text:
User talk:BDD/Archive 1

User:205.222.240.2

 * Hi BDD. I put this information on the user page to identify this account as a school with shared access, not to be rude. My intention was to alert admins who might be tempted to hand out a permanent ban. The ip is (presumably) shared by many students and we should try to avoid long term blocks in this case. Duk 16:18, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the line, Duk. I practice a policy of "hating the sin, not the sinner," so I wasn't really upset at you. I understand your intentions, given that this was a vandal, but I also feared that your actions could easily be misconstrued as inconsiderate or rude. I, for one, would not appreciate someone posting the location of this IP, another public school, even though there is a vandal or two who uses the same address. Thus, I still think that my actions were justified. Could we agree to keep the IP accessible to administrators (or even law enforcement officials) via the page's history, without showcasing the school's information to anyone who comes across it? --BDD 16:34, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Registered users have anonymity, not even admins can access the IP's of a registered user (developers can). But wikipedia does not let unregistered users hide their IP; in fact, an unregistered user's account name _is_ their IP. Anyone can do a reverse dns search to find this type of information. I always do this when dealing with unregistered vandals, to see if the IP is shared, static, or re-allocated.
 * I put back some of the information on the user page, you can trim it if you like. We should retain the fact that it is a shared school account.--Duk 17:59, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I understand the proceedures; I just wanted to have minimal protection rather than none. Could we compromise by keeping a note that it is a shared school IP and let people check the details via the history? I know I probably sound pretty petty, but I just feel like we shouldn't humiliate the guy or anything. --BDD 12:50, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, sounds good, make it so :) --Duk 17:49, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Jolly good show. Workin' together... that's what Wikipedia's all about. --BDD 18:49, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

List of notable U.S. presidential relatives
You sound offended Alex, and I'm sorry if you are. I was not questioning the accuracy of the statement, only it's relevance. There is nothing notable or even unusual about being a liberal or even an atheist, so why mention it? He never was arrested for these actions motivated by his views, as far as I know. RR Jr. strikes me as a very ordinary person rather mediocre who's had his 15 minutes of fame for being his dad's son. Do his views deserve your supplying a wider broascast? Vincent 04:03, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Ron Reagan is an atheist and very much liberal. (Anon)

Not so much, Vincent, no, I'm not really offended. Initially I felt a bit blown off since you were acting like what I wrote wasn't even true, and apparently hadn't even looked at Ron's article. I believe that his views are mostly what he's known for. I mean, I know Wikipedia is a place to come to learn, but I hadn't even heard of his Saturday Night Live escapade. I knew him as the leftist son of the 20th century's right-most president who endorsed John Kerry and wrote against George W. Bush. To me, keeping the article as it was would be like mentioning some point where Billy Carter got into a traffic accident and giving no mention to Billy Beer.

The bottom line, I think, is that I am following the title of the article closer, whereas you are following the text at the top more so. I agree that his beliefs aren't scandalous, and I agree that being liberal in and of itself is not notable. It's simply the context that makes it notable in this case. If Jerry Falwell had an atheist son, it would be notable. If a grandson of Adolf Hitler heavily supported Martin Luther King in the civil rights movement, it would be notable. And if you do think this is unfair, I would be fully supportive of adding similar cases to other presidents. I, indeed, am a liberal, but if Chelsea Clinton started interning with Rush Limbaugh, even I would jump to add that to this page.

I can understand where you're coming from. How about you? --BDD 02:19, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

''Hope this was concise enough. What I was originally writing here got wiped before I could post it.''

AMA Meeting Proposal
Hi! I put together a proposal for another AMA meeting that I'm hopeful you can chime in on. --Wgfinley 19:47, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

NASCAR
BDD: I appreciated your ironic correction of Mark Holmberg. Thanks for taking the initiative to fill in all those columnists ( ...and correcting the one original misspelling!). Could you edit the sports page section to add a bit on RIR and NASCAR races. I myself don't read the RTD sports section but I know car races and other events at RIR are popular. The backgound is I just created the article on Richmond International Raceway yesterday and then realized that the RTD sports section might have a reference to it... and I found that it doesn't. I just don't know what to say. MPS 13:55, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. I'm really not big on NASCAR, but I do hope Henrico County gets the Hall of Fame. I'll see what I can do; I'm glad you appreciate the work. --BDD 14:49, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Invite to Star Wars Wiki
Come on over to the Star Wars Wiki (aka Wookieepedia). We'd love to have another Star Wars contrib. SparqMan 21:56, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[User:Riffsyphon1024|Riffsyphon1024]] 05:57, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Altar Q
I'm not the right person to ask about restoring this page as it would be against proper procedure for me to do so. If you feel strongly that the page should be undeleted your best option is to list it at Votes for Undeletion and present you arguments there. - SimonP 19:58, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you, Simon. I didn't know any better, but will now be removing my comments from your talk page to put them on VfU. Thanks for directing me to the proper place. --BDD 20:31, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Reverting an article
Hello, I don't know if anyone's answered this yet but after reading your User Page I thought I'd help you out with reverting articles. Here are the steps: 1. Go to the Article's History page 2. Choose the "correct" version of the page (i.e. the one prior to the vandalizement) 3. The version of the article you selected should come up 4. Choose to edit the page 5. When you are on the edit page, simply put "rv" in the Edit Summary and choose to save the page The page will then be reverted. Sorry if this didnt make much sense. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revert go here if you need more help. -CunningLinguist 22:15, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Altar Q
...has been undeleted. It's presently on VFD, per proper process. Please contribute to the vote, and add your newly found information to the article. Yours, Radiant_* 07:21, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

Collectivism
I suggest you take the time and read the writings of the eminent twentieth-century Russian-American philosopher Ayn Rand. They will dispel the blatant myth of collectivism that you have quite obviously fallen prey to.

Also, stop calling yourself a "liberal". That term properly belongs to individuals such as myself, Ayn Rand, Barry Goldwater, Murray Rothbard, Michael Badnarik, and P.J. O'Rourke.

Thanks! Kurt Weber 19:48, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Human Rights Servey on Wikipedia (The final post of I_sterbinski)

 * Dear all,

 * Wikipedia was recently a subject of intensive research of an huge international human right organization. A team of people from different nationalities and ages were acting on Wikipedia for 20 days, investigating previously noted anomalities of Wikipedia free editing and forming a final report, which (between the others similar reports) will later be a guide to all future moves of the organization concerning Wikipedia. Acting under an account of a real person, their privacy is to be held private. Therefore, very few private information will be revealed.
 * Also, this is a result of the lack of final possition of the organization concerning Wikipedia and human rights, which was still not formed.

 * The team's final post on Wikipedia, where they explain their actions can be found on the following addresses:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:I_sterbinski
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Macedonia#Human_Rights_Servey_on_Wikipedia_.28The_final_post_of_I_sterbinski.29

 * The team would like to thank to all the persons who took part in the correspondence with us.
 * We also want to appologise for keeping our identity secret for a longer period.

 * Best regards,
 * Aleksandar, Biljana, Asparuh, Christos, Valjon, Michael and Ana Luiza
 * I sterbinski 01:06, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Samuel H. Shapiro
Since you added fraternity information, I would suggest that you also add college information. It looks a little odd to talk about the former without even a mention of where he went to college. -- DS1953 14:12, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I will certainly look elsewhere, as the AEPi manual gave no mention of the specific college. --BDD 16:15, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Template/Workshop
You, or any Wikipedia user, can contribute your suggestions and comments to the /Workshop page of any active arbitration case. Comments on evidence or proposals can help in understanding the import of evidence and in refining proposals. Proposed principles, findings of fact, or remedies may be listed on /Proposed decision and form part of the final decision. Fred Bauder 18:38, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Flitwick's drink
Any particular reason you removed Flitwick's drink preference? Too obscure a detail? Just wondering, Kam Tonnes 00:14, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Exactly. It seemed very out of place. I've read all books and seen all movies, so I don't think I'm missing anything that would render that significant. Do you think it's worth inclusion? --BDD 18:52, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I think I was just trying to include as much information as possible for a minor character who doesn't have a whole lot of information available. You are probably right, though.  I don't mind it staying out. -- Kam Tonnes 01:26, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I certainly understand that, having an article outlining all we know of him. As long as you don't mind it being removed, though. I'm just not sure its inclusion does much. --BDD 13:24, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

AMA
Hello, you are receiving this message because your name is on the list of members of the Association of Members' Advocates. There is a poll being held at Wikipedia talk:Association of Members' Advocates for approval of a proposal for the revitalisation of the association. You are eligible to vote and your vote and input are welcome. Izehar 22:16, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

AMA, II
You have voted Neutral on the vote currently held at AMA. I have voted Oppose, request split of voting. I suggest you do the same, otherwise, the rules will pass without objection. Thanks — Ian Manka Questions? Talk to me! 03:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Ian. That does better express my position. --BDD 03:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

New AMA poll
Please have a look at the proposed election parameters under the section entitled An election proposal... and cast a ballot. Wally 23:27, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

AMA Coordinator Election
Dear AMA Member,

You are entitled to vote in the AMA Coordinator election, set to begin at midnight on 3 February 2006. Please see the pages on the election and its candidates and the procedure and policy and cast a vote by e-mail!

Wally 10:59, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

AEPi
Hey, thought you'd like to know I came up with an AEPi userbox. Interesting that you're not Jewish and a member, but oh well. Thought you might like it.

Just put on your userpage, and the box will show up and automatically put you in the "Wikipedians in Alpha Epsilon Pi" Category -- pm_shef 00:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Important AfD

 * The article for the G10 Group of Prestigious Canadian Universities is up for Deletion, please go and support Education related articles in Canada. This is a very important group of schools, Canada's version of the Ivy League, and it needs your support! -- pm_shef 04:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, ! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:30, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

VandalProof 1.2 Now Available
 After a lenghty, but much-needed Wikibreak, I'm happy to announce that version 1.2 of VandalProof is now available for download! Beyond fixing some of the most obnoxious bugs, like the persistent crash on start-up that many have experienced, version 1.2 also offers a wide variety of new features, including a stub-sorter, a global user whitelist and blacklist, navigational controls, and greater customization. You can find a full list of the new features here. While I believe this release to be a significant improvement over the last, it's nonetheless nowhere near the end of the line for VandalProof. Thanks to Rob Church, I now have an account on test.wikipedia.org with SysOp rights and have already been hard at work incorporating administrative tools into VandalProof, which I plan to make available in the near future. An example of one such SysOp tool that I'm working on incorporating is my simple history merge tool, which simplifies the process of performing history merges from one article into another. Anyway, if you haven't already, I'd encourage you to download and install version 1.2 and take it out for a test-drive. As always, your suggestions for improvement are always appreciated, and I hope that you will find this new version useful. Happy editing! --AmiDaniel (talk) 02:06, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Dr. McNinja
Thank you for endorsing undeletion! I was unaware that Dr. mcNinja was a memeber of Dayfree Press--I've added that to the article draft (if you find any other purtinent info, please feel free to add it directly to the article). I hope this one pulls through. ~ Porphyric Hemophiliac   §  22:05, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 00:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

mongol expansion
thanks! I like your userpage motto by the way, it especially is true if you look through random pages --Astrokey 44 10:40, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Solicitud de ayuda a AMA
Hola, gracias por tu ayuda.

El caso es que he sido bloqueado de forma permanente (infinito) en la es.wikipedia por el usuario Dodo. En la es.wikipedia no existe ningún mecanismo de resolución de conflictos. Me he dirigido al usuario Angela de Meta para consultarle que podía hacer sobre este tema y su respuesta viene a ser que las wiki locales son autónomas. Creo que esto está en contradicción con las bases de Wikipedia, aunque parece acorde con la definición de usuarios retirados

El usuario Dodo, además de ser bibliotecario, tiene un peso específico muy importante en es.wikipedia y en las acciones del resto de bibliotecarios.

Me he dirigido a este usuario, de acuerdo con las instrucciones que se dan al usuario que ha sido bloqueado cuando intenta editar, a través del IRC y allí me han insultado y me han bloqueado.

He solicitado que se retirasen de mi página de usuario los datos personales y solo han sido retirados tras mediación de otro bibliotecario en base a mi "Derecho a desaparecer" sin embargo no han retirado ni mi página de discusión ni me permiten editarla. De esta forma han realizado una redirección de mi página de usuario a un comentario en el que se indica que yo he solictado retirarme de Wikipedia. Lo cual no es cierto.

La causa por la que he sido bloqueado no es la de vandalismo trivial sino la interpretación que se aplica de forma sistemática a todas las personas que discuten alguna política en es.wikipedia aunque bien es cierto que en alguna ocasión debido al círculo vicioso he incurrido en alguna edición que pudiera ser objeto de penalización.

Te agradecería tu mediación, en la medida de lo posible. Caso de que sean necesarias más referencias o documentación te las facilitaré con mucho gusto.

Manuel Joseph contribuciones  Mjoseph 15:25, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

AMA Roll Call
There is currently an AMA Roll Call going on. Please visit the page and sign your name to indicate whether or not you're still active. :-) אמר Steve Caruso ( desk / poll ) 17:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Dear BDD, please email me
Dear BDD,

Can you please email me? My email address is MichaelDWolok@aol.com    This is not spam. I am sending this email to four other advocates today. I am having a hard time with Wikipedia and am looking for an advocate with a lot of experience with Wikipedia to help me. Thank you. Email: MichaelDWolok@aol.com

Michael D. Wolok 18:31, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Felipe Calderón
If it's frivolous then I'm sure you will have no trouble providing a source, preferably an English language one. I have not reverted your edit because I am no longer allowed to edit without being blocked. Regards, freestylefrappe 02:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Association of Members' Advocates
Hi, you are receiving this message because you have listed yourself as an active member of WP:AMA. If you aren't currently accepting inquiries for AMA, or if you have resigned, please de-list yourself from AMA Members. If you are still active, please consider tending to any new requests that may appear on Category:AMA Requests for Assistance. We're going to put AMA on wheels. :) Sorry for the template spamming - we're just trying to update our records, after we had a huge backlog earlier in the week (if you've been taking cases, then sorry, and please ignore this :)). Again, sorry, and thanks! M a  rtinp23  20:50, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

User:152.163.100.201
This user is an AOL user, and not only is it sometimes shared by many different people, but every time someone logs back into AOL, their IP changes. BAnning someone over an offense has no merit, because they can just sign back out and sign in again (I've seen it happen before); what's more, it would ban many someone elses. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 16:40, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I saw that... my problem was that the casual user looking at that page would get an illusion of leniency towards vandals. Maybe AOL users shouldn't be given "ultimatum"-type warnings. You don't threaten someone with banning if you won't actually ban them, mm? --BDD 21:18, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Monarchies/Republics
A monarchy differs from a republic in that a monarch is the head of state. Like here in the UK: we may elect a government but Her Maj technically wields supreme executive power. Not like the good ol' US of A of course, where a system of checks and balances ensure President Dubya wields supreme executive... er... never mind. --81.79.29.103 02:05, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you an AMA member
Are you an AMA member? If so please make sure your name is on the membership list. --CyclePat 04:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply to Premier League Top Scorers
Well if we included those who scored fewer goals and gave fewer assists, we'd end up with way more than the top 10: it'll be like the top 20. When the season goes on and more goals are scored, then it'll be clearer, as you said. Right now it's best to stay less than 10 rather to have way more. The does (talk) 15:19, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Respectfully, I disagree. It helps to know who's in the 4-goal range, since it makes it easier to move someone up when he scores his fifth. And at this point, when just one of them does so, we're at an even top 10 with everyone who's scored 5 and up and we're both happy. It probably won't happy today or tomorrow, but next week if any one of those 6 players scores, we're good. Or even if someone at 3 goals gets really active. So what do you say? Perhaps we can agree that the table won't look the way we'd like it to early on, but err on the side of more, rather than less, information? I think that's a good overall Wikipedian principle. --BDD (talk) 15:29, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright, I see someone added a note with the 4-goal scorers. I can live with this compromise, but I think you'll see if you look at previous league tables, the convention is to include the top 10 scorers regardless of whether it's ten men or not. Hopefully a few goals next week solve the problem for us. --BDD (talk) 15:52, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Appearances in CL top goalscorers reply
Hey,

I'm sorry, but minutes played is not there to offer insight on scoring frequency. It's there as a method of ranking. If two players have scored 5 goals, the player that has played the least amount of minutes played gets placed higher. Appearances are not used for that purpose, which is why I removed the column. Digirami (talk) 23:22, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm quite sure it serves both purposes. It has a function in the rankings, yes, but it need not. Look at the corresponding table in this season's Premier League--there really isn't any reason we couldn't just rank players alphabetically who have the same number of goals. And as long as we record minutes played, it's helpful to include a number of appearances. After a while, the minute counts just get to be very big numbers. And we frequently compare appearances to goals scored on an individual level; it's prominently displayed in the player templates, even for goalkeepers. --BDD (talk) 00:24, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It does not. It is clear from the UEFA's site that minutes are used for ranking purposes. When players are tied in the number of goals scored, the player with the least amount of minutes played gets ranked higher. Appearances do not even show up in their goalscorers list. If minutes did not matter, then yes, alphabetical order for players with the same number of goals is the logical choice. Digirami (talk) 04:27, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, but while the UEFA table is the primary source for ours, it's not just a copy. This is Wikipedia! We're going to have more information than just about anyone else anyway. What's wrong with including a statistic as basic and important as appearances? --BDD (talk) 04:35, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not important in this case because it is not used the purpose of ranking. Including it would also be considered original research, and that's a no-no. Digirami (talk) 04:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Player nationality and club affiliation aren't used for ranking, but we include them. Also, appearances are readily available from the UEFA site, so it really doesn't even come close to violating Wikipedia's policy against original research. --BDD (talk) 05:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * But appearance count does. Digirami (talk) 06:24, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * How? Click any player's name in that same table and you'll get his appearance count. It's not a number I or anyone else just made up or is guessing at. --BDD (talk) 15:34, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Not all players. And it also boderline against WP:NOT. The only stats should be in that table are those pertinent to ranking. Appearances do not factor in to it. Anything else is extra fluff. Digirami (talk) 19:51, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Jimmy Farris, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fantasy football (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:30, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Didn't even think of that. Thank you, helpful bot! --BDD (talk) 16:23, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Genesee, Idaho, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Genesee (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, bot! This one was intentional. I'd say there's a general Genesee area in New York not well reflected by any individual link on that disambiguation page.--BDD (talk) 17:25, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your support on Talk:Unfulfilled religious predictions. What a hopeless article that is. Phiwum (talk) 14:50, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Requested Move for Artificial Intelligence
Isn't AI a proper noun as it is a unique field of study? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Varagrawal (talk • contribs) 04:37, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * That's generally not the sort of thing we'd capitalize here. Compare, perhaps, international relations, or organic chemistry. You may see such capitalization in a course catalog, to refer to a specific class on the topic, but otherwise, this capitalization calls to mind an organization. Lowercase is the default for a topic, including fields of study. --BDD (talk) 15:02, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 19
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

 * Daniel Bukvich (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Our Father

 * Lionel Hampton School of Music (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Musical performance

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Public outcry
Redirects should be nominated at WP:RFD, not WP:AFD. I moved it there for you. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:56, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Merge proposal for Government / Political system
Hi Beland, I noticed you didn't create a discussion section for your proposed merger of Political system into Government. I thought you might want to know another user began a section in opposition to your proposal. I thought you might want to give some of your reasons. As such—perhaps just because the only respondents so far are opposed—it's hard to see it going anywhere. --BDD (talk) 02:45, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up! -- Beland (talk) 08:11, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

GOCE request completion
Hi, I saw your edit summary asking if it matters whether you use done or completed. No, it doesn't matter how you signal the completion, so long as I can spot it. Thanks for asking. Rgds, --Stfg (talk) 21:39, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I didn't really expect anyone to answer. :) --BDD (talk) 22:31, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Just saw your HTML comment in the leaderboard. Yes, 10K counts as 2, and 22990 (sheesh!) will count as 4. If you survive it :)) --Stfg (talk) 13:21, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Seamus incident dispute resolution
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Seamus incident". Thank you. HHIAdm (talk) 04:52, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Haitian Creole
You previously made a comment about a move request Talk:Haitian Creole language. Just to let you know that Haitian Creole people was moved to Haitian people after a related move request in case this affects your opinion in the former case. —  AjaxSmack  03:00, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

For the see also section

 * List of Indian snacks

Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:37, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --BDD (talk) 20:24, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Croats of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Hi, I left you a message on my talk page.

Thx for working on the article. -- Wusten  fuchs  15:32, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Thermopylae
Just visited your user page. I'm not Greek myself (though my RL name forces me to explain that some folks), but I too was into the Battle of Thermopylae long before it was cool. It's always been near the top of my list of tremendous Ancient History episodes, thanks to a history teacher whose emotional telling of it was like a work of interpretive literature. Good to run across another whose historical knowledge antedated computer-enhanced cinematography. Happy editing! HuskyHuskie (talk) 02:29, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Twitter issue
As you had participated in the previous AfD, your views would be welcome here Talk:Use_of_Twitter_by_celebrities_and_politicians. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 16:32, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
—/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 16:05, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Category renaming fiasco
Hi. Thanks for helping straighten out the mess I made. I usually screw up stuff like renaming requests, etc.  Quis separabit?  17:38, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Deletion debates
I have to admit, deletion debates are where I get in the most trouble as a Wikipedian. I never have trouble collaborating outside of deletion debates, for the most part. Every time one arises, I tell myself, "Maybe I shouldn't even participate in this, because I'll get in trouble." But then I say, "Well, why not, I can just civilly express my opinion, and make a useful contribution to the discussion." But somehow it tends to go awry. Maybe it's partly because I create and edit articles on controversial subjects, and people's feelings and biases (including mine) end up tainting the discussion with emotion and personal opinion, when it really should just be dispassionate application of policy and collaboration to salvage the article, if it can be. I'm not really sure what to do about that, because if I create articles, then I am inevitably going to end up dealing with AfD at some point.

Also, people frequently say, "Policy says x," and then I ask where it says that, and they get offended. I suppose they think I'm wikilawyering, which maybe I am. But people try to have it both ways. On the one hand, they want to use policy to play wikiprosecutor, but then I can't point to the policy (or lack thereof) as a defense. If the issue is courtesy rather than policy, then I think people should say upfront that it's a matter of courtesy rather than policy. Although in this case I think there may have simply been some confusion about policy rather than an attempt to have a double standard.

Anyway, that article is probably going down in flames, but I don't see why it needs to when the information is so reliably sourced as to meet the WP:GNG. There must be a place on Wikipedia for the information somewhere, no? Maybe I'm wrong, who knows. It kinda blows when you go to the trouble to look up a whole bunch of mainstream media sources, which if not the gold standard of notability (academic journals seem to get more respect) are at least the silver standard, and the article still gets deleted. Leucosticte (talk) 17:34, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * That wikilawyering issue is a tricky one. Plenty of people wave around a bunch of initialisms like it's an alphabet soup contest. But the user you responded to on that AFD should have pointed somewhere instead of just saying "I think that's policy." But templates like the one you used are bound to feel like an attack when you respond with one alone. It may seem pedantic, but a quick statement like, "I'm not familiar with that policy—which one are you referring to?" is going to sound much more civil (even if you don't mean it!).

 * As for the article itself, did you know you can create a draft article in your own user namespace? See WP:UPYES under "Work in progress or material that you may come back to in future." Just open a page like User:Leucosticte/Controversial cases involving sex offenses and you'll have effectively unlimited time to hone an article that will pass muster. You can even get other editors to help you, and eventually launch it into main space when you think it's ready. My warning: policies with legal foundations, such as WP:BLP, may still apply to such pages, though I'm not sure. --BDD (talk) 17:55, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The downside is that it's not possible to wikilink from mainspace to the article in userspace. Traffic to the article aids collaboration on it, and incoming wikilinks, google hits and mainspace search results assist with getting traffic to it. Of course, traffic to an article that isn't yet up to par is exactly what the immediatists and/or deletionists want to prevent. It's kind of a catch-22, because without adequate collaboration, it may never get up to par. Also, I think in this case, the BLP concerns would have been issue even in userspace, and it could have ended up at WP:MFD, a decidedly unfriendly environment. I of course don't agree with the BLP concerns, because Rodriguez has already received a lot of media coverage, so it's no secret from the Internet what his history is.

 * The template was a bit of an attempt to inject humor into the situation, but I suppose humor in AfDs was deprecated a long time ago, since a lot of users got offended by whimsically-worded votes. Leucosticte (talk) 18:05, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your response
I've tried to address your concerns with an update to my FAQ at User:Born2cycle/FAQ. --Born2cycle (talk) 18:49, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Upcoming RM
Perhaps the RMs I am working on are of interest to you: User:Kauffner/RM incubator. Kauffner (talk) 13:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28
Hi. When you recently edited Self-deportation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mother Jones (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:25, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Self-deportation
Yngvadottir (talk) 16:04, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:BDD/Archive 1


text:
Lucknow Pact

The Lucknow Pact was an agreement reached between the Indian National Congress and the Muslim League (AIML) at a joint session of both the parties held in Lucknow in December 1916. Through the pact, the two parties agreed to allow representation to religious minorities in the provincial legislatures. The Muslim League leaders agreed to join the Congress movement demanding Indian autonomy. Scholars cite this as an example of a consociational practice in Indian politics. Bal Gangadhar Tilak represented the Congress while framing the deal, and Muhammad Ali Jinnah (who joined the Muslim League in 1913) participated in this event.

Background
The British had announced under immense pressure from Indian masses, in order to satisfy the Indians, that they will be considering a series of proposal that would lead to at least half of the members of the Executive Council being elected and the Legislative Council having a majority of elected members needed. Both the Congress and the Muslim League supported these. Both had realized that for further concessions to be gained, greater cooperation was required.

Agreements by the Congress
The Congress agreed to separate electorates for Muslims in electing representatives to the Imperial and Provincial Legislative Councils. Although the Muslims were given this right in the Indian Council Act of 1909, the Indian National Congress opposed it. The Congress also agreed to the idea of one-third seats for the Muslims in the Councils despite the fact that the Muslim population represented less than a third. Apart from that, the Congress agreed that no act affecting a community should be passed unless three-quarters of that community's members on the council supported it. After the signing of this pact the rivalry between moderates and extremists was reduced to some extent. There was a significant change in their relation.

Demands presented to the British
Both parties presented some common demands to the British. They demanded:
 * The number of elected seats on the councils should be increased.
 * Laws/Motions which were passed by large majorities in the councils should be accepted as bindings by the British Government.
 * Minorities in the provinces should be protected.
 * All provinces should be granted autonomy.
 * Separating the executive from the judiciary
 * At least half of the members of the Executive Council being elected, the Legislative council having a majority of elected members

Importance
The Lucknow Pact was seen as a beacon of hope to Hindu–Muslim unity. It was the first time that the Hindus and Muslims had made a joint demand for political reform to the British. It led to a growing belief in British India that Home Rule (self-government) was a real possibility. The pact also marked the high-water mark of Hindu-Muslim unity. It established cordial relations between the Muslim League and the Indian National Congress. Before the pact, both parties were viewed as rivals who opposed each other and worked in their own interests. However, the pact brought a change in that view.

The Congress also accepted Muslim demands such as weightage in elections and separate electorates. they earlier had rejected this concession given to Muslims in the Morley Minto reforms. This also highlighted that Congress accepted Muslim league status and that it was a separate party working for the interests of Muslims. It also meant that the Hindus and Congress accepted that Hindus and Muslims are separate communities with different demands and interests.

The Lucknow Pact also helped in establishing cordial relations between the two prominent groups within the Indian National Congress – the 'extremist' faction led by the Lal Bal Pal trio (Lala Lajpat Rai, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Bipin Chandra Pal), and the 'moderate' faction led by Gopal Krishna Gokhale until his death in 1915 and later represented by Gandhi. Though Jinnah advocated a separate nation for the Muslims 20 years later, in 1916 he was a member of both Congress and Muslim League, was an associate of Tilak, and hailed as 'ambassador of Hindu-Muslim Unity’.

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

title: Lucknow Pact


text: User talk:163.153.161.104

title: User talk:163.153.161.104


text:
Tzaraath

Tzaraath (Hebrew: ṣāraʿaṯ), variously transcribed into English and frequently translated as leprosy (though it is not Hansen's disease, the disease known as "leprosy" in modern times ), is a term used in the Bible to describe various ritually impure disfigurative conditions of the human skin, clothing, and houses. Skin tzaraath generally involves patches that are white and contain unusually colored hair. Clothing and house tzaraath consists of a reddish or greenish discoloration.

The laws of tzaraath are given in depth in chapters 13–14 of Leviticus, and several Biblical stories describe individuals who have contracted tzaraath.

Name
Variant transcriptions of the name into English include saraath, zaraath, tzaraat, tsaraat, tzaraas, and tsaraas.

The Hebraic root tsara or tsaraath (צָרַע "to be struck with leprosy, to be leprous"), and the Greek lepros (λεπρός), refer to conditions other than Hansen's disease. The editors of the Septuagint translated the term tzaraath with Greek lepra (λέπρα), which in classical sources referred to psoriasis and similar skin conditions; at the time Hansen's disease was known in Greek by a different term (elephantiasis graecorum). The connection with the bacterial infection now known as Hansen's disease increased as the latter disease spread more widely, and was firmly established by Islamic works on medicine in the 9th century. The classical Greek term lepra stems from the noun lepis λεπίς (a scale (of a fish)), which in turn stems from the verb lepó λέπω (to peel), hence 'leprosy' (literally, morbid scaliness). Variants of the word leprosy conflating tzaraath with Hansen's disease were used from the earliest English translations of the Bible, including Wycliffe's, Tyndale's, and Coverdale's.

The linguistic root of tzaraath (צרע) may mean "smiting"; the Arabic cognate tzaraa (صرع) has a similar meaning. Alternatively, tzaraath may be derived from the Hebrew word tzirah (wasp), based on the idea that tzaraat affects the skin in a manner resembling a wasp's sting. Other theories suggest a connection to the roots שרע ("to spread") or זרע ("seed", i.e. a growth).

The manifestation of tzaraath is termed a negah "affliction", nega'im (plural: ).

Affliction of the body
There are three varieties of nega'im that relate to human flesh:
 * 1) on the skin
 * 2) in a boil  or burn
 * 3) bald patches or lesions of the scalp or beard, in which case the lesion is called a נתק (netek)

Skin patches
White patches of the skin are confirmed as tzaraath by the occurrence of one of three signs:
 * 1) white hair (והיא הפכה שיער לבן) – if at least two hairs within the confines of the negah turn white
 * 2) healthy flesh (ומחית בשר חי) – if skin of a normal appearance appears within the confines of the patch
 * 3) spreading (ואם פשה תפשה המספחת בעור) – if the patch became enlarged since the time of the initial examination by the Kohen

Tzaraath skin patches can come in three varieties : se'et ("a rising" or "discoloration" ), sapahat ("a scab"), and baheret ("a bright spot"). The meaning of these terms is obscure, but they may suggest that tzaraat consists of an abnormal skin texture as well as color. However, rabbinic interpretation almost universally concluded that these three terms refer to different shades of color (white like wool or like snow, etc.) rather than different textures. The rabbis even argued the phrase "its appearance is deeper than the skin of his flesh" refers to color ("deeper" presumed by the rabbis to mean "of lighter color"). As se'et and baheret (both terms which may refer to color and not texture) are later discussed individually, while sapahat (apparently referring to texture) is not, sapahat may be considered a possible feature of se'et or baheret rather than an individual condition; in which case, the rabbinic interpretation may also be the original meaning of the verses.

Paradoxically, if the tzaraat covers a person's entire body, it is considered pure, and no isolation or purification ritual is needed. However, according to a minority interpretation, it is not the entire body, but the entire lesion (including any "islands" of previously healthy skin within the lesion) which must be covered by tzaraat in order to have this pure status.

Boils and burns
Boils and burns, as occur naturally as a result of an abscess, blunt force trauma or thermal insult to the skin, are not tzaraath and do not carry impurity. During the healing phases of these wounds, however, if certain signs that mimic those of the aforementioned patches appear, tzaraath may occur.

Confirmation is by the occurrence of one of two signs:
 * 1) white hair (ושערה הפך לבן and נהפך שער לבן בבהרת) – similar to that in patches
 * 2) spreading (ואם פשה תפשה בעור and אם פשה תפשה בעור) – similar to that in patches

Scalp or beard
The initial symptom of this type of tzaraath is patches of hair loss. According to Maimonides, scalp and beard tzaraath is characterized by hair loss without any change to the skin of the bald spot. The Tosefta, however, maintains that the skin of the bald spot becomes altered.

There are two confirming signs:
 * 1) thin yellow hair (ובו שער צהב דק) – if at least two-and-a-half hairs from within the bald patch turn yellow
 * 2) spreading (והנה פשה הנתק בעור) – if the balding spreads, according to Maimonides. According to Abraham ben David, who quotes the Tosefta, this spreading would refer to spreading of a skin change as well.

While baldness is not a form of tzaraath, patches that occur on a bald scalp may be tzaraath if they meet the criteria mentioned by the Torah. Such an eruption on a bald scalp must appear in a distinct fashion, but is regulated by rules similar to that of tzaraath on the skin; however, it can only occur on men. For a scalp eruption to be tzaraath, the lesion must be a white patch tinged with red (נגע לבן אדמדם). This can occur in one of two places: within what are referred to as a man's posterior baldness (קרחת) and anterior baldness (גבחת).

Inspection and pronouncement
To determine whether a skin condition is indeed tzaraath, the afflicted individual must visit a kohen (a priest, possessing direct male lineage to Aaron). The kohen, trained in examining lesions and diagnosing tzaraath, examines the lesion according to the previously mentioned criteria, and determine whether it meets the specifications of tzaraath. If during the initial examination the lesion meets the criteria for tzaraath, the kohen pronounces the individual ritually impure (tamei, טמא).

If the criteria are not met by the lesion during the initial examination, the individual is confined to his home for seven days, pending a follow-up examination. If the criteria for tzaraath are again not met and the lesion has not spread, there is a difference in protocol depending on the type of lesion.
 * For skin patches, another confinement period of seven days is imposed.
 * For boils or burns, the kohen declares it merely a צרבת (tzarevet, "scar") and there are no further examinations.
 * For bald patches or lesions of the scalp or beard, another confinement period of seven days is imposed. However, prior to this second confinement period, the individual is shaved around the lesion, but not in the lesion itself; according to the rabbis, a rim of two hairs surrounding the bald spot is left, to make any spreading recognizable.

After the second confinement period of seven days, those with skin patches or bald patches are re-evaluated once more. If the criteria for tzaraath have still not been met, the individual is declared pure. He or she, must, however, wash both his or her body and garments; due to the confinement, he or she is considered impure in some sense.

If the lesion was declared ritually pure and later it spread, it must be shown once again to a kohen, who will then pronounce it tzaraath.

If, however, the criteria for tzaraath have been met, either during the initial inspection or at either of the two follow-ups (when applicable) or even after a previous pronouncement of purity, the individual is declared impure. The individual is declared impure even if the lesion did not worsen or spread but remained the same—the skin eruption must become dimmer in appearance for it to be declared pure at the second follow-up examination.

The biblical emphasis appears to be on the ritual impurity that results from a diagnosis of tzaraath, not on any possible medical danger. The commands repeatedly discuss the sufferer's "pure" or "impure" status, only rarely mentioning "healing", and no Biblical story of tzaraath appears to involve the danger of death to the afflicted person.

Impure status
The individual who is declared impure with tzaraath is referred to as either a tzarua (צרוע) or a metzora (מצורע). Such individuals must live alone outside the confines of their community, and call out [ritually] impure, [ritually] impure. They must tear their garments, keep their hair unkept or uncut (פרוע), and cover their upper lip; these practices are expressions of mourning. In a different interpretation, the mouth must be covered, to prevent contagion.

A few medical historians, such as Arturo Castiglioni, regard this as the first model of sanitary legislation. Nevertheless, some (though not all ) Talmudic laws treat tzaraath as noncontagious: non-Jewish victims of tzaraath were not considered ritually impure; in special circumstances (during a holy day, or for a bridegroom after his wedding) the kohen's inspection could be delayed until after the celebrations; in cases where white hair is a sign of tzaraat, if the white hairs were plucked before the inspection then the person was not declared impure. Similarly, in the Biblical description of house-tzaraath, individuals are encouraged to remove their belongings from the house before the house and its contents are pronounced impure.

Purification ritual
Once the metzora's lesion vanishes, he is evaluated by a kohen, who leaves the community to examine him. When the priest had certified that tzaraath had been cured, the biblical text requires that the formerly infected person (metzora) undergo a number of ritual events, some occurring immediately, and some occurring a week later.

Initially, the person took two kosher birds, cedar-wood, scarlet, and ezov. "Living" water was placed in an earthenware vessel, over which one of the birds was slaughtered and into which the blood was allowed to run. The kohen then dipped the remaining bird and other items into the bloodied water, and sprinkled it on the metzora seven times. The live bird was freed into the open field. The metzora washed their garments from impurity and shaved off all their hair.

The metzora then waited for seven days to begin the final steps of his purification ceremony; in this period he must avoid his own home, but may mix with other people. On the seventh day, he again washed his garments from impurity and again shaves off all of his hair, and was then deemed pure. On the eighth day, he brought three animal sacrifices to the sanctuary: a sin-offering of a female lamb, and a guilt-offering and a burnt-offering, both male lambs. (One who could not afford this sacrifice would instead offer birds rather than lambs for the sin-offering and burnt-offering. ) Blood from the slaughtered guilt-offering was placed on his right ear, right thumb and right big toe; then some of the oil for the sacrifice was poured into the priest's left palm, and applied with the priest's right forefinger onto the metzora right ear lobe, right thumb, and right big toe. The rest of the oil from the priest's palm was poured on the metzora 's head. Finally, the sin-offering and burnt-offering were sacrificed.

Some scholars speculate that the initial ritual may have originally been connected to sympathetic magic, with the living bird representing the departure of ritual impurity. Hyssop might simply be a good implement to use for sprinkling, with cedar-wood perhaps having alleged medicinal properties. Alternatively, tzaraath is seen as akin to death, and the use of "living" water dyed with blood (representing life: ) and scarlet dye, along with cedar and ezov which also appear in the ceremony of purification from corpse-impurity , represent the symbolic return of the metzora to life.

Stories involving tzaraat
The Hebrew Bible also speaks of tzaraath in several stories:
 * In, when Moses stood before the burning bush, he doubted that the Israelites would believe that God had sent him. God provides him with two signs to prove his mission: turning his rod into a snake and then back into a rod, and turning his hand into being stricken with tzaraath and then back again. Moses performed these signs for the elders in.
 * In Numbers 12:10, Miriam was stricken with tzaraath for her involvement in slandering Moses. Aaron asks Moses to cure her. Moses prays for his sister and she is cured of the tzaraath but must remain in confinement for seven days. The Torah, however, does not indicate that she went through any purification process similar to what is normally required. Miriam's tzaraath is described as "like snow", perhaps less due to the white color than due to the production of skin flakes, which is common in various skin diseases.
 * Naaman, an Aramean general, suffered from tzaraath until being cured by Elisha. However, after Elisha's servant Gehazi defrauded Naaman, Gehazi and his descendants were punished with tzaraath.
 * In, four men with tzaraath were staying outside the besieged city of Samaria, and were the first to discover that the besieging Aramean army had fled.
 * King Uzziah was stricken with tzaraath after offering incense in the Temple, a task forbidden to all except the priests.

Affliction of clothing
Tzaraath can also afflict garments. Garment tzaraath is relevant to only three materials:
 * 1) wool (Hebrew צמר)
 * 2) linen (Hebrew פשתים)
 * 3) leather: either unworked leather (עור) or finished leather (כל מלאכת עור, literally "all worked leather")

In a wool or linen garment, the tzaraath may appear uniformly throughout the fabric, or else be limited to the garment's woof or to its warp (או בשתי או בערב).

Tzaraath appears in clothing as an greenish (ירקרק – yerakrak) or reddish (אדמדם – adamdam) eruption. This has been interpreted as either a intense color ("the greenest of greens") or a mild one ("less than fully green").

Such clothing must be brought to the kohen for inspection. A garment cannot be declared impure upon initial examination; rather, it is confined for seven days, and if on the seventh day, the eruption has spread, the garment is declared impure with tzaraath. Subsequent to a declaration of tzaraath, the garment, whether wool, linen or leather, is completely burnt in fire; if the tzaraath was confined to the woof or warp, only that need be burnt.

Upon re-evaluation after the seven-day confinement, the kohen may instruct that the garment with the eruption be washed and confined once more for seven days. If upon a second re-evaluation after the second seven days of confinement, the kohen sees that the eruption did not dim and did not spread, the garment is declared impure and must be completely burnt.

If the second re-evaluation reveals a dimming of the eruption, the kohen tears the area with the eruption from the garment and burns the torn out portion completely. The torn out area is patched to allow for a reinspection of the area for return of the lesion. If, the eruption returns to the patch, there is no confinement period instituted and the entire garment is completely burnt; if a lesion reappears on the garment but not on the patch, the garment must be burned but the patch can be saved. To recapitulate, if the lesion remained as it was after the first week of confinement, it is washed and reconfined. If it remained as it was after the second week of confinement, it is burned.

If, however, upon the second re-evaluation, the lesion disappears, the garment must be immersed in a mikveh (ritual bath) and is then pure.

Fabrics and clothing affected by tzaraath were required by the text to be burnt entirely, unless it was the form of tzaraath that faded after washing but came back after being torn out, in which case it could be considered ritually pure as soon as the tzaraath had gone, and it had subsequently been washed.

Affliction of housing
The third and last type of tzaraath mentioned by the Torah affects buildings. If an individual notices an affliction on his house, he is to inform a kohen. The kohen will then command that they empty the house of all of its contents prior to his inspection; this is to prevent further financial loss, because should the house be confined, everything within it became impure as well.

When the kohen comes to perform the inspection, he looks for lesions on the wall that appear either intense green (ירקרקת) or intense red (אדמדמת) and that appear sunken below the plane of the wall's surface (שפל מן הקיר, literally "lower than the wall"). If this is what he sees, the kohen exits the house and confines it for seven days.

On the seventh day, upon re-evaluating the eruption, if the kohen sees that the eruption has spread beyond what it had been, the afflicted stones are removed, the area around the afflicted stones is scraped and both the removed stones and clay plaster are cast into a place of impurity.

The void is filled with new stones and clay plaster and the house is confined for another seven days. If upon a second re-evaluation, the negah has returned after new stones have been plastered in, the negah is deemed tzaraath and the entire house must be dismantled. If the negah does not return, the house is pronounced pure, and the same purification process mentioned in relation to tzaraath of human flesh is employed here.

Tzaraath infections in houses were to be treated similarly harshly according to the biblical regulations, and didn't have any exceptions; stones showing the symptoms had to be removed, and the house had to be scraped, with the removed stones and scraped-off clay being cast into a rubbish heap outside the city, and if the infection returned once replacement stones were laid and daubed with clay, then the whole house had to be dismantled, with the rubble again going to the tip outside the city. Additionally, people who had been in a house while it was infected with tzaraath was considered ritually impure until the evening came, and anyone who had eaten or slept there had to also wash their clothes.

A house that was "healed" from tzaraat received a purification ritual virtually identical to that of a healed person, involving cedar-wood, scarlet, ezov, and two birds. However, the second half of the person's purification ritual, involving Temple sacrifices, was not performed.

In Rabbinic Judaism
Rabbinic tradition includes an extensive elaboration of the tzaraath laws recorded in the Bible. The rabbinic laws of tzaraath appear in Mishnah tractate Nega'im.

Laws of skin
Rather than interpreting the biblical descriptions of tzaraath in the manner of modern doctors, classical rabbinical literature took an extremely literal view. This is shown in the following laws:
 * In the group of symptoms where the hair of the inflicted region has turned white, the Mishnah argues that plucking out the white hair was all that was required for the disease not to be considered tzaraath.
 * Since the biblical text mentions tzaraath occurring where boils had previously healed, but not where unhealed boils exist, the Mishnah maintains that the appearance of the other symptoms in an unhealed boil or burn do not indicate tzaraath, and that if the boil or burn subsequently heals, it still does not indicate tzaraath, unless the other symptoms occur in parts of the body not previously diseased.
 * Sores smaller than the size of a lentil, those on the extremities of the body (such as the fingers, toes, ears, nose, breasts, etc.), and those that occur in hairy parts of the body, do not indicate tzaraath.

Rabbinic literature describes additional laws regarding priest's inspection of tzaraath:
 * The kohen must be able to see the entirety of the lesion. Thus, if the skin eruption or bald spot wraps around either the body or body parts, or occurs at the tip of terminal body parts—any place that would preclude the observation of the entire lesion at one time (i.e. wrapping around the torso, scalp or arm, or occurring at the tip of a finger or toe) – there can be no declaration of tzaraath.
 * In a similar vein, a kohen who is blind in one eye or who cannot see well may not perform the inspections. An eligible kohen may inspect anyone, including his relatives, except himself. Even a non-kohen may perform the inspection if they are proficient in the laws of nega'im, but only a kohen may declare purity or impurity. A non-kohen examiner may inform an accompanying inexpert kohen of his determination that a negah is or is not tzaraath and the kohen declares "purity" or "impurity".
 * Nega'im do not render impurity on parts of the body that are naturally concealed by other parts of the body according to specific regulations. For skin eruptions on the legs, men are inspected standing as though they are hoeing and women standing as though they are rolling dough. For eruptions on the arms, men raise their arms as though they are picking olives and women raise their arms as though they are weaving or spinning.
 * Nega'im do not render gentiles impure.
 * A groom is exempt from visiting the kohen until the eighth day after his wedding for any nega'im on his flesh, garments or house. Similarly, there are no inspections carried out on the days of Passover, Shavuot or Sukkot.
 * Even on the days when inspections are performed, they are only allowed for two hours each day: during the fourth and eighth hour of the day (corresponding roughly to 9–10 AM and 2–3 PM).

If someone cuts off some skin or a part of his body to remove a tzaraat lesion, he becomes impure, even if he had no confirming signs. He may become pure only after another lesion forms. The exception is when a lesion appears on the tip of the foreskin and is cut off during circumcision, which is permitted, because a positive commandment overrides a negative commandment.

Additional laws relate to the sacrifice offered at the metzora's recovery:
 * The sprinkling was done onto the back of his hand, or else (according to another opinion) on his forehead.
 * The slaughtered bird was buried in the presence of the metzora.
 * When the recovered metzora is shaved, this shaving excludes places similar to those in which nega'im are not subject to impurity.
 * The dabbing of sacrificial blood on the recovered metzora caused some complication, because the metzora was not allowed into Temple grounds prior to his purification process, while the blood of the offering was not allowed out of the Temple grounds. To reconcile this dilemma, the metzora stuck these body parts through the gateway one at a time to receive the blood. The same was done with the oil from the flour offerings of the metzora. If the metzora lost any of these body parts after he was ready for purification, he could never obtain purification.
 * The remaining portion of the olive oil from the purification offering, called in Hebrew log shemen shel metzora, is retained by the kohen at the completion of his service. This portion is listed as one of the twenty-four kohanic gifts.

Laws of clothing
There are a number of limitations to tzaraath as it applies to clothing:
 * Clothing belonging to a gentile are insusceptible to tzaraath.
 * Only sheep's wool is susceptible to a negah of tzaraath, although an even mixture of sheep's wool and another type of wool (camel's wool, for example) can be afflicted. In a similar vein, a mixture of plant fibers containing linen is insusceptible unless it is at least half linen.
 * The leather referred to by the Torah does not include the hides of marine animals.
 * The fabric of wool or linen or leather article cannot be rendered impure by tzaraath if it is artificially dyed. If, however, the item is naturally colored (such as wool from a black sheep), it can be rendered impure.

Laws of houses
At least two afflicted stones are necessary for removal of any stones and at least two new stones must be used to fill the void. If the afflicted wall is shared by two houses owned by two neighbors, both neighbors must help to remove the afflicted stones, scrape and place the new stones, but only the owner of the house whose interior was afflicted performs the replastering. It is from this ruling that the proverb Oy l'rasha, oy l'scheino (אוי לרשע אוי לשכנו, "Woe to the wicked! Woe to his neighbor!") originates.

There are numerous limitations put on the tzaraath that afflicts houses:
 * The house of a gentile is insusceptible to tzaraath.
 * Only houses that possess four walls and four corners are susceptible. Similarly, only those houses that rest on the ground are susceptible, to the exclusion of those that are suspended above ground or are built on a boat.
 * Tzaraath only affects houses that are built entirely out of stones, wood and clay plaster. If any of the four walls are built or internally overlaid with marble, natural outcropping of rock, brick or earthen soil, that wall is insusceptible to tzaraath, and a house cannot be rendered impure unless all four walls are susceptible.
 * Two storey houses are treated as two distinct houses and the beams that serve as the floor of the upper storey and the roof of the lower storey are allowed to remain with whichever house remains.
 * Houses are the only buildings that are susceptible to tzaraath (not, for example, barns or cattle stalls) and only houses that exist within the region of land originally divided among the 12 tribes, because the verse refers to beis eretz achuzaschem (בית ארץ אחזתכם, "a house of the land of your inheritance"); this also excludes houses in Jerusalem, because it was not given as an inheritance to any one tribe, but rather held jointly by all of Israel.

Interpretations
The Talmud, and most historic Jewish literature (for example Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch), regards tzaraath as a punishment for sin, and argue that cure from tzaraath only comes about through repentance and forgiveness. The verse itself arguably suggests this, as it directs those who find themselves afflicted to seek out a Kohen (priest) and not a doctor, even though generally the Torah encourages seeking medical treatment from doctors.

The Talmud lists seven possible causes for tzaraath: lashon hara ("evil tongue", i.e. malicious gossip), murder, a vain oath, illicit sexual intercourse, pride, theft, or miserly behavior. Elsewhere, the connection with gossip is supported by the wordplay metzora (leper) - motzi [shem] ra (slanderer). One modern source asserts that as a "physical manifestation of a spiritual malaise," tzaraath is a "divine retribution for the offender's failure to feel the needs and share the hurt of others."

In particular, Midrash Rabbah sees the different types of tzaraath as increasing levels of punishment, which could be curtailed at any stage if repentance was made:
 * 1) the first stage in the Rabbah's view was the infection of homes, and if repentance came here it only required removal of the affected stones for a cure.
 * 2) in the second stage, the entire house must be torn down as the tzaraath would not go away, and the infection came upon one's clothes; if repentance came here it required only washing of the clothes for a cure.
 * 3) in the third stage of Rabbah's scheme, the clothes must be burnt, and the infection enters the person's skin; if repentance occurs here then purification could occur.
 * 4) in the fourth stage, which only occurs when the person has completely refused to repent, the person is forced to dwell alone.

Each Biblical victim of tzaraath is stated to have received the condition due to some violation of biblical laws, including Joab for the murder of Abner (whose blood was shed deceitfully in time of peace), Gehazi (for 1. rebelling against Elisha's decision to not take payment for a miracle God had worked 2. working deceitfully to take the payment 3. lying to Elisha, saying he hadn't done the thing); and Uzziah for burning incense in the Temple (a ritual whose performance was limited to priests).

Other classical rabbinical writers saw tzaraath of houses as having a practical benefit. According to one, as well as being a punishment for miserliness, it also demonstrated that the house owner was lying, if they had said they did not own certain objects neighbours had asked to borrow, since the biblical regulations require the house owner to take all their possessions outside prior to confinement. On the other hand, Rashi states that tzaraath of houses was a reward for the homeowner, arguing that the Israelite homes had previously been those of Canaanites, who had hidden their valuables in the walls; the tzaraath required the house owner to remove the bricks, and so find the treasures hidden there.

The items used in the purification ritual - birds, cedar wood, and worm - were specifically included to deliver a message to the metzora. The sin most associated with tzaraath is lashon hara; to speak derogatorily about others to one's friends is likened to birds, who chatter endlessly. Similarly, the one who speaks ill of others is haughty, holding himself or herself high above others, like the tall cedar. To be healed, the metzora must erase arrogance, making themselves lowly like a worm. This is a play on words—the word tola'as (תולעת) means both "red" and "worm" – as well as hyssop.

Current practice
The laws of tzaraath are not practiced by contemporary Jews. Several approaches have been suggested to explain why this is the case:
 * One could contract tzaraath nowadays, but this is practically irrelevant, because in the absence of a Temple it is impossible to perform the tzaraath purification ritual, and because since the exile there is no commandment to remove tzaraath sufferers from the camp.
 * One cannot formally acquire the status of tzaraath nowadays, since there are currently no priests with proven priestly lineage who can declare this status, or else because current priests do not have the necessary tradition or knowledge to determine the status, or because the Temple robes which must be worn while declaring the status are unavailable.
 * In times of exile tzaraath is not regarded as a direct Divine punishment with a ritual remedy, but rather as a normal physical disease whose treatment is purely medical.

Tzaraath of the skin
Scholars suspect that the descriptions of tzaraath of the skin actually refer to a number of different skin diseases, which, owing to the undeveloped state of medical science at that period, were not distinguished. A wide range of diseases, infections, and skin conditions known to modern medicine have been suggested as differential diagnosis of tzaraath, including psoriasis, seborrhoeic dermatitis, favid, dermatophyte infections, nummular dermatitis, atopic dermatitis, pityriasis rosea, crusted scabies, syphilis, impetigo, sycosis barbae, alopecia areata, boil, scabies, lichen simplex chronicus, scarlet fever, lupus erythematosus, lichen sclerosus et atrophicus, folliculitis decalvans, morphea, sarcoidosis, and lichen planopilaris.

Of the particular situations that Leviticus describes as being tzaraath,
 * the whitening of the skin over the whole body with sores, is considered by scholars to be most indicative of psoriasis
 * the spreading of sores is regarded by scholars as most symptomatic of impetigo
 * the spreading of swellings or spots in a burn injury, according to scholars, is most probably a result of erysipelas
 * in regard to subcutaneous disease where the hair has turned white
 * the additional presence of swellings or spots in a burn injury are thought by scholars most likely to be tropical sores
 * the additional presence of bodily sores, and swellings or spots where there previously had been a boil, is one of the classical symptoms of leprosy
 * the additional presence of sores on the head or chin is thought by scholars to most probably indicate the presence of ringworm
 * a white spot in the head or beard hair, called a netek, may be favus.

Russian pathologist Gregory Minh discovered that leprosy is contagious; assuming that biblical tzaraat is non-contagious, he therefore concluded that tzaraath is in fact vitiligo. Similarly, Reuven Kalisher suggested that vitiligo is the most likely candidate for biblical tzaraath, as it is non-contagious, cause the hair located within the discolored area to turn white (also known as poliosis or leukotrichia), and can grow in size within a week to two-week period. Yehuda L. Katzenelson added that while vitiligo lacks the characteristic of biblical tzaraat, the Mishna (Negaim, chapter 1) also does not mention this characteristic. However Katzenelson concluded his analysis by listing many unanswered difficulties with Minh's opinion.

One recent author suggests that tzaraath in fact corresponds to no naturally occurring disease: "By establishing rigid criteria, almost everyone who was examined was destined to fail to meet the criteria for diagnosis. Therefore this passage was designed to integrate persons with disfiguring skin diseases back into society, not to excommunicate them as was the practice in neighbouring societies."

Similar conditions not considered tzaraath
In addition to simple rashes, inflammations, and swellings, the biblical text mentions a number of other conditions that could be confused with tzaraath. Among other situations the text considers harmless are the appearance of dull white spots, white patches of skin without sores, and baldness without sores; the latter two of these are thought by scholars to most probably refer to vitiligo and alopecia, respectively, and the Bible remarks that the former – the dull white spots – are merely a form of freckles. The symptoms that the text considers to be indicative of disease include those of the spread of superficial swellings or spots (where there had previously been a boil), and those of reddish-white sores in areas of baldness; the former condition is identified by the Bible as plague, and scholars regard its symptoms as pointing to a diagnosis of smallpox, while the latter is unidentified in the biblical text, but considered by scholars to indicate favus.

In clothing fabrics
In addition to infecting the skin, tzaraath is described by Leviticus as being able to infect historically common clothing fabrics, specifically wool, linen, and leather. The biblical description of tzaraath in such fabrics is strikingly analogous to that of tzaraath in the skin, with, for example, spreading of the infection being tested for by isolating the fabric in question for first 7 days. The principal symptoms are described as being green or red spots, which spread within a week, or that do not change appearance at all after a fortnight, having been washed after the first week, or that return a week after having been torn out, if they also had faded with washing prior to being torn out. These descriptions are regarded by scholars as most probably indicative of certain moulds,  and especially matching infections by Penicillium (the fungus that produces penicillin).

In houses
The biblical text also describes tzaraath as infecting the walls of houses; the symptoms it describes are depressions in the wall, which are green or red, and spread over a period of seven days. The description is regarded by scholars as again being strikingly similar to the wording of the description of tzaraath infections in the skin, but still somewhat obscure; it would seem to fit some form of fungal growth, especially dry rot, which produces yellowish-green and reddish patches on walls.

title: Tzaraath


text:
ULEB

Union of European Leagues of Basketball (ULEB; Union des Ligues Européennes de Basket-Ball) is a sports organization within basketball created for growth of professional basketball in Europe. Its members are the professional basketball leagues organisations of 11 countries: Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Russia, and Spain.

History
The professional basketball organizing bodies of Italy, France and Spain established the ULEB on June 25, 1991 in Rome, Italy. In November 1992, a joint All-Star weekend was held in Madrid, Spain, featuring the most outstanding players from the Spanish and Italian Leagues. The experience was repeated one year later in Rome before a crowd of 10.500 fans. In 1994, the French League joined the event and the All Star weekend moved to Valencia, Spain, with Italian, Spanish and French stars competing and showing their skills.

The Greek League was the first to join the three founders in 1996. The ULEB has had three Presidents since its inception: Gianluigi Porelli (since September 1991 until March 1998), Eduardo Portela, (since March 18, 1998 until October 6, 2016) and Tomas Van Den Spiegel, elected October 6, 2016. In December 1999, the Union welcomed the British, Belgian and Swiss Leagues.

A key date in ULEB and European basketball history was Friday June 9, 2000. That day, the most important clubs in Europe and the ULEB leagues, met in Sitges, and decided to create and manage a new competition, the EuroLeague. Until that moment, it had been FIBA that ran the men's top basketball clubs competition in Europe. The first game of the new EuroLeague, Real Madrid vs. Olympiacos, was played on October 16, 2000 in Madrid.

One year later, in October 2001, the ULEB was expanded with the leagues of Germany, Netherlands and Poland. In October 2002, the ULEB Cup, the second-tier level European club competition, was born. Its first game was played in Istanbul, on October 15, 2002, between Darüşşafaka and Novo Mesto.

In June 2003, the league of Lithuania joined, and one year later, in July 2005 ,the union was expanded with the league of Israel. The most recent addition to the ULEB family is the Russian VTB United League, which was granted admission in July 2014, replacing its predecessor, the PBL (which had been admitted in May 2011). So, the ULEB currently represents a total number of 10 professional basketball leagues from across Europe. Other leagues such as Portugal, Adriatic, Austria, Switzerland and the Czech Republic, have been also members of the ULEB in the past, but all of them left the Union for different reasons. The Portuguese and Swiss leagues have ceased memberships, the Adriatic lost recognition from FIBA Europe, and the Austrian, British and Czech leagues voluntarily renounced their membership.

ULEB is currently a shareholder of Euroleague Commercial Assets (ECA) through Euroleague Basketball SL, and is also a shareholder of Basketball Champions League SA. As written above, former Belgian player Tomas Van Den Spiegel is the current President of the ULEB, and Greek League President Vangelis Galatsopoulos is the current Vice President. The current Executive Committee of the Union is completed by the leagues of Belgium, France, Germany and Spain.

Members
Members of ULEB in 2022:

Former
Former ULEB members:

Presidents

 * 🇮🇹 Gianluigi Porelli 1991-1998
 * 🇪🇸 Eduardo Portela 1998-2016
 * 🇧🇪 Thomas Van Den Spiegel 2016-

title: ULEB


text:
Canteen

Canteen most often refers to:
 * Canteen (bottle), a water container
 * Cafeteria, a type of food service location within an institution in which there is little or no waiting staff table service
 * A complete set of cutlery comprising knives, forks, and spoons, usually sufficient for several place-settings at a meal
 * An archaic use was to describe a sutler's shop, where provisions were sold to the military.

Canteen may also refer to:

Places

 * Canteen Township, St. Clair County, Illinois, a township in Illinois
 * North Platte Canteen, a railroad stop in North Platte, Nebraska, United States that operated from 1941 to 1946

Other uses

 * Canteen (magazine), an English-language literary and arts magazine
 * CanTeen, the Australian and New Zealand national support organisation for young people with cancer
 * Canteen, a railway tender, hauled by a steam locomotive, which holds only water
 * Canteen (prison), or prison commissary, a store within a prison where inmates can buy sundries

title: Canteen


text:
Joseph Hardcastle (1752–1819)

Joseph Hardcastle (1752–1819) was an English merchant. One of the founders of the Missionary Society, later the London Missionary Society, he devoted time and money to its affairs, becoming its first treasurer.

Life
Hardcastle was born in Leeds, where he lived until the age of 15, at which point he moved to London to join his uncle's business. He eventually became a merchant, still based in London. During his time in London he lived at Old Swan Stairs, before moving to Hatcham House in Deptford, then a rural Surrey village, in what is now the New Cross Gate area of Lewisham.

Thomas Clarkson the slavery abolitionist was a frequent guest at Hatcham House. Here Clarkson wrote much of his History of the Abolition of the Slave Trade, and met his future wife, a niece of Mrs Hardcastle. Joseph Hardcastle was especially active in arranging missionary expeditions to Africa, and created schemes through which missionary work could be self-funding by the sale artefacts brought back by the missionaries.

Hardcastle is buried in Bunhill Fields non-conformist cemetery, in London. The grave is in the north section of the T-plan, close to the red granite obelisk to Joseph Hart.

Legacy
The story of Joseph's life was published in "Memoir of Joseph Hardcastle Esq., the first Treasurer of the London Missionary Society: A Record of the Past for his Descendants", which was written by his last surviving daughter, Emma Corsbie Hardcastle, and published in 1860. A number of roads in the modern New Cross Gate reflect his time, most notably Joseph Hardcastle Close.

Family
Hardcastle married in 1777 Anne Corsbie, daughter of John Corsbie of Bury St Edmunds. They had nine children, two dying young, with three sons and four daughters becoming adults. They included:

 * Anne (died 1827), the eldest daughter, who married in 1810 Henry Forster Burder.
 * Mrs Arnould (Elizabeth, died 1827), mother of Anne Elizabeth Hardcastle Arnould, who married the Rev. Henry Olivier and was grandmother of Laurence Olivier.
 * Alfred (1797–1841), second son, married firstly Anne Cobb Hurry (1789–1815); Joseph Alfred Hardcastle, MP, was their son. He married secondly Emma Smith, in 1820.
 * Emma Corsbie (1800–1867), youngest daughter, who married in 1822 Alexander Haldane (1800–1882).

The other children were Selina, Joseph and Nathaniel.

title: Joseph Hardcastle (1752–1819)


text: User talk:151.188.16.33

title: User talk:151.188.16.33


text:
Luis Agote

Luis Agote (September 22, 1868 – November 12, 1954) was an Argentine physician and researcher. He was the first to perform a non-direct blood transfusion using sodium citrate as an anticoagulant. The procedure took place in Rawson hospital in the city of Buenos Aires on November 9, 1914. Agote was the first to perform this procedure in the Americas. Agote worked independently and separately from the Belgian surgeon Albert Hustin, who discovered that sodium citrate in tolerable quantities could anticoagulate blood for transfusion on March 27, 1914.

Biography
Agote was the son of a politician. He studied first in the Colegio Nacional de Buenos Aires, and then at the University of Buenos Aires Faculty of Medicine, where he was also a teacher. He graduated as a doctor in 1893 with a thesis about suppurative hepatitis. He became Secretary of the National Department of Hygiene in 1894 and became head of the leper hospital in 1895 on the island of Martin Garcia. He was elected Congressman in 1910 and Senator in 1916 of the legislature in Argentina.

First recorded transfusions
The first recorded blood transfusion was made between dogs by the English doctor Richard Lower around 1666. In 1667, French scientist Juan Bautista Denys transfused a human with animal blood. In 1900, Karl Landsteiner identified some of the blood substances responsible for the agglutination of red blood cells, identifying blood groups for the first time and some of their incompatibilities. Direct transfusions were still not practiced at the beginning of the 20th century because it was impossible to keep unaltered blood outside the body for later use. After 6–12 minutes, coagulation begins manifested initially by a gradual increase of viscosity that terminates with almost complete solidification. Coagulation is the defense of an organism to staunch wounds and minimize hemorrhages. Now we know that clotting is almost totally formed by platelets fastened by a network of filaments of fibrin.

Fibrin does not normally exist in blood and is created from protein plasma by the action of the thrombin enzyme. Similarly, thrombin is not naturally present in blood and is created by the precursor substance prothombrin, in a process that involves platelets, some exiting from calcium and substances produced by lesioned materials. Since clots are not created if there is a lack of some of these elements, the addition of sodium citrate (which eliminates calcium ions from blood) prevents its formation.

title: Luis Agote


text: User talk:195.93.21.33

title: User talk:195.93.21.33


text:
Kobus (given name)

Kobus or Cobus is a Dutch and now primarily Afrikaans masculine given name, a short form (hypocorism) of the given name Jacobus.

People with this name include:

 * Kobus Brand (born 1994), Namibian cricketer
 * Cobus de Swardt, South African sociologist
 * Kobus Jonker, South African paralympic athlete
 * Cobus Kellermann, South African financial analyst
 * Kobus Moolman, South African poet
 * Kobus Marais, South African politician
 * Cobus Pienaar (born 1985), South African cricketer
 * Kobus van der Schlossen (died 1695), Dutch legendary thief
 * Kobus Vandenberg (born 1950), Dutch sports sailor

South African rugby union players: Company：Cobus Industries
 * Kobus de Kock (born 1988)
 * Cobus Grobbelaar (born 1981)
 * Kobus Marais (born 1994)
 * Cobus Reinach (born 1990)
 * Kobus Van Deventer (born 1995)
 * Kobus van Dyk (born 1994)
 * Kobus van Wyk (born 1992)
 * Cobus Visagie (born 1973)
 * Kobus Wiese (born 1964)
 * Cobus Wiese (born 1997)

title: Kobus (given name)


text:
Self-incrimination

In criminal law, self-incrimination is the act of making a statement that exposes oneself to an accusation of criminal liability or prosecution. Self-incrimination can occur either directly or indirectly: directly, by means of interrogation where information of a self-incriminatory nature is disclosed; or indirectly, when information of a self-incriminatory nature is disclosed voluntarily without pressure from another person.

In many legal systems, accused criminals cannot be compelled to incriminate themselves—they may choose to speak to police or other authorities, but they cannot be punished for refusing to do so. There are 108 countries and jurisdictions that currently issue legal warnings to suspects, which include the right to remain silent and the right to legal counsel. These laws are not uniform across the world; however, members of the European Union have developed their laws around the EU's guide.

Canadian law
In Canada, similar rights exist pursuant to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Section 11 of the Charter provides that one cannot be compelled to be a witness in a proceeding against oneself. Section 11(c) states:

"Any person charged with an offence has the right ... not to be compelled to be a witness in proceedings against that person in respect of the offence ..."

An important caveat in Canadian law is that this does not apply to a person who is not charged in the case in question. A person issued a subpoena, who is not charged in respect of the offence being considered, must give testimony. However, this testimony cannot later be used against the person in another case. Section 13 of the Charter states:

"A witness who testifies in any proceedings has the right not to have any incriminating evidence so given used to incriminate that witness in any other proceedings, except in a prosecution for perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence."

Historically, in Canadian common law, witnesses could refuse to give testimony that would self-incriminate. However, section 5(1) of the Canada Evidence Act eliminated that absolute common law privilege by instead compelling witnesses to testify. In exchange, section 5(2) of the same act granted the witnesses immunity from having that evidence used against them in the future except in the case of perjury or impeachment. While these provisions of the Canada Evidence Act are still operational, they have been overtaken in their application by the immunities granted by sections 13 and 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Chinese law
After the 1996 amendments to the Criminal Procedure Law, Article 15 states that "It shall be strictly prohibited to extort confessions by torture, gather evidence by threat, enticement, deceit, or other illegal means, or force anyone to commit self-incrimination." In 2012 the law was also re-amended to strengthen the human rights protection of criminal suspects. China has since recognized the right against self-incrimination and forced confessions are prohibited by law. However, in practice as human rights violations in China continue to be committed, it is still common practice for police to use torture on suspects to obtain forced confessions. China's accession to the United Nations's International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1998 also guarantees Chinese citizens the right against self-incrimination; however, China has not ratified the treaty.

Indian law
In India, under Article 20 (3) of the Constitution, the defendant has the right against self-incrimination, but witnesses are not given the same right.

A defendant must be informed of their rights before making any statements that may incriminate them. Defendants must not be compelled to give any statements. In the case that a defendant is pressured into giving a statement that is self-incriminating, the statement will not be admissible in a court of law. The Code of Criminal Procedure and the Indian Constitution give defendants the Right to Silence, i.e. the right to withhold self-incriminating information to authorities. Defendants must inform the authorities that they are exercising their Right to Silence; withholding information is not considered using their right to withhold information that can potentially be self-incriminating. In order to exercise their right to remain silent, the defendant must verbally and clearly state that they are doing so. For example, a defendant can say, "I am exercising my right to remain silent and will not be answering any further questions." Article 20 (3) does not pertain to those who made a confession willingly without being intimidated or coerced into making such statement.

English and Welsh law
The right against self-incrimination originated in England and Wales. In countries deriving their laws as an extension of the history of English common law, a body of law has grown around the concept of providing individuals with the means to protect themselves from self-incrimination.

The current statutory basis for the privilege against self-incrimination for defendants in criminal trials in England and Wales is the Criminal Evidence Act 1898 s1(2) (as amended):

"a person charged in criminal proceedings who is called as a witness in the proceedings may be asked any question in cross-examination notwithstanding that it would tend to criminate him as to any offence with which he is charged in the proceedings"

Applying to England and Wales, the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 amended the right to silence by allowing inferences to be drawn by the jury in cases where a suspect refuses to explain something, and then later produces an explanation. In other words, the jury is entitled to infer that the accused fabricated the explanation at a later date, since the accused refused to provide the explanation during the time of the police questioning. The jury is also free not to make such an inference.

Scots law
In Scots criminal and civil law, both common and statute law originated and operate separately from that in England and Wales. In Scots law, the right to silence remains unchanged by the above, and juries' rights to draw inferences are severely curtailed.

On January 25, 2018, the law in Scotland changed in regard to people being detained by police. These changes only affect people who are arrested after January 25, 2018. Those who are arrested have 'the right to remain silent' and are not obligated to answer questions asked by police. However, although someone being detained by police does not need to answer questions regarding the crime they are accused of, it is mandatory for detainees to answer basic questions of identity such as: name, date of birth, address, and nationality.

United States law
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the accused from being forced to incriminate themselves in a crime. The Amendment reads:

"No person ... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself ..."

Additionally, under the Miranda ruling, a person also has the right to remain silent while in police custody so as not to reveal any incriminating information. In order to invoke this constitutional right to remain silent, a person must explicitly and unambiguously tell officers that they are exercising this right to remain silent. Therefore, staying silent without a prior exclamation that one is exercising this constitutional right does not invoke the right.

In Miranda v. Arizona (1966) the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination requires law enforcement officials to advise a suspect interrogated in custody of them their right to remain silent and their right to an attorney. Justice Robert H. Jackson further notes that "any lawyer worth his salt will tell the suspect in no uncertain terms to make no statement to police under any circumstances".

Miranda warnings must be given before there is any "questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way". Suspects must be warned, prior to the interrogation, that they have the right to remain silent, that anything they say may be used against them in a court of law, that they have the right to have an attorney and if one cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed to defend such person. Further, only after such warnings are given and understood, may the individual knowingly waive them and agree to answer questions or make a statement.

It is also important to note that the Fifth Amendment protects certain types of evidence, specifically testimonial evidence, which are statements that are spoken by the person in question that are made under oath. For a list of other different types of evidence, see Evidence (law).

Shift in court decision regarding handcuff usage
The United States Supreme Court rulings of Miranda v. Arizona and Terry v. Ohio leave questions about the types of conduct that are appropriate for both the protection of the public, and criminal suspects' constitutional rights. The use of handcuffs on a suspect during a Terry stop infringes on their Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. During the action of handcuffing a suspect, a custodial environment is created, thereby invoking the information of that individual's Miranda rights. The Second Circuit Court maintained the notion that by utilizing handcuffs during a Terry stop, that stop is then automatically transformed into an arrest, thus warranting the reading of Miranda rights, up until the decision of US versus Fiseku.

In holdings of U.S. versus Fiseku, the defendant argues that the officers’ use of handcuffs convert a Terry stop into an arrest without probable cause, thus violating his Fourth Amendment rights. The District Court ruled in disagreement with this matter, suggesting that there were unusual circumstances surrounding the investigatory stop, requiring the use of handcuffs in order to ensure the protection of those officers involved. This differs from Second Circuit court rulings of the past.

In the case of U.S. vs. Newton, a police officer is permitted to utilize handcuffs during a Terry stop if the officer has reason to believe that the detainee poses an immediate physical threat, and that by handcuffing the individual, the potential threat is defused in the least invasive means possible.

In the case of U.S. vs. Bailey, the Second Circuit court found the officers' original stop to be constitutional, but ruled that the events which transpired after handcuffing took place fell outside the realm of a constitutional Terry stop. This results from both suspects having already been patted down and deemed unarmed. At which point, the officers had no authority to handcuff either of these men, as they were already proven to be non-threatening.

In both cases, the Second Circuit court made the determination that the use of handcuffs converted these stops into arrests, and were grounds for Miranda. The ruling of U.S. versus Fiseku disrupts this conversion trend by determining otherwise. The grounds for this holding are ambiguous, given the striking similarities between this court ruling and those of Newton and Bailey. The new verdict could potentially be instituted to enable police officials to impede on citizens' constitutional rights as long as the technique being used is considered to be less intrusive than that of an officer pulling his or her gun on an unarmed suspect.

Truthful statements by an innocent person
An incriminating statement includes any statement that tends to increase the danger that the person making the statement will be accused, charged or prosecuted – even if the statement is true, and even if the person is innocent of any crime. Thus, even a person who is innocent of any crime who testifies truthfully can be incriminated by that testimony. The United States Supreme Court has stated that the Fifth Amendment privilege

"protects the innocent as well as the guilty. ... one of the Fifth Amendment's basic functions ... is to protect innocent men ... who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances. ... truthful responses of an innocent witness, as well as those of a wrongdoer, may provide the government with incriminating evidence from the speaker's own mouth."

The U.S. Supreme Court has also stated:

"Too many, even those who should be better advised, view this privilege as a shelter for wrongdoers. They too readily assume that those who invoke it are either guilty of crime or commit perjury in claiming the privilege."

title: Self-incrimination


text:
File:Dragon pass box cover.jpg

Licensing

 * Description: This is a flatbed scan of the box cover for the Dragon Pass board wargame. It was reduced in size and a drop shadow added with Paint Shop Pro.
 * Size: 259 × 353 pixels.

title: File:Dragon pass box cover.jpg