text:
Talk:Red River Shootout

SBC
Yuck. This renaming business leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Sorry, but to this Longhorn it'll always be the Red River Shootout. · Katefan0(scribble) 22:01, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I could not agree with you more. It is a particularly ugly combination when big business meets political correctness. That is why I have not even been tempted to hit the Move button.  Someone else can do it, and probably will eventually, but it won't be me! Johntex\talk 22:03, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't know anything about the naming rights contract, but I'm assuming it expires at some point - frankly, I hope the article isn't moved at all. It will always be the Red River Shootout.Bbatsell 00:22, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * You're right, it's limited -- two or three years I think I read. I agree on the page move, too.  Shoot, I'm certainly not going to do it. · Katefan0(scribble) 00:28, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree with your take on the name change - I think it's the general consensus that the name stay the way it is. SBC can call it whatever they want - it will always be the Red River Shootout to me.
 * In truth, "Red River Shootout" was just the first corporate-concocted nickname for the game. Texas-OU certainly hasn't always been called anything like "Red River Shootout" or "Red River Rivalry." My memory fails me on the exact dates, but I don't think "Red River [whatever]" is much more than 15 years old, if that. Because of their contrived origins, I have no attachment to either of the two corporate sponsor-generated names for Texas-OU, and I wouldn't mind at all if the first lame nickname (RRS) were replaced by the latest lame nickname (RRR) as far as the naming of this article goes. Historically, this game is "Texas-OU" if you're a Texas fan, and "OU-Texas" if you're an OU fan. ~ João Do Rio 05:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Will this game be changed to the AT&T Red River Rivalry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.9.189 (talk • contribs) 18:34, 2006 June 20
 * We actually cover this in the article. Johntex\talk 03:39, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

 * The corporate co-opting of these events is disgusting. Thank you all for leaving this as the Red River Shootout. -Rolypolyman 15:45, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * "Red River Shootout" was also a corporate invention -- just an older one. ~ João Do Rio 17:49, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

UT Stadium
The article states "Darrell K. Royal-Texas Memorial Stadium seats 84,000 and may soon be expanded further." I was not aware expansion plans were being considered. We should add that the article on the stadium as well. Do we know a source? Johntex\talk 22:44, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, DeLoss Dodds just recently told the Statesman that they're considering an expansion. It's very tentative though, hasn't been approved or really even planned yet, but they are doing some preliminary estimates now on what it would cost to expand seats and suites on the north end up to about 90,000. (HEADLINE: Hook 'em home? Rivalry might move from Cotton Bowl to campuses, Statesman, Oct. 3, 2005; Mark Rosner) · Katefan0(scribble) 22:49, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Awesome, they should just close in the South End as well. If Michigan can fill 100,000 seats, so can Texas. Johntex\talk 23:03, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

All right, I know DKR fills up to about 84K normally, but Owen Field fills up to about 85K usually. I'm going to change the capacity of DKR to 80,082, the number listed on the official UT athletics site, just as the 82,112 is the official OU number. Tmrobertson 19:22, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

100th Meeting - 2005
Whats the relevance of the information in this section? It reads like a Sports Illustrated article, not an encyclopedia article. Mainly because this section will require editing immediately after the final outcome of the game - not a good standard for encyclopedia articles. Sorry for not being a registered user, I will get around to that soon.
 * Anon touches on an issue that comes up periodically, which I would paraphrase as "To what extent does/should Wikipedia concer itself with capturing/documenting/referencing current events". My opinion is that people expect a web-based information source to be up-to-date and topical.  We have an opportunity to meet this expectation since Wikipedia is not paper.  Also, current events, such as the recent nomination of Harriet Miers to the US Supreme Court, and anniversaries, such as October 5 being Republic Day in Portugal are likely to cause increased traffic to those articles.  As for needing to change the article again right after the event, that shouldn't be difficult with so many editors interested in the topic.  Given that there is a table with all 99 previous game results, someone would need to come here to edit in the 100th result anyway.  Johntex\talk 17:14, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It's a good and valid question, but I don't really see the harm in it. Folks might reasonably come here prior to the game looking for good information. As long as the information is good, I can't see a reason to excise it. Somebody will clean it up after the game is over. · Katefan0(scribble) 17:20, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

I took out the information as it is now 2006. Let the score board do the talking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.9.189 (talk • contribs) 18:34, 2006 June 20
 * The information has been restored. First, the 2006 game has not been played yet, so the 2005 game is the most recent on-field result.  Second, the 2005 game will always be a special result since it was the 100th meeting. Johntex\talk 03:39, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Although I think the information in this section is perfectly good, I also think that merely having this section is rather POV. Sure, it's the 100th meeting, but most of the information revolves around Longhorn records and their path to the national championship.  To fix this problem, we could include:
 * A) A section on notable Red River games, including others besides 2005, and
 * B) A section on Red River Shootout records (including stats such as Jamaal Charles' rushing records)
 * Until such a time as the section doesn't purely emphasise Longhorn success, I'm putting a POV tag on the section. - Runch 18:55, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm all for expanding the article, but I strenuously object to the tag. The 100th meeting was significant and the section talks about the meeting in a NPOV way.  A POV tag is not warranted because the section is written in correct NPOV style. If there is such a things as a "needs expansion" tag that might be less inappropriate, but I don't know what good it would do since most articles on Wikipedia do need expansion. Johntex\talk 19:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * What is significant about the 2005 game other than it being the 100th occurrence? If it is because the winner went on to win the Nat'l Championship, there should be sections for many years. No offense, Johntex, but you and I are a little biased and truthfully many people that visit this page are probably as well. So getting the input of outside readers, people who wouldn't normally read the article, may be beneficial and definitely couldn't hurt.--NMajdan •talk 19:12, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Significance of the 100th game (from weakest to strongest in my opinion) is:
 * It is human nature to consider milestones like 100th and 1,000,000th as being more important than other similar events.
 * Both teams were very highly ranked (not unique, but doen't happen every year, either)
 * One team went on to win the National Championship (again, not unique, but not an annual occurance either)
 * First game played since creation of the article. (Although we should strive to achieve historical balance, it is natural that people will tend to write about recent events where there is easily available information at hand).
 * Game received extra media attention as a result of being the 100th meeting and a special commemorative DVD was released.
 * First year with corporate sponsorship and corporate name.
 * Most recent game played in the series. (For a few more weeks at least)
 * Again, I have no objection to adding other sections, but this section is written in a NPOV manner and does not deserve a POV tag. I certianly never objected to outside opinion, but I most assuredly have the right to disagree with those outside opinions when I believe they are in error. Johntex\talk 19:21, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * OU was unranked going into that game.--NMajdan •talk 19:37, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * D'oh! My memory plays tricks on me. I retract that statement. At least I was right when I said it is not every year when both teams are highly ranked.  :-) Johntex\talk 19:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Let me try and clarify my position: The only aspect of the section that I feel is at all biased is that it focuses on a year that we (Texas) did very well and ignores all other performances, both good and bad, by Texas or OU.  Perhaps a POV tag wasn't the best option, but it has generated some discussion on the matter, and as you mentioned, Johntex, perhaps we just need to expand the article.  When I get a chance, I'll be more than willing to help.  I think we should start by adding a section on historically notable games, and Red River Shootout Records.
 * As soon as we have at least one or two more notable games summarized, I think we can move the 2005 game summary into a new section, and of course, remove the POV tag.
 * Also, does anyone happen to know any credible sources that we could use as references for these sections? - Runch 22:39, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Runch, thanks for your reply.
 * For recent years, it should be possible to find pretty good results using Google or other search engine. I would suggest starting out using as one of your search terms either the date of the game or the date after the game, since many articles would presumably come out the next day.
 * For older games, it will probably be considereably harder since we can't expect the news sources to be available online. In the section below this one, there is the full text of an article on the first game, which has now passed into the public domain because it is so old.  We could certainly quote from it with attribution.
 * Since you agree that the section does not violate NPOV, I ask that you remove the POV tag you have placed on the article.
 * I believe I have found a more appropriate tag, which is is . According to this list of templates, the correct usage for this template is on the Talk page of the article, not in the article itself.  Best, Johntex\talk 23:12, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Or this: .--NMajdan •talk 23:15, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. - Runch 23:17, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Thank you both! I added a new section break called "Notable games" though that may not be the best title since the word "notable" might be problematic.  I added the 1900 game, which in a way worsens our problem because now we have 2 Texas victories described, but at least the Austin paper spends most of their time complaining about the Texas team not being better than they wear.  What other games should be included and which ones should we focus on first?  I would suggest that the 2000 season should be added since that game led to OU's most recent national title.  It's also notable as the biggest blowout of the series.  Again, it should be easy to find information on that one. Johntex\talk 00:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I've now added the 2000 game. I look forward to everyone's edits. Johntex\talk 00:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Austin Newspaper Story on 1st Meeting
The following is the Austin American-Statesman article on the first ever game between UT and OU. It was published October 14 1900. Note that neither team was using their current team name at that time:

 * TEXAS 28, OKLAHOMA 2

 * Practice game yesterday

 * The game of football yesterday afternoon at the Varsity athletic field was an interesting contrast, notwithstanding the rather one-sided score of 28-2 in favor of the Varsity.

 * The Oklahoma men played a very good game, but they had weak points and the Varsity men found this out, and proceeded to take advantage of them. For instance, the visitors' tackles and ends were weak, and the Varsity men made most of their gains through these men. Their guards and center, though, were stiff enough, and the Varsity's attack at these points never netted large gains, and were frequently futile.

 * While Oklahoma should be given credit for the stiffness of her center trio, the fact that the Varsity backs made but small headway at these points is partly due to the Varsity backs themselves. They had not the life and dash that is necessary to successful line plunging, and they failed to heed Coach Thompson's oft repeated admonition to hit the line low and with speed, and the consequence was that when they got to the line they did not have the necessary momentum to plunge on through.

 * This was the case, notwithstanding the fact that the men are coached to play a good distance behind the line, so that they can get up speed by the time they reach it.

 * Leslie was particularly slow in this respect, although he sprinted well on the end plays. Napler comes in for criticism on this point also, as does the elder McMahon and the other men who played behind the line.

Posted by Johntex\talk 22:28, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Imitation and Flattery
WOAI (San Antonio) ran an article on their website (here) which was a copy/paste of information from this article. I contacted them to let them know that Wikipedia is available under the GFDL but that they had to comply with that license, cite Wikipedia properly (WP:CW), etc. They promptly took the article down. Good work to everyone who has made this article worth copying by a commercial news outlet!!! Johntex\talk 22:01, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

1975 game
Johntex, I reverted your edits back to the previous by IP. He had the correct score which you reverted back to the incorrect score. Here is proof of the correct score: http://soonerstats.com/fb/seasons/schedule.cfm?SeasonID=1975. Just letting you know.--NMajdan •talk 01:39, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Listing of the 2003 game in Notable Games
There should be a mention of the significance of the 2003 game. Currently, it is the game with the largest winning margin for either team.
 * I agree. Please add it in if you like or if not then I'll try to remember to write something up when I have a bit of time. Johntex\talk 01:40, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Verification / POV
I removed a verification/POV template from the article today because there were no specific concerns raised here on the talk page. I'm sure we can do better, but the article has a fair number of sources and generally seems (to me at least) to be pretty fair at discussing the two teams. If anyone wants to re-tag the article please list actual objections here so that they can be addressed. Thanks! Johntex\talk 07:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed subjective section from 'Venue'
I removed a section from 'Venue', because it sounded biased. There may be a better way to phrase what was written regarding the OU fans heckling the Texas players. It may be true, but at the very least, it needs a more neutral tone. I removed it because it sounded a little inflammatory. If someone can reword it neutrally, I wouldn't have a problem with them undoing my revision. →Deser† sapper •≈ talk 17:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi Desert sapper, thanks for explaining your reasoning. I agree with you that the information was not well worded.
 * However, it is true that the Sooners did formerly control the south end zone every year. It is true that they pelted the Longhorn players with debris (though this has been lessened by a cover over the entryway).  It is also true that as a result of the extension that the two teams will now alternate which has the south end zone.
 * Most opinions I have read say this equates to the Sooners giving up an advantage, but some think that the sorth endzone confers an advantage because there are a few more seats there and whoever controls it will have an advantage in crowd noise for plays going into the North end zone.
 * We should leave the info out until it is written a bit better and backed up by one or more sources. Johntex\talk 17:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it is true, Johtex. It's fairly well documented ('Bootlegger's Boy', 'Running with the Big Dogs', various DMN and DO articles throughout the years). The wording didn't sound objective enough. This DO article is the latest I've seen that mentions it: click here →Deser† sapper •≈ talk 16:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Notable games
I dont think this section belongs in the article because whatever games are chosen, it'll be subjective to the views of the editor. Its ok for Bill Little to do it at Mackbrown-texasfootball.com, but I dont think wikipedia's the place for it. Corpx 05:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Move to Red River Rivalry

 * I think it should be moved there because its the new official name. Place a redirect in the current place, similiar to what was done on UFCU Disch-Falk Field.  Corpx 03:49, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm a recent OU graduate and I've never--ever--heard anybody call it the "Red River Rivalry" (aside from the media or corporations involved.) The name "Red River Shootout" is by far more common and will probably continue to be far more common for the foreseeable future. Thus, the article should be left where it is. (As as example, take a look at the article for South Korea. The country is officially just the "Republic of Korea", but because it is more commonly known as "South Korea", that's what the article is named." 211.18.204.250 (talk) 05:53, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:OU-tx2006.gif
Image:OU-tx2006.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

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

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

BetacommandBot (talk) 15:09, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:SBC Red River Rivalry 100 year logo.JPG
The image Image:SBC Red River Rivalry 100 year logo.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --22:48, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 04:02, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Red River Shootout


text:
File:Mapa-rodovia-assis-chateaubriand.jpg

Summary
Map of Assis Chateubriand Highway in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. Drawn on a public domain map by the Ministry of Transportation, Brazil.

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


text:
Talk:Oklahoma Sooners

100th meeting of Red River Shootout
Hello, I'm doing a bit of clean-up at Red River Shootout in anticipation of a few extra page views this weekend. If anyone here would like to help out that would be great. (And yes, I am aware that corporate interests and political correctness have led to a name-change). Johntex\talk 22:01, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

conference championships?
I've done quite a bit of cleanup on this article today, having found it while looking for something else, and I'm perplexed by the list of dates and coaches listed under the 'College Basketball' heading. It doesn't make much sense to me - repetitive dates, apparent redundancies (Billy Tubbs seems to have won two or three titles each year), generally a mess. I'm thinking about deleting it and just listing each coach, then the championships won by that coach in one line. It would save space and be much clearer. Other comments are welcome, but I don't think it can't stay the way it is. In the meantime, I'll take a look at the WP entries for other Division I colleges for ideas. - ddlamb 01:08, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Good job btw, a lot of the awkwardness came from a previous Wikipedian who seemed to be a rabid Poke State fan, making POV comments bordering on vandalism. The redundancy in B-ball comes from the Big 8/12 regular season championships as opposed to tournament championships. This should be highlighted.Tmrobertson 01:04, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Football national championships
This part of the article seems confusing to me: "The Sooners possess seven poll-determined national championships in football,... Oklahoma acctually can claim 15 National Titles, due to other Championship Polls. Not to mention all of those titles Oklahoma would have won if there wasent a rule for schools going to back to back bowl games year after year during the 47 Game Win Streak in the 1950's." So, is it 7 poll-determined national championships or 15? We need to be consistent with our terminology. If they are from polls other than AP, I think that needs to be explained. Also, the final sentence "Not to mention..." does not sound very encyclopedic to me. What is it trying to say? Johntex\talk 00:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It's been removed now (not by me), but I agree that it is confusing. The wording is poor for one thing, but it is also not NPOV.  Z4ns4tsu 23:32, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

2007 Football Video Highlights (Game by Game)
Game 1: Oklahoma Vs. University of North Texas

Game 2: Oklahoma Vs. University of Miami

Game 3: Oklahoma Vs. Utah State University

Game 4: Oklahoma Vs. University of Tulsa

I removed the above content from this article for two reasons (as noted in the edit summary). I thought I would explain myself more fully here. First, in my opinion, these links are completely unnecessary and violate the mirror or repository of links, images and media files part of WP:NOT. Second, if these are content that should be included in a Wikipedia article they are still inappropriate for this article. They should instead be added to the article for the 2007 Oklahoma Sooners football team. I have included the code I removed above to facilitate it's re-introduction to the article if the community disagrees. z4ns4tsu \talk 22:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't even notice these were added or I would also have removed them. I've never thought about adding these to the 2007 article. What is the precedence for this? Should they be added to the external links section on the 2007 article?↔NMajdan •talk 23:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Traditions -- national anthem?
I know that, when singing the national anthem, students traditionally replace "brave" with "Sooners!" while pointing their right index finger upward -- similar to the OU chant. Should this be mentioned in the article? I don't know where one would find a source for it... Trvsdrlng (talk) 22:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

why a special blurb about the 2006 football team?
I'm just curious why there's a special section on the 2006 football team within the main "football" section. It seems a little out of place as that team, while special, isn't quite up there with, for example, the 2000 team. Would it be OK if we deleted that section? Perhaps we can place links to articles that describe each individual football season in depth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by No1cub17 (talk • contribs) 19:24, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Some vandalism on the page on December 8th, 2008
There was some vandalism to the article listed after 00Z on 8 December, mainly in relation to the Sooner football team. I think I've managed to remove it all, but I'm not 100% certain. The last clean copy was listed on 6 December.

Big 12 WikiProject
I'm trying to gauge the interested in created a Big 12 WikiProject and wondering who would like to be involved. There are already pages for WikiProject Big Ten and WikiProject ACC. A Big 12 project would cover the schools themselves and anything to do with conference sports including: events, rivalries, teams, seasons, championships and lore. There is already quite a bit of activity here on Wikipedia regarding the Big 12, and I think a project could help coordinate and unify our efforts. Please see WikiProject Council/Proposals/Big 12 if you are interested, and add your name to the list. Grey Wanderer (talk) 00:31, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Oklahoma Sooners. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/si_online/news/2002/10/01/1_10/

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 07:15, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 one external links on Oklahoma Sooners. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20070820100647/http://www.soonersports.com:80/sports/m-footbl/archive/m-footbl-quick-facts.html to http://www.soonersports.com/sports/m-footbl/archive/m-footbl-quick-facts.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100928054731/http://www.soonersports.com:80/sports/m-footbl/archive/m-footbl-national-championships.html to http://www.soonersports.com/sports/m-footbl/archive/m-footbl-national-championships.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071120093043/http://www.soonersports.com/sports/m-footbl/archive/m-footbl-no1-program-modern-era.html to http://www.soonersports.com/sports/m-footbl/archive/m-footbl-no1-program-modern-era.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060826121836/http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_football_past_champs.html to http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_football_past_champs.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070812141111/http://www.soonersports.com:80/sports/m-gym/spec-rel/nissen-emery.html to http://www.soonersports.com/sports/m-gym/spec-rel/nissen-emery.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) 18:35, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

"2015 Oklahoma Sooners women's soccer team" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 2015 Oklahoma Sooners women&. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 2 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm Talk 05:22, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Oklahoma Sooners


text:
File:Cartett.gif

Summary
JC poster against ETTs.

title: File:Cartett.gif


text:
Robbie Crane

Robert Crane (born January 5, 1969) is an American musician who is the current bass guitarist of hard rock band Black Star Riders. He has also been a member of Ricky Warwick's band The Fighting Hearts. He was previously the bassist with the band Ratt.

Early life and career
Crane moved to the Fairfax District of Hollywood, California, at the age of nine where he attended Bancroft Junior High and Fairfax high school. For his 14th birthday, his father bought him his first bass guitar from Fairfax Music School in Hollywood. Soon after, Crane and best friend Stuart Waldman were playing Hollywood clubs with their first band "Dream Suite" when they were only 16. Crane went on to work as bass technician for Bobby Dall of Poison from 1984–86.

As a bassist, Crane played in local L.A. bands Lancia, Hot Wheelz, NEWHAVEN and Monroe (Rick Monroe), and has toured with Vince Neil's (Mötley Crüe) solo band featuring Steve Stevens, Dave Marshall and Vik Foxx. He also played with Stephen Pearcy and Al Pitrelli in Vertex and toured and recorded with Ratt.

Crane joined Black Star Riders in 2014, replacing their original bassist Marco Mendoza. He has also worked with Vince Neil and Adler's Appetite. In 2021, he filled in as the touring bass player for Warrant whilst Jerry Dixon took a break, and has joined them on the road again in 2024 for a run of summer dates.

With Vince Neil Band

 * Carved in Stone (1995)

With Tuff

 * Fist First (studio bassist) (1994)
 * Religious Fix (studio bassist) (1995)

With Ratt

 * Collage (1997)
 * Ratt (1999)
 * Infestation (2010)

With Adler's Appetite

 * Adler's Appetite (2005)

With Saints of the Underground

 * Love the Sin, Hate the Sinner (2008)

With Lynch Mob

 * Sun Red Sun (2014)

With Black Star Riders

 * The Killer Instinct (2015)
 * Heavy Fire (2017)
 * Another State of Grace (2019)
 * Wrong Side of Paradise (2023)

title: Robbie Crane


text: User talk:69.199.5.145

title: User talk:69.199.5.145


text:
Hypophora

Hypophora, also referred to as anthypophora or antipophora, is a figure of speech in which the speaker poses a question and then answers the question. Hypophora can consist of a single question answered in a single sentence, a single question answered in a paragraph or even a section, or a series of questions, each answered in subsequent paragraphs. Hypophora is used (1) as a transitional device, to take the discussion in a new direction, (2) a device to catch attention, since a reader's curiosity is stimulated by hearing a question, and (3) to suggest and answer questions the reader might not have thought of.

History
The word anthypophora is present in Ancient Greek and is mentioned by the Roman orator Quintilian in his book Institutio Oratoria. In Institutio Oratoria, Quintilian merely identifies anthypophora as a device used to verify the truth of something, and does not mention raising a hypothetical question or objection. An earlier work by the Greek rhetorician Gorgias mentions anthypophora in its current definition, that is, presenting an opposing argument and then refuting it. The 16th-century English rhetorical handbook The Arte of English Poesie, reputedly by George Puttenham, gives the current definition of Anthypophora as well as numerous examples.

Hypophora vs. anthypophora
In recent times, a division has arisen between the definitions of hypophora and anthypophora. The Century Dictionary identifies hypophora as the dissenting statement or question and anthypophora as the reply to the question. Thus, the two terms have come to embrace both elements of hypophora, as well as dealing with the whole concept.

Effect
The rhetorical effectiveness lies in allowing the speaker to answer questions the listener may have. For instance, in Paul's Epistle to the Romans, Paul is explaining Jesus and he says "Is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also" (Romans 3.29). In this manner, Paul confirms to the reader that God is god of both the Jews and Gentiles.

title: Hypophora


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Zephram Stark/Proposed decision

all proposed

After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other arbitrators, parties and others at /Workshop place proposals which are ready for voting here.

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain.
 * Only items that receive a majority "support" vote will be passed.
 * Items that receive a majority "oppose" vote will be formally rejected.
 * Items that do not receive a majority "support" or "oppose" vote will be open to possible amendment by any Arbitrator if he so chooses. After the amendment process is complete, the item will be voted on one last time.

Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator before or after his/her time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that she/he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were passed.

On this case, 1 Arbitrators is recused and 3 are inactive, so 5 votes are a majority.

Proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on. Non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.
 * For all items:

Motions and requests by the parties
Place those on the discussion page.

Proposed temporary injunctions
Four net "support" votes needed to pass (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support") 24 hours from the first vote is normally the fastest an injunction will be imposed.

Template
1)

{text of proposed orders}

 * Support:

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

=Proposed final decision=

Civility
1) Wikipedia requires reasonable courtesy toward other users, including assumption of good faith on their part, see Civility and Assume good faith

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 14:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 00:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:00, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 05:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Neutral point of view
2) The central policy of Wikipedia, the pole star, is Neutral point of view which contemplates inclusion of an article of fair statements of all significant points of view on the subject.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 14:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 00:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:00, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 05:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Probation
3) Users may be banned either directly or via the mechanism of Probation from editing articles which they disrupt by tendentious editing or other activity.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 14:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 00:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:01, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 05:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Focus of dispute
1) The focus of this dispute is the article terrorism which, according to Zephram Stark, deteriorated due to the aggressive editing of others. and other actions of Jayjg and SlimVirgin. He has waged a campaign to restore what he considers an adequate article, free of the complex ambiguities introduced by his opponents, see Talk:Terrorism/Archive_6 and Requests_for_arbitration/Zephram_Stark/Evidence.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 14:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC) Removed names of specific editors Fred Bauder 15:06, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 00:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * ... but might prefer other wording, below. James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:
 * Tries and fails to address the main issues of this case. →Raul654 09:18, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I prefer 1.2 below ➥the Epopt 00:45, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Different wording
1.1) The focus of this dispute is the article terrorism which, according to Zephram Stark, deteriorated due to the "aggressive editing and other actions" of a group of editors including Carbonite, csloat, Jayjg, SlimVirgin, and Willmcw. Stark has waged a campaign to restore what he considers an adequate article; see Talk:Terrorism/Archive_6 and Requests_for_arbitration/Zephram_Stark/Evidence.

 * Support:
 * I think this might be easier for others to swallow; I've removed the "complex ambiguities" useage, as it didn't seem to add anything, and have added more editors who took part in the dispute on the other 'side'. James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:
 * Zepharm Stark's inability to deal with complex ambiguities is the essence of the problem. Fred Bauder 21:37, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * As above, tries and fails to address the main issues of this case. →Raul654 09:18, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Focus of the dispute - alternative finding
1.2) Zephram Stark launched a prolonged, aggressive campaign to dramatically alter the terrorism article to conform to his personal views. His actions there were characterized by a sustained pattern of antisocial behavior and a staunch refusal to listen to others.

 * Support:
 * →Raul654 09:18, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 00:40, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:
 * He went too far, but labeling him as "antisocial" goes way far. Using the same criteria George W. Bush could be labeled antisocial. Fred Bauder 17:24, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed with Fred. James F. (talk) 16:54, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Strike "antisocial" and I wil support this statement. Kelly Martin (talk) 23:20, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Focus of dispute
1.3) Zephram Stark engaged in tendentious (exhibiting a strong POV) and disruptive editing with respect to the article terrorism over an extended period of time, see Talk:Terrorism/Archive_6 and Requests_for_arbitration/Zephram_Stark/Evidence.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 21:08, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 16:54, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Acceptable. →Raul654 17:15, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 06:58, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 18:34, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Kelly Martin (talk) 23:21, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Ethnic slurs
2) Frustrated by opposing editors, Zephram Stark made an edit on his talk page referring to them as "fucking Jews"

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 14:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 00:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 05:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Kelly Martin (talk) 23:21, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Unrepentant attitude
2.1) Zephram Start continues to make ethnic slurs, declaring that he just likes to do it

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 02:09, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Disruption of talk page
3) Zephram Stark has removed others' comments from article talk pages.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 14:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 00:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:03, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 05:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Kelly Martin (talk) 23:29, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Extended disruption
4) Zephram Stark's editing of terrorism is marked by dogged persistence and lengthy argument. Opponents are many, supporters few; see Talk:Terrorism/Archive_6.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 17:42, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 00:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:16, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 05:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Kelly Martin (talk) 23:22, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Wikilawyering
5) Zephram Stark has engaged in "Wikilawyering" involving dismissal of this case on spurious grounds and has attempted to alter proposed decisions in this arbitration case against him.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 17:42, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 00:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 06:34, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 05:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Kelly Martin (talk) 23:23, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Proposed remedies
Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

Ban for ethnic slur
1) Zephram Stark is banned for one month for ethnic slurs.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 14:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC) second choice Fred Bauder 05:31, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 06:36, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * It's a bit too short for my tastes, but with the other remedies, I can live with it -- Second choice →Raul654 07:03, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Kelly Martin (talk) 23:24, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:
 * far too short ➥the Epopt 00:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Too short in light of Kelly Martin (talk) 01:29, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Ban for multiple offenses
1.1) Zephram Stark is banned for six months for personal attacks, edit warring, and attempted interference with the arbitration case against him.

 * Support:
 * ➥the Epopt 00:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * First choice - →Raul654 05:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Kelly Martin (talk) 01:29, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 02:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC) First choice Fred Bauder 05:31, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 03:44, 11 November 2005 (UTC) (Changed, since he can't seem to stop the offending behavior even while this case is about to close.)
 * James F. (talk) 11:11, 11 November 2005 (UTC) Changed, as with Mindspillage.

 * Oppose:
 * Fred Bauder 03:25, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC) Too lengthy.
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 07:09, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Too long. Kelly Martin (talk) 23:27, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Probation
2) Zephram Stark is placed on Probation for one year. He may be banned by any administrator from any article the editing of which he disrupts by lengthy argumentation or edit warring.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 14:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 05:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC) - (In reply to Epopt) Not great by itself, but good in conjunection with other remedies.
 * as Raul: if other remedies are sufficient, this will help ➥the Epopt 01:05, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 06:59, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Kelly Martin (talk) 23:27, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:
 * far too mild ➥the Epopt 00:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Ban from terrorism and related articles
3) Zephram Stark is banned from Terrorism and all related articles.

 * Support:
 * →Raul654 05:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 11:57, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * permanently, I assume ➥the Epopt 00:37, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 07:00, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Kelly Martin (talk) 23:30, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:
 * Fred Bauder 23:51, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Blocks enforcing bans
1) Should edit any article or talk page from which he is banned he may be blocked briefly, up to a week in the case of repeat offenses.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 14:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 00:11, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC) Though perhaps we should make this an automatic, implicit part of probation?
 * →Raul654 05:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Mindspillage (spill yours?) 07:01, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Kelly Martin (talk) 23:31, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

=Discussion by Arbitrators=

Motion to close
Four net "support" votes needed to close case (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support") 24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close.

 * I think we have all we need here. Kelly Martin (talk) 23:32, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Close Fred Bauder Fred Bauder 05:32, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The longer ban has now passed. →Raul654 05:18, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Close. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 00:16, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Close. →Raul654 03:46, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * as long as he is banned for six months or more, I am willing to close — I object to closing this case with any lighter remedy ➥the Epopt 05:22, 11 November 2005 (UTC)


text:
Robert D. Keppel

Robert David Keppel (June 15, 1944 – June 14, 2021) was an American law enforcement officer and detective. He was also an associate professor at the University of New Haven and Sam Houston State University. Keppel was known for his contributions to the investigations of Ted Bundy and Gary Ridgway, and also assisted in the creation of HITS, the Homicide Investigation Tracking System.

Early life
Robert Keppel was raised in Spokane, Washington, where he attended Central Valley High School. After graduating, he went on to attend Washington State University, where he competed in the high jump. Keppel was inspired by his father to pursue criminal justice, in hopes to become a police chief. He went on to receive his master's degree in police science and administration. Following graduation in 1966, Keppel worked for the King County Sheriff's Office before being drafted as an Army drill sergeant and a captain in the Vietnam War from 1967 to 1974.

Career
The "Ted Murders" marked the beginning of Robert Keppel's career as a detective. Witnesses from Lake Sammamish State Park provided information regarding a man named "Ted" who had talked to two young women that were declared missing. During the investigation, Keppel narrowed down a large list of suspects until he was left with 25, including Ted Bundy. He confronted Bundy, but Bundy dismissed the conversation. Before Keppel could speak with him again, Bundy had already been arrested and fled custody.

After moving on from the "Ted Murders," Keppel decided to return to a doctorate program at University of Washington. While completing this 12-year program, he took the position as chief investigator for Washington State Attorney General's office. In this position, he investigated other crimes like the disappearance of Captain Rolf Neslund, and the death of Donna Howard.

Keppel was asked to assist in the Green River Task Force for the investigation of a set of murders in Washington. By 1984, Ted Bundy began writing letters to Robert Keppel in hopes to help in the investigation of the Green River Killer. This correspondence led to interviews between the two, which resulted in Bundy confessing to his unidentified crimes days before his execution.

Later life
Keppel retired as chief criminal investigator for the Washington State Attorney General's Office in 1995. He joined the faculty of Seattle University. , Keppel was an associate professor of criminal justice at Sam Houston State University, and taught there via teleconference. In 2007, Keppel joined the University of New Haven as an associate professor of criminal justice.

Keppel was author of The Riverman: Ted Bundy and I Hunt for the Green River Killer, made into a made-for-TV movie of the same name in 2004, starring Bruce Greenwood as Keppel and Cary Elwes as Bundy. He was also the author of many textbooks regarding criminal justice and related topics.

Works

 * Serial Murder: Future Implications for Police Investigations (1989; ISBN 0932930840)

 * Signature Killers (with William Birnes) (1997; ISBN 0671001302)

 * Murder: A Multidisciplinary Anthology of Readings (with Joseph Weis) (1999)

 * The Psychology of Serial Killer Investigations: The Grisly Business Unit (with William Birnes) (2003; ISBN 0124042600)

 * The Riverman: Ted Bundy and I Hunt for the Green River Killer (with William Birnes) (1995; ISBN 0671867636 / Revised after Ridgeway confessions, 2004; ISBN 9780671867638)

 * Offender Profiling (2006; ISBN 075938875X)

 * Forensic Pattern Recognition: From Fingerprints to Tool Marks (with Katherine M. Brown and Kristen M. Welch) (2006; ISBN 978-0132329484)

 * Serial Violence: Analysis of Modus Operandi and Signature Characteristics of Killers (with William Birnes) (2008; ISBN 9781420066326)

 * Profiling: Principles, Processes, Practicalities (with David V. Canter) (2010; ISBN 9780131192768)

title: Robert D. Keppel


text: User talk:81.79.85.125

title: User talk:81.79.85.125


text:
User talk:Janawar

Hola,

¿Eres hispano? Discúlpame, mi castellano no es perfecto. Vi tus contribuciones a Salvador Allende y la traducción de la entrevista a inglés no pareció perfecto. Lo intenté a mejorar, ¿cómo te parece el artículo actual?

Saludos,

Andyluciano 22:06, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

un gringo a que le gusta leer de américa latina.

Proposed deletion of Operation Last Chance

The article Operation Last Chance has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mythpage88 (talk) 00:23, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Cedel for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cedel is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Cedel until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. » Shadowowl  |  talk  13:54, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

title: User talk:Janawar


text:
CESIL

CESIL, or Computer Education in Schools Instruction Language, is a programming language designed to introduce pupils in British secondary schools to elementary computer programming. It is a simple language containing a total of fourteen instructions.

Background
Computer Education in Schools (CES) was a project that commenced in 1968 under the stewardship of the John Hoskyns Group. The project was taken over by International Computers Limited (ICL) in September 1969 to become ICL-CES. CESIL was developed by ICL as part of the ICL-CES project, and introduced in 1974. In those days, very few if any schools had computers, so pupils would write programs on coding sheets, which would then be transferred to punched cards or paper tape. Typically, this would be sent to run on a mainframe computer, with the output from a line printer being returned later.

Structure
Because CESIL was not designed as an interactive language, there is no facility to input data in real time. Instead, numeric data is included as a separate section at the end of the program.

The fundamental principle of CESIL is the use of a single accumulator, which handles mathematical operations. Numeric values are stored in variables, which in CESIL are referred to as store locations. CESIL only works with integers, and results from DIVIDE operations are rounded if necessary. There is no facility for data structures such as arrays, nor for string handling, though string constants can be output by means of the PRINT instruction.

Jumps and loops can be conditional or non-conditional, and transfer operation of the program to a line with a specific label, which is identified in the first column of a coding sheet. The instruction or operation is stated in the second column, and the operand in the third column. On some coding sheets, comments and the text of the PRINT instruction would be written in a fourth column.

Instructions
Instructions, or operations, are written in upper case and may have a single operand, which can be a store location, constant integer value or line label. Store locations and line labels are alphanumeric, up to six characters, and begin with a letter. Numeric integer constants must be signed + or −, with zero being denoted as +0.

Input and output

 * – reads the next value from the data, and stores it in the accumulator. The error message  is printed if the program tries to read beyond the end of the data provided.
 * – prints the current value of the accumulator. No carriage return is printed.
 * – prints the given text. No carriage return is printed.
 * – prints a carriage return, thus starting a new line.

Memory storage

 * or  – copies the value of the given location or constant to the accumulator.
 * – copies the contents of the accumulator to the given location.

Mathematical instructions

 * or  – adds the value of the given location or constant to the accumulator.
 * or  – subtracts the value of the given location or constant from the accumulator.
 * or  – multiplies the accumulator by the value of the given location or constant.
 * or  – divides the accumulator by the value of the given location or constant. The result is rounded down if the result is positive, and up if the result is negative. A   error message is printed if the divisor is zero.

In each case, the result of the operation is stored in the accumulator, replacing the previous value.

Program control

 * – unconditionally transfers control to location labelled.
 * (Jump If NEGative) – transfers control to location labelled if the accumulator contains a negative value.
 * (Jump If ZERO) – transfers control to location labelled if the accumulator contains zero.
 * – terminates the program.

Other symbols
Three special symbols are used in CESIL at the beginnings of lines.
 * is used to mark the end of the program and the start of data.
 * is used to mark the end of the data.
 * is used at the start of a line to indicate a comment.

CESIL programming tools
An emulator for CESIL, designed to run on Windows and called Visual CESIL, is available as freeware.

An interpreter for CESIL, designed to run on the Android platform and called Wyrm CESIL, is available as free to install.

Example
The following totals the integers in the runtime data section until it encounters a negative value and prints the total. LOAD   +0 LOOP   STORE   TOTAL IN       JINEG   DONE ADD    TOTAL JUMP   LOOP

DONE   PRINT   "The total is: " LOAD   TOTAL OUT LINE HALT

% 1 2 3 -1

The output of the above program would be:

title: CESIL


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dustin Leggans

 * 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. Sjakkalle (Check!)  06:57, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Dustin Leggans
Another vanity article related to Ostensible, also up for deletion. Friday (talk) 22:08, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom.   Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk   22:22, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I object. Ostensible Magazine is a real magazine with a distribution of over 2,000. It has featured interviews with prominent musicians, scholars and artists. It has a website and it has even won the Aiko Underground Press award for best new publication in Tokyo in 2004. Though it is a sort of "vanity" to put in entries linking it's creators to it's main entry, certainly they all have a purpose together and certainly Ostensible deserves it's own page.

 * Delete as per nom (see also Evan Greenspoon, just re-created). --Dvyost 19:02, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. See also Dog Thesis Foundation as well. MCB 23:09, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete as per nom --Daniel Lotspeich 08:37, 11 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.


text: User talk:68.185.199.65

title: User talk:68.185.199.65


text:
Sex, Toys & Chocolate

Sex, Toys, & Chocolate was a talk show produced by Alliance Atlantis on cable and satellite in Canada from 2003 to 2005. Premiering on March 5, 2004, new episodes appeared on Life Network and older ones ran on Discovery Health network. It was hosted by Robin Milhausen and Michael Cho. Each show opens with interspersed scenes of Milhausen and Cho discussing some sex-related topic with three women and three men respectively. The men and women are then brought together for a group discussion, followed by role-playing or trivia games at the end. Field reporter Roy Roman interviews people on the streets of Miami about the same topic, which typically include oral sex, masturbation, fetishes, orgasm, pornography, and the like. The show includes explicit language and discussion not seen on American television, and is distinguished from other sex-related television series (such as those hosted by Sue Johanson and sex therapist Ruth Westheimer (Dr. Ruth) in that it is primarily designed to convey the opinions and experiences of average people and not to convey expert advice.

title: Sex, Toys & Chocolate


text:
Santa Fe Grande

The Santa Fe Grande is a New Mexico chile pepper, also known as "Yellow hot chili pepper" and the "Guero chili pepper", is a very prolific cultivar used in the Southwestern United States. The plants are resistant to tobacco mosaic virus.

The conical, blunt fruits are about 2 in long. they ripen from a pale yellow to a bright orange or fiery red. The peppers grow upright on 24" chile plants. Santa Fe Grande's fruit have a slightly sweet taste and are fairly mild in pungency. Fresno chile peppers are of the Santa Fe Grande group.

title: Santa Fe Grande


text: Category:American television actors

title: Category:American television actors


text:
Le Parisien

Le Parisien (lit. 'The Parisian') is a French daily newspaper covering both international and national news, and local news of Paris and its suburbs. Since 2015, Le Parisien has been owned by LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE, better known as LVMH, belonging to French billionaire Bernard Arnault.

History and profile
The paper was established as Le Parisien libéré (lit. 'The Freed Parisian') by Émilien Amaury in 1944, and was published for the first time on 22 August 1944. The paper was originally launched as the organ of the French underground during the German occupation of France in World War II.

The name was changed to the current one in 1986. A national edition exists, called Aujourd'hui en France (lit. 'Today in France').

LVMH acquired the paper from Éditions Philippe Amaury in 2015.

Circulation
Le Parisien had a circulation near to one million copies in the early 1970s. The paper reached a circulation of 659,200 copies on 24 April 1995, the day after the first round of the presidential election. In the period of 1995–1996 the paper had a circulation of 451,159 copies.

The combined circulation of Le Parisien was 485,000 copies in 2001. The paper had a circulation of 147,143 copies and a combined circulation of 360,505 copies in 2002. It was the second largest regional newspaper in France with a combined circulation of 530,000 copies in 2008, behind Ouest-France, which had a circulation of about 800,000 copies. The circulation of Le Parisien was 229,638 copies in 2014. The circulation of Le Parisien was 264,952 copies in 2020.

title: Le Parisien


text: User:Titoxd/UserPage/Neutrality

title: User:Titoxd/UserPage/Neutrality


text:
User talk:Paducci

Welcome, Paducci!
Hello Paducci, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like it here and stick around. If you want, you can drop us a note at New user log to introduce yourself.

Before you start doing a lot of editing, you might want to take the Tutorial. It gives a lot of basic info you'll want to get you oriented on Wikipedia.

Here're some handy links:
 * Help:Contents is the list of all of the information you need to use Wikipedia.
 * How to edit a page gives editing help.
 * Manual of Style gives formatting info.
 * Policies and guidelines tell about the principles we operate on. It's important, but don't try to read it all now.
 * Help desk is a good place to ask questions.
 * Show preview explains how to double-check your edits before saving, which is often an important feature.

Remember to sign your name on talk pages by typing " ~~~ " for your username and " ~~~~ " for your username and a timestamp (which is mostly preferred).

Feel free to drop me a question on my talk page. I'll answer if I'm here.

Take care, --Blackcap | talk 22:12, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Paducci


text: User:Titoxd/UserPage/Vandalism

title: User:Titoxd/UserPage/Vandalism


text:
Features, events, and processes

Features, Events, and Processes (FEP) are terms used in the fields of radioactive waste management, carbon capture and storage, and hydraulic fracturing to define relevant scenarios for safety assessment studies. For a radioactive waste repository, features would include the characteristics of the site, such as the type of soil or geological formation the repository is to be built on or under. Events would include things that may or will occur in the future, like, e.g., glaciations, droughts, earthquakes, or formation of faults. Processes are things that are ongoing, such as the erosion or subsidence of the landform where the site is located on, or near.

Several catalogues of FEP's are publicly available, a.o., this one elaborated for the NEA Clay Club dealing with the disposal of radioactive waste in deep clay formations, and those compiled for deep crystalline rocks (granite) by Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB, SKB, the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company.

title: Features, events, and processes


text:
Talk:Julian year (astronomy)

Requested move
Reason: to reverse an unsupported renaming

 * Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~

 * Support The disambiguation link in the original article is sufficient Nike 22:26, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Perhaps the recently (today) created Julian year (calendar) should be a separate article under that title or perhaps it should be renamed or perhaps it should be merged into Julian calendar; however the title Julian year should be given to the astronomy article and Julian year (disambiguation) would list Julian year (calendar) if that article is retained under that name.   The Julian year is in actual current usage as a time unit in astronomy (fundamentally a way to measure days, not years), whereas the Julian calendar is not in any actual current usage.   Until today, the astronomy article was at Julian year, and that ought to be restored.  -- Curps 03:43, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The problems caused in the historical record because of alterations to the start of the julian year, is at least as vaild a topic as the use of the Julian year in astronomy. Philip Baird Shearer 08:44, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose, per Philip Baird Shearer. "Current usage" does not automatically establish more notability.  —Lifeisunfair 02:13, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Add any additional comments

Although I originally suggested the move and (incorrectly) tried to implement it, I am pursuaded by another that it would not be appropriate. The original article was replaced by a disambiguation page, which links to this article and another which does not exist, Julian year (calendar). The latter subject is covered an existing article, Julian calendar. Since this is already covered by a disambiguation link, a disambiguation page is unnecessary. See discussion on the original talk page. --Nike 22:26, 4 October 2005 (UTC).

 * Comment: An article was created by User:Philip Baird Shearer at Julian year (calendar), but another user rapidly changed it to a redirect to Julian calendar. We should get some feedback on whether the content of that article should be a separate article or be merged into Julian calendar.  I personally have no opinion. -- Curps 02:19, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

I see that now. I am thinking that probably it does not need an article separate from Julian calendar. However, the first sentence is, "A Julian year is of 365.25 days long." This is factually incorrect. A year of the Julian calendar is either 365 or 366 days long, never 365.25 days. A better one would be, "A Julian year is a period beginning on January 1 and ending on the following December 31 on the Julian calendar, which is either 365 or 366 days long, depending upon whether the given year is a leap year." --Nike 03:17, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The whole point of the previous discussion (and the new article) is that the Julian year has not always started on 1 January. The times when countries changed is important information for anyone who is interested in history because changes in dates caused by the move over to the Gregorian calender is only one of the complications. Another is that the recorded year of an even may be different in an historical source because the source may use a different date for the start of the year. Philip Baird Shearer 08:44, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * BTW I think the changes made to this article in the 12 hours (since it was moved) has made it a far better article. Philip Baird Shearer 10:49, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

 * If you wish to create an article about what day was considered the first day of the year, then "Julian year" is hardly the clearest title for it. This is not the first thing that would spring to mind.  First day of the year would make more sense, or New Year's Day, or something similar.  In fact the topic could be expanded to non-Western calendars to flesh out a full article (see for instance.

 * Also, I suspect the start date of March 25 was not universal. It certainly seems to have applied to Britain and its colonies, but in Ancient Rome the year apparently started on either March 1 or January 1, and according to this fairly detailed page:
 * In his excellent book Marking Time Duncan Steel remarks (p.165) that it is often claimed that part of the Gregorian reform consisted in setting the first day of the year (New Year's Day) to January 1st, but that in fact the papal bull made no reference to the date of New Year's Day. January 1st was already New Year's Day in many European countries.
 * So it seems the starting day of the year was not an inherent property of the Julian calendar but varied on a country-by-country basis, which again would make First day of the year or some such a more appropriate title than Julian year (calendar). -- Curps 17:01, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

 * It is not just the start of the year which is of interest, it is also the ordinal of the year. Different times have started their calendar from different years. I am no expert on the Roman period and I look forward to more contributions on the subject. This is also something which happens in later times as well when people date their correspondence from the date of the start of a reign, but that is much easier calculate because the start of their reign is usually agreed upon and widely disseminated, although working out the saint's day can be tricky. Philip Baird Shearer 09:07, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

The year-number is also not an inherent part of the Julian calendar, unlike the Gregorian. It was first instituted in Roman times, when the years were named for consuls, and later the reigns of emperors, so it is not just "something which happens in later times". AUC dates were used mostly by historians. Various other methods have also been used. AD dates only came into general use much later, and are also used with the Gregorian calendar. So the Julian year is independent of any method of counting years. This already discussed in the Anno Domini article, so there is no point on duplicating the information, nor would it be the most appropriate place. What would there be in Julian year (calendar) article that is not already covered by other articles? --Nike 20:32, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Request for Comment
This still appears on the request for comment list so I'll add my two cents. I doubt it's a significant inconvenience to astronomers to click on the disambiguation link. However, an amateur history buff with an interest in Napoleon's invasion of Russia would find it confusing to reach the astronomy page by accident. Encyclopedias are references for laypeople. Durova 18:06, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Decision
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. (proposal was to move to to Julian year) Ryan Norton T 13:01, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Intro improvement
The intro first explains the Julian astronomical year technically, then everything that a julian year isn't, up to including confusing a bit, but why such a rigid Julian year concept? What use? I believe the truth is that it was needed for the astronomical epochs: the tropical year varied somewhat by planetary perturbations and the varying ellipticity of Earth's orbit around the Sun, so an astronomical year couldn't be used. Later developments have also shown that a day isn't well enough defined, therefore JD and epochs based on JD are moving to rely on ephemeride time ET, so that we get JDE and epochs based on JDE, otherwise the physics involving celestial mechanics will contain systemic errors. ... said: Rursus ( m bork³ ) 11:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

 * In general you are correct, although any such reason seems more appropriate in the Usage section which follows the lead. The Julian year replaced the variable Besselian year used before 1984, per the IAU (1976) System of Astronomical Constants. However, both Terrestrial Time (the new name for Ephemeris Time) and Universal Time (variable Earth time) are used with it. TT (atomic time on Earth's geoid) is used for calculating the motions of solar system bodies (in two forms if relativity is included, TCB and TCG), but that time is useless for events on Earth, which requires UT (in two forms, UT1 (mean solar time at Greenwich) and UTC (atomic time with leap seconds). For example, whether a solar eclipse will occur on Earth is calculated using TT, but to determine where and when it will occur on the surface of the Earth UT is needed. — Joe Kress (talk) 17:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Julian calendar distinguished
This sentence in the intro has several problems: "Astronomers follow the same calendar conventions that are accepted in the world community: They use the Gregorian calendar for events since its introduction on October 15, 1582 (or later, depending on country), and the Julian calendar for events before that date."

"Astronomers" can be taken to mean modern astronomers, or all astronomers who were active after 1582. I have no idea what calendar an English astronomer would have used to record an event in 1700. I think the truth is that astronomers use many different calendars from one minute to the next, depending on whether they are creating an ephemeris, writing the date of a contemporary observation, researching historical observations, or scheduling telescope time. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

 * I reviewed a few published texts, specifically planetary tables, that is, tables that predict the position of the Sun, Moon, and planets. Ephemerides and almanacs only give their positions for a few years in the future at most. If they are intended for an international audience, they might use both calendars after 1582, or give conversion instructions. Ptolemy, Theon, and Copernicus used Egyptian years of 365 days each. I assume medieval Arabic astronomers used the tabular Islamic calendar. Only after the introduction of the Gregorian calendar do we find dates given in the Julian calendar in planetary tables. Kepler ignored the Gregorian calendar — he only uses Julian dates in his Rudolphine Tables (1627). In his Tables astronomiques (1740), Jacques Cassini used the Gregorian calendar after 1582 and the Julian calendar for earlier dates, as expected since France adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1582. Similarly, in his Tables of the Sun (1898), Simon Newcomb used the Gregorian calendar after 1600, the Julian calendar before 1500, and either during 1500–1600, even though the United States as a British colony adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1752. Newcomb does not allow a Julian date between 1600 and 1752. The Royal Society was founded in 1660 so its published records would be useful. — Joe Kress (talk) 05:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Angular measure?
Are the tropical and sidereal years reversed in the discussion of "angular measure"? If not, some clarification is in order.  — Aldaron • T/C 13:14, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

 * That passage was gibberish. The article by Simon et al. is 21 pages long and isn't really about the Julian year or the length of any of these years. Expecting someone to understand that passage (if it has any meaning, which I doubt) without a reference to a specific page and equation or table is completely unreasonable. I deleted the passage. Jc3s5h (talk) 13:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

 * Thanks. I'm glad it wasn't just me!  — Aldaron • T/C 17:04, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Julian year (astronomy). 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/20070216041250/http://www.iau.org/Units.234.0.html to http://www.iau.org/Units.234.0.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724121012/http://pweb.jps.net/~gangale3/other/allison2_frm.htm to http://pweb.jps.net/~gangale3/other/allison2_frm.htm

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) 12:40, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Julian year (astronomy)


text:
User talk:Petrasr

Image copyright problem with Image:Tirpok-clinton.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Tirpok-clinton.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. BRossow 21:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging
Please clarify the copyright status of the image at  . Thanks! ⇒ BRossow T/C 21:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Roborig.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Roborig.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 11:32, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Petrasr


text:
Fenwick Tower

Fenwick Tower may refer to:

 * Fenwick Tower (Halifax, Nova Scotia), Canada
 * Fenwick Tower, Northumberland, Matfen, England

title: Fenwick Tower


text:
Easy Street (1917 film)

Easy Street is a 1917 short action-comedy film starring and directed by Charlie Chaplin.

Plot
In a slum area called Easy Street, the police are failing to maintain law and order.

The Little Tramp, a down-and-out derelict, is sleeping rough outside the Hope Mission near the streets of a lawless slum. The sounds of a service in progress draws him wearily inside. After the sermon from the preacher, he is entranced by a beautiful mission worker and organist and he stays after the service. Holding his hand, she pleads him to join the mission, inspiring his religious "awakening". He vows to reform, returning the collection box that he slipped into capacious pants.

Spotting a help-wanted ad for a job at the police station, the Tramp accepts and is assigned the rough-and-tumble Easy Street as his beat. Upon entering the street he finds a bully roughing up the locals and pilfering their money. The Tramp gets on the wrong side of the bully and after a brief chase, the Tramp finds him impervious to his blows. In a display of his great strength, the bully bends a gas streetlamp in two, whereupon Charlie leaps on his back, covers his head with the lamp, and turns on the gas, rendering him unconscious.

After giving him one more shot of gas, he calls the squad to retrieve the Bully. For the moment, the Tramp becomes the cock-of-the-walk in the locality, frightening away the denizens by simply spinning around to face them. Then he helps a woman (who turns out to be the Bully's wife) who has stolen food from a street vendor but she rather 'rewards' him by nearly dropping a flower pot on his head. The mission worker happens by and takes him across the way to another apartment where a couple has a large brood of children whom Charlie feeds by scattering bread crumbs among them as if he were feeding chickens.

The bully is put in handcuffs by the police but manages to escape from the station and returns to Easy Street. After a battle with his wife, he attacks the Tramp. He chases the Tramp fanatically until he manages to knock the bully unconscious by dropping a heavy stove on his head from a two-story window. On returning to his beat on Easy Street, the unruly mob knocks the Tramp unconscious and drops him into a nearby cellar where he manages to save the Mission worker from a nasty junkie after accidentally sitting on the drug addict's upturned needle. Supercharged by the effects of the drug, he takes on the mob and heroically defeats them all, and as a consequence restores peace and order to Easy Street.

By the end of the film, a New Mission is built on Easy Street and the inhabitants flock to it, even including the former bully: now a well-dressed respectable, churchgoing citizen. Arm in arm, The Derelict and The Mission Worker follow them into the church.

Charlie On The Beat
An edited version of this film was released as "Charlie On The Beat". It was available in 8mm silent cine format. It ran for about 3.5 minutes and is available on YouTube [Link to film www.YouTube.com/watch?v=0iBftP-QkOM&t=7s].

Inspiration
It could have been inspired by the similarly named East Street market in the Walworth district of London (where Chaplin is believed to have been born), a suggestion made as early as 1928 in the film The Life Story of Charlie Chaplin by Harry B. Parkinson and reasserted in David Robinson's introduction to the most recent edition of My Autobiography, while the famous trousers and boots of Chaplin's trademark tramp costume may have been drawn from the everyday clothes Chaplin saw worn there.

Review
The Moving Picture World offered the following praise: "In 'Easy Street,' Charlie Chaplin's latest and best, if we may venture to obtrude so decided an opinion, an original key has been struck. At any rate, it is Chaplin at his funniest; and nothing much more entertaining, by way of comedy, could be imagined..."

A reviewer from Variety wrote, "The resultant chaos and several new stunts will be bound to bring the laughter, and the star's display of agility and acrobatics approaches some of the Douglas Fairbanks pranks. Chaplin has always been throwing things in his films, but when he 'eases' a cook stove out of the window onto the head of his adversary on the street below, that pleasant little bouquet adds a new act to his repertoire. Easy Street certainly has some rough work in it--maybe a bit rougher than the others--but it is the kind of stuff that Chaplin fans love. In fact, few who see Easy Street will fail to be furnished with hearty laughter."

Cast

 * Charlie Chaplin ... The Derelict
 * Edna Purviance ... The Mission Worker
 * Eric Campbell ... The Bully
 * Albert Austin ... Minister/Policeman
 * Lloyd Bacon ... Drug Addict
 * Henry Bergman ... Anarchist
 * Frank J. Coleman ... Policeman
 * William Gillespie ... Heroin addict
 * James T. Kelley ... Mission Visitor/Policeman
 * Charlotte Mineau ... Big Eric's Wife
 * John Rand ... Mission Tramp/Policeman
 * Janet Miller Sully ... Mother in Mission
 * Loyal Underwood ... Small Father/Policeman
 * Erich von Stroheim Jr. ... Baby
 * Leo White ... Policeman (uncredited)
 * Tom Wood ... Chief of Police (uncredited)

Sound version
In 1932, Amedee Van Beuren of Van Beuren Studios, purchased Chaplin's Mutual comedies for $10,000 each, added music by Gene Rodemich and Winston Sharples and sound effects, and re-released them through RKO Radio Pictures. Chaplin had no legal recourse to stop the RKO release.

title: Easy Street (1917 film)


text:
Rolladen-Schneider LS2

The Rolladen-Schneider LS2 is a 15-metre span single seat glider prototype with trailing-edge flaps, designed and built by Rolladen-Schneider Flugzeugbau GmbH c. 1973.

The LS2 was designed by Wolf Lemke and Walter Schneider in response to changes in the Standard Class rules. Only one example, an experimental prototype, was built.

First flown in 1973, it won the German Championships that year. Helmut Reichmann competing in the LS2 won the 14th World championships in Waikerie, South Australia in 1974.

Design
The design was nevertheless unsatisfactory. The flaps occupied most of the trailing edge of the wing, being intended both as a means to control speed and improve climb rates in narrow thermals. Class rules did not allow these surfaces to be coupled to the ailerons. The resultant sluggish roll rate from the very short ailerons led to poor and unsafe flying characteristics. Thrice World Champion Helmut Reichmann reportedly said the performance advantages were not worth the extra pilot workload.

The LS2 highlighted inconsistencies in the rules that promoted unwise design trends, with trade-offs having to be made by designers between competitiveness and safety. Many observers also felt that trailing-edge flaps were against the spirit of the Standard Class, an issue that affected other types such as the PIK-20, Libelle and Schreder HP-8.

The International Gliding Commission voted a new set of rules in 1974, prohibiting any lift-enhancing devices in the Standard Class and creating the 15 metre Class where these were allowed without any restriction.

title: Rolladen-Schneider LS2


text:
File:ToRss.jpg

Summary
Screenshot from the PlayStation 2 RPG Tales of Rebirth by Namco. Veigue Lungberg is using Genryuuzan (幻龍斬) in battle; the characteristic three lines of the "Three-line Linear Motion Battle System" are visible.

Source: captured and uploaded by Wikipedia user Tsunade.

Fair use rationale

 * Namco Bandai Games has not released any such images to the public domain
 * The image is used to demonstrate the game's distinctive art style
 * The image is being used in an informative way and should not detract from the game
 * The image is a small, web-resolution image
 * The image is used to illustrate important characteristics of the game mentioned in the article
 * The image's only purpose is to aid in the description of the fictional world of Tales of Rebirth, and for no other purpose
 * The image does not limit Namco Bandai's ability to sell the game

title: File:ToRss.jpg


text: Wikipedia:Picture of the day/October 5, 2005


text:
Talk:1918 United States Senate elections

Untitled
To anyone who knows or can do this -

the table of "senate elections" should be changed, to include a link to the 1918 election

Obtuse Article
While the text of the article says, "The Republican Party gained control with a slim 2-seat majority after picking up a net six seats", the box at the right indicates a tie 48 to 48 Democrats vs GOP. (PeacePeace (talk) 16:26, 27 August 2019 (UTC))
 * I've added an explanation: (4 in general elections and 2 in special elections) —GoldRingChip 16:30, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Good. But still some explanation is needed. Why is there still the 48 to 48 tie indicated in the box? Were the special elections part of the 1918 election? (PeacePeace (talk) 16:36, 27 August 2019 (UTC))
 * There, I've made some changes. Instead of my explaining it to you here (where it's less useful), can you figure it out now from the article? —GoldRingChip 19:58, 27 August 2019 (UTC)


text: User talk:70.70.137.58

title: User talk:70.70.137.58


text:
Rodovia Adhemar de Barros

Rodovia Adhemar de Barros (official designation SP-340) is a highway in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. It is 170 km long.

The highway follows very closely a south–north direction, departing from the city of Campinas, then passing by Jaguariúna, Holambra, Santo Antônio da Posse, Mogi Guaçu, Mogi Mirim, Estiva Gerbi, Aguaí, Casa Branca and ending at Mococa, near the border of the state of Minas Gerais.

The highway's name honours the former physician and twice Governor of the State of São Paulo, Adhemar Pereira de Barros. It is managed and maintained by a state concession to private company Renovias, and is therefore a toll road.

title: Rodovia Adhemar de Barros


text:
Category:American film actor stubs

This category should be used for Americans who are notable only or primarily for their work as a film actor. If an American actor is notable for more than just film acting, then a stub article about them should use US-actor-stub instead.

This category should only be used for actors whose birth year is not known; if it is, one of the subcategories should be used instead.

The perfect article about an actor gives both a (possibly short) biography and a list of performances. Also, appropriate categories should be added, especially Category:American film actors.

title: Category:American film actor stubs


text: User talk:68.51.146.241

title: User talk:68.51.146.241


text:
Category:American theatre actor stubs

This category should be used for Americans who are notable only or primarily for their work as a theatre actor. If an American actor is notable for more than just theatre acting, then a stub article about them should use US-actor-stub instead.

The perfect article about an actor gives both a (possibly short) biography and a list of performances. Also, appropriate categories should be added, especially Category:American stage actors and Category:American musical theatre actors.

title: Category:American theatre actor stubs


text: Category:Economic, Social and Cultural Council Standing Committee members


text:
Manitoba (disambiguation)

Manitoba is a province of Canada.

Manitoba may also refer to:
 * Manitoba (computer chip), a computer chip made by Intel in 2006
 * Manitoba (horse), a British-Australian Thoroughbred racehorse
 * Lake Manitoba, a lake in Manitoba, Canada
 * Manitoba Colony, Mexico, Mennonite colony in Mexico
 * Manitoba Colony, Bolivia, ultaconservative Mennonite colony in Bolivia
 * Manitoba Junction, Minnesota, an unincorporated community in the United States

Music

 * Manitoba (American band), punk rock band formed in New York City
 * Richard Manitoba (born 1954), American musician and satellite radio DJ
 * Manitoba (Canadian band), electronic band led by Dan Snaith

Transportation

 * Manitoba, operated by the Hudson's Bay Company from 1880–1884, see Hudson's Bay Company vessels
 * Manitoba, the first steel-hulled ship to be built in Canada (see Polson Iron Works)
 * Manitoba, a lake freighter operated by Lower Lakes Towing
 * 45558 Manitoba, a British LMS Jubilee Class locomotive

title: Manitoba (disambiguation)


text: Wikipedia:POTD/October 5, 2005

title: Wikipedia:POTD/October 5, 2005


text:
Category:American television actor stubs

This category should be used for Americans who are notable only or primarily for their work as a television actor. If an American actor is notable for more than just television acting, then a stub article about them should use US-actor-stub instead.

The perfect article about an actor gives both a (possibly short) biography and a list of performances. Also, appropriate categories should be added, especially Category:American television actors.


text:
Category:American voice actor stubs

This category should be used for Americans who are notable only or primarily for their work as a voice actor. If the decade of birth is known, use US-voice-actor-1900s-stub instead. If an American actor is notable for more than just voice acting, then a stub article about them should use US-actor-stub instead.

The perfect article about an actor gives both a (possibly short) biography and a list of performances. Also, appropriate categories should be added, especially Category:American voice actors.

ca:Categoria:Actors de doblatge estatunidencs

title: Category:American voice actor stubs


text: Template:US-film-actor-stub

title: Template:US-film-actor-stub