text:
Wikipedia talk:Milestones/Archive 2

19
This has reached 19000 articles. That has reached 19000 articles. English has reached 190000 articles... Something special about the number 19? Κσυπ Cyp    14:50, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Joining ODP
moved talk about joing Open Directory Project to Village Pump

Prime numbers

 * English wikipedia has reached 199,637 articles, a prime number.

I think that's a bit silly. There are lots of prime numbers. Primes up to 200,000, for example:

199637, 199657, 199669, 199673, 199679, 199687, 199697, 199721, 199729, 199739, 199741, 199751, 199753, 199777, 199783, 199799, 199807, 199811, 199813, 199819, 199831, 199853, 199873, 199877, 199889, 199909, 199921, 199931, 199933, 199961, 199967, 199999. Evercat 18:49, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Other language Wikipedia announcements
We have lots of announcements of the form "xx language wikipedia reached yy,000 articles?" This page is supposedly for en announcements. Should we change the remit of this page to include the good tidings from our other-tongued cousins? (It could duplicate the equivalent meta page), or should we boldly remove them, with a swift "moved to meta" summary comment? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 11:15, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Alas - I think you are right. Wikimedia News is better for X language X articles announcements. --mav

 * I think that is in line wwith what is supposed to be. But those quick short annoucements hurt nothing don't they? -- Taku 17:00, Feb 9, 2004 (UTC)

 * I also agree with Taku. They don't clutter that much, even though they should not be here. It's not like we have that many announcements anyway. Dori | Talk 17:08, Feb 9, 2004 (UTC)

 * These 'X Wikipedia X milestone' posts results in new announcements every other day. Each day at least one new announcement is listed the Announcements link on RC should be bolded. Since most of the announcements are just noise that does not pertain to the English Wikipedia, I imagine that many people ignore the bolded announcement link on RC. Wikimedia News is the place for that type of stuff. Right now Wikimedia News is more or less a copy of the English Wikipedia's announcement page and that may result in many people ignoring that page as well. --mav

 * They have nothing to do with en, and end up sounding like a desperate competition. It also furthers the idea that here (En WP) is the mother/main WP, where anything other WPs do must be report to the superior. Wikimedia is where we all belong under. It is a false idea these other WP # reporters are having. Why exactly aren't these #s reported in the German or Malay WP, for example? --Menchi 17:19, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Most of the Wikipedia traffic comes to en. In the future this may not be true, but until then en is the most visible place. That's probably why most people post the announcements here. Dori | Talk 01:05, Feb 10, 2004 (UTC)

 * Actually, the German announcement page currently has announcements regarding the Croatian, Dutch, Danish, Japanese, Swedish, Polish and French Wikipedia article counts. Not to imply that these should be there, but this isn't strictly an English phenomenon.—Eloquence 02:27, Feb 10, 2004 (UTC)

 * I updated the boilerplate at the top of the page to try to reflect opinion offered here. It seems to me that this discussion is a microcosm of the wider use of meta: vs Wikipedia: namespaces. Meta would, in an ideal world, be used more and Wikipedia: less . But its not an ideal world because we don't have things like integrated (or side-by-side) recent changes, integrated watchlists and single sign-on. They would be brilliant features in my opinion. Until they come online I don't think it is reasonable to really make a "push for meta", and so the current status quo is going to be maintained. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 09:22, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I updated your update. :) The status quo is what we make it. By ignoring Meta you ensure that it will remain ignored. --mav

 * I am happy with your slightly bolder update. We can try to move the status quo but without new software features to lower the barrier of entry I fear it is like pushing a big and every growing boulder up a steep hill :) Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 09:51, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * My own view is a little different. I am of the opinion that what is happening to other versions is of major interest to the English Wikipedia.  In a real sense, EN is the "parent" Wikipedia, and is by far the largest.  In a number of places, Wikipedia calls for people to help with translation from EN to other languages.  Thus as English speakers were have a vital interest in what's going on in the wider Wikiworld.  And as someone else has pointed out, keeping track of other languages is not confined to EN.  The German version does; so does the Afrikaans version - where their MAIN PAGE compares the progress of their version to that of the English and Dutch ones.  And yes, I agree with Pete - we MUST get some new software features, to allow for seamless navigation between the different languages of Wikipedia, as well as the different Wikimedia organs (Wiktionary, Wikisource, etc).Davidcannon 10:02, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Then they could just go over to Wikimedia News to get that info. I'm going to move the other language notes to meta in a day or two. This announcements page needs to focus on the English Wikipedia. --mav 02:52, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Article counter drift
For the record, en.wikipedia hit 200,000 a few days before it was announced, as the article counter had drifted due to some bugs that didn't update it correctly in some operations. --Brion 23:40, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Publicity from press release
I doubt that the press release can have had that much to do with the increase in traffic. So far I have only seen it on one german news site and on kuro5hin. That can't possibly have caused much new traffic.Jrincayc 15:23, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * The German news TV program was watched by 2.2 million people. So if as many as 0.1% visited Wikipedia then that would be 2,000 visitors... how many extra did we have? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 16:22, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Time zones
Sorry, Simon. It's the 29th where I am (New Zealand) - I'm on the other side of the international dateline. I'll be more careful in future to make sure I go by ETC. Davidcannon 22:54, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * It's not a problem, I'm beginning to appreciate the difficulties; daylight saving has come into operation here, so now British time doesn't match UTC. Oh well, can't wait for the simplicities of Autumn *(I do know that GMT is not UTC, but it's near enough) SimonMayer 22:58, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Alexa references
Regarding the comment on March 22: Alexa Internet flags wikipedia.org as a reference site, says Wikipedia should show up on their Top 50 Reference Sites list "within days". This does not seemed to have happened. Any ideas? Fuzheado 08:56, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Over to User:Sj who got in touch with Alexa. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 09:05, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Good question. I wondered the same thing myself; they have definitely updated their (weekly?) shuffle since then.  Wrote them yesterday; hope they didn't think it was a joke.  The contact who responded so quickly before was Kelly Dragoo, at "help@alexa.com".

Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 16:25:55 -0500 (EST) To: Alexa Support

Dear Kelly,

Happy April Fool's Day, and thank you for your lightning-fast response last week! I wrote the ODP the same day, and have yet to hear from them. I notice that the Reference list has been updated, but that Wikipedia is not on it. Perhaps the latest ODP update overwrote the category change made to your backend? (Wikipedia *is* categorized by the ODP, but only under "Open Source".)

Our Alexa reach hit 1.7% today! Your metrics may not be "representative of the global Internet population", but they are certainly fun. :-)

Hopefully they'll be in touch soon... (it's already 2 hrs into their business day) +sj+ 18:43, 2004 Apr 2 (UTC)

Other languages (parte deux)
Following on from the above discussion, note that of the 43 announcements made last month, fully 28 of them were about other language Wikipedia passing various article number milestones. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 09:05, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * I might add that many of those were minor milestones indeed. I understand fully that reaching 1000 articles is a large feat for a language that recently kicked off. But reporting the next 1000 and so on is overdoing it. The news value of this page is devalued by all these minor announcements. I think only round numbers should be reported, e.g. only 1000, 5000, 10000, 25000, 50000, 75000 etc.

 * Same goes for Alexa records highs, too many of those Erik Zachte 11:15, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, yes, yes! Please report more on content, quality standards, highlighting new templates (a good template or model article is worth a hundred decent stubs in my book)... +sj+ 18:47, 2004 Apr 2 (UTC)

 * Speaking for myself, I rather like the reporting of milestones on this page. I think its good for us (Britons, Americans, and other English speakers) to keep an eye on what is happening with the other language wikis.  I can see your point, though.  As a compromise, how about putting the milestones under a separate heading, at the bottom of the page?  That way, those coming to the page would first see matters relevant to the English wikipedia, but would be able to scroll down the page (or follow the link in the TOC) to the MILESTONES section.  I'll set it up that way in the next day or two.  You can tell me how you like it (I think you will, but if you don't, you can revert it - no offence taken). Davidcannon 10:48, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * There is a page for that already - it is called Wikimedia News. That is where they should go - this page needs to be for and about English Wikipedia matters. I will move them myself in a few days. --mav 03:55, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * The problem is that the Meta is far less known, and has much less traffic, than the English Wikipedia. I am of the opinion that Britons and Americans tend to be a bit too insular with respect to other languages; compare that with the attitude of speakers of other languages such as German (whose Wikipedia keeps track of what's happening with other languages) and Afrikaans, whose MAIN page gives comparative statistics for English and Dutch, as well as Afrikaans.  That's their MAIN page!  Not one of us has suggested doing anything like that with our own main page, and I would not support such a move, but what's the harm in having it on our announcements page?

Having said all that, I believe in majority rule, and will gladly comply with it. To determine what the majority verdict is, I'm starting a POLL at the bottom of this page. As I said, I will abide by the result. But having said that, I believe it is in everybody's best interests if we (AND every other language in which Wikipedia is published) has information about what is going on in the wider community.

Page rank?
What's the page rank of the main page now? Backlinks have passed 100k on Google. +sj+ 21:06, 2004 Apr 2 (UTC)

 * Page rank is 8/10, backlinks 107,000. :)  Catherine 02:03, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

POLL
What do you think of removing foreign-language milestones from the ANNOUNCEMENTS page of the English Wikipedia, and publishing such stones only on the Meta?

Meta only

 * 1) Menchi 07:50, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC): Doing so ingrains the popular and ever-growing misconception that the English WP is the superior leader of all 20+ WPs. Meta is appropriate. And if you really care about other-language WPs painstaking growth. You can check it out there.
 * I've never seen it as ingraining the stereotype of the superiority of the English Wikipedia. On the contrary, I see it as doing the exact opposite: it shows that there is a life outside of English, and gives the other languages their due acknowledgement. Davidcannon 13:37, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Acknowledgements due under WikiMedia, not under English WP. --Menchi 18:59, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 09:27, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC). Menchi has it right. I think it would be very valuable to break the cycle of people not reading meta because meta does not have the information, but also people refusing to put information on meta because meta does not have readers. En is not the be all and end all.
 * I'm not saying that such information shouldn't be on the Meta. It should be.  But should it be only there?  I don't think so.  I might change my mind if a few structural changes were made (such as seamless integration of the Meta with all language Wikis, etc, which wouldn't require separate watchlists and separate logins for the users of multiple WPs, or for users of a Wikipedia and the Meta)  I'll be far more willing to remove information of this type to the Meta if and when such upgrades are forthcoming.  I'll explain my reasoning behind all this in an article I've got planned for publication on the Meta in a few days.Davidcannon 13:37, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * I have been of the same mind. However such structural changes are a long way off. I think we should push meta regardless - if you have long-lasting log in cookies you barely notice the difference anyway. As for data being only there... the only two logical choices are to have the data just on meta, or all data on all wikis ... having the data on meta and en gives undue prominence to en. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 16:41, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Erik Zachte 11:10, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC) Major milestones can be reported in a new section at Multilingual statistics
 * 2) Dori | Talk 13:48, Apr 6, 2004 (UTC) They're getting to be too many. With so many Wikipedias, there will probably be some sort of milestone every day.
 * 3) Support. People need to go to Meta more often. Angela. 16:31, Apr 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) Dump em. I don't need to hear that the Esperanto wikipedia has hit 4,500 articles. →Raul654 16:07, Apr 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * 5) There is no point in mirroring content here and on Meta. The fact that any other wiki has done anything is not relevant to the English Wikipedia's announcements page. As it is, announcements by and for the the English Wikipedia are drowned out by milestone announcements. Meta is for inter-wiki coordination and is therefore the natural place to have such inter-wiki announcements. --mav 00:30, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Keep significant announcements on en as well as meta

 * 1) Donar Reiskoffer 08:24, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC) (but only real milestones i.e. 1k 2k 5k 10k 20k 50k 100k 200k ...)
 * 2) Kpjas 12:48, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC) but leave only significant milestones
 * 3) Jrincayc 13:02, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC) But only significant milestones
 * 4) SimonP 16:48, Apr 6, 2004 (UTC), but significant milestones only
 * 5) DavidWBrooks 17:00, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC) yes, keep significant ones
 * 6) Okay, I get the point. Yes, the milestones have been a bit inflated with the inclusion of many trivial ones, and I've had a part in that also.  I agree that they need to be streamlined, and only major ones should be reported here. Davidcannon 13:37, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * 7) Real milestones only, and moderation over alexa (considering that it is google toolbar only). Secretlondon 18:23, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * 8) Tuf-Kat 16:19, Apr 7, 2004 (UTC) (significant only = formation, 1000, 5000, 10000, 20000, 50000, 100000, every 50000 after that)
 * 9) Nice round number announcements are good. "Swedish wikipedia reaches 24,000" isn't. -- Cyrius|&#9998 03:49, Apr 9, 2004 (UTC)

Keep status quo

 * 1) David Gerard 07:25, Apr 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) Taku 16:19, Apr 6, 2004 (UTC)

-- What is the status quo?! Isn't it the same as Proposal 2? (Both here and on Meta, as of now). --Menchi 19:00, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * The status quo is: Lots of announcements of non-significant milestones reached by non-en wps on en and (to a lesser extent) on meta. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 20:15, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I see the point that people are making - that too many minor events are being classified as "milestones" and are cluttering the page. I agree that we (including I) should avoid posting such trivia in future. Depending on which way the vote goes, I will continue to post milestones - but only really significant ones (e.g. the Romanian Wikipedia reaching 5000 but NOT the Spanish Wikipedia reaching 21,000). As for moving the milestones to the Multilingual Statistics page, as Eric Zachte suggested: thanks for that idea, Eric. I didn't think of that. It seems a good idea to me. As for moving them entirely to the Meta, please stay tuned for an article I'll be posting on the Meta in the next day or two about the need for an upgrade to allow seamless navigation between the Meta and Wikipedia (and also among the different language Wikipedias, and the sister projects as well). IMO, that's the only think that's going to make the Meta a success any time soon. Anyway, now that I've read what everybody has had to say, I can agree that some significant adjustments in the publication of milestones are needed. Where I continue to differ somewhat with some members is how these adjustments are to be carried out. Davidcannon 11:29, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Suggestion
How about we simply have a table where people can put the latest milestone?

i.e.

Don't put the entire list, but anytime someone wants to put an announcement, and their language isn't there, it gets added. They're all sorted alphabetically by language code. Dori | Talk 04:02, Apr 9, 2004 (UTC)

That's an excellent idea, Dori. It's a win-win solution for both sides. Let's go for it! Davidcannon 09:28, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, I put some announcements there. I am afraid to remove the announcements while leaving the table as so many people voted for them. Someone who knows how should probably align the entries. Dori | Talk 17:57, Apr 9, 2004 (UTC)

 * I removed them since no one complained. If there is some big disagreement, just revert it. Dori | Talk 04:51, Apr 12, 2004 (UTC)

 * I disagree. This makes it quite difficult to find out when the last milestone happened, which can be done now by just going back through the history of annoucements.  Jrincayc 13:37, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * You could just look at the dates. Dori | Talk 14:04, Apr 14, 2004 (UTC)

 * I am not sure what the term would be, but I mean the milestone before the displayed one. So if the current milestone is 5000, when did they hit 1000? Announcments is starting to become harder to read, because many of the annoucements are no longer placed with the date, so I can't just read from the last date that I looked at it and work my way from there. Jrincayc 20:09, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * There is no need to clutter up Announcements for that. and  are much better. Dori | Talk 16:43, Apr 15, 2004 (UTC)

 * How about we create use Milestones and put the whole darn thing there. I think that announcements should be a linear list of annoucements by time.  I would have no objection to a seperate paged dedicated to milestones that was not a linear list of annoucements by time. Jrincayc 13:23, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Milestones Table Edit
I have removed several milestones from the table. Yes, I pushed for milestones to be retained, but the "consensus decision" was that only  major  milestones should be included, and I think it is important to hold ourselves to that decision. Accordingly, I have removed a number of milestones that are not round numbers. Please don't take offence, User:Alfio - given the recent dramatic growth of the Italian Wikipedia, you'll get your turn in just a few days, so don't run away just yet :-) Davidcannon 13:55, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I heartily approve of presenting the milestones in a table-like fashion. It is much more helpful to the reader... in this form I am more relaxed about the data being on en... I would prefer meta, but am happy if it is on both. As for the layout of the table... do we intend to only have one entry for each language or, as further milestones are reached, would a language have more than one row (e.g. when en reaches 250,000 do we drop 240,000 or keep it?). I would prefer keeping it, as otherwise we lose historical data, and miss out on the rate of progress. On the flip side, this means the table will eventually become quite substantial in size. Might it be more appropiate to have the table on another page, clearly linked from this one and others? I recommend upgrading Milestones for this purpose, which isn't widely used right now. Any comments? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 14:02, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I can see the merit of your suggestion, Pete, but speaking for myself, I'd prefer each language to have only one entry - its latest milestone. Taking up your suggestion of upgrading the Milestones page, however, we could have more detailed tables on that page that would keep track of the rate of progress. The Milestones page could record milestones not only for the number of articles, but also for registered users, edits, and other interesting data. Davidcannon 14:17, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, the rate of progress is clearly visible in tabular and graphical form in the international statistics. Erik Zachte 14:43, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

100 article Wikipedias?
Why were the 100 article Wikipedias deleted from the milestones list? There is no consensus about which milestones are important and which aren't, but 100 articles basically means the Wikipedia has become seriously active... that's the majorest milestone there is. Tuf-Kat 04:22, Apr 19, 2004 (UTC)

Interesting that you should say that, Tuf-Kat. In the vote we held earlier, you yourself were one who suggested 1000 as the first milestone (just scroll up the page and you'll see it). Don't get me wrong, Tuf-Kat. I myself am very much in favour of keeping milestones on the Announcements page, and I pushed for their continued inclusion. But let's get one thing straight: Only a VERY narrow majority voted for their retention - and only for MAJOR milestones; only two voted for the indiscriminate inclusion of whatever one fancies to be a milestone. Almost half voted for their complete removal - and that included a number of "names" that have been around Wikipedia much longer than I. While not in sympathy with their views, I think we've got to factor them into the equation. In a nutshell, 89 percent voted either for no milestones or very significant ones only; of these, 50 percent favoured keeping significant milestones, and 39 percent favoured dumpingthem. 61 percent voted for milestones altogether, but only 22 percent for indiscriminate ones.

My interpretation of these figures is that while a majority exists for milestones to be kept, it is a tenuous one, and those of us who favour them can't just throw our weight around and include everything that we fancy to be a milestone. When the number 1000 was proposed as the smallest milestone (by you and I think one or two other persons), nobody suggested a smaller figure. And no, I wouldn't say that 100 articles "means that the Wikipedia has become seriously active," as you put it. The Occitan Wikipedia has almost five times that number - and it's been stuck at 487-493 for months and months now. Is it "seriously active?" Not by my standard of reckoning! If 493 articles is insufficient to render a Wikipedia seriously active, I hardly think 100 is. 1000 is a much more realistic figure. What do the rest of you think? David Cannon 10:27, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * I understand, but respectfully continue to disagree. I originally voted for formation as the first milestone, but on further thought that made little sense, since Wikipedias are created (i.e. a Main Page exists at xx.wikipedia.org) before there are any contributors (sometimes somebody does push for the creation of a particular language wiki, but not usually), so the Wikipedia is often "formed" before there are any Wikipedians.  I think 100 articles establishes that there are (or were) at least one Wikipedians.  Certainly, 100 articles is not a guarantee of continued growth, but pedias like Occitan are the exception, I think (Basque and Afrikaans also had some major activity but have since dropped off, IIRC). Tuf-Kat 01:18, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)

Milestones ordered by size?
I see that the milestones have been reordered by size, rather than alphabetically, as previously. I don't mind, but it will make a lot more work for those uploading them, as their relative sizes will inevitably change. I think alphabetical listings would be much easier to handle. David Cannon 19:47, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * I think it's nicer to see the relative sizes. It can't be that much more difficult to update -- if the Wikipedia your updating just hit ten thousand articles, you know the milestone it would have been listed at last time.  People don't generally do more than update at a time anyway, I think. Tuf-Kat 04:07, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)

 * Relative sizes give you a much better idea of how the sub-projects are doing. en obviously dominates over the rest, but you can see that de is doing even better, given its relative number of speakers. In contrast, es and zh should have a lot more articles.

 * This is of course a simplistic analysis tool, and ignores socio-economic inequities and article quality. But it does give you a rough idea of how a language-specific Wikipedia is doing. Sorting alphabetically gives no information aside from the milestones themselves. -- Cyrius|&#9998 10:39, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)

Changing attribution for an edit

 * An option for reorganization of Changing attribution for an edit is at the corresponding talk page.

I removed this. It isn't an important enough announcement to put on this page as it does not affect the whole project. If anything, it should go to requests for comment. Angela. 21:20, May 16, 2004 (UTC)

Election
Why does the election notice on the Announcements page go to an empty page with an error message, No such article? David Cannon 01:57, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Where is the report from the election? -- Kaihsu 22:43, 2004 Jun 21 (UTC)
 * It was linked from RC a short while and a link appeared on last week's Goings-on. It is here. ✏ Sverdrup 22:49, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

June 15 alexa.com rank announcement
"After a steady climb, Wikipedia's Alexa rating has fallen to a daily traffic rank of 819. This may be the effect of the server trouble we had last week, or it may be partly due to the fall of traffic from China (see China block below)." Looking at alexa's daily traffic rank plot, I honestly fail to see anything unusual. Traffic rank is oscillating all the time; there's nothing unusual in the past couple of days, and especially nothing that would justify an announcement. Or what does everyone else think? -- Schnee 17:46, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree - it's far too soon to put an explanation on this fall, or even treat it as more than a blip. sjorford 08:31, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * I believe several factors may have caused the change in ranking, but I believe a significant cause was due to Nick Berg. For a couple of weeks Wikipedia was the top search result for 'Nick Berg'  and similar searches on both Google and Yahoo.  100,000s of people were searching for the video and ending up visting Wikipedia trying to find it.  In May the Nick Berg article got almost half a million hits ], even those stats probably understate the true number.  I believe this greatly increased Wikipedia's ranking in late May 2004.  However Wikipedia's Nick Berg article dropped from the top spot on Google and the number of searches dropped off dramatically going into June, causing a decrease in the Alexa rank.  Or it could be something else. -- Popsracer 11:12, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Nick Berg got a lot of hits, that's true, but 500,000 hits out of 81,000,000 should hardly be enough to influence the traffic rank in any significant way. -- Schnee 16:09, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, decapitation got 300,000 hits and presumably most of those came via the link from Nick Berg. Likely, most visitors read at least a couple of related articles. Fredrik | talk 01:47, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * In my opinion the falloff of traffic is noteworthy. Wikipedia has seen fairly steady growth in traffic, apart from times of server overload.  The traffic has definitely fallen off in the last three weeks, so much so that the weekly averages are below the 3-month average.  I, for one, am very curious why.  --Fritzlein 05:28, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * My pet theory is that the drop-off corresponds with the rise of the "second generation" of Wikipedia mirrors that now how to work the Google algorithm. For example thefreedictionary.com always hammers WP in the rankings, which has dropped off dramatically for many searches. The timing matches. Pcb21| Pete 08:55, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * That's a very plausible theory. I just did a Google search on Zsuzsa Polgar, and the Wikipedia article was not in the top 140.  That rankles because six of the cloned articles are in the top 100, with two of them in the top 10!  Perhaps Google, which once drove Wikipedia growth doesn't do so as much.  But what I don't understand is this: if all of the clones are compliant and link back to the original Wikipedia article, won't that push the Wikipedia rank higher than that of any single clone?  Peace, --Fritzlein 08:01, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Lots of factors. First some clones are in very poor compliance. Others link only to the main page not the original article. Not surprisingly we are #1 hit for "Wikipedia". Others hide deliberately awkardify the links so when the click a link they don't go directly to our site.. it runs a tiny script on the mirror site which redirects them to WP for the ordinary user, but stays at the mirror if you are the Googlebot, thus stopping us from getting pagerank from them - not surprising since we are their competitor! Pcb21| Pete 08:49, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * The reason I added that announcement was to counter all the announcements about the good raising. Thought we should be NPOV...imagine that. Dori | Talk 13:36, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC)

 * Sure we should. But the announcement is (was) misleading in that it made it seem as if the drop in Alexa rank was a significant or unusual event, which it wasn't - you could write similar announcements every week. In other words, NPOV is good, but you don't have to add non-news to the page for that. -- Schnee 15:05, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * It was just as significant as the other alexa announcements we had (when was the last time it was 800? and 700? for a while). Dori | Talk 13:17, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)

 * I never saw those myself. Still, if you actually *look* at the current Alexa rank plot, you'll see that there was *nothing* special about June 15 at all. I'm all for announcements, no matter whether they're announcements of good or bad news, but it should be *news*, at least. We're not announcing that Wikipedia currently has 298873 articles, either, for example - even though it *is* a milestone, it's not an interesting or newsworthy ones. -- Schnee 18:41, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I think the meat of the announcement is that we fell, this a new thing and there is a good case for reporting it as soon as it was seen. Pcb21| Pete 19:00, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * If you actually look at the Alex rank plot, you'll see that a drop in rank is not news at all. -- Schnee 16:14, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Alexa Traffic Rating
IS now 620 :) Ilyanep 18:50, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Number of article milestones
On top of the 'Number of article milestones'-section a number of significant milestones are mentioned. Is there any reason why the English and the Dutch language mention a milestone that is not in this list (300,000 and 30,000 respectively)? Donar Reiskoffer 15:05, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, because the list is not very well thought out. Do we really expect to have no announcements between 350k and half a million articles?  A milestone should be recognized at every 10,000 articles, then after 100,000, perhaps every 25,000 articles. Fuzheado | Talk 16:34, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Because someone put it there. The English milestones are different, since this is the English Wikipedia. We have regular announcements at every 100K for the English Wikipedia. Dori | Talk 16:52, Jul 13, 2004 (UTC)

 * Since the list of major milestones was arbitrary anyway, I'm going to change it to something mathematically reasonable, but I don't suspect it will matter. Folks can add announcements about English Wikipedia article milestones whenever they like, as far as I'm concerned, since this is the English Wikipedia announcements page.  I wish people would stick to the schedule for non-English Wikipedias, though.  True, it doesn't clutter things up because the table stays the same size.  The weirdness is that the Dutch appear to be ahead of the French, because the French didn't announce 30,000.  --Fritzlein 17:20, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I've changed the new measures to:
 * Every 1,000 articles, up to 10,000
 * Every 10,000 articles up to 100,000
 * Every 50,000 articles thereafter

Feedback welcome. Fuzheado | Talk 23:42, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * That's the most sensible scheme I've heard of yet. Later today, I'll edit the table to conform to it, provided that nobody objects. David Cannon 00:36, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * You won't be saying that when in five years time we are getting 50,000 articles per day :). But for now it seems like a very good suggestion! Pcb21| Pete 08:22, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * If we're getting 50,000 articles a day, I think all our heads will have exploded and we won't really care that much about article count announcments. -- Cyrius|✎ 13:11, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I have no objection. My only concern is that the people who voted to only announce major milestones will feel these aren't major enough.  But if they don't mind, let's go for it.  --Fritzlein 18:00, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * *raises hand* I feel that the older series was more "major", even if its jumps were a bit more irregular. It's true that it made it harder to reach milestones when you already have lots of articles, but *shrug*. But eh. I won't die if we keep the current measures. -- pne 10:03, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

On top of the 'Number of article milestones'-section a new list with significant milestones is mentioned. Is there any reason why the following languages are mentioned with a milestone not in this list? Donar Reiskoffer 08:04, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * German 120,000
 * French 45,000
 * Polish 25,000
 * Swedish 25,000

 * I hereby appoint you to keep all announcements in line with the stated policy :). I guess these things get out of line because no-one cares that much. Pcb21| Pete 12:53, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia Performance
The announcement on July 11 mentions that the performance should improve. Does Wikipedia track performance? If so, where can I find that?
 * The response time at (daily combined) (weekly separate) is a simple indicator. Dori | Talk 04:00, Jul 14, 2004 (UTC)

Break out the Champgne
Due to the breaking of the 500 barrier in the alexa traffic rank (471 as of July 23rd)...I think that's a cause for celebration! Ilyanep (Talk) 22:46, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Don't get too excited, it's just the daily ranking. -- Cyrius|✎ 23:07, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Maybe you can get excited about this: . They said they would do this a while back, but they just changed it. Dori | Talk 16:13, Jul 25, 2004 (UTC)

 * Or maybe this one . Jan Pedersen 09:44, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * THe 389 rank is nowhere to be found in their chart. I watch regularly and it often happens that a major increase or decrease has disappeared later on the day. So better announce a day or two later after their figures have settled in. Erik Zachte 18:26, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Fastest growth
This is moved from the main page.

 * July saw the fastest rate of monthly growth in Wikipedia's history. The total Wikipedia project (in 100 languages) posted a net gain of 81,859 new articles, shattering the previous record of 75,223 new articles in March.  The English Wikipedia gained 21,507 articles - breaking the March record of 21,037; other languages to make record gains included Italian (8659 new articles - the previous record was 1668, in May), Portuguese (4127 - the previous record was 1855, in May), Swedish (3095 - the previous record was 2874, in March), and Norwegian (1475; the May and June figures of 1001 and 1004 new articles had themselves been records).  On current trends, Wikipedia will number one million articles by mid-September.

I don't know where this claim is grounded. I mean what kind of growth? I added monthly but numbers suggest definitely not montly growth. Worse, it has no reference to those numbers; where do they come from? -- Taku 01:26, Aug 5, 2004 (UTC)

 * Actually, it is monthly. See Multilingual statistics. --denny vrandečić 11:29, Aug 5, 2004 (UTC)

 * Those stats seem to differ significantly from the automated stats. Which seem to suggest the number of new articles across all languages was big in July 2004, but not as big as it was in March 2004. -- Popsracer 11:57, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * The automated stats are broken at the moment, and several of the stats are under estimates, including that one. Pcb21| Pete 17:51, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Which stats are broken? Please provide an url. And why are you so sure the stats are under estimates :) Erik Zachte 18:21, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Hi Erik. There is a prelimary discussion of which stats are wrong at Wikipedia talk:List of Wikipedians by number of edits. Certainly the CSV file that outputs the number of edits isn't screwy somehow. People are reporting that their total number of edits has gone down! Also it says there were 7k new articles on EN in July (from 283-290K). However the count on the main page went from 283K to 315K. The number of new editors (again on en - http://en.wikipedia.org/wikistats/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm) is listed as 168 - the lowest since April 2003. However the webalizer stats say that July was by far the busiest month on record. The growth in database size (in MB) is consistent with webalizer - not the stats related to number of articles/number of wikipedians. I am pretty certain there is a problem somewhere - I for one would be extremely grateful if you could track it down. Pcb21| Pete 22:38, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * "However the webalizer stats say that July was by far the busiest month on record." This is the number of page requests. The number of visitors was high but equal to 5 months ago. Page requests is a shady figure. It includes all robots. With official partnership to Yahoo and 10ths of mirrors (many of whom make money over the back of Wikipeda but that is another story) that get their act together and keep their sites up to date, instead of relying on a half year old dump this is bound to rise more rapidly than number of contributions to database. This does not mean all is well. I will have to look into it. Erik Zachte 00:39, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I found the culprit. Now if someone would have alerted me to this problem earlier :(  It was relatively easy to spot once I stripped the original script to bare bones for specific tests. The script thinks it is ready reading the cur database when on 75% it encounters the SQL statement that signals end of data, but here as part of an article text. It was bound to happen sometime. Thus new articles which are all in the back of cur database are only counted after two edits (when they appear in old database). I'll send an update soon. Erik Zachte 01:33, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Article milestones redesign
Davidcannon redesigned the article milestones section. It's much nicer now, by far. Congrats. My one comment is the bright colors. I think I might have a seizure. - Plutor 00:19, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * My eyes!!!!11 -- Cyrius|✎ 00:33, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I admit that I love bright colours. But if the majority would like something milder, I have no problems with changing them:-) David Cannon 01:17, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks Davidcannon! I would vote for muting the colors somewhat, but the new format is much preferable to the old one.  My only question is mathmematical.  If the progression of milestones is 1, 2, 5, 10, etc., shouldn't the latest milestone for the English Wikipedia be 200,000 rather than 100,000?  --Fritzlein 07:08, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Oh, I agree. I suppose I didn't go for that option this time, because it would create three rows with only one entry - but then, there's really nothing wrong with that.  I admit that my spacing of the milestones was pretty arbitrary - it would probably make more sense mathematically to follow Fuzzheado's suggestion (every thousand up to 10,000, every 10,000 up to 100,000, and every 50,000 thereafter).  When we have literally hundreds of languages on Wikipedia, we'll probably do something like that.  At the moment, I think it would create an unnecessarily large table with lots of empty space, which I'm trying to avoid.  When several wikipedias reach 100,000 (Japanese almost certainly will before the end of the year; French is about to hit 50,000 and, with a bit of luck, might double before the year's out), we'll create a new level (200,000) for English.  And oh yes, if others express the same sentiments as you, I'll certainly tone the colours down a bit when I get around to it over the next few days.  I'm quite happy about that.

Upload caveat
The following was removed from the main page.

 * Please stop uploading images where permission is granted for non-commercial use only, effective immediately. Under official Wikipedia policy, these images are no longer accepted. . It is anticipated that existing images with the tag will be deleted at some point in the future (once untagged images are uncommon; likely after a new upload form has been introduced).

This is true but how come is it an announcement? -- Taku 01:10, Aug 12, 2004 (UTC)

1,000,000 articles sitewide
look on meta's milestone page for more ino, but i think we are really close to getting to 1,000,000 articles with all wikis combined.. surely this is a milestone?

Lightning 16:17, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)

 * According to, there were 984K articles total on 8 September. Help translate the milestone press release! - Plutor 19:44, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, we are really close. My own count shows 980k for 12 September (slightly lower than the Wikistats count).  Either way, it's time to order the champagne!  BTW, I'll try to find time today to update the tally on Multilingual statistics. David Cannon 23:06, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * The stats will be updated at the weekend. The official announcement should not be made before Monday when the press release goes out, preferably late on Monday to help reduce server load on an already busy day of the week. Angela. 04:32, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * I've been keeping an eye on quite a number of wikipedias over the past few days. Am I the only one who has noticed that most of our projects are growing faster than usual, and that this month is going to be an all-time record for quite a number of languages?  Portuguese has exploded - 4500 new articles since the beginning of the month - more than 2500 of them in the last two days.  Serbian has exploded too.  Even Luxembourgish has come from nothing to be grazing a thousand articles.  I realize that bots may have been employed - but am I alone in thinking that they were deliberately unleashed at this time, as each language's wiki strives to play its part to make the million article milestone happen?  It's exciting; I only hope they keep it up after the milestone is announced.

 * Of this I'm sure: the day will come when we shall look back on our million-article milestone as only a tiny start. My own dream is for a billion articles in the world's 6500 languages by 2010.  Let's all work hard to achieve that goal.  (If you've got an even bigger dream, go for it!  It won't be hard to convert me:-) David Cannon 13:13, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Premature announcement
I reverted the premature anouncement of Alexis 349 position. I look at Alexis sometimes several times a day: the stats for the current day are notoriously untrustworthy and will almost change markedly before tomorrow. Often a sharp increase has then been changed into a small decrease and vice versa. Erik Zachte 16:39, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Erik I look also daily the alexia stats. this http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?&range=3m&size=large&compare_sites=slashdot.org&url=wikipedia.org#graph says 349 to me for the 21. I think the 409 was from 20 september.Sometimes the graph is updated before the traffic rank. The graph shows the stats for from yesterday (the 21 september) as daily but tomorrow the 21 september will be drawn as a 3 day average. so it will be changed bye a small decrease. And at the weekend you will they will be drawn higher.

 * Yes they print the figure 349, but please look at . I always look at that one. There is no reason to show a 3 day average here, as there are 5 or 6 pixels available for each day. Yet the very high or low value shown at the far right usually has disappeared 12 hours later, nowhere to be found. Erik Zachte 21:15, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Try this one? Κσυπ Cyp  05:01, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

From the site :

How Are Traffic Trend Graphs Calculated? The Trend graph shows you a three-day moving average of the site's 'daily traffic rank, charted over time. The daily traffic rank reflects the traffic to the site based on data for a single day. In contrast, the main traffic rank shown in the Alexa Toolbar and elsewhere in the service is calculated from three months of aggregate traffic data.

Daily traffic rankings will sometimes benefit sites with sporadically high traffic, while the three-month traffic ranking benefits sites with consistent traffic over time. Since we feel that consistent traffic is a better indication of a site's value, we've chosen to use the three-month traffic rank to represent the site's overall popularity. We use the daily traffic rank in the Trend graphs because it allows you to see short-term fluctuations in traffic much more clearly.

It is possible for a site's three-month traffic rank to be higher than any single daily rank shown in the Trend graph. On any given day there may be many sites that temporarily shoot up in the rankings. But if a site has consistent traffic performance, it may end up with the best ranking when the traffic data are aggregated into the three-month average. A good analogy is a four-day golf tournament: if a different player comes in first at each match, but you come in second at all four matches, you can end up winning the tournament

Daily Alexa Rank seems to be cyclic by week
It seems as though the Alexa page ranking is cyclic by week, peaking on Tuesday. Why is that?

One million articles - add to September 20?
Would it be appropriate to mention the one-million-article milestone on the date page September 20? —Etaoin 20:50, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * No.
 * I thought it violated Avoid self-references, but then I checked Wikipedia Day -- it is linked to from January 15. Not that such a link is definitive, but it suggests we may have decided in the past that it was acceptable.  Important question -- would we note the date that Brittanica hit its millionth article?  If so, I think we can add it.  If not, however, I think we leave it alone.  Jwrosenzweig 20:53, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * There is no definitive date for that. Unless they keep detailed records of when articles are paid for, you'd have only the option of mentioning when the first edition of Britannica with 1m went to print. Does anyone else think September 20, etc. would be advisable. Essentially an alternative archive to Announcements. --  user:zanimum
 * It doesn't really violation Avoid self-references, which says that "Wikipedia can, of course, write about Wikipedia, but context is important." In this case I think it's in bad taste, though, as Wikipedia hitting one million articles has too low an impact on the world to be chosen as one of the fewer than 100 events in the last 2000 years which gets put on that page. anthony 21:16, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * That puts things into the appropriate perspective. --Ardonik.talk* 21:20, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Good point. Are articles like September 20 appropriate? The way announcements are now aren't that timeless. -- user:zanimum

I agree with Anthony about the big picture. The appropriate place to put this is generally on Meta (remember, this milestone is all Wikipedias, not just the English one). Pages there include Wikipedia timeline and Milestones. I find that better than September 20. --Michael Snow 21:33, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I agree with Anthony also, though I will note that some events make it onto dates without meeting quite so strict a criterion. And I want to note also for anyone's benefit that a fairly decent list of important Wikipedia dates is at History of Wikipedia -- since the days are wikified, a what links here from a given day (say, September 20) will note it's linked to from History of Wikipedia.  I don't know how useful that is, given the number of articles linking to days.  But I thought it worth mentioning. Jwrosenzweig 21:50, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

October 10

 * Brewster Kahle proposes the scanning of the complete Library of Congress, potentially releasing a vast amount of raw public domain reference material for Wikipedia. (BBC)

 * I think this is a good thing but why does this need to be put in annoucements? -- Taku 17:38, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)

WikiProject announcements
I added an announcement that WikiProject World music has completed an article on the music of every independent country in the world. I think it would be a good idea to have more WikiProject announcements for events of this sort. Any other opinions? I seem to recall there being an announcement once for the completion of an article on every German province or something, or I may be imagining that... WikiProject announcements seem more interesting and relevant, I think, than more Alexis stuff or obscure languages reaching 100 articles. Tuf-Kat 22:13, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)

 * I think Village pump (news) is more suitable for those sorts of announcements. Angela.

Wiki wars
This probably should not be in annoucements but I thought it is interesting:
 * Wiki wars
 * Wikis have become the latest battleground in the presidential election as users of Wikipedia squabble over entries related to President George W. Bush and Democratic challenger John Kerry. Red Herring

-- Taku 16:32, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)

 * See also Jimbo's mailing list post about that article. Angela. 01:39, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)

Server Names mis-linked
Seems to me that when mentioning the server names, their names should be linked to the people they were named after. Hope it's OK that I am making that change, albeit belatedly, to the entry about the new web servers.

title: Wikipedia talk:Milestones/Archive 2


text:
Handy Mandy in Oz

Handy Mandy in Oz (1937) is the thirty-first book in the Oz series created by L. Frank Baum and his successors, and the seventeenth written by Ruth Plumly Thompson. It was illustrated by John R. Neill. The novel was followed by The Silver Princess in Oz (1938).

Plot
The book's heroine is an "honest and industrious" goat-girl named Mandy, who grazes her flock on the slopes of Mt. Mern (a location otherwise unidentified).

The story opens with a bang and a splash: an underground spring erupts in a geyser that blasts Mandy into the sky. The force propels her across the Deadly Desert to Oz; she lands in the little principality of Keretaria in the Munchkin Country, her impact cushioned by the power of a magic blue daisy. Mandy finds a silver hammer, and meets a white ox with golden horns; she blunders into the court of King Kerr of Keretaria and his courtiers. They are outraged by the intrusion of such an outlandish figure — for Mandy has seven arms and hands. As Mandy explains,

 * "This iron hand...I use for ironing, lifting hot pots from the stove and all horrid sort of hard work; this leather hand I keep for beating rugs, dusting, sweeping, and so on; this wooden hand I use for churning and digging in the garden; these two red rubber hands for dishwashing and scrubbing, and my two fine white hands I keep for holding and braiding my hair."

Mandy, for her part, is amazed to meet so many two-handed people; on Mt. Mern, everyone has seven hands.

Mandy is reprieved from the dungeons by Nox the Royal Ox, who takes her as his personal slave. Mandy and Nox quickly become friends. (It is Nox who gives the girl her nickname, Handy Mandy.) Nox is preoccupied by the political situation of Keretaria: the rightful king, a boy named Kerry, has disappeared, and his throne has been usurped by his uncle Kerr. Mandy discovers that the Royal Ox's horns have magic powers: they can be unscrewed from his head, and when they are, the right horn grants wishes, and his left horn offers clues. When a clue indicates that King Kerry can be found at a place called the Silver Mountain, the enterprising Mandy leads Nox on a search for the missing monarch.

They swim rivers and survive a flood on their way to the Gillikin Country. A doorway hidden under a waterfall leads them to a subterranean world under the Silver Mountain. The domain is ruled by an evil and ambitious tyrant called the Wizard Wutz. Wutz controls a subversive network of spies and secret agents located in many parts of the land of Oz. He is plotting to have his agents steal all the main magical artifacts of Oz. They actually do steal the Magic Picture, Glinda's Great Book of Records, and the jug that is the confinement vessel of Ruggedo, the Gnome King (he was transformed into a jug at the end of Pirates in Oz). Mandy and Nox learn that old King Kerr is one of Wutz's agents and that Wutz is holding the rightful King Kerry prisoner.

Wutz's machinations have of course attracted the notice of Princess Ozma, the Wizard of Oz, Princess Dorothy, the Scarecrow, and their friends and allies. Yet their efforts to solve their difficulties are frustrated, since they lack the Magic Picture and Book of Records.

When Mandy and Nox confront Wutz, he imprisons them in a dungeon under his mountain. Mandy accidentally liberates Ruggedo from the jug. Wutz and Ruggedo instantly become allies in evil and set off for the Emerald City to complete their conquest. Mandy's silver hammer, though, has proven to be magic; striking it calls forth a helpful purple elf named "Himself", who has formidable magic powers. With the hammer and elf, the blue daisy, and Nox's magical horns, Mandy and the ox escape confinement, find and rescue King Kerry, and reach Ozma's palace in time to frustrate the plans of Wutz and Ruggedo. Himself the elf transforms the two villains into potted cacti. (This is the last appearance of Ruggedo the Gnome King in the "Famous Forty" Oz books, though he does re-appear in the works of later Oz authors.)

Ozma restores order and repairs damage with her Magic Belt. Wutz's spies and agents are transformed into moles; Kerry is returned to his throne. Mandy is rewarded with an emerald necklace and a luxury she has longed for — gloves; Ozma gives her seven sets of seven gloves for her seven hands. After a month at home on Mt. Mern, Mandy returns to Oz (with her goats) via wishing pill, for a new life.

The plot of this book strongly resembles that of Baum's The Lost Princess of Oz, in which Ugu the shoemaker steals magical artifacts and kidnaps a ruler in a conquest plot, just like the Wizard of Wutz. Indeed, Trot comments on the plot resemblance in Chapter 14 of Handy Mandy.

The characters
Thompson later wrote a 48-line poem that provides an origin for Mandy, though this origin is inconsistent with the novel. In the poem, Mandy is an artificial and created being, made of "wood and tin...wire and cloth and plaster...." She was built as a sort of domestic robot to perform housework. The novel, in contrast, clearly indicates that Mandy, despite her inanimate parts, comes from a race of seven-handed people.

The principal villain, the Wizard Wutz, is another unusual character for Oz: a handsome, smooth, graceful but pure-evil villain who commands a hierarchical organization of subversives, with planted spies in positions of power all over the land of Oz, and a systematic collective strategy for overthrowing the government.

Ruggedo the Gnome King makes his last appearance in the Oz-Canon of Forty here. It's very small, barely more than a cameo. He begins having been transformed into a jug (see Pirates in Oz) and ends transformed into a cactus.

Reception
The Vancouver Sun wrote, "You will want to read this book from cover to cover before you give it to some lucky boy or girl. The illustrations by John R. Neill are whimsically appropriate." The Indianapolis News agreed, saying, "Handy Mandy is one of [Thompson's] best books... The best of all Christmas presents for children."

In the 1983 Dictionary of Literary Biography, Michael Patrick Hearn was less than impressed, writing, "In her last Oz books, Thompson wildly stretched her imaginative powers, at times risking loss of the child's perspective... The seven-armed goat girl of Handy Mandy in Oz is certainly one of the oddest and thus one of the least sympathetic heroines in juvenile literature."

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

title: Handy Mandy in Oz


text:
Fürstenberg Castle (Hüfingen)

Fürstenberg Castle (Burg Fürstenberg or simply Fürstenberg, literally "Prince's Hill") is a castle in Baden-Württemberg, Germany. It is located on the Fürstenberg hill in the Baar region, near the town of Hüfingen.

The castle was first mentioned in a deed of 1175 as a possession of the House of Zähringen, which became extinct with the death of Duke Berthold V. Around 1250, his heir Count Henry of Urach made it his residence and thereafter was the first to call himself a Count of Fürstenberg. The castle was devastated in the Thirty Years' War, and it was never rebuilt.

title: Fürstenberg Castle (Hüfingen)


text:
User talk:Pcooch

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, you can post to the help desk or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! DES (talk) 03:52, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Printz v. United States
Thanks for your very nice article about Printz v. United States. You might want to find a few more places to link to it, but that is minor. You had the right stub tag for an SC case, but IMO this is far beyond a stub, so i have removed the stub tag. see WP:STUB for more on this. Thanks again, and welcome. DES (talk) 03:52, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

AACI
Good job on Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry. Hope I made it little better, not worse. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 10:20, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pcooch


text:
Dialogue Mass

A Dialogue Mass (in Latin, Missa dialogata; also Missa recitata) is a Low Mass wherein the people recite some parts of the Latin Tridentine Mass.

History
The Dialogue Mass was an intermediate development in the twentieth century liturgical reform that culminated in the reform of the Roman Mass authorised by the Second Vatican Council and promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1969.

Before the introduction of the Dialogue Mass, the people had little active participation in the Mass other than interior disposition. This was intended to emphasise the fact that Catholics gathered together to witness and participate in an action (i.e. the sacramental renewal of the sacrifice of Christ on Calvary) rather than merely participate in common prayer which was a hallmark of the Protestant Reformation of the 16th century. The introduction of bilingual hand Missals (Latin-vernacular) occurred in Germany in the 19th century in defiance of Church law which required liturgical texts to be reproduced exclusively in Latin. Later given authorisation, they allowed the laity to quietly follow the Mass ("Pray the Mass") rather than the traditional practice of saying other private prayers as the priest celebrated. The subsequent step was the people actually saying the Latin responses of the Mass called the Dialogue Mass.

In 1922, the Holy See gave approval to the practice whereby "at least in religious houses and institutions for youth, all people assisting at the Mass make the responses at the same time with the acolytes", a practice that it declared praiseworthy in view of the evident desire expressed in papal documents "to instil into the souls of the faithful a truly Christian and collective spirit, and prepare them for active participation." The practice was already established without authorisation in Belgium and in Germany before the First World War. Further approval was granted in 1935 and 1958. However, the Dialogue Mass was not obligatory and there were conflicting statements about the practice from the Vatican. The Decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites of 1922, shortly after the incipient Dialogue Mass, replied to the question "May the congregation, assisting at the Sacrifice make the responses in unison, instead of the server?" by saying: "The norm is: Things that in themselves are licit are not always expedient. Owing to the difficulties which may easily arise, as in this case, especially on account of the disturbances which the priests who celebrate and the people who assist may experience, to the disadvantage of the sacred Action and of the rubrics. Hence it is expedient to retain the common usage, as we have several times replied in similar cases."

The Dialogue Mass never became prevalent in English-speaking countries and current celebrations of Tridentine Mass in these countries are in practice rarely structured as a Dialogue Mass. In other countries, such as France and Germany, the Dialogue Mass was met with a greater acceptance as Church hierarchs of these countries in the 1940s and 1950s tended to be more progressive than the generally traditionally-minded bishops of anglophone lands as became evident during the Second Vatican Council. A number of Tridentine Masses currently celebrated in these countries use the Dialogue Mass form.

Forms of Dialogue Mass
The minimum form of Dialogue Mass introduced in 1922 allowed the people to join with the servers in reciting the responses in the Ordinary of the Mass. In addition, the people were allowed to recite those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass that are sung by all at a Missa Cantata: the Gloria, Creed, Sanctus and Agnus Dei, and to recite with the priest the triple "Domine non sum dignus" that he leads as part of Communion of the People. Rarely, the people were also allowed to recite the Introit, Offertory and Communion Antiphons sung by the choir at a Solemn or High Mass. The form to be used in a particular diocese was left to the discretion of the local bishop.

title: Dialogue Mass


text:
Midshires Way

The Midshires Way is a long-distance footpath and bridleway that runs for 230 mi from the Chiltern Hills from near Bledlow in Buckinghamshire, through the Midlands counties of Northamptonshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire, to Stockport, Greater Manchester. It also links several other long-distance walking routes or trackways including The Ridgeway, the Pennine Bridleway and the Trans Pennine Trail.

The route was opened in 1994 as a collaboration between numerous Local Authorities and user groups. It is intended as a multi-user trail but there are places where the recommended route for walkers differs from the route for horse riders and cyclists.

Buckinghamshire section
The Midshires Way starts from Wain Hill, between Bledlow and Chinnor. From there it runs near Princes Risborough north to Waddesdon and on to Winslow then in a northwest direction passing through the town of Milton Keynes. North of the town it passes to the west of Stoke Goldington before crossing the county border into Northamptonshire.

Northamptonshire section
There is a 46 mi section in Northamptonshire. Between Northampton and Market Harborough it follows the Brampton Valley Way along the route of a disused railway line, passing through two tunnels. One section within Northampton runs close to the Grand Union Canal at Blisworth Junction in Rothersthorpe, Northampton.

Leicestershire section
It enters Leicestershire just south of Sutton Bassett and heads northwards for 31 mi, crossing into Nottinghamshire just north of Old Dalby.

Nottinghamshire section
After passing through Willoughby on the Wolds it tracks west, turning north just outside Kegworth before turning north towards Derbyshire.

Derbyshire section
The Derbyshire section starts at Sawley near Long Eaton running to Duffield then linking with the High Peak Trail close to Wirksworth. The route passes through the Peak National Park and on to Buxton. The trail then follows the Goyt Valley towards Stockport.

Greater Manchester section
In the final section it enters Greater Manchester at the Etherow Country Park at Compstall running on to meet the Trans Pennine Trail in the Tame Valley. The trail finishes at Stockport. The section between Whaley Bridge (Derbyshire) and Compstall is separately waymarked and marketed as the Goyt Way.

title: Midshires Way


text: Category:512 deaths

title: Category:512 deaths


text:
Shaggy Man

The Shaggy Man is a character in the Oz books by L. Frank Baum. He first appeared in the book The Road to Oz in 1909.

He is a kindly old wandering hobo, dressed in rags. His philosophy of life centers on both love and an aversion to material possessions. His one possession of value is the Love Magnet. His individuality is not welcome in the United States, but is accorded respect in the Land of Oz, where Princess Ozma provides him with a fine wardrobe of silks, satins, and velvets, but as shaggy as his old rags.

Character biography
The Shaggy Man appears at the Kansas home of Dorothy Gale one day in August, asking for directions to the nearby town of Butterfield so as to avoid going there by accident, for he wants to avoid a man who would return a loan of fifteen cents: as "Money...makes people proud and haughty. I don't want to be proud and haughty." Dorothy agrees to show him the way, but after a short time the two become inexplicably lost. The Shaggy Man tells Dorothy about a magical device he has called the Love Magnet, which causes the owner to be loved by everyone he meets. He claims that this artifact was given to him by "an Eskimo in the Sandwich Islands."

Eventually Dorothy and the Shaggy Man realize that they are wandering in an unknown fairyland. After a series of adventures, he and Dorothy reach the Deadly Desert, where his ingenuity lets them pass safely over the sands. Arriving in the Land of Oz, they find that their journey has been prearranged so that Dorothy can attend a birthday party for Princess Ozma. The Shaggy Man is awed by the splendor of the fairy-realm, and resolves to live there permanently. Upon being questioned by Ozma, he reveals that he has actually stolen the Love Magnet from a girl in Butterfield, but is without remorse because doing so has allowed him to travel to Oz with Dorothy. Nevertheless, eager to be a good subject to the princess, he agrees to Ozma's decree that the Love Magnet be donated to the Emerald City and hung over the city gates.

In The Patchwork Girl of Oz, the Shaggy Man serendipitously arrives to rescue Ojo and his traveling companions from man-eating plants that attack them along a yellow brick road in the Munchkin Country. In Tik-Tok of Oz, it is revealed that the Shaggy Man has a long-lost brother who is being held prisoner by the Nome King. Much of that book revolves about his efforts and those of his companions to rescue and disenchant this brother. Finally, the Shaggy Man decides to give up Oz to remain with his brother and other companions; the prospect of losing him from Oz persuades Ozma to allow these others to enter Oz. Much like the Shaggy Man himself, this brother has no name which is ever revealed to the readers, and is simply identified as "the Shaggy Man's brother." He was called Wiggy in the stage version.

In The Shaggy Man of Oz, the love magnet has worn through the nail and broken, and the Shaggy Man must go to the creator of the love magnet, Conjo (a retcon) in order to have it fixed. To get there, he visits many of the places visited in John Dough and the Cherub.

In the modern Oz book Queen Ann in Oz (1993), authors Carlson and Gjovaag give the Shaggy Man a personal name — Shagrick Mann.

Portrayal
Although Baum used The Shaggy Man a great deal in his books from his first appearance onward, he did not appear in any productions of The Oz Film Manufacturing Company, nor did he appear much in the work of Baum's successors other than Jack Snow.

Frank F. Moore would portray the role on the Los Angeles stage opposite James C. Morton as Tik-Tok in the 1913 play The Tik-Tok Man of Oz. The role was modeled on Fred Stone's Scarecrow in The Wizard of Oz, and Moore would go on to play the Scarecrow in His Majesty, the Scarecrow of Oz.

In comics, Shaggy Man appeared briefly in Eric Shanower's The Ice King of Oz and in issue #19 of Oz.

In other media
The Shaggy Man appears in Return to Oz. He is seen in the background at Princess Ozma's coronation.

title: Shaggy Man


text:
Self Immolation (record label)

Self Immolation is a record label and publishing company run by J. G. Thirlwell. Originally an actual label for Thirlwell's self-released early Foetus EPs and albums, Self Immolation became more akin to a vanity label for Thirlwell's releases on Some Bizzare Records and Wax Trax! Records. Most Self Immolation releases are identified by a call number beginning with a Foetal-inspired "WOMB" designator.

Beginning in the early 1990s, Thirlwell began a second personal label, Ectopic Entertainment (often shortened to Ectopic Ents). Its exact relation to Self Immolation is unclear: initially called a "subsidiary" of Self Immolation, it appears to have later wholly replaced Self Immolation. Coming full circle, Thirlwell's self-released Manorexia project is released on Ectopic Ents.

Self Immolation releases

 * WOMB S201 : Foetus Under Glass – Spite Your Face/OKFM
 * WOMB ALL 007 : You've Got Foetus On Your Breath – Wash It All Off
 * WOMB OYBL 1 : You've Got Foetus On Your Breath – Deaf
 * WOMB KX07 : Phillip And His Foetus Vibrations – Tell Me, What Is the Bane of Your Life
 * WOMB WSUSC 12.5 : Foetus Over Frisco – Custom Built for Capitalism
 * WOMB OYBL 2 : You've Got Foetus On Your Breath – Ache
 * WOMB FDL 3 : Scraping Foetus Off The Wheel – Hole
 * WOMB FAT 11.12 : Foetus Art Terrorism – Calamity Crush
 * WOMB FGH 12.8 : You've Got Foetus On Your Breath – Wash/Slog
 * WOMB UNC 7.12 : Foetus Über Frisco – Finely Honed Machine
 * FOE 1 : The Foetus of Excellence – The Foetus Of Excellence
 * WOMB FIP 4 : Scraping Foetus Off The Wheel – Nail
 * WOMB FAN 13 : The Foetus All-Nude Revue – Bedrock
 * WOMB PIG 12.12 : Scraping Foetus Off The Wheel – Ramrod
 * WOMB FIP 5 : Foetus Interruptus – Thaw
 * RIFLE 1 : Foetus Corruptus – Rife
 * WOMB INC 6 : Foetus Inc – Sink
 * WOMB FLY 18T : Foetus Inc – Butterfly Potion
 * WOMB FLEX 1 : Foetus Inc – Somnambulumdrum

Non-Existent releases

 * WOMB 6T33 : Foetus On The Beach. Often mentioned in press releases, this triple-LP set was never issued.

Ectopic Ents releases

 * ECT ENTS 001 : ???
 * ECT ENTS 002 : Steroid Maximus – Quilombo
 * ECT ENTS 003 : Steroid Maximus – Gondwanaland
 * ECT ENTS 004 : ???
 * ECT ENTS 005 : Foetus In Excelsis Corruptus Deluxe – Male
 * ECT ENTS 006 : ???
 * ECT ENTS 007 : ???
 * ECT ENTS 008 : Foetus - Gash
 * ECT ENTS 009 : Foetus – Null disc of Null/Void
 * ECT ENTS 010 : Foetus – Void disc of Null/Void
 * ECT ENTS 011 : ???
 * ECT ENTS 012 : You've Got Foetus On Your Breath – Deaf reissue (Thirsty Ear CD)
 * ECT ENTS 013 : You've Got Foetus On Your Breath – Ache reissue (Thirsty Ear CD)
 * ECT ENTS 014 : ???
 * ECT ENTS 015 : ???
 * ECT ENTS 016 : ???
 * ECT ENTS 017 : ???
 * ECT ENTS 018 : ???
 * ECT ENTS 019 : ???
 * ECT ENTS 020 : Foetus - Flow
 * ECT ENTS 021 : Manorexia – Volvox Turbo
 * ECT ENTS 022 : Foetus - Blow
 * ECT ENTS 023 : Steroid Maximus – Ectopia
 * ECT ENTS 024 : Manorexia – The Radiolarian Ooze
 * ECT ENTS 025 : ???
 * ECT ENTS 026 : Foetus – (not adam)
 * ECT ENTS 027 : Foetus – Love
 * ECT ENTS 028 : Foetus – Damp
 * ECT ENTS 029 : Foetus – Vein
 * ECT ENTS 030 : Foetus – Limb
 * ECT ENTS 031 : The Venture Bros.: The Music of JG Thirlwell (released by Williams Street Records, designation used for sale at Ectopic's online shop )
 * ECT ENTS 032 : v/a – Bait (Other Music Digital exclusive compilation featuring previously released Foetus, Steroid Maximus, and Manorexia tracks)

title: Self Immolation (record label)


text: File:The Reality of My Surroundings.jpg

title: File:The Reality of My Surroundings.jpg


text:
Category:Organs (anatomy)

In biology, an organ is a collection of tissues joined in a structural unit to serve a common function.

title: Category:Organs (anatomy)


text:
Nunga

Nunga is a term of self-identification for Aboriginal Australians, originally used by Aboriginal people in the southern settled areas of South Australia, and now used throughout Adelaide and surrounding towns. It is used by contrast with Gunya, which refers to non-Aboriginal persons. The use of "Nunga" by non-Aboriginal people is not always regarded as appropriate.

The term comes from Wirangu, the language spoken around Ceduna, and is effectively the South Australian counterpart of Koori as used in New South Wales and Victoria. Other words used for Aboriginal people in South Australia are Anangu (north-west), Nharla (western Lake Eyre Basin), and Yura (Flinders Ranges).

In the variety of Aboriginal English known as Nunga English, most of the terms of Indigenous origin are from Ngarrindjeri, with quite a number from the west coast (Kokatha and Wirangu) and some from Narungga, but very few from the Kaurna language (the language of Adelaide). The language evolved from the people who grew up in missions such as Point Pearce (Bukkiyana) and Point McLeay (Raukkan), and so reflects their experience with European culture. Some are working on the emergence of a separate Kaurna culture, so would like to see Kaurna language to be taught rather than Nunga English.

Use of the term in official capacities includes the Nunga Court (Aboriginal sentencing courts), the "Nunga Way" cultural teaching framework for schools, the SA Department of Human Services' Yunga Nungas program (to support Aboriginal young people with complex needs) and Nunga Screen (a film event, formerly known as Black Screen).

title: Nunga


text:
HMS Royal George

Eight ships of the Royal Navy have been named HMS Royal George after various members of the House of Hanover. A ninth was renamed before being launched:

 * HMS Royal George was a 100-gun first-rate ship of the line launched as HMS Royal James (1675) in 1675. She was renamed HMS Victory in 1691, HMS Royal George in 1714 and HMS Victory again in 1715.
 * HMS Royal George was a 100-gun first rate launched as HMS Royal Charles (1673) in 1673 and renamed HMS Queen in 1693, HMS Royal George in 1715 and HMS Royal Anne in 1756.
 * HMS Royal George (1756) was a 100-gun first rate launched in 1756. She served in the Seven Years' War and the American War of Independence and sank at Spithead in 1782.
 * HMS Royal George (1776) was a 20-gun sloop listed as serving on the Canadian lakes in 1776.
 * HMS Royal George (1788) was a 100-gun first rate launched in 1788 and broken up in 1822.
 * HMS Royal George (1809) was a 20-gun sloop launched in 1809. She served on the Canadian lakes in the War of 1812, was renamed HMS Niagara in 1814 and was sold in 1837.
 * HMY Royal George was a yacht launched in 1817 and broken up in 1905.
 * HMS Royal George (1827) was a 120-gun first rate launched in 1827, fitted with screw propulsion in 1853 and sold in 1875.
 * HMS Royal George was to have been a battleship, but she was renamed HMS King George V (1911) before she was launched in 1911.

title: HMS Royal George


text:
Bundle (macOS)

In NeXTSTEP, OPENSTEP, and their lineal descendants macOS, iOS, iPadOS, tvOS, and watchOS, and in GNUstep, a bundle is a file directory with a defined structure and file extension, allowing related files to be grouped together as a conceptually single item.

Examples of bundles that contain executable code include applications, frameworks, and plugins. This kind of bundle usually contains one file representing executable code, and files that represent resources such as nibs, templates, images, sounds, and other media. On some other systems, such as Microsoft Windows, these resources are usually included directly in the executable file itself at compile time. On older Macintoshes, a similar technique is used, where additional metadata can be added to a file's resource fork. Similar in concept are the application directories used in RISC OS and on the ROX Desktop.

Examples of bundles that do not contain executable code include document packages (iWork documents) and media libraries (iPhoto Library).

Bundles are programmatically accessed with the  class in Cocoa, NeXTSTEP and GNUstep's Foundation frameworks, and with   in Core Foundation. Bundles often include an file for metadata. The Uniform Type Identifier (UTI) for an Apple bundle is.

Application bundles
Application bundles are directory hierarchies, with the top-level directory having a name that ends with a  extension.

In a macOS application bundle, the first directory in the bundle underneath the top-level directory is usually named. Within  there is usually another directory, called , which contains the application's executable code. The  folder contains a file named , which contains application information, such as the software vendor's name, name of the files that contain the applications executable and icon, the version of the application, permissions requested, etc. Within the   folder there is usually also a directory called  , which contains the resources of the application.

Among other things, the  folder contains localized versions of the application's nib files.

Other common subdirectories include,  ,   and. The  directory contains frameworks used by the application, and are used even if another version of the framework exists on the system. The  directory contains frameworks that can be used both by the application that contains them, and other applications; they are used only if a newer version does not exist elsewhere on the system. contains extensible code used by the application. The  folder contains information used by the system to validate that the package to establish that the package originates from a trusted party, and has not been tampered with.

By default, the Finder displays application bundles, which can also be referred to as packages, as opaque files with no underlying structure; the contents of the bundle can be shown with the "Show Package Contents" context menu item.

GNUstep by default uses the name of the application to name the folder that contains application code. An alternative is to name them by the computer architecture and OS the code is intended for to form a fat binary, so the application can be opened on many platforms.

macOS framework bundles
macOS frameworks are also stored as bundles; the top-level directory of a framework bundle has a name that is the name of the framework followed by the extension. In the top-level directory is a  directory, with subdirectories for one or more versions of the framework, each subdirectory containing the dynamic library code for the framework, in a file whose name is the same as the name of the framework, possibly with a   folder containing header files for the framework, and other subfolders such as. The  directory also contains a symbolic link   to the directory for the current version of the framework. In the top-level directory are symbolic links to the contents of.

The Finder displays framework bundles as directories rather than as opaque files.

Although GNUstep uses frameworks, they are not usually stored as bundles. This is because the full semantics of framework loading are considered too alien to other platforms.

Loadable bundles
Loadable bundles are bundles which contain code that can be loaded at runtime. Loadable bundles usually have the extension, and are most often used as plug-ins. On macOS, there is a way to load bundles even into applications that do not support them, allowing for third party hacks for popular applications, such as Safari and Apple Mail. A feature inherited from NeXTSTEP, GNUstep has the -[NSBundle principalClass] interface too.

By default, the Finder displays loadable bundles, which can also be referred to as packages, as opaque files with no underlying structure; the contents of the bundle can be shown with the "Show Package Contents" context menu item.

Other bundle formats
There are many macOS applications which utilize their own custom bundle format (e.g. CandyBar, Aperture  , VMware Fusion  , etc.).

.lproj
An .lproj file is a bundle that contains localization files for OpenStep, macOS, or GNUstep software. It typically contains the  files for a given language along with   files and images if needed (for example, ReadMe or license files). These localized files are used by installer makers to customize install packages. They are also included in an application bundle.

title: Bundle (macOS)


text:
User talk:Just me~enwiki

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Just me. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Just me~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 00:48, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 14:43, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Just me~enwiki


text:
Talk:Standard gravitational parameter

plant

Info
Thanks for this great info. I'm trying to use it to calculate the orbital distance between two hypothetical stars. But I have become quite lost in the formulas. I am no math wiz - obviously - so that may expain why. I'm having trouble figuring out how to connect the formulas together. As well as determining what values to use for some of the items such as Mass (M). Is it in solar masses? kg? Plus, what is "<<"? It can't mean less-less than. Sorry about all this -- I guess I'm just one of those lost souls who need an example after the formulas. BY THE WAY: These pages are really great! They helped me develop a table that tells what the Apparent Magnitude of any object is at any given distance! Only took me all night to write it, so my own apparent magnitude was pretty dim! Tesseract 501@aol.com

 * I am glad you like Wikipedia. "<<" means "much less". M can be taken in kg. Note the difference between m^3 and km^3.--Patrick 12:27, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you Patrick. "Much less" being a relative term, I suppose.  When I only get two slices of pizza instead of four, I consider it <<.  I'm still struggling with the Gravitational Constant and the SGParameter.  It all started when I just tried to calculate Orbital Periods for hypothetical objects.  The various websites seem to give info along the lines of "if planet was .68 AU from the star, its Orbital Period would be 228 days.  If it was 0.01 AU, its Orbital Period would be 18 days.  Etc."  So, I tried to plug in value into the T = 2\pi\sqrt{a^3/\mu} formula for determining orbital period (small body around central body) -- and the bit-more involved formula for two bodies orbiting each other.  It's straightforward enough to get the Semi-Major Axis values and the masses.  But, the plugging the Gravitation Constant into the equation is where I'm a bit stuck.  I'm not sure how to incorporate the kg-1, m3 and s-2 aspects.
 * I wish the page had at least one example using hypothetical objects (one for the small-body equation, and one for the two-body equation).
 * Thanks again -- I've seen your work on other pages. It is really great stuff.  Inspiring.
 * Tesseract501@aol.com (August 27, 2005)

 * Thanks. The "kg-1, m3 and s-2" mean that distances should be in meters, not AU, and times in seconds, not days. Anyway, you may not need G, you need the sum of the two μ-values; for those you can e.g. multiply the number of solar masses by the μ-value for the Sun.--Patrick 00:13, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Unit Conversion
This might go better in the units of measure area, but since there were already people talking about it in this area, I'll stay here for the moment. :)

Patrick, could you give an example of converting, for example, km3/s-2 to m3/s2? I understand how to convert km3 to m3 (multiply the value by 1000, since there are 1000 meters in a kilometer), but I don't understand what unit of time s-2 is referring to, or how to convert between different exponentations of the same time unit, which is what it sounds like it's asking me to do. --Kintar 15:04 CST, 06 October, 2005

 * 1 km3s-2 = 1 km3/s2 = 1,000,000,000 m3/s2.--Patrick 22:17, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm not really sure how km3 is the same thing as m3. I understand that GM is m3s-2, but wouldn't that only make the equation kms-2?  So is the equation on the front page correct?--oscabat  18:13 CST, 06 January 2005.

 * Perhaps you're misunderstanding the difference between km and m^3. 1 km = 1000m . 1 km^3 = 1 km*km*km = (1000m)*(1000m)*(1000m) = 1'000'000'000 m^3 = 1*10^9 m^3. The units on the front page are correct. I would prefer that the units of GM be changed to m^3/s^2. SI units all the way. DavidMcKenzie 20:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

The units are not correct right now. On the table (top right corner) the unit is (m3s−2) and the value for Earth is 398600.4418(9). In the article, the value given is 398600.4418±0.0008 km3s−2. Same value, different unit. The correct value should be 398600000000000 m3/s2 =3,986*10^14 (rounded), from the values of G (6,67*10^-11m3/kgs2) and M(6*10^24kg). That is 398600 km3/s2 so the value in the text is correct, the table is not. Hoemaco (talk) 10:40, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Standardized table to m3.- Elmidae  12:46, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Moon GM parameter
I thought that the Moon should have a listing in that table, especially if Ceres has! referenced from here:

Precision
From the article: "The value for the Sun is called heliocentric gravitational constant and equals 1.32712440018 × 1020 m3s-2." How did we get that many places of precision? RJFJR (talk) 21:18, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

All of the values in the table are shown as having an uncertainty (9) in the last figure. That seems quite unlikely, and in the text the value for Earth is given as 8 in the last place, so that would contradict. Were these just assumed because the true uncertainties were unknown? And if so, is that a commonly accepted practice? Sethhoyt (talk) 19:55, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Cite this definition?
The first paragraph currently defines the "standard gravitational parameter" as based on the sum of the two objects' masses and states the mass of one object times the gravitational constant (GxM) is an approximation of the "standard gravitational parameter". If this is the "true" meaning of the phrase, a source should be cited. The notion seems wrong to me: while I see some logic in such a notion, it means a "standard gravitational parameter" does not apply to a single body (e.g., the Sun's standard gravitational parameter), but actually applies to a pair, e.g., the Sun-Earth standard gravitational parameter. This is radically different than the manner in which the term is used. While "G times the sum of the masses" is a very useful quantity, I would say that the "standard gravitational parameter" of a particular body could be described as a good approximation of this useful quantity, for smaller objects orbiting around it. 74.69.160.254 (talk) 17:48, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Standard gravitational parameter


text:
Luise Neumann

Luise Neumann (7 December 1818 – 17 October 1905) was a German actress, the daughter of the actress Amalie Haizinger. Her younger sister,, was also an esteemed actress of the period.

She made her debut at the age of 16 in a performance of the Deutschen Hausfrau in Karlsruhe. In 1839, she joined the Burgtheater in Vienna, of which she was a member until 1856. On 14 January 1857, she married Karl Graf von Schönfeld and ended her career as an actor.

title: Luise Neumann


text:
Captain Tractor

Captain Tractor is a Canadian folk rock band, based in Edmonton, Alberta. They play a punk-influenced variant of Celtic folk music, similar to such bands as Great Big Sea, The Pogues or Spirit of the West. Their songs are often rich in local, cultural, and geographical references.

History
The band's most famous songs have been renditions of the folk music classics "The Log Driver's Waltz" and "Drunken Sailor", as well as a cover of the Arrogant Worms' "The Last Saskatchewan Pirate". They have also developed a following for their brand of Canadian rock, with singles such as "Up the Hill", "Frozen Puck to the Head", "This Is Not a Sad Song", "Another Drinking Song", and "The Bastard of Strathcona County".

In celebration of the release of the band's sixth album, North of the Yellowhead (2005 Six Shooter Records), Edmonton's Alley Kat Brewing Company released Captain Tractor's Yellowhead Wheat Ale.

Their seventh studio album, Famous Last Words, was released on May 3, 2011. A live record, Live at the Roxy, was released in 2015.

To celebrate their 25th anniversary in 2018, the band released 25 Years On, a re-mastered retrospective with four new tracks recorded in February 2018 with Nik Kozub at The Audio Department in Edmonton, two unreleased tracks from the vaults, and seventeen previous tracks. In addition, they partnered with Hansen Distillery to create the Twenty-Fifth Anniversary Limited Edition Captain Tractor Spiced Rye Whiskey.

Band members
The band consists of five men, one woman, and their mascot, a deer named Bucky. The band members are:
 * Chris Wynters - vocals, guitar, songwriter
 * Scott Peters - vocals, mandolin, guitar, bodhran, songwriter, driver
 * Jules Mounteer - drums, percussion, driver
 * Jon Nordstrom - bass, trumpet, guitar, vocals, songwriter. Joined before Hat Trick.
 * Jason Kodie - keyboards, vocals, musical restraint. Joined before North of the Yellowhead.
 * Shannon Johnson - fiddle, vocals

Former members include:
 * Aimee Hill - flute, vocals. Left after East of Edson.
 * Jeff Smook - bass, vocals, songwriter. Left after Bought the Farm.
 * Brock Skywalker - accordion, flute, guitar, bodhran, penny whistle, harmonica, mandolin, keyboards, vocals, songwriter. Left just before North of the Yellowhead.

Discography
Captain Tractor has released seven albums:
 * Land (1994)
 * East of Edson (1995)
 * Bought the Farm (1997)
 * Hat Trick (1998)
 * Celebrity Traffic Jam (1999)
 * Hoserista (2000)
 * North of the Yellowhead (2005)
 * Famous Last Words (2011)
 * Live at the Roxy (2015)
 * 25 Years On (2018)

They have also released a video entitled Inconsequential Things in 1998, and an interactive CD-ROM, Bus Madness, in 1995.

Members' solo albums:
 * Chris Wynters's Skywriting (Six Shooter Records, 2005) and 2010-1982 (Shameless Records, 2010).
 * Jon Nordstrom's Brick and Stone (Independent, 2003) and Waiting for Summer (Independent 2005).
 * Former member Brock Skywalker's Cerebral Reruns (FrozenPuck, 2004).

title: Captain Tractor


text:
Fragaria moupinensis

Fragaria moupinensis is a species of wild strawberry native to China. It is similar in appearance to F. nilgerrensis.

All strawberries have a base monoploid count of 7 chromosomes. Fragaria moupinensis is tetraploid, having 4 pairs of these chromosomes for a total of 28 chromosomes.

title: Fragaria moupinensis


text: Template:Events at the 1984 Summer Olympics


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GreatNews

 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. - Mailer Diablo 17:07, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

GreatNews
advertisement for a nn software product. 10 google hits for "GreatNews + RSS", and that includes the company's own site. largely created by User:GreatNews. Delete DES (talk) 04:00, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, vanity and nn. GregAsche 04:47, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ad. I was half expecting to be told the article saved a load of money by switching to Geico. -R. fiend 04:57, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Adcruft. Hoorah. RasputinAXP   talk  *  contribs  12:57, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Sorry guys. I should have read the policy before posting about the software. Please delete. --GreatNews 14:10, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

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


text:
Talk:Oceania Champions Cup

Hope you don't mind but I'm going to merge this to the Oceania Club Championship page. Cursive 18:38, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Oceania Champions Cup


text:
The Silver Princess in Oz

The Silver Princess in Oz (1938) is the thirty-second book in the Oz series created by L. Frank Baum and his successors, and the eighteenth written by Ruth Plumly Thompson. It was illustrated by John R. Neill. The novel was followed by Ozoplaning with the Wizard of Oz (1939).

In this story, young King Randy of Regalia (from Thompson's The Purple Prince of Oz) is visited by his old friend, Kabumpo, the Elegant Elephant of Pumperdink. Together, they set out to visit their friend Jinnicky the Red Jinn (also from Purple Prince) in the Land of Ev. On the way, they meet Planetty, the silver Princess from Anuther Planet, and her fire-breathing colt, Thun. When they reach Jinnicky's palace, they find that Jinnicky has been deposed and enchanted by an untrustworthy slave.

Thompson's novel is notable in that she avoids the use of Baum's classic characters and relies on those of her own invention (as is true of some of her other later books, like Captain Salt in Oz); and also for the fact that author and artist portray the followers of Jinnicky as turbanned black African slaves, with images and language which today could be considered racist.

Planetty and Thun return in Jeff Freedman's 1994 novel The Magic Dishpan of Oz.

Reception
The Indianapolis News observed, "Bits of the dialogue may annoy the adult, for the writing sometimes seems deliberately childish rather than childlike, but the child, himself, won't be bothered by such details. To him, the Silver Princess will belong with all the other fascinating inhabitants of Oz."

In A Brief Guide to Oz, Paul Simpson notes, "The book has attracted considerable criticism for the casually cruel way in which Planetty treats a group of black slaves, and the way in which she compares them to unthinking beasts."

In the Dictionary of Literary Biography, Michael Patrick Hearn is also umimpressed, writing, "In her last Oz books, Thompson wildly stretched her imaginative powers, at times risking loss of the child's perspective. The Silver Princess in Oz, in its struggle to be new, is uncomfortably grotesque."

title: The Silver Princess in Oz


text:
Category:Aviation risks

Risks associated with aviation and general aircraft operation.

title: Category:Aviation risks


text:
User talk:Joelus

I am Joel.

Melbourne High School logo
Hi, I've recreated the logo of Melbourne High School you uploaded. (Old: Image:Unicorn.jpg, new: Image:Melbourne High Unicorn.png). It's now a PNG. Therefore I listed the original for deletion. I hope this is OK. Mysid ( talk ) 12:12, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Pros:
 * Twice the resolution
 * Half the file size
 * Cleaner
 * Cons:
 * No anti-aliasing
 * The font is slightly different

title: User talk:Joelus