text:
Talk:Cloudesley Shovell

Shovel descendants
I would like to contact the author of the recent article on Cloudesley Shovel - who states that he is direct descendant of Sir Cloudesley. Our family have always been told that we are descended from his family, and have the name Shovel in our family tree, but need more information.Bloomsbu 05:26, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Does he have any connection to Clodsley Shovel the Mole, the Narnia character by C. S. Lewis?

Don't know about the Narnia character, but I am curious. How is it the author states that he is a direct descendant in the male line if there were only two daughters? Bloomsbu 12:34, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

I should clarify that the information I have about Sir Cloudesley Shovel's parents comes from books and internet. These show he had two daughters and do not mention a son, thus I am unable to verify whether the sentence "The Shovell family survived and there remain five direct descendants in the male line, one of whom is the present author." is correct or not. The sentence was added by 195.195.166.41, so questions about the source for details of a son of Sir Cloudesley Shovel should be directed to that user. Some years ago when the treasure from the Association was being recovered from the wreck there was considerable interest in tracing any possible descendants who might make a claim. Descendants from his two daughters were traced through a number of generations. I have details. Op. Deo 16:45, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

I have tried to contact user 195.195.166.41, but am new to Wikipedia and haven't had any luck. I was led to believe from my Grandmother that her mother was a direct descendant from Sir Cloudesley - maiden name Jane Foott-Shovel. My Uncle was named Cloudesley, and also the street where we lived in Australia is Cloudesley St - after our supposed ancestor. I would like to know where to search for more information to find a link to Jane Foott-Shovel - as our information on Sir Cloudesley seems to be dead wrong - I understood that he was illegitimate. So your mention of his parentage was a revelation. Bloomsbu 00:32, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Major tidy up
As a result of studying various references including wills, I felt a major tidy up was required. The remaining issue is the name, for which many different versions exist. I have reported evidence showing that it should be SHOVELL rather than SHOVEL. This means the page title needs changing - I am not sure how best to do this just at present. But if no one objects, or if no one makes the change I will find out myself how to do it.Op. Deo 15:47, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

The case for the move to Cloudesley Shovell is as follows: --Op. Deo 16:41, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * There is complete confusion on the web. A Google search world wide gives 900 hits on Cloudesley Shovel and 600 hits on Cloudesley Shovell. However a Google search on UK only reverses the postion, giving 247 hits on 136 sperate sites for Cloudesley Shovell against 227 hits on 79 seperate sites for Cloudesley Shovel. This later number includes Wikipedia and about 10 mirrors of the Wikipedia article carring the Shovel spelling. So you could say the UK web votes 2:1 by number of web sites for Cloudesley Shovell. However, I consider much more important than this number is what the man, his family and his biographers use, as listed in the following bullets.
 * In the 1701 will of Sir Cloudesley Shovell, he both signs and spells his name as Shovell.
 * In the 1653 will of his father, John Shovell, both his father's and Cloudesley's surnames are spelt Shovell.
 * In the 1726 will and 1729 codicil of his wife Elizabeth Shovell, she spells and signs her surname Shovell.
 * In the most recent biography Simon Harris uses the spelling Shovell in its title.

Thanks to the admin who made the move. I have tidied up the links to the article. -- Op. Deo 20:19, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

The murder of Cloudesley Shovell is controversial
It seems that your lines about the woman who killed Cloudesley Shovell contradict the information I've just collected from Britannia (see External links). Imiraven 9:05, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Make that information you've just dumped in the article from Britannia with little thought to copyright and you're closer to the mark. Hence my RV of the entry. GraemeLeggett 10:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Besides the issuing of infringing copyright, one needs to be careful about collecting info from anywhere on the web. I had a look at the source on brittania.com. Interestingly, at about us on the site it says Britannia is published by Britannia.com, LLC, a privately held company incorporated in Delaware, USA. Since it was launched on the Web in April, 1996,... It appears that this site may be commercial and publish editorial articles by its in order to attract surfers. I I have not previously heard of the person who wrote the article, however, it does seem reasonably competent although I would quibble with the bald statement that ships were east of where they thought they were. I have read an analysis of the logbooks from the voyage which shows they were also very considerably to the North. As far as the supposed murder is concerned, the WP article only says that it was said as indeed it was by some authors. Others have dismissed the story for lots of reasons. There are actually a number of very suspect tales to be found on the web about Sir Cloudesley, eg that he was a poor shoemaker's apprentice before going to sea. Another likely myth very recent propagated in the TV series Longitude was that he had a sailor who warned of the navigation error hung. In my view Simon Harris's book is the most thorough recent review of all that has been published on Sir Cloudesley, and I would certainly recommend checking new info against what is in that book. Op. Deo 14:32, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Hello Op. Deo: I red something on the web about Shovell being cursed by a sailor who warned him before the wreck, the article said Shovell hunged that man just because of his impertinence. It sounded more like a Hollywood plot than real history to me, but it was in a history page so it kept me wondering. The last part with his body washed ashore and the robbery by the old woman seems unfortunally much more real to me.

Ruben 07 March 2006

 * Hello Ruben, Just a tip on formatting -using a space at beginning of a paragraph makes a long box for the text. Use a series of colon punction marks to indent a paragraph. (dont worry it is all arcane!)

 * Both these stories did surface long ago, but were thought to be ill founded by at least some of the historians. (Especially see the arguments against these stories in the only full modern biograhy of Shovell written by Simon Harris.) Very unfortunately the popular history of science writer, Dava Sobel, chose to repeat the hanging story in her book Longitude which was published in 1995 and this hanging was picked up when the book was turned into a TV series by the BBC. So everyone KNOWS about it. Yet, read Harris and he thinks it very unlikely for all sorts of reasons. It is very interesting to study the navigational article by May which I dont seem to have referenced, but I have notes from it in my notebook. It shows the poor quality of the agreement between the different ships' captains. It almost inconcievable that an uneducated sailor would have be able to work out the latitude etc better than the properly equipped and trained ship's officers even though their standards were modest. Longitude was of course a matter od dead reckoning. However, looking at the error by the conference of the Captains, in many ways the latitude error was more serious than the longitude error. Apparently the TV film portayed Shovell in a very unfavourabe light, but the truth is he was greatly loved by both sailors and officers - almost a Nelson like figure in this respect-- Op. Deo 22:19, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * All cleaned up and referenced now. Dormskirk (talk) 10:07, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Cloudesley Shovell. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.royalnavalmuseum.org/info_sheets_cloudesley_shovell.htm

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 17:21, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Cloudesley Shovell the Younger
The family history of Sir Cloudesley Shovell is not in my field of interest. However, having seen the bits of controversy noted in the talk, I should note for anyone interested that there is a Cloudesley Shovell (or, rather, an improbable Shovell Cloudesley) listed as a clerk in the Navy Office (Victualling Accounts) from June 1703 to his death noted as 18 December 1723. See http://www.british-history.ac.uk/office-holders/vol7/pp45-76#h3-0006 and http://www.british-history.ac.uk/office-holders/vol7/pp81-116. Macquants (talk) 01:43, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Clodsley Shovel
Of course Clodsley Shovel, the Narnian mole, is named for Cloudesley Shovel; C. S. Lewis, an Englishman, expected his readers to see his witticism. Of course Shovel, or Shovell, is a far better name for a mole than for an admiral. J S Ayer (talk) 01:46, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Cloudesley Shovell


text:
Talk:HIV/AIDS/Archive 6

NPOV Dispute
I am very concerned about the way this article tilts away from what I understand the scientific consensus to be. Specific areas of concerns include:

 * An estimated 60% of people with AIDS live in sub-Saharan Africa, where poor economic conditions leading to the use of dirty needles in healthcare clinics and no effective screening of blood transfusions may contribute to high rates of AIDS.

The clear implication is that this is the primary source of the high infection rates, a claim further amplified in this sentence:

 * Health clinics in some countries are responsible for as much as 30% of HIV transmission worldwide. reference There is an urgent need to address medical transmission as a priority in these countries. see HIV transmission in the medical setting.

Firstly, the source of the 30% figure is based on a quote from a researcher, Yvan Hutin, in a US State Department press release. The relevant paragraph is as follows:

 * Hutin told the lawmakers that WHO estimates that approximately 2.5% of all HIV infections in sub-Saharan Africa are transmitted through unsafe healthcare injections but warned that his research of several "relatively reliable" HIV studies has revealed that medical transmission could actually be three to fifteen times higher than the conservative WHO figure.

To go from that, from a popular press source, to the phraseology currently in the article is inappropriate.

The second link goes to a report by a group called "Physicians for Human Rights", which argues for a higher priority to be given to medical transmission. I haven't had time to assess this report. I haven't heard of this group myself and have no idea of its credibility (one way or another; it's just that some organisations have established a reputation for getting it right over the years, and I don't know if this one has), and b) just because a report is clearly-written and has references doesn't make it credible. I've seen clearly-written, referenced reports by advocacy organizations where the references didn't actually support the article.

The article barely mentions the scientific near-consensus that the majority of cases in sub-Saharan Africa are transmitted through heterosexual sex!

Additionally, the article still talks about the "Bangui definition". My earlier concerns, noted earlier on this talk page, have still not been effectively addressed. --Robert Merkel 07:09, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

 * I hope this 2003 quote helps you

 * Voluntary testing and counselling are accepted widely for the prevention of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Therefore, simple, accurate and affordable tests are required. The diagnosis strategy used in developed countries, based on an immunoblot confirmatory test, cannot be used on a large scale in developing countries because of its cost. Sci guy 03:58, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

 * What does that have to do with anything? At least the paper you cite below speaks directly to your claim...--Robert Merkel 04:25, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Robert, I have reinstated the reference that you previuously deleted

 * A study on Zaire published in 1993 found that of 465 patients with clinical signs of AIDS, 39.4% were seropositive. see Epidemiology and clinical manifestation of HIV infection in northern Zaire.Strecker W, Gurtler L, Schilling M, Binibangili M, Strecker K. Eur J Epidemiol. 1994 Feb;10(1):95-8.

 * I will try and see if I can get a copy of this paper to have a look. However, I'm pretty skeptical.  In effect, this paper claims that something other than HIV is causing AIDS.  This is an absolutely sensational conclusion; if there was anything to it, it should have attracted a bunch of followup by now.  However, that study that has not been cited by any *other* papers in PubMedSci.  Just because *one*, seemingly "orphaned", paper says something is not evidence that the scientific consensus is that the paper is correct (or, more to the point, the conclusions you've drawn from it are the current scientific consensus).

There are many other simliar studies, which I am happy to source and add.

 * Please do so, particularly including survey articles, articles published in the top-end journals, or reports detailing the consensus views of policy-advising bodies like the CDC, WHO, or equivalent.

If you can find any evidence of HIV testing in diagnosis of AIDS in Africa and other "developing" countries please provide it. My understanding is that few countries diagnose AIDS as thoroughly as the US - although I have read that most of the AIDS patients in Africa would not test as HIV positve in Australia, even many US and Eurpoean AIDS patients would not be considered HIV positive. This is because Australia requires more Western blot spots than any other country. The more stringent standard was required because so many Australians who tested negative on ELISA were postive on Western blot!

I am concerned that you think by adding information from WHO, CDC and UNAIDS, that neutral point of view is threatened! Indeed you have been active in deleting quotes from these sources. Sci guy 13:30, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

 * No I haven't. Check the edit logs if anybody is interested. --Robert Merkel 01:32, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Oh, and as I'm in Australia, I might see if I can check that claim with some local AIDS experts... --Robert Merkel 04:25, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Unsafe medical injections
I have just added link to CDC January 2005 update stating that "According to the World Health Organization, the global burden of disease from unsafe injections worldwide accounts for an estimated 5% of HIV infections." This is recognised as a major current issue by the so called "mainstream scientific consesus" Sci guy 16:23, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

 * That's interesting. I'd like to know where the WHO said it.  That's still a very long way from 30%.

For a fuller analysis I suggest you read HIV infections in sub-Sahara Africa not explained by sexual or vertical transmission Sci guy 16:27, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

 * I just did. The article summary suggests that the current medical consensus is that heterosexual sex is to blame for the majority of infections; the authors dispute that consensus.  What I am suggesting to you is that the consensus hasn't changed; the fact that there is scientific disagreement on the topic is worthy of discussion in the article, but implying that majority medical/scientific opinion is of the view that medical transmission is responsible for more than a fraction of AIDS cases is incorrect. ---Robert Merkel 04:43, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

 * I suggest you read it again. There is no scientific disagreement. The 1983 "consensus" was a political decison based on the available evidence. After twenty years of collecting data from Africa, the facts no longer support the earlier ideas. This is happening all the time in AIDS research. New facts result in changes to the hypothesis. It is called the scientific method. 203.123.69.214 02:56, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

 * As a working researcher (in software engineering, but the process is similar) I know something about scientific consensus. And one paper claiming the scientific consensus needs changing, doesn't mean it *has* changed.  --Robert Merkel 14:22, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

It is important to note that in 2001 the issue of preventing HIV/AIDS infections in health care settings has been identified by the United Nations as needing immediate attention.

 * Again, interesting, but not supporting your claim.

AIDS diagnosis in developing countries
I hope this quote helps you see the diffculties with the WHO simplified algorithms based on sequential screening tests, and in general confirm the lack of laboratory testing on AIDS diagnosis in many countries. The conclusion is essentially that most of the AIDS cases would not be confirmed by standard testing in France. (or any other Western country) Sci guy 04:29, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

 * The lack of expensive equipment and well-trained laboratory technicians in developing countries makes it difficult to use standard methods (2 EIA confirmed by western blotting) to diagnose HIV infection. This led the WHO to develop simplified algorithms based on sequential screening tests, with no confirmation by immunoblotting. These algorithms were tested in the normal diagnosis conditions of a medical unit in Maputo, Mozambique. We tested 402 sera, collected with the consent of the patients concerned. The sera were first tested for HIV according to French regulations (2 EIA with western blot if at least one EIA was positive). This strategy identified 53 sera as positive for HIV1 and 1 serum as positive for HIV2. We then tested who algorithms, one for a predicted rate of prevalence < 10% and the other for a predicted rate of prevalence > 10%. Neither algorithm performed adequately for diagnostic purposes. Further evaluation with a panel of local sera is required to select the most suitable algorithm in terms of specificity and sensitivity, and algorithms should be throughly tested before inclusion in national AIDS control strategies.

Alternative Strategies for Confirmation of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection Require Judicious Use
This 2002 article details the problems with the World Health Organization testing strategies for alternative HIV confirmation to maximize accuracy while minimizing cost. Almost half of 2,000 samples could have been mislabeled as HIV positive!

??
What has happened to this article? Suddenly it's very short, and much of the information seems to be missing... Exploding Boy 16:45, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

Well at present we are having a discussion about whether WHO/CDC/UNAIDS information is breaching the NPOV! But apart from that the article is essentially the same as when you last edited. Vaccine has been moved to treatment. Duplicated material has been consoidated and many unreferenced speculations deleted. I have been attempting to restore all the deleted references. Please feel free to add anything you think has been deleted in error. Sci guy 16:59, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

What's happened is that Sci guy has butchered what was a very complete and well-written Wikipedia article. Take a look at his 27 May 2005 edits, if you don't believe me. I've got no idea what his motive is. I'm tempted to take him up on his "feel free to add anything you think has been deleted in error" offer and revert the whole thing back to the 26 May 2005 version. Carl Henderson 02:56, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

I have compared the 26 May 2005 version with the currect one. Main changes are correcting monkey to chimpanzee and adding references. The safer sex was edited to make the main issue clear: "put a condon on the penis to stop AIDS". Ideas about AIDS have changed so much in 20 years. Should this article be about gay men and IV drug users in the United States or pregnant women and children in Africa? Should Africans be given antiretroviral drugs or blood transfusions that have been screened for HIV? Why do different countries use different tests (or even no tests) to diagnose AIDS? What percentage of AIDS cases in the "developing world" would be confirmed by testing this the United States? As most people in the world dianosed with AIDS do not have HIV antibodies, what is causing their AIDS? All of these questions are part of the UNAIDS, WHO, CDC, and RED Cross "medical consensus".

 * "How the crisis confronting Africa is defined, and by whom, will make a fundamental difference to the outcome. HIV is an exceptional disease which, in HIV prevalence countries, has a unique capacity to derail development progress. However, a line must be drawn between treating HIV as an exceptional disease (exceptionalism) and paying attention only to HIV at the expense of other diseases (isolationism) or development issues. The AIDS epidemic should be understood as part of the wider crisis of underdevelopment."
 * quoted from

According to the WHO the cumulative number of AIDS cases from 1980 through 1997 for all of Africa was 620,000. For comparison, the cumulative total of AIDS cases in the USA through 1997 was 641,087. But the US cases were all tested for HIV antibodies and confirmed with Western blot! The African cases were not all tested for HIV. A study on Zaire published in 1993 found that of 465 patients with clinical signs of AIDS, 39.4% were seropositive. see Epidemiology and clinical manifestation of HIV infection in northern Zaire. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7957799&dopt=Abstract)Strecker W, Gurtler L, Schilling M, Binibangili M, Strecker K. Eur J Epidemiol. 1994 Feb;10(1):95-8. Sci guy 03:52, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

 * I was in error. I said May 26th when I should have said May 22nd. May 23rd was when you made the bulk of the changes I felt were unwarranted. Sorry for the confusion--this article changes so fast I just lost track.Carl Henderson 05:53, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Big revert
This page has unfortunately been infected by one of the types that Wikipedia finds most-difficult to deal with; the well-informed zealot. Essentially, Sci Guy and his ilk are very vocal, well-informed advocates for a view well outside the medical mainstream. That doesn't make them wrong, but it does mean that they have turned this article into advocacy for their position. I'm not an expert on AIDS, but I do know that the article is pushing a very different line to the WHO and the like, and that Sci Guy is consistently misrepresenting the state of the scientific consensus. Hence, in the absence of either the expertise or the patience, I'm reverting to what appears to be one of the last "known-good" versions. --Robert Merkel 04:41, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Your revert deletes all the UNAIDS, CDC and WHO references that were specifically sourced and added at your request. But your revert is full of outdated and unreferenced opinions. How is this good wiki behaviour? Sci guy 11:56, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm not really interested in debating the issue any more with you, frankly, because you're just going to continue to selectively quote evidence in a way that doesn't represent the scientific mainstream on the issue. As a researcher in a different field, I can quote all manner of studies to "prove" things that are way outside the consensus of it, which is exactly what you're doing.  I invite others to compare the way the article ended up through your edits, compared to the version I'm reverting to. --Robert Merkel 15:54, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

 * As a researcher in this field of HIV/AIDS, I want to try to put a more professional view on what is understood in HIV research to this date. Unfortunately, I am being reverted by Sci Guy who has no educational or knowledge basis for hs reverts. --Grcampbell 17:26, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Precisely. I am restoring versions that have the support of two or more other editors. Your input is both valued and appreciated, but not at present understood. Perhaps you could use the discusion page of the relevant article to explain your intentions. Sci guy 17:06, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Just because you think previous versions have 'support' of two or more editors doesn't mean they are more correct. Perhaps if you used that discusion page of the relevant article, you could ask others which version they support more before making ridiculous reverts... JoeSmack (talk) 17:17, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

 * Joe, restoring a version previously supported by several other editors is NOT making ridiculous reverts Sci guy 02:07, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

AIDS diagnosis in developing countries
Fred, I ask you a similar question to what I asked Sci Guy. The stuff about diagnostic criteria not involving antibody testing dates from more than 10 years ago. Is that still the case in 2005? --Robert Merkel 13:57, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

NPOV dispute
I believe that the current edit-war between Robert Merkel and Sci Guy represents a divergence of opinion which needs to be recognized in a better way than simply reverting Sci Guy's changes. I'm not saying either is right, or wrong, but that fair consideration of disputes be acknowledged. Whig 05:32, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you Whig! I have a completely open mind on where this article is going. There have been so many changes of direction in AIDS, that next year could bring anything. After the false starts of AZT, HAART and chemokines, I am reluctant to expect much of the new treatment vaccine, but the results are intersting enough to include in the article. My main interest has been to attempt to reference the article and bring it up to date. Also editing was required to remove material that was repeated within the article. The removal of material referenced from source like WHO, CDC, UNAIDS and National Institutes of Health and National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease is of concern to me. I would prefer to discuss how we can better summarise the facts, rather than discard the facts. Sci guy 15:51, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Quite frankly, I agree with Robert's assment of the situation, that Sci Guy seems to be pushing his particular brand of POV. I'm not expert on the topic of AIDS, but even I can recognize that what he's saying is at odds with the consensus of the scientific community. →Raul654 19:17, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure Wikipedia's encyclopedia article on AIDS should be written by someone who can characterize HAART as a "false start" - it's still current treatment, or who believes that chemokines were ever a "start" of any kind - they never had any significant clinical use. All opinions aren't equal, and the denialists are already more than adequately represented in that article: it doesn't have to be brought here, where it degrades the quality of the article. - Nunh-huh 00:23, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I am sorry you misunderstood my comments about HAART. HAART was orignally promoted as a therapy to eliminate HIV and prevent progression to AIDS. This was the hit hard, hit early apporoach, which has now been discredited and abandoned by the scientific consesus based on many clinincal studies. Treatment guidelines now defer HAART until CD4 count is about 200 or there is an AIDS defining condition. So effectively HAART is now used to treat AIDS rather than prevent it. Sci guy 15:51, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I really think there are more constructive ways to resolve things than revert warring. Rather than agreeing or disagreeing with Robert or Sci Guy, let's discuss here what changes the article needs to make it conform to NPOV. The mainstream scientific viewpoint is not universally held, but minority views should not be given precedence. The solution is not to state viewpoints as facts, but to attribute statements with appropriate citations. While Wikipedia encourages us to be bold I think that it would be best here for changes to be made in small steps with explanations given in this Talk section to back them up. Whig 00:33, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * No viewpoint is "universally" held, and no fact is universally acknowledged. The fact that someone somewhere doubts a given fact doesn't make that fact a "viewpoint". - Nunh-huh 00:40, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Science is not a collection of facts, but a method, by which hypotheses are tested and become generally accepted theories. Even theories which have existed for hundreds of years are subject to challenge and refinement or replacement with ones that more accurately describe and/or predict observations. In this specific case, the HIV theory of AIDS is generally accepted today, and the article should properly say so, without stating it as fact. Whig 01:26, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Just the fact that some people doubt something don't turn a fact back into a theory. There are thousands of Holocaust deniers, yet nobody has agreed to call the historical account "The Holocaust legend" or "theory". Wikipedia loses credibility if it refers to the standard model of AIDS as a "theory". JFW | T@lk  02:26, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * That's nonsense and you know it. By your (Whig's) logic, there are no facts -- the earth doesn't revolve around the sun, it's just a generally accepted and well supported theory. Should we edit the relavant wikipedia article to state such? →Raul654 02:30, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

 * This is devolving to Godwin's Law here. The Holocaust was a historical event, not a scientific theory. Newton's "law" of gravitation was actually a (very good) theory, and was replaced by Einstein's general relativity, which in turn does not reconcile with certain observations of quantum mechanics. Biological science (and consequently medicine) also evolves over time. We don't have final answers on the causes of many diseases and disorders, from multiple sclerosis to cancer to AIDS. We have inferences and treatment modalities based upon the best scientific research available, and we apply them and study whether they cure or treat the underlying condition or the symptoms. We do not have a cure for AIDS yet, so nobody can claim to have a full understanding of the cause or causes. We do have a generally accepted theory that HIV causes AIDS, and it is the basis of almost all current research. The article should represent exactly this, and the minority who disagree should not be given precedence. I've said this before. But the objections that some people seem to be making are that we ought to state the prevalent theory as fact and denounce the possibility of error. And that violates both the scientific method and NPOV. Whig 07:37, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Really minor point. According to the theory of gravitation, the sun and earth both "revolve" around one another to some extent, inasmuch as any two massive bodies each attract the other. The relative mass of the sun is so very much greater than the mass of the earth that the distinction is almost trivial, but the perturbations are real and measurable. Whig 07:43, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Getting the Opening Paragraph right
'' We do have a generally accepted theory that HIV causes AIDS, and it is the basis of almost all current research. The article should represent exactly this, and the minority who disagree should not be given precedence. '' - Ok, let's take this idea and run with it. Let us compare the opening paragraph's of Sci-guy's version and Robert Merkel's version as they pertain to HIV:

 * Robert Merkel's version: AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome or Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, sometimes written Aids) is a human disease characterized by progressive destruction of the body's immune system, thus destroying the body's ability to fight infection and certain cancers. It is widely accepted that AIDS results from infection with HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus).

 * Sci-Guy's version: AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome or Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, sometimes written Aids) is a global, human epidemic...These global estimates of AIDS are based on HIV antibody testing of small samples of pregnant women at selected clinics rather than actual reported AIDS cases.

Which one of these more accurately represents the generally held view that HIV causes AIDs? I think the answer is quite obvious - Sci guy's version is an obvious attempt to distance any connection between HIV and AIDs, and this attempt sticks out like a sore thumb. →Raul654 08:01, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

 * If you consider it a "generally held view" why declare it as a fact, instead? Why claim a concensus when the questions of well-qualified scientists, well-documented in Wikipedia despite efforts to exclude their work, must be excluded from the notion of concensus for the notion to have merit? Sandlawould 20:45, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

 * On the first paragraph comparison, Robert Merkel's version is better, if we have to choose between one or the other. Fortunately we aren't forced to make these sorts of binary decisions on Wikipedia, we can work to edit things continually to a better state. I'd take a pass at proposing a revision, but it's way past time I went to bed for tonight. Maybe tomorrow. :) Whig 08:23, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)My god is this old chestnut still being argued about? Oh I forgot, there are quite a few paranoid flat earthers out there.

I agree that getting the first paragraph right is a good start. It defines the scope of the article.

In 2005, the main issue is the global epidemic claims of WHO and UNAIDS. I assume we agree that WHO and UNAIDS are part of the consesus. I think reporting the range of these estimates is important to give a clear idea of the accuracy claimed for these estimates. Also the 60% in sub-Saharan Africa, as this is claimed to be the most affected area (and also the source of the epidemic, if we accept the chimapanzee theory).

It is also important to note that while screening of blood transfusions and using clean needles for each injection were adopted 20 years ago in the United States to "stop the spread of AIDS", these precautions have not been widely adopted in Africa. Back in 2001, the UN called for the adoption of these measures to stop the spread of AIDS in Africa. So once again this all appears very consesus to me.

Whether or not HIV causes AIDS is red herring. The fact is that since 1985 evidence of HIV antibodies has been required in the United States for an AIDS diagnosis and the WHO/UNAIDS estimates for Africa are based on HIV antibody testing of pregnant women, who had a blood test for syphilis. So by definition there is no AIDS without HIV.

The more difficult question is the thousands of US blood donors and army recruits who have tested positive in HIV antibody tests. In most cases the repeat test was negative or the western blot did not confirm. What caused all these false positive results.

I notice that "HIV carriers" is now the preferred term in RA Weis and RW Wrangham. From Pan to pandemic (http://faculty.virginia.edu/bio202/weiss%20pan%20to%20pandemic%201999.pdf). Nature 397, 385-6 (1999). Also the scientific consesus is always careful to say "estimated 23 million people with AIDS have died since 1981" rather than dying of or from AIDS. Is this pedantry or precise use of language.

I have no problem with "dumbing down" the facts for Wikipedia, as long as we avoid subtle shifts of meaning. If Sci guy has sinned in this regard, then edit his summaries by all means, but do not simply revert to delete advances in the scientiic consesus that you do not like.

Personally I think both versions need a lot of work! Fred2005 13:43, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I've made a pass at editing the first paragraph. Have a look, please edit appropriately if you can improve it, and/or comment here. Whig 21:24, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"In most cases this weakening is progressive"

I still don't like this phrasing. Out of tens of millions of infected people, how many long term survivors are there? Dozens? Maybe a few hundred? I don't think it's unreasonable to say it's a trivial, negligible number. Saying that it is a progressive weakening 'in most cases' falsely implies that long term survivors are a non-trivial portion of AIDS patients. →Raul654 21:50, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

 * Robert Merkel's version: AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome or Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, sometimes written Aids) is a human disease characterized by progressive destruction of the body's immune system, thus destroying the body's ability to fight infection and certain cancers. It is widely accepted that AIDS results from infection with HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus).

 * "Sci-Guy's version: AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome or Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, sometimes written Aids) is a global, human epidemic...These global estimates of AIDS are based on HIV antibody testing of small samples of pregnant women at selected clinics rather than actual reported AIDS cases.

 * AIDS AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome or Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, sometimes written Aids) is a disease, and a global human pandemic, characterized by progressive destruction of the body's immune system, thus destroying the body's ability to fight infection and certain cancers. It is widely accepted in the scientific community that AIDS is usually the progressive result from infection with HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus).  A person with HIV that does not develop AIDS is called a HIV/AIDS nonprogressor.

That's my contribution to the opening paragraph, I like Sciguy's caracterization of it being a epidemic, i think it really is a pandemic do to it being over a certain threshold of infections. --ShaunMacPherson 23:40, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I just went through and did 3 big removals - I removed the "see also" and "related diseases" lists at hte bottom --- see also is depreciated (anything worthy of a see also should be written into the prose of the article and linked; the same applies for related diseases); I removed the bolded from the phrases, because you're only supposed to use bold for the article name and phrases that redirect here; lastly, I removed that horrible section at the end of the intro that looked like links, but weren't properly formatted and didn't seem to be cited by any particular fact (someone can add these back in again if they do it properly). →Raul654 23:53, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Also - the citation style on this article *sucks* and needs to be improved drastically. →Raul654 23:54, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

 * OK I'm just reverting Sci Guy. He continues to remove information about HIV causing AIDS and replace it with his "AIDS is defined as occuring..." gibberish. At least make an attempt to use proper English, Sci Guy. Rhobite 16:03, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

 * I am sorry you think the CDC definition of AIDS is gibberish. It has been the basis of all thinking on the subject since 1993. Also it is referenced to source and is factual. Sci guy 16:12, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A suggestion
I think the CDC definiton of AIDS is both widely accepted and NPOV

 * AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome or Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, sometimes written Aids) is a global human epidemic. AIDS is defined as occuring in persons with HIV antibodies, who have an AIDS-defining condition or a CD4+ T-lymphocyte count less than 200 cells/uL [1] (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00018871.htm)

Also the Global epidemic figures from UNAIDS are both current and NPOV

 * UNAIDS and the World Health Organization estimated that between between 2.8 and 3.5 million people with AIDS died during 2004. [2] (http://www.unaids.org/wad2004/EPIupdate2004_html_en/Epi04_02_en.htm#P16_3133) It was estimated that between 39 and 44 million people around the world had antibodies to HIV in December 2004.

Can we at least agree on this factual, referenced start to the article? Sci guy 16:06, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Um, no, as I think we've made clear. For a start, it's way too technical for the first sentence of an article.  Stuff about diagnostic criteria is better covered, in detail, in a later section. --Robert Merkel 16:08, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * It may be technical, but it is also accurate and referenced. It defines what everyone means by AIDS. Asl it sticks to the facts and avoids POV issues Sci guy 16:13, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * What we already had was accurate, and it was better writing as well. Simply copying a definition from a source and calling it an introduction is inherently bad writing. →Raul654 16:43, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

 * I wonder why Sci Guy doesn't want to copy this sentence from the CDC as well? "The etiologic agent of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) is a retrovirus designated human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)." Sci Guy, your selective quoting and obfuscation of facts is detrimental to this article. One more thing, it's spelled "occurring". If you're going to revert war in this highly visible article, at least use a spell checker. Rhobite 20:31, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

 * Its a bad lede sentence for the same reason I think some may prefer it: it misses the point when it mentions "HIV antibodies" rather than "HIV infection". It uses a circular definition (AIDS is defined by having an AIDS-defining condition) while falsely suggesting that having a CD4 count of less than 200 is not an AIDS-defining condition. It suggests that the illness is "defined" rather than described. (And it advances Sci-Guy's preferred style of "Aids" rather than "AIDS", which is far more common, while suggesting that the idea that it is "sometimes called "Aids" is something quoted from the CDC (which it isn't)).- Nunh-huh 00:20, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree that many people consider the CDC definition to be a circular definition. Also you are correct the CDC definiton lists CD4 count of less than 200 and AIDS-defining conditions as two bullet points. They are two different catergories. Sci guy 00:55, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Incorporating all these suggestions could give this version:

 * AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome) is a global human epidemic. The etiologic agent of AIDS is a retrovirus designated human immunodeficiency virus HIV. AIDS is defined as a CD4+ T-lymphocyte count less than 200 cells/uL or an AIDS-defining condition in persons with HIV antibodies.

This avoids much of the POV unreferenced specualation Sci guy 01:49, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I'm missing something - what POV, unreferenced speculation? You were removing a whole lot of material that I don't really thing one could argue is not true, such as the fact that it is currently incurable or the fact that it was first noticed in homosexuals. (At least not with a straight face) →Raul654 02:03, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

Estimating epidemics
The methods used to estimate the spread of a disease may be very different for the methods to diagnose that disease. During the recent SARS outbreak in China, sales of vinegar provide useful information about the spread of [SARS within China, because vinegar is a traditional Chinese remedy for symptoms associated with SARS. This does not mean that eveyone who buys vingar has SARS. World wide sales of vinegar provide no useful information about the global spread of SARS.

HIV antibody tests have not been evaluated for use in Africa. Many common tropical diseases are known to cause a false positive. HIV antibody screening of all pregnant women in European coutries has confirmed no increase in positve results since 1985 and about two third of positve results are women from Africa. Also most African children who tested HIV positive have a mother who is HIV negative! The major risk factor for children in Africa appears to be unsafe medical injections. Sci guy 15:52, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Fred's big deletion...
Fred, while some of the information you've deleted is redundant and belongs elsewhere, some of it isn't, and your opening sentence is less clear than what was there before. Please try to remember that we're writing for a non-expert audience. --Robert Merkel 15:12, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC) I'm reverting then C&Ping the changes here. While I think a lot of these are good, I see none of the discussion and edit summaries you'd expect. Its not good behavoir, even if you think its good editing--Tznkai 17:50, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Fred2005's changes can be seen here [[]] A lot of these look like good changes, but I think overall the quality has been reduced. Please discuss here, reach consensus then change article, especially one so contraversial--Tznkai 17:55, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I found his information much more informative and clear. He seems like he has a good background, I favor his edits, all of them. 207.224.198.170 02:48, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * He's an HIV/AIDS denier, just like Sci Guy. His edits should be viewed with appropriate skepticism. Rhobite 02:59, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * According to his edit history, his revisions today lieft intact the connection between HIV and AIDS, in fact more bluntly than the previous. 207.224.198.170 04:07, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * In any case, mass deletions should always be justified. The information may be "redundant", but this is because the article follows the summary style recommended for large articles. To quote the style page: "Articles written in summary style have lead sections that are concise encyclopedia articles in their own right." Some of Fred2005's changes seemed positive, but as Tznkai and Robert Merkel have said, the overall quality had been markedly reduced. -- Hadal 03:02, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree with the comments above that mass deletions should be disfavored unless very well justified and I have said before that we ought to be addressing this article in a more conservative fashion, despite the general principle that editors be bold. Nonetheless I think that some of Fred's changes would be worthwhile had they been made in a more careful and constructive fashion. This article is honestly getting worse from a NPOV standpoint, not better, because of the strong views of those who wish to discredit and remove elsewhere any dissent. I am not taking sides on who is right or wrong, nor have I suggested that minority views be given precedence, but they ought not to be excluded either. My own efforts to clean up the introduction have been effectively obliterated. I think I will try to selectively apply some of Fred's wordings where they seem appropriate and invite constructive comment rather than mass reversions. Whig 07:13, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I restate my point. I am all for improving this article, but massive changes should come with good explanation, and superior support, not just an opinion that its superior. Revert wars are never the answer. The goal here should be comprehensive: Primarly show the majority mainstream view, "facts" and then note the minority views and where they come from--Tznkai 16:45, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * If you have to put "facts" in quotes, I think you recognize that the majority mainstream view is not necessarily factual. Again, the MMV should be given precedence, no question at all, but we should attribute and not state as fact. Whig 18:57, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * The quotes are there to indicate that there are facts, and there are facts. Fact is one of those wonderfully misused word "Evolution is a fact/Not a fact just a theory" especially in science. For a while the MMV was that AIDS is a gay disease, something that modern statistics shows totally false. Facts to me, is anything properly cited, a definition used by the medical community, or anything else which the statement itself isn't debateable, just its implications. At any rate, as it is, this article is a bit large and could use some careful editing.

I keep forgetting to sign--Tznkai 19:29, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

POV evolving to total dispute
The present article does not even make mention of the fact that there exists any controversy with respect to the cause and definition of AIDS, the accuracy of testing methodologies, the differing definitions in the US, Canada, Europe and Africa, the safety and efficacy of antiretroviral medications, and therefore presents a unitary POV that excludes any and all disagreement. Whether or not this POV is correct or false is not, and has not been, my concern. However, every attempt I have made to give even a suggestion of the existence of dispute has been removed, and there is not even a link now to the (very poorly written) article on AIDS reappraisal. The article now even begins by defining AIDS as infection by HIV. I am becoming increasingly inclined to mark this article totally disputed unless folks are willing to work constructively to work these issues out in a way which gives appropriate precedence to the mainstream view while respecting the existence of diverse views by respectable scientists. Whig 03:32, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, and you were inclined to endorse the 83% false positive rate for Western Blots in the dissenting article, too. One thing this article doesn't need is more disinformation like that. - Nunh-huh 03:43, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm not inclined to endorse or dispute any fact that I don't have a citation for. The 83% false positive rate was stated in the article, and similtaneously claimed to be negligible. That is inconsistent. Either the false positive rate is considerably lower than 83% or it is non-negligible. Whig 03:53, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, and you eliminated the wrong alternative. You ought to be inclined to dispute someone who says a test in clinical use has an 83% false positive rate. If you were in doubt as to which of the inconsistent alternatives was wrong - and you should not have been - you should have cleared that doubt up by doing research rather than simply picking the alternative you favored. . - Nunh-huh 04:54, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm not a medical doctor, and I don't claim to be capable of doing the kinds of original research which doesn't in fact belong on Wikipedia WP:NOR. I try to copyedit articles by taking the facts as given in good faith. If those facts were incorrect, they ought to be corrected by someone who can dispute the citation with a better one, and this kind of refactoring should be ongoing. Don't ask me to take sides because I won't do so, I am not going to push either POV. You obviously agree that the statements were inconsistent, and my edit history made clear the reasons for my changes, which led to changes in the article that hopefully improved the factual basis, and that is all for the better. Let's continue to work constructively to improve the treatment of this subject. Whig 05:27, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * That's not original research, it's actually looking at and reading the reference that was already there! The 83% figure was most likely willful misrepresentation. Assuming good faith in the AIDS revisionist article is inadequate protection against error. If you can't take sides as to whether Wikipedia should misrepresent the sources it quotes, you shouldn't be editing. That's something you ought to take sides on. - Nunh-huh 06:36, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:HIV/AIDS/Archive 6


text: User talk:71.108.240.152

title: User talk:71.108.240.152


text:
User:Liberlogos/François Legault

François Legault is a Quebec businessman and politician for the Parti Québécois.

Resources

 * François Legault
 * Parti Québécois leadership election, 2005

Category:Quebec MNAs

title: User:Liberlogos/François Legault


text:
User talk:HellRaiser

Do you remember me? It's your younger sister, Julia. Anyway, welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. You can sign with 3 tildes like ~, or 4 tildes like ~ ~. Happy editing, NazismIsntCool/sig [[User:NazismIsntCool| Nazism  isn't   cool ]] 04:25, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Happy editing, Scott Gall 04:38, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC) PS: Ignore any taunts from your sisters about their "l33t sk1llz".

Our forum
Welcome to the Romanian Wikipedia notice board! This page is a portal for all Romanian-related topics and a place for Romanian editors to gather and socialize and debate. Discussions are encouraged, in both English and Romanian. Post any inquiry under their relevant cathegory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Romanian_Wikipedian%27s_notice_board

--Anittas 18:24, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

romanian Alexander for Admin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Alexander_007 ,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#Alexander_007. I've nominated User:Alexander_007 as admin. Let's vote for him! -- Bonaparte  talk  &  contribs  20:24, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Central Asia
Hi, I'm trying to start some sort of working group to improve the coverage of Central Asia and related topics in Wikipedia. Leave a message on my userpage if you're interested. Aelfthrytha 02:57, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Central Asia
WikiProject Central Asia has finally been created! If you're interested, please consider joining us. Aelfthrytha 21:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Kazakhstan
Hello, I thought you would be interested in helping finish create and maintain the Kazakhstan Portal. --Boguslavmandzyuk 08:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Romania
--Codrin.B (talk) 04:14, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:HellRaiser


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nozomi Online

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. jni 08:16, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nozomi Online
Fledgling website with Alexa rank of 5.4 million. User also embarked on a 70 entry spam campaign across every Jpop entry.

delete

lots of issues | leave me a message 04:26, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete. Shameless self-promotion of an insignificant site. -- Hadal 04:30, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete website advertising. JamesBurns 06:42, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, website promotion. Alexa rank of 5.4 million is far from important. - Mgm|(talk) 08:26, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.  Please do not edit this page .


text:
Talk:Socialisme ou Barbarie

Untitled
"(Castoriadis) became a Cold War apologist for Western military intervention as the only way such bureaucracies could be defeated."

The phrase "Cold War apologist" when applied to a Left intellectual is definitely not NPOV and may be wholly inaccurate. This is in need of a rewrite, but preferably by someone more knowledgeable about Castoriadis than myself. I know he became critical of anti-Americanism in his later years and took a more nuanced view of the first Gulf War than many in the anti-War movement would have liked, but that in itself hardly makes him a "Cold War apologist".

It should also be noted that the "later years" of Castoriadis' life were well after Socialisme ou Barbarie - perhaps that information should be merged into the Castoriadis biography article.

This article should more strongly emphasize the ideas and activities of Socialisme ou Barbarie during its years of activity. The article needs some mention of other important SOB figures (such as Lyotard), the Pouvoir Ouvrier split, influence upon the Situationists, etc. - Peter Werner - 2005/06/14

The "Cold War apologist" tag presumably results from his 1980 "Facing The War" text. It took a premise that "Russia has become the primary world military power". To sustain this in the context of the visible economic inferiority of the Soviet Union in the civilian sector, he proposed that the society may no longer be dominated by the party-state bureaucracy but by a "stratocracy" - a separate and dominant military sector with expansionist designs on the world. It is not Castoriadis' most durable writing. But as the previous writer said, this has little to do with Socialisme ou Barbarie. It would be useful if some material on this moved out of this article and into the Castoriadis article, which at the moment is very off-balance - covering only his late, wordy books. AllyD 8 July 2005 22:38 (UTC)

 * In Berlin at the hight of Reaganophobia, Castoriadis and "peacenik" Ernst Tugendhat, the top German analytical philosopher, who was very fond of C's philosophy and had invited him, but who was a better red than dead defeatist, had an awful exchange of words over Soviet politics.--Radh (talk) 15:30, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

All known members of SouB listed in Andrea Gabler' s "PhD"
Andrea Gabler's great 2006 dissertation on SouB (from Göttingen University) seems to have a as complete as possible list of members with short biographies if possible. It is online (pdf), but of course written in German.--Radh (talk) 15:21, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Revolutionary party
"rejecting the idea of a revolutionary party" I think this is not true, specially to Castoriadis; at least in the first years, S. ou B. saw itself as the revolutionary party, or at least as its embryo; there was a polemic with Pannekoek about that, and this was the reasons of the temporary scissions by Claude Lefort.

From Socialisme ou Barbarie: A French Revolutionary Group (1949-65) by Marcel van der Linden, Left History 5.1, 1997:

 * Right from the start there was a debate  on  matters  of  organization  in Socialisme  ou Barbarie.

 * What exactly  was  the group's self-definition? Was it  to  be a  collection  of  independently  acting  militants,  with  no  responsibilities  whatsoever,  or  was  it necessary  to  develop  a common  praxis  alongside the journal? If  so,  should  such  activity  assume  the role  of  a vanguard,  or  not? How was  the  organization  to  be  internally  structured? Was  democratic  centralism  finished  or  not?

 * In April 1949 the majority  of  the group  voted  for  a resolution  which was to  serve  as a  programmatic  basis  for  future work. In  it the Leninist conception  of  arousing  political  consciousness  in  the  working  class  from  the  outside  was  rejected,  as was  the idea  that  the  group was  to  be merely "a  collection  of  individuals"  who  would  restrict themselves  to  publishing  a "more  or less academic  journal." Yet  despite  this delineation  of  aims, the group  remained  more  or less 'old-fashioned': Socialisme  ou Barbarie  was  to develop  into  a  revolutionary  party,  capable  of  leading and  co-ordinating  the  independent workers' struggle,  directed  at the  conquest of  state  power.[18] There was  opposition  to  this  resolution,  but  it  was  weak.  It  was  only  in 1951-52,  after  a small group  of  ex-Bordigists had  joined,[19]  and the membership  had  shrunk  further, that the few opponents decided  to  voice their own opinion  more  openly.[20] Claude Lefort,  especially,  opposed  the  attempts  to  form  a  vanguard  party.

--MiguelMadeira (talk) 23:55, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Socialisme ou Barbarie


text:
User talk:GarethBrown

Greetings! The article Gareth brown has now been deleted. Thanks for your understanding, and good luck with your site; if you have any other contributions to make to Wikipedia, you're most welcome to stick around and edit. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:28, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:GarethBrown


text:
Anže Kopitar

Anže Kopitar (, born 24 August 1987) is a Slovenian professional ice hockey centre and captain of the Los Angeles Kings of the National Hockey League (NHL). The 11th overall pick in the 2005 NHL Entry Draft, Kopitar became the first Slovene to play in the NHL upon making his debut in 2006. Kopitar has spent his entire NHL career with the Kings, has led the team in scoring in all but two seasons and is second in franchise history in points, fourth in franchise history in goals, and first in franchise history in assists. He scored his 1,000th career point in 2021. Following the 2015–16 season, he was named the Kings' captain. Noted for both his offensive and defensive play, Kopitar was awarded the Frank J. Selke Trophy as the best defensive forward in the NHL in 2016, as well as the Lady Byng Memorial Trophy for gentlemanly play the same year. He won the Selke Trophy a second time in 2018 and the Lady Byng Trophy in 2023.

Kopitar played junior hockey for his hometown team HK Acroni Jesenice before moving to Sweden at age 16 to play in a more competitive league. He spent one season with the junior teams of the Södertälje SK organization, and then with the senior team of the top-level Elitserien. He moved to North America to join the Kings in 2006, one year after he was drafted, and finished fourth in the Calder Memorial Trophy voting for the league's top rookie. Kopitar's offensive talent was immediately apparent when he joined the Kings, while his defensive style developed in later seasons and he has become recognized for his two-way play, being a finalist for the Selke Trophy four times and winning twice. In 2018, he was a finalist for the Hart Memorial Trophy. He also exemplified great gentlemanly play, being nominated for the Lady Byng Memorial Trophy three times and winning twice. Praised as one of the best players in the NHL, Kopitar won the Stanley Cup with the Kings in 2012 and 2014, leading the playoffs in points on both occasions (tied with teammate Dustin Brown in 2012). Internationally, Kopitar has represented the Slovenian national team in several junior and senior tournaments, as well as at the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi. He also played for Team Europe at the 2016 World Cup of Hockey.

European career (2002–2006)
In 2002, Kopitar began playing for the youth team of his hometown, HK Acroni Jesenice. He split the year between the team's under-18 and junior clubs, and also appeared in 11 games for the senior team HK Kranjska Gora of the Slovenian Ice Hockey League. Kopitar had four goals and four assists in the senior league, and recorded 76 points in 14 games for the Jesenice under-18 team and 27 points in 20 games for the junior club. He led the Slovenian Ice Hockey League in scoring at the age of 16, and Swedish scout Lars Söder recruited Kopitar for the Elitserien in 2004 (Söder had originally discovered Kopitar when he was 13 at the 2001 European Youth Olympic Winter Festival in Vuokatti, Finland).

The Slovenian Ice Hockey League did not have a high enough skill level, so Kopitar decided that if he wanted to improve his career prospects, he would have to leave the country. He was offered a chance to play in Sweden for Södertälje SK, eventually joining their junior team where he led the League in scoring, with 49 points (28 goals, 21 assists) in 30 games. At 17, prior to the 2005 NHL Entry Draft, Kopitar was ranked the top European skater by the NHL Central Scouting Bureau. After his first season in Sweden, he was chosen 11th overall by the Los Angeles Kings in the 2005 Draft. Unlike most top-ranked prospects, Kopitar was not at the draft, but in Sweden playing in preseason games. Some members of the team had a party for the draft, including Niclas Bergfors, who was selected 23rd overall by the New Jersey Devils. Prior to the NHL Draft, Kopitar was also selected in the CHL Import Draft by the Regina Pats of the Western Hockey League (WHL). At 18 years of age, he declined to move to North America, however, hoping to further his development by continuing to play against professionals in the Elitserien, rather than against major junior players in the WHL.

Los Angeles Kings (2006–present)
Kopitar signed an entry-level contract with the Kings on 7 September 2005, but returned to play in Sweden for another season. The next year, 2006, he accepted an invitation to Los Angeles' rookie camp.

Early career and establishment (2006–2010)
Kopitar made his NHL debut on 6 October 2006, against the Anaheim Ducks and scored two goals in the game. In January 2007, he was named to the NHL YoungStars Game, an event included at the All-Star Game festivities; Kopitar recorded two goals and three assists. Kopitar completed his first NHL season third among rookies in scoring, behind Evgeni Malkin and Paul Šťastný, with 20 goals and 41 assists for 61 points. It marked the fifth-highest point total by a Kings rookie, and the highest since Luc Robitaille in 1986–87. He finished fourth in voting for the Calder Memorial Trophy as rookie of the year. Kopitar was awarded the Mark Bavis Memorial Award as the best first-year member of the Kings and was also named the Kings' Most Popular Player.

The following season, 2007–08, Kopitar was selected to represent the Western Conference at the 56th NHL All-Star Game in Atlanta, his first all-star game appearance. He was the youngest player in the game, nearly two years younger than the second-youngest player, Paul Stastny (Sidney Crosby was younger, but had to withdraw prior to the game due to injury). Kopitar finished the regular season with 32 goals and 45 assists for 77 points; he led the Kings in assists and points and was second in goals. Kopitar won the Bill Libby Memorial Award as the most valuable player on the Kings.

Early in the 2008–09 season, on 11 October 2008, Kopitar signed a seven-year contract extension with the Kings worth $47.6 million. The contract would keep Kopitar with the team until the conclusion of the 2015–16 season. He finished the season with 27 goals and 39 assists for 66 points in all 82 games, leading the Kings in both assists and points, while again finishing second in goals scored.

The following season, Kopitar scored his first career NHL hat-trick (three goals in one game) on 22 October 2009 against the Dallas Stars. He finished the 2009–10 season with a career-high 34 goals, 47 assists and 81 points in all 82 contests played. For the second time in his career, Kopitar won the Bill Libby Memorial Award as the Kings' most valuable player, and led the team in scoring for the third-straight year. Kopitar made his Stanley Cup playoff debut that season, as the Kings qualified for the postseason for the first time since 2002. The Kings lost in the Western Conference Quarterfinals in six games to the Vancouver Canucks, and Kopitar finished tied for third on the team with five points in six games.

Stanley Cup championships (2010–2015)
The 2010–11 season saw Kopitar play in his 325th consecutive NHL game, which set a new Kings team record, passing Marcel Dionne on 15 March 2011. However eleven days later, Kopitar's season and ironman streak came to an abrupt end at 330 games after he suffered a broken ankle in a game against the Colorado Avalanche. Despite the injury setback and missing the final seven regular season games and the playoffs, Kopitar led the team in scoring for the fourth straight season with 73 points (25 goals, 48 assists), and was named the team's most valuable player for the second time.

In the 2011–12 season, Kopitar led the Kings in scoring with 76 points, (25 goals and a career-best 51 assists) in all 82 games played. After the defeating the back-to-back Presidents' Trophy-winning Vancouver Canucks in five games in the conference quarterfinals along with a conference semifinals sweep to the St. Louis Blues and a five-game victory over the Phoenix Coyotes in the conference finals of the 2012 playoffs, the Kings won the Stanley Cup as the playoff champions, by defeating the New Jersey Devils in six games in the Stanley Cup Finals for their first title in team history. Kopitar finished tied with Kings captain Dustin Brown to lead the team in playoff scoring, with each having 20 points (eight goals, 12 assists) from all 20 games played. Kopitar became the first Slovenian-born player to win the Stanley Cup. In recognition of this, Kopitar was named as the 2012 Slovenian male Athlete of the Year.

The 2012–13 NHL season was delayed due to the NHL lockout, so Kopitar joined his younger brother Gašper on Mora IK of the Swedish second-tier league HockeyAllsvenskan, signing a contract with the team for the 2012–13 season. He played 31 games for Mora, scoring 34 points, before the NHL lockout ended in January 2013. A shortened, 48-game NHL season commenced, Kopitar recorded 10 goals, and 32 assists for 42 points in 47 games to once again lead the Kings in scoring, and was named the team's best defensive player. Kopitar and the Kings would go on another lengthy playoff run as the defending champions but unable to defend their title as they lost in five games to the Presidents' Trophy-winning and eventual Stanley Cup champion Chicago Blackhawks. Kopitar finished the 2013 playoffs by playing in all 18 games with three goals and six assists for nine points recorded.

The 2013–14 season saw Kopitar play all 82 games and lead the team in scoring for the seventh consecutive season, with 70 points (29 goals, 41 assists), and was named both the team's most valuable player and best defensive player. He also was a finalist for the Frank J. Selke Trophy as best defensive forward in the NHL for the first time, which was eventually awarded to Patrice Bergeron of the Boston Bruins. In the 2014 playoffs, Kopitar led the entire league in scoring, recording five goals and 21 assists for 26 points in all 26 games, as the Kings won their second Stanley Cup championship in three seasons and second in franchise history altogether after they defeated the San Jose Sharks in seven games in the first round (after initially trailing 3–0 earlier in the series), the Anaheim Ducks in the second round in seven games (after initially trailing 3–2 earlier in the series) and the defending Stanley Cup Champion Chicago Blackhawks in the third round in seven games prior to defeating the New York Rangers in five games in the Stanley Cup Finals. Kopitar's productivity throughout the 2014 playoffs led to him being a potential candidate for the Conn Smythe Trophy as the playoff MVP (although the award eventually went to teammate Justin Williams).

Despite the defending Stanley Cup champion Kings not qualifying for the 2015 playoffs, The 2014–15 campaign saw Kopitar continue his individual dominance and tie Marcel Dionne as he became the only player in Kings history to lead the team in scoring eight times, having scored 16 goals and 48 assists for 64 points in 79 games. Kopitar was a finalist for the Selke Trophy again (although it was eventually given to Patrice Bergeron again), and also for the Lady Byng Memorial Trophy, awarded for sportsmanship (which was eventually awarded Jiri Hudler of the Calgary Flames.

Selke Trophy wins, start of captaincy (2015–2021)
During the 2015–16 season Kopitar signed an eight-year contract extension with the Kings. It would pay him an average of $10 million per season until the end of the 2023–24 season. He finished the season with 25 goals, 49 assists and 74 points, setting a team record by leading the Kings in scoring for a ninth consecutive season and the Kings would get back into the playoffs where they would lose in five games to the San Jose Sharks. Kopitar also was awarded both the Lady Byng Trophy and Frank J. Selke Trophy, the first player from the Kings to win either award. He also won the Bill Libby Memorial Award as the most valuable player on the Kings for the fifth time.

On 16 June 2016, Kopitar was named the captain of the Kings, replacing Dustin Brown. In his first season as captain of the Kings, Kopitar saw his production drop, and he finished with 12 goals, 40 assists and 52 points in 76 contests, second on the team behind Jeff Carter's 66 points, and ending his nine-year streak of leading the team in scoring.

Kopitar returned to form in the 2017–18 season scoring a career-high 35 goals and 57 assists for 92 points in all 82 games played, helping the Kings get back to the playoffs. He scored his fourth career hat-trick with four goals on 22 March 2018, against the Colorado Avalanche. After the season, Kopitar was a finalist for the Hart Memorial Trophy (as the regular season MVP) for the first time and was awarded the Frank J. Selke Trophy for the second time in his career. Kopitar and the Kings would return to the playoffs after missing the year prior. In the 2018 playoffs, Kopitar recorded a goal and an assist as the Kings would be swept in the opening round to the Vegas Golden Knights.

On 5 January 2019, Kopitar recorded his 300th NHL goal in a 4–0 win against the Edmonton Oilers on Oilers' goaltender Cam Talbot. Towards the end of the 2018–19 season, on 1 April, in a 7–2 loss against the Calgary Flames, Kopitar played his 1,000th NHL game.

On 5 May 2021, towards the end of the pandemic-shortened 2020–21 season, Kopitar recorded his 1,000th career point against the Arizona Coyotes on a Sean Walker goal, becoming the 91st player to reach the mark.

Recent years (2021–present)
On 14 October 2021, Kopitar scored three goals and two assists against the Vegas Golden Knights, setting a franchise record for most points in a home opening game since Jari Kurri did it back in 1991–92. However, Kopitar missed the 20-goal mark for the first time since the 2016–17 season (excluding the shortened 2020–21 season). He recorded his 700th career assist on a goal by Adrian Kempe in the Kings' final home game of the season on 23 April 2022, a 4–2 win against the Anaheim Ducks. Kopitar finished the 2021–22 season playing in 81 games with 67 points (19 goals, 48 assists) recorded as the Kings qualified for the playoffs for the first time since 2018 where the Kings lost in the first round in seven games to the Edmonton Oilers. He was eventually awarded the Mark Messier Leadership Award, becoming the second Kings player to win it after teammate Dustin Brown in 2014.

On 9 January 2023, Kopitar recorded his 1,100th NHL point in a 6–3 win over the Edmonton Oilers with an assist on a Kevin Fiala goal, becoming the third player in Kings history to reach the mark. Kopitar recorded his sixth career hat-trick on 28 February, scoring four goals in a 6–5 shootout victory against the Winnipeg Jets. At the season's end, he would win his second Lady Byng Memorial Trophy, becoming the first Kings player since Wayne Gretzky to win the award more than once.

The Kings re-signed Kopitar to a two-year contract extension on 6 July 2023. On 21 October, in a 4–2 loss to the Boston Bruins, Kopitar passed Dustin Brown as leader of games played in the Kings franchise history. Having an impressive start in the 2023–24 season, on 8 November, he scored his 400th NHL goal, which was also the game-winning goal, against the Vegas Golden Knights. On 3 December, Kopitar passed Marcel Dionne to become the all-time assists leader in Kings franchise history. On 20 March 2024, Kopitar recorded his 1,200th NHL point with an assist on a goal scored by Kevin Fiala in a 6–0 win over the Minnesota Wild. He finished the 2023–24 season with 26 goals and 44 assists for 70 points in 81 games along with one goal, two assists and three points in all five games in the 2024 playoffs.

International play
Kopitar first played in an international tournament when he participated in the Division I (second level) tournament of the 2003 IIHF World U18 Championships for the Slovenian national junior team. He appeared in five games and recorded three points. The following year he appeared in the 2004 U18 tournament and the 2004 World Junior Championships. Slovenia competed in Division I at both tournaments, one level below the top division. Kopitar scored six goals and eight points in five games during the under-18 tournament and finished second overall for goals scored and third for points, leading Slovenia in both categories; at the World Juniors he had one goal and one assist in five games.

In 2005, Kopitar appeared in three international tournaments for Slovenia; he took part in the U18 Championship, World Juniors, and the senior World Championship, his first tournament with the Slovenian national team. Slovenia competed at the Division I level for both junior tournaments, but at the top level for the senior championship. He would play his last junior tournament in 2006 at the Division I level, with six points in five games. At the 2006 World Championship he played for Slovenia at the top level and recorded three goals and nine points in six games, tying for fifth among scoring leaders. Slovenia was relegated to Division I for 2007, where Kopitar had 13 assists and 14 points, leading the tournament in both categories. Back in the top division for the 2008 IIHF World Championship, Kopitar appeared in five games and had four points to lead his team, though Slovenia was once again relegated.

Slovenia qualified for the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi; as the qualifying games were held during the NHL season Kopitar was unable to participate, though his father Matjaž coached the team and Gašper played in the matches. Though Gašper was part of the team that secured qualification for Slovenia, he was not named to the Olympic roster. Kopitar helped Slovenia reach the quarterfinals of the tournament by scoring two goals and one assist.

Kopitar was also named to play in the 2016 World Cup of Hockey for Team Europe, which includes players from most of Europe (the Czech Republic, Finland, Russia, and Sweden have their own teams). Prior to the announcement Kopitar had expressed excitement towards the concept, which was to be introduced during the tournament, noting that as a Slovenian he had few opportunities to play in tournaments like this.

Playing style
Kopitar is known in the NHL as one of the most effective two-way forwards, excelling in both offence and defence, for which he has won the Frank J. Selke Trophy in 2016 and 2018, after being a finalist for the award in both 2014 and 2015. In addition to his defensive play, Kopitar has one of the highest career averages for winning faceoffs, and has led the Kings in team scoring 14 times in his career.

"'He combines size, strength and intelligence, he's as difficult to play against as any player in the league. He's very responsible defensively and checks very well, especially with his stick. He's one of the best in the league at anticipating where the puck is going and jumping in to cut off cycles.'"

Personal life
Kopitar was born in Jesenice, Slovenia (then part of Yugoslavia) to Matjaž and Mateja Kopitar. Matjaž played hockey for HK Acroni Jesenice, winning the league title three times, and was a member of the Yugoslav and Slovenian national teams. He also coached HK Acroni Jesenice of the Austrian Hockey League during the 2006–07 season and the Slovenian national team from 2010 until 2015. Mateja worked at the family restaurant in Hrušica, a village about five kilometres from Jesenice.

When Kopitar was four, his father first taught him how to skate; Matjaž built an ice rink in their backyard in Hrušica, and Kopitar would play there whenever he could. Kopitar has a brother, Gašper, who is five years younger. Gašper also plays hockey; when the Kopitar family moved to Los Angeles, Gašper joined a junior team sponsored by the Kings. He then played for the Portland Winterhawks of the major junior Western Hockey League (WHL) and the Des Moines Buccaneers of the United States Hockey League (USHL), before turning professional with Mora IK in Sweden. Kopitar's grandmother taught English at a local high school, and both Kopitar and his brother learned to speak English from her. Kopitar speaks five languages: Slovene, Serbian, German, Swedish, and English. He enjoys playing soccer and is a declared supporter of Slovenian soccer club NK Maribor.

Kopitar is renowned in Slovenia due to his hockey exploits, with a government-sponsored website declaring that after he won the Stanley Cup in 2012 he was "the most recognised Slovenian sportsman." As a youth, he played in the 2000 and 2001 Quebec International Pee-Wee Hockey Tournaments with a team from Slovenia. He also hosts an annual charity golf tournament that benefits various groups, mainly youths.

Kopitar lived with his parents until moving to Sweden, where he lived alone in an apartment. After his first season in the NHL, the rest of Kopitar's family joined him in Los Angeles; Kopitar bought a home in Manhattan Beach in 2014. Kopitar met Ines Dominc in Slovenia in 2005; they married in July 2013. Their first child, a daughter named Neža, was born on 14 March 2015. Their second child, son Jakob, was born 5 October 2016.

Regular season and playoffs
Bold indicates led league

All-Star Games

 * All statistics are taken from NHL.com.

title: Anže Kopitar


text:
User talk:Latch

Welcome boilerplate follows -202.7.166.170 04:30, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Gday!
Maybe you would like to get involved with the Seventh-day Adventist Church WikiProject? Ans e ll 04:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

My hello! Good to see you lurking in these parts! -Fermion 02:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Aaahh, another Wikipedia editor I know! Looks like you haven't contributed for a while, but I expect you will see this welcome eventually. What is it with so many Aussies editing the Adventist-related pages? Cheers, Colin MacLaurin 14:56, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

G'day! :) --Shannonr 06:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Ichthus: January 2012
 In this issue...

- Ichthus is published by WikiProject Christianity For submissions and subscriptions contact the Newsroom
 * From the Editor
 * What are You doing For Lent?
 * Fun and Exciting Contest Launched
 * Spotlight on WikiProject Catholicism

title: User talk:Latch


text:
Hastings Cutoff

The Hastings Cutoff was an alternative route for westward emigrants to travel to California, as proposed by Lansford Hastings in The Emigrant's Guide to Oregon and California. The ill-fated Donner Party infamously took the route in 1846.

Description
A sentence in Hastings' guidebook briefly describes the cutoff:

The most direct route, for the California emigrants, would be to leave the Oregon route, about two hundred miles east from Fort Hall; thence bearing West Southwest, to the Salt Lake; and thence continuing down to the bay of St. Francisco, by the route just described.

The cutoff left the Oregon Trail at Fort Bridger in Wyoming, passed through the Wasatch Range, across the Great Salt Lake Desert, an 80-mile nearly water-less drive, looped around the Ruby Mountains, and rejoined the California Trail about seven miles west of modern Elko (also Emigrant Pass).

The west end of the cutoff is marked by Nevada Historical Marker 3.

Trail use
Hastings led a small party overland late in 1845 and spent the winter in California. Significantly, his stay at Sutter's Fort coincided with a visit by John C. Frémont, who had just explored the Great Salt Lake Desert and whose letter describing a new route to California would be widely published in Eastern newspapers. In April, Hastings set out with a few companions to meet the emigration of 1846. He stayed in the vicinity of the Sweetwater River while an eastbound traveler carried his open letter inviting emigrants on the California Trail to meet him at Fort Bridger. Between 60 and 75 wagons did so and traveled with Hastings on his cutoff. They endured a difficult descent down Weber Canyon, a waterless drive of 80 miles across the Great Salt Lake Desert, and a lengthy detour around the Ruby Mountains. Despite the usual trials of overland travel, they arrived safely in California.

The Donner Party, following in the wake of this initial party in 1846, had an unsuccessful experience with the Hastings Cutoff. They had arrived about a week early to travel with Hastings' party, and on his suggestion pioneered an alternate route to avoid Weber Canyon. The roadbuilding required through the Wasatch Mountains and the grueling Great Salt Lake Desert delayed them. When they had arrived at the California Trail, they were delayed about a month. The party arrived at Donner Pass just as an early winter storm rendered it impassable. After becoming snowbound in the Sierra Nevada, many died of starvation, and some of the emigrants resorted to eating their animals and the deceased members of the group.

In July 1847, Mormon leader Brigham Young led a vanguard company of emigrants from Winter Quarters, in what is now Omaha, to the future site of Salt Lake City. The company chose to use the Hastings Cutoff passing through modern-day Emigration Canyon. Young's group made remarkable improvements to some parts of the cutoff on their journey so subsequent Mormon companies could more easily make it through to the Salt Lake valley. William Clayton, the company's scribe, stated in his journals that the company tried to follow the route left by the Donner Party the previous year, yet only occasionally could identify the tracks.

The California gold rush created an enormous increase in westward traffic and several parties of 1849 and 1850 used the Hastings Cutoff. The year 1850 saw the development of a new route called the Salt Lake Cutoff that avoided the Great Salt Lake Desert west of the lake. Subsequently, the Hastings Cutoff was abandoned except for portions east of Salt Lake City, where it remained as the end of the Mormon Trail.

General references

 * DeLafosse, Peter H., ed. Trailing the Pioneers: A Guide to Utah's Emigrant Trails, 1829–1869. Utah State University Press, 1994.
 * Hastings, Lansford W.The Emigrants' Guide to Oregon and California. Bedford, Mass.: Applewood Books, 1994. (Facsimile of the 1845 ed.)
 * Kelly, Charles. Salt Desert Trails. Hastings Cutoff Sesquicentennial ed. Edited by Peter H. DeLafosse. Salt Lake City: Western Epics, 1996.
 * Korns, J. Roderic, and Dale L. Morgan, eds. West from Fort Bridger: The Pioneering of Immigrant Trails Across Utah, 1846–1850. Revised and updated by Will Bagley and Harold Schindler. Logan: Utah State University Press, 1994.
 * Knight, Hal, 111 Days to Zion. Deseret Press, 1978.
 * Morgan, Dale L., Overland in 1846: Diaries and Letters of the California-Oregon Trail. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1993. 2 vols. Reprint; originally published by Talisman Press in 1963. ISBN 0-8032-8202-8.
 * Spedden, H. Rush., The Fearful Long Drive: The 1846 Hastings Cutoff Overland Journal, Oregon-California Trails Association, Vol. 12, No. 2, Summer 1994.
 * Spedden, H. Rush., Hastings Cutoff: Bryant's Trail to Skull Valley Overland Journal, Oregon-California Trails Association, Vol. 23, No. 2, Summer 2005.
 * Spedden, H. Rush., The Donner Trail Across the Salt Lake Valley Overland Journal, Oregon-California Trails Association, Vol. 26, No. 1, Summer 2008.
 * Spedden, H. Rush., Lansford Hastings, Orson Pratt, Google Earth, and GPS Overland Journal, Oregon-California Trails Association, Vol. 28, No. 4, Summer 2010.
 * Tea, Roy D., ed. The Hastings Cutoff: Grantsville to Donner Springs, May 1996. Salt Lake City, UT: [Utah Crossroads Chapter, Oregon-California Trails Association], 1996.
 * Tea, Roy D., ed. Hastings Longtripp: A Hastings Cutoff Trail Guide from Donner Spring to the Humboldt River. Salt Lake City, UT: Utah Crossroads, Oregon-California Trails Association, 1996.
 * Tea, Roy D., ed. The Hastings Cutoff: A Tragic Decision: The Weber Canyon Route. Salt Lake City, UT: Utah Crossroads, Oregon-California Trails Association, 2004.

title: Hastings Cutoff


text:
User talk:Lennon fan

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Alai 04:33, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Image tagging for Image:Jo_simpsons.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Jo_simpsons.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 10:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Lennon fan


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Travis Fahey

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. jni 08:18, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Travis Fahey
Delete...written by anon, almost appears as self-promotion. googled subject, no real results. Srcrowl 04:34, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable (no claim to it anyway). Could be an attack page. -- BD2412 talk 04:51, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity. JamesBurns 06:42, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong delete, Travis Fahey gets about 36 Google hits none of which seem to point to him being a professional author or award-winning journalist as claimed. - Mgm|(talk) 08:28, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Mild Shock, I am Travis Fahey. I must say I am a little shocked by the reaction to this listing, thus far. Upon checking my email yesterday, I discovered that a close friend of mine had created a listing in Wikipedia as a joke. I took it as that, a joke, despite the fact that I am, indeed, a two-time award-winning journalist from Burlington, Vermont. When you google my name, you'll mostly find references to my careers since; I have since worked in public realtions at Middlebury College and currently work as a corporate communications specialist. I think you all need to find something else to do with your time than berate what is clearly a humorous, albeit factually accurate, entry and a playful jab between two friends. - [[User:travisfahey|[[User talk:travisfahey|08:28, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, This Travis Fahey is obviously an unsavory character who must be stopped immediately. The repercussions to this fine, upstanding Christian web encyclopedia could be endless if we don't remove references to violent, degenerate gun-toting whiskey drinking liberal writers, like the said Mr. Fahey.  Good luck and God Bless you strange little men... - [[User:phineasPEgo|[[User talk:phineasPEgo|09:35, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Note: last two edits are part of some bizarre joke; non-existant users misappropriated Mgm's good name. -- BD2412 talk 13:50, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)
 * Delete --Xcali 14:27, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, and quickly. I need to get back to my hymns, all this talking about scotch makes me feel bad. --Scimitar 14:34, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Not good enough for BJAODN.  ral  315  18:38, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity/prank. --Etacar11 21:49, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Votes by non-existent users

 * Strong Keep I exis' and i respek dis fine guyman.--64.229.92.23 01:22, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Comment - 166.19.102.20 made the previous nine votes (below) attributed to non-existant users, and vandalized the signatures in the votes of several users (i.e. ) -- Plutor 17:37, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The following users do not exist --Scimitar 18:32, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC): Just delete the page--the response was simply a protest about how seriously people are taking this. And by the way, it's not "hacking" or "vandalizing" if the page is open for HTML editing by the public! Just read the statement below--If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, do not submit it. Chill out.
 * Keep --User: Fasshishel 15:35, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep --User: Gimminy Crickets 15:36, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep --User: Much Tewilliger 15:37, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep --User: indelliblewatermark 15:38, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep --User: CranialApathy 15:39, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep --User: thewonderboy22 15:40, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep --User: underworldrenegades1 15:41, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep --User: WTFJKITUP 15:42, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep --User: HTMLISFUN 15:43, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * No, it is still vandalising; simply not hacking, in the most proper sense. jglc | t | c 18:53, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia uses Vandalism in a technical sense, not in the ordinary dictionary meaning. RJFJR 22:07, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete for sockpuppetry and personal attacks. RickK 05:09, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.  Please do not edit this page .


text:
Legislative route

In the United States, a legislative route (LR) or legislative highway is a highway defined by laws passed in a state legislature. The numbering of such highways may or may not correspond to the numbers familiar to the public as part of the state, U.S. highway, and Interstate highway systems. Legislative routes may be composed of several such roads, and conversely, state, U.S., and Interstate highways may be made up of several legislative routes. Minnesota also had highways defined in an amendment to the Minnesota State Constitution in 1920, and those roads are known as constitutional routes.

title: Legislative route


text:
File:Rockport Co Op.jpg

This building functioned as the Rockport Coop from 1885 until the 1930's.

title: File:Rockport Co Op.jpg


text:
Talk:Jaken

Jaken is a short emp who always follows Sesshomaru because hes his like slave or servent.Jaken is abused by Sesshomaru sometimes but seems like hes always loyal to Sesshomaru. Although sometimes he may seem like a coward hes not, look at Myoga he runs everytime Inuyasha is in a battle but Jaken doesnt ever run he actually helps sesshomaru!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.49.43.13 (talk • contribs)

Kappa?
Jaken is definitely not a kappa. In the episode "Chokyukai and the Abducted Bride" there is a kappa, and it looks totally different from Jaken and the other examples of his race.

What is he then? Do you think he's a reptilian demon or some kind of froglike amphibian?

 * The Japanese wiki article doesn't identify Jaken as anything, which it probably would if he was as popular a creature as a kappa is. He also seems to lack a kappa's distinctive head-plate and affinity for the water. If you wanted to guess at what popular beastie he is, he could just as easily be a ko-tengu, despite the lack of wings. I think he's just something Takahashi made up. Kotengu 20:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the anime said he was an imp. I'm not sure about that though. Showers 07:13, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Jaken