text:
Mike Birbiglia

Mike Birbiglia (born June 20, 1978) is an American stand-up comedian, actor, storyteller, director, producer and writer. He is a frequent contributor to This American Life and The Moth, and has released several comedy albums and television specials. His feature-length directorial debut Sleepwalk with Me (2012), based on his one-man show of the same name and in which he also starred, won awards at the Sundance and Nantucket film festivals. He also wrote, directed, and starred in the comedy-drama Don't Think Twice (2016). His 2010 book Sleepwalk with Me and Other Painfully True Stories was a New York Times bestseller and a finalist for the 2011 Thurber Prize for American Humor. Birbiglia has appeared in films such as Your Sister's Sister (2011), Cedar Rapids (2011), and Trainwreck (2015), played a recurring role in Orange Is the New Black, Billions and has guest starred in episodes of Girls, Inside Amy Schumer, and Broad City. He also filled in for Jimmy Kimmel on his talk show for a week, as Kimmel caught COVID-19.

Early life and education
Birbiglia was born in Shrewsbury, Massachusetts, the son of Mary Jean (née McKenzie), a nurse, and Vincent Paul Birbiglia, a doctor. He is the youngest of four children. He is partially of Italian descent and was raised Catholic. Birbiglia attended the all-boys Catholic school St. John's High School for one year, and graduated from St. Mark's School in 1996. He says seeing comedian Steven Wright perform inspired him to begin writing jokes at age 16. He subsequently attended Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., graduating in 2000, after meeting future A-list comedians John Mulaney and Nick Kroll through an on-campus improv group. During college he performed as a member of the Georgetown Players Improv Troupe, worked as a server in a comedy club, and began performing at DC Improv (The Improv) in Washington, D.C.

Early career
Birbiglia began doing improv in 1997. His sister was able to get him an interview on Conan O'Brien's show as an intern, where he worked for associate producer Jordan Schlansky. Birbiglia moved to New York in 2000, and appeared on the Late Show with David Letterman in 2002. He told his first story on stage at the U.S. Comedy Arts Festival in Aspen, in 2003, and eventually became a semi-regular contributor to The Moth storytelling series. He released his first album, Dog Years, in 2004, followed by My Secret Public Album, Volume 1a (2005) a compilation of his appearances on The Bob and Tom Show. His next two albums, Two Drink Mike (2006), and My Secret Public Journal Live (2007) were released on Comedy Central Records. My Secret Public Journal Live was named one of the best comedy albums of the decade by The A.V. Club.

In 2008 CBS picked up a sitcom pilot loosely based on Birbiglia's life and featuring him, Bob Odenkirk and Frances Conroy that ultimately never aired. He later called the failure of his pilot "the luckiest thing that ever happened to me."

Sleepwalk and beyond
In 2008, Birbiglia opened Sleepwalk with Me, a one-man show that straddled standup comedy and theater, off-Broadway at the Bleecker Street Theater. The show was presented by Nathan Lane, and The New York Times called it "simply perfect". Time Out New York named it their "Show of the Year" in 2009.

Birbiglia adapted his material into the 2010 book Sleepwalk with Me, and Other Painfully True Stories and the 2011 album Sleepwalk With Me Live. The book debuted at #29 on the hardcover nonfiction New York Times Bestseller List and number four on the hardcover nonfiction section of the Washington Post Political Bookworm Best Sellers. The book was also a finalist for the 2011 Thurber Prize for American Humor. Sleepwalk With Me Live debuted at #1 on the Billboard Comedy Charts.

Birbiglia made his directorial debut with Sleepwalk with Me, based on his one-man show and which he wrote, directed, and starred in. The film premiered at the 2012 Sundance Film Festival and won the NEXT Audience Award. It was selected in the "Festival Favorites" category at the South by Southwest film festival in Austin, Texas and also appeared in the Nantucket Film Festival where it won the award for best writer/director. The film was produced by Jacob Jaffke and This American Life's Ira Glass and stars Birbiglia, Lauren Ambrose, Carol Kane, James Rebhorn, and Cristin Milioti and has cameos by Glass, Kristen Schaal, Wyatt Cenac, David Wain, Jessi Klein, John Lutz and Marc Maron. While hosting the 2012 Gotham Awards, Birbiglia roasted I Heart Huckabees director David O. Russell by reading a transcript of Russell's on-set argument with actress Lily Tomlin. The event, specifically the joke and what transpired after it, later formed a large part of Birbiglia's show, Thank God for Jokes.

In addition to starring in Sleepwalk with Me, Birbiglia has appeared in films such as Trainwreck, Going the Distance, Cedar Rapids, Your Sister's Sister and The Fault in Our Stars. He has also guest-starred in episodes of Girls, Inside Amy Schumer, and Broad City. He played the role of Oscar Langstraat in the third and fifth seasons of Showtime's hit show Billions and Danny Pearson on the Netflix series Orange Is the New Black in its third and fourth seasons, with which he shared the 2016 Screen Actors Guild Award for Outstanding Performance by an Ensemble in a Comedy Series.

In 2011, Birbiglia mounted his second one-man show, My Girlfriend's Boyfriend, which ran for four months off-Broadway and won the Lucille Lortel Award for Outstanding Solo Show. He toured My Girlfriend's Boyfriend around the world with tour dates in the United States, Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom. On June 2, 2013, Birbiglia performed it for the last time at Carnegie Hall. My Girlfriend's Boyfriend was featured as the number one stand-up special of 2013 by Vulture, Paste, The Laugh Button and Laughspin. It was also named one of Time Out New York's Best Comedy Specials of 2013. Flavorwire listed the special as one of the top 20 funniest stand-up specials of all time.

For his second film, Birbiglia drew upon his early experience with improv in Don't Think Twice (2016), which centers on a fictional Manhattan improv troupe. Birbligia also stars among an ensemble cast including Keegan-Michael Key, Gillian Jacobs, Kate Micucci, Tami Sagher, and Chris Gethard. The film was nominated for several awards, including the Critics' Choice Award for Best Comedy and St. Louis Film Critics Association award for Best Comedy.

Birbiglia's Thank God for Jokes comedy special was released on Netflix on February 28, 2017.

In April 2017, Birbiglia announced a tour of his newest show titled The New One. The tour started with 25 cities and, in December 2017, featured a limited podcast titled The Old Ones. The podcast features Mike Birbiglia analyzing his old stand-up with guests including his brother Joe Birbiglia, comedians Pete Holmes and John Mulaney, film producer and director Judd Apatow, contributor to 'This American Life' Ira Glass and his wife. The New One made its off-Broadway debut at the Cherry Lane Theatre on July 26 and was scheduled to run through August 2 before a high demand for tickets extended the show's run to and through August 26.

The show then received a Broadway transfer, with performances beginning October 25, 2018 and running through January 20, 2019 at the Cort Theatre.

In March 2020, Birbiglia created a charity initiative called "Tip Your Waitstaff" with fellow comics to raise money for comedy clubs closed because of COVID-19.

Birbiglia is a regular contributor to the Public Radio International-distributed program This American Life.

Birbiglia temporarily replaced Jimmy Kimmel for a short time in 2022, as Kimmel recovered from COVID-19.

In 2022, Birbiglia premiered his show titled The Old Man and the Pool at the Steppenwolf Theatre Company in Chicago, where it ran from April 28 to May 22. He later opened the show on Broadway at the Vivian Beaumont Theater, where it ran from November 13, 2022, to January 15, 2023. It is scheduled to run at the Wyndham's Theatre in London's West End between September 12, 2023, and October 7, 2023. The show premiered on Netflix on November 21, 2023, to positive reviews.

Personal life
Birbiglia has rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder, which causes him to live out his dreams and sleepwalk. While asleep in a motel room in Walla Walla, Washington, he ran through a second-story window. As a result of the accident, Birbiglia received 33 stitches in his leg. His show, a story on This American Life, and subsequent film Sleepwalk with Me largely centers around this event. He also had a tumor on his bladder at the age of 19.

Birbiglia is married to Jen Stein, whose pen name is J. Hope Stein, and whose work is featured in The New One. They have one daughter, Oona, born in 2015.

Discography
Audio releases (physical and/or digital formats)
 * Main
 * 2004: Dog Years (out of print) (self-produced, winner of the "Just Plain Folks" comedy album of the year)
 * 2005: My Secret Public Album (the best of Birbiglia's "Secret Public Journals" weekly guest spots on The Bob and Tom Show)
 * 2006: Two Drink Mike
 * 2007: My Secret Public Journal Live
 * 2011: Sleepwalk with Me Live
 * 2013: My Girlfriend's Boyfriend
 * 2019: Thank God For Jokes (vinyl)

 * Compilations
 * 2005: Invite Them Up (Comedy Central Records CD/DVD compilation of indie comics)

title: Mike Birbiglia


text:
Talk:Race and intelligence (average gaps among races)

Kudos
Wow someone has done an incredible job with this article. This is and the other articles in the series are probably the best introduction to the IQ debate available anywhere.

 * I would be interested in the racial demographics of the contributors to this article. It goes without saying that the racial classification of the individuals who hold the beliefs purported in this article is something that any moderators of this article (who themselves would have political and social viewpoints that may be far from objective) would be wise to look at in order to determine how representative this article is of the variety of viewpoints that exist (I'm sure that this point recurs frequently).

 * Also, given a subjective opinion (ie: "This is and the other articles in the series are probably the best introduction to the IQ debate available anywhere.") sounds more like an advertisement for alcholic beverage that it does for sound scientific and apolitical analysis (though, nobody said that that is what we're looking for here).

--Nukemason 19:53, August 1, 2006 (UTC)
 * I generally support Chomsky's opinion on that issue:
 * I rather doubt that the non-white, non-male students, friends, and colleagues with whom I work would be much impressed with the doctrine that their thinking and understanding differ from "white male science" because of their "culture or gender and race." I suspect that "surprise" would not be quite the proper word for their reaction.
 * But figures in this field who don't consider group differences off-limits have included representation from Whites, Jews, Asians, and African Americans (Thomas Sowell ).--Nectar 19:43, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

NPOV
This page will be marked as NPOV until the identical charts and passages from the main race and intelligence page have been NPOV'd. Jokestress 19:29, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

 * what's up with this now? --Rikurzhen 07:23, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

 * For starters, title should be changed to average test score gaps among races, so we can move all that IQ stuff here instead of the "main" page. Jokestress 22:05, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The complication with that title is that brain size doesn't fit well with "test score".
 * Question: all that IQ stuff here instead of the "main" page what stuff? --Rikurzhen 22:14, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

 * The brain size-intelligence correlation is not well-established, and anatomical stuff should go under the neurology section. The articles as they stand make a bunch of tendentious connections and infer a stronger correlation than has been established. There should be at least six articles to explain the possible connections:

 * "race" and neuroanatomy
 * neuroanatomy and "intelligence"
 * "race" and "intelligence"
 * "intelligence" and test scores
 * test scores and "race"
 * neuroanatomy and test scores

 * Jokestress 01:37, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Slow down there. The brain size-intelligence correlation is not well-established. This is false. If you are basing your judgement on article content on that belief, this will be a problem. McDaniel (2005) is the latest meta-analysis of IQ and brain size, and finds an overall correlation of 0.4. See Thompson and Gray (2004) for a broader review of the literature on brain/intelligence relationships -- thanks to MRI, correlations have been worked out to the level of specific brain structures. As to your suggested list of articles: The main problem is that you cannot discuss the science of "intelligence" without discussing test scores; no other measure of intelligence exists which can substitute for test scores (even measures of intelligence that purport to not be IQ tests are "tests" nontheless, such as creativity tests). So it is not feasible to divide a discussion of things related to "test scores" and "intelligence" into separate articles. For exmaple, neuroanatomy and test scores and neuroanatomy and "intelligence" are not distinguishable -- all of the literature on intelligence/neuroanatomy relies on psychometrics and g -- and the current WP article for this idea is Neuroscience and intelligence. Likewise, I don't know how you would divide "race" and "intelligence" from test scores and "race", although this very article tries to focus on just the data rather than interpretations of cause. The intelligence (trait) article covers "intelligence" and test scores, with most of the test scores material in IQ. This leaves "race" and neuroanatomy, for which historically material could be covered in Craniometry, but is most relevant here. --Rikurzhen 01:59, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

 * I guess we need an IQ and intelligence article too, then. Brain size-IQ seems to have been correlated in some studies, but others suggest brain size and intelligence have not. Both this and the "main" article are almost entirely about IQ and present exhaustive analysis of IQ data, but they barely discuss the controversy surrounding IQ. The race/IQ chart that appears on every page is, to me, one of the major agenda-pushing elements of this series. Just because IQ is widely used and is the best available evidence does not mean it is conclusive or even meaningful. That debate needs to be aired in the article(s). Jokestress 15:57, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I guess we need an IQ and intelligence article too, then. if you insist, but intelligence (trait) would seem to be the right place for that discussion, as most articles link there and it has the most general title; otherwise more detailed criticism of IQ can go on the IQ page.
 * Brain size-IQ seems to have been correlated in some studies, but others suggest brain size and intelligence have not. Both this and the "main" article are almost entirely about IQ and present exhaustive analysis of IQ data, but they barely discuss the controversy surrounding IQ. I'm afraid that the "controversy" surrounding IQ is not deep enough to support the kind of robust discussion you are seeking. There is no serious alternative for intelligence testing that isn't a de facto IQ test, even Sternberg's tests turned out to predominantly measure g. Add to this the fact that g makes up almost 100% of the predictive power of IQ scores. For that reason, "IQ" is the metric upon which things like "retardation" or "giftedness" are measured, and IQ (although the tests have various names) is the measure by which average group differences in intelligence are quantified. If there is a serious controversy around IQ, it is that IQ doesn't measure all behaviors that might be described as "intelligent", but most experts seems to think that it measures most of the important aspects of inteligent behavior. This is why, as DAD pointed out, review artices aimed at the general scientific audience say that g is the sense of intelligence they will focus on and then move on:

In this review,we emphasize intelligence in the sense of reasoning and novel problem-solving ability (BOX 1). Also called FLUID INTELLIGENCE (Gf)11, it is related to analytical intelligence12. Intelligence in this sense is not at all controversial, and is best understood at multiple levels of analysis (FIG. 1). Empirically,Gf is the best predictor of performance on diverse tasks, so much so that Gf and general intelligence (g, or general cognitive ability) might not be psychometrically distinct13,14.Conceptions of intelligence(s) and methods to measure them continue to evolve, but there is agreement on many key points; for example, that intelligence is not fixed, and that test bias does not explain group differences in test scores15. Intelligence research is more advanced and less controversial than is widely realized15–17, and permits some definitive conclusions about the biological bases of intelligence to be drawn.

 * The race/IQ chart that appears on every page is, to me, one of the major agenda-pushing elements of this series. Just because IQ is widely used and is the best available evidence does not mean it is conclusive or even meaningful. That debate needs to be aired in the article(s). We should develop the "what is intelligence?" debate as fully as possible on the intelligence (trait) article, and then as per WP:NPOV we should only state the necessary assummption about IQ as a "brief, unobtrusive pointer". As this part of NPOV policy states "There are virtually no topics that could proceed without making some assumptions that someone would find controversial." We should not describe the debate on every page: "there is probably not a good reason to discuss some assumption on a given page, if an assumption is best discussed in depth on some other page". The best page for an "what is intelligence?" debate is the the intelligence (trait) page. --Rikurzhen 17:53, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

 * Just because IQ is widely used and is the best available evidence does not mean it is conclusive or even meaningful. Aside from test bias, which was settled long ago, there is no reason to think that an IQ difference isn't meaningful or conclusive. (I know of no one who says they aren't meaningful; consider Atkins v. Virginia.) That is, conclusive about there being a skills difference, and meaningful insofar as those skills are useful. The "IQ" metric shown in the charts (which are WISC-R scores, I think) could be substituded with SAT (college entrance) scores, or NAEP (education) scores, or AFQT (military) scores, and they would paint the same picture. The use of "IQ" scale numbers is just for the sake of communication -- most scores are converted to the IQ scale for the sake of presentation. The Sternberg-Gardner point (Triarchic theory of intelligence and Theory of multiple intelligences, but note Sternberg is a critic of Gardner) about IQ does not lessen the acutal importance of IQ, rather they are trying to stake out further aspects of behavior to be labeled "intelligence", with variable success. Moreover, even if Sternberg were right, it would not change the fact that there is a group difference in g, even if g were not a full (enough) description of intelligence. I've never read Sternberg argue otherwise. --Rikurzhen 18:12, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

Old measurments
The text present in great detail very old data and even has several images. These are not very interesting because 1) skull size and shape has changed and 2) doubtful methodology, for example many of the old studies claimed to show to whites had larger brain size than East Asians. Therefore they should be summarized in a brief paragraph and the images removed. Objections? Ultramarine 16:10, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Some studies, both historical and modern, have shown that Whites have larger brain size than East Asians. Others (such as Morton's Crania Americana) showed that East Asians' were larger than Whites.  However, when adjusted for average body size, East Asians always come out above Whites in terms of encephalization quotients.  And even though the pictures are old, the illustrations are important because they show the extent that the same thing that is being debated today was known over a hundred years ago, and that the same trend (Black --> White --> East Asian) appeared then as it does today.  And what is your evidence for the claim that the methodology was doubtful?  Dd2 05:29, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

 * See my cited paper. Ultramarine 06:23, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Which cited paper? "How 'Caucasoids' got such big crania and why they shrank"?  Dd2 15:54, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes. Ultramarine 17:48, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Deleted paragraph
Here is the explanation for the deletion of this paragraph: "Several historical studies from the 19th century and early 20th century found racial differences. However, they often argued that whites had the largest measurements which was the politically correct view at the time. This is different from more recent results . The results may also be of little relevance for current differences, because, as noted later, brain size and shape has changed greatly."

 * Problems with this paragraph:

 * The studies that I know of that included East Asians ranked them in front of Whites in terms of brain size
 * Insinuating that the studies showed Whites had larger brain size out of political correctness is original research
 * The claim that the results have little relevance or may be different today (and it's not; the order is still the same) has no citation and as it stands is original research. Dd2 05:40, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Changed due to above critic. Ultramarine 06:23, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

NEANDERTHALS
IQ can change depending on environmental conditions from day to day,stress can change iq scores being sleepy,or emotional factors like anger or depression,which just happens to be highest among people with poor medical access and poverty in general,also scientific evidence proves that the neanderthal had larger brains than humans,they werent smarter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.38.73 (talk • contribs) 07:34, 19 August 2005

 * True, but not consequential. Also, wrong article. --Rikurzhen 17:46, August 19, 2005 (UTC)

 * We cannot make representations of the intelligence of Neanderthals unless we can point to scores that Neanderthals achieved on intelligence tests. Also, let us not forget that skull size does not allow us to compare brain sizes.  Neanderthal brains may have had a different distribution of ratios of cortex (gray matter) to cross-connecting axons (white matter), or their cortexes may have had a different distribution of wrinkledness.  Brain size aside, there are many convoluting factors....

 * The Neanderthals failed the biggest test of all; they failed to evolve. 205.161.226.94 07:20, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Some people speculate that the Neanderthals had higher spacial/visual intelligence than Homo Sapiens.

Samuel Morton
Samuel Morton actually didn't mention that East Asian skulls were bigger. See this source: He was among the few that claimed that white skulls were bigger.

From PBS:

Samuel G. Morton (1799-1851), a Philadelphia doctor, collected and measured hundreds of human skulls in order to confirm that there are inborn differences among the races -- above all, a difference in brain size. His systematic large-scale experiments made him a pioneer of American science, especially the discipline of Physical Anthropology, which studies the biology of human populations.

Living in a time of slavery, when Indians were in full retreat, Morton was confident whites were naturally superior. He belonged to a school of thought called 'polygenism,' which held that the different races are different species, with separate origins. This contradicts the Biblical story of Adam and Eve. Morton also thought he could identify any skull's racial origin simply by measuring it. Modern physical anthropologists no longer make this claim. And 'race' is now seen not as a biological fact, but as a social and cultural perception.

Morton assumed that brain size bore a direct relation to intelligence, so he tried to rank the races by measuring the brain cavities of human skulls. He poured skulls full of lead pellets, then dumped the pellets into a glass measuring cup. When he found that individuals within each race varied widely he set out to compare averages by measuring many skulls.

He ended up with more than 300 Native American skulls from North and South America, probably because they were the easiest to obtain. He also had 100 skulls from Egyptian mummies and a sampling of skulls from other races and populations. His tables assign the highest brain capacity to Europeans (with the English highest of all). Second rank goes to Chinese, third to Southeast Asians and Polynesians, fourth to American Indians, and last place to Africans and Australian aborigines.

Using Morton's raw data the evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould checked these results. He found Morton had manipulated his data, overlooking inconvenient exceptions. Gould assumes that brain size correlates most closely with height. The bigger the body, the bigger the brain, regardless of race. Rereading Morton's notes, Gould concludes that Morton doctored his results by relying on smaller individuals -- in particular, women -- to lower the figures for the races he wished to prove inferior. Once Gould eliminated body size as a factor he found that all races have roughly the same brain capacity.

Other resources:

* Stephen Jay Gould, The Mismeasure of Man, 1981, W.W. Norton, New York * Stanton, William, The Leopard's Spots: Scientific Attitudes towards Race in America, 1815-1859, 1960, University of Chicago Press, Chicago * Frank Spencer, editor, History of Physical Anthropology, 1997, Garland, New York * American Anthropological Association, "Statement on Race" in Anthropology Newsletter, September, 1998 (www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm)

data analysis by gender
The data is clear that test results are consistantly different for racial groups. What is not clear is the significance of the data. Tests can be culturally biased, neonatal health can affect subsequent developement, societal bias can affect things, as well as poverty, and societal expectations.

I would be interested in the black females/white females comparison as separate from blackmale/white male results. That would hold bias/poverty/nutrition variables constant and focus on societal expectations. If black females are close to white females whereas black males are below white males it would suggest a diffent cause for the data than if the analysis shows no difference by gender.

152.133.6.195 13:48, 19 December 2006 (UTC) Todd

 * Great points, Todd.--futurebird 08:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

OR
It is plainly a violation of WP:NOR and WP:NPOV to find supportive data unrelated to the question of Race and Intelligence to build a point. --JereKrischel 08:21, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

NPOV continues
I've added the NPOV tag due to the lack of definition over "black" or "white". without this, the average IQ numbers do not mean anything, and can only be a POV rather than fact. --Rebroad 23:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

 * The citations are ubiquitous in this series of articles, but happen to not be on that sentence. They've been added. --W. D. Hamilton 23:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Both of these sources are over ten years old. A lot chanes in that time. Do you have anything more recent? futurebird 00:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

 * There's a lengthy discussion of BW IQ scores in the main article and this article. The discussion in the main article is more up-to-date. --W. D. Hamilton 00:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Great point, Rebroad. These data are meaningless without a clear definition. futurebird 00:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Gottfredson (1997) - ''8. The bell curve for whites is centered roughly around IQ 100; the bell curve for American blacks roughly around 85; and those for different subgroups of Hispanics roughly midway between those for whites and blacks. The evidence is less definitive for exactly where above IQ 100 the bell curves for Jews and Asians are centered. '' --W. D. Hamilton 00:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Neisser (1996) - Although studies using different tests and samples yield a range of results, the Black mean is typically about one standard deviation (about 15 points) below that of Whites --W. D. Hamilton 00:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I can't find a definition of "black" or "white" in these articles. All I see is that 52 out of 100 scientisis who were contacted for the article were willing to say race was linked to IQ... back in 1994 (and, the link need not be due to entirely genetic factors.)futurebird 00:16, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

 * These source don't define "black" or "white" because these terms are universally understood in the context used, but Neisser 1996 does give definitions. They are the same as those found in the main article, which gives relevant background on the issue of race. --W. D. Hamilton 00:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Do you have a citation to support your assertion that "these terms are universally understood"? --JereKrischel 23:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

This is not a neutrality dispute
You guys might think these data are meaningless without a definition, but the researchers don't, and Wikipedia is reporting their views neutrally. --causa sui talk 04:03, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't agree. There are many people who share this view point. Without a definition of race that is clear-- what can any of this possibly mean? Instead of reflecting scientific evidence it may only reflect historical ideas of race used to justify racist public policy, and segregation. This article has a strong POV because it presumes that race can be measured in a universal way suitable for scientific study. You say that " Wikipedia is reporting their views neutrally" --those of us who object are a part of wikipedia too. Please respect our opinions and the opinions of the people in the scientific community who also question this kind of research. No one has even attempted to answer the question "How do you know if a person is black or white?" futurebird 05:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Your personal objections to the researchers' views do not entitle you to have your opposing views represented in the article. That is the mainstay of the No original research policy. We report the views of others neutrally, no matter how morally repugnant we may find them, and Wikipedia is not censored against the possibility that neutral and verifiable information could possibly be used for evil purposes -- if it were, the encyclopedia would contain very little information indeed. --causa sui talk 21:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

 * These are not just my personal views. futurebird 21:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Then the inclusion of content that makes use of distinctions between races should not be a problem for you. --causa sui talk 23:38, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

 * It seems to me that regardless of how one characterizes the dispute, there are problems with this article. Reporting the views of only one POV, and treating them as fact rather than assertion, is rife throughout the text.  Including content that makes use of racial distinctions is not a problem until we present those distinctions in a completely uncritical manner.  To date, Rikurzhen/WDHamilton has done a commendable job in drawing up a meta-analysis research paper that could be published in a Pioneer Fund journal.  He has not done a good job of balancing the article with data, opinion, and information contrary to his POV.  I would further argue that Wikipedia is not an appropriate venue for such detailed point-by-point arguments, and although mediawiki software may be a good tool to use, such original meta-analysis research papers should be written elsewhere. --JereKrischel 23:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

 * The "one POV" you are describing is actually the set of views found in the scholarly literature. What you describe as the Pioneer Fund view is the view of the APA's intelligence task force, the 52 professors who signed the WSJ statement and the hundreds who responded to the opinion survey conducted by Snyderman and Rothman. What you call a distinction between fact and assertion appears to me to be an attempt to portray all claims made in the research literature as doubtful whether there is actually any published doubt or not. The articles on evolution, global warming and other controversial sciences aren't written in this manner and neither should these articles. What you are actually suggesting is that all of the research literature that you dislike should be described in terms that skeptics of intelligence research would use, despite the fact that this is not how the research is described in scholarly literature reviews and the collective-statements. If there's doubt about a report in the literature, this doubt should be described and ascribed to those who hold it; it shouldn't be used to paint an equivalence of uncertainty where the multi-author reviews suggest there is none. Moreover, the full description of what's written in the research literature is not metaanalysis (the statistical integration of multiple original studies) and it's not original so long as it builds from existing literature reviews, but rather it is the appropriate application to neutral sourced writing. Several principles regarding NPOV from arbcom seems to apply: (1) It is inappropriate to remove blocks of well-referenced information which is germane to the subject from articles on the grounds that the information advances a point of view. Wikipedia's NPOV policy contemplates inclusion of all significant points of view. (2) The Wikipedia policy of editing from a neutral point of view, a central and non-negotiable principle of Wikipedia, applies to situations where there are conflicting viewpoints and contemplates that significant viewpoints regarding such situations all be included in as fair a manner as possible. (3) Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy contemplates including only significant published viewpoints regarding a subject. It does not extend to novel viewpoints developed by Wikipedia editors which have not been independently published in other venues. (4) Neutral point of view as defined on Wikipedia contemplates inclusion of all significant perspectives regarding a subject. While majority perspectives may be favored by more detailed coverage, minority perspectives should also receive sufficient coverage. No perspective is to be presented as the "truth"; all perspectives are to be attributed to their advocates. (5) Wikipedia articles are edited from a Wikipedia:Neutral point of view which contemplates that all significant viewpoints regarding a matter shall be appropriately represented. --W. D. Hamilton 02:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I think it is fairly obvious that the scholarly literature does not have simply "one POV". Your interpretation of opinion polls does not give the POV you support some sort of blessed status.  Your conflation of intelligence research with the question of race-based research is the leap of faith that is most often criticized -> that race is a good proxy for genetics.  Your complete lack of balance in your well-researched but one-sided set of articles makes for a problem.  I understand that you truly believe that your POV is the "one POV", and that scientists like Lieberman somehow represent a fringe or minority view, but again, your interpretation of opinion polls and selection of literature differs from others.  We can certainly cite similar statements from prominent groups and scientists decrying the utility of race as a scientific category, just as you may cite a poll that asserts that most people think there is some genetic component to the B-W IQ gap in the U.S..  One might go so far as to assert that your POV is fringe, but I certainly wouldn't use that against you to insist on the removal of your information (as it seems you'd like to assert about the anti-racialist POV).  Again, you've done a commendable job on writing a pro-hereditarian research paper, but it is better hosted at gnxpwiki.com than wikipedia.org. --JereKrischel 04:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I wrote, "The "one POV" you are describing is actually the set of views found in the scholarly literature." You wrote, "I think it is fairly obvious that the scholarly literature does not have simply "one POV"." Do you see the disconnect? I guess I should have been clearer in the use of the phrase "set of views", but I assumed that that term clearly indicates a multiplicity of POVs. But your interpretation and response seems implausible to me -- the implication would seem to be that I believed that the one POV was the modal POV of the S&R survey. However, the issue of ignoring the "set of views" that are established as significant by the 3+ major sources remains. In the current content, this means suggesting that it is an NPOV issue to report what the APA, WSJ, S&R, etc. report as the scientific mainstream view as such. In the context of the explanations article, it involves the attribution of the consensus view to Gottfredson alone (while calling her a controversial researcher, suggesting that what she was describing is also controversial), renaming the two major POVs on causation (partly-genetic and environment only) to terms that don't represent what the majors sources describe, and removing 30k of cited material that reports the details of the debates between the two major POVs on causation (with the edit summary that they describe a straw man position). --W. D. Hamilton 06:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Again, your "3+ major sources" certainly do not illustrate or prove a predominance over the other major sources, that challenge the racialist POV. Neither is your use of POV based rhetoric (the characterization of "partly-genetic" and "environment only") within the terms of organization of the article appropriate.  It would be just as POV pushing to characterize it using the terms "racist" and "anti-racist" (rhetoric used by some anti-hereditarians).  Furthermore, creating 30k+ of tit-for-tat meta-analysis of evidence is worthy of a research paper, but not very encyclopedic.  Please, take your wonderful work, and put it someplace more appropriate like gnxpwiki.com.  Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a research journal for detailed meta-analysis of evidence. --JereKrischel 10:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

This is a neutrality dispute. Please see WP:NPOVD if you are in any doubt, and do not remove the NPOV tag as this would be in breach of wikipedia policy. Thanks. --Rebroad 15:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it is clear that many editors think these articles are non-neutral, but in fact these editors actually have a problem with the neutrality of the researchers being cited. --causa sui talk 00:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it's better to characterize it as a problem of balance - researchers on both sides of the issue will have their own POV, but both POVs should be presented with some balance. Currently, the articles read like a research paper doing a meta-analysis for only one POV. --JereKrischel 04:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The text describing the BW gap as it is described by the WSJ and APA reports (cited above) has been removed from this article. In this case, the "one POV" is like the "one POV" that anthropogenic climate change is real. But moreover, the reasons given for removal are that the terms "Black" and "White" are problematic. --W. D. Hamilton 06:36, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

 * From your APA citation - These groups (we avoid the term "race") are defined and self-defined by social conventions based on ethnic origin as well as on observable physical characteristics such as skin color. As well as, The Genetic Hypothesis. It is sometimes suggested that the Black/ White differential in psychometric intelligence is partly due to genetic differences (Jensen, 1972). There is not much direct evidence on this point, but what little there is fails to support the genetic hypothesis. .  I find it hard to believe that given the prominent importance you put on the APA citation, that you would disagree with the problematic nature of your POV pushes in this article.  Given the APA text, shouldn't this article be named, Groups and intelligence (United States)? --JereKrischel 10:10, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

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


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of English words containing a Q not followed by a U

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was non consensus, defaulting to keep. Sasquatch ↔讲↔看 07:25, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

List of English words containing a Q not followed by a U
This is not an encyclopedic article. It might, possibly, be transwikiied to Wiktionary, and I previously added a tag for that, but it was removed by the author. Uppland 19:30, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

 * keep: Wow, what an interesting battle going on here!  As a studier of Chinese, I am particularly interested how Chinese has merged into other languages...the three most common being Vietnamese, Korean, and Japanese.  The names of these countries in their repective languages all come from the Chinese...does that mean that they are not real Vietnamese, Korean, or Japanese words?  Of course, the assimilation of Chinese into English is a bit different, being that we deal with romanization.  Therefore, the word meaning "energy" that is described in the list would at one time have been known as Ch'i, or Chi, has become Qi in the official Pinyin system.  This word is becoming more common in English usage as more and more people become interested in Asian culture.  Other good examples are Qin and Qing, the names of two Chinese dynasties.  Perhaps, though, these problems could be solved by naming the article instead, "List of Words in English containing a Q not followed by a U".  The current title does lead the reader to believe that the words listed will be of English etymological origin.Iluvchineselit 18:23, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't think renaming would be a bad idea, but I'm not convinced it's strictly necessary either. Nevertheless, there is hardly such a thing as English etymological origin. Almost every word in English ultimately originates from another language, so it's just a question of how recently they migrated. Still, the article has benefitted greatly just from being on VfD, and a lot more people have read it than otherwise would have done, so really it's all good. Agentsoo 18:33, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Very true! Iluvchineselit 20:05, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Scrabbletionary. Joking, just delete as an unencyclopedic list. Sasquatch′↔T↔C 19:39, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * delete: Unremarkable list. "qwerty" is the only one that's not a loan-word (and "tranq", but that's slang). Peter Grey 19:51, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Since these words aren't really related at all, except for their spelling, I don't think there's really a point in putting it is Wiktionary either. Just delete. --Dmcdevit·t 20:04, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * I am the author so obviously I will vote keep but let's discuss this reasonably. I think this is more than a dictionary entry, because it attempts to explain how we end up with such words in English when most people believe they do not exist. Admittedly this bit needs expansion but that's exactly what I'm working on at the moment. After Uppland added the transwiki tag, I posted my reasons for keeping it on Wikipedia to the Talk page. Ten days later, neither he nor anyone else had replied, so I assumed that everyone was satisified with my reasoning - apologies if that was not the case, and I'm quite happy to have the transwiki debate again. To address some of the above concerns: they are mostly loan words, but are considered naturalised according to at least one major dictionary (Collins). As a list of words, it is no worse then any of the other articles in the 'Lists of English words' category. As I say, I'm sorry if I caused any confusion by removing the transwiki tag, but this article really doesn't deserve to be deleted. Agentsoo 20:10, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * You may not have noticed, but Category:lists of words, which is Category:Lists of English words's parent has a "move to wiktionary" tag on it. While we can't and wouldn't just transwiki whole category and its contents, the symbolic meaning is that there has been a judgment that whole lot of them don't belong here. Maybe I should list some today. --Dmcdevit·t 20:24, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry for missing your talkpage comment. I just feel that the connection between these words is trivial, basically just the result of certain conventions for transcribing from various other languages. It might be worth mentioning somewhere (in the article on English spelling or in a general article on loanwords in English, which might exist somewhere under some title) that there are words in English with a Q not followed by a U, that this is a result of borrowing, and proceed to give an example or two from each language with an explanation of why this or that particular phoneme has been represented by a Q in English. I just don't see the need for a comprehensive list. Uppland 20:28, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Whether a particular list of words are connected in a trivial or non-trivial way is totally a matter of opinion, so if you disagree on that then fair enough. I hadn't noticed that the parent cat is up for transwikiing; thanks for the info. If a judgement has been made that these articles belong on Wiktionary then by all means move them, but I don't think deletion is the answer, and would be disappointed as I have put quite a bit of time into this article. Agentsoo 20:36, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * What's wrong with this list? I found it very interesting, so i want to keep it. I think one of the better features of Wiki is disproving commonly belived facts, which this list does. Jono 20:26, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. The title is a misnomer. At first, I would have said keep.  But upon reading, I say delete. Thorns Among Our Leaves 20:52, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what is misleading about the title, but I'd be more than willing to listen to suggested improvements - please elaborate. Either way, it doesn't seem right to delete an article purely because it has the wrong title. Agentsoo 21:01, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The words aren't english, persay, just romanized. Delete. humblefool® 21:03, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * They are naturalised in English, at least according to the Collins dictionary. In that sense they are as English as any other word lifted directly from other languages, i.e. the vast majority of English words. Being more recent naturalisations may make them not 'true' English words in your eyes, but the dictionary has to be the authority here. Agentsoo 21:23, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Rule of thumb: ''If the only reference you need is a dictionary, then its not an encyclopedia article, since Wikipedia is Not a Dictionary. --Dmcdevit·t 21:34, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * The dictionary is not the only reference required; the opening paragraphs are clearly encyclopaedic. Nevertheless I don't object to moving the page to Wiktionary, at least in preference to deleting it altogether. Agentsoo 21:39, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * per se, as those Romans would write if they were late enough to use lowercase, rather than "persay". Sorry to be a spelling nitpicker, but it's a VfD on an article about 'spelling'.  Barno 23:48, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete Mainly because the vast majority of these are loan words. There is much scope for differences in spelling anyway because the Q is only used to approximate a particular letter sound in other languages. In the New Oxford English Dictionary at least, they are nearly all listed differently anyway, without a lone Q (some with K, QU, CH, etc). I also agree that "tranq" should be removed from the list whatever happens because it is just a shortening (the OED spells it "trank" anyway). However, it is an interesting article, hence the "weak" and I might yet change my vote because it would be relatively "harmless" to keep. Bobbis 21:12, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * My criterion was for them to appear in at least one major dictionary. The NODE is considerably shorter (fewer than half as many words) and less permissive than Collins, so I suppose it is not that surprising that the alternative spellings are not specified in it. Regarding Tranq, it is a shortened form, but it is not an abbreviation; it is written without a dot, just like 'vet' which I think most people would agree is a word in its own right. Glad you found the page interesting though, and I hope I can resolve your issues with it. Agentsoo 21:23, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Interesting list. Doesn't belong in a dictionary. CalJW 21:42, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Interesting and educational. But say a bit more about them being loan words, and about the existence of alternative spellings (as in contribution to this discussion from Bobbis. --Hugh2414 21:50, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Good idea, thanks. I've elaborated on this point. Agentsoo 22:04, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Can't see a good reason to delete it james gibbon  21:53, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, though expand to include more discussion of history (?), etc... Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 22:49, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Hugh2414 & Flcelloguy. …Markaci 2005-07-25 T 23:49:59 Z
 * Keep, but withold this document from the paper version of Wikipedia, whenever that comes out. —RaD Man (talk) 00:13, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:WINAD. Most of the words aren't English, and the fact that they are loanwords and the pronunciation info is content fit for a dictionary, not an encyclopedia. android  79  01:00, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * The article is about the words as much as it is a list of them; maybe the title should be changed. See, for example, fuck - a whole entry about the word itself, rather than the concept. Agentsoo 09:31, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Interesting and notable. Whether they are loan words or not. hansamurai 飯侍 (burp) 01:02, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, all bar qwerty are not English words. That would be because...there are almost no true English words to go in this article...so we don't need the article. -Splash 01:21, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * See No true Scotsman Agentsoo 09:31, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is encyclopedia territory rather than dictionary. If not kept, could be merged with a suitable article such as English spelling. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 02:15, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge to Q. Plenty of room for it there. A list like this is just stupid. And verify that these are actual English words. -R. fiend 02:35, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. The list has no place in a dictionery. DS1953 03:42, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge to Q, please don't delete or transwiki... the introductory section could use some fleshing out, but this is basically an encyclopedic treatment of one (arcane) aspect of English orthography. -- Visviva 07:39, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. The rarity of such words makes them notable, and such a list interesting. Sjakkalle (Check!)  07:45, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. The list has no place in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedic stuff about the QU rule and things that break it might be appropriate under an article on the English orthography or Q. Felix the Cassowary 10:50, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Interesting. - Longhair | Talk 12:35, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable to anyone interested in English orthography. Kappa 13:25, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep reasonable list... Y0u (Y0ur talk page) (Y0ur contributions) 15:08, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, since the general knowledge (rather than just list-of-loanwords) has been expanded the last couple of days. Still not sure how encyclopedic vs. dictionaric it is, but it's interesting to more than just nuts like us Scrabble players.  Barno 23:48, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, this is just the sort of information I come to wikipedia to find. --Measure 23:57, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete these are not english words per se but english translations/transliterations of mostly arabic loan words, arranged into a list of dicdefs - wikipedia is not a dictionary. JamesBurns 08:24, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text: File:Salaam Namaste poster.jpg

title: File:Salaam Namaste poster.jpg


text:
Urban climate

The climate in urban areas differs from that in neighboring rural areas, as a result of urban development. Urbanization greatly changes the form of the landscape, and also produces changes in an area's air. The study of urban climate is urban climatology.

In 1950 Åke Sundborg published one of the first theories on the climate of cities.

In the pursuit of a forthcoming shift in energy sources, the pivotal role of natural elements within urban settings cannot be overstated. This involves tapping into the possibilities presented by solar radiation, wind patterns, as well as the thermal capacities inherent in soil and water. Additionally, it encompasses leveraging the influence of weather patterns, seasonal variations, and the presence of green spaces.

Climate change
As climate change becomes a pressing global issue, both global and local economies must adapt and innovate in their methodologies to foster sustainable practices and combat its effects. It is essential for them to embrace alternative approaches, such as renewable energy sources, eco-friendly production methods, and efficient resource management, to maintain economic growth while minimizing environmental impact. As we learn more about climate change, it's important for experts and those sharing knowledge to keep talking and working together to lower the spread of inaccurate information and hopefully spread active awareness to every corner of the world. In regions like India, attaining sustainable urban development poses formidable challenges due to a notable dearth of climate awareness within the planning system. Sustained progress relies on a comprehensive understanding of the intricate interactions between urbanization and climate change, which necessitates incorporating climate considerations and resilience measures into the fabric of urban planning. By enhancing knowledge and raising awareness among planners, policymakers, and stakeholders, it becomes possible to integrate climate-responsive strategies into the planning process, including efficient land use, low-carbon transportation, renewable energy, and climate-resilient infrastructure. Addressing this knowledge gap and fostering a climate-conscious mindset within the planning system are critical steps towards achieving sustainable urban development in India and empowering cities to navigate the complex challenges of climate change while ensuring a harmonious and prosperous future for its residents.

Communities
Contemporary urban planning should transcend mere aesthetics achieved through private initiatives, recognizing the significance of inclusive and accessible public spaces. These shared spaces play a vital role in safeguarding the fundamental right to adequate housing for all. It entails a social contract that fosters unity among diverse individuals by establishing a sense of belonging and shared values. By prioritizing the development of public spaces alongside private endeavors, city planning can foster community cohesion, promote equitable access to resources, and contribute to the overall well-being and quality of life for residents, reinforcing the principles of social unity and collective progress.

Role of remote sensing education
A considerable number of undergraduate minority students with STEM backgrounds have limited knowledge of remote sensing and its applications in geophysics. This inadequate exposure, awareness, understanding, and engagement hinder their exploration of innovative approaches to gather environmental knowledge. In order to enrich undergraduate education, adequately prepare future geoscientists, empower underserved communities, and tackle the shortage of geoscience professionals, it is crucial to employ unique teaching and learning methods. The Center for Remote Sensing and Earth System Sciences (ReSESS) at City Tech focuses on leveraging remote sensing to attract and engage students from underserved communities, with a specific emphasis on studying urban climate dynamics in their local neighborhoods. This approach has demonstrated success in raising awareness and deepening understanding of the geosciences, while motivating students to contribute their newly acquired knowledge to local environmental sustainability initiatives.

Temperature
Increased urban land use and occupation alters the local thermal field resulting in the development of warmer regions known as urban heat islands (UHIs). An urban heat island is a phenomenon where these surface temperature deviations and air in the lowest levels of the atmosphere are concentrated in urban areas and those immediately downwind, and often are more pronounced at night than during the day, rather than surrounding suburban and especially rural areas. The solar energy absorbed and produced from solar radiation and anthropogenic activity is partitioned accordingly: warming the air above the surface via convection, evaporating moisture from the urban surface system, and storing heat in surface materials, such as buildings and roads. The solar energy is stored during the day and typically released during the night. Dark materials making up the buildings, impermeable soil and paved surfaces retain a majority of the solar energy. This allows for larger heat islands and increased thermal discomfort. Surface reflectivity in urban areas can impact ambient temperature. When the vegetative surface is dark and dry it can reach 52 C, whereas when the land is light and moist it reaches 18 C. Water evaporation usually helps to release energy from vegetative surfaces to cool the surface above. But most hotspot locations have little greenery which influences the formation of urban heat islands. Darker man-made surfaces have a lower albedo and heat capacity than natural surfaces allowing for increased photochemical reaction rates and absorption of visible radiation. This phenomenon can also be exacerbated when people release waste heat via heating and ventilating systems (e.g. air conditioners) and vehicular emissions. Expansion of these urban areas can lead to higher surface and air temperatures contributing to urban climate.

Thermal loading
A significant global challenge that cities face today is the escalating urban heat island effect. This phenomenon refers to the elevated temperatures experienced in urban areas due to the cumulative impact of both natural and human-induced factors. Managing the thermal load becomes imperative to regulate and sustain optimal temperatures in these urban environments. Strategic planning and implementation of various heat mitigation strategies become essential to counteract the adverse effects of urban heat islands. This involves the careful consideration of factors such as urban design, green infrastructure, building materials, landscaping, and energy-efficient cooling systems. By adopting a multifaceted approach that integrates natural and technological solutions to add or remove heat as necessary, cities can create more resilient and comfortable living environments, ensuring the well-being and quality of life for their inhabitants while mitigating the impact of urban heat islands on public health, energy consumption, and overall urban sustainability.

Precipitation
Because cities are warmer, the warmer air is apt to rise, and if the humidity is high it can cause convectional rainfall – short intense bursts of rain and thunderstorms.

Urban areas produce particles of dust (notably soot) and these act as hygroscopic nuclei which encourages rain production and otherwise affect convection via cloud microphysics.

Because of the warmer temperatures there is less snow in the city than surrounding areas.

Winds
Wind speeds are often lower in cities than the countryside because the buildings act as barriers (wind breaks). On the other hand, tall buildings can act as wind tunnels in which winds are funneled between the structures. This effect can be exacerbated on longer streets with suitable buildings properly oriented to the wind direction. The gusty winds around buildings also leads to eddying.

Humidity
Cities usually have a lower relative humidity than the surrounding air because cities are hotter, and rainwater in cities is unable to be absorbed into the ground to be released into the air by evaporation, and transpiration occurs much less since cities contain little vegetation relative to rural areas. Surface runoff is usually taken up directly into the subterranean sewage water system and thus vanishes from the surface immediately. Better understanding of urban temperature and water vapor contributions and/ or loss will reveal the reasons for lower relative humidity within cities, especially since relative humidity is dependent on temperature changes.

title: Urban climate


text:
Mandulis

Mandulis (also Merul and Melul) was a god of ancient Nubia also worshipped in Egypt. The name Mandulis is the Greek form of Merul or Melul, a non-Egyptian name. The centre of his cult was the Temple of Kalabsha at Talmis, but he also had a temple dedicated to him at Ajuala.

The worship of Mandulis was unknown to Egypt under the native Pharaohs, the Temple of Kalabsha being constructed under the Ptolemies (305 to 30 BC ). The temple was popular during the Roman period. It was expanded under the emperors Augustus (27 BC – AD 14) and Vespasian ( AD 69–79). A series of dated inscriptions can be found in the temple from the reign of Vespasian down to AD 248 or 249. In one of these he is identified as the "Sun, the all-seeing master, king of all, all-powerful Aion."

Besides his own temples at Kalabsha and Ajuala, Mandulis was worshiped in the Temple of Petesi and Pihor at Dendur and at Philae. An inscription at Dendur identifies him as the "great god, lord of Talmis", clearly indicating the centre of his cult. At Philae, he is depicted in humanoid form on a wall next to the last known hieroglyphic inscription, which was dedicated to him in AD 394.

Mandulis was often depicted wearing the Hemhem crown. He was sometimes shown in the form of a falcon but with a human head.

title: Mandulis


text: User talk:71.112.225.215

title: User talk:71.112.225.215


text:
Timeline of Germanic kingdoms in the Iberian Peninsula

This is a historical timeline of the Iberian Peninsula during the period of the post-Imperial kingdoms (5th to 8th centuries).

5th century

 * 409
 * Invasion of the NW of the Iberian peninsula (the Roman Gallaecia) by the Suevi (Quadi and Marcomanni) under king Hermerico, accompanied by the Buri. The Suevic Kingdom eventually received official recognition (Foedus) from the Romans for their settlement there in Gallaecia. It was the first kingdom separated from the Roman Empire that minted coins.
 * Invasion of the Iberian peninsula by the Vandals (Silingi and Hasdingi) and the Sarmatian Alans.
 * 410 – Rome is sacked by the Visigoths under King Alaric I.
 * 411 – A treaty with Western Roman Emperor Flavius Augustus Honorius grants Lusitania to the Alans, Gallaecia to the Suevi and Hasdingi, and Baetica to the Silingi.
 * 414 – Paulus Orosius, clergyman of Braga, visits St. Augustine in Hippo Regius.
 * 415
 * Baquiário, priest of Braga, writes his work De fide, where he retracts from Priscillianism heresy.
 * Beginning of the invasion of the Iberian peninsula by the Visigoths led by King Theodorid, expanding from Aquitaine and under request by the Romans.
 * 417 – Balconius becomes bishop of Braga.
 * 419 – The Hasdingi Vandals attack the Suevi, these resist with Roman aid.
 * 426 – The Alan king Attaces is killed in battle against the Visigoths, and this branch of the Alans subsequently appealed to the Vandal king Gunderic to accept the Alan crown.
 * 427 – Hydatius is ordained bishop of Aquae Flaviae (modern Chaves). Hydatius was the author of a chronicle of his own times that provides us with our best evidence for the history of Hispania in the 5th century.

 * 428 – The Alans defeat the Suevi and the Romans at the Battle of Mérida.
 * 429 – The Vandals and the Alans move to North Africa, where they establish a kingdom. The Buri vanish into the Suevi kingdom.
 * 438 – Hermerico, the first Suevi king of Gallaecia, ratified the peace with the Galaicos people and, tired of fighting, abdicated in favor of his son Requila.
 * 448 – Suevi king Requila dies leaving a state in expansion to his son Requiario who imposed his Catholic faith on the Suevi population.
 * 451 – Thorismund becomes King of the Visigoths.
 * 453 – Theodoric II becomes King of the Visigoths.
 * 454 – The Ibero-Roman population ask for the help of King Theodoric II of the Visigoths against Suevi incursions.
 * 455 – The Bishop of Rome assumes control over all of Western Christianity, proclaiming himself Pope, under the name of Leo I.
 * 456
 * King Theodoric II of the Visigoths defeats the Suevi at the Battle of Orbigo and sacks their capital city Braga.
 * Suevi king Requiario is executed and some candidates for the throne appear, grouped in two factions, those who follow Frantán and those who follow Aguiulfo (dependent of the Visigoths). A division marked for the river Minius is noticed, probably a consequence of the two tribes, Quadi and Marcomanni, who constituted the Suevi nation.
 * 457 – Maldras becomes king of all the Suevi.
 * 459 – After the death of King Maldras of the Suevi, a new division appears between Frumario and Remismundo.
 * 462 – Hydatius, Bishop of Aquae Flaviae (modern Chaves), is imprisoned by the Visigoths.
 * 463 – Remismundo unites the Suevi and becomes king.
 * 466 – Euric becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 468
 * The Roman city of Conimbriga, near modern Coimbra, is sacked by the Suevi.
 * Lusídio, Roman governor of Lisbon, delivers the city to the Suevi.
 * 469 – Teodemundo becomes King of the Suevi.
 * 470
 * Hydatius, Bishop of Aquae Flaviae, dies.
 * King Euric of the Visigoths conquers southern Gallaecia and Lusitania to the Suevi.
 * 475 – King Euric (who unified the various quarreling factions of the Visigoths) forces the Roman government to grant the Visigothic kingdom full independence. At his death, the Visigoths were the most powerful of the successor states to the Western Roman Empire.
 * 476, 4 September – Romulus Augustus, the last usurper Emperor of the Western Roman Empire, is deposed when the chieftain of the Heruli, Flavius Odoacer, proclaims himself King of Italy and vassal of Emperor Zeno. Conventional date for the fall of the Western Roman Empire, and widely considered the end of ancient history and beginning of the Middle Ages.
 * 484 – Alaric II becomes king of the Visigoths.

6th century

 * 501 – Council (Ecumenical Synod) of Braga.
 * 507
 * At the Battle of Vouillé the Franks wrested control of Aquitaine from the Visigoths. King Alaric II, the conqueror of all Hispania, was killed in battle, and after a temporary retreat to Narbonne, Visigoth nobles spirited his heir, the child-king Amalaric to safety across the Pyrenees and into Iberia.
 * Gesalec becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 511–526 – The Visigoths and Ostrogoths were reunited under Theodoric the Great, ruling from Ravenna, acting as regent for Amalaric. The center of Visigothic rule shifted first to Barcelona, then inland and south to Toledo.
 * 526 – Amalaric becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 527 – Council (Ecumenical Synod) of Toledo.
 * 531 – Theudis becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 537 – Profuturus becomes bishop of Braga.
 * 548 – Theudigisel becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 549 – Agila becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 550
 * Karriarico becomes King of the Suevi.
 * Saint Martin of Dumes arrives in Suevish Gallaecia. Born in Pannonia, he was the foremost Iberian scholar of his time. He was given the church of Dume, where he built a monastery.
 * 554 – Athanagild becomes king of the Visigoths.

 * 558 – Saint Martin, Abbot of Dumes becomes Bishop of Dume.
 * 559 – Teodomiro becomes King of the Suevi.
 * 561 – Council (Ecumenical Synod) of Braga.
 * 562 – Saint Martin of Dumes becomes Bishop of Braga.
 * 567 – Liuva I becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 568 – Liuvigild becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 569 – Council (Ecumenical Synod) of Lugo.
 * 570
 * Miro becomes King of the Suevi.
 * King Liuvigild of the Visigoths begins military actions with the explicit purpose of conquering all of Hispania.
 * 572 – Council (Ecumenical Synod) of Braga.
 * 583 – Eborico (also called Eurico) becomes King of the Suevi.
 * 584
 * Andeca becomes King of the Suevi.
 * The Visigothic King Liuvigild invades the Suevic kingdom and finally defeats it.
 * 585 – Andeca, the last king of the Suevi, held out for a year before surrendering in to the Visigothic King Liuvigild. With his surrender, this branch of the Suevi vanished into the Visigothic kingdom.
 * 586 – Reccared becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 587 – Reccared, the Visigothic king at Toledo, having been converted to Catholicism puts an end to dissension on the question of Arianism and launched a movement to unify the various religious doctrines that existed in Hispania.
 * 589 – Pantardus becomes bishop of Braga.

7th century

 * 601 – Liuva II becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 604 – Witteric becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 610 – Gundemar becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 612 – Sisebur becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 621 – Suintila becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 624 – The Visigoths, through the conquest of the last Byzantine domains and the Basque Country, control all of the Iberian peninsula.
 * 631 – Sisenand becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 633 – Julian becomes bishop of Braga.
 * 636 – Chintila becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 640 – Tulga becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 641 – Chindasuinth becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 649 – Reccasuinth becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 653 – Potamius becomes bishop of Braga.
 * 656 – St. Fructuosus of Dumes becomes bishop of Braga.
 * 663 – Council (Ecumenical Synod) of Braga.
 * 672 – Wamba becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 675
 * Leodegisius becomes bishop of Braga.
 * Council (Ecumenical Synod) of Braga.
 * 680 – Erwig becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 681 – Liuva becomes bishop of Braga.
 * 688 – Faustinus becomes bishop of Braga.
 * 693 – Félix becomes bishop of Braga. Félix of Braga was the last bishop of Braga to reside there until 1070, due to the Moorish invasion. His successors established themselves in Lugo (Galicia).

8th century

 * 701 – Wittiza becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 710 – Roderic becomes king of the Visigoths.
 * 719 – Founding of the Kingdom of Asturias.


text:
Salaam Namaste

Salaam Namaste is a 2005 Indian romantic comedy-drama film written and directed by Siddharth Anand in his directorial debut and produced by Aditya Chopra and Yash Chopra under Yash Raj Films. The film stars Saif Ali Khan and Preity Zinta in lead roles, alongside a supporting cast of Arshad Warsi, Tania Zaetta and Jugal Hansraj. The film was released on 9 September 2005, and was the first Indian film to be shot entirely in Australia.

The film tells the story of two young and modern Indians, Nick and Ambar, who have left their homes to make a life on their own in Melbourne, Australia. The story follows one year of their lives, dealing with their problems and relationships, from their first meeting at a wedding ceremony, to their decision to move in together without marriage, to their break-up upon discovering that Ambar is pregnant.

Salaam Namaste became the third highest-grossing Indian film of the year, as well as India's biggest hit in the overseas market that year. On 24 September 2005, the script of the film was invited to be included in the Margaret Herrick Library, which is operated by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Zinta received widespread critical acclaim for her role and earned nominations for Best Actress at the Filmfare Awards, IIFA Awards, Star Screen Awards and Zee Cine Awards.

Plot
Nikhil "Nick" Arora (Saif Ali Khan) and Ambar "Amby" Malhotra (Preity Zinta) are two progressive Indians who have left India to live in Melbourne, Australia. Nick was originally sent abroad to become an architect, but his real passion is cooking. After graduating, he designs a restaurant, which he takes over as head chef. While living at home in Bangalore, Ambar rejected more than a dozen marriage proposals. She traveled to Australia for a one-year foreign exchange program, then decided to stay and become a surgeon. After hearing this, her parents disowned her. To pay for her education, she works as an R.J. at a local radio station, 'Salaam Namaste '.

Nick is scheduled to do an interview for Salaam Namaste, but he oversleeps the first time, then again when it's rescheduled, and irritated Ambar insults him on-air. Nick becomes the caterer for a wedding Ambar attends. His best friend Ranjan "Ron" (Arshad Warsi) falls in love with Ambar's best friend Cathy (Tania Zaetta) at the wedding. Nick feels a connection with Ambar, although they have no idea who the other really is. Ron and Cathy hastily marry and Nick and Ambar discover each other's true identities. Nick gives the interview on Salaam Namaste, where he states that he loves Ambar. The pair fall in love and decide to move in together. Although they planned on maintaining distance amongst each other, they end up making love. Later, Ambar discovers she is pregnant, and they decide to end the pregnancy but she cannot go through with it. The pair argue and break up.

Over the next five months, they have several comical disagreements. During one argument, the baby kicks for the first time and Nick realises he still loves Ambar. Ambar asks Nick to take a blood test because she has thalassemia minor, and if he has the disease too, there will be complications. Nick takes the blood test and discovers that Ambar is carrying twins. On the way home, Nick realises he has left Ambar alone through the whole pregnancy when she needed him the most. He decides to commit to her and their children and goes to buy an engagement ring. At the store, he sees Ambar trying on rings with her friend, Jignesh. He believes she is marrying Jignesh and is devastated. In a drunken haze, he takes home a drunk girl from the bar named Stella. The next morning, an annoyed Stella tells Nick that all he did the previous night was cry over Ambar. Nick is relieved, but Ambar sees Stella in the bedroom and assumes that they have slept together. Nick discovers that Ambar was trying on rings for Jignesh's girlfriend, Tina. He searches for Ambar with the help of many devoted Salaam Namaste listeners. He finds her and apologises but Ambar's water breaks and they rush to the hospital.

At the hospital, Ron is there with Cathy, who's giving birth as well, and the nurse turns out to be Stella. She tells Ambar that Nick didn't do anything the previous night and is in love with Ambar. They meet the obstetrician Dr. Vijay (Abhishek Bachchan), who turns out to be a comical and incompetent doctor who albeit manages to deliver the children. Before the birth, Nick proposes to her, to which she joyously agrees. The film ends with Nick and Ambar welcoming twins.

Cast

 * Saif Ali Khan as Nikhil "Nick" Arora
 * Preity Zinta as Ambar "Amby" Malhotra
 * Arshad Warsi as Ranjan "Ron" Mathur
 * Tania Zaetta as Cathy Mathur
 * Jugal Hansraj as Jignesh “Jerry” Pandya
 * Abhishek Bachchan as Dr. Vijay Kumar MDGGO (cameo appearance)
 * Jaaved Jaffrey as Jaggu Yadav aka Crocodile Dundee
 * Kunal Vijaykar as Deepan Nair / Debonair
 * Ravi Khote as Aslam Dheka (Nick of Time Restaurant owner)
 * Siddharth Anand as the Taxi Driver (special appearance)
 * Maria Goretti as Lady at the bookstore (special appearance)
 * Ness Wadia as the man reading the newspaper on the bus (special appearance)
 * Jessica Craike as the lady giving birth
 * Kavita Kapoor as Dr. Reema Desai
 * Lucas Campbell as the guy talking to "Nick" in Bar
 * Andrew Willox as the Professor of Medicine
 * Bonnie Hill as Stella

Production
Several people made cameos in the film. Abhishek Bachchan is the narrator and makes a special appearance as a doctor towards the end. Director Siddharth Anand makes an appearance as the taxi driver towards the end. The mother and son in the bookshop Saif Ali Khan's character visits, are actor Arshad Warsi's wife and son, Maria Goretti and Zeke. Preity Zinta's then-boyfriend, Ness Wadia, makes an appearance as the man reading the newspaper beside whom Zinta sits on the bus.

Soundtrack
The film has seven songs composed by the duo Vishal–Shekhar. The music of the film released on 3 August 2005. The music includes 4 songs and 2 remixes. Lyrics are penned by Jaideep Sahni. According to the Indian trade website Box Office India, with around 14,00,000 units sold, this film's soundtrack album was the year's thirteenth highest-selling.

Themes
The film dealt with such topics as cohabitation, premarital sex and pregnancy, and the "altercation between domesticity and individual freedom". Authors Snachari De and Amit Sarwal noted the film for presenting the "Australian Dream" as an alternative for the American Dream. They further noted that premarital pregnancy was not tabooed in the film as would be expected from a film involving Indian characters. Subhash K. Jha further wrote, "Beneath the vibrant veneer, the film makes a very telling and serious comment on commitment-phobia especially among the ambitious urban males who would rather have their cake and sleep with it too."

Release
Salaam Namaste was the highest-grossing Indian film at the overseas market. It grossed inr 572000000 worldwide.

Fran Bailey, Australia's Minister for Small Business and Tourism at the time, attributed the 21% growth of Indian tourism to Australia, to the film's success: "Australia is receiving enormous exposure through Salaam Namaste, the latest Bollywood hit filmed entirely on location in Victoria."

Critical reception
Salaam Namaste received positive reviews from critics upon release, with high praise directed towards the bold concept and storyline, and Zinta's performance in particular received widespread critical acclaim.

Taran Adarsh from the entertainment portal Bollywood Hungama rated Salaam Namaste 4 out of 5 stars, calling it "an immensely likeable film that should appeal to all ages, mainly its target audience -- the youth". He further noted Khan for his "spirited performance" and Zinta "delivering her most accomplished performance to date". The film was said to resemble the 1995 American film Nine Months, with film critic Anubha Sawhney precising that it lifts particular scenes from the same. The Hindu noted "a surprising realness about the whole thing" and noted particularly the film's second-half where "everyone's too immersed in the story" and Zinta "especially does a good job with the hysterics". Dominic Ferrao of Filmfare noted that "Khan and Zinta come off with flying colors, delivering superlative and lively performances" and concluded that the film exemplifies how "Indian cinema is evolving". Pratim D. Gupta of The Telegraph called it "the film of the year", praising Khan's comic timing and Zinta as "an absolute treat to watch".

Devyani Srivastava of Mid-Day believed the film's "substance lies in the pensive questions it poses, and answers, about adult relationships", and appreciated the "memorable performances", noting Zinta's character of "the strong-willed, independent Ambar" to be "a rare Bollywood heroine."

Subhash K. Jha argued that the treatment of the subjects, along with the performances, made up for an otherwise mediocre story. Screen described the film as "a visual treat", praised the performances of Khan and Zinta who "live their roles" and Anand's "confident debut". Sarita Tanwar of Mid Day noted the film's "bold, refreshing and unique" subject, praised the performances, but thought the script needed "some fine-tuning". Rediff 's Lindsay Perreira concluded that "for an afternoon of laughs, some excellent performances by Khan, Zinta and Jaffrey, and a well-shot tour of Melbourne, you can't go wrong with Salaam Namaste". Rama Sharma of The Tribune gave a positive review of the main lead and concluded the film as worth a watch, despite an "inadequate" end.

Namrata Joshi of Outlook called it "a rare Hindi film" in its portrayal of the characters, but criticized the pregnancy part, which she found unconvincing. Khalid Mohamed of DNA India called it "a picture that's polarized between the terrific and the tedious", but noted the main leads.

Salaam Namaste was reviewed positively by several foreign media outlets. Derek Elley of Variety noted its similarity to Nine Months and said it "serves up a bonny 2.5 hours of dialogue-driven entertainment". Elley called Khan "a real leading man" and Zinta "the most substantial actress among the younger Bollywood crop", believing they avoid sentimentality and "show the ability to spin on a dime between comedy and drama". Ethan Alter of Film Journal International concluded, "It's fair to say that the Melbourne setting, along with Khan and Zinta, makes the film. Otherwise, it mainly feels like Bollywood business as usual." The BBC's Manish Gajjar described the film as "a great entertainer" and enjoyed the pairing of Khan and Zinta, who he thought performed convincingly and whose comic timing he found "just perfect". Writing for The New York Times, Anita Gates praised Zinta as a "cheerleader-homecoming queen-fraternity sweetheart pretty", but gave the film a mixed review.

Awards and nominations
 51st Filmfare Awards:

Nominated

 * Best Actress – Preity Zinta
 * Best Supporting Actor – Arshad Warsi
 * Best Comedian – Javed Jaffrey

 7th IIFA Awards:

Won

 * Best Comedian – Javed Jaffrey

Nominated

 * Best Actor – Saif Ali Khan
 * Best Actress – Preity Zinta

title: Salaam Namaste


text:
Misprision

Misprision (from mesprendre, modern se méprendre, "to misunderstand") in English law describes certain kinds of offence. Writers on criminal law usually divide misprision into two kinds: negative and positive.

It survives in the law of England and Wales and Northern Ireland only in the term misprision of treason.

Negative misprision
Negative misprision is the concealment of treason or felony. By the common law of England, it was the duty of every liege subject (vassal) to inform the king's justices and other officers of the law of all treasons and felonies of which the informant had knowledge, and to bring the offender to justice by arrest (see Sheriffs Act 1887, s. 8). The duty fell primarily on the grand jurors of each county borough or franchise (until the abolition of grand juries in 1933), and is performed by indictment or presentment, but it also falls in theory on all other inhabitants. Failure by the latter to discharge this public duty constitutes what is known as misprision of treason or felony.

Misprision of treason, in the words of Blackstone, "[consists] in the bare knowledge and concealment of treason, without any degree of assent thereto: for any assent makes the party a principal traitor". According to Bracton, de Corond, seq. 118, failure to reveal the treason of another was in itself high treason, but statutes of 1551–1552 and 1554–1555 made concealment of treason misprision only. Most of the statutes regulating procedure on trials for treason also apply to misprision of treason. The punishment is loss of the profit of the lands of the offender during life, forfeiture of all his goods and imprisonment for life. These punishments are not affected by the Forfeiture Act 1870.

Misprision of felony is the concealment of a felony committed by another person, but without such previous concert with, or subsequent assistance of the offender, as would make the concealer an accessory before or after the fact. The offence was (and in the United States still is) a misdemeanour punishable on indictment by fine and imprisonment.

Under the old common law hierarchy of crimes (as treasons, felonies and misdemeanours), misprision of treason was a felony and misprision of felony was a misdemeanour. (There was no such offence as misprision of a misdemeanour.) These categories were abolished in 1967.

In the United States, misprision of treason () is defined to be the crime committed by a person owing allegiance to the United States, and having knowledge of the commission of any treasonous crime against them, who conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the president or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor, or to some judge or justice of a particular state. The punishment is imprisonment for not more than seven years and a fine of not more than one thousand dollars.

The United States Code also includes misprision of felony ().

Positive misprision
Positive misprision is the doing of something which ought not to be done; or the commission of a serious offence falling short of treason or felony, in other words of a misdemeanour of a public character (e.g. maladministration of high officials, contempt of the sovereign or magistrates). To endeavour to dissuade a witness from giving evidence, to disclose an examination before the privy council, or to advise a prisoner to stand mute, used to be described as misprisions (Hawk. P. C. bk. I. c. 20).

"The old writers say that a misprision is contained in every felony and that the Crown may elect to prosecute for the misprision instead of the felony. This proposition merely affirms the right of the Crown to choose a more merciful remedy in certain cases, and has no present value in the law. Positive misprisions are now only of antiquarian interest, being treated as misdemeanours."

Statutory offences similar to negative misprision
None of the following offences are described as misprision, but they have a similar scope.

Terrorism
Section 38B of the Terrorism Act 2000 (c.11) creates the offence of failure to disclose information that might prevent an act of terrorism or secure the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of a person for an offence involving the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism. The maximum sentence was increased from five years to ten years in 2019.

Section 19 of the same Act creates an offence of failure to disclose a belief or suspicion that a person has committed an offence under sections 15 to 18 of that Act if that belief or suspicion arises from information acquired in the course of employment or professional work. The maximum sentence is still five years.

England and Wales
In England and Wales, there is no longer a positive obligation on a person who is aware of an offence having been committed to report it. However, section 5(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 provides that if a person knows or believes that a "relevant offence" has been committed, and they have information which might be useful in prosecuting the person who committed it, then if they accept any consideration in return for not disclosing that information, they commit the offence of concealing an offence. There is an exception for "making good of loss or injury caused by the offence", and for "the making of reasonable compensation for that loss or injury". In this context, "relevant offence" means one for which the sentence is fixed by law, such as murder, or where a prison sentence of five years or more can be given.

Arrestable offences
Sections 5(1) and (2) of the Criminal Law Act (Northern Ireland) 1967 (c.18) (N.I.) creates the offence of failure to disclose information which might secure the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of a person for an arrestable offence.

Other jurisdictions and meanings
United States law defines misprision of felony as a federal crime. If one knows that one is a target of a Federal investigation, it is illegal under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act to erase one's browser history intentionally. Khairullozhan Matanov was prosecuted for erasing computer records about his friends, Dhzokar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev; he pleaded guilty to a lesser included offense in 2015.

The term misprision can also be applied in some legal systems to a wilful act or omission by a person who is involved in or has knowledge of the facts of a crime, which results in an innocent person being punished for the crime; e.g., a frameup.

In some jurisdictions, such as New York and the military justice system, misprision also refers to the "intent to cause a false impression", for example, for the sale of fake drugs, such as oregano instead of marijuana.

title: Misprision


text:
User talk:Gong Bank

I don't care. Stop bothering me. ‡  Jarlaxle   19:34, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

 * Ditto .    ‡   Jarlaxle   21:00, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Gong Bank


text:
Lars Arvid Nilsen

Lars Arvid Nilsen (born 15 April 1965 in Notodden) is a retired Norwegian shot putter. He represented Urædd Friidrett.

He finished fifth at the 1986 European Championships, fifth at the 1987 World Indoor Championships, tenth at the 1990 European Indoor Championships, sixth at the 1990 European Championships and fifth at the 1991 World Indoor Championships. He became Norwegian champion in 1989 and 1991. Later in 1991 he won the bronze medal at the World Championships in Tokyo with a throw of 20.75 metres, but as the silver medalist, Nilsen's countryman Georg Andersen was later disqualified from the competition because of using a banned substance, Nilsen was promoted to silver medal position. Nilsen's last international competition was the 1992 European Indoor Championships, where he finished seventh.

His personal best throw was 21.22 metres, achieved in June 1986 in Indianapolis. This is the current Norwegian record.

Nilsen was tested for and found to be using banned substances in 1987 and 1992, which led to a lifetime ban from organized sports. In 2004 he was pardoned and is free to participate in organized sports and competitions in any other sports than shot put. He may not participate in competitions which qualify for national or international championships.

title: Lars Arvid Nilsen


text:
Fictitious capital

Fictitious capital (German: fiktives Kapital) is a concept used by Karl Marx in his critique of political economy. It is introduced in chapter 25 of the third volume of Capital. Fictitious capital contrasts with what Marx calls "real capital", which is capital actually invested in physical means of production and workers, and "money capital", which is actual funds being held. The market value of fictitious capital assets (such as stocks and securities) varies according to the expected return or yield of those assets in the future, which Marx felt was only indirectly related to the growth of real production. Effectively, fictitious capital represents "accumulated claims, legal titles, to future production" and more specifically claims to the income generated by that production.

 * Fictitious capital could be defined as a capitalisation on property ownership. Such ownership is real and legally enforced, as are the profits made from it, but the capital involved is fictitious; it is "money that is thrown into circulation as capital without any material basis in commodities or productive activity".
 * Fictitious capital could also be defined as "tradeable paper claims to wealth", although tangible assets may themselves under certain conditions also be vastly inflated in price.

In terms of mainstream financial economics, fictitious capital is the net present value of expected future cash flows.

Uses of the term
Marx saw the origin of fictitious capital in the development of the credit system and the joint-stock system.

"The formation of a fictitious capital is called capitalisation." It represents a claim to property rights or income. Such claims can take many forms, for example, a claim on future government tax revenue or a claim issued against a commodity that remains, as yet, unsold. The stocks, shares and bonds issued by companies and traded on stock markets are also fictitious capital.

A company may raise (non-fictitious) capital by issuing stocks, shares and bonds. This capital may then be used to generate surplus value, but once this capital is set in motion, the claims held by the owners of the share certificate, etc., are simply "marketable claims to a share in future surplus value production". The stock market "is a market for fictitious capital. It is a market for the circulation of property rights as such".

Since the value of these claims does not function as capital, is merely a claim on future surplus, "the capital-value of such paper is...wholly illusory... The paper serves as title of ownership which represents this capital.

The stocks of railways, mines, navigation companies, and the like, represent actual capital, namely, the capital invested and functioning in such enterprises, or the amount of money advanced by the stockholders for the purpose of being used as capital in such enterprises...; but this capital does not exist twice, once as the capital-value of titles of ownership (stocks) on the one hand and on the other hand as the actual capital invested, or to be invested, in those enterprises." The capital "exists only in the latter form", while the stock or share "is merely a title of ownership to a corresponding portion of the surplus-value to be realised by it".

The formation of fictitious capital is, for Marx, linked to the wider contradiction between the financial system in capitalism and its monetary basis. Marx writes: "With the development of interest-bearing capital and the credit system, all capital seems to double itself, and sometimes treble itself, by the various modes in which the same capital, or perhaps even the same claim on a debt, appears in different forms in different hands. The greater portion of this 'money-capital' is purely fictitious. All the deposits, with the exception of the reserve fund, are merely claims on the banker, which, however, never exist as deposits." The expansion of the credit system can, in periods of capitalist expansion, be beneficial for the system; but in periods of economic crisis and uncertainty, capitalists tend, Marx argues, to look to the security of the "money-commodity" (gold) as the ultimate measure of value. Marx tends to assume the convertibility of paper money into gold. However, the modern system of inconvertible paper money, backed by the authority of states, poses greater problems. Here, in periods of crisis, "the capitalist class appears to have a choice between devaluing money or commodities, between inflation or depression. In the event that monetary policy is dedicated to avoiding both, it will merely end up incurring both".

The term is also used by the economist Cédric Durand as the title of a 2017 book, Fictitious Capital: How Finance Is Appropriating Our Future. The book argues government intervention allows fictitious capital to "assume proportions incompatible with the real production potential of economies," leading inevitably to crises such as the Great Recession.

Speculation
Profit can be made purely from trading in a variety of financial claims existing only on paper. This is an extreme form of the fetishism of commodities in which the underlying source of surplus-value in exploitation of labour power is disguised. Indeed, profit can be made by using only borrowed capital to engage in (speculative) trade, not backed up by any tangible asset.

The price of fictitious capital is governed by a series of complex determinants. In the first instance they are governed by the "present and anticipated future incomes to which ownership entitles the holder, capitalised at the going rate of interest". But fictitious capital is also the object of speculation. The market value of such assets can be driven up and artificially inflated, purely as a result of supply and demand factors which can themselves be manipulated for profit. The inflated value can just as rapidly be punctured if large amounts of capital are withdrawn.

Banking
Marx cites the case of a Mr Chapman who testified before the British Bank Acts Committee in 1857:

"though in 1857 he was himself still a magnate on the money market, [Chapman] complained bitterly that there were several large money capitalists in London who were strong enough to bring the entire money market into disorder at a given moment and in this way fleece the smaller money dealers most shamelessly. There were supposed to be several great sharks of this kind who could significantly intensify a difficult situation by selling one or two million pounds worth of Consols and in this way taking an equivalent sum of banknotes (and thereby available loan capital) out of the market. The collaboration of three big banks in such a manoeuvre would suffice to turn a pressure into a panic."

Marx added that:

"The biggest capital power in London is of course the Bank of England, but its position as a semi-state institution makes it impossible for it to assert its domination in so brutal a fashion. Nonetheless, it too is sufficiently capable of looking after itself... Inasmuch as the Bank issues notes that are not backed by the metal reserve in its vaults, it creates tokens of value that are not only means of circulation, but also forms additional - even if fictitious - capital for it, to the nominal value of these fiduciary notes, and this extra capital yields it an extra profit."

Public stocks
Marx writes:

"To the extent that the depreciation or increase in value of this paper is independent of the movement of value of the actual capital that it represents, the wealth of the nation is just as great before as after its depreciation or increase in value.

"The public stocks and canal and railway shares had already by the 23rd of October, 1847, been depreciated in the aggregate to the amount of £114,752,225." (Morris, Governor of the Bank of England, testimony in the Report on Commercial Distress, 1847-48 [No. 3800].)

"Unless this depreciation reflected an actual stoppage of production and of traffic on canals and railways, or a suspension of already initiated enterprises, or squandering capital in positively worthless ventures, the nation did not grow one cent poorer by the bursting of this soap bubble of nominal money-capital."

title: Fictitious capital