text:
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Beland

Beland
[ Vote here] (58/0/0) ending 00:50 4 September 2005 (UTC) - Okay, this one may be a little early, but we'll see how it goes. He only has ~11,500 edits and he's only been here since July, 2004. But, all joking aside, I think Beland's one of our best janitors and (fellow) Wikignomes. On a given day, the name Beland probably shows up on your watchlist, as it does mine, all the time. He also runs the User:Pearle bot, helping with CFD and other stuff too. This guy's due. --Dmcdevit·t 00:50, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * closed Uncle Ed 00:05, September 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept. -- Beland 20:21, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Support! Yay! Dmcdevit·t 00:54, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Support. Uber-janitor. Maurreen (talk) 01:02, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, definitely. Andre ( talk ) 01:05, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Support. How on Earth did it take this long to get around to doing this?? -Splash 01:12, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Support, definitely. Should have been in a while ago. Sarge Baldy 01:17, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Support. I can't believe we've overlooked him for this long. Rje 01:19, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Merovingian (t) (c) 02:16, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Support no doubt!  ∞ Who ? ¿ ?  03:00, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Support - Guettarda 06:16, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Support. You mean he isn't already? --Carnildo 06:18, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Please use the recent donations to buy a time machine and make him an admin per last month. I had no idea he wasn't one and would have immediately nominated him if I had known that. Radiant_ >|< 07:51, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Good grief.— Encephalon |  ζ   08:24:15, 2005-08-28 (UTC)
 * Aw, I suppose so. Might just pass muster as an admin. ;) Beland is an A-grade top-quality wikipedian - I guess we'd all thought he already was an admin. Grutness...  wha?  08:31, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Support - even without waiting for acceptance and his answers to the questions! Stewart Adcock 09:08, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) --Sn0wflake 13:15, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Will Support after 12,000 edits and 14 months time in service. ;-) Func( t, c, @,) 16:04, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Support, absolutely. Not administrator yet? — Stevey7788 (talk) 18:34, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Support. Dragons flight 22:56, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Unconditional support - I would have nominated him if he'd put a * by his name on this list. -- Rick Block (talk) 23:24, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Strongest possible support. A finely tuned Wiki-chine, this one is. -- BD2412 talk 00:36, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Support. Surprised Beland is not an admin yet. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:50, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Grant him the golden mop. Denelson83 03:53, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Support. Should have been one before: lots of useful work, and I really, really like his answer to Question #3. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 07:01, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Support. Excellent contributor in many ways. Sjakkalle (Check!)  07:19, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Support  =Nichalp   «Talk»=  07:34, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) Support. El_C 08:50, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Support. --Doc (?) 09:10, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 15) Support. --Kbdank71 15:20, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 16) Support -- Trevor MacInnis (Talk | Contribs) 15:21, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 17) Support. If there's a shortage of mops he can have mine for a bit; he deserves it!  TenOfAllTrades(talk) 19:26, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 18) Support. I thought he was already etc etc. JFW | T@lk  21:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 19) Support. I do not always agree with the actions that Beland sometimes takes, and we have indirectly clashed in the past. However, Beland is also a tireless contributor to the project, and I recognize his abilities and effort as valuable and meaningful. That's enough for me to support him. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 21:21, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * 20) Support Briangotts (talk) 21:43, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 21) Support Thought he was one. Bratsche talk  5 pillars 22:20, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * 22) Support. Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 01:45, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 23) Support.  ral  315  05:27, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * 24) Support per the Comment section below.  Acetic Acid  ( talk  ) 13:35, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * 25)   Journalist  C./ Holla @ me!
 * Yep, Support. --Lord Voldemort (Dark Mark) 19:40, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Support. Should have happened a long time ago. --Allen3 talk 21:07, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Dang! Support by all means. Fire Star 21:55, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Support absolutely. Hall Monitor 22:15, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Oh Yeaahh! the wub  "?/!"  16:02, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) That's hot. Mike H (Talking is hot) 16:07, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Support with no reservations. Hamster Sandwich 16:51, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Support. +sj  +  17:55, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 05:09, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Wow.— Encephalon |  ζ   06:17:14, 2005-09-01 (UTC)
 * Wow indeed; isn't this the first time? ah, and Support Lectonar 09:29, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * He actually supports a lot of people. Acetic  ' Acid  09:59, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Support: --Bhadani 14:41, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Support --Cyberjunkie | Talk 17:00, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Support. My pleasure. SlimVirgin (talk) 18:37, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Support --Saluyot 00:45, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Support. siafu 00:54, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Support. Almost should have skipped Admin and went straight to Bureaucrat with this one.   Un  focused  19:52, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Support without reservations. Hall Monitor 20:10, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Support - obvious. Enjoy it. JesseW, the juggling janitor 22:49, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Support - Alright, Beland! I'm now voting Support for you since Joolzer and others, such as RobChurch, who said I was being a dick and trying to make a point, and trying to buy my vote off of me, they've finally won! I'm virtually being forced to support you! So here's another support. You're the man! WikiFan04Talk 17:56, 2 Sep 2005 (CDT)
 * 10) BRIAN 0918  • 2005-09-3 04:00
 * 11) Support. Long overdue. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:10, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose. I don't see you very much around Wikipedia. --WikiFan04Talk 00:14, 30 Aug 2005 (CDT)

Neutral

Comments
 * All together now: "I thought he already was one!"
 * All together now: "Let's force people to vote YES to Beland!"

 *  Oppose. I don't see you very much around Wikipedia. --WikiFan04Talk 00:14, 30 Aug 2005 (CDT)
 * Your vote is respected, but really, is that a valid reason to oppose someone? You've never seen them very much? What happened to looking at a person's contributions etc.  Journalist C./ Holla @ me!
 * It's a very valid reason. People were opposing me because of that very same reason, or "not talking with the community". --WikiFan04Talk 19:22, 30 Aug 2005 (CDT)
 * Generally, I have a personal policy to only support users on RfA I've had some positive interaction with, or have seen on articles or RC working in a positive (or at least effective) light. I make exceptions, however, based on a user's record, and this user is one of those exceptions. I wouldn't oppose, though, based simply on unfamiliarity. Fire Star 01:09, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, I find that seeing unknown names on RfA usually means *I* haven't been editing enough lately (or more likely, slacking on RC patrol). ;)  --Alan Au 22:53, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * There is a very substantial difference between you not having interacted with this editor up to this point - probably due to the fact that both of you work on different areas of expertise - and lack of interaction between editors and the community in general. If the candidate for adminship has not carried several conversations with other editors, it becomes very hard to evaluate him/her as a person, and not merely as an article writer. Since admins have to deal directly with people, and worse, with vandals, it is not wise to Support the nomination of a candidate who cannot/will refuse to carry a conversation with other editors, or whom has not done enough of that. --Sn0wflake 01:23, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Unresponsiveness is a definite problem. A history of deliberate stonewalling would be a reason to oppose. Fire Star 04:14, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * And, just to be clear, I assume you're speaking in general and not accusing Beland of this sort of misbehavior (right?). -- Rick Block (talk) 17:43, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * You are correct. My support for Beland is unchanged. I was responding to Sn0wflake who I assume has had experience with a different user up for admin who was unresposive to some questions. Fire Star 04:34, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I think that not having heard of an editor at all can in some cases be symptomatic of possible problems. Wikipedia's a huge place, but if one has been around for a while and hasn't run into an editor at the Village Pump, VfD, policy discussions, etc., that might indicate that that editor might not have sufficiently broad interests.  Having said that, I think that opposing all nominations for that reason alone borders on bad faith, especially for editors who do seem to have sufficiently broad scope in editing.  JYolkowski // talk 01:52, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
 * 1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)

 * A. I often deal with batch jobs and category renaming and deletion. This often turns up articles or categories that need to be unprotected or deleted.  Having admin powers would certainly help getting these cleaned up.   I don't really go on vandal patrol, but if I happen to come across any situations where blocks or page protection are warranted, I may implement the appropriate policy. -- Beland 20:21, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

 * A. There are a few listed at User:Beland, most of those being pictures of San Francisco, but there are also a few articles I've nearly or completely re-written. A lot of my work is on Wikipedia: pages and category membership.  I do offline analysis of database dumps to produce new or update existing problem reports, which seem to be helpful for editors to make systematic repairs to the site.  I like to think that having clean coordination pages helps lots of editors be more productive, and that it makes the site look more inhabited, if not more credible.

 * And of course there's Pearle, the bot which has made category cleanup a lot easier - there's even a clone. Playing with bots is fun (because I like programming small, useful projects), interesting from a research point of view, and nifty because it multiplies the amount of useful work that I and other editors can do. -- Beland 20:21, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
 * A. Oh, sure. You can't edit articles on Wikipedia for as long as I have without running into people who have a radically different view of the world than you do, and with whom you may initially disagree about what an article should say.  A few things I've learned about forming consensus, both before and during my time on Wikipedia: 1.) Keep the discussion focused on the task at hand.  Don't try to reach consensus on how the world should be, or even why the article should be one way or the other.  All you have to do is agree on what words to write.  2.) Most people find it difficult to argue with you if you are being polite and giving them the benefit of the doubt.  So I try to do so even when I might be privately yelling at my screen.  It prevents them from getting too upset to have a civil conversation, and it saves face if it turns out they were right and I was wrong. If they are being gruff or offensive, just ignore that and discuss article content instead.  3.) Do research.  Sometimes it's easy to convince people that they are wrong if you present some reliable evidence from outside sources.  Sometimes in the process of gathering it, you realize that you yourself are wrong, or that something more complicated is going on, which makes you both right or both wrong.  4.) Get outside opinions.  Filing a request that other editors comment on the dispute can be quite helpful.  5.)  Just walk away.  Sometimes a dispute exceeds the time or expertise I have to devote to it.  So I just make sure my greivance is noted on the talk page, that the article is appropriately tagged, if necessary, and leave it until later.  There are so many things I'm working with on the site, there's no point in getting stuck on just one thing.  6.) Disengage from people who make persistent personal attacks.  I'm not getting paid enough to put up with that sort of thing.  Fortunately, it's hardly ever a problem.

 * Given how many articles Pearle touches, a lot of people have complaints about her. When she's running, I actively monitor her talk page, and try to resolve any complaints before starting a new run.  Some complaints are about the substance of what Pearle is doing.  Usually this just means I have to point the person at the community decision which Pearle is implementing, of which they were unaware.  Occasionally we discover the original decision was unwise, or ambiguous, resulting in my implementation not aligning with what someone was expecting.  Some complaints are about the operational details, which are split between the "oh, you found a bug", and "no, it's supposed to do that" variety.  I do feel obligated to clean up any messes that Pearle makes, whether by reprogramming her or reverting her edits manually (which can be rather tedious, depending on how far she's gotten before someone notices something has gone wrong).  Once my personal account was blocked as a side-effect of blocking Pearle (because they come from the same IP address).  That was really annoying, but all I could do was send a polite e-mail explaining that she was, in fact, authorized to be doing what she had been doing, even though I hadn't gotten around to adding that to her home page from Wikipedia talk:Bots.  But I suppose misunderstandings are inevitable when you do something that thousands of people can see. -- Beland 20:21, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Wow, thank you all for your support. -- Beland 19:30, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Beland


text: User talk:66.160.92.78

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

title: User talk:66.160.92.78


text:
The Temptations Sing Smokey

The Temptations Sing Smokey is the second studio album by the Temptations for the Motown label, released on the Gordy Records subsidiary (G 912) in 1965. As its name implies, it is composed entirely of songs written and produced by Smokey Robinson, and several other members of the Miracles as well.

Several of the songs are covers of songs Robinson produced for the Miracles or Mary Wells, while the rest were originally recorded by The Temptations. Among these are three successful hit singles, starting with "The Way You Do the Things You Do", which featured Eddie Kendricks on lead vocals. The next two songs feature lead vocals by new Temptation David Ruffin – "It's Growing" and the group's signature song, "My Girl".

Not included are two singles which predate these two singles, "I'll Be in Trouble" and "Girl (Why You Wanna Make Me Blue)" (whose B-side, "Baby, Baby I Need You", is here). These songs would be included on the next Temptations album, The Temptin' Temptations. A third hit single, "The Way You Do the Things You Do", is present here, although it was also issued on the previous Temptations album, Meet the Temptations.

Track listing
Side one
 * 1) "The Way You Do the Things You Do" (Smokey Robinson, Bobby Rogers) (lead singer: Eddie Kendricks) – 2:41
 * 2) "Baby, Baby I Need You" (Robinson) (lead singers: Eddie Kendricks, Paul Williams, Temptations ensemble) – 2:53
 * 3) "My Girl" (Robinson, Ronald White) (lead singer: David Ruffin) – 2:55
 * 4) "What Love Has Joined Together" (Robinson, Rogers) (lead singer: Eddie Kendricks) – 2:58
 * 5) "You'll Lose a Precious Love" (Robinson) (lead singer: David Ruffin; Melvin Franklin on last line of bridge) – 2:35
 * 6) "It's Growing" (Robinson, Warren Pete Moore) (lead singer: David Ruffin) – 3:00

Side two
 * 1) "Who's Lovin' You" (Robinson) (lead singer: David Ruffin) – 2:59
 * 2) "What's So Good About Goodbye" (Robinson) (lead singer: Eddie Kendricks) – 2:40
 * 3) "You Beat Me to the Punch" (Robinson, White) (lead singer: Paul Williams) – 2:45
 * 4) "Way Over There" (Berry Gordy, Jr., Robinson) (lead singer: Eddie Kendricks) – 3:03
 * 5) "You've Really Got a Hold on Me" (Robinson) (lead singer: Eddie Kendricks; co-lead harmonies: David Ruffin, Paul Williams) – 3:00
 * 6) "(You Can) Depend on Me" (Gordy, Robinson) (lead singers: Eddie Kendricks, Otis Williams) – 2:32

Unreleased recordings from the Sing Smokey sessions: Both these songs have subsequently been released.
 * "What's Easy for Two Is So Hard for One" (Robinson) (lead singer: Paul Williams)
 * "Happy Landing" (Robinson, White) (lead singer: Eddie Kendricks)

Personnel
The Temptations with:
 * David Ruffin – vocals (all tracks except "Baby, Baby I Need You")
 * Eddie Kendricks – vocals
 * Paul Williams – vocals
 * Melvin Franklin – vocals
 * Otis Williams – vocals
 * Elbridge "Al" Bryant – vocals ("Baby, Baby I Need You")
 * The Andantes – additional backing vocals ("It's Growing")
 * The Funk Brothers – instrumentation
 * Detroit Symphony Orchestra – strings

Technical
 * Smokey Robinson – producer, executive producer
 * Bob Folster – cover design

Chart and singles history

 * Note – There was no Billboard R&B singles chart from November 1963 until January 1965. Most discographies include R&B information from Cash Box magazine to fill in the gap in the R&B chart, as is done here with the 1964 releases.

title: The Temptations Sing Smokey


text:
Headright

 * ''Osage headrights is a specific and distinct topic. This article is about the general topic of headrights.

A headright refers to a legal grant of land given to settlers during the period of European colonization in the Americas. A "headright" includes both the grant of land and the owner (the head) that claims the land. The person who has a right to the land is the one who paid to transport people to a colony. Headrights are most notable for their role in the expansion of the Thirteen Colonies; the Virginia Company gave headrights to settlers, and the Plymouth Company followed suit. The headright system was used in several colonies, including Maryland, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina. Most headrights were for 1 to 1000 acre of land, and were granted to those who were willing to cross the Atlantic and help populate the colonies. Headrights were granted to anyone who would pay for the transportation costs of an indentured laborer. These land grants consisted of 50 acre for someone newly moving to the area and 100 acre for people previously living in the area. By ensuring the landowning masters had legal ownership of all land acquired, the indentured laborers after their indenture period had passed had little opportunity to procure their own land. This kept a large portion of the citizens of the Thirteen Colonies poor and led to tensions between the laborers and the landowners.

Cause for the headright system
Early colonists of Jamestown were employees of the Virginia Company and were responsible for the production and profit of the colony. Jamestown struggled initially due to the scarcity of gold and silver throughout eastern North America; however, the colony began to flourish after a focus on tobacco production began to take shape. This increase in tobacco production required many more workers to handle the labor. A disproportion between the amount of land available and the population led to a low supply of labor, resulting in the growth of indentured servitude and slavery. The Headright System was created to solve labor shortages and contributed to the success of Virginia.

Overview of the headright system
The headright system began in the colony of Jamestown in 1618 as an attempt to solve labor shortages due to the advent of the tobacco economy, which required large plots of land with many workers. The headright system also served to attract new settlers. Settlers who had already been living in Virginia were each given two headrights of 50 acres (20 ha); immigrant colonists who paid for their passage were given one headright, and individuals would subsequently receive one headright each time they paid for the passage of another individual. This last mechanism increased the division between the wealthy land-owners and the working poor. Headrights were given to heads-of-households, and because 50 acres were accumulated for each member of the household, families had an incentive to make the passage to the colonies together. Although the Headright System increased the population of colonies like Virginia, it also contributed to the expansion of indentured servitude, the lower class, and slavery. After the American Revolution, the system was no longer used.

Process of obtaining headrights
After paying for the passage of an individual to make it to the colonies, one needed to obtain a patent for the land. First, the governor or local county court had to provide a certificate that certified the validity of the importation of a person. One would then select the land one desired and have an official survey made. The two basic surveying instruments used to mark plots of land were a chain known as Gunter's chain and a compass. The patent's claimant would then take the description of this land to the colony's secretary, who created the patent to be approved by the governor. The patent usually included the name of the immigrants, or headrights, in the document. Once a headright was obtained, it was treated as a commodity and could be bought, sold, or traded. It also could be saved indefinitely and used at a later date.

Eligibility
Individuals who could afford to do so would accumulate headrights by providing funds for poor individuals to travel to Virginia. During the 17th century, the cost of transport from England to the colonies was about six pounds per person. This system led to the development of indentured servitude where poor individuals would become workers for a specified number of years and provide labor in order to repay the landowners who had sponsored their transportation to the colonies. The claimants to headrights could receive grants for men, women and children since anyone could become an indentured servant. Early documentation from the Virginia Company seems to suggest that a landowner could receive a headright even if the indentured servant whose trip they sponsored did not make it to Virginia alive. Even after the Virginia Company was dissolved on May 24, 1624, the Privy Council ordered for patents for headrights to still be issued.

Slavery and the headright system
Plantation owners benefited from the headright system by buying imported slaves from Africa. This, along with the increase in the amount of money required to bring (European) indentured servants to the colonies, contributed to the shift towards slavery in the colonies. Until 1699, an enslaved person was worth a headright of fifty acres. According to records, in the 1670s over 400 enslaved people were used as headrights in Virginia. This number increased in the 1680s and 1690s. Many families grew in power in the colonies by receiving large tracts of land when they imported slaves. For example, George Menefie purchased sixty slaves, and received a total of 3,000 acres (12.1 km2) in 1638. In 1699, it was decided that headrights would only be granted to free citizens and that transporting indentured laborers or slaves would no longer a guarantor of land.

Issues with land patent records
According to records, there was a large discrepancy between the number of headrights issued and the number of new residents in the colonies. This gap may be explained by high mortality rates of people during their journey to the colonies. Landowners would receive headrights for the dead and thus, the gap would widen between population growth and the number of headrights issued. Another explanation suggests that the secretary's office that issued the headrights grew more lax. There were few regulations in place to keep the headright system in check. Because of this, headrights were claimed multiple times and people took advantage of the lack of governance. For instance, when a person was brought to the colonies, both the ship captain and the individual paying the transportation costs may have attempted to receive land patents or headrights for the same person. Another problem was that secretaries sometimes issued headrights for fictitious people. During the 1660s and 1670s, the number of headrights was about four times greater than the increase in population. If this large discrepancy must be attributed to more than fictitious issuing, a final explanation suggests that people had accumulated and saved headrights. Headrights could be bought for about 50 pounds of tobacco each. The owners of the grants then claimed the land years later once the land had risen in value. Although keeping a count of the number of headrights issued may not lead to accurate estimations of population growth in the colonies, the number of patents issued acts as an indicator of the demand for land.

title: Headright


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cakeplow

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

The result of the debate was delete. --Tony Sidaway Talk 08:37, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

cakeplow
Seems like spam, no value as encyclopedia entry, just promoting the linked sites Trisk 00:53, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless someone wants to completely rewrite it and show why its notable. Elfguy 01:17, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neologism, at best. -- DS1953 01:23, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. *drew 02:36, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Dicdef Amren (talk) 04:20, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete and outright nonsense-vandalism. Block the author.   Paul Klenk 05:28, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Cdyson37 14:08, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Nonsense. Nothing but an attempt at blog self promotion. --Cactus.man 14:47, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - seems to be a non-famous neologism --Mysidia (talk) 16:07, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * speedy delete nn __earth 04:50, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, just stupid.  ral  315  17:29, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text: User talk:69.34.50.101

title: User talk:69.34.50.101


text: User talk:65.240.164.114

title: User talk:65.240.164.114


text:
Friesland Foods

Royal Friesland Foods (Koninklijke Friesland Foods N.V.) was a Dutch company that developed, produced and sold branded dairy products and fruit-based drinks. Royal Friesland Foods had a strong presence in Western Europe, Central Europe, West Africa and Southeast Asia.

On 30 December 2008, Friesland Foods merged with Campina, under the new name of FrieslandCampina. The process was announced in December 2007. The EU conditioned the merger to the sale of certain cheese and dairy drink divisions by both companies.

Overview
Royal Friesland Foods employs 15,312, of whom 10,000 work outside the Netherlands. The cooperative's leading brands are Appelsientje, Bonnet, Chocomel/Cécémel, Completa, CoolBest, Debic, DubbelFrisss, Dutch Lady, Extran, Frico, Friso, Foremost, Friesche Vlag, Frisian Flag, Fristi, Milli, NoyNoy, Peak, Pöttyös Túró Rudi, Rainbow, and Taksi.

Royal Friesland Foods is organized as a cooperative, with roots going back to 1879. It has grown through mergers and takeovers, the most significant of which occurred in late 1997, when four Dutch dairy cooperatives joined to create the business in its current form.

In December 2001, KFF NV acquired the Drinks & Dairy division of Numico including the brands Chocomel/Cécémel, Fristi and Extran.

Royal Friesland Foods gained its current name in June 2004 after Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands granted it the Royal status ("Koninklijk" in Dutch) in honour of its 125th anniversary. Prior to that, the company was known as Friesland Coberco Dairy Foods.

Longevity Brand - Sữa Ông Thọ
In Vietnam, the U.S. and Canada the company is well known for its canned condensed milk product, Sữa Ông Thọ (Longevity Brand condensed milk), popularly used in Vietnamese iced coffee with milk (Cà phê sữa đá) drinks, and in various other Vietnamese desserts. Sữa Ông Thọ was mass-produced in the Saigon-Biên Hòa area and widely consumed in the Republic of Vietnam, produced by Friesland Foods prior 1975. It was used in coffee, mixed with hot water to produce hot milk for babies and young children to drink (since fresh milk had to be imported and were thus expensive), dipped with French bread (Bánh mì) or in other dessert applications. After the 1975 Fall of Saigon, the factories manufacturing Sữa Ông Thọ, along with all other commercial and private properties were collectivized by the communists, and the facilities came under the state company Vinamilk, who continued to produce Sữa Ông Thọ condensed milk under the same name and used domestically and elsewhere in Indochina. Friesland Foods continued production of Sữa Ông Thọ - Longevity Brand after 1975 in the U.S. and Canada for the North American market, especially catering to Overseas Vietnamese consumers, and increasingly to Western consumers as the popularity of Vietnamese coffee and cuisine in general, increases. In North America, Longevity Brand - Sữa Ông Thọ is widely available in Asian supermarkets, and increasingly in conventional supermarkets.

2008 baby milk scandal

In September 2008, the testing of Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA) found that the "Dutch Lady" brand of strawberry flavoured milk manufactured in China to be contaminated with melamine. This product was recalled and destroyed. Friesland Foods recalled all of its plastic-bottled milk in Hong Kong and Macau.

title: Friesland Foods


text:
Historical method

Historical method is the collection of techniques and guidelines that historians use to research and write histories of the past. Secondary sources, primary sources and material evidence such as that derived from archaeology may all be drawn on, and the historian's skill lies in identifying these sources, evaluating their relative authority, and combining their testimony appropriately in order to construct an accurate and reliable picture of past events and environments.

In the philosophy of history, the question of the nature, and the possibility, of a sound historical method is raised within the sub-field of epistemology. The study of historical method and of different ways of writing history is known as historiography.

Though historians agree in very general and basic principles, in practice "specific canons of historical proof are neither widely observed nor generally agreed upon" among professional historians. Some scholars of history have observed that there are no particular standards for historical fields such as religion, art, science, democracy, and social justice as these are by their nature 'essentially contested' fields, such that they require diverse tools particular to each field beforehand in order to interpret topics from those fields.

Source criticism
Source criticism (or information evaluation) is the process of evaluating the qualities of an information source, such as its validity, reliability, and relevance to the subject under investigation.

Gilbert J. Garraghan and Jean Delanglez (1946) divide source criticism into six inquiries:

 * 1) When was the source, written or unwritten, produced (date)?
 * 2) Where was it produced (localization)?
 * 3) By whom was it produced (authorship)?
 * 4) From what pre-existing material was it produced (analysis)?
 * 5) In what original form was it produced (integrity)?
 * 6) What is the evidential value of its contents (credibility)?

The first four are known as higher criticism; the fifth, lower criticism; and, together, external criticism. The sixth and final inquiry about a source is called internal criticism. Together, this inquiry is known as source criticism.

R. J. Shafer on external criticism: "It sometimes is said that its function is negative, merely saving us from using false evidence; whereas internal criticism has the positive function of telling us how to use authenticated evidence."

Noting that few documents are accepted as completely reliable, Louis Gottschalk sets down the general rule, "for each particular of a document the process of establishing credibility should be separately undertaken regardless of the general credibility of the author". An author's trustworthiness in the main may establish a background probability for the consideration of each statement, but each piece of evidence extracted must be weighed individually.

Procedures for contradictory sources
Bernheim (1889) and Langlois & Seignobos (1898) proposed a seven-step procedure for source criticism in history:

 * 1) If the sources all agree about an event, historians can consider the event proven.
 * 2) However, majority does not rule; even if most sources relate events in one way, that version will not prevail unless it passes the test of critical textual analysis.
 * 3) The source whose account can be confirmed by reference to outside authorities in some of its parts can be trusted in its entirety if it is impossible similarly to confirm the entire text.
 * 4) When two sources disagree on a particular point, the historian will prefer the source with most "authority"—that is the source created by the expert or by the eyewitness.
 * 5) Eyewitnesses are, in general, to be preferred especially in circumstances where the ordinary observer could have accurately reported what transpired and, more specifically, when they deal with facts known by most contemporaries.
 * 6) If two independently created sources agree on a matter, the reliability of each is measurably enhanced.
 * 7) When two sources disagree and there is no other means of evaluation, then historians take the source which seems to accord best with common sense.

Subsequent descriptions of historical method, outlined below, have attempted to overcome the credulity built into the first step formulated by the nineteenth century historiographers by stating principles not merely by which different reports can be harmonized but instead by which a statement found in a source may be considered to be unreliable or reliable as it stands on its own.

Core principles for determining reliability
The following core principles of source criticism were formulated by two Scandinavian historians, Olden-Jørgensen (1998) and Thurén Torsten (1997):

 * Human sources may be relics such as a fingerprint; or narratives such as a statement or a letter. Relics are more credible sources than narratives.
 * Any given source may be forged or corrupted. Strong indications of the originality of the source increase its reliability.
 * The closer a source is to the event which it purports to describe, the more one can trust it to give an accurate historical description of what actually happened.
 * An eyewitness is more reliable than testimony at second hand, which is more reliable than hearsay at further remove, and so on.
 * If a number of independent sources contain the same message, the credibility of the message is strongly increased.
 * The tendency of a source is its motivation for providing some kind of bias. Tendencies should be minimized or supplemented with opposite motivations.
 * If it can be demonstrated that the witness or source has no direct interest in creating bias then the credibility of the message is increased.

Criteria of Authenticity
Historians sometimes have to deal with deciding what is genuine and what is not in a source. For such circumstances, there are external and internal "criteria of authenticity" that are applicable. These are technical tools for evaluating sources and separating 'genuine' sources or content from forgeries or manipulation. External criteria involve issues relating to establishing authorship of a source or range of sources. It involves things like if an author wrote something themselves, if other sources attribute authorship to the source, agreement of independent manuscript copies on the content of a source.

Internal criteria involve formalities, style, and language for an author; if a source varies from the environment it was produced, inconsistencies of time or chronology, textual transmission of a source, interpolations in a source, insertions or deletions in a source.

Eyewitness evidence
R. J. Shafer (1974) offers this checklist for evaluating eyewitness testimony:

 * 1) Is the real meaning of the statement different from its literal meaning?  Are words used in senses not employed today?  Is the statement meant to be ironic (i.e., mean other than it says)?
 * 2)  How well could the author observe the thing he reports?  Were his senses equal to the observation?  Was his physical location suitable to sight, hearing, touch?  Did he have the proper social ability to observe: did he understand the language, have other expertise required (e.g., law, military); was he not being intimidated by his wife or the secret police?
 * 3) How did the author report?, and what was his ability to do so?
 * 4) Regarding his ability to report, was he biased?  Did he have proper time for reporting?  Proper place for reporting?  Adequate recording instruments?
 * 5) When did he report in relation to his observation?  Soon?  Much later?  Fifty years is much later as most eyewitnesses are dead and those who remain may have forgotten relevant material.
 * 6) What was the author's intention in reporting?  For whom did he report?  Would that audience be likely to require or suggest distortion to the author?
 * 7)  Are there additional clues to intended veracity?  Was he indifferent on the subject reported, thus probably not intending distortion?  Did he make statements damaging to himself, thus probably not seeking to distort?  Did he give incidental or casual information, almost certainly not intended to mislead?
 * 8)  Do his statements seem inherently improbable: e.g., contrary to human nature, or in conflict with what we know?
 * 9)  Remember that some types of information are easier to observe and report on than others.
 * 10)  Are there inner contradictions in the document?

Louis Gottschalk adds an additional consideration: "Even when the fact in question may not be well-known, certain kinds of statements are both incidental and probable to such a degree that error or falsehood seems unlikely. If an ancient inscription on a road tells us that a certain proconsul built that road while Augustus was princeps, it may be doubted without further corroboration that that proconsul really built the road, but would be harder to doubt that the road was built during the principate of Augustus.  If an advertisement informs readers that 'A and B Coffee may be bought at any reliable grocer's at the unusual price of fifty cents a pound,' all the inferences of the advertisement may well be doubted without corroboration except that there is a brand of coffee on the market called 'A and B Coffee.'"

Indirect witnesses
Garraghan (1946) says that most information comes from "indirect witnesses", people who were not present on the scene but heard of the events from someone else. Gottschalk says that a historian may sometimes use hearsay evidence when no primary texts are available. He writes, "In cases where he uses secondary witnesses...he asks: (1) On whose primary testimony does the secondary witness base his statements? (2) Did the secondary witness accurately report the primary testimony as a whole?  (3) If not, in what details did he accurately report the primary testimony?  Satisfactory answers to the second and third questions may provide the historian with the whole or the gist of the primary testimony upon which the secondary witness may be his only means of knowledge.  In such cases the secondary source is the historian's 'original' source, in the sense of being the 'origin' of his knowledge.  Insofar as this 'original' source is an accurate report of primary testimony, he tests its credibility as he would that of the primary testimony itself." Gottschalk adds, "Thus hearsay evidence would not be discarded by the historian, as it would be by a law court merely because it is hearsay."

Oral tradition
Gilbert Garraghan (1946) maintains that oral tradition may be accepted if it satisfies either two "broad conditions" or six "particular conditions", as follows:

 * 1) Broad conditions stated.
 * 2) The tradition should be supported by an unbroken series of witnesses, reaching from the immediate and first reporter of the fact to the living mediate witness from whom we take it up, or to the one who was the first to commit it to writing.
 * 3) There should be several parallel and independent series of witnesses testifying to the fact in question.
 * 4) Particular conditions formulated.
 * 5) The tradition must report a public event of importance, such as would necessarily be known directly to a great number of persons.
 * 6) The tradition must have been generally believed, at least for a definite period of time.
 * 7) During that definite period it must have gone without protest, even from persons interested in denying it.
 * 8) The tradition must be one of relatively limited duration.  [Elsewhere, Garraghan suggests a maximum limit of 150 years, at least in cultures that excel in oral remembrance.]
 * 9) The critical spirit must have been sufficiently developed while the tradition lasted, and the necessary means of critical investigation must have been at hand.
 * 10) Critical-minded persons who would surely have challenged the tradition – had they considered it false – must have made no such challenge.

Other methods of verifying oral tradition may exist, such as comparison with the evidence of archaeological remains.

More recent evidence concerning the potential reliability or unreliability of oral tradition has come out of fieldwork in West Africa and Eastern Europe.

Anonymous sources
Historians do allow for the use of anonymous texts to establish historical facts.

Synthesis: historical reasoning
Once individual pieces of information have been assessed in context, hypotheses can be formed and established by historical reasoning.

Argument to the best explanation
C. Behan McCullagh (1984) lays down seven conditions for a successful argument to the best explanation:

 * 1) The statement, together with other statements already held to be true, must imply yet other statements describing present, observable data. (We will henceforth call the first statement 'the hypothesis', and the statements describing observable data, 'observation statements'.)
 * 2) The hypothesis must be of greater explanatory scope than any other incompatible hypothesis about the same subject; that is, it must imply a greater variety of observation statements.
 * 3) The hypothesis must be of greater explanatory power than any other incompatible hypothesis about the same subject; that is, it must make the observation statements it implies more probable than any other.
 * 4) The hypothesis must be more plausible than any other incompatible hypothesis about the same subject; that is, it must be implied to some degree by a greater variety of accepted truths than any other, and be implied more strongly than any other; and its probable negation must be implied by fewer beliefs, and implied less strongly than any other.
 * 5) The hypothesis must be less ad hoc than any other incompatible hypothesis about the same subject; that is, it must include fewer new suppositions about the past which are not already implied to some extent by existing beliefs.
 * 6) It must be disconfirmed by fewer accepted beliefs than any other incompatible hypothesis about the same subject; that is, when conjoined with accepted truths it must imply fewer observation statements and other statements which are believed to be false.
 * 7) It must exceed other incompatible hypotheses about the same subject by so much, in characteristics 2 to 6, that there is little chance of an incompatible hypothesis, after further investigation, soon exceeding it in these respects.

McCullagh sums up, "if the scope and strength of an explanation are very great, so that it explains a large number and variety of facts, many more than any competing explanation, then it is likely to be true".

Statistical inference
McCullagh (1984) states this form of argument as follows:

 * 1) There is probability (of the degree p1) that whatever is an A is a B.
 * 2) It is probable (to the degree p2) that this is an A.
 * 3) Therefore, (relative to these premises) it is probable (to the degree p1 × p2) that this is a B.

McCullagh gives this example:

 * 1) In thousands of cases, the letters V.S.L.M. appearing at the end of a Latin inscription on a tombstone stand for Votum Solvit Libens Merito.
 * 2) From all appearances the letters V.S.L.M. are on this tombstone at the end of a Latin inscription.
 * 3) Therefore, these letters on this tombstone stand for Votum Solvit Libens Merito.

This is a syllogism in probabilistic form, making use of a generalization formed by induction from numerous examples (as the first premise).

Argument from analogy
The structure of the argument is as follows:

 * 1) One thing (object, event, or state of affairs) has properties p1 . . . pn and pn + 1.
 * 2) Another thing has properties p1 . . . pn.
 * 3) So the latter has property pn + 1.

McCullagh says that an argument from analogy, if sound, is either a "covert statistical syllogism" or better expressed as an argument to the best explanation. It is a statistical syllogism when it is "established by a sufficient number and variety of instances of the generalization"; otherwise, the argument may be invalid because properties 1 through n are unrelated to property n + 1, unless property n + 1 is the best explanation of properties 1 through n. Analogy, therefore, is uncontroversial only when used to suggest hypotheses, not as a conclusive argument.

title: Historical method


text: File:Tempts-sing-smokey.jpg

title: File:Tempts-sing-smokey.jpg


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thwack

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

The result of the debate was Delete as duplicate content with wiktionary. --11:40, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Thwack
Delete. Moved to wiktionary. No potential to ever be encyclopedic. — Fingers-of-Pyrex 00:54, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep link to Wiktionary, delete other content — page has already been replaced by a link. Andrew pmk | Talk 01:31, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Move to Wiktionary. *drew 02:31, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Non encyclopaedic. --Cactus.man 14:43, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: I put this on VFD because of the note generated by the Transwikied to Wiktionary template: The final disposition of the article on Wikipedia has not yet been determined. It may be redirected, it may go to Wikipedia:Votes for deletion, or it may evolve beyond a dictionary definition and remain on the Wikipedia. If none of these tasks have been performed, please do so. — Fingers-of-Pyrex 17:12, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * move as per *drew's suggestion. __earth 04:49, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment again: It was moved to Wiktionary on 2005-05-20. At this point, the article needs to be (1) redirected, (2) expanded, or (3) deleted. — Fingers-of-Pyrex 11:50, August 29, 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/Thwack


text:
Isaac Riley

Isaac Riley (October 1853—July 8, 1926 ) was a politician in Manitoba, Canada. He served in the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba from 1899 to 1915 as a member of the Conservative Party.

Riley was born in Mornington Township in Perth County, Canada West (now Ontario), the son of Charles Riley, and was educated at public schools. He entered business as a lumber merchant. In 1876, Riley came to Winnipeg. He later moved to Stonewall, Manitoba where he was a lumber merchant and also owned a hotel. In 1882, Riley married Laura M. Poore.

He was first elected to the Manitoba legislature in the 1899 provincial election, defeating Liberal incumbent Samuel Jacob Jackson by sixty-five votes in the Rockwood constituency. The Conservatives won a majority government, and Riley served as a backbench supporter of the administrations led by the Hugh John Macdonald and Rodmond Roblin. Riley was re-elected in the elections of 1903, 1907, 1910 and 1914, and continued to serve as a government backbencher. In the 1914 campaign, he defeated Liberal candidate Arthur Lobb by fifty-nine votes.

The Roblin administration was forced to resign in 1915 amid a serious corruption scandal. A new general election was called, which the Liberals won in a landslide. Riley did not seek re-election.

He died in Stonewall in 1926.

title: Isaac Riley


text:
File talk:Mouse-mechanism-cutaway.png

nice picture. --Cyberman 00:56, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Am I correct that the picture is drawn with a single optical encoder on each axis? I'm not really sure how that would work; you can get speed, but how do you get direction? It is possible to use a more complicated code on the wheels that would allow that, but that is not what is drawn. The howstuffworks page shows a mouse with a simple pattern like here, but two photosensors. That gives two signals (roughly) in quadrature, which allows you to determine the direction. The graphic is very nice though, very clear.
 * 70.22.220.128 16:37, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

The image of the mouse shell is blurry
I suggest recapturing this image using the macro mode on the camera.

Readability
It would be easier to read the diagram if the text was directly below it instead of being 2 paragraphs down. Does it make sense to change the layout a bit? JWhiteheadcc (talk) 21:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

title: File talk:Mouse-mechanism-cutaway.png


text:
Talk:Pub crawl

Santas
Why is this page ("pub crawl" in wiki) no longer displayed in Google, but comes up as "Running of the Santas"??? Has someone been manipulating the SEO on this?

Bar tour
"Bar tour" is a term more common to American English, while "Pub Crawl" is used throughout the English speaking world, including the US. In the US, the term "pub crawl" conotes getting incredibly drunk, while one may not necessarily become sloppy drunk participating in a bar tour. The "bar tour" article deals with the culture surrounding American bar tours. I think it would be better for the articles to cross-reference each other than be combined into one.

I think you're making this up. "Bar tour" what is that! I am American and have never heard this term. Yet I have been on many 'pub crawls'! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.152.23.8 (talk) 23:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

My local CAMRA branch describes its excursions as pub crawls. 12:16, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Red Dwarf
Would a reference to the infamous pub crawl in Red Dwarf be appropriate? --Merovingian (t) (c) (e) 19:56, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Possibly, perhaps a fictional pub crawl section or even a new entry maybe in order. -- BarFly (t) (c) 22:48, 12 April 2006 (GMT)

Unsourced material will be removed without mercy
This article is terrible. It cites exactly one source, the OED, for one piece of information. (I strongly doubt that Guinness World Records, whose most recent edition (ISBN 1904994121) was published on 2006-08-08, lists a world record purportedly made two months after its publication.) All information must be sourced, and unsourced material will be removed without mercy. Uncle G 11:05, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

>>>Just pointing out that Guisness doesn't hold records on Pub Crawls as it no longer takes records on alcohol related events, so the statement can't be true regardless.

Why exactly are there so many "citation needed" tags on this article? Particularly with the Monopoly Pub Crawl, because there's NOTHING there that's not verifiable facts.

 * There are far, far too many "Examples of famous pub crawls" in here. Every town of any size will have one - we can't go including all of them! The Monopoly board one is an example of one that probably should stay because it's genuinely well-known beyond the confines of London... but how many people outside Stoke, Mumbles or Wiesbaden have heard of those? 86.132.142.39 01:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I've removed a ton of unsourced material. Material added in without reliable sources is subejct to removal. - 152.91.9.144 23:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

The image used hardly looks a 'likely stop' - more a picturesque country pub!

Commercial Pub Crawls
This page used to have several links to companies running pub crawls around Europe. Some are still mentioned in the Details section but all links to commercial pub crawls have been removed except for the one in Rome. I think this violates neutrality; either all commercial companies get a link, or none. The majority of the article is for private routes for the public to freely participate in so it makes no sense to have the commercial ones in the same section. I suggest we create a subheading for pub crawl companies and put in as many as we can find - or the Rome ones are cut.

I'd like links to professional pub crawl operators to be included under a separate heading please. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.215.51.203 (talk) 04:30, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Stampede pub crawl.
In Calgary, Alberta, Canada was apparently over 7000 people in 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.158.204.178 (talk) 10:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

"Other notable pub crawls" really should be removed.

Criticisms
I don't know if there are any official sources for this, but some criticisms or arguments against pub crawls could be included. For example, there are significant overhead involved in moving pubs/bars/clubs after every drink, such as:
 * You have to pay for every drink individually, rather than make one payment for all your drinks, if you stay in one location.
 * You may have to sacrifice a good seating or table arrangement to move to another location.
 * As the night continues and locations get more busy, it may be more difficult to find a table and seating, order a drink, or even get into the establishments.
 * As drinkers move to different locations and become more inebriated, drinkers may find themselves in an unfamiliar (and potentially dangerous) location, and it may be difficult to return home safely.

Ouizardus (talk) 19:40, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Terms
The term "bohemian death march" created by Special:Contributions/76.164.159.115 at 16:01, 10 March 2010, as vandalism, became a term used in a few places across the internet.

Books Group (14 Oct 2010). ""Pub Crawls: Pub Crawl, the Claret Run, Pub Golf, Otley Run, the Tom Waits Run, Portland Urban Iditarod, King Street Run, Brides of March"". Google Books. Books LLC. Retrieved 14.10.2014.

Marcos Pitti (November 2nd, 2013). ""Da de los muertos Pub Crawl"". carpechepe.com. Carpe Chepe and Exploradores Urbanos Sociedad de Responsabilidad Limitada. Retrieved 02.11.2014.

Meghan Pescio (Aug 28, 2013). ""Livin' Local: Vegas Cycle Pub – A Pedal Powered Pub Crawl"". pinpoint publications. Pinpoint Publications Limited Liability Company. Retrieved 28.08.2014.

21st birthday bar crawl
In the mid-west - especially college towns - a bar crawl is when someone turns 21 their friends take them to every bar in the area and they get a free drink for their birthday. The friends usually end up carrying their friends home. Have seen this at Ohio State, Ohio U, Kent State, Pitt, and Indiana. Add this to the article?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.171.131.162 (talk) 01:18, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Pub crawl. 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/20131128094312/http://gothamist.com/2013/11/24/ray_kelly_says_nypd_supports_santac.php to http://gothamist.com/2013/11/24/ray_kelly_says_nypd_supports_santac.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140223005711/http://gothamist.com/2011/12/12/its_time_for_santacon_to_stop.php to http://gothamist.com/2011/12/12/its_time_for_santacon_to_stop.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131216192835/http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20121218/hells-kitchen-clinton/drunk-santas-terrorized-city-during-seasonal-rampage-critics-say to http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20121218/hells-kitchen-clinton/drunk-santas-terrorized-city-during-seasonal-rampage-critics-say
 * Added tag to https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/pub-crawl
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141030144410/http://santapubcrawl.co.uk/index.htm to http://santapubcrawl.co.uk/index.htm
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20120714022707/http://illawarra.yourguide.com.au/articles/1099385.html?src=topstories to http://illawarra.yourguide.com.au/articles/1099385.html?src=topstories
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080227005708/http://www.stuffmagazine.com/articles/index.aspx?id=923 to http://www.stuffmagazine.com/articles/index.aspx?id=923

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) 04:06, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pub crawl. 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/20120616191027/http://www.wcnc.com/news/local/Pub-crawl-goes-on-dispite-rainy-weather-143077956.html to http://www.wcnc.com/news/local/Pub-crawl-goes-on-dispite-rainy-weather-143077956.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150501150437/http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2012/11/zombie_pub_crawl_breaks_guinness_world_record.php to http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2012/11/zombie_pub_crawl_breaks_guinness_world_record.php

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) 21:37, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pub crawl. 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/20140326040348/http://www.canada.com/life/crawl+Santas+Vancouver+joins+Christmas+spirit+with+SantaCon/9288323/story.html to http://www.canada.com/life/crawl+Santas+Vancouver+joins+Christmas+spirit+with+SantaCon/9288323/story.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:52, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

contradiction in terms
In the UK, pub crawls are generally spontaneous nights out in which the participants arrange to meet - mm, if "participants" "arrange" to meet the activity can hardly be called "spontaneous", can it? Generally spontaneous also doesn't square with drinking sessions based around a special occasion such as a birthday or a leaving celebration. It also doesn't square with my experience. I haven't been to the UK for a while and the usage may have changed, but I'm rather sure that when I lived in Nottingham in 2005 (the nation's binge-drinking capital at the time, is it still?) a spontaneous night out with friends that involved "bar-hopping" was neither considered nor called a "pub crawl"; that term would expressly refer to a fixture in the social calender, something you'd "take part" in and be a "participant" of, much like a field trip, an event someone organized, arranged, appointed, planned, plotted and premeditated with malice aforethought - but definitely not something you'd describe as generally spontaneous merrymaking with little apparent coherence or structure. Then again my recollection may be clouded by the current usage of the term here in Germany/Berlin, where "Pub Crawl" is encreasingly encroaching on the "traditional" German terms Kneipentour and Kneipenbummel. Commercial package tours for tourists are invariably advertised as "pub crawls". Many student clubs will also take you on a "pub crawl" these days, though many still stick with "Kneipentour", but you'd never ever just meet up with your mates and call it a "pub crawl", that kind of spontaneous bar-hopping is still a Kneipentour. --Judith Wahr (talk) 16:06, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Pub crawl


text:
Beam (nautical)

The beam of a ship is its width at its widest point. The maximum beam (BMAX) is the distance between planes passing through the outer sides of the ship, beam of the hull (BH) only includes permanently fixed parts of the hull, and beam at waterline (BWL) is the maximum width where the hull intersects the surface of the water.

Generally speaking, the wider the beam of a ship (or boat), the more initial stability it has, at the expense of secondary stability in the event of a capsize, where more energy is required to right the vessel from its inverted position. A ship that heels on her beam ends has her deck beams nearly vertical.

Typical values
Typical length-to-beam ratios (aspect ratios) for small sailboats are from 2:1 (dinghies to trailerable sailboats around 20 ft) to 5:1 (racing sailboats over 30 ft).

Large ships have widely varying beam ratios, some as large as 20:1.

Rowing shells designed for flatwater racing may have length to beam ratios as high as 30:1, while a coracle has a ratio of almost 1:1 – it is nearly circular.

Rule of thumb - formula
The beam of many monohull vessels can be calculated using the following formula:
 * $$Beam = LOA^\frac{2}{3} + 1$$

Where LOA is Length OverAll and all lengths are in feet.

Some examples:
 * For a standard 27 ft yacht: the cube root of 27 is 3, 3 squared is 9 plus 1 = 10. The beam of many 27 ft monohulls is 10 ft.
 * For a Volvo Open 70 yacht: 70.5 to the power of 2/3 = 17 plus 1 = 18. The beam is often around 18 ft.
 * For a 741 ft long ship: the cube root is 9, and 9 squared is 81, plus 1. The beam will usually be around 82 ft, e.g. Seawaymax.

As catamarans have more than one hull, there is a different beam calculation for this kind of vessel.

BOC
BOC stands for Beam On Centerline. This term in typically used in conjunction with LOA (Length overall). The ratio of LOA/BOC is used to estimate the stability of multihull vessels. The lower the ratio the greater the boat's stability.

The BOC for vessels is measured as follows: For a catamaran: the perpendicular distance from the centerline of one hull to the centerline of the other hull, measured at deck level. For a trimaran: the perpendicular distance between the centerline of the main hull and the centerline of either ama, measured at deck level

Other beams
Other meanings of 'beam' in the nautical context are:
 * Beam – a timber similar in use to a floor joist, which runs horizontally from one side of the hull to the other athwartships.
 * Carlin – similar to a beam, except running in a fore and aft direction.
 * Beam – the direction across the vessel, perpendicular to fore-and-aft; something lying in that direction is said to be abeam.

title: Beam (nautical)


text:
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians for Jimbo's beard

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

The result of the debate was delete with a copy to BJAODN.

In evaluating this discussion, I merged the three related discussions. Given the topic, it seems to me that an inconsistent result would be the worst possible choice.
 * Wikipedia:Non-main namespace pages for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians who frankly don't care about Jimbo's beard
 * Wikipedia:Non-main namespace pages for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians for Jimbo's beard
 * Wikipedia:Non-main namespace pages for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians against Jimbo's beard

By strict vote-counting, I get the following: The last line represents the opinions if you took all three discussions and merged them, then eliminated duplication. The fractions come from 2 people who voted differently in the different discussions.

I should also note that 5 of the "keep" voters did so with comments that make it very difficult to tell if they were being serious. Their stated reasons appear to have no connection to the discussion. My hypothesis is that the discussion is about a joke and they consider surreal comments to be humorous and therefore appropriate. Not every culture shares that view, however. I was within a hair's-breadth of putting those comments in the "could not call" column.

Noting that a synopsis is already in the BJAODN archive, I am going to take the last step to delete the pages and the related redirects. Rossami (talk) 02:52, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikipedians for Jimbo's beard
Bad joke. BJAODN. Andrew pmk | Talk 01:01, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * First, merge all "Beard" VFD's together. Second, keep (and BJAODN) all of them. I'd like to see where this ends up if it's allowed to go on. --Tito xd 01:13, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Temporarily, that is... --Tito xd 01:16, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. non-encyclopedic. Elfguy 01:18, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete
 * Keep. ‣ ᓛᖁ  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ ᑐ ] 01:39, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. We went over this before and it was speedy keep. They should all be merged however. Please note that these were made at a time when Wikipedia desperately needed a laugh, and they served their purpose (See FreplySpang's comment on its talk page). But now let us merge them and put it in Category:Wikipedia humor. Redwolf24 (talk) 01:48, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete amusing while they lasted, but they needn't last. -Splash 02:17, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. *drew 02:47, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * BJAODN works for me. FreplySpang (talk) 03:55, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * BJAODN shouldn't be a wikiproject but definately deserves a place at BJAODN. Jtkiefer  T - 04:04, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, useless project, not funny enough for BJAODN. — J I P | Talk 07:31, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Joke project, has outlived the joke. --Tony Sidaway Talk  07:59, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * BJAODN, nice parody of the censorship/countercensorship Wikiproject debacle. Radiant_ >|< 08:55, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep but Merge all the Beard projects into one and put into category:Wikipedia:Humour. Thryduulf 10:20, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete all Jimbobeardcruft.--Scimitar parley 16:13, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. --  user:zanimum
 * Speedy keep, Leviticus 19:27 Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 20:08, 2005 August 29 (UTC)
 * BJAODN - Mike "Mig" 23:59, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * GJAODN --Ryan Delaney talk 08:28, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, MOVE to WikiProject Wikipedians against Wikipedians against Jimbo's beard --Cool Cat My Talk 16:03, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Abstain A comment, I think the problem with Jimbo's beard is the length. It's too short and it makes it a little stubly.  He needs to grow it longer and the longer the better.  Hopefully so long he needs servants to carry it.  DyslexicEditor 19:49, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - since when is humor not permitted? — Dan | Talk 23:30, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm violent supportive of Jimbo's beard. I'd support a move to commons though. --fvw *  00:17, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: ElfGuy said non-encyclopedic... is that a criteria for non namespace VfD's? R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 23:16, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep — Matt Crypto 08:15, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete all joke wikiprojects including specifically this one per my reasoning in the related discussion below.Rossami (talk) 18:54, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Lulu. ~ Syrae Faileas - « Talk » 21:14, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Lulu Ryan Norton T 07:17, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep all beard projects. They show Wikipedia isn't as boring as you'd think. :) - ulayiti (talk)   (my RfA)  13:31, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - it has run its course. -- DS1953 03:39, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. First of all it has already been through this and has been kept. Secondly, without such things, WP is like a nerds' club.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91  ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|)  04:37, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. Yay! Notable! :D --WikiFanatic,formerly known as WikiFan04Talk 00:03, 5 Sep 2005 (CDT)
 * In Soviet Russia, beard grows you! Keep or Move to Mother Russia Wikipedia Project2501a 14:27, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep: opposition to funny Wikipedia pages, if done, should be done as a policy, not piecemeal. Article has already been vfd and kept can't confirm. Possible move to meta. nevermind about thatDDerby(talk) 15:56, 8 September 2005 (UTC) edited 17:31, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Charlie Papazian

Charles N. Papazian (born January 23 c. 1949) is an American nuclear engineer, brewer and author. He founded the Association of Brewers and the Great American Beer Festival, and wrote The Complete Joy of Home Brewing (1984). He is the longtime former president (1979–2016) of the Brewers Association. He is also the creator of the National Pie Day, a celebration of pies which is celebrated on January 23, Papazian's birthday.

Early life and career
Papazian, an American of Armenian descent, was born in 1949 and raised in Warren Township, New Jersey. His father was a chemical engineer who managed a manufacturing plant. He attended the University of Virginia, graduating in 1972 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Nuclear Engineering.

In 1970, while in Charlottesville, Papazian was introduced to an older man who had learned to brew beer during Prohibition. Papazian, who was working part time as a janitor at a daycare facility, began brewing in the daycare's kitchen during off-hours. As people began to show interest in his beer, Papazian wrote up a two-page set of instructions and began distributing it by hand.

After college, he moved to Boulder, Colorado where he eventually landed a job as an elementary school teacher, a position he held for ten years. During that period, Papazian began offering weekly home brewing classes in his kitchen. One of his earliest students was Jeff Lebesch, co-founder of New Belgium Brewing Company.

Brewing associations
In 1978 U.S. President Jimmy Carter signed a law reopening the beer market to small craft brewers, also permitting homebrewing. In 1979 Papazian founded the Association of Brewers, and remained president of that organization until 2005, when the Association of Brewers merged with the 63-year-old Brewers Association of America, and Papazian was named president of the combined organization.

Papazian also founded the American Homebrewers Association in 1978, a group that is also now under the umbrella of the Brewers Association. Other organizations and annual events subsequently founded by Papazian include the Institute for Brewing Studies, Brewers Publications, the Great American Beer Festival, the World Beer Cup, and Zymurgy magazine.

The American Homebrewers Association is a division of the Brewers Association focused on homebrewers of beer, cider, and mead. The AHA was founded in 1978 by Papazian. The AHA runs the world's largest homebrew competition and also organizes several homebrew events in the United States and Canada. Gary Glass is the current director. The AHA publishes the magazine Zymurgy six times per year to its 47,000 members.

Every year the AHA hosts events like National Homebrew Competition, the Homebrew Con (previously known as the National Homebrewers Conference) which includes the finals of the National Homebrew Competition, held the third week in June, the Big Brew, held the first Saturday in May, Mead Day, held the first Saturday in August and Learn to Homebrew Day, held the first Saturday in November.

American Homebrewers Association gives the Ninkasi Award, a prize given for the brewer who gains the most points in the final round of the National Homebrew Competition, judged at the National Homebrewers Conference. Points are gained from the brewer's winning entries in the 23 categories of beer and several categories of mead and cider. At least 2 points (1 bronze placement) must come from a beer entry. The Ninkasi Award is named in honor of Ninkasi, the Sumerian goddess of beer.

Complete Joy of Home Brewing
In 1984 Papazian published his first book on the subject of homebrewing, titled The Complete Joy of Home Brewing. The book contained a foreword by influential British beer writer Michael Jackson. As of August 2005, The Complete Joy of Home Brewing had seen 25 reprintings, 3 editions, and has sold over 900,000 copies. A fourth edition was released in September 2014. As the first American (and, for over a decade, the only) mass-market book to provide in-depth information on subject of how to brew beer in the home, The Complete Joy of Home Brewing was very often the sole source of home brewing information for novice home brewers in America. Consequently, the book has gained iconic status among America's home brewing community, who have referred to it as the "home brewer's bible." Throughout The Complete Joy of Home Brewing, Papazian reminds the novice brewer to "Relax. Don't worry. And have a homebrew." Papazian has since written five more books.

National Pie Day
Papazian also began National Pie Day, a celebration of pies. It is celebrated on January 23, Papazian's birthday. after he declared his own birthday, January 23, to be National Pie Day. Since 1986, National Pie Day is sponsored by the American Pie Council. In 2014, the American Pie Council partnered with Paramount Pictures in promoting the romantic thriller film Labor Day in conjunction with National Pie Day. (A pie-making scene features prominently in the film, and the film's general release was within a few days of National Pie Day.)

Books

 * ''Joy of Brewing, Copyright 1976, Log Boom Brewing, Boulder Colorado
 * The Complete Joy of Homebrewing (4th Edition), ISBN 0-06-221575-2
 * The Homebrewer's Companion, ISBN 0-06-058473-4
 * Brewing Mead: Wassail! In Mazers of Mead (co-authored with Robert Gayre), ISBN 0-937381-00-4
 * Home Brewer's Gold: Prize-Winning Recipes from the 1996 World Beer Cup Competition (compiled by Charlie Papazian, currently out-of-print), ISBN 0-380-79192-7
 * Zymurgy For The Homebrewer And Beer Lover: Best Articles and Advice From America's #1 Homebrewing Magazine (edited by Charlie Papazian, currently out-of-print), ISBN 0-380-79399-7
 * Microbrewed Adventures: A Lupulin Filled Journey to the Heart and Flavor of the World's Greatest Craft Beers, ISBN 0-06-075814-7

Personal life
Papazian lives in the Boulder, Colorado area with his wife Sandra. The couple have a daughter, Carla.

title: Charlie Papazian


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Royal friesland foods

 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 KEEP. I'll move to the correct capitals. -Splash 01:46, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Royal friesland foods
Unknown exactly what this is. Doesn't show up in Google. Wikipedianinthehouse 01:23, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and Expand/Cleanup. Many (16,300) entries found on Google. Some relevant. Andrew pmk | Talk 01:33, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I rewrote the article from scratch and removed references to two individuals which did not seem relevant. After the Vfd is over, this article should be moved to Royal Friesland Foods (correct capitalization).  -- DS1953 01:58, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * keep Taste the Flavour yourselves: http://www.fcdf.com/ Roodog2k 02:25, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. *drew 02:51, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep 16k hits in google. Elfguy 03:16, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep DS1953's rewrite and move to Royal Friesland Foods. Notable company with 18000 employees. Capitalistroadster 03:56, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable company. Amren (talk)  04:19, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep but properly capitalize.  Paul Klenk 04:21, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. Have added more references and paragraph about Royal status and name change in 2004. No change in vote from Keep. Capitalistroadster 04:34, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep a real company. __earth 04:51, August 29, 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:
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians who frankly don't care about Jimbo's beard

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

The result of the debate was delete with a copy to BJAODN.

In evaluating this discussion, I merged the three related discussions. Given the topic, it seems to me that an inconsistent result would be the worst possible choice.
 * Wikipedia:Non-main namespace pages for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians who frankly don't care about Jimbo's beard
 * Wikipedia:Non-main namespace pages for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians for Jimbo's beard
 * Wikipedia:Non-main namespace pages for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians against Jimbo's beard

By strict vote-counting, I get the following: The last line represents the opinions if you took all three discussions and merged them, then eliminated duplication. The fractions come from 2 people who voted differently in the different discussions.

I should also note that 5 of the "keep" voters did so with comments that make it very difficult to tell if they were being serious. Their stated reasons appear to have no connection to the discussion. My hypothesis is that the discussion is about a joke and they consider surreal comments to be humorous and therefore appropriate. Not every culture shares that view, however. I was within a hair's-breadth of putting those comments in the "could not call" column.

Noting that a synopsis is already in the BJAODN archive, I am going to take the last step to delete the pages and the related redirects. Rossami (talk) 02:52, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikipedians who frankly don't care about Jimbo's beard

 * Bad joke. BJAODN. Andrew pmk | Talk 01:01, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * First, merge all "Beard" VFD's together. Second, keep (and BJAODN) all of them. I'd like to see where this ends up if it's allowed to go on. --Tito xd 01:13, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Temporarily, that is... --Tito xd 01:16, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. same as all the others, non-encyclopedic. Elfguy 01:19, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. agree with Elfguy. Wikipedianinthehouse 01:20, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete amusing while they lasted, but they needn't last. -Splash 02:17, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. *drew 02:49, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * BJAODN works for me on this one too. FreplySpang (talk) 03:55, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete.   Paul Klenk 04:42, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, useless project, not funny enough for BJADON. — J I P | Talk 07:28, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mildly funny, slightly embarrassing.  Now make it go away. --Tony Sidaway Talk  07:58, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * BJAODN, nice parody of the censorship/countercensorship Wikiproject debacle. Radiant_ >|< 08:55, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * BJAODN JimboBeardCruft... and for the above reasons --Mysidia (talk) 16:09, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Maybe preserve one beard joke as BJAODN, the rest should go. MCB 18:09, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Any objections if I userfy the page (i.e. move it to User:Flcelloguy/...) and leave a redirect to it? Thanks! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 00:46, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep but Merge all the Beard projects into one and put into category:Wikipedia:Humour. Thryduulf 10:20, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete all Jimbobeardcruft.--Scimitar parley 16:13, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. --  user:zanimum
 * Speedy keep, don't let the deletionists suppress apathy. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 20:06, 2005 August 29 (UTC)
 * Userfy or BJAODN all three. -Sean Curtin 01:59, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's not part of the encyclopedia per se and it's good for a laugh. --IvanP 19:20, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - since when is humor not permitted? — Dan | Talk 23:18, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, I'm violently agnostic with regards to Jimbo's beard. I'd support a move to commons though. --fvw *  00:16, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete all joke wikiprojects including specifically this one per my reasoning in the related discussion below.Rossami (talk) 18:55, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Lulu. (Though I am a deletionist, I take exception to these bearded cases.) ~ Syrae Faileas - « Talk » 21:17, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Humor people :) Ryan Norton T 07:17, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep all beard projects. They show Wikipedia isn't as boring as you'd think. :) - ulayiti (talk)   (my RfA)  13:31, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - it has run its course. -- DS1953 03:39, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Merge all three and delete.  Not worthy of BJAODN.  Get back to making an encyclopedia.  revtor07 21:29,  8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text: File:Temptin-tempts.jpg

title: File:Temptin-tempts.jpg


text:
Elanora

Elanora may refer to:

 * Elanora Heights, New South Wales - a suburb of Sydney
 * Elanora, Queensland - a suburb of the Gold Coast

title: Elanora


text:
User talk:Megaira~enwiki

42

Welcome!
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! Incidentally, may I direct you to The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? Rob Church Talk 01:05, 28 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

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

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

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 01:26, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:11, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Megaira~enwiki


text:
Welland Recreational Waterway

The Welland Recreational Waterway is a water channel in the city of Welland, Ontario, Canada. It is an old alignment of the Welland Ship Canal that was abandoned after the construction of the Welland By-Pass in the 1970s. The Waterway is now managed by the Welland Recreational Canal Corporation to provide enjoyment for the city's residents. Most local residents refer to it as the old canal or simply the canal.

Original plans
The bottom of the canal was at a time proposed to become a roadbed for an extension of Highway 406. However, that never came to be and the old canal was retained in an almost original state with the purpose of developing several recreational facilities and tourist attractions along its shores. The plans called for fishing platforms, water slides, boat rental points, as well as marine and rail historical exhibits. To date most of these plans have not been realized, but some are in the process of being accomplished.

Changes
Some changes have been made to the Waterway's original shape since the construction of the By-Pass. The most significant modification is an earth plug that bisects the Waterway along Ontario Highway 58A (between Humberstone Road and Townline Tunnel Road). This was necessary due to very long (4 km, or 2.5 miles) low-grade approaches to the Townline Tunnel required for trains to travel underneath the new canal segment.

As multiple leaking problems were surfacing with the aqueduct that carries the Welland River underneath the old alignment, it was decided to control the problem by drilling intentional holes in the aqueduct. As a result, the Welland River downstream of the aqueduct is partially fed from the canal, and the flow in the northern section of the Waterway has reversed to compensate for the water flowing into the river.

The old alignment was originally spanned by five vertical lift bridges and a railroad swing bridge (bridge 15). After the relocation, two of the bridges were replaced by modern fixed-span bridges and another had its towers removed due to excessive cost of potential renovation. Two more bridges were built in the northern section of the Waterway, and a bridge was constructed in downtown Welland to twin the East Main Street bridge.

The Waterway today
Today, pedestrian and bicycle pathways line both banks of the Waterway. The pathways are important components of Welland's pedestrian and bicycle transportation network, providing a safe and pleasant environment in which to move about the central part of the city. A section that is particularly popular is the path on Merritt Island, a carefully cared for, elongated strip of land created when the old alignment of the canal was constructed basically parallel to the Welland River. Signs outlining the path and listing local attractions have been erected along the paths. The equally popular 140-km Greater Niagara Circle Route (GNCR) also runs along the canal, and is used by residents and tourists alike.

Welland City Councillors placed a motorboat prohibition on the waterway known as the "Go Quietly" by-law, turning the former shipping canal into a waterway suitable for kayaking, rowing, canoeing and paddle boating.

The Welland Recreational Canal Corporation is an organization whose board of directors is made up of three members of city council and six citizens. The corporation is responsible for the protection and development of the canal and adjacent lands, and has inaugurated various programs, including a canoe/paddle boat rental facility and numerous fishing platforms.

Future plans
The Waterway is seen as a crucial part of plans for revival of downtown Welland. The Civic Square, housing the city hall and the library, was newly built by the canal. The Welland Recreational Waterway Master Plan is available online and details proposals for the future of the canal.

In 2012, Bike Welland and ShortHills Cycling Club (SHCC) jointly presented a proposal to the Welland Recreational Canal Corporation (WRCC) for a 160-acre naturalized, urban park along the "northern reach" section of the Welland Canal. The land, which is embedded in the urban fabric, is already used by residents for hiking, trail running and mountain biking, and is the only section of the canal in Welland that is undeveloped. The Northern Reach Park would conserve the area for recreation and wildlife habitat, and continue to provide opportunities for hikers, runners, mountain bikers and cross-country skiers, as well as naturalists, to engage with a "natural" landscape. The proposal also outlines the potential of the park for sport tourism. However, it was learned that the WRCC has plans to raze the area to build a solar farm, although no public consultation has occurred and no information is available from their website or financial statements.

In 2023, it was announced that LIV Communities will build over 3,800 homes on nearly 62 hectares of land along the Waterway. It will be known as "Lock and Quay", and accessed via Towpath Ave. Construction will begin in 2026.

title: Welland Recreational Waterway