text:
Talk:Electrical wiring in the United Kingdom

The ring
We have a Part P'er living up the road from us, and a neighbour into DIY mentioned that there had been talk of ditching the ring method, as it inherently relies on the ring being complete / fault free for the T&E to carry the loads the sockets are rated at. If the ring were to become faulty, one side of it could then potentially end up being overloaded for the standard diameters. Has anyone with their Part P heard about that or know if it's worth mentioning in the section on rings in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.135.245 (talk) 02:50, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Its a false argument for 2 reasons.
 * 1) One side of the cable only is able to carry the load
 * 2) A poor connection in a ring circuit is perfectly safe, a poor connection in a radial is liable to result in a fire.

There are a lot of criticisms of rings without comparing the effects in radials, which are in almost all cases far worse. Just hows how illogical people are. Tabby (talk) 07:58, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

- "A poor connection in a ring circuit is perfectly safe, a poor connection in a radial is liable to result in a fire."

Not true at all. A poor connection in a ring is NOT perfectly safe - At least not for the standard U.K. ring. The cable used is not rated to carry the full 30 or 32A of the protective device; in fact the Wiring Regs. require only that with appropriate deratings applied (for grouping, thermal insulation etc.) it is capable of carrying 20A. A poor connection on a ring can thus result in a cable rated at only 20A being left to carry up to 30A. Even without the problems of a poor connection, it's entirely possible for part of the ring to be overloaded by connecting heavy loads close to the distribution board on one side of the ring. 91.125.155.122 (talk) 23:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Another advantage of a radial is that if a live or neutral connection fails, the circuit will not work, whereas a ring with the same fault will probably go unnoticed and thus create electro-magnetic fields and risk over-load. On the plus side, there is a 'spare' earth cable should one fail on a ring main. Lighting circuits are always radial circuits, so there is no reason to suggest that a properly designed radial circuit is inherently dangerous. 87.113.198.19 (talk) 17:37, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Supply voltage
This section of the article is vague and out of date. It reads, in part, Since 1960, the supply voltage in UK domestic premises has been 240 V AC (RMS) at 50 Hz. Okay, that's fine…what was it before 1960? It also says ''electricity suppliers can work with an asymmetric voltage tolerance of 230 V+10%-6% (216.2-253 V). This was supposed to be widened to 230 V ±10% (207-253 V), but the time of this change has been put back repeatedly and currently sits in 2008 (BS 7697).'' It's now 2009…what's the status of this? —Scheinwerfermann T·C 07:07, 23 January 2009 (UTC) A random measurement on my rural village supply on a Sunday evening at 9.40pm local time (21 March 2010) showed 247V. G1MFG (talk)G1MFG —Preceding undated comment added 21:45, 21 March 2010 (UTC).

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Electricity_Basics#230v_or_240v explains the situation from 1960 to now.

Before 1960 there were multiple standards in use. Most places were anything from 200v to 250v 50Hz, but some were 110v. Its common to see transformer tappings for 200,220,230,240,250v on 1950s & 60s equipment. Tabby (talk) 00:33, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

"Since 1960, the supply voltage in UK domestic premises has been 240 V AC (RMS) at 50 Hz."

This statement is not merely vague, it's wrong. Standardization at 240V across the whole country wasn't achieved until the early 1970's, so there were still some areas with supplies of nominal voltages other than 240V well after 1960, with corresponding 3-wire 1-phase and 3-phase voltages. Although they gradually became less common, D.C. supplies also existed into the 1960's in some places. PBC1966 (talk) 18:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * You know what to do. Write it and cite it. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:41, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

 * The available transformer tappings and their disappearance from subsequent were little to do with the range of supply voltages then available. In spite of many people's beliefs to the contrary, non 240 volt systems still persist in the UK.  Many suburbs of large cities were installed at 250 volts and despite a reluctance of supply companies to admit it, they still are 250 volt (the reluctance is primarily due to the non availability of 250 volt light bulbs).  A part of West London really is 230 volt (but distributed as 115 - 0 - 115, an experimental system).  This is allowable because even 250 volt systems fall within the permitted tolerance band of the nominally 230 volt supply (but only by a couple of volts).  I am not aware of any other variations.

 * The transformer tappings (and not always transformer - some were taps on a resistor) were solely provided for thermionic valve (vacuum tube) equipment where the heater circuits were very particular about the voltage from which they were run. Nearly everything else (including the thermionic valve HT circuits) were much less fussy and would operate from any supply betwenn 200 and 250 volts.

 * DC systems survived in the UK longer than you may have believed. Fleet Street in London had a DC supply (generated by Bankside Power Station) right up until it was decommisioned in 1981, and then subsequently provided by locally installed transformer/recitifier units).  This was to power the antique (1920's era) hot metal type machines that the unions insisted that the newspapers had to use (because they were very labour intensive).  It was the inevitable migration to the docklands areas and the adoption of desktop publishing systems that ended that particular requirement.  I am not aware of any large area DC mains distribution system in use today, though local systems are still common (colleges and universities; laboratories etc. etc.) 86.180.161.250 (talk) 13:23, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Colour Harmonisation dates and table
87.113.116.186 (talk) 11:50, 1 December 2009 (UTC)KO If the colours were harmonised in 2004, why does the table show the colours changing Pre-2004 ????? from memory the colour changes came into force jan 2005, so the table should read Pre-2005 -

That table also omits all mention of earlier standards, such as the use of white instead of yellow up until 1964. The history of flex color coding is also rather more convoluted than suggested, with white continuing in use for some years after it had been replaced by yellow in fixed cabling, and green/yellow being introduced as an alternative to plain green several years before the adoption of brown/blue in place of red/back.

The section about D.C. color coding could also use some clarification. For 3-wire systems mentioned, the old standard was red for positive outer, white (or yellow) for negative outer, and black for middle wire (usually earthed). The negative outer was changed to blue in 1966. But for a 2-wire system derived from a 3-wire distribution network, as in the case of a normal residential supply, the 2-wire installation standard specified red and black, with black for the earthed side of the supply and red for the "live" side, regardless of whether the house was fed from the positive or negative side of the 3-wire system. So yes, there was potential for confusion, but in houses fed from the negative side of the 3-wire system, the coding was actually red for negative and black for positive, with the positive side being earthed. PBC1966 (talk) 18:55, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Earth conductor insulation, in Circuit Design section
"The earthing conductor is supplied uninsulated for a number of reasons, primarily because it may be considered safer that way. If the insulation of the live/neutral wire becomes damaged due to intrusion by a foreign object (such as a nail/screw) or by fire or heat (caused by short circuit or poor installation), then the wire is more likely to earth itself and in doing so either trip the RCD or burn the fuse out by drawing too much current. "

This is not true. If the CPC (earth wire) were insulated, the distance from the copper to the top outer surface of the cable would be exactly the same as it is now, hence there is no difference in penetration performance.

"Some may argue that insulating the earth conductor would unnecessarily increase the cost, weight, size and rigidity of the cable"

Insulating it would necessarily result in a wider cable, thus more total pvc is used, and one extra moulding process is used to insulate the CPC. I dont see any justification for the phrase 'some may argue that.'

"There is some confusion as to why the third earthing conductor is supplied uninsulated, however the general consensus is for ease of terminating."

I find this an odd view. In a capitalist world, an insulated CPC would cost more due to
 * the increased cable size and thus pvc use
 * the extra moulding step
 * the increased carriage costs due to larger cable dimensions

Now, why would anyone pay a higher price for a cable with no significant advantage? Selling it would be a death blow for any business.

L&N need to be double insulated to avoid risk of shock & fire. There is no reason to add such insulation to earthed metal. Tabby (talk) 00:28, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Article currently says: "Some may argue that insulating the earth conductor would unnecessarily increase the cost, weight, size and rigidity of the cable.[citation needed]"

So... is there anyone that claims that adding pvc insulation to the cpc would NOT increase cost, size and weight? Tabby (talk) 13:57, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Additional info in search of a definitive solution
The CPC does not carry current under normal, non-fault, conditions (apart from a tiny functional earth current from filters and switched-mode power supplies in IT equipment) whereas L & N carry the full load current. The CPC is there to provide a reference earth potential (effectively zero volts) so unless the earth continuity is compromised (or there is a fault to earth), it is hard to get a shock from it. Indeed, it is connected to all exposed conductive parts of any equipment it protects to keep them at (safely near to) earth potential. Since it is "safe" for the CPC to have reduced insulation, economic arguments are allowed to come into play. (Note that the CPC has to be insulated with earth sleeving at terminations to prevent it shorting on other conductors before it enters the earth terminal.)

The IEE Wiring Regulations (BS 7671:2008) have an appendix giving references for all other British standards used in it. It would be worthwhile looking up the standard for twin-and-earth cable because in this case, the Wiring Regs defer to it whereas they would ordinarily not condone the practice of leaving off the insulation. Sorry I haven't got an up-to-date copy at the moment or I might be able to find specific regulations and give a better reference.

Peter Riches (talk) 23:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Part P & 12v
"One of the many quirks of Part P is that in some cases the installation of 12V downlighters is notifiable where as the installation of 240V mains downlighters isn't. This appears strange but it's because 12V downlighters draw high currents and that combined with the wrong choice of wire could lead to a fire."

Illogical... both 12v and mains downlighters can and do cause fires, so this is not the reason for the discrimination between them. Tabby (talk) 14:00, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

 * The official rules about what's notifiable versus what's not notifiable are full of inconsistencies and illogicalities. Typical committee-inspired nonsense which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.  87.114.73.16 (talk) 22:25, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Plug fuse confusion
Article now says: "In the case of non-permanently connected domestic equipment, a socket rated at 13 A is attached to the ring circuit, into which a fused plug may be inserted.  The fuse protects the contacts (including any switch contacts) and the equipment flex.   There are two benefits to this arrangement.   Firstly with low power equipment a flex with a low current rating (and therefore small diameter) can be used.   Secondly, if the equipment is moved to a different socket, it will remain protected by the same (hopefully correct) fuse.   The disadvantage is that despite warnings to the contrary people often use a fuse rated at too high a current, or even wrap a blown fuse in aluminium foil, meaning that under fault conditions the contacts and flex will be subjected to anything up to the maximum ring circuit current.   This is likely to cause a fire."

This is confused. Tabby (talk) 15:16, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) 13A sockets are never fitted to ring mains, they're used on ring circuits - I've corrected that. A ring main is something else.
 * 2) All appliances are required to be safe with a BS1362 13A mains fuse. Only some historic equipment may be non-compliant
 * 3) The advantage of keeping an individual fuse with its associated appliance was originally to do with fuse rating, but no longer is. The current advantage is that if a faulty appliance blows its fuse, the user won't get exposed to the risk situation a 2nd/3rd time by plugging it in elsewhere.
 * 4) There is no such a thing in Britain as a mains plug fuse rated at too high a current for an appliance
 * 5) The above passage fails to define or clarify 'maximum ring circuit current', and most readers will think that means either 13A or 30/32A. In practice its usually over a thousand amps, and upto 6000A.
 * 6) A dead short fault carrying this maximum current isn't a significant fire risk, installations are designed to handle this if necessary. Fuse or MCB operate so fast under these conditions that the i^2t isn't sufficient to set things alight. And in case of total MCB failure, The BS88 fuse acts to disconnect the whole installation. Fire is a problem with much lower overcurrents, where disconnect times are greatly prolonged, and total energy dissipation much greater.

Now I'm confused. I thought a 'ring main' was the informal term for a ring final circuit. Ie a circuit into which you connect your BS1363 plugs, so what IS a ring main then?87.113.198.19 (talk) 17:47, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

User:Tabby does much to muddy the waters as far as electrical things work, especially, electrical protection. If someone uses a foil covered fuse at an appliance plug, the circuit protection will operate, as it is supposed to, on short circuit or thermal overload. The idea of a ring circuit is what is installed in most domestic places in the UK, although, places like this are slowly moving towards radial circuits, because of better circuit design and protection available (ie, CB's vs Fuses). Also, what Tabby is talking about is Prospective Short Circuit Current, which depending upon how close you are to your supply transformer, this current could be as little as 3000A, could be as large as 15,000A. A ring main is what the supply authority in your area uses to supply electricity to each block of houses, it is fused at each "take-off", to your and everyones houses down the road, each house is spread in sets of 3 over three phases. Trumpy (talk) 05:29, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Trumpy (talk) wrote: The idea of a ring circuit is what is installed in most domestic places in the UK, although, places like this are slowly moving towards radial circuits, because of better circuit design and protection available (ie, CB's vs Fuses). It is not the "idea" that is installed!  Both ring and radial final circuits are in use in the UK, they are selected according to what is appropriate in any given situation.  There is no difference in the protection methods used, only the rating of the protection, 20A for radial with sockets connected, 32A for the ring.  FF-UK (talk) 22:54, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Merge
I propose that the contents of Consumer mains wiring be merged into this article, since that article is almost entirely about wiring in the UK. After the merge, however, that article should be redirected to Electrical wiring since the title is too generic to redirect here.--Srleffler (talk) 04:34, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Support since the suggested merge source is strictly about UK practice and somewhat overlaps the contents of this article anyway. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:58, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Merge complete.--Srleffler (talk) 04:39, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Historical D.C. systems
The article says

I believe someone may have assumed this from that fact that non mains wired DC uses this colour coding (example: the colours of test leads for test meters and battery connectors in portable systems). In reality, it was certainly not the case for mains distribution. DC used to be distributed as a three wire system from the generating station (i.e. -200V - 0 - +200V the centre conductor being earthed at the source). Where a building was supplied with a single pole supply, the colours used were RED for the LIVE wire and BLACK for the earthed wire, regardless of the polarity of the live wire. It was not considered necessary to identify the polarity of the live wire because virtually all the loads available at this time would operate correctly regardless of the polarity of the supply (being confined to incandescent lamps; electric heating systems and series D.C. motors). Someone wishing to charge batteries from DC mains (for example) would have to ascertain the polarity before installing the charging system. A 1920 electrical book tells me that this was fairly easy to do by simply dipping the two wires in a mild salt solution (no health and safety here!). The wire with the most number of bubbles was connected to the negative pole.

By contrast, early US systems had no specified standard, but generally used Red for the positive wire and Black for the negative regardless of which was actually earthed. This arrangement made it impossible to identify which was the live wire by mere inspection alone (though the live wire was usually the one routed through the metering system). Later the US settled on White for the earthed wire and Red for a positive live wire or black for a negative live wire.

Where all three wires were available in an installation, the colours were Red (+200V), Black (0) and Grey (-200V) in the UK. The US merely extended the two wire scheme into Red (+ve), White (0) and Black (-ve). 86.180.161.250 (talk) 12:46, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

 * The I.E.E. recommended standard for 3-wire d.c. in the U.K. back in the 1950s was red positive, black middle wire, white negative. In 1964 the white was changed to yellow, mirroring the similar change for the second phase in a.c. systems.  Then in 1966, it was changed to red positive, black middle wire, blue negative.   Then when the European flex colours were introduced circa 1970 is became even more complicated.  87.114.73.16 (talk) 22:22, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Now edited to reflect the above and remove the incorrect grey reference. Also removed the specific reference to +/-200V, since the I.E.E. colour code applied to 3-wire d.c. systems of any voltage level (although most public supplies were from 200/400 to 250/500V).  87.114.73.16 (talk) 13:00, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Selection of conductors and circuit breakers
For a non-electrical person - but someone who wants to find out more - I felt there was a bit of 'assumed knowledge' required to read certain parts of this article. In particular I found it hard to understand a table where, within an electrical context, there is "Capacity" as a column heading but it has Amps "(A)" as its units rather than Farads ...and then the contents of the column is in Watts, square metres or tonnes! This would benefit from some clearer narrative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.152.245.252 (talk) 11:47, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Farads are a measure of capacitance. Probably the units in the table are mixed or muddly because they are based on BS 7671 which is probably even more confusing.87.113.198.19 (talk) 17:52, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Capacity in the table heading is short for current carrying capacity. GrahamN-UK (talk) 20:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Article needs cleanup and improvement
While the article is quite detailed, the detail covers up a lack of organisation and patchy coverage. The main issues for me:

 * Title is "Electrical wiring in the UK", but focuses almost exclusively on just two areas of it: regulatory + domestic / low voltage. Non-domestic and industrial? 3 phase? High voltage? Ultra low voltage? All types of electrical wiring that are not for power transmission (data wiring for example)? Other?

 * There is pretty much no history section (even if brief), cross references to older standards or other background. I'd expect an article like this to have some way to read the background or history.  We have a good-ish article on this at AC power plugs and sockets - British and related types but the historical information there isn't hinted at here, even though it's relevant.

 * The regulatory section is very large (compared to other sections) which seems a bit disproportionate, and is somewhat artificially split from "legal" even though they overlap greatly in focus and content. Ideally I think "legal" and "regulatory" should probably go together to make one main section of the article, but the length of this section, compared to length given to other aspects of the topic, feels a bit excessive.

I'm not sure how best to fix/improve these, as "UK electrical wiring" is a very broad topic area, and has quite distinct sub-topics. Perhaps make this into an umbrella article which briefly covers key points and then links to sub-articles for more detailed coverage of topics such as "electrical voltages and cables in the UK", "history of electrical wiring in the UK", "domestic and single-phase wiring in the UK", "industrial and commercial wiring in the UK", and "legal and regulatory framework of electrical wiring in the UK"? Each of those could cover an article easily, and perhaps some of these already exist.

Thoughts on how best to improve our coverage of the topic? FT2 (Talk 20:09, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

The way to go on this is to make it definitely known that it is building wiring at low voltage, as per the electrical wiring page. Note that the navbox has been edited to enable this focus, which was dipping into HV and distribution. Dougsim (talk)


text:
Magic Time (Van Morrison album)

Magic Time is the thirty-first studio album by Van Morrison, released in 2005 by Geffen Records. It debuted at No. 25 on the US Billboard charts and No. 3 in the UK - Morrison's best UK chart debut until Still on Top – The Greatest Hits opened at No. 2 in 2007. Rolling Stone ranked 'Magic Time' seventeenth on The Top 50 Records of 2005.

Recording
The album covers a variety of styles ranging from Celtic rock to R&B and the blues. "Just Like Greta" was recorded in 2000 and originally intended for 2002's Down the Road (when the album was tentatively titled Choppin' Wood), but it was ultimately dropped and used for this album. The rest of the songs were recorded in 2003.

Composition
The title song is about a nostalgic searching of the past in order to capture a magic moment almost lost in memory. "The Lion This Time" is a continuation over thirty years later of "Listen to the Lion" that first appeared on his album Saint Dominic's Preview. There is a nursery rhyme quality to it as with its predecessor and a delicate use of a classical string arrangement. "Gypsy in My Soul" is also reminiscent of a song "Gypsy" from Saint Dominic's Preview. "Just Like Greta" and "Stranded" have similar themes of being lost in an alien world with only oneself to rely on. "Celtic New Year" is reminiscent of Irish Heartbeat. "Carry On Regardless" is a singing list of "Carry On Films" that Morrison seemed to have a special fondness for.

Reception
A Paste reviewer on Magic Time says: "You expect to encounter a tired legend, a once-mighty king becalmed and tamed by the miles and years. You find instead an echo of a full-throated roar hanging in the air, the telltale signs of a bloody struggle, and an empty cage. The lion in winter is on the loose." (Andy Whitman)

Thom Jurek of Allmusic concludes that "[the] acoustic 'The Lion This Time' is one of the finest ballads Morrison has cut in decades. Period." He finds that "Celtic New Year" is "trademark Morrison; the long, loping, repetitive line that is his trademark fuels this one. It's carried by the interplay between Morrison's acoustic and Foggy Lyttle's electric guitar fills, and aided by Chieftain Paddy Moloney's whistle."

The Music Box rated Magic Time the number seven album of the year in May 2005.

By the end of 2005, Magic Time had sold 252,000 copies in the United States, according to Nielsen SoundScan.

Liner notes
On the first page of the liner notes is the notation: "This album is dedicated to the memory of Foggy Lyttle who played on most of the tracks."

Track listing
All songs by Van Morrison; unless otherwise noted

 * 1) "Stranded" – 5:34
 * 2) "Celtic New Year" – 6:10
 * 3) "Keep Mediocrity at Bay" – 3:44
 * 4) "Evening Train" – 2:48
 * 5) "This Love of Mine" (Sol Parker, Henry W. Sanicola, Frank Sinatra) – 2:42
 * 6) "I'm Confessin'" (Doc Daughtery, Al Neiburg, Ellis Reynolds) – 4:29
 * 7) "Just Like Greta" – 6:25
 * 8) "Gypsy in My Soul" – 4:04
 * 9) "Lonely and Blue" ("Black and Blue" with altered lyrics) (Harry Brooks, Andy Razaf, Fats Waller) – 3:41
 * 10) "The Lion This Time" – 4:56
 * 11) "Magic Time" – 5:06
 * 12) "They Sold Me Out" – 3:11
 * 13) "Carry On Regardless" – 5:54

Personnel
Musicians:
 * Van Morrison – vocals, electric guitar, acoustic guitar, harmonica, alto saxophone
 * Mick Green – guitar
 * Foggy Lyttle – guitar
 * Michael Fields – Spanish guitar, lute
 * Martin Winning – tenor and baritone saxophones
 * Matt Holland – trumpet
 * Paddy Moloney – whistle
 * Myles Drennan – piano, Hammond organ
 * Brian Connor – piano, keyboards
 * Dave Lewis – piano
 * John Allair – Hammond organ
 * Jerome Rimson – bass, backing vocals
 * David Hayes – bass
 * Liam Bradley – drums, backing vocals
 * Noel Bridgeman, Johnathan Mele née Jonathan Mele, Bobby Irwin – drums
 * Johnny Scott, Siobhan Pettit, Olwin Bell, Crawford Bell, Aine Whelan, Karen Hamill – backing vocals
 * Irish Film Orchestra – strings

Production:
 * Richard Evans – Design and art direction, sleeve photographs
 * Tim Young at Metropolis Mastering, London – Mastering
 * Javier Pierini/Getty Images – Front cover photograph
 * Solly Lipsitz – Sleeve notes

Charts
Album – UK Album Chart

Album – Billboard

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

title: Magic Time (Van Morrison album)


text:
Kick Up the Fire, and Let the Flames Break Loose

Kick Up the Fire, and Let the Flames Break Loose is the second album from the British alternative rock band, The Cooper Temple Clause, released on 8 September 2003 in the UK by Morning Records, and on 24 February 2004 in the U.S. by RCA.

It was released on CD and vinyl, including a limited edition with bonus DVD, a Japanese edition and an album sampler. Some CD releases of the album feature Copy Control protection.

The title is a quotation from a poem by Philip Larkin.

The album charted at #5 in the UK charts and dropped to #41 the following week. It was however considered a big success for the band.

CD

 * 1) "The Same Mistakes" – 4:52
 * 2) "Promises, Promises" – 3:26
 * 3) "New Toys" – 5:26
 * 4) "Talking to a Brick Wall" – 5:59
 * 5) "Into My Arms" – 6:12
 * 6) "Blind Pilots" 4:01
 * 7) "A.I.M." – 4:58
 * 8) "Music Box" – 6:28
 * 9) "In Your Prime" – 2:14
 * 10) "Written Apology" – 10:10

The Japanese version includes "I Know" as a bonus song.

Bonus DVD
Bonus DVD video tracks (1–6), audio tracks (7–10):

 * 1) "Promises, Promises"
 * 2) "Making Promises, Promises"
 * 3) "Let's Kill Music"
 * 4) "Film-Maker"
 * 5) "Been Training Dogs"
 * 6) "Who Needs Enemies?"
 * 7) "Promises, Promises" (live)
 * 8) "Blind Pilots" (live)
 * 9) "The Same Mistakes" (live)
 * 10) "A.I.M." (live)

Album Sampler

 * 1) "The Same Mistakes"
 * 2) "Promises, Promises"
 * 3) "Blind Pilots"
 * 4) "New Toys"
 * 5) "Music Box"


text:
Trinidad and Tobago Football Association

The Trinidad and Tobago Football Association  (TTFA) is the governing body of football in Trinidad and Tobago. It is based in Port of Spain, Trinidad. It is a member of FIFA and is responsible for governing amateur and professional football and including the men's and women's national teams. The TTFA is also responsible for sanctioning referees and football tournaments for leagues in Trinidad and Tobago.

The association was known as the Trinidad and Tobago Football Federation (TTFF) between 1992 and 1 July 2013.

History
The first World Cup qualification campaign for the national team began in 1965 in preparation for the 1966 World Cup. The team failed to qualify after finishing last in their group in the First Round of qualification. However, in 1973, Trinidad and Tobago came within two points of qualifying for the 1974 World Cup in controversial fashion. Trinidad and Tobago lost a crucial game on 4 December 1973 against hosts Haiti 2–1 having five of their goals disallowed.

It was not until qualification for the 1990 World Cup that the national team would be in contention again. Needing only a draw to qualify in their final home game against the United States, Trinidad and Tobago's hopes were dashed by Paul Caligiuri who scored the game's only goal in the 38th minute to give the United States the last qualification spot for the World Cup.

Trinidad and Tobago qualified for the 2006 World Cup in Germany, its first-ever qualification for the tournament. They became the smallest country to qualify for the FIFA World Cup in 2006, succeeding Haiti for the title. In Germany, Trinidad and Tobago were grouped with England, Sweden and Paraguay in Group B. The team earned some international respect after a draw with Sweden in their opening game and managing to hold England scoreless for 83 minutes. Trinidad and Tobago finished with their first-ever point from World Cup play after finishing 0–1–2 for the tournament.

2006 World Cup players' bonus dispute
Following the 2006 World Cup, the national team was thrown into turmoil by a dispute between the players from the World Cup squad and the TTFF. Prior to the competition, the players had agreed to a bonus scheme with the TTFF, where the players would share 50% of the federation's income from the World Cup.

Following the competition, the TTFF declared the income and expenses of TT$18.25 million and TT$17.97 million, respectively. This left TT$282,952 in net revenue and offered each player TT$5600, whereby the players rejected the offer. Subsequently, the TTFF revised their figure to TT$950,000. The amount the Federation received during their qualification campaign prior to the 2006 World Cup. The players also rejected the revised offer and requested to see the TTFF's unaudited accounts. The Federation refused the player's request.

The sixteen players were Marvin Andrews, Chris Birchall, Atiba Charles, Ian Cox, Cornell Glen, Cyd Gray, Shaka Hislop, Kelvin Jack, Avery John, Stern John, Kenwyne Jones, Collin Samuel, Brent Sancho, Aurtis Whitley, Evans Wise, and Anthony Wolfe. The players claim to have been blacklisted as none had been selected to represent the national team since a friendly against Austria in November 2006. The TTFF claimed that the decision was left to the coach, Wim Rijsbergen.

On 30 June 2007, the players initiated a lawsuit against the TTFF. Following an August 2007 inquiry by their lawyers to the Trinidad and Tobago government under the Freedom of Information Act, it was revealed that the TTFF had understated its income by at least TT$173.5 million. This was not including a TT$32 million bonus paid by the government and television revenue from friendly matches played in Europe prior to the World Cup. As a result, the players were deprived of at least TT$6.5 million each.

Following the inquiry, the TTFF immediately lifted its ban on the players, and agreed to go to arbitration in London rather than to court. On 18 May 2008, British arbitrator Ian Mill QC ruled that the Soca Warriors were entitled to 50% of the profits of the Federation obtained from 2006 World Cup qualifying, as well as friendlies prior to the World Cup. However, on 9 Jan 2009 the proceedings never progressed as the TTFF were no longer interested in arbitration hearings in London and shifted their dispute to the Port of Spain Higher Court. The TTFF argued that the change was due to lawyers representing the 16 players breached the confidentiality clause in comments made to a local newspaper and other international media houses. A hearing of the application to lift the order which prevents the Port of Spain High Court from hearing the case is expected on 16 June 2009.

In February 2011 the High Court ruled that an interim payment of US$100 be paid to the footballers. The judge also rejected the accounting documents submitted by the TTFF.

In August 2012, the Federation relocated to new offices in Woodbroke as a consequence of having its equipment seized in a court order relating to unpaid payments.

In March 2020, following 12 years of neglect, the digital presence of the TTFA was upgraded by JellyBean Agency and the TTFA transitioned away from ttfootball.org, to thettfa.com a more modern and impactful statement of the Associations quest to grow digitally and embrace a new era of sports engagement.

The FIFA Council suspended the TTFA on 24 September 2020 after the federation filed a claim in a local court against FIFA's decision to appoint a normalisation committee to reform the TTFA.

The FIFA Council lifted the membership suspension on 19 November 2020 after the federation agreed to terminate all legal court action being pursued against FIFA. This consequently led to all FIFA membership rights being reinstated; this includes the inclusion in international football tournaments.

It is estimated that there is currently an outstanding debt level at the TTFA of TT$500 million owing to both footballing creditors such as the men's national team, and to non-footballing creditors including the backroom staff. It is understood a number of sponsors such as Caribbean Chemicals, AVEC, and Digicel are owed vast amounts of money through undelivered sponsorship agreements.

Adult level

 * 1) Trinidad and Tobago men's national football team
 * 2) Trinidad and Tobago women's national football team

Youth teams

 * 1) Trinidad and Tobago U-23 men's national football team
 * 2) Trinidad and Tobago U-20 men's national football team
 * 3) Trinidad and Tobago U-17 men's national football team
 * 4) Trinidad and Tobago U-15 men's national football team
 * 5) Trinidad and Tobago U-20 women's national football team
 * 6) Trinidad and Tobago U-19 women's national football team
 * 7) Trinidad and Tobago U-17 women's national football team
 * 8) Trinidad and Tobago U-15 women's national football team

Leagues and organizations

 * 1) TT Pro League
 * 2) National Super League
 * 3) TT Women's League Football
 * 4) Secondary Schools Football League
 * 5) Primary Schools Football League
 * 6) Trinidad and Tobago AYSO Youth League
 * 7) Veteran Footballers Assoc

Professional leagues
The TT Pro League is a first division football league in Trinidad and Tobago founded in 1999 and comprises eight teams. The Women's Football League is the top-level women's football league. It was established in 1986 and consists of 15 teams in two divisions, Premier and First.

The TTFF has also, since 1927, sponsored a nationwide tournament open to all TTFF affiliated clubs known as the FA Trophy.

Awards
The association awards the Trinidad and Tobago Footballer of the Year yearly to a male and a female professional footballer. Below is a partial list of recipients of that award:


text:
Walter Martínez (journalist)

Walter Nelson Martínez Martínez (born 1941) is a Venezuelan award-winning journalist, originally from Uruguay. Martínez's career spans over three decades in radio, television and the press. He is best known for his work in international relations, and also for using a patch in his right eye, due to a home plumbing accident.

Career
Martínez was a war correspondent during the 1980s and 1990s. He worked for the Venezuelan state television channel, Venezolana de Televisión, until 2005, where he hosted and produced his one-hour-long program Dossier every night at ten. Additionally, he hosted a radio version of that program on Radio Nacional de Venezuela, also state-owned.

Dossier returned to the air on 15 September 2008 when the program was given the same time slot on Venezolana de Televisión live on weekdays at night. The program is broadcast a few hours later on TeleSUR.

Martínez is famous for thescatchphrase "nuestra querida, contaminada y única nave espacial" (our beloved, polluted and sole spaceship), referring to planet Earth. He would begin every radio and TV address with the phrase. And "Acontecimientos en pleno desarrollo" referring to the events taking place.

In April 2016, Walter Martinez received the Felix Elmuza Medal, top award given by the Association of Cuban Journalists (UPEC) to national and foreign professionals in the field.

title: Walter Martínez (journalist)


text:
User:Phantombantam

Real Name: Patrick. Location: Rhode island. But the idea of a ghost chicken is so much better. My pride and joy: New Zealand Mud Snail

title: User:Phantombantam


text:
Canton of Mersch

Mersch (Miersch) is a canton in the centre of Luxembourg. It is the only canton, other than Luxembourg, to be entirely surrounded by other cantons, and therefore not to have an international boundary.

Administrative divisions
Mersch Canton consists of the following ten communes:

 * Bissen
 * Colmar-Berg
 * Fischbach
 * Heffingen
 * Helperknapp
 * Larochette
 * Lintgen
 * Lorentzweiler
 * Mersch
 * Nommern

Mergers

 * On 1 January 2018 the former communes of Boevange-sur-Attert and Tuntange were merged to create the commune of Helperknapp. The name "Helperknapp" derives from the name of a hill of the same name located within the commune.

title: Canton of Mersch


text:
List of Masters of Requests of England and Scotland

The Master of Requests was a Great Officer of State in the kingdoms of England and Scotland.

Masters of Requests (England)
In England the office was created in the 15th century and abolished in 1685. For main article, see Master of Requests (England).

Masters of Requests Ordinary • 1471–1480: William Hatteclyffe

• 1514: Sir Thomas More

• 1540–1554: Sir Edward Carne

• 1550–1553: John Cock

• 1552–1553: John Lucas

• 1553–1558: John Throckmorton

• 1553–1558: Sir Thomas White

• 1558–?1587: Thomas Seckford (died 1587)

• 1558–1571: Walter Haddon

• 1571–1573: Thomas Wilson

• 1576–1589: Valentine Dale

• 1579–1581: Sir William Gerard

• 1582–1584: David Lewis

• 1585–1600: John Herbert

• 1586–1596: Ralph Rokeby

• 1590–?1595: William Aubrey (died 1595)

• 1596–1606: Julius Caesar

• 1600–1616: Roger Wilbraham

• 1617–1622: Sir Christopher Perkins

• 1608–1609: Sir Thomas Smith

• 1609–1614: Sir Ralph (or Roger) Winwood

• 1614–1616: Sir Richard Williamson

• 1616 - No of Masters of Requests increased from 2 to 4

• 1616–1640: Sidney Montagu

• 1616–1618: Sir Robert Naunton

• 1616–1619: Sir Lionel Cranfield

• 1618–1641: Sir Ralph Freeman

• 1619–1622: Sir John Suckling

• 1622–1641: Sir Edward Powell, 1st Baronet

• 1622–1625: John Coke

• 1625–1641: Sir Thomas Aylesbury, 1st Baronet

• 1640–1641: Robert Mason

• Appointed by King Charles I at Oxford

• 1643: Arthur Duck

• 1644–1645: Edmund Pierce

• Appointed by Oliver Cromwell

• 1657: Nathaniel Bacon (died 1660)

• Restoration of the Monarchy

• 1660–1664: Sir Richard Fanshawe, 1st Baronet

• 1660–1667: Sir Ralph Freeman (resworn, died 1667)

• 1660–1662: Robert Mason (resworn, died 1662)

• 1660–1675: Gervase Holles (died 1675)

• 1662–1675: Thomas Beverley (died 1675)

• 1664–1679: Sir John Birkenhead (died 1679)

• 1667–1685: Sir Charles Cotterell

• 1675–1685: William Glascock

• 1675–1685: Thomas Povey

• 1679–1681: William Fanshawe

• 1681–1685: Charles Morley

• 1685 Office abolished

Masters of Requests Extraordinary  - partial list
 * 1591–1596: Julius Caesar
 * 1630–1640: Robert Mason
 * 1660: Sir Edmund Pierce

Masters of Requests (Scotland)
In Scotland the office first appeared in the reign of King James V. Its functions in Scotland differed from those of the offices in England and France and included the receiving of petitions from subjects and presenting them for consideration by the Scottish Privy Council. After 1603, the Scottish Master of Requests acted as an intermediary between the Council in Scotland and the King in England. Although not named as an Officer of State in 1579, he was "to have acces in the counsalehouse and be present in tyme of counsale". In 1592, however, he was included with the Secretary, the Lord Justice Clerk, the Lord Advocate and the Lord Clerk Register who "being ordinar officaris of the estait as also senatouris of the college of justice" could not attend council on a daily basis.

The Master of Requests sat in the Scottish Parliament as an officer of State from 1604 to 1633, but his office was not revived at the Restoration, its duties being taken over by the Secretary.

 Masters of Requests Ordinary - partial list
 * 1577-1606: Mark Kerr, 1st Earl of Lothian
 * 1606: Robert Kerr, 2nd Earl of Lothian
 * 1614: Sir William Alexander (died 1640)


text: Category:Regions of Turkmenistan

title: Category:Regions of Turkmenistan


text:
Sika

Sika may refer to:
 * Sika (people), an ethnic group in Indonesia
 * Sika, Burkina Faso, a village
 * Sika, Iran, a village
 * Sika, Võru County, a village
 * Sika, Rõuge Parish, a village
 * Sika language, the language of the Sika people
 * Sika deer, a species of deer native to East Asia
 * Sika AG, a chemical company based in Switzerland
 * Sika Club Beirut, a former association football club in Lebanon

People with the given name

 * Sika Anoaʻi (born 1945), American Samoan professional wrestler
 * Sika Koné (born 2002), Malian women's basketball player
 * Sika Manu (born 1987), New Zealand rugby league player

People with the surname

 * Jutta Sika (1877–1964), Austrian graphic designer and artist
 * Paul Sika (born 1985), Ivorian fashion and advertising photographer, creative director and artist
 * Salesi Sika (born 1980), Tongan-American rugby union player
 * Seïdou Mama Sika (born 1949), Beninese politician
 * Semisi Sika, Tongan politician

title: Sika


text:
Leica Digilux 1

The Leica Digilux 1 is a digital camera developed in partnership with Panasonic, which was released in 2002, roughly the same time as the Canon PowerShot G2 and the Nikon 2000. It is the second of Leica's digital offerings. Where the original Digilux was developed in partnership with Fuji Camera, the Digilux 1 was developed jointly with Panasonic; Leica is responsible for optics, while Panasonic designs the camera electronics. According to Leica, this allows both companies to design cameras that creates a harmonious matching of lens to sensor to produce color and contrast to Leica standards.

Design
Billed as "the digital reportage camera", the Leica Digilux 1 shares much of its design with the Panasonic-badged equivalent DMC-LC5. At the time, the Digilux 1 boasted the lowest shutter lag in comparison to other cameras in its class, in combination with its fast lens, made the camera suitable for photo reportage / photojournalistic applications.

The Digilux 1 has a retro, boxy style that harkens back to the designs of Leica rangefinders; in appearance and in size, it is very similar to the Leica CM Zoom. The LC5 is housed in a more modern casing, but retains identical controls.

Some believe the Digilux 1 performs less post-processing on the image, resulting in colors and contrast that are more in line with the color and contrast expected from a Leica camera. The Panasonic DMC-LC5 performs post-processing that increases contrast and saturation to create photos that are acceptable to the consumer market.

Sensor
The Digilux 1 and Panasonic DMC-LC5 both use a CCD sensor fitted with a complementary CYGM color filter array, rather than the GRGB Bayer filter fitted to most other digital camera sensors. The CYGM filter had two benefits: However, the CYGM filter has less color accuracy.
 * 1) It captures about 2/3 of the visible spectrum versus GRGB which captures only 1/3 of the visible spectrum, so that the colors, especially reds and blues are more saturated. This is a benefit for landscapes especially.
 * 2) The CYGM filter allows the passage of twice the photons, so that the camera is inherently twice as sensitive to light at the base ISO of 100, which means that exposure times are half that of a comparable camera with GRGB filter array.

Lens
The camera has a 3× optical zoom lens branded Leica Vario-Summicron, with a focal length of 7~21 mm (equivalent to 34~102 mm focal length for a 135 film camera) and a variable maximum aperture ranging from ~2.5.

Compared with a typical compact cameras that has a maximum aperture ranging from –5.6, the Digilux 1 is up to three f stops faster at telephoto: two f stops due to f2.8 vs f5.6 and one f stop due to the 2× photonic sensitivity afforded by the CYGM filter array. To match exposure time under this focal length at max available aperture requires the second camera to be set to ISO 800 while the Digilux 1 is at ISO 100 [tested cameras side by side.]

This lens has been fitted to numerous cameras using a 1/1.8" CCD sensor starting from 2000, including:

 * Canon PowerShot G1
 * Canon PowerShot G2
 * Casio QV-3000EX (as a Canon lens)
 * Casio QV-3500EX
 * Casio QV-4000
 * Casio QV-5700
 * Epson PhotoPC 3000Z
 * Epson PhotoPC 3100Z
 * Panasonic Lumix DMC-LC40
 * Sharp VE-CG30 (as a Canon lens)
 * Sharp VE-CG40
 * Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-S70 (as a Carl Zeiss-branded Vario-Sonnar)
 * Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-S75
 * Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-S85
 * Sony CD Mavica MVC-CD300
 * Sony CD Mavica MVC-CD400
 * Sony CD Mavica MVC-CD500
 * Toshiba PDR-M70
 * Toshiba PDR-M81

Operation
Batteries are readily available.

Post-processing
Digilux 1 images undergo less post-capture noise reduction compared to modern cameras, so it is always necessary to use a noise suppression filter in post processing when shooting above the base ISO of 100. If this is done, then ISO 400 images can be quite acceptable. At ISO 400 and, the exposure times will be the same as a compact camera with an lens at ISO 2400, and the noise levels on the Digilux 1 will be much less after post-processing.

If you run across contemporary reviews of the camera from 2002, there is often a criticism of the noise levels and "smearing" or "watercolor" appearance. But with modern software, these issues are no longer problems. There are thousands of images on the WEB that attest to the quality of this camera (see also DMC-LC5 pictures.)

Exposure
On sunny days the light can be too bright for the camera, which has a minimum aperture of and a minimum exposure time of $1/undefined$ second. It may be necessary to add a polarizing filter or a neutral density filter of three f stops equivalent density, which requires an adapter which extends the lens housing beyond the most extreme travel of the zoom lens. This adapter is available as part of a wide angle conversion lens kit which, while sold mainly for the Panasonic DMC-LC5, also fits the Digilux 1. The wide-angle lens converter makes a 28 mm equivalent focal length, and with the Leica 28mm optical finder which fits the flash bracket, it makes a good quality wide-angle camera.

Manual controls
Full manual exposure is possible using the jog buttons. The display mimics the exposure changes rather than brightening up as the scene moves into darker areas, so that it is possible to see what the manual adjustments are doing to the image. The only problem is that for exposure time settings longer than $1/undefined$ sec, the display won't match the actual exposed image.

The Digilux 1 and DMC-LC5 can be set for macro focus, and also manual focus, using the coaxial fly by wire ring control around the lens.

Storage
The camera stores images on SD cards up to 1GB; larger cards are not recognized.

One of the biggest advantages is that the camera will shoot single frame TIFF files - each about 12 MB in size, and taking about 5 seconds to write to a fast SD card. These uncompressed files have none of the compression artifacts typical of JPEG files.

For rapid sequence shots the JPEG mode must be used. As also for auto exposure bracketing.

Flash
The built in flash is adjustable ±2 EV, which is good for fill in flash.

title: Leica Digilux 1


text:
Talk:One People's Project

Untitled
The One People's Project is a group composed of two people that have attracted public attention to themselves. There are currently featured in "The Nation". Their accusations against white activists have been challenged in court, and they have lost, thus there is no reason their accuracy cannot be questioned.

This page was recommended for deletion by an anti-racist activist who, without any factual knowledge or basis, has attacked numerous well-documented posts.

 * Besides the fact that this is EXTREMELY POV, it falls under the speedy delete category for lack of notability and information. If you have any other information to add to make this more encyclopedic or refrences to notability, please add them. Otherwise, this is a speedy delete and shall remain so. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 19:56, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

Additional sources were added and the "delete" was removed. Anti-racist activists apparently do not like attention being focused on them, and are BSing "speedy deletes" for some of my pages as a result. I am not 100% familiar with Wikipedia etiquette, but if there was some better way to resolve this, I would appreciate knowing about it Baxter2

I'd like to point out that I nominated this article for deletion because, at the time, it had no verifiable information and it was terribly POV, until it was fixed by Baxter2. I'm certainly no anti-racist activist, whatever that means :) Sarg 18:39, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Unuseful links

 * ''While controversial, the One People's Project accusations against their political opponents have not always held up in court (Roanoke City Trial Transcript). The One People's Project, whose slogan is for "activists who don't play nice", has also had its credibility marred by the arrests of some its activists, just as Erica Hoesch, for both non-political criminal activities and criminal activities related to her involvement in the group.
 * Roanoke City Trial Transcript
 * Virginia Court Case Information System -- Pending case CR05000444-00 in Roanoke County
 * Virginia Court Case Information System -- Pending case GC05003293-00 in Bedford County

I cant' find the OPP mentioned in the transcript. Also, the court case information system isn't showing much of anything on them either. Are these the correct links? Thanks, -Willmcw 22:50, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Questionable entry
The One People's Project website has the following commentary on its front page:

PROOF THAT BILL WHITE NEEDS A LIFE Many of us who trapse about the internet have found our way to an online encyclopedia called Wikipedia. This encyclopedia allows visitors to publish and edit entries on a person, topic, etc. Of course, this policy lends itself to abuse, and the operators of the website have often deleted entries that are questionable. That may need to happen soon.

This week, a few entries that a user named "Baxter2" seems to have a hand in authoring were published. One of them is for Bill White. Another is for Erica Hardwick, another for Chuck Munson of Infoshop.org, yet another for Tad Kepley of Anarchy! Magazine and then one for One People's Project. All of them put a negative light on all of their subjects, except one - Bill. In fact, the negative things said about each of the other subjects are exactly the same charges and same spin that Bill puts on these subjects on his own site, Overthrow.com. In his user info page, "Baxter2" notes that he had came to Wikipedia to "flesh out" the article on Bill White, and while he was there contribute to the other entries. He listed the entries he had also contributed to, which included the above as well as one for Jennifer Adams, who White lived with for a spell in Missouri (we think it has since been deleted). It should be noted that Bill was bitching earlier this week about a Wikipedia entry on him, and it is very curious to us how "Baxter2" has the same writing style and talking points that Bill has. Based on this, we think that Bill is the actual author of all of these entries, and is basically trying to use Wikipedia to give credibility to the BS he normally posts on Overthrow that has long been discounted as a credible source.

We have contacted the folks at Wikipedia and asked them to investigate the matter, and we hope to hear from them soon. As much as we would like the entry, truly there are better authors than Bill--we mean "Baxter2". We are posting this to let our readers know not to trust the current entry on us or any that "Baxter2" is associated with.

Oh, and Bill? Get over yourself. With the ongoing investigations of HUD and the FBI (no they did not drop them, you idiot), one would have thought that something would have broken past your dellusion that you are accomplishing something.

To Daryle Lamont Jenkins
If you're reading this, I'd like to take the opportunity to let you know that we take personal threats and the publication of people's public information on this website very seriously. We have removed this information about yourself as soon as we saw it. If you see it again, please let me know on my talk page or on WP:AN and we'll sort things out as soon as we can.

P.S. on a personal note: if you're against racism, you're cool with me! :-) - Ta bu shi da yu 05:31, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

This wikipedia entry doesn't even pretend to be NPOV. It reads like a self-serving autobiographical release from the organization. It should be completely rewritten or deleted.--PW1000 19:58, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with PW1000 This is ore like an advertisment than a NPOV. Can somebody please re-write this entry and amke it Npov? RichardLangford 20:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

The article has been edited, but if others should go over it and see at it is not as NPOV as it originally was. Elyrad 02:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Partly Rewritten
The article was extremely (favorably) propagandistic and bloated. I have revised the first three paragraphs. I do not have the time to finish right now, but may later.

Reference removed
I have removed all reference to Mootstromfront because that fragment of the OPP article was untruthful. OPP was not the birthplace of the Mootstormfront discussion board.RichardLangford 00:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

As the owner and primary admin of Mootstormfront, I have to disagree - OPP's forum was in fact where virtually all the principal founding staff members of MSF - Descendant, Rach, Otter, myself and a number of original members not on staff - met and joined forces, although some others were culled from the Opposing Members section of Stormfront.

I'm therefore reverting. I was there, and unless I'm mistaken, you weren't.

Kamandi November 20th, 2006

I have looked through MootStormront and can find no evidence that what you claim is true. The OPP has it's own forum. I believe you are trying to latch onto the OPP to advertise your website. Wikipedia is not an advertising service. RichardLangford 00:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC) I have also removed the redirect from mootstormfront to here, and bagan a new artilce for mootstormfront. Edit that one and tell people about your forum and stop hijacking others for advertising puposes.RichardLangford 00:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for taking so long to address the above ridiculous points, Rich, but let me do so now:

1. If the OPP didn't have its own forum, how could we have met there? Great use of logic, Richard. *rolls eyes*

2. Our forum is far more active than OPP's and hardly needs any advertising from it. We certainly have the blessing of the One People's Project to mention MSF in the article, and, in fact, we were advertised by Darryl when we began several years ago.

3. Of the flagship principals of MootSF; that is, myself, Descendant, Rach, and Otter, all were originally OPP members on its first discussion forum (long since crashed). How exactly do you explain that fact?

I'm reverting the reference for the above reasons, as your MootSF page seems to have been eliminated.

Kamandi 21 March 2007

Propaganda
Hmm, this page is propaganda. Make it neutral please. OPP is a hategroup... daryle lamont jenkins incites violence against law abiding americans by using incendiary pavlovian flags like 'nazi rally' and 'kkk anti-immigrant rally'.

 * If the subject has been called a "hate group", or whatever, in a reliable source then we should include it. However we shouldn't call it a "hate group", or whatever, just because we think it is. Strong opinions should be attributed to a speaker. (You can learn more about the project in the welcome message on your talk page.) ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 07:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Abject nonsense. Words have real meanings. Just because some members might dislike something. Doesn't mean its a 'hate group'. The catholic church 'hates satan'. Is the catholic church a hate group? Of course it is not. Mahattma Gandhi hated opression. Was he spreading hate? Of course he has not. Mother teresa hated poverty. Was she spreading hate? Of course she wasn't. And OPP hates racism. Are they spreading hate? Of course not. Duckmonster (talk) 03:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

The reliable source is the opp website, linked to on the opp entry. Not that I would really call it a reliable source, but it certainly illustrates the hateful intentions... calling for violence by labelling peaceful events with the most inflammatory rhetoric available. We all know the quickest way to incite the largest crowds is words like 'nazi' the hategroup being directly fed from this page, is reliable enough I hope.

 * That's just an opinion of the material. We can cite material on the website to describe it, or even give a few characteristic quotations from the site, but we can't just make up stuff about it. ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 08:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Provide a single example of "calling for violence". No, some random posted on a chat board doesn't count. This is a bog-standard smear thrown at anti racist activists, even where its almost hilariously wrong (For instance rock against racism in the UK (Organises educational concerts), and FDB in australia (researchers) have both been smeared like this, even though in both case demonstrably wrong). Cut it out dude. Duckmonster (talk) 03:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of citing material on websites, There is a guy who posts on a page for white nationalists named "Vic_tory" who said he came here and edited the entry, then complained that his edits were deleted because they weren't neutral. You can find that post [ http://www.stormfront.org /forum/showthread.php/our-brother-and-sister-attacked-407055p47.html here]. That wouldn't happen to be you, would it? Elyrad 15:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)Elyrad

Well as a matter of fact it is. So let's make this entry neutral. My efforts are being attacked, so one of you please see to it. As it stands its offensive to see this hatemonger described as he is.

As a side note, the thread that links to is an example of the violence incited by this website, thanks for the reminder... because dlj labeled this guy as 'anti-immigrant kkk' even though he was at a legal, mayor sponsored event to deputize law enforcement to help deal with ILLEGAL immigration concerns, some boneheads were incited to attack him and his wife. All thanks to the one peoples project. The fact is, just because opp calls something 'anti-immigrant' doesn't change it into something 'anti-immigrant' but for the people just looking for an excuse to commit violence, that's all it takes, and adding 'kkk' to the end of it is just the kind of careless pavlovian trick that will set it into action. That one link on the opp entry has it all... declaring the next step is someone will die?
 * How is a rally, protesting against immigrants (illegal or otherwise) NOT an anti immigration rally? This is puzzling to me Duckmonster (talk) 03:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

But you need a more reliable source of the hate produced by this 'organization'

So in the meantime, write something that is neutral, not something that is just some rant because you're upset about something that happened at a rally. It is going to be blown out of the water pretty quickly if you don't.Elyrad 00:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)Elyrad

What I wrote is absolutely neutral. I am only going by what I have read on the O.P.P. website. If I were to rant it would be very obvious. Going by what suggestions were made at the top of this topic, I cited straight from the O.P.P. website. Please don't delete my contribution and call it vandalism. What you are doing is censorship. My contribution is entirely neutral.

Side note, I have to ask, what is going ot be blown out of the water, if I don't write something that you feel is neutral? Honestly you aren't exactly an impartial observer being the main contributer to the website in question, so maybe you should just step back and let others make a truly neutral article about what you are promoting on your website. My only interest is the truth. But seriously please expand on what you are referring to about blowing out of the water... I am truly mystified.

Please also note I never once tried to remove your article, and have never attempted to mess with your site. Only trying to add an impartial observance to an impartial 'wikipedia'

Well, thanks for playing, guys. I could swear I read somewhere about wikipedia being 'neutral' and wanting impartial articles... But if you have 'ELYRAD' (go ahead see if you can spell it backwards...) editing the article about his own page, it honestly just makes it into an ADVERTISEMENT. I've been trying to add my impartial quote TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM THE PAGE IN QUESTION but for soem reason, 'ELYRAD' keeps censoring my contributions, declaring it 'vandalism'.

If you want to maintain ANY integrity as an unbiased source, you will NEED to block him from that. Or is this Daryle-pedia now? Why not have his banner on every entry? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tellthetruthplease (talk • contribs).

 * I've trimmed the parts of your edit that weren't neutral or which made assertions that weren't sourced. Also please sign your talk page contributions. ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 04:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for not entirely deleting my contribution this time, but honestly the main point behind the quote is the fact that him declaring someone a nazi doesn't make thema nazi, and it was a lot worse than 'slapping around'. I understand this is probably as neutral as this wil get though. also, the correct date is 7-28-07 for the rally, I may have typoed it myself, not sure, but I'll keep my text off the page for now. Tellthetruthplease 10:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

 * I deleted the part about "declaring someone a Nazi" because it's just a personal opinion. The "some people think" parts were neutral, but unsourced. I didn't check the date, if it's wrong it'd be great if you can fix it. ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 18:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Changing all phrases like "white nationalist", "racist" or whatever terms were used to "pro-white" is the very opposite of being neutral and non-propagandistic. The only people who use the phrase "pro-white" are individuals in the white nationalist movement. Wikipedia is not i the business of promoting that, or any other poitical agenda.Spylab 19:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I never used those phrases, spylab. Only thing I can figure, maybe when my entries were being deleted, the page reverted to an earlier page? I know full well that phrases like 'pro-white' are not going to last long here. I kept every bit of my editing seperate from what was already posted, every time. I considered deleting the entire thing and rewriting it, but only for the briefest of moments, the way someone might consider eating an entire pie before realizing the one slice is a full serving.

As far as I can tell wikipedia claims to be entirely neutral, so I have tried to be entirely neutral with what I have edited.

For what it's worth, I don't think this site is factually neutral, but I can't think of anything that is, no, not even Switzerland. I am not deluded enough to think that I can effect any sort of true neutrality being waged on this site, but I have tried, at least in this instance.

As for the declaring someone a nazi... The quote from the o.p.p. site I included, was in reference to the only people being 'slapped around' at the event, and since he called them nazis in that quote, I assumed he was calling them nazis. As far as I'm concerned the phrase 'white nationalist' is actually neutral, at one point I did notice that all of those were phrased 'white supremacist' which, while there is definitely some crossover between the two groups, are actually not at all the same thing. But, as I said, I didn't change anything except to add, entirely seperately, what I tried to add every time I laid my keyboard across that page. Ok, I am changing the date in the entry now. That's the only thing I'll bother changing. 22:16, 2 August 2007 Tellthetruthplease 22:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I clarified the "Rally Response" portion of the entry, as opposed to deleting it altogether. It should be noted that it involved a recent event that is still playing itself out. Elyrad —The preceding  signed but undated.

Daryle, please stop trying to make this page into a commercial for your website. I fixed your attempt to vandalize the entry. Tellthetruthplease 06:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I just put back what you took out because it is you that vandalized the entry. This time there will be a third party involved, because the reference that you deleted was to where the Stormfront poster Vic_tory said he was coming here to alter the entry. You are the one not being neutral, and my name is not Daryle. Elyrad 12:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually if you look at the history you'll see that 'willbeback' trimmed down my contibution to a neutral state. Afterwards, I corrected the date. nothing more. So, adding your point of view is in fact adding your own bias. Thanks for the goof though daryle. I'm not touching this entry, I've reported your vandalism and attempts to make an advertisement for your site, so it's in the hands of the third party now. Tellthetruthplease 22:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

As I said, I'm not touching this entry, but I really, really want to correct your horrendous grammar. I'm sure the neutral third party can handle it though.Tellthetruthplease 22:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

It is the truth that brecht forum supports OPP. Opp even states that on their site. This is clear use of extreemist leftist propaganda. User:Edward Nyhouse 16:00, 5 March, 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality
First off, of course elyrad editting the article for his own project is very biased. Saying something is vandalism, and censoring it, isn't the same thing as coming to a neutral consensus. It is, in fact, biased. I can see why my entry was editted down to what it was by willbeback, and so I have left the page alone since then, except to correct the date cited. For some reason, elyrad had to edit that neutrally agreed state to fit in with the advertising point of view for his website. That is not neutral. Also, stormfront is not at all related to the one peoples project, so the link to that page is irrelevant. Several people were angry about the violence at the rally, and some people attributed the inflammatory remarks to the One Peoples Project. Including the police forces there who made the arrests. Those aren't mentioned, why mention a chat forum? It's obvious that it's easier to portray yourself as some sort of freedom fighters if you point the finger at those you have already declared to be nazis, even though they had nothing to do with Abraham and Co. being arrested. The legitimate police forces, combined with the illegally aggresive actions of Abe's crew, led to the arrest and charges. I didn't mention either, because they were irrelevant. Neither incited these activists to commit this violence. I alleged that O.P.P. incited this violence, and the 'npov' editors decided there wasn't enough proof of this, but came up with what seemed to me to be a fairly neutral statement about the incident. Probably because Willbeback has no personal stake in the subject of the entry, and is therefore, far more neutral that 'elyraD'. It's a very simple matter to make, at least the last paragraph of the entry, neutral again. Revert it to august 19th, and block Elyrad from editting this page. Block me too, either way I'm not interested in an edit-war, just the neutrality. Tellthetruthplease 23:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Looking at the history page I'd have to say I was wrong, I guess August 17th was when the vandalism started so reverting to the 19th wouldn't help. It seems August 2nd, when I corrected the date cited, was the last state of non bias. So, trying to understand this... where the entry mentions what the O.P.P. call a rally, which is relevant in an article about the O.P.P., why did you decide to add 'robb pearson's' take on it? Who is that, and what does he have to do with O.P.P.? And why not cite his declaration? The only time I've read the name is when you mention how you won't lose sleep if he feels like someone keeps calling him a racist. What is his connection with O.P.P.? Tellthetruthplease 05:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Third Party Opinion - Rejected

As this article contains or is about some pretty contoversial subject matter, the fact that it remains entirely unreferenced is startling. There are no citations, so there is little to no basis for any argument over what should or should not be considered factual information or outright vandalism. Prior to reconsidering a 3PO requent, there should be at least some substantiated information in this article. As it stands, the article can, should and will be deleted in 5 days henceforth should these issues not be dealth with. Do your best to keep cool in your dispute until after one or both of you can substantiate the reason for this article's existence. Don't be insulted -- just trying to keep this article up to Wikipedia standards. :)  DRosenbach  ( Talk 12:46, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

 * If you want to reintroduce a proposed deletion tag, possibly using an update rationale, I won't automatically object. FWIW, I personally believe the article should be kept and stubbed. Addhoc 13:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

 * It's not my place to recommend deletion...I really despise it when random editors make it their duty to patrol random articles and make decisions on things like "subject notability" and "article deservability" when they have nothing to do with the articles and do not understand their focus, drive, objective, point and/or slant. I really just picked up on this from the 3PO request, and was trying to get this article properly sourced.  If no one minds, I'll just go back to minding my own business.  Have fun! :)  DRosenbach  ( Talk 02:55, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

 * I have never suggested deleting this article. Somehow, it has been decided this organization is notable. My issue was entirely with the advertisement aspect.  The owner of the subject of the entry making daily edits to the entry severely compromised the integrity of this entry, and wikipedia as a whole.  I love the concept of a free online encyclopedia with a npov.  As I've seen more and more stories on the news in the last few days of the corruption of the 'anyone can edit' policies, it just seems that this resource isn't going to maintain any sort of respectability much longer unless there is some discretion practiced, and a truly neutral point of view on EVERY article, not just the ones that a majority of editors feel can be neutral. As I said, on a whole, it seems to me that people try really hard to be neutral with their submissions.  At times it can be tough, that's why I haven't tried to edit anything I actually care about anymore.  Someday I may get the neutrality in writign down enough that I feel I can excercise an even hand on subjects that even are very personal to me, but not yet.  However, self editting organizations making advertisements for themselves on wikipedia are just, plain, wrong. Tellthetruthplease 11:49, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

This is about tag cleanup. As all of the tags are more than a year old, there is no current discussion relating to them, and there is a great deal of editing done since the tags were placed, they will be removed. This is not a judgement of content. If there is cause to re-tag, then that of course may be done, with the necessary posting of a discussion as to why, and what improvements could be made. This is only an effort to clean out old tags, and permit them to be updated with current issues if warranted. In this case I'll remove all tags - you all can update any disagreements that might remain as you like.Jjdon (talk) 19:02, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

RfC
An RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 17:10, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on One People's Project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070927041653/http://onepeoplesproject.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1211&Itemid=2 to http://onepeoplesproject.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1211&Itemid=2

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 06:35, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:One People's Project


text:
Dina bint Abdul-Hamid

Dina bint Abdul-Hamid (دينا بنت عبد الحميد; 15 December 1929 – 21 August 2019) was a Hashemite princess and Queen of Jordan from 1955 until 1957 as the first wife of King Hussein. She was the mother to Hussein's oldest child, Princess Alia bint Hussein. She and the king were married from 1955 to 1957, and in 1970 she married a high-ranking official in the PLO. She was a graduate of the University of Cambridge and a lecturer in English literature at Cairo University.

Early life and education
Dina was born on 15 December 1929 in Cairo, Kingdom of Egypt to Sharif Abdul-Hamid bin Muhammad Abdul-Aziz Al-Aun (1898–1955) and his wife, Fahria Brav (died 1982). A member of the House of Hashim, she had the honorific title sharifa of Mecca as an agnatic descendant of Hasan ibn Ali, the grandson of Muhammad. Dina was also a third cousin of her future father-in-law, King Talal of Jordan. Through her mother, Dina was connected to Egypt's Circassian elite. Her father and uncles claimed a waqf that consisted of nearly 2,000 feddans.

Like many children of the landed Arab aristocracy, Dina was sent to a boarding school in England. She next obtained a degree in English literature from Girton College, Cambridge University, and a post graduate diploma in social science from Bedford College, London.

After her return home, she began to teach English literature and philosophy at the University of Cairo while residing in the affluent suburb of Maadi with her parents. As a young woman, Dina was considered beautiful, highly educated, sophisticated and emancipated. She was well-liked by her entourage and friends.

Queen of Jordan
Dina first met her distant cousin Hussein in 1952 in London at the home of a relative from Iraq. The King was then studying at the Harrow School while she was studying at Girton College, Cambridge and was pursuing a Bachelor of Arts degree and obtained it with honours. After her graduation, she returned to Egypt, where Hussein visited her in Maadi thereafter.

In 1954, two years after her son's accession to the throne, Hussein's mother, the Dowager Queen Zein, who exerted a significant influence early in his reign, announced the engagement of the King and Dina. The match was considered to be perfect as Dina was a Hashemite princess, and brought up with the best education the West had to offer. The union was also strongly favoured by Gamal Abdel Nasser, the future President of Egypt. They were married on 19 April 1955 at Raghadan Palace. The bride was 25 and the groom was 19 at the time.

Upon her marriage, Dina became Queen of Jordan. According to author Isis Fahmy, who interviewed Dina in the presence of her husband on their wedding day, Hussein determinedly said that she would have no political role. Fahmy noted that Hussein had intended to exercise authority over Dina, who was herself a strong personality, and that his mother viewed her as a threat to her own status.

It soon became apparent that the king and queen had little in common. On 13 February 1956, she gave birth to the king's first child, Princess Alia, but the arrival of a child did not help the royal marriage.

Princess of Jordan
In 1956, while the queen was on a holiday in Egypt, the king informed her about his intention to separate from her. Hussein likely did so at the prompting of his mother, Queen Zein, with whom Dina was on bad terms. The couple divorced on 24 June 1957, during a period of strain between Jordan and Egypt, at which time she became known as HRH Princess Dina Abdul-Hamid of Jordan. The ex-queen was not allowed to see her daughter for some time after the divorce.

On 7 October 1970, Dina married Lieut-Colonel Asad Sulayman Abd al-Qadir (born 27 October 1942 in Bethlehem), alias Salah Ta'amari, a Palestinian guerrilla commando who became a high-ranking official in the Palestine Liberation Organization. He was imprisoned by the Israelis in 1982. A year later, Dina negotiated one of the largest prisoner exchanges in history—freeing her husband and 8,000 other prisoners.

Death and funeral
Princess Dina died in Amman on 21 August 2019, aged 89. On the same day, King Abdullah II, Crown Prince Hussein, Prince Hassan, and other members of the royal family attended her funeral at the Royal Cemetery. Senior officials and officers also offered their condolences to the King and members of the royal family. The King then took part in the noon prayer and the funeral prayer at the Royal Guards Mosque.

International roles and positions

 * Honorary president of the Muslim Women's Association of the United Kingdom

Notable published works

 * Duet for Freedom, Quartet Books Ltd, 268 pages, (29 January 1988). ISBN 0704326779

Honours

 * National
 * Dame Grand Cordon of the Supreme Order of the Renaissance, special class (19 April 1955).
 * Foreign
 * 🇪🇸 Spain: Dame Grand Cross of the Order of Civil Merit (3 June 1955).

title: Dina bint Abdul-Hamid


text:
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/RFC

I think in general this is a good idea and something that needs to be done. I'll take my own example because I know it better than any others: I was involved in a content dispute and I was punished for that by the ArbCom even though there was really no rational reason for punishment, since I repeatedly stated I was open to any kind of compromise or concession. But basically a content dispute had gotten heated and moved along to the point that people collectively seemed to agree that something needed to be done to resolve it; they were tired of the endless bickering and personality feuding. So I was slapped with a harsh penalty, ostensibly for bad behavior, which effectively ended the content dispute, but without any actual consideration of the content itself.

I think that's less than ideal, and something of a stopgap remedy where a more direct and effective approach could be imagined. It might have been more effective, in a case where nobody was breaking any rules, but tensions were clearly at an intolerable level, to have a committee to take a look at the content issues and make some broad recommendations about it, perhaps even make a judgment on some particularly contentious specific points. As I see it, that would undoubtedly have resolved the issue without requiring any unreasonable user penalties.

The case I was involved in is a part of the broader differences of opinion between inclusionists and deletionists. These disputes get very heated at times and really go to the very heart of what Wikipedia is as an encyclopedia, yet the resolutions we arrive at are often clumsy and inconsistent. It would be nice to have a committee to say, regarding the most intractable sorts of questions, that one thing seems generally preferable and one thing seems contrary to such and such basic principle. I think ideally this would not be something with any kind of teeth, but just an advisory committee that people would more or less agree to adhere to. If they didn't, then I think that would make these cases more clearly behavioral in nature (in an indirect sort of way) and more easily dealt with by the ArbCom. Those are just some thoughts off the top of my head after reading what Raul wrote. Everyking 19:43, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wrong place to comment
Sorry if I put my screed in the wrong place. Since I'm not on the arbcom, I guess it wasn't my place to comment.

I don't think I'm in "some kind of old-timers heaven", I just forgot. -- Uncle Ed (talk) 17:42, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Increased civility
The real problem is lack of civility in the discussion. The solution is much simpler than many of the dicussions above - more frequent and broader use of specific subject matter bans, based on behavior. We should continue to use behavior as the barometer, one revert a day for 2 weeks is just as egregious as 3RR. We should not rely on subject matter experts the opinions of those in the field are easily available. No one or two (or ten editors) will hold back the work that needs to be done - and those that can not compromise and consensus build should work on other things.

Providing a better environment for people to work - Good. More and more buraaucracy - Bad. Trödel| talk 21:18, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes. Less buraucracy = speeder RfC = what we need. For example, the (first and only so far) case I am invovled in, Requests for arbitration/Zivinbudas, is dragging close to a month now, with almost nothing happening lately, and I have to admit I am dissapointed in RfC. In such a simple case, why a decision cannot be made in less then one week? I am afraid to think how long decisions must take in more 'grey' situations, if simple banning of a permanent vandal and his IP range with no objections takes close to (or longer then...?) a month. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:56, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Lengthy page
Whoa, this is long. It kind of impairs legibility of the entire discussion. There are over a dozen proposals up to now, and several of them have apparently been discounted because too many people think it's not a good idea. Maybe those should be moved to some archive page, so we can focus on brainstorming on the active proposals? Radiant_ >|< 10:18, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Sophroniscus

'''Please feel free to leave me a message...

Maria Theresa Chiramel
Hi, there has been some recent activity on the above article, including removal of content. I'm not sure if it's ok or if it's vandalism. If you have time can you check it out? Regards Denisarona (talk) 06:12, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Eastern Catholicism stubs
Hi Sophroniscus. I am working on stub sorting and I have placed a proposal related to Eastern Catholicism. Would you be so kind and write your opinion on it here? Thank you! Regards, --Fadesga (talk) 14:27, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Position and state
Hello,

Concerning the article "Categories (Aristotle)".

Your propositions about "Being-in-a-position" and "Having, or state", the ones that start by "The examples Aristotle gives indicate that he meant...", are really interesting. However, I cannot find anything similar in the available literature. Is there any reference that could be given?

Thank you David Odd (talk) 22:31, 13 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Odd (talk • contribs) 22:30, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sophroniscus


text:
Talk:Glutathione

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jjexpat. Peer reviewers: Lisa96liu.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:28, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Glutamate having two carboxyls
Reverted https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Glutathione&type=revision&diff=1054555623&oldid=1050207757. It's a good question (I don't know the topic well enough to know what the answer is) but the edit shouldn't have been made on the page itself; it should have been raised on the talk page.

Anyway, I doubt the author of that change I just reverted is paying attention to the talk page, but if so, glutamate does have two carboxyls but it may be that only one of the carboxyls is actually capable of attaching to cysteine? No idea but either way if the sentence needs to be modified in that way then I favor the "between a carboxyl group" wording.

TL;DR: I reverted the change because it's basically well-intentioned vandalism so to speak, but they might have an actual point on the question that was raised. But again I don't know much chemistry etc so I'm not equipped to say whether the sentence as it stands now ("between THE carboxyl group") is accurate or if the wording needs to be amended. So I'm re-raising that community member's question here, in a more appropriate venue, if anyone has an answer one way or the other. RyanSKemper (talk) 19:59, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

 * Thanks . The sentence is fine as is.  Glutamate does indeed have two carboxyls but only one is on the side chain. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 08:00, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

References to skin whitening and injectable administration are plain dangerous
The suggestion given in references ( www.royalclinicdubai.com on dermatological use for skin whitening using an injectable administration route  are plain dangerous. And, beside the obvious self-serving marketing, the verbiage, rationale and the examples are inaccurate, taken out of the context or or plainly manipulated. Ovi Ciobanu (talk) 05:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Glutathione


text:
Marvin Isley

Marvin Isley (August 18, 1953 – June 6, 2010) was an American musician best known as the youngest member of the family music group the Isley Brothers and its bass guitarist.

Early life
Originally from Cincinnati, Ohio, Isley and his family moved to a home in Englewood, New Jersey in the summer of 1959. Isley eventually graduated from Englewood's Dwight Morrow High School in 1972. In 1976, he graduated from C.W. Post College with a degree in music.

Career
Marvin began playing bass guitar while in high school and by the end of the decade was being tutored and mentored by his elder brothers alongside elder brother Ernie and their friend, Chris Jasper, who was an in-law. By 1971, Marvin began performing bass guitar on The Isley Brothers' album, Givin' It Back. Within two years, he became an official member of the group. In addition to playing bass, he also provided percussion and also wrote or co-wrote some of the group's hits including "Fight the Power", "The Pride" and "Between the Sheets". Breaking away from the Isleys in 1984, he, Ernie and Chris formed the trio, Isley-Jasper-Isley, who had a hit in 1985 with "Caravan of Love".

The group broke up in 1988 after Ernie Isley signed a solo recording deal. Three years later, Marvin and Ernie reunited with Ron Isley to reform the Isley Brothers. Marvin remained a member until complications from his longtime battle with diabetes forced him into retirement in 1997. Having been diagnosed with diabetes in his early 20s, Isley's condition worsened to the point where he had to have both legs amputated. Isley was inducted as a member of the Isley Brothers to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1992.

Death
Marvin Isley died on June 6, 2010, from complications of diabetes at the Seasons Hospice within Weiss Memorial Hospital in Chicago, Illinois, at age 56. Besides his two brothers Ronald, and Ernie, Isley was survived by his wife Sheila Felton Isley, a son Cory, and two daughters, Sydney and Jalen. Marvin is interred in George Washington Memorial Park in Paramus, New Jersey. His niche is located 2 spots above singer/songwriter, Luther Vandross.

title: Marvin Isley


text:
Margam Castle

Margam Castle, Margam, Port Talbot, Wales, is a late Georgian country house built for Christopher Rice Mansel Talbot. Designed by Thomas Hopper, the castle was constructed in a Tudor Revival style over a five-year period, from 1830 to 1835. The site had been occupied for some 4,000 years. A Grade I listed building, the castle is now in the care of Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council.

History
The Margam estate was occupied in the Iron Age, and the remains of a hill fort from that period, Mynydd-y-Castell, stands north of the castle. After the Norman Invasion of Wales, Robert, 1st Earl of Gloucester, and Lord of Glamorgan, granted the lands at Margam to Clairvaux Abbey, for the establishment of a new Cistercian monastery which became Margam Abbey. Following the Dissolution of the Monasteries from 1536, the Margam estate was bought by Sir Rice (Rhys) Mansel. His descendants built a substantial Tudor mansion in the park. In the 18th century, this mansion was demolished, and the family returned to one of their earlier ancestral homes, Penrice Castle, Thomas Mansel Talbot (1747–1813), commissioning Anthony Keck to build a new mansion next to the castle ruins. Keck was also employed at Margan, which Talbot turned into a pleasure garden, using Keck to design an enormous orangery. Christopher Rice Mansel Talbot succeeded his father in 1813 at the age of ten. Enriched by the development of Port Talbot in the early 19th century, and after making a Grand Tour of Europe as a young man, Talbot returned to south Wales and from 1830 re-established Margam as his main seat. A new house, Margam Castle was designed in a Tudor Gothic style by the architect Thomas Hopper (1776–1856), with Edward Haycock Snr (1790–1870) as supervisory architect, and designer of parts of the interior and exterior of the house, the stables, terraces and lodges.

Talbot also took a keen interest in the project, encouraging his architects to borrow elements from Lacock Abbey in Wiltshire (ancestral home of the Talbots and home to his cousin William Henry Fox Talbot) and Melbury House in Dorset (home of his mother's family, the Fox-Strangways, Earls of Ilchester). William Henry Fox Talbot was a frequent visitor to Margam, and the castle featured as an image in some of his early photographic experiments. Margam's links with photography also include being the location of the earliest known Welsh photograph, a daguerreotype of the castle taken on 9 March 1841 by the Reverend Calvert Richard Jones.

After the death of Emily Charlotte Talbot, the daughter of its first owner, the castle passed to her nephew and continued to be used by the Talbot family until 1941, when it was sold. David Evans-Bevan, who bought it, found it too large to live in, but could not find any public organisation interested in taking it on, and it fell into disrepair. For many years it belonged to the local authority, but was not open to the public. In 1977, a fire caused substantial damage, and it was only after this that a restoration project began in earnest.

Margam Castle is in the care of Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council. The credulous suggest it may have ghosts.

Architecture
Margam Castle is a Grade I listed building. Its service courtyard is listed Grade II*, as are the terrace walls and screen, while the steps in the terraced garden are listed Grade II.

title: Margam Castle


text:
Murray Beauclerk, 14th Duke of St Albans

Murray de Vere Beauclerk, 14th Duke of St Albans, (born 19 January 1939), styled Earl of Burford from 1964 until 1988, is an English duke. He was a member of the House of Lords from 1988 until 1999.

Family
The only child (by his first wife) and eldest son of Charles Beauclerk, 13th Duke of St Albans, the 14th Duke descends from King Charles II and Nell Gwyn by their illegitimate son, Charles Beauclerk, 1st Duke of St Albans. He is also the senior representative of the De Vere family.

Career
Beauclerk attended Tonbridge School in Kent, before qualifying as a Chartered Accountant in 1962.

Since 1989, he has served as Governor-General of the Royal Stuart Society, a monarchist organization with Jacobite ties, and is also a Freeman of the City of London and Liveryman of the Drapers' Company.

Marriages and issue
Murray Beauclerk married three times. On 31 January 1963 he married firstly Rosemary Frances Scoones, a daughter of Francis Harold Scoones of West Ham and his wife Rose Frances E. Callis. They were divorced in 1974, having had two children:
 * Lady Emma Caroline de Vere Beauclerk (born 22 July 1963), married 1991 David Craig Shaw Smellie
 * Charles Beauclerk, Earl of Burford (born 22 February 1965)

In 1975, Rosemary Beauclerk remarried to Paul Pellew, 10th Viscount Exmouth, 9th Marquess of Olías.

On 29 August 1974, shortly after his first divorce, Beauclerk married secondly Cynthia Theresa Mary (1929–2002), daughter of Lt-Col. William James Holdsworth Howard, D.S.O., and former wife of the late Sir Anthony Robin Hooper, 2nd Baronet. They were divorced in 2001, without issue.

In 1988, Beauclerk's father died, and he became the 14th Duke of St. Albans.

The Duke married his third and current wife, Gillian Anita Northam, on 14 December 2002 in London.