text:
Talk:Washington State Route 410

References for the change
--NE2 14:55, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, Highway Designation Sought, April 23, 1967: the Washington Highway Commission chose the all-weather route for extending US 12 into Washington
 * Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, May 29, 1967: [this is about the Lewis and Clark Trail] "On eastbound trip following spring, the explorers traveled overland, crossed the Columbia near Wallula, struck off across land due eastward until they hit the Touchet, then followed that river to Dayton before turning over the hills to Pomeroy and thence along present U.S. 410 back to the Lewiston-Clarkston area. The highway designation of the 1961 Washington State legislature six years ago had this wording: "Beginning at a junction with primary state highway No. 1 in the city of Vancouver, thence on the routes of primary state Highways No. 8 and No. 3 via Kennewick, Walla Walla and Pomeroy to the Washington-Idaho state line at Clarkston." Reasoning behind the routing through Walla Walla at that time was to bring easterners through the historic Walla Walla Valley generally and especially to such historic points of national interest as Whitman Mission National Historic Site, Fort Walla Walla and other historic spots of interest."
 * Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, Highway 12 Route Will Run Through the City, June 22, 1967: "...from the Idaho border to the ocean, the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO) said Wednesday...The U. S. 12 designation was awarded to Washington over an application by Oregon for the route to the Pacific on the south side of the Columbia River."
 * Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, November 24, 1967: "The longest highway in the state is U.S. 410, which serves this area. Most of this road is to be re-numbered as U.S. 12, officials say. It gives the motorist a long ride, from Clarkston in the southeastern corner, to Aberdeen and the Grays Harbor area on the coast."
 * Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, Highway 410 is now U.S. No. 12, December 27, 1967: includes a photo of a sign being changed: "Former U.S. Highway 410 route signs were changed locally Tuesday to an official designation as U.S. Highway 12 rom Clarkston to Grays Harbor, completing the mid-west and western portion of an eventual route from the Atlantic to the Pacific...U.S. Highway 12 formerly extended from Detroit, Mich., to Lewiston, Idaho, proceeding west through Chicago, Minneapolis, South Dakota, a corner of North Dakota, the northern tier of Montana to Helena, then southwest across the Lolo Pass to Lewiston. The new portion of U.S. 12 begins at Clarkston and continues to Walla Walla, the Tri-Cities, Yakima and across the Cascades on White Pass to Interstate 5. U. S. Highway 410 was designated through Chinook Pass. U. S. 12 changes at the Grand Mound interchange and follows former State Highway 8 to Grays Harbor. Purpose of changing the highway number, said White, is to [?]" "...display the "old" and "new" number designations which changed U.S. Highway 410 to a link in a future U.S. 12 scenic transcontinental route." "A similar route from Detroit to a point on the Atlantic coast is being sought to complete transcontinental U.S. Highway 12."
 * Tri City Herald, Route 410 Renamed Highway 12, December 31, 1967: "Highway 410, which comes into the Tri-Cities across the Snake River Bridge from Burbank and extends on through Prosser, is now officially U.S. Highway 12...The highway, running from Clarkston to Grays Harbor, completes the mid-west and western portion of an eventual route from the Atlantic to the Pacific oceans. U.S. 12 formerly extended from Detroit to Lewiston, Idaho, proceeding west from Chicago, Minneapolis, South Dakota, a corner of North Dakota, the northern tier of Montana to Helena, then southwest across the Lolo Pass to Lewiston."
 * Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, Highway 410 Is Now Designated 12, February 12, 1968: "The U.S. 410 number was dropped by the American Association of State Highway Officials because the highway was almost entirely within Washington. The new number, U.S. 12, begins in Detroit and now continues westward through Minneapolis to the Grays Harbor area. Part of the change included the naming of U.S. 830 as State Highway 14. The remaining portion of U.S. 410 has been changed to State Highway 410 from Naches Junction over White Pass to Enumclaw, Tacoma and Olympia."
 * Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, U-B Action Line, September 29, 1968: "Why isn't highway 410 designated as such instead of just highway 12? This would help tourists immensly. Mrs. J.R. Answer: Since the route designation changes, highway 410 does not go through Walla Walla anymore. What is now marked as highway 12 IS highway 12, and so designated on 1968 road maps. Route 12 runs between Lewiston, Walla Walla, Yakima and over White Pass to Interstate 5. Route 410 now is between the junction northeasterly of Naches, over Chinook Pass to Puyallup and Tacoma, state Department of Highways Resident Engineer Orville Headding told Action Line."

U.S. Route 410

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. –  T M F 05:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Shouldn't U.S. Route 410 have its own seperate article about its own history? All other defunct U.S. Routes do. ComputerGuy890100TalkPolls 23:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Not really; there are a lot of redirects in Category:Former U.S. Highways. Basically all information about the history of US 410 would be duplicated either here, in US 12, or in SR 8. --NE2 09:43, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

 * US 410 was split into six separately numbered highways when it was decommissioned. The information from US 410 could be split that way. Who wants to read 6 articles to find the information on one highway? I would retain a separate article for US 410 with appropriate inline links to successor highways. Sehome Bay (talk) 07:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I believe it would make sense to merge US 410 into WA 410 due to the common number. Whihe it was part of other routes, this would work as the best redirect target. For instance, U.S. Route 213 redirects to Maryland Route 213 even though much of the former US 213 is now US 50. ---Dough4872 16:57, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Merging Chinook Scenic Byway
I would definitely support merging Chinook Scenic Byway into WA 410 as the entire byway follows that route and the current byway article is a stub that cannot be expanded much further. ---Dough4872 01:22, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Bridge accident
I get the whole WP:NOTNEWS and all that, but isn't a construction accident that kills three people at least worth a mention here? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:21, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd wait to see any lasting effects from the investigation (e.g. changes in WSDOT's policy on construction or contractors) before including it in here. It's still a bit too recent to tell.  Sounder Bruce  03:23, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * So, should we yank the bit about the 2009 landslide? It rerouted the highway for a couple years, but that had no real lasting effects. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * It created a signed alternate route designated by WSDOT, which makes it notable on its own. It also permanently re-routed the roadway, which should be covered.  Sounder Bruce  04:22, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Still, the way I see it, it's fine to include it (the bridge) if we give it the proper weight, and I see one or two sentences as totally proper. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 12:42, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * You may want to ask at WT:USRD for this particular one, I (personally) see it as borderline. --Rschen7754 13:26, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

I would include both the landslide and the bridge accident. However, I would rewrite the bridge accident section entirely. Anyone can write that a chunk fell and people died, but that doesn't really tell our readers anything. I at least want to see how and why it happened. –Fredddie™ 00:45, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I think a couple sentences describing the bridge accident are worth including in this article as it is a notable event that has gotten significant media attention. However, we do not need to go overboard in covering every little detail of the accident. In addition, I think the detail and coverage of the mudslide is fine as that was a significant event that affected the route for a few years.  Dough   4872   01:09, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

I would omit the bridge accident unless it results in some lasting change to the highway. The landslide has done that based on the above comments. However, it does not sound like the bridge accident will permanently change the highway, so it should be omitted from the article.  Imzadi 1979  →   03:38, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * A similar incident has been listed in Oklahoma State Highway 145 for years, although that incident spurred the state legislature to take action to increase DOT funding. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 09:19, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Washington State Route 410


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myran (0th nomination)

 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. FCYTravis 06:53, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Myran
non-notable vanity stub Babajobu 00:15, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Allmusic has never heard of him. no evidence of notability. Friday 02:44, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy DeleteNot Notable. He claims to be a Sony artist, but Sony dosn't have any record of any "Myran". Hamster Sandwich 04:56, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable rapper vanity. Fails WP:MUSIC guidelines. JamesBurns 09:01, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete NN, Vanity. --Ragib 17:43, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Apparent vanity or hoax --Irishpunktom\talk 20:24, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete blatant nn vanity. -- Etacar11   23:39, 20 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.

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


text:
Memorial Acclamation

The Memorial Acclamation is an acclamation sung or recited by the people after the institution narrative of the Eucharist. They were common in ancient eastern liturgies and have more recently been introduced into Roman Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, and Methodist liturgies.

Liturgy of St James
The Liturgy of St James is the principal liturgy of the Syriac Orthodox Church, Syriac Catholic Church, Syro-Malankara Catholic Church, Maronite Church, and Malankara Orthodox Church. It is also occasionally used in the Eastern Orthodox Church and Melkite Catholic Church and other Eastern Catholic Churches of Byzantine Rite.

In the Syriac form of this liturgy, after the Words of Institution, to which the people respond with "Amen" after the formula for the blessing of the bread and again after the formula for the blessing of the chalice, the priest celebrant says: "Do in remembrance of Me when you partake of this sacrament, commemorating My death and My resurrection until I come." The people then respond with the acclamation: "Your death, our Lord, we commemorate, Your resurrection we confess and Your second coming we wait for. May Your mercy be upon us all."

In the Byzantine form of the Liturgy of St James, the priest celebrant says: "This do in remembrance of me; for as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show forth the Lord's death, and confess His resurrection, till He comes." The people respond: "We show forth Thy death, O Lord, and confess Thy resurrection."

Alexandrian Rite
The Alexandrian Rite is the liturgical rite of the Coptic Orthodox Church. The Memorial Acclamation is present within the conclusion of the Institution Narrative of all three liturgies of the rite, which are the Liturgy of St. Cyril, the Liturgy of St. Basil, and the Liturgy of St. Gregory. The memorial acclamation is made up of a short prayer by the priest followed by a congregational response. These two parts are commonly referred to as the Anamnesis to distinguish them from the Epiclesis and the other segments of the Institution Narrative. As with many Alexandrian prayers the priest prays in Coptic while the congregation responds in Greek.

Roman Rite
The Memorial Acclamation was introduced into the Roman Rite of Mass in 1969 as part of the revision of the Roman Missal by Pope Paul VI. Previously the only acclamations by the people in the eucharistic prayer were the Sanctus and the Amen to the final doxology.

The three acclamations
The three acclamations given in the Roman Missal are, in the official English translation, as follows:

"We proclaim your Death, O Lord, and profess your Resurrection, until you come again.

When we eat this Bread and drink this Cup, we proclaim your Death, O Lord, until you come again.

Save us, Saviour of the world, for by your Cross and Resurrection you have set us free."

The initial edition of the Roman Missal in English, which in part was a more dynamic rather than literal translation of the original, had instead the following four acclamations:
 * Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again.
 * Dying you destroyed our death, rising you restored our life. Lord Jesus, come in glory.
 * When we eat this bread and drink this cup, we proclaim your death, Lord Jesus, until you come in glory.
 * Lord, by your cross and resurrection, you have set us free. You are the Saviour of the world.

Mysterium fidei
As a lead to the Memorial Acclamation, the priest says or sings: "The mystery of faith".

This introductory phrase, mysterium fidei in the Latin original, was previously translated loosely into English as "Let us proclaim the mystery of faith", and in some places was sung or spoken by the deacon instead of the priest in spite of the clear instruction in the Missal itself and in the apostolic constitution Missale Romanum with which Pope Paul VI promulgated the revision of the Roman Missal. The English translation was corrected in 2011 and now reads simply: "The mystery of faith".

Mysterium fidei in the Tridentine Mass
Before the 1969 revision of the Roman Missal, the phrase mysterium fidei was included in the formula of consecration of the wine spoken inaudibly by the priest, appearing as follows (here accompanied by an unofficial English translation):

 * Text (in Latin)

 * Simili modo postquam cenatum est,
 * accipiens et hunc praeclarum calicem
 * in sanctas ac venerabiles manus suas:
 * item tibi gratias agens, benedixit,
 * deditque discipulis suis, dicens:
 * Accipite, et bibite ex eo omnes.
 * Hic est enim calix sanguinis mei,
 * novi et aeterni testamenti:
 * mysterium fidei:
 * qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur
 * in remissionem peccatorum.
 * Haec quotiescumque feceritis,
 * in mei memoriam facietis.

 * Unofficial English translation

 * In like manner, after He had supped,
 * taking also into His holy and venerable hands
 * this goodly chalice,
 * again giving thanks to Thee, He blessed it,
 * and gave it to His disciples, saying:
 * Take and drink ye all of this:
 * For this is the chalice of My blood,
 * of the new and eternal testament:
 * the mystery of faith:
 * which will be shed for you and for many
 * unto the remission of sins.
 * As often as ye shall do these things,
 * ye shall do them in remembrance of me.

Some traditionalist Catholics have criticised the removal of the phrase mysterium fidei from the words of consecration.

Meaning of the phrase mysterium fidei in context
The phrase mysterium fidei was added to the words of consecration at some time before the 6th century, perhaps by Pope Leo I (440-461) and perhaps, in reaction to the denial by Manichaeism of the goodness of material things, as an expression of the Catholic Church's belief that salvation comes through Christ's material blood and through participation in the sacrament, which makes use of a material element.

The memorial acclamations that follow suggest that "the mystery of faith" refers, in its new context, to "the entire mystery of salvation through Christ's death, resurrection and ascension, which is made present in the celebration of the Eucharist". An alternative memorial acclamation permitted in Ireland, "My Lord and my God", was disapproved of by Pope Paul VI for seemingly concentrating on the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist rather than on Eucharistic sacrifice as a whole, but even this may be interpreted in the same sense, since it is a repetition of what in refers to Christ as risen and as still bearing the marks of his suffering.

Other liturgies
In its 1979 version of the Book of Common Prayer, the Episcopal Church (United States) has in Prayer B the acclamation: "We remember his death We proclaim his resurrection We await his coming in glory"

In three of its Rite 2 eucharistic prayers, the acclamation is made by celebrant and people together.

The Book of Alternative Services of the Anglican Church of Canada has a Memorial Acclamation, as have some United Methodist churches.

Lutherans also have an acclamation.

title: Memorial Acclamation


text:
User:Parson12

Test

title: User:Parson12


text:
Signal bleed

Signal bleed is a type of filter, usually for cable television, that does not block a targeted channel as designed. Such filters came to public awareness as more channels with adult material began to be available on cable television services and, occasionally, children were able to view faint or partial images of adult material on channels that were supposed to be completely blocked.

Signal bleed was discussed in the 2000 U.S. Supreme Court case United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group.

title: Signal bleed


text:
Mystery of faith

"The mystery of faith" and "a mystery of faith" are phrases found in different contexts and with a variety of meanings, either as translations of Greek τὸ μυστήριον τῆς πίστεως (tò mystérion tês písteos) or Latin mysterium fidei, or as independent English phrases.

Two English translations of 1 Timothy 3:9
The phrase "the mystery of faith" is given as a translation of the phrase "τὸ μυστήριον τῆς πίστεως" in in two English versions of the Bible: the Wycliffe Bible and the Douay–Rheims Bible. This translation of the text is exceptional, since far more numerous are the Bible versions that render the phrase as "the mystery of the faith", while others still have phrases like "the deep truths of the faith" (New International Version and New International Reader's Version); "the secret of the faith that God made known to us" (New Century Version); "the revealed truth of the faith" (Good News Translation); "the mystery of the Christian faith" (God's Word Translation); "the true faith that God has now made known to us" (Easy-to-Read Version); "what God has shown us about our faith" (Contemporary English Version); "the faith that has been revealed" (Common English Bible); "the secret of the faith" (Young's Literal Translation); "God's plan and what we believe" (Worldwide English).

The passage in question requires deacons to hold to this "mystery of faith", "the deep truths of the faith", "the true faith that God has now made known to us" or however else it can best be expressed. Richard C. H. Lenski identifies it with "the mystery of godliness" mentioned in verse 16 of the same chapter. According to Witness Lee, it is mainly Christ and the church. This mystery, Andrew Louth says, interrogates us rather than being questioned by us. Barnes' Notes on the Bible identifies the word "the faith" in this context with "the gospel", a view with which Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible agrees, as does the People's New Testament, while Clarke's communion  on the Bible remarks that one manuscripts gives, in place of "the faith", "the resurrection of the dead, which is one of the greatest mysteries of the faith. Floyd H. Barackman says that in this passage "the faith" refers to the whole of the New Testament.

Theosophical idea
Arthur Edward Waite wrote that in the Zohar, which is the foundational work of the Jewish Kabbalah, there lie embedded fragments of a mystical work, Sepher ha-bahir, an anonymous work of Jewish mysticism, attributed to the 1st century, behind which Waite discerned "a single radical and essential thesis which is spoken of in general terms as 'The Mystery of Faith'." The Mystery of Faith, he said, is represented by the letter of the Tetragrammaton and is identical with the Mystery of Sex. He saw the Mystery of Faith as underlying also popular Christian devotion, such as the veneration of relics, and the doctrine of the Eucharist, and the legends of the Grail as telling that "the secret words, which were of the essence of the Mystery of Faith, had passed out of all common knowledge".

Theological term
In theology, an article of faith or doctrine which defies man's ability to grasp it fully, something that transcends reason, is called "a mystery of the faith". The Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks of the Trinity as "a mystery of faith in the strict sense, one of the 'mysteries that are hidden in God, which can never be known unless they are revealed by God'", and it declares: "The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is the central mystery of Christian faith and life. It is the mystery of God in himself. It is therefore the source of all the other mysteries of faith, the light that enlightens them." The Church itself is "a mystery of the faith".

Ludwig Feuerbach applied the phrase "the mystery of faith" to belief in the power of prayer.

"The Mystery of Faith" is used in the title of some books as a reference to the totality of the doctrine of the Eastern Orthodox Church or of the Catholic Church. More frequent are books of that title that refer to Roman Catholic doctrine on the Eucharist, which was the subject also of a papal encyclical by Pope Paul VI, whose incipit was Mysterium fidei (Latin for "mystery of faith" or "mystery of the faith").

The phrase "a mystery of faith", rather than "the mystery of faith", appears also with reference to the Eucharist, as in the title of a book by Joseph M. Champlin.

Translation of a phrase in the Roman-Rite Mass
Since November 2011, the phrase "mysterium fidei" in the Roman Rite liturgy of the Mass is officially translated as "the mystery of faith", while from 1973 to 2011 the English phrase used as an equivalent was "Let us proclaim the mystery of faith".

In this context, the phrase, spoken or sung after the Words of Institution, refers to "the entire mystery of salvation through Christ's death, resurrection and ascension, which is made present in the celebration of the Eucharist". As originally inserted into the words of consecration, perhaps in reaction to the denial by Manichaeism of the goodness of material things, it may have been an expression of the Catholic Church's belief that salvation comes through Christ's material blood and through participation in the sacrament, which makes use of a material element.

title: Mystery of faith


text:
User:Hinto

Hi there. I'm a Canadian Wikipedian who calls Vancouver home, although I'm currently studying at the University of Toronto. I also lived in Hong Kong for more than a decade.

Areas of interest on Wikipedia

 * Television broadcasting
 * Infrastructure and transportation, namely roads, bridges and subways.
 * History and geography

I'll fix grammatical and spelling mistakes whenever I see them.

Work in progress, prototypes, etc.

 * /MTRStations - stations template for MTR
 * /GVRDLandmarks - landmarks template for Greater Vancouver
 * /Translink Services and /Translink Services 2 - services templates for TransLink
 * /NextStations
 * /US O&Os - prepare for split from O&O
 * /Terminating vistas
 * /Boston Bridges and Tunnels

 * /Gallery - pictures I took

zh:User:Hinto

title: User:Hinto


text:
Florida Cabinet

The Florida Cabinet is a body of the government of Florida comprising the attorney general, the commissioner of agriculture, and the chief financial officer that engages in the collective governance of the state.

History
Created following Reconstruction, when there had been a widespread distrust of the governors appointed by the federal government, the cabinet was originally designed to decentralize authority from the governor. Thus, until January 7, 2003, Florida was unique among states in that its cabinet consisted of six independently elected members who each held an equal vote with the state governor in executive decisions. The original Cabinet positions were:
 * Attorney General
 * Commissioner of Agriculture
 * Commissioner of Education
 * Comptroller
 * Secretary of State
 * Treasurer/Insurance Commissioner/Fire Marshal

In 1998, Florida voters voted to amend the Florida Constitution to shrink the Cabinet to its current three members. This amendment took effect in 2003, following the 2002 election. Under the reforms adopted, the secretary of state and education commissioner became appointed officials under the governor who would oversee their respective agencies, while the positions of the comptroller and the treasurer/insurance commissioner/fire marshal were combined into the new position of the chief financial officer of Florida. The Cabinet also lost its control over the Florida Department of Education: management of K–12 education and community college education which was shifted to the new Florida Board of Education and management of the State University System of Florida to the new Florida Board of Governors. Some environmental policy powers of the Cabinet were shifted to other officials as well. The reforms were seen as ways to strengthen the power of the governor.

Composition
The meetings of the Cabinet are chaired by the governor, currently Ron DeSantis, and include these officers:

 * Chief Financial Officer Jimmy Patronis
 * Attorney General Ashley Moody
 * Commissioner of Agriculture Wilton Simpson

Each member is popularly elected statewide and carries one vote in executive decisions. In the case of a tie, the vote cast by the governor decides the outcome.

Agencies
The governor and Cabinet serves as the board of directors of several state agencies and during their bi-weekly meetings discuss agency business and make policy decisions for the agencies. The governor and Cabinet, all statewide officials, also oversee the separate offices and agencies under their departments. The governor and Cabinet oversees the following agencies:

 * State Board of Executive Clemency
 * State Board of Administration (excluding the commissioner of agriculture)
 * Division of Bond Finance
 * Department of Veterans' Affairs
 * Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles
 * Department of Law Enforcement
 * Department of Revenue
 * Administration Commission
 * Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission
 * Electrical Power Plant and Transmission Line Siting Board
 * The Board of Trustees Internal Improvement Trust Fund
 * Financial Services Commission

Aides
The governor and each member of the Cabinet has an office dedicated to Cabinet affairs. These offices are headed by a chief Cabinet aide, who is assisted by other aides. The week prior to a Cabinet meeting, the Cabinet aides meet to discuss the agenda and to conduct preliminary discussions on a variety of issues slated to come before the full Cabinet. Cabinet aides' meetings are considered an important part of the Cabinet process.

title: Florida Cabinet


text:
User talk:Vsmith/archive1

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Follow the Simplified Ruleset
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

HTML colors
I noticed your comment on ammonia. I had thought three-character color codes were accepted equally well as six-character codes. Which version of which browser do you use? -- 03:15, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Opera 7.23 - I don't think three character codes are standard HTML. Not everyone uses IE or Netscape so it is best to stick with standards.

Vsmith 03:25, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

MoS violation
American spelling is the international standard according to whom? English, unlike other languages, has no central authority on proper usage. There are several organizations, such as IUPAC, the OED, and others that attempt to set rules but there is no reason we must follow them. Even many scientific periodicals and journals do not follow the convention you mention, much less encyclopedias. Most UK scientific journals still seem to use British spelling, as any database search will show. - SimonP 17:39, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * According to IUPAC and as my quote indicated according to Wikipedia policy. Standards are important for consistency and clarity. In science articles the standards should be used with notes for common names and spellings where needed. I'm not used to the standard for aluminium, and often forget in common usage, but I intend to use the standards and will support Darrien to standardize usage in Wikipedia science articles.

Vsmith 22:56, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Wikiproject rocks & minerals
I started this project shortly after I joined wikipedia (months ago), and soon discovered that decisions & discussions about what really belonged in the infobox & how to phrase things were way beyond my ancient & rudimentary experience. I haven't been involved in this project since then, and I have no idea whether anyone else has picked it up and started solidifying the standard infobox & terminology & applying it to articles. (I've abandoned rocks for the dog breeds project :-) .) I would be thrilled if someon else were to take the initiative on this project & work on establishing some suggested standards to help ensure consistency.  It's always a challenging thing to do, but IMHO needs doing--in a cooperative and encouraging way, of course.   Have fun, in between torturing high school students!  And I'd be delighted to answer questions about what we've done in the dog project over time, too, as a parallel.  Elf | Talk 16:06, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks. I noted that activity had been almost nil and was wondering. Don't know if I want to take over, but will work on it when I have time and maybe develop it more. Torturing teenagers keeps me occupied:) Don't know much about dogs though, just have one old mutt. -Vsmith 01:08, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Those are usually the best kinds of dogs! Elf | Talk 03:55, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Concentration
Thanks very much for your efforts on concentration. The article is much, much better for your input! -- FirstPrinciples 09:06, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks - there is more I plan to do, but now I have chemistry tests to grade. Gotta keep torturing them teenagers:) -Vsmith 16:18, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Timeline
So far, I like the direction your edits are taking; you are sharpening the viewpoint; if I might suggest an addition, at the epoch of the big bang at the instant of the first timestep, the physical constants may not have yet stabilized toward the current set we are enjoying now. What I am pointing out is that at the event of the big bang, in the infinity of cosmological decades (in the sense of 10^^-N years or seconds), just at the edge of the first Planck time, we could have been in a different version of the multiverse (one which would not have settled on our specific universe yet). Thus the current set of physical constants determined our version of the multiverse, our universe. I say timestep because before the first Planck timestep, we cannot really talk about the continuous variable time. My viewpoint is that we really cannot talk about t=0. Regards, Ancheta Wis 23:42, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Done. Plus a bit more. Time = 0 ...hmm. How about time < 0 from our universe perspective? Refers to the previous big crunch? I don't really want to think about that either. Implies time as independent of space or spacetime. I'm just rambling and its time to go to bed. -Vsmith 03:55, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Intrusive Rock
Hi there! I like the work you've done on the geology\minerals articles. I was hoping for a suggestion. There are lots of links to intrusive rock and I am wondering how to link this. Pluton links back to Batholith. I was thinking of an article like Intrusion (geology), where I could list Batholith, Laccolith, stock, sill etc. Then intrusive rock could link to there. But perhaps that's overkill? You know of any articles out there I'm overlooking that would make a good link? The geoogy catagories seem a bit juggled too; many articles are in several cats within cats. I want to move a lot of stuff under Earth Science category to Geology, But will fish around for comments first. Just looking for any suggestions; I love discussing geology. Thanks! --DanielCD 21:32, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Done. Link away & enjoy:-) Intrude away. I had been planning on making that a working link for a while now - you provided the spark. I did it off the top of my head so edit, correct and add to it. Now to make some redirects and/or modify those red links. I've been playing with the categories under geology - plan to make these a classification system of sorts, been working with mineral categories lately. Lots to do there. You've been doing some good work, keep at it. -Vsmith 23:53, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Archive 11
My apologies, both for apparently misplacing some of the discusion on chemical names when I archived and for not answering sooner. I thought I had, but I must have pressed the wrong button.

I agree that the discussion seems to have died out; that's why I archived it. I didn't follow along and so don't know how close you were to a consensus. If you were close, you might want to state your current proposal and see if there are any objections. If you're far from consensus, you might want to put it aside for the time being. If the discussion was somewhere in between, you might want to try a straw poll.

Good luck. I'm not sure how helpful this is. I've been on Wikipedia less than two months myself.

By the way, I worked for a year at a high school in Tempe, Arizona. Maurreen 06:48, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Stratum
Hey, do you think this article is better under Stratum or Rock strata? I saw your comment, but I thought Stratum would work better. But now I'm not so sure; Rock strata seems more intelligible to the layman. Just letting you know I didn't just brush your suggestion aside. They can always be switched. --DanielCD 16:14, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Fine either way. I initially preferred Rock strata, but stratum had more direct links to it. Doesn't make much difference to me. Thanks. -Vsmith 16:18, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with the rock/mineral articles. I've moved several from the 1911 ency. and intend to work on updating/clarifying the info as I'm able. Some of the names may be outdated as well, so if you see any outdated stuff, zap it or LMK. Really appreciate the help! --DanielCD 14:59, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * I rewrote a bit in alunite last night, I worked on a mountain of the stuff in Arizona back in the '70s. Also just changed a link in mafic to Silicate minerals which is my current mineral classification project. Plan to make pges for each mineral group (carbonates sufides etc.) and link them from a master Minerals list classified or something like that. You are welcome to take a look and fix any errors you find there. -Vsmith 16:32, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Geologic time
Hey, I am having a hard time finding any policy on capitalizing sub-words that go with geologic ages, such as "Late" Paleozoic and Permian "Period" (as opposed to late Paleozoic and Permain period). Outside info says to capitalize these, but I don't know what to do here. I would like to follow the standard and capitalize them. You have an opinion ? --DanielCD 19:44, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Capitalize 'em, at least the periods, eras, etc when used with the time. Not so sure about the late & early, may depend on context - I hadn't thought about that very much. Do it the way it seems right and don't fret, others may change - probably not worth an edit war - discuss it with 'em if they do. -Vsmith 00:42, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Standardization
I saw you are standardizing some mineral formulas. I've done quite a few lately, and may have left some messes because I need to research more and the 1911 formulas often translate badly. Geology could use some standardization in dates also. Someone commented in the talk at the Gondwana article that the dates didn't add up. Almost afraid to tackle that one because dates vary so much. Just letting you know; I'm working on it and always like to fish for comments/suggestions. Especially when I fins someone who appreciates rocks! --DanielCD 14:35, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * It is quite a job, the amphiboles and chlorites were a real mess. Some day I'll tackle the clays... I use the refs. listed at Silicate minerals, the websites are quite comprehensive - although they disagree on some formulas. Some of the 1911 names and data are quite dated. I haven't looked at the Gondwana dates closely. Think I'll let that one be for a while. Keep up the good work and enjoy {B-)} Vsmith 20:33, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the " " template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace " " with "  ". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

thanks for ...
... addition to "Niagara Falls". This is up as one of the Featured article candidates if you are interested in supporting (or ... gulp ... objecting to) it.Sfahey 18:54, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your vote. Did you think the geo. section was incomplete, or were there errors in it? I like to learn things from the (someimes arduous) process of getting an article through the FAC gauntlet. Also, I noticed you are/were a geologist, and presumably have done serious scientific writing. Do you see any problem in wikipedia asking "us" to agree to that public licensing agreement that "Ram-bot" just sent to frequent contributors? Sfahey 03:22, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * You are welcome. It is a good article. The geo section was a bit incomplete and Pollinator did a pretty good job of filling it in. I'm still thinking about the escarpment and the dip of the strata toward the Appalachian basin to the south and the effect of that on the falls, but not sure of the local dip or how to include without getting too technical. Also the bit about the erosion of the underlying soft shale and its relation to the development of the falls is fuzzy.
 * I've added that dual licensing disclaimer to my user page - seems OK to me although I'm not totally clear about the details. -Vsmith 04:43, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

... and for your recent vigilance on "Niagara Falls". It's interesting how different folks pick up on different types of items, (usually) for the betterment of the whole enterprise. BTW, I just now noticed your reply (above) to my long-past query. D'ya know if the convention is to reply on this page, as you did, or to the originator's "mailbox"? You must have enjoyed a bump in classroom attentiveness since the tsunami.Sfahey 01:49, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Please refrain from personal attacks
See No personal attacks. Your reply to my comment was a personal insult, and did not address what I had to say. Guettarda 18:52, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I did address a part of your post. There was no insult intended, sorry if you took it that way. It was a comment on a common problem in academia along with an attempt at humor. Vsmith 21:22, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

'The Boomer Bible' vs. 'Boomer bible'
Dear Vsmith,

I only moved the contents for the enty, 'Boomer bible' to an appropriate entry title of, 'The Boomer Bible.' The book being described is, in fact, The Boomer Bible by R. F. Laird, (New York, NY:  Workman Publishing, 1991) and I thought it would be appropriate to have it under the correct title.

There was a link that pointed people that had used 'Boomer bible' to the new destination of 'The Boomer Bible' for the convenience of other users.

Please reconsider your decision to undo my edits.

Thank you for your kind consideration.

Regards,

BalowStar

 * Hi - you seem to have had a rough start :-)

 * The article Boomer bible was quite adequate as it was, and yes, it was about the R.F. Laird book - I just added bibliographic info to that page and deleted some redundant and commercial external links. If you felt that it was mis-named, the proper edit would have been a move rather than a copy and paste job which just made a near duplicate article and left the article history with the old one. A move moves the article and its history and talk page - important info that needs to go with an article. See the help pages for details.

 * I am in complete agreement with jpgordon and the others who have reverted your various promotional edits. Note: your efforts have been reported on Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress. Wikipedia is not for product or website promotion - proceed with caution - explore and learn the Wiki way. And, no I won't reconsider my decision. Vsmith 05:02, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * (above copied from my talk BalowStar)
 * Dear Vsmith,
 * Thanks for taking the time to get me up to speed. I certainly intend no vandalism to your site.  The edits made as to content and external links are certainly appropriate within your context and that is what jpgordon and I were discussing.
 * The only item I am asking you to re-consider is the title of the entry itself. You can see that the entry for 'Moby-Dick' is not 'Moby dick.'  The entry for 'War and Peace' is not 'War and peace.'  The entry for 'Charlotte's Web' is not 'Charlotte's web.'  Nor do we find an entry for 'Brothers karamazov,' but, more appropriately, 'The Brothers Karamazov.'  It just seems that the entry 'Boomer bible' should be 'The Boomer Bible,' as the actual title of the book -- a point made directly regarding the lesser known 'Moby-Dick' title format.  Of course, with re-directs from the prior entry name.
 * Due to my inexperience here, I had made a new entry for 'The Boomer Bible' and incorrectly copied the entry from the adequate 'Boomer bible' entry. I now understand that this should have been a move to the newly titled entry to preserve the history from the original 'Boomer bible' entry.        I apologize for violating the community's policies and spirit.
 * I will not proceed until you tell me that you think it is the appropriate action to take regarding the title of the entry for The Boomer Bible.
 * Kindest Regards,
 * BalowStar
 * Due to my inexperience here, I had made a new entry for 'The Boomer Bible' and incorrectly copied the entry from the adequate 'Boomer bible' entry. I now understand that this should have been a move to the newly titled entry to preserve the history from the original 'Boomer bible' entry.        I apologize for violating the community's policies and spirit.
 * I will not proceed until you tell me that you think it is the appropriate action to take regarding the title of the entry for The Boomer Bible.
 * Kindest Regards,
 * BalowStar
 * Kindest Regards,
 * BalowStar
 * BalowStar

BalowStar sounds well-intentioned, and he may have a point about moving this page.

Shall we list it on Wikipedia:Requested moves? Would that be the best way to proceed?

Jonathunder 19:02, 2004 Dec 17 (UTC)

 * Not sure about the intentions - there was quite a bit of promotional spamming involved by BalowStar And the email address is telling (BalowStar@BoomerBible.com). Hopefully a lesson was learned as a result of all the reverts. I became aware of it thru a suspicious link added to Albert Einstein.

 * Given that; I agree that the name should be either Boomer Bible or The Boomer Bible, I'd prefer the former. As those both exist with a bit of history I guess it will require an admin to accomplish the deed. Boomer Bible has essentially no content in its history, just botched redirects, could an admin simply delete that and move the article there? I don't know much about all this. -Vsmith 23:34, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I would only add for your consideration that the entry title for 'The Brothers Karamazov' is not 'Brothers Karamazov.' Thanks for your help. BalowStar 19:20, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Aerosol pic
(William M. Connolley 10:14, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)) Hi. You added a nice pic to the aerosol article, but... to me it doesn't necessarily look like pollution. It looks rather more like cloud from the mountains. Could you add a link back to the NASA source so I/we can check NASA's description? Thanks.

 * Done. Should have added the link last night. Vsmith 12:51, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * (William M. Connolley 14:49, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)) Thanks. No question but you have labelled it correctly from the NASA description. I still feel ever-so-slightly dubious about NASAs description but they are probably right and are obviously more of an Authority than me.

slag / slut
I note you've moved the alternate definition of the former to the same page as the latter. As the definitions and applications thereof are, however, very different I believe it would be better to leave them in seperate locations (and expand the former), it also being bad practice to point from a term to different term in this way. Slag (slang) is now at slag --Vamp:Willow 10:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * That works. I put the disamb. at the top, but didn't have enough info on the slang to create a decent stub, so included it with slut. Slag (slang) makes a neat phrase :-) Vsmith 14:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * thanks re comment about quotation; looked in my own install of Opera (same version) and it was fine so I think it is probably an issue of what language / codepage you have set; the items after each entry are just using the charcodes for tick and cross. btw, although it seems odd, most people tend to put replies to comments back on the sender's page so that they see them (ie I wouldn't have looked for the response I see just above here so have only seen it by accident!) --Vamp:Willow 20:46, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Liquifaction
Hey, could you peek at the liquefaction article and see my edits. I think I am getting in a beef with the creationists, though I don't want to (believe me, I stay away from the debate like the plague!). But I need an opinion. If I can't put scientific stuff on the Flood geology page, why should there be stuff like that on a science page? Maybe I'm getting Wikistress or something. But I don't think all fossils formed by sinking into the ground and I don't know of any published studies on this. I also removed a statement that claimed all strata were laid down at one time under water by precipitation. I don't want to offend anyone though; I just want to work on geology stuff. An opinion would be appreciated. --DanielCD 16:14, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi - I removed that section and it was promptly put back in. Seems Ungtss is intent on spreading the word. His earlier edits to the liquifaction page appear to be a stage setting to work in the flood stuff. I also checked his work on Wave loading and found the same stage setting ploy without references to support his verbosity. I have listed that page as needing attention and peer review as well as no sources cited. I'm with you on this, but these characters are stubborn :-) Vsmith 16:35, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Sedimentary rocks
I am surprised to see that in your template of sedimentary rocks you go for "clastic" vs "precipitate". It seems to me that even when you add "biogenic or chemical" this falls a bit short for carbonates. What do you do with a cross bedded grainstone for example? I would like to suggest that carbonates be kept into a subcategory of their own. I realise this is a discussion that could go on for ever but I am not trying to pick a fight..this is just meant as a friendly point of view/suggestion. Carole a 13:24, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Hi, glad to have some input. I created those very preliminary templates a while back planning to get more organized with them - but have been off chasing other dreams for awhile. Maybe clastics, evaporites, and carbonates. With further subdiv. under each esp. the carbonates. And realizing that there is always going to be something that doesn't fit or fits in more than one category. Maybe this will spur me to get it more organized and move them from my personal workspace to the rock & mineral group page. Your suggestions are welcome and you can edit them, even tho they are currently in my user space. Vsmith 16:18, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Oh good, you didn't take it badly. The all thing about rock classification is that, you are right, it is never going to be perfect. Coal, for one will always mess you up and chalk is another killer if you get to the nitty gritty of it. I am not a regular wikipedian, so I don't want to promise too much, but I'll try to help with the rock project every now and then. I am out of country right now, away from my books and don't want to do too much stuff from the top of my head. I'll make sure that I take a couple of my favourite petrography texts next time I leave home. Carole a 04:48, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Water hardness
Hi there again. I just made an article at Water hardness and would like to invite you to proofread/comment, if you are interested. None of the other water articles seemed to cover it in any depth. Later --DanielCD 15:51, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Took a quick look, fixed a couple IUPAC spellings and made a couple of links. Overall looking good. I will be back for a longer look later. -Vsmith 18:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Actually, right after I wrote the article it was brought to my attention that there was already an article at Hard water (who would have thought to look for it there, duh!) That's why I like to categorize things so much: it makes it easier to find things so you can know if an article is already floating around out there. My pre-research wasn't as thorough as I thought, but I think the two articles create a really succesful merged one. --DanielCD 19:34, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Kare Fog
I just read that Kare Fog page. The thing makes me cringe with how much more it's concerned with demonizing Lomborg than with disputing his work. Perhaps there is a better page that could be found to represent scientific critique of Lomborg's work? I also stumbled across this analysis of the Fog criticisms, which you should read all the way through if you have not yet, since it seems to be written from a more clear perspective. — Cortonin | Talk 07:48, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Wave Loading
Hi again. You know, I've been looking at that wave loading article and it just doesn't seem to make sense. I've tried researching it, but nothing is really clear on what it is or what its connection to liquefation is. In short, I can't find any reference material to verify anything this article is saying. Is it simply sediment suspended in water? Is it wave pressure pounding on one side of a structure? I'm just a little puzzled and was hoping you could help me decide what this is. Know of any references that might help?

Thanks for your time. --DanielCD 14:56, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

From what I can tell, it means pressure that waves themselves exert on a floating vessel or pressure placed on submerged structures. I don't think the sediment in the water has anything to do with it. I would like some input on possibly removing the wave loading reference from the liquefaction article. Nothing I find says anything about sediment in the water affecting the pressure the waves exert. Sure it may affect a centimeter's depth of sediment in very shallow water, but that's like using lunar gravity to explain the water movement in my bathtub. --DanielCD 15:14, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * I listed wave loading on physics pages that need attention because it isn't really on track with the engineering topics I get w/Google. The writer was trying to build support for a creation science page I think, so I doubt it is verifiable. But don't know much about it. Yes, I agree the wave loading ref has no or minimal application to the liquifaction article - take it out. The cuurent wave loading article could be listed for deletion, unless you feel like doing a total re-write. Vsmith 16:26, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the response. I doubt I could find enough info for a rewrite without some major research. I'm gonna look some more before I post for delete though. I will remove it from the liquefaction page. Thanks again, your responses are always helpful. --DanielCD 17:34, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well, I did it, but as you might guess, Unguss quickly reverted it. Ho hum. Check out liq. talk page for some laughs. And someone else "clarified" the def of wave loading at that article. Sorry to be a pest. Just LMK if you want no part of this. --DanielCD 19:22, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Figured that might happen :-). Looks like Cortonin is watching my talk page, Hello Cortonin, as fast as he added that clarification. It is a thickening plot - hmmm... methinks it'll maybe help me figure out some other relationships :-) -Vsmith 19:52, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * All I want to know is how wave loading is so darn important to liquifaction. The effect is really minor and it makes the article confusing. Why stop in the midst of things and describing how water moves sediment. It's already pretty obvious that water moves sediment. And besides, I put a link in the 'see also' section. The explaination at the w. loading article itself should suffice for anyone who is interested. --DanielCD 20:14, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Guilty as charged. :)  I was watching for you to reply to the Kare Fog comment above.  Regarding wave loading, it seems some of those examples might need touching up as well.  Somehow Ungtss seems to think that all wave loading is about sediment (where the only places I've ever seen that mentioned is on creationscience.com and in the abstract for one paper I am unable to access the full text of).  Storms can break pipes just from traditional wave loads of waves or wind crashing into them.     — Cortonin | Talk 23:14, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Hi Cortonin - that was an interesting little bit :) I did take a preliminary look at that doc on Kare Fog, but haven't had time yet to degest it all - I get sidetracked easily (so many pies and too few fingers :). And, yes the wave loading page needs some serious work from an engineers viewpoint. - Vsmith 23:50, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Archaeopteris
Hi again. I just posted a new article at Archaeopteris, a fossil tree. Don't know how much into paleo you are, but it's more my specialty and I think you might find it interesting. I think its pretty good, but could use some peer review. Once again, thanks for your time. --DanielCD 21:12, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * It looks great to me. But, I'm no paleontologist - just one course, Invert. Paleo., in college way back when. So - I'm not much help on this one. Vsmith 00:25, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Alfred Wegener
Nice cleanup of Alfred Wegener. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 12:46, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)

requests for comment/138.130.194.229
Hi again, it seems this is not our first mutual run in with nonsense and idiocy on wikipedia. Why do we keep meeting this way? :o) I see you've recently voted in the RNA world vote (thank you). However creationist nutter 138.130.194.229 just won't stop, he is continuing his revert wars and has also now begun inserting copyvios etc. Your input on requests for comment/138.130.194.229 would be very greatly appreciated. Thanks.--Deglr6328 19:53, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Caribbean Plate and Kick-'em-Jenny
The changes you made are great. Glad I could find something new for you to learn. -- Gruepig 07:40, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Consensus Science
Originally had a long rant here, but I decided to spare you.

Yes, the Eugenics example was masterfully funny if nothing else. Wanna place a bet on how long the Creation example will stay if I put it back? --DanielCD 15:21, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I just re-inserted it ;-). Also note the discussion at the end of Talk:Scientific consensus. Our friend Ungtss just now discovered consensus science. Should be interesting to hear his reaction.;-) With him looking around there the half-life will be quite brief, I'll bet. -Vsmith 16:40, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Take a look at Talk:Deluge (mythology). I made a few small changes and it's sparked a storm of BS. If only they could take they highpowered, anal need to diagram every word of a person's reponse and turn it toward the creation articles. --DanielCD 19:34, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It irks me to no end to see these guys using "Flood geology" in articles like Deluge (mythology). It is not a legitimate field of study and I don't think it should be stated as such because the term makes it sound as if it's real geology. I took it out and put creation science in its place, but they changed it back. I'd like to remove it again, but I know these guys will have a fit. What do you think? --DanielCD 14:18, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Looks like Ungtss quit Wiki. I think I'm gonna lay off the debate stuff for a while. I am getting a little too nitpicky I think. I hate to see him leave, he was actually a really even-tempered debater. Never saw him rant like some of the others. Oh well. --DanielCD 17:10, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Hmm... he was a very persistent debator, but like you say rational (considering ;-). Sorry I hadn't responded earlier, been occupied with some climate article wrangles. Vsmith 17:20, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration
Thanks for your comment on my discussion page. Unfortunately I have very little time at the moment to get really involved into things. I just finished my comment for the ArbCom. Probably you know about that already, but nevertheless here is the link: Requests for arbitration/JonGwynne. best regards -- mkrohn 02:14, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

3RR and 172
The block only prevents the "Save Page" function. Admins can still (un)block/protect/delete pages while they are blocked. Even the one-click page rollback function still works (and looks to other users like regular edits). Rollbacks of course are not permitted on the disputed page, but may be used during Recent Changes patrol against vandalism. I could live without these can-do-while-blocked features, but so far there were very little problems in that respect with admins. Hope this answers your questions. -- Chris 73 Talk 08:18, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Agate
Hey, at the agate article, there is this: "Mexican agate, showing only a single eye, has received the name of cyclops." This apparently came out of the 1911 encyclopedia. I typed in "mexican cyclops agate" in Yahoo, and it looks like this same reference is all over the web. I dunno about any "cyclops" agate; I know about Mexical crazy lace though. I'm trying to veryfy what this is, got any ideas? Do you know of any good resource that gives detail of agate formation?

Also, a picture popped into the fossil article captioned "fossil plants" that I think is a dendrite and not a fossil. Give it a peek if you get the chance. Thanks. --DanielCD 19:43, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Don't know anything about cyclops agate so I'm no help there. I see you have improved the agate article - good. As for the plant fossil, I agree that it appears to be a dendritic manganese mineral form rater than a plant. Maybe the one pictured about midway down this page? Surely there's a better plant fossil image available. Also looks like wiki could use an article on dendritic crystalization or minerals - from frost on a window, to Mn, Cu & Ag, and on to NASA micrograv experiments and metal crystallization. One more for my todo list. :-) Vsmith 03:15, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * I didn't think to do it earlier, but I clicked on the Cyclops link and it goes to Cyclops (rock). Guess what...it's the same stuff! Frankly, I think that article needs to be deleted because it's unverified and already at the Agate article. Interesting that someone saw the need for an article of its own though. --DanielCD 14:34, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dendrites
I'll start Dendrite (rock) here in a bit, unless you have a better name. --DanielCD 16:56, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Maybe dendrite (crystal) - thinking of the NASA stuff that fits and frost ... I added a source to cyclops. Found an interesting link for you, from RV Dietrich - enjoy. Vsmith 17:18, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dendrite (crystal) has been launched. No new info yet, just moved the old stuff over. --DanielCD 14:16, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Norman L. Bowen
Hi. If re-writing a copyvio, please use the temporary page as indicated in the copyvio text. Updating the original article text causes more work for administrators because the copyvio must still be deleted from the article's history. By using the Temp page for the re-write, the original article with the copyvio in it's history can be deleted and the Temp re-write can replace it. In that way, no copyvio in the history. It just makes life easier for admins if the copyvio process is followed as explained. Nothing really get messed up but the page history doesn't accurately reflect the article's edit history. That's why I copied it to the talk page before deleting it. RedWolf 04:09, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

Hematite
Hey, I added a pic to Hematite. I think I might need to crop it some though now that I see it on the page. Know anything about doing pics? I'm just venturing into the world of wikiimages. My first one was better, at Asaphus kowalewski. Also check out Schist. LMK what ya think. --DanielCD 13:26, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Looks good, I'd say crop it a bit and re-upload, don't know any way to crop a pic that's already there. Neat picture, are the yellow spots light reflection or something on the hematite? Vsmith 16:11, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * The yellow spots are the reflection of the lighting lamp I was using. I don't know why it came out so blurry, it should be sharper. I may try to take another. I had better luck with the red backdrop and the trilobite. --DanielCD 19:32, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Solar greenhouse (technical)
Just working through the page history. It's hilarious. Will try and make some sense of what is really going on after class. Guettarda 17:24, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yea, you wouldn't think a lil' green shack for growing flowers would be so controversial. --DanielCD 14:21, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * (William M. Connolley 12:18, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)) Faced with Cortonins intransigence, I've reverted back to my original version. I would rather have your compromise version and no edit war, though. But since C just seems to keep edging back to his version, I'm not sure what to do to keep the peace. Hope the arbcomm moves rapidly, perhaps (thanks for your comment there).

Vsmith, I have kept most of your version around, but have simply tried to make sure that the physics is correctly described within it. See the lengthy description under "Approaches to a question" on the talk page for an explanation of why this is necessary. — Cortonin | Talk 19:22, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Norite
Sorry about Norite - thanks for fixing it. I was a bit afraid it was too much of a composite to be called a mineral, but I did not find it anywhere in Wikipedia and didn't know where to put it. I ran into the minerals list on "random" viewing. Pdn 16:53, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * No problem. You provided the spark to get me to write a stub on norite that was on the backburner of my todo list. Now if I can get around to improving it - break out the books - as that was mostly an off the top of the head production. Someday... Cheers! Vsmith 17:11, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Colaborate?
Hi, I've notived you seem to monitor similar pages to me (eg. geomorphology). Would you like to purposefully collaborate at fleshing some of the lesser entries out? Cheers, Daniel Collins 03:52, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Line Breaks
I was going to yell at you for reformatting my multiline paragraph into a single line paragraph. But having read Don't use line breaks I now understand it's more complicated than making editing easier. But, having said that: why do you collapse multi-line paragraphs into single-line paragraphs? Josh Parris ✉ 03:11, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Hmm... never gave it a thought, just seemed the thing to do while I was fixing other bits & pieces. Still don't see any need for single line breaks - makes comparing difficult to my eyes. Very seldom are line breaks needed or useful in my view - such that I didn't even think about it, just got rid of 'em, as they seem useless holdovers from somewhere? Guess maybe in a pre html world :-) On rare occaisions when I want a hard single line break for whatever reason, I use a BR tag. which doesn't mess up the indent result like

this does... Vsmith 03:51, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * The reason I started doing it is because I read somewhere that it makes doing diffs easier rather than harder. I don't know what the answer is, but until I went looking for the definitive answer I thought there was one (a definitive answer).  Anyways, perhaps in the future we should treat them like farm gates - leave them the way we find them.  That will minimize the diffs immediately after our edits.

WMC, Ed
Just wondering if you might not want to tone down your comments just a tad. I know I shouldn't talk (given our first conversation, and the fact that I went straight to Ed's talk page)...Ed appears to be a lost cause, his true colours have come out...but I suspect that other readers might give your comments more weight if they were just a little more measured. I think it's important to say what you said, I just feel like the tone was a little stronger than it had to be in a few places. Feel free to ignore this, btw - I don't actually know what I am talking about when it comes to the whole "people" question. Guettarda 00:30, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * You are probably right. Usually when I'm irritated I compose a "hot" response and then just delete rather than save - cool down time :-). Then usually never get back to any response. This time irritation won. Oh well, maybe Ed will get us both banned along with WMC. The people thing is one of my weak spots, probably should just stick with editing rock & mineral articles - less controversy there. But then taking Ed's line of thought - that's where I shouldn't edit because of my expert's bias (not that I'm an expert at all)... Best stop, I'm rambling again. -Vsmith 02:00, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Need to start making friends in the arbcom :) Anyway, I've been keeping bad company recently - I nominated a socialist for adminship ;)  I ended up not heeding my own advice and laying it on some more in reply to Cortonin's comments - on the other hand, I found some common ground with Silverback (he seemed to think Ed went overboard too).  It was actually a huge relief to see you and Silverback post - they could ban the lot of us, but I hope there are a few senior people who would stand up for us...maybe we could petition Anthere.  Guettarda 02:29, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Greenhouses
(William M. Connolley 22:33, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)) Hi. I've just read the Horticern paper and commented on the solar greenhouse page. I don't think it supports C's POV, and I don't even think he has understood it. I am more than ever convinced that he is simply pushing his own personal research, probably out of a combination of dislike for anything I say combined with embarassment at being corrected by me right at the start of this. I doubt he will do anything other than post a lot more words there. On the assumption that he has nothing useful to say:

My proposal is: that the GHE page goes back to what it was before this: stating that the GHE is a misnomer, with a few refs (inc the Weart one, which I consider quite reliable). I'm asking you because the sub-page was your attempt at consensus. I think we can leave the sub-page for a while, unlinked from the GHE page. Will you support me in this?

To Cortonin: yes, I know you'll read this. Please don't place intrusive comments or I'll just take this discussion onto personal mail.

 * Yes, C's summary of the Horticern research basically indicates that they are working from the "given" of isolation from convection as do all the glazing researchers - ignoring the basic importance of convection blockage.
 * I would go with re-insertion of a much shortened "real greenhouse" section, seems reasonable sort of as a disclaimer about the name without much detail about greenhouses themselves. My attempt at defusing the situation sorta flopped :-) Hey, that's OK - I learned quite a bit in the process.
 * I think the technical page is worth keeping - if we can get the controversy out of it, maybe just a brief mention there of the global effect. There is lots of room for expansion about the agricultural usage and the high-tech glazings C is so fond of. The Solar greenhouse (technical) page should exist as a sub-page (sort of) for the greenhouse page and be independant of greenhouse effect (climate). Of course C probably won't agree with all this given his insistance on getting the physics right.
 * Vsmith 23:55, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * (William M. Connolley 09:10, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)) The Great Revert War has restarted; do feel free to join in...

(William M. Connolley 09:00, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)) Thanks for your help. Sorry I was little use, my "24" hour ban seems to have been a bit extended, for obscure reasons.

(William M. Connolley 14:33, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)) Errm, but I think I ought to aplogise for reverting your version to mine. The reason was that it appeared to be so compromised as to be near meaningless.

 * No problem - we do need to find some way of finding some kind of compromise in hopes of ending this, I must admit to being pessimstic about that though, seems C has to have the last word; he's maybe even stubburner than someone else around here :-). I just re-did the spelling thingy. Let's see how C deals with it :-). Note, I'm watching the clock more carefuly now as C would probably like to slap a 3rr on me, too. I see atlast... woke up again for his weekly foray into nonsenseland on the RFA. Vsmith 16:52, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * (William M. Connolley 18:28, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)) Yeeeesss... compromise is tricky though, this is not too dissimilar to flat-earthism or creationism. If we can agree, then C will have to compromise... or widen the war. Who knows, we can hope for sense. Meanwhile: ALA: yes indeed. I'm assuming his rants do "his side" more harm than good :-). There is a weather-vs-climate thingy somewhere on wiki, I know cos I wrote some of it, but *where* is it...

Phenotype
Don't worry about it. I'm glad you caught the vandalism I missed. Thanks for the note, though. Dave (talk)

Liquify
Hey, is liquefaction the "process by which sediments are transformed into suspension by water pressure from beneath" ? There's a new article at liquify. I haven't been following the "Liq." articles, but a lot of moving going on. How does water pressure come from beneath and then suspend sediments in water above? It would have to be a spring or something, eh?, and as such, a very minor thing. --DanielCD 16:47, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I changed it a bit. I'm not so sure these articles needed to be split up. --DanielCD 16:50, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Good change to liquify. It seems Ungt was rather obsessed with the flow from beneath idea - an important force in his creation geology nonsense to explain many rock features or some such. Ungt and a user Zeizmic are both creating pages on liquefaction and each claiming to own the issue of sorts. I helped Ungt fix a move mess he made in the process. Watching & waiting for more nonsense to surface :-) Vsmith 02:36, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * There's also a bit of funnyness at Second law of thermodynamics. I kind of hastily reverted a paragraph there. Perhaps I need a cyberslap to remind me how much I hate getting into it with these guys. --DanielCD 15:44, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Evidence, not Talk
Looks like everyone forgot what page they were on.  (SEWilco 16:16, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC))

 * There's been quite a bit of that and yes I'm guilty too. Vsmith 16:20, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Your crumpet
For your tireless efforts to defend the integrity of the science articles on Wikipedia, I hereby award you this buttered crumpet.

Don't let it get stale, don't feet it to your students, and don't eat it all in one sitting. Otherwise, enjoy! --DanielCD 20:35, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

JonGwynne
Ah, I see. Well, if he does it a lot and is in the wrong, there will be plenty of other opportunities to block him, or whatever. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 03:20, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Encyclopedia minerals
Thanks for tidying some of my new mineral articles including essexite. I'm no geologist; these come from the project to cover all the ground of Britannica (2004_Encyclopedia_topics) and I realized some of these articles were low-hanging fruit. Er, rocks. Feel free to jump in and find other rocky red links on those 28 pages. I also created ferricrete, ferrierite, ferrohortonolite (so far). David Brooks 05:06, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Clinohumite
A new gem/mineral article that looks a little fishy (a copyvio?). Definitely needs some focusing/pruning. Just thought you might like to take a look as minerals seem to be your prime area. --DanielCD 04:14, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, I've been watching it develop. As the anon seems to have signed up now, I'll give him a chance to finish working. Don't have a copy of the book he's using, so am not sure about copyvio. It is heavy on superlatives - pushing a rare gemstone. Does need wikifying and perhaps reorganizing for consistency with other articles of the type. It has prompted me to think about a Humite group article or some such. Later though - it's finals time now, lots of grading to do :-) Vsmith 02:26, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your message! (I didn't have gemstone on my watchlist, for some odd reason.) I've done a major refactoring and expansion of the article, and included the infobox and three more references in the process. Most of the bare facts were correct, at least those pertaining to the actual mineral. However, the bulk of the article seemed to be tangential background information about the historical and geological history of the Pamir region, which IMO didn't belong in the article. I axed most of the text explaining the humite group; this could be moved into a new article on the subject, but I'm not prepared to do that if its copyright status is in question. Judging from the colour of the imaged stone, it would pass as climohumite; then again, it could easily be its cousin chondrodite (which is apparently better known for its garnet-like colour). It's certainly a very large specimen (I've got stone envy). Judging by the generic file name, it's likely this user's own digital image. I'll ask him to provide source and licensing information, of course. After that's established I'll probably crop and re-upload it to the Commons.

I regret that Arem's book is one of the few (English) gemmological texts I don't own. It isn't a recommended text, as it's a bit dated (I own only one gem reference book whose edition predates my birth, but it's an exceptional monograph on synthetics); however, if Arem goes into this much detail on clinohumite of all things, I think I better find myself a copy. You see, clinohumite is one of those ridiculously rare gemstones that isn't even included in the secondary (optional) British course syllabus. I have several thousand dollars' worth of reference books, and only one (Webster's Gems, the "gemmologist's bible") mentions clinohumite, in a rather terse single paragraph. Webster doesn't mention Youngman or van Dyk, nor does he corroborate their observations. A recent (2000) Journal of Gemmology article did establish that Pamir is not the sole source of gem-quality material, and I've included this (along with Webster and Mindat's entry) within the references.

User:Zotter's text does look like a copyvio, especially due to his/her mention of the USSR in present-tense. I don't know how I'll broach the subject of possible copyright violation, because I don't want to be accused of "biting the newcomer". Anyway, how does the article look now? :) -- Hadal 07:00, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

 * I somehow missed both the creation of those impressive lists and the VfD listing of mindat.org! It's great to see mindat's webmaster is now a Wikipedian (Jolyon actually answered one of my questions on the mindat message board recently, and followed up on another by rectifying the image issue at marcasite), and the species import scheme is commendable. (As someone noted on the VfD vote, it's too bad mindat's images are copyrighted.) I like the way each listing has links to mindat and webmineral, too. It seems I'm a bit late to the party (as it were), but seeing as we're both part of the same WikiProject, please let me know if there's anything I can help with.

 * Thanks for apprising me, and for all the work you've done on geology/mineralogy-related articles. I've felt much more confident in the veracity of these articles since you've arrived. Case in point, the thoughtful work and feedback you contributed to the FAs turquoise, ammolite, and diamond. I'm grateful. -- Hadal 09:51, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Serial comma
Hello. In the past, you've spoken in favor of the serial comma in the WP Manual of Style. Currently, two or three users have been taking out all guidance on that in favor of a statement that the MoS takes no position. They've said they reached a consensus on the talk page. Would you care to comment there? Jonathunder 22:06, 2005 May 9 (UTC)

Diamonds&Uvarovit
Hi! Why you deleted discussion on diamond talk page? The talk is continued [here ]

p. s. thanks for correction of Udachnaya pipe. I Hope for successful cooperation. Stepanovas 03:13, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Hi - I didn't delete the discussion, simply moved it down to near the bottom of the page to be in chronological order as is standard for wiki talk page format . Both I and Jolyonralph have been and continue digging into the issue. My further searching and thinking is now more in agreement with you as Mg-Cr-garnet would be more compatable with peridotite source conditions. Thanks for noting the error and bringing it to our attention. Note - moved comment to bottom in chron. order. Vsmith 11:44, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Hallow ! I understood later what happened :))
 * I am beginner in wiki and do not know the local rules.
 * You should remember that diamonds originate from two mantle rocks: eclogite and peridotite. Garnets from peridotites - purple and red, contain high Cr. Eclogitic garnets - orange and contain low Cr because eclogite is basalt metamorphosed under high pressure. Both this garnets types are contain high MgO and are ndicator mineral for kimberlites adn diamonds.
 * Stepanovas 07:46, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes - it takes a bit to learn the various ways things get done around here. I see User:Hadal has modified the diamond page to better show the various garnet indicators - seems my uvarovite info was in error. Hadal is a gemmologist and an admin around here, good person to go to for questions. Great editor and if you have questions or need help with editing just drop either of us a note. Vsmith 16:06, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

I agree with edites. Best wishes. Stepanovas 20:16, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Trilobote pic
HI there Vsmith. I put a new picture in at Trilobite and I was hoping I could get your opinion on it. Do you think it's too dark? I'm kind of scratching my head as to whether I should try to lighten it. It looks fine on my monitor, but on another I saw it was really dark. It's the Cyphaspis tafilalet pic. Perhaps some of the folks who frequent your talk page will take a peek too. --DanielCD 01:51, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

The Skeptical Environmentalist
Hi Vsimth. You reverted my attempt to delete the quote in TSE and replace it by a summary. While I don't think my summary was the best ever, I do think that the TSE page is - in general - plagued by excessive quotes. I don't think that encyclopedic articles should contain that much quotes, esp. since they could easily be summarised. Would you mind joining the discussion I started on this topic on the TSE Talk page? Thanks! Luis rib 20:06, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Re: Theory
Thanks, I've put it on watch and will try to help. Joe D (t) 01:53, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

galena (mineral) / lead sulfide
That was the result of an database artefact from me trying to action the request on WP:RM to move Lead Sulfide to lead sulfide. I saw that the history of lead sulfide pretty much terminated when galena (mineral) was created, and that the two were essentially identical at that time - that is, apparently a cut and paste move some time last year.

To merge the page histories, I had to delete galena (mineral) so I could move lead sulfide on top and then undelete the historical edits for galena (mineral). Somewhat bizarrely, when you undelete, you can end up with an older edit later in the edit history than more recent edits, so I had to "revert" an edit from (IIRC) April 2005 to end up with the most recent version of the page from May 2005! Strange but true. Once "reverted", the database seems to catch up with itself, so it looks like I reverted an edit that was never there.

You may also have noticed that I screwed up in making the page move - I managed to send lead sulfide to "galena (mineral)" (note the spurious quotes) and had to play around with more moves and deletes to sort it out. Sigh. Perhaps I should leave this stuff to violetriga! -- ALoan (Talk) 00:04, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Re: That was fast!!
Hee. :) I just happened to see the article's creation on a random reload of Recentchages, and I thought it was the least I could do. I've been rather lazy lately in that I haven't written/expanded any articles since mid May, and no rock/mineral articles (save for diamond) since.. I don't remember. I'll try to remedy that once this sticky heat wave is over. (Promises, promises.) By the way, those were great edits to diamond! The section is much more precise now, and reads better too. I hope Stepanovas has been appeased. :) -- Hadal 04:42, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Vsmith/archive1


text:
User:ILFoxtrot

Articles Contributed

 * Jean Teasdale
 * Jim Anchower
 * Peelian Principles

Amusing Mistakes
Later, it dawned on IL to check the history tab. Finally, and feeling quite embarassed, she restored the original African American Vernacular English text.
 * Upon clicking the link ebonics found a nonsense entry. Hoping to clean it up, IL entered the full of her knowledge of the subject.  This was:  "An english language variance".
 * I put the album template in a talk page and not in the mainspace. (Was kindly pointed out to me by another member.)  If you find an amusing mistake (or a mistake that enrages you) feel free to alert me on my talk page.
 * IL came to understand the full legal definition of moratorium through trial and error. For the record, Illinois is no longer a non- death penalty state.

title: User:ILFoxtrot


text: User talk:69.171.145.145

title: User talk:69.171.145.145


text:
Category:Bishops of the Episcopal Church (United States)

The following persons are either past or current bishops of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America.


text:
Marguerite Bourgeoys

Marguerite Bourgeoys, CND (17 April 1620 –12 January 1700), was a French religious sister and founder of the Congregation of Notre Dame of Montreal in the colony of New France, now part of Québec, Canada.

Born in Troyes, she became part of a sodality, ministering to the poor from outside the convent. She was recruited by the governor of Montreal to set up a convent in New France, and she sailed to Fort Ville-Marie (now Montreal) by 1653. There she developed the convent. She and her congregation educated young girls, the poor, and children of First Nations until shortly before her death in early 1700.

She is significant for developing one of the first uncloistered religious communities in the Catholic Church. Declared "venerable" by the pope in 1878, she was canonized in 1982 as the first female saint of Canada.

Early life
Marguerite Bourgeoys was born on 17 April 1620 in Troyes, then in the ancient province of Champagne in the Kingdom of France. The daughter of Abraham Bourgeoys and Guillemette Garnier, she was the sixth of their twelve children.

As a girl, Bourgeoys was never much interested in joining the confraternity of the Congregation Notre-Dame attached to the monastery in town. It had been founded in 1597 by Alix Le Clerc, dedicated to the education of the poor. The canonesses of the monastery helped the poor, but remained cloistered. They were not allowed to teach outside the cloister. To reach poor young girls who could not afford to board within the cloister as students, they relied upon a sodality, whose members they would educate in both religion and pedagogy. Marguerite decided at about age 15 to join the sodality affiliated with the congregation.

in 1652 Paul de Chomedey, Sieur de Maisonneuve, the Governor of the French settlement at Montreal in New France, visited his sister, an Augustinian canoness in Troyes. She directed the sodality to which Bourgeoys belonged. The governor invited Marguerite Bourgeoys to come to Canada and start a school in Ville-Marie (eventually the city of Montreal).

Before February 1653, Bourgeoys accepted the assignment to set up a congregation and a mission in New France. She set sail on the Saint-Nicholas from France, along with approximately 100 other colonists, mostly men. They had been recruited and signed to working contracts.

Life in the colony
Upon her arrival in the port of Quebec City on the following 22 September, Bourgeoys was offered hospitality with the Ursulines there while transportation to Ville-Marie was arranged. She declined the offer and spent her stay in Quebec living alongside poor settlers. The colony was so small that Bourgeoys would have soon come to know practically everyone.

During these early years, Bourgeoys initiated institution building. In 1657 she organized the formation of a work party to build Ville-Marie's first permanent church – the Notre-Dame-de-Bonsecours Chapel (Bonsecours), known in English as the Chapel of Our Lady of Good Counsel. In April 1658 she was provided with a vacant stone stable by de Maisonneuve, founder of Ville Marie, to serve as a schoolhouse for her students. This was the beginning of public schooling in Montreal, which Bourgeoys established five years after arrival.

Soon after receiving the stable, Bourgeoys departed for France to recruit more women to serve as teachers for the colony. She combined this goal with housing and caring for the King's Daughters or filles du roi, as they are known in Quebec, after they arrived from France. These were young women who were impoverished or orphaned or looking to start a new life whose passage to Nouvelle France was paid by the Crown in order to marry and create families in the colony. The young women had to be recommended by the Church as being of good character. Bourgeoys and her four companions also interviewed the male settlers who came to the settlement seeking a wife.

Later life
The small group of women began to follow a religious way of life, establishing periods of common prayer and meals. The women also worked independently in various villages and towns throughout the colony, teaching the local children. During this three-year period, Bourgeoys and her small community sought official recognition and legitimacy from both the Crown and the religious establishment in New France. In 1669, Bourgeoys had an audience with François de Laval, the Apostolic Vicar of New France and its highest religious authority. He ultimately issued an ordinance that gave permission to the Congregation Notre-Dame to teach on the entire island of Montreal, as well as anywhere else in the colony that considered their services as necessary.

In 1670 Bourgeoys returned to France again, seeking an audience with the King to protect her community from being cloistered. She left with no money or clothing, only with a letter of recommendation by Jean Talon, Royal Intendant of the colony; he praised her great contribution to its future. By May 1671, she had met with Louis XIV, and had obtained letters patent from him that secured the viability of her community in New France as "secular Sisters". The French monarch wrote: "Not only has (Marguerite Bourgeoys) performed the office of schoolmistress by giving free instruction to the young girls in all occupations (...), far from being a liability to the country, she had built permanent buildings (...)."

"Golden Age"
Helene Bernier refers to Bourgeoys's work after 1672 as the "Golden Age" of the Congregation.

She established a boarding school at Ville-Marie, so that girls of more affluent area families would not have to travel to Quebec for their education. She also established a school devoted to needle-work and other practical, artisan occupations for women in Pointe-Saint-Charles. Other members of the Congregation founded smaller schools in places such as Lachine, Pointe-aux-Trembles, Batiscan, and Champlain. In 1678, Bourgeoys reached out to Catholic Native communities, setting up a small school in Kahnawake, the mission village south of Montreal. Its population was primarily converted Mohawk and other Iroquois peoples.

During the 1680s, the congregation of sisters grew significantly and finally gained a strong foothold in the city of Québec. The new bishop in the colony, Jean-Baptiste De La Croix de Saint-Vallier, was impressed with the vocational school that Bourgeoys had established in Ville-Marie and worked with her to found a similar institution in Québec. Numerous sisters were brought to Île d'Orléans to help the growing community in that area. In 1692, the congregation opened a school in Québec that catered to girls from poor families.

Final years
After announcing that she would step down in 1683, Bourgeoys stayed on as the figurehead of the Congregation until 1693. She gave up daily leadership, but worked to help her sisters retain their characteristic spirit. Bourgeoys and her colleagues kept their secular character despite efforts by Bishop Saint-Vallier to impose a cloistered life by a merger with the Ursulines. On July 1, 1698, the congregation was "canonically constituted a community".

During her last two years, Bourgeoys devoted her time primarily to prayer and writing her autobiography, of which some remnants have survived. She died in Montreal on 12 January 1700.

Veneration and canonization in 1982
The day following her death, a priest wrote, "If saints were canonized as in the past by the voice of the people and of the clergy, tomorrow we would be saying the Mass of Saint Marguerite of Canada." Helene Bernier writes, "[P]opular admiration had already canonized her 250 years before her beatification."

Numerous stories related to the time preceding her death. The elderly Sister Bourgeoys was said to have offered her life to God in order to save that of a younger member of the Congregation who had fallen ill. After intense prayer, the young sister was said to be cured, and Marguerite fell terribly ill, dying soon thereafter. After her death, she continued to be admired and highly regarded. The convent held an afternoon visitation open to the public; people treasured objects that they touched to her hands at this time, which became spiritual relics. Her body was kept by the parish of Ville-Marie, but her heart was removed and preserved as a relic by the Congregation.

Marguerite Bourgeoys was canonized by the Catholic Church in 1982, and is the first female saint of Canada. The process was begun nearly 100 years before in 1878, when Pope Leo XIII declared her "venerable". In November 1950, Pope Pius XII beatified her. The two miracles that led to her beatification both involved a miraculous cure from gangrene of the foot, gained by Joseph Descoteaux of St. Celestin, Quebec; and John Ludger Lacroix of St. Johnsbury, Vermont. On 2 April 1982, Pope John Paul II issued the Decree of Miracle for a cure attributed to her intercession. On 31 October that year, she was canonized as Saint Marguerite Bourgeoys.

Honours
On 30 May 1975 Canada Post issued the stamp, "Marguerite Bourgeoys, 1620–1700", designed by Jacques Roy and based on a painting by Elmina Lachance. The 8¢ stamps are perforated 12.5 x 12 and were printed by Ashton-Potter Limited.

title: Marguerite Bourgeoys


text:
Jon Gindick

Jon Gindick (born September 10, 1948, Hollywood, California, United States) is an American best-selling musical instruction author. His books, CDs, and videos on playing the blues harmonica have sold over 2,000,000 copies. He puts on 'Blues Harmonica Jam Camp,' a traveling seminar for harmonica players of all levels. Gindick is also a blues guitarist and singer.

title: Jon Gindick


text:
Dmitry Karakozov

Dmitry Vladimirovich Karakozov (Дми́трий Влади́мирович Карако́зов; 4 November 1840 – 15 September 1866) was a Russian political activist and the first revolutionary in the Russian Empire to make an attempt on the life of a tsar. His attempt to assassinate Tsar Alexander II failed and Karakozov was executed.

Early life and studies
In early 1866 he became a member of the "revolutionary wing" of the Ishutin Society, founded by his cousin Nikolai Ishutin in Moscow in 1863.

Attempted assassination of Alexander II
In the spring of 1866, Karakozov arrived in St Petersburg to assassinate Alexander II. He circulated his hand-written proclamation called "Друзьям-рабочим" ("To Friends-Workers"), in which he incited people to revolt. He wrote a manifesto to the St Petersburg governor blaming the Tsar for the suffering of the poor: "I have decided to destroy the evil Tsar, and to die for my beloved people." This note never reached anyone; it was lost in the mail.

It is possible 1866 was the year chosen because of the character of Rakhmetov in What Is to Be Done?. This fictional inspiration of revolutionary youth plans for a revolution to coincide with the apocalypse according to Newton-1866.

"I have long been tormented by the thought and given no rest by my doubts why my beloved simple Russian people has to suffer so much! ... Why next to the eternal simple peasant and labourer in his factory and workshop are there people who do nothing – idle nobles, a horde of officials and other wealthy people, all living in shining houses? I have looked for the reason for all this in books, and I have found it. The man really responsible is the Tsar. ... the Tsar is the first of the nobles. He never holds out his hand to the people because he is himself the people's worst enemy."

- Karakozov

On 4 April 1866, Dmitry Karakozov made an unsuccessful attempt on the life of Tsar Alexander II at the gates of the Summer Garden in St Petersburg. As the Tsar was leaving, Dmitry rushed forward to fire. The attempt was thwarted by Ossip Komissarov, a peasant-born hatter's apprentice, who jostled Karakozov's elbow just before the shot was fired. Contemporary monarchists argued that Komissarov's action proved the people's love for their tsar, while contemporary radicals and later Soviet historians argued that Komissarov's involvement in the event was either an accident or an outright government fabrication. Komissarov was ennobled and given a generous allowance, but proved to be an embarrassment to the government due to his boorishness and incoherence and had to be politely removed to the countryside.

Karakozov tried to flee instead of using the second cartridge in his double-barrelled gun, but was easily caught by the guards. He kept one hand in his jacket. It was revealed later to be holding morphine and strychnine to kill himself and prussic acid to disfigure his face. Alexander asked him "What do you want?" "Nothing, nothing," he replied.

Karakozov was taken to the Peter and Paul Fortress. He begged for forgiveness and confessed to a priest. The Supreme Criminal Court sentenced him to death by hanging and he was executed in St. Petersburg on 3 September 1866. Of the twenty-six others who were accused of being his accomplices, Ishutin was sentenced to death (this was later commuted as he was about to executed), seven received hard labor, eleven went to prison, and seven were acquitted. As a result of the assassination attempt, the Tsar punished St Petersburg University. Students could no longer form any kind of organisation, no matter how harmless (Ishutin's organisation had officially been to set up sewing cooperatives). They were subjected to constant surveillance and periodic searches.

Karakozov was an inspiration for the radical nihilists Sergei Nechaev and Vera Zasulich. Alexander II was assassinated in 1881.

title: Dmitry Karakozov