text:
Rabbit-proof fence

The State Barrier Fence of Western Australia, formerly known as the Rabbit-Proof Fence, the State Vermin Fence, and the Emu Fence, is a pest-exclusion fence constructed between 1901 and 1907 to keep rabbits, and other agricultural pests from the east, out of Western Australian pastoral areas.

There are three fences in Western Australia: the original No. 1 Fence crosses the state from north to south, No. 2 Fence is smaller and further west, and No. 3 Fence is smaller still and runs east–west. The fences took six years to build. When completed, the rabbit-proof fence (including all three fences) stretched 2023 mi. The cost to build each kilometre of fence at the time was about $250.

When it was completed in 1950, the 1139 mi No. 1 Fence was the longest unbroken fence in the world.

History
Rabbits were introduced to Australia by the First Fleet in 1788, but they became a problem after October 1859, when Thomas Austin released 24 wild rabbits from England for hunting purposes, believing "The introduction of a few rabbits could do little harm and might provide a touch of home, in addition to a spot of hunting."

The rabbits proved to be extremely prolific and spread rapidly across the southern parts of the country. Australia had ideal conditions for an explosion in the rabbit population, including the fact that they had virtually no local predators.

By 1887, losses from rabbit damage compelled the New South Wales Government to offer a £25,000 reward for "any method of success not previously known in the Colony for the effectual extermination of rabbits". A Royal Commission was held in 1901 to investigate the situation.

Construction
The fence posts are placed 12 ft apart and have a minimum diameter of 4 in. There were initially three wires of $12 1/2$ gauge, strung 4 in, 1 ft, and 3 ft above ground, with a barbed wire added later at 3 ft and a plain wire at 3 ft, to make the fence a barrier for dingoes and foxes as well. Wire netting, extending 6 in below ground, was attached to the wire.

The fence was constructed with a variety of materials, according to the local climate and availability of wood. At first, fence posts were made from salmon gum and gimlet, but they attracted termites (locally known as white ants) and had to be replaced. Split white gum was one of the best types of wood used in the fence. Other timbers used were mulga, wodjil, native pine, and tea-tree, depending on what could be found close to where the fence was to be built. Iron posts were used where there was no wood. Most materials had to be hauled hundreds of kilometres from rail heads and ports by bullock, mule and camel teams.

From 1901, the fence was constructed by private contractors, but in 1904, the project became the responsibility of the Public Works Department of Western Australia, under the supervision of Richard John Anketell. With a workforce of 120 men, 350 camels, 210 horses and 41 donkeys, Anketell was responsible for the construction of the greater part of No. 1 Fence and the survey of its last 70 mi.

Maintenance
Alexander Crawford took over the maintenance of the fence from Anketell as each section was finished and remained in charge until he retired in 1922. The area inside the fence to the west became known as "Crawford's Paddock". The fence was maintained at first by boundary riders riding bicycles and later by riders astride camels. However, fence inspection was difficult from atop the tall animal. In 1910, a car was bought for fence inspection, but it was subject to punctured tyres. It was found the best way to inspect the fence was using buckboard buggies, pulled by two camels.

The camels were used as pack animals, especially in the north, while in the east, camels were used to pull drays with supplies for the riders. Camels were ideal for this as they could go for a long time without water, and it has been suggested that the fence could not have been built or maintained without the use of camels.

In addition to Crawford, there were four sub-inspectors, each responsible for about 500 mi of fence, and 25 boundary riders who regularly patrolled 100 mi sections of fence. Due to frontier violence in the north of the state, a 300 mi section of No. 1 Fence was patrolled by riders in pairs.

Crawford was responsible for eliminating rabbits which had breached the fence. In the first year following the fences' completion, rabbit colonies were found and killed at several locations inside the fence, including sites near Coorow, Mullewa, and Northampton.

Following the introduction of myxomatosis to control rabbits in the 1950s, the importance of the rabbit-proof fence diminished.

Effectiveness
By 1902, rabbits had already been found west of the fence line that had been initially constructed. The Number 2 Rabbit Proof Fence was built in 1905 in order to stem their advance. It held back the rabbits for many years, to such an extent that the Government Scheme for supplying rabbit netting, by extending long term loans, never applied to farmers west of that fence. The farmers between the two fences suffered from the ravages of the rabbits for many years, before they bred into plague form to spread out over the agricultural districts to the west of the No. 2 fence.

Overall, as a long-term barrier to rabbits the fences were a failure; even while construction was underway, rabbits were hopping into regions the fences were intended to protect.

Intersection with railway system
No. 1 Fence intersected railway lines at:

 * Eastern Railway near Burracoppin
 * Wyalkatchem: Southern Cross railway at Campion
 * Sandstone Branch Railway: just west of Anketell
 * Meekatharra – Wiluna railway: at Paroo

No. 2 Fence intersected with most of the Wheatbelt railway lines of Western Australia.

Elsewhere in Australia

The Darling Downs-Moreton Rabbit Board fence is a rabbit fence that extends along part of the Queensland-New South Wales border.

Cultural references
In 1907, Arthur Upfield, an Australian writer who had previously worked on the construction of No. 1 Fence, began writing a fictional story which involved a way of disposing of a body in the desert. Before the book was published, stockman Snowy Rowles, an acquaintance of the writer's, carried out at least two murders and disposed of the bodies using the method described in the book. The trial which followed in 1932 was one of the most sensational in the history of Western Australia. A book was published about the incident called Murder on the Rabbit Proof Fence: The Strange Case of Arthur Upfield and Snowy Rowles. The incident is now referred to as the Murchison Murders.

Doris Pilkington Garimara's book, Follow the Rabbit-Proof Fence (1996), describes the use of the fence in the 1930s by three Indigenous Australian girls to guide their route back home to Jigalong. The girls, taken from their parents in Western Australia as part of the Stolen Generations, escaped from the Moore River Native Settlement where they were being held and walked back to their family at Jigalong by following the rabbit-proof fence. The dramatic film Rabbit-Proof Fence (2002) is based on the book. In 2016, Englishwoman Lindsey Cole walked the fence from Moore River Settlement, 1600 km through to Jigalong. She was met by Doris's daughter at the end of the walk in September 2016.

title: Rabbit-proof fence


text:
St Clair, New South Wales

St Clair is a suburb of Sydney, in the state of New South Wales, Australia. It is 44 kilometres west of the Sydney central business district, in the local government area of the City of Penrith and is part of the Greater Western Sydney region. St Clair is within view of the Blue Mountains.

History
St Clair takes its name from a residential housing development established in 1970. The current St Clair Post Office opened on 17 March 1981.

Aboriginal culture
Traditionally, the area was inhabited by the indigenous Dharug people. By the year 1816 however, the Dharug people had been decimated by clashes with settlers and contracting diseases brought to the area by Europeans. As time passed, the traditional culture declined, as it did across the entire continent and they became increasingly dependent on the settlers for their survival. Although they had always maintained a camp on or around the Mamre estate (which is found adjacent to St Clair, in the suburb of St Marys, the Rev. Samuel Marsden now sought to encourage them to work in exchange for food and clothing.

European settlement
The area was part of an area named South Creek. It was later, unofficially, known as South St Mary's, with the southern section being named Erskine Park. The original site of St Clair was once part of Chatsworth Nursery, a branch of Darling Nursery, which had been established in 1827 during the reign of King George IV. The owner Thomas Shepherd developed an irrigation system utilizing water from Eastern Creek and a large portion of the area was covered with Camelia orchards. The nursery, known for its camellias, was moved to Colyton and existed until the end of the 19th century. The area remained largely rural until a new housing development in the 1970s.

The name "St Clair" has no historical links with the area. It was the name given to a residential housing development established in 1970 by the Latex Finance Company, a subsidiary of the Cambridge Finance Company which went bankrupt in the year 1976. The Land Commission of New South Wales acquired the land after a bankruptcy declaration and extended the area to create a large suburb. The Geographical Names Board of New South Wales eventually made the decision in late 1981 to divide the area into two separate suburbs named St Clair and Erskine Park, rather than call the whole area Erskine Park as many people had desired. Its population has soared since 1981 and is now a well established suburb with modern facilities with close access to the M4 Motorway and shopping centre.

Location
The suburb is bordered by Erskine Park Road to the east, the M4 Motorway on the north and Mamre Road along its western boundary. The suburb to the south and east of St Clair is Erskine Park. Considerable parklands provide open space for recreational activities and St Clair is renowned for having a family oriented atmosphere.

Next to St Clair is Erskine Park but once called "Fox Dale", which is located on the eastern and southern sides of Erskine Park Road. Erskine Park is not as big as St Clair in housing and population, but a massive new industrial area to the south encompassing developments on Lenore Lane and James Erskine Drive is partially developed and bringing new opportunities to the area.

The new development is expected to bridge Old Wallgrove Rd with Lenore Lane and Archibold Road in the future. This will create a freight corridor connecting the area's three main industrial areas at Minchinbury, Erskine Park and Wonderland, along with the two mines in the area, encouraging heavy vehicles down non-suburban back roads, freeing up the existing roads for car traffic, and substantially reducing travel time from the current 45 minutes in heavy traffic to 10 minutes.

Schools
The suburb has one public high school which is located on Endeavour Avenue, named St Clair High School. Some St Clair residents are zoned to go to the nearby Erskine Park High School. Private high schools near St Clair include Emmaus Catholic College and Mamre Anglican School. Primary schools in St Clair include St Clair Public School, Banks Public School, Blackwell Public School, Clairgate Public School and Holy Spirit Catholic School.

A fire occurred at St Clair High School in the early morning hours of 29 June 2014. Fire and Rescue NSW reported later that morning that the fire was extinguished by 0545, but that 80% of a two-storey building was destroyed. There were no victims. Following the fire, the Department of Education funded a AU$20,000,000 redevelopment of the school, which opened in October 2018, providing the school with 16 new classrooms, a research area, lecture hall, 3 new kitchens & a cafe, multiple outdoor learning areas, and a large opened terraced area, providing many new facilities for students to use throughout their schooling

Commercial area
In 2008, St Clair shopping centre underwent a major refurbishment with new specialty stores, a food court area, and outdoor seating. It contains medical facilities including X-ray, pathology and optometrist, food outlets, news, fashion and jewelry, electronics, the local library, and a petrol station. Two local schools border the shopping centre to the west and south, as do soccer fields to the north containing a recently constructed skate bowl. There are also 3 BWS bottle shops located within the suburb, within a relatively close proximity. The Blue Cattle Dog Hotel is the only pub located in St Clair or Erskine Park. It is on the corner of Mamre Road and Banks Drive.

Politics
St Clair is in the federal Division of McMahon, held by Australian Labor Party's Chris Bowen and the state district of Badgerys Creek, held by Liberal Tanya Davies.

It was previously in the federal Division of Prospect.

Leisure Centre
St Clair has an indoor leisure centre, located behind St Clair Shopping Centre. The centre is managed by the local government authority Penrith City Council.

Neighborhood Centre
Community Junction Inc. now covers St Clair, Erskine Park, Colyton, St Marys and Werrington. CJI manages several community halls on behalf of Penrith Council, as well as a number of programs for residents.

Churches
Holy Spirit Parish, St Clair.

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

title: St Clair, New South Wales


text:
St Andrews, New South Wales

St Andrews is a suburb of Sydney, in the state of New South Wales, Australia 55 kilometres south-west of the Sydney central business district, in the local government area of the City of Campbelltown. It is part of the Macarthur region.

History
The name St Andrews came from an early 19th-century property owned by Scottish convict Andrew Thompson who in turn had named it after the patron saint of Scotland St Andrew.

The area was used for cattle and dairy farming for the next 150 years or so. In 1957, the first plans were announced by the state government to create a large satellite city in the area but the idea foundered after locals opposed it because the land was such good farming land. Nevertheless, the sprawl of Sydney towards Campbelltown couldn't be halted. In 1976, the name St Andrews was approved for the suburb and in 1977, Landcom began building homes in the area. The following year a primary school was opened and the suburb was well established.

Population
In the 2006 Australian Bureau of Statistics Census, the suburb of St Andrews had a population of 5,952 people, with higher than average numbers of Australian citizens (90%) and people born overseas (28%). The most common languages spoken other than English were Arabic (5%), Hindi (2%) and Spanish (2%). The median family income ($1282 per week) was slightly higher than average as was the median housing loan repayment ($1500 per month).

Schools

 * St Andrews Public School
 * Robert Townson (Primary) - Raby
 * Robert Townson High School - Raby
 * Mary Immaculate Catholic Primary School - Eaglevale
 * Mount Carmel Catholic College - Varroville

title: St Andrews, New South Wales


text:
Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal

The Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal ('History of William the Marshal') is a near-contemporary Anglo-Norman biography of the English nobleman, William Marshal (died 1219). In terms of genre it is therefore something of a rarity for its period, as it fits all the characteristics of a true biography, being William's story from cradle to grave, and moreover it examines the life of a lay person. It is a substantial work composed in 19,214 octosyllabic lines of plain verse in the French dialect of the Touraine. It shows little trace in its composition of any influence of the medieval schools. A modest number of Latin vitae or biographies survive from the period, almost all of them of clergymen. Its author was not entirely divorced from Latin scholarship, however.

Authorship
Its author names himself in a closing colophon to the work as John (Johans) 'who wrote this book' (lines 19195-6). Attempts have been made to identify this John with the other John mentioned in the colophon as having a hand in the composition: this was John of Earley (died 1229), one of the old Marshal's wards as a youth, and later his household knight and banneret. That he was one and the same as the John who was the author was a throw away suggestion of the discoverer and first editor of the text, Paul Meyer (1840–1917). His suggestion was adopted by several historians as fact. One of Marshal's better modern biographers, Sidney Painter (1902–1960), referred to Earley as his late lord's 'biographer'. It was an identification still being championed in 1998. This has not been sustainable since the publication between 2002 and 2007 of the modern analytical edition by a team headed by Professor Tony Holden (1925–2009). It found the History was composed in a French dialect of the Loire Valley, not the Anglo-Norman dialect that John of Earley, who came from the English West Country, would have spoken. In his treatment of events the author showed an ignorance of English political life John of Earley would not have exhibited. The author tells us further that he relied for much of his basic material on written memoirs sent him by the Marshal's friends concerning what they witnessed which again John of Earley would not have required. The conclusion from the details he revealed is that John the author was probably a young poet commissioned by the Marshal's friends and relatives from the former Angevin lands along the river Loire, well acquainted with the cities and castles of Anjou and Normandy.

Manuscript
There is a single manuscript of the work, which the young Paul Meyer noticed in 1861 browsing the sale room of Sotheby's during the disposal of the manuscripts of Saville collection, compiled by the justice and antiquary Sir John Savile in the late 16th century. It was swept up by the bibliophile Sir Thomas Phillipps at the time and did not resurface till Meyer tracked it down amongst the remnants of Phillipps estate in 1880 and was able to study and identify it for what it was. In 1958 it was acquired by the Pierpont Morgan Library in New York, where it remains as manuscript M. 888. It is a book of 127 folios in a mid 13th century hand. It is not the author's original manuscript but a copy of one of his drafts by an English copyist who modified the original language towards his own Anglo-Norman dialect. Three other copies are once know to have existed from medieval library catalogues.

Date and Sources
Paul Meyer in his edition of the History calculated that the author commenced his work for his patron William Marshal the Younger in 1224, when the young earl left to take up his appointment as justiciar of Ireland and worked on it till the summer of 1226. David Crouch's analysis of the author's sources revealed by his work finds that the poet was an assiduous researcher. He deployed a range of items he found in the Marshal family archive for the early period of the Marshal's life, many of them generated by his tournament career: lists of ransoms, a French language history of the exploits of his master Young King Henry between 1176 and 1182, and a great roll of the French royal tournament of Lagny-sur-Marne in 1179. For the later period he had access to Marshal's state correspondence and solicited written memoirs from the old man's friends and colleagues for the period from the 1180s onward. The author counted for much of the colour of his work on family anecdotes passed on to him by Marshal's sons and his knight and executor, John of Earley. On one occasion he can be proved to have used for the Marshal's childhood a Latin chronicle then kept at Gloucester Abbey.

Reception
Since Meyer's edition the History has assumed increasing importance in the understanding of the life of the aristocracy of the 12th and early 13th centuries. It has provided the material for nearly a dozen modern biographies of its hero. Georges Duby praised the work as 'infinitely precious: the memory of chivalry in an almost pure state, about which, without this evidence, we should know virtually nothing'. John W. Baldwin has commented that 'much of the modern understanding of twelfth-century chivalry is simply the life of William the Marshal writ large'. Each period finds its own Marshal. Sidney Painter and Georges Duby treated him as the definitive chivalric male, picking up the author's constant emphasis on the Marshal's loyalty to his lords, even as unworthy a lord as John of England. With the 1980s and a move away from 19th-century ideas of what chivalry may have been came a reassessment. David Crouch presented in 1990 a different, more intelligent and accomplished Marshal, a skilful courtier trading on his military talents and masterfully charting a course through the dangerous waters of European royal and princely courts. He also pointed out the author's concern to construct a defence of the late earl from the accusations being brought against his reputation at the royal court of the 1220s.

Editions

 * Paul Meyer (1840–1917), ed., Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal, comte de Striguil et de Pembroke, régent d'Angleterre, Paris, Société de l'histoire de France, 1891–1901, with a partial translation of the original sources into modern French. Also available here.
 * A. J. Holden, D. Crouch, edd.; S. Gregory, trans., History of William Marshal. 3 vols London: Anglo-Norman Text Society, Occasional Series, 4-6 (2002–2007).

title: Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal


text:
Raffaellino del Garbo

Raffaellino del Garbo (1466–1527) was a Florentine painter of the early Renaissance.

Biography
His real name was Raffaello di Bartolomeo dei Carli. He was also known as Raffaello Capponi after his adoptive family. The appellation "del Garbo" comes from the location of his workshop on the street formerly known as the via del Garbo, now the via della Condotta. He was also called Raffaelle de' Carli and signed at least one altarpiece, in situ in the church of Santa Maria degli Angeli in Valli, Siena, as "Raffaello de Florentia" [i.e. Raphael of Florence]. He was a pupil of Filippino Lippi, with whom he remained until 1490, if not later. He accompanied Filippino to Rome, where, according to Vasari, he painted the anteroom of the chapel of St. Thomas Aquinas (Carafa Chapel) in the church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva.

Vasari thought the artist died at Florence in 1524, but he was certainly alive in 1527, when he was described as fit for military duty. He probably succumbed to the plague that ravaged Florence between 1527 and 1528.

His pupils reportedly included Andrea del Sarto and the young Bronzino.

Works
Raffaellino produced altarpieces, frescoes and small scale religious works for domestic interiors. His activity was focused on Florence and its environs. Four extant altarpieces are signed and dated:

Other altarpieces include the Pietà of about 1497, originally in the Nasi chapel in Santo Spirito, Florence, and now at the Alte Pinakothek in Munich; the Resurrection of about 1498 for the church of the Benedictine monastery of Monte Oliveto, Florence, now in that city's Galleria dell'Accademia; and the Madonna and Child with Saints John the Evangelist, Lawrence, Stephen and Bernard for the Segni chapel in Santo Spirito, which remains in its original location, in its original frame, and is inscribed with the date of 1505. In 1503 he frescoed the Miracle of the Loaves in the refectory of the Florentine convent of the Cestello (now called Santa Maria Maddalena dei Pazzi), now detached and displayed alongside its sinopia (underdrawing) in the church of Sant'Antonino a Bellariva in the outskirts of Florence. Raffaellino's large Coronation of the Virgin, painted in 1511 for the high altar of San Salvi, Florence, where it was described by Vasari, is now at the Musée du Petit Palais, Avignon.
 * Madonna and Child with Saints Francis, Zenobius and Two Donors, dated 1500, once at the Ospedale di Santa Maria Nuova, Florence, and now at the Museo del Cenacolo di San Salvi, Florence.
 * Mass of Saint Gregory, dated 1501, originally in the Antinori chapel, Santo Spirito, Florence, and now at the Ringling Museum of Art, Sarasota, Florida.
 * Madonna and Child with Two Angels, Saints Jerome and Bartholomew, dated 1502, originally in the Corsini chapel, Santo Spirito, Florence, and now at the Palace of the Legion of Honor, San Francisco, California.
 * Madonna and Child in Glory with Saints Bernardo degli Uberti, Mary Magdalen, John the Baptist and a Bishop Saint, dated 1502, in its original location over the high altar of Santa Maria degli Angeli in Valli, Siena.

title: Raffaellino del Garbo


text: User talk:129.21.148.6

title: User talk:129.21.148.6


text:
User talk:BusinessAndGovernment

Welcome!

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

Flowerparty 00:05, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:BusinessAndGovernment


text:
Talk:Transbrasil

Untitled
I find it very weird that the content of this page looks like a really badly translated version of http://www.portalbrasil.eti.br/aviacao_transbrasil.htm Isn't that kind of copy (i.e. no source indication/authorization) against wikipedia's rules?

Just wondering. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.181.93.244 (talk • contribs) 00:05, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Transbrasil


text:
The Spit, New South Wales

The Spit is an urban locality in the suburb of Mosman in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. The Aboriginal word for The Spit is Burra Bra. The Spit is located in the local government area of the Municipality of Mosman and is part of the Lower North Shore.

Landmarks
The Spit protrudes off Beauty Point and is home to the Spit Bridge, a bascule bridge opened in 1958 over Middle Harbour. The bridge opens at set times to allow yachts with high masts to pass. The Spit is the site of the Middle Harbour Yacht Club and a marina.

History
From as early as 1834, a ferry operated by Barney Kearns carried passengers across the waters of Middle Harbour. From the 1850s, a punt operated by Peter Ellery, carried passengers across for sixpence and horse-drawn vehicles were charged 1s 6d. If the horses swam across, there was a reduction of sixpence. In 1889, it was replaced by a government steam punt. A wooden bridge was opened in 1924 after the electric tram lines were extended to the Spit. This was replaced by the bascule bridge in 1958, which was needed to cope with heavy traffic from the Sydney CBD to the Northern Beaches. Chinamans Beach was named after the Chinese residents who had market gardens and salt pans there, it is now a popular family beach.

Heritage listings
The Spit has a number of heritage-listed sites, including:
 * Monash Crescent (East Side): Middle Harbour Syphon

title: The Spit, New South Wales


text: User talk:70.59.107.243

title: User talk:70.59.107.243


text:
Talk:Allen Weinstein

Removed incorrect material
I removed this from the article:

 * For The Haunted Wood, he purchased exclusive rights to KGB files preventing other scholars from confirming his translations.

because it's very inaccurate. It was Random House who negotiated the contract with the SVR for archival access, not Weinstein, and a number of different authors were covered. (Among the others are Costello, for Deadly Illusions.) The authors did have "exclusive access", but given that Random House paid for the privilege, this is not as sinister as it may first sound.

(Without reviewing the contract, it's not clear exactly how "exclusive" this "exclusive" is, anyway - presumably Random House was only interested in protecting its commercial interest, i.e. the "exclusive" might simply mean that it's an exclusive license to reprint copyrighted material. That would not preclude e.g. others reviewing the material. But that's all speculation.)

Anyway, the principal reason no other authors can review the material is that the SVR closed off access to its archives to all outsiders in late 1995, for a variety of reasons. So it's simply incorrect to say that it's Weinstein who is "preventing other scholars from confirming his translations". Noel (talk) 00:05, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Also the material on Perjury is unbalanced; Perjury first appeared in 1979 and had a conclusion that Hiss may have been innocent. After material from Soviet Archives was reviewed, Perjury was rereleased in the 1997 Edition which included material from Soviet Archives and had different conclusions.  Being the only difference between the two books is insertion of written material from Soviet Archives, the material based on personal intereviews remained unchanged.  Hence, as the article reads,
 * "Critics on the left have argued that Weinstein's books Perjury and The Haunted Wood (both arguing Alger Hiss was a Soviet spy) have severe problems. Interviewees quoted in Perjury claimed they were badly misquoted..."
 * makes no light of this, it is uninformed and needs revision. nobs 01:51, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Required edit made
Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately. — from the box at the top of this page.

I just removed a whole bunch of completely unsourced controversial material from the "Criticism" section. Current Wikipedia policy strictly forbids that sort of writing about any living person on any page on this site. Anyone who wants to restore it will need to say exactly who makes those criticisms of Weinstein, and give verifiable cites to Reliable Sources. CWC 23:38, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

July 2007
I've just made a substantial edit, using links provided by Bdell555. (Thanks for that!) The comment by Ellen Schrecker that Bdell555 found is undated; I got its date from here.

I made two unrelated changes. First I removed the following sentence:
 * One subject, Samuel Krieger, sued Weinstein for libel in 1979, leading Weinstein to settle out of court by issuing a public apology and paying Krieger $17,500.

WP:BLP requires immediate removal of uncited negative claims like this. I did a quick Google search but didn't find any WP:RSes. If someone can produce a cite, we'll put it back. (Important note: The Nation is clearly not a Reliable Source of the subject of Allen Weinstein.)

Second, having just come across a malignantly selective quote in another article, I was worried enough by the "weakness for mystification" quote to Google it. Guess what? No hits except for this article! My bogometer is well into the red zone. Plus that's a very strange thing to say about a successful historian; it's suggestive but uninformative. So I've deleted that too. If someone can produce a copy of "Tangled Treason", we can take another look at it to see if we can use it.

Cheers, CWC 15:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

May 2009
"The Nation is clearly not a Reliable Source"?? Apparently this is because The Nation has published research criticizing Weinstein. NPOV requires that critical voices as well as celebration be recorded, as long as the record includes cited sources.Jonwiener (talk) 01:16, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Apparently"? Not to this doctrinaire liberal. The Nation practices advocacy journalism at best, and my recollection is that many who support its general line where severely shocked when, apparently to make a point about nuclear proliferation or information security practice, they published plans for making a nuclear weapon, based on sources that were already in the process of being made unavailable in order to hinder nuclear proliferation . I probably support most of their politically controversial positions, but i don't regard them as a reliable source for purposes of WP's V policies. --Jerzy•t 20:42, 23 September & 01:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to apologize for relying on my memory (especially since i used the phrase "...my recollection is that..."). Moderation in all things, especially where there are more things to fix than editors, but plenty of editors who may catch errors without recourse to research. On the other hand, i'm pleased to have had nagging self-doubts and have responded to them with
 * research that makes me believe i was wrong, and striking thru my clause in which i went wrong.
 * It was The Progressive that, in 1979, published nuclear secrets that the gov't wanted to suppress. (If there were more detailed plans -- perhaps assembled by a then high school student -- published by a left periodical, then i don't know which one. But i'm pretty sure that i did confuse The Nation and The Progressive.) (BTW, "already in the process of being made unavailable" was a ref to documents that were
 * classified (or, less likely -- since classification is grossly overused -- should have been but hadn't been) but placed on library shelves accessible to some people who lacked the appropriate security clearance, and removed after information from them was published or planned for publication. My questionable memory says that the library in question was at or closely associated with Los Alamos.)
 * As to using The Nation as a ref, i no longer claim to have a killer argument against its use, but after a brief browse of their Web site, at least the role of financial contributors (some labeled as "Activist"- or "Loyalist"-grade supporters) is further evidence of advocacy journalism. I would 'not object to using The Nation in a concurring reference that reinforces some more clearly neutral source (nor, of course, to using it as a ref abt what was claimed in its pages). --Jerzy•t 01:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

"No friend of anti-communists"
I removed
 * , no friend of anti-communists,

as unencyclopedic in its ironical vagueness (litotes?). If she is usually a critic of anti-communism, say so and provide a ref. --Jerzy•t 20:42, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Evidence and claims
I inserted into the accompanying article the wording that i have bolded on this talk page, within the following sentence:
 * In 1997, Editor Victor Navasky published what he claimed as evidence that Weinstein had misquoted, misrepresented, or misconstrued several of his interview subjects for Perjury.

My wording would (presumably) be unnecessary if the source cited, namely either As a matter of fact, John Ehrman's CIA paper has the PoV that
 * 1) did not require a subscription in order to check it, or
 * 2) were the object of an essentially undisputed consensus that
 * _ at least three sources (two do not amount to "several") had been subjected by Weinstein to at least one of the offenses of misquoting, misrepresenting, or misconstruing them, and
 * _ what is presented there does constitute "evidence" that, for each of those kinds of offense at least one source had been subjected to that specific offense: at least one case of each offense, bcz any case where it is merely unclear which of the three offenses produced what he reported is correctly described not as "misquoted, misrepresented, or misconstrued", but rather as "at best misconstrued" or "inaccurate in the form of something in the range from misconstruction to misquotation".
 * Substantively, Navasky's main claim was that Weinstein had quoted his interviewees and documents out of context or distorted their words.

essentially suggesting that any misquotes are insubstantial and Navasky's claims must rest on his implicit assertion that he has the ability to evaluate context and intention of third parties better than Weinstein. That doesn't show Navasky lied, but it means countervailing evidence for such a consensus is needed for the former claim. As an alternative to finding on-line evidence for either of those two sets of circumstances, a classic use of the fair use provision is quotation for the purpose of facilitating our discussion of how the source can accurately be paraphrased: an editor with a subscription can, without committing a copyvio, quote directly, here on the talk page, to the extent necessary to make their argument to those without subscriptions that Navasky's supposed evidence is prima facie evidence; likewise to answer our objections. But anything Navasky calls evidence, but may be regarded by other reasonable observers as not needing to be countered, amounts, in the absence of better sourcing than we have now, to just Navasky's or the editor's PoV that N presents evidence. My reasoning in the preceding portion of this contrib might be disparaged as mere theoretical prissiness. In fact, the knowledge i had during early drafts of it would have made that label merely harsh -- if i had saved it at that point. But it turns out that John Ehrman's cited article attributes to Weinstein a claim to have the quotes on tape: so we have to believe that Navasky either The first of those would be an extraordinary claim, calling for extraordinary evidence. The second, based on that word presumably being given years after Weinstein's interviews, and perhaps soon after having been abused by Navasky with something like "what kind of fascist toadie would say what you said to Weinstein?", would amount to an extraordinary act of faith on Navasky's part. --Jerzy•t 08:23, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) satisfied himself that the tapes were doctored, or
 * 2) didn't know of them and called Weinstein a liar, based simply on a belief in one or more people who gave him their word that they remembered that they could not, when interviewed, have been in a state of mind where they could have uttered what Weinstein attributed to them.
 * Whether or not a subscription is required has no bearing on our usage of the article, good faith should be (initially) assumed of those who put it in, even if it is not easily available. I do not subscribe to the Nation, and I have no problem reading the link, so I reremoved the false subscription required statement.  Neither of the alternatives above are correct.  Weinstein claims to have quotes supporting him on tape.  He refuses to let anyone else listen to them, after promising Navasky, who certainly knows of them, that he would.  Navasky has excellent evidence on his side in at least one case, which was wrongly removed from the article a couple years ago - Weinstein was sued for libel, apologized, paid the plaintiff and settled. The Nation refers to a New York Magazine article bearing on that case, tracking it down could yield a helpful additional source.John Z (talk) 09:45, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is another problematic removal, it is not clear that the Tanenhaus article is not the source of all the criticism, it is certainly true that his appointment was protested with reason. TNR's site is currently down, so I can't even see how much it costs, though their archive is partly accessible, enough to see the article is there.John Z (talk) 11:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You may or not be backed by our generic policies, in insisting that it is just fine to have to pay out money in order to know whether to challenge content. When the content has been as PoV-pushing as it in fact is in the accompanying article on both sides of the controversy (even after, for instance, your quite proper anti-OR "rm editorializing" edit), IMO that would be crazy (whether it's clear policy or not): referees prepared to edit boldly are needed, and should in that role be free of such financial inhibitions; the PoV pushers should shoulder whatever burdens that thrusts upon them, or watch their casually documented content evaporate. BLP cases, such as this one, are even more exceptional, and override e.g. AGF (not of course in permitting PA but in shifting the burden of proof away from the removing editor), and i'm confident you're wrong as far as BLP cases are concerned. As to the content whose free availability you've clarified, thank you for that. I'll figure out if TNR is The National Review (which i recall weighed in) rather than The New Republic, and use the library time i'd planned to spend tomorrow on The Nation (as i mentioned on yr tk pg, before noticing your response on this tk pg!) on the appropriate one instead -- so don't waste any money based on that concern. --Jerzy•t 22:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry for taking a long time to reply. Of course we should be more careful in a BLP - I'm not sure what I'm wrong about - usage of nonfree sources? I meant The New Republic; the TNR Tanenhaus article is the source of the "weakness for mystification" quote discussed above and removed - correcting what I said above,  from other sources, Tanenhaus was one person allowed to hear some tapes.  There are enough other sources, probably free ones or free snippets out there to corroborate all or most of the criticism in the Nation, which I think is sufficiently reliable  here, although its POV should be taken into account.John Z (talk) 06:04, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Substantively, Navasky's main claim was that Weinstein had quoted his interviewees and documents out of context or distorted their words.

Navasky's main claim and point here was that Weinstein demonstrates pretty poor standard of scholarship using a few examples as mere illustration of his point. Weinstein's distorsions and misrepresentations of sources and evidence, as well as unfounded speculations, deliberate ommisions and other dirty tricks serving to just one purpose - to vindicate Chambers and portray Hiss "guilty as charged" - are far more numerous. But what is the worst of all and what violates all basic principles of scholarly work is the fact that Weinstein kept his files closed for some thirty years (despite of repeated promises to make them public for other researchers to check his claims) and he is in the same work once again with The Haunted Wood.88.101.177.121 (talk) 03:14, 24 May 2010 (UTC)Honza73

New information for Career
I cleaned up the unreferenced career section and gave it a few more clear breaks in the Career section to make it easier to read. These edits don't involve your argument, but I hope you guys don't object with the edits. I will continue to polish this section and not interfere with the arguments about his scholarship,

Thanks much SADADS (talk) 15:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Allen Weinstein. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070711114701/https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/docs/v44i5a01p.htm to https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/docs/v44i5a01p.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060922224233/http://www.archives.gov/about/info/archivist-biography.html to http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&cPath=18_22&products_id=281568-1

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:39, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Allen Weinstein. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110616213327/http://www.ifes.org/publication/6f5c379784c1f59253bc90702333a237/Weinstein_PR.pdf to http://www.ifes.org/publication/6f5c379784c1f59253bc90702333a237/Weinstein_PR.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thenation.com/doc/19971103/navasky
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.archives.gov/about/info/archivist-biography.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:31, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Allen Weinstein


text:
Damasonium alisma

Damasonium alisma is a species of flowering marsh plant known by the common name of starfruit. Its native range includes parts of Great Britain, France, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, and Kazakhstan.

Damasonium alisma is native to the British Isles and was at one time commonly found in south and central England. Numbers have declined as a result of the loss of pond habitats. It was not recorded in the wild in 2006 and is classified as endangered within the United Kingdom. Seeds from the (extinct) Headley Heath population were germinated in undisturbed ponds managed by Surrey Wildlife Trust in 2013, and have grown there each year since (at least up to 2018).

Ecology
Damasonium alisma grows in acidic ponds. In Great Britain it went into decline along with the village pond. It once grew in many English counties from Sussex north to Shropshire, but by 1900 was reduced to two ponds in Buckinghamshire and one in Surrey. It is gradually starting to make a comeback due to intense conservation efforts. It requires open, well-lit, shallow water to grow in and regularly churned-up mud for its seeds to germinate.

It is very variable in form according to the depth of the water it is growing in. Dwarf plants with aerial leaves occur growing sub-terrestrially on mud. The number of ovules vary. Usually there are two in each carpel, but carpels with four to many occur over the range. Multi-ovulate forms from southwestern Europe and Sicily were originally described as D. polyspermum.

The shape of the follicles depends on the number of seeds; the beak (empty upper part) of the carpel is elongated in two-seeded plants, whereas in many-seeded plants the seeds occupy more of the follicle and the beak is relatively shorter and less well defined.

Taxonomy
It was first described by Carl Linnaeus as Alisma damasonium in 1753, but was assigned to the genus, Damasonium, in 1768 by Philip Miller.

title: Damasonium alisma


text:
Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Researcher99

Dunkelza's response to Researcher99
Okay, Researcher99 just spammed the Talk:Polygamy page by posting his RFC response on THAT page as well. I removed it from that inappropriate place, but will leave his response here, where it belongs. This is another example of Researcher99 hijacking legitimate article discussion to grind his personal ax. Such activity is highly counterproductive and MUST STOP.

Also, for the record, I am not upset that Researcher99 doesn't like my citations, but rather that he doesn't present any NPOV evidence of his own. I agree that my citations aren't always the best quality, as it is difficult to find entire bodies of text that show group marriage as being included in the broad category of polygamy. Instead, I cited study guides and other academic snippets where group marriage is shown as a subcategory of polygamy. In the process, I have consistenly maintained an NPOV. We should all be avoiding (as much as possible) information provided by political groups like "Christian Polygamists", "Anti-Polygamists", and "Polyamorists".

Researcher99 has instead insisted on using the definitions provided by said Christian Polygamists, rather than scientific definitions from Anthropology, Sociology, or Zoology. I believe that Researcher99 should focus that POV work on a Christian Polygamy article and bring only appropriate scientific evidence to the general NPOV polygamy article. Dunkelza 20:08 August 30, 2005 (EDT)

 * In defense of Dunkelza's references, Researcher99 merely asked for an existence proof.
 * The article currently declares a false statement, saying that "group marriage" is sometimes called "true polygamy."
 * and
 * The article currently also declares another false statement. It makes up a new word, saying that "group marriage" is sometimes called "polygynandry."

 * In both cases, a handful of references proving that the terms are used as described is sufficient to handle Researcher99's claims. Later refererences improved on the initial references. Nereocystis 17:19, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Nereocystis's response to Researcher99
I will only respond to a couple of items.

Yes, Researcher99 and I did discuss a possible resolution. As one of the conditions, Researcher99 wanted me to defer to his expertise. I was unwilling to do this. After nearly 2 weeks of discussion which want around in circles, I was ready to quite. Uriah923's offer to mediate came at a fortunate time. After nearly 2 weeks of discussing Uriah923's mediation, Researcher99 wasn't any closer to agreeing. He wanted to discuss past insults from months ago (which this RFC is also doing, oh well). It was too late to revert to the previous discussion between Researcher99 and me. We had 2 discussions lasting nearly 2 weeks each without ever discussing the text of the article. Add in the previous attempts, and it was clear that Researcher99 wasn't going to come close to appropriate wiki behavior.

I suggest that Researcher99 find a mentor who can help him through the use of collaboration. This will allow Researcher99 to contribute without causing undue pain to others.

I do look forward to a Christian Polygamy article, but that has to be done carefully as well. There are a number of people or groups who consider themselves Christian polygamists. Researcher99 considers only his group thetruthbearer.com, to be legitimate Christian polygamy. Nereocystis 00:25, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Response to dropping RfC
In response to Neigel von Teighen request that I drop this RfC:

 * No, I won't drop the RfC. At least not yet. Researcher99 hasn't shown that he is interested in resolving the dispute. I don't think that he has chosen an AMA yet. Today's editing of Talk:Polygamy is another example of inappropriate behavior. Once again, he has put NPOV on a talk page, and put his diatribe at the top of the talk page, making it difficult to find anything else on this page. When I see evidence that he is trying to resolve the dispute, I am willing to look at the RfC, if there is evidence that he behavior is improving. I don't even know what Researcher99 wants, whether he wants a good article, and just to complain about me until the end of time. He has again refused mediation. Nereocystis 03:18, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Well considering that Researcher99 compared Nereocystis to a rapist and a terrorist, it doesn't seem like he wants mediation, or that mediation would be appropriate with such an abusive user; He said "At this beginning stage, I believe it is probably too early to be discussing Mediation, as it is much like suggesting the idea of negotiating with a terrorist or like asking a rape victim to let the rapist just talk to them to work out their differences." I'm not sure this Rfc is going to achieve much.... Kewp 07:07, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

 * It really annoys me that Nereocystis says that Researcher has no AMA when himself knows that it was because of that that I wanted this RfC dropped, or are you trying to say that, because an "inappropiate" behaivor of Researcher, I'm not doing the things you want me to do?
 * I'll repeat it once again: to drop the RfC will be a good way to make a free an clear RfM. I'd like to hear some reasons of you both, Kewp and Nereocystis, of why that shouldn't be made. --Neigel von Teighen 21:13, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

 * My apologies. I thought that Researcher99 had turned down all of the AMAs. I haven't heard a statement from him that he has chosen any of them as an official AMA yet.  Has he? In my experience with him, it is common to say things which I initially believe is a commitment to action, but then discover that he does not consider himself to have made a decision. This isn't bad behavior per se, but it causes me to be cautious about any steps I make with him. I would like to hear a clear statement from him that he has chosen one or more advocates. Yes, if you are still Researcher99's advocate, then I will work with you.

 * So far I have not seen any indication that Researcher99's behavior has changed. Thus, I don't want to drop the RfC. Researcher99 has turned down a suggestion for moderation. Has Researcher99 agreed to any method of resolving our differences? Nereocystis 22:54, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Now, the whole dropping stuff doesn't matter. I've started the mediation as representing Researcher. Anyway, I'd like know where is Kewp as he surely could help on this... --Neigel von Teighen 23:25, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your help as my AMA, Neigel von Teighen. I am glad to follow your guidance.  Thanks!   Researcher 00:29, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

 * OK. This sounds good. Will Researcher99 state clearly that you are his AMA and that he agrees to the mediation? Nereocystis 23:55, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Researcher99's recent post on this page suggests that he is not quite ready to assume good faith or practice civility. If the mediation is successful, this RfC will be unnecessary, I hope. On the other hand, if he is really willing to undergo mediation, perhaps we can resolve all of these problems. I do think that the notice of mediation needs to appear on Talk:Polygamy so that others can participate. I definitely don't want to assume complete responsibility for polygamy. Nereocystis 01:24, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm sorry I wasn't around when this discussion was going on. I would say that it very unclear from Researcher99's end that he wants to procede with mediation.  When Researcher says "At this beginning stage, I believe it is probably too early to be discussing Mediation", It doesn't really seem that he wants mediation, but then Imaglang says that he does.  I think we should have mediation, but from Researcher99's last post I don't see why the RfC should be dropped, his actions and comments are increasingly abusive, even accusing me and other users of lying and stalking.  Researcher99 needs to be civil to other users and needs to be clear about his intentions:  He says one thing, and his AMA says another. Kewp 08:01, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Nereocystis, I put a message on Talk:Polygamy inviting users to take part on the mediation. --Neigel von Teighen 23:17, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

More disputed behavior by Researcher99
Since the RfC was created, Researcher99 has engaged in questionable behavior. This section lists the questionable behavior.

 * 7 September, 2005 Researcher99 refuses mediation, also compares Nereocystis with terrorist and rapist.
 * 8 September, 2005. Researcher99 places his disputed at top of Talk:Polygamy, places NPOV tag on Talk:Polygamy.

Nereocystis 00:14, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Proof of Lies & Ganging Up against Researcher
As further proof that I am being ganged up on, here is proof of how Nereocystis and Kewp have both told the identical lie about me, on 2 separate TALK pages.

In the following proofs, they both cited from the same DIFF of a post I made, this one.

At 20:25, 9 September 2005, on the polygamy TALK page, Nereocystis posted the following very aggressive post, completely "running over me" yet again:

"Researcher99 has decided against mediation again. I suggest that we ignore his postings while his RFC continues, unless they are about the article, and try to work on improvements to the article. It's going to be a painful process. Nereocystis 20:25, 9 September 2005 (UTC)"

At 07:07, 12 September 2005, on the Requests_for_comment/Researcher99 TALK page, Kewp posted the following:

"Well considering that Researcher99] compared [[User:Nereocystis|Nereocystis to a rapist and a terrorist, it doesn't seem like he wants mediation, or that mediation would be appropriate with such an abusive user; He said 'At this beginning stage, I believe it is probably too early to be discussing Mediation, as it is much like suggesting the idea of negotiating with a terrorist or like asking a rape victim to let the rapist just talk to them to work out their differences.' I'm not sure this Rfc is going to achieve much.... Kewp 07:07, 12 September 2005 (UTC) |undefined"

Since both of those cited this post from me, here is what I actually said:

"Thank you for your input, it has been very kind and helpful. I have sent you an email, as you suggested earlier. Nereocystis often says many things, but then they come back with abuse anyway. So their pretend willingness for Mediation is an act to be distrusted. At this beginning stage, I believe it is probably too early to be discussing Mediation, as it is much like suggesting the idea of negotiating with a terrorist or like asking a rape victim to let the rapist just talk to them to work out their differences. (Maybe Mediation can work later though.) Currently, though, no matter how much a single issue might get resolved in Mediation, the abuser, if not stopped, will only continue to deploy further stalking, attacks, and abuse afterward. I want to succeed in going forward, not to be back here in this problem over and over again. So, while we might end up there at Mediation eventually, I first need to have some things addressed with the help of an AMA. I believe in the Wikipedia Guidelines, even though it seeems to appear that I am among the extreme minority of those who really believe in that. I very much appreciate your help. Thanks. Researcher 19:14, 7 September 2005 (UTC)"

In that post which I made at 19:14, 7 September 2005, it clearly reveals that I had said, "Currently, though, no matter how much a single issue might get resolved in Mediation, the abuser, if not stopped, will only continue to deploy further stalking, attacks, and abuse afterward. I want to succeed in going forward, not to be back here in this problem over and over again. So, while we might end up there at Mediation eventually, I first need to have some things addressed with the help of an AMA."

It is important to note the dates of the posts.

Nereocystis, 20:25, 9 September 2005, posted the lie on the polygamy TALK page.

Kewp 07:07, 12 September 2005, posted the lie on the RfC/Researcher TALK page.

They both cited the same post from my TALK page, 19:14, 7 September 2005.

But after I had made that 19:14, 7 September 2005 post on my own TALK page, I had also made another later post at 20:05, 8 September 2005. Outwardly declaring that I am seeking discussion with an AMA and am open to Mediation, I said,

"I appreciate that effort, thank you, and I do hope it continues. However, the outrageously unnecessary RfC against me is but one of a number of abusive attacks from Nereocystis. Another example is the very suspicious sabotage of the deleted 'anti-polygamy' article I tried to create as another possible proposal for solving some of the issues in the overall problem. Their telling such outright lies, as I showed on your TALK page, is another example. These examples and more are simply individual examples of the overall agenda to destory everything I do so that I leave Wikipedia and that they can then feel free to fill the polygamy article with their deliberately hostile and/or sneaky-subtle anti-polygamy POV propaganda. (I have never ever encountered such a dysfunctional, patently abusive individual as Nereocystis. I never allow this kind of human dysfunction toward me in my real life. So, when I turn to Wikipedia rules to prevent the abuse, instead the rules have seemingly been ignored and it has only prolonged for months on end.) The larger overall issue is that I am targeted at every step, stalked to every post, and prevented from doing anything for the value of Wikipedia, all by Nereocystis. I need to have a discussion directly with a listening-AMA before I can commit to anything. I am open to Mediation, but only after I have some real discussion from some AMA who has read ALL the facts and now can clearly see the reality of Nereocystis's prolonged abuse toward me and toward my every edit. So, I agree that the RfC against me needs to be removed, but it is only one step among many that are needed. The abuse HAS to come to end. Researcher 20:05, 8 September 2005 (UTC)"

That post occurred before both Nereocystis's 20:25, 9 September 2005 posted lie and Kewp's 12 September 2005 posted lie. It was posted on the same TALK page (i.e., mine) that had had the same 19:14, 7 September 2005 post from me on my own TALK page which both lying posts cited.

So, clearly, both Nereocystis and Kewp have posted the identical lie about me, trying to abusively suggest that I said things I obviously did not say. One (Nereocystis) says the lie on one TALK page, and the other (Kewp) says the lie on another. Not only is it a deliberate and identicial lie, but also by thier doing it that way together, they tried to present a false idea of originality of telling the lie on each of the TALK pages individually. What it really, though, is just a ganging up on me with a clear lie.

This kind of lying about me is exactly this kind of non-stop abuse against me that has been going on for so long. I am hopeful that, with the help of my AMA, the abuse will finally come to an end. Researcher 00:23, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your plans, Researcher99. I hadn't realized that you are still considering mediation.  Have you changed your mind on mediation? Are you willing to go with mediation for our dispute? Have you chosen AMAs? If so, please list all of your official AMAs? Nereocystis 00:48, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Researcher99, what I posted about you was not a lie, you said "At this beginning stage, I believe it is probably too early to be discussing Mediation, as it is much like suggesting the idea of negotiating with a terrorist or like asking a rape victim to let the rapist just talk to them to work out their differences." You are comparing the people that you would ostensibly be in mediation with to terrorists and rapists.  Unless you are talking about yourself, this comment can only taken as a direct attack on the other parties involved in this discussion.  For you to say that I am lying or to call it "abuse" is disingenuous, and wholly unreasonable.  I will not respond to any of the other allegations in Researcher99's last post, because they can only be described as ludicrous.   Kewp 08:12, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Caught in a Lie, More Lies came Forward
Readers may note how the lies continue. Readers may observe the responses to my last post here, "Proof of Lies & Ganging Up against Researcher" and in other posts Nereocystis and Kewp made in other parts of this RfC/TALK page. Based on their responses, they seem to that think I violate the principles of Assume_good_faith and Civility to expose how they have obviously lied about me, yet they equally think that they are somehow in full acordance with those princples for telling the lies.

Nereocystis actually asks if I changed my mind on Mediation as if my "mind" had somehow refused it previously. Kewp actually says it was not a lie to read a quote from mine which acually proves that I did not reject Mediation!  Being caught in an obvious lie, the instead use even more lies and abusively suggest that I am the one who is supposedly not being civil and polite!

In my post which they both cite so much, on 19:14, 7 September 2005 on my own TALK page, I clearly said that, chronologically, I need to speak with an AMA first. Here are three quotes from that post:

 * At this beginning stage, I believe it is probably too early to be discussing Mediation...

 * (Maybe Mediation can work later though.) ...

 * So, while we might end up there at Mediation eventually, I first need to have some things addressed with the help of an AMA.

In my later post on 20:05, 8 September 2005, I made that clear there too.

 * I need to have a discussion directly with a listening-AMA before I can commit to anything...

 * I am open to Mediation, but only after I have some real discussion from some AMA who has read ALL the facts and now can clearly see the reality of Nereocystis's prolonged abuse toward me and toward my every edit.

As anyone can obviously see, I never once refused Mediation. I had said it over and again, that I needed to first speak with an AMA before doing anything else. So, it is another lie to suggest that someone simply "minsinterpreted" my intention. What I had said could not have been clearer. (So, even the "sorry I misinterpreted" assertion is an obvious lie, too, because there was no room for such supposed "misinterpreptation".)

Instead, the suggestion that I somehow refused Mediation was simply the deliberate lie they advanced in order to once again "run right over me" in the undeniably abusive act of Nereocystis's declaration for everyone to "ignore (my) postings". It is yet another example of the kind of non-stop abuse I get. It proves that, no matter how many times I make my point, Nereocystis ignores what I say and just "runs right over me."

Could it be that Nereocystis is Kewp?
It appears that Kewp must be thinking they are Nereocystis (maybe they are the same person?).

In my 20:05, 8 September 2005 post I made, I had only said,

 * The larger overall issue is that I am targeted at every step, stalked to every post, and prevented from doing anything for the value of Wikipedia, all by Nereocystis.

In the past post I made which they both cite from me so much (which disproves their lie), I had only said,

 * Nereocystis often says many things, but then they come back with abuse anyway. So their pretend willingness for Mediation is an act to be distrusted. At this beginning stage, I believe it is probably too early to be discussing Mediation, as it is much like suggesting the idea of negotiating with a terrorist or like asking a rape victim to let the rapist just talk to them to work out their differences.

Obviously, my comparison references and discussion about Mediation possibilities at a later time only applied to Nereocystis. What is even more ironic is that in Kewp's original post where they told the proven lie against me, they themselves quoted that I was only talking about Nereocystis.

Why should Kewp think they were being identified that way in their latest posts (here and here)? After all, they were not even involved in any of the discussion with me during anything, until they arrived at the end of August to unwaveringly support every abuse perpetrated by Nereocystis against me, very late into this months-long situation.

It is so odd that Kewp would think they were being identified that way. It is so perplexing that it makes me wonder if it might possibly be because it was actually Nereocystis making those posts but had forgotten they were using the Kewp username at the time they posted.

Given how both Kewp and Nereocystis have told the identical clearly-proven lie on two separate TALK pages, and that now Kewp made this post and this post, thinking that my quotes applied to them too, I wonder if Nereocystis is Kewp.

If true, that would not surprise me, considering that it very much appears to me that Nereocystis was Ghostintheshell. (FMI about that specificially: readers may see: The Ghostintheshell Situation (7 May 2005) and Solution Needed for Gangs of Sneaky Vandals (16 May 2005).

Of course, this is only a suspicion about Kewp. I am simply noting how very odd it is that Kewp would be posting as if they are Nereocystis.

Clearly, it is those who advance obvious lies about me who are the ones who refuse the principles of Assume_good_faith and Civility. To accuse me (as in here and here, with the former one updated here) of rejecting those principles proves that they are the ones rejecting the principles themselves. To suggest that the act of my pointing out the obvious lie somehow means that I reject those principles is undeniably another obvious lie itself they are advancing against me.

I am hopeful that, with the help of my AMA, these kinds of lies and abuse will come to an end, and I will truly be treated with the principles of Assume_good_faith, and Civility, and honesty.

Researcher 20:05, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Replies

 * No, I am not Kewp. In fact, I do not have sock puppets on Wikipedia, though I probably made a couple of anonymous edits quite a while ago. Nereocystis 01:18, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Researcher99- I have NEVER misrepresented myself as Nereocystis. As you can see here, , I said quite clearly
 * Well considering that Researcher99] compared [[User:Nereocystis|Nereocystis to a rapist and a terrorist, it doesn't seem like he wants mediation, or that mediation would be appropriate with such an abusive user; He said "At this beginning stage, I believe it is probably too early to be discussing Mediation, as it is much like suggesting the idea of negotiating with a terrorist or like asking a rape victim to let the rapist just talk to them to work out their differences." I'm not sure this Rfc is going to achieve much.... Kewp 07:07, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

In my second post, I was responding to your claim that I lied about your comparing Nereocystis to a rapist and a terrorist. Please do not willfully misrepresent my words. You have accused me of lying and now of being a sockpuppet. Neither are true. Kewp 06:41, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

 * From Researcher 20:12, 15 September 2005 (UTC)  - Readers may note that my last post had already noted the irony that Kewp had said that about Nereocystis in their post.  As seen in my post above, I had said:

 * "Obviously, my comparison references and discussion about Mediation possibilities at a later time only applied to Nereocystis. What is even more ironic is that in Kewp's original post where they told the proven lie against me, they themselves quoted that I was only talking about Nereocystis."

 * "Why should Kewp think they were being identified that way in their latest posts (here and here)? After all, they were not even involved in any of the discussion with me during anything, until they arrived at the end of August to unwaveringly support every abuse perpetrated by Nereocystis against me, very late into this months-long situation."

 * It is the quotes in the "(here and here)" part of that which showed Kewp acting as if they thought I was making those references to them, sounding like they are Nereocystis.

 * As I said, Kewp has arrived on this situation only very recently. Yet they think they are somehow involved or have any legitimacy for supporting every single abuse that Nereocystis advances.  Rather than being involved, Kewp has only arrived as a "cheerleader" for Nereocystis.  They have no part in this months-long systematic abuse that Nereocystis has heaped on me, but Kewp continues to act as if they are.  It is Kewp's actions that so identically duplicate Nereocystis's actions that causes the very serious suspicion that Kewp actually is Nereocystis.  Researcher 20:12, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Attempts at mediation failing
On 13 September, 2005, one of Researcher99's AMA convinced Researcher99 to accept mediation at Requests for mediation/Researcher99 and Nereocystis. As of October 2, 2005, Researcher99 has refused to allow the mediation to include a discussion of the text of polygamy. It appears that the mediation will not work. Nereocystis 15:31, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above post by Nereocystis is another lie, which has been answered and proved on the related RfM page. It shows once again how Nereocystis cleverly invents lies about me and then completely "runs right over me," even after I had explained something seven times.  Researcher 19:22, 4 October 2005 (UTC)


text:
Wikipedia:Peer review/Supermarine Spitfire/archive2

Supermarine Spitfire
Resubmission - would like this to be Featured soon, I'll admit I'm not too knowledgeable on the technicalities myself but its the sort of thing I'd like to read about. --PopUpPirate 00:07, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * You really need to do something about the image copyrights. In particular, the GFDL claims for Image:Spitfire.JPG, Image:Supermarinespitfire.JPG are almost certainly wrong, and I'm not certain that Canadian Crown Copyright is an appropriate license for Wikipedia -- it appears to have a "no commercial use" clause. --Carnildo 07:37, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * These were some of my comments from the last review of this same article:
 * "The first thing I noticed is that there is no mention of Lady Lucy Houston's important contribution to the early project. The page could do with sections about the plane's contribution to the air war over Europe, N. Africa, and elsewhere. (Weren't they withheld from France in 1940?)"
 * Most of these issues still appear to need addressing. Thanks. :) — RJH 17:30, 10 September 2005 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Jdhedden

Welcome!

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

Flowerparty 00:06, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jdhedden


text:
Spit Junction, New South Wales

Spit Junction is an urban locality in the suburb of Mosman in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Spit Junction is in the local government area of the Municipality of Mosman and is part of the Lower North Shore.

History
E. and W. E. Brady bought 9 acre in this area in 1855 and it became a bush racetrack until the area was subdivided in 1902. The area had been known as Trafalgar Square, from the name of a block of shops built at the corner of Spit Road and Military Road.

Commercial area
Bridgepoint Shopping Centre is a small shopping mall located at Spit Junction. It features a supermarket, grocery shops, bookshop, gift shops, cafés, health practitioners, and offices.

title: Spit Junction, New South Wales


text:
Talk:Sony HiFD

HiFD drive formatting problems
The article does not mention that a floppy formated at 1.44 MB by the superdisk could not be read by the standard drives! This fact would also contribuit to the non-acceptance of the new drives. I don't know if the sony drives suffered from this problem.
 * I'm almost certain this is not true. Do you have a source for this claim? Maury 17:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Original research
The fact that ultimately Superdisk (even as LS-240, which could read and write 240MB and 120MB media, supported 1,44MB HD floppies and could format them up to 30MB) did not survive either is seen as the greatest proof of this theory. Whose theory is this? If this is a conclusion drawn by an editor, and it cannot be sourced, then it should be removed. — OranL (talk) 16:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sony HiFD


text:
User:Gamey91

the super cool guy on nsider

title: User:Gamey91


text:
User:NickBax

Visit my personal homepage Nick's Place.

I live in Seattle, Washington.

One of my favorite games to play is Carcassonne, go pick it up right now!

Wikipedia is now a family affair! My younger cousin is active as an editor, and vandal-fighter!

I like making smaller edits. (Typo fixing and whatnot as I read along.) You'll also see me making large reorganizations to articles. I find this very satisfying and I think it does a lot to improve the articles, but those are definitely more work.

Remember the world will not end tomorrow

title: User:NickBax


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl Schilde

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete --Allen3 talk 15:10, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

Carl Schilde
Delete Non-notable PhilipO 00:08, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. No assertion of notability. Pburka 00:48, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per Pburka (criteria A7). Jaxl | talk 01:05, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as per WP:CSD A7. Hall Monitor 21:42, 2 September 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:
South Windsor, New South Wales

South Windsor is a suburb of the town of Windsor in north west Sydney in the state of New South Wales, Australia. It is generally bounded in the west by Rickabys Creek and in the east by South Creek, both tributaries of the Hawkesbury River. It is also home of Bede Polding College, a Catholic secondary school.

South Windsor was previously called "Newtown"; the new name of "South Windsor" was assigned on 10 September 2004.

The population is somewhat younger than the bulk of the country. In the, the median age of people in South Windsor was 33 years, compared to the national median of 37 years. Children aged under 15 years made up 22.7% of the population, and people aged 65 years and over made up 10.2% of the population.

The majority of residents (82.6%) were born in Australia, compared to the national average of 69.8%; the next most common countries of birth were England 4.3%, New Zealand 2.1%, Scotland 0.8%, Philippines 0.7% and Malta 0.4%.

title: South Windsor, New South Wales


text:
South Wentworthville, New South Wales

South Wentworthville is a predominantly residential suburb in Greater Western Sydney, in the state of New South Wales, Australia.

History
Traditional owners of the land were the Dhrag or Darug peoples.

The Fullagar estate, the part which was South of the Great Western Highway was available for auction in 1895. The map shows the Western Road (now called the Great Western Highway) and Frances Street which no longer connects to the Highway because of the M4 construction.

The Fullagar estate was available for sale again in 1902 which shows the area between Coleman Street, France’s Street is in the middle and up to Richmond Street (which is not specifically named on this map).

Geography
South Wentworthville is located 26 kilometres west of the Sydney central business district, in the local government area of the Cumberland Council and is part of the Greater Western Sydney region. South Wentworthville is an extension of Wentworthville.

Transport

 * Liverpool–Parramatta T-way – a bus-route that passes through South Wentworthville
 * M4 cycleway – a cyclist and pedestrian path that connects South Wentworthville to Sydney Olympic Park

Notable residents

 * Rick Springfield was born in South Wentworthville.
 * Channel Seven newsreader, Chris Bath, grew up in the suburb and worked at nearby Kmart Merrylands.

title: South Wentworthville, New South Wales


text:
South Turramurra

South Turramurra is a suburb on the Upper North Shore of Sydney in the state of New South Wales, Australia 18 km north-west of the Sydney central business district, in the local government area of Ku-ring-gai Council. Turramurra and North Turramurra are separate suburbs.

South Turramurra is a leafy suburb, surrounded by the upper section of the Lane Cove National Park. There are many walking trails, including the Great North Walk and walking trails with access to neighbouring suburbs such as North Epping, Marsfield and West Pymble.

History
Turramurra is an Aboriginal word which is thought to mean either big hill, high place, or small watercourse. Early settlers referred to the area as Eastern Road until the name Turramurra was adopted when the railway station was built in 1897.

During the early 1990s, a community organisation (Coalition Against Lane Cove Valley Freeways) was formed to oppose plans for the construction of the B2/B3 extension, designed to connect the M2 motorway in North Epping with the Pacific Highway.

South Turramurra became a separate suburb from Turramurra on 5 August 1994.

Demographics
At the, the suburb of South Turramurra recorded a population of 3,084 people. Census data shows that:
 * South Turramurra's Age distribution reflects the popularity of the suburb with families and retirees. The median age was 42 years, compared to the national median of 38 years. Children aged under 15 years made up 23.7% of the population (national average is 18.7%) and people aged 65 years and over made up 18.1% of the population (national average is 15.8%).
 *  Ethnic diversity : 67.8% of people were born in Australia, compared to the national average of 65.5%; the next most common country of birth was England at 6.0.  77.6% of people only spoke English at home. Other languages spoken at home included Mandarin at 3.8%.
 *  Religion : The most common responses for religion were No Religion 32.6%, Anglican 21.0% and Catholic 17.8%.

Transport
The nearest railway station is Turramurra. CDC NSW bus route 571 runs between Turramurra station and South Turramurra along Kissing Point Road, and route 572 runs the same route extended to Macquarie University.

The Comenarra Parkway, a minor arterial road consisting of only one lane in each direction, creates a boundary with Turramurra, to the north and West Pymble to the south.

Commercial area
South Turramurra Shopping Village is located on the corner of Auluba Road and Kissing Point Road.

Schools

 * Turramurra High School Located on Maxwell Street
 * Turramurra Public School is located on the south side of Turramurra but is technically in Turramurra, not South Turramurra

Parks
South Turramurra is surrounded on the other three sides by the Lane Cove National Park.
 * Field of Dreams, Kissing Point Road near Vernon Street
 * Sir David Martin Oval (Auluba Oval), Auluba Road (Home of Kissing Point Sports Club)
 * Netball Courts, Canoon Road

Community
The strong community support for the anti-freeway campaigners resulted in the protection of the bushland at the foot of the suburb of South Turramurra as part of the Lane Cove River National Park. Many different and diverse action groups were formed (and still remain) in order to effectively lobby government. The environmental community group STEP Inc, which was formed in South Turramurra in 1978 has grown to be a powerful force for the environment in northern Sydney.

1st Turramurra Scout Group is a Scout Group, with active programs for boys and girls aged from 8–11 Cub Scouts, 11–15 Scouts through to young men and women 15–17 Venturer Scouts and 18–25 Rovers.

Turramurra and Kissing Point Rover Scout Crews, both based on the south side of Turramurra, are active groups of young people aged 18~25, who are into a wide range of outdoor, social and community service activities.

There are also a number of Churches and various religious temples in South Turramurra, some having youth groups for children aged 5–18 years old.

title: South Turramurra


text:
KUOK

KUOK (channel 36) is a television station licensed to Woodward, Oklahoma, United States, affiliated with the Spanish-language network Univision. Owned by the Oklahoma City–based Tyler Media Group, the station maintains a transmitter near State Highway 34 in rural southwestern Woodward County.

KUOK-CD (channel 36) in Oklahoma City is a low-power, Class A station that rebroadcasts KUOK's signal across the Oklahoma City metropolitan area. This station's transmitter is located between Southeast 50th Street and Santa Fe Avenue (adjacent to the studios of KUOK) in southern Oklahoma City. Even though KUOK and KUOK-CD maintain digital signals of their own, their combined broadcast range does not reach the entire Oklahoma City market. Therefore, KUOK is simulcast in high definition on the second digital subchannel of Shawnee-licensed sister station, Telemundo affiliate and Tyler Media flagship KTUZ-TV (UHF channel 29.2, mapped as virtual channel 36.1) from its transmitter near 86th Street and Ridgeway Road (south of Britton Road) in northeast Oklahoma City.

KUOK, KUOK-CD and KTUZ are also sisters to low-power Estrella TV affiliate KOCY-LD (channel 48). All four outlets share studios near Southeast 51st Street and Shields Boulevard in south Oklahoma City.

History
The station first signed on the air on May 15, 2002, as an affiliate of Pax TV (now Ion Television); the following year, Equity Broadcasting Corporation purchased the station (Equity subsequently sold KQOK [channel 30] to Oklahoma City-based Tyler Media Group, which converted that station into a Telemundo affiliate under the KTUZ-TV call letters). On May 8, 2004, KUOK became a Univision affiliate, the first affiliate of the Spanish language network in the state of Oklahoma; it also served as the full-power flagship of a six-station bi-state network collectively branded as "Univision Arkansas-Oklahoma". Prior to the affiliation switch, Univision had previously been only receivable via local cable providers within the state (such as Cox Communications in the Oklahoma City and Tulsa markets), which carried the Spanish language network's programming from its national feed; that feed was eventually replaced by a direct fiber optic feed of KUOK – whose schedule now mirrors the national feed outside of local advertising, news inserts and occasional paid programming substitutions, and provided improved reception of the station throughout the market than that receivable over-the-air prior to the digital transition – from the station's studios.

KUOK and the three low-power stations that also Equity acquired to become its translators (K69EK [channel 69, later KWDW-LP, KUOK-LP, KOCY-LP, and now KOCY-LD on channel 48] and KCHM-LP [channel 36, now KUOK-CD] in Oklahoma City; KUOK-CA [channel 11] in Norman; and KOKT-LP [channel 20] in Sulphur), originally relayed Univision programming across Oklahoma via a direct simulcast from then-sister station KLRA-LP (now KKYK-CD) in Little Rock, Arkansas (from late 2004 to 2005, the regional network was even branded as "Univision Arkansas-Oklahoma"), including local commercials from the Little Rock area that were inserted by that station during national commercial breaks and KLRA-LP's station identification bumpers (the Oklahoma City repeaters were identified only through text-only IDs placed at the bottom of the screen each half-hour). In March 2005, KUOK – though still programmed via satellite from Equity's headquarters in Little Rock – discontinued the KLRA-LP simulcast, and began carrying advertising for businesses within the Oklahoma City market and separate station promotions.

On June 25, 2008, Equity announced that it would sell KUOK and its low-power repeaters—along with Univision affiliates KEYU (now a Telemundo affiliate) in Amarillo, Texas, KUTW-LP/KWKO-LP in Waco, Texas, WLZE-LP/WEVU-CA in Fort Myers, Florida, and WUMN-CA in Minneapolis–Saint Paul—to Luken Communications (owned by former Equity executive Henry Luken) for $25 million, with a contingency to reduce the sale price to $17.5 million if Luken closed its purchase on all of the stations simultaneously. That December, Equity Media Holdings filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection; offers by Luken Communications to acquire Equity-owned stations in six markets were later withdrawn. KUOK and its repeaters were sold at auction to Tyler Media on April 16, 2009, which created a duopoly with KTUZ-TV (which became an affiliate of Univision competitor Telemundo in 2005); this placed KUOK in the unique position of being the junior partner in a duopoly with a Telemundo affiliate, a rarity given that Univision is the longer established and higher rated nationally of the two networks.

Newscasts
From 2005 until May 2008, Equity Broadcasting produced Spanish-language newscasts for KUOK, titled Noticias Univision Oklahoma; the newscasts aired at 5 and 10 p.m. weeknights, consisting of a single broadcast that was repeated later in the evening. This replaced now-former sister station KLRA-LP's Little Rock-centered newscast Noticias Univision Arkansas (later rebranded as Noticias Univision Arkansas-Oklahoma through a refocusing of the newscasts towards both states), which ran in the 5 and 10 p.m. timeslots until KUOK discontinued the KLRA-LP station simulcast. While KUOK maintained its own locally based full-time reporters and photographers, most of the newscast segments were produced out of studios located at Equity's headquarters in Little Rock; as with the newscasts that Equity produced for its other Univision affiliates around the country, the program consisted of nine minutes of local news and weather segments, accompanied by pre-recorded national and international news and sports segments produced for inclusion in all of the broadcasts. As a result of corporate cutbacks spurred by the company's financial issues, Equity discontinued the newscasts it produced for all six of its Univision affiliates (including KUOK) on June 6, 2008.

Since becoming a sister station to KTUZ-TV, KUOK has continued not to offer any full-scale news programming of its own (other than those provided by Univision) and does not simulcast KTUZ's 5 and 10 p.m. weeknight newscasts (however, those programs have aired on Univision-affiliated sister station KUTU-CD in Tulsa since August 2011); in lieu of local newscasts, KUOK currently airs half-hour comedy programs broadcast by Univision at 5 p.m., and the network's late night newsmagazine series Primer Impacto Extra at 10 p.m. In addition, it runs a station identification slide that features a seven-day weather forecast for Oklahoma City which runs at approximately the top and bottom of each hour during station breaks, along with news and weather updates on weekday mornings airing between 6:25 and 8:25 a.m. during Despierta América.

Technical information
As the station's original construction permit was granted after the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) finalized the DTV allotment plan on April 21, 1997, the station did not receive a companion channel for its digital signal. Instead, at the end of the digital conversion period for full-service television stations, KUOK would have been required to turn off its analog signal and turn on its digital signal (called a "flash-cut").

On December 8, 2008, KUOK's then-owner Equity Media Holdings filed a petition for bankruptcy relief under Chapter 11 of the federal bankruptcy code. As a result, the station was required to obtain post-petition financing and court approval before digital facilities were to be constructed, and had to cease its analog signal on February 17, 2009, regardless of whether digital facilities were operational by that date. The station filed an authority to remain silent if required by the FCC.

While the DTV Delay Act extended this deadline to June 12, 2009, Equity had applied for an extension of the digital construction permit in order to retain the broadcast license after the station went dark. The main KUOK signal was later added as a digital subchannel of Telemundo-affiliated sister station KTUZ-TV for viewers in Oklahoma City with an over-the-air digital receiver in 2011. In December 2011, KCHM-CA ended analog operations and flash-cut its signal to digital (becoming KUOK-CD), allowing Oklahoma City viewers who previously lost access to the station following the digital transition to view the station over-the-air; the KUOK-CD signal covers a 32 mi radius that includes the entire Oklahoma City metropolitan area, although reception is spotty in some areas of the city.

Translators
KUOK operates a translator, which is licensed to and serves the immediate Oklahoma City area:

KUOK operated KOKT-LP (channel 20) in Sulphur as a translator from 2004 until 2011, when that station ceased operations. Prior to affiliating with Univision, KOKT-LP operated as an independent station from 1994 to 1995, before becoming the UPN affiliate for the Ada, Oklahoma-Sherman, Texas television market between 1995 and 2004; however Oklahoma City area and North Texas editions of TV Guide (during the magazine's local listings era) claimed that the market's NBC affiliate KTEN ran select UPN programs as an additional affiliation from 1995 to 2002. Oklahoma City sister station KOCY-LD (which remains in operation as an Estrella TV affiliate) also operated as a KUOK translator from 2004 to 2012. Now-defunct KUOK-CA (channel 11) in Norman served as a translator of KUOK from 2004 to 2008, when it affiliated with LAT TV.

title: KUOK


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sui thor

 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 speedy merged and redirected. - Mgm|(talk) 09:10, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Sui thor
23 Google hits for sui-thor and 5 for suithor, none clearly related to the general usage claimed. Isolated term from an online game, and the link to the game is not active. Samaritan 00:10, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge with SubSpace (computer game). Al 00:53, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: I was bold, and just completed the merge per Al Wikibofh 03:41, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * Nice job with the merge, but instead of deleting the page, it should now be kept as a redirect in order to preserve the page history as per the GNU license. Fernando Rizo T/C 04:07, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I agree it's necessary, but OK. :)  It would be nice if we could close this out early then.  Wikibofh 04:11, August 31, 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:
WTIX

WTIX may refer to:

 * WTIX-FM, a radio station (94.3 FM) licensed to serve Galliano, Louisiana, United States
 * WEGO (AM), a defunct radio station (1410 AM) formerly licensed to serve Concord, North Carolina, which held the call sign WTIX from 2009 to 2018
 * WTOB (AM), a radio station (980 AM) licensed to serve Winston-Salem, North Carolina, which used the call letters WTIX from 2006 to 2009
 * WQNO, a radio station (690 AM) licensed to serve New Orleans, Louisiana, which used the call sign WTIX from 1953 to 2005

title: WTIX