text:
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sydney Riot of 1879/archive1

Sydney Riot of 1879
Self-nom, though others have helped. An interesting side-story. There was some discussion around whether the quotations should stay - but given their historical significance in the tale, and that any précis wouldn't be much shorter, they've been kept in (and there are other FAs I've seen that take a similar approach too), jguk 18:59, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Support. This is really interesting from start to finish,very well written and informed. Giano | talk 07:15, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Support. Looks good to me. violet/riga (t) 10:04, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Support. Great article. It would be nice if there could be photos from somewhere, but perhaps from 1879 there wouldn't be...  Perhaps contacting MCC or the New South Wales cricket board might be of use?  Otherwise, fantastic. Smoddy (Rabbit and pork) 11:28, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I've never seen a photo or artist's impression of the SCG from this era. The later ones all show a stand that wasn't there in 1879, jguk 12:03, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I was just suggesting that these two bodies may have something that they could share. I do see that it is unlikely, however. Smoddy (Rabbit and pork) 12:25, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Conditional support, if we could change the inline urls to use Template:Ref and Template:Note. Also wish to say that I am a big fan of jguk's work! - Ta bu shi da yu 04:00, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Dealt with, jguk 07:22, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Support. A wonderfully original topic for FA. My only suggestion would be to extend the lead somwehat, perhaps by mentioning what the "controversial decision" was and a brief summary of the reaction. Harro5 06:58, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * I've added a comment on what caused the riot and when the overriding dispute was resolved, jguk 07:31, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Object for now - Prose does seem to be brilliant (although Webster tells me whilst is archaic) but Wikipedia is not a place to have full letters (that is what Wikisource is for so saying that the he 'full text of the letter is on Wikisource' is a bit misleading since the full text is in this article as well). Both of the letters in this article need to be cut down to size by using ... as appropriate (one quarter to one third of their current length should do it). Also, the external link cites really do need to become part of the ref/note setup already in the article due to the fact that the two systems work differently and thus mixing and matching them is confusing to readers (one system brings the reader to another part of the article while the other lands them in another website). the lead could also be expanded a bit. --mav
 * I agree about the letters, a summary, or abridged version and a link to the full text in wikisource would be better, Minor object for now--nixie 03:07, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with this. At least, the letters should be indented (was the original not indented?) for readability.  Conditional support. -- 07:24, May 31, 2005 (UTC) Looks better now, but I still would prefer shortening. -- Sundar 08:43, May 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * I too agree with mav, and will object until the letters are abridged significantly (especially the first) or summarized. --Spangineer ( háblame  ) 13:53, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * I've ummed and ahed over the letters for a while. Overall the bias appears to be in favour of keeping them. Since they tell much of the story, any useful précis of them is likely to be fairly long anyway. Also, they are of particular historic importance in the dispute - so much so that Wisden Cricketers Almanack (despite the space they took up) saw fit to print them in full. In an article that is 30kb, they look ok - if the article was much longer, I'd probably agree with you though, jguk 07:31, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Sorry - What Wikipedia is not is a policy page, and all FAs need to follow policy. In the realm of having full letters, this article does not follow that policy. So if the whole letters are not abridged or summarized, then this article can not be featured (irrespective of the number of supports this FAC gets). --mav 04:22, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * What part of WP:WIN does this article contravene? I can't work it out.  The article is certainly more than a mere collection of public domain or other source material.  smoddy 11:23, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * 'Complete copies of primary sources should go into Wikisource.' The two letters are complete copies and Wikipedia is not a place to host those. --mav 12:31, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * That to me is intended at excluding these article from existing on Wikipedia as articles in themselves, not as stopping the whole of a source being shown. smoddy 13:23, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * And yet 'Complete copies of primary sources should go into Wikisource.' See also the associated guideline, which explains this in more detail. --mav 16:56, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I understand from your comments on other pages that your opposition to including sources in articles has always been that the source remains editable. I would have no objection if the source was placed into a template that was protected and transcluded into the article, jguk 08:09, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * No offense to Mav, but does this mean that if I fire off a two line email that causes WWIII then we would not be able to include it in a Wikipedia article? I think this sounds a little off-putting. If the entire letter is significant to the article, then we should keep it. If the letter should clearly only be quoted in part, then we should only quote that part. I have no real opinion as yet on the letters, btw, as I haven't read the article (in as great a depth as I should have - clarification). - Ta bu shi da yu 03:36, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * As far as I'm aware, they were not indented - however, I've added some paragraph gaps to improve readability, jguk, jguk 07:39, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Support. This is a good candidate for the main page. Very well written, interesting, should be chosen.  --Igor 04:32, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Support. I know nothing of cricket and little of Australia, and I still found the article enjoyable. --Scimitar 18:01, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Support = Nichalp  ( Talk )= 18:24, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

 * Support. Although I have a couple of transcription queries which I have inserted into the letters as comments. --Theo (Talk) 21:44, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the comments. I have now done a thorough check back to the original source and amended as approprate. Your transcription queries turned out to be correct:) jguk 09:33, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Support Tintin 11:36, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 *  Conditional support. As below please eliminate the one and two sentence paragraphs. Also the lead in this case is really too short. Also I'm not sure if it is cricket terms or Brit/Aussie idioms that I am failing to parse, but the lead has a couple things that I don't get: "controversially given out" and "lead an England representative side". Is "given out" cricket terminology similar to "called out" or what would be said as "given an out" in baseball? What is involved in leading a side? As a player, captaining the team, or what? The article has another one "...refusal of an appeal for caught behind against Lord Harris...". That is also either tortured english, or cricket lingo. - Taxman Talk 21:05, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * A fine criticism. I have wiki-linked the confusing terms to afford succour to the bewildered. --Theo  (Talk) 00:14, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok that helps, but the lead is still too short, and there are still two one sentence paragraphs that need to be merged or expanded. Also that last sentence I mentioned above still seems tortured after the link was added. Can you really say "of an appeal for caught behind"? Even if "caught behind" is a cricket phrase, doesn't that still need a verb like "being" in there? And further, I don't see anything in the article you linked that tells what caught behind is. I apologize if this is all horridly obvious to those familiar with cricket, but to those not, it's baggling. - Taxman Talk 13:06, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * I am leaving the structural stuff for JGUK to address. As to the rest: Essentially, "yes", syntactically, one does say "of an appeal for caught behind". There is an element of elision here but it is not quite where you appear to imagine. The unelided phrase would be "an appeal for [an umpire's decision that the player be given out according to the circumstances known as] caught behind". I have added an explanation of "caught behind" to Dismissal (cricket). Even if this might make sense to those of us in the know, it is good to test the piece against the intelligently unfamiliar.Theo (Talk) 07:47, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I've merged a few paragraphs so there are fewer short ones, although I have kept the one that says "Independent witnesses said Coulthard's decision was close but fair" as I think it's reasonable to let that one stand out, leaving a sort of irony there by its starkness. I've also changed the reference to being "caught behind" so it only refers to an appeal for a catch to dismiss Lord Harris being turned down (that the catch was taken by the wicket-keeper is a detail that's not relevant here), jguk 09:33, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I've now increased the lead section a wee bit too, jguk 16:47, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Object. References are good, but including the entire reference in the article is not good style and not something an example article should have. Even on just on readability, a long passage in italics is hard to read. A more significant objection is that this is plagiarism. No Account 01:31, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It's not plagiarism: the letters are fully attributed. The letters are particularly significant in the history and aftermath of the riot, so much so that they were quoted in full in Wisden despite their length. There has been quite a bit of discussion before as to whether they should stay, and the general feeling is that they should remain - they are an integral part of the story. I did at one stage attempt to précis them, but found that in practice I would either have to omit much information, or come up with something that's not much shorter than the original - so I think it's better to give the full documents here - as you can see from the messages of support, a clear majority is happy for them to remain. I'll try moving the quotations out of italics. Let me know if they look better, jguk 08:02, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Bigger question is are they allowable to be used at all? Using the whole letter would fail under fair use, or citation exemptions to copyright protection. Forgive me if this has alrady been covered elsewhere, I'm in a bit of a rush. - Taxman Talk 17:16, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * They are very clearly old enough to be public domain now. smoddy 17:43, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * They are more readable now. Still, including the whole letter is plagiarism. Not because of lack of attribution, but because the article is not an original work. A featured article should be a great example of an original encyclopedia article, not a collection of primary sources printed in full. Still object on that basis. No Account
 * I think you misunderstand what plagiarism is. Also, this is clearly an article in its own right, it isn't just a collection of primary sources printed in full, jguk 18:51, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I do know what plagiarism is, I assure you. If a student of mine submitted this as his own work, quoting two long letters in full, even if fully attributed, I would require it to be redone. As it stands, this is not an example of a great encyclopedia article. It should not be featured. No Account 02:02, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * We should be able to agree that it is not plagiarism - as it's not. On your other point, WP articles are not academic papers - they are articles telling a story that imparts some facts to an (at least partly) interested reader. They therefore adopt a different style - one that should interest the reader (and from the 12 support votes above, it is clear the article achieves this). Of course, in a different context, a different style would be adopted (eg when writing a paper for a client I would include all detail in one or more appendices, and I'd adapt my choice of language too), so I am not surprised that in the context of your work. My guess is that neither of our work styles would be appropriate - but the article is not written in the context of our work, it is from the context of providing an interesting encyclopaedia article to readers. Finally, please note that here the letters are a large part of the story (as well as telling it). This is similar to what happened in our article on Samantha Smith, which was similarly promoted to FA status. I fear we are not going to agree on this, and I appreciate you are not alone in your concerns - and you will see from the talk page I have ummed and ahed on this myself, but most readers of the article are happy with the letters staying as they are both historically significant and they help impart the tale, jguk 07:21, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I should have added that no WP article ever claims to have only one author - it has many. We do not claim it to be one person's work - and indeed that is untrue here as, although I have contributed greatly, so have many others: the article really is a true collaborative work, jguk 07:25, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Support. Thorough treatment of the subject at hand. Don't see any problems with the letters, I think they're needed for informational purposes. Sam Vimes 21:30, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Support - a great article. The letters (in toto) should stay. For appearance I would have preferred them to be in italics also (as in Samantha Smith) contrary to what someone said above, but that's a minor issue. - Ian 03:34, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: the letters. Oh, no. Are you serious? The article is very nicely structured apart from the letters, why ruin its proportions with a lot of redundant Victorian prosing? Please note that the narrative part of Harris' letter is obviously the basis of the section "The riot" above, which gives the exact same details with much of the same wording. If the whole letter were to be used, the "riot" section would become redundant. But AFAIC we don't want to use the whole of these prolix, comfortable Victorian-style accounts, to kill all interest—who are we, the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica? Let's give a professional presentation here. By that, I mean: any material that has already appeared should be ruthlessly slashed, most of the rest should be concisely summarized, and quotes interspersed of those sections of the letters that are a) reasoning and argumentative, rather than merely narrative, and b) interesting. I have done a version of this for the first letter, please check it out and give me feedback. (If it's approved, I'll do the same with the second.) My version isn't necessarily the best we can do, but I do believe the principles are sensible. Bishonen | talk 16:20, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. This is a change of opinion because I am concerned about the reversion of Bish's proposal without discussion or acknowledgement. I do not share Bish's objection to Victorian prose (indeed, I am rather partial to it) but I thought that the changes that she made showed a way to make a good article better. To my mind, retaining substantial portions of the letters while eliminating material duplicating more appropriate sections combines the period flavour with efficient communication. --Theo  (Talk) 00:38, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I discussed this with Bishonen on IRC at the time - as well as other amendments to the article so it's not true that there was no discussion, jguk 05:59, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Imprecise phrasing by me: I should have said no discussion or acknowledgement here on Wikipedia.  Either way, I see the redrafted form as an improvement and the subsequent reversion as a retrograde step. My objection remains. --Theo  (Talk) 20:31, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * In this case the letters are key to the subject - they were printed in full in both the English and NSW press at the time and reported in full in Wisden despite its limited space. Without the letters the article would just not be comprehensive - it would be the same as one of the many ordinary accounts of the riot that abound. Here, our WP article is taking a lead - adding information from a wide variety of sources to recount the riot in a way that no one of the sources can do on its own. In short, without the letters the article quite simply would not be comprehensive - that is why they have to remain, jguk 18:52, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I think there's a good reason no other references include the letters—because they don't work in an encyclopedia article. Bish is right; there's too much victorian prose that is verbose and includes superfluous details. The letters in full are on wikisource; if someone wants to read them, they can.  But to leave essential parts of the story in such a difficult to digest format is unnecessary and unhelpful for the average reader.  Summarize them mercilessly to include the important information, quote them periodically, and link to wikisource.  BTW, newspapers nowadays (I don't know about back then) often include original stuff (i.e. speeches, court decisions etc.), but we don't include those verbatim in their respective articles.  Those articles can be considered comprehensive, and similarly, I think this article can be perfectly comprehensive without the letters if it summarizes the key contents of the letters and links to them on wikisource.  With the letters, it is not completely "well-written" and thus cannot in my opinion be wikipedia's "best work". --Spangineer ( háblame ) 19:34, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

 * No source is an encyclopaedia - so they are writing with a different aim than us. Also the better ones do quote very extensively from the letters - always leaving me (as the reader) wondering why they don't go the whole hog. The sources - and I have read a fair few - they tend to be short and not comprehensive. We have a real chance to offer a full article here on an interesting side-topic to the history of cricket. We shouldn't lose it, jguk 20:23, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support - if you don't like the letters, just skip over them... – ugen64 20:46, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Robert Gould Shaw

Comments
I have just removed the following information from the article:
 * Mount Ida College, a private liberal arts college, built its modern day campus on the site of the Shaw Family Estate in Newton, Massachusetts. Many of the estate's original buildings still exist; this includes the family's thirty room mansion, which is now a female residence hall at the center of campus. Other remaining structures house administrative offices and classrooms.

News
Mount Ida College is located on the site of the estate of Robert Gould Shaw II, who was the cousin of Robert Gould Shaw. Please see the letter on the Newton Conservators website: Robert Gould Shaw II. DiverDave (talk) 01:32, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

What does "Shaw was born in blackness, dew to a hillbilly family" mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.7.82.105 (talk) 07:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

 * Vandalism, that's what it means. Revert in progress. Sensei48 (talk) 08:05, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

About Ken Burns and his documentary
I took off in the article this sentence about the letters written by Col. Robert Gould Shaw:

"They are quoted liberally by Ken Burns in his documentary miniseries ''The Civil War"

I've attentively watched all these movies: there was not the slightest trace of Robert Shaw's words! soldat_bleu@live.be —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.104.33.133 (talk) 13:40, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

I think there is confusion Burns quotes George Bernard Shaw. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.38.84.34 (talk) 11:46, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

First marriage
Why isn't his first marriage and divorce to Lady Astor noted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.68.50.119 (talk) 03:18, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

 * You are thinking of the wrong Robert Gould Shaw. Your Lady Astor was born in 1879; this Col. Shaw died in 1863. Lady Astor's husband RGS was a distant cousin of this RGS, and Astor's husband was named in honor of this Civil War hero.Sensei48 (talk) 04:29, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Did Col. Shaw really exist?
Significant lack of citation is evident.--173.69.135.105 (talk) 01:53, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

54th MA NOT "first all-black regiment"
I have often seen this stated as a fact; it is incorrect. There were several pre-existing "all-black" regiments (but led by white officers) in the South, such as in Louisiana and the Carolinas. Indeed, the movie Glory even showed -- quite unfavorably -- one such regiment. And the 1st Regiment Kansas Volunteer Infantry (Colored) was organized in late 1862, being accepted into federal service on January 13, 1863. Accordingly, I added "in the Northeast" to the statement at the very beginning of the article. Nevertheless, very few other states in the North followed the lead of Massachusetts; instead, they allowed their black residents to join all-black federal regiments called United States Colored Troops (USCT). Most Northern states -- unlike Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Kansas -- did not organize black regiments during the Civil War. Don Columbia (talk) 21:14, 5 January 2016 (UTC).

Photo editing
From my Talk page, to the article Talk page where it belongs - The original image of Robert Gould Shaw was fine as it was uncropped. It is better being able to see the classic historic sitting pose, which your cropping obscured. Judging by this and the other image you've been reverted over, you have a tendency too make photos too bright. At least to my eye and the other editor. Per WP:BRD this should stay as it has been for years unless you get consensus to change it. - Gothicfilm (talk) 17:54, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Please be aware that BRD is not policy but an essay (i.e., opinion). Over notation of personal opinions about editors and prior edits, however, is addressed in the edit warring policy, and it should be noted that your behavior of reverting rather than discussion or actually attempting to come to consensus is a steadfast and brightline rule.  We can start an RfC, if you'd like.  That way, there will be opinions gathered from more than just you and I regarding this image.  -- ψλ  ● ✉ ✓ 19:11, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
 * It is appreciated if anyone is trying to improve images, but the cropped version is arguably lower quality because it has more noise or grain than the original. Brightening or increasing the exposure too much increases the noise. So does cropping (unless it's a lossless crop). Spellcast (talk) 02:48, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't have more grain or noise because it was retouched to reduce the digital noise. -- ψλ  ● ✉ ✓ 02:54, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Photos under "Memorials"
Could someone please display the first two photos listed, whose code is currently shown in their place? I've tried several times to fix this, but I simply can't figure out what the problem is. (I'd also appreciate it if the person who makes the correction would respond to this message so I can see where I went wrong.) Rontrigger (talk) 06:31, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Overstatement of Number of African American Volunteers
The following statement, the last line of the second full paragraph, does not seem accurate. "They inspired hundreds of thousands more African Americans to enlist for the Union helping to turn the tide of the war to its ultimate victory." There is no citation to that statement, so I don't know what source is relied upon by the author. There is no doubt that the 54th inspired African Americans to volunteer in great numbers, but "hundreds of thousands" is a really big number. Everything I found on the number of African Americans in the Union Army, including on Wikipedia, said that the total number was about 180,000. That's still a huge number and shows what a great contribution African Americans made to the war. I'm not really Wikipedia savvy, so I thought I'd just leave this note rather than trying to research and edit myself.

I think this page needs a touch up
Leaving this as a note to myself and others that i want to clean up some of the sourcing and styling on this page. Sources need updating, some paragraphs need sources, and maybe a category re-arrangement. Carlp941 (talk) 06:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Robert Gould Shaw


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Honor by association

 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 delete. Rossami (talk) 23:08, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Honor by association
The creator of this article decided that the logical fallacy of guilt by association must have an "opposite" called "honor by association". That's not logical -- honor is not the opposite of guilt. In any case, the concept is not one I've seen in works on logic or philosophy, or indeed any place outside Wikipedia. So even if the concept were logical ("innocence by association" perhaps?), it would be original research.

A request: please don't vote to keep this article just because the concept appeals to you. You should only do so if you can cite use of the concept (under this name or another name) in pre-existing literature or other sources. Isaac R 19:01, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Halo effect Xcali 01:07, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * "Halo effect" describes a psychological phenomenon, not a logical fallacy. Isaac R 01:12, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, original "research". --W(t) 01:17, 2005 May 29 (UTC)
 * Comment The exact same text appears here, http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/H/Ho/Honor_by_association.htm, leaving me confused. Xoloz 19:48, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * A Wikipedia mirror, as the bottom of the page indicates. Isaac R 19:59, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * It's a concept -- whether this is the name for it, and whether or not it oughtn't to be merged with other articles on logical fallacies .... --Simon Cursitor 07:07, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This appears to be a neologism with no usage outside of this particular article.  Quale 17:48, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Whatever it is, this concept can also be included in the Guilt by association article. E Pluribus Anthony 07:29, 12 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:
Banffshire (UK Parliament constituency)

Banffshire was a constituency of the House of Commons of Great Britain from 1708 to 1800, and of the House of Commons of the Parliament of the United Kingdom from 1801 to 1983. It elected one Member of Parliament (MP), using the first-past-the-post voting system.

Creation
The British parliamentary constituency was created in 1708 following the Acts of Union, 1707 and replaced the former Parliament of Scotland shire constituency of Banffshire.

History
The constituency elected one Member of Parliament (MP) by the first past the post system until 1983 when it was split and merged into Moray and Banff and Buchan.

The constituency covered the county of Banffshire, Scotland, but until 1918 the county town of Banff and the burgh of Cullen were represented as part of Elgin Burghs.

Elections in the 1850s
Duff resigned by accepting the office of Steward of the Manor of Hempholme, causing a by-election.

Back to Election results

Elections in the 1860s
Duff's resignation caused a by-election.

Back to Election results

Elections in the 1870s
Back to Election results

Elections in the 1880s
Duff was appointed a Lord Commissioner of the Treasury, requiring a by-election.

Duff was appointed Civil Lord of the Admiralty, requiring a by-election.

Back to Election results

Elections in the 1890s

Back to Election results

Elections in the 1900s

Back to Election results

Elections in the 1910s
General Election 1914–15:

Another General Election was required to take place before the end of 1915. The political parties had been making preparations for an election to take place and by July 1914, the following candidates had been selected;
 * Liberal: Walter Waring
 * Unionist: Edward Archibald Hume

Back to Election results

Elections in the 1920s
Back to Election results

Elections in the 1930s
General Election 1939–40

Another General Election was required to take place before the end of 1940. The political parties had been making preparations for an election to take place and by the Autumn of 1939, the following candidates had been selected; Back to Election results
 * Unionist: William Lindsay
 * Liberal: Murdoch McKenzie Wood
 * Labour: George A Mair

Elections in the 1940s
Back to Election results

Elections in the 1950s
Back to Election results

Elections in the 1960s
Back to Election results

Elections in the 1970s
Back to Top

title: Banffshire (UK Parliament constituency)


text:
Inkwell (Macintosh)

Inkwell, or simply Ink, is the name of the handwriting recognition technology developed by Apple Inc. and built into the Mac OS X operating system. Introduced in an update to Mac OS X v10.2 "Jaguar", Inkwell can translate English, French, and German writing. The technology made its debut as "Rosetta", an integral feature of Apple Newton OS, the operating system of the short-lived Apple Newton personal digital assistant. Inkwell's inclusion in Mac OS X led many to believe Apple would be using this technology in a new PDA or other portable tablet computer. None of the touchscreen iOS devices – iPhone/iPod/iPad – has offered Inkwell handwriting recognition. However in iPadOS 14 handwriting recognition has been introduced, as a feature called Scribble.

Inkwell, when activated, appears as semi-transparent yellow lined paper, on which the user sees their writing appear. When the user stops writing, their writing is interpreted by Inkwell and pasted into the current application (wherever the active text cursor is), as if the user had simply typed the words. The user can also force Inkwell to not interpret their writing, instead using it to paste a hand-drawn sketch into the active window.

Inkwell was developed by Larry Yaeger, Brandyn Webb, and Richard Lyon.

In macOS 10.14 Mojave, Apple announced that Inkwell will remain 32-bit thus rendering it incompatible with macOS 10.15 Catalina. It was officially discontinued with the release of macOS Catalina on October 7, 2019.

title: Inkwell (Macintosh)


text:
State Crown of George I

The State Crown of George I is the imperial and state crown crafted in 1714 for King George I. It was modified and used by subsequent monarchs until 1838. The empty gold frame and its aquamarine monde which dates from the reign of King James II are both part of the Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom. They are on public display in the Jewel House at the Tower of London.

Origin
The crown, made by royal jeweller Samuel Smithin, replaced the state crown of Charles II (also used by his successors, James II, William III and Queen Anne) and incorporated some of the jewels and pearls from the old crown, with the addition of 265 new pearls, 160 diamonds, 6 emeralds and 2 sapphires, at a total cost of £1,440. Very little change was made to either the shape of the crown or the arrangement of the stones. The gold frame is 20.4 cm tall, and the monde and cross surmounting it are 8.5 cm tall.

Watercolour
The crown is vibrantly depicted in a watercolour painting by Bernard Lens III, the miniature painter to the court of George II, dated 1731. This date suggests that Lens had made a sketch of the crown before it was entirely reset in 1727 for George II but did not finish it until some time afterwards. The inscription reads:

"The crown with which George I, King of Great Britain, was crowned on 20 October 1714. The cap is of crimson velvet or purple; welt of ermine; circle and arches of beaten gold. The ornaments are silver and set with diamonds; the larger stones are sapphires and emeralds, and a few small rubies. The balas in the cross in front was given to the crown by James II. The ball on which the upper cross is fixed is an aquamarine but the lower part is gold enamelled green. It is worn when the king goes to parliament, is made new for every coronation, and kept at the Tower of London."

The "balas" mentioned here is the Black Prince's Ruby, a large spinel that was actually in the state crown of Charles II, and is first mentioned in Tudor inventories as being set in a crown used by Henry VIII. The "aquamarine" dates from 1685, when it replaced the original monde in the state crown of Charles II, and was later found to be paste or coloured glass.

Subsequent use and fate
George I's state crown was subsequently used at the coronations of George II, for whom the arches were pulled upwards, and George III. In 1821, because it was seen as being a "very poor affair", the crown underwent extensive changes, including the replacement of the rhombus-shaped monde with a globe of diamonds. Although the crown was present at the coronation of George IV, he was crowned using a new coronation crown made especially for him. William IV was the last monarch ever to use the crown. For her coronation in 1838, Queen Victoria had a new Imperial State Crown made, using precious stones from George I's state crown.

Emptied of its jewels and discarded by the royal family, the 1714 crown was loaned to the Museum of London by the Amherst family from 1933 until 1985. It was purchased by Asprey in 1987 and later acquired by Jefri Bolkiah, Prince of Brunei, who presented it to the United Kingdom. It had been valued at £576,000 in 1995 for the purposes of an application to export the crown to the United States. The application was withdrawn during a review by the Reviewing Committee on the Export of Works of Art. It is now part of the Royal Collection. It was on public display in the Martin Tower at the Tower of London from 1996-2023, and is now on display in the Tower Jewel House.

title: State Crown of George I


text:
User talk:Monkberg

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

-℘yrop (talk) 19:02, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of Revelation Space characters

The article List of Revelation Space characters has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Fan cruft with no sourcing. Fails WP:LISTN. See Articles for deletion/List of Revelation Space locations and Articles for deletion/List of Revelation Space races."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:07, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

title: User talk:Monkberg


text:
Talk:The Doctor Dances

Nancy
Should we have an article about Nancy, as she is a main character in the two-parter. Sorry, though, I can't do it --Jawr256 19:02, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * She's still a minor character, unless she becomes a companion or something, so no. --khaosworks 19:06, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * It would go the way of Doctor Constantine — listed for VFD. Tim! (talk) 08:30, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Edits
Sorry about the mess with the edits this morning. I'd done lots of tweaks in one session, then couldn't save them because another edit had been done at the same time. So I tried to merge my changes back in; however, I'd used the 'Synopsis' edit link rather than the global one, so by reapplying the change I managed to delete stuff outside that block. Ah well, I think I'll do edits in small chunks from now on. --DudeGalea 07:55, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * We live and learn. :) --khaosworks 10:30, May 29, 2005 (UTC)

Gushing
I don't normally insert editorial comments here, but I just wanted to note that Steven Moffat turned in an absolutely corking two-parter that stands up to the best Who has ever done. It was a tough call for me whether to show the Doctor triumphantly crying, "Everybody lives! Just this once!" for the article screencap, but I thought that would be too much of a spoiler right at the head of it. --khaosworks 10:30, May 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * bit ironic given its the middle of the blitz. GraemeLeggett 14:59, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

"Schlecht"

 * Continuing the "bad wolf" references, the German bomb that Jack sits on has the words "Schlecter Wolf" stencilled on its shell. "Schlect" is German for "Bad".

No—schlecht is. Either the transcription or the episode itself is off. Note also that "bad wolf" in German would be "b�ser Wolf", to match the fairytale—"schlecht" is usually bad as in failing; "b�se" is usually bad as in evil (they are somewhat interchangeable, but these are the most common uses). JRM � Talk 14:37, 2005 May 30 (UTC)

 * It was "schlechter", as can be seen in the photo on Mickey's site. I've fixed up the spelling in the notes. Regarding the difference between 'schlecht' and 'b�se', it could be either that the writers didn't realise the difference in meaning, or that they really do mean 'bad' as in 'failing'. Who knows until we see the end of the season? (Admittedly, "Failing Wolf" would be a pretty crappy name to give a bomb. :-) )--DudeGalea 15:01, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

A bilingual pun could have been created - bad in German being bath.

 * Interestingly, it looks like RTD didn't even plan this one. Apparently the production crew spotted lots of "Bad Wolf" references, and stuck this one in for a bit of fun. Can't remember where I read this; maybe the RTD interview in DWM, or possibly on the BBC site. --DudeGalea 17:12, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Having taken German classes, I'd like to point out that "Schlechter Wolf" does not mean "Worse Wolf". The '-er' is one of a family of suffixes that are added to adjectives when they appear before nouns. "Worse Wolf" in German would be "Schlechterer Wolf". --[KT]

 * But "schlechter" doesn't mean "bad". "Schlecht" means "bad". "Schlechter" therefore means "More bad", i.e. "worse". (as does "schlechterer", which is another level above that) --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 08:50, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

 * You're both right, after a fashion. "Der Wolf ist schlecht", the wolf's bad. "Es ist ein schlechter Wolf," it's a bad wolf. "Dieser Wolf ist (noch) schlechter," this here wolf's (even) worse. Consequently, "er ist ein schlechterer Wolf", "it's a worse wolf." So "schlechter Wolf" is indeed "bad wolf" -- it does not mean "worse wolf" in this context; also, as someone correctly pointed out, the "canonical form" (as in, big bad wolf) would be "böser Wolf", which clearly implies "evil" or "wicked", whereas "schlecht" could mean "(morally) bad" or "faulty." --Azundris

Superjamie
This doesn't need to go into the article because it's sheer speculation, but it's interesting to note that the nanogenes weren't just programmed to heal to the right pattern, but to make its patients battle-ready. Now, the Doctor did reprogram them, but that was after they restored Jamie to full health, using Nancy's pattern. That means Jamie is perfectly healthy, but does that also mean he's still a fully equipped Chula warrior? ;) --khaosworks 17:14, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

 * LOL! Nice observation. I'm guessing the intended answer is 'no' (the reprogrammed nanos could also have re-repaired Jamie), but it's fun to think through the possible consequences. --DudeGalea 18:15, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Perhaps this will be a future episode, as Boom Town is bringing back one of the Slitheen, and the rift in Cardiff? :-> --Christopherlin 20:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

I've been idly wondering why the Reapers didn't show up, given that a dead Jamie is now a not dead Jamie... Harris 17:18, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Because there wasn't a paradox, really. Jamie's survival may have been meant to happen. The difference between Jamie being saved and Pete being saved was not so much the fact of Pete's survival, but that by saving her father, Rose altered her own personal history (she went back in time because her father died/her father lived so she didn't go back in time/she didn't go back in time so her father died/she went back in time because her father died) tangling up her own timeline in a very very nasty knot. --khaosworks 17:27, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

 * Could also be that there was a long time line/story axis involved - given what happens in the last episode. (I am trying to avoid accidental overriding of plot-spoilers.)Jackiespeel 15:47, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Quotes
Can anyone remember the Doctor's comment on having a long night and a lot of shelves to put up? I'd like to put it on Doctor Who. --Jawr256 18:28, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

 * I actually had Jack's comment just before that up, but I'll expand it and shift it to the Conversations section of the quote article. --khaosworks 18:33, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

Butcher
She says that half the street believes that Mrs Lloyd is having an affair with the butcher, but she knows that it is actually Mr Lloyd who is doing so - serious blackmail material in the 1940s.

My memory of this episode isn't too hot, but I seem to recall that the "affair" was only implied; Nancy expressed it as something like "Everyone thinks Mrs Lloyd is involved with the butcher, but it's actually you"; which could mean that she knows he's involved in some criminal enterprise, rather than a relationship. I know the implication that we are supposed to derive, but I just had this feeling that it was phrased ambiguously enough to make the "blackmail" comment inappropriately definite.

But I could be wrong. Anyone remember exactly how it went? --DudeGalea 15:23, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * The phrase was, IIRC, "Half the street thinks your missus is messing about with Mr Haverstock the butcher, but she isn't, isn't she? You are." I've rephrased the "blackmail" line a bit. --khaosworks 15:25, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

 * 'Messing about' still doesn't necessarily mean they're having an intimate affair; they may just be, as DudeGalea just said, partners in a black-market operation to profit from illicit meat distribution... Radagast 16:24, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

 * True, but you have to look at it in context of the sentence, where "messing about" implies sexual conduct. If it meant something else, the sentence should have been "half the street thinks your missus is messing about... but she isn't. You're dealing/stealing stuff with the Butcher" or something similar. --khaosworks 16:28, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

 * I think the phrase "messing about" is quite understandable in English, unless you are referring to children "larking about". GraemeLeggett 16:26, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree that "messing about" is a bit more specific than the version I remembered. And I also agree that it was clear that the intended meaning was sexual. But still, the fact that it was an ambiguous phrase (even if only a very slight ambiguity) means that we should retain the feel of the original phrasing when we summarise it, rather than make it sound like the episode contained an overt sexual reference. IMHO, of course. --DudeGalea 17:52, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, let's leave in "messing about" and leave it up to people who want to read it however they want to read it. --khaosworks 17:58, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

 * I like it. --DudeGalea 18:10, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Hmm, that's odd. I fixed up the English in your edit because it was a bit garbled. But now when I do a diff, your edit looks perfectly fine! I have no idea what happened there, but feel free to rv to your edit. --DudeGalea 18:13, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Oh heavens, now it looks garbled again. I dunno, I'm gonna abandon wikipedia for a while and let someone else with a competent connection sort it all out. :-) --DudeGalea 18:15, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Are there meant to be parallels with the other "triangle" at the end - the Doctor, Rose and Jack?

OnCom or OmCom?
I thought the "communicate through anything with a speaker" was called OmCom (as in "omni-communiation", or some such). Anyone got the DVD to check? (I know the DVD subtitles aren't entirely accurate, but they might help.) —Josiah Rowe 14:16, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

 * OmComm sounds right, actually. Should have caught that. --khaosworks (talk � contribs) 14:30, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I guess when the script book comes out we'll know the spelling for sure. —Josiah Rowe 14:52, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Erm...you know that the Doc says anything with a speaker grille can be used? Well...what about the typewriter that Nancy points out? That doesn't have one.--84.51.149.80 17:45, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

 * He was still using it to communicate, though. In any case, Jamie's powers weren't limited to talking through radios. He was also telekinetic, and super-strong. --khaosworks (talk � contribs) 17:52, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

 * (Edit conflict)- True, but he didn't say only something with a speaker grille could be used. Alternatively, it could only speak through a something with a grille- typewriters don't speak. --Sean Jelly Baby? 17:58, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Subtitles call it "Om-Com" but without the quotation marks.
 * And that's what's in The Shooting Scripts too. Confirmed. —Josiah Rowe 17:56, 17 October 2005 (UTC)\

Shooting script confirms "nav-com" as well. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 11:15, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

DVD typo
As requested, I can confirm that the "Dance's" mistake is present only on the "vanilla" release. At least, it's not on my R1 or R2 Series One box sets either. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:03, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Nobody Dies
Can Castrovalva or The Celestial Toymaker really be considered "nobody dies" episodes? All the residents of Castrovalva were certainly destroyed, does the fact that they weren't "real" people mean they didn't die? Given they certainly had free will, I'd call that dying. The Toymaker's minions were people he had trapped formerly and certainly died when his world was destroyed. --Suttkus 21:16, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

 * That's why the note says "technically", I thought. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 22:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

 * My bad. I should have read more carefully. --Suttkus 14:58, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Having just gotten to see School Reunion I fieel that it needs to be said that, while individual viewers might debate whether the destruction of Jack's computer casts doubt on the "everybody lives" nature of this story, there are numerous examples in the history of the show that the Doctor considers artificial life of importance and worth consideration. Along with his reactions to K9 Mark III's sacrifice tonight I am reminded of the Doctor's sentiments to K9's I and II travails, to Kamelion's pleas for destruction and, in particular, the way the Doctor treats the andoids in both The Robots of Death and The Androids of Tara. Now I know that there have been numerous androids and computers that the Doctor has destroyed AND I know that the scriptwriters may simply have missed the fact that the destruction of Jack's ship might constitute a death in this episode. However, I like to think that, perhaps in a future book or radio story (of debatable canonicity), that the Dootor finds a way to go back and rescue Jack's Chula ship then truly everybody will have lived. MarnetteD | Talk 03:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I'd also have some dispute with that claim for Silence in the Library / Forest of the Dead... the whole archaeology crew effectively died! Their brainwaves were saved and put into the index computer, but whether they are therefore still alive, or, in the library's own words, merely "saved" (without surviving) is another matter. What's left behind is something akin to a mental photograph... After most of them were stripped to the bone, and River was electrocuted, even the behind-the-scenes footage from the Doctor Who Confidential pretty much concludes the existence within the databanks as a kind of postmortem "heaven" 77.102.101.220 (talk) 19:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Everybody Dies
Another example of the "Everybody Dies" type episode is the 5th Doctor's "Warriors of the Deep", in which nearly all the humans and all of the Silurians and Sea Devils die. The Doctor's comment at the end of the story, 'There should have been another way', pretty much sums this up. D. R. Hucke

 * Yep. The reason why the others aren't mentioned is because the note is primarily for examples of "Everybody lives". --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 10:32, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

The Girl in the Fireplace
The S2 episode The Girl in the Fireplace also has a reference to the Doctor dancing/not being able to dance (and a banana mentioned with it).

Jackiespeel 16:30, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes. The Girl in the Fireplace is mentioned in relation to bananas in note 6. Added a brief line about the repeat of "dancing". --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 22:38, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Spoilers
Was it really necessary to put such a *large*, detailed spoiler (the Bad Wolf one) for episodes beyond this one in the footnotes? When it said "Plot and/or ending details follow", I was assuming for the episode, not the whole season. Certainly I don't expect spoiler protection for things like 'there's a 10th doctor' (or inconsequential ones like the reference to dancing in a second season episode), but it'd be nice to avoid spoiling episodes that haven't yet aired in the US in en.wikipedia.org. Or at least say 'season ending details' to make it clear.

 * I'm not sure I understand - are you talking about the "defabricated" note? --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 07:07, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Yeah. I bailed out of reading immediately at that point so I don't know what other context there might have been, but it was an unpleasant surprise. --tavella

 * Sorry, tavella (hi, if it's the same person from LJ); but honestly, it's not a major spoiler, just a very minor event in Bad Wolf. Perhaps the word "defabricated" is a bit vague and can be misconstrued: I'll rephrase it. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 07:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

 * On reflection, the note is quite trivial, and isn't really notable by itself. I'm removing it. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 07:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks! I've managed to remain so unspoiled I don't even know what Bad Wolf is, and I'm trying to hold on to that for the last three episodes. Glad to know it wasn't as significant as it sounded. And yes, I'm tavella from LJ. --tavella

Speaker grill
Sorry if this has been mentioned before in the talk, but after seeing a few 10th Doctor spoilers on this page, I had to quit reading.

Problem 1: It is about the OmCom/Oncom being able to transmit through anything with a speaker grill. A speaker grill is just the piece of wire or plastic over the speaker. Now, I have a feeling it is implied that a speaker must be under the grill, but I could have a speaker grill attached to the side of my desk here, with no speaker. That would make O(m/n)Com impossible, in my opinion. Nitpicky I know.

Problem 2: Rose turns up the radio just prior to inviting the Doctor to dance. With no power to the radio, Jack Harkness would have had to increase the power output through the O(m/n)Com system for the sound to increase. Without power to the radio, Rose should not have been able to turn the radio up at all.

Problem 3: If, in The Parting of the Ways, Mickey heard the TARDIS from far off, enough to make him have to run, why in the world didn't Jack Harkness hear it arrive in his ship? Is there a difference between planetary appearances and appearances in smaller areas, such as a small ship? —Lady Aleena talk / contribs 08:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC) PS. I am American, so I used the common spelling for "grill" here in the States.
 * Problem 1: . . . oops. 'Twas a goof.
 * Problem 2: Another goof.
 * Problem 3: Continuity error.
 * Darn those pesky writers. ;)  DonQuixote 15:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Are 1 and 2 notable enough to be included in the article? I guess I should have asked that. - LA @ 18:00, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Is this season's DVD set out in the UK yet? If so, does it have subtitles. If yes, then to clear up the O(m/n)Com problem, just turn on the subtitles to see which is right. The set isn't out in the US until 7/4. - LA @ 18:03, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

 * It's OmCom. That's what's in the shooting script. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 22:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Bit of an awkward quote
"The world doesn't end if the Doctor dances" because it sounds like he *has* to.

Lunakeet 18:04, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Luke Perry?
I suspect that this ISN'T the American actor Luke Perry (a la "Friends"), so the hyperlink on the name should either be removed or redirected.

(BTW, "suspect" is used ironically here.)

98.229.237.2 (talk) 07:32, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Thanks for catching that. It's been redirected. DonQuixote (talk) 15:57, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't know where else to put this or how (newbie, advice appreciated), but...

Rose, Jack and the Doctor play the tape of Dr Constantine trying to treat Jamie. But there were no tape recorders in Britain in 1941. Tape recording was developed by the Germans in WW2 and not available to the Allies until after the liberation of Luxembourg. A professional like Dr Constantine would have used a transcription disk of some type. Jeffm23 (talk) 06:57, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Just put it down to the Doctor Who universe being different from ours. We didn't have nanobots running around during WWII either. DonQuixote (talk) 15:09, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

 * That is now mentioned in the Production section. -- Beardo (talk) 22:48, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

'Spose so. I'm a recent discoverer of the BBCAmerica series, finding the whole mythos very interesting. One thing I noticed about Earth in the "Doctor Who universe" is that it seems amazingly un-bigoted, particularly regarding ethnicity and sexuality. Of course, it does appear that the price they pay is that they get invaded by aliens every Xmas... Jeff (talk) 22:13, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on The Doctor Dances. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gallifreyone.com/newstv.php

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:15, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Jack as a companion
There's no such thing as "being credited as companion". Defining a companion as such is original research. Sources say that Jack is a companion, and that's what wikipedia goes by. DonQuixote (talk) 11:03, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I have done some digging and not found any sources that explicitly state that Captain Jack Harkness was a companion. There are lots that say that he joined and travelled with the doctor from this point but none that say that he played the role of a companion in this episode. Also what I meant by being credited as a companion is that you never see a companion being credited anywhere apart from the top of the episode end credits and the opening credits as well. Jack was credited in neither of those. Panda815 (talk) 12:28, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * That's your interpretation of the credits and constitutes original research. As per companion, a quick search results in . Also, read Jack Harkness DonQuixote (talk) 12:39, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Your source tells us that Captain Jack was a companion in general but with regards to this episode all it says is that he met the doctor here. There is no source that confirms that he was a companion in his first appearance. It’s like Wilfred Mott, he wasn’t put as companion in Voyage of the Damned was he? Panda815 (talk) 12:53, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Wilfred Mott was a separate character before they made him a recurring character (after Howard Attfield's death) and then made him a companion in The End of Time. If you read Jack's character creation, they clearly mapped out his role in series 1 during production. They're nothing alike in terms of creation and development (i.e. MOS:REALWORLD). DonQuixote (talk) 13:03, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:The Doctor Dances


text:
Lance Sijan

Lance Peter Sijan (April 13, 1942 – January 22, 1968) was a United States Air Force officer and fighter pilot. On March 4, 1976, he posthumously received the Medal of Honor, the United States' highest military award, for his selflessness and courage in the face of lethal danger.

Early life and military career
Lance Peter Sijan, also known by his Serbian name Lazar Šijan (Лазар Шијан), was born to Sylvester and Jane Sijan on April 13, 1942, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. His father, who owned a restaurant, was an ethnic Serb, his parents emigrated from Serbia during World War I; his mother was an Irish-American. Lance was the eldest of three children. Sijan graduated from Bay View High School in 1960. Immediately after his graduation he attended the Naval Academy Preparatory School at the United States Naval Training Center Bainbridge, Maryland. After completion of the program, he gained an appointment to the United States Air Force Academy at Colorado Springs, Colorado. He played on the academy's football team for three years, but quit the team in his final year to concentrate on his studies. Graduating with a Bachelor of Science degree in Humanities in 1965, he was awarded a second lieutenant's commission and began Undergraduate Pilot Training. After its completion, he was assigned to the 480th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 366th Fighter Wing, stationed at Da Nang Air Base, South Vietnam. He flew as a pilot and systems officer in an F-4 Phantom.

Last mission
On the night of November 9, 1967, for his 52nd combat mission, Sijan and pilot Lieutenant Colonel John Armstrong were tasked with a bombing mission to Ban Laboy ford in Laos. As they rolled in on their target to release their ordnance, their F-4C (AF Ser. No. 64-0751) was engulfed in a ball of fire due to the bomb fuses malfunctioning and causing a premature detonation on their release. Sijan managed to eject from the aircraft, and although likely rendered unconscious in the ejection, his parachute landed him on a rocky limestone karst ridge adjacent to the target.

From the night of 9/10 November to the morning of 11 November, no electronic or radio signals were heard from either Sijan or Armstrong. However, early on the morning of 11 November, Sijan made radio contact with a Misty FAC F-100F aircraft that was flying over his crash site. For the duration of that day, the USAF launched a massive effort to locate his position, and 'soften up' the numerous enemy air defences in his area. At dusk, the SAR forces were finally able to position a CH-3 Jolly Green Giant helicopter near Sijan's position. During this overall rescue operation, over 20 aircraft were damaged by anti-aircraft fire, and many had to return to base. One A-1H aircraft was shot down, though its pilot was soon rescued by a SAR helicopter on station. Sijan, refusing to put other airmen in danger, insisted on trying to crawl to a jungle penetrator lowered by the helicopter, and he opposed the helicopter's Para-Jumper (PJ) coming down to find and rescue him. The helicopter crew could not see him in the heavy jungle, and strangely, they did not deploy the PJ to find and rescue Sijan. After the Jolly Green hovered for 33 minutes, and upon hearing no further radio transmissions from Sijan, the on-scene SAR commander (flying in an A-1H Skyraider aircraft) suspected a trap, and thus ordered the Jolly Green and the entire SAR armada to withdraw. Search efforts continued the very next morning, but they were called off when no further radio contact was made with Sijan. He was then listed in a MIA casualty status.

During his violent ejection and very rough parachute landing on the karst ridge, Sijan had suffered a fractured skull, a mangled right hand, and a compound fracture of the left leg. He was without food, with very little water, and no survival kit; nevertheless, he evaded enemy forces for 46 days. During this entire period, Sijan was only able to move by sliding on his buttocks and back along the rocky limestone ridge and later along the jungle floor. After managing to move several thousand feet, Sijan crawled onto a truck road along the Ho Chi Minh Trail, where he was finally captured by the North Vietnamese on Christmas Day, 1967. Very emaciated and in poor health, Sijan was imprisoned in an NVA camp. Soon thereafter, he managed to incapacitate a guard and escape into the jungle, but was recaptured several hours later.

Sijan was transported to a holding compound in Vinh, North Vietnam, where he was placed in the care of two other recently captured POWs, Air Force Major Robert R. Craner and Air Force Captain Guy Gruters. Although in terrific pain from his severe wounds and brutal beatings and torture from his captors, Sijan had not disclosed any information other than what the Geneva Convention guidelines allowed (name, date of birth, service, rank, and service number). Suffering terribly from exhaustion, malnutrition, and disease, he was soon transported to Hanoi, under the attentive care of both Craner and Gruters. However, in his weakened state, he contracted pneumonia and died in Hỏa Lò Prison (better known as the "Hanoi Hilton") on January 22, 1968.

First Lieutenant Sijan was promoted posthumously to captain on June 13, 1968. His remains were repatriated on March 13, 1974, and were positively identified on April 22, 1974. He was buried with military honors in Arlington Park Cemetery in Milwaukee. His former cellmate, Colonel Craner, recommended him for the Medal of Honor, with supporting testimony provided by his other fellow cellmate, Captain Gruters. Sijan received the Medal of Honor posthumously in 1976, with his parents (Sylvester and Jane Sijan) receiving it on his behalf on March 4, 1976, from President Gerald R. Ford.

Military awards
Sijan's military decorations and awards include:

Medal of Honor citation
The President of the United States in the name of The Congress takes pride in presenting the MEDAL OF HONOR to SIJAN, LANCE P. Rank and organization: Captain, U.S. Air Force, 4th Allied POW Wing, Pilot of an F-4C aircraft. Place and Date: North Vietnam, 9 November 1967. Entered service at: Milwaukee, Wis. Born: 13 April 1942, Milwaukee, Wis.

Citation: "While on a flight over North Vietnam, Capt. Sijan ejected from his disabled aircraft and successfully evaded capture for more than 6 weeks. During this time, he was seriously injured and suffered from shock and extreme weight loss due to lack of food. After being captured by North Vietnamese soldiers, Capt. Sijan was taken to a holding point for subsequent transfer to a prisoner of war camp. In his emaciated and crippled condition, he overpowered 1 of his guards and crawled into the jungle, only to be recaptured after several hours. He was then transferred to another prison camp where he was kept in solitary confinement and interrogated at length. During interrogation, he was severely tortured; however, he did not divulge any information to his captors. Capt. Sijan lapsed into delirium and was placed in the care of another prisoner. During his intermittent periods of consciousness until his death, he never complained of his physical condition and, on several occasions, spoke of future escape attempts. Capt. Sijan's extraordinary heroism and intrepidity above and beyond the call of duty at the cost of his life are in keeping with the highest traditions of the U.S. Air Force and reflect great credit upon himself and the U.S. Armed Forces. /S/GERALD R. FORD"

Other honors

Sijan's heroism and courage brought him numerous honors. The United States Air Force created the Lance P. Sijan Award, recognizing individuals who have demonstrated the highest qualities of leadership in their jobs and in their lives. It has become one of the U.S. Air Force's most prestigious awards.

Because Sijan was the first graduate of the United States Air Force Academy to receive the Medal of Honor, a cadet dormitory, Sijan Hall, was named after him. The dormitory was dedicated on Memorial Day, 1976.

Sijan's high school in Milwaukee set up a scholarship in his honor, presented each year to the student who best exemplifies Lance Sijan's examples of leadership and courage. A nearby park, Sijan Playfield, is dedicated to him, and Milwaukee's Serbian community honors him with a memorial on the grounds of St. Sava Serbian Orthodox Cathedral.

An F-4 Phantom jet fighter on display in front of the 440th Tactical Airlift Wing at Milwaukee's Mitchell Airport is painted using the color scheme of the one he flew.

Sijan was named as the class exemplar at the United States Air Force Academy for the Class of 2002.

In June 2006, before the 440th Airlift Wing was relocated to Pope AFB in North Carolina, there were calls to move the F-4 Phantom jet fighter display from Mitchell International Airport to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial on the Lake Michigan lake front. However, the display was finally moved on February 28, 2017, to another more visible location at Mitchell International Airport. It was re-dedicated at this location on May 26, 2017.

Sijan is a member of the DeMolay International Hall of Fame.

Mountain Home AFB in Idaho named Sijan St. in his honor. A major road at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Anchorage, Alaska, is also named for him.

title: Lance Sijan


text:
Portal talk:Ukraine

Notice from the Portals WikiProject
WikiProject Portals is back!

The project was rebooted and completely overhauled on April 17th, 2018. Its goals are to revitalize the entire portal system, make building and maintaining portals easier, support the ongoing improvement of portals and the editors dedicated to this, and design the portals of the future.

As of May 2nd, 2018, membership is at 60 editors, and growing. You are welcome to join us.

There are design initiatives for revitalizing the portals system as a whole, and for improving each component of portals. So far, 2 new dynamic components have been developed: Template:Transclude lead excerpt and Template:Transclude random excerpt.

Tools are provided for building and maintaining portals, including automated portals that update themselves in various ways.

And, if you are bored and would like something to occupy your mind, we have a wonderful task list.

From your friendly neighborhood Portals WikiProject. Hope to see you there. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   07:49, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Areas of traditional spread of Ukrainians and Ukrainian language
Category:Areas of traditional spread of Ukrainians and Ukrainian language has been nominated for merging with Category:Ukrainian irredentism. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. Place Clichy (talk) 21:12, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

On-going anti-LGBTQ purges and censorship in the List of people from Ukraine
A clique of editors seem to be implementing a purge of any mentionings of notable LGBTQ Ukrainians and LGBTQ activism in Ukraine.

In particular, the corresponding section in the List of people from Ukraine listing notable LGBTQ Ukrainians and Ukrainian LGBTQ activists with Wikipedia pages, has been first censored and then completely purged by this clique of editors, under the obviously false pretext of such entries in the list being "unecyclopedic"(!).

Please review the following revision history, between July 27 and July 29, 2020, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_people_from_Ukraine&action=history.

The purged list of notable LGBTQ Ukrainians and Ukrainian LGBTQ activists is as follows:

LGBTQ Ukrainians, pro-European and pro-Western LGBTQ Ukrainian activists
 * Bogdan Globa
 * Mike Enzi – US Senator from Wyoming
 * Maurice Hinchey – former New York Congressman (Ukrainian mother)
 * Volodymyr Horowitz
 * Olha Kobylianska
 * Alla Nazimiv - US Ukrainian actress, also known as an active member of the Hollywood LGBTQ community
 * Anna Sharyhina - influential Ukrainian lesbian, LGBTQ leader
 * Stav Strashko - distinguished Ukrainian Israeli transgender actress, passionate advocate of transgender lifestyle in Ukraine
 * Edward Tarletski - Belarusian-Ukrainian LGBTQ activist

Please help to monitor and report the disruptive anti-LGBTQ editors and please help to edit List of people from Ukraine so that it objectively reflects the role of the LGBTQ people in the past, current and future Ukrainian politics, life, arts and science! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Special:Contributions/2601:646:8500:2DD0:D429:B0BF:9012:558F 1 August 2020

Confusion about 95th Kvartal, Kryvyi Rih
Could someone check this article. It seems to my, that the article is confusing Gorkogo Square and Quarter 95 as the same thing, while on uk its uk:95 квартал (місцевість у Кривому Розі) for the district and uk:Площа Горького (Кривий Ріг) of a place within this district ... Sicherlich Post 21:11, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

National anthem of Ukraine
If you are interested in the discussion about the anthem’s title, please take part: Talk:National anthem of Ukraine. VSL (talk) 13:31, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

title: Portal talk:Ukraine


text:
Talk:René Arnoux

Headlines
Hold on - "...but Arnoux took the headlines due to a fierce but good-natured wheel-banging battle with Gilles Villeneuve". What headlines?

It's Wiki-worthy that Jabouille won at Dijon in Arnoux's bio, but not that Villeneuve took second over Arnoux after that epic battle? Arnoux was a participant in (maybe) the most intense motorsport battle ever, yet I'd contend that the "headlines" grabbed were more Villeneuve's than Arnoux's. I can find many, many more sources trumpeting Villeneuve's result at Dijon than Arnoux's. I'm not playing some Arnoux vs. Villeneuve pissing contest - I am a big fan of both drivers - having watched F1 since 1976. If this article is to keep to Wikipedia standards, I think it should stick to facts rather than hyperbole. Please note, I have not edited the G. Villeneuve article at all... I'm not a so-called "fanboy". —Preceding unsigned comment added by MikeyMoose (talk • contribs) 23:10, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I think it would benefit the page if Rene Arnoux's performance on superstars were acknowledged. Few racing drivers made an impact on this show/contest, but Jody Schecter and Rene were two who did.

Vinadanimex (talk) 23:20, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

1983 F1 Championship
Arnoux was still in title contention in the final race (admittedly his chances were largely mathematical but e.g. the 1964 and 2007 champions also only had mathematical chances in the final race which then occurred), so he was hardly "left behind" in the run in;

Final championship table Piquet (59 pts) Prost (57) Arnoux (49)

Prost and Arnoux both failed to finish in the final race (in South Africa) and Piquet finished 3rd (worth 4 pts in those days and a win was worth 9) so you can see how Arnoux could have been champion (e.g. winning in South Africa with Piquet 5th or lower and Prost failing to score).

i.e. the existing article makes out that Arnoux was out of it sometime before the final race in 183 - not true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr gobrien (talk • contribs) 17:08, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:René Arnoux


text:
Galen Gering

Galen Laius Gering (born February 13, 1971) is an American actor most known for his portrayal of characters on daytime soap operas. He currently plays the role of Rafe Hernandez on the long-running NBC soap opera Days of Our Lives. He also appeared on the NBC daytime soap opera Passions as Luis Lopez-Fitzgerald.

Early life
Galen Laius Gering was born in Los Angeles, California, to Alan Gering and Michele de Oñate, a renowned west coast artist. He is of Russian Jewish descent on his father's side and French and Spanish/Basque descent on his mother's side (his maternal great-grandfather was a Basque immigrant). He has an older sister, Charissa. Gering was close to his grandmother, who was also an artist.

At the age of 18, Gering moved to New York City to start a modeling career and finished high school remotely. He traveled Europe as a model before attending New York University for a year. Gering finished college at the University of Miami where he studied creative writing and film.

Career
In 1999, Gering learned of a role in an upcoming NBC daytime soap called Passions through Irene Marie Models. By the time Gering graduated from UM, he was already taping Passions, on which he had landed the role of Officer Luis Lopez-Fitzgerald. Gering was named one of People's 50 Most Beautiful People in 2000, and remained with Passions until its cancellation in 2008.

On October 31, 2008, Gering debuted on another NBC soap, Days of Our Lives, as Rafe Hernandez, an FBI agent who is hired to guard Sami Brady while she is under witness protection. He has also appeared in over 50 national commercials.

On September 25, 2011, Gering and his wife, Jenna, starred on the E! reality series Dirty Soap together with their kids. The show ended on November 13, 2011, after only one season.

Personal life
Gering is married to Jenna Hudlett and they have two sons together.

title: Galen Gering