text:
Talk:Nuwaubian Nation

Article quality
I would like to make it clear from the onset that I definitely believe that this subject has a place in the encyclopedia, I have no doubt about that. A problem arises, in my opinion, when any article is as dependent for its basic references directly on primary sources, as as this one is. My biggest concern is that it's somewhat unnecessary, I've already located two reliable sources online in book form that would both add a great deal to setting up authoritative referencing for the core of this article. I'll add links to them here later today or tomorrow for others to peruse. This article appears to have spawned a number of "spin off" articles which suffer from the same referencing problem in my opinion. In December of last year, through consensus, it was decided that one of those articles should be merged with this one and two are currently nominated for deletion/merger. From my perspective it inherently makes more sense to stabilize this situation by focusing on providing proper referencing for this one, as the 'core' article, before creating spin offs that are, in most cases, equally improperly supported. I think it goes without saying that because of the obscurity of the subject, it can be very difficult to find secondary sources for supporting the material sometimes, but I believe that without them, it's possible for an article to quickly become a type of "primary source" itself for sometimes hard to locate material, something policy strongly discourages. Without the support of independent sources for material, any editor is free to synthesize their own personal interpretation of what is relevant and important and should be included in an introductory article to the belief system, something I consider dangerously close to "original research". cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * A drastic solution might be that we simply start deleting everything that has no source or only a primary source.--Sloane (talk) 22:34, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That would also be a destructive solution. A constructive solution would be better. One wikipedia content guideline on using fringe group sources says: “Organizations and individuals that express views that are widely acknowledged by reliable sources as fringe, pseudoscience, or extremist may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as: 1. the material used is relevant to the notability of the subject of the article; 2. it is not unduly self-serving; 3. it does not involve claims about third parties; 4. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject; 5. there is no reason to doubt its authenticity; 6. the article is not based primarily on such sources;” I think criteria #1–5 are met (perhaps with some arguments about #5 in some cases), only criteria #6 is at issue here.  The solution is to bolster the reliable third-party sourcing in the article, rather than removing the valid and useful primary sourcing. — (talk) 01:01, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * My edit tonight, in removing the "Etymology" section in its entirety, was because I believe that it simply doesn't meet criteria 1-3 for inclusion in Moorlock's posting above. thanks Deconstructhis (talk) 01:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Merge from Yamassee...
Per the AfD for that page, the consensus was to merge the contents of Yamassee with this article, then to change Yamassee to a disambig page with links to Nuwaubianism, Yamasee (the notable Native American tribe), and/or Dwight York... - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

 * There was no such consensus. The result of the AFD for Yamassee was keep with an encouragement to discuss possible merges on its talk page. -Moorlock (talk) 18:11, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

 * The result of the AfD was Keep, because there should only be two ways to close, Keep or Delete... but the consensus of the discussion was to merge... no mention of the word possible... can you give any reason why it should not be merged? - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

 * There was a lot of discussion on the AFD page on whether the page should be kept distinct, should be merged with Dwight York, should be merged with Nuwaubianism, or should be merged with Washitaw Nation. This discussion did not result in a consensus.  I can see arguments for each position; my recommendation is to keep the page distinct, as the Yamassee group is distinct from the Nuwaubians, and I think that a merge now might very well just lead to confusion and a need for a demerging later. The Nuwaubian groups and the Yamassee group were very tightly bound only for the period of time in which Dwight York was in his “I’m an Injun Chief” phase, but the Nuwaubians have since dropped their native-american pretensions and the two groups are back to evolving independently. -Moorlock (talk) 19:01, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

 * All of the references provided and all that I saw said that it was only a name change... York created "The United Nuwaubian Nation of Moors", and since he went to jail, the group has changed it's name to "The Yamassee Native Americans of the Creek Nation"... You said twice during the discussion that it should be kept (and please note you were the only one that thought it should be kept), but you never answered any of the requests to provide citations for your statements... you are the only one that thought it should be kept, you are the only one that mentioned a merge with Washitaw Nation, every other editor that contributed to the discussion thought it should be merged with either Dwight York or Nuwaubianism, the latter of which would be more logical... there was not much dicussion at all, just a number of editors agreeing that this page needs to be merged and changed into a disambig... when 5 of the 6 editors that were involved in the discussion come to agreeance, that is considered a consensus in my book... the only editor that did not agree was you... why do you continue to debate this? - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

 * On the AfD discussion page I count two keeps (not sure what dab means, but the note afterwards sounds like a "keep" to me), one merge with Dwight York, two merge with Nuwaubianism, and one merge with either York or Nuwaubianism. The result of the AfD was keep.  That you insist that the matter is closed and that there was a "consensus" to merge with Nuwaubianism strikes me as railroading, as this is decidedly not what the record shows.  A 2:1 ratio of merge:keep recommendations, especially with the merge faction split and the sample size decidedly low does not a consensus make.  You have a point that the bulk of third-party references to the Yamassee group refer to it only in the context of York's temporary leadership of the group, but this says more about the relative newsworthiness of York than about the nature of the group. -— (talk) 20:01, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

 * Dab = disambig = merge content and disambiguate this page... and consensus is not based on numbers... again, the AfD was to keep, and not delete the page... we have gotten past that, the page is not going to be deleted... the content of the page is going to be moved to another page, and this page is going to be turned into a disambig... please, stop restating the obvious... yes, the result of the AfD was keep... but that does not mean that the merge is not still going to happen... by definition, merge is not an acceptable closure option... the page is going to be kept, and changed... you arguing about what exactly was said at the AfD, when anyone can go there and read it for themselves, is not helping the situation... if you really want to help this article, then (as I've said several times now) find some third party reliable sources for what you claim, and merge the article onto either Nuwaubianism or Dwight York (I'll even let you choose which to merge to if it makes you happy)... there is really no point in continuing this debate with you if you are not going to move on past your "the result was keep" arguement... - Adolphus79 (talk) 20:45, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to pop in and let it be known that I'm not deliberately ignoring the current proceedings going on here. Later on tonight, I'm hoping to make another troll through Lexus, Jstor, Wilson's etc. to see if I can pick off any more referencing on these issues. I'll report back later on and let you all know what I found. I wonder if it might be helpful to consult with the admin who closed the debate in order to see if she can provide a comment? cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 22:48, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I went ahead and merged it.--Sloane (talk) 04:12, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

York's name
In light of the fact that legal documents, including the prison registry list him as Dwight D. York, I think we should refer to him by his real name and not a pseudonym. --Pstanton (talk) 00:37, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

 * I've changed the article to reflect that his legal name is Dwight. I've left Malachi in quotes, and references as I suppose he isn't the only author ever to publish under a pseudonym. But calling him Malachi throughout the article contradicts the style used in his own article Dwight York --Pstanton (talk) 00:44, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Yamasee Native American
This former article was previously merged into the Nuwaubianism article, so I'm moving the contents of its talk page below. Here is the discussion about its nomination for deletion. -Uyvsdi (talk) 20:52, 21 November 2010 (UTC)Uyvsdi

comment moved from article
Derrick Sander's mother from birth lives here in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.He was just here last year visiting his ailing mother, therefore this seems to me like another attempt by the nuwaubian counterfeiters to tie themselves in with someone who alraedy has some historical lineage,hoping to benefit from the prosperity of others.

Yamasee Native American
It seems to any reasoning knowledgable fact finder, one would research the answers and the questions. The Commander and chief of the Yamassee Native Americans and the United Nation of Nuwabian are a seperate entity one being a religious group who are the FOLLOWERS of Dr. York, and The Yamassee Native are not a religious people their nation consist of millions of nationals in the United States and across the Americas.

This page to be a stab at the Federally Recognized Nation of Indigenous people, [all one needs to do is to read Lewis and Clarks Expiditions with photos] research the yamassee war and the discription of the people. It seems that only close minded individuals who cannot get pass skin color would state repeatedly [Black] a legal status not a nationality. Stop labeling it time for "change", The Chief of the Yamassee did not suffer from an indictment for tax evasion, There are also treaties of peace and friendship with the Washitaw Nation, as well as Federal documents that are in fact Valid with seals that the Governor now want to regret he gave, which are legally sound with other federally documented records with the highest authentication recognition[3].

Let's just all live as one family in true reality that The Indigenous Aboriginal people were Various Copper Colored found in the Northern Hemisphere by the Europeans when they arrived were dark dravidian type and this definitions comes from 1832. Let drop the hate and wake up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.158.225.112 (talk) 15:54, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Significant revert and protection
I would like to say that I just reverted to an older version as the past several edits were all vandalism. I'm going to move that we add the pp-semi-vandalism box and get this page protected from editing by anonymous IP addresses. --Pstanton 05:52, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I've listed this article on Requests for page protection --Pstanton 06:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Assessment
I am assessing this article as Start class for now, but it could easily be moved up to C-class with only a small amount of work... Feel free to let me know if you need help with anything... good luck, and happy editing... - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Infobox - Infoboxes are almost standard anymore... check out Infobox Micronation...
 * In-line references - I notice that there are some links added throughout the article, it would be better if someone could change these into in-line refs, WP:REF can help with this...
 * Images - The old saying "a picture is worth a thousand words" still rings true today... try to find some that have either been released to the public domain, or otherwise fall under WP:FAIRUSE...

 * After reading this article again, I have decided to remove the WikiProject Micronations banner... as this article sits now, it is not about a micronation, but more about a group of people... there is a mention of micronationalism, but until that section is expanded, I do not believe this article falls under the Project's scope... If, in the future, the details of the micronation itself are expanded (or an article is written about the nation itself), let me know (or anyone at the project) and I will be more than happy to re-assess... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

NPOV tag
Can someone explain why there is a NPOV tag on the article? --Pstanton (talk) 21:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

 * certain little phrases throughout the article that I think are not as neutral as they could be... such as...
 * is attempting to fill the power vacuum left after the arrest and conviction of Dwight York
 * Derrick Sanders's “Yamassee Native Americans” are not that group but are
 * York’s other attorneys were loath to risk the wrath of the court
 * the Nuwaubian “nation” seems to be splitting up, with various of its sub-factions trying to set the agenda and take over for the leadership vacuum
 * among others... also, with most of the article discussing York's court case, and a very small amount about the subject of the article (the group), it fails WP:UNDUE, which is part of WP:NPOV... - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:14, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I get a similar feeling while reading that material, but I think it may be a slow process to actually achieve an overall "balance" in things like tone, at the moment, I'd just like to see some appropriate and reliable referencing in place, it'd be a good start in my opinion. I think it's important at this point that all editors keep in mind that Wikipedia articles are not to be used as vehicles to either promote a particular ideology, nor used to "bash" it either. I've watched many religion articles about more 'obscure' belief systems crash and burn over time in Wiki because there actually *weren't* enough reliable secondary sources available to even support their existenece as articles, I'd say this subject is relatively well served in that department. As I've said elsewhere, it's question of whether or not there are editors willing to devote the time to do the required work and put together something that's properly backed up AND neutral. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 00:13, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Adolphus on points 1 and 4. They do appear somewhat biased, but I think 2 is fine and I think 3 is somewhat reasonable.

About 2, considering "Yamassee" is very close in spelling to "Yamasee" there is often confusion and editors and readers often think this article is referring to what is a legitimate Native American tribe, because they didn't notice the slightly different spelling.

And point 3, a brief look through the transcript of the hearing shows that York's lawyers definitely were unhappy with York's persistent interruptions, which were out of order and over time caused the judge to become irritated with the defense. I think it is reasonable to state that York's lawyers were nervous about the judge being angry, considering the judge eventually told the lawyers to stop wasting his time with BS that had no relevance to the hearing anyways. The language of the statement is a bit.... ornate. "Loath to risk the wrath" could probably be changed to something like "didn't want to try the Judge's patience" or some such. I actually believe the judge told York's lawyers that if the defense made another wild claim to sovereignty out of order, in a hearing in which the court's jurisdiction wasn't under discussion, he'd find them in contempt of the court or some such. --Pstanton (talk) 21:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

 * well, that was basically my point... the wording was a little POV... Firstly, the group is not Sander's, Sander is just the one that took over leadership when York went to jail. And as far as bullet three, it was the "were loath to risk the wrath" part that bothered me... it could have been written a lot more neutrally.  I did a good bit of POV cleanup on the article before catching on to all of the inaccuracies... At this point, we'll have to see what the outcome of the AfD is, but I don't think this article will be around much longer anyway... - Adolphus79 (talk) 21:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

AFD
After trying to cleanup the article and do research, this article seems to be comepletely incorrect, biased, and lacking on major parts of the history/story... according to this news story, the Southern Poverty Law Center lists the "Nuwaubian nation" as a hate group, due to York's preaching of black supremacy and hatred. And that since his conviction (77 counts of child molestation, child exploitation, tax evasion, and racketeering), the size of the group has "dwindled"... it seems to be more of a cult than anything else, with York having only a very small following... It seems that the group was originally called "The United Nuwaubian Nation of Moors", then changed their name to "The Yamassee Native Americans of the Creek Nation" after the court case. All of their property was siezed by the feds, and all that remains are a couple fanatical followers, a website, and a small bookstore... I can't seem to find any information about Sanders other than his run-in with the Justice Department, and I can't seem to find any sources on the group that aren't stories about York with mere mentions of his "cult"... according to MSNBC, "the cult was used for his sexual pleasure and financial gain, including recruiting members to groom children for sex with him." This seems to be a very small group of people who still follow York, and do not seem to pass notability concerns as a group. I think enough of the story and information is covered in York's article, that this article should either be deleted, or redirected to either York's article or Yamasee...

 * MSNBC - Georgia cult goes quiet after leader jailed
 * G-news search for "Derrick Sanders" (most about an actor with the same name)
 * G-news search for "Yamassee Native Americans" (all 12 hits of it, most about either Sanders case, or York's cult falling apart)

- Adolphus79 (talk) 04:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

 * After thinking about it further, I am going to take it to AfD to gain a consensus on what should be done... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

 * Sounds like a good candidate for AfD. Don't inflict it on true Native Americans by any redirect to Yamasee Indians.--Parkwells (talk) 16:51, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Merge
The result of the AfD was to merge this article with Nuwaubianism, and to make this page a disambig for Nuwaubianism / Yamasee... Discussion is here... - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That is dishonest, or, charitably, inaccurate. The result of the AFD for Yamassee was keep with an encouragement to discuss possible merges on its talk page. -— (talk) 18:11, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply and discussion here... - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:28, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Another merge: Nuwaupian
Nuwaupian has nothing to offer that's reliably sourced. Phrases like "Our unity works on the principle of synergy, where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts" are indicative of POV editing, and the references are obviously not independent of the subject. Author has tried to make the article rely on Nuwaubu/Nuwaupu, which are both at AfD and likewise have no reliable, secondary sources. Drmies (talk) 15:43, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Merger of the article Nuwaupian with the article nuwaubianism is no longer required. Your request to merge Nuwaupian into Nuwaubianism, has been considered and rejected. The Article called Nuwaupian has from this day forth, been merged with the Article called Nuwaupu.Logistical One (talk) 20:49, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

This article is grotesquely bad, and I have seen a few articles about crackpot movements. I don't know about the notablility of this, apparently it is a Georgia topic. Perhaps York is notable in Georgia. But if a confused rambling guru attains local notability, this doesn't mean that the article about him must also be in the form of incoherent stream-of-consciousness rambling and piles of random quotes. Less attention to primary sources, more attention to secondary sources. I suggest that all material that quotes York or other "Nuwaubian" directly should be removed, and the article put on the basis of secondary literature. --dab (𒁳) 07:31, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Notablility
Ok, so it turns out that this is a mostly defunct cult movement which in its prime had some 500 adherents. It is certainly notable enough for a Wikipedia article, but it is notable enough for more than one? As a classic cult focussed on the charismatic leader, the leader being notable for the cult only, and the cult for the leader only, I wonder if we really need two separate articles Dwight York and Nuwaubianism (let alone a full Category:Nuwaubianism). "Nuwaubianism" is basically York's charismatic ego project which happened to attract 500 or so followers during the 1990s, and which crash-landed after he was jailed for sexually molesting his adherent's children. I would say a single article on this rather sad topic will suffice completely to satisfy encyclopedic coverage. --dab (𒁳) 08:59, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I disagree. The leader is well-known not only as the founder of this sect, which was very active both in New York and Georgia and has since spread internationally, but also as the subject of one of the largest child molestation cases (in terms of number-of-victims) prosecuted in the U.S. The sect itself is still in operation, in various forms, and seems to have enough followers and would-be leaders to keep going even as York's own guidance has become less-direct.  Its continuing influence on pop culture and ongoing presence in the black nationalist movements in the U.S. and elsewhere make it notable. –Moorlock (talk) 17:01, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Beyond all that has already been mentioned, the ideas of this movement have found currency beyond their followers. Without rendering any judgement here on whether this is good, bad or neither, I would point out that such influence means that the group and its views are notable. The movement attracted some rappers in the past and may continue to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.12.203.113 (talk) 23:11, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

well, I am happy to yield to actual references, but from what I could find so far, I conclude from this, that there isn't any "Nuwaubianism". The term is a nonce word, used in print about five times, and this only because it had been pushed on Wikipedia since 2007.
 * the term Nuwaubianism was not in use by anyone prior to 2008, i.e. years after York had been locked away as a child molester and the Tama-Re compound had been demolished.
 * of the 10 (ten) google books hits for the term since 2008, five are directly derived from Wikipedia, and the other five date to after this article was created under the title "Nuwaubianism"

The article confirms this. There is no movement or doctrine called "Nuwaubianism". There is only York, his writings, and his victims. Yes, York and his crimes are notable. This is why we have a lengthy Dwight York article. But there is no reason to dedicate another page to an unsorted dump of his writings and pronouncements: it is not only unencyclopedic, but also in rather bad taste. A bit like creating an article on A European Declaration of Independence as a notable work of political ideology apart from the Anders Behring Breivik article.

Wikipedia needs to avoid coining new terms. This isn't always easy, because of the high visibiilty of Wikipedia, we get a lot of agenda-driven edits trying to tout neologisms. In this case, the accident has already happened, Wikipedia successfully coined the term "Nuwaubianism", now generating 15,000 google hits, most of them citing or linking back to Wikipedia. And just because nobody could muster some basic skepticism while this article has been online for three years.

The damage has been done, but it can still be limited, but only by cleaning up this mess, getting rid of the quotefarms and random lists, and basing it on published secondary references, exclusively. We will see how the article will look like after it has been cleaned up, and a the benefit of a possible merger will need to be evaluated from that point. --dab (𒁳) 11:33, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

 * A characteristic of nuwaubianism is that the doctrines, practices, and terminology are always in flux. So at any time during the development, the term they use to describe these doctrines & practices may change. So what was once called "sound right reasoning" will later be called "egiptology" and then "factology" and then "nuwaubu" and then "wu-nuwaupu" and who knows what it will become next. The term "nuwaubianism" is an umbrella term that is meant to cover this entire range of incarnations, in the absence of a stable, canonical term.
 * I appreciate the effort you are putting forward in improving this article, but I hope you will respect the work that has been put into it thusfar, and not recklessly discard useful information. From your comments here, you strike me as overly-dismissive of the topic and somewhat ill-informed about it (also please double-check for spelling mistakes before clicking "Save"). –Moorlock (talk) 16:14, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * "citation needed". Look, instead of explaining "nuwaubianism" off the top of your head, how about you sit down and produce some decent references? And by references I don't mean websites, I mean published sociological literature which analyzes the phenomenon. I will not remove "useful information", understanding that the only useful information is derived from such sources. What I will remove, of course, is the quotefarm and primary cruft that has accreted on the page. --dab (𒁳) 08:35, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

A minor side note, this group is apparently still active and occasionally in the news as of Oct, 2012 (e.g.: http://hancock.13wmaz.com/news/news/76719-nuwaubians-accuse-putnam-officials-violating-their-laws). 13:31, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Fallout11 (talk) 13:31, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Adding to what the guy above me said, the group is still active as of January 2014 although whether or not York is writing the new Doctrines from jail is in dispute. (http://www.11alive.com/news/article/314393/40/Decatur-temple-maintains-ties-to-Nuwaubian-cult) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.45.149.134 (talk) 18:07, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Cleanup
Ok, based on the above, it is clear that the term "Nuwaubianism" isn't tenable. But this doesn't mean that the topic is invalid, it just means that googling "Nuwaubianism" isn't going to turn up anything useful.

But there are monographs on the topic, at least one: The Nuwaubian Nation: Black Spirituality and State Control (2010). So my suggestion at this point is: --dab (𒁳) 11:55, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * get rid of the merge tag
 * move the article to either Nuwaubian Nation or Nuwaubian movement (viz. the terms used in actual quotable publications)
 * remove all the quotefarms and primary references, and base the article on the 2010 monograph and other decent secondary WP:RS

I have removed the merge and notability tags now. After I found the above monograph (of which the article had been completely unaware), I conclude that it is possible to keep an article about this topic. Is it alright if I move it to Nuwaubian movement? I a asking just so nobody can cry about "undiscussed move" later on. As I have shown above, the term "Nuwaubianism" was coined on-wiki, the term used in the monograph is "Nuwaubian movement". Can you believe the shamelessness of some "authors"? We need to take great care to avoid using this kind of, ahem, "independent reference".
 * Wikipedia (2007): "Nuwaubianism is an umbrella term for the various doctrines and practices of the followers of Malachi Z. York."
 * George Romero (2011) : ""Nuwaubianism is an umbrella term for the various doctrines and practices of the followers of Malachi York." (p. 28)

The problem with this article is that it isn't aware of the topic's notability. Apparently the notability can be shown, but for three years, this article has consistently failed to do so. The burden of establishing an article's notability lies with those editors wishing to keep it. --dab (𒁳) 08:44, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

RfC
An RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 17:09, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * This article is not about the SPLC, and hence you need to put none. If people want to know they can click the link and find out. SPL and its opinions are greater than the info about the actual organization and have no place hi in the lead. What Nuwaubian nation and others think about SPL is certainly not in the 2nd line of that lead. Per Wikipedia WP:LEAD--Inayity (talk) 16:14, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Lede too long
The lede of the article could be tidied up and shortened. I've done a little work on it. Jonpatterns (talk) 11:51, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Too many quotes/primary sources
There is way too much quoting from York, as noted above. I am going to delete those very lengthy sections of his writings and quotes without sources, as was discussed above. The article has to use RS secondary sources, according to WP requirements. It doesn't make sense to keep all this myth-making by York. He published plenty - let people go to those sources.Parkwells (talk) 15:59, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you in advance. Ogress 17:45, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I removed some of the original research, cited to York or altogether uncited, with this edit; I see that it's been an on-going problem with the article. Please see the diff for some of the inline comments embedded prior (not by me). K.e.coffman (talk) 23:57, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I removed some more OR (and outright gibberish) while I was at it. Wow, what a strange article. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:41, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your work on the article. I'd like to note that this statement is incorrect: The article has to use RS secondary sources, according to WP requirements. Primary sources can be used in certain circumstances and with care, see WP:PRIMARY. Jonpatterns (talk) 10:40, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comment; yes, I was overstating the case, in some frustration at the lack of Reliable secondary sources.Parkwells (talk) 14:08, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nuwaubian Nation. 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/20051103105819/http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200412354.pdf to http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200412354.pdf

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) 06:11, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Nuwaubian Nation


text:
Talk:List of software licenses

Untitled
I question whether it is appropriate to distinguish "GPL-compatible" from "non-GPL compatible" here as this calls for a legal conclusion to be made. Kurt 17:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Also, I don't get this FSF/OSI "approval" bit. While certainly there are OSI-certified open-source licenses, a license need not be OSI-certified (or approved) to be considered an "open source" license. Likewise, for free software. It would be better to say that OSI offers a definition for the term "open source" and a certification program and give a list of OSI-certified licenses. Likewise, FSF offers a definition of the term "free software" and makes statements as to what licenses it considers to be consistent with that definition. Here we can offer there definition and a list of licenses the FSF considers to be consistent that that definition.

We should be careful to distinguish their opinions from fact. In the OSI-certified case, this is a verifiable fact. In the FSF-opinion case, their opinion is published and hence verifiable. However, we need to careful not to word the article so that their opinion appears as our opinion.

We should also note that the these definitions are not accepted and/or adhered to by all in the community. For instance, some regard any publicably viewable source as being "open source" regardless of the restrictions placed upon the viewed copied. 17:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Floatware
Browsing the web I came across this Floatware License I am wondering how to categorise this, or how to include it in the list of licenses? Thanks

Neutrality
I've placed the NPOV tag on the article because I see no reason why licenses should be categorized according to their compatiblity with the GPL. Such categorization implies that the GPL is more important than the many thousands of other licenses out there. --Android Mouse 05:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Is there a better way we could organize them? i.e., "derivatives must be under same license"? Even so, the GPL is a major, if not the most well known, open source license. OSbornarf 05:05, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * definitely -for one thing, licenses for source should be clearly differentiated from End-user licence. For example, Symbolics and other major software companies use to reveal source code with "end-users" as a matter of convenience, but since then licenses have evolved, and PC software changed licensing profoundly. I think historical precedent should be considered. Public Domain might also be pertinent here. Cuvtixo 12:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Only the section on free software licences is broken down based on GPL-compatibility. 55-70% of all free software is GPL licensed (depending on how the measurement is done), so yes, the GPL is on a different scale in terms of importance when compared with the many thousands of licences out there, and being compatible with it is very important.  Here's an essay I can well recommend: http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/gpl-compatible.html --Gronky 12:34, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I certainly wouldn't dispute that the GPL is very widespread. But I don't understand why being compatible with it is very important.  Does that imply that the GPL is good or desirable?Jacksheriff 21:35, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Being compatible with GPL is important if one wants to mix GPL'ed and non-GPL'ed sources in one project. The non-compatibility with GPL may even force you to favor specific technical design decisions (e.g. to use client/server instead of linked library). And since GPL is, as mentioned above, very widespread, having information on GPL compatibility in Wikipedia is very useful. There is a good chance that a library or application that one wants to reuse for an own project is GPL'ed or LGPL'ed, and Wikipedia would allow to check for compatibility.
 * Whether GPL itself is good or desirable is a matter of taste and personal view, but classifying licenses based on GPL compatibility has nothing to do with this view. I assume that it is absolutely neutral to discuss and tabulate GPL compatibility, and it would be violation of neutrality to remove this useful information just because it discusses GPL. I guess the issue would not have been raised if the discussion were about MIT- or BSD-license compatibility (which could also be discussed in the article). Regards, Saulius Gražulis (grazulis(commercial at)akl . lt) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.60.34.231 (talk) 15:33, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * More than sorting the licenses based on GPL compatibility, I think that a better way to divide them is separing "copyleft"/"share alike" licenses (such as GPL) from permissive ones. A second divison could be between that allow commercial usage of the licensed software and those who don't. Regarding GPL compatibility I think that a note should suffice, while the list of compatible license would find a better place to exist in the GPL own page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.31.23.132 (talk) 19:11, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Why is this article still using GPL 2 as the standard of comparison, when the current GPL is GPL 3.The Apache License is compatible with GPL 3, and I',m sure there are several other differences as well. Misty Willows 07:18, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Software licensing?
This article reads "List of software licenses".

I don't know, whether it pertains to "software licensing" or not: as (end) user - be it private or non private ... -> enterprise etc. - what might interest one most is: is there no fee to pay or is there - which might be different, whether the software is used in private, or in enterprise ... public environment etc.

The other (/another?) point of view might be the one of a developer: whether the source is closed, open, reusable, or not reusable, changeable, etc.

Is it possible to have such ... list of "forms of licensing" information in Wikipedia ... is it already somewhere - more detailed/specific than what is in here; if yes -> where? --Alien4 (talk) 15:28, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:List of software licenses


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Materialisations

 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 Redirect to materialization. Fernando Rizo T/C 00:03, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Materialisations
Unverified, and unverifiable junk. Not quite patent nonsense in the wikipedia sense, but there is no way this can be converted to an encyclopedic article that I can see. Delate! DES (talk)
 * Article has been marked with speedy tag, but if votes are still needed Delete. -- WCFrancis 03:53, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * This has come up before, at Votes for deletion/Materialization (science fiction). Plural→singular Redirect to materialization. Uncle G 05:16:45, 2005-08-19 (UTC)
 * Redirect. per Uncle G. Alf 10:59, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unverified pseudoscience, original research at the best stretch. (I put up the Speedy tag on the original unadorned page, but after seeing this have replaced it with VfD.) MCB 07:13, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect as Uncle G. Perfect. --Tony Sidaway Talk  22:37, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Patricia Neske

Patricia Neske (born 19 October 1966) is an American-born German former competitive figure skater. She represented Germany at the 1992 Winter Olympics, finishing 13th. She won a bronze medal at the European Championships in 1989 and 1992, and is the 1990 German national champion. She also competed at five World Championships, with her best result being a fourth-place finish in 1989.

Personal life
Patricia Neske was born in California to Horst and Ingrid Neske, who had emigrated from Germany. She attended a vocational school learning about banking in Oberstdorf. In 1992, she returned to California where she attended Loyola marymount university and got her accounting degree. She has two kids

Career
Neske chose to compete for Germany, representing the Düsseldorfer EG. She trained in Oberstdorf, Bavaria, coached by Peter Jonas.

In the 1984–85 season, Neske won silver at the German nationals. She finished 8th in her first appearance at the European Championships and then debuted at the World Championships, placing 12th. Over the next several years, Neske obtained silver and bronze medals at the St. Ivel International (Skate Electric) and bronze medals at Skate Canada International, Nations Cup, International de Paris, and Nebelhorn Trophy. In 1989, she also won her first bronze at the European Championships. She then placed 4th at the World Championships, achieving her career-best World result.

In the 1989–90 season, Neske won gold at the German Championships but did not reach the European podium again until 1992 when she won her second European bronze medal, earning selection for the 1992 Winter Olympics in Albertville, where she placed 13th overall. She retired from competition later that year.

title: Patricia Neske


text:
Donald Duck Party

The Donald Duck Party (Kalle Anka-partiet) is a Swedish joke political party named after the Disney character Donald Duck. The party has received joke or protest votes without actually existing for several years; however, before the 2002 Swedish general election, Malmö citizen Bosse Persson had ballots made for the party (as well as for several other frivolous parties). Contrary to popular belief, however, the party was never officially registered with the Election Authority.

In the 2002 national election, the party received 10 votes from pre-printed ballots and an unknown number of hand-written ballots. In the 2006 elections, the party (including all spellings) received 223 votes.

In the 2010 elections, the party received 167 votes.

In the 2014 elections, the party received 133 votes.

title: Donald Duck Party


text:
Joanna Page

Joanna Louise Page (born 23 March 1977) is a Welsh actress and presenter, known for portraying Stacey Shipman in the BAFTA-winning television series Gavin & Stacey. She played Dora Spenlow in the 1999 adaptation of David Copperfield, and featured as Just Judy in the 2003 romantic comedy Love Actually. She currently co-presents (with Melanie Sykes) the BBC One consumer series Shop Well for Less. In 2023, Page joined Loose Women as a regular panellist.

Early life
Page was born in Treboeth, Swansea, Wales. She attended Mynyddbach Comprehensive School, where she was head girl. She graduated from the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art (RADA) in 1998.

Career
On graduation from RADA, Page spent ten years in stage-based roles, mainly costume dramas for the Royal National Theatre and Royal Shakespeare Company. This led to appearances in film productions, including From Hell, Mine All Mine, Love Actually and Miss Julie.

Page came to wider public attention after taking a leading role in the BBC comedy Gavin & Stacey, playing the main part of Stacey Shipman. She appeared in the show's three series between 2007 and 2010, before returning for a Christmas specials in 2019. In May 2024 it was announced that a final episode of the show, to be broadcast on Christmas Day 2024, had been written.

Page had a leading role in the 2001 BBC drama production The Cazalets, about a disparate, well-to-do English family during the Second World War. In 2009, Page provided the voice-overs for a series of Kingsmill bread TV and radio advertisements and the Christmas TV advertising campaign for the Carphone Warehouse. In December 2009, she was the cover star of FHM. During Christmas 2009, Page played the role of Cinderella in pantomime in Woking, a role she played a year earlier in Wimbledon. The following year, she played the role of Alice Fitzwarren in Dick Whittington at the Milton Keynes Theatre.

In 2010, she hosted Sky 1 show My Pet Shame. In October of the same year, she became the new face of Superdrug.

From May 2011, Page provided the voice of the lead character in the first season of Nick Jr. Channel UK's pre-school animation Poppy Cat, later replaced by Jessica Ransom from ITV's Doc Martin. In 2012, Page played Leanne Powell in the BBC One drama series The Syndicate, Helen Pearson in the Sky Living comedy Gates, and Mrs Peterson in Nativity 2: Danger in the Manger. In November 2013, Page starred as Queen Elizabeth I in "The Day of the Doctor", the 50th Anniversary episode of Doctor Who.

In 2021, Page began presenting BBC One's consumer series Shop Well for Less. At the end of 2021 she began co-hosting the show The Pet Show on ITV with Dermot O'Leary. In 2022, she appeared on the second series of The Masked Dancer as Pig. In 2023 she filmed the BBC television feature Men Up, about the first clinical trials for the drug Viagra that took place in Swansea in 1994.

In 2023, Page began appearing as a regular panellist on the ITV talk show Loose Women.

Personal life
Page is married to English actor James Thornton. They both appeared in the 1999 TV serial David Copperfield (Page as Dora Spenlow and Thornton as Ham Peggotty).

Recognition
Page was nominated for Best Female Comedy Newcomer at the 2007 British Comedy Awards.

title: Joanna Page


text:
Huaisu

Huaisu (, 737–799), courtesy name Zangzhen (藏真), was a Buddhist monk and calligrapher of the Tang dynasty, famous for his cursive calligraphy. Fewer than 10 pieces of his works have survived. One of his representative works is Huai Su's Autobiography.

He was born in Lingling, Yongzhou, Hunan. Not much is known of his early life. His secular surname may have been Qian (錢). It is possible that Huaisu was a nephew of the poet Qian Qi (錢起). He became a monk in his childhood, apparently out of poverty.

Legend has it that he planted banana trees (or any genus of trees under Musaceae) in the courtyard of the temple where he lived and used the leaves as paper to practice his art. He gained his national fame in his early thirties when he came to Chang'an, which was then the capital of China. Famous poets of his time, spoke highly of his works, including Li Bai. Like Li Bai, he was fond of alcohol.

Traditionally Huaisu is paired with the older Zhang Xu as the two greatest cursive calligraphers of the Tang dynasty. The duo is affectionately referred to as "the crazy Zhang and the drunk Su" (顛張醉素).

title: Huaisu


text:
Hrochův Týnec

Hrochův Týnec is a town in Chrudim District in the Pardubice Region of the Czech Republic. It has about 2,300 inhabitants.

Administrative parts
The villages of Blansko, Blížňovice, Skalice and Stíčany are administrative parts of Hrochův Týnec.

Geography
Hrochův Týnec is located about 8 km east of Chrudim and 12 km southeast of Pardubice. It lies in the Svitavy Uplands. The highest point is at 270 m above sea level. The town is situated at the confluence of the rivers Novohradka and Ležák.

History
A settlement named Týnec was first mentioned in 1194, but it is not possible to prove that it is Hrochův Týnec. The first trustworthy written mention of Hrochův Týnec is from 1293. It was then a property of the Hroch of Mezilezy family. In 1544, the village was promoted to a market town by Ferdinand II. In 1854, Hrochův Týnec became a town.

Transport
The I/17 road, which connects Chrudim with the D35 motorway, passes through the town.

Hrochův Týnec is located on the railway line Chrudim–Moravany.

Sights
Hrochův Týnec Castle was built at the end of the 17th century and rebuilt in 1717. It is a valuable Baroque complex with a castle garden.

The main landmark of the town centre is the Church of Saint Martin. The current Baroque appearance dates from 1723–1725.

Notable people

 * Friedrich Simony (1813–1896), Austrian geographer

title: Hrochův Týnec


text:
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Rainbowwarrior1977/Evidence

Has this request been abandoned by the people who brought it? It seems odd to me that I'm the first person to present evidence. The Literate Engineer 03:32, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I haven't abandoned it. However, apparently the ArbCom uses a completley different format than RfC, and as such, I have to go back over every diff to recategorize it. The RfC was divided up into offenses and diffs that supported that offense, while the ArbCom format seems to be "date of offense and diff of the offense." I've basically had to go back over all the diffs I cited (quite a few) and redo the entire thing, and combined with my real-world responsibilities, I haven't finished it yet. If any of the others who certified my initial post in the RfC would like to help, email me and I'll send you a link to the sandbox where I have it. -- Essjay ·  Talk 05:00, August 20, 2005 (UTC)


text:
Dugu Qiubai

Dugu Qiubai is a fictional character who is mentioned by name in three wuxia novels by Jin Yong (Louis Cha). He does not appear directly in any of the novels because he lived in an era long before the events of the novels took place. Nicknamed "Sword Devil" to reflect his prowess in and devotion to the practice of swordplay, he attains the philosophical level of "swordsmanship without a sword", which means that he uses swordplay techniques in combat without the physical existence of a sword.

Name
Dugu Qiubai's family name Dugu (literally "alone") suggests that he was ethnically Xianbei; his given name "Qiubai" literally means "seek defeat". His full name thus roughly translates to "A Loner Who Seeks Defeat", representing his status as an invincible swordsman haunted by solitude, as no one can defeat or equal him in swordplay.

Fictional character biography
In this novel, set in the late Song dynasty (c. mid 13th century), Yang Guo inherits Dugu Qiubai's Heavy Sword Technique. He encounters the Condor, a giant eagle-like creature that was once a companion of Dugu Qiubai. The Condor saves Yang Guo after he loses his arm, and leads him to Dugu Qiubai's Tomb of Swords. Yang Guo learns Dugu Qiubai's skills with the help of the Condor and inherits the Heavy Iron Sword. The Heavy Sword Technique has a rigorous requirement on inner energy, emphasising simple swings and moves accompanied by potent inner energy exertion. Although it lacks the fancy and stylish movements of typical swordplay styles, it is more effective than the most complicated form of sword attacks. When Yang Guo is learning this technique, he notes that he can break average swords immediately when he channels his inner energy into the Heavy Iron Sword during duels. The sword's weight would also boost the power of his swings and thrusts. Yang Guo masters the inner energy technique used by Dugu Qiubai and fulfils the requirement.
 * The Return of the Condor Heroes

Dugu Qiubai's swordplay technique, the Nine Swords of Dugu, is featured in this novel. The protagonist, Linghu Chong, learns this technique from the reclusive swordsman Feng Qingyang, and uses it to counter its "evil" counterpart, the Bixie Swordplay.
 * The Smiling, Proud Wanderer

In a very brief inner monologue, Chengguan, a knowledgeable but naïve Shaolin monk, ponders about two great swordsmen in the past who fought with swords without following any defined stances: Dugu Qiubai and Linghu Chong.
 * The Deer and the Cauldron

Nine Swords of Dugu
Created by Dugu Qiubai, the Nine Swords of Dugu are nine independent sword stances created to overpower all sorts of weapons, including swords, sabers, spears, clubs, staffs, whips and arrows, as well as barehanded attacks. This swordplay has nine stances, each of which is designed to counter a particular style of martial arts. The mastery of all nine forms allows the swordsman to counter a wide range of moves, including those involving the use of weapons. The first core element of the swordplay is speed. The swordsman is trained to quickly predict and identify the weaknesses in the moves executed by an opponent, and then attack those weak points. The second core element of the swordplay is its formless nature and adaptability. Unlike typical martial arts styles described in wuxia stories, the moves of the Nine Swords of Dugu do not follow any fixed sequence or pattern. As such, it is impossible for an opponent to predict and counter correspondingly the moves of the swordplay. The key to mastering the swordplay is to understand the two core elements instead of rigidly memorising all the stances. Once the swordsman has grasped the essence of the swordplay, he can use it in endless forms and variations, hence the swordplay has no fixed sequence or pattern. During combat, the less the swordsman remembers, the less restricted he is by the original stances. He is thus able to customise and adapt the swordplay accordingly.

The nine stances are:

 * 1) General Index Stance
 * 2) Sword-defeating Stance
 * 3) Saber-defeating Stance
 * 4) Spear-defeating Stance
 * 5) Whip-defeating Stance
 * 6) Chain whip-defeating Stance
 * 7) Palm-defeating Stance
 * 8) Arrow-defeating Stance
 * 9) Qi-defeating Stance

Tomb of Swords
Dugu Qiubai's final resting place is known as the Tomb of Swords. In The Return of the Condor Heroes the Condor leads Yang Guo to the Tomb, where Yang Guo reads a statement which Dugu Qiubai carved in stone: "'Having roamed the jianghu (martial artists' community) for more than 30 years, I have killed all my foes and defeated all champions. Under Heaven no one can be my equal. Without any other choice, I could only retreat and live in seclusion in this deep valley, with only a Condor as my companion. Alas, all my life, I have sought a match but in vain. Unbearable loneliness is my destiny.' — 'Sword Devil' Dugu Qiubai"

Yang Guo also read this at the Tomb of Swords: "'The 'Sword Devil' Dugu Qiubai has become the invincible and unchallenged swordsman under Heaven, hence he buried his swords here. The heroes of the realm bow before me. Now, my Long Sword is of no use anymore. The agony!'
 * The first sword (present): 'My first sword was so sharp, strong and fierce that none could withstand it. With it in hand, I strive for mastery by challenging all the heroes of the Northern Plains in my teenage years.'
 * The second sword (not present, represented by a wooden tablet): 'My second sword was violet in hue and flexible in motion. I used it in my 20s. With it, I have mistakenly wounded righteous men. It turned out to be a weapon of doom that caused me to feel remorse endlessly. I cast it into a deep canyon.'
 * The third sword (present): 'My third sword was heavy and blunt. The uttermost cunning is based on simplicity. With it, I roamed all lands under Heaven unopposed in my 30s.'
 * The fourth sword (represented by a wooden sword): 'After the age of 40, I was no longer hampered by any weapon. Grass, trees, bamboos and rocks can all be my swords. Since then, I have developed my skills further, such that gradually I can win battles without reaching for weapons.'"

title: Dugu Qiubai


text:
Ardabil Carpet

The Ardabil Carpet (or Ardebil Carpet) is the name of two different famous Persian carpets, the larger and better-known now in the Victoria and Albert Museum in London. Originally there were two presumably identical carpets, and the London carpet, as restored and reconstructed in the 19th century, uses sections from both. It now measures 1044 x. The other carpet, now in the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, and smaller at 718.82 x, was made up of the sections in adequate condition unused for the London carpet. Both carpets are now smaller (shorter in particular) than they would have been originally, and there are other fragments in various collections that appear to come from the reconstruction process. The carpets have a typical Tabriz design, with one central medallion and smaller, ornate designs surrounding. Such medallions and shapes were central to the design and reality of Persian gardens, a common symbol of paradise for followers of Islam.

A cartouche on the London carpet contains the date A.H. 946, or 1539-40, which is thought to be the earliest date on any Persian carpet.

Design
The foundation is silk with wool pile at a knot density of 300 –. The size of the London carpet is 1044 x, which gives its about 26 million knots in total. The carpets have an inscription: a couplet from a ghazal by Persian mythic poet Hafiz Shirazi and a signature. The inscription reads:"I have no refuge in the world other than thy threshold. There is no protection for my head other than this door. The work of the servant of the threshold Maqsud of Kashan in the year 946." Translating this date into the Christian calendar shows that the carpet was woven around the years 1539–40 during the reign of Shah Tahmasp, one of the great patrons of carpet weaving. The design of the central medallion resembles that of the interior side of the dome of the Sheikh Lotfollah Mosque in Isfahan, with two differently sized lamp motifs surrounding the design, now seen as a deliberate use of graphical perspective, when looked at from the end with the smaller lamp the two appear the same size. However, a debate exists due to the fact that there is no proof that graphical perspective was used in 1530s Iran and other historians and critics instead believe the lamps are ones found in mosques or shrines at the time. The border is created from cartouches filled with decorations and calligraphy, adding even more details to the already accomplished style.

Designs for prestige carpet commissions were supplied by the court atelier of artists, who also designed for manuscripts, tiling patterns on buildings and other media, giving a uniform style to elite Safavid art. The designs were then copied and adapted for smaller carpets for a wider market. The design of these carpets are not typical of later Ardabil rugs, but products of the finest Safavid weaving, with influence from manuscript painting.

History
Completed after about four years weaving during the rule of the Safavid Shah Tahmasp I in 1539-40, probably in Kashan, the carpets are considered some of the best of the classical Iranian (Persian) school of carpet creation. According to the traditional story, now rather doubted by historians, when new they were placed in the Sheikh Safi al-Din Khānegāh and Shrine Ensemble in Ardabil, but became heavily worn and were sold in 1890 to a British carpet dealer who restored one of the carpets using the other and then resold the restored one to the Victoria and Albert Museum.

Many specialists are now dubious that the carpets were made for Ardabil; apart from anything else, they would not fit in the shrine there. They also do not match any carpets described in an inventory of the shrine from 1795. On the other hand, at their presumed original size, the two would fit into a space in the more important Imam Reza Shrine at Mashad.

This carpet was sold by the dealer Edward Stebbing of Robinson and Company as "The Holy Carpet of the Mosque at Ardebil", stressing the "exceptionalism of the carpet and its provenance as a product of the Safavid royal atelier of Shah Tahmasp, made for the Safavid dynastic shrine at Ardabil". William Morris advised the V&A in the acquisition: "It was William Morris, in his capacity as one of the V&A's Art Referees, who persuaded the Museum to raise, with the aid of public subscription, the then vast sum of £2000 to purchase the carpet in March 1893". Morris wrote in a letter to Thomas Armstrong that "it has no counterpart". Gradually, word came out that there was a second Ardabil carpet. When the Victoria and Albert Museum began to check out the piece in 1914, the historical consensus came to be that the modifications on the current Los Angeles Ardabil to repair the London Ardabil were managed by Ziegler and Company, the first buyer of the carpets from Persian resident Hildebrand Stevens, supposedly using Tabriz or Turkish craftsmen. The second Ardabil had visible changes in its structure, with its borders replaced into a newly woven narrow line while the London Ardabil was thoroughly over-restored. Historians of the time spoke to this, stating 'The highest market value was for complete carpets, rather than damaged ones or fragments. The London carpet was 'a remarkable work of Art', and as Morris has said, of real historical importance, but it had been compromised to suit the market values of 19th century art connoisseurship.' The carpet was for decades displayed hanging on a wall. Since 2006, it has been shown flat in a special glass pavilion in the centre of the Jameel gallery, Room 42 of Islamic art. The lighting is kept very low to prevent fading, and is increased for a brief period each hour.

The second "secret" carpet, smaller, now borderless and with some of the field missing, made up from the remaining usable sections, was sold to the American businessmen Clarence Mackay and was exchanged by wealthy buyers for years. Passing through the Mackay, Yerkes, and De la Mare art collections, it was eventually revealed and shown in 1931 at an exhibition in London. American industrialist J. Paul Getty saw it, and bought it from Lord Duveen for approximately $70,000 several years later. Getty was approached by agents on behalf of King Farouk of Egypt who offered $250,000 so that it could be given as a wedding present to his sister and the Shah of Iran. Getty later donated the carpet to the Los Angeles County Museum of Science, History, and Art in the Exposition Park in Los Angeles. Other fragments have appeared on the market from time to time. The knot density is actually higher on the Los Angeles carpet. It is now in the Los Angeles County Museum of Art in Los Angeles. In 2003 it was cleaned and restored by the Royal Collection's Textile Conservation Studios at Hampton Court Palace, near London.

Copies
The Ardabil Carpet was an original design, though in the style of some other Persian carpets of the same period. It has been the subject of numerous copies ranging in size from small rugs to full scale carpets. There is an 'Ardabil' at 10 Downing Street (office of the British Prime Minister), and even Adolf Hitler had an 'Ardabil' in his office in Berlin. Commercial copies of the carpet for sale range from prices of $200 to $45,000.

title: Ardabil Carpet


text:
The Gabrieliad

The Gabrieliad («Гавриилиада», Gavriiliada) is a humorous poem on the subject of the Annunciation widely believed to have been written by Alexander Pushkin in April 1821, while he was in his student years.

Synopsis
The Gavriiliada is a satiric description of the beginning of the New Testament, primarily making fun of the virgin birth and God's ineptness. In Pushkin's narrative, Mary, the mother of Jesus, a young and attractive Jewish girl, is married to an old and impotent carpenter who has taken her as wife only to keep house. God chooses her to be the mother of Jesus and sends Archangel Gabriel to announce the good news. Satan learns about God's plan and arrives first in the form of a snake to seduce and deflower Mary. Gabriel arrives too late to save her from Satan but manages to drive him off with an illegal punch to testicles. Then he quickly has his way with Mary, who had already seen him in a vision and was impatiently waiting for him. The next morning, God in the form of a dove flies into Mary's bedroom and has intercourse with her, thus thinking He has conceived Jesus.

Case of Gavrieliad
The poem was written anonymously because the author could be prosecuted for blasphemy by the Holy Synod. In 1828, an official investigation of the alleged authorship by Pushkin started. After initially denying writing the poem, Pushkin admitted it in a letter to Nicholas I.

title: The Gabrieliad


text:
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Team pages format

Stanley Cup Champions succession box
I was wondering about this for weeks. Should we remove all those Stanley Cup champions succession boxes from the NHL team pages? For example- at Montreal Canadiens, Toronto Maple Leafs and Detroit Red Wings (with honorable mention to the Boston Bruins and Edmonton Oilers), they seem to clog up the bottom of the page (also makes the page longer them needed). What everyone's views. GoodDay 16:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Nope I think they are fine where they are. There are only a few cases where they get that long so I don't see it as an issue. --Djsasso 16:43, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The Canadiens is the only instance in which it gets a little long. Perhaps they could be put into a template and be hidden by default on just theirs? IrisKawling 23:35, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll go for that idea. GoodDay 00:04, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Well they are already listed in the infobox. --Krm500 00:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't really see where the issue is to begin with. Its not adding any load time really cause there is very little text to them. And having to scroll down is not really a big deal. For the sake of uniformity they should stay just how they are. --Djsasso 02:06, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Personally, I can't stand them. What do they add to an article?  Why is it important to note on the Calgary Flames article that Edmonton won the cup in both 1988 and 1990?  Also, why does it matter on Sidney Crosby's article who won the Calder Memorial Trophy the year previous and following?  IMO, succession boxes are simply filler used to add irrelevant information. Resolute 03:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Changed my mind. Perhaps it's best to remove them. Krm500 is correct, the Stanley Cup championship years are already listed at the top Infobox. GoodDay 20:44, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I see your point, but it allows people to follow the succession of champions throughout the years. I think it may serve as a metaphor by "linking one story to the next". Maybe I'm just full of shit, but that's me. Darthflyer 03:54, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't agree with that. When I look at a team page being able to see who they replaced as the Stanley Cup Champion and who replaced them or if they repeated as being a very worthwhile thing. I personally like succession boxes as long as they are sorted properly on the page. For me its not about seeing that they won the championship because as you mentioned that's in the infobox, but more about who came before or after them which I do find very relevant. --Djsasso 23:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Isn't that what List of Stanley Cup champions is for? Resolute 23:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You could say similar things about everything on a team page. Information is going to be duplicated in places...if I am just focusing on the Montreal Canadiens I don't want to have to jump to multiple pages. --Djsasso 23:20, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

 * I can do without the succession box. IMHO, it's useless. Gmatsuda 02:57, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I could do without succession boxes. They look tacky (something you'd see on a high schooler's web page) and stumbling across ones that haven't been updated isn't good.  I know its sacrilege, but I prefer the templates.  They can be updated quickly, and universally.  Before someone trots out the Derek Jeter example - I am not in favour of over-templating, with every team and championship, but they look much better and are easier to maintain than succession boxes.  Canada Hky (talk) 16:28, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I just saw that this was three years old, disregard. Canada Hky (talk) 16:29, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Diacritics compromise policies
Good luck everyone. I'm through with these diacritics usage disputes. So much for compromising. GoodDay 23:39, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Please see my comment on the projects main talk page. --Krm500 23:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * We did compromise on player names. Place names was something we never discussed cause it is already covered by an overall Wikipedia policy as mentioned in KM500's note on the main project page. --Djsasso 23:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

It will help make things clearer, to all editors. GoodDay 17:54, 7 July 2007 (UTC) :::Nevermind, they're already there. GoodDay 18:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Montreal Canadiens
Could someone (familiar with symatix) add Denis Savard and Tony Esposito to the Canadiens 'Honored members' section. Afterall, the policy is full inclusion. GoodDay 23:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I brought this up on April 20th, yet know one added them. GoodDay 23:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Which flag in the current roster table?
Is the flag next to the player his country of current citizenship? I use Alexei Ponikarovsky as a case in point. His birth place is listed as the USSR, but he has the Ukrainian and Canadian flags next to him in the table, since he holds dual citizenship. (He was recently naturalized as a Canadian citizen, per his article.) This isn't touched on in the text, so I figured I'd ask for clarification. Thanks. —C.Fred (talk) 03:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * We use the flag of the country they have played for in international competition, otherwise their birth country or a country where there is a source that they actually have citizenship from. --Djsasso 04:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Does not look good with two flags in the table. I'll remove the Canadian flag, otherwise there's a risk we'll see thousands of this example since many, many players have dual citizenship. --Krm500 11:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * We should add some text about it to the manual if we want to get rid of dual flags in tables, infoboxes and other narrow places. --Bamsefar75 12:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I believe the second field was added for players who have played for more than one country internationally. I can't remember who the example was off the top of my head but he played for Russia and Latvia I think it was. Or Nedved who played for Russia and Canada. --Djsasso 17:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Omitting Canada/USA from roster templates?
Hi, just seeking clarification as to why "Canada" and "USA" do not directly follow the state/province listed in the place of birth column. Is this only for North American roster listings?--Lvivske (talk) 06:43, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * We've had a war or two over this in the past, IIRC, and the weight of the argument seemed to rest on the fact that omitting the country name for US/Canadian geographic locations is common practice in North American hockey media -- thus, omitting it in North American teams' roster listings seemed in keeping with that practice. There's no ambiguity introduced since no states and provinces share a name, and in 90% of cases, the citizenship flag matches the birthplace anyway (the occasions where it doesn't is a whole other issue).  VT  hawkeye talk to me 00:14, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Since previous "consensus" was mostly based on the fact that official sources used to ommit the country, how valid is it now that official NHL team pages do list the country : http://hurricanes.nhl.com/team/app?service=page&page=TeamPlayers&type=roster ? The points you make about ambiguity and flags are valid but would apply to other countries all the same. Bohdan80 (talk) 10:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually it was based on the fact that most hockey media (north american and european) omit the country. This has still not changed. -Djsasso (talk) 12:23, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Looking at previous discussions it does appears official NHL team pages were one reason. It also appears there was in fact no real consensus. Bohdan80 (talk) 17:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

City & Country for all
Toronto, Canada & Louisvill, United States, is how they should be done. GoodDay (talk) 18:40, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Section header logical flow issues
Ok, so I was made aware of this project standard by some recent changes at New Jersey Devils, and, frankly, I have several issues with it.

Firstly, as my title indicates, there is a total lack of logical flow in section headers in this format. The biggest, in my view, is the placing of "current" roster under the "Season-by-season records" header. There's absolutely no logical flow there, as the curentr roster is not a subtopic of the records. The season records themselves shouldn't even be a top level header; they logically flow as a subtopic of the main "history" section. I propose that it be moved there. The roster, along with individual player records, the "honored members" section and the listings of team captains and former coaches and GMs from the "Leaders" section (which is too vaguely named, and not really a top-level, separate-section-worthy concept) can and should be combined into a "Players and Personnel" section.

Another issue is the "Team colors and mascot" section. Firstly, while the section inevitably contains historical information, the same could be said about any section, and the section usually is focused on the current branding as much as the historical. I believe it should be a separate main header, as it does not fit neatly into history (which is largely chronological) or any other section. I also find the name weak, as not all teams have identifiable mascots. Logos or crests, which every team has, would be a better mention, but overall I would just call it "team branding and appearance" or something along those lines.

Finally I note that there is no quick listing of home arenas. While I guess that the infobox covers that, I'm reluctant to leave it to the infobox alone, as I've always felt that the infobox shouldn't contain information not elsewhere in the article. The arenas are naturally named in the history section, but so are coaches and they get a separate list. Of course, most teams have had far more coaches that arenas. I don't think it's critical to include, but I do suggest it.

So, to summarize, my suggestion looks like this:
 * Introduction
 * History
 * Various chronlogical sections covering periods of team history
 * Season-by-season records, listing the last five years, with a link to the all-time records page
 * Players and personnel
 * Current roster via template
 * Leading scorers
 * Other notable single-season player records
 * Other notable all-time player records
 * Team records
 * Coaches list
 * GM list
 * Captains list
 * Team identity and appearance
 * Logo
 * Uniforms
 * Mascot (If there is one)
 * Other unique identifiers-weird team traditions and such (octopus?)
 * Home arenas (maybe)

Anyway, I truly felt I had to put that out there, as the current format really lacks logical grouping and flow, the way I see it. Let's see what sticks. oknazevad (talk) 15:48, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Your suggestions all seem appropriate to me. I just had issue with a situation where one page is completely different than the others because it can lead to the information being harder to find if each team is different, so I completely support changing the basis for all of them to your suggestions, I just didn't want it done bit by bit on only a couple teams. -DJSasso (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I like a lot of the suggestions as well. I don't see a need for a L3 header for the season by season record - it can stay as an L2, but moving it below history would be ideal.  An overabundance of lists detracts from the article in my view, and as such I personally would rather the GMs, captains, awards and coaches lists stay with their own child articles - and it may be worth modifying the team navbox to have links to those articles.  Home arenas are generally already mentioned in prose in the team history.  Resolute 16:47, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The L3 for the season-by-season is just a matter of flow and importance. As it isn't a complete list, which has rightly been split off per WP:SUMMARY, there's nonreal need for an entire major header for it.
 * The problem with eliminating the lists is most of those positions have no child articles, and I likely think that any attempt to split off such lists would be too stubby to really need a child article. Anyway, an average reader, wanting to know who was, say the coach of the Minnesota North Stars in 1979 would most likely head to the North Stars article to find out. So keeping the info in the main article serves those readers best, in my opinion.
 * And, as I said, the coaches are also mentioned in the prose, but are also rightly listed in a quick reference list. Not everyone who comes to an article reads the whole thing from beginning to end. As a reference work, readers are just as likely to go to a page, check the fact they want, and leave. It is appropriate to serve those readers with quick reference lists that are linked in the ToC for easy access. While Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, it also has aspects of an almanac (sports almanac, in this case).oknazevad (talk) 18:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, all of those lists have child articles. Some need to be completed (namely several draft pick lists), but we do need to worry about both summary style and page size constraints.  Having so many bare lists in these articles detracts from the overall quality of it.  Resolute 15:11, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

 * I put a proposed team page out there for discussion, but no-one has talked about it. The notice went to the archive without comment. I put it at WikiProject Ice Hockey/Proposed team pages format. (The Ottawa Senators page uses it.) Go ahead and edit that, if you want. The main point is to put prose before the bunch of tables and lists. ʘ alaney2k  ʘ ( talk ) 17:55, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily a bad idea. My main concern with it is that would push the current roster and other player-centric aspects too far down on the page. As players are central to the team (after all, they're the ones actually playing the game), the should be fairly prominent, I think. oknazevad (talk) 18:23, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Not a comment on which way would be better. But technically these pages are about the franchise first. The pages that focus on the current team are each of the season pages where I would expect the roster to be very prominent. So technically the roster on these pages are second to information about the franchise itself. To some this is a key fact to consider, how important it is to everyone I don't know. -DJSasso (talk) 18:27, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm just trying to keep in mind the average reader who is unaware of the heirarchy of pages that have developed across the various team sports Wikiprojects. I'm pretty sure that most even regular editors aren't knowledgable about the existance of the season articles. I'd also argue that without players, the franchise is meaningless, but that's a different debate. oknazevad (talk) 18:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like some solid suggestions, but I'd prefer to have the Players and personnel section below team identity section. —Krm500 (Communicate!) 19:25, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ultimately I could go either way on it. My main concern was getting subsections under the appropriate headers, and getting things at the right level. Since the article is about the team, puttig the team-centric identity info first is fine. oknazevad (talk) 20:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Two comments about the above proposal. Team Identity, etc. is really part of the team history. Secondly, putting prose of the team identity, logo, etc. after the players and personnel tables violates the style guidelines of Wikipedia. I like the idea of simple top-level headers. (History, Members, Record) ʘ alaney2k  ʘ ( talk ) 19:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That was three things. For each: I disagree that team identity is completely part of history. The section should first be descriptive of what the team uses now, with a discussion of historical development following up on that. Some teams have a lot of branding history, and haven't had a major change in decades, others haven't. But all if them have an identity that stands out. I believe the section should as well.
 * Now. It is a hockey team in the NHL. In a certain division. That's about it.

 * I know of no such style guide that requires all charts, lists, etc. after prose. In fact, most articles I've seen, including a great many technical ones, but such information where it logically and topically makes sense. That is what I feel is needed here, a better grouping of topics within team articles. They currently make little sense.
 * Not all. But look it up in WP:MOS. It's good style to put prose first. If it is after a bunch of lists, it gets ignored. ʘ alaney2k  ʘ ( talk ) 20:28, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Finally, the problem with one word headers is they aren't descriptive enough and could cause confusion. "Leaders", for example, doesn't say enough about weather it covers team officials or record holders. While it's obvious that it's the former when you read the section, it isn't obvious from the table of contents, which is important for the quick refence aspect of these articles. It also isn't a word commonly used in describing the positions, which makes it a poor choice. oknazevad (talk) 20:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 * That was an over-simplification on my part. Here is an example of simple, straight-forward headers that are standard. The Roads group specifies Route Description, History, Future and Exit list. You know, it works. ʘ alaney2k  ʘ ( talk ) 20:28, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, hearing no further negative feedback, Im going to do a test implementation of my idea at the Devils article. Based on the feedback, I'll flip the "team identity" section before the roster and player records bits. Let me know what you think. oknazevad (talk) 04:06, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

 * I have been away. Don't take my comments as negative feedback. I've been coming at it from another team's perspective. I've looked over the Devils. I've adopted the Players and personnel title for the Ottawa Senators article. I'm not sure about the Team Identity heading. On the Senators article, I have a section called 'Sens Mile' about an area of downtown set up for Sens fans and celebrations. Doesn't seem to fit. ʘ alaney2k  ʘ ( talk ) 15:38, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hm, I'm not too wedded to the "Team identity" header, but I figured it was broad enough to include things like the "Sens Mile" that help give the each team it's unique and local flavor. That was my intention, at least. I would expect some variation needed fir each team, of course. These sort of team traditions, unique characteristics and local customs are the hardest part of having standardized headers. oknazevad (talk) 21:15, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Ghost town
Wowsers, the sub-branch of WP:HOCKEY seems to have been abandoned. GoodDay (talk) 05:33, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Ramping up ...
The page badly needed an update, so I did it. In particular, I used the "Pro hockey team" template instead of the NHL one, and edged towards minor league usages. The NHL teams are all solidly done, after all, and a new team creation would almost certainly be a minor pro/junior/collegiate squad.   Ravenswing   10:25, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Regarding the guidance, "Equal weight should be given to a team's entire history," I think instructions on due weight should be given. A team's championship years, for example, should receive greater emphasis than other years. isaacl (talk) 13:41, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good idea to me.   Ravenswing   15:09, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, I have revised the text accordingly. isaacl (talk) 02:43, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

 * While we are at it, perhaps some guidance on naming of history section subheaders? Pittsburgh Penguins, for instance, has gotten to be quite asinine. And though a non-hockey example, what has become of Toronto Blue Jays reflects very poorly on Wikipedia. Resolute 15:14, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I completely agree. This current fad for proclaiming the handful of years a star plays for a club or a coach is in place an "era" is moronic.  If headers have names at all, they should reflect broadly accepted -- and, dare I say it, sourced -- terms: "Broad Street Bullies," "Big Bad Bruins," the dynasties of the Red Wings, Canadiens, Oilers and Islanders.  Players' names in those headers should reflect only the greatest of stars: the Gretzkys, Orrs, Howes and Richards of the world (for all it was a tragedy, Michel Briere's career was a single-season blip in the Penguins' nearly fifty year history, and his name shouldn't head a section, for instance).  Other than that, we fall on widely known breakpoints: the WWII era, the 1967 expansion, the merger with the WHA, the 2005 lockout ... and if that means we have some long sections, then we have some long sections.  Thoughts?   Ravenswing   15:36, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * In the case of Calgary Flames, I simply used year ranges (and yesterday reverted a late addition of POV 'eras'). And while in that case I did use unofficial breakpoints, if we keep to simple divisions like that, then there is no need for long sections.   Resolute 16:09, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Although broadly accepted terms are generally preferable, I don't think it is necessary to limit headings to only these. Editorial judgment should be allowable to decide on useful section divisions and appropriate headings with appropriate descriptions. It can be a key event during the corresponding period, or in some (in my opinion, typically exceptional) cases a key person. isaacl (talk) 02:23, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
 * My problem with that is that everyone's notion of "key event" and "typically exceptional" varies, and we can all think of prolific editors with disruptive definitions of anything not put down in black-letter guidelines (*cough* Dolovis *cough*) ... how sections are named "The (Coach/Team Captain de jour) Era."   Ravenswing   07:47, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The problem with requiring section headings to be sourced is that it would make section divisions inflexible, as editors would be unable to rebalance sections based on the content, and that frankly the divisions and labelling of stretches of ordinary seasons is arbitrary. Different sources will divide them up differently, based on their own convenience, not out of any generally-accepted convention. Plus the promotional and storytelling nature of sports journalism means that finding sources for "the Player x era" is straightforward for a team's top player, anyway.
 * As in all articles, the heading should be germane to the section, and ideally provide a label that facilitates distinguishing the time period from others, but often that won't be completely possible. However in a lot of ways this discussion is moot: in my experience, people aren't sufficiently interested to engage in a consensus discussion on article headings, and so most of the time it's going to be a case of "last edit wins". isaacl (talk) 12:03, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

 * Okay, I filled in a few more holes, and I admit I got a little bit silly. Take a look and tell me what you think, folks.   Ravenswing   16:34, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the updates to this page, it should be helpful for pointing new users towards. A couple of comments/questions. In the Franchise History in the Infobox, should the time periods be en-dashes? Most of what I have seen are and I have been correcting others when they use the hyphen or when they are mixed because I thought I had read that in a Manual of Style somewhere. Also I have been recently in a policing effort with User talk:66.94.206.60 (who is quite un-responsive) about breaking up the teams in the info box when they also switch leagues instead of just names/relocations. It doesn't matter in a lot of cases (such as Tulsa Oilers) but in some cases it can get ridiculous (such as their edits to Utah Grizzlies and Wenatchee Wild)? Thoughts/opinions?
 * Yes on the en dashes and no on splitting up the leagues. -DJSasso (talk) 03:11, 12 September 2015 (UTC)


text:
Chapeltown, South Yorkshire

Chapeltown is an area of Sheffield in South Yorkshire, England. It is the half way point between Barnsley and Sheffield approximately 7 miles from both. It is part of the civil parish of Ecclesfield. It is historically within the West Riding of Yorkshire. Up until April 1st 1974, Chapeltown was part of the Wortley Rural District, after which, it was made part of the new administrative county of South Yorkshire and the Sheffield City Council area.

Geography
Chapeltown is located approximately 7 mi north of Sheffield city centre on the railway between Sheffield and Barnsley. Chapeltown railway station is served by the Penistone Line and Hallam Line. Two junctions of the M1 motorway also serve the area. The A6135 road passes through the town from north to south and is joined near the town centre by the A629 road from the south-east and the B6546 road from the west.

Like much of Sheffield, there is a large amount of greenspace in and around Chapeltown. The town centre has a cricket ground and a wooded park on either side of it. Between Chapeltown and Ecclesfield the land is used for residential purposes on one side of the main road and agricultural on the other. There is also a brownfield site above the park.

History
Until industrial expansion, Chapeltown was a hamlet that originated at the intersection of the roads between Sheffield and Barnsley and between Rotherham and Wortley. In the late 16th century a blast furnace was installed there which initially used charcoal, and from 1780 was fired with coke. Chapeltown was part of the ecclesiastical parish of Ecclesfield and had a population of 4063 persons around 1870. Coal mining was one of the main occupations of the inhabitants.

The works of Newton, Chambers & Company were first established in Chapeltown in 1793. Initially they were an iron works specialising in cast iron products, but over time the company expanded into related mining industries and products from the fractional distillation of coal, including the Izal disinfectant range. In the Second World War they produced Churchill tanks. The company's site is now Thorncliffe Industrial Estate, where most of the industry in Chapeltown is located.

title: Chapeltown, South Yorkshire


text:
Talk:Alpha Centauri

Distance
Based on the new parallax (2021), shouldn't the distance be corrected to 4,344?--McBayne (talk) 20:44, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-Protection request
Expiration date: indefinite

Reason 1: High-risk page

Reason 2: This is one of the most famous star systems.

--2600:1700:6180:6290:B035:F1A4:CC25:7A4C (talk) 23:54, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Split request
This page is getting too long, so can someone fell free to split it up, by the following:
 * Alpha Centauri/Nomenclature
 * Alpha Centauri/Stellar system
 * Alpha Centauri/Observation
 * Alpha Centauri/Kinematics
 * Alpha Centauri/Planetary system
 * Alpha Centauri/View from this system
 * Alpha Centauri/Other Names
 * Alpha Centauri/Future exploration
 * Alpha Centauri/Historical distance estimates

Thanks! --2600:1700:6180:6290:7D89:F761:BBA0:74D1 (talk) 20:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Similar to your request at Talk:Solar System. By the way, I removed your extraneous "Other" section header. Tarl N. ( discuss ) 04:24, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Long articles can easily be scrolled, there is no real reason to split it into smaller parts. Artem.G (talk) 06:04, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Proxima Centauri c & d
are these planets confirmed or not. i see them in lists like list of closest exoplanets and list of multiplanetary systems as if they are confirmed and also in the aplha centauri & proxima centauri articles. but in the pages themselves they are apparently "controversial" (c) and a candidate only (d). c is "not formally confirmed" but "existence is undisputed" according to this article but apparently there is one source disputing it in c 's article.

this is opposed to candidate 1 which is just a candidate and pretty clearly defined as such everywhere through its absence from the above exoplanet lists and also it has a "?" marker in the alpha centauri template.

i've tried looking in the talks sections of all the directly related articles; i found 2 discussions on proxima centauri and proxima centauri c, but they are all from 1+ year ago and thus cant incorporate the 2022 source disputing c (but both discussions say it's a candidate). d is conflictingly claimed to be confirmed and candidate on proxima centauri and its own article repsectively, both using the same sources to say different things

(it also doesn't help that idk how a planent would be "formally" confirmed...is it just 1 other group of scientists saying "yeh this checks out" or "i see the same pattern here"? or if "general consensus" is needed, what is the definition of that? or how mny independent investigations/confirmations are needed)

I'm probably misunderstanding something here so just wanted to make sure before doing any changes on multiple articles and that template.

Sbznpoe (talk) 01:29, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Indeed, as you mention, Proxima c has recently been disputed. I would say that Proxima d is confirmed (and it's described as such in the same recent paper), but I wouldn't want to start another argument about a planet's confirmation status. It's always possible that further observations might cast doubt on it in the future, as happened with planet c. SevenSpheres (talk) 15:15, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Chimera article
I think that this article is a chimera of trying to describe Alpha Centauri AB system and the whole Alpha Centauri system (with Proxima Centauri) as a whole. We should split off Alpha Centauri A and Alpha Centauri B into its own article, and only talk about the whole system with a summary of individual stars in this article. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 06:54, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Second binary discovered?
Article currently says "" with a source. I have not checked the source but I have concerns that whatever the source says, it doesn't seem to be correct. Binary star and Mizar suggests Mizar was discovered first before even Acrux. If my read is correct, Mizar was discovered as a binary sometime earlier in the 17th century via telescope and it's undisputed this is Mizar rather than Mizar and Alcor. Of course, technically we now know Mizar is not a binary star since it has four compononents but nor is Acrux which has 6. If there is some reason why this is still argued to be correct e.g. because parts of Acrux could be called a binary but nothing of Mizar, IMO this needs clarification at least via footnote which would probably also explain why Alpha Centauri itself is counted. Nil Einne (talk) 10:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Hmm yes, Mizar A and B were distinguished in 1617. This was only recently discovered in Galileo's notebooks. Further reading. But double star cites that Battista Riccioli knew by 1650, before Acrux was known to be so. DAVilla (talk) 11:54, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Circled in red?
"Alpha Centauri AB (left) forms a triple star system with Proxima Centauri, circled in red." I don't see anything circled. Similarly where the same photo is used on Proxima Centauri. Image is unchanged since 2016. DAVilla (talk) 11:41, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

 * There is a circle. is just hard to see 87.52.110.156 (talk) 22:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Proxima Centauri‘s circumstellar disk
Proxima Centauri has a Circumstellar disc

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJ...855L...2M/abstract https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...850L...6A/abstract https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/proxima-centauris-dust-belt-hints-at-more-planets Fredeee335 (talk) 22:14, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

 * See Proxima Centauri where this is discussed. There most likely is not a disk according to the 2018 paper you linked. SevenSpheres (talk) 22:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh ok Fredeee335 (talk) 20:01, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Alpha Centauri


text:
Adam Terry

Adam Terry (born September 1, 1982) is a former American football offensive tackle. He was selected by the Baltimore Ravens in the second round of the 2005 NFL Draft. He played college football at Syracuse.

He was also a member of the Indianapolis Colts, San Diego Chargers, Jacksonville Jaguars and Tennessee Titans.

Early life
Terry attended Queensbury High School in Queensbury, New York. As a junior, he was a first-team All-Conference pick and a first-team All-State selection, and was named an All-East selection by Prep Football Report.

College career
Terry played college football at Syracuse where he started in the final 35 games of his career there. He earned a degree in History.

Baltimore Ravens
Terry was selected by the Baltimore Ravens in the second round (64th overall) in the 2005 NFL Draft. In his rookie season, he played in seven games. In the 2006 season he played in all 16 regular season games and was part of an offensive line that only allowed 17 sacks, a franchise record. Furthermore, that season the Ravens rushed for 1,637 yards and 11 touchdowns. However, Terry continued to struggle with injuries, which led to his departure.

Indianapolis Colts
Terry signed with the Indianapolis Colts on March 12, 2010. Terry was cut by Colts following Training Camp.

San Diego Chargers
Signed on September 5, 2010, following his release from the Colts, Terry spent two games in San Diego before being released to make room for receiver Kelley Washington on November 4.

Tennessee Titans
On August 15, 2011, he signed with the Tennessee Titans, but he was released by the team on September 3, 2011.

title: Adam Terry


text:
Barkov

Barkov (masculine, Барков) or Barkova (feminine, Баркова) is a Russian surname. Notable people with the surname include:

 * Alexander Barkov Sr. (born 1965), Russian ice hockey player and coach
 * Aleksander Barkov (born 1995), Finnish-Russian ice hockey player
 * Anna Barkova (1901–1976), Russian Soviet poet, journalist and writer
 * Dmitry Barkov (footballer) (born 1992), Russian footballer
 * Dmitri Barkov (sport shooter) (1880–?), Russian sport shooter
 * Ivan Barkov (c. 1732–1768), Russian poet and writer
 * Roman Barkov, Barkov's Forces in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare (2019 video game)

title: Barkov