text:
Red Cow interchange

The Red Cow interchange is a major road junction in west Dublin, Ireland on the M50, meeting the N7 Naas Road (to Cork and Limerick) at a free-flow grade-separated junction which incorporates a tram line. The N7 route commences at this junction, junction 1 on the N7 and junction 9 on the M50, and the Naas Road from the city centre via Inchicore to the Red Cow interchange comprises part of the R110 and the R810. The junction is the busiest road junction in Ireland. In its original configuration, with traffic signals governing many movements, it frequently had tailbacks several kilometres long on the routes leading to it.

Original configuration
Opened in 1990 as part of the M50 Western Parkway project, the junction was originally a grade-separated interchange from the point of view of M50 travellers; however, for N7 motorists it was a signal-controlled roundabout with negotiation of traffic lights required for all movements. From 1994 onwards the roundabout became the terminus of the N7 road following the decision to detrunk the road inside the M50 (becoming the R110 road).

The nickname Mad Cow roundabout was commonly used to refer to the junction, referring to the slang term given to cattle suffering from the brain disease BSE. The actual name of the roundabout referred to the "Red Cow Inn", a landmark pub formerly in the vicinity. The Red Cow Moran hotel stands adjacent to the interchange today.

Upgrade
The junction was upgraded as part of works on the M50 motorway. Congestion was alleviated by providing a third level of grade-separation, allowing Dublin–Cork/Limerick traffic to travel from the M50 to the N7 without having to navigate a roundabout. The junction upgrade was substantially complete by December 2008, with only minor finishing works outstanding. A similar upgrade of the N4/M50 interchange was completed on 20 December 2007. .

The junction is now a rather tight spaghetti-style interchange, a variant of the partially-unrolled cloverleaf design. Following the creation of a grade-separated junction at Newlands Cross in November 2014, the last signal-controlled crossing on the N7/M7 route between the Red Cow interchange and Limerick was eliminated.

Luas stop and depot
The tram depot for the Luas Red Line, a halt (Red Cow) and a Park and Ride are located at the interchange. The interchange includes a Luas tram stop (Red Cow), the main depot for the Red Line, a Park and Ride facility with 727 spaces, and the control centre for the whole system. The Luas complex added extra traffic to the already-busy junction when it opened in 2004. The tram line crossed the slip roads on the southern side of the junction, as well as crossing half of the road from the city centre before it met the junction (the tram line reaches this point by following the median of the road). When leaving the stop, southbound trams run alongside the motorway until the next junction. The issue of the traffic disruption added by the tram system was seemingly ignored during the original planning of the Luas system. After an outcry over this, government ministers were involved in discussions about the system passing over the junction on "stilts", while the actual construction of the system was underway.

The new interchange keeps trams separated from all other traffic.

title: Red Cow interchange


text:
Mediobanca

Mediobanca is an Italian investment bank founded in 1946 at the initiative of Raffaele Mattioli (at that time CEO of Banca Commerciale Italiana) and Enrico Cuccia to facilitate the post-World War II reconstruction of Italian industry. Cuccia led Mediobanca from 1946 to 1982. Today, it is an international banking group with offices in Milan, Frankfurt, London, Madrid, Luxembourg, New York and Paris.

As of today, Mediobanca Group is a diversified banking group consisting of four business divisions: Wealth Management, Corporate & Investment Banking, Consumer Finance and Insurance. The Wealth Management area, whose launch in 2016 reshaped the group's strategy, recorded the highest growth rates in the second half of 2023 and is expected to become by 2026 the first business in terms of fee income and the second in terms of revenues.

The company is listed in the FTSE MIB index of the Borsa Italiana and a member of the Standard Ethics Italian Banks Index.

Mediobanca has been designated as a Significant Institution since the entry into force of European Banking Supervision in late 2014, and as a consequence is directly supervised by the European Central Bank.

History
Mediobanca was set up to provide medium-term financing for manufacturers and establish a direct relationship between the banking sector and the investment needs of the reorganization of industry after the devastation caused by World War II. The Banking Act of 1936 established a clear separation between short term and medium-to-long term financing and the major banks had opted for specializing in short-term loans and there was the institution that would deal with financing for the flotation of companies that wished to obtain a stock market listing. In addition to granting consolidated loans against certificates of deposit and savings books, Mediobanca developed its activity of placement of bonds and shares issued by Italian companies. The professionalism developed by the bank under the, some would say brilliant, guidance of Enrico Cuccia enabled it to quickly acquire a position of leadership in the field of investment banking in Italy. In the mid-1950s, Mediobanca entered into agreements with important foreign partners (Lazard Group, Berliner Handels-Gesellschaft, Lehman Brothers, Sofina) that enabled the bank to play a role on the international market and obtained a Stock Exchange listing in 1956.

Since its origins, Mediobanca has operated in collateral areas to the credit market, such as trust management (1948 with Spafid), the promotion of international trade (through trading companies mainly operating between Italy and Africa in the mid-1950s), consumer credit (in 1960 through the company Compass which had been set up ten years earlier to develop new initiatives with industrial partners), auditing (1961 with Reconta, which was the first Italian audit firm), leasing operations (1970 with Selma). The placement of securities of Italian companies on the domestic market and abroad led to the acquisition of small holdings which have increased over time reinvesting part of the profits. They became the bank's main real investment for the protection of its equity. These packages favored the retention of major customers, the most important being Assicurazioni Generali, Montedison, SNIA Viscosa, Pirelli and Fiat. In 1963, together with other banks and financial institutions, Mediobanca led the formation of the first shareholder syndicate to intervene in the capital of a company, Olivetti, with the objective of redefining its strategic purchases on several occasions of Generali shares led to the bank being its largest shareholder (currently 13%). There were numerous, equally important, operations with Montedison, Fiat, SNIA Viscosa and Italcementi. These and other firms operated with Mediobanca were commonly called the ‘Northern Galaxy’.

When Mediobanca was set up, the shareholders authorized Enrico Cuccia to operate using his own judgment and he kept the bank free from the political influences that gradually affected IRI, the public entity that controlled the three Italian banks of national interest that were Mediobanca's majority shareholders. 1982 saw the beginning of a period of intense friction with IRI under the presidency of Romano Prodi, when the three banks were instructed to discontinue Mr. Cuccia's mandate. Cuccia resigned as general manager by was elected to the Board by the shareholder Lazard while Mediobanca continued to be managed by two of his trusted aides, Silvio Salteri as CEO and Vincenzo Maranghi, his generally accepted “heir”. In 1988, when Antonio Maccanico took over the presidency, the conflict was settled and the bank was privatized by the setting up of a shareholders’ syndicate with equal representation of banking groups (initially the three founding banks) and private groups. On that occasion the position of CEO went to Vincenzo Maranghi and Cuccia accepted his appointment as Honorary President maintaining a symbolic presence in the bank and performing strategic consultancy. After Antonio Maccanico, called to government posts, the presidency went to Francesco Cìngano, who was Mattioli's successor in Banca Commerciale Italiana.

The new banking law passed in 1993, abolished the specialization requirement allowing ordinary banks to enter the medium/long term credit market and generated a series of problems between Mediobanca and its banking partners, which ceased to be the almost exclusive channel for the placement of term deposits and bonds. In the changing context of the financial markets of the early 1990s, Mediobanca evolved by engaging more decisively in investment banking operations, creating a major diversification in the private banking business and expanding its consumer credit area, finally developing an international presence. In the 1990s, it was among the main players in the Italian program of privatization of large state-owned enterprises (the largest operations concerned Telecom Italia, Enel, Banca di Roma and Banca Nazionale del Lavoro), also contributing to foreign programs in the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Spain.

Its final and perhaps greatest coup was its decisive role in the 1999 takeover of Telecom Italia by Olivetti. The deal was decided by the narrowest of margins with 51% of shareholders voting in favour of the deal. Under Cuccia's leadership, which lasted until his death in 2000, the bank was widely described as "secretive" despite being publicly traded: meetings with analysts or interviews with the media were not granted.

Business
Mediobanca's business structure today consists of four specialized areas: Wealth Management, Corporate & Investment Banking, Consumer Finance and Insurance.

Starting from 2003, Mediobanca simplified the structure of the group by exiting the non-strategic equity investments inherited from the historical management; in 2019, revenues from equity investments refer mainly to the share in Assicurazioni Generali.

The Wealth Management division (25% of Group revenues) is segmented as follows:

 * Affluent & Premier clients are managed by Mediobanca Premier;
 * the Private Banking, HNWI & UHNWI segment is managed by Mediobanca Private Banking, CMB Monaco (leader in Monaco);
 * the Asset Management platform is composed of the subsidiaries Mediobanca SGR, Polus Capital (based in London and New York) and RAM Active Investments (based in Switzerland)
 * Fiduciary services are managed by the subsidiary Spafid S.p.A.

Mediobanca is active in Corporate & Investment Banking (22% of revenues), directly and through subsidiaries (in particular Messier & Associès, based in Paris and Arma Partners, based in London and offices in the Principality of Monaco), covering the following areas: financial services for companies and in particular in M&A, Capital Market, Corporate Lending and Trading services.

The Consumer Finance division (34% of revenues) consists mainly of the subsidiary company Compass Banca S.p.A.

In line with the Group's sustainability policy, at the end of fiscal year 2022-23 Mediobanca selected 100 percent of new investments in asset management using both ESG and financial criteria and obtained 100 percent of energy procurement from renewable resources. Mediobanca also achieved climate neutrality in 2023, in adherence to the program of the UN-sponsored Net-Zero Banking Alliance, in which the Group participates.

In July 2023, Mediobanca created a joint venture with Founders Factory, a London-based venture studio and startup accelerator and leader in the fintech sector, with the aim of investing in the development of 35 innovative companies in the financial services sector.

Mediobanca today
The death of Enrico Cuccia in June 2000 exacerbated tensions with the banking shareholders. In April 2003, Vincenzo Maranghi agreed to resign as long as the bank's independence was preserved. This was achieved by promoting two of his aides to top management positions, Alberto Nagel and Renato Pagliaro. They developed market operations more intensely (IPOs, M&A, trading of financial instruments), reducing the weight of historical shareholdings (some of which, like Fiat, were sold). They also achieved penetration of the main foreign markets, where the bank's presence was established through local professional teams. With the launch of Che Banca! in 2008, operations in the retail banking segment expanded creating a model of multi-channel distribution (Internet, call centers, branches) capable of providing substantial deposit flows.

While the years immediately following the resignation of Maranghi entailed the appointment of an external Presidency (Gabriele Galateri and Cesare Geronzi), subsequent events reestablished all the conditions guaranteeing the independence of the institution whose leadership today has Alberto Nagel as CEO and Renato Pagliaro as president.

In 2001, the partnership between Mediobanca and Banca Mediolanum gave life to Banca Esperia, a project launched within Mediobanca and designed starting from an intuition of Alberto Nagel with the aim of offering the institution's entrepreneurial clients support in the management of liquidity deriving from extraordinary operations carried out by the institution's Corporate & Investment Banking division.

Banca Esperia laid the groundwork for the launch of Mediobanca Private Banking. The division serving large Italian entrepreneurial families of Mediobanca was officially established in December 2017 after the acquisition of 50% stake owned by Banca Mediolanum and with the subsequent merger by incorporation of Banca Esperia within Mediobanca.

The ambition of this division was precisely the one imagined by Nagel at the end of the 1990s: to become the first Private & Investment Bank in Italy, a model that is now also highly regarded by the financial community.

With the launch of CheBanca! in 2008, a digital native bank, Mediobanca expanded its funding model by accessing substantial deposit flows. In the following 15 years CheBanca! created and leveraged on a model of multi-channel distribution (Internet, call centers, branches) for providing Wealth Management services to Italian households.

Starting with the 2016-19 strategic plan, Mediobanca outlined a new growth path for CheBanca!, with an increasing focus on managing Italian’s savings and investments. Such a positioning played a more and more relevant role in the strategic plans that followed, especially in the 2023-26 strategic plan "One Brand One Culture" in which the growth of the Wealth Management division has been defined as a priority objective for the Group.

According to the strategic guidelines, in January 2024 Mediobanca launched Mediobanca Premier, a new bank of the Group specializing in wealth management and investments for Italian households, which combines and enhances two of the Group's fundamental assets: on the one hand the expertise gained by Mediobanca in over 70 years of activity on the markets alongside businesses, and on the other the heritage from CheBanca!.

International branches
Since 2006 Mediobanca has embarked on an internationalization process with the aim of expanding its market base, diversifying counterparty risk and assisting its clients in their cross-border transactions. In Corporate and Investment Banking, Mediobanca has operations throughout continental Europe through branch offices opened in London, Luxembourg, Paris and Madrid. In these countries the Bank's strategy is to provide corporate finance activities through a wide range of corporate and leveraged finance, corporate lending, debt capital market and equity capital market services. The New York office performs brokerage and representative activities. Since summer 2013 Mediobanca has had a footprint in Turkey through subsidiary Mediobanca Advisory. The London branch office, set up in 2008, consists of specialist teams: Credit, Rates, FX, Alternatives and Equity Derivatives, Corporate Lending and Leveraged Finance, Equity research and Advisory. As well as its role as equity and derivatives platform, the London office is strategic in strengthening relations with hedge funds and private equity funds. Since 2014 the London office has also been home to the FIG EMEA team.

Mediobanca's international activities are characterized by the cross-market presence in the European market of the Corporate & Investment Banking division, which has also been consolidated through several acquisitions abroad. The most recent, in May 2023, was the acquisition of Arma Partners, a UK-based company that is a leader in the digital economy market for advisory in the contexts of M&A transactions. Mediobanca strengthened its presidium in France and began the development of a pan-European Corporate & Investment Banking platform in 2019 with the acquisition of Messier Maris & Associés, an investment bank based in Paris with offices in New York, with a team of 40 professionals.

In the Wealth Management area, Mediobanca's international presence consists of the asset management firms Polus Capital Management (specialising in alternative credit strategies launched in 2022 following the strategic combination of two leading European credit managers, Cairn Capital – acquired in 2015 -  and Bybrook Capital - acquired in 2021 ) and RAM Active Investments (systematic equity operator acquired in 2017 ) and of CMB Monaco, leader in the private banking market in Monaco.

Among the acquisitions in Wealth Management it has been relevant the acquisition (carried out by the subsidiary CheBanca!) of some retail business operations of Barclays Italy, transaction announced in 2016 that increased CheBanca!'s positioning in investment management.

Mediobanca also started the geographical diversification of the Group's Consumer Finance division in 2023, taking over 100% stake in HeidiPay Switzerland AG, fintech firm specializing in Buy Now Pay Later. The deal strengthened the Group's operations in the BNPL sector as well as the 2022 acquisition of Italian fintech company Soisy.

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

title: Mediobanca


text:
Talk:Kenneth Johnson (filmmaker)

Untitled
Note to self: need to disambiguate this Kenneth Johnson from the wrestling manager Kenneth Johnson (a.k.a. "Slick"). IMDb lists the latter as "Ken Johnson". --Stormie 08:39, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Alien Nation Movie
He had noting to do with the original Alien Nation movie, only with the television series and subsequent TV movies. I changed the article, which previously claimed he had created both the film and the television series, to reflect this. -- Yotsuyasan

title: Talk:Kenneth Johnson (filmmaker)


text: Talk:Inositol

title: Talk:Inositol


text:
1736 in architecture

Events concerning Architecture from the year 1736.

Buildings

 * Karlskirche in Vienna (begun 1716), designed by Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, is completed by his son, Joseph Emanuel Fischer von Erlach.
 * Melk Abbey in Austria (begun 1702), designed by Jakob Prandtauer, is completed.
 * Town church of Piaseczno in Poland, designed by Carl Frederick Pöppelmann, is built.
 * Rebuilt church of St George the Martyr Southwark in London, designed by John Price, is completed.
 * Rebuilt St Swithun's Church, Worcester, England, designed by Thomas and Edward Woodward, is completed.
 * Rebuilt Reformed Church, Șimleu Silvaniei in Romania is completed and consecrated.
 * Reconstruction of church of San Marcuola on the Grand Canal in Venice, designed by Antonio Gaspari, is completed by Giorgio Massari.
 * Church and Convent of Capuchins in Antigua Guatemala is consecrated.
 * Khan Sulayman Pasha in Damascus is completed.
 * Đình Bảng communal house in Vietnam is completed.
 * Roskilde Royal Mansion (Denmark), designed by Lauritz de Thurah, is completed.
 * Hermitage Hunting Lodge, designed by Lauritz de Thurah, is completed.
 * Scots Mining Company House at Leadhills in Scotland, attributed to William Adam, is built (approximate date).
 * North wing of house at Bregentved on the Danish island of Zealand, designed by Lauritz de Thurah, is completed.
 * The Burrough's Building at Peterhouse, Cambridge, England, designed by James Burrough, is built.
 * York House, St James's Palace, London, is built.
 * Marschall Palais in Wilhelmstraße, Berlin, designed by Philipp Gerlach, is built.
 * Hôtel de Hanau in Strasbourg is completed (begun in 1731)
 * Hôtel de Klinglin in Strasbourg is completed (begun in 1732)

Births

 * March 21 – Claude Nicolas Ledoux, French neoclassical architect (died 1806)

Deaths

 * January 31 – Filippo Juvarra, Sicilian-born architect (born 1678)
 * March 25 – Nicholas Hawksmoor, English architect (probably born 1661)
 * October 22 – George Clarke, English politician, scholar and amateur architect (born 1661)

title: 1736 in architecture


text:
Talk:Sandra Shamas

Untitled
See William Jeanes on using 'debut' as a verb:

''Three consecutive electronic press releases told me that a company intended to "debut" a vehicle at the show. I protest. As part of one of the last generations to attend debutante parties, let alone attach any significance to them, I can tell you that no socially prominent parents ever "debuted" their daughter. Rather, the daughter "made her debut," a term signifying her introduction to society. The word is of course French, and a French dictionary will tell you it means "beginning, start, or coming out," (whence the term "coming-out party"). The dictionary will also tell you that "debut" is a noun and not a verb. Consider the noun "introduction." One makes an introduction, arranges an introduction, pays for an introduction and so on. One does not, however, "introduction a new car." Or even "introduct" it. One "introduces" it. So it should be with debut. A new car may make its debut. It may have a debut or have a debut planned for it. But only grammatically challenged automakers attempt to "debut" a new sedan.''

If you try to use debut as a verb, in English, of course, you might end up in the mess this writer has discovered, with a ghastly past participle 'debutted', which sounds as if something has been removed from a 'butt'. In English, this is a large container, but in American it's something much more unpleasant, of course. I'm now going to edit the article to remove this construction.... Brequinda 08:40, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sandra Shamas


text:
Roll cage

A roll cage is a specially engineered and constructed frame built in (or sometimes around, in which case it is known as an exo cage) the passenger compartment of a vehicle to protect its occupants from being injured or killed in an accident, particularly in the event of a rollover.

Designs

There are many different roll cage designs depending on the application. Hence, various racing organizations have differing specifications and regulations, although most of these organizations harmonize their rules with those of the FIA.

Roll cages help to stiffen the chassis, which is desirable in racing applications. Racing cages are typically either bolt-in or welded-in, with the former being more straightforward and cheaper to fit while the latter is stronger and more substantial.

A roll bar is a single bar behind the driver that provides moderate rollover protection. Due to the lack of a protective top, some modern convertibles utilize a strong windscreen frame acting as a roll bar. Also, a roll hoop may be placed behind both headrests (usually one on older cars), which is essentially a roll bar spanning the width of a passenger's shoulders.

Road cars
A newer form of rollover protection, pioneered on the Mercedes-Benz R129 in 1989, is deployable roll hoops that are usually hidden within the body of a car. When sensors detect an imminent rollover, the roll hoops quickly extend and lock in place. Cars that have a deployable rollover protection system include the Peugeot 307 CC, Volvo C70, Mercedes-Benz SL 500, Jaguar XK, and the Lamborghini Reventón Roadster.

Other applications
Roll bars are also used historically on row crop tractors, and roll cages are incorporated as part of the cab on modern tractors.

title: Roll cage


text:
Talk:J. Anthony Lukas

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on J. Anthony Lukas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100706214815/http://www.bookweb.org/btw/awards/Critics-Circle.html to http://www.bookweb.org/btw/awards/Critics-Circle.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://rfkcenter.org/vincitori-rfk-book-award-3?lang=en

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:33, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on J. Anthony Lukas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Replaced archive link http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:D1xHeGCOFFUJ:www.nationalbook.org/authorsguide_jalukas.html+THe+%22Free+University+of+Berlin%22+,+%22Jay+OR+J.+Anthony+Lukas%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a with https://web.archive.org/web/20160304060512/http://www.nationalbook.org/authorsguide_jalukas.html on https://www.nationalbook.org/authorsguide_jalukas.html
 * Replaced archive link http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:D1xHeGCOFFUJ:www.nationalbook.org/authorsguide_jalukas.html+THe+%22Free+University+of+Berlin%22+,+%22Jay+OR+J.+Anthony+Lukas%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a with https://web.archive.org/web/20160304060512/http://www.nationalbook.org/authorsguide_jalukas.html on https://www.nationalbook.org/authorsguide_jalukas.html
 * Replaced archive link http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:vQJqzLUuWokJ:www.nytimes.com/books/98/12/06/specials/lukas-common.html+J,+Anthony+Lukas,+.+Boston+Don%27t+Shoot:+We+Are+Your+Children+(New+York:+Random+House,+1968)&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=firefox-a with https://web.archive.org/web/20170303063432/http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/12/06/specials/lukas-common.html on https://www.nytimes.com/books/98/12/06/specials/lukas-common.html
 * Replaced archive link http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:D1xHeGCOFFUJ:www.nationalbook.org/authorsguide_jalukas.html+THe+%22Free+University+of+Berlin%22+,+%22Jay+OR+J.+Anthony+Lukas%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a with https://web.archive.org/web/20160304060512/http://www.nationalbook.org/authorsguide_jalukas.html on https://www.nationalbook.org/authorsguide_jalukas.html
 * Replaced archive link http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:SBah-2OiJ6wJ:www.aaronsw.com/2002/press/vivafranca+%22literary+Journalism%22,+J.+Anthony+Lucas&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=usRosenbaum, with https://web.archive.org/web/20160207032705/http://www.aaronsw.com/2002/press/vivafranca on https://www.aaronsw.com/2002/press/vivafranca

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:57, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on J. Anthony Lukas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060620174608/http://www.jrn.columbia.edu/events/lukas/ to http://www.jrn.columbia.edu/events/lukas/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060908021401/http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/reports/00-3NRfall/State-of-Narrative.html to http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/reports/00-3NRfall/State-of-Narrative.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:55, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:J. Anthony Lukas


text:
User talk:WikiSceptic

Obrigado
Thank you for helping me on my article at Confederation of the Equator. I also hope to edit for the Portuguese Wikipedia some day. (I also LOVE the language of saudade)

 * That's fine. I am trying my best to be of par here at Wikipedia, so hope my article was good, in spite of the errors I made.  Also, I hope to be able to be considered an "exception newcomer" or something like that by the general community. OMEN 05:13, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the star...

From: Novo-rei, NOVO-REI 02:54, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

210.211.142.17
Hello - I agree that 210.211.142.17 has been engaging in spam vandalism. However, I'm not an admin and cannot block him/her myself. Also, his last edit was 4 days ago. Generally admins don't block a user when their last vandalism was more than a few hours prior. I recommend keeping an eye on this user's edits. If you notice him spamming, leave him another final message (spam4) on his talk page. If he continues to spam soon thereafter, report him here: Administrator intervention against vandalism. I know leaving another "final4 message" may seem redundant since he/she already has one on the talk page, but leaving another one shows the blocking admin that the user has seen a warning recently.

I hope this information helps. Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns --AbsolutDan (talk) 04:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Civility
Please refrain from winding people up on talk pages, as you did here. Thankyou. Blnguyen | rant-line 06:10, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, I've reviewed your past history and it doesn't look good and seems to have occurred before, and you have been around for a long time so you should know better. So I have handed you a 10 day block. Blnguyen | rant-line 07:52, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Talk page blanking
You cannot blank your own talk page. It serves as a record of your actions and must be kept. Ryūlóng 05:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If you want out, then stop editting. Ryūlóng 05:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If you seriously do not want to be an editor of Wikipedia, then just leave. Never sign back in. Just do not blank your own talk page. There are problems with that. Ryūlóng 05:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * And your subpages can be deleted by tagging them with db-user which I did for that one page that you did blank. Ryūlóng 05:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

When I delete my pages because I want out, can you stop your pompous self-important meddling in my affairs? I am not deleting other people's pages, but my own. You got a problem? Can't mind your own business? WikiSceptic 05:35, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You still cannot delete your talk page. Ryūlóng 05:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, really? And why is that? If I want out of Wikipedia, I cannot? And, apparently, that also goes for my original pages created as subsidiaries to my talk page? Wow, this is fantastic! Has Hitler come back to life? Or is it Stalin? WikiSceptic 05:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If you want out of Wikipedia, then just leave. Never sign back in. Just do not blank your own talk page. Ryūlóng 05:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I have had enough of the criminal insolence and arrogance of you lot. Nguyen was not the first, and you will certainly not be the last. It is my right to remove my personal pages, and in preventing that, you tresspass on my rights. This, in civil law; I do not care for Wikipedia's internal rules. I not only want out of Wikipedia, I also want my personal pages out, and that is my right. I am not asking for any charity or privileges but to mind my own business. Please stop meddling in my affairs - although, from my long experience, I know that you will not cease your present outrageous encroachments on my rights. WikiSceptic 05:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm copying this over here for a reason. There is nothing "criminal" about what Wikipedia, its administration, and its users are doing to you. What you are doing is against our rules at Wikipedia. These pages are not yours. They are Wikipedia's. This includes this page, a User talk page. No one is encroaching on your rights. We are not a part of the US government, so free speech does not cover Wikipedia. Wikipedia has the right to remove and keep what it wants. And your user talk page is under this. Ryūlóng 05:48, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, you are wrong. And if you are seeking to file legal charges against Wikipedia, you'll find yourself unable to edit anymore. Ryūlóng 05:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Your dispute
My suggestion is that you reread the terms and conditions of use and Copyright. Ryulong is correct here. I'm sorry you've had such a difficult time, but Ryulong is only enforcing the rules of Wikipedia, as is the prerogative of any editor, especially those who patrol for vandalism. You are not being targeted by anyone, only being expected to abide by the terms and conditions of use to which you agreed by editing on Wikipedia. --Chuchunezumi 06:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Joseph rene vilatte.gif
Thank you for uploading Image:Joseph rene vilatte.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Shell babelfish 07:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Pierina da Silva
A tag has been placed on Pierina da Silva requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ravichandar My coffee shop 13:42, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Narayan Waman Tilak

The article Narayan Waman Tilak has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * No reference does not meet WP:bio

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Linguisticgeek (talk) 15:35, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello WikiSceptic! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 18:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Geert Jan Stuyver -

Proposed deletion of Francesco Ricossa

The article Francesco Ricossa has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * No evidence of notability; only a very few google hits, and a couple of minor quotes showing up in google news archives.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TallNapoleon (talk) 08:55, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. The-Pope (talk) 13:36, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.  Cheers AKS  08:09, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

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

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Navin Hiranandani (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.  Cheers AKS  07:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of William J. Morgan (Sedevacantist)

The article William J. Morgan (Sedevacantist) has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * No evidence of WP:NOTABILITY

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 16:09, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Dharmadhyaksha/Lakhumal Hiranand Hiranandani

A tag has been placed on User:Dharmadhyaksha/Lakhumal Hiranand Hiranandani requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Article now created at Lakhumal Hiranand Hiranandani by someone

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:32, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

"Catholic Resistance" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Catholic Resistance and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 7 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 22:00, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:WikiSceptic


text:
Talk:Orangeism

Redirect
I've reverted this page to the original purpose of a redirect to Orangism. The subject is covered there, with links to other relevant pages, so this one is unnecessary. Stu 08:42, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

The two are very different and spelled differently, which makes a redirect the wrong call. The articles can link to each other if necessary.

Lapsed Pacifist 12:47, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Orangeism


text:
Repentance in Islam

Tawba (توبة alternatively spelled: tevbe or tawbah, tövbe) is the Islamic concept of repenting to God due to performing any sins and misdeeds. It is a direct matter between a person and God, so there is no intercession. There is no original sin in Islam. It is the act of leaving what God has prohibited and returning to what he has commanded. The word denotes the act of being repentant for one's misdeeds, atoning for those misdeeds, and having a strong determination to forsake those misdeeds (remorse, resolution, and repentance). If someone sins against another person, restitution is required.

Etymology
The literal meaning of the Arabic word tawba is "to return" and is repeated in the Qur'an and hadith (sayings of the Islamic prophet Muhammad). In the context of Islam, it means to turn or to retreat from past sinful and evil activities, and to firmly resolve to abstain from them in future. In, the word tawba has been associated with the word نصوح (nasūh) which means "to make pure or sincere". Thus, tawba signifies sincere and faithful repentance, free from pretense and hypocrisy.

Quran
In the Quran, there is a complete surah (chapter) titled At-Tawba, which means "The Repentance". As with other topics, the act of atoning (for one's misdeeds) and seeking God's forgiveness has also been discussed in the Qur’an, and given much importance. For those believers who have wronged themselves, the Qur'an asks them to become repentant, seek Allah's forgiveness, and make a sincere tawba. It assures them that if they do this, God will forgive them, and exonerate them from their misdeeds:

"...Turn to Allah in repentance all together, O believers, so that you may be successful."

"O believers! Turn to Allah in sincere repentance, so your Lord may absolve you of your sins and admit you into Gardens, under which rivers flow, ..."

"...Surely Allah loves those who always turn to Him in repentance and those who purify themselves.”"

"Allah only accepts the repentance of those who commit evil ignorantly ˹or recklessly˺ then repent soon after—Allah will pardon them. And Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise. However, repentance is not accepted from those who knowingly persist in sin until they start dying, and then cry, “Now I repent!” nor those who die as disbelievers. For them We have prepared a painful punishment."

The Qur'an also addresses the disbelievers and urges them to turn to God, upon which God promises to pardon them:

"Their punishment will be multiplied on the Day of Judgment, and they will remain in it forever, in disgrace. As for those who repent, believe, and do good deeds, they are the ones whose evil deeds Allah will change into good deeds. For Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful. And whoever repents and does good has truly turned to Allah properly."

Sunnah
Like Quran, the hadith also mentions and stresses the importance of tawba:
 * In Sunan al-Tirmidhi, a Hadith is narrated:"Allah's apostle said, "Every son of Adam sins, the best of the sinners are those who repent.""

- Sunan al-Tirmidhi, Hadith no. 2499

"Allah's Apostle said, "Allah is more pleased with the repentance of His slave than anyone of you is pleased with finding his camel which he had lost in the desert.""
 * Jami` at-Tirmidhi (In-book reference	 : Book 40, Hadith 20). Narrated Abu Hurairah: Mohammed (ﷺ) said: "The adulterer is not a believer while he is committing adultery, and the thief is not a believer while he is stealing, but there is a chance for repentance; (if he repents, Allah will accept the repentance)."
 * In Sahih al-Bukhari, Anas ibn Malik narrates:

"Allah's apostle said,"By Him in Whose Hand is my life, if you were not to commit sin, Allah would sweep you out of existence and He would replace (you by) those people who would commit sin and seek forgiveness from Allah, and He would have pardoned them.""
 * In Sahih Muslim, Abu Ayyub al-Ansari and Abu Huraira narrate:

"The Prophet said, "Amongst the men of Bani Israel there was a man who had murdered ninety-nine people. Then he set out asking (whether his repentance could be accepted or not). He came upon a monk and asked him if his repentance could be accepted. The monk replied in the negative and so the man killed him. He kept on asking till a man advised to go to such and such village. (So he left for it) but death overtook him on the way. While dying, he turned his chest towards that village (where he had hoped his repentance would be accepted), and so the angels of mercy and the angels of punishment quarrelled amongst themselves regarding him. Allah ordered the village (towards which he was going) to come closer to him, and ordered the village (whence he had come), to go far away, and then He ordered the angels to measure the distances between his body and the two villages. So he was found to be one span closer to the village (he was going to). So he was forgiven.""
 * In Sahih Bukhari, Abu Said Al-Khudri narrates:

- Sahih Bukhari 3470

"A man kissed a woman (unlawfully) and then went to the prophet and informed him. Allah revealed: "And offer prayers perfectly At the two ends of the day And in some hours of the night (i.e. the five compulsory prayers). Verily! good deeds remove (annul) the evil deeds (small sins)." (11:114). The man asked Allah's messenger, "Is it for me?" He said, "It is for all my followers.""
 * In Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim narrated Abdullah ibn Masud,

-, ,

"A person came to Allah's Apostle said: Allah's messenger, I have committed an offence which deserves imposition of haad, so impose it upon me according to the Book of Allah. Thereupon he said: Were you not present with us at the time of prayer? He said: Yes. Thereupon he said: You have been granted pardon."
 * In Sahih Muslim narrated Anas ibn Malik,

"On the authority of Abu Umama (RA), the Messenger of Allah, may God bless him and grant him peace, said, "Surely the angel of the left holds the pen over a sinner or a criminal Muslim for six hours." Then if he repents of his sin and seeks forgiveness from Allah, then he ignores it. Lest a sin is written.""

- Tabarani Kabir 7667, Baihakbir Shuabul Iman 7051, Sahih al-Jame'/2097, Silsilatus Sahiha 1209

Theological viewpoints
Since the issue of tawba or repentance arises from Islamic religious context, it can be understood well when discussed from that perspective.

Repentance to Allah alone
Islam does not view any human being as being infallible. Any human being can be subject to errors, Allah being the only perfect one. Thus the sole authority for the forgiveness of any human being corresponds to Allah. Muslims deny the authority of men to listen to another person's confessions and then pronounce him forgiven of his sin. Likewise repenting to anyone besides Allah is forbidden. The Quran states:

"Verily those whom ye call upon besides Allah are servants like unto you."

- Quran

Tawba and the benevolence of Allah
Sincere tawba is always accepted by Allah. Allah says:

"Verily, He is One Who forgives (accepts repentance), the Most Merciful."

- Quran

In numerous verses of the Quran, Allah describes Himself as being extremely generous, merciful, and forgiving towards His creations. In verse 22 of sura Al-Hashr, for example, He assures: "He is Allah besides Whom there is no God; the Knower of the unseen and the seen; He is the Beneficent, the Merciful".

The use of the verse "In the name of Allah, the Benevolent, the Merciful" at the beginning of every sura (except one) further testifies to this fact. According to the Quran and Hadith, Allah's overarching mercy permits even the gravest sins to be pardoned by Him, provided the wrongdoer intends a sincere tawba.

Shirk is an unforgivable sin if one dies without repenting from it: "Indeed, Allah does not forgive associating others with Him in worship, but forgives anything else of whoever He wills. And whoever associates others with Allah has indeed committed a grave sin."

- Quran As such, becoming hopeless of the mercy of Allah is prohibited. The Quran declares:

"Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah: for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."

- Quran

Again, God says to the believers in a Hadith Qudsi: "'O son of Adam, so long as you call upon Me, and ask of Me, I shall forgive you for what you have done, and I shall not mind. O son of Adam, were your sins to reach the clouds of the sky and were you then to ask forgiveness of Me, I would forgive you. O son of Adam were you to come to Me with sins nearly as great as the earth, and were you then to face Me, ascribing no partner to Me, I would bring you forgiveness nearly as great as it.'"

Conditions of tawba
According to Islamic Sharia, when an act of tawba is performed by a Muslim, Allah generally accepts it. However, that tawba should be sincere and true. Islamic scholars agree upon the fact that if a person is not ashamed of his past misdeeds, or does not intend to forsake those, then his verbal announcement of tawba is an open mockery of repentance. Mere verbal repentance does not account for a true tawba. A sincere tawba has some criteria.

Ali was asked as to what is tawba, and he replied that tawba consists of six elements:

 * 1) to regret one's past evil deeds;
 * 2) to carry out Divine duties (fard, wajib etc.) that were missed;
 * 3) to return the rights/properties of others that were usurped unjustly;
 * 4) to ask forgiveness of a person who has been wronged by him, physically or verbally;
 * 5) to make a firm resolve of avoiding the sin in future; and
 * 6) to employ oneself in Allah's obedience, as he previously employed himself in Allah's disobedience.

In Islamic sharia, tawba is a twofold approach: a person first should be able to recognize and forsake his/her sins upon which Allah promises to forgive them. Islam expects Muslims to realize their mistakes and shortcomings, and to seek His forgiveness. Forgiveness for one's sins is not something that comes automatically; it is something that must be sought for, with sincereness and true devotion. Becoming indifferent to one's sins is seen as dangerous. Muhammad said:

"A believer sees his sins as if he were sitting under a mountain which, he is afraid, may fall on him; whereas the wicked person considers his sins as flies passing over his nose and he just drives them away like this (and he moved his hand over his nose in illustration)."

Another important perspective on repentance in Islam is that a person should always seek God's forgiveness even when they are not apparently guilty of any particular sin. This is because there are many subtle natures of sin involving immorality which escape notice, and also because it is a Muslim's duty to turn towards God.
 * In hadith, Muhammad asked people to seek Allah's forgiveness: "O people, seek repentance from Allah. Verily, I seek repentance from Him a hundred times a day."
 * In Islamic sharia, submission to Allah is necessary not only for achieving God's forgiveness, but also for being worthy of entering into paradise. Muhammad said: "Do good deeds properly, sincerely and moderately, and receive good news because one's good deeds will not make him enter Paradise." The companions asked, "Even you, O Allah's Apostle?" He said, "Even I, unless and until Allah bestows His pardon and Mercy on me."

Turning away from tawba

 * 1) Postponement of tawbah according to Islam was seen as a great sin.

title: Repentance in Islam


text:
Talk:Lisa Scott-Lee

Mishearing the poll results
I edited the sentence about Lisa mishearing the poll results because I felt that the original sentence was too opinionated. Singerisbored 22:45, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Discography
There was no need to repeat the Steps albums in a solo discography (note this wasn't done for the singles), so I removed them and added a link to the group list. Given that Scott-Lee's singles have received more widespread release than her album, it seems to make sense to place them first.

Also, I removed the comment about Never Or Now being "not able to chart"; as this news story makes clear, download-only albums were chart-eligible well before the album was released. If it didn't chart, it was presumably because of how many copies it sold, not because of chart policy, which the previous text could be read as implying. Gusworld (talk) 08:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Images
I've uploaded about 20 more photos to the LSL cat on Commons. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:04, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 one external links on Lisa Scott-Lee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110711004222/http://www.rte.ie:80/ten/2011/0709/richardsc.html to http://www.rte.ie/ten/2011/0709/richardsc.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20061023204410/http://totallyscottlee.lisascottlee.com:80/ to http://totallyscottlee.lisascottlee.com/
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060620032757/http://forums.lisascottlee.com:80/showthread.php?t=21351 to http://forums.lisascottlee.com/showthread.php?t=21351
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080421192519/http://www.celebrity-babies.com:80/2008/03/lisa-scott-lee.html to http://www.celebrity-babies.com/2008/03/lisa-scott-lee.html

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:08, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Lisa Scott-Lee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20111006045757/http://www.digitalspy.co.uk:80/tv/news/a330859/steps-to-reunite-for-sky-living-documentary-series.html to http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/news/a330859/steps-to-reunite-for-sky-living-documentary-series.html

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:17, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Children
Is it necessary/advisable to include the names of her children? CountessCobra (talk) 12:05, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lisa Scott-Lee


text:
User talk:212.219.63.66

October 2018
Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for reverting your recent experiment with the page Mark Field. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead, as someone could see your edit before you revert it. Thank you. – Gilliam (talk) 03:34, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

November 2018
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Amanda Solloway. Thank you. Girth Summit  (blether) 15:37, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

January 2022
Hello, I'm Serols. I noticed that in this edit to Spy film, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Serols (talk) 15:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Spy film, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Serols (talk) 15:26, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

November 2022
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Jean Piaget, you may be blocked from editing. Throast  { { ping }} me! (talk | contribs) 15:23, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
Hello, I'm Kristiannumber1. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Southampton F.C. have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Kristiannumber1 (talk) 12:56, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Southampton F.C.. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Opal|zukor (discuss) 12:57, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Pot Noodle, you may be blocked from editing. Kristiannumber1 (talk) 13:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Pot Noodle. Kristiannumber1 (talk) 13:02, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:212.219.63.66


text:
General Optical Council

The General Optical Council (GOC) is an organisation in the United Kingdom which maintains a register of opticians and regulates the services provided by dispensing opticians and optometrists. The stated function of the GOC is "to protect the public and promote high standards of professional conduct and education amongst opticians".

Role
In order to practice as optometrist or work as a dispensing optician within the UK, individuals must demonstrate to the GOC that they are suitably qualified and fit to practise. The GOC also maintains a register of companies who carry on business as opticians. , the register had around 30,000 optometrists, dispensing opticians, undergraduate optometry students, opticians and optical businesses.

The GOC sets standards so that every registered practitioner knows what is expected of them. They take action against opticians who do not meet these standards of professional conduct and also against people or companies who break the terms of the Opticians Act. A consultation on new standards of practice in 2015 received 2,000 responses. The Optical Confederation and other trade associations called for the new standards to be proportionate to the risks.

History
The GOC was set up by the Opticians Act 1958 to maintain a register of opticians and to uphold the Act. Legislation was subsequently consolidated with the Opticians Act 1989.

The GOC was in the news at the end of September 2005 after taking action against eBay UK for "‘aiding and abetting’ sales of contact lenses without the involvement of a qualified optician."

Oversight of health and social care regulators
The Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care (PSA), is an independent body accountable to the UK Parliament, which promotes the health and wellbeing of the public and oversees the twelve UK healthcare regulators, including the General Optical Council.

title: General Optical Council


text:
User:Fenne~enwiki

Links: http://www.fenne.net

title: User:Fenne~enwiki


text:
User talk:RachelStevensIsSexy

Please don't go about putting "controversial" tags on articles where no controversy has been evident. If there is indeed controversy, the first step is discussion on the article's talk page. Tagging articles is a last, not a first step. - Nunh-huh 08:46, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Don't mark articles as "totally disputed" where there is no dispute. If you continue you will be banned from editing Wikipedia. - Nunh-huh 08:48, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

So sorry, the 3RR is not a licence to do things three times before stopping. I've banned you for 24 hours because you've persisted in your tagging despite warnings and other indications that your tagging was inappropriate. You're more than welcome to resume editing - hopefully in a more constructive way-- when the 24 hours is up. - Nunh-huh 08:58, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:RachelStevensIsSexy


text:
Bean tree

Bean tree is a name used in different parts of the world for various trees that carry their seeds in large pods. Examples include:

 * Carob
 * Catalpa
 * Cassia brewsteri
 * Cassia tomentella
 * Erythrina
 * Castanospermum australe
 * Lysiphyllum carronii

title: Bean tree


text:
User:Sam Chen/Sandbox

=Sam Chen's Personal Sandbox= This is a test page.

=2=

title: User:Sam Chen/Sandbox


text:
Talk:Valladolid debate

Prologue
A caricature of cultural history. Not worth working on. --Wetman 08:50, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

 * 6 months later and it's not much better. I removed these substantial sections as unsourced speculation, but I hesitated to delete them entirely, so I moved them here. If someone could provide sources for any of this feel free to add it back in, but as is it reads like unbacked apologetics that has little to do with the actual debate. (I bolded the section headers, I didn't know what else to do.)--Cúchullain t/ c 17:20, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Conquests As Crusade

It should be noticed that the debate was over two distinct notions - the legitimacy or lack thereof of the Conquests, and the other being the treatment of the natives of the New World.

While the Church's attitude is that Las Casas was right on the second question, there was strong support for the belief that, despite the unacceptable misbehaviour of the Conquistadores, the Conquests were theologically legitimate as part or extension of the Luso-Spanish Reconquistas, with the same basis as that of the Bull Inter Cunctas, etc.

It is to be noted that this theology has fallen into disuse in the last few centuries.

Protestantism

Calvinism and Jansenism were to revive the Sepulvadian opinion, rejecting the idea that black peoples possessed souls and could attain to salvation.

While in practice this was diluted, nevertheless, this was the basis of the Dutch South African Calvinists' Apartheid policy in South Africa.

It was also the cause for the Anglo-Saxon settlers in North America, Australia, etc. to follow the policy of land clearances forcing out the aborigines into reservations or Bantustans, and for the refusal of England to grant the same rights of true self-government to British India that it had extended to its white colonies of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc.

Catholicism Largely as a result of the Valladolid Debate and its conclusions, which helped clarify Catholic thought on the controversy, colonists from Catholic countries in the New World tended to settle amongst and intermarry with the natives rather than expel or reduce them to ghettos.

The significant exceptions are Costa Rica and Argentina.

In the later case, European colonists and the newly independent Argentinians were more influenced by Evolutionary and Calvinist ideas imported via England, so that, rejecting the aborigines as subhuman species, they insisted on expelling and reducing the Amerindians, especially in Argentinian Patagonia, resorting to genocide.

These ideas also caused the Argentinians to harbor the conceit of being a White society surrounded by Creole or Aborigine-dominated states.

 * The removal has improved the article - better for it to stick to its immediate subject Provocateur 05:44, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

What about souls?
It is hard to believe the beginning of this article. I'm sorry to cite wikipedia in spanish, but we have put this:
 * No discurría en torno a si los indígenas de América eran seres humanos con alma o salvajes susceptibles de ser domesticados como animales. Eso hubiera sido herético, y ya estaba resuelto por la bula papal Sublimis Deus (1537). Algunas veces se entiende esta bula como respuesta a opiniones que pusieran en entredicho la humanidad de los naturales; pero el papa (Paulo III, incitado por dos dominicos españoles) no pretendía definir la racionalidad del indígena, sino que suponiendo dicha racionalidad en cuanto que los indios son hombres, declaraba su derecho a la libertad y la propiedad, así como el derecho a abrazar el cristianismo, que debe serles predicado pacíficamente. El propósito declarado de la discusión era ofrecer una base teológica y jurídica segura para decidir cómo debía procederse en los descubrimientos, conquistas y población de las Indias.

In my bad english: not about indians was humang beings with soul... that should be heretic, and already resolved by papal bula Sublimus Deus 1537... The proposal of the discussion was offer a safer teological and juridic base for... conquer. Please, change.--Ángel Luis Alfaro 18:09, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

 * This guy seems to be right. First of all, different wiki pages say different things about who won the debate. This guy says there's no reliable record of a resolution. And Sublimis Deus did establish full humanity of the natives. See Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda for the perspective that it was about Aristotle's concept of "natural slaves," not an issue about souls. Jonathan Tweet 21:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Since the article cites no references, I added factual accuracy and unreferenced tags. Hopefully someone can sort this all out.--Cúchullain t/ c 22:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I found one reference that looks pretty good and modified the text to match. I wouldn't mind if someone triple-checked me. Jonathan Tweet 22:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I did some work on the article based on the source you provided. I also removed the tags. Thanks for finding that and amending the text, this was an embarassment before.--Cúchullain t/ c 00:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the changes, the article is well enough now. Perhaps you must add a link to Leyes de Burgos that talk about the Junta de Burgos, the precedent of the Junta de Valladolid in 1511. If you want improve more the article, I suggest add images (in spanish we have put three with comments very ilustratives, in my opinion). I dont dare doing myself.--Ángel Luis Alfaro 16:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it is worth mentioning that this was not really a "debate" in the modern sense of the word. Sepulveda and Las Casas never met, and were never actively debating face to face, as we think of debates held today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.18.212.105 (talk) 22:06, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Jesuit
De Sepulveda was not a Jesuit. He may have been a Dominican. The Spanish side about him says that. My professor told me that he was a normal diocesan priest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.78.136.132 (talk) 08:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * He was neither, he was a jurist and theologian, but not a member of any religious order.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 13:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

The debate led to a new issue of the New Laws in 1552
I believe it is very important to point out that the debate led to the passing of new laws that put an end to the legal slavery of the Indians, Even if it didn't end poor treatment of the natives in all cases, it wasn't officially sanctioned any longer and made it illegal to mistreat them. So yes, it did have a very important effect on the local population from then onwards and as such it should be reflected in the article. --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 09:42, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That's going to need a source, as your material directly contradicts the source we do have. This specifically says that the debate itself did not substantially alter the treatment of the Indians. However, Sepulveda didn't see the New Laws overturned, which is what he wanted.--Cúchullain t/ c 11:16, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "My" material are the New Laws in 1552, which made it illegal to mistreat the natives and are a direct consequence of the Valladolid debate. There's no better source than that, wouldn't you agree?

--RafaelMinuesa (talk) 12:24, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No... Wikipedia relies on secondary sources, written by experts interpreting the documents themselves. And they must be included in inline citations. The New Laws had already been passed in 1542; the Vallodolid debate, if anything, only resulted in existing laws being reissued. That is not what las Casas wanted, but at the same time it wasn't what Sepulveda wanted.--Cúchullain t/ c 12:39, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, there was a mistake in the edit I made, but not exactly what you pointed out. The Valladolid debate resulted in new laws issued in 1573 by the Ordinances Concerning Discoveries, which forbade any unauthorized operations against independent Native Americans. I have to do some more research before implementing the edit completely, but no one can argue that they had a direct positive effect on the native population.
 * Please do not remove the Codex drawing as it was used as evidence during the Debate. Thanks.
 * --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 17:17, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You're going to need a citation for the claim that the Ordinances Concerning Discoveries were directly a result of this debate. The claim is in contrast to what appears in the other sources used so far. These say that the debate had some slight effect, but was really just one of several events that slowed down and somewhat weakened the encomienda system. The debate itself didn't really have much effect, and it especially didn't have the effect that either debater wanted.
 * I'm okay with the image, if you can show that it was actually used during this debate.--Cúchullain t/ c 18:26, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

POV in last paragraph
Fixed some "White Legend" POV in the last paragraph to something closer approaching neutrality. Would appreciate modification to make it even more NPOV, but a revert would be terrible idea.69.114.170.9 (talk) 00:00, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Today I've reverted some edits by User:Rafael Minuesa which also slanted the article towards the white legend side. For example he removed the note that Sublimus Dei only officially but not practically abolished slavery - Sublimus Dei was rescinded a year after its promulgation by the same pope who issued it and who later made statements in favor of slavery. Almost all accounts state that Sublimus Dei had no practical effects on the treatment of Indians. It is also quite commonly stated in the sources that an important part of the reason that Las Casas position found favor with the king was the growing need to control the encomenderos. Apart from that Las Casas did not have great favor with the catholic church, after the death of Cardinal Xisneros he had almost no friends in the Church. Similarly the edits exaggerrated the importance of the New Laws, which were in fact never implemented in most of the Spanish colonies.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 13:03, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Good start, but I'm afraid it's still not far enough. The article formerly made it clear that nothing that came out of this had any substantial effect on the treatment of the Indians, and that the real reason las Casas found favor in the power structure was that his position would challenge the encomenderos. This has been consistently eroded over the last year or so with little discussion. I'll see what I can do.--Cúchullain t/ c 13:13, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I think that is true, I am going to have to find some sources, and give a better description of the debate and of its consequences.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 13:19, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The last three paragraphs are all troubling. The first two have the same problem I brought up over a year ago: they're using a primary source to advance an interpretation. And the material on the Black Legend and its use by Spain's enemies does not appear in the source it's attributed to.--Cúchullain t/ c 15:03, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I just went ahead and removed them. A year is more than enough time to correct the issues in the first two paragraphs, and the last paragraph isn't supported in the citation. It's also irrelevant to this article, as there's no indication this debate in particular influenced British, French, etc. interpretations of the Black Legend.--Cúchullain t/ c 15:07, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, it seems to misrepresent Keen, attributing him the opposite view of the one he espoused.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 15:56, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

 * Hi ·ʍaunus, Regarding your statements:
 * 1- "Sublimus Dei was rescinded a year after its promulgation by the same pope who issued it and who later made statements in favor of slavery"
 * 2- "the New Laws, which were in fact never implemented in most of the Spanish colonies"
 * Could you please provide some sources that back up those statements? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by RafaelMinuesa (talk • contribs)
 * It would be more to the point for you to demonstrate why your material is relevant, than for us to demonstrate why it's not.--Cúchullain t/ c 23:29, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

 * If you write that the Pope "made statements in favor of slavery", you have to prove it, specially when you use it as part of your argument for deleting material
 * Same applies to the following statement "the New Laws, which were in fact never implemented in most of the Spanish colonies", when in fact they were implemented in all Spanish colonies. Perhaps you meant to write that they were at times overlooked?
 * --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 23:43, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * And of course I will provide those references, but they are not necessary to remove the material. Since the material is not supported by sources it can be removed at any time and in order to reinclude it it would be necessary for you to provide valid reliable sources. We have discusssed the implemenation of the new laws before - and no they were never implemented in Peru where the encomendero's revolted when the viceroy attemted to do so, nor in New Spain where the viceroy simply chose not to implement them since he was himself an encomendero and feared the reaction of the other encomenderos.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 23:54, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

 * Paul III withdrew both Sublimis Deus and its companion Pastorale Officium on june 19th 1538 due to pressure from slaveowners (Armando Lampe, 2001, Christianity in the Caribbean: essays on church history p. 17). He repealed an ancient law giving freedom to slaves that touched the emperor's statue on the capitoleum, he affirmed the right of Roman citizens to buy and sell slaves and authorized the possession and trade of Muslim slaves in Rome in 1548. (That the world may believe: the development of Papal social thought on aboriginal rights", Michael Stogre S.J, Médiaspaul, 1992).·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:17, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm looking right now at the source you provided and I fail to see anything of the kind.
 * Would you be so kind as to provide the page number? Thanks --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 00:46, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * You mean Stogre, p. 116? And when will you provide your first source?·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:50, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I still fail to see anything of the kind in the source you provided? --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 01:17, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Then one of us is mistaken. Perhaps we need a third set of eyes to determine who. And when will you provide a source for some of your claims?·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 01:20, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, Rafael, the burden of evidence is on you to defend your challenged material, not for Maunus to track down citations explaining the challenge to you. That's putting the cart before the horse.Cúchullain t/ c 01:32, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

 * Again, Cuchullain, all I'm asking is the sources for the following claims, upon which part of the material was deleted.
 * 1- "Sublimus Dei was rescinded a year after its promulgation by the same pope who issued it and who later made statements in favor of slavery"
 * 2- "the New Laws, which were in fact never implemented in most of the Spanish colonies"
 * Thank you. --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 01:47, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Which I have done. Now provide a source saying that the New Laws (of 1542) or the Ordinances (of 1573) were a result of the valladolid debate (of 1550).·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 10:49, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Maunus is not obligated to introduce sources, he's not trying to add anything. YOU are obligated to provide reliable, secondary sources that back up your material directly, and you still have not.--Cúchullain t/ c 14:32, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Protector of the Indians
Hi Cúchullain, Regarding your statement:

"nothing that came out of this had any substantial effect on the treatment of the Indians"

How could that be? A set of Laws enacted by the highest authority at the time, specifically addressing the treatment of Native Indians surely must have a deep effect.

I also see that large portions of the article, specifically the part that explained the implementation in all colonized settlements of a crown-appointed official known as the "Protector de Indios" (Protector of the Indians), that was perfectly referenced, has been removed without explanation. I believe it must have been a mistake in your part and I'm therefore restoring it. Please, next time you feel like mass deleting large parts of the article give some valid reasons for doing it, and cite some references which in your opinion would nullify those that are already there.

Thank you --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 22:16, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Neither New Laws nor the later ordinances were not a result of the debate, and you have not presented any source to suggest that it was. Neither was the implementation of the office Protector of Indians a result of the debate. Reasons for the deletions are given above. I will revert your inclusions again pending further discussion.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:55, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

 * Yes, after over a year, we have no source saying that this debate led to new laws protecting the Indians, and in fact have sources that say it had no such effect. Your Britannica source doesn't mention this debate; the other source is a primary source and can't be used here. I'll have to check on the "Protector de Indios" source; if I removed it unduly I apologize. But this challenged material had better stay out pending discussion.--Cúchullain t/ c 23:29, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

 * You must have misread the paragraph you keep deleting for no valid reason. It says "the new statutes within the Ordinances Concerning Discoveries", not the "Ordinances" themselves.
 * That the implementation of the office Protector of Indians was a result of the debate is just common sense derived from the fact that Bartolomé de Las Casas himself was the first person to be named Protector of the Indians. But I will provide references for your benefit since you seem to doubt such an obvious fact.
 * In the meantime, please stop deleting this paragraph unless you can provide a source suggesting the opposite.
 * And please, refrain from mass deleting large parts of the article that are perfectly referenced without trying at least to discuss it with other editors. If you are challenging that material as you say, the proper way to proceed is through discussion
 * Thank you --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 23:35, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Las Casas was named Protector of the Indians in 1517 - 33 years before the Valladolid debates. So much for "obvious facts". The material stays out of the article untill reliable sources are provided and consensus to include is established. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 23:44, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * We discussed this over a year ago, and the material has sat without proper references ever since. That's plenty of time to fix it. You need to provide a reliable, secondary source that includes this material directly. As I said the primary source is inadequate, and the Britannica article doesn't mention this debate. A cursory look at the Protector de Indios book makes it appear that source doesn't mention the debate either. Without that, the material should not be in Wikipedia, especially as it contradicts another published source that specifically says the debate didn't have any real effect on the treatment of the Indians.Cúchullain t/ c 23:49, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, you must have misread the paragraph. It read "the implementation in all colonized settlements of a crown-appointed official known as the "Protector de Indios". The implementation did take place after the Valladolid debate and Bartolomé de Las Casas himself was the first person to be appointed officially as "Protector of the Indians" by the government.
 * I have restored the perfectly referenced deleted part and changed "named" for "officially appointed", so it is even clearer now.
 * Please stop deleting this paragraph unless you can provide a source suggesting the opposite. What you are doing goes against the basic principles of Wikipedia.
 * Thank you --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 00:03, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * This is a basic principle of wikipedia: WP:EDITWAR and WP:CONSENSUS. Failure to follow those can result in being blocked. Las Casas was officially appointed Protector in 1517, Juan de Zumarraga in 1537 - how could this be a result of a debate taking place in 1550? ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:07, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Then why do you keep deleting that material without previous consensus?
 * Again, Bartolomé de Las Casas was named "Protector de Indios" in 1517, but he wasn't officially officially appointed by the Spanish Government as "Protector de Indios" until the Valladolid Debate was over.
 * What's the part you don't understand? You keep deleting perfectly sourced material without prior discussion just because you don't understand, and when proven wrong you keep deleting it and resort to threats? Unbelievable.
 * --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 00:20, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Another basic policy is WP:V - material that is challenged can be removed at any time. We are challenging this material and you have not provided a shred of evidence to support your claims. You claim about Las Casas not being officlally protector untill after 1550 is simply ridiculous and you need to provide a source for that since all his biographies say that he was appointed officially in 1517 after his audiences with Emperor Charles, if he was not appointed untill after the debate then he wouldn't be the first since Zummarraga was officially appointed in 1537. You are not making any sense, and obviously do not command the historical literature very well.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:24, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

 * He was named "Protector de Indios" in 1517 by Cardinal Cisneros, NOT by the Spanish Government, that didn't officially appointed him as "Protector de Indios" until the Valladolid Debate was over. This is useless, you obviously know by now what the facts are, and nonetheless keep deletinang perfectly sourced material without discussion. And then talk about "slant".
 * --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 00:35, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * He may have been named by Cisneros but it was an official appointment supported by the Emperor who in the same moment sent the Hieronymite friars to be the new governors of Hispaniola. He did not to my knowledge receive a second appointment after the debates, which would have been futile since he did not return to the Americas after the debates but stayed in Spain acting as an informal counselor to the King in matters related to the Indies. This is all in the biographies of Las Casas such as Raup-Wagner, Lewis Hanke and Gimenez Fernandez.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:48, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The implementation of the official Protector of Indians office didn't take place until the debate was over. That's what you deleted.--RafaelMinuesa (talk) 00:54, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes because it is contradicted by reliable sources. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:57, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * If a debate sponsored by the King (head of the government), in which Bartolomé de Las Casas defends the need for Laws protecting the natives, is followed by new Laws protecting the natives, is just common sense to say that the debate led to new Laws protecting the natives. Wouldn't you agree on that? This doesn't contradict any reliable source. If it does, please let us know, that's all I'm asking since the beginning of this discussion. --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 02:18, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes it does sinceaccording to reliable sources there were officially appointed Protectors of the Indians 30 years before the debate. Also we do not deal in common sense here but in sourced information. To argue that the the implementation of the office of protector of indians was a result of the debate that occured thirty years later, first you will need a source supporting that claim.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 10:51, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Once again, your material is not backed up directly in the sources, and the problem hasn't been addressed in over a year. On top of that your insufficiently cited material directly contradicts material in another cited source. There's really not anything more to discuss here.--Cúchullain t/ c 01:26, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, the implementation of the Protector of Indians office didn't take place until the debate was over as new statutes within the Ordinances Concerning Discoveries. This doesn't contradict any reliable source. If it does, please let us know, that's all I'm asking since the beginning of this discussion. Again, where is your reliable source that says the Office of the Protector of Indians office was in place before the debate? You haven't provided any. You just have deleted perfectly valid material for no reason and now you refuse to give an explanation. --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 01:32, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I have mentioned several biographies of Las Casas that all state this. Where is your source suggesting that it was instated after the debate?·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 01:35, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * No you haven't provided one single source that disputes that the implementation of the Protector of Indians office didn't take place until the debate was over as new statutes within the Ordinances Concerning Discoveries. This doesn't contradict any reliable source. If it does, please let us know, that's all I'm asking since the beginning of this discussion. Again, where is your reliable source that says the Office of the Protector of Indians office was in place before the debate? You haven't provided any. --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 01:44, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Fray Juan de Zumárraga, Protector of the Indians. Fidel de J. Chauvet. The Americas, Vol. 5, No. 3, Special Issue Dedicated to the Memory of Don Fray Juan de Zumárraga, First Bishop and Archbishop of Mexico#. (Jan., 1949), pp. 283-295. Now quit wasting my time with your misrepresentations and filibustering. Start reading some sources and bring them here. I am not answering any of your posts here before you start providing sources in support of your claims.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 01:49, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The wording in your request at WP:3O is not at all a neutral description of what this dispute is over. We are trying to work with you but it is becoming increasingly difficult. Perhaps it's time to disengage for a while.Cúchullain t/ c 01:29, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Look, Rafael. To include your material, you need to provide sources that say DIRECTLY that (1) the Valladolid debate led to new statutes in the Ordinances Concerning Discoveries in 1573 and that (2) the debate led to the creation of the office of Protector de Indios. Until you have done that, there is nothing more to talk about.--Cúchullain t/ c 15:56, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Third opinion
This is a straightforward issue (without comment on the validity of the opposing viewpoints). WP:BURDEN, an en-wikipedia policy, states: ''The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. You may remove any material lacking a reliable source that directly supports it.'' Therefore it is up to RafaelMinuesa to defend his/her edits by providing direct sources before they can be reinserted into the article. For example, a reliable source that clearly states that the 'protector of the Indians' office was a direct result of the debate and not an existing office prior to it, and explains the contradiction (that the office existed before as well) is necessary before that can be included in the article. --rgpk (comment) 19:23, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, RegentsPark. That is most helpful.--Cúchullain t/ c 20:11, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Concluding paragraph
I've marked the following passage as promoting a non-neutral viewpoint:

"The arguments presented by Las Casas and Sepúlveda to the junta of Valladolid remained too abstract, with both sides stubbornly clinging to their opposite theories that ironically relied on similar, if not the same, theoretical authorities, which were interpreted to suit their respective arguments"

The loaded language, I hope, speaks for itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.22.238.84 (talk) 02:17, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Sublimis Deus
"Sublimus Dei" is a gross misspelling of "Sublimis Deus", the name of the papal bull.

title: Talk:Valladolid debate


text: Category:Sailing manoeuvres

title: Category:Sailing manoeuvres