text:
Talk:John Wick: Chapter 4

Ending
People, he's dead. Dead, really dead, very dead. Not "seemingly dead", not "ostensibly buried", dead. End of story. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:54, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
 * IF John is REALLY dead, how can they have a "John wick chapter 5" in the future? They said "We're giving John Wick a rest for now." Not quite sure if this is a RS but it does back my quote up: https://www.menshealth.com/entertainment/a43375588/john-wick-5-release-news/ Urbanracer34 (talk) 18:08, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
 * There is not going to be a Chapter 5. That was the plan, but not anymore. The first link I posted goes into detail about this. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:10, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I guess we will have to see what happens in the future. Urbanracer34 (talk) 18:33, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

So, now a fifth film could happen after all, because who doesn't love money, but as far as we know — based on what the film wants us to believe and based on Stahelski and Reeves' unambiguous comments — Wick is dead. If this is retconned in the future, then we can come back to adjust. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:11, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It is very possible that a fifth film gets made with John somehow surviving, but even then, I would hesitate to change anything in this film's plot summary. We describe what appears on screen in this film, and that doesn't change even if it is somehow walked back in a later film. My 2¢. --GoneIn60 (talk) 11:30, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Arbitrary break
Instead of repeatedly trying to make this change which disrupts the article, you should be joining the discussion here. As mentioned above, the depiction in this film is that John Wick dies. Setting aside all interpretations and interviews, we know the characters in the film even react as though he's dead. Despite the fact they could retcon this in the future, there's no reason for us to imply doubt that the death actually occurred, not at the present time. As stated, we can revisit at a later date if that changes. --GoneIn60 (talk) 16:22, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The fact that the characters in the film react as though he's dead doesn't necessarily mean he's dead. That's also an interpretation (of yours) to consider he's dead on the pretext that they react as though he's dead! They may perfectly know he's alive and behave as if he's dead. Given his non lethal injuries, his death may (could) simply be a fake! Progrogue (talk) 16:43, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The possibility is there, of course. But to insert that into the plot summary at this time is reading between the lines. We should describe what has occurred on screen. When Winston is standing at his headstone at a gravesite following the duel, we see John's name on the headstone. The only reasonable assertion (barring any future discovery) is that he died. Looks like an IP has already corrected this. --GoneIn60 (talk) 16:49, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * According to me, the plot summary should not assume he's dead whatsoever. I repeat: given his 3 non lethal injuries at the end of the duel, assuming he's dead is not reasonable at all... and it's only an interpretation of what has occurred on screen... Progrogue (talk) 17:01, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Well good luck in trying to attain consensus for that change. It is also inconsistent to say "passes out" when we say "he is buried" in the next sentence. --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:06, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It seems to be inconsistent but it's not! BTW, consensus is for the common people! Progrogue (talk) 17:12, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with User:GoneIn60 that saying that he passed out and then mention a burial in the next paragraph is not logical. We can say that he "succumbed to his wounds", and keep it at that, not specifying if we mean that he passed out or died. Debresser (talk) 22:10, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Stahelski and Reeves were very clear when speaking at SXSW that John Wick is dead, and they extensively discussed Lionsgate's reaction to their pitch and why they decided to kill him off: . However, I've now uncovered more recent interviews in which Stahelski says the ending was left ambiguous on purpose and is open to interpretation:   . Given this new info, I think we can go with Debresser's suggestion to avoid stating whether he died or not, and then add a efn note saying While director Chad Stahelski and star Keanu Reeves initially affirmed that John is deceased, Stahelski later stated that the ending was intentionally left ambiguous and open to interpretation. InfiniteNexus (talk) 03:43, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The efn sounds good to me. --GoneIn60 (talk) 05:25, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. Debresser (talk) 17:07, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * This wiki article is fine. If Chapter 4 is the last movie, then he is dead and I'm cool with that ending; but there is a plot hole after he slumped over on the steps. For a 5th movie, they could say that he passed out then they faked his death so he could go into hiding, thus the tombstone and visit to the cemetery was faked in attempt to throw off doubters.  They didn't show him dead in a coffin nor was his body physically mutilated in a way that would be hard to explain away, such as a sword fight chopping off his head or a gun shot exploding his head.  They could have added a massive funeral scene with an open casket, but they didn't, because they wanted a plot hole.  •  Sbmeirow  •  Talk  • 05:19, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

De Gramont
I noticed that in the middle of a sentence "de Gramont" is not capitalized. I think that in French the "de" should be capitalized, especially when not preceded by the given name. What should we do on Wikipedia? I tried to find this in the Manual of Style, but didn't find anything. Debresser (talk) 20:24, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It should be capitalized in the middle of a sentence. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:46, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 March 2023
HUGE SPOILER ALERT In the reception section! "John Wick dies in chapter 4" <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 12:32, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

 * apologies - SPOILER in the future section <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 12:34, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 14:34, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: See WP:SPOILER. If you haven't seen the film, you are advised not to visit this page. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:05, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Post-credits scene
I do believe the post-credits scene is relevant to the plot, as it implies Caine is killed (or at least, attacked) by Akira. Omitting the scene makes it seem like he got a "happy ending" after being granted his freedom, which isn't the case. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. Per the guideline he himself quoted, this should be mentioned. Debresser (talk) 23:48, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The relevance of that little tidbit is debatable. We only suspect that an attack was forthcoming, but a lot of things could have happened in the moment that follows, including a decision by Akira to abort. It's a cliffhanger of sorts with no direct tie-in to the main plot surrounding John Wick. That leaves its relevance up to speculation on how important that scene really is. If it had brought some kind of closure, then I'd be more willing to leave it. Caine does ultimately get the ending he sought, which is regaining his freedom from the High Table and ensuring his daughter's safety. Being attacked or killed doesn't change that.Another thing to consider is the plot summary's word count. Previously, the post-credit entry was one of several factors that took us over 700 words. Now it is taking us right up to the limit pushing the summary to 692. I think it's bloat, but apparently I'm in the minority at the moment. --GoneIn60 (talk) 12:04, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * You make a compelling argument. It is indeed a cliffhanger, obviously. Since the main character is John Wick, this is probably indeed not really important, although it is directly related to other important characters in the film. The word count is only a rule of thumb, and a few words over the count is not a problem. Debresser (talk) 15:38, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Let's not forget that the inclusion criteria for a post-credits scene is the same as for the main part of the film, not stricter. Debresser (talk) 15:40, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * "Let's not forget that the inclusion criteria for a post-credits scene is the same as for the main part of the film"
 * Oh, I'm fully aware, having participated in the discussion that got it added. My point is that it's not as relevant as other items we cover in the plot summary. If a similar scene had occurred midstream throughout the movie involving different characters (not Caine, because we know his presence at the end is crucial), then we would not have included it in the plot summary. It is getting special recognition for occurring post credits, but the guideline advises against that. --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:44, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * "The word count is only a rule of thumb, and a few words over the count is not a problem."
 * Not sure how many plot summaries you've interacted with over the years, but I can tell you in almost every case I've been involved in, where a major film runs over 700 words, it is scaled back significantly. The expectation is that the limit is not crossed (or even approached) except in rare circumstances where a convoluted plot demands it. Sorry but JW4 does not qualify as such an exception. --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:52, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I have participated in several, I'd say enough. Yes, some do as you say, others have a different approach, and I am one of them. In any case, since it is Caine, I think we would have it in the plot summary; ergo we should have it. Debresser (talk) 21:15, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * If the scene were placed before the credits, I would still have advocated for it to be included in the plot summary. If the scene happened right after the duel ended, I would also have advocated for it to be included. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:38, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
 * They are two of the major characters in the film and it may be worth keeping just for that reason. Maybe the wording can be sharpened to state that the attack is immanent: "...approached by Akira, holding an exposed assassin's knife by her side. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:41, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Caine's fight with Shimazu and his willingness to let Akira flee characterizes the emotions and motivations of Caine. Both are integral to the main storyline, because they occur in the buildup to the climax. Any remaining thread between Caine and Akira, especially following the film's climax, is a minor subplot that has no bearing on the trajectory of the main plot. In fact, it is left open as a loose end, unresolved, making it nothing more than a flash-in-the-pan reminder that it still exists as the curtain falls. Sometimes subplots are crucial to character development, controlling pace, and patching plot holes. However, this one is nothing more than a detour.Probably the last I'll say about it, as it appears to be staying in. --GoneIn60 (talk) 02:12, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I think it's relevant enough to the plot and Caine's character arc to warrant a mention. It's not like the shawarma scene in The Avengers or whatever, and I don't think it's an irrelevant sequel tease. In the context of this film, it signifies his actions coming back to bite him. If there's some reveal that he survived or it got interrupted at the last second, that's more of a concern for the article of whatever film retcons it. Wikipedia isn't a crystal ball.  Dark knight  2149  23:53, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * And to be clear, I don't think it matters whether or not he lives or survives. The scene is relevant because it shows the actions of a major character in the film had consequences and he didn't get to ride off into the sunset. That's what sets it apart from any random detached sequel tease. The scene is an extension of Caine's character arc in the film.  Dark knight  2149  23:57, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with the above. Caine even said "I will be waiting for you" after killing Akira's father, and this plot point was foreshadowing Akira's revenge since the early parts of the movie. Just leave the short, factual mention as-is, no need for speculation in the synopsis. Ivey-kun (talk) 04:34, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 April 2023
Please modify the last paragraph in the Plot subsection to "After collapsing on the staircase, John reflects upon his life and marriage before [seemingly] succumbing to his injuries. Sometime later, Winston and the Bowery King bid farewell to John at a gravesite where he is [ostensibly] buried next to his late wife, Helen."

Reason: There is ongoing speculation that there will be a sequel, and John Wick's death was never outright confirmed. This may be the personal hope of a long-time fan of the series, but considering there is a script for a fifth movie currently out there, I wouldn't want the main character's death to be stated as fact when it could be simple misdirection. (Additionally, it is stated many times in 2, 3, and 4 his only way out was death. They never said he actually needed to die, just that it needed to look like he died. Again, this might just be me hoping for number five, but theres still the possibility.) <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 02:17, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: There are editors which will contest this edit (see above section Talk:John Wick: Chapter 4), which precludes this edit from being performed via an edit request. If you would like, you could participate in that section to try and argue for a consensus to do this. — Sirdog (talk) 02:46, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The film's director and star have both made it very clear that John Wick is dead. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:00, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Closing the distance
I’d noted in an earlier edit that the two parties closed the distance to each other in the duel, which was important because they had ostensibly agreed to work to gather to take out the Marquis, and closing the distance made it easier for John to kill him in round 3. That got pulled, and I don’t want to start an edit war, so I’d be interested in feedback as to whether or not get was important enough to include in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1011:B18F:9F09:20C3:77CE:9F91:480F (talk) 11:57, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Spoiler Alerts
This article needs spoiler alerts - especially towards the end. <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 22:44, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

 * It would be a violation of WP:SPOILER. Edwordo13 (talk) 23:02, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:John Wick: Chapter 4


text:
Wikiversity talk:Wikiversity project proposal

The original version of the proposal page

 * Why are there two copies of this page (c.f. Approved Wikiversity project proposal) in en:wikiversity? --Hillgentleman|User talk:hillgentleman 06:04, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

source: wikimedia

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


text:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/trekclub.org

Links

 * trekclub.org 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 6 additions.


text:
User:Oliver~enwikiversity/Portal:Engineering and Technology

Learning Projects | Education | Engineering and Technology | Humanities | Interdisciplinary Studies | Learning Materials | Life Sciences | Physical Sciences | Practical Arts and Sciences Social Sciences | Social Research


text:
Martyna Klekot

Martyna Klekot (born 1 July 1988 in Blachownia) is a road cyclist from Poland. She participated at the 2012 UCI Road World Championships. She won the bronze medal at the 2014 World University Cycling Championship in the road race.

title: Martyna Klekot


text:
General Relativity/Tensors/Tensors Differential Forms and Variational Principles

Please note: We can not submit copyrighted information onto this site. We'll have to have offline discussions over specific problems in the book. I am pretty sure however that we can discuss problems of our own creation that are inspired by similar problems within the books we reference. Jhouse

Chapter 1
In E $$a/b$$
 * Problem 1.1


text:
Talk:Cape Meares Light

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 March 2021 and 14 June 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Liam Raviv Patterson. Peer reviewers: Aiqin314, Dahlman, Steven A..

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Cape Meares Light. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110105102900/http://rudyalicelighthouse.net/NWLts/CpMeares/CpMeares.htm to http://www.rudyalicelighthouse.net/NWLts/CpMeares/CpMeares.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100114084602/http://www.kmtr.com:80/news/local/story/Historic-Cape-Meares-Lighthouse-damaged-by-vandals/7ueTER9GHkK_DIQdzUyJIg.cspx to http://www.kmtr.com/news/local/story/Historic-Cape-Meares-Lighthouse-damaged-by-vandals/7ueTER9GHkK_DIQdzUyJIg.cspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100114081204/http://www.kval.com:80/news/local/81158907.html to http://www.kval.com/news/local/81158907.html

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:21, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Cape Meares Light


text:
Maximum throughput scheduling

Maximum throughput scheduling is a procedure for scheduling data packets in a packet-switched best-effort network, typically a wireless network, in view to maximize the total throughput of the network, or the system spectral efficiency in a wireless network. This is achieved by giving scheduling priority to the least "expensive" data flows in terms of consumed network resources per transferred amount of information.

In advanced packet radio systems, for example the HSDPA 3.5G cellular system, channel-dependent scheduling is used instead of FIFO queuing to take advantage of favourable channel conditions to make best use of available radio conditions. Maximum throughput scheduling may be tempting in this context, especially in simulations where throughput of various schemes are compared. However, maximum throughput scheduling is normally not desirable, and channel-dependent scheduling should be used with care, as we will see below.

Example 1: Link adaptation
In a wireless network with link adaptation, and without co-channel interference from nearby wireless networks, the bit rate depends heavily on the carrier to noise ratio (CNR), which depends on the attenuation on the link between the transmitter and receiver, i.e. the path loss. For maximum throughput scheduling, links that are affected by low attenuation should be considered as inexpensive, and should be given scheduling priority.

Example 2: Spread spectrum
In the uplink of a spread spectrum cellular system, the carrier-to-interference ratio (CIR) is held constant by the power control for all users. For a user that suffers from high path loss, the power control will cause high interference level to signals from other users. This will prevent other more efficient data flows, since there is a maximum allowed interference level in the cell, and reduce the throughput. Consequently, for maximum throughput scheduling, data flows that suffer from high path loss should be considered as the most expensive, also in this case.

Example 3: Dynamic channel allocation
In wireless network with fast dynamic channel allocation (DCA), on a packet-by-packet or slot-by-slot basis, a user that is situated in the overlap between the coverage areas of several base stations would cause, or would be affected by, interference to/from nearby cells. The DCA algorithm would prevent the nearby cells from using the same frequency channel simultaneously. The cost function would correspond to the number of blocked nearby base station sites.

Comparison with other resource sharing policies
If there are large differences between the "cost" of each data flow, which is the case especially in wireless networking, resources may be assigned to only one or very few data flows per physical channel in the network. If there are many simultaneously active data flows, a majority of the data flows will have to wait until the most inexpensive flows have no more data to transfer, and will suffer from scheduling starvation.

A maximum throughput scheduling policy may be tempting since it would optimize the resource utilization in a given network, but it would not be likely to maximize profit for the network operator. The levels of customer satisfaction would remain low due to many customers experiencing long or permanent service outages.

Proportional fairness would result in lower throughput, but starvation would be avoided.

Max-min fairness would result in even lower throughput, but higher level of fairness, meaning that the service quality that each data flow achieves would be even more stable.

Unlike max-min fair scheduling based on the fair queuing or round robin algorithms, a maximum throughput scheduling algorithm relies on the calculation of a cost function, which in wireless networks may require fast and truthful measurement of the path loss. Proportional fairness based on weighted fair queuing also require measurement or calculation of the cost function.

title: Maximum throughput scheduling


text:
Talk:Benjamin M. Bitanga

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Benjamin M. Bitanga. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20121202030249/http://ph.linkedin.com/pub/benjamin-bitanga/35/a3b/b30 to http://ph.linkedin.com/pub/benjamin-bitanga/35/a3b/b30

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:44, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Benjamin M. Bitanga


text:
Gouda

Translations

 * Dutch:
 * German: Gouda
 * Greek: Χάουντα
 * Portuguese: Gouda

Noun

 * 1) A yellow Dutch cheese made from cows' milk.

Translations

 * Dutch:
 * Finnish: goudajuusto
 * German: Gouda
 * Greek:

Etymology
First attested as golda in 1143. Derived from the hydronym Gouwe, derived in turn from a compound of and.

Noun

 * 1)  Gouda cheese

Noun

 * 1) Gouda kind of cheese

Etymology
.

title: Gouda


text:
Mangelia pyrgota

Mangelia pyrgota is an extinct species of sea snail, a marine gastropod mollusk in the family Mangeliidae.

Description
The length of the shell attains 6.9 mm, its diameter 2.6 mm.

Distribution
This extinct marine species was found in Miocene strata in the Alum Bluff Group, Florida, USA

title: Mangelia pyrgota


text:
Talk:Denny Neagle

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Denny Neagle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120419185602/http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/9919487-419/retired-baseball-star-denny-neagle-sues-northbrook-based-financial-adviser.html to http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/9919487-419/retired-baseball-star-denny-neagle-sues-northbrook-based-financial-adviser.html

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Denny Neagle