text:
Karađorđe's Park

Karađorđe's Park (Карађорђев парк/Karađorđev park) is a public park and an urban neighborhood of Belgrade, the capital of Serbia. While the park itself is located in Belgrade's municipality of Vračar, majority of what is today considered the neighborhood of Karađorđev Park is since 1957 located in the municipality of Savski Venac (though historically still within the old, much larger neighborhood of Vračar).

As the first trees in modern park were planted in 1806, it is considered a predecessor of all green areas in Belgrade. It is sometimes described as the oldest park in Belgrade, but the proper park was planted only in 1848. In 1979, Karađorđev Park was added to Historic Landmarks of Great Importance list, and it is protected by Republic of Serbia.

Geography
Karađorđev Park is located on the southern slope of the Vračar hill, beginning at the Vračar plateau and the National Library of Serbia and ending at the highway interchange of Autokomanda. It is elongated in the north to south direction, bordered by the Boulevard of the Liberation on the west and the Nebojšina street on the east.

Today, Karađorđev Park in the term of neighborhood covers larger area than the park itself. It is bordered by the neighborhoods of Vračar on the north, Neimar on the east and Autokomanda on the south, but the term spread on the area west and northwest of the park (former sections of Zapadni Vračar and Englezovac/Savinac, respectively), so basically all the area along the Boulevard of Liberation from Autokomanda to the Slavija square is today called Karađorđev Park. Across the northernmost top of the park to the west is another park, Park Milutin Milanković.

It is one of the busiest parts of Belgrade with very dense traffic as the Boulevard of Liberation is one of the major routes to downtown Belgrade. Area is mostly non-residential, with public buildings (the Faculty of the veterinarian medicine of the University of Belgrade, many clinics of the Belgrade Clinical Center, Children University Hospital, Belgrade Meteorological Station, etc.).

19th century
The predecessor to the modern park was a camp set by the Serbian army in 1806 during the siege of Belgrade in the First Serbian Uprising. After the Serbs secured Belgrade, soldiers killed in the battle on the liberation day, 30 November 1806, were buried at this place. In 1806 the first trees were planted at the burial place, chestnut trees and black locusts.

The burial site was arranged as the Insurgents Cemetery in 1848, when the Monument to the Liberators of Belgrade was also erected. The 5.5 m tall memorial was one of the first public monuments in Belgrade. Out of the 50 original tombstones, 12 still survives. The patron of the monument was Aleksandar Karađorđević, the ruling prince of Serbia, and son of the First Serbian Uprising leader and the founder of the Karađorđević royal family, Karađorđe.

After the monument was erected, it was suggested that the park should be planted around it. City officials dismissed the idea, citing lack of necessary funds. One of the first avenues in Belgrade was planted along the Kragujevac Road (modern Liberation Boulevard), in 1848, from which the park developed in time. The planted seedlings were of chestnut trees, and the chestnut alley descending from the original one still survives in the park. By 1887, the cemetery and monument became neglected.

After ascending to the throne in 1889, king Alexander Obrenović ordered for the cemetery to be arranged. The remaining tombs were rearranged, the monument was renovated and the metal fence was placed around it, while the seedlings of black locust were planted in order to form the memorial park. As the king was coming from the Obrenović dynasty, a fierce rival of the former (and future) Karađorđević dynasty, this was seen as the kings attempt to reconcile two ruling families. Also, after creation of this one, numerous other memorial parks began to form throughout Serbia.

20th century

Another dynastic change followed in 1903, when the Karađorđević dynasty was restored the Serbian throne. Originally outside of the urban core of Belgrade, there were plans for the enlargement of the park 1903-1904, in order to mark the centennial of the First Serbian Uprising, which broke out in 1804. The works began only in 1907, after king Peter I Karađorđević became also president of the Society for the Embellishment of the Monuments, Parks and Environment. The society leveled the park's terrain, created pathways, planted grass, lindens, chestnuts and decorative shrubs. The hedge, which encircled the park was also planted, while thujas were planted around the monument. This way, more or less, the present borders of the park were set. Also, during these works, an artificial hill with gazebo on its top was built.

Plans were made to erect a Monument to the Third-Class Reservists in 1914, but due to the outbreak of World War I, the monument was erected on 29 July 1923. After the war, additional monuments were erected in the park. Since the occupational Austro-Hungarian forces demolished the Karađorđe monument in Kalemegdan, in 1916, it was proposed after the war that new monument should be built in the park, close to the tombs of his comrades-in-arms. Also after the war, the park got its present name. The monument to Karađorđe was erected only in 1979, but it is located across the park. It is situated on the Vračar plateau, on the top of the mound at the entry section of the path which leads to the Church of Saint Sava.

Also during the Interbellum, a monument to Alphonse de Lamartine was erected. At the end of this period, an underground shelter was hastily built under the park. On the very first day of German attack, during the massive bombing of Belgrade on 6 April 1941, the shelter was directly hit, killing almost 200 people in it. Three small, shallow swimming pools in the central section of the park were also built.

After the war, a monument to the International Brigades, dedicated to the fighters in the Spanish Civil War 1936-1939, was placed in the park in 1950. A small, pavilion-type ground floor house in the central part of the park, next to the swimming pools, was built in the 1950s, and in the 1960s, the venue was adapted into the children's cultural center by the Union of Pioneers of Yugoslavia. After the 1960s, when the central pavilion with small pools was adapted for children's use, the park got its present appearance. In 1975 another monument was erected, dedicated to the victims of the 1941 bombing. In 1979 the park was declared a cultural monument.

21st century
Neglected for a long time, Karađorđev Park went through massive reconstruction and beautification in the early 2000s which completely rejuvenated the park, including new benches, children's playgrounds and candelabra. The idea at the time was to turn it into the first English type park in Belgrade, with added wall around the park, gates with porters and working hours, but after the failed bids for the job, the idea was put on hold.

The central pavilion was abandoned, the pools were covered with earth in 2003 and the flowers were planted. There was another, even smaller, green pavilion, at the plateau behind the house. It was used for selling food and beverages but was demolished later. In September 2019, it was announced that the house will be adapted into the "Momo Kapor Endowment". First plans for the Momo Kapor's pavilion were made public in March 2023. The pavilion will be preserved (330 m2), the plateau in front of it will be paved with stone slabs in the color of pavilion's façade (792 m2), and swimming pools will be revitalized as the "linear shallow decorative water surface" (133 m2). The fountain will be added to the plateau complex, which will serve as an open air public cultural scene.

On 23 October 2023, a monument to General Božidar Janković was dedicated in the park, close to the Monument to the Liberators of Belgrade. It marked the 120th anniversary of the Society of War Volunteers.

Characteristics
The park covers an area of 2.52 ha.

Monuments

Monuments in the park include:

 * "Monument to the Liberators of Belgrade" (Spomenik oslobodiocima Beograda/Споменик ослободиоцима Београда), erected in 1848, the oldest public monument in Belgrade. Dedicated to those killed in the liberation of Belgrade in 1806, it is 547 cm high, made of stone with the cover of artificial rock. Erected by the prince Aleksandar Karađorđević, it was renovated by the king Aleksandar Obrenović in 1889.
 * "Monument to the third-class reservists" (Spomenik Trećepozivaca/Споменик Трећепозиваца, author Stamenko Đurđević), erected in 1923, dedicated to the soldiers of the final reserve (those unfitting for drafting and summoned only in the extreme situations) killed in the World War I. Made of natural stone, it is 470 m high.
 * "Monument to Alphonse de Lamartine" (Spomenik Lamartinu/Споменик Ламартину), dedicated to the French poet, erected in 1933 (street dedicated to him, Lamartinova, also begins here).
 * Memorial to the International Brigades from the 1936-1939 Spanish Civil War, built in 1950.
 * Stone memorial dedicated in 1975 to the victims killed in an underground shelter during German bombing of Belgrade on 6 April 1941. Built hastily before the war began, it suffered a direct hit by a bomb and collapsed, killing 192 Belgraders.
 * In 1979, it was decided to erect the Monument to Karađorđe (author Sreten Stojanović), but instead in the park named after him, the monument was erected on the Vračar plateau, across the Nebojšina street, in front of the Temple of Saint Sava.
 * Monument to General Božidar Janković, dedicated in 2023.

title: Karađorđe's Park


text:
Clementi Town Secondary School

Clementi Town Secondary School (CTSS) is a government secondary school located in Clementi, Singapore, founded in the 1980s.

History
The school was officially opened on 22 July 1982 by the then-Member for Parliament of Clementi Bernard Chen Tien Lap. In 1984, in order to prevent students loitering in public places, the school's prefects, in cooperation with the Students' Care Service, set up a location for students to relax and study after school hours. This centre was the first of its kind in secondary schools in Singapore.

Notable alumni

 * Joi Chua: singer
 * Derrick Hoh: singer
 * Pornsak Prajakwit: television presenter, Mediacorp

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

title: Clementi Town Secondary School


text:
Xia Yan (playwright)

Xia Yan (30 October 1900 – 6 February 1995) was a Chinese playwright and screenwriter, and China's Deputy Minister of Culture between 1954 and 1965.

Among the dozens of plays and screenplays penned by Xia Yan, the most renowned include Under the Eaves of Shanghai (1937) and The Fascist Bacillus (1944). Today the Xia Yan Film Literature Award is named in his honour.

Personal life
Xia entered Zhejiang Industrial School (, a technical school of Zhejiang University) in 1915, five years before being sent to study in Japan. He was forced to return in 1927, two years after graduating with an engineering degree.

Political career
On Xia's return in 1927 — expelled by Japanese authorities for his political activity — he joined the Communist Party of China and rose to become a cultural chief in the Shanghai municipality, and then Deputy Minister of Culture in 1954.

In 1961, Xia wrote an essay called "Raise Our Country's Film Art to a New Level". The essay, implicitly critical of the Great Leap Forward, called for greater autonomy for artists and more diversity within Chinese cinema. The implementation of his directives is said to have led to the achievement of a "tremendous diversity" which lasted until the Cultural Revolution.

Xia is credited with introducing Soviet cinema to China, and helped to establish a realist tradition that emphasised active engagement with national issues, leaving a strong legacy that continued into the post-Mao era.

Xia's political career ended in 1965, when he was removed from office and spent eight years in prison during the Cultural Revolution.

title: Xia Yan (playwright)


text:
Liberty Bridge

Liberty Bridge may refer to:
 * Ponte della Libertà in Venice
 * Liberty Bridge (Bay City, Michigan)
 * Liberty Bridge (Budapest)
 * Liberty Bridge at Falls Park on the Reedy in Greenville, South Carolina
 * Liberty Bridge (Novi Sad)
 * Liberty Bridge (Pittsburgh)
 * Liberty Bridge (Skopje)
 * Liberty Bridge, Zagreb, the first divided highway bridge in Zagreb, Croatia
 * The original proposal for the Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge in New York City, referred to as the "Liberty Bridge"

title: Liberty Bridge


text: User talk:82.147.18.76

title: User talk:82.147.18.76


text:
Category:Singaporean cuisine

Categorising dishes that have evolved to be a distinct component of the cuisine of Singapore here. This is NOT the same as cuisine of Malaysia - some of these dishes have evolutionary forks.

title: Category:Singaporean cuisine


text:
Talk:Inseminoid

Alien and Scooby-Doo
Imagine a cross-over of Alien and Scooby-Doo, and you've just about got it right. -- Karada 10:03, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Inseminoid. 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://www.webcitation.org/5s5407NWL?url=http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Classified.nsf/ClassifiedWorks/f0808b7f2d944c2880256feb005d95f4?OpenDocument to http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Classified.nsf/ClassifiedWorks/f0808b7f2d944c2880256feb005d95f4?OpenDocument

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) 05:55, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Not Psychosis
I disagree that Sandy was suffering from psychosis. There was no evidence that she was having delusions, hallucinations, etc.

She was likely being controlled by the alien creature biologically, like some actual parasites are capable of. See: behavior-altering parasite.

I am not sure how to rewrite the sentence that said she developed psychosis. Pantstrovich (talk) 10:14, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

 * There was a scene in which she appeared to have a dream involving the doctor giving her an injection, which he hadn't yet, but the movie was unclear about what exactly caused that.
 * I still think that it was alien mind control, either way, and that "psychosis" is a real mental health concern, that can't really be applied to a vague sci-fi horror, video nasty. Parasitic behaviour is much more likely in a movie like this. Pantstrovich (talk) 10:32, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Inseminoid


text:
Crawshays RFC

Crawshays Welsh RFC is a Welsh invitational rugby union team.

In 1922 Captain Geoffrey Crawshay was invited by the Engineer Commander of Devonport Services, SF Coopper, to bring a team of Welsh rugby union players to play Devonport Services R.F.C.

They are mainly a touring team who play fast, entertaining rugby. They are usually, a mix of seasoned internationals, and promising youngsters, with the occasional local player available at short notice. Many Wales rugby players have played for them, including JPR Williams, Phil Bennett and Jonathan Davies.

From 1923 Crawshays Welsh Touring XV started to include Camborne RFC on their fixture list and this was to become a regular annual fixture for many years. In 1926-27 Camborne RFC achieved their first win over a Crawshay's side and the two sides played most recently in 2003 when Camborne celebrated their 125th anniversary season.

Crawshays Welsh XV have played all over the rugby playing world. There is also an under 19 team that travels extensively and it is not unusual to for them to field a team in the international sevens tournaments.

Links

 * Crawshays.com Official website

title: Crawshays RFC


text:
Neolithic circular enclosures in Central Europe

Approximately 120–150 Neolithic earthworks enclosures are known in Central Europe. They are called Kreisgrabenanlagen ("circular ditched enclosures") in German, or alternatively as roundels (or "rondels"; German Rondelle; sometimes also "rondeloid", since many are not even approximately circular). They are mostly confined to the Elbe and Danube basins, in modern-day Germany, Austria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, as well as the adjacent parts of Hungary and Poland,  in a stretch of Central European land some 800 km (500 mi) across. They date to the first half of the 5th millennium BC; they are  associated with the late Linear Pottery culture and its local successors, the Stroke-ornamented ware (Middle Danubian) and  Lengyel (Moravian Painted Ware)  cultures. The best known and oldest of these Circular Enclosures is the Goseck circle, constructed c. 4900 BC.

Only a few examples approximate a circular form; the majority are only very approximately circular or elliptic. One example at Meisternthal is an exact ellipse with identifiable focal points. The distribution of these structures seems to suggest a spread from the middle Danube (southern Slovakia and western Hungary) towards the west (Lower Austria, Lower Bavaria) along the Danube and to the northwest (Moravia, Bohemia, Saxony-Anhalt) following the Elbe. They precede the comparable circular earthwork or timber enclosures known from Great Britain and Ireland, constructed much later during c. 3000 to 1000 BC (late Neolithic to Bronze Age). But, by contrast to the long lifetime of the "Megalithic" culture, the time window during which the neolithic Roundels were in use is surprisingly narrow, lasting only for about 200–300 years (roughly 49th to 47th centuries BC).

The earliest roundel to be described was the one at Krpy (Kropáčova Vrutice), Bohemia, by Woldřich 1886, but it was only with systematic aerial survey in the 1980s and the 1990s that their ubiquity in the region became apparent. Three types have been distinguished:
 * two semicircular ditches forming a circle and separated by causeways at opposing entrances.
 * multiple circuits of ditches interrupted with entrances at cardinal or astronomically-oriented points and also having an internal single or double timber palisade.
 * a single ring ditch.

The structures are mostly interpreted as having served a cultic purpose. Most of them are aligned and seem to have served the function of a calendar (Kalenderbau), in the context of archaeoastronomy sometimes dubbed "observatory", with openings aligned with the points sunrise and/or sunset at the solstices. This is the case with the "gates" or openings of the roundels of Quenstedt, Goseck and Quedlinburg. The observational determination of the time of solstice would not have served a practical (agricultural) purpose, but could have been used to maintain a lunisolar calendar (i.e. knowledge of the date of solstice allows an accurate handling of intercalary months).

Known Circular Enclosures: There are around 50, among them:
 * in Slovakia (Ivan Kuzma 2004): about 50 candidate sites from aerial surveys, not all of which are expected to date to the Neolithic. There are 15 known neolithic (Lengyel) sites. The largest of these are (with outer diameters of more than 100 m): Svodín 2 (140 m), Demandice (120 m), Bajtava (175 m), Horné Otrokovce (150 m), Podhorany-Mechenice (120 m), Cífer (127 m), Golianovo (210 m), Žitavce (145 m), Hosťovce (250–300 m), Prašník (175 m). Others include: Borovce, Bučany, Golianovo, Kľačany, Milanovce, Nitrianský Hrádok, Ružindol-Borová.
 * in Hungary: Aszód, Polgár-Csőszhalom, Sé, Vokány, Szemely-Hegyes.
 * in the Czech Republic (Jaroslav Ridky 2004): 15 known sites, all dated to the late Stroked pottery (Stk IVA). Běhařovice, Borkovany, Bulhary, Krpy, Křepice, Mašovice, Němčičky, Rašovice, Těšetice, Vedrovice, Vinoř roundel near Prague
 * in Austria (Doneus et al. 2004): 47 known sites with diameters between 40 and 180 m. Lower Austria: Asparn an der Zaya, Altruppersdorf, Altruppersdorf, Au am Leithagebirge, Friebritz (2 sites), Gauderndorf, Glaubendorf (2 sites), Gnadendorf, Göllersdorf, Herzogbirbaum, Hornsburg, Immendorf, Kamegg, Karnabrunn, Kleedorf, Kleinrötz, Michelstetten, Moosbierbaum, Mühlbach am Manhartsberg, Oberthern, Perchtoldsdorf, Plank am Kamp, Porrau, Pottenbrunn, Pranhartsberg, Puch, Rosenburg, Schletz, Simonsfeld, Statzendorf, Steinabrunn, Stiefern, Straß im Straßertale, Strögen, Velm, Wetzleinsdorf, Wilhelmsdorf, Winden, Würnitz. Upper Austria: Ölkam.
 * in Poland by region:
 * Biskupin (Greater Poland)
 * Bodzów, Rąpice
 * Pietrowice Wielkie (Upper Silesia)
 * Nowe Objezierze (Pomerania)
 * near Łysomice (Kuyavian-Pomeranian)
 * near Tylice (Kuyavian-Pomeranian)
 * Drzemlikowice (Lower Silesia)
 * in Germany
 * Saxony Anhalt (Ralf Schwarz 2004): Quenstedt, Goseck, Kötschlitz, Quedlinburg, outer diameters between 72 and 110 m.
 * Saxony: Dresden-Nickern (3 sites), Eythra (2 sites), Neukyhna (3 sites)
 * Bavaria: Lower Bavaria: Eching-Viecht, Künzing-Unternberg, Meisternthal, Moosburg an der Isar-Kirchamper, Oberpöring-Gneiding, Osterhofen-Schmiedorf (2 sites), Stephansposching Wallerfing-Ramsdorf, Zeholfing-Kothingeichendorf; Upper Bavaria: Penzberg
 * Nordrhein-Westfalen: Borchum-Harpen, Warburg-Daseburg
 * Niedersachsen: Müsleringen
 * Franconia: Hopferstadt, Ippesheim
 * Brandenburg: Bochow, Quappendorf
 * Rheinland-Pfalz: Goloring


text:
Dan Shea (actor)

Daniel J. Shea (born December 23, 1954) is a Canadian actor and stunt coordinator who is best known for his recurring role as Sgt. Siler on Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis.

Education
Shea attended the University of Waterloo (Ontario) studying Kinesiology and playing Hockey until his athletic career was derailed by an eye injury. Anatomy, biomechanics, and a deep understanding of the body’s physical capabilities has come in handy for Shea who’s been living and working as a stunt performer in Vancouver for nearly 25 years. After an eye injury curbed his dreams of the NHL, he headed west with vague notions of Hollywood and in need of income.

“I crashed a beer commercial audition and two days later I was in Hawaii blasting around on jets skis in shark infested waters making more money than I ever dreamed possible.”

Career
Shea was the stunt coordinator and Richard Dean Anderson's stunt double on Stargate SG-1. He previously served as Anderson's stand-in on MacGyver. He has appeared in episodes of three different series with Richard Dean Anderson: MacGyver, Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis. In Season 1, Episode 19 of Stargate SG-1; "Tin Man" he appeared as Colonel Jack O'Neill's (Richard Dean Anderson) 'clone'.

He has been credited in all 214 episodes of Stargate SG-1 as either an actor, stunt double or stunt coordinator.

Dan was the stunt coordinator on the movie X-Men: The Last Stand and the show Psych.

He appeared as the zombified Father Buckner in the 2012 horror film The Cabin in the Woods.

Personal life
Shea was born in Ontario. He has 2 daughters. He was a College Hockey player but suffered an eye injury which ended his sports career.

Filmography

 * Psych - stunt coordinator (2006–2014)
 * Stargate SG-1 - actor, stunt double, stunt coordinator (1997–2007)
 * Stargate Atlantis - actor, stunt performer, stunt double (2004–2007)
 * The Cabin in the Woods - "Father Buckner"
 * X-Men: Days of Future Past - Policeman (Uncredited)

title: Dan Shea (actor)


text:
Wikipedia:Korea-related topics notice board/Housekeeping

Nothing needed to cleanup right now. This text just added to prevent this page from being blank. If the original and only author would like it deleted, just add the { {db|CSD G7}} template to it, and someone will do so. Thanks! JesseW, the juggling janitor 17:37, 29 September 2005 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Kevin Price

Key Success Indicator listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Key Success Indicator. Since you had some involvement with the Key Success Indicator redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Pam D  15:44, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Kevin Price. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Kevin Price~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 01:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kevin Price


text:
Georgeson Botanical Garden

The Georgeson Botanical Garden is located at 117 West Tanana Drive on the University of Alaska Fairbanks campus in Fairbanks, Alaska, United States. The five acre garden hosts a variety of research and educational programs in subarctic horticulture. It is open to the public during daylight hours, May through September, for a fee. It is part of the Alaska Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station. The garden was named after Charles Christian Georgeson, who was USDA Special Agent in Charge of Alaska Investigations in 1899. Dr. Georgeson arrived in Alaska during the Gold Rush to research the possibilities for agriculture in Alaska. He surveyed the land near Fairbanks and started the Fairbanks Experiment Farm. A portion of the land was later annexed for use as the first campus of the University of Alaska.

Research at the garden involves a variety of plants including annual flowers, vegetables and perennial ornamentals with an emphasis on Alaska native plants. A ten-year effort begun in 2001 to explore the possibility of exporting fresh cut flowers has led to a small industry centered on peonies. Flowers have been exported to retail and wholesale markets since 2007. Because of Alaska's northern environment, many flowers bloom later than other regions, providing a competitive advantage on world markets. Research results are available on the GBG website. Research also emphasizes domestication and management of wild stands especially of Alaska wild blueberries and lingonberries.

title: Georgeson Botanical Garden


text:
User:Kmccoy/Delfino

There seems to be a vandal(s) going around inserting references to a few different things:
 * The Varian v. Delfino case
 * The Delfino v. Moore case
 * Negatively mention Varian Medical Systems in as many places as possible, especially with regard to filming in restrooms
 * Negatively mention Agilent in as many places as possible, especially in reference to employing Moore from the above mentioned case.
 * Push references to SLAPP
 * Push references to Tory v. Cochran
 * Push the book Be Careful Who You SLAPP, especially a link to mobeta.com, the publisher's site.

It appears that this vandal(s) could be involved in the case personally. Most of the IPs are from the San Francisco area.

User:Lotsofissues brought this up on IRC, and now there are a few of us there working on it (10:03, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)) Feel free to use this space for any notes regarding this vandalism while we're compiling it.

And just in case we're not having fun with this: http://www.techsoc.com/slapp.htm

IP list
List of IPs that (t)he(y) seems to have used:

 * 1) - three edits, two articles, one new, checked
 * 2) - one edit, one article, checked
 * 3) - two edits, one article (the VFD, no vandalism, comments only), checked
 * 4) - three edits, three articles, checked
 * 5) - four edits, three articles, checked
 * 6) - three edits, three articles, checked
 * 7) - eight edits, five articles, one new, checked
 * 8) - six edits, three articles, checked
 * 9) - three edits, three articles, checked
 * 10) - three edits, three articles, checked
 * 11) - four edits, three articles, checked
 * 12) - two edits, two articles, one new, checked
 * 13) - eight edits, seven articles (including VFD page), checked
 * 14) - 18 edits, eight articles, one new, checked
 * 15) - eight edits, six articles, checked
 * 16) - three edits (one probably someone else), three articles, checked
 * 17) - two edits, one article, checked
 * 18) - one edit, one article, checked
 * 19) - 18 edits (seven probably someone else), nine articles, checked
 * 20) - four edits, three articles (including the VFD page, checked
 * 21) - five edits, four articles, one new, checked
 * 22) - five edits, four articles, one new, checked
 * 23) - five edits, two articles, two new, checked
 * 24) - nine edits, six articles, checked
 * 25) - 27 edits, ten articles, checked
 * 26) - maybe not the vandal, three edits (two unrelated), two articles, checked
 * 27) - 30 edits, 12 articles, checked
 * 28) - two edits, two articles, checked
 * 29) - 29 edits, 18 articles, two new, checked
 * 30) - 16 edits, 14 articles, one new, checked
 * 31) - three edits, three articles, one new, checked
 * 32) - nine edits, six articles, checked
 * 33) - one edit, one article, checked
 * 34) - two edits, two articles, checked
 * 35) - six edits, six articles, checked
 * 36) - eight edits, four articles, checked
 * 37) - three edits, two articles, checked
 * 38) - six edits, four articles, one new, checked
 * 39) - one edit, one article, checked
 * 40) - one edit, one article, checked
 * 41) - 24 edits (11 probably someone else), seven articles, checked
 * 42) - maybe not the vandal, one edit, one article, checked

New article list
A list of articles that seem to have been created by this user(s) or for this case:

Vandalized article list
List of articles that seem to have been vandalized.

 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)
 * 5)
 * 6)
 * 7)
 * 8)
 * 9)
 * 10)
 * 11)
 * 12)
 * 13)
 * 14)
 * 15)
 * 16)
 * 17)
 * 18)
 * 19)
 * 20)
 * 21)
 * 22)
 * 23)
 * 24)
 * 25)
 * 26)
 * 27)
 * 28)
 * 29)
 * 30)
 * 31)
 * 32)
 * 33)
 * 34)
 * 35)
 * 36)
 * 37)
 * 38)
 * 39)
 * 40)
 * 41)
 * 42)
 * 43)
 * 44)
 * 45)
 * 46)
 * 47)
 * 48)
 * 49)
 * 50)
 * 51)
 * 52)
 * 53)
 * 54)
 * 55)
 * 56)
 * 57)
 * 58)
 * 59)
 * 60)
 * 61)
 * 62)
 * 63)
 * 64)
 * 65)
 * 66)
 * 67)
 * 68)
 * 69)
 * 70)
 * 71)
 * 72)
 * 73)
 * 74)
 * 75)
 * 76)
 * 77)
 * 78)
 * 79)
 * 80)

As it happens
I'm trying to work through the lists above to detail the vandalism that has happened. Please put new stuff in this section.

may be someone involved in the case, responding to the VFD on the Delfino article.

-- this user even changed votes on a VFD page. kmccoy (talk) 05:11, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

New/old IP -, vandalized the VFD page again. kmccoy (talk) 17:20, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

title: User:Kmccoy/Delfino


text:
Talk:Gwangju Uprising

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 April 2019 and 14 June 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Jiahpark.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Tim Shorrock's Article
Having read Tim Shorrock's article a few times, I think it carries significant biases, and comes to a lot of unsubstantiated conclusions. I am not averse to citing it, but I would recommend we add some more sources to balance it out and completely rework the "Background" section into a "U.S. involvement" section, rather than having a whole section of this dedicated to one article by one author. Additionally, the way the information is presented now is very slanted:

Tim Shorrock, through his analysis of recently declassified U.S. government documents, has shown the following discoveries regarding U.S. involvement with the incident

Saying he has "shown" the following is very definitive when his article is, in fact, very controversial and not by any means authoritative. I suggest this be reworded to something like, "Freelance Journalist Tim Shorrock analyzed recently declassified U.S. government documents, and came to the following conclusions in his article '"The U.S. Role in Korea in 1979 and 1980"':"

''U.S. officials in Seoul and Washington knew Chun's contingency plans included the deployment of Korean Special Warfare Command troops, trained to fight behind the lines in a war against North Korea. The Black Beret Special Forces, who were not under U.S. command, were modeled after the U.S. Green Berets and had a history of brutality dating back to their participation alongside American troops in the Vietnam War. ''

The first sentence is too general. Though Shorrock claims that U.S. officials knew of the deployment of South Korean SF to Gwangju, the actual quotes and documents he uses do not back up that assertion. What they show is that U.S. officials were aware that SF had been deployed and used for riot control at times in the past, that they had been used recently in Seoul (with results far better than what occurred in Gwangju), and that there was some knowledge of general movements of SF units within South Korea. DIA speculated that one unit might be used in Gwangju, because it remained outside of Seoul. However, the document clearly shows that this was speculation, albeit perhaps well-founded speculation. But it does not show that DIA or any other U.S. officials in Seoul knew that Chun would deploy that unit to Gwangju. I suggest this be reworded to something similar to, "U.S. officials in South Korea had some indication that Chun would use..." as it is currently written, it is far to definitively stated given the actual evidence Mr. Shorrock cites. The second sentence I recommend be deleted, as it is very inflammatory ("a history of brutality") and does not really add anything to the article.

''On May 22, 1980, in the midst of the Gwangju uprising, the Carter administration approved further use of force to retake the city and agreed to provide short-term support to Chun if he agreed to long-term political change. At a White House meeting on that date, plans were also discussed for direct U.S. military intervention if the situation got out of hand.''

The second sentence, about plans for direct U.S. military intervention, is not mentioned anywhere in the article that I can see, nor have I seen any evidence to suggest this was the case. I am going to delete that sentence, because it does not appear in the cited article, and no other evidence is presented for it. Rooster3888 07:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Both Don Oberdorfer and Bruce Cummings seem to suggest if not propose outright that Commander US Forces in Korea was complicit in General Chun's decision to pull frontline Korean troops from the border to aid in quelling the riot/massacre. The impression I got was that they felt Chun could not have done so without at least tacit approval. I remember hearing Shorrock at Univeristy of San Francisco, Center for the Pacific Rim in the late nineties actually propose that US Embassy Seoul was directly involved in allowing Chun to move 'combat troops' off the line to supress activities in Kwangju. The supporting documentation was to a significant extent obtained under Freedom of Information Act and as most government-produced material, dry and boring...but justified drawing the inferences Shorrock presented.

 * Oberdorfer also notes that the US officials were essentially rubber-stamping a fait accompli. He also says they believed that the troops being sent were not the special forces troops who had earned a nasty reputation in Vietnam.--ThreeAnswers 05:02, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Oberdorfer and Cumings can suggest all they want, but they ought to have some evidence to back up their assertion. Without it, all they have is speculation. If there are better sources that support the idea that the U.S. Embassy was involved in allowing Chun to move troops, then I have no issues adding it. However, the article cited here does not present any evidence of that, and I am somewhat skeptical of Shorrock's documentation. If he does have documentation that supports it, then great. But I am very skeptical of the inferences he draws, especially given the article cited here. He cites numerous documents, but draws conclusions from them that I do not think are substantiated.Rooster3888 06:38, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This should probably be a new thread, but the 1985 Heritage Foundation article (citation number 5, presently) isn't really up to snuff. It's bizarre, reactionary, and inaccurate (there aren't many, these days, who'd associate the Chun regime with "law and order". Etc.). I suggest it be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mudeungsan (talk • contribs) 02:01, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

The primary evidence that the U.S. authorized deployment of the 20th Division are Ambassador Gleysteen's repeated statements that this was so. I would suspect, even, that Wickham acknowledges as much in his memoirs. Anyway, I included one such statement, along with the State Department notation that, technically, it didn't mean anything. For balance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mudeungsan (talk • contribs) 04:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

(1) There's not really anything superceding Shorrock's analysis, so we need to include it. (2) The U.S. may not have had any clear alternative to acquiescence (in the Chun coup), and that perhaps should be made clear. (3) However, most offensive, and telling, to Koreans, was "not that the U.S. did nothing, but" the subsequent spectacular/economic embrace of the Chun regime (first head of state invited to the Reagan White House, the notorious Import/Export loan, etc.). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mudeungsan (talk • contribs) 04:21, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Redefine?
Any objections to redefining this article to include the whole uprising, and renaming it to Gwangju People's Uprising? The deaths are important, but they aren't the only important part of this epochal protest. -- Visviva 07:31, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

 * List of Asia-related topics calls it "Gwangju Uprising". wasn't the official name changed a few years ago, to something like Gwangju Democratization Movement? Appleby 06:05, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

This really should be named to Gwangju Riot or something. Massacre gives the wrong idea. 15357 02:15, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

It was definitely not a "riot," unless you are referring to the actions of the Korean troops sent to Gwangju to suppress with violence what began as a peaceful demonstration demanding free elections. "Massacre" is the way people in Gwangju (those who were there at the time) generally refer to this incident. The official title now is the "Gwangju Democratization Movement," though many left-leaning scholars prefer to call it the "Gwangju People's Resistance." 70.71.4.163 21:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)Don Baker

Gwangju Massacre is not the official name used in any official document. Korean government explicitly uses "Gwangju Democratization Movement" or "5.18 Democratization movement" on official document, and UNESCO names it "May 18th Democratic Uprising" when documents and documentary regarding to this movement is registered at Memory of the World. I think the argument that Gwangju Massacre should be used as the title of this article since it's the most commonly used name is flawed since common usage can never override official usage. I think official name should be appeared first, then Gwangju Massacre be attached next to it.

"Gwangju Massacre" needs to be changed to something more neutral. This is a sensitive topic and needs to be agreed upon left-leaning liberals and conservatives alike. The official term is the "Democratization Movement" for even which, there are attempts to re-examine. The title of the article needs to be changed to what is generally accepted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Octavii (talk • contribs) 23:00, 19 July 2013 (UTC) --Octavii (talk) 23:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

--Octavii (talk) 23:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC)Also, there needs to be a section challenging the "democratization movement". Recent conservative scholars prefer to call this the "5.18 Gwangju Event/Incident" as any tangible enhancement of Korea's democracy is left to be discussed.

Film
A film was recently released in South Korea depicting the incident in question. Anyone have an IMDB link?
 * I've just done finding. Click this. Peterhansen2032, July 31, 2007 16:35 KST

OK, I've added a link to the official movie's website in the main article's "External Links" section. It's called "Hwaryeohan Hyuga (A Magnificent Holiday)" (2007). 75.69.117.140 (talk) 06:37, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

The Korean television series Sandglass (Korean drama) deals with the events leading up to the massacre, and it's lasting impact on the Korean people. The imprisonment of Korean president Chun_Doo_Hwan was directly attributed to popular response to Sandglass (Korean drama). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.215.115.31 (talk) 20:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Casualties
Under this heading it states that the film May 18 says "the incident resulted in 207 deaths, 2,392 wounded, and 987 missing people, but the exact number of casualties has been subject to considerable dispute. Members of the military government were indicted with rebellion but the culprit of ordering open fire against the citizens has yet to be identified," but it's never present on the actual film as a coda (such as the statement in the beginning is physically there on screen and translated in the English subtitles), only tagged onto the end of the English subtitles with no apparent source. Are we sure this is actually part of the film and not just an overzealous fansubber? Robixsmash (talk) 04:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Non-neutral writing
At present, the content and style of writing at a number of points in the article undermine its neutrality, specifically to advocate against the Democratization Movement. Here are just a few examples:

 * The first sentence of the second paragraph ("The events of May 1980 were not a deliberate plot by the ROK government to massacre innocent civilians in South Cholla Province.") is abruptly introduced, apparently to immediately establish innocence.
 * The (ungrammatical) sentence "Therefore, so called Kwangju Democratization Movement" demonstrates disagreement with the (so far) accepted label for the movement.
 * Expelled student leaders and their influences in the Background section are linked to North Korean ideology without evidence, and are compared to Nazi propaganda in Europe.
 * Statements such as "These claims are completely unsubstantiated. The facts of the casualty rate are clear." in the Casualties section too confidently, and emotionally, reject alternative calculations.

Some of the non-neutral writing seems to be based in external sources, and is cited appropriately. However, just because an opinion is taken from an external source does not elevate it to the status of fact--it remains an opinion, and must be treated as such. --BlueResistance 11:14, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Over the past several months, this article has been deformed by a series of ideological edits amounting basically to vandalism. These edits vary from the childish to the dangerously fallacious (examples given above are characteristic). They're not - (where substantiated at all) - generally substantiated by sources of any credibility (in this respect BlueResistance's point, above, is well-taken). Or they're referred to sources at variance, in fact, with claims made. Probably the best course would be to restore the article text of several months ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mudeungsan (talk • contribs) 22:19, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the acknowledgement, Mudeungsan. Your revisions helped to streamline things a bit, and the Kimsoft reference helped.  Unfortunately, the revision cited the content of a non-documentary movie, which cannot be used as a valid reference in a situation like this, and it removed the foreign press/Chun Doo-hwan opposition view of the casualties.  Listing their view does not mean taking their side over the official position or the view of the May 18 Bereaved Family Association; it's just part of being neutral, valid, and comprehensive.  In light of this, I restored part of my 14 June 2010 revision, while maintaining part of yours. --BlueResistance 15:27, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

2012 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. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 03:56, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Gwangju Democratization Movement → Gwangju massacre – Gwangju massacre is the most common name per the following Google book search.

 * "Gwangju massacre" 342
 * "Gwangju uprising" 71
 * "Gwangju Democratization Movement" 57

―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 23:18, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Note: This article was moved from Gwangju massacre to Gwangju Democratization Movement by User:Historiographer on 26 June 2007.

 * Support. "Kwangju massacre" is the common name, according to this ngram. Kauffner (talk) 09:33, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - the references don't provide much evidence; also the name "massacre" removes the context of the democratisation movement part. Can you clarify why this move improves the article? JoshuSasori (talk) 02:03, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Support. Clearly the common name and likely to remain so. The lasting significance of the incident is not so much what the rioters were able to do as the national and international revulsion that the massacre produced, which was a major factor in the eventual founding of the Sixth Republic of South Korea (one intervening republic later). Andrewa (talk) 05:31, 28 December 2012 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

in culture : "In memorium Gwangju"
Commissioned for Montreal symphony Orchestra in period 1982- 1995 ?

Premiere in Salle Wilfred Pelletier under Charles Dutoit, Richard Robertson, concertmaster ??

See : Isang_Yun

G. Robert Shiplett 23:35, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:24, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

 * A POV tag was re-added in April 2015, but there is still no discussion here.--Jack Upland (talk) 04:48, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

move request
Gwangju massacre → Gwangju Democratization Movement Gwangju massacre is more common. but the translation of 광주 민주화 운동(Korean)is Gwangju Democratization Movement and this event is closer to democratization movement--Lhs1219 (talk) 12:05, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

 * From 1980 till nowadays, there have been many official Korean names for this event, each of them describing mostly the ulterior motives of the successive governments. A careful description of this process could be more useful that yet another renaming of the article. In any case, the key fact is the so many people that were shot to death. Let us remember them. Pldx1 (talk) 16:54, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with Pldx1. The article title is determined by the most common English name, "Gwangju massacre" which was adopted by the Western world. However there are many Korean names for this event. The Japanese article describes this transition of the names. Gwangju Affair (광주사태), Gwangju Uprising (광주의거), Gwangju Democratization Movement (광주 민주화 운동), Gwangju Populace Conflict (광주민중항쟁), Gwangju Democratization Conflict (（광주민주화항쟁),  Gwangju Conflict (광주항쟁), and Gwangju  People's Uprising (광주인민봉기) in North Korea. Unfortunately Japanese article has no source, however if there is a reliable source, this transition should be mentioned in this article.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 21:03, 19 August 2013 (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. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 02:08, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Gwangju massacre → Gwangju Uprising – This is the name adopted by UNESCO (May 18th Democratic Uprising), and is by far the most commonly used terminology according to Google Books - the search for "Gwangju Massacre" only yields 1,510 results, while "Gwangju Uprising" yields 26,700 hits. The term "Gwangju Massacre" (광주 학살) isn't even used that commonly in Korean, resulting in 6,420 hits on Google Books compared to 14,400 for "Gwangju Uprising" (광주 항쟁). Furthermore, the article mostly details the process of the armed conflict that erupted as a result of the massacre, large part of which were clashes between the local militia and the military regime - "Massacre" misrepresents the nature of the events that transpired. Dodam.a.ih (talk) 19:43, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

By the way, even the official Memorial Foundation founded by the survivors uses "Uprising" as the preferred term. Dodam.a.ih (talk) 19:50, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Also confer: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Gwangju+Massacre%2CGwangju+Democratization+Movement%2CGwangju+Uprising&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1980&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CGwangju%20massacre%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CGwangju%20Uprising%3B%2Cc0 Dodam.a.ih (talk) 19:53, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Support. Here's another ngram that includes more terms from the previous request, and Kwangju Uprising: ngram. Dekimasu よ! 03:10, 12 March 2014 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

I have a question
What's the difference between "uprising" and "riot"?175.252.178.92 (talk) 17:42, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Naming, again

 * 1) Title is Gwangju Uprising
 * 2) Lead was The Gwangju Massacre, alternatively called May 18 Democratic Massacre by UNESCO,[3] and also known as Gwangju Democratization Movement[4] (Hangul: 광주 민주화 운동; hanja: 光州民主化運動; RR: Gwangju Minjuhwa Undong) (as changed by 119.192.213.123)
 * 3) Desinfobox says "Gwangju Massacre"

BUT

 * 1) Survivors are saying: The May 18 Memorial Foundation is a non-profit organization established on August 30, 1994 by the surviving victims of The 1980 Gwangju Democratic Uprising, the victims families, and the citizens of Gwangju. The foundation aims to commemorate as well as continue the spirit and struggle and solidarity of The May 18 Uprising; to contribute to the peaceful reunification of Korea; and to work towards peace and human rights throughout the world. Thus the spirit of the May 18 is inherited and passed on, significantly influencing the progress of democracy in Korea..
 * 2) Unesco is saying: Human Rights Documentary Heritage 1980 Archives for the May 18th Democratic Uprising against Military Regime, in Gwangju, Republic of Korea

Therefore I have reverted the "May 18 Democratic Massacre" into "May 18 Democratic Uprising" since Unesco has authority about what Unesco has said. As an additional rationale, may I add that "Democratic Massacre" is a total stupidity. Are you really implying that such a slaughter was perpetrated as an act of democracy ?

Moreover, desinfobox shouldn't be allowed to say anything about the name of the event: that information should be transcluded from the article's title. A skilled person is required !

Finally, I left the other two 'Massacre' in the lead to imply that those two are more relevant of a 'content discussion'. Beware nevertheless of the following fact: 'massacre' is implying that the victims were slaughtered like animals, while 'uprising' is implying that they were standing up for their rights, like any other decent person. Beside what sources are saying, we can also aks ourselves about what is the most decent and respectful presentation of the deceased and the survivors either?

Pldx1 (talk) 11:19, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Gwangju Democratization Movement
Gwangju Uprising seems to be what the sources call it. Jadeslair (talk) 15:24, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Merge - The existence of two almost identical articles appears to reflect a copy-and-paste that was probably done by someone who didn't know that Wikipedia doesn't use copy-and-paste. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:21, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Merged - The Korean user had the wrong idea of what the word "uprising" meant. They thought it had similar connotations to "rebellion" or "riot", which has been used by the far-right in Korea to detract from event. Maybe the article should be semi-protected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.112.66.66 (talk) 08:12, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 one external links on Gwangju Uprising. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20110603040007/http://www.518.org/eng/html/main.html?TM18MF=03020000 to http://518.org/eng/html/main.html?TM18MF=03020000
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070927175044/http://www.hrschool.org/doc/mainfile.php/lesson36/ to http://www.hrschool.org/doc/mainfile.php/lesson36/
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070624231723/http://www.hrschool.org/doc/mainfile.php/lesson37/ to http://www.hrschool.org/doc/mainfile.php/lesson37/
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070312011433/http://www.hrsolidarity.net:80/mainfile.php/1996vol06no02/117/ to http://www.hrsolidarity.net/mainfile.php/1996vol06no02/117/
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080209123735/http://www.rememberu518.co.kr:80/ to http://www.rememberu518.co.kr/

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 20:03, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Gwangju Uprising. 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/20130331004754/http://seoul.usembassy.gov/backgrounder.html to http://seoul.usembassy.gov/backgrounder.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130331004754/http://seoul.usembassy.gov/backgrounder.html to http://seoul.usembassy.gov/backgrounder.html
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130615204436/http://koreajoongangdaily.joinsmsn.com/news/article/Article.aspx?aid=2971803 to http://koreajoongangdaily.joinsmsn.com/news/article/Article.aspx?aid=2971803

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:08, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gwangju Uprising. 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/20080222220549/http://www.heritage.org/Research/AsiaandthePacific/asb35.cfm to http://www.heritage.org/Research/AsiaandthePacific/asb35.cfm

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) 10:19, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

It's also known as the "Gwangju Massacre"
This should be stated in the beginning of the article, which currently it is not. 2601:8C:4500:4680:A0D9:DDE8:B720:E5C (talk) 08:20, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

it is not uprising, it is protest and civil movement
in Korea, the government recognized this movement as a democratic movement and 18th of May became a national holiday of Korea. If we maintain this as "Uprising", it doesn't contain its original meaning. You guys know that Korean think uprising as riots and rebellion. And that already means it is not adoptable. 웬디러비 (talk) 02:43, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * What do you suggest it should be called then? It was an uprising in that a section of the population rose up against the government. The name does not suggest that it was illegitimate any more than the Warsaw Uprising was. Mztourist (talk) 03:30, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I agee. The term "uprising" in English is not pejorative.--Jack Upland (talk) 04:28, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * well, the Korean government officially calls it as "Democratic Uprising" or "Democratic Movement", so I think we should call in that name. Here is evidence

 *
 *
 *
 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by 웬디러비 (talk • contribs) 01:12, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The first line says: "The Gwangju Uprising (Korean: 광주 민주화 항쟁; Hanja: 光州民主化抗爭), alternatively called the May 18 Democratic Uprising by UNESCO,[2] and also known as May 18 Gwangju Democratization Movement[3] (Korean: 5·18 광주 민주화 운동; Hanja: 五一八光州民主化運動)", which I think is more than adequate. As Jack Upland has said "uprising" is not perjorative so I see no reason to make a change.Mztourist (talk) 03:13, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Revelations of U.S. foreknowledge
Existing text "Declassified United States Department of State documents in July 2021, requested by the South Korean government, revealed that the U.S. ambassador William H. Gleysteen was informed by the Chief Presidential Secretary Choi Kwang-soo of the plans for an army crackdown on 26 May 1980, a day before it took place.[48] The diplomatic cables showed Gleysteen expressed Washington's concerns over growing anti-American sentiment in and around the Gwangju area, amid "broadcasts" asserting that the U.S. was involved in the military crackdown."

Having followed the link provided by Citation #48, it's a news article which provides no links to the declassified documents themselves. The linked article has the following text (2 paragraphs out of 13 paragraphs total):

In the meeting with Choi, Gleysteen also expressed Washington's concerns over growing anti-American sentiment in and around the Gwangju area, amid what he described as some "broadcasts" asserting that the U.S. was involved in the military crackdown.

"We had told that such crude efforts to shift the blame to U.S. were unacceptable, and if continued, would necessitate a firm U.S. denial," he said.

Wiki text: Gleysteen expressed Washington's concerns over growing anti-American sentiment in and around the Gwangju area, amid "broadcasts" asserting that the U.S. was involved in the military crackdown. Cited article text with words excised from the copy/paste into the Wiki article in italics: Gleysteen also expressed Washington's concerns over growing anti-American sentiment in and around the Gwangju area, amid what he described as some "broadcasts" asserting that the U.S. was involved in the military crackdown.

My problems are that 1) when I first read this section my impression was that it lead back to the declassified documents themselves directly or indirectly, which it does not. Note: my impression; others may not share this, and I know little enough of Wikipedia's policies to know whether this is an actual problem or not. 2) 1 paragraph out of a total of 13 paragraphs is partially quoted without it being stated to be a quote; if phrased as 'Gleysteen ... expressed Washington's concerns over growing anti-American sentiment in and around the Gwangju area, amid ... "broadcasts" asserting that the U.S. was involved in the military crackdown.' it would be a direct quote. It's not 'our' summary, it's a copy/paste of the summary within the cited article without being acknowledged as such. 3) To me, the text as entered in the Wiki article gives no indication as to whether there actually was any US involvement (depending upon your personal bias, it could be read either way, which is one form of neutrality I suppose); that ambiguity of interpretation is why I followed the link in the first place. The text of the paragraph immediately following that quoted, which I included above, would seem to indicate that there wasn't any US involvement. 4) Slightly out of order, but the first sentence of the wiki text says that the US was informed "on 26 May 1980, a day before it took place". Again, I'm not as familiar with Wikipedia practices as many, but my RL experience shows that if you don't specify what time zone different events occur in, the true amount of time between events can be drastically misrepresented; given the distance between South Korea and Washington, DC, not knowing what time of day within what time zone for i) the US being informed, and ii) for when the crackdown commenced, could give an inaccurate impression of how long the US Government had to react to the news. Again, time zone matters; in the US, 26 May 1980 was Monday, true, but a day celebrated in the US as Memorial Day, a Federal Holiday; all non-essential government offices would be closed. Context is crucial.

It's long enough since I was in college that I'm not sure what differences a secondary source from a tertiary source, but given that the cited source does not provide any links to the primary source it references, and the copy/pasted text was not identified in article as a quote from the declassified documents, unlike other sections of the article... I dunno. It bugged me enough that I kluged up this post.JohnBobMead (talk) 14:35, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Use of non-free photographs
(and the license of that image seems dubious, as its a photo of someone else's photograph), with the rest of the pictures being of memorials constructed afterwards. Given the importance of having visual information on what occurred, and given the lack of non-free photographs of the event, I think this would be an ideal candidate for the addition of a non-free image.

Here are a few candidates I've found to get this started:

 * https://res.heraldm.com/content/image/2018/02/07/20180207000458_0.jpg (Yonhap)
 * https://cdn-japantimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/p14-kingston-gwangju-a-20140518.jpg (AP)
 * https://flexible.img.hani.co.kr/flexible/normal/520/413/imgdb/resize/test/original/2022/0510/7816521690568055.jpg (May 18 Memorial Foundation)
 * https://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/english_editorials/894592.html (no credit in article)
 * https://english.khan.co.kr/khan_art_view.html?code=710100&artid=201606201731347 (no credit in article)
 * https://res.heraldm.com/content/image/2018/10/31/20181031000467_0.jpg (Yonhap)
 * https://www.economist.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=960,quality=90,format=auto/sites/default/files/20200606_ASP002.jpg (Shutterstock)
 * https://times.postech.ac.kr/news/photo/201905/20843_25747_043.jpg (mediacity)
 * https://religiousleftlaw.typepad.com/.a/6a0120a69a468c970c0224df33cb9a200b-600wi (corbis)
 * https://www.thenation.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=896,quality=80,format=auto/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/chonnam-university-img.jpg (May 18 Memorial Foundation)
 * https://www.thenation.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/may-21-1980-img.jpg (May 18 Memorial Foundation)
 * https://www.thenation.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/gwangju-battle-img.jpg (May 18 Memorial Foundation)
 * https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/126E3/production/_104219457_gettyimages-111299474.jpg.webp (Getty images)

Freedom4U (talk) 19:50, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:08, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * May 18th Movement Archives11.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:08, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * May 18th Movement Archives11.jpg

Date format
Hi,

This article seems like it should use the DMY date format (e.g. 1 May 1919) instead of the current MDY format (e.g. May 1, 1919). See MOS:DATETIES; for most Korea-related articles, including the article for South Korea itself, DMY is used.

Does anyone know of any reasons why MDY may be preferred here? Maybe I'm missing something. I know the event is called "5.18" (May 18), but that has more to do with Korea's use of YMD than it does MDY.

In the meantime, I'm going to go ahead and make the change to MDY because I think it may be uncontroversial. Please undo it and discuss if you disagree. toobigtokale (talk) 05:38, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Gwangju Uprising


text:
Peter Mitchell

Peter or Pete Mitchell may refer to:

Media

 * Pete Mitchell (broadcaster) (1958–2020), British broadcaster
 * Peter Mitchell (newsreader) (born 1960), Australian journalist
 * Peter Mitchell (photographer) (born 1943), British documentary photographer

Sports

 * Pete Mitchell (American football) (born 1971), American football player
 * Peter Mitchell (cyclist) (born 1990), British racing cyclist
 * Peter Mitchell (golfer) (born 1958), English golfer
 * Peter Mitchell-Thomson, 2nd Baron Selsdon (1913–1963), British peer and racing driver
 * Peter Mitchell (footballer), Northern Irish former professional footballer, wheelchair basketball player, actor and motivational speaker

Others

 * Peter Mitchell (politician) (1824–1899), Canadian politician
 * Peter Chalmers Mitchell (1864–1945), British zoologist
 * Peter D. Mitchell (1920–1992), British biochemist

Fictional characters

 * Peter Mitchell (Three Men and a Baby), from the film Three Men and a Baby and its sequel
 * Pete Mitchell (Top Gun), nickname "Maverick", from the films Top Gun and Top Gun: Maverick

title: Peter Mitchell


text:
Minimum information about a microarray experiment

Minimum information about a microarray experiment (MIAME) is a standard created by the FGED Society for reporting microarray experiments.

MIAME is intended to specify all the information necessary to interpret the results of the experiment unambiguously and to potentially reproduce the experiment. While the standard defines the content required for compliant reports, it does not specify the format in which this data should be presented. MIAME describes the minimum information required to ensure that microarray data can be easily interpreted and that results derived from its analysis can be independently verified. There are a number of file formats used to represent this data, as well as both public and subscription-based repositories for such experiments. Additionally, software exists to aid the preparation of MIAME-compliant reports.

MIAME revolves around six key components: raw data, normalized data, sample annotations, experimental design, array annotations, and data protocols.


text:
Strawberry festival

A strawberry festival is an event and celebration in many towns in North America. In most instances, areas around these towns are, or have been, deeply involved in the production and marketing of strawberries, and the festivals are usually held in late spring around the time of the strawberry harvest. Such festivals generally involve a parade and other community events and the consumption of the fruit, and may attract visitors from other places.

United States

 * Arroyo Grande, California – Memorial Day weekend
 * Assonet, Massachusetts – Father's Day
 * Belleville, Michigan – National Strawberry Festival
 * Bellevue, Washington
 * Billings, Montana Strawberry Festival
 * Buckhannon, West Virginia – West Virginia Strawberry Festival
 * Wisconsin
 * Cabot, Arkansas
 * Chassell, Michigan
 * Crawfordsville, Indiana
 * Dayton, Tennessee – Tennessee Strawberry Festival (Dayton, Tennessee)
 * Fort Mill, South Carolina
 * Garden Grove, California
 * Humboldt, Tennessee – Strawberry Festival (Humboldt, Tennessee)
 * Lebanon, Oregon – Strawberry Festival (Lebanon, Oregon)
 * Lahaska, Pennsylvania – Peddler's Village Strawberry Festival
 * Lincolnville, Maine – Strawberry Festival (Lincolnville, Maine)
 * Long Grove, Illinois
 * Los Gatos, California
 * Mattituck, New York– 2nd week of June
 * Marysville, Washington – 3rd week of June
 * Newark, Ohio
 * North Canton, Connecticut, at the North Canton Community United Methodist Church, Saturday before Father's Day
 * Owego, New York – 3rd Saturday in June
 * Oxnard Plain – California Strawberry Festival, 3rd weekend in May
 * Pasadena, Texas – May 16, 17 and 18, 2008
 * Ponchatoula, Louisiana – April 3–5
 * Plant City, Florida – the Florida Strawberry Festival,
 * Portland, Tennessee – Strawberry Festival (Portland, Tennessee)
 * Poteet, Texas – Strawberry Festival
 * Pungo, Virginia Strawberry Festival
 * Rehoboth, Massachusetts – First Sunday in June
 * Sandy Spring, Maryland
 * Santa Maria, California
 * Schodack, New York – Strawberry Festival (Schodack, New York)
 * South Berwick, Maine
 * South Windsor, Connecticut
 * Stilwell, Oklahoma
 * Troy, Ohio –  Strawberry Festival (Troy, Ohio)
 * Vashon Island, Washington
 * Vanceboro, North Carolina

Brazil

 * Brasilia
 * Gravatá
 * Nova friburgo

Australia

 * Cleveland, Queensland (1965–2001)

Philippines

 * La Trinidad, Benguet – In March 2015, 6,000 slices of strawberry cake were served as part of the events at this municipality's Strawberry Festival. The cakes for the slices were prepared using fresh strawberries.

Finland

 * Suonenjoki – In July, the so-called "the Strawberry Town" hosts an annual "Strawberry Carnival" (Mansikkakarnevaalit).

India

 * Panchgani

title: Strawberry festival


text:
User talk:Idelivers

thanks to those making Wikipedia avaiable to all. Your kind effort has contributed to the improvements to our daily lives.

title: User talk:Idelivers


text:
Romanization of Bulgarian

Romanization of Bulgarian is the practice of transliteration of text in Bulgarian from its conventional Cyrillic orthography into the Latin alphabet. Romanization can be used for various purposes, such as rendering of proper names and place names in foreign-language contexts, or for informal writing of Bulgarian in environments where Cyrillic is not easily available. Official use of romanization by Bulgarian authorities is found, for instance, in identity documents and in road signage. Several different standards of transliteration exist, one of which was chosen and made mandatory for common use by the Bulgarian authorities in a law of 2009.

Features
The various romanization systems differ with respect to 12 out of the 30 letters of the modern Bulgarian alphabet. The remaining 18 have consistent mappings in all romanization schemes: а→a, б→b, в→v, г→g, д→d, е→e, з→z, и→i, к→k, л→l, м→m, н→n, о→o, п→p, р→r, с→s, т→t, ф→f. Differences exist with respect to the following:
 * letters involving the glide sound /j/, where some systems use Latin $⟨j⟩$ and some Latin $⟨y⟩$: й→j/y, ю→ju/yu, я→ja/ya; also ь→’/j/y.
 * letters denoting palatal/alveolar fricatives and affricates. Here, the choice is mostly between Latin letters with diacritics, as used in many Latin-based orthographies of other Slavic languages, and digraph combinations, as used in English: ж→ž/zh, ч→č/ch, ш→š/sh, щ→št/ŝ/sht. Also, Cyrillic x may be rendered as either $⟨h⟩$, $⟨x⟩$ or $⟨kh⟩$, and Cyrillic ц as either $⟨c⟩$ or $⟨ts⟩$. The rendering of щ as $⟨št⟩$ or $⟨sht⟩$ is specific to Bulgarian and differs from the conventions for the East Slavic languages, where it is rendered mostly as $⟨šč⟩$ or $⟨shch⟩$.
 * the letter ъ, which in Bulgarian (unlike Russian, where it is not pronounced at all) denotes a special schwa-like vowel. This sound, which occurs in the first syllable of the country name Bulgaria (България), is variously rendered as $⟨ă⟩$, $⟨ŭ⟩$, $⟨a⟩$, $⟨u⟩$, or, in more extreme cases, $⟨y⟩$ or $⟨ə⟩$. Moreover, Cyrillic у, which is mostly rendered as Latin $⟨u⟩$, is sometimes rendered instead as $⟨ou⟩$ to distinguish it from ъ, for example in the Danchev Romanization system and based on historical etymology (e.g., the fact that Cyrillic у was descended from Uk).

Standards
Three different systems have been adopted officially by Bulgarian authorities at overlapping times.

ISO/R 9:1968
An older system in the tradition of common Slavic scientific transliteration was adopted by the Council of Orthography and Transcription of Geographical Names in Sofia in 1972 and subsequently by the UN in 1977. It is identical to that codified in the ISO norm ISO/R 9:1968. This system uses diacritic letters ($⟨č, š, ž⟩$) as well as $⟨j⟩$ and $⟨c⟩$. It was adopted in 1973 as the Bulgarian state standard BDS 1596:1973 which, although still valid formally is no longer used in practice, having been superseded by the 2009 Transliteration Act.

French-oriented
The second system was a French-oriented transliteration of personal and place names in the documents issued by the Bulgarian Ministry of Interior for travel abroad, used until 1999.

English-oriented digraph systems
Systems based on a radically different principle, which avoids diacritics and is optimized for compatibility with English sound-letter correspondences, have come into official use in Bulgaria since the mid-1990s. These systems characteristically use $⟨ch, sh, zh⟩$ rather than $⟨č, š, ž⟩$, and $⟨y⟩$ rather than $⟨j⟩$.

Danchev
One such system was proposed in Danchev et al.'s English Dictionary of Bulgarian Names of 1989.

Streamlined System
A similar system (differing from the former in the treatment of letters ъ, у, and digraphs ай, ей, ой and уй), called the "Streamlined System" by Ivanov (2003) and Gaidarska (1998), was adopted in 1995 for use in Bulgarian-related place names in Antarctica by the Antarctic Place-names Commission of Bulgaria. Another system along similar lines, differing from the Antarctic one only in the treatment of ц ($⟨ts⟩$ vs. $⟨c⟩$), was adopted by the Bulgarian authorities for use in identity documents in 1999; after an amendment in 2000, the official Bulgarian system became identical with that of the Antarctica Commission.

The new official Bulgarian system does not allow for unambiguous mapping back into Cyrillic, since unlike most other systems it does not distinguish between ъ and а (both rendered as a). It also does not distinguish between the digraph values of $⟨⟩$, $⟨⟩$ and the value of the same Roman strings in rendering accidental clusters of separate Cyrillic letters $⟨⟩$ and $⟨⟩$, as they occur in words like изход (izhod) or схема (shema).

New Orthographic Dictionary system
A modification of the system using a diacritic was proposed in the authoritative New Orthographic Dictionary of the Bulgarian Language in 2002, with ъ rendered as ă rather than a. However, that proposal was not adopted for official usage, and failed to become established in popular practice.

Streamlined System with -ia-exception
An exception to the rules was introduced by the Bulgarian authorities in 2006, mandating the transliteration of word-final -ия as -ia rather than -iya in given names and geographical names (such as Ilia, Maria and Bulgaria, Sofia, Trakia etc.). In 2009, a law passed by the Bulgarian parliament made this system mandatory for all official use and some types of private publications, expanding also the application of the ia-exception rule to all -ия in word-final position.

The Streamlined system was adopted by UN in 2012, and by BGN and PCGN  in 2013.

According to Arenstein, "The international roots of the Bulgarian romanization system strike at the core of one of romanization's most perplexing paradoxes: an impulse to redefine and distinguish national identity while also ensuring the accessibility of that identity to outside groups. In other words, instilling nationalism with a sense of internationalism."

Streamlined System with unambiguous reverse mapping
A variant of the Streamlined System allowing for unambiguous mapping back into Cyrillic was proposed by Ivanov, Skordev and Dobrev in 2010 to be used in cases when the retrieval of the original Cyrillic forms is essential. For that purpose, certain Cyrillic letters and combinations of letters are transliterated as follows: ъ→`a, ь→`y, зх→z|h, йа→y|a, йу→y|u, сх→s|h, тс→t|s, тш→t|sh, тщ→t|sht, шт→sh|t, шц→sh|ts, ия (in final position, if the ia-exception rule is applied) →i|a. The standard transliteration form of a given text is obtained from its unambiguously reversible one by simply removing the additional symbols ` (grave accent) and | (vertical bar).

Other
Systems along similar lines to the new official Bulgarian system, though with differences regarding the letters х, ъ, ь, ю and я, have also been in use in the ALA-LC Romanization scheme of the Library of Congress, British Standard 2959:1958, the now-superseded 1952 BGN/PCGN romanization of the United States and British geographic naming institutions, and the 1917 system of the British Academy.

The ISO 9 standard, in its 1995 version, has introduced another romanization system that works with a consistent one-to-one reversible mapping, resorting to rare diacritic combinations such as $⟨â,û,ŝ⟩$.

The GOST 7.79-2000 "Rules of transliteration of Cyrillic script by Latin alphabet" contains an unambiguous and reversible ASCII-compatible transliteration system for Bulgarian: й→j, х→x, ц→c or cz, ч→ch, ш→sh, щ→sth, ъ→a`, ь→`, ю→yu, я→ya.

Archaic letters
The archaic Cyrillic letters ѣ and ѫ, which were part of the pre-1945 orthography of Bulgarian, are variously transcribed as ⟨i͡e, e⟩, as ⟨ya, ě⟩, and as ⟨u̐, ŭǎ⟩, respectively, in the ALA/LC, BGN/PCGN and ISO 9 standards.

Personalized and stylized writing
Some people and companies prefer to use or retain personalized spellings of their own names in Latin. Examples are the politicians Ivan Stancioff (instead of "Stanchov") and Simeon Djankov (instead of "Dyankov"), and the beer brand Kamenitza (instead of Kamenitsa). The freedom of using different Roman transliterations of personal names is guaranteed by Article 2(2) of the governmental 2010 Regulation for Issuing of Bulgarian Personal Documents.

Informal writing
Sometimes, especially in e-mail or text messaging, the Cyrillic alphabet is not available and people are forced to write in Roman script. This often does not follow the official or any other of the standards listed above, but rather is an idiosyncratic Bulgarian form of text speak. While most letters are straightforward, several can take different forms. The letter variants listed below are often used interchangeably with some or all of the above standards, often in the same message.

There is no set rule, and people often vary the combinations within a single message, so that "ъ" may be presented as "u", "a" or "y" in three adjacent words, and "щ" can be "sht" in one word, and "6t" in the next, and "ю" may be written differently in the same word. Conversely, "j" could be used to represent "й", "ж" and even "дж" in adjacent words, while "y" can be used for "ъ" in one word and for "й" in the next.

This unofficial email/SMS language is often referred to as "shlyokavitsa"    The use of Latinised Bulgarian, while ubiquitous in personal communication, is frowned upon in certain internet contexts, and many websites' comment sections and internet forums have rules stating that posts in Roman script will be deleted.

title: Romanization of Bulgarian


text:
Diplosome

In cell biology, a diplosome refers to the pair of centrioles which are arranged perpendicularly to one another located near the nucleus. The diplosome plays a role in many processes such as in primary cilium development, spermiogenesis of teleosts, and mitosis. The rigid arrangement of centrioles in a diplosome is generally established after the procentriole is formed during mitosis.

Role of Diplosome in Primary Cilia Development
Primary cilia develop from the diplosome. Although the mechanism is not defined, during prometaphase of mitosis the diplosome ungergoes many changes to allow cilium resorption to occur.

Role of Diplosome in Spermiogenesis of teleosts
The type of spermiogenesis the teleost will undergo is dependent on the location of the diplosome on the nucleus, which ultimately acts as the cause of where the flagellum will be. In type I spermiogenesis, the diplosome is located at a lateral position on the nucleus leading to a perpendicular flagellum to the nucleus. In type II spermiogenesis, the diplosome is located at the apical pole of the nucleus, creating a parallel flagellum to the nucleus. In both scenarios the diplosome will reach the nuclear fossa after nuclear roation.

Diplosome in Mitosis
Diplosomes first appear during G2 phase of the cell cycle. In the early stages of mitosis the diplosome will split and begin to move in opposite directions until both reach edges of the nucleus. At this point one diplosome will return to the center of the nucleus while the other continues over the edge moving toward the center on the opposite side of the nucleus. The separated diplosome will stay in place until the nuclear envelope has broken.

title: Diplosome


text:
National Weight Control Registry

The National Weight Control Registry is a research study that includes people (18 years or older) who have lost at least 13.6 kg (30 lbs) of weight and kept it off for at least one year. There are currently over 10,000 members enrolled in the study, making it perhaps the largest study of weight loss ever conducted. Members complete annual questionnaires about their current weight, diet and exercise habits, and behavioral strategies for weight loss maintenance.

The National Weight Control Registry is coordinated through the Miriam Hospital's "Weight Control and Diabetes Research Center" in Providence, Rhode Island. It was founded and is currently overseen by Dr. Rena Wing at Brown University and Dr. James Hill at University of Colorado.

Demographics
The registry is composed of approximately 80% women. The “average” female participant is 45 years old and currently 145 pounds while the average man is 49 years old and 190 pounds. On average, registry members have lost about 70 pounds and kept it off for five and a half years when joining the registry. However, within the study there is great variation in age, weight loss speed and duration, and amount of weight lost.

Research findings
The research has shown that members lost weight by a wide variety of methods. However, 98% of people modified their food intake and 94% of participants increased their exercise. After losing weight, almost all of the registry members ate breakfast and weighed themselves regularly, most commonly once per week. About 45% of registry participants lost weight on their own, while 55% of participants obtained help from some type of program. Registry participants watch less television than the average American, which leaves time to engage in about 60 minutes per day of moderate intensity physical activity, or the equivalent.

Research findings from the National Weight Control Registry have been featured in many national newspapers, magazines, and television broadcasts, including: USA Today, Oprah magazine, The Washington Post, and Good Morning America. They have also been published in many research journals, including Journal of Clinical Nutrition, International Journal of Obesity, Health Psychology, and Obesity Research.

Articles

 * Klem ML, Wing RR, McGuire MT, Seagle HM & Hill JO (1997). A descriptive study of individuals successful at long-term maintenance of substantial weight loss. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 66, 239-246.
 * Shick SM, Wing RR, Klem ML, McGuire MT, Hill JO & Seagle HM (1998). Persons successful at long-term weight loss and maintenance continue to consume a low calorie, low fat diet. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 98, 408-413.
 * McGuire MT, Wing RR, Klem ML, Seagle HM & Hill JO (1998). Long-term maintenance of weight loss: Do people who lose weight through various weight loss methods use different behaviors to maintain their weight? International Journal of Obesity, 22, 572-577.
 * Klem ML, Wing RR, McGuire MT, Seagle HM & Hill JO. (1998). Psychological symptoms in individuals successful at long-term maintenance of weight loss. Health Psychology, 17, 336-345.
 * McGuire MT, Wing RR, Klem ML, Hill JO (1999). The Behavioral characteristics of individuals who lose weight unintentionally. Obesity Research, 7, 485-490.
 * Wyatt HR, Grunwald GK, Seagle HM, Klem ML, McGuire MT, Wing RR & Hill JO. (1999). Resting energy expenditure in reduced-obese subjects in the National Weight Control Registry. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 69, 1189-1193.
 * McGuire MT, Wing RR, Klem ML, Lang W & Hill JO. (1999). What predicts weight regain among a group of successful weight losers? Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 177-185.
 * McGuire MT, Wing RR, Klem ML, Hill JO. (1999). Behavioral strategies of individuals who have maintained long-term weight losses. Obesity Research, 7, 334-341.
 * McGuire MT, Wing RR, Hill JO. (1999). The prevalence of weight loss maintenance among American adults. International Journal of Obesity, 23, 1314-1319.
 * Klem ML, Wing RR, Chang CH, Lang W, McGuire MT, Sugerman HJ, Hutchison SL, Makovich AL & Hill JO. (2000). A case-control study of successful maintenance of a substantial weight loss: Individuals who lost weight through surgery versus those who lost weight through non-surgical means. International Journal of Obesity, 24, 573-579.
 * Klem ML, Wing, RR, Lang W, McGuire MT & Hill JO. (2000). Does weight loss maintenance become easier over time? Obesity Research, 8, 438-444.
 * Wing RR & Hill JO. (2001). Successful weight loss maintenance. Annual Review of Nutrition, 21, 323-341.
 * Wyatt HR, Grunwald OK, Mosca CL, Klem ML, Wing RR, Hill JO. (2002). Long-term weight loss and breakfast in subjects in the National Weight Control Registry. Obesity Research, 10, 78-82.

For more, go to http://nwcr.ws/Research/published%20research.htm

title: National Weight Control Registry


text:
File:PA103judges.jpg

PA 103 Scottish judges, sitting in the court in the Netherlands; photo widely available, taken from

Fair use in Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial
Copyright law of the United States

U.S. Copyright Law, Title 17, Chapter 1, § 107

Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and  106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include— The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
 * 1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
 * 2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
 * 3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
 * 4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

title: File:PA103judges.jpg


text:
Juan Pizarro (conquistador)

Juan Pizarro y Alonso (born c. 1511 in Trujillo; died July 1536) was a Spanish conquistador who accompanied his brothers Francisco, Gonzalo and Hernando Pizarro for the conquest of Peru in 1532.

Biography
Juan Pizarro was the illegitimate son of Captain Gonzalo Pizarro y Rodríguez de Aguilar (senior) (1446–1522) and María Alonso, from Trujillo. His father was a colonel of infantry who had served with distinction in the Italian campaigns under Gonzalo Fernández de Córdoba, and in Navarre. Juan Pizarro was the half brother of Francisco and Hernando Pizarro, and full brother to Gonzalo Pizarro.

Juan and his brothers, led by Francisco and friend Diego de Almagro, conquered the mighty Inca Empire in 1533. Juan, and Gonzalo Pizarro, were then appointed regidores on 24 March 1534, and garrisoned the city of Cuzco with ninety men, while Francisco Pizarro departed for Jauja.

In early Feb. 1536, two hundred thousand Incan warriors laid siege to the two hundred Spaniards in Cuzco. Hernando, Gonzalo and Juan led the defense with counterattacks on the fortress overlooking the city. Juan led the attack to recover the citadel. Unable to wear a helmet (his jaw was swollen after being hit by a slingshot), Juan was struck in the head by a large stone and died a fortnight later.

title: Juan Pizarro (conquistador)


text:
Larry Miller

Larry, Laurence or Lawrence Miller may refer to:

Arts and entertainment

 * Larry Miller (accordionist) (born 1936), American Cajun accordion builder
 * Lawrence Miller (1944–2009), American art director, Best Scenic Design nominee in 1982 at 36th Tony Awards
 * Larry Miller (artist) (born 1944), American pioneer in Fluxus mixed media
 * Laurence Miller, American art collector, founder in 1984 of Laurence Miller Gallery
 * Larry Miller (comedian) (born 1953), American actor, podcaster and columnist
 * Larry Miller (guitarist), American rock and avant garde musician active since 1980s

Business

 * Larry H. Miller (1944–2009), American automotive retail businessman and sports team owner of Utah Jazz
 * Larry Miller (sports executive), American sports apparel and basketball team president, active since 1980s
 * Larry S. Miller (born 1957), American entrepreneur

Politics

 * Lawrence G. Miller (1936–2014), American politician and businessman in Connecticut
 * Larry Miller (Tennessee politician) (born 1954), American legislator in Tennessee House of Representatives
 * Larry Miller (Canadian politician) (born 1956), member of Canadian House of Commons

Sports

 * Larry Miller (baseball) (1937–2018), American pitcher
 * Larry Miller (basketball player) (born 1946), American shooting guard
 * Larry Miller (American football) (born 1962), American quarterback
 * Larry Miller (athlete) (born 1963), Antiguan Olympic runner

title: Larry Miller


text:
Talk:Freshwater ecosystem

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2020 and 8 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wiki limno.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:52, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

[Untitled]
I deleted the merge notice (with Limnology - please see talk:Limnology for the reasons. Blank Verse   ∅  10:29, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[Seriously]
No ecological factors, whatsoever! Seriously? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:88:8104:D007:9538:D6D9:A6DA:E74A (talk) 01:32, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Discussion about types of ecosystems
If anyone is watching this page, could you please help with improving the ecosystem article? We're discussing how the different types of ecosystems should be included there (if at all). I would like to see how this article would best interact with the other one. EMsmile (talk) 06:40, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Plan for this article's improvements (June 2021)
I'd like to work on improving this article. However, I am mindful of not duplication too much content across similar articles. This article has two sub-articles, which look very detailed and well developed (at first glance): lentic ecosystems and lotic ecosystems. One level higher than this article is the one on aquatic ecosystem. Some content about threats and solutions would therefore be the same across the three layers of articles. The tree structure would be: Ecosystem is the highest level, then aquatic ecosystem, then freshwater ecosystem, then lentic ecosystem and lotic ecosystem. What are your thoughts about the level of detail required for each? How can we make sure they fit together nicely in a tree structure, getting progressively more detailed / specific? EMsmile (talk) 02:04, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * This would have been a good use of a Portal but they seem to be dying out, or even deprecated. --Northernhenge (talk) 20:12, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Categories
I've deleted "DEFAULTSORT:standing water Ecosystem" because it meant this page appeared in category lists under "S". I've also removed a blank pipe from "Freshwater ecology" because it meant that this page appeared outside of the alphabetical list. (That makes sense in the other piped categories where this page discusses the examples but isn't itself an example.) I'm just mentioning this here in case I've overlooked a rationale for the sorting. --Northernhenge (talk) 20:09, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Ecology
— Assignment last updated by Nick Deacon (talk) 15:58, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Science
Fresh water ecosystem give an proper explaination 2409:4081:1D06:9AAF:5F0F:46F8:F132:81A1 (talk) 18:02, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

 * Please see Freshwater ecosystem for a full explanation.  Velella  Velella Talk 18:07, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Types
The paragraph "There are three basic types of freshwater ecosystems: Lentic (slow moving water, including pools, ponds, and lakes), lotic (faster moving water, for example streams and rivers) and wetlands (areas where the soil is saturated or inundated for at least part of the time)" appears in both the lead and the types section. I was wondering if this is an issue or anything because it is exactly copy and pasted. The citation appears on both the first and second instance but I was thinking the first instance could be deleted or shortened. Thoughts? Thanks, FS Fishy-Finns (talk) 15:38, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Freshwater ecosystem