text:
Antipodes Subantarctic Islands tundra

The Antipodes Subantarctic Islands tundra ecoregion, within the tundra biome, includes five remote island groups in the Pacific Ocean south of New Zealand: the Bounty Islands, Auckland Islands, Antipodes Islands and Campbell Island groups of New Zealand, and Macquarie Island of Australia.

Location and description

The islands constituting this ecoregion share a long history of isolation, both from other landmasses and each other. The isolation, combined with harsh climates characterised by low temperatures, strong westerly winds and few hours of sunlight in winter, have resulted in the evolution of many endemic plants and animals, though species richness is relatively low. Wind speeds reach an average of 40 km/h while even in summer the thick cloud cover prevents much sunlight from penetrating. The Bounty Islands are small granite rocks (with a maximum height of 88 m), while the small Antipodes Islands group (maximum height 366 m), the largest group the Auckland Islands (705 m) and Campbell Island (569 m) are volcanic in origin. Macquarie Island (433 m) is the furthest south and the coldest. Where present, soils are mainly boggy peats, up to 8 m deep in flat areas. None of the islands are inhabited although there are ongoing research projects including a permanent base of the Australian Antarctic Division on Macquarie Island.

Flora
Vegetation may include low forests of Southern rātā in the more sheltered areas of the Aucklands and parts of Campbell Island, with tussock grassland, shrubland, herbfield, feldmark and cushion plants elsewhere. The islands represent a transition zone between the Antarctic to the south and temperate climates to the north. Individual species include many endemics, such as a Cyathea tree fern, which are not found any further south in the world, along with others that also occur in New Zealand and further north. Macquarie Island, being colder (average annual temperature 5 °C), does not sustain any wooded plants, while the small Bounty Islands lack soils and their flora is largely restricted to algae and lichens on the rocks. The islands are home to a number of rare plants, including a unique genus, the Auckland Island Pleurophyllum, and the only subantarctic orchids, Corybas dienemus and Corybas sulcatus of Macquarie Island.

Fauna
There are no native land mammals, nor amphibians or reptiles. Marine mammals include five breeding species of seal; the southern elephant seal, Australasian fur seal, subantarctic fur seal, Antarctic fur seal and the rare New Zealand sea lion, 95% of the world's population of which breed on the Auckland Islands.

There are also large numbers of breeding penguins and other seabirds, including almost half of the world's species of albatross, especially the world's only breeding colonies of the Antipodean albatross (Diomedea exulans antipodensis), southern royal albatross (Diomedea epomophora epomophora), Campbell albatross (Thalassarche impavida), white-capped albatross (Thalassarche steadi), and Salvin's albatross (Thalassarche salvini). The large colonies of Salvin's albatross on the Bounty Islands build nests of feathers as there is no vegetation to use. There are also isolated populations of land birds that have presumably settled here, having been blown off course by ocean winds. Many of these have since evolved into unique species, including two endemic parakeets on Antipodes Island; the Antipodes parakeet (Cyanoramphus unicolor) and Reischek's parakeet (Cyanoramphus hochstetteri).

Similarly, a high proportion of the Lepidoptera and other insects of the islands have evolved into unique endemic species.

A number of species have disappeared since the islands were discovered by humans, including the Macquarie Island rail and the Macquarie Island parakeet.

Threats and preservation
Although the islands have been partially occupied at various times the habitats remain largely unspoilt. However, introduced animals prey on native wildlife and graze on the plant cover while both mammals and seabirds are vulnerable to entanglement in deep-sea fishing equipment. Longline fishing for tuna and trawling for squid are particularly damaging.

Current predators on the islands include rats and cats which are being systematically removed while cautionary procedures have been implemented to prevent more alien species from establishing. All cats have now been removed from Macquarie Island and there appears to have been an immediate increase in some seabird populations. All of the islands are nature reserves, World Heritage Sites and (except for the Bounty Islands) a Centre of Plant Diversity. Permission to land must be obtained from the Department of Conservation (New Zealand) for the New Zealand islands and the Tasmania Parks and Wildlife Service for Macquarie.

title: Antipodes Subantarctic Islands tundra


text:
Orapa

Orapa is a town located in the Central District of Botswana. It is the site of the Orapa diamond mine, the largest diamond-producing mine in the world, and is considered to be the diamond capital of the country. Nearby is another kimberlite mine owned by Lucara Diamond, thought to have very large reserves of diamonds.

The town has four schools, one of which teaches in English, serving a community containing a high proportion of immigrants. The population in 1996 was approximately 10,000 which increased in the next 10 years and is still increasing due to mining output in line with development targets.

According to the 2022 Population and Household census, the population of Orapa stood at 8,648.

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

title: Orapa


text:
Norito

Norito (祝詞) are liturgical texts or ritual incantations in Shinto, usually addressed to a given kami.

History
The first written documentation of norito dates to 712 CE in the Kojiki and 720 CE in the Nihongi.

The Engishiki, a compilation of laws and minute regulation presented by the court compiled in 927 CE, preserves twenty-seven representative forms of norito.

Etymology
There is no single universally accepted theory to explain the meaning of the term. One theory derives norito from noru (宣る, 'to declare'; cf. the verbs inoru 'to pray' and norou 'to curse' ) - combined with the suffix -to. A variant term, notto, is derived from a combination of norito with koto, 'word'.

There are various known ways of writing the word in kanji: aside from 祝詞 (currently the standard), 詔戸言, 詔刀言, and 諄辞 are also attested.

One recent writer summed up the original meaning of norito as "a general term meaning magic by means of words."

Form and content
The Shinto religion did not produce any writings, particularly those that inferred from myths and legends, that would have constituted a religious theology except for the norito. (One should, however, note that the Kojiki and the Nihongi, while written primarily as historical works rather than sacred scriptures, do contain mythical narratives of the Shinto tradition.) These few prayers were primarily used in purification rituals and articulated gratitude towards the gods for the blessings of kami or to ask for climate change such as rain.

Norito is a form of a rhythmic poem recited to facilitate the transmission of posterity. The incantation would usually begin with praises for the supreme power of kami and concludes with an expression of respect and awe. The Nakatomi no Harae Kunge or the Exposition of the Ritual of Purification describes norito within a process that implies the idea of human beings as children of the kami who lost their purity but who return to their divine origin by restoring it.

Reading
Norito were (and still are) traditionally written in a variety of man'yōgana where particles and suffixes are written in a smaller script than the main body of the text. This style of writing, used in imperial edicts (宣命 senmyō) preserved in the Shoku Nihongi and other texts dating from the 8th century (Nara period), is known as senmyōgaki.

title: Norito


text:
Les Misérables (1998 film)

Les Misérables is a 1998 film adaptation of Victor Hugo's 1862 novel of the same name, directed by Bille August. It stars Liam Neeson, Geoffrey Rush, Uma Thurman, and Claire Danes. As in the original novel, the storyline follows the adult life of Jean Valjean (Neeson), an ex-convict pursued by police inspector Javert (Rush). It was filmed at Barrandov Studios in Prague, Czech Republic.

Plot
Jean Valjean, a man arrested for stealing food, is released after spending 19 years in a prison labour camp. When no one is willing to allow a convict to stay the night, Bishop Myriel kindly welcomes him into his home. Valjean explains to Myriel that sleeping in a real bed will make him a new man. In the night, Valjean, interrupted by Myriel while stealing his silverware, strikes him and flees. When the police arrest Valjean for stealing and drag him back to Myriel, Myriel tells them that the silverware was a gift and scolds Valjean for forgetting to take his candlesticks as well. Myriel then reminds Valjean that he is to become a new man.

Nine years later, Valjean is now a wealthy industrialist and a mayor. Fantine, a single mother working at one of Valjean's factories, is fired when her manager learns she has had a daughter out of wedlock. However, Valjean is preoccupied with the arrival of Inspector Javert, who previously served as a guard at the prison in which Valjean was held. Fantine, in desperate need of money to pay the extortionate demands of Mr. and Mrs. Thénardier for looking after her daughter Cosette turns to prostitution. Javert starts to suspect that the Mayor and Valjean are the same person. Fantine is attacked by some customers and when she retaliates, Javert beats and arrests her, planning on sending her to prison. Citing his authority to do so as mayor, Valjean insists on her release and she is let go.

Valjean nurses Fantine back to health, and promises her that she will have her daughter back. However, the Thénardiers continue to extort more money from Valjean and Fantine on the pretence of Fantine's daughter being ill. Later, Valjean receives word that another man is mistaken as being him and is about to be arrested. Valjean arrives at court where the man is being tried and reveals his identity that he is the real Valjean. Valjean then returns home and finds Fantine at death's door. Before she dies, Valjean promises Fantine that he will raise her daughter as his own. Javert arrives at Valjean's home to arrest both him and Fantine, But Fantine dies when Javert tells her she will be sent to prison. Angry and grieving, Valjean fights Javert and knocks him out, then flees the town. Valjean eventually finds and rescues Cosette from the Thénardiers, the corrupt innkeepers who were supposed to care for her, but are actually forcing her to be their servant. They care little for the girl, seeing her merely as a way to bring in money (going so far as to offer up Cosette as a child prostitute to the as-yet unrevealed Valjean). Both Valjean and Cosette finally make it to Paris where they start a new life together as father and daughter, cloistered within a religious convent.

Ten years later, they leave the convent, and Cosette, now nineteen years old, falls deeply in love with a revolutionist, Marius. Meanwhile, Javert is now undercover as an insurrectionist, trying to undermine the organization to which Marius belongs. During an attempt to finally arrest Valjean, Javert is captured by Marius and is brought to the barricades as a prisoner to be executed. Valjean journeys to the barricades himself when he learns how much Cosette and Marius love each other, intending to persuade Marius to return to Cosette. When the soldiers shoot and kill Gavroche, a young boy allied with the revolutionists, Valjean uses his influence with Marius to have Javert turned over to him, so that he himself can execute him. Valjean takes Javert to a back alley, but instead of killing him, sets him free. Marius gets shot and Valjean takes him down a sewer to bring him to safety. Javert catches them, but agrees to spare Marius. Valjean takes Marius back to his home, also saying goodbye to Cosette. When Valjean returns to Javert, Javert tells him that he is now unable to reconcile Valjean's criminal past with his current lawful existence and the great kindness, generosity, and goodness that Valjean has shown. Stating, "It's a pity the rules don't allow me to be merciful," Javert finally sets Valjean free, shackles himself, adding "I've tried to live my life without breaking a single rule," and throws himself into the Seine thus taking his own life. Valjean walks down the empty street, finally a free man, with a smile on his face.

Adaptation from the novel
The film changes the names of secondary characters and places to make them more readily understood by an English-speaking audience. Many details of the plot are faithfully reproduced, including the trial at Arras and the death of Gavroche, while entire segments of the plot are eliminated. As mayor, Valjean is aided by a junior police official more loyal to him than to Javert. The Thénardier family appears only when Valjean redeems Cosette. The Petit Gervais episode does not occur. Marius has no family background and leads the student revolt. Cosette is far more independent in the film, suggests leaving the cloister to experience the outside world, and challenges Valjean's control of her life. Valjean explains his past to her directly rather than through Marius. The film ends with Javert's suicide, eliminating the novel's extended denouement including the wedding and Valjean's death.

Critical reception
Les Misérables received generally positive reviews from critics. On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, the film holds an approval rating of 75% based on 44 reviews, with an average score of 6.9/10. The website's critical consensus reads, "This intelligent, handsomely crafted adaptation of Victor Hugo's classic novel condenses the story's developments without blunting its emotional impact." On Metacritic, the film received a score of 65 based on 24 reviews.

Box office
The film opened at number four in the US in its opening weekend with $5,011,840 behind He Got Game, City of Angels, and The Big Hit; the film grossed a US & Canadian total of $14,096,321.

title: Les Misérables (1998 film)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Divine Brown

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 01:28, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Divine Brown
POV, non-notable DEL Who 06:46, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * This seems to have been VfDed without actually ending up on the VfD page. I've added it now, although I'm neutral as to the article itself. -- Vardion 05:00, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

 * I've rewritten it to be more NPOV, but I don't know whether it should be kept. -- Vardion 01:56, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, verifiable, NPOV, of interest to large numbers of people, better as a separate article from Hugh Grant. Failing keep, merge with Hugh Grant. Kappa 06:26, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Good cleanup. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 07:00, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge with Hugh Grant. Not notable outside of that particular incident. Megan1967 07:04, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I thought that had happened already... [/rimshot] Kinitawowi 15:51, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect -- some people will remember her name when Mr.Grant is merely a footnote in fringe Brit-entertainment. --Simon Cursitor 07:47, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I suspect that for most people, however, it will be the other way around. Uncle G 17:32, 2005 May 23 (UTC)
 * keepe.Dunc|☺ 10:32, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect: Attendant fame redirects to the source of the fame. He had $50 hanging out the window, and she came to the car. (shrug)  So far as I know, she made one attempted porn afterward and was so bad in it that there was no more career for her.  Geogre 11:10, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Well-known incident in the 1990's. Capitalistroadster 11:28, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - she managed to work the incident into more than her 15 minutes. -- BD2412  talk  15:19, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
 * Keep - even the Germans know her name.I have a question: Is it allowed to upload her mugshot? MutterErde 15:31, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd say that would be a fair use of the image. -- BD2412  talk  18:40, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
 * OK, Thank you. I did it. Let´s wait and see :-) Greetings MutterErde 19:12, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Hugh Grant. Not notable on her own.  RickK 21:25, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect. -Sean Curtin 01:24, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge per the above. Radiant_* 11:03, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep***. Divine Brown is a part of history now and should stand as her own article.  People may want to research people like her and there isn't any other information available anywhere about her.  Just leave the article and allow updates.  You never know if she could become a government official or anything (everybody else does despite their pasts).  She also may become a vital part of Black History in the future.  PLEASE DON'T MERGE or DELETE!!!  User:pauldavies
 * The above is in reality User:209.240.205.62. RickK 20:47, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * 209.240.205.62, everything past your first sentence is a reason for deletion. If there "isn't any other information available anywhere about her", then this article would be unverifiable.  (Your claim is false, however.)  If she "could become a government official" or "a vital part of Black History", but hasn't done so yet, then she doesn't belong belong because Wikipedia is not a crystal ball.  Uncle G 17:32, 2005 May 23 (UTC)
 * Keep, she may not go down in history like Jezebel, but there will be people curious about her who want a little more information than can fairly be diverted on Hugh's page--Sherurcij 17:57, May 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Merger counterindicated because, in the Hugh Grant article, this level of detail about Brown would be clutter. JamesMLane 09:25, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Hugh Grant. Leanne 05:04, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Botolan

Botolan, officially the Municipality of Botolan, is a 1st class municipality in the province of Zambales, Philippines. According to the 2020 census, it has a population of 66,739 people.

The municipality was founded by Spanish Governor-General Juan de Salcedo in 1572. Botolan is known for its larger Aeta population, wide gray sand beaches, and as the location of Mount Pinatubo.

Etymology
The name Botolan came from the a native variety of banana common in the area called "Boto-an". The word "Boto-an" is a Sambal word which combines the word botol which means "seeds" and the locative prefix -an, referring to a place with many seeded bananas.

Geography
Located just south of the provincial capital of Iba, Botolan has the largest land area of the municipalities in Zambales.

Botolan is 7 km from Iba, 71 km from Olongapo, and 197 km from Manila.

Barangays
Botolan is politically subdivided into 31 barangays. Each barangay consists of puroks and some have sitios.

 * Bancal
 * Bangan
 * Batonlapoc
 * Belbel
 * Beneg
 * Binuclutan
 * Burgos
 * Cabatuan
 * Capayawan
 * Carael
 * Danacbunga
 * Maguisguis
 * Malomboy
 * Mambog
 * Moraza
 * Nacolcol
 * Owaog-Nibloc
 * Paco (poblacion)
 * Palis
 * Panan
 * Parel
 * Paudpod
 * Poonbato
 * Porac
 * San Isidro
 * San Juan
 * San Miguel
 * Santiago
 * Tampo (poblacion)
 * Taugtog
 * Villar

Demographics
In the 2020 census, the population of Botolan was 66,739 people, with a density of undefined PD/km2.

Elected officials
Municipal officials (2019-2022)
 * Mayor: Omar Ebdane
 * Vice Mayor: Doris Ladines

Tourism
The barangay of Binoclutan is the "Beach Capital" of Botolan, featuring several first class resorts. The area is a habitat of sea turtles, as is all of the Zambales coastline. Olive Ridley, Green turtles and Hawksbill turtles nest along the beaches of Botolan every year between September and January. A turtle hatchery located is located in Binoklutan. The area also has many other attractions, beach resorts, waterfalls, hiking paths, views of the lahar fields left by the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo, and views of Mount Pinatubo itself.

The Fiesta Poon Bato, held January 23–24, is a religious festival that attracts up to 500,000 devotees. Features include cultural dancing from local Aeta tribes in the town plaza on the first night.

The Domorokdok Festival, held May 3–4, includes street parades, street dancing, a beauty pageant and displays of Botolan products and industries.

Ina Poon Bato

The Ina Poón Bató is a purportedly miraculous, syncretised image of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Legend has it that before the arrival of the Spanish in the area sometime in the 17th century, local Aeta peoples had discovered a carved wooden statue on a large rock and began worshipping the image. On the arrival of Recollect missionaries in 1607, the natives associated the statue with the Roman Catholic depictions of the Virgin Mary, and the image was subsequently Christianised as Ina Poonbato (Our Lady of Poonbato). The original image was previously in the Recollect missionaries’ custody. During the Philippine Revolution, the Filipino revolutionaries took the image and enshrined it in an Aglipayan Church.

The Catholic image was canonically blessed by Pope John Paul II in 1985 at a ceremony in Vatican City. After the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo destroyed the original village of Poonbato, the patio image (which was found intact and buried chest-deep in lahar) and its shrine were moved to the nearby resettlement area of Loob-Bunga. The feast of Ina Poón Bató is celebrated every late January, with devotees flocking to the original image inside a chapel belonging to the Aglipayan Church, and the 1976 replica enshrined in the Catholic chapel.

title: Botolan


text: User talk:68.23.187.112

title: User talk:68.23.187.112


text:
Walpola Rahula Thero

Walpola Rahula Thero (9 May 1907–18 September 1997) was a Sri Lankan Buddhist monk, scholar and writer. In 1964, he became the Professor of History and Religions at Northwestern University, thus becoming the first bhikkhu to hold a professorial chair in the Western world. He also once held the position of Vice-Chancellor at the then Vidyodaya University (currently known as the University of Sri Jayewardenepura). He has written extensively about Buddhism in English, French and Sinhala. He wrote the book What the Buddha Taught about Theravada Buddhism.

Biography
He was born on 9 May 1907 at Walpola, a small village in the Galle district of southern Sri Lanka. At thirteen, he entered the Sangha. His education covered Sinhala, Pali, Sanskrit, Buddhism, history and philosophy. He studied at the Vidyalankara Pirivena and at the University of Ceylon, where he associated with E. F. C. Ludowyk, G.P Malalasekera, E. W. Adikaram and other scholars. After his period at the Sorbonne, he became Vice-Chancellor of Vidyodaya University. He was noted not only for his erudition but also for his strong socialist views, as well as his belief that monks have a duty to play a role in guiding the political consciousness of the people. His book Bhikshuvakage Urumaya (Heritage of the Bhikkhu) was a strong voice in the Buddhist Nationalist movement that led to the 1956 electoral victory of Solomon Bandaranaike. He left Vidyodaya University in 1969, due to political differences with the government of the day. Thereafter, he returned to the West and worked in many academic institutions in Europe. He returned to Sri Lanka during his last days, and lived in the temple near the New Parliament in Kotte, until his death.

Academic career
Rahula Thero attended Ceylon university (now known as the University of Peradeniya). He obtained a B.A. Honours degree (London), and then earned a Doctorate of Philosophy, having written a thesis on the History of Buddhism in Sri Lanka (Ceylon). Then he went on to study Indian Philosophy at Calcutta University and later studied Mahayana at the Sorbonne. It was during his time at the Sorbonne in the late 1950s that he produced What the Buddha Taught, a widely read and highly influential introductory text on Buddhism, for which he is best known.

Walpola Rahula Thero is the first Buddhist monk to become a professor in a Western University. When he became Professor of History and Literature of Religions there were no Theravada Temples in the United States. He later became a Professor Emeritus at the same university. Rahula also held positions at several other American Universities. He was a visiting lecturer at Swarthmore College and Regents Lecturer at UCLA. He became Vice-Chancellor of Vidyoda University (now Sri Jayawardhanapura University) in 1964. He was later instrumental in encouraging the formation of the first Theravada temple in the United States, the Washington Buddhist Vihara, located in Washington, D.C.

Titles
Rahula Thero was awarded several titles during his lifetime. The highest honorary title, Tripitakavagisvaracarya (Supreme Master of Buddhist Scriptures), was given him by Sri Kalyapi Samagri Sangha-sabha (the Chapter of the Sangha in Sri Lanka) in 1965, with the qualification Sri (Gracious), a title held by only two or three scholars in Sri Lanka. He was also awarded the title "Aggamaha Panditha" from Burma.

Publications
Rahula Thero wrote extensively about Theravada Buddhism. Apart from his world-renowned book What the Buddha Taught, he published an enormous number of papers on Buddhism. Notable books written by him include, History of Buddhism in Ceylon, Heritage of the Bhikkhu, Zen and the Taming of the Bull and Le Compendium de la Super Doctrine (French).

title: Walpola Rahula Thero


text: Category:Jewish Dutch history

title: Category:Jewish Dutch history


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/"The Day Mobotropolis Fell."

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. – ABCD 23:11, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"The Day Mobotropolis Fell."
On befalf of SatAM fans everywhere, I request that you keep this page. Reason to keep this page: http://www.satamsonic.com/forum2/index.php?act=ST&f=29&t=6043
 * Delete It is an unofficial fan made movie. NN.Lectonar 06:55, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - make the movie more popular first, and then the fans can add it to Wikipedia's base of knowledge.   — Rickyrab | Talk 07:06, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I was originally going to VfD this myself, but hesitated. Now that it has already been VfD'd, I can vote "delete" because it's non-notable fancruft.   — J I P | Talk 07:28, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, fancruft. Megan1967 09:00, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Made by editing the cartoon? Yeesh. --Calton | Talk 10:35, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. because this is not even fancruft. Fancruft is at least of interest to fans. Sjakkalle 12:54, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually I think this fits the orginal definition of fancruft, before it underwent semantic drift. Kappa 14:53, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep- This film is especially notable being that it has kept the series alive for many fans.
 * The above unsigned comment is from, whose only other contribution to date has been to vandalize another VFD discussion page. Uncle G 02:44, 2005 Apr 16 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable Dsmdgold 01:33, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Unsigned comment by User:24.4.106.240, whose only contributions are on articles and VfD's about unofficial fan movies about Sonic the Hedgehog.   — J I P | Talk 03:50, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete Non-notable, vanity, advertisement. --InShaneee 18:51, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Ben Hartsock

Benjamin Richard Hartsock (born July 5, 1980) is an American former professional football player who was a tight end in the National Football League (NFL). He played college football for the Ohio State Buckeyes and was selected by the Indianapolis Colts in the third round of the 2004 NFL Draft.

Hartsock also played in the NFL for the Tennessee Titans, Atlanta Falcons, New York Jets, and Carolina Panthers during his NFL career. Since retiring he has worked as a color analyst for pro and college football on Fox Sports Radio and ESPN Radio.

Early life
Hartsock attended Unioto High School in Chillicothe, Ohio, where he caught 86 passes for 1562 yards (18.16 yards reception). He also played running back, placekicker, and linebacker. Hartsock recorded 61 tackles, and 19 quarterback sacks during his senior season, after switching from linebacker to defensive end. Hartsock was a three-year captain and four-year letter winner. Hartsock committed to play at Ohio State University during his senior year of high school.

College career
Hartsock attended the Ohio State University, where he played tight end. He was a three-time Academic All-Big Ten Conference honoree and won CoSIDA Academic All-American honors as a junior.

During his college career, Hartsock started 31 of 51 games played and had 58 receptions for 519 yards (8.9 yards per reception). Hartsock recorded 33 catches for 290 yards and 2 touchdowns) in his senior year. As a junior, he was a contributor for the 2002 Ohio State Buckeyes football team, which that defeated the Miami Hurricanes in the Fiesta Bowl, winning the BCS National Championship.

Indianapolis Colts
Hartsock was drafted in the third round with the 68th overall pick of the 2004 NFL Draft by the Indianapolis Colts. He was a reserve tight end in his time with the Colts, playing behind Marcus Pollard and Dallas Clark.

Tennessee Titans
In 2006, Hartsock signed with the Colts' division rival, the Tennessee Titans. He started 12 games, compiling 206 yards receiving in two years at tight end for Tennessee. The Titans lost Hartsock to unrestricted free agency in March 2008.

Atlanta Falcons
On March 2, 2008, the Atlanta Falcons came to an agreement with Hartsock. He was released on September 1, 2009.

New York Jets
Hartsock was signed by the New York Jets on September 2, 2009 to a one-year $1.2 million contract. Hartsock recorded his first career touchdown on a two-yard pass from Jets quarterback Mark Sanchez against his former team, the Tennessee Titans, in September 2009.

Hartsock was re-signed by the team to a two-year contract in March 2010. On March 2, 2011, Hartsock was released by the Jets after spending the past two seasons with the team primarily as a blocker.

Carolina Panthers
Hartsock signed a two-year contract with the Carolina Panthers on July 27, 2011.

New England Patriots
On August 10, 2014, Hartsock was signed by the New England Patriots. He was released just four days later, on August 14.

Personal life
Hartsock is a Christian. He married his high school sweetheart, Amy Lykowski, in 2003, and they have two daughters, Whitney and Lindsey.

title: Ben Hartsock


text:
Ruben Torres (Filipino politician)

Ruben Deloso Torres (born September 10, 1941) is a politician in the Philippines. He goes by the nom de guerre "Kadre" which he was known as a leftist during martial law period.

Life
Torres was known as a student activist, then a leftist leader during and after martial law.

Under President Corazon Aquino, he served as an undersecretary in the Department of Labor and Employment from 1989 to 1990. Afterwards he was promoted to full secretary, serving from 1990 to 1992. Under the next president, Fidel V. Ramos, he worked as executive secretary (colloquially known as the Little President) from 1995 to 1998. He was instrumental in brokering a peace accord with the Muslim rebels in Mindanao. Torres ran for a Senate seat in the 1992 and 1998, under the banner of Lakas–CMD and Laban ng Makabayang Masang Pilipino, respectively, but lost.

He later served as Congressman of the 2nd District of Zambales from 2001 to 2004 in the House of Representatives. He is currently the president of the Trade Union Congress of the Philippines and a columnist at The Manila Times.

Autobiography
Torres was portrayed by Cesar Montano in the 1997 movie Kadre.

title: Ruben Torres (Filipino politician)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Hartsock

Ben Hartsock
vanity, non-notable Who 06:58, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, wannna be professional football player, not yet drafted --nixie 07:14, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I have reformatted the page to make it look better, but I see no notability. Sjakkalle 07:16, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sonic the Hedgehog The Movie: The Doomsday Project

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. – ABCD 22:39, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sonic the Hedgehog The Movie: The Doomsday Project
Another unofficial Sonic movie, un-encyclopedic, delete--nixie 07:01, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) Keep This film is canon; it was taken from a TV series and has NOT been altered from the fictional universe. It is up here for the fans.
 * Delete; see above Lectonar 07:30, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable fancruft.   — J I P | Talk 07:31, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, fancruft. Megan1967 09:00, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Like she said. --Calton | Talk 10:34, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, fancruft.--Bucephalus talk to me  11:18, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non-canonical Starblind
 * Delete NN K1Bond007 19:17, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - fancruft --Anonymous Cow 20:31, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * See also: Roboticizer. Delete all.  RickK 23:24, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is certainly worth keeping given that it's an important part of an established fictional universe.
 * The above comment is by, who vandalized this discussion page. I've reverted. Uncle G 02:41, 2005 Apr 16 (UTC)
 * Comment: also, according to the article, it is fan-made and unofficial, and thus not part of an established fictional universe. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 14:58, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I am a SatAM fan that just came to this page. Please keep it! What will it take to keep this page?

Yes, please keep it! I'll even start a petition if you need it. We were denied a third season! Please don't take this away from us!

There is no reason to remove this page when taking into account the fact that the "Mobius" page has a fan-made map of Mobius. This movie is not "fan-made." It is simply all the episodes of an entire story arc that took place during the series' run and in that order.

 * these unsigned votes are all from user:24.4.106.240

 * Delete. If socks want to keep it, it should go! P Ingerson 20:29, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC

Seriously, if the Mobius page can include a fan-made map of the planet then what's wrong with this here?

What would it take to keep this page on Wikipedia?
 * unsigned comments again from user:24.4.106.240

 * Well, if you really want to keep the material, maybe you could merge it into the Sonic the Hedgehog (TV series) article, or create a proper Sonic the Hedgehog (SatAM) episode guide and use the information there. P Ingerson 20:47, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Talk:Parlement

actes or arrêts?
A recent anon edit changed actes de réglement to arrêts de réglement. Is this correct in the context where it is used? I believe both terms exist, and I thought the correct one was there, and there is no citation or edit summary. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:01, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * I confirm. Arrêt de réglement is the correct term. Do a Google search with "arrêt de réglement", and you'll see several authentical documents from the 17th and 18th centuries containing the term. Hardouin 10:55, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * http://ledroitcriminel.free.fr/dictionnaire/lettre_a/lettre_a_arm.htm as retrieved on May 21, 2005 looks like a fairly good citation on this.

Savoy?
Why is Savoy listed here? It was not part of ancien régime France. —Preceding unsigned comment added by John Kenney (talk • contribs) 18:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

parliament
The term "Parliament of Paris" appears twice, and "parliament" and "parliamentary" also appear. Should these actually say "parlement"?  Randall Bart    Talk   16:53, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I would think so. I don't feel expert enough to assert absolutely that "parliament" is wrong, but it does seem unnecessarily confusing. Parlement (the French ancient regime judicial institution) is certainly not equivalent to the Westminster legislative assembly, and transliteration from French to English can only be confusing. BruceW07 (talk) 00:53, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

The word "parliament" is still there today. --Clifford Mill (talk) 14:17, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Math error
"In 1789 there were 13 parlements, ... Each was composed of a dozen or more appellate judges, or about 1,100 nationwide." But 13 * 12 = 156, not 1,100. To get 1,100 each court would have to have 84 judges, which is 7 dozen; nothing like "a dozen or more" which in English means something considerably under 24. I hope someone who knows more about this, can correct the phrase to "several dozen" or verify my math. Thanks, Nick Beeson (talk) 13:18, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

 * I would guess that in this case "dozen or more" means "from 12 to infinity"... But we need a source anyway. Thus I'll undo your change and add the tags... --Martynas Patasius (talk) 23:26, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Needed re "conseil"
The terms "conseil souverain" and "conseil provincial" need to be defined and distinguished from "regular" parlements.

"Sovereign Court of Lorraine and Barrois" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Sovereign Court of Lorraine and Barrois. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed,Rosguill talk 17:26, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Move to singular term
Hello all- I am renaming the article to the singular term, which is how entry terms are listed in reference works. See WP:SINGULAR. Eric talk 18:38, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Parlement


text:
Talk:Harvard Kennedy School

Rehnquist
Did William Rehnquist attend the school? His wikipedia page says he attained a master's degree in government, so I guess he went to the JFK School of Government. --Harro5 07:04, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Why is Bill O'Reilly included in the list of notable alumni. I would agree he is notable but he is nowhere near as notable as all the other heads of state lited along with him

Bill O'Reilly and Katherine Harris should be listed under the notorious category. But that would be contrary to the NPOV principle.

--User: JerDW

Why is the Ph.D. program listed as tops in International Relations. The rankings referred to the government department proper, while the masters rankings refered to the KSG?
 * I have not read the article, but I suspect you are right. Generally, Harvard's Dept. of Government is the top-rated Ph.D. program.  This program lives in GSAS, not KSG. Rlove 05:14, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I have deleted the mention of the Foreign Policy poll, as I believe the citation is misleading. The previous text referred to a "PhD program in Foreign Policy", but KSG has no such program (it's PhD programs are in "Public Policy"). Moreover, the Foreign Policy poll was for PhD programs in International Relations. As noted above, the PhD program in International Relations is administered by the Department of Government, in so far as it allows doctoral students to choose International Relations as their focus field of study. The Foreign Policy poll also ranks master's degree programs in international relations (Harvard ranks fourth I believe), but it is unclear whether this refers to programs offered by KSG or the Department of Government. Indeed, whether the editors or respondents had a specific program in mind is an open question. --User: Beige-DC

I have deleted the ranking comparison to Maxwell as these rankings change often and can be misleading.

Joshua Frydenberg
Upon reading the article on Frydenberg, it's fairly clear that the reference to him in this article keeps getting deleted because he is not an alumnus until he actually earns his degree (which according to his page, he is still in the process of doing). In other words, wait until he graduates to add him back in, please. ScreaminEagle 22:16, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Clare O'Neil
See above (Frydenberg) for same explanation. She can be added again once she actually receives her degree. ScreaminEagle 02:47, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Orientation Sessions for Incoming US Congressmen
The school has run orientation seminars for incoming "freshman" U.S. congressmen since at leas the mid 1970s. There was an interruption in 1994 with the Gingrich led "Republican Revolution" and "Contract with America". I recall learning at the time the reason having been that the Republicans who went through the seminars at the school found them to be liberally biased. I wasn't able to find enough reliable sources to add this yet, but some of the data is here and here. What is missing from those is 1) why the Republicans denied the school the opportunity to run the seminars and 2) when and why they moved back. GRBerry 02:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The Kennedy School has hired some quite notable republicans. In terms of orientation most of the seminars are fairly straight-forward -- how to read a report from the Congressional budget office. What skills are needed for staffers. What are the problems with Federal workforce. What are the processes in Congress. How Congress differs from various state houses. It is almost an employee orientation for the most powerful people in the world. It is not partisan. The republicans ran their own one year, and then joined the KSG program the next year. Ljean

KSG Degree Programs
Yes, KENNEDY SCHOOL DOES HAVE A HIGHLY RANKED DOCTORATE IN PUBLIC POLICY  in addition to, count them, three other doctoral programs. "The Ph.D. in Public Policy is administered jointly by the Kennedy School (KSG) and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (GSAS)." which means you are addmitted to KSG by KSG faculty, take KSG & GSAS classes, and must have GSAS faculty on the doctoral committee. http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/ksgdoctoral/

KSG also offers a Master in Public Administration/International Development (M.P.A./ID). Another program worthy of inclusion.

The degrees that one can receive from KSG are facts, and it should be possible to add these obvious, basic, verifiable facts. Ljean

Split article: list of prominent alumni
The list of alumni is very long, probably too long to be part of this same article. It would be better to create a new separate article to list all the prominent alumni, move all the listed people from this article, and create an interwiki link between the two. There may also be the possibility of keeping a few very select names on the main article, however, to do that we would need some clear criteria. Any ideas? (talk) user:Al83tito 10:54, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

 * It is clear from the existing list that it is a to include a combination of notable alumni who never completed their degree, who did an Executive degree, who did postdoctoral work or some other combination of alumni status. Notability criteria also varies. If the individual has an page that has not been contested on Wikipedia that would seem to qualify? Which then leaves the only important element being what do we define as an alumni? Does someone who attended but never completed a degree count? Would Harvard claim Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg as alumni? Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk)

 * Also, recommend the editor who removed someone b/c his degree was a JD, take the time to read the page at Fernando_Martín_García -- it says individual received both a JD from Harvard and a MPP from the Kennedy School. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 09:48, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

 * We do need a clear criteria, possibly a split article.

Reverted edits by User:JesseRafe

Why:

Choice of what is "notable" was arbitrary. For example, editor kept:

 * Marilinda Garcia (MPA '10) - member of the New Hampshire House of Representatives

Yet deleted:

 * Fernando Martín García (JD '75) - Puerto Rican politician and former Senator

For example editor kept:

 * Timothy S. Sullivan - U.S. Coast Guard Rear Admiral

(no graduation date sourced)

Yet deleted:

 * Rowayne A. "Wayne" Schatz Jr. (MPP '85) - U.S. Air Force Major General

... need more information why certain items need to be removed. Are they not notable, not alumni, or some other reason? Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 07:51, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Mason program
I feel that the Mason program could use some additional information, as it is an important component of the Mid Career MPA program at HKS. I made it a new paragraph and added a brief description that can be fleshed out more.ZR312 (talk) 14:53, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Alumni
If someone did not graduate from the JFK School of Government, they are not an alumnus. It's pretty simple, Benutzernamen. There's no basis for changing that to include random people who did not graduate from the school in the section for alumni. Furthermore, as in ALL lists of notable people on Wikipedia, they established criteria is that they are a blue link or have a citation for their notability. Otherwise they don't belong here, they're prima facie non-notable. If they have a JD from Harvard, then add them to the Harvard Law School notable alumni list, they are irrelevant here. Really can't imagine the problem you have this. JesseRafe (talk) 17:45, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

 * JesseRafel, please re-read my question to you - your criteria for edits is capricious. You did not remove someone who had absolutely no degree year listed, yet you removed others. Why?

 * Furthermore you seem to think it is okay to have someone do the ExecEd program but not the Post-Doctoral program, why?

 * Lastly, you removed someone because you said "the JD means they clearly didn't go to the school" when in fact the page for that person said they did both a JD and an MPP, potentially as part of a joint program. So again, your edits are capricious.

 * At this point we are now running-up against Wikipedia's "rule of 3" which means you need to stop reverting and we need to discuss a solution together. If you want to label, "needs more references" for this part -- that makes sense. Or if you want to discuss a proposal for what should vs. should not be included in alumni, ExecEd? Post-Docs? Joint degree programs like the JD/MPP example? that's another path. However please do not keep on reverting edits, as that is against Wikipedia's Rule of 3. Please discuss. Thank you, going to bed for now. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 18:13, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Proposal Towards A Compromise
1. Mark the alumni section as needing references. Allow contributors time to provide references, at the end of which, remove those alumni who lack references.

2. Notability criteria: If they have a Wikipedia page that is not being contested as notable. Easy.

3. Keep as alumni: MPP, MPA, ExecEd, Post-Doctoral work, and Joint Degrees as long as one of the joint degrees were one of the other mentioned degrees.

4. Remove: Lacking a Wikipedia page. If they really are notable, one should be started. Also remove those who didn't complete a degree. Or had a degree but had it later revoked.

5. If list is too long, consider a separate page. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 18:30, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

 * Or: Keep it as it is, and if you have anyone who needs to be added, add them WITH the appropriate citation. Your strong feelings about this matter make me strongly suspect a COI on your behalf for one of the names I've correctly removed. Further, post-docs and ExecEds are NOT alumni, and JD does not stand for Joint Degree, but Juris Doctorate means they went to the law school. Everything else you've said is irrelevant and three weeks? No. If they don't belong on the list, they don't belong on the list. If they do belong on the list, prove it. With a reference or a bluelink. JesseRafe (talk) 18:39, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

 * JesseRafe, I am trying to compromise with you in good faith. They could have done a Joint Degree as an MPP/JD. Remember Wikipedia is "Assume Good Faith" and your efforts do not seem to be working to a compromise. You just broke the Rule of 3. Reverting your edit as that is vandalism as you have not discussed the criteria. Again, see my question why are you keeping some folks who do not have their degree type or year even listed? Someone might say you have a grudge against someone here. I won't. Instead, let's work on the consensus here. What about the above differs from your logic? Do you include or not include ExecEd or Post-Docs or Joint Degrees? Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 18:49, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

 * JesseRafe, please work towards Dispute resolution -- I have asked for your criteria for deletes as you are being inconsistent. You have not responded. Please see Dispute resolution Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 00:33, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

 * I have not been inconsistent in the slightest, people who did not graduate from this school or are not notable do not belong on a list of "notable alumni", that's the end of the story. This isn't about you or your personal reasons for including one of these people whom you've added to this list (And done NOTHING ELSE on Wikipedia, but about the standards of the encyclopedia, not your random additions. JesseRafe (talk) 00:48, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

 * Request for mediation has been filed. You did not remove Ed Balls, no degree noted. You did not remove John R. Allen, Jr., Exec degree. You did not remove Andrey Bezrukov , degree stripped. You are inconsistent. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 01:11, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

 * Further, not all universities do the definition you have of must have graduated to be an alumni. Other schools count as alumni students. Wikipedia's own definition of Alumni has this. Again, you need to explain your criteria and we need to reach consensus. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 01:11, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

All for removing individuals who do not have notable blue link articles
JesseRafe, I'm not going to type too much other than to say if you saw my efforts towards a Compromise in this text page I have always been for removing non-notable, non-blue link individuals. I was pointing out your original edits removed some non-linked but didn't remove others that were non-linked. I asked why? Could you explain your criteria and that you were being inconsistent?

You didn't explain. So then I tried to work out here your criteria. I asked if Exec Ed would be included or not, you kept on saying alumni would have to have graduated. I tried to share the definition of alumni to point out they didn't have to have graduated to be considered one. You didn't seem to want to engage in that discussion. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 13:57, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

After the mediation request I requested failed, you again made edits that were inconsistent. You removed some Exec Ed graduates but not all. All I have been asking for throughout this is what is your criteria and can you be consistent? Look at the Proposal Towards a Compromise lines 2 and 4, I've always been for:

 * Notability criteria: If they have a Wikipedia page that is not being contested as notable.
 * Remove: Lacking a Wikipedia page. If they really are notable, one should be started.

Thank you. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 13:58, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your 3rd Opinion
Thank you Stfg for your prompt and well researched 3rd Opinion. Apologies on my end for any grammar or typo mistakes I may have made with alumni vs. alumnus or linking to Wiktionary, very helpful to learn the right format.

Agree that while graduates are included, non-graduates are not excluded: any former pupil can legitimately be regarded as an alumnus.

So we circle back to my original attempts to build a compromise criteria for what is kept and what is removed from this article based on the criteria, one might suggest the only real key is:

 * 1) Notability criteria: If they have a Wikipedia page that is not being contested as notable.
 * 2) Keep as alumni: those who did MPP, MPA, ExecEd, Post-Doctoral work, and Joint Degrees at the Kennedy School as long as one of the joint degrees were one of the other mentioned degrees.
 * 3) Remove: Lacking a Wikipedia page. If they really are notable, one should be started.

Open to feedback from anyone? Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 13:42, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

 * How many times do you have to be told Post Docs are not and never have been considered students? They're paid research positions. Also Joint Degrees are irrelevant, if they have an MPA then they have an MPA, whether it comes with an MA, PhD, or JD is irrelevant. Any degree from HKS puts them on the list, Arts and Science or Law degrees are moot. Lastly you don't get to make up your own notability criteria, if they are notable a citation is often enough to override their lack of a blue link. JesseRafe (talk) 13:50, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

 * JesseRafe, this is again where you seem to feel like it is okay to talk down to me. We just asked for a third opinion which, while not binding, raised the same case I did which is alumni do not necessarily have to have graduated. So my question remains, do ExecEd count? Stanford University thinks Post-Docs count as students too. I was asking about Joint Degrees because some note MPA/MBA you cannot get an MBA at the Kennedy School. I wanted to clarify if you think listing the /MBA at the end of the MPA/MBA is okay so we aren't edit warring. I am try to work to a clear criteria. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 14:03, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

 * Update: Recommend that per Executive Education it is apparent that Harvard considers their executive education attendees to be alumni. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 14:22, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

 * And of course I know about the notability. Again, your original edits did not remove some that did not have blue links which is why I said that. You don't have to talk down to me. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 14:03, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

 * You're either making things up or being willfully ignorant. ExecEds were never an issue, don't make things, that's why I didn't remove them. I don't know what kind of degree it is, but I assumed it was what they called their part-time program, like an "executive MBA".
 * Obviously you didn't read what I said about nobility (I get the impression you don't read a lot) I never said blue links were the sine qua non of notability, I said they're sufficient, but in many cases a citation is enough to establish notability. Hmm, maybe that's why I didn't remove people who were cited.
 * As for post docs, Stanford does not consider them students, but allows them to maintain a student status for loan deferment purposes, and even if they did consider them a student, how would this be relevant to Harvard, an institution, like the other 99% incidentally, that doesn't consider them students? It's a paid position. Everywhere. When you get paid for the work you do rather than pay the school or take classes, that's called a job. JesseRafe (talk) 14:56, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

 * Hello JesseRafe. Thank you for acknowledging that Exec Eds are okay. The next question as we work on a criteria for what is included are individuals who start but do not finish a degree, are they alumni? Do you consider them to be alumni or do we need to seek more opinions?

 * Also, a slightly related category is do you consider individuals who receive their degree at the Kennedy School of Government but later have it revoked to be alumni? Thank you. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 21:30, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

 * Also question for clarity, should we list joint degrees received outside of the Kennedy School of Government, such as MBA or JD, or just the degree sought while at the Kennedy School of Government? Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 21:32, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

 * From what I recall only one person who had their degree taken away was not notable, so that point seems moot unless you want to start adding non-notables again. Everything else I don't care. JesseRafe (talk) 21:50, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

 * JesseRafe, please refrain from personal attacks as we try to work to clarity as to what should be included. Andrew Card is notable and was listed as not completing his degree, alumni or not alumni? Bruce Kovner, after some research online, also did not complete his degree at the Kennedy School = alumni or not alumni? Thank you. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 13:27, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Not alumni by Harvard's own definition. Alumni must have completed degrees. And postdoc tracks are not degree-seeking and therefore don't meet their "alumni" criteria. I think this is a closed case. Wish I saw this before spending so much time on the RfC. Eye close font awesome.svg czar ⨹   14:18, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

 * With all respect Czar, it is not a closed case, else there would not exist List of Harvard University non-graduate alumni. Even Alumni in Wikipedia mentioned they do not always include those who just graduated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_University#Notable_alumni includes Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerburg as notable alumni of Harvard University so there seem to be some alternative views as to what constitutes an alumni. I am not a native English speaker so I am open to other references if there are some? Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 16:33, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

 * http://www.nationalpostdoc.org/policy-22/what-is-a-postdoc lists the Postdocs Community as Graduate Students.
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postdoctoral_research#United_States references students twice.
 * http://www.webguru.neu.edu/professionalism/research-team/postdoctoral-students references them as students
 * http://postdocs.stanford.edu/handbook/status.html references them as students.
 * These links are the top 4 hits on Google if you type in "are postdocs students". Recognizing they blur the lines between faculty and students, the bigger question with the dispute is should they be listed as alumni if we're including as a alumni individuals who attended the School but did not graduate? I would submit they are researching under the mentoring of a senior Faculty Advisor. Thank you. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 16:33, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Post docs are not students that is the end of the discussion on that. Czar is 100% correct and it is a closed case. Also, please stop staying random "please refrain from personal attacks", you've been accusing me of all sorts of shit in your edit summaries from the beginning, accusing me of being capricious, etc. or not willing to discuss things when I have responded on Talk pages multiple times (and you've since deleted them) and your words for me are just as well applying to you. It's boring and under-handed.
 * There are multiple reasons why a Postdoc would be listed as student, but they do not take classes and they do not pay tuition, they are PAID researchers. End of story, how many times must this be explained? You ignore facts that don't fit your pre-formed narrative. I already said that Stanford's reasoning EXPLICITLY states that they treat postdocs as students merely so they can defer capitalization of the interest on their student loans. If you don't understand that process, that ask it to be explained. But that does not make them actually students, nor is it something that'd be listed as "Education" on someone's CV, it'd be experience. Because it's a JOB. JesseRafe (talk) 18:08, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Simply arguing it is so JesseRafe doesn't make it so, do you have references that can help? That is why I provided those 4 above. Most would look at your tone and see that you are making this personal instead of discussing facts. I am open to it going either way, and just trying to work towards consensus. Thank you. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 19:58, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * This is ridiculous, as I said twice already the sources you yourself provided explicitly state that they are considered students solely for financial reasons, it is an incentive Stanford offers to do their postdocs a financial favor. That's in YOUR source, I don't have to prove your point for you, do your own research. The onus is on you to prove the nonsense claim, the status quo is they are not students, you're the only person who knows what a postdoc is (or maybe you don't) who thinks that they are students, so it's your responsibility to prove it. JesseRafe (talk) 02:33, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
 * JesseRafe, this source: http://www.nationalpostdoc.org/policy-22/what-is-a-postdoc lists the Postdocs Community as Graduate Students. It makes no mention re: reimbursement purposes. This is the top Google link for searching for are postdocs students. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postdoctoral_research#United_States references students twice. This link http://www.webguru.neu.edu/professionalism/research-team/postdoctoral-students refers to them as references them as students. These three do not discuss financial reasons. The third link explicitly says: the majority of postdoctoral students spend most of their time working on one or more research projects with a strong interest in bringing their projects to full fruition - presenting and publishing as much of their work as possible in the highest quality technical journals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk • contribs) 13:48, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what you've been reading, but it is clearly not those links you've provided twice and twice have been told they are moot. The first, clearly draws a distinction between the two, hence the two headings on the sidebar, "graduate students" and "postdocs" and the postdoc tab is full of information about retirement, maternity leave and salary - these are the trappings of a JOB. The second, the wiki article NOWHERE states that they are students. There is a mention of "doctoral students as well as postdocs" which unambiguously demonstrates they are separate categories, and there is a separate tangent about PhD students in general (PhD students by definition do not have a PhD (or at least not yet the one they are working on) that leads to the article's larger point about being a PhD grad (and then maybe a student). There is ZERO mention of "Postdocs are graduate students". They are graduates, that's why it's "post". The third link, with a name like "web guru" would get immediately slapped with a tag, because it in no way resembles a bona fide resource. They couldn't even spell a simple plural or create a verb phrase correctly, e.g. "Ph.D.'s" and "perceived of as a prerequisite", plus, it in general looks like a homemade website. A distinct geocities vibe. Worthless source as far as I can tell. If you have to reach this far to prove a tenuous point (why, might I ask? You know you're wrong, what are you trying to prove?), it's clearly not going to pass muster. JesseRafe (talk) 20:02, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Definition of Alumni
Wikipedia's own definition of Alumni is worth reading as we work on a compromise. It notes that commonly, not always, does an alumni mean the individual graduated. Alumnus in the English definition of Wikitionary notes that it can be a 1. a student or 2. a graduate. Graduation doesn't have to have occurred. Also it can be male or female, or male only. I assume in this case we mean both male and female. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 19:00, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

http://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/alumnus#English — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
 * ,, I don't see a good reason why I shouldn't block the both of you for edit warring: you two are, as suggested by the history of the article, embarrassing yourselves. I'm going to apply full protection to the article for a week (no doubt it's the wrong version, but that's how it is) and then you two can figure out a way to agree. Consider Third opinion or the Dispute resolution noticeboard. Drmies (talk) 06:13, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * So you willfully acknowledge this current version you protected is wrong? That's what's wrong with Wikipedia over the years, admins don't care about substantive issues, only protocols. Note that Benutz... has made NO OTHER EDITS ever in their history and only made an account to include non-notables who don't belong, and I have plead to other admins on the boards and none have cared that this user is a sockpuppet or an obvious COI case, and is undermining the integrity of Wikipedia with their flaunting. JesseRafe (talk) 06:17, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Further "agreement" is a sham when the other party isn't an actual editor, just created an account to futz about with this article, nothing else. Can a scientist and an imbecile "agree" about global warming when one has facts and the other is just spouting nonsense? Not a valid criterion in every dispute. JesseRafe (talk) 06:20, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Jesse, if you can't understand that there's two sides to every coin you'll never be trusted with real currency. It's always the wrong version for somebody--in this case, it's you. See WRONGVERSION. If you have suspicions about this editor, go to ANI or SPI or some other board and have the matter investigated. If you have, well, maybe there is not enough evidence to block this editor as disruptive or whatever. Also, I don't see any non-notables on the list right now (they all seem to be blue links), so it is not immediately clear to me that your opponent is a vandal, for instance. Drmies (talk) 06:31, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * JesseRafe, remember Wikipedia is about assume good intent. You seem to now be labeling me as not having a NPOV or being a sockpuppet solely because I disagree with you, when I have tried the Wikipedia approach to build consensus and |request for mediation. If you could spell out your criteria for why you're moving certain things and not others we could work towards consensus as opposed to you throwing mud my way.

 * For example: You did not remove Ed Balls, no degree noted. You did not remove John R. Allen, Jr., Exec degree. You did not remove Andrey Bezrukov, degree stripped. You are inconsistent in what you claim is an Alumni. Wikipedia's own definition of alumni says it does not necessarily have to be someone who graduated.

 * Case in point: Harvard_University lists Bill Gates as a notable alumni, yet Bill Gates did not complete his degree. Do you have a reply for this? Are you going to start revising that article next?

 * ... then when I work to try and do the article consistent your logic, if you're not happy with it instead of edits of your own your solution is to revert the work?

 * My question remains: what is a consistent definition of alumni. Harvard_University lists Mark Zuckerberg as a notable alumni, also did not complete his degree. I have tried to engage you in discussing this, you don't seem to be open to discussion. Wish we could work towards consensus together. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 06:26, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * This is exactly what I'm talking about. Who cares about Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg? Did they go to Kennedy? If so, add them, if not, who cares? All I did was remove non-notables and this editor has done nothing but undo my solid edits and copy-and-paste in a manner that is borderline unreadable to make their claims. There is not two sides to "every" coin. That is my point, this is not a real editor. Have you looked at their history? Please, have you? Why do admins no longer care about these things? I have been open to discussion from the beginning! I have constantly asked him/her to refer to WP's standards and tones which they ignore. Have you not read where I have said this sockpuppet account constantly obfuscates the issue at hand and makes it look like I am not engaging when he/she opens multiple Talk topics and ignores previous responses? I never once in my life claimed to be perfect, and likewise I never claimed to have removed all the bad items here, just the ones I happened to see. Benutz's claim that since I didn't remove Balls for whatever reason is supposed to invalidate the (appropriate) rationale I employed in removing all the others? The solution, if Benutz objected to not removing Balls was not to undo my removal of all the others who didn't belong, but to remove Balls. Simple. Likewise they made the spurious claim that I should have done the same thing with their silly "??" instead of reverting, when that's literally EXACTLY what I did. I already removed the eyesore ??s and they reverted me (why?), so I directly removed them again, because the other admins were ignoring this issue and no one else seemed to care. The two arguments are not comparable. Like I said, I acknowledge violating 3RR but only because this situation wasn't getting its attention from the admins when they were notified. JesseRafe (talk) 06:42, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

 * The OED entry for alumnus is here[subscription required]. (Including it in the 3O text broke the template for some reason.) --Stfg (talk) 09:43, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

 * You're ridiculously basic... ad hominems? No substantive case??? It was my name being dragged around in the mud in the edit summaries with BS claims about my lack of rationale. And it was me doing actual Wikipedia work. All you have to do is click on their edit history and see that this account was created solely for the purpose of adding non-notables to this article. I never cared about what definition of alumni was used, I always was removing unambiguous non-alumni, e.g. JD students and post docs, don't confuse the issue, those labels are for people who did not go to this school, I never said anything about whether one graduates. Read better. It's simple, and the article is fine the way it is now, although, a few notable alumni were unrighteously removed (I don't care), I'm satisfied that none of the non-notables and non-alumni are still in it. I've been clamoring this user has a COI (since removed) or is a sockpuppet to hide their COI since the beginning but do the admins care? Don't say I didn't provide the evidence of it, it's plain as day.
 * When I began by righteously removing the non-notables and non-alumni, Benutz objected that I removed his/her non-cited, non-blue link additions. That's the whole issue, and then Benutz wanted them left on the page for THREE WEEKS, my position was, "No, this is OR, they get deleted", that's when Benutz started besmirching me and accusing me of all sorts of capriciousness in edit summaries. I've been consistent and civil the whole time, while more than happy to discuss on the Talk Page, yet note how Benutz would obfuscate the Talk Page with multiple headings and ignore my responses, but then duplicitously accuse me of not discussing.
 * My latest compromise was that for the notable people (blue links) who had no graduation year, I put a CN tag on them. But since these were not the non-notables that Benutz cared about being added to this article, s/he abruptly removed them entirely. Hmmm, one of us is bad at compromising, huh? And according to Stfg it's me, because I didn't allow Benutzernamen188 66 8 4's uncited OR to remain on the page for three weeks just because they stomped their feet. And I have no substantive case, right? What a joke.JesseRafe (talk) 13:45, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * , your tone here is unacceptable. You've yelled at everyone involved, including me and . I will tell you once again, the version I protected has no red- or unlinked entries so you can drop that part of your complaint right now; and what happened in the past is not material for the current version, whether that is Benutzer's or yours. You need to seriously tone down the rhetoric or I will block you for continued personal attacks--and if you don't know what I mean with "rhetoric" here (Stfg has also pointed at the sock accusations--and "person X is not a real editor" is also a personal attack) you needn't come back. And it would be nice if both of you could be more succinct. From what I can gather the main thrust in terms of content is whether post-docs count as alumni. Our article cites Merriam-Webster to suggest "yes"; the OED and Macmillan may suggest no. This is a matter for a focused discussion on the merits of the case, and the way to go about it is to propose an WP:RFC in a slightly wider forum, like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Education or some place like that. Simple. Get more editors involved, propose two option, get a consensus on one of them. Drmies (talk) 15:26, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * My tone here is one of frustration, I have asked several times that one just look at Benutz's history and see that this whole thing started with them adding non-notables and a few days later me coming across them. Benutz is outright lying or incredibly forgetful as they now claim that they've always been against the inclusion of non-blue linked people when the addition of non-blue-linked people without any cites was literally the only thing they did upon account creation. How should I not be frustrated by this complete lack of anyone's due diligence on this matter? So according to you no one has a Conflict of Interest and no account is a sock puppet? Because how else could one be found one, if they weren't accused of it first? Oh, no, we can't have any accusations, can we? Especially not ones backed up by irrefutable evidence, oh heavens to betsy, let's not do that. The issue, which is painfully obvious, has never been anything other than whether non-notable or non-alumni people belong on the list. The list now (due to my work persistently removing Benutz's additions) reflects that. I don't care about this article, I only care about Wikipedia's accuracy. It's fine now, until the ban lifts in a week and Benutz adds their COI pet crusade of non-notables back in (or does another account). All the other issues (Benutz constantly making spurious claims about me and my intentions, but s/he doesn't get called out about that? I do? For stating facts? Like a single-purpose account being at least a red flag for COI?) are not germane. I said before that I'm not perfect and I never stated that my removals of non-notable and non-alumni were exhaustive, I just removed the ones I happened to notice. That's it. That's not inconsistency, that's just one editor doing what little they can to make WP better and more factually accurate. When those edits get undone (reinstating Original Research after warnings is tantamount vandalism, is it not? Please, for once, answer a question) time and time again and the other admins simply don't care, what else should I have done? JesseRafe (talk) 16:01, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * "Benutz is outright lying" is not frustration, it's a personal attack, the umpteenth. I'll place a formal warning on your talk page, something I rarely do with established editors. I'll not block you myself, though you deserve to be blocked for all of this, since your likely response will be rather predictable. But you've been offered a way forward and you chose to repeat the same old claims again and again; as far as I'm concerned, any validity those claims may have had is overwhelmed by your counterproductive tactics. I'll answer your last question--sure. It's just that you haven't proven that this is the case. Your lengthy, unparagraphed, disorganized, and barely coherent rants may have evidence hidden in them, but I can't find it. The only thing I see is stuff like "Benutz constantly making spurious claims about me and my intentions", when all I can see is your claims about them. Good luck to the next admin who tries to help you out. Drmies (talk) 16:40, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

In an effort to combine what we have discussed and learned, I have taken the version of the Kennedy School of Government dated 05:05, 4 December 2014 by User:I dream of horses which does not represent edits either JesseRafe or I had made. I then kept only those individuals with a Wikipedia entry (blue links) and have received an MPA, MPP, Exec, or PhD from the Kennedy School. This should make JesseRafe happy I hope. I removed those individuals who did not complete one of those four degrees. I researched the dates where I could for those individuals who did not have a degree listed.

Comments and edits welcomed on the draft page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Benutzernamen188_66_8_4#Notable_HKS_alumni I am hoping this will allow us to be ready to cut-and-paste a version we have all reviewed and are comfortable with when Drmies unfreezes the page. Hope this helps work towards agreement that we are all okay with. Thank you. Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 14:06, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Protection
I will be happy to lift protection if involved editors agree to not continue edit warring. Ping me when you reach that agreement. Thanks to all, Drmies (talk) 17:55, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

 * JesseRafe, what do you say? Comments and edits welcomed on the draft page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Benutzernamen188_66_8_4#Notable_HKS_alumni which keeps only those individuals with a Wikipedia entry that have received an MPA, MPP, Exec, or PhD from the Kennedy School. Individuals were removed who did not complete one of those four degrees. Dates added where I could for those individuals who did not have a degree listed. Does this work for you? And has the list gotten long enough that it is better as a split-off list referenced by the Kennedy School article instead? Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 14:32, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Have received no additional comments or edits, so cut-and-pasted https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Benutzernamen188_66_8_4#Notable_HKS_alumni which keeps only those individuals with a Wikipedia entry that have received an MPA, MPP, Exec, or PhD from the Kennedy School. I do wonder if this is better as a split-off list referenced by the Kennedy School article instead? Benutzernamen188 66 8 4 (talk) 13:34, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on John F. Kennedy School of Government. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071217091343/http://www.news.harvard.edu:80/gazette/2007/12.13/04-ksgweb.html to http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2007/12.13/04-ksgweb.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080331220629/http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com:80/grad/pad/search to http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/grad/pad/search

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

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:12, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John F. Kennedy School of Government. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100926155627/http://www.hks.harvard.edu/leadership/ to http://www.hks.harvard.edu/leadership

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Overreliance on Harvard sources
As of October 2, 2017, this article contains 47 references. Of these, 36 (76.5%) cite publications by Harvard University, the Kennedy School, or closely related outlets. Specifically:
 * 27 cite to harvard.edu
 * 3 to the Kennedy School
 * 2 to Kennedy School student-edited journals
 * 3 to The Harvard Crimson or Harvard Gazette
 * 1 to Harvard's Shorenstein Center

That leaves only 11 references to sources ostensibly independent of Harvard University.

While the Harvard primary sources provide useful information, they also tend to hype the Kennedy School. Wikipedia's policy WP:NOTPROMOTION mandates that this encyclopedia is not a vehicle for advertising, showcasing or recruitment. Naturally alumni and current students of the Kennedy School are proud of their institution; but editors ought to resist the temptation for boosterism, which undermines the credibility of Wikipedia. KalHolmann (talk) 17:58, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think the article is overly promotional and the referencing is adequate. Britishfinance (talk) 10:04, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John F. Kennedy School of Government. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110101052808/http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-public-affairs-schools/rankings/ to http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-public-affairs-schools/rankings
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160402213222/http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-public-affairs-schools/harvard-university-166027 to http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-public-affairs-schools/harvard-university-166027

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:07, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Request to change title
Request help in editing name of the Wikipedia page from "John F. Kennedy School of Government" to "Harvard Kennedy School".

Reason: The School calls itself HKS now. Every mention on the website, press releases, and other publication refers to "Harvard Kennedy School". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.234.189.45 (talk) 05:33, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves/Technical_requests&diff=977676488&oldid=977670981 move requested]. --bdijkstra (talk) 08:17, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Stuff moved from Harvard University
The following was added today to the main HU article. It's way too much over there:

In 1936, a $2 million donation from Harvard College alumnus and former Harvard football coach Lucius Littauer, a businessman and former U.S. Congressman, was used to launch Harvard's first graduate school focused exclusively on public policy, economics, international affairs, and politics, called the Harvard Graduate School of Public Administration. In 1966, in honor of John F. Kennedy, the school was renamed the John F. Kennedy School of Government and later Harvard Kennedy School. Since its founding, Harvard Kennedy School has graduated 17 heads of state, launched a number of sizable programs within the school, including the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation, the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, the Dubai initiative, the Harvard Institute of Politics, the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy, and others, and built an endowment of $1.7 billion as of 2021. Harvard Kennedy School routinely ranks as the world's best, or one of the best, graduate programs for public policy, social and health policy, international affairs, and national security. . EEng 01:56, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Harvard Kennedy School


text:
User:Fpotter~enwiki

Fred Potter is Fred Potter.

title: User:Fpotter~enwiki


text:
Chinese Army (disambiguation)

Two existing armies have been known in English as the Chinese Army:

 * People's Liberation Army Ground Force, the land force component of the People's Liberation Army in the People's Republic of China
 * Republic of China Army, which succeeded the National Revolutionary Army in 1947 and retreated to Taiwan in 1949

For the Chinese army between 1927 and 1947, see:
 * National Revolutionary Army

For Chinese armies before 1912, see:
 * Military history of China before 1911

title: Chinese Army (disambiguation)


text:
Talk:Dike (geology)

Youtube Video
When I first read this article, I had no idea what was going on. I have no background in geology, and so all the pictures just look like random pictures of rocks. The captions don't help at all because I can't tell which type is rock A and which type is rock B. The first paragraph of this article is extremely confusing for somebody who is just starting to learn about geological concepts. I think it would be great if there was a schematic diagram here which clearly labelled a dike and a sill and showed it distinct from the surrounding rock. A resource that helped me understand dikes and sills immensely was a YouTube video that I found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6loGYTCBVqo I'm wondering if it's possible to put this video on the wiki article, or to create a similar video, or to create a schematic similar to the one depicted on it. I feel that this would improve the article's readability, particularly for the layperson. XieChengnuo (talk) 20:57, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Question
What does "rotate the including sequence" mean? - Chris

 * Folding or tectonic deformation resulting from plate collisions, orogeny. This does need to be clarified in the article - put it on my to do list (means procrastinate :-) Vsmith 15:22, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Picture
I seriously doubt that it's dike on this picture. Dikes are mainly composed of mafic rocks (basalt, diabase) because only rocks which are low in silica have sufficiently low viscosity to flow in such a narrow cracks. More silicic intrusions have much bigger aspect ratio (ratio of thickness to length). I believe that it's an anatexis (partial melting) on this picture. Siim 17:36, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Mea culpa. I made a mistake. Most of these white narrow stripes are indeed products of partial melting but wider leucocratic structure seems to be intruded material, it means dike. I asked one experienced petrologist to comment that picture and he made it clear for me. Siim 16:17, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Volcano
Are dikes a type of volcano? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.105.206.130 (talk • contribs) 03:23, 29 July 2007
 * No, but they are related. An intrusive (i.e. igneous) dike occurs when magma forces apart existing rock along a vertical plane, probably along an existing fault where the rock has been broken in slipping upward or laterally. The dike is the rock resulting when that magma solidified underground. A volcano is an extrusive feature, where magma flows upward and breaks thru to open space (air, water, vacuum on Mercury and moons). Volcanos are typically small rather than long, narrow, openings, presumably because the breakthru at the weakest point relieves the pressure that would be necessary to break thru elsewhere. As lava cools and solidifies near the vent, the volcanic cone of solidified rock builds up, producing a volcanic mountain. Intermediate between igneous dikes and volcanos is a breakthru to the surface all along a fault, with lava spilling out and spreading in a sheet (or two sheets, one on each side of the fault), producing features like the Deccan Traps or the Siberian Traps. --Jerzy•t 08:19, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

sedimentary dike in permafrost
I disagree with the second mechanism of sedimentary dike formation in the article: "When a soil is under permafrost conditions the pore water is totally frozen. When cracks are formed in such rocks, they may fill up with sediments that fall in from above. The result is a vertical body of sediment that cuts through horizontal layers: a dike."

By this definition any sedimentary infilling of a crack of any kind is a dike, and this definition is too broad. It could include sediment that fills in mudcracks, or even just alluvium filling a slot canyon. The basic concept of a dike is that it intrudes overlying layers from below. If the above definition is in a textbook or article somewhere, please include the citation. Jstuby (talk) 13:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Not helpful
''The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with USA and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (April 2011) ''

Wow, two for two on the Most Irritating Things About Wikipedia list. First, we have the ignorant nitpicking by people (or bots) who know nothing about a field. Second, we have political correctness at its most ludicrous. Crap like this is EXACTLY why people don't want to contribute to Wikipedia, either with edits or cash.

Geology is concerned with the natural earth, not human-made political borders. The only thing that's important is that the examples are accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.119.248.102 (talk) 07:37, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

 * Seems the lack of references is more important. Vsmith (talk) 10:16, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I must disagree with the anonymous contributor above who goes rather over the top. An article which deals with a worldwide subject such as dikes/dykes benefits from a worldwide perspective. After all whilst there are similarities between phenomena which are displayed on one part of the Earth, there can also be differences - and casual readers of Wikipedia may be more likely to return if they find examples from their own neck of the woods, be that the nearby town or even simply their own continent. I may get around to adding some useful British material - provided it is accurate and enhances the article, that is! And Vsmith makes a good point too of course. cheers Geopersona (talk) 05:15, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dike (geology)


text:
Talk:Moisés Alou

IPA
Could someone (preferably a speaker of Spanish) add the IPA for his name? I've heard "moy-ses" and I've heard "moy-say". Which one is correct? →Vik Reykja 07:06, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi
Well... In Español, the name Moisés (Moses) is pronounced mo-e-SES. For more details about this name, you can check at:. Have a nice day. MusiCitizen 14:14, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Beltre?
Can someone explain why his last name is listed as Beltre? Must have been a mistake. I fixed it. NickBall 12:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No is not a mistake. According to this, this, this, and this that's his real name, and the story behind it. Osplace 11:07, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Giants Images
I have added two images of Alou to the article that were previously on here. Even though they show him in a Giants uniform, I feel that having images for this article, especially of his unusual batting stance, is important until they can be replaced with fair use images from his current team. - NickBall 06:47, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Moises Alou pic
Please stop replacing the free use pic of him with a copyvio one Em0. Also explain how the free use photo of him is "disgusting" like you put in one of you edit summaries. Quadzilla99 17:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The account adding the non-free use pic has been blocked indefinitely.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 20:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that was both lame and ridiculous. Quadzilla99 20:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Picture Date Incorrect
The picture date was incorrect because it read that he was with the Gaints in March 2006, the picture was taken at Busch Stadium II in St. Louis, at that time Busch Stadium II had been demolished and Busch Stadium III was on the site — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.200.253.182 (talk) 22:42, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Moises as a "five tool player"
I'm watching the Alex Gibney documentary "Catching Hell." In the program Gibney, who also acts as narrator, says "Moises Alou was not a great fielder." A short time later Moises Alou himself admits that he was "not very good" at defense. This would suggest that Alou, while certainly an excellent offensive player, may not deserve the classification of being a "five tool" player.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Moisés Alou. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121020042556/http://www.baseballlibrary.com/ballplayers/player.php?name=Moises_Alou_1966 to http://www.baseballlibrary.com/ballplayers/player.php?name=Moises_Alou_1966
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050324221246/http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/chc/news/chc_news.jsp?ymd=20040927&content_id=872737&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp to http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/chc/news/chc_news.jsp?ymd=20040927&content_id=872737&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080924204825/http://blogs.nypost.com/sports/mets/archives/2008/07/alou_likely_don.html to http://blogs.nypost.com/sports/mets/archives/2008/07/alou_likely_don.html
 * Added tag to http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/bird-land/bird-land/2009/03/moise-alou-sees-wbc-as-likely-his-last-rodeo

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:17, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Moisés Alou


text:
Trot (disambiguation)

Trot is a two-beat diagonal gait of the horse.

Trot or trots may also refer to:
 * Trot (music), a genre of Korean pop music
 * Trot (Oz), a character from the Oz books of L. Frank Baum
 * Trot (lai), a medieval Old French poem
 * Trot, informal term for a Trotskyist
 * The trots, a slang term for diarrhea
 * Trot, a term for a literal translation
 * Trot Nixon, Christopher Trotman "Trot" Nixon (born 1974), former American baseball player

title: Trot (disambiguation)