kinetic energy

E = \frac{\mathbf{p}^2}{2 m} + V(\mathbf{r}) $$

where $$m$$ and $$\mathbf{p}$$ are the particle's mass and linear momentum, respectively.

The particle's linear and angular momentum are not conserved in Euler's problem, since the two centers of force act like external forces upon the particle, which may yield a net force and torque on the particle. Nevertheless, Euler's problem has a second constant of motion

C = r_{1}^{2}\,r_{2}^{2}\,\frac{d\theta_{1}}{dt} \frac{d\theta_{2}}{dt} + 2\,a \left( \mu_{1} \cos \theta_{1} - \mu_{2} \cos \theta_{2} \right), $$

where $$2\,a$$ is the separation of the two centers of force, $$\theta_1$$ and $$\theta_2$$ are the angles of the lines connecting the particle to the centers of force, with respect to the line connecting the centers. This second constant of motion was identified by E. T. Whittaker in his work on analytical mechanics, and generalized to $$n$$ dimensions by Coulson and Joseph in 1967. In the Coulson–Joseph form, the constant of motion is written

B = \mathbf{L}^2 + a^2 p_n^2 + 2\,a\,x_n \left(\frac{\mu_1 }{r_1} - \frac{\mu_2}{r_2} \right), $$

where $$p_n$$ denotes the momentum component along the $$x_n$$ axis on which the attracting centers are located. This constant of motion corresponds to the total angular momentum squared $$\mathbf{L}^2$$ in the limit when the two centers of force converge to a single point ($$a\rightarrow 0$$), and proportional to the Laplace–Runge–Lenz vector $$\mathbf{A}$$ in the limit when one of the centers goes to infinity ($$a\rightarrow\infty$$ while $$|x_n - a|$$ remains finite).

Quantum mechanical version
A special case of the quantum mechanical three-body problem is the hydrogen molecule ion,. Two of the three bodies are nuclei and the third is a fast moving electron. The two nuclei are 1800 times heavier than the electron and thus modeled as fixed centers. It is well known that the Schrödinger wave equation is separable in prolate spheroidal coordinates and can be decoupled into two ordinary differential equations coupled by the energy eigenvalue and a separation constant. However, solutions required series expansions from basis sets. Nonetheless, through experimental mathematics, it was found that the energy eigenvalue was mathematically a generalization of the Lambert W function (see Lambert W function and references therein for more details). The hydrogen molecular ion in the case of clamped nuclei can be completely worked out within a Computer algebra system. The fact that its solution is an implicit function is revealing in itself. One of the successes of theoretical physics is not simply a matter that it is amenable to a mathematical treatment but that the algebraic equations involved can be symbolically manipulated until an analytical solution, preferably a closed form solution, is isolated. This type of solution for a special case of the three-body problem shows us the possibilities of what is possible as an analytical solution for the quantum three-body and many-body problem.

Generalizations
An exhaustive analysis of the soluble generalizations of Euler's three-body problem was carried out by Adam Hiltebeitel in 1911. The simplest generalization of Euler's three-body problem is to add a third center of force midway between the original two centers, that exerts only a linear Hooke force. The next generalization is to augment the inverse-square force laws with a force that increases linearly with distance. The final set of generalizations is to add two fixed centers of force at positions that are imaginary numbers, with forces that are both linear and inverse-square laws, together with a force parallel to the axis of imaginary centers and varying as the inverse cube of the distance to that axis.

The solution to the original Euler problem is an approximate solution for the motion of a particle in the gravitational field of a prolate body, i.e., a sphere that has been elongated in one direction, such as a cigar shape. The corresponding approximate solution for a particle moving in the field of an oblate spheroid (a sphere squashed in one direction) is obtained by making the positions of the two centers of force into imaginary numbers. The oblate spheroid solution is astronomically more important, since most planets, stars and galaxies are approximately oblate spheroids; prolate spheroids are very rare.

The analogue of the oblate case in general relativity is a Kerr black hole. The geodesics around this object are known to be integrable, owing to the existence of a fourth constant of motion (in addition to energy, angular momentum, and the magnitude of four-momentum), known as the Carter constant. Euler's oblate three body problem and a Kerr black hole share the same mass moments, and this is most apparent if the metric for the latter is written in Kerr–Schild coordinates.

The analogue of the oblate case augmented with a linear Hooke term is a Kerr–de Sitter black hole. As in Hooke's law, the cosmological constant term depends linearly on distance from the origin, and the Kerr–de Sitter spacetime also admits a Carter-type constant quadratic in the momenta.

Original Euler problem
In the original Euler problem, the two centers of force acting on the particle are assumed to be fixed in space; let these centers be located along the x-axis at ±a. The particle is likewise assumed to be confined to a fixed plane containing the two centers of force. The potential energy of the particle in the field of these centers is given by

V(x, y) = \frac{-\mu_1}{\sqrt{\left( x - a \right)^2 + y^2}} - \frac{\mu_2}{\sqrt{\left( x + a \right)^2 + y^2}}. $$

where the proportionality constants μ1 and μ2 may be positive or negative. The two centers of attraction can be considered as the foci of a set of ellipses. If either center were absent, the particle would move on one of these ellipses, as a solution of the Kepler problem. Therefore, according to Bonnet's theorem, the same ellipses are the solutions for the Euler problem.

Introducing elliptic coordinates,

\,x = \,a \cosh \xi \cos \eta, $$

\,y = \,a \sinh \xi \sin \eta, $$

the potential energy can be written as

\begin{align} V(\xi, \eta) & = \frac{-\mu_{1}}{a\left( \cosh \xi - \cos \eta \right)} - \frac{\mu_{2}}{a\left( \cosh \xi + \cos \eta \right)} \\[8pt] & = \frac{-\mu_{1} \left( \cosh \xi + \cos \eta \right) - \mu_{2} \left( \cosh \xi - \cos \eta \right)}{a\left( \cosh^{2} \xi - \cos^{2} \eta \right)}, \end{align} $$

and the kinetic energy as

T = \frac{ma^{2}}{2} \left( \cosh^{2} \xi - \cos^{2} \eta \right) \left( \dot{\xi}^{2} + \dot{\eta}^{2} \right). $$

This is a Liouville dynamical system if ξ and η are taken as φ1 and φ2, respectively; thus, the function Y equals

\,Y = \cosh^{2} \xi - \cos^{2} \eta $$

and the function W equals

W = -\mu_{1} \left( \cosh \xi + \cos \eta \right) - \mu_{2} \left( \cosh \xi - \cos \eta \right). $$

Using the general solution for a Liouville dynamical system, one obtains

\frac{ma^{2}}{2} \left( \cosh^{2} \xi - \cos^{2} \eta \right)^{2} \dot{\xi}^{2} = E \cosh^{2} \xi + \left( \frac{\mu_{1} + \mu_{2}}{a} \right) \cosh \xi - \gamma $$

\frac{ma^{2}}{2} \left( \cosh^{2} \xi - \cos^{2} \eta \right)^{2} \dot{\eta}^{2} = -E \cos^{2} \eta + \left( \frac{\mu_{1} - \mu_{2}}{a} \right) \cos \eta + \gamma $$

Introducing a parameter u by the formula

du = \frac{d\xi}{\sqrt{E \cosh^2 \xi + \left( \frac{\mu_1 + \mu_2}{a} \right) \cosh \xi - \gamma}} = \frac{d\eta}{\sqrt{-E \cos^2 \eta + \left( \frac{\mu_1 - \mu_2}{a} \right) \cos \eta + \gamma}}, $$

gives the parametric solution

u = \int \frac{d\xi}{\sqrt{E \cosh^{2} \xi + \left( \frac{\mu_{1} + \mu_{2}}{a} \right) \cosh \xi - \gamma}} = \int \frac{d\eta}{\sqrt{-E \cos^{2} \eta + \left( \frac{\mu_{1} - \mu_{2}}{a} \right) \cos \eta + \gamma}}. $$

Since these are elliptic integrals, the coordinates ξ and η can be expressed as elliptic functions of u.

title: Euler's three-body problem


text:
Washington County, D.C.

The County of Washington was one of five original political entities within the District of Columbia, the capital of the United States. Formed by the Organic Act of 1801 from parts of Montgomery and Prince George's County, Maryland, Washington County referred to all of the District of Columbia "on the east side of the Potomac, together with the islands therein." The bed of the Potomac River was also considered to be part of Washington County.

Originally Alexandria County, D.C. formed the portion of the District west of the Potomac River, ceded by the commonwealth of Virginia. Alexandria County, including the City of Alexandria, was returned to Virginia by Congress in 1846, leaving just Washington County. Within Washington County there were two incorporated areas, the City of Washington and the City of Georgetown. At times the rural parts outside of the cities were referred to as "Washington County" but all three were part of the county. Upon the passage of the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871, the three governments were unified under a single District government and made coterminous, ending Washington County's separate identity.

Government
Starting in 1801, Washington County was governed by a board of commissioners, or a levy court, made up all of the Justices of the Peace, or magistrates, of the county appointed by the President and the number of those were not fixed. In 1812, the board was reorganized with seven magistrates, two from east of Rock Creek but outside of Washington City, two from west of Rock Creek but outside of Georgetown and three from Georgetown, with none from Washington City until 1848 when four members from the city were added. The board was again changed in 1863 when it was reduced to nine members, three from the city of Washington, one from Georgetown, and five from county lands outside the city. These justices carried out the duties of county commissioners. Despite being within the federal territory, Congress left Washington County subject to the laws of Maryland.

History
Rural Washington County, the part outside of the cities, included Pleasant Plains, the estate of the Holmead family; Edgewood, home of Treasury Secretary Salmon P. Chase; and Petworth, the estate of Colonel John Tayloe III. Also contained in rural Washington County was the U.S. Soldiers' Retirement Home, where President Abraham Lincoln lived during his summers as president. Despite its comparatively large geographic size, rural Washington County was sparsely populated until the end of the 19th century.

Slavery was legal in Washington County, as it was in Maryland, but it was illegal to import a slave from Alexandria County for sale in Washington County. Slavery was ended in Washington County in April 1862 by the District of Columbia Compensated Emancipation Act. Except for the abolition of slavery by the unionist "Restored Government of Virginia" in April 1864, the DC Emancipation Act was the last part of the United States to end slavery before the 13th Amendment ended it throughout the country.

During the American Civil War (1861–65), Washington County contained a partial circle of defensive fortifications that made Washington one of the most heavily fortified cities in the world at that time. The forts surrounding Union-held territory in Virginia completed the defense circle. The Battle of Fort Stevens, July 11–12, 1864, took place in Washington County.

After the Civil War, many of the old estates in Washington County were sold and developed into suburbs for the growing capital city. Among the earliest developments were LeDroit Park and Mount Pleasant, which eventually became the first "streetcar suburb". Uniontown and Barry Farm, a settlement for freedmen, developed east of the Anacostia River.

Washington County and the cities of Washington and Georgetown were abolished in 1871 following the passage of the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871. This law brought the entire District of Columbia under the control of a territorial government headed by an appointed governor, an appointed eleven-member council, and a locally-elected 22-member assembly. Two of the eleven council seats were reserved for representatives from the District outside of the cities of Washington and Georgetown. Three years later, Congress abolished the territorial government in favor of direct rule over the District by an appointed three-member commission.

title: Washington County, D.C.


text:
Talk:The Protectorate

[Untitled]
I've re-written the entry to make it more consistent with associated Wiki articles. I'm happy to have it reviewed. [BTW: anyone know who "Abbott" is?] StockholmSyndrome 19:48, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I suspect Abbott is Wilbur Cortez Abbott, who compiled the standard (but flawed) collection of sources on Cromwell. Greycap 13:29, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Infobox
I reverted the change to the title of the infobox to restore "Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland". Simply heading it "The Protectorate" gives the impression that there was an entity that styled itself so---there wasn't; it's just a convenient term that is applied to distinguish 1653--59 from the rest of the Commonwealth period. As an analogue, compare East Germany, whose infobox is headed by the state's official title, Deutsche Demokratische Republik. StockholmSyndrome 09:44, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Error creating thumbnails
Erm, just a randomer here.

The page seems to have problems generating the thumbnails for the pictures at the top.

Someone should probably sort that out, i have no idea how.

Merge?
I've asked on the Commonwealth of England page if there is any real good reason why there should be two articles on the Commonwealth/Protectorate. --sony-youth pléigh 14:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

See my reply on the same page - suffice it to say there are good reasons. Greycap 19:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Replied at the same place. --sony-youth pléigh 21:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Currency
As far as I'm aware, Scottish currency was in use throughout this period, not just pound sterling, and they had different exchange rates. --195.147.223.253 15:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Sections
I've divided the article into basic sections. If anyone can do better, please do! I wasn't completely sure about some of them, but I feel it's better than having none. Simulato 23:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Popular history
Wow! This article is sure "Barebones", especially when it comes to popular history!

We Wikipedians are ostensibly big on knowing and understanding how the common people live, at every time and in every place. This article gives few clues to the time.

And it was a very important time, politically and socially, for the world and for English-speaking cultures. But it is easy to overlook quiet social changes in the spotlight of easy=to-follow political developments.

One development that particularly intrigues me is the Puritan ban on Christmas. There was a certain amount of backlash against such policies in the Restoration, and an ongoing social standoff for many years, until Dickens cured the ills of his countrymen on that score with A Christmas Carol, which defamed the character of those opposed to Christmas-keeping, and exalted the keepers of that ancient pagan rite by painting them with a pseudo-Christian glow of holiness. That is to say, he made some very effective propaganda that we are living with the consequences of to this day.

I'm not knocking Christmas so much as pointing out that there was a social conflict that came to the fore in this era. I'm not knocking Dickens either, just saying he was quite disingenuous in his portrayal of human character on both sides. That is to say, he was strongly POV.

That's just one example of the reasons we need some more popular history in this article.

Alfarero 21:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Coat of Arms
Surely these are the arms of Oliver Cromwell as Lord Protector, not of the Commonwealth, hence the small shield of Cromwell's in the centre. An image without Cromwell's arms are a better representation of the entire Commonwealth--  Barliner  talk 12:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

 * The Coat of Arms has always represented the Monarchy, not the Kingdom so I think it representing the Lord Protector makes sense. Regards, Rob (talk) 15:01, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Achan???
Achan is neither here nor there, who Cromwell was refering to was Hiel the Bethelite (1st Kings 16:34). In his days did Hiel the Bethelite build Jericho: he laid the foundation thereof in Abiram his firstborn, and set up the gates thereof in his youngest son Segub, according to the word of the LORD, which he spake by Joshua the son of Nun. If nobody objects I will change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.117.101.209 (talk) 19:13, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

End of the Protectorate
As this article is about the protectorate itself the end section should reflect that, calling it post-Cromwell does not. It also implies that the Protectorate was nothing but Oliver Cromwell. This section needs expansion. --Utinomen (talk) 23:01, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

 * You have made a bold edit. I have reverted it. Please agree a consensus for your changes before reverting again.

 * I would agree that it needs expanding but it needs two sections to replace it. The first is a section on Richard and a second on the Second Commonwealth and the moves leading to the Restoration. Until such time as those are written the current wording is better than that which you have replaced it with as it mentions several of the key players and events which your edits remove and those players and events are linked to other articles. -- PBS (talk) 05:54, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I have added clearly referenced material this time. Please do not revert to unreferenced material! I cannot see it needs a section on Richard and more than it needs one one Oliver, both have their own entries and this article is about the Protectorate itself.--Utinomen (talk) 17:42, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Your further additions have now made it possible to restructure the sections. I have altered the headings to reflect the added information on the Second Protectorate and have re-added the paragraph on the Second Commonwealth as an Aftermath. -- PBS (talk) 23:07, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Extent of the Protectorate
The map and infobox show the Protectorate as comprising the UK and Ireland - why are the Thirteen Colonies and Jamaica omitted? Le Crapaud (talk) 11:20, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Dunkirk should also be added (taken by the Protectorate in 1658) --131.111.184.8 (talk) 16:02, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Not part of the Commonwealth but instead possessions of either the Commonwealth, Lord Protector or Crown. Regards, Rob (talk) 15:03, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Requested Move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Proposal withdrawn by OP as move no longer necessary. Regards, Rob (talk) 14:27, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

The Protectorate → Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland (1653 to 1659) – To make article consistent with Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland (1659 to 1660) and thus reduce confusion. Regards, Relisted. BDD (talk) 16:16, 16 August 2013 (UTC) Rob (talk) 17:04, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Support and disambiguate -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 02:32, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. If moved it should be to Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland (1653–1659). We don't use "to" in date ranges. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:07, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now as "the Protectorate" is the common name. "To make article consistent with Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland (1659–1660)" However that article was created by WheelerRob (the prosper of this move) at 15:39, 7 August 2013 by copying text from another article -- so the argument "To make article consistent with" is a premature. Particularly as I reverted it pending further discussions.-- PBS (talk) 16:44, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment, Please don't respond to this. Many of my edits regarding other parts of the Interregnum have been reverted, making this move not necessary. I hoping to get my edits back. I will also change the 'to' to a '–'. Regards, Rob (talk) 23:35, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The Protectorate refers to the lands ruled by the two Lord Protectors, Oliver and Richard. The Commonwealth covers the whole time from the execution of Charles I to the request of Parliament to Charles II to govern.Gazzster (talk) 05:03, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Unsure exactly how the scopes of the various articles covering the governance of England 1649-1660 should be arranged, or exactly what the titles of the others should be, but we certainly want a separate one on The Protectorate and at that title. I note that Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland (1659 to 1660) is currently a redirect, and that both it and the proposed new title Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland (1653 to 1659) are unusual in the punctuation of the date range, so it's probably not the right new title for this reason too. Perhaps the scope of the article Commonwealth of England should include the period 1653-1659? The sense in which the Commonwealth of England did not exist in this period is esoteric. That's what is confusing to our readers. Our article titles exist to help readers to find information, not to split hairs on terminology. Andrewa (talk) 07:33, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

See discussion at Talk:Commonwealth of England regarding this page and others surrounding the Interregnum. Regards, Rob (talk) 14:30, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Lead
Although this edit arguably removes repetition, having the "Commonwealth of .." wording here does stress that the Commonwealth continued in one sense, and it is also the formal term used in the Instrument of Government, so saying it is making a slightly different point from the opening assertion that the Lord Protector was in charge of England, Scotland and Ireland. Not least because whatever they seemed to have called their state at any one point doesn't always correlate exactly to what territory was held. A couple of other points:  N-HH   talk / edits  17:25, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The second sentence now doesn't make sense grammatically (I would just repair that but, as noted, I'm not convinced by the substance of the change that caused it). In addition footnote a, which offers alternative translations of the term, now makes no sense
 * I'm not convinced by the 1654 date for annexing Scotland or the use of the word "later" in the opening sentence. As discussed previously elsewhere, there is no fixed date for the definitive "annexation", but we can probably say with some certainty that Scotland was more or less under Cromwell's/parliament's authority by 1653
 * I think the lead needs to be restructured to exclude repetition, but also include the formal term used in the Instrument of Government. I agree with the other things that you stated. Also from my understanding, the Protectorate followed the voluntary dissolution of Barebone's Parliament, not the forcible dissolution of the Rump.
 * Rob (talk) 20:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll have a think about further changes and suggest something here (or anyone else should just go ahead). On the latter point, off the top of my head and without looking into it right now, my recollection is that the creation of the post of Lord Protector preceded Cromwell's formal appointment into it. Hence, again, there may some inexactitude when it comes to dates and events, although we should be able to refer to how reliable sources lay out the precise timetable.  N-HH   talk / edits  12:00, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

War with Spain
The Robles case about whether Jews could be in England (see for example ) suggested that England and Spain were at war in 1656 (so it was better in England to be Jewish than Spanish). If so, it should be covered in the Foreign policy section. --Rumping (talk) 22:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

National flag
With reference to national flags. @User:108.162.103.13, User:Sodacan and User:BilCat please see Talk:Flag of England/Archive 1. -- PBS (talk) 20:36, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Also Talk:English Army -- PBS (talk) 09:56, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

For the Protectorate, it might be appropriate to remove the English flag and make it that it clear that the arms are those of of Oliver Cromwell. I think it is a point worth discussing. -- PBS (talk) 09:56, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:The Protectorate


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Pinups

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. jni 17:27, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The Pinups
Non-notable band. Radiant! 13:48, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC) This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
 * Delete, not encyclopedic. Wyss 20:21, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, article as it stands is un-encyclopaedic. Megan1967 02:51, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Pelicans

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. jni 17:26, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The Pelicans
Drinking society. Not very encyclopedic now is it? Radiant! 13:48, Feb 14, 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.
 * Google Web turns up a SIG of the Society for the History of Technology, a baseball team , and, of course, the almost obligatory band , all of whom are more notable than yet another student drinking club. Delete unless rewritten about something notable by this name. Uncle G 16:15, 2005 Feb 14 (UTC)
 * Delete this article and its skin-crawly language. Wyss 20:20, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, article as it stands is un-encyclopaedic. Megan1967 02:52, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. ComCat 02:04, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Affects good image of college. r 12:02, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)


text:
Man of Two Worlds (novel)

Man of Two Worlds (1986) is a science fiction novel by American writers Brian and Frank Herbert.

Plot summary
On the distant planet Dreenor lives the most powerful species in the Galaxy. All of the Universe is the creation of the Dreens, who possess the power of "idmaging", turning their thoughts into reality. They can create whole worlds, of which the wild, ungovernable planet Earth is one. But suddenly Earth is a threat, its people on the verge of discovering interstellar travel, and with it, of gaining access to Dreenor itself - a paradox within a paradox, not to be permitted. While the elder Dreens plan Earth's destruction, a youngster, Ryll, embarks on an unauthorized jaunt across space. Forced for survival to merge bodies with an "Earther" whose mind is as strong as his own, he has to battle for control. And the future of all earthly life lies in the hand of a composite being, half wily, aggressive human, half naive adolescent alien, confused and far from home.

Reception
Dave Langford reviewed Man of Two Worlds for White Dwarf #80, and stated that "The combination of tension and daftness (eg, Dreens are helpless against the mind-rotting Earthly herb, basil) makes for an odd read."

Reviews

 * Review by Peter A. Brigg (1986) in Fantasy Review, June 1986
 * Review by Ken Lake (1986) in Vector 133
 * Review by Brian Stableford (1986) in Foundation, #37 Autumn 1986
 * Review [French] by Thierry Bosch (1987) in Fiction, #392
 * Review by Helen McNabb (1988) in Paperback Inferno, #70
 * Review [French] by Jonathan Dornet (1988) in A&A, #113-114
 * Review by Ken Brown (1988) in Interzone, #23 Spring 1988
 * Review [German] by Brian Stableford (1990) in Das Science Fiction Jahr Ausgabe 1990

title: Man of Two Worlds (novel)


text:
Homeland Security Act of 2002

The Homeland Security Act (HSA) of 2002, was introduced in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks and subsequent mailings of anthrax spores. The HSA was cosponsored by 118 members of Congress. The act passed the U.S. Senate by a vote of 90–9, with one Senator not voting. It was signed into law by President George W. Bush in November 2002.

HSA created the United States Department of Homeland Security and the new cabinet-level position of Secretary of Homeland Security. It is the largest federal government reorganization since the Department of Defense was created via the National Security Act of 1947 (as amended in 1949). It also includes many of the organizations under which the powers of the USA PATRIOT Act are exercised.

Background

The new department assumed a large number of services, offices and other organizations previously conducted in other departments, such as the Customs Service, Coast Guard, and U.S. Secret Service. It superseded, but did not replace, the Office of Homeland Security, which retained an advisory role. The Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2004 provided the new department its first funding. A major reason for the implementation of HSA is to ensure that the border function remains strong within the new Department.

The Act is similar to the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA) in reorganizing and centralizing Federal security functions to meet post–Cold War threats and challenges. Like IRTPA, there are some inherent contradictions in the bill not solved by reorganization. These reflect compromises with other committees needed to secure passage, but the result is at times inconsistent or conflicting authorities. For example, the Act identifies the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) first responsibility as preventing terrorist attacks in the United States; but, the law's language makes clear that investigation and prosecution of terrorism remains with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and assigns DHS only an analytical and advisory role in intelligence activities. Similarly, with Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP), which relates to the preparedness and response to serious incidents, the Act gave DHS broad responsibility to minimize damage but only limited authority to share information and to coordinate the development of private sector best practices.

Establishments
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 is the foundation for many other establishments, including:
 * 1) the Department of Homeland Security, which is headed by the Secretary of Homeland Security
 * 2) an established Directorate for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection within the Department of Homeland Security, which is headed by the Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection.
 * 3) the Critical Infrastructure Information Act of 2002
 * 4)  the Cyber Security Enhancement Act of 2002

Titles
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 documented under Public Law is divided into 17 titles that establishes the Department of Homeland Security and other purposes. Each title is broken down into several sections, summarized below.

 * 1. Department of Homeland Security
 * Title I consists of three sections that establish the Department of Homeland Security, which carries out several missions that comply with the United States Code.

 * 2. Information Analysis And Infrastructure Protection
 * Title II consists of two subtitles, including the Critical Infrastructure Information Act of 2002, and nineteen sections, including the Cyber Security Enhancement Act of 2002. It is headed by the Under Secretary and used to access, receive and analyze law enforcement information, intelligence information, and other information from federal, state, and local government agencies for further use towards the prevention of terrorist acts.

 * 3. Science And Technology In Support of Homeland Security
 * Title III consists of thirteen sections. It is described as a plan to develop national policy and strategic plans to develop countermeasures for chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and other emerging terrorist threats. It also establishes, conducts, and administers primary research and development.

 * 4. Directorate Of Border And Transportation Security
 * Title IV consists of forty-eight sections and regulates what comes in out of United States territory in an effort to prevent terrorists and instruments of terrorism. This is done generally by securing the borders, territorial waters, ports, terminals, waterways, and air, land, and sea transportation systems of the United States, including managing and coordinating governmental activities at ports of entry.

 * 5. Emergency Preparedness and Response
 * Title V consists of nine sections and it helps to ensure the response time and preparedness of providers for terrorist attacks, major disasters and other emergencies. In addition, it establishes standards, joint exercises and trainings and providing funds to the United States Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency.

 * 6. Treatment of Charitable Trusts For Members Of The Armed Forces Of The United States And Other Governmental Organizations
 * Title VI consists of one section which, through several requirements, designates the late Central Intelligence Agency officer Johnny Michael Spann as a trust fund for distribution towards surviving spouses, children, or dependent parents, grandparents, or siblings of Government related service members.

 * 7. Management
 * Title VII consists of six sections which is headed by the Under Secretary to manage the budget, appropriations, expenditures of funds, accounting, and finance, human resources, information technology, and procurement of the Departments.

 * 8. Coordination With Non-Federal Entities; Inspector General; United States Secret Service; Coast Guard; General Provisions
 * Title VIII consists of fifty-three sections that establishes an Office for State and Local Governments to oversee and coordinate Departmental programs for and relationships with State and local governments.

 * 9. National Homeland Security Council
 * Title IX consists of six sections which establishes a "Homeland Security Council" within the Executive Office of the President. This Council functions as an advisor to the President.

 * 10. Information Security
 * Title X consists of seven sections regarding the establishment of several divisions of information security. This title and its subchapter provide tactics and mechanisms for protecting federal information and preserve information security. It also establishes set standards, responsibilities, authorities and functions, the various definitions in information security, and an annual independent evaluation.

 * 11. Department of Justice Divisions
 * Title XI consists of sixteen sections which detail the powers and duties of the Secretary, the Under Secretary, and the Attorney General.

 * 12. Airline War Risk Insurance Legislation
 * Title XII consists of four sections which detail air carrier liability for third-party claims arising out of acts of terrorism, extension of insurance policies, correction of reference, and reports.

 * 13. Federal Workforce Improvement
 * Title XIII consists of thirteen sections which in several chapters details and establishes Chief Human Capital Officers and its council.

 * 14. Arming Pilots Against Terrorism
 * Title XIV consists of seven sections which contains the establishment of a program to deputize volunteer pilots of air carriers providing passenger air transportation or intrastate passenger air transportation as Federal law enforcement officers to defend the flight decks of aircraft of such air carriers against acts of criminal violence or air piracy.

 * 15. Transition
 * Title XV consists of ten sections establishing the 12-month period beginning on the effective date of this Act. It consists of the definitions, reorganization plan, plan elements, and modification of plans.

 * 16. Corrections To Existing Law Relating To Airline Transportation Security
 * Title XVI consists of three sections that establish retention of security sensitive information authority at the Department of Transportation, increase civil penalties, and allow United States citizens and United States nationals as screeners.

 * 17. Conforming And Technical Amendments
 * Title XVII consists of seven sections that amend or alter several acts and amendments of the United States such as the Inspector General Act of 1978 and Title 5 of the United States Code

Department of Homeland Security

The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS), formed November 25, 2002 through the Homeland Security Act, is a Cabinet department composed of several different divisions that work to protect the United States from domestic and foreign terrorism. It was created as a response to the September 11 attacks in 2001. The Department of Homeland Security manages the Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate. The directorate helps fulfill the Department's overarching goal: to keep America safe from terrorist attacks. The Department also works to enhance preparedness and response efforts and to integrate these efforts with prevention work. With the Homeland Security Act there are several provisions that identify the specific duties for the EP&R Directorate.

Provisions
The Homeland Security Act contains several provisions that identify specific duties for the EP&R Directorate. Title V and Title II outline the way the department ensures that the use of intelligence and its own threat analysis of terrorist capabilities are intended to distribute funds to those areas where the terrorist threat is greatest, and that states provide the Federal Government with their Emergency Response Plans so that the department can coordinate priorities regionally and nationally.

Establishments under the Homeland Security Department

 * Ready.gov which was conceived in March 2002 and launched in February 2003
 * National Incident Management System which was established in March 2004
 * National Response Plan (NRP) which was created in December 2004
 * National Cyber Security Division (NCSD)
 * E-Verify

Proposed

 * Department of Homeland Security Interoperable Communications Act (H.R. 4289; 113th Congress) - a bill that would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to make the Under Secretary for Management of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) responsible for policies and directives to achieve and maintain interoperable communications among DHS components. The bill was written in reaction to a 2012 report by the DHS Inspector General that indicated DHS "lacks an effective governance structure to ensure interoperable communications across divisions.
 * National Cybersecurity and Critical Infrastructure Protection Act of 2013 (H.R. 3696; 113th Congress) – a bill that would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to require the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to conduct cybersecurity activities on behalf of the federal government and would codify the role of DHS in preventing and responding to cybersecurity incidents involving the Information Technology (IT) systems of federal civilian agencies and critical infrastructure in the United States. The bill passed in the United States House of Representatives on July 28, 2014.

Legislative information

 * Senate:
 * House: HR. Rept. 107-609
 * Law: ,

title: Homeland Security Act of 2002