text:
Ice hockey at the 1992 Winter Olympics

The men's ice hockey tournament at the 1992 Winter Olympics in Albertville, France, was the 17th Olympic Championship. The games were played at the Méribel Ice Palace in Méribel, about 45 km from host city Albertville. The competition, held from 9 to 23 February, was won by the Unified Team in its only appearance. The team was composed of some newly emerged nations from the former Soviet Union, which had dissolved just weeks before the Games began. Canada won the silver medal, its first hockey medal since 1968 and 11th Olympic ice hockey medal.

Qualification
The Olympic tournament was to be contested by twelve nations. The top eleven nations from the 1991 World Championships (eight from pool A, top three from pool B) qualified directly, while the twelfth ranked nation had to play off against the winner of that year's pool C.

Poland qualified in final tournament

First round
Twelve participating teams were placed in two groups. After playing a round-robin, the top four teams in each group advanced to the Medal Round while the last two teams competed in the consolation round for the 9th to 12th places.

Group A

Group B

9–12th-place semifinals

Quarter-finals

5–8th-place semifinals

Semi-finals

Average age
Team Germany was the oldest team in the tournament, averaging 28 years and 6 months. Team USA was the youngest team in the tournament, averaging 24 years. Gold medalists Unified Team averaged 24 years and 2 months. Tournament average was 26 years and 4 months.

Unified Medal controversy
Russian goaltender Nikolai Khabibulin was the third on the depth chart and never played when the Unified Team won gold in Albertville, France. Instead of giving the gold to someone who did not play, coach Viktor Tikhonov kept it. Only players are given Olympic medals; coaches and management are not. The medal was returned to Khabibulin in a private medal ceremony during the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah.

title: Ice hockey at the 1992 Winter Olympics


text:
Talk:Hemiplegia

Untitled
WHAT IS THE BEST TREATMENT FOR THIS TYPE OF STROKE INITIATED SPEECH LOSS?

 * Rehabilitation. JFW | T@lk  00:41, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

hemiplegia during pregnancy? I think this is trying to say that a common time for hemiplegia to begin is "in utero or at parturition"...not "during pregnancy". The latter would imply that the mother is affected while she is pregnant, but not after, which contradicts a later statement saying that spontaneous recovery is very rare. I don't know enough about the condition to jump in and make the change, though. Would someone more knowledgeable do so if appropriate? Rootlet (talk) 23:26, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Merge Hemiparesis and Hemiplegia
This article basically covers the same ground as hemiparesis. I don't see a need for separate discussions on the causes, treatment, pathophysiology of each condition since they are the same. Hemiplegia is just the most severe form of hemiparesis. In comparison, Quadriparesis redirects to Quadriplegia (technically they both redirect to Tetraplegia). The convention seems to be keeping the "plegia" page (monoplegia, triplegia) so that's how I want to merge them. --Gccwang (talk) 16:30, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Hemiplegia one is a more severe version of the other. Should be merged to hemiparesis as that is the broader term. Happy to see a merge. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 08:29, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Support merge of Hemiplegia into Hemiparesis Jytdog (talk) 03:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Hemiplegia


text:
San Diego Botanic Garden

The San Diego Botanic Garden is a botanical garden in Encinitas, California. The garden includes rare bamboo groves (said to be the largest bamboo collection in the United States), desert gardens, a tropical rainforest, California native plants, Mediterranean climate landscapes, and a subtropical fruit garden. The garden sits on 37 acres (150,000 m2) of land.

Until 1957 the gardens were the private estate of Ruth Baird Larabee, at which time she donated her house and grounds to the County of San Diego. The Quail Botanical Gardens Foundation was established in 1961. In March 1970, the Quail Botanic Garden opened as a public botanic garden. The name was changed in 2009 to San Diego Botanic Garden. Today the gardens include over 5,000 varieties of plants from around the world, including tropical, subtropical, and California native plants. The botanical garden also house geographically organized areas for Africa, Australia, Arid Madagascar Garden, Arid South America, the Canary Islands, Cape South Africa, Central America, the Himalayas, the Mediterranean, the Middle East, and New Zealand.

Selected plants
Plant varieties include fuchsias, hibiscus, bamboos, proteas, cacti and succulents, as well as other drought-resistant plants including Australian shrubs. Herbs, water plants, wildflowers, perennials, brugmansias, cork oaks, and palms are also featured.

One such plant is the corpse flower, which bloomed in July 2023, for the first time in a couple years. The plant stands at around 4 feet tall, and in order to see it, guests must reserve a viewing time in advance, as it is only in bloom for a few days. One identifying feature of a corpse flower is it's strong smell, which has been compared to rotting flesh. The flowers are classified as endangered, and botanic gardens around the United States, are working to preserve them.

Of particular interest is the maturing Cork Oak (Quercus suber) forest. Paths wind through a cluster of twisted and majestic Cork Oaks. Cork Oaks groves in other parts of the world are still harvested for their cork (bark) that is used in for corks placed in wine bottles, as well as for purses, jewelry and wallets.

title: San Diego Botanic Garden


text:
Gakgung

The Korean Bow (각궁, Gak-gung hanja: 角弓, or horn bow) is a water buffalo horn-based composite reflex bow, standardized centuries ago from a variety of similar weapons in earlier use. Due to its long use by Koreans, it is also known as Guk Gung (국궁 hanja: 國弓, or national bow). The Korean bow utilizes a thumb draw and therefore employing the use of a thumb ring is quite common. The Korean thumb ring is somewhat different from the Manchu, Mongol, or the Turkic Thumb Ring, as it comes in two styles, male and female. Male thumb rings are shaped with a small protrusion that sticks out that the bowstring hooks behind (similar to a release aid), while the female thumb ring simply covers the front joint of the thumb as protection from getting blisters (pulling heavy bows repetitively with only the thumb can easily cause blisters to form on the pad of the thumb).

Gungsul, 궁술, hanja: 弓術, sometimes also romanized as goong sool, literally means "techniques of the bow", "way of the bow", or "skill with the bow". It is also referred to as Korean traditional archery. Gungdo, 궁도, hanja: 弓道, is another epithet for traditional Korean archery, as used by Koreans.

History of military origin and usage
The reflex bow had been the most important weapon for Koreans in wars with Chinese dynasties and nomadic peoples, recorded from the 1st century BC. Legend says the first king and founder of the Goguryeo, Go Jumong, was a master of archery, able to catch 5 flies with one arrow. Bak Hyeokgeose, the first king of the Silla, was also said to be a skilled archer. The ancient Chinese gave the people of the East (Shandong Peninsula, Huai river basin, Jianghuai, Manchuria, the Korean Peninsula, Japanese archipelago, and eastern Siberia) the name of Dongyi (東夷) being a combination of the two characters for "large" (大) and "bow" (弓). However, it also need to be noted that the term was widely applied by the Chinese to note any foreign tribes in the east associated with large bows.

Yi Sŏng-gye, the founding king of Joseon was known to have been a master archer. In a battle against Japanese pirates, Sŏng-gye, assisted by Yi Bangsil, killed the young samurai commander "Agibaldo" with two successive arrows, one arrow knocking out his helmet, with the second arrow entering his mouth. In his letter to General Ch'oe Yŏng, Sŏng-gye lists as one of five reasons not to invade Ming China as during the monsoon season, glue holding together the composite bow weakens, reducing the effectiveness of the bow.

The founding of Joseon dynasty saw the retention of the composite bow as the mainstay of the Joseon military. Archery was the main martial event tested during the military portion of the national service exam held annually from 1392 to 1894. Under Joseon, archery reached its zenith, resulting in the invention of pyeonjeon, which saw great service against the Japanese in 1592 and against the Manchus in early 1600s.

Until the Imjin wars, archery was the main long-range weapon system. During those wars, the tactical superiority of the matchlock arquebus became apparent, despite its slow rate of fire and susceptibility to wet weather. However, it was the gakgung, referred to as the "half bow" by the Japanese, that halted the Japanese at the Battle of Haengju as well as at the Battle of Ulsan. Although Joseon adopted the arquebus during the Imjin War, the gakgung retained its position of importance in the military until the reforms of 1894. Under King Hyojong's military reforms, an attempt was made to revive horse archery as a significant element of the military. It was also practiced for pleasure and for health, and many young males — including the king — and some females would spend their free time practicing it.

Transition to recreational sport
In 1899, the visiting Prince Heinrich of Prussia expressed his astonishment to Emperor Gojong at a traditional archery demonstration. The Prince, hailing from a militarized Prussian culture, sought out demonstrations of Korean martial arts, and Archery was the most impressive among the arts demonstrated. He was familiar with Turkish and Hungarian Archery of Europe, which were similar to Korean Archery. Prince Heinrich suggested making the art into a national sport. The emperor, convinced by the Prince, decreed "let people enjoy archery to develop their physical strength" and established an archery club. In the subsequent standardization of Korean archery, the nature of the bow and the arrow was standardized, as was the range of the targets. Korean traditional archery now uses one specific type of composite bow, bamboo arrows, and a standard target at a standard distance of 120 bo (about 145 m). Korean Archery as a sport developed under the Japanese Occupation, its textbook, "Joseon eui Goongdo" being published in 1920.

Tradition says that a noted general of the Joseon Dynasty settled in Yecheon about 300 years ago, and handed down his expertise and knowledge. "Today, it is estimated that bowyers from Yecheon and its environs produce approximately 70% of Korea's traditional horn composite bows ...Yecheon has produced numerous Olympic medalists and world champion archers". The city has the Jinho International Archery Field.

Construction and competition
The Gakgung is a highly reflexed version of the classic Eurasian composite bow. The core is bamboo with sinew backed to prevent the bow breaking and to add a pulling strength to the limbs, with oak at the handle. On the belly is water buffalo horn which significantly increases the power by pushing the limbs. This combination of horn which pushes from the belly and sinew that pulls from the back is the defining strength of the bow. The siyahs, the stiffened outer ends of the limbs, are made of either mulberry or black locust and V-spliced onto the bamboo. The glue is made from isinglass. Over the sinew backing is a special birch bark that is imported from Northeast China. It is soaked in sea water for about one year. It is applied to the back using diluted rubber cement (using benzene as the solvent). No sights or other modern attachments are used.

The draw weights vary, but most are above twenty kilograms (approximately 44 pounds). The cost for this type of bow is in the US$800 range. For a similar modern version made of laminated fiberglass, the cost is US$200–300. For most competitions, either bow may be used, with carbon-fiber arrows, but for national competitions, only the composite bow and bamboo arrows may be used. Korean archers have also been very successful in Olympic and other competitions with more modern types of bow.

The sukgung, a kind of crossbow, and the Gak-gung are a small but very powerful bow. A sukgung can shoot up to 400 m while a Gak-gung can shoot up to 350 m.

The art of constructing traditional Korean bows was designated an Important Intangible Cultural Property in 1971.

title: Gakgung


text: User:Carnildo/templates/peerreview

title: User:Carnildo/templates/peerreview


text:
Quinta Grande

Quinta Grande, created on 24July 1848, is one of the five civil parishes that constitute the municipality of Câmara de Lobos in the archipelago of Madeira, Portugal. The population was 2,099, in an area of 4.14 km2. The community is primarily oriented around agriculture, although it has become an important tourist stop in Madeira, due to the Cabo Girão, which is considered the highest promontory in Europe at 580 m.

Geography
Quinta Grande is situated within a river-valley and buttressed between the parishes of Campanário and Câmara de Lobos in the southwest coast of the island. The southeast part of the parish (along the coast) comprises Cabo Girão, a high escarpment and sheer cliff face. The residential and commercial buildings of this parish are located primarily along the river course, and, with forest, natural vegetation and terraced fields occupying the interior of the parish. The western part of the parish, although occupied by homes is a forested ridge and the eastern ridge is occupied by communication towers, radio and television facilities. Some vineyards and farmlands surround the parish to the north and east, and mostly concentrate on the cultivation of grapes for the production of Madeira Wine.

title: Quinta Grande


text:
Talk:United States Army Corps of Engineers

Flood Control Act of 1928
Concerning Flood Control Act of 1928 reference that Sheldonville added, this is the only law that had any type of explanation of the legislation itself, and the explanation referenced just one small but important part of the legislation. The explanation IS important and notable, but it might be best to actually go under the main article Corps of Engineers civil works controversies.

Also, since the Great Flood of 1927 was linked as the reference to FCA 1928, I went into it and put in the detail and a reference that actually connects the Great Flood with FCA 1928. 199.123.72.97 (talk) 13:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Wetlands Takings
Perhaps something about the controversial nature of calling a piece of land a "wetland". There have been at least one Supreme Court case where the Army Corps of Engineers lost its case.
 * That is a topic well worth persuing, but really should be under the article on wetlands. When I get some time I will start it. When I first came to Wikipedia, I contributed the Army Corps definition of a wetland to the wetland article and it was reverted very quickly with the comment that the arrticle was not about U.S. wetlands. Not a good start for a newbie, but I quickly got over it ;^) - Marshman 02:51, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hurricane Katrina
Given that Gen. Strock has now admitted that design flaws in the Corps-designed levees were responsible for the flooding of New Orleans, shouldn't that become part of the Corps history?

Agreed. There be should SOME mention of the mistakes made by the Corps insofar as the construction of the New Orleans levees somewhere in this entry. I've heard that the levees were supposedly rated for a "three" hurricane, but the Katrina flood surge was only equivalent to a "two". Yikes. --Weirdoactor 15:16, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Concur - but I would put it under a broader heading of mistakes, flaws or other failings (neutral wording needed). While they in general do a "good" job, there has been a number of high-visibility and massive dollar failings in some of their projects. --FienX 15:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

"Some projects are said to have created profound detrimental environmental effects and/or provided questionable economic benefit such as the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet in southeast Louisiana. Faulty design and substandard construction have been cited in the failure of levees in the wake of Hurricane Katrina that caused flooding of 80% of the city of New Orleans." This passage is bad because it implies that the flooding of the city is either a "questionable economic benefit" or a "profound detrimental environmental effect," when what we're really talking about is loss of life due to negligence--a conclusion based on the Corps' own research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.226.171.68 (talk) 02:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Mississippi
maybe there should be a place in the article for something about the changes made to the mississippi by them.

Pork, boondoggles, and blunders
I'm thinking of starting a section called "Pork, boondoggles, and blunders". If it gets too long it can be moved to a new article. Any comments? --Jagz 02:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * How would that be better/different than "Civil Works Controversies"? It seems like the same idea, only without the neutrality. -Gueneverey (talk) 22:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Right, I created that section. --Jagz (talk) 17:43, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

References in this Article, or Lack Thereof
How is it that the few references in this article almost all come from one or two Army Corps of Engineers booklets. A lot of this looks and smells like propaganda. Another article, without the name US Army... would have a lack of references cited tag.

such as:  or Truthunmasked (talk) 11:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

 * Truthunmasked -- The same thing could be said for most articles. For example, the article on Julie Andrews sure sounds like someone is playing up her strong points; hell, I'd like for her to be my Grandmother!  LOL

 * Some facts about USACE (like being the nation's number one provider of recreation) sound like propaganda but are merely a stated fact, and are facts that most people don't know ... especially from the mainstream media. Other facts (like mission) have to come from the organization itself or its "charter".  USACE's "charter" or mission, in this case, is founded in law.  You could take a whole lot of time to research the US Code to see if you can find the exact public laws or they could find the exact provision/act just by asking USACE.  But in either of those two examples, using facts from the Corps of Engineers doesn't necessarily negate the article's neutrality.  It might help, however, if some user were to take those laws and facts provided by/through USACE references, and see if they can find independent verification of them.  http://uscode.house.gov/usc.htm and http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html are two places where an industrious user could find information to help ensure neutrality.

 * The interesting thing is that much about the Corps of Engineers really IS unknown by most people. Wikipedia -- like an encyclopedia -- gives people an opportunity to learn more about a Federal Government organization which can greatly impact (positively and negatively) their lives.

 * That said, it is vitally important for neutrality. There are significant problems that have occurred by or on behalf of the Corps of Engineers.  And those SHOULD be -- and sometimes are -- acknowledged ... but also in the context of neutrality.  For example, I added a significant amount of information, much of which is not currently focused on by the media, on the "Civil Works Controversies" main page for just that reason.  Prior to my edits, most of the "controversies" focused just on New Orleans and on the generalized issue of Congressional pork within the USACE budget without talking about what the real controversies are.

 * Interesting sidebar is that many "negative" issues are referenced through mainstream media content which, if one thinks critically about them, are more references to opinion rather than fact (a problem that will not be solved here).

Operational Facts and Figures
I think that the Operational Facts and Figures of the article on the United States Army Corps of Engineers should be much higher in the article because most people do not know about the extent of USACE's impact on the United States and they might not wade through the other "boring" (though relevant :) ) information to find these facts and figures out.  From that standpoint, I think that it warrants being higher up in the article.   Don'tKnowItAtAll (talk) 13:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree, the trivial facts and information should be placed towards the bottom of the article. For organizational purposes, it does not make sense to show the statistics on an encyclopedia as the first part of the article. Wikipedia is not designed to be an informational outlet to "sell" the Corps of Engineers with facts and figures to the general public. -Signaleer (talk) 12:35, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I hear what you are saying. I sort of agree and am not necessarily looking at selling the Corps.  Most people only know of USACE in one context and do not know the extent of the Corps' reach into society.  I guess the question would be ... how do you quickly get this real information out?  I think it is more important than organization and somewhat more important than notable projects (and possibly history).  Perhaps if some of the more mundane figures (e.g., the employee population, the number of districts, etc.) were culled to make it more relevant....  What do you think? Don'tKnowItAtAll (talk) 12:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * As I stated previously, bear in mind that this is an encyclopedia. Not a "quick reference" in order to pull statistics about the organization. There are very few if any Wiki articles that place the trivia, facts or statistics up front in an article. On the contrary, it should be placed at the very bottom instead of the middle. -Signaleer (talk) 13:03, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * If it was trivia, I'd agree; in fact, I'm trying to find a way to reduce the trivia section. And I certainly agree that it shouldn't go at the top.  But as I look over the article, I see that some of my concerns are covered in the text above this section.  At the same time, some of this should NOT be in the text above because it would dilute the focus of those particular sections.  I guess I can live with it where it is, more or less.  I've tweaked some of it already anyway; maybe moving/tweaking some more will work.  Don'tKnowItAtAll (talk) 13:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Major Revert
I have reverted the edits from the user CORNELIUSSEON contributed on November 16, 2008, the edit between a military organization and garrison is wrong. The USACE is not a garrison but an active U.S. Army organization. Furthermore, the placement of the insignia and plaque is unnecessary in an encyclopedia content. -Signaleer (talk) 12:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me, but USACE is NOT specifically a Civilian agency, but IS a Military Agency. it is the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and it is - by law - both a Combat Arm, AND a Combat Service. Indeed, it is the only such part of the US Army that IS both an Arm and a Service. The numbered units I prepared spend most of their time as Arms, rather than Services, which means that they carry weapons, and do most of their work in Camouflage. The Data I posted is mostly from the US Army Center of Military History, especially the Lineage and Honors. The rest is either from the unit's own web site, or from one of Shelby L. Stanton's "Order Of Battle" books, which are condensed from Center of Military History records. as to the Garrison issue, ALL US Army units have a Garrison Location. The term Garrison has to do with the location that is their designated Home Post. I suggest that you look at the Wiki article for further clarification: Garrison. As to the graphics, those were assigned to the units in question by the US Army Institute of Military History, and are OFFICIAL. If you are stating that I placed them on Wikipedia, you are wrong. They reside over on Commons, and are linked to the article.-SSG Cornelius Seon (Retired) (talk) 18:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

 * The first part of your arguement making references to civilian versus military organization has nothing to do with the template which you used to conver the article's main information box. You used a garrison template .  Furthermore, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is not what you think it is.  The USACE only has 650 uniformed Army personnel and over 34,600 civilians, see the Who We Are website.  Apparently you have a misconception what USACE is and stands for versus the "Corps of Engineers" which refers to the combat/construction side or military side of the house.  Please see Engineer types  I hope this clarifies two separate articles. -Signaleer (talk) 20:38, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

 * I have to side in part with Cornelius. USACE is both a Combat Arm and a Combat service and is, despite the overwhelming civilian populace, a military agency.  And "Corps of Engineers" correctly refers both to USACE and to Engineer-branched soldiers.  Cornelius, could you provide a reference to the law issue?  The USACE commander is both the commander of the USACE agency as well as the Engineer units under his control.  The 249th Engineer Battalion (Prime Power), 412th and 416th ENCOMs (or is it "Theater Engineer Commands (TEC)" now?? LOL), and 911th Engineer Company all report to USACE.
 * However, Signaleer is also right in that the garrison template used may not be appropriate. USACE may have a garrison in the British sense of the word, but generally not in the American sense of the word as only the HQ is in Washington DC (atually, more properly in Alexandria, VA, I believe).  Also, I think Singaleer is right that the Corps' logo is more appropriate for this article than the Corps' plaque.
 * That said, I don't think it hurts the article at all to have the insignia shown in the article (perhaps at United States Army Corps of Engineers since USACE does have its own insignia (distinctive unit insignia, shoulder sleeve insignia, etc.) -- which are NOT necessarily the same things as the branch and regimental insignias. It may be problematic, however, since the insignia section is part of the infobox for military units.  Cornelius, perhaps we can create am Engineer branch website similar to the others cited on Branch insignia of the United States Army which -- IMNSHO -- incorrectly links to USACE for Engineers.
 * Oh yeah, one other thing: I think the article, Corps Castle (wikilinked in the United States Army Corps of Engineers section), has the wrong pix as well and could use more detail and pictures. LOL
 * Don'tKnowItAtAll (talk) 22:21, 17 November 2008 (UTC) (LTC, EN, USAR (ret.) with 13 years on active duty ... and a USACE civilian to boot!)

Lack of links to Wiki military articles
I came to this article trying to find out information and/or links to Wiki articles about the military side of the USACoE, "combat engineers" including civil engineering in combat zones, training, training schools, etc. Frankly, I found the article rather weak in references and links to articles which would bear on those subjects. I realize that there may be many articles on Wiki which cover the subjects I mentioned, but it seems that I would have to do my own searchs to find them. The US domestic civil engineering side of the CoE is well covered in this article as it should be, but I think that it would be better served with more links to the military side of the CoE.--TGC55 (talk) 16:52, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that there is room to add information on combat engineers. USACE is a unique military organization in that it has two distinct missions.  Good, bad, or otherwise, most of its work is dedicated, though, to the non-military activities; and this is also evidenced on their own website (www.usace.army.mil).  Note, for example, its composition and organization; most of the subordinate elements are focused on the non-military.  However, there are subordinate military units listed herein with some of them having their own wiki articles.  You can also look at Sapper, Combat engineering, and Military engineer; perhaps we can find a way to link those herein.  Don'tKnowItAtAll (talk) 13:24, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Don'tKnowItAtAll (talk) 14:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Picture inappropriate?
Is it appropriate that of the tens of 1000's of pictures available, a West Point-graduate daughter of a retired army general is selected as an illustration of engineering "warfighting"? I don't see a connection between the subject matter and the illustration. Just saying. Perhaps a picture of Engineers in- I dont know... combat? signed: WPPA
 * Please sign your username next time by typing in ~ . Second, did you bother reading the article and seeing the image, it directly coincides with the article. Please discuss information on the talk page to improve the article. -Signaleer (talk) 04:57, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

an image of an engineer in a warfighting scene would better illustrate the concept of combat engineering. signed: WPPA 98.167.202.148 (talk) 03:34, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

How should USACE Branding efforts affect Article's name, if any?
USACE has spent a lot of time, effort, and taxpayer dollars working on its "branding" and trademarking. The preferred way to reference USACE from a branding standpoint is "US Army Corps of Engineers" ("U.S. Army Corps of Engineeers" is also seen frequently enough to be a dual personality). They almost never refer to themselves as "United States Army Corps of Engineers", even in formal press releases.

I'm wondering if it would be better to make the title to this article the "US Army Corps of Engineers" and make "United States Army Corps of Engineers" as the redirect rather than vice versa as currently is.

Thoughts?

There are currently the following redirect pages; the bolded ones are the USACE preferred methods of self-reference: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Army Corp of Engineers US Army Corps of Engineers US Army Corp of Engineers US Corps of Engineers US Corp of Engineers U.S. Corps of Engineers U.S. Army Corp of Engineers U.S. Corp of Engineers Corps of Engineers Corp of Engineers Army Corps of Engineers Army Corp of Engineers USACE USACOE ACOE COE

Don'tKnowItAtAll (talk) 20:24, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Page titles and redirects exist to aid readers in navigating the encyclopedia. We should avoid the use of abbreviations in page titles regardless of the Corps PR department. Every conceivable plausible alternate term already redirects here so that's not a problem either. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:13, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Names of incumbents in the staff hierarchy
I suggest that the names of incumbents in executive positions is not sufficiently notable to mention them here, unless the individuals themselves are notable. It requires unnecessary maintenance. This article is not a proxy for the USACE PAO website function. Just keep the current Chief of Engineers in the infobox--that should be sufficient. Those wanting to know names of incumbents can follow links in references that support the description of the command structure. User:HopsonRoad 18:00, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Public Laws affecting the Corps of Engineers
This long list of bullets contains items that should be references supporting descriptive text in this section. One has no idea of what are contained within the cited laws without clicking on each link to search through what one finds there. This is contrary to the intent of Wikipedia and the Manual of Style. User:HopsonRoad 03:35, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Emergency Response: The Wikipedia article on the Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act and the National Response Framework do not mention a role for the Corps. Citing public laws without proper references smacks of original research, not using tertiary sources. Therefore, I'm commenting out this section, for now. User:HopsonRoad 14:29, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I commented out the entire section until it can be written in clear, concise, descriptive language that summarizes, rather than lists the effect of the public laws in question. For now, it consumes too much space while providing too little information to a typical reader of an encyclopedia. User:HopsonRoad 14:37, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I recommend looking at the Manual of Style's guidance on when and how to use embedded lists before restoring content in this section. User:HopsonRoad 15:00, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

What does the Martis Creek picture have to do with the article? there is no reference to it, it's just randomly inserted and makes no sense. -Sincerely, concerned wikireader. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.242.218.91 (talk) 20:41, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

This article should be distinguished from the US Army Engineer Branch/Regiment "The US Army Corps of Engineers" and the organization US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). This article is used as universally used as a link to the Engineer Branch when the article is in fact about the general engineering organization USACE, overseen by the US Army Engineer Branch. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WIKI1Q2W3E4R (talk • contribs) 10:01, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

New York Times article on USACE responsibility for Hurricane Katrina flooding
This New York Times article might be useful as a reference for this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/24/us/decade-after-katrina-pointing-finger-more-firmly-at-army-corps.html "http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/24/us/decade-after-katrina-pointing-finger-more-firmly-at-army-corps.html" Eastmain (talk • contribs)  19:46, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 one external links on United States Army Corps of Engineers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120106170052/http://www.usace.army.mil:80/History/Documents/Brief/03-transportation/transport.html to http://www.usace.army.mil/History/Documents/Brief/03-transportation/transport.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080913145536/http://www.usace.army.mil:80/missions/warfighting.html to http://www.usace.army.mil/missions/warfighting.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081216234240/http://www.usace.army.mil:80/missions/Security.html to http://www.usace.army.mil/missions/Security.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081014175133/http://www.usace.army.mil:80/missions/infrastructure.html to http://www.usace.army.mil/missions/infrastructure.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081218221846/http://www.usace.army.mil:80/missions/environment.html to http://www.usace.army.mil/missions/environment.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120515154107/http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/missouristatenews/story/aff2ac0b5a2c828c8625735a0073d4fd?OpenDocument to http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/missouristatenews/story/AFF2AC0B5A2C828C8625735A0073D4FD?OpenDocument

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

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:32, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

clarification request
what percentage of US military personnel with a combat engineering rank/role is actually a part of this corps? 37000 ppl with only 2% military seems to indicate that most aren't — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.227.26.211 (talk) 10:18, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on United States Army Corps of Engineers. 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/20080415174741/http://www.hq.usace.army.mil/history/vignettes/vignette_1.htm to http://www.hq.usace.army.mil/history/vignettes/vignette_1.htm
 * Added tag to http://www.hq.usace.army.mil/cepa/pubs/jan08/story2.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060319204716/http://www.hq.usace.army.mil/history/ to http://www.hq.usace.army.mil/history
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090109014147/http://operations.sam.usace.army.mil/Hydropower/ to http://operations.sam.usace.army.mil/Hydropower/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060329154834/http://www.hq.usace.army.mil/history/vignettes/Vignette_90.htm to http://www.hq.usace.army.mil/history/vignettes/Vignette_90.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060111042808/http://www.hq.usace.army.mil/history/Vignettes/Vignette_89.htm to http://www.hq.usace.army.mil/history/vignettes/Vignette_89.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080119100812/http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/releases/07/05/20070514.html to http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/releases/07/05/20070514.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) 07:58, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Europe Division
Hi Folks, does anybody know where the Europe Division of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (a proper corps). This article Ernest James Harrell seemed to be in command of then. I cant see an article about that Division. Thanks.  scope_creep Talk  21:37, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

USACE benchmarks
In the past, the USACE installed benchmarks at various points to aid in surveying land and structures, as in this photo. Does USACE still install these markers? Or is this only something that was done in the past? Either way, I think it should be mentioned in the article. Pete unseth (talk) 20:25, 18 June 2022 (UTC)


text: User talk:70.22.18.62

title: User talk:70.22.18.62


text:
User:ClockworkSoul/Templates

"ClockworkSoul's Coffee Roll"

An entry in Talk page templates/vote.

Yes, the name seems arbitrary, but that's what the colors remind me of. Sort of. Well, it rhymes anyway.

For my first entry, I decided to go with a color scheme that I'm familar and comfortable with: I recently used it on my own user page, and similar colors on the WikiProject Beer infoboxes.

The "featured article" images have mostly been around for a while, but as far as I know this is the first time that all three have been used in templates at the same time (for three different purposes) – I also created a new "former featured article candidate" FA star for this series. Also, the Image:Evolution-tasks2.png image has been reassigned from "peer review" templates to "vfd" templates.

You may notice three new icons borrowed from http://www.icon-king.com. I found this site by doing a Google search on "GNU icons". Thats all for now, I'm glad that my templates are used for Wikipeda purposes.

Featured article after PR and VFD
{{/featured}

title: User:ClockworkSoul/Templates


text:
Talk:Wetland

Suggestions for improvement (March 2021)
I have some suggestions for improvements. I'll try to work on this article in the next few months but if someone else gets here before then, these are the things that I noticed:
 * Some of the headings feel messy, use more standard headings
 * There is a lot of bold formatting in the text which should probably be removed
 * There is a repetition of the heading "human impact" - bundle that under a stand-along heading on human impact?
 * Article goes into too much detail in areas where sub-articles exist (I have just corrected that for the sub-topic of constructed wetland where I have now replaced text with an excerpt.
 * The lead is a bit short and not a good summary of the article yet.
 * The readability score is quite low, so the readability should be improved (use easier to understand language). EMsmile (talk) 14:20, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Update: I have now taken out the repetitive heading on "human impact" and also deleted some content that was unsourced, overly detailed, not encyclopedic (not summary style). There is actually a lot of content here without sources which needs to be corrected. EMsmile (talk) 18:12, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Image collage for the lead
I've created an image collage for the lead which looks better than four images below each other. However, we need to ponder over the choice of images. Does it show a good range of different types of wetlands and locations? Should the schematic be replaced with a photo? Overall, I feel that we should probably add more photos from the Global South to this article. Should a constructed wetland photo be included in the lead? It's a subset of wetlands but I wasn't sure if one of them should be included in the collage. EMsmile (talk) 09:12, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Do wetlands exist in Antarctica? Seems to be unclear.
I have a question about this sentence "Wetlands occur naturally on every continent " The publication is not open access and doesn't mention in the lead if they really exist on all continents including Antarctica. Could we replace this with a better reference or add one that makes a statement about Antarctica? Note that EPA says "except Antarctica", see here. A google search on the topic lead me to this, which talks about a "wetland like" system beneath the ice: https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=138450. But I am not sure if this could be termed a wetland in the conventional sense. So I think we need to provide more clarity on this (but perhaps not in the lead is it's not that important). EMsmile (talk) 09:39, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

 * Here's a reference on Antarctic ephemeral wetlands. The Hydroecology of an Ephemeral Wetland in the McMurdo Dry Valleys, Antarctica
 * https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2019JG005153#:~:text=Wetlands%20occur%20in%20the%20polar%20desert%20regions%20of%20the%20Arctic%20and%20Antarctic. ASRASR (talk) 10:07, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It seems to be disputed whether such kind of wetlands are "conventional wetlands". Or why else would the EPA website say "except Antarctica" (unless they copied this from the Wikipedia article earlier!). Might need a little deeper digging and then explaining in the Wikipedia article e.g. "some scholars describe the existence of wetland-type systems in Antarctica as "wetlands" whereas others don't regard these as wetlands". Or we e-mail EPA and ask if their information is wrong? Found also this interesting discussion on Quora. I guess it comes down to the definition, whether something that is frozen for large parts of the year can be called a wetland. So either way, I think somewhere in the article (but not in the lead) we should explain the different viewpoints so that readers understand that it's not a yes or no answer. EMsmile (talk) 10:20, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * For now I've changed the sentence from to ""Wetlands occur naturally on every continent" to "Wetlands occur all over the world" - I think this is a safer statement, given all the uncertainties. EMsmile (talk) 10:29, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Removal of reference on Digital
Dear. Please explain your removal of this new reference added by in the Monitoring and Mapping Section:

"Digital Twin Enabled Mass Personalization: A Case Study of a Smart Wetland Maintenance System". American Society of Mechanical Engineers. MSEC2020 (8363): 6. January 15, 2021 – via ASME

I can see the reference isn't at all formatted properly. Is this the reason? Can fix this? Regards ASRASR (talk) 09:27, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

 * SomayehMontaseri (and another account, currently named Sustainabilityandresilience but called 'SuezSmartSolution' prior to a recent rename) have been spamming citations related to a company called Suez Smart Solutions and its employees across Wikipedia, including this one on a case study undertaken by the company. I removed it as promotion / citation spam. It had nothing to do with formatting, and I do not believe that this citation improves the article. It should be left out. MrOllie (talk) 10:47, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Clarification comments on the table dealing with nitrous oxide fluxes
Dear re table on nitrous oxide fluxes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetland#Greenhouse_gas_emissions. Please explain your comment requesting clarification in 3 places in this table. Are you questioning the referenced data that have negative to positive ranges? Fluxes can be both negative and positive. Regards ASRASR (talk) 12:01, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi ASRASR (1) The minus sign and the n-dash are very similar, so first of all I wasn't totally sure which was meant. You have now explained that they are minus signs. So for clarity, the dashes should be replaced by "to", or something similar. (2) You have also now explained that fluxes can be both negative and positive. Not being an expert (like many other users) I don't understand what a negative flux means, so that should be explained somewehere in the article. Regards ---Speminallium (talk) 15:17, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

 * Hi . Yes negative fluxes are caused by uptake of N2O by the soil. I will add that explanation in a footnote to the table. I had no trouble differentiating between the negative sign and the larger n-dash. They are rather different e.g −0.07 – 0.06. Wouldn't you agree? I suppose changing the "n-dash" to "to" is possible. Please go ahead with that change if you wish. Regards ASRASR (talk) 21:33, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's helpful. Regards---Speminallium (talk) 07:10, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I have moved this now to Wetland methane emissions as I felt it was too detailed. I've also proposed on the talk page of that article to rename it to Wetland greenhouse gas emissions. EMsmile (talk) 20:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Update: that sub-article has now been renamed to Greenhouse gas emissions from wetlands. EMsmile (talk) 17:19, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Section on Biodiversity
I have modified the reference to Lake Baikal specifying instead the wetlands in the Selenga River Delta of Lake Baikal. Lake Baikal is not a wetland and the text dealing with its biodiversity has been removed. Have saved it here so it can be moved to the article on Lake Baikal. Text removed: ''Evidence from a research study by Mazepova et al. suggest that the number of crustacean species endemic to Baikal Lake (over 690 species and subspecies) exceeds the number of the same groups of animals inhabiting all the fresh water bodies of Eurasia together. Its 150 species of free-living Platyhelminthes alone is analogous to the entire number in all of Eastern Siberia. The 34 species and subspecies number of Baikal sculpins is more than twice the number of the analogous fauna that inhabits Eurasia. In southern Baikal, about 300 species of free-living nematodes were found in only six near-shore sampling localities. "If we will take into consideration, that about 60% of the animals can be found nowhere else except Baikal, it may be assumed that the lake may be the biodiversity center of the Eurasian continent."'' ASRASR (talk) 14:25, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Is your recommendation to move the text to Lake Baikal? How come there are no references though, did you drop them when you moved this to the talk page or were there none to start with? EMsmile (talk) 20:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Some problems with the references
There are still quite a few references that have either no URL to go with them or where the link is no longer working. There seems to be a problem with many of the refs that go to the Ramsar convention website, i.e. these refs are all going to dead links: 2, 19, 29, 50, 104. Also, I don't understand what this sentence is mean to say: Unless otherwise cited, ecosystem services information is based on the following series of references. We should not use such a sentence but rather provide in-line citations. This is perhaps a left over from a very old version of this article. EMsmile (talk) 20:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Worked on the section on "climate change aspects"
I've done some work on the section on "climate change aspects":
 * I've consolidated the info about GHG emissions in one place instead of two. I've moved some content that I felt was too detailed to Wetland methane emissions. I've also proposed on the talk page there to rename that article to Wetland greenhouse gas emissions. Please comment there. (update: that article has now been renamed to greenhouse gas emissions from wetlands). EMsmile (talk) 22:54, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I think we need to explain to non-expert readers (like myself) how it can be that wetlands on the one hand emit dangerous greenhouse gases but on the other hand are useful for climate change mitigation. When do they do which and what role are humans playing with their interferences? There is no logical flow between the two sections on GHGE and mitigation in the article yet. Can someone help?
 * The info on mitigation and adaptation should be updated with the latest info and figures from the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, WG III on mitigation and WG II on adaptation. I don't have time myself at the moment, so just putting this here as a reminder for someone.
 * However having said that, how can we ensure that similar content about wetlands as a carbon sink is not repeated in several locations? Maybe just put it in one location and then use an excerpt for the other locations? I see it currently in this article, also in climate change mitigation, carbon sequestration, blue carbon, biosequestration. Also pinging User:Chidgk1 and User:Epipelagic in case they are interested in wetlands/blue carbon/carbon sequestration etc. EMsmile (talk) 20:30, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Current Topics in Earth and Environmental Sciences
— Assignment last updated by Aditoaster12 (talk) 17:34, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Wetland


text:
Talk:The Quatermass Experiment

Doctor Who Restoration Team — reliability as a source
It has been suggested on this article's Featured Article Review page that some reliability criteria be established for the Doctor Who Restoration Team website as a source. The Doctor Who Restoration Team are a group of Doctor Who fans who work within the technical side of the television industry, who since the early 1990s have provided extensive restoration to Doctor Who video and DVD releases for BBC Worldwide and latterly 2 entertain Ltd. They also performed restoration work on the Quatermass Collection DVD release in 2005, hence the link to the page on their website explaining their work on that set. The main page of their website explains a bit more about them. Independent verification of the team's activities and status comes from the official BBC Doctor Who website, and a feature in The Guardian. Angmering 21:19, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Images
While the desire to limit fair use images is laudable, I think that it's a shame that the article has lost all screenshots save the title card. I think that an appropriate fair use rationale could be written for including one image from each version of the programme: perhaps Image:Quatexp02.JPG and Image:Quatermass2005-2.jpg, as representative samples. I don't think that the DVD covers really suffice as replacements for the screenshots, and this seems like the exact sort of circumstance for which tv-screenshot is intended. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I was under the impression that we were generally encouraged to use only one fair use screenshot per article, which is why I removed the others and replaced them with free alternatives. Or is that a recommendation, rather than an actual policy? Angmering 12:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

 * My understanding is that if screenshots add distinct information to the article, or accompany relevant critical commentary about distinct elements in the article, you can have more than one. It's a slightly fuzzy area in our policies: there's some discussion here and, more recently, here — the latter shows a case where the fair use experts thought there were too many fair use images, which I don't think would be the case here.  I think that one screenshot from each version of the programme would be acceptable.  If you're willing to brave the storms at Wikipedia talk:Fair use we could ask for clarification there, but I fear that you'd get contradictory answers, since fair use is such a disputed issue. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Okay, I'll put Tate back in, although I'll reduce the resolution of it on the image page as I have with the title caption. I'll grab a new one for the 2005 shot, though, as that download copy screengrab is fairly ghastly. Angmering 18:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Looks good! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:20, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Diction
"In America the film was renamed The Creeping Unknown after the title Shock! was considered for that territory [?], and an alternative opening title sequence with that name was prepared." What does this mean exactly? Marskell 12:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I was using "terriroty" instead of "country"... erm... not sure why. They went so far as to make an opening title sequence using Shock! for the US, before they decided on The Creeping Unknown instead. Phrasing is a bit ugly, isn't it? Apologies. Angmering 13:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Reception and influence
 The Quatermass Experiment'' achieved favourable viewing figures in 1953, opening with an estimated audience of 3.4 million for the first episode, building to 5 million for the sixth and final episode, and averaging 3.9 million for the entire serial. The Times estimated that one year before The Quatermass Experiment was broadcast, in August 1952, the total television audience consisted of about 4 million people. In March of that year, the BBC estimated that an average of 2.25 million people watched BBC programmes each evening. ''

Almost all the standard viewer numbers predate the Coronation, which in popular myth at least is supposed to have massively increased the number of television sets in homes. Are there any figures available for potential audience numbers in July 1953? Timrollpickering (talk) 02:16, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Infobox x2
Should the remake have it's own infobox (as all the details are different from the main infobox)? --h2g2bob (talk) 16:59, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Live
What is the word "live" doing in this: "broadcast a live remake of the serial"? 31.52.254.73 (talk) 13:02, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Quatermass Experiment. 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/20061128012507/http://news.independent.co.uk/people/obituaries/article1948184.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/people/obituaries/article1948184.ece
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070302221228/http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/Q/htmlQ/quartermass/quartermass.htm to http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/Q/htmlQ/quartermass/quartermass.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:45, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Quatermass Experiment. 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/20070806171559/http://www.purpleville.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/rtwebsite/quatermass-article.htm to http://www.purpleville.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/rtwebsite/quatermass-article.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:14, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

WP:URFA/2020 notes
Reviewing for WP:URFA/2020. Addressing these comments may help this article remain a featured article. Pinging main contributor. Heartfox (talk) 02:40, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

 * Some of the citations do not appear to be reliable/have editorial oversight (IMDb, The Quatermass Home Page, Doctor Who Restoration Team, Mausoleum Club).
 * Viewership figures would benefit from footnotes.
 * Fn 15 and 21 lack page numbers.
 * The last sentence has no citation.
 * I don't know if a BBC DVD should be used to cite "Viewers' responses were generally positive" for a BBC program; how can this be a neutral source?
 * Are there any other newspapers/magazines from the time period that can be used to cite/add stuff that are now available online?

 * The article is now littered with cn tags. It requires a FAR. Desertarun (talk) 22:31, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:The Quatermass Experiment


text:
Azipod

Azipod is a trademarked azimuth thruster pod design, a marine propulsion unit consisting of a fixed pitch propeller mounted on a steerable gondola ("pod") containing the electric motor driving the propeller, allowing ships to be more maneuverable. They were developed in Finland in the late 1980s jointly by Wärtsilä Marine, Strömberg and the Finnish National Board of Navigation.

Although "Azipod" is a registered brand name, it is sometimes used as a generic trademark for podded propulsion units manufactured by other companies.

Concept
In the conventional azimuth thrusters such as Z-drive and L-drive thrusters, the propeller is driven by an electric motor or a diesel engine inside the ship's hull. The propeller is coupled to the prime mover with shafts and bevel gears that allow rotating the propeller about a vertical axis. This type of propulsion system has a long tradition throughout the 1990s and today such propulsion units are produced by a number of companies around the world.

In the Azipod unit, the electric motor is mounted inside the propulsion unit and the propeller is connected directly to the motor shaft. Electric power for the propulsion motor is conducted through slip rings that let the Azipod unit rotate 360 degrees about the vertical axis. Because Azipod units utilize fixed-pitch propellers, power is always fed through a variable-frequency drive or cycloconverter that allows speed and direction control of the propulsion motors.

The pod's propeller usually faces forward because in this pulling (or tractor) configuration the propeller is more efficient due to operation in undisturbed flow. Because it can rotate around its mount axis, the pod can apply its thrust in any direction. Azimuth thrusters allow ships to be more maneuverable and enable them to travel backward nearly as efficiently as they can travel forward. In order for the full capabilities of podded propulsion units to be realized in commercial service, shiphandling training on simulators and manned models is required for the crew.

The podded design typically achieved a 9% better fuel efficiency than the conventional propulsion system when it was first installed in the 1990s. In the meantime, improvements to the conventional designs have shrunk the gap to 6–8%, but on the other hand the hydrodynamic flow around the Azipod has been improved by fin retrofits and a dynamic computer optimization of the respective operating angles of the pods in multipod installations, thereby yielding overall efficiency improvements now in the range of 18%.

Development

In 1987, the Finnish National Board of Navigation made a co-operation proposal to the electrical equipment company Strömberg (later ABB) and the Finnish shipbuilder Wärtsilä Marine for the development of a new type of electric propulsion unit. Prior to this, the companies had been working together for decades in the field of diesel-electric propulsion systems and in the 1980s produced the first icebreakers with alternating current propulsion motors and cycloconverters.

The development of the prototype started in 1989 and the first unit was ready for installation in the following year. The 1.5MW unit, dubbed "Azipod" (short for azimuthing electric podded drive ) was installed on the 1979-built Finnish fairway support vessel Seili at Hietalahti shipyard in Helsinki, Finland. After the refit, the vessel's icebreaking performance was considerably increased and she was also found out to be capable of breaking ice astern (backwards). This discovery of a new operating mode eventually led to the development of the double acting ship concept in the early 1990s. When Seili was refitted with new propulsion system in the 2000s, the prototype unit was donated to Forum Marinum and put on display in Turku, Finland.

Following the encouraging experiences from the prototype installation, the development of the Azipod concept continued and the next units were retrofitted on two Finnish oil tankers, Uikku and Lunni, in 1993 and 1994, respectively. Nearly eight times as powerful as the prototype, the 11.4MW Azipod units considerably increased the icegoing ability of the vessels that were already built with independent icebreaking capability in mind. Since the 1990s, the vast majority of ships capable of operating in ice without icebreaker escort have been fitted with Azipod propulsion system.

The first three Azipod units were of so-called "pushing" type in which the propeller is mounted behind the gondola. In the subsequent installations, ABB adopted the more efficient "pulling" configuration similar to propeller-driven airplanes.

The world's first cruise ship fitted with Azipod propulsion units, Elation, was delivered by Kværner Masa-Yards Helsinki shipyard in the spring of 1998. Even though the Azipod was initially developed for icebreaking vessels, cruise ships have become the largest group of ships by type to be fitted with Azipod propulsion system since the 1990s and the success of the electric podded propulsion units has paved the way for competitors such as the Rolls-Royce Mermaid. Among the vessels fitted with Azipod units are Royal Caribbean International's Voyager-, Freedom-, Oasis- and Icon-class cruise ships, each of which held the title of the largest cruise ship in the world at the time of delivery.

Another further development of the original electric podded propulsion concept is the Compact Azipod, a smaller Azipod unit introduced in the early 2000s. It is intended for smaller ships such as research vessels and yachts as well as dynamically positioned drilling rigs that may utilize up to eight such propulsors. The smaller Azipod Compact differs from the full-size unit by its permanent magnet synchronous motor which is directly cooled by sea water. For drilling vessels, it is also available in "pushing" configuration and can be fitted with a nozzle to increase bollard pull thrust in stationkeeping applications. Unlike the full-sized Azipod units which are assembled in Finland, the Compact Azipod units are manufactured in China.

Bearing-related problems
During the initial years in service, some widely publicised cruise ship service disruptions with the bigger Azipod V design have occurred.

The latest design, the Azipod X, incorporates these improvements, with a view to a service interval of five years, and features bearings that can be taken apart and repaired from inside the pod while the ship is harbored normally.

title: Azipod


text:
Hugh Francis Redmond

Hugh Francis Redmond (October 30, 1919 - April 13, 1970) was an American World War II paratrooper (506th Infantry Regiment) who later worked for the CIA in their storied Special Activities Division. He was in Shanghai disguised as an ice cream machine salesman with Hennington and Co from 1946 to 1951, returning intelligence information on the Chinese Communist Party.

On April 26, 1951, while boarding a ship to San Francisco to return to the United States, Redmond was captured and imprisoned. Held for almost twenty years in a prison camp, he was severely tortured, but never admitted his connection to the CIA.

In 1970, he died; the Chinese claim he slit his wrists on April 13, 1970. The Chinese cremated his remains and they were returned to the United States. Redmond was buried in Yonker's Oakland Cemetery on August 3, 1970. Considerable mystery still surrounds whether or not he was murdered during his imprisonment.

title: Hugh Francis Redmond


text: User:Carnildo/templates/farc

title: User:Carnildo/templates/farc


text:
User talk:Saxonjf

Jim Rome edit
When you edited "Jim Rome," you edited the a link "syndicate" to "television syndicate." If you did this yourself, or had a bot do it, I don't know, but it was wrong, and you might want to reprogram your bot to check on different kind of syndications. The appropriate syndication correction was that of "radio syndication." I have made the correction manually, but wanted to warn you so you can take proper steps in the future. Best wishes. --Saxonjf 03:59, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Ahh, thank you for correcting that, I wasn't using a bot though, I just do them quickly. Anyway, I saw all the talk about ESPN and assumed television syndication I imagine. Thanks for fixing it :D - cohesion ★

talk 05:38, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Mark Twain Village
I see you have added some information to this article, but still without any references. (See my discussion from a month ago.) If you have any reliable references for the information in the article, please add them.

Without references, adding information to an article makes it worse, not better; and when the information is explanations rather than stated facts, it looks like original research and so not acceptable at all.

I have not attempted to edit the article, because if I removed unsourced statements, the entire text would go. It needs somebody who does know about it to give some references. --ColinFine 20:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:MetroNashvilleParks.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:MetroNashvilleParks.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 09:13, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The Right Stuff: September 2011
  September 2011

FROM THE EDITOR

An Historic Milestone

 By Lionelt Welcome to the inaugural issue of The Right Stuff, the newsletter of WikiProject Conservatism. The Project has developed at a breakneck speed since it was created on February 12, 2011 with the edit summary, "Let's roll!" With over 50 members the need for a project newsletter is enormous. With over 3000 articles to watch, an active talk page and numerous critical discussions spread over various noticeboards, it has become increasingly difficult to manage the information overload. The goal of The Right Stuff is to help you keep up with the changing landscape.

The Right Stuff is a newsletter consisting of original reporting. Writers will use a byline to "sign" their contributions. Just as with The Signpost, "guidelines such as 'no ownership of articles', and particularly 'no original research', will not necessarily apply."

WikiProject Conservatism has a bright future ahead: this newsletter will allow us tell the story. All that's left to say is: "Let's roll!"

PROJECT NEWS

New Style Guide Unveiled

 By Lionelt A new style guide to help standardize editing was rolled out. It focuses on concepts, people and organizations from a conservatism perspective. The guide features detailed article layouts for several types of articles. You can help improve it here. The Project's Article Collaboration currently has two nominations, but they don't appear to be generating much interest. You can get involved with the Collaboration here.

I am pleased to report that we have two new members: Rjensen and Soonersfan168. Rjensen is a professional historian and has access to JSTOR. Soonersfan168 says he is a "young conservative who desires to improve Wikipedia!" Unfortunately we will be seeing less of Geofferybard, as he has announced his semi-retirement. We wish him well. Be sure to stop by their talk pages and drop off some Wikilove.

-

ARTICLE REPORT

3,000th Article Tagged

 By Lionelt On August 3rd Peter Oborne, a British journalist, became the Project's 3,000th tagged article. It is a tribute to the membership that we have come this far this quickly. The latest Featured Article is Richard Nixon. Our congratulations to Wehwalt for a job well done. The article with the most page views was Rick Perry with 887,389 views, not surprising considering he announced he was running for president on August 11th. Follwing Perry were Michele Bachmann and Tea Party movement. The Project was ranked 75th based on total edits, which is up from 105th in July. The article with the most edits was Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2012 with 374 edits. An RFC regarding candidate inclusion criteria generated much interest on the talk page.

The Right Stuff: October 2011
  October 2011

INTERVIEW

An Interview with Dank

 By Lionelt

The Right Stuff caught up with Dank, the recently elected Lead Coordinator of WikiProject Military History. MILHIST is considered by many to be one of the most successful projects in the English Wikipedia.

Q: Tell us a little about yourself. A: I'm Dan, a Wikipedian since 2007, from North Carolina. I started out with an interest in history, robotics, style guidelines, and copyediting. These days, I'm the lead coordinator for the Military History Project and a reviewer of Featured Article Candidates. I've been an administrator and maintained WP:Update, a summary of policy changes, since 2008.

Q: What is your experience with WikiProjects? A: I guess I'm most familiar with WP:MILHIST and WP:SHIPS, and I'm trying to get up to speed at WP:AVIATION. I've probably talked with members of most of the wikiprojects at one time or another.

Q: What makes a WikiProject successful? A: A lot of occasional contributors who think of the project as fun rather than work, a fair number of people willing to write or review articles, a small core of like-minded people who are dedicated to building and maintaining the project, and access to at least a few people who are familiar with reviewing standards and with Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

Q: Do you have any tips for increasing membership? A: Aim for a consistent, helpful and professional image. Let people know what the project is doing and what they could be doing, but don't push.

 If you've got a core group interested in building a wikiproject, it helps if they do more listening than talking at first ... find out what people are trying to do, and offer them help with whatever it is. Some wikiprojects build membership by helping people get articles through the review processes. -
 DISCUSSION REPORT

Abortion Case Plods Along

By Lionelt The arbitration request submitted by Steven Zhang moved into its second month. The case, which evaluates user conduct, arose from contentious discussions regarding the naming of the Pro-life and Pro-choice articles, and a related issue pertaining to the inclusion of "death" in the lede of Abortion. A number of members are involved. On the Evidence page ArtifexMahem posted a table indicating that DMSBel made the most edits to the Abortion article. DMSBel has announced their semi-retirement. Fact finding regarding individual editor behavior has begun in earnest on theWorkshop page. Last month it was decided that due to the success of the new Dispute Resolution Noticeboard the Content Noticeboard would be shut down. Wikiquette Assistance will remain active. The DRN is primarily intended to resolve content disputes.

-
PROJECT NEWS

Article Incubator Launched

 By Lionelt Was your article deleted in spite of your best efforts to save it? You should consider having a copy restored to the Incubator where project members can help improve it. Upon meeting content criteria, articles are graduated to mainspace. The Incubator is also ideal for collaborating on new article drafts. Star Parker is the first addition to the incubator. The article was deleted per WP:POLITICIAN. WikiProject Conservatism is expanding. We now have a satellite on Commons. Any help in categorizing images or in getting the fledgling project off the ground is appreciated. We have a few new members who joined the project in September. Please give a hearty welcome to Conservative Philosopher, Screwball23 and Regushee by showing them some Wikilove. Screwball23 has been on WikiPedia for five years and has made major improvements to Linda McMahon. Regushee is not one for idle chit chat: an amazing 93% of their edits are in article space.

The Right Stuff: November 2011

PROJECT NEWS

WikiProject Conservatism faces the ultimate test

 By Lionelt On October 7, WikiProject Conservatism was nominated for deletion by member Binksternet. He based his rationale on what he described as an undefinable scope, stating that the project is "at its root undesirable". Of the 40 participants in the discussion, some agreed that the scope was problematic; however, they felt it did not justify deletion of the project. A number of participants suggested moving the project to "WikiProject American conservatism". The overwhelming sentiment was expressed by Guerillero who wrote: "A project is a group of people. This particular group does great work in their topic area[,] why prevent them from doing this[?]" In the end there was negligible opposition to the project and the result of the discussion was "Keep". The proceedings of the deletion discussion were picked up by The Signpost, calling the unfolding drama "the first MfD of its kind". The Signpost observed that attempting to delete an active project was unprecedented. The story itself became a source of controversy which played out at the Discuss This Story section, and also at the.

Two days after the project was nominated, the Conservatism Portal was also nominated for deletion as "too US-biased". There was no support for deletion amongst the 10 participants, with one suggestion to rename the portal. In other news, a new portal focusing on conservatism has been created at WikiSource. Wikisource is an online library of free content publications with 254,051 accessible texts. One highlight of the portal's content is Reflections on the Revolution in France by Edmund Burke.

 October saw a 6.4% increase in new members, bringing the total membership to 58. Seven of the eight new members joined after October 12; the deletion discussions may have played a role in the membership spike. Mwhite148 is a member of the UK Conservative Party. Stating that he is not a conservative, Kleinzach noted his "lifetime interest in British, European and international politics." Let's all make an effort to welcome the new members with an outpouring of Wikilove.

Click to keep up to date on all the happenings at WikiProject Conservatism. -
 DISCUSSION REPORT

Timeline of conservatism is moved

 By Lionelt Timeline of conservatism, a Top-importance list, was nominated for deletion on October 3. The nominator stated that since conservatism in an "ambiguous concept", the timeline suffers from original research. There were a number of "Delete", as well as "Keep" votes. The closing administrator reasoned that consensus dictated that the list be renamed. The current title is Timeline of modern American conservatism.

The Right Stuff: January 2012

 January 2012

ARTICLE REPORT
Wikipedia's Newest Featured Portal: Conservatism

 By Lionelt On January 21, The Conservatism Portal was promoted to Featured Portal (FP) due largely to the contributions of Lionelt. This is the first Featured content produced by WikiProject Conservatism. The road to Featured class was rocky. An earlier nomination for FP failed, and in October the portal was "Kept" after being nominated for deletion.

Member Eisfbnore significantly contributed to the successful Good Article nomination of Norwegian journalist and newspaper editor Nils Vogt in December. Eisfbnore also created the article. In January another Project article was promoted to Featured Article. Luís Alves de Lima e Silva, Duke of Caxias, a president of Brazil, attained Featured class with significant effort by Lecen. The Article Incubator saw its first graduation in November. A collaboration spearheaded by Mzk1 and Trackerseal successfully developed Star Parker to pass the notability guideline. -

PROJECT NEWS

Project Scope Debated

 By Lionelt Another discussion addressing the project scope began in December. Nine alternatives were presented in the contentious, sometimes heated discussion. Support was divided between keeping the exitsing scope, or adopting a scope with more specificity. Some opponents of the specific scope were concerned that it was too limiting and would adversely affect project size. About twenty editors participated in the discussion.

Inclusion of the article Ku Klux Klan (KKK) was debated. Supporters for inclusion cited sources describing the KKK as "conservative." The article was excluded with more than 10 editors participating.

Project membership continues to grow. There are currently 73 members. Member Goldblooded (pictured) volunteers for the UK Conservative Party and JohnChrysostom is a Christian Democrat. North8000 is interested in libertarianism. We won't tell WikiProject Libertarianism he's slumming. Let's stop by their talkpages and share some Wikilove.

Click to keep up to date on all the happenings at WikiProject Conservatism.

DISCUSSION REPORT

Why is Everyone Talking About Rick Santorum?

 By Lionelt

Articles about the GOP presidential candidate and staunch traditional marriage supporter have seen an explosion of discussion. On January 8 an RFC was opened (here) to determine if Dan Savage's website link should be included in Campaign for "santorum" neologism. The next day the Rick Santorum article itself was the subject of an RFC (here) to determine if including the Savage neologism was a violation of the BLP policy. Soon after a third was opened (here) at Santorum controversy regarding homosexuality. This RFC proposes merging the neologism article into the controversy article.

The Abortion case closed in November after 15 weeks of contentious arbitration. The remedies include semi-protection of all abortion articles (numbering 1,500), sanctions for some editors including members of this Project, and a provision for a discussion to determine the names of what are colloquially known as the pro-life and pro-choice articles. The Committee endorsed the "1 revert rule" for abortion articles.

Upcoming Wikimedia events in Missouri and Kansas!
You're invited to 3 exciting events Wikipedians are planning in your region this June—a tour and meetup at the National Archives in Kansas City, and Wiknics in Wichita and St. Louis:

Disambiguation link notification for August 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rey Cross, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Penrith (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

wb
--j⚛e deckertalk 16:37, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Come to the First Topeka Meetup, January 15!

Come celebrate Wikipedia Day with other Kansas Wikipedians sponsored by Wikimedians Active in Local Regions in the United States (WALRUS) and hosted by the Topeka and Shawnee Public Library. Come chat, hang out and enjoy good company while find out more about Wikipedia in our regional community! RSVP at Meetup/Topeka/Wikipedia_Day.

If you can't come, but still want to find out about events in the greater Topeka region (which may include KC, Manhattan, Lawrence, Salina, or other places where volunteers are interested) sign up for future notifications at Meetup/Topeka/Invite list.

Hope to see you there Sadads (talk) 20:19, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Area Code 629
Hello ,

It seems to me that an article you worked on, Area Code 629, may be copied from http://www.barlar.org/areacodes.htm. It's entirely possible that I made a mistake, but I wanted to let you know because Wikipedia is strict about copying from other sites.

It's important that you edit the article and rewrite it in your own words, unless you're absolutely certain nothing in it is copied. If you're not sure how to fix the problem or have any questions, there are people at the help desk who are happy to assist you.

Thank you for helping build a free encyclopedia! MadmanBot (talk) 22:52, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Old Bridge (Heidelberg), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page German. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:39, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

NRHP stuff
Hi, I noticed your new Estes Kefauver Federal Building and United States Courthouse article about a recently-listed National Register property, which is great, then I found my way also to your older article Jefferson Davis State Historic Site about another National Register site. At the latter, I added a NRHP nomination document reference from 1973 and a limited claim to the lede. Perhaps I over-qualified the claim and it could be more broadly stated, as I see further down in the article that there is claim that the monument is the tallest in the world of its type. Certainly a world-wide claim is worth stating in the lede. :)

I note your interest in history and perhaps generally in history of Tennessee and Kentucky. You'd be very welcome as a member of WikiProject NRHP, in which I am active, and/or to post at wt:NRHP. TN and KY are quite a bit less-developed than other states, in terms of NRHP coverage, which can be seen graphically at wp:NRHPprogress. Any which way, thanks for your contributions, and keep up the good work! cheers, -- do ncr  am  23:33, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

The Daily Wire
I removed them because people aren't categorized by their works; however, I've created Category:The Daily Wire people, and added them there. Trivialist (talk) 23:26, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

A page you started (Libido (1965 film)) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Libido (1965 film), Saxonjf!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"Imdb is a banned source at WP:RELIABLESOURCES."

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 20:12, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

The Right Stuff June 2018

 June 2018

 FROM THE EDITOR

The Right Stuff Returns

 By

Fellow members, I'm pleased to announce the return of the newsletter of WikiProject Conservatism. And considering the recent downsizing at The Signpost the timing could not be better. The Right Stuff will help keep you apprised of what's happening in conservatism at Wikipedia and in the world. The Right Stuff welcomes submissions including position pieces, instructional articles, or short essays addressing important conservatism-related issues. Post submissions here.

Add the Project Discussion page to your watchlist for the latest updates at WikiProject Conservatism (Discuss this story) -
 ARBITRATION REPORT

Russian Agents Editing at American Politics?

 By

After a series of unfortunate events largely self-created, bureaucrat and admin was the subject of an Arbitration case for conduct unbecoming. Prior to the case getting underway Andrevan resigned as bureaucrat and admin. A widely discussed incident was when he suggested that some editors he described as "pro-Trump" were paid Russian agents. This resulted in a number of editors from varied quarters denouncing the allegations and voicing support for veteran editors including and the notorious.

Editors who faced Enforcement action include (no action),  (three month topic ban ARBAPDS),  (no action) and  (indef topic ban ARBAPDS). (Discuss this story)

 IN THE MEDIA

Breitbart Versus Wikipedia

 By

Breitbart News, in response to Facebook's decision to use Wikipedia as a source to fight fake news, has declared war on our beloved pedia. The article in Haaretz describes the Facebook arrangement as Wikipedia's "greatest test in years" as well as a "massive threat" to the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Breitbart's targeting of Wikipedia has resulted in an "epic battle" with respect to editing at the Breitbart article. The article has also recently experienced a dramatic increase in traffic with 50,000 visitors according to Haaretz. There is no love lost between Breitbart and Wikipedia where editors at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard have criticized the news websites unreliability and have compared it to The Daily Mail. (Discuss this story) -
 DISCUSSION REPORT

Liberty and Trump and Avi, Oh my!

 By

There are several open discussions at the Project:

Recently closed discussions include Anti-abortion movements which was not renamed, and an RFC at Trump–Russia dossier. (Discuss this story)
 * There is an RFC regarding Liberty University and its relationship to President Trump; see discussion
 * Activist and commentator Avi Yemini is listed at AFD; see discussion

Delivered: 11:12, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

The Right Stuff: July 2018

 July 2018

 DISCUSSION REPORT

WikiProject Conservatism Comes Under Fire

 By

WikiProject Conservatism was a topic of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard/Incident (AN/I). Objective3000 started a thread where he expressed concern regarding the number of RFC notices posted on the Discussion page suggesting that such notices "could result in swaying consensus by selective notification." Several editors participated in the relatively abbreviated six hour discussion. The assertion that the project is a "club for conservatives" was countered by editors listing examples of users who "profess no political persuasion." It was also noted that notification of WikiProjects regarding ongoing discussions is explicitly permitted by the WP:Canvassing guideline.

At one point the discussion segued to feedback about The Right Stuff. Member SPECIFICO wrote: "One thing I enjoy about the Conservatism Project is the handy newsletter that members receive on our talk pages." Atsme praised the newsletter as "first-class entertainment...BIGLY...first-class...nothing even comes close...it's amazing." Some good-natured sarcasm was offered with Objective3000 observing, "Well, they got the color right" and MrX's followup, "Wow. Yellow is the new red."

Admin Oshwah closed the thread with the result "definitely not an issue for ANI" and directing editors to the project Discussion page for any further discussion. Editor's note: originally the design and color of The Right Stuff was chosen to mimic an old, paper newspaper.

Add the Project Discussion page to your watchlist for the "latest RFCs" at WikiProject Conservatism (Discuss this story) -
 ARTICLES REPORT

Margaret Thatcher Makes History Again

 By

Margaret Thatcher is the first article promoted at the new WikiProject Conservatism A-Class review. Congratulations to. A-Class is a quality rating which is ranked higher than GA (Good article) but the criteria are not as rigorous as FA (Featued article). WikiProject Conservatism is one of only two WikiProjects offering A-Class review, the other being WikiProject Military History. Nominate your article here. (Discuss this story)

 RECENT RESEARCH

Research About AN/I

 By

Reprinted in part from the April 26, 2018 issue of The Signpost; written by

Out of over one hundred questioned editors, only twenty-seven (27%) are happy with the way reports of conflicts between editors are handled on the Administrators' Incident Noticeboard (AN/I), according to a recent survey. The survey also found that dissatisfaction has varied reasons including "defensive cliques" and biased administrators as well as fear of a "boomerang effect" due to a lacking rule for scope on AN/I reports. The survey also included an analysis of available quantitative data about AN/I. Some notable takeaways:

 * 53% avoided making a report due to fearing it would not be handled appropriately
 * "Otherwise 'popular' users often avoid heavy sanctions for issues that would get new editors banned."
 * "Discussions need to be clerked to keep them from raising more problems than they solve."

In the wake of Zarasophos' article editors discussed the AN/I survey at The Signpost and also at AN/I. Ironically a portion of the AN/I thread was hatted due to "off-topic sniping." To follow-up the problems identified by the research project the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-Harassment Tools team and Support and Safety team initiated a discussion. You can express your thoughts and ideas here. (Discuss this story)

Delivered: 09:27, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Gilbert Mansion
Hi. I noticed that you added some useful information to the Gilbert Mansion--thanks for that. A while back I created many articles on the National Register of Historic Places listings in Davidson County, Tennessee. It would be very useful if you could re-read them and perhaps expand them. As you know, everything on Wikipedia is a collaborative work in progress, so anything helps. Thanks!Zigzig20s (talk) 13:33, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I've added a bit more. I tried to look for Leon Gilbert's obituary but couldn't find it on Newspapers.com. Not sure if you can find out when he died. It looks like he was the chairman of Nashville Electric Power, a state legislator, and the owner of what later became Beaman Park. As a member of the Tennessee House of Representatives, he would be sufficiently notable to have his own article on Wikipedia. Please ping me if you can find one. Thanks!Zigzig20s (talk) 14:32, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Ways to improve Jonah Heston
Thanks for creating Jonah Heston.

A New Page Patroller Meatsgains just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:

"Consider providing reliable sources to strengthen the page's verifiability."

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Meatsgains (talk) 02:53, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Jonah Heston, Mystery Science Theater 3000.jpg
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:06, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Jonah Heston, Mystery Science Theater 3000.jpg
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:00, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Category:The Daily Wire has been nominated for deletion
Category:The Daily Wire, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:12, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Robowar (film) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robowar (film) 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/Robowar (film) 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. Donaldd23 (talk) 23:11, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Fred D. Thompson U.S. Courthouse and Federal Building moved to draftspace
Thanks for your contributions to Fred D. Thompson U.S. Courthouse and Federal Building. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 05:14, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Fred D. Thompson U.S. Courthouse and Federal Building
Hello, Saxonjf. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Fred D. Thompson U.S. Courthouse and Federal Building, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

title: User talk:Saxonjf