text:
Talk:Open access publishing

movement or industry strategy?
Is Open Access more of a Movement or an Industry Strategy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.200.82.106 (talk • contribs) 06:46, 22 April 2005 (UTC)

'Free access'
I've heard some poeple (notably someone who works for Oxford University Press) making a distinction between 'open access' (where the author pays) and 'free access' (where no-one pays). Should this distinction be incorporated into the site? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.214.173.238 (talk • contribs) 14:29, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

It is a good point that there are distinctions in terminology on various different types of open access, which would make a good addition to the wikipedia article.

"free access" is often used with subscription-based journals, which are not at all open access, but rather provide free access after a delay or embargo period. A good place to look for these articles is Highwire Free, at http://highwire.stanford.edu/lists/freeart.dtl

There are different business models for open access, one of which is a processing fee approach [payment made on behalf of the author for publishing services]. This is sometimes erroneously referred to as the "author-pays" model. It is erroneous because professional researchers do not pay these fees out of their own pockets; rather, than are paid either by funding agencies or by the institutions. The majority of open access journals do not use the processing-fee model, however. Some, using volunteer labor, open source software and in-kind support, publish quality with no hard costs (not unlike wikidpedia itself, of course!). In other cases, journals are subsidized, whether by governments, universities, scholarly or professional associations. This happens with journals which charge subscription fees, not only the open access ones. Suzannah 01:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)suzannah

Scientists from all major Dutch universities officially launched a website on Tuesday where all their research material can be accessed for free.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/05/11/open_access_research/

http://www.darenet.nl/en/page/language.view/home - Omegatron 23:09, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

 * Wicked! Thanks for the link Omegatron. I've included this in the main article. --Username132 23:03, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Non-notable external links
I am not keen on an edit war, but I do agree with Eliezer that the yasharbooks links is non-notable. In fact, it stands out like a sore thumb even in this fairly long list we already have. WP is not a web directory, and we shouldn't list every website that claims to do some sort of open access thingy. Rl 6 July 2005 15:42 (UTC)
 * It doesn't just claim to do it, it seems to do it, providing free for download some extremely high quality material in an under-represented area. In what way does it "stick out like a sore thumb"? Jayjg (talk)  7 July 2005 14:46 (UTC)

==question: preferred terminology this article refers to

 * It is a link to a highly specific, tiny bit of fringe science. The other links are related to open access (well, duh!), this one belongs into Torah if it is a good source which is not something I am qualified to decide. Rl 7 July 2005 15:17 (UTC)

Excessive inline external links
This article contains far too many external links inline in the text, and in many cases these could link to existing Wikipedia articles or articles should be created. External links, should they be necessary, should be grouped at the end of the article, or included discreetly as a citation using a bracket, e.g.. Please consult External links for the policy on when where to use external links in Wikipedia. Thanks. Lexor|Talk 12:32, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Open access publishing revert
I removed the following text from the first paragraph. First, open access publishing doesn't always require submission fees. Second, this sentence doesn't fit at this point in the document. Third, other parts of the document do cover this. Fourth, the second sentence is POV "'Open Access publishing, where the author (or a third-party acting on his/her behalf) pays to publish, has been proposed as an alternative to a subscription-based revenue model. Unfortunately, its success has been rather limited.'" Liblamb 18:34, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy on links to Closed Access
Does Wikipedia have a policy on linking to sites which are not Open Access? In science and medicine this is sometimes necessary since these are the definitive references. They are also usually protected by strong copyright, so abstraction will have to be careful.

Would it be a useful idea to have a flag on the link indicating that the site is not Open Access (i.e. the reader would have to pay to read it)? I have done this for Mauveine.

Petermr 12:45, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * No, Wikipedia does not have any such policy. Though easily-accessed sources are preferred for verification purposes, either in addition to more authoritative hard-to-access sources or instead of equivalent offline or closed sources. -- Beland 23:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Criticisms of Open Access
There should be some possible downsides of the open access philosophy included in the article, at the moment anyone reading it would be unaware that any arguments against full OA exist - they're alluded to at the beginning but aren't covered later on and the later paragraphs are relentlessly positive. For example, many librarians may indeed be in favour of OA, but equally many may not wish their subscription budgets to be transferred to pay for academics' submission charges. And if these charges don't exist, where does the sustainable money come from for the publishing process? Paraffinbrain 14:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Agreed - at the moment, this article feels rather biased Papervolcano 11:14, 29 July 2006 (UTC)papervolcano

 * Well, it's still biased as of November 2006. Since Wikipedia is open access, I guess it demonstrates one particular flaw: mass lunacy. Open Access says "yes" to the Dark Ages and unpaid contribution, and "no" to fair reward for great ideas and individual thought. I guess we're all supposed to do things for free in the future and live in a shack while doing research. I don't know about you, but I can't think when I'm eating two-day old pizza. Here, let's smoke a bong together and sleep in our own feces. Hooray for Open Access! --24.77.216.252 16:17, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Have you actually read the article? As I understand it, researchers don't get paid when people buy journals containing their work - Open Access wont affect a researcher's income (no-one is asking them to work for free). What is being asked, is that they publish with one of the many Open Access journals who then provide the work for free (traditionally, journals would keep the money for themselves). --Username132 (talk) 23:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Claims that open access can be duplicated by interlibrary loans, can only be from those who have never conducted research. Anyone who has, knows that the process needs an overview of all the literature - not just individual papers ordered at £10 a pop. As for the user who equates Open Access to the 'Dark Ages' of unpaid contributions, well I've got news for him ... Journals don't pay researchers for their contributions - RESEARCHERS PAY JOURNALS to publish their work. Last time I submitted to the IEEE they were charging OVER $100 PER PAGE to publish my contibution. (82.22.160.108 16:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC))

And here is a point that should be at least mentioned criticaly. In the Eysenbach-Research he says, that the oa-option costs $1000 per article. The posibility raises, that journals lower their expectations to earn the fast money. I don't say, that has to happen. But only that it is a point of critics. (09:15, 04 May 2007)

Berlin declaration
I have been told that the Wikimedia chapter Germany signed the Berlin declaration. GerardM 13:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

How Can I Help?
How can individuals support open access? What can we do?

 * see What you can do to promote open access --Username132 (talk) 23:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Open access
At the Open access article is this section of numbers/trivia, Open_access. Should it be there? I've not seen anything like it elsewhere on Wikipedia, and it even makes reference to the reader, saying "If you know of numbers that measure the benefits, growth, or status of open access, please add them here". Since cross-namespace redirects are not allowed due to problems with forking and Wikipedia's wider aims as an encyclopedia, should this section not be removed?

prefered terminology?
What do the people here prefer:
 * subject repository
 * subject-based repository
 * discipline repository
 * disciplinary repository
 * discipline-based repository

one advantage of the -based repository is that it would be parallel with funder-based repository etc. . DGG 08:36, 1 October 2006 (UTC) (without getting into a discussion of the general merits of this approach)

 * I like subject suppository, myself --24.77.216.252 16:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Other Colors
I've heard of other colors being used for different methods of OA, like the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) which is supposedly free after six months. Anyone know anything about this ? Ericblazek 23:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

See 'Free Access' above. This is not the same as open access.

new section
Shouldn't the newly added large section "Towards Understanding the Role of Open Repositories in the Information Landscape, Open Repositories Conference 2007" be either a separate artcle or integrated into the main article better? WP is not a blog. DGG 04:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC) DGG 04:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

main article
Open access is the universally used term for the concept, and should not be a redirect. its where the main article should be. I think there's consensus of the editors who have been working on it--this isnt a matter of opinion, its the use in the real world, and supported by the references. The article is being restored here, as it was on Saturday but with some improvements from subsequent edits retained. (& as specifically agreed by the other main editors)DGG 05:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

restore main article in progress
This is the correct article under the correct name. For documentation that Open access is the generally --indeed the universally--used name, see the books and documents cited in the article. For additional discussion, see the talk page for Open access journal

Many of the recent edits have greatly helped the article by improvingthe language and improving the NPOV. It is possible that not all of them have been included here while restoring, but this may take a few days.

Unfortunately, some of the edit history has gotten lost during the process, and some sections are missing. They will be restored as soon as they can be located. It is possdible that only older versions of these sections will be found, and then they will need to be updated as best wee can. I firmly believe that when we are finished, we will have a much improved article here for the main article, and much improved articles for some of the assoicated article as well.

Please make what improvements you can in the meantime. But please do not rearrange the material in a radical way without prior consultation on the talk page to attain consensus. It has been a long night restoring it to this point. I apologize to my fellow editors if I have made some errors in the process, or contributedto the confusion. Because of the unfinished state, I have placed an underconstruction tag on the page. And I hope all the redirects work. I know we'll need some work on the links, both in and out. DGG 07:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

copyedits.
Now that we've gotten the article back, I am editing it to maintain a NPOV between OA as publishing as open access journals, and OA as self-archiving in a repository. I am usingthe prefered language of those who follow those roads--"open access journals" and "self-archiving". People who run open access journals call them open access journals. (The article also needs a NPOV between pubishing OA and publishing non OA, but that will take more than a copy-edit.) DGG 19:11, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

BOAI
The BOAI I and II links were to the same place, http://www.soros.org/openaccess/index.shtml, which mentions both of the methods equally. Is there any published use calling one of them BOAI I and the other BOAI II? If not, this cannot be the place to introduce the distinction. DGG 23:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

cleanup
A fair bit of clean-up seems to have taken place already. How does the cleanup notice get taken off? Suzannah 01:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)suzannah
 * I think the basic structure is more or less agreeable to all the editors involved, though undoubtedly there will be some additions and deletions and changes to many of the details, based on the attention to detail which has always been shown to articles on this topic. The tag served the purpose of saying, yes, we know there's more to do, don't bite us about it. Anyone can put it on, anyone can put it off.  I just took it off.DGG 04:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

NPOV
True NPOV requires that the depth of opposition not be glossed over, and that the arguments of those who think OA unnecessary, undesirable, impossible, or not worth the trouble, be presented in the strongest possible form, to match the arguments for OA that are already being presented in the strongest possible way. I expanded a little, but there is more to come. It would be better if those opposed to OA were aware of this article, so they could add their own arguments, but I will do the best for them that I can. Eventually, each individual argument, pro and con, must be sourced. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DGG (talk • contribs) 23:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC).

button
I almost removed the entire section on this as COI. However, the nature of the button is supported by the website of the guy who made the button & much other eprint software, which be considered an RS. The statement on usefulness depends entirely on opinion--expressed in postings on the e-mail list of the WP editor who made the  edit. I don't want to fight over opinion, I have elsewhere expressed my own (somewhat skeptical) opinion of the virtues of this feature. but I have no business inserting such opinion in the article. There is certainly no consensus--I tried for neutral purely descriptive NPOV. DGG 01:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Naming Problem & proposed Move
In order to clear up terminology, an attempt was made by another editor to improve the open access disam page so it went to Open Access publishing, which is of course only one of the 2 methods. This completely lost access to this page, and I have reverted it. But since this is the 2nd mixup in two months, obviously the names we are accustomed to use use are confusing people. So we need to change, unfortunately. Calling this page Open access (academic publishing) has also proved confusing, and led to a move that lost content. I think I have found a good name, which would adequately reflect the actual contents of this page, lead naturally into the two methods, and not be confused with the other meanings of the phrase "open access" that have been accumulating.: Open access movement. I think that describes it, and should be recognisable by all the advocates, and the opponents. This is Sunday night, so it might be best to wait one day and make the change Monday or Tuesday, and then--alas--fix up all the many links. I will assume agreement as the default, because it is clear we must do something to prevent accidental dismemberment. And if I fix the links I don't want to have to do it a second time. DGG

I strongly urge that the defintion of Open Access simply be made explicit and crystal clear from the outset, to discourage further bright lights from scrambling it. Open Access means what is means, and the fact that some people, uninformed about Open Access, keep conflatiung it with Open Access Publishing is not a reason to do away with the Wikipedia entry on Open Access: Open Access Publishing is a subset of Open Access, not the supraset. It is illogical and simply further promulgates the misunderstanding is "open access" is given an entry as a "movement". Open access means free online access (to journal articles, in the first instance). There are two ways to provide open access. One is through the author putting the article online free. The other is through the author publishing it in a journal that pots the articel online free. There can be 100% OA without a single OA journal ever existing, so it is absurd to subsume OA under OAP. Not only absurd, but highly misleading, because there is far more OA via OA self-archiving than via OA journal publishing, and it is OA self-archiving that is about to be mandated worldwide. One of the factors delaying the adoption of the mandate is precisely the common misconception that OA means OAP. Please let Wikipedia not capitulate to and compound that misconception, but correct it! Harnad 19:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem is errors that will be made individual editors, and not all of them will read the article or even the top two lines--and any editor can alter them at any time. (The arguments about which method will give the most OA are not relevant to the problem of finding the page in WP.)   It is apparently not the least clear to a non specialist that OA publishing is the subdivision, because to a non-specialist OA is about publishing. I myself haven't the least objection to the current names, but I want a maintainable article.
 * I've removed the informal proposed change, since it is clear it does not have unmistakable consensus. Let's see how long it is before they get mixed up again. If that should happen, I will then propose the name change through the formal mechanism so the community can decide.
 * Alternative formulation: merge Open access publishing into Open access journal. DGG 02:25, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

~ Although I quite like the suggestion of "Open access movement", that's a little obscure. "Open access" will do for the main page, I feel. I like the suggestion of merging "Open access publishing" into "open access journal". Fences and windows 00:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Self-archiving vs open access publishing
The addition of the preamble by Stevan was awkward, and placed too great an emphasis on his own interpretation/beliefs around open access. I would be happy to see a discussion of OA with self-archiving in the article, but not right at the top. NPOV is king, right? Even the terminology used in the background of "gold" (OA publishing) and "green" (self-archiving) is not universally accepted in the OA movement.

Copy edit and rearrangement
I'd add another criticism of the article as a whole - it begins terribly with no real lead in to what it actually means or why it is argued for - instead there is a morass of jargon and dates. Would anyone unfamiliar with open access have a clue what was being discussed? The whole article has a cobbled together feel to it. I don't have the energy in me to properly edit it, but perhaps someone could give it a go? I'd propose two solutions - merge in the content from "Open access journals", "Open access publishing" and "Self-archiving", or else cut down the content of this main article substantially, and direct readers to these other articles. At the moment there is considerable duplication and confusion.

My own COI: I work for BioMed Central. I hope there won't be an edit war over the preamble, it really was out of place. Fences and windows 00:46, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I had a go at editing the first half of this article - I hope it flows better and is less repetitive now, and has less POV. I didn't get to Public and Advocacy onwards, and some of those sections really still need a heavy edit, especially the History of OA. Fences and windows 00:44, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Glad to see the changes. The former non-standard opening was intended to to answer criticisms about the unclear scope of the article, but I  think the improvements you have made now make it clear enough.
 * In the recent past, attempts to merge in content have resulted in chaos, further complicating the article, confusing readers, and losing text. It would probably be better to move out some of the details into the separate articles.
 * The material in the history does duplicate much of the opening; either the history section should be moved to a separate article, or it should be retained and the opening part describing the basics considerably shortened. Personally, I prefer the latter. After moving out some of the detailed content, the article will no longer be so big that it must be split.
 * The section "by the numbers" is no longer being maintained, and unless there are plans to do so, it should be removed. The data is readily available elsewhere & the article already has the necessary links.
 * I have further made a slight copyedit. COI: I am not associated with any organization having an active role in either self-archiving or open access publishing.
 * Suggestions for next round of copyediting

 * 1) Changing references to standard format using the "cite" template, and using fewer of them. At present, they don't even show the OA version of some of the published articles referred to.The template can deal with this, and also automatically handle any duplicate citations.
 * 2) Adjusting links so they are made only at first appearance of a word.
 * 3) Writing articles for the red-links. This may also permit some simplification of the article. DGG 22:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I will leave it to seasoned Wikipedians to edit the references.
 * I agree that "by the numbers" was always an odd section, and so long as the content is reflected elsewhere, it won't be missed.
 * Some of the history of open access could be moved to earlier in the article, and then the rest can largely be removed, as it duplicates content elsewhere.
 * There is too much detail about self-archiving in the section "Research funders and universities" and as the Self-archiving article is so slight, much of this content can be moved there (but it will still need editing to make it less obscure).
 * In general, I agree that content needs moving into the other articles, and "Open access journal" needs merging with "Open access publishing".
 * Do we even need to stick to these headings at all? They don't seem natural headings - "Users" is a particularly strange one.
 * Generally speaking the jargon still needs hacking back. We need this article to be readable by those unfamiliar with open access, not just the select few of us who live and breathe it. Fences and windows 00:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

by the numbers
There was earlier consensus, now confirmed, that the by the numbers section would best be removed when it was no longer being actively maintained, and the time has come. They are still available for reference in the page history. DGG 06:06, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

merge question
The question of whether the page Open access publishing   should be merged with open access journal has been asked again. There are some reasons for having two pages: Opinion? DGG 05:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) the open access journal page links to pages for lists of oa journals, and oa journals in the various disciplines. Though not all of this has been done yet, there's a project around working on getting them all.
 * 2) There seems to be no common term for (OA journal + hybrid OA journal + delayed OA journal). This would imply that this present open access publishing page should be the main page for the concept, with the other three leading off it.
 * 3) Doing this would take a little rearranging, but it wouldn't be too difficult. I think it could be done without moving too many links.
 * There are now at least three articles on this, open access publishing, open access journal, and open access. That seems excessive to me. Superm401 - Talk 06:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I have to agree. I find it excessive and confusing; and I am familiar with the topic and interested in it. Imagine how confusing it would be for a layperson seeking information. PretentiousSnot (talk) 04:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * OA is definitely not the same thing as OA publishing, but they are still perpetually being conflated. It would be a big mistake and would just compound people's confusion instead of correcting it if the two entries were (yet again) merged under OA publishing. OA Publishing is one of the two ways to provide OA. The other is OA self-archiving of non-OA publications. OA is the general notion, and OAP and OASA are the two particular cases of it. Leave well enough alone. Stevan Harnad 02:36, 14 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Harnad (talk • contribs)

Would it perhaps be more logical to have three articles as follows: OA journals, OA publishing, and OASA? The page OA could then be reduced to a short article linking to these three pages. Something along these lines might make things clearer for the layperson. --Crusio (talk) 11:06, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

There still needs to be a general article. Wouldn't it make more sense for it to be called Open Access, which is a formally defined term and the one in widest use, than open access publishing, which is really quite ambiguous, having been used both for oa in general, and for oa journals and their kin. But alternatively, given that open access is used for many unrelated things, perhaps it does make sense for this article to be merged with open access publishing and called by the later name.

FWIW, the terminology is so confusing that the invented terms, gold ( oa journals),  and green (SA) still remain in use. I am not sure that SA is actually a good descriptor either, as the predominant form of actual OA seems to be officiallly mandated archiving in places like PubMed Central, at least in the US -- or officially mandated archiving in institutional archives-- and I don't see how such mandates can be called "self-archiving".
 * But alternatively, FWIW,2, I think Harnad had a discussion on his list for alternative terms, and there really wasnt much agreement on anything better. He himself still uses green and gold. What I might do is bring this to the attention of a few people offline. DGG (talk) 03:45, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Merge
Restored from the talk page that had been at Open access publishing prior to the merger to Open access and subsequent move back to this location Parsecboy (talk) 05:05, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

 * If there were to be a merge, it would be with Open access journal -- Open access publishing is a re-titling of "Open access publisher" and it refers to such journals, not open access in general, which includes a/open access journals, on the one hand, (gold open access) and b/institutional or centralized repositories on the other (Green open access). The articles are all inter-related, so it will take some thoughtDGG (talk) 04:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

 * I would say merge all three - the distinctions are somewhat arbitrary to say the least. The boundaries between books, journals, traditional media and web material are beginning to change as more and more stuff becomes available and indexable online. A discussion of open access can't be separated from 'open access publishing'. Separating 'publishing' from 'journals' is similarly misguided, in my view. Hopsyturvy (talk) 11:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Merger is a very bad idea. The only way it would make sense would be a merger under "Open Access" -- definitely not under "Open access publishing" or "Open access journal." The reason is the same as the reason it would make no sense to merge Peer Review with "Peer Reviewed Journal" or "Peer Reviewed Publishing." Both Open Access and Peer Review are more general. There is Peer Review in research evaluation, Peer Review in clinical evaluation, etc.. Merging these with publishing or journals is like merging "food" under "fruit". The same is true of Open Access: There are Open access journals ("Gold Open Access") but there are also non-Open Access journals whose articles are made Open Access by their authors, through self-archiving ("Green Open Access"). It has taken years to sort out the confusion under which Open Access was subsumed under Open access publishing. Wikipedia should resolve this confusion, rather than add to it. If there is to be a subsumption, then Open access publishing and Open access journals should be subsections of Open Access, along with Open Access self-archiving, not vice versa. But the Open Access entry already covers Open access publishing and Open access journals, so it makes even more sense simply to add in whatever is new from the Open access publishing entry to the corresponding subsections of Open Access. --  Stevan Harnad 10:40, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I completely agree (except with the very first sentence) Hopsyturvy (talk) 13:48, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Stevan, I am no longer of the opinion I gave in April. It was suggested to me by that OAP is often used as a synonym for publishing in an OAJ, and that therefore a more general term was needed to encompass the two standard methods--an argument I find quite plausible and that matches yours. Recall that those publishers publishing OA journals or even optional OA Journals refer to themselves as OA Publishers. I've never seen the term used by those who instead permit self-archiving. Nonetheless, open access as such is now an ambiguous word. Looking at recent news stories using it, it seems to be used most by people outside the publishing/librarianship/repository world for equality of access to the hgh speed internet, of the openness of clinical trials for those who wish to enroll. I suggest therefore the following which would avoid all these problems, dividing the material in OAP between the OA and the OAJ article as appropriate, and retitling the present article from OA to OA (publishing). We still need a list of OA Publishers, and that does have to go somewhere. OA Publisher was rejected as a title for this two years ago, but maybe we can try again.   As for Peer Review, the current proposal has been to make peer review of scientific grants into a separate article,a the considerations and the literature is quite different from peer review in publishing --or for that matter peer review in academic promotions or evaluation. I think there's an advantage in being specific.  While we are both here, what's in your opinion the best generic term for green OA -- "self-archiving" seems wrong for what is usually now mandatory archiving, especially when its organised not by the author but the institution,  and institutional repositories are of  course not the only way it is done, though of course we know it is your preferred way. DGG (talk) 03:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
 * David, if there is ambiguity among the various senses of OA (countryside, bandwidth, research) then OA could be disambiguated as OA (research), but I think calling it OA (publishing) would be a very bad idea, for the same reasons as above: OA is something that is provided to individual articles, and it can be provided by the publisher (OAP) or the author (OASA). And SA is self-archiving even if the keystrokes are being done by the institution's library and even if the host is a funder repository. There are only two parties that can make an author's own writings OA: the author or the publisher. Let's not conflate this with various inchoate plans to make the author's institution the "copyright holder." Even there, it's the author assigning copyright for his own writing to his own institution (and it's a silly makeshift arrangement anyway -- essentially an attempt to create conditions that make it easier for an author to provide OA to his own writings). The author's own self is the "self" in :self-archiving," If the publisher is not the one making the article OA, then it's the author. That makes it self-archiving, irrespective of the implementational details, either contractual or ergonomic. And it very much needs to be called self-archiving (again, regardless of who is stroking the keys, and regardless of the fact that the author's institution and or funder is mandating that the article be self-archived). The "self" in the self-archiving is not the stroker of the depositing keys, but the one who wrote the article -- as opposed to the one who published it. Otherwise, authors will remain passive, as they are now, imagining that OA to their articles is something that needs to be provided by someone else, other than themselves. Stevan Harnad 02:55, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Public and advocacy section
I think this section needs a lot of attention. It is written in a very relaxed way, with few citations. What is the point of this section? What is it driving at? Can't we stick to facts on Wikipedia, and let other websites do OA advocacy? What on earth does "Public and advocacy" mean anyway??

An anonymous user just added a mention of HINARI, which seems fair, but they also stick the boot in to OA with the unsourced claim that "Critics of the various open access initiatives point out that there is little evidence that a significant amount of scientific literature is currently unavailable to those who would benefit from it. While no library has subscriptions to every journal that might be of benefit, virtually all published research can be acquired via interlibrary loan". Well this might be true, but doesn't this belong in the "Criticisms" section? And it needs a citation to back it up, otherwise it is simply POV. I'm guessing that the editor has some kind of COI (as do I, but I've declared mine as working for BioMed Central). It is probably no coincidence that this very issue has just cropped up on the World Association of Medical Editors listserve. As for the substance of the comment, we can't all spend our time taking trips to the British Library or filling in little forms and waiting weeks for one article to turn up... Does anyone know of citations to reputable sources or published literature detailing the problems with access to the scientific literature? Fences and windows 23:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, I dug up a few arguments for needing more access from Peter Suber's open access overview: Argument for Taxpayer's access: http://www.earlham.edu/%7Epeters/fos/newsletter/09-04-03.htm#taxpayer OECD report: "fostering broader, open access to and wide use of research data will enhance the quality and productivity of science systems worldwide". http://www.oecd.org/document/0,2340,en_2649_34487_25998799_1_1_1_1,00.html Permissions crisis: http://www.earlham.edu/%7Epeters/writing/acrl.htm Top US universities don't subscribe to all the most cited journals (study by LANL): http://library.lanl.gov/libinfo/news/2003/200312.htm#jourbench Discussion here: http://www.earlham.edu/%7Epeters/fos/newsletter/01-02-04.htm#ullage

These might be worth working in at the right place. Fences and windows 00:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC) add them, then. Adding new reports has gotten a little behind, I'm afraid. DGG 07:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

 * A good deal has gotten out of date. Does anyone want to revise, or have we all become exhausted from discussing this?DGG (talk) 23:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced arguments
I removed most of the criticism section, because it consisted of a back and forth of completely unsourced arguments ("Many people say X, but many people respond Y"). I'm sure there is plenty of criticism that can be sourced for the section. Superm401 - Talk 07:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Removed prominent mention of Bentham Open
Bentham Open was added into the introduction. This is a new collection of journals that has attracted significant controversy and is not a notable open access publisher. See http://poynder.blogspot.com/2008/04/open-access-interviews-matthew-honan.html Fences and windows (talk) 23:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Does the controversy make it notable, perhaps? --Crusio (talk) 10:38, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Open access movement
User Piotrus has created a new page Open Access movement and removed content from this page. I fail to understand the logic of this, and have reverted. If anyone wants to make such major edits, wait for a discussion and some kind of consensus, please. Fences and windows (talk) 11:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I have reverted your revert. The logic is thus: a social movement is not the same as a concept about it. A civil rights movement is different from civil rights concept. Free and open source software movement is different from free and open source software concept. And so on - including the fact that open access movement is not the same as open access concept.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup
I've tagged this article as needing cleanup. Especially now that Piotrus has decided to fork this page, there's a lot wrong with this article, and it needs reorganising. I may try to do this. I think it needs a whole new structure, as the current headings don't make much sense. "Authors and researchers"? "Users"? Fences and windows (talk) 21:06, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Open access publishing


text:
Oakleigh East, Victoria

Oakleigh East is a suburb in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia 16 km south-east of Melbourne's Central Business District, located within the City of Monash local government area. Oakleigh East recorded a population of 6,804 at the 2021 census.

The suburb is mostly residential with some commercial lots. The suburb is bordered by Ferntree Gully Road to the north, Clayton Road to the east, North Road to the south, and the Princes Highway and Franklyn Street to the west.

History
An Oakleigh East Post Office opened on 15 June 1918 on Huntingdale Road near Huntingdale (then East Oakleigh) railway station. This was renamed Huntingdale around 1955. In 1967 another Oakleigh East office opened on Huntingdale Road north of Dandenong Road (Princes Highway).

Today
The suburb has a small commercial hub on Huntingdale Road and the Princes Highway, which includes a post office, a liquor store, restaurants, a massage parlour, a hair salon, a golf injury clinic, and a mower shop.

Another small commercial strip stands the Ferntree Gully Road end of Macrina Street. This strip includes an IGA, a laundromat, and a few restaurants and cafes.

The suburb has one primary school, Amsleigh Park Primary School, and several preschools and early learning centres. Along Princes Hwy there is a large oval, park and playground area known as Princes Hwy Reserve. Opposite this park is the Clayton Chinese Christian Church. Other parks in the suburb include Reg Harris Reserve on Carmichael Road and Ferntree Gully Road, Hurst Reserve on Ferntree Gully Road and Princes Hwy, Cheel St Reserve on Ferntree Gully Road and Cheel St, F E Hunt Reserve on Highland Ave.

The suburb has a scout hall, the Victorian Rover Centre, which is located in F E Hunt Reserve.

The suburb is serviced by the 800/802/804/862 buses on Princes Hwy, the 733 bus on Clayton Road, the 693 and 742 buses on Ferntree Gully Road, and the 630 and 900 SmartBus service on North Road.

Sport
The suburb is home to the Oakleigh District Football Club of the SFNL. The club is based at Princes Highway Reserve.

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

title: Oakleigh East, Victoria


text:
File:Rv-logo.jpg

Summary
Logo for RV, "red election alliance", which is a Norwegian socialist party

title: File:Rv-logo.jpg


text:
Oakleigh South, Victoria

Oakleigh South is a suburb in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 17 km south-east of Melbourne's Central Business District, located within the Cities of Kingston and Monash local government areas. Oakleigh South recorded a population of 9,851 at the 2021 census.

A largely residential suburb, its boundaries are North Road to the north, Dingley Bypass to the south, Warrigal Road to the west and Huntingdale/Clarinda Roads to the east.

Oakleigh South Post Office opened on 1 September 1936.

History
Following World War II, Melbourne burst its borders and flowed into semi-rural land. The suburbs Moorabbin and Oakleigh expanded to the south-east. The end of the Second World War also saw an Australian government attitudinal change with regards to immigration. In the 1950s and 1960s, the Australian government formed agreements with many European countries and actively encouraged immigrants from southern and northern Europe. Many southern European migrants settled first in Melbourne’s inner suburbs such as Carlton and Brunswick, but as they became more financially established, and more family and friends arrived, many sought to purchase or build larger homes. Land in developing suburbs such as Oakleigh South provided an ideal opportunity for larger house blocks. Many people chose to build their own houses and local industries provided employment for many of the first generation of Greek and Italian settlers.

Education
Oakleigh South has two primary schools, Oakleigh South Primary School and Huntingdale Primary Bilingual School. The two spoken languages are English and Japanese. Oakleigh South has one secondary school, South Oakleigh Secondary College.

The Melbourne International School of Japanese, a supplementary Japanese school, holds its classes at Oakleigh South Primary.

Transport
Oakleigh South is serviced by Huntingdale railway station.

As part of the Dingley Arterial Project, Old Dandenong Road was connected to South Road, thereby linking suburbs west of Oakleigh South along South Road (such as Bentleigh, Moorabbin, and Brighton) with suburbs to the east of Oakleigh South along Old Dandenong Road (such as Heatherton and Dingley Village).

Sports
Located in southeastern Melbourne's famous Sandbelt, the area is home to three noted private golf clubs: Metropolitan Golf Club, Huntingdale Golf Club and Commonwealth Golf Club.

The Olympic Ice Skating Centre, located on Centre Road at the middle of Oakleigh South, is the oldest ice rink in Melbourne, opened on 7 July 1971. It was the only public ice rink in Melbourne until the opening of Docklands' Icehouse in 12 February 2010, and was where the Melbourne Ice of the Australian Ice Hockey League previously played up until 2009.

Parks

After the completion of the South Road Extension, Mavis Hutter Reserve was created at the corner of Carroll Road and Bourke Road. The park contains two workstations of outdoor gym equipment, a playground, and a granitic sand track. The playground comprises a slide, swings, and butterfly sculpture. The granitic sand creates a circuit in the park.

Other parks in Oakleigh South are Scammell Reserve, which contains sporting facilities and playgrounds, Dales and Talbot Parks, and Davies Reserve.

The National Trust of Australia has more than 1000 trees listed on its significant tree register. One of these trees is a flowering gum outside the Metropolitan Golf Club's clubhouse in Oakleigh South.

Demographics
According to the Australian Tax Office, the mean yearly taxable income for an Oakleigh South resident is $42,622, which is higher than the Australian average of $39,719. However, even though Oakleigh South residents earn more than the national average, they pay less in income taxes. The average Australian pays $11,554 per year in income taxes while the average Oakleigh South resident pays $9,680 per year in income taxes.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics reveals the following demographic facts about Oakleigh South:

 * The proportion of households in Oakleigh South where Greek is the main language spoken is 14.2 per cent compared to the Australian average of 1.3 per cent. The proportion of households where Italian is the main language is 4.7 per cent compared to the Australian average of 1.6 per cent.
 * Many in Oakleigh South fully own their own home. The proportion of houses that are fully owned (occupant does not pay rent or mortgage) in Oakleigh South is 42.2 per cent compared to the Australian average of 32.6 per cent.
 * There are relatively few flats, units, or apartments. Most Oakleigh South residents own separate houses. In Oakleigh South, 3.4 per cent of dwellings are flats, units, or apartments compared to the Australian average of 14.2 per cent.

Livability
A 2005 report called Livable Melbourne that was commissioned by The Age and conducted by Tract Consultants and ACIL Tasman, ranked Melbourne suburbs and assigned them scores on fourteen characteristics such as crime, CBD proximity, and traffic congestion. The report found that Oakleigh South had a very low crime rate and good proximity to cafes, restaurants, and shopping facilities. Negative characteristics of Oakleigh South include lack of trams, poor proximity to schools, lack of open spaces, and little topographical variation.

Places of Worship
The Sankat Mochan Samiti temple on North Rd conducts Hindu ceremonies and services while the South Oakleigh Gospel Hall on Centre Rd conducts Sunday schools and Christian services.

title: Oakleigh South, Victoria


text:
Template talk:Journalism

Template
Nice template. It seems clear, NPOV, maybe a bit large on the page, but well done. I need to get into how templates like this are made. Calicocat 06:48, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks! The best way to do it is to copy one: both news trade and journalism templates have edit links on them that point them to the template, in this case at Template:News-trade and Template:Journalism. The  in the page will have the exact name minus the "Template:" prefix. -SV|t|add 07:19, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I adjusted the width a bit and think it fits better on the page, I hope you don't mind. I also added a link to Video news release, which is an article I put a lot of work into and one that seemed relevant to the template. Calicocat 00:33, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Creative Nonfiction/Literary Journalism
Please include Creative nonfiction currently Literary journalism is redictred there and while they are not really identical, it is sufficent, for now, that one or the other be included major source of award-winning journalism. Yours, Calicocat 01:11, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Interactive Journalism
This is a new field of journalism and I think it should be included in the Template. It is essentially news video games. I started an article for it. It's very rough and I plan to return to it. I'm a new contributor, not sure how to give it stub classification. Check it out: Interactive journalism. --Ill seletorre 03:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Stringer
Any thoughts on adding stringer to the roles list? -- Blueshango (talk) 18:06, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Analytical journalism
Article under way --Pcernuta (talk) 11:09, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Journalism culture
The comparative overview of world-wide journalism cultures could be added in the first part of the box under "Journalism". Maybe below Journalism school and above Index of journalism articles. JaneViolett (talk) 12:02, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Scientific skepticism
I would like to propose adding a category Scientific skepticism to the Areas section (and maybe Genres as well?) This is a category of journalism distinct from science journalism. It concerned with topics that mainstream science does not generally address, such as UFOlogy, the paranormal and conspiracy theories, as well as countering claims of alt-medicine advocates. People in this field write for journals such as Skeptical Inquirer and Skeptic (U.S. magazine). How do I make this addition? RobP (talk) 16:16, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Template POV Items, Issues
Issues with this template. When I first saw this it did not contain the link to a highly questionable article named "news trade," then I saw it did, or if it was there in the first place, I didn't check all the articles it linked to and then found it's path to "news trade" original research. With that link present, this template is POV and violates policy on [no original research |original research]. I strongly object to the article "news trade" and with it's inclusion on this page, I just strongly object to this template and caution any others to not make use of it, if it contains the a link to News Trade Calicocat 15:45, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I disagree with the title heading "Marketing Influences" VNRs are not just marketing, but also govt. propaganda in the US, in part, so I'd like to change that to "Outside Influences" as NPOV, an alternative might be, Public Relations/Government Influences, which is way to long, etc. I don't want to be to bold on template editing, but to feel strongly that "marketing influences" doesn't do it. Calicocat 01:11, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Format question
This template is looking great, I'm just wondering if it needs some kind of border, it seems to be kind of floating? Also, do you think it should have a little less width? You do such good work with the templates that I'm reluctant to add or change anything. Cheers, Calicocat 20:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Can you add our Wikiprojects?
We have two projects going, the journalism one and I started a media project to help me understand how to work on the journalism project. I was thinking that we should make the Journalism project a decendent of the Media Project.

Wikiprojects
 * members needed
 * Journalsim Project
 * Media Project

I was trying to do it and I still don't get the syntax. I still don't grock how to use the template namespace or a basic html editor for simple wiki tables, etc...gree. anyway, what do you think about including them? Take care, Calicocat 11:26, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to archive.
Some of the past comments might be best archived since they involve expired issues we've moved well past. I'd archive up to the most recent couple of posts. Calicocat 11:33, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Self-references
Remember that the template, (if used on article space,) should avoid self-references - that is intended for readers, not primarily editors. A journalism/media template could be made to apply in relevant talk pages, that could legitimately contain reference to WikiProjects and recruiting for them. TheGrappler 21:08, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Template format, order of items
I like the template and find it useful, however, the use of the ampersands disturbes me. I'd rather suggest that the template items be placed in a more logical alphabetical order with some uniform character seperating the items. I do think there's a kind of point of view lurking in there somewhere, the ampersands imply replationships and a point of viewabout those relationship, I'd rather aim for a better expression of neutality. Thoughts? Calicocat 08:13, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Editorial independence
I just changed editorial independence from a redirect (Freedom of the press) to a stub. This important concept deserves better coverage and should be included in journalism once it is more than an embarrassingly short stub. Rl 08:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Would recommend adding "organizations" to the J box
It would be nice to include a section on journalism organizations -- if not just a link to a main overview of journalism organziations -- to incorporate the existence of the SPJ, Investigative Reporters & Editors, Poynter Institute, AAJA, and others to this template box.

A link maybe could go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Journalism_organizations Guroadrunner 02:55, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Template overhaul proposal
I've created a reorganization of this template here in my user namespace, mostly to distinguish fields, like fashion and business, from genres, like investigative and watchdog journalism, but also to avoid various redirects, redundancies, and one red link. I've tried to include links to the most general, well-developed articles, because those then tend to include links to articles on various more specific topics. I've also tried to tidy up the visual aspect of the text layout a bit. I realize an organizational overhaul of an article namespace template may be a bit too bold, so please comment here on this talk page or over on the temporary talk page if you have any suggestions or ideas so that I can evaluate whether or not my version is compatible with consensus. Thanks! -Tobogganoggin talk 20:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It has been a while since anybody commented here, but I'd just like to say to that the alternate version looks great!  Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 17:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC).

Well folks, it's been about two months and I've only received one (positive - thanks Curt Wilhelm VonSavage!) response, so I'm implementing my changes. Feel free to contact me for any further discussion. - Tobogganoggin talk 01:04, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Redlinks in template?

 * There is a redlink to List of journalism books in the template. I don't feel like finding sources and creating an article for that list topic, and it looks uncouth to have a redlink substed onto lots of other articles.  If and when that topic gets its own article, we can put it back, even if it's a stub.  Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 17:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC).

Erroneous with images
Template seems to be causing formatting problems on pages with images first, see Fourth Estate and MSU Faculty of Journalism. It probably needs to get fixed (I don't know how). --ssr (talk) 23:34, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Now I know how. Solution was in adding . --ssr (talk) 17:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Adding Media concentration
I suggest to add Concentration of media ownership to the template, after freedom of the press.--Desyman44 (talk) 20:33, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

 * I support its addition. Evolauxia (talk) 06:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

We would like to thank Sydney for such a memorable holiday and for the experience of your wonderful people, my wife and I where staying in the Marque Hotel up in China town we recommend the hotel and it's friendly and very helpful staff we had the misfortune to lose all our travel documents , travellers cheques and passports including our flight tickets to continue our trip to see our daughter and grand children in Adelaide to stay over christmas , you can imagine how frantic we were in trying to trace our steps to find our missing docs we needn't of worried as one of your city's amazing people actually found our doc's and by a process of detective work he contacted our daughter to find out were we where staying and delivered the said docs to our hotel, we met the young man in question and made a thank you gift to him but i feel he should get a mention on tv for his honesty and kindness he is a true ambassador for your city his name is [deleted] and he works for the assurance and advisory buisiness services of Ernst and Young he is a credit to his company. Thank you so much Sydney for a heartwarming experience , regards [deleted] xx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.110.82.132 (talk) 23:45, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Criticism?
This template appears on articles such as Propaganda model but this article does not appear in the template. Should there be room for criticism of journalism in the template? causa sui ×  23:38, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think it necessary to add the names of all articles that use the template, which should really refer only to major topics. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 23:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Collapse
This template is useful but really takes a lot of space. Can it be made to collapse? I tried <|collapse=yes> with no result. Maybe some of you authorized template code people can do it. Thanks. Marcus334  (Talk)  16:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I am no too familiar with sidebar templates, but it is not inviting to do so (it produces a big ugly "[Show]" text in the caption). Folding a sidebar may be a bad idea, since the text must rearrange when clicking. Maybe sidebar with collapsible lists can help. btw, I also find it unnecessarily broad. -DePiep (talk) 17:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Simplify lists
The listings currently are mixing two styles: a vertical list (using <br/>) and a horizontal list (using ·). To me that is confusing. I suggest we change each list into a flowing one (as Journalism footer has). -DePiep (talk) 11:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * example now in Template:Journalism/sandbox this version. Could be into hlist class later on. -DePiep (talk) 11:52, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Image on journalism siderbar
The image on the journalism sidebar template, which you can see, for example, here: Is it really adding anything? I find it distracting and confusing, and I'd suggest removing it or replacing it with something less inscrutable. It was added in this edit:. Yilloslime (talk) 17:04, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Have to say that I agree. Image seems to be an old style press pass. RobP (talk) 15:52, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
 * As there has been no reply here for months, I removed the image. RobP (talk) 02:29, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Legal journalism
How about adding Legal journalism into the section "Areas" of the template? K8M8S8 (talk) 20:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

title: Template talk:Journalism


text:
User:Doggerblow

Sockpuppet blocked indefinitely for vandalism. SlimVirgin (talk) 07:07, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)

title: User:Doggerblow


text:
Talk:Skip James

Untitled
wouldn't be surprised if there's a mississippi john hurt record with the same name, but this one is Skip, see links.

[http://bluesnet.hub.org/artists/skip.james.html Discovered in a hospital in Tunica he appeared at the 1964 Newport Folk Festival and subsequently recorded two superb albums for Vanguard, the pick of which is Skip James Today! which features his best known compositions: "Hard Time Killing Floor Blues", "Special Rider Blues" and "I'm So Glad", among others.]

[http://launch.yahoo.com/read/review/14204687 The 12 sides that comprise Today! are among the best James would record after his rediscovery in the '60s. His playing may be a bit less intricate than that captured on his legendary 78s from the '30s, but his unique falsetto sounds no less troubled or haunting than before on this album's definitive performances of "Hard Times Killing Floor Blues," "Special Rider Blues," and one of James' few later compositions, "Washington D.C. Hospital Center Blues."]

--Heah 06:51, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Verifiability

 * I added the {POV} tag. The article contains many unsourced statements such as :"James is regarded as a gifted and distinctive guitarist". More references, less fancruft please,

 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

What references would you require? We are discussing folk musicians, not scientific studies. Just listen to the music. I suppose one could gather together fingerpicking guitarists and ask them to set down their impressions of his music so there would be a documentary reference, but perhaps I may set down my opinion here: "James is regarded amongst the many fingerpicking guitarist that I know, as a gifted and distinctive guitarist" - ED Denson. Satisfactory? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edenson (talk • contribs) 19:42, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No, because that would be original research, which Wikipedia does not do or report. Wikipedia reports and summarises only information that has been published elsewhere, by reliable sources.  Sorry, but your opinion doesn't count.  You might find it worthwhile to look at this guidance as well - "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth — what counts is whether readers can verify that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true."  Of course, I'm sure there are many published sources that testify to Skip James' skills - the trick is to find them, and include the references in the article.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:12, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Skip James is a unique talent and does require any support more anybody's ears to testify it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.11.209.83 (talk) 05:30, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

 * You are missing the point - see the detailed comments above. Your opinion, my opinion, someone else's ears etc., count for nothing on Wikipedia. Text within articles needs to be sourced (as explained).  This article is typical of many in that some editors find it irresistible adding their own thoughts, ideas and opinions - it is not how Wikipedia is supposed to work.  Like it or loathe it, it is as simple as that.

 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 10:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

 * IMHO, this article is in a better shape than it possibly has ever been. However, it still needs a considerable input of references.  Thus I have added the {Refimprove} tag in the vain hope that someone else will help out.  Thanks,

 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 01:41, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

The entry writer says, "James' classically-informed, finger-picking style was fast and clean, using the entire register of the guitar with heavy, hypnotic bass lines," and someone has posted "citation needed." Why on earth would a citation be needed for info gleaned from listening to the music? — Preceding unsigned comment added by E-elemental (talk • contribs) 22:32, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

 * I refer to the comments above. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a collection of what various editors ears may choose to hear and prefer.  Please read Verifiability, or more broadly Five pillars.

 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Tuning
I'd like to see a reference on the D Minor tuning. Everythng I have read--and I have citations--indicated that Skip used E Minor tuning, not D Minor. The songs in question are in the key of E Minor, so Skip would have had to use a capo to get his guitar to sound in E Minor if tuned to D Minor. Robert Johnson's song "Hellhound On My Trail" is in E Minor tuning.

ACushen (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I believe you are correct, I changed it to E minor and cited a quote from Stephen Calt's biography of Skip James where he mentions that it was tuned to an open E minor. 169.232.198.121 (talk) 18:25, 3 May 2013 (UTC)z

Wenders
Thanks for your changings: being french, my english is awkward! But I think it's a pity to have suppressed the quotation of Vietnam blues, a song which shows Skip's deep involvment (despite the fact that he was so ill) abouts this war, and about the poor blokes who had to kill "maybe their brothers"! Not many blues lyrics are so involved, ansd Cassandra's version is great! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mardigan (talk • contribs) 12:09, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

 * There are two or three potential problems with that. Firstly, the quoting of lyrics may be deemed to be a copyright violation, whilst someone writing an anti-Vietnam war song is really not particularly notable in itself.  Secondly, statements regarding whether "blues lyrics are so involved, ansd Cassandra's version is great" are purely personal opinions, which violate both WP:POV and WP:V.

 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:59, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks fot answering. But I never wrote in the article that "Cassandra 's version (was) great": just in this talk! I wrote: "Cassandra Wilson, who sings Vietnam blues. In this song, Skip James shows a real political conscience for « The poor boys fightin’ and hidin’ in them holes / Maybe killin’ their brothers they don’t know. », which is neutral ans expresses only the truth. It is legal to quote some lines of a song or paragraphs of a book: if not, nobody could write literary critics. Furthermore, millions of wkp pages makes compliments about singers, actors, sportsmen... even in this page, where praises are logicaly written about Skip's style. Im not so sure that many traditional bluesmen wrote songs against Vietnam war, contrarily to folk singer or rockers.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mardigan (talk • contribs) 10:50, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Skip James


text:
User:YS1

br:Implijer:YS1 de:Benutzer:YS1 eo:Vikipediisto:YS1 fr:Utilisateur:YS1

title: User:YS1


text:
La Fin de Satan

La Fin de Satan ("The End of Satan", 1886) is a long religious epic by Victor Hugo, of which 5,700 lines were written between 1854 and 1862, but left unfinished and published after his death.

When it was rejected by his publisher in 1857, Hugo tried to integrate it into Petites Epopées (later La Légende des siècles), eventually announcing that it would form a companion work, along with Dieu. His intention, apparently, was to invest the storming of the Bastille with a religious significance; after making various efforts, he ceased work on it in 1862 and returned to novels. There are many gaps large and small.

Argument
Satan is defeated and thrown into the Abyss ("Depuis quatre mille ans il tombait dans l'abîme"), but Evil is communicated to Man through the agency of Lilith-Isis. She provides three weapons with which Cain murders Abel:

The Bronze will become a gauntlet, symbol of War; the Wood will become a gibbet, or crucifix, symbol of Execution; and the Stone will become a prison, symbol of Oppression.

This preface is followed by three books, interleaved with otherworldly episodes.

Book the First tells the story of Nimrod, a powerful and monstrous king of Judaea. Wandering the Earth, which he has fully dominated and laid waste, he decides to conquer the heavens. For this purpose, he builds a cage and attaches four giant eagles to it, with the meat of dead lions above their heads to draw them upward. With his servant, the eunuch, Nimrod releases the cage from its tethers, and the eagles start towards the heavens. After a journey of one year, moving continuously upwards and finding only an immense blue, Nimrod shoots an arrow into the infinite, and is thrown back to Earth.

Book the Second describes the life and death of Jesus. It emphasises the evil of human beings. In "Tenebres" (II:XXI), Barabbas curses this impure world which liberated him instead of Christ, and claims that we would have chosen to die if offered the choice.

Book the Third is about the storming of the Bastille. (Almost nothing in this book was completed.)

Structure

 * Hors de la Terre ("Beyond Earth"), I
 * La Première Page
 * Livre Première: Le Glaive
 * Hors de la Terre, II
 * Livre Deuxième: Le Gibet ("The Gallows")
 * La Judée ("Judea")
 * Jésus-Christ
 * Le Crucifix
 * Hors de la Terre, III
 * Satan dans la Nuit ("Satan at Night")
 * L'Ange Liberté ("The Angel of Liberty")
 * Livre Troisième: La Prison
 * Hors de la Terre, IV

title: La Fin de Satan


text:
Yuen Qiu

Cheung Cheun-Nam, known professionally as Yuen Qiu (born 19 April 1950), is a Hong Kong actress and martial artist. She is an expert of both Chinese martial arts and Beijing-opera skills, and was apprenticed at the Peking Opera School under the same master, Yu Jim-yuen, as Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung.

Early life
On 19 April 1950, Yuen was born as Cheung Cheun-Nam in Hong Kong. Yuen was given the performance name of Yuen Qiu.

Education
Yuen attended a Peking Opera School in Kowloon, Hong Kong.

Career
Yuen was a stuntwoman and a night club performer from the late 1960s to early 1970s.

In 1974, Yuen had a small role in the international production, The Man with the Golden Gun (1974), portraying as Hip's niece Nara rescuing Roger Moore as James Bond.

In 1979, Yuen was able to demonstrate her acrobatic and kicking abilities in Dragon's Claw. In 1970s, there were limited opportunities for stuntwomen.

After being away from the Hong Kong film industry for nearly 20 years, she landed a role in Kung Fu Hustle only by chance. She was accompanying a junior woman fellow of the China Drama Academy at the audition but the director's eye was on her. It was reported that Stephen Chow convinced her to take on the role only after unremitting and persistent persuasion.

Yuen later appeared in the movie Kung Fu Mahjong, with Yuen Wah, and has been active in cinema since then.

Personal life
In 1985, Yuen was married to martial arts director Lu Chun-koo (魯俊谷). Together they have a son and a daughter. Yuen and Lu divorced in 1995.

On 31 March 2005, Yuen was arrested along with 10 other women and two men for illegal gambling.

title: Yuen Qiu


text: User:Agathocles of Bactria

title: User:Agathocles of Bactria


text:
User talk:Arctic.gnome

"Edmonton Strathcona" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Edmonton_Strathcona&redirect=no Edmonton Strathcona] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Canadian Swing Championships for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Canadian Swing Championships is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Canadian Swing Championships until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.  Sdkb  talk 20:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

title: User talk:Arctic.gnome


text:
Bujang Valley

The Bujang Valley (Lembah Bujang) is a sprawling historical complex and has an area of approximately 224 km2, with the discovery of a set of new iron smelting sites, Sungai Batu site enlarging the settlement area to 1000 km2. Bujang Valley situated near Merbok, Kedah, between 1,217-metre Mount Jerai in the north and Muda River in the south. It is the richest archaeological area in Malaysia.

The area consists of ruins that may date more than 1,500 years old. More than 50 ancient pagoda temples, called candi (pronounced as "chandi"), have also been unearthed. The most impressive and well-preserved of these is located in Pengkalan Bujang, Merbok. The Bujang Valley Archaeological Museum is also located that known as Sungai Batu, excavations have revealed jetty remains, iron-smelting sites, and a clay brick monument dating back to 110 AD, making it the oldest man-made structure to be recorded in Southeast Asia.

The local rulers adopted Hindu-Buddhist Indian cultural and political models earlier than those of Kutai in eastern Borneo, in southern Celebes or Tarumanegara in western Java, where remains showing Indian influence have been found dating from the early 5th century. Relics found in the Bujang Valley are now on display at the archaeological museum. Items include inscribed stone caskets and tablets, metal tools and ornaments, ceramics, pottery, and Hindu icons.

Etymology
The archaeological remains suggest a Buddhist polity once existed in the area. In Sanskrit the term bhujangga means "scholar", thus the name itself is roughly translated into "Scholars' Valley". The Malaysian word bujang means "bachelor" and suggests a combined meaning of "bachelor scholars" who pursued spiritual studies instead of wordly ties.

Archaeological research
For the past two decades, students from universities around Malaysia have been invited for research and have done their graduate works at the Valley. Much of the historical links is still vague considering not many of the scriptures and writings survive. Even the temples did not survive the onslaught of age because their wooden roofing has rotted and withered over the past 1,200 years. The museum itself is inadequate and not organised, much of the findings are elsewhere scattered from Museum Negara to Singapore (which once formed a part of Malaysia). Folk stories and oral history also provide place for a magnificent kingdom of jewels and gold. Outside peninsular and insular Southeast Asia, oral history in India suggests the presence of golden chariots and jewels in hidden caves at Bujang Valley and Mount Jerai. Some visitors to the antiquity department at Muzium Negara has eyewitness accounts of magnificent objects such as a 10-feet-tall Raja Bersiung Throne and various idols and items from the Valley. In 2013, it was reported that, a 1,200-year-old Hindu Temple at the site, identified as Candi No. 11, had been demolished by a land developer. Candi 11 was one of the most ancient of the Old Kedah kingdom and was amongst 17 registered candi. In the face of public criticism, the Kedah State Government sought to deflect blame by claiming that it was powerless to do anything because the land was privately owned and further, that the site had not been gazetted as a historical site. After the controversy, the Tourism and Heritage Ministry has agreed to consider gazetting the Bujang Valley as heritage site.

Before the 1970s, the research in Bujang Valley was done by western archaeologists, the most prominent ones include H.G. Quaritch Wales, Dorothy Wales, and Alastair Lamb. After the 1970s, local archaeologists were trained to continue the research, excavations and reconstructions of sites were done by National University of Malaysia and University of Malaya in collaboration with National Museum. The most prominent local archaeologist who did research in the Bujang Valley was Nik Hassan Shuhaimi Nik Abdul Rahman who wrote and publish countless books and articles on this topic. He introduced a periodisation of the history of Bujang Valley as well as a theory which explains about the process of indigenisation of the Indian Culture which formed the socio-economic make up of the polity. Other earlier local archaeologist who significantly contributed to the research of Bujang Valley include from Leong Sau Heng, Mohd Supian Sabtu, Kamarudin Zakaria, and Zulkifli Jaafar. After 2008, The Centre for Global Archaeological Research (CGAR) from University Sains Malaysia, led by Mohd Mokhtar Saidin explored a new archaeological complex which reveals dozens of new sites, said to be dated from 2nd CE.

History
Claudius Ptolemaeus (Greek: Κλαύδιος Πτολεμαῖος; c. 90 – c. 168), known in English as Ptolemy, was a Greek geographer, astronomer, and astrologer who had written about Golden Chersonese, which indicates trade with India and China has existed since the 1st century AD.

As early as the 1st century AD, Southeast Asia was the place of a network of coastal city-states, the centre of which was the ancient Khmer Funan kingdom in the south of what is now Vietnam. This network encompassed the southern part of the Indochinese peninsula and the western part of the Indonesian archipelago. These coastal cities had a continuous trade as well as tributary relation with China from very early period, at the same time being in constant contact with Indian traders.

The rulers of the western part of Indonesia adopted Indian cultural and political models e.g. proof of such Indian influence on Indonesian art in the 5th century, i. e. an Amaravati Buddha statue found in southern Sulawesi and a Sanskrit inscription found east of Jakarta. Three inscriptions found in Palembang (South Sumatra) and on Bangka Island, written in a form of Malay and in an alphabet derived from the Pallava script, are proof that these "Indonesians" had definitely adopted Indian models while maintaining their indigenous language and social system. These inscriptions reveal the existence of a Dapunta Hyang (lord) of Srivijaya who led an expedition against his enemies and who curses those who will not obey his law.

Being on the maritime route between China and South India, the Malay peninsula was involved in this trade The Bujang Valley, being strategically located at the northwest entrance of the Strait of Malacca as well as facing the Bay of Bengal, was continuously frequented by Chinese and south Indian traders. Such was proven by the discovery of trade ceramics, sculptures, inscriptions and monuments dated from the 5th to 14th century CE. The Bujang Valley was continuously administered by different thalassocratical powers including Funan, Srivijaya and Majapahit before the trade declined.

Kedah inscriptions
In Kedah there are remains showing Buddhist and Hindu influences which has been known for about a century now from the discoveries reported by Col. Low and has recently been subjected to a fairly exhaustive investigation by Dr. Quaritch Wales.

An inscribed stone bar, rectangular in shape, bears the ye-dharma hetu formula in Pallava script of the 7th century, thus proclaiming the Buddhist character of the shrine near the find-spot (site I) of which only the basement survives. It is inscribed on three faces in 6th century, possibly earlier. Except for the Cherok To'kun Inscription which was engraved on a large boulder, other inscriptions discovered in Bujang Valley are comparatively small in size and probably were brought in by Buddhist pilgrimage or traders.

UNESCO proposal
UNESCO made a report in 1987 endorsing the site. In 2014, some ruins of candi (temples) in Bujang were destroyed by an urban developer, causing an international outcry against attacks on cultural heritage. In 2017, the government of Malaysia announced that more research on the site is still needed, thus excluding it from the Malaysian tentative list. The government also said that Bujang's Merbok Museum and Pengkalan Bujang held historical significance to the site.

The Bujang Valley is currently in the process of being nominated by Malaysia into the UNESCO World Heritage List since 2013. In 2017, the government announced that they will make more research and conservation efforts in the valley to preserve its outstanding universal value. The site's inclusion to the world heritage list is backed by diplomats from India, Indonesia, Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Singapore, the Philippines, Timor-Leste, Bangladesh, Japan, Bhutan, Nepal, Myanmar, Laos, Brunei, Papua New Guinea, Maldives, and Sri Lanka.

title: Bujang Valley


text:
Talk:Siatista

Untitled
Reads like a travel pamphlet. gren 06:59, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I would agree with this. The part about Siatista being the only "unsubjugated" area in Macedonia is also quite umbiguous and too partial to be included in an Encyclopedia article. chris 15:35, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have been to Siatista, and the local people do view it as a "fact" that they were the only unsubjugated part of Macedonia. From what I have gathered, it would be more accurate to say that there were not a completely subjugated as other areas.

Also, the town has a website: www.siatista.gr —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.152.236.4 (talk • contribs)

title: Talk:Siatista


text:
Hemayetpur

Hemayetpur or Himaitpur (হেমায়েতপুর) is a small village of Pabna Sadar Upazila in Pabna District of Bangladesh. It is situated on the bank of Padma river.

This is birthplace of Sree Sree Thakur Anukulchandra. He initiated a spiritual movement in Bangladesh which subsequently spread to India. He preached the simplicity of life and attainment of high spiritual realization. He never advocated austerity and instead promoted the normal way of life through which self-realization could be attained. He was a physician, educationist and social reformer, who influenced great leaders of his time. Mahatma Gandhi visited him in Himaitpur as did other leaders, to seek his views and draw inspiration for creating a new India. He had built a philanthropic organization called 'Satsang' in Himaitpur. Sri Sri Thakur Anukulchandra left Himaitpur and came to Deoghar, Jharkhand, India on 1 September 1946 and in 1947 the partition of India happened. The Satsang buildings of Sree Sree Thakur were taken over by the then Eastern Pakistan (now Bangladesh) government with Vested Property Act. Pabna Mental Hospital was moved into them in 1960. The entire property of Sree Sree Thakur still remains public property of Bangladesh Government till today.

Hemayetpur has the only government-run mental hospital in Bangladesh.

title: Hemayetpur


text:
Talk:DownloadStudio

On 3 Apr 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. See Votes for deletion/DownloadStudio

seems to be malware
Reference https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34641025 2601:602:9803:990:4DD9:6C3:45C7:7E62 (talk) 18:43, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:DownloadStudio


text:
Talk:Dæmon (His Dark Materials)

Cause and Effect
It is said in the article that: "Lord Asriel claims that the act of settling triggers Dust to begin to be attracted to the person." This is what we do believe at this point in the trilogy, but later we find out that Dust is the cause of setteling, and not the other way around. Dust (the angels betraying heaven etc.) is the thing that makes you sentient, an adult, and one manifestation of that is settling.109.186.94.42 (talk) 02:04, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Original research
This article had the phrase, "(at least, when caused by a very high fall) ", in the last sentence of the first paragraph of the section 1 Form 1.1 Separation. But beginning with the last paragraph on page 375, Lord Asriel says, "There was something else that happened when the made the cut...The energy that links the body and the dæ mon is immensely powerful. When the cut is made, all that energy dissapates...they never thought of harnessing it." Clearly stating that the energy becomes available any time the link is cut. It appears that falling off the cliff severed the link between Roger and his dæmon, but that fall was not necessary to getting the energy by cutting the link.Nick Beeson (talk) 15:10, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

 * Nick Beeson, there is/was quite a lot of 'fan-sitey' speculation in ALL the HDM pages, ditto over-detailed info. I spent several months trying to clean up, but retired exhausted. If you are fairly sure of your ground, I would prune. There are now few editors editing these pages. Pincrete (talk) 12:41, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Dæmon (His Dark Materials). 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/20080305011900/http://www.moreintelligentlife.com:80/node/697? to http://www.moreintelligentlife.com/node/697
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.avnet.co.uk/amaranth/Critic/ivpullman.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:18, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

A source to check
According to Cantrell, the daemons are also discussed in this work that I was not able to locate:
 * Townsend, John Rowe. "Paradise Reshaped." Horn Book Magazine 78, no. 4 (2002): 415-424. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:49, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dæmon (His Dark Materials)


text:
List of Art Deco buildings in Tasmania

This list of Art Deco buildings in Tasmania includes historically significant Art Deco buildings in Tasmania.

Art Deco is a loose term, that may include:
 * Interwar Free Classicism (Deco Free Classicism): using classical motifs largely as decoration, in a very stylised or abstracted manner, with little reference to the norms of the classical language
 * Jazz Moderne [Zig-Zag Moderne]: No particular classical references. Angular lines and vertical emphasis. Somewhat related to ‘Skyscraper Gothic’.
 * Streamline Moderne: No particular classical references. Curved lines and horizontal emphasis. Related to the ‘streamlining’ of contemporary forms of transport.

Office and commercial buildings

 * Commonwealth Bank Building, Hobart, Elizabeth Street, Hobart
 * Hobart Mercury Building, Hobart
 * Hydro-Electric Commission Building, Davey Street, Hobart
 * Prudential Insurance Building, Elizabeth Street, Hobart
 * T&G Insurance Building, Hobart
 * Colonial Mutual Life building, Hobart
 * Original Myer Building, Liverpool Street, Hobart (Destroyed By fire 22 September 2007)
 * Former Government Printer, 2-4 Salamanca Place, Hobart
 * Land's Building, Hobart
 * The State Library of Tasmania, Hobart
 * 10 Murray Street, Hobart (demolished 2018)
 * Holyman House, corner of Brisbane and George Street, Launceston
 * Hotel Charles (Old Launceston General Hospital), Launceston
 * Park Hotel, Invermay Road, Launceston
 * Former Tasmania Savings Bank, Invermay Road, Launceston
 * Holmes Building, corner Brisbane and Charles Street, Launceston
 * Duncan House, Launceston
 * Princess Theatre, Launceston
 * Alfred Harrap Building, corner of Tamar and Cimitier Street, Launceston
 * Shepherds Bakery, corner Quadrant and St John Street, Launceston
 * Medibank House (Launceston Gas Company), St John Street, Launceston
 * Lucks Corner, corner Patterson and George Street, Launceston
 * Star Theatre (St Vincent De Pauls), Invermay Road, Launceston
 * Rapson Tyre Factory, west end of Gleadow Street, Invermay, Launceston
 * Deacons Corner, corner Lytton Street and Invermay Road, Invermay, Launceston
 * Legacy House, Launceston
 * Hently House, Launceston
 * Don College, Devonport

Institutional buildings

 * Royal Hobart Hospital, Hobart

title: List of Art Deco buildings in Tasmania


text:
Sanibel Causeway

The Sanibel Causeway is a causeway in Southwest Florida that spans San Carlos Bay, connecting Sanibel Island with the Florida mainland in Punta Rassa. The causeway consists of three separate two-lane bridge spans, and two-man-made causeway islands between them. The entire causeway facility is owned by Lee County and operated by the Lee County Department of Transportation (DOT). The causeway is 3 mi long with a $6 toll for island-bound vehicles only.

Portions of the causeway were destroyed by Hurricane Ian on September 28, 2022 and reopened on October 19, 2022.

Background
As early as 1912, automobile ferries serviced Sanibel Island from the mainland at Punta Rassa. The idea of building a bridge from the mainland to the island was highly controversial amongst the early residents of the island, as many thought a bridge would ruin the beauty and isolated feel of the island, although one of the largest proponents of building a bridge was island resident Hugo Lindgren, who saw the island's potential and tried to convince Lee County to build a bridge. Despite the opinions of the islanders, it was clear that the ferries were insufficient by the mid-1950s as demand increased leading to long lines of vehicles waiting to cross the bay. Wildfires on the island in 1955 further convinced the county to build a bridge as it would improve access to the island for firefighters.

Planning and construction
An early proposal would have had a bridge running from Point Ybel (where Sanibel Lighthouse is currently located) to the mainland, since it was the shortest route. The current route was ultimately selected due to the bay being shallower and two causeway islands could be created by dredging. While Bailey Road was then selected as the terminus of the bridge on the island, Hugo Lindgren granted the county right-of-way through his property on the bay, which the county accepted. Construction on the entire causeway and the three original bridges lasted 15 months and cost $2.73 million. It was the last major project designed by Hector F.J. Estrup, civil engineer and owner of Caribbean Engineers.

Opening and early years
The Sanibel Causeway was completed and opened for traffic on May 26, 1963. Due to the causeway, Sanibel Island experienced major growth in the early 1970s leading to Sanibel's incorporation into Lee County's third city, which took place on November 5, 1974. Former congressman and CIA director Porter Goss served as Sanibel's first mayor.

By the early 1990s, the original bridges began showing signs of rapid deterioration due to the bay's saltwater, prompting the county to make major repairs. As a result, Lee County briefly proposed the idea of replacing the bridges with a single four-lane high-span bridge. This idea was abandoned due to opposition from island residents. Further repairs were made in 1997 as rapid deterioration from overall lack of maintenance and saltwater corrosion continued. In 2001, the county made plans to replace Bridges B and C, and make major repairs to Bridge A (the drawbridge).

During a routine inspection in early 2003, severe cracks were discovered underneath a 48 ft deck section on Bridge B. After this discovery, all three of the bridges were very closely monitored, and the damaged section was braced with additional steel pilings. Bridge B's speed limit was temporarily lowered to 10 mi/h, and the rest of the causeway's speed limit was lowered to 20 mi/h. A temporary 10-ton weight limit was put in place. Lee County determined that the 48 ft deck section needed to be completely replaced as soon as possible. After extensive preparations, the causeway was shut down all day on January 20, 2003. The deck section was replaced with a steel grate section. The replacement was completed quickly, and the causeway re-opened ahead of schedule. After this turn of events, Lee County reexamined its original plan for rehabilitating Bridge A (the drawbridge), and concluded that all three of the bridges needed to be replaced as soon as possible.

Replacing the bridges
Once it was decided to replace the drawbridge, there was a debate on replacing it with another drawbridge versus a high-span bridge. The county wanted a high-span, while a number of Sanibel residents wanted another drawbridge. Shortly before construction was set to begin on the high-span bridge, the city filed a lawsuit against Lee County in an attempt to stop construction. Sanibel claimed that Lee County did not maintain the bridges properly and used the toll revenue for other road projects. Lee County then filed a counter-lawsuit, claiming Sanibel was interfering with construction. A second lawsuit against Lee County was filed by a group of Sanibel residents who created a non-profit organization called "Save Our Bay, Inc." All of the lawsuits delayed construction and were eventually dismissed.

Construction of the high-span bridges commenced in May 2004. On August 13, 2004, the area was struck by Hurricane Charley, a Category 4 hurricane. The causeway received minor damage and was inspected before Sanibel residents were permitted to return to the island. In November 2004, the $3 toll was increased to $6 to finance construction. Construction on the high spans lasted three years and cost $137 million. An official grand opening ceremony for the bridges was held on September 8, 2007. The original drawbridge was later demolished, and their remains sunk into the water to create artificial reefs in the San Carlos Bay and the Gulf of Mexico.

In March 2020, Lee County-owned toll bridges were temporarily transitioned to all-electronic tolling due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This change became permanent on June 23, 2021. The $3 administrative fee for vehicles without transponders was suspended during the pandemic and was reinstated on October 1. The motorcycle discount plans were removed as part of the plan for a permanent transition to all-electronic tolling.

Hurricane Ian
On September 28, 2022, Hurricane Ian partially destroyed the causeway, and the mainland approach was heavily damaged. Both the islands of Sanibel and Captiva were cut off from the mainland United States by road. No deaths or injuries were confirmed by the Lee County Sheriff's Office. After undergoing emergency repairs, the causeway reopened to trucks on October 11, and reopened to all vehicular traffic on October 20.

Permanent repairs to the causeway were completed in 2024. As part of this work, improvements were made to the causeway’s design to better withstand future storms without cutting off access to the mainland.

Bridge A
Bridge A is the bridge closest to the mainland at Punta Rassa. Bridge A is 70 ft tall and stands as the tallest bridge in Lee County. The bridge previously holding this record was the nearby Matanzas Pass Bridge, which is 65 ft tall. The original Bridge A was a 26 ft high drawbridge. The current Bridge A finally opened for traffic on June 28, 2007, along with the current toll plaza.

The Sanibel-Captiva Optimists Club had held a raffle for the opportunity to be the operator of the drawbridge's machinery for its final opening. A private ceremony was held the day after the current bridge opened to commemorate the drawbridge's final opening. Seasonal Sanibel residents Bob and Ana Finks won the raffle, and they also got to keep the operating lever from the drawbridge's control room as part of the prize.

Bridge B
Bridge B is the middle bridge, and is also the shortest of the three bridges. The current Bridge B opened for traffic on April 11, 2007, making it the first of the current spans to open. The current Bridge B was built ten feet taller than the original Bridge B to help reduce corrosion from salt spray, which was one of the major factors in the deterioration of the old bridge. Unlike the other two bridges, Bridge B is a low-level bridge, and has no navigation channel passing underneath.

The first few sets of piling from the original bridge on the south shore remain today. While the county initially planned to demolish the entire structure, a grassroots campaign was launched by local fisherman to have part of the span left intact for a fishing pier similar to the former spans of the Sunshine Skyway Bridge and the Overseas Highway. Despite the campaign initially succeeding, plans to install new deck sections on top of the pilings for the pier were scrapped in early 2010 due to budget cuts.

Bridge C
Bridge C is the closest bridge to Sanibel Island, and is also the longest of the three bridges. Bridge C's vertical clearance over its navigation channel is 26 ft. The current Bridge C opened for traffic on September 8, 2007, making it the last of the current spans to open. Similar to Bridge B, the current Bridge C was also constructed ten feet taller than the original bridge.

Causeway Islands Park

The causeway's islands were dredged from the San Carlos Bay when the original bridges were built. Since the completion of the current bridges, the islands have been operated as Causeway Islands Park by Lee County Parks and Recreation. The islands are referred to as Island A and Island B, and they serve as public beaches. Island B includes restroom facilities on each side of the road. The islands have always been a popular area among beachgoers for windsurfing and kitesurfing.

Media references
In Blue Collar Comedy Tour: One for the Road (2006), comedian Ron White makes a reference to the old Sanibel Causeway bridge when he said he was pulled over for driving 11 mi/h in a 5-mile-per-hour zone on one of the bridges. The speed limit was indeed reduced to 10 mi/h on one of the bridges after speculation that the bridges were severely damaged from corrosion.

title: Sanibel Causeway


text:
Talk:Society of Mathematicians, Physicists and Astronomers of Slovenia

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Society of Mathematicians, Physicists and Astronomers of Slovenia. 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/20050207000019/http://www.eps.org/natsocs/slovenia.html to http://www.eps.org/natsocs/slovenia.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:04, 27 December 2017 (UTC)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newton Arvin

 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

Newton Arvin
Definitely notable, this is a must keep!!! I dont understand why, something so critical would even be considered for deletion. KEEP!
 * del. nonnotable. old news. Mikkalai 07:07, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's a towering work of genius now that I'm done with it.
 * Vote by User:64.160.45.112, who has a dozen edits.
 * Weak keep as published author, even if he only writes meta-literature. Radiant_* 10:17, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, you can buy his book and a biography of him  on Amazon.com, plus 800 Google hits, pretty good for an author who's been dead for more than 40 years. --bainer 12:55, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - Very notable. Whats with you guys? --Irishpunktom\talk 14:42, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - National Book Award = notable. FreplySpang (talk) 14:49, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable enough for me. --Myles Long 15:55, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep this "towering work of genius". Kappa 19:51, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep -- notable enough. - Longhair | Talk 12:30, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * keep because it is very notable ok? Yuckfoo 00:45, 26 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:Valmorification

On 3 Apr 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. See Votes for deletion/Valmorification

title: Talk:Valmorification