text:
Grant County International Airport

Grant County International Airport is a public use airport located 6 mi northwest of the central business district of Moses Lake in Grant County, Washington, United States. Formerly a military facility, the airport is owned by the Port of Moses Lake, and its 13500 ft runway is the 17th longest in the U.S.

According to Federal Aviation Administration records, the airport had 1,369 passenger boardings (enplanements) in calendar year 2008, 2,920 enplanements in 2009, and 1,442 in 2010. It is included in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems for 2011–2015, which categorized it as a general aviation airport.

History
Opened as a training airfield during World War II, the facility was operated by the U.S. Air Force as Larson Air Force Base until 1966.

On 24 June 1969, Japan Airlines Flight 90, a Convair 880, crashed on take-off from runway 32R at Grant County International Airport. The power was reduced on the number four engine during take-off, however, the aircraft continued to yaw to the right until the number four engine struck and slid off the runway. It burst into flames, killing three of the five crew members on board. The probable cause was a "delayed corrective action during a simulated critical-engine-out takeoff maneuver resulting in an excessive sideslip from which full recovery could not be effected."

In September 2019, Boeing stored 100 of its undelivered 737 MAX airplanes at the Moses Lake airport while it awaited clearance from the FAA and other aviation regulators to return the jet to commercial service.

Passenger air service to and from Moses Lake ended on 8 June 2010.

Overview
With 4,650 acre and a 13500 ft main runway, it is one of the largest airports in the United States. Moses Lake is famous for good flying weather, as it is located on the east side of the Cascade Range, in the semi-arid desert of central Washington.

Grant County International Airport was an alternate landing site for the NASA Space Shuttle.

Scheduled passenger flights on Big Sky Airlines to Boise and Portland were discontinued on September 1, 2006. The service was subsidized by the Essential Air Service program. United Express, operated by SkyWest Airlines offered nonstop flights to Seattle from June 2009 until June 2010. The airport currently has no commercial passenger air service.

The airport was used for heavy jet training by Japan Airlines (JAL) for over forty years, until the closing of their training offices in March 2009. The airport also had been used for flight testing of the Mitsubishi SpaceJet.

In November 1974, the airport hosted a new Supersonic Transport (SST) Concorde for a month during FAA certification testing.

It is also utilized by the U.S. Air Force and Boeing as a testing facility. Most of the traffic at the airport is general and military aviation.

In 2011, the 92nd Air Refueling Wing at Fairchild AFB in Spokane temporarily moved its KC-135 R/T fleet and operations to Moses Lake while Fairchild's runway underwent reconstruction and other infrastructure improvements, to include an upgrade to the base's aviation fuel distribution system.

The main campus for Big Bend Community College is also located on the grounds of the airport.

After the grounding of all Boeing 737 MAXs from March 2019, approximately 50 of the grounded airplanes were parked at the airport. This was originally seen as an economic opportunity for the airport, but later caused concern as the number of planes stored kept increasing, to approximately 130 by October 2019.

Facilities and aircraft

Grant Co. International Airport covers an area of 4650 acre at an elevation of 1189 ft above sea level. It has five runways:
 * Runway 14L/32R is 13503 by, with an asphalt/concrete surface
 * Runway 4/22 is 10000 by, with an asphalt/concrete surface
 * Runway 9/27 is 3500 by, with a concrete surface
 * Runway 18/36 is 3327 by, with an asphalt surface
 * Runway 14R/32L is 2936 by, with a concrete surface

For the 12-month period ending December 31, 2018, the airport had 77,335 aircraft operations, an average of 212 per day: 61% general aviation, 15% military, 10% air carrier and 14% air taxi. At that time there were 49 fixed-wing aircraft and 2 gliders based at this airport: 84% single-engine, 12% multi-engine, and 4% glider.

Other sources

 * Essential Air Service documents (Docket OST-1998-3344) from the U.S. Department of Transportation:
 * Order 2001-6-22 (June 28, 2001): selecting Big Sky Airlines, to provide essential air service at Ephrata/Moses Lake, Washington, for a two-year period at an annual subsidy of $479,702.
 * Order 2004-12-18 (December 30, 2004): selecting Big Sky Transportation Company, Inc., to continue providing essential air service (EAS) at Ephrata/Moses Lake, Washington, for a new two-year period. This order establishes a subsidy of $1,698,922 per year for service consisting of twelve nonstop round trips to Portland and six nonstop round trip to Boise each week.
 * Order 2006-6-8 (June 12, 2006): directing interested persons to show cause why the department should not terminate the subsidy eligibility of Ephrata/Moses Lake, Washington, under the essential air service (EAS) program and allow Big Sky Transportation Company, Inc., d/b/a Big Sky Airlines (Big Sky) to suspend service there as of August 1, 2006.
 * Order 2006-8-16 (August 22, 2006): terminating the subsidy eligibility of Ephrata/Moses Lake, Washington, under the essential air service (EAS) program and allowing Big Sky Transportation Company, Inc., d.b.a. Big Sky Airlines to suspend service, if it chooses.

title: Grant County International Airport


text:
Talk:Exercise Reforger

Deleted Text

 * Various combat and support units were involved. Approximately 100,000 troops and dependents were withdrawn from units in Germany and reassigned to various sites in the continental US.

 * The 30th Medical Battalion was one of those support units. One company of that battalion was the 595th Medical Clearing Company, moved from Crailsheim to Ft. Devens, Mass. This unit was airlifted from Munich International Airport in May or June of 1968 by the USAF. Married troops and dependents flew commercial jets to their destinations while other troops were flown back to the US via a C-141 to McGuire AFB and bussed to Ft. Devens.

 * All vehicles, tents, and assigned medical equipment was brought to full strength as assigned. A level 2 priority was assigned for back-ordered equipment and vehicles.  Items that had been on order for years was finally delivered and immediately turned in for storage.  Level 2 priority was said to be a combat level priority. (Spc 5 Bill Thomas(bfthomas@alltel.net)

I deleted the above as unencyclopedic. It seems to be a personal story and a personal e-mail address. Paul, in Saudi 04:01, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I remember some more detailed things on one of the earlier reforgers like that, it was a pretty big deal, but that one does not seem to do it as well.

I can research and better expand the REFORGER entry, I just was flipping through and noticed that wording that I knew was incomplete since I was stationed in Germany and involved in the exercises at the time, participating in REFORGER 88, 90 and Caravan Gaurd 88 and 89. REFORGER is the Forces Return exercise, and CG is a practice of what occurs prior to REFORGER with native units only. Reforger also included Canadian forces(4 CMBG) and german troops.
 * True. I was in REFORGER 79 & 81. I worked for NATO Central Army Group (CENTAG) in the first one and was a liaison to the 5th Panzer Division in the last one. The 4th CMBG was always one of the stars every year. The NATO allies should be recorded here as well. Not listing them misses a lot of the interoperability that was a key to the exercise. 155.213.224.59 (talk) 16:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Exercise Reforger


text:
Meet the Temptations

Meet the Temptations is the debut studio album by the Temptations for the Gordy (Motown) label released in 1964. It includes most of the group's early singles, excluding only the first, "Oh Mother of Mine", and its b-side, "Romance Without Finance" (later included on a CD reissue of the LP); as well as the single "Mind Over Matter" (and its b-side "I'll Love You Till I Die"), in which the group is credited as The Pirates. The album consists entirely of previously released singles, including the group's first hit single, "The Way You Do the Things You Do".

The lineup on the cover features Eddie Kendricks, Melvin Franklin, Paul Williams, Otis Williams, and newest Temptation Davis (later David) Ruffin. Ruffin had just joined the act three months before this album was released, and actually only appears on "The Way You Do The Things You Do". The other tracks all feature original Temptation Elbridge "Al" Bryant, who was fired from the group in December 1963.

Again, excepting the hit single, these tracks all date from the Temptations' slow-selling starting period (during which some Motown staffers referred to them as the "hitless Temptations"). Despite local success in Detroit and the midwest, the Temptations released six singles that missed the Top 100 Pop & R&B charts, and one, "Dream Come True", which made it to #22 on the R&B singles chart. Most of these songs feature Paul Williams as (main) lead, while Kendricks, Bryant, Franklin, and Otis Williams were given plenty of lead lines, ad-libs and harmony vocals heard throughout the album. Kendricks was also given a small handful of songs to lead as well, including the two charting singles.

The album was originally issued only in monaural sound. A stereo remix of the album was issued along with the original mono version in 1966. The bonus tracks were added to the album in 1999.

Side one

 * 1) "The Way You Do the Things You Do" (Smokey Robinson, Bobby Rogers) (lead singer: Eddie Kendricks) 2:46
 * 2) "I Want a Love I Can See" (Robinson) (lead singer: Paul Williams) 2:33
 * 3) "(You're My) Dream Come True" (Berry Gordy, Jr.) (lead singer: Eddie Kendricks) 2:57
 * 4) "Paradise" (Gordy) (lead singers: Eddie Kendricks, Melvin Franklin) 2:52
 * 5) "May I Have This Dance" (Janie Bradford, Norman Whitfield) (lead singer: Eddie Kendricks) 2:13
 * 6) "Isn't She Pretty" (Gordy, Eddie Kendricks, Otis Williams) (lead singers: Eddie Kendricks, Otis Williams, Paul Williams, Melvin Franklin, Al Bryant) 2:45

Side two

 * 1) "Just Let Me Know" (Gordy) (lead singer: Paul Williams) 2:56
 * 2) "Your Wonderful Love" (Gordy) (lead singer: Paul Williams) 2:52
 * 3) "The Further You Look, the Less You See" (Robinson, Whitfield) (lead singer: Paul Williams) 2:21
 * 4) "Check Yourself" (Elbridge Bryant, Melvin Franklin, Gordy, Otis Williams) (lead singer: Paul Williams; intro: Otis Williams, Melvin Franklin) 2:48
 * 5) "Slow Down Heart" (Robinson) (lead singers: Paul Williams, Melvin Franklin) 2:36
 * 6) "Farewell My Love" (Gordy) (lead singers: Eddie Kendricks, Melvin Franklin, Paul Williams, Al Bryant) 2:28

1999 CD reissue bonus tracks

 * 1) "Oh, Mother of Mine" (William "Mickey" Stevenson, Otis Williams) (lead singers: Eddie Kendricks, Paul Williams) 2:20
 * 2) "Romance Without Finance" (Stevenson, Kendricks) (lead singer: Paul Williams) 2:48

Outtakes and other early tracks
Technically there wasn't a recording session for this album as it was basically a collection of the group's singles and B-sides up to that point. Other tracks that were recorded along the same timeline that could have been included on the album were:
 * "My Pillow" (Robert Plaisted)*
 * Produced by William "Mickey" Stevenson, led by Eddie Kendricks & Melvin Franklin
 * (Features Franklin, Otis Williams, Al Bryant, and Paul Williams singing the chorus out front in a four-part vocal harmony)
 * "Camouflage [Version 1]" (Gordy)*
 * Produced by Berry Gordy, Jr., led by Eddie Kendricks & Melvin Franklin
 * "So Much Joy" (Bradford, Rebecca Nichols, Earl Brooks)
 * Produced by Earl Brooks, led by Paul Williams
 * "I Couldn't Cry If I Wanted To" (Whitfield, Edward Holland, Jr.)**
 * Produced by Norman Whitfield, led by Paul Williams
 * "Tear Stained Letter" (Whitfield, Bradford)*
 * Produced by Norman Whitfield, led by Paul Williams
 * "It Don't Have To Be This Way" (Clarence Paul)
 * Produced by Clarence Paul, led by Paul Williams
 * "Witchcraft (For Your Love)" (Stevenson, Robert Hamilton)**
 * Produced by William "Mickey" Stevenson & Robert Hamilton, led by Paul Williams
 * "(Talking 'Bout) Nobody But My Baby" (Whitfield, Holland)**
 * Produced by Norman Whitfield, led by Eddie Kendricks
 * "Positively Absolutely Right" (Andre Williams)
 * Produced by Andre Williams, led by Melvin Franklin, Al Bryant and Eddie Kendricks
 * "A Tear From A Woman's Eyes" (Holland–Dozier–Holland)**
 * Produced by Brian Holland & Lamont Dozier, led by Eddie Kendricks
 * All of the above tracks have subsequently been released
 * Four other tracks were released as tracks/bonus tracks on other albums

There have also been some reports (including Otis Williams’ Temptations autobiography) that some of the then-current group members were not available at the time of recording some songs. However, this cannot be substantiated by official Motown studio records. The tracks with supposedly missing group members (and the missing member/s) are:

 * "Check Yourself" (Eddie Kendricks and/or Al Bryant)
 * "May I Have This Dance" (Al Bryant)
 * "I Couldn't Cry If I Wanted To" (Al Bryant)
 * "I Want A Love I Can See" (Melvin Franklin)
 * "The Further You Look, the Less You See" (Melvin Franklin)

"A Tear From A Woman's Eyes", an H-D-H production, competed with "The Way You Do the Things You Do" (and "Just Let Me Know", "Not Now (I'll Tell You Later)", and "Give It Up") for the a-side of the group’s seventh single. It was recorded just three days before the hit song.

(*) released on Lost and Found: You've Got to Earn It (1962–1968) (**) released on the Emperors of Soul box set

Personnel
with:
 * The Temptations
 * Eddie Kendricks – vocals (tenor/falsetto)
 * Paul Williams – vocals (second tenor)
 * Melvin Franklin – vocals (bass)
 * Otis Williams – vocals (baritone)
 * Elbridge "Al" Bryant – vocals (tenor/falsetto) (all tracks except "The Way You Do the Things You Do")
 * Davis "David" Ruffin – vocals (tenor/falsetto) ("The Way You Do the Things You Do")
 * Eddie Holland – backing vocals ("Check Yourself")
 * Brian Holland – backing vocals ("Check Yourself")
 * Technical
 * Berry Gordy – "Dream Come True", "Paradise", "May I Have This Dance", "Isn't She Pretty", "Just Let Me Know", "Your Wonderful Love", "Check Yourself" and "Farewell My Love", Executive Producer (Album)
 * Smokey Robinson – "The Way You Do the Things You Do", "I Want a Love I Can See", "May I Have This Dance", "Just Let Me Know", "The Further You Look, the Less You See", "Slow Down Heart" and "Farewell My Love", Executive Producer (Album)
 * Norman Whitfield – producer on "May I Have This Dance" and "The Further You Look, the Less You See"
 * Andre Williams and William "Mickey" Stevenson (as "Dre-Mic") – producer on "Oh, Mother of Mine" and "Romance Without Finance"
 * Bernard Yeszin, Wallace Mead - cover design, photography

Singles history
The main lead vocalists on each track are identified by superscripts: (a) Paul Williams, (b) Eddie Kendricks, (c) Al Bryant, (d) Otis Williams, (e) Melvin Franklin.

 * "Oh Mother of Mine" a, b
 * Miracle single 5 (originally a non-album single; CD bonus track), July 24, 1961; b-side: "Romance Without Finance" a, b
 * "Check Yourself" a, (intro: d, e)
 * Miracle single 12, November 7, 1961; b-side: "Your Wonderful Love" a
 * "(You're My) Dream Come True" b
 * Gordy single 7001, March 16, 1962; b-side: "Isn't She Pretty" (recorded 1961) c, a, b, e, d
 * "Paradise" b, e
 * Gordy single 7010, September 26, 1962; b-side: "Slow Down Heart" a, e
 * "Mind Over Matter (I'm Gonna Make You Mine)" b (credited as The Pirates)
 * Mel-O-Dy single 105 (non-album single), September 29, 1962; b-side: "I'll Love You Till I Die" a (The Pirates)
 * "I Want A Love I Can See" a
 * Gordy single 7015, March 18, 1963; b-side: "The Further You Look, the Less You See" a
 * "Farewell My Love" a, b, c, e
 * Gordy single 7020, June 25, 1963; b-side: "May I Have This Dance" (recorded 1962)* b, e
 * "The Way You Do the Things You Do" b
 * Gordy single 7028, January 23, 1964; b-side: "Just Let Me Know" (recorded 1963) a, c

(*) Elbridge "Al" Bryant was originally credited as the lead on "May I Have This Dance". In fact the first tenor lead on this song was actually performed by Eddie Kendricks singing in his natural tenor, as well as his falsetto on the end. Other songs with Kendricks’ natural singing voice include "My Pillow", "Camouflage [Version 1]", and "Way Over There" (from The Temptations Sing Smokey).

Chart history

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

title: Meet the Temptations


text:
Carreg Cennen Castle

Carreg Cennen Castle (Castell Carreg Cennen) is a castle sited on a high rocky outcrop overlooking the River Cennen, close to the village of Trap, four miles south east of Llandeilo in Carmarthenshire, Wales. Castell Carreg Cennen means castle on a rock next to (the river) Cennen, the river name itself being a reference either to cen meaning lichen or perhaps a personal name.

The dramatic limestone precipice was originally the site of a native Welsh castle, possibly constructed by The Lord Rhys (d. 1197), although any remains of this castle have been subsumed by later English work. In 1277, during the conquest of Wales by Edward I, the English gained control of the castle. It was briefly retaken by Welsh forces in 1282, but was back under English control by the following year, when it was granted to the English baron John Giffard (d. 1299). The castle was unsuccessfully besieged by Owain Glyndŵr during the Welsh Revolt. During the Wars of the Roses it was surrendered to the Yorkists and slighted in 1462 to prevent further use.

The castle visible today was probably constructed by John Giffard and his son John (d. 1322). It is situated within the Brecon Beacons National Park and is now in the care of Cadw, the Welsh Government historic environment service.

Description
Carreg Cennen Castle consists of a strongly-walled and towered square court. There are six towers, all of different shapes, including a great twin-towered gatehouse on the north side. A range of apartments on the east side of the inner court, or ward, includes a hall, kitchens, chapel, and the so-called 'King's Chamber'. This chamber has a well-carved stone fireplace, and traceried windows, one facing into the courtyard, the other outwards commanding impressive views to the south. These date from the late 13th or early 14th century.

The castle is protected by limestone cliffs to the south and rock-cut ditches to the west. To the north and east there is an outer ward, and within that a barbican, gatehouse. Three drawbridges over deep pits protected the access to the inner ward. In the south-east corner of the inner ward steps lead to a vaulted passage and a natural cave beneath the castle, which leads deep into the hillside. A freshwater spring rises in the cave, which would have been a useful supplement during dry weather when the castle would have had difficulty harvesting rainwater in filling the rainwater cisterns. The castle is under the care of Cadw, who have stabilised and, to a limited extent, restored some of the remains. The castle is accessed via a steep climb up the hill from Castell Farm, which is near the car park. A large threshing barn has been converted to tearooms and a shop, whilst the majority of the farm buildings, around a traditional farmyard, retain their agricultural purposes. Since 1982 these have been part of a farm park with rare and unusual breeds of cows and sheep. This castle did not have a keep as such; the gatehouse acted as the castle's keep because this was the tallest part of the Castell Carreg.

Geology
The Carreg Cennen Disturbance, a zone of ancient geological faults and folds stretching from Pembrokeshire to Shropshire, gains its name from this location where it is most impressively revealed. The rocky outcrop on which the castle is perched is an isolated block of Carboniferous Limestone trapped within two faults which form a part of the disturbance. In contrast, the immediately surrounding countryside is underlain by Old Red Sandstone. This disturbance is probably also responsible for the alignment of the Afon Cennen to the west of this location where the river follows the line of the fault for over 2.5 mi / 4 km because firstly glaciers during the Ice Age then more recently the river have found it easier to erode these deformed rocks.

Prehistoric evidence
Human remains found in a cave inside the limestone rock date human activity here back to prehistoric times. The site may well have also been an Iron Age hillfort.

Roman coins from the 1st and 2nd century have also been found, although it is unlikely the Romans occupied this site on a permanent basis.

Welsh period
The first masonry castle was probably built by The Lord Rhys, and remained a possession of the Deheubarth dynasty for the next 50 years. The earliest documented mention of the castle is 1248, when Brut y Tywysogion records that Rhys Fychan ap Rhys Mechyll's mother Matilda de Braose, to spite her son, granted the castle to the Norman English, but before the English took possession of it Rhys captured the castle.

For the next 30 years it changed hands frequently between Rhys and his uncle Maredudd, who were fighting for control of the Kingdom of Deheubarth. In 1277, at the start of the conquest of Wales by Edward I, the Welsh lords of the region sided with Edward against the Welsh leader Llywelyn ap Gruffudd and the castle was handed over to the English. In 1282, a second phase of fighting began and the local Welsh nobles switched sides, joining the widespread Welsh rebellion and seizing control of the castle. By the following year it was back in English hands.

English period
In 1283 Edward I granted the castle to John Giffard, the commander of the English troops at Cilmeri where Llywelyn ap Gruffudd was killed. Giffard was probably responsible for the remodelled castle we see today; reconstruction occurred in phases, and it is likely the work was completed under his son, John.

Rhys ap Maredudd briefly captured Carreg Cennen during a rebellion against English rule in 1287, although he did not retain control of the castle for long.

Glyndŵr rebellion
In early July 1403 Owain Glyndŵr, together with 800 men, attacked Carreg Cennen, but, although inflicting severe damage to the walls, failed to take the castle. It was defended against Glyndwr's forces, who laid siege to it for several months, with Owain himself present, by a man who was to marry one of Glyndwr's daughters just a few years later, Sir John Scudamore of Herefordshire.

Wars of the Roses
The damage was repaired in 1409, and by the mid-fifteenth century had come into the possession of the Duchy of Lancaster. Its custodian was Gruffudd ap Nicolas. During the Wars of the Roses, Carreg Cennen became a Lancastrian stronghold. The Yorkist victory at the Battle of Mortimer's Cross in 1461 forced Gruffudd's sons to surrender the castle. The Yorkists subsequently set about demolishing (slighting) it with a team of 500 men.

Recent history
Ownership of the castle passed to the Vaughan and Cawdor families, and from the 18th century it started to attract artists. J. M. W. Turner painted the castle in 1798. The second Earl Cawdor began an extensive renovation in the 19th century, and in 1932 Carreg Cennen was given to the guardianship of the Office of Works. In the 1960s Carreg Cennen Castle was acquired by the Morris family of Castell Farm, when Lord Cawdor's legal team made a mistake in the wording of the deeds and included the castle as part of the farm. Today, the castle remains privately owned by Margaret and Bernard Llewellyn, daughter and son in law of the late Mr. Gwilim Morris. The castle is now maintained by Cadw. It is open daily from 9.30am to 5.00pm between April and October and 9.30 to 4.30pm between November and March (closed Christmas Day).

title: Carreg Cennen Castle


text:
File:Lilies-dvd.jpg

Lilies DVD cover

title: File:Lilies-dvd.jpg


text: File:Tempts-gettin-ready.jpg

title: File:Tempts-gettin-ready.jpg


text:
Fargo Air Museum

The Fargo Air Museum is an aviation related museum in Fargo, North Dakota. It is located at Hector International Airport in the northern part of the city. The museum includes many historic aircraft of which 90% are in flying condition.

History

The museum broke ground on a Beck-Odegaard Wing in August 2013. In 2016, the museum acquired a 1944 tractor that served as an aircraft tug at Naval Air Station Atlantic City during World War II.

The museum announced a partnership with North Dakota State University Archives in April 2022 to help preserve the museum's archives.

The museum will be opening a new exhibit about the early years of the North Dakota Air National Guard in January 2024.

Aircraft on display

Airworthy aircraft

 * Aero L-39 Albatros
 * Cessna O-1 Bird Dog
 * Douglas DC-3 "Duggy"
 * Fairchild PT-19
 * Focke-Wulf Fw 190 – Half-scale model
 * Lancair 360
 * Meyer's Little Toot
 * North American Harvard Mk IV
 * North American P-51D Mustang
 * Piper J-3 Cub
 * Piper PA-46-350P Malibu Mirage
 * Rearwin Skyranger
 * Rutan Long-EZ
 * Schleicher K7
 * Taylorcraft L-2
 * Velocity SE-FG

Static display aircraft

 * Bell UH-1 Iroquois
 * General Atomics MQ-1 Predator
 * McDonnell F-101B Voodoo
 * North American B-25 Mitchell
 * Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk – 1:1 Scale Model
 * Pitts Special
 * PZL TS-11 Iskra
 * Standard J-1
 * Vultee BT-13 Valiant – Under restoration
 * Wright Flyer – Replica

title: Fargo Air Museum


text:
Grape juice

Grape juice is obtained from crushing and blending grapes into a liquid. In the wine industry, grape juice that contains 7–23 percent of pulp, skins, stems and seeds is often referred to as must. The sugars in grape juice allow it to be used as a sweetener, and fermented and made into wine, brandy, or vinegar.

In North America, the most common grape juice is purple and made from Concord grapes while white grape juice is commonly made from Niagara grapes, both of which are varieties of native American grapes, a different species from European wine grapes. In California, Sultana (known there as 'Thompson Seedless') grapes are sometimes diverted from the raisin or table market to produce white juice.

Grape juice can be made from all grape varieties after reaching appropriate maturity. Because of consumers' preferences for characteristics in colour, flavour and aroma, grape juice is primarily produced from American cultivars of Vitis labrusca.

History

The method of pasteurizing grape juice to halt fermentation has been attributed to an American physician and dentist, Thomas Bramwell Welch, in 1869. A supporter of the temperance movement, he produced a non-alcoholic wine to be used for church services in his hometown of Vineland, New Jersey. His fellow parishioners continued to prefer and use regular wine. His son, Charles E. Welch, who was also a dentist, eventually gave up his practice to promote grape juice. In 1893, he founded Welch's Grape Juice Company at Westfield, New York. The product was given to visitors at international exhibitions. The oldest extant structure associated with the company is Welch Factory Building No. 1, located at Westfield, and listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1983.

As the temperance movement grew, so did the popularity of grape juice. In 1913, US Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan served grape juice instead of wine during a full-dress diplomatic function, and in 1914, Josephus Daniels, Secretary of the Navy, forbade any alcoholic drinks on board of naval ships, actively replacing them with grape juice. During World War I, the company supplied "grapelade", a type of grape jam, to the military and advertised aggressively. Subsequent development of new grape products and sponsorship of radio and television programs made the company successful.

Ingredients and composition
Grape juice from concentrate means that excess water from the grapes was removed, making the juice more concentrated. This allows the juice to be compressed and frozen to make packaging and transporting easier. Water is then added to the juice before being sold. A major brand of American grape juice – Welch's – is made from Concord grapes, using the entire grape (pulp, skin and seeds). A small amount of citric acid is naturally found in grapes, and may be added for tart taste and antioxidant properties which inhibit oxidation, leading to a longer storage life.

Production

Around mid-September in the northern hemisphere, the grapes are harvested mechanically, using a grape harvesting machine (e.g. Chisholm-Ryder grape harvester), and placed in a bulk box that is transported separately by a tractor or truck. The harvested grapes are then delivered to the processing facility within 4 to 6 hours. (p93)

A rotating perforated drum removes any stems and leaves that remain attached to the grapes. Once they are detached from the stems, the grapes are subsequently crushed and pass through the holes of the drum. Stems, leaves and other residuals continue along the drum to be removed as waste. (p93) The crushed grapes are heated to 60 °C as they move through a shell and tube heat exchanger. A press aid (e.g. sterilized rice hulls, bleached Kraft paper, ground wood pulp) and a pectinase enzyme are two components that are both added to the grapes at this point for effective juice pressing. The mash of the grapes and press aid is pressed at high temperatures for maximal yield of colour and juice. (p95) There are various types of pressing equipment that can be used for this process (screw, hydraulic, belt, and pneumatic). (p96) Pressed juice and free run juice are held in slurry tanks. The press aid is added to the juice, serving as a filter when the juice undergoes rotary vacuum belt filtration to remove insoluble solids. The juice contains minimal insoluble solids (1% or lower) after filtration. (p97-98) The filtered juice is heated to 85 - 88 C for at least 1 minute and is then cooled to -1.1 - 0 C before it is stored in tanks. The stored juice may undergo necessary re-pasteurization if there is any presence of alcohol, yeasts and moulds. (98–99) Additional pectinase is added to speed up and simplify the final filtration process. This filtration process involves diatomaceous earth suspended in the grape juice as it passes through a pre-coated pad or plate. The latter two processes are intended to reduce or prevent sedimentation once the juice is bottled and stored for a long duration of time. (p99-100)

There are other process alternatives that can be applied to the processing grape juice, including cold-pressing the juice, and adding sulfur dioxide to the juice. (p101-104) The juice can be further processed by removing water to produce a pure concentrate that can be used in a variety of juice products.

Packaging and storage
Hot filling is traditionally used to package grape juice. In this process, grape juice is heated to a minimum of 77-82 °C using a heat exchanger before the juice is poured into preheated containers made of materials such as glass or newer, heat resistant plastics. Glass presents a more high quality appearance, but can also be quite fragile and bulky compared to plastics. Pasteurization can also be used afterwards to prolong its shelf life by heating the juice to 85 °C for 3 min before cooling it down. At the highest quality of retention, unopened grape juice can be stored for 6–12 months unrefrigerated. After opening, grape juice can be stored for approximately 7–10 days in the refrigerator before spoilage occurs.

Aseptic processing can also be used, which requires the grape juice to be sterilized before packaging. There are different methods of sterilization. Sterile filtration can be used for clarified grape juice with no particulate matter, which uses membranes with a pore size that is small enough to filter out microorganisms (<0.45 μm). Thermal sterilization can also be used by heating the juice to a temperature of 93-100 °C for 15–45 seconds. Additionally, the container itself must also be sterilized with a chemical sterilizing agent like hydrogen peroxide. This process is beneficial for packaging materials such as Tetra Paks that cannot withstand high temperatures. The containers must then be filled in a sterile environment and can be stored for at least 6 months unrefrigerated. Although aseptic packaging is more costly, it maximizes shelf life and results in less heat damage and nutrient losses compared to hot filling.

Grape varieties
Commercial grape juice does not use the same varieties of grapes known for eating as "table grapes". Due to the large selection of grape varieties, considerations that go into the choice of grape species include factors such as consumer preferences, grape disease resistance, and tolerance to climate. The purple-skinned Concord grape is the most common grape used for juice in North America due to its durability to its environment and its labrusca flavour that comes from its methyl anthranilate properties. This type of grape can also be used for wines and jelly. The green grapes that are used for white grape juice lack the phytochemicals that give their purple counterparts their dark colour.

Catholicism
In certain circumstances, the Catholic Church allows mustum to be used instead of fermented wine for the celebration of the Eucharist. Mustum is defined as "grape juice that is either fresh or preserved by methods that suspend its fermentation without altering its nature (for example, freezing)."

Protestantism
Some Protestant denominations (specifically those which oppose the use of alcoholic beverages by members) use grape juice in their celebration of the Eucharist. The Baptist and Methodist denominations are the most notable.

Judaism
Alcohol is permitted by traditional Jewish law and wine is used for sacramental purposes. The Jewish legal code, the Talmud, in tractate Bava Batra 97b, permits the use of unfermented fresh grape juice for sacramental use. Later legal codes have ruled that while wine is preferable to grape juice, grape juice is permitted for blessings and rituals such as Shabbat, the Jewish Sabbath.

title: Grape juice


text: User talk:68.206.10.248

title: User talk:68.206.10.248


text: User talk:24.178.60.144

title: User talk:24.178.60.144


text:
Lansing Hoskins Beach

Lansing Beach (June 18, 1860 – April 2, 1945) was a U.S. Army officer who served for a time as Chief of Engineers.

Early life
Born in Dubuque, Iowa, Beach graduated third in a class of thirty-seven in the United States Military Academy (USMA) class of 1882 and was commissioned in the Corps of Engineers of the United States Army. Among his classmates there at the academy were several men who would, like Beach himself, eventually attain the rank of brigadier general or higher during their military careers, such as Edward Burr, Adelbert Cronkhite, John T. Thompson, Charles Treat, Edward A. Millar, Richard W. Young, Benjamin Alvord Jr., George W. McIver, Henry T. Allen, William H. Sage, and Thomas B. Dugan, and William H. Allaire.

Military career
Beach developed plans for the reconstruction of the Muskingum River locks and dams soon after Ohio ceded the state-built improvements to the federal government in 1887. From 1894 to 1901 he worked on public improvements in the District of Columbia, serving as Engineer Commissioner there in 1898–1901. As Detroit District Engineer in 1901–05, he oversaw harbor improvements as far west as Duluth. Beach supervised improvements along the Louisiana Gulf Coast in 1908–12 and in Baltimore in 1912–15. He also oversaw the entire Gulf Division in six of those seven years and the Central Division in 1915–20. In the latter capacity and as Chief of Engineers, he oversaw construction of the huge Wilson Locks and Dam on the Tennessee River. Beach also served on the Mississippi River Commission and the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors. After his four-year tour as Chief of Engineers, he retired on June 18, 1924. After retirement, General Beach served as consulting engineer for various business interests in the United States and Mexico. He was President of the American Society of Military Engineers, and a member of the International Water Commission from 1924 to 1930.

Beach died in Pasadena, California on April 2, 1945. He was interred at Arlington National Cemetery beside his wife Anna May (Dillon) Beach (1861–1934) on January 29, 1946.

title: Lansing Hoskins Beach


text:
G70

G70 may refer to:

 * GeForce 7 series, a graphics processing unit
 * G70 Fuzhou–Yinchuan Expressway, a road in China
 * HMAS Queenborough (G70), a ship
 * Genesis G70, a car
 * designation of 7th generation BMW 7 Series

title: G70


text: User talk:203.22.214.3

title: User talk:203.22.214.3


text:
User talk:Yonir

LOSP
The reason I mention the 27 Google hits is that, by comparison, "liero game" draws 633 hits before "similar results" kicks in. Similarly, "worms game" gets between 600 and 700, as does "halo game". "mario game" comes in at 757. It seems to me, at least, that a notability threshold is pretty easy to establish. A program of mine draws 202 and I know it's not notable. So that's where I'm coming from on this. I'm putting it here rather than on the VfD as I don't want to unnecessarily bias other voters; your page certainly deserves a fair shake. — Lomn | Talk / RfC 04:10:54, 2005-08-26 (UTC)

Well, I don't think that "LOSP Liero Open Source Project" is the best string for results, as it is usually reffered to as LOSP, this just gives only relevant results. Anyway, I go to sleep now (It's.. 7:18am here.....)
 * I would agree, but if you try, say, "losp liero", you only improve to 32. "LOSP" itself is too common to get a baseline with, but this one seems to disambiguate real fast. — Lomn | Talk / RfC 04:24:54, 2005-08-26 (UTC)

Was going to sleep, but thought about that " game" is not a very good line for searching things, "LOSP game" gives 137 results.. Yonir 04:31, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Signatures
You sign pages by typing " ~ " — Lomn | Talk / RfC 04:23:41, 2005-08-26 (UTC)

Signature works :> Yonir 04:32, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Shalom
They call it a Barnstar:

Scott 11:44:58, 2005-09-04 (UTC)

Thanks :o I didn't do too much though Yonir 17:43, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

So what take it! Scott 17:45:08, 2005-09-04 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:LOSP.png
File:LOSP.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:LOSP.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 10:05, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

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

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

title: User talk:Yonir


text:
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Terri Schiavo/archive1

Re: Schiavo Fac nom.: I told you so
Mark, (and I shall cross-post it to Violet Riga’s page -and the Schiavo talk and nomination pages)

As the Terri Schiavo nomination was being considered, I hinted (and may have outright said??) that its nomination would actually increase stability (even though you thought that the article was indeed moderately stable at some point).

However, the lack of nomination has de-stabilized it. All out edit warring and a PAGE LOCK has now occurred. I told you that the article should have been nominated -and accepted -I told you so. (No offense meant.)

Here, to prove my allegations that the "Front Page" status would stabilize it are these diffs:

 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Template_messages/Maintenance&diff=22810758&oldid=22664771#Protections

 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Template_messages/Maintenance&diff=22812630&oldid=22812588#New_template

In these diffs, the creation of a new template to handle this problem has been suggested and -even after much exposure -not opposed -and why should they be? Since it is fair to "lock" images on the front page, why not articles as well -to avoid, for example, pornographic or foul language vandalism.

Anyhow, I wanted to give the article time to be reviewed, but now I regret my decision to wait: It was ready for Fac status, but now it is sliding in the opposite direction -and the edit warring was due in large part to FuelWagon, who has, in the past, opposed clear concensus -and, yes, I provide the diffs to verify my allegations.

The page is locked, and (other than one over-worked admin who has a second job AND college classes), NO HELP IS IN SIGHT.

I made blood sacrifices (literally, due to the energy/stress expended) to obtain a relevant "references" section and non-Fair-Use images and clean up the article.

This problem happened on your watch: Help .--GordonWattsDotCom 21:26, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

My proposed solution:

 * My proposed solution would be to do this, and in this order:
 * 1: Re-Nominate Terri Schiavo, a sentiment shared by many.
 * 2: Feature it as a Featured Article.
 * 3: Lock the images with the existing tools.
 * 4: Lock the article with "Gordon's Tool," the newly created template, shown at the diffs above.
 * 5: Grab a cold one, most preferably non-alcoholic, and relax for a well-earned rest.
 * --GordonWattsDotCom 23:09, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I've listed your new ProtectedMainPageArticle template for deletion. Locking articles on the main page is not standard procedure. --Carnildo 00:06, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

 * "Locking articles on the main page is not standard procedure." Oh? Then, why, pray tell, must you insist on not deleting these "Locking images" templates, displayed here? (and shown below)

 * * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Mpimgprotected

 * * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:ProtectedMainPageImage

 * Apparently, there is sufficient reason, namely vandalism, to have these templates -both sets. See the template talk page here here please before you act in a way which contradicts your own lack of actions in regards to the image protect templates.--GordonWattsDotCom 00:27, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Images are locked because otherwise they will frequently get overwritten by Image:Autofellatio2.jpg. Similarly, Main Page is protected, as are Template:Main Page banner, Template:In the news, Template:Wikipedialang, Template:WikipediaSister, Template:donate, Template:newpagelinksmain, and the current Today's featured article, Selected anniversaries, and Today's second feature subpages.  The idea is to keep the visible contents of the main page under control.  Featured articles are not visible on the main page, so they are not locked. --Carnildo 02:54, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, I understand that the images are more sensative, and need more protection, so if the concensus is this much against me, y'all go ahead and play loose and easy and allow max-access, if you like; It's wiki, after all! ** I really didn;t mean to give you hell and be annoying -I was just trying to help keep sensitive things protected, but moderation rules the day -right or wrong (a little of both, I imagine). --Thx for your clarifications, Carnildo.--GordonWattsDotCom 05:29, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

This page has been archived
This page has been archived, link here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Terri_Schiavo/archive1

(Apparently, what is written into this page is copied to the archive1 file too.)

(cur) (last) 04:53, 5 September 2005 GordonWattsDotCom m (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Terri Schiavo moved to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Terri Schiavo/archive1)

--GordonWattsDotCom 04:58, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Refactoring & Placing new news at the top: GNU FDL Images Obtained!
OK, this should take care of some of the major remaining concerns: These photos are all released under GFDL, and they fall into three categories:

 * 1. Those photos that would "stylistically" fit into the Schiavo article (most of the pictures).

 * 2. A few photos of me (or a sign with my name on it) to prove that I took the photos, not someone else -that is, proof that I didn't snatch them off someone's website under "Fair Use."

 * 3. One "test" photo. (I had to test the camera out before I drove across the state!)

The images are stored as indicated below, and in multiple places, but I have not, as yet, uploaded them to commons.--GordonWattsDotCom 23:03, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

The recent "Fair Use" Controversy

 * I agree: it is possible to use fair use images to illustrate this article. All Image:TerriSchiavo2.jpg and Image:Schiavo catscan.jpg need is for someone to make sure all the requirements for using fair use images are covered (see Fair use and Image description page).  Image:Schiavo.jpg, on the other hand, has problems.  The claim is that it is used to illustrate Terri's post-brain-damage behaviour, but since it's a single frame of a video, it shows no such thing.  Image:Terri Schiavo grave.jpg simply cannot be used on Wikipedia as a fair use image, since it's quite possible for a Wikipedian to replace it with a free image. --Carnildo 20:42, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * "Image:Schiavo.jpg, on the other hand, has problems. The claim is that it is used to illustrate Terri's post-brain-damage behaviour, but since it's a single frame of a video, it shows no such thing." OK, I fixed that on the pic page at this diff, Revision as of: 10:01, 3 September 2005 (UTC). Now, the comments on the actual article, on the other hand, are not biased: The text in the diff, giving both sides of the story, was drawn from the page, so the only concern you have left is regarding the grave site. I would prefer to ask Mark (aka Raul654) whether or not we need to send me out to the grave site at this time.--GordonWattsDotCom 10:05, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

The recent "Word Count" Controversy
Since I know there is a concern here, let me point out that User:Justsomechick made a post on my page with this concern, and I finally analyzed and replied. Since the analysis was instructive to me, other editors might find it interesting or useful, so, here it is reprinted in another "little box," OK?

 * --GordonWattsDotCom 10:11, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

 * ADDITIONAL COMMENTS on Just Some Chick's POST:
 * "through the use of a few (but not too many) sub-articles." Already covered. We have several sub-articles at present time. "FWIW, I thought everything through "Petition to Remove Feeding Tube" was very good and needs very few changes" A collective "Thank you" to you! "it's from "...Schiavo I" forward that I got lost." Sorry. It happens to the best of us, if we've been reading and get fatigue. "Also, since I'm here, I think the page numbers of the references you (or the collective you, since I'm not sure who did this) used belong where the other references are at the bottom - it's almost redundant as is since there are footnotes pointing to the source anyway, and it messes with the word flow." Well, I am the one who did that, and some feel that page numbers are needed at each juncture, so putting them at the bottom may be worse, since there are several sentences for each reference-note at the bottom, and each sentence may have a different page number -but that is just my opinion on the style used. I like it for how it "verifies" the page number too! "Good luck, I think it would be really cool to have it as an FA, and I hope to vote support in the near future." Thanks. "Have a good weekend." And you too and the other editors here as well.--GordonWattsDotCom 10:21, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

The rest of the comments
Well, the recent talk on the talk page has people from all sides either agreeing the article is great or simple silence -no actual complaints which I can recall -in the recent past that is. (Let me add that this is both a controversial -and a well-known -topic, and thus it should be a featured article if it can be protected from vandalism. MAIN REASON: Public interest on this topic from people on both sides --all sides --of the issue.) GordonWattsDotCom 04:11, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * All these math and science majors, but illogical comments. Wow! OK, let me try to reply below...--GordonWattsDotCom 06:39, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Object strongly. Here's the short list of what's wrong with the article: TOCright breaks the manual of style, the TOC (with its 37 sections) is quite overwhelming, the article has no introduction, it has no references section to complement the inline linking, it has a see also section (which should be converted to prose, inserted into the article, and the section deleted), every image used in the article is fair use, and it's 80 kilobytes long and should be shortened and/or broken into subarticles. →Raul654 04:34, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * "TOCright breaks the manual of style" Well, why do we even have a TOCleft if it's "wrong," Mark? Here's why: Raul654, the Table of Contents on the left side would be adjacent to the "sub-articles" contents box, and this would not only look funny but also maybe get people confused into thinking that they are the same thing; They are different: The Table of contents is for that page, and the other box is for related articles. "the article has no introduction" It does. Take a look at the first paragraph. Is that not an introduction? "it has no references section to complement the inline linking," OK, I agree with you on this point: You are welcome to add links to other pages, for example, some of my personal pages offer additional resources, but they have been voted down by other editors who didn't understand that the vanity policy only discouraged links to your own pages -and did not fully prohibit such. If you can fix this, then do. If not, we can ignore, as it's "close enough" to please me. "it has a see also section" OK, I must have missed that. Could you be more specific on exactly what paragraph you mean here? "every image used in the article is fair use" So? Have we violated policy? (I link to the laws below.) "and it's 80 kilobytes long and should be shortened and/or broken into subarticles" We've already broken it into sub-articles. Do you want us to tear it into small grains of sand. This article could even be longer (it was a "long ordeal" for the nation and the news media -and the family), but I think we've struck the right balance.--GordonWattsDotCom 06:39, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Erm, that box needs to be eliminated (along with the see also section), and the article broken up into sub articles with template:main. See our Evolution featured article to see an example of doing this properly. →Raul654 06:44, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, I think this is a minor style difference, and if you want to change the format to say "main article" instead of "see also," I don't think it would create a fire-storm, but be careful: We've hammered out a lot of problems and have concensus after much work.
 * Um, no disrespect intended, but after reading your replies, I have to ask - have you actually looked at any featured articles? Or, for that matter, What is a featured article?
 * I haven't studied featured articles, no, but I have seen a lot of other articles and think the Schiavo one can hold it's own, and yes, I did read the rules. Look at my very first edit on this page before ZScout removed some extra quotations of the rules.--GordonWattsDotCom 07:40, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The introduction: Compare the introduction on Terri Schiavo with the introduction on today's featured article, Angkor Wat. The latter has an introduction that gives all the essentials, the who-what-when-where-why, whereas the Schiavo article has a single sentence that only describes, in the vaguest sense, who she was. "The lead should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it could stand on its own as a concise version of the article... The appropriate length of the lead section depends on the total length of the article." - Lead section. For an article of this size, an introduction of 2-3 paragraphs is appropriate; a single sentence is not.
 * Good point, but some others insisted in including extra stuff -it still is good to the reader.--GordonWattsDotCom 07:40, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The images: "A featured article should... Have images where appropriate, with good captions and acceptable copyright status" - What is a featured article. Fair use, while tolerated to a certain extent on Wikipedia, is generally to be avoided on featured articles except in the most limited of circumstances (generally when no alternative is available)
 * I'm not an expert here. You are welcome to fix the image legality situation, and then we can have a better article.--GordonWattsDotCom 07:40, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The references section: We are not going to ignore featured article requirements because the editors on the article are too shortsited or ignorant of policies to permit it. Featured article criteria are not subject to negotiation.
 * Good point. This should be easy to fix for a person with authority like you. Can you put in the right links, eh?--GordonWattsDotCom 07:40, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * See-also: This section needs to be turned from a list into prose. If something is worth linking to in an article, it should be given in the form of a sentence indicating its relation to the subject.
 * Minor and easy to fix -if you'd like.--GordonWattsDotCom 07:47, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The sub-articles: There are exactly three Terry Schiavo subarticles (at least I only found 3 - the organization of this article is such that these things could be easily overlooked). The ones I found were - Terri Schiavo timeline, Palm Sunday Compromise, Schiavo memo. The fact the main article is 80 kilobytes, and the sub articles are stubby (not counting the timeline which is actually a list) is indicative of serious organizational problems. →Raul654 07:20, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * The organization is clear to me: Under Terri_Schiavo, I found a WHOLE bunch of sub-articles; Also, under Terri_Schiavo, we find this link clearly visible beneath the title: (Gordon Watts; I signed below, but had to split this paragraph due to the format of the link breaking the paragraph here in two.)
 * You did spot several sub-article, but there are LOTS, so the article IS sub-divided properly, in my honest opinion. Have you been up many hours? How could you have missed so many links here?--GordonWattsDotCom 07:47, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, I've gone ahead and fixed most of the problems. However, the article still needs references (specifically, it has plenty of html commented references; people need to uncomment them into some acceptable inline style, and compile them into a references section) and add copyleft images. Also, given all the changes, it's rather unstable ATM (50% of the article disappeared or changed overnight) so if/when this nom fails, it might be a good idea to renominate it again in a couple weeks. →Raul654 02:24, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

 * Object. Way to long, and I can't see how this can ever be completely NPOVed. WegianWarrior 04:57, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, WegianWarrior, it is long, but it would be longer if the sub-article were still in the main article -but some other editors removed them; As far as the NPOV, we don't strive to have a single "neutral" view, but instead, the policy of Wikipedia states that we must present all views with equal fairness, giving prominence, of course, to the main views, but also telling of minority view. Yes, we've argued, but this is about the most agreement you can expect on this type of controversial article, so smile and be happy -and consider: What do you seek here? Is it possible and/or reasonable? What do you expect us to do with the article? If you got any ideas, you come and help us edit it; I'm getting tired and fatigued from over-work, here and in my personal life, doing double-duty.--GordonWattsDotCom 06:39, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * To quote a suggestion from the last peer review this article went thru:
 * "Terri Schiavo (blah blah 19?? - foo foo 2005) was an American woman who was in a persistent vegetative state. (no discussion of PVS should be in this article whatsoever - just link to the PVS article) Although this diagnosis was disputed by a minority of doctors who diagnosed her (refs), it was upheld a number of times by the courts (refs). Her husband, Michael Schiavo, took the decision to have her feeding tube withdrawn, a decision which was hotly contested and challenged by her parents (refs). The case garnered widespread national and international media attention, splitting the American public. A number of attempts were made by various individuals, church leaders and politicians (refs) to overturn the decision to withdraw the feeding tube, but at each stage courts upheld the original decision (refs). Eventually, Terri Schiavo passed away x days after the removal of her feeding tube on foo foo, 2005."
 * Off course, it can (and possible should) be expanded with the section on her life _up to her accident_. The rest can easily be moved into sub-articles and referred from the article. In my opinion, the article as it stands now says virtually nothing about Terri Schiavo, but a whole lot about family relationship, family breaking up, discussions on PVS, legal battles and stuff... which bloats the article something fiercely.
 * Anyhow, that’s my opinion - VMMW, but as the article stands now I must still object to it being of worthy of being a FA. As a side note, the way I understand WP:NPOV, the article itself should be neutral, as opposed to your interpretation of providing several POV’s with in the article. WegianWarrior 07:16, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * WegianWarrior, what is "VMMW?" I can not find this acronym/abbreviation, like "IMHO" stands for "In my honest opinion" and rofl stands for "rolling on the floor, laughing." Thanks in advance.--GordonWattsDotCom 07:47, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * It's a typo for YMMW - Your Mileage May Wary. Sorry for the confusion WegianWarrior 08:17, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, you must really be Norwegian, hense English may be a 2nd language. It is spelled "Vary" with a 'V', but you are doing well in English. Thank you; I should have recognized that -it was close to the right spelling.--GordonWattsDotCom 08:21, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * smiles* Off course I'm really Norwegian - I didn't pick this username randomly =) As for doing well in English - it's partly due to my line of work, partly due to other things. WegianWarrior 08:34, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * To put the length problem into perspective, this article contains approximately 10,000 words of prose, or 25 pages. Running it through some readability tests gives a Flesch-Kincaid grade level of 13 and a fog factor of 12.7 (foggy), so the average person will take 30-45 minutes to read it.  A good article will take about 20 minutes to read, and be at a 10th grade reading level. --Carnildo 05:29, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I would also explain the reason why we have to use Fair Use on the pictures here. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 05:00, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Huh? What is your explanation, and how does it relate to the qualifications and merits of the Schiavo article as a featured article?--GordonWattsDotCom 06:39, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * See Carnildo's objection below. I mainly made my statement as a comment. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 17:59, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * PS: Thanks for removing my extra quotations from the rules. I'm kind of new to the nomination stuff.
 * While you are welcome about the extra quotations (you just list on why you want to nominate the article, since you and we assume that you have met all requirements at WP:WIAFA, but until yall deal with Carnildo's objection, I will also object to this article becoming a FA. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 00:02, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Object. Needs a better intro, needs to be cleaned up, needs to be condensed, possibly moving text to sub pages, and I think it probably violates wikipedia's "Stable" requirement for FAs.  Being featured, as mentioned, would likely exacerbate an already existing problem.  I think the only way this can be fixed is time... as Terri Schiavo is moved out of "recent events" and into "history" it might be easier to get an more NPOV perspective on the issue. Fieari 05:42, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * "Needs a better intro" Well, what is wrong with it? "needs to be cleaned up" Huh? We have regular spell-checks and grammar experts who regularly keep it clean. "needs to be condensed, possibly moving text to sub pages" We already have many sub-pages; do we need more? Are you sure? If so, then help us out. If not, then please reconsider your analysis. I await your feedback.--GordonWattsDotCom 06:39, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I think you misunderstand the stability requirement - the stability requirement is meant to discourage articles that are *currently* unstable; it's not meant to apply indefinitely to the future. In the case of this article, it's only gotten 5 small edits in the last week, which (to me, as the person who wrote that requirement) is relatively stable →Raul654 05:48, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with you on this point. It (finally!) appears to be stable, and I personally think it should be protected and edited only by paid, screened, and trained professional editors, but that is my opinion and maybe not consensus, since this is "wiki," you know.--GordonWattsDotCom 06:39, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Object
 * The image Image:TerriSchiavo2.jpg is claimed as "fair use". However, it does not have either a fair-use rationale or source information.
 * The image Image:Schiavo catscan.jpg is claimed as "fair use", but does not have fair-use rationale or definitive information about who owns the copyright.
 * The image Image:Schiavo.jpg is claimed as "fair use", but it doesn't really add anything to the article. Thus, any claim of fair use is doubtful.

 * You can certainly contact http://TerrisFight.org if you have concerns about this. They have a feedback form. Alternatively, you can take a look at the laws, (our Florida state laws, Federal, and International) here, here, or here. While I'm not a lawyer, I don't think tat we violate fair use. It shouldn't be that hard. We've had NO complaints from the official Terri's Fight website, the source of most or all the images, I would imagine. Most of these people are my personal friends, and I'm sure I would have heard something about it by now if there were a problem, but if you have doubts, contact Pamela Hennessey and crew at http://TerrisFight.org --GordonWattsDotCom 06:39, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The image Image:Terri Schiavo grave.jpg is claimed as "fair use". Unless there's something really unusual about Sylvan Abbey Memorial Park, it's quite possible for a Wikipedian to take a picture of the gravesite and place the photo under a free license.  There is no reason to use a "fair use" picture here.
 * --Carnildo 06:18, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * So, what you're saying is that this is just a photo of a public area and noting proprietary about it, right? So, that should be even more reason to not worry, right? Am I missing something here?--GordonWattsDotCom 06:39, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're missing the fundamental nature of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a free content encyclopedia.  That means that other people are free to take the content and create other works from it.  This is not possible if parts of an article (such as the images) are under a non-free license such as "fair use".  In an ideal world, Wikipedia would not have a single fair-use image in it.  However, since in the real world it's hard or impossible to get free-use images for pop culture subjects, fair-use images can be used in articles.  Their use should be kept to a minimum, though. --Carnildo 07:37, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I believe the image of Terri with her mother comes from 6 hours of video that is part of the court record. Terri's parents took the video as part of a court case. They then took 4.5 minutes of that video, turned it into clips, and released it on the web. But the original images should be part of the court record. I'm not sure if that's public record or if it's sealed or what. Someone who knows the law could figure this out. FuelWagon 14:30, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * As a legal matter, you're wrong about the effect of ease of replacement on fair use. The easier it is for someone to replace a "fair-use" image with a free-use image, the harder it is to claim fair use on it. --Carnildo 07:37, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Carnildo, could you provide a legal source for that last claim (that the easier it is for someone to replace a "fair-use" image with a free-use image, the harder it is to claim fair use on it)? Cedars 08:13, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * My objection still stands. Nothing has been done about the image copyright problems. --Carnildo 19:36, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't disagree with you, but since I contributed to much of the other sections of the article, I expect someone else to address the copyright issues. That's not my specialty. Maybe, I'll catch a second wind and look into it, but don;t count on me: Those who raise the objection are expected to be the first to solve the problem, hint, hint.--GordonWattsDotCom 06:20, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Support. I don't know all things about everything, but I do feel that the Schiavo article is a good treatise about Terri. That is one reason http://Google.com rates it THIRD in the world -here: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=terri+schiavo --for this reason and those stated elsewhere in this comment/talk/discussion page, I support the nomination. Sincerely,--GordonWattsDotCom 08:08, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. I have to correct you slightly... Google don't rank it third because its a good treatise (se Proto's comment below for that btw), but because a lot of people link to the article. There is a difference between that and being 'endorse' by Google (which is how I read your comment. Again, YMMW) WegianWarrior 08:24, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Logged and noted, WegianWarrior -you're right: The high rating in GOOGLE is due to people linking to the page -not due to accuracy (and in a "wiki" format, errors can creep in) -However, who do people link to it? Very Accurate, and EXTREMELY comprehensive. That's just my guess, but google.com indirectly gives the article a "good reference."--GordonWattsDotCom 00:55, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Object. I already commented on this article on its Peer Review, and few if any of the comments from myself and other editors on the Peer Review have been actioned, yet the article has still been nominated for FA status?  Daft. Too long, too much 'he said she said', not encyclopaedic at all.  It is indeed a (fairly) good treatise.  A treatise is not an encyclopaedia article. Proto t c 08:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Support. With the recent cuts to the article, it's now a lot shorter. And I think the intro now qualifies as getting to the heart of the matter in spite of 15 years of legal wrangling and 4 trips to the US Supreme Court. FuelWagon 13:54, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

how to split it into anything smaller 4.250.168.27 19:27, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Terri Schindler: Early Life
 * Terri Schindler: Initial medical crisis
 * Terri Schindler: Rehabilitation efforts
 * Terri Schindler's malpractice suit
 * Michael Schiavo
 * PVS and the law
 * Terri Schindler's family
 * Terri Schiavo I
 * Terri Schiavo II
 * Terri Schiavo III
 * Terri Schiavo IV
 * Terri Schiavo diagnosis
 * Public opinion and activism in the Terri Schiavo case
 * Terri Schiavo's Death
 * Terri Schiavo Autopsy
 * Terri Schiavo Memorial

 * Object. This is way too long and way beyond the scope of Wikipedia. I think just the first 2 paragrphs, plus a little summing up statement of its significance should suffice. While this topic is obviously important to those close to the person, it gets a disproportionate amount of attention relative to other articles, and there is really very little in it that would interest a general public. What is needed here is some perspective. For example, the article on George Washington is less than half the size of this article. Is there really twice as much to say about Terri Schiavo than about George Washington that would actually interest a general public? This is not the forum to dispute issues, rather it is the place to put things into their proper perspective and to show how they fit with other aspects of knowledge. What is the historical significance of this case?  Why should we remember it in 20 years? What does it tell us about the United States in 2005? Nrets 18:30, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. Maybe the Washington article is too short. See below RoyBoy's comment for WHY I think it is OK for the article to be as long as it is.--GordonWattsDotCom 00:55, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Strongly object. Basically everything Raul said. It's not our job to fix the article; it's the job of those who are interested. But as long as the article does not meet the standards of a featured article, I cannot support its nomination. I'm especially annoyed by the lack of a lead section as well as the inappropriately done up references (see cite sources). And simply put, an 80kb article cannot be a featured article. A decent article has to be of a suitable length to ensure the average human being is not put off. Many consider a 40kb or 50kb article to be pushing it, but 80kb is simply way over the top. This is one case where I think we should seriously consider a few dozen subarticles. Johnleemk | Talk 16:04, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Object. As said by others, the lead is too short and the article is too long. It seems to me that in the quest to reach agreement on the article among various editors everything but the kitchen sink was dumped in. Nrets also raised an excellent point by comparing the George Washington article with the Schiavo one--if Washington's article is half this length, there is no reason for this article to be so long. The references are also not in any of the standard styles.--Alabamaboy 16:56, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Weak support just to make some points. I think FA status can be more fluid than this. Is the article long? Yes. Is the subject long. Yes. Why not sub-articles? That's all well and good but that's a hell of a lot of sub articles, and perhaps a conscious allowance for the recent occurrence of this event can allow more flexibility on that point for the time being.

Wikipedia is different; it gets to subjects fast and hard... and I understand the ethic of delivering relevant information fast and hard too (hence shorter articles). But at this moment moving things into sub articles may be premature given our ability to accumulate information as events take place. What's the waiting period, dunno, I suppose until the article is considered "stable"... and perhaps that has happened for this article since it is being nominated. Also maybe being given the FA status could be the *starting point* of moving things into sub-articles; rather than having it as a requirement a priori. - RoyBoy 800 19:48, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Good Point. Since this article has a LOT of information, "more is better" for the curious mind. Why do you think Google.com rates it so highly? ANSWER: As WegianWarrior points out, many people link to it. Why do they link to it? EXTREMELY COMPLETE and COMPREHENSIVE treatise on the subject, and yet also very accurate. That's just my take, but I think I'm right.--GordonWattsDotCom 00:55, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Yeah, I'd perhaps tweak my standard when an article should be broken up is when interest in the subject is minimal. I'd say interest in this article is still relatively high, and as such it would actually be detrimental to keep splitting things off; since for now people are more likely to be interested in a complete narrative. In future, we can split it up since obviously the majority of readers will be looking for specific facts for research; and hence the article splitting won't effect them much. Yes an encyclopedia article should be brief, but at the same time it should not be fragmented. - RoyBoy 800 15:20, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * (Quoting you) "Yes an encyclopedia article should be brief, but at the same time it should not be fragmented." I could not have said it any better, so I'll just agree that readers probably WILL NOT want to look all over for info on this case. Yes, it's been fragmented, but we can "stop while we're ahead." I think the article would be damaged if it were split into smaller parts -and would confuse curious-George readers looking for the bottom line and full story. If they don't want to read the whole thing, at least it's better to have it handy and nearby. Therefore, the problems associated "dial-up" users, for example, downloading a large page are minimal. I could download it on dialup, and I can download it even FASTER! now that i have high-speed DSL -and those T1 LAN line users can download it still faster. Yes, I agree that the "length problem" is over-stated and over-rated and exaggerated.--GordonWattsDotCom 00:13, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

In reply to Raul654's post on the talk page, right before my reply here, is now recopied here:

''OK, Mark, I've reviewed and tweaked all of your edits. After all of the fuss over the lack (or deficit) of a sufficient number of sub-articles, I don't see why you wanted to remove the sub-article box present. Plus, after all the fuss over "article length," I don't see why you like all that white space between the table of contents (left side) and the photo. I fixed both of those. I prefer the Table of contents RIGHT -as Jesus has, but I am flexible and am OK with your preference to put it on the left side. I appreciate your interest and knowledge on the issue, but please make sure your contributions don't remove positive elements and "make the natives restless."--GordonWattsDotCom 01:14, 27 August 2005 (UTC)'' --GordonWattsDotCom 01:17, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Plus, I made additional comments on your talk page.--GordonWattsDotCom 01:33, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I really like what you've done with the article; it's more uniform with the style of other articles now. I think the only reason left to object now is that the article is too long (I'm not too bothered with the fair use pictures issue). I'd try my hand at shifting certain portions to subarticles myself, but my intermittent internet access (see my user page) isn't exactly helping. Johnleemk | Talk 14:54, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * "I really like what you've done with the article..." Thanks you. I see your comments here and in the Schiavo talk page, in which you seem to Support the Fac status, with the idea that a few improvements can fix it. Most of your improvements seem, however, related to splitting the article apart to make it several smaller fragments. See my comments to RoyBoy above about that.--GordonWattsDotCom 00:13, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I support the efforts being made to improve it, which means I want to see this as a featured article. However, I do not want to compromise the criteria that all featured articles are meant to adher to. I've read your reply to RoyBoy, but I'm not convinced. Splitting an article doesn't mean it has to be ground into tiny pieces with a few dozen small articles and one medium-size main article. Rather, like with Mozilla Firefox, you should end up with several medium- to long-sized articles. Also, the main reason we prefer short articles is no longer for technical reasons but stylistic and readability issues — see Article size. Johnleemk | Talk 14:23, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Logged and noted, John. Time will tell.--GordonWattsDotCom 10:38, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I thought it was a pretty good article. One of the best 3 in the world on the topic. Maybe it will get even better after being featured. Uncle Ed 00:24, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks, for your Support Uncle Ed. I had to "translate" for you, and bold face it so it would be obvious that support is gaining. Also, Mark (aka Raul654, the Fac editor) and I (and others) are working on it, cutting it up and making it smaller and sleeker. I would prefer it be LARGE, but I feel the tide turning against me there. At least it is still a good article, so we hope and pray.--GordonWattsDotCom 02:11, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Object. The comments brought up in the PR have been completely ignored and the contributors seem to think that as long as a subject attracts a lot of dedicated editors, any reasonable definition of "encyclopedic" should be disregarded; clearly a sign that the article needs a few months (or years) to cool down. And the article is still at 60k+. Try getting it down to less than 20k if you're going to renominate it. And please, please, plsae don't write more sub-articles about Terry. At best they'll only please the contributors themselves and at worst not even that. / Peter Isotalo 22:34, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Uh...I think cutting it to less than 20k is very, very extreme. Most FAs are about 30k to 40k in size. I also don't see what's wrong with more sub-articles, as long as they're not all stubs. Johnleemk | Talk 09:01, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Object. However well this article may be written, the recentness of the subject and its bitter controversy are going to cause multiple edit wars and frivolous NPOV debates for some time yet.  For this reason, it cannot yet satisfy the 'stability requirement' necessary for featured articles.   Ingoolemo  talk 23:43, 2005 August 29 (UTC)

 * Object neutral Too long, comprehensive, but not FA-quality, Peer Review has been ignored. May change my mind after overhaul has been complete. Borisblue 22:55, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I looked at the three peer reviews, and the only MAJOR complain was "too long," but this article HAS to be long to address the subject. Your concern is noted, but unless you have specific gripes, I don't see your point in objecting. Do you have specific concerns? If so, what are they?--GordonWattsDotCom 06:20, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Strongly Object FA-status represents a lower standard that no article should aspire to. Please withdraw this nomination, and stop hacking at the article.--Silverback 06:25, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your concern Silverback, but I don't plan to hack the article into a lower energy orbit, and I think I speak for a majority of the regular Schiavo editors, even those who often disagree with me on presentation of issues (FuelWagon is a good example here). Nonetheless, I don't plan to withdraw it. Either Fac raises its standards, or we get booted on our own merit, thank you. (PS: The article, while hacked a bit, is still improved, but, no, I agree with you: It DOESN'T need to be cut, hacked, and reduced any further:-) "FA-status represents a lower standard that no article should aspire to." Thank you for being so bold to speak your mind; I don't know if you're correct or not, but a) It's a good point to consider; and b) I HOPE that you're not right about that "lower standards" thing here. --GordonWattsDotCom 06:35, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I do not believe that is a valid reason to object. If you state what changes you feel have degraded the article, then that would be a valid objection. Johnleemk | Talk 11:25, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you for supporting my quest for the full scoop, John. Silver Back may yet have good objections that would sway me to fix the article before declaring it "ready," but as of now, I think --- Mission Control -- IT'S a GO -- WE Have Liftoff. (Translation: Terri Schiavo's whipped into shape, and ready to be "featured." She can take on Rocky with just a little more training, FYI.--GordonWattsDotCom 11:31, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I have temporarily changed to neutral, although I am pessimistic about what any pressure to shorten the article will do.--Silverback 14:36, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * Object: this article, though fair, is not one I would put forward as an example of Wikipedia; I must say that the tonitruous campaing of the instigator of this nomination lead me to ponder about his motivations. Rama 11:36, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) What are my motivations? 2) Does that even matter? 3) You yourself say the article is fair, hense good, so what exactly is your objection. I had to look up "tonitruous," which means a thundering campaign on my part. Sometimes the majority is not right --remember: You are dealing with humans, whose history is less than sparkly, if you know what I mean. I think that a vote -for or against --without any expalation is really not a vote, but a defense -but a defense of what?
 * My "motives" are to show honor to the team efforts of MANY people. If I am one of them (conflict of interest), does that matter? I await any feedback on what IS wrong with it, not merely suspicians. MY EAR IS OPEN.--GordonWattsDotCom 11:44, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I said "fair", not "brilliant". If we had to feature the gazillions articles which are at least as good as this one, we'd need to feature five articles a day. As for your motivations, your instantaneous rant about "Sometimes the majority is not right", "You are dealing with humans", etc. speaks for itself. Rama 12:17, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * "Ranting and raving," ?? I merely told the truth -- you have not specifically told me the objections you have, other than to say Schiavo's not "brilliant," or that we don't have room for "five articles a day" to be featured. Is that true? (Do we really have many more worthy candidates, such that Terri Schiavo is squeezed out? Do we? Which ones, and why??) OK -- Tell me "how," or otherwise, me ear will be "closed" to opinions --and count them as a "ranting and raving." I am not trying to offend you, but if you want to win me over to your point of view, you have to make an argument, not merely state a conclusion. Try again.--GordonWattsDotCom 12:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I do not wish to "win you over". You clearly have stated that you would not change your mind on the matter, I can't see why I should waste my time trying to convince you then. Rama 12:48, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * False: You are wrong, when you say I won't listen. Just to give you one example of why this has proven false, let me point out that other objections that people had were "seriously considered": For example, Raul654, the Fac editor, suggested the references section was not using the proper format, and I spent about 12-hours yesteday and about 24-hours on a few other days, fixing that section: If you have a "real" complaint, we will listen; If you're just complaining, we won't listen.--GordonWattsDotCom 12:54, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * My objection not about mere formatting points. This article is well-arranged, factual, meticulous, and incredibly boring and overlong. There seems to be virtually no synthesis effort, and as it is, it looks more like a maniacal collection of every tiny bit of information of the subject, than a useable introduction to the subject. "From 1990 to 1993, Mr. Schiavo and the Schindlers enjoyed an amicable relationship. [5] (Page 3 of 30 of Court Ruling) The Schindlers even allowed Mr. Schiavo to live rent free in their condominium for several months."... I mean, come on. Rama 13:11, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Regarding the article length & all them little details..., I see what you mean, but for those interested in the subject, this won't matter. Besides, the intro is now much shorter. As far as the article being long, well, some people wanna put in their "pet project," and, as long as it isn't "rally disruptive," others generally allow it. It's the nature of teamwork, and, this way, it is complete. Just think about it this way: The short intro for the "short article" folks, and the "long part below" for those who want "in depth" info: The best of both worlds: Nominate. Vote Terri. Terri for President. oh, nevermind that --just ask yourself, "What do I want?" and then, ask yourself: Is the article OK? If so --> "YES" -- if not, maybe change a few things. I did my best --I don't get paid for this you know --unless you count The Creator. Is He paying me? (Yes)--GordonWattsDotCom 13:30, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Object - this article needs more time to stabilize, it's too soon. Perhpas in a year or so.  --Quasipalm 14:36, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The Abortion article is still not stabilized, and this is after over thirty (30) years since the 1973 Roe v. Wade court case. Therefore, waiting for it to "stabilize" will make us wait forever. I think this is bad, but thank you for your comments. If it needs to be stabilized further, the page can be protected and locked.--GordonWattsDotCom 09:32, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Changed to support. Come to think of it, they are plenty of controversial FAs (look at Turin Shroud for example) and they reflect really well on wikipedia, that we manage to write a good article that fills the middle ground. And Gordon, I have to warn you that your abrasive tone in this FAC is costing you votes. You need to be more diplomatic- use gentler language, and apologize to people that feel you insulted them. One of the reasons I voted neutral rather than support the first place was because I didn't like the way you treating your objectors.Borisblue 18:31, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your support. I am not trying to offend anybody. (My replies may seem agressive or pushy, but I am simply trying to fulfil my duties and obligations to answer all the critics: Since I am the one who nominated the article, it is MY responsibility/duty to answer concerns or criticisms.) If I have offended any Wikipedia editors, I apologize: All people are important, even if we are all humans and make mistakes. Furthermore, I am trying to help others as we produce a quality article for our world community. I am only one person, but I will do what I can to help others feel welcome and help the article improve.--GordonWattsDotCom 09:36, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

 * oppose-- the article is far from ready for the featured status. The article needs more editing, it is today too verbose, to chronological and too little sorting (information) has been done. The references need a better solution too, with some section having two references per sentence. The partitioning of the article is too arbitrary and does not resemble anything seen in a FA. — Sverdrup 23:23, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * "it is today too verbose" I apologize for this, but this subject is complex, and we editors are trying to avoid sacrificing quality. "to chronological and too little sorting (information) has been done." I apologize if this offends you, but I thought that being chronological was good organization. "The references need a better solution too, with some section having two references per sentence." I just did a lot of work, creating a brand new Terri_Schiavo section that had not been there before. Also, is is not GOOD to have two (2) references sometimes? It is like a spare tire on a vehicle -if one tire is flat, you can use another -a backup -an alternate. "The partitioning of the article is too arbitrary and does not resemble anything seen in a FA." How would you improve it? Thank you for your feedback.--GordonWattsDotCom 09:18, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd like to add that I really dislike how the nominator is pushing this article; applying to Jimbo to use his god powers (when did he have this power over content) is certainly not in the realm of wikipedia. Also, it seems the nominator was a big actor in the case the article documents: if I was the FA director, I wouldn't accept this personal agenda-pushing.
 * — Sverdrup 23:23, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * "I'd like to add that I really dislike how the nominator is pushing this article; applying to Jimbo..." If a person thinks an article is good, should he or she not push and advocate? "(when did he have this power over content)" It is my understanding (I may be wrong??) that Jimbo has the last word, that is, that he does currently have power over content --but I have heard that he is decreasing his authority in the near future. "Also, it seems the nominator was a big actor in the case the article documents:" Yes, it is true. I went to court, and I almost won -I lost 4-3, and the Governor of Florida, Jeb Bush, lost 7-0. I did better than the "professionals," but how does this change things? All it means is that I have additional experience and knowledge (and, I admit, I might have a hidden "conflict of interest" or selfish motives) --however, we are not voting on "Gordon Watts' motives" --we are discussing an article about Terri Schiavo. "if I was the FA director, I wouldn't accept this personal agenda-pushing." Have you stopped to think that maybe this agenda is a good one? I am not saying that this is necessarily the case, but you must look beyond my motives and personal involvement -to the bigger picture: Do we work hard to make a quality product simply to become distracted by "personal agendas?" -- Do we act for ourselves; or, instead, do we think about out readers? Yes, the article is not perfect, but we are trying to improve it -and, I think it is good, even very good, even if not perfect.--GordonWattsDotCom 09:26, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Support This was an exciting project to work on. There's very little that's been published since Terri Schiavo's obituary that reflects a neutral point of view and presents so much information comprehensively, which accounts for its length.  Books about this tragedy will be published for years but this article is ready now and the authors of such books will be looking at this article.  It needs to be protected from vandalism. It's timely and of extraordinary public interest.  (On the photo copyright status: The family pictures were simply distributed to the old media and blogs without copyright) patsw 13:23, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Too long really,it could be a seperate website on it's own,Also it has too many details that don't belong in an encyclopedia.

 * Oppose, it really is too long and unwieldy at this time. It's a very good article, and not POV at all, which I find amazing since it hasn't been that long since she died - definitely worthy of FA status in the near future.  However, I believe the article can be successfully broken down into smaller yet comprehensive articles without sacrificing the quality of information already provided.  Also, the extensive quoting of various law statutes paragraph-length quotes of various opinions, as well as some law statutes can be significantly reduced if not eliminated, but my main concern is length. I don't think we need the 15+ articles that was suggested above, but 3-4 of them wouldn't be unreasonable.   justsomechick · chat · stuff  21:43, 1 September 2005 (UTC) amended  justsomechick · chat · stuff  21:52, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * In spite of the fact you oppose the article on length issues, thank you for amending your concerns about citing legal info. I must respectfully point out that I think the article is too short. Here is why: It doesn't hurt anything for all the info to be in one place (unless you are on dial-up, with a slow connection). Conversely, I think the reader can sort out what is important. Yes, it would still be "workable" with even more "reduction" of the article into more sub-articles (because we could link to them), but as it stands, there already are several sub-articles: The original version was broken into chunks, and any more would break it into bits and pieces. Do you really want that?
 * PS: You are not alone: Many people have a problem with the length, and I do too, but I think the article is too short, and that it should be put back together. I am the nominator of this Fac, and that is my view.--GordonWattsDotCom 15:00, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose - Far too unstable, with far too much controversy. Simply by virtue of it's subject, it will never attain a subjective status of full NPOV to all sides.--Fangz 13:26, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your opinion, Fang Zhou, but I respectfully dissent: You imply that anything with "too much controversy" is unsuitable to feature as a featured article; this alone should make me think the article should at least be considered: The fact it is so controversial means there has been much interest; and, if the article can be presented well, explaining all points of view, then it should be featured.
 * The important point here is the NPOV means Neutral Point of View, not "No Point of View"; While I admit is it very hard to please all parties when explaining the various points of view, if all "major" points are included, then they balance themselves, and the result is a fairy "neutral" point of view: Explaining both (or all) sides.--GordonWattsDotCom 14:11, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Support on condition that:
 * it's made shorter,
 * it's made more chronological,
 * the references are tidied up, to look more professional, rather than having things like page 4 of 12, which are usful for those who want to look up the documents, but intrude if you're a newcomer and just want to read the story of Terri,
 * the article does not assert as fact anything that is merely hearsay (even if a judge or guardian ad litem believes it) — examples would include: Michael was woken by the sound of a thud, Michael finally accepted that Terri was not going to get better, etc. Such POV-ish corroboration has been in the article before, and might creep back in.

 * I suppose that means that I'm giving it delayed support, if there is such a thing. And I'm going to be busy until around 19 October, so I can't do much tidying of the article. Ann Heneghan (talk) 15:11, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your support and kind words, Ann. I've already stated my opinions on the length; I agree that it should follow a chronological order, but I have not studied the article in fine detail; Yet, as far as I can see, the article is generally chronological: Most sections go in order of time, from a quick overview, it appears. As far as the "page 4 of 14" format, I think it could go both ways, and I am waiting for either a clear concensus or a "ruling by the authorities" on this, "authorities" meaning admins, such as Raul, overseeing the Fac. I agree on the last point: We should not state unproven opinions as facts, no matter which side they support.
 * For example, it would be wrong to say: "Terri was PVS."
 * It would also be wrong to say: "Terri moved around and was clearly not PVS."
 * We've agreed, by concensus, to say that Terri "was diagnosed as PVS" and that there was major disagreement, with an eventual court ruling one way on the issue, etc. That is the right way to state the facts for our reading audience.
 * I agree on some of your points, disagree on others, and am neutral on the references format.--GordonWattsDotCom 15:53, 3 September 2005 (UTC)