text:
Talk:Yuya

Hieroglyphs
Can someone add the hieroglyph(s) for Yuya and the one(s) for Yusef, as it would illustrate part of the article suitably.

A useful link to do this is
 * How to add hieroglyphs into wikipedia

Here is an example : produces

I haven't seen an illustration of either hieroglyph(s) so I don't know what to put here, otherwise I would do it myself. 21:42, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I have no idea what they should look like. --Briangotts (talk) 12:44, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Yuya and Thuya
Hi - I have created a page for Yuya and Thuya (or Yuya and Tjuya, etc). These should be merged together, dont mind which way though (although they seem to come as a pair!) Markh 07:47, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

 * Can't find that page. --Briangotts (talk) 12:42, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Should be Yuya_and_Tjuyu. Probably best to delete mine and point to this page. Markh 13:17, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

 * Have redirected my page here, and merged the articles (actually just added the tomb details here) Markh 13:27, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

 * Cool. I think this one is probably easier to find. But we should do a second page for Tjuyu to the extent that there's info available. --Briangotts (talk) 15:33, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Done a stub for Tjuyu Markh 19:30, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Joseph
'''This Yuya can't be Joseph because Joseph's bones were carried out by the Israelites from Egypt. During the exodus, Israel carried Joseph's bones across the Red Sea. (book of Exodus in the Bible)'''

 * Well, you know, not everyone thinks that the Bible is 100% true. Paul B 14:05, 25 July, 2005 (UTC)

Question: Don't know if it's appropriate to ask this here, but what if Joseph was really Imhotep instead of Yuya? I don't know much about heiroglyphs but Imhotep's status as a commoner before he became famous and the fact that his bones haven't been found in Egypt makes him a more likely candidate, don't you think?

Also, the article on Djoser who was king during Imhotep's time says that the king is remembered for ending a famine. Heather B 22:21, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Apart from the lack of any evidence for Imhotep the main argument would be that he's way too ancient, at over a 1000 years before Yuya. Paul B 23:30, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I see what you mean about him possibly being too ancient to be Joseph, but there are all kinds of different opinions concerning biblical timelines. Also, I found a site that says there is some evidence of Imhotep, though I'm not certain of the authenticity of the site. http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/imhotep.htm Heather B 06:42, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

 * It is impossible for Imhotep and Joseph to have been one and the same. Note that chariots were not around at the time of Imhotep, that the dream sequence with Djoser was way off (plus Imhotep was already in his position when he did this), and there were no years of plenty before the famine.  Plus I have taken notice that on the website showing similarities between Imhotep and Joseph with a link on Imhotep's article, there is a lot that seems to have been made up.

 * It's not anymore impossible that Imhotep and Joseph were the same than Yuya and Joseph were the same. In fact, I believe there is more evidence for the Imhotep link. Note the Dream Stelae, the list of titles given to Imhotep, including "High Priest of On (Heliopolis)" (an important one that Yuya did not have), and the fact that Yuya's bones were found in Egypt. In regards to timelines, it's more realistic that Imhotep was Joseph than Yuya, especially when suggesting, as Ahmed Osman did, that Moses was Akhenaten. There were at least 400 years between Joseph and Moses and less than 100 between Yuya and Akhenaten. The Dream Stelae presents the most clues: Imhotep was raised to a vizier position, 2nd in command after Pharoah, was given all the titles listed in the Bible, and advised Djoser to tax 10% of Egypt's grain to prepare for a seven-year famine. You can't say there weren't seven years of plenty just because it isn't specifically referenced. User:Jicannon 02:21, 31 July 2006

 * It is much more probable that Yuya was Joseph, but remember, the space of time given between Joseph and Moses could not have been 400 years although mentioned in the Bible. Both Jewish tradition and the Bible itself state that Moses was born to relatively young parents, not on the day of his father's death; the distance of time between Imhotep and most reasonable times for Moses are c.1450 years, so, if you ask me, timewise Yuya IS the better candidate.  Also, as to the priest of Heliopolis, it was his father-in-law.  This seems likely in Yuya's case as his son, Anen, was priest of Heliopolis, which was a hereditary title.  As to the "bones", that passage has almost been proven to be a later insertion, so therefor, it shouldn't be heeded.  Imhotep was NOT given the all of the titles in the Bible.  In fact, none of them were given to Imhotep.  Rather, all of the titles mentioned were given to Yuya.  He was first to bear "Master of the Chariotry", and the only to bear "Father to Pharaoh".  There weren't even chariots at the time of Imhotep.  The tax was long after the famine started, and Djoser is said to have been the fourth Pharaoh he served, while Joseph is said to have served two Pharaohs, which Yuya probably did.  Imhotep is said to advise Djoser to worship Hapy, when we also know that Joseph kept his religion in Egypt (priesthood in ancient Egypt did not quite matter, as it was, in fact, more of a political job and is nothing like today).  And I can say that there weren't any seven years of plenty because the dream with Djoser was already well into the famine, and Imhotep did not do any interpreting.  The Pharaoh who is likely to have appointed Yuya, Tuthmosis IV, was known to have been a dreamer, whose story of the Sphinx is very similar to the Talmud account of the Pharaoh who appointed Joseph's life.  There is evidence to the famine occuring in the reigns of Tuthmosis IV and Amenhotep III.  In the tomb of Yuya's oldest son, Anen, it is said he was in charge of graineries built for famine, as was Manasseh, oldest son of Joseph.  Also, at the time of Imhotep, the shepherds would not be an abomination, and we know that Imhotep came from Nubia.  Therefor, it is much more probable that Joseph was Yuya.71.243.140.149 00:18, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Also, Yuya had two sons and Imhotep had no known sons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robust21 (talk • contribs) 20:43, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

I have removed the hieroglyphs for Joseph as this appears to be Original Research. Markh 11:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, there was a request for them, but I see that it would make sense that it was original research as there is no way to know EXACTLY how they were written.mikey 02:19, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Image on the left side
There are a few individuals on Wikipedia who will insist that the image placement on the left side of the opening of the article is not allowed or against the style guidelines. Dont believe it, it looks great and is perfectly allowed. This is just a pre-notice as they will probably be along shortly. Nice article. Stbalbach 15:33, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Reversion tennis

 * Anyone want to discuss why they keep reverting between link (see also Tjuyu)? Markh 12:04, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

 * No-one's actually saying so, but one link is to a white supremacist website that tries to prove that Yuya and Tjuyu were blond Nordic Aryan types. It has high quality images but they illustrate a text that many contributors would think it inappropriate to link to. The comments about his "blondness", of course, ignore the chemical changes that affect the colour of his mummy's hair - which was probably white. The other link is not ideologically problematic, but (to be sure) not as visually rich. Paul B 12:30, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * If content of site is inappropriate to wikipedia, then at 1. at least link with same or better quality must be provided. 2. If a site is white supremacist, that does not imply that everything on it is wrong. AlV 13:30, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

 * What "Chemical changes" specifically? Why is it so ridiculous to believe that some ancient Egyptians were indeed blond? Thuya and Yuya's hair were both blond, according to the images. To assume that this is only due to a "Chemical change" is only indicative of someone else's racism. Besides, the whole "Only Nordic people were blond" hoax is nonsense. For the record, here are the images showing the hair color: https://archive.is/5GbCH/bff1a5e8c868aad9f0c7055b583e3685164b23f1.jpg
 * Mystery of the Blonde Egyptian Mummies Has Been Solved: https://mysteriousuniverse.org/2016/05/mystery-of-the-blonde-egyptian-mummies-has-been-solved/
 * 97.104.181.98 (talk) 22:50, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 * And there are sea monsters in San Francisco bay: Why are you replying to a post almost 14 years old? Where has she published this in a peer reviewed journal? Doug Weller  talk 12:08, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Pictures
I just bought Osman's book, Hebrew Pharoahs of Egypt, which gives much more information about Yuya, along with of course his claims relating the mummy to Joseph, and some pictures of the actual face of Yuya and his wife courtesy of the Museum of Cairo. The first and last I imagine will be of great interest here, and so I shall look to do this probably monday or tuesday, when I have time.

KV 19:22, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

 * You will find "some pictures of the actual face of Yuya and his wife" on the white supremacist web-page you deleted with the odd, and certainly inaccurate, claim that he wasn't mentioned on it. Paul B 23:08, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, we have pictures..... Wikipedia says to not put external links to anything we can have on the site..... and certainly it not being topical, and we can get our own pictures without them calling the bright yellow embalming fluids, which those who originally studied the bodies acknowledged as such, denoting the real color of the hair, as blonde. The page may have had a picture or two, but there's no need to link to that..... we'd be better off external linking directly to the pictures.

 * KV 06:45, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

 * You will see discussion of this in the "reversion tennis" section above. The argument in favour of keeping was that the pictures were high quality, though I suspect that the editor in question had other motives, and the blonde mummy nonsense has appeared elsewhere . In the end it was left with a warning aabout the nature of the site. Also, it looks as though your pictures are about to be deleted unless you tag them.Paul B 11:40, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

 * They've been since tagged, and I've seen the discussion. If there was to be a link to that site, for the pictures, then the external link should be to the picture hosted on the server specifically.  It's possible.  I read the discussion above, and Wikipedia policy disagrees with the rationale for keeping the link.  External links states, in links to avoid, "Any site that contains factually inaccurate material or unverified original research, unless it is the official site of the article's subject or it is a notable proponent of a point of view in an article with multiple points of view. (See WP:RS for further information on this guideline.)"

 * Surely, the white supremacists are not notable proponents in this category, but I would even say that Wikipedia is being skewed there, it would not be NPOV to neglect such viewpoints because they aren't notable proponents. The problem is that it has factually inaccurate material, which is taken in poor context to make arguments which aren't reasonably backed up at all.  It simply makes arguments that only appease people who are looking to agree with the conclusion.  No discussion is even put forth about how these relate to the Egyptians being white.

 * Furthermore, the link is not topical. Sure, it may have a picture of the two, though it isn't prominent which explains why I missed it on first review, but the page does not give any real information on the subject at hand, Yuya.  If there is to be a restoration of any such link, it should be to the pictures directly, which are the only topical part of the issue.  However, I wouldn't find this link objectionable on Wikipedia's page Controversy over race of Ancient Egyptians.  There it would be topical, only a poor resource.

 * http://www.white-history.com/hwr8_files/yuya.jpg http://www.white-history.com/hwr8_files/thuya.jpg are the respective links, if you really feel it necessary to relink it. Both work, there is no external image linking protection on that site, as in accordance with the rule I have found: neo-nazis don't know how to do anything complex with technology.  I discovered this playing a game on DALnet on IRC, where you go into #nazi and say something supporting racial equality, and see how long it takes them to boot you.  It took them about an hour at first to figure out how to kick you, then it took them a month to figure out how to ban someone, and about two extra months after that to figure out how to ban someone in a way that they couldn't change names.

 * Personally, I think that the pictures don't give as good of an idea of the visage as the ones I added to the article directly, and would need some explaining that the embalming process makes hair blonde, which I can prove if necessary. Any link to them, should describe such.  Certainly, they weren't purple-skinned people either :)

 * KV 04:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

 * The links to the images don't seem to work. Still, it's not important.Paul B 11:10, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Interestingly, they work only if you've been to the page just prior :/

 * KV 17:16, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Resources
The resources sections in Wikipedia are usually used as a bibliography, this one seems to be that plus external links...... if someone who knows which of those were actually used in the article wants to weed it out into resources and external links.... it would be greatly appreciated, before I go add in sources.

KV 05:00, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I see someone has done that, and I thank you. I figured some of the external links may have been used, but I guess not.

 * KV 18:12, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Just tidied up the references, and linked the foot notes. Markh 18:50, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I saw...... and it confused me for a minute until I figured out how to work with those. I miss the old days of non-linkable citations used on simple word processors.

 * KV 19:15, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

List of Honors
I've added this, which while this article is as small as it is, makes sense to stay a part of the article....... however, if the article gets really big, we may want to move it.

I do intend on contributing more to this article in the coming days.

KV 18:12, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Reference for Akhmim
The page cited for that citation simply states, "Akhmim clearly rose in importance in New Kingdom times, and is known as the birthplace of Tutankhamun's maternal grandparents Yuya and Thuya." It doesn't say that mainstream Egyptologists don't take the asiatic theory seriously or that he came from nobility, it only states that he is known to have come from Akhmim, there needs to be other citations, especially since the source is very pro-Akhmim. I'll have to add another fact tag where it isn't covered.

KV(Talk) 16:17, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Tomb
Should someone add a section about his tomb? It was a huge discovery, one of the biggest finds in the Valley of the Kings.mikey 20:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

This statement
Yuya is the only person in Egyptian history known to have been granted the title "Beloved Father of Pharaoh" other than Joseph. Could someone find a source for Yuya's being called Father of Pharaoh in a (preferably not Osman) source? I seem to recall reading that the term rendered Father of Pharaoh for Joseph was probably a rendering of the egyptian quite common It-Ntr, father of the god. Thus I am suspicious as to if Yuya was ever legitimatly called It-Pr-Aa. Thanatosimii 18:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

 * http://www.specialtyinterests.net/the_many_faces_of_ashurnasirpal_and_his_son.html this says it. Theodore Davis also mentions his title in his accounts of the founding of Yuya's tomb.  In addition, another title is expanded from It-ntr into It-ntr-n-nb-tawy, Holy Father of the Lord of the Two Lands, yet another way to say "father to Pharaoh", Yuya also being the only to bear this title as well.  While Osman's theories are not commonly accepted, he does always cite his sources, and even if you don't agree with his theories, all of the info in his books that he uses to support is factual.

mikey 00:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Category:Judaism
Should Category:Judaism be removed? I mean, it's sort of POV. mikey 21:52, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Deleted Osman Content
The discussion on Osman within one Wikiproject, not the actual page, states that Osman's theories are rejected by mainstream Egyptologists (of course, not all egyptologists). They do not disagree with some hard facts about Yuya that Osman mentions. They only disagree with the interpretation. I've readded much there as it informs more on Yuya, and quite frankly, as it stands, the article doesn't even begin to suggest that Yuya = Joseph. The idea isn't presented.

In the future, I'll probably readd some information on that, as it should not be excluded as per WP:ATT which stresses that it is notable if mainstream scholars mention it, even degradingly, which the discussion over at Wikiproject:Ancient Egypt admits. Quite frankly, I see people taking a controversy that is perhaps the most notable thing about Yuya, and removing any reference to it rather than adding more information to NPOV it. That is sad. And I would like to note that I have not added any information on this article in the past or currently on that actual discussion, only the hard facts.

KV(Talk) 21:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I think you should add some information about the possible connection to Joseph. I've recently acquired an interest in Egyptology through the Teaching Company's course, looking for some of the newest research I found this entry in wikipedia and googled the possible Joseph connection. It is to my uninformed mind an interesting connection, and enough seems to be there to warrant inclusion, with appropriate skepticism, of course.

Rleibman 22:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Its not credible, also see WP:FRINGE, and discussion above. Markh 22:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Though his theories may be fringe, his facts are not. KV(Talk) 01:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Was Yuya the Biblical Judah?
Hi,

I'm curious to find out if anyone else believes that Yuya may have been the Biblical Judah and that Amenhotep son of Hapu was Joseph.. Would love to chat with someone about this.

Hathorpe (talk) 05:34, 11 November 2010 (UTC)Hathor

Yuya as Joseph again
I added the opposing point of view based on Redford and Sweeney's article. I removed the comment that this theory is supported by Ronald E. Clements, Professor of Old Testament Studies at King's College in London. I cannot find any source that states anything like this. The reference for that statement was not verifiable as it only stated AP (not sure what that refers to; Associated Press?) and the date of October 24, 1987. This supposed support is mentioned all over the internet, but I have not been able to trace it back to any real publication. --AnnekeBart (talk) 17:39, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Sweeney on Osman
The edits claiming that the text was misrepresenting Sweeney were removed by me. There is no attempt to make Osman look worse than he is. This is exactly how bad the arguments are. Sweeney is highly critical given some quotes:
 * What about the linchpin of Osman's theory? Usual as it may seem at first sight,
 * Yuya's title "God's father of the Lord of the Two Lands" is simply a more
 * elaborate version of "God's Father," a title which was held from the Old Kingdom
 * to the Nineteenth Dynasty by a number of people related by blood or by marriage
 * to the king (= the "god" of the title), and from the mid-Eighteenth Dynasty also
 * by royal tutors and certain priests. The title cannot equate Yuya with Joseph.

So yes, the whole it-netjer argument is dismissed. Removing this type of counter argument appears overly apologetic to me. --AnnekeBart (talk) 23:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

And re edit comment: After reading the Sweeney article, she expressed more doubt than actual rebuttal of the theory. That is just patently false. Given statements from the article: These are not statements of doubt. These are pretty blatant comments stating Osman is wrong in many of the arguments he uses.--AnnekeBart (talk) 00:22, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Osman reinterprets the whole narrative of Isaac's conception (Gen 18:1-15; 21:1-7), which clearly takes place many years after Abraham's return from Egypt (in Gen 12:20. Were I to follow Osman's line of reasoning, I might cheerfully argue that Isaac is the son of Abimelech of Gerar!
 * Some of the egyptological theories on which Osman rests his arguments have now been disproved, such as the view that during the Eighteenth Dynasty the right to inherit the throne descended in the female line, and the Pharaoh thus had to marry the royal heiress to become king.
 * Many of Osman's attempts to establish the Eighteenth Dynasty as a terminus post quem for the Joseph story are not accurate.
 * etc
 * Trust me, the examples you've shown here are true. However, this article doesn't deal with Osman's ideas on Isaac (which are certainly reaching and bizarre) or the view on the female line (which was, at one point, the accepted view and only comprehensive view).  While the author doesn't agree with the identification of Yuya and Joseph, the article further misrepresents both Sweeney's quote regarding the God's Father title and Osman's assertion regarding Joseph's burial (which, despite all the craziness going on in his book, is surprisingly well-supported).  Though I don't agree with Osman, I certainly don't seek to defame him even more than he has been just because I'm not sold.  I'm not being apologetic.  I'm being fair by making sure the rebuttals to Osman's claims are represented while not misrepresenting him. Dr. Hannibal Lecter 03:02, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * By the way, I certainly don't want to start a reverting war. That really doesn't help anyone.  However, I feel it may be best to revert to my most recent edit (though I will certainly give it another look over to make sure I didn't mess up anything from Sweeney). Dr. Hannibal Lecter 03:02, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with the last edit you provided. The one before that (the one I reverted) I felt did not really reflect what was in the literature. My reading of the article was that the pretty much ripped up the book. She questioned the methodology, and pointed out use of outdated (and worse disproven) theories, factual errors, etc. Thanks for the thoughts and efforts btw. The last edit is an improvement over what was there before (including mine). Cheers --AnnekeBart (talk) 13:51, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Delete the Jospeh section
It is not accepted by mainstream egyptology, it is speculative at best, there is no evidence to support it but a vague name. And what the hell are semitic features as opposed to Egyptian ones. Semitic is a sub-linguistic group of African-asiatic languages. Meaning looking semitic can mean anything from looking Hausa Nigerian to Berber Algerian to Syrian Arab or Israeli jew or Somalian. No one can look semitic, its not a race. You have black, white, multiracial, asiatic etc type semites. this is really a fringe theory. If you include this then you are going to have race debates in every article off what some whacko thinks this mummy looks purple, that mummy looks blue, this mummy looks orangutang. Hernanday (talk) 23:43, 20 August 2013 (UTC)hernanday

Unicode
vandalism?? ==

I strenuously object to having unicode characterized as vandalism. Why is it that I've been reverted with such an invalid edit summary?

Unicode codepoints exist for Egyptian heiroglyphics, meaning one can add it directly to the article without using images.

-- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 09:19, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

 * I'm using Internet Explorer 11, and your inserted code is coming up on the article and on the talk page as a mess, not as hieroglyphics. What browser are you using? Wdford (talk) 12:11, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

 * You need to install Heiroglyphic font support ; this is what happens with rare languages, you can't display them unless you install the proper fonts. This is why many articles on Wikipedia have things such as

 * Try this webpage it tests if you have the correct fonts installed.
 * -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 00:43, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Warning template is now implemented : Contains Egyptian Hieroglyphic text
 * per discussion at WP:AE. -- 70.50.148.248 (talk) 04:14, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Citing then discrediting Osman
One citation uses Osman's one book, though it doesn't name him (Hebrew Kings of Egypt), then discredits another book of his and his own personal interpretation and stated mission of accounting for both theorized history (because accepted theory is all history really is) and what may be historically correlative in the Old Testament (why would Joseph be so important to not be mentioned at all throughout Egypt). The article also doesn't account for the long list of titles both Joseph and Yuya were given, nor state substantive arguments against Osman while trying to discredit his theory: 'factualizing' anything stated in the Bible without archeological evidence is not a proof that something to the contrary actually occurred (i.e. if a proposed site or evidence of the remains of Joseph actually exists in Israel); no persons are named in the article who were granted any version of the 'father of god' title (let alone the additional other titles given to Yuya AND Joseph) to support the contradiction of Osman's statement, so in itself, it holds no water within the article itself.

As previously mentioned - Osman cites his sources and is obvious about his interpretations and suggestions as being just that. Sources offering evidence, rather than summations or generalizations, are a proper counter to the interpretations of actual, sourced facts. There are a lot of seeming 'coincidences' that historians like to overlook because it's inconvenient, but unless they can be proved coincidence, they remain plausible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.3.61.82 (talk) 20:49, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Yuya


text:
List of storms named Keli

The name Keli has been used for three tropical cyclones worldwide, one in the Eastern Pacific ocean and two in the South Pacific Region.

In the Eastern Pacific:
 * Hurricane Keli (1984) – remained over open waters.

In the South Pacific region: The name Keli was retired in the South Pacific basin after the 1996–97 season.
 * Cyclone Keli (1986) – a minimal category 1 tropical cyclone (australian scale), affected Vanuatu.
 * Cyclone Keli (1997) – the first recorded post-season tropical cyclone to form in June within the South Pacific Ocean.

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

title: List of storms named Keli


text:
User talk:Nescio

FYI
I think you have been following the news about the taping of Abu Zubaydah's interrogation, and the subsequent destruction of those tapes.

Something the MSM hasn't noticed, or hasn't touched is that at least one of the Guantanamo captives, Ibrahim Zeidan, testified about images from Abu Zubaydah's interrogation scars being shown to other captives during their own interrogations.

I am going to write a little note about this, in User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Ibrahim Zeidan reports Abu Zubaydah image used as an interrogation tool. Would you mind offering your opinion?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 23:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification...
on the waterboarding article. I was getting a bit confused myself. Remember (talk) 14:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

FYI: Requests for checkuser/Case/Inertia Tensor
Requests for checkuser/Case/Inertia Tensor. Lawrence Cohen 17:30, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

 * Does this mean I am now talking to myself?:) Anyway, something fishy is going on. Nomen Nescio Gnothi seauton 17:41, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

 * FWIW, although we are not big time correspondents, you and hypnosadist and I have worked on some of the same articles for ages. I am 100 percent certain that the two of you are (1) wikipedians who fully comply with WP:CIV and all other wikipedia policies; and (2) are unique individuals.

 * My interactions with Lawrence Cohen are more recent, but I am confident he isn't a sockpuppet of either of you.

 * I have had some left-field accusations of being a sock-puppet. No matter how groundless, they can be annoying.  Geo Swan (talk) 22:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Waterboarding arbitration
The problem is, it's an established principle that the Arbitration Committee does not rule on content issues. They can rule on procedures for determining consensus, but they will not give a definitive "right" answer to the content disputes. Most of your proposed principles are issues of substantive content, rather than of Wikipedia policy and procedure.

With regard to the actual substantive points you made, I agree that non-legal and popular opinion should not be given great weight in determining the consensus on a legal issue. However, where we disagree is that I do not believe torture is solely a legal issue, nor do I believe that the position under US and international law should be definitive. With regard to a politically-charged term like torture, I don't believe we should ever try to reach a definitive "correct" answer, as to do so is POV; instead, we should outline the dispute and cite reliable published sources (whether legal, political or psychological) on both sides. It is perfectly acceptable to say that waterboarding is widely considered torture, and that it probably contravenes US and international law relating to torture, but not to say definitively that it is torture. WaltonOne 18:17, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

 * Just to add to the above. I want to say that, from what I've seen of your work, I highly respect you, and you're clearly an intelligent and well-informed person when it comes to legal issues etc (I say this as an Oxford law student). Our disagreements in the waterboarding arbitration are nothing personal. I note from your userpage that you do have strong views in relation to the Bush administration and its treatment of detainees (just as I have strong political views on certain issues, as you can identify from my userpage). I substantially disagree with you about many political matters (I'm a strong supporter of the death penalty, for instance) but I'm not an uncritical admirer of the Bush administration, and my stance on waterboarding is nothing to do with political views; I'm not trying to promote an agenda or make Wikipedia into some kind of pro-Bush propaganda site. As I said, I have no personal opinion as to whether or not waterboarding is torture. But I just believe that we should represent the controversy in the article without taking one side or the other. WaltonOne 19:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the compliments. Hopefully you understand that I have no negative feelings towards you. As lomg as people remain civil I more than welcome an opposing opinion. Debate only sharpens the mind and increases our knowledge.

 * Regarding the waterboarding dispute, it is evident that it revolves around the legalities. Although there are many ways to view a topic, i.e. legal, political, medical, philosophical, ethical, it doubt the current debate is about the metaphysical concept of waterboarding. Clearly, the Bush administration is in very serious trouble the moment waterboarding is torture. We have multiple reasons for assumuing the legalities are the prime reason for instigating this teach the controversy debate.
 * In 1996 the US adopted the War Crimes Act. This specifically defined the violation of the Geneva Conventions as a war crime.
 * Following 9/11 Gonzales observed that with the WCA in mind it was possible a future administration would pursue criminal prosecution of individuals for violating the WCA by engaging in certain activities. (I wonder what activities could he mean?)
 * He opined that removing the GC from the equation would limit the possibility of the previous happening.
 * Coincidentally the Bush administration then argued that the GC did not apply in the WoT. (Again, I wonder why this happened directly after the comment by G.)
 * In 2006 the Supreme Court dismissed that notion and stated that all detainees in the WoT are protected by the GC, that is article 3 regarding treatment of detainees.
 * Immediately following that ruling the Bush administration pushed for the adoption of the Military Commisions Act which could no longer wait.
 * Coincidentally part of the MCA was retroactively rewriting the WCA in such a way that those people discussed by G, in point 2, would no longer be punishable under US law for what before the adoption of the MCA was considered a war crime.
 * Then it became known that around the time of the disclosure of secret detention facilities, and consternation surrounding Abu Graib, videos depicting enhanced interrogation techniques miraculously got destroyed depite a court order and legal advise not to do so.(Apparently of all the videos, audioredording, paper files these videos could reveal the identities of CIA agents. Why the CIA was able to prevent disclosure, while not having to destroy videos, audioredording, paper files, in other cases remains a mystrery.)
 * Then suddenly we have a debate on whether waterboarding is torture. Several key officials have stated they were unable to make such a determination because it would implicate certain individuals and may result in criminal liability.
 * With the above in mind it is difficult to see why the debate is-is not torture is not a legal one. The above shows a pattern of trying to evad criminal liability for what Gonzales himself has identified as possible war crimes. Nomen Nescio Gnothi seauton 15:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Use of minor edit
Hi Nescio. Did you mean to use the minor edit button when you reverted my deletion of two paragraphs citing BLP concerns? Thanks, Andjam (talk) 00:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Candace Gorman
I saw you contributed to Candace Gorman recently.

Could I ask for your opinion of this set of edits to the article?

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 19:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Waterboarding RfM
A Request for Mediation has been filed on the Waterboarding article concerning the content dispute in the first six words of the article. You have been named as a party and your participation would be appreciated. I believe this is the best approach to an amicable resolution of the dispute. Please indicate your agreement here. Thank you. Neutral Good (talk) 20:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Your waterboarding reverts
Your reverts here:, were unconstructive. The Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain case was already cited properly by the page here:. I just added a more specificic cite to let you know where the exact quote was here: 542 U.S. 692, 734 (2004). Please refrain from reverting my edits any further. If you revert my edits for a third time I will consider it vandalism. Thanks.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 18:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Trying this again
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Requests for mediation/Waterboarding 2, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Neutral Good (talk) 02:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Associação Académica de Coimbra
Thanks. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 09:17, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Your claims about me
Hi Nescio,

In this edit, you say "Please stop removing sourced material as you were told before by others." and in this edit, you say "Also, you fail to mention your previous attempt at removing sourced material was dismissed by an uninvolved editor".

Can you provide a diff supporting those claims? Andjam (talk) 12:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Nescio, I share your convictions about AIDS Reappraisal, BUT...
This edit you made is unconstructive.

Plase, I beg you, let´s try to work on what sources say. Yours Randroide (talk) 20:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Command responsibility
Hi Nescio, I presume you missed my comment over at Talk:International Criminal Court explaining why I removed command responsibility. I appreciate that the doctrine of command responsibility is fundamental to the ICC, but so are hundreds of other concepts, such as impunity, human rights, immunity from prosecution (international law), etc. It seems bizarre to me to single out command responsibility ahead of so many other equally relevant articles — particularly when command responsibility is already linked in the international criminal law footer at the bottom of the ICC article. If you don't agree, let's discuss it at the talk page. Regards, Polemarchus (talk) 16:07, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Wilderness Diarrhea Getting Killed
Nescio:

You're interested in Backpacking, so I guess that's good, though as an American, I may not understand your definition; an MD, so I guess that's good, but you're a Brit, so you may not understand this issue.

 * Dunno, but it seems remotely possible you'd be interested in Wilderness Diarrhea getting merged into Travelers Diarrhea by a couple of zealots who seem to have no concept of outdoor interests.

I get around a lot in the outdoors (in N.A.), and rarely treat water, but WD article had some good stuff.

 * After a couple of weeks of calm discussion, I went ballistic and no longer want to participate. Rational voices might help.

These guys have irrationally convinced themselves that WD isn't a legitimate topic for a Wikipedia article.

 * I've pointed out several bomb-proof arguements to no avail. I'd say the strongest is the vast number of published articles that discuss WD as a separate concern from TD. They are both environmental health topics, and obviously the context of each are far different.

 * They simply ignore all this.

Afd of Mucoid plaque
Mucoid plaque is up for AFD... again.

The latest discussion is here. As a previous participant in a AFD discussion for this article, you are encouraged to contribute to ongoing consensus of whether or not this article meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion.--ZayZayEM (talk) 02:36, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:3RR
Just formally noting that you have made three reverts on Unitary executive theory in the last two hours, each time without any regard for the discussion going on on the talk page. You're an experienced editor, so shouldn't need the reminder about WP:3RR.

With respect to the substance, Ahmad Chabad's unpublished thesis does not meet WP:RS, so please stop adding these fringe theories into Wikipedia articles. THF (talk) 15:29, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

 * And you've now made a fourth reversion, perhaps while I was giving you this notice. THF (talk) 15:31, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Two seperate edits, two edits each. No 3RR applies Nomen Nescio Gnothi seauton 15:32, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

 * You're wrong about that, too. Reread the policy, especially the part in bold. THF (talk) 19:46, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Ahmad Chaheb
What's your relationship with Ahmad Chaheb? The only Google footprint for his unpublished dissertation is your repeated additions of it to Wikipedia articles and insistence that this person is a "legal expert." THF (talk) 16:13, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

 * You still haven't answered the question. THF (talk) 19:46, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Edit warring warning
Hi, this is a warning to both and. Please stop edit warring on, or you may both be blocked without further warning. I'd appreciate it if you would not delete this warning. Thanks,  Sandstein   15:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Dermatology
Do you have an interest in dermatology? If so, I am always looking for more help ;) kilbad (talk) 22:54, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Could you please explain...
I saw you voiced concerns over WP:SYNTH and WP:NPOV at Articles for deletion/Uyghur guest houses suspected of ties to islamist militancy.

I requested another contributor who voiced a WP:SYNTH concern, if they could find the time, to offer a fuller explanation of their concern. And, if you had the time, I would be very grateful if you would try to offer a fuller explanation of your concerns.

I do my best to comply with all our policies, but I am only human, and I may have overlooked a lapse. If I really did lapse, and you can explain that lapse, I will do my best to make sure I don't make a similar lapse in future.

WRT the absence of WP:RS from the MSM -- first, while the Daily Times (Pakistan) is not an American reference, does that mean it is not from the MSM?

Second, while MSM references are frequently used in articles, perhaps more often than scholarly references, books, or official government publications, I don't see that as an indication that they are better than scholarly references, books, or other WP:RS. I see the frequent use of MSM references as merely being a reflection that there are, generally, more of them to choose among. The last time I tried to review all the relevant wikidocuments that address this question, which I admit was more than a year ago, I found no indication that MSM references were preferred to other WP:RS. If you are aware of a wikidocument that states MSM references are preferred, could you direct it to my attention?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 19:40, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Vann Nath painting at Waterboarding
Hi there. I've started a thread on the appropriateness of the Vann Nath painting at Talk:Waterboarding. I hope you'll participate in that discussion.--agr (talk) 00:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

interview request
Hello, My name is Natalia Ioana Olaru and I am a final year master student in the Corporate Communication programme at the Aarhus School of Business in Denmark. I am currently working on my final paper on the topic of user motivation to create content on collaborative media websites, the focus being Wikipedia. As a sample I chose the English and Danish portals. I would like to invite you for an online interview on the topic of what motivates you, to participate in editing and creating articles for this platform. I plan on doing the actual interviews in the period between 1st and the 15th of May via Skype, MSN or Yahoo Messenger. I am, however, open to other channels of communication too. Please let me know if you would like to participate in this interview and the preferred channel.

Thank you, Natalia Olaru Email: natalia.ioana.olaru@gmail.com MulgaEscu (talk) 13:34, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

A group which is described in sources as including Islamic beliefs is "Christian terrorism"?
Query. Seems to me that it is not specifically Christian if it includes Islamic beliefs. Your mileage appears to differ on this, I take it. Cheers. Collect (talk) 14:06, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

 * Please note this quote from the article:
 * The group is based on apocalyptic Christianity,[4][5][6][7][8][9][10] but also is influenced[11] by a blend of Mysticism[12] and traditional religion,[13]
 * "Also influenced" to me suggest this is less important than being based on apocalyptic Christianity---  Nomen Nescio  Gnothi seauton  contributions  14:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It also means (since the group specifically self-identified as being Islamic as well) that the group is not simply basing its acts on Christian theology.  Collect (talk) 15:34, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, an open access peer reviewed journal with no charges, invites you to participate
Hi

Did you know about Wikiversity Journal of Medicine? It is an open access, peer reviewed medical journal, with no publication charges. You can find more about it by reading the article on The Signpost featuring this journal.

We welcome you to have a look the journal. Feel free to participate.

You can participate in any one or more of the following ways:
 * Publish an article to the journal.
 * Sign up as a peer reviewer of potential upcoming articles. If you do not have expertise in these subjects, you can help in finding peer reviewers for current submissions.
 * Sign up as an editor, and help out in open tasks.
 * Outreach to potential contributors, with can include (but is not limited to) scholars and health professionals. In any mention of Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, there may be a reference to this Contribute-page. Example presentation about the journal.
 * Add a post-publication review of an existing publication. If errors are found, there are guidelines for editing published works.
 * Apply to become the treasurer of the journal
 * Join the editorial board.
 * Share your ideas of what the journal would be like in the future as separate Wikimedia project.
 * Donate to Wikimedia Foundation.
 * Translate journal pages into other languages. Wikiversity currently exists in the following other languages
 * Ceština, Deutsch, Español, Français, Italiano, 한국어, Português, Slovenšcina, Suomi, Svenska, Ελληνικά, Русский, العربية, 日本語
 * Technical work like template designing for the journal.
 * Sign up to get emails related to the journal, which are sent to . If you want to receive these emails too, state your interest at the talk page, or contact the Editor-in-chief at.
 * Spread the word to anyone who could be interested or could benefit from it.

The future of this journal as a separate Wikimedia project is under discussion and the name can be changed suitably. Currently a voting for the same is underway. Please cast your vote in the name you find most suitable. We would be glad to receive further suggestions from you. It is also acceptable to mention your votes in the email list. Please note that the voting closes on 16th August, 2016, unless protracted by consensus, due to any reason.

 D ip ta ns hu Talk 14:28, 11 August 2016 (UTC) -on behalf of the Editorial Board, Wikiversity Journal of Medicine.

Alternative set of procedures listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Alternative set of procedures. Since you had some involvement with the Alternative set of procedures redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD (talk) 21:08, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Backpacking project
I see you have self-identified as a backpacker by using the ”This user enjoys backpacking” userbox. I invite you to join the backpacking project. It recently reactivated. There is plenty of good work to do improving the encyclopedia’s coverage of backpacking equipment, organizations, celebrities, books, skills, and trails. The project provides a system to rate articles and prioritize editing efforts. Visit the project’s page, take a look, and please consider joining me in improving the articles and coverage of an activity we both enjoy.

—¿philoserf? (talk) 19:57, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nescio


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plot patent

 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 delete. Dmcdevit·t 06:00, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

Plot patent
Neologism. Non-notable. Presumably promotional. See also "Storyline patent" above. I vote delete. --Edcolins 21:43, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to storyline patent. On the other hand.. just delete. --R.Koot 21:54, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete People attempt to patent all sorts of crazy non-patentable things; they don't become notable unless they draw real legal attention. This hasn't, and very, very likely won't. Xoloz 05:11, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
 * delete as per storyline patent. Mmmbeer 13:44, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn concept. JamesBurns 03:28, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neologism. Advertisement. --Ann O'nyme 11:20, July 25, 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:
Van den Broek

Van den Broek is a Dutch toponymic surname, meaning "from the marshes". Variant spellings include Van den Broeck, Van den Broeke, and Vandebroek. People with this surname include:
 * Antonius van den Broek (1870–1926), Dutch lawyer and physicist known for defining the atomic number
 * Barbara van den Broek (1932 – 2001), New Zealand-born Australian architect and landscape architect
 * Benjamin van den Broek (born 1987), New Zealand footballer
 * Dirk van den Broek (1924–2020), Dutch businessman
 * Elias van den Broek (1649–1708), Dutch Golden Age flower painter
 * Hans van den Broek (born 1936), Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs
 * Irene van den Broek (born 1980), Dutch cyclist
 * Jacques van den Broek (born 1960), Dutch businessman, CEO of Randstad Holding
 * Jan Karel van den Broek (1814–1865), Dutch physician in Japan
 * Jo van den Broek (1898–1978), Dutch architect
 * Johannes van den Broek (1882–1946), Dutch businessman and Minister of Finance
 * John van den Broek (1894/1895–1918) Dutch cinematographer who died while filming
 * Klaas van den Broek (born 1955), Dutch ice hockey player
 * Koen van den Broek (born 1973), Belgian painter
 * Marc van den Broek (born 1953), Belgian painter and sculptor
 * Marilène van den Broek (born 1970), Dutch princess
 * Marleen van den Broek (born 1971), Dutch singer and presenter known as Marlayne
 * Nanja van den Broek (born 1975), Dutch freediver
 * Roel van den Broek (born 1931), Dutch religious history scholar
 * Theo van den Broek (born 1930s), New Zealand football player
 * Theodore J. Van den Broek (1783–1851), Dutch Dominican missionary to the United States
 * Van den Broeke
 * Vandebroek
 * Sophie Vandebroek (born 1962), Belgian electrical engineer and business executive

title: Van den Broek


text:
User talk:SebastianHelm/Sheep vote

NPOV and personal attacks
This page is far from being netural, and is one blatent blanket personal attack aginst users who lodge a silent approval or opposition vote in admin elections. But i dout it will be taken down. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 04:45, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't see how it is a personal attack, it gives reasons behind why someone would vote one way or another in an admin election, some of those reasons are actually valid. Derktar 05:17, July 21, 2005 (UTC).
 * This looks like a perfectly valid article to me. Themindset 02:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Deletion Tag
Since the voting is over and the verdict has been reached, can the deletion tag please be removed? Ryan 03:20, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

VfD
This article was the subject of an August 2005 Votes for Deletion. The result was 'no consensus, kept.

Outside Wikipedia?
If anyone could find evidence that this occurred outside Wikipedia, I'd remove the specific reference to VfAs and then turn it into an article (on the main namespace, not Wikipedia:).

Unfortunately, I can't find any such evidence. All Google will tell us is that democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

However, pages documenting Wikipedia phenomena seem to be acceptable on Meta, and there's no NPOV policy there, so I'm going to copy this over. Seahen 17:19, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:SebastianHelm/Sheep vote


text:
Rhode Island Route 214

Route 214 is a 2.2 mi state highway in the U.S. state of Rhode Island. Its southern terminus is at Route 138A in Middletown, and its northern terminus is at Route 114 in Middletown.

Route description
Route 214 begins at the intersection of Aquidneck Avenue, which carries Route 138A, and Valley Road in Middletown. Heading north on Valley Road, the highway parallels the eastern short of Green End Pond. North of the pond, the road passes through a residential area before reaching the Main Street commercial district at Route 138. From there, it continues to the north and northwest where it ends at Route 114 (Main Road).

title: Rhode Island Route 214


text:
Beta Sigma Psi

Beta Sigma Psi National Lutheran Fraternity (ΒΣΨ), commonly known as Beta Sig, is a United States social organization for Lutheran college men. Founded at the University of Illinois in 1925, the fraternity has more than 7,500 initiated members. It has twelve chapters, primarily in the mid-west, and over 300 undergraduate members.

Purpose
Beta Sigma Psi's purpose is to create an environment where the Lutheran college man can grow spiritually, scholastically, and socially. The fraternity undertakes programs designed to develop leaders, along with character, intellectual awareness, social responsibility, spiritual welfare, brotherhood, integrity, friendship, and justice.

Founding
In 1911, Rev. Frederick William Gustav Stiegemeyer accepted a position at St. John's Evangelical Lutheran Church in Champaign, Illinois. As part of his ministry, he was to serve the students at the University of Illinois. In the fall of 1919, Stiegemeyer organized the Lutheran Illini League with ten students. The Lutheran Illini League met weekly for religious instructions and discussions on contemporary issues. In the fall of 1920, the group had twenty members and rented a house. In early 1921, it reorganized as the Concordia Club.

By 1923, the Concordia Club was active on campus and adopted the name Concordia Fraternity. Its members planned to expand into a new national Greek letter fraternity. Beta Sigma Psi filed Incorporation papers on 1925-04-17, in Springfield, Illinois. Its founders were: • Harold Ahlbrand

• Wilbur E. Augustine

• Norbert W. Behrens

• Herman H. Gilster

• Arden F. Henry

• Russell Henry

• Julius J. Seidel

• Frederick William Gustav Stiegemeyer

• William H. Welge

Expansion
The Concordia Fraternity at Champaign corresponded with the Rev. Paul Schmidt, who had formed a similar organization at Purdue University for students. In May 1925, Alpha chapter members drove to Purdue to help organize the Beta chapter. Within months, the first National Council of Beta Sigma Psi was elected. Gamma chapter formed at the University of Michigan (1928) and Delta chapter at the University of Nebraska (1929). By this time, the Alpha chapter was building a new house.

When the depression of the 1930s hit, fraternity financing became very difficult. The Gamma chapter closed in 1933, and the Alpha chapter closed in 1940. During World War II, Beta Sigma Psi had only two active chapters, Beta and Delta, with a combined membership of fourteen men. An undergraduate member from the Delta chapter, Delmar Lienemann, was elected secretary-treasurer of the national fraternity, serving for 22 years. The fraternity's named its highest honor for Lienemann.

In 1949, the Epsilon chapter formed at Iowa State University. Expansion continued over the next few years as the Zeta chapter organized at Kansas State University in 1951, and the Eta chapter followed at the University of Missouri–Rolla in 1952. That year at the National Council meeting in Ames, Iowa, John Hingst, an alumnus of the Beta chapter, was elected national president and served for fourteen years in that position. In 1955, the Alpha chapter was reactivated. In 1962, the Iota chapter formed at the University of Missouri.

In the 1960s, chapters formed at Western Michigan University, Eastern Illinois University, and the University of Minnesota. Dick Weiss, an alumnus of the Epsilon chapter, became the fraternity's first salaried secretary-treasurer. The national headquarters moved from Omaha, Nebraska to St. Louis, Missouri. In 1969, Beta Sigma Psi became a full member of the National Interfraternity Conference (NIC), the first "niche" fraternity to be recognized as a full member of NIC.

Walter E. Rose, the campus pastor at Eastern Illinois University and pastoral adviser to the Mu chapter, moved to St. Louis in 1971 to succeed Dick Weiss as executive director. Rose helped to form Phi Beta Chi Lutheran sorority at the University of Illinois and served as the executive director of both organizations.

Challenge and resolve
From the 1970s through the early 1990s, around two-thirds of its chapters closed, including the Delta chapter which had the most initiated members of any Beta Sig chapter. Craig Varner of the Iota chapter was elected national president in 1996. Under his leadership, the fraternity created an annual membership education forum and revived its leadership academy. The expansion focus shifted from large universities to smaller colleges. With these changes, Beta Sigma Psi led all national fraternities in 1999 with a 97% increase in associate members from the previous academic year. During the first part of the 21st century, Beta Sigma Psi has continued to grow and the Delta chapter was rechartered in 2006.

Symbols
Luther's Emblem or seal consists of a black cross inside of a red heart inside of a rose and represents the Lutheran faith. It is incorporated into the coat of arms and the badge. The badge consists of a black cross inside a heart superimposed on top of a golden rose (Luther's Emblem). The emblem is placed on a shield with the Greek letters ΒΣΨ in an arc above the rose. The variation of the badge includes eighteen pearls bordering the shield. The badge is worn by activated members.

The fraternity's flag consists of a coat of arms on a field of cardinal red and white with letters in the upper left quadrant. The banner has the coat of arms on a cardinal red and white field. The gold rose is the fraternity's official flower. The fraternity's publication and yearly national formal are also named after the flower.

Chapters
There are eleven active chapters, indicated in bold; inactive chapters are in italics.

Graduate organizations
Beta Sigma Psi consists of three separate alumni corporations, each with a specific mission, purpose, and board of directors. The three corporations are the National Fraternity, the Education Foundation, and the Housing Foundation.

Notable members

 * Norbert T. Tiemann, Delta chapter – Governor of Nebraska
 * Lloyd Karmeier, Alpha chapter – justice, Supreme Court of Illinois
 * Brian Bosma, Beta chapter – speaker, Indiana House of Representatives
 * Edward Mueller, Eta chapter – chairman and CEO, Qwest

title: Beta Sigma Psi


text:
Guy Du Faur, Seigneur de Pibrac

Guy Du Faur, Seigneur de Pibrac (1529–1584) was a French jurist and poet.

Life
He was born at Toulouse to an old family of the magistracy. He studied law there with Jacques Cujas, and afterwards at Padua.

In 1548 he was admitted to the bar at Toulouse, at once took high rank, and rose to be juge-mage, an office in Languedocian cities about equal to that of privat. He was selected in 1562 as one of the three representatives of the king of France at the Council of Trent. In 1565 he became general advocate to the parlement of Paris, and extended the renaissance in jurisprudence which was transforming French justice. In 1573 he was sent by Charles IX of France to accompany as chancellor his brother Henry (afterwards Henry III) to Poland, of which country Henry had been elected king. Pibrac's fluent Latin won much applause from the Poles, but his second visit to Poland in 1575, when sent back by Henry III to try to save the Crown he had deserted, was not so successful. Then he was employed in negotiations with the so-called politiques, and he managed to keep them quiet for a while. In 1578 he became the chancellor of Marguerite of France, queen of Navarre. Although he was fifty, her beauty and intellectual gifts led him to aspire to win her affection; but he was rejected with disdain.

Works
His oratorical style was rather pedantic, but quotations from the classics had a fresher meaning in his day. He was the friend of Ronsard, de Thou and l'Hôpital, and left, among other literary remains, elegant and sententious quatraines.

title: Guy Du Faur, Seigneur de Pibrac


text:
Talk:Echinopsis

Here's how I made the species list: got all species from IPNI, confirmed each one with one of the other references (or confirmed it was a synonym and commented it out.) Those I couldn't find in one of the other references I labeled with a <! --?--> Here's a list of the unconfirmed species:
 * Echinopsis amoenissima Werdermann
 * Echinopsis apiculata Linke
 * Echinopsis aurata Salm-Dyck
 * Echinopsis berlingii Y. Ito
 * Echinopsis bolligeriana Mächler & Helmut Walter
 * Echinopsis bonnieae (Halda, Hogan & Janeba) Halda & Malina
 * Echinopsis campylacantha Pfeiffer & Otto
 * Echinopsis caulescens (F. Ritter) M. Lowry
 * Echinopsis chereauniana Schlumb.
 * Echinopsis colmariensis Hort.
 * Echinopsis cristata Salm-Dyck
 * Echinopsis decaisniana Walp.
 * Echinopsis gibbosa Pfeiffer
 * Echinopsis gigantea Rud. Meyer
 * Echinopsis gladispina Y. Ito
 * Echinopsis hamatispina Werdermann
 * Echinopsis hossei Werdermann
 * Echinopsis imperialis Hort.
 * Echinopsis jajoiana Hort.
 * Echinopsis jamessianus Hort.
 * Echinopsis knotti Schlumberger
 * Echinopsis lorethroides Werdermann
 * Echinopsis macrodiscus Frič
 * Echinopsis melanacantha A. Dietr.
 * Echinopsis mihanovichii Frič & Gurcke
 * Echinopsis misleyi J. Labouret
 * Echinopsis nigrispina Walp.
 * Echinopsis nodosa Linke
 * Echinopsis octacantha Muehlenpf.
 * Echinopsis pectinata Fennel
 * Echinopsis pelecygona Y. Ito
 * Echinopsis picta Walp.
 * Echinopsis pulchella Zucc.
 * Echinopsis reichenbachiana Pfeiff.
 * Echinopsis robinsoniana Werdermann
 * Echinopsis rubescens Backeberg
 * Echinopsis salmiana F. A. C. Weber
 * Echinopsis salpigophara A. C. Lemaire
 * Echinopsis schelhasii Pfeiff. & Otto
 * Echinopsis scopa Carrière
 * Echinopsis setosa Linke
 * Echinopsis simplex Niedl
 * Echinopsis spegazzinii K. Schumann
 * Echinopsis sphacelata Gravis
 * Echinopsis strausii Graessn.
 * Echinopsis tacuarembense J. Arechavaleta
 * Echinopsis tephracantha Hort.
 * Echinopsis tricolor A. G. Dietrich
 * Echinopsis tuberculata Niedt
 * Echinopsis tucumanensis Y. Ito
 * Echinopsis verschaffeltii Hort.
 * Echinopsis zuccarinii Pfeiff. & Otto

Matt 21:54, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Echinocactus, Mexico
The references to Echinocactus and Mexico here are odd. Are they nicked from some very old (before 1950 or so) book? As far as I know, no modern sources link Echinopsis and Echinocactus together, and Echinopsis (however you define it) are native only to Paraguay, Bolivia, Argentina, Chile, Peru, southern Brazil, Uruguyay and (one species) Ecuador. Echinocactus on the other hand, is restricted to Mexico and the USA. Jgrahn 21:43, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * You're right, 1889 to be precise. If you know better than this then please edit the article to bring it up to date. Matt 21:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

 * The section of the article you're talking about is copied directly from http://cactus-succulents.webgardenguide.com/Echinopsis_spachiana_4790_650_2.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.232.120 (talk) 00:43, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Or maybe they are both copied from the 1889 source, just like Matt claimed. I wanted to do something about all this ... but at least today that would mean ripping out most of the article, and I don't really have anything sourced to replace it with. JöG (talk) 21:20, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Lobivia
I am tangopaso on french Wikipedia. There is a redirection of Lobivia to Echinopsis. But Lobivia and Echinopsis are two different genus. --81.249.154.161 (talk) 10:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Not according to the revision which sunk Lobivia and several other genera into E., just like the article explains. There could still be a separate Lobivia article, though. JöG (talk) 21:24, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

 * What is the latest with the taxonomy? Kew shows Lobivia is accepted and so is Trichocereus, Leucostele, Soehrensia --Cs california (talk) 09:45, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

 * It's not clear to me what PoWO's source is for cactus taxonomy. As I noted below, sadly, cactus taxonomy seems to remain in flux, with no clear consensus. Some sources continue to use Hunt's 2016 CITES Cactaceae Checklist, others have revised parts. Whether we should choose PoWO's approach for article titles and taxonomy isn't clear to me. (I recently revised Opuntia a bit, where Kew seems to have a lumping approach, not followed by everyone, so I left the species list with taxa PoWO doesn't accept.) Peter coxhead (talk) 10:08, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of separating out everything out based on what is on Wikispecies and Wikicommons but I wanted to check if there is anyone had issues with that. Cs california (talk) 06:09, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikispecies and Wikicommons aren't sources that can be used; what reliable source would you use? Peter coxhead (talk) 16:55, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I am pretty sure they mirror what Kew has. I am fine with whatever you guys think is more recent --Cs california (talk) 19:01, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, using PoWO ensures consistency, even if they aren't always the most up to date. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:18, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

"K. Trout" and taxonomy criticism
Is it really notable that a pseudonym author from the drug scene (and apparently not a professional botanist) dislikes the merge of Trichocereus into E.? Especially since numerous amateur and professional growers also dislike it. I won't remove it, but it looks silly. JöG (talk) 21:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * how is he not a valid source when he works at the | Cactus Conservation Institute and has several publications on conservation and chemistry as shown in the link. Just because he works on pharmacology of some of drug chemicals does not invalidate his other work--Cs california (talk) 17:17, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * your link doesn't show K. Trout to me. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:36, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * not sure why the link does not work and redirects https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Keeper-Trout --Cs california (talk) 17:36, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Echinopsis


text:
List of storms named Nona

The name Nona has been used for three tropical cyclones worldwide, one in the Central Pacific and two in the Western Pacific – the second use in the latter basin was in the Philippines by the PAGASA.

Central Pacific:
 * Tropical Storm Nona (1994), a short-lived tropical storm that did not affect land.

Western Pacific:
 * Typhoon Nona (1952) (T5212), a Category 1 typhoon that struck the Philippines and southern China.
 * Typhoon Melor (2015) (T1527, 28W, Nona), a Category 4 typhoon that made multiple landfalls in the Philippines.

PAGASA retired the name Nona after the 2015 typhoon season, and replaced it with Nimfa, which was first used in 2019.

title: List of storms named Nona


text:
Antonius van den Broek

Antonius Johannes van den Broek (4 May 1870, Zoetermeer – 25 October 1926, Bilthoven) was a Dutch amateur physicist notable for being the first who realized that the number of an element in the periodic table (now called atomic number) corresponds to the charge of its atomic nucleus. This hypothesis was published in 1911 and inspired the experimental work of Henry Moseley, who found good experimental evidence for it by 1913.

Life
Van den Broek was the son of a civil law notary and trained to be a lawyer himself. He studied at Leiden University and at the Sorbonne in Paris, obtaining a degree in 1895 in Leiden. From 1895 to 1900 he held a lawyers office in The Hague until 1900, after which he studied mathematical economy in Vienna and Berlin. However, from 1903 on, his main interest was physics. Much of the time between 1903 and 1911 he lived in France and Germany. Most of his papers he wrote between 1913 and 1916 while living in Gorssel. He married Elisabeth Margaretha Mauve in 1906, with whom he had five children.

Major contribution to science
The idea of the direct correlation of the charge of the atom nucleus and the periodic table was contained in his paper published in Nature on 20 July 1911, just one month after Rutherford published the results of his experiments that showed the existence of a small charged nucleus in an atom (see Rutherford model). However, Rutherford's original paper noted only that the charge on the nucleus was large, on the order of about half of the atomic weight of the atom, in whole number units of hydrogen mass. Rutherford on this basis made the tentative suggestion that atomic nuclei are composed of numbers of helium nuclei, each with a charge corresponding to half of its atomic weight. This would make the nuclear charge nearly equal to atomic number in smaller atoms, with some deviation from this rule for the largest atoms, such as gold. For example, Rutherford found the charge on gold to be about 100 units and thought perhaps that it might be exactly 98 (which would be close to half its atomic weight). But gold's place in the periodic table (and thus its atomic number) was known to be 79.

Thus Rutherford did not make the proposal that the number of charges in the nucleus of an atom might be exactly equal to its place on the periodic table (atomic number). This is the idea put forward by Van den Broek. The number of the place of an element in the periodic table (or atomic number) at that time was not thought by most physicists to be a physical property. It was not until the work of Henry Moseley working with the Bohr model of the atom with the explicit idea of testing Van den Broek's theory, that it was realized that atomic number was indeed a purely physical property (the charge of the nucleus) which could be measured, and that Van den Broek's original guess had been correct, or very close to being correct. Moseley's work actually found (see Moseley's law) the nuclear charge best described by the Bohr equation and a charge of Z-1, where Z is the atomic number.

Henry Moseley, in his paper on atomic number and X-ray emission, mentions only the models of Rutherford and Van den Broek.

title: Antonius van den Broek


text:
Talk:Lymph gland

Please merge with another article. — Stevey7788 (talk) 21:48, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lymph gland


text:
Inborn error of lipid metabolism

Numerous genetic disorders are caused by errors in fatty acid metabolism. These disorders may be described as fatty oxidation disorders or as a lipid storage disorders, and are any one of several inborn errors of metabolism that result from enzyme defects affecting the ability of the body to oxidize fatty acids in order to produce energy within muscles, liver, and other cell types.

Some of the more common fatty acid metabolism disorders are:

Coenzyme A dehydrogenase deficiencies

 * Very long-chain acyl-coenzyme A dehydrogenase deficiency (VLCAD) - Very long-chain acyl-coenzyme A dehydrogenase
 * Long-chain 3-hydroxyacyl-coenzyme A dehydrogenase deficiency (LCHAD) - Long-chain 3-hydroxyacyl-coenzyme A
 * Medium-chain acyl-coenzyme A dehydrogenase deficiency (MCAD) - Medium-chain acyl-coenzyme A dehydrogenase
 * Short-chain acyl-coenzyme A dehydrogenase deficiency (SCAD) - Short-chain acyl-coenzyme A dehydrogenase
 * 3-hydroxyacyl-coenzyme A dehydrogenase deficiency (HADH) - 3-hydroxyacyl-coenzyme A dehydrogenase

Other Coenzyme A enzyme deficiencies

 * 2,4 Dienoyl-CoA reductase deficiency - 2,4 Dienoyl-CoA reductase
 * 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA lyase deficiency - 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA lyase
 * Malonyl-CoA decarboxylase deficiency - Malonyl-CoA decarboxylase

Carnitine related

 * Primary carnitine deficiency - SLC22A5 (carnitine transporter)
 * Carnitine-acylcarnitine translocase deficiency - Carnitine-acylcarnitine translocase
 * Carnitine palmitoyltransferase I deficiency (CPT) - Carnitine palmitoyltransferase I
 * Carnitine palmitoyltransferase II deficiency (CPT) - Carnitine palmitoyltransferase II

Lipid storage

 * Acid lipase diseases
 * Wolman disease
 * Cholesteryl ester storage disease
 * Gaucher disease
 * Niemann-Pick disease
 * Fabry disease
 * Farber’s disease
 * Gangliosidoses
 * Krabbé disease
 * Metachromatic leukodystrophy

Other

 * Spinal muscular atrophy
 * Mitochondrial trifunctional protein deficiency
 * Electron transfer flavoprotein (ETF) dehydrogenase deficiency (GAII & MADD)
 * Tangier disease
 * Acute fatty liver of pregnancy

title: Inborn error of lipid metabolism