text:
Doria Pamphilj Gallery

The Doria Pamphilj Gallery (often Doria Pamphili Gallery in English) is a large private art collection housed in the Palazzo Doria Pamphilj in Rome, Italy, between Via del Corso and Via della Gatta. The principal entrance is on the Via del Corso (until recently, the entrance to the gallery was from the Piazza del Collegio Romano). The palace façade on Via del Corso is adjacent to a church, Santa Maria in Via Lata. Like the palace, it is still privately owned by the princely Roman family Doria Pamphili. Tours of the state rooms often culminate in concerts of Baroque and Renaissance music, paying tribute to the setting and the masterpieces it contains.

Collection
The large collection of paintings, furniture and statuary has been assembled since the 16th century by the Doria, Pamphilj, Landi and Aldobrandini families now united through marriage and descent under the simplified surname Doria Pamphilj. The collection includes paintings and furnishings from Innocent X's Palazzo Pamphilj (in Piazza Navona), who bequeathed them to his nephew Camillo Pamphilj.

The Palazzo has grown over the centuries; it is likely the largest in Rome still in private ownership. The main collection is displayed in state rooms, including the chapel, complete with the mummified corpse of the family saint. However, the bulk is displayed in a series of four gilded and painted galleries surrounding a courtyard. An extensive suite of further rooms have now been converted to permanent well-lit galleries, containing the more medieval and Byzantine art in the collection.

The palace was renovated for the marriage of Andrea IV Doria Pamphilj Landi to Princess Leopoldina Maria of Savoy, daughter of Louis Victor, Prince of Carignan and Christine of Hesse-Rotenburg in 1767. Work was carried out under the supervision of Francesco Nicoletti, an architect from Trapani.

Velázquez's Portrait of Innocent X, who rose to papacy as cardinal Giovan Battista Pamphilj in 1644, is considered the collection's masterpiece. Velázquez while not idealizing the pope's countenance, is not unflattering in the portrait; Innocent X's features were by his contemporaries believed to symbolise a despotic lifestyle and vindictive character. The portrait painted to commemorate the Holy Year was commissioned by his hedonistic sister-in-law Olimpia Maidalchini who was his close confidante and adviser, and some say mistress. Since 1927, Velázquez's portrait was placed in a specially designated small room along with a sculptured bust of the same pope by Bernini.

Olimpia Maidalchini's son Camillo Pamphilj, defying his powerful mother, renounced the Cardinalship conferred on him by his uncle the Pope and married the widowed Olimpia Borghese. Born an Aldobrandini, she brought the palazzo known as Palazzo Aldobrandini into the Pamphilj family. Following a period of exile in the country, to avoid confrontation with the Pope and Olimpia Maidalchini, the newly married couple took up permanent residence in the Palazzo Aldobrandini which from 1654 Camillo began to expand on a large scale; neighbouring houses and a convent were bought and demolished as the Palazzo grew, in spite of local opposition from the neighbouring Jesuits at the Collegio Romano. The architect in charge of this lengthy project was Antonio Del Grande. The façade facing the Via del Corso, however, is by Gabriele Valvassori. Following Camillo's death in 1666, building continued under the auspices of his two sons Giovanni Battista (his heir) and Benedetto.

One of Camillo and Olimpia's daughters, Anna Pamphilj, married the Genoese aristocrat Giovanni Andrea III Doria Landi in 1671, and it was their descendants who inherited the Palazzo when the Roman branch of the Pamphilj family ended in 1760. In 1763 Prince Andrea IV combined his Genoese and Roman names to the present Doria-Pamphilj-Landi. In 1767 the ceilings of the state rooms were frescoed by late-baroque artists such as Crescenzio Onofri, Aureliano Milani, and Stefano Pozzi (Sala degli Specchi).

The collection was first opened to the public by the three-quarters English Princess Orietta Pogson Doria Pamphilj, whose English husband Commander Frank Pogson added her name to his. Her own father, Prince Filippo Andrea VI, was half English. Princess Orietta and Commander Frank did much to restore the collection and the Palazzo; following her death in 2000 the guardianship of the collection was taken over by her adopted, English-born children, Jonathan Doria Pamphilj and Gesine Pogson Doria Pamphilj, who still live in the palazzo. Along with the possessions of the Colonna and Pallavicini-Rospigliosi families, this is one of the largest private art collections in Rome.

Overview

 * The Family chapel was designed by architect Carlo Fontana in the late 17th century, but since altered. The ivory crucifix was carved by Ercole Ferrata.
 * Saletta Gialla and Rossa contain Gobelins tapestries, including those on Zodiac signs by Claude Audran.
 * Sala del Poussin: Landscapes by Claude Lorrain. Birth of Adonis and the Rape of Adonis by Poussin and Giacomo Eremiti.

Main painting galleries: Room of Andrea Doria: Portrait of Christopher Columbus by Jan Mabuse and Sebastiano del Piombo, Portrait of Andrea Doria. Green Salon: large mid-15th century Tournai tapestry with the medieval legend of Alexander the Great; bronze of Innocent X by Algardi; Portrait by Lotto; and Filippo Lippi's Annunciation.
 * 1st Gallery: Mary Magdalene by Carracci; Christ in the house of the Pharisee by Cigoli; St. Roch and angel by Saraceni; and Herminia and Tancred by Guercino.
 * 2nd Gallery (Galleria degli Specchi): Velázquez and Bernini portraits, antique Roman statues; and Crossing of Red Sea by Antonio Tempesta.
 * Saletta del Seicento: Caravaggio's Penitent Magdalene and The Rest on the Flight into Egypt
 * Saletta del Cinquecento: Double portrait by Raphael; Salome with the head of St John the Baptist by Titian.
 * Saletta del Quattrocento: works by Ludovico Mazzolino and Antoniazzo Romano.
 * 3rd Gallery: St Jerome by Lotto; Return of prodigal son by Guercino; Madonna in adoration of the Child by Reni; Crucifixion by Marcello Venusti; Holy Family by Sassoferrato; Landscape with hunting scene by Paul Brill.
 * 4th Gallery: bust of Olimpia Aldobrandini by Algardi; St John the Baptist by Caravaggio; Christ in the temple by Mazzolino.
 * Saletta degli Specchi: Landscape by Domenichino; St Joseph by Guercino; Angel by Titian, Christ in the Garden by Venusti.
 * Salone Aldobrandini: antique sculptures and marble reliefs by Duquesnoy.

Note: The Palazzo housing the Gallery Doria Pamphilj should not be confused with the Palazzo Pamphilj, in Rome's Piazza Navona, now the Brazilian Embassy. Nor should this palace be confused with a second Palazzo Doria-Pamphilj, a summer urban villa, in Valmontone near Rome; this palace, while badly damaged during the Second World War, is renowned for its late Baroque fresco series by Francesco Cozza, Pier Francesco Mola, and Mattia Preti.

title: Doria Pamphilj Gallery


text:
Ministry of Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry

The Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry is a government ministry of the Canadian province of Ontario that is responsible for Ontario's provincial parks, forests, fisheries, wildlife, mineral aggregates and the Crown lands and waters that make up 87 per cent of the province. Its offices are divided into Northwestern, Northeastern and Southern Ontario regions with the main headquarters in Peterborough, Ontario. The current minister is Greg Rickford.

In 2021, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry again merged with the Ministry of Energy, Northern Development and Mines to form the Ministry of Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry, while the Ministry of Energy became a separate ministry. Following the 2022 Ontario general election, the Ministry of Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry was split up into three separate ministries. The Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry has been Graydon Smith since the 2022 election. The Minister of Mines is George Pirie, and the Minister of Northern Development is Greg Rockford, the previous minister for the combined of NDMNR&F.

History
The first government office charge with responsibility of crown land management in modern-day Ontario was the Office of the Surveyor-General of the Northern District of North America, created in 1763 and initially headed by Samuel Holland. Holland was initially appointed Surveyor General of Quebec, but offered to assume the larger responsibility at no increase in salary. In 1791, Upper and Lower Canada were created via the Constitutional Act 1791. Holland continued to serve as Surveyor General for both, but openly advocated that they should be separate posts.

In 1792, David William Smith was named by Lieutenant Governor John Graves Simcoe to be acting Surveyor General of Upper Canada (against Holland's advice to appoint William Chewett as his replacement), Smith and was subsequently officially appointed to the position in 1798 and held the office until his resignation in 1804. The previously overlooked Chewett and Thomas Ridout were appointed to the position jointly in the interim. In 1805, Charles Burton Wyatt was appointed (along with Joseph Bouchette ) but was suspended in 1807. Ridout was named to the office in 1807 and held the position until 1829.

The Office of the Commissioner of Crown Lands for Upper Canada was established in 1827. By the 1840s, however, the crown lands department had been established over which the Commissioner presided, and by 1860, this was renamed the Department of Crown Lands. The primary responsibility of the department was the sale and management of public lands and the granting of land to settlers. Between 1827 and 1867, the responsibilities of the department expanded to include the duties of the Surveyor General (in 1845), as well as those of the Surveyor General of Woods and Forests (in 1852). By 1867, the department had responsibility over mines, fisheries, ordnance lands, colonization roads, and Indian affairs, as well.

In 1867, the Department of Crown Lands for the Province of Canada was replaced with the Department of Crown Lands for Ontario. Ordnance lands, Indian affairs and fisheries were, however, transferred to the federal government in 1867. In 1900, the department also acquired responsibility over immigration and colonization.

In 1905, legislation was passed which renamed the Commissioner of Crown Lands to the Minister of Lands and Mines. With this change, the department was renamed the Department of Lands and Mines. At this time, responsibilities for forestry were transferred to the Department of Agriculture. In 1906, the department was renamed the Department of Lands, Forests and Mines, resuming responsibilities for forestry. It also resumed responsibilities for immigration and colonization between 1916 and 1920.

In 1920, the department was renamed Department of Lands and Forests when a separate Department of Mines was established. Responsibilities for immigration and colonization were also transferred back to the Department of Agriculture.

The department existed until 1972, when it amalgamated with the Department of Mines and Northern Affairs to form the Ministry of Natural Resources. The ministry was responsible for northern affairs until 1977, and for mines until 1985. It was again merged briefly between 1995 and 1997 with Northern Development and Mines to form a single Ministry of Natural Resources, Northern Development and Mines. In 2014 the ministry was renamed the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, but responsibilities did not change.

In June 2021, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry once again merged with the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines to form the Ministry of Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry.

After the 2022 Ontario General Election in which the incumbent Progressive Conservatives were re-elected, the Ministry was once again separated, this time into 3 independent ministries; the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, the Ministry of Northern Development and the Ministry of Mines.

Organization
MNRF is organized into divisions; within each division are branches/regions, sections, and units.
 * Divisions:
 * Regional Operations Division
 * Provincial Services Division
 * Policy Division
 * Corporate Management and Information Division

Responsibilities
The Ministry is responsible for:

 * Fish & Wildlife Management – sustainably managing Ontario's fish and wildlife resources.
 * Land & Waters Management – leading the management of Ontario's Crown lands, water, oil, gas, salt and aggregates resources, including making Crown land available for renewable energy projects.
 * Forest Management – ensuring the sustainable management of Ontario's Crown forests.
 * Ontario Parks – guiding the management of Ontario's parks and protected areas.
 * Forest Fire, Flood and Drought Protection - protecting people, property and communities from related emergencies.
 * Geographic Information – developing and applying geographic information to help manage the province's natural resources.

The ministry also has responsibility for the Office of the Mining & Lands Commissioner and the Niagara Escarpment Commission agencies.

Ontario Parks
Ontario Parks protects significant natural and cultural resources in a system of parks and protected areas.

Aviation, Forest Fire and Emergency Services
The Ministry's Aviation, Forest Fire and Emergency Services (AFFES) program coordinates forest fire detection, monitoring, suppression and public information and education services for Ontario. AFFES also provides aviation services for the Ontario government and leads emergency management planning and response for natural hazards such as forest fires, floods, erosion, dam failures, unstable soils and bedrock, droughts and oil and gas emergencies.

The Ministry's entrance into the field of aviation started with hiring Laurentide Air Services to carry out fire patrols however the government soon realized it could save money by carrying out the operations itself and formed the Ontario Provincial Air Service, (O.P.A.S.) in February 1924 with 13 second hand Curtiss HS-2L flying boats that had been originally built for the US Navy. The OPAS was an early pioneer in the use of aircraft for the discovery and extinguishing of forest fires. Initially this involved carrying warnings of fires back to existing fire patrols, to be extinguished by teams that travelled by canoe or overland but soon they began landing firefighters (never more than a few at a time due to the limited carrying capacity of the aircraft available) with a hand-operated water pump near a fire. As a part of this program the OPAS completely rebuilt damaged aircraft before they began building a number of aircraft under license to meet their requirements such as the Buhl Air Sedan, and later provided considerable input on the development of the de Havilland Canada DHC-2 Beaver and de Havilland Canada DHC-3 Otter and finally were central to the invention of the water bomber. The first water bomber was an OPAS DHC Beaver with a tank mounted on the float designed to dump the water out quickly. This had followed unsuccessful experiments with bags of water.

 * Current AFFES Airfleet
 * 9 Bombardier Canadair CL-415 - firefighting
 * 3 Bell 206 L-1 Long Ranger II
 * 1 Eurocopter 350-B2s
 * 2 Beechcraft King Air 300
 * 7 Eurocopter EC 130 B4
 * 6 de Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otters - firefighting
 * 5 de Havilland Canada DHC-2 Mk III Turbo Beavers - firefighting

 * Retired

 * 4 Buhl CA-6 Air Sedans
 * 2 Canadian Vickers Vedette Flying Boats
 * 14 Curtiss HS-2L Flying Boats
 * de Havilland Canada DHC-2 Beaver
 * de Havilland Canada DHC-3 Otter
 * de Havilland Dove Twin Engine Monoplane
 * de Havilland Fox Moth Cabin Biplane
 * 2 de Havilland Giant Moth Cabin Biplane
 * 17 de Havilland Moth (includes DH.60G Gypsy Moth, DH.60M Moth & DH.60X Moth)
 * 4 Fairchild 71 cabin monoplanes
 * Fairchild KR-34 (Open cockpit biplane permanently assigned to the Superintendent)
 * Grumman CS2F-1 Tracker - firefighting
 * 4 Hamilton Metalplane cabin monoplanes
 * 1 MBB/Kawasaki BK 117 twin engine helicopter
 * 10+ Stinson Reliant Cabin monoplane
 * Waco ZQC-6 Cabin Biplane

Aircraft on display

 * Former MNR de Havilland Beaver, C-FOBS, serial number 2, the first production Beaver manufactured by de Havilland Canada, is on display at the Canadian Bushplane Heritage Centre, Sault Ste Marie, Ontario

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


text:
User:Marcol

Ok, just to start: I'm mainly interested in interior point methods.

Here is what I'm planning to do:

 * Add details to interior point methods
 * Barrier function
 * Primal-dual algorithms
 * Central path and path-following
 * Comparison with simplex method

 * Complete Mehrotra predictor-corrector method

 * Add somewhere a short bibliography of reference texts

title: User:Marcol


text:
Talk:Specific absorption rate

Untitled section
Why is the hazards discussed in relation to a pure technical measurement unit? I think that that discussion should be moved to the "Electromagnetic radiation hazard" page.
 * I will give it a graze period and then remve the hazrd discussion. I do not think that it belongs here either.Mossig 21:22, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually the SAR has primarily been used for measuring RF absorption due to MRI, not cell phones. 1 SAR is defined as 1Watt / kg = 1 Joule / kg s

 * So why aren't the units sieverts per second? Gene Nygaard (talk) 12:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

 * It could be, but as sievert are mainly used for ionizing radiation SAR from RF-fields are described as measured in W/Kg. I have never seen SAR used as a unit, as proposed above. Mossig (talk) 20:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks. I figured it was something like that, but I'd forgotten how to characterize it.  Gene Nygaard 22:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

 * The unit Sievert is only used for ionizing radiation and it includes already a biological weighting factor (for ionizing radiation). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.142.107.30 (talk) 10:03, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

SAR Limits
I've just added a bit more detail on European SAR limits. I have quoted directly from IEC-60601-2-33:2002 for the MRI limits, but I don't have access to IEC 62209-1 (handheld devices) - could somebody who has the standard check that 2W/kg is accurate? I have also hidden the reference to the ICNIRP limit -- I don't think this is considered current, but again, I'd like to have someone confirm. Finally, does someone out there know the FCC/FDA SAR limits for MRI? GyroMagician (talk) 16:34, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Why souldnt the ICNIRP limit be considered current? I will unhide the link to ICNIRP, as this still is the basis for most of the worlds regulations. And I am sceptical about quoting technical standards, such as the MRI standard, direct without the rest of the definitions. It is to little information to be really useful, and to much to give any insight into the matter for the curious reader. Mossig (talk) 00:04, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Okay, I wasn't sure about the ICNIRP limit, I though IEC standards had superceded it - thanks for correcting. Which definitions do you think are missing from the MRI SAR limits? Maybe I should remove the 1st/2nd controlled level limits and only quote the normal operating limits? Or maybe you would prefer to see the MR limits on the MR page? I would also like to try and give some context to the ICNIRP line - it seems rather 'hanging' at the moment. Input welcome. GyroMagician (talk) 11:45, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

An SAR measurement appears to refer to physical absorption at the time of use (cell phone, MRI), but not cumulative absorption over time. Does the extreme proliferation of radio waves represented by cell-phone use (transmission towers, "hot spot" wi-fi, etc.) increase cumulative retention of some potentially tissue-altering effect? Jimsimple (talk) 13:53, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Good question. SAR is usually used to give an indication of the amount of heating caused by a device. If you deposit too much heat, you start cooking tissue. But if you stay below some limit, it is generally assumed that the heat will dissipate, and no permanent damage is done. For example, IEC-60601 assumes that if the heating stays under 1°C, no damage is done (you can experience a higher temperature rise with a fever, so this seems reasonable). But SAR by itself only measures energy is deposition, over a given time. In principle it could be used to prescribe limits based on concerns about low-level 'background' EM radiation, with an averaging period of years rather than minutes, although I have never seen it used this way. GyroMagician (talk) 19:22, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Volume/Mass
Local SAR is commonly measured/calculated over 10g (IEC) or 1g (FDA) of tissue. This is confusing because the integral of (sigma * E^2/ rho) is taken over a volume, not a mass (check the units). In simulation (FDTD and similar) this is done by expanding a volume around the calculation point until it contains the required mass. I've modified the wording of the article to try to capture this - is it better? GyroMagician (talk) 06:57, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Lab measurements versus practical antenna operation
Hope I'm not off-topic, but these lab measurement don't seem to say anything about the actual compling between the user's hand and head to the emission object, that is the hand-held cell phone. I learned a long time ago after many years as a radio amateur that the coupling to the body is of keen importance at these microwave frequencies. Witness the Iphone 4's bad reputation due to the placement of the feed to two separate antennas in the natural grip point of a right-handed user, which causes a weakening of the emitted field, and dropped calls with resulting bad PR. This coupling effect is included in the calculations of the designers; and must be met if the impedance and emission pattern is to be the desired one. This is not always true for all antenna designs, for example: fractal antennas are often least affected as their feeding impedance is already so low, whereas stub or frame antennas are most affected. See iPhone 4 which uses a frame antenna. Rumors say that their next model will have a metal backplane as one antenna. My point in this all, is that assigning "safe" and "unsafe" gradings are worthless and may be completely incorrect as to the effect on the brain. Secondly, at these frequencies there often occurs hot spot anomolies, which could be much higher than than measured or calculated average over a unit the size of the brain. Witness the unevenness which plagued the first generation of microwave ovens. I would have proposed instead a measuring system based upon a "in-ear" sensor unit with a shielded (coax) cable to the measuring unit. Whether the sensor could be placed in actual human user's ears is another question; but see no reason why notas we after all are using cellphones meant for intensive consumer use. I perhaps unnecessarily add that I have a degree in EE from NC State University, but claim no expertise in modelling in a lab environment---although have done some practical work but in the 2--30 Mhz range. Thanks for any guidance to a newbie at Wikipedia.

Idealist707 (talk) 21:42, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Practical difference between US SAR and EU SAR?
Can somebody who knows more than I do about this matter add something about what the difference between the EU SAR measurement and US SAR measurement means in practice. It now explains that one is measured over 1g of tissue and the other over 10g, but says nothing about what that difference is measuring actually means. It is clearly not just a different scale, as the difference between the EU SAR and US SAR on the same phone varies.

If Device A has a higher US SAR rating ccompared to Device B, but a lower EU SAR than Device B, what is the actual difference between the devices for the radiation dose of the user? Does it mean that the "worst 1g spot" on the user's head gets more radiation using Device A, but over a larger mass (10g) the total dose is lower, so the radiation absorbion is more concentrated on a specific spot using Device A but less on total, or what? And if so, how is it possible that some phones have a higher EU SAR rating than US SAR? And how is it possible that some phone have a higher US SAR value than EU SAR value, if the US standards should measure the maximum value over a smaller mass?

--86.50.106.241 (talk) 13:13, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Mobile phone SAR list
Is this list useful? To be trustworthy every entry needs a reference required and that is clearly impractical. The article is about the definition of SAR not the SAR of every item that people can think of. All that is needed is a single entry saying that the SAR of a mobile phone is in the range of 0.5 - 1.5. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtpaley (talk • contribs) 00:12, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

The fact that this table includes the operating system of each devices is damning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtpaley (talk • contribs) 00:15, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I propose moving the SAR list to a new page. Anyone disagree? Mtpaley (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Done it. There is now a new page called Mobile Phones SAR List Mtpaley (talk) 20:21, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Put 'Mobile Phones SAR List' on request for deletion. It it a list of numbers without meaning or sensible units. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtpaley (talk • contribs) 21:52, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

In Feb 2013 I moved the 'Mobile Phones SAR List' into a new page and a month later I proposed (badly - I accept a procedural messup here) to get this page deleted which it was. The current SAR page is now close to a edit war between ViperSnake151 and Elvey about the value of a list of SAR values for many phones which is a reenactment of what happened in Feb 2013 when I moved this list into a new article. Look at the talk page section 'Mobile phone SAR list' for comments on this. The same debate seems to be coming back between ViperSnake151 and Elvey. I am just commenting on this to point out that there is a history - I intend to keep out of any debate this time. Mtpaley (talk) 23:48, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

 * As I believe is now obvious to all, the SAR values are verifiable in the FCC database; so one reference to the database suffices. Viper last two edits were both removed the list at least twice.  Is this the talk page section you're referring to, or are you referring folks to a deleted page, or what?  Link, please.  I won't speculate as to what the real reasons some folks oppose the list are, but it seems like a 'see what sticks' approach is being tried.  I can't think of a COI that would provide such evidently strong motivation.--Elvey (talk) 00:37, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

 * The individual SAR's can be listed in their respective infoboxes. I personally think that here, its merely trivia, as it does not discuss the SAR's of any other products. ViperSnake151   Talk  20:31, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

 * I don't see an argument there, just unsupported opinion.  I don't see an offer to merge it to infoboxes either.  (I do see the argument that the information is not verifiable, but that's been thoroughly debunked.)  I've added some commentary from the FCC, which I think provides some useful context that a bare, stand-alone list doesn't offer.  WP:IDONTLIKEIT isn't policy and you shouldn't be making that argument in this or any deletion discussion.   --Elvey (talk) 23:40, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

It looks like the stand-alone list that was just deleted per AfD is being recreated in this article, and the issues with criteria for inclusion have not been resolved. I agree with 's observation above that the section should mention the FCC & other agencies' limits for mobile phone radiation, and maybe a few examples, but not an exhaustive list of every phone ever rated. I'm also concerned that only Android devices are listed, and devices running other operating systems have been scrubbed through various revisions - this looks like POV pushing. It's not relevant in this article whether the phone is supported by a free OS or if it is available unlocked. Ivanvector (talk) 16:59, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

 * Ivan, you're wrong, in that the list was created here first. It was then sneakily deleted, out of process.   For a role in which, IIRC, Mtpaley apologized.  I don't think the OS is POV pushing; I think it's an artifact of the delete any such list; throw every excuse we can come up with POV pushing.  But we agree, there's no need for that column.  --Elvey (talk) 22:04, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

 * I see that it was created here first. I shouldn't have said that it was being "recreated" here; that implies an end-run around AfD, and that wasn't my intent. My POV concern was that only unlocked Android phones were listed, and there was a WP:WEASELy blurb that seemed to be pushing Replicant, but that has all been resolved by adding more phones and removing the two columns. I don't object to the OS being indicated, I was just concerned that there was only one. Ivanvector (talk) 23:06, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

If there is going to be a list of SAR values then I would support one entry for phones specifying about 1 W/Kg but it should also include some other non ionizing sources of energy to make this number meaningful. A quick back of the envelope calculation gives tropical sunshine at 1.0, WIFI at 2m is 0.008. If pressed I will calculate the numbers for a audio speaker, ultrasound scan, cell phone base station at 10m and a few more. But agreeing with the current list is even worse than the one that I got rid of a year ago. I mentioned that the OS of a phone is irrelevant but if it can be unlocked is even more irrelevant and just serves to discredit this article. Mtpaley (talk) 19:47, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

 * I don't understand what it is that you would support. A list that has just one entry for all phones, with  1 W/Kg as the combined/averaged SAR for that entry?  With what as the RS?  --Elvey (talk) 22:04, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Obviously, we couldn't include a "back-of-the-envelope" calculation but ideally there are tests published for other types of devices. I'm not an expert in this, I don't know where to look. Ivanvector (talk) 23:09, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

I have proposed deletion of the category Low-radiation smartphones, for the same reasons discussed in the AfD List of low-radiation smartphones. This seems like the most appropriate place to post a notice since the "main page" was already deleted. Please head to the CfD section to comment. Thanks! Ivanvector (talk) 18:50, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

 * Ivan, I'm disappointed that you re-raise the idea that we don't have a RS, as the FCC was provided as an RS for the SAR values, and updated list of 20 lowest radiation cellphones was provided by Enric Naval as a list of the 20 lowest radiation cellphones. The idea seems discredited to me.  No?  --Elvey (talk) 22:04, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Criticism - removed
I have just removed the following:

 * SAR limits don't consider that the human body is particularly sensitive to the frequencies responsible the microwave hearing effect, which occurs with exposures well below SAR limits and perhaps is particularly sensitive to other frequencies or signal patterns that could explain other reported physiological effects.

There is no conflict between SAR and the uw hearing effect - you simply have to average over a small enough volume. The heating involved is tiny in terms of energy (and temperature change, according to the linked WP page) - so in terms of safety, there is no concern. Unless I'm missing something? GyroMagician (talk) 21:14, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

 * What about resonance?
 * I think the intention is a broad criticism of using just thermal heating as the safety metric. If some people can sense MHE at low power levels, then there may be other problems that may be triggered in fine structures (and countering the notion that a bulk measure is appropriate). I'm ignorant of the field, but here's a firefighter's organization objecting to collocating cell towers with fire stations:
 * http://www.iaff.org/hs/Facts/CellTowerFinal.asp
 * I cannot speak the cited references weight, but there are plenty. For example, footnote 9: "Drs. Henry Lai and N. P. Singh of the University of Washington in Seattle have reported both single- and double-strand DNA breaks in the brains of rats exposed to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation at an SAR of 1.2 W/Kg. DNA is the carrier of the genetic information in all living cells. Cumulated DNA strand breaks in brain cells can lead to cancer or neurodegenerative diseases."
 * Glrx (talk) 23:56, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

 * Gyro confabulates SAR limits set by law, which are for specified volumes and SAR limits of the measurer's choice of volume. I'm restoring the text, but adding "set by law" to clarify:

 * SAR limits set by law don't consider that the human body is particularly sensitive to the frequencies responsible the microwave hearing effect, which occurs with exposures well below SAR limits set by law and perhaps is particularly sensitive to other frequencies or signal patterns that could explain other reported physiological effects.--Elvey (talk) 22:54, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

 * And I am re-reverting. I usually try to be more gentle about reverts, but the proposed paragraph is pseudo-scientific nonsense, without any supporting evidence. The addition of "set by law" does not make the disputed paragraph any more acceptable.
 * It's relevant to your comment, "you simply have to average over a small enough volume" - you can't do that given the "set by law" clarification, which is why I added it. --Elvey (talk) 01:48, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

 * Let's start at the beginning. SAR measures energy absorbed by tissue under some sort of excitation, usually but not exclusively electromagnetic RF. SAR is only intended to measure heating, and assumes no cooling effects (tissue perfusion, etc). SAR does not attempt to quantify any ill-defined damaging effects caused by undetermined mechanisms.

 * The microwave hearing effect page says the following (in the lede): "The generally accepted mechanism is the rapid (but minuscule, in the range of 10−5 °C) heating of the brain". Heating in the range of 10-5°C is certainly not large enough to be a safety concern. You see a far larger change in temperature when you step outside each morning. Most standards (IEC, FDA, etc) assume energy deposition causing a temperature rise of approximately 1°C to be the safe limit. That is around 10,000 times the heating caused by the MHE. That the human body can sense such small changes is remarkable - which is why the MHE page remarks upon it. As I understand it, there is nothing special about the frequency range involved, in terms of absorption by the human body. But also note that frequency dependence is included in the definition of SAR, via tissue conductivity, which is most certainly a function of frequency.

 * Further, SAR is about heating caused by energy deposition. As such, the integral of energy deposited over some time period is interesting. The actual waveform, or signal pattern, is not relevant.

 * I do not understand what kind of resonance you think may be relevant here. But I also point you back to the tissue conductivity, which may show sharp peaks at some frequencies.

 * Of course, SAR has limitations as a safety metric - I am often in the position of arguing against it. See, for example, some of the work from Tommy Vaughan at the University of Minnesota. He argues, fairly convincingly, that we really need to be looking at tissue temperature, and that this correlates badly with SAR - but SAR always over-estimates heating, becuase it does not account for cooling or diffusion effects. GyroMagician (talk) 00:15, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

 * I'm all about not advocating pseudoscience. I'm not an advocate of closed-mindedness.  Your argument is circular: the FDA assumes heating is the only issue, and the heating is not significant, so there's no issue.   Do you accept that that there's strong evidence that the microwave hearing effect exists?   What is it dependent on, if not the frequencies or signal patterns that you dismiss with your circular argument?--Elvey (talk) 01:48, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

 * For reference, this is the current text being discussed:

 * SAR limits set by law don't consider that the human body is particularly sensitive to the frequencies responsible the microwave hearing effect, which occurs with exposures well below SAR limits (as set by government regulations) and perhaps is particularly sensitive to other frequencies or signal patterns that could explain other reported physiological effects.

 * Sure, the MHE exists. Do you accept that the mechanism causing it is understood, and that because the heating involved is so small, it does not present a safety concern? GyroMagician (talk) 00:29, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

 * I'm not aware that the mechanism causing it is understood, and if you are, why didn't you answer when I asked what it is? Competing theories explain the results of interferometric holography tests differently, per http://www.sciencemag.org/content/209/4461/1144.extract?sid=f514230e-1373-4da5-ad36-3689f428e21b .   As to your section question, 'it' is MHE?  I understand what non-ionizing radiation is.  I also understand that there's quite a large body of evidence (and a bunch of nonsense too) indicating that there are adverse health effects.  I think Larry Lessig's review correlating cell phone safety research funding and results is impressive, but inconclusive.--Elvey (talk) 20:12, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Low-radiation smartphones
Category:Low-radiation smartphones has been nominated for. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page.

I decided to add the proper notice here too. Please comment on the CfD page. Ivanvector (talk) 18:52, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Improvements and deletions to the Mobile phone SAR list section
I have made the following changes: (1) removed the Phonearea.com text: it is not shown as a reliable source and it is not relevant that it offers a list for sale. Direct links to clearly reliable sources like the FCC are available and in fact are provided for the listing; (2) Removed the health disclaimer that was below the text. It is not relevant to a listing, and the disclaimer is not made by any regulatory body assessing SAR like the FCC; (3) That mobile phones can use a free OS is not relevant to a SAR listing; I have removed the text and will begin removing it from the listing itself (help appreciated); (4) A phone's status as locked or unlocked is not relevant to a SAR listing; I will begin removing it from the listing itself (help appreciated); (5) I think the "Original shipping mobile phone operating system and TUI" column should also be deleted, as I do not see the relevance to a SAR listing, except to identify a particular phone to readers. Is that necessary information? Comments invited; (6) I have improved the remaining text. --papageno (talk) 22:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

 * I have removed the "free OS" and "unlocked" columns from the table, as they are not relevant in the context of this article. The "model number" is probably not useful here (readers will know phones by their common name or model name), and I'm not sure that the "ID" and "link ID" columns are necessarily useful. I'm also skeptical that the TUI is necessary to list for Android devices, unless it affects the SAR measurement, but it's reasonable to think a reader would want to sort by OS so let's keep that. Also, I'm not familiar with all of the specific measurements listed (product specific use, etc.) but if they are to be included, it should say somewhere in the article how the measurements are derived or why the particular measurement is important. CENELEC measurements for EU market should be added as well, if they are reasonably accessible.

 * Since it's conceivable that any editor could come along and add any phone to this list, we should set a limit to inclusion. It's hard to say what the criteria should be, but I suggest perhaps a phone that was tested more than some number of years ago would be deleted from the list, in order to keep it to a manageable size. Is two years reasonable? Ivanvector (talk) 04:30, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Note: a user has moved the entire list to a standalone article (again), as of this edit called Comparison of specific absorption rate for devices but changing frequently as before. Please continue discussion on that talk page. Ivanvector (talk) 14:25, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Instead of struggling to decide on inclusion criteria for a list, then keeping a list up to date, let's avoid the problem all together by providing good information for readers on how they can look up the information themselves. We could write it generically ("Search your national regulatory authority…One should look for these things…Here are some explanatory notes…Two sources one might consider are the FCC and EU…caveat that models may be different in your jurisdiction…etc.") This still runs into issues about how to include a reasonable number of regulatory authorities in the main places in the world, but at least we could start with the FCC and EU, and perhaps a few other major English-speaking countries. --papageno (talk) 16:18, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

 * The only rating authorities mentioned in the article are the FCC (US) and CENELEC (EU). India uses FCC ratings but has other non-SAR criteria for rating, so I think at this point just including the FCC and CENELEC values is fine. Do we know how to look up CENELEC tests? I'm not opposed to the list - our inclusion criteria is "phones that are rated" which seems fine to me. If it gets too big we could revisit in the future. I'd like to see some CENELEC numbers though. Ivanvector (talk) 22:37, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Comparision
I found unhelpful this article without the comparision between several devices (cell phones, WiFi, incandescent light bulb, power lines, etc.) and natural ocurrence (like solar radiation). But I only found the SAR for cell phones, and W/m2 for the others. If anyone can get the data I'd appreciate it.Eloy (talk) 07:15, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

SAR and eyeglasses
User JIA329 has made a few edits talking about SAR and eyeglasses. The reference provided is not accessible, so I have added a Verify source template. I can find this article online, which is perhaps the source. However, the article is poorly written, is a computer simulation without experimental confirmation (and so preliminary), and is not indexed in PubMed. Without more solid confirmation, the paragraph should be removed. --papageno (talk) 22:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

 * No comment about the quality or verifiability of the reference, but even if it is legit, it definitely does not belong in the header of the SAR article where it is currently placed. If the reference is verified and deemed to be relevant, I would suggest changing the "Criticisms" section to "Criticism and Limitations" or something similar and include it there. --EvilTwinSelf (talk) 11:14, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Not just humans

 * Article: "Specific absorption rate (SAR) is a measure of the rate at which energy is absorbed by the human body..."
 * ... except when it's absorbed by mice and rats in experiments. The calculations differ for these creatures (unfortunately, in a way that I do not have the expertise to edit into the article). 92.3.210.192 (talk) 16:18, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Better inclusion of time averaging
SAR values are averaged over time. I do not believe this is adequately mentioned in the text. A footnote to the MRI table does mention six minute averaging, but there should be mention made in the lede, and in the mobile phone section. I believe the time averaging period is six minutes for mobile phones as well, per ICNIRP 1998 (reference is in the article). I also know that the time average period is six minutes in Canada. --papageno (talk) 21:48, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

EU regulatory landscape
I'm not an expert but my understanding is that CENELEC doesn't set the exposure limits--it sets standards for testing. My understanding is that the European Council sets the limit in the EU (i.e. 1999/519/EC, which EUR-Lex says is still in force), based on recommendations by the ICNIRP. My understanding is also that CENELEC sets standardization of methods of the measurement of SAR, not the limits. The publicly available 1999/519/EC document could serve as a reference for these two points: The introduction and conclusion discuss the fact that the document is based on the recommendation of the ICNRP and point (12) discusses the role of CENELEC. Thanks MyIpIsLocalhost (talk) 21:19, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Specific absorption rate


text:
Talk:Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology

Title of the Page
RMIT University would read Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology University, this seems pleonastic. Not unlike if MIT was MIT University. Came across some difficulty moving the page, could somebody help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikijokr (talk • contribs) 05:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

 * It is pleonastic. It is also their name, so please don't try to move it. The Drover's Wife (talk) 05:17, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Concur with The Drover's Wife on this one. --Coolcaesar (talk) 06:42, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 27 January 2024

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Per consensus, WP:TITLECON. – robertsky (talk) 23:07, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

RMIT University → Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology – Use the official legal name per the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology 2010 (No. 3 of 2010) passed by the Parliament of Victoria. We also have WP:TITLECON policy. As a prior discussion said, we use Massachusetts Institute of Technology instead of "MIT" for the Wikipedia article title, even if the name "MIT" may be used often. This is also true for having California Institute of Technology instead of "Caltech" for article title. Cfls (talk) 05:51, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose. WP:COMMONNAME is a policy. WP:TITLECON is a mere essay, not a policy.  Google Ngram Viewer shows that RMIT is more common than Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology in the published English corpus and has been since 1992.--Coolcaesar (talk) 06:06, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Support. It is better to use the full name. People in Melbourne, like me, know what RMIT is, but for those outside Melbourne it is better to have the full name. Bduke (talk) 06:44, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Higher education has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:08, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Australia has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:09, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support per nom and Bduke. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:16, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Support. Aside from universities with The in their legal name, this seems to be the only Australian university article title that is under a brand name. A similar example would be CQUniversity which is under the article title of Central Queensland University despite that institution also rarely using the long form outside of degree parchments. While brand names such as CQUniversity and QUT may be more recognisable in the states where they are being used, it may be less recognisable for others. The Google Ngram Viewer rationale may not be useful since it shows similar graphs for MIT and Caltech and doesn't take into account why the abbreviations are being used. It's only a metric. My opinion does assume that place names matter in article titles, but WP:COMMONNAME doesn't seem to be used consistently on article titles about universities and WP:TITLECON seems more relevant. I am from WA. The Education Auditor (talk) 05:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)


text:
Ted McKeever

Ted McKeever is an American artist known for his work in the comic book industry. A master of pen-and-ink, McKeever has also fully painted many comics. He is known for his distinct graphic style and "bold, angular lines, which gives his work a fantastic, almost Kafka-esque edge."

McKeever's first professional comics work appeared in 1986 with Transit, published by Vortex Comics. His following thirty years in the industry also included such titles as Eddy Current, Plastic Forks, Metropol, Industrial Gothic, Junk Culture, and Faith. Over the years, McKeever collaborated with other creators, including Dave Gibbons, Peter Milligan, Jean-Marc Lofficier, and Rachel Pollack. McKeever cites editors Archie Goodwin, Lou Stathis, Karen Berger, and Jim Valentino as being important contributors to his career.

Life and career
McKeever came to comics after working for some years in the journalism field, first for ABC television as a courtroom artist, and then at the Miami Herald as an editorial artist.

In the mid-1980s, at the Atlanta Fantasy Fair, McKeever showed editor Archie Goodwin some preliminary pages for Transit; Goodwin encouraged him to show the work to as many publishers as possible. As a result, the project was picked up by Vortex Comics and editor Lou Stathis. McKeever's next project, Eddy Current, was published by the short-lived publisher Mad Dog Graphics in 1987–1988.

McKeever's next series, Plastic Forks, was originally set for publication by Comico, but the company went out of business before publishing a single issue. McKeever showed Archie Goodwin, now head of the Marvel Comics creator-owned imprint Epic Comics, some original art pages from the first issue of Plastic Forks, which Goodwin immediately approved, and added it to the Epic line-up. Metropol followed, also published by Epic in 1991–1992. McKeever left Epic after his epilogue series, Metropol A.D. (1993) was given new editors partway through its production.

In 1994, McKeever connected with DC Vertigo Executive Editor Karen Berger, first working on The Extremist with writer Peter Milligan. McKeever then took over as artist of Doom Patrol, working with writer Rachel Pollack; McKeever drew most of the last 13 issues before the series was canceled. Other Vertigo projects followed — most edited by Lou Stathis, who had moved to Vertigo (but who died in 1997) — including Industrial Gothic (1995), Junk Culture (1997), Toxic Gumbo (with writer Lydia Lunch, 1998), and Faith (1999–2000).

In 2010 McKeever began producing solo projects for Jim Valentino's Shadowline imprint at Image Comics. Starting with Meta4, McKeever then continued between the years 2011 through 2015, where he produced the series Mondo, Miniature Jesus, The Superannuated Man, and finally Pencil Head in 2016, before he walked away from the comics industry for good.

Creator series

 * Transit (Vortex Comics, 1986)
 * Eddy Current (Mad Dog Graphics, 1987–1988)
 * Plastic Forks (Epic Comics, 1989–1990)
 * Metropol (Epic Comics, 1991–1992)
 * Metropol A.D. (Epic Comics, 1993)
 * Industrial Gothic (Vertigo, 1995)
 * Junk Culture (Vertigo, 1997)
 * Faith (Vertigo, 1999–2000)
 * Meta4 (Shadowline, 2010–2011)
 * Mondo (Shadowline, 2010–2012)
 * Miniature Jesus (Shadowline, 2013)
 * The Superannuated Man (Shadowline, 2014–2015)
 * Pencil Head (Shadowline, 2016)

Other comics work

 * untitled one-pager in Strip AIDS U.S.A. (Last Gasp, 1988)
 * (with writer Dave Gibbons) "Survivor," in A1 #1 (Atomeka Press, 1989)
 * "The Talk of Creatures," in A1 #2 (Atomeka Press, 1989)
 * (with writer Peter Milligan) The Extremist (Vertigo, 1993)
 * (with writer Rachel Pollack) Doom Patrol #75–79, 81–82, 84–87 (Vertigo, 1994–1995)
 * "Engines" in Batman: Legends of the Dark Knight #74–75 (DC Comics, 1995)
 * "Perpetual Mourning" in Batman Black and White #1 (DC Comics, 1996)
 * (with writers Randy Lofficier, & Jean-Marc Lofficier) Superman's Metropolis (DC Elseworlds, 1997)
 * (with writer Lydia Lunch) Toxic Gumbo (Vertigo, 1998)
 * (with writers Randy Lofficier & Jean-Marc Lofficier) Batman: Nosferatu (DC Elseworlds, 1999)
 * "A Life Less Empty," in The Matrix Comics Series 1 (WB Publishing, 1999)
 * "Grave Wisdom," in Flinch #14 (Vertigo, 2000)
 * "The King of Never Return," in The Matrix Comics Series 2 (WB Publishing, 2000)
 * (with writer Keron Grant) "Day In... Day Out", in The Matrix Comics Series 2 (WB Publishing, 2000)
 * "Memories of Green," in Marvel Knights Double Shot (Marvel Knights, 2002)
 * (with writer Brian Michael Bendis) Ultimate Marvel Team-Up #12–13 (Marvel Comics, 2002)
 * Spider-Man's Tangled Web #18 (Marvel Comics, 2002)
 * (with writers Randy Lofficier & Jean-Marc Lofficier) Wonder Woman: The Blue Amazon (DC Elseworlds, 2003)
 * (with writer Joe Kelly) Enginehead (DC, 2004)
 * (with writer Steve Niles ) Little Book of Horror: War of the Worlds (IDW Publishing, 2005)
 * (with writer F. Paul Wilson) "Cuts," in Doomed #1 (IDW, 2006)
 * (with writer Joe Harris) "Dr. Locrian's Asylum," The Nightmare Factory (Fox Atomic Comics, 2007)
 * "Morgue Amore," in Legion of Monsters #1 (Marvel Comics, 2007)
 * (inspired by Tori Amos' Under the Pink) "Past The Mission," Comic Book Tattoo (Image Comics, 2008)
 * "Modern Primitive," in Rampaging Wolverine #1 (Marvel Comics, 2009)
 * "Breakfast All Day," in Astonishing Tales #1 (Marvel Comics, 2009)
 * "So This Is How It Feels...," in The Mystic Hands of Dr. Strange #1 (Marvel Comics, 2010)
 * "Bonebomb Babylon," in Savage Axe of Ares #1 (Marvel Comics, 2010)

title: Ted McKeever


text:
Ministry of Seniors and Accessibility

The Ministry for Seniors and Accessibility, is the ministry responsible for issues relating to seniors and persons with disabilities in the Canadian province of Ontario.

Established in June 2018, it helps seniors and people with disabilities stay independent, active, and socially connected. The Ministry also helps seniors stay safe, makes Ontario more accessible for everyone and promotes the benefits of age-diverse, accessible workplaces and communities where everyone is able to participate.

The Ministry provides seniors with information on programs and services, healthy lifestyles and aging; recognizes and promotes seniors' contributions to communities; encourages greater social inclusion and volunteerism among seniors; supports and recognizes age-friendly communities across the province; oversees the Retirement Homes Regulatory Authority (RHRA). It embeds accessibility into government policies, programs and services; supports the development of educational tools and resources on accessibility; oversees the compliance with, and enforcement of, accessibility laws; helps create and update accessibility standards under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, and promotes employment for people with disabilities by engaging employers, disability organizations, service providers, not-for-profit organizations and educational providers.

The Ministry also oversees the Retirement Homes Regulatory Authority (RHRA), the organization that administers the Retirement Homes Act, 2010 and its regulation on behalf of the government and the Minister’s Accessibility Standards Advisory Council. It administers the following legislation: Retirement Homes Act, 2010; Seniors Active Living Centres Act, 2017; Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005, and Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2001. The current Minister for Seniors and Accessibility is Raymond Cho.

title: Ministry of Seniors and Accessibility


text:
Florence MacCarthy

Finnin MacCarthy (Fínghin mac Donncha Mac Carthaig) (1560–1640), was an Irish clan chief and member of the Gaelic nobility of Ireland (flaith) of the late 16th-century and the last credible claimant to the Mac Carthaig Mór title before its suppression by English authority. Mac Carthaig's involvement in the Nine Years' War (1595–1603) led to his arrest by the Crown, and he spent the last 40 years of his life in custody in London. His clan's lands were divided among his relatives and Anglo-Irish colonialists.

Early life

Mac Carthaig was born in 1560 at Kilbrittain Castle near Kinsale in the province of Munster in Ireland, into the MacCarthy Reagh dynasty, rulers of Carbery, the son of Donogh MacCarthy Reagh, 15th Prince of Carbery. His grandfather was Donal MacCarthy Reagh, 12th Prince of Carbery.

The significance of Mac Carthaig's career lies in his command of territories in west Munster, at a time when the Tudor conquest of Ireland was underway. Southwest Munster was the area most open to Spanish intervention, which had been mooted from the late 1570s to aid Catholic rebellions in Ireland. The overlord of much of this area, but excluding Carbery, was the MacCarthy Mór of Desmond, whose lands were located in modern west Cork and Kerry. There were, in addition, three more princely branches of the MacCarthy dynasty, the MacCarthys of Muskerry, the MacCarthys of Duhallow, and finally the most wealthy: the MacCarthy Reagh of independent Carbery, of whom Florence's father had been a (semi-)sovereign prince. It was into a complex interplay between the crown government and these opposing branches that Florence found himself pitched.

The Mac Carthaig Reagh branch established itself as loyal to the crown during the Desmond Rebellions (1569–73 and 1579–83), to assert their independence from their nominal overlords, the Earl of Desmond and the Mac Carthaig Mór, both of whom had joined the rebellion. Mac Carthaig's father, Donnchadh Mac Carthaig Reagh, served the crown faithfully and reported that he had mobilised his men to drive the rebel Gerald FitzGerald, 15th Earl of Desmond out of his territory during the Second Desmond Rebellion. When his father died in 1581, Mac Carthaig, by then in his late teens or early twenties, led around 300 men in the English service with the assistance of an English captain, William Stanley, and his lieutenant, Jacques de Franceschi, under the overall command of the Earl of Ormonde. They drove Desmond's remaining followers out of MacCarthy territory, 'into his own waste country', where the rebel earls' troops could find no provisions and deserted. Mac Carthaig also claimed credit for the killings of Gorey MacSweeney and Morrice Roe, two of Desmond's gallowglass captains.

Upon his father's death in 1581, Mac Carthaig inherited substantial property but was not the prince's tanist (second in command and usually successor to the head), and therefore did not assume his father's title, which went to Mac Carthaig's uncle, Owen MacCarthy Reagh, 16th Prince of Carbery. The position of tanist went to Mac Carthaig's cousin, Donal na Pipi (Donal of the Pipes). But, in 1583, Mac Carthaig did go to court, where he was received by the queen, who granted him 1000 marks and an annuity of 100 marks. In 1585 he served as a member of the Irish Parliament at Dublin.

The Tower
Upon his marriage to Ellen, the daughter and sole heir of the Mac Carthaig Mór (also Earl of Clancare), Fínghin mac Donncha fell foul of the crown government in Munster on account of the prospective unification of the two main branches of the Clan Carthy. To add to government suspicion, there was also a rumour of communications by him with Spain. In particular, he was accused of contact with William Stanley and Jacques de Franceschi, who had defected with a regiment of Irish soldiers from the English to the Spanish side in the Eighty Years' War in Flanders.

As a result of these suspicions, Mac Carthaig was arrested in 1588 as a precaution against his assumption of the title of Mac Carthaig Mór, which would have given him command over huge estates and thousands of followers. The English authorities considered this too dangerous a prospect in a country they were trying to pacify and disarm.

Initially detained by Carew at Shandon Castle in Cork, after six months Mac Carthaig was moved to Dublin, and then to London, where he arrived in February 1589 to be committed to the Tower. His wife escaped from Cork a few days later, probably on his instructions. Mac Carthaig was examined by the privy council in March and denied all complicity in the continental intrigues of the English Catholic, Sir William Stanley. He was sent back to the Tower, but fifteen months later his wife appeared at court and Sir Thomas Butler, 10th Earl of Ormonde, volunteered to stand surety for him in the sum of £1000. Since no charges were proved against him, Mac Carthaig was set at liberty in January 1591 on condition that he not leave England nor travel more than three miles outside London without permission.

The Queen's principal secretary, Lord Burghley, backed him, and he obtained protection against his creditors and permission to recover an old fine of £500 due to the Crown from Lord Barry, a neighbour and rival of his in Munster, whom he blamed for his arrest; Barry was later to accuse him of disloyalty as this suit was prosecuted. Mac Carthaig subsequently obtained permission to return to Ireland.

Succession disputes
Fínghin mac Donncha returned to Ireland (though he was still technically a prisoner) in November 1593, following his wife and child. In the next year, his uncle Owen (the Mac Carthaig Reagh) died and was succeeded by his nephew, Donal na Pípí. The latter bound himself in the sum of £10,000 not to divert the Mac Carthaig Reagh succession from MacCarthy, who was in turn his tanist. Mac Carthaig appeared before the council at Dublin in June 1594 to reply to the accusations of David de Barry, 5th Viscount Buttevant, a local rival of Mac Carthaig's with whom he had a land dispute, which again implicated him pro-Spanish intrigues with William Stanley. Florence then returned to England by licence and remained there until the spring of 1596 in a vain attempt to prosecute Lord Buttevant. The execution of Patrick O'Collun, a fencing master, for conspiracy to murder the Queen in 1594 did nothing to restore Mac Carthaig's reputation since O'Collun had once been a member of his household.

In 1596, Donal Mac Carthaig, Mac Carthaig Mór and Earl of Clancarthy, died without male issue and the matter of the succession became highly complicated. Clancar's estate should by law have reverted to the crown, but Mac Carthaig had a mortgage on the lands and also had right by his wife. Another Donal, the Earl's illegitimate son (not to be confused with Donal na Pipi), also asserted a claim, not to the English Earldom, but to the title of Mac Carthaig Mór. Fínghin mac Donncha Mac Carthaig would in future correspondence refer to Donal as "Donal the bastard".

It was most unlikely that the English authorities would acknowledge Mac Carthaig or grant him the derived English title as they wanted to break up the Mac Carthaig lands; so the real dispute in law came down to the recovery of lands by Florence from an English mortgagee (William Brown), who had possessed them on account of a debt owed to him by the earl. In June 1598, Mac Carthaig travelled to England to pursue the matter.

However, the situation was transformed by the arrival in Munster of the Ulster forces of Hugh O'Neill, who was leading a nationwide rebellion – the Nine Years' War – against the English government in Ireland. In the autumn, Donal Mac Carthaig (the late Earl's illegitimate son) was reported to have acknowledged the authority of the rebel O'Neill and assumed the title of Mac Carthaig Mór, but the O'Sullivan Mór withheld the White Wand or rod of inauguration (which symbolically approved the accession) in favour of Fínghin mac Donncha Mac Carthaig. In a desperate situation, when it seemed that all the native lords in Munster were going into rebellion, the crown granted Mac Carthaig a free pardon, on terms that he immediately withdraw his followers from rebellion in return for qualified acknowledgement of his title against Donal Mac Carthaig, but he prevaricated and only returned to Munster after Sir Robert Devereux, 3rd Earl of Essex – whose favour he had been relying upon – threw up his command as lord lieutenant in Ireland in late 1599 and returned to England under a cloud. Mac Carthaig had managed to negotiate English support for his claims to land and title, but he also maintained contact with the rebels to the same end. This has made some commentators claim that his real sympathy lay with the rebels, especially as he was described in his youth as being "very zealous in the old religion [Catholicism]". However, it is more likely Fínghin mac Donncha was using both sides as a lever to further his own aims.

War in Munster
During the Nine Years' War in Munster, Mac Carthaig failed to engage with the English military campaign and secretly negotiated with the rebels under Hugh O'Neill and the Spanish. O'Neill's strategy was to back those local Irish lords who had a grievance against English authority and were in command of sufficient land and followers to contribute to his war effort.

In 1599, Mac Carthaig visited Fitzthomas, the rebel "Súgan" Earl of Desmond, in Carbery, where he claimed to have spoken in the queen's favour; it is more likely that Mac Carthaig promised his support for the rebels on condition that O'Neill acknowledge him as Mac Carthaig Mor. In the following days, Fitzthomas, followed reluctantly by Donal Mac Carthaig, laid waste to Lord Barry's territory of Ibawne, on the ground that Barry had refused to join the rebellion. From his base at Kinsale, Fínghin mac Donncha closed all the approaches into his own country.

In 1600 O'Neill's army arrived in Munster and pitched camp between the rivers Lee and Bandon, whereupon MacCarthy came into the camp for an interview and was installed there as Mac Carthaig Mór at the expense of his rival, Donal Mac Carthaig. To the English, it now appeared that Mac Carthaig had sided conclusively with O'Neill, and military action was taken against him. In fact, Florence may simply have been playing both sides to become the Mac Carthaig Mor. In April an English expedition led by Captain George Flower raided his lands in Carbery and fought a bloody skirmish with Mac Carthaig's levies, which left over 200 men dead between the two sides.

In the same month, Sir George Carew was appointed governor of Munster, with sufficient men and resources to pacify the province. Carew summoned Mac Carthaig to Cork for an explanation of his conduct; at first, Mac Carthaig refused to come in without guarantees for his life and liberty, and when he did come in he refused to give his son as hostage. Carew urged him to support the English campaign, but Mac Carthaig promised no more than his neutrality, arguing that he was loyal, but that if he were to side openly with the English his own followers would desert him (a common plea of Gaelic leaders).

In fact, at this time Mac Carthaig, in an intercepted letter to Hugh Roe O'Donnell, had sought to assure the northern rebels of his commitment to their cause. He was also the main contact in the south of Ireland for the Spanish, who planned a landing in Munster, which Mac Carthaig most likely expected would settle the war for good. On 5 January 1600, he wrote to Philip II of Spain, via his agent in Ulster, Donagh mac Cormac Mac Carthaig, offering, "his person and lands as well as his vassals and subjects to your Royal service…to receive favour and aid…seeing as there is no other that can and will assist us better against these Heretics in this holy enterprise."

In the months that followed, Carew broke the rebellion in Munster, retaking rebel castles, arresting Fitzthomas, the Súgan Earl, and persuading Donal MacCarthy to change sides. Carew viewed this as highly significant, because Donal Mac Carthaig was not only a credible rival, but also knew the remote and mountainous terrain in which Fínghin mac Donncha was based. Having pacified the province, Carew had no intention of leaving Fínghin mac Donncha installed as MacCarthy Mór, judging that his supremacy would make any future English presence in the area impossible. To this end, he arrested Florence, having called him to his camp for talks, 14 days before the expiry of the safe conduct "on discretion" (i.e. without charge) – an action which, although unlawful, was approved by the Queen's secretary, Robert Cecil, for reasons of state.

The Irish Annals of the Four Masters states: "Fineen [Florence], son of Donough Mac Carthaig(who was at this time called Mac Carthaig Mór), went before the President at Cork; but as soon as he had arrived in the town he was made a prisoner for the Queen; but Fínghin mac Donncha began to declare aloud, and without reserve, that he had been taken against the word and protection. This was of no avail to him; for he [was] sent to England in the month of August, and Fitzthomas [the rebel Earl of Desmond]... shewn the Tower as their house of eating and sleeping from that forward to the time of their deaths, or end of their lives, according to the will of God and of their Sovereign."

Mac Carthaigm was sent to England in August 1601 and committed to the Tower. Carew also arrested Mac Carthaig's son, as well as his kinsmen, Dermot mac Owen and Taig mac Cormac, and his follower, O'Mahon. Only a month later, the Spanish landed at Kinsale and enquired immediately for Mac Carthaig, their main local contact. His absence was no doubt a serious disadvantage in organising local support. Most of the Mhic Carthaig, including both Donal and Donal na Pipi, did go over to the Spanish side, but surrendered after the English victory over the Irish and Spanish at the Battle of Kinsale in 1601.

In custody in London
Mac Carthaig vainly petitioned for release from prison with a promise to serve against O'Neill. After the English victory at the battle of Kinsale, his brother, Diarmuid Maol ("Bald Dermot"), who commanded Fínghin mac Donncha's followers in his absence, was killed accidentally in a cattle-raid by some of Donal II O'Donovan's men under the command of Fínghin Mac Carthaig, his first cousin, son of his uncle Owen; many of his kinsmen were also killed in various encounters with English or rival Irish forces. In 1604 he was transferred to the Marshalsea for his health, but sent back to the Tower, with the privilege of access to his books.

In 1606, Donal na Pípí surrendered his claim to the Mac Carthaig lordship and received a grant of the territory of Carbery. Then Sir Richard Boyle, Earl of Cork, and Lord Barry tried to wrest from Mac Carthaig the territory inherited from his father, but he successfully resisted by means of the law. However, much of his former lands were re-distributed. He went to the Marshalsea again in 1608, was released in 1614 on bonds of £5000 not to leave London, and in 1617 was recommitted to the Tower on the information of his servant, Teige O'Hurley, alleging his involvement with William Stanley and several exiled Irish Catholic priests and nobles, including Hugh Maguire. Mac Carthaig was due for release in 1619 but was sent back to the Gatehouse in 1624, to "a little narrow close room without sight of the air", owing to the death of two of his sureties, Donogh O'Brien, 4th Earl of Thomond and Sir Patrick Barnewall. He was freed in 1626 on fresh sureties and won his protracted suit for the barony of Molahiffe in 1630 (although the lands were still in the possession of the English mortgagees in 1637).

MacCarthy lived the remainder of his life in London, where he wrote a history of Ireland, Mac Carthaigh's Book, based on Old Irish texts. He wrote that, "although they [the Irish] are thought by many fitter to be rooted out than suffered to enjoy their lands, they are not so rebellious or dangerous as they are termed by such as covet it". He died in 1640.

Legacy
Mac Carthaig had a troubled relationship with his wife, who grew jealous of his inheritance and who informed on him to the English authorities. She also seems to have disapproved of his political choices, reportedly saying that she, "would not go begging in Ulster or Spain". In 1607 he reported that he had, "sent away that wicked woman that was my wife…whom I saw not nor could abide in almost a year before my commitment [imprisonment]". Nevertheless, he did have four children by her who are known: Teige (died as a boy in the Tower), Donal (who converted to Protestantism and married Sarah daughter of the MacDonnell Earl of Antrim), Florence (married Mary daughter of Donal III O'Donovan), and Cormac (Charles).

In time, the title of Mac Carthaig Mór was subdued and the personal lands of Fínghin mac Donncha Mac Carthaig were distributed to English settlers, among them Richard Boyle, 1st Earl of Cork. The MacCarthy lords, including Donal na Pipi of Carberry, Donal MacCarthy (son of the earl) and Dermot MacCarthy of Muskerry were granted title to their lands, but had to surrender up to a third of their inheritance to the crown. Donagh MacCarthy, the son of Dermot Mac Carthaig, later created Viscount of Muskerry, would later be one of the leaders of the Irish Rebellion of 1641 and Confederate Ireland in the 1640s.

A rough portrait of Mac Carthaig was taken to France in 1776 by a collateral kinsman, Justin Mac Carthaig (1744–1811) of Springhouse, Bansha, County Tipperary, who was a direct descendant of Dónal na Pípí and was going into exile because of the harsh treatment in Ireland of Catholics under the Penal Laws. The portrait was kept in the mansion at 3, Rue Mage in the city of Toulouse where he resided as Count MacCarthy-Reagh of Toulouse. The Count was noted for his rich library which in importance was second only to the King's in Paris.

An anonymous writer in 1686 wrote of Fínghin mac Donncha Mac Carthaig, drawing on a contemporary description in Pacata Hibernia, 'Of all the MacCarthys, none was ever more famous than…Florence, who was a man of extraordinary stature (being like Saul higher by the head and shoulders than any of his followers) and as great policy with competent courage and as much zeal as anybody for what he falsely imagined to be the true religion, and the liberty of his country. However, his rival Donal "the bastard" MacCarthy described him as "a damned counterfeit Englishman whose study and practice was to deceive and betray all the Irishmen in Ireland".

title: Florence MacCarthy


text:
Jocelyne LaGarde

Jocelyne Bredin LaGarde (24 April 1924 – 12 September 1979) was a Native Tahitian actress who became famous for her first and only acting role in the 1966 motion picture, Hawaii, for which she was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress.

Biography
The film Hawaii was a big-budget drama based on the best-selling novel of the same name by James A. Michener that tells the story of 19th-century white missionaries bringing Christianity to the island natives. LaGarde was a Polynesian woman who fit perfectly the physical attributes of an important character in the film. Although she had never acted before, and could not speak English (speaking only fluent Tahitian and French), she was hired by Mirisch Productions and given a coach who taught her enough English to handle her character's dialogue.

As "Queen Malama Kanakoa, Aliʻi Nui of Hawaii", LaGarde's personality and facial beauty, combined with a reported 300 lb frame, brought a commanding presence to the screen. Surrounded by a cast of Hollywood all-stars, she stole the show not only with the audience but with the professional members of the film industry. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences nominated her for the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress, the only performer in the film so nominated. She was the first Polynesian and first Indigenous person ever nominated for an Academy Award. LaGarde remains to date the only actor ever nominated for an Academy Award for her only film appearance. A number of other actors have been nominated, some successfully, for their debut film performances, but all of them have gone on to make other films. The Hollywood Foreign Press Association voted her the winner of their Golden Globe Award for Best Supporting Actress. Hawaii was LaGarde's only acting role. In 1972, she traveled back to Honolulu to receive medical treatment for complications of diabetes which resulted in the amputation of one foot. She died at her home in Papeete, Tahiti, in 1979, without a reported cause of death.

title: Jocelyne LaGarde


text:
Talk:History of mobile phones

May 2017
Hello All, I consider that the statement "In Europe, several mutually incompatible mobile radio services were developed." is very derogatory as well as being factually incorrect. Europe had the big disadvantage of language difficulties between licencing authorities but in spite of this developed GSM so a few years after the initial incompatible start had a well integrated system. It was many years after the Europeans had roaming throughout Europe with GSM that you could still not purchase a phone in one part of the USA and expect it to work in other parts. Japan and south Korea have still not managed to cooperate to this day (2017). I would hope that the original author would be good enough the correct this "Put down" of Europe before someone else does.

Ted Slevin Chief Engineer at Burndept UK at the time in question

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on History of mobile phones. 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/20120207062016/http://www.privateline.com/archive/Ringcellreport1947.pdf to http://www.privateline.com/archive/Ringcellreport1947.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mobilen50ar.se/eng/FaktabladENGFinal.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://star-techcentral.com/tech/story.asp?file=%2F2005%2F9%2F20%2Fcorpit%2F12066894&sec=corpit

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) 11:34, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Inventor
The BBC is pushing the concept that the British invented the mobile phone. Why isn't this listed as a british invention? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:630:12:1090:ECC4:5605:C7AC:D7A3 (talk) 14:08, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of mobile phones. 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/20130117052435/http://www.historyofthecellphone.com/people/john-mitchell.php to http://www.historyofthecellphone.com/people/john-mitchell.php

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) 03:54, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Date corrections
Dear Wikipedians,

I have just corrected the dates of some literary references in this article. The article erroneously listed 1707 as the date for a Punch Magazine article which came out in 1906. It also cited another literary reference from 1931 as having been published in 1631. I am somewhat concerned that this may be evidence of vandalism, as it seems to me unlikely (though still possible) that these would both be legitimate mistakes. In addition, London is referred to as "Løndon", which I haven't corrected. 187.147.2.114 (talk) 20:51, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Chargers
The image of the Micro-USB interface has recently been replaced by an image of a USB-C interface by User:Jurian15 claiming the previous image to be outdated for smartphones. This might be true for the higher end smartphones but Micro-USB is still found on the lower end smartphones as well as feature phones. I would like to remind readers that this article is about the history of mobile phones in general (not just smartphones). Tk420 (talk) 20:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * By 'lower end' I mean the cheapest models (mainly under £100 in UK terms but I have found some USB-C ports on smartphones under £150). According to a source, cited for the increase in USB-C ports, USB-C has the additional cost of semiconductor content compared to an interface integrated circuit (IC) needed for a traditional USB Type-A or USB Type-B port which is possible reason for the current continued use of micro-USB in the cheaper models. Tk420 (talk) 20:40, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

In response to a claim of mini-USB being part of the common standard, as far as I can gather this is not the case although I know Motorola did use the mini-USB interface on its phones around the mid-2000s and I know the interface was used on other portable devices e.g. MP3 players possibly in anticipation of a common standard. I read in a Wikipedia article (I forget which) in 2009 before the standard was implemented that some media outlets incorrectly reported mini-USB as the common standard instead of micro-USB which might be where the claim is from. Tk420 (talk) 10:28, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Reverted vandalism from IP user 199.20.27.59
Clear bad faith edit - a date changed to one obviously false for history of telecommunications. Other recent user activity also apparent vandalism. Recognitor (talk) 17:23, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:History of mobile phones


text:
Nazi punk

A Nazi punk is a neo-Nazi who is part of the punk subculture. The term also describes the related music genre, which is sometimes also referred to as hatecore. Nazi Punk music generally sounds like other forms of punk rock, but differs by having lyrics that express hatred of some ethnic minorities, Jews, communists, homosexuals, anarchists, and other perceived enemies. Most other punks reject Nazi punks.

It is a subgenre of punk that contrasts sharply with the anti-authoritarian and frequently leftist ideas prevalent in much of the punk subculture.

In 1978 in Britain, the white nationalist National Front had a punk-oriented youth organization called the Punk Front. Although the Punk Front only lasted one year, it recruited several English punks, as well as forming a number of white power punk bands such as Dentists, The Ventz, Tragic Minds, and White Boss. In the early 1980s, the white power skinhead band Brutal Attack temporarily transformed into a Nazi punk band.

The Nazi Punk subculture appeared in the United States by the early 1980s in the hardcore punk scene.

title: Nazi punk