text:
Talk:Conspiracy theory/Archive 5

The (Non) Logic of "Conspiracy Theory" Accusations
The term "conspiracy theorist" as it is almost always used is simply nothing more than a logically self-contradictory ad hominem attack.

The reason the charge of "conspiracy theorist" is logically self-contradictory is because everyone with an I.Q. high enough to tie their shoes is a believer in conspiracies. Governments are the biggest promulgators of belief in conspiracies--witness all the laws against "conspiracy" and all the criminal charges of "conspiracy" brought against people. The offical U.S. government story regarding such events as, e.g., the Pearl Harbor attack, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and the 9/11 attacks are charges by the U.S. government of conspiracy having been conducted against it by other governments or by non-government terrorist groups.

Thus, those making the charge of "conspiracy theorist" are also believers and/or promulgators of notions regarding conspiracies--often far more so than the person being accused as being a "conspiracy theorist."

A conspiracy is simply when two or more people formulate a plan which involves doing something untoward to another person or other people (of which plan may or may not be kept secret, i.e., secrecy is not a necessary component of conspiracy).

It certainly says something regarding the intellectual blinders one making the charge of "conspiracy theorist" is wearing that they don't even stop to realize the logically self-contradictory nature of this charge, as going by the literal meaning of the two words in the phrase "conspiracy theorist." For the one making this charge is himself a believer in conspiracies.

And so it is here where we come to the real meaning of the term "conspiracy theorist" as it is used by those making the charge. What they mean by this charge is that the accused believes in and/or promotes ideas regarding conspiracies which have not been offically sanctioned by the accuser's government--whereas the accuser making this charge believes in and/or promotes ideas regarding conspiracies which his government has deemed appropriate for the public to believe in. The difference between the two is that the accuser believes in and/or promotes ideas regarding conspiracies which are statist in their implications, in that they merely reiterate the offical government line--whereas the accused believes in and/or promotes ideas regarding conspiracies which are anti-statist in their implications, in that they go against what the accuser's government would have the public believe.

Also, the term "theory" as it is used in this logically self-contradictory ad hominem attack is misapplied and inappropriate. The term "theory" suggests a principle or law of operation. Thus you have the General Theory of Relativity and the Theory of Evolution. Yet almost always the logically self-contradictory ad hominem charge of "conspiracy theorist" is against those who are making specific claims regarding historical events. To illustrate this point, if someone says that it rained over the Bahamas on September 2, 2004 are they then a "theorist" for saying so?--209.208.77.64 09:44, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to argue with you over this for the same reason that I don't spend my time mud wrestling with pigs. But I do think that you should consult a dictionary for the definition of "theory".  It does not "suggest a principle or law of operation".  Laws have been proven as verifiable.  Theories have not.  Thus the word applies for the term "conspiracy theory".  Dismas|(talk) 09:50, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, talk about an ad hominem attack! That is a way to dehumanize me by conflating me with animals used for slaughter. I will here ask you to please stop psychologically projecting upon me. I've actually read many dictionaries on this matter, including having read Wikipedia's very own entry on the term "theory." Apparently you would have people believe that you've never heard of the General *Theory* of Relativity and the *Theory* of Evolution. Is not the General *Theory* of Relativity a physical law? Go ahead and look at Wikipedia's own entry on "theory." You'll find that it has no relevancy to almost any belief in conspiracy. So please now answer my question: if someone says that it rained over the Bahamas on September 2, 2004 are they then a "theorist" for saying so? That is the issue here with the misapplied term "theory." The logically self-contradictory ad hominem attack of "conspiracy theorist" is against those making claims regarding historical events which go against the claims of the political establishment. Such people attacked by this ad hominem are making claims regarding historical events based upon historical inquiry. Either the event happened or it did not--just as with the historical claim of rain having fallen on a certain day and at a certain place.--209.208.77.64 10:23, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * "Is not the General *Theory* of Relativity a physical law?" No.  That's why it's called a "theory".  See Theory of relativity and you'll see in the evidence in the first sentence.  I'm done... At least you made me chuckle and shake my head... Dismas|(talk) 10:44, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The General *Theory* of Relativity is certainly a physical law in the sense that every experiment to date has confirmed it, i.e., in the sense of a principle that is known to be true to date. By your use of "law" in this context, nothing could be a physical law unless proved *a priori* (since experiment can't prove a general principle but merely confirm it). Granted, using "law" in this sense isn't logically rigorous in the utmost of sense if one means by "law" something which is known cannot possibly be violated, but all mainstream physicists that I am aware of speak of the "laws of physics" (i.e., as they are currently known). At any rate, this is a total diversion by you from my actual statement. I said "The term 'theory' suggests a principle or law of operation. Thus you have the General Theory of Relativity and the Theory of Evolution." Notice I said "principle *or* law," so your own incorrect cavils regarding the term "law" are irrelevant even on their own terms. The point is that merely making a claim regarding a historical event is not the same as positing a principle or law of operation. So, once again, please now answer my question: if someone says that it rained over the Bahamas on September 2, 2004 are they then a "theorist" for saying so (whether they be either right or wrong)?--209.208.77.64 11:27, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

- Cleanup notice removed --Cberlet 13:23, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

''The Notable "conspiracy theories" segment needs attention and cleanup. Categorization and "ranking" is needed badly. Some of them are very minor and some are very major. It's "all over the place", so to speak. ''

- "Some people believe that Freemasonry was condemned by the Church primarily because of its view that all religions are equal; this view was diametrically opposed to the Catholic belief that it is the only true religion. Since many Catholics and some Protestants now agree with the Masonic principles condemned by the Church ..." Some issues with this: No past tense needed. A catholic may not be a freemason, on pain of excommunication. What exactly is meant by "All religions are equal"? And do many catholics and protestants agree on these alleged masonic principles? Perhaps this part can be coordinated with the wikipedia article on freemasonry, if there is one?

Can someone justify the "Anti-Semitic belief systems" section?
Almost all of this section is devoted to the idea that Jews have prospered by lending money for profit, in a manner justified by their religious beliefs. Although this is an interesting topic, I'm not sure what it belongs in the "conspiracy theory" article unless someone can clarify what the conspiracy is supposed to be. Is the conspiracy supposed to involve the Jews making back-room deals to jack up interest rates, or to hiding their financial activity from the general public? (It seems to me that on usually doesn't need to "conspire" in order to lend money for profit. So why would the Jews need to?) Or is the conspiracy supposed to involve non-Jews spreading this rumor about the Jews in order to discredit them? Or is it something else? --Ryguasu 12:29, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * It's a legitimate point on this page because it is the start of many of the worst conspiracy theories about Jews. The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion has already been cited as an example of that sort of thing. Edward I's treatment of the Jews in England is another example of a conspiracy theory starting from that point. Hitler also used aspects of the money lending point in his attacks on Jews. It's not so much a conspiracy theory in and of itself as the starting point for a great many theories. David Newton 11:33, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I've created two new archive pages. Philwelch 19:29, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

Note that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a hoax, which was written in the late 1700s, which has been pressed into ideological service many times for many philosophies, including Nazism and other such groups. Davidizer13 16:08, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

U.S Interventions

"During the 20th century the United States has also often been accused of plotting foreign coups d'état for commercial interest, as in the 1954 overthrow of Guatemalan president Jacobo Arbenz Guzman."

That's not a conspiracy theory, it's a well documented fact. --Tothebarricades.tk 02:47, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Removed text
Have removed the following text from the article: Firstly if such an article exists where is it, and secondly the red link (which is only linked to from here) is a target for vandals of wikipedia. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 14:21, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Another article exists which lists and describes a vast array of conspiracy articles, including a series of global conspiracy theories, conspiracy theories peculiar to the United States of America, conspiracy theories peculiar to Canada, and conspiracy theories peculiar to the Arab and Muslim world. This includes a discussion of Zionist conspiracy theories regarding the September 11th 2001 Terrorist Attacks.

Well, there was this crazy conspiracy which involved several Israeli citizens allegedly found with a camera and cheering when the towers fell.Bold textItalic textThis has been proven to be false. What really happened was that 5 Israelis drove a white van across the George Washington Bridge later that day. The police had a tip that Middle Eastern terrorists in a white van were going to destroy the bridge. The Israelis were detained, and that's how that falsehood started. I cite Chapter 71, "911" of the book, "The 80 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time" (quite possibly the best list of conspiracies ever compiled) to back this up. Davidizer13 16:15, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Rosh Hashannah theory
A recent addition by Gzuckier discussed an original date of 9/17 or 9/18. I'd never heard that before. Do you have a cite? Quadell (talk) 19:23, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * With the information that the news agency was 'Al Manar', I can now find a few such sources:
 * 4,000 Jews Did Not Go To Work At World Trade Center On Sept.11
 * AL-MANAR Television Special Investigative Report
 * Beirut, Lebanon - Monday, September 17, 2001
 * 4,000 Jewish Employees in WTC Absent the Day of the Attack
 *
 *

 * According to Nexis and the Google search engine, the first mention of Israeli involvement in the attacks came in a Sept. 17 report on Lebanon's Al-Manar Television. The Los Angeles Times reports that the terrorist group Hezbollah has free access to Al-Manar's airwaves, and the station's Web site claims that the station exists to "stage an effective psychological warfare with the Zionist enemy."
 * The next day at 6:26 a.m., the American Web site Information Times published an article headlined "4,000 Jews Did Not Go To Work At WTC On Sept. 11," and credited it to an "AL-MANAR Television Special Investigative Report." This was not the first time that Information Times had pointed the finger at Israel. The day after the attacks, it warned in an article that the "terrorist government of Israel … cannot be ruled out" as a suspect. Information Times purports to be edited by Syed Adeeb from the eighth floor of the National Press Club at 549 15th St. NW, Washington, DC, 20045. The Press Club says it has no such tenant and repeated messages sent to the e-mail address for Syed Abeed listed on the site bounce back as undeliverable. Directory assistance for Washington, D.C., has no listing for Information Times.
 *

Actually, the claim that no Israelis were killed at the WTC appears to be correct. All the victim lists I've found only list 1 Israeli death, and it was on a plane, not in the WTC.. Whether there were any Israeli employees working there normally I don't know. - Mustafaa 20:50, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Although Haaretz disagrees, citing 5 victims, 3 of which were at the WTC. - Mustafaa 21:03, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The reason for the disagreement is that 4 of these were listed as Americans elsewhere - presumably dual citizens. - Mustafaa 21:44, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It may be a good idea to take this discussion to Talk:Zionist conspiracy theories regarding the September 11, 2001 attacks. I've made extensive recent edits, partly benefiting from the Slate link cited above, and would be interested to get more input. - Mustafaa 23:27, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

In the book "The 80 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time," it says that figure was drawn from the 4000 Israelis who worked in the entire city! It is highly unlikely that they all worked in the WTC.Davidizer13 16:15, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

psychology of conspiracy theories
This is a good article, but it could really do with a section on the psychology of conspiracy theories. Why are they so prevalent for instance ChrisG 18:57, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * 'owzat? Adhib 16:53, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Iraq weapons of mass destruction qualifies as Conspiracy theory?
In light of definition given

 * "common historical or current understanding of events, under the claim that those events are the result of manipulations by one or more secretive powers or conspiracies."

As current understanding is that Iraq didn't have 'weapons of mass destruction' so old theory that it had 'weapons of mass destruction' and it was provided by 'secret agencies' can it qualify as conspiracy theory?
 * Zain 23:08, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Fixed Zain's spell-error--OleMurder 14:59, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Seems more like 'blatant baldfaced lie'. Gzuckier 17:50, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * The BBC briefly claimed that No.10 Downing Street "probably knew" that their pronouncements on Iraq were false, which claim amounted to charging people within the UK government of conspiracy. The BBC corrected the claim in later reports in that same broadcast, but was eventually eviscerated by the UK government backlash. The point is this: The idea that Tony Blair and chums are two-faced liars makes more sense in a lazy media narrative than the idea that the UK government were institutionally blind to reality. This latter appears, now, to be the case. But it made (and still makes) a far too complicated narrative to set out in a mass media context. Why were people of such evidently limited critical faculties chosen to run the country? Much harder to answer than "Why is this lying b****rd lying to me?" Adhib 17:07, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, except for that pesky Downing Street Memo that recently came out.

Secret reasons for the end of communism
I removed this section from the article. The text was

 * It is sometimes claimed that not only the bad economics terminated the communism in Eastern Europe, but that because of bad technology and frequently occuring UFOs, the principle of Cold War - the equilibrum of terror - was not maintainable any more. This theory can be claimed by some extraordinary and well documented UFO incidences in East and West before 1989.

At first, I though I'd just fix up the English and POV, but when I was done I had

 * It is sometimes claimed that the fall of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War was caused by UFOs.

And the references 1) are all in German, and 2) look like they aren't that good anyway. dbenbenn | talk 19:50, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup attempt
This article suffers from being a way that proponents of dubious conspiracy theories get to insert their claims into an article. Much of this can be linked to external articles, and the detail deleted. The new Popper stuff is interesting, but derails the main theme of the article. I think we should move it lower. And none of us can claim to know what Popper would like and dislike today. So that was cut. This article still needs a lot of work to make it coherent and more balanced. --Cberlet 00:30, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Can anyone explain what this section is doing on this page?
 * "Termination of rocket experiments at Cuxhaven"
 * It just seems to be a complaint about a government ruling about rocket testing. Is this actually a well-known conspiracy theory? I cannot find evidence of this as a major conspiracy theory --Cberlet 13:53, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Tidying-up
OK, I've started trying to lick this into better shape. Apart from new subsidiary articles exporting some of the discussions to stand on their own, I'll be removing the occasional paranoid fantasy or re-describing it in non-commital NPOV. Oh, and I'll also be pasting dubious 'facts' here for debate about whether they warrant reinsertion into the article: for a first example, I think Al Capone might have had something to say about this ...
 * The Mafia was essentially completely unknown to outsiders until Joe Valachi revealed them in 1963.

Adhib 09:51, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Apologies for the snafu and thanks to Cberlet for the rescue job. Seems my set-up (iMac, 'course) can't handle editing stuff that's way over-length. The edit window just gives me the first 40kb or so, hence the ugly snip that occurred, even when I reverted. This means the bits I valued from my own contrib of the 23rd (material on the Chinese Embassy in the War sub-section; 16:09, 23 Feb 2005 ) are inaccessible to me to copy and paste across to their appropriate home in Cberlet's new Conspiracy theories (a collection) article. Anyone got any advice? Adhib 15:59, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Removed from main article for analysis
An unidentified user added this to 'Psychology of ...'

 * There may also be specific historical periods during which a government is actually covertly subverted from within by a conspiratorial cabal. In such a case, if successful, covert control over the mass electronic news media, the central nervous system of any modern democracy, will probably also be employed, leaving the public at large with an officially-sanctioned conspiracy theory produced to distract attention and blame away from the true conspirators.  In such cases, those people who accept the government-provided unproven conspiracy theory will not see themselves as conspiracy theorists, yet will see anyone who does not accept the unproven official conspiracy theory as a "conspiracy theorist"  with some ulterior need or motive.  When this happens, it is time to cast aside the labels and psychology and study the physics in order to determine the truth of the matter.  For example, in the case of 9/11, the official government explanation of the "gravitational" collapses of the twin towers, which occurred in near-free-fall times, despite the great expenditure of energy pulverizing so much concrete to an impossibly fine powdery dust along the way, requires the belief that gravity was stronger than gravity, a ludicrous proposition.

This does not to achieve NPOV, a basic standard of inclusion in Wikipedia articles, but instead commits to one - at least somewhat controversial - interpretation of events. If it is to be revised to appear in an article, I recommend it is placed appropriately in Misinformation and rumors about the September 11, 2001 attacks. Adhib 14:43, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree with Adhib. This was an attempt to insert a specific POV conspiracy theory into the text. The idea here is that this page is a general discussion of Conspiracy theory. There is another page that mentions specific Conspiracy theories, and then there is a page just on 9/11 conspiracy theories (and many other topicla pages). Also, for the record, Popular Mechanics has a thorough study debunking precisely this conspiracy theory. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html --Cberlet 02:19, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Another unidentified user added the following.
 * But as real conspirations quite naturally sometimes occur in history, (for instance tere ocur often spy paronoias in some contexte where people sees spies wherever, but naturally real spies also do exits, so the fact that exist sometimes that sort of paranoïa quite not do that tera can be real spies) So the nowadays success of the concept of "conspiracy theory, and the strange   propensity in some section of media the resort of that "arm" to a-priori discreditate every troublesome susputions, do that now many poeple suspect that that new "fashion" is mainly the fact of power circles, that found a very potent and easy to use weapon to frighten all would be critics, "whistleblowers", or truth-searchers, and thus maybe prevent that real conspiracies or every kinds of scandal might come to light !

AndrewMcQ 19:26, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

And here's yet more in that vein ... we're clearly going to need to find a way to head off these kinds of contribution, if possible. This seems to me to constitute original research:

 * Equally relevant to consider is the psychology of dismissing conspiracy theories by the dominant cultural influences in society (governments, media, etc.). Throughout the ages, one of the commonest techniques employed by powers that be with regard to allegations that make them feel uncomfortable is to accuse supporters of such alternative views of insanity or irrationality, even if their case is supported by at least prima facie evidence. This approach serves to effectively deter continued discussion of a theory in question on the fear that those who give ear to it be publicly labelled "insane".

 * Thus the modern-day term "conspiracy theory" has been generally denigrated to mean a point of view that could more aptly be called a "conspiracy hypothesis". N.B.: a theory differs from a hypothesis in that a theory is a supposition that is backed up by some (prima facie, at least) evidence in practice. The dominant cultural influences however, whose vested interest is to maintain the dominant (=their own) explanations of things, consistently strip the term "conspiracy theory" of this important shade of meaning that sets it apart from a simple hypothesis. The very existence of evidence to back up a "conspiracy theory" is thus denied by the powerful on the level of verbal conditioning of the masses (=consumers of the dominant culture). In this fashion, the very accusation of something being a "conspiracy theory" carries today the undue connotation that the dissenting point of view is lacking in evidence and is hence unworthy of any pursued investigation.

Excising the original research and logical fallacies from these pars leaves, as far as I can see, nothing to reinsert in the article. Adhib 10:00, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Bias against anonymous editors
The insertion of highly POV material in defense of conspiracy theories by an anonymous user is almost comical on this topic. Folks, at least have the common courtesy of signing in and defending you views.--Cberlet 04:21, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia policy does not treat edits by anonymous users different from edits by logged-in ones. Reverting an edit because it worsens the article is acceptable. Reverting it because it was made by an anonymous users is against the rules. --FOo 14:42, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * I was not clear. I was commenting on the irony of anonymous edits on the conspiracy page. I meant sign into the discussion page first. Bad choice of words on my part.   I reverted the edit for three reasons: 1) it was very poorly written and did not make a lot of sense. 2) this is a contentious page and people have been asked to discuss these matters first before a major edit. 3)It was an unsupported opinion plonked into a section on the psychology of conspiracism that is based on over 50 years of research in academia.--Cberlet 20:15, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * I suspect that some "anonymous posters" on this and certain other articles do so in order not to be targetted by "the idiots"/flamers and other suchlike (as distinct from "those who rearrange for the fun of it/to annoy others."

Bogus Edits
Dear User:Bogusstory Let's not have a revert war. The definition is cafefully worded. Your attempts at editing have been poorly written, often barely coherent, and opinionated. If you want to discuss what you are trying to say, this is the place. But let's not have a revert war.--Cberlet 22:52, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Lead
The lead definition should not be focused on the political examples with "secretive powers" and "common understandings".

I don't care who writes the lead definition, however I was not happy with the current one because I (and likely Rhobite) think it is incomprehensible and inaccurate compared to dictionary definitions and leans more towards the colloquial or political definitions.

The lead definition needs to be flexible enough to work for any special case. The concept of "conspiracy theory" is really just the combination of the concept of "conspiracy" and the concept of "theory" or "guess". To conspire is to plan together to do something, usually bad but not necessarily. For example you and your mom can conspire to surprise your dad with a party! So a "conspiracy theory" is a guess that a group of people conspired to do something. It is a guess, because the person guessing has no direct knowledge that the group of people planned it and executed on it. In the previous example, after the surprise party, your dad might suspect that the two of you were in on the surprise because he doubts either one of you could have pulled it off on your own (his conspiracy theory) and ask you both how you planned it. [Perhaps only your mom knew that he would be there at that time and only you could have invited his friends.] After revealing these facts to him, his theory becomes a fact.

If you check the new definition of conspiracy theory, you will see that my above example is correct usage of the term. However the previous lead definition would not allow for it. Bogusstory 09:18, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * This is absurd. The meaning of "conspiracy theory" is not just the defs of the two words mashed together. And please put future comments at the bottom of the page.--Cberlet 14:02, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * 'the concept of "theory" or "guess".'

Nonsense. The word 'theory' does not mean 'guess'. Matthew Platts 16:08, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Debate on "Conspiracy Theory" in Wiki page titles
There is a new page, Conspiracy_theory where there is going to be a larger discussion of the use of the term "Conspiracy Theory" in Wiki titles. It would be ideal if people with a variety of viewpoints joined the discussion on that page, since a number of page titles are likely to be discussed, and name changes debated.--Cberlet 20:10, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

NPOV / apologists
I'm tempted to put a NPOV label on the two uses of "Skeptics / apologists". I think "skeptics" is fine, but "apologists" carries a negative connotation.
 * Sure, why not. Either that or go through and tack 'cranks' on every description of conspiracy theorists for balance. ;)
 * Erm, and "conspiracy theorist" doesn't in itself carry a negative connotation? If anything, it seems to me that BOTH are skeptics of something (a "conspiracy theorist" of the official story, and an "apologist" of "conspiracy theory", though, admittedly, the inverse is not necessarily true in either case).  In terms of negative connotation, "apologist" just means "A person who argues in defense or justification of something, such as a doctrine, policy, or institution." The only reasons it would have a negative connotation are

 * a.) what the apologist offers "apology" for (in the explanation sense of the term) is widely criticized or indefensible on it's face, or

 * b.) the average reader is ignorant of the definition of the term.

 * While my own POV tells me that both are correct in this case, I disagree that the term implies POV.

London
i need comments:

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/London bombing

--Striver 19:44, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Guild
Join: WikiProject Conspiracy

Guys, what about starting Coincidence Theory ?

It gets 4 020 hits on google...

--Striver 23:08, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I like this idea. This article is incredibly biased, from the term "conspiracy theory" down to the detailed obsession with categorizing the mental illness of people who perceive certain conspiracies. So then what about gullibility and susceptibility to propaganda as mental illnesses?

See: Coincidence theory

I'm not paranoid, but ...
I have to say, I agree with Striver. This is an incredibly arrogant and blatantly biased article, and I'm surprised no-one's stuck a POV flag on it. I am currently trying (gradually) to broaden it a bit, without (hopefully) going too far in the other direction.

Since I think the vote about 'Conspiracy theory' ended with the conclusion that 'CT' wasn't a perjorative, then it's only fair to do something about this article, which seems to believe that all conspiracy theorists are nuts. Garrick92 14:41, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Making it un-biased would need to rewrite the whole article, and that would raise question about biasedness of word Conspiracy Theory itself. I propose that "conspiratorial" views would be treated as opinions of the authors; in some cases proving against those opinions would be trivial (author is a nut) or just a matter of choice (cannot be proven for or against). History knows many human beings whose work was disputed by contemporaries, but was later proven true. Earth is flat, isn't it?

--80.220.157.40 23:04, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

MKULTRA
The bulleted paragraph MKULTRA seems to be garbled. Will the author please rearrange the sentence fragments? I can't figure out how the last sentence is supposed to read. J S Ayer 14:08, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Problems with introduction
"proponents sometimes substitute zeal for logic."

As do proponents of a certain car, computer, fashion label or political party. The point of is ?

I think this unfortunately falls into the category that I'm seeing a lot of on Wikipedia recently; soundbites in the introductions of articles which really have no place being there and are not informative or educational to new readers at all with the potential to skew or distort the entire article.

The other argument to this would be that logic has been rigourously and studiously applied by many individuals who have the burden of being labled 'conspiracy theorists', for example surrounding 9/11 to come to the legitimate alternative conclusion that the official explanation surrounding the attrocity is incomplete or just plain wrong.

Personally, I take issue with "proponents sometimes substitute zeal for logic" which is a superficial and misleading stereotype that doesn't belong in an introductory paragraph.

 * The phrase is drawn from the work of Barkun, Goldberg, and others. It is a common assertion of these and other scholars, although others disagree, as is noted in the article. This page offers a range of views, but the views of most scholars and reputable publications is skeptical of conspiracy theories as a genre.--Cberlet 15:07, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Conspiracy theories and history
Slightly tautological but:

There will always be conspiracies (even on the level of arrangements of convenience).

There will always be "collections of coincidences."

Sometimes the significance of certain pieces of information/documents is not realised at the time and so they get destroyed in innocence. (If the guard in the Watergate building had not noticed that the door had been taped shut, history might have developed very differently).

Information does get lost or forgotten over time.

Certain events will capture the imagination (the deaths under strange circumstances of certain people who are popular).

Some people will take (groups of) events that fall under the last four categories, play "join the dots"/interpret them from a particular political or other view point and deduce the first comment.

My "theory" is that some of the objects of the Ancient World were constructed partially to generate conspiracy theories among future generations.

Have to distinguish between "conspiracy theory" and "working theory" (ie where someone works within the normal rules of evidence and research and adapts as appropriate).

See discussion on other page
Hi, some of my recent edits are based on a big discussion on this page:

Please join in.--Cberlet 19:02, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Uncited assertion
I do not think the following claim is true, and it certainly is not cited:
 * "It is important to add that this article itself - purely by discussing the 'psychology' of conspiracy theories - could be used to support an argument that 'conspiracy theorists' (i.e., anyone and everyone who believes, or tends to believe, in a non-orthodox explanation for at least one social 'event') are somehow mentally ill. There is no evidence that would support such a sweeping claim. However, there is plentiful evidence to suggest that humans have an urge to conform, even superficially."

Anyone have a cite?--Cberlet 01:52, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

standards of assessment
IMHO, the article Apollo moon landing hoax accusations has very nicely written introductory paragraph about conspiracy theory and assessment of it. Shouldn't it be incorporated here in some way? Most of it is treated in more detail here, but over there it's really nicely summed up. Samohyl Jan 21:13, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * How about this, taken from the article mentioned above:
 * Conspiracy theories often defy an official or dominant understanding of events. Even though some conspiracies are proven to exist, many more, even though they come to be widely accepted, are often propounded by advocates who substitute zeal for logic. While conspiracy theories vary widely in their plausibility, common standards of assessment can be applied to all:
 * Followed by the list consisting of Occam's razor, etc.

 * Anybody object? Should we workshop it here first, or just edit and revise on the page? Tom harrison 02:33, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

The (Non) Logic of "Conspiracy Theory" Accusations
The term "conspiracy theorist" as it is almost always used is simply nothing more than a logically self-contradictory ad hominem attack.

The reason the charge of "conspiracy theorist" is logically self-contradictory is because everyone with an I.Q. high enough to tie their shoes is a believer in conspiracies. Governments are the biggest promulgators of belief in conspiracies--witness all the laws against "conspiracy" and all the criminal charges of "conspiracy" brought against people. The offical U.S. government story regarding such events as, e.g., the Pearl Harbor attack, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and the 9/11 attacks are charges by the U.S. government of conspiracy having been conducted against it by other governments or by non-government terrorist groups.

Thus, those making the charge of "conspiracy theorist" are also believers and/or promulgators of notions regarding conspiracies--often far more so than the person being accused as being a "conspiracy theorist."

A conspiracy is simply when two or more people formulate a plan which involves doing something untoward to another person or other people (of which plan may or may not be kept secret, i.e., secrecy is not a necessary component of conspiracy).

It certainly says something regarding the intellectual blinders one making the charge of "conspiracy theorist" is wearing that they don't even stop to realize the logically self-contradictory nature of this charge, as going by the literal meaning of the two words in the phrase "conspiracy theorist." For the one making this charge is himself a believer in conspiracies.

And so it is here where we come to the real meaning of the term "conspiracy theorist" as it is used by those making the charge. What they mean by this charge is that the accused believes in and/or promotes ideas regarding conspiracies which have not been offically sanctioned by the accuser's government--whereas the accuser making this charge believes in and/or promotes ideas regarding conspiracies which his government has deemed appropriate for the public to believe in. The difference between the two is that the accuser believes in and/or promotes ideas regarding conspiracies which are statist in their implications, in that they merely reiterate the offical government line--whereas the accused believes in and/or promotes ideas regarding conspiracies which are anti-statist in their implications, in that they go against what the accuser's government would have the public believe.

Also, the term "theory" as it is used in this logically self-contradictory ad hominem attack is misapplied and inappropriate. The term "theory" suggests a principle or law of operation. Thus you have the General Theory of Relativity and the Theory of Evolution. Yet almost always the logically self-contradictory ad hominem charge of "conspiracy theorist" is against those who are making specific claims regarding historical events. To illustrate this point, if someone says that it rained over the Bahamas on September 2, 2004 are they then a "theorist" for saying so?--209.208.77.64 09:31, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

To put the recent postings here in context, interested editors my visit Wikipedia_talk:Words_to_avoid. Tom harrison 11:48, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Conspiracy theory/Archive 5


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pot Sweet

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Merge with Pot Noodle --Gareth Hughes 19:47, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Pot Sweet
Short lived and little remembered doesn't bode well for notability. Really can't see how this is useful! - Ta bu shi da yu 13:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge with Pot Noodle. Btm 22:34, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge as per Btm. Denni ☯ 23:42, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable commercial product, and nothing like a pot noodle. Kappa 00:31, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge per above. --JAranda | watz sup 02:38, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

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

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


text:
Topological K-theory

In mathematics, topological $K$-theory is a branch of algebraic topology. It was founded to study vector bundles on topological spaces, by means of ideas now recognised as (general) K-theory that were introduced by Alexander Grothendieck. The early work on topological $K$-theory is due to Michael Atiyah and Friedrich Hirzebruch.

Definitions
Let $X$ be a compact Hausdorff space and $$k= \R$$ or $$\Complex$$. Then $$K_k(X)$$ is defined to be the Grothendieck group of the commutative monoid of isomorphism classes of finite-dimensional $k$-vector bundles over $X$ under Whitney sum. Tensor product of bundles gives $K$-theory a commutative ring structure. Without subscripts, $$K(X)$$ usually denotes complex $K$-theory whereas real $K$-theory is sometimes written as $$KO(X)$$. The remaining discussion is focused on complex $K$-theory.

As a first example, note that the $K$-theory of a point is the integers. This is because vector bundles over a point are trivial and thus classified by their rank and the Grothendieck group of the natural numbers is the integers.

There is also a reduced version of $K$-theory, $$\widetilde{K}(X)$$, defined for $X$ a compact pointed space (cf. reduced homology). This reduced theory is intuitively $K(X)$ modulo trivial bundles. It is defined as the group of stable equivalence classes of bundles. Two bundles $E$ and $F$ are said to be stably isomorphic if there are trivial bundles $$\varepsilon_1$$ and $$\varepsilon_2$$, so that $$E \oplus \varepsilon_1 \cong F\oplus \varepsilon_2$$. This equivalence relation results in a group since every vector bundle can be completed to a trivial bundle by summing with its orthogonal complement. Alternatively, $$\widetilde{K}(X)$$ can be defined as the kernel of the map $$K(X)\to K(x_0) \cong \Z$$ induced by the inclusion of the base point $x_{0}$ into $X$.

$K$-theory forms a multiplicative (generalized) cohomology theory as follows. The short exact sequence of a pair of pointed spaces $(X, A)$

 * $$\widetilde{K}(X/A) \to \widetilde{K}(X) \to \widetilde{K}(A)$$

extends to a long exact sequence

 * $$\cdots \to \widetilde{K}(SX) \to \widetilde{K}(SA) \to \widetilde{K}(X/A) \to \widetilde{K}(X) \to \widetilde{K}(A).$$

Let $S^{n}$ be the $n$-th reduced suspension of a space and then define

 * $$\widetilde{K}^{-n}(X):=\widetilde{K}(S^nX), \qquad n\geq 0.$$

Negative indices are chosen so that the coboundary maps increase dimension.

It is often useful to have an unreduced version of these groups, simply by defining:

 * $$K^{-n}(X)=\widetilde{K}^{-n}(X_+).$$

Here $$X_+$$ is $$X$$ with a disjoint basepoint labeled '+' adjoined.

Finally, the Bott periodicity theorem as formulated below extends the theories to positive integers.

Properties

 * $$K^n$$ (respectively, $$\widetilde{K}^n$$) is a contravariant functor from the homotopy category of (pointed) spaces to the category of commutative rings. Thus, for instance, the $K$-theory over contractible spaces is always $$\Z.$$
 * The spectrum of $K$-theory is $$BU\times\Z$$ (with the discrete topology on $$\Z$$), i.e. $$K(X) \cong \left [ X_+, \Z \times BU \right ],$$ where $[, ]$ denotes pointed homotopy classes and $BU$ is the colimit of the classifying spaces of the unitary groups: $$BU(n) \cong \operatorname{Gr} \left (n, \Complex^{\infty} \right ).$$ Similarly, $$\widetilde{K}(X) \cong [X, \Z \times BU].$$ For real $K$-theory use $BO$.
 * There is a natural ring homomorphism $$K^0(X) \to H^{2*}(X, \Q),$$ the Chern character, such that $$K^0(X) \otimes \Q \to H^{2*}(X, \Q)$$ is an isomorphism.
 * The equivalent of the Steenrod operations in $K$-theory are the Adams operations. They can be used to define characteristic classes in topological $K$-theory.
 * The Splitting principle of topological $K$-theory allows one to reduce statements about arbitrary vector bundles to statements about sums of line bundles.
 * The Thom isomorphism theorem in topological $K$-theory is $$K(X)\cong\widetilde{K}(T(E)),$$ where $T(E)$ is the Thom space of the vector bundle $E$ over $X$. This holds whenever $E$ is a spin-bundle.
 * The Atiyah-Hirzebruch spectral sequence allows computation of $K$-groups from ordinary cohomology groups.
 * Topological $K$-theory can be generalized vastly to a functor on C*-algebras, see operator K-theory and KK-theory.

Bott periodicity
The phenomenon of periodicity named after Raoul Bott (see Bott periodicity theorem) can be formulated this way:

 * $$K(X \times \mathbb{S}^2) = K(X) \otimes K(\mathbb{S}^2),$$ and $$K(\mathbb{S}^2) = \Z[H]/(H-1)^2$$ where H is the class of the tautological bundle on $$\mathbb{S}^2 = \mathbb{P}^1(\Complex),$$ i.e. the Riemann sphere.
 * $$\widetilde{K}^{n+2}(X)=\widetilde{K}^n(X).$$
 * $$\Omega^2 BU \cong BU \times \Z.$$

In real $K$-theory there is a similar periodicity, but modulo 8.

Applications
The two most famous applications of topological $K$-theory are both due to Frank Adams. First he solved the Hopf invariant one problem by doing a computation with his Adams operations. Then he proved an upper bound for the number of linearly independent vector fields on spheres.

Chern character
Michael Atiyah and Friedrich Hirzebruch proved a theorem relating the topological K-theory of a finite CW complex $$X$$ with its rational cohomology. In particular, they showed that there exists a homomorphism

 * $$ch : K^*_{\text{top}}(X)\otimes\Q \to H^*(X;\Q)$$

such that

 * $$\begin{align}

K^0_{\text{top}}(X)\otimes \Q & \cong \bigoplus_k H^{2k}(X;\Q) \\ K^1_{\text{top}}(X)\otimes \Q & \cong \bigoplus_k H^{2k+1}(X;\Q) \end{align}$$

There is an algebraic analogue relating the Grothendieck group of coherent sheaves and the Chow ring of a smooth projective variety $$X$$.

title: Topological K-theory


text:
Talk:Alexander Baring, 1st Baron Ashburton

Untitled
Alexander Baring was a great banker with foresight and wisdom. It is a pity that the firm was undermined by a trader and incompetant management.


text:
File:R.E.M. - Perfect Square.jpg

Summary
The cover of R.E.M.'s 2004 DVD release, Perfect Square.

Fair use in Perfect Square
Though this image is subject to copyright, its use is covered by the U.S. fair use laws because:
 * 1) It's a low-resolution copy of a film poster / VHS or DVD cover.
 * 2) It doesn't limit the copyright owner's rights to sell the film in any way, in fact, it may encourage sales.
 * 3) Because of the low resolution, copies could not be used to make illegal copies of the artwork/image.
 * 4) The image is itself a subject of discussion in the article or used in the infobox thereof.
 * 5) The image  is significant because it was used to promoted a notable film.

Source

 * 1) Derived from a digital capture (photo/scan) of the Film Poster/ VHS or DVD Cover (creator of this digital version is irrelevant as the copyright in all equivalent images is still held by the same party). Copyright held by the film company or the artist. Claimed as fair use regardless.

title: File:R.E.M. - Perfect Square.jpg


text:
Talk:Blue in Heaven

Untitled
I made both the Blue in Heaven and Blue in heaven articles and I agree that they do need to be merged. The correct (and perfected) article is Blue in Heaven so the other needs to be deleted. I have tried to delete the incorrect one but I have not been a member of the site long enough to be allowed to do so. It would be appreciated if someone did so for me. Thank you.
 * "(and perfected)"... outstanding. :) I merged the two. Mostly deleted, like you said Anon. If anyone wants to make the Shane O'Neill (singer) page they might want to make a disambig page as well. --Bookandcoffee 23:11, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * There are conflicting spellings of his name O'Neil vs O'Neill on the web. I don't have the albums handy, so could someone check maybe Island Records's official roster?

album cover
wouldn't this work as the image for the article since it's an album cover and would be considered fair use since it's promo material?

photo request and my edits (29 June, 5-6 July)
ok, i've spent about 3 days filling this article out with anything and everything i could find on the net. now, someone please add a photo. thanks! :) --205.188.117.7 07:30, 6 July 2006 (UTC)Ĉåmîllë (29 June, 5-6 July)

UK & Ireland copies of Julie Cries on discogs apparently from 1984 credit Island Records on the record label
https://www.discogs.com/master/261287-Blue-In-Heaven-Julie-Cries 92.29.29.232 (talk) 18:48, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Blue in Heaven


text:
Lambeth London Borough Council elections

Lambeth London Borough Council is elected every four years.

Summary results of elections
Summary of council election results:

Council elections

 * 1964 Lambeth London Borough Council election
 * 1968 Lambeth London Borough Council election
 * 1971 Lambeth London Borough Council election
 * 1974 Lambeth London Borough Council election
 * 1978 Lambeth London Borough Council election (boundary changes increased the number of seats by four)
 * 1982 Lambeth London Borough Council election
 * 1986 Lambeth London Borough Council election
 * 1990 Lambeth London Borough Council election
 * 1994 Lambeth London Borough Council election (boundary changes took place but the number of seats remained the same)
 * 1998 Lambeth London Borough Council election
 * 2002 Lambeth London Borough Council election (boundary changes reduced the number of seats by one)
 * 2006 Lambeth London Borough Council election
 * 2010 Lambeth London Borough Council election
 * 2014 Lambeth London Borough Council election
 * 2018 Lambeth London Borough Council election
 * 2022 Lambeth London Borough Council election (boundary changes took place but the number of seats remained the same)

Wards
Since the last boundary changes in 2022 the council has comprised 63 councillors representing 25 wards, with each ward electing two or three councillors. Elections are held every four years. The wards are:

 * Brixton Acre Lane (3)
 * Brixton North (3)
 * Brixton Rush Common (3)
 * Brixton Windrush (2)
 * Clapham Common and Abbeville (2)
 * Clapham East (2)
 * Clapham Park (3)
 * Clapham Town (3)
 * Gipsy Hill (2)
 * Herne Hill and Loughborough Junction (3)
 * Kennington (3)
 * Knight's Hill (3)
 * Myatt's Fields (2)
 * Oval (3)
 * St Martin's (2)
 * Stockwell East (2)
 * Stockwell West and Larkhall (3)
 * Streatham Common and Vale (3)
 * Streatham Hill East (2)
 * Streatham Hill West and Thornton (2)
 * Streatham St Leonard's (3)
 * Streatham Wells (2)
 * Vauxhall (3)
 * Waterloo and South Bank (2)
 * West Dulwich (2)

2002–2022
The wards between 2002 and 2022 (each electing three councillors) were:

 * Bishop's
 * Brixton Hill
 * Clapham Common
 * Clapham Town
 * Coldharbour
 * Ferndale
 * Gipsy Hill
 * Herne Hill
 * Knight's Hill
 * Larkhall
 * Oval
 * Prince's
 * St Leonard's
 * Stockwell
 * Streatham Hill
 * Streatham South
 * Streatham Wells
 * Thornton
 * Thurlow Park
 * Tulse Hill
 * Vassall

1978–2002
The wards between 1978 and 2002 (each electing three councillors) were:

 * Angell
 * Bishop's
 * Clapham Park
 * Clapham Town
 * Ferndale
 * Gipsy Hill
 * Herne Hill
 * Knight's Hill
 * Larkhall
 * Oval
 * Prince's
 * St Leonard's
 * St Martin's
 * Stockwell
 * Streatham Hill
 * Streatham South
 * Streatham Wells
 * Thornton
 * Thurlow Park
 * Town Hall
 * Tulse Hill
 * Vassall

1965–1978
The wards between 1965 and 1978 (each electing three councillors) were:

 * Angell
 * Bishop's
 * Clapham Park
 * Clapham Town
 * Ferndale
 * Herne Hill
 * Knight's Hill
 * Larkhall
 * Leigham
 * Oval
 * Prince's
 * St Leonard's
 * Stockwell
 * Streatham South
 * Streatham Wells
 * Thornton
 * Thurlow Park
 * Town Hall
 * Tulse Hill
 * Vassall

1964–1968
There were no by-elections.

1971–1974
There were no by-elections.

1990–1994
The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Dick J. F. Sorabji.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Susan T. B. Smith.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Colin Mason.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Ian R. Mallett.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Kenneth J. Sharvill.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. John Tuite.

The by-election was called following the death of Cllr. Graham P. Nicholas.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Gloria Hutchens.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Joseph Singh.

1994–1998
The by-election was called following the resignations of Cllrs. Denis E. Cooper-King and John E. Harrison.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Roger J. Liddle.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Peter J. Evans.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Joseph Callinan.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Margaret E. Jones.

1998–2002
The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Alan M. White.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Michael D. Cruickshanks.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Paul Connolly.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Anthony P. Hewitt.

2002–2006
The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Gabriel Fernandes.

The by-election was called following the death of Cllr. Tim Sargeant.

2006–2010
The by-election was called following the death of Cllr. Liz Atkinson.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Sam J. Townend.

2010–2014
The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Toren Smith.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Steve Reed.

The by-election was called following the death of Cllr. Ms. Ruth Ling.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Kingsley J. Abrams.

2014–2018
The by-election was called following the disqualification of Cllr. Sonia Winifred.

The by-election was called following the resignation of Cllr. Chris Marsh.

The by-election was called following the death of Cllr. Niranjan Francis.

Coldharbour
The by-election was caused by the death of Matthew Parr.

Thornton
The by-election was caused by the resignation of Jane Edbrooke.The by-election was caused by Lib Peck who resigned as Leader of Lambeth Council and as a councillor in order to take the role as the Director of the Mayor of London’s newly established Violence Reduction Unit.

Vauxhall
The by-election was caused by the death of Liam Jarnecki.

Fareed Alderechi stood previously for Clapham Common and Abbeville in 2022.

Knight’s Hill
This by-election was caused by the resignation of Sonia Winifred.

This election took place on the same day as the 2024 United Kingdom local elections.

Streatham Common and Vale
This by-election was caused by the resignation of Tom Rutland, Labour's prospective parliamentary candidate for East Worthing and Shoreham at the 2024 general election.

This election took place on the same day as the 2024 United Kingdom local elections.

Lambeth's recent political history
In 1979, the administration of Edward "Red Ted" Knight organised the borough's first public demonstration against the Thatcher government.

In 1985, the left-wing Labour administration of Knight was subjected to 'rate-capping', with its budget restricted by the Government. Knight and most of the Labour councillors protested by refusing to set any budget. This protest resulted in 32 councillors being ordered to repay to the council the interest the council had lost as a result of budgeting delays, and also being disqualified from office.

In 1991, Joan Twelves's administration both failed to collect the poll tax and openly opposed the war in the Persian Gulf. Twelves, and 12 other councillors were subsequently suspended from the labour party's local group by regional officials for advocating non-payment of the poll tax and other radical policies in 1992.

Twelves's equally militant deputy leader in this era was John Harrison.


text:
User talk:Adashiel/The OKCupid Wikipedia Test key

This is the test key's discussion or talk page.


text:
Alisa Camplin

Alisa Peta Camplin, (born 10 November 1974) is an Australian former aerial skier who won gold at the 2002 Winter Olympics, the second ever winter Olympic gold medal for Australia. At the 2006 Winter Olympics, Camplin finished third to receive a bronze medal. She is the first Australian skier to win medals at consecutive Winter Olympics, making her one of Australia's best skiers.

Background
Camplin is an ex-gymnast, standing at 157 cm tall. She was educated in Melbourne at the Methodist Ladies' College and has a bachelor's degree in information technology from Swinburne University of Technology. As a teenager, Alisa was an accomplished sailor, winning two Australian National Titles in the Hobie Cat catamaran class. Inspired by the example of three-time Olympian Kirstie Marshall, Camplin approached the Olympic Winter Institute of Australia in 1994 to see the possibilities of becoming an aerial skier. She was new to skiing, and even in Salt Lake she trampled on her victory flowers when she fell over during the trip to the winner's news conference.

Before the 2002 Winter Olympics, none of the dozen top 10 results she had made on the World Cup circuit included a victory, and compatriot Jacqui Cooper was viewed as the favourite for the aerials event. While most athletes use flags to mark the start of their jumps, Alisa used a wooden spoon. The rationale was that early in her career, confusion was caused by both Alisa and Jacqui using Australian flags to mark their starts, but in Australia a wooden spoon is a metaphorical prize for people or teams coming last in their sporting event.

Salt Lake City 2002
Alisa competed at the Olympics against doctors' advice—she had injured herself after being caught by a headwind in training a few weeks before. At the time, she was told she had bone bruising, it was not until she was examined by doctors in Salt Lake that she discovered both her ankles were fractured. The doctors were amazed that she was walking, let alone planning to jump.

Jacqui Cooper injured her knee in practice a week before the games. Alisa was so nervous she did not eat dinner the night before the final. Camplin performed a pair of triple-twisting, double backflip jumps to win the event.

Her family had been told to stay home by the athlete because she did not want distractions in the crowd, but her mother and younger sister Georgina defied her, watching her from behind a large Australian flag.

Camplin's gold was celebrated by Australia Post issuing a 45-cent stamp of her. Her stamp was issued on 22 February, four days after her victory. She received A$20,000 for the use of her image. Camplin was delighted, saying "For us to be put in with the summer Olympians who had their stamps and the previous 39 sporting legends who’ve had their stamps is amazing."

Turin 2006
In her preparations for the Turin Winter Olympics, Camplin incurred a serious knee injury in October 2005, requiring a knee reconstruction. To speed the healing process, she used the relatively uncommon practice of using donor tissue in the knee, and returned to limited training only 11 weeks after the surgery. She finished fourth at a World Cup event in Lake Placid to secure her place in the team.

On 22 February, in a night competition that was marked by a thick fog that disturbed competitions to an extent, Camplin registered a score of 94.99 in her first jump, the fourth best. In the second jump, she received a 96.40, which temporarily placed her second, a silver medal. She was, however, eventually dislodged by China's Li Nina, finishing third behind Switzerland's Evelyne Leu, who won the event, and Nina, who took silver. She also benefited from the unexpected fall of China's Xinxin Guo, who had received the highest score in the first jump and was expected to secure a place in the Olympic podium—at which time Camplin, who was already third then, would have gone out of the medal zone.

She was the Australian flag-bearer at the Opening Ceremony.

Post-skiing career
Camplin announced her retirement from competition in July 2006. She intends to pursue interests in the media and in the ski travel industry.

As of 30 July 2006, she is an international executive for IBM, works as a motivational speaker, and does promotional and charity work. Camplin currently works as a senior executive at IBM managing a team of over 300 people. She has been the face of Wrigley's Extra chewing gum in Australia since shortly after the 2002 Winter Olympics. She is also a judge on the Australian television competition Torvill and Dean's Dancing on Ice, and runs Alisa Camplin Ski Tours.

On 4 November 2009, Alisa Camplin was one of 15 international torchbearers taking part in the relay's International media program, aimed at increasing global coverage of the cross-Canada relay. She ran on day 6 of the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic torch relay through the town of Dawson City in the Yukon Territory.

On 8 December 2009, it was announced that Alisa has joined the Collingwood Football Club board as a replacement for Sally Capp.

Personal life
Camplin married Oliver Warner in December 2010. Their first child, Finnan Maximus Camplin-Warner, was born six weeks prematurely on 10 March 2011. Finnan died 10 days later due to a congenital heart condition. Camplin and Warner have set up the charity Finnan's Gift (http://finnansgift.com), organised through the Royal Children's Hospital, to raise money to buy equipment that will detect heart defects in other babies. On 3 October 2013, Camplin gave birth to their second child. On 20 July 2016, Camplin gave birth to their third child.

Honours
Camplin received the Australian Sports Medal in 2000. She was awarded a Medal of the Order of Australia in 2003 for her 2002 gold medal win. In 2008, she was inducted into the Sport Australia Hall of Fame. In the 2019 Queen's Birthday Honours Camplin was appointed a Member of the Order of Australia in recognition of her "significant service to the community through support for paediatric health care".

title: Alisa Camplin


text:
Talk:Blue in heaven

This article needs to be deleted. The correct article is Blue in Heaven.

title: Talk:Blue in heaven


text:
Perfect Square

Perfect Square is a 2004 concert film of the alternative rock band R.E.M., filmed on July 19, 2003, at the Bowling Green in Wiesbaden, Germany. It was released by Warner Reprise Video on March 9, 2004.

The concert features a performance of the song "Country Feedback", which Michael Stipe opens by declaring it his "favorite song". The rendition features appended lyrics from another song, Reveal's "Chorus and the Ring", and a guitar solo by Peter Buck, neither of which are in the original. The performance (in audio form) also found its way onto the limited edition issue of the In Time compilation, which was released a few months after the Wiesbaden concert.

Other concert highlights include the appearance of two then-new songs, "Bad Day" (Also originally known as PSA when first written in the early 1980s) and "Animal", and the re-emergence of the long-lost song "Permanent Vacation". "Permanent Vacation" dates back to 1980, years before their first album, while "Bad Day" dates back to 1985.

Included on the DVD release is a bonus documentary, A Stirling Performance, chronicling the band's three-night stand at Stirling Castle in Scotland in July 1999. The documentary demonstrates the effect the concerts had on Stirling and its residents. It was released in 2000.

Audio

 * Dolby Digital Stereo
 * Dolby Digital 5.1

Track listing
All songs written by Bill Berry, Peter Buck, Mike Mills and Michael Stipe except as indicated.
 * 1) "Begin the Begin" – 4:04
 * 2) "What's the Frequency, Kenneth?" – 4:12
 * 3) "Maps and Legends" – 3:28
 * 4) "Drive" – 4:44
 * 5) "Animal" (Buck, Mills, Stipe) – 4:22
 * 6) "Daysleeper" (Buck, Mills, Stipe) – 3:46
 * 7) "The Great Beyond" (Buck, Mills, Stipe) – 4:17
 * 8) "Bad Day" – 4:24
 * 9) "The One I Love" – 3:22
 * 10) "All the Way to Reno (You're Gonna Be a Star)" (Buck, Mills, Stipe) – 5:00
 * 11) "Orange Crush" – 3:59
 * 12) "Losing My Religion" – 4:45
 * 13) "At My Most Beautiful" (Buck, Mills, Stipe) – 3:37
 * 14) "Electrolite" – 4:28
 * 15) "She Just Wants to Be" (Buck, Mills, Stipe) – 5:58
 * 16) "Walk Unafraid" (Buck, Mills, Stipe) – 5:16
 * 17) "Man on the Moon" – 5:57
 * 18) "Everybody Hurts" – 6:26
 * 19) "So Fast, So Numb" – 4:24
 * 20) "Country Feedback" – 6:11
 * 21) "Permanent Vacation" – 2:52
 * 22) "Imitation of Life" (Buck, Mills, Stipe) – 3:55
 * 23) "It's the End of the World as We Know It (And I Feel Fine)" – 5:55

Personnel

 * R.E.M.
 * Peter Buck – guitar, bass guitar, banjo, mandolin
 * Mike Mills – bass guitar, backing vocals, piano
 * Michael Stipe – lead vocals

 * Auxiliary musicians
 * Scott McCaughey – guitar, keyboard, vocals
 * Bill Rieflin – drums, percussion
 * Ken Stringfellow – keyboard, banjo, bass guitar, vocals

title: Perfect Square


text:
Graça Aranha, Maranhão

Graça Aranha is a municipality in the state of Maranhão, Brazil, founded in 1959.

 * Altitude: 192m.
 * Population: 6,261 inhabitants (2020)
 * Area: 271 km2
 * Demographic density: 16.82 inhabitants/km2
 * Postal code: 65785-000
 * Microregion: Presidente Dutra

title: Graça Aranha, Maranhão


text:
The Show Place Arena

The Show Place Arena is a 5,800-seat multi-purpose arena just south of Upper Marlboro, Maryland, which is used for sporting events, concerts, boxing and professional wrestling events, consumer shows, trade shows, religious services, graduations and other events. Opening in 1993, the Show Place Arena contains a 35,360-square-foot (136' by 260') floor allowing it to be used for various events such as concerts and trade shows. There are telescopic bleachers which can be placed in an open position to allow more permanent seating for events. In addition, equestrian, rodeo and other events use the arena with 6-8 inches of stonedust on the concrete floor to provide the preferred footing for equestrian events.

The arena is currently home to horse shows, computer shows, train shows, concerts, religious events, cultural festivals, trade shows and graduations. The facility was also the venue for the 2004–2005 season of the American Basketball Association Maryland Nighthawks as well as home of the Patriot League Men's and Women's Basketball Championship in 2002-2004, the Chesapeake Icebreakers minor league hockey team (1997–1999), the Chesapeake Tide and Maryland Maniacs indoor football teams and the 2010 Atlantic 10 Conference Women's Basketball Tournament. It had served as the host of the Colonial Athletic Association Women's Basketball Tournament from 2011 to 2016.

The arena has two Daktronics message/scoreboards and the floor to ceiling height measures 40 feet. There are three spotlights in the arena and a portable stage. The arena also contains two backstage ramps and two permanent concession stands plus a full-service bar. The arena also features ten handicapped-accessible restrooms and five private suites. There are three meeting rooms measuring a total of 7000 sqft. Seating capacities are 3,000 for rodeos and horse shows, 5,500 for hockey and basketball, 5,200 for boxing and wrestling and up to 4,700 for concerts. A clock tower is located near the main entrance. There are 2,500 parking spaces at the complex with another 3,000 within walking distance.

In 2014, the building received significant upgrades to both the building and equipment used for hosting equestrian events.

In October 2022, it hosted the Washington International Horse Show. It was the first time in more than 20 years the WIHS was hosted in Prince George's County.

Other facilities
The Show Place Arena is located on the property of the Prince Georges Equestrian Center. The outdoor facilities include two 150' x 300 show rings with adjacent schooling rings, and one 140' x 280'show ring with adjacent schooling ring. Also located on the premises is a heated/air conditioned horse show secretaries office, permanent stabling for 240 horse, a vendor area, food concession building and an area for exhibitor campsites with electricity.

title: The Show Place Arena


text: User talk:70.251.98.109

title: User talk:70.251.98.109


text: Template:Gaelic Athletic Association

title: Template:Gaelic Athletic Association


text:
Dan Iannuzzi

Daniel Andrèa Iannuzzi, (February 24, 1934 – November 20, 2004) was a Canadian entrepreneur, journalist, and broadcaster.

A third generation Italian Canadian, Iannuzzi was born in Montreal. At the age of 18 he enrolled with the Canadian Grenadier Guards, and two years later, in 1954, he moved to Toronto. Here, together with Arturo Scotti, he founded the Italian-Canadian newspaper Corriere Canadese, a daily publication serving the Italian-Canadian community, on 2 June 1954 (Republic Day). The publication is distributed exclusively in Ontario and Quebec. He produced multilingual TV programs for Toronto's Citytv from 1972 to 1979 and in 1979, he launched the world's first multilingual television station, CFMT-TV (today OMNI 1), initially broadcasting in 24 languages. For ten years, Dan Iannuzzi served as President and Executive Producer for the station.

In 1977 he was given the Canadian Family Man Award from the League of Human Rights. In 1979, he was awarded the City of Toronto Achievement Award and the Ontario Bicentennial Medal in 1984. He was nominated at the EXPO ’86 Award for Excellence and Contribution in pioneering multicultural communications. In 1987 he was named "Man of the Year" by the Canadian Italian Business and Professional Association. In 1989, he was admitted into the Order of Ontario. In 1990, he was made a Member of the Order of Canada for being "a pioneer in multicultural communications and a significant contributor to Toronto's Italian community". He was also a Knight Commander in the Order of Malta.

Through his ownership of Multimedia Nova Corporation he owned and published the following community newspapers throughout the Greater Toronto Area and in Quebec:

 * Town Crier Community Newspapers
 * Corriere Canadese (Italian language)
 * Tandem magazine (English language newspaper for the children of Italian immigrants)
 * Correo Canadiense (Spanish language)
 * O Correio Canadiano Nove Ilhas (Portuguese language)
 * Insieme (Italian language)

He died in Rome while on a business trip following a cardiac arrest.

title: Dan Iannuzzi


text: File:Kareličy Coat of Arms.gif

title: File:Kareličy Coat of Arms.gif


text:
Forrest Gainer

Forrest Gainer (born April 15, 1979) is a Canadian rugby player. He plays for Canada national rugby union team. Gainer is 180.3 cm tall (5 ft 11) and weighs 111.8 kg (247 lb).

title: Forrest Gainer


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/10061092961

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was speedy delete. – Rich  Farmbrough 10:36, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

10061092961
The subject is not notable there are infinte number of integers having to prime factors abakharev 13:42, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Delete, I'm getting tired from voting to delete non notable numbers.Rhetoricalwater 14:49, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. NNN (non-notable number).  This one seems even more non-notable than most.  Plus, per WP naming convention, years, not numbers, have all numeric titles, as 2005, 1945, 476 and 3.  This article should be about the year AD 10061092961.  Redirect to 10061093rd century!? --A D Monroe III 15:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Barely notable. Title makes it look like the article is about a year. --Optichan 17:42, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete It's pages like this that need to be speedy deleted. We really don't need to even have a vote on this, do we? Masterhatch 18:00, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Very few numbers deserve articles (e, pi, the golden ration, etc.). This is not one of them.  I agree, that some guideline should be put in place to speedy delete such articles. Cool3 03:59, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, as above. Jitse Niesen (talk) 20:43, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as NNN per AD Monroe. Xoloz 12:16, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Totally uninteresting number. Title makes it look like a year. Boot the wretched thing. Reyk 02:59, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Real number, NPOV and verifyable.
 * Delete this one really is nn as far as we know now. Rich  Farmbrough 10:27, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * In fact I cant help wondering if it was a case of WP:POINT. Rich  Farmbrough

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


text:
Talk:International Football Association Board

Question
Could some one pls help me my grandfather played for the isle of man international team in 1954 his name is Samual stewart and he has lost all of his memerabial if anyone can help pls contact me on ######## (email address removed) - anon

Home nations power on the IFAB
Would it be fair to say that the Home Nations' FA representatives now basically rubber-stamp FIFA proposals? Jooler 21:55, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

That is not true. --201.53.52.227 16:33, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Questions and Answers to the Laws of the Game
Dear members, My name is Sérgio, from Brazil, referee. I've a question about a situation in the "Questions and Answers to the Laws of the Game", law 3 - questions 13 first answers, where it's:

A substitute, warming up behind his own goal, enters the field of play and prevents the ball entering the goal with his foot. What action does the referee take? The referee stops play, cautions the substitute for unsporting behaviour and the match is restarted with an indirect free kick to the opposing team where the ball was when play was stopped *.

=
====

I think that the answers correctly is following: The substitute player should be sends-off because prevents the goal and the game is restarted with an indirect free kick to the opposing team where the ball was when play was stopped *.

Because I think that I've sends-off: In the "Laws of the Game 2006" for Step 12 Fouls and Misconduct, Sending-Off Offences say's: A player, substitute or substituted player is sent off and shown the red card if he commits any of the following seven offences:

5: denies an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the player’s goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick

am I correctly?

Please, I need your help...

I want to Thank the attention for me.

First meeting
There have been some edits corrupting the info about the formation of the IFAB. It originally said 1882 Manchester, and then someone changed it to 1886 and this was called into question and then a meeting in Holborn for 1886 replaced the Manchester meeting. However from we have ''In 1882, the Football Association, firm in its resolve there should be uniformity in the laws, invited the associations of Scotland, Wales and Ireland to a meeting to discuss the formation of a board to settle their differences and to organize an international championship. Scotland at first declined the invitation, relenting only after the Football Association threatened to end the yearly international matches. At the meeting, held in Manchester on December 6, 1882, the four associations adopted a uniform code and established the International Football Association Board to approve changes in the laws. Each association was given equal voting rights on the board.'' Jooler 12:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * However the minutes of the first meeting in 1886 can be found here -http://ssbra.org/html/laws/IFABarc/pdf/1886/18861ST.pdf The fact that a date is given for the 1882 meeting suggest there was was a meeting in Manchester, and perhaps here the IFAB was proposed. Jooler 12:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

 * I think this pins it down a bit more.
 * 1882: A conference was held in Manchester on December 6th, where certain alterations to the existing Laws were agreed by representatives of the four British Associations (England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales). There were no changes made to the off-side Law.

 * 1885: The Manchester Conference of 1882, led to the creation of the "International Football Association Board" who became the single Law authority. To begin with, the International Board consisted of two representatives from each of the four United Kingdom Associations, England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales. Today, the International Football Association Board (IFAB) consists of the four UK associations, and FIFA. Each shall be entitled to be represented by four delegates. Because the first Laws were historically promulgated in England, the authentic text is written in English and then translated into other languages.

Jooler 12:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

 * The IFAB website claims the organisation was started in 1886. https://www.theifab.com/ 37.170.75.124 (talk) 18:15, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

UK members & Olympics
The presence of 4 UK members on the board is the main reason why the UK has no Olympic football team - since they think a unified team will harm their existence as separate entities. Perhaps there should be a section on this? Malick78 (talk) 15:27, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * While I'm sure the home nations' governing bodies enjoy their level of influence in the IFAB, surely resistance to a unified Olympic team is more about a perceived threat to their (arguably anachronistic) separate existence as national teams in international competitions? Jellyman (talk) 23:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The main opposition to a single UK team for the olympics comes from the three smaller Associations, they know that there is little chance of one of 'their' players making the team. No disrespect meant to Scottish, Welsh or NI football, it's a simple matter of maths with England making up 84% of the UK population. Markb (talk) 09:46, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe Jellyman to be more on the money. A combined UK team is not a fruitful alliance. 84.92.169.252 (talk) 15:17, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Pronunciation
Do you pronounce "IFAB" as one word or letter by letter? E. g. "eefupp" or "I.F.A.B."? I'm a little confused regarding this because "FIFA" is pronounced as one word. --31.17.159.244 (talk) 03:34, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Never heard this spoken aloud before, but I did a search and according to this FIFA video, it's eye-fab. I don't think including this pronunciation is necessary for this article. --LukeSurlt c 09:13, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Serie A video replay chosen by IFAB
Should/how can this be included:

On 14 April 2016, it was announced Serie A was selected by the International Football Association Board to test video replays, which will initially be private for the 2016–17 season, before allowing them to become a live pilot phase with replay assistance by the 2017–18 season at the latest; while Italian Football Federation president Carlo Tavecchio says, "We were among the first supporters of using technology on the pitch and we believe we have everything required to offer our contribution to this important experiment." Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 20:07, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on International Football Association Board. 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/20051224123804/http://ssbra.org:80/html/laws/ifab.html to http://ssbra.org/html/laws/ifab.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) 22:28, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * While the bot did a good job, I've been able to fix this link manually to an active site. --LukeSurlt c 08:38, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on International Football Association Board. 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/20071007012127/http://ssbra.org/html/laws/IFABarc/pdf/1886/18861ST.pdf to http://ssbra.org/html/laws/IFABarc/pdf/1886/18861ST.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:06, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Location Maps
Here are maps of the locations of the IFAB meetings. They could be inserted in the article if editors think they would add value. Grover cleveland (talk) 00:43, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

 * That's impressive work, but I don't think the meetings and their locations are particularly important to the reader. --LukeSurlt c 10:15, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

OWN GOAL
WHY DOES IT COUNT AS AN OWN GOAL WHEN THE BALL DIDNT CROSS THE LINE BUT THE GOALIE CAUGHT IT AND CROSSED LINE???? HOW TF DOES THAT MAKE ONE BIT OF SENSE??? SHOULD ONLY BE AN OWN GOAL IF SOMEONE KICKS THE BALL IN, NOT ALL THIS CROSSING THE LINE BS!!!!!!!! 86.1.169.113 (talk) 19:43, 9 September 2023 (UTC)


text:
Calnexin

Calnexin (CNX) is a 67kDa integral protein (that appears variously as a 90kDa, 80kDa, or 75kDa band on western blotting depending on the source of the antibody) of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). It consists of a large (50 kDa) N-terminal calcium-binding lumenal domain, a single transmembrane helix and a short (90 residues), acidic cytoplasmic tail. In humans, calnexin is encoded by the gene CANX.

Function
Calnexin is a chaperone, characterized by assisting protein folding and quality control, ensuring that only properly folded and assembled proteins proceed further along the secretory pathway. It specifically acts to retain unfolded or unassembled N-linked glycoproteins in the ER.

Calnexin binds only those N-glycoproteins that have GlcNAc2Man9Glc1 oligosaccharides. These monoglucosylated oligosaccharides result from the trimming of two glucose residues by the sequential action of two glucosidases, I and II. Glucosidase II can also remove the third and last glucose residue. If the glycoprotein is not properly folded, an enzyme called UGGT (for UDP-glucose:glycoprotein glucosyltransferase) will add the glucose residue back onto the oligosaccharide thus regenerating the glycoprotein's ability to bind to calnexin. The improperly-folded glycoprotein chain thus loiters in the ER and the expression of EDEM/Htm1p  which eventually sentences the underperforming glycoprotein to degradation by removing one of the nine mannose residues. The mannose lectin Yos-9 (OS-9 in humans) marks and sorts misfolded glycoproteins for degradation. Yos-9 recognizes mannose residues exposed after α-mannosidase removal of an outer mannose of misfolded glycoproteins.

Calnexin associates with the protein folding enzyme ERp57 to catalyze glycoprotein specific disulfide bond formation and also functions as a chaperone for the folding of MHC class I α-chain in the membrane of the ER. As newly synthesized MHC class I α-chains enter the endoplasmic reticulum, calnexin binds on to them retaining them in a partly folded state.

After the β2-microglobulin binds to the MHC class I peptide-loading complex (PLC), calreticulin and ERp57 take over the job of chaperoning the MHC class I protein while the tapasin links the complex to the transporter associated with antigen processing (TAP) complex. This association prepares the MHC class I for binding an antigen for presentation on the cell surface.

A prolonged association of calnexin with mutant misfolded PMP22 known to cause Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease leads to the sequestration, degradation and inability of PMP22 to traffic to the Schwann cell surface for myelination. After repeated rounds of calnexin binding, mutant PMP22 is modified by ubiquitin for degradation by the proteasome as well as a Golgi to ER retrieval pathway to return any misfolded PMP22 that escaped from the ER to the Golgi apparatus.

The x-ray crystal structure of calnexin revealed a globular lectin domain and a long hydrophobic arm extending out.

Cofactors
ATP and calcium ions are cofactors involved in substrate binding for calnexin.

title: Calnexin


text: User talk:84.92.108.150

title: User talk:84.92.108.150


text: User talk:70.128.128.113

title: User talk:70.128.128.113


text:
Talk:Simultaneous localization and mapping

Disney Link
Why is that patent on Disney in the header? There are tons of SLAM related patents filed every year, IROS conference has a whole section dedicated just to slam paper submissions, of which there are usually 30-50. Unless I'm missing something I'm going to remove it. Haxonek (talk) 15:58, 14 July 2022 (UTC)debug

Use of undefined terms
The following paragraph uses a lot of undefined terms (which unfortunately is a common and major mistake in scientific discourse):
 * SLAM consists of multiple parts; Landmark extraction, data association, state estimation, state update and landmark update. There are many ways to solve each of the smaller parts.

What is a landmark? What distinguishes it from any other points on the map? What is a state (this can literally be anything in computer science and means nothing without additional description)? Is it the pose and location of the robot? What is landmark update? How is it different from updating the map in general? All this is extremely vague and imprecise. This is a summary for someone who knows already what is meant. Reading the text before this paragraph gives some rough idea, but it stays a lot more vague than the precise terms suggest. Please define. For that matter, the provided formal definition contains symbols which are undefined. What does Z represent? If it is an abbreviation of the standard form of Bayes' theorem, it should be explicitly defined here.

I tried
I tried to insert a link to Andrew Blake, pioneer of probabilistic methods for vision and tracking, but discovered there already is another Andrew Blake in the entertainment industry. Someone should resolve this ambiguity... Probots

Note: While A Blake has researched probabilistic methods and some SLAM methods use heavily a probabilistic approach, I consider unsuitable to force the issue here since there is no direct link between A Blake and SLAM. Baring differences is like having Kalman in the list because Kalman filters are used in some SLAM systems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.222.103.132 (talk) 17:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I like the intent of this sentence:

SLAM has not yet been fully perfected, but it is starting to be employed in unmanned aerial vehicles, autonomous underwater vehicles, planetary rovers and newly emerging domestic robots.

but have doubts as to what arial and underwater vehicles use SLAM for. I thought this technique was only for mapping indoor environments. -- BAxelrod 13:44, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * SLAM is a general tehnique/framework for creating maps dynamically while navigating in unknown territories. It is not domain-limited, and is therefore ideally suited for applications like autonomous arial and underwater navigation in unknown territories. Computational complexity may, however, pose a problem in such embedded devices. --Fredrik Orderud 23:35, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup

 * I've done a restructure, and have introduced some basic equations and notation.  Also removed repeated and hand-wavy material about chick/eggness, and restructed the problem aspects inside of algorithms.    Not sure if we should present details of EKF and PFs on this page or make do with links to their existing pages -- discuss?

OrthoSLAM and conflicts of interest
There is no explanation about why OrthoSLAM is cited in this article, even though no other type of SLAM is mentioned. This very much looks like an attempt to promote one's own research paper. See diff: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Simultaneous_localization_and_mapping&diff=618133249&oldid=617474799 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.238.5.214 (talk) 09:13, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Why does FAST SLAM redirect here?
I think that (a) each SLAM method is separate enough to warrant its own page giving a brief overview of how it differs from other SLAM methods, and that (b) FAST SLAM needs its own page ASAP.

For example,  GraphSLAM   and   EKF_SLAM are, sensibly, separate pages. I'd like to suggest this information architecture approach:

1) every SLAM method should have its own page giving a brief overview of how it differs from other SLAM methods. e.g. GraphSLAM, EKF_SLAM

2) every SLAM method page should be listed on List_of_SLAM_Methods

3) Simultaneous_localization_and_mapping should - as it already does - discuss the general intent and approach; link to List_of_SLAM_Methods as "for specific implementations see"; not mention or reference any particular method — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.181.251.130 (talk) 05:34, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Simultaneous localization and mapping. 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/20100816040331/http://www.kn-s.dlr.de/indoornav/ubicomp2009_final_my_pub.pdf to http://www.kn-s.dlr.de/indoornav/ubicomp2009_final_my_pub.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100702155505/http://www-robotics.usc.edu/~maja/teaching/cs584/papers/smith90stochastic.pdf to http://www-robotics.usc.edu/~maja/teaching/cs584/papers/smith90stochastic.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120313064730/http://www.kn-s.dlr.de/indoornav/footslam_video.html to http://www.kn-s.dlr.de/indoornav/footslam_video.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) 19:38, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

The history section needs to mention Lu & Milios (1997)
Bazuz (talk) 08:03, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Mathematical description is wrong in multiple ways
The formula description is wrong in multiple way; especially in the last double sum. The sum should be taken over $$m_{t-1}$$ or all indices be shifted by one. Also, the dependency on $$x_t$$ on the LHS seems to be removed. But still the subtlety exists and the formula should point to the correct reference for the reliability and the credibility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.20.193.254 (talk) 02:22, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

It is unclear what is "control ut" — the very first variable in very first formula
Needs to be clarified Minas-A (talk) 03:50, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Ale xi
A 152.231.35.107 (talk) 15:29, 7 June 2022 (UTC)


text:
Jacksonville Coliseum

The Jacksonville Veterans Memorial Coliseum (originally and still commonly known as the Jacksonville Coliseum) was a multi-purpose arena located in Jacksonville, Florida. Built in 1960 and known as "northern Florida's most historic concert venue", it was home to most of the city's indoor professional sports teams and it hosted various concerts, circuses, and other events. It was demolished in 2003 and replaced with the VyStar Veterans Memorial Arena.

History
The Coliseum was dedicated on November 24, 1960. The general contractor was Daniel Construction, and construction took two years and cost $3 million. The first event was the first ice hockey game ever played in Jacksonville, featuring the New York Rovers and Charlotte Clippers on November 30. The first events scheduled included an automobile show, a boat show, boxing matches, the circus, an ice skating show, a pro basketball exhibition game and a tennis tournament.

Events
Ice hockey teams based in the Coliseum included the Jacksonville Rockets (1964–1972) of the Eastern Hockey League, the Jacksonville Barons (1973–74), the Jacksonville Bullets (1992–96), and the Jacksonville Lizard Kings (1995–2000). (Fans of the Lizard Kings referred to the coliseum as the "Reptilian Pavilion.") The American Basketball Association franchise known as The Floridians played some of its home games there in 1971 and 1972. The Jacksonville Dolphins utilized the coliseum for their home basketball games from 1969 to 1999, and it hosted the 1981 Sun Belt Conference and 1999 and 2000 Atlantic Sun Conference men's basketball tournaments.

The Jacksonville Tea Men of the NASL played indoor soccer home games at the coliseum during the 1980–81 & 1981–82 seasons.

The Jacksonville Tomcats of the af2, the Arena Football League's developmental league, called the Coliseum home from 2000 to 2002.

The WCW events WrestleWar 1992 and WCW Greed (the final pay-per-view before WCW's acquisition by the World Wrestling Federation) were staged at the coliseum, as well as some episodes of WCW Monday Nitro.

Hundreds of thousands of Duval County high school students received their diplomas at ceremonies in the Coliseum, and the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus train stopped in Jacksonville for two weeks of shows every January for decades. The fairgrounds were adjacent to the Coliseum, and the Greater Jacksonville Agricultural Fair incorporated the facility into their November event, hosting music concerts, entertainers and exhibitions. Monster truck shows, tractor pulls and motocross events were also very popular over the years.

The Coliseum hosted hundreds of concerts and shows during its 43-year history, including Grand Funk Railroad in 1970,Rush, Bob Dylan, Duran Duran, Billy Joel, Black Sabbath, Bon Jovi, Frank Sinatra, Jimi Hendrix, Elvis Presley, New Kids On The Block, The Smashing Pumpkins, David Bowie, Bruce Springsteen, Led Zeppelin, Jacksonville's Lynyrd Skynyrd, Journey, AC/DC, Deep Purple, Wishbone Ash, Grateful Dead, Judas Priest, Three Dog Night, Def Leppard and Iron Maiden.

Famous Southern rock bands from Jacksonville that played at the Coliseum were The Allman Brothers Band in 1970, Lynyrd Skynyrd in '75, 38 Special in '82, Molly Hatchet in '85, Blackfoot in '80, and also Limp Bizkit played there in 2000. Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers from Gainesville played there in '87.

Demolition
By the 1990s, it became harder for promoters to fill the seats of the Coliseum. The venue was designed in the late 1950s before the advent of the rock concert, and strong bass and drums reverberated off the dome. The facility had not been renovated since its construction in 1960, giving the arena an outdated feel. It looked like a water treatment plant, according to Mayor John Delaney. Considered a mid-sized venue at best against its larger competitors, concert promoters for the most popular acts wanted venues with at least 15,000 seats; performers disliked the building's poor acoustics and the structure couldn't support the elaborate special effects lighting and sound equipment which rock concerts had come to require. The Eagles, Bon Jovi, Ozzy Osbourne, Dave Matthews and Fleetwood Mac all declined to perform at the Coliseum, although the acts wanted to perform in Jacksonville. The venue was still able to house exhibition shows, special events and several country acts including Alan Jackson, Garth Brooks, Reba McEntire, Wynonna Judd and the Dixie Chicks.

The Coliseum was imploded on June 26, 2003, and replaced with the $130 million Jacksonville Veterans Memorial Arena. Extreme care was taken not to damage the black granite Veterans Memorial Wall located just eight feet from the east wall of the building. After the debris was cleared, a 2 acre walking park was added to the area around the Memorial.

title: Jacksonville Coliseum


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apostrophe (Band)

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete --Gareth Hughes 21:11, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Apostrophe (Band)
nn - does not meet inclusion guidelines set out at WP:MUSIC Haeleth 13:46, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * delete per nom. Tempshill 14:49, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * —Michael Z. 2005-10-15 15:55 Z
 * Delete performances at three different high schools does not qualify as a national or international tour. No other indications of coming close to WP:MUSIC. --Allen3 talk 02:22, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

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