text:
Talk:Mark Belling

Picture
Can we get a picture of Mark on here that isn't a possible copyvio please?

Wetback section blanked
Someone deleted the wetback controversy section, so I reverted it and am referring them here so they can express the exact nature of their objection and see if it can't be addressed through consensus. From my view, the material is sourced (and if any specific info is considered soft on sources, we may be able to dig it up rather than delete it), verifiable, neutral WP:NPOV, and it is definitely WP:DUE - this event is the single most covered single event in Belling's career. So I think we can surely find a way to keep the general information contained here freely available. If anyone has issues, lets work them out instead of obliterating the info altogether. --Izauze (talk) 20:24, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

 * First of all, wetback is a slur so please refer to the controversy by another name in the future. In any case, the "Hispanic Controversy" as it was called was pulled months ago after lengthy debate on both sides, and a moderator stepped in voting to close the section for a myriad of reasons.  Just check the history of the talk page for specifics.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.102.247.134 (talk) 14:31, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Yes it is a slur, but it is a slur he said, which is well documented, and which he admits to - there is and was controversy about it. It's in quotes, so I don't see the problem.  Eliminating it via a slightly inaccurate "hispanic controversy" is simply POV pushing as far as I can see, unless you can point me towards some sort of wikipedia policy that says you shouldn't put such things in subject headings, but I don't think there is.  I also don't see this big conversation about it in the past here - you'll have to provide me with diffs.  And I remind you of course that "consensus can change".  Additionally, please follow wikipedia's BRD model in the future and get consensus here before making any further changes to this section.  I will be restoring this section until we can find a consensus here. --Izauze (talk) 15:37, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

 * That isn't my argument. My point is that this was resolved a long time ago.  I don't mean to rehash the original argument as I was only an observer, not a participant.  All I know is that there were several people arguing a number of points and eventually a moderator decided to settle it in favor of removing the fmr. Hispanic Controversy section.  Changing the name of the section doesn't change the general thrust of that section that was removed a long time ago per those arguments.  If you follow the BRD the old revert-war (that page's term, not mine) ended in the Hispanic controversy section being removed.  If you like you're free to review the histories for those discussions which I am not inclined to repeat.  The general just of those debates (as summarized by the moderator I speak of) were that, ultimately, the Hispanic Controversy portion was disproportionately large for the overall size of the article and while warranting some comment, did not deserve an entire section.  It was also clear through citations that it was not the most significant portion of Mr. Belling's career, as he has hosted national programs, authors articles, and of course the 20-some year length of his radio program is more significant than a 2-week controversy.  Part of the reasoning is covered in Biographies_of_living_persons; note the standards for such pages is different than others.  So, because this issue was resolved before, it is proper to address this issue with the other individuals who debated this a long time ago.  It is also appropriate not to use BRD because that is for "new" issues, not those which have been resolved in the past.  Also note that you are the reverter, not the "bold"-er (my term, not Wiki's), as the Hispanic controversy was in the page at one time and removed per consensus.  Consequentially it is appropriate to keep the section in question removed until the issue is resolved.  I am not disputing "consensus can change".  However, as the consensus was artificially concluded some time ago by a moderator, it is appropriate at this point to go by PGLIFE.  Therefore it is my interpretation that the former consensus is the presumption, and that you have the burden, at this time, to demonstrate some change in the consensus (Id.).  I believe the standard is for you to present the totality of your argument and offer others to intercede for two weeks, at which time if there are no responses your edit can be presented.  Please do so and hopefully those others will show up.  If not, in two weeks I will agree with you that the consensus has changed, and you may return the wetback, hispanic, or whatever section to article's page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.102.247.134 (talk) 18:39, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

First i wanted to let you know to sign your comments by using four tildes: ~ in a row. Secondly, as you admit, you are the one "being bold" by erasing existing material, and I am the reverter. Per wikipedias guidelines after the article is reverted to its previous state, it must go through discussion in that state. So, please do not continue to edit war. We can talk about this and work out some sort of compromise that tries to address any valid issues you may have with the material without deleting it entirely. Your quoting of "Life Cycle" is not appropriate, since Life Cycle pertains to changing long established wikipedia guidelines and rules, not little articles on controversial radio DJs.

That being said, even though there is no life cycle, and consensus can change, I of course WOULD like to learn from discussions that may have happened here in the past. However I do not see any such discussion on the talk page history, so you will have to provide me with a link to it in order for me to consider it.

If you don't have any specific objections yourself, I'm okay waiting a little while to see if anyone objects before I restore the material. I personally don't believe it is an undue amount of attention for this subject - it is the single most covered event in his career. He makes a living as a pot-stirring semi-controversial talk show host, and this is him at his most controversial. Indeed, it came close to ending his career in Milwaukee. If you or anyone else thinks there are other important events or material regarding his career, anyone can be bold and add it. Let's discuss. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Izauze (talk • contribs) 01:43, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

 * btw, here is a diff of the change that is being proposed:  If anyone has any additions, concerns, etc. - please speak up now.  --Izauze (talk) 20:40, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

 * People keep try to delete this, but it's just obvious POV pushing/vandalism. Someone always catches it and puts it back though - no biggie.  76.208.147.124 (talk) 02:23, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Please stop posting the slur controversy section. As discussed many times before, a full section concerning that single topic violates Wikipedia's NPOV undue weight & peacock terms policies; and basicallly everything in the BLP page. If you disagree please state your case here as to why it does not violate those three rules (note the BLP page is huge so there's a number of sub-topics to cover).  Wiki takes BLP seriously in order to prevent libel so let's be cautious here.  72.135.238.173 (talk) 05:31, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

IPs keep deleting stuff off this page
What can be done about the continuing problem of this article seeing its material deleted by persistent editors operating anonymously behind IPs? Perhaps it needs to be semi-protected if this continues. I know this is a slow page, but any thoughts anyone? Izauze (talk) 09:26, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Anyone visiting Izauze's talk page will notice a long list of disputes in which Izauze has made an inappropriate posting to various Wikipedia pages. Or maybe they won't - because Izauze regularly deletes these disputes from his talk page to hide the fact that almost every edit s/he makes is eventually reverted due to innappropriateness.  I know I'm attacking the messenger here, so I'll repeat what was already reached at a consensus a long time ago regarding Izauze's attempts to revisit a debate that s/he was the single member of months ago above on this page.  In short, Izauze is pushing his/her POV, violating Wikipedia's NPOV and, in particular, it's higher standard BLP rules.  All of this has been hashed and rehashed by Izauze and the detractors of his/her edits from months ago; nothing new here.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.92.140.153 (talk) 04:40, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * IP, I am glad you have finally come to the talk page. It is preferable you present your case here rather than to continue what appears to be vandalism and harassment on users talk pages.  IP, if you want to keep deleting users well-sourced contributions, you MUST give a valid reason, and you MUST achieve consensus.  As you have failed to do either of those things despite numerous warnings on your talk page and here on the discussion page and in edit comments, I can only believe that you are knowingly vandalizing this page in clear violation of wikipedia rules and guidelines.  As such, I have reverted your persistent attempts at vandalism and reported your actions to the administrators in the hopes that they might be able to guide your behavior more effectively.

 * If you wish, you may attempt to make a case for your deletions here. If, for example, you believe the material is somehow in violation of BLP despite being reliably sourced and neutrally-voiced, please state which part of the BLP policy it is in violation of.  You have failed thus far to do this despite multiple requests to do so.  If you seem to believe your deletions have some sort of consensus, please feel free to provide links or diffs showing this consensus.  Despite multiple attempts, you have failed to provide a single link or diff or any attempt to indicate consensus.  In absence of this, what you are doing appears to be nothing more than persistent vandalism and annonymous whitewashing in clear violation of NPOV.  Please refrain or your IP may be suspended or blocked indefinitely.  Izauze (talk) 05:53, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

The Case for deleting the controversy section?
IP, please state your case. Continually deleting material off this page without explanation, and reverting over and over again will only get you in trouble. What is your reason for saying that an undisputed direct quote covered by multiple well respected sources is in any way a violation of BLP? If we are to solve this without the administrators involvement, we require at the very least your participation. If there is no discussion, there is no room for movement, and someone else will have to be called in. Please help avoid that. Thank you. Izauze (talk) 08:24, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I am simply supporting the comments of the following users: 174.102.247.134, 76.208.147.124 and 72.135.238.173. I agree with them.  Their comments have already encapsulated the point: Izauze deletes the comments of others on talk pages to suppress them, deletes vandalism and edit war controversies posted on his/her own talk page to suppress criticism against Izauze, and makes edits without supporting them.  Where is Izauze's argument that a gigantic section that covers 1 week of the BLP's life need be included in the article?  Where is Izauze's argument the same controversy not only take up one quarter of the BLP even though it took up less than 0.001% of the BLP's life, but should be posted twice, once in a different section superfluously, on the BLP's page?  How is modifying a page that has had a long-standing consensus with a laundry list of edits that are clearly Izauze's personal POV not violative of Wikipedia's NPOV policy?  Izauze's argument that the slur controversy should be included seems to be "because it happened" or "because I think so"; this is in contrast to my argument that it ought not be included due to the stringent requirements of Wikipedia's BLP policies (slander/libel issues, undue weight subsections) and NPOV policies (no citations to multiple good-standing articles, only to one minor, biased source).  BTW, are the "multiple well respected sources" the one website called "Democratic Underground"?  The following areas would be in violation of the BLP page with Izauze's edits: 1) Presumption in favor of Privacy, subheadings Avoid victimization, Public figures, Subjects notable only for one event; 2) Where BLP does and does not apply, subheadings Non-article space, Categories, lists and navigation templates (esp. false light); 3) Maintenance of BLPs, subheading Importance of maintenance.  I believe each of these 7 BLP factors need be addressed (and on each point would fail) before we can move on to the NPOV issue, which would also fail, before Izauze's edits could be made. 70.92.140.153 (talk) 20:34, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with the IP. Izauze has not made any argument in support of his position.  He has also professed a [verbal] hate for Belling in the past, in part for political reasons; and in part because Tom/Izauze is a Nihilist and resents Belling's open Christianity.  I would say his personal bias should suggest greater scrutiny over his posts on this article (and any involving Christianity, IMHO).  Ikeinthemed (talk) 06:34, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The "wetback slur" incident is only the most easily sourced of the many cases where Belling has been caught displaying the attitude which is his stock in trade; that's why, I think, so many IP addresses want to remove it (not sure how many actual human beings are involved), since they can't deny it happened, they just pretend it doesn't matter. And Ike, I deeply resent the strong implication that Belling's profession of Christianity is why people oppose him and his policies. It is because of my profound Christian beliefs that I oppose Belling and all those like him (not that that has anything to do with this article). If you weren't trying to imply that Belling's opponents are anti-Christian bigots, then I request you retract or rephrase the "resents Belling's open Christianity" part. -- Orange Mike  |   Talk  18:34, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Just for the record, I've reinstated the sourced material. I did not do so because of any personal feeling or beliefs, I did so because it's properly sourced and seems notable. If the IPs insist on removing the material, I would suggest they come here to the talk page and make their cases, to try and sway consensus. Doing so in an edit summary is not sufficient for discussion. Dayewalker (talk) 19:04, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I replaced it for the same reason. It's properly sourced (and other sources can easily be found), and seems a significant item. It's hard to tell how many editors are behind the IPs as IP addresses change. If anyone wants it removed they need to get consensus. Dougweller (talk) 19:34, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * All of you are expressing opinions as to whether the sourcing is proper and regarding notability. None are addressing the many points addressed by the IP 70... above.  Furthermore, the only cite I have seen is a single citation by an old newspaper archive that is not meant to encapsulate a major event in this minor, local celebrity's life ([WP:SOAPS] - scandal mongering).  According to, multiple sources are expected (emphasis added).  I am told there are multiple sources on this event, but I'm afraid I've only noticed the SF Chronicle one.  I did do a Google search for a number of words combined with Belling s/a slur, wetback, etc., and the SF paper was the only one that was even remotely NPOV (the remainder included, but were not limited to, Media Matters and Democratic Underground).  I did find some other major publications but all of them sourced or drew from, verbatim, the same AP report which only counts as one source (bootstrap us back to the multiple reliable source point above).  I expect the following, in a list: 1) Address the lack of citations, and not with POV cite sources, and not with papers that use the same AP story (including citing to it - easy to miss!), 2) Refutation of how this isn't an incredible breach of []/WP:BLPSOURCES/WP:GRAPEVINE/WP:BLPREMOVE/WP:BLPGOSSIP!!!  3) Address how this event is in any way worth noting: .  In summation, those advocating the inclusion of this non-notable event for their POV reasons are only expressing opinions, but not including any Wikipedia guidelines in their positions - just "what they want" or "feel".  I think it is fair to say that it violates Wikipedia's guidelines ... to fail to follow Wikipedia's guidelines.173.89.18.89 (talk) 07:29, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The notability guidelines relate to whether an article should be deleted from Wikipedia or not. The policies which relate to this dispute is WP:NPOV, WP:IRS, WP:V, and WP:UNDUE, the last of which says: Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint. The text in the article satisfies that condition. — goethean ॐ 14:14, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought that was a well-written post Goethean. I have reviewed the notability guidelines and I think you're right; since there already an article, notability inclusion is no longer relevant.  However, there are still other points that need be addressed for inclusion, IMHO.  With regard to WP:V, WP:IP, WP:UNDUE, and your quotation from the latter, I have as yet only seen one reliable citation on this event.  I have seen a number of very-POV sources (again, I'll reiterate Media Matters and Democratic Underground), and a number of newspapers that either repeat the AP source or rehash it in their own words, none of which count as a second source.  Remember, multiple sources are expected (emphasis added). So I'm still waiting on that >1 reliable source that several people tell me is out there ... but I can't find.  Furthermore, with regard to the same latter subheading (WP:UNDUE), this event is clearly a "discussion of isolated events, criticisms, or news reports about a subject may be verifiable and neutral, but still be disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic."  I don't know how anyone could argue otherwise.  Remember, Wikipedia's rules are usually to be interpreted liberally in favor of inclusion - except for a living person.  In the case of a living person, as applies here I believe, the rules are to be interpreted strictly.  According to WP:NPOV "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.  Users who persistently or egregiously violate this policy may be blocked from editing."  Emphasis not added.  Look at how this event violates: WP:BLPSTYLE, WP:BLPSOURCES WP:GRAPEVINE WP:BLPREMOVE and WP:BLPGOSSIP per my initial conversation, plus WP:WELLKNOWN.  I thank Gothean for being the first user to discuss this on this discussion page rationally, rather than simply telling us all "what they feel like" or that we supposedly should be banned because of a percieved political position. 173.89.18.89 (talk) 16:25, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The material is well sourced. I'm supposed to AGF, but when the editors objecting to this are basically all IPs, some, like you and 70. from the same area and using the ISP, it raises questions. But raise it at WP:BLPN by all means if you think there's a BLP violation. I think you're wrong but if other experienced editors disagree, so be it. Dougweller (talk) 16:36, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The material is not sourced by a NPOV source. NPOV isn't just about the article, it's also about the source.  You couldn't say, concerning a member of the Saudi Family "This appears in the Saudi Royal Family Times seven times, therefore it is NPOV."  I'm not even sure you could say it is well sourced.  As to Mark Belling's removal from the air, it is sourced by the SFGate.  The SFGate's parent company is a direct competitor to Mark Belling's company!  We're talking BP saying something bad about Exxon/Mobil in their company newsletter and saying it's a good source.  This is a bit odd in that Hearst's main product is a newspaper, but it's still one mass media corp. commenting on another mass media corp. in their paper.  That is not NPOV.  I vote removal. 64.179.60.10 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 19:49, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * We don't expect sources to meet our NPOV criteria. Dougweller (talk) 09:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is supposed to give due weight to neutral versus biased sources. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Biased_or_opinionated_sources 12.233.74.2 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:56, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * is another. Dougweller (talk) 09:50, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Reinstate the controversy section
Okay any right-winger who is deleting sections simply on the basis of political disagreements will be warned and quite possibly banned. Belling has said numerous racially-motivated and hateful comments in the past that do not give him a pass (http://mediamatters.org/research/200812120009). The least he deserves is a controversy section. Anyone who reverts any attempt to establish a controversy section for this individual will be put on notice. It is an insult to the integrity of Wikipedia that you all walk around spreading your bias, which would in all fairness be much more suited here: http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page --Drdak (talk) 20:02, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Slur Controversy Input Wanted
I think it's fair to say we've heard the arguments for and against the controversy section. I'd like to build a consensus, one way or the other, on whether to keep the Slur section. I think, maybe, about 4 weeks is appropriate to allow input? So to make it simple, input through the end of February 2012? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.89.18.89 (talk • contribs) 16:25, 3 February 2012
 * No. The Controversy covers a 2 week period of time of a program that lasted over 23 years. That is less than 0.2% of the program's lifetime, and even less of this person's career or life.  Considering this is a BLP, it's too fractionally small to be worth mention, it may violate NPOV, and does not rise to the level deserving of a Wikipedia article (ie it belongs in Wikinews or Wikigossip, if the latter even exists).173.89.18.89 (talk)
 * Yes, of course - highly revelatory of his real attitude towards a large portion of the American people. -- Orange Mike |  Talk  16:35, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Does anyone other than Orange Mike actually agree with this? I don't know what evidence there is this reveals any general attitude.  A bad word, used once in however many years this guy's been on the air, shows any kind of attitude?  When it is his job to talk for a living for hours every day?  Seems to me that after so much talking with only saying an inappropriate word once shows an attitude of 'not' being prejudiced.  Additionally I haven't been able to determine what the context was - for all I know he was quoting someone else, and given this is a bio of a living person I'd assume the best until I I have a source that says otherwise as not to get Wikipedia on the slander/libel hook.  The purpose of this section and the talk page is to build consensus for the article page.  OrangeMike is the only one who wants to keep that section and he's making a comment I can't understand.  Perhaps you could help us understand your position a little better OrangeMike because from my perspective, right now, it seems like you're the one prejudiced against the bio subject.  But maybe I'm coming late to the party so please do enlighten us as to how you formulated your opinion.  12.233.74.2 (talk) 17:10, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * No. This is clearly being reposted up there by obscure sociopaths who have it in for the guy, Orangemike being an obvious such individual. For example, what evidence does Orangemike have this is indicative of the guy's personal beliefs?64.179.60.10 (talk) 23:27, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Personal attacks are not a good substitute for argument. He was suspended for a week, that's a significant thing in the career of a journalist. Dougweller (talk) 09:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No.I also agree with Dougweller that Orangemike is aiming at making a personal attack on Belling. I don't agree with him that being suspended for a week is a "significant thing in the career of a journalist."  This comment is twice in error.  First, Belling is a commentator, not a journalist.  Second, being suspended for one week is far less significant than many things Belling has done over his career.  Until those things are all cited and posted, it doesn't really make sense to post the one-week suspension.12.233.74.2 (talk) 21:55, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note that this IP added No before my comment, which I've of course removed. I wasn't commenting on Orangemike who is an excellent editor. Dougweller (talk) 08:55, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
 * No. Per http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2007/04/16/story6.html, the remark was not a serious violation of any rules. The individual this bio covers was not sacked.  No person of importance condemned him (that I could find a citation to).  Seems like a total non-story to me.  And Wikipedia is supposed to be particularly stringent about criticisms of living people so as to avoid slander or libel - stringent in the sense that the preference is to not include such statements.12.233.74.2 (talk) 17:01, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Material I removed
"he has broken stories, usually covering Wisconsin politics." - had no source. "When aired, the television program received higher ratings than WDJT's nightly prime-time newscasts, despite being in the Sunday morning timeslot" - "Belling, Mark, Mark Belling Late Afternoon Show, 23 June 2011; fifth segment." may be his claim, but we'd need something meeting WP:RS, not his own claim. "he has broken stories, usually covering Wisconsin politics." - checked the sources, they didn't confirm this. And the stuff about what he discusses, being a music fan, etc - trivia that doesn't belong in our article unless discussed in some depth by a reliable source. Dougweller (talk) 08:37, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Unsourced still in article
"1986 finalist for "Journalist of the Year" in Illinois as awarded by United Press International." "Radio-Television News Directors Association award" I can't source either of these. If reliable sources can't be found, they will have to be removed. Dougweller (talk) 09:24, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mark Belling. 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/20101204165708/http://www.american-partisan.com/cols/2004/rollins/qtr4/1119.htm to http://www.american-partisan.com/cols/2004/rollins/qtr4/1119.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121104024357/http://www.belling.com/pages/archived_links.html?feed=281681&article=8088858 to http://www.belling.com/pages/archived_links.html?feed=281681&article=8088858

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) 00:57, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Unverified college attendance and degree
The posting of Mark Belling as a "graduate of the University of Wisconsin–La Crosse" appears to be unsubstantiated and should be removed. I am posting it here for the article watchers to take note and comment if they can, before I remove it for being unreferenced. Not even Mark Belling's own website mentions his university attendance. I couldn't find it elsewhere either, through a search, so at some point in the future I am going to remove it, since it appears to be made-up information by an editor (probably anonymously)...Stevenmitchell (talk) 16:38, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mark Belling


text:
User talk:Xiong/tobydemo

Demo documentation
The sample page is, of course, Cultural Revolution. I marvel that an article that describes such bloody times has so few photos of bloodshed -- but then, Western media was pretty much forbidden the Middle Kingdom then, and the less said about the State media, the better. I should like the article illustrated somewhat more graphically.

That said, begin your tour of Simple Toby here. Presumably you got to this entrypoint into the Toby system through a sidebar link -- preferably a miniature Toby icon. You are presented with a simple choice: Toby or not Toby. You choose.

If you choose "No thanks, Toby" then you wind up on the unaltered article page. The End. Or hit your back button to play some more with Toby.

If you want Toby to watch for you, then you go to the sample Toby demo version of the same article. Note that all images have been replaced by gray regions. FWIW, these are not images themselves; they are simply empty gray spaces, the same size and shape as the images they replace. Original captions remain.

Additionally, a big Toby appears in the lower-left corner of your browser window. Now, when Mom, Teacher, Boss, or Parole Officer sticks his/her/its head in the door of your cubby, you can instantly point to Toby and say, "It's okay, Mom. Toby's watching." Your local overlord can see you did not just pull the switch, quickly covering those National Geographic photos with a Disney window. You may indeed be reading an article about naked women, but you're not seeing any. Your hands never touch the mouse.

So, Mom is gone and you decide to take a chance. Hey, it's a free country. It is way outside of Wikipedia's purview to lock you out. Maybe you just finally got released from your daily bondage and now you are relaxing at home. Click Toby and you come again to the choice: Toby or not Toby. You choose. The only difference is that Toby is already watching at this point.

Note also each image placeholder contains a link to this same decision page. An alternate implemenation would stick Toby's image right in the placeholder, but that seems very distracting and just plain bad graphic design. Instead, currently the demo uses a bullet ("•"). I could swear I once saw a Unicode "no-in-circle" once, but now I search for it in vain. I suppose we could have a very small, discreet, black symbol there. You choose.

To recap, the navigation path is: any page Foo → click sidebar link → Toby or not Toby → Foo minus images → click Toby or image placeholder → Toby or not Toby → Foo with images.

Can't get much simpler than that.

Implementation
I really do hope everyone understands that this is not the way we do it for real. This is only a demo. To make it happen, I gleefully hacked all over, with weird markup galore.

Ideally, once agree on what we want, we petition the development team to make it happen. '''We do not edit any pages over and over again. We do not maintain two versions of each page.''' Toby does it all.

I hope nobody is confused -- this is a demo of Simple Toby, not the full-blown original proposal, which may just be unnecessarily complex. Simple Toby turns all image display off, on every page, until you turn him back on again. (I use Cologne Blue skin, so naturally I didn't think of it at first -- but of course, Toby only suppresses output of content images, not the WP logo, etc.)

Discussion
Please, please, please keep the discussion here limited to my sorry-assed demo only. I'll fixit if I can. The right place to discuss the proposal is on Wikipedia talk:Toby/censored (if faint of heart) or Wikipedia talk:Toby/uncensored, if not. Thank You! — Xiong 熊 talk * 14:04, 2005 August 27 (UTC)

Similar option
Rather than using Toby, what's wrong with a simple option in preferences? The navigation path would take the same number of steps, and the implementation could take a very uncontroversial position, like so:

It's not making any value judgement on whether images are bad, it's not explicitly linked on every page, but it would still be available on the preferences. Users who enabled this would save a bit of bandwidth, I imagine. The images would still be there, but as file names to click on, similar to the autofellatio page. -- Norvy (talk) 16:20, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * This is all very interesting, but it's a comment about the proposal, not about the demo itself. So, I'm putting it on the proposal talk pages, okay? Please talk there. No need to have yet another point for discussion, right? — Xiong 熊 talk * 10:50, 2005 August 29 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Xiong/tobydemo


text:
User talk:ASchmoo

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! Shimgray 14:04, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Legend page
Goodness, you're conscientious... I never got round to reading this one until now :-)

That page is intended more as an explanation of terms people use than as a set of instructions; if you look at the edit history for a reasonably busy page it'll be filled with "+cat", "rv", "copy", "rm link", "-dup" and so on, which can be rather confusing. Hence the need for a bit of a glossary.

As for the specific one you mention... yeah. That is rather odd. I assume it's just a rather odd example; as far as I can tell, it's saying -
 * the text "Bill clinton" would have to be fixed by making the "c" uppercase, so we note "ucase" in the summary alongside the text we've fixed;
 * the text "BILL CLINTON" would have to be fixed by making most of it lowercase, so we note "lcase" in the summary alongside the text we've fixed.

The problem is, of course, that no-one in their right minds would actually do this, rather than just writing "clinton, fixed caps" or something. I think I'll quietly remove that example just now, lest it confuse anyone else in the future...

Hope the rest of it made sense. It's not particularly critical to read all the help files; they're more there in case you get stuck on something; do feel free to dive into editing whenever you feel like it. Drop me a note if you need a hand with anything. Shimgray 02:56, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

AfD
Welcome and remember that a nomination of an article to AfD is by itself a vote for deletion, so no need for another comment: Delete per nom. Best for future nominations. -feydey 12:37, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Joining
Since you seemed to be interested in Tolkien in general, would you like to join WikiProject Middle-earth? — Mir  l   e   n   22:41, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

A welcome from Mirlen
— Mir  l   e   n   14:38, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

P.S. You don't have to devote all your time to this WikiProject, just as long as you contribute in the discussions a bit (we like to hear opinions from our members), and improve Tolkien articles in general. Oh, and there's currently two proposals going on on the talk page, so it'd be appreciated if we could here some feedback from our participants :). Also, the Things to do page is our most active page, and is really the heart of the WikiProject. — Mir   l   e   n   14:50, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Happy Easter! (or whatever else it is that you celebrate)
Happy Easter — or whatever else you celebrate! Even if you don't really celebrate anything this weekend (like me), you should still try the delicious chocolate! — Mir  l   e   n   19:09, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Update
There is a poll/proposal concerning the renaming of our WikiProject. Please vote here to share your opinion! — Mir  l   e   n   19:33, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should post your comment on the poll? :) -- Mir  l   e   n   19:50, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

The Lord of the Rings Peer Review
I have make extensive changes to our Lord of the Rings article in an attempt to work it up to Featured Article status. In order to find more suggestions I have listed it under Peer Review. Under the guidelines to nominations I am required to notify others of knowledge in the area to review it. I have decided that the best group for this would be our WikiProject. So I ask you all to look at the article and make any suggestions you can. Hopefully we will be voting this FA soon enough. Sorry Guy 00:51, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Cadderly Bonaduce
An article that you have been involved in editing, Cadderly Bonaduce, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you. — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 18:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:ASchmoo


text:
File:Blason france Périgord petit.jpg

Crest of the Département of Dordogne

Found in French Wikipedia at fr:Image:Blason france Périgord petit.jpg

title: File:Blason france Périgord petit.jpg


text:
Joseph-Désiré Job

Joseph-Désiré Job (born 1 December 1977) is a former professional footballer who played as a forward. Born in France, Job represented the Cameroon national team.

After starting his career in France, Job moved to English team Middlesbrough, where he spent six years and is most remembered for scoring one of the two goals in the 2004 League Cup Final, where Middlesbrough won their first ever trophy.

He also played for clubs in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Belgium. Whilst playing for Saudi club Al-Ittihad, he won the 2005 AFC Champions League and scored in the final.

Lyon
Job was born in the French city of Lyon and began training with the Olympique Lyonnais youth academy at the age of ten. He made his debut for the club in the Intertoto Cup when he was nineteen years old in 1997, scoring a hat-trick as the club beat Polish club Odra Wodzisław 5–2.

Lens
Job joined RC Lens on 1 August 1999.

He scored a number of goals for Lens in the 1999–2000 UEFA Cup as they reached the semi-final stage.

Middlesbrough
Middlesbrough's then manager Bryan Robson signed Job in 2000 for £3 million, where he scored 19 goals in 94 appearances for the club. He also scored 20 minutes into his debut against Coventry City. After struggling to hold down a regular place in the team, he was sent on loan to French Ligue 1 club FC Metz in December 2001, until the end of the season.

On 30 November 2002, Job cracked his skull in a clash of heads with West Bromwich Albion player Darren Moore and was knocked unconscious on the pitch. On 29 September 2003, Job twisted his knee in training and was expected to be out of action for four months, just after scoring the clubs winning goal against Everton with then Middlesbrough manager, Steve McClaren saying, "It's a huge blow for Joseph because he has been playing well lately and he also got our winner against Everton. We'll miss him. The highlight of his career at Middlesbrough came in the 2004 Football League Cup Final on 29 February 2004 when he scored a second minute goal to help the club to win their first ever major trophy, in a 2–1 win over Bolton Wanderers at the Millennium Stadium, Cardiff, a result which also saw the club qualify for the UEFA Cup.

On 15 December 2004, Job scored Middlesbrough's second goal in a 3–0 UEFA Cup Group E win over Serbian club FK Partizan at the Riverside Stadium as they qualified, as winners of the group, for the knockout stages. Middlesbrough went out of the competition in the Round of 32 to Portuguese club, Sporting CP, with Job again scoring in the home leg on 10 March 2005. During his time at Middlesbrough he was the subject of one of the more memorable fan chants, being serenaded by the words "there's only one Job on Teesside!", due to a lot of unemployment in the area at the time.

In the 2005–06 season, he was again sent on loan, this time to Saudi Arabia on 31 August 2005, where he played for Al-Ittihad on a season-long loan. He helped the club win the AFC Champions League in 2005, scoring in the second leg of the final against United Arab Emirates club, Al Ain FC on 5 November 2005 in Jeddah. Job's struggle to win a first-team place became even more difficult, following the signings of established Premiership strikers Mark Viduka, Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink and Yakubu. His contract with Middlesbrough expired after his loan spell with Al-Ittihad. He spent part of the 2006–07 pre-season training with Watford, but was not offered a contract.

Sedan
Job joined Ligue 1 club CS Sedan on 19 September 2006 on a one-year contract. He capped 28 times and scored 10 goals.

Nice
Job moved to Ligue 1 club OGC Nice in summer 2007, signing a two-year contract.

In summer 2008, he was linked with a move to English Football League Championship club Blackpool.

Lierse
On 15 March 2010, Lierse SK signed the Cameroonian 32-year-old forward as free agent. At the start of the 2009–10 Season, Lierse SK were the major favorites to win the championship in the Belgian second division (EXQI League) but when Job arrived, they were struggling in the deciding moments. Job played his first game against KV Turnhout. He entered the game in the second half, when Lierse was behind 0–1 at home and playing badly. He scored 2 goals and gave 1 assist to help Lierse win the match 3–1 and ultimately helped them win the championship, as he also scored the second goal in the deciding match at home against Red Star Waasland (2–0 win).

Job signed a new contract for Lierse for two seasons on 21 June 2010.

International career
Job was tipped early on to be a future French International player, however he instead accepted a call-up to the Cameroon national team, and made his debut in a 2–0 defeat to England at Wembley Stadium in November 1997.

Job has played at two FIFA World Cup finals, in 1998 and 2002. He also played for Cameroon at the victorious 2000 African Cup of Nations and in the FIFA Confederations Cup in 2001 and 2003. However, his next call up to the Cameroon squad came five years later, in March 2007, when he was called up to the squad for a 2008 Africa Cup of Nations qualifier against Liberia.

In January 2008 he scored three goals in two games, scoring once as Cameroon beat Sudan 2–0 in a friendly match and twice as Cameroon beat Zambia 5–1 in a 2008 African Cup of Nations qualifying match. He was also in the Cameroon squad for the 2008 Africa Cup of Nations.

Personal life
Job is the cousin of Marvin Matip and Liverpool defender Joël Matip.

Honours
Middlesbrough
 * Football League Cup: 2003–04

Al-Ittihad
 * AFC Champions League: 2005

Cameroon
 * Africa Cup of Nations: 2000

title: Joseph-Désiré Job


text:
File:Turn On Tune In Drop Out album.jpg

Licensing
Title: Turn On, Tune In, Drop Out. The Original Motion Picture Soundtrack. Author: (LEARY, Timothy). Description: Chicago: Mercury, 1967. LP record (SR 61131). The soundtrack of the film version of Leary's "psychedelic celebrations", with "original psychedelic music". The movie, which was suppressed within a week of its premiere in LA and has never been re-released, features Timothy Leary in the role of the Guide, Ralph Metzner as the Voyager, and Rosemary Woodruff as the Divine Connection. "Promotional Copy. Not For Sale" stamp to back cover. Unusually crisp, Fine copy in psychedelic sleeve.

title: File:Turn On Tune In Drop Out album.jpg


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benoit Meunier

 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 deleted --cesarb 21:55, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Benoit Meunier
nn vanity Groeck 14:05, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. No claim to notability. Probably vanity. Pburka 14:45, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Speed Delete Under A7, can be sent to a better place forthwith. Dottore So 15:11, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy A7 Placed the Tag --Aranda56 21:54, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

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


text:
Eilean Rìgh

Eilean Rìgh is an island in the Inner Hebrides of the west coast of Scotland. It lies in Loch Craignish, about 300 m off the Argyll coastline. The name is Gaelic for "King's Island", although which royal is not known.

History
The island has the remains of two Iron Age forts.

In the 1930s, the island was home to Sir Reginald Johnston, retired tutor to Puyi, the last Chinese emperor. Johnston modernised the houses, built a Buddhist temple, and even flew the flag of Manchukuo in the Chinese-style gardens. Chinese servants lived in the farmhouse. In the multiple Oscar winning film by Bernardo Bertolucci The Last Emperor, Johnston was portrayed by Peter O'Toole.

The property was purchased by a retired Indian army officer, Major Campbell, who lived in it with his family until the outbreak of the Second World War; Campbell believed that a German submarine had entered the loch during the First World War and had caught sheep. In 1959 it was purchased by Wilfred Brown and his cousin Robert Banks Skinner. They believed that in the future the UK would become crowded and the island would be a place for some privacy, but it was largely used as a holiday home. In 1992 it was sold to James Waldegrave, Viscount Chewton.

The current owner is a Scottish-based ex-financier, Christian Siva-Jothy, who bought the island from Viscount Chewton in 1998. He substantially renovated the properties on it, installing mains electrics via an undersea power cable, a new fresh water well and telecoms via a microwave link. The island was for sale from 2013 for over a year but was taken off the market early in 2015 when Siva-Jothy sold his estate in the north of Scotland and moved back to live permanently on Eilean Righ. Siva-Jothy and his wife—who studied Mandarin at SOAS, where Johnston had been the first professor of Chinese—now reside full-time on the island.

title: Eilean Rìgh


text:
Talk:Firefox (novel)

Merge
I created the Firefox (book) article - I found it as a link on the Mig-31 page and didn't realise that there was a Firefox (novel) page as well. I think the (book) page has a better written content but the (novel) page has better format. If we can combine the better aspects of both then merging is fine by me. Bob the Pirate 14:07, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I waited a month or so and nobody else seems to care one way or the other so I've gone ahead and merged the articles. --Bob the Pirate 10:26, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CraigThomas Firefox.jpg
Image:CraigThomas Firefox.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CraigThomas Firefox filmtiein.jpg
Image:CraigThomas Firefox filmtiein.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CraigThomas Firefox filmtiein.jpg
Image:CraigThomas Firefox filmtiein.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CraigThomas Firefox.jpg
Image:CraigThomas Firefox.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Plot length.
I've trimmed it to 598 words - which is less than the earlier 707 words. Please help by suggesting edits (or even making them) - I think it now covers the important aspects of the novel. Although, tbh I think it did before when I removed the template last time at 609 words. Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:21, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Infobox Preceded by / Followed by
The infobox currently says and. But the article text makes it clear that Firefox doiwn is the sequel, and that these two books are before and after only in the sequence of the author's publications. There is already a link to Craig Thomas where a list of the author's woks is given in publication order. It seems to me that this listing of "Preceded by" and "Followed by" without context to explain in what sense this is meant is confusing. I propose to remove this from the infobox, and possibly add info on the publication sequence to the article body. Does anyone object? DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:00, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

 * Yes, I object to the removal. Per the notes at Template:Infobox book/doc:
 * preceded_by
 * Title of prior book in series; will be italicised by template code (do not use to connect separate books chronologically)
 * followed_by
 * Title of subsequent book in a series or a sequel; will be italicised by template code (do not use to connect separate books chronologically)

 * I've corrected the parameters accordingly, and thanks for pointing it out. This is a standard infobox used in thousands of book articles, and a misuse on one article is minor. If it continues to be a problem here, then we can add hidden notes on correct usage to the article's infobox. - BilCat (talk) 00:14, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I have also proposed deprecating the parameter on the infobox, because such misuse is all too common, and because i think putting such information in the infobox is more likely to be confusing than helpful. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 00:18, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

 * That's the proper venue to discuss removing the parameter. - BilCat (talk) 00:31, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Indeed, but this talk page is the proper venu to discuss whether it should be used on this article or not. Just because an infobox supports a parameter does not mean it must be used on any particular article. I think that not using it here would improve this specific article. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:12, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

 * I don't see why it shouldn't be kept. If keeps being changed, then perhaps. But let's at least see if it causes further problems. At the moment, the sequel isn't even mentioned in the Lead. - BilCat (talk) 01:32, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Firefox (novel)


text:
Talk:Willow (1988 film)

Is it Eborsisk or Sispert?
The article contradicts itself on this point. Is it both? If so, that should be clarified inline. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 12:07, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Digital morphing image
It would be better if this were either an animation or at least a side-by-side with multiple frames (at least 3, though 5 would be ideal), so you can see the actual transformation. — trlkly 14:29, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Kilmer Tweet About A Possible Sequel
Is there a citation for that rambling train wreck of a paragraph that Val Kilmer allegedly Tweeted about a possible sequel to Willow? Xin Jing (talk) 16:40, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 28 November 2022

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

The result of the move request was: '''Not moved - no consensus. Some opposition not addressed, despite much support for the motion.''' (non-admin closure) Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 09:44, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Willow (film) → Willow (1988 film) – There is another film Willow (2019 film). 71.95.108.35 (talk) 19:26, 28 November 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:44, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per nomination. "Willow (film)" is incomplete disambiguation and should redirect to the Willow (disambiguation) dab page. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 21:20, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Support since neither film is the primary topic; the tree willow is the primary topic. All other topics are not primary and should be disambiguated from each other. This is codified at WP:PRIMARYFILM; see the Titanic film examples. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 21:25, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose The 1988 film is still the obvious primary topic by pageviews. It normally gets more than 20 times the pageviews as the 2019 film which is well above the primary topic threshold. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The 1988 film is not the primary topic; willow is. There is no such thing as "Willow (film)" in the real world. The "(film)" disambiguation term is solely a Wikipedia construct, the only term that matters for discussion is "willow". There is only one primary topic, and everything else is secondary. We should not be ranking non-primary topics to be second or third in ambiguity or lack thereof. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 15:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Ironically, in Talk:Cast Away I argued the exact same thing and was completely repudiated. Despite it being extremely easy to assume that "Castaway" was the title of the Tom Hanks movie, people successfully agreed to keep it at Castaway (film) rather than further disambiguating it, because it was an obvious primary topic.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:29, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:PRIMARYFILM. Shwcz (talk) 08:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per en.wp naming rules. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose WP:INCDAB states that In individual cases consensus may determine that a parenthetically disambiguated title that is still ambiguous has a primary topic, but the threshold for identifying a primary topic for such titles is higher than for a title without parenthetical disambiguation. This is clearly the case; the 1988 Willow film takes precendence over the 2019 Willow film, meaning the location at Willow (film) is perfectly acceptable. -- Alex_ 21 TALK 21:58, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose. With 25 times the pageviews of the obscure Macedonian film, this film is clearly the primary topic for its title. And with a hatnote pointing to the 2019 film, there is no benefit to sending everyone to a dab page. Station1 (talk) 00:16, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. It may be noted that, unlike Thriller (album), there is not a single English Wikipedia entry styled as "XXXX (film)" alongside one or more other entries styled "XXXX (YEAR film)", not even for the redirect Titanic (film) per WP:PRIMARYFILM, as already indicated in the above comment by Erik. Thus, if we were to enable the continued existence of Willow (film) alongside Willow (2019 film), it would be the sole such inconsistent film entry in English Wikipedia. As for the previously mentioned "Castaway", those two film entries, although similar, are not analogous to the two Willow films — Cast Away and Castaway (film), rather than the inconsistent alternative option A: Cast Away and Castaway (1986 film) or option B: Cast Away (film) and Castaway (1986 film). —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 19:11, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

 * Support It’s standard rules, and it doesn’t matter if this is the most viewed movie page, there’s still other films named Willow so we need that clarification. Frozen (2013 film) is the same, despite being the biggest film named “Frozen”. AlienChex (talk) 22:47, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Support I don't think around 20x is enough for a PDAB and 2019 is probably long enough ago recentism wouldn't be too much of an issue.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 07:54, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose. 20x the views is an enormous discrepancy, particularly when we're comparing a film from 34 years ago with a recent film, which would tend to inflate the latter's figures. WP:INCDAB is clear that we can and should use an incomplete disambiguator in this case, as is the case for, say, Thriller (album). — Amakuru (talk) 21:28, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Relisting comment: INCDAB (opposers) and PRIMARYFILM (supporters) camps remain at war with each other. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:44, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

 * Support per WP:PRIMARYFILM. Partial disambiguation would not be helpful to readers. — BarrelProof (talk) 06:12, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Support not only WP:PRIMARYFILM but the fact that it would be helpful to readers, as it would clear up any possible confusion. Historyday01 (talk) 15:17, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Support. Rreagan007 (talk) 22:16, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per nomination. Orthostasis (talk) 08:05, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:PRIMARYFILM. The issue of partial disambiguation was resolved years ago by the Film Project: if we going to disambiguate then the titles should be fully diasmbiguated. Precisely why Avatar (2009 film) is not a Avatar (film). This is not a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC issue since neither film is the primary topic. Betty Logan (talk) 07:04, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose. After reading comments by ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ and mellohi, I think it should remain as, Willow (film).Halbared (talk) 12:42, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

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

Requested move 12 October 2023

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

The result of the move request was: moved (non-admin closure). The bar for an incomplete disambiguation is high (significantly higher than for a usual primary topic) and in this case there is a rough consensus that this topic does not reach that bar. Jenks24 (talk) 11:19, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Willow (film) → Willow (1988 film) – title is clearly ambiguous as there is more than one film with this title. Per WP:DAB and WP:PRIMARYFILM, titles should be fully disambiguated if any ambiguity exists. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC only applies to undisambiguated titles, not partially disambiguated ones like this, unless an expcetion is made per WP:INCDAB. However, the general consensus on film is per the guideline WP:PRIMARYFILM so we need to defer to that here as the group consensus clearly trumps any individual consensus. -- wooden superman  12:36, 12 October 2023 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose, again, per WP:INCDAB. Nothing has changed in the 10 months since the last RM. This famous film still gets |Willow_(2019_film) 97% of the pageviews in a WP:ONEOTHER situation, easily meeting the higher threshold of INCDAB. There's really no point in sending 97% of readers using this title to a dab page, especially when the 3% wouldn't even benefit. The arguments presented in the proposal do not enjoy consensus, as shown in the just-closed RM of Vertigo (film). - Station1 (talk) 19:25, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * But WP:INCDAB states that Usually, a qualified title that is still ambiguous has no primary topic, and therefore should redirect to the disambiguation page. No exception should be made because WP:PRIMARYFILM is the underlying guideline here. -- wooden  superman  08:13, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree, but the key word is "usually". INCDAB goes on to state In individual cases consensus may determine that a parenthetically disambiguated title that is still ambiguous has a primary topic, but the threshold for identifying a primary topic for such titles is higher than for a title without parenthetical disambiguation. In this case, with 97% of the views and only one other possibility, it easily qualifies. Station1 (talk) 17:50, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nomination. "Willow (film)" is incomplete disambiguation and should redirect to the Willow (disambiguation) dab page. It may be also noted that in the previous nomination — Talk:Willow (film) — the "no consensus" votes were not evenly distributed — among the 16 votes, 5 supported Willow (film), while 11 supported Willow (1988 film). —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 06:37, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nom and Roman. An incomplete title does not server readers nor does it help editors. Gonnym (talk) 19:18, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Station1, usually does not mean always. The title is already disambiguated, further disambiguation is not necessary as this is the primary topic for films that are named "Willow". —Locke Cole • t • c 05:17, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:PRIMARYFILM. 162 etc. (talk) 05:48, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support. I reject the notion of a primary disambiguator. The parenthetical disambiguator has only one purpose, disambiguation. And if there are 2 films with the same title, then usuing "(film)" for either title disambiguator is inherently ambiguous. Rreagan007 (talk) 00:38, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nom and those above. While I do believe that there can be a primary topic for a disambiguated title, the bar for that must be extremely high, and I think the 2019 film has sufficient significance to force further disambiguation. BD2412  T 02:49, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Station1 above. Here again, an exception not only can but should in my view be made, given the extremely greater notoriety of this film.- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  14:26, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support. Adding "1988" to the title doesn't seem like a major burden and would improve consistency among film articles per WP:PRIMARYFILM. — BarrelProof (talk) 18:22, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak support per BD2412.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 19:30, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Willow (1988 film)


text:
Talk:The Great Gig in the Sky

Anyone want to reword this?
It is also true that Clare once finished to record The Great Gig In The Sky felt herself not completely satisfied: not a lot was said (to me and about the recorded piece)...well well thank you very much and (I) left. Nobody apparently told her that her job was great that she could not even immagine that her recording would have been than a part of the album!! Despite that Richard Wright once said to Clare that she really did a great job but due he saw Clare really embarrassed he told her that was wonderful. It seems to be a bit contradictory.

That needs serious work.

Massive conflict
This article contradicts Dark Side of the Moon, which says:

 * ...often-misheard "I never said I was frightened of dying" (during the middle of "The Great Gig in the Sky") came from Peter's wife, Myfanwy 'Miv' Watts.

There is a contradiction within this article as well, the line "Aside from the soaring vocals there are two spoken parts, an introduction at 0:38 spoken by “Gerry” (an Irish Abbey Road Studios doorman at the time), and Clare Torry's voice at 3:33." appears to be crediting Torry with the 3.33 spoken part

'ed note' section'
I removed the 'ed note' section. This doesn't belong in the article, as it is opinion.

LLBBooks 07:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Wrong Wife!
I have to correct you> Peter Watts was never known as Puddie Watts> Puddie was Patricia Gleeson second wife of Peter Watts. Myfanwy Watts is not on the album at all. But is the mother of his children. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.26.62.240 (talk) 22:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for solving that mystery! Back in the early 1990s Gilmour did an interview where he mentions Puddie Watts as being one of the voices on DSotM. He then describes her as "the wife of one of our roadies, an American girl". As Myfanwy was not American, I presume Patricia was and is the one on the album.NH78.147.153.46 (talk) 12:06, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Recording name
I don't think it was called "the Religion Song" during recording, I belive it was "The Mortality Sequence" or something like that....

Spoken Words
In the main section on Clare Torry's vocals it says that she spoke the line in the song at 3:33, however at the bottom of the page it says that it was Naomi Watts mother that said it. Which is right? RENTASTRAWBERRY  FOR LET?   röck  17:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC) Neil Ratner Rock Doc, who supported the Dark Side of The Moon tour with his company Circus Talents, interviews Puddie Watts in his podcast and solves the mystery. https://audioboom.com/boos/3359862-part-1-the-long-lost-voice-from-the-dark-side-of-the-moon

Neither is true. According to Nick Mason (in his book Inside Out) and the Mojo article on Dark Side of the Moon, together with the followup letter written by David Gilmour, the line is spoken by Patricia "Puddie" Watts, the second wife of road manager Peter Watts. Naomi Watts's mother is Miv Watts, Peter Watts's first wife. I've corrected this attribution. Jeffrw (talk) 12:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Live instrumentation
Onstage, who played the Hammond organ during this song? I ask because during a large portion of the song, there is both piano and Hammond organ playing, and it would have been impossible for someone to use one hand on each instrument, as the piano part is too complex. Rick Wright obviously played piano, and there is continued bass and drums, leaving Roger Waters and Nick Mason out of the equation. There is guitar early and later in the song, but I can't tell if there is no guitar going during this section (leaving Dave Gilmour free to play organ) or if the guitar is very far down the mix (a la the "Mother Fore" section of "Atom Heart Mother," where it is clear from the KQED video that Gilmour is playing guitar).

So, did Dave Gilmour play organ, or did someone else, say Dick Parry or a roadie? Carolus 13:23, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * David Gilmour played Hammond organ live in the seventies. Floyd(Norway) 15:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Can you cite a source and put it in the main article? Carolus 04:16, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

"Citation needed" for artifact at the very end of the song?
Why is a citation needed for the artifact (speed/tone variation) at the very end of the song? It can be trivially verified by simply listening to the CD. Granted, it is very faint so it has to be listened loud (preferrably with earphones), but the means for verifying this are widely available, so I don't think it requires a particular authoritative source. If this needs a citation, then other stuff that can be verified by checking the CD also do, like the track length(!). Citations for things that can't be verified easily, such as recollections from the people involved in the making of the song, etc., are welcome and useful, but I feel there's a bit of a "citation needed" overload on Wikipedia lately, and I feel this is a case of this. I did remove the "citation needed" tag there once, but it was reverted, so I thought about bringing this up for discussion here. Thoughts? --LodeRunner 04:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

 * My feelings exactly. In fact, that's what I came to this Talk page to ask about!  Since nobody's spoken up for about half a year now, I've gone ahead and removed the citeneeded.  This time, however, the statement in question has been reworded to sound less critical.  Maybe the only reason it was getting tagged for citation is, some bright spark didn't like the idea of his favorite song going "out of tune".  After all, this is Pink Floyd, you know.  Pink Floyd were never wrong, just . . . different.  --63.25.8.245 (talk) 20:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

"compression..." removed
Evidently after a bit more research (I was the one that initially added it), Chris Thomas was brought in more for the reason of Gilmore's and Waters' difference of opinion on how the record should sound. I do recall an interview with Parsons where he mentions the dialog between him and Thomas concerning the use of compression. I recently read somewhere that each of them initially snuck in during Parsons and Thomas mixing, eventually leading to both of them sitting with him during mixdown. From the experience I've had with many sessions over the years, that must have been tough. Wamnet (talk)

an addition to Trivia
The song (along with "Money") was used in Estonian animation "Sunday" ("Pühapäev", 1977) by Avo Paistik, although it is not mentioned in the credits of the film.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1075379/ http://www.bcdb.com/cartoon/96796-Puumlhapaumlev.html 88.196.213.98 (talk) 11:42, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Missed spoken parts
There is also a part saying 'I neversaid I was frightened of dying' which is missed out from this article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.42.254.91 (talk) 14:40, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

At 3:34 : "If you can hear this whisper you're dying"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.118.45.8 (talk) 20:01, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Great video interview with Clare
You have to se this - hope they keep it on boob tube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1LTSLbhyoY&feature=related

Wamnet (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC).

Unreferenced
It is also true that Clare once finished to record The Great Gig In The Sky felt herself not completely satisfied: not a lot was said (to me and about the recorded piece)...well well thank you very much and (I) left.

Bold Edit/Reorg
I'm doing a bold edit on this page to reorganize it and bring the quotes, which I think are pretty interesting, inline. Jeffrw (talk) 21:19, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Removing Rock from Genres
There's no reason it should be there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.239.37.41 (talk) 03:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

✅. Completely agree. There's little reason for any infobox to have more than one genre anyway. Friginator (talk) 22:56, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 20:16, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:The Great Gig in the Sky


text:
Southern California Eagles

Southern California Eagles are an American soccer team based in La Mirada, California. Founded in 2001 as the Southern California Seahorses, the team plays in USL League Two, the fourth tier of the American Soccer Pyramid. They also field a team in the Women's Premier Soccer League.

The team plays its home games in the stadium on the campus of Whittier College. The team's colors are navy blue, white and orange.

The Eagles are a division of Missionary Athletes International (MAI), an organization which undertakes sports ministry to share the message of Christianity through the environment of soccer. They are a sister organization of the Charlotte Eagles in USL League Two.

History
The Seahorses, which had previously been in existence as a youth soccer club since 1983, joined the PDL in 2001, and were successful immediately, finishing second to Orange County Blue Star in their debut season with a 13–6–1 record. 2002 continued the trend, when the Seahorses again finished second in the Southwest Division, this time behind Chico Rooks, with an 11–7–0 record. Their first trip to the playoffs was also a successful one, when they beat Spokane Shadow and Cascade Surge to advance to the national final four, where they were defeated in the semi-finals by Boulder Rapids Reserve.

The Seahorses missed the playoffs in 2003, finishing third behind divisional champions Fresno Fuego, and just missed out again in 2004, finishing third behind Orange County Blue Star, despite posting some impressive victories in the regular season, including 4–1 defeat of Nevada Wonders and a 5–1 demolition of San Diego Gauchos.

The developing rivalry between the Seahorses and Orange County Blue Star continued in 2005, when yet again the men from La Mirada finished a close second to their all-conquering Southland neighbors in the Southwest Division standings. The Seahorses began the season with a five-game winning streak that included a 3–0 trouncing of California Gold; however, they did not manage to defeat – or even score a goal on – their rivals in their three games, losing 4–0, 3–0 and 3–0 to the eventual divisional champs. Nevertheless, the Seahorses were clearly the next best thing in the southwest, and enjoyed several impressive wins (including a trio of 3-0s over San Diego Gauchos, Nevada Wonders and Fresno Fuego) in the second half of the season. Their trip to the playoffs was a short one, however, as the Seahorses lost to Cascade Surge first time out. Striker Anthony Stovall registered an impressive 7 goals on the season, and Dylan Martinez led the team in assists.

2006 saw the Seahorses finally capture their first divisional title, besting Orange County Blue Star by seven points at season's end. The year was one of solid consistency, and included a hugely impressive 9-game winning streak which stretched from early June to the end of July, and included two 4–0 victories (over Los Angeles Storm and California Gold), and a hard-fought finale against the San Fernando Valley Quakes. However, for the second year in a row, the Seahorses' playoff excursion ended quickly with a 2–1 defeat to BYU Cougars. MLS-bound striker Josh Hansen scored an impressive 8 goals and 4 assists on the season, closely followed by Romanian import Cristian Rus with 6. Keeper Eric Reed enjoyed the best goalkeeping statistics in the PDL, with a goals-against average of 0.621 per game, and keeping 10 clean sheets in his 15 games.

However, much like their crosstown rivals Blue Star, everything went wrong for the Seahorses in 2007. With Eric Reed having gone to new USL-1 franchise California Victory, the Seahorses defence became incredibly leaky; the team suffered four defeats in their first five games – including a chaotic 4–3 loss to the San Fernando Valley Quakes – and although things began to sure up towards the second half of the season, they found themselves unable to actually WIN any games. Five ties in their last ten games put an end to their playoff hopes early, although the team did finish with a flourish with a resounding 4–0 thrashing of Bakersfield Brigade on the final day, and eventually finished 7th. Midfielder Conan Hawkins led the scoring stats, tallying 4 goals on the season, while Chris Leiva registered 6 assists.

The downturn in form continued in 2008 for the Seahorses, who began the season with a 3–1 loss to San Fernando Valley Quakes, and then won just one of their next eight games, a 1–0 road win over Lancaster Rattlers. To their credit, few of the Seahorses' losses were blowouts: 0–1 here, 1–2 there, but in each game their strikers never quite seemed to breach the opposition defenses, or show enough sharpness in front of goal. They enjoyed their revenge over Orange County Blue Star with a 1–0 win in June, making up for a 4–1 thrashing earlier in the season, and put an end to the San Jose Frogs' playoff chances with an impressive 3–1 home victory in mid-July, but finished the year with a 5–2 hammering at the hands of Fresno Fuego, and a disappointing bottom-of-the-table clash with Lancaster Rattlers on the final day of the season which ended in a 1–1 tie and managed to keep them out of the basement spot. The Seahorses ended their season in 9th place; Chris Leiva, Diego Mejía and Cristian Rus were the joint top scorers with three goals each, while Scott Lucky led the assist stats with 2 to his name.

The Seahorses entered their ninth season in the PDL looking to recapture the form of yesteryear, but it was not to be; despite welcoming ex-pros Josiah Snelgrove and Adam Frye back into the fold, and despite posting a 6–2 victory over Bakersfield Brigade in their second game of the season in which new signing Ryan Shaw netted twice, the Seahorses began to find that the story of their season would revolve around ties. The Seahorses drew eight of their sixteen regular-season games, and were made to rue their matches with Fresno Fuego and Ventura County Fusion in which they conceded a 90th-minute equalizing goals when they looked odds-on to win. Their last win of the season came at the beginning of July, a 2–1 away victory over the Lancaster Rattlers, and thereafter the men from La Mirada staggered to the finishing line, eventually finishing sixth in the division, eight points out of the playoffs, and missing the postseason for the third straight year. Ryan Shaw was the Seahorses' top scorer, with 6 goals.

On February 13, 2024, the team changed its name to the Southern California Eagles to match with other Missionary Athletes International soccer teams.

Colors and badge
On March 1, 2018, the unveiled a new crest, as a part of a partnership with Charlotte Eagles.

Notable former players
This list of notable former players comprises players who went on to play professional soccer after playing for the team in the Premier Development League, or those who previously played professionally before joining the team.

 * 🇺🇸 Mark Bloom
 * Tomislav Colić
 * 🏴 Michael Cunningham
 * 🇺🇸 Adam Frye
 * Josh Hansen
 * 🇺🇸 Patrick Ianni
 * 🇺🇸 Christopher Klotz
 * 🇺🇸 Steven Lenhart
 * 🇺🇸 Kiel McClung
 * 🇸🇻 Diego Mejía
 * 🇺🇸 Ben Page
 * 🇺🇸 Eric Reed
 * 🇺🇸 Gregg Schroeder
 * 🇨🇦 Josiah Snelgrove
 * 🇺🇸 Anthony Stovall
 * 🇺🇸 Brent Whitfield

Honors

 * USL PDL Southwest Division Champions 2006
 * USL PDL Western Conference Champions 2002

Head coaches

 * 🇺🇸 Todd Elkins (2005–2013)
 * 🇺🇸 Johnny Juarez-Jackman (2013–2015)
 * 🇺🇸 Joe Lurker (2015–present)

Stadia

 * Stadium at La Habra High School; La Habra, California (2003–2004)
 * Al Barbour Field; La Mirada, California (2004–present)

Average attendance

 * 2005: 300
 * 2006: 279
 * 2007: 263
 * 2008: 328
 * 2009: 277
 * 2010: 233
 * 2011: 150
 * 2012: 223
 * 2013: 200
 * 2014: 198
 * 2015: 176

title: Southern California Eagles


text:
Yorkshire Ring

The Yorkshire Ring is a canal ring in South and West Yorkshire, England. It was completed in 1905 with the construction of the New Junction Canal. It lasted for under thirty years before the closure of part of the Dearne and Dove Canal and subsequently the complete Barnsley Canal. Both these canals are currently under restoration.

Canal Rings
The concept of a canal ring was created in 1965, as part of a campaign by the Inland Waterways Association to prevent the complete closure of the Rochdale Canal. Initially the canal was described as part of the "Cheshire Canal Ring", which was soon shortened to the "Cheshire Ring". It described a series of interconnecting canals which could be navigated, usually in a week or two, without having to cover any section twice, and has subsequently been applied to several other such routes.

The Yorkshire Ring is the result of a similar campaign. The Barnsley Canal Group was formed in 1984, initially with the intention of attempting to secure the restoration of the Barnsley Canal from the Aire and Calder Navigation near Wakefield to the town of Barnsley. As the group developed, the attraction of the canal being part of a through route came to be appreciated, and in 1986 they considered whether the Dearne and Dove Canal could also be restored. There were extra problems with restoring this canal, because significant parts of it had been destroyed by development since its closure, but the Great Central Railway line from Mexborough to Barnsley was abandoned at around this time, and offered a route for the construction of new sections of the canal to replace those that could not be restored. Thus the idea of restoring both waterways, and the idea of the Yorkshire Ring as a way of promoting this was born.

Timeline

 * 1793:The possibility of a complete ring is realised when the Barnsley Canal and the Dearne & Dove Canal are both authorised by Acts of Parliament passed on the same day.
 * 1804:The Dearne and Dove Canal is completed, five years after the Barnsley Canal. Only a short section of the ring remains to be constructed between the Stainforth and Keadby Canal and the Aire and Calder Navigation.
 * 1888:The Sheffield and South Yorkshire Navigation Company is created, and eventually succeeds in taking over control of the River Don Navigation, Stainforth and Keadby Canal, Dearne and Dove Canal and the Sheffield Canal from the Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway Company in 1895.
 * 1891:The Aire and Calder Canal company obtain an Act of Parliament to authorise construction of the New Junction Canal. However, the project was to be jointly funded and owned by the newly formed Sheffield and South Yorkshire Navigation, and could not start until they had obtained their waterways from the railway company. The construction did not therefore start until after 1 March 1895.
 * 1905:The New Junction Canal is completed thus also completing the Yorkshire Ring.
 * 1934:The ring is broken again by the closure of the central section of the Dearne and Dove Canal, as a result of problems caused by mining subsidence.
 * 1953:The Barnsley Canal is officially closed
 * 1961:The Dearne and Dove Canal is also closed
 * 1984:There is possibility of the complete ring being resurrected by the Barnsley Canal Group which has been formed with the intention of restoring the Barnsley and Dearne & Dove Canals.

title: Yorkshire Ring


text:
The Rink (film)

The Rink, a silent film from 1916, was Charlie Chaplin's eighth film for Mutual Films. The film co-starred Edna Purviance, Eric Campbell, Henry Bergman, and Albert Austin, and is best known for showcasing Chaplin's roller skating skills. Chaplin's obvious skill on roller skates surprised many of his fans, but Charlie was an experienced performer. As a touring vaudevillian with Fred Karno's pantomime troupe, Chaplin appeared in a roller-skating skit in which he displayed a talent for comedic falls—and the ability to cause other skaters to topple.

Plot
Charlie is an inept and sometimes clumsy waiter at a restaurant. He is serving one of his customers, the hot-tempered Mr. Stout. Charlie determines his bill by examining what he has spilled on his suit. While he is not a great server, Charlie is an excellent skater at the nearby roller rink. He meets a girl there and saves her from the unwanted attentions of the same Mr. Stout he earlier encountered at the restaurant. The grateful girl invites Charlie to a skating party. Charlie accepts and attends the party in top hat and tails. He again encounters the volatile Mr. Stout and runs afoul of Mrs. Stout. While skating, Charlie accidentally falls on her and pulls down her skirt. The skating party quickly descends into a riot. The police are called to restore order, but Charlie escapes by deftly rolling away with his cane hooked to the back of a moving automobile.

Cast

 * Charlie Chaplin - A Waiter. Posing as Sir Cecil Seltzer, C.O.D.
 * Edna Purviance - The Girl
 * James T. Kelley - Her Father
 * Eric Campbell - Mr. Stout, Edna's Admirer
 * Henry Bergman - Mrs. Stout and Angry Diner
 * Lloyd Bacon - Guest
 * Albert Austin - The Cook and Skater
 * Frank J. Coleman - Restaurant Manager
 * John Rand - Waiter
 * Charlotte Mineau - Friend of Edna
 * Leota Bryan - Friend of Edna
 * Fred Goodwins - Man in the jacket

Reception
A reviewer from Variety positively wrote, "There is plenty of fun provided by [Chaplin] on the rollers and he displayed a surprising cleverness on them. A number of funny falls occurred as was looked for, with Charlie outshining and outwitting any of the others on the floor."

Sound version
In 1932, Amedee Van Beuren of Van Beuren Studios, purchased Chaplin's Mutual comedies for $10,000 each, added music by Gene Rodemich and Winston Sharples and sound effects, and re-released them through RKO Radio Pictures. Chaplin had no legal recourse to stop the RKO release.

title: The Rink (film)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ConsuML

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent 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 MERGE to Consumerium. -Splash talk 21:00, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

ConsuML
ConsuML is not notable and never was and will likely never be since the design paradigm of Consumerium was changed to heavily utilizing wiki on August 31 2003 --Juxo 14:09, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now.  No opinion. —Cryptic (talk) 08:17, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge to Consumerium. Not notable as a separate article but notable as an aspect of Consumerium history. — Phil Welch 23:34, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Relisting in search of more discussion. -Splash talk 01:14, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Merge to Consumerium as per Phil Dlyons493 03:08, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to consumerium because it is defunct. Andrew pmk | Talk 18:10, 25 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.

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ConsuML


text:
Talk:FNBDT

We ready to move this to SCIP ?
 * Sounds like the right thing to do. — Matt Crypto 17:29, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:FNBDT


text:
Talk:Vesara

Some sources

 * Indian temples
 * Central Indian temple architecture style
 * Nagra – Dravida – Vesara Pictures
 * All three sources, I have given just for examples - there may be several others. --Bhadani 15:21, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 03:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Vesara. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070106225819/http://www.sanathanadharma.com:80/temple/history.htm to http://www.sanathanadharma.com/temple/history.htm
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070203120944/http://chitralakshana.com:80/history-12.htm to http://www.chitralakshana.com/history-12.htm
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070106225819/http://www.sanathanadharma.com:80/temple/history.htm to http://www.sanathanadharma.com/temple/history.htm

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) 21:52, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Vesara


text:
Steve Soboroff

Steve Soboroff (born August 31, 1948) is a Los Angeles based businessman, philanthropist, and civic leader who served as a Los Angeles Police Commissioner from 8/30/13-8/30/23. He spearheaded the use of body cams for the LAPD. Soboroff served as President of the Los Angeles Recreation and Parks Commission between 1995 and 2000. After serving on the L.A. Harbor Commission and as Senior Advisor to Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, Soboroff ran for Mayor of Los Angeles in the 2001 election and placed third.

An active businessman and philanthropist, Soboroff was the Chairman and CEO of Playa Vista. He served on the Board of the Weingart Foundation for 22 years, seven of which he was Chairman, and served for 20 years on the Board of MaceRich Company (NYSE). In September 2011 he was appointed by the California Science Center to be the Senior Advisor to the museum in its project with NASA to bring, and permanently exhibit, the Space Shuttle Endeavour. He is Chairman of the Maccabiah Games Committee of 18. Soboroff was Chairman of the Center for the Study of Los Angeles at Loyola Marymount University, and was a Senior Fellow and member of the Advisory Board at UCLA's Luskin School of Public Affairs.

Early life and education
Soboroff was raised in a middle-class, secular Jewish family in Chicago, the son of Evelyn and Irving Soboroff. His father's hat manufacturing business declined in the 1960s when hats went out of fashion and the family moved first to Arkansas and then to California where his folks opened the successful Shaxted linen boutique in Beverly Hills. In 1966, Soboroff graduated from Taft High School in Woodland Hills, Los Angeles. He tried to enlist during the Vietnam War but was denied for medical reasons. He holds Bachelor and Master's Degrees from the Dept. of Finance, Insurance and Real Estate at the University of Arizona. During the summers while in college, he worked as a chauffeur/kid watcher/assistant for Kirk Douglas, whose wife Anne was a frequent customer to his parents' retail linen shop named Shaxted

Career
While in college, Soboroff's father had introduced him to J. K. Eichenbaum, a Los Angeles-based real estate developer who specialized in shopping centers. In 1971, Soboroff went to work for Eichenbaum, and in 1979, he left the company and using his network of contacts began to lease and renovate retail areas on his own.

STAPLES Center
Soboroff is widely credited as the driving force behind the development of STAPLES Center in downtown Los Angeles, having come up with a plan, as Senior Advisor to Mayor Riordan, to bring the Los Angeles Lakers, the Los Angeles Kings and the Los Angeles Clippers to the heart of downtown Los Angeles.

2001 Los Angeles mayoral election
Soboroff entered the 2001 mayoral primary election, and received Riordan's endorsement. Soboroff placed third in the primary, coming within 3% of eventual winner James K. Hahn. Hahn and former California State Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa advanced to the runoff.

In 2005, many of the traffic-fighting proposals Soboroff introduced during his 2001 campaign, as well as his plan to break up the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), were reintroduced by other candidates in that year's mayoral contest. Later in 2005, newly elected Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, with whom Soboroff competed for the Mayor's job in 2001, implemented Soboroff's proposal to ban all road construction during rush hour. Villaraigosa's 2005 and 2009 campaign manager, Ace Smith, played the same role for Soboroff in 2001.

Playa Vista
In October 2001, Soboroff joined Playa Vista as the communities President and CEO. He oversaw the development of 20 parks, an elementary school, offices, the Los Angeles Clippers Training Center, residences, and other amenities, which has resulted in one of the most popular neighborhoods in Los Angeles. The wetlands were preserved and major traffic mitigation improvements were established.

Los Angeles Dodgers
On April 19, 2011, Soboroff was hired to be the Vice Chairman of the Los Angeles Dodgers baseball team. His responsibilities were said to include leading the efforts to improve the fan experience and strengthening the team's ties to the community.

One day later, Major League Baseball seized control of the Dodgers from owner Frank McCourt. He resigned his position on June 25, 2011, citing the "unanticipated action by the commissioner of Major League Baseball" as preventing him from doing the job for which he had been hired.

Personal life
In 1982, he married Patti Schertzer. They have five children: Jacob (1983), Miles (1985), Molly (1987), Hannah (1988), and Leah (1993). and six grandchildren.

Soboroff is widely known as the foremost collector of typewriters that were previously owned by famous individuals. Six, including those of Maya Angelou and John Lennon, were donated to The Smithsonian in Washington, D.C. and others to Planet Word in Washington DC, the American Writers Museum in Chicago.

Soboroff joined Big Brothers while a college student and was matched with then 9 year old Terry Alan Williams as his Little Brother. In 2024 the pair celebrated their 56th year as a match. Both Steve and Terry are now grandfathers. In 2022, Steve was inducted into the National Big Brothers Big Sisters of America Alumni Hall of Fame.

title: Steve Soboroff


text:
Uitmarkt

The Uitmarkt (Out Market) is the opening of the cultural season in Amsterdam, held every year over a weekend at the end of August, usually on and around the Leidseplein, Museumplein (museum square) and Nieuwmarkt. Many theatres open their doors for free, showcasing several genres like classical music, ballet, hiphop, cabaret, literary recitals, and film. Besides that, there are stands on the square and surrounding streets selling books or giving information on various cultural events of the next year.

The image shows Symfonisch Blaasorkest ATH performing with singer Gé Reinders at the 2006 edition of the Uitmarkt.

The name literally means outmarket, referring to 'going out' (to see a show).

title: Uitmarkt


text: File:Tempts-wish-it-would-rain.jpg

title: File:Tempts-wish-it-would-rain.jpg