text:
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Cool Cat/Wiki-politics

User:Cool Cat/Wiki-politics
This page has been deleted per my request. This vote is kind of pointless as the page is no longer there. --Cool Cat Talk 20:28, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

I have asked Coolcat to delete that page, he refused to do so. User pages are part of Wikipedia, and it is both immature and irresponsible to have such target lists, even more, when the information there has been indicated to be erroneous. Fadix 22:15, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete. Our userspace it there for content that somehow benefit the Wikipedia project. It is not there to provide space for useless mud throwing rants about named wikipedians. -- Karl Meier 22:40, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * None of the material presented there is made up. There are diffs avalible for each and every "accusation" I make, I am too lazy to do that. I do not quite understand why blankfaze will leave wikipedia if I become an admin, I had no dispute with that person as fasr as I know. How does it help wikipedia when some people complain about stuff that relates to me for no good reason such as here or remove a post of mine with a "stupid" title with no comment towards it . All 5 people pictured on that page have been asked to leave me alone/explain self. If blankfaze bothers me again I will recall that not because I hold grudge (I dont) but because I really have no idea whats up with the threats or stalking. --Cool Cat Talk 08:49, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * There you go again Cool Cat. However, this is not an appropiate place for you rants against other Wikipedias eighter... Seriously Cool Cat, why don't you just end your childish behavior and give an apology to the editors that you have attacked and offended with you hit-list? Another thing is that a member of the ArbCom has already criticized that you are constantly calling in your chit-chat-team, so why don't you just stop doing that also? -- Karl Meier 17:48, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep not covered. --Cool Cat Talk 22:54, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Deletion_policy Userpage included. Fadix 22:59, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * This isnt over yet. That coment was for VfD. --Cool Cat Talk 23:13, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete this one and other "hit lists." says that if user's request the user page or user subpage to be removed, it must be removed. But if it does not, it can be removed by AFD. However, I think this falls under Miscellany for deletion, but no matter what the case it, hit lists should be strongly discouraged. Zach (Sound Off) 23:03, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It is not a hitlist. It is a list of peoples actions. --Cool Cat Talk 23:05, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The so-called Elders of Wikipedia "list" too, was allegedly based on peoples action. Besides, it has already been indicated what is the worth of the content. Fadix 23:12, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The list that Stormfront created? Zach (Sound Off) 23:13, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The worth of the content, is, about the content of Coolcat pages. Was that what you asked? The first list I was talking about, yes, it was about that. Fadix 23:17, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * That was how I saw the list. Zach (Sound Off) 23:20, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I do not care about other lists, if I am forbid to record harrasment I recieve this will only make things worse. --Cool Cat Talk 23:15, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * WP:RFC. You can post evidence there, also at WP:RFAr. Zach (Sound Off) 23:20, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It is not an evidence page. So it tells you on it. --Cool Cat Talk 00:13, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Re-list at Miscellany for deletion, per policy. Jkelly 23:08, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Done. Zach (Sound Off) 23:10, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - if it is a "notes to self" page, then why should it be readable by anyone other than Cool Cat. I don't particularly see why anyone should object to it, but also, I don't see why a "notes to self" page should be on the wiki if anyone does disagree with it.  The whole issue seems blown way out of propotion to it's importance. JesseW, the juggling janitor 23:15, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Cool Cat tells me that he has no easy place to keep it privately, so, as per my view that this is a non-issue, I'm changing my vote to keep. Now, to the people mentioned on the page - it's already obvious to most people that you all and Cool Cat are fighting, having this page isn't going to change much, either way.  Drop it. JesseW, the juggling janitor 23:22, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't think, you will vote keep, if you were included in such a list, more so, when the content was shown to be not accurate, in the current Arbcom cases, I don't like to be associated with the CIA, neither be accused of POV pushing, when I have spent a considerable amount of time in the project, and even fought against my own personal positions in various occasions. He is free to take a host, and tell how some members hate him. I have tried to kindly ask him to delete that thing, when he already has now, over three mentors to report. And he refused. Fadix 23:27, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I do not have agree to everything you order me. Mentors ment to monitor my edits, I DONT report to them. This isnt the army boy. --Cool Cat Talk 00:10, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, as per JesseW, the juggling janitor. *SIGH* --Phroziac(talk)[[Image:Flag_of_Phyzech_Republic.svg|25px]] 00:03, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Why am I not surprised? Perhaps, I shall start a list myself and lie about other members. And dare voting against. Oh, guess what, maybe I should include you also. Fadix 00:08, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Why are we not suprised we are seeing you here, Fadix? I dare you to rant here. --Cool Cat Talk 00:10, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * And if Cool Cat put it up for deletion, I would vote keep on it. --Phroziac(talk)[[Image:Flag_of_Phyzech_Republic.svg|25px]] 00:43, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Sure, dude, you claimed that what Coolcat has done was far from what I and others have done. Since the day Coolcat was the one that presented your RfA, you support him, whenever you find the occasions. And your claim here, is contrary to your answers to the ArbCom. But this is entirly another story. Fadix
 * Comment I think this discussion belongs in the Dispute Resolution Process, not AfD. Coolcat and Fadix have a long standing rivalry springing from Armenian Genocide, and this just seems to be a continuation of it; Fadix's comments may or may not have merit(i'm fairly neutral), but the rivalry clouds that potential merit. They need to continue talking in the various Dispute Resolution procedures from what little i've seen. If I can help, please let me know. I knew a professor in Holocaust studies back at my alma mater who could look into the accuracy of the article.Karmafist 00:11, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * You are mistaken, this is a simple cases, in which a member uses his user page to slander others. I am not the only involved, he also has two administrators and two other members. Fadix 00:16, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Fadix, most of the page on the chopping block looked like opinion, which cannot be Slander, and besides, the stuff on there that is factual(not the common perception of the term, but something that can be proven or disproven) would be libelous rather than slanderous since this is written down ;-)
 * However, like I said before, because of the current feud between you two, it'll be difficult to gain consensus since some of the people who are on the fence will see this as a tit for tat rather than an actual problem that needs to be resolved. The real problem isn't the page, but the seeming animosity between Cool Cat and everyone on that page. However, from looking at this deletion page, i'm guessing the Palestinians and the Israelis have a better chance of burying the hatchet. Karmafist 04:31, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Again, it is more simple than you put it. An Arbcom cases was opened, during it, Coolcat opened this page, which is not his evidence page. He brought evidences against me, Davenbelle and Karl, not on this page, but another one. He was not able to support his claims that are in this page. Now, the Arbcom cases is at its end, and I have waited before presenting that page to deletion, for him to support his attacks. Yesterday or a day before, I have asked him to delete the page, he refused. So I presented this here. This is really a problem that need to be resolved, you bring things that have nothing to do, since this is more simple than you put it. The rivality you are speaking about, has nothing to do with it.(not to mention, that he was found to be disruptive in his edits in the Armenian Genocide page, not me). I is true, that some will not vote in all impartiality, I have not voted, while Coolcat has voted for his own page. And Coolcat, using the IRC was able to make someone change his vote, and I wonèt be surprised if he had used to get more supports. Have you any other alternative? If you have any alternative better than a deletion vote, please make it known. Fadix
 * I've said the alternative before a few times: more mediation. From what i've heard, if this is deleted, Coolcat is just going to make it again, and I assume you'll ask to delete that one, and the cycle will continue ad infinitum. The only positive thing that can happen here is you two ending this feud regardless of what's happened in the past and moving on with more constructive attitudes figuring out ways to diffuse situations such as these. Also, openly lobbying for votes may often be frowned upon here on Wikipedia, but the entire point of pages where consensus is needed is to try and sway other users through your opinions in order to get a satisfactory conclusion for all. Karmafist 17:29, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * If Coolcat does reestablish the page, it won't be the first time he does such a thing. Why should he even listen to others. I still think, you don't understand very well what is happening. I am TIRED. We've passed on the Arbcom, issues and problems have been addressed, a mentorship will be the way it will work. Since now, he will have mentors, and that the cases is at its end, I thought he will have no problem deleting it, so I have asked him this. How can you proposed mediation, for a page, that should even not exist in the first place? Is it not logical, that AFTER an Arbcom, people should forget past problems and move on? Like I said, I could myself build a page, on him, I will fill thousands of words, but I left the cases in the hand of the Arbcom, and as I said, since the cases its at its end, I won't participate in it anymore and move on working on articles,(something I was doing before that thing ate my time) and this is why I thought Coolcat will have no problem to delete that thing. HE REFUSED. I have no time runing after mediation, arbitrations, just for a page, THAT SHOULD EVEN NOT EXIST. Do you imagine if every members were to build pages about others, just because nthey dislike them? More so, when the information was shown to be not accurate? I just want him, to delete those lies about me, either he present his claims to the Arbcom, or shut the $#%% of, and I already told him this, he was not able to support them, but still keep them, and will be keeping them after the Arbcom cases, and he even announce that he will bring that page back again, if it is decided that it should be deleted. Fadix 18:01, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I suppose I don't understand then. I suppose i'm naive for believing that all Wikipedians can get along with each other, despite their disagreements. I'm beginning to believe that in real life too. However, can you answer me something -- what has this hostility between you two accomplished? Just listen to the anger in your voice in that reply. What's the point in being angry about this? When all else fails, just Ignore All Rules and continue on until the situation is resolved. I apologize if i've made it sound like this your(Fadix's) fault, from what i've seen so far, it's 50/50, and both sides need to step outside of themselves and understand this. Karmafist 02:05, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I will repeat this for the last time. Ignore what you think about Coolcat and my situation, ignore all the crap you heard at IRC. This is a simple cases I submit, the page Coolcat has that I submitted for deletion. It is as simple as that. I gave him the occasion to support what is in it, to the Arbcom, the cases is nearly over, he he was not able to support what he claim on this page. I asked him, to delete that thing, he refused. He will place it there even after being deleted. Think, just of this, my anger is irrelevant, what happened at the Armenian Genocide article is irrelevant, what is relevant, is that there is a page which contain a hit list, 5 members and not only me, and I have asked him to delete it and he refused. Can you just think about that, and only that? That was the only thing I asked, since it appears that members only understand and start thinking when it happens to them. Fadix 20:23, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I'll respond here since the colons were getting out of control. This conversation has swung me towards Weak Keep. I don't particularly like Cool Cat's politics page, but there is precedent for keeping similiar pages in the cases of Sam Spade 1 and Klonimus 2, a precedent that shouldn't change unless they try to make an actual "hit list"(with physical violence or legal threats) similiar to the Mr. Treason or Ashida Kim 3. Like i've said before, this deletion effort is worthless regardless of the result, the only way I see this being resolved is Fadix just reverting everything POV he sees from Coolcat, finding some friends to assist in the effort or making minor alterations to avoid a 3RR situation, and letting Coolcat's negative karma towards others from his user page come to fruition, because in the end, it always does. Trust me on that one. In my opinion, Coolcat won't get rid of that user subpage until it isn't worthwhile to either side. Fadix is obviously concerned with it regardless of how others percieve it. Karmafist 15:33, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Hold on a second, I find it rather offensive that you compare Coolcat pages with Sam page. I am aware of those pages, and I don’t believe I need any memory refresh. But that you compare Coolcats hitlist with those is certainly beyond understanding. Sam Spade page is everything but a hitlist, if you pay attention, it has a clear goal, and evidences were also collected to be presented also to arbitration committee. While, Coolcat doesn’t restrict himself to evidences, but to slander and make accusations which were unsupported. Sam has a section for resolved arbitration cases, now the cases with Coolcat has been resolved, the material in Coolcat pages has nothing to do with collecting evidences, but everything to do with what he believes about members he dislike, and he even has a tag, which says that he himself question the accuracy of the material he has placed there. Coolcat act is an attempt to the credibility of the members he dislikes. In fact, you judge this cases not based on Wikipedia policies, but on other bases. First, I don’t remember having any exchanges with you before I placed Coolcat pages to deletion. Second, you come here and knows what happened in the Armenian genocide article, while you have even not participated there. You even claimed a guilt 50-50, while, not only I had problems with Coolcat, but Thoth, Raffi were even more harsh than I, when Coolcat was disrupting the pages. Davenbelle, including Streotek were also present, the pages was followed for a year at the Lithuanian Wikipedia, and a report of the Armenian genocide article talk page situation is now on a members page, and is listed among the must reads on Wikipedia:Help.

 * If you find there is nothing with Coolcat behaviour, that is fine for me, but to justify it, as if you understand what he is trying to do, that I think, I can’t tolerate, you can’t understand until it happens to you. But again, it always help sometimes to post such cases to deletion, to see whom here are ready to support other members when there is an attempt against their reputation, by cheap tricks, lies etc. And this time, it is the last time I answer, not only to you, but this whole pages. I am not interested to read the justifications that Coolcat was able to getter on IRC, neither why a pages slandering me should be kept there, when I will not tolerate as a member in the community, any such childishtic immature act, even if, it was build against Coolcat.

 * Ah, a last thing, maybe we should abolish the Arbcom also, why the need, since there are members that will tolerate members making justice themselves. Or, maybe I should also victimize myself on IRC, and threaten to leave everytime there is something I don’t like. It seems such things always pay, and that wrongdoings are even excused… it was probably a mistake to have though that I, as a member, could have asked to obtain, the deletion of a libellous pages, and even saying that I could edit POV from that page, when according to Wikipedia policies, it should even NOT EXIST. Here, I “end” my rant. Truly yours. Fadix 19:51, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, they are the agressive side. --Cool Cat Talk 00:13, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * While I am ignoring your empy talks, and concentrating on the legitimity of the page, you are justifying and self victimizing yourself. As you probably did when you used IRC once more, to get a member change his vote. Get a life. Fadix 00:19, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Get a life. eh? go read WP:NPA. Based on which deletion policy is his vote? --Cool Cat Talk 00:36, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Are you serious Cool Cat? You have called me an idiot and asked me to go screw myself, and now you feel offended that Fadix ask you to go get a life? You can't be serious! -- Karl Meier 17:58, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Karl Meier. --fvw *  00:24, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I really think there is no harm in me creating a page recodring objectionable activity by users relating to me. I got people threatening to leave wikipedia if I become an admin, I do not quite know why and they arent telling. --Cool Cat Talk 00:41, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * And you ranting about it is going to make it all better? If they did anything you consider unacceptable, first discuss it with them and if you remain at odds over the matter, RfC them. --fvw *  00:43, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I tried that, Dmn refused to answer and Blankfaze deleted the comment and declared it "stupid" . I am not ranting, just reminding self what people said. --Cool Cat Talk 00:46, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Then you need to decide whether you want to learn to live with it or find it such a slight that you feel it requires an RfC to resolve once and for all. --fvw *  00:49, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, I forgot an important step: Try mediation: Either formally through the medcom, or perhaps more appropriately, ask a friend who agrees with your position to try and discuss the matter with the people you're having trouble with. --fvw *  00:50, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I lost complete respect/belief to dispute resolution after my ArbCom case. --Cool Cat Talk 00:53, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Then you should give up and leave or fork. --fvw *  01:53, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I have a "no tolerance" policy towards bullies who stalk me. I am about to bail out of wikipedia completely. I am frankly tired of this nonsense. --Cool Cat Talk 01:58, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Keep list offsite until it s content becomes relevant to use on Wikipedia (i.e. Arbitration case, etc.). El_C 00:51, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I dont have that. It is related to an arbcom case somewhat. I just dont see it as evidence. Davenbelle did present it as evidece. See: Requests_for_arbitration/Coolcat%2C_Davenbelle_and_Stereotek/Evidence --Cool Cat Talk 00:53, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Karl and Fadix; delete personal attacks and libel. User:Cool Cat can keep this shite on a piece of paper if he doesn't have offline storage space for it. nb: This is in arbitration. — Davenbelle 04:08, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Be nice. --Phroziac(talk)[[Image:Flag_of_Phyzech_Republic.svg|25px]] 04:45, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Alway. I criticized the material, not the source of it. Please note that User:Cool Cat has a pseudo-disputed notice on the page that reads The neutrality and factual accuracy of this material is disputed at least by its creator. The point appears to be disruption. — Davenbelle 06:07, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah yeah every edit I made has been a disruption. Even me recieving a barnstar was a disruption, that very statement verifies the need of the page. --Cool Cat Talk 08:53, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep While the motives of keeping this page may not be clear, it is clear from reading it that no threats are being made and no misbehavior is being planned (here, in any case). Userpages have always had a little protection from the more rigorous requirements articles must meet; I see no reason to hold this page to different expectations. Denni ☯ 04:17, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * This is becoming rather ridiculous, what sort if arguments are those? His slanders and accusations have not been supported to the Arbcom. I ask anyone that vote keep, to think a little longer, than so-called user page. Think as if, a member is lying about you, on his user page. It is like someone presenting his cases on court, and the judges deciding that the evidences are lacking, and after the sentence, continuing with the same accusation. It is defamation. I should have even not presented this to be voted, but rather to a speedy delete. Sounds that some don't even understand the situation, but still vote, when the question is about having a page, lynig about members he dislike. Believe me whe I say, that I could fill thousads of words about Coolcat, but I accept that there is a limit to decency, and could, and will not, engage in such childish stupidies. Fadix 05:50, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't believe this material helps Wikipedia to become a better encyclopedia; rather, it serves to create ill will in the community. Keep up your good contributions, Cool Cat; I don't believe you'll need this page to carry on. — Knowledge Seeker দ 05:46, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It helps me keep a track of my disputes with people. Two of the disputes are for reasons I have not made aware of. If people are stalking me or opposing my RfA with threats to leave wikipedia it is imperative I keep track of this. --Cool Cat Talk 08:21, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I understand that it helps you, but I don't believe it furthers our goal of making Wikipedia a better encyclopedia. There is no need to keep this information on Wikipedia. You are welcome to track it using your own resources. — Knowledge Seeker দ 08:56, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It certainly does not help wikipedia when one deals with nonsense like this: --Cool Cat Talk 09:14, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * One single incident with people does not warrant an RFC. The parties declined to comment on their threats to leave wikipeda (dmn and blankfaze). The other three.... well two are before an arbitration hearing with me (requested by Tony Sideaway). Notice the personal attack(s) by User:Fadix here. --Cool Cat Talk 08:29, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you missed this reply from Blankfaze: No threats here. A simple statement of [f]act is all. I believe you to be wildly, wildly, wildly unsuitable for adminship. You have lied about things, namely copyright statuses, on a number of occasions, one of which caused a very, very good Wikipedian to leave the project. We should not reward such conduct with the tools and aura of trustworthiness of adminship. — Davenbelle 08:38, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I dont recall asking you for that. Blankfaze needs to explain himself. He is accusing me of forcing a wikipedian leave a project. I dont see wtf is up with that. --Cool Cat Talk 08:49, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * See: Blocking users by article pondered after block triggers admin's departure. — Davenbelle 09:00, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * No one can hold me resposible of RickK's departure. He just overreacted to a revert war and a 3rr block which I was not a part of. --Cool Cat Talk 09:14, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * To whom do you think RickK was referring to in his final statement on his user page? — Davenbelle 09:21, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete; not NPOV, and user space is not beyond VFD jurisdiction.  Erwin
 * Keep The thing is, to me anyway, the list seems almost indescipherable to anyone who isn't CoolCat.  It makes it clear he doesn't like those listed, but his "points" are so bare that they don't seem to be intended for outside viewers.  For this reason, I don't think it constitutes defamation; it's almost in code. Xoloz 12:00, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm on that list, he is lying about me, using wikipedia. I have given the chance for him, to support those claims to the Arbcom, this is the reason why I have waited before placing it to be deleted and this, after I asked him to delete it. He was not able to support his claims. I repeat, I am on that list, the information he previde was shown to be not accurate, but he still want to keep it in Wikipedia servers. It is always amazing, how people that easily vote keep. Users like you are making it much more difficult, since it is obvious that I will do everything to get those lies about me deleted, as I am sure that any users here would do, if they were concerned, to those that vote keep, I just wish you were in the same situation, and had to get an unanimous vote, and were unable to do so. This is one of those examples, that democracy doesn't always work in Wikipedia. Fadix
 * I'm sympathetic, Fadix, but you didn't really address my point, which is: other than your name (and the general impression that CoolCat doesn't like you), I can't understand anything CoolCat says at all. The page makes very little sense, so I can't judge whether it defames you.  And, since you suggested it, I wouldn't really be bothered if someone called me names on a page that looks like it was autogenerated by a bad translation program.  The state of the page doesn't make the accusations look credible in any case; of course, CoolCat says this is deliberate, and that the checklist is for his use only. Xoloz 18:30, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep in userspace. These issues are better worked out on RFC in any case. Christopher Parham (talk) 17:14, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * This has already gone all the way to Arbitration, and it is now listed at RFC. — Davenbelle 09:48, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I am against hitlists and am only voting keep because this is outside the scope of afd. Jtkiefer  T - 20:30, 2 October 2005 (UTC) Vote withdrawn.  Jtkiefer  T - 20:40, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Jtkiefer, while the original page was at WP:AFD, there was a request to move it to WP:MD, or misc. deletion. This is usually reserved for Wikiprojects and for Userpages. While it is my fault for not changing the links at the various locations, I will be happy to properly relist the page at WP:MD at a later date. Zach (Sound Off) 20:34, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, violation of Wikiquette. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:29, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Christopher Parham. --Apyule 08:14, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * This has already gone all the way to Arbitration, and it is now listed at RFC. — Davenbelle 09:48, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Perhaps the best course of action, then, would be to request a temporary injuction from them? Xoloz 11:02, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. My experience with CoolCat - pretty much exclusively on the Armenian Genocide issue - is that he is "contributing" for the sole purpose of pushing a hidden agenda - and this agenda - in the AG case and seemingly here - is to create as much disruption and ill will as possible - to prevent any real progress on article(s) he finds personally offensive or that he diagrees with. I think this is exactly what he is doing here as well and I find such uncalled for slander to be inappropriate here. --THOTH 02:08, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. How is this different from the Black books episode?  He who must be obeyed weighed in on that one to say it wasn't a good idea. -  brenneman (t) (c)  03:33, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Now Wikipedia Little black books on the other hand... --fvw *  03:42, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Zoe. Ryan Norton T 09:30, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Any evidential content in that document should have been copied by its author to the evidence page of his arbitration case; I assume that he has already done so.  The arbitration case was closed a few hours ago.  Let us draw a line under this affair and move on. --Tony Sidaway Talk  04:28, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * delete as per Tony Sidaway. DES (talk) 04:52, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Strong delete per Tony Sidaway. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | WS 15:06, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete as per Tony Sidaway. Steven 23:01, 20 October 2005 (UTC)


text:
Talk:MEDLINE

Inclusion of Journals
I think that the phrase claiming that only high-quality journals are indexed by medline should be changed. Have a look at these medline searches discussed on the bioinformatics-blog nodalpoint: There are two japanese researchers who generated 50 articles with a kind of semi-automatic article-generation pipeline that is based on various automatic analyses. They published these articles in a journal that (seemingly) accepts everything sent in. This journal is indexed by pubmed. It might be an isolated example. Still, in my opinion, almost any journal can get included in pubmed and the fact of being included does not mean that the journal is worth any impact point. --Maximilianh 17:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Please note that the Medline entry contains the statement: "Additionally, MEDLINE influences researchers in their choice of journals in which to publish. Few researchers today would consider publishing in a journal not indexed by MEDLINE because then other researchers would not find (and cite) their work."

This is also accurate and illustrates the importance of Medline indexing to medical journals. I am currently investigating claims By Hoffer and others that Medline have excluded orthomolecular journals from indexing over a period spanning decades. I have been unable to obtain an explanation for the exclusion of these journals.

The two journals listed are well known examples. This is not special pleading but a statement of facts of general interest. Medline have been openly accused of censorship by leading physicians. I think this should be stated because of its potential importance and general interest.

I don't see how you can remove this content and claim NPOV. Without this text the page that describes Medline as being of central importance to the choice of journal by medical researchers but excludes the observation that it has no objective criteria for journal indexing and has been repeatedly accused of censorship. Without the text, the page most certainly has a POV.

By all means change the wording - but don't remove the content.

Dr Steve Hickey

The comments on criteria for medline indexing were removed. They are however both accurate and important. The fact that there are no published objective criteria to inclusion of journals in Medline is clearly of concern to medical professionals and people alike.

Since this is of concern to many members of the general public it should only be removed on the basis of inaccuracy. The statements are, however, to the best of my knowledge accurate and well referenced.

 * Please sign your comments on this page! Hugh2414 00:06, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

 * But the section as currently written is way too specific, and reads like a diatribe against NLM and Medline. Not exactly NPOV, even if it is accurate. It needs rewriting to make it more general and more balanced. Rather than special pleading on behalf of orthomolecular medicine, we should have a general, and balanced, review of Medline's selection criteria. I think the link to the JOM page should also be removed. May be accurate, but too specific! Hugh2414 00:06, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Section on usage added. I have written a number of workshops on using PubMed for orthopaedics I didn't think it was appropriate to link to those in the main article --Mylesclough 22:15, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

A link for JournalReview.org has been removed by user:Noisy. This site appears to be a good resource that I have enjoyed using. I have no affiliation with the site, but do use it and find it to be very helpful. I'm not sure if user Noisy even viewed the site. I thought I would post the link here so other Wikipedia users may evaluate the usefulness for possible inclusion in Wikipedia.

 * This from

 * This link was added to numerous articles together with solicitations to visit the website. As such I characterised it as linkspam.  It appears to be a review/index of other journals.  As such, it may be a useful research resource for someone interested in medicine, but it does not have any content that would expand on any article from which it was linked.  (Well ... maybe an article that listed medical journals, but then again the information would be better in the Wikipedia article itself.)  Noisy | Talk 19:10, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

 * I too reviewed the link. I see why you thought it was linkspam, and it was not appropriate to add to numerous articles at the same time. However, I did not think that there was any solicitations to visit the website, and the link was placed in appropriate places (for the post part in external links). The web site appears to be a very useful resource especially for those interested in evidence based medicine and pubmed (two of the pages where the link was added) -- as it appears to work by facilitating communication between specialists on published works. I too reviewed the links that the website was placed, and though I see why on quick review it would appear as linkspam - I understand why the user placed it there. In my opinion, it appears to be a good resource that many would benefit from - and appropriate for either inclusion within an article, or within external link sections. I do not think that the text included was a solicitation - but rather a brief description of the function of the website. Further, I did register for the site, and registration was friendly, and free. There are no adds on the site, and it appears to be a genuine effort to better communication amongst doctors. As a physician interested in evidence based medicine, I look forward to participating in the site. I believe the link is one that will be of value to others in the community, and I will add it back both here and on Evidence Based Medicine ONLY. Noisy - if you believe it should be in the text of an article, feel free to move it where appropriate. I would give the site careful review before disregarding it's merit to our community and discarding it as "spam" or "advertisement".  I think this is a keeper. EBMdoc

 * It is hard to say that a title has been discriminated against for over 35 years. The selection committee, LSTRC, changes membership on a regular basis. Over 35 years, this title would have been reviewed by at least 50 different members and all of them agreed that this title isn't index worthy. See http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/factsheets/jsel.html for more on the selection process. (Yes, that URL should probably be added when the re-write of the inclussion section is done.) Shore7 12/20/05

Edits to inclusion section for NPOV
I edited the "Inclusion" section for NPOV, e.g. institutional bias, no objective criteria. The references to Pauling, etc. were not sourced, so I deleted these. Retained JOM claims of bias. —ERcheck @ 04:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

MEDLINE should be capitalized
MEDLINE appears in all upper case letters in all official documents. I've edited the page to capitalize all instances. (Note the phrase MedlinePlus does not capitalize MEDLINE and I left that instance alone.) I'm unable to change the page's actual heading display to all upper case. How would this be done?

 * Disagree with this unsigned comment. Just because the NLM is in the habit of using capital letters, that doesn't mean that Wikipedia must follow suit. Marks and Spencer also generally uses capital letters on its shop signs - but that doesn't mean we must all always write it as MARKS & SPENCER. (Actually, I don't know about Marks and Spencer, but that doesn't affect the principle.) Medline should remain Medline. Hugh2414 09:37, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, I did look here first, where it shows MEDLINE with the trademark symbol attached, which I took to be definitive. If it is a registered trademark, then I believe the convention is to use it as registered.  I'll just see if I can find any policy on this.  User:Noisy | Talk 09:50, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I've just noticed - the tab on my browser for the link has it capitalized, together with the trademark symbol as well. User:Noisy | Talk 09:53, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I would say that a trademark is a symbol, which may incorporate the name of the product and present it in a particular way (typeface, size, colour, etc). The name of the product remains Medline, even if the trademark presentation of it is more like MEDLINE. OK - I admit I haven't consulted Wikipedia rules on this one... Hugh2414 09:56, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

 * The best I've found so far is Naming conventions (acronyms). I don't know that it's strictly an acronym, but there is a companion site called TOXLINE which indicates that TOXLINE is a contracted form of 'Toxicology Literature Online'.  Should we consult a wider audience?  User:Noisy | Talk 10:15, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Is Medline/MEDLINE an acronym? Not quite, I'd say. It actually stands for MEDLARS online - so I can see that MEDline would make sense, but not really MEDLINE... However, that is the way the NLM presents it, and I don't really mind. If the consensus is in favour of MEDLINE, I withdraw my objection. What I did rather object to was that it was changed with no discussion - and by a real fluke, this happened at precisely the moment I was writing the beginning of this discussion! Where is that wider audience? Does nobody else care? Probably not! Hugh2414 23:10, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

PubMed
Medline is the data base and Pubmed is the search engine, Entrez is the comprehensive search engine. As is is now, the list of internet search engines lists PubMed, but this redirects to MEDLINE. I do not want to make an edit before having some more opinions how to handle this. Andreas 03:05, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I think PubMed should have its own entry. I have created a stub to get it going... Hugh2414 10:18, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

 * It is even more confusing than that. MEDLINE is a database, PubMed is another database which contains all of MEDLINE and other content. In addition, OldMEDLINE, MEDLINE citations from prior to 1966, are being added to MEDLINE and consequently to PubMed. The largest current difference between PubMed and MEDLINE currently is the addition of Epub Ahead of Print articles to PubMed. MEDLINE only lists citations after they have been published in a final form in a "permanent" location (i.e. part of an issue). PubMed lists citations supplied by the publishers ahead of their permanent publication. Entrez is a search engine used to search PubMed, but it can also be used to search other NCBI databases.

Yes, PubMed should have it's own entry. Unfortunately, it will read very similar to MEDLINE's entry since most users can't distinguish one from the other. Shore7
 * Fooey, and I came here specifically to see if Wikipedia had some good brief notes on the distinctions between PubMed and MEDLINE. Well, I will work on that stub -- but in the meantime, I'm going to  Rfd the redirect from "Pubmed" (with that capitalization) to "MEDLINE" -- clearly, given the existence of a PubMed page, the redirect shouldn't exist anymore. Deborah-jl Talk 17:58, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Pubmednci
I thought I was going to have a laughing fit when inserted material referring to PubMedNci. He is suggesting that PubMed does not index "Orthomolecular medicine" and "Medical veritas" because of a conflict of interest. This is wrong, of course. It does not index them because the NCBI has no duty to index pseudoscience. JFW | T@lk  12:16, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

MeshPubMed & GoPubMed
Unless theres room for major expansion these stub articles would probbaly be better off as part of this main article. Artw 01:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

The MEDLINE database is licensed to various companies and organizations who provide added value and re-sell the content. MeshPubMed and GoPubMed appear to be two of these products (which simply happen to be free currently). I don't believe they belong in the MEDLINE article any more than OVID Medline ( see http://www.ovid.com/site/catalog/DataBase/901.jsp?top=2&mid=3&bottom=7&subsection=10 ) should be included. Shore7 20:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Do meshpubmed and gopubmed actually work? I can get nothing out of them! Even if/when they do work, I am a bit doubtful about them. Are they notable enough? Whatever - they certainly do not belong as part of the MEDLINE article. Maybe they should become a footnote in PubMed. Gnusmas 23:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the Medline article is about the database itself. PubMed is a search engine, not a database, but the two are continually being confused, just as the various Chemical abstracts files and SciFinder are frequently confused. Based on their pages, meshpubmed and gopubmed are front ends on PubMed, not on Medline. they would go in the pubmed article, not here. I cant get them to work either, 6 months later. I'm going to ask them directly about this--there is nothing wrong with having articles on beta or experimental services, but there should be at least something working. Probably, yes, they should be merged into PubMed. Ovid as a search engine/search aggregator, and SilverPlatter also, just have stub articles, that need to be much expanded, especially if they do continue as separate products. The Medline article can mention all the front ends to it, including Ovid--and for that matter the PubMed article can also mention the alternatives. DGG 05:03, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * correction they do work, but it takes some playing around to find a part that accepts a search. they are of demo status. I think there's enough to write an article--but they are companion products from the same company, so it will take some thought about the best name--or if there should be a separate article. i want to do a little more OR (smile).DGG 05:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Official website?
I attempted to identify the primary official website. I think this is it:
 * https://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/medline.html

 Blue Rasberry  (talk)  22:52, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ ? --Ronz (talk) 23:14, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It's the first one. MEDLINE and PubMed are not the same thing... --Randykitty (talk) 16:42, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:MEDLINE


text:
User talk:Samobot5

Me, Myself, and Someone Else

 * Hi everyone, I'm Sam. I'm 16 years old and from South-eastern Pennsylvania

I'm really new here and looking forward to learning to make a decent page. I'm open to advice also.

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello Samobot5, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name's Robert, aka Jaxl. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page.
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

I noticed on your user page that you were having trouble with the help pages (such as the ones listed above), so if you need any help, just ask me and I'll gladly give you some advice. Again, welcome!

(I'm also a fan of The Who as well. :))  Rob e  rt  03:34, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello Samobot5, welcome to Wikipedia! I'm HyperHobbes or Megawatterson. I've seen that you're new here! If you need to contact me, visit my talk page. You can find it if you click on the link at the end of this message. So get editing and don't worry, everybody makes mistakes! Good luck! HyperHobbes 16:29, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Stuff
I'll admit, all the formatting and links and stuff do sometimes get hard to remember. You know how to sign talk pages, don't you. And 2nd level headings. Basically, type a colon before words makes an indent. Type an asterisk and you get a bullet point. A lot of the tools you can use are in the toolbar when you edit. --HyperHobbes 16:36, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Cool
Sam, you've done great work so far and we would love to see you make more contributions-Wikipedia needs the input of 14 year-olds as much as 40 year-olds. I am a professional typographer and font designer and I have expanded the Paragraph article quite a bit. Read thru it and if you want to discuss anything leave a message on Talk:Paragraph or my talk page. —Arbo 18:52, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Samobot5


text: Category:Theatre in Hungary

title: Category:Theatre in Hungary


text:
Talk:Bremen (disambiguation)

Untitled
Is there any reason not to put an redirect from Bremen to Bremen (city)? All other Citys are named after the german city.--TruBlu 10:33, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The reason is the somewhat complicated relationship between Bremen (city), Bremen (state), and the several historical entities known as Bremen. The Duchy of Bremen, for example, did not include the city of Bremen itself, which was a free city. I have just fixed more than a hundred incoming links to Bremen and about 15% did not mean Bremen (city). Kusma (討論) 13:34, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * That means 85% did mean the city, which in my understanding is the most common meaning of the term. I vote that Bremen should be the article on the city, and the disambiguation be moved to Bremen (disambiguation). -Branddobbe 21:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Agree with Branddobbe. The city is by far the most common use. Chl 14:17, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Yepp agree, "Bremen" should directly point to the city. Ewok1 20:47, 3 December 2006

title: Talk:Bremen (disambiguation)


text:
Meet the Browns (play)

Meet the Browns is an 2004 American stage play written, produced and directed by Tyler Perry. It stars David & Tamela Mann as Mr. Brown & Cora, as they head off to see Brown's side of the family. The play is a spin off of 2003's Madea's Class Reunion, where it's revealed at the ending that Brown is Cora's long-lost father. The live performance released on VHS and DVD on October 27, 2004 was recorded live in Cleveland at the Palace Theatre in October 2004.

Plot
The play begins with Brown's (David Mann) brother, L.B., and his wife, Sarah, in their house very early in the morning. Their daughter, Milay (whose real name is Millie Jean), soon comes in after being awakened at her own house by her parents. She soon learns that her grandfather (Brown and L.B.'s father) had died, and they need help preparing for the funeral. After a little convincing, Milay decides to help with funeral arrangements.

The next morning, Sarah and Milay are talking together while L.B. is upstairs crying. We soon learn that Milay was divorced and had a son who died. But before more can be learned, Mr. Brown and Cora come in and get acquainted with everyone. Everyone is surprised to learn that Brown is Cora's father and that Madea is her mother. Soon after, Will and his wife, Kim, come in. Will's overly drunk mother, Vera (singer Nicci Gilbert) comes in after them crying hysterically. She jumps upon seeing Brown, believing it was he that had died. When she is told it is her father that has died, she nearly collapses, and begins to cry again. Vera begins to insult Cora about her weight, and Cora starts yelling and pulls out a gun, and begins to act like her mother Madea, very crazy.

Meanwhile, the ladies are at the church when Tracey Stevens walks in. She tells them that she is pregnant and the father is a married man. Sarah gives Tracey her number and address and tells her to stop by any time. Soon only Cora is left in the church when Rev. Henry Oliver walks in. Cora soon takes a liking to the reverend as the two develop a romance.

Later, Tracey comes to the house and goes off with Sarah. Milay's ex-husband, Gerald shows up, giving his sympathy and planning to come to the funeral. Milay is outraged, mainly because Gerald didn't have the decency to come to their own son's funeral. Once Gerald leaves, Tracey then comes back and sees Will, stating that he is her baby's father. The revelation startles everyone, especially Kim, who storms out in tears.

Sarah, in a musical number, prays to God and hopes her family will be healed. After continuing to angrily reject Will's apologies, Sarah speaks to Kim, who tells her to make a list with every good thing Will had ever done for her along with every bad one. She continues, saying that if the bad outweighed the good, then she was free to let Will go. But if the good were to outweigh the bad, then she should fight completely for her marriage. Later, Tracy reveals that she is not pregnant and reveals her intentions, and Will and Kim finally reconcile. Gerald and Milay also reconcile. In a special feature on the DVD while Brown is teaching the guys how to play golf Madea calls "The Brown's House" looking for Cora and Brown telling them that she is in jail and she will tell them what she did in the next play, Madea Goes to Jail.

Musical numbers
All songs written and/or produced by Tyler Perry and Elvin D. Ross.
 * 1) "Find A Good Woman (You'll Find a Good Thing") – Will, Brown and L.B.
 * 2) "Ain't Nothing Like a Good Man" – Vera, Kim and Tracy
 * 3) "Heart to Heart" – Cora
 * 4) "Give It to Jesus" – Sarah
 * 5) "Don't Give Up on Me" – Will
 * 6) "I'll Fly Away" - Sarah and Cora
 * 7) "In The Morning (When I Rise)"- L.B., Brown, Henry
 * 8) "What Happened to The Man"- Milay and Gerald
 * 9) "Silent Night" (ad-lib) - Brown
 * 10) "This Is Your Grandaddy" (ad-lib) - Brown
 * 11) "Ain't Nothing Like Family" - Sarah, Gerald, Will, Brown, Cora and Company

Film adaptation
A film adaptation of the play was released on March 21, 2008. The film altered almost all the plot details found in the play with most of its storyline coming from the 2006 play, What's Done in the Dark.

Differences from the stage play

 * Despite being the title characters, the Browns are only supporting characters and are only included in the story's subplot. In addition to this, they are only seen near the beginning of the film and near the end.
 * The only characters that appear in the film are Mr. Brown, Cora, LB, Sarah, Will, and Vera.
 * LB is more laid-back and friendlier than he is in the play
 * Mr. Brown is not the central character or protagonist. He is only comic relief.
 * Madea only appears in the film, as she did not appear in the stage play. (Although she did appear in a flashback in the very beginning & in a recorded phone call towards the middle of the play.)

TV series
The TV series is based on the play and the film of the same name by Tyler Perry. The TV series involves several main characters from the film including, Mr. Brown, Cora Simmons, Will Brown, and features Vera Brown in a recurring role. David Mann, Tamela Mann, Lamman Rucker, and Jenifer Lewis all respectively reprise their characters from the film. L.B. does not make an appearance at any point in the series, although he is mentioned once in an episode of House of Payne.

Original touring cast

 * David Mann as Leroy Brown
 * Tamela Mann as Cora Jean Simmons
 * Kendrick Mays as Larry Brown (L.B.)
 * Joyce Williams as Sarah Brown
 * Tamika Scott as Milay Brown
 * Terrell Carter as Will Brown
 * Demetria McKinney as Kim Brown
 * Nicci Gilbert as Vera Brown
 * Terrell Phillips as Gerald
 * Euclid Gray as Rev. Henry Oliver
 * Trina Braxton (credited as Trina E. Braxton) as Tracey Stevens

After Tamika Scott left production, Trina Braxton assumed her role.

The band

 * Mike Frazier - Musical Director / Bass Guitar
 * Eric Morgan - Drums
 * Donnie "D-Major" Boynton - Keyboards
 * Clarence Hill - Keyboards

title: Meet the Browns (play)


text:
Peter Hudson

Peter John Hudson AM (born 19 February 1946) is a former Australian rules footballer who played for the Hawthorn Football Club in the Victorian Football League (VFL) and for the New Norfolk Football Club and Glenorchy Football Club in the Tasmanian Australian National Football League (TANFL).

A legend in the Australian Football Hall of Fame, Hudson is considered one of the greatest full-forwards in the game's history. He holds the highest career goal-per-game average (5.64) in VFL/AFL history, and he is only one of two VFL/AFL footballers (the other being 's John Coleman) to average more than 5 goals per game. He was the first VFL/AFL player to kick 100 or more goals in a season five times, equalled Bob Pratt's VFL/AFL record of 150 goals in a season in 1971 and, after the AFL decided to retrospectively recognise the leading VFL goalkickers during the home-and-away season back to 1955, won the Coleman Medal four times.

Hudson was a superb reader of the play and knew how to use his body well in one-on-one contests. He had a safe pair of hands and although he was known for using the flat punt when kicking for goal, he was usually very accurate.

Over his career, he kicked 1,721 goals in 288 premiership games between 1963 and 1979, and 1981. His final match was in the 1981 TANFL Preliminary Final for Glenorchy, where Hudson, who had made a brief comeback with two rounds remaining due to Glenorchy having a string of injuries, kicked 30 goals in three matches, including six in his team's Preliminary Final loss to New Norfolk. Hudson was kept goalless just four times during his career in premiership matches by Richmond's Barry Richardson in Round 7 of 1969, Collingwood's Ian Cooper in Round 2 of 1974, Carlton's Rod Austin in Round 14 of 1977 and in the TANFL, Bruce Greenhill of Sandy Bay in 1978.

Some sources list Hudson as playing 107 games and kicking 769 goals for Glenorchy for a TANFL total of 185 games and 1,147 goals, and a career total of 314 games and 1,875 goals. These discrepancies arise from the TANFL including goals scored in intrastate matches representing the TANFL in TANFL player's career statistics at that time, a ruling that was later rescinded.

If the Tasmanian competitions, representative and night series games are considered, Hudson played an overall total of 372 matches and kicked 2,191 goals – an average of 5.89 goals a game over his entire career – making him the highest goalkicker in elite Australian rules football history.

Hudson also experienced success as a coach during and after his playing days, leading Glenorchy to a TANFL premiership as playing coach and later coaching Hobart to successive finals appearances. He also became a respected club administrator, serving as CEO at and  during the 1990s.

Early life
Peter Hudson was born in 1946 in New Norfolk, Tasmania.

VFL career
Hudson's arrival in the VFL came at a period when full-forwards were beginning to experience a resurgence, most notable being Doug Wade of and Peter McKenna of. After sitting out the first game of 1967, as he didn't meet the league's residential requirements, Hudson's first game was against. Lining up against rugged full-back Wes Lofts, he managed to kick four goals.

In 1971, he equalled Bob Pratt's record of 150 goals in a season after kicking three goals in Hawthorn's winning Grand Final side. Hudson kicked into the man-on-the-mark Barry Lawrence (St Kilda) in one of his attempts to break the record during the grand final.

In the first round of 1972, he seriously injured his knee just before half time. He had already kicked 8 goals and had just taken a mark within distance when he fell awkwardly. It was thought that his career had finished.

On 25 August 1973 he returned from Tasmania to kick eight goals against Collingwood at VFL Park. After playing Rounds 1 and 2 in 1974, he again injured his knee and returned to Tasmania. Later that year, after hurting his knee playing netball, he decided to have knee surgery in the summer. He did not play another VFL game until lured back for the 1977 season, during which he kicked 110 goals for the season.

VFL statistics

! colspan=3 | Career ! 129 !! 727 !! 330 !! 1578 !! 176 !! 1754 !! 782 !! 5.6 !! 2.6 !! 12.2 !! 1.4 !! 13.6 !! 6.1 !! 78
 * 1967 || | || 26
 * 17 || 57 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 55† || 179 || 29 || 208 || 90 || 3.4 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 3.2† || 10.5 || 1.7 || 12.2 || 5.3 || 3
 * 1968 || | || 26
 * 19 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 125† || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 62† || 274 || 31 || 305 || 113 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 6.6† || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 3.3† || 14.4 || 1.6 || 16.1 || 5.9 || 16
 * 1969 || | || 26
 * 19 || 120 || 40 || 217 || 16 || 233 || 111 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 6.3† || 2.1 || 11.4 || 0.8 || 12.3 || 5.8 || 8
 * 1970 || || 26
 * 22 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 146† || 44 || 282 || 19 || 301 || 140 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 6.6† || 2.0 || 12.8 || 0.9 || 13.7 || 6.4 || 14
 * bgcolor=F0E68C | 1971# || || 26
 * 24 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 150† || 72 || 346 || 41 || 387 || 180 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 6.3† || 3.0 || 14.4 || 1.7 || 16.1 || 7.5 || 18
 * 1972 || || 26
 * 1 || 8 || 1 || 12 || 1 || 13 || 9 || 8.0 || 1.0 || 12.0 || 1.0 || 13.0 || 9.0 || 1
 * 1973 || || 26
 * 1 || 8 || 3 || 15 || 0 || 15 || 10 || 8.0 || 3.0 || 15.0 || 0.0 || 15.0 || 10.0 || 2
 * 1974 || || 26
 * 2 || 3 || 3 || 10 || 7 || 17 || 6 || 1.5 || 1.5 || 5.0 || 3.5 || 8.5 || 3.0 || 0
 * 1977 || || 1
 * 24 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 110† || 50 || 243 || 32 || 275 || 123 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 4.6† || 2.3 || 10.1 || 1.3 || 11.5 || 5.1 || 16
 * - class="sortbottom"
 * 1973 || || 26
 * 1 || 8 || 3 || 15 || 0 || 15 || 10 || 8.0 || 3.0 || 15.0 || 0.0 || 15.0 || 10.0 || 2
 * 1974 || || 26
 * 2 || 3 || 3 || 10 || 7 || 17 || 6 || 1.5 || 1.5 || 5.0 || 3.5 || 8.5 || 3.0 || 0
 * 1977 || || 1
 * 24 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 110† || 50 || 243 || 32 || 275 || 123 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 4.6† || 2.3 || 10.1 || 1.3 || 11.5 || 5.1 || 16
 * - class="sortbottom"
 * 24 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 110† || 50 || 243 || 32 || 275 || 123 || bgcolor=CAE1FF | 4.6† || 2.3 || 10.1 || 1.3 || 11.5 || 5.1 || 16
 * - class="sortbottom"
 * }

Honours and achievements
Team
 * VFL Premiership player : 1971
 * Minor premiership : 1971
 * TANFL Premiership player (Glenorchy): 1975

Individual
 * 4× Coleman Medal: 1968, 1970, 1971, 1977
 * 2× J.J. Dennis Memorial Trophy: 1968, 1970
 * 6× Hawthorn leading goalkicker: 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1977
 * 2× All-Australian team: 1966, 1969
 * 2× William Leitch Medal: 1978, 1979
 * New Norfolk best and fairest: 1965
 * 3× Glenorchy best and fairest: 1976, 1978, 1979
 * 8× TFL leading goalkicker: 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1979
 * 4× New Norfolk leading goalkicker: 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966
 * 4× Glenorchy leading goalkicker: 1975, 1976, 1978, 1979
 * Australian Football Hall of Fame – Legend status
 * Tasmanian Football Hall of Fame Icon
 * Hawthorn Hall of Fame – Legend status
 * Hawthorn Team of the Century
 * Tasmanian Team of the Century
 * Hawthorn life member

Post-VFL career
Hudson coached and played for Glenorchy Football Club in the TFL in 1975 and 1976, taking them to a premiership in his first year. Following his second return from the VFL, in 1978 he once again played for Glenorchy, kicking 153 goals and winning the highest individual honour in the TFL, the William Leitch Medal. In the next season he again topped the goalkicking with 179 goals, winning his second William Leitch medal. He retired as a player at the end of the season. He coached Hobart in the TFL in 1986–1987 for consecutive unsuccessful finals campaigns.

In 1979, he was made a Member of the Order of Australia (AM) in the Australia Day Honours, for services to Australian football.

He was inducted into the Australian Football Hall of Fame in 1996 and elevated to "Legend" status in 1999. His citation reads: "A freakish full-forward who just kept accumulating goals. Made brilliant use of the body, was deadly accurate and had an amazing ability to read the play. Holds the best goals per game average (5.59) in VFL/AFL history and in 1971 matched Bob Pratt's record for most goals in a season with 150."

Hudson is well respected for his business acumen. Since retirement he has had a stint as the Chief Executive Officer at Hawthorn and St Kilda. Currently he is a senior executive of insurance giant Bupa.

Hudson was inducted into the Sport Australia Hall of Fame in 2001.

Hudson is depicted in a Tasmanian state guernsey taking a mark against South Australia in Jamie Cooper's painting The Game That Made Australia, commissioned by the AFL in 2008 to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the sport.

In 2010, Hudson became the eleventh player to feature in a Toyota Memorable Moments advertisement with Stephen Curry and Dave Lawson, comically re-enacting his unsuccessful attempt to break Bob Pratt's season goalkicking record in the 1971 VFL Grand Final.

Family
His son Paul also played for the Hawthorn Football Club, Western Bulldogs and Richmond Football Club, and nephew Simon Minton-Connell also played AFL football for the Carlton Football Club, Sydney Swans, Hawthorn Football Club and Western Bulldogs.

title: Peter Hudson


text:
EuroBasket Women

EuroBasket Women is a biennial international women's basketball competition held between the nations of FIBA Europe for women's national teams. EuroBasket Women is also used as a qualifying tournament for the FIBA Women's World Cup and also the Olympic Games.

History
The first tournament was held in 1938 in Fascist Italy, with participation of only five national teams. Despite losing to Lithuania (21–23), the host team won all other matches and captured inaugural title thanks to better head-to-head point difference among Top 3 teams. Lithuania and Poland took silver and bronze medals respectively.

The Second World War (1939–1945), which began the following year, interrupted the organization of women's basketball tournaments for a long time. The next continental championship was held in Hungary only 12 years later, in 1950. From 1950 to 1980, women's championships were held biennially each even year – unlike men's European Basketball Championship which were held each odd year. This tournament marked beginning of the era of dominance of the Eastern European teams which lasted for next four decades. In the last and decisive match of the final round hosts met with Soviet team. Hungary led after first half (24–22), but in the second half Soviets players looked much better. They managed to achieve victory (45–32) and to won its maiden European title. Czechoslovakia took bronze medals. At the next European Championship which was held in Moscow in 1952, Soviet team proved own dominance by beating Czechoslovakia and Hungary with margin of 23 points (52–29) and 30 points respectively (71–41). Two years later in Yugoslavia, Soviet team captured European title for third time by beating Czechoslovakia with margin of 7 points (69–62) in a decisive match of the final round. Bulgaria took bronze European Championship medals for first time. On the next tournament which was held in Czechoslovakia in 1956, Soviet team took gold medals for fourth time in a row by beating Hungarians in the final match (49–41) while hosts took bronze.

1958 European Championships which was held in Łódź, Poland became remarkable event. Soviet Union, the winner of four previous tournaments, lost European title for first time. In the decisive match of final round, Bulgaria led by Vanya Voynova managed to beat Soviet team in overtime (54–51) and to break Soviet dominance. This victory was remarkable – it's enough to say that this defeat (alongside with Soviet defeat to United States at the 1957 World Championship) remained the only two defeats in the history of participation of Soviet team at all international basketball competitions during very long time – till 1986. Next year Soviet Union took revenge by beating Bulgaria in the decisive match of the 1959 World Championship which was held in Moscow (51–38). The next European Championship was held in 1960 in Sofia, Bulgaria. Soviet team returned European title although this victory was more difficult. They achieved victory over Czechoslovakia (future bronze medalists) with margin of just two points (58–56). In the decisive match of final round, Soviet team again met with Bulgaria. After first half, Bulgarians led with margin of 9 points (22–13). However, in second half Soviet players managed to equal score and then achieve victory in overtime (52–50). Last 5 minutes and overtime of this match were played in an indoor hall of the National Stadium due to rain. Two years later European Championship was held in France. At the group round, Soviet Union defeated Czechoslovakia only in overtime (51–49). Later both teams reached final match where Soviet team won with a bigger advantage (63–46). At the next 1964 European Championships which was held in Hungary, Soviet team won third title in a row by beating Bulgaria in the final match with margin of just two points (55–53). Two years later at the 1966 European Championships in Romania, Soviet team won over Czechoslovakia in a final match (74–66).

1968 European Championships which was held in Italy became debut for legendary center Uļjana (Iulijaka) Semjonova. This giant 2.10-meter tall player played key role in Soviet team for next 18 years. From 1968 to 1985, she played at 10 European Championships and always won gold. Before Semjonova's debut, the vast majority of decisive matches were ended with favour of Soviet team but with relatively close margin. With Semjonova in the squad, the superiority of Soviet Union over opponents became overwhelming. Other prominent European basketball national teams at that time, such as Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria or Hungary were huge step behind the Soviet Union. Soviet team played 74 games during these 10 tournaments, and the slimmest margin of victory was 16 points. Another architect of the success of Soviet basketball was Lidiya Alekseyeva (1924–2014) who took direct participation in 16 Soviet victories at the European Championships – firstly as team captain (4 titles from 1950 to 1956), then as assistant coach (1962) and later as a head coach of national team (record 11 titles from 1964 to 1983). Soviet team was unbeaten not only in Europe, but also in the world. From 1959 to 1985, Soviet Union won all international competitions in which they participated without losing any match - 14 European Championships, 6 World Championships (1959, 1964, 1967, 1971, 1975 and 1983) and 2 Olympic tournaments (1976 and 1980).

After the 1980 Olympic Games and 1980 European Championships, it was decided to hold women's continental tournament biennially each odd year – just like men's European Basketball Championship. Soviet team continued to win but in late 1980s, as a result of changing of generation, their superiority became not such overwhelming as it was before. In 1986 they suffered first defeats at international competition for 28 years - at first, they lost to United States at the decisive match of the 1986 Goodwill Games with margin of 23 points (60–83) and next month they lost to US team with margin of 20 points (88–108) in the final match of home World Championship (both matches were played in Moscow). Nevertheless, Soviet team continued to dominate at European area. They won 1987 European Championship held in Spain after beating Czechoslovakia (89–81) in semifinals and Yugoslavia (83–73) in the final match. But next year at the 1988 Summer Olympics in Seoul, South Korea, Yugoslavia managed to perform better - they took silver medals by losing just 7 points to US team in the final match (70–77) while Soviet team surprisingly failed to reach final and unexpectively finished only at third place for first time in their history. At the group round of the 1989 European Championship held in Bulgaria, Soviet team defeated Czechoslovakia and Netherlands with margin of just 3 points (78–75 and 59–56 respectively) and then reached final where defeated Czechoslovakia once again with same margin (64–61). But at the 1990 World Championship in Malaysia, Soviet Union lost in the second group round to Czechoslovakia (79–82) and Yugoslavia (63–64) and finished only at fifth place. It was first and only time when Soviet team failed to reach podium at the international competition where they participated. Like two years ago, Yugoslavia took silver medals after losing to US in the final match (78–88).

At the next 1991 European Championship held in Israel, Yugoslavia managed to beat Soviet team at the group round (75–74). It was only second defeat of Soviet Union at the continental championships and the first since 1958. Despite this defeat, Soviet team reached final match where met with Yugoslavia once again. In this final, Yugoslavia led with margin of 14 points after first half (53–39), but in the second half Soviet players managed to change situation and won match with margin of 13 points (97–84). It was last participation of Soviet team at the European Championships. Their dominance at this tournament was simply unimaginable. The facts speak for itself: participation in 22 championships resulted in 21 titles as European Champions, 151 matches and 149 wins (the only two defeats: in overtime to Bulgaria in 1958 and one-point defeat by Yugoslavia in 1991), including 114 consecutive wins between 1958 and 1991. It's hard to imagine that any other team from any other sport could ever equal these amazing achievement. Next year the former Soviet players who completed for Unified Team at the 1992 Summer Olympics in Barcelona, Spain as a result of Soviet Union's dissolution in December 1991, managed to achieve surprising success after shocking victory over United States in semifinals (79–73) and victory over China in the final match (76–66). There was last participation of Soviet basketball at the international competitions and true "true swan song" of Soviet team which ceased to exist after that.

During four decades, vast majority of the European Championships ended with very predictable results - Soviet Union took gold medals while silver and bronze medals went to other Eastern European teams. However, in early 1990s situation totally changed after dissolution of Soviet Union, SFR Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia. It opened way for the success of other national teams and made European Championships much less predictable. At the 1993 European Championships which was held in Italy, Slovakia took bronze medals and became only newly formed national team who managed to reach podium. For the first time, two Western European teams played in the final match – Spain took their maiden European title by beating France (63–53). It's remarkable that not one of medalists reached the podium at the next 1995 European Championships which was held in Czech Republic. Led by Olympic Champions Maryna Tkachenko and Olena Zhyrko, Ukraine became the first post-Soviet national team to win European title after victories over Russia in semifinals (69–64) and over Italy in the final match (77–66). Russian team also took podium after beating Slovakia in the bronze medal match (69–50). 1997 European Championships became successful for Lithuania who beat Slovakia in the final match (72–62) while Germany took bronze medals and reached podium for first time after the German reunification. Two years later Poland achieved their maiden success at the home 1999 European Championships by beating France in the final match (59–56) while Russia took bronze medals. In 2001 France also won maiden European title at home championship after victory over Russia in the final match (73–68).

The next two tournaments finished by final matches between Russia and Czech Republic. In 2003, Russia won with score 59–56 and achieved their first European title after dissolution of Soviet Union. In 2005, Czech Republic took revenge (72–70) and also achieved their maiden trophy while Spain won bronze medals for third time in a row. Two years later Russia won European title for second time after victory over Spain in the final match (74–68) while Belarus took bronze medals and reached podium for first time. In 2009, France defeated Russia in the final match (57–53) and became European Champions for second time while Spain finished 3rd. Two years later Russia won European Championship for third time by beating Turkey women's national basketball team in the final match (59–42). Nevertheless, it was first European medals for Turkish team. France won bronze medals. At next four European Championship, French team reach final matches but lost all four matches. In 2013 at the home championship, they lost final to Spanish team with margin of just one point (69–70). In 2015, French players lost final match to Serbia who won European title for first time. 2017 and 2019 finals were ended in favour of Spain who defeated France (71–55 and 86–66 respectively) thus becoming first national team since 1991 years who managed to defend their own European title. The next 2021 European Championship was co-hosted by France and Spain. It was won by Serbia – for second time in history. France lost final match for fifth time in a row (54–63) while Belgium finished in third place.

In 2023, Belgium won their maiden trophy after victory over Spain in the final match (64–58) while France finished 3rd.

The 39 European Championship tournaments have been won by 12 different nations. The most successful nation is the now defunct Soviet Union with 21 titles. The other European Championship winners are Spain, with four titles; Russia, with three titles; France and Serbia, with two titles each; as well as Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Italy, Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine, with one title each.

Medal table
Countries in italics no longer compete at the European Championships.

Most successful players
Boldface denotes active basketball players and highest medal count among all players (including these who not included in these tables) per type.

Multiple medalists
The table shows players who have won at least 7 medals in total at the Eurobasket Women.

Tournament awards

 * Most recent award winners (2023)

title: EuroBasket Women


text:
Saint George Award

The Order of Saint George Medallion is the top award given to members of the Army's mounted force by the United States Armor Association of the United States Army. The award is issued (in increasing levels of prestige) as a black, bronze, silver, or gold medallion, depending on the recipient's eligibility. , a total of 76 Gold OSGs and 4 Gold NPAs had been awarded, and a total of just over 10,000 medallions of all types.

History
The United States Armor Association began its awards program in 1986 and added the black medallion in 2008. It is named in honor of Saint George, who is the patron of mounted warriors and is often depicted on horseback. The Saint George Award program provides the mounted force with a way to recognize outstanding performers, their spouses (Order of St. Joan D'Arc Medallion) and Armor Force supporters (Noble Patron of Armor Award).

The Black Medallion is awarded to junior officers (lieutenants and junior captains) as well as junior NCOs (corporals, sergeants, and staff sergeants) and the very best and extraordinary performing enlisted soldiers.

The Bronze Medallion is presented to officers who have successfully completed a successful armor company or cavalry troop command (generally senior captains or majors) or officers who completed a successful armor battalion, cavalry squadron, or brigade command (lieutenant colonels and colonels). It should only be awarded once, so an officer who has a successful battalion command after receiving the award as a captain should not receive it again. The Bronze Medallion is also awarded to senior NCOs (sergeant first class, first sergeant, sergeant major) for exemplary performance as a platoon sergeant, company/troop first sergeant, or battalion/squadron/brigade/division command sergeant major.

The Silver Medallion is only presented to officers or NCOs who reach retirement (20+ years of service to the army's armor/cavalry branch) or serve beyond the branch (generally officers promoted to general officer status which has no branch) while maintaining bronze level qualification in all levels of authority. As such, this level defines the difference between the best of the professional career armor/cavalry soldiers and the best of the citizen-soldier armor/cavalrymen who were top performing leaders but do not make the army a career.

The Gold Medallion is presented as a special-level award that recognizes amazing service to the army and the branch beyond military service (if retired army) or as a civilian or policymaker. While military service can greatly enhance a nomination for this level, it is not enough of a qualification by itself. Some Gold OSG recipients include: GEN James H. Polk (#2, 1986), GEN Donn Starry (#5, 1987), GEN Bruce C. Clark (#9, 1988), GEN William A. Knowlton (#12, 1989), GEN Glenn K. Otis (#14, 1990), GEN Michael S. Davison (#16, 1991), MG George S. Patton IV (#17, 1991), GEN Gordon R. Sullivan (#43, 2002), SMA Jack Tilley (#53, 2008), GEN Frederick M. Franks (#73, 2016), & SMA Kenneth O. Preston (#74, 2016).

Eligibility
Recipients of the Saint George Award must be members of the United States Armor Association and they must be nominated by another qualified member. Black and Bronze Medallions are approved by the first qualified O-5 (lieutenant colonel) battalion/squadron commander in the soldier's chain of command. Silver Medallions are approved by the first qualified O-6 (full colonel) or above, depending on the recipient's rank and position.

Related U.S. military association awards

 * Order of Saint Maurice - National Infantry Association
 * Order of Saint Barbara - United States Field Artillery Association
 * Order of Saint Michael - Army Aviation Association of America
 * Order of Samuel Sharpe - Army Ordnance Association
 * Order of Saint Christopher - Transportation Corps Regimental Association
 * Order of Saint Martin - US Army Quartermaster Foundation
 * Order of Saint Isidore - Armed Forces Communications & Electronics Association International
 * The Thomas Knowlton Award - Military Intelligence Corps Association
 * de Fleury Medal - The United States Engineer Regiment

title: Saint George Award


text:
User:Amxitsa

As well as working of Wikipedia I have also contributed quite a lot of articles to A Doctor Who specific Wiki. I am currently working on an number of projects mainly related to films.

Work related to film

 * User:Amxitsa/Non-Sci-fi film Articles I am working on
 * User:Amxitsa/Sci-fi film Articles I have started

TV Articles

 * User:Amxitsa/He-Man Articles I am working on

None film articles I have substantially added to

 * Jabberwacky
 * Karl Davies
 * Rhys Wakefield

Articles I am currently working on

 * User:Amxitsa/The Queen on the Application of “J” v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2006)
 * User:Amxitsa/He-Man episode tests

title: User:Amxitsa


text:
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/San Francisco Baker Beach

San Francisco Baker Beach

I was looking for a picture of Baker Beach when I found this panorama. The over exposed area in the center is very dramatic.

 * Nominate and support
 * Yikes, overexposed highlights detract from image quality, people. Only very, very rarely can it be made to actually add to the quality of a photo. --Deglr6328 23:04, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment -- This is an appropriate liscense, right? TomStar81 04:02, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * An anon changed the license from "Copyrighted Free Use" to "Public Domain"; I reverted the change. Both are perfectly acceptable. don't be scared by the big word "Copyright", "Copyrighted Free Use" is actually more permissive than any other license.--Eloquence* 16:13, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Overexposed highlights — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enochlau (talk • contribs) 22:47, October 2 2005 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry! Enochlau 23:54, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Ahhhhh...the sun...I'm blind. --ScottyBoy900Q ∞ 02:50, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 *  ( − ) Oppose As ScottyBoy --Fir0002 02:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The sun really messes up this one. Tito xd (?!?) 05:49, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Broken S 03:22, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


text: Template:User eu-2

title: Template:User eu-2


text:
Meet-the-People Sessions

The Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS) is a series of one-to-one meetings between elected Members of Parliament (MPs) and their constituents in Singapore. The sessions are usually held once a week at a local constituency office staffed by partisan volunteers. Constituents visit their representative in the hope of resolving their various problems encountered in daily living. The MP will then write letters to the relevant ministry, statutory board or any concerned parties to appeal on behalf of the constituent. These letters are usually accorded a higher priority by the Civil Service as they come from elected Members of Parliament, regardless even from elected opposition MPs as the Singapore Civil Service is ought to accord MPs equally and democratic as based and sworn by the Singapore National Pledge.

Cases deal with a wide range of issues. The list is not exhaustive such as family financial problems (e.g. health-cost issues, jobs seeking, financial assistance), CPF matters, various licenses, HDB-related problems (e.g. subsidised rental housing, obtaining a subsidised HDB flat), immigration issues, and appeals for school admissions and school fee subsidy, neighbor and any other relational disputes.

Almost all Meet-the-People Sessions start after 7pm and can routinely last past midnight based on queue, and are staffed by partisan volunteers.

History
The establishment of these sessions can be traced back to Chief Minister David Marshall of the Labour Front in the 1950s.

Rationale
The rationale for the Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS) is so that Members of Parliament (MPs) can get a feel of the ground. Even Cabinet ministers are required to go to their weekly MPS, although sometimes they may seek help from other MPs to cover duties when they have ministerial duties to attend to.

The 1966 Wee Chong Jin Constitutional Commission had recommended an ombudsman to deal with complaints against the bureaucracy however, Parliament rejected the recommendation and instead preferred that such cases were to be handled by the Members of Parliament themselves or the national Feedback Unit. The need to perform an ombudsman function is probably another rationale for having the Meet-the-People Sessions.

Process
The process of meeting the Members of Parliament varies from constituency to constituency, but follow a general pattern:
 * 1) Registration and take queue number.
 * 2) Constituent meets the writer who pens the appeal letter (either hand-written or via computer) on behalf of the MP.
 * 3) Wait for a queue to consult the MP in person.
 * 4) Meet and consult the MP, constituent narrates to the MP of his/her concerns.
 * 5) MP will assure the constituent that they will provide assistance to their cases via the letters. For urgent cases, the letter will be typed out, proof-read and sign by the MP and hands it to the constituent on the spot. For typical cases, the letter will be vetted through by the MP and sent out usually after three working days.

Criticism
There have been criticism that MPs do not give sufficient time allowance to each constituent. There have also been criticism that party activists at Meet-the-People Sessions are unable to connect with constituents and that the general attitude of party activists has changed over time, to the organisations detriment.

Criticisms include the use of standard templates for many of the appeal letters which are repetitive, an inability to accommodate constituents with disabilities and a lack of empathy towards fellow Singaporeans.

To counter the criticism, the organisation has begun to redesign the "Meet-the-People" Sessions to actually feel the ground in reality, to try and gain back the trust and support of the people that the people had entrusted to them.

title: Meet-the-People Sessions


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bell UH-1

 * 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 redirect to UH-1 Iroquois. – Rich Farmbrough 19:55, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Bell_UH-1
This article is a duplicate of UH-1_Iroquois Sylvain Mielot 22:21, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect. Thryduulf 22:26, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Redirect. Vegaswikian 06:24, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * "Speedy Redirect" would hide non-CSD content under a rdr, and have virtually the effect of an illegitimate deletion.
 * Merge, as nominator should have instead of burdening AfD. I will perform the history merge early Oct 5 UTC and document that here, unless there are objections before then. --Jerzy•t 17:17, 3 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:
Talk:Fly Like a Bird

Lyrics
"many feel that Carey is endorsing suicide, because of the song's message of longing to be in Heaven." -- is it a serious fact? this is the first time I hear this... Alensha 22:22, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

heh, Extraordinary Machine, it looks like we were both thinking the same thing! -- getcrunk   juice  contribs 17:18, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Yeah, that was kind of strange :). Extraordinary Machine 17:34, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

 * regarding your comment: are Say Somethin' and this being released separately or as a double A-side?, I believe that the singles are not being released as a double a-side because 1) http://www.mariahdaily.com/newsdesk.shtml lists March 14, 2006 as the "Fly Like A Bird" radio release for Top 40 Rhythmic-Crossover and April 4, 2006 for "FLAB" and "SS" release to other stations, 2) the single cover for "Say Somethin'" does not mention "FLAB" and 3) the completely different themes :P -- getcrunk   juice  contribs 18:00, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Extraordinary machine - the info is not unsourced, it is true. the live performances happen and flab has been played on several urban, rhythmic, and urban adult contemporary stations across the U.S. look it up if you don't believe me. And also, finish your removal of the link, don't just stick a '1' in with no link! —This unsigned comment was added by 195.93.21.72 (talk • contribs).

 * The article already said that the song was played on those radio stations. Now there's two mentions of this: the one I retained, and the one you added in afterwards.
 * We don't need a list of all of Carey's performance's of the song, as WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. Extraordinary Machine 19:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Why was the entire mention of her Grammy performance removed? That was an important performance in her career, and it should at least be mentioned in the article.  --Musicpvm 22:58, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree with the Grammy perfromance, that is one of the most important places a song can be performed at, and was a great perfromance that deserves recognition... --Thankyoubaby 05:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone know if there is supposed to be a music video for this song or not? 69.209.236.146 10:03, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, there is not a video. You might want to check fan sites like http://www.mariahdaily.com about it -- getcrunk   juice  contribs 19:41, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

UK Release
Does anyone know if there will be a UK release of this song?

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

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

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:50, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Promotional single
It wasn't a promo single was it? Calvin  • Na Na Na C'mon! 13:35, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

 * According to a certain editor, it was. He wrote why on my talk page, a while ago.-- CallMe Nathan  •  Talk2Me   15:57, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * But it was released to radio and released as a single? Calvin  • Na Na Na C'mon!  17:19, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ask him. I honestly have no idea what it is :S-- CallMe Nathan  •  Talk2Me   17:24, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Who?? Lol. It can't be a promo single, who releases a promo single after they have released 5 or so singles which have been hugely successful, as well as the biggest selling album of the year, what else is there to promote? Unless someone can find a source that says this song is a promo single, I am changing it back to single status, because no one ever had an issue with it before. Calvin  • Na Na Na C'mon!  18:33, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Do you really know what a promo single is?? It's a song which is released only on radio/TV, but not commercially. Beautiful, Dirty, Rich is another example of it. If the album was really that much success, why this song was a flop? The answer is that this song was a U.S. promo-only single. If this song were a single (commercial release), it would definitely enter the Billboard Hot 100 at least Top 40 Bluesatellite (talk) 21:34, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

 * Being given official single status doesn't guarantee a song entering the Hot 100. The song had high-profile performances, people can easily download the album version. I've never heard of this song being a promo single before. Plus, if you are going to make changes like this, you need to be consistent, and change the entry on the TEOM article too. Rihanna's Wait Your Turn had high profile performances too, but didn't chart on the Hot 100, and it was internationally released. Calvin  • Na Na Na C'mon!  22:15, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

 * Yes that's totally right, but that's not my point. You need to know the difference between s 'single' and a 'promotional single'. Every album's songs can be downloaded digitally, but only a 'single' available in pysical CD. In this case, "Fly Like a Bird" did not have a commercial release, only a promo CD single. Yes, I'm gonna change to the TEOM article as well :) Bluesatellite (talk) 01:53, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * "Fly Like a Bird" was sent to radio (on three different formats) which makes it like a single, not a promotional single. Pancake (talk) 19:33, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Fly Like a Bird computer game
Is there a way to mention that there is also a computer game called Fly Like a Bird? Zipzip50 (talk) 04:03, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Fly Like a Bird


text:
Royal Governor of Chile

The Royal Governor of Chile ruled over the Spanish colonial administrative district called the Captaincy General of Chile, and as a result the Royal Governor also held the title of a Captain General. There were 66 such governors or captains during the Spanish conquest and the later periods of Spanish-centered colonialism. Since the first Spanish–Mapuche parliaments in the 17th century it became an almost mandatory tradition for each governor to arrange a parliament with the Mapuches.

Appointed by Charles IV

 * Ambrosio O'Higgins, Marquis of Osorno: (May 1788 – May 1796)
 * José de Rezabal y Ugarte (Interim): (May 1796 – September 1796)
 * Gabriel de Avilés, 2nd Marquis of Avilés: (18 September 1796 – 21 January 1799)
 * Joaquín del Pino Sánchez de Rojas: (January 1799 – April 1801)
 * José de Santiago Concha Jiménez Lobatón (Interim): (April 1801 – December 1801)
 * Francisco Tadeo Diez de Medina Vidanges (Interim): (December 1801 – January 1802)
 * Luis Muñoz de Guzmán: (January 1802 – February 1808)

Appointed by Ferdinand VII
(Dissolved 1810-1814 Patria Vieja)
 * Juan Rodríguez Ballesteros (Interim): (February 1808 – April 1808)
 * Francisco Antonio García Carrasco Díaz: (April 1808 – July 1810)

 * Period of the Reconquista Española: Governors and Captains General:

 * Gabino Gaínza Fernández de Medrano: 19 July 1814 – 26 December 1814
 * Mariano Osorio (Interim): (2 October 1814 – 26 December 1815)
 * Francisco Marcó del Pont Ángel Díaz y Méndez: (26 December 1815 – 12 February 1817)

title: Royal Governor of Chile


text: User talk:68.79.61.15

title: User talk:68.79.61.15


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arne Kaijser

 * 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. — J I P | Talk 05:24, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Arne Kaijser
I am not convinced Arne passes the average professor test. If the article were created today I'd be tempted to speedy it for not making any assertion of notability - however this article has been around since 19 May 2001 and has attracted only 4 minor edits since then, including the Conversion script and my addition of the afd tag (the first edit in over a year). There are a grand total of two inbound links.

Because of its age this article has been picked up by just about every Wikipedia mirror site going, making raw google hit numbers irrelevant. Almost all the other hits seem to be directory type listings. The lack of an interwiki to the Sweedish Wikipedia makes me doubt he is significantly more notable in that language, but my knowledge of Sweedish extends to one word - Igelkott (Hedgehog) - so I cannot say. Thryduulf 22:22, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Wow, the weird things one finds in Wiki-land. Keep -- since the article has been here forever, I give it the benefit of the doubt and presume it is notable.  As nom. suggests, its age also makes it unclear what set of criteria to apply to judge it.  Absent a positive case that this fellow is non-notable, I think such an established, if obscure, article does no harm in remaining.  Credit to nom. for even finding it, though. Xoloz 09:26, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I deserve no credit for finding it, I arrived there via the random article link while playing with Kate's Six Degrees of Wikipedia tool. Thryduulf 11:06, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I have managed to find some more information about him, but I can't tell if he's notable or not. // Liftarn

 * Keep, professor at one of the leading technical universities in Europe. Kappa 23:56, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not every single one of the professors in the world are notable. Gamaliel 03:45, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Very true. Nor has any other known professor been here since 19 May 2001. Xoloz 05:30, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, professor - and head of a department - at a major university of technology, author/co-author of several books, and member of the editorial board of two scientific publications. Seems to pass the average professor test. / Alarm 17:24, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * If all this is true, why isn't it in the article? Gamaliel 18:51, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Because no one had added it. Until now. / Alarm 12:45, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep per Alarm. -- DS1953 03:00, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Alarm CLW 08:58, 7 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: Template:User eu-3

title: Template:User eu-3