text:
Bibliology

Bibliology, also known as the Doctrine of Scripture, is a branch of systematic theology that deals with the nature, character, and authority of the Bible.

Issues
The Doctrine of Scripture includes several key issues. The most basic issue is how Scripture's divine and human authors relate to one another. The inspiration of Scripture may entail that Scripture is infallible and even inerrant. Another set of concerns is whether the Bible is clear. The perspicuity or clarity of Scripture is the extent to which the Bible can be understood. Finally, the degree to which the Bible is authoritative for Christian life and doctrine is called the Sufficiency of Scripture. The Bible is either the only source of authority (Sola scriptura) or the highest of several related sources of authority (Prima scriptura), or one authority among equals.

Roman Catholic views
The Second Vatican Council published the document Dei Verbum to summarize the Roman Catholic view of Scripture. According to the Council, the Biblical authors were inspired by God to write their texts, so that while their writing is human, they also teach "solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation." However, because the writers are humans, living in certain times and places and speaking certain languages, readers of Scripture need to "carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers really intended, and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words" by looking at ancient literary forms, styles, and customs. Scripture must also be interpreted in the context of the entirety of Scripture, and the entirety of the "living tradition of the Church." Finally, Dei Verbum connects the human and divine authorship of Scripture using an analogy with Christ' incarnation: God's "eternal wisdom" has "condescended" to human form by the human authors: "the words of God, expressed in human language, have been made like human discourse, just as the word of the eternal Father, when He took to Himself the flesh of human weakness, was in every way made like men."

The Catechism of the Catholic Church reiterates the teaching in Dei Verbum that the Bible is written by both God and humans and so is inspired and true. The Catechism also adds that "Christian faith is not a "religion of the book"" because the meaning of Scripture requires illumination by the Spirit. Most recently, Pope Benedict XVI expounded the Roman Catholic view of Scripture in a document titled Verbum Domini.

Eastern Orthodox views
According to the Orthodox Church of America (an Eastern Orthodox church), the Bible was written by humans and so contains "all of the marks of the men who wrote them, and of the time and the culture in which they were written. Nevertheless, in the full integrity of their human condition and form, the words of the Bible are truly the very Word of God." The OCA takes a moderate position on inerrancy, writing that the Bible "contains no formal errors or inner contradictions concerning the relationship between God and the world. There may be incidental inaccuracies of a non-essential character in the Bible. But the eternal spiritual and doctrinal message of God, presented in the Bible in many different ways, remains perfectly consistent, authentic, and true."

Another group, the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, highly values the Bible and writes that while "the Bible is treasured as a valuable written record of God's revelation, it does not contain wholly that revelation. The Bible is viewed as only one expression of God's revelation in the ongoing life of His people. Scripture is part of the treasure of Faith which is known as Tradition." In this view, the Bible, the Creeds, and the Councils are all mutually interpreting, guarded by the Church and illuminated by the Spirit of God.

Conservative Protestant views
Conservative Protestants and Liberal Protestants diverged during the fundamentalist–modernist controversy over topics related to the truthfulness and authority of Scripture. It became important to conservatives in the wake of the controversy to stress the total inerrancy of Scripture. For example, in 1932 the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod wrote that the Scriptures are the Word of God and therefore "contain no errors or contradictions, but that they are in all their parts and words the infallible truth, also in those parts which treat of historical, geographical, and other secular matters." According to the same document, the view that the Bible might contain an error is "horrible and blasphemous" and "overthrows the foundation" of Christianity. In 1978 a group of Evangelical scholars published the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. Its authors maintain that the Bible is "wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God’s acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than in its witness to God’s saving grace in individual lives."

Liberal Protestant views
Liberal Protestants tend to see Scripture as one source among several (others being tradition, reason, history, and experience). For example, the Episcopal Church believes that the Bible, "understood through tradition and reason," is the foundation of the faith. Meanwhile a document from the Presbyterian Church (USA) lists a variety of views that its members hold. This document then highlights what is at stake in these disagreements: whether Scripture governs "every possible issue or truth" or is limited to non-scientific truths (or other limits), and how to rightly interpret the Bible and make judgements for today based on that interpretation. Finally, the Protestant Church in Germany, as a composite denomination, has no single view on the Bible but writes that church "have the task of studying further these differences of doctrine" including "hermeneutical questions concerning the understanding of Scripture, confession of faith, and Church."

"Bibliologies" on a calculator
The plural form of the word bibliology, "bibliogies", is the equal-longest English word that can be spelled upside down on a seven-segment display such as a 12-digit calculator (with "glossologies" being the other, which, fittingly, is the scientific study of language and linguistics). This fact is based on the assumption that 1 = I (capital "i"), 2 = Z, 3 = E, 4 = h, 5 = S, 6 = g, 7 = L, 8 = B, 9 = none, and 0 = O, and that heebeegeebees is not considered a word (as it isn't included in the Oxford Dictionary, for example). The discovery was made by a Reddit user AlwaysSupport, who wrote a computer program to find the longest upside-down calculator words via brute force.

title: Bibliology


text:
User:Treebo

Matt Chamberlain, born April 17, 1967 in San Pedro, California, is one of the world's least-prominent, yet widely-heard session drummers. Chamberlain began playing drums at the age of 2. Chamberlain lives in Seattle, Washington.

Chamberlain received his first set of drums at age 15, and studied with David Garibaldi, Murray Spivack, Chuck Flores, and Greg Bissonette before being awarded a scholarship to study at North Texas State University three years later.

Chamberlain is possibly most famous for his short stint with the band Pearl Jam, which he joined on a temporary basis as a "hired gun" in 1991. Chamberlain played around 10 shows with Pearl Jam between July 4, 1991 and August 23, 1991, and can be seen on the band's video for the song Alive. He then joined the Saturday Night Live Band and, per his suggestion, was replaced by Dave Abbruzzese.

Chamberlain's other work includes huge contribution to the tours and albums of Tori Amos. He has also recorded or gigged with Morrissey, Fiona Apple, Christina Aguilera, Critters Buggin', Weapon of Choice, Stone Gossard, Edie Brickell and the New Bohemians, Tim and Neil Finn, David Bowie, Elton John, Peter Gabriel, The Wallflowers, Natalie Merchant, Kenny Rogers, Bill Frisell, the Saturday Night Live Band, Robbie Williams, Kanye West, Garbage, Anika Moa, Shakira, John Mayer, Brad Mehldau, Liz Phair, Chris Isaak, Dave Navarro, Sam Phillips and William Shatner.

Matt has been through a number of endorsements with a number of companies including Sabian, Bosphorus, and Zildjian cymbals and Ayotte, Drum Workshop , and Ludwig drums.

Discography (Excerpt)
Matt Chamberlain has played on the following records:

{| border="2" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" style="margin: 1em 1em 1em 0; background: #f9f9f9; border: 1px #aaa solid; border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 95%;"
 * Year
 * Group
 * Title
 * Label
 * Tracks Played
 * 1990
 * Edie Brickell & New Bohemians
 * Ghost of a Dog
 * All
 * 1995
 * Critters Buggin'
 * Guest
 * Loosegroove 478376 2
 * All
 * 1996
 * The Wallflowers
 * Bringing Down the Horse
 * Interscope IND90055
 * All
 * 1996
 * Critters Buggin'
 * Host
 * Loosegroove LG0009-2
 * All
 * 1996
 * Fiona Apple
 * Tidal
 * Epic
 * Some
 * 1998
 * Critters Buggin'
 * Bumpa
 * 1998
 * Tori Amos
 * From the Choirgirl Hotel
 * Atlantic Record/WEA
 * All
 * 1999
 * Fiona Apple
 * When The Pawn..
 * Epic
 * Some
 * 1999
 * Macy Gray
 * On How Life Is
 * 1999
 * Tori Amos
 * To Venus and Back
 * Atlantic 7567-83242-2
 * All
 * 2000
 * The Wallflowers
 * Breach
 * Interscope
 * Some
 * 2001
 * Tori Amos
 * Strange Little Girls
 * Atlantic 7567-83486-2
 * All
 * 2001
 * Stone Gossard
 * Bayleaf
 * Epic 504567 2
 * Bore Me, Fits
 * 2001
 * Garbage
 * Beautiful Garbage
 * 2001
 * Natalie Merchant
 * Motherland
 * 2001
 * Elton John
 * Songs From The West Coast
 * 2002
 * David Bowie
 * Heathen
 * 2002
 * Tori Amos
 * Scarlet's Walk
 * Epic 5087822
 * All
 * 2003
 * John Mayer
 * Heavier Things
 * 2003
 * David Bowie
 * Reality
 * 2003
 * Matt Nathanson
 * Beneath These Fireworks
 * All
 * 2004
 * Tori Amos
 * Welcome to Sunny Florida (CD and DVD)
 * Epic 516288 2
 * All
 * 2004
 * Finn Brothers
 * Everyone is Here
 * All
 * 2004
 * Critters Buggin
 * Stampede
 * 2004
 * Thruster!
 * Live: Seattle, WA 4/2/04
 * KUFALA Recordings
 * All
 * 2005
 * Anna Nalick
 * Wreck of the Day
 * Columbia
 * Some
 * 2005
 * Matt Chamberlain
 * Matt Chamberlain
 * Web of Mimicry
 * All
 * 2005
 * Tori Amos
 * The Beekeeper
 * Epic EK 92800
 * All
 * 2005
 * Robbie Williams
 * Intensive Care
 * Chrysalis
 * All
 * 2005
 * Daniel Powter
 * Daniel Powter
 * 2006
 * Morrissey
 * Ringleader of the Tormentors
 * Attack Records
 * All
 * All
 * 2005
 * Anna Nalick
 * Wreck of the Day
 * Columbia
 * Some
 * 2005
 * Matt Chamberlain
 * Matt Chamberlain
 * Web of Mimicry
 * All
 * 2005
 * Tori Amos
 * The Beekeeper
 * Epic EK 92800
 * All
 * 2005
 * Robbie Williams
 * Intensive Care
 * Chrysalis
 * All
 * 2005
 * Daniel Powter
 * Daniel Powter
 * 2006
 * Morrissey
 * Ringleader of the Tormentors
 * Attack Records
 * All
 * 2006
 * Morrissey
 * Ringleader of the Tormentors
 * Attack Records
 * All
 * All

Matt Chamberlain

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

title: User:Treebo


text:
File:Mazeikiai district map.png

Mažeikiai district map created by Renata3.

title: File:Mazeikiai district map.png


text:
Melanie Appleby

Melanie Susan "Mel" Appleby (11 July 1966 – 18 January 1990) was an English singer best known as one half of the 1980s duo Mel and Kim. They had a number one hit on the UK Singles Chart in March 1987, with the song "Respectable".

Career
Appleby was born in Hackney, London, to a Jamaican father and a British mother. She initially worked as a glamour model, before joining her sister Kim Appleby to form Mel and Kim. The duo enjoyed considerable chart success in the late 1980s, achieving four UK top ten hits, including the number one "Respectable" (1987), while their debut album, F.L.M. (1987) spent 25 weeks on the UK chart and was certified platinum in the UK.

Death
In 1985, prior to the duo's recording career, Mel was treated for malignant paraganglioma, a form of cancer, on her liver. By January 1987, Mel was experiencing back problems, delaying the filming of the "Respectable" music video. During a promotional visit to Japan in June 1987, Mel's back pain worsened, rendering her unable to perform, and she returned to the UK in a wheelchair. A recurrence of the cancer was detected in Mel's spine after undergoing tests at St Bartholomew's Hospital. The sisters withdrew from publicity while Mel underwent treatment, while trying to keep the diagnosis secret from the public and many colleagues. The terminal cancer diagnosis was revealed to the public when a journalist went to her house pretending to be a nurse.

Appleby died of pneumonia in Westminster, London, on 18 January 1990 following treatment for cancer. She died at the age of 23 and is buried in East Finchley Cemetery.

title: Melanie Appleby


text:
Flatbrød

Flatbrød (literally "flat-bread") is a traditional Norwegian unleavened bread which is usually eaten with fish, salted meats and soups. Originally it was the staple food of Norwegian farmers, shepherds and peasants. Flat bread is dry and free from water so it is possible to store it for a long period of time.

Background
The basic ingredients are barley flour, salt, and water, though many varieties exist which incorporate other staples.

It was once generally eaten in all meals, most often with cured herring and cold boiled potato, often along with sour cream and/or butter. It may also accompany betasuppe, a traditional meat soup or lobscouse, a traditional stew.

The thinner the bread is, the better it is. It is rolled and then cooked on a large griddle. The tradition of making flat bread used to be passed down through generation after generation by housewives, and each person had her own recipe for preparing it. It is still an important part of Norwegian food traditions, particularly in the countryside.

title: Flatbrød


text:
Portal:Trains/Anniversaries/August 22/More

20th century

 * 1905 – The Spokane, Portland and Seattle Railway is incorporated.
 * 1910 – The first Western Pacific Railroad passenger train to operate over the railroad's entire route from Salt Lake City, Utah, arrives in San Francisco, California.
 * 1935 – Diesel locomotives begin to replace steam locomotives on Baltimore and Ohio Railroad's long-distance passenger trains.
 * 1950 – Canada's railroad workers go on strike, crippling operations across the country.
 * 1968 – Magma Arizona Railroad discontinues its use of steam locomotives.
 * 1994 – Indian Railways orders the first WDM-2C locomotives.

21st century

 * 2003 – Sound Transit connects to Tacoma, Washington.


text:
Nagwa

Nagwa is a village with a population of 8,000 and 1300 acre in the Ballia district in the eastern part of Uttar Pradesh in India. A large percentage of the population consists of Hindus. The village is 6 km east of Ballia District Headquarters close to the River Ganges. It is the birthplace of Indian hero Mangal Pandey. Many statues and sculptures of martyrs were placed in Ballia after the Independence of India.

Mangal Pandey, widely regarded in India as the First Martyr in India's First War of Independence in 1857, was born and brought up in this village. In the movie "Mangal Pandey" the name of Ballia is not mentioned due dispute amongst the locals. People from Ballia believe that he lived in the thatched kutiyas. After a certain period he moved to the main Ballia market from Nagwa for trade.

An overview over rival claims
News in Mid Day of August 15, 2004:

"One hundred and forty-seven years after this sepoy of the 35th battalion in Barrakpur (Kolkata) was executed by the colonial rulers, he seems to have lost his identity, with two districts, four villages and several families in Uttar Pradesh fighting among themselves to claim him, and the state administration's not sure enough to be the last word on the issue." In the heart of the village there is a primary school. After many efforts of villagers, government recognised a university named after Mangal Pandey which is under construction.

title: Nagwa


text:
Wikipedia talk:Lists of protected pages/Archive 2

Sorting this page out
OK, I just spent 4 solid hours sorting this page out. At 34k it had got ''way' to long, and edting it had become very difficult. No wonder it was so full of errors! I made three major changes:

 * Split off the recently unprotected pages into Unprotected page to cut the page-length in half. This means you have to make two edits to unprotect a page (which is a pity) but on the other hand, at least you can see what you are doing without going cross-eyed and wearing out your scrolling wheel.
 * Re-ordered the counter-intuitive "newest at top" listings, so that the page order is now the standard "newest at bottom".
 * Went through the protected list:
 * cleaning out a whole stack of no-longer-required protections (mostly Wik vs Anthony stuff)
 * discovering another whole stack of pages that were listed here but had been unprotected ages ago
 * discovering another stack of protected pages that probably should have been unprotected ages ago, but which no-one knew about because this page was so long and disorganised.

In doing this, I came to several conclusions, which I think are worth sharing:

 * Now that I've ruthlessly organised and trimmed, the two pages would probably be short enough to combine again. But it was only the split that made the ruthless cleaning out possible in the first place. (There is still more that could be done, of course. But it should be fairly easy now.)
 * 99% of the page protections are caused by 1% of the users. (Well, probably 0.1% of the users.) If we were more proactive about dealing with problem users, we wouldn't have got into this mess in the first place.

Finally, my apologies to all for such bold and unilaterial action. I didn't actually intend to go anywhere near as far as this, and I carefully made easy revert points so that other users could come along and restore the status quo if desired. But each action seemed to lead to another one and now reverting my changes isn't really practicable, short of several hours work. (I always did tend to get a bit carried away with a good idea.) Tannin 14:09, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm struck by your comment that "99% of the page protections are caused by 1% of the users." Maybe this is too simplistic a suggestion, but perhaps there should be a middle way between protecting an article and banning a user: banning a user from editing a particular article, say. If an edit war breaks out between two users, it might be worth banning them from that particular article in order to force them to work out their differences. In the meantime, other editors could get on with developing the article without being caught in the middle of someone else's edit war. -- ChrisO 01:24, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * That is exactly what I am trying to do as an arbitrator. --mav 01:39, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Are talk pages meant to be protected?
And is it acceptable for an admin involved in a dispute to protect a page? Sam Spade 22:37, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Under some circumstances, (IMHO) yes. →Raul654 22:38, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)

 * According to protection policy: "Do not protect a page you are involved in an edit dispute over".

 * It is not acceptable for an admin involved in a dispute to protect a page. Martin 23:23, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I was referring specifically to talk pages (as Sam's heading indicated). I don't think the policy is supposed to apply to those. →Raul654 23:26, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)

 * The policy page states: "In general, pages should not be left protected for very long, and discussion pages should be left open", indicating that protecting talk pages is typically an error.
 * In rare circumstances, talk pages may be protected for the reasons stated on the policy page: Enforcing a "cool down" period, target of persistent vandalism or persistent edits by a banned user, or investigating a possible bug. This is subject to the same restrictions as articles, so it is still not acceptable for an admin involved in a dispute to protect a page. Martin 00:14, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

There appears to be a problem with what happened on talk:pantheism. Sam Spade 23:25, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia has many problems. Martin 00:14, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Ideally, if an article is experiencing an edit war, the article is protected, and the issue is hashed out in the TALK area. I imagine if the TALK area turns into an edit war, then it would be protected too. Kingturtle 00:16, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Removing unprotected articles from this list
I think an unprotected article should remain on this list for a day. If the article has to be re-protected, it makes more sense to keep that action listed under the same activity....if that makes any sense. Kingturtle 04:41, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Contact us
I think this page should be semi-permanently protected. If you look at its history, it is mostly vandalisms and reversions. Since it's a fairly important page to have in an unvandalized state, I think it should be protected. Dori | Talk 17:45, Mar 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * But wouldn't it be unfortunate to protect a page that starts out saying In case you did not already know, everyone can edit an article on Wikipedia. So if you see something wrong, just click "Edit this page."? Kingturtle 22:51, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Protecting it won't stop people who want vandalise doing so. They will just move on to a less watched page and vandalise that, which is more likely to go unnoticed. There are a large number of pages where the majority of edits are vandalism, including About and This page is protected. I don't see that as a reason to permanently protect them. The history shows a number of edits by non-sysops and unlogged in users that were valid edits. Why should these people be stopped from editing the page? Angela. 02:00, Mar 9, 2004 (UTC)

Spam
spam: On Wikipedia talk:How to revert a page to an earlier version I propose modifying the protection policy to allow gentle discouragement of revert wars. Comments? Martin 23:20, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I've made the change to protection policy. Martin

A Reader's Opinion
PROTECTING CONTENT pages (not startpages, licenses eg), affected by vandalism and wars CONFLICTS with the idea of an OPEN ENCYCLOPEDIA. it is better to remove affected pages or simply let the vandalism and wars go on, then UNDERMINING the idea behind this whole project. the way you (the admins) do it now, CENSORSHIP and MANIPULATION become possible. Example: Al Gore Bill Clinton

end of readers opinion. ...posted 09:58, 20 Mar 2004. . by 194.232.66.26

Mistaken protection
I clicked "protect this page" when I was trying to click "Discuss this page" on Australian archaeology - is there anywhere I should report this? - Texture 02:24, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * No. Anthony DiPierro 02:26, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * No, it happens a lot. Don't worry about it. Just check the protection log regularly to find mistakenly protected pages and unprotect them. Angela. 10:31, Mar 28, 2004 (UTC)

Protection policy
Nazism was protected without support of policy, please look into this and correct it, thanks. Sam Spade 03:51, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)

MediaWiki
Should Template:Test, Template:NPOV be listed? Maybe others similar? --Trainspotter 13:50, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

 * They are listed. See Protected page. The whole MediaWiki namespace was protected by default when it was first introduced. I expect things will change when the new template namespace comes into effect. Angela. 18:41, May 10, 2004 (UTC)

 * Oh yes, so they are. D'oh!  Thanks.  --Trainspotter 11:26, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

Do we still need this page?
Protection log now shows the reason for protection, so do we still need this page? Angela. 19:13, 29 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Is there a page other than this one which shows which pages are protected right now? It's quite hard to work that out from the protection log. --Camembert

 * Yes, we do. --Cantus 20:19, 29 May 2004 (UTC)

About
I disagree with protecting this page. Protecting it won't stop people who want to vandalise from doing so. They will just move on to a less watched page and vandalise that, which is more likely to go unnoticed. There are a large number of pages where the majority of edits are vandalism, including Contact us and This page is protected. I don't see that as a reason to permanently protect them. The history shows a number of edits by non-sysops and unlogged in users that were valid edits. Why should these people be stopped from editing the page? Oh, and didn't I already say this somewhere? Angela. 00:09, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * I agree with your second point, but we can't not protect it just because the vandals will move to a different page. Ilyanep 14:58, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * I think the point Angela was trying to make was that it's more likely to be fixed quickly on a high-profile page. --Random|832 17:52, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Protect the page supplying a reason
Is "protection requested via IRC" a valid reason for protection? With no other explanation of why, or who made such a request? I dispute the protection of Adolf Hitler, esp. as there seems to be no reason for protection expressed on the article talk page. Sam [Spade] 20:18, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Who unprotected Saddam Hussein?
Could we get it deleted from here, and could whoever do it explain why they did it? As I expected, the minute it was unprotected, Lir went in and vandalized it again. Rick'''K 19:27, Jul 1, 2004 (UTC)

Semi-permanently protected (user pages)
Might it make sense to allow _all_ users [not just sysops] to A) protect/deprotect their own user pages, and B) edit their own protected user pages? --Random|832 12:20, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Agreed, but don't let them block their own talk pages (Trolls, vandals, etc.) Ilyanep 14:57, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * No. It's a wiki. Why would you want to stop people editing? What about if I want to fix a spelling, or correct a link after I move or delete a page? A user does not own their user page; they just happen to have more reason to edit it than other users. If you want something only you can edit, why not get your own webpage. That's not what Wikipedia is for. Angela. 06:23, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * To the contrary, I believe it's a good idea. - Mike Rosoft 15:58, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Material removed from project pages; user: and user talk: pages

 * The protected page system may be changed in the future so that all users can modify them, but modifications won't go through until a certain amount of time has passed (and/or an admin accepts them). This would reduce the requirements for admin intervention for useful things to happen.

This has been proposed for over a year and lacks consensus, sponsorship, and developer interest. I have moved it here for now. Should any support develop for this idea, it can be moved back. UninvitedCompany 01:56, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Excessive protection of user and talk pages
I am dismayed at the number of user pages that are protected, particularly since many have no significant history of vandalism. Protected pages are harmful, right? I believe that administrators should not protect their user pages merely because they have the capacity to do so. Those user pages that are targets of ongoing, frequent vandalism can and should be protected; others should not.

Also, I note that there are a number of user talk pages that are protected. I believe, strongly, that this is a bad thing, and would encourage the users who have such pages to unprotect them unless there are overwhelming reasons for keeping them protected. UninvitedCompany 01:56, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I strongly agree. It sets a bad example, and is not fair on non-sysops who can't do the same thing. It's also annoying when there is something which needs to be fixed on a page. There is very very rarely any good reason to permanently protect such pages. Sysops should expect a bit of vandalism on their user page. Maybe this should be mentioned at RfA. Angela. 06:23, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Rethinking PP Policy
Protected page/Draft

 * What exactly is being "rethought" in this proposed policy? V V 19:26, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * See the page itself. Its quite self-explanitory. -SV

Removal of protection from user pages and talk pages
I have begun a campaign of unprotecting user pages and talk pages for which there appears to be no justification for protection. See Protected pages considered harmful as well as my and Angela's comments above. User and talk pages where the affected user objects to the unprotection are listed here:

 * User:Deb - user reprotected the page herself citing "unwanted amendements" to the page (no vandalism in history)

-UninvitedCompany

policy on protection of user pages
I tweaked the "policy" on protection of user pages, which I had added on July 1.

There has been considerable growth in use of page protection on user pages in the last year, a development I find troubling. As of a year ago, there were only one or two user pages protected. Now there are over a dozen. I believe most such protection is unwarranted.

UninvitedCompany 22:26, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Why? There are no grounds that I can think of for one person to be editing another's user page, and many of these people are consistently receiving vandalism. Ambivalenthysteria 07:46, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * There are plenty of reasons for other people to be editing user pages. For example, removing underscores, factual corrections, adding interlanguage links, fixing bugs, awarding barnstars, fixing links after a page move, formatting links, adding content, fixing interlanguage links, text corrections, grammatical improvements, removing unnecessary code, adding messages when the user can't get online, correcting formatting, fixing fonts etc etc. Angela. 19:40, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)

Of course its not a policy issue at all, but its nice to think about. More along these lines, the use of people's particular boxes (like on User:Seth Illys, or User:172's, abstracted to a template, could be made available to everyone on a common page, say Userboxes. -SV

wording of pp entry, npac, george w. bush, anti-american sentiment
I was putting interesting information on there, since it's quite rare and unusual for three pages to be protected in the same day, due to revert wars all sharing the same user, and because protected pages are considered harmfull. It was an effort to get the pages unprotected quicker, by providing access to relevant information. I put in, now, a compromise wording, with indisputable neutrality. However, I think that the relevant issues could be resolved quicker and more judiciously if more access to relevant information was provided. Kevin Baas | talk 23:09, 2004 Aug 8 (UTC)

 * Your wording, besides being inaccurate and prejudicial, failed to mention that the shared user was User:Get-back-world-respect. The conflict on PNAC was between him and TDC (although I had been involved prior to that), the other two were between me and him.  I doubt you're fooling anyone with your claim of pure motives, considering your own deep involvement, particularly at GWB. V V  23:33, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Ad hominem circumstantial is logical fallacy and empty rhetoric. My motives are to respect and protect the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia, including consensus, an equal voice for all contributors, good faith, and neutral point of view.  Kevin Baas | talk 05:35, 2004 Aug 9 (UTC)

 * Posturing is empty rhetoric. The red herring is a logical fallacy, as is proof by assertion. V V  06:28, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Look, you're exercised your right to make allegations, and I've exercised my right to defend my motives. Beyond that, everything else is useless and inappropriate bickering; people can look at the record and make their own judgements. Kevin Baas | talk 14:57, 2004 Aug 9 (UTC)

 * What you have not defended is your incorrect characterization of the edit wars. V V 23:18, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Additional templates protected
Should other protected templates (such as template:stub and template:disambig) be added to the list of protected templates? --ssd 05:24, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I think it is assumed that they are all protected unless listed at Unprotected MediaWiki messages. Perhaps this should change now that the mediawiki and template namespaces have been split up though. Angela. 21:48, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)

LUElinks
is being vandalised again. Dunc_Harris|☺ 21:19, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Bush, Kerry: Short term page protection?
The recent edit histories of George W. Bush and John Kerry have been a slew of petty vandalisms and their reverts. Barring some major unexpected developments that will necessitate serious additions to their respective articles, I suspect that more of the same is about all we can expect over the next few days. I think temporary vprotected status for both pages to election day might be warrented. Objections, comments? (this same text added at Talk:George W. Bush, Talk:John Kerry, and Wikipedia talk:Protected page). -- Infrogmation 19:34, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I belive that is an excellent idea supported by existing policy regarding protection of pages that are targets of persistent vandalism. I have protected the pages.  uc 20:14, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * What if something notable happens? Will the protection continue between the election and inauguration, to keep people from gloating? Gazpacho 20:22, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * The protection can be removed by any admin. Notice my proposal does not suggest continuing the protection later. -- Infrogmation 20:32, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Someone else has supported this on the talk page. I appear to be in the minority thinking this is a bad precendent to set. -- Graham  ☺ | Talk 20:25, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Gloating would take the form of a bad edit. The purpose of the protection is to deter vandalism, not bad edits.  While bad edits have been a problem in the past on these pages, the present problem is vandalism.  Once the election is over, I believe that vandalism of these pages will return to its previous (lower but still considerable) level.  I see parallels between the situation on these pages and that on the main page, which was a constant target of vandalism before it was protected permanently.  With the number of page views the Bush and Kerry pages are likely to receive in the coming days, it is bad PR for us and poor public service if we permit vandalism to stand even if only for a minute or two.  The Kerry page was a recent target of page move vandalism, which was reverted the wrong way, so that the histories had to be merged, making the page unavailable in its proper form for several minutes.  This sort of thing is only likely to get worse for the next few days.  I am not a big fan of page protection but this brief period on these pages is justified.  uc 20:32, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * That would be me. I just see a glut of vandelism between now and the election. `PPGMD 20:51, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm not a great fan of it either but if it must be done, then it must be done. Does protection stop page moves by the way?  I wasn't aware that it did. -- Graham  ☺ | Talk 20:48, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Shouldn't the above discussion be moved to the Talk page? -- Schnee 20:57, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * It started out there but was moved here for some reason. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 20:58, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Michael Badnarik is another candidate for next week's election and his page has been protected since Oct 18. Should this protection remain? -- Graham ☺ | Talk 21:00, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I disagree with protecting the Bush and Kerry pages. The vandalisms have been promptly reverted. These are probably two of the most frequently Watchlisted articles in Wikipedia. The total amount of legitimate editors' time consumed in reverting has been negligible, considering how many different people have shared the load. Better to unprotect and just keep swatting flies for a few more days. JamesMLane 22:51, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I agree that the page being protected and should be protected until at least November 3rd (barring nothing absolutely important). As I think there will be a large amount of vandalism as we closer and closer to election day. PPGMD 20:18, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Overprotection
I can't help but notice that we have a lot of protected pages right now, and to remind people that protected pages are considered harmful. I think we need to be more careful when protecting pages - I've seen a lot get protected over relatively minor edit wars where the admin who protected could just as easily have stepped in and helped mediate a resolution to a dispute. Snowspinner 20:16, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

 * Yup. In that same light, it's someone else's turn to go and unprotect all the user pages and "boilerplate" pages that have no history of vandalism, or where they have been protected a long time.  I still have scars from last time I did this.  uc 20:20, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, I notice though that there were quite a lot that were protected by User:Neutrality on October 20. What is the standard period these things are left before unprotection if there is no indication of a resolution in the article's talk page? -- Graham  ☺ | Talk 20:27, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I believe it is traditional to allow a week to go by without any discussion on the article's talk page. In cases where the article has been repeatedly protected, a longer delay may be appropriate (e.g. Surrealism).  uc 20:37, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Actually, many of the pages listed by Neutrality on October 20 were not protected on that date but earlier, and he wasn't necessarily the one doing the protecting, he just updated the list on the page. Quite a few of these are the pages affected by the recurring revert wars involving Gzornenplatz, Shorne, and/or VeryVerily, which is now the subject of an arbitration case. If these users get put on revert parole then unprotection should be okay, but unfortunately so far attempts at unprotection have usually led to an immediate resumption of the revert war. --Michael Snow 18:30, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Location of protected page tags
I would like to propose that we now place and  tags at the bottom of the affected pages. This will make it more unobtrusive, which is important in those instances where high-profile pages are protected, e.g. John Kerry and George W. Bush. Indeed, in any case where a user is coming to the encyclopedia to read an article, rather than to edit it, the protected message is cluttersome.

The requirement for such tags being at the top of articles was instituted before the software was changed to warn administrators when editing protected articles. The idea was that administrators would be less likely to edit protected pages inadvertently (an action usually in violation of policy) if the notice were prominent. Now that the software warns administrators (in bold red text no less) who are about to edit a protected page, this is no longer necessary.

uc 21:57, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * This might be reasonable for, the reason being that if it's only protected due to vandalism, there's no particular reason to warn the reader that the content may be flawed. With respect to the regular  tag, I am inclined to disagree, as a full-blown revert war strongly suggests the article may not be in an acceptable state. Inadvertent editing of protected pages may have been the primary motivation at the time, but I have to think that another consideration is whether the reader deserves to be informed that there are concerns about the content. --Michael Snow 18:22, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

protectedsmall notices and editing protected pages
Several pages have been protected as a result of revert wars involving User:Chuck F. The protected versions are heavily disputed, in some cases reflecting only Chuck F's view against a more consensus or NPOV version. Following The Wrong Version, everyone involved put up with this. However, some people not aware of the background have edited these protected pages for grammer/spelling, and the protection notices have been swapped for a smaller one. The smaller notice makes it appear that the currently protected versions are endorsed. I don't believe the shorter notice is appropriate except in cases where pages are the subject of obvious vandalism and there is no content dispute. I also think more attention should be drawn to the policy to not edit protected pages. The affected pages in this case are: Libertarianism and libertarian theory and Libertarian League. --172.203.11.105 04:26, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Images protected while on Main Page
I agree with Pakaran's comments on the de facto policy of protecting images on the Main Page and I've added the following line to Editing the main page: "Images are also temporarily protected while they are featured on the Main Page." -- ChrisO 19:34, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Image:Viktor Fedorovych Yanukovych prime minister of Ukraine.jpg
Could an admin please unprotect this no-longer Main page image and change the GFDL tag to únverified? This image was taken from a copyrighted poster, and thus violates that copyright. See User talk:Steschke. Thanks, [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 12:45, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

Protection against page moves
Protection against page moves, but not from editing, is now possible (assuming this bug is fixed). Are there any objections to doing this for pages that ought not be moving and often come under attack by page move vandals? For example, the Village Pump, the Sandbox, and VfD. Angela. 23:00, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

 * None here. —Charles P. (Mirv) 00:37, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * In fact, since I don't foresee any objections, I've gone and done this. These pages are not likely to need moving without serious discussion beforehand anyway, and when (if ever) that time comes, they can easily be unprotected in advance. —Charles P. (Mirv) 22:41, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Please do. I've had to hunt down lost bits of the sandbox history several times.  Pakaran (ark a pan) 22:39, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Will they fix the software at some point to show what kind of protection is in place on the little tab at the top? I almost unprotected a Pump page. Perhaps this now protection could be mentioned in the talk pages of the pages being protected this way, since this discussion isn't very easy to find? --—Ben Brockert (42) UE News  00:51, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

 * Do we list them somewhere? I protected a few of the "deletion" pages. -- User:Docu

Popular articles
Why has the redirect Popular articles been protected? Is the protection against some sort of database bug? The discussion Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Wikipedia:Popular articles says its history is corrupted somehow. jni 14:28, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Front page security hole?
I'm not sure if this is a security problem or not. Yesterday, the Image:Humpback anglerfish.png was featured in the Template:Did you know on the Main Page. A local page was created, with some of the copyright info, but the image is actually on the Commons. The local page was eventually protected, but the page on the Commons never was.

Is this a security hole? I assume creating a local page, and protecting it, is sufficient to prevent someone from uploading a local image and thus overriding the version on the Commons (which was my initial concern). But it also looks like a persistent vandal could have just uploaded a new image over the one on the Commons, with the same effect. Would loading a local copy of the image, protecting it here, and then deleting the local copy when the image leaves the Main Page be sufficient?

Since I'm unregistered I have no practical experience with uploading images; I may be mistaken. But given the recent template vandalism and the current lockdown of the Main Page, if it is a problem a solution should be disseminated, at least to the handful of people involved with updating the templates and protecting the images on the front page. In keeping with the security thought obscurity precept, I deliberately didn't ask while it was still in the template; and I posted the question here, rather than on a more high profile page like Main Page talk, or the admin's noticeboard.

68.81.231.127 15:51, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Protected page that isn't in the list
Melanin is protected but isn't in the list.
 * It was protected by: 06:31, Mar 12, 2005 Jiang (protected due to edit war)

I don't know how to add it to the list properly. RJFJR 20:42, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)

Protected Templates
I've just protected Template:Welcome. This important template is visible to numerous new users on their user talk pages. It was recently vandalized with a graphic felatio image. I noticed at least one user thought the image had been put on their own page by someone. I put a note on Template_talk:Welcome in case anyone without admin access has reason to make legitimate edits to the template. Any objections? -- Infrogmation 23:42, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Template:Unverified
Please move Template:Unverified to Template:No source. I can't do this because this template is protected. Thank you. --Ellmist 05:04, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC) Okay. Thanks again. Have a nice day. --Ellmist 06:53, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Done. In the future, Requested moves would be a better (and more visible) place for such requests. --Slowking Man 06:43, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

Protecting articles from recreation
In the past we have had problems with articles being deleted by VfD and persistently recreated by vandals (dozens and dozens of times). I found that you can effectively prevent this type of vandalism by deleting it to remove history, recreating it with content (the default system message for empty articles), and protecting this new version. The what links here link on that system message can keep track of pages protected by this method. Don't use this unless recreation is a constant problem like it was at André Nilsen and Andre Nilsen. silsor 00:30, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * This is a BOFH solution. silsor 08:23, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I still don't think this is a very good way to do it. We should be obvious about the page's status and provide a clear message, not obscure them confusingly.  Something like Shawn Mikula (though a tag could be devised describing the reason for protection in a better way). -- Netoholic @ 16:40, 2005 Jan 14 (UTC)

"Protected against article re-creation vandalism" subsection
I thought it was really useful to separate out the non-articles that we don't need to unprotect quickly, from the real articles we do need to free, so I put this subsection back. Noel (talk) 12:53, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * While I'm on this topic, I agree with the comments above that using {mediawiki:noarticletext} as the content of recreation-abuse pages is really confusing - it wasn't until I read the entry above that I understood what I was seeing there. Unless there's an objection, I will create a suitable template and modify those pages to use it. Noel (talk) 14:27, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Terminology
VfD I know, but that's not necessarily so for all readers. What is RfC??? These need to be explained/linked in this article. 24.91.43.225 05:25, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Unprotected article marked as protected
The article woman has a {vprotected} message on its top, but it is not protected. Is it supposed to be protected, or should the message be removed? - Mike Rosoft 15:53, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Where to go with a request to unprotect
I followed the link here from the Al-Qaeda page (via This_page_is_protected) but neither there or on this page I found the proper place to request unprotection. Could someone enlighten me - posting the answer here or to my user page. Or just read the talk on Al-Qaeda and unprotect it... TH 19:34, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Australian Flag (image)
As of this moment it still has protect status tag i.e.(Is or will shortly appear on main page.) As the "Australian page" has recently been but no longer is a front page and still the protection of the flag image remains, I was wondering what system is in place to remove protection after such events. Conce 04:29, 2005 August 17 (UTC)

 * Image now unblocked Conce 19:09, 2005 August 17 (UTC)

Unprotection request
The templates Promotional and PAphoto are currently protected, though I can't see why. In any event, I am interested in rewriting both as part of the overall fair use tag rewriting project going on at WikiProject Fair use -- if someone could unprotect them, it would help me very much. Thanks. --Fastfission 18:00, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Done. In the future, WP:RFPP is the place designed for this kind of request. Dmcdevit·t 18:40, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I appreciate it. --Fastfission 20:20, 21 August 2005 (UTC)


text: User talk:81.152.142.240

title: User talk:81.152.142.240


text: User talk:82.139.11.168

title: User talk:82.139.11.168


text:
Talk:VH2

Fuck MTV for cancelling this ! The only true music channel on Tv !

Why did you had to delete the sign here link ! We want VH2 back !

Hear hear ! VH2 was absolutely fantastic, and millions of people thought so. People weren't buying the ringtones off the channel because the typical VH2 viewer wasn't a mindless common idiot who was part of that chav culture. You've got my signature. By the way you could've made the effort to put your own signature at the end of your own posts. Hiyahiyahiya 17:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

If you are so desperate to get your beloved VH2 to come back go do your campaigning elsewhere. Wikipedia is not the place for it.Anon Dude 15:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Vh2 logo.png
Image:Vh2 logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

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

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

BetacommandBot 05:02, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:VH2


text:
Talk:Asian Kung-Fu Generation

masafumi goto
is goto san really married? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.196.230.64 (talk) 22:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes he is, and that's all we know. 123.2.80.57 (talk) 12:04, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Unnecessary info
Is their college major an important piece of information?--DeviantCharles (talk) 23:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

 * It's common to list biographical information, which this is. As long as it can be sourced, I think this kind of information is useful. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Nano-Mugen
There is incorrect information about Nano-Mugen Festival and their compilations. There have been 6 NMF's. See: http://www.nano-mugenfes.com/history.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.2.80.57 (talk) 13:23, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Emo band?
Excuse me but: Can AKFG really be catalogued as a Emo band? I disagree with this statement.

 * I also disagree with that statement. 123.2.80.57 (talk) 08:57, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

 * I think they are emo because they influence Japanese emo band Eastern Youth very much.
 * And Lady GaGa has been influenced by David Bowie and Queen, but that doesn't mean that they're dance/pop, too. Alphabet55 (talk) 22:27, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * In Japanese Wikipedia said they are emo band so they are emo.
 * Please, don't pay any attention to what jp.wikipedia.org says about Emo, they say that "At The Drive-In" is an emo band... (http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A8%E3%83%A2%E3%83%BB%E3%82%B3%E3%82%A2#1990.E5.B9.B4.EF.BD.9E) Could they be more wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bass-Kuroi (talk • contribs) 14:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The band themself have said they perform pop and emo music. From their own description of themselves, this is correct. It's also very apparent in their lyrics, especially on Kimi Tsunagi Five M, Sol-fa, and Fanclub. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.128.75.73 (talk) 02:14, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you have any source for this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bass-Kuroi (talk • contribs) 22:39, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Surf Bungaku Kamakura
Surf Bungaku Kamakura is semi-collection of B-sides, Surf Bungaku Kamakura is Asian Kung-Fu Generation's third big release in 2008, NOT full length 5th Album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.172.174 (talk) 04:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

The page photo
It's kind of hard to see Kiyoshi. Also, it looks like their temporary touring keyboardist, who isn't a permanent member, is in it. Should this be replaced with a better image?24.6.130.20 (talk) 01:30, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Initialisation
Would it not be appropriate to use the official initialisation 'AKG' instead of the unofficial 'AKFG'?Kanjo Kotr (talk) 15:47, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Full Metal Alchemist them song
It should be mentioned somewhere in the article that their song rewind was used as the 4th intro theme in the television series Full Metal Alchemist 50.135.250.142 (talk) 04:51, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Asian Kung-Fu Generation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091215034202/http://noitamina.tv:80/yojouhan/ to http://noitamina.tv/yojouhan/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090419013309/http://www.mva.jp:80/en/nomination/nomination_conceptual.html to http://www.mva.jp/en/nomination/nomination_conceptual.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 00:50, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Asian Kung-Fu Generation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090316090948/http://mva.jp:80/nomination/index.html to http://mva.jp/nomination/index.html

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:04, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 one external links on Asian Kung-Fu Generation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nano-mugenfes.com/en/history.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nano-mugenfes.com/artist.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nano-mugenfes.com/cd.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120312110245/http://www.oneasianworld.com/2011/07/2011-jisan-valley-rock-festival-rocks-korea/ to http://www.oneasianworld.com/2011/07/2011-jisan-valley-rock-festival-rocks-korea/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131105094836/http://www.tfm.co.jp/eh/english.html to http://www.tfm.co.jp/eh/english.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mtvjapan.com/special/vmaj2007_nominee/index.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081024161638/http://www.mva.jp/nomination/index.html to http://www.mva.jp/nomination/index.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:27, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Asian Kung-Fu Generation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090107011123/http://www.under-flower.co.jp/uf/uf%20new%20top%20page/underflowerlabel/Uf%20disco5.html to http://www.under-flower.co.jp/uf/uf%20new%20top%20page/underflowerlabel/Uf%20disco5.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080610055157/http://www.nano-mugenfes.com/en/history.html to http://www.nano-mugenfes.com/en/history.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070218074243/http://www.asiaarts.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=32753 to http://www.asiaarts.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=32753
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/esearch/chart_display.jsp?cfi=848&cfgn=Singles&cfn=Japan%20Hot%20100%20Singles&ci=3097151&cdi=9813111&cid=07%2F04%2F2008
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/esearch/chart_display.jsp?cfi=848&cfgn=Singles&cfn=Japan%20Hot%20100%20Singles&ci=3097999&cdi=9842744&cid=07%2F25%2F2008
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090419003019/http://www.pegasusnews.com/news/2007/mar/06/funimations-fullmetal-alchemist-wins-five-awards-i/?refscroll=326 to http://www.pegasusnews.com/news/2007/mar/06/funimations-fullmetal-alchemist-wins-five-awards-i/?refscroll=326
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100727085043/http://www.jmignited.com/interviews/189-asian-kung-fu-generation-2005 to http://jmignited.com/interviews/189-asian-kung-fu-generation-2005

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:15, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Asian Kung-Fu Generation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/esearch/chart_display.jsp?cfi=848&cfgn=Singles&cfn=Japan%20Hot%20100%20Singles&ci=3097151&cdi=9813111&cid=07%2F04%2F2008
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080822113737/http://www.nano-mugenfes.com/artist.html to http://www.nano-mugenfes.com/artist.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080730030739/http://www.nano-mugenfes.com/cd.html to http://www.nano-mugenfes.com/cd.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/esearch/chart_display.jsp?cfi=848&cfgn=Singles&cfn=Japan%20Hot%20100%20Singles&ci=3097999&cdi=9842744&cid=07%2F25%2F2008
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080624122607/http://www.creativeman.co.jp/2008/weezer/index.html to http://www.creativeman.co.jp/2008/weezer/index.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080804001903/http://www.mtvjapan.com/special/vmaj2007_nominee/index.html to http://www.mtvjapan.com/special/vmaj2007_nominee/index.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090101224740/http://www.mva.jp/history/mva04.html to http://www.mva.jp/history/mva04.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:34, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Asian Kung-Fu Generation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071006075642/http://www.digmeout.net/artist_e.cfm?id=56 to http://www.digmeout.net/artist_e.cfm?id=56
 * Added tag to http://www.asiankung-fu.com/pc/diary/main.jsp?ym=201001
 * Added tag to http://www.asiankung-fu.com/pc/diary/main.jsp?ym=201002
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111007191722/http://6109.jp/akg_gotch/?year=20110318 to http://6109.jp/akg_gotch/?year=20110318
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111007191732/http://6109.jp/akg_gotch/?blog=234684 to http://6109.jp/akg_gotch/?blog=234684
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071217024656/http://www.mva.jp/history/mva05.html to http://www.mva.jp/history/mva05.html
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20071217024701/http://www.mva.jp/history/mva06.html to http://www.mva.jp/history/mva06.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:39, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Asian Kung-Fu Generation


text:
Category:Alumni of Christ's College, Cambridge

See also Category:Fellows of Christ's College, Cambridge.


text: User talk:81.79.79.84

title: User talk:81.79.79.84


text:
Category:Alumni of Churchill College, Cambridge

See also Category:Fellows of Churchill College, Cambridge.


text:
Greatest Painting in Britain Vote

The Greatest Painting in Britain Vote was a survey made by BBC Radio 4's Today programme in Summer 2005 with the aim of discovering the best-loved painting in Britain, in the manner of 100 Greatest Britons and The Big Read. It was criticised for the conservatism of the final selection as well as the unsuitability of the idea for the non-visual medium of radio.

The winner, voted for by the public from a shortlist of 10, was announced on air on 5 September 2005.

title: Greatest Painting in Britain Vote


text:
Category:Alumni of Clare College, Cambridge

See also Category:Fellows of Clare College, Cambridge.


text: User talk:66.93.45.117

title: User talk:66.93.45.117


text:
Wikipedia:Productivity of Wikipedia Authors

By its very nature, Wikipedia lends itself preeminently for international comparisons. For example, currently Wikipedia (DE) has some 478,000 articles, Wikipedia (EN) comprises Special:Statistics articles. Does that mean, English-speaking Wikipedians write more than their German-speaking colleagues? And how does that compare to Wikipedia in other languages?

The results might give some clues on the intellectual climate in various countries.

Productivity of Wikipedia authors
A meaningful measure would be the Productivity of Authors, that is the number of articles in a language compared to the number of potential authors. To be a potential author, at least two requirements must be fulfilled:

 * Command of the language. This must be at least sufficient to write an article, perhaps with the help of other Wikipedians. For practical purposes this a too vague a measure. Therefore, in the following table only native speakers of each language have been taken into account because these numbers are available. However, this determines only the lower limit of potential authors - the real number will be higher and therefore their real productivity will be lower than shown below.

 * Access to the Internet On this there accurate statistics by geographic region. However, speaking a language can comprise several geographic regions - for example, English is a language spoken nearly all over the world. On the other hand, there are geographical regions where several languages are spoken - for example, Switzerland is a country where 4 languages are spoken).

Thus, in the following table there is a column "countries" which lists the main countries where native speakers of a language reside and over which the Internet penetration was averaged.

Productivity of Wikipedia authors by languages
potential                 Productivity Native Speakers    Internet-  Wikipedia-  Wikipedia      of Wikipedia 		      Age -  Penetration  Authors     Articles        Authors			 as of Aug 2005 Language Wiki (mio) (countries)       (%)    (million)    ('000)    (articles/'000 pot. aut.)	  Begin	     (month) - ---  --- --  --    -	 --   English    en   322   USA,GB,CDN      66.6	221.1	     684		3.0		Jan 2001	56 German	  de   100    B,D,A,CH	      56.6	 55.5	     274		4.8		May 2001	52 Japanese  ja   125	J	      60.9	 76.1	     134		1.8		Sep 2001	48 French	  fr	 79   F,B,CDN,CH      49.9	 35.9	     148		3.9		Aug 2001	49 Polish	  pl	 43	PL	      27.8	 12.8	      80		6.1		Sep 2001	48 Dutch	  nl	 21	B, NL	      66.2	 16.6	      85		5.0		Aug 2001	49 Italian   it	 61	I	      48.8	 34.2	      55		1.6		Jan 2002	44 Swedish   sv	  8.8	S	      73.6	  6.5	      96	       14.8		May 2001	52 Spanish   es   332   E,MEX,Latinam. 14.1	 45.1	     60		1.3		May 2001	52 Portuguese pt  170	P,BR	      13.5	 23.0	      61		2.6		Jun 2001	51 Chinese   zh  1080	RC	       7.9	 85.3	      37		0.4		Oct 2002	34 Hebrew	  he     5.1	IL	      44.8	  2.3	      24	       10.5		Jul 2003	23 Norwegian no	  4.6	N	      68.2	  3.1	      32	       10.2		Jan 2002	44 Finnish   fi	  5.2	FIN	      62.3	  3.2	      29		9.0		Sep 2002	35 Russian   ru   170	RUS	      15.5	 26.4	      29		1.1		Nov 2002	33 Danish	  da	  5.3	DK	      68.7	  3.6	      29		8.7		Feb 2002	43 Bulgarian bg	  9.0	BG	      21.4	  1.9	      17	        8.8		Dec 2003	41 Slovene   sl	  2.0	SL	      47.5	  0.9	      17	       17.9		Jul 2003	23 Hungarian hu	 14	H	      30.2	  4.2	      15		3.5		Jul 2003	23 Czech	  cs	 12	CS	      34.5	  4.1	      14		3.4		Nov 2002	33 Turkish   tr	 51	TR	       9.9	  5.0	       4.6		0.9		Dec 2002	32 -       -              ---                                                 666.8       1924.6 (ca. 96%     2.88 avg.                                                             of all Wikipedia)

Column Native Speakers comprises two sub-columns:

 * (mio) - Total number of native speakers (see List of languages by total speakers).
 * (countries) - countries taken into account when averaging the internet-penetration.

Column Internet-Penetration is the weighted average over the countries of native speakers of a language (see Interstat's Internet Usage Statistics)

Column potential Wikipedia-Authors is the product of number of native speakers and the average Internet-Penetration in their countries. This is the approximate number of people who might be capable of writing a Wikipedia article.

When you compare the number of potential Wikipedia-Authors and the number of Wikipedia articles (see the main page of each language). you get the productivity of wikipedia authors in articles per 1000 potential authors.

Findings

 * 1) Surprising is the great disparity among language communities: The most productive one, Slovenia, produced more than twenty times more Wikipedia articles per '000 potential authors than the last one, China. That's even more remarkable since Slovene is one of the youngest Wikipedias whereas Chinese is 9 months older.
 * 2) All Scandinavian countries rank very well (from Sweden to Norway and Finland and even Denmark is still far above average). That cannot be explained by their age alone - a number of older Wikipedias show less productivity.
 * 3) An outstanding productivity is achieved in Israel, though Hebrew is one of the youngest Wikipedias in this list.
 * 4) Remarkably well does Poland, while Polish is almost the same age as English, German and French.
 * 5) The languages most prominent in Wikipedia (English, German, French) are about average. Well, for arithmetic reasons that's not really astonishing. Thus, however, nearly 50% of all potential Wikipedians have about the same productivity (while, as said before, there are great differences among the others).
 * 6) Widespread languages (e.g. Chinese, Russian, Turkish) have rather poor productivity in writing Wikipedia articles, though all of them are nearly 3 years old.

More comparisons/graphs

This graphs shows a comparison of a factor, which suppose to represent the number of articles per person for Wikipedias with more than 10,000 articles (as on 27th May 2006). The values "Articles per person" were calculated as: the number of articles in a given language divided by a number of people, for which that language is native. All numbers are based on the data given in English and Polish Wikipedias. If an accurate value was not available an average between the lowest and the greatest number was taken. The graph for language "Ido" was cut, because it amounted to 5.34, whilst the next best (Icelandic) is only 0.038.

Ratio of active Wikipedians (with more than 10 editions per month) to the number of native speakers for Wikipedias with more than 10 000 articles. The values are given in promils (1/1000).


text:
Category:Alumni of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge

See also Category:Fellows of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge


text:
Petty Enterprises

Petty Enterprises (formerly Lee Petty Engineering) was a NASCAR racing team based in Level Cross, North Carolina, USA. It was founded by Lee Petty with his two sons Richard Petty and Maurice Petty. The team was later owned by Richard Petty, his son Kyle Petty and Boston Ventures. At the time of its folding the team operated the No. 43 and No. 45 Dodge Chargers in the NASCAR Sprint Cup Series. Petty Enterprises ran from 1949 until 2008. The team closed shop in January 2009 and merged with Gillett Evernham Motorsports after sponsorship could not be found for any of the cars in the Petty stable; the merged team took the name Richard Petty Motorsports, adopting a logo similar to that of Petty Enterprises' logo. In 2021, Richard Petty Motorsports became Petty GMS Motorsports, and in 2023 the team rebranded as Legacy Motor Club.

Petty Enterprises formerly held the title of winningest team in NASCAR Cup Series for 61 years, beginning in 1960 with a win by Lee Petty. At the time of the team's final victory, it totaled 268 wins in the series. In 2021, Hendrick Motorsports eclipsed the record, winning its 269th race in the Coca-Cola 600 with Kyle Larson.

Old race shop in Level Cross
The facilities in Randleman that was vacated by the race team is still owned by the Petty family and is now (since 2010) a small business called The Petty Garage and specializes in custom cars, vintage restorations, and other specialty automotive work. The last few years has seen it host Mopar (Chrysler Co. vehicles) appreciation meets.

Lee Petty (1949-1961)
Founded as Lee Petty Engineering, Lee Petty brought Petty Enterprises their first starts, the first of these at Occoneechee Speedway, where Petty finished ninth. The team's first win came that year in Lee's fifth start at Heidelberg Raceway, with Petty and the team finishing 2nd in points that season. Petty won one race in each of the years 1950 and 1951, before collecting three victories in 1952. Lee grabbed five wins in 1953 and finished second in points before winning the championship in 1954. He followed that with six wins the next season and two more the following year, making him one of the most dominating drivers in the series at that time. In 1957, Petty won four races as the team began running additional teams. Petty would accumulate a total of 54 career wins, one of them being the inaugural Daytona 500 in 1959, and three national championships. But during the 100 Mile Qualifying Races for the 1961 Daytona 500, Petty was involved in a horrific crash with Johnny Beauchamp, this would hospitalize both drivers, and Petty would only make a handful of starts between 1962 and 1965.

Lee's sons, Richard and Maurice Petty, would also make a few starts in their father's cars in the early part of their careers. Several other drivers raced a handful of times in the No. 42, including Marvin Panch, Paul Lewis, Tiny Lund, G.C. Spencer, and Dan Gurney.

Kyle Petty (1979-1984)
The year of 1979 saw Richard's son, Kyle Petty, start his career winning the very first race he entered - the Arca 200 at Daytona International Speedway, Petty drove five cup races for PE in 1979. In 1983, the No. 42 became the #7 due to Kyle Petty's 7-Eleven-sponsorship. Kyle earned eight Top 5's, but no wins during that stretch. Petty left to drive for the Wood Brothers in 1985, taking the sponsor with him and causing the team to shut down.

Pre-Richard Petty years (1954-1958)
Believed to be one of the most recognizable numbers in motorsports, the No. 43 team debuted in 1954, when Lee Petty expanded to a two car team and put Bob Welborn in the driver's seat. Welborn competed in two races that season; West Palm Beach and Savannah, finishing 11th and 20th, respectively. The #43 would not return with Petty Enterprises until 1957, this time with Bill Lutz behind the wheel. Lutz drove his Oldsmobile to a 6th-place finish at Daytona Beach. The 43 car would once again take a break from competition until 1959, when Lee placed his son Richard in the car.

Richard Petty (1959-1992)
Richard made ten starts in 1959, accumulating five top tens, and four top fives making him the 1959 Rookie of the Year. Petty returned in 1960, making forty starts, with three wins, sixteen top fives, and thirty top tens. He finished second in NASCAR Grand National Series points, scoring his first career win at Charlotte Fairgrounds Speedway. Petty scored ten wins throughout 1961 and 1962, finishing eighth and second in championship standings. Although he had tremendous success early in his career, his true breakout year was 1963. In '63, Petty scored fourteen wins, thirty top fives, thirty-nine top tens, and eight poles. However, he still fell short of the championship, finishing second to Joe Weatherly.

1964 saw Richard win his first Grand National title, and first Daytona 500. Joining in the Chrysler boycott of NASCAR due to the ban of the Hemi engine, Petty spent most of 1965 drag racing, and only made fourteen out of fifty-five races on the circuit. In 1966, Petty returned to NASCAR. Winning yet another Daytona 500, and finishing third in points. 1967 was a monumental year for Richard. He compiled twenty-seven wins out of forty-eight starts, including a record ten wins in a row. One of these victories was the Southern 500 at Darlington Raceway. This would be his only win in the Southern 500. His dominance in this season dubbed him the nickname of, "King Richard." He had previously been known as the "Randleman Rocket." He also scored his second Grand National Series championship during that season. Petty continued this success in 1968, although he finished third in final points ranking. In 1969, Petty switched brands to Ford, as Richard believed his Plymouth was not as competitive on superspeedways. He requested to run a Dodge Daytona, but Chrysler executives insisted he stay with Plymouth. He would take home ten race wins, and finish second in points. In 1970 Plymouth developed their own version of the Dodge Daytona, the Plymouth Superbird. It had the features Richard wanted, and he switched back to Plymouth for the 1970 season. 1971 was a year of "threes" for Petty, he won his third Daytona 500 and third championship, edging over Virginia driver, James Hylton. Richard would win twenty-one races that year, making him the first stock car racing driver in history to win over $1,000,000. At the end of the 1971 season, Chrysler announced they would no longer factory-back the Pettys.

In 1972, STP began a long, very successful sponsorship arrangement with the team. However, it put an end to the years of famous all "Petty Blue" cars. Initially, STP insisted the car be all orangish-red. But after a lengthy negotiation session, they decided on a car that would be a combination of the "Petty Blue" and the "STP Red." This paint scheme would become the one of all STP sponsored race car, most notably Gordon Johncock's 1982 Indianapolis 500 winning automobile. Thanks to his eight victories, twenty-five top fives, and twenty-eight top tens, Petty won his fourth series title, making him the inaugural Winston Cup champion. In 1973, Petty completed his first full-time season in a Dodge Charger (he had tested them in 1972.) 1973 also saw Petty's fourth Daytona 500 victory, outlasting Buddy Baker's K&K Insurance Racing Dodge. A year later, all NASCAR races were shortened due to the energy crisis. Petty would win the "Daytona 450," along with nine other races, winning his fifth championship.

1975 was another historic year for Petty, as he won the World 600 in Charlotte for the first time in his career, en route to twelve more victories and his sixth series title. The thirteen wins is a modern era (1972–Present) record, tied by Jeff Gordon in 1998. In 1976, Petty was involved in one of the most famous finishes in NASCAR history. He and David Pearson were battling for the win on the last lap of the Daytona 500. When Petty tried to pass Pearson coming out of turn four, his right bumper and Pearson's left front bumper touched. Pearson and Petty both spun and hit the wall. Petty's car came to rest just yards before the start/finish line, but his engine had stalled. Pearson had struck the wall and clipped another car, but his engine was running. Although Team Petty tried to push-start Richard, Pearson would end up winning the race. 1978 was another big year for Petty, not because of his success, but because of his lack of success. This very well could've been the only year in Petty's prime where he did not visit the Winner's Circle. The team could not get their Dodge Magnum to handle the way they wanted, even though they spent countless hours trying to improve the car's performance.

Unhappy with his 1978 results, Petty decided to part ways with Chrysler, and began racing General Motors vehicles. This change proved very successful as Petty scored six top ten finishes in the last ten races of the season. He would go on to have even better results in 1979. He kicked off the season with winning the Daytona 500, the sixth of his career, and the first live flag-to-flag broadcast of a NASCAR race. This race became infamous for a fistfight between competitors Donnie Allison and Cale Yarborough after the race. Allison and Yarborough were running first and second on the last lap when they crashed, allowing Petty to sneak by. The race is also regarded as being the turning point of modern-day NASCAR. The East Coast was snowed in by a blizzard, giving CBS a captive audience. He ran most of the remaining races that season in a Chevrolet, winning four additional times, and his seventh and final NASCAR championship, beating Darrell Waltrip by eleven points. That would be the record for closest championship battle until 1992.

1980 was not a very good year for Petty, he only won twice. This is widely considered to be the first season of Richard's downfall. 1981 was slightly more promising. Prior to the 1981 season, NASCAR dictated that all teams had to downsize their cars to a 110" wheel-base. Even though Petty had been successful with General Motors cars, he wanted to return to his Mopar roots. So, in 1981 Petty revealed a brand new 1981 Dodge Mirada and took it to Daytona in January for testing. Petty's fans were also mostly Dodge fans, so when word got out about the Mirada, over 15,000 people attended just to watch Petty test. Unfortunately for Richard, the Dodge's top speed averaged at 186 miles per hour, about 8 miles per hour slower than his fellow GM and Ford competitors. So, Petty abandoned the Dodge Mirada, and purchased a Buick Regal for the Daytona 500. Petty would end up winning the 500 for the seventh and last time thanks to a strategic late-race pit stop. While Petty would win three races in 1981, Petty was still disappointed in his results and concluded that the Regals were poor in reliability and ill-handling. For the 1982 season, he moved to the Pontiac Grand Prix. At first, the Grand Prix behaved much like the 1978 Dodge Magnum, but towards the end of the year things began to improve. Richard would end the season with three victories, nine top fives, and twenty-one top tens.

Richard would leave Petty Enterprises after the 1983 season, moving to Curb Racing in hopes his statistics would improve. In 1986 Richard returned to his family's team. The following years would come with little success for struggling Petty, scoring a combined zero wins, fifteen top fives, and thirty-two top tens.

On October 1, 1991, Petty announced he would retire from racing after the 1992 season. Petty's final top ten finish came in the 1991 Budweiser at the Glen, which is the same race that claimed the life of veteran driver JD McDuffie. Petty's final season was dubbed the "Fan Appreciation Tour." This tour took him around the country, participating in special events, ceremonies, and fan meeting sessions. Petty would lead the field on the pace lap at every race as a salute to the fans.

Petty led the first five laps of the Pepsi 400 at Daytona, but dropped out on lap 84. Petty's final race came at the season-ending Hooters 500 at Atlanta Motor Speedway. Petty was involved in an accident on lap 94, but the team managed to restore the car and send him back out with two laps to go and Richard Petty was running at the finish in 35th position before taking one last lap after the race in a fender-less race car, with tear-filled eyes and a hand out the window, waving goodbye to his many fans.

Legacy Motor Club and Daytona International Speedway unveiled the first of 28 unique statues featuring Petty’s famed hat.

Wally Dallenbach Jr. / John Andretti (1994)
In 1994, the No. 43 car made a return with Wally Dallenbach Jr. as the driver. Dallenbach tallied three top 10's and one top 5, but struggled to qualify races. He was replaced mid-season by John Andretti.

Bobby Hamilton (1995-1997)
For 1995, 1991 Winston Cup Rookie of the Year Bobby Hamilton was hired to drive. Hamilton would score four top fives, and scored his first win with the team the following year at Phoenix, this would be Petty Enterprises first win since 1983. In 1997 Hamilton won at Rockingham, but left the team at the end of the season to drive for Morgan-McClure Racing.

John Andretti (1998-2003)
In 1998, journeyman John Andretti was hired and he gave the team three Top 5's in his first year, and another win at Martinsville the following. This would ultimately be the final win for Petty Enterprises. In 2000, Andretti began to fail and he only scored two Top 10's. The next year, he did score one Top 5 at Bristol.

The team lost longtime sponsor STP in mid-2000 and changed to General Mills. The #43 team began a noticeable downward slide, and would not win another race in Cup competition until 2014 as Richard Petty Motorsports.

Christian Fittipaldi (2003) and Jeff Green (2003-2005)
2003 saw Andretti get released fourteen races into the season in favor of Brazilian driver Christian Fittipaldi, who struggled and was also released after ten races. Jeff Green took over for 2004–2005, with a best finish of seventh at Martinsville in 2004.

Bobby Labonte (2006-2008)
In 2006, the team brought in 2000 Winston Cup champion Bobby Labonte and former Hendrick Motorsports crew chief Robbie Loomis. Many analysts saw this combination as the key to putting Petty Enterprises back into victory lane. The team's first year together showed promise, Labonte finished 21st in the points with eight top tens. Late in the 2007 season, Petty Enterprises moved its shop into the old Robert Yates Racing facility in Mooresville, North Carolina. It would be the first time since the inception of the company that it wouldn't be located in Randleman, North Carolina. "PE believes that this is necessary to move forward with the team," Richard Petty said. "It's kind of hard for us and the people in the community to accept maybe we're not there anymore. We just feel for us to move forward and keep up with where NASCAR is going, we just felt we had to try to go somewhere else." That year, Labonte improved to 18th in points. Labonte fell back to 21st in points in 2008, posting just two top-10 finishes Earlier in the year, General Mills announced they would leave the team to sponsor Richard Childress Racing's fourth cup car in 2009. Rumors surfaced in early December 2008 that Petty Enterprises may cease operations and liquidate its assets, since Boston Venture was unable to secure sponsorship for the No. 43.

Merger with Evernham Motorsports (2009)
In January 2009, Petty Enterprises merged with Gillett Evernham Motorsports and the No. 43 car was absorbed into the team. Labonte left the team before the 2009 season, leaving the car with no driver and no sponsor for 2009. By January 2009, the only employees left were Robbie Loomis and Richard Petty himself. CEO David F. Zucker was reassigned to the Richard Petty Driving Experience, which Boston Ventures also controlled. The team's merger with Gillett Evernham Motorsports moved the No. 43 over to that team, In 2021, RPM merged with GMS Racing and the No. 43 moved there where it is currently driven by Erik Jones.

Maurice Petty (1960-1961)
The No. 44 debuted in 1960 with driver Maurice Petty, Petty finished eighth. Maurice returned with the #44 in 1961, finishing twenty-first at Bowman Gray Stadium.

Rick Wilson (1993)
After Richard Petty's retirement, the No. 43 was renumbered as the No. 44 and Rick Wilson was signed to drive for 1993. Wilson struggled, only placing in the top 10 once at Sonoma, and was released at the end of the season.

Kyle Petty (1997-2000)
The No. 44 returned when Kyle Petty formed his own PE2 Motorsports team for the 1997 season. After 1998 the team merged into Petty Enterprises and Kyle became the team's new CEO. Midway through 2000 after his son Adam Petty was killed while practicing for a Busch Series race at New Hampshire International Speedway, Kyle elected to finish out Adam's Busch season in his No. 45 and would switch to using the No. 45 in Cup from the 2001 season onwards. Steve Grissom would complete the season in the No. 44.

Buckshot Jones (2001-2002)
The No. 44 became a Dodge team in 2001 with a sponsorship from Georgia-Pacific and Buckshot Jones driving. In his first year driving the car, Jones finished 41st in points, failing to qualify six times and not recording a single Top 10 finish. Jones returned in 2002 but again struggled, and was released approximately mid-season. Petty Enterprises hired several substitute drivers including Jerry Nadeau, who nearly led the team to victory at Sonoma in June, and Greg Biffle, who ran the last three races.

After being used sparingly over the next season, recent Petty signee Christian Fittipaldi was to take over the car for 2004, but was released.

In 2009, Petty said the No. 44 would return with McCumbee, but McCumbee said "the plans are up in the air" due to lack of funding. With the recent merger with Gillett Evernham Motorsports, those plans were completely scrapped and McCumbee was without a ride for 2009. The No. 44 instead took the place for the No. 10 at Richard Petty Motorsports, with A. J. Allmendinger driving.

Car No. 45 history
The No. 45 was not always part of Petty Enterprises.

Adam Petty (2000)
The team appeared to be on the rise again with fourth-generation driver Adam Petty joining the team. He made his first Winston Cup start in April 2000, and many experts believed he would be the future of the team. Kyle Petty was planning to move out of the cockpit soon after, and into the full-time ownership role of the team.

About a month and a half after his first career Winston Cup start, Adam Petty was killed in a practice crash at New Hampshire International Speedway in Loudon, New Hampshire. The tragedy deeply affected the team. Kyle Petty took over what was supposed to be Adam's No. 45 car, and drove it for several seasons in his honor.

Kyle Petty (2001-2008)
Kyle Petty would have sponsorships from Sprint now driving the No. 45 in honor of his son. From 2003 to 2005, he would pick up Georgia-Pacific and Brawny (moving over from the No. 44 team) as his sponsors, but was still unable to bring Petty Enterprises back to its former days. With the addition of both Bobby Labonte and Robbie Loomis in 2006, as well as sponsors Wells Fargo and National Tire & Battery, Petty improved his position to 34th in the points.

For 2007, with the passing of Benny Parsons, Petty would join TNT for six races, dubbed their "Summer Series". During this time, John Andretti returned to the team for four races, and NASCAR Craftsman Truck Series driver Chad McCumbee made his debut at Pocono Raceway. Before his stint in the booth for TNT, Petty had some significant on-track success, finishing third in the Coca-Cola 600, his first Top 5 Cup finish since 1997. After the Centurion Boats at the Glen, Kyle injured his hand in the team's hauler due to punching a desk. Petty would sit out two races while Kenny Wallace and McCumbee filled in. The No. 45 team finished 35th in the 2007 owners points. Kyle Petty in an interview with NASCAR.com said: "I no longer work for the team" when referring to Petty Enterprises.

While the No. 45 car posted no Top 10s and went through multiple sponsors and drivers, it was announced in early December 2008 that Petty Enterprises may cease operations and liquidate its assets since Boston Venture was unable to secure sponsorship for the No. 45. In January 2009, when Petty Enterprises merged with Gillett Evernham Motorsports, the No. 45 team was folded, leaving Kyle Petty with no ride for 2009.

Car No. 8 history
In 2000, Petty Enterprises fielded the No. 8 car for Steve Grissom at Rockingham. He finished 37th.

Car No. 30 history
Petty Enterprises made their Busch Series debut in 1988 with Kyle Petty as the driver of the No. 30 car.

Car No. 43 history
In 1994, Petty Enterprises hired Rodney Combs to drive the No. 43 Black Flag/French's Pontiac the following year. Despite the famous ride, 1994 was a roller coaster. Combs did not make four of the 27 races, but matched his three top-10s of '93. Combs best runs were a pair of 9th at Martinsville and Myrtle Beach and a 10th at Bristol. Yet, Combs did have seven other top-20s. However, in addition to poor qualifying results with the first year team, Combs' team had 9 DNFs, a tough thing to overcome. (In Combs' defense, all but two were mechanical) This led to a poor 21st place showing in points.

Combs' best career year in any NASCAR series came in 1995, where he finished 11th in points. This year, Combs made all the races, and this enabled him to once again earn three top-10s. Combs earned new career bests of 6th at Myrtle Beach and Atlanta, and tacked on a 10th at Dover International Speedway and a large 16 other top-20s to boot. Along with a lesser DNF count (4), Combs' team looked in good shape for 1996.

However, 1996 was not Combs' best year, and it began to lead to his departure from the sport. Combs made all but one start in 1996, and earned 18th in points, after another up-and-down year. Combs earned a pair of sixths as his only top-10s in 1996 at Daytona and Atlanta. (Combs would later prove to have a career best finish of 6th-four times) Combs did earn what would prove to be his best career start: a 3rd at Myrtle Beach. However, on the flipside, Combs only earned 9 top-20s, down from 19 in 1995, the primary reason for his points slide.

In 1997, Petty Enterprises sold the 43 team to David Ridling.

Car No. 45 history
In 1999, Petty Enterprises fielded the No. 45 Chevrolet for Adam Petty. Petty finished sixth in his first Busch Series race at Daytona and had a best finish of fourth place at Fontana, though he also failed to qualify for three of the Busch races. Petty finished the 1999 season 20th overall in points.

Petty Enterprises planned to have Petty run a second Busch season in 2000, while giving him seven starts in the 2000 NASCAR Winston Cup Series, in preparation for a full Winston Cup campaign in 2001. On May 12, 2000, in a practice session for the Busch 200 race at New Hampshire Motor Speedway, which would have been his 48th career Busch Series start, Petty's throttle had stuck wide open going into the third turn of the track, causing the car to hit the outside wall virtually head on, killing Adam instantly as he developed a basilar skull fracture. He was 19 years old. Adam's father Kyle Petty, who had driven the No. 44 Hot Wheels-sponsored Pontiac Grand Prix Winston Cup car at the time of his son's fatal crash at New Hampshire, chose to take over Adam's No. 45 car in the Busch Series for the remainder of 2000 season.

In 2001, Steve Grissom drove the No. 45 car at Daytona. He finished 26th.

Truck No. 34 history
In 1999, Petty Enterprises fielded the No. 34 truck for Adam Petty at Richmond and Texas.

Truck No. 42 history
In 1997, Petty Enterprises fielded the No. 42 truck for Ken Bouchard at Texas. He finished 10th.

Truck No. 43 history
In 1995, Petty Enterprises made their Craftsman Truck Series debut with Rodney Combs drove the No. 43 truck part-time.

In 1996, the No. 43 would run full-time with Rich Bickle as the driver. He won two poles and ended the season with 9 top-10 finishes.

In 1997, Jimmy Hensley joined the team to pilot the No. 43 Cummins Dodge in the next three seasons.

In 1998, Hensley found victory lane at Nashville and finished sixth in the final points standings.

In 1999, he finished first at Martinsville, recording what would be the last win of his career.

In 2000, Steve Grissom was hired by Petty Enterprises to drive their No. 43 Dodge Ram in the Craftsman Truck Series. While he did not visit victory lane, Grissom finished in the top-five six times and finished tenth in points.

In 2001, Carlos Contreras would drive the No. 43 Dodge full-time. He would post two top tens on the season and move up to 14th in the overall points standings.

In 2002, Contreras returned with to the series with Petty Enterprises and again turned in another solid season. He would post one top ten on the season and would rank 16th in the overall point standings.

Petty Blue
One of the most distinctive features of the No. 43 car is its color. Petty Blue, as it's called, was created by the Petty family. According to Richard, the color was created by accident when they didn't have enough white or dark blue paint to cover the entire car. The resulting mix of white and blue proved to be very popular and remains on the No. 43 car to this day. Previous to that 1958 occurrence, Petty cars were generally white or red.

title: Petty Enterprises


text:
Flamethrower, Portable, No 2

The Flamethrower, Portable, No 2 (nicknamed Lifebuoy from the shape of its fuel tank), also known as the Ack Pack, was a British design of flamethrower for infantry use in the Second World War.

Description
It was a near copy of the German Wechselapparat ("Wex") from 1917.

The Mark 1 was used as a training weapon, while the improved Mark 2 was used in action. Over 7,000 units were produced from 1943 to 1944. They were ready for service during Operation Overlord (the Allied invasion of Normandy).

The Ack Pack was a harness carrying a doughnut-shaped fuel container with a capacity of 4 Imperial gallons (18 litres) of fuel on the operator's back. In the middle of the "doughnut" was a spherical container holding nitrogen gas as a propellant, which was pressurized to 2,000 lbf/in2 (140 Bar). This was sufficient to propel the burning fuel 120 feet (36 metres). A hose from the fuel tank passed to the nozzle assembly which had two pistol grips to hold and aim the spray. The back grip had the trigger.

In some versions the nozzle was fitted with a 10-chambered cylinder which contained the ignition cartridges. These could be fired once, each giving the operator 10 bursts of flame. In practice this gave 10 one-second bursts. It was also possible to spray fuel without igniting it to ensure there was plenty splashed around the target, then fire an ignited burst to light up the whole lot.

At some 64 lb the flamethrower was considered heavy.

title: Flamethrower, Portable, No 2


text: Talk:Petty Enterprises

title: Talk:Petty Enterprises


text:
Category:Alumni of Downing College, Cambridge

See also Category:Fellows of Downing College, Cambridge


text:
File:Transparent taxobox.jpg

printscreen of wikipedia for bug query

title: File:Transparent taxobox.jpg


text:
Category:Alumni of Emmanuel College, Cambridge

See also Category:Fellows of Emmanuel College, Cambridge.


text:
Category:Alumni of Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge

This category also includes non-collegiate students affiliated to Cambridge University, known as students of Fitzwilliam House, prior to the granting of collegiate status in 1966.


text:
User:Smicke~enwiki/sandbox

blabla

title: User:Smicke~enwiki/sandbox