text:
Talk:Response spectrum

I haven't found yet any external refs that I like. --Zeizmic 15:42, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have largely replaced this section because for transient input, such as seismic, there will always be a finite peak response, even with no damping. Infinite response occurs with periodic input and then only after an infinite time.--Muchado 11:27, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Although this is a great tool for building codes, and seismic hazard analysis, there are limitations. The fundamental assumption is that these are linear oscillators, which have been exposed to a sufficient amount of shaking, as to have achieved a steady state in the equations of motion.  Of course, the oscillators only register a finite peak acceleration because of the damping that is assumed, normally 5% of critical for structures. (Undamped oscillators would fling those blocks into orbit!)
 * Actually response spectra do not assume steady-state. They are made up of "peak responses" to any transient input. This is a common confusion due to the superficial similarity to plots of simple harmonic response to simple harmonic excitation (transfer functions). Or perhaps "response spectra" mean something else in other fields? My apologies if that is the case. Muchado 01:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Need to organize the uses of Response Spectrum
Time history analysis for a structure gives us the Action/Displacement with respect to time.

So, in this respect how the Response Spectrum Analysis for a structure is different from Time History Analysis.

i.e, what more or less is done when we perform Response analysis for a structure? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.52.146.226 (talk) 10:52, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Time history analysis generally refers to time domain analysis of multi-degree-of-freedom systems to earthquake ground motions. Response spectra are created by plotting the maximum response of "single-degree-of-freedom" systems with a range of different natural frequencies to a ground motion. Response spectrum analysis is the decomposition of a multi-degree-of-freedom system into "single-degree-of-freedom" systems (typically by modal analysis), and then reading the response of those systems off the response spectrum, and combining the results (typically using some form of SRSS combination) to approximate the response of the structure to ground motion. The advantage is that you don't need to do a time history analysis, and also that you can define a "design response spectrum" which is an idealised form that envelopes the effects of many different earthquakes. Since we don't know what earthquake ground motion is going to occur, we would have to choose appropriate ground motions or generate artificial ones and then perform multiple analyses. Response spectrum analysis reduces the analysis time significantly. I will see if I can find time to rewrite the article at some point, but am currently too busy doing design. --Muchado (talk) 06:27, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * There is something new called Uniform Hazard Spectrum (UHS). Can anyone tell me how to use it in a modal response analysis and in a time history analysis? Thanks. Zymogen (talk) 17:00, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Predominant period and frequency
Hi,

We need to add why it is important to estimate the predominant period and frequency and how to do it.

RB — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.177.81.47 (talk) 23:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Damping
Need a discussion on what damping is, is not well defined here or on other pages it seems Jtyler277 (talk) 17:31, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Response spectrum. 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/20090413043929/http://140.194.76.129/publications/eng-manuals/em1110-2-6050/a-b.pdf to http://140.194.76.129/publications/eng-manuals/em1110-2-6050/a-b.pdf

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) 20:13, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Presence of damping required for steady state?
The following statement:

"If the input used in calculating a response spectrum is steady-state periodic, then the steady-state result is recorded. Damping must be present, or else the response will be infinite."

Should only be true if the response spectrum contains the natural frequency of the oscillating mass, correct? 208.181.64.249 (talk) 16:39, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Response spectrum


text:
Super Star Wars

Super Star Wars is a 1992 action video game developed by LucasArts and Sculptured Software for the Super Nintendo Entertainment System. It is based on the 1977 film Star Wars. It was released by JVC Musical Industries in Japan and North America in 1992 and Europe in 1993. The game was followed by two sequels based on the subsequent Star Wars films, Super Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back (1993) and Super Star Wars: Return of the Jedi (1994). The game was re-released in November 1996 as part of Nintendo's Player's Choice series. It was released on the Wii’s Virtual Console by LucasArts in 2009.

In 2015, Disney Interactive Studios re-released the game for the PlayStation 4 and PlayStation Vita, with Code Mystics developing the ports. The port features enhanced options for saving, including cross-save, leaderboards and trophies, and modern displays and controllers. The game was also made a part of a bundle with the purchase of Star Wars Battlefront for the PlayStation 4, which included Star Wars: Racer Revenge, Star Wars: Jedi Starfighter and Star Wars Bounty Hunter.

Super Star Wars features side-scrolling run and gun gameplay, although it has stages which feature other challenges, such as driving a landspeeder or piloting an X-wing. It also features multiple playable characters with different abilities.

Gameplay
Super Star Wars generally follows the plot of Star Wars, although some allowances were made to adapt the story to suit an action game. For example, instead of simply buying C-3PO and R2-D2 from the Jawas, Luke Skywalker must fight his way to the top of a Jawa sandcrawler while leaping from a series of moving conveyor belts. Brief cutscenes between levels tell an abbreviated version of the film's story through written text. Later stages allow the player to control smuggler and pilot Han Solo or Chewbacca the Wookiee. The game also features several vehicle-based levels in which the player takes control of an X-Wing or a landspeeder.

Most of the stages consist of run and gun and platforming gameplay, with several different upgrades available to the standard blaster weapon. Luke can also wield a lightsaber after acquiring it from Obi-Wan Kenobi. The end of the game has players reenacting Luke's Death Star trench run to destroy the Death Star, with Darth Vader confronting the player in his TIE Advanced x1.

Development
Artist Jon Knoles did the visual designs for the characters, while Harrison Fong drew the backgrounds. Fong recounted that he did very little concept drawing before rendering the characters on the computer "because everybody knew what the Star Wars characters looked like." Originally, the game design was planned to give the characters a dark black outline around their bodies. However, this idea was abandoned, as it was thought to make the characters too cartoonish-looking.

The "Kalhar Boss Monster" is based on one of the chess pieces R2D2 plays with on the Millennium Falcon in the film. There was a trash compactor level that was deleted from the game due to lack of cartridge space. An image was published in an issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly around the time of the game's release.

The game's audio contains scores from the movie, which were all arranged by Sculptured Software's in-house musician Paul Webb. According to Webb, he was given the original handwritten scores that John Williams had created. Paul then used the company's in-house music software to convert the scores onto the Super NES's 8-channel sound chip. The game's instrument samples were taken from the Ensoniq EPS and EPS16 keyboards.

A PC port of Super Star Wars was in the works since 1994, by Danish game company Brain Bug and produced by Softgold. The game was almost completed, and was well into the playtesting phase, but in 1995 LucasArts decided to halt the development and cancel the release. An unfinished version of this port was leaked onto the internet.

A Mega Drive version was in the works by Sega Interactive from late 1992 to some point in 1993, when it was cancelled for unknown reasons. An early prototype's ROM was dumped in 2020.

Reception
Entertainment Weekly wrote that "If you've ever fantasized about piloting an X-wing fighter into the heart of the Death Star, now you can do it—in simulated 3-D as well as reenact the movie's key plot developments." In 2009, Official Nintendo Magazine placed the game 68th on a list of the greatest Nintendo games.

Super Star Wars was awarded Best Action/Adventure Game of 1992 by Electronic Gaming Monthly, as well as Best Movie-to-Game. Super Star Wars was rated 4th in Nintendo Power top ten Super NES games of 1992. IGN ranked Super Star Wars 83rd on their "Top 100 SNES Games of All Time". In 2018, Complex listed the game 38th in its "The Best Super Nintendo Games of All Time." In 1995, Total! ranked the game 60th on their Top 100 SNES Games summarizing: "The sequels left a little to be desired but this is a great interpretation of the original and best film." In the same year, Flux magazine rated Super Star Wars 25th on its Top 100 Video Games. They lauded the game writing: "The second greatest SNES platform game after Super Mario World." They also praised the game's graphics and felt the game was easy.

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

title: Super Star Wars


text:
Guarda District

The district of Guarda (Distrito de Guarda ) is located in the Centro Region of Portugal, except Vila Nova de Foz Côa, which is in the Norte Region. The district capital and most populous city is Guarda. It borders Spain.

Municipalities
The district contains 14 municipalities:

 * Aguiar da Beira
 * Almeida
 * Celorico da Beira
 * Figueira de Castelo Rodrigo
 * Fornos de Algodres
 * Gouveia
 * Guarda
 * Manteigas
 * Mêda
 * Pinhel
 * Sabugal
 * Seia
 * Trancoso
 * Vila Nova de Foz Côa

Cities
The following seat of municipalities have city (cidade)status: Gouveia, Guarda, Meda, Pinhel, Sabugal, Trancoso.

Subregions Included within the District of Guarda
Beira Interior Norte, Serra da Estrela, Douro and Dão-Lafões.

Geography
The main mountain ranges are the Serra da Estrela and Serra da Marofa. The main rivers are the Mondego, Côa, and Douro.

Main Monuments/Castles

 * Guarda Sé/ Cathedral of Guarda.
 * Castles:(Castelos de) Pinhel, Sabugal, Sortelha, Marialva, Celorico, Rodrigo, Almeida, Trancoso.
 * Pelourinhos de Pinhel and Alverca da Beira.

Summary of votes and seats won 1976-2022
!rowspan=2|Parties!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S!!%!!S !colspan=2 | 1976 !colspan=2 | 1979 !colspan=2 | 1980 !colspan=2 | 1983 !colspan=2 | 1985 !colspan=2 | 1987 !colspan=2 | 1991 !colspan=2 | 1995 !colspan=2 | 1999 !colspan=2 | 2002 !colspan=2 | 2005 !colspan=2 | 2009 !colspan=2 | 2011 !colspan=2 | 2015 !colspan=2 | 2019 !colspan=2 | 2022 ! Total seats || colspan=2|6 || colspan=10|5 || colspan=16|4 || colspan=4|3 ! colspan=33|Source: Comissão Nacional de Eleições
 * - class="unsortable"
 * - class="unsortable" align="center"
 * align="left"| PS || 25.2 || 2 || 26.3 || 1 ||26.3 || 1 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|33.5 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|2 || 23.3 || 2 || 21.8 || 1 || 26.8 || 1 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|43.7 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|2 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|43.4 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|2 || 34.7 || 2 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|46.8 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|2 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|36.0 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|2 || 28.3 || 1 || 33.8 || 2 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|37.6 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|2 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|45.1 || style="background:#FF66FF;"|2
 * align="left"| PSD || 25.7 || 2 || align=center colspan=4 rowspan=2|In AD || 31.5 || 2 || style="background:#FF9900;"|33.6 || style="background:#FF9900;"|2 || style="background:#FF9900;"|60.0 || style="background:#FF9900;"|4 || style="background:#FF9900;"|58.6 || style="background:#FF9900;"|3 || 39.9 || 2 || 39.2|| 2 || style="background:#FF9900;"|48.5 || style="background:#FF9900;"|2 || 34.7 || 2 || 35.6 || 2 || style="background:#FF9900;"|46.3 || style="background:#FF9900;"|3 || align=center colspan=2 rowspan=2|In PàF || 34.3 || 1 || 33.5 || 1
 * align="left"| CDS-PP || style="background:#0093DD;"|32.1 || style="background:#0093DD;"|2 || 23.8 || 1 || 19.5 || 1 || 6.6 || || 5.9 ||  || 9.9 ||  || 9.8 ||  || 9.6 ||  || 7.0 ||  || 11.2 ||  || 11.2 ||  || 5.0 ||  || 2.2 ||
 * align="left"| AD || colspan=2| || style="background:#00FFFF;"|60.6 || style="background:#00FFFF;"|4 || style="background:#00FFFF;"|60.6 || style="background:#00FFFF;"|4 || colspan=26|
 * align="left"| PàF || colspan=26| || style="background:#00AAAA;"|45.6 || style="background:#00AAAA;"|2 || colspan=4|
 * align="left"| CDS-PP || style="background:#0093DD;"|32.1 || style="background:#0093DD;"|2 || 23.8 || 1 || 19.5 || 1 || 6.6 || || 5.9 ||  || 9.9 ||  || 9.8 ||  || 9.6 ||  || 7.0 ||  || 11.2 ||  || 11.2 ||  || 5.0 ||  || 2.2 ||
 * align="left"| AD || colspan=2| || style="background:#00FFFF;"|60.6 || style="background:#00FFFF;"|4 || style="background:#00FFFF;"|60.6 || style="background:#00FFFF;"|4 || colspan=26|
 * align="left"| PàF || colspan=26| || style="background:#00AAAA;"|45.6 || style="background:#00AAAA;"|2 || colspan=4|
 * align="left"| PàF || colspan=26| || style="background:#00AAAA;"|45.6 || style="background:#00AAAA;"|2 || colspan=4|
 * align="left"| PàF || colspan=26| || style="background:#00AAAA;"|45.6 || style="background:#00AAAA;"|2 || colspan=4|
 * }

title: Guarda District


text:
Rajmahal

Rajmahal is a subdivisional town and a notified area in Rajmahal subdivision of the Sahebganj district in the Indian state of Jharkhand. It is situated at the banks of Ganges and was former capital of Bengal Subah under Mughal governor, Man Singh I.

Area
Rajmahal has an area of 7.5 km2.

Overview
The map shows a hilly area with the Rajmahal hills running from the bank of the Ganges in the extreme north to the south, beyond the area covered by the map into Dumka district. ‘Farakka’ is marked on the map and that is where Farakka Barrage is, just inside West Bengal. Rajmahal coalfield is shown in the map. The entire area is overwhelmingly rural with only small pockets of urbanisation.

Note: The full screen map is interesting. All places marked on the map are linked and you can easily move on to another page of your choice. Enlarge the map to see what else is there – one gets railway links, many more road links and so on.

History
Rajmahal region was earlier ruled by Raja Mal sub-group of Mal Paharia tribes. Earlier this place was known as "Agmahal" and is surrounded by Rajmahal hills on one side and river Ganges on another side. The region was also known as 'Daman-i-Koh' during Mughal rule.

In 1576, Battle of Rajmahal was fought between Mughal Emperor, Akbar and Sultan of Bengal, Daud Khan Karrani of Karrani Dynasty. After war, Daud Khan was captured and later executed by the Mughals.

Later, after the conquest of Odisha in 1592, Raja Man Singh I, Mughal governor of Bengal Subah came to Rajmahal. He chose the site for his capital in 1595–96 because of its strategic command of the Teliagarhi Pass and the Ganges River. Raja Man Singh I, also renamed the town in 1595 as 'Akbarnagar' in tribute to Emperor Akbar and he also constructed palace, garden and mosque on behalf of Mughal rulers. In 1610, the capital of Bengal was transferred to Dacca (now Dhaka, Bangladesh) by Islam Khan.

In 1639, Rajmahal regained its glory and was once more made the capital of Bengal by Shah Shuja, governor of Bengal Subah and second son of Emperor Shah Jahan. It continued as the seat of the Mughal Viceroy up to 1660 and a mint town till 1661.

In 1757, Battle of Plassey was fought between Robert Clive and Nawab of Bengal, Siraj-ud-Daulah where Nawab lost the war due to treachery of Mir Jafar and he fled from Murshidabad towards Patna. During his halt at Rajmahal, Siraj-ud-Daulah was captured by Mir Jafar's son Miran and was murdered at the site.

Battle of Udhwa nala at Rajmahal was fought between Mir Qasim, and British in 1763. Nawab Mir Qasim was defeated by the British and fled with his family to the Rohtas (Bihar), but was not able to hide at the Rohtasgarh Fort.

During British rule, Permanent Settlement was passed in 1793 and it forced the landlords to improve productivity of the land. The Santals were increasingly used for land reclamation and improvement and further Santals got permanently settled in the region. British also constructed Neel-Kothi for process and storage of Neel (Indigo) which was used for dying cotton cloth.

Later, Daman-i-Koh became the origin of Santhal Rebellion and leaders like Sidhu and Kanhu Murmu, Chand and Bhairab, etc. and they fought against the British colonial authority and the corrupt zamindari system mobilizing more than 10,000 Santhals.

Geology
Plant Fossil bearing Inter-trappean beds of Rajmahal Formation nearby has been declared the National Geological Monuments of India by the Geological Survey of India (GSI), for their protection, maintenance, promotion and enhancement of geotourism.

Demographics
According to the 2011 Census of India, Rajmahal had a total population of 22,514, of which 11,755 (52%) were males and 10,730 (48%) were females. Population in the age range 0–6 years was 3,985. The total number of literate persons in Rajmhal was 11,618 (62.70% of the population over 6 years).

Infrastructure
According to the District Census Handbook 2011, Sahibganj, Rajmahal covered an area of 7.5 km2. Among the civic amenities, it had 10 km roads with both open and closed drains, the protected water supply involved hand pump, uncovered well. It had 4,025 domestic electric connections, 456 road lighting points. Among the medical facilities, it had 3 hospitals, 2 dispensaries, 2 health centres, 1 family welfare centre, 6 maternity and child welfare centres, 1 maternity home, 1 TB hospital/ clinic, 1 nursing home, 1 charitable hospital/ nursing home, 1 veterinary hospital, 20 medicine shops. Among the educational facilities it had 15 primary schools, 6 middle schools, 2 secondary schools, 2 senior secondary schools, 1 general degree college, 1 non-formal education centre (Sarva Sikhsha Abhiyan). Among the social, cultural and recreational facilities, it had 2 cinema theatres, 2 auditorium/ community halls, 2 public libraries, 2 reading rooms. Three important commodities it produced were china clay products, electrical goods, wooden goods. It had the branch offices of 3 nationalised banks, 1 private commercial bank, 1 cooperative bank, 2 agricultural credit society.

Tourist attractions

 * Teliagarhi Fort, It was built by family of Teli Zamindar before Islamic rule in the region. Teliagarhi is also called 'Ancient Gateway of Bengal'.
 * The Jami Mosque, built in reign of Emperor Akbar at Mangalhat
 * Baradari, build by Fateh Jung khan, a wealthy zamindar of Bengal. Half of the structure was bombed by Mughal governor, Man Singh.
 * Akbari Mosque built in 1556 by Mughal governor, Man Singh I
 * Palace of Shah Shuja, consists Singhi Dalan, a marble pavilion facing the river Ganges
 * Palace of Mīr Qasīm, Nawab of Bengal.
 * Tomb of Maina-Bibi, built in 1779. Historian H.M Qureshi has identified the tomb with Munni Begum, who was a Begum of the harem of Nawab Mir Jaffer of Bengal
 * Tomb of Miran, son of Mir Jafar, Nawab of Bengal
 * Neel Kothi, built by British
 * Taksal of Jagat Seth, notable banker of Bengal
 * Kanhaiyasthan, It is believed that the place was visited by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu
 * Shivgadi, a cave temple of Hindu god, Shiva
 * Bhognadih, the place where Santhal Rebellion initiated, a monument is also erected on the place and every year Shaheed Mela is organised
 * Moti Jharna waterfalls
 * Udhwa Bird Sanctuary

Assembly segments
Presently, Rajmahal Lok Sabha constituency comprises the following six Vidhan Sabha (legislative assembly) segments:

Members of Parliament
The Rajmahal (Lok Sabha constituency) is centered around the city and Vijay Kumar Hansdak is the M.P of the region from Jharkhand Mukti Morch.

title: Rajmahal


text:
Candidate gene

The candidate gene approach to conducting genetic association studies focuses on associations between genetic variation within pre-specified genes of interest, and phenotypes or disease states. This is in contrast to genome-wide association studies (GWAS), which is a hypothesis-free approach that scans the entire genome for associations between common genetic variants (typically SNPs) and traits of interest. Candidate genes are most often selected for study based on a priori knowledge of the gene's biological functional impact on the trait or disease in question. The rationale behind focusing on allelic variation in specific, biologically relevant regions of the genome is that certain alleles within a gene may directly impact the function of the gene in question and lead to variation in the phenotype or disease state being investigated. This approach often uses the case-control study design to try to answer the question, "Is one allele of a candidate gene more frequently seen in subjects with the disease than in subjects without the disease?" Candidate genes hypothesized to be associated with complex traits have generally not been replicated by subsequent GWASs  or highly powered replication attempts. The failure of candidate gene studies to shed light on the specific genes underlying such traits has been ascribed to insufficient statistical power, low prior probability that scientists can correctly guess a specific allele within a specific gene that is related to a trait, poor methodological practices, and data dredging.

Selection
Suitable candidate genes are generally selected based on known biological, physiological, or functional relevance to the disease in question. This approach is limited by its reliance on existing knowledge about known or theoretical biology of disease. However, molecular tools are allowing insight into disease mechanisms and pinpointing potential regions of interest in the genome. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping examine common variation across the entire genome, and as such can detect a new region of interest that is in or near a potential candidate gene. Microarray data allow researchers to examine differential gene expression between cases and controls, and can help pinpoint new potential genes of interest.

The great variability between organisms can sometimes make it difficult to distinguish normal variation in single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) from a candidate gene with disease-associated variation. In analyzing large amounts of data, there are several other factors that can help lead to the most probable variant. These factors include priorities in SNPs, relative risk of functional change in genes, and linkage disequilibrium among SNPs.

In addition, the availability of genetic information through online databases enables researchers to mine existing data and web-based resources for new candidate gene targets. Many online databases are available to research genes across species.
 * Gene is one such database that allows access to information about phenotypes, pathways, and variations of many genes across species.
 * When examining functionality between genes in pathways, the Gene Ontology Consortium can help map these relationships. The GO Project describes gene products in three different ways via a species-independent manner: biological processes, cellular components, and molecular functions. Using this information can further a priori knowledge of a pathway and thus help to choose the most likely candidate gene involved.
 * Topp Gene is another useful database that allows users to prioritize candidate genes using functional annotations or network analysis. ToppGene aids researchers in selecting a subset of likely candidate genes from larger sets of candidate genes, likely discovered through high-throughput genome technologies.
 * Lynx is an integrated systems biology platform that allows users to prioritize candidate genes using both functional annotations and gene pairwise association networks. Lynx provides two sophisticated prioritization tools, Cheetoh and PINTA, to help users select candidate genes from the whole genome based on the relevance to input gene list which can be a list of known genes contributing to certain disease or phenotype, or differentially expressed gene from next-generation RNA sequencing technology.

Prior to the candidate-gene approach
Before the candidate-gene approach was fully developed, various other methods were used to identify genes linked to disease-states. These methods studied genetic linkage and positional cloning through the use of a genetic screen, and were effective at identifying relative risk genes in Mendelian diseases. However, these methods are not as beneficial when studying complex diseases for several reasons:

 * 1) Complex diseases tend to vary in both age of onset and severity. This can be due to variation in penetrance and expressivity. For most human diseases, variable expressivity of the disease phenotype is the norm. This makes choosing one specific age group or phenotypic marker more difficult to select for study.
 * 2) The origins of complex disease involve many biological pathways, some of which may differ between disease phenotypes.
 * 3) Most importantly, complex diseases often illustrate genetic heterogeneity – multiple genes can be found that interact and produce one disease state. Oftentimes, each single gene is partially responsible for the phenotype produced and overall risk for the disorder.

Criticisms
A study of candidate genes seeks to balance the use of data while attempting to minimize the chance of creating false positive or negative results. Because this balance can often be difficult, there are several criticisms of the candidate gene approach that are important to understand before beginning such a study. For instance, the candidate-gene approach has been shown to produce a high rate of false positives, which requires that the findings of single genetic associations be treated with great caution.

One critique is that findings of association within candidate-gene studies have not been easily replicated in follow up studies. For instance, a recent investigation on 18 well-studied candidate genes for depression (10 publications or more each) failed to identify any significant association with depression, despite using samples orders of magnitude larger than those from the original publications. In addition to statistical issues (e.g. underpowered studies), population stratification has often been blamed for this inconsistency; therefore caution must also be taken in regards to what criteria define a certain phenotype, as well as other variations in design study.

Additionally, because these studies incorporate a priori knowledge, some critics argue that our knowledge is not sufficient to make valid predictions. Therefore, results gained from these 'hypothesis-driven' approaches are dependent on the ability to select plausible candidates from the genome, rather than use a hypothesis-free approach.

Use in research studies
One of the earliest successes using the candidate gene approach was finding a single base mutation in the non-coding region of the APOC3 (apolipoprotein C3 gene) that associated with higher risks of hypertriglyceridemia and atherosclerosis. In a study by Kim et al., genes linked to the obesity trait in both pigs and humans were discovered using comparative genomics and chromosomal heritability. By using these two methods, the researchers were able to overcome the criticism that candidate gene studies are solely focused on prior knowledge. Comparative genomics was completed by examining both human and pig quantitative trait loci through a method known as genome-wide complex trait analysis (GCTA), which allowed the researchers to then map genetic variance to specific chromosomes. This allowed the parameter of heritability to provide understanding of where phenotypic variation was on specific chromosomal regions, thus extending to candidate markers and genes within these regions. Other studies may also use computational methods to find candidate genes in a widespread, complementary way, such as one study by Tiffin et al. studying genes linked to type 2 diabetes.

Many studies have similarly used candidate genes as part of a multi-disciplinary approach to examining a trait or phenotype. One example of manipulating candidate genes can be seen in a study completed by Martin E. Feder on heat-shock proteins and their function in Drosophila melanogaster. Feder designed a holistic approach to study Hsp70, a candidate gene that was hypothesized to play a role in how an organism adapted to stress. D. melanogaster is a highly useful model organism for studying this trait due to the way it can support a diverse number of genetic approaches for studying a candidate gene. The different approaches this study took included both genetically modifying the candidate gene (using site-specific homologous recombination and the expression of various proteins), as well as examining the natural variation of Hsp70. He concluded that the results of these studies gave a multi-faceted view of Hsp70. The manipulation of candidate genes is also seen in Caspar C. Chater's study of the origin and function of stomata in Physcomitrella patens, a moss. PpSMF1, PpSMF2 and PpSCRM1 were the three candidate genes that were knocked down by homologous recombination to see any changes in the development of stomata. With the knock down experiment, Chater observed that PpSMF1 and PpSCRM1 were responsible for stomata development in P. patens. By engineering and modifying these candidate genes, they were able to confirm the ways in which this gene was linked to a change phenotype. Understanding the natural and historical context in which these phenotypes operate by examining the natural genome structure complemented this.

title: Candidate gene


text:
Carl Baugh

Carl Edward Baugh (born October 21, 1936) is an American young Earth creationist. Baugh has claimed to have discovered human footprints alongside non-avian dinosaur footprints near the Paluxy River in Texas. Baugh promoted creationism as the former host of the Creation in the 21st Century TV program on the Trinity Broadcasting Network.

The scientific community considers his claims pseudoscience. The creationist groups Answers in Genesis and Answers in Creation have characterized his claims as incorrect or deceptive. Baugh claims to have multiple doctorates, all of which are from unaccredited schools. He was also the president and a graduate of Pacific International University, an unaccredited university located in Springfield, Missouri.

Biography
Born in Kenedy, Texas, Baugh graduated in 1955 from Abilene High School in Abilene, Texas. He formerly appeared on Trinity Broadcasting Network program Creation in the 21st Century. Baugh was also the president and a graduate of the unaccredited Pacific International University.

In 1984, Baugh started the Creation Evidence Museum in a double-wide trailer in Glen Rose, Texas, near Dinosaur Valley State Park, to promote creationism. The museum exhibits have been strongly criticized by scientists as incorrectly identified dinosaur prints, other fossils, or outright forgeries. In 2008, a descendant of a family that found many original Paluxy River dinosaur tracks in the 1930s claimed that her grandfather had faked many of them. Others, such as purported dinosaur claws, were identified by University of Texas at Austin paleontologist Wann Langston as crocodile teeth.

In 1996, Baugh presented his "man-tracks" in the widely criticized program The Mysterious Origins of Man. Creationist Ken Ham, of Answers in Genesis, criticized the claims in a review titled "Hollywood's 'Moses' Undermines Genesis," regarding Baugh: "According to leading creationist researchers, this evidence is open to much debate and needs much more intensive research. One wonders how much of the information in the program can really be trusted!" He also has been given television exposure by the tele-evangelist Kenneth Copeland. He has authored several self-published books on such topics as the age of the universe, dinosaurs coexisting with humans and critiques of evolution.

In 2001 Baugh and Creation Evidence Museum were featured on The Daily Show where Baugh likened human history to The Flintstones and the show poked fun at his claims about the hyperbaric biosphere, pterodactyl expeditions, and dinosaurs.

He is a promoter of intelligent design. In 2002 he appeared with William A. Dembski at a conference in Texas and has built his more recent web material around ID and Dembski.

Claims
Both scientists and creationists have criticized Baugh's claims. Between 1982 and 1984, several scientists (including J.R. Cole, L.R. Godfrey, R.J. Hastings, and S.D. Schafersman) examined Baugh's purported "mantracks" as well as others provided by creationists in the Glen Rose Formation. In the course of the examination, "Baugh contradicted his own earlier reports of the locations of key discoveries" and many of the supposed prints "lacked human characteristics." After a three-year investigation of the tracks and Baugh's specimens, the scientists concluded there was no evidence of any of Baugh's claims or any "dinosaur-man tracks".

On September 27, 1984, Al West, a Baugh co-worker for two years, who followed the mantrack claims since 1974, and friend of Glen Kuban, publicly announced that Baugh "never had evidence for manprints as claimed." Gayle Golden, writer for The Dallas Morning News, reported that Baugh "paid $10,000 for his Moab skeleton and confirmed that Baugh knew at their purchase that the bones had already been dated at 200-300 years. However Baugh later claimed that the bones were found in Cretaceous deposits."

One of Baugh's more famous claims, aside from the dinosaur tracks, is the London Hammer, an alleged out of place artifact of an "18th century miner's hammer" found in million-year-old Ordovician rock (he has also claimed it is in Cretaceous rock) found in 1934 from London, Texas. Baugh asserted this as evidence against scientifically known ways that rocks form. However, laboratory tests discounted his claim about the hammer's being formed in the rock. J.R. Cole wrote, "The stone concretion is real, and it looks impressive to someone unfamiliar with geological processes. How could a modern artifact be stuck in Ordovician rock? The answer is that the concretion itself is not Ordovician. Minerals in solution can harden around an intrusive object dropped in a crack or simply left on the ground if the source rock (in this case, reportedly Ordovician) is chemically soluble."

In July 2008, Baugh was in contact with Alvis Delk and James Bishop, who claimed to have found a dinosaur-human print fossil. Baugh bought the "fossil" from Delk who used the money to pay his medical bills. On the authenticity of the claims, reporter Bud Kennedy noted, "since no scientists were involved, about all we really know so far is that the museum has a new rock." This was deemed "not a convincing human footprint in ancient rock" by biologist Glen J. Kuban and called a "blatant fake" by biologist PZ Myers.

Creationist organizations such as Answers in Genesis have criticized Baugh's claims saying he "muddied the water for many Christians. . . . People are being misled." Don Batten, of Creation Ministries International wrote: "Some Christians will try to use Baugh's 'evidences' in witnessing and get 'shot down' by someone who is scientifically literate. The ones witnessed to will thereafter be wary of all creation evidences and even more inclined to dismiss Christians as nut cases not worth listening to." Answers in Genesis (AiG) lists the "Paluxy tracks" as arguments "we think creationists should NOT use" [emphasis in original]. Also Answers In Creation reviewed Baugh's museum and concluded "the main artifacts they claim show a young earth reveal that they are deceptions, and in many cases, not even clever ones."

In his 1992 book Panorama of Creation, Baugh claims that a layer of metallic hydrogen surrounded the early Earth. Furthermore, he professes that hexagonal water, or, "Creation water" as he calls it, is capable of healing. Such claims have been addressed by scientists as pseudoscience,.

Baugh has claimed several college degrees, at one point professing to earning three doctorates, when no evidence exists that he even graduated from high school. All three "doctorates" are from unaccredited "schools." One is an honorary "Doctor of Philosophy in Theology" from the non-accredited California Graduate School of Theology. His claimed 1989 "doctorate" and master's degrees in archaeology come from the non-accredited Pacific International University, of which Baugh was also the president. His dissertation titled "Academic Justification for Voluntary Inclusion of Scientific Creation in Public Classroom Curricula, Supported by Evidence that Man and Dinosaurs Were Contemporary" was reviewed by Brett Vickers who criticized its "descriptions of his field-work on the Paluxy river 'man-tracks', speculation about Charles Darwin's religious beliefs and phobias, and biblical evidence of Adam's mental excellence." In 2005, Baugh claimed to have completed another doctorate in theology from the unaccredited Louisiana Baptist University.

title: Carl Baugh


text:
Pulborough Brooks

Pulborough Brooks is a 160 ha biological Site of Special Scientific Interest south of Pulborough in West Sussex. It is part of the Pulborough Brooks nature reserve, which is managed by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. It is also part of the Arun Valley Ramsar site, Special Area of Conservation and Special Protection Area.

These wet meadows are crossed by a network of ditches, some of which have a rich aquatic flora and invertebrate fauna, including several which are nationally rare. The site is internationally important for wintering wildfowl and many species of birds breed there, such as lapwing, snipe, garganey, yellow wagtail, grey partridge, skylark, reed bunting and barn owl.

title: Pulborough Brooks


text:
Ragged school

Ragged schools were charitable organisations dedicated to the free education of destitute children in 19th-century Britain. The schools were developed in working-class districts and intended for society's most impoverished youngsters who, it was argued, were often excluded from Sunday School education because of their unkempt appearance and often challenging behaviour. After a few such schools were set up in the early 19th century by individual reformers, the London Ragged School Union was established in April 1844 to combine resources in the city, providing free education, food, clothing, lodging, and other home missionary services for poor children. Although the Union did not extend beyond London, its publications and pamphlets helped spread ragged school ideals across the country before they were phased out by the final decades of the 19th century.

Working in the poorest districts, teachers (often local working people) initially utilised stables, lofts, and railway arches for their classes. The majority were voluntary teachers, although a small number were employed. There was an emphasis on reading, writing, arithmetic, and study of the Bible, and the curriculum expanded into industrial and commercial subjects in many schools. It is estimated that between 1844 and 1881, about 300,000 children went through just the ragged schools in London alone.

The Ragged School Museum in the East End of London, housed in buildings previously occupied by Thomas John Barnardo, shows how a ragged school would have looked. It provides an idea of the working of a ragged school, although Thomas Barnardo's institution differed considerably in practice and philosophy from the schools accountable to the London Ragged School Union.

Origins
Several schools claim to have pioneered truly free education for impoverished children. They began from the late 18th century onwards but were initially few and far between, only being set up where someone was concerned enough to want to help local disadvantaged children towards a better life,

In the late 18th century, Thomas Cranfield offered free education for poor children in London. Although a tailor by trade, his educational background had included studies at a Sunday school on Kingsland Road, Hackney and in 1798, he established a free children's day school on Kent Street near London Bridge. By his death in 1838, he had established 19 free schools offering opportunities and services daily, nightly, and Sundays for children and infants living in the lower-income areas of London.

John Pounds, a Portsmouth shoemaker, also provided significant inspiration for the movement. When he was 12, his father arranged for him to be apprenticed as a shipwright. Three years later, he fell into a dry dock and was crippled for life after damaging his thigh. Unable to continue as a shipwright, he became a shoemaker and, by 1803, had a shop on St Mary Street, Portsmouth. In 1818, Pounds, known as "the crippled cobbler", began teaching poor children without charging fees. He actively recruited them to his school, spending time on the streets and quays of Portsmouth, making contact, and even bribing them to attend with the offer of baked potatoes. He taught them reading, writing, and arithmetic, and his reputation as a teacher grew; he soon had more than 40 students attending his lessons. He also gave classes in cooking, carpentry, and shoemaking. Pounds, who died in 1839, quickly became a figurehead for the later ragged schools movement, his ethos being used as an inspiration.

In 1840, Sheriff William Watson established an industrial school in Aberdeen, Scotland to educate, train and feed the vagrant boys of the town. In contrast to the earlier efforts of Pounds and Cranfield, however, Watson used compulsion to increase attendance. Frustrated by the number of youngsters who committed petty crimes and faced him in court, he used his position as a law official to arrest vagrant boys and enrol them in the school rather than send them to prison. His Industrial Feeding School opened to provide reading, writing, and arithmetic, as Watson believed that gaining these skills would help them rise above the lowest level of society. It was not confined to the 'three R's', however, as the scholars also received instruction on geology. Three meals a day were provided, and they were taught valuable trades such as shoemaking and printing. A school for girls followed in 1843, and a mixed school in 1845, and from there, the movement spread to Dundee and other parts of Scotland.

On Sunday, 7 November 1841, the Field Lane ragged school began in Clerkenwell, London, and it was the secretary of the school, S. R. Starey, who first applied the term 'ragged' to the institutions in an advert he submitted to The Times seeking public support. Historians have debated how connected the movement was between England and Scotland. E.A.G. Clark argued that 'the London and Scottish schools had little in common except their name'. More recently, Laura Mair has demonstrated that literature, philosophy, and passionate individuals were shared between schools. She writes that 'schools forged significant links across cities and countries that disregarded physical distance'.

In Edinburgh, the first example was the Vennel Ragged School (aka New Greyfriars School) created by Rev William Robertson, the minister of the nearby New Greyfriars Church, in 1846 on the ground on the north-west corner of George Heriot's School. The unassuming Robertson was, however, eclipsed by the self-promoting Rev Thomas Guthrie, who created a parallel Ragged School on Mound Place, off Castlehill in April 1847. Guthrie placed himself at the forefront of the movement in Scotland but was certainly not alone in his aims. His 'Plea for Ragged Schools', published in March 1847 to garner the public's support for a school in the city, laid out his indisputable arguments that proved highly influential. Guthrie was first introduced to ragged schools in 1841 while acting as the Parish Minister of St. John's Church in Edinburgh. On a visit to Anstruther in Fife, he saw a picture of John Pounds in Portsmouth and felt inspired and humbled by the cobbler's work.

Birth of the London Ragged School Union
In 1840, the London City Mission used the term "ragged" in its Annual Report to describe its establishment of five schools for 570 children. The report stated that the schools had been formed exclusively for children "raggedly clothed", meaning children in worn-out clothes who rarely had shoes and did not own sufficient clothing suitable to attend any other school. By 1844, there were at least 20 free schools for the poor, maintained through the generosity of community philanthropists, the volunteers working with their local churches, and the organisational support of the London City Mission. During this time, it was suggested that it would be beneficial to establish an official organisation or society to share resources and promote their common cause.

Then, in April 1844, the London Ragged School Union was founded during a meeting of four men to pray for the city's poor children. Starey, the secretary of Field Lane school, was present along with Locke, Moutlon, and Morrison, and they formed a steering committee to address the social welfare needs of the community. On 11 April 1844, at 17 Ampton Street off London's Grays Inn Road, they facilitated a public meeting to determine local interest, research feasibility, and establish structure. This was the birth of the London Ragged School Union. Mr Locke called for more help in keeping the schools open. Many petitions for funding and grants were made to Parliament to assist with educational reform. He asked the government to give more thought to preventing crime, rather than punishing the wrongdoers and said the latter course only made the young criminals worse.

Prominent supporters
Several people volunteered and offered their time, skills, and talents as educators and administrators of the ragged schools. These included Anthony Ashley-Cooper, 7th Earl of Shaftesbury, one of Britain's most significant social reformers whose broad-ranging concerns included education, animal welfare, public health, and improving working conditions.

In 1844, Lord Shaftesbury became the London Ragged School Union president. He used his knowledge of the schools and refuges and his understanding of low-income families' living conditions to pursue legislation changes. He served as the president for 39 years, and in 1944 the Union adopted the name "Shaftesbury Society" in his honour until, in 2007, the Society was merged with John Grooms, taking the new charity name of Livability. Shaftesbury maintained his commitment to the Ragged Schools and educational reform until he died in 1885.

In 1843, Charles Dickens began his association with the schools and visited the Field Lane Ragged School. He was appalled by the conditions yet moved toward reform. The experience inspired him to write A Christmas Carol. While he initially intended to write a pamphlet on the plight of poor children, he realised that a dramatic story would have more impact.

Dickens continued to support the schools, donating funds on various occasions. He donated funds along with a water trough at one point, stating it was "so the boys may wash and for a supervisor"! (from a letter to Field Lane). He later wrote about the school and his experience in Household Words. In 1837, he used the street called Field Lane as a setting for Fagin's den in his classic novel Oliver Twist.

Charles Spurgeon and the Metropolitan Tabernacle were also supporters. In May 1875's Sword and Trowel Spurgeon recorded:

"A most interesting and enthusiastic meeting was held in the Lecture Hall of the Metropolitan Tabernacle on Wednesday, the 17th ult., in connection with Richmond Street Ragged and Sunday Schools. After tea, at which about six hundred persons sat down, Mr. Olney took the Chair, and the public meeting was addressed by Dr. Barnardo, J. M. Murphy, and W. Alderson, Mr. Curtis, of the Ragged School Union, and the superintendents, Messrs. Burr and Northcroft. Mr. J. T. Dunn gave a brief sketch of the rise and progress of this good work. The friends heartily responded to an earnest appeal for help to build new schools, and contributed £128 17s. ld. It is proposed to raise another £100 by 23rd of June. The friends have thus raised in a few months over £350, which, with Mr. Spurgeon's promise of £150, makes £500. At least £300 more is required."

Growth of the organisation
There was a massive growth in the number of schools, teachers, and students. By 1851, the number of educators would grow to around 1,600 persons. By 1867, some 226 Sunday Ragged Schools, 204 day schools, and 207 evening schools provided a free education for about 26,000 students. However, the schools relied heavily on volunteers and continually faced problems finding and keeping staff. Women played an important role as volunteer teachers. A newspaper report on the progress of the schools announced that 'the most valuable teachers in ragged schools are those of the female sex'.

The ragged school movement became respectable, even fashionable, attracting the attention of many wealthy philanthropists. Wealthy individuals such as Angela Burdett-Coutts gave large sums of money to the London Ragged School Union. This helped to establish 350 ragged schools by the time the Elementary Education Act 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 75) was passed. As Eager (1953) explains, "Shaftesbury not only threw into the movement his great and growing influence; he gave what had been a Nonconformist undertaking, the cachet of his Tory churchmanship – an important factor at a time when even broad-minded (Anglican) churchmen thought that Nonconformists should be fairly credited with good intentions, but that cooperation (with them) was undesirable".

Legacy of the ragged schools
The ragged schools' success definitively demonstrated a demand for education among people experiencing poverty. In response, England and Wales established school boards to administer elementary schools. However, education was still not free of fees. After 1870, public funding began to be provided for elementary education among working people.

School boards were public bodies created in boroughs and parishes under the Elementary Education Act 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 75) following campaigning by George Dixon, Joseph Chamberlain, and the National Education League for elementary education that was free from Anglican doctrine. Board members were directly elected, not appointed by borough councils or parishes. The demand for ragged schools declined as the school boards were built and funded. The school boards continued in operation for 32 years. They were officially abolished by the Education Act 1902, which replaced them with local education authorities.

Ragged School Museum
Founded in 1990, a Ragged School Museum occupies a group of three canalside buildings on Copperfield Road in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets that once housed the largest ragged school in London; the buildings had previously been used by Dr Thomas Barnardo.

Barnardo arrived in London in 1866, planning to train as a doctor and become a missionary in China. In London, he was confronted by a city where disease was rife, poverty and overcrowding endemic, and educational opportunities for the poor nonexistent. He watched helplessly as a cholera epidemic swept through the East End, leaving more than 3,000 Londoners dead and many destitute. He gave up his medical training to pursue his local missionary works and, in 1867, opened his first ragged school where children could gain a free primary education. Ten years later, Barnardo's Copperfield Road School opened its doors to children, and for the next thirty-one years, it educated tens of thousands of children. It closed in 1908, by which time enough government schools had opened in the area to serve the needs of local families.

The buildings, originally warehouses for goods transported along the Regent's Canal, then went through various industrial uses until, in the early 1980s, they were threatened with demolition. A group of local people joined together to save them and reclaim their unique heritage. The Ragged School Museum Trust was set up and opened a museum in 1990.

The museum was founded to make the history of the ragged schools and the broader social history of the East End accessible to all. An authentic Victorian classroom has been set up within the original buildings, in which 14,000 children each year experience a school lesson as it would have been taught more than 100 years ago.

title: Ragged school


text:
User talk:Temik

Radius
Why did you remove half of the article on Radius Computers? I'm reverting to the full version.

Kiand 15:47, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It hadn't saw your submit, only was editing previous version. You article is much better anyway.

title: User talk:Temik


text:
Dirty Sweet

Dirty Sweet is the debut four-track extended play released by Australian rock band Jet in November 2002 on Rubber Records. It was re-recorded and re-issued on 6 May 2003 by Elektra Records. All tracks on the EP are also on the band's debut album, Get Born, which followed on 14 September. Two tracks, originally on the EP, were later issued as singles from Get Born, "Rollover DJ" (November) and "Cold Hard Bitch" (March 2004).

Background
Dirty Sweet is the debut extended play by Australian rock band, Jet, which first appeared in November 2002 on Rubber Records. The line-up of Jet were Chris Cester on drums, percussion, guitar and backing vocals; his brother, Nic Cester on vocals, rhythm guitar, piano and tambourine; Cameron Muncey on lead guitar and backing vocals; and Mark Wilson on bass guitar, keyboards, harmonica, and backing vocals. Two tracks, "Take It or Leave It" and "Cold Hard Bitch" were recorded in July 2002 with Lindsay Gravina, and two more tracks, "Move On" and "Rollover DJ", in the following month with Craig Harnath.

In January 2003 the EP was re-recorded prior to Jet supporting The Rolling Stones at gigs in Sydney and Melbourne in February, on the Australian leg of their Licks Tour. Dirty Sweet was re-released on 6 May 2003 by Elektra Records.

Reception
Allmusic's MacKenzie Wilson reviewed Dirty Sweet and noted influences from AC/DC and Mick Jagger for the "impressive debut", where the group "keeps it real with raw energy; there's nothing kitschy about it". However, Stylus Magazine's Sam Bloch described their "watered-down blues-wannabe riff monsters ... the sound of a bunch of poseurs having a play at ROCK because they saw it on TV once". Drowned in Sound's Ross Bennett found that they "might not jump out and grab you; it might not make you sweat, but if you own a Stones record, and an AC/DC album, then it will do you no harm to slot this EP in between the two. There is enough musicianship, melody and spirit on this record to make you want to hear more".

Personnel

 * Jet members
 * Chris Cester – drums, percussion, backing vocals, tambourine
 * Nic Cester – vocals, rhythm guitar
 * Cameron Muncey – lead guitar, backing vocals
 * Mark Wilson – bass guitar, harmonica

 * Additional musicians
 * Andre Warhurst – slide guitar (track 3)

 * Production work
 * Engineer – Lindsay Gravina (tracks 1, 2), Craig Harnath (tracks 3, 4)
 * Producer – Lindsay Gravina (tracks 1, 2), Craig Harnath (tracks 3, 4)
 * Studio – Birdland (tracks 1, 2), Hothouse (tracks 3, 4)

 * Art work
 * Photography – Brad Jones, Melanie Fergin
 * Cover art – Jet, Traffic Design Studios

title: Dirty Sweet


text:
Talk:Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom)

Amendment of origins
Having boosted the section on the origins of the MoD, there will probably be room for improvement on my edit. Three sections for improvement could well be: discussion of the formation of an united defence ministry before 1946, the effectiveness of pre-1940 defence co-ordination, and the balance of power between the MoD and the service ministries between 1946 and 1964.Hyuey 18.53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Requested move
This page was moved in February 2005, so that the former page could disambiguate between the British Ministry of Defence and the Sinaporean Ministry of Defence. This is a clear case of primary diambiguation and should be moved back. Jooler 15:48, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * ''Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation and sign your vote with ~

 * Oppose, since "Ministry of Defence" is far too generic. It may be used for translating most similar names of ministries of defence of other countries, and may even be the official English translation in many cases (see ). Uppland 21:08, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. -- Necrothesp 10:14, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Proteus (Talk) 10:22, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Far too generic.  Countries having a "Ministry of Defence" include Singapore, New Zealand, India, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Romania, Brunei, Hungary, France, Greece, and Denmark, and this is just from the first two pages of google hits for "Ministry of Defence". srs 17:30, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose: too generic. Can also refer to the Norwegian Ministry of Defence. Jonathunder 19:11, 2005 May 1 (UTC)
 * Support. Primary disambiguation material, definitely. James F. (talk) 01:44, 2 May 2005 (UTC) Changing my mind. Should instead be at British Ministry of Defence - paranthetic disambiguation is ugly. James F. (talk) 21:04, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Maccoinnich 23:44, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose. Ministry of Defence is a very widely used title/translation. As such I would consider it highly biassed if Wikipedia's article under this heading referred only the British ministry. Rje 01:46, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Cal T 20:31, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose - looks fine as it is Brookie:The grass on the hill 09:17, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Noisy | Talk 10:08, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. International spelling tends to be defense and thus it should be used for disambiguation page; defence is primarily restricted in scope to Commonwealth countries, of which United Kingdom is the most likely search target. DmitryKo 19:06, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
 * See my comment below. Uppland 19:51, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Not to put too fine a point on it, the claim is utter nonsense. See my points below also.  India, Australia, Jamaica, South Africa, New Zealand, Canada, Ireland, Zimbabwe, Barbados, Tanzania, Bermuda, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Egypt, nearly every country that has English as a major language spells the word "defence". --Tony Sidaway|Talk 16:24, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutral. There are arguments for both.  I would rather that Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom) were moved to the unambiguous British Ministry of Defence, which is a common form of the organisation's name used when it is necessary to specify a nationality. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 16:15, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Too general. -- Chris j wood 19:23, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Voting over, see decision below

Discussion
Oppose since "Ministry of Defence" is far too generic. It may be used for translating most similar names of ministries of defence of other countries, and may even be the official English translation in many cases (see ). Uppland 21:08, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Translations are irrelevant. This is English Wikipedia. Jooler 21:54, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Um, that may actually be why translations are relevant, because there tends to be complaints from some people on the English Wikipedia when translatable foreign terms are left untranslated. -- Uppland 22:06, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I mean in terms of primary disambuation. We don't make President of the United States a disambiguation page because of the Presidente de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos Jooler 22:11, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * No, but "Ministry of Defence" is far more generic than President of the United States. I would agree with the Royal Air Force being what you claim Ministry of Defence to be, but the RAF has, well, better brand recognition than the British Ministry of Defence. You could use "Royal Air Force" in a converation outside a UK context and in most cases it would be obvious that it was the British Royal Air Force that was meant, not the Dutch, Swedish or Saudi or that of any other monarchy. You couldn't use "Ministry of Defence" like that without specifying which one was intended. Uppland 22:28, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * In English Wikipedia - you could. Look at what links here and to Ministry of Defence  and most of those linking here were changed recently from the other. Jooler 22:41, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think saying that "Ministry of Defense' refering to the UK is a primary usage is systemically biased towards native English speakers. Non-native speakers wouldn't necessarily immediately think of the UK when they hear 'Ministry of Defense', they would probably think of their own, or a neighboring country's. This is the sort of thing that Combating systemic bias is trying to work towards fixing. Lachatdelarue (talk) 15:12, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose: too generic. Can also refer to the Norwegian Ministry of Defence. Jonathunder 19:11, 2005 May 1 (UTC)
 * Fantastic example. There are precisely two articles linking directly to that page. One is the the Ministry of Defence page and you added the reference yourself a few hours ago. The other is Orphaned Articles/M-Z. I couldn't have made the case for the UK MOD being a case of primary topic diambiguation better myself. Jooler 22:06, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

The primary target of search for Ministry of Defence is the United Kingdom government department. Defence is strictly a Commonwealth English term, while Defense is generic for both International English and U.S. English, so it's likely to be used for other Defense Ministries of the world (see searsh results). A link to disambiguation page at the start of the page will help anyone searching for Norwegian Ministry of Defence and the likes. DmitryKo 19:06, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
 * "International English" usually equals British spelling: At least the following countries (from the first few pages of Google hits, and excluding major Commonwealth countries such as India) have official websites using Ministry of Defence:
 * Thailand,
 * Republic of Macedonia, *Bulgaria,
 * Hungary
 * Sweden
 * Finland
 * Greece (actually Ministry of National Defence, but it's the spelling which is the point here)
 * The Netherlands
 * Mongolia (not on the webpage, but in the name of the page)
 * Israel
 * There are probably many more, and even restricting ourselves to Commonwealth countries, I don't see the point of giving priority to the UK MoD. I have voted for primary disambiguation in cases like Lancaster and Middlesex, where the English place obviously has historic priority, but the Ministry of Defence has, according to the article here, only been called that since 1964. -- Uppland 19:51, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Google seems to treat defense as a subset of defence so the search results are not really indicative. And I'm not going to browse the government sites of all the UN member states in order to collect statistics on the usage of defence.
 * The UK ministry is the only genuiune among the ones you listed (others being a mere translation from native dialect), and there are no articles for Commonwealth ministries that may share the same name. DmitryKo 08:39, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

 * It's utter nonsense to describe the spelling defense as international in any way. It's almost, but not quite, strictly a US spelling.  In Canada the English name of the defence force is Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces .  The Jamaican equivalent is the Jamaica Defence Force .  The Australian equivalent is the Department of Defence .  The New Zealand name is New Zealand Defence Force .  In South Africa the force is the Department of Defence .  The Indian Ministry of Defence  and Pakistan's Defence Division  (though the Pakistan website sometimes spells the word defense). Nearly every country I can think of where English is a major language spells the word "defence".  As well as Pakistan's occasional spelling of "defense", Israel's IDF website  does use the spelling "Israel Defense Forces". But Canada, Ireland, India, outh Africa, New Zealand, Jamaica and Australia spell it with a C.--Tony Sidaway|Talk 15:57, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Read what I said above. Commonwealth countries use British English spelling, international day-to-day use tends to be US English one. DmitryKo 12:41, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Decision
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. violet/riga (t) 18:16, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Linkage
Nearly 6 months after this page was moved from Ministry of Defence and Special:Whatlinkshere/Ministry_of_Defence shows that this is still a good case for primary topic diambiguation at Ministry of Defence Jooler 01:02, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

 * This set of redirect changes (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=JoanneB&offset=200509291940&limit=170) (170 modifications) - 6 months after this page was moved this - clearly demonstrates that Ministry of Defence is still a good case for primary topic diambiguation. Jooler 21:58, 29 September 2005

 * Once again another 6 months later and we STILL have a vast number of linkages to Ministry of Defence intending to refer to the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence (Special:Whatlinkshere/Ministry_of_Defence) - which clearly demonstrates that Ministry of Defence should use primary topic disambiguation and refer to the UK MoD. Jooler 21:33, 7 April 2006 (

DEFENSE BUDGET

There's a lengthy section on the MoD's property portfolio but no discussion of the Defense budget, I think someone who's knowledgeable about that should add that info. 12.199.96.253 20:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

DefenCe budget. TheMongoose 13:46, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

PROPERTY PORTFOLIO

I agree, the property portfolio of the MoD is rather irrelevant to the article, it would more properly be placed in the article on Defence Estates agency.
 * I think a re-think on the organisation and presentation of this article is needed. The main sections of the article should cover the purpose, a brief history of its foundation (the current section seems fine), the senior ministers, officials and staff officers, then a broad outline of the organistion of the MoD.  I am happy to do that, there is plenty of source material.  I intend to update the section on defence agencies as the current section is badly outdated, although the change process is still ongoing.
 * Information on the defence budget could be included in a section about financing but good luck finding someone willing to go into detal on that one, complex is not a strong enough word to describe the MoD accounts!!. George4405, 8th December 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by George4405 (talk • contribs) 14:44, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Ministry of Attack?
The Ministry of Defence has been criticised for military intervention seen as offensive rather than defensive, and critics suggest it would be more appropriate to call the ministry the Ministry of Attack, claiming the present name is an example of double speak. The Ministry of Defence however claims current military intervention is justified under the rationale of Preemptive war, which argues offensive policies are a form of defence. I believe this text is simply argumentative and politically motivated. In addition the quoted reference is not consistent with the section. I believe the section should be removed. Any thoughts?--Aled D (talk) 17:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Concur, and removing. - BillCJ (talk) 18:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't see why this can be put here but the DoD can't be changed to the DoA. America has started more wars than us, so if their's doesn't change, neither does ours. 213.78.183.91 (talk) 15:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

 * ....hold on please. I feel it should stay: 1) It is properly sourced and presents a valid criticism - criticism which certain users may not like cannot be labeled "argumentative and politically motivated" and then arbitrarily removed. The language used is as objective as possible without removing the meaning from the criticism 2) in response to (User:213.78.183.91): the fact that your observation is not on the DoD page is a problem with the DoD page NOT this page. Chendy (talk) 11:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

 * Firstly the name Ministry of Defence is a proprietary name of the organisation defined by the Act of Parliament.
 * Secondly the one source brought to back this up is clearly unreliable and lacking in authority.
 * Thirdly, the Ministry can hardly be blamed for executing the policy of the elected Government.
 * Fourthly, because attack is the best form of defence, and no country has ever survived by maintaining a defensive posture, it doesn't matter what the name of the organisation is; it will have the capabilities required of it by law to perform the role in the Government that it does.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠ ♥ ♦ ♣ 11:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

 * Britain has launched totally unprovoked attacks on Maoris in New Zealand and others. The Ministry should be called the Ministry of Offence, or MoO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.3.225 (talk) 13:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Suggest removing subsection Fraud and Criticism...
As the subject is about the "role" of the Ministry of Defence. Both Fraud and Criticism don't really fall into this category, while yes they are relevant, if you were to write every single subject on this matter you will still be reading it at page 253.

Slightly off the topic and a tongue in the cheek, how about a subsection on the "The role of UK Government short-term institutionalise Ministry of Defence planning" and a follow up on "How it leads people who thought of these crazy ideas up in the first place somehow get a promotion?"

Lastly on the subject of the Ministry of Attack, had the writer bothered to read History books, he/she will be please to know that The Ministry of Defence once called Ministry of War. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lopsidedbunny (talk • contribs) 22:05, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Re-Organisation

 * After examining it, I think it may be more appropriate if the property portfolio section concentrate just on the MoD Main Building and its environs, without going into more detail about all the property the MoD owns, apart from a quick one liner to say it owns alot!.

 * The Agency list needs to be updated and I will do that along with creation of a section on the organisational hierarchy of the MoD, regarding top level budgets and the major constituent parts of the department. I think this would also be the section in which to explain how the MoD is accountable to Parliament.

 * The section on Defence policy needs to be expanded with an explanation of the broader subject of British Defence Policy and how it set and where it is sourced from. There should rightly be a mention of NATO and the EU here given the emphasis on combined operations.

 * The section on fraud has only one story in it making it really a section on Gordon Foxley!. THe section on Criticism is also a one hit wonder.  There are two ways to go, one is to create a section on Controversy/Criticism that contains such like fraud and incompetent procurement, and then to expand it with further examples, or to delete the two sections completely.  I favour the first section.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by George4405 (talk • contribs) 15:08, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

ARMED FORCES MINISTER
I'm trying to understand how the responsibilites of the Armed Forces Minister, or as it's put in the article Minister of State for the Armed Forces, is different from that of the Minister of Defence. Does he aid in setting policy or does he simply oversee the implementation of it? Or is it that he's simply the person responsible for over seeing the individual Armed Services as distinct from the larger Defence Ministry? User 070 (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Generally, a secretary of state has overall responsibility and accountability for all aspects of a Department's work, and they set the strategic direction. Underneath the SoS, a set of junior ministers handle all the day-to-day aspects of running the Department, and they escalate any particularly tricky or sensitive issues up to the SoS. So in the MOD, the day-to-day tasks are split between four junior ministers, one for personnel and veterans, one for international security strategy, one equipment, and one for actual military operations. The junior minister responsible for operations is known as the 'Armed Forces Minister'. Thom2002 (talk) 19:20, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Criticism
In the long history of the MoD we only have one item of specific criticism. The MoD has a history of programme fiascos, would it be better just to give a link to the procurement policy/activities rather than give undue weight to one criticism that just happened to be in the recent news. MilborneOne (talk) 12:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect and out of date info
MoD Civilian staff are currently 85,530 personnel according to latest figures. Apr 2010&from=listing&topDate=2010-04-30. Also MoD's budget is just over £40 billion according to HM Treasury. The current source used for the MoD's budget is actualy projections made by the MoD pre-2007 and arent updated....ever. More reason to use latests government figures. Recon.Army (talk) 14:07, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Also, the Chief of Defence Materiel is now Mr Tony Douglas (since Nov 15)(not Sir Bernard Gray) — Preceding unsigned comment added by McTeagues (talk • contribs) 12:27, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

 * Recon.Army uses the spelling "latests". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C0:FCF6:4801:BC34:C583:3C82:767 (talk) 07:09, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

British Armed Forces and the Ministry of Defence
Are the British Armed Forces part of the Ministry of Defence, or just under its command? Currently, at Royal Marines, the info-box states that it is part of the MOD, which is not stated at Royal Air Force. Also, if the British Armed Forces are not part of the MOD, then what exactly are they? Thanks, Rob (talk) 20:06, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Here we enter the strange, twilight world of the British Constitution. Most of the institutions we know and love, including both the MOD and the armed forces, have no legal personality. So the authority to command the armed forces is with the Queen, who delegates this role to the Defence Council, which is a committee chaired by the Secretary of State for Defence. The other civilians in what we call the MOD are civilian servants of the Crown (which is an abstract legal entity) who are working to the Secretary of State for Defence. The Defence Council has a number of sub-committees including the Army Board, the Air Force Board, and the Admiralty Board. These sub-committtes act as the legal authority for command of those forces, and are deemed part of the MOD. The 'Army' as a whole has no legal personality, there is the Board, and then a chain of command down through the officers and enlisted men. The individual officers 'work for' the Queen, although their salary is paid centrally by the MOD. They may be assigned to particular Corps (in the case of the Army), although the Corps have no legal personality either. Clear as mud? Next week we can try to work out what the hell the Bank Of England "is". Thom2002 (talk) 21:52, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
 * To actually answer your question, its probably a strict 'no' as the officers and men are effectively agents of the Crown and the vast majority of them are not appointed by the Secretary of State for Defence. Buts it kind of a practical 'yes' as the Senior Board and the HQ function for each Armed Force sit clearly within the MOD structure and all the money comes via the MOD. The Armed Forces have no corporate personality beyond their respective Boards, which is a similar set-up to many old UK institutions. Thom2002 (talk) 22:38, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, that's really interesting. Thank you. Rob (talk) 10:33, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Every few years Parliament passes an Armed Forces Act which permits the legal maintenance of the Army. The Monarch has no right to maintain and Command an Army herself, but only under the authority of the people and with their permission, via Parliament. So the ultimate authority to command the Army is Parliament. Mmitchell10 (talk) 11:15, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Command ≠ organisational structure. The forces are commonly referred to as the 'Armed Forces of the Crown'. They're not part of a government department. Rob984 (talk) 12:00, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree. It's interesting how it all fits together. Mmitchell10 (talk) 13:03, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Woops, I thought you were trying to justify a recent edit. Sorry. Rob984 (talk) 13:59, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

 * So the rather extensive discussion making reference to legislation, doctrine and the legalities of command wasn't clear?
 * I'm not going to rehash it, but the point that you're trying to substantiate, isn't simplistic. Command is enacted through the same legal framework that puts the organisational structure in place.
 * GhostlyLegend (talk) 09:00, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Please cite this legal framework. If it does exist, the extensive discussion would have been unnecessary.
 * Rob984 (talk) 10:43, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The Armed Forces Act, supported by the three sets of Queens Regulations...
 * GhostlyLegend (talk) 15:25, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Neither of which support any of your claims... Uh? Rob984 (talk) 17:44, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
 * So you've read them, and all the associated policy documentation that explains how they work in practice, and the case law, and the doctrine? So which staff course did you do then?
 * GhostlyLegend (talk) 19:16, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
 * You don't just cite an entire document and expect another editor to read the whole thing to verify your claim... Rob984 (talk) 21:49, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
 * You don't just cite an entire document and expect another editor to read the whole thing to verify your claim... Rob984 (talk) 21:49, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom). 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/20121008043154/http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/3A7A2BEA-C92D-431A-B146-AC9E9860EB36/0/central_tlb.pdf to http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/3A7A2BEA-C92D-431A-B146-AC9E9860EB36/0/central_tlb.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090805064236/http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/BB03F0E7-1F85-4E7B-B7EB-4F0418152932/0/polpaper1_def_dip.pdf to http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/BB03F0E7-1F85-4E7B-B7EB-4F0418152932/0/polpaper1_def_dip.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090806040415/http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/FE7BE9AA-DD65-4971-8C00-B913E1EA84FA/0/mainbuilding.pdf to http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/FE7BE9AA-DD65-4971-8C00-B913E1EA84FA/0/mainbuilding.pdf

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 06:56, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Date of formation
Is there a more precise date than "1964" for the MoD coming into effect? I have seen uncited 31 December elsewhere. Davidships (talk) 20:05, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The legislation was the Defence (Transfer of Functions) Act 1964 which is dated 12 March 1964, it mentions an appointed day to be declared, I believe this was the 1 Apr 1964 but I am still looking for a reliable reference for the date. MilborneOne (talk) 20:41, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * OK found it [|The Defence (Transfer of Functions) (Appointed Day) Order 1964] says it is the 1 April 1964. MilborneOne (talk) 20:48, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks - presumably should be in article proper as well as Infobox? Davidships (talk) 23:27, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom). 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 http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20121026065214/http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/65F3D7AC-4340-4119-93A2-20825848E50E/0/sdr1998_complete.pdf to http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/65F3D7AC-4340-4119-93A2-20825848E50E/0/sdr1998_complete.pdf

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) 15:47, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom). 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/20150702081038/https://www.rusi.org/analysis/commentary/ref:C523A2F0A381F3/ to https://www.rusi.org/analysis/commentary/ref:C523A2F0A381F3/
 * Added tag to http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/defence/Head-Royal-Navy-tells-Government-cut-ships/article-1351027-detail/article.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:49, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

How Defence works September 2020
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/920219/20200922-How_Defence_Works_V6.0_Sep_2020.pdf

Insert when necessary

BlueD954 (talk) 04:15, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

T45 Controversey
Should we include a section on the issues with Type 45? Imperialpeace (talk) 08:20, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Guardian: Army families suing MoD for poor housing told to drop claims or have pay docked
Hi all, not sure if this information should be included on this article or on another, any suggestions? Please feel free to just add it, I don't know much about this subject.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/nov/13/army-families-suing-mod-for-poor-housing-told-to-drop-claims-or-have-pay-docked

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 18:21, 13 November 2022 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Alokvishwakarma

HISTORY OF NOTES AND DOMINO

As you might expect of such complex and successful software, Lotus Notes and Domino share a long and rich history. In some respects, this history mirrors the evolution of the computing industry itself—the development and widespread adoption of PCs, networks, graphical user interfaces, communication and collaboration software, and the Web. Notes and Domino have been there nearly every step of the way, influencing (and being influenced by) all these critical developments.

This article briefly retraces the history of Notes and Domino, starting with the earliest conceptual and development stages and continuing through major feature releases. Along the way, it examines: Where the idea of Notes originated Notes pre-release development Release 1.0 Release 2.0 Release 3.0 Release 4.0 and 4.5 Release 5.0 Notes/Domino 6 Finally, we'll take a quick look at Notes and Domino 6.5, the upcoming new version, and talk a little about what the future holds for these storied products.

The early days: The birth of an idea You may find this a little surprising, but the original concept that eventually led to the Notes client and Domino server actually pre-dates the commercial development of the personal computer by nearly a decade. Notes and Domino find their roots in some of the first computer programs written at the Computer-based Education Research Laboratory (CERL) at the University of Illinois. In 1973, CERL released a product called PLATO Notes. At that time, the sole function of PLATO Notes was to tag a bug report with the user's ID and the date and to make the file secure so that other users couldn't delete it. The system staff could then respond to the problem report at the bottom of the screen. This kind of secure communication between users was the basis of PLATO Notes.

In 1976, PLATO Group Notes was released. Group Notes took the original concept of PLATO Notes and expanded on it by allowing users to: Create private notes files organized by subject Create access lists Read all notes and responses written since a certain date Create anonymous notes Create director message flags Mark comments in a document Link notes files with other PLATO systems Use multiplayer games PLATO Group Notes became popular and remained so into the 1980s. However, after the introduction of the IBM PC and MS-DOS by Microsoft in 1982, the mainframe-based architecture of PLATO became less cost-effective. Group Notes began to metamorphose into many other "notes type" software products.

Ray Ozzie, Tim Halvorsen, and Len Kawell worked on the PLATO system at CERL in the late 1970s. All were impressed with its real-time communication. Halvorsen and Kawell later took what they learned at CERL and created a PLATO Notes-like product at Digital Equipment Corporation.

At the same time, Ray Ozzie worked independently on a proposal for developing a PC-based Notes product. At first, he was unable to obtain funding for his idea. However, Mitch Kapor, founder of Lotus Development Corporation, saw potential in Ozzie's work and decided to invest Lotus's money for its development. Kapor's business acumen, creativity, and foresight were critical in changing Ozzie's vision into reality.

Development on Notes begins Near the end of 1984, Ozzie founded Iris Associates Inc., under contract and funded by Lotus, to develop the first release of Lotus Notes. In January 1985, shortly after Iris Associates began, Tim Halvorsen and Len Kawell joined Ozzie, followed soon after by Steven Beckhardt. All brought extensive knowledge and vision to the company, as well as career-long interests in collaboration and messaging software at a time when such concepts were considered novel at best and impractical at worst. They modeled Lotus Notes after PLATO Notes, but expanded it to include many more powerful features. Alan Eldridge from Digital Equipment Corporation soon joined Iris Associates, contributing to the database and security features of the Notes architecture.

The original vision of Notes included on-line discussion, email, phone books, and document databases. However, the state of the technology at the time presented two serious challenges. First, networking was rudimentary and slow compared to today. Therefore, the developers originally decided to position Notes as a personal information manager (PIM), like Organizer, with some sharing capability. Second, PC operating systems were immature, so Iris had to write a lot of system-level code to develop things such as the Name Server and databases. Eventually, as networking became more capable, Iris began to speak of Notes as groupware. The term groupware (which eventually grew virtually synonymous with Notes itself) refers to applications that enhance communication, collaboration, and coordination among groups of people.

To meet these goals, Notes offered users a client/server architecture that featured PCs connected to a local area network (LAN). A group could set up a dedicated server machine (a PC) that communicated with other groups' server machines (either on the same LAN or through switched networks). Servers exchanged information through "replicated data" (that is, there were potentially many copies of the same database resident on different servers, and the Notes server software continuously synchronized them). This made it just as easy for users to exchange information with co-workers in a branch office as with those in their own office.

The vision of the founders quickly evolved into the idea of creating the first virtual community. Tom Diaz, former Vice President of Engineering at Iris, said, "It was eccentric to think about group communication software in 1984, when most people had never touched an email system...the product was very far ahead of its time. It was the first commercial client/server product."

Another Notes key feature was customization. According to Tim Halvorsen, early on there was debate over the structure of Notes. He said the developers wondered, "Should we build applications in the product or should we allow it to be flexible and let users do it because we don't know what they will want?" They eventually opted for a flexible product that allowed users to build the applications they needed. Thus, Notes architecture used a building block approach; you could construct group textual applications by piecing together the various services that are available. "This was big in the success of the product," stated Halvorsen. "In no case do we say, 'no, this is the only way you can do it.'" Notes has survived the changes in the industry because it is a flexible product users can customize to fit their changing needs.

Around this time, Apple Computer released the Macintosh with a new easy-to-use graphical user interface. This influenced the developers of Lotus Notes, and they gave their new product a character-oriented graphical user interface.

Most of the core development was completed within two years, but the developers spent an additional year porting the code for the client and the server from the Windows operating system to OS/2. During this time, the developers at Iris used Notes to communicate remotely with people at Lotus. Halvorsen said, "Simply using the product every day helped us develop key functionality." For example, the developers needed to synchronize data between the two different locations, so they invented replication. "This wasn't in the original plan, but the problem arose and we solved it," said Halvorsen.

The development of Notes took a long time by today's standards. But according to Steve Beckhardt, this extended development period helped ensure the success of Notes. This made Notes a very solid product with no real competition in the market.

In August 1986, the product was complete to a point it demonstrated all of its unique capabilities and had preliminary documentation. It was ready to ship to the first internal Lotus users. At that time, Lotus evaluated and accepted the product. Lotus bought the rights to Notes in 1987.

Lotus Notes was successful even before its first release. The head of Price Waterhouse viewed a pre-release demo of Notes and was so impressed he bought 10,000 copies. At that time, it was the largest PC sale ever of a single software product. As the first large Notes customer, Price Waterhouse predicted that Lotus Notes would transform the way we do business. As we now know, they were right.

title: User talk:Alokvishwakarma


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ClockworkSoul/Templates

ClockworkSoul's Coffee Roll
Not-notable. Fancruft. Copyvio. Neologism. Grammar school. Duplicate of Tick ToC. – ClockworkSoul 15:59, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete : Author has no taste, and smells a bit like cabbage. – ClockworkSoul 15:49, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Move to BJAODN - SomeRandomUser 16:32, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Move to ClockworkSoul's Coffee Roll ON WHEELS!!! - smurray  inch   e  ster  ( User ), ( Talk ) 18:30, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


text:
Oligo

Oligo may refer to:

 * Oligomer, as an abbreviation for the general term, or specifically for oligonucleotide, oligopeptide, oligosaccharide, or oligoester.
 * OLIGO Primer Analysis Software
 * Oligo- as a prefix, meaning "few"

title: Oligo


text:
Pronucleus

A pronucleus (: pronuclei) denotes the nucleus found in either a sperm or egg cell during the process of fertilization. The sperm cell undergoes a transformation into a pronucleus after entering the egg cell but prior to the fusion of the genetic material of both the sperm and egg. In contrast, the egg cell possesses a pronucleus once it becomes haploid, not upon the arrival of the sperm cell. Haploid cells, such as sperm and egg cells in humans, carry half the number of chromosomes present in somatic cells, with 23 chromosomes compared to the 46 found in somatic cells. It is noteworthy that the male and female pronuclei do not physically merge, although their genetic material does. Instead, their membranes dissolve, eliminating any barriers between the male and female chromosomes, facilitating the combination of their chromosomes into a single diploid nucleus in the resulting embryo, which contains a complete set of 46 chromosomes.

The presence of two pronuclei serves as the initial indication of successful fertilization, often observed around 18 hours after insemination, or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) during in vitro fertilization. At this stage, the zygote is termed a two-pronuclear zygote (2PN). Two-pronuclear zygotes transitioning through 1PN or 3PN states tend to yield poorer-quality embryos compared to those maintaining 2PN status throughout development, and this distinction may hold significance in the selection of embryos during in vitro fertilization (IVF) procedures.

History
The pronucleus was discovered the 1870s microscopically using staining techniques combined with microscopes with improved magnification levels. The pronucleus was originally found during the first studies on meiosis. Edouard Van Beneden published a paper in 1875 in which he first mentions the pronucleus by studying the eggs of rabbits and bats. He stated that the two pronuclei form together in the center of the cell to form the embryonic nucleus. Van Beneden also found that the sperm enters into the cell through the membrane in order to form the male pronucleus. In 1876, Oscar Hertwig did a study on sea urchin eggs because the eggs of sea urchins are transparent, so it allowed for much better magnification of the egg. Hertwig confirmed Van Beneden's finding of the pronucleus, and also found the formation of the female pronucleus involves the formation of polar bodies.

Formation
The female pronucleus is the female egg cell once it has become a haploid cell, and the male pronucleus forms when the sperm enters into the female egg. While the sperm develops inside of the male testes, the sperm does not become a pronucleus until it decondenses quickly inside of the female egg. When the sperm reaches the female egg, the sperm loses its outside membrane as well as its tail. The sperm does this because the membrane and the tail are no longer needed by the female ovum. The purpose of the cell membrane was to protect the DNA from the acidic vaginal fluid, and the purpose of the tail of the sperm was to help move the sperm cell to the egg cell. The formation of the female egg is asymmetrical, while the formation of the male sperm is symmetrical. Typically in a female mammal, meiosis starts with one diploid cell and becomes one haploid ovum and typically two polar bodies, however one may later divide to form a third polar body. In a male, meiosis starts with one diploid cell and ends with four sperm. In mammals, the female pronucleus starts in the center of the egg before fertilization. When the male pronucleus is formed, after the sperm cell reaches the egg, the two pronuclei migrate towards each other. However, in brown alga Pelvetia, the egg pronucleus starts in the center of the egg before fertilization and remain in the center after fertilization. This is because the egg cells of brown alga Pelvetia, the egg pronucleus is anchored down by microtubules so only the male pronucleus migrates towards the female pronucleus.

Calcium concentration
The calcium concentration within the egg cell cytoplasm has a very important role in the formation of an activated female egg. If there is no calcium influx, the female diploid cell will produce three pronuclei, rather than only one. This is due to the failure of release of the second polar body.

Combination of male and female pronuclei
In sea urchins, the formation of the zygote starts with the fusion of both the inner and outer nuclei of the male and female pronuclei. It is unknown if one of the pronuclei start the combination of the two, or if the microtubules that help the dissolution of membranes commence the action. The microtubules that make the two pronuclei combine come from the sperm's centrosome. There is a study that strongly supports that microtubules are an important part of the fusion of the pronuclei. Vinblastine is a chemotherapy drug that affects both the plus and minus ends of microtubules. When vinblastine is added to the ovum, there is a high rate of pronuclear fusion failure. This high rate of pronuclear fusion failure highly suggests that microtubules play a major role in the fusion of the pronucleus. In mammals, the pronuclei only last in the cell for about twelve hours, due to the fusion of the genetic material of the two pronuclei within the egg cell. Many studies of pronuclei have been in the egg cells of sea urchins, where the pronuclei are in the egg cell for less than an hour. The main difference between the process of fusion of genetic materials in mammals versus sea urchins is that in sea urchins, the pronuclei go directly into forming a zygote nucleus. In mammalian egg cells, the chromatin from the pronuclei form chromosomes that merge onto the same mitotic spindle. The diploid nucleus in mammals is first seen at the two-cell stage, whereas in sea urchins it is first found at the zygote stage.

title: Pronucleus


text:
User:D6032e

d6032e

title: User:D6032e


text:
Talk:Friendship/to do

(Taken from empty section headings)

*History
 * Friendship among animals
 * Developmental aspects of friendship
 * Modern forms
 * Discuss male/female friendships and female/female friendships

title: Talk:Friendship/to do