text:
Hwang Woo-suk

Hwang Woo-suk (황우석, born January 29, 1953) is a South Korean veterinarian and researcher. He was a professor of theriogenology and biotechnology at Seoul National University until he was dismissed on March 20, 2006. He was considered a pioneering expert in stem cell research and even called the "Pride of Korea". However, he became infamous around November 2005 for fabricating a series of stem cell experiments that were published in high-profile journals, the case known as the Hwang affair.

Hwang was best known for two articles published in the journal Science in 2004 and 2005, where he reported he had succeeded in creating human embryonic stem cells by cloning. However, soon after the first paper was released, an article in the journal Nature accused Hwang of having committed ethical violations by using eggs from his graduate students and from the black market. Although he denied the charges at first, Hwang admitted the allegations were true in November 2005. Shortly after this, data from his human cloning experiments was revealed to have been falsified.

On May 12, 2006, Hwang was charged with embezzlement and bioethics law violations after it emerged much of his stem cell research had been faked. The Korea Times reported on June 10, 2007, that Seoul National University fired him, and the South Korean government canceled his financial support and barred him from engaging in stem cell research. Hwang was sentenced to a two years suspended prison sentence at the Seoul Central District Court on 26 October 2009, after being found guilty of embezzlement and bioethical violations but cleared of fraud. On the same day, CNN reported that the scientist in 2006 had admitted faking his findings after questions of impropriety had emerged. He had his conviction upheld but his suspended sentence reduced by 6 months on 15 December 2010 by an appeals court in South Korea. In 2014, the South Korean Supreme Court upheld its 2010 ruling.

Since the controversy, Hwang has maintained a relatively low profile, but continues to work in scientific fields. As of September 2020, he worked at the Sooam Bioengineering Research Institute in Yongin, Gyeonggi Province, leading research efforts into creating cloned pig embryos and embryonic stem cell lines. In February 2011, Hwang visited Libya as part of a US$133 million project in the North African country to build a stem cell research center and transfer relevant technology. The project was canceled due to the 2011 Libyan civil war. In November 2015, a Chinese biotech company Boyalife Group announced that it would partner with Hwang's laboratory, Sooam Biotech, to open the world's largest animal cloning factory in Tianjin. The factory would aim to produce up to one million cattle embryos per year to meet the increasing demand for quality beef in China.

Timeline
Hwang first caught media attention in South Korea when he announced he had successfully created a cloned dairy cow, Yeongrong-i in February 1999. His alleged success was touted as the fifth instance in the world in cow cloning, with a notable caveat: Hwang failed to provide scientifically verifiable data for the research, giving only media sessions and photo ops. Hwang's next claim came in April 1999, when he announced the cloning of a Korean cow, Jin-i, also without providing any scientifically verifiable data. Despite the notable absence of any of the scientific data needed to probe the validity of the research, Hwang's several claims were well-received by the South Korean media and public, who were attracted by Hwang's claim of immeasurable economic prospect that his research was said to be promising. The claims of his research results resulted in him being awarded the Scientist of the Year Award by the Korea Science Journalists Association and the Inchon Award. Until 2004, Hwang's main area of research remained in creating genetically modified livestock that included cows and pigs. During that period, Hwang claimed to have created a BSE-resistant cow (which has not been verified), and also stated his intention to clone a Siberian tiger.

In February 2004, Hwang and his team announced that they had successfully created an embryonic stem cell by the somatic cell nuclear transfer method, and published their paper in the March 12 issue of Science. Although Hwang had already established himself as an expert in animal cloning and secured celebrity status in South Korea in the late 1990s, his alleged sudden success came as a surprise because this was the first reported success in human somatic cell cloning. Until Hwang's claim, it was generally agreed that creating a human stem cell by cloning was next to impossible due to the complexity of primates. Hwang explained that his team used 242 eggs to create a single cell line.

In May, Nature journal published an article stating that Hwang had used eggs taken from two of his graduate students, based on an interview with one of the students. The article raised the question of whether the students might have been pressured to give eggs and thus whether such a donation would have been "voluntary" as Hwang claimed in his scientific paper. At that time, Hwang denied that he had used his students' eggs.

Hwang's team announced an even greater achievement a year later in May 2005, and claimed they had created 11 human embryonic stem cells using 185 eggs. His work, published in the June 17 issue of Science, was instantly hailed as a breakthrough in biotechnology because the cells were allegedly created with somatic cells from patients of different age and gender, while the stem cell of 2004 was created with eggs and somatic cells from a single female donor. This meant every patient could receive custom-made treatment with no immune reactions. In addition, Hwang's claim meant that his team had boosted their success rate by 14 times and that this technology could be medically viable.

Hwang made further headlines in May 2005 when he criticized U.S. President George W. Bush's policy on embryonic stem cell research. Also, Time magazine named Hwang one of its "People Who Mattered 2004", stating that Hwang "has already proved that human cloning is no longer science fiction, but a fact of life."

Following on the earlier success, on August 3, 2005, Hwang announced that his team of researchers had become the first team to successfully clone a dog, which was independently verified through genetic testing. The dog, an Afghan Hound, was named Snuppy.

Shortly after his groundbreaking 2005 work, Hwang was appointed to head the new World Stem Cell Hub, a facility that was to be the world's leading stem cell research center. However, in November 2005, Gerald Schatten, a University of Pittsburgh researcher who had worked with Hwang for two years, made the surprise announcement that he had ceased his collaboration with Hwang. In an interview, Schatten commented that "my decision is grounded solely on concerns regarding oocyte (egg) donations in Hwang's research reported in 2004." Following an intense media probe, Roh Sung-il, one of Hwang's close collaborators and head of MizMedi Women's Hospital, held a news conference on November 21. During the conference, Roh admitted that he had paid women US$1,400 each for donating their eggs which were later used in Hwang's research. Roh claimed Hwang was unaware of this, while the South Korean Ministry of Health asserted that no laws or ethical guidelines had been breached as there were no commercial interests involved. Hwang maintained that he was unaware that the eggs had been obtained via these methods, but regardless resigned from his post at the World Stem Cell Hub.

On November 22, PD Su-cheop (Producer's Note), a popular MBC investigative reporting show, raised the possibility of unethical conduct in the egg cell-acquiring process. Despite the factual accuracy of the report, news media as well as people caught up in nationalistic fervor in their unwavering support for Hwang asserted that criticism of Hwang's work was "unpatriotic", so much so that the major companies who were sponsoring the show immediately withdrew their support.

On November 24, Hwang held a press conference in Seoul, in which he declared his intention of resigning from most of his official posts. He also apologized for his actions and said, "I was blinded by work and my drive for achievement." He denied coercing his researchers into donating eggs and claimed that he found out about the situation only after it had occurred. He added that he had lied about the source of the eggs donated to protect the privacy of his female researchers, and that he was not aware of the Declaration of Helsinki, which clearly enumerates his actions as a breach of ethical conduct. After the press conference, which was aired on all major South Korean television networks, many of the nation's media outlets, government ministries, and members of the public expressed sympathy for Hwang.

In mid-December, co-author of Hwang's papers came forward, telling the media that Hwang had confessed to fabricating evidence for nine of the eleven cell lines. He (Dr Roh Il-Sung) reportedly said he had doubts about the remaining two lines.

On December 29, 2005, the university determined that all 11 of Hwang's stem cell lines were fabricated. The university announced on January 10, 2006, that Hwang's 2004 and 2005 papers in Science were both fabricated. Following on the confirmation of scientific misconduct, on January 11, Science unconditionally retracted both of Hwang's papers.

On January 12, 2006, Hwang held a press conference to apologize for the fiasco, but did not admit to cheating. Instead, he blamed other members of his research project for having deceived him with false data and alleged a conspiracy, saying that his projects had been sabotaged and that there was theft of materials involved. He said that cloning human stem cells was possible and that he had the technology to do it, and if he were given six more months he could prove it. This is an extension of the ten days he said he needed to re-create the stem cells that he asked for back on December 16, 2005. Seoul prosecutors started a criminal investigation and raided Hwang's home that day.

On January 20, 2006, Hwang maintained that two of his 11 forged stem cell lines had been maliciously switched for cells from regular, not cloned, embryos. The allegation involves the lines Hwang claims to have created at Seoul-based MizMedi Hospital.

On November 22, 2016, Hwang received a certificate of patent on NT-1 technology from the Korean Intellectual Property Office.

Hwang's laboratory technique
In the late 1990s, the method that scientists used in cloning was somatic cell nuclear transfer, which is the same procedure that was used to create Dolly the sheep. This laboratory technique begins when an egg is taken from a donor and the nucleus is removed from the egg, creating an enucleated egg. A cell, which contains DNA, is then taken from the animal being cloned. The enucleated egg is then fused together with the nucleus of the cloning subject's cell using electricity. This creates an embryo, which is implanted into a surrogate mother through in vitro fertilization. If the procedure is successful, then the surrogate mother will give birth to a baby that is a clone of the cloning subject at the end of a normal gestation period. In 2014 researchers were reporting cloning success rates of seven to eight out of ten but in 1996 it took 277 attempts to create Dolly.

Hwang allegedly used this technique at his laboratory in SNU to clone dogs during his experiments throughout the early 2000s. He claimed that it was possible to clone mammals and that probability for success can be better than 1 in 277 attempts (as in similar cases such as Dolly). Hwang was the first in the world to clone a dog, an Afghan hound called Snuppy in 2005. He described his procedure for cloning in the journal Nature. Researchers from the Seoul National University and the US National Institutes of Health confirmed that Snuppy was a clone. Since then Hwang and his associates have cloned many more dogs. In 2015, it was reported that Huang Woo-suk's company Sooam Biotech had produced 700 cloned puppies since 2005, with their owners paying about $100,000 each to have their dogs cloned.

Hwang's intention to develop better technique for cloning was focused on stem cells because they are still at an early stage of development and retain the potential to turn into many different types of cell and when they divide, each new cell has the potential to either remain a stem cell or become another type of cell with a more specialized function.

According to stem cell biologists, it might be possible to harness this ability to turn stem cells into a super "repair kit" for the body, theoretically to use stem cells to generate healthy tissue to replace that either damaged by trauma or compromised by disease. The many conditions and illnesses that may eventually be treated by stem cell therapy include Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, heart disease, stroke, arthritis, diabetes, burns, and spinal cord damage.

In March 2012, it was announced that Hwang would collaborate with Russian scientists in an attempt to clone a woolly mammoth from remains found in Siberia. He had previously successful cloned eight coyotes in March 2011 using domestic dogs and grey wolves as surrogate mothers. However no mammoth sample fit for cloning had been found as of 2015.

In 2015, the Chinese company BoyaLife announced that in partnership with the Hwang Woo-suk's company Sooam Biotech, they were planning to build a 200 million RMB (about US$32 million) factory in Tianjin, China to produce 100,000 cloned cattle per year to supply China's growing market for quality beef, starting in 2016.

In 2015, Sooam Biotech cloned a male boxer puppy from a pet dog that had been dead for 12 days. This was the first time they had cloned a dog that had been dead for such a long time.

In 2016, Hwang's company was regularly cloning pigs which were genetically predisposed to certain diseases so that they could be used for testing pharmaceuticals, and cloning cattle which were highly valued for their meat. In total Sooam Biotech was reported to be producing roughly 500 cloned embryos a day from various species. They were also reported to be attempting to clone the Ethiopian wolf, one of the world's rarest canids, of which there are only 500 in the wild, another endangered canid, the dhole, of which there only about 2,500 adults, and the Siberian musk deer, which is classified as vulnerable by the IUCN.

Controversies
Until late November 2005, Hwang was criticized only for unpublicized ethical violations. Colleagues and media outlets asserted that he had paid female donors for egg donations and that he had received donations from two junior researchers, both of which were violations. Later controversies centered around scientific misconduct.

His team, which cloned the first human embryo to use for research, said they had used the same technology to create batches of embryonic stem cells from nine patients. According to Hwang, the result was much more efficient than they had hoped. Hwang's integrity as a researcher was again put in doubt when it was revealed that PD Su-cheop had scheduled a follow-up report questioning his achievement published in Science in June 2005, which stated he had cloned 11 lines of embryonic stem cells. This caused furious backlash among many South Koreans, and the reaction only intensified when it was discovered that Kim Sun-Jong, one of Hwang's researchers from MizMedi, had been coerced by illegal means to testify against Hwang. As a result, the scheduled broadcast was canceled and the network made a public apology to the nation, everyone more or less operating under the assumption that the show was at fault and not Hwang. Yet, other news outlets began to question Hwang's claims.

Close scrutiny revealed that several of the photos of purportedly different cells were in fact photos of the same cell. Hwang responded that these additional photos were accidentally included and that there was no such duplication in the original submission to Science. This was later confirmed by the journal.

Researchers raised questions about striking similarities between the DNA profiles of the cloned cells. Then collaborator Gerald Schatten asked Science to remove his name from the paper, stating as a reason that there were "allegations from someone involved with the experiments that certain elements of the report may be fabricated."

In the midst of national confusion, Hwang disappeared from public sight, to be hospitalized days later for alleged stress-related fatigue, while public opinion gradually began to turn against Hwang with even the major Korean companies who had withdrawn their support from PD Su-cheop reportedly now less than pleased with Hwang. Days later, Hwang started going to his laboratory while requesting Seoul National University to officially conduct a probe to the allegations surrounding him.

The scandal took a dramatic turn on December 15, when Roh Sung-il, who had collaborated on the disputed paper, stated to media outlets that nine of those eleven lines had been faked; specifically, DNA tests illustrated that those nine lines shared identical DNA, implying that they had come from the same source. Roh stated that "Professor Hwang admitted to fabrication", and that he, Hwang, and another co-author had asked Science to withdraw the paper. Adding fuel to the fire, MBC broadcast the content of the canceled PD Su-cheop show, which substantiated Roh's claim.

On the same day, The Seattle Times reported that Science had not yet received an official request from Hwang to withdraw the paper, and it had refused to remove Schatten's name from the paper, stating, "No single author, having declared at the time of submission his full and complete confidence in the contents of the paper, can retract his name unilaterally, after publication."

Several prominent scientists, including Ian Wilmut, who cloned Dolly the sheep in 1996, and Bob Lanza, a cloning expert based in Worcester, Massachusetts, did call on Hwang to submit his paper to an outside group for independent analysis. Lanza noted, "You can't fake the results if they're carried out by an independent group. I think this simple test could put the charges to rest."

Two major press conferences were held on Korean television networks on December 16, one with Hwang, followed by one with his former colleague, Roh Sung-il. Hwang started his press conference by claiming that the technology to make stem cells existed—not an explicit denial that the stem cell lines he used in his paper to Science were fakes. He, however, acknowledged the falsifications of research data in the paper, attributing them to unrecoverable "artificial mistakes". He said that there was a problem with the original lines caused by contamination, and if he were given ten more days he could re-create the stem cell lines. He accused Kim Sun-Jong, a former collaborator, of "switching" some of the stem cell lines.

Despite Hwang's claim, in another press conference held only minutes later, Roh Sung-il rebutted Hwang's accusation, saying Hwang was blackmailing MizMedi and Kim Sun-jong. He maintained that at least nine of the eleven stem cell lines were fakes and that Hwang was simply untrustworthy.

"Roh Sung-il, chairman of the board at Mizmedi Hospital, told KBS television that Hwang had agreed to ask the journal Science to withdraw the paper, published in June to international acclaim. Roh was one of the co-authors of the article that detailed how individual stem cell colonies were created for 11 patients through cloning. Roh also told MBC television that Hwang had pressured a former scientist at his lab to fake data to make it look like there were 11 stem cell colonies. In a separate report, a former researcher told MBC that Hwang ordered him to fabricate photos to make it appear there were 11 separate colonies from only three. [...] University of Pittsburgh researcher Gerald Schatten has already asked that Science remove him as the senior author of the report, citing questions about the paper's accuracy. Seoul National University announced this week it would conduct an internal probe into Hwang's research."

Some scientists have started questioning Hwang's earlier work published in Science in February 2004, in which he claimed to have cloned embryonic stem cells. Maria Biotech head Park Se-pill said, "Up until now, I have believed Hwang did derive cloned embryonic stem cells although he admitted to misconduct in his follow-up paper on patient-specific stem cells...Now, I am not sure whether the cloned stem cell really existed."

On July 26, 2006, Hwang said in testimony that he spent part of 500 million won in private donations in attempts to clone extinct Russian mammoths and Korean tigers.

Official probe and confirmation of fraud
An internal panel was set up in Seoul National University to investigate the allegation, and the probe was started on December 17, 2005. The panel sealed off Hwang's laboratory and conducted a thorough investigation, collecting testimonies from Hwang, Roh and other people who were involved with the scandal. On December 23, the panel announced its initial finding that Hwang had intentionally fabricated stem cell research results creating nine fake cell lines out of eleven, and added that the validity of two remaining cell lines is yet to be confirmed. The panel stated that Hwang's misconduct is "a grave act damaging the foundation of science." Hwang's claim of having used only 185 eggs to create stem cell lines was also denied by the panel, which indicated that more eggs may have been used in the research process.

The panel announced additional findings on December 29, and confirmed that no patient-matched embryonic stem cells existed, and that Hwang's team did not have the scientific data to prove any of the stem cells had ever been made.

In its final report published on January 10, 2006, the panel reaffirmed its previous findings while announcing additional discoveries. The panel found out that, contrary to Hwang's claim of having used 185 eggs for his team's 2005 paper, at least 273 eggs were shown to have been used according to research records kept in Hwang's lab. In addition, the panel discovered that Hwang's team was supplied with 2,061 eggs in the period of November 28, 2002, to December 8, 2005. Hwang's claim of not having known about the donation of eggs by his own female researchers was also denied by the panel; in fact, it was discovered that Hwang himself had distributed egg donation consent forms to his researchers and personally escorted one to the MizMedi Hospital to perform the egg extraction procedure.

The panel stated that Hwang's 2004 Science paper was also fabricated and decided the stem cell discussed in the paper may have been generated by a case of parthenogenetic process (which is itself a significant development, as mammals rarely reproduce by parthenogenesis; in addition, this would make Hwang's lab the first ever to successfully generate human stem cells via parthenogenesis, predating other research facilities' successes). Although Hwang's team didn't rule out the possibility of parthenogenetic process in the paper, the panel said, his team didn't make any conscientious effort to probe the possibility through the tests available.

Chung Myunghee, the head of the panel, said at a news conference that the panel was not in a position to investigate Hwang's claim of his stem cells having been switched with MizMedi's, but added that such a claim was incomprehensible when there were no data to prove any of the stem cells were ever made to begin with.

However, the panel confirmed that Hwang's team had actually succeeded in cloning a dog they named Snuppy, as results from analyses of 27 markers that allowed distinguishing amongst extremely-inbred animals and of mitochondrial DNA sequencing indicated that Snuppy was a somatic cell clone of Tie (the dog who gave the somatic cells required for Snuppy, which were then inserted into the eggs of surrogate mothers whose nuclei had been removed), making Snuppy the first ever dog to be cloned.

The panel, in conclusion, stated that Hwang's team intentionally fabricated the data in both the 2004 and the 2005 papers, as described by Myung Hee Chung (Head of Seoul National University's investigation) and that it was an act of "deception of the scientific community and the public at large".

Resignation and the official dismissal
On December 23, 2005, Hwang apologized for "creating a shock and a disappointment" and announced that he was resigning his position as professor at the university. However, Hwang maintained that patient-matched stem cell technology remained in South Korea, and his countrymen would see it.

Seoul National University said Hwang's resignation request would not be accepted, citing a university regulation that dictates that an employee under investigation may not resign from a post, thus avoiding full retribution and possibly dismissal if found at fault, while benefiting from an honorable voluntary resignation.

On February 9, 2006, the university suspended Hwang's position as a professor, together with six other faculty members who participated in Hwang's team; Hwang was dismissed on March 20, 2006.

Indictment of Hwang and collaborators
On May 12, 2006, Hwang was indicted on charges of embezzlement and breach of the country's bioethics law, without physical detention. Prosecutors also brought fraud charges against the three stem cell researchers. He embezzled 2.8 billion won (US$3 million) out of some 40 billion won in research funds, for personal purposes and the illegal purchase of ova used in his experiments.

The prosecution also said Hwang's three associates involved in his stem cell research, Yoon Hyun-soo, Lee Byeong-chun and Kang Sung-keun, also misappropriated tens of millions of won in research money. Investigators have been tracking 24.6 billion won to find out how the research money was spent. It was part of Hwang's 36.9 billion won research funds raised through state support and private donations. Investigators said Hwang used bank accounts held by relatives and subordinates in 2002 and 2003 to receive about 475 million won from private organizations. He allegedly laundered the money by withdrawing it all in cash, breaking it up into smaller amounts and putting it back in various bank accounts. Hwang also withdrew 140 million won in August 2001 to buy gifts for his sponsors, including politicians and other prominent social figures, before Chusok holidays, according to prosecutors. He also allegedly misappropriated around 26 million won in research funds in September 2004 to buy a car for his wife. Hwang is suspected of embezzling 600 million won, provided by a private foundation, on multiple occasions from 2001 to 2005 for personal use. Prosecutors are also accusing him of illegally paying some 38 million won to 25 women who provided ova for his research through Hanna Women's Clinic in the first eight months of 2005. They also said Hwang gave several dozen politicians about 55 million won in political funds on numerous occasions from 2001 to 2005. He allegedly provided 14 million won to executives of large companies that provided financial support for his research. The prosecution added Hwang wired about 200 million won to a Korean American, identified only as Kang, in September 2005 and received the equivalent amount in U.S. currency from him when the scientist visited the United States two months later. Also in 2005, Hwang received one billion won each in research funds from SK Group and the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation based on his fabricated stem cell research results. Meanwhile, investigators said Lee Byeong-chun and Kang Sung-keun, both professors of veterinary science at Seoul National University, embezzled about 300 million won and 100 million won each in state funds by inflating research-related expenses. Yoon Hyun-soo, a biology professor at Hanyang University, also embezzled 58 million won from the research fund managed by MizMedi Hospital.

Parthenogenesis
On August 2, 2007, after much independent investigation, it was revealed that Hwang's team succeeded in extracting cells from eggs that had undergone parthenogenesis. Hwang claimed he and his team had extracted stem cells from cloned human embryos. However, further examination of the cells' chromosomes shows the same indicators of parthenogenesis in those extracted stem cells as are found in the mice created by Tokyo scientists in 2004. Although Hwang deceived the world about being the first to create artificially cloned human embryos, he did contribute a major breakthrough to the field of stem cell research. The process may offer a way for creating stem cells that are genetically matched to a particular woman for the treatment of degenerative diseases.

The news of the breakthrough came just a month after an announcement from the International Stem Cell Corporation (ISC), a California-based stem cell research company, that they had successfully created the first human embryos through parthenogenesis. Although the actual results of Hwang's work were just published, those embryos were created by him and his team before February 2004, when the fabricated cloning results were announced, which would make them the first to successfully perform the process. Jeffrey Janus, president and director of research for ISC, agrees that "Dr. Hwang's cells have characteristics found in parthenogenetic cells" but remains cautious, saying "it needs more study."

Government involvement
After having acquired a celebrity status in South Korea, Hwang actively sought to establish every possible tie to political and economic institutions in the country. Hwang especially tried to win favor from the Roh Moo-hyun government, which in turn was suffering from a lack of popular support and wanted to demonstrate its competency by creating and promoting an exemplary policy success.

Hwang approached Park Ki-young, a former biology professor, then appointed as the Information, Science and Technology Advisor for the President, and put her as one of the co-authors in his 2004 Science paper. Ties with Park yielded a favorable environment for Hwang in the government, as a non-official group consisting of high-ranking government officials was created to support Hwang's research that includes not only Hwang and Park, but also Kim Byung-joon, Chief National Policy Secretary, and Jin Dae-je, Information and Communications Minister. The group was dubbed as "Hwang-kum-pak-chui", a loose acronym made from member's family names, which means "golden bat" in Korean.

After Hwang's paper was published in Science in 2005, support for Hwang came in full swing. In June 2005, the Ministry of Science and Technology selected Hwang as the first recipient of the title Supreme Scientist, an honor worth US$15 million. Hwang, having already claimed the title of POSCO Chair Professor worth US$1.5 million, secured more than US$27 million worth of support in that year.

President Roh had been acquainted with Hwang since 2003, and made a number of comments intended to protect him from potential bioethical issues. On June 18, 2004, Roh awarded Hwang a medal and said, "it is not possible nor desirable to prohibit research, just because there are concerns that it may lead to a direction that is deemed unethical." In another instance at the opening of World Stem Cell Hub on October 19, 2005, Roh remarked, "politicians have a responsibility to manage bioethical controversies, not to get in the way of this outstanding research and progress."

On December 5, 2005, after PD Su-cheop stirred a national controversy, Cheong Wa Dae reaffirmed its unflinching support for Hwang and his research team. Roh said, "We'll continue to support Professor Hwang. We hope he will return to his research lab soon for the sake of people with physical difficulties and the public", according to presidential spokesman Kim Man-soo.

While implying the controversies over MBC-TV's forceful methods used to gather information from Hwang's former junior staff members, Roh said, "The disputes will be resolved gradually and naturally through following scientific research and study. We hope the ongoing disputes over Hwang's achievement will be settled without further trouble."

It was alleged that advisor Park Ki-young deliberately avoided to report Roh about details of Hwang's allegation for misconduct, while emphasizing a breach of journalist ethics by MBC. Park, after weeks of silence for her role in the controversy, announced her intent to resign from the advisor post on January 10, 2006.

On January 11, 2006, the national post office stopped selling post stamps commemorating Hwang's research. The title of Supreme Scientist awarded to Hwang was revoked on March 21, 2006, after Hwang was dismissed from Seoul National University the day before.

Supporting lawmakers group
On December 6, 2005, a group of 43 lawmakers from the ruling and opposition parties inaugurated a body to support  Hwang Woo-suk. Members of the group, dubbed the "lawmakers' group supporting Professor Hwang Woo-suk", pledged to help Hwang continue his experiments in pursuit of a scientific breakthrough.

"There are many lawmakers who, regardless of party affiliation, want to support Hwang. We will join forces to help Hwang devote himself to his studies", Rep. Kwon Sun-taik of the ruling Uri Party said in a news conference at the National Assembly, who was also the leader of the group.

He said the group would seek to establish bioethics guidelines and come up with supporting measures for biotechnology researchers in the country. Among those who had joined the group were Reps. Kim Hyuk-kyu, Kim Young-choon and Kim Sung-gon of the ruling party, Kim Hyong-o of the main opposition Grand National Party (GNP) and Kim Hak-won, chairman of the United Liberal Democrats.

Some female lawmakers participated in a civic group for voluntary egg donations for therapeutic research, which opened in November 2005 following the egg procurement scandal.

Reps. Song Young-sun and Chin Soo-hee of the GNP said they would provide their eggs to Hwang's research team. Meanwhile, the ruling and opposition parties called on the Korean Broadcasting Commission to thoroughly investigate the staffers of MBC's PD Note, which broadcast a documentary program critical of Hwang with coercive tactics in interviews, and reprimand them.

After most of Hwang's claims were confirmed to be false on January 10, 2006, some lawmakers revealed that Hwang had made several campaign donations to them and other lawmakers.

Resumption of PD Note
The MBC investigative journalism show PD Note (Korean: PD수첩) returned on air on January 3, 2006, and summarized the course of Hwang's scandal to date. The show had been cancelled under pressure after it broadcast its show on November 22 that accused Hwang of oddities in his research. The last show in 2005, aired on November 29, covered other topics. It remained off the air for five weeks. The second show in 2006, on January 10, dealt further with the Hwang affair, focusing on several instances of Hwang's media spinning tactics. It also covered the unwillingness on the part of a significant part of the public in South Korea to believe that someone who had almost achieved a status of a national hero committed such a shame.

Rallies supporting Hwang
The same day many South Korean citizens rallied outside Hwang's laboratory; as more than 1,000 women pledged to donate their eggs for the scientist's research. [ ... ] Hwang has been in seclusion since apologizing in November 2005, for ethical lapses in human egg procurement for his research. The symbolic event was as a gesture from Hwang's supporters that says they intend to donate their eggs with 1,000 of their members after they took egg-donation pledges online via their website. "Dr. Hwang will not be able to return to the lab, at least, until at the end of this week because he is extremely exhausted, mentally and physically", a key team member, Ahn Cu Rie, wrote in an e-mail to Reuters. [ ... ] At Hwang's lab at Seoul National University, women left bouquets of the national flower, a hibiscus called the Rose of Sharon, for the scientist along with notes of encouragement.

The stem cell research center that Hwang led before resigning said it hoped he would return, even though his lapses could hurt its efforts to work with other research institutions.

"So far more than 700 South Korean women have pledged to donate their eggs and the number is steadily rising", said Lee Sun-min, an official at a private foundation launched last week to promote egg donations. [ ... ] Thousands of patients have applied to participate in the research, hoping the technology could help treat damaged spinal cords or diseases such as Parkinson's. On Tuesday, an official at the lab said it was hoped that Hwang would return.

"We're waiting for Hwang to assume the leadership after some rest", Seong Myong-hoon told a news conference. But Seong said the controversy could hurt the lab. That conclusion was reached after one of Hwang's close research partners, Ahn Cu-rie, returned Tuesday after a 10-day trip to meet with scientists in the United States and Japan, Seong said.

"The reaction of foreign scientists was that they understand what Dr. Hwang disclosed, but they cannot accept that without criticism", Seong said. "We can never be optimistic about cooperation with foreign institutions."

Seong added: "Researchers of our country were newly awakened to the fact that we have to take every precaution to ensure we don't fall behind international ethics (guidelines) while researching."

"The only hope for us is Dr. Hwang. Don't trample on our one shred of hope", a woman whose son suffers from a severe kidney ailment told South Korean broadcaster YTN at the university. The woman also pledged to sell her eggs to Hwang.

Online ova donations
A website backed by Hwang's supporters began taking egg-donation pledges online since late November 2005 after Hwang resigned all his official posts at World Stem Cell Hub, relaying them to a clinic linked to Hwang's research team. The number of pledges had reached 725 by early December 2005.

Banners like "Please come back, Doctor Hwang. I'm already dying to see you, Professor Hwang", were put up on the home page.

The site also carried a photo of Hwang and his cloned dog, Snuppy, trimmed with images of the rose of Sharon, South Korea's national flower, in an apparent appeal for patriotism. The national anthem played as background music.

Those who applied to donate ova included people with incurable illnesses and their family members, who hoped that Hwang's research would eventually lead to cures, and young, healthy women.

Documentary
In June 2023, Netflix released a documentary film, King of Clones which covered Hwang Woo-suk and the Hwang affair.

title: Hwang Woo-suk


text: User talk:83.109.158.147

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

title: User talk:83.109.158.147


text:
Lidcombe railway station

Lidcombe railway station is located on the Main Suburban line, serving the Sydney suburb of Lidcombe. It is served by Sydney Trains T1 Western, T2 Inner West & Leppington, T3 Bankstown and T7 Olympic line services.

History
Lidcombe station opened on 1 November 1858 as Haslam's Creek after local landowner, Samuel Haslam. When in 1867 land was set aside for a cemetery nearby, the residents renamed the locality Rookwood. The official name of the station followed, being renamed Rookwood in 1878. By the turn of the century the Necropolis was also called Rookwood, so on 1 January 1914 the station name was renamed again to Lidcombe.

On 11 November 1912, Lidcombe became a junction station, with the opening of a deviation of the Main South line to Regents Park.

On 23 April 1999, Platform 0 was opened as part of the Olympic Park line project. As part of this work, the station was refurbished and a second footbridge added at the eastern end.

In 2007, the Lidcombe Station Upgrade project removed the Walter Bowmer Memorial Reserve and Memorial Plaque (dedicated by Auburn Council in 1986 to former alderman Walter Bowner, who served in the 1950s and had a hairdressing salon at the site) located on the western end of the station adjacent to Tooheys Lane.

The station works as part of the CityRail Clearways Project completed in 2010 featured a new platform for terminating Bankstown Line services. This was built in conjunction with the Homebush turnback, which claimed to improve reliability on the Inner West & Leppington Line.

A new train timetable implemented in October 2013 resulted in the discontinuation of all Bankstown to City via Regents Park services and discontinuation of almost all trains to Liverpool via Regents Park prompting a community campaign to reinstate lost services.

In 2020, the NSW Legislative Council Inquiry into Sydenham to Bankstown line conversion questioned the need to terminate services at Lidcombe, and recommended that both Bankstown to City via Regents Park and Liverpool to City via Regents Park services be reinstated. The Liverpool to City via Regents Park service is scheduled to be reinstated in the 2024 timetable.

Platforms and services
Lidcombe has six platforms: five for ordinary suburban services, and one for the shuttle between Lidcombe and Olympic Park – officially Platform 0 but known simply as the Olympic Park Sprint platform. During times of special events, some train services may make additional calls at Lidcombe.

Transport links
Transit Systems operates four bus routes via Lidcombe station:
 * 401: to Lidcombe Birnie Avenue loop service
 * 915: to University of Sydney Cumberland Campus (limited semester service)
 * 920: Parramatta station to Bankstown station
 * 925: to East Hills via the Botanica Estate and Bankstown

Lidcombe station is served by three NightRide routes:
 * N50: Liverpool station to Town Hall station
 * N60: Fairfield station to Town Hall station
 * N61: Carlingford station to Town Hall station

Trackplan
The Lidcombe Junction trackplan includes the Lidcombe Triangle Loop with a direct bi-directional track between Auburn and Berala. The Lidcombe Triangle Loop is primarily used during trackwork as a diversion route for trains from the Western Line to connect with the Bankstown Line towards Sydney CBD.

title: Lidcombe railway station


text:
Talk:Hwang Woo-suk

Hwang's laboratory (questionable) techniques
128.54.56.153 added the work "(questionable)" to the heading of this section. Though I think that most of the contributions from this user are welcome, I do not think that this particular edit was appropriate, as it adds a value judgment to the section heading.

Also, it is not very grammatical.

If the techniques were "questionable", this information can be presented in the section text, but I do not think it belongs in the heading.

I reverted the change, only to have the user revert it back. I'm loathe to start an revert war, so I would like to ask other people's input in this matter.

Is "Hwang's laboratory (questionable) techniques" an appropriate header, or should it be kept at "Hwang's laboratory techniques"? Baeksu (talk) 23:51, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Pub Med
Regarding "...appearing nine times as a senior author on PubMed." PubMed is not a publication. It is a search engine. This implies that the subject was published in or on PubMed, when this isn't something that happens. Barring any objections, I intend to remove this statement. Rex Manning (talk) 06:25, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Which type of stem cell is being discussed?
Maybe distinguish which type of stem cell is being discussed by using "embryonic" or "adult" to modify the phrase "stem cell" wherever it is being used.

A quick Internet search will show that some scientists, institutions work on embryonic stem cells (derived from embryos), and some scientists, institutions work on adult stem cells (derived from unbilical cords, other human non-embryonic sources). (Some may work on both kinds of stem cells also.)

These different types of stem cells have been known for at least the last few years. Also what is NOT "news" is making embryonic-like (pluripotent) stem cells from adult stem cells.

Many of your readers will be familiar with these and other terms describing different stem cells and will expect the article writers to know them.Lindisfarnelibrary (talk) 00:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 21:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Hwang Woo-Suk → — modern capitalization of Korean names. See this Guardian article Heroeswithmetaphors (talk) 16:59, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Support. Capitalisation per WP:NC-KO. PC78 (talk) 17:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Court upholds sentence of disgraced scientist
Some recent news regarding the punishment of Hwang Woo-suk:

Court upholds sentence of disgraced scientist

Note that the Wikipedia article on Hwang Woo-suk mentions that he was sentenced to a two years suspended prison sentence, whereas the article in the JoongAng Daily mentions that Hwang Woo-suk was sentenced to 18 months in jail (suspended for two years).

It may also be interesting to add the following link to the Wikipedia article on Hwang Woo-suk:

South Korean policy failure and the Hwang debacle

143.248.157.242 (talk) 07:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

 * I noticed my external link to the commentary "South Korean policy failure and the Hwang debacle" has been removed. In my opinion, the referenced article provides good insight into Hwang Woo-Suk’s descent into scientific misconduct, based on interviews undertaken in Korea in 2005. I therefore decided to revert the change. Note that this article is not an editorial. Also, note that some of the other external links are no longer working. 192.249.18.76 (talk) 03:31, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

NPOV/due weight problem
The scandal surrounding the subject's research was very significant, but given that time has passed, and he continues doing reasonably high-profile work, I question whether the amount of detail we have is due here in his biography today. The best solution may be to have a shortened (by about 50%) summary here, and to put the full detail in to a separate article about the controversy. -- J N  466  12:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * He is notable principally for his fraud, and the article should reflect this – just as this article in Nature does. Maproom (talk) 19:54, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

 * My vote is with Jayen466. Hwang falsified evidence and he paid the price for it.  But he has moved on and has done a lot before since then which is hardly mentioned.  This article is mostly a one-sided attack on him.  To my mind this article is far from neutral and should be rewritten to make it an objective Wikipedia article.  SylviaStanley (talk) 12:55, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * This has nothing to do with voting. All you have to do is to add new content. No amount of voting will change the fact that his fraud was notable, and this is an objective fact. It is not an "attack"; it is a description of what happened. If there is a non-neutral language (attack), feel free to edit.  - üser:Altenmann >t 20:25, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Hwang Woo-suk. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20070929124245/http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200605/kt2006051218295711960.htm to http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200605/kt2006051218295711960.htm
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070929124133/http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200512/kt2005120617530311990.htm to http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200512/kt2005120617530311990.htm

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 05:55, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Hwang Woo-suk. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20070929124133/http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200512/kt2005120617530311990.htm to http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200512/kt2005120617530311990.htm

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:22, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Hwang Woo-suk. 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/20060117034101/http://www.snu.ac.kr:6060/sc_sne_b/news/1196178_3497.html to http://www.snu.ac.kr:6060/sc_sne_b/news/1196178_3497.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:54, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hwang Woo-suk. 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/20060211013103/http://www.snu.ac.kr/ICSFiles/afieldfile/2006/01/10/report.pdf to http://www.snu.ac.kr/ICSFiles/afieldfile/2006/01/10/report.pdf

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) 22:44, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hwang Woo-suk. 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/20140107223608/http://news.sciencemag.org/health/2010/12/south-korean-court-reduces-hwangs-sentence to http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2010/12/south-korean-court-reduces-hwang.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) 02:58, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

This article needs to be split into 2
The article right now is disproportionately about Hwang's cloning controversy mixed with details about his personal life and similar. It should be ideally split into 2 separate articles, one about South Korean cloning constroversy or similar, and one about Hwang the person. As of now, it's doing neither well. Soni (talk) 16:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

 * The page Hwang affair now exists. Paintspot Infez (talk) 18:32, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Hwang Woo-suk


text:
Columbia Basin College

Columbia Basin College (CBC) is a public community college in Pasco, Washington. It is accredited by the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities. The college offers English as a second language and General Educational Development (GED) prep classes, the Running Start program, many associate degree (transfer, associate of applied science, associate of arts) programs, and the Bachelor of Applied Science degree.

History
Columbia Basin College has served Benton and Franklin counties for nearly 60 years. The first classes at CBC were authorized by the State Board of Education in May 1955. Classes began in September, 1955 in temporary quarters at the former Pasco Naval Airbase. The Pasco School District received title to more than 150 acre of land for the present campus site in Pasco. CBC's first permanent building was completed in 1957 and was the V building which was replaced in 2011 by the Center for Career and Technical Education (CTE). The Community College Act of 1967 separated the college from the Pasco School District and CBC became the 19th community college district in the state of Washington. CBC continually expands and renovates programs which now includes Bachelor of Applied Science degrees. The enrollment of the college has grown from 299 students in 1955 to more than 8,000 students per quarter today. The faculty includes 140 full-time instructors and 300 part-time instructors.

Campus
The Pasco campus has seen substantial growth in the past decade, adding new facilities to accommodate the large demand for higher education from a growing community. Standout facilities include the Arts Center (P building), Lee R. Thornton Center for Science, Technology, and Diversity; Bechtel National Planetarium; Robert & Elisabeth Moore Observatory; the Center for Career and Technical Education (CTE); and a research farm. Recent infrastructure improvements include substantial remodels to the Hawk Union Building (HUB), Business building, the Library, the Science building, the Administration building, the Fitness Center, the athletic fields, and the I-Complex.

The CBC Health Science Center is located in Richland, Washington, approximately 10 miles from the main campus. The four-story building was built in 2006 to house CBC's Health Sciences programs. The Wortman Medical Science Building on the Richland Campus and a new Social Sciences and World Language building opened on the Pasco campus in 2017.

Athletics
CBC is a member of the Northwest Athletic Conference (NWAC) and the mascot is the Hawk. CBC sports include:
 * Volleyball
 * Baseball
 * Softball
 * Men's and Women's Soccer
 * Men's and Women's Basketball
 * Men's and Women's Golf

Student life
Activities and events that are hosted by CBC, the Associated Students of CBC, and various student clubs. The Theatre Arts Department produces multiple stage productions each year, the Music Department has multiple concerts each quarter, and the CBC Esvelt Gallery hosts multiple student and guest artist exhibits year-round.

Notable alumni

 * Byron Beck, professional basketball player
 * Steve Buratto, professional football coach
 * Darrell Ceciliani, professional baseball player
 * Clint Didier, professional football player
 * Ron East, professional football player
 * Doc Hastings, former member of the U.S. House of Representatives
 * Mark Kafentzis, professional football player
 * Dave McKay, professional baseball player
 * Chad Orvella, professional baseball player
 * Leon Rice, college basketball coach
 * Nikki Torres, member of the Washington State Senate
 * Ray Washburn, professional baseball player

title: Columbia Basin College


text:
Combined Array for Research in Millimeter-wave Astronomy

The Combined Array for Research in Millimeter-wave Astronomy (CARMA) was an astronomical instrument comprising 23 radio telescopes, dedicated in 2006. These telescopes formed an astronomical interferometer where all the signals are combined in a purpose-built computer (a correlator) to produce high-resolution astronomical images. The telescopes ceased operation in April 2015 and were relocated to the Owens Valley Radio Observatory for storage.

The Atacama Large Millimeter Array in Chile has succeeded CARMA as the most powerful millimeter wave interferometer in the world.

Location
According to the CARMA observatory catalog, the median height of all telescope pads was at an elevation of 2196.223 m. The observatory was located in the Inyo Mountains to the east of the Owens Valley Radio Observatory, at a site called Cedar Flat (after relocating the Cedar Flat Group Camps to the west of Hwy-168), accessed through Westgard Pass. The high elevation site was chosen to minimize millimeter wave absorption and phase decoherence by atmospheric water vapor.

Features
This array was unique for being a heterogeneous collection of radio telescopes of varying sizes and design. There were three types of telescopes, all Cassegrain reflector antennas with parabolic primary mirrors and hyperbolic secondary mirrors:

 * Six telescopes each 10.4 m in diameter. These were part of the Millimeter Array at the OVRO site operated by Caltech. They were moved to Cedar Flat in the Spring of 2005.
 * Nine telescopes each 6.1 m in diameter. These were formerly located at the Hat Creek Radio Observatory and operated by the Berkeley-Illinois-Maryland-Association (BIMA) consortium. These were moved from HCRO in the spring of 2005 to Cedar Flat.
 * Eight telescopes each 3.5 m in diameter. These were built as an instrument for cosmology and are also known as the Sunyaev-Zel'dovich Array (SZA), a project led by John Carlstrom at the University of Chicago. The SZA spent three years on the valley floor at the Owens Valley Radio Observatory observing the cosmic microwave background (CMB) and galaxy clusters. In the summer of 2008 it was moved up to Cedar Flat.

Deployment
, the six telescopes from the OVRO array and the nine telescopes from the BIMA array were working together to gather scientific data. Pioneering work on compensating for the image distortion resulting from turbulent water vapor distributions in the troposphere started in the fall of 2008.

The most extended configurations of the array, up to 2 km, were required for viewing the finest details in astronomical images. Over these distances the variation in the time of arrival of signals at the different telescopes as they pass through different amounts of water vapor severely limits the quality of images.

By siting an SZA antenna near each of the CARMA antennas and observing a compact astronomical radio source near the source under study, the properties of the atmosphere could be measured on time scales as short as a couple of seconds. This information could be used in the data reduction process to remove a significant fraction of the degradation caused by the atmospheric scintillation.

Observations using the SZA (operating at 30 GHz) to make the atmospheric measurements started in November 2008. The SZA has also participated directly in the science operations of CARMA during experiments where all three types of telescopes were attached to the same correlator.

Observations were primarily in the 3 mm range (80–115 GHz) and the 1 mm range (210–270 GHz). These frequencies are useful for detecting many molecular gases, including the second most abundant molecule in the universe, carbon monoxide (CO).

Observing CO is an indirect indicator of the presence of molecular hydrogen gas (the most abundant molecule in the universe) which is difficult to detect directly. Cold dust is also detectable in this wavelength range and can be used to study planet-forming disks around stars, for example. In 2009, the OVRO 10.4 m antennas were instrumented with 27–35 GHz receivers and made observations in the centimeter band in concert with the SZA antennas.

VLBI
CARMA was an array element in the early proof-of-concept observations by the Event Horizon Telescope project, and in 2007 participated in observations which showed that event-horizon-scale structures could be seen in the Milky Way's supermassive black hole, Sgr A*.

Universities involved
CARMA was a consortium composed of three primary groups.

California Institute of Technology, Berkeley-Illinois-Maryland Association (BIMA), University of Chicago

 * California Institute of Technology
 * University of California, Berkeley, Radio Astronomy Laboratory
 * University of Chicago
 * University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Laboratory for Astronomical Imaging
 * University of Maryland, College Park, Laboratory for Millimeter-wave Astronomy


text:
Mount Lafayette

Mount Lafayette is a 5249 ft mountain at the northern end of the Franconia Range in the White Mountains of New Hampshire, United States. It lies in the town of Franconia in Grafton County, and appears on the New England Fifty Finest list of the most topographically prominent peaks in New England. The mountain's upper reaches are located in the alpine zone, an area where only dwarf vegetation exists due to the harsh climate.

The mountain
Mount Lafayette is the highest point in the Franconia Range, a line of peaks along the east side of Franconia Notch. It is the sixth highest peak in New Hampshire and the highest outside of the Presidential Range. It is the second most prominent peak in the state.

On the western side, its lower slopes lie inside Franconia Notch State Park. The remainder of the mountain lies within the White Mountain National Forest. The summit marks the western border of the Pemigewasset Wilderness Area within the WMNF.

Trails
A variety of trails lead up over 3,000 vertical feet (900 m) to its exposed summit. The Greenleaf Trail begins at the parking lot for the Cannon Mountain tramway and ascends to the Appalachian Mountain Club's Greenleaf Hut, then continues to the summit. The Bridle Path trail follows a western spur ridge of Lafayette from Lafayette Place Campground on Interstate 93 past Greenleaf Hut and joins the Greenleaf Trail, reaching the summit 1.1 mi after the hut. The peak is at the junction of the Garfield Ridge Trail, which follows the ridge northeast to Mount Garfield, and the Franconia Ridge Trail, which leads south to Mounts Lincoln, Liberty, and Flume. Both the Garfield Ridge Trail and the Franconia Ridge Trail form part of the Appalachian Trail.

A very popular hike is to make a loop combining the three most notable summits of the Franconia Range. The loop starts with the Old Bridle Path to the AMC Greenleaf Hut. From there, one takes the Greenleaf Trail to the summit of Mt. Lafayette. Turning south along the Franconia Ridge Trail, one passes over Mount Lincoln and Little Haystack, then descends via the Falling Waters Trail, which connects back with the beginning of the Old Bridle Path. This loop is 8.9 mi long, with a cumulative elevation gain of about 3900 ft.

History
The mountain is named to honor General Gilbert du Motier, Marquis de La Fayette, a French military hero who fought with and significantly aided the Continental Army during the American Revolutionary War. Loved and adopted as an aide by George Washington during the conflict, Lafayette made a triumphal tour re-visiting New Hampshire and all the other then states in 1824-1825 celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill.

title: Mount Lafayette


text:
Three Rivers Convention Center

The Three Rivers Convention Center is the convention center for the Tri-Cities of south-eastern Washington, United States. It gets its name from the Snake River, Yakima River, and Columbia River, all of which intersect in the general area of the Tri-Cities. It is located in western Kennewick, adjacent to the Toyota Center, and opened in 2004.

Early proposals for a convention center in the Tri-Cities emerged in the late 1970s, with the three principal cities of the area competing to attract a potential suitor. The initial plan for the Tri-Cities Coliseum (now Toyota Center) in the 1980s included an adjacent convention center, but it was not realized for several decades.

title: Three Rivers Convention Center


text:
Mount Lincoln (New Hampshire)

Mount Lincoln is a 5089 ft mountain within the Franconia Range of the White Mountains of New Hampshire. Lincoln is located between Little Haystack and Mount Lafayette. All three overlook Franconia Notch. The west side of Lincoln drains into the main stem of the Pemigewasset River. The east side drains into Lincoln Brook, thence into the Franconia Branch of the Pemigewasset.

The Appalachian Trail, a 2170 mi National Scenic Trail from Georgia to Maine, traverses Franconia Ridge, including Lincoln.

title: Mount Lincoln (New Hampshire)


text:
1968–69 NFL playoffs

The NFL playoffs following the 1968 NFL season determined who would represent the league in Super Bowl III.

Tournament bracket
Within each conference, the two division winners qualified for the playoffs. In the start round, the Capitol and Century division winners played in the Eastern Conference Game, while the Coastal and Central division winners were in the Western Conference game. The winners of the two conference games advanced to the NFL Championship Game to compete for the NFL league title and the right to face the American Football League champion in the Super Bowl. The losers of the conference championship games played in the Playoff Bowl, a third place game held at the Orange Bowl in Miami, Florida.

Prior to, the playoff sites rotated and were known prior to the start of the season. In 1968, the hosts were the Century and Coastal division winners for the conference championships (first round), and the Eastern Conference for the championship game. This effectively gave home field advantage to the Century Division winner, the Cleveland Browns (10–4). The 1967 and 1969 playoff hosts were Capitol, Central, and Western, respectively.

The rotation system forced the 12–2 Cowboys, champions of the Capitol Division, to play at the 10–4 Browns in the Eastern Conference playoff. In the Western Conference, the 13–1 Colts hosted the 8–6 Vikings; the home teams won both games in the opening round.

Eastern Conference: Cleveland Browns 31, Dallas Cowboys 20
Despite the game's high score, this was actually a defensive struggle as both teams took advantage of each other's turnovers throughout the game. However, Cleveland emerged triumphant, overcoming a 10–3 first half deficit with 21 unanswered points.

Early in the first quarter, Mike Howell intercepted a pass from Don Meredith (who was playing in his final game) and returned it 20 yards to set up Don Cockroft's 38-yard field goal. Dallas took the lead later on, when linebacker Chuck Howley forced a fumble while sacking Browns quarterback Bill Nelsen and returned it 44 yards for a touchdown.

In the second quarter, Dallas increased their lead to 10–3 when an interception by Cowboys linebacker Dave Edwards led to Mike Clark's 16-yard field goal. However, the Browns tied the game with a last minute drive at the end of the half, moving the ball 85 yards in 4 plays and scoring on Nelsen's 45-yard touchdown pass to running back Leroy Kelly.

The Browns broke the game open on the first play of the second half when linebacker Dale Lindsey intercepted Meredith's sideline pass intended for Bob Hayes and raced 27 yards to the end zone, giving Cleveland a 17–10 lead. Then on the third play after the ensuing kickoff, Meredith threw a pass that bounced out of the grasp of Lance Rentzel and was picked off by defensive back Ben Davis, who returned the ball 3 yards to the Cowboys' 35. On the next play, Kelly took a pitch to the right and ran 35 yards for a touchdown, increasing Cleveland's lead to 24–10.

Dallas coach Tom Landry eventually replaced Meredith with Craig Morton, who managed to lead the team to a 47-yard field goal by Clark with 3:24 left in the 3rd quarter. But 24–13 was as close as the score would get. On Cleveland's next drive, Nelsen's play action pass to Paul Warfield picked up 39 yards and a first down on the Dallas 11-yard line. Three plays later, Ernie Green's 2-yard touchdown run gave them an insurmountable 31–13 4th quarter lead. All that remained in the game would be Morton's meaningless 2-yard touchdown pass to fullback Walt Garrison with a minute left in regulation. The final 31 seconds would never be reached because the game had to be called off, as Cleveland fans spilled out on the field for an early victory celebration.

Nelsen completed 13 of 25 passes for 203 yards and a touchdown, with one interception. Kelly rushed for 87 yards, caught two passes for 46 yards, and scored two touchdowns.

Western Conference: Baltimore Colts 24, Minnesota Vikings 14
Baltimore shut out the Vikings for the first three quarters and built a 21–0 lead to earn a trip to the NFL championship game.

The Colts got their first scoring chance early in the first quarter when defensive back Jerry Logan intercepted a pass from Vikings QB Joe Kapp and returned it 24 yards to the Minnesota 22. The Vikings defense managed to prevent a score when Earsell Mackbee recovered a fumble from running back Tom Matte, but after a punt, Colts quarterback Earl Morrall completed a 39-yard pass to Willie Richardson that gave the team a first down on the Vikings' 36-yard line. On the next play, Richardson made a leaping catch on the 3-yard line for a 33-yard gain. Minnesota managed to stuff two Colts rushing attempts, but on third down, Baltimore got on the board with Morrall's 3-yard touchdown pass to Tom Mitchell. This ended up being the only score of the half. The only other highlights would be an interception from each team, by Ed Sharockman and Bobby Boyd.

Colts kicker Lou Michaels missed a 33-yard field goal attempt early in the third quarter, but the Colts got the ball back with great field position at midfield after the Vikings punted. Then on the second play of the Colts' ensuing drive, Morrall threw a pass to tight end John Mackey, who broke ahead of linebacker Roy Winston, caught the ball and then raced past safeties Karl Kassulke and Paul Krause to score on a 49-yard touchdown completion, giving the Colts a 14–0 lead. Vikings returner Clint Jones gave his team a chance to get back in the game with a 35-yard kickoff return to the Colts' 42-yard line. However, on the second play of the possession, Bubba Smith plowed into Kapp as he was winding up to throw a pass, knocking the ball out of his hand and right into the arms of linebacker Mike Curtis, who returned the fumble 60 yards to the end zone.

Faced with a 21–0 deficit in the 4th quarter, Minnesota drove 77 yards, aided by two catches by Gene Washington for 27 yards and a 33-yard pass interference penalty on Lenny Lyles that gave them a first and goal on the Baltimore 1-yard line. After that, Kapp threw a 1-yard touchdown toss to tight end Bill Martin. However, a 33-yard field goal by Michaels quickly snuffed out the Vikings' hopes of a miracle comeback. All they could do with the remaining time was make the final score 24–14 when Kapp finished off a 73-yard drive with a 7-yard touchdown pass to running back Bill Brown with 4 seconds left on the clock.

Morrall completed 13 of 22 passes for 280 yards and two touchdowns, with 1 interception. Richardson caught 6 passes for 148 yards, while Mackey had 3 receptions for 92 yards and a touchdown. Kapp finished the day 26 of 44 for 287 yards and two touchdowns, with two interceptions. He was also the game's leading rusher with 10 carries for 52 yards. Washington caught 5 passes for 95 yards.

NFL Championship Game: Baltimore Colts 34, Cleveland Browns 0
Baltimore held Cleveland to just 173 total yards as they avenged their only regular season loss of the year, against the Browns, with a dominant shutout win. Cleveland crossed midfield only twice, just once in each half, and kicker Don Cockroft missed three field goal attempts.

Things actually started out promising for Cleveland. Browns defensive back Ben Davis wiped out a scoring chance for Baltimore on their opening drive when he intercepted a pass from Earl Morrall on the Cleveland 14-yard line. The Browns then drove to the Colts' 35-yard line, with Bill Nelsen completing passes to Paul Warfield and Milt Morin for gains of 16 and 22 yards. However, Nelsen was dropped for a 7-yard loss on first down by Fred Miller and Ordell Braase. He managed to lead the team back to the 35 by the time they got to 4th down, but Cockroft's 42-yard field goal attempt was blocked by defensive tackle Bubba Smith. The Colts then took over and drove to a 3–0 lead on a 28-yard field goal by Lou Michaels.

In the second quarter, Baltimore completely took over the game. Colts running back Tom Matte scored on a 1-yard touchdown run, giving the Colts a 10–0 lead. Later on, the Colts seemed to blow a scoring chance when tight end John Mackey lost a fumble that was recovered by Erich Barnes and returned 9 yards to the Browns' 23. But on the next play, linebacker Mike Curtis intercepted a pass from Nelsen on the 33, leading to Matte's 12-yard touchdown run that gave Baltimore a 17–0 lead going into halftime.

After halftime, Cleveland forced a punt and got the ball on their own 40, where they proceeded to drive to the Colts' 38. But once again their drive stalled and Cockroft missed a 50-yard field goal attempt. He got another chance as a result of a penalty on the play, but missed again from 45 yards on his next attempt. After an exchange of punts, Baltimore got the ball on the Cleveland 48 and drove to a 24–0 lead on Matte's third touchdown of the day. Meanwhile, Nelsen was benched and replaced by Frank Ryan, but this did nothing to improve Cleveland's misfortunes. On his first play, he fumbled the snap, and linebacker Don Shinnick recovered the ball on the Browns' 20-yard line, leading to Michaels' second field goal, giving Baltimore a 27–0 lead on the second play of the 4th quarter. Ryan completed just 2 of 6 pass attempts for the rest of the game, while Colts running back Timmy Brown scored the final points on a 4-yard touchdown run.

Matte, an Ohio native and former quarterback at Ohio State, was the sole offensive star of the game, rushing for 88 yards and 3 touchdowns, while also catching 2 passes for 15 yards.

title: 1968–69 NFL playoffs


text:
Adolph Wagner

Adolph Wagner (25 March 1835 – 8 November 1917) was a German economist and politician, a leading Kathedersozialist (academic socialist) and public finance scholar and advocate of agrarianism. Wagner's law of increasing state activity is named after him.

Biography
Born in Erlangen as the son of a university professor, the physiologist Rudolf Wagner, Adolph studied economics at the University of Göttingen, receiving a doctorate in 1857 under supervision of. Wagner’s academic career took him first to the Merchants’ Superior School, Vienna (1858–1863), then – after failing to secure a chair at the University of Vienna because of disagreements over fiscal policy with Lorenz von Stein – to the Hamburg Higher Merchants’ School (1863–1865), both institutions comparable to business schools today. In 1865, he took the chair of Ethnography, Geography, and Statistics (in reality an economics professorship) at the University of Dorpat in Livonia which is located in the present day Estonia, but was then part of the Russian Empire.

In Dorpat (Tartu), Wagner "became a follower of Bismarck’s policy for unifying Germany under Prussian guidance. Thus when German unification became realistic, Wagner wanted to go back to Germany proper.

Beginning Fall Term 1868/69, Wagner therefore took over the Chair of the Cameralistic subjects (roughly, state management) at the Badensian University of Freiburg im Breisgau, and very soon afterwards, in 1870, the Chair of Staatswissenschaften at the University of Berlin, by that time not only the premier university in Germany but probably in the world. It was in Berlin, that Wagner began his tenure as one of the most intellectually and politically influential economists of his time.

A former student of his, Werner Sombart, was his successor at the economics chair of the University of Berlin.

Wagner was an early member of the conservative Christian Social Party, founded in 1878 by Adolf Stoecker as the Christlichsoziale Arbeiterpartei (Christian Social Workers' Party). Wagner was also one of the leading figures in the Conservative Central Committee (CCC), established in 1881. The CCC soon formed into the anti-Semitic Berlin movement, in which Wagner worked with Adolf Stoecker, among others.

Wagner died in Berlin in 1917.

Work
Wagner is the main protagonist of a specific school of economics and social policy, called "State Socialism" ("Staatssozialismus"), which is a specific form of Kathedersozialismus. (Albert Schäffle (1831–1903), Lujo Brentano (1844–1931), Gustav von Schmoller (1838–1917) and Karl Rodbertus(-Jagetzow) (1805–1875) were important protagonists of that thought as well.) He was a member of the Historical school of economics, as his general review essay on Marshall's Principles of Economics so clearly demonstrates. However, he did fundamentally differentiate himself from what he called the 'younger' and more 'extreme' members of the German historical school such as Gustav von Schmoller who, according to Wagner, tended to dismiss too hastily what the latter terms the more deductive work of English writers (in short, those in the tradition of classical economics, including the famous contemporary Cambridge University Professor Alfred Marshall whose book he was reviewing).

Character
Wagner had a very combative and harsh personality. He did not take insults lightly and never phrased things diplomatically. He had difficulties with Schmoller and was an enemy of Lujo Brentano – and these two were about his closest colleagues.

By all contemporary accounts, it is probably fair to say that Wagner was vain, easily hurt and extremely choleric.

In the 1890s, Wagner would so enrage an industrial-conservative member of the Reichstag, likewise with a defense of the Kathedersozialist influence within the University, that the deputy challenged him to a duel. (Wagner did not categorically refuse, but it was never fought.)

An even more famous case was Wagner’s altercation with Eugen Dühring (against whom Friedrich Engels' Anti-Dühring is directed), and which in the very end resulted in Dühring's remotion and dismissal from the University of Berlin.

Life
Together with Gustav von Schmoller, Wagner belongs to the most important economists of the Bismarck period. He was a member of the Verein für Socialpolitik (Society for Social Policy).

Wagner formulated the Law of Increasing State Spending, also known as "Wagner's Law."

His works set the stage for the development of the monetary and credit systems in Germany and substantially influenced the central bank policy and financial practice before World War I.

By Wagner

 * Wagner, Adolph (1864). Die Gesetzmässigkeit in den scheinbar willkührlichen menschlichen Handlungen vom Standpunkte der Statistik. Hamburg: Boyes & Geisler.
 * Wagner, Adolph (1866). Beiträge zur Finanzstatistik des Schulwesens in den Städten des Ostseegouvernements Livland, Kurland und Esthland. Dorpat: Als Manuscript gedruckt. / Druck von C. Matthiesen.
 * Wagner, Adolph (1866). "Die auswärtige Politik Rußlands und ihre Bedeutung für Preußen." Preußische Jahrbücher, vol. 18, no. 6 (December), pp. 657–692.
 * Wagner, Adolph (1867). "Statistik." In Deutsches Staats-Wörterbuch, vol. 10. Leipzig: Expedition des Staats-Wörterbuchs, pp. 400–481.
 * Wagner, Adolph (1868). Die russische Papierwährung. Riga: Kymmel.
 * Wagner, Adolph (1870). Die Abschaffung des privaten Grundeigenthums. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.
 * Wagner, Adolph (1892). Grundlegung der politischen Ökonomie. Part 1, vol. 1. 3rd edn. Leipzig: Winter.
 * Wagner, Adolph (1895). Die akademische Nationalökonomie und der Socialismus. Berlin: Julius Becker.
 * Wagner, Adolph (1900). Allgemeine und theoretische Volkswirtschaftslehre oder Sozialökonomik. (Theoretische National-Oekonomie.). Berlin: Als Manuskript gedruckt.
 * Wagner, Adolph (1902). Agrar- und Industriestaat. Die Kehrseite des Industriestaats und die Rechtfertigung agrarischen Zollschutzes mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die Bevölkerungsfrage. 2nd edn. Jena: Fischer.
 * Wagner, Adolph (1904). Die finanzielle Mitbeteiligung der Gemeinden an kulturellen Staatseinrichtungen und die Entwickelung der Gemeindeeinnahmen.Jena: Fischer.
 * Wagner, Adolph (1916). Staatsbürgerliche Bildung. Berlin: Verlag "Bodenreform".
 * Wagner, Adolph (1948). Finanzwissenschaft und Staatssozialismus. August Skalweit, ed. Frankfurt/Main: Klostermann.

 * In English
 * Wagner, Adolph (1939). "Speech on the Social Question" (abridged), in Donald O. Wagner, ed. Social Reformers. Adam Smith to John Dewey. New York: Macmillan, pp. 489–506.

 * Letters
 * Wagner, Adolph (1978). Briefe – Dokumente – Augenzeugenberichte, 1851–1917. Heinrich Rubner, ed. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

About Wagner in English

 * "Wagner on the Present State of Political Economy". The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1 (1): 113–133. 1886.
 * Backhaus, Jürgen G. (1997), ed. Essays in Social Security and Taxation. Gustav von Schmoller and Adolph Wagner Reconsidered. Marburg: Metropolis. (Contains much of the best recent research on Wagner in English)
 * Wright, H.R.C. (1993). "Adolph Wagner and the Plural Society." The South African Journal of Economics, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 59–66.

title: Adolph Wagner


text:
Talk:Toonie

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 20:27, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Toonie → Canadian 2 dollar coin – Page was moved and renamed Toonie without warning or discussion. Toonie is a nickname and isn't even the proper spelling, as there are several other variant spellings of the nickname. Twoonie, Twonie, Twooney, Twoney, etc. The page should be moved back to its proper name with its nicknames referenced in the lead. UrbanNerd (talk) 15:11, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * This article should be merged with Canadian dollar, IMHO. GoodDay (talk) 15:40, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

 * I agree that the nickname isn't a good name for the article, but I think "Canadian two-dollar coin" is more consistent with Canada's other currency denominations. I very much disagree with merging the articles.   PK  T (alk)  16:07, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * My comments are at Talk:Loonie. This ought to have been a consolidated move discussion. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 17:38, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose this is about the toonie, not other Canadian two-dollar coins. There have been several 2-dollar coins in the history of Canada. It should not be merged with Canadian dollar, because this is about a particular series of coins, which have a bimetal form, and usually have a Polar bear on it, though also has had other designs. Since this is about a particular series of coins, and not the 2-dollar-coin in general, it should not be called Canadian two-dollar coin. WP:UCN, the common name is "toonie", which is even used by business reporters and reliable source financial media. -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 19:47, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If there have been other two-dollar coins, they should be mentioned/discussed in the article once it's moved to a better name.  PK  T (alk)  13:27, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * We have Sacagawea dollar and Susan B. Anthony dollar which are separate articles from the US one-dollar denomination coin article Dollar coin (United States) so, the US articles have them a separate topics. We should similarly have Canadian two-dollar coins and particular two dollar coins as separate articles. -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 04:37, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

 * Support - only a domestic nickname Moxy (talk) 20:55, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Support - A nickname not used outside of Canada. Proper named should be used. UrbanNerd (talk) 23:01, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You're conflating the "two-dollar coin" (a coin with a face value of two dollars) with the particular series of coins described in this article (a series of bimetal coins denominated as two dollars usually with a polar bear on it introduced in 1996), which are two different subjects. Further WP:TIES, the name with ties to the subject (ie. the Canadian name) is used. -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 04:31, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose, the toonie is not a nickname, it is the only commonly used name of the coin. 117Avenue (talk) 01:04, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Support per UrbanNerd. Steam5 (talk) 04:44, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME, per the fact that it is the name most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources. Canuck 89 (converse with me) 06:06, October 22, 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose we already have a guideline for this. Its called WP:COMMONNAME. It is never called the two-dollar coin, its always the Twoonie. And redirects take care of anyone who isn't aware of the common name. -DJSasso (talk) 12:09, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

New security measures - 2012
Unless Canada withdraws the older coins and makes them worthless, whats to stop someone from counterfeiting the old version?2605:E000:AA1F:E400:68C9:409C:99D:83B1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:49, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Alternative spellings assertion needs backup urgently
The assertion of alternative spellings ("also spelled twonie or twoonie") needs to either be finally bolstered with some references or backup, once and for all, or removed. The idea was first introduced on 30 April 2004 by an anonymous user at 130.49.146.60, and should have been challenged right then at the time for a reference and backup. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Toonie&oldid=3261027. I am a literate, reasonably well-educated and well-read Canadian, and I have literally never come across anyone in any form of media who says toonie contains, or should contain, a "w"." If nothing else, such an assertion constitutes "original research" and should be disqualified on those grounds. Randal Oulton (talk) 16:31, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Done. Twonie seems to be a historical nickname, and Twoonie seems to be a regional spelling, but both have been given two major sources supporting their use each. Builder018 (talk) 02:32, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Toonie