text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kathryn McCamant

 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. dbenbenn | talk 23:31, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Kathryn McCamant
Article about a non-notable person, possibly a vanity article. I reccomend it be deleted. Foobaz · ✐  06:07, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless someone provides notable evidence. Zzyzx11 20:39, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. not notable enough. —Brim 17:22, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, maybe merge this and Charles Durrett into an article about their book instead. I believe the book is notable, even if they may not be notable independent of the book. I'm not aware of any reason to keep separate articles on each of them. At the very least, they and their book deserve mention at "cohousing". -- Jmabel | Talk 21:48, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, I'm the one that posted this. I know them personally and asked them if they had any biographical information. My only rationale for attaching their bios was that I hought that it might be of use when I saw the CoHousing article with dead links to each of them as individuals. I did try to remove any gratuitous self serving info from their bios before posting, but if I'm violating posting rules, I'm happy to have them pulled. bren@lene.com

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:
Mascarene Plateau

The Mascarene Plateau is a submarine plateau in the Indian Ocean, north and east of Madagascar. The plateau extends approximately 2000 km, from Seychelles in the north to Réunion in the south. The plateau covers an area of over 115000 km2 of shallow water, with depths ranging from 8 - 150 m, plunging to 4000 m to the abyssal plain at its edges.

It is the second-largest oceanic plateau in the Indian Ocean after the Kerguelen Plateau.

Geography
The northern part of the Mascarene Plateau includes the Agaléga Islands and the Seychelles Islands. The southern part of the Mascarene Plateau includes Hawkins Bank, the Mascarene Islands, Nazareth Bank, the Saya de Malha Bank, and the Soudan Banks. The Mascarene Islands are the mountainous islands of the Cargados Carajos Shoals, Mauritius, Réunion, and Rodrigues.

Geology
The Indian subcontinent was at one time next to the east coast of Seychelles, but seafloor spreading has moved the landmass to its current position, where it has collided and fused with the continent of Asia.

The northern part of the Mascarene Plateau is formed of granite, and is a fragment of the ancient supercontinent of Gondwana. The granite is topped with deposits of limestone and basalt. The basalt deposits in the Seychelles are from the Deccan Traps eruption, which occurred in the central part of the Indian subcontinent 66 million years ago, at the end of the Cretaceous period.

The southern part of the Mascarene Plateau, also known as Southern Mascarene Plateau (SMP), was formed by the Réunion volcanic hotspot along with the Chagos–Laccadive Ridge. The banks and shoals of the southern part of the Mascarene plateau were once volcanic islands, much like Mauritius and Réunion, which have now sunk or eroded to below sea level or, in the case of the Cargados Carajos, to low coral islands. The Saya de Malha Bank formed 35 million years ago, and the Nazareth Bank and the Cargados Carajos shoals formed later. Limestone banks found on the plateau are the remnants of coral reefs, indicating that the plateau was once a succession of islands. Some of the banks may have been islands as recently as 18,000–6,000 years ago, when sea levels were up to 130 meters lower during the most recent ice age. Mauritius formed 8–10 million years ago, and Rodrigues and Réunion formed around two million years ago. Piton de la Fournaise volcano on Réunion is one of the most active volcanoes in the world.

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

title: Mascarene Plateau


text:
Talk:Streamium

Remove or alter the text about Philips Media Manager, as it seems removed from Philips website - correct me if I cannot find the new page? --Fat64 (talk) 03:24, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Reference to the Philips media manager can still be found at http://wiki.simplecenter.org/display/GEN/The+SimpleCenter+Story Hence I would advise against removing the text about the Philips Media Manager. brian stormer (talk) 08:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

This article was proposed for deletion Feb. 2005. Votes for deletion/Streamium Joyous 06:09, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Streamium


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fashionistas

 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 18:30, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Fashionistas
Unreleased movie. Delete. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:14, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC) This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
 * Delete future events as unverifiable. Rossami (talk) 07:56, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nor verifiable. Let the movie be released first. -- Brhaspati (talk, contribs) 05:16, 2005 Mar 2 (UTC)
 * Delete, crystal ball gazing. Current contents won't be useful if and when it's released. —Korath (Talk) 07:15, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)


text:
Semantic equivalence (linguistics)

In semantics, the best-known types of semantic equivalence are dynamic equivalence and formal equivalence (two terms coined by Eugene Nida), which employ translation approaches that focus, respectively, on conveying the meaning of the source text; and that lend greater importance to preserving, in the translation, the literal structure of the source text. Nida formulated the distinction originally in relation to Bible translations.

Approaches to translation
The "Formal-equivalence" approach emphasizes fidelity to the lexical details and grammatical structure of the source language, whereas "dynamic equivalence" tends to employ a rendering that is more natural to the target language.

According to Eugene Nida, dynamic equivalence, the term as he originally coined, is the "quality of a translation in which the message of the original text has been so transported into the receptor language that the response of the receptor is essentially like that of the original receptors." The desire is that the reader of both languages would understand the meanings of the text in a similar fashion.

In later years, Nida distanced himself from the term "dynamic equivalence" and preferred the term "functional equivalence". What the term "functional equivalence" suggests is not just that the equivalence is between the function of the source text in the source culture and the function of the target text (translation) in the target culture, but that "function" can be thought of as a property of the text. It is possible to associate functional equivalence with how people interact in cultures.

A similar distinction was expressed by Maimonides in a letter to Samuel ibn Tibbon, his translator, in 1199. He wrote: "I shall premise one rule: the translator who proposes to render each word literally and adhere slavishly to the order of the words and sentences in the original, will meet with much difficulty and the result will be doubtful and corrupt. This is not the right method. The translator should first try to grasp the meaning of the subject, and then state the theme with perfect clarity in the other language. This, however, cannot be done without changing the order of words, putting many words for one word, and vice versa, so that the subject be perfectly intelligible in the language into which he translates." Maimonides comes down on the side of dynamic/functional equivalence, though perhaps not going so far as to consider the cultural function of the text. He does clearly reject formal equivalence as "doubtful and corrupt".

Theory and practice
Because the functional equivalence approach eschews strict adherence to the grammatical structure of the original text in favor of a more natural rendering in the target language, it is sometimes used when the readability of the translation is more important than the preservation of the original grammatical structure.

Formal equivalence is often more goal than reality, if only because one language may contain a word for a concept which has no direct equivalent in another language. In such cases, a more dynamic translation may be used or a neologism may be created in the target language to represent the concept (sometimes by borrowing a word from the source language).

The more the source language differs from the target language, the more difficult it may be to understand a literal translation without modifying or rearranging the words in the target language. On the other hand, formal equivalence can allow readers familiar with the source language to analyze how meaning was expressed in the original text, preserving untranslated idioms, rhetorical devices (such as chiastic structures in the Hebrew Bible) and diction in order to preserve original information and highlight finer shades of meaning.

Minor Differences between Approximate Equivalents
Sandy Habib observed how the Arabic, Hebrew and English words for angel have slightly varying connotations. This leads to religio-cultural differences over questions such as whether angels are immortal or capable of doing evil, and their appearance (e.g. the colour of their wings). Due to his focus upon natural semantic metalanguage, Ghil'ad Zuckermann considers such minute distinctions between lexical items in different languages to be a major obstacle in producing translations that are both accurate and concise.

Bible translation
Translators of the Bible have taken various approaches in rendering it into English, ranging from an extreme use of formal equivalence, to extreme use of dynamic equivalence.

 * Predominant use of formal equivalence
 * Douay–Rheims Bible (1610)
 * King James Bible (1611)
 * Young's Literal Translation (1862)
 * Revised Version (1885)
 * American Standard Version (1901)
 * Concordant Version (1926)
 * Revised Standard Version (1952)
 * Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (1966)
 * New American Standard Bible (1971)
 * New King James Version (1982)
 * Green's Literal Translation (1985)
 * New Jewish Publication Society Tanakh (1985)
 * New Revised Standard Version (1989)
 * Orthodox Study Bible (1993)
 * Third Millennium Bible (1998)
 * Recovery Version (1999)
 * World English Bible (2000)
 * English Standard Version (2001)
 * Revised Standard Version Second Catholic Edition (Ignatius Bible) (2006)
 * Lexham English Bible (2011)
 * Modern English Version (2014)
 * Tree of Life Version (2014)
 * English Standard Version Catholic Edition (2018)
 * Literal Standard Version (2020)

 * Moderate use of both formal and dynamic equivalence
 * New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (1961, revised 1984, 2013)
 * Confraternity Bible (1969)
 * Modern Language Bible (1969)
 * New American Bible (1970, revised 1986 & 1991)
 * New International Version (1978)
 * Holman Christian Standard Bible called "optimal equivalence" (2004)
 * New Community Bible (2008)
 * Common English Bible (2011)
 * New American Bible Revised Edition (2011)
 * Christian Standard Bible (2017)
 * Evangelical Heritage Version (2019)
 * New Catholic Bible / New Catholic Version (St. Joseph New Catholic Bible) (2019)
 * Revised New Jerusalem Bible (2019)

 * Extensive use of dynamic equivalence or paraphrase or both
 * The Holy Bible: Knox Version (1955)
 * Amplified Bible (1965)
 * Jerusalem Bible (1966)
 * New Life Version (1969)
 * New English Bible (1970)
 * Good News Bible (formerly "Today's English Version") (1976)
 * New Jerusalem Bible (1985)
 * Easy-to-Read Version (1987)
 * Christian Community Bible (1988)
 * Revised English Bible (1989)
 * God's Word Translation (1995)
 * Contemporary English Version (1995)
 * New Living Translation (1996)
 * Complete Jewish Bible (1998)
 * New International Reader's Version (1998)
 * New English Translation (2005)
 * Today's New International Version (2005)
 * CTS New Catholic Bible (2007)
 * EasyEnglish Bible (2018)

 * Extensive use of paraphrase
 * The Living Bible (1971)
 * The Street Bible (UK) (2003), as the word on the street (US) (2004)
 * The Message Bible (2002)
 * The Voice (2012)
 * The Passion Translation (2017)

title: Semantic equivalence (linguistics)


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Vaoverland

Vaoverland
final (30/0/0) ending 06:16 6 March 2005 (UTC)

Just hit 7300 edits in ~1 year, recently averaging 120+ per day. His user page speaks for itself: 2 featured articles, 11 WikiProject memberships, hundreds of articles contributed to. They should create an expedited adminship request for people like this. His own statements regarding adminship nomination:

 * I am honored by your offer. I would embrace those responsibilities, and I believe I could do a good job. Aside from vandalism, which almost always seems to come from mysterious IP addresses, I try to be very respectful and nurturing of the work of other editors. I would be cautious in exercising the additional power. I am retired from having a business with a peak of 200 employees, so I am not into power games. I have been enjoying working with you also, and appreciate your accuracy, focus, and the battleboxes. Thanks. Mark in Richmond.

brian0918   06:16, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * I accept. To avoid misleading anyone, I need to note that I like to save edits while working on an article, so the high number is due to not working offline on a Word Processor. It helps me to see how the article is coming along, but that tends to increase edit volume a lot. I do try to stick to articles I know something about, and have good access to reference material. Vaoverland 07:12, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

Support
 * 1)  brian0918    06:31, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Shanes 08:40, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Meets my new admin criterion,jguk 14:31, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Rje 17:27, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Wow.  Just... wow. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  18:43, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Niteowlneils 19:00, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC). As an editor, Mark goes for quality of articles over quantity, is detail-oriented, and very collaborative. All these traits seem to be valuable in an admin.
 * 7) Antandrus 20:01, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC) Very impressed. In addition to his excellent contributions, I like his comment about not being into power games.
 * 8) Jonathunder 22:50, 2005 Feb 27 (UTC)
 * 9) He can't be human! --Slowking Man 07:49, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Great user! -- Darwinek 14:16, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Cool. JuntungWu 16:40, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Go for it ugen 64 23:30, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) His talk page is a wonderful example of collaboration. Add in all the other positive traits that are so clear from his contributions and this is an easy Support vote.  SWAdair | Talk  11:06, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) R yan!  |  Talk  12:25, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 15) Of course I support! Mgm|(talk) 14:02, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 16) Support. PedanticallySpeaking 16:11, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 17) Support. --Lst27 ( t a l k )  21:46, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 18) Jordi·✆ 02:21, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 19) Support -- Chris 73 Talk 02:52, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * 20) jni 09:28, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 21) Everyking 11:24, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 22) His help with WikiProject Trains has been instrumental in moving more rail transport articles to Featured status.  slambo 18:07, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * 23) Absolutely support. - Lucky 6.9 22:49, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 24) of course. dab (ᛏ) 13:31, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 25) Duk 14:32, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC). Great work, and lots of it.
 * 26) How much clearer does it get? Smoddy (t) (e) 19:23, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 27) What's not to support? Excellent user. Bishonen | Talk 02:26, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 28) Oh dear oh lor' yes indeedy. And a train-buff too! Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 10:42, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 29) Appears to be an excellent editor. Jayjg (talk) 14:55, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 30) Not that he really needs more support ;) Carrp | Talk 14:57, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

Comments

Questions for the candidate

A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
 * 1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)
 * A. I am willing to help in any of the capacities needed. For example, I have seen several situations where temporarily protecting pages may have been wise. I have a problem with censorship in general, and of course, the concept of protecting pages (or images) is in conflict with basic WP philosophy of anyone can edit. I check WP at least daily, and often much more often, so I could be "on-call" to check for requests for help, etc.
 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. I was very proud of the 2 FA successful nominations I contributed heavily to. One was Battle of Hampton Roads in particular, because it linked to many other WP articles which I and (and others) did additional work on. The other major contributor was strong in images, boxes, etc., where I tend to do more on content, so I thought the informal collaboration worked out nicely for the end result.
 * I recently have had a lot of fun creating Lost Counties, Cities and Towns of Virginia which I am hoping will stimulate some new contributions from others. I also have done some good work (I think) contributing to someone else's creation, Pioneer Zephyr, another article which naturally leads to more articles, and should catch and stimulate our readers (and future writers).
 * 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and will deal with it in the future?
 * A. Only once. On a talk page, another user from my hometown accused me of making up a fact he/she had never heard of, with a choice of wording I was particularly offended by. I snapped back with a reply which was also a little less diplomatic than I wished I had said on reflection. We communicated some more and cleared up my hurt feelings (unintended by the other party, who just should have questioned the factual basis with a bit more tact) and we got together on the substance of the concern, and resolved it. Had I cited my sources to begin with, the issue probably wouldn't have come up at all. We both collaborate on that article since then, and it is gradually getting better and had had a couple of new contributors helping on it as well.

 * I have never had an editing battle, reversion battle, etc. Lots of other contributors correct my spelling, and add to or change what I have written, and add or correct my cats, which is OK with me. I cannot recall feeling I was right and they were wrong. Regarding content, I seldom feel strongly that I said it better, etc., and I am very reluctant to change what someone else wrote unless it is factually incorrect, and I have verified that. For example, Cyrus McCormick was not born in Roane County, West Virginia. In that case, I made sure that I had the facts right, and changed and added to other content as well. The page history didn't indicate the contributor, so it was impossible to drop a friendly line, but that would be the best way to go about it. I often add sections to long blocks of text in existing articles, especially if I am adding much content.

 * I missed my WP time a great deal during a power outage earlier this winter, and during the February 21 outage. It made me appreciate WP more, though. My interest to do WP admin work is based on a willingness to help make WP grow and be better yet. Thanks. Vaoverland 07:12, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)


text: Category:Aprons

title: Category:Aprons


text:
Talk:Throckley

[Untitled]
This article was proposed for deletion Feb. 2005. Votes for deletion/Throckley Joyous 06:18, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Throckley


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2000's fashion

 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. Carrp | Talk 04:06, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

2000's fashion
Non-encyclopedic, original research, created by a vandal. RickK 06:18, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

 * Agreed, delete. And apparently my style needs some work! Foobaz · ✐  06:26, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete this and all other original research articles. /sɪzlæk  ˺/  07:00, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Looks like original research. Zzyzx11 20:40, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research. May reconsider if sources are cited. —Korath (Talk) 07:13, Mar 2, 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:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Society of Linguistic Research and Preservation

 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. Carrp | Talk 04:08, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

World Society of Linguistic Research and Preservation
Nonnotable society. Established yesterday (February 26, 2005). External links yield 403 (permission denied). Zero google hits. Delete. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:19, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete. Foobaz · ✐  06:49, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I concur with Wile E. Heresiarch. Zzyzx11 20:51, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Promotion for a new venture, not notable. jni 06:49, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. World Society of Linguistic Research and Preservation gets zero google hits; WSLRP gets six, none relevent; Linguawiki gets eight.  Six articles on the wiki.  Clearly non-notable. —Korath (Talk) 07:22, Mar 2, 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:
User talk:Hotelsecrty

Image:Alf.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Alf.jpg. Please leave a note on that page about the source of the image because of copyright law. Thank you. --Ellmist 06:20, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Hotelsecrty


text:
Talk:Tore Uppström

Untitled
This article was proposed for deletion Feb. 2005. Votes for deletion/Tore Uppström Joyous 06:21, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tore Uppström


text:
Unirea Tricolor București

Unirea Tricolor București was a Romanian football club from Bucharest, south-east Romania, founded in 1914 as Tricolor București. It was one of the most famous inter-war clubs in Romania.

History
Tricolor București

Tricolor, first named Teiul, was set up in 1914, in the district of Obor, by some high-school students. Among the first players was Costel Rădulescu, a 1930s coach and manager of the Romania national team and co-founder of the modern national championship system (league system).

After World War I, the club became champion of the Bucharest Region and played in the final tournament of the National Championship.

They finished once runner-up in the Liga I in 1919–20 and once they won the national championship in 1920–21. In 1921–22 the club was knocked out in the semifinals by Victoria Cluj after the team from Bucharest failed to appear, so it lost the game with 0–3, by administrative decision.

On September 23, 1923, the team wins the first game of a Romanian club against a former Yugoslavian club (Beogradski Belgrad: 2–1).

In 1926 it merged with "Unirea" taking on the name of Unirea Tricolor. Unirea, was founded in 1924, after the merging of "Orizontul" and "Zburătorii", in the same district of Obor as the above Tricolorul.

Unirea Tricolor București

The President and owner of the team was Nicolae Lucescu, and a famous public character around Unirea Tricolor was Titi Barosanu, a leader of the fans.

In 1947–1948, due to Communist regime norms (stating that all sports associations had to join a form of trade-union, or a governmental institution), the team is taken over by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and, on May 14, 1948, merged with another club, Ciocanul București (former Maccabi), the new teams being named Dinamo "A" and Dinamo "B".

In the 1947–1948 season, they played as Dinamo "A" (Ciocanul) and Dinamo "B" (Unirea Tricolor), and next season, in Divizia A remained only one, Dinamo "A" (later Dinamo București), Dinamo "B" (Unirea Tricolor) being relegated to the Divizia B.

In the 1950 season Dinamo "B" (Unirea Tricolor) moved to Braşov as Dinamo Braşov, in 1957–1958 it moved again, this time to Cluj-Napoca, only to disappear after the 1957–58 season after the team was dissolved and the players were relocated to Dinamo Bacău.

Honours
Liga I:
 * Winners (2): 1920–21, 1940–41

Liga II:
 * Winners (4): 1938–39, 1946–47, 1948–49, 1950

Romanian Cup:
 * Runners-up (2): 1935–36, 1940–41

title: Unirea Tricolor București


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eyre Empire

 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. J OHN C OLLISON (An Liúdramán) 23:26, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Eyre Empire
Hoax? Nonsense? Fiction? Anyway, there's only one Google hit for "Eyre Empire". Plus this article was created by a vandal. RickK 06:23, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Foobaz · ✐  06:48, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I do not think that this article should be deleted, namely because it seems to be a fascinating part of history. I, too, did a google search, one for Truelove Eyre, and a number of websites came up. All members should google search for Truelove Eyre before they either vote to delete, lest wikipedia should be deprived of a very interesting historical entity. And, if google hits for the Eyre Empire are rare, that is probably because the entire thing went on within one family. I've been doing my homework, and there IS an Eyrecourt in Ireland. Go to yahoo.com, and search it. Then try google, and britannica. Tourists go there now. Add to that, there is a large inland body called, "Lake Eyre," in Australia. Deleting this article would be silly, and deprive students and history buffs of a topic that is not covered very often.
 * i dont know how to vote on this thing, but i agree w/the last person. That articles cool, its helping me with my paper. you should leave it up.
 * Please note that both anonymous comments above were added by the same IP address, 68.18.24.191. Also, i reformatted the comments to make them easier to read, but did not alter the content. Foobaz · ✐  19:12, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The comments would naturally use the same IP address, as they're coming from the same computer. I posted a comment here some time ago, as has my sister. It seems utterly ridiculous to me to delete this article, especially when there is such an abundance of outside reference for it. Go to google and look up Jehu Eyre. You have to search around a bit, but it's there. How does one vote not to delete? Also, look up, "Eyre Coat of Arms."
 * 68.18.24.191, if "there is such an abundance of outside reference for it," why didn't you cite them in the article instead of having everybody else search for it? Zzyzx11 20:47, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The answer for that is simple: I did not write the article. However, I still stand by what I said; I'm not a history person in the sense that I don't enjoy it (though I do not quite a bit about it because of some wonderful teachers), yet this piqued my interest. My sister and I both have to report on a historical family (she's doing the Hapsburgs), and these people just seemed like a very fascinating bunch. Plus, there are about five different people who routinely use this computer, which means that when I have to do research, I need it FAST. Wikipedia has become my academic crutch, especially in terms of history. I've always liked it because it features articles on things that aren't always widely known. If I, a high school student, can find information on google to back this stuff up, then surely wikipedia can recognize said article's validity. Trust me, google, yahoo, it's there. Just do what I did and you can see these sources for yourself. I'll ask my friend about all of this...he is a real whiz with history.
 * Funny, when I Google for "Truelove Eyre", I get zero hits. Care to point to a single website (created before today's date) that has a mention of him?  RickK 22:47, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * restarting the indentation
 * Certainly. Go to YAHOO.COM (NOT GOOGLE) and type "Truelove Eyre" into the search bar. A list will come up. Numbers 1 and 5 give a history about the story surrounding this man and his family. Poke around the other websites there, because I've only had time to look at a few. This is all very exciting! I feel like a detective...but with history...kind of. 68.18.24.191 (talk · contributions)
 * I found the Eyre Empire's blog! Foobaz · ✐  23:45, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Looks like even more of this nonsense. And when I did as suggested and went to yahoo, I still got zero hits -- .  RickK 23:58, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Come on, you've got to be kidding. I don't know how much easier to make this; on the first page of the yahoo search are ten different websites. Did you actually go into any of them or just look at the titles? Here, this is the simplest way I know how to do this: http://eyres.home.texas.net/Eyrecrest.htm. I mean, heck, the other guy found something. Foobaz, you seem to know what you're doing. Go to yahoo and do what I wrote earlier. Be sure to actually go INTO 1. and 5. on the sites that pop up. By the way, an Eyre blog? I'll have to search around for more in that vein. 68.18.24.191 (talk · contributions)
 * WHOOPS, SORRY!!! WRONG WEBSITE!!! THE REAL WEBSITE IS: http://eyres.home.texas.net/Eyrescrest.htm. GO TO THIS ONE, NOT THE ONE PREVIOUSLY LISTED!!! 68.18.24.191 (talk · contributions)
 * There is still nothing at the page indicated which supports any of the material in the article. I'm through with this, the hoaxing has wasted enough time. RickK 00:20, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * OH, MY, GOSH, YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING. I know why you didn't get any hits on yahoo: you weren't actually supposed to put the quotation marks into the search! Just enter in the name Truelove Eyre WITHOUT quotation marks. 68.18.24.191 (talk · contributions)
 * "Nothing at the page that supports anything in the article?" I suppose that the whole "legend of Truelove Eyre," thing wasn't in either article, right? 68.18.24.191 (talk · contributions)
 * Okay, okay. Google for truelove + eyre + "william the conqueror", that brings up some actual hits. No vote yet, but I just wanted to establish that this isn't completely a hoax. DS 03:03, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I also attempted to follow the anon contributor's suggestions for verifying the content of this article. I have found a few datapoints at the perimeter and two blogs but not enough to convince me yet that this is verifiable.  No vote yet but inclining strongly toward delete unless the author returns with a better citation of his/her sources.  Rossami (talk) 07:54, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I got two Google hits for this but neither of them seemed related. For landholdings in Eire lasting some centuries to royalty related to William the Conqueror, I'd want something more verifiable. Capitalistroadster 08:21, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - suspicious, reminds me of various noble pretenders and other people who have bought nonexistent "coat of arms" from various sources. Although apparently innocent now, reminds me too much of claims of Alexis Brimeyer and Oscar Hartzell. Writer may think the information genuine, but I have my doubts. - Skysmith 10:00, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Concur with Skysmith, Delete. Radiant! 10:09, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Two kids and their semi-factual fantasies. -- RHaworth 11:49, 2005 Feb 28 (UTC)

Keep: some of the websites behind it seem fairly genuine. And one of the blogs, imperialpress.blogspot.com, does offer a history section that positively identifies the link between William the Conqueror and Truelove Eyre through Edmund II. Go to the archives section, November of 2004, and read the article, "House of Eyre Came From House of Wessex." A number of other families established similar domains: the Angevins (not widely known), the Plantagenets (not widely known), the Hapbsburgs (not widely known among Americans), etc. Also, the Coat of Arms is real, that's on yahoo. History21 168.184.90.11 (talk · contributions)
 * The claims on that page are not backed up by any references or sources at all except a brief mention of "newly unearthed records". That doesn't "positively identify" anything, and indeed makes this whole business look even less credible.  Foobaz · ✐  14:56, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Keep and Tweak: as an (enthusiatic) student of medieval studies, I have come across similar articles in stories over the years. Most of what this article says is accurate. However, I would recommend something; while most historians confirm that Truelove Eyre did exist, some of his ACTIONS are a bit murky, said to have originated in legend. (There is a similar story that says Truelove knew King Richard the Lionheart, a sheer impossibility due to the fact that they lived in separate centuries). The author should clarify that while Truelove is widely acknowledged to have founded the Eyre Dynasty, the WAY in which he did it is still disputed. Also, some source citations wouldn't be a bad idea; you can find the stuff, but it's inconvenient to search. Other than that, keep it. It would be a shame to get rid of an article that deals with one of the very few things able to last through the Medieval, Renaissance, Enlightenment, Industrial, and Modern Ages. 168.184.90.11 (talk · contributions)
 * Delete. WP is not a geneology resource, and one of the few sources that has anything to say about the alleged "Truelove Eyre" notes that the story is not well-attested. HyperZonktalk 18:08, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

I stand by what I said yesterday, and what the two people there have said completely proves my point. The whole Truelove Eyre thing must be rooted in some fact, otherwise the family crest (which we've all established existed) wouldn't bear the leg symbol. I went to imperialpress and found it quite helpful. The fact that there even IS controversy at the site that Hyperzonk cited shows that there is some sort of historical basis for Truelove Eyre. I agree with the other ones. Aside from Truelove, we now for a fact that this family exists (especially as many of the links listed on THIS PAGE take readers to sites detailing Eyre descendants now living in the US). The article is a website about a rich and influential family called "Eyre." We now know that that family is a factual part of history. So, not counting the Truelove Eyre thing (which should be modified to reflect his mythical status), the article should stay. 68.18.24.191 (talk · contributions)

Also, the "Eireland," thing is true, and so is the claim of the Gaelic name, "Eire," for Ireland. That had to come from somewhere. This article offers a good explanation.

 * Delete. Not verifiable. Rhobite 21:02, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Anyone with the ability to open a history textbook or type the name Truelove Eyre into yahoo can verify this as true. The fact that this is even a debate stuns me. I have never known such historical ineptitude on the part of wikipedians before. Edit the Truelove thing, keep the rest, move on. 68.18.28.36 (talk · contributions)

 * Delete unless actual references provided - I don't appreciate being insulted because the author can't be bothered to provide references. -- Cyrius|✎ 02:05, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Hey, give the guy a break. It's not like historians have studied 1066 England much. Did anything important even happen back then? Rhobite 02:28, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete. Utter tripe. Codswallop, I tell you, codswallop. GeorgeStepanek\talk  02:09, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Enthusiatic Keep and Edit This is a good article dealing with historical fact and should not be trashed, but I annoyed by several things. First of all, the author mentions "Leroy Heller's descendants," yet fails to reference some of the most important among them. To begin with, Leroy's son, Stanley Heller, the chairman of a Philadelphia bank and presumably the rightful heir to a resurrected Eyre Empire (should that unlikely day ever come about), is entirely skipped over. This leads me to believe that the author had a less than full knowledge of the subject matter. Stanley Heller is a significant descendant and should be listed. Secondly, another of Leroy's granddaughters holds a high level position for CDC and another works for a Democratic senator. Why haven't these things been included? Anyone with enough knowledge about this, please edit the article, or I will. I say, ANYONE WITH ENOUGH KNOWLEDGE, because it's not a widely known subject except in some royalist and medieval historical circles. So, if you don't know what you're talking about, don't try to fix this because you'll just make it worse. Elizabeth 168.184.90.11 (talk · contributions)

http://www.standard.net.au/~daneyre/Histeyre.htm There you go, read that. Elizabeth 168.184.90.11 (talk · contributions)

Okay, I'm a registered Wiki user with hundreds of edits to my name. I have no vote on this issue yet; I'd just like to provide some actual Google hits here, so as to clarify that this is NOT NONSENSE. It may not be notable, but it's not nonsense, okay? Sheesh. Note that many of these are for "Truelove who was henceforth called Ayre/Eyre", or similar phrasings. [1] (http://www.standard.net.au/~daneyre/Histeyre.htm), [2] (http://www.last-names.net/surname.asp?surname=Ayres), [3] (http://www.vmb-collection.com/A&DPages/AandDP20.html), [4] (http://www.meddows-taylor.com/Eyre.htm), [5] (http://www.cholet.us/Family%20Tree%20Index%20Pages/ayres_tree.htm), [6] (http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/pa/bucks/history/local/davis/davis15.txt) (a 100-year-old transcript which refers to "True Love" instead of "Truelove"), [7] (http://www.trueloves.info/history.html) (a history of the family name 'Truelove', and how it's associated with Eyre), and [8] (http://superjordans-home.com/MariahsAncestors/a23.htm). I'll grant that many of these have similar wording; this is apparently because they're all quoting the same centuries-old source. That source's reliability is another issue, of course. 168.184.90.11 (talk · contributions)

If this is a hoax, the hoaxsters have put an enormous amount of work into it over a long, long, long time. The ineptness of the page's defendants shouldn't be a factor in deciding whether it's worthy of being kept or deleted.DS 14:50, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC) 168.184.90.11 (talk · contributions)

 * Please note that everything above this and below GeorgeStepanek's vote was added by an anonymous user, 168.184.90.11 (talk · contributions), the same IP who posted two other "votes" above. Thank you for providing sources, but they only establish the origin of a name, not the existence of an entire empire, or any of the other fantastic claims made in the article. Foobaz · ✐  20:14, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * For the record, I'm annoyed that my comment from the VFD debate for Truelove Eyre was poached and transplanted into this debate (and done so ineptly, by someone who doesn't understand how WP allows us to sign our comments). DS 14:38, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Enthusiatic Keep and Edit This is a good article dealing with historical fact and should not be trashed, but I annoyed by several things. First of all, the author mentions "Leroy Heller's descendants," yet fails to reference some of the most important among them. To begin with, Leroy's son, Stanley Heller, the chairman of a Philadelphia bank and presumably the rightful heir to a resurrected Eyre Empire (should that unlikely day ever come about), is entirely skipped over. This leads me to believe that the author had a less than full knowledge of the subject matter. Stanley Heller is a significant descendant and should be listed. Secondly, another of Leroy's granddaughters holds a high level position for CDC and another works for a Democratic senator. Why haven't these things been included? Anyone with enough knowledge about this, please edit the article, or I will. I say, ANYONE WITH ENOUGH KNOWLEDGE, because it's not a widely known subject except in some royalist and medieval historical circles. So, if you don't know what you're talking about, don't try to fix this because you'll just make it worse. History21 (talk · contributions)

CZAR TO MAKE TRIP TO THE CAPITOL; FEBRUARY 16, 2005(OLD CALENDAR) The Imperial Compound is confirming today that Czar Arthur is planning on making a visit to Washington, D.C. this summer, where he will be given a VIP tour of the Capitol and will meet with several senators in the Senate Dining Room for luncheon. The czar's second cousin, Princess Alicia (a granddaughter of Senior Dowager Czar Leroy and a niece of Dowager Czarina Marie), who has overseen a Senate office for the last twelve years, will be host to her royal relation. Proponents of the Eyre Empire see it as an enormous step in the right direction. It will be Czar Arthur's first official trip since being crowned head of the resurrected financial dynasty in December. It will also serve as the first meeting between an Eyre monarch and a government representative since the spring of 1929, a milestone that many say is representative of the family's rejuvenation. Dowager Grand Duchess Augusta, mother to Grand Duchess Anna and Czarevna Mildred, was thrilled to hear the news. "This is the best thing that could have possibly happened," she said. It has also confirmed many in their thoughts that the empire is rising once more. “It’s like everything is happening at once,” said Grand Duchess Anna, referring to other recent events within the family (see articles below). The Imperial Compound has promised to keep the Imperial Press updated on these events.

Take a look at that. From imperialpress.blogspot.com. I've left a comment. It seems...hmm... 68.18.28.36 (talk · contributions)

 * Isn't that your own blog? The one you tried to spam on weblog? Please stop pretending that you're all these new people. Rhobite 22:22, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

No, that is my blog. I, for one, do not appreciate insinuations that I am A. trying to spam. or, B., writing under false pretenses. Not once have I tried to log in under two different names. In fact, I haven't provided any. And the above passage "I am a wiki user," was contributed by someone other than myself at a different area of this site who had the kindness to let me copy and paste. The moronic insistence at this sight (with the exception of some people, whom, I can assure you, are not myself in disguise) to deny historical fact because the majority of the history came from a murky time just makes me laugh to myself at the hypocrisy of the "contributors," who, in this case, have become, "detractors." Grow up and learn to properly use a computer. Also, a dictionary wouldn't help; you misspelled, "You're." comment by anonymous user 68.18.28.36

 * If you continue to change other people's votes and comments on this page, you'll be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This is a pretty serious rule around here. Also, personal attacks are not allowed. Rhobite 01:21, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Robyn, if I find out that you are in any way responsible for this article, I will personally throw you down a deep, deep well where you will never be able to attend another Drama Club meeting again! Bwa ha ha ha! Just kidding. Please, though, don't exploit my family history with this "article." Love you, E 168.184.90.11 (talk · contributions)

Whomever is continuing to post that ridiculous, "Imperial Press," rubbish on this page, please stop. I have already had to remove it once from this site. It is completely unrelated to the dioscussion at hand and constitutes nothing more than a blatant and shameless attempt at spamming. Have the academic integrity to at least keep the argument based somewhat in reality. 168.184.90.11 (talk · contributions)
 * I just replaced it again. We frown on the removal of other people's comments, whether they're ridiculous or not. I also just signed all the anonymous posts. Hopefully this makes the discussion easier to follow. Foobaz · ✐  16:43, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * comment. I don't know what to think of the article but I do know that the name Éire come from Irish mythology, it is a variation on the name of the celtic goddess Ériu. The main square in Galway is called Eyre square but I don't know if it's named after a family or if it's another variation on Ériu. -- Lochaber 14:26, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete as obvious hoax by sockpuppeting vandal. DreamGuy 21:34, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete this awful mess... Nick04 23:00, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Keep new edits now talk about the Eyre FAMILY, not the Eyre EMPIRE. The Eyre Family did exist, while the Eyre Empire is entirely fictitious. Change title to, "Eyre Family." References provided prove the existence of Jehu Eyre as an actual person. 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:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RuneScape runes

 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 no clear consensus (but strong majority to keep). Cool Hand Luke  07:29, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

RuneScape runes
This level of detail about a n obscure game is not encyclopedic, and constitutes fancruft. I think it should be deleted. I feel the same about the other RuneScape subpages but will wait to see how this one fares. Foobaz · ✐ 06:23, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge into a single article about the game along with any subpages. The game is widespread enough to warrant an entry of its own but obscure subpages are clutter.  Arkyan 07:07, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Everyking 08:18, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. J1459 11:57, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Longhair 12:02, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep — RuneScape is a commercial online game. — RJH 18:20, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, it's a widely known game. Megan1967 22:30, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge back to a more general runescape page, wikipedia isn't gamefaqs--nixie 08:32, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * While I agree that Runescape is popular enough to merit inclusion, I'd prefer to see some more content and less lists of levels at which a certain skill (or rune) becomes availalable, as the latter is FAQ or manual material. As such, merge. Radiant! 10:10, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak delete, or merge into RuneScape any information of general interest not already there. I'm a gamer and was once slightly interested in RS when it was on paper and not yet online, but it isn't really notable in ways that reach outside the roleplaying subhobby.  This level of detail isn't encyclopedic, as WP is not a gaming directory.  I can't wait for the Ashlee Concert Simulation Module for RuneScape, nor for its article.  Barno 16:45, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I think if you can't write your vote without including some insult against another user, subtle or otherwise, your vote shouldn't count. Everyking 17:01, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * However, WP policy suggests more strongly that if you can't include the reason for your vote, as Everyking failed to do above, your vote won't count. Barno 17:50, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. The Recycling Troll 09:57, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, if Kingdom of Loathing creator isn't allowed to stay, then RuneScape's, gasp, runes should be speedied already. Grue 12:11, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as it has no independently verifiable references. If those can be found, keep - David Gerard 00:21, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * ~Delete - too broad and vague. Could be in more categories. jozephb 13:47, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: fancruft. Wile E. Heresiarch 15:26, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect or, if that's not workable, keep. -Sean Curtin 03:07, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think it needs a cleanup, and certainly improved, but it deserves to be a part of the information on runescape. The intial reasons for deletion has a problem as well, "This level of detail about an obscure' game is.."- Runescape is the largest online java game, and has more players online at a given moment then CounterStrike, and is among most well known and least obscure mmorpg's. Consider there are close to 10x more people playing it at this moment, then there are wikipedians with over a 1000 edits. MasterRune 19:53, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * You're right, i'm crossing out "obscure" in my rationale. However, regardless of the game's popularity, minutiae like these are just a drain on Wikipedia's resources. Grand Theft Auto 3 is at least as popular a game, but its article is very clean, concise, and encyclopedic. I love video games and have spent significant portions of my life playing and writing them, but i don't believe that emulating GameFAQs should be one of Wikipedia's goals.  23:21, 8 Mar 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:
Mbum language

Mbum Proper (also Mboum, Buna, Mboumtiba and Wuna) is a Adamawa–Ubangi language of Central Africa. It is spoken by about people in Cameroon and the Central African Republic.

History
The Mbum language is spoken by the Mbum people who inhabit Cameroon, the Central African Republic, and Chad. While their origins are unclear, some believe that the Mbum were one of the earliest ethnic groups of the Adamawa Region.

The Mbum people have such a close relationship with the Dii people, and one which has persisted for so long, that outsiders often have a hard time distinguishing them. In the early nineteenth century, both groups came under the rule of the Fulani Muslims, who they are said to have intermarried in large numbers. Despite this, the Mbum and Dii peoples still managed to hold on to their traditional spiritual beliefs until the twentieth century. The Mbum converted to Islam, while the Dii converted to Christianity.

Varieties
Mbum is a complex dialect continuum consisting of several varieties. ALCAM (2012) considers Mbum, Larang, Pana and Gbata to be four distinct but closely related languages. Pana (also spoken in Chad), Karang, Kali-dek and Kuo are eastern varieties that may be separate languages.

To the south, Gbata is spoken in the northern part of the arrondissement of Bélabo in Lom-et-Djerem department, Eastern Region. There, it is spoken in Woutchaba and Deng-Deng, located to the west and east of the Sanaga River, respectively. Blench (2006) considers Gbete (Gbata) to be a separate language.

The LiMbum is spoken to the South West especially in the Donga Mantung and around the Nkambe and Ndu Sub Divisions.

Distribution
Mbum is spoken in:

Limbum is spoken in the Donga Mantung Particularly in Ndu and Nkambe Subdivisions.
 * Adamaoua Region
 * Vina department (Ngaoundéré and Mbe communes)
 * Djerem department (Ngaoundal and Tibati communes)
 * Faro-et-Déo department (Tignère communes)
 * North Region
 * Mayo-Rey department (Touboro commune)
 * Faro department (Poli commune)
 * North West Region*

title: Mbum language


text:
Talk:Trevs

This article was proposed for deletion Feb. 2005. Votes for deletion/Trevs Joyous 06:24, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Trevs


text:
Arm wrestling

Arm wrestling (also spelled armwrestling) is a sport with two opponents who face each other with their bent elbows placed on a table and hands firmly gripped, who then attempt to force the opponent's hand down to the table top ("pin" them). The sport is often casually used to demonstrate the stronger person between two or more people. Arm wrestling is an ancient sport that was revived in the 1950s in the United States. In September 1962, the first world wrestling championship was held in Petaluma, California, as this wrestling was called (literally, “wrist wrestling”).

In the early years other names were used to describe the same sport, including arm turning, arm twisting, twisting wrists, wrist turning and wrist wrestling.

History
Current knowledge of the history of arm wrestling is based on written and pictorial evidentiary sources, and arm wrestling may have existed in any number of ancient or medieval cultures that did not record it. The most popular claims claim that it was practiced in ancient Egypt or ancient Greece, while not necessarily implausible, are founded on misinterpretation of sources (confusing references to wrestling with the arms or images of wrestling with the hands or of dancing for arm wrestling).

Modern-day practices and depictions of arm wrestling have been widely practiced during the Edo-period of Japan(腕相撲; formerly known as "wrist wrestling" in this context in English, the literal translation of the Japanese) depicted in art from as early as the 1700s, and recorded in writing as early as the eighth century in the Kojiki. Illustrations unambiguously demonstrate this was the same as modern arm wrestling. It is likely that the modern popularity of arm wrestling comes from the Japanese treatment of the sport.

Arm wrestling was also practiced by Spaniards and Cubans in the nineteenth century, possibly via the influence of Japanese contact; these arm-wrestlers would place a piece of money under each elbow.

Arm wrestling in the United States was formerly also called "Indian arm wrestling"; some sources suggest the practice originated amongst Native American peoples such as the Lenape. A similar sport, "Indian hand wrestling", attested from the early 20th century and commonly ascribed Native American origins, was conducted standing upright. Both "Indian arm wrestling" (or simply "arm wrestling") and "Indian hand wrestling" were popular among Boy Scouts and other American youth in the early to mid 20th century.

Organized arm wrestling tournaments arose in the 1950s, while the World’s Wristwrestling Championship, Inc. (WWC) was the first armwrestling organization, organized the first World’s Wrist-wrestling Championship - held in Hermann Sons Hall, the second largest auditorium in Petaluma, California in 1962; later those (WWC's) World championships were known as Petaluma World’s Wrist-wrestling Championships.

Casual
Casual arm wrestling is common between individuals simply as a game or casual contest of strength. Casual arm wrestling is usually performed seated on any available surface (commonly a standard table or chair) and lacks the technical rigor, specially designed table, and regulation of competitive arm wrestling. Injuries are more common in casual settings than in competition due to a general lack of conditioning and proper technique. Additionally, participants in casual matches are less likely to be close in strength, and such strength disparities often result in dangerous positions which increase the likelihood of injury.

Competition
In competitive arm wrestling, a match is conducted with both competitors standing up with arms placed on a tournament arm wrestling table. Competitions are usually conducted in either tournament or supermatch form. A tournament usually involves successive rounds of a single match (or "pull") between any two opponents and a large number of total participants. A "supermatch" usually involves anywhere from 3 to 6 matches between two specific athletes, with short rest periods between consecutive matches. The supermatch format is usually reserved for more experienced and high-level pullers, and is analogous to a traditional bout in other combat sports.

Competition tables
Tables used for organized armwrestling competitions include elbow pads, which indicate the area within which a competitor's elbow must remain throughout the match, pin pads, which indicate the height an opponent's hand must reach before being considered pinned, and hand pegs, which must be gripped with the non-wrestling arm and are used for additional leverage. These tables vary slightly in their dimensions based on the governing body of the competition, but are always symmetrical with predefined distances between the elbow pads and pin pads.

Competition divisions
As with other combat sports in which body weight is recognized to play a significant role in victory, arm wrestling tournaments are usually divided along weight classes as well as left and right-handed divisions. Because most pullers are right-handed, right-handed competitions are both more common and more prestigious than equivalent left-handed competitions.

There are also rules governing fouls and imposition of penalties, such as when a competitor's elbow leaves the pad where the elbow is meant to remain at all times, when a false start occurs, and attempting to escape arm pinning by breaking the grip ("slipping") with the opponent which may result in a loss. Paraphrasing USAF rules, arm wrestlers must straighten their wrists with less than a one-minute time lapse during set up.

Types

 * arm wrestling
 * stand-up arm wrestling left hand
 * sit-down arm wrestling right hand

 * wristwrestling
 * stand-up wristwrestling left hand

 * sit-down wristwrestling right hand

Technique
There are many styles and moves in arm wrestling, each with their own relative balance of hand and arm pressures. The three most common general moves are the hook, toproll and press.

Pressures
Many force vectors, or "pressures", contribute to the overall success of an armwrestler. Generally speaking, these pressures can be classified into hand pressures and arm pressures.

Hand pressures
The primary hand pressure is "cupping", or wrist flexion. The flexing of the wrist by the forearm muscles bends back the opponent's wrist, and dramatically decreases their accessible leverage during the match.

Secondary hand pressures include supination (as in a hook), pronation (as in a toproll) and "rising", or wrist abduction. Each of these can be used to get an opponent into an uncomfortable or disadvantageous position, from which the initiator can more easily pin.

Arm pressures
The three major arm pressures in arm wrestling include side pressure, back pressure, and "posting" or upward pressure.

Side pressure involves isometric contraction of the pectoral muscles, internal shoulder rotators, and whole body movement expressed through the elbow joint in order to generate force against the opponent perpendicular to the plane of the palm. This pressure is most directly associated with movement of the hands toward the pin pad, and as such is often the main or only pressure instinctively utilized by novices trying to pin their opponent.

Back pressure involves contraction of the muscles of the back (primarily the lats), and the biceps, in order to adduct the upper arm and generate force toward the self and away from the opponent. If successful, the application of back pressure increases the elbow angle of the opponent and therefore limits their leverage.

"Posting", or upward pressure, involves contraction of the biceps in order to flex the elbow. If successful, the application of upward pressure decreases the elbow angle of the initiator, therefore increasing their leverage against their opponent.

Hook
The "hook" or "hooking" is any move classified within the "inside" style of arm wrestling. The defining characteristic of a hook is supination of the hand and forearm, which results in a match centered on pressure applied through the wrist. Generally, a successful hook is more dependent on raw arm strength (centered on the biceps) than hand control and technique compared to a toproll.

Toproll
The "top roll" or "top rolling" is any move classified within the "outside" style of arm wrestling. The defining characteristic of a toproll is pronation of the hand and forearm, in which the thumb becomes the point in which pressure is applied as you rotate into the opponent's hand. Generally, a successful toproll is highly dependent on technique and the strength of the hand and forearm, more so than a hook or press.

Press
The "triceps press", "shoulder pressing", or "shoulder rolling" is often described as the third primary move or style of arm wrestling. The defining characteristic of a press is the rotation of the competitor's torso in order to position their shoulder behind their hand. This position allows the athlete to better utilize their triceps strength and body weight, and is usually only attempted in neutral or advantageous positions in order to finish an opponent. A press can be accessed from either a hook or toproll.

Factors
Various factors can play a part in one's success in arm wrestling, technique and overall arm strength being the two greatest contributing factors. Other considerations such as the length of an arm wrestler's arm, muscle and arm mass/density, hand grip size, wrist endurance and flexibility, reaction time, and other traits can lend advantages of one arm wrestler over another.

Governing organizations

 * 1) WAF
 * 2) IFA
 * 3) WAL
 * 4) WWC (World Wrist Wrestling Championships)

The World Armwrestling Federation (WAF) has been the universally recognized global governing body for professional arm wrestling and comprises 82 member countries.

World Armwrestling Federation (WAWF) - 1977-1997

World Armwrestling Federation (WAWF) - World Armsport Federation (WAF) - 1998-2005

World Armwrestling Federation (WAF) - Since 2006

The World Arm Wrestling Championship is the largest international arm wrestling competition. Held annually under the auspices of the World Armwrestling Federation. The first official world championship took place in 1979 in Canada. In 1997, there was a division into two WAF federations - the World Armsport Federation and the World Armwrestling Federation.

Since 1998, arm wrestlers have participated in two world championships. In 2006, the federations decided to end the division and work together as the World Armwrestling Federation.

Europe
Source:

Common rules
The rules and regulations for arm wrestling are designed to create an even playing field and to prevent broken bones. Below are some of the general arm wrestling regulations:

 * The shoulder of both players must be in a square position before the match starts.
 * All starts will be a "Ready… Go!" The cadence will vary.
 * Competitors must start with at least one foot on the ground. After the "go" players may have both feet off the ground.
 * One's opposite (non-wrestling) hand must remain on the peg at all times. (If one slips off the peg and quickly regains contact it does not count as a foul in most cases)
 * If the elbow of the offensive competitor comes off the pad prior to a pin it will not be counted and a foul will be given.
 * To make a winning pin, a player must take any part of the opponent's wrist or hand (including fingers) below the plane of a touch pad.
 * A false start is a warning. Two warnings equals a foul.
 * Competitors will forfeit the match with a second foul. (Subject to change based on foul limits)
 * If opponents lose grip with one another, a strap is applied and the match is restarted.
 * Intentional slip-outs are fouls, which occur when player's palm completely loses contact with the other player's palm.
 * Competitors may not touch their body to their hand at any time.
 * Shoulders may not cross the center of the table at any time.
 * Competitors will always conduct themselves in a sportsperson-like manner while at the tournament.
 * The most important arm wrestling rule: the referee's decision is final.

Training
Improvement at armwrestling is most driven by two factors: strength development/conditioning, and experience.

While there is no consensus among top athletes as to whether table training or weight training is most effective for developing armwrestling strength, it is generally accepted that both are important. Common lifts for armwrestling include bicep curls, wrist curls, and rows, all of which develop overall pulling strength and greater pressures against the opponent. In addition to standard dumbbells and barbells, serious pullers often make use of bands and cable systems with specialized handles in order to more closely replicate the angles and tensions of real armwrestling during weight training.

Table training often involves pulling many casual or semi-serious matches from various starting positions, and developing one's strategy and techniques against a large variety of opponents and styles.

Associated injury
Arm wrestling puts substantial torque/torsion stress on the upper arm's humerus bone, to a degree seen in few other physical activities. Generally speaking, the bones and connective tissue involved in arm wrestling are not prepared to accommodate the stresses imposed by the sport, and severe injuries can occur without proper training and conditioning. An arm bone may fail in a diagonal break at or below the shoulder and elbow midpoint. This is significantly more likely when one of the pullers rotates their shoulder inward (as in a press) without first getting behind their hand, a position known as the 'break arm' position. It is for this reason that a common safety cue for beginners is to maintain eye contact with their own hand. This helps prevent rotation of the shoulders away from the arm, and therefore limits the likelihood that the puller will reach the 'break arm' position.

Common injuries include humeral shaft fractures, shoulder trauma, muscle strain, golfers' elbow, and less commonly pectoralis major/biceps rupture.

Injuries associated with armwrestling occur most commonly between novices or athletes of significant strength difference, when competitors are forced into unsafe positions out of inexperience or inability to maintain advantage. Matches or practices involving experienced pullers with the conditioning and knowledge to stay safe very rarely produce injuries.

Examples of matches that have caused injury
On 11 June 2015, Australian former rugby league player Ben Ross participated in an arm wrestling match against another Australian former rugby league and rugby union player, Wendell Sailor, on The Footy Show. However, Ross' arm gave way and was immediately rushed to hospital.

In September 2018, in an office arm wrestling match between two New South Wales parliamentarians, then-Attorney General Mark Speakman and then-Finance Minister Victor Dominello, Speakman reportedly broke Dominello's arm.

In popular culture

 * In The Old Man and the Sea (1952), the character Santiago recalls winning an arm wrestling match that lasted for a whole day.
 * In the episode "Dead Lift" of the series The Streets of San Francisco (first broadcast May 5, 1977), where Arnold Schwarzenegger plays an important role, one sees his friend Franco Colombu, himself a high-level bodybuilder, and also a competitor of athletic strength and "strong men" contests, make a showdown in a bar.
 * At the beginning of the film Predator (1987), the characters played by Arnold Schwarzenegger and Carl Weathers improvise a showdown after a vigorous handshake.
 * The film Vendetta dal futuro (1986) features arm wrestling.
 * The film Over the Top (1987) features an arm wrestling champion, played by Sylvester Stallone.
 * The film Addams Family Values (1993) opens with a showdown between Gomez and Thing.
 * The Fly (1986 film) features an arm wrestling scene in which one competitor's arm suffers a compound fracture.
 * In the episode of The Simpsons "Marge's Son Poisoning" (2005), Homer enters an armwrestling tournament.
 * The 2007 Japanese rhythm video game Moero! Nekketsu Rhythm Damashii Osu! Tatakae! Ouendan 2 has an unlockable bonus image of two oendan holding an informal arm-wrestling contest at a picnic, awarded to players who are able to raise their total high score to an exceptional level.
 * The documentary Pulling John (2009), focuses on the battle for pre-eminence between heavyweights John Brzenk, Travis Bagent and Alexey Voevoda.
 * The reality TV show Game of Arms (2014) showed teams of American competitors sacrificing to become the nation's best armwrestler.
 * In Italy, the term used for arm wrestling is braccio di ferro, and the cartoon character Popeye is also called Braccio di Ferro.
 * The film Golden Arm (2020) features an arm wrestling championship.

title: Arm wrestling


text:
Talk:Mbum language

An African language in Cambodia? Huh? RickK 06:25, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mbum language


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scopetech

 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

Tally: I count 7 delete, 2 keep by editors whose votes count (Mrmiscellanious and Randy Johnston), 2 keep by editors with less than 50 edits (G-RaZoR and Dinero) and some anonymous votes. Ignoring the anonymous votes and the votes by editors with less than 50 edits, the votes are 7-2 to delete. I'll go delete Scopetech now. Wile E. Heresiarch 19:33, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Scopetech
Website promo. Launched last month by some television personalities. Delete. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:25, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete. Foobaz · ✐  06:49, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. (Probably self-) promotion. -- RHaworth 08:07, 2005 Feb 27 (UTC)
 * Delete. Smells like self-promotion. Zzyzx11 20:52, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * This is not a Self Promo, I am the one who added it, and I am showing off a Tech site created by former On-Air Talents. They did not add it themselves.
 * G-RaZoR blanked this vfd and inserted the above as his ninth edit. —Korath (Talk) 07:02, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, advertisement, non-notable. —Korath (Talk) 07:02, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Do Not Delete, notable exchange of tech and general information in forums. www.danielwalters.net
 * Do Not Delete, Brand new exchange of current Tech information.
 * Do Not Delete, It's iffy right now. I'd say keep it up for now, but think about describing it better and making it sound less like an ad.  My two cents. --Mrmiscellanious 23:43, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Is notable, not self-promotion.  --Randy 01:07, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. ComCat 02:12, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Gamaliel 02:17, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Do Not Delete, This is Wikipedia, we're trying to create a compendium of all human knowledge. Scpetech is something people might want or need to look up and we should keep the information we have on them. It's not like the article is making it sound any better than it really is. -- Dinero 03:21, Mar 6, 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:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Kessler

 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. Carrp | Talk 04:10, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Andy Kessler
Personal promo. No evidence of notability. Delete. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:26, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete. Foobaz · ✐  06:51, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless someone comes up with notable content. Zzyzx11 20:53, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep: I vote to keep this article, because the man did found a financial company and he does contribute to Forbes. He may not be terribly well-known, but he sounds like an important figure of corporate America.   history21
 * Note: user's first edit.

 * Abstain: "Andy Kessler" + Forbes gets over 500 hits on Google. That seems kindof low; substituting with "Andrew" gives about 80 results. Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy)  02:17, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, there's plenty of guys like that. Radiant! 10:12, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable enough. —Brim 17:27, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Article does not establish notability.   — Gwalla | Talk 04:33, 2 Mar 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.