text:
Japan National Route 6

National Route 6 (国道6号) is a Japanese highway from Tokyo to Sendai that goes through the cities Mito, Iwaki and Sōma. It traces the old Mito Kaidō route from Tokyo to Mito, and, for much of its 353.6 km route, it runs parallel to the Jōban railway line and the Jōban Expressway.

Route description
Originating in Chūō, Tokyo (at Nihonbashi, which also marks the origins of Routes 1, 4, 14, 15, 17 and 20), it ends in Miyagino-ku, Sendai (at the Nigatake interchange, junction with Route 45, also the origin of Route 47)

Major cities and villages it passes through include: Kashiwa, Toride, Tsuchiura, Ishioka, Mito, Hitachi, Iwaki, Tomioka, Ōkuma, Sōma, Watari, Iwanuma

The actual terminus is Iwanuma in Miyagi (at the Fujinami intersection) which is the junction of Routes 4 and 6. In the areas north of Iwanuma which overlap with the Route 4, signboards for Route 6 are not posted. The distance from Tokyo to Iwanuma is 334.0 km. This is equivalent to the distance from Mito to Kakegawa / Ichinoseki.

Overlapping sections
The following sections of Route 6 overlap with other routes:
 * In Chuo, Tokyo, from the origin point to Muromachi intersection: Route 17
 * In Chuo, Tokyo, from the origin point to Honchō 3-chōme intersection: Route 4
 * In Chuo, Tokyo, from the origin point to Asakusa-bashi intersection: Route 14
 * From Kashiwa, Chiba to Toride: Route 294
 * In Tsuchiura: Route 125 and Route 354
 * In Ishioka: Route 355

Effects of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster
One side of National Route 6 is known as the "nuclear dense zone". Tōkaimura (the first nuclear power plant of Japan), Ōkuma (center of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster) and Naraha (location of the Fukushima Daini Nuclear Power Plant) are located on adjacent of Route 6.

Due to the nuclear disaster, access is prohibited to a zone of 20 km radius from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. National Route 6 was blocked for non-authorized traffic between Hirono (the Iwaki side) and Haranomachi (the Sōma side). The ban was lifted in September 2014 after the road decontamination, and vehicles (with exception of motorcycles and bicycles) are now allowed on the stretch of road.

History
National Route 6 is a part of the lengthened Tōkaidō which connects the Kansai region (Kinai), or Nara and Kyoto in particular, and the Pacific coast of Tōhoku (called the Tagajō). During the Ritsuryō period, roads from Kinai to the Tagajō were divided into two: the Tōkaidō eastern sea road (via Nagoya, Hamamatsu, Tokyo and Mito) and the Tōsandō eastern mountain road (via Gifu, Shiojiri, Takasaki and Utsunomiya). During the foundation of Kamakura Kanagawa, Ritsiryō Tōkaidō was divided into two roads: the westward Tōkaidō which connects southern Kantō (Kamakura, Edo, Tokyo) and Kyoto, and the northward Tōkaidō which connects southern Kantō and Pacific coasts of Tōhoku. Since the foundation of Edo, Tōkaidō was narrowed by the Tokugawa Shogunate, the westward Tōkaidō functioned as a seaside road to Kyoto and the northward Tōkaidō functioned as one to the Pacific coasts of Tōhoku.

On 4 December 1952 the Ritsuryō Tōkaidō north of Tokyo was designated First Class National Highway 6, while the other section was designated as National Route 1. On 1 April 1965 the route was re-designated as General National Highway 6. On 12 March 2011, access to a large section of National Route 6 was restricted due to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster between Hirono and Haranomachi.

List of major junctions

 * Route 16 in Kashiwa: Ōmiya, Saitama (west) and Chiba (southeast)
 * Route 125 in Tsuchiura: Koga, Ibaraki and Kumagaya (west) and Kashima, Ibaraki and Katori, Chiba (east)
 * Route 50 in Mito, Ibaraki: Utsunomiya, Oyama, Tochigi, and Takasaki
 * Route 51 in Mito: Kashima and Narita
 * Route 461 in Takahagi: Ōtawara, Nikkō, and Numata, Gunma
 * Route 289 in Nakoso (southern Iwaki): Shirakawa, Tajima, and Tadami, Fukushima
 * Route 49 in Iwaki, Fukushima: Kōriyama, Aizuwakamatsu, and Niigata
 * Route 288 in Ōkuma, Fukushima: Kōriyama, Aizuwakamatsu, and Niigata
 * Route 115 in Sōma, Fukushima: Fukushima (Nakadōri), Inawashiro, and Yonezawa, Murakami
 * Route 113 in Shinchi, Fukushima : Shiroishi, Miyagi, Nanyō, Yamagata, and Murakami

title: Japan National Route 6


text:
Talk:Hearts of Space

Archive 1

Official website links
There is lots of good history and other stuff on the official website which I put into the external links. But integrating it all without any copyright violations will take a bit of work so for now I just stubbed the article. Dalf | Talk 06:49, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Music From
Why is the show's longer title, Music From the Hearts of Space only mentioned once, and obliquely at that? Kouban (talk) 17:39, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

 * The oblique reference is to the MST3K parody of the longer title. Establishing the origin of that longer title needs the new source I've provided below, but there is still an element of uncertainty.
 * The show was created in 1973 on KPFA titled as "Music from the Hearts of Space" (MFTHOS). The show title was subsequently shortened to "Hearts of Space" (HoS). Some commenters still refer to it by the longer name, as can be seen from relatively recent posting dates found during a Google search on that phrase.
 * The date when this name shortening officially occurred is unclear from reading a convenience copy of a May 1995 HoS history webpage: A L M O S T E V E R Y T H I N G Y O U E V E R W A N T E D T O K N O W A B O U T H E A R T S O F S P A C E (Almost Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Hearts Of Space). "'After ten years development as a local program, Music from the Hearts of Space began national syndication to 35 stations via the NPR satellite in January, 1983. Within three years, Hearts of Space had signed its 200th station.'"
 * This could mean that the show ended the KPFA run as MFTHOS in December 1982, and began national syndication in 1983 as HoS. But it could also be read to mean that the show began national syndication as MFTHOS, and was retitled as HoS sometime during the following three years.
 * Note that Hearts of Space Records was founded in 1984.
 * On the other hand, Current, the U.S. public tv and radio newspaper, still referred to the program as MFTHOS, following the 10th anniversary of national syndication in 1993.
 * Also statements using MFTHOS (found only by a site phrase search) appear on the HoS web site in review of the HoS Records album "Cruisers 1.0" released in 1988; and more significantly, "Prophecy" released in 1999: "'The music of Prophecy comes from our weekly public radio program, Music from the Hearts of Space.'"
 * Pending a definitive source, this all collectively suggests that the older MFTHOS title may still be considered valid by both producers and some commenters – especially for descriptive clarity that the radio show plays music. Milo 09:52, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Rod Serling.
Stephen Hill's narration is basically one big Rod Serling impression. Why isn't this mentioned in the article? --208.65.188.23 (talk) 23:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

 * You're kidding, right? Gingermint (talk) 03:42, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

 * He means the narrator. And yeah, the guy does sound like Rod Serling, whether you like it or not. --98.232.181.201 (talk) 05:02, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

The Music
It would be good, perhaps, to list just a few of the artists who are featured on the show to give more of an idea of the kind of music featured on the show. Gingermint (talk) 03:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

"Home Station"
Removed info box item listing KPFA as "home station." The HOS website doesn't mention KPFA, and a thorough check of the station's schedule doesn't turn up HOS. Ergo, not "home station." I don't consider this original research, just fact checking. Tapered (talk) 06:16, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Hearts of Space


text:
Category talk:2004–05 Southern Hemisphere tropical cyclone season

Untitled
darnit, this should be 2004-2005 not 2004-05. Imagine what happens when we get to 2099. Jdorje 06:49, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Umm, I don't see anything wrong with 2004-05 personally. For that matter 1998-99 is unambiguous isn't it? As long as 1999-2000 is in full there isn't a issue.--Nilfanion (talk) 23:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


text:
Imad al-Dawla

Ali ibn Buya (, علي بن بویه), commonly known by his laqab (honorific epithet) Imad al-Dawla (عمادالدوله; c. 891/2 – December 949), was the founder of the Buyid amirate of Fars, ruling as its amir (ruler) from 934 to 949. Together with his two younger brothers, Rukn al-Dawla and Mu'izz al-Dawla, he established a triumvirate, centered on Ray, Shiraz and Baghdad.

Early career
Ali was the eldest son of Abu Shuja Buya, a fisherman of modest origin from Daylam, a region in northern Iran. Abu Shuja Buya was most likely a recent convert to Islam, which explains the Arabic names of his sons, typical of the children of a convert.

Ali first entered the services of the Samanids under Nasr II, where he became a member of the ruler's entourage. From there he eventually joined Makan ibn Kaki, who ruled Gorgan and Ray as a governor of the Samanids, in around 928. He may have done so at Nasr's suggestion; in any case, he managed to occupy a high position under Makan and gained army commissions for his two younger brothers, Hasan and Ahmad. In 930, however, Makan rebelled against the Samanids by seizing Khurasan; he was subsequently attacked by the Ziyarid prince Mardavij and forced to give up Tabaristan.

Ali and his brothers managed to defect to Mardavij's side just as the Ziyarid was preparing to undertake the conquest to the south of the Alborz mountains as far as Qazvin. Not long afterwards Mardavij granted Ali administrative rule over Karaj, a strategically important town probably situated near modern Bahramabad. While making a stop in Ray on his way to Karaj, however, Ali was warned by Mardavij's vizier al-'Amid that the Ziyarid was planning to eliminate him. Hurriedly leaving Ray, he arrived at and took over Karaj.

With a small number of Daylamite troops to support him, Ali sought to expand his position. Moving against the heretical Khurramites, who controlled the surrounding mountains, he gained control of the region and was heavily enriched by the expeditions. At the same time, he managed to maintain his troops' loyalty, despite Mardavij's attempts to incite them against their master.

Foundation of the Buyid state
In order to further secure his position, Ali decided to seize the nearby city of Isfahan, then under control of the Abbasid governor Yaqut. The enemy army outnumbered Ali's, but a large portion of it defected to him upon his appearance before the city. Yaqut, however, refused to negotiate with him, and Mardavij's approach forced him to abandon Isfahan in favor of the Ziyarids. Having fled Karaj as well, Ali now took Arrajan, a city between Fars and Khuzistan. Having stayed for the winter in Arrajan, Ali decided to campaign in Fars in the spring of 933. There he encountered the resistance of Yaqut, who was also the governor of Fars and from whom Ali had stripped Arrajan. He also found an ally, Zayd ibn Ali al-Naubandagani, a wealthy landowner who disliked the Abbasids. After a series of battles, Ali managed to prove the victor. By May or June 934, he entered Shiraz, the capital of Fars.

In order to prevent Mardavij from pressing claims on his territory, Ali sought the recognition of the Abbasid Caliph, who confirmed him as his viceroy in September or October 934. Although the caliph's emissary arrived with the insignia for his office, however, Ali delayed giving the requisite tribute; by the time the emissary died in Shiraz two years later, the tribute was still unpaid. Mardavij continued to pose a threat; he decided to invade Khuzistan, which was still under caliphal control, in order to sever the Buyids from the Caliphate. This invasion prompted the caliph to reach an agreement with the Ziyarid, which forced Ali to recognize Mardavij's authority. This recognition proved short-lived, as Mardavij was assassinated in January of 935. Ali then decided to press claims on Khuzistan, and occupied 'Askar Mukram. The Buyid and the caliph then came to terms with one another; the latter confirmed Ali in his possession of Fars and gave Khuzistan to Yaqut.

The Buyid empire takes shape
Bolstered by many of Mardavij's Turkish mercenaries that had joined him, as well as the collapse of Ziyarid control over central Iran, Ali decided that Isfahan should be taken. He sent his brother Hasan to accomplish this. Hasan initially managed to take Isfahan but later encountered difficulties (for details about his campaigns in central Iran, see Rukn al-Dawla). After Hasan took Isfahan, Ali sent his other brother Ahmad (see Mu'izz al-Dawla) to take Kirman. Although the bulk of that province was compelled to recognize Buyid authority, direct control was not established, and Ali eventually recalled him. Ali next sent Ahmad to Khuzistan, where the Basrian clan of the Baridis had become the de facto rulers of the province but were trying to throw off caliphal rule. They asked Ali for their struggle against the Abbasids, providing the pretext for Ahmad to enter Khuzistan. Although the Baridis temporarily recovered the province and even managed to take Baghdad a few times, Ahmad eventually took control of Khuzistan himself. From Khuzistan Ahmad waged a series of campaigns in Iraq, until in 945 he entered Baghdad. The caliph then gave him the title of "Mu'izz al-Dawla", while Ali and Hasan were given the titles of "Imad al-Dawla" and "Rukn al-Dawla", respectively. By 948 Rukn al-Dawla had also secured his position in central Iran, causing a clear definition of the borders of the Buyid state.

Imad al-Dawla was not the master of the entire Buyid empire. Rukn al-Dawla, who had carved up his own kingdom without in central Iran without military support from Imad al-Dawla, was relatively independent of the latter. Mu'izz al-Dawla, on the other hand, had been given support by his brother in his efforts to take Khuzistan, and was a subordinate of Imad al-Dawla. He was not listed as an independent ruler on contemporary sources, and the name of his brother appeared before his own on coins struck by him. Despite the fact that Mu'izz al-Dawla's capture of Baghdad resulted in him gaining the title of senior amir (amir al-umara), which in theory made him the highest ranking individual out of all three Buyids, he remained little more than a provincial ruler under Imad al-Dawla's authority. Imad al-Dawla himself claimed the title of senior amir during his lifetime, and although he never officially held it, nor was entitled to do so, he was recognized as the de facto holder of that position.

Imad al-Dawla's lack of an heir posed a problem until shortly before his death. A few months beforehand, he settled on Rukn al-Dawla's eldest son Fana-Khusraw as his successor. He died in December 949, and his brothers helped to install Fana-Khusraw (who took the title of "'Adud al-Dawla") in Shiraz. Rukn al-Dawla, who was the most powerful of the Buyids, claimed the title of senior amir for himself and received both Mu'izz al-Dawla's and 'Adud al-Dawla's recognition as such.

Imad al-Dawla was buried in Istakhr.

title: Imad al-Dawla


text:
Talk:2004–05 Southern Hemisphere tropical cyclone season

What Happened to JTWC?
Why are their forecasts taking a backseat? They have a bit more cretability and experiance than the random weather offices (RSMC status aside) scattered throughout the southern hemisphere (the Australians are pretty good though...) -- Hurricane Eric - my dropsonde - archive 04:28, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I would imagine due to the primary mission of the JTWC is to warn and protect the assets of the United States and Department of Defense. --Holderca1 14:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Todo
Information for all storms. Jdorje 20:00, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Nothing more, I guess! It's now a dab page. RaNdOm26 14:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Capitalization
The capitalization of terms is inconsistent in this article and some other similar ones. For example, "southern hemisphere" is both capitalized and lower-case in the first few sentences here. Also in the lead section, "tropical storms" doesn't need to be capitalized (except, of course, the first word when beginning a sentence). And so forth. Someone needs to go through these storm related articles and make the capitalization consistent (and correct). (I would fix this article but the job is bigger than a single article, so that's why I'm posting this here.) - dcljr (talk) 17:38, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


text:
Nagasaki Naval Training Center

The Nagasaki Naval Training Center (長崎海軍伝習所) was a naval training institute, between 1855 when it was established by the government of the Tokugawa shogunate, until 1859, when it was transferred to Tsukiji in Edo.

During the Bakumatsu period, the Japanese government faced increasing incursions by ships from the Western world, intent on ending the country's two centuries of isolationist foreign policy. These efforts cumulated in the landing of United States commodore Matthew Perry in 1854, resulting in the Treaty of Kanagawa and the opening of Japan to foreign trade. The Tokugawa government decided to order modern steam warships and to build a naval training center as part of its modernization efforts to meet the perceived military threat posed by the more advanced Western navies.

History
The training center was established near the Dutch settlement on the artificial island Dejima in Nagasaki, where maximum interaction with Dutch naval technology would be possible. Nagai Naoyuki was appointed the first director with a first class of 37 cadets from the various hatamoto with fealty directly to the Shōgun, and 128 cadets sent from the various feudal han (16 from Satsuma Domain, 28 from Fukuoka Domain, 15 from Chōshū Domain, 47 from Saga Domain, 5 from Kumamoto Domain, 12 from Tsu Domain, 4 from Fukuyama Domain and one from Kakegawa Domain). Katsu Kaishū was director of training under Nagai starting from 1855, until 1859, when he was commissioned as an officer in the Shogunal navy the following year.

Officers of the Royal Netherlands Navy were in charge of education, the first being Pels Rijcken (from 1855 to 1857), and the second Willem Huyssen van Kattendijke (from 1857 to 1859). Western medical science was taught by J. L. C. Pompe van Meerdervoort. The curriculum was weighed towards navigation and Western science. The training institute was also equipped with Japan's first steamship, Kankō Maru given by the King of the Netherlands in 1855. It was later joined by the Kanrin Maru and the Chōyō.

The Nagasaki Naval Training Center provided not only samurai students but also local domain students with opportunities to pursue systematic Western-style naval training. The students gradually overcame language and other barriers and learned various modern naval skills and marine technology and organization. Under the guidance of Dutch instructors, the Shogunate built a factory for the repair of naval ships as a part of the School's supporting facilities. This was the first modern factory in Japan utilizing imported European machinery.

The number of cadets from various domains proved unwieldy, and the second class of 1856 was reduced to only 12 cadets, all from the hatamoto in Edo. In 1857 another naval training academy was opened at Tsukiji in Edo. The director of the center Nagai moved to the new center, and Kimura Kaishū was promoted to director of the Nagasaki center. The third class of 1857 has 26 cadets. The future Admiral Enomoto Takeaki was one of the students of the Nagasaki Training Center. The Training Center was closed in 1859, and all education transferred to the Tsukiji Naval Training Center, where the Kankō Maru was also sailed by a Japanese-only crew.

The decision to terminate the School was made for political reasons, arising from the Japanese side as well as from the Dutch side. While the Netherlands feared that the other Western powers would suspect that they were helping the Japanese accumulate naval power to repulse Westerners, the Shogunate became reluctant to give samurai from traditionally anti-Tokugawa domains opportunities to learn modern naval technology.

Although the Nagasaki Naval Training Center was short-lived, it had considerable direct and indirect influence on future Japanese society. The Nagasaki Naval Training Center educated many naval officers and engineers who would later become not only founders of the Imperial Japanese Navy but also promoters of Japan's shipbuilding and other industries.

title: Nagasaki Naval Training Center


text: User talk:218.102.23.117

title: User talk:218.102.23.117


text:
Cobham Intermediate School

Cobham Intermediate School is a state intermediate school in the northwestern Christchurch, New Zealand suburb of Burnside.

Cobham was originally named Fendalton Intermediate. However, there was confusion between the school and Fendalton Open Air School, so the governor-general of New Zealand, Viscount Cobham, allowed the school to use his name. At the end of term 1 in 2011 long-running principal Trevor Beaton left Cobham Intermediate to retire. Scott Thelning from Mt. Pleasant School took over as principal in Term 3, 2011.

In March 2018 Cobham student Maia Devereaux invited Women's Minister Julie Anne Genter to come and talk about the gender pay gap to the room 11 and 12 students.

Cobham today
Cobham is currently the largest intermediate school in the South Island and has a total attendance of 726 students.

Achievements
In 2005, Cobham won the Cantamath competition (a mathematics competition for schools around the Canterbury region) in both the year 7 and 8 competition. Many musicians and singers from this school participate in the Lions Primary School Music Festival.

Notable alumni

 * Corey Anderson – New Zealand cricketer
 * Tim Batt – New Zealand comedian
 * John Key – New Zealand Prime Minister (2008–2016)
 * Tom Latham – New Zealand cricketer
 * Hayley Westenra – New Zealand pop opera singer

title: Cobham Intermediate School


text:
Merville, British Columbia

Merville is an unincorporated community in the Comox Valley between the City of Courtenay, Mount Washington, Dove Creek, and Black Creek near the east coast of Vancouver Island. It was named by Canadian World War I soldiers returning to the Island after fighting in France; they named it after Merville-Franceville-Plage, where the Canadians had their first field headquarters.

People from Merville

 * Emily St. John Mandel, novelist

Twin Town
Merville-Franceville-Plage

title: Merville, British Columbia


text:
Lottery mathematics

Lottery mathematics is used to calculate probabilities of winning or losing a lottery game. It is based primarily on combinatorics, particularly the twelvefold way and combinations without replacement.

Choosing 6 from 49
In a typical 6/49 game, each player chooses six distinct numbers from a range of 1–49. If the six numbers on a ticket match the numbers drawn by the lottery, the ticket holder is a jackpot winner—regardless of the order of the numbers. The probability of this happening is 1 in 13,983,816.

The chance of winning can be demonstrated as follows: The first number drawn has a 1 in 49 chance of matching. When the draw comes to the second number, there are now only 48 balls left in the bag, because the balls are drawn without replacement. So there is now a 1 in 48 chance of predicting this number.

Thus for each of the 49 ways of choosing the first number there are 48 different ways of choosing the second. This means that the probability of correctly predicting 2 numbers drawn from 49 in the correct order is calculated as 1 in 49 × 48. On drawing the third number there are only 47 ways of choosing the number; but we could have arrived at this point in any of 49 × 48 ways, so the chances of correctly predicting 3 numbers drawn from 49, again in the correct order, is 1 in 49 × 48 × 47. This continues until the sixth number has been drawn, giving the final calculation, 49 × 48 × 47 × 46 × 45 × 44, which can also be written as $${49!\over (49-6)!}$$ or 49 factorial divided by 43 factorial or FACT(49)/FACT(43) or simply PERM(49,6).

608281864034267560872252163321295376887552831379210240000000000 / 60415263063373835637355132068513997507264512000000000 = 10068347520

This works out to 10,068,347,520, which is much bigger than the ~14 million stated above.

Perm(49,6)=10068347520 and 49 nPr 6 =10068347520.

However, the order of the 6 numbers is not significant for the payout. That is, if a ticket has the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, it wins as long as all the numbers 1 through 6 are drawn, no matter what order they come out in. Accordingly, given any combination of 6 numbers, there are 6 × 5 × 4 × 3 × 2 × 1 = 6! or 720 orders in which they can be drawn. Dividing 10,068,347,520 by 720 gives 13,983,816, also written as $${49!\over 6! * (49 - 6)!}$$, or COMBIN(49,6) or 49 nCr 6 or more generally as

 * $${n\choose k}={n!\over k!(n-k)!}$$, where n is the number of alternatives and k is the number of choices. Further information is available at binomial coefficient and multinomial coefficient.

This function is called the combination function, COMBIN(n,k). For the rest of this article, we will use the notation $${n\choose k}$$. "Combination" means the group of numbers selected, irrespective of the order in which they are drawn. A combination of numbers is usually presented in ascending order. An eventual 7th drawn number, the reserve or bonus, is presented at the end.

An alternative method of calculating the odds is to note that the probability of the first ball corresponding to one of the six chosen is 6/49; the probability of the second ball corresponding to one of the remaining five chosen is 5/48; and so on. This yields a final formula of

 * $${n\choose k}={49\choose 6}={49\over 6} * {48\over 5} * {47\over 4} * {46\over 3} * {45\over 2} * {44\over 1} $$

A 7th ball often is drawn as reserve ball, in the past only a second chance to get 5+1 numbers correct with 6 numbers played.

Odds of getting other possibilities in choosing 6 from 49
One must divide the number of combinations producing the given result by the total number of possible combinations (for example, $${49\choose 6} = 13,983,816$$ ). The numerator equates to the number of ways to select the winning numbers multiplied by the number of ways to select the losing numbers.

For a score of n (for example, if 3 choices match three of the 6 balls drawn, then n = 3), $${6\choose n}$$ describes the odds of selecting n winning numbers from the 6 winning numbers. This means that there are 6 - n losing numbers, which are chosen from the 43 losing numbers in $${43\choose 6-n}$$ ways. The total number of combinations giving that result is, as stated above, the first number multiplied by the second. The expression is therefore $${6\choose n}{43\choose 6-n}\over {49\choose 6}$$.

This can be written in a general form for all lotteries as:

$${K\choose B}{N-K\choose K-B}\over {N\choose K}$$

where $$N$$ is the number of balls in lottery, $$K$$ is the number of balls in a single ticket, and $$B$$ is the number of matching balls for a winning ticket.

The generalisation of this formula is called the hypergeometric distribution.

This gives the following results:

When a 7th number is drawn as bonus number then we have 49!/6!/1!/42!.=combin(49,6)*combin(49-6,1)=601304088 different possible drawing results. You would expect to score 3 of 6 or better once in around 36.19 drawings. Notice that It takes a 3 if 6 wheel of 163 combinations to be sure of at least one 3/6 score.

1/p changes when several distinct combinations are played together. It mostly is about winning something, not just the jackpot.

Ensuring to win the jackpot
There is only one known way to ensure winning the jackpot. That is to buy at least one lottery ticket for every possible number combination. For example, one has to buy 13,983,816 different tickets to ensure to win the jackpot in a 6/49 game.

Lottery organizations have laws, rules and safeguards in place to prevent gamblers from executing such an operation. Further, just winning the jackpot by buying every possible combination does not guarantee to break even or make a profit.

If $$p$$ is the probability to win; $$c_t$$the cost of a ticket; $$c_l$$ the cost for obtaining a ticket (e.g. including the logistics); $$c_f$$ one time costs for the operation (such as setting up and conducting the operation); then the jackpot $$m_j$$ should contain at least

$$ m_j \ge c_f + \frac{c_t + c_l}{p} $$

to have a chance to at least break even.

The above theoretical "chance to break-even" point is slightly offset by the sum $$\sum_{i}{} m_i$$ of the minor wins also included in all the lottery tickets:

$$ m_j \ge c_f + \frac{c_t + c_l}{p} - \sum_{i}{} m_i $$

Still, even if the above relation is satisfied, it does not guarantee to break even. The payout depends on the number of winning tickets for all the prizes $$n_x$$, resulting in the relation

$$ \frac{m_j}{n_j} \ge c_f + \frac{c_t + c_l}{p} - \sum_{i}{} \frac{m_i}{n_i} $$

In probably the only known successful operations the threshold to execute an operation was set at three times the cost of the tickets alone for unknown reasons $$ m_j \ge 3 \times \frac{c_t}{p} $$

I.e.

$$ \frac{n_j p}{c_t} \left ( c_f + \frac{c_t + c_l}{p} - \sum_{i}{} \frac{m_i}{n_i} \right ) \ll 3 $$

This does, however, not eliminate all risks to make no profit. The success of the operations still depended on a bit of luck. In addition, in one operation the logistics failed and not all combinations could be obtained. This added the risk of not even winning the jackpot at all.

Powerballs and bonus balls
Many lotteries have a Powerball (or "bonus ball"). If the powerball is drawn from a pool of numbers different from the main lottery, the odds are multiplied by the number of powerballs. For example, in the 6 from 49 lottery, given 10 powerball numbers, then the odds of getting a score of 3 and the powerball would be 1 in 56.66 × 10, or 566.6 (the probability would be divided by 10, to give an exact value of $\frac{8815}{4994220}$ ). Another example of such a game is Mega Millions, albeit with different jackpot odds.

Where more than 1 powerball is drawn from a separate pool of balls to the main lottery (for example, in the EuroMillions game), the odds of the different possible powerball matching scores are calculated using the method shown in the "other scores" section above (in other words, the powerballs are like a mini-lottery in their own right), and then multiplied by the odds of achieving the required main-lottery score.

If the powerball is drawn from the same pool of numbers as the main lottery, then, for a given target score, the number of winning combinations includes the powerball. For games based on the Canadian lottery (such as the lottery of the United Kingdom), after the 6 main balls are drawn, an extra ball is drawn from the same pool of balls, and this becomes the powerball (or "bonus ball"). An extra prize is given for matching 5 balls and the bonus ball. As described in the "other scores" section above, the number of ways one can obtain a score of 5 from a single ticket is ${6\choose 5}{43\choose 1} = 258$. Since the number of remaining balls is 43, and the ticket has 1 unmatched number remaining, $1⁄43$ of these 258 combinations will match the next ball drawn (the powerball), leaving $258/43 = 6$ ways of achieving it. Therefore, the odds of getting a score of 5 and the powerball are ${6 \over {49\choose 6}} = {1 \over 2,330,636}$.

Of the 258 combinations that match 5 of the main 6 balls, in 42/43 of them the remaining number will not match the powerball, giving odds of ${{258 \cdot {\frac{42}{43}}}\over {49\choose 6} } = \frac{3}{166,474} \approx 1.802 \times 10^{-5}$ for obtaining a score of 5 without matching the powerball.

Using the same principle, the odds of getting a score of 2 and the powerball are ${6\choose 2}{43\choose 4} = 1,\!851,\!150$ for the score of 2 multiplied by the probability of one of the remaining four numbers matching the bonus ball, which is $4/43$. Since $1,851,150 \cdot \frac{4}{43} = 172,\!200$, the probability of obtaining the score of 2 and the bonus ball is $\frac{172,200}{49 \choose 6} = \frac{1025}{83237} = 1.231\%$ , approximate decimal odds of 1 in 81.2.

The general formula for $$B$$ matching balls in a $$N$$ choose $$K$$ lottery with one bonus ball from the $$N$$ pool of balls is:

$$\frac {\frac{K-B}{N-K}{K\choose B}{N-K\choose K-B}} {N\choose K}$$

The general formula for $$B$$ matching balls in a $$N$$ choose $$K$$ lottery with zero bonus ball from the $$N$$ pool of balls is:

$${N-K-K+B\over N-K}{K\choose B}{N-K\choose K-B}\over {N\choose K}$$

The general formula for $$B$$ matching balls in a $$N$$ choose $$K$$ lottery with one bonus ball from a separate pool of $$P$$ balls is:

$${1\over P}{K\choose B}{N-K\choose K-B}\over {N\choose K}$$

The general formula for $$B$$ matching balls in a $$N$$ choose $$K$$ lottery with no bonus ball from a separate pool of $$P$$ balls is:

$${P-1\over P}{K\choose B}{N-K\choose K-B}\over {N\choose K}$$

Minimum number of tickets for a match
It is a hard (and often open) problem to calculate the minimum number of tickets one needs to purchase to guarantee that at least one of these tickets matches at least 2 numbers. In the 5-from-90 lotto, the minimum number of tickets that can guarantee a ticket with at least 2 matches is 100.

Information theoretic results
As a discrete probability space, the probability of any particular lottery outcome is atomic, meaning it is greater than zero. Therefore, the probability of any event is the sum of probabilities of the outcomes of the event. This makes it easy to calculate quantities of interest from information theory. For example, the information content of any event is easy to calculate, by the formula

$$ \operatorname I(E) := - \log{\left[\Pr{\left(E\right)}\right]} = -\log{\left(P\right)}.$$

In particular, the information content of outcome $$ x$$ of discrete random variable $$ X$$ is

$$ \operatorname I_X(x) := - \log{\left[p_{X}{\left(x\right)}\right]} = \log{\left(\frac{1}{p_{X}{\left(x\right)}}\right)}.$$

For example, winning in the example above is a Bernoulli-distributed random variable $$ X$$ with a $1⁄13,983,816$ chance of winning ("success") We write $ X \sim \mathrm{Bernoulli}\!\left(p\right) = \mathrm{B}\!\left(1, p\right)$  with $ p = \tfrac{1}{13,983,816}$  and $ q = \tfrac{13,983,815}{13,983,816} $. The information content of winning is

$$ \operatorname{I}_X(\text{win}) = -\log_2 {p_X{(\text{win})}} = -\log_2\!{\tfrac{1}{13,983,816}} \approx 23.73725$$shannons or bits of information. (See units of information for further explanation of terminology.) The information content of losing is

$$ \begin{align} \operatorname{I}_X(\text{lose}) &= -\log_2 {p_X{(\text{lose})}} = -\log_2\!{\tfrac{13,983,815}{13,983,816}} \\ &\approx 1.0317 \times 10^{-7} \text{ shannons}. \end{align}$$

The information entropy of a lottery probability distribution is also easy to calculate as the expected value of the information content.

$$ \begin{alignat}{2} \Eta(X) &= \sum_{x} {-p_{X}{\left(x\right)} \log{p_{X}{\left(x\right)}}} \ &= \sum_{x} {p_{X}{\left(x\right)} \operatorname{I}_X(x)} \\ &{\overset{\underset{\mathrm{def}}{}}{=}} \ \mathbb{E}{\left[\operatorname{I}_X (x)\right]} \end{alignat}$$

Oftentimes the random variable of interest in the lottery is a Bernoulli trial. In this case, the Bernoulli entropy function may be used. Using $$ X$$ representing winning the 6-of-49 lottery, the Shannon entropy of 6-of-49 above is

$$ \begin{align} \Eta(X) &= -p\log(p) - q\log(q) = -\tfrac{1}{13,983,816}\log\!{\tfrac{1}{13,983,816}} - \tfrac{13,983,815}{13,983,816}\log\!{\tfrac{13,983,815}{13,983,816}} \\ & \approx 1.80065 \times 10^{-6} \text{ shannons.} \end{align}$$

title: Lottery mathematics


text: Category:Communications in Senegal

title: Category:Communications in Senegal


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EMSSA

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

The result of the debate was No consensus. Linuxbeak | Talk 23:13, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

EMSSA
This does not seem like material worthy of inclusion. A search for "electronic Martial Spirit of Southern Africa" on Google produces about 500 results. I do not think this is a large enough number for an online community. Alexa rankings don't come into the picture, since their websites are located at Angelfire and Yahoo! (which further suggests that this group is not worthy of inclusion). Delete. Joel7687 06:55, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EMSSA


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Philosophical Approach to Language and Knowledge

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

The result of the debate was DELETE. Linuxbeak | Talk 19:14, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

A Philosophical Approach to Language and Knowledge
Original Research cohesion | talk 06:56, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete. Original research, and Wikipedia is not a repository of academic publications. --MarkSweep ✍ 07:07, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:NOR and WP:VAIN --Kgf0 08:12, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:NOR. --Angr/undefined 11:51, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOR. This article can go to wikisource, but the author does not seem interested. Paolo Liberatore (Talk) 15:23, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
EnergyAustralia

EnergyAustralia (formerly TRUenergy) is an electricity generation, electricity and gas retailing private company in Australia. It is one of the "big three" retailers in the National Electricity Market. It generates electricity primarily using coal fired generation, at the Yallourn Power Station in Victoria, and the Mount Piper Power Station in New South Wales. 10% of its generation is from wind power, 32% from gas, and 58% from coal. It is Australia's second biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, after AGL Energy. As a loss making company in 2023, its parent in Hong Kong, CLP Group, has stated that it is looking for partners for renewable energy investment, however as of this time, there were no plans to build new renewable energy itself.

It has committed to closing Yallourn Power Station in 2028, but plans to keep Mount Piper Power Station running until 2040.

Over 400,000 customers have opted in to EnergyAustralia's "carbon neutral" product, offered at no additional cost, however this product has led to legal accusations of "greenwashing".

History
In 2005, TXU Corp sold all its Australian assets to Singapore Power, which retained the distribution businesses (electricity and natural gas distribution networks) in Victoria, and onsold the retail and generation businesses to the Hong Kong-based CLP Group, which also owned the Yallourn Power Station, in Victoria's Latrobe Valley. In Australia, CLP traded as TRUenergy, and became the fifth largest energy retailer in Australia. In 2011, TRUenergy acquired from the New South Wales Government the state's electricity retail business and trade name of EnergyAustralia. Following the sale of the government's electricity retail assets, the government changed the name of the remainder of the government enterprise to Ausgrid, and in 2012 TRUenergy changed its name to EnergyAustralia.

In 2013, EnergyAustralia acquired Wallerawang Power Station, now closed, along with Mount Piper Power Station, both in New South Wales, from Delta Electricity for A$160 million.

In 2015, EnergyAustralia closed its call centre in Melbourne, outsourcing up to 300 jobs to the Philippines.

In 2018, EnergyAustralia became one of the 17 energy businesses who supported the launch of the Energy Charter, a global initiative aimed at bringing together all parts of the power supply chain to give customers more affordable and reliable energy.

In 2021, EnergyAustralia announced that it will close the Yallourn Power Station in mid-2028, four years ahead of schedule, and instead build a 350 megawatt power-generating battery in the Latrobe Valley by the end of 2026. At the time, Yallourn produced about 20% of Victoria's electricity.

Operations
EnergyAustralia supplies electricity and natural gas to more than 1.7 million residential and business customers throughout Australia.

In 2021-22, it emitted 16.2 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, making it Australia's second largest emitter.

As at July 2017, EnergyAustralia has a master hedge agreement with Ecogen Energy for Ecogen to supply to it the output from Ecogen's gas-fired Newport and Jeeralang Power Stations, both in Victoria, which have a combined capacity of 960 MW. EnergyAustralia also owns the gas-fired Hallett Power Station in South Australia with a capacity of 200 MW.

In addition to the retail function, EnergyAustralia has a significant portfolio of industrial and commercial customers, and a A$5 billion portfolio of energy assets, including Hallett Power Station, Wallerawang Power Station (now decommissioned), and Mount Piper Power Station. It owned an underground natural gas storage facility at the Iona Gas Plant near Port Campbell until 2015.

In September 2023, the ACCC, the competition regulator, commenced legal action in regard to EnergyAustralia allegedly not complying with industry regulations around transperancy in pricing, in 2022. EnergyAustralia may face millions of dollars of fines in regard to this.

Carbon neutral electricity
EnergyAustralia offers a carbon neutral electricity option to their customers by purchasing carbon offset units from a range of Australian and international offset projects including renewable energy projects in developing countries, land management and tree planting in Australia. It is certified by Climate Active, the Australian government's certification product.

However, it does not commence until 6 months after an accounts connection date, and if the account number changes, the six month counter restarts. This is not clearly advertised, however it is in their terms and conditions.

In relation to this product, in August 2023, a lawsuit was filed in the Federal Court of Australia, accusing EnergyAustralia of greenwashing, aiming to bar them from making deceptive claims about their product in the future. EnergyAustralia stated that their product complied with the federal government's Climate Active certification product. However, a 2022 Australia Institute report heavily criticised this certification product, alleging that it was "state sponsored greenwashing."

According to Michael Mazengarb, a consultant in renewable energy and climate change policy, EnergyAustralia is by far the largest buyer of offsets under the Climate Active certification. It is able to afford to offer this product at no additional cost to its customers, because "the offsets are so cheap".

Energy generation and assets
EnergyAustralia's portfolio of assets includes:
 * Mount Piper Power Station, New South Wales
 * Tallawarra Power Station, New South Wales
 * Wallerawang Power Station, New South Wales (decommissioned)
 * Pine Dale Mine, New South Wales
 * Yallourn Power Station, Victoria
 * Cathedral Rocks Wind Farm, South Australia
 * Hallett Power Station, South Australia
 * Waterloo Wind Farm, South Australia

title: EnergyAustralia


text: Category:Religion in Senegal

title: Category:Religion in Senegal


text: Category:Society of Senegal

title: Category:Society of Senegal


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Renee Bryant

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

The result of the debate was DELETE. Linuxbeak | Talk 00:39, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Renee Bryant
This page is one of a circular set of self-refential non-notable (low google hit count) bios, all of which have a family relationship and have been created in the last couple of weeks There's also a set of redirects for various forms of each of the names. Josh Parris # 06:58, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Lori Bryant-Woolridge Special:Whatlinkshere/Lori Bryant-Woolridge
 * Benjamin Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Benjamin Bryant
 * Paco Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Paco Bryant
 * Renee Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Renee Bryant
 * Delete; nicely wikified, but NN -- Egil 11:52, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable.  Logophile 13:45, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable. Hopefully the author isn't too discouraged by this because all of these articles are well presented and wiki'd, even if the subjects are not very notable.--Isotope23 18:15, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Clearly notable for receiving presitigious awards and for relation to a Brigadier General. Possibly, she does not merit her own article, but the Bryants as a whole should certainly deserve some mention. I advocate combining all of the above into one article. (unsigned by Ronald Collinson)
 * What is so notable about the Outstanding Civilian Service Award or the Commander's Award for Public Service? Both of these were added to wikipedia by the author of this article, presumably to bolster the case for Renee Bryant's notability.  Can you point out other existing articles on wikipedia where these awards are used as a case for notability (not by the author of the Bryant articles)?  I'm not advocating removing the articles for these awards because I think this is good, useful, encyclopedic information (and the articles are well written); however they don't make a case for notability.  Your other point about her being notable for relation to a Brigadier General also isn't supported by wikipedia precedent.  Norman Schwarzkopf has a wife and three children... none of them have wikipedia articles. Colin Powell has a wife and three children as well.  Only Michael Powell has a wikipedia article because he has clearly achieved notability on his own (ignoring any arguements of nepotism) by becoming the chairman of the FCC.  The Bryant's clearly have had distinguished and interesting lives, but not one of them, other than Lori Bryant-Woolridge has done anything to acheive an encyclopedic level of notability.--Isotope23 13:34, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The two awards are clearly notable, as they are (verifiably) the third and fourth highest honors the Department of the Army can award to a civilian. Supported by www.cpol.army.mil/library/mer/awards/public.html, they are clearly not throwaway or vanity honors that are handed out to every Tom, Dick, or Harriet. By definition it stands to reason that there have not been that many of these awards given out (this is admittedly conjecture, but based on similar stats for similar high-level government awards).  Interestingly, Albert Bryant Jr's awards are given out to far more people than the ones Renee Bryant has received.  Thus in an odd way, Renee Bryant may be more notable than her husband.--el_amante
 * Keep. Based on the legitimate significance of the awards and the clear link to an established multi-generational, award-winning, military family.  Just because there are low Google hits does not mean she is not notable.  It doesn't strike me that there would be much coverage of this type of individual, however notable, except, perhaps local coverage and or DoD press advisories at the time.  Do we know, too, whether some of these awards weren't awarded pre-dating the archiving of articles, etc. commonly on the Internet?  (Agree, as well, that the article is well written.) ''(el_amante) 19:22, 12 October 2005
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
St Nicholas Church, Leicester

St Nicholas Church is a Church of England parish church, and the oldest place of worship in Leicester, England.

Location
It is situated next to the Jewry Wall, a remnant of Roman masonry. To the east is the site of the Roman forum.

The church lies just outside the city's inner ring road. Despite being some distance from the campus, it is the official church of the University of Leicester.

History
Parts of the church fabric certainly date from c. 880 AD, and an architectural survey in the early 2000s suggested possible Roman building work. The tower is Norman. The church itself was consecrated in 879, and in modern times retains almost all of the original nave and crossing tower. It has been suggested that an Anglo-Saxon minster on the same site was the cathedral for the Diocese of Leicester, 679–874, and the current church may contain some material from this building.

By 1825, the church was in an extremely poor condition, and plans were made for its demolition. Instead, due to lack of funds for the construction of the planned replacement church, it was extensively renovated between 1875 and 1884, including the building of a new north aisle.

Renovation continued into the 20th century. A 15th-century octagonal font from the redundant Church of St Michael the Greater, Stamford was transferred to St Nicholas.

In the 1950s, St Nicholas was directed to the spiritual needs of local university students. In recent times, as a city centre church without a large residential parish, St Nicholas became an Inclusive Church, with a mission to welcome people of diverse sexualities, identities, disabilities, origins, and socioeconomic situations. As a result, it has acquired a significant LGBTQ worshipper population and displays pride flags.

St Nicholas is one of, or the only, church in the UK to have an Ornithologist in Residence, Dr Alexander Bond, principal curator and curator-in-charge of birds at the Natural History Museum, London.

Organ
The organ was built in 1890 by the local firm of J. Porritt, and incorporates pipework of an earlier organ by an unknown builder dating from the 1830s. In 1975, the organ was cleaned and overhauled by J. W. Walker & Sons Ltd at a cost of around £4,500, and has continued to be refurbished periodically since then.

Ian Imlay was the organist from 1960 until his death in August 2021.

Bells
The church has three bells, dated 1617, 1656 and 1710, that had been taken down from the tower in 1949 and replaced by one big bell. As part of the millennium celebrations, the three bells were rehung at a total cost of £5,848, paid for by an appeal. Because the tower is not very strong, they were re-hung for stationary chiming (not swung). The smallest bell, which was cracked, was repaired, and all three bells were taken away to Hayward Mills Associates Bell Hangers of Nottingham. They were returned to the church in July 2002, and were rung to welcome Queen Elizabeth II on her Golden Jubilee visit to Leicester.

title: St Nicholas Church, Leicester


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albert Bryant Jr

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

The result of the debate was No consensus. Rx StrangeLove 04:35, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Albert Bryant Jr
This page is one of a circular set of self-refential non-notable (low google hit count) bios, all of which have a family relationship and have been created in the last couple of weeks There's also a set of redirects for various forms of each of the names. Josh Parris # 06:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Lori Bryant-Woolridge Special:Whatlinkshere/Lori Bryant-Woolridge
 * Benjamin Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Benjamin Bryant
 * Paco Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Paco Bryant
 * Renee Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Renee Bryant
 * This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now.  No opinion, other than to note that most of the article is a verbatim copy-paste of http://www.knox.army.mil/dcg.stm, though that's likely PD. —Cryptic (talk) 10:29, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable Brigadier General and probable vanity. Non-notable because in looking at the other Brigadier Generals that have wiki articles, they all have a major accomplishment or scandal tied to them.  Albert Bryant Jr's involvment with the 4th ID (of which one unit actually captured Saddam Hussein) is probably the most notable thing in this article, but he was not personally involved in the capture.  The rest of the article details some great accomplishments, but nothing that really stands out from the accomplishments of other military top brass... which brings me to my second point: vanity.  I don't know what relation User25be is to the Bryant's but the level of biographical detail in all these articles, the pictures, and the trail of edits User25be has made (all are about Bryants or auxillary articles about awards they've acheived, etc.) lead me to believe that this is something of a vanity project for this user.  User25be has a real flair for writing wiki articles; technically these articles are near perfect... my only beef is that there is too much information in some articles (for example Renee Bryant's awards listed in articles other then her own).  I hope that regardless of the outcome of these AfD's User25be continues to contribute because he or she has a real knack for writing.
 * Strong Keep for a couple of reasons. Let's dispense with the less weighty one first: I came across this article while following links from other articles being considered for deletion and I found myself actually interested.  This family is obviously accomplished and by the time I got to this bio, I felt like I had learned something.  That kind of gut reaction, genuine interest in the subject generated by the entry, means something.  With the extended bandwith Wikipedia has to offer, as I mentioned in another post, there is room for the "B-listers" who are notable, if not as notable as those who can be included in more restricted informational resources.  The second is that I legitimately feel this person is notable, but notable in sum, if not for one reason only.  The accomplishments are legitimate and the career is clearly noted.  The link to Saddam Hussein's capture is legitimate as he was the Assistant Division Commander of the unit.  It would be different if he were a fellow soldier, but he was the second in command at the time and that is significant.  Also, his wife has won the third and fourth highest awards the Secretary of the Army can award to civilians, and his son is a decorated veteran as well (this is bolstered when you look at some of the other Bryant entries...this is clearly a military "dynasty" of sorts, with EVERY SINGLE eligible member--subject, subject's father, subject's father-in-law--making it to the General Officer level, and son and wife receiving military decorations, as well as the other son working on the highest-profile Coast Guard project undertaken.  I am from a military family myself and thus know that these are not things easily achieved and I have great respect for the people who have done so (my father and grandfather never got past MAJ and LTC in 20 and 25 years respectively, and they were not chopped liver.)
 * ''Though I do wish user25be had offered more than a cut-and-paste of BG Bryant's official bio. If he/she is as close to the subjects as he/she appears to be (which in of itself should NOT be a disqualifying factor) I think a fleshed out entry would give us a better idea of whether or not this person is as notable as he appears to be (or not to be).  If he/she reads this before the 5-day period closes, I invite user25be to elaborate (and justify, to an extent) his/her inclusion of these entries.  I have noted that I believe some of his/her entries are strong keeps, while others are weak keeps.  I would appreciate his/her reasoning. el_amante 20:12, 12 October 2005
 * Strong keep. Deputy Commander of Fort Knox qualifies as notable -- Mrmooky 15:13, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, but rewrite. Being in charge of the unit that captured Saddam Hussein makes him notable. But, calling him "BG Bryant" before he's actually promoted to Brigadier General is misleading, and the overall tone, to me, sounds a bit un-NPOV. Otherwise, there's a lot of useful information, especially to someone writing a report on Fort Knox or the capture of Saddam Hussein. -Oddtoddnm 18:41, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete NN. Josh Parris # 00:08, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

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


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lori Bryant-Woolridge

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

The result of the debate was KEEP. Linuxbeak | Talk 00:33, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Lori Bryant-Woolridge
This page is one of a circular set of self-refential non-notable (low google hit count) bios, all of which have a family relationship and have been created in the last couple of weeks There's also a set of redirects for various forms of each of the names. Josh Parris # 06:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Lori Bryant-Woolridge Special:Whatlinkshere/Lori Bryant-Woolridge
 * Benjamin Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Benjamin Bryant
 * Paco Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Paco Bryant
 * Renee Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Renee Bryant
 * Keep assuming copyright situation is handled. Remember to unwikify any links to NN persons. -- Egil 11:55, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. The subject seems notable enough to me.  The copywright issue must be taken care of.  Logophile 13:23, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as the only one in the bunch that is notable... as long as someone rewrites it so that it is not Copyvio. Even if permission is obtained for this copy, it needs to be rewritten to strike some of the non-notable wiki's and references. Could also use some POV adjustment.--Isotope23 18:08, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as long as the copyvio issue is rectified. Hall Monitor 18:23, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: A GFDL version of this article is now available at Lori Bryant-Woolridge/Temp if this will help expedite the removal of the copyvio. Hall Monitor 21:42, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * keep this please it has been rewritten so it is fine now Yuckfoo 00:09, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. Obviously notable based on precedents for authors (circulation, etc.) Both books are from major publishing houses and are sold on Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and Books-A-Million.  There are also several user reviews on Amazon from a wide variety of locations.  I suspect the copywrite issue is moot, as this appears to be the standard bio circulated by publishers to the press, etc. exactly for this purpose. el_amante 19:28, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benjamin Bryant

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

The result of the debate was DELETE. Linuxbeak | Talk 00:37, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Benjamin Bryant
This page is one of a circular set of self-refential non-notable (low google hit count) bios, all of which have a family relationship and have been created in the last couple of weeks There's also a set of redirects for various forms of each of the names. Josh Parris # 06:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Lori Bryant-Woolridge Special:Whatlinkshere/Lori Bryant-Woolridge
 * Benjamin Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Benjamin Bryant
 * Paco Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Paco Bryant
 * Renee Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Renee Bryant
 * Weak keep, seems notable. Any wikilinks to NN persons can be unwikified. Delete (as Isotope23) -- Egil 11:53, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Somewhat notable.  Logophile 13:35, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - OK let's break it down. Searching for Benjamin Bryant + Majic 95.5: .  3 hits that actaully are on topic... 2 of which are from his website.  Searching for Benjamin Bryant + K-Juice:  yields one hit... from his website.  So basically, he qualifies as a non-notable disc jockey.  The behind the scenes stuff (i.e. Program Director) isn't merit enough for inclusion either.  He won a Paul R. Ellis Award, which has it's own wiki entry compelete with mention of Mr. Bryant; not so surprising when you notice that the author of that article is the same as the author of the Benjamin Bryant article.  I would surmise the Paul R. Ellis Award article was added to support Mr. Bryant's article...
 * This delete nomination seems kind of personal, probably one of the reasons I felt compelled to research it a little more in-depth. As for the award, the author may be same, but a quick web search for the award supports that it is an award of some repute from a nationally recognized organization. When the entry is worthy of inclusion on its own, do we get to disqualify it because we question the motives for inclusion? http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=3027862
 * Moving on, Mr. Bryant hosted and emceed some local events, nothing more exciting than what many local "celebrities" do. Mr. Bryant then moved on to column writing.   produces one valid hit, which puts him on the level of every other column writer that doesn't have a bio on wikipedia.  The claim that The early 2000s saw Bryant’s writings published on all of the industrialized continents, and translated into several languages... appear to be non-verifiable.

 * This is verifiable, I found a list (with some links to original material) on Benjamin Bryant's website (the same one you cite): A number of these publications appear to meet the circulation requirements of the Wikipedia biography policy and they, in what I, at least, found interesting, cover a wide variety of topics.  You seem very insistent that this point is unverifiable.  One look at this page (and the links to actual scans and/or reprints of the original publications) kind of debunks that...Benjamin Bryant is clearly a widely published author, if not an author of the "sexy" material variety (No Brad and Angelina articles, though there is a piece on a beauty queen).  http://www.benjaminbryant.net/stringbook/  el_amante 21:41, October 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * There is nothing personal about it el_amante and you seem to be inferring bad faith on my part just because I'm actually trying to support my argument for a deletion. I agree that the Paul R. Ellis Award is worthy of inclusion in wikipedia on its own... I just don't agree that getting this award confers notability to the recipient.  I view in the same way I view the Medal of Honor: If someone has done something notable, and happens to be a medal of honor recipient as well (regardless of whether or not the notable action is tied to receiving said honor) the MoH certainly merits mention in the person's article.  However, just receiving the MoH is not, in my opinion, sufficient merit for inclusion in wikipedia.  My argument against using the Paul R. Ellis Award as a benchmark for notability is solely based on that reasoning and my mention of the genesis of the Paul R. Ellis Award was simply a comment, though perhaps inappropriate in the context of an AfD.
 * Per your second statement, I don't know how you are inferring that I am very insistent that the point about his published work is unverifiable from the statement appear to be non-verifiable... denoting the fact that I could not verify the claim. I missed that link you posted when I originally looked at Mr. Bryant's website.  Having reviewed it, I still don't see anything that meets my criteria for notable published works.  It is a collection of local newspaper articles.  The Soap Weekly article I mentioned in my original vote, and some technical writings and press releases.  I'm not judging this on the "sexy" nature of the material, but rather on precedent.  Looking around wikipedia, I don't see many articles on local newspaper writers (baring those who write for nationally distributed "local" papers like the NY Times, Washington Post, etc.) or for technical/ad copy writers.
 * There is nothing personal about my delete vote. My long explanation for deletion in my original vote was simply because that, based on the article, a simple "delete - nn-bio" was inappropriate based on the numerous contentions of notability.  I was at least trying to do some due diligence and look at the claims the author made.  If this article stays, it needs a cleanup to removed POV wording (like "cinderella-like"), but ultimately I simply disagree with retaining an article on someone of such low notability.--Isotope23 15:28, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

The rest of the article concerns his lineage (which does not confer notability unless you are Paris Hilton), some minor awards, and his career. An unpublished novel and an unfinished play cap it all off. Taking it all together, I don't see anything that confers notability her. It is a well written article with tons information. It would make a great resume, but there as of right now, I don't see anything that distinguishes Mr. Bryant as notable. If his book ever comes out I may change my mind on this...--Isotope23 17:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC) I *would* be interested in User25be answering some of these points, so I invite him/her to do so before the 5-day deadline if he/she comes across this discussion. el_amante 19:45 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Isotope23's excellent analysis. The page, although well written, is absurdly bloated for an unkown DJ. Quale 18:43, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep – the page is well-written, and all the information is relevant. Having won a number of awards, and being related to an Emmy-winner, he is clearly a noteworthy individual. He also holds the record of 'youngest director of a mid/major market commercial station in all of Texas', which is undoubtedly of interest to somebody. Simply not being well-known does not mean that the subject is not noteable. It may be possible to merge all of the Bryant articles into a single article, but deleting is too crude and wasteful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronald Collinson (talk • contribs) 21:57, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * If "[s]imply not being well-known does not mean that the subject is not noteable", then what is the definition of notability? MCB 01:37, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * So if I am related to someone who does something notable, like win an award or become CEO of a company, I'm therefore notable enough for a wiki article? I better start writing up my copy...--Isotope23 13:45, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * C'mon, let's keep this discussion fair and reasonable. Obviously, being related to a notable is not simply enough, but when the person is a published writer related to another published writer of significant note, and obviously part of a family of significant achievement (and we can debate whether a given person is or is not) I think they can qualify for an entry, at least on principle, to be evaluated individually.--el_amante 19:34, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. I was on the fence of "keep" vs. "strong keep" but I ultimately chose strong keep for the following reasons: While this person is not well known, the accomplishments are legitimate.  Though some of the Google searches link to his site http://www.benjaminbryant.net (click through to the "professional" site), an actual review of the site provides plenty of supporting information--including several newspaper articles, and a complete list of works written for major publications and public relations campaigns managed in various countries.  The most notable are the Black History Maker of Tomorrow award, which I know from watching a TV special years ago is (was?) a legitimate national award given by McDonalds, and being the youngest Program Director of a commercial station in Texas.  Other supporting information includes being named "Most Memorable of 1996" and working on a major Defense program that is always in the news. ALONE, the circular reference to the other family members (some of which are also clearly notable, others not so much) or the fact that the Ellis Award entry was entered by the same author, might challenge the article's legitimacy, but there are clearly enough supporting factors to keep this one.  I do not think we should be too dependent upon how many Google hits a person turns up--many people accomplished things before the Internet was in widespread use, particulary for archiving.  I also think that one of the brilliant things about Wikipedia is that we can include "B-list" notables that might otherwise be left out of traditional encyclopedias due to space constraints.  Wikipedia can be less elitist and I think that's a good thing.  Sorry for the length of this, but I wanted to rebut the detailed entry above, as I strongly disagree with using primarily quantitative data (hits, etc.) as justification for keeping OR deleting--and I'm not sure that while Ben Bryant's page was cited, that the author actually followed many of the links on that page, which support Mr. Bryant's notability el_amante 19:45, 12 October 2005 (UTC).
 * A note: I noticed that the bio on the site(and even the tone of the bio) is not the same as this Wikipedia article, which I often find is the case when a person has done their own their own vanity page. el_amante 21:54, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete (as Isotope23) Josh Parris # 00:17, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
User:CLW/monobook.js

// User:Lupin/popupsdev.js - please include this line

document.write(' ');

popupShortcutKeys=true; // optional: enable keyboard shortcuts popupAdminLinks=true;  // optional: enable admin links popupStructure='menus'; // new feature: lovely CSS dropdown menus popupFixDabs=true; popupFixRedirs=true;

title: User:CLW/monobook.js


text:
User:Joaquin Murietta/personal sandbox

'''THIS IS MY SANDBOX

ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK'''

=Sandbox=

The blockquote command will indent both margins when needed instead of the left margin only as the colon does. Centered text.

ISBN 012345678X

ISBN 0-12-345678-X

Holloway

 * Aruba Getagrip Translated Aruban media articles
 * Aruba Truth, Aruba's "Strategic Communications Task Force"
 * Blogs for Natalee
 * Scared Monkeys
 * Joran van der Sloot blog
 * Hyscience
 * Riehl World View
 * Bushy Haired Stranger NH discussion
 * The Unusual Suspects
 * CeetveeRefuges NH Discussion
 * Websleuths Crime Slaughtering Community

 * Information wants to be free

 * The Birmingham News full coverage
 * Caribbean Net News - Netherlands Antilles
 * Court TV full coverage
 * Yahoo! News full coverage
 * Joran Interview Unedited transcript
 * Aruba Judicial System Summary

=sig=

Joaquin Murietta 04:41, 18 October 2005 (UTC) {user:joaquin murietta/sig}

=Boycott Aruba= Boycott Aruba has emerged from claims of institutional racism and violations of victims rights in Aruba.

On January 29 2004, Dr. Arianna Mathew called for a boycott of the island of Aruba following the incarceration of her husband, Eduardo Mathew. After his release, Mathew alleged institutional racism against black inmates and filed a lawsuit with the European Court of Human Rights. On September 29, 2005, the court ruled in his favor.

A separate campaign to boycott the island emerged after the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. In this case, the Aruban government is alleged to have mishandled the criminal investigation.

External Links
 * Aruba Getagrip Translated Aruban media articles, no commentary

title: User:Joaquin Murietta/personal sandbox


text:
User talk:Sgt Andrew

Welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia, the greatest encyclopedia on Earth! You seem to be off to a good start. Hopefully you will soon join the vast army of Wikipediholics!

You may wish to review the welcome page, tutorial, and stylebook, as well as the avoiding common mistakes and Wikipedia is not pages.

Here are some helpful links:
 * Merge, for information about merging, renaming and moving pages.
 * Wikipedia directory is also quite useful.
 * Meet other new users You may want to add yourself to the Wikipedia new user log.
 * Assign edits to your username from before you registered.
 * Be Bold!
 * Don't let grumpy users scare you off.
 * Play nice with others
 * Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
 * Tell us about you
 * How to upload files and image copyright tags.

By the way, an important tip: To sign comments on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments.

Hope to see you around the Wiki! If you have any questions whatsoever, feel free to contact me on my talk page! Please review the image copyright section as soon as possible and properly tag your images, or they will be deleted within 7 days. Thanks. ∞ Who ? ¿ ? 07:00, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Note, if you personally captured the images, then you can use film-screenshot for a tag for some of the images you uploaded.  ∞ Who ? ¿ ?  07:02, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

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

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

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have questions about copyright tagging of images, post on Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags or User talk:Carnildo/images. 07:27, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Blue Meanie.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Blue Meanie.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Hetar 05:03, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Boogeymanandjillian.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Boogeymanandjillian.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. feydey 18:31, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sgt Andrew


text:
The Phalanx

The Phalanx; or Journal of Social Science was a Fourierist journal published in New York City, edited by Albert Brisbane and Osborne Macdaniel from 1843 to 1845.

The Phalanx was eventually moved, along with another publication called The Social Reformer to Brook Farm in West Roxbury, Massachusetts. They became one journal called The Harbinger; its first issue was published on June 14, 1845. Its first issue under this title announced its mission: "The interests of Social Reform will be paramount to all others in whatever is admitted into the pages of the Harbinger. We shall suffer no attachment to literature, no taste for abstract discussion, no love of purely intellectual theories, to seduce us from our devotion to the cause of the oppressed, the down trodden, the insulted and injured masses of our fellow men. Every pulsation of our being vibrates in sympathy with the wrongs of the toiling millions; and every wise effort for their speedy enfranchisement will find in us resolute and indomitable advocates."

After Brook Farm's dissolution, the publication was eventually moved to New York City under the editorial control of George Ripley and Charles Anderson Dana where it continued weekly until October 1847. In addition to Ripley and Dana, early contributors to The Harbinger included Parke Godwin, James Russell Lowell, William Wetmore Story, John Greenleaf Whittier, and Nathaniel Parker Willis. Edgar Allan Poe, who strongly distrusted the Utopian movements, referred to The Harbinger as "the most reputable organ of the Crazyites".

title: The Phalanx


text:
Continentalism

Continentalism refers to the agreements or policies that favor the regionalization and/or cooperation between states within a continent. The term is used more often in the European and North American contexts, but the concept has been applied to other continents including Africa, Asia and South America. In North American history, continentalism became linked to manifest destiny and involved merging continental expansion with international growth.

United States
Historically, the United States of America saw itself as a blossoming continental nation-state. Accordingly, the first governing body for the North American colonists was called the Continental Congress, which sought to receive delegates from across the British colonized areas of the continent, including the future Canadian provinces of Quebec and Nova Scotia.

Continentalism in the United States was developed through the expeditions and experiences of frontier expansion on the American frontier. In the nineteenth century, the ideology of continentalism became internationalised by the growing concept of Manifest destiny, to create a belief amongst state and commercial leaders that the United States would help spread Western civilisation from Europe to the rest of the world. Between 1840–1898, American continentalism began to involve ideas on overseas expansion, which would go on to influence the imperialistic foreign policies of Roosevelt and McKinley.

Early United States continentalism involved the gradual absorption of North American territory into the U.S. There were various struggles of independence and expansionism in the United States between 1776–1865, including American settlers battling indigenous nations and efforts to buy territory from European imperial powers such as in the Louisiana purchase. American continentalism became an issue with global implications from the mid-nineteenth century as the United States grew as an economic and political power. Continental disputes with Canada were based on America vying for greater global economic power to challenge the British dominated marketplace, as they sought commercial control of Canadian natural resources and agriculture. One benefit of the 1867 Alaska Purchase noted by Secretary of State William H. Seward was that it would make trade with the East easier, as he viewed that making America politically central would allow them to intercept European and Eastern trade effectively. This idea of using the geographic advantages of the North American continent to intercept trade was mimicked by non-state actors, such as Perry Collins in 1865 who attempted to create a telegraph line stretching from British Columbia to Alaska and Siberia.

Continentalism was replaced by a more colonialist approach to American foreign policy in the 1901 Insular Cases. The Supreme Court rulings decreed that citizens from the newly acquired territory of the Spanish–American War did not have the constitution applied to them; however, they were controlled by the U.S. judiciary. Within the United States, this led to a growth in nationalism due to the ideological separation between the nation and new territory it was colonising. Most of the inhabitants of the United States, if not all, call themselves "Americans" as a demonym, and say America to refer to the country instead of the continents of North and South America. For a more extensive discussion over this polemical case, read the main article: Use of the word American.

Canada
In Canadian political history, continentalism has referred to policies that emphasize Canadian trade and economic ties within the North American continent, particularly with the United States, over those with the United Kingdom or within the British Empire. In the 19th century, continentalism was one of the three main theories of Canadian nationality, the others being pro-British imperialism, and Canadian independence.

The most extreme form of continentalism is annexationism, which advocates all or part of Canada joining the United States. Opponents of continentalism often argue that stronger ties with the United States could eventually lead to annexation, and that this is to be feared. Continentalists themselves may or may not be in favour of continuing to deepen ties with the United States beyond the economic and into areas like a customs union, common currency or political union.

The traditional proponent of continentalism was the Liberal Party of Canada, and particularly farmers and resource industries that advocated reciprocity (i.e., free trade) with the United States. The 1911 federal election was fought over the issue of a reciprocity agreement that the Liberal government of Wilfrid Laurier had negotiated with the United States, with the Conservatives of Robert Borden opposing reciprocity. The Conservatives won the election and cancelled the agreement.

However, the Progressive Conservative Party took on many continentalist policies beginning during the Brian Mulroney government in the 1980s, which promoted and successfully signed the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement and, later, the North American Free Trade Agreement. These policies were maintained by the Liberal and Conservative governments that followed.

Continentalism today is seen in both negative and positive terms. Canadian economic nationalists typically oppose continentalism. Opposing this, many pro-market libertarians and neo-conservatives tend to favour it, on the grounds that it opens up commercial and economic opportunities, allowing free trade between nations. As this process is taking place in parallel with and as part of a broader economic globalization, the increasing trade between Canada and the United States is not generally seen as a threat to Canadian sovereignty.

Continentalism in Africa
Continentalism in Africa, commonly referred to as Pan-Africanism, is a sociopolitical world view, philosophy, and movement that seeks to unify native Africans and members of the African diaspora into a "global African community".

Modern Pan-Africanism began around the beginning of the twentieth century. The African Association, later renamed the Pan-African Association, was organized by Henry Sylvester Williams around 1887, and the first Pan-African Conference was held in 1900.

Continentalism in South America
Continentalism in South America is linked to and associated with Bolivarianism; a set of political doctrines that enjoys currency in parts of South America, especially Venezuela. Bolivarianism is named after Simón Bolívar, the 19th century Venezuelan general and liberator who led the struggle for independence throughout much of South America.

Modern support for Bolivarianism is especially evident in Venezuela and partly responsible for the founding of the Union of South American Nations. USAN is an intergovernmental union that integrated two existing customs unions: Mercosur and the Andean Community of Nations, as part of a continuing process of South American integration and is modeled on the European Union. However, in 2019, rising concerns surrounding Nicolas Maduro's authoritarian rule in Venezuela split the Union, with the majority of South American states withdrawing from the USAN and joining the newly created Forum for the Progress and Integration of South America.

title: Continentalism


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paco Bryant

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

The result of the debate was DELETE. Linuxbeak | Talk 00:35, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Paco Bryant
This page is one of a circular set of self-refential non-notable (low google hit count) bios, all of which have a family relationship and have been created in the last couple of weeks There's also a set of redirects for various forms of each of the names. Josh Parris # 07:03, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Lori Bryant-Woolridge Special:Whatlinkshere/Lori Bryant-Woolridge
 * Benjamin Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Benjamin Bryant
 * Paco Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Paco Bryant
 * Renee Bryant Special:Whatlinkshere/Renee Bryant
 * Delete NN. Including any redirects -- Egil 11:54, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable.  Logophile 13:28, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete the whole lot, unfortunately. It is my hope that  will continue their work here and continue to contribute to other existing articles as he or she holds the potential to become another great asset to Wikipedia.  Hall Monitor 17:28, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * To clarify, please delete the lot of Bryant articles noted above, the Lori Bryant-Woolridge article can be handled through the normal copyvio process. Hall Monitor 18:49, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as admirable for his service, but ultimately non-notable. Hall Monitor, Look at Lori Bryant-Woolridge before you call delete on the whole lot...  she appears to be somewhat notable, even if the rest are not.--Isotope23 18:12, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * You are correct, please accept my humble apologies. I have started Lori Bryant-Woolridge/Temp to replace the copyvio.  Hall Monitor 18:49, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep vaguely noteable for his service and relation to clearly noteable Lori Bryant-Woolridge, but not enough to merit his own article. This should be incorporatd into either a Lori article, or one of the linked miliatary articles Ronald Collinson 22:05, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep as he is clearly the least notable of the Bryant entries. He has won a Bronze Star, which is admirable, but is not uncommon among veterans.  The only reason I don't recommend "delete" is that he is differentiated from other veterans as he was (is?) a member of the very famous 82nd Airborne, was featured in a book that is widely available by a very well-respected and widely-known author (just do a Google search for the book and/or the author), and is clearly part of a military family who could be considered notable for the fact that it is has "dynasty" qualities: both grandfathers are decorated Generals, as is the father, and he is a decorated veteran of a high-profile war featured in a major book.  Clearly, when taken in total, the family is certainly notable for their consistent multi-generational military achievements (many people are from "military" families, but very, very few, I suspect, consistently reach the general officer level).  If this entry is deleted, I would suggest keeping reference to same in the Albert Bryant Jr. and Renee Bryant entries. el_amante 19:56, 12 October 2005
 * May I also say that just because several notable family members are entered at one time and by one person does not mean that they are automatically vanity pages. On very rare occasions (and I think this is one of them) the individuals entered are actually notable for their own reasons.  I'm not sure that user25be isn't a relation, but while there are some traditional red-flags, close review shows that these people are largely notable. el_amante 19:56, 12 October 2005
 * Delete NN Josh Parris # 00:22, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.