text:
1 February 2015 (UTC)

Another serious thing I should also mentioned about Jeh and his fellows. In this link the following words has been removed by Claw of Slime, yeah one of his claws.

"You do not answer the question above, and mislead a lot! I would email to AMD Corporation, whether your explanation is misleading or not, I wish they would answer by emails! Stop IP-inspection! Frankly, I am using software, Hide My IP, because your fellows blocked my IPs already! What a shame! Just want to shut my month up, then block and lock all my user accounts and IPs! And someone portrayed as Chinese in Zh.Wikipedia.org to hook me up! What such a shameless behaviour! I just talk about x86, x86-64, PAE and IA-32. But your people just treat me like what?"

It is a complaint and also a fact to be told. And in this link, the following words could also prove that he also hires someone from zh.wikipedia.org to inspect one's IP address to report IP sock puppet. And you see what such a newer Wikipedia user, less than a month, but so familiar to assist Jeh to make so many reports successfully.

"This ip seems to be a proxy, for its TCP port 80 is accessible"

Through the words above, we can not deny Antigng is another claw of Jeh.

This is only one example, and many and many other examples do really exist. Through the talk page history of Jeh, we could also find many other Wikipedia users made complaints. They might make useful contributions, but denied by Jeh, and blocked by him indirectly too. I believe those other users could lose their passion continuing to pay time on Wikipedia.org, so the quality of some articles could never be improved. Through Jeh's words on the talk page of PAE, we also could find he might has the trend to make advertisements through the article he has involved. That might be another reason why he has been passion for reporting all the time. But we should respect him as most of his useful contributions to Wikipedia.org. So we should have manage something to improve Wikipedia.org. <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 23:09, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

 * The above would be funny if it wasn't so sad. Jeh (talk) 23:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

 * by another admin due to socking. -- slakr \ talk / 05:08, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:<IP_ADDRESS> reported by User:Bsuorangecrush (result: no vio)
User:<IP_ADDRESS> has began removing MWN from the tv section on 2013–14 Boise State Broncos men's basketball team and 2014–15 Boise State Broncos men's basketball team. There has been no reason given on the edit summary or on the talk pages as to why it was removed. There have been other users remove it that have also never given any reason. The discussion was taken to the college basketball project talk page and decided it can stay yet it continues to be removed. I do not want to just continue to revert these edits and possibly get banned for edit warring. What can I do to stop this from happening?Bsuorangecrush (talk) 18:14, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

 * -- slakr \ talk / 05:09, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * That's because I was trying to avoid the three revert rule to keep from getting banned. The fact that it continues to happen yet nobody ever says anything on the talk pages and completely ignores my warnings hasn't worked. Is their anything I can to to revert it over 3 times yet not get banned?Bsuorangecrush (talk) 07:12, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Dilan chamara reported by User:Crystallizedcarbon (Result: Blocked)
Page:

User being reported:

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Disruptive single purpose new user, created promotional page repeatedly added Facebook links as references and repeatedly removed AfD tags.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 11:25, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * – 31 hours. EdJohnston (talk) 14:42, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Sayoon3 and User:Inkyhack reported by User:Paul 012 (Result: Blocks)
Page:

User being reported:

Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)
 * 5)
 * 6)

User being reported:

Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)
 * 5)
 * 6)

Comments:

 * Sayoon3 claims Inkyhack is spamming, while Inkyhack claims Sayoon3 is engaging in vandalism. What is obvious is that both are very strongly pushing their POV in the article. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:09, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I appreciate you looking into this. My intention was to try correct errors on the page. I attempted to address some of Sayoon3's concerns by adding a line clarifying Ratish Thakur's role at the University (he was listed as president), correcting the name of the president of Webster with a citation and adding a section on accreditation (he had claimed in the talk page that the University was not accredited). Instead, the page has been repeatedly reverted back to the incorrect state. Please note that one of the incorrect pieces put on the page is that the University is "Indian managed." Ratish Thakur is Indian, but the University is managed by an American non-profit and has numerous Americans, Europeans and Asians on staff. To specifically change this to "Indian managed" strikes me as somewhat racist. Inkyhack (talk) 17:34, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Result: The two reported users were both blocked 24 hours by User:Callanecc. EdJohnston (talk) 15:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Eatprayswimm reported by User:Arjayay (Result: Semi)
Page:

User being reported:

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]

Comments:

Situation was explained - and ignored - at the teahouse here Several more minor reverts if you look at the page history - Arjayay (talk) 19:25, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Situation has not been Ignored, I have addressed both you and the teahouse. Please do not post false information in your request for a ban. I have addressed the issues and provided resolution. Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:35, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

All Edits were reverts from other users. The content added and removed was done so according to Wiki policy and was not a violation. It has become a wiki-edit war and I will not participate in the lunacy that is happening with the page. I would hope that all references are properly cited and erroneous links and unverified information is removed. Please refer to all Edits with the page, and all usernames. Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:34, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Please note Wikipedia guidelines for Biographies of Living Person: (reference BLP circumstances

Biographies of living persons are considered to be the most fragile part of Wikipedia today. The potential for libelous materials to enter into an article about a living or recently deceased person and cause a great deal of damage for Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation is omnipresent. Therefore, it is paramount for administrators to take this policy into account when dealing with 3RR reports.

For example, if two users are edit warring over a BLP, one is removing a potentially libelous statement and the other is entering it, then the user removing it may be given the benefit of the doubt. Essentially, if the user, who is removing the potentially damaging statement(s), violates 3RR, then their violation may be exempt from any action taken. Unfortunately, this can be very subjective and any 3RR report on a BLP should be scrutinised with the utmost care and attention to WP:AGF.

If there is any confusion at all for the admin closing the report then they should post a message on WP:AN and/or WP:ANI to get wider input from the community. Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:39, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The information contained on Taylor Lianne Chandler's page is in multiple violations of this Circumstance and the edits have pointed out all of the violations Ms. Chandler has committed. If there is an issue with the references pointed out, please advise. Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:39, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The article's talk page hasn't even been created. Use it to point out specific factual errors with specific reasons why they're incorrect. Blanking almost the entire article stating "falsified information" won't get you anywhere. --Neil N  talk to me 19:45, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Result: Article semiprotected for 10 days by User:Callanecc. EdJohnston (talk) 15:22, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Cantonhonhun reported by User:eatprayswimm (Result: Semi)
Page:

User being reported:

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]

Comments:

Several more minor reverts if you look at the page history Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:48, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Obviously a retaliation to the report above. User:Cantonhonhun has been reverting User:eatprayswimm's repeated removal of sourced material. And the 4 reverts listed in this spurious report are all by the reporter, not by the editor about whom the report purports to be. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:55, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

David Biddulph, changes have been made multiple times by both parties, including the report below. Who is in the wrong? Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:59, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

 * The report below is as spurious as this one. You ask who is in the wrong; the answer is that you are.  You have violated the bright line of WP:3RR and you have made no effort to discuss the problem on the article's talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:07, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

 * @DavidBiddulph - There is not article talk page. Kind Regards, Eatprayswimm (talk) 22:16, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The talk page is here Talk:Taylor Lianne Chandler Theroadislong (talk) 22:20, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Result: Semiprotected by another admin. EdJohnston (talk) 15:24, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User: Taychatlc reported by User:Eatprayswimm (Result: Semi)
Page:

User being reported:

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)
 * 5) Also undid NielN revisions: Undid revision 646671248 by NeilN (talk) Removed citations without merit adding duplicate info) (  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eatprayswimm (talk • contribs) 20:09, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:56, 11 February 2015 (UTC) Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]

Comments:

Several more minor reverts if you look at the page history Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:56, 11 February 2015 (UTC) Please note Wikipedia guidelines for Biographies of Living Person: (reference) BLP circumstances

Biographies of living persons are considered to be the most fragile part of Wikipedia today. The potential for libelous materials to enter into an article about a living or recently deceased person and cause a great deal of damage for Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation is omnipresent. Therefore, it is paramount for administrators to take this policy into account when dealing with 3RR reports.

For example, if two users are edit warring over a BLP, one is removing a potentially libelous statement and the other is entering it, then the user removing it may be given the benefit of the doubt. Essentially, if the user, who is removing the potentially damaging statement(s), violates 3RR, then their violation may be exempt from any action taken. Unfortunately, this can be very subjective and any 3RR report on a BLP should be scrutinised with the utmost care and attention to WP:AGF.

 * As in the report above, the 4 diffs given are all to reverts by the reporter User:eatprayswimm, thus demonstrating that 3RR has been violated by the reporter. No evidence has been given of edit-warring by User: Taychatlc. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:04, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Revisions edited, copied previous versions of wrong persona, these revisions belong to TLC Eatprayswimm (talk) 20:09, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Result: Article semiprotected by another admin. EdJohnston (talk) 15:24, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Tsavage reported by User:Mark Marathon (Result: Both warned)
Page:

User being reported:

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

This editor clearly has no intention of respecting WP:BRD or waiting for consensus to be reached on the article talk page, to the poinht of reverting my edits twoce whiel i was composing yet anther contribution to the talk page.Mark Marathon (talk) 01:15, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Please examine the whole history sequence. Mark Marathon made substantial edits to one paragraph of a section and posted a note to that effect on the Talk page. Rather than revert those edits, which I found to be POV and poorly sourced, I entered into discussion, and continued to make incremental edits.

 * Mark Marathon completely reverted three times. The last reversion deleted the entire section. At that point, I reverted back to the version just prior to his edits, started a clean thread on the Talk page. Publicity section paragraph rewrite for local consensus to directly work on the paragraph, and have no intention of editing that material in the article as made clear in the edit summary and Talk page. --Tsavage (talk) 01:33, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Result: User:Tsavage and User:Mark Marathon are both warned. Each of you has made at least four edits in 24 hours and, depending on whether a rewrite can be considered a revert, it seems that both of you broke WP:3RR. Each of you must know what it takes to get a talk page consensus. Further reverts that aren't based on a talk page agreement may lead to a block. EdJohnston (talk) 15:45, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Prince Silversaddle reported by User:AdamDeanHall
Page:

User being reported:

For some reason this user added a nonexistent program Outrageous Kid Parties to the List of programs broadcast by Discovery Family; this program didn't air on that channel. AdamDeanHall (talk) 16:56, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Nonexistent? You can't be serious. I Googled the show, and yes, it does exist. Here's proof:
 * Exhibit A
 * Exhibit B
 * Exhibit C
 * I just wanted to set the record straight. Electric  Burst (Electron firings)(Zaps) 20:18, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Winkelvi reported by User: (Result: Socks indeffed)
Page:

User being reported:

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1) [diff]I am unfamiliar with how to show a user's reverts. One can see from the page history and talk page that User:Winkelvi has been combative and very unproductive, reverting much sourced content and making ambiguous demands. On the talk page, Winkelvi has issues with at least three separate editors, with one stating, "Winkelvi was NOT helpful in this process with cryptic edits and escalating to reporting me for attempting to comply with his/her ambiguous comments". Can this user be banned from this page? It's getting out of control. --LDS FLDS (talk) 04:34, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * 2) [diff]
 * 3) [diff]
 * 4) [diff]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]

Comments:

 * It's not clear how Winkelvi has behaved disruptively, nor is it clear how you are involved in whatever dispute may exist since you have never edited the article or its talkpage. Are you operating more than one editor account? –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:37, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

 * It's not clear to me, either, Roscelese. I've never heard of this editor, have no idea what they are referring to, and have to wonder if it's a sockpuppet of a disgruntled editor that, for some reason, sees me as an enemy.  Weird. -- WV ● ✉ ✓  04:41, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Comment: Because this report made no sense to me (being filed by a brand-new account and a user I had never heard of previously), I did some investigation. Subsequently, I have filed an SPI here: . -- WV ● ✉ ✓  06:40, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Comment:And then moved to attacking other articles written under Kbabej, which is the exact reason this account was created to report your reconstructive edits. Stop wikihounding me! --Kbabej (talk) 14:23, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Update: Kbabej has admitted socking at SPI here: []. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 14:35, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Update': Winkelvi continues to Wikihound me. Can something please be done about this user? Out of 4,000,000,000+ articles, he just happens to find other articles of mine to suddenly start focusing on after I opened a legitimate complaint against him that I wanted researched? And I did it under a new username for this exact reason, so I wouldn't be targeted, which is happening. See here. --Kbabej (talk) 17:23, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * filer (puppet) and Kbabej (master) indefinitely.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:11, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Cmpunksdiva reported by User:Philip J Fry (Result: Declined)

 * Page:
 * User being reported:

 * Previous version reverted to:

 * Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)  "Fix the name Hasta El Fin Del Mundo means Until The End of the World"
 * 1)  "Fix the name Hasta El Fin Del Mundo means Until The End of the World"
 * 1)  "Fix the name Hasta El Fin Del Mundo means Until The End of the World"
 * 1)  "Fix the name Hasta El Fin Del Mundo means Until The End of the World"
 * 1)  "Fix the name Hasta El Fin Del Mundo means Until The End of the World"

 * Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
 * 1)   "←Created page with '== Until the End of Time == Please I come to ask you to stop your edits, since this translation is unofficial, not even beam chosen to add references to what you...'"
 * 2)   "/* Until the End of Time */"

 * Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

 * Comments:

I've left a message on their discussion, but it is seen that this user is not interested in understanding anything. This user tries to change the title of the article without making any reference, and the title you want to place is not the official title of the telenovela. Also request a verification of accounts. Since this user seems to be a puppet of Unitele12 José (talk) 07:22, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * . There were only two reverts by the new user as on the last set of edits, they self-reverted. I'm also not convinced that this account is related to the other, but I will comment more about that at SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:09, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Accesskele reported by User:Jamie Tubers (Result: Blocked)

 * Page:
 * User being reported:

 * Previous version reverted to:

 * Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)  "Undid revision 646721720 by Jamie Tubers (talk)"
 * 2)  "/* Early life */ Please, refrain from adding information you don't know about a person."
 * 3)  "Editted info about his place of birth. Actor was born, raised and have lived in Lagos his entire life"
 * 4)  "Undid revision 646799853 by Jamie Tubers (talk)"
 * 5)  "Undid revision 646800674 by Jamie Tubers (talk)"
 * 1)  "Undid revision 646799853 by Jamie Tubers (talk)"
 * 2)  "Undid revision 646800674 by Jamie Tubers (talk)"

 * Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
 * 1)   "/* Ramsey Nouah */ new section"
 * 2)   "/* Ramsey Nouah */ reply"

 * Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

 * Comments:

This User has been edit warring on the article of Ramsey Nouah for sometime. He changes figures, removes information which are cited and replaces them with contentious information which can't be found in any reliable source. There seems to be conflict of interest here, cos the user stated that he said he is "a member of Ramsey Nouah team". I have given a warning on his talkpage, and two other users have also previously given warnings on his talkpage....also because of his edits on the page of the same subject. This user is becoming disruptive, as he doesn't want to discuss, neither is he willing to provide sources for his controversial edits, as suggested to him. Jamie Tubers (talk) 15:42, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * .--Bbb23 (talk) 00:54, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

User:6675548 reported by User:Lerdthenerd (Result: Blocked)

 * Page:
 * User being reported:

 * Previous version reverted to:

 * Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)  "Undid revision 646810405 by Dlsqor (talk)"
 * 2)  "Undid revision 646808500 by Dlsqor (talk)"
 * 3)  "←Blanked the page"
 * 1)  "Undid revision 646808500 by Dlsqor (talk)"
 * 2)  "←Blanked the page"

 * Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
 * 1)   "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Guri. (TW)"

 * Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
 * 1)   "/* redirect war, Disqor and 667 use the talk page! */ new section"

 * Comments:

users arguing over what the page should be called Lerd the nerd  wiki defender  16:17, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * .--Bbb23 (talk) 01:16, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

User:<IP_ADDRESS> reported by User:Barek (Result: Block and semi)
Page:

User being reported:

Initial edits posted earlier today by:

Diffs of the user's reverts: Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]
 * 1)  People with no connection to the city, please do not make any corrections. The script is native language of the city and it should be included.
 * 2)  Undid revision 646861780 by Abecedare
 * 3)  Undid revision 646862375 by Barek
 * 4)  Undid revision 646862791 by Barek
 * 5)  Undid revision 646864260 by Barek

Link to discussion with the user:
 * User talk:Barek

Comments:

User refuses to take the disputed content to article talk page, despite multiple requests and being reverted by multiple editors. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:21, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * . I indeffed Monkreal and semi-protected the article for one week. If the IPs act up on other pages and you don't feel comfortable blocking them on your own,, let me know or point another administrator to my comment if I'm not around.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:31, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Safehaven86 reported by User:HughD (Result: Referred to ANI)
Page:

User being reported:

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)  to WP:RSN as not RS
 * 2)  to WP:RSN as not RS
 * 3)  to WP:RSN as not RS
 * 1)  to WP:RSN as not RS

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

See also WP:RSN. User reported some sources to WP:RSN, then returned to the article to edit war to increase the level of detail drawn from those very sources, among other reverts.

19:52, 12 February 2015 Today another example of on the talk page Talk:illinois Policy Institute and at WP:RSN. Seems like either the article space or the talk space/noticebaord behaviour may not be in good faith. Hugh (talk) 23:15, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:FORUMSHOP. The OP has opened a thread here as well Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Safehaven86 (talk) 23:20, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Forum shopping is the same or essentially the same issue on multiple notice boards. This is a 3RR compliant. The ANI report is a separate editor behaviour issue. Hugh (talk) 16:33, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Result: No action. The submitter has already taken this to ANI and there is no need to discuss the same thing in multiple venues. So far it appears that ANI is not impressed. EdJohnston (talk) 04:39, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * "The submitter has already taken this..." Hello Ed. Thanks for your service here. This is a 3RR report. The ANI report is a separate editor behaviour issue. Please re-open this. Thank you. Hugh (talk) 16:29, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * As a 3RR report this is closed. If you are not happy with my decision you can appeal it to WP:ANI. EdJohnston (talk) 17:38, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Михаил Марчук reported by User:Mark Marathon (Result: Withdrawn)
Page:

User being reported:

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)
 * 2)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Editor persistently reverts and has shown no inclination of discussing the issue on the talk page. the behaviour is seen at Darwin, Northern Territory. Mark Marathon (talk) 07:52, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

You're right, I should not do so, excuse me. --Mr. Vladimirovic (talk) 09:07, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Mr. Vladimirovic seems to have seen the light. For my part I'm happy to chalk this up to someone having bad day and drop the whole thing.Mark Marathon (talk) 10:28, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Result: Withdrawn. User:Михаил Марчук was making inappropriate additions to multiple articles but he has apologized on his talk page. It looks like he has begun to undo his changes. EdJohnston (talk) 17:43, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Bolterc reported by User:Sitush (Result: Blocked)
Page:

User being reported:

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: User_talk:Bolterc

Comments:

This is a new user, unfortunately. They're causing problems at several articles, including AAP and a copy/paste creation at Bhagavankoil which they then recreated at Bhagavankovil. While I am sure this is unintentional, someone needs to have a word other than me. - Sitush (talk) 12:33, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I have just declined this malformed speedy attempt[, mostly because it is notable even when I had reviewed it back in May. Always had this article on my watchlist. [[User:OccultZone| Occult Zone ]] (Talk • Contributions • Log) 13:24, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

 * – 24 hours. The four diffs listed above seem to be a 3RR violation at Aam Admi Party. The user appears not to like the existence of Aam Aadmi Party (Pakistan) and doesn't want it to be mentioned in a hatnote. EdJohnston (talk) 00:11, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Stevendacosta reported by User:Revent (Result: Blocked)

 * Page:
 * User being reported:

 * Previous version reverted to:

 * Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)  "Girls United is a SEPARATE group from Girlicious, the are not a re-brand!! They are not affiliated in any way! (besides sharing Nichole as a member!)"

 * Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

 * Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

 * Comments:

This appears to be the same editor as <IP_ADDRESS> (note the identical edit summaries) who logged in after being warned for edit warring here. Revent talk 00:28, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * – 31 hours. EdJohnston (talk) 01:44, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

User: <IP_ADDRESS> : reported by User:NathanWubs (Result: blocked for 1 week)
Page:

User being reported:

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

 * 1) diff 1 Undid User: 2a02:2f0a:507f:ffff::567b:22e8
 * 2) diff 2 Undid same Ip again.
 * 3) diff 3 Undid Same Ip Again.
 * 4) diff 4 Undid User: RobinHood70
 * 5) diff 5 reverted User:NathanWubs

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: link 1 link 2

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: diff 1 (do not know if this is correct probably would need more diffs, other talk pages are involved too)

Comments : This Ip has tried to add the same source of information (later modified) to different content pages. In content pages that it does not belong in the first place. Which has been told to him in the talk pages and also in the reverts. Further more the information that can be used in polygamy and monogamy need to be edited to avoid WP:OR and still need to determine what weight it bares. Also all the none RS sources and sources that do not say what is placed in the text need to be removed. But besides the content despite talking on the talk page user keeps reverting and adding new information and unreliable sources. Has reverted now 5 times on the page mentioned and 2-3 times on most of the other pages

If I need to be blocked as well because I see that maybe it could have been acted out better. Then I fully submit too that. I just want this edit war to stop. So that the information that might be able to be used in the two pages can be looked at properly. And that the other pages do not become more of a chaos. NathanWubs (talk) 01:12, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

 * In addition to what NathanWubs reported above, I've encountered this same user on the Polyamory article. While only at three reversions there, not exceeding it, the IP in question is adding substantively similar content to that page, which was challenged and discussed at Talk:Polyamory. A review of the IP's history will show that they've added similar content to other pages as well. Given that the content has been objected to and reverted multiple times on every page it was added to (I think), and that there was a discussion of the synthesis issues on RSN, I see this as not just a single revert violation, but a combined violation that spans all the invovled pages. – Robin Hood  (talk)  01:21, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

 * . Also noted the removal of other warnings, which led to an increased length. seicer  |  talk  |  contribs  02:11, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Wasp-1992 reported by User:Flat Out (Result: Warned)

 * Page:
 * User being reported:

 * Previous version reverted to:

 * Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)  "/* Current members */Flat Out can change the page but it will not change the fact that CHRIS SLADE is the drummer of the band"
 * 2)  "/* Former members */"
 * 3)  "/* Current members */"
 * 4)  "/* Former members */"
 * 5)  "/* Former members */Chris Slade is not just a live member he is a real band member."
 * 6)  "/* Current members */"
 * 1)  "/* Former members */Chris Slade is not just a live member he is a real band member."
 * 2)  "/* Current members */"
 * 1)  "/* Current members */"

 * Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
 * 1)   "Warning: Edit warring on List of AC/DC band members. (TW)"
 * 2)   "Warning: Edit warring on AC/DC. (TW)"
 * 3)   "/* February 2015 */"

 * Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
 * 1)   "/* Phil Rudd/Chris Slade */ consenus editing"

 * Comments:

Persistent edit warring on this article and also at AC/DC despite warning and attempts to engage in discussion. Edits reflect opinion and is not here.  Flat Out  let's discuss it  01:50, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The diffs above don't show an actual violation of 3RR, though User:Wasp-1992 may have promised to edit war. The question is whether Chris Slade is now the AC/DC band's 'official' drummer and not simply the acting drummer who goes on tour with them. Only editor consensus can parse this subtle distinction, and editors need to be willing to accept whatever this consensus turns out to be. There's an ongoing discussion at Talk:AC/DC. I would be tempted to close this with a warning to User:Wasp-10992. Any more reverts should lead to a block. EdJohnston (talk) 23:17, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Result: User:Wasp-10992 is warned per my comment above. The reverts appear to have stopped for the moment. EdJohnston (talk) 02:14, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Ritsaiph reported by User:Kudzu1 (Result: Blocked)
Page:

User being reported:

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments: This isn't a WP:3RR complaint, but it's a very clear case of WP:EDITWAR behavior, and in the last case, a very disruptive WP:POINT violation. User:Ritsaiph has also behaved very unpleasantly on Talk:War in Donbass, as you can see in this thread (including a poorly disguised link to hardcore pornography). Under the circumstances, as an uninvolved editor (who is sick of seeing this come up over and over on my Watchlist, natch) I think a short timeout is warranted. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:27, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

 * I think more than a "short timeout" is warranted. See the AN/I thread I opened. RGloucester  — ☎ 04:28, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed, the image link the user placed on a talkpage needs oversight. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:32, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The disruptive link has been removed, but for posterity, it's here: -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:38, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Still needs to be revdeleted... RGloucester  — ☎ 04:40, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Although I don't see a 3RR violation I do see a couple of other things that are unacceptable. That said, the editor in question seems to have retired. If they come back, any repeat of this behavior will warrant appropriate action. In the meantime I've revdelled the Talk:War in Donbass edit. Philg88 ♦talk 05:39, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Retired or not, this is a clear case of WP:NOTHERE. If the user is going to do what he just did, it is clear that he has the potential to cause severe disruption. For that alone, he should be blocked. Verification of his "retirement" is another story, too. I say block him, and let him make his case if he wants to come back. I see no reason why that kind of despicable behaviour should be tolerated. RGloucester  — ☎ 06:11, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree, although I don't know if the behavior covered here nearly rises to the level of an indef block. I do think there should be some action, as I have seen too often how disruptive editors dodge sanctions by claiming to be "retired" only to resurface a short time later and resume their old tricks. -Kudzu1 (talk) 06:40, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry guys, but blocks are preventative, not punitive. As I said above, if (s)he comes back and continues with disruptive behavior then appropriate action will be taken. Philg88 ♦talk 17:04, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Result: Blocked 31 hours by User:Callanecc. Unsure whether he saw this report. EdJohnston (talk) 02:07, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * No I didn't see this one. Though adding a retired template to one's userpage shouldn't be a way to avoid sanctions, which were deserved. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:34, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Dlsqor reported by User:Lerdthenerd (Result: Blocked)

 * Page:
 * User being reported:

 * Previous version reverted to:

 * Diffs of the user's reverts:
 * 1)  "Undid revision 646810254 by 6675548 (talk)"
 * 2)  "Dlsqor moved page Guri-si, Gyeonggi-do, South Korea to Guri over redirect"
 * 3)  "←Redirected page to Guri, Gyeonggi-do"
 * 4)  "←Redirected page to Guri"
 * 1)  "←Redirected page to Guri, Gyeonggi-do"
 * 2)  "←Redirected page to Guri"

 * Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
 * 1)   "General note: Removal of content, blanking on Guri article South korea. (TW)"

 * Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
 * 1)   "/* redirect war, Disqor and 667 use the talk page! */ new section"

See above for 667, and can someone merge these two together-- Lerd the nerd wiki defender  16:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Comments:
 * .--Bbb23 (talk) 01:17, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

 * I think that administrator should reconsider enforcement. By provision 4 of WP:NOT3RR, we can revert obvious vandalism. User:Dlsqor edited against vandal User:6675548, and . User:ASDFGH and User:Zanhe will know the facts.  Sawol (talk) 08:01, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

source: wikimedia

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

title: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive271


text:
User:Jaydavidmartin/Promised Land, Crusader State

Promised Land, Crusader State: The American Encounter with the World Since 1776 is a 1997 book by American historian Walter A. McDougall outlining the historical foreign policy traditions of the United States. McDougall splits American foreign policy into two eras, each consisting of four traditions: the "Old Testament", dominant from 1776 until the 1890s, consisting of the doctrines Liberty at home, Unilateralism abroad, an American System of states, and Expansion; and the "New Testament", dominant in the twentieth century, consisting of Progressive Imperialism, Wilsonianism, Containment, and "Global Meliorism".

Summary
McDougall splits the history of American foreign policy into two periods: the "Old Testament" and the "New Testament". Each, in turn, is divided into four traditions: the Old Testament into Liberty at Home, Unilateralism, The American System, and Expansionism; the New Testament into Progressive Imperialism, Wilsonianism, Containment, and Global Meliorism. Each tradition can be roughly described as follows:
 * 1) Liberty at home: The United States is free to shape its internal affairs—to advance the "blessings of liberty"—independent of any foreign powers.
 * 2) Unilateralism: The United States will utilize unilateral action when necessary to defend liberty at home.
 * 3) The American System: The United States will defend its national interests in the Western Hemisphere so as to stave off foreign interference in its domestic politics.
 * 4) Expansionism: The United States will be free to grow within the much of the North American continent.
 * 5) Progressive Imperialism: American power will be used to remake foreign societies.
 * 6) Wilsonianism: The United States will implant itself into a liberal international order, forfeiting some degree of national sovereignty in the pursuit of multilateralism and collective security.
 * 7) Containment: The United States will restrict the influence of the Soviet Union so as to stave off the spread of communism.
 * 8) Global Meliorism: The United States will promote economic development and human rights in foreign countries.

He places the Old and New testaments into sharp distinction: the Old, he contends, was basically defensive, centered around preventing the outside world from shaping the politics of America, which was conceived of as a "Promised Land" which served as an example for the rest of the world, while the New was primarily offensive, concerned with empowering America to do precisely what it had resisted for itself—to shape the politics of foreign countries as a "Crusader State". It is from this distinction that the book receives its name.

In his own analysis, McDougall looks favorably on the Old Testament while. While he says that the United States fight against fascism and Communism is perhaps America's "finest hour", he asserts that "the Crusader State has...made many mistakes and done much that is bad and ugly, not least to itself". He further contends that the Founding Fathers "flatly denied that the United States ought to be in the business of changing the world, lest it only change itself—for the worse".

Mcdougall also stresses that several of the traditions that he lays out were intended as correctives to conventional historical wisdom. In particular, Liberty at home is a corrective to the belief that American exceptionalism was intended by early American leaders to be reflected in foreign policy; Unilateralism is a corrective to the "myth" of isolationism; The American System and Expansionism are meant as correctives to the all-encompassing influence ascribed to the Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny, respectively; and Wilsonianism is meant as a corrective to liberal internationalism.

Old Testament
The "Old Testament" includes the four policy traditions that defined US foreign policy from the founding of the United States in 1776 to the turn of the 19th century: Liberty at Home, Unilateralism, The American System, and Expansionism. Importantly, McDougall argues that each tradition naturally follows from those before it to form a "logical, consistent, and well-proportioned set of traditions that guided early American statecraft". He broadly describes the system as such: If the United States was to remain free and independent—the first tradition—then it must pursue a unilateral foreign policy—the second tradition. If Unilateralism was to survive, then it must promote an American System of states—the third tradition. But it was not enough that the United States remain aloof from Europe. It must preempt European bids for influence over the vast unsettled lands that remained in North America—hence the fourth tradition.

Liberty at home
McDougall contends that the earliest United States foreign policy was a practical commitment to defending "liberty at home"—that is, to take only those diplomatic and military steps necessary to defend the system of government they had recently established, which in the eyes of early Americans was one devised to secure the "blessings of liberty". He relates this to the idea of American exceptionalism, the belief (common among early colonial rebels in the US) that America is inherently different and uniquely good in comparison to other countries. He pushes back on the idea promoted by some scholars that exceptionalism logically entails that early American leaders must have intended foreign policy to advance American ideals outside of its borders. Rather, he elucidates from the writings of early American leaders that exceptionalism entailed little more than protecting America from foreign interference—that it was intended only to defend the "beacon of hope", or "shining city on a hill", that America represented. According to McDougall: [T]o the generation that founded the United States, designed its government, and laid down its polices, the exceptional calling of the American people was not to do anything special in foreign affairs, but to be a light to lighten the world...The foreign policy powers of the executive branch were the shield, sword, and lawyer's brief for American Exceptionalism; they were not themselves an expression of it...Foreign policy existed to defend, not define, what America was.

McDougall points to four "challenges" to support his thesis. (the struggle for independence, the reaction to the French Revolution, the transition of power from Federalists to Democratic Republicans, and the response to Latin American revolutions) The first challenge was America's initial struggle for independence in the Revolutionary War. ... The Constitution, while espousing high-mined ideals towards the American people and containing myriad restrictions on the domestic power of the government, places no idealistic restrictions on the actions of the state in foreign affairs. The second is the reaction to the French Revolution, which acted as a potential crossroads for American foreign policy as it forced American leaders to decide whether the country would keep to itself or commit to aiding revolutionary democratic movements (much like it had been assisted in its own recent revolution).

Unilateralism
McDougall argues that unilateralism was the next American foreign policy tradition—and one that flowed naturally from the first. He says that the "self-evident course for the United States was to avoid permanent, entangling alliances and to remain neutral in Europe's wars except when our Liberty—the first hallowed tradition—was at risk". The reasoning for this, he claims, is quite straightforward: First, if the United States became enmeshed in war and imperialism on the European model, it would have to raise large armies and navies, tax and conscript its people, and generally compromise domestic freedom, the Republic's raison d'être. Second, if it became enmeshed in European conflicts, the United States would be forced to play junior partner in alliances with mighty empires, perhaps losing, or losing sight of, its own national interests. Third, if it became enmeshed in foreign conflicts, the European powers would compete for Americans' affections, corrupt their politics with propaganda and bribes, and split them into factions. Fourth, if the United States joined Europe's rivalries, the arena of battle would surely include America's own lands and waters, as they had for over a century.

He contrasts this tradition of unilateralism with the oft-stated myth that early American foreign policy was "isolationist". "Isolationism", he points out, was never used to describe US foreign policy until the 1890s, when it was used as a pejorative against anti-imperialists. McDougall thus refers to isolationism as "no tradition at all, but a dirty word that interventionists, especially since Pear Harbor, hurl at anyone who questions their policies".

The American System
If the United States was to nurture its independence and Liberty at home, it must steer clear of Europe's wars and ambitions and preserve its freedom of action. Hence the dicta of Washington and Jefferson against entangling alliances. But to refuse to "go over to Europe" was not enough; the United States must also see to it that European powers did not "come over to America." For if they did, they would inevitably threaten American interests, force the United States to play a role in the European balance of power, or, what was worse, create a second balance-of-power system in the Western Hemisphere itself. Hence the United States must work to fashion, as its limited means allowed, a uniquely American international system.

Expansionism
The fourth and final tradition of the Old Testament is expansionism, which captures the reasoning for the enlargement of the territorial boundaries of the United States from its initial restriction to the East Coast at the time of the founding to the total possession of all land stretching from the East Coast to the West Coast by the 1850s. McDougall points out that expansion was already an inevitability—people were going to venture further west regardless of any government direction or lack thereof—and expansionism was simply the ideological rationalization of that inevitability. This bottom-up nature contrasts with the first three traditions, which were essentially concerted decisions by the American government and which could have differed had different winds prevailed. However, he contends that the wide embrace of the ideology of expansionism among the early American population flows naturally from the first three traditions: not only was a central element of liberty at home the freedom to grow, but to defend the American System from European encroachment it must maintain the ability to preempt European bids on North American land by unilaterally expanding its borders.

McDougall further explicates the ideology of expansionism by pointing to the eight ideological motivations of expansionism identified by historian Albert K. Weinberg:
 * 1) Natural right: The United States had a natural right to "regulate the future destiny of North America".
 * 2) Geographic predestination: The unoccupied portions of North America were without value unless developed; hence, it was geographically predestined that the United States should expand further into the continent to develop it.
 * 3) Natural growth: It was only natural that a nascent country grow.
 * 4) The American sphere: New lands would gravitate into the American sphere (for example, John Adams believed Cuba would gravitate towards the United States after gaining independence from Spain).
 * 5) Virtuous industry: Virgin land existed for man to develop, so naturally Americans should expand into the undeveloped continent.
 * 6) Liberty: American growth ipso facto meant an increase in liberty; hence, expanding republicanism provided a justification for the expansion of the United States.
 * 7) Manifest Destiny: As people moved into and developed more of the continent, it was the duty of the United States to admit all qualified territories freely into its republic. This, according to McDougall, was the "pure" expression of Manifest Destiny; however, he notes a second "belligerent, insatiable, and impatient" version developed that pushed for the forceful expansion of America's borders.
 * 8) Regeneration of other cultures: The United States should "liberate" foreign places—even densely populated ones—to bring them into the "blessings of American civilization".

McDougall counters the traditional historical narrative that American expansion was primarily motivated by the belligerent version of Manifest Destiny. Rather, he argues that most nineteenth century Americans would have accepted the first seven elements but would have rejected the eighth element; he points, for example, to President James K. Polk's decision to accept the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, purchasing Texas, New Mexico, and California from Mexico—after emerging victorious from the Mexican-American War— while rejecting the minority opinion that all of Mexico should be taken over. He also pushes back against the idea that expansionism was motivated by an ideology of racial superiority, i.e. that expansion was a deliberate effort to dispossess Native Americans or that a "victory culture" promoted expansion for the purpose of defeating and slaughtering Natives. In his view, expansionism was never motivated by racial superiority (which was a widely held belief through much of American history), it was motivated by those eight elements listed above and racial superiority was only used to reconcile the contradiction that Americans believed they were expanding liberty while at the same time doing immense harm to Natives.

Wilsonianism
The sixth US foreign policy tradition identified by McDougall is Wilsonianism, the brand of liberal internationalism associated with US President Woodrow Wilson. In line with the interventionist nature of Progressive Imperialism, but favoring a more universalist, multilateral approach of collective security, open diplomacy, reduction of armaments, self-determination, and an intergovernmental association of nations, McDougall concludes that Wilsonianism largely conflicted with the first four traditions by thrusting America upon the world in an attempt to shape it along abstract, American ideals.

Deeply tied as it is to Wilson, McDougall expends considerable space analyzing the man's philosophies and temperament. Describing Wilson as someone who "loved, craved, and in a sense glorified power", he adduces that Wilson advanced a far different version of American Exceptionalism than the founders had intended: rather than be a shining city on a hill that would serve as an example—but not an interferer—in the rest of the world, America, with Wilson at the helm, would instead set out to improve the world through its foreign policy. "The idea of America", Wilson asserted, "is to serve humanity". For this reason, Wilson was a supporter of Progressive Imperialism. He cheered the annexation of the Philippines and Puerto Rico, imposed military protectorates on Haiti and Nicaragua, and refused to engage with the government of Victoriano Huerta in Mexico because of Huerta's brutality, despite the fact that this jeopardized American business interests. He even once quipped he would "teach the South American republics to elect good men".

It would be this belief that would motivate Wilson to enter the nation into World War I (begrudgingly—he had initially wanted to negotiate peace, the so-called "Peace without Victory" approach). While there were many factors motivating the US entrance into the world, not least Germany's decision to wage unrestricted submarine warfare, McDougall argues that Wilson's primary motivation was to set the United States—under his leadership—in a position to establish a new, peaceful world order based upon liberal principles: The damage done to U.S. commerce seems to have interested Wilson little. Nor did he cling to neutrality because it was American tradition, or because he was a pacifist (he was not), or because the American people were almost unanimously in favor of staying out of the war. He did it because he believed that remaining above the battle was the only way that he, Wilson, could exert the moral authority needed to end the war on terms that would make for lasting peace...[principles of]: no more territorial gains achieved by conquest; equality of rights for small nations; government control of arms manufacture and an "association of nations wherein all shall guarantee the territorial integrity of each."

Wilson, for this reason, always described the United States as an "associated power" and not an "allied power" of the Allies so as to distinguish the aims of the United States, which would seek to advance a liberal internationalist world order after the war, from the Allie's war aims, which sought to reestablish the old imperial order at the conclusion of the war. Adding to the mix, during the War the Bolsheviks seized power from the Tsarist autocracy in Russia and set about establishing an international communist order. Thus, the United States under Wilson became one of four contestants for the world's future: "the German militarists, the democratic but imperialist Allies, Wilson with his program of liberal internationalism, and Communists preaching social revolution."

With the Russians out of the war, and the allies victorious, Wilson set about advancing his goal of a liberal international world order, which he had previously elucidated in his famous Fourteen Points. In negotiating the peace treaty to conclude the war, Wilson hammered for his liberal internationalist ideas to be incorporated. In the end, he was forced to compromise on most of his principles for the sake of ensuring the establishment of the League of Nations, an international organization that would serve as the progenitor of the United Nations. But he was unable to convince the United States Senate to ratify the League Covenant (in large part due to his unwillingness to accommodate almost any of the Senate's reservations, according to McDougall), depriving the League of one of the world's great powers—and the nation whose leader had championed it in the first place.

Ultimately, the League would prove mostly ineffectual and the Republican Congress of the 1920s would sink back from many of Wilson's principles, enacting protectionist tariffs rather than advance free trade, severely restricting immigration, and generally pulling back from the world stage. However, Wilsonian principles became ingrained enough as to find their way into every presidential platform since Wilson and, most importantly, would come raging back in modified form under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who would establish a liberal international order and make Wilsonianism the "dominant U.S. diplomatic tradition".

Containment
Containment called forth that spread-eagle, damn-your-eyes, us-against-them defiance never far from the surface of the American personality, and convinced the nation that its oldest and dearest tradition, Liberty, was under siege at home and abroad. Nor did Containment violate American Unilateralism so much as it might appear, for whereas the United States made commitments all over the map, it was clearly the boss of the alliances, and so retained its freedom of action. Containment meshed well with Progressive Imperialism, since it validated the projection of U.S. military power across the oceans and made parts of Asia and the Middle East into virtual protectorates. Containment did excellent duty on behalf of Exceptionalism, in that it opposed both colonial and Communist empires, and thus opened or kept open the markets and resources of half the world. Containment even honored Wilsonianism insofar as it served Liberal Internationalist values, enlisted them as weapons in the Cold War, and used the U.N. whenever possible. Hence "American hegemony"—if you will—"constituted a form of anti-imperialist imperialism".

Global Meliorism
McDougall also has particular contempt for Global Meliorism, saying that it is "the least effective and in some ways the most arrogant of all our diplomatic traditions". He argues that foreign aid has, for the most part, been harmful rather than helpful, that triumphs like the Marshall Plan and the occupations of Germany of Japan were "dubious and anyway no model for other parts of the world", and considers its failures—like the Vietnam War and poverty in America's own inner cities—both extremely destructive and harmful to the international reputation of the United States. McDougall wholesale recommends the United States "close its Meliorist shop and abolish all its do-gooder agencies" and instead bolster its own institutions and values domestically so that it may serve as an example to the world.

Reception
David C. Hendrickson, writing in Foreign Affairs, calls the book a "beautifully crafted examination, rich in argument and historical detail, of the traditions of American foreign policy".

It received a mixed review in the conservative American magazine Commentary. While praising it as an "excellent starting point for...examing our present circumstances, consulting our past, and developing a new foreign-policy tradition", professor at Princeton Aaron Friedberg says that "there is...much to quarrel with in Promised Land, Crusader State". In particular, he finds McDougall's treatment of the period following World War II to be "problematic", regarding McDougall's reasoning for viewing containment positively while viewing "global meliorism" negatively to be awkward and convoluted. He points in particular to McDougall's analysis of the Vietnam War, saying that McDougall's caricature of the war as a product of meliorism is a narrative contortion that ignores that the war was motivated in large part by containment itself.

George Nash, writing in the Wall Street Journal, provides a mostly positive review. He says that McDougall has "written a lively and provocative book that does much to clarify our diplomatic traditions", and will be particularly liked by "by libertarians, Buchananite conservatives and all who detest the utopian pretensions of liberal internationalism". He does, however, spout off a list of probing questions for McDougall, asking, for instance, if "American altruism abroad in this century [has] been as futile and destructive as Mr. McDougall believes?"


text:
User:Uchiha Albus/sandbox

 * Indented line This page is created by a Filipino and a Dabawenyo.  [[File:Example.jpg]]

--Uchiha Albus (talk) 13:00, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

ؠؠؠؠؠؠؠؠؠؠؠؠؠؠ ؠ         ؠ        ؠ ؠ         ؠ        ؠ ؠ                   ؠ ؠ                   ؠ

title: User:Uchiha Albus/sandbox


text:
nanoelectronic

Adjective

 * 1)  Describing any electronic device constructed on the nano scale

Translations

 * French:
 * Italian: nanoelettronico

title: nanoelectronic


text:
Kuwait International Fair

The Kuwait International Fair is a large fairground Founded in 1971 and located in Mishrif, Kuwait. The fairgrounds consists of six large air-conditioned exhibition halls, its largest spanning 7,000 square meters. The fairgrounds is a popular site for several exhibitions that occur in Kuwait, with over 45 occurring annually.

title: Kuwait International Fair


text:
2017 BFD Energy Challenger

The 2017 BFD Energy Challenger was a professional tennis tournament played on clay courts. It was the third edition of the tournament which was part of the 2017 ATP Challenger Tour. It took place in Rome, Italy between 25 September and 1 October 2017.

Seeds

 * 1 Rankings are as of 18 September 2017.

Other entrants
The following players received wild cards into the singles main draw:
 * 🇮🇹 Andrea Arnaboldi
 * 🇮🇹 Cristian Carli
 * 🇮🇹 Matteo Donati
 * 🇮🇹 Gian Marco Moroni

The following players received entry into the singles main draw as special exempts:
 * 🇪🇸 Carlos Taberner
 * 🇷🇴 Adrian Ungur

The following players received entry from the qualifying draw:
 * 🇪🇸 Íñigo Cervantes
 * 🇪🇸 Daniel Gimeno Traver
 * 🇦🇷 Patricio Heras
 * 🇮🇹 Adelchi Virgili

The following player received entry as a lucky loser:
 * 🇫🇷 Elliot Benchetrit

Singles

 * 🇷🇸 Filip Krajinović def. 🇪🇸 Daniel Gimeno Traver 6–4, 6–3.

Doubles

 * 🇸🇰 Martin Kližan / 🇸🇰 Jozef Kovalík def. 🇧🇪 Sander Gillé / 🇧🇪 Joran Vliegen 6–3, 7–6(7–5).

title: 2017 BFD Energy Challenger


text:
Northumberland (1805 EIC ship)

Northumberland was launched in 1805. She made six voyages as an extra ship of the British East India Company (EIC), between 1805 and 1818. In 1810 and 1811 she served as a transport in the British invasions of Mauritius and Java. She was sold for breaking up in 1819.

Voyages
On 9 April 1805 Thomas Hardy received a contract for six voyages from the EIC. The freight rate was £15 9s per registered ton peacetime rate, plus £12 10s per ton for wartime contingencies as of the first voyage.

EIC voyage #1 (1805–1807)
Captain George Raincock acquired a letter of marque on 20 June 1805. He sailed from Cork on 31 August, bound for St Helena and Bengal. Northumberland reached Madeira on 29 September and St Helena on 13 December. There a passenger, the future explorer and naturalist William John Burchell left her. She was at the Cape of Good Hope on 27 February 1806, and Penang on 29 May. She parted from Euphrates off the Andaman Islands on 15 July. Although Euphrates arrived at Calcutta on 18 July, Northumberland did not arrive at Calcutta on until 4 August.

Northumberland was at Saugor on 13 September. She was again at Calcutta on 25 September. Homeward bound, albeit indirectly, she was at Saugor on 21 November, and Madras on 11 January 1807. By 20 February she was at Bombay. She reached Point de Galle on 5 April, the Cape on 5 June, and St Helena on 9 July. She arrived back at the Downs on 26 September.

EIC voyage #2 (1808–1809)
Captain John Robinson Francklin (or Franklin) acquired a letter of marque on 11 March 1808. He sailed from Portsmouth on 15 April 1808, bound for Madras and Bengal. Northumberland was at Madeira on 1 May, and arrived at Madras on 19 September. On 5 November she was at Calcutta. Homeward bound, she was at Saugor on 29 December and Point de Galle on 7 February 1809.

On 15 February she sailed from Point de Galle as part of a fleet of 15 East Indiamen under escort by HMS Culloden (1783) and HMS Terpsichore (1785).

On 14 March 1809, off Mauritius, a gale developed. Four of the ships, Bengal,  Calcutta,  Jane, Duchess of Gordon, and  Lady Jane Dundas, parted company with the main convoy. They were never heard of again. Huddart was the last to vessel to see Bengal and Calcutta; Hugh Inglis was the last vessel to see Jane, Duchess of Gordon and Lady Jane Dundas. The hull of one of the four missing vessels was sighted overturned off Mauritius the following October, but sank before it could be identified.

Northumberland reached St Helena on 29 April. She arrived at the Downs on 13 July.

EIC voyage #3 (1810–1812)
Captain Franklin left Portsmouth on 14 March 1810, bound for Madras and Bengal. She reached Madras on 8 July and arrived at Diamond Harbour 29 July. Outward bound, she was at Saugor at 30 August, and Mauritius on 29 November. She may have been transporting troops or material to support the British invasion of Mauritius. She then returned to Diamond Harbor on 23 February 1811.

Next, she sailed in support of the British invasion of Java. She was at Saugor on 17 March and Malacca on 4 May. Northumberland was in the fourth division, which left Malacca on 17 June.

On 4 August she was at Batavia. She returned to Calcutta on 23 October. Finally homeward bound, she was at Saugor on 26 January 1812, Madras on 4 February, and St Helena on 11 May. She arrived at the Downs on 21 July.

EIC voyage #4 (1813–1814)
Captain Franklin sailed from Portsmouth on 2 June 1813, bound for Bengal. Northumberland was at Madeira on 22 June Madeira and arrived at Diamond Harbour on 8 November. She was at Calcutta on 25 December. Homeward bound, she was at Saugor on 29 January 1814, the Cape on 25 April, and St Helena on 19 May. She arrived at Woolwich on 12 June.

EIC voyage #5 (1815–1816)
Captain Franklin sailed from the Downs on 3 April 1815, bound for Madras and Bengal. Northumberland reached Madeira on 18 April and Madras on 6 August. She arrived at Calcutta on 5 September. Homeward bound, she was at Saugor on 25 November, Madras on 29 December, Bencoolen on 1 February 1816, and St Helena on 10 May. She arrived at the Downs on 13 July.

EIC voyage #6 (1817–1818)
Captain William Mitchell sailed from the Downs on 6 May 1817, bound for Bengal and Bencoolen. Northumberland reached Madeira on 21 May, and arrived at Diamond Harbour on 28 September. On 17 December she was at New Anchorage (Calcutta, near Diamond Harbour and Kedgeree.) On 27 February 1818 she was at Bencoolen. She reached St Helena on 3 July, and arrived at the Downs on 29 August.

Fate
Northumberland was sold in 1819 for breaking up.

title: Northumberland (1805 EIC ship)


text:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/rozcloud.com

Links

 * rozcloud.com resolves to [//<IP_ADDRESS> <IP_ADDRESS>]
 * Link is not on the blacklist.
 * Link is not on the domainredlist.
 * Link is not on the Monitorlist.
 * None of the mentioned users is on the blacklist.
 * Link is not on the whitelist.
 * Link is not on the monitor list.
 * Link is not on the whitelist.
 * Link is not on the monitor list.

 * st.dist.rozcloud.com resolves to [//<IP_ADDRESS> <IP_ADDRESS>]
 * Link is not on the blacklist.
 * Link is not on the domainredlist.
 * Link is not on the Monitorlist.
 * None of the mentioned users is on the blacklist.
 * Link is not on the whitelist.
 * Link is not on the monitor list.
 * None of the mentioned users is on the blacklist.
 * Link is not on the whitelist.
 * Link is not on the monitor list.

Additions

 * Displayed all 2 additions.


text:
World History/World Religions

' This page is for an elementary explanation of the origins and nature of the religions. It is not meant to be an in depth study by any means. '

Animism
Animism (from Latin animus, -i "soul, life") is the worldview that non-human entities (animals, plants, and inanimate objects or phenomena), possess a spiritual essence.

Baha'i Faith
The Bahá'í Faith is the youngest of the world's independent religions. Its founder, Bahá'u'lláh (1817–1892), is regarded by Bahá'ís as the most recent in the line of Messengers of God that stretches back beyond recorded time and that includes Abraham, Moses, Buddha, Zoroaster, Christ and Muhammad.

The central theme of Bahá'u'lláh's message is that humanity is one single race and that the day has come for its unification in one global society. God, Bahá'u'lláh said, has set in motion historical forces that are breaking down traditional barriers of race, class, creed, and nation and that will, in time, give birth to a universal civilization. The principal challenge facing the peoples of the earth is to accept the fact of their oneness and to assist the processes of unification.

Wikipedia article: Bahá'í Faith

Buddhism
Buddhism is a religion based largely around the teachings of the Siddhārtha Gautama (although his exact status is still controversial and changes by sect) and is now the central religion of most of Southeast Asia, Mongolia, Sri Lanka, and parts of China, Nepal, India, and a small part of Russia. It is also a major religion in Korea and Japan and has a growing influence in the west.

Gautama was born in ancient Nepal around the 6th century BC, son of a King and relieved of all tasks. One day, while being brought around by his charioteer, he saw the four passing sights (an old man, a sickly man, a decaying corpse, and a holy man), which brought him to the realization that birth, old age, sickness, and death happen to all people over countless lives. He left his wife, children, rank, and his entire life to solve that problem. Gautama tried everything to achieve inner peace (he nearly killed himself numerous times) but found nothing that worked. He then tried sitting peacefully under a Bohdi tree and meditating. This proved very successful, and he soon achieved the inner peace he wanted. He then traveled the lands, preaching his new faith. (Postscript-Buddhism is largely based on Jainism, and shares many beliefs with Jainism.)

Within the context of postclassical China, dominations such as pure land and Zen Buddhism appealed to both aristocratic elites and the mass peasantry. A commonality of religion in the global context: the induction of fervent belief system in the presence of societal corruption and lack of intellectual synthesis.

Modern Buddhism still follows the ideals of Gautama-peace, kindness to man, and love of nature (including vegetarianism). There are three modern sects of Buddhism - Theravada, Mahāyāna, and Vajrayāna (practiced in southeast Asia, East Asia, and scattered parts of Asia, respectively).

For information on the sects of Buddhism, or some tenets of Buddhism, go to the Wikipedia articles on:

Buddhism

Theravada

Mahayana

Vajrayana

Christianity
Wikipedia article on Christianity.

Confucianism
Wikipedia article on Confucianism

Hinduism
Hinduism is a term coined to designate the traditional socio-religious systems of the people of India. This term does not appear in any of the sacred literature of India. Hindus refer to their religion as Sanatana Dharma which loosely translated means “The Eternal Path”. Sanatana means eternal, perpetual or sustained. Dharma means any method by which one sees reality for what it is, and that by which one is drawn closer to the Absolute Truth and Ultimate Reality — it is the Philosophia Perenis.

In a context of world history, the Hindu emphasis placed upon social divisions as ample means for a productive society led to the highly stratified caste system in which birth and socio-economic position determined semi-permanent placement.

There are two world religions which have formed the cultural and ethical basis of the world as we know it. Both have an unbroken history going back thousands of years. Judaism with a 5000 year old tradition is the mother of the western civilization through its offshoot Christianity. Hinduism is the older of the two with a literature going back to the beginning of recorded history.

Hindu civilisation originated in the Gangetic and Indus valleys and from there spread out over the entire region of southeast Asia. Its offshoot — Buddhism, shaped and molded the civilizations of Japan, China, Tibet and the rest of Asia. There is evidence to suggest that the Ancient pre-Biblical kingdom of the Mittani in Asia minor was ruled by Kings with Hindu/Sanskrit names. The Hittites were an Indo-European people and according to some sources are said to have originated in the Gangetic Basin of India. Hindu philosophy/theology influenced the ancient Greeks since the time Alexander the Great conquered parts of north India. A remarkable similarity has also been demonstrated between the religion and mythology of the ancient Scandinavian people and that of the people of India.

The ancient civilizations such as the Roman, Greek, Egyptian, Sumerian, Babylonian, Mayan, Aztec, and Inca have all passed away. Even the Jewish culture has undergone many radical changes since its inception 5000 years ago – yet the Hindu civilisation continues as a vibrant and living vector, and has remained virtually unchanged for over 6000 years. Today, Hindu communities are to be found in almost every country on earth.

Hinduism

Islam
Islam

Jainism
Jainism

Judaism
Judaism

Sikhism
Sikhism

Shinto
Shinto

Taoism
Taoism/Daoism

title: World History/World Religions


text:
violina

Noun

 * 1) Violin

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) violin

Noun

 * 1) violin (string instrument)

title: violina


text:
1979 in Greece

Events in the year 1979 in Greece.

Incumbents

 * President – Konstantinos Tsatsos
 * Prime Minister – Konstantinos Karamanlis

Events

 * 20 April – Maria Pangalou, rhythmic gymnast
 * 9 September – Vasileios Tsolakidis, artistic gymnast

title: 1979 in Greece


text:
Timeline of Nortel

Timeline of major events for Nortel.

Bell Telephone Company of Canada

 * 1882: A mechanical department is created within Bell Telephone Company of Canada to manufacture  telephone equipment for Canada,
 * 1886: The mechanical department starts manufacturing its first switchboard, a 50 line Standard Magneto Switchboard.
 * 1888: The mechanical department  has 50 employees.
 * 1890: The mechanical department  has 200 employees and  a new factory is under construction.
 * 1895: Northern Electric and Manufacturing Company Limited is spun off from Bell Canada

Northern Electric and Manufacturing Company

 * 7 December 1895: Northern Electric and Manufacturing Company Limited is incorporated with initial stock capital of $50,000 at $100 per share, with 93 percent held by Bell Canada
 * March 24, 1896: The first general stockholders meeting
 * December 1899: Bell Telephone Company of Canada buys a cabling company for $500,000 later named  The Wire and Cable Company.
 * 1900 Northern Electric and Manufacturing manufactures the first Canadian wind-up gramophones.
 * 1911: The Wire and Cable company changes its name to the Imperial Wire and Cable Company.

Northern Electric Company

 * 1913: The construction of a new manufacturing plant started at Shearer Street in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, as preparations began for the two manufacturing companies' integration.
 * January 1914: the Northern Electric and Manufacturing Company and the Imperial Wire and Cable Company merge into the Northern Electric Company,
 * 1915: the new company opens the doors on a new manufacturing plant in January. This facility at Shearer Street was the primary manufacturing center until the mid-1950s. Edward Fleetford Sise was the president and his brother Paul Fleetford Sise was the vice-president and general manager.
 * During the First World War Northern Electric manufactured the Portable Commutator, a one-wire telegraphic switchboard for military operations in the field.
 * 1922: Northern starts to produce, for $5, the "Peanut" vacuum tube, which required only a single dry-cell battery. The use of alternating current was still under development during this time. The "Northern Electric Peanut tube was the smallest tube made, and drew only one-tenth of an ampere and was the most remarkable radio frequency amplifier ever made."
 * During the 1920s: Northern Electric made kettles, toasters, cigar lighters, electric stoves, and washing machines.
 * January 1923: Northern Electric starts operating an AM radio station with call letters CHYC, in the Shearer Street plant, and much of the programming was religious services for the Northern Electric employees and families in the community.
 * July 1923: CHYC-AM was the first radio station to provide entertainment to the riders of the transcontinental train, in a parlor car fitted with a radio set to receive the broadcast as it left Montreal and traveled west.
 * Later1920s: Northern creates the first talking movie sound system in the British Empire for a theater in Montreal.
 * 1930 – 1933 (Great Depression ):  Sales drop from $34 million to $8.2 million, and the number of employees dropped from 6,100 to 2,400.

Independence from Western Electric

 * 1949: an antitrust suit in the U.S. forces AT&T/Western Electric to sell its stake in Northern Electric to Bell Canada. Deprived of its Western Electric tie, Northern starts developing its own products.
 * 1953:  Northern Electric produces its first television sets using tubes made by RCA.
 * 1964: Bell Canada acquires 100 percent of Northern Electric
 * 1966: the Northern Electric research lab, Northern Electric Laboratories (the predecessor to Bell-Northern Research), starts looking into the possibilities of fiber optic cable
 * 1969: work begins on digitizing telephone communications.
 * 1969: Northern begins making inroads into the U.S. market with its switching systems.
 * 1972: Northern opens its first factory in the U.S. in Michigan.
 * 1972: Northern begins shipping the SG-1 'Pulse' PBX, a PAM TDM PBX with digital control.
 * 1975: Northern begins shipping its first digital switching systems, one of the earliest such systems to be sold.
 * Early 70’: Northern Telecom is, with Bell-Northern Research, a part owner of MicroSystems International a semiconductor manufacturer based in Kanata, outside Ottawa.

Northern Telecom and "Digital World"

 * 1976: Northern Electric Company name changed to Northern Telecom Limited.
 * 1976: "Digital World" three-page advertisement appears in major trade publications
 * 1977, Nortel introduces its DMS line of digital central office telephone switches
 * 1984: AT&T breakup
 * 1985: Northern Telecom becomes the first non-Japanese supplier to Nippon Telegraph and Telephone. The NT DMS-1 would make up 0.6% of NTT's inventory.

Deregulation

 * 1983: Due to deregulation, Bell Canada Enterprises is formed as the parent company to Bell Canada and Northern Telecom. Bell-Northern Research is jointly owned 50-50 by Bell Canada and Northern Telecom. The combined three companies are referred to as the tricorporate.

 * 1995: Northern Telecom becomes Nortel, the streamlined identity it adopts for its 100th anniversary.

Optical boom and the Right Angle Turn

 * 1998: company's name is changed to Nortel Networks
 * 1998: Nortel acquires Bay Networks
 * 1998: BCE ceases to be the majority shareholder of Nortel.
 * late 1990s: share price of Nortel stock reaches unheard-of levels despite the company's repeated failure to turn a profit.
 * 2000: Nortel accounts for more than a third of the total valuation of all the companies listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX), employing 94,500 worldwide, with 25,900 in Canada alone.
 * 2000: BCE spins out Nortel, distributing its holdings of Nortel to its shareholders. Bell-Northern Research is gradually absorbed into Nortel.
 * 2000: John Roth (CEO) cashes in his own stock options for a personal gain of C$135 million
 * 2000-2002: Nortel's market capitalization fell from C$398 billion in September 2000 to less than C$5 billion in August 2002, as Nortel's stock price plunges from C$124 to C$0.47.
 * 2001: CEO John Roth retires, replaced by Chief financial officer Frank Dunn. Dunn would be fired "for cause"

Frank Dunn CEO - accounting restatements

 * 2001-2003: Two-thirds of Nortel's workforce (60,000 staff) are laid off
 * 2001: writedowns of nearly US$16 billion
 * 2003: temporary return to profitability resulting in $70 million in bonuses awarded to the top 43 managers, with $7.8 million going to Dunn alone, $3 million to chief financial officer Douglas Beatty, and $2 million to controller Michael Gollogly.
 * Independent auditor Deloitte & Touche advises audit committee chairman John Cleghorn and board chairman "Red" Wilson to look into the suspicious results, who promptly hired the law firm WilmerHale to vet the financial statements.
 * October 2003, Nortel announces its intention to restate approximately $900 million of liabilities carried on its previously reported balance sheet resulting in a reduction in previously reported net losses for 2000, 2001, and 2002 and an increase in shareholders’ equity and net assets previously reported on its balance sheet.
 * A dozen of the company's most senior executives return $8.6 million of bonuses they were paid based on the erroneous accounting.
 * Investigators find about $3 billion in revenue was booked improperly in 1998, 1999, and 2000.
 * More than $2 billion is moved into later years, about $750 million pushed forward beyond 2003 and about $250 million is wiped away completely.
 * 2003: Nortel reaches an agreement with Export Development Canada for it to provide Nortel with a credit support facility of up to US$750 million.
 * April 28, 2004: Dunn, Beatty, and Gollogly are fired "for cause" relating to "accountability for financial reporting".
 * March, September 2007: The SEC charges eight former Nortel executives with civil fraud. Three junior executives settled, paying fines.
 * June 19, 2008: The RCMP charges Dunn, Beatty, and Gollogly with criminal fraud for manipulating financial results.
 * January 16, 2012: The criminal trial begins.
 * January 14, 2013: Dunn, Beatty, and Gollogly found not guilty of fraud.
 * December 19, 2014: The SEC dismisses all remaining claims.

Owens and Zafirovski

 * After Dunn's firing, retired United States Admiral Bill Owens – at the time a member of the board of directors – was appointed interim CEO.
 * Nortel Networks subsequently returned to using the Nortel name for branding purposes only (the official company name was not changed).
 * June 2005: Nortel acquires PEC Solutions, a provider of information technology and telecommunications services to various government agencies and departments, and renames it Nortel Government Solutions Incorporated (NGS).
 * August, 2005: LG Electronics and Nortel formed a joint venture, with Nortel owning 50% plus one share, to offer telecom and networking solutions in the wireline, optical, wireless and enterprise areas for South Korean and global customers.
 * Peter W. Currie, previously the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of the Royal Bank of Canada, was named CFO of Nortel in 2005, having previously served as Northern Telecom's CFO in the 1990s.
 * Gary Daichendt, the former Chief Operating Officer of Cisco Systems, was hired as President and COO, and was expected to succeed Owens as CEO.
 * Shortly afterward, Daichendt appointed ex-Cisco Chief Science Officer Gary Kunis as Chief Technology Officer (CTO). Both Garys were concerned about the overall direction of Nortel, especially when compared to Cisco, their previous employer.
 * Three months later, Daichendt resigned after both his restructuring plan and his suggestion that Owens and Currie leave the company immediately were rejected by the board of directors.
 * Kunis quit shortly thereafter.
 * At the year's end, directors Lynton "Red" Wilson and John Cleghorn retired from the board.
 * Mike S. Zafirovski, who had served as President and CEO of GE Lighting and then as Motorola President and COO, succeeded Owens as president and CEO on November 15, 2005.
 * Motorola filed a suit against Zafirovski's hiring, alleging that his new position would break the terms of the non-disclosure agreement he had signed. Nortel agreed to pay $11.5 million on his behalf to settle the lawsuit.
 * Nortel also paid out US$575 million and 629 million common shares in 2006 to settle a class-action lawsuit that accused the company of misleading investors about the company's health.
 * Peter W. Currie stepped down as Executive Vice President and CFO in early 2007.
 * February 2007: Nortel announces its plans to reduce its workforce by 2,000 employees, and to transfer an additional 1,000 jobs to lower-cost job sites.
 * The Securities and Exchange Commission files civil fraud charges against Nortel for accounting fraud from 2000 to 2003; the fraud was allegedly to close gaps between its true performance, its internal targets and Wall Street expectations.
 * Nortel settles the case, paying $35 million, which the Commission distributes to affected shareholders, and reports periodically to the Commission on remedial measures to improve its financial accounting.
 * Nortel announces plans in February 2008 to eliminate 2,100 jobs, and to transfer another 1,000 jobs to lower-cost centres.
 * As part of the reductions, Nortel shut down its Calgary campus in 2009.

 * During its reporting of third quarter 2008 results, Nortel announced it would restructure into three vertically-integrated business units: Enterprise, Carrier Networks, and Metro Ethernet Networks.
 * As part of the decentralization of its organization, four executive positions were eliminated, effective January 1, 2009: Chief Marketing Officer Lauren Flaherty, Chief Technology Officer John Roese, Global Services President Dietmar Wendt, and Executive Vice President Global Sales Bill Nelson.
 * A net reduction of 1,300 jobs was also announced. As its stock price dropped below $1, the New York Stock Exchange notified Nortel that it would be delisted if its common shares failed to rise above $1 per share within 6 months.
 * Rumours continue to persist of Nortel's poor financial health, amid the late 2000s recession, and its bids for government funds are turned down.

Protection from creditors

 * January 14, 2009: Nortel files for protection from creditors, in the United States under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, in Canada under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act, and in the United Kingdom under the Insolvency Act 1986.
 * Nortel's share price falls more than 79% on the Toronto Stock Exchange.
 * Nortel is the first major technology company to seek bankruptcy protection in this global downturn.
 * Nortel had an interest payment of $107 million due the next day, approximately 4.6% of its cash reserves of approximately $2.3 billion.
 * Export Development Canada agrees to provide up to C$30 million in short-term financing through its existing credit support facility with Nortel.
 * The Canadian government resists characterizing its position on Nortel as a bailout.

 * Nortel pays out retention bonuses to almost 1,000 top executives, totalling up to US$45 million.
 * Severance payments to employees laid off prior to the creditor protection filing are being withheld.
 * End of January 2009: Nortel announces that it would be discontinuing its WiMAX business and its joint agreement with Alvarion.
 * Nortel sells its Layer 4–7 application delivery business to Israeli technology firm Radware for $18 million, after Radware has initially placed a stalking horse bid. Nortel had acquired the application switch product line in October 2000 when it purchased Alteon WebSystems.

Wind-up

 * June 2009: Nortel announces that it no longer plans to emerge from bankruptcy protection, and is seeking buyers for all of its business units.
 * June 26, 2009 : Nortel shares are delisted from the Toronto Stock Exchange at a price of $0.185 per share.
 * August 2009: Mike Zafirovski resigns
 * August 2009: Nortel's board of directors reorganized with three members instead of nine.
 * 2009: Nortel hands out $14.2 million in cash compensation to seven executives
 * 2009: Nortel pays out $1.4 million to 10 former and current directors
 * 2009: Nortel pays $140 million to lawyers, pension, human resources and financial experts helping to oversee the company’s bankruptcy proceedings.
 * July 2009: Ericsson purchases Nortel's CDMA and LTE assets for $1.13 billion in an auction.
 * July 20, 2009: Avaya wins an auction for Nortel's Enterprise Solutions business, including Nortel's stake in Nortel Government Solutions and DiamondWare, for $900 million, after having placed a stalking horse bid of $475 million.
 * November 2009: Nortel sells its MEN (Metro Ethernet Networks) unit to Ciena Corporation for US$530 million in cash and US$239 million in convertible notes,
 * November 2009: Nortel sells its GSM business at auction to Ericsson and Kapsch for US$103 million.
 * December 8, 2009: Hitachi purchases the Next Generation Packet Core assets.
 * December 2009: John Roth (former CEO )files for a US$1 billion indemnification from Nortel, joining the list of U.S. creditors.
 * February 2010: Ernst & Young, the court-appointed monitor of Nortel's Canadian bankruptcy proceedings, reports that the assets of Nortel's Health and Welfare Trust had a shortfall of $37 million in its net assets as of December 31, 2008. The trust supports pensioners' medical, dental and life insurance benefits, as well as income support for some groups such as long-term disability recipients.
 * February 2010: Nortel negotiates a $57-million deal to wind up the health care and other benefits provided to former Canadian employees.
 * February 2010: Nortel proposes spending $92.3M on retention bonuses for 1,475 employees in its Nortel Business Services and Corporate groups, with $2.5 million in incentives going to Christopher Ricaute, president of Nortel Business Services; $27 million allocated for Canadian employees; and $55 million allocated for U.S. employees.
 * March 2010: US trustee Roberta DeAngelis objects to the payment of $55.6 million to 866 employees.
 * Court-appointed representatives for Nortel's former employees in Canada, who are creditors in the Ontario bankruptcy court, have signed an agreement to not oppose any employee incentive program.
 * May 2010: Genband purchases the Carrier VoIP and Application Solutions (CVAS) unit, as Nortel accepted its stalking horse bid of $282 million, with adjustments that decreased the net sale price to about $100 million, without a formal bidding process.
 * June 2010: Ericsson purchases Nortel's share in its joint venture with LG Electronics for US$242 million, forming LG-Ericsson.
 * September 2010 : Ericsson purchases Nortel's final operating unit, the Multi-Service Switch division, for US$65 million.
 * October 2010 : Nortel's Ottawa campus on Carling Avenue is purchased by Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) for a cash purchase price of CDN$208 million.

 * December 2010: Nortel's 53.13% stake in Turkish company Nortel Netaş was acquired by One Equity Partners (OEP) and Rhea Investments for $68 million.
 * approximately 6,000 patents and patent applications encompassing technologies such as wireless, wireless 4G, data networking, optical, voice, Internet, and semiconductors, are sold for $4.5 billion to a consortium including Apple, EMC, Ericsson, Microsoft, Research In Motion, and Sony, pending American and Canadian court approval. (Google had placed the initial stalking horse bid of $900 million and later upped the bid to $1,902,160,540, then $2,614,972,128, and eventually $3.14159 billion, which are references to Brun's constant, Meissel–Mertens constant, and pi.)
 * October 2011: Bankruptcy filings state that Nortel owes former Canadian engineers $285,000 for patent awards that were not paid.
 * October 2011, the administrators of Nortel's British subsidiary lose their appeal to overturn a court order requiring them to pay £2.1 billion into Nortel's underfunded pension plan.
 * January 2017, judges in Delaware and Canada approve a plan to pay more than $7 billion to creditors of Nortel Networks thus ending one of the longest and most expensive Chapter 11 cases.

title: Timeline of Nortel


text:
User:Eleopeo/sandbox

This is a Wikipedia Workshop on Wednesday 11th July 2012 at Boston Spa, British Library. British Library website Eleopeo (talk) 14:16, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

title: User:Eleopeo/sandbox


text:
User:Gonzales5064

Hey everyone so ready to get this class project started.

hey its celeste just talking on your page for the assignment :)

title: User:Gonzales5064


text:
Miguel Santos Ruiz

Miguel Santos Ruiz (born 4 October 1999) is a Spanish chess player. He was awarded the title of Grandmaster (GM) by FIDE in 2019.

He played in the chess World Cup 2019, where he was defeated by Wei Yi in the first round.

title: Miguel Santos Ruiz


text:
Townley Run

Townley Run is a 3.68 mi long tributary to West Branch French Creek that is classed as a 1st order stream on the EPA waters geoviewer site.

Course
Townley Run rises in Greenfield Township of eastern Erie County, Pennsylvania and then flows southeast to meet West Branch French Creek southwest of Little Hope, Pennsylvania.

Watershed
Townley Run drains 4.71 sqmi of Erie Drift Plain (glacial geology). The watershed receives an average of 47.0 in/year of precipitation and has a wetness index of 484.45. The watershed is about 53% forested.

title: Townley Run


text:
User:Bigg Sho/sandbox

does ranitidne give off a false positive result for meth? i had a pain management doctor release me cause said i was on meth. i have been taking ranitidine for heartburn along other prescribed pain meds but not meth. can someone please provide a document or a clear information that states that? please advise. send anything you got to<EMAIL_ADDRESS> i have left leg amputation and i'm trying to get off fentenaly and now they wont even talk to me cause all of a sudden they say i'm on meth.... not true. i hate drugs. i'm trying to get off all my meds. any info would be appreciated. thanx,

title: User:Bigg Sho/sandbox


text:
The Amazing Spider-Man: Chance Encounter!

The Amazing Spider-Man: Chance Encounter! is a graphic novel by Todd McFarlane published by Boxtree in 1996.

Contents
The Amazing Spider-Man: Chance Encounter! is a graphic novel which collects two stories in which Spider-Man faces off against Morbius, the Living Vampire, in the story "Sub City" originally published in 1971, and against the wealthy supervillain Chance in the story "Chance Encounters" originally published in 1987.

Reception
Dean Evans reviewed The Amazing Spider-Man: Chance Encounter! for Arcane magazine, rating it a 7 out of 10 overall. Evans comments that "The collection [...] is mainly notable as a showcase of McFarlane's early artistry, exhibiting the seeds of a visual style that catapulted the celebrated Spawn comic into the best-seller list. You can't help feeling that a measly two tales isn't much for your [money], so many of us are going to feel a bit ripped-off, but the hardcore fans out there certainly won't be disappointed with the quality of the stories."


text:
Lachnus

Lachnus is a genus of aphids and the name-bearing type genus of the subfamily Lachninae. It consists of about 20 species.

title: Lachnus


text:
adjectiu

Etymology
.

Adjective

 * 1) adjective incapable of independent function
 * 2) adjectival pertaining to the part of speech
 * 3)  adjective of a dye that needs the use of a mordant

Noun

 * 1) adjective a part of speech

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1)  adjective

title: adjectiu


text:
Rural Municipality of Lost River No. 313

The Rural Municipality of Lost River No. 313 (2016 population: ) is a rural municipality (RM) in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan within Census Division No. 11 and SARM Division No. 5. Located in the central portion of the province, it is adjacent to the South Saskatchewan River.

History
The RM of Lost River No. 313 incorporated as a rural municipality on December 11, 1911.

Communities and localities
The following unincorporated communities are within the RM.

 * Localities
 * Allan Hills
 * South Allan

Allan Hills
The Allan Hills (51°40′0″N, 106°15′2″W) are a plateau south-east of Saskatoon and east of Blackstrap Lake mostly within the RM of Lost River. Parts of the plateau are also in the RM of Dundurn No. 314, RM of Morris No. 312, and RM of McCraney No. 282. South Allan and Allan Hills are the only communities located on the plateau. The Allan Hills rise about 100 metres from the surrounding prairies and the highest point is 658 metres above sea level. The plateau is dotted with several small lakes, including Willie Lake, Cygnet Lake, Horseshoe Lake, and Bultel Lake. Arm River starts near Horseshoe Lake at the south-east corner of the hills and flows south into Last Mountain Lake. Highway 764, a gravel road, is the main road through the hills. It starts at Allan and heads south past South Allan to Allan Hills. From there, it heads west to Hanley.

In December 2015, Ducks Unlimited Canada (DUC) partnered with local cattlemen to help preserve 21 quarters of land (about 13,440 acres) in the hills. It was the largest conservation agreement in DUC's history.

Demographics
In the 2021 Census of Population conducted by Statistics Canada, the RM of Lost River No. 313 had a population of $252$ living in $71$ of its $80$ total private dwellings, a change of NaN% from its 2016 population of $242$. With a land area of 549.96 km2, it had a population density of in 2021.

In the 2016 Census of Population, the RM of Lost River No. 313 recorded a population of living in  of its  total private dwellings, a NaN% change from its 2011 population of. With a land area of 549.92 km2, it had a population density of in 2016.

Government
The RM of Lost River No. 313 is governed by an elected municipal council and an appointed administrator that meets on the second Tuesday of every month. The reeve of the RM is Charles E. Smith while its administrator is Christine Dyck. The RM's office is located in Allan.