text:
User talk:SatCam

Image:Encyclia-cordigera.jpg
I've added the copyright tag  JoJan 13:54, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Fayard Nicholas Photograph
The Fayard Nicholas Photo comes from a US government website.

Help
I have a favor to ask. I don't know how to upload images or get copyright permission on images, etc., but I'd like to use this image,. Can you help? Thank you. Nobs01 29 June 2005 01:33 (UTC)

Ron and Fez
Hi. The Ron and Fez show article is great, but it's getting too damn big. I think the "Cast of Characters" section should be broken out into a separate article. What do you think? -- BD2412 talk 23:57, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Axl Rose
Thx for addressing that which I was observant enough to notice but too lazy to research/fix. — F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( TALK )  15:29, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

Fishbone
I see you know a lot about Fishbone...do you know what is the size of giant saxophone that Angelo Moore plays? I've been trying to figure that out for a long time. I'm pretty sure it's a bass saxophone. Badagnani 02:20, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

I've seen them a couple of times, and he used to actually throw this saxophone across the stage to a roadie when he was finished playing it. I think it must be one of these: http://www.basssax.com/photographs.htm  Badagnani 02:25, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

I did go through the changes carefully and they didn't seem that substantial, and most, to me, were for the better. I fixed the two bad edits s/he made, but largely it seems like the changes were to add a photo and redo the players section in a box. Looking at the remainder of edits, they seemed to be intelligently done, not the work of a newbie or troublemaker at all (despite his/her prior controversies here, which I have noted on his/her "Discussion" page). Badagnani 01:32, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

user has history of being a fairy
Kevin McManus has made few substantive contributions anywhere, but frustrated tattle tale efforts in various locales. Admins encouraged to reverse McManus's contributions at will.
 * I was willing to give McManus the benefit of the doubt, but after looking at the bulk of his edits, it really seems like he's just intent on being a homosexual and not adding any useful information. --Kevin McManus 00:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you have a sense of humor, Umph

I have deleted the copyvio in the John Cafferty article. Wikipedia has a very good "Eddie And The Cruisers" article anyway!

Spoken articles
Hello! I am seeking assistance in getting involved in the spoken articles project. I noticed your name on the project page and was hoping you might be able to help. Other than downloading Audacity, I have yet to get into the project; I need some guidance on equipment and how to use the software. Any help you could provide is greatly appreciated. Thanks! Paul 21:25, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks a bunch for the advice! The article I would like to record is one that I hope brings much amusement to the WP commuity...I'll keep you posted. Incidentally, we live not too far from one another, if you are ever interested in putting together a WP meetup in NYC or Conn., let me know, as I am very eager to attend one. Rock on...Paul 22:55, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Spoken Articles 2
Dear SatCam, Me too! I have been recording audio for a while, but not onto a computer, and not adding anything to a website before. I've tried to understand the instructions on recording (where you listed your offer of help), but don't know how to make OGG files, or what canonicalization is - I can't make head or tale of that little lot I'm afraid.

I can get as far as recording an article quite easily on Adobe Audition, but then I'll just be sitting there looking at my recording, blinking slowly and wondering why I did that. What are the next steps? And also, as a complete novice at using Wikipedia or any other place where you write on the internet, how will I know when you have replied to me? Thanks a lot SatCam.

Patrick

--Patrick 08:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Spoken Articles 3
Hi, I noticed you offered yourself as a helping hand and as an Auacity User, I wonder if you could help me on. I tried Noise Removal, at the 2nd thing away from less, which is the nearest I can get without it damaging my voice, but it's still leaving what I can only describe as swooshy noises that resemble when a glass of coke is sparkling. The only sound noise in the room is that of my computer's fan. How can I remove this noise from the file? Dev920 21:49, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image:DJ_Spinbad.PNG
I Got It From Computer. I Went To A DJ Spinbad Event, He Gave Me Photo, I Scanned, Put Said Picture To Computer, Uploaded To Wikipedia For 'Spinbad Article.

That Is All.

Frank0115932 17:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Cd1019 logo.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Cd1019 logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Z100 logo.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Z100 logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:39, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Babylon_Whores_Deggael.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Babylon_Whores_Deggael.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 04:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:55, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:55, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:WJFK daily schedule
Template:WJFK daily schedule has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — BlueAzure (talk) 01:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Bon Jovi 100 Million Bon Jovi Fans.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bon Jovi 100 Million Bon Jovi Fans.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

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

The following images also have this problem:

 * Image:Bon Jovi One Wild Night.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --21:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Babylon Whores Cold Heaven.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Babylon Whores Cold Heaven.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Babylon Whores King Fear.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Babylon Whores King Fear.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Babylon Whores Sloane 313.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Babylon Whores Sloane 313.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Babylon Whores Trismegistos.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Babylon Whores Trismegistos.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bon Jovi 7800 Fahrenheit.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bon Jovi 7800 Fahrenheit.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bon Jovi Cross Road.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bon Jovi Cross Road.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bon Jovi Have a Nice Day.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bon Jovi Have a Nice Day.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bon Jovi Keep The Faith.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bon Jovi Keep The Faith.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bon Jovi This Left Feels Right.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bon Jovi This Left Feels Right.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:44, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:24, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Hartford Meetup: We need your help!
The next Connecticut Wikipedia meetup will take place sometime during April 2009 at Real Art Ways cafe and arts center in Hartford, Connecticut. Please list on the meetup page whether or not you can go. Also please contribute ideas for topics and dates! Hope to see you there! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:00, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Connecticut Meetup: You are invited!
The 2nd Connecticute Meetup will take place on April 18th, 2009 at Real Art Ways cafe and arts center in Hartford, Connecticut. Please state whether or not you can attend on the meetup page. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) because your name was on the invite list. 16:36, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

You're invited! New England Wikimedia General Meeting
Message delivered by Dominic at 09:16, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.

2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting
You are invited to the 2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, on 20 July 2013 in Boston! We will be talking about the future of the chapter, including GLAM, Wiki Loves Monuments, and where we want to take our chapter in the future! EdwardsBot (talk) 09:42, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

New England Wikipedia Day @ MIT: Saturday Jan 18
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

You're invited!
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

This Friday: Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA
You are invited to join the Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA on October 16! (drop-in any time, 6-9pm)--Pharos (talk) 18:29, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Sunday July 16: New England Wiknic @ Cambridge, MA
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. clpo13(talk) 23:36, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

title: User talk:SatCam


text:
Stefan Rahmstorf

Stefan Rahmstorf (born 22 February 1960) is a German oceanographer and climatologist. Since 2000, he has been a Professor of Physics of the Oceans at Potsdam University. He studied physical oceanography at Bangor University and received his Ph.D. in oceanography from Victoria University of Wellington (1990). His work focuses on the role of ocean currents in climate change. He was one of the lead authors of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report.

Public role
Rahmstorf is a co-founder of the blog Real Climate, which has been described by Nature as one of the top-5 science blogs in 2006, and included among the 15 best environmental websites by Time in 2008. He also co-founded the German blog KlimaLounge. KlimaLounge won the 3rd prize of the science blog award of 2013. He is a frequent contributor of articles on climate and climate change/global warming in the popular press, some of which are internationally syndicated via Project Syndicate. He writes a regular column in the German environmental magazine Zeo2, and has published the children's science book Wolken, Wind und Wetter (Clouds, Wind, and Weather) on weather and climate. The book was selected as Environmental Book of the Month for January 2012 by the Deutsche Umweltstiftung. In addition, it was later voted Environmental Book of the Year 2012.

Rahmstorf has commented on climate change and climate policy on TV and radio. He was portrayed as one of the world's 10 leading climate scientists by the Financial Times in 2009. The ARD presented a portrait of Rahmstorf in their prime news magazine Tagesthemen when he received the Deutscher Umweltmedienpreis (German Environmental Media Award) in 2007.

Work
The University of Flensburg found that among all climate scientists from Germany, Rahmstorf published the largest number of studies which ranked amongst the most-cited in the scientific literature during the years 1994–2013. Rahmstorf was a member of the German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU) from 2004 till 2013.

Awards and honors

 * Climate Communication Prize of the American Geophysical Union (2017).
 * Fellow of the American Geophysical Union (2010)
 * Along with other authors of the IPCC AR4 report, he was honored by the award of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize to the IPCC, shared with Al Gore.
 * Honorary Fellow of the University of Wales (2007)
 * German Environmental Media Award (Deutscher Umweltmedienpreis), for his work on scientific accurate reporting anthropogenic climate change and impacts (2007)
 * Centennial Fellowship Award from the James S. McDonnell Foundation, research grant of $1 million (1999)

Selected publications
An overview of Rahmstorf's publications can be found at his Google Scholar profile.

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

title: Stefan Rahmstorf


text:
User talk:157.127.124.134

Proposed deletion of Westinghouse Astronuclear Laboratory

The article Westinghouse Astronuclear Laboratory has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Non-notable place, unsourced since 2010"

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.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Westinghouse Astronuclear Laboratory for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Westinghouse Astronuclear Laboratory is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Westinghouse Astronuclear Laboratory until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:41, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:157.127.124.134


text: File:Norther mirror of madness 1.jpg

title: File:Norther mirror of madness 1.jpg


text:
Principality of Beloozero

The Principality of Beloozero (Белозерское княжество) was a Russian principality which flourished between the 13th and 15th centuries in the Russian North. In terms of the current administrative division of Russia, the principality was located in the west of Vologda Oblast, around the south of Lake Beloye.

Its capital was Beloozero (now Belozersk), one of the five original towns mentioned in the Primary Chronicle. It was closely associated with Rostov until it became independent in 1238 during the Mongol invasions. Dmitry Donskoy secured control over Beloozero and passed it to his descendants; it was formally annexed to Moscow by Ivan III.

History
The Primary Chronicle states that Rurik sent the Ves tribe to Beloozero. But even before this, the town already had their own aboriginal inhabitants. Simon Franklin cautions against taking the chronicle at present value; of legendary tales of brothers founding a new city and a new ruling dynasty, similar to other mythological origin stories that happened across different cultures.

During the Rurik period, Rostov and Beloozero were under the authority of Novgorod but were later detached and governed directly from Kiev, during the late 11th century. Later in the early- to mid-12th century, Rostov-Suzdal (who would later claim authority over Beloozero) emerged in power under the rule of Yuri Dolgorukiy (son of Vladimir Monomakh) and made state policy to dominate the Novgorod trade route along the Volga.

The chronicle mentioned that in 1071, the Kievan tysiatskii, Ian Vyshatich was collecting tribute while in Beloozero, when he saw locals refusing to hand over the volkhvy (pagan priests). The volkhvy had previously killed many women whom they blamed for hoarding supplies and caused a famine in Rostov. Ian later managed to kill the volkhvy.

The duchy had lost its former significance by the early 14th century. In the first half of the 14th century, Ivan Kalita, the Grand Prince of Moscow, was already appointing namestniks of Beloozero who administered the principality instead of the princes.

The principality was detached from the Principality of Rostov in 1238. The town of Beloozero (today's Belozersk) became its capital. Prince Gleb was the first prince of Beloozero (ca. 1238–1278). He increased his standing enormously by marrying Sartaq's daughter. The later rulers of Beloozero could claim a descent from Genghis Khan through this marriage. During Gleb's reign, the duchy's territory embraced the basin of Lake Beloye, the lower streams of the Sheksna River, and Lake Kubenskoye.

In 1389, it was subjugated by Muscovy. Dmitry Donskoy, the Grand Prince of Moscow, handed the principality out to his son Andrey Dmitriyevich. At the end of the 14th century, two influential monasteries were founded on the lands belonging to the principality: Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery in 1397 and Ferapontov Monastery in 1398. The creation was supported by the Moscow princes who considered the foundation of the monasteries as an arm of the influence of Moscow in the north.

In 1486, the principality, which at the time was part of the united Principality of Beloozero and Vereya, was formally incorporated into the Grand Duchy of Moscow. Numerous descendants of the ruling Rurikid princes moved to Moscow and continue in a male line to the present. The Belosselsky-Belozersky family was the most notable among them.

Economy
The chronicle suggests a high importance to Beloozero as it was the residence of Rurik's brother, yet the town did not develop into a major political center, however, it became a frequent port of call. Even though Beloozero was a small rural settlement, Scandinavian items such as combs have been excavated there, suggesting extensive trade networks. Furthermore, 10th-century fragments found in Beloozero suggest imports from the southern regions to the town. Kievan glassware was traded in Beloozero, indicating trade contacts between the towns.

List of princes
Dmitry Donskoy's son Andrei and his son Mikhail were the nominal princes of Beloozero until it was formally annexed in 1485.

title: Principality of Beloozero


text:
Callianthe darwinii

Callianthe darwinii is a shrub typically growing 2 m tall, native to Brazil (South America). The flowers are pink.

Uses
Callianthe darwinii is a popular ornamental plant in hot regions with a humid climate.

title: Callianthe darwinii


text:
User:Benbread

Hey there I'm Ben Clark (alias Benbread), of the UK. I'm 20 years old studying Computer Science at Swansea University, Wales, UK. I've been a Wikipedia member since October 2004.

title: User:Benbread


text:
Philip Rahv

Philip Rahv (March 10, 1908 in Kupin, Russian Empire – December 22, 1973 in Cambridge, Massachusetts) was an American literary critic and essayist. In 1933 he and William Phillips co-founded Partisan Review, one of the most influential literary periodicals in the first half of the twentieth century. Initially affiliated with the Communist Party and adhering to their agenda of proletarian literature, Rahv went on to publish a broad spectrum of modern writers in the pages of his magazine. He was one of the first to introduce Kafka to American readers.

Life
He was born to a Jewish family in Kupin, Russian Empire. The family migrated and spent two years in Vienna, where Philip attended the gymnasium. He was born under the name Fevel Greenberg. He made his way to Providence, Rhode Island, with his father and two brothers, Selig and David. He lived for a time in Palestine where his mother chose to live, and worked as a teacher of Hebrew, in Portland, Oregon, from 1928 to 1931. He wrote at first under the name Philip Rann. Then came the modification to "Rahv," which appeared in an essay he published in 1932.

In 1933 Rahv joined the American Communist Party. Partisan Review broke with the Soviet line in 1937 in the wake of the Moscow Trials and maintained an ongoing feud with Stalinist Popular Front advocates such as Granville Hicks of New Masses. He was officially expelled as a Trotskyite by the American Communist Party on October 1, 1937. Rahv taught at Brandeis University in his later years and died in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 1973.

Literary career
Philip Rahv's writing career began during the Depression. It reflected the prevailing literary currents of Marxism and the rise of proletarian literature. In search of a collective ideology, he and others of his generation rejected the formalism and social disengagement of the great writers of the twenties. An exception was T. S. Eliot, whose intellectual depth and historic sense Rahv continued to admire, Eliot's increasingly reactionary politics and traditional religiosity notwithstanding. Because Rahv believed the creative contradictions within a writer are the greatest measure of his achievement, he welcomed the opportunity to reconcile Eliot's conservative views with revolutionary ones that his writing also contained. Rahv's literary influence arose from his role as editor, author, and reviewer for Partisan Review and other magazines including The New York Review of Books. From the start of his writing career he articulated his key literary values: the need for a synthesis between European and American artistic traditions and between literary modernism and radicalism; the importance of the Marxist dialectic to effectuate such syntheses; the value of cosmopolitanism to promote a broad understanding of the world and the leading ideas of the writer's times; the rejection of parochial ideas based on region, nation, or ethnicity. In one of his most often quoted essays, "Paleface and Redskin," he identified two opposing currents: upper-class palefaces such as Henry James and Nathaniel Hawthorne and uncultured redfaces such as Walt Whitman and Mark Twain. The result was a dichotomy between consciousness and experience and between symbolism and naturalism. Rahv deplored the dichotomy, looking to the future for the kind of synthesis achieved by such European writers as Marcel Proust and Thomas Mann.

Rahv reached the height of his literary influence editing and writing for Partisan Review in the late 1930s. His influence continued through the 1940s with his writings on a wide range of European and American authors, most notably Henry James, whose reputation he contributed to reviving. With the rightward turn of politics in the 1950s, however, he retreated from his earlier literary and political prominence. He played little role in Partisan Review in this era, publishing essays in other publications, most notably The New York Review of Books. In the 1960s his brief enthusiasm for the New Left was followed by disillusionment. He never finished his final project, a book on Dostoyevsky.

Works

 * Image and Idea (1949) – essays
 * The Myth and the Powerhouse (1965) – essays
 * Literature and the Sixth Sense (1969) – essays
 * Essays in Literature and Politics (1978) – essays
 * Modern Occasions, vol 1., 1970–71, issues 1, 2, 3, 4; vol. 2, 1972, issues 1, 2.

title: Philip Rahv


text:
Cecil Roth

Cecil Roth (5 March 1899 – 21 June 1970) was an English historian. He was editor-in-chief of the Encyclopaedia Judaica.

Life
Roth was born in Dalston, London, on 5 March 1899. His parents were Etty and Joseph Roth, and Cecil was the youngest of their four sons. In childhood, Cecil received a traditional Jewish religious education, including studying Hebrew with Jacob Mann. He went to school at City of London School. He fought in the First World War, seeing active duty in France in 1918.

Roth studied history at Merton College, Oxford. He took a first-class B.A. in modern history in 1922, and a D.Phil. in 1924. His first published work, based on his thesis, was The Last Florentine Republic (1527-1530), published in 1925. Roth was elected a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society in the same year and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature in 1941.

In 1928 he married Irene Rosalind Davis and lived off freelance writing until returning to Oxford as Reader in Post-Biblical Jewish Studies from 1939 to 1964.

The couple were enthusiastic collectors of Judaism-related manuscripts and objets d'art, selling substantial collections of the former to the Brotherton Library of the University of Leeds in 1961, and of the latter to the Beth Tzedec Synagogue Museum in Toronto.

On his retirement from Oxford in 1964, at the invitation of Joseph H. Lookstein, Roth became a visiting professor at Bar-Ilan University, Israel, moving to Jerusalem. However, within a month of his arrival he was attacked in a publication by Rabbi Avraham Yitzhak Bromberg for allegedly arguing that Moses never existed – when in fact he had noted others' scepticism about Moses' existence and argued that Moses had in fact lived. The accusation prompted a scandal, and Roth suffered a heart attack in November 1964. Roth's wife Irene attributed the heart attack partly to stress of migrating, and partly to the stress of the accusations. Roth stood down from his position at the University early in 1965, citing ill health. He went on to hold a position at the Queens College, City University of New York (1966–1969) while working as general editor of the Encyclopaedia Judaica, dying in post shortly after the first edition of the encyclopaedia was completed.

Roth died, aged 71, on 21 June 1970 in Jerusalem.

Works
He was editor-in-chief of the Encyclopaedia Judaica from 1965 until his death.

His works number over 600 items, including:
 * The Last Florentine Republic (1527-1530) (London, 1925)
 * Life of Menasseh Ben Israel (Philadelphia, 1934)
 * Roth Haggadah (1934)
 * A short History of the Jewish people (Macmillan, London 1936)
 * Magna Bibliotheca Anglo-Judaica: a Bibliographical Guide to Anglo-Jewish History (London, 1937)
 * The Spanish Inquisition (Robert Hale Limited 1937)
 * Anglo-Jewish Letters, 1158-1917 (London, 1938)
 * History of the Great Synagogue (of London), available online, as part of the Susser Archive of JCR-UK
 * The Jewish Contribution to Civilization (New York, 1941)
 * History of the Jews in England (Oxford, 1941)
 * History of the Jews in Italy (Philadelphia, 1946)
 * The Rise of Provincial Jewry (Oxford, 1950), available online, as part of the Susser Archive of JCR-UK
 * History of the Jews (initially published as A Bird's-Eye View of Jewish History) (1954)
 * The Jews in the Renaissance (Philadelphia, 1959)
 * Jewish Art (1961)
 * The Dead Sea Scrolls (1965)
 * The House of Nasi: Doña Gracia (1969)
 * The House of Nasi: Doña Gracia (1969)

Biography

 * Roth, Irene. Cecil Roth: Historian without Tears. A Memoir (New York: Sepher-Hermon Press, 1982), ISBN 9780872031036

title: Cecil Roth


text:
Talk:Adrien-Marie Legendre

Untitled
I can't find Legendre's formula in the Englishpedia:

$$ n! = \prod_{i=1}^{k} p_{i}^{ \sum_{j=1}^{\infin} \left[ \frac{n}{p_{i}^{j}} \right] } $$

please would you so kind to tell me how do you call this in English and if you had an article about this? Thanks: Gubbubu 20:09, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Confusion with Lagrange
>his work on roots of polynomials inspired Galois theory; Does anyone know what he concretely did? I think that it confuses Legendre with Lagrange. --132nd 05:07, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

The page says he's known for the Lagrangian. Can someone confirm that this is confusing Legendre with Lagrange? Skoozdag (talk) 19:41, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

From what I can see, the "work on roots of polynomials" that inspired Galois theory was indeed Lagrange and not Legendre. They apparently knew of each other however, as professional contemporaries, and in fact, the roots of Legendre polynomials are significant. However, when it comes to the methods of finding roots that inspired Galois theory, that was primarily Lagrange, and it doesn't seem correct to attribute it to Legendre here, so I took it out.Kemery720 (talk) 19:36, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Pronunciation
How is his name pronounced? Better if in IPA please. --Octra Bond 23:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It is in IPA now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.53.52.21 (talk) 09:50, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 02:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

ERRATUM
Take care about the picture, it's Louis LEGENDRE, and *not* Adrien-Marie LE GENDRE. http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Legendre_(homme_politique)

This information has been strongly verified here : Proof : http://books.google.fr/books?id=eoMGAAAAQAAJ&dq=editions:02n1RXQ5uEKlRR2b

and I've received answers from the french "Bibliothèque de l'Institut de France". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.218.144.116 (talk) 15:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Would an editor please include the CORRECT portrait
Why include a silly caricature? If there's no good portrait, a silly caricature is not the best substitute. The best substitute is nothing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.232.191.16 (talk) 20:13, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

As pointed out by the previous poster, the portrait of an unrelated politician also called Legendre (who was born in the same year) has been misrepresented everywhere as the portrait of the mathematician... That wrong portrait was duly removed from this Wikipedia article a few months ago, but someone put it back! It would be nice to eliminate that VERY COMMON mistake once and for all by displaying here what's apparently the only extant portrait of Adrien-Marie Legendre! That portrait is a sketch drawn before 1820 (it's therefore in the public domain) which can be found in one of the links appearing at the end of the article, namely: http://www.numericana.com/answer/record.htm#legendre —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.122.83.82 (talk) 10:57, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Removed - don't know where to find a correct portrait though, unless we use the caricature on that page. — PhilHibbs | talk 20:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for removing this pervasive erroneous portrait. Yes, the caricature on that page is the ONLY extant portrait and it's now in the public domain (no copyright).  Could someone post it properly ASAP:

Caricature of Legendre: http://www.numericana.com/fame/legendre.jpg (100 x 125 pixels). The entire page it has been clipped from (next to J.B Fourier): http://www.numericana.com/fame/legendre-fourier.jpg (758 x 595 pixels). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.122.80.77 (talk) 00:46, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Adding explanation section

 * Interesting story! I thought a ghost jumped out at me when I came to this page after looking up Legendre transformation. I'll add a short photo debacle section to this article so others don't have to waste the time I did investigating this matter (which is similar to the wasted time I spent investigating the Robert Boyle photo destruction by Newton). Another common photo error is the mixing of Lazare Carnot's photo with his son's photo Sadi Carnot, such as in error on this page. --Libb Thims (talk) 18:11, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Another portrait
There's also this portrait of him, it seems: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k8742069/f203.item --2A02:6D40:3B9A:A201:4169:46C6:34AF:C193 (talk) 17:52, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

 * If you can read the Conditions for use and make sure that we are allowed reupload the image to Wikimedia Commons (or to English Wikipedia if we cannot upload it to Wikimedia Commons), please feel free to do so (after downloading the image in as high resolution as possible). Although the current portrait is so much funnier :D —Kri (talk) 03:51, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello @Kri ,
 * Thanks to the person who shared above this 1) "Portrait given to Barral"
 * ("Le portrait choisi pour notre livre a été fait sur un croquis donné par Legendre à Arago, en 1829, et transmis à mon père par le célèbre astronome." Translation: Barral says that the drawing of Legendre was given to his father by Arago. Source).
 * This image has been imported into Common here.
 * Caution: there are like 2 versions of the Barral book 1889 and 1892 (see links : "une de 1889 intitulée "Histoire populaire des 72 savants dont les noms sont inscrits sur la grande frise de la Tour Eiffel" par les deux frères Barral (disponible que dans certaines bibliothèques)
 * et une (plus complète a priori) de 1892 "Le Panthéon scientifique de la tour Eiffel" par Georges Barral sans son frère (chez Gallica ou Google Livres ).")
 * Two more portraits have been found (thanks to the persons of the Legendre's fr-wiki talk page) :
 * 2) « pastel » de Lenclos is a copy of this vignette in Historica
 * 3) Statute - Paris Hotel de ville : Commons link. Source : this book. (other quality version at Gallica). More infos at Orsay.
 * I hope this helps. Jurbop (talk) 10:14, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Thank you; that's great! Maybe we can create a gallery of all pictures now at the bottom of the page. In the last photo, is the statue of the correct Legendre? I see no first name, only the surname, so for all I know it potentially could be another Legendre. —Kri (talk) 23:31, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Adrien-Marie Legendre


text:
Talk:Group (periodic table)

A Group NN element is the series...
A large number of the individual group articles start with the phrase "A Group N element is the series..." This sounds ungrammatical to me -- is this some unusual usage I'm not familiar with? I only ask (instead of correcting it) because it's been like this for over a year and no one has corrected them... --Steve Pucci | talk 03:29, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I changed them to read "A Group N element is one in the series...". Those lead sentences still seem awkward, but I'm not sure how to fix it.  "Group N elements are the series..." seems equally awkward. --Steve Pucci | talk 16:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

in the elements they always have 15 letters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.87.66.12 (talk) 17:03, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Steve Pucci, it still is awkward. Sadly. -DePiep (talk) 12:34, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Date of new IUPAC system?
It would be of interest to add the date of the "new" IUPAC recommendation, if someone knows it. Dirac66 16:10, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. --Itub (talk) 12:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

F-block
Our standard periodic table contains the f-block, and has four blocks on the periodic table. So we should number the groups in the f-block from 3-16 and following d-block and then into p-block. It will then has 32 group on the periodic table. Then groups number to 18 through just s-block, d-block, and p-block would become the old style just like using Roman numeral through only s-block and p-block. I think that it will happen in the future for IUPAC to number the groups in the f-block. Cosmium 00:48, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia is not ... IUPAC. Based on the Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought principal, and the Wikipedia is not a crystal ball principal, that nomenclature would not be appropriate for the article. We don't create the nomenclature used in the periodic table, we just report what the leading scientific bodies use, which right now is the periodic table published by IUPAC on June 22, 2007, which uses groups 1-18 for most of the elements, and has the actinoids and lanthanoids off in their own, ungrouped, area. Gentgeen (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 14:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

 * I just realized I answered a question that's a year old. d'oh! Gentgeen (talk) 14:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding first section
Ok, I give up: what is a "conch" configuration? ... elements in a group have similar (conch) configurations ... --Wnross7 19:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Good question. The word has no relevance to this subject so I have just deleted it. I checked the article history and someone added it in January 2006 with no explanation. Thanks for pointing this out. Dirac66 22:49, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

P.S. The word "conch" may have been an attempt at "shell" by someone more familiar with another language, since in English a conch is a mollusk with spiral shells, and in French a "couche électronique" is an "electron shell". However the sentence reads better as it now is with "conch" just deleted, and "electron shells" a few words later. Dirac66 00:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Navel-gazing
Today a very original periodic table was added to the article by Badgettrg. While I have seen many different periodic tables while teaching chemistry, I certainly have never seen one color-coded to show the quality of the Wikipedia article for each element.

Sorry, but this seems to be a clear example of navel-gazing, defined as being directed towards self-absorbed pursuits. It suggests that the properties of Wikipedia are more important for readers than the properties of the chemical elements.

I agree that a periodic table of some kind would help the article. Could we not for example use the one in the Periodic table article, which actually shows the chemical groups of the periodic table? Dirac66 (talk) 19:05, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

 * That table is used by the Elements WikiProject to keep track of article quality. While it is useful for the project's purposes, it is certainly not meant to be used in articles! --Itub (talk) 22:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

 * OK, I have now replaced it by the one from Chemical Element, which has a more conventional color coding. Dirac66 (talk) 02:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

VIIIA as old numbering for noble gases
The noble gases are currently marked Group 18 (Group 0), suggesting that everyone called them Group 0 prior to the 1985-90 IUPAC reform. Certainly many authors used Group 0, but I have also found VIIIA in two leading 1980s inorganic textbooks: Cotton and Wilkinson, Advanced Inorganic Chemistry (5th edn 1988, page facing inside back cover) and Huheey, Inorganic Chemistry (3d edn 1983, inside front cover). Therefore I am adding VIIIA as an another old number for this group.

I am not however adding VIIIB for this group as I have no evidence that anyone actually used it. If someone does find a book which uses VIIIB for the noble gases, I would encourage them to add it after VIIIA, after first indicating the source on this talk page. Dirac66 (talk) 15:39, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Not a primary proof of use, but does say that the noble gases were in group VIIIB in the "European system". --Itub (talk) 16:03, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Group 3 element
Doesn't this also have the name rare earth metals? Lanthanum-138 (talk) 09:16, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The rare earths originally were the lanthanides (Z = 57-71), to which Sc and Y have been added by IUPAC, I think in the 1990s. The actinides are still excluded, so now Group 3 = rare earths + actinides. I'll add that description to the table. Dirac66 (talk) 02:36, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Roman numerals
The article correctly states that IUPAC groupings use Arabic numerals, but falsely asserts without a reference that the non-IUPAC conventions use only Roman numerals. A quick google search on "noble gases 8a" shows nearly the same number of hits as "noble gases VIIIA", and "halogens 7A" is about as widely used as "halogens VIIA". This counter-factual assertion needs to be dropped. Rwflammang (talk) 03:04, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

 * Perhaps we should distinguish the past and the present. I think that both older conventions originally used Roman numerals, but it is true that some more recent authors place the A and B after Arabic numerals. Dirac66 (talk) 14:02, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

 * It is generally true that Roman numerals are being used less and less in all applications, but unless we can find a reference to changing conventions in group nomenclature, I think that the best course of action here is to drop all mention of Roman numerals. Rwflammang (talk) 20:32, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * That would introduce european style "group 8" for groups 8, 9, 10. Such usage should not go without a disconfusing note. -DePiep (talk) 12:39, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Old IUPAC (European) numbering for groups 8, 9, 10
Currently, for old IUPAC (aka European) numbering, we use for groups 8-9-10: VIII (Roman 8). In the source:, Flick is describing the old confusion. e.g. (bolds added): What to conclude? -DePiep (talk) 22:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * "Fig. 1. Periodic table according to H.G. Deming": VIII for all three columns.
 * "In Europe the alkali metals and alkaline earth metals are usually designated as IA and IIA, respectively; the elements scandium [group 3] to nickel [group 10] as IIIA to VIIIA".
 * Deming's textbook was published in New York and is described as appearing in the USA and setting the precedent for Sargent-Welch's USA periodic tables. So I conclude that the USA notation differed from the European, from about the 1920s to the 1980s according to this source. Dirac66 (talk) 22:25, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

18 or 32?
If there are 32 columns, then why is there 18 groups? Are the lanthanides and actinides ALL in group 3?? 108.66.232.241 (talk) 17:18, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

 * I am restoring the above question which was deleted by the previous edit with the edit summary "remove troll question alr[eady] answered in article." In general Wikipedia policy for talk pages is to leave others' comments alone unless they are completely irrelevant to the article subject, which is clearly not the case here. See WP:TPO.

 * Also my opinion is that the question is only partly answered in the article. The article does explain that yes, all the lanthanides and actinides are in group 3 so there are only 18 groups and not 32. But it does not explain WHY this is the case which is a valid question, especially since a 32-column periodic table based on full electron configuration (including f-shells) has been proposed occasionally although we do not see it very often. When my students ask this question, I tell them that (1) the properties of all the lanthanides and actinides are so similar that one group is felt to be sufficient, and (2) a 32-column Janet-type table would not fit too well on book pages and classroom wall charts. However those answers are rather incomplete and unsourced; the Wikipedia article might be more useful if it included a brief history (with sources) of the evolution from 8 to 18 groups (now in Periodic table but not in this article) and also the decision to stop at 18 groups and not 32. I think the question of 108.66.232.241 is useful in pointing out that the information in this article is incomplete on this subject. Dirac66 (talk) 16:13, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

 * This is what it might look like...

3 4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13  14  15  16 La Ce Pr Nd Pm Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho  Er  Tm  Yb
 * Above comment by 108.66.233.108 (13 November 2016)
 * Yes. And the best-known complete 32-column table is the left-step periodic table below as proposed by Charles Janet, with Groups 1 and 2 on the right. Not sure if this should be in the article.

Dirac66 (talk) 01:01, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * you mean "yes" for the proposed numbering by IP? No it is (when group numbers are added to Janet's table, they'd start from the d1-column rightwards, on the sequence 3–18, 1, 2, and maybe a He note).
 * Group numbering is not an administrative action (as column numbering is), it is a properties-based scientific statement. Elements in one group have corresponding properties (eg valence).
 * re The article does explain that yes, all the lanthanides and actinides are in group 3: The article, and both graphs, states that 14 + 14 lanthanides and actinides have no group number. (Though indeed group 3 article mentiuos this, among other descriptions).
 * It is true that lots of periodic tables show group 3 containing 32 elements (Sc, Y and all lanthanides, actinides). This started in ~1940 when Seaborg 'discovered' the actinides and placed them in the PT in the "group 3" column(s) (usually in a footnote-style rectangle below & asterisks for placeholders, which is equivalent). However, nowadays scientific ideas are that group 3 only has four elements, and the other 14 + 14 lanthanides + actinides have no group number. (WP talk here) In 2015, IUPAC initiated a project to determine the exact composition of group 3: The constitution of group 3 of the periodic table:
 * "This project will deliver a recommendation in favor of the composition of group 3 of the periodic table as consisting either of the elements Sc, Y, Lu and Lr, or the elements Sc, Y, La and Ac."
 * Note that the 32-elements option is not even a possible outcome. So the Janet and rgular PT have 14 columns without group number. -DePiep (talk) 13:50, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, thank you. I learned many years ago that all the lanthanides and actinides are in group 3, but I accept now that this view is obsolete. I will expand the note about group 3 to make this point and also mention the IUPAC project. Dirac66 (talk) 01:41, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. However my edit appears not in this article, but in Template:Periodic table (group names) which is copied as a whole into this article. Dirac66 (talk) 02:51, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * yes, good edit. This "drop the Sc/Y/*/** group 3" is a very recent development (few years?), and is slow to be accepted. My main explanation is that everybody has learned that original setup (wallcharts, books), and older scholars are hard to convince or take interest (or are not working with group 3). Few sources actually state & prove that those 32 elements have group 3 properties. OTOH, the discussion between Sc, Y, Lu and Lr or Sc, Y, La and Ac is as lively as you can get. I'm anxious to learn what the Scerri team comes up with. This will be defining (a change in) the PT structure, and so will is huge in PT history. -DePiep (talk) 15:40, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

 * This is what it should look like:

1 2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 1 H                                                                                He 1 2 Li Be                                                                         B  C  N  O  F Ne 2 3 Na Mg                                                                        Al Si  P  S Cl Ar 3 4 K Ca                                           Sc Ti  V Cr Mn Fe Co Ni Cu Zn Ga Ge As Se Br Kr 4 5 Rb Sr                                           Y Zr Nb Mo Tc Ru Rh Pd Ag Cd In Sn Sb Te  I Xe 5 6 Cs Ba La Ce Pr Nd Pm Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu Hf Ta W Re Os Ir Pt Au Hg Tl Pb Bi Po At Rn 6 7 Fr Ra Ac Th Pa U Np Pu Am Cm Bk Cf Es Fm Md No Lr Rf Db Sg Bh Hs Mt Ds Rg Cn Nh Fl Mc Lv Ts Og 7 1 2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 108.65.81.94 (talk) 15:18, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

 * But this format would suggest to the uninitiated that there are 32 groups, with carbon in group 28 etc. etc. I think it would be less confusing to use the actual group numbers plus blank spaces:

1 2                                            3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1 H                                                                                He 1 2 Li Be                                                                         B  C  N  O  F Ne 2 3 Na Mg                                                                        Al Si  P  S Cl Ar 3 4 K Ca                                           Sc Ti  V Cr Mn Fe Co Ni Cu Zn Ga Ge As Se Br Kr 4 5 Rb Sr                                           Y Zr Nb Mo Tc Ru Rh Pd Ag Cd In Sn Sb Te  I Xe 5 6 Cs Ba La Ce Pr Nd Pm Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu Hf Ta W Re Os Ir Pt Au Hg Tl Pb Bi Po At Rn 6 7 Fr Ra Ac Th Pa U Np Pu Am Cm Bk Cf Es Fm Md No Lr Rf Db Sg Bh Hs Mt Ds Rg Cn Nh Fl Mc Lv Ts Og 7 1 2                                            3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Dirac66 (talk) 17:31, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * We won't go numbering 32. Dirac66, maybe this was just a try by the IP. Not to waste time on. -DePiep (talk) 17:43, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

 * That blank spaced one would be confusing. I recommend the top one, as it suggests the number of columns. 108.65.81.94 (talk) 18:58, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

 * Less confusing was actually a poor choice of words on my part. The real point is that Wikipedia policy is to conform to the accepted presentation in the scientific literature and not make original changes. In this case IUPAC is in the process of deciding between two 18-group tables with different versions of Group 3, so can present both of those for now. However the scientific community does seem to agree not to use 32 group numbers, so it is not up to Wikipedia to introduce 32 new groups. It is acceptable in the scientific literature to show 32 columns provided that 14 of them are not labelled as groups, so we can present that option as well. Dirac66 (talk) 21:08, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

 * This is what it would look like:

1 2                                             3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18                                                                                s2                                                                                He  s1 s2 f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 f6 f7 f8 f9 f10f11f12f13f14d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d9 d10p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 1 H                                                                                2 Li Be                                                                          B  C  N  O  F Ne 3 Na Mg                                                                         Al Si  P  S Cl Ar 4 K  Ca                                           Sc Ti  V Cr Mn Fe Co Ni Cu Zn Ga Ge As Se Br Kr 5 Rb Sr                                            Y Zr Nb Mo Tc Ru Rh Pd Ag Cd In Sn Sb Te  I Xe 6 Cs Ba La Ce Pr Nd Pm Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu Hf Ta  W Re Os Ir Pt Au Hg Tl Pb Bi Po At Rn 7 Fr Ra Ac Th Pa  U Np Pu Am Cm Bk Cf Es Fm Md No Lr Rf Db Sg Bh Hs Mt Ds Rg Cn Nh Fl Mc Lv Ts Og 108.66.235.190 (talk) 02:31, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, this version might be useful, provided that it is explained that it is the top row which has the accepted conventional group numbers, and that the second row is added to show the relationship of group numbers to (ideal) electron configurations. Dirac66 (talk) 18:59, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

New table?
I suggest that we place the electron configurations below the group numbers (and isolate helium with s2 instad of p6) and place an asterisk on the square for the displaced elements (such as gadolinium). That way, we will know what the ideal electron configurations are. This is what it should look like.

1 2                                             3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18                                                                                s2                                                                                He  s1 s2 f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 f6 f7 f8 f9 f10f11f12f13f14d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d9 d10p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 1 H                                                                                2 Li Be                                                                          B  C  N  O  F Ne 3 Na Mg                                                                         Al Si  P  S Cl Ar 4 K  Ca                                           Sc Ti  V Cr Mn Fe Co Ni Cu Zn Ga Ge As Se Br Kr 5 Rb Sr                                            Y Zr Nb Mo Tc Ru Rh Pd Ag Cd In Sn Sb Te  I Xe 6 Cs Ba La Ce Pr Nd Pm Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu Hf Ta  W Re Os Ir Pt Au Hg Tl Pb Bi Po At Rn 7 Fr Ra Ac Th Pa  U Np Pu Am Cm Bk Cf Es Fm Md No Lr Rf Db Sg Bh Hs Mt Ds Rg Cn Nh Fl Mc Lv Ts Og 108.65.81.161 (talk) 00:44, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Group 1
may effect a preference for the bloated transcluded table over placing description in the article proper. But YBG may not disrupt behaviour of the Group 1 element link and. For the record, vehemently oppose redirecting these things to alkali metal – it would defeat the IUPAC’s idea that every element (at least for elements in s-, p-, and d-blocks) is assigned to one of eighteen groups. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:05, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Please clarify. Which edit or proposal by YBG are you referring to? And, why would this be more appropriate, while all other pages in "group x element" are, or end up in, a straight group page? -DePiep (talk) 19:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * (presently) edit in the article – it stripped my redirects of their landing target. My solution has shortcomings, but IMHO it is a kind of compromise: it dissuades users from ideas that “group 1” and “alkali metals” are synonymous (although a controversy over inclusion of hydrogen exists). Simultaneously it avoids creation of a separate article. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:30, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

The relevant edits that I have made are: I did this to place all group-specific footnotes in the template itself rather than having some inside the template and some outside the template. In doing so, I did not notice that I was removing the. For this unintended consequence, I sincerely apologize. If there is a need to have such an anchor in Group (periodic table), I think that a better solution would be to add a new section == Irregular group composition == or something similar, with subsections ===Group 1=== and ===Group 3=== with expanded versions of the footnotes in the template. These subsections would provide an appropriate anchor target. YBG (talk) 21:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * this edit to Periodic table (group names)
 * this edit to Group (periodic table)
 * Thanks for the answer. Just to note: the precarious situation of the Group 3 is not equivalent to the case of “hydrogen and…”. There is a controversy which namely (and how many) elements to include to “the scandium group” in periods having a f-block. Contrary, definition of the IUPAC Group 1 is hopefully non-controversial: an element having, in neutral form, $n − 1$ full electron shells and exactly one $ns$ electron. It covers everything from hydrogen to ununennium with exactly one element per period. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 21:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * That's why I did not suggest "Controversial group composition"; the adjective "irregular" seems IMHO to be descriptive of the situation in both group 1 and group 3. YBG (talk) 06:54, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Again… while there is a controversy over the Group 3, it perfectly can be explained in the dedicated article. We have another kind of trouble for the Group 1: the dedicated article bluntly doesn’t exist. Why to lump both cases together? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 09:24, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not terribly uncommon for H to be excluded from group 1 in spite of IUPAC. Greenwood and Earnshaw even show the periodic table with a floating H as well as a floating He: they explain the first on p. 43 by saying that H is different enough from both group 1 and group 17 to justify keeping it out of both, although of course its electron configuration is similar to that of both groups. FWIW I support group 1 redirecting to the anchor here so that readers get an explanation about the hydrogen issue, as well as a statement that the exact placement of H is not always agreed on. Double sharp (talk) 14:14, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * There is already a collection of opinions in period 1 element and yet another one may be placed to hydrogen proper. As for this article proper, it shouldn’t exclusively stick to the IUPAC dogma, but follow Wikipedia’s structure and customs in presenting pluralism. “The IUPAC’s definition = {hydrogen} ∪ alkali metals” should be stated first and foremost. Most of the remaining stuff and controversy should be conveyed with internal links to detailed articles. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 21:10, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

if to add a parenthetical, then add both. Don’t. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 11:15, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Both are present in both revisions you linked, so I don't understand what you mean. Double sharp (talk) 12:35, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Oops, misread the diff for some unclear reason. Sorry. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 13:40, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

 * I object to using terms "controversy" and "IUPAC definition of group 1". First of all, it is not a controversy as in 'opposing opinions' or 'heated discussions': it is a difference by scientific arguments. This is purely rational, and adding dramatic effects does not help explaining the situation. Further, a "IUPAC definition" (source?) does not exist. Maybe you refer to "collective names for like elements are IUPAC-approved: : alkali metals (Li, Na, K, Rb, Cs, Fr), ...". That's as strong as it gets. When there are scientific arguments to change a set, IUP{AC does not forbid such a report. (For example: this). -DePiep (talk) 16:22, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The IUPAC definition of groups is at https://iupac.org/what-we-do/periodic-table-of-elements/#a6 (the image is on the same page above) – groups are stated to be columns, whose membership is pretty explicit. Classification of elements is not the same deal as establishing facts. There is no factual basis under statement “helium belongs to group 18”. We could classify elements strictly by shape of orbitals which are occupied, which certainly would made beryllium a homologue of helium and IMHO such system perfectly can be useful in description of some physical processes. But for chemistry it’s often more important to know which nearby orbitals are unoccupied (as it mostly determines electronegativity), and the common wisdom “helium belongs to group 18” reflects understanding that a closed valence shell—for chemistry—is the most important classifying property which overrides differences between exact composition of the shells. One can call it a “difference by scientific arguments”, but atomic physicist’s and chemist’s arguments may contradict for many cases. IUPAC ruled the cases of H and He in opposite directions applying some chemical commons sense. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:19, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * We don't need or use a IUPAC definition of groups. No such definition exists. IUPAC only recommends. -DePiep (talk) 18:44, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Since 1988, IUPAC recommended that the groups (i.e. columns) be simply numbered from 1 to 18.
 * The table on the same page—to which the citation unambiguously refer—is titled “IUPAC Periodic Table of the Elements”. IUPAC defines “groups [as] columns” (although “only recommends” to use numbers for them) and places hydrogen in the same column as lithium. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:42, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * That's sdtill recommending then, while you also confuse the issue by introducing the column & group getting: not needed, not helpful, not clarifying. Listen. IUPAC themselves have stated that their current "Group 3" recommandation (or definition if you like) is not correct. IUPAC asked Scerri et al to improve the group 3 statements while explicitly excluding their (IUPAC's) previous group 3 set. This is how IUPAC states things (not "defines" things): go for the scinetific base, not by an ukaze. -DePiep (talk) 19:58, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Look, the anchor is. Perhaps it would be easier to make an article then? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 10:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The anchor should work now. Double sharp (talk) 13:30, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Suboptimal, but tolerable. If noone broke redirects again, ’d make no further lawyering here. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 17:23, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

… and again
the same story yet another time. A redirect from a general topic to a partial topic may benefit some readers, but strategically it brings confusion. A separate article on the group 1, perhaps? am tired of this endless argument. Pinging. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 08:21, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I would say a redirect to a footnote makes a lot of confusion. Therefore, I reverted your edit. Your edit didn't have an edit summary. Christian75 (talk) 08:36, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The redirect to a footnote alerts a reader about irregularity. The alkali redirect is corrosive to mind – a superficial reader can think that the terms are synonymous or—at very least—the alkali metals topic subsumes everything related to the group. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 09:27, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * (ec) re I.M.: Rereading this thread, and half a dozen of earlier discussions about the topic of group 1 being presented as H + alkali metals with detailed notes in applicable places, I conclude that consensus is to not honour your proposal (to create separate articles "Group 1" and "Alkali metals". As has been explained by me and eloquently by YBG and Double sharp and Christian75: the situation can very well be clarified with a non-split article using footnotes, body texts, and what we can use. Remember, even if we would split articles the same issue is present: explain the difference between the two (group 1 and alkalis), but in both articles. -DePiep (talk) 08:40, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The same situation in North Asia vs Siberia. Or Universal Character Set vs Unicode. Or disc galaxy vs spiral galaxy. So let all such pairs to be lumped together? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 09:27, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know. Ask & argue on their talkpages. It's called WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. -DePiep (talk) 09:57, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Saved as draft:Group 1 element. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 11:26, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The above-referenced diff (special:diff/914594651/914283193) by is merely reverting the bold edit (special:diff/810792861/910330257 made by . The previous redirect had been present for nearly two decades, and so while bold editing is to be encouraged, when reverted discussion and consensus are strongly encouraged. So I suggest that the pre-existing redirect should remain until a consensus to change it has been achieved.
 * A redirect to a footnote seems to be unusual. Does anyone know of any policy about such things? Does anyone know of any other examples of such redirects? YBG (talk) 15:34, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * There is no consensus, and no known solution seems to satisfy everybody. am against the alkali redirect.  is against redirecting to a footnote.  doesn’t like a dedicated section in this article.  is—or certainly was—against a separate article. IMHO the time to submit an RfC. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 15:58, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not categorically opposed to a separate article nor a redirect to a section; a redirect to a footnote does seem to be very unusual, though I wouldn't reject it out of hand particularly if redirect-to-footnote is something used elsewhere in WP. I am not convinced that there is a need to change it from the status quo, but I don't reject change out-of-hand. It might be helpful to catalog a list of all the different possibilities (and there are more than those I have just listed) and then discus the pros and cons of each one. In such a discussion, it would probably be helpful if all participants made a point of mentioning the shortcomings of their preferred solution and the advantages of the other solutions. In this way we avoid sounding like it "my way or the highway" and we maximize the possibility of finding consensus.
 * The WP:ELEM project has had a history of long and vociferous discussions that finally result in a consensus. I'm quite confident we can do it again, even if it takes us 12-18 months and hundreds of KB. In the past, we have conducted such discussions on our main WT:ELEM page. YBG (talk) 04:58, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

"n/a" group header usage (MOS)
About stabilising the "n/a" group header (for f-block columns), see the new discussion at. DePiep (talk) 09:03, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

science
names of different group/families in pt. 112.209.177.232 (talk) 23:54, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Group (periodic table)


text:
User talk:TeamRevertViolation

Reverted edits by Jewish supremacist/revisionist team and proud to do so. Accuracy, not propaganda.

title: User talk:TeamRevertViolation


text:
1958 Manitoba general election

The 1958 Manitoba general election was held on June 16, 1958 to elect Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Manitoba, Canada. The election resulted in a minority victory for the Progressive Conservative Party under the leadership of Dufferin Roblin.

This election was the first in Manitoba after a comprehensive electoral redistribution in 1956. The redistribution saw the city of Winnipeg abandon its three four-member districts. St. Boniface also was broken up into two single-member districts. The old Winnipeg, St. Boniface and two suburban districts were made into 20 single-member constituencies altogether, to give the City of Winnipeg increased representation in the legislature. Elections hereafter used FPTP.

As well the other districts in the province had dropped the Alternative Voting system and simply used the plurality first past the post system from here on.

Premier Douglas Campbell's Liberal-Progressives lost the majority they had held since 1922. The Progressive Conservative Party under the leadership of Dufferin Roblin won 26 seats, three short of a majority, while the Liberal-Progressives were reduced to second-place status with 19. The social democratic Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) held the balance of power with 11 seats, and independent Stephen Juba was also elected in Winnipeg. Both Social Credit and the Labour Progressive Party lost their legislative representation.

After the election, the Liberal-Progressives attempted to form a coalition with the CCF to remain in power. The CCF rejected this offer, instead giving confidence and supply to a PC government under Roblin and ending 36 years of Progressive and Liberal-Progressive led governments in Manitoba. Although the Progressive Conservatives had been part of a coalition government with the Liberal-Progressives from 1940 to 1950, this was the first time since 1915 that they had formed an administration on their own. This was the last time the Liberals formed government in Manitoba. This would begin a sharp decline for the Liberals, and a concurrent rise for the CCF.

Roblin's government proved unstable, and was defeated in the legislature in early 1959. Manitobans returned to the polls shortly thereafter, and gave the Tories an outright majority while the Liberals were cut down to only 11 seats.

Riding results
Party key:
 * PC: Progressive Conservative Party of Manitoba
 * LP: Liberal-Progressive Party of Manitoba
 * CCF: Manitoba Co-operative Commonwealth Federation
 * SC: Manitoba Social Credit Party
 * LPP: Labour Progressive Party of Manitoba
 * Ind: Independent

(incumbent) denotes incumbent.

Arthur:
 * John Gordon Cobb (PC) 2072
 * John Wilfred McRae (LP) 2032
 * Walter D. Taylor (SC) 693

Assiniboia:
 * (incumbent)Donovan Swailes (CCF) 2409
 * George William Johnson (PC) 2278
 * David McKee Graham (LP) 1165

Birtle-Russell:
 * (incumbent)Rodney Stewart Clement (LP) 2232
 * Robert Gordon Smellie (PC) 2102
 * Eugene Caldwell (CCF) 933

Brandon:
 * (incumbent)Reginald Otto Lissaman (PC) 4442
 * Robert Addison Clement (LP) 2818
 * Hans Fries (CCF) 780

Brokenhead:
 * Edward Richard Schreyer (CCF) 1474
 * Fred H. Helwer (LP) 930
 * Howard Wachal (PC) 729
 * (incumbent)Stanley Copp (Ind) 641
 * John William Cross (SC) 203

Burrows:
 * (incumbent)John Martin Hawryluk (CCF) 2032
 * (incumbent)William Arthur Kardash (LPP) 1207
 * Joseph R. Hnidan (LP) 1084
 * John Kereluk (PC) 1067

Carillon:
 * (incumbent)Edmond Prefontaine (LP) 2433
 * Liguori Gauthier (PC) 1047
 * Henry Mueller (Ind) 608

Churchill:
 * Edward Joseph Williams (PC) 1580
 * K. Don Wray (LP) 1283
 * Frank Mercer (CCF) 370

Dauphin:
 * Stewart Edgertson McLean (PC) 2740
 * John Potoski (LP) 1389
 * A. Clifford Matthews (CCF) 1067

Dufferin:
 * (incumbent)Walter Clifton McDonald (LP) 1822
 * William Homer Hamilton (PC) 1749
 * Ivan Langtry (SC) 545

Elmwood:
 * Steve Peters (CCF) 2375
 * (incumbent)Alexander Turk (LP) 1519
 * Joseph Stepnuk (PC) 1084
 * Michael Baryluk (Ind C) 689

Emerson:
 * (incumbent)John Peter Tanchak (LP) 2897
 * Frank Caspar (PC) 1918
 * Joseph Lambert (Ind) 200

Ethelbert Plains:
 * (incumbent)Michael Nicholas Hryhorczuk (LP) 2308
 * Peter Burtniak (CCF) 1327
 * Isadore Syrnyk (PC) 835

Fisher:
 * Peter Wagner (CCF) 1437
 * (incumbent)Nicholas Volodymir Bachynsky (LP) 1381
 * John O. Olsen (PC) 1140

Flin Flon:
 * (incumbent)Francis Lawrence Jobin (LP) 1935
 * Charles Hubert Witney (PC) 1563
 * J. Conrad W. Kerr (CCF) 637

Fort Garry:
 * Sterling Rufus Lyon (PC) 3731
 * (incumbent)Leslie Raymond Fennell (LP) 2408
 * Nena Woodward (CCF) 1035

Fort Rouge:
 * (incumbent)Edwrd Gurney Vaux Evans (PC) 3647
 * James Edward Wilson (LP) 1862
 * Ernest Richard Draffin (CCF) 1143

Gimli:
 * George Johnson (PC) 1988
 * (incumbent)Steinn Olafur Thompson (LP) 1374
 * Sigurdur Wopnford (CCF) 954

Gladstone:
 * Nelson Shoemaker (LP) 2570
 * Clayton Gault (PC) 1677
 * Melvin Batters (CCF) 455

Hamiota:
 * Barry Peill Strickland (PC) 2261
 * William T. Wherrett (LP) 1859
 * Arthur Nicholson (CCF) 416

Inkster:
 * (incumbent)Morris Gray (CCF) 3083
 * Peter Okrainec (PC) 1584
 * Peter Stanley Taraska (LP) 1516

Kildonan:
 * Anthony John Reid (CCF) 2776
 * John Ernest Willis (PC) 2665
 * George Nordland Suttie (LP) 1808

Lac Du Bonnet:
 * Arthur A. Trapp (LP) 1526
 * Glen A. Stewart (PC) 1350
 * Harry Olensky (CCF) 569
 * Lawrence P Schlamp (SC) 299

Lakeside:
 * (incumbent)Douglas Campbell (LP) 2119
 * John F. Bate (PC) 1582

La Verendrye:
 * Stanley Carl Roberts (LP) 1565
 * Stan Bisson (PC) 1395

Logan:
 * (incumbent)Stephen Juba (Ind) 2234
 * Art Coulter (CCF) 1669

Minnedosa:
 * (incumbent)Charles Lemington Shuttleworth (LP) 2117
 * Sidney Paler (PC) 1983
 * (incumbent)Gilbert Alexander Hutton (SC) 634
 * William A. Yuel (CCF) 443

Morris:
 * (incumbent)Harold Proctor Shewman (PC) 1762
 * Bruce McKenzie (LP) 1014
 * August Recksiedler (SC) 370

Osborne:
 * (incumbent)Lloyd Cleworth Stinson (CCF) 3215
 * John Howorth (PC) 2813
 * Keith N. Routley (LP) 1654

Pembina:
 * (incumbent)Maurice Evans Ridley (PC) 2683
 * Kenneth C Hartwell (LP) 1510

Portage la Prairie:
 * (incumbent)Charles Edwin Greenlay (LP) 1978
 * Robert Ernest Burke (PC) 1528
 * Albert R. Barrett (CCF) 541

Radisson:
 * (incumbent)Andrew Russell Paulley (CCF) 3504
 * Bernard Rodolph Wolfe (LP) 2334
 * Harold Huppe (PC) 2116

Rhineland:
 * (incumbent)William Conrad Miller (LP) 1687
 * Oscar Martel (PC) 854
 * Abe Enns (SC) 758

River Heights:
 * William Blakeman Scarth (PC) 3945
 * William John McKeag (LP) 2884
 * Andrew Moore (Ind) 803

Roblin:
 * Arnold Keith Alexander (PC) 1884
 * (incumbent)Raymond Mitchell (LP) 1686
 * Monty A. Miller (CCF) 1031

Rock Lake:
 * (incumbent)Abram William Harrison (PC) 2465
 * Walter Ernest Clark (LP) 2227

Rockwood-Iberville:
 * (incumbent)Robert William Bend (LP) 2450
 * George Henry Wilson Huttonn (PC) 1731
 * Samuel Cranston (CCF) 434

Rupertsland:
 * Joseph Ernest Jeannotte (PC) 2342
 * (incumbent)Francis Roy Brown (LP) 511
 * Asta Oddson (Ind) 364

St. Boniface:
 * (incumbent)Roger Joseph Teillet (LP) 3178
 * Harry DeLeeuw (PC) 2616
 * Ben Cyr (CCF) 1256

St. George:
 * (incumbent)Elman Keisler Guttormson (LP) 2144
 * Dan McFayden (PC) 970
 * Douglas S. Stefanson (CCF) 593
 * Mahlin J.G. Magunsson (Ind Con) 274

St. James:
 * Douglas Moncreiff Stanes (PC) 2646
 * (incumbent)Reginald Frederick Wightman (LP) 2170
 * Alvin H. Mackling (CCF) 2136

St. Johns:
 * David Orlikow (CCF) 2495
 * Stan Carrick (PC) 1295
 * Jaroslaw Rebchuk (LP) 922

St. Matthews:
 * William George Martin (PC) 2848
 * Gordon Richard Fines (CCF) 2026
 * Anne Ethel Murphy (LP) 1854
 * (incumbent)Henry Baird Scott (IC) 260
 * George Albert Frith (Ind) 149

St. Vital:
 * Frederick Groves (PC) 3616
 * William R. Appleby (LP) 2331
 * Leslie C. Foden (CCF) 1334
 * Percy B. Hayward (Ind) 242

Ste. Rose:
 * (incumbent)Gildas Laurent Molgat (LP) 2400
 * Alvin Getz (PC) 1010
 * Alphonse J. Bouchard (SC) 415
 * Leon W. Hoefer (CCF) 354

Selkirk:
 * (incumbent)Thomas Paterson Hillhouse (LP) 1850
 * David B. Veitch (PC) 1493
 * Frank Kuzemski (CCF) 591
 * Fred L. Luining (SC) 173

Seven Oaks:
 * Arthur Edgar Wright (CCF) 3641
 * Maurice Gutnik (PC) 1541
 * Cecil Joseph Henry Lyon (LP) 1449

Souris-Lansdowne:
 * Malcolm Earl McKellar (PC) 2256
 * David Lloyd Barclay (LP) 1549
 * Alex Shiloff (CCF) 95

Springfield:
 * (incumbent)William Lucko (LP) 1351
 * Oscar Russell (PC) 1269
 * Ed Kanarowski (CCF) 875
 * William G. Storsley (SC) 283

Swan River:
 * Albert Harold C. Corbett (PC) 1421
 * Hilliard Farriss (CCF) 1316
 * (incumbent)Ronald Douglas Robertson (LP) 1083
 * Aldric S. Helps (SC) 285

The Pas:
 * John Benson Carroll (PC) 2325
 * William E. Cudmore (LP) 898
 * Howard Russell Pawley (CCF) 801

Turtle Mountain:
 * (incumbent)Errick French Willis (PC) 2949
 * Edward Ingo Dow (LP) 1880
 * Clarence A. Ferguson (SC) 316

Virden:
 * (incumbent)John William McLeod Thompson (PC) 2935
 * (incumbent)Francis Campbell Bell (LP) 1662

Wellington:
 * Richard Harry Seaborn (PC) 2532
 * James R. McIsaac (CCF) 2385
 * (incumbent)Jack St. John (LP) 1958

Winnipeg Centre:
 * James Cowan (PC) 3462
 * Paul W. Goodman (LP) 1623
 * David Adrian Mulligan (CCF) 1141

Wolseley:
 * (incumbent)Dufferin Roblin (PC) 3959
 * John Gurzon Harvey (LP) 1739
 * Allen Denton (CCF) 1202

title: 1958 Manitoba general election


text:
Launch loop

A launch loop, or Lofstrom loop, is a proposed system for launching objects into orbit using a moving cable-like system situated inside a sheath attached to the Earth at two ends and suspended above the atmosphere in the middle. The design concept was published by Keith Lofstrom and describes an active structure maglev cable transport system that would be around 2,000 km (1,240 mi) long and maintained at an altitude of up to 80 km (50 mi). A launch loop would be held up at this altitude by the momentum of a belt that circulates around the structure. This circulation, in effect, transfers the weight of the structure onto a pair of magnetic bearings, one at each end, which support it.

Launch loops are intended to achieve non-rocket spacelaunch of vehicles weighing 5 metric tons by electromagnetically accelerating them so that they are projected into Earth orbit or even beyond. This would be achieved by the flat part of the cable which forms an acceleration track above the atmosphere.

The system is designed to be suitable for launching humans for space tourism, space exploration and space colonization, and provides a relatively low 3g acceleration.

History
Launch loops were described by Keith Lofstrom in November 1981 Reader's Forum of the American Astronautical Society News Letter, and in the August 1982 L5 News.

In 1982, Paul Birch published a series of papers in Journal of the British Interplanetary Society which described orbital rings and described a form which he called Partial Orbital Ring System (PORS). The launch loop idea was worked on in more detail around 1983–1985 by Lofstrom. It is a fleshed-out version of PORS specifically arranged to form a mag-lev acceleration track suitable for launching humans into space; but whereas the orbital ring used superconducting magnetic levitation, launch loops use electromagnetic suspension (EMS).

Description
Consider a large cannon on an island that shoots a shell into the high atmosphere. The shell will follow a roughly parabolic path for the initial flight, but drag will slow the shell and cause it to return to Earth in a much more vertical path. One could make the path purely ballistic by enclosing the predicted path in a tube and removing the air. Suspending such a tube would be a significant problem depending on the length of the path. However, one can use the shell to provide this lift force, at least temporarily. If the tube is not exactly along the flight path of the shell, but slightly below it, as the shell passes through the tube, it will be forced downward, thereby producing an upward force on the tube. To stay aloft, the system would require the shells to be fired continually.

The launch loop is essentially a continuous version of this concept. Instead of a cannon firing a shell, a mass driver accelerates a cable into a similar trajectory. The cable is surrounded by an evacuated tube, which is held aloft by pushing down on the cable using electromagnets. When the cable falls back to Earth at the other end of the trajectory, it is captured by a second mass driver, bent through 180 degrees, and sent back up on the opposite trajectory. The result is a single loop that is continually travelling and keeping the tube aloft.

To use the system as a space launcher, a launch loop would be about 2,000 km long and 80 km high. The loop would be in the form of a tube, known as the sheath. Floating within the sheath is another continuous tube, known as the rotor which is a sort of belt or chain. The rotor is an iron tube approximately 5 cm (2 inches) in diameter, moving around the loop at 14 km/s (31,000 miles per hour). Keeping the system aloft requires a significant amount of lift, and the resulting path is much flatter than the natural ballistic path of the rotor.

Due to the possibility of the loop failing and falling to Earth, it is normally considered as running between two islands outside of heavy shipping routes.

Ability to stay aloft
When at rest, the loop is at ground level. The rotor is then accelerated up to speed. As the rotor speed increases, it curves to form an arc. The structure is held up by the force from the rotor, which attempts to follow a parabolic trajectory. The ground anchors force it to go parallel to the earth upon reaching the height of 80 kilometers. Once raised, the structure requires continuous power to overcome the energy dissipated. Additional energy would be needed to power any vehicles that are launched.

Launching payloads
To launch, vehicles are raised up on an 'elevator' cable that hangs down from the West station loading dock at 80 km, and placed on the track. The payload applies a magnetic field that generates eddy currents in the fast-moving rotor. This both lifts the payload away from the cable, as well as pulls the payload along with 3g (30 m/s²) acceleration. The payload then rides the rotor until it reaches the required orbital velocity, and leaves the track.

If a stable or circular orbit is needed, once the payload reaches the highest part of its trajectory then an on-board rocket engine ("kick motor") or other means is needed to circularize the trajectory to the appropriate Earth orbit.

The eddy current technique is compact, lightweight and powerful, but inefficient. With each launch the rotor temperature increases by 80 kelvins due to power dissipation. If launches are spaced too close together, the rotor temperature can approach 770 °C (1043 K), at which point the iron rotor loses its ferromagnetic properties and rotor containment is lost.

Capacity and capabilities
Closed orbits with a perigee of 80 km quite quickly decay and re-enter, but in addition to such orbits, a launch loop by itself would also be capable of directly injecting payloads into escape orbits, gravity assist trajectories past the Moon, and other non closed orbits such as close to the Trojan points.

To access circular orbits using a launch loop a relatively small 'kick motor' would need to be launched with the payload which would fire at apogee and would circularise the orbit. For GEO insertion this would need to provide a delta-v of about 1.6 km/s, for LEO to circularise at 500 km would require a delta-v of just 120 m/s. Conventional rockets require delta-vs of roughly 14 and 10 km/s to reach GEO and LEO respectively.

Launch loops in Lofstrom's design are placed close to the equator and can only directly access equatorial orbits. However other orbital planes might be reached via high altitude plane changes, lunar perturbations or aerodynamic techniques.

Launch rate capacity of a launch loop is ultimately limited by the temperature and cooling rate of the rotor to 80 per hour, but that would require a 17 GW power station; a more modest 500 MW power station is sufficient for 35 launches per day.

Economics
For a launch loop to be economically viable it would require customers with sufficiently large payload launch requirements.

Lofstrom estimates that an initial loop costing roughly $10 billion with a one-year payback could launch 40,000 metric tons per year, and cut launch costs to $300/kg. For $30 billion, with a larger power generation capacity, the loop would be capable of launching 6 million metric tons per year, and given a five-year payback period, the costs for accessing space with a launch loop could be as low as $3/kg.

Advantages of launch loops
Compared to space elevators, no new high-tensile strength materials have to be developed, since the structure resists Earth's gravity by supporting its own weight with the kinetic energy of the moving loop, and not by tensile strength.

Lofstrom's launch loops are expected to launch at high rates (many launches per hour, independent of weather), and are not inherently polluting. Rockets create pollution such as nitrates in their exhausts due to high exhaust temperature, and can create greenhouse gases depending on propellant choices. Launch loops as a form of electric propulsion can be clean, and can be run on geothermal, nuclear, wind, solar or any other power source, even intermittent ones, as the system has huge built-in power storage capacity.

Unlike space elevators which would have to travel through the Van Allen belts over several days, launch loop passengers can be launched to low Earth orbit, which is below the belts, or through them in a few hours. This would be a similar situation to that faced by the Apollo astronauts, who had radiation doses about 0.5% of what the space elevator would give.

Unlike space elevators which are subjected to the risks of space debris and meteorites along their whole length, launch loops are to be situated at an altitude where orbits are unstable due to air drag. Since debris does not persist, it only has one chance to impact the structure. Whereas the collapse period of space elevators is expected to be of the order of years, damage or collapse of loops in this way is expected to be rare. In addition, launch loops themselves are not a significant source of space debris, even in an accident. All debris generated has a perigee that intersects the atmosphere or is at escape velocity.

Launch loops are intended for human transportation, to give a safe 3g acceleration which the vast majority of people would be capable of tolerating well, and would be a much faster way of reaching space than space elevators.

Launch loops would be quiet in operation, and would not cause any sound pollution, unlike rockets.

Finally, their low payload costs are compatible with large-scale commercial space tourism and even space colonisation.

Difficulties of launch loops
A running loop would have an extremely large amount of energy in its linear momentum. While the magnetic suspension system would be highly redundant, with failures of small sections having essentially no effect, if a major failure did occur the energy in the loop (1.5×1015 joules or 1.5 petajoules) would approach the same total energy release as a nuclear bomb explosion (350 kilotons of TNT equivalent), although not emitting nuclear radiation.

While this is a significant amount of energy, it is unlikely that this would destroy much of the structure due to its very large size, and because most of the energy would be deliberately dumped at preselected places when the failure is detected. Steps might need to be taken to lower the cable down from 80 km altitude with minimal damage, such as by the use of parachutes.

Therefore, for safety and astrodynamic reasons, launch loops are intended to be installed over an ocean near the equator, well away from habitation.

The published design of a launch loop requires electronic control of the magnetic levitation to minimize power dissipation and to stabilize the otherwise under-damped cable.

The two main points of instability are the turnaround sections and the cable.

The turnaround sections are potentially unstable, since movement of the rotor away from the magnets gives reduced magnetic attraction, whereas movements closer gives increased attraction. In either case, instability occurs. This problem is routinely solved with existing servo control systems that vary the strength of the magnets. Although servo reliability is a potential issue, at the high speed of the rotor, many consecutive sections would need to fail for the rotor containment to be lost.

The cable sections also share this potential issue, although the forces are much lower. However, an additional instability is present in that the cable/sheath/rotor may undergo meandering modes (similar to a Lariat chain) that grow in amplitude without limit. Lofstrom believes that this instability also can be controlled in real time by servo mechanisms, although this has never been attempted.

Competing and similar designs
In works by Alexander Bolonkin it is suggested that Lofstrom's project has many unsolved problems and that it is very far from a current technology. For example, the Lofstrom project has expansion joints between 1.5 meter iron plates. Their speeds (under gravitation, friction) can be different and Bolonkin claims that they could wedge in the tube; and the force and friction in the ground 28 km diameter turnaround sections are gigantic. In 2008, Bolonkin proposed a simple rotated close-loop cable to launch the space apparatus in a way suitable for current technology.

Another project, the space cable, is a smaller design by John Knapman that is intended for launch assist for conventional rockets and suborbital tourism. The space cable design uses discrete bolts rather than a continuous rotor, as with the launch loop architecture. Knapman has also mathematically shown that the meander instability can be tamed.

The skyhook is another launch system concept. Skyhook could be either rotating or non-rotating. The non-rotating skyhook hangs from a low Earth orbit down to just above the Earth's atmosphere (skyhook cable is not attached to Earth). The rotating skyhook changes this design to decrease the speed of the lower end; the entire cable rotates around its center of gravity. The advantage of this is an even greater velocity reduction for the launch vehicle flying to the bottom end of the rotating skyhook which makes for an even larger payload and a lower launch cost. The two disadvantages of this are: the greatly reduced time available for the arriving launch vehicle to hook up at the lower end of the rotating skyhook (approximately 3 to 5 seconds), and the lack of choice regarding the destination orbit.

title: Launch loop