text:
Chisum

Chisum is a 1970 American Western film directed by Andrew McLaglen, starring John Wayne in the title role, and adapted for the screen by Andrew J. Fenady from his short story "Chisum and the Lincoln County War." The supporting cast features Forrest Tucker, Christopher George, Ben Johnson, Glenn Corbett, Andrew Prine, Bruce Cabot, Patric Knowles, Richard Jaeckel, Lynda Day George, Pedro Armendariz Jr., John Agar, John Mitchum, Ray Teal, Christopher Mitchum and Hank Worden with Geoffrey Deuel and Pamela McMyler receiving "introducing" credits. The picture was filmed in Panavision and Technicolor.

Chisum is based on the Lincoln County War of 1878 and, although it changed a number of details, many of the historical figures in the film (such as Chisum, Tunstall, McSween, Murphy, Brady, Evans, Garrett, and Billy the Kid) were in the New Mexico Territory at the time and did play a part in the conflict.

Plot
In Lincoln County, New Mexico, John Chisum, a kindly and successful cattle baron, finds his peace threatened when amoral Lawrence Murphy and his business partner James Dolan forcibly buy up most of the land and businesses in the area. Initially, Chisum tries to not get involved, though he does allow ranchers forced out by Murphy to water their herds on his land.

Bribed by Murphy, corrupt Sheriff Brady secretly hires Neemo and his group of banditos, who kill two of Chisum's men and steal a herd of horses. Chisum and his men pursue the thieves, retrieve the horses, and discover the American money in the Mexican outlaw's pocket. They are assisted by Billy "The Kid" Bonney, a notorious killer who was recently hired and given a chance to reform by John Henry Tunstall, Chisum's philanthropic British neighbor.

Chisum's niece Sallie arrives in Lincoln to live with her uncle, and Billy begins to court her. Alexander McSween, invited by Murphy to be his lawyer, arrives with his wife Sue on the same stagecoach. During Sallie's welcome party, Murphy sends Jess Evans and his gang to rustle Chisum's cattle, which are being taken to the United States Army to feed the Native Americans on a nearby reservation. A wandering Pat Garrett warns Chisum's men of the approaching riders; during the subsequent shootout, one of Chisum's wranglers dies and the cows stampede away. Chisum sends for Justice J.B. Wilson to try Murphy's men for murder, but the damage is done and the Army starts buying its cattle from Murphy. McSween, not liking Murphy's methods, switches sides.

McSween, Tunstall, and Chisum open a new store and bank to combat Murphy's monopoly. Billy, Garrett, and several of Chisum's men go to Santa Fe to get supplies to stock the store. Billy is nearly killed when Murphy has Evans attack the wagon train as it is returning to Lincoln; in response, Tunstall decides to go to Santa Fe to ask Governor Axtell to intervene in the land war. Deputies Morton and Baker stop Tunstall on the road, falsely accuse him of rustling, shoot him dead, and plant a gun so it looks like Tunstall drew first.

Justice Wilson arrives in Lincoln during Tunstall's funeral. Brady refuses to go after his own men, so Wilson deputizes Chisum and Garrett, and they track and capture the fugitive deputies in a nearby town. On the way back, Chisum separates from the group to get the judge. Billy, wanting revenge for his friend and mentor, and skeptical that justice will be done in Lincoln, knocks out Garrett and kills Morton and Baker. He then rides into town, publicly murdering Brady before fleeing. Murphy convinces Governor Axtell to fire Justice Wilson and appoint bounty hunter Dan Nodeen, who harbors an old grudge against Billy, as sheriff.

While a large posse scours the countryside to find Billy, he gathers his allies, starting with two of Tunstall's wranglers, Charlie Bowdre and Tom O'Folliard. They break into McSween's store to get dynamite to rob Murphy's bank, but Nodeen notices them inside, and a protracted firefight breaks out between Murphy's and Billy's men. McSween, unarmed and wanting no part of the battle, asks that he and his wife be allowed to leave, but only Sue is allowed to go. When the shooting resumes, she flees to get Chisum, so Murphy has his men erect barricades in the streets of the town. McSween comes out to bargain with Murphy, and Nodeen shoots him in cold blood.

Chisum and his men arrive in Lincoln, driving Murphy's own cattle before them to break through the barricades. Murphy's men are defeated, with Billy personally pursuing and killing Evans. Chisum gets into a fistfight with Murphy, ending with both men falling from a balcony. Murphy is impaled on a decorative bull's horn he was using as a weapon; Nodeen, his paymaster dead, leaves town, pursued by Billy.

Garret and Sallie begin a relationship. He is appointed Sheriff of Lincoln County, and the next governor of the territory, Lew Wallace, declares amnesty for those involved in the land war. With peace restored, Chisum goes up a hill to survey his land.

Cast

 * John Wayne as John Chisum
 * Forrest Tucker as Lawrence Murphy
 * Christopher George as Dan Nodeen
 * Ben Johnson as James Pepper
 * Glenn Corbett as Pat Garrett
 * Andrew Prine as Alex McSween
 * Bruce Cabot as Sheriff Brady
 * Patric Knowles as Henry Tunstall
 * Richard Jaeckel as Jess Evans
 * Lynda Day as Sue McSween
 * Geoffrey Deuel as Billy "The Kid" Bonney
 * Pamela McMyler as Sallie Chisum
 * John Agar as Amos Patton
 * Lloyd Battista as Neemo
 * Robert Donner as Morton
 * Ray Teal as Justice J.B. Wilson
 * Edward Faulkner as James Dolan
 * Ron Soble as Charlie Bowdre
 * John Mitchum as Baker
 * Glenn Langan as Colonel Nathan Dudley
 * Alan Baxter as Governor Samuel Beach Axtell
 * Alberto Morin as Juan Delgado
 * Bill Bryant as Jeff
 * Pedro Armendáriz Jr. as Ben
 * Christopher Mitchum as Tom O'Folliard
 * John Pickard as Sergeant Braddock
 * Abraham Sofaer as Chief White Buffalo
 * Gregg Palmer as Karl Riker
 * Hank Worden as Stationmaster Elwood
 * Pedro Gonzalez Gonzalez as Mexican Rancher

Production
The film was based on a screenplay by Andrew J. Fenady called Chisum and the Lincoln County Cattle War. Originally set up at 20th Century Fox, the project moved to Warner Bros.-7 Arts in August 1969 because John Wayne wanted to make the film that year, but Fox's production schedule was full. Michael Wayne, John's son and the film's executive producer, took on the project of making Chisum because he felt the story summed up his father's political views. As is the case with many of Wayne's films, in this, his 200th starring role, the sizeable cast is packed with familiar faces from earlier John Wayne films, among them Sands of Iwo Jima (Wayne, John Agar, Forrest Tucker, and Richard Jaeckel).

The picturesque vistas in the film were captured by cinematographer William H. Clothier in Durango, Mexico, where the film was shot. John Wayne was on the set of Chisum when he heard he was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Actor for his work in True Grit, an award he would go on to win.

During filming, John Mitchum, brother of Robert, introduced John Wayne to his patriotic poetry. Seeing that Wayne was greatly moved by Mitchum's words, Forrest Tucker suggested Mitchum and Wayne should collaborate to record some of the poetry, which eventually resulted in the Grammy-nominated spoken-word album, America, Why I Love Her (1973).

The song "The Ballad of John Chisum", which is heard during the opening credits of the film, features verses spoken by William Conrad, while the song heard later in the film, "Turn Me Around", is sung by Merle Haggard.

Box office and reception
The film premiered in Dallas, Texas, on June 24, 1970. It grossed $6 million at the box office.

U.S. President Richard Nixon commented on the film during a press conference in Denver, Colorado, on August 3, 1970. In doing so, he used the film as a context to explain his views on law and order:

"Over the last weekend I saw a movie–I don't see too many movies but I try to see them on weekends when I am at the Western White House or in Florida–and the movie that I selected, or, as a matter of fact, my daughter Tricia selected it, was 'Chisum' with John Wayne. It was a western. And as I looked at that movie, I said, 'Well, it was a very good western, John Wayne is a very fine actor and it was: a fine supporting cast. But it was just basically another western, far better than average movies, better than average westerns.'

I wondered why it is that the western survives year after year after year. A good western will outdraw some of the other subjects. Perhaps one of the reasons, in addition to the excitement, the gun play, and the rest, which perhaps is part of it but they can get that in other kinds of movies but one of the reasons is, perhaps, and this may be a square observation–is that the good guys come out ahead in the westerns; the bad guys lose.

In the end, as this movie particularly pointed out, even in the old West, the time before New Mexico was a state, there was a time when there was no law. But the law eventually came, and the law was important from the standpoint of not only prosecuting the guilty, but also seeing that those who were guilty had a proper trial."

Director Andrew V. McLaglen called the film one of his favorites and said: "I wanted Billy the Kid to just be Billy the Kid, a human being, not a bad little boy. Fenady was sort of a scholar about the Lincoln County Cattle War, which was a conflict over water and cattle—trading cattle—and John Chisum actually became a very powerful landowner. It was an American story."

Home media
Warner Home Video released Chisum on Blu-ray on June 7, 2016.

title: Chisum


text:
Phyllodes tumor

Phyllodes tumors (from Greek: phullon), are a rare type of biphasic fibroepithelial mass that form from the periductal stromal and epithelial cells of the breast. They account for less than 1% of all breast neoplasms. They were previously termed cystosarcoma phyllodes, coined by Johannes Müller in 1838, before being renamed to phyllodes tumor by the World Health Organization in 2003. Phullon, which means 'leaf' in Greek, describes the unique papillary projections characteristic of phyllodes tumors on histology. Diagnosis is made via a core-needle biopsy and treatment is typically surgical resection with wide margins (>1 cm), due to their propensity to recur.

Signs and symptoms
Phyllodes tumors typically present as a firm, mobile, and palpable mass that is painless in nature. On physical examination, the mass can demonstrate a smooth or nodular texture depending on its size. In addition, larger masses can stretch the overlying breast tissue leading to nipple retraction, chest wall fixation, and in advanced cases, ulceration from pressure necrosis.

Phyllodes tumors can grow to a variety of sizes, ranging from 0.8 to 40 cm, with the average tumor growing to between 4 and 8 cm. Their growth can be slow, rapid, or demonstrate alternating growth patterns. A notable feature, however, is that their growth rarely regresses, a distinguishing feature from fibroadenomas which tend to change in size based on a female's menstrual cycle.

Causes
Experts are unsure of the exact etiology of phyllodes tumors. Genetically, phyllodes tumors have shown to have a higher incidence with conditions such as Li-Fraumeni syndrome and BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations. In addition, males with a history of gynecomastia have shown an increased incidence of developing a phyllodes tumor.

Mechanism
The pathogenesis behind the development of a phyllodes tumor is not well-defined. Some theories suggest a genetic cause while other literature supports the involvement of hormone and growth factor receptors, cell signal transduction pathways, and cell cycle markers. Certain receptors include estrogen/progesterone, glucocorticoid, and HER2. The most well-studied cell signal transduction pathway includes the Wnt pathway, which is a highly conserved genetic pathway between species. In the Wnt pathway, gene transcription via B-catenin is a highly regulated process by proteins including, but not limited to, c-myc, c-jun, Fra, and cyclin D1. Mutation of any these proteins can lead to the un-regulated, rapid growth characteristic of phyllodes tumors.

In addition, vascular factors promoting angiogenesis have been shown to further promote growth of these breast masses. These proteins include vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), Hypoxia-inducible factor-1a, Platelet-derived growth factor, endothelin-1, and nitrogen oxide synthase. The increased expression of these angiogenic factors reflects the increased angiogenesis seen in higher grade phyllodes tumors.

Genes that have been associated with a higher incidence of phyllodes tumors include Mediator Complex Subunit 12 (MED12) exon 2, Telomerase Reverse Transcriptase (TERT) promoter, and Retinoic Acid Receptor Alpha (RARA); important genes for regulating DNA synthesis.

The current theory behind the development of phyllodes tumors involves the interaction between each of these pathways to some degree and how they alter the normal interaction of the breast epithelial-stromal tissue.

Diagnostic techniques
Radiographical imaging is the first-line test for identifying a phyllodes tumor. Despite their propensity to grow rapidly and deform the overlying breast tissue, approximately 20% of phyllodes tumors can present as a nonpalpable mass on screening mammography. Other imaging tools used to assess the size and spread of a phyllodes tumor include ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). None of these imaging tools are definitive tests for differentiating a phyllodes tumor from a benign fibroadenoma. Phyllodes tumors can only be diagnosed histologically, as they tend to have many overlapping features with other breast masses on physical examination and radiological imaging.

A core needle biopsy is the primary tool used to provide a definitive diagnosis for phyllodes tumors. Other biopsy techniques include fine-needle aspiration and excisional biopsy. Following biopsy, histological and gross examination is performed which helps clinicians better grade and classify the phyllodes tumor.

Classification
Phyllodes tumors are part of a group of breast diseases called cellular fibroepithelial lesions. This term incorporates a spectrum of diseases ranging from a benign fibroadenoma to a malignant phyllodes tumor, with numerous variants in between. They are classified by ICD-O, not by MeSH.

Phyllodes tumors may be considered benign, borderline, or malignant depending upon their histological features, including stromal cellularity, infiltration of the epithelial-stromal interface, and mitotic activity. Due to their propensity to metastasize and grow quickly, almost all phyllodes tumors are regarded as having malignant potential and treated accordingly. A large case series from the MD Anderson Cancer Center reported the incidence of each type of phyllodes tumor as benign (58%), borderline (12%), and malignant (30%). Malignant phyllodes tumors can behave similarly to sarcomas leading to development of blood-borne metastases. Approximately 10% of phyllodes tumor develop distant metastases and this occurrence is higher (20%) in patients with histological-identified malignant tumors. The most common site for distant metastases include the lung, bone, and abdominal viscera. In more insidious cases, the parotid region has also been described in literature.

Prevention and screening
There is no evidence-based recommendations for screening or preventative measures for early detection of phyllodes tumors.

In patients with a prior history of a phyllodes tumor, the follow-up recommendations are employed on a case-by-case basis depending upon the grade and stage of the treated tumor.

Patients who have not had a mastectomy should continue regular breast cancer screening based on the recommendations by the United States Preventative Services Task Force.

Treatment
The most common, curative treatment for a phyllodes tumor is wide surgical excision with greater than 1 cm margins. Other than surgery, there is no definite cure for a phyllodes tumor as chemotherapy and radiation therapy have not proven effectiveness. The risk of developing local recurrence or metastases is related the histologic grade and mitotic activity of the tumor. Despite proper surgical excision, a high percentage of surgeries performed to treat a phyllodes tumor demonstrate incomplete excision margins that require additional revision surgery. Radiation treatment, after breast-conserving surgery with negative margins, may significantly reduce the local recurrence rate for borderline and malignant tumors. A study performed in 2012 derived a risk calculator for relapse risk of phyllodes tumors after surgery.

Prognosis
The prognosis of phyllodes tumor is good with an overall 87% 10-year survival rate. After wide-margin surgical excision, 98.7% of benign phyllodes tumors and 80% of borderline were cured. In rare cases where the tumor has metastasized, the prognosis is poor. This most commonly occurs in cases of malignant grade phyllodes tumor.

Epidemiology
Phyllodes tumors account for approximately 1% of all breast neoplasms. They primarily occur in adult women, with very few examples reported in adolescents. Incidence is most common between the ages of 40 and 50, prior to the onset of menopause. For comparison, this is about 15 years older than the typical age of patients with a fibroadenoma, a common differential diagnosis in patients with a suspected phyllodes tumors. Younger women have a higher chance of having a benign phyllodes tumor, while older women are more likely to have higher-grade tumors.

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

title: Phyllodes tumor


text:
Template talk:Ffd2

Untitled
This image is intended for use on WP:IFD. Example usage:

* Foo_bar.jpg, OR, NE. ~

Note: Underscores are required instead of spaces.

Judging by IFD, the "delete" links part of this or a related template is broken. I don't know the cause or I would of course fix it. --kingboyk 06:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

 * It's from not using underscores instead of spaces. —User:ACupOfCoffee @ 05:48, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Why is there a sup tag with the id of the image that only contains a space? Kotepho 19:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Looking at it, I can't imagine a good reason. BigDT 23:12, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Section
Having the talk | delete links in the header is completely unnecessary. They still can't be used from the TOC, and it doesn't save time otherwise. It also results in the same comment being substed in dozens of times on a page and wasting editors time (or having them leave a useless comment). I'm moving the links down. Superm401 - Talk 14:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Notify
The notify link wants to add the notification in a new section (which requires a section header). This is unnecessary as the notification message creates a new section header. I don't know how to fix it. --kingboyk 14:00, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Still broken, and I still can't fix it. I've disabled and hope that will spur somebody into action. --kingboyk (talk) 20:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

"Fix me"
I removed the following comment from this template, which has been here for months with apparently no effect:

 * <!-- Fix me: The included template outputs a section header, but Mediawiki with "require edit summaries" turned on won't save the page unless a section header is added. Also, if possible please populate the new talk page message with the name of the deleted image.-->

If anyone can address these concerns, the appropriate changes should be made. Otherwise, it's not worth having this comment strewn hundreds of times across all IFD pages. —Bkell (talk) 14:41, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi folks, just to let you know that I unwittingly broke Template:Ffd2 in an attempt to prepopulate the page name as a deletion reason. It means that the Delete button next to some listings will prefill a deletion reason of "Stifle (talk) 10:48, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Updated
I made a small change to the template; what it does is now if you include the "File:" prefix on your nomination, it won't cause nastiness like it previously did (something that used to frustrate me several months ago when I hadn't yet gotten used to never using the prefix in templates like this). I will have minimal computer access for the next several days, so if something starts going wrong because of this and you don't know how to fix it quickly, please feel free to undo it. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 13:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Another update
I've added an upload link that links to the uploader's uploads, to make it easier for users to access them.—  Dæ dαlus Contribs 09:47, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

What links to the file
How about a "WhatLinksHere" link within the template? Linking to the pages linked by the file? If no one opposes, or adds this feature, I will "attempt" to add it in a few weeks :) Reh  man  05:08, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * This seems like a good idea, I can't see any problems with it. I went ahead and added it; if someone thinks of any problems they can go ahead and revert. r ʨ anaɢ (talk) 11:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: Any changes that are made here should also be made to Template:Ffd2a. —Bkell (talk) 12:10, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I see you have updated FFD2A too. Thanks again. Happy holidays. Reh  man  13:04, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Removed bullet
I was BOLD and removed the bullet that was in front of the nominator's rationale, to match process at AfD, TfD, RfD and MfD. Makes sense to be. But you can revert it if you think it's bad. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:01, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Added the graphical list
I have added the graphical upload list to the list of links in the parentheses. That is Special:ListFiles. SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:55, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Headers delinked
I have opened a discussion with a suggestion at WT:Files for deletion in which editors who are involved with this template may want to participate. Thank you in advance! –  Paine Ellsworth   C LIMAX ! 02:33, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

If no further discussion is needed, the headers will be delinked soon. –  Paine Ellsworth   C LIMAX ! 17:47, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Adding lowercase parameters (uploader/reason)
I made some edits at Template:ffd2/sandbox as attempt to add lowercase parameters,  and. However, I previewed my edits at the testcase and found the substitution to be poorly executed. I don't know how else to add the lowercase parameters without affecting the main template. May someone else add them please? Thanks. George Ho (talk) 05:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

After sandbox edits and failed tests, I realize that I have a lot to learn. George Ho (talk) 21:50, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

After sandboxing and testing, I finally made it. I'm not well experienced on templates, but it was well done. George Ho (talk) 00:18, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Template talk:Ffd2


text:
Campeonato Fluminense

The Campeonato Fluminense was the football league of the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, during the period when the Guanabara state and the Rio de Janeiro state were two separated states.

Until 1960, Rio de Janeiro city was the Brazilian capital and was not part of homonymous state. In the same year, with the inauguration of Brasília as the new capital of Brazil, the city of Rio de Janeiro became the new Guanabara state. Only in 1975 the states of Rio de Janeiro and Guanabara fused forming present day's Rio de Janeiro state, but the Campeonato Fluminense continued separately until 1978, after which all its clubs joined the city league, the Campeonato Carioca.

As most of the big clubs in the Campeonato Carioca have come from Rio de Janeiro city, the countryside clubs have rarely contended for the state title since the merger; only two countryside clubs, Americano and Volta Redonda, came close to winning the Carioca title, settling for runner-up in 2002 and 2005 respectively.

Amateur era
The first Campeonato Fluminense was disputed in 1915, right after the foundation of LSF (the first state football association). In 1928 the clubs were replaced by city XI teams, and the champion league represented the state. From 1941 to 1945 FFD (former AFEA) replaced the city XI teams by clubs. In 1946 the clubs were again replaced by city XI teams. These were the state champions clubs in the amateur era:
 * 1915 - Ararigboya (Niterói)
 * 1916 - Parnahyba (Niterói)
 * 1917 - Odeon (Niterói)
 * 1918 - Nictheroyense (Niterói)
 * 1919 - Fluminense (Niterói)
 * 1920 - Fluminense (Niterói)
 * 1921 - Barreto (Niterói)
 * 1922 - Byron (Niterói)
 * 1923 - Barreto (Niterói)
 * 1924 - Byron (Niterói)
 * 1924 - Byron (Niterói) - extra championship
 * 1925 - Serrano (Petrópolis) - AFEA championship
 * 1925 - Byron (Niterói) - LSF championship
 * 1926 - Elite (Niterói)
 * 1927 - Gragoatá (Niterói)
 * 1928 - Niterói team
 * 1928 - Niterói team
 * 1930 - Niterói team
 * 1931 - Niterói team
 * 1932 - not disputed
 * 1933 - not disputed
 * 1934 - Barra do Piraí team
 * 1935 - Niterói team
 * 1936 - Campos team
 * 1937 - not disputed
 * 1938 - Niterói team
 * 1939 - Campos team
 * 1940 - Campos and Nova Friburgo team
 * 1941 - Icaraí (Niterói)
 * 1942 - Royal (Barra do Piraí)
 * 1943 - Icaraí (Niterói)
 * 1944 - Petropolitano (Petrópolis)
 * 1945 - Serrano (Petrópolis)
 * 1946 - not held
 * 1947 - Campos team
 * 1948 - Petrópolis team
 * 1949 - Petrópolis team
 * 1950 - Barra do Piraí team
 * 1951 - Barra do Piraí team

Professional era
In 1951, FFD (Federação Fluminense de Desportos) formed a professional department (the D.E.P.), which carried out the first professional club state championship. Since then the state championship was disputed by the professional champions of each region. From 1959 on, the Fluminense champions had berths in the Taça Brasil, but neither the later Roberto Gomes Pedrosa tournament and its successor, the Campeonato Brasileiro, awarded berths to the Fluminense champions. In 1975, although the Rio de Janeiro and Guanabara states had already fused, the federations were still separate. The FFD organized the Countryside State Championship: In 1978 the federations merged into the new FERJ. However, on this year FERJ still organized a Countryside Championship, considered the last Campeonato Fluminense:
 * 1952 - Adrianino (Engenheiro Paulo de Frontin)
 * 1952 - Adrianino (Engenheiro Paulo de Frontin) - extra championship
 * 1953 - Barra Mansa FC (Barra Mansa)
 * 1953 - Barra Mansa FC (Barra Mansa) (Superchampionship)
 * 1954 - Coroados (Valença)
 * 1955 - Frigorífico (Mendes)
 * 1955 - Goytacaz FC (Campos) (Superchampionship)
 * 1956 - not finished
 * 1957 - not finished
 * 1958 - Manufatora (Niterói)
 * 1959 - Fonseca AC (Niterói)
 * 1960 - Fonseca AC (Niterói)
 * 1961 - Rio Branco (Campos)
 * 1962 - Fonseca AC (Niterói)
 * 1963 - Goytacaz FC (Campos)
 * 1964 - Americano FC (Campos)
 * 1964 - Eletrovapo (Niterói) (Superchampionship)
 * 1965 - Americano FC (Campos)
 * 1966 - Goytacaz FC (Campos)
 * 1967 - Goytacaz FC (Campos)
 * 1968 - Americano FC (Campos)
 * 1969 - Americano FC (Campos)
 * 1970 - Central (Barra do Piraí)
 * 1971 - Central (Barra do Piraí)
 * 1972 - Barbará (Barra Mansa)
 * 1973 - Barbará (Barra Mansa)
 * 1974 - Sapucaia (Campos)
 * 1975 - Americano FC (Campos)
 * 1976 - Central (Barra do Piraí)
 * 1977 - Manufatora (Niterói)
 * 1978 - Goytacaz FC (Campos)

Titles by team

 * Americano FC - 5
 * Goytacaz FC - 5
 * Byron - 4
 * Fonseca AC - 3
 * Adrianino AC - 2
 * Central SC - 2
 * Fluminense AC - 2
 * AA Barbará - 2
 * Icaraí FC - 2
 * AD Niterói (as Manufatora AC) - 2
 * Serrano FC - 2
 * Barra Mansa FC - 2
 * Barreto - 2
 * Coroados FC - 1
 * AE Eletrovapo - 1
 * SC Elite - 1
 * Frigorífico AC - 1
 * GR Gragoatá - 1
 * Petropolitano FC - 1
 * CE Rio Branco - 1
 * Royal SC - 1
 * EC Sapucaia - 1
 * Nictheroyense - 1
 * Odeon - 1
 * Parnahyba - 1
 * Ararigboya - 1

title: Campeonato Fluminense


text:
Talk:New River (eastern North Carolina)

Article needs editing
The Los Angeles river also has its headwaters and mouth in the same county. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.173.122.203 (talk) 00:21, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Requested move 24 February 2024

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to New River (eastern North Carolina). per consensus, with no preference for whichever capitalisation of eastern. – robertsky (talk) 14:40, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

New River (North Carolina) → New River (Onslow County, North Carolina) – Incomplete disambiguation with New River (Kanawha River tributary). Open to other suggestions, such as New River (eastern North Carolina). Hameltion (talk | contribs) 23:13, 24 February 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 14:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Support the other has 2,473 views compared with only 303[|New_River_(Kanawha_River_tributary)] for this one.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 19:47, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * But it's mostly notable for its sections in Virginia and West Virginia, not North Carolina. —  AjaxSmack  02:23, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * My support is for the full disambiguation, I don't have much of an opinion on the target.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 09:04, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

 * Support for New River (Eastern North Carolina), along with a redirect of New River (Western North Carolina) to New River (Kanawha River tributary), or whatever that ends up being. Helps with disambiguation of the 2 rivers. 5minutes (talk) 18:10, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Good idea. —  AjaxSmack 06:27, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Rivers has been notified of this discussion. – robertsky (talk) 14:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject United States has been notified of this discussion. – robertsky (talk) 14:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Support a move to any title that isn’t as incorrect as the current one.
 * Until I peeked at the map at New River (Kanawha River tributary), I had no idea it flowed thru any state other than WV.
 * RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 08:16, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

title: Talk:New River (eastern North Carolina)


text:
Elaine Douvas

Elaine Douvas has been Principal Oboe of the Metropolitan Opera Orchestra in New York City since 1977. She is also Instructor of Oboe and Chairman of the Woodwind Department at The Juilliard School. She also serves on the faculty of Mannes College The New School for Music in New York City, the Bard College Conservatory of Music in Annandale-on-Hudson, NY, the Aspen Music Festival and School, Le Domaine Forget Academie (Quebec), and the Hidden Valley Music Seminars (Carmel, CA).

Her primary studies were with John Mack at the Cleveland Institute of Music and at the Interlochen Arts Academy with Don Th. Jaeger, Jay Light, and Robert Morgan. Prior to joining the Met, she was Principal Oboe of the Atlanta Symphony under Robert Shaw.

Her solo recordings are issued by Boston Records, Oboe Classics, and Music Minus One.

title: Elaine Douvas


text: User talk:83.249.140.66

title: User talk:83.249.140.66


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blog Advance

 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 'ALREADY SPEEDIED, apparently, but not by me. -Splash 01:39, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Blog Advance

 * Delete. Ad, was wrongly speedied (see WP:DP). --Tony Sidaway Talk  23:33, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Umm... it's still a redlink. --Tito xd 23:44, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * So what was in it? Kappa 02:31, 28 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:
User talk:Robert McClenon/Crisis

Untitled
Robert, I only read part of what you wrote on the main page here, but I agree that things could be improved and that ideally mediation would come before user conduct RFCs.

Maybe we should start Dispute resolution reform? Maurreen (talk) 00:50, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Caseworkers, etc.

 * Here are a couple ideas, food for thought:

 * 1) Enlarge or otherwise change ArbComm so it can hear more cases more quickly.
 * 2) Invent a new designation -- maybe "caseworker". These people would be empowered and possibly have the duty to resolve any disagreements as they see fit. Think of them as combining the functions of a mediator and enforcer. They would need to be approved by at least 90 percent of those voting. Maurreen (talk) 01:11, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree that the ArbCom needs to be enlarged and have smaller panels.
 * Before I can support the idea of another designation of functionaries, I would like an explanation of exactly what they would and would not do. How would they resolve disagreements beyond mediation?  If they would resolve disagreements by locking the article, that solution already exists, and is undesirable.  If they would resolve disputes by blocking any revert that was inconsistent with what had been mediated, then I am concerned about the possibility of abuse.  As I mentioned later in the paper, there need to be better limits on the use by administrators of special powers.  The vast majority of admins use their powers wisely and cautiously, but a small number of disputes, such as an admin blocking an admin, result in considerable tension.  If we were to create a tier of "caseworkers", we would need to decide how to remove the occasional rogue caseworker.  Also, would caseworkers resolve content disputes by finding consensus and presenting alternative views as POV, or by making unilateral decisions?  I assume it would be the former, but what would be the recourse if an occasional caseworker declared that there was a consensus when 45% of the editors said that there was not? Robert McClenon 13:56, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Good points, Robert. I realize the "caseworker" idea is fairly radical, and I wouldn't be surprised if it gains little support.
 * Maybe it would be more useful for me to back up and explain what it's intended to address.
 * Most WPians agree that WP is intended to be governed by consensus. But sometimes that consensus is difficult to achieve or determine or interpret. And of course, sometimes people ignore consensus or essentially dismiss disagreement.
 * Our dispute resolution process in intended to help with the above. But for the most part, no parties uninvolved with a disagreement have any duty or individual responsibility to help with any disagreement. So sometimes things more or less fester.
 * People might list things on RFC and hope for a definitive answer to emerge, but not help on any other RFC. For instance, I've listed things on RFC and got little or no response. (But whenever I do list something, I try to help at another disagreement.)
 * If there is a consensus, and one or more parties are acting against it, the options are fairly limited, unless someone is breaking 3RR.
 * If there is a consensus, and one or two parties are acting against it, then Maurreen is right that the options are limited, but they are sufficient. If there is a consensus, then the community can revert to the consensus version.  Either the one or two non-consensus editors will violate 3RR, or their edits will be reverted.  Also, if the consensus and the minority are both reasonable, then perhaps the minority POV can be presented as a minority POV.
 * Admin powers only come into play when people are making significat policy violations. "The community" is THE higher authority, but it's often too slow and open to varying interpretations.
 * Ideally caseworkers would operate like this, in a nutshell: If there is no consensus, they would mediate or otherwise work to achieve one. If there is a consensus, they would enforce it. And I agree that there should be mechanism for removal. Hope that helps. Maurreen (talk) 14:22, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * What does Maurreen mean by enforcing a consensus? Robert McClenon 18:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I think that the "caseworker" concept is worth further consideration, but I also have serious doubts about whether there might be abuses, so that the procedures would need to be very well-defined. Robert McClenon 18:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

 * 1) Part of what I mean about enforcing consensus, and part of the problem in general, is that sometimes disagreements boil down to a question of who is going to be more stubborn, which party is willing to revert more.
 * 2) Maybe it would be better to suspend the caseworker idea and consider possible improvements to arbitration. (To be fair, arbitration is probably a largely thankless task.) Maurreen (talk) 22:10, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

random thoughts
The problem is that the the dispute resolution system appears to be designed by people who have no training in actually resolving disputes, mediation, and what not.

Simple case in point, the "user RFC" is not actually a request for comments, but rather a form that any editor can fill out to 'make charges', build a case, and get a bunch of friends to sign on to support it. alternatively, a bad editor with an RFC can get a bunch of editors to come to his defense.

A user RFC should be renamed something like "incident report" and it should have some objective measures that limit waht can be put into the same report. it should be limited to an "incident", not some vague, ill defined problem that effectively allows a snowball effect, with many editors with separate grudges to snowball the incident report.

 * On the one hand, I think that FuelWagon has an interesting idea to introduce a new type of report that is an "incident report", which could concern 3RR violations or a series of closely related personal attacks. On the other hand, I disagree with renaming the user conduct RfC to be an incident report.  The user conduct RfC is a penultimate step toward arbitration, as a way of punishing or getting rid of problematical users.  There does need to be a way of demonstrating a long pattern of abuse, and a long pattern of abuse should be the basis for punishing a user.  Robert McClenon 18:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I find it odd that a document that you consider to be the penultimate step to arbitration and possible banishment be called something that is considered completely harmless in any other field. Are you familiar with Request for Comments used on the internet? Right now, article RFC's are like the RFC's that the rest of the world uses. The user RFC you describe with its penultimate step to arbitration is more like a grand jury, which decides if a case should go to trial. If you put these ideas in the "dispute resolution" spectrum, you get an "article RFC" at teh first step, mediation at level 2, a user RFC->arbitration at 3. If that's what you want, then I really think article RFC's and user RFC's should have different names. A user RFC should be named something that indicates this grand-jury nature that you're describing. FuelWagon 23:34, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

some admins may need to specialize. mediators shouldn't be able to block. "caseworkers" or whatever they're called, may not be able to block eitehr, but would have final control over an RFC.

A violation should be treated as a violation, regardless of who committed it. One of the things that I am sick of hearing is so-and-so is an editor with XX,XXX edits under their belt and so punishing them won't help wikipedia. Actually, if an editor violates wikipedia integrity and integrity is not restored in some way, then that makes wikipedia worse. If any editor causes a dispute with another editor and violates policy, letting that editor off the hook because of their edit count only furthers the accusations of a cabal at wikipedia, and tells new editors that they're not as important as long-time contributers.

admin priveledges should be no big deal, but when an admin breaks policy, it apparently becomes a big deal that they're an admin. Part of the root of this problem is that the 'arbitration committee' seems to be generally feared because they essentially have final authority and can hand out any punishment they wish.

 * I either do not understand, or do not agree. Abuses of administrative power should be a big deal, because they are a misuse of trust. Robert McClenon 18:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy needs to be designed so that Jimbo Wales can hand control over and have a sense that it will be able to run on its own. That doesn't mean he steps down, but it means that policy is designed so that it needs less and less subjective interpretation and is much more objective in what is and is not acceptable.

wikipedia needs finer-grained control. An RFC is sort of like "over the last few weeks, this user has been a real pain in the ass, and here's why". It's a subjective interpretation of policy violations like NPOV that require human interpretation.

 * I agree that there should be finer-grained standards in some areas. However, it appears that FW is suggesting more bureaucracy than is appropriate.  Unfortunately, sometimes a user really is a pain for several months and really does need to be told to chill for a month.  Robert McClenon 18:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

one thing that would help would be to have a link beside any "edit history" that says "report this edit". If an editor violates NPA in a single edit, that single edit should be dealt with. It should require an RFC and evidence and everything else to deal with it. It should be reported, and an uninvolved admin should make the call.

Another change that would help would be to put objective ways to measure whether an admin is "invovled" or not, so as to determine whether they can enforce policy violations with any individual editor. FuelWagon 16:18, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree about uninvolved administrators. There do need to be finer-grained controls there.  Robert McClenon 18:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Oh, and having admins who can (1) admit when they make a mistake, (2) apologize, (3) clean up any issues they create would also go a long way. FuelWagon 17:43, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Terminology
FuelWagon is completely correct on the terminological disconnect. I am familiar with Internet Requests for Comments. They are also, oddly, misnamed in a different way, which is that an RfC on the Internet may be either a real Request for Comments, or a standard. In Wikipedia, an article Request for Comments really is a Request for Comments. On the other hand, a user conduct Request for Comments is something else. It is not an Incident Report. However, it probably should be called something like a Request for Corrective Action (RfCA). The corrective action can be for the subject user to change his behavior, or for the subject user to stop editing, or for mediation (that should have happened earlier), or for arbitration.

Sometimes misunderstandings about terminology can result in deep divisions. This appears to have happened between FuelWagon and SlimVirgin. FW, relying on common Internet terminology, filed an RfC. SV, relying on well-known Wikipedia context, treated it as a personal attack. They were (in words once used by Winston Churchill) divided by a common language. FW did not intend to be attacking SV. SV thought that FW was attacking her. That is to be understood because they were divided by a common language.

The terminology should be changed. Then can we move on beyond these two valuable bold editors insulting each other? Robert McClenon 01:04, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

uninvolved editors
 The policy proposal for allowing admins to enforce NPA with a 24 hour block reflects the root of teh problem. Some want to reserve teh right for subjective interpretation to each individual admin as to whether or not the admin is "involved" with the editor in question. I proposed an objective definition saying an admin can't have edited the page that contains the attack one week prior, and that after the admin imposes a warning or block, that same admin cannot warn or block the same editor for one week after. Howls of protest have erupted saying that bad editors will game the system. Any possibility of admin abuse is dismissed. The fact that an objectively defined system would make it harder for accusations of admin abuse to be harder to make falls on deaf ears. Poeple want vigilante justice. No sense of rule of law is honored. Admins are "trusted" and should therefore be granted whatever power is needed to enforce policy, included deciding whether policy was broken or not, no matter how subjective the definition may be. FuelWagon 22:27, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't think that I understand, but I think that FW is just venting his frustration in that paragraph, and will ignore it. Robert McClenon 18:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

suggested solution: random
OK, so, if you're a registered editor, when you view an edit history, you'll see (curr) (last) and (report). If you click on the report button, it will report that diff as a policy violation. This will get put into a queue of all reported policy violations. Admins who wish to handle a reported violation will go to a page, click on a button and the wikipedia website will pick which reported violation they are to investigate. Ideally, this decision making would filter out reported violations that occured on pages that the admin regularly edits, or users that the admin is often involved with. Beyond that, the software could randomly pick a reported violation (or pick from the ones that have the largest number of editors reporting it) and assign it to that admin. The admin would then investigate and either administer a warning or a block or close the report as insufficient to warrant punishment. Gaming the system by admins would be impossible. Which means cries of "cabal" and "old boys network" would be silly. Basically, an admin is nothing more than an editor and maintenance person and can only act as a policy enforcer on issues assigned by this randomized tool. This would require some changes to the wiki software, but it could be done. FuelWagon 22:38, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

See and. FuelWagon 22:41, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Neutral Policy Enforcement
I think it would be useful to attempt to define when an admin may and may not be considered "neutral" in enforcing a possible policy violation. The current definition is that the admin is not "editorially" involved with an editor. I think it would be useful if this was nailed down to more objective measures. And it could apply to all policy enforcement, not just personal attacks.

 * any admin may enforce any arbcom decision

 * an admin my block someone for a violation on a page if the admin hasn't made an edit to that page within the last week.

 * after an admin enforces policy with an editor, they may not enforce policy violations with that same editor for one week afterwards.

It's a thought. It basically requires an admin to cool off after blocking someone and to get some distance. It also means that multiple back-to-back violations will be enforced by multiple admins, which makes almost automatically gets the opinion of several different admins regarding the problem. FuelWagon 08:19, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * # 2: Editing a page within a week of someone else doesn't imply in any way a dispute with them. Editing a page the same day as someone else doesn't. I don't see what's wrong (unseemly, maybe, but not actually wrong) with blocking someone you've been involved with on a clearcut case like 3RR.
 * # 3: I can see the point of this, but look at, for instance, SlimVirgin's dealings with Gabrielsimon/Gavin the Chosen (here). N (t/c) 14:18, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * (1) if it was always "clear cut", it wouldn't be a problem. Determining if a policy violation occurred often requires some subjectivity. Determining if an admin is "editorially" involved with an editor requires some subjective interpretation. Two things that require subjective interpretation (policy violation, involvement) means two sources of possible problems. The idea is that you could at least come up with an objective definition for "involvement" that would remove possible problems.
 * (2) I skimmed through the RFA, Gavin violates 3RR, gets a 24 hour block, the block is dropped, and 24 hours later, he gets another 3RR block. You would need only 3 admins to keep this up indefinitely. Is there only one admin willing to block this editor?

 * So, here's the deal. Say you take the definition of "involved" and make it objective, with a one week before and one week after restriction. Say you write policies in objective terms, the way 3RR is pretty objective to determine if a violation occurred. If you do this, then you have reduced the risk for abuse by admins within the system, and you could actually give them more power for enforcement. The example that comes immediately to mind would be you could increase the duration of a block as the violations accumulate because those violations would require multiple admins to enforce. This would mean that the Gavin thing would require 3 or 4 admins for the first blocks, and then after that, policy enforcement could say that 3RR violations can be blocked for 48 hours if there are 3 violations in the last week, or 6 violations in the previous month. By designing the system with higher confidence that it will operate properly, you can give admins greater power in enforcing violations because you'll know it's harder for them to misuse. You could design an objective policy that would allow a few admins to deal with Gavin indefinitely without it ever going to arbcom. That seems like an advantage to me. FuelWagon 17:54, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree with FW's concept of neutral policy enforcement. I don't think that an admin who has been actively editing an article should be the one who blocks an editor for 3RR violations.  Most admins are scrupulous about not misusing their privileges, but allowing the same person to be a content editor and a policy enforcer could result in an admin taking a proprietary interest in an article.  Robert McClenon 18:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Also, I do not think that administrators should be the continuing line of defense against persistently problematical editors. Persistently problematical editors should be taken to the ArbCom.  In order to permit this, and relieve the need for admins to shoot on sight, arbitration needs to be streamlined.  (Perhaps the demands for vigilante justice arise because due process justice by the ArbCom is too slow and should be speeded up.)  Robert McClenon 18:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

objective policies, enforced neutrally
One of the problems is "scale". The number of editors has exploded and the number of admins is around 500. wikipedia needs to be able to have possibly thousands of admins to deal with trouble. The current system of subjective policies and subjective definitions of neutrality would work when you have a small number of admins and Jimbo Wales being able to keep an eye on all of them directly. If you want to scale wikipedia, you need a system that can allow for two thousand admins to work reliably with little oversight. To achieve that, wikipedia policies should be defined as objectively as possible and they should be neutrally enforced. This would allow a large number of admins to be appointed and they could could be set loose on wikipedia. if policies are defined objectively, then admins will know what they can and cannot do, and it will be easy to determine if an editor broke policy and if an admin overstepped their authority. If neutrality is defined objectively, then it will be easy to determine if an admin can enforce policy on an editor based on past edits. The idea of "open policies, enforced neutrally" would be a sort of "meta-policy" for all otehr policies. And it should make it easier to scale the number of admins, quickly enforce policy, easily find rogue admins, and manage the whole process neutrally. And it has a cool acronym too (OPEN). FuelWagon 20:25, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

This would have the decided advantage that admins could handle individual violations quickly and easily. it would also mean that several admins could easily enforce multiple violations in a row from the same editor, which could then also be used as a way of flagging that editor as a repeat offender needing to go to arbitration, and possibly defining objective ways of increasing block lengths for repeated violations, because it would mean multiple admins have looked and found several different violations. The "this editor has been a pain over the last few months" should be easily documented by multiple policy violations that have been logged by multiple admins of the last few months. Arbcom could simply look at a block log history and issue a ruling. FuelWagon 20:30, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration
Maybe it'd be good to do a little research about how long arbitration cases take. I'd be willing to do some if anyone else will also. Maurreen (talk) 22:15, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Public Hearing
Robert, the name "Request for Corrective Action" could be interpreted to mean the RFCA is a request for arbcom to come in and "correct" something. I wouldn't want a name that some would interpret to mean this is an application/request to get to arbitration. I would prefer a name that clearly reflects (1) the idea that this step in the process is intended as a way to resolve something in and of itself and (2) is as serious in that it is one step from going to arbitration, the way a grand jury is one step to going to trial. I thought the name "public hearing" might work, since that's really what a user rfc is. Both sides make their cases public, the public (all editors) hears them, and the public (all editors) can give its opinion. It is still non-binding and not punitive and all that, but it is a step unto itself, it may resolve a problem without needed to go on to arbitration, or if the dispute is not resolved, then RFA would be the next step.

So I suggest the term "Public Hearing" as the new name for the step in the dispute resolution process that we currently call a "user RFC". FuelWagon 15:48, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

proposal
I have created a proposal here RFCReform

title: User talk:Robert McClenon/Crisis


text:
Don Schultz

Donald Schultz (May 13, 1936, Woodhaven, Queens, New York – April 20, 2020, New Jersey) was a president and a vice-president of the United States Chess Federation (USCF). He was elected vice-president on August 14, 2005. He was defeated by the Susan Polgar-Paul Truong slate when he ran for re-election in July, 2007. He was a rated chess expert.

Chess organizer and official
Although an expert chess player, Schultz's greatest joy came in bringing people together through the many chess tournaments that he either organized or helped with. Schultz and his family were traveling from their home in Brussels, Belgium in 1971 to the United States to visit family when they stopped in Reykjavik, Iceland to see the Fischer/Spassky tournament. Bobby Fischer was a friend and asked him to stay on as one of his allowed council of three. This was the beginning of Schultz's foray into the world of international chess. Over the next several decades, he traveled around the world for chess conferences and tournaments, often accompanied by his wife, Teresa Russ Schultz.

Schultz first ran for USCF President in 1966, but was defeated by Marshall Rohland. In 1981, Schultz was appointed U.S. Delegate to FIDE, the World Chess Federation. In 1982, in Thessaloniki, Schultz was elected to the Executive Council of FIDE.

In 1992, he was elected to the Policy Board of the USCF. In 1993, he organized a tour for the Israel Youth Chess Team to the US. In 1993 and 1994 he, along with Yasser Seirawan, ran a chess school for children in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin. In 1996, Schultz was elected President of the USCF for a three-year term. In 2003, Schultz was elected to the Executive Board of the USCF for a four-year term. He is the author of two books, "Chessdon" and "Fischer, Kasparov and the Others". He has held numerous political positions in chess.

Schultz died on April 20, 2020, in Emerson, New Jersey from complications caused by the COVID-19 virus.

State Associations

 * President, NYS Chess Association 1964-1965
 * President, North Carolina Chess Association 1966–1971
 * President, Georgia Chess Association 1977–1979
 * President, Florida Chess Association – 1987 -1993
 * Elected Honorary Lifetime Member Florida Chess Association Board of Directors in 1996.
 * Editor floridaCHESS 1994 to 1996. Won numerous awards including Best State publication in 1995 and 1996.
 * FIDE Delegate: 1983 to 1989 and 1993
 * FIDE Zonal President: 1982, 1993 to 1994
 * FIDE Executive Board; 1982 to 1990
 * Attended 21 FIDE Congresses (1972, 1974, 1978 to 1991, 1993, 1994, 2000, 2002 and 2005).

Major Tournaments Organized

 * 1963 NYS Championship – Poughkeepsie, NY
 * 1962 U.S. 30/30 Championship, Poughkeepsie, NY
 * 1967 U.S. Junior Open, Raleigh, NC
 * 1969 North Carolina Invitational, Raleigh, NC
 * 1990 World Youth Chess Championships, Fond du Lac, WI
 * 1991 U.S. Women's Championship, Highland Beach, FL
 * 1993 Amateur Team Finals, Baltimore, MD
 * 1994 US Championship, Key West, FL
 * 1996 New York Invitational, NYC (one of the strongest round robins ever held in U.S.)
 * 2005 U.S. Senior Open in Boca Raton, Florida

Other Major Event Organized

 * 1981 FIDE Congress in Atlanta: (only FIDE Congress ever held in the U.S.)

Other Key Positions

 * FIDE Executive Council 1982 to 1990
 * Co-Chair FIDE UNESCO Commission- 1981, 82
 * USCF Executive Board Member: 1992 to 1995
 * USCF President: 1996 to 1999
 * USCF Secretary: 2004, 05
 * USCF Vice President: 2005 – 2007
 * Chess for Peace Advisory Board: 2005 -

Books

 * Fischer, Kasparov and Others ISBN 0-9670775-1-6
 * Fischer, Kasparov and Others ISBN 0-9670775-1-6

title: Don Schultz


text: Category:Pop musicians by nationality

title: Category:Pop musicians by nationality


text:
Talk:Sonic Spinball

Untitled
isn't the official title "sonic spinball"?
 * A quick Google image search for "Sonic Spinball" will bring up both the title screen and the box art. Admittedly the "the Hedgehog" part is downplayed, but it's still part of the title.
 * Also, it helps keep discussions clearer if you sign your comments. You can either click the signature button or simply type , or ~ for a sig with a timestamp. : ) --Sparky the Seventh Chaos 06:46, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

 * Hmm, at the United States Patent and Trademark Office Home Page, "Sonic Spinball" has a hit, registered to Sega of America. However, "Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball" has no hits.  Since Sega therefor registered "Sonic Spinball" (in America at least) shouldn't that title of this article be "Sonic Spinball"? Sonic3KMaster(talk)  21:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

 * The title screen, if you look closely, has "The" capitalized. I don't want to start a big thing here... --Brandon Dilbeck 06:52, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Genocide City
I heard that the Machine level is really the deleted level called Genocide City inside the old Sonic 2

From what's known, at least part of it is. Allyourbasearebelongtousomg 03:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

WII release
Shouldn't the wii release be mentioned?
 * It is mentioned, in the intro. (Don't know when this comment was left, so I may be responding to a question that was asked before the Wii release was added.) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 00:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Only game with AoStH characters?
The opening paragraph contains this sentence: "It is the only Sonic game to feature characters from the Saturday morning cartoon Sonic the Hedgehog and Adventures of Sonic the Hedgehog, though only in cameos." Yet I'm pretty sure Scratch and Grounder were in Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine, and the enemies they were based off were in Sonic 2 (the red Grounders in Aquatic Ruin and the chicken gunners in Wing Fortress) Yoshiman64 (talk) 02:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Another Console Release?
In 1993-4, I recall visiting Nobody Beats the Wiz and desperately wanting to purchase an Atari Jaguar because Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball was bundled with it. The game was sold out for every other system, but I was not willing to spend the money for a new system just for one game when I could just wait for the next shipment. I do not see any acknowledgement that it was ever released on the Jaguar either here or on the List of Jaguar games page. — Thincom2000 (talk) 15:04, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Stand Alones and Compilations
I don't think it really matters whether a game is release as a stand-alone or part of a compilation. If it's officially released for a particular console, then that console belongs in the game's list of platforms. Firstly, Sonic Spinball was developed in a time where video games are only a few megabytes. Because consoles nowadays use discs that have capacities in several gigabytes, it's necessary to put in a group of those vintage games. But that doesn't mean those compilations should be excluded from a game's platform list. 208.54.4.130 (talk) 00:38, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * - you're always maintaining infoboxes - can you break it down for him? Sergecross73   msg me  04:44, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The compilations/ports for PS2/Steam are all emulated without any changes. The infobox guidelines for this states that we should only list "The unabbreviated console or operating system for which the game was specifically developed. This includes dedicated ports, but not games in emulation or services". Info like this belongs in the article, where it can be written in more detail anyway. The iOS version remains in the infobox because it was changed (however slightly), so it wasn't a direct ROM being played by an emulator. ~ Dissident93  (talk) 04:57, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 18 November 2017

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 01:53, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball → Sonic Spinball – Per WP:COMMONNAME. A quick Google search shows 224,000 results for "Sonic Spinball" and only 150,000 if "the hedgehog" is added. Furthermore, many of the sources used prefer just "Sonic Spinball", and it's also officially referred to by the name on Steam. JOE BRO  64  23:49, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support also as more WP:CONCISE.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ<  18:40, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. We also recently moved Sonic the Hedgehog CD to just Sonic CD for the same reasons. ~ Dissident93  ( talk ) 03:50, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support sounds good. JAG  UAR   11:53, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support, as aformentioned with WP:CONCISE. ~ P*h3i   (talk to me)  08:17, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per nom TarkusAB talk 21:45, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. –  Hounder4  03:45, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Aoba47 (talk) 03:51, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support both per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:CONCISE. --TL22 (talk) 01:52, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Recent edits
Not sure you are so hellbent on including a link to Mega Drive/Genesis when this violates the use of American English (per the tag), WP:COMMONNAME, and WP:NOPIPE. The article also includes GameRankings and IGN game profile pages as citations, which shouldn't be allowed, nor does it make any mention of release dates in prose, where the citations belong anyway. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:13, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Absolutely not. Get the absurd notion that Genesis is the common name of the console out and resist the dogma. This is not the point though; you are advocating the total omission of the usage of 'Mega Drive' from anything you see and I don't know why. I've already explained that ENGVAR is absolutely irrelevant from preferring one term over the other. Think of the readers who don't know what the other name of the console could be. I for one lived all of my life not knowing it was called Genesis in North America until I saw the Wikipedia article three years ago. You need to take reader's accessibility into account here. Where does it say that IGN and GameRankings can't be used to source release dates (albeit them being the only ones which do)? Can you be sure if they're user-generated? And regardless, why is it that FA reviewers always requests that release dates be sourced in the infobox? I had to oblige their requests, even for FAs like Super Mario World and Galaxy. If the release dates are incorrect or if the urls break the infobox, then by all means remove or fix them but I don't see the valid reason of doing so. JAG  UAR   20:24, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Late response, but Genesis is the common name on Wikipedia, using regional names (on an American produced game no less) because of personal preference just causes unnecessary edit warring, as seen here. It becoming a FA does not make everything carried over infallible and unable to be changed. Nothing personal against the name Mega Drive, I just fail to see any valid reason to make an exception to use it here and on none of the other Genesis game articles. Also, game profile pages shouldn't be used for verifying release dates, as many are user submitted, I.E. GameSpot sources theirs from GameFAQs. Also nothing personal against GameRankings, but if there was no better source for the date, then maybe that's saying something about the verifiability of it? And I don't know why FA commenters requested sources inside the infobox when none of them seemed to care that they the dates even mentioned in the article itself, which is where it should always be. Although not directly stated, infoboxes should follow the same general practice as WP:CITELEAD. Maybe I'm in the wrong here, but I'd like to see further discussions from other WP:VG members. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 22:06, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * As from what I've seen, most people know it as the Genesis in any context anyways, so it shouldn't really be too much of an issue. Zoom  ( talk page ) 22:24, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

 * The general way of handling this across Wikipedia, up until this point, is to use Genesis. As a compromise, there's been times where we mention "Sega Genesis/Mega Drive" once in a first mention somewhere, but otherwise use Genesis (we don't need to be spelling out both at every mention - people can remember on their own.) Genesis is preferred due to its consistency with the article title, unless it's literally a Europe-only title or something. I see little reason to randomly deviate at this particular article. Sergecross73   msg me  22:17, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't see a problem with either name. While the article is titled "Sega Genesis", either version (Sega Mega Drive, Mega Drive/Genesis, etc.) links to the exact same article, where it's explained immediately in the opening sentences. JOE BRO  64  22:20, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

This is the third time you've accused me of having a personal preference, Dissident. I don't have a problem with the name Genesis, but what I do have a problem with is the fact that it's being erroneously enforced as the one and only common name; bolstered by WPVG's internal bias. I would like more flexibility on the usage of "Sega Genesis/Mega Drive" on all articles, Anglocentric or not, as leverage for all readers. The English Wikipedia caters for the entire Anglosphere—this includes the world outside Wisconsin. As a dead compromise, I'd advocate using both names at least once in the article's lead and then perhaps use one name in the body. While we're on the topic of determining a common name, I'll pull off some examples of what a common name actually is:

 * Fédération Internationale de Football Association → FIFA
 * Elizabeth Tower → Big Ben
 * Socialist Republic of Vietnam → Vietnam

A simple cursory search of 'Sega Genesis' into Google provides about 1,500,000 results. A search of 'Mega Drive' provides 34,900,000 results. This line of reasoning is even strengthened here on this page. In November a page move request for this article was initiated with the persuasion being that Sonic Spinball was the WP:COMMONAME of the game, trumping Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball. The fact? Sonic Spinball turned out 224,000 results, while Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball only had 150,000. It was met with unanimous support. Can anybody really convince me that Genesis is still the preferred term for the console when it was released under a different name in every other market including its native Japan? Is there anything to justify why editors will systemically remove Mega Drive from literally every article they see? I don't want to change the name of the article, like I said it doesn't bother me but it's dumbfounding to see a more logically common (because that's what it is) name be replaced with a statistically more uncommon one. If we're not talking about statistics, then let's look at more facts. In September Dissident removed all mentions of 'Mega Drive' on Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine with the only reason being that the article's name was Genesis. The fallacy of that statement was because the article was called Genesis, it meant that all traces of the other name should be removed from an article about a game which was developed in Japan, released initially exclusively in Japan. Dissident reverted this prior in August, stating that "the game didn't just release in PAL regions". So that must mean if a game was released in North America too, Genesis takes precedence. Right! There is no evidence to support the fact that most people know it is Genesis, it's whatever people perpetuate it to be.

The arguments I've seen make no sense. We need to promote Mega Drive as an equal counterpart to Genesis. Perhaps it is hard to view it from a different perspective if all you've ever known is Genesis, but do not let the unfamiliarity of another name sway your judgement – let's be open to the idea of using both names as the custom. I don't have the energy to gather more research and start a crusade on the main talk page, but I know I could make enough good points to provoke a good debate, not fuelled by emotions like the others claim. To be honest my motivation for Wikipedia is at an all time low that I doubt I'll ever be active again. It vexes me to see all the effort I've put into writing VG articles over the years—80+ GAs and several FAs—to turn into battlegrounds for such trivial crap if I'm frank. This was pushed up on me before as well. Nobody cares about writing articles anymore, I do regret saying that but I don't see the people on the project ever untangling from the bias. I will stick around for a little while longer if I can get people to see the light, but in the meantime I can't feel compelled to return if this climate persists. JAG UAR   00:02, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I have to say that parts of what you said were false. I found ~8,890,000 results for 'Mega Drive' and ~6,090,000 results for 'Sega Genesis'. In addition to this, Mega Drive is also connected to a band, giving it more results. Besides this, the Mega Drive is equal to the Genesis, but it should be known just as the Genesis for the reason of it being under WP:COMMONAME and for the reason of the article using American English, favoring American terms and vocabulary. I know it's a weak argument and excuse, but still a somewhat valid one at that. Zoom  ( talk page ) 00:25, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * It is not the common name! What has ENGVAR got to do with it? JAG  UAR   00:57, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Just used the video game custom search engine to see what the results were, and it appears as if more sources do use "Mega Drive". 47,500,000 for "mega drive", and 2,460,000 for "sega genesis". JOE BRO  64  01:04, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You must have not used quotes to search for the specific string, as "Mega Drive" got me 1,320,000 results, while "Sega Genesis" got 1,360,000. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 01:11, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I only wish to eliminate the subjective personal preferences behind it. I personally don't care if it's Genesis, Mega Drive, or a combo of the two, as long as it's consistent across every other Genesis/Mega Drive-related article; I just settled on Sega Genesis as that is the current article title, and therefore seen as the common name. But until we have a project wide consensus for handling this, including Mega Drive on an American-produced game with an AmEng tag just seems so out of place. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 01:08, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Use both at the top of the article. For subsequent use either use both throughout the article, or use the developer nationality or a case-by-case consensus. But both should be used at the top of the article, both names are valid. We don't have people going around changing every incidence of Tyre or Faucet in WP. This is no different. - X201 (talk) 08:45, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sonic Spinball


text:
Jean-Pierre Dumont

Jean-Pierre "J.P." Dumont (born April 1, 1978) is a Canadian former professional ice hockey forward who played in the National Hockey League for the Chicago Blackhawks, Buffalo Sabres, and Nashville Predators. Dumont was hired as the head coach of the Tier I Nashville Junior Predators, based in Franklin, Tennessee, in 2016.

Amateur
As a youth, Dumont played in the 1992 Quebec International Pee-Wee Hockey Tournament with the Montreal Canadiens minor ice hockey team.

Dumont played four seasons for Val-d'Or Foreurs in the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League. Roberto Luongo, Francis Lessard, Steve Bégin and Jean-Luc Grand-Pierre were teammates at Val-d'Or who have also made it to the NHL.

Professional
Dumont was drafted third overall the 1996 NHL Entry Draft by the New York Islanders. In 1998, a contract dispute between Dumont and the team led to the Islanders to trade him to the Chicago Blackhawks along with a fifth round pick in exchange for Dmitri Nabokov. In March 2000, he was traded by the Blackhawks to the Buffalo Sabres. Dumont, Doug Gilmour and a draft pick went to the Buffalo Sabres in exchange for Michal Grosek.

In August 2006, he signed a two-year, $4.5-million contract with the Nashville Predators after the Buffalo Sabres rejected Dumont's $2.9-million arbitration award.

During the 2007–08 season, Dumont was signed by the Predators to a four-year, $16-million contract extension.

On October 17, 2008, Dumont scored his 400th point in a game against the Columbus Blue Jackets.

In the 2010-11 season, Dumont posted just 19 points in 70 games with the Predators, his lowest point total since coming to Nashville. Consequently, on June 30, 2011, the day before free agency, the Predators bought out Dumont, making him an unrestricted free agent for July 1. In ending his tenure with the Predators, Dumont left the franchise placing fifth in all-time scoring with 267 points in 388 games.

With limited NHL interest, on October 21, 2011, he signed a one-year contract with Swiss team SC Bern of the National League A. Marking a return after playing 13 games for Bern during the 2004–05 NHL lockout. In his final professional season in 2011–12, Dumont contributed to the offence at a point-per-game average, helping Bern reach the Championship finals.

Personal
J.P. is married to Kristin and has four daughters: Ella, Ava, Laila and Mya.

In 2010, Dumont generously donated items to the Brewer, Maine, youth hockey program, by-way of (now former) Maine State Representative Chris Greeley, who served for a number of years in the Maine Legislature with Dumont's father-in-law, a state senator.

title: Jean-Pierre Dumont


text:
Talk:Alessandro Scarlatti

Encyclopedic Content Must Be Verifiable
You know, I bet everything in this article is true... but I have no way of verifying this.

This needs all of that stuff that fleshes out a good article... like a reason for believing anything written here. Gingermint (talk) 03:20, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Comment
There seems some confusion over dates and patrons here:

 * 1) "In the interval he enjoyed the patronage of Ferdinand III of Tuscany". This redirects to Ferdinand III, Grand Duke of Tuscany, for whom the lifespan of 1769–1824 is given. Hence Ferdinand III wasn't born until 44 years after Scarlatti's death in 1725.

 * 1) "The operas composed for Ferdinand de' Medici are lost". There were two Ferdinands de' Medici: 1549–1609 and 1610-1670. The first died before Scarlatti's birth in 1660, and Scarlatti was only ten when the second died.

Can someone provide some clarification here? --BillC 23:36, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I can. It is not Ferdinand III of Tuscany (the third austrian ruler of Tuscany). It is Ferdinando III de' Medici (1663 – 1713). Actually he is called Ferdinando III improperly, because he never ruled. I have fixed the links in the article. Greetings from Florence, Italy.

Silvano 02:53, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

More confusion over dates -- this article has Alessandro Scarlatti (born 1660) as the father of Domenico Scarlatti (born 1665). And just to make sure no one imagines there was some other Domenico Scarlatti, it links to the Domenico born just five years after his "father".

kentfx 04:45, 21 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kentfx (talk • contribs)

Scarlatti as the originator of the Ritornello
I did not quite understand the claim of Scarlatti being the one who introduced Ritornello into operas. We see earlier examples of the use of ritornello going as far back as Monteverdi. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.1.146.251 (talk) 11:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Date of death
Most if not all of the major European language WPs, including Italian, have him dying on 24 October. We prefer 22 October. What do we know that all the others don't? --  Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  08:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Hmm, very interesting. Looking in my usual dead-tree sources -- Donald J. Grout's article in the 1980 New Grove gives 22 October; Roberto Pagano's article in the most recent New Grove (2001?) gives 22 October; and Nicolas Slonimsky's big Baker's Biographical article also gives 22 October. Not sure where the 24 October date comes from. None of the articles give exact details of his last day(s). Antandrus (talk) 17:22, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Very belated thanks, Antandrus. --  Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  08:36, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Alessandro Scarlatti


text: File:Rays feet.jpg

title: File:Rays feet.jpg


text:
Penny Broadhurst

Penny Broadhurst (born 21 October 1980 in Harrogate, Yorkshire), is a British pop singer, songwriter, writer and spoken word artist from the north of England. She listed Kate Bush, Doctor Who, Prefab Sprout, Lloyd Cole, Belle & Sebastian, Kirsty MacColl and The Smiths among her many influences. She ceased all use of this name for creative work in late 2009 and has changed her name in private life.

Career
Penny Broadhurst first started performing her own material as a spoken word performer when she was a student in Norwich in 1998. Her performances were delivered in a broad Yorkshire accent and often accompanied by pop and rock music. Her first album of spoken word with music, Blue Bank got radio play on BBC 6 Music, and the NME declared "...You can't mosh to poetry, but if you could, then you'd mosh to this." A BBC Tees review described one of her performances as "leaving a tough act to follow."

She gradually moved away from using just the spoken word, and began to write and sing her own pop songs and dance routines, working with producers Ed Heaton, and Si McGrath of Hightone Productions. Clint Boon of Radio Xfm Manchester said of her songs : "She's unsigned, but she sounds like an established act to me. I can see why she calls herself the Queen of Pop."

She has appeared at Ladyfest around the UK and literary festivals including Off The Shelf and Ilkley Literature Festival. She was a member of the Yorkshire young writers' initiative The Writing Squad, funded by the Arts Council. In Summer 2005 she played at Glastonbury and in 2005 and 2006 at the Truck festival. She has also recently appeared at other festivals including Latitude Festival (2006 and 2007), Wireless Festival (2007), Solfest (2007) and Indietracks (2008) and made a television appearance on BBC Look North.

As well as having radio play on BBC Radio 1, BBC 6 Music, and Radio Magnetic in the UK (on their playlist), Penny Broadhurst's work has been broadcast on FM4 in Austria, Slovakia and other local and international stations. Her songs have also been featured on Xfm and Dandelion Radio.

Penny Broadhurst was based in Leeds, but regularly performed at venues throughout the UK.

Recordings
In January 2005, she released a demo MP3 single for free download of two tracks. "LJaded" – described by Leonie Cooper of The Guardian as "a tribute to the Myspace and blogging generation" and another demo track, "London". It was accompanied by the following instructions: "Download the MP3s, burn a CD, download the artwork, print it out, stick it in a jewel case and hey presto! A Penny Broadhurst single."

Her first EP, Allons-y!, which featured more demo tracks, was released on Killer Disc Records on 24 September 2007 in a limited edition run of CDs, which were numbered and signed. This included a different mix of "London" from the mix on the free single, which is now no longer available for download. The title is the French for "Let's go!", which reflects the tone of the EP and is also a common utterance by the Tenth Doctor as played by David Tennant in Doctor Who.

Her EP 'Sparkle The Dark' included a mixture of both solo and band tracks (as Penny Broadhurst & The Maffickers) and an accompanying booklet of short stories based on the lyrics to "The End" by several writers: Broadhurst herself, Danny Broderick, Robert Shearman, Danny Broderick, Benjamin Adams and Swithun Cooper.

Track List
Demo

"London" (download only) Released January 2007 by Killer Disc Records, Leeds .
 * 1) "London (Jeff Lynne Superstar)"
 * 2) "LJaded"

Lyrics by Penny Broadhurst, music by Broadhurst/Heaton/Mcgrath.

EP Released 23 September 2007 by Killer Disc Records, Leeds

Allons-y!

 * 1) "Give It Up"
 * 2) "Chemist Goods"
 * 3) "LJaded"
 * 4) "London (Klar Mix)"

EP Released December 2008 by Mafficker Press, Leeds

Sparkle The Dark
 * 1) "The End"
 * 2) "Ragbag Song"
 * 3) "Cut Dead" (cover of a song by The Jesus and Mary Chain)
 * 4) "Guess Who I've Messed With (live acoustic radio session)"

Published works
Penny Broadhurst's first printed collection of poetry and lyrics, That Way Out (ISBN 0-9549684-1-7), was published on 25 August 2006 by Killer Question with photography by Danny North. This brings together previously unpublished material as well as some of the lyrics recorded for the spoken word album Blue Bank and other words and lyrics originally published in X magazine, Parameter, Brittle Star, Citizen 32 and Leeds Guide.

title: Penny Broadhurst


text:
John Ferrillo

John Ferrillo is an American oboist. He has been the Principal Oboe of the Boston Symphony Orchestra since 2001. He is also member at the Tanglewood Music Center. Prior to these posts, he was Co-Principal Oboe of the Metropolitan Opera Orchestra in New York from 1986 to 2001 as well as a former teacher at the Juilliard School and Mannes School of Music. Ferrillo studied with John de Lancie at the Curtis Institute of Music.

title: John Ferrillo


text:
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology

The Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology is a monthly peer-reviewed academic journal covering all aspects of information science published by Wiley-Blackwell on behalf of the Association for Information Science and Technology. The journal publishes original research and rapid communications, as well as book reviews and announcements of the association. Occasional special issues appear with contents focused on a single topic area.

History
Established in 1950 as the quarterly journal American Documentation, the new publication was produced by the American Documentation Institute (ADI), which had formed in 1937 around a group of researchers and practitioners interested in the emerging technology of microfilm as a medium for the preservation and dissemination of documents and knowledge. Many of the same people and institutions were involved in a pre-war American Library Association journal called The Journal of Documentary Reproduction, which ran from 1938 to 1943, before being discontinued due to the imperatives of the war.

American Documentation was an explicit continuation of and extension upon The Journal of Documentary Reproduction, with a broader brief to cover documentation as a whole, then defined as "...the creation, transmission, collection, classification and use of 'documents'; documents may be broadly defined as recorded knowledge in any format."

In the postwar years, rapid technological and social changes ushered in an "information explosion" which created many new problems and opportunities of special interest to documentation specialists, and in time documentation found itself at the center of the emerging field of information science. The ADI's membership and scope increased rapidly, and in 1968 the members voted to change the organization's name to "American Society for Information Science", to reflect the changes in their membership and focus. As their official journal, American Documentation followed suit, and beginning with the first issue of 1970 it changed its name to The Journal of the American Society for Information Science and began publishing bimonthly.

In 1991, the publication frequency increased to 10 issues yearly and by 1996, the journal was publishing monthly. In 2000, ASIS again voted to change its name, this time to The "American Society for Information Science and Technology", in order to recognize the further changes in membership and interests brought on by the rise of the internet and the mainstreaming of networked computing and information technology. The journal's name was subsequently also changed in January 2001 to Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. It obtained its current name in January 2014.

Abstracting and indexing
The journal is abstracted and indexed in: • Chemical Abstracts Service

• CINAHL

• Current Contents/Social and Behavioral Sciences

• EBSCO databases

• Ei Compendex

• FRANCIS

• Inspec

• Library and Information Science Abstracts

• Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts

• Modern Language Association Database

• ProQuest databases

• Science Citation Index Expanded

• Scopus

• Social Sciences Citation Index According to the Journal Citation Reports, the journal has a 2020 impact factor of 2.687.


text:
ABBA Gold

ABBA Gold: Greatest Hits is a compilation album by the Swedish pop group ABBA. It was released on 21 September 1992 through PolyGram, making it the first compilation to be released after the company had acquired Polar Music, and thus the rights to the ABBA back catalogue.

With sales of 30 million, Gold is the best-selling ABBA album, as well one of the best-selling albums worldwide. Since 1992, it has been re-released several times, most notably in 1999 as the first remastered reissue to mark the group's 25th anniversary of winning the Eurovision Song Contest 1974, in 2008 to coincide with the release of the film Mamma Mia! and most recently in 2014 to mark the group's 40th anniversary of winning the Eurovision Song Contest.

Background and overview
Polar had only produced and distributed ABBA's records in Scandinavian countries, licencing the recordings for release by different companies around the world (such as Atlantic in the US and Epic in the UK). This meant there were many different compilations released in different parts of the world. As these licences were renewed every three years, between 1989 (when PolyGram acquired Polar) and 1992 all of these licences had expired. Although PolyGram had made all of the original studio albums available (along with the 1986 live album which had originally been issued by Polydor worldwide), all previously released ABBA compilations had been deleted. Erasure had released a 4 track ABBA cover EP, Abba-esque, in summer 1992 which topped charts around the world showing there was still a strong interest in ABBA's music. Rather than issue the multiple previous compilations, PolyGram put together a new collection, optimised for the CD format.

Gold: Greatest Hits was well received by the music-buying public, and went on to be one of the best-selling albums of all time. It has been re-released in various "special" or "remastered" releases:

Australasian editions
The 1992 and 1999 editions released in Australia and New Zealand (and some other territories in that area) had a modified track listing (see below) to include three local hits, replacing three other songs on the international edition.

The 2002 re-release was not released in Australia, while in New Zealand, the international edition was issued.

From 2008 onwards, only the international editions have been released in Australia and New Zealand.

Spanish versions
The original 1992 release had a slightly different track listing, replacing the English versions of "Chiquitita" and "Fernando" with the Spanish language versions.

Shortly after the release of Gold: Greatest Hits, a Spanish version of the album, titled Oro: Grandes Exitos was issued, followed later by Mas Oro: Mas Grandes Exitos.

Video and DVD
In 1992 a VHS video was released which included all tracks from the original album. During the 1990s, various regional variations on this video were issued, until Universal Music decided in 2003 to re-issue the video on VHS and DVD. The track listing was similar to the original album, with some added content: a 25-minute documentary produced in 1999, and the 1992 video of "Dancing Queen". In 2010, the DVD was remastered with six bonus clips, including five "split-screen" versions of the clips to show which improvements were made by remastering the old videos. These "split-screen" clips were "Gimme! Gimme! Gimme!", "Mamma Mia", "Dancing Queen", "The Winner Takes It All" and "Money, Money, Money". The sixth bonus clip was an Australian cartoon version of "Money, Money, Money". The 2010 edition did not include the 2003 ABBA documentary or the 1992 version of "Dancing Queen". This disc was available as a stand-alone DVD and as part of the 2010 'Special Edition' re-release.

Other variations
In 2002, Gold: Greatest Hits was released in mainland Europe (though not in the UK) with a bonus second disc.

The UK saw a 30th Anniversary Edition released in 2004 with a gold-coloured sleeve cover with black writing, rather than the normal black sleeve with gold writing. The original release included a DVD with 18 of the 19 songs from the CD, excluding "The Name of the Game". It is also available without the DVD.

Commercial performance
With pure sales of 5.61 million copies, Gold: Greatest Hits is the second-highest selling album of all time in the United Kingdom, after Queen's Greatest Hits. In August, 2019, Gold: Greatest Hits became the longest-running top 100 album of all time, spending 900 weeks on the UK Albums Chart. The album spent 61 (non-consecutive) weeks in the top 10 and topped the British chart 5 times, most recently for two weeks in 2008 following release of the motion picture Mamma Mia!. As of July 2021, "Gold" became the first album to reach 1000 weeks on the Official Charts in United Kingdom with pure sales of 5.61 million copies sold in United Kingdom. In November 2021, it was awarded 20× Platinum by the British Phonographic Industry, denoting six millions album-equivalent unit in the UK.

In the United States, the album has sold a total of 5.8 million copies and is the nineteenth biggest-selling greatest-hits album in the Nielsen Music era (which began in 1991). In Canada, Gold: Greatest Hits achieved Diamond status (one million units sold) in May, 2000.

In Germany, Gold: Greatest Hits has been certified five times Platinum for shipment of 2.5 million units. It has also been certified 10 times Platinum in Switzerland for sales of 500,000 units. In Austria, the album charted for 397 weeks, making it the all-time second longest stay on the chart. After reaching catalogue status, it returned to the top 10 three times, twice in the wake of the releases of Mamma Mia! The Movie Soundtrack and Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again and once due to the release of a special edition.

Critical reception
Gold: Greatest Hits has been called one of the most influential compilation albums ever released. Music critic Elisabeth Vincentelli (New York Post; Time Out New York) credits the album for a revival of critical interest in ABBA's music after ten years of neglect following the band's 1982 break-up.

Writing for Pitchfork in 2019, reviewer Jamieson Cox agreed, describing Gold: Greatest Hits as a "refined package with surprising emotional range". The album, he wrote, "capitalized on a simmering, subcultural interest in ABBA’s work and sparked a full-blown revival" that culminated in the Mamma Mia! stage and film productions.

BuzzFeed music editor Matthew Perpetua included Gold: Greatest Hits among the compilations he considered "so well curated in presenting a fertile period of a career that they are arguably an artist's definitive work".

Former Rolling Stone magazine writer Tom Moon included Gold: Greatest Hits among his 1,000 Recordings to Hear Before You Die, describing the tracks as "models of impeccable craft", adding that the album is "an excellent starter kit for those wanting to investigate the DNA of post-Beatles pop."

Writing for Vanity Fair, singer-songwriter Elvis Costello included Gold: Greatest Hits among his list of 500 essential albums.

Track listings
All tracks are produced by Benny Andersson and Björn Ulvaeus.

Personnel

 * Agnetha Fältskog - vocals
 * Anni-Frid Lyngstad - vocals
 * Björn Ulvaeus - Steel-string, acoustic guitar, vocals
 * Benny Andersson – synthesizer, keyboards, vocals

Production
 * Benny Andersson, Björn Ulvaeus – producers
 * Michael B. Tretow – engineer, digital remastering (1992 edition)
 * Jon Astley – digital remastering (1999, 2002, 2004 reissues)
 * Henrik Jonsson – digital remastering (2008 reissue)
 * Ingemar Bergman – compilation
 * Chris Griffin – compilation
 * George McManus – compilation
 * Jackie Stansfield – compilation
 * John Tobler – liner notes, compilation
 * Carl Magnus Palm – liner notes (1999, 2002, 2004, 2008 reissues)

title: ABBA Gold


text:
Hadeland Folkemuseum

Hadeland Folkemuseum is a regional museum for Hadeland (Gran, Lunner and Jevnaker). It was founded in 1913, and is located in Tingelstad in Gran. The museum is situated along Kongevegen (The King's Road), the road from Oslo to Bergen which passes through Hadeland. Hadeland Folkemuseum is a subsidiary of Randsfjordmuseene, a regional institution which also manages Lands Museum and the Kittilbu Open-Air Museum in Vestre Gausdal.

Overview
Hadeland Folkemuseum is an open-air museum containing more than 30 buildings from the 17th to the 20th centuries. All the items in the museum are original and have been collected from various farms and other locations in the area. The Documentation Center for Hadeland consist of photographs, archive, objects from Hadeland and a library. Hadeland Folkemuseum has a collection of farm implements as well as  a copy of the Dynna stone which dates from the 11th century. The Dynna stone originated in Gran but was relocated to the Norwegian Museum of Cultural History in Oslo in 1879.

Hadeland Folkemuseum is located near Tingelstad old church (Tingelstad gamle kirke) also known as St. Petri Church. The Romanesque stone church was built around 1220 and known for its intact interior from the 16th and 17th century.

Granske Kompagni, a local regiment in Gran municipality during the 16th and 17th century, had its exercise ground nearby at Granavollen. The regimental arsenal building or Tent house (Telthus) has been relocated to Hadeland Folkemuseum.

Located within the museum area is Halvdanshaugen, the reputed grave of a local king from the Viking Age. Halvdanshaugen, (from the Old Norse word haugr meaning mound) is one of several burial sites attributed to Halfdan the Black.

title: Hadeland Folkemuseum