text:
User talk:Mmeiser

If you have a note for me regarding edits please put it here. Otherwise feel free to email me at "wikipedia at mmeiser.com"

Hey man, nice work with Social Media page. It is a great start, and something that needs to be Wiki'd badly.

Request for blocking of user Pdelongchamp on vlogging article
Submitted to Wikipedia:Community sanction noticeboard posted here for documentations purposes... if you care to comment or vote on a ban post there... if you want to comment off the recorde feel free to respond here on my talk page.

--beging post -- Request assistance, advisement, and possible blocking of user Pdelongchamp from editing videoblogging article.

Charges are long term "delete trolling" (aka. "blanking vandalism"), "retributive editing" and threatening other users with blocking.

1) User deletes every contribution at least once.

Over the last year to two years user has attempted to have article deleted outright and upon failure has deleted every single one of thousands upon thousands of edits to the article at least once and more often then not multiple times despite attempts to appease him with citations and edits. This despite only one or two original contributions himself.

Delete's are almost always automatic, occurring within hour or days of contribution allowing no time or room for response, contribution or improvement by other contributors. User's deletes hence dominate article, disrupting activity on said wikipedia article and prohibiting other willing users from collaborating.

User cites frivolous reasons unworthy of automatic and outright deletion like "original research" and "needs citations" on these deletes despite repeated attempts to work with him by members of the community over the long term and repeated citations of wikipedia's editing policy, particularly the section "perfection is not required" and information contained therein on proper deletion procedure.

Please consider this emphasis. User has deleted EVERY contribution at least once if not multiple times. This is not an exaggeration. Article has been withered down by user to a stub of less than 500 words multiple times in the last two years and all contributions (no matter how obvious the value may seem or how obvious the good intentions of the contributor) have to be submitted multiple times and/or by multiple contributors and often debated before said user will admit them to the article, if said user 'allows' them at all, and often only to delete them months later.

Most recently the user deleted over 90% of the article and is currently involved in an edit war with multiple members of the community who have attempted to work with him to re-establish the article.

2) Retributive editing

User has edited other articles or attempted to have them deleted as a form of retribution.

In less than 10 edits and a relative number of minutes the user went from reverting a contribution to the videoblogging article to going through that users past contributions deleted edits and attempted to have 3 different articles deleted. Actually succeeding on one count.

This was admittedly my edit and my contributions, but they were others articles of which I had only made minor contributions and having nothing to do with the videoblogging article. It's as plain a case of retribution as I can find and shows alarming spitefulness and willingness to jeopardize a great amount by others and on other topics that are in no way connected to the videoblgging article.

(note re: "retributive editing" - I could find no other language for it so you'll have to pardon the terminology. Have been unable to find any other information on it, if you know it by another name or have any documentation on subject please respond.)

3) User has threatened users with blocking.

User has repeatedly threatened me with blocking in editing disputes despite being advised disputes are not a block-able offense.

Summation

Despite what can be considered nothing less than tremendous patience over the past two years because of the above and other actions I believe the community no longer assumes this user is editing in good faith. I believe I can speak on behalf of the community on this matter but am prepared to back it up with dozens if not hundreds of signatures of community members by whatever method you deem necessary. I also believe wether blocking be in order, or another form of action that the community would like a chance to send this user a message with their consensus on the matter to restore faith in the wikipedia editing process.

I believe the user in question wishes the article deleted or at the least he is trolling the community in an attempt for either attention or simply to frustrate and waste the time / energy of the community. He has succeeded in the last two years in driving off many well intentioned long term editors, and in bringing the evolution of the article to a complete standstill.

User is basically holding an entire community of would be contributors hostage with a delete button.

I believe there is more than enough evidence (2 years worth) and community consensus, I can virtually ensure 100's of signatures if there is a procedure for requesting a block.

Will be happy to cite in wikipedia history well documented proof of all above points at your request.

Please advise on how to proceed.

Thank you, -Michael Meiser --mmeiser 07:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Video blog
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Pdelongchamp 14:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC) Thank you I've been on wikipedia for 3+ years now, but better welcome to you too... what's also not welcome is simply deleting every addition to a page by every single person for two straight years without making a single contribution yourself... which is exactly what you are doing... the term I believe is either "delete mongering" or simply "trolling" I suggest you read up on it and start collaborating and working with people instead of simply acting like your some hight priest of wikipedia. --mmeiser 17:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Pdelongchamp 18:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. Continuing to add unsourced or original content is considered vandalism and may result in a block. Pdelongchamp 17:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Pedalongchamp... stop deleting everything from the videoblogging page indescriminently... and even more importantly stop leaving threatening comments on my user page. --mmeiser 23:22, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Pdelongchamp 02:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Pdelongchamp... disputions of content are not a reasonable reason for blocking... your threatening to block me however may well be a blockable offense... as such I have sought the attention of an administrator and am requesting moderation, during which time you also may not block me. Your abuse against editors and would be editors of the videoblogging page have gone on long enough... I will be seeking the stiffest penalty I can against you. Your delete mongering / trolling of the videoblogging article with thousands of thousands of deletes, your inability to collaborate with anyone at all, and failure to make a single positive contribution to the article as demonstrated in the history of the article should be more than enough. You have made over half the edits... and not a single one of them is a contribution, they are ALL deletes. The history of the talk page itself also illustrates this domineering of the vlog article as every single issue has been Pdelongchamp against everyone else. If you would now attempt to submit the article for deletion one more time based on it's lacking of substatiation, a situation you created... as you've already done once before my evidence will be complete. I've also noted to administrators you've vindictively gone after other articles I've contributed to. I'm not a vindictive person... but you've left me no choice but to go on the offensive. For documentation purposes I'm posting this to my talk page as well as yours. --mmeiser 04:35, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi Mike, thanks for the message. I took Pdelongchamp's seemingly innocent comment at WP:RFF at face value, as it read like someone who was on the receiving end of an edit war. I wish that I had checked the article's history first! It is very clear from those diffs that she is not innocent in this long-running edit war, deleting material that may be sufficiently valid to be kept. At least valid enough not to be reverted on sight, but improved instead.
 * However, she is right to say on the talk page that every addition must be sourced. I can see that you know that already, but I think that it is important to give absolutely no reason for other editors to question or remove one's contributions, particularly when an editor has shown a propensity to do so. Make the material bomb proof and no-one can reasonably remove it.
 * It seems to me that your intentions for this article are genuine and positive. What you must be careful of, as I'm sure you know, is 3RR (the letter and spirit alike). If it was only an edit war, I would suggest that WP:RFC or even just WP:3O would probably be enough, but with the unwarranted vandalism warnings and block threat, I think you should prepare a case for admin intervention and raise the possibility of that with an experienced admin. Gather all the evidence, both for an against each party, very carefully; if you have vio'd 3RR in your efforts to deal with it, mention it and explain it, which will minimise any weakening of your case. I think your case is fairly strong, but you might want to seek further advice at WP:ANI.
 * I might make some uncontroversial positive edits to the article in the meantime and see what happens. Keep an eye on it and consider following that up with some of the strongest parts of your intended additions, with solid reliable 3rd party sources, properly ref'd and carefully written. Consider reworking them substantially if necessary. The more solid your contributions are, the more solid your case - whether RFC, ANI, or AFD - will be.

Adrian  M. H.  18:08, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi again. I have just given Video blog some minor edits, including some hidden comments to assist editors. At this time, I have not tagged any individual statements that need citations, but there a couple that do, namely the growth in popularity of Yahoo's service and the use of the acronym vblog. What I would like to propose, if you're interested, is that you create or copy/paste your preferred version of the article to a sub-page of your user space where you can take your time getting it 100% right, with good sources/refs for every fact. Then maybe invite Pdelongchamp to view it and try to meet in the middle. That might be easier than going to RFC right now, and you can keep that as an option. The thing with this situation is that, like a lot of disputes on Wikipedia, no-one is totally blameless. If you can find a way to get your version, or something close to it, accepted by making it 100% up to standard, that's got to be the best way. Let me know how things go, and I'll be around for advice/assistance if you need it. Regards, Adrian   M. H.  20:35, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the message. I'm glad you're keen on the user space idea; it does work well for collaborative efforts when you want to keep it in a stable form. Once, you have a decent draft up together, I recommend that you put it forward for review by independent third parties and see how it goes. If the feedback is positive, then you'd be well placed to use your material in the article itself. See WP:RFF and also WP:PR (which, I have just noticed, has yet another of Wikipedia's backlogs!) Regards,  Adrian   M. H.  13:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Crowdfunding
I submitted Crowdfunding for deletion. See the discussion here.

Video blog
You have challenged me to point out instances where you have been rude. Can you understand why your posts seem rude? Pdelongchamp 19:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You use absolutes. You should avoid saying things like "never", "always".  They're rude and often inaccurate. For example:
 * "your ongoing deletion of ALL attempts at contribution"
 * "all you have done"
 * "no contributions were made"
 * "I am absolutely not"
 * "You have in fact turned away 100% of all contributor"
 * "have made no contributions ever"
 * "I'm the last person trying to contribute to this article you have not driven off"
 * You use excessive markup: It undermines a reasoned argument with the appearance of force. You should avoid using CAPITAL LETTERS, which are considered SHOUTING, and RANTING!!!!! For example:
 * "ALL attempts at contribution"
 * "this IS and has constantly been"
 * "The ONLY difference"
 * You are not concise: If your post is longer than 100 words consider shortening it. Long, rambling messages are difficult to understand, and are frequently either ignored or misunderstood. They come off as rants and appear rude.
 * You use personal attacks. Rather than arguing the edit, you argue the editor. For example:
 * "in response to your argument that I'm "sidetracking the conversation" I am absolutely not... your domimnance of this article have made you the central subject of this talk page.."
 * Mmeiser, I asked you to discuss my summary edit points. You replied by making a personal attack.  I asked you not to sidetrack the conversation and discuss my summary edit points.  Once again, you replied by making a personal attack.  In both cases, you did not discuss the reasons for which I made my edits and whether the reasoning was valid or not.

Response: When I use the term "ALL" when saying you have "deleted ALL contributions at least twice"... it's only because even though there have been thousands and thousands of contributions over the last two years to this article you HAVE deleted every single contribution at least twice. You have in fact tried to have the whole article deleted. This is not yelling, yelling would be whole sentences and paragraphs in CAPS... this is emphasis. Emphasis from someone who has wether you want to admit it or not the only person who has not completely lost patience with you and walked away.

I don't fault you for any particular point on the article, but all the same I will not defend point by point the worthiness of every single point for the 90% of the article you deleted. You've gone to far. I find fault that this is fundamentally not conducive to collaboration. While everyone else has lost patience and stopped contributing to the article all together I'm the only one who's had the patience to work with you this long. So you'll have to forgive me for being rude or condescending or any of your issues above. I think I've been more than patient enough.

One final note, you accuse me of "personal attacks"... you'll have to pardon me, I unforetunatly laughed out loud when I read this. Rude as it may be I couldn't help myself. Again, don't want to be rude or anything, but your history of contributions clearly shows that among other things you went through my history of contributions and in about seven obvious steps you attempted to delete several articles I contributed to and deleted several of my edits as well as others.

While this was a very personal and mean spirited attack on me you've deleted others hard work just to spite me. To say this is much more serious than simply "being rude" is to be polite. In fact it's all the politeness I can muster right now.

This means that in addition to "delete trolling" (as wikipedia defines it), you have more seriously hurt others and damaged other unrelated articles in acts of retribution, which is refered to on wikipedia as, "retributive editing".

The later is a particularly serious issue here on wikipedia as it shows a lack of good faith. Good faith is the the foundation of collaboration and therefore the foundation of wikipedia.

I could go further but you leave through your actions, (despite whatever words you, or I, chose to use) a well documented record of who you are and your character. I've chosen not to take stronger action because I'm trying not to escalate. I have tried, perhaps to a fault, to use discretion in dealing with you directly and to protect your identity and the worst of your actions from the community on wikipedia and within the vlogging space. However you are known to people throughout the community for you actions here and elsewhere. (Yes others have recognized the pattern.) I've been unsuccessful because they have serious reservation, to put it as politely as possible, as to your good faith and intentions and I can't unfortuneatly can't argue with them anymore.

I still hold some hope that there's a chance for some good to come of this of this. I hope you still want to see this wikipedia article evolve despite strong evidence to the contrary. However, you'll have to forgive me for these signs (rudeness or otherwise) of my patience running low. I will not hold my breath.

That said, I'm going to leave your delete's in place... now that there's nothing left of the article, not even enough for it to stand on you'll either be forced reconcile your actions and start contributing to it allow others to contribute to it and work with them, or to submit it for deletion, which if you do I'll be standing right there pointing to your record of actions to admins and others. The ball is now in your court.

I am no saint... maybe I'm to wordy, maybe I'm over expressive in my tone or language... maybe even rude... but your actions continue to speak for themselves regardles of what words you use to defend them.

Your actions cannot be erased, even if they could I've made sure make a record both here and with administrators, and eventually if you keep going down this path someone is going to take some action against you with wikipedia administrators. Use accounts have been banned for much less than what you've done, but perhaps they would just ban you temporarily, or maybe they'd block you from editing the vlogging article. Either way I have no doubt you'd find other ways to be abusive if you wanted to so. This is why I'm continuing with what patience I have left to appeal to your better judgement.

You must realize that you could be subjected to the same treatment as you're treating others and so I ask, what you would do about if it was you having all your and others contributions deleted on an article?

I ask this same question of myself... I think I could forgive someone for being rude as you say of me.

Even if they were to stop deleting all contributions could you forgive someone for deleting all contributions to an article for two years? What if they also attempted to delete your own hard work and that of others as a form of retribution on other articles?

I can only conclude that my being rude is not your problem. That it makes no difference how rude or nice I am. That I care enough to continue with this long term chirade hardly the problem at all. Sooner or later you'll have problems with enough other people on wikipedia, people that will not simply walk away as all others have... and eventually you'll have to conclude that the people opposing you are in fact are the people on your side because they care enough to debate the importance of said points your care about with you instead of dismissing them... and that you need to find a subtler, nicer, more collaborative methods then deleting and dismissing others edits as quickly as they attempt to add them. Perhaps in fact this has resulted from others behaving so disrespectful from your contribs the way you're now treating mine and others.

I'll admit I could have been much more subtle in my earlier debates with you as well. Oh well.

I'm not going to worry about it further. Do with the vlogging article as you will, I'll only oppose you with your own evidence of past actions if you attempt to have it completely deleted a second time, or the next time you delete some other persons honest contributions so readily. The web is an open place and I'm already working with others on many other community projects to document and define the space. The vlogging article is but a small piece of the picture. I had figured the wikipedia review process would help in refining it but you've given no others the chance to participate. How can you say that's not about you? It's you who've made it all about you.

Peace, Mike --mmeiser 03:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

lol, no one would delete my contributions because they're always sourced. (in the end, Adrian didn't reinsert your content did he? he stated the same conditions as I have always stated.  Everything must be properly sourced to be reintroduced into the article) It's really not that hard of a concept to grasp. Just take a look at the references section of the vlog article. More than half of them were inserted by me. You'll notice that I never removed the only properly sourced piece you've ever contributed to the article. (the steve jobs timeline) You'll notice that Steve Garfield contributed a source timeline event to the article as well and I didn't remove that either. Maybe you should try adding more of those. (properly sourced contributions) The reason I went into your contributions was because I wanted to make sure you weren't inserting original research into other articles. I merely nominated Crowdfunding for deletion, it's other editors that voted and felt the same as I did. That's why it got deleted. Pdelongchamp 15:47, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

LOL is good, perhaps you prefer the term whatever. How many times did you delete the books before finally accepting them as part of the article, four, five, maybe 10 times? ...but of course you right, you must be right... 100% of the time you must be right, in fact you must never be wrong, because you've deleted everything in the page at least twice and how dare I contribute even the tiniest contrib without properly and thouroughly and perfectly sourcing it. You're right, you're the man... have fun editing the article by yourself... should be fun for you... I know it's going for me to whatch... watch it completely stagnate. Other than me not a single person has added something that met you're approval since you deleted Steve's edit multiple times. Wait... how long ago was that? Must be over a year, year and a half, two years? You've deleted how many contributions in the last two years, 1000, 2000 legitimate attempts at contribution and not a single one has met you're approval, like someone died and made you the authority anyway. You still 100% completely don't get it. One final time... *When you control every edit and act as the gatekeeper for the entire article, subjecting every edit to you're approval you are fundamentally wrong. That's fundamentally not collaboration, it's tyranny. It doesn't matter if you're points are correct about particular edits 50%, 80% or even 95% of the time, it's that that you leave NOONE else any room to collaborate that's the problem.* So... have fun with it, have fun working on other articles with people too, that you haven't accepted a single contribution from anyone besides steve garfield's edits in the last two years is a testimate to your wrong-headedness. Where do you aim to have the article in another two to four years... will it have 4 items in the timeline by that time instead of two.. perhaps you should delete that timeline alltogether since you can't call it timeline if it only has two items in it. Either way, i can see it as nothing but humor. You've made the videoblogging article your folley... it reflects you so perfectly. Sooner or later you'll learn how to play well with others. I just love that now that you've dug yourself a hole by turning the article into a stub that you have no choice but to either start allowing others to contribute or write it all yourself. Good luck with that. Just being "rude". I notice you keep ignoring adressing my charge of how when you've deleted 100% of all contributions over the last two years it could not be considered the very definition of "delete trolling", nor have you acknowleged your going through my contribs to other articles retributively editing even attempting to have whole articles deleted. Next to your actions I gladly wear the title of being rude toward you. It pales in comparison to your misdeads. You forgot to put "poster of unsourced material" and "he who refuses to point by point defend 90% of the article for the 15th time." I don't know how I live with myself. --mmeiser 19:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Saved for documentation purposes
I've copied the following list of edits here merely for documentation purposes.

21:35, 10 April 2007 (hist) (diff) Talk:Culling  ( →Satanist Groups - Reference? )  21:33, 10 April 2007 (hist) (diff) <a href="/wiki/Culling" title="Culling">Culling</a>  (rm unsourced statements) (top) </li>

<li>20:53, 10 April 2007 (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Seal_hunting&action=history" title="Seal hunting">hist</a>) (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Seal_hunting&diff=prev&oldid=121771784" title="Seal hunting">diff</a>) <a href="/wiki/Seal_hunting" title="Seal hunting">Seal hunting</a>  ( <a href="/wiki/Seal_hunting#Cruelty_to_animals" title="Seal hunting">→</a>Cruelty to animals - rm unsourced statement from Dr. Mary Richardson.  Only reintroduce if properly sourced.) </li> <li>19:02, 9 April 2007 (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2007_April_9&action=history" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 April 9">hist</a>) (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2007_April_9&diff=prev&oldid=121483773" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 April 9">diff</a>) <a href="/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2007_April_9" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 April 9">Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 April 9</a>  (Adding <a href="/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Photofeed" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Photofeed">Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Photofeed</a>) </li>

<li>19:01, 9 April 2007 (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Photofeed&action=history" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Photofeed">hist</a>) (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Photofeed&diff=prev&oldid=121483547" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Photofeed">diff</a>) <a href="/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Photofeed" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Photofeed">Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Photofeed</a>  (Creating deletion discussion page for <a href="/wiki/Photofeed" title="Photofeed">Photofeed</a>) </li> <li>18:59, 9 April 2007 (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Photofeed&action=history" title="Photofeed">hist</a>) (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Photofeed&diff=prev&oldid=121483101" title="Photofeed">diff</a>) <a href="/wiki/Photofeed" title="Photofeed">Photofeed</a>  (nominated for deletion: see <a href="/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Photofeed" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Photofeed">Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Photofeed</a>) </li>

<li>18:45, 9 April 2007 (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Fantoft_stave_church&action=history" title="Fantoft stave church">hist</a>) (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Fantoft_stave_church&diff=prev&oldid=121479653" title="Fantoft stave church">diff</a>) <a href="/wiki/Fantoft_stave_church" title="Fantoft stave church">Fantoft stave church</a>  (This article does not adequately cite its references or sources.) </li> <li>18:42, 9 April 2007 (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Photofeed&action=history" title="Photofeed">hist</a>) (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Photofeed&diff=prev&oldid=121478575" title="Photofeed">diff</a>) m <a href="/wiki/Photofeed" title="Photofeed">Photofeed</a>  </li>

<li>18:41, 9 April 2007 (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Social_media&action=history" title="Social media">hist</a>) (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Social_media&diff=prev&oldid=121478430" title="Social media">diff</a>) <a href="/wiki/Social_media" title="Social media">Social media</a>  (This article does not adequately cite its references or sources.) </li> <li>18:34, 9 April 2007 (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Photofeed&action=history" title="Photofeed">hist</a>) (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Photofeed&diff=prev&oldid=121476717" title="Photofeed">diff</a>) <a href="/wiki/Photofeed" title="Photofeed">Photofeed</a>  (This section does not cite its references or sources.) </li>

<li>17:36, 9 April 2007 (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2007_April_9&action=history" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 April 9">hist</a>) (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2007_April_9&diff=prev&oldid=121462439" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 April 9">diff</a>) <a href="/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2007_April_9" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 April 9">Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 April 9</a>  (Adding <a href="/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Crowdfunding" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crowdfunding">Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crowdfunding</a>) </li> <li>17:33, 9 April 2007 (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Crowdfunding&action=history" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crowdfunding">hist</a>) (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Crowdfunding&diff=prev&oldid=121461648" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crowdfunding">diff</a>) <a href="/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Crowdfunding" title="Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crowdfunding">Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crowdfunding</a>  (Creating deletion discussion page for <a href="/w/index.php?title=Crowdfunding&action=edit" class="new" title="Crowdfunding">Crowdfunding</a>) </li>

<li>15:57, 9 April 2007 (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Video_blog&action=history" title="Video blog">hist</a>) (<a href="/w/index.php?title=Video_blog&diff=prev&oldid=121444043" title="Video blog">diff</a>) <a href="/wiki/Video_blog" title="Video blog">Video blog</a>  (<a href="/wiki/WP:UNDO" title="WP:UNDO">Undid</a> revision 121378802 by <a href="/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mmeiser" title="Special:Contributions/Mmeiser">Mmeiser</a> (<a href="/wiki/User_talk:Mmeiser" title="User talk:Mmeiser">talk</a>)) </li> </ul>

Andreas' polite observations on the issue: http://www.solitude.dk/archives/20061028-2354/

Olive Branch
You asked me to explain how you've been rude because you seemed genuinely concerned and I tried to phrase my Rude Challenge 2007 comment as diplomatically as possible. In my bullet points, I quoted Wikipedia policies and sites on constructive arguments in the hopes of being NPOV. I wasn't trying to start something negative.

Let's work positively from now on and I hope that you accept my initial RC 2007 comments in good faith. Enjoy your weekend Mmeiser. Pdelongchamp 21:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Response: Unfortuneatly Pdelongchamp, words are meaningless without action, which is why being rude has nothing to do with this. It's simply lame excuse on your part to discredit the only other contributor left to the article as you've driven everyone else off with your delete trolling and worse retributive editing (a case of which is documented above). An olive branch does not mean saying one thing and then continuing to do another. I've discussed this issue with you enough. Any further discussion is completely redundant and beside the point. There can be no olive branch until you stop deleting every single contribution from the video blogging article art start playing nice with others. It's that simple. In order to remove myself from the situation completely so you may no longer use me as an excuse and can prove you have some good intention and some ability to collaborate with others I'm going to stop editing the wikipedia article videoblog article for now at that location and may reserect it here under the protection of my user page to solicit feedback. What you do with the main article is now is up to you. It's currently a stub, a testament to the folly of your methods in working with others. If you want to improve it it's now up to you to start allowing the *imperfet* contributions of others or to simply do it yourself. I've documented this case thoroughly here and elsewhere and if you attempt to delete it, continue to treat others disrespectfully or attempt further form of retribution against other members of wikipedia who disagree with you I will simply continue to bear witness, document your behavior, and provide any information to any admin so they can be the judges. Peace, --mmeiser 10:27, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

You are failing to assume good faith. Pdelongchamp 19:32, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

LOL. What does that mean "failing to assume good faith". That doesn't even make sense. I can't respond to that, but can say this. I tried with what no one could contest was tremendous patience to work with you over TWO years on the vlog article, assuming in "good faith" that you wanted to improve the videoblogging page despite a history of deleting all contributions, even when you attempted to have the article deleted, and though you failed many would consider that attempt at deletion a very obvious sign you weren't editing in good faith and yet when all others walked away I still continued to try and work with you.

But then you went through my own past contributions on UNRLEATED articles deleting my edits and those of others and attempting to delete whole articles as well. In doing so you attempted to delete the contributions of dozens, even hundreds of other people, just to spite me. That's unconscionable. SO, yeah, I'm "failing to assume good faith". That's like saying I'm failing to continue trust you. I gave you trust when it was unearned, I gave you trust despite the odds... you took that trust, that dood fait and deleted it without a second thought.

You've proven you can't be trusted. Even if I assume the best, how can I assume good faith after your actions. If it wasn't that I was so enjoying the absurdity of our conversations I would have stopped responding to you a long time ago, because it's plain to see that there's no resolution here. Like all trolls the only way to difuse the situation is to just walk away, which I've done.... if you honestly feel the same way about me, that I'm somehow trolling me, then let me offer you the same advice as I myself am taking, just stop leaving comments on my talk page as I have done with yours. I've stopped editing the vlog article also... i've ceded you the contested ground... it's your's do somethign spectacular with it, if I was holding you back I'm not anymore.

The vlog article is all yours, prove me wrong about you, make something of it, anything. But if you think that I would continue to assume that you're anything less than that your an *sshole who thinks this is some sort of a game, and just wants attention, to attempt to waste my time and others, to feel you have some sort of power by abusing your power to use a delete button, then you're more convoluted then I thought.

What I assume is you said "you're failing to assume good faith", a statement that fails to make sense, as some sort of joke in an attempt to flaunt one of wikipedia's core guidelines. Rude or not, this is my talk page, I'm just expressing my opinion to let you know where you and I stand. I don't trust you, it's no longer important that I trust you because I'm not editing the vlog article, so the issue is for all purposes resolved for the time being, and we have no reason to discuss the matter further.

To put it even more bluntly... you don't need my "good faith" in you... go do your thing... I don't want anything to do with you. Live your life... do what you want to with the wikipedia article... prove me wrong... make it something great.

You seem to think this is about me, but it's about you, rather than field absurd he said / she said comments that won't resolve anything I'm removing myself completely from the picture so you can collaborate merrily on the videoblogging article as you may... you're doing such a great job... keep going. Prove that you do have the best interests of the article in mind. If you truely are editing in "good faith" then it'll all come out in time and you'll can prove me wrong. I'd be way, WAY to happy to be proven wrong on this point. Prove me wrong. Please, prove me wrong. Please god, if only as a sign of spite, let Pat prove me wrong by turning the wikipedia article into something more than the sad stub of an article that is a disgrace with a timeline with only two items.

If on the other hand you are who I think you are you'll continue to delete every single contribution wether posted with good intentions or not, or god willing you'll attempt to have it deleted again. That would be less pleasing then you actually proving me wrong, but at least in proving me right there will be some sort of definitive proof for wikipedia admins to take action on, not that there isn't already.

If you haven't gotten the point already, I've rejected your olive branch on the basis of what I feel is overwhelming evidence you're untrustworthy and don't have good intentions. I'n doing so though I don't trust you I'm giving you the benifit of the doubt yet again, in allowing you to prove that I'm the one holding you back. I've chosen the alternative to remove my self from the situation, so you can prove your character without my interference in any way shape or form.

Please don't leave any further comments here as they're unwanted and unwarranted, and go about your business. If you do, know I very well may not respond.

P.S. I find this business with the headline funny... you sight it as a protected part of your comment. I'm just shaking my head, how you can think leaving such an inflamatory headline on someone's homepage can be consided a protected part of a comment. It's beyond me. Would it be my a protected comment if I accused you of being an *sshole on your talk page and put the headline "Regarding so and so being an *sshole"? Your logic is beyond me, and not even worth debating, I'm glad you decided to change it to something non-inflamatory. Thanks for that at least.

Videoblogging group
Hey,

There's renewed interest in the article from the videoblogging group. I think if you can assume good faith and look towards the future you'll see that we can both make good progress on the article. You asked from help from Adrian. He made suggestions and I've already began to implement some of them into the article. I hope you'll take that as proof that we're moving in the right direction. Pdelongchamp 22:35, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Your request for a community ban on Pdelongchamp
I've checked this user's block log and it appears that he has never even been blocked. If you have issues with this user's conduct please follow the Dispute resolution process. --Tony Sidaway 01:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Howdy tony, Regarding your comment on my talk page. Am actively seeking alternatives. Maybe I jumped the gun but I've been all up and down the the process on how to resolve this process... you said the user has never been banned?  I thought that's what we were submitting for?  To tell you the truth I'd just love it if an admin talked to the user in question and told him... "look, you're dominating the editing there's something fundamentally wrong with that, give some other people a chance to contribute."  Instead he just goes on emboldened by admins statments that it's "just an editing dispute"... this has been going on for over a year... if a matter of him disagreeing with everyone else is it just an editing dispute? I'm willing to try other processes, I only tried this community... thing... out of desperation. In the meantime I'll continue to gather information. The thing is he will be all polite now, but when noone's looking he'll just start mass deleting again. What other action can we take to send a message to a user to chill out on the deletes already? I need procedural advice mostly. Any sort of acknowlegement from wikipedia that this is not ok would go a tremendous distance... there's a whole community who's been alienated here and all the admins seem to say in their actions are "yeah, it's ok to delete every contribution to an article." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmeiser (talk • contribs) 03:15, 4 May 2007

 * If he's continually reverting good edits and refuses to explain himself, and several other people have tackled him about the same issue, then the next thing to do is to try Requests for comment/User conduct. --Tony Sidaway 03:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks tony that's the best piece of advice i've hear yet. That's a much better approach then the community ban thing which is frankly over the top.

Olive Branch Part Deux
Hey Mike,

Can we agree to put the past behind us and work together? Pdelongchamp 01:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Pdelongchamp, it is not an olive branch from me you need. It is the communities. Sooner or later you will see it is better to be respected and to respect others then to simply be right. It is better to listen sometimes than to always speak, better to allow a little water under the bridge then to drown in your own pride.

I am done with the article, at least for the time being... we'll se where this issue stands in 3 or so months. What you've made of the page... if anyone else is contributing or if you've chased them off. It doesn't appear to me if the last vote has been declaired on the arbitration process... but I no longer care... it's over with as far as I'm concerned, unless some admin expresses interest. It strikes me as an absurdity that all but one vote was cast before I'd submitted any evidence... I can see that the assumption there is that all evidence will be submited up front... a failing of process perhaps... and a VERY large failure at that... who does make decisions without evidence for both sides being presented I don't know. I clearly I would submit evidence as it moved forward, noone inquired nor waited. So... whatever, it's done... You're problem is not in convincing me to work with you, it is as it has been in the past convincing the community. My hands are washed of the matter.

I just want you to know... this isn't personal... I will not hold it against you... I can even forgive that in the heat of the argument you went through my past contribs and attempted several deletions. I've hold and have held nothing against you.. you've had some damn good edits... the issue has been and continues to be simply your domination of the article, the fact you've made nearly half of all the edits and that the majority were straight deletions. This may be grey area when observed as indidual edits by others, but the sum total is not conducive to collaboration. --forgot to sign this, but it was me --mmeiser 17:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Dude please re-read the advise you've been getting for a long time from people, such as the explanations for why the process to consider banning pdelongchamp was halted. From what I read, the error didnt seem to be with the design of the processes, rather with jumping the gun and choosing the wrong process. My understanding is that you tried the first step, seeking advice, but then jumped straight to the last resort, calling for a user ban, which I dont think was advice you were given at any prior stage? The discussion about a ban was edited away when it became clear pdelongchamp has never even been blocked, which I assume is a sort of lesser temporary suspension. I guess people who get banned often have a long history of being blocked and other formal sanctions against them. Seeing that there was no such history here, you've been advised to go back and try the various methods of dispute resolution. Assuming good faith and talking about article specifics, not personalities, or personal dispute histories, would be an excellent start. I imagine these dispute resolutions are aimed at achieving decent articles, so if you have decided that a ban of pdelongchamp, or some grueling exercise in him earning the trust of an external community are the only satisfactory outcomes, then I am not overly optimistic that these processes will satisfy. SteveElbows 05:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks Steve, you are of course right... the issues is one of process. The process of user dispute is not well documented. Luckily Tony Sideaway above recommended Requests_for_comment/User_conduct. There also may be another step prior to that. I'm going to give things some time to cool off.--mmeiser 17:54, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Michael, taking into consideration your difficulty in assuming good faith, I believe it may be best for you to take a break from the article as you mentioned. I had hoped to work constructively with you however I am concerned that this may not be possible as you have not yet acted upon the Administrators' recommendations.  Upon your return, I would encourage you to take Adrian and Cailil's advice and work on the article from your userspace.  I believe that you have a lot to bring and that a focus on verifiability and reliable sources will help in your contributions.  I would also recommend, when taking in new information, that you read comments and policies carefully and in a neutral mindset in order to avoid confirmation bias.  I believe you have misinterpreted Tony's comment as a recommendation.  Please make sure to read the top of the Requests for comment/User conduct page very carefully.  I hope to see you again soon when you are ready to return. Pdelongchamp 00:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mmeiser


text:
Fiction (Yuki Kajiura album)

Fiction is Yuki Kajiura's first solo album, containing remixes of her previous anime work as well as original songs. The Japanese edition features three bonus songs.

Track listing

 * 1) "Key of the Twilight" (.hack//SIGN)
 * 2) "Cynical World"
 * 3) "Fake Wings" (.hack//SIGN)
 * 4) "Fiction"
 * 5) "Vanity"
 * 6) "Red Rose"
 * 7) "Canta per me" (Noir)
 * 8) "Zodiacal Sign" (Aquarian Age)
 * 9) "Awaking" (Aquarian Age)
 * 10) "Open Your Heart" (.hack//SIGN)
 * 11) "Winter"
 * 12) "Salva Nos" (Noir)
 * 13) "Lullaby" (Noir)
 * 14) "Echo"

Personnel

 * Yuki Kajiura: Keyboard and programming
 * Emily Bindiger: Vocals on tracks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10
 * Yuri Kasahara: Vocals on tracks 6, 12
 * Deb Lyons: Vocals on tracks 7, 11
 * Kaori Nishina: Vocals on tracks 8, 9
 * Tulivu-Donna Cumberbatch on track 13

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

title: Fiction (Yuki Kajiura album)


text:
Percy Scholes

Percy Alfred Scholes (pronounced skolz) OBE PhD (24 July 1877 – 31 July 1958) was an English musician, journalist and prolific writer, whose best-known achievement was his compilation of the first edition of the Oxford Companion to Music. His 1948 biography The Great Dr Burney was awarded the James Tait Black Memorial Prize.

Career
He was born in Headingly, Leeds in 1877, the third of six children of Thomas Scholes, a commercial agent and Katharine Elizabeth Pugh. He was educated privately, owing to his poor health as a child. He became an organist, schoolteacher, music journalist, lecturer, an Inspector of Music in Schools to London University and the Organist and Music Master of Kent College, Canterbury (1900), All Saints, Vevey, Switzerland (1902) as well as Kingswood College, Grahamstown, South Africa (1904). He was Registrar at the City of Leeds (Municipal) School of Music (1908–1912). In 1908 he married Dora Wingate, a talented pianist. That year he founded the magazine The Music Student in 1908 (renamed The Music Teacher in 1921), and continued as its editor until 1920. During the First World War he directed the Music section of the YMCA for troops at home and abroad.

At various times Scholes was music critic for the Evening Standard (1913-1920), The Observer (1920–1925) (immediately following Ernest Newman's departure) and the Radio Times (1923–1929). From 1923 up until 1928 (when he departed for Switzerland) he was making regular music appreciation broadcasts on BBC radio.

He was made an Officer of the Star of Rumania in 1930 and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Antiquaries in 1938. He was founder and general secretary of the Anglo-American Conference on Musical Education, Lausanne (1929 and 1931). Scholes and his wife came back to the UK in 1940, but with his health in decline they returned to Switzerland at the end of 1956. He ended his days in Cornaux, Chamby sur Montreux.

Work
Scholes wrote more than 30 books, mainly concerning music appreciation. His best-known work is The Oxford Companion to Music, which was first published in 1938. Like Groves Dictionary of Music and Musicians (1878–89) the Companion sought to reach out beyond professional musicians to the amateur as well. This work took him six years to produce and consisted of over a million words (surpassing the length of the Bible). Scholes was assisted by various clerical assistants, but wrote virtually all the text himself. The only exceptions were the article on tonic sol-fa (for which he was dissatisfied with his own article) and the synopses of the plots of operas (which he regarded as too boring). Although the Oxford Companion to Music was (and is) regarded as authoritative, the text of the first edition is enlivened by Scholes' own anecdotal and sometimes quirky style.

He was also the author of Puritans and Music in England and New England: A Contribution to the Cultural History of Two Nations  (1934). In 1947, he produced the two volume, 960 page The Mirror of Music, compiling, enlarging and commenting on material published in The Musical Times between 1844 and 1944.

Scholes was deeply concerned with connecting music with a wider audience through musical appreciation in the tradition of Dr Burney, an influence he cited himself and the subject of his biography in 1948. Frank Howes (writing as "Our Music Critic" in The Times) called The Listener's Guide to Music (1919) "that masterpiece of simplification". He recognised very early the possibilities of the gramophone as an aid to knowledge and understanding of music. His First Book of the Gramophone Record (1924) lists fifty records of music from the sixteenth to the twentieth century, with a commentary on each; a Second Book followed in 1925. From 1930 onwards, Scholes collaborated with the Columbia Graphophone Company in The Columbia History of Music by Ear and Eye; this comprised five volumes, each containing an explanatory booklet and eight 78rpm records specially made for the series, including Renaissance vocal and instrumental items performed by Arnold Dolmetsch and his family. He also worked on the innovative 'AudioGraphic' project for the Aeolian Company creating richly annotated player-piano (pianola) rolls, having joined as Secretary the Honorary Advisory Committee on the Use of Piano-Player Rolls in Education, chaired by Sir Alexander Mackenzie, in 1925. The AudioGraphic rolls were printed with music biographical and analytical commentary material and illustrations including woodcuts, photographs of drama and opera productions, and paintings, which could occupy over two metres of the roll. These rolls were issued in England from around 1926 to 1929 and America from 1927 to 1930.

Style and temperament
"Nothing he put out was ever 'ghosted'; all bore the individual stamp of the salty P.A.S style," wrote W. R. Anderson in 1958. In his writing for this work, and elsewhere, Scholes never believed in holding back his personal views in favour of a neutral point of view. He is credited with the description of harpsichord music as sounding like "a toasting fork on a birdcage"; when describing Handel and Bach, he said that "Handel was the more elegant composer, but Bach was the more thorough".

Scholes led the public denunciations of Arthur Eaglefield Hull when his book Music: Classical, Romantic and Modern (1927) was found to include material borrowed from other writers. How much of this was plagiarism and how much a mere careless, hasty failure to cite sources is not known, but the scandal left Hull very upset. He took his own life by throwing himself under a train at Huddersfield station on 4 November, 1928. Scholes also made enemies amongst The Sackbut group which included Philip Heseltine and Ursula Greville. Scholes' criticism of Hubert Foss' Song-cycle on Poems of Thomas Hardy infuriated Heseltine, who sent Scholes abusive letters, took to telephoning him late at night, and circulated a petition seeking his sacking from the Observer. Scholes sought legal advice on this matter but took no action. Reviews of Christian Darnton's You and Music (1940) were generally positive until Scholes catalogued so many serious and obvious errors (such as “Binary form may be represented by A.B.A.”) that he presented the work as an elaborate joke to trap unwary reviewers.

In The Oxford Companion to Music some composers (Berg, Schönberg and Webern, for example) were described in somewhat unsympathetic and dismissive terms. His article on Jazz states that "jazz is to serious music as daily journalism is to serious writing"; similarly, his article on the composer John Henry Maunder states that Maunder's "seemingly inexhaustible cantatas, Penitence, Pardon and Peace and From Olivet to Calvary, long enjoyed popularity, and still aid the devotions of undemanding congregations in less sophisticated areas."

Death and legacy
Scholes died in 1958, aged eighty-one, in Vevey, Switzerland, where he had been living for many years. Shortly before his death, his "professional" library was acquired by the National Library of Canada. This comprised approximately 50 linear metres of research files and correspondence.

His former assistant John Owen Ward revised the Tenth Edition of the Companion in 1970. Ward considered it "inappropriate to change radically the characteristic rich anecdotal quality of Dr. Scholes' style." and left much of Scholes' distinctive work intact. In 1983 Oxford University Press produced The New Oxford Companion to Music, edited by Denis Arnold, which consciously tried to overcome some of the perceived deficiencies of the Scholes' work. This included taking a more eclectic line on music to be included, and resulted in a two-volume work of some 2000 pages. The 2002 edition, edited by Alison Latham, reverted to the original title, and single-volume format.

Publications

 * Candidates Self Examiner in Scales, etc. (1907)
 * The Music Student (ed). (1908 – 1921, later renamed The Music Teacher)
 * Introduction to French Music (1917)
 * Everyman and his Music (1917)
 * An Introduction to British Music (1918)
 * Listener’s Guide to Music (1919)
 * Musical Appreciation in Schools (1920)
 * Learning to Listen by Means of the Gramophone (1921)
 * New works by modern British composers, Carnegie UK Trust (Series 1 and 2, 1921, 1924)
 * Beginner’s Guide to Harmony (1922)
 * The Book of the Great Musicians (1923)
 * The First Book of the Gramophone Record (1924)
 * The Appreciation of Music by Means of the Pianola and Duo-Art (1925)
 * Everybody’s Guide to Broadcast Music (1925)
 * Miniature History of Music (1928)
 * Columbia History of Music Through Ear and Eye (1930, in five parts)
 * Miniature History of Opera (1931)
 * Some Aesthetic and Everyday Reflections on the Vegetarian System of Diet (1931)
 * Practical Lesson Plans in Musical Appreciation by Means of the Gramophone (1933)
 * Puritans and Music (1934)
 * Music: the Child and the Masterpiece (1935)
 * Radio Times Music Handbook (1935)
 * Oxford Companion to Music (1938)
 * God Save the King! Its History and Romance (1942)
 * The Mirror of Music (1947)
 * The Great Doctor Burney (1948)
 * Why I am a Vegetarian (1948)
 * The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Music (1952)
 * The Life and Adventures of Sir John Hawkins (1953)
 * Oxford Junior Companion to Music (1954)
 * God Save the Queen! The History and Romance of the World's First National Anthem (1954)

title: Percy Scholes


text:
König's theorem (kinetics)

In kinetics, König's theorem or König's decomposition is a mathematical relation derived by Johann Samuel König that assists with the calculations of angular momentum and kinetic energy of bodies and systems of particles.

For a system of particles
The theorem is divided in two parts.

First part of König's theorem
The first part expresses the angular momentum of a system as the sum of the angular momentum of the centre of mass and the angular momentum applied to the particles relative to the center of mass.

$$\displaystyle \vec{L} = \vec{r}_{CoM} \times \sum\limits_{i} m_{i} \vec{v}_{CoM} + \vec{L}'= \vec{L}_{CoM} + \vec{L}'$$

Proof
Considering an inertial reference frame with origin O, the angular momentum of the system can be defined as:

$$\vec{L} = \sum\limits_{i} (\vec{r}_{i} \times m_{i} \vec{v}_{i} )$$

The position of a single particle can be expressed as:

$$\vec{r}_{i} = \vec{r}_{CoM} + \vec{r}'_{i}$$

And so we can define the velocity of a single particle:

$$\vec{v}_{i} = \vec{v}_{CoM} + \vec{v}'_{i}$$

The first equation becomes:

 * $$\vec{L} = \sum\limits_{i} (\vec{r}_{CoM} + \vec{r}'_{i}) \times m_{i} (\vec{v}_{CoM} + \vec{v}'_{i})$$

 * $$\vec{L} = \sum\limits_{i} \vec{r}'_{i} \times m_{i} \vec{v}'_{i} + \left( \sum\limits_{i} m_{i}\vec{r}'_{i}\right) \times \vec{v}_{CoM} + \vec{r}_{CoM} \times \sum\limits_{i} m_{i} \vec{v}'_{i} + \sum\limits_{i} \vec{r}_{CoM} \times m_{i} \vec{v}_{CoM}$$

But the following terms are equal to zero:

$$\sum\limits_{i} m_{i} \vec{r}'_{i} = 0$$

$$\sum\limits_{i} m_{i} \vec{v}'_{i} = 0$$

So we prove that:

$$\vec{L} =  \sum\limits_{i} \vec{r}'_{i} \times m_{i} \vec{v}'_{i}+M \vec{r}_{CoM} \times  \vec{v}_{CoM}$$

where M is the total mass of the system.

Second part of König's theorem
The second part expresses the kinetic energy of a system of particles in terms of the velocities of the individual particles and the centre of mass.

Specifically, it states that the kinetic energy of a system of particles is the sum of the kinetic energy associated to the movement of the center of mass and the kinetic energy associated to the movement of the particles relative to the center of mass.

$$K = K' + K_{\text{CoM}}$$

Proof
The total kinetic energy of the system is:

$$K = \sum_i \frac{1}{2} m_i v_i^2$$

Like we did in the first part, we substitute the velocity:

 * $$K = \sum_i \frac{1}{2} m_i |\bar v'_i + \bar v_\text{CoM}|^2$$

 * $$K = \sum_i \frac{1}{2} m_i (\bar v'_i + \bar v_\text{CoM})\cdot(\bar v'_i + \bar v_\text{CoM}) = \sum_i \frac{1}{2} m_i {v'_i}^2 + \bar v_\text{CoM} \cdot \sum_i m_i \bar v'_i + \sum_i \frac{1}{2} m_i v_\text{CoM}^2$$

We know that $$\bar v_{CoM}\cdot\sum_im_i \bar v'_i = 0,$$ so if we define:

$$K' = \sum_i \frac{1}{2} m_i {v'_i}^2$$

$$K_\text{CoM} = \sum_i \frac{1}{2} m_i v_\text{CoM}^2 = \frac 12 M v_\text{CoM}^2$$

we're left with:

$$K = K' + K_\text{CoM}$$

For a rigid body
The theorem can also be applied to rigid bodies, stating that the kinetic energy K of a rigid body, as viewed by an observer fixed in some inertial reference frame N, can be written as:

$$^{N}K = \frac{1}{2} m \cdot {^N\mathbf{\bar{v}}} \cdot {^N\mathbf{\bar{v}}} + \frac{1}{2} {^N\!\mathbf{\bar{H}}} \cdot ^{N}{\!\!\mathbf{\omega}}^R $$

where $${m}$$ is the mass of the rigid body; $${^N\mathbf{\bar{v}}}$$ is the velocity of the center of mass of the rigid body, as viewed by an observer fixed in an inertial frame N; $${^N\!\mathbf{\bar{H}}}$$ is the angular momentum of the rigid body about the center of mass, also taken in the inertial frame N; and $$^{N}{\!\!\mathbf{\omega}}^R$$ is the angular velocity of the rigid body R relative to the inertial frame N.

title: König's theorem (kinetics)


text:
Wikipedia talk:Special:MostImages

Protected edit request on 31 May 2018
Add Category:Redirects to special pages Dpleibovitz (talk) 22:43, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:02, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia talk:Special:MostImages


text:
User:Charles Matthews/Okpewho

Antti Aarne - Wande Abimbola - Karl Abraham - Roger Abrahams - H. Abrahamsson - Robert Ackerman - A. W. H. Adkins - Afanas'ev - Adiele Afigbo - Jacob Ade Ajayi - Samuel Akintola - Ebiegberi Alagoa - Walyer Anderson - Ayi Kwei Armah - Robert G. Armstrong - Robert Plant Armstrong - Obafemi Awolowo - Hampate Ba - Adeboye Babalola - Ayo Bamgbose - William Bascom - Patrick Bastable - Adolf Bastian - J. Bedier - Thomas Beidelman - Ulli Beier - Dan Ben-Amos - Theodor Benfey - Daniel Biebuyck - Charles Bird - P. Boelaert - James Boon - L. Bryce Boyer - R. E. Bradbury - B. K. Braswell - Claude Bremond - Dennis Brutus - Seydou Camara - Richard Chase - J. P. Clark - John Pepper Clark - Kenneth W. Clarke - William Conton - Donald Cosentino - Emmanual Cosquin - A. Coupez - T. F. Crane - Friedrich Creuzer - Daniel Crowley - Andrew Dale - N. J. Demerath - R. E. Dennet - Stanley Diamond - K. O. Dike - Cheikh Anta Diop - Richard M. Dorson - Carlos Drake - Avis Dry - Alan Dundes - Michael J. C. Echeruo - John Edemode - Frank Edgar - Jacob U. Egharevba - R. N. Egudu - Peter Ekeh - Cyprian Ekwensi - G. Elliott-Smith - A. B. Ellis - Tonye Ereks - Martin Esslin - Euhemerus - Daniel O. Fagunwa - Remi Fani-Kayode - Mona Fikry-Atallah - Ruth Finnegan - Raymond Firth - Joseph Fontenrose - Daryll Forde - Meyer Fortes - Erich Fromm - Howard Gardner - A. Gerber - James Gibbs - Jack Goody - Veronika Goro-Karady - John Greenway - Marcel Griaule - Jean Guiart - Lee Haring - Bessie Head - Hilda Hein - Frances Herskovits - Melville Herskovits - Melvin Hiskett - Elmer Holenstein - Norman Holland - S. H. Hooke - Robin Horton - George Hunt - E. Bolaji Idowu - Obaro Ikime - Obotunde Ijimere - Gordon Innes - Abiola Irele - John Iroaganachi - Dan Izevbaye - Jolande Jacobi - Melville Jacobs - I. C. Jarvie - Heda Jason - Andre Jolles - A. C. Jordan - Henri Junod - Fode Kaba - Phyllis Kaberry - T. Kamanzi - Banna Kanute - Dembo Kanute - Lilyan Kesteloot - Marion Kilson - Isaria Kimambo - Dedan Kimathi - G. S. Kirk - Semakula Kiwanuka - May A. Klipple - Clyde Kluckhohn - Jan Knappert - Julius Krohn - Kaarle Krohn - Djeli Mamoudou Kouyate - Mazisi Kunene - Weston la Barre - Winifred Lambrecht - Duro Ladipo - Ludwig Laistner - E. L. Lasebikan - Camara Laye - Philip Leis - William Lessa - Nehemiah Levtzion - I. M. Lewis - P. C. Lloyd - Elias Lonnrot - Albert Lord - J. Olumide Lucas - Max Luthi - Karl Mannhardt - Mansa Musa I - R. R. Marrett - John Mbiti - Daniel McCall - Eleazar Meletinsky - Robert Merton - A. Mnouchkine - Thomas Mofolo - Lewis Morgan - H. F. Morris - Michael N. Nagler - Rodney Needham - Bruno Nettl - James Ngugi - Ngugi wa Thiong'o - Djibril Niane - Lewis Nkosi - Charles Nnolim - Philip Noss - Hugo Nutini - Donatus I. Nwoga - Emmanuel N. Obiechina - G. M. O'Donnell - Modupe Oduyoye - Bethwell Ogot - Hubert Ogunde - Kola Ogunmola - E. Ojo Arewa - Okabou Ojobolo - Atukwai Okai - Gabriel Okara - C. Ojiudu Okeze - Isidore Okpewho - Moses Olaiya - Femi Osofisan - Yambo Ouologuem - Sembene Ousmane - William Owens - Oyekan Owomoyela - Areoye Oyebola - Oyin Tamara - Ferdinand Oyono - Milman Parry - Denise Paulme - Patrick Pender-Cudlip - Richard Priebe - Paul Radin - Otto Rank - Robert Redfield - Robert D. Richardson - W. H. R. Rivers - Adrian Roscoe - John Roscoe - Ino Rossi - Harold Scheub - Aylward Shorter - Niel Skinner - Edwin Smith - Bamba Suso - C. W. von Sydow - Carl Wilhelm von Sydow - Konstantin Symmons-Symonolewicz - John Szwed - P. Amory Talbot - Dennis Tedlock - Placide Tempels - Eric ten Raa - Stith Thompson - Samory Toure - Terence S. Turner - Amos Tutuola - W. Marshall Urban - F. Lee Utley - Robert Lee J. Vance - Jan Vansina - Alexander Veselovskii - A. Volkov - Jan de Vries - Henri Wald - Obiajunwa Wali - Ian Watt - Chancellor Williams - Kay Williamson - R. G. Willis - Roy Willis - Dominique Zahan - Zora Zeljan

title: User:Charles Matthews/Okpewho


text:
Etxebarria

Etxebarria is a town and municipality located in the province of Biscay, in the autonomous community of Basque Country, northern Spain.

Notable people

 * Yolanda Arrieta

title: Etxebarria


text:
User:Charles Matthews/Roth

Iso Abe - Gisuke Aikawa - Katsumaro Akamatsu - G. C. Allen - Rewi Alley - L. S. Amery - General Anami - Katsuo Aoyama - Kazuo Aoyama - Erwin Baelz - Joseph W. Ballantine - T. A. Bisson - H. Borton - Paul Butler - Homer Capehart - Evans F. Carlson - W. H. Chamberlin - Chang Hsueh-liang - Chen Lifu - Chu Teh - Earl R. Dickover - Domei - Eugene H. Dooman - M. Dubosc - Eighth Route Army - Wilfred Fleisher - Harrison Forman - Ginjiro Fujiwara - Samuel Gompers - Shojiro Goto - Joseph Clark Grew - Senator Guffey - Gumbatsu - William F. Halsey, Jr. - D. G. Haring - Nevile Henderson - Toyosaku Hirose - Clare Hoffman - D. C. Holtom - Stanley K. Hornbeck - House of Mitsui - Inukai - Seihin Ikeda - Baron Ikki - E. Iogan - Tadaatsu Ishiguro - Baroness Ishimoto - Baroness Shidzue Ishimoto - Taisuke Itagaki - Marquis Ito - W. C. Johnstone - Wataru Kaji - Kambatsu - Sen Katayama - Kanju Kato - Frank B. Kellogg - Naoe Kinoshita - Shinsuke Kishi - Takiji Kobayashi - General Koiso - Kuniaki Koiso - Prince Konoye - F. Konoye - Shosui Kotoku - Fusanosuke Kuhara - Kuo Mojo - Kurama Islands - Kurusu - W. C. Lamott - Laokay - Owen Lattimore - Ramon Lavalle - J. M. Maki - Count Makino - Kenjiro Matsumoto - Mombatsu - Ken Mori - Masamitsu Mori - Morito - Sanji Muto - Seigo Nakano - Nasu - J. Newman - Nippon Seitetsu - Juzo Nishio - Admiral Nomura - E. Herbert Norman - E. H. Norman - Tetsuo Nosoka - Kantaro Oi - Susumu Okano - Masatoshi Okawachi - Count Okuma - Shigenobu Okuma - Yukio Ozaki - Peace Preservation Law - H. Vere Redman - R. K. Reischauer - Andrew Roth - Prince Saionji - Viscount Saito - Takao Saito - Toshiko Sakai - Zawa Sakara - G. B. Sansom - Baron Shidehara - Baron Kijuro Shidehara - Seisaku Shiomi - Agnes Smedley - Edgar Snow - General Sonobe - Guenther Stein - Henry L. Stimson - Nobemasu Suetsugu - Kazuo Sugimoto - Sun Fo - Bunji Suzuki - Kantaro Suzuki - Daikichiro Tagawa - Susumu Takayama - Yoshitatsu Takikawa - Baron Tanaka - Kyugu Tanaka - Viscount Tani - Naoiyukii Tanikawa - O. Tanin - George Taylor - Teikoku Bank - Marshal Terauchi - Tohokai - Tokashiki - O. D. Tolischus - Teijiro Toyoda - Isaku Tsukuda - Juichi Tsushima - Emori Ueki - F. Utley - XCNR - H. E. wildes - Field-Marshal Yamagata - Prince Yamanashi - Fumio Yano - Toji Yasui - Yokohama Specie Bank - Mitsumasa Yonai - Sakuzo Yoshino - A. M. Young - E. M. Zacharias -

title: User:Charles Matthews/Roth


text:
Infernäl Mäjesty

Infernäl Mäjesty is a Canadian thrash metal band, formed in 1986 and now based in Vancouver. They are best known for their debut album None Shall Defy, released in 1987. However, the 1998 re-issue by Displeased Records inspired them to get back together and they recorded a new album, followed by a European tour. They are still active.

Members

 * Chris Bailey – vocals
 * Kenny Hallman – guitars
 * Steve Terror – guitars
 * Eric Dubreuil – bass
 * Kiel Wilson – drums

Former members

 * Brian Langley – vocals
 * Bob Quelch – bass
 * Kevin Harrison – drums
 * Psycopath – bass
 * Chay McMullen – bass
 * Rick Nemes – drums
 * Kris DeBoer – drums
 * Greg Cavanagh – vocals
 * Don "Vince" Kuntz – vocals (died 2001)
 * Kiel Wilson – bass

Full-length

 * None Shall Defy (1987)
 * Unholier Than Thou (1998)
 * One who Points to Death (2004)
 * No God (2017)

Other

 * Nigresent Dissolution (1988)
 * Chaos in Copenhagen (live, 1999)
 * Demon God EP (2007)

title: Infernäl Mäjesty


text: User talk:69.250.124.35

title: User talk:69.250.124.35


text:
Forua

Forua is a town and municipality located in the province of Biscay, Basque Country, Spain.

title: Forua


text:
User:Charles Matthews/Hourani

'Abbas Hilmi - 'Abd al-Khaliq Sarwat - 'Abd al-Latif Shushtari - 'Abd al-Majid al-Khani - 'Abd al-Qadir al-Jaza'iri - 'Abd al-Rahman al-Jabarti - 'Abd al-Razzaq al-Baitar - J. Abdel-Jalil - J. Abdel-Nour - Butrus Abu Manneh - Iliya Abu Madi - J. M. Abun-Nasr - R. M. Adams - Adib Ishaq - A. Adnan - Mirèse Akar - Ahmad al-Tijani - Ahmad Shawqi - Al-Biruni - Al-Bukhari - Al-Ghazali - Al-Hakim bi-amr Allah - Al-Hallaj - Mansur al-Hallaj - Al-Jahiz - Al-Jurjani - Al-Nasir - Al-Taftazani - Al-Yousi - H. Algar - Allenby - 'Ali 'Abd al-Raziq - Ali Shari'ati - Ahmad Pasha - Ahmed Abdesselem - Jamal Muhammed Ahmed - Jamal Muhammed Ahmed - Jamal Ahmed - G. C. Anawati - Anis al-Maqdisi - Anouar Abdel-Malek - George Antonius - Aqa Muhammad Baqir Bihbihani - Shakib Arslan - D. Attwater - J. Aubin - D. Ayalon - Baal Shem Tob - M. M. Badawi - S. W. Baron - A. Bausani - C. H. Becker - Jacques Berque - R. Bevis - J. K. Birge - De Bonneval - J. H. Breasted - C. Brockelmann - Kenneth Brown - Leon Carl Brown - E. G. Browne - R. Brunschwig - Edmund Burke, III - Butrus Bustani - Butrus al-Bustani - Sulaiman Bustani - Claude Cahen - Roger Caillois - J. Carswell - P. Casanova - R. Chidiac - R. L. Collison - H. Corbin - C. Courtois - Maurice Jacques Couve de Murville - Kenneth Cragg - S. Digby - Mehmet Djavid - C. M. Doughty - Joseph, Baron Eötvös - Thomas Erpenius - S. J. Falk - N. Farag - Faris Nimr - H. G. Farmer - Firdawsi - H. L. Fleischer - Charles Forster - K. Z. M. Fouad Bey - Fuat Köprülü - Charles de Foucauld - Thomas Valpy French - J. Fück - A. Galland - Louis Gardet - Abraham Geiger - F. Georges-Picot - Ghulam Husain Khan - E. J. W. Gibb - H. A. R. Gibb - Michael Gilsenan - M. J. de Goeje - Ignaz Goldziher - G. Goodwin - G. Graf - R. Gramlich - Arnold H. Green - R. Griffiths - E. Grube - Gustave E. von Grunebaum - Hafiz Ibrahim - Hajji Khalifa - Katib Çelebi - J. von Hammer-Purgstall - Andras Hamori - G. Harpigny - Martin Hartmann - Hasan Hanafi - J. Hashim - W. Heinrichs - J. Henninger - U. Heyd - Beni Hilal - M. Hiskett - C. Snouck Hurgronje - Marshall Hodgson - Albert Hourani - Huseyn Hezarfenn - Ibn Abi Usaibi'a - Ibn Abi'l-Diyaf - Ibn 'Arabi - Ibn Bassam - Ibn Khaldun - Ibn Qutaiba - Ibn Rushd - Ibn Sa'd - Muhammad ibn Sa'd - Ibn Sina - Ibrahim al'Awra - Ibrahim al-Yaziji - Ibrahim Müteferrika - S. M. Ikram - Halil Inalcik - Ishaq ibn Jubair - Istifan al-Duwaihi - N. Itzkowitz - Jamal al-Din al-Afghani - Djemaleddin al-Afghani - S. K. Jayyusi - Salma Jayyusi - Jibran Khalil Jibran - J. Jomier - Iran Julfa - Nikki R. Keddie - B. Z. Keder - Khair al-Din - Khalil Mutran - Mawlana Khalid - Hendrik Kraemer - Alfred von Kremer - A. Kuran - A. K. S. Lambton - E. W. Lane - H. Laoust - Ira Lapidus - Abdallah Laroui - D. M. Leavitt - James Legge - Giorgio Levi Della Vida - Levi-Provençal - R. Lopez - A. B. Lord - Albert Lord - Cyril Lucaris - C. J. Lyall - D. B. Macdonald - H. R. Mackintosh - Mahmud Hamza - J. Maisami - George Makdisi - Malek Bennabi - G. Marçais - D. S. Margoliouth - Lodovico Marracci - Henry Martyn - Louis Massignon - Alexander Mavrocordato - Mawlana Khalid - Mawlay Idris - Mawlay Sulaiman - W. H. McNeill - R. Meinertzhagen - Midhat Pasha - Mirza Abu Talib Khan Isfahani - Mikha'il Mishaqa - E. Mittwoch - J. Mohl - Hossain Modarressi - Muhammad 'Abduh - Muhammad Bairam - Muhammad Bey - Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab - Muhammad Kurd 'Ali - Muhammad Rashid Rida - William Muir - M. Mujeeb - Mulla Sadr al-Din Shirazi - Muneccimbaşi - A. Musil - Naima - Nu'aima - J. U. Nef - R. A. Nicholson - Carsten Niebuhr - Theodore Nöldeke - Simon Ockley - Peter the Venerable - Karl Pfander - Julian Pitt-Rivers - Edward Pococke - Ernest Psichari - E. Quatremère - Fazlur Rahman - André Raymond - J. W. Redhouse - Riaz Pasha - Piri Reis - R. Repp - Rashid Rida - Maxime Rodinson - F. Rosenthal - F. Rückert - Jalaluddin Rumi - J. Rypka - E. Sachau - Sa'd Zaghlul - Salama Hijazi - Samy Bey Fraschery - Şemseddin Samy Fraşeri - Sayyidna Husain - Sayyidna Zainab - Silvestre de Sacy - George Sale - K. S. Salibi - G. Scarcia - Joseph Schacht - A. M. Schimmel - Sabbatai Sevi - Said Halim Pasha - Shah Waliullah - Shaikh Armad Sirhindi - Shaikh Rahmatullah al-Kairanawi - Shaikh Sidiya - Haim Shaked - Sharif Husain - R. Simon - W. M. de Slane - William McGuckin de Slane - Reuben Smith - Wilfred Cantwell Smith - P. Spear - St. John of Damascus - Samuel Stern - Taha Husain - Tannus Shidyaq - Jibra'il Taqla - A. L. Tibawi - H. Toledano - J. S. Trimingham - Christian Troll - Cornelius Van Dyck - J. Waardenburg - Richard Walzer - H. Wardman - Julius Wellhausen - Joseph White - W. Wright - Ya'cub Sarruf - Yirmisekiz Mehmed Said Efendi - Yusuf Ali - Robin Zaehner - Jurji Zaidan - M. Zwettler - Adab - Al-shahid - A'yan - dhikr - fiqh - Jama'i - Silsila - Tabaqat - tariqa - Umara - zawiya

title: User:Charles Matthews/Hourani


text:
Fruiz

Fruiz also known as Fruniz is a town and municipality located in the province of Biscay, in the autonomous community of Basque Country, northern Spain.

Place name
Fruiz is one of the place names of the Basque Country finished in -iz. Julio Caro Baroja defended that the names came from a proper name + the Latin suffix ``-icus``

In the Basque area called vasconavarra Caro Baroja considered that -oz,-ez and-iz suffixes applied to the place names in antiquity indicated that the site had been owned by the person whose name was attached to one of those suffixes, being able to trace their origin from the Middle Ages until the time of the Roman Empire.

In the case of Frúniz, Julio Caro Baroja proposed that the name could come from a hypothetical Furius - a Latin word. If it is added the -icus suffix to the Latin word we get the word Furicus. From a very similar latin Furunicus we could reconstruct the origin of the place-name Frúniz. Furunicus might also be a son of Furious.

Fruniz was established as the proper name of the village, and in the early nineteenth century it was changed to Frúniz, after establishing the Royal Spanish Academy in 1763 which forced to use the Spanish accent. However, the name continued developing in the Basque language, losing the intervocalic -n-, a common phenomenon from ancient Basque, which makes the name end up like Fruiz. The current name of the town in Basque is Fruiz while the known name in Spain is Frúniz.

In 1994 the city council decided to formalize the Basque form of the name, and since then it has officially been called Fruiz.

History
The origin of Fruniz dates back to the late eighth century, when Fortunio Fruniz won a battle against the Asturian in Asturiazaga, there he ordered to build a solar house. Their lands produced wheat, corn and beans. In 1781 it was established an annual cattle fair, which was held in the chapel of San Lorenzo. Nowadays it is celebrated on the second Sunday of August in the neighborhood of Aldai. The woods afforded good pasture for cattle fattening and abundant timber for the construction.

Festivities
In Fruniz there are four main festivities that are celebrated:

On 6 August the "Big Day" of Fruniz is celebrated, "San Salvador". A meal typically called "Herry Bazkari" is typically organized for all the people who want to join whether they are from the village or not.
 * Festivitie - San Salvador

Agricultural-Livestock Fair is held the second Sunday of August.
 * Agricultural-Livestock Fair

On 10 August it is celebrated the feast of San Lorenzo in the chapel located in the Barrio Andeko.
 * Sallebante / San Lorenzo

On 29 September it is celebrated in Barrio Botiola the feast of St. Michael.
 * San Miguel

2011 municipal elections
Four political parties presented to the candidacy to access the mayor: BILDU, EAJ-PNV, PSE-EE and PP. These were the results obtained:

 * EAJ-PNV: 165 votes (5 councilors)
 * Bildu: 98 votes (two councilors)
 * PSE-EE: 5 votes (0 councilors)
 * People's Party (PP): 5 votes (0 councilors)

These results showed that the PNV was the winner.

title: Fruiz


text:
User talk:Cutter

Video game music samples
The discussion can't involve just me and you. We need other editors to give an opinion on this subject. ☢ Ҡieff⌇↯ 22:25, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I absolutely agree. Should we wait for people to come and express their opinions or go look for them on other video-game related articles and draw their attention? --CutterX 23:38, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Featured_picture_candidates/Water_drop_animation
You may wish to reconsider your vote after seeing the new version of this animation. Feel free to remove this note once you've seen it. --Gmaxwell 23:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Private information on talk page, Please Stop
Hi, you may not realize it but you could be potting someone's life in harm's way by revealing private information about them. If the information is true it still needs to be widely known and reported in reliable sources. If it's not true you could be putting someone who you believe to be that person at risk. Crocker has received death threats and wikipedia cannot contribute to the harm of someone by revealing their private information. You probably meant well but it's more important that wikipedia sticks to guidelines for reporting private information per [WP:Bio]. Benjiboi 19:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, what were you talking about? I don't remember providing any Crocker's personal information as I don't know them. --CutterX 02:28, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
 * My apologies! I completely clicked on the wrong link and thus got the wrong user. Please accept my apologies. Benjiboi 03:26, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem! :) --CutterX 03:32, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:21, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Cutter


text:
User:Charles Matthews/Meyer

Franklin P. Adams - George Ade - James Alexander - Joseph Alsop - Stewart Alsop - Jack Anderson - Arthur Baer - Russell Baker - Dave Barry - Meyer Berger - Hosea Biglow - Erma Bombeck - Hal Borland - William Cowper Brann - Jimmy Breslin - Arthur Brisbane - David Broder - Heywood Broun - Charles Farrar Browne - Robert Jones Burdette - Herb Caen - Abraham Cahan - William A. Caldwell - Jimmy Cannon - Mary Cantwell - Carp (Frank O. Carpenter) - Frank O. Carpenter - Marquis Childs - Raymond Clapper - Francis Cline - Richard Cohen - Robert Considine - John Crosby - Dorothy Day - George H. Derby - Silence Dogood - Jack Downing - Roscoe Drummond - Finley Peter Dunne - Eugene Field - Doris Fleeson - George Frazier - Margaret Fuller - William Lloyd Garrison - William Geist - Harry Golden - Ellen Goodman - John Gould - Sheilah Graham - Robert Bernard Greene - Meg Greenfield - Lewis Grizzard - Milt Gross - Pete Hamill - Sydney Harris - Joseph C. Harsch - Lafcardio Hearn - Ben Hecht - Mark Hellinger - Marguerite Higgins - Nicholas von Hoffman - Hedda Hopper - Elda Furry - Ada Louise Huxtable - Molly Ivins - Donald Kaul - Murray Kempton - John F. Kieran - Michael Kinsley - Joseph Kraft - Charles Krauthammer - Arthur Krock - Irv Kupcinet - John Lardner - Ring Lardner - David Lawrence - John Leonard - Anthony Lewis - Flora Lewis - A. J. Liebling - David Ross Locke - Leonard Lyons - Miss Manners - Judith Martin - Joyce Maynard - Charles McCabe - Anne O'Hare McCormick - Ralph McGill - Mary McGrory - Oscar Odd McIntyre - Isaac Metzker - Ernest L. Meyer - Karl E. Meyer - Henry Mitchell - Christopher Morley - Jim Murray – Victor S. Navasky - Nancy Newhouse - Edgar Wilson Nye - Dan Parker - Louella Parsons - Drew Pearson - Westbrook Pegler - Phinn - John Phoenix - Peter Porcupine - Shirley Povich - Publius (James Madison) - Ernie Pyle - Anne Quindlen - William Raspberry - James Reston - A. M. Rosenthal - Carl Rowan - Mike Royko - Vermont Royster - Sydney Schanberg - Willian V. Shannon - Henry Wheeler Shaw - Hugh Sidey - Simeon Stylites - Red Smith - Seba Smith - George Sokolsky - Vincent Starrett - Kurt M. Stein - Thomas L. Stokes - Richard Strout - Ed Sullivan - C. L. Sulzberger - Bert Leston Taylor - Ernest L. Thayer - Phyliss Theroux - Calvin Trillin - R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. - Bill Vaughan - James Wechsler - Tom Wicker - George F. Will - Gary Wills - Charles Erskine Scott Wood - Yeoman (Frederick Law Olmstead)

title: User:Charles Matthews/Meyer


text:
Galdakao

Galdakao is a town and municipality located in the province of Biscay, in the Basque Country.

It is located in the Greater Bilbao, in the valley of the Ibaizabal river, near the Ganguren mountain range. It is surrounded by some summits such as Arrezurriaga (329 m), Txispamendi (221 m) and Santa María (476 m) in the north and Upo (556 m) and Mandoia (640 m) in the south.

It is coterminous with Zamudio, Lezama and Larrabetzu in the north, with Zaratamo and Zeberio in the south, with Amorebieta, Lemona and Bedia in the east and with Etxebarri and Basauri in the west.

Neighbourhoods

 * Aperribai
 * Arteta
 * Bekea
 * Bengoetxe
 * Berezikoetxe
 * Elexalde
 * Erletxe
 * Olabarrieta-Txistulanda
 * Urreta
 * Usansolo
 * Tximelarre Bekoa
 * Tximelarre Goikoa
 * Muguru
 * Zabalea

title: Galdakao


text:
Galdames

Galdames is a town, valley, and municipality located in the Biscay province of the autonomous community of Basque Country, Spain.

Main sights are Santa Maria Magdalena and Arenaza caves, both situated in Triano mountain range and the latter containing stalactites and rest of mining operations. The medieval Torre Loizaga is located in Concejuelo, which is now the site of a classic car museum.

History
The town of Galdames was first mentioned in a document dating to 1214. During the Middle Ages, Galdames was the home of various important lords and their families. The towers of the local Loizaga, Atxurriaga and Larrea people bear witness to this.

The Council of Galdames claimed the right to be a member of the Lordship of Biscay, which it received in 1672. In 1740 the council separated from the Lordship of Biscay before rejoining in 1800.

During the First Carlist War, the followers of Baldomero Espartero burned the forests surrounding San Pedro Galdames. From the 19th to mid-20th centuries, the town prospered due to the mineral wealth located beneath the valley.

In 1946, a group of Maquis returned from the Cantabrian mountains to Bizkaia and constructed a sheltered in the cave of Uraiaga and the surrounding mines.

Geography
The municipality of Galdames is located in the northeastern corner of the comarca of Enkarterri. It borders the municipalities of Sopuerta, Zalla, and Gueñes in Enkarterri; and the municipalities of Muskiz, Abanto y Ciérvana-Abanto Zierbena, Ortuella, Valle de Trápaga-Trapagaran, and Barakaldo in Gran Bilbao.

The municipality of Galdames is centred around the valley of Galdames, a WNW-ESE oriented valley which lies within the Basque Mountains. Notable peaks overlooking the valley include Pico Mayor to the northeast, Ganeran to the east, Luxar to the south, and Larrea to the southwest.

Galdames Creek flows north-westward through the valley before meeting the Barbadun River in Montellano. From there, the Barbadun River flows northward into Muskiz.

Demography
Despite being located in the west of Biscay near Bilbao, Galdames didn't experience the same population growth that other municipalities in the area – such as Barakaldo, Sestao, and Portugalete – had during the second half of the 20th century. Contrary to regional trends, the population of Galdames declined significantly between 1920 and 1981 before stabilizing.

As of 2021, Galdames has a population of 831, which is only about 21.6% of its population in 1920.

Neighborhoods
Galdames is administratively divided into 8 neighborhoods or wards, with San Pedro Galdames being the most populous:
 * Atxuriaga (La Aceña)
 * Concejuelo
 * Humaran
 * Larrea
 * Montellano
 * San Esteban Galdames
 * San Pedro Galdames
 * Txabarri

title: Galdames


text:
Talk:Thomas Young (scientist)

German wiki
The German wikipedia mentions a Young's formula, which supposedly governs wetting to some extent. Yet I can find no mention of it here. Could someone please check to see if Thomas Young did in fact formulate this formula:
 * $$\cos \Theta = \frac{\sigma_S - \sigma_{LS}}{\sigma_L}$$

-- Ec5618 10:43, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article on Surface Energy credits Thomas Young and links to the article on Contact Angle which appears to be angle Theta in your formula. I think it is an accomplishment worth adding to the Thomas Young article. Also there should be mention of the Young temperament and possibly Young's Rule for determining child medicine doses.

Harold14370 16:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

"Last Person to Know Everything"?
How can he be considered "the last person to know everything" when two of the others claiming the same "title" (Coolerige, Goethe) died after Young? 208.201.250.2 04:26, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Not meaning any disrespect to the two persons mentioned, but I don't think they really qualify. Coleridge was pretty much just a poet. I don't even know why he was mentioned. Goethe made an impact as poet, dramatist, and novelist which are closely related. As a scientist, he really made no impact. His theory of light was a crock. As a painter, he just dabbled. A great man surely, but not really a polymath on the same order as Young. Harold14370 03:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

This article needs work
Please compare this article to the Answers.com entries and improve this article. For instance, Young was the first to use the term energy in its modern, physical sense.--76.220.203.60 06:30, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

F = kx (formula attributed to Newton)
In the section titled "Young's modulus", the formula F = kx is attributed to Newton, but I always thought that was (Robert) Hooke's law of elasticity. Does anyone know for certain who devised this "law"? Did Newton also devise this relationship/law? TimProof 19:18, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

 * All the books I've consulted say Hooke. The only Newton connection is that Newton prevented Hooke's ideas from being given any play while Newton was alive. Dicklyon 23:27, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

John Zachary Young
I'm sure that J. Z. Young was a stalwart fellow, but surely the place to mention that he's a direct line descendant of Thomas Young is on his own (large and lengthy already) wikipedia article, and not on Thomas Young's. arkuat (talk) 06:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Why not mention it in both? Dicklyon (talk) 14:18, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Because then we'd be expected to do the research to make sure that all of Thomas Young's other descendants who were at least as notable as JZ were also mentioned in Thomas Young's article. arkuat (talk) 21:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

 * That's a lame excuse; there is no requirement to be complete or balanced in wikipedia. Dicklyon (talk) 21:48, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I think in this case an excuse is required for leaving this irrelevancy in Thomas Young's article, and no excuse is required for removing it. arkuat (talk) 03:02, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Doctor of Physics?
German wikipedia says that he obtained a decree as doctor of medicine. Considering physics' reputation back then, this seems to be more credible. Possibly change the article in this regard? Christoph Hahn (talk) 11:37, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Check and cite a source or two in the process. Apparently the Göttingen degree and later degrees at Cambridge were in "physic", which is what physician studies, i.e. what we now call medicine.  See this book and this book. Dicklyon (talk) 16:46, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

 * D'accord. I was confused by a today's statement of my professor. Christoph Hahn (talk) 17:59, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Pendulum
The text says: "In 1816 he was secretary of a commission charged with ascertaining the length of the second's pendulum" There have been amendments concerning the apostrophe - but what does a "second's pendulum" mean? Myrvin (talk) 14:08, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 * It had been editted without comment to "second pendulum", which is clearly not what was intended. You can find hudreds of books that talk about a "second's pendulum" or a "seconds pendulum" on google book search.  Dicklyon (talk) 02:40, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You make it seem that what it is is obvious - it isn't. There is an article in Wiki on the "seconds pendulum", so there should be a link. Also perhaps a short explanation. Myrvin (talk) 13:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Did it myself Myrvin (talk) 09:43, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Latest edits
There have been some strange edits by Cajun80.I have reverted them. Myrvin (talk) 19:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Last person to read everything?
Does anyone know if it's true that he was the last person to read all books (in English, presumably) that were published up to and including his lifetime? (I'm sure that can't be strictly true since I'm sure some books were published just before his death, but it could be true up until a certain point in his life.) If true, should it be mentioned? M-1 (talk) 00:41, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Young on animals?
I found this work called "An Essay on Humanity to Animals" (1798) at Googlebooks, and I wonder whether this is the Thomas Young of this article or another. Hope somebody may help.--Goose friend (talk) 07:00, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Read this ; and this . Myrvin (talk) 11:28, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Boxhorn and IE
Boxhorn's name for the group was Scythian because he did not know about Sanskrit. The information about Boxhorn here is irrelevant (Pamour (talk) 15:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)).

Logical semantics
The fourth paragraph in 'biography' reads, ". . . in 1818, after his death, he became secretary . . ." He didn't die until 1829 and I am finding it so difficult to contribute to this page on my smart phone (not being able to copy from the page in question and paste to here) I shan't bother in future. Kevin M Skinner (talk) 20:13, 14 April 2018 (UTC) Kevin M Skinner Kevin M Skinner (talk) 20:13, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
 * That vandalism edit was reverted, and then the revert was self-reverted. So I reverted that.  Now it's fixed, I think. Dicklyon (talk) 22:18, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Move to Thomas Young
This page should not be Thomas Young (scientist), it should be main the “Thomas Young” page. Duh, to ∞.

title: Talk:Thomas Young (scientist)


text:
Gamiz-Fika

Gamiz-Fika is a town and municipality located in the province of Biscay, in the autonomous community of Basque Country, northern Spain.

title: Gamiz-Fika


text:
Tony Bongiovi

Anthony Carmine Bongiovi Jr (born September 7, 1947) is an American record producer and recording engineer. He is the cousin of musician Jon Bon Jovi.

Early life
Anthony Carmine Bongiovi Jr. was born on September 7, 1947 in Raritan, New Jersey to Anthony Carmine Bongiovi Sr., an embalmer, and Frances Miriam Pellicane. He is of Italian descent.

Early career
In 1964 at the age of 17, while a student attending Bridgewater-Raritan High School West, Bongiovi became interested in recording studios, and visited Bell Sound and Regent Sound in New York City, where he overheard engineers speculating about how Motown achieved the sound of their recordings. Determined to figure out what made the Motown recordings sound different, Bongiovi ended up determining that the reverb decay on Motown recordings was much shorter than recordings produced in other studios, and he was able to primitively apply this re-created effect to songs produced in New York to make them sound more Motown-like. Bongiovi attempted to present his findings to an engineer at Columbia's studio, but the engineer wasn't interested. With encouragement from Jim Czak at Bell Sound, Bongiovi called Motown's chief engineer, Mike McLean, who arranged for Bongiovi to meet Motown producer Lawrence Horn in New York City. Horn, upon hearing Bongiovi's findings, asked 17-year-old Bongiovi whether he wanted to come to Detroit and visit Motown. His initial 4-day visit to the label's Hitsville U.S.A. studios in Detroit was the first of many that gave Bongiovi the opportunity to work with such artists as Stevie Wonder, Marvin Gaye, and The Supremes.

Bongiovi returned home with a temporary Hitsville, U.S.A. ID card, which he used to secure job offers from numerous New York recording studios, accepting a job at the newly-opened Apostolic Recording Studio, New York City's first 12-track recording facility. At Apostolic, Bongiovi worked with Frank Zappa and The Mothers of Invention and producer Shadow Morton.

In 1968, Bongiovi left Apostolic Studios and was hired by Gary Kellegren to work at the just-opened Record Plant, where he worked nights with Jimi Hendrix during the recording of Electric Ladyland. He also worked with Alan Douglas on some of Hendrix's posthumous releases. Later, he worked with the songwriting and production team Holland–Dozier–Holland for Chairmen of the Board's "Give Me Just a Little More Time" and Freda Payne's "Band of Gold", and received engineering credit on Vanilla Fudge's 1969 album, Near the Beginning, but the studio's co-founder Chris Stone fired him.

Bongiovi went to work at Mediasound Studios, where he mixed Woodstock: Music from the Original Soundtrack and More. He also formed the Disco Corporation of America production company with Meco Menardo and was part of the production team responsible for Gloria Gaynor's 1974 hit "Never Can Say Goodbye" and 1977's platinum-selling Star Wars and Other Galactic Funk. He was approached by former Record Plant co-worker Tommy Ramone to produce the Ramones, and Bongiovi co-produced the band's second and third albums at Sundragon Studios. He also co-produced the Talking Heads album ''77 at Sundragon.

Power Station
Now earning significant production royalties, Bongiovi decided to build his own recording studios. Partnering with former Mediasound co-worker Bob Walters and hiring a team that included engineer Ed Stasium, Ed Evans, and Bob Clearmountain, they found an abandoned building at 441 West 53rd Street in New York City's Hell's Kitchen neighborhood, which Bongiovi purchased from New York City for $360,000 as part of a building rehabilitation program. Bongiovi, Walters, and their team worked with Stephen B. Jacobs Associates to design a studio that would apply Bongiovi's ideas regarding acoustics. The new studio was named Power Station in acknowledgment of the building's origins as a former Consolidated Edison power station.

1992, the studio was put in Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and sold to Chieko and Kirk Imamura, who re-named it Avatar Studios to ensure that Bongiovi could continue to receive Power Station production royalties.

Bongiovi moved to Florida, where he did sound design consulting for Universal Studios Florida before returning to New York, where he continued studio work.

In 2012, Bongiovi helped open Power Station Studios in Pompano Beach, Florida. He is also Managing Director and co-founder of Bongiovi Acoustic Labs, headquartered in Port St. Lucie, Florida. Here he has developed a suite of algorithms called Bongiovi Acoustic Labs DPS (Digital Power Station), enabling engineers the ability to produce recordings with studio-like sound.

Personal life
He is a second cousin of Jon Bon Jovi, who is the lead singer of the band Bon Jovi.

Production and engineering credits

 * 1972: Hypnotized - Martha Veléz
 * 1975: Never Can Say Goodbye - Gloria Gaynor
 * 1975: Crash Landing - Jimi Hendrix
 * 1975: Midnight Lightning - Jimi Hendrix
 * 1975: Are You Ready For Freddy? - Freddy Fender
 * 1975: Experience Gloria Gaynor - Gloria Gaynor
 * 1976: I've Got You - Gloria Gaynor
 * 1977: Leave Home - The Ramones
 * 1977: Rocket to Russia - The Ramones
 * 1977: Talking Heads '77 - Talking Heads
 * 1977: Tailgunner - Jimmy McGriff (recording and remix engineer)
 * 1977: Star Wars and Other Galactic Funk - Meco
 * 1978: Encounters of Every Kind - Meco
 * 1978: Tuff Darts! - Tuff Darts
 * 1978: Can't Stand the Rezillos - The Rezillos
 * 1978: Ace Frehley - Ace Frehley
 * 1979: This Is My Life (La Vita) with Meco - Shirley Bassey
 * 1980: Christmas in the Stars: Star Wars Christmas Album - Meco
 * 1980: 1978-80: 1978-1980 Six Singles - Al Downing
 * 1980: The Empire Strikes Back - Meco
 * 1981: Balance - Balance
 * 1982: I'll Be Loving You - Al Downing
 * 1982: Darlene - Al Downing
 * 1982: Big Al Downing - Al Downing
 * 1982: Rock in a Hard Place - Aerosmith
 * 1982. Aldo Nova
 * 1982: In for the Count - Balance
 * 1983: Bark at the Moon - Ozzy Osbourne
 * 1983: Superstar - Lydia Murdock
 * 1984: Bon Jovi - Bon Jovi
 * 1984: Love on the Line - Lydia Murdock
 * 1990: Back for Another Taste - Helix - co-producer
 * 2005: Boo! B***h - Mystery - co producer with Steven Gagnon
 * 2002: Sympathy - Goo Goo Dolls
 * 2005: As Above So Below - NoEnd

Others produced

 * Jodi Bongiovi
 * Cidny Bullens
 * Carlene Carter
 * Rick Derringer
 * Mike DeVille
 * Buck Dharma
 * Carol Douglas
 * The Electriks
 * Barry Goudreau
 * Gus & The New Breed
 * Millie Jackson
 * The Rezillos
 * Sylvain Sylvain
 * Tuff Darts
 * Samantha Sang
 * Marlena Shaw

title: Tony Bongiovi


text:
Gatika

Gatika (Gatica) is a town and municipality located in the province of Biscay, in the autonomous community of Basque Country, northern Spain. As of 2009, it has 1,559 inhabitants. The historic Butrón castle is located in Gatika.

title: Gatika


text: User talk:85.113.253.250

title: User talk:85.113.253.250