text:
Central Massachusetts Railroad

The Central Massachusetts Railroad was a railroad in Massachusetts. The eastern terminus of the line was at North Cambridge Junction where it split off from the Middlesex Central Branch of the Boston and Lowell Railroad in North Cambridge and through which it had access to North Station in Boston. From there, the route ran 98.77 miles west through the modern-day towns of Belmont, Waltham, Weston, Wayland, Sudbury, Hudson, Bolton, Berlin, Clinton, West Boylston, Holden, Rutland, Oakham, Barre, New Braintree, Hardwick, Ware, Palmer, Belchertown, Amherst, and Hadley to its western terminal junction at N. O. Tower in Northampton with the Connecticut River Railroad.

Inception (1868–1883)
In the late 1860s citizens in the towns of Sudbury, Wayland, and Weston petitioned the General Court of Massachusetts to build a railroad through their towns. On February 21, 1868 the state chartered the Wayland and Sudbury Branch Railroad to run 6.75 miles from Mill Village in Sudbury through Wayland to a connection with the Fitchburg Railroad at Stony Brook in Weston. Later that year another group of citizens submitted a petition requesting that the new railroad extend further west to Northampton. On May 10, 1869 the General Court chartered the Massachusetts Central Railroad and united it with the Wayland and Sudbury Branch.

The Massachusetts Central Railroad was organized on September 2, 1869 with James M. Stone of Charlestown elected as its first president. Construction began the following fall despite difficulty in raising capital. The company hired contractor Norman Munson to build the railroad in April 1871, but two years later the Panic of 1873 forced Munson into bankruptcy and halted construction. The railroad stagnated until June 5, 1878 when new president Silas Seymour called a stockholders meeting. The stockholders elected a new Board of Directors which appointed George S. Boutwell president in 1879 and rehired Munson to resume construction.

That same year, the Massachusetts General Court amended the railroad's charter to allow for several new expansions. The most significant was an extension east through Waltham and Belmont, which eliminated the connection with the Fitchburg at Stony Brook. From Beaver Brook to Hill Crossing, the line ran alongside the Fitchburg. Original plans called for the route to briefly parallel the Lexington Branch cutoff through North Cambridge and terminate at the Boston and Lowell Railroad (B&L) mainline at Willow Bridge. However, this was later changed to join the cutoff at North Cambridge Junction, west of North Avenue (now Massachusetts Avenue). Other amendments included a branch from Amherst to a connection with the Troy and Greenfield Railroad in West Deerfield and approval to connect with and build over the route of the never-constructed Holyoke and Belchertown Railroad through Granby and South Hadley.

With its new connection in the east the stockholders approved a 25-year lease of the Massachusetts Central to the B&L on March 21, 1880 pending its completion within two years. The first rails were finally laid in October that same year at the junction with the Framingham and Lowell Railroad in South Sudbury. The route from Cambridge to Hudson was complete by August 20, 1881 and inspected by state and company officials on September 21. Satisfied with the work the officials set the railroad's grand opening for October 1, 1881. The company appointed Munson as general manager and purchased five locomotives. The first schedule included four passenger round trips from Boston to Hudson, four passenger round trips from Boston to Waltham, and a daily freight from Boston to Hudson and back.

Meanwhile, westward construction continued with tracks reaching Oakdale and Jefferson by June 1882. In 1883 the selling agents for the company's bonds, Boston-based Charles A. Sweet and Co., declared bankruptcy. The railroad ceased operations and construction on May 16 and remained in limbo for the next 29 months.

Resurrection and operation under the Boston & Maine (1883–1902)
To restore service to the line the Central Massachusetts Railroad was formed out of the failed Massachusetts Central Railroad Company on November 10, 1883. The directors contracted with the B&L to operate trains over the Central Massachusetts route in the fall of 1885 with service resuming from Boston to Hudson on September 28 and to Jefferson on December 14. The new schedule included seven daily round trips from Boston to Jefferson and another ten to Waltham.

The B&L formally leased the Central Massachusetts on December 7, 1886, resuming work on the route to Northampton but abandoning any plans for branches to Holyoke or West Deerfield. Though considerable grading work had already been done along the original planned route in Hardwick, Greenwich, and Enfield the railroad's leadership decided to redirect the route through an easier terrain in the Ware River Valley, taking the line into Palmer and reconnecting with the original route in Belchertown. This turned out to be a fortuitous decision given that much of the disused portion of the line was flooded in the 1930s to construct the Quabbin Reservoir. Tracks were installed through Muschopauge in Rutland by November.

The Boston and Maine Railroad (B&M) leased the B&L On April 1, 1887, renaming the Central Massachusetts line as the Central Massachusetts Branch. The tracks reached Ware on June 27, 1887 and before the end of that year construction finished with the completion of the bridge over the Connecticut River. The first train to traverse the entire route, led by locomotive No. 238, Hudson, left Boston at 8:30 A. M. on December 12 and arrived in Northampton at 12:30 P. M. Revenue service commenced on December 19 with three daily passenger round trips between Boston and Northampton, two between Boston and Hudson, three between Boston and Wayland, and two between Ware and Northampton.

Although the Central Massachusetts Railroad never grew beyond Northampton as its early backers had hoped it nonetheless became an integral link for the B&M to points west and south. This was primarily due to the fact that no rail bridges spanned the North River in New York City, separating New England from major metropolitan areas such as Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Washington, D. C. In 1889 construction of the Poughkeepsie Bridge over the Hudson River at Poughkeepsie, New York completed the Poughkeepsie Bridge Route, the first all-rail route between New England and points south of New York City. Trains such as the Philadelphia and Washington Express and the Harrisburg Express traveled over the several railroads that composed the route, including the Central Massachusetts Branch of the B&M.

With the B&M suddenly such an important link into New England Archibald Angus McLeod, president of the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad (P&R), sought to use the line as part of his bid to control the coal mining traffic between eastern Pennsylvania and New England independent of the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad (NYNH&H). In 1892 McLeod took stock control of the B&M and of the New York and New England Railroad to fulfill his plan, electing himself president of the B&M on October 26. Early in 1893 the P&R went bankrupt and McLeod lost stock control of the B&M, resigning as president on May 23. With relatively stable local control restored the B&M was able to lease one of its major competitors, the Fitchburg Railroad, in 1900. Two years later, on February 20, 1902, the B&M outright purchased the Central Massachusetts Railroad and dissolved its corporate entity.

With the Central Massachusetts Branch now a part of its system the B&M set about improving the connections between the line and the rest of its network. The first change was in Oakdale where on March 30, 1902 the railroad shut down the accident-prone yard where the Central Massachusetts Branch crossed at grade over the Worcester, Nashua, and Portland Division (WN&P) main line. The next improvement was at Jefferson where the B&M rehabilitated a connecting track that split off of the Central Massachusetts Branch at Holden Junction and connected with the Worcester and Hillsboro Branch at Carr Junction to allow passenger service into Princeton, Hubbardston, Gardner, and Winchendon. Finally the B&M built a connection in Gleasondale from Gleason Junction on the Central Massachusetts Branch to C. M. Junction on the Marlborough Branch to enable passenger service into Marlborough. While traffic into Marlborough flourished, traffic along the connection in Jefferson languished, and in 1909 the B&M took up that track.

Wachusett Reservoir Relocation (1902–1907)
On June 5, 1895 the General Court of Massachusetts authorized the damming of the south branch of the Nashua River for the construction of the Wachusett Reservoir, flooding roughly 4000 acres of land in the towns of Clinton, Boylston, and West Boylston. The Central Massachusetts Branch needed to be rerouted as the new reservoir would cover 7.01 miles of track as well as the stations at South Clinton, Boylston, and West Boylston. Two proposals for the new route emerged. The first proposal called for a connection to the defunct Lancaster Railroad in Hudson that would route traffic through Bolton to a connection with the WN&P Division main line in South Lancaster and leave Berlin at the end of a four-mile branch. The second proposal would build a new route through Clinton and connect with the WN&P Division main line there. On April 3, 1902 the Metropolitan Water and Sewerage Board reached an agreement with the B&M to reroute the Central Massachusetts Branch according to the latter plan.

The new portion of the Central Massachusetts Branch started just west of West Berlin Junction in Berlin where the Central Massachusetts Branch connected with the Fitchburg Line of the NYNH&H. From there it ran northwest into Clinton through a 1110 foot-long tunnel. The western portal of the tunnel opened onto a 917-foot viaduct near the site of the Wachusett Dam that passed over Route 70 and the Nashua River before connecting with the WN&P Division main line at Clinton Junction. Traffic over the Central Massachusetts Branch followed the WN&P Division main line through Sterling into Oakdale where a redesigned junction routed it back onto the original Central Massachusetts Branch. Just before Clinton Junction an additional connection branched off at Reservoir Switch leading to East Switch on the WN&P Division to allow traffic to approach the Central Massachusetts Branch from the north or continue from the Central Massachusetts Branch north along the WN&P Division main line. The first train passed over the new route on June 2, 1903 while the old track was officially removed from through service on June 15 but remained in place and used during the remainder of the reservoir construction, some of it being re-gauged to 3' to allow construction trains to utilize it. Under this arrangement the WN&P main line between Oakdale and Sterling Junction became exceptionally busy as it accommodated B&M traffic from the WN&P Division and the Central Massachusetts Branch as well as NYNH&H traffic heading between Worcester and Fitchburg along the tracks of the original Fitchburg and Worcester Railroad.

Operation under Charles Mellen (1907–1913)
In 1907 Charles Sanger Mellen, the president of the NYNH&H and protégé of J. P. Morgan, gained control of the B&M to form a near monopoly on all rail traffic in southern New England. Mellen sought to build a direct route through Springfield that would funnel traffic into Boston along the Central Massachusetts Branch and away from the Boston and Albany Railroad (B&A), which was controlled by William H. Vanderbilt’s New York Central Railroad (NYC). Legal proceedings brought against Mellen by Louis D. Brandeis to break up his monopoly meant Mellen could not build the route himself so he befriended a railroad contractor from Westfield named Ralph D. Gillett and made him president of the Hampden Railroad with the intent to lease the new route upon its completion.

The Massachusetts General Court incorporated the Hampden in July 1910. It started at Hampden Junction on the Central Massachusetts Branch about two miles east of Bondsville and continued 14.82 miles southwest through Belchertown, Ludlow, and Chicopee to the B&A main line at Athol Junction about two miles east of Springfield. Construction finished by May 9, 1913 with service between New York and Boston scheduled to commence on June 23. Just days before its grand opening operations were suspended indefinitely as Mellen faced a hearing before the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) regarding his questionable business practices. He abruptly resigned from the presidencies of both the NYNH&H and B&M on July 9 leaving the Hampden a bridge between two suddenly competing railroads. Despite one more tour by B&M officials in November 1914 neither they nor the NYNH&H wished to lease the line, which was shut down for good in 1925.

Severance (1913–1939)
The failure of the Hampden and Mellen's empire marked the beginning of the downturn of the Central Massachusetts Branch. Much of the traffic routed through Northampton under Mellen's empire vanished or was rerouted by the B&M along the parallel Fitchburg Division via Mechanicville. In August 1917 the B&M discontinued passenger service between Ware and Northampton and downsized the terminal in Ware significantly. The line enjoyed a brief upswing in traffic between World War I and the early 1920s but the Great Depression and increased competition from automobiles and trucks began to take their toll in the latter half of the decade. By 1928 no freights and only one passenger train ran the length of the line from Boston to Northampton.

The struggling economy and reduction in business forced the B&M to take austerity measures and cut back on less profitable lines including the Central Massachusetts Branch. To keep the line open but defray some of the operation and maintenance costs the B&M obtained trackage rights to the Central Vermont Railway's Southern Division in 1931, which ran parallel to the Central Massachusetts Branch for several miles between Belchertown and Amherst. Connections at Canal Junction in Belchertown and at Norwottuck Junction in Amherst allowed the B&M to route all of its trains over the Southern Division and abandon the parallel Central Massachusetts Branch tracks. The railroad pulled off a similar maneuver in January 1933, obtaining trackage rights to the Ware River Branch of the B&A. In order to maintain service to customers in Gilbertville and Wheelwright the B&M build three connections to the Ware River Branch at Barre Junction in Barre, Forest Lake Junction in Palmer, and Creamery in Hardwick. The railroad routed trains on the Central Massachusetts Branch along the Ware River Branch and made the sections from Creamery to Gilbertville and Wheelwright spurs, taking the tracks south of Gilbertville to Forest Lake and north of Wheelwright to Barre Junction out of service. The ICC approved the abandonments in 1941 and the B&M took up all of the abandoned tracks.

To further cut costs the B&M also reduced service on the Central Massachusetts Branch, discontinuing passenger service to Northampton on April 23, 1932. In 1943 the B&M abandoned the Marlborough Branch between its original connection with the Fitchburg Division in South Acton through Maynard and Stow to Gleason Junction, making the Central Massachusetts Branch the exclusive route into Marlborough. By 1938 most of the traffic on the Central Massachusetts Branch was east of Clinton. The only business on the western end of the line was local freight service between Northampton and Rutland. Since no trains passed over the middle of the route the B&M took the tracks between Oakdale and Muschopauge out of service on June 1, 1938. Later that year on September 21 the Hurricane of 1938 badly damaged the tracks, particularly near the Quinapoxet, Ware, and Swift Rivers where washouts severed the line at Coldbrook and knocked out a bridge in Gilbertville. The B&M could not justify the cost to make repairs to an area it was hardly using and so on January 30, 1939 the railroad formally submitted a request to the ICC to abandon the tracks between Oakdale and Barre Junction, abandon the tracks between Creamery and Gilbertville, and discontinue operations on the Ware River Branch between Creamery and Barre Junction. The ICC approved the abandonments on November 7 and then the discontinuance of service on the Ware River Branch a month later on December 17. With the line officially cloven in two the B&M renamed the line between Northampton and Wheelwright as the Wheelwright Branch and retained the Central Massachusetts Branch moniker for the eastern half of the line between Boston and Oakdale.

Abandonment of the Wheelwright Branch
On the Wheelwright Branch freight service continued between Northampton and Wheelwright at least three times per week until 1973 when the paper mill in Wheelwright closed. In April 1974 the B&M cut freight service to once per week, took the tracks between Creamery and Wheelwright out of service, and embargoed all traffic on the line east of Bondsville. With only one customer in Bondsville the railroad petitioned the ICC to abandon the remainder of the Wheelwright Branch in June 1979, reasoning that that business could be better served by the new Massachusetts Central Railroad which the General Court had chartered on October 16, 1975 to run along the Ware River Secondary of the bankrupt Penn Central Railroad after that line was to be excluded from the government's reorganization of the northeast railroads into Conrail. The ICC approved the plan and operations east of Amherst ceased by August and on the rest of the line by November.

On February 14, 1980 the B&M officially took line from Northampton to Norwottuck out of service. Later that month the Massachusetts Central assumed responsibility for the customer in Bondsville but had to stop after about a year due to the poor condition of the tracks. The ICC finally approved the abandonment of the Wheelwright Branch in 1982 and the B&M took up the tracks between Northampton and Norwottuck later that year. This left only two sections of B&M-owned track on the Wheelwright Branch: between Canal Junction and Bondsville and between Creamery and Wheelwright. The Massachusetts Central could not afford to acquire either property and so in 1983 the B&M took up both. As of 2006 the last remaining portion of the Central Massachusetts Railroad still in revenue service is in Ware where the Massachusetts Central uses what remains of the yard in that town as well as a small section that provides access to a paper plant customer.

Decline in the east (1939–2006)
In 1939 the B&M ended passenger service to Marlborough leaving the four daily trains between Boston and Clinton the last of the passenger service on the Central Massachusetts Branch. Freight service, however, continued to all three communities and saw a major uptick as World War II intensified. In 1942 the United States Government built the Fort Devens-Sudbury Training Annex which connected to the Central Massachusetts Branch at Mirror Lake Junction just east of Ordway station in Hudson. B&M trains transported huge quantities of ammunition to and from the bunker with inbound ammunition from Boston being dropped in a yard just north of Mirror Lake Junction and outbound ammunition being brought to the NYNH&H in South Sudbury. This business ended with the war as the government repurposed the facility and removed the yard and connection to the Central Massachusetts Branch.

Further east the B&M worked with the state and other railroads to modernize and streamline the rail infrastructure in and around Boston between 1951 and 1952. Rather than have the Central Massachusetts Branch and Fitchburg Division run parallel to one another from Clematis Brook to their connection at Fens in Cambridge, the B&M decided to connect the two lines at Clematis Brook and route all Central Massachusetts Branch traffic onto the Fitchburg Division. After upgrading the Fitchburg Division to handle the increase in traffic the railroad took up the tracks of the Central Massachusetts Branch tracks between Clematis Brook and Hill Crossing. The remaining track between Hill Crossing and North Cambridge Junction became a part of the Freight Cutoff to the yards in Boston. Around the same time the B&M also modernized its motive power, adopting diesel locomotives throughout its system. The last of the steam locomotive operations for scheduled passenger revenue service on the B&M took place between Boston and Clinton on the Central Massachusetts Branch. On May 5, 1956 the last steam-powered train on the line departed Clinton for Boston and shortly thereafter the railroad closed the engine house in Clinton and began using Budd self-propelled railcars for passenger service along the route.

By 1958, freight and passenger business between Clinton and Boston dwindled to nearly nothing. The B&M cut all service west of Berlin early that year with only two weekday passenger trains running as far as Hudson on the Marlborough Branch. On August 11 the railroad removed all track between Berlin and Clinton Junction, including East Switch, from service. The viaduct in Clinton remained in place until 1974 when the Metropolitan District Commission removed it. On June 14, 1959, the B&M further cut passenger service to Hudson back to one daily round trip, after attempting to abandon all service on the line.

MBTA purchase and abandonment
In 1959, the NYNH&H discontinued passenger service on its lines in the former Old Colony Railroad network, triggering calls for state intervention. In response, the Mass Transportation Commission tested fare and service levels throughout the NYNH&H and B&M systems, concluding that commuter rail service was important enough to warrant continued operation, but was unlikely to be financially self-sustaining. Based on this conclusion, the state created the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) on August 3, 1964 and merged it with the existing Metropolitan Transportation Authority to serve a larger part of the state and subsidize commuter rail service. The MBTA immediately set to work optimizing the commuter rail networks of the NYNH&H, NYC, and B&M. On the Central Massachusetts Branch, this included cutting passenger service back to South Sudbury starting on January 18, 1965.

In spite of the subsidies, ridership continued to decline on the Central Massachusetts Branch, and by 1969 the MBTA recommended an end to all service on the line. Devoted riders managed to briefly delay the decision, but in December 1970 the B&M filed for bankruptcy. On July 30, 1971, the state renewed the B&M's annual subsidy but without funding for the Central Massachusetts Branch. A group of citizens from Wayland argued that the single train along the route was too inconvenient for commuters and so on October 1 the MBTA announced that it would temporarily schedule more trains to determine whether the line was still viable. After two months, the MBTA concluded that the modest increase in ridership was not sufficient to warrant continued funding; on November 26, all passenger service ended on the Central Massachusetts Branch. The MBTA examined the possibility of restoring passenger service to the line in 1972 and again in 1975, but nothing came of either study.

Despite the end of passenger service on the Central Massachusetts Branch freight service continued well into the 1970s. Trains ran to South Sudbury 3–4 times each week and traveled as far as Hudson when needed, usually 1–2 times per week. With no business in Marlborough the B&M took the last section of the Marlborough Branch out of service in 1974. On December 27, 1976 the B&M sold the Central Massachusetts Branch as well as its Budd RDC fleet and several other lines to the MBTA but retained the rights to freight service. Business continued to decline however, and by 1977 the B&M had to reduce service to runs as needed. That same year the railroad removed the track between Berlin and Hudson from service as it had deteriorated to the point of being unsafe. In August 1979 the B&M petitioned the ICC to abandon the Central Massachusetts Branch between Berlin and Waltham North Station and the remaining segment of the Marlborough Branch. The last train to Hudson ran on June 19, 1980 and the last train west of Waltham about a month later on August 14. The B&M officially took the track west of Bacon Street in Waltham out of service on September 11 and the United States District Court overseeing the B&M's bankruptcy approved the abandonment in October. Around the same time the B&M and MBTA increased vertical height clearances along the New Hampshire Route main line. This made the Hill Crossing Freight Cutoff obsolete and in 1980 the B&M and MBTA took up the Central Massachusetts Branch track between Hill Crossing and North Cambridge Junction to make room for the MBTA's Red Line.

In 1983 Guilford Rail System purchased the B&M and began to transfer all operations to the B&M subsidiary Springfield Terminal Railway. The Springfield Terminal took over operations on the last piece of the Central Massachusetts Branch between Clematis Brook and Bacon Street in Waltham in 1987 and continued them until the last customer shut down in 1994. In 1996 State Representative Nancy Evans of Wayland proposed restoring commuter service on the Central Massachusetts Branch between Interstate 495 in Berlin and Boston to alleviate traffic on Route 20 but was met with substantial backlash from residents of new homes built along the dormant line in the time since its operations had ceased. The Executive Office of Transportation carried out a feasibility study anyway estimating that restoring service to the route as far as Berlin would cost in excess of $103 million and that any benefit gained was unlikely to outweigh the costs. In 1999 Evans, now the Director of Planning for the MBTA, proposed converting the Central Massachusetts right of way into a busway but the state rejected this proposal as well. As of 2006 the grade crossings and bridges between Clematis Brook and Berlin have been mostly removed but the tracks remain mostly intact if encroached upon and badly overgrown.

Rail trail plans
In 1996 the towns along the eastern portion of the Central Massachusetts Branch requested permission to convert the route between Clematis Brook and Berlin into the Mass Central Rail Trail - Wayside. The MBTA agreed to lease the property for the project with the stipulation that it would retain the right to revert it to a commuter rail line and that the trail would be policed and maintained by the communities themselves. Every town along the route except for Weston accepted the terms but without unanimous approval the trail took a while to come to fruition. Waltham moved ahead to convert the property in their city anyway reasoning that even if service were restored it would start from a new connection at Stony Brook west of their city limits. As of 2019, Massachusetts DCR moved forward in Weston and Wayland and opened a 4.5 mile paved section of the trail from the bridge over the MBTA Fitchburg line at the Waltham-Weston border as far west as Wayland Station near the intersection of Route 126 and US 20. A crushed stone continuation connects the fully paved portion with the shopping center at the intersection of US 20 and Andrew Ave in Wayland. In Sudbury and Hudson, a 7.6 mile paved section is under construction in partnership between DCR and Eversource's buried power line project, with an estimated completion in 2026.

Efforts to convert the property to recreational trails found more success elsewhere along the route. The portion of the Marlborough Branch between Gleason Junction and Marlborough became the Assabet River Rail Trail. In Boston the former Central Massachusetts Branch section of the Hill Crossing Freight Cutoff between Hill Crossing and North Cambridge Junction became the Fitchburg Cutoff Path.

The towns along the former Wheelwright Branch exhibited similar enthusiasm for recreational trails along the property. In March 1985 with support from the local governments and regional planning agency the state purchased 10 miles of the line between the west end of the Connecticut River Bridge in Northampton and Amherst with the intent to convert it into a rail trail. Work began in 1992 and on July 29, 1993 the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management officially opened the Norwottuck Branch Rail Trail. By 1997 the trail extended as far as Belchertown where progress halted due to a concerted effort from private landowners who had taken over the long-abandoned property. In 2006 the western end of the trail was extended to N. O. Tower. In West Boylston, Holden, and Rutland a volunteer organization called Wachusett Greenways began to convert the roughly 30 miles of property between Oakdale and Rutland to the Mass Central Rail Trail. The Mass Central Rail Trail currently includes a portion of the former Fitchburg and Worcester Railroad in Sterling between Sterling Junction and Sterling Center; however this route was never a part of the Central Massachusetts Branch and does not connect with the rest of the trail since the former WN&P Division main line tracks remain in service as the Worcester Main Line of Pan Am Railways.

Locomotives
The Massachusetts Central Railroad operated five locomotives between 1881 and 1883. These were the only five locomotives that the company ever owned with other railroads providing motive power later in the line's history.

 * No. 1
 * Model: 4-4-0
 * Manufacturer: Rogers Locomotive and Machine Works
 * Manufacturer Number: 2308
 * Cylinders: 15 x 24
 * Date Manufactured: 1873

Rogers Locomotive and Machine Works built locomotive No. 1 for the Indiana, Bloomington and Western Railway (IB&W) as their No. 70. In 1880 the IB&W returned the locomotive to Rogers which sold it to the Housatonic Railroad as their No. 21. The Massachusetts Central Railroad purchased the locomotive in 1881 then sold it to the St. Johnsbury and Lake Champlain Railroad (SJ&LC) in 1883 where it became No. 11, Col. Jewett. The locomotive became a part of the B&L following its merger with the SJ&LC in 1885. The B&L renumbered it as No. 163, Highgate. The locomotive returned to the SJ&LC 1887 when the B&M leased the B&L and became No. 8, Highgate. The SJ&LC scrapped the locomotive in May 1892.

 * No. 2
 * Model: 4-4-0
 * Manufacturer: Rogers Locomotive and Machine Works
 * Manufacturer Number: 2310
 * Cylinders: 15 x 24
 * Date Manufactured: July 26, 1873

Rogers built locomotive No. 2 for the IB&W as their No. 71. In 1880 the IB&W returned the locomotive to Rogers which sold it to the Housatonic as their No. 22. The Massachusetts Central Railroad purchased the locomotive in 1881 then sold it to the SJ&LC in 1883 where it became No. 12, Col. Fairbanks. The locomotive became a part of the B&L in 1887, which renumbered it as No. 164, Col. Fairbanks. The B&M took possession of the locomotive in 1895, renumbering it as No. 629 and then No. 555 on February 29, 1904. The B&M scrapped the locomotive on March 20, 1907.

 * No. 3
 * Model: 4-4-0
 * Manufacturer: Schenectady Locomotive Works
 * Manufacturer Number: 1443
 * Cylinders: 17 x 24
 * Date Manufactured: October 1881

Schenectady Locomotive Works built locomotive No. 3 for the Massachusetts Central Railroad. In 1887 the locomotive became B&L No. 10, Woburn, and later that year it became B&M No. 310, Woburn. The B&M rebuilt the locomotive in 1898 and renumbered it No. 680 in 1911 before scrapping it in August 1920.

 * No. 4
 * Model: 4-4-0
 * Manufacturer: Schenectady Locomotive Works
 * Manufacturer Number: 1444
 * Cylinders: 17 x 24
 * Date Manufactured: October 1881

Schenectady built locomotive No. 4 for the Massachusetts Central Railroad. In 1887 the locomotive became B&L No. 65, Marlboro, and later that year it became B&M No. 365, Marlboro. Manchester Locomotive Works rebuilt the locomotive in 1904 and the B&M renumbered it No. 683 in 1911, scrapping it before 1923.

 * No. 5
 * Model: 4-4-0
 * Manufacturer: Hinkley & Williams
 * Manufacturer Number: 809
 * Cylinders: Unknown
 * Date Manufactured: October 1867

Prior to its time with the Massachusetts Central Railroad Locomotive No. 5 was No. 11, N. C. Munson, of the N. C. Munson Construction Company (incidentally the original contractor for the Massachusetts Central Railroad). It was sold to the Massachusetts Central around 1882 and sold at auction in 1886.

Other Power
In addition to the above locomotives the Massachusetts Central Railroad would on occasion lease power from the B&L. Small 4-4-0, 4-6-0, and 0-4-0 locomotives predominated through 1900 partially due to weight restrictions over the line's bridges. After 1900 the 4-4-0 locomotives continued to provide the bulk of the power for passenger service with class B-14 and B-15 2-6-0, class L-1 4-8-0, and class A-41-f 4-4-0 locomotives mixed in for longer and freight trips. During WWII K-8-b and K-8-c class 2-8-0 locomotives worked the larger ammunition trains on the eastern end of the line. J-1 class 4-4-2 locomotives generally handled passenger service during the war and into the 1950s. Diesel power arrived in the mid-1950s with EMD SW9 switchers regularly assigned to the Marlborough local freight starting in June 1953. Road switchers equipped with steam generators took over passenger service on the Central Massachusetts Branch starting in 1956. Budd Rail Diesel Cars quickly replaced the road switchers for passenger service beginning in the late 1950s and continued service in that capacity until passenger service ceased in 1971.

Stations and junctions
The Central Massachusetts Railroad built its stations in the Gothic-inspired Victorian style of architecture popular during the 1870s. The name of the architect responsible for their design has been lost to time. Cost restrictions played heavily into the station designs though the railroad added decorations such as painted wainscotting and gables for aesthetics. All of the stations were wooden and based on one of two basic plans for smaller or larger communities. Individual stations were often tailored to their location, including additions such as attached or separate freight houses and milk sheds which were similarly decorated to appear presentable to the public. Other structures such as engine houses, water towers, section houses, and crossing shanties were not decorated. To create the illusion of variety the railroad never used the same design on two consecutive stations except at Waverly and Belmont where the consistent design helped passengers distinguish the Central Massachusetts Railroad stations from those of the parallel Fitchburg Railroad.

The station listing on the Central Massachusetts Railroad changed many times over the line's history thanks to leases, ownership changes, and rerouting. The list below is from the 1920 Boston and Maine Southern Division employees' timetable. The listings with grayed-out backgrounds are the stations between West Berlin Junction and Oakdale that the railroad abandoned during the construction of the Wachusett Reservoir. The italicized mileage numbers for these stations indicate their position on the line in the 1892 employees' timetable.

title: Central Massachusetts Railroad


text:
American Skiing Company

American Skiing Company was one of the largest operators of alpine ski, snowboard and golf resorts in the United States. Its resorts included Sunday River and Sugarloaf, in Maine, The Canyons in Utah, Killington, Mount Snow, Haystack, Heavenly and Steamboat. In the early 2000s, the company sold all assets and shut down in 2007.

History
In 1980, Les Otten, the son of a German immigrant, purchased the Sunday River resort for $840,000 from the Sherburne Corporation. Sunday River included one double chair and a couple of surface lifts at the time. Sunday River slowly grew to become New England's second most popular resort in the 1990s.

In 1994, Otten formed LBO Resort Enterprises Corp and purchased Attitash Bear Peak in New Hampshire. By 1995, Sugarbush, Vermont was added to the portfolio of LBO resorts.

In 1996, Otten purchased Mount Cranmore in the Mount Washington Valley of New Hampshire. Later that year, Otten sought to purchase S-K-I Ltd., owners of Killington, Mount Snow, and Haystack, Vermont, Waterville Valley, New Hampshire, and controlling interest in Sugarloaf, Maine. Because of monopoly concerns, the company was only allowed to purchase Killington, Mount Snow, Haystack, and Sugarloaf. Upon acquiring S-K-I Ltd., LBO Resort Enterprises was renamed the American Skiing Company

By 1997, the company expanded west, buying Wolf Mountain in Park City, Utah. It quickly was transformed into The Canyons, now the largest resort in Utah. In 1997, the company, now known as American Skiing Company went public on the New York Stock Exchange and purchased Heavenly, California and Steamboat, Colorado from Kamori International. All American Skiing Company resorts have a Grand Summit Hotel, a condominium-hotel in which investors were to buy a quarter of a year ownership of the hotel room units. The income from these condo quarter-shares was intended to be key to finances of the company.

By the time the new millennium rolled around, Les Otten had left the company amidst a huge debt crises; their earnings had not kept pace with their growth. William (BJ) Fair took over as CEO. As the huge debts racked up, ASC was forced to sell Heavenly to Vail Resorts, Steamboat to Intrawest, and Sugarbush to a group of investors.

In January 2007, rumors surfaced that ASC might be in the process of selling Killington and Pico to Powdr Corporation, and Attitash and Mount Snow to Peak Resorts. It was later confirmed in a letter to the All For One pass holders that Mount Snow and Attitash had been sold to Peak Resorts and that Killington and Pico had been sold to SP Land Company, LLC, who would join with Powdr in a new venture to operate the two mountains.

In June 2007, ASC announced plans to sell Sunday River and Sugarloaf to Boyne Resorts.

Finally in July 2007, it was announced that American Skiing Company's last remaining and flagship resort, The Canyons had been bought by the Talisker Corporation for $100 million. This was the final resort sold by the American Skiing Company, in preparation for the dissolution of the company by September 2007.

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

title: American Skiing Company


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Anti-Backpack Movement

The Anti-Backpack Movement

Unsuitable article about a non-notable non-existing album with text that looks like it is copyed from some promo page.

 * Delete -85.89.40.10 16:26, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC) (nominator)
 * Delete. The album exists  although at #189,000+ on the Amazon sales list, isn't very notable.  It does appear to have tracks from well known artists.  It is however copyvio, which someone can add if they beat me to it. Wikibofh 17:01, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)


text:
Dark Journey (wrestling)

Lynda Newton (born May 25, 1957) is an American naturopath and retired professional wrestling valet and professional wrestler, better known by her ring name, Dark Journey.

Early life
Newton was born in Los Angeles, California. She was raised by her grandparents in Brockton, Massachusetts, until the age of nine, when she began living with her mother. Newton attended Brockton High School, leaving in the middle of her senior year. She lived in California and Florida before moving to Atlanta, Georgia.

Mid-South Wrestling/Universal Wrestling Federation (1985–1987)
In 1985, Newton met professional wrestler Dick Slater while working as a stripper in Atlanta. Slater introduced her to professional wrestling, bringing her into Mid-South Wrestling as his valet under the ring name "Dark Journey".

Dark Journey was initially a villainous character. As a biracial woman in the socially conservative Southern United States, her relationship with Slater attracted controversy. Dark Journey assisted Slater in his feuds with opponents such as Butch Reed, Jake Roberts and Jim Duggan.

In 1986, Newton ended her romantic relationship with Slater, who left Mid-South Wrestling (by then renamed the Universal Wrestling Federation) shortly thereafter. Dark Journey turned face and became a valet for the newly-arrived The Missing Link. In mid-1986, the duo began a feud with John Tatum and his valet, Missy Hyatt. Dark Journey and Hyatt would regularly engage in catfights at ringside. In September and October 1986, Dark Journey and The Missing Link faced Tatum and Hyatt in a series of mixed tag team matches. In early 1987, The Missing Link and Dark Journey began feuding with The Fabulous Freebirds and their valet Sunshine. On April 11, 1987, Dark Journey faced Nickla Roberts, Hyatt and Sunshine in a four way bout at "Superblast at the Superdome", held in the Superdome in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Jim Crockett Promotions (1987)
In April 1987, the Universal Wrestling Federation was acquired by the Charlotte, North Carolina-based Jim Crockett Promotions. Newton's contract was transferred over to Jim Crockett Promotions, and she became a valet for Tully Blanchard, a member of The Four Horsemen. Following The Great American Bash tour in July 1987, Newton was released from Jim Crockett Promotions, subsequently retiring from professional wrestling.

Naturopathy career
After retiring from professional wrestling, Newton returned to Los Angeles. She worked in a number of jobs before becoming the manager of a clothing store. In the late-1990s, she opened her own chain of stores in Los Angeles County. In the early-2000s, she began working in naturopathy, gaining certification as a massage therapist and colon hydrotherapist.

Personal life
Newton is married to Brent, with whom she has a son, Zane.

title: Dark Journey (wrestling)


text:
Massachusetts Central Railroad

The Massachusetts Central Railroad is a short line railroad in western Massachusetts, United States. It was established in 1975 to provide railroad transportation services on portions of the Boston & Maine Wheelwright Branch in and around their trackage in Bondsville (a village of Palmer) and Ware, and later between Palmer and South Barre on the old Right of Way (ROW) of the Ware River Railroad.

History
The Ware River Railroad was an independent line that ran from Palmer to the Cheshire Railroad in Winchendon. It was built in 1868. The first section, from Palmer to Gilbertville, opened in 1870, and the rest three years later. Until 1873 it was leased to and operated by the New London Northern Railroad.

It was eventually taken over by the Boston and Albany Railroad and run as its Winchendon Branch. The B&A wanted to run the Ware River Line in conjunction with the Monadnock Railroad in order to gain access to the resort areas of Peterborough, New Hampshire. When the B&A failed to gain control of the Monadnock, the Ware River Line was not very profitable.

By 1968, the line came under the control of the Penn Central, and tracks were abandoned between South Barre and Waterville, splitting the line in two. The Boston and Maine Railroad took over the line from Waterville to Winchendon and operated it until it was abandoned in 1984. Penn Central continued to operate the line south of Barre, but in 1975 all services between Gilbertville and South Barre were discontinued. Conrail operated the line between Palmer and Ware and applied for abandonment of the remainder of the line.

Massachusetts ownership
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts acquired most of the line in 1978, except a few miles in Palmer to the Palmer Depot and the B&A main line. The State contracted out the continued service to the newly formed Consolidated Rail Corp. (Conrail).

By 1975, the MCER, or as it later became known—the MassCentral. It was formed by three individuals from Western Massachusetts and started limited operations on a few miles of the Boston & Maine trackage in and around the Ware Yard. After a year of Conrail operations on the State-owned line, the contract was awarded to MassCentral. The train rarely ran north of Ware until 1999 when a new rail customer, a "reload", justified restored freight service to South Barre.

Service to half a dozen customers from Palmer Village up to the Reload at South Barre continues to the present, five days a week from its interchange with CSX. From the former Intermodal Yard around milepost one next to the ex Central Vermont Railroad main line (1 customer), with other customers located at the Gibbs Crossing Transload Yard (2); in and around Ware Yard (4); and at the "Wildwood Reload" at South Barre (1), where numerous customers are provided rail to truck services, including warehousing and transloading by the reload.

title: Massachusetts Central Railroad


text:
Talk:Gurdwara Sri Tarn Taran Sahib

I removed the following material: ''At Present Mr. Harmeet Singh is the M.L.A. from this Constituency, and S. Rattan Singh Ajnala as its member Parliament, with another Rajya Sabha Member,S. Manihar Singh Gill who belongs to Tarn Taran. ''

title: Talk:Gurdwara Sri Tarn Taran Sahib


text:
Talk:Green fireballs

Disputed
According to Watch the Skies, by Curtis Peebles, 27-29, "In mid-February 1949, a meeting was held at Los Alamos to discuss the green fireballs. Making up the group were military officers, Los Alamos scientists, La Paz, atmospheric physicist Dr. Joseph Kaplan, and Edward Teller. ... Most had seen a green fireball.  La Paz led a group who believed the green fireballs were not natural objects.  ... Most people at the meeting felt that green fireballs were simply unusual meteors.  Green meteors, although not common, where known.  ... After two days, the group concluded that green fireballs were a natural phenomenon." Bubba73 (talk), 00:50, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I've added an external link on the main page to the actual final report of Project Twinkle. A small quote: "There has been no indication that even the somewhat strange observations often called "Green Fireballs" are anything but natural phenomena. " Bubba73 (talk), 16:24, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Quoting from

 * ... "This was one conference where there was no need to discuss whether or not this special type of UFO, the green fireball, existed. Almost everyone at the meeting had seen one. The purpose of the conference was to decide whether the fireballs were natural or man-made and how to find out more about them. "...

 * ... "People who were at that meeting have told me that Dr. La Paz's theory was very interesting and that each point was carefully considered. But evidently it wasn't conclusive enough because when the conference broke up, after two days, it was decided that the green fireballs were a natural phenomenon of some kind. " ...

 * and ... "He mentioned Dr. La Paz and his opinion that the green fireballs might be man-made, and although he respected La Paz's professional ability, he just wasn't convinced." ...

 * ... "From the conversations, I assumed that these people didn't think the green fireballs were any kind of a natural phenomenon. Not exactly, they said, but so far the evidence that said they were a natural phenomenon was vastly outweighed by the evidence that said they weren't. " ...

 * La Paz had a different opinion, but "...He hoped that they were a natural phenomenon..." Bubba73 (talk), 18:28, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

-

This is simply bunk! Don't take my word for it. You can read the transcript of the meeting online here:

As you'll see if you read it, most of the meeting was devoted to La Paz describing his findings to date and a lot of questions being asked of him. It is simply not true that "most people at the meeting felt felt that the green fireballs were simply unusual meteors." It is more proper to say that they mostly deferred to La Paz's expertise, were puzzled, and had no explanation. Scientists like Teller and Bradbury did speculate about possible natural origins like meteors but agreed that findings like flat trajectories and absence of sound would probably ruled that out. Teller suggested possibly an atmospheric electrical phenomenon, but Bradbury noted that in itself would have problems as an explanation.

Peebles statement that "green meteors, although not common, were known" is also misleading and was dealt with at the conference. As La Paz notes, the green fireballs were a lime-green or yellow-green, but "green" meteors, besides being rare, were actually blue-green:

Dr. Bradbury:  Green is not an unknown color in meteors?

Dr. LaPaz: If I were to rewrite the report that I first presented on that subject instead of saying "rarely observed" this color green, I think I would now say "never observed". You sometimes see green, Dr. Bradbury, but it is a blue-green. The blue-green color is rare, but it is observed. For instance, Dr. Sherman Smith's observation was essentially a blue-green, but on the blue side.

...Dr. Bradbury:  But it's apparently a yellowish-green we're talking about here. If you can see a bluish-green, you can also see yellows and whites.

Dr. LaPaz:  There is some defect, possibly in the vision, that requires a pretty high intensity in that yellow-green before it's noted in a meteor fall.

(Please note that this means that your example that you inserted at the end of the article of "green" meteor is also misleading. It is instead an example of a blue-green meteor mentioned by La Paz, not the strange yellow-green fireballs.)

Peebles is also wrong about the meeting lasting two days. It doesn't seem that Peebles bothered to read the minutes and just made up most of his statements about what transpired.

Please remove the "disputed" flag. There is nothing to dispute here other than the accuracy of Peebles.

Realize Bubba that just because a skeptic writes something that you apparently want to believe doesn't mean they're telling the truth or have their facts straight. You've done the same over on the Majestic 12 write-up, just regurgitating Klass, even though many of his objections are provably false. It's going to take some time to clean up the many factual errors in that article as presently written, while trying to present both sides. Dr Fil, 5 December 2005 - This is nonsense. Green fireballs are quite common; the colour is caused by the ionisation of oxygen. Here is a link to a page which explains that, with a nice picture of green fireballs to boot. http://www.cloudbait.com/science/fireballs.html The colour of ionised oxygen is also visible in aurorae; I have seen it that context and it is neither blue-green nor lime green, but a middle range green, so could easily be observed as either. It looks to me as if this Dr LaPaz was mistaken in that respect. He was mistaken too if he accepted the estimates of height made by some of the witnesses; meteors and bolides are generally observed at heights of 20-40 kilometers, not a few thousand feet, although most observers think they are much closer and lower. So that makes Dr LaPaz's estimates of speed almost certainly inaccurate. eburacum --- It is pretty clear that you again don't know what you're talking about. LaPaz wasn't using estimates of height or speed by witnesses. Where did you dream that up? LaPaz always triangulated such data from at least two different sets of witnesses, which is something completely different, because you get quantitative results, not estimates. It's a technique he had used for a very long time to determine trajectories of meteor fireballs, find the impact point, and then recover meteorites. He was considered one of the world's experts in doing this. Triangulation from witness accounts is still used in tracking down meteorites.

In the case of the huge green fireball of January 30, 1948, literally hundreds of witnesses were interviewed. Again LaPaz came up with anomously low altitude and speed, based on triangulated reconstruction of trajectory, not witness guesses. I don't think you know the difference.

As for the green color, the color of the green fireballs was lime-green, not blue- green from ionized oxygen. LaPaz knew all about occasional blue-green color being reported in meteors. He knew about blue-green auroras. LaPaz had been watching the skies and studying meteor reports for over 30 years. He said the color was completely unlike any other meteor he had ever observed or had ever been reported. LaPaz was a world-class astronomer and meteor expert, not some CSICOP skeptic who doesn't even have the basic facts straight.

More nonsense. Lime green is a subjective assessment of the colour, and auroral ionised oxygen often tends toward lime green shades. Examples here http://www.windows.ucar.edu/earth/Magnetosphere/aurora/images/aurora_1_hao_comet.jpg http://local.aaca.org/fairbanks/images/Aurora%20photo-green.jpg http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/spaceweather/lenticular/green_aurora.jpg http://www.abmedia.com/astro/aurora/aurora110904-12.jpg These images look mid-range green to yellow green to me, rather than blue green. In fact I have never seen a noticably blue-green aurora; that suggests to me that LaPaz was consciously or subconsciously biased in favour of anomaly in this case. Triangulation of meteor heights using witnesses is inaccurate to an order of magnitude or more unless you have instrumentation; luckily one 'green fireball' sighting at White Sands did involve triangulation using cinetheodolites. The height calculated was 150,000 feet (45 kilometers) which is entirely consistent with a meteor. eburacum

Color, speed and altitude weren't the only anomalous characteristics. Absence of sound was another. -- Absence of sound in a meteor observation is not an anomaly, it is the expected situation. As meteors occur several tens of kilometers away from the observer any sound which might be noticed would be heard a number of minutes later. Just for your information, the question of sound in meteors has its own anomalous aspect; some observers report instantaneous sound, which is supposedly impossible. One theory is that radio waves from the meteor are received by equipment near the observer in certain circumstances, and heard as static white noise, But I digress. eburacum -

Also flat trajectories and occasional observed course changes. Turning on and off like a light switch. Lack of a smoke trail. Confinement in geographical area, with a predilection towards sensitive areas like Los Alamos. Inability to ever find fragments, despite extensive searches, quite unlike the other meteor fireballs LaPaz had tracked and recovered meteorite fragments from. This had LaPaz convinced that the green slimely hot fireballs were artificial, and he wasn't the only one. Dr. Mariarchi, the first head of Project Twinkle was convinced of it too. Dr Fil 18:13, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Argument from authority, and an authority with out of date information. Dr LaPaz was a pioneer in the study of meteors; but fifty years of additional data now show that green meteors are not unusual phenomena at all. eburacum --- Here is a spectrographic analysis of a Perseid meteor made in 1999; http://amsmeteors.org/spectra/majdenobs.html the most interesting feature is the 'forbidden line' of O1 at 5577 Angstroms. This emmission line is smack bang in the middle of the green paert of the spectrum, ie not blue green at all. Dr LaPaz would not have known about this line in 1948-1950 as it was only discovered in 1958. eburacum

NPOV
NPOV added. Article is way out of balance. Bubba73 (talk), 14:42, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Removed Infobox, NPOV, "Pseudoscience"
What is the basis for any of these other than personal biases? How do you define "pseudoscience"? LaPaz used standard scientific methods for tracking meteors that he had used successfully for 30 years. The guy was one of the world's experts in meteorites and astronomy. He was also an expert mathematician and top theoretician in special relativity. This is an obvious smear to try to paint him as a kook.

As the USAF Directorate of Intelligence noted upon the closing down of Project Twinkle, no satisfactory solution was ever offered:

 * "The Scientific Advisory Board Secretariat has suggested that this project not be declassified for a variety of reasons, chief among which is that no scientific explanation for any of the ‘fireballs’ and other phenomena was revealed by the (Project Twinkle) report and that some reputable scientists [note plural] still believe that the observed phenomena are man-made."

No satisfactory scientific explanation has been given since then (nonsensical debunking explanations don't count). LaPaz also wasn't alone in his "beliefs" of artificial origins. Remember the "scientistS" in the above quote? One of these was the first director of Project Twinkle, Dr. Anthony Mirarchi, who also agreed with LaPaz. He was so incensed at the public debunkery, that he went public in 1951 and almost got prosecuted for violating his security oath. See Bruce Maccabee's article on this.

In addition, the director of Project Blue Book, Edward J. Ruppelt said that when he went to Los Alamos and spoke to the various scientistS there, almost all of whom had personally seen the green fireballs, they were almost unanimous in believing them NOT to have natural origins but were probably alien probes instead.

So I guess all these people were "pseudo-scientists" as well. Again, I ask on what basis do you label this "pseudoscience"?

Infobox preserved below pending discussion. Dr Fil 00:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Lack of falsifiable predictions does present a problem with the "artificial" theory. But this article is about the phenomenon and not the "study of strange green fireballs in the sky" ---J.Smith 22:18, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Actually it was fully falsifiable in principle. Among other things, had they been able to find fragments, they could probably have determined one way or another if the material was artificial or natural.  Accordingly, LaPaz (who said he hoped they were natural) spent a tremendous amount of time and effort trying to locate fragments, using the same triangulation techniques in which he had a high rate of success in locating meteorite fragments following an ordinary fireball.  They were never able to find anything, even though LaPaz, because he was working with military intelligence, had many more resources at his disposal than he usually did.

 * Falsification might also have been possible through collection of better data. One of the purposes of Project Twinkle was to gather such data by setting up a network of photographic and observation posts to hopefully film, accurately triangulate, and get such things as spectra.  Twinkle was never properly funded or fully implemented, with only one or two posts in operation at any time, LaPaz's protests notwithstanding.  This wasn't LaPaz's fault.  Labeling him a "pseudoscientist" or his theory (supported by some other scientists involved) as "pseudoscience" is nothing but a cheap shot intended to denigrate LaPaz and the subject matter.

 * I should also like to point out that "falsifiability," while always desirable, is not a necessary part of the scientific method. Inability to falsify does not by itself make something "pseudoscience."  If that were the case, many branches of accepted science would immediately become "pseudoscience" because they aren't testable.  E.g., there is currently no way to falsify string theory because it has yet to make a testable prediction.  Some old school particle physicists argue that this makes it a non-science or pseudoscience, yet most physicists probably feel that this is an extreme view.  "Pseudoscience," like beauty, is often in the eye of the beholder.Dr Fil 16:57, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Restore NPOV tag
This article is a total disaster. Virtually the entire page is written from the "ooh arent these green flashes spooky and probably UFO's?!?" POV. there is no attempt at a balanced scientific viewpoint anywhere within. I will begin edits to modify the article shortly. --Deglr6328 06:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

 * My what an intelligent comment. You have made your personal prejudices abundantly clear.  But this is supposed to be an encyclopedia article.  Do you have anything actually, you know, 'factual' to contribute?

 * The history of the green fireballs and Project Twinkle is extremely well- documented from declassified government documents, including those from the Army, Air Force, and FBI. The histories in the "sources" and "external links" are all directly derived from these documents.   Ruppelt, the director of the Air Force's Project Blue Book, devoted an entire chapter of his book on the subject.

 * Like most "disbelievers," you probably never bothered to read a single one of the already provided source histories and external links. If you had, you would know that the green fireballs were indeed of high concern to Army and Air Force intelligence because of their high concentration over sensitive atomic military installations like Los Alamos and Kirtland.  They were indeed scientifically studied by La Paz and other scientists.  There were indeed special scientific conferences called at Los Alamos and by the A.F. Scientific Advisory Board to discuss the phenomenon.  There were indeed scientists besides La Paz who vehemently disagreed that they were a natural phenomenon and thought them artificial.  Read Ruppelt where he discusses his visit with Los Alamos scientists and technicians, nearly all of whom had seen the green fireballs, who were virtually unanimous in their opinion they were extraterrestrial probes.

 * "ooh arent these green flashes spooky and probably UFO's?" No, the green fireballs weren't dreamed up by gullible UFO believers. This was stuff of great concern to military intelligence and various government scientists.    It's all in the documents. Everybody agreed they were a real phenomenon of some kind.  Too many intelligence officers and scientists had seem them with their own eyes.  Astronomer Clyde Tombaugh had seen them (3 in fact).  Later notorious UFO debunker Donald Menzel had seen one.  He wrote a letter to the AF Scientific Advisory Board saying so and also admitting he was mystified.  What he had seen was not a normal meteor fireball.

 * Try reading the already-provided references first before endlessly slapping demands for citations every other sentence. I'm playing along for now in the introduction.  Highly specific page references are provided.  But if you keep playing this pointless citation game, I'm going to start deleting them as totally unnecessary and redundant. Everything in the article is already in the references at the end.

 * And if you start inserting your mere skeptical opinion into the article claiming you are being more "scientific", you better be prepared to back up each of your statements with an actual scientific reference (not more unsupported opinion from some skeptical magazine you read). I can play the endless citation game too.  But what results is an unreadable article cluttered with way too many distracting references. Dr Fil 00:39, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Reading the history of the article changes more carefully, I notice Deglr6328 did not slap the recent citation requests on the article. My apologies.  My experience on other articles is the so-called "scientific skeptics" put up endless demands for citations on subjects they personally believe to be "pseudoscientific."  No matter how many citations are provided, they demand more.  They almost never bother to read the references already there at the end.  They merely assume the material is all made up and never based on anything of substance.  Be skeptical if you must, but please read the references first.  The material in the article is 100% verifiable.  The green fireball phenomenon was not made up by Ufologists.  Everything about them comes from government documents or from public commentary of those directly involved.  E.g., the subject was written up by LIFE magazine in April 1952.  La Paz and Dr. Mariarchi, the first director of Project Twinkle set up to study them, also made statements in newspaper articles during the 1950s.  Both disagreed that the green fireballs were natural.   Dr Fil 01:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, they both disagree - and LaPaz might as well be the subject of this article, as it spends undue amount of time following his actions and perspectives on the phenomena. I doubt he was the only scientific mind at work on this, yet this article even openly defends him at points and casts doubt on the assertions of others. This article is a mess. It claims meteors can't be green - because LaPaz asserted that - but we know that is now false. 2601:87:4400:AF2:84D7:679C:1DA0:C7F6 (talk) 17:07, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Ball Lightning
I think it's either ball lightning or an asteroid contaning copper. -Realwheels, December 10, 2006 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Realwheels (talk • contribs) 16:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

Uh... sure. Someone could say its a UFO, another could say its an asteroid, another still could say its lightning. Until a theory is proven, it simply may or may not be true. Opinions don't belong on Wikipedia. :/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.127.11.233 (talk) 20:06, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Huh?
Ok, I don't really get why this topic is not an average meteor. Is green an abnormal colour in meteors? Also, Some of this isn't NPOV, like "as if that weren't enough". —Preceding unsigned comment added by AstroHurricane001 (talk • contribs) 00:49, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Wording cited has been changed to "In addition." Intense, saturated, lime-green is an abnormal color in meteors, but there were numerous other reasons cited in the article and references why scientists like La Paz felt these weren't normal meteors: low speed, low, flat trajectory, changes of course, absence of sound, absence of smoke trail, absence of particles despite extensive searches, heavy concentration in one geographical area, etc. Dr Fil 18:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Midgreen is not an abnormal colour in meteors- La Paz was wrong. He simply did not know about the 'forbidden line' ionisation of oxygen which I cited above; here it is again. http://amsmeteors.org/spectra/majdenobs.html Of course this is no reflection on LaPaz's skill, as the forbidden line was only spectrographically detected in the late fifties. Midgreen meteors are actually seen quite often see also here http://www.meteorobs.org/maillist/msg13013.html note that the forbidden line green spectrum has even been detected in Perseid meteors. By placing this nonsense on Wikipedia you are causing observers who see green meteors to suspect that they are seeing unidentified flying objects rather than ordinary meteors. This is a clear case of bias. eburacum 87.102.28.2 (talk) 13:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I just saw one 30 minutes ago in Oregon, USA, it was beautiful. Very very green. I was actually just looking for a page on green meteors when I ended up here.MacroMyco (talk) 10:29, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

This kind of does put the information contained within the article in a new light - LaPaz may not have had the opportunity of knowing - but whomever wrote the article sure did - this article is subtly (or not-so-subtly) biased in favor of LaPaz. Which, honestly, is par for the course on the website when it comes to this type of phenomena. 2601:87:4400:AF2:84D7:679C:1DA0:C7F6 (talk) 17:03, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Well I’m not sure if meteors can burn green. But I would assume so since copper when heated to the proper temperature does create a green flame. Alloys of copper burn different shades of green depending on the copper content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:80:8400:E9F9:44E1:C27B:7F2F:A4CA (talk) 01:42, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

my sighting
I had a sighting of a green fireball, in wich it came from a red,white and blue aurua, just wondering if this ment something.(this wasn't the entire sighting, it takes a long time to write about the entire thing.)--Sonicobbsessed (talk) 02:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Ohio Sighting
I was on my way from toledo to youngstown last night via interstate 80 and seen one that was about 1.5 to 2 inches in diamater at arms length i was just waundering if anyone knew of this instance or could maby tell me more about it i seen it around cleveland around 8:30-9:00--Cmedinger (talk) 21:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Michigan Sighting
On June 30, 2008 at 11:57 p.m. in Swartz Creek, MI. A gigantic green fireball flew from Southeast to Northeast being seen from Seymore Rd. and Bristol Rd. It only lasted about 3-4 seconds. It dispursed into 4 fragments and vanished. 4 minutes later two helicopters flew in its trajectroy. Could have been a meteor, could of been something else, couldn't tell ya. I've seen some crazy stuff, but this is new crazy stuff. Update: 4 July 2009 11:40 P.M. Wasn't green, but I just watched a glowing red/orange orb float aimlessly over Swartz Creek in the same general area as the last sighting. Could be related. Firework spectators?Zxeroluda (talk) 18:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Tombaugh Lapaz 3 3 1954.jpg
The image Image:Tombaugh Lapaz 3 3 1954.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

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

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --15:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Sighting in Stike on trent UK 4th april 2009
I was traveling along the A50 back into stoke on trent when a green Shooting star crossed the sky in front of us. It appered from knowhere glowing bright green as it crossed smaller fragments trailed behind but more the colour of a spark. It moved very fast in quite a horizontal direction. At first it looked like a fire work rocket but the way it burnt out it was definatly a shooting star. Never Seen one like that before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.169.49.156 (talk) 15:01, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Possibly relevant material
Talbycodes (talk) 03:39, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

South Africa, c.1957
I and many others saw a green fireball from a train at night in the Karoo near De Aar. For perhaps ten seconds it lit up the desert with a brilliant green glow. The display had all the characteristics one might associate with a meteor. Later in life I became a geologist. I remain convinced that the falling object was either (1) a stone containing much nickel or copper or (2) a man-made object containing copper wiring that burned upon re-entry. Captainbeefart (talk) 14:17, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

LaPaz's further investigations
While LaPaz is very important to green fireballs, is his entire UFO investigative history needed here? The section, "Green fireballs revisited (1965)" could stay, with an added link to Socorro incident, but the rest reads like padding. 71.234.215.133 (talk) 05:54, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Green fireballs. 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/20051029134829/http://user.cs.tu-berlin.de/~thomasg/gf.htm to http://user.cs.tu-berlin.de/~thomasg/gf.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050918112110/http://ufos.about.com/library/weekly/aa080597.htm to http://ufos.about.com/library/weekly/aa080597.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:43, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Copper in space?
Copper along with many other metals has been observed in meteors. The article makes several assertions that its "rare", this is strange. I'd like to see the source that says it is rare or nonexistent. Dominick (TALK) 11:11, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Green fireballs outside the United States (section)
I am concerned that much of this section is undocumented, including direct quotes from unknown sources. It has been flagged as "citation needed," but without references, there is no verifiability. Should this section be included under these circumstances? Hifrommike65 (talk) 12:05, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Clean-up attempt
This article is not even close to being encyclopedic, with issues of WP:FRINGE, WP:FRIND, WP:OR, and WP:UNDUE, to name just a few, dominating the entire thing, soup to nuts. The dozens of 'content needed' tags have been here for years. I have begun the slow process of content editing ... JoJo Anthrax (talk) 22:50, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Good start. There are still too many fringe sources; CUFOS, Project 1947, etc. and Clark, Steiger and Ruppelt are listed as general sources. I haven’t looked for WP:FRIND sources on the topic but I’d be surprised if they didn’t exist. - LuckyLouie (talk) 13:19, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh sure. My initial search for RS last year revealed nothing, but it was brief, non-exhaustive, and I never got back to the task. See my Talk page for some renewed interest in the topic. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 13:50, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I note that the History Channel writeup on the topic tries hard to emphasize a sensationalist POV, but begrudgingly includes that government investigators concluded that the green fireballs were some kind of never-before-seen natural phenomenon. Interest in, and investigation into, the fireballs dropped off at the outbreak of the Korean War.. - LuckyLouie (talk) 14:42, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Imo, the article should be rewritten to emphasize what the title says it is, a type of colored fireball, and the UFO aspect just a small paragraph about misdentification. When done, a link should be added from this article to the colours section of Meteoroid. I'm just commenting and don't intend to edit.  5Q5 |✉ 11:08, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

More Disputed plus Wikipedia NPOV
i endorse the observation that this topic is "a mess", but there are three important points to make here.

the first is that "UFO" or "UAP" are real. they are no longer (never were) a "fringe" topic. the U.S. military has taken the issue seriously, the 2022 Defense Authorization Act creates an "Office of UAP Research" within the office of the under secretary of defense for intelligence, Navy pilots have encountereed them frequently and verified them both visually and recorded them with the newest generation of radar, FLIR, and even with cellphone cameras; near air collisions have become such a problem that UFO are officially reported to the pentagon as air hazards, and the DoD is actively working both to collect information about them and to reduce the stigma of reporting them. several "scientific" or fact based organizations, including NARCAP and the Science Coalition for UAP Research, have published well documented, entirely empirical studies of UFO. there is absolutely no substantive, scientific, technical or informational reason to associate UFO with fringe science.

the second is that wikipedia cheerfully allows the citation of sources and the propagation of claims that are themselves blatantly pseudoscientific. there is *no* scientific theory, argument or evidence to support the claim that the "green fireballs" were "sequelae of atomic weapons tests". there is *no* scientific theory, argument or evidence to support the claim that the "green fireballs" were "clouds of nuclear fallout." there is *no* scientific theory, argument or evidence to support the claim that the "green fireballs" were "lunar material ejected from meteor impacts on the Moon's surface". these risible fabrications are historically products of an explicit and programmatic effort at disinformation and propaganda, suppression of information, and lying about the facts orchestrated by a defense/intelligence establishment alarmed at the potential for exploitation of the topic by foreign governments to disturb the U.S. population. by tolerating and even editorially supporting that point of view wikipedia becomes itself an instrument of propaganda.

given all that, the final point is that wikipedia editorial policy needs to reexamine its working premises and this needs to be propagated throughout the relevant editorial staff. in particular, the topic of UFO as observed phenomena and documented event needs to be editorially distinguished from the "extraterrestrial hypothesis" or "interdimensional travel" or "area 51" or "alien corpses" as speculation. these are still unverified by any reputable scientific or journalistic source. do not throw the baby out with the gray bathwater. you spread misinformation and leave your head stuck in the 20th century when you do. Drollere (talk) 17:16, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

 * As far as Wikipedia is concerned, the military of some random country does not decide what is real and what is not. The same applies to random organizations that have for some reason chosen to include the word "science" in their names. Instead, reliable sources are the relevant authority.
 * And new stuff goes to the bottom. --Hob Gadling (talk) 14:17, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

FBI document on green fireballs
The following is an FBI document on green fireballs .Chantern15 (talk) 11:03, 5 November 2021 (UTC)chantern15

Declassified Documents For Project Twinkle Under Project Grudge For Green Fireballs
As seen here: Chantern15 (talk) 07:46, 9 November 2021 (UTC)chantern15

 * Nothing on theblackvault.com is likely to be seen as acceptable under WP:RS criteria. This is a privately-run website, and there is no way to validate the authenticity of its content. Not that it matters much, since we don't base articles on primary source documents anyway. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:15, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that that is unfortunate, since the documents on Black Vault come from the government and are backed by the stamps and signatures present on them which highlight their importance. As for primary sources, RSPRIMARY states that they can be used in specific circumstances.Chantern15 (talk) 12:37, 9 November 2021 (UTC)chantern15
 * I guess you mean "the government" of the country you happen to live in. Why should Wikipedia care about that? Since when have governments been reliable sources? --Hob Gadling (talk) 12:43, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Not the government of the country I happen to live in, but the government of the United States, from where these documents have been declassified from. If you read the headers of the documents, that's where they come from. This is not an appeal to the authority of the US Government, merely to point out the relevance of this clearance, as sightings in the US, will be relevant to them being covered by the US Government.Chantern15 (talk) 12:49, 9 November 2021 (UTC)chantern15

title: Talk:Green fireballs


text:
User talk:Ryan Prior/MTGsets

MTGSets
The standard practice is to have the article at the simplest name possible. If there are no other things called Mirrodin, it should stay at Mirrodin and so on. Also if there is a red link to "Mercadian Masques (Magic:The Gathering)" then the article is more likely to get created there, but then if someone searches for just "Mercadian Masques" he won't find the existing article (the Search feature is working now, but sometimes it doesn't). Grue 18:24, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I was going to drop my own note on your page, but I noticed Grue had beat me. The point is that You should use the simplest form and not one bit simpler. If an article can happily reside on a page without an added suffix and without ambiguation, leave it there. Ambush Commander 22:38, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks a bunch for the naming help. Ryan Prior 13:13, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ryan Prior/MTGsets


text:
Patkai

The Pat-kai (Pron:pʌtˌkaɪ) or Patkai Bum (Burmese: Kumon Taungdan)  are a series of mountains in the Indo-Myanmar border falling in the northeastern Indian states of Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Upper Burma region of Myanmar. In Tai-Ahom language, Pat means to cut and Kai means chicken.

Geography
The Patkai range mountains are not as rugged as the Himalayas and the peaks are much lower. Features of the range include conical peaks, steep slopes and deep valleys.

Three mountain ranges come under the Patkai. The Patkai-Bum, the Garo-Khasi-Jaintia hills and the Lushai Hills. The Garo-Khasi range is in the Indian state of Meghalaya. Mawsynram and Cherrapunji, on the windward side of these mountains are the world's wettest places, having the highest annual rainfall.

The climate range from temperate to alpine due to differences in altitude.

The Pangsau Pass offers the most important route through the Patkai. The Ledo Road was built through Pangsau Pass as a strategic supply road over the duration of World War II to link India with the Burma Road and finally onto China.

In World War 2, the Patkai Range was considered a part of The Hump by the Allied Forces.

title: Patkai


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derek Riordan

 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 KEEP. JeremyA 05:25, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Derek Riordan
Appears to be a hoax; Googling "David Riordan" +Hibernian (his supposed football team) gets 2 hits, apparently unrelated. Created by a user whose other edits were all vandalism. Can someone verify this guy actually exists? Meelar (talk) 16:30, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Not a hoax. The Hibernian Football Club web site lists him as the top scorer.  (See left column on linked page, "2004/05 Scorers").  Notability is another question, and I have no opinion on that.  --Tabor 18:41, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment 2 If you googled "David Riordan" instead of "Derek Riordan", perhaps that was the problem? --Tabor 18:42, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Ah...ahem...yes, yes it was. Move along now, nothing to see here. Nomination withdrawn, changing my vote to keep. In my defense, the rest of the anon's contributions were blatant vandalism. Meelar (talk) 21:16, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable professional footballer. Capitalistroadster 05:58, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Forbsey 23:17, 7 Jun 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:
Potter Valley, California

Potter Valley is a census-designated place in Mendocino County, California, United States. It is located 18 mi north-northeast of Ukiah, at an elevation of 948 ft at the headwaters of the East Fork Russian River. The CDP population was 665 at the 2020 census.

History
In 1852, when William and Thomas Potter and Mose Briggs first entered what would become known as Potter Valley, they were searching for the headwaters of the Russian River from their base in Sonoma County. The Pomo people called it Ba-lo Kai. They found three Pomo villages (each about 500 people strong), the Russian headwaters, and a lush valley with wild oats "stirrup high". Eventually the Potters returned to settle there, and the valley became known by the American ranchers' name.

The post office opened in 1870.

Painter Grace Hudson was born in Potter Valley in 1865.

In addition to his famous Ridgewood Ranch, Charles S. Howard, owner of the racehorse Seabiscuit, owned a ranch in Potter Valley where he ran cattle.

Geography
Potter Valley is located 18 mi northeast of Ukiah and 8 mi northeast of Lake Mendocino in Mendocino County, with the valley floor at roughly 950 ft in elevation. The headwaters of the East Fork of the Russian River originate in the valley. The Potter Valley Project delivers additional water from the Eel River, which flows into the Russian River here via a controversial hydroelectric plant that tunnels through the mountains to take advantage of the relative proximity of these two waterways. This diversion supplies a significant amount of water to inland Mendocino and Sonoma counties. Potter Valley is a rich agricultural region, with excellent soils, planted mostly in irrigated pasture, wine grapes, and pears, but supporting a wide variety of farms and ranches.

According to the United States Census Bureau, the Potter Valley Census Designated Place (CDP) covers an area of 4.0 sqmi, 99.31% of it land, and 0.69% of it water. The entire valley, which is mostly rural, has an area of roughly 12 sqmi.

Climate
Potter Valley has a hot-summer Mediterranean climate (Csa) typical of the interior of Northern California, with hot, dry summers and cool, wet winters, along with great diurnal temperature variation.

Demographics
The 2010 United States Census reported that the Potter Valley CDP had a population of 646. The population density was 159.2 PD/sqmi. The racial makeup of Potter Valley was 516 (79.9%) White, 2 (0.3%) African American, 13 (2.0%) Native American, 2 (0.3%) Asian, 0 (0.0%) Pacific Islander, 97 (15.0%) from other races, and 16 (2.5%) from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 154 persons (23.8%).

The Census reported that 636 people (98.5% of the population) lived in households, 10 (1.5%) lived in non-institutionalized group quarters, and 0 (0%) were institutionalized.

There were 241 households, out of which 73 (30.3%) had children under the age of 18 living in them, 125 (51.9%) were opposite-sex married couples living together, 20 (8.3%) had a female householder with no husband present, 16 (6.6%) had a male householder with no wife present. There were 20 (8.3%) unmarried opposite-sex partnerships, and 0 (0%) same-sex married couples or partnerships. 61 households (25.3%) were made up of individuals, and 22 (9.1%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.64. There were 161 families (66.8% of all households); the average family size was 3.19.

The population was spread out, with 142 people (22.0%) under the age of 18, 56 people (8.7%) aged 18 to 24, 156 people (24.1%) aged 25 to 44, 206 people (31.9%) aged 45 to 64, and 86 people (13.3%) who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 41.6 years. For every 100 females, there were 105.1 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 101.6 males.

There were 267 housing units at an average density of 65.8 /sqmi, of which 152 (63.1%) were owner-occupied, and 89 (36.9%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 0%; the rental vacancy rate was 10.0%. 382 people (59.1% of the population) lived in owner-occupied housing units and 254 people (39.3%) lived in rental housing units.

Politics
In the state legislature, Potter Valley is in, and.

Federally, Potter Valley is in.

title: Potter Valley, California


text:
Ivan Smagghe

Ivan Smagghe is a French DJ and producer. He was originally known as Ivan Rough Trade, after his job in the Rough Trade record store in Paris. His musical style has been described as electro house and "minimal electro." Smagghe's Death Disco compilation was a key release in the electroclash genre. He formed Black Strobe in 1997 with Arnaud Rebotini, but left in 2006. Black Strobe describe their dark electronic sound as "frozen balearic gay biker house". Smagghe is also a member of the Volga Select project, with Marc Collin.

As Ivan Rough Trade

 * French Fried Funk (Slip 'n' Slide Records, 1997).

As Ivan Smagghe

 * How To Kill The DJ (Part One) (Tigersushi Records, 2003)
 * Bugged Out! Presents Suck My Deck (React, 2004)
 * Death Disco (Eskimo, 2004)
 * Fabric 23 (Fabric London, 2005)
 * Kill The DJ Introducing The Dysfunctional Family - A Mixed Up Compilation By Chloé Et Ivan Smagghe (Kill The DJ Records, 2006)
 * Cocoricò 03 (Mantra Vibes, 2008)

title: Ivan Smagghe


text:
Yumiko

Yumiko is a feminine Japanese given name.

Possible writings
Yumiko can be written using different kanji characters and can mean:
 * 弓子, "bow, child".
 * 由美子, "reason/cause, beauty, child".
 * 結実子, "fruition, child".
 * 夕実子, "evening, fruit, child".
 * 優美子, "tenderness, beauty, child".
 * 悠美子, "permanence, beauty, child".
 * 祐美子, "help, beauty, child".
 * 由実子, "reason/cause, fruit, child".
 * 有美子, "exist/possess, beauty, child".
 * 夕美子, "evening, beauty, child".
 * 友美子, "friend, beauty, child".
 * 裕美子, "rich, beauty, child".
 * 勇美子, "brave, beauty, child".

The name can also be written in hiragana or katakana.

People

 * Yumiko Abe (由美子), a Japanese professional wrestler.
 * Yumiko Cheng (鄭烈瓊), a Hong Kong Cantopop singer.
 * Yumiko Fujita (弓子), a Japanese actress.
 * Yumiko Fukushima, announcer.
 * Yumiko Hara (裕美子), a Japanese marathon runner.
 * Yumiko Hosono (佑美子), a Japanese voice actress, actress, and singer.
 * Yumiko Hotta (祐美子), a Japanese professional wrestler and mixed martial artist.
 * Yumiko Igarashi (ゆみこ), a Japanese manga artist.
 * Yumiko Kobayashi (由美子, born 1979), a Japanese voice actress.
 * Yumiko Kokonoe (佑三子), a Japanese actress.
 * Yumiko Ōshima (弓子), a Japanese manga artist.
 * Yumiko Nakagawa, a Japanese girl at the center of an Okinawan controversy.
 * Yumiko Shaku (由美子), a Japanese actress and model.
 * Yumiko Shibata (由美子), a Japanese voice actress.
 * Yumiko Suzuki (disambiguation), multiple people.
 * Yumiko Takeshima (竹島 由美子), a Japanese costume designer, ballet dancer, and founder of YUMIKO dancewear.

Fictional characters

 * Yumiko Kusaka (友美子), a character in the novel, film and manga Battle Royale.
 * Yumiko Shirasagi (白鷺弓子), a character in the novel series Digital Devil Story and the video game adaptation Digital Devil Story: Megami Tensei.
 * Yumiko Takagi (高木由美子), a character in the anime and manga series Hellsing.
 * Yumiko Sakaki (榊由美子), a character in the Grisaia series of visual novels.
 * Yumiko (弓子), a female Japanese-American character in the comic book series The Walking Dead as well as the TV series adaptation.
 * Yumiko "Hibana" Imagawa (今川 由美子), a character in the video game series Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege
 * Yumiko, a character in the fighting game, Brawlhalla.
 * Mirkou Yumiko, a character from  Kusunoki Mebuki is a Hero.

title: Yumiko


text:
Category:Sacramentals

Sacramentals (Latin: sacramentalia) are sacred signs, ritual acts or a ceremonies, which, in a certain imitation of the sacraments, have a spiritual effect and are obtained through the intercession of the Church.

title: Category:Sacramentals


text:
Angiomotin

Angiomotin (AMOT) is a protein that in humans is encoded by the AMOT gene. It belongs to the motin family of angiostatin binding proteins, which includes angiomotin, angiomotin-like 1 (AMOTL1) and angiomotin-like 2 (AMOTL2) characterized by coiled-coil domains at N-terminus and consensus PDZ-binding domain at the C-terminus. Angiomotin is expressed predominantly in endothelial cells of capillaries as well as angiogenic tissues such as placenta and solid tumor.

Discovery
Angiomotin was discovered in 2001 by screening a placenta yeast two-hybrid cDNA library for angiostatin-binding peptides, using a construct encoding the kringle domains 1-4 of angiostatin.

Gene location
AMOT gene is located on human chromosome X:112,021,794-112,066,354, containing 3252 nucleotides in coding sequence as 11 exons.

Protein structure
Two splice isoforms are known for angiomotin: p80 and p130. The alternative splicing is somewhat tissue specific. Cells expressing p130 contained more actin than those expressing p80. p80 is not the product of cleavage of p130, as p130 contains no potential proteolytic cleavage site for such conversion.

Angiomotin p80 is a 72.54 kD protein of 675 residues, characterized by conserved N-terminal coiled coil domains and C-terminal PDZ binding motifs, with angiostatin binding domain (ABD) located in the central region. It is hypothesized that the ABD is extracellular, while the coiled-coil and the PDZ binding domain are intracellular. The PDZ-binding motif of angiomotin serves as a protein recognition site and deletion of as few as three amino acids from the C-terminal results in complete loss of pro-migratory activity, and endothelial cells expressing such mutant angiomotin failed to migrate or form tubes.

Angiomotin p130 differs from p80 by having an N-terminal cytoplasmic extension of 409 amino acids rich in glutamine, which mediates the binding of p130 to F-actin and tight cell-cell junctions. This binding remains after destabilizing actin with cytochalasin B.

Like other surface-associated proteins that can bind plasminogen and its derivatives, angiomotin does not appear to have a signal sequence, thus its association with the cell surface may be via protein–protein interaction usually referred to as non-classic secretion.

Role in cell motility and angiogenesis
Expression of angiomotin p80 in endothelial cells increases the random migration of endothelial cells, as well as the migration of endothelial cells toward growth factors, e.g. bFGF, VEGF and LPA etc. Angiomotin also mediates tube formation of endothelial cells. Angiomotin promotes angiogenesis by both stimulating cell spreading and stabilizing established tubes, e.g. in mouse aortic endothelial (MAE) cells the tubes remained stable for over 30 days, while control tubes started to regress after 3 days. In the presence of angiostatin, endothelial cells expressing angiomotin p80 exhibit reduction in migration as well as reduction in tubules formation in vitro. These observations are consistent with the localization of angiomotin in the leading edge of migrating cells. Angiostatin therefore, is an inhibitor of angiomotin.

Angiomotin p80 locates and binds angiostatin on the cell surface. In primary endothelial of Chinese hamster ovary, it localizes to cell-cell junction, recruits ZO-1 and interacts with MAGI-1. It may play a role in the assembly of endothelial cell-cell junctions, as well.

Angiomotin p130 does not promote cell migration, nor responds to angiostatin. It localizes to cell-cell junction like p80 and regulates paracellular permeability. Its N-terminal domain localizes to actin fibers and stabilizes them, and this effect is not affected by angiostatin. Transfection of p130 angiomotin into MAE cells results in change in cell shape, increased average cell size and stress fiber formation. So p80 is involved in cell migration and expressed during migratory phase. While p130 controls cell shape by interaction with actin, and is expressed during the period of blood vessel stabilization and maturation. The relative expression levels of p80 and p130 regulate a switch between a migratory and a non-migratory cell phenotype, where homo-oligomerization of p80 and hetero-oligomerization of both isoforms are critical for this regulation.

Role in Hippo signaling pathway
AMOT, AMOTL1 and AMOTL2 play critical roles in the Hippo signaling pathway by regulating the subcellular localization of the co-activators YAP (Yes-associated protein) and TAZ (transcriptional co-activator with PDZ-binding motif), and activating LATS2 through a novel conserved domain. The activity of YAP and TAZ can be restricted through their interaction with AMOT and AMOTL1, and such interaction depends on the WW domain of TAZ and the Proline-Proline-x–Tyrosine motif at the N-terminus of AMOT.

In position-dependent Hippo signaling, where the outer and inner cells are polar and nonpolar respectively, AMOT and AMOTL2 are essential for Hippo pathway activation and appropriate cell fate specification. In the nonpolar inner cells, AMOT localizes to adherens junctions (AJs), and Ser-176 at the N-terminal domain is phosphorylated by LATS downstream of GPCR signaling, which inhibits actin binding activity and stabilizes the AMOT-LATS interaction to activate the Hippo pathway. Thus, AMOT is a direct substrate of LATS and its phosphorylation at Ser-176 inhibits cell migration and angiogenesis. In the outer cells, the cell polarity sequesters AMOT from basolateral adherens junctions to apical domains, thereby suppressing Hippo signaling. It is therefore proposed AMOT acts as a molecular switch for Hippo pathway and links F-actin with LATS activity.

Along the Hippo pathway, AMOT's binding to Merlin releases its auto-inhibition and promotes Merlin's binding to LATS1/2. Phosphorylation of Ser-518 outside the Merlin's auto-inhibitory tail prevents binding and thus inhibits Hippo pathway kinase activation. USP9x regulates the ubiquitin-mediated turnover of AMOT, and the deubiquitylation of AMOT results in its stabilization and lower YAP/TAZ activity.

Cancer research
A DNA vaccination targeting angiomotin generated antibodies that detected AMOT on the endothelial cell surface, which inhibited migration. It blocked angiogenesis and prevented growth of transplanted tumors for up to 150 days in vivo. A combination of DNA vaccines encoding AMOT and the extracellular and transmembrane domains of the human EGF receptor 2 (Her-2)/neu oncogene inhibited breast cancer progression and impaired tumor vascularization in Her-2/neu transgenic mice, showing DNA vaccination targeting AMOT may be used to mimic the effect of angiostatin and no toxicity or impairment of normal blood vessels was detected.

In human breast cancer tissues, AMOT is highly expressed compared with control, and its level is associated with other angiogenesis markers. AMOT links to the proliferation and invasion of breast tumours and the long-term survival of the patients, and could be a potential target for therapy.

For melanoma, AMOT binds a variant of soluble cell adhesion molecule (sCD146) in endothelial progenitor cells (EPC). Silencing AMOT in EPC inhibits the angiogenic effect of sCD146, e.g. EPC migration, proliferation, and capacity to form capillary-like structures in Matrigel.

title: Angiomotin