text:
Talk:Canadian blogosphere

Hockey Blogs? Art Blogs? Canadian Literature Blogs?
This description is too focussed on the "political" blogosphere. There are lots of other "wings" of the Canadian Blogosphere that are more clearly "Canadian" in their scope. Check out the large collection of hockey blogs, for instance.

 * Add it if you want. No reason not to.

 * Jason Cherniak 17:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

political discription
I would suggest moving the appropriate sections of Progressive Bloggers here. That article would be more focused as a result. Also, many of the arguments for importance you've made in the PB article are really about the Canadian blogosphere. I still think you need to be cautious about original research, though. Friday 05:21, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Am planning to do so once the VfD on Progressive Bloggers is over. In the meantime, the material is needed as background for the vote.--Simon.Pole 05:24, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

The two blogging groups should not really be simply labled as centre-left/centre-right.

Even just correcting the "centre-right" to state that the Blogging Tories are Tories would be an understatment. If you look at the blogs, they nearly all advocate policies (far) more right wing than the "mainstream" Conservative party in Canada.

I have been unable to find Wikipedia guidlines for political judgment, but from a Canadian point of view, this one is definatly off base.

 * Perhaps it would be more accurate to say "Centrist and Left-wing" and "Centre and Right-wing" for each group? You must keep in the mind that those on the right view some of the Blogging Tories as "centrists".  In the past the Blogging Tories were described in this entry as just "right-wing" and it was edited by a sympathetic party to include "centre-right" -- a change that has remained for some time now.  When editing Wikipedia you must keep in the mind different P.O.V.'s that must be balanced out;  I'm sure many Blogging Tories think most Progressive Bloggers are extreme left-wingers, and would object to the "centrist" tag--Simon.Pole 02:54, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't believe that is the most accurate way to go about it. I understand that there are many socialists/conservatives etc, who wish to portay themselves as centrist or mainstream.  If we let political pundits define themselves, it might make them happy, but we undermine the credibility and impartiality of this information source.  The only way to put a label on these groups of bloggers, is to fairly compare them to the general society they represent, Canada.

 * I don't know that Wikipedia makes a claim for impartiality. The operative principle seems to be "point of view". Saying there is no centrist element in the Blogging Tories could be construed as Negative Point of View (especially when a case could be made that there are a number of centrist Blogging Tories, though they are small in number).  Your larger point may be correct, but I don't think in the context of Wikipedia you'll carry the day.  Change the description of Blogging Tories by all means, but don't be surprised if it leads to an edit war.--Simon.Pole 04:57, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

"Blogosphere
I think this should really be "Blogsphere". The "o" is unnecessary for pronunciation and there is not such thing as a "blogo".

Jason Cherniak 17:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Corporate blogging
This section has been repeatedly put back in. However, this looks to me like an advert for one particular company, with no sources to indicate why this particular company is significant. Anyone else have opinions on this? Friday (talk) 00:47, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

The anon who added this back in apparently wants us to do research before removing this? Well, google news gives 0 results for "Social Media Group". If this company is significant, they're keeping it fairly well hidden so far. Friday (talk) 00:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Canadian blogosphere. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070210203341/http://www.ctv.ca:80/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061018/turner_quotes_061018/20061018?hub=CTVNewsAt11 to http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061018/turner_quotes_061018/20061018?hub=CTVNewsAt11

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:28, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Canadian blogosphere. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929095544/http://www.prdirect.ca/en/view_release.aspx?TrafficID=3370 to http://www.prdirect.ca/en/view_release.aspx?TrafficID=3370

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:34, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Canadian blogosphere


text:
User:GordyB/Rugby

The Canadian national rugby union team (also known as the Canucks) compete in the Churchill Cup, the Super Powers Cup and the Rugby Union World Cup.

The sheer size of Canada means that talent is scattered across the country making the job of coaches and selectors very difficult. THe climate is also unfavourable for playing rugby union for much of the year. The province of British Columbia is something of a stronghold as it doesn't have quite as severe a climate.

History
Rugby football in Canada dates back to the 1860s. Introduction of the game and its early growth is usually credited to immigrants, the British army and the Royal Navy in Halifax, Nova Scotia and Esquimalt, British Columbia.

In 1864 the first recorded game of rugby in Canada took place in Montreal among artillery men. At that time no international agreed set of rules existed and the Rugby Football Union of England would not publish its official set of rules until 1871. Shortly after the game in Montreal Trinity College in Toronto published the first set of Canadian rugby rules.

In 1874 when the first North American international game took place in Cambridge, MA between McGill and Harvard universities. Later that same year a second game was played, but this time Harvard were the hosts, and the game was played with early "American Football" rules. Today, in carrying on the oldest annual sporting competition in North America, McGill University and Harvard University continue the tradition of competing for the Covo Cup, at alternating venues each November, using the original rules of rugby football. McGill University can therefore lay claim to being the oldest rugby club in Canada, but due to rugby's popularity among students and the McGill University Rugby Football Club's affiliation with the university, the claim as the oldest independent rugby club goes to the, still active, Westmount Rugby Football Club.

A Canadian Rugby Football Union was established in 1884, although this organisation went on to become the Canadian Football League, as rugby football in Canada evolved into Canadian Football. In 1909, Lord Earl Grey, then Governor General of Canada, donated a trophy to the CRU to be awarded for the Rugby Football Championship of Canada. This trophy became known as the Grey Cup. However the rules used in Canada were vastly different to the rules used in countries that were part of the IRB. In the years that followed, the CRU would legalise forward passing and make other changes that would make Canadian football a totally different sport.

During World War 1 and 2 rugby union was suspended but in the inter-war period there was something of a renaissance. In 1919 a Canadian Services team played overseas against representatives from England, New Zealand, South Africa and Australia. The formation of the Rugby Union of Canada took place in 1929 and this was followed by a tour of Japan by a Canadian representative side in 1932 to help foster trade between the two countries. They lost 9-8 and 38-5 in the two test matches.

The original Canadian Rugby Union disbanded just before World War 2. The Rugby Union of Canada were re-formed in 1965 as the Canadian Rugby Union.

The Canadian national team put in some strong performances over the past decade or so as high-tide marks for performance. They went out in the quarter-final of the 1991 World Cup 29-3 to New Zealand; they famous beat Wales at Cardiff Arms Park, France in Canada 18-16; achieved a 27-27 draw against Ireland in 2000, and a 26-23 win against Scotland in Vancouver in 2002. The win over Scotland was the start of a series of seven victories before losing to Wales in Cardiff and France in Paris.

They also won the now defunct Pacific Rim tournament three years in succession in 1996, 1997 and 1998. Since 2003 Canada has played host to the Churchill Cup, but has yet to make the final. In 2004 and 2005 they replaced China in the Super Powers Cup.

In recent years Canada has slipped out of the top 10 rugby union nations, but has never-the-less provided top class players to teams in England, Wales and France. Dan Baugh, Rod Snow, Mike James, Colin Yukes and Jamie Cudmore all play in Europe. Like all second and third tier nations the Canadians have had problems having these players available for important games.

The Canadians qualified for their fifth world cup in a row, the 2003 World Cup in Australia. Their sole win was a 24-7 result against Tonga.

Famous players

 * Al Charron
 * Norm Hadley
 * Gareth Rees

title: User:GordyB/Rugby


text:
First of the Summer Wine

First of the Summer Wine is a British sitcom written by Roy Clarke that aired on BBC1. The pilot originally aired on 3 January 1988, and the first series of episodes followed from 4 September 1988. The show ran for two series of six episodes each, with the final episode airing on 8 October 1989. The pilot episode was produced and directed by Gareth Gwenlan. Both series of episodes were produced and directed by Mike Stephens. The show has never been repeated by the BBC but has occasionally been repeated on Gold. The show was broadcast in Australia on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation network in the early 1990s.

First of the Summer Wine is a prequel to Clarke's long running show, Last of the Summer Wine, portraying the youth of the principal characters from the mother show in the months leading up to World War II. With the possibility of war hanging over them, the young men and women enjoy their youth while trying to find a place for themselves in the world. The show used young, mostly unknown actors to play the characters, with only two actors from the original series making an appearance in the prequel.

Production
With the success of Last of the Summer Wine, the BBC approved a new series which Roy Clarke would carry over characters of the original show. With the new series, Clarke hoped to show the lives of his characters as they were in the "first summer" of their lives, as opposed to the "last summer" depicted in Last of the Summer Wine. While there would still be the "shadow of the Grim Reaper" hanging over them, this time it would be because of World War II, not due to their old age.

For the new series, Clarke used mostly young, inexperienced actors to fill the roles of the characters carried over from the original series. The actors were required to mimic the vocal characteristics and mannerisms already established in Last of the Summer Wine to create a continuity between the two series.

The show features much 1920s and 1930s music, which adds to the nostalgic feel of the show. The theme tune is "Sweet and Lovely", sung by Al Bowlly, accompanied by Roy Fox and his Band. The recording was made in London on 18 September 1931.

Characters
First of the Summer Wine followed a group of young men and women, some of whom were adapted from Last of the Summer Wine, with others being specifically created for the new show. The men consisted of Paul Wyett as the scruffy and immature Compo Simmonite; David Fenwick as meek and deep-thinking Norman Clegg; Paul McLain as snobbish ladder-climber Seymour Utterthwaite; Richard Lumsden as the eager soldier Foggy Dewhurst; Gary Whitaker as the love-smitten Wally Batty; and Paul Oldham as their friend, Sherbert. The women consisted of Helen Patrick as the object of Wally's affections, Nora Renshaw; Sarah Dangerfield as Ivy; Joanne Heywood as Dilys, Judy Flynn as Lena, and Linda Davidson as Anita Pillsworth.

The adults around the young people act as supporting characters. Peter Sallis and Maggie Ollerenshaw play David and Violet Clegg, Norman's parents. Sallis had played the role of Norman in Last of the Summer Wine. Derek Benfield portrays Mr Scrimshaw, the manager of the shop where Ivy, Dilys, Sherbert, Norman and Seymour work.

Scenario
First of the Summer Wine takes place between May and September 1939, in the months leading up to World War II. The series revolves around the diary entries of the young Norman Clegg. Each episode begins with him resting on his bedroom windowsill and greeting the day; the words "the diary of Norman Clegg, aged 18 years" introduce the theme of each episode.

Episodes revolve around the antics of the young men of a small Yorkshire village and their usually level-headed female counterparts, all of whom are grappling with the world around them, their youth, and their experiences with the opposite sex. With rumblings of war on the European continent as Hitler's Nazi Germany and the United Kingdom become increasingly poised for war, the lives of the young men and women will be changed forever.

The scenario uses retroactive continuity. In Last of the Summer Wine, Seymour is introduced in later series, and is initially unknown to the other central characters.

title: First of the Summer Wine


text:
Section 25 (band)

Section 25 are an English post-punk and electronic band, best known for the 1984 single "Looking from a Hilltop", associated with Manchester record label Factory Records.

Early recordings 1977–1982 (Always Now to Key of Dreams)
Section 25 formed in Poulton-le-Fylde near Blackpool, Lancashire, in November 1977. Initially the band was a duo, consisting of brothers Larry Cassidy (bass, vocals) and Vincent Cassidy (drums). In June 1978 they made their live debut with Phil Denton on guitar. Denton was replaced in November by Paul Wiggin. June 1979 saw the Cassidy brothers promote a charity gig in aid of International Year of the Child at Blackpool Imperial Hotel, featuring Section 25 and other local bands as well as Joy Division and Orchestral Manoeuvres in the Dark. As a result, Section 25 were invited to play at the Russell Club in Manchester, and joined Factory Records.

Their debut 7″, "Girls Don't Count", was released in July 1980 on Factory Records, produced by Ian Curtis and Rob Gretton of Joy Division. All Section 25 releases would be released through either Factory Records (until the demise of that label), or sister imprint Factory Benelux. Their debut LP, Always Now, appeared in 1981 and was produced by Martin Hannett at Britannia Row studio. The pochette sleeve was among the most expensive and elaborate in the label's history (designed by Peter Saville) utilising an exclusive 'marble' effect design printed on the inner jacket and a fold-out cover that resembled a match-book similar to the cover used by Cabaret Voltaire for their 2x45 album.

The three-piece group played many gigs in Britain and Northern Europe between 1979 and 1981, both as a headline act and with other Factory Records artists, such as Joy Division, A Certain Ratio, Blurt, The Durutti Column, Crispy Ambulance and New Order. The group also released a self-produced second album, The Key of Dreams. However the original line-up split in September 1981 shortly after Paul Wiggin declined to fly to a concert in Helsinki supporting New Order, swallowing up most of their fee by travelling overland. With a North American tour already planned, his fear of flying made his departure inevitable. Factory label boss Tony Wilson then tried and failed to recruit then-unknown guitarist Johnny Marr as a replacement.

Abandoning much of the existing live set, the Cassidy brothers prepared for an upcoming European tour with backing tapes and an extra percussionist John Grice. Following a warm-up date in London, the group visited Belgium, Holland and Germany in January 1982 in tandem with Factory labelmates Crispy Ambulance. The band then undertook their first North American tour, albeit restricted to the East Coast.

1983–2006 (From The Hip to Love & Hate)
Joined by percussionist Lee Shallcross, Section 25 gradually evolved with a more electronic-dance direction, a process which culminated in the album From the Hip and remix single "Looking From A Hilltop", both released in 1984 and produced by Bernard Sumner of New Order. This second version of the band also featured the Cassidy brothers' sister Angela Flowers (vocals, keyboards) and Larry Cassidy's wife Jenny Ross (vocals, keyboards). The five-piece completed a lengthy second tour of North America in January 1985, where the single "Looking From A Hilltop" achieved a measure of club success.

Later in 1985 the single "Crazy Wisdom" emerged on Factory Benelux as a 12", but the group again splintered, leaving husband-and-wife team Larry Cassidy and Jenny Ross to complete a fourth album, Love & Hate, finally released by Factory in 1988. Bad News Week was also released as a 12" single, remixed by Bernard Sumner. Section 25 then fell silent for more than a decade, although their entire back catalogue was reissued on CD on LTM as well as an archive DVD, So Far. There have also been several live and rarity CDs released by the same label.

In 2001 the band regrouped and started composing new material. It was originally expected that this would form the basis for a new album, but these plans were derailed when Jenny Ross, after a long fight with cancer, died on 20 November 2004 at age 42. The LTM DVD So Far, an audio-visual history of the band released in January 2005, was dedicated to her memory.

2006–2009 (Part-Primitiv to Nature and Degree)
Now with Ian Butterworth (formerly of fellow Factory act Tunnelvison) on guitar and Roger Wikeley on bass and keyboards, the Cassidy brothers performed their first live show in nearly two decades at their hometown Poulton-Le-Fylde in May 2006 followed by dates in Blackpool, Paris, Brussels, Leicester, London and Athens.

A new studio album by the quartet, Part-Primitiv, was released by LTM in April 2007, together with Communicants, a DVD assembled from live performances in 2006. Larry and Vin Cassidy also featured in the 2006 Factory documentary film Shadowplayers, and a BBC television documentary on the label. The group performed at the Plan K venue in Brussels in December 2007 as part of the Factory Night (Once Again) event, being joined onstage by Peter Hook of New Order for a cover of "Temptation". It was then proposed that Hook and Section 25 play further shows together, performing a mixture of Section 25, Joy Division and New Order songs.

Roger Wikeley left Section 25 in 2008 and was replaced by Stephen Stringer. In November this revised line-up played with Peter Hook in Paris, Brussels, Oss in the southern Netherlands and Krefeld in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. Ian Butterworth parted company with the Section 25 at the end of the year. Stephen Stringer moved on to guitar and Section 25's sound engineer and programmer Stuart Hill moved on to bass guitar. Both were no strangers to Larry and Vin, who had helped them record demos in 1983 and 1985.

The band released a new album in 2009 called Nature + Degree through LTM Recordings. Several tracks featured vocals by Bethany Cassidy, daughter of Larry and Jenny, who joined the group as co-vocalist and keyboards player. Section 25 appeared at the "Factory Night (And Then Again)" event at Plan K on 12 December 2009, with Beth and Larry sharing vocals. The group also returned to the States for festival dates in Los Angeles and San Francisco.

On 27 February 2010, it was announced that founding member, singer, and bass player for the group, Larry Cassidy, had died at the age of 56. His cause of death was later described as "heart failure brought on by a blood clot".

2010–present (Retrofit to Elektra)
Prior to Larry Cassidy's death, the band had completed work on a new album, Retrofit, which was released on 14 September 2010. The album features electro reworkings and updates of previously issued Section 25 tracks, as well as one new song "Über Hymn". The album closes with a new version of Looking From A Hilltop, produced and arranged by Stephen Morris of New Order.

Limited copies came with an extra CD of a 16-minute recording of Larry Cassidy reading selected lyrics of Joy Division's Ian Curtis. This was recorded in January 2010 and would be Larry's last visit to a recording studio.

The band opted to continue to perform with their current line up. Section 25 played the FAC251 club in Manchester on 20 November 2010, and in 2011 issued their first new release without Larry Cassidy, a download-only EP titled "Invicta" EP, via Hacienda Records. June 2012 saw a deluxe vinyl reissue of From the Hip (Fact 90), issued as a special edition on Factory Records with 'remixed' artwork by Peter Saville, as well as a split coloured-vinyl 12" with Stereograph featuring two dub versions of "Colour Movement Sex and Violence" and "Inner Drive".

Saville also provided the cover image and title for their eighth studio album, Dark Light, issued on the Factory Benelux imprint in February 2013. "My Outrage" was also released as a 7″ single. Also released during the same period were the 10" single "Invicta Max" (an expansion of the 2011 EP of the same name) and the official remix album "Eigengrau", featuring numerous remixes of earlier Section 25 recordings by Zoviet France, Absolute Body Control, Portion Control and Renaldo and the Loaf among others.

In May 2014, the group issued an expanded 30th anniversary CD edition of From the Hip via Factory Benelux, with a bonus disc featuring original demos as well as a BBC radio session from 1984 plus a new recording of "Reflection". Both Bernard Sumner and Jon Savage contributed liner notes. The new version of "Reflection" (subtitled 'Young Image') was also issued as a limited edition orange vinyl 7" single to mark Record Store Day in April 2014. On Record Store Day the band performed in Manchester with Factory peers Crispy Ambulance and Minny Pops. A review of the show in The Guardian described Section 25 as "a revelation" and "the best new/old band in Britain."

In April 2015, Section 25 released "Mirror", another limited edition 7″ single for Record Store Day, with guest vocals by Simon Topping, formerly of A Certain Ratio. The song dated from 1980 but had never before been recorded in the studio. Both the song and the packaging complemented a new CD edition of Always Now, re-mastered and featuring a bonus disc with their 1981 John Peel radio session as well as a complete live concert from 1980. The packaging replicated the original wraparound cover designed by Peter Saville.

In 2016, the group released a new live album, Alfresco, as a vinyl and CD package to mark Record Store Day in April and played a short series of live dates to coincide with its release. That same year the track "Hit" from their 1981 album Always Now was sampled by Kanye West on a new song, "FML", featured on his seventh studio album, The Life of Pablo.

In December 2017, the band announced on their Facebook page that they were working on a new album, to be released during the spring 2018. Vincent Cassidy also announced that their original guitarist, Paul Wiggin, will contribute on the new album. June 2018 saw the release of an eleven-track album, Elektra, recorded at West Orange Studios during the early part of the same year. The album featured appearances by original guitarist Paul Wiggin and newest family member Michael Cassidy on bass. One of the tracks, "FML", is an acoustic cover of the Kanye West track that sampled the band's "Hit" from their 1981 set Always Now.

Discography

 * 1981: Always Now
 * 1982: The Key of Dreams
 * 1984: From the Hip
 * 1988: Love & Hate
 * 2007: Part-Primitiv
 * 2009: Nature + Degree
 * 2010: Retrofit
 * 2013: Dark Light
 * 2018: Elektra
 * 2020: Duette
 * 2021: Jams From The Bardo
 * 2022: Hymns From The Bardo
 * 2024: Move On

title: Section 25 (band)


text:
Before I Speak

Before I Speak is the debut album from Canadian singer/songwriter Kyle Riabko. The album infuses R&B style with elements of funk and soul.

The album was released a few months prior to Riabko's high school graduation. Each song on the album was written by Riabko. He played guitar and bass for the recording along with backing from former Prince drummer Michael Bland and former Grapes of Wrath keyboardist Vince Jones. Liz Phair and Robert Randolph contributed guest vocals. The album was co-produced by Riabko with Matt Wallace and Chris Burke-Gaffney, who acts as Riabko's manager.

Most of the album's recording took place at Sound City in Los Angeles. The tracks "Before I Speak" and "Doesn't Get Much Better" were recorded in Riabko's bedroom at his parents' home just prior to the completion of the album. Three singles were released from the album: "Carry On," "Do You Right," and "What Did I Get Myself Into."

Track listing

 * 1) "Learn To Speak" (Intro)
 * 2) "Do You Right"
 * 3) "What Did I Get Myself Into"
 * 4) "Half As Much"
 * 5) "Miss Behavin’"
 * 6) "Carry On"
 * 7) "Chemistry Blues" (Interlude)
 * 8) "Before I Speak"
 * 9) "Waiting"
 * 10) "Paranoid"
 * 11) "Teach Me"
 * 12) "Chemistry
 * 13) "Doesn’t Get Much Better"
 * 14) "Until Next Time" (Outro)
 * 15) "Good Time"
 * 16) "Devil" (hidden track)

title: Before I Speak


text:
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Donald Bradman/archive1

 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 01:32, 14 October 2007.

Donald Bradman
One of the great Australian icons, greatest batsman of all time, article looks good, surely his time has come. ---Dyslexicbudgie 12:20, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment

Don't have time to review it properly right now but I noticed the following just from scanning it.

 * Section about his Batting technique what about his fielding and Bowling?
 * popular culture section has the look of a triva section
 * Table and chart overlapping in stats section
 * A lot of notes not entered right
 * Can't read Graph of Test averages above 50
 * Section titles should not stat with "The" or the name of the subject
 * "See also" links should say "Main article"
 * Why does the Bodyline section start with a quote?

Buc 21:25, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Oppose. I count three "citation needed" tags. Is note 4 necessary? The statistic charts are overlapping (Firefox, 1024x768).-Wafulz 21:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Support - Best article on wikipedia in my opinion, and yes note 4 is essential. Dyslexicbudgie 15:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. "Most centuries scored in a single session of play: 6 (1 pre lunch, 2 lunch-tea, 3 tea-stumps)" Six centuries? Really? In any case, this is not a "single session". Perhaps the author meant a "single day"? Axl 18:03, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Gallium(III) hydroxide

Gallium hydroxide is an inorganic compound with the chemical formula Ga(OH)3. It is formed as a gel following the addition of ammonia to Ga(3+) salts. It is also found in nature as the rare mineral söhngeite which is reported to contain octahedrally coordinated gallium atoms. Gallium hydroxide is amphoteric. In strongly acidic conditions, the gallium ion, Ga(3+) is formed. In strongly basic conditions, [Ga(OH)4]− (tetrahydroxogallate(III)) is formed. Salts of [Ga(OH)4]− are sometimes called gallates.

title: Gallium(III) hydroxide


text:
CFNB

CFNB may refer to:

 * CFNB-FM, a radio station (97.5 FM) licensed to D'Arcy, British Columbia, Canada
 * CIBX-FM, a radio station (106.9 FM) licensed to Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada, which held the call sign CFNB from 1926 to 1996

title: CFNB


text:
Talk:Cave Story

This Article does not mention that Cave story + was also released on the epic games store
This Article does not mention that Cave story + was also released on the epic games store somewhere in 2020. It only talks about how it was released for Steam  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teuf0rt (talk • contribs) 19:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Comment
I don't think that the article is ready at all. Granted, the main subject is the original 2003 version, but even still, there's barely any coverage of Cave Story 3D, which is surprising since it's one of the more well-known versions, being the biggest budgeted of all of the CS games. I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of articles dealing with the development, and AFAICS, there is no reception in the article regarding it (a bit of a shock considering the vast differences). - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 21:35, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Legitimacy of Fan Translation?
Why does this article reference the unofficial and now outdated Neon Genesis fan translation instead of the official one used by all the commercial versions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.138.15.230 (talk) 23:14, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Convenience. I have a copy of the transcript of the Aeon Genesis translation, but not the Nicalis translation, so that's what I used. If you have exact quotes from the newer translation, feel free to replace the existing ones. However, do not replace single terms with their newer translations (e.g. Mimigas ---> Mimiga), because that would create a weird mish-mash of different translations and just be confusing. Axem Titanium (talk) 04:30, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

how can "jumping" also help players "progress"?
It's about the following sentence: The player progresses by jumping and navigating platform game puzzles and shooting enemies with the equipped weapon. So as what said in title, I have a question here: how can "jumping" also help players "progress"? - Dr. Cravix ♪Eternal Reminiscence 02:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC) To get to places they otherwise couldn't. Most,if not all,levels require jumping to continue. 82.40.165.129 (talk) 09:37, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Spoilers galore, wtf
Uh...that "story" section is so filled with spoilers it's ridiculous. It gives away almost all of the game's secrets that you uncover as you play, and surely would ruin a new player's fun in the process. I notice this has been mentioned before. If it was just ignored (as seems to be the case), then you "editors" of this article are a sick joke. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.219.46.50 (talk) 12:34, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:SPOILER is quite clear that we don't include warnings or remove valid info simply because it's a spoiler. I also would expect the average reader would know enough to realize that a section titled story would give away aspects of the story that could spoil it. I don't see any sick joke here.--76.65.42.142 (talk) 21:53, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Cave Story. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/64lo7ecoe?url=http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-12/14/humble-indie-bundle-4 to http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-12/14/humble-indie-bundle-4

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:42, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Remove Bit.Trip Runner DLC reference?
Th Bit.Trip Runner reference in the Development section feels more like an advertisement than anything else. What is the relevance to Cave Story? (added in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cave_Story&oldid=563797903) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.52.240.73 (talk) 20:50, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I've moved it to reception (a reference is a long term bit of reception)--I think it's just a problem with it being in the wrong section. --Izno (talk) 21:12, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cave Story. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120705171450/http://www.desura.com/games/cave-story to http://www.desura.com/games/cave-story

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:47, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cave Story. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150729124343/http://www.usgamer.net/articles/the-15-best-games-since-2000-number-15-through-11/page-3 to http://www.usgamer.net/articles/the-15-best-games-since-2000-number-15-through-11/page-3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:26, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

"Title screen" is not actually the title screen
This is the actual title screen. What is currently shown as the "title screen" is a screenshot of the scene that plays before the title screen, with the title logo superimposed onto it. That image inaccurately represents itself as an actual screenshot of the game's title screen, but is actually a fan-made "cover art" that someone stitched together from 2 separate screenshots.2600:1015:B110:7E54:EC20:FB:4E8:7F6E (talk) 00:37, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Citation for Quote's hat in Terraria?
In the Legacy section, it states "Quote's hat is also featured in the game Terraria." Although the Terria Wiki suggests this may be so, no source has been cited. Can anybody find the source, as I am having no luck? The info was added to Wikipedia here I will continue searching, as it truly bugs me when websites refer to one another as sources, with no original source given.

Although we endeavor to remove unsourced trivia from the Terraria Wiki, this was not always the case, and even now it sometimes slips by us. This particular bit of trivia has been on our wiki since 2011, much to my chagrin. --BCreegan (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2018 (UTC),

Metroidvania controversy
The first line of this article describes Cave Story as "a 2004 Metroidvania platform-adventure game," but in reality this game is NOT a Metroidvania. One of the main characteristics of a Metroidvania game is "a large interconnected world map the player can explore," but this is absolutely not the case in Cave Story. The different regions of the map are completely separated, and you can only reach them via teleporter.

The citation for the description of Cave Story being a Metroidvania game is an article about how it was influential to the evolution/resurgence of Metroidvania games, but the main reason this game is influential to the genre is because it was an Indie game developed entirely by one person. The actual gameplay does not line up with the requirements of the genre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.218.65.147 (talk) 20:50, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I understand that in Metroid to visit the interconnected areas, you use an elevator shaft, which is the same type of game mechanic as a teleporter, but presented artistically different. Regardless, the article cited is talking about Metroidvainia and how it is present in Cave Story. And it's not a trivial mention either. Metroidvania is mentioned throughout the article. I can get on board with changing this from Metroidvania, but you need a reliable source that states an alternative, preferably one without a trivial mention since we have one article that has a non-trivial discussion and goes into great depth about the metroidvania genre as it relates to Cave Story. Until those sources are discussed on this talk page, any edit warring will not be allowed and if it continues, you will be banned from editing Wikipedia (assuming you are the anonymous IP that edited the page earlier). Leitmotiv (talk) 21:19, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Clarify who is being quoted in Development section
> To make levels memorable, Amaya designed them around a single theme, such as "warmth" for the Egg Corridor, and "arid and oppressive" for the Sand Zone.

These phrases "warmth" and "arid and oppressive" appear in the 1UP article, but it's not clear that these are Pixel's own words. Spazquest (talk) 20:40, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

The legal issues section is blatantly incorrect
The DMCA was against one project. Just one. That project was CSE2 (Cave Story Engine 2), a disassembly of Cave Story designed to be as close as possible to what Pixel's original source code would have looked like. Only the source code was DMCA'd, not anything built with said source code. This entire thing was widely misreported.

The takedown request can be found here: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/11/2020-11-19-nicalis.md

As you can see CSE2's source code was asked to be taken down because it was alleged to be the source code for Cave Story (it isn't, but it is probably close enough that it could easily be mistaken for the original source code). Andwhyisit (talk) 10:40, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Cave Story


text:
Pelagonia

Pelagonia (Пелагонија; Πελαγονία) is a geographical region of Macedonia named after the ancient kingdom. Ancient Pelagonia roughly corresponded to the present-day municipalities of Bitola, Prilep, Mogila, Novaci, Kruševo, and Krivogaštani in North Macedonia and to the municipalities of Florina, Amyntaio and Prespes in Greece.

History

In antiquity, Pelagonia was roughly bounded by Paeonia to the north and east, Lynkestis and Almopia to the south and Illyria to the west; and was inhabited by the Pelagones, an ancient tribe of Upper Macedonia, who were centered at the Pelagonian plain and belonged to the Molossian tribal state or koinon. The region was annexed to the Macedonian kingdom during the 4th century BC and became one of its administrative provinces. In medieval times, when the names of Lynkestis and Orestis had become obsolete, Pelagonia acquired a broader meaning. This is why the Battle of Pelagonia (1259) between Byzantines and Latins includes also the current Kastoria regional unit and ancient Orestis.

Strabo calls Pelagonia by the name Tripolitis and names only one ancient city of the supposed three in the region; Azorus. Two notable Pelagonians include the mythological Pelagon, the eponym of the region, who, according to Greek mythology, was son of the river-god Axius (modern Axios or Vardar river) and father of the Paeonian Asteropaeus in Homer's Iliad. The second one is Menelaus of Pelagonia (ca. 360 BC) who, according to Bosworth, fled his kingdom when it was annexed by Philip II, finding refuge and citizenship in Athens.

Today, Pelagonia is a plain shared between North Macedonia and the Greek region of Macedonia. It incorporates the southern cities of Bitola and Prilep in North Macedonia and the northwestern city of Florina in Greece; it is also the location of Medžitlija-Niki, a key border crossing between the two countries. Many Mycenaean objects have been found in the area, such as the double axe, later found in Mycenae and are exhibited in the Museum of Bitola.

Important Bird Area
A 137,000 ha tract of the plain has been designated an Important Bird Area (IBA) by BirdLife International because it supports populations of ferruginous ducks, white storks, Dalmatian pelicans, Eurasian thick-knees, little owls, Eurasian scops owls, European rollers, lesser kestrels and lesser grey shrikes.

title: Pelagonia


text:
Savage Pencil

Edwin Pouncey (born June 1951), also known by the nom de plume Savage Pencil, is an English comics artist, musician, and music journalist.

Biography
As Savage Pencil and otherwise, Pouncey has contributed to magazines such as Sounds ("Rock'n'Roll Zoo", etc.), Forced Exposure and The Wire. He has illustrated record sleeves for bands such as The Fall, Big Black, Sonic Youth and Rocket From The Crypt amongst others. Savage Pencil was also a member of The Art Attacks, a band who released two 7"s; "I'm A Dalek" b/w "Neutron Bomb" (released on the Albatross label in 1977) and "First & Last" / "Punk Rock Stars" / "Rat City" (released on the Fresh label in 1979).

He is currently a member of the "improvising drone-rock noise band" Pestrepeller, along with Peter Hope-Evans (ex-Medicine Head), Ed Pinsent, Harley Richardson, Nick Neocleous and Rob Brown. They released an album in May 2006 on Important Records, entitled Isle of Dark Magick, described in the press release as "a gem of free-improvised-found-sound-collage enriched with dark pagan folky vibes and supernatural horror noise dedicated to H. P. Lovecraft, Clark Ashton Smith and Austin Osman Spare." AllMusic described them stating "There's a kind of loopy charm to the oddball British band Pestrepeller".

Other sources

 * Savage Pencil at Lambiek's Comiclopedia

title: Savage Pencil


text:
Talk:Esa Tikkanen

Untitled
Two things: Isn't Esa's Finnglish better known as 'Tikkenese', and should his tour of duty with the Anyang Halla Winia of the Asia League Ice Hockey be added to this? -William McDuff 05:36, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't see why not. Do you have info on it?  Kraigus 01:43, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * A week late: as the guy who added "Tikk Talk" to the page, I was simply idly putting in what I knew it as. I'm certainly not going to bother defending it when the Google results are pretty clear. Lord Bob 18:39, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 15:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Esa Tikkanen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071201164110/http://www.ntra.com/stats_bios.aspx?id=1924 to http://www.ntra.com/stats_bios.aspx?id=1924

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:08, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Esa Tikkanen


text:
State ratifying conventions

State ratifying conventions are one of the two methods established by Article V of the United States Constitution for ratifying proposed constitutional amendments. The only amendment that has been ratified through this method thus far is the 21st Amendment in 1933.

Constitutional text
Article V reads in pertinent part (italics added):

"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths thereof, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress.…"

Use of the convention ratification option
Ratification of a proposed amendment has been done by state conventions only once—the 1933 ratification process of the 21st Amendment. The 21st is also the only constitutional amendment that repealed another one, that being the 18th Amendment, which had been ratified 14 years earlier.

As is true for a state legislature when ratifying a proposed federal constitutional amendment, a state ratifying convention may not in any way change a proposed constitutional amendment, but must accept or reject the proposed amendment as written.

Purpose
The convention method of ratification described in Article V is an alternate route to considering the pro and con arguments of a particular proposed amendment, as the framers of the Constitution wanted a means of potentially bypassing the state legislatures in the ratification process.

To some extent, the convention method of ratification loosely approximates a one-state, one-vote national referendum on a specific proposed federal constitutional amendment, thus allowing the sentiments of registered voters to be somewhat more directly felt on highly sensitive issues. The theory is that the delegates of the conventions—who presumably would themselves be average citizens—might be less likely to bow to political pressure to accept or to reject a given amendment than would be the case with state legislators. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that a popular referendum is not a substitute for either the legislature or a ratifying convention—nor can a referendum approve of, or disapprove of, a state legislature's, or a convention's, decision on an amendment (Hawke v. Smith, 253 U.S. 221, [1920]). This ruling was challenged in Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, in which the United States Supreme Court defined the term "legislature" broadly to include "the power that makes laws", which the court held included direct lawmaking by the people of the state. The majority opinion stated that the Article V use of the term "legislature" applied only to the representative body of the states as a "federal" function, as opposed to a "state" function of the legislature as prescribed in Article 1, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution. This conflict over the interpretation of the word "legislature" creates potential constitutional questions over the role that popular referendums could play in state ratifying conventions.

New Mexico law provides that the members of its legislature would themselves be the delegates and form such a ratifying convention—if Congress were to again select that particular method of ratification. The issue having never come before the federal courts, it is unknown whether this New Mexico state law violates Article V.

By state
In a state's legislature, the ratification method is procedurally simple—merely propose a resolution, memorial, or proclamation of ratification and vote it up or down in each chamber of that state legislature. But using the convention method of ratification is a bit more complicated because it is, by necessity, separate and different from a state legislature. As early as the 1930s, state lawmakers enacted laws to prepare for the possibility of Congress specifying the convention method of ratification. Many laws refer to a one-off event, with an ad-hoc convention convened solely for the purposes of the 21st Amendment. Other laws, however, provided guidelines for ratifying conventions in general.

Delaware
In Delaware, the governor announces an election of delegates; the latest date possible is the next general election held at least three months after the amendment has been proposed.

The convention has 17 members, of which 7 are from New Castle County, 5 from Kent County, and 5 from Sussex County. Slates of candidates are nominated by petition; nine slates are selected, one for each county and for each position (for, against, or uncommitted as to the proposed amendment) based on the petitions with the most signatures. In the election, slates from the three counties are merged into three tickets (for, against, or uncommitted), and delegates are all elected using at-large statewide block voting; there is the option to vote straight-ticket but no write-in.

Florida
In Florida, the governor has 45 days to announce the election. The election is held between five and ten months after Congress proposes the amendment, unless a statewide election is to be held within a year in which case the governor can hold the delegates election at that time.

The convention has 67 members. They are all elected using at-large statewide block voting, with candidates being listed on the ballot by category of whether they declared themselves for, against, or unpledged as to the proposed amendment; write-in votes are allowed. Filing for candidacy requires a $25 fee and a 500-name petition if the candidate declares themselves pledged.

The convention meets on the second Tuesday following the election and a majority of delegates forms a quorum. Delegates receive no compensation.

New Mexico
In New Mexico, the governor has 10 days to call a convention. The convention is not elected, but formed by all members of the New Mexico Legislature.

The legislators meet in the chamber of the New Mexico House of Representatives and is presided over by the lieutenant governor. They receive compensation for three days.

Vermont
In Vermont, the governor has 60 days to call for the election of delegates to the state ratifying convention. The state convention has 14 members, as many as counties in Vermont.

The governor, lieutenant governor, and speaker of the Vermont State House nominate 28 candidates, two from each county: one for ratification and one against. Candidates are listed on the ballot by label (for or against); the election of delegates uses at-large statewide block voting, where every elector can vote for up to 14 candidates regardless of label and the top-fourteen vote-getters are elected; write-in votes are allowed.

The governor chooses a date for the opening of the convention, within 20 to 30 days after the election. The convention meets in the Vermont Senate chamber in Montpelier, and a majority of the elected delegates are a quorum. The Vermont state code gives few rules for the proceedings of the convention, with a $10 compensation and reimbursement of expenses.

title: State ratifying conventions


text:
User:SweenyTod/scratch/Electronic Frontiers Australia

Electronic Frontiers Australia Inc. (EFA) is a non-profit  Australian national organisation representing Internet users concerned with online  liberties and  rights.

Its major objectives are to:
 * Protect and promote the civil liberties of users and operators of computer based communications systems such as the Internet.
 * Advocate the amendment of laws and regulations in Australia and elsewhere which restrict free speech.
 * Educate the community at large about the social, political, and civil liberties issues involved in the use of computer based communications systems.

Board Members

 * Executive Director Irene Graham
 * Chair Greg Taylor
 * Vice-Chair Robert Rose
 * Secretary Matt Black
 * Treasurer Nick Ellsmore
 * General Board Members
 * David Cake
 * Dale Clapperton
 * Kimberley Heitman
 * Andrew Pam
 * Danny Yee

History
EFA was created in 1994. Its founders were inspired by the US-based Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), but EFA is not affiliated with the EFF. EFA is a founding member of the Global Internet Liberty Campaign. They have been active in the political arena, lobbying local and federal governments on behalf of the Internet community, including appearing before senate committees, organising protect rallies, radio and television appearances and helping Internet users with legal issues relating from harassment, such as attacks on website owners by The Church of Scientology.

Controversy
It was due to one of these attacks, that EFA developed its Code of Conduct. Steve Zadarnowski was contacted by Scientology because of his website and various Usenet postings he had made, which were critical of the Church. Having previously defended ARPAR against Scientology legal threats, EFA board member Jeremy Malcolm began working on behalf of Scientology. This conflict lead to Jeremy standing down from the board, and later resigning from EFA altogether. It was this incident that lead to the Code of Conduct being introduced.

Notiable Achivements
Some of the notiable achivements of the EFA include:
 * Submitted a request for right of reply to the Australian Senate Committee of Privileges in relation to adverse remarks about EFA made in the Senate by Senator Richard Alston, Minister for Information Technology and the Arts. EFA's reply was tabled in the Senate on October 21. (1999)
 * Made a submission to the House of Representatives Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee Inquiry into the Privacy Amendment (Private Sector) Bill 2000 (May), and appeared as a witness at a hearing of the Committee
 * Organised protest rallies around Australia in May 1999 in opposition to the Internet censorship legislation.
 * Submitted a response to the Senate Legal and Constitutional References Committee Inquiry into Privacy and the Private Sector (Privacy Amendment Bill 1998) - Jul 98.
 * Appeared before that Senate Committee at their hearing in Brisbane, refer Hansard transcript - Apr 97.
 * Organised an industry-wide meeting with DoCA and Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) officials in relation to the proposed regulatory framework. - 97
 * Prepared a major response to the Australian Government's proposals to censor and regulate the Internet, i.e. the Principles for a Regulatory Framework for On-line Services in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 issued by the Department of Communications and the Arts (DoCA) - Aug 97.


text:
Hollywood Congress of Republicans

The Hollywood Congress of Republicans (HCR) is a chapter of the California Congress of Republicans, itself a permanently chartered organization of the California Republican Party. Founded in 2001, the group's members are conservatives who work in the film industry in Hollywood.

title: Hollywood Congress of Republicans


text:
Talk:Radical left

disambiguation?
Radical right redirects to far-right.. is there some reason Radical left doesnt redirect to far-left? Stbalbach 05:39, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes there is. As you can read in the article, Radical Left has also a historical meaning different from far-left. Electionworld 06:30, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Seems odd radical left is being disambiged but radical right is not. Radical right could be neo-conservative for example, Im sure there are others. It would also be more useful to have both "radical" go to the same article and be a proper article. This is not how disambig pages are meant to be used, they are navigation aids, not neo-articles. Stbalbach 07:02, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

weird!
How strange and funny to read the old bickerings here. The things people will do on Wikipedia to spite one another (redirecting Radical Left to Far Right? come on, people) are sometimes just jaw-droppingly hilarious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kikodawgzz (talk • contribs) 19:15, 10 January 2006

merge?
I am honestly unsure why we have multiple separate pages for the terms Ultra leftism, Far left, Radical left. Each of the articless explains somewhat redundant history and the fact that the terms are vague (used by different groups to mean somewhat different things). In other words, the terms are vague and to the extent they have substance it's largely non-evident from the name ("ultra"--what does ultra mean? it's a meaningless intensifier) or non-evident to people who don't use that particular term, and the groups intended to be covered by the term are similar in each set anyway (whether or not they really belong together). "Ultra left" is just never going to grow -- it's basically a meaningless phrase used simply as a pejorative; "radical left" just says it's lumping together anarchists, communists & socialists; and while there's a lot of content in "far left", it's largely redundant with left-wing politics. I propose that we just merge them all into a single page, redirect the other two terms to the single page, and have one page that defines each separate term. (I'm choosing "radical left" simply because it actually has a specific meaning and "radical" has a specific meaning, unlike "far" or "ultra".) That way we can be much more consistent within discussing each term and its discussions of other terms, and we can take a clear eye at figuring out whether the content currently on far left should be kept on the combined article, or moved into left-wing politics. --lquilter 13:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Since wikipedia isn't a dictionary and all the terms are either vage or used pajoritivly, I vote we redirect all of the pages to left-wing politics and merge any usefull info into that page.--JK the unwise 14:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I see some merit in keeping a page to group together terms used to describe the various radical left tendencies, distinct from center/liberal left ... not sure of the best way either way, but raising the question. --lquilter 14:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ultra left should be kept as it is the name of an actual movement (although the detail on its use as a pejorative term should be cut to a disambiguator pointing to far left). Radical left has pretty much nothing of importance - while our article claims it has a specific meaning, I suspect it will be difficult to find references for that, so it might be better redirected to left-wing politics.  I'd like to keep far left, as it's a common term with a vague definition but lots of potential references to allow an article to explore the concept. Warofdreams talk 15:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree with Warofdreams that ultra left should be kept separate since it's an article on a specific movement of Marxism, but the discussion of the term as a generic/pejorative one should be moved. I think radical left should be redirected to far left, which already discusses the ideas in more detail. --Delirium 04:14, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Does agreeing with Delirium make me delirious? ;) But seriously, I have merged (and redirected) Radical left with the Far left article. --Loremaster 04:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Weighing in late: Extreme left and far left were right to be merged, and probably radical left too. Ultra leftism needs to keep its seperate page, as it (also) refers to something very specific, as its page makes very clear. A while back, incidentally, I removed all links to ultra left that should have gone to extreme/far left. BobFromBrockley 13:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * And looking at the pejorative uses section of ultra-left, I think it needs to be kept, not moved, as it is clear from the article that ultra-left as a pejorative has a fairly specific use within the far left. BobFromBrockley 13:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree. --Loremaster 14:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

 * We have agreement not to merger Ultra Left. I will remove the tag from that page. --Duncan 12:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I also think we have agreement to merge this page into Far left. Is that okay?

far left merge is incorrect
I disagree with the merge of Radical Left into Far Left and I think we should have a very thorough discussion and a vote on this. This is especially true given that it seems the redirect is done without having first paid attention to the construction of the Far Left article, which according to Wikipedia is very badly done (and which looks it, too), and hasn't been cleaned up or attended to yet. Kiko 15:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Could you give a substantive reason why the merge is incorrect. Do the terms have separate meanings? C mon 16:49, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, radical left can refer both to liberal left and to far left. --Checco 23:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Disambiguation then to radicalism (historical), the far left and parties called radicals of the left? C mon 23:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I can live with it, but I still prefer the current version. --Checco 14:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Ultra-leftism
Ultra-leftism was merged into the far left page despite this consensus, and more recently the section was deleted without discussion, so I have re-created the page. Needs some work though. BobFromBrockley (talk) 13:24, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

This page is terrible.
Can we delete it? --Duncan 12:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, we should. Except for disambing the danish and french parties, what real content is there. Is there any source for the claim that 'radical left' has any independent meaning, except for 'left that is radical'? We cannot have an article for every imaginable position along the highly contextual left-right-axis (left moderate left, revolutionary left, militant left, populist left, liberal left, etc.). --Soman (talk) 21:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Is there any, any sourcing for the wordings in the present article? I've posted a totallydisputed tag on it, and if no credible reference pops up, I'd post an afd. --Soman (talk) 17:13, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Anarchist OR Communist?
Aren't those two philosophies mutually exclusive? How can "radical left" refer to both simultaneously?

 * Depends on which brand of communism. Anarcho-communism, council communism, communalism, and libertarian municipalism all incorporate some Marxist/communist theory, but for a purely anarchist end.72.78.177.33 (talk) 11:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Merge discussion
It has been proposed that Far left be merged into this article. Please comment here. TFD (talk) 20:19, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I actually tried the other day to unilaterally move the content of far left over to here, but obviously that failed and was reverted, as I'd suspected it would be. But the radical left, as a group, really is discernably different from either far left (which can mean "farther to the left of something else but still not radical as radical is currently known") or social democracy (which in some sections of the world is still erroneously seen as somewhat 'far left', too).
 * The reason we should be using the term "radical left" to refer to revolutionary socialist and anarchist sectors of society is that "radical left" is largely the label they use for themselves. In a day or two, I'll try once again to transpose the article content of far left over to here, unless a bunch of people chime in between now and the next 48 hours and make good cases as to why this shouldn't happen. Kikodawgzzz (talk) 16:34, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I do not see the terms radical left or far left used in any consistent way. Could you please provide a source for it.  They are more like dictionary then encyclopedia articles.  It probably be better just to merge far left into The Left and leave this article as a disambiguation page.  TFD (talk) 16:51, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You can't just copy-and-paste the content of another page and call it a new article. If they truly are exactly the same, then a redirect would do.  If not, then the new page would have to be substantially different from far left to constitute its own article.  Also, Radical left is currently a disambiguation page.  All the content would have to be moved elsewhere, instead of simply deleted.  Radical left (disambiguation) is the target you want to aim for, assuming you write an article for Radical left. –Schmloof (talk · contribs) 16:53, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hold on there now, Schmloof. I virulently disagree with the basis for your view. With the action of transposing the content of far left over to here, I'm not "making a new" anything. None. Instead, with that action, I am unequivocally making the case that the term radical left is objectively the most-used worldwide term to refer to the collection of anarchists, revolutionary socialists, revolutionary communists, left communists, etc. as an overall political 'grouping'. I am arguing that the content of the far left article is better suited here, under the name "radical left", than it is under the name of far left. And I will continue to argue that point. Also, it's weird for anyone to expect anyone to provide "sources for" the idea that radical left is the most appropriate overall term. It would be like me asking you to provide "sources for" the idea that far left is the most appropriate overall term. Both are equally ridiculous things to actually expect in the real world. Maybe we should put this thing to a vote, and also invite WikiProject Socialism into the debate as well? Kikodawgzzz (talk)
 * When you make the comment, "the term radical left is objectively the most-used worldwide term" you need a source that states this and explains what the term means. For example for radical right there are many sources that explain taxonomy, one of the most recent being a 2010 book on the U.S. far right that says, "Radical right is commonly, but not completely, used to describe anticommunist organizations such as the Christian Crusade and John Birch Society...."  TFD (talk) 19:17, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I did not refer to anything about content. It's not something I have an informed opinion about; it's something you should consult WP:WikiProject Socialism about.  I merely provided the technical reasons behind my reversion and proffered some suggestions on how to proceed.  Also, as per WP:VOTE, this is most likely NOT something we should be voting on. –Schmloof (talk · contribs) 21:37, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * And as per Voting is not evil, I am going to counter that we should vote on it and that WP:Socialism should definitely be in on it. I'm going to make a Vote Discussion Box (if I can figure out the code) on this Talk page. Kikodawgzzz (talk) 18:07, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Could you please provide a reliable source supporting your comment, "the term radical left is objectively the most-used worldwide term". TFD (talk) 18:13, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably, and I'll look for one, but on the other hand, can you provide a reliable source supporting your implicit counter-comment that the term far-left is the most-used worldwide term (used in self-description by the radical left)?" If you can't, then why are you expecting me to support mine with evidence? That'd be a double standard... Kikodawgzzz (talk) 18:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Please do not accuse me of "using a double standard", which may be seen as a personal attack. I did not make the "implicit counter-comment that the term far-left is the most-used worldwide term".  In fact, if I wrote, "I do not see the terms radical left or far left used in any consistent way"  TFD (talk) 18:32, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Kiko, I think you're consistently misinterpreting us. We have tried to be as neutral as possible, while you have accused us of having several viewpoints or agendas. There is no need for a poll; a grand total of three people are in this discussion, and there have been no counter-points to your suggestion so far. There is simply nothing to vote on. Also note that WP:VOTE is a guideline, while WP:Voting is not evil is an essay which warns to "consider [its] views with discretion". And the reason you must provide a source is that the "burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material". I highly suggest you consult the WikiProject, seeing as there appear to be no other interested editors involved. –Schmloof (talk · contribs) 20:09, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll try to involve editors over at the Socialism WikiProject, the Communism WikiProject and/or the Anarchism WikiProject (and/or the Portals of these three) by linking back to this discussion on each of those Talk pages. I maintain my position that radical left is the most common term and I believe that those in the WikiProjects I mention (most of whom can be assumed to have similar politics to the articles in that project) will agree with me and will say as much, possibly also including the evidence you've asked for before I could get to the point where I could offer it myself. All that being said, the fact it's the case that the "burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material" is sort of not applicable to this situation because, as you'll see if you look at the History tabs of far left, radical left, extreme left, and so on, you will see that the content currently in far-left has been at various times moved between the different names, with different degrees of content and expansion, over quite a long span of time. So the fact that I'm raising this now... why does it place the burden of proof specifically on me? Is it because I'm the one proposing it now, at this point in time? It's just as valid to ask any of the number of people who have moved these things around in the past, as it would be to ask me specifically. You're probably only asking this of me because I'm the current one who believes that the content should be transposed. But I am not the first one to suggest it nor am I the first one to actually have pursued definitive action in this regard. Several others have moved the content around over these years already. Kikodawgzzz (talk) 01:32, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Could you please provide a source that the term "radical left" is the one most commonly used, and also could you please provide a source that provides the definition. As far as I can see it is inconsistently used and has no clear definition.  TFD (talk) 01:37, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Again, I maintain that I hold no stance on this issue. I would just like to point out that even if WP:BURDEN was not enforced in the past, it doesn't mean that you get to do it, too.  How many people speed down a highway and how many get caught? –Schmloof (talk · contribs) 01:52, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * So I'm the one on the proverbial highway that got caught and so now the burden is mine? Piffle. We'll leave it to other editors (I've now pasted the existence of this discussion over in the appropriate WikiProjects) to round this out and chime in. Kikodawgzzz (talk) 01:57, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Oppose any action: Malformed request; there are no scholarly reliable sources given in this discussion (or on this talk page) discussing terminology to allow invited external editors to make a considered editorial position. Fifelfoo (talk) 02:10, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Oppose no reason given for move based on reliable sources. TFD (talk) 02:11, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Comment My impression is that the taxonomy of the Left is adequate (and used by them) and therefore scholars had no need to invent one. It lends itself to taxonomy modelled on biology - virtually all left-wing groups developed through splits in the Left since 1848, and they can be categorized according to their point of departure.  The Revolutionary Communist Party for example can be described as a Maoist party, which is a subset of communism, which is a subset ot the Left.  The Right however presents taxonomic problems because they lack shared history, ideology or self-identification.  The John Birch Society for example did not develop from a counter-revolutionary tradition, and does not consider itself to be right-wing (per Cleon Skousen's view of the leftr-right spectrum, which places anarchists on the right), yet has similarities with the right-wing counter-revolutionary National Front).  So scholars developed terms, all of which are controversial, viz., far right, radical right, right-wing populism, right-wing extremism.  Some writers have applied these categories to the Left, but with even less consistency.  We have the same problem with the use of the terms center-left, centrist, and center-right, which are also vaguely defined.  Why use these terms as categories when one may accurately describe these parties as conservative, christian democratic, liberal, etc? TFD (talk) 13:53, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose, 'radical left' is an ambigious term and is only suitable as a dab page for organizations named 'radical left'. 'Radical left' is not = 'far left', although the terms have some similiarity in some contexts. --Soman (talk) 09:21, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Canvassing issue
Kikodawgzzz inappropriately canvassed for support at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Politics. Fifelfoo (talk) 02:07, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Why is it inappropriate, Fifelfoo? How is WikiProject Politics not in the appropriateness loop? Kikodawgzzz (talk) 06:09, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * In this diff you say "I need input from this WikiProject and other similar ones to provide me with the backup I need to push the proposal through." WP:CANVASS says, "canvassing which is done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way is considered inappropriate.".  It is normal to notify interested projects.  It is not acceptable to ask editors on such projects to take an opinion on the matter, for instance, by asking for backup to push a proposal through.  Thanks! Fifelfoo (talk) 07:15, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You're right. I shouldn't have added that particular wording; it was impulsive on my part and was not actually meant, now that I think more about it. On the other hand, I am sure that those who disagree will be more than willing to take it upon themselves to offer objections. Do you think I should modify the proposal in order to excise that "take an opinion" wording? I can certainly do that. On a separate note, though, I still notice a tad of hostility in your "voice", and I want to remind you that there is no reason to attack me or my intentions; Wikipedia is a collective and I seek only its betterment, in concert with other editors who want similar betterment. Kikodawgzzz (talk) 16:09, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The main problem I see is that you have not provided any reliable sources that support the conclusions you have made about the use of terminology. TFD (talk) 16:12, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * And the main problem I have with article content that should be under Radical Left being at Far Left instead, is that no one over at Far Left has provided any reliable sources that support the conclusions they have made about the use of that terminology, either. It would seem we are at an impasse. Kikodawgzzz (talk) 17:58, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * When at an impasse, search for literature reviews and signed scholarly articles in academic encyclopedia (SAGE, ABC-CLIO, Oxford, Cambridge, etc...) which deal with the state of literature in a field. You may also want to determine what magisterial survey works exist in the field. Fifelfoo (talk) 01:59, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:Radical left