text:
User:Mamgeorge

I use this space to clarify principles I use in wiki pages. In other words, this is about me and what believe. I include it so discussions about my comments have an accessible context.

Presupposition
I am a Christian, and I believe the Bible is literally Gods truth. If you are antagonistic to this, I ask you to try not to rely on stereotypes. A common accusation is that some Christians attempt to force their beliefs on others, or intolerant (which is simply demandingness). Another is that a committed literal Bible believer is uninformed (which is simply implying ignorance). I believe both of these conclusions are wrong, and weaken communication through ad hominem attacks. Hopefully, the following essays will clarify this.

 * As time has passed, and as I have observed how rational discussions progress, I am coming to the conclusion that truth (and it can be any truth) is often inexpressible, indefensible, but sharable.

Are these defenses refutable? Of course. Are the refutations arguable? Undoubtedly. Are the arguments debatable? No question. So, dear reader, you have a choice... Will you trust rationality to answer your questions and lead your life? Is the truth really so invisible, or unavailable to you?

inexpressible
Is it possible to have a belief that does not need to be defended? Consider the attempt of AI scientists to represent intelligence in symbolic form. Basically, the assumption was that a general problem solver was attainable in 10 years (the original GOFAI goal)*. The assumptions evolved over that time, but the original expectation clearly failed. Yet, there is no need to assume the work was useless, impossible, or that nothing was learned from trying. The drive to try has not dimmed. Perhaps defending beliefs is similar. I do not think one should give up trying to formalize philosophy or thinking, but perhaps we should examine what the goal of that work would be. Perhaps we should consider the possibility that truth is inexpressible.

 * Does this require believing truth is "elusive" (and therefore unattainable)?. Defining truth as "elusive" is often construed as a logical argument; but it appears that 6000 years of philosophy does not allow ANY consensus. To me, a historical view of "thought" supports a view that truth is "inexpressible", or indescribable. As in GOFAI, the logic, or perhaps just the vocabulary, just is often not there. This does not prevent us from acting on it; but it does appear to have limited our applications and may change our expectations in a discussion.

 * note: If the GOFAI topic interests you at all, please see Hubert Dreyfuss "What Computers Still Can't Do" A Critique of Artificial Reason (MIT Press, 1992)

indefensible
Saying truth is inexpressible may imply that "some have it, and some do not". Yet I suggest an even harder corollary exists: the possibility that defensibility is not a necessary component of truth. For example, consider a child who sees a tree and is told it is a beach ball. He may lack the "equipment" to defend his observation, but still be right. Incidentally, the childs ability simply to declare what he sees or knows can be viewed as a stage in defensibility (the ability to acknowledge and distinguish). Again, he need not be proficient at polemics to be right, and his truth can be debated, rebuffed, and ridiculed ad nauseum, but only because the mechanics of logic allow it. (Another example of this can be seen in the limitations of a mute person experiencing warmth, etc.)

sharable
Why should "inexpressible" or "indefensible" truths be shared? Assuming defensibility may not be available does not require silence. While other implications could be explored, the main thing I want to emphasize is the change in expectation it leads to in discussion. Whether communicating a truth is successful or not, there is a moral component to the discussion: the motivation for pursuing it.

 * mamgeorge 22:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Nonreligious
Can a secular Philosophy remove suffering? There is a strong trend in our world culture that suggests a rational, supposedly objective, scientific approach excludes religion. Often, the failures of religions are pointed to as the cause. Yet, the atheism of communist Russia or China proves clearly that "freethinking" or "values by choice" simply do not remove the ignorance, violence, and willfull injustice in our hearts.

Is it possible to actually be "nonreligious"? It is impossible for anyone to exist without deeply held beliefs that are unprovable. The man golfing on Sunday will kill for his right to do so; or kill the possibilities that prevent it. When pressed to defend his choices, his manner will exhibit the same irrationality of any self respecting fanatic. Such a one assumes his choices do not have eternal consequences, pretends he is not perpetuating a system, and in all cases, believes something unprovable about his rights.

Behavior ALWAYS comes from beliefs. It is impossible to act out a behavior without some internal expectation. In all areas of behavior, whether in business, politics, government, etc., your behavior  is controlled by ultimately unprovable beliefs. Any fundamental view of the value and direction of humanity is endlessly debatable and rationally unprovable. Consider the assumptions choice, justice, and equality require in the following areas:

 * taxes
 * education
 * health care
 * abortion
 * justice
 * punishment
 * separation of church & state
 * burial
 * etc.

Tolerance
Tolerance is NOT inclusiveness. However, the word "Tolerance" is usually used to minimize exclusiveness and demand conformance. It demands offending contradictions to be sterilized, and that unique claims have no value. This is merely another exclusive claim which in itself is an unprovable belief. Is inclusiveness bad? Like all things that can be twisted, not inherently. The issue is the boundary. The boundary is identified by the purpose.

COBs (Choice Oriented Believers) Without exclusive beliefs (beliefs that separate one truth from another, or beliefs that insist upon uniquely possessing truth) the result is picking & choosing what you believe. Such COBs (Choice Oriented Believers) use the human spirit as the guide. Is this reasonable?

Atheists, agnostics, nonreligious, new-agers, mystics, freethinkers, humanists, and any other non-formal religion ultimately share one essential similarity: reliance on the self. Yet the atheism of Russian & Chinese Communists certainly did not stem the flow of violent injustice. Countless millions were murdered for what is ultimately exposed as the drives of human nature: greed, power, money.

Spirituality
All religions are based on self. There are 6 major world religions that account for 93% of the worlds beliefs (Encyclopedia Britannica): Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, ChineseFolkReligions. Yet, there are really only 2 principles here: either you decide what is true, or something else tells you what is true. In reality, most "Christians", Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists, & FolkReligionists pick and choose what they want to believe. 6000 years of philosophy has only proven there is nothing in the mind of the the human spirit that removes suffering or consistently answers mans deepest questions.

Can spirituality be separated from religion? From religion, yes, but not from the disease. Those claiming "I believe in spirituality, I just do not support organized religion"; such "nonreligious" sentiments hide uglier truths: human nature  (or personally chosen values) have no moral authority. We see by example that atheism does not possess the authority to stop injustice. But spirituality is just as bad: what moral authority does choice oriented beliefs over the worshipers whose faith requires them to disembowel tortured innocents against their will''' (see Aztec, Korowai, etc.). The "nonreligious" person who disagrees with that has failed to think through the effects of their beliefs.

Why does this matter? The "human spirit", of course, is capable of much that is beautiful. The issue is that it is also the source of all pain. This is a particularly obvious conclusion atheists seem to ignore; and one religionists ignore when they blame "other religions".

 * mamgeorge 14:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Violence & Injustice
Where does human suffering, particularly injustice, come from? Clearly from humanity itself. Amazingly, the uninformed place this blame on religion. This accusation often takes the form that wars originate in religious zeal. This is merely a terrified denial of the root causes. Wars are born in the violence, lust, or foolishness of the "human spirit". None of the religious founders (Jesus, Mohammed, Vyasa, Buddha, Laozi, who account for 80% of human beliefs) intended to perpetuate war or violence. Consider:

 * What teaching of the Bible motivated Conquistadors to expel Jesuits?
 * What teaching of the Koran motivated GhengisKhan to pursue other faiths?
 * How did the Hindu Vedas permit the attacks on Muslim shrines?
 * How did the Buddhist Sutras permit the killing fields of Cambodia?

Why DID communism perpetuate mass killings in China? Why DID Hitler kill Jews? Not for any religion. But it did occur. Why? And especially why if there is no God? No "religion"? Does not all such violence occur from that which is already inside us"? From the "humanity" of man? From the natural "human" spirit?

The justifications for violence come from the human soul. Not even the devil is powerful enough to be blamed for that. It is our own "human spirit" that athiests, agnostics, and the "nonreligious" want to extol as worthy of setting a moral policy. If babies were born "inherently" good, then immorality could not perpetuate.

The effectiveness of ideologies may be debated; but not the source. Hostility never needed formalized ideology to breed, and no institutionalization removes it. It is in our soul; to deny this is to deny ourselves and make smokescreens to protect our wounded pride. Such accusations for any ideology is probably unintentional by the accuser. The frightening aspect of the demandingness of an undesired ideology is much easier to blame than facing the implications of what "freedom of choice" really means.

Sadly, what can be applied to "religious" wars can be applied to other atrocities; Inquisitions, Book burnings, Imperialism, Proselytizing, and other actions are merely the natural expressions of the "Human Spirit"; violence, control, greed, and pride come from us. The mere fact that someone can ask "What Would Jesus/Mohammed/Vyasa/Buddha/Laozi Do" shows that there is a distinction between an "enlightened" understanding and a "natural" one.

 * mamgeorge 21:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Suffering
Why would a loving God kill 250,000 people in the tsunami in Indonesia? Wrong question. It is structured in the same tautology as "Why do you deny beating your spouse?" Everyone, not just the 250000, dies. Period. No exceptions. OK, then, Why does a loving God allow death? Here the assumptions become more obvious: What is death anyway? To judge it as useless assumes that its existence is understood fully as bad. What unprovable claim permits that? Here is a better question: Why does God let us live? What are we alive FOR? This question allows the understanding that we do not necessarily deserve our destiny, and that we may not fully have all the facts of our identity answerable.

The core question is (as always) why does a loving God permit suffering if He is able to prevent it. Or, why does reaching His plan for us require difficult steps of development? I can no more answer this any better than anyone else. But I can point out two things:

 * 1) The logic of the questions assumes our capacity to embrace it. Actually, this is an insurmountable barrier, one that is consistently avoided by disciples of rationality. Assuming God has an answer we can understand is, well, an assumption!
 * 2) The question rarely reflects a genuine desire to understand. Instead, it really seems to have the purpose of questioning why we can not control our own destiny. With that question is the assumption we deserve to do so, or that we could effectively do so.

mamgeorge 15:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Judgmental
Beliefs come from our external shaping and internal tendencies. the history of human purity proves both must be judged. The concept that judgment is inappropriate is a culturally perpetuated myth apparently intended to defend a pluralistic world view. As shown above, such pluralism has no effect on reducing the damage to humanity. The idea that judgment is bad is often associated to a corrupt interpretation of the Christian scripture "Judge not..." (Matt 7:1).

Of course, this fallacy is exposed simply by reading the next few verses. In Matt 7:6 of the same chapter we see that Matt 7:1 identifies a different use of the word. This "dual use" is clearly identified in John 7:24. It includes two approaches;

 * 1) Judgment used for control. This includes unfair comparisons, based on appearances, or personal standards. Matt 7:1, et. al. This is the "wrong judgment" of John 7:24.

 * 2) Judgment used for evaluation. This includes measured comparisons, based on intent, or Godly standards. Matt 7:6, et. al. This is the "right judgment" of John 7:24.

Possibly this sloppy exegesis comes from the attempt to minimize moral reaction by the use of the phrase as an invective, thus amounting to an ad hominem attack.

 * mamgeorge 21:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

ILO (Inherit Limitation of Observation)
Science changes unreliably. Anyone who points to science (or philosophy, freethought, newage, humanism, etc.) without recognizing its frailities is avoiding their own ignorance. We know so little about the universe. Consider just a few discoveries in the last 5-40 years:

 * physics Hadrons no longer describe Elementary particles
 * troposphere Upper-atmospheric lightning (jets, sprites, & elves) and SuperLightning (TLEs)
 * botany Taxonomy fundamental revisions every 50 years since Conrad Gessner;
 * astronomy Pluto declassified as a planet ; the discovery of
 * astronomy Dark energy considered 95% of the universe, yet unobserved
 * astronomy Big Bang theory replacing the Steady State cosmogony replacing aether
 * biology Dinosaur Extinction theories
 * biology 'Soft Tissue' discoveries  in Paleontology.

And so on, and so on, to the next discovery. These are not simply advances; or "paradigm shifts", they are "rewrites" to the perception of scientific reality. In 50 years, we will laugh at our current understanding of the sciences. Science simply changes. 6000 years of science has only proven there is no consistent interpretation of observations; and no consensus of knowledge that consistently answers mans deepest questions.

Does not discovery reveal the transient nature of understanding? Is not every carefully documented observation ultimately open to a redefinition that under girds the assumptions such details are dependent upon? If so, observational truth appears as elusive as philosophical consensus. The use of science by those who reject religion is simply sad: without an external source of truth, we see such a community bound to reinvent itself in perpetual futility.

The book "Contact" (by Carl Sagan) exposes this quandary with appropriate vulnerability. In it, he portrays a scientist forced to describe something wonderful without evidence. He even rejects a secular conclusion (i.e. numinous ; ultimately a secular cause for religion). It was more than clever; it was honest.

 * mamgeorge 17:40, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Scripture
So what is a reliable source of truth? The Bible is reliably unique. Why? Because:

 * a) it is historically reliable:
 * b) it is bibliographically reliable:
 * c) it is scientifically reliable:
 * d) it is prophetically reliable:

a) it is historically reliable: from Genesis to Revelation, the Bible has historical evidences to support its claim of authority. This includes Universal Flood Traditions, (The Flood of Noah is affirmed by the Nuwa of China, Manu of India, Nu of Egypt, Deucalion of Greece, Nota of the Aztecs, etc.); Confirming extra biblical tablets: Armana Tablets, Merneptah Stele, Mesha Tablet, Taylor Prism, Cyrus Cylinder, many many more; Confirming extra biblical sites: Tyre, Sidon, Hazor, Megiddo, and hundreds more; Confirming extra biblical people: Shalmaneser, TiglathPileser, Sargon, MardukApalIddina, Sennacherib, Esarhaddon, Ashurbanipal, and many more; Confirming extra biblical reports: Josephus, Tacitus, Serapion, Phlegon, Thallus, and more.

b) it is bibliographically reliable: The Bible was preserved in such a way as to allow accurate copies. the careful manner of the writing of the OT Masoretic text was compared with the much older writing of the Dead Sea Scrolls to show it has remained basically the same. The abundance of copies of the NT Majority text (25000) permitted the reliable transmission of the words of Christ.

c) it is scientifically reliable: Although the Bible is not a science book, and although science continually changes, there are observations that it makes that align with accepted observations. Specifically, the claims of the Bible regarding speciation (Gen 1:11, 21-22, 24, 26 "kinds"), world oceans (Gen 1:9), earth roundness (Isa 40:22), gravity (Job 26:7), sea springs (Gen 7:11), air currents	(Ecc 1:6), and many others.

d) it is prophetically reliable: Specifically, prophecies regarding Edom & Petra, Tyre & Sidon, the prophecies of Christ in the OT, and many more, all written in the OT, faithfully fulfilled in the NT.

Creationism
A) How can one determine if an individual is meaningfully qualified to discuss Creation/Evolution?

 * I propose that the person should have, as a minimum, the following qualifications:

 * 1) historical perspective: awareness of changes in observations in any branch of science (at least biology, geology, astronomy) in 50 year increments since the enlightenment (1500s)

 * 2) awareness of classification details: at least a familiarity with the taxonomy of animals; specifically the phyla, class, order, genus of 50 or so animals
 * 3) awareness of classification systems: must be able to distinguish between shape based and relation based taxonomies

 * 4) awareness of fossil record: at least a familiarity with 10 divergent animal types

B) Is the Creationism article NPOV?

 * It appears not. Structurally the artical does not match the Evolution article. It projects the variation of views, without any real discussion of evidences. Compare the approach to the Evolution article; could not the evolution article be similarly dissected? The Creationism article appears to be minimized by its emphasis on Sociology, rather than a description of evidences.

C) May I suggest the following outline?

 * Mathematics Physics Chemistry Troposphere Meteorology Geography Oceanography Geology Botany Taxonomy Astronomy Biology Physiology

 * mamgeorge 19:59, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Classification Links
Physics, Troposphere, Botany, Astronomy, Biology (esp. Taxonomy). GKT from George University

 * 1 Mathematics Physics Chemistry
 * 2 Troposphere Meteorology Geography Oceanography Geology
 * 3 Botany Taxonomy
 * 4 Astronomy
 * 5 Biology Physiology
 * a Sociology Philosophy Language (Chinese) Politics Law Economics
 * b Arts Painting Drawing Music (Piano, Chopin, Jazz) Literature Dance
 * c Technology Agriculture Medicine Engineering (Computers) Military
 * d History World History Ancient World History Current

Contribution Summary

 * note: some articles included for completeness; asterisks represent special involvement

Astronomy

 * List of constellations, List of constellations by area, Serpens

Ancient

 * Ancient literature, Sacred Books of the East, Amarna Letters
 * Hebrew: Book of Proverbs
 * Egypt: Amenemhat Instructions, Amenemopet Instructions, Amenope Onomastica, Ani Papyrus, Tchaenhotep
 * India: Rigveda, Smriti, Darsana
 * Chinese: (see below)
 * Americas: Popol Vuh

Chinese Authors

 * Shangdi related: 馬融 Mo Zi*, 馬融 Ma Rong, 鄭玄 Zheng Xuan
 * Pangu related: 徐整 Xu Zheng, 葛洪 Ge Hong*, 徐整, Ouyang Xun
 * Nüwa related: 列圄寇 Lie Yukou, 屈原 Qu Yuan*, 劉安 Liu An, 司馬遷 Sima Qian*,
 * 許慎 Xu Shen, 李榮 Li Rong, 盧同 Lu Tong, 司馬貞 Sima Zhen, 李昉 Li Fang
 * Others: 左丘明 Zuo Qiuming, 劉向 Liu Xiang*, 郭璞 Guo Pu, 李東陽 Li Dongyang

Chinese Texts

 * 東周: 春秋時代:五經 Wujing: 書經 Shujing, 詩經 Shijing, 禮記 Liji, 春秋 Chunqiu, 易經 Yijing, 樂經 Yuejing
 * 東周: 春秋時代:四書 Sishu: 大學 Daxue, 中庸 Zhongyong, 論語 Lunyu*, 孟子 Mengzi*

 * 東周: 戰國時代: 列子 Liezi, 楚辭 Chuci, 史記 Shiji, 太一生水 Taiyi Shengshui, 國語 Guoyu, 左傳 Zuozhuan, 藝文類聚 Yiwen Leiju, 孝經 Xiaojing
 * 漢朝: 山海經 Shanhaijing, 淮南子 Huainanzi, 水經注 Shui Jing Zhu
 * 唐朝: 鴻臚井 Honglujing Stele
 * 宋朝: 宋四大書 Songsi Dashu, 太平御覽 Taiping Yulan, 冊府元龜 Cefu Yuangui, 四庫全書 Siku Quanshu, 風俗通義 Fengsu Tongyi
 * 明朝: 大明會典 Da Ming Huidian

Chinese History

 * 夏朝 Xia Dynasty, 商朝 Shang Dynasty, 周朝 Zhou Dynasty, 周文王 King Wen of Zhou, 宋國 Song (state)

Chinese Mythology

 * Chinese mythology*, Talk:Chinese mythology*
 * 上帝 Shangdi*, Talk: Shang Ti*, 盤古 Pangu*, Talk:Pangu*
 * 元始天尊 Yuanshi Tianzun*, 玉皇 Yu Huang*

 * Deluge, Talk:Deluge (mythology)*
 * 女媧 Nüwa*, Talk:Nüwa*

Others

 * Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style, Scuppers*, Riddle of the Sphinx

title: User:Mamgeorge


text:
Philotas

Philotas (Φιλώτας; 365 BC – October 330 BC) was the eldest son of Parmenion, one of Alexander the Great's most experienced and talented generals. He rose to command the Companion Cavalry, but was accused of conspiring against Alexander and executed.

Biography
When Alexander became king of Macedonia (336 BC) with Parmenion's support, he and his relations were rewarded with offices and commissions. Philotas was promoted, from a commander of a cavalry squadron to commander of the Companions, the corps of Macedonian cavalry that also provided bodyguards and attendants to the King. In battle, Alexander rode with and led this cavalry corps; they were, literally, his "companions," hence the name. Philotas, though a highly capable officer, was widely perceived as arrogant and pompous; he was never able to master the role of courtier, was often a center of conflict, and often earned the King's disfavour. He would serve alongside Alexander in numerous battles, fighting at the Battle of the Granicus, the Siege of Miletus, and the Siege of Tyre.

In the latter part of 330 BC, while with Alexander in the area of today's Afghanistan during the conquest of the Achaemenid Empire, Philotas was accused of conspiring against Alexander, due to being aware of Dimnus's plot and not informing Alexander. He had been subject to similar reports previously, though the case against him in 330 BC was more serious; his accusers included the commander Coenus, who was married to Philotas' sister. Philotas was tried and convicted, tortured to reveal the extent of the conspiracy, implicating his father, then stoned or speared to death with other convicted plotters. The execution of Philotas necessitated the removal of Parmenion, who, while innocent of any plotting, was judged unreliable once his son and heir had been put to death. Alexander sent assassins to kill Parmenion before the news of his son's execution reached him. Following his execution, command of the Companions was split between two officers.

In literature and film
The story of Philotas was dramatized in 1604 by the English poet and playwright Samuel Daniel. A performance of the eponymously named play earned Daniel the unwelcome scrutiny of the Privy Council, because of a perceived resemblance between the play's protagonist and Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, executed for rebellion and treason in 1601. In 1731 a second play about his life Philotas was written by Philip Frowde and performed in London.

In the film Alexander (2004), Philotas is played by Joseph Morgan; in the 1961 television version of Terence Rattigan's play Adventure Story, Philotas is played by Lyndon Brook; and in the film Alexander the Great (1956), Philotas is played by Rubén Rojo.

Philotas by Gotthold Ephraim Lessing
The German dramatist and critic Gotthold Ephraim Lessing also adapted the story; his play Philotas dates to 1759. It was written during the Enlightenment and when Prussia was a major player in Germany.

The drama was also written during the Seven Years' War (1756–1763) between Prussia and Hannover, against France, Austria, Switzerland, and Spain for control over regions such as Silesia and Saxony.

The play tells the story of prince-commander Philotas, a young and impulsive heir, who is made prisoner during his first battle. While captive, Philotas is visited by King Arideus, a former friend of his father. While in warm dialogue with Philotas, Arideus tells him that his own son has also been made captive by the other side, and that both kings are planning an exchange of prisoners.

Soon afterwards, Philotas is seen by Parmenio, his father's messenger, who asks him about when the exchange of prisoners will take place. Philotas pleas with Parmenio for more time, and requests an extra day prior to the exchange.

Philotas then begins a heavy monologue, filled with moral and ethical questions, about whether remaining alive would better serve his father's interests, especially considering that he is in possession of Arideus' son.

Philotas concludes that the most appropriate thing to do is to kill himself, to preserve his father's dominion over the lands in dispute. He then manages to obtain a sword from Arideus, claiming it would 'fit him better' before meeting the squadron, something Arideus has asked him to do.

The legitimacy of Philotas' suicide is a subject of discussion in modern theatre and ethics education. A common question is whether Philotas' suicide was necessary, and whether Lessing desired to praise, or else criticise, the strong moral codes that dominated Prussia during the 18th century, which according to many scholars were key to the survival of the Prussian empire.

Among the values exalted by the Prussian morale were: prudence, modesty, hard work, honesty, fairness, courage, strictness with oneself, order, duty, punctuality, integrity, austerity, loyalty, and subordination to power.

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

title: Philotas


text:
User:BorgHunter

BorgHunter (contribs | edit count | deletions | blocks | protections): Registered member since February 2005; administrator since December 2005.

Awards
I don't have enough to merit a subpage. :(

I'm Jokermage and I approve this Wikipedian! Paid for by the Jokermage for Chief Librarian Campaign.  Minor edits are often-overlooked, but essential, contributions to the Wikipedia. The Minor Barnstar is awarded for making minor edits of the utmost quality. —Zero 21:47, 22 February 2006 (UTC) I, Lcarsdata, award you this telegraph pole for being kind and giving good advice.Lcarsdata Talk 15:28, 30 April 2006 (UTC) With the authority bestowed on me by the Federation Council I hereby award you the Starfleet barnstar for the creation and recreation of rank insignias for the Starfleet ranks and insignia article. -- Cat out 23:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC) The Surreal Barnstar

You get a Barnstar too. Best edit summary I've read in months. IronGargoyle (talk) 16:49, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

(In reference to )

Other projects

 * I have a few images on the Wikimedia Commons.
 * Meta-wiki rarely, once upon a time.
 * Simple English Wikipedia A few edits there, not much.

Milestones

 * 1st "unofficial" edit:
 * 1st official edit:
 * 100th edit:
 * 500th edit:
 * 1000th edit:
 * 2000th edit:
 * 3000th edit:

Userspace pages

 * User:BorgHunter/Voting stats
 * User:BorgHunter/W, welcome template
 * User:BorgHunter/List of non-instrumental songs with titles that do not appear in the lyrics

title: User:BorgHunter


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Spanish verbs

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was - should be moved to Wiktionary and then probably redirected to Spanish verbs. - SimonP 22:26, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

List of Spanish verbs

 * Isn't this more of a wiktionary thing? --W(t) 00:12, 2005 May 28 (UTC)
 * Since none of the entries on the list will get an article, I'd say yes. Transwiki to wiktionary. Mgm|(talk) 00:21, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to wiktionary then delete. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:28, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article is a good supplement to the very encyclopedic Spanish verbs article.  But that article had simply gotten so big that it was preferable not to include a long list.  If the article isn't kept, then much of its content will have to be put back into the main article.  This is a clear case where a spin-off article is a good thing.  Blackcats 19:03, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
 * A simple dictionary. Unencyclopaedic.  There's an easily editable dictionary, of Spanish and all other languages, over there, with active contributors adding Spanish verbs, Italian verbs, and many others. Blackcats is wrong that this content will "have to be put back".  Just do your dictionary work in the dictionary and refer readers there.  That's what it's there for. Delete. Uncle G 20:27, 2005 May 28 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Wiktionary. Gonna list every verb in Spanish?  RickK 22:30, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki, no question.Yuber(talk) 01:08, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Extreme transwiki. Radiant_* 10:41, May 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge back into original article. However, I could be talked into voting to keep it if it focused upon irregular verbs, or if it tied to some sort of proficiency test, or if it were limited to verbs found the Swadesh list. If merged back, it should be pared down to only the most important verbs. --Arcadian 22:17, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki then delete. JamesBurns 11:20, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki. I could live with a more compact list in the article showing some "regular irregulars" (vowel-alternating) and other common irregular patterns. --Pablo D. Flores 01:45, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This once survived a Vfd.  I never liked it, so what I did was to move it to Spanish verbs and greatly expand it, adding a lot of info about how Spanish verbs work.  That way, this silly list didn't have its own article, but was just tagged onto the end of the good one, where I could keep it under control.  However, I made the Spanish verbs article too big, and so someone split the list out again!  We're back to where we were: with a list that nobody likes very much.  I say let's just delete it.  If we ever decide to put some sort of list of common verbs in the Spanish verbs article, this list is preserved in the history, so we can just pull it out at any time.  — Chameleon 23:38, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * NO! don't get rid of it just attach it on to something else!!!!!!!! I'd rather not delete it...at least not entirely,  at least just tack it back on to the Spanish verbs article.  I mean, since this is a very incomplete list of Spanish verbs... and it is impractical for an extensive list to be placed here, I suggest that it should at least be considered that the article is not deleted, but have a section on its article on Spanish verbs. Dbraceyrules 19:55, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I have a compramise. I have moved it to Wiktionary and the link on Spanish verbs can be changed to this link.  Also have a transfer where List of Spanish verbs is K-unit 01:47, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Asparagus (disambiguation)

Asparagus is a type of vegetable.

Asparagus may also refer to:

 * Asparagus (genus), the name of a genus of plants
 * Asparagus (color), a brownish shade of green that resembles the plant asparagus
 * Asparagus (film), a 1979 American experimental animated short film

title: Asparagus (disambiguation)


text: Template:Infobox radar

title: Template:Infobox radar


text:
Hushpuppy

A hush puppy (or hushpuppy) is a small, savory, deep-fried round ball made from cornmeal-based batter. Hushpuppies are frequently served as a side dish with seafood and other deep-fried foods.

History
The use of ground maize (corn) in cooking originated with Native Americans, who first cultivated the crop. Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole cooking introduced one of its main staples into Southern cuisine: corn, either ground into meal or limed with an alkaline salt to make hominy, in a Native American technology known as nixtamalization. Cornbread was popular during the American Civil War because it was inexpensive and could be made in many different shapes and sizes. It could be fashioned into high-rising, fluffy loaves or simply fried for a quick meal."To a far greater degree than anyone realizes, several of the most important food dishes that the Southeastern Indians live on today is the 'soul food' eaten by both black and white Southerners. ... Indian boiled cornbread is present in Southern cuisine as 'corn meal dumplings', ... and as 'hush puppies'..."

Some have assigned influence to the founding ceremony of the convent of Ursuline nuns who settled in New Orleans after leaving France, where they served croquettes de maïs (corn croquettes).

Hushpuppies are strongly associated with the Southern United States. A southern hushpuppy championship is held annually in Lufkin, Texas, and they are also available throughout the United States at restaurants serving deep-fried seafood.

Name
The first recorded use of the word "hush-puppy" dates to 1899. The name has no verified origin. Etymology is attributed to a variety of sources. Although there are many possible origins for the dish, it is found to be akin to "red-horse bread", named after the red horse fish of the South Carolina rivers. Associated with former slave chef Romeo Govan, "red horse bread" is said to have been similar in consistency and ingredients. "Red horse bread" of South Carolina then became "hushpuppies" in Georgia around 1927, then gained national traction around 1943 in Florida.

Characteristics and preparation
Typical hushpuppy ingredients include cornmeal, wheat flour, eggs, salt, baking soda, milk or buttermilk, and water, and may include onion, spring onion (scallion), garlic, whole kernel corn, and peppers. Sometimes pancake batter is used. The batter is mixed well, adjusting ingredients until thick, and dropped a spoonful at a time into hot oil. Many older recipes call for the batter to be cooked in the same oil as the fish it accompanies. The small corn dumplings are fried until crispy golden brown, and cooled. Hushpuppies are often served with seafood or barbecued foods. They are commonly made at home or served in restaurants advertising home-style food.

Caribbean

In Jamaica, such fried bread dumplings are known as "festivals", and are made from a flour and cornmeal dough, with added salt and sugar, which is then formed into hot-dog roll shapes and deep-fried. They are sweeter than hushpuppies, which often contain onion or garlic. They are served with jerked meats such as pork or chicken. Mostly, it is served with fried or escoveitch (see also escabeche and ceviche) fish.

In Puerto Rico, hushpuppies are made in the shape of a short sausage and are called "sorullos" or the diminutive "sorullitos", for smaller sizes. Sugar is added to the cornmeal and can be stuffed with cheddar cheese or cream cheese with guava. They are served with coffee, guava dipping sauce, or fry sauce.

title: Hushpuppy


text:
Commodity checkoff program

In the United States, a commodity checkoff program promotes and provides research and information for a particular agricultural commodity without reference to specific producers or brands. It collects funds through a checkoff mechanism that is sometimes called checkoff dollars, from producers of a particular agricultural commodity and uses these funds to promote and do research on that particular commodity. As stated earlier the organizations must promote their commodity in a generic way without reference to a particular producer. Checkoff programs attempt to improve the market position of the covered commodity by expanding markets, increasing demand, and developing new uses and markets. Checkoff programs amount to $750 million per year.

The United States Department of Agriculture is responsible for overseeing the formation of checkoff organizations under the authority of the Commodity, Promotion, Research and Information Act of 1996.

These organizations are responsible for familiar American advertising campaigns, including "Milk Does a Body Good," the Got Milk? milk moustache series, "Pork. The Other White Meat", "The Incredible, Edible Egg", and "Beef: It's What's for Dinner."

Many of these programs are authorized by the Commodity Promotion, Research and Information Act of 1996.

United States policy
The Sheep Promotion, Research, and Information Act of 1994 authorized the creation of the American Lamb Board as a commodity checkoff program.

Because individual producers of nearly homogeneous agricultural commodities cannot easily convince consumers to choose one egg or orange or a single cut of beef over another, they often have joined together in commodity promotion programs to use generic advertising in an effort to expand total demand for the commodity with the objective of helping their own sales as well. Activities are intended to expand both domestic and export demand; examples include advertising, nutrition education, research to improve product quality and appeal, market research studies, and technical assistance. These activities are often self-funded through assessments on marketing – hence, the name commodity check-off programs.

This article provides a state-by-state application of the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service final rule, Soybean Promotion, Research, and Consumer Information; Beef Promotion and Research; Amendments to Allow Redirection of State Assessments to the National Program; Technical Amendments.

Controversies
Congress has permitted producer groups to make checkoffs mandatory, and this aspect has generated legal challenges by some producers, who contend they must pay taxes for activities they would not underwrite voluntarily. The U.S. Supreme Court [in United States v. United Foods, Inc., 533 U.S. 405, 412 (2001)] ruled that the mushroom check-off violated the Constitutional free speech provisions (First Amendment), creating uncertainty about the future of other check-offs. Since then, separate lower federal courts have ruled that various check-offs also are unconstitutional. However, on May 23, 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that the beef check-off does not violate the First Amendment. In its decision, Johanns v. Livestock Marketing Association and Nebraska Cattlemen v. Livestock Marketing Association (Nos. 03-1164 and 03-1165), a majority of the Court agreed with check-off defenders that the programs are in fact "government speech" (an issue that was not considered in the mushroom decision)."'Compelled funding of government speech does not alone raise First Amendment concerns,'...'Citizens may challenge compelled support of private speech, but have no First Amendment right not to fund government speech.'" A Montana federal court ruled in June 2017 that the operation of the beef checkoff there was unconstitutional.

In 2008, the American Egg Board attempted to funnel $3 million to oppose a ballot measure in California prohibiting the extreme confinement of farm animals. They were stopped by an injunction issued by a federal court. In 2013, the Egg Board attempted to get government regulators and retailers to take action to halt sales of egg-free vegan "Just Mayo" brand products. In this scandal, an Egg Board executive was caught discussing "putting a hit on" Hampton Creek co-founder Josh Tetrick.

Despite $4 million spent to support the retention of the checkoff, a referendum held in 2000 among hog farmers voted to eliminate the checkoff. Ann Veneman, the Secretary of Agriculture, voided the results.

The Senate in 2017 was considering changes to the enabling legislation.

Legal challenge
The constitutionality of checkoffs was challenged in federal court, and in July 2021 the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a 2020 grant of summary judgment dismissing the challenging suit. "'The court found that threat of decertification of the [qualified state beef councils] upon the Secretary’s disapproval of their use of funds worked to effectively control the third-party speech, thus rendering it government speech immune to First Amendment review.'"

Major checkoff organizations

 * Almond Board of California
 * American Egg Board
 * American Lamb Board
 * Cattlemen's Beef Board
 * Cattlemen's Beef Promotion and Research Board
 * Christmas Tree Promotion Board
 * Concrete Masonry Products Board
 * Cotton Board
 * National Dairy Promotion and Research Board
 * Dairy Management Inc.
 * Mushroom Council
 * National Honey Board
 * National Mango Board
 * United Sorghum Checkoff Program
 * National Watermelon Promotion Board
 * National Peanut Board
 * National Pork Board
 * National Processed Raspberry Council
 * Paper and Packaging Board
 * Popcorn Board
 * Propane Education and Research Council
 * U.S. Highbush Blueberry Council
 * United Soybean Board
 * United States Potato Board

title: Commodity checkoff program


text:
M8 Greyhound

The M8 light armored car is a 6×6 armored car produced by the Ford Motor Company during World War II. It was used from 1943 by United States and British forces in Europe and the Pacific until the end of the war. The vehicle was widely exported and still remained in service with some countries.

In British service, the M8 was known as the "Greyhound", a service name seldom, if ever, used by the US. The British Army found it too lightly armored, particularly the hull floor, which anti-tank mines could easily penetrate (the crews' solution was lining the floor of the crew compartment with sandbags). Nevertheless, it was produced in large numbers. The M8 Greyhound's excellent road mobility made it a great supportive element in the advancing American and British armored columns. It was marginal cross country, especially in mud.

Development and production history
In July 1941, the U.S. Army Ordnance Department initiated the development of a new fast tank destroyer to replace the M6 37 mm gun motor carriage, which was essentially a ¾-ton truck with a 37 mm gun installed in the rear bed. The requirement was for a 6×4 wheeled vehicle armed with a 37 mm gun, a coaxial machine gun mounted in a turret, and a machine gun in the front hull. Its glacis armor was supposed to withstand fire from a .50 in machine gun and side armor from a .30 in machine gun. Prototypes were submitted by Studebaker (designated T21), Ford (T22) and Chrysler (T23), all of them quite similar in design and appearance.

In April 1942, the T22 was selected, despite complaints about deficiencies, due to the need for vehicles. By then, it was clear that the 37 mm gun would not be effective against the front armor of German tanks; so, the new armored car, now designated the M8, took on a reconnaissance role instead. Contract issues and minor design improvements delayed serial production until March 1943. Production ended in June 1945. A total of 8,523 M8 and 3,791 M20 armored cars were built, The M8s and M20s were manufactured at Ford Motor Company plants in Chicago, Illinois, and Saint Paul, Minnesota; the St Paul plant built 6,397 M8s to Chicago's 2,126; the 3,791 M20s were produced at the Chicago plant only.

In May 1942, having viewed the prototype, the British Tank Mission turned down the offer to acquire the M8 through lend-lease. It was named "Greyhound" in keeping with other U.S. armored cars already ordered by the British, such as the (cancelled) T18 Boarhound, the T17 Deerhound, the T17E1 Staghound and the (also cancelled) M38 Wolfhound.

Mission and operational performance

The cavalry reconnaissance troops (equivalent to companies) assigned to infantry divisions and squadrons (equivalent to battalions) assigned to armored divisions or independent, and used at the direction of a division or corps commander, served as advance "eyes and ears," and this required speed and agility. When on the march, the cavalry was to make contact with enemy forces at the earliest practical moment and maintain it thereafter. The reconnaissance troops identified hostile units and reported their strength, composition, disposition and movement. During withdrawals, the cavalry often served as a screening force for the main units.

The M8 was not designed for offensive combat, and its firepower was adequate only against similar lightly armored enemy vehicles and infantry. With only the unarmored hull pan to serve as floor armor, the M8 was particularly vulnerable to mines.

The vehicle's other drawback was limited mobility in muddy or broken terrain or heavily wooded areas. The use of wheels, rather than continuous tracks like a tank, gave it a higher ground pressure which hampered its off-road performance in such terrain. Armored cavalry units preferred using the ¼-ton reconnaissance car (Willys MB "jeep") in these environments. A large turning radius, limited wheel travel, and open differentials also limited its cross-country mobility and made the M8 susceptible to immobilization off-road in off-camber terrain and defiles. This led operators to using the vehicle mostly on existing roads and paths, where it became vulnerable to ambush. Conversely, the performance of the M8 on hard surfaces was exceptional, with the vehicle having a long range and able to consistently maintain its top speed of 55 mph. Conversely, as a wheeled vehicle, the M8 was generally more reliable than tracked vehicles of similar size, requiring far less maintenance and logistical support.

Description

The M8's armor was thin, but it provided protection for the crew from small-arms fire and shrapnel, enough so that the vehicle could carry out its main mission of reconnaissance. The frontal, sloped hull armor varied in thickness from 0.5 to 0.75 in The side and rear hull armor, also sloped but slightly less so than the front, was 0.375 in thick. The top armor was 0.25 in thick, as was the floor. The turret was comparatively better protected than the hull, being 0.75 in thick all around, with an 0.25 in partial roof. The cast, rounded gun shield was uniformly 1 in thick.

The M8 was fitted with a 37 mm M6 gun (aimed by an M70D telescopic sight) and a coaxially mounted .30 in Browning machine gun in a one-piece, cast mantlet, mounted in an open-topped, welded turret. The M8 was initially fitted without any kind of anti-aircraft defense; as a stopgap solution a .50 caliber Browning M2HB machine gun on a ring mount was retrofitted to nearly all vehicles already in service. A purpose-designed pintle was mounted on all late-production vehicles, but it saw comparatively little action due to a troubled development process.

The crew of four comprised a commander (who doubled as the loader), gunner, driver, and radio operator (who could also act as a driver). The driver and radio operator were seated in the forward section of the hull, while the commander and gunner sat in the turret, with the commander seated on the right, and the gunner on the left,

The vehicle carried 80 37 mm rounds (16 in the turret and 64 in an ammunition rack in the right sponson) when fitted with a single radio. Vehicles with a second radio installed only carried 16 main gun rounds. Some units solved this problem by cutting up the removed main ammunition rack and stowing 18 rounds in each sponson, under the radios. This raised the number of main gun rounds able to be carried to 52. Another modification (the most common one) involved fabricating (again from the discarded main ammunition rack) a 43-round bin to be placed behind the driver's seat, and a 20-round bin attached to the framing of the turret basket. This raised the ammunition capacity up to 79 rounds. Machine gun ammunition consisted of 1,500 .30 caliber rounds and 400 .50 caliber rounds. In addition, the vehicle carried a mix of six Mk 2 fragmentation grenades, 6 MK 3 offensive grenades, four smoke grenades, and four M1 carbines for the crew, and six M1 anti-tank mines.

The M8 was powered by a Hercules Model JXD in-line six-cylinder 320 cubic-inch gasoline engine giving it a top speed of 55 mph on-road, and 32 mph off-road. With a 54 USgal fuel tank, it could manage a road range of 200 – The Hercules JXD ran more quietly than other engines of comparable power, which helped the M8 maintain an element of surprise and reduce the chance of being heard by the enemy. Because of this, the M8 armored cars in Patton's Third Army were known as "Patton's ghosts", since they were difficult to detect.

Each M8 armored car was equipped with a long-range radio set to communicate with higher headquarters. A short-range radio set was used to communicate within the unit, or with headquarters. The M8 weighed 16400 lb fully loaded with equipment and crew, and was capable of 100 - 250 mi cross country or 200 - 400 mi on highways without refueling. On normal roads, it was capable of a sustained speed of 55 mph. Early production models were fitted with the SCR-193 transmitter and SCR-312 Receiver due to lack of SCR-508 radio sets.

World War II
The M8 light armored car entered combat service with the Allies in the 1943 invasion of Sicily. It was purpose designed to serve as the primary basic command and communication combat vehicle of the U.S. Cavalry Reconnaissance troops. It was subsequently used by the US Army in Italy, Northwest Europe and the Pacific. In the latter theater, it was used mostly on Okinawa and the Philippines, and was even employed in its original tank destroyer role, as most Japanese tanks had armor that was vulnerable to its 37 mm gun. Over 1,000 were supplied via Lend-Lease to US allies; the United Kingdom, Free France and Brazil.

In the European Theater, the M8 received "varied acceptance." Its on-road performance was generally good, and it was armed and armored well enough for reconnaissance missions. On the other hand, the turning radius was considered too wide, and the engine was considered underpowered, routinely experiencing problems such as overheating from being run at high output continuously and/or having its ventilation louvers obstructed by personal equipment stored on the rear of the vehicle. Large numbers were regularly under repair, gaining the vehicle a reputation of being unreliable. Off-road mobility, especially on soft ground like mud or snow, was poor; in the mountainous terrain of Italy and in the Northwest European winter, the M8 was more or less restricted to roads, which greatly reduced its value as a reconnaissance vehicle. It was also very vulnerable to landmines. In February 1944, an add-on armor kit was designed to provide an extra quarter-inch of belly armor to reduce landmine vulnerability. Some crews also placed sandbags on the floor to make up for the thin belly armor. Another problem was that commanders often used their reconnaissance squadrons for fire support missions, for which the thinly-armored M8 was ill-suited. When it encountered German armored reconnaissance units, the M8 could easily penetrate their armor with its 37 mm gun. Conversely, its own thin armor was vulnerable to the 20 mm autocannons that German scout cars were equipped with.

Due to mobility problems with the M8, namely with regards to its suspension, the US Army's Special Armored Vehicle Board recommended the development of a new six-wheeled armored car which matched the M8's dimensions and size but was equipped with an articulated, independently sprung suspension system. Two prototypes, the Studebaker-developed T27 Armored Car and the T28 designed by Chevrolet were trialed by the US and also reviewed by the British Armed Forces. Although the T28 was standardized as the M28 and marked for production by Ford, the new armored car program was shelved and then permanently cancelled due to the end of the war, as impetus and funding for new military development projects had plummeted. The fleet of M8 and M20 armored cars already available was then considered more than adequate for the postwar US Army, which was demobilizing thousands of personnel and already had large stockpiles of equipment surplus to its requirements.

Post-war
After the war, many of the US Army's M8 and M20 armored cars were marked off as surplus and donated or sold to various countries, especially under the Foreign Military Assistance Program (MAP). Most of the remaining vehicles remained in service with the United States Constabulary in various Western European nations. M8s were also used by American occupation forces in Korea, which later donated them to the fledgling Republic of Korea Army's first armored cavalry regiment.

Most M8s and M20s remaining in US service had been allocated to one of five reorganized armored cavalry regiments by the early 1950s. The others were utilized by the Military Police Corps, which deployed them during the Korean War for guarding static installations and escorting prisoners. A small number of M20s were modified by US or South Korean forces as assault vehicles equipped with ring-mounted flamethrowers during that conflict. All the US Army M8s and M20s were retired from active duty due to age and increasing obsolescence shortly after the Korean War. The majority of decommissioned vehicles were then shipped abroad as aid to various armies, especially the French Far East Expeditionary Corps, save for a small number which were retained by Army National Guard units. When the Army National Guard retired its own armored cars a few years later, an undisclosed number were purchased by domestic police departments and modified for riot control purposes.

France was the largest postwar operator of the M8/M20 series after the United States, having received hundreds of the vehicles as American aid between 1945 and 1954. During the First Indochina War, many second-hand examples were shipped directly from the US to French Indochina, where they were deployed for rural patrols and road reconnaissance. These remained in service in Indochina until the end of the war, when they were donated to the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN). The French Foreign Legion also utilized the M8 during the Algerian War, where it was superseded first by the Panhard EBR and subsequently by the Panhard AML in counter-insurgency operations. The EBR was accepted as a generic replacement for all remaining M8s by the French military in 1956. Between 1956 and 1964 the remaining M8s and M20s were donated to the Mobile Gendarmerie, as well as the armies of several former French colonies.

ARVN M8s and M20s saw considerable action during the Vietnam War; however, by 1962 the US noted the attrition rate of the fleet was becoming high due to age. This resulted in a proposal to fund the design and production of a new purpose-built armored car for the South Vietnamese government: the Cadillac Gage Commando. The Commando series began to replace the M8 and M20 in ARVN service from the mid-1960s onward. A small number of the older armored cars were still held by the ARVN reserves as late as 1975; these were inherited by the People's Army of Vietnam after the war.

Another country which received a substantial number of ex-American M8s following the war was Belgium, which presumably received them as part of a NATO military assistance program. These M8s were adopted primarily by the Belgian Air Component, which issued them to base security units, and the Force Publique in the Belgian Congo. Following Congolese independence several of the Force Publique M8s fell into the hands of Katangese separatists, while others were repurposed for peacekeeping operations by the United Nations Operation in the Congo (ONUC).

The continued proliferation of M8s and M20s during the late 1960s and the 1970s resulted in American and French defense contractors offering several commercial upgrade kits to extend their service life. At least ten countries, Cameroon, Cyprus, Ethiopia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Jamaica, Morocco, Venezuela, and Zaire, modernized their M8/M20 fleets with diesel engines and new transmissions during this time. The National Army of Colombia also invested heavily in upgrading the M8's turret armament, having it replaced by a single .50 caliber machine gun and a launcher for BGM-71 TOW anti-tank missiles. In the late 1960s Brazil developed an upgraded M8 with an articulated suspension, new gearbox, and a new engine built with parts that could be sourced locally. This project spawned a series of indigenous prototypes, including a bizarre four-wheeled variant of the M8 chassis known as the VBB, and another more conventional six-wheeled design known as the VBR-2. The latter subsequently evolved into the first Brazilian-manufactured armored car, the EE-9 Cascavel.

Current operators

 * 🇧🇯 Benin:7
 * 🇧🇫 Burkina Faso: 10; donated by France.
 * 🇨🇲 Cameroon: 8
 * 🇨🇴 Colombia
 * 🇬🇹 Guatemala: Some by the US after World War II
 * 🇲🇬 Madagascar: 8; donated by France
 * 🇵🇾 Paraguay: 12
 * 🇵🇪 Peru: 30

Former operators

 * 🇩🇿 Algeria: Some donated by France
 * 🇦🇹 Austria: 25
 * 🇧🇪 Belgium: Utilized primarily by the Belgian Air Component for base security, as well as the Force Publique
 * 🇧🇷 Brazil: 20
 * 🇰🇭 Cambodia: 5
 * 🇨🇦 Canada
 * 🇨🇱 Chile
 * Democratic Republic of the Congo
 * 🇨🇺 Cuba: 20
 * 🇨🇾 Cyprus: Some donated by Greece and later modernized by an American firm
 * 🇸🇻 El Salvador
 * 🇪🇹 Ethiopia: 15; modernized in the 1960s with diesel engines
 * 🇫🇷 France: 894; 689 M8s and 205 M20s
 * Nazi Germany: Captured during World War II. Some used as dedicated air defense vehicles.
 * West Germany: Donated by US and used by the Bundesgrenzschutz
 * 🇬🇷 Greece: 207
 * 🇭🇹 Haiti
 * 🇮🇩 Indonesia used by the Indonesian Police
 * 🇮🇷 Iran: 100
 * 🇮🇹 Italy: Some donated by the US after World War II
 * Ivory Coast: 15; donated by France
 * 🇯🇵 Japan
 * 🇯🇲 Jamaica
 * Katanga
 * Laos: 15; donated by France
 * 🇲🇷 Mauritania: 15
 * 🇲🇽 Mexico: 50
 * 🇲🇦 Morocco: 55; some purchased from both France and the US
 * 🇳🇱 Netherlands: Later used by Indonesia
 * 🇳🇪 Niger: 8; donated by France
 * 🇳🇴 Norway
 * 🇵🇭 Philippines
 * 🇵🇹 Portugal: Some donated by the US as part of a NATO assistance program
 * Republic of China: Lend leased by the US during World War 2
 * 🇸🇦 Saudi Arabia
 * 🇸🇳 Senegal: 10; donated by France
 * 🇰🇷 South Korea: 200
 * South Vietnam: Estimates range from 75 to 125 in service
 * 🇪🇸 Spain: most notably used in the Sahara, by the Legion
 * 🇸🇪 Sweden: 4 captured from the enemy during UN peacekeeping missions in the Congo 1960–1964, used by Swedish Army elements
 * 🇹🇼 Taiwan
 * 🇹🇭 Thailand: 50
 * 🇹🇬 Togo: 6
 * 🇹🇳 Tunisia: 10
 * 🇹🇷 Turkey
 * 🇬🇧 United Kingdom: 496
 * 🇺🇳 ONUC
 * 🇺🇸 United States: 8,523
 * 🇻🇪 Venezuela: 15
 * Vietnam: Presumably inherited from the defunct ARVN
 * Yugoslavia: 150 to 265, received during the Informbiro

Variants

 * T22 light armored car: first prototype
 * T22E1 light armored car: a 4×4 prototype
 * T22E2 light armored car: prototype eventually standardized as M8
 * M8 light armored car: production variant
 * M8E1: light armored car: a variant with modified suspension. Two vehicles were produced in 1943.
 * M20 armored utility car: also known as the M20 scout car, was a Greyhound with the turret replaced with a low, armored open-topped superstructure and an anti-aircraft ring mount for a .50 cal M2 heavy machine gun. A bazooka was provided for the crew to compensate for its lack of anti-tank weaponry. The M20 was primarily used as a command vehicle and for forward reconnaissance, but many vehicles also served as armored personnel carriers and cargo carriers. It offered high speed and excellent mobility, along with a degree of protection against small arms fire and shrapnel. When employed in the command and control role, the M20 was fitted with additional radio equipment. Originally designated the M10 armored utility car, it was redesignated M20 to avoid confusion with the 3-inch Gun Motor Carriage M10. A total of 3,680 M20s were built by Ford during its two years in production (1943–1944).
 * T69 multiple gun motor carriage: in late 1943, an anti-aircraft variant of the M8 was tested. The vehicle was armed with four .50-inch machine guns in a turret developed by Maxson Corporation. The anti-aircraft board felt that the vehicle was inferior to the similarly armed M16 MGMC half-track and the project was closed.
 * M8 TOW tank destroyer: M8 upgraded by the US company Napco. The main gun was replaced by a .50-inch machine gun and a BGM-71 TOW launcher was installed above the turret. Upgraded vehicles were used by Colombia.
 * M8/M20 H-90: a French upgrade for the M20 showcased by GIAT Industries in 1971, which mounted a 90 mm low-velocity gun adopted from the Panhard AML family of reconnaissance vehicles.
 * CRR Brasileiro: a version developed in 1968 by the Brazilian Army Engineering Institute (IME). The middle axle was removed and a new engine (120 hp Mercedes-Benz OM-321) installed to create the VBB-1 of which one prototype was completed, the vehicle being found to be inferior. The Vbb-1 was, in turn, the basis for the CRR which reverted to a 6×6 configuration and eight vehicles were produced for evaluation. The EE-9 Cascavel was developed from the CRR.
 * M8 (diesel):Hellenic Army armored car: a number of M8 armored cars were upgraded with a Steyr diesel engines in place of the Hercules JXD gasoline engines, this required a rearwards extension of the engine compartments by 11.8 in, as well as some heightening. Also fitted were new radios, indicators and new hooded lights, rear view mirrors, while the M2HB anti-aircraft machineguns were moved to the right front of the turrets, where new pintle sockets were bolted on the partial roofs (the turret rear sockets being retained) and the coaxial 0.30-inch M1919A4s replaced by 7.62×51mm NATO MG3 machineguns. Used for coastal defense and retired from service in the late 1990s.
 * Colombian AM8: a Colombian fusion of turret-mounted World War II anti-air artillery in an M8 with a modern motor. It is a counter-insurgency weapon for use against guerrilla ambushes in the Colombian mountains.

title: M8 Greyhound


text:
User talk:Sco738

Hello,

I saw you restored a national seal to Template:Japan infobox. I still think we should stick to the fact that there is no formal national seal. I put my position at Template talk:Japan infobox. I want to see your motive for the restoration. -- Taku 00:16, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CitySymbol-Kawasaki.png
Thanks for uploading Image:CitySymbol-Kawasaki.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 18:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:TsukubaUniv-logo.png
Thanks for uploading Image:TsukubaUniv-logo.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 20:39, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:07, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:04, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sco738


text:
William Price Craighill

William Price Craighill (July 1, 1833 – January 18, 1909) was born in Charles Town, Virginia (now West Virginia), son of William Nathaniel Craighill & Sarah Elizabeth Brown. He was an author, Union Army officer in the American Civil War, and later served as Chief of Engineers.

Army Corps of Engineers
A classmate of Philip Sheridan, John Bell Hood, and James B. McPherson, Craighill ranked second in the United States Military Academy class of 1853 and was commissioned in the United States Army Corps of Engineers. After working on several Atlantic coast forts including Fort Delaware, he taught engineering at the Military Academy from 1859 to 1862.

Civil War
As a Virginian who stood for the Union Army, Craighill was division and department engineer during the American Civil War and worked on the defenses of Pittsburgh, Baltimore, San Francisco, and New York City.

Craighill wrote the 1862 Army Officer's Pocket Companion: A Manual for Staff Officers in the Field, one of the first Army field manuals. He also translated Antoine-Henri Jomini's the Art of War from French, with George H. Mendell in 1862.

Post war
After the Civil War, Craighill superintended construction of defenses at Baltimore Harbor and Hampton Roads. He headed the Engineer Office in Baltimore from 1870 to 1895, overseeing river and harbor work in Maryland and parts of Virginia and North Carolina. When the Corps began to build locks and dams on the Kanawha River in West Virginia in 1875, Craighill assumed charge there as well. He completed the first of the moveable wicket dams built in the United States, after visiting France to study their use. He became the Corps' first Southeast Division Engineer. He was a member of the Board of Engineers from 1886 to 1889. He was appointed Chief of Engineers by President Grover Cleveland in 1895.

He retired two years later and died in Charles Town, West Virginia.

title: William Price Craighill


text:
Yellow Magic Orchestra (album)

Yellow Magic Orchestra is the first official studio album by Japanese electronic music band Yellow Magic Orchestra, who were previously known as the Yellow Magic Band. Originally released by Alfa Records, in Japan in 1978, the album was released by A&M Records in Europe and the United States and Canada in early 1979, with the US version featuring new cover art but without the closing track of "Acrobat". Both versions would later be re-issued in 2003 as a double-disc format, with the American version as the first disc.

The album was an early example of synth-pop, a genre that the band helped pioneer. It contributed to the development of electro, hip hop, techno, and bleep techno. The album's innovations in electronic music included its use of the microprocessor-based Roland MC-8 Microcomposer music sequencer which allowed the creation of new electronic sounds, and its sampling of video game sounds.

The album sold 250,000 copies in Japan and entered the Billboard 200 and R&B Albums charts in the United States. Its most successful single was "Computer Game / Firecracker", which sold over 400,000 records in the United States and was a top 20 hit in the United Kingdom.

Production
The album was intended to be a one-off project for producer and bass player Haruomi Hosono and the two session musicians he had hired: drummer Yukihiro Takahashi and keyboard player Ryuichi Sakamoto. The trio were to create their own cover version of Martin Denny's 1959 exotica melody "Firecracker" with modern electronics, as a subversion of the exoticisation and Orientalism of the original tune, along with various original compositions also exploring themes of Asianness, exoticisation and Orientalism from a Japanese perspective. The album would eventually be called Yellow Magic Orchestra, as a satire of Japan's obsession with black magic at the time. The project proved highly popular, culminating in a career for the three musicians; one that would last until 1983, followed by successful solo careers and reunions over the decades to come.

They began recording the album in July 1978 at a Shibaura studio in Tokyo. It utilized a wide variety of electronic music equipment (as well as electric), including the Roland MC-8 Microcomposer, the Korg PS-3100 polyphonic synthesizer, the Korg VC-10 vocoder, the Yamaha Drums and Syn-Drums electronic drum kits, the Moog III-C and Minimoog monosynths, the Polymoog and ARP Odyssey analog synthesizers, the Oberheim Eight-Voice synthesizer, the Fender Rhodes electric piano, and the Fender Jazz Bass. Besides the electronic equipment, the only acoustic instruments used in the album were a Steinway piano, drum set, and a marimba.

It was the earliest known popular music album to use the Roland MC-8 Microcomposer, which was programmed by Hideki Matsutake during recording sessions. The swingy funk element present throughout the album was expressed by Matsutake programming through subtle variations of the MC-8's input. At the time, Billboard noted that the use of such computer-based technology in conjunction with synthesizers allowed Yellow Magic Orchestra to create new sounds that were not possible until then. The band later described both the MC-8 and Matsutake as an "inevitable factor" in both their music production and live performances.

The album was an early example of synth-pop, a genre that Yellow Magic Orchestra helped pioneer. Yellow Magic Orchestra experiments with different styles of electronic music, such as Asian melodies played over synthpop backings in "Firecracker" and "Cosmic Surfin'", the extensive use of video game sounds in "Computer Game", and the electronic disco bass in "Tong Poo", a song that was inspired by Chinese music produced during the China's Cultural Revolution, and in turn influenced video game music such as Tetris. Both "Computer Game" tracks proper contain the same audio and were made to sound as if both games were being played in the same room; each track being from the perspective of its titular arcade game unit: Circus and Space Invaders. The song also samples the opening chiptune used in the arcade game Gun Fight (1975). Both Circus and Space Invaders, along with several other popular arcade video games, were also featured in the promotional film for "Tong Poo".

Release history
The album was first released in Japan in 1978. It was released in the US on 30 May 1979 by A&M Records on the Horizon label with a new mix by Al Schmitt, new cover art and a slightly different track listing. This "US version" was subsequently released in Japan on 25 July 1979 by Alfa. Promotional A&M copies were pressed on yellow vinyl.

"Firecracker" was released as a single under the name "Computer Game". As such, on early US pressings of the album, "Computer Game 'Theme from The Circus'" and "Firecracker" were combined as one track, while the firecracker sound effect at the end of the track was indexed by itself as "Firecracker". This was corrected on later pressings. US pressings also featured a more American-friendly mixing (highlighting a punchier equalization and heavy use of reverb). Several of the segues on the second side of the album were edited differently, while "Bridge over Troubled Music" was given an additional electric piano solo over top of the introductory percussion.

Reception
From contemporary reviews, Rosalind Russell of Record Mirror compared the group to Giorgio Moroder and Kraftwerk stating that the group "might resign themselves to coming a poor second", finding that the group's ethnicity and accents "may put off this nation's xenophobes. But who needs the UK? In the disco world we're small stakes anyway: the sons of Nihon are probably casting their eyes to the States and Germany."

Personnel
Yellow Magic Orchestra – arrangements, electronics
 * Haruomi Hosono – bass guitar, synth bass, synthesizers, production, mixing engineer (credited as "Harry Hosono" for latter two)
 * Ryuichi Sakamoto – synthesizers, piano, electric piano, percussion, orchestration
 * Yukihiro Takahashi – vocals, drums, electronic drums, marimba, percussion

Guest musicians
 * Hideki Matsutake – Microcomposer programming
 * Chris Mosdell – lyrics
 * Shun'ichi "Tyrone" Hashimoto – vocoded vocals on "Simoon"
 * Masayoshi Takanaka – electric guitar on "Cosmic Surfin'" and "La femme chinoise"
 * Tomoko Nunoi (uncredited on earliest issues) – French narration (credited as "Sexy Voice") on "La femme chinoise"

Staff
 * Kunihiko Murai – executive producer
 * Norio Yoshizawa & Atsushi Saito – recording engineers
 * Shunsuke Miyasumi – recording coordinator
 * Masako Hikasa & Akira Ikuta – management
 * Aijiro Wakita – design, art director
 * Kazuo Hakamada – illustrations

US version alternative staff
 * Minako Yoshida – vocals on "Yellow Magic (Tong Poo)"
 * Tommy LiPuma – supervisor
 * Al Schmitt – mixing engineer
 * Mike Reese – mastering engineer
 * Roland Young – art director
 * Amy Nagasawa & Chuck Beeson – design
 * Lou Beach – front cover art
 * Masayoshi Sukita – back cover art

"Computer Game / Firecracker"
The song "Firecracker" was released as a single in Japan in 1978 and in the United States and United Kingdom in 1979, becoming a major R&B hit in the United States. The same year, the song was released as the "Computer Game" single, which combined the "Computer Game" and "Firecracker" tracks together. The "Computer Game" single was an even greater international success, selling over 400,000 copies in the United States and entering the top 20 of the UK Singles Chart.

In popular culture
The song was popular with the emerging hip hop community, which appreciated the new electronic sounds, and in the Bronx, where it was later sampled by pioneering hip hop artist Afrika Bambaataa in his famous 1983 debut album Death Mix (1983). The "terse video-game funk" sounds of "Computer Game" would have a strong influence on the emerging electro and hip hop music genres; the song's use of video game sounds and bleeps has been described as "ahead of their time" and as having a strong influence on 1980s hip hop and pop music. It was later included in electro hip hop artist Kurtis Mantronik's compilation album That's My Beat (2002), which consists of electro music that influenced his early career.

The song was also an influence on early techno, specifically Detroit techno, for which it was included in Carl Craig's compilation album Kings of Techno (2006). The song also influenced Sheffield's bleep techno music; Warp's third record, "Testone" (1990) by Sweet Exorcist, defined Sheffield's techno sound, by making playful use of sampled sounds from "Computer Game" along with dialogues from the film Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977).

De La Soul's "Funky Towel" (for the 1996 film Joe's Apartment), Jennifer Lopez's hit "I'm Real" (2001), and the original version of Mariah Carey's "Loverboy" (for the 2001 film soundtrack Glitter), which was released as part of the 2020 compilation album The Rarities on October 2, 2020, also sampled the song.

The anime series Cowboy Bebop has a character named Mad Pierrot, and Mad Pierrot's other alias is "Tongpu".

title: Yellow Magic Orchestra (album)


text: User talk:68.74.5.22

title: User talk:68.74.5.22