text:
Talk:Cancer/Archive 7

Semi-protected edit request on 14 March 2017
Change: Tobacco is responsible about one in five cancer deaths worldwide[33] and about one in three in the developed world[34]

to

Tobacco is responsible for about one in five cancer deaths worldwide[33] and about one in three in the developed world.[34]

Edit: missing word "for" and period after 'world' and before [34]. <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 19:14, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Neil N  talk to me 19:21, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

buttercups and dasys are flowers i like

To Maintaining Low Blood Sugar as a New Cancer Treatment
Many people believe that vegetarian diet is good for cancer. And many scientist tried to find out certain factor which is important thing as cancer treatment from vegetables and fruits. But, remarkable factor is not revealed in the world. So this writing is for the discovery of the factor. And perhaps side effect of surfeit of vegetable is the factor. For determine whether low blood sugar which is side effect of surfeit of vegetable is the main factor or have no relation to death of cancer, amount of sugar essential and total of sugar supply are partially calculated.

A human cell has about 2.8billion(1) base pairs(or about 5.6 billion base) and 2.8billion base pairs have 11.2 billion deoxyriboses as a DNA back bone(2). Deoxyribose and glucose are sugar. So glucose maybe used as a raw material of DNA back bone. And for 1.12e+10 deoxyriboses, 3.3477e-12 g glucose may be essential as a raw material of deoxyriboses.

The number of cancer cells is about 2000/mm^2(3) and the density of microvessel is about 200(count)/mm^2(3) and the average diameter of microvessels is about 10μm. One microvessel of 200 microvessels in 1cm length of tumor is surrounded by 4472 cancer cells.

2000/mm^2 times sqrt{2000/mm^2} times 10mm div 200/mm^2 approx 4472.136 The concept of a cancer cell is a point. And the concept of a microvessel is a line.

Cancer cells which surround one microvessel must needs 1.4971e-8 g glucose per 1cm as the raw material of the deoxyriboses.

The blood flow velocity is about 0.49 mm/sec in capillaries(4). If the average blood sugar level is 100mg/dl, total amount of glucose which passes through a microvessel of10μm diameter is 3.323376e-6g/Day.

1.4971e-8 g is about 0.45% of 3.323376e-6g. But it's not calculated that how percent of 3.323376e-6g glucose is absorbed by 4472 cancer cells. And it's sure that 4472 cancer cells consume more glucose than 1.4971e-8 g.

For calculating the percent of the absorption, osmotic pressure and diffusion velocity must be considered. And it must not ignored that the convection must be limited among the cancer cells.

Most cancer cells starve(die) and 4% of survived cells induce KRAS Pathway Mutations in 9mg/dl glucose(5). This means that low blood sugar induce the necrosis of cancer cells. Besides, the density of microvessels in tumor have relation to cancer returns(6).

Under 70mg/dl glucose in micorvessels may reach under 9mg/dl glucose among cancer cells. One microvessel manages about 40μm from itself. 40μm is 8 times of radius of microvessel of 10μm diameter. Cancer cell which closes to microvessel will absorbs more sugar than enough so another cell may absorbs less sugar than essential amount. Besides, the glucose concentration in a micorvessel of the cancer tumor will be getting lower as blood flows(figure1). Figure1 explains that why huge tumor have disadvantages in low blood sugar level.

The calculation is not completed. But if someone completes this calculation, every things will be sure. Or if someone who has cancer maintains low blood sugar level(under 70mg/dl), we can know the relation between blood sugar level and cancer growth.

At last, the change of dietary has relation to avoid cancer death(7) no matter that the relation are strong or not. The important thing is that perhaps the induced low blood sugar by vegetable based diets are the main reason to avoid cancer death. The concentration of amino acid also needs to consider.

The purpose of this writing is to informing that to maintaining low glucose may be better treatment than chemotherapy. All of cancer patients have to know that perhaps to maintaining low blood glucose(always under 70mg/dl) is enough good as a new cancer treatment.

Figure1. Conception of glucose loss when blood flows : As blood flows, concentration of glucose is getting lower as cancer cell absorb much glucose.

e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
reference

1.a one in a life time exp

2. Levene P, (01 December 1919). "The structure of yeast nucleic acid". J Biol Chem 40 (2): 415–24. http://www.jbc.org/cgi/reprint/40/2/415.

3. Tsuyotoshi Tsuji, Yoshihiro Sasaki, Masanori Tanaka, et al: Microvessel Morphology and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Expression in Human Colonic Carcinoma With or Without Metastasis. Lab Invest 2002, 82:555–562

4. M.Stucker, V. Baier, T. Reuther, et al. Capillary Blood Cell Velocity in human skin capillaries located perpendiculary to the skin surface: Measured by a New Laser doppler anemometer. Microvascular research 52, 188-192(1996)

5. Jihye Yun, Carlo Rago, Ian Cheong, et al. Glucose Deprivation Contributes to the Development of KRAS Pathway Mutations in Tumor Cells. Science DOI: 10.1126/science.1174229

6. Noel Weidner. Intratumor Microvessel Density as a Prognostic Factor in Cancer. American Journal ofPathology, Vol. 147, No. 1, July 1995

7. WC Willett: Diet, nutrition, and avoidable cancer. Environmental Health Perspectives 103:165-170, 1995 (suppl 8)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Evilstriver (talk • contribs) 08:21, 23 September 2009

feminism — Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 14:39, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleaner_fish
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_fish http://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/can-dogs-sniff-out-cancer/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impath

<IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 13:26, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2017 - add external link proposal
Proposal: Add to external links the following non-profit/ad-free cancer support network web site for purposes of cancer patients, friends and family to share and educate each other about the personal aspects of the cancer fight. An extremely valuable resource, SSL encrypted, non-affiliated, free and syndicated - this is a good thing, not about promotion or click-thru and I am a stage 4 esophageal cancer patient so this has deep meaning to me and unique in the scope of the site. Thank you.

Cancer Defiance Support Network CancerDefiance (talk) 20:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * We include very few ELs. Google collects them. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 20:45, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cancer. 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/20110516082645/http://www.nationalconsensusproject.org/Guideline.pdf to http://www.nationalconsensusproject.org/guideline.pdf

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:21, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Potentially misleading claim about testosterone levels
"Similarly, men of African ancestry have significantly higher levels of testosterone than men of European ancestry and have a correspondingly higher level of prostate cancer."

The chapter cited for this point only claims that African American men have higher levels of testosterone in utero and in young adulthood ("this difference appears to dissipate with age"). Should this claim be modified?
 * What do you want to change it to? Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 15:38, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Bilateral cancer
moved this from bilateral cancer:

 * Bilateral cancer is a cancer that occurs in both of a pair of organs.

I'd say it is basically a dicdef but it does not constitute formal terminology. It also raises a lot of questions as to whether both cancers arose simultaneously or one spread to the other. JFW | T@lk  18:50, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
 * See the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine . The point is that the article Bilateral cancer was one sentence and effectively a dictionary definition. From the page views, it seems likely that people are searching for the term. If that is the case, what is preferable:
 * To have no destination in Wikipedia for the search term "Bilateral cancer"?
 * To have a one-line article that is merely a dictionary definition?
 * To have a very short paragraph in the cancer article?
 * My own preference would be the mention within the Cancer article, but if you don't want the text here, then you really ought to also revert my changing the Bilateral cancer to a redirect. It makes no sense for someone who searches for "Bilateral cancer" to arrive at Cancer only to find no mention of the search term they were looking for. --RexxS (talk) 00:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * My own preference would be the mention within the Cancer article, but if you don't want the text here, then you really ought to also revert my changing the Bilateral cancer to a redirect. It makes no sense for someone who searches for "Bilateral cancer" to arrive at Cancer only to find no mention of the search term they were looking for. --RexxS (talk) 00:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

 * I'm one of the editors who weighed in on the discussion at WP:Med. There, I questioned the need for the one-sentence Bilateral cancer article, and I still do. It should be merged into the Cancer article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:49, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

 * It should redirect here. Alexbrn (talk) 03:47, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * JFW, would you be less dissatisfied if it didn't say that it was "a" cancer? I think it might also be desirable to give a few examples (something like "both breasts, both lungs, both kidneys" – something that an average teenager could understand).  WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:17, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

I would be okay with it as long as it is not bolded. Not important enough to deserve bolding. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:21, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Bolding is not equivalent to importance on Wikipedia, - see MOS:BOLD: "The most common use of boldface is to highlight the first occurrence of the title word/phrase of the article (and often its synonyms) in the lead section, ." (my emphasis). Boldface is regularly used where a likely search term takes a reader to a particular page or section, as it would do in this case. --RexxS (talk) 16:30, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure and we regularly do not follow this recommendation as one can ends up bolding very minor terms of little importance. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 16:34, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * It's not a recommendation, it's part of the Manual of Style and as such has project-wide consensus, so we need good reason to go against that guidance. The importance of a topic has no connection to whether it should be boldface on Wikipedia. The bolding is there to reassure readers who searched for a term that they have arrived at the correct place; that's all. --RexxS (talk) 16:49, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * As another example we do not bold brand names outside a few main ones in the lead. Otherwise we could end up with a section that lists hundreds of brands with them all bolded. I disagree with bolding every conceivable redirect to a page. IMO using common sense / IAR is applicable. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 17:36, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I also disagree with bolding every conceivable redirect and with bolding hundreds of brand names. It's for those sort of extreme situations that the MOS states "This is done for the majority of articles, but is not a requirement." However, you're employing the fallacy of the Logical extreme here. Just because we should not be rendering hundreds of terms in boldface does not refute an argument in favour of rendering one term, as was done in this case. --RexxS (talk) 18:03, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree the cases I mention are extreme. I am just not seeing "bilateral cancer" as being important enough to redirect. I see it as falling into the uncommon brandnames situation. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 18:26, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, taken a while to get back to this. I wonder if bilateral cancer comes up in people's searches because they want to know what "bilateral" means. I actually think it should be redirected to Anatomical terms of location! JFW | T@lk  18:51, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. If there is something to say about the word "bilateral cancer" beyond a definition (such as e.g MEDRS compliant sources saying that prognosis is worse or that genetic counseling may be warranted) having a dedicated page may be worth it. Or Terminology of cancer if there are other terms to write about that don't all merit their own article. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:25, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Vitamin D + sunlight and Cancer / sunlight causing cancer is inaccurate
according to this trial[1] around 1000 iu of vitamin d and calcium reduce all cancer risks by like 50 percent... considering that 1000 ui is pretty low dose of vitamin d, higher dose will probably even reduce the risk even more. and considering that anyone with internet connection can cross check data from CDC regarding cancer rates per state[2] vs Sunlight days avg per state [3] and see there is high negative correlation (-0.6<) and considering in wiki article it says cancer patients got low vitamin D compared to healthy. I think its safe to say that vitamin D reduce cancer risks by a pretty robust effect size. I mean, some cancer risks as red meat consumption increase of 17 percent cancer rate/100 grams daily, are only based on Correlations studies if I understand correctly ,and they get more spotlight in wiki article then the 0 attention the controlled trial of vitamin d and calcium with reduce risk by 50 percent ?

[1]http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/85/6/1586.full Vitamin D and calcium supplementation reduces cancer risk: results of a randomized trial1,2 Joan M Lappe, Dianne Travers-Gustafson, K Michael Davies, Robert R Recker, and Robert P Heaney [2]https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/data/state.htm [3]https://www.currentresults.com/Weather/US/average-annual-state-sunshine.php RebelRex (talk) 09:55, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Some tentative evidence. Will need more study to make it stronger. Cancer was a secondary rather than primary end point. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 05:48, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Doc James, let me get this straight, tentative evidence for you means: (1) randomized trials demonstrating that low dose of vitamin d (and calcium) reduce all cancer risks by more then 50 percent ; in conjunction with (2)(3) naturalistic data that shows reduce cancer rate with more sunshine hours a year ; in conjunction with (4) data shows cancer patients got low vitamin d compare to healthy individuals;  in conjunction with (5) scientific observational data that shows reduce breast cancer with intake of vitamin D - about 50 percent reduction; in conjunction (7) with scientific observational data showing high serum of 25(oh)d (>33) are linked to reduce risk of Colorectal Cancer, again 50 percent reduction; in conjunction (6) with data showing individuals with skin pigmentation with increase risk of cancer and finally in conjunction with (8) recommendations of the non profit health organization MayoClinic of vitamin d intake to reduce cancer risk

Statements that are false, and/or without scientific proof behind their claims in the cancer wiki article: "Vitamins are not effective at preventing cancer," - this has not been proven. For a start, the scientific paper which the upon it wiki based on is poorly made, not even mentioning Vitamin D in it (9). And as you say, in order to prove something you need replications of it. I haven't seen much replications of studies showing all vitamin doesn't reduce cancer risk. " People who have cancer are also at a high risk of *developing* vitamin D deficiency"- this statement is not backed with scientific data presented in the article and hints for inverse cause and effect, the article that is cited (10) clearly says "Patients with cancer are at high risk for vitamin D deficiency." Why wikipedia decided to add the word "developing"? The sad part is that even the articles wikipedia cites cleary says that intake of vitamin D is safe way to reduce cancer risk.

(1)http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/85/6/1586.full Vitamin D and calcium supplementation reduces cancer risk: results of a randomized trial1,2 Joan M Lappe, Dianne Travers-Gustafson, K Michael Davies, Robert R Recker, and Robert P Heaney (2) https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/data/state.htm (3) https://www.currentresults.com/Weather/US/average-annual-state-sunshine.php (4) wiki cancer article (5) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749379706004983 (6) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960076006003918 (7) http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2004.045260 (8) https://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements-vitamin-d/art-20363792 (9)https://web.archive.org/web/20120525134048/http://english.prescrire.org/en/81/168/46461/0/2010/ArchiveNewsDetails.aspx?page=2 (10)http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ben/acamc/2013/00000013/00000001/art00010

RebelRex (talk) 18:33, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:MEDRS Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 05:37, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Doc James, I took the time to write a well referenced and backed up answer to you, you haven't read it , and only gave me a link to irrelevant Wikipedia guidance article. If you had taken the time to even read the last paragraph of what I said, you would have seen that I was referring to the errors inside the current Wikipedia article and the inconsistency BETWEEN WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE AND ITS OWN CITES: Statements that are false, and/or without scientific proof behind their claims in the cancer wiki article: "Vitamins are not effective at preventing cancer," - this has not been proven. For a start, the scientific paper which the upon it wiki based on is poorly made, not even mentioning Vitamin D in it, so how does it get a conclusions about all vitamins?(9). And as you say, in order to prove something you need replications of it. I haven't seen much replications of studies showing all vitamin doesn't reduce cancer risk. " People who have cancer are also at a high risk of *developing* vitamin D deficiency"- this statement is not backed with scientific data presented in the article and hints for inverse cause and effect, the article that is cited (10) clearly says "Patients with cancer are at high risk for vitamin D deficiency." Why wikipedia decided to add the word "developing"? The sad part is that even the articles wikipedia cites cleary says that intake of vitamin D is safe way to reduce cancer risk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RebelRex (talk • contribs) 22:39, 6 November 2017 (UTC) (9)https://web.archive.org/web/20120525134048/http://english.prescrire.org/en/81/168/46461/0/2010/ArchiveNewsDetails.aspx?page=2 (10)http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ben/acamc/2013/00000013/00000001/art00010 RebelRex (talk) 22:42, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * So you read this "No vitamin or mineral supplement has a proven benefit in preventing cardiovascular disease or cancer in adults in developed countries."

 * As saying vitamin D prevents cancer?
 * Not really sure anything more to discuss unless you have other good sources. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 00:55, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

I'll try to be more clear, I have a problem with Wikipedia's Cancer article, Section "Prevention" , under "Medication", second paragraph which state: Vitamins are not effective at preventing cancer,[111] although low blood levels of vitamin D are correlated with increased cancer risk.[112][113] People who have cancer are also at a high risk of developing vitamin D deficiency.[114] Whether this relationship is causal and vitamin D supplementation is protective is not determined.[115] Beta-carotene supplementation increases lung cancer rates in those who are high risk.[116] Folic acid supplementation is not effective in preventing colon cancer and may increase colon polyps.[117] It is unclear if selenium supplementation has an effect.[118] THE ARTICLE YOU CITE IS THE ONE WIKIPEDIA IS CITING NUMBER [111]. I BROUGHT THIS ARTICLE UP TO SHOW IT IS TRASH,NOT TO SHOW THAT VITAMIN D HELP CANCER. WIKIPEDIA SHOULDN'T BASED SUCH A DECISIVE AND FALSE STATEMENT UPON IT AS THE ARTICLE ITSELF DOESN'T BACK ITS OWN STATEMENT. WHY IT IS TRASH? BECAUSE THE ARTICLE ITSELF DOESN'T MENTION VITAMIN D (READ THE LINK TO IT) ,NOR DO CHECK RELEVANT LITERATURE REGARDING VITAMIN D. REGARDING THE STATEMENT: People who have cancer are also at a high risk of developing vitamin D deficiency.[114] THIS STATEMENT IS THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT [114] TRYING TO SAY, FROM THE ARTICLE: A multitude of studies have associated improved vitamin D status with decreased risk for developing several deadly cancers including colon, breast, pancreatic and ovarian cancers. Patients with cancer are at high risk for vitamin D deficiency. Sensible sun exposure, vitamin D fortification and vitamin D supplementation should be encouraged to improve the vitamin D status of children and adults not only for bone health but for reducing risk of developing and dying of cancer. The goal is to achieve a blood level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D of 40-60 ng/mL. This can be accomplished by children taking 600-1000 and adults 1500-2000 international units (IU) vitamin D daily from diet and supplements along with sensible sun exposure when the sun is capable of producing vitamin D in the skin. THE ARTICLE DOESN'T STATE THAT IF YOU HAVE CANCER YOU HAVE CHANCE TO DEVELOP VITAMIN D DEFICIENCY! IT SAYS PEOPLE WITH CANCER ARE MORE LIKELY TO HAVE VITAMIN D DEFICIENCY. CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION!

As long as wikipedia article try to convey that vitamin d doesn't reduce cancer risk, because of some strict rules of WP:MEDRS, practically saying the opposite, then Wikipedia cancer article is maybe scientifically mainstream but not Empirical or based on facts.

[111] "Vitamins and minerals: not for cancer or cardiovascular prevention". Prescrire International. 19 (108): 182. August 2010. . Archived from the original on 25 May 2012. [114] Holick MF (January 2013). "Vitamin D, sunlight and cancer connection". Anti-Cancer Agents in Medicinal Chemistry. 13 (1): 70–82. doi:10.2174/187152013804487308. . — Preceding unsigned comment added by RebelRex (talk • contribs) 02:31, 7 November 2017 (UTC) RebelRex (talk) 02:33, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Added some newer sources  Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 15:55, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

First of all, I have no access to the full article you linked. But this article is meta analysis, and personally I wouldn't trust meta analysis of any kind to prove my point. Not relaying on the them exclusively that for sure. To me it seems you try to avoid at any cost actually looking at the science data, and using your brain to understand the facts. If you have 10 positive clinical trials regarding vitamin d and cancer, and 10 negative clinical trials regarding vitamin d and cancer, so the conclusion by your logic is that there is no evidence because the 10 positive and the 10 negative trials negate each other, right? By your logic, If you have 3 big trials that saying vitamin d reduce cancer, and 3 bigger trials saying vitamin d doesn't reduce cancer, then the bigger the trials negate the big trials?

This is not how scientific deduction works. The facts are still that vitamin D is reducing cancer risks. I BROUGHT 8 LINKS TO RESEARCHES THAT IN CONJUNCTION TO EACH OTHER PROVED IT IS SO. YOU IGNORED THEM.

RebelRex (talk) 17:13, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cancer. 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/20110904052252/http://www.apocpcontrol.org/page/popup_paper_file_view.php?pno=MzcxIFBhcmsucCZrY29kZT04MjI=&pgubun=i to http://www.apocpcontrol.org/page/popup_paper_file_view.php?pno=MzcxIFBhcmsucCZrY29kZT04MjI=&pgubun=i

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:37, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

WHO Cancer update
The WHO cancer fact sheet from 2009 has been updated to its newest, 2018 version. Best Regards, Barbara ✐ ✉  11:38, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 March 2018
Hi, I'd like to update some of the links to the National Cancer Institute. There are about eight links in this article that point to old URLs (the ones with the prefix: www.cancer.gov/cancertopics). Thanks! Yaelnussbacher (talk) 15:33, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * , just for future reference, edit requests are more likely to be answered if you phrase them more specifically as "Please change X to Y." That said, thei request gace me enough information to search for the information and find the current urls for the National Cancer Institute pages, some of which have been updated significantly or changed entirely.  Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:48, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Cancer: disease or condition?
The opening line is "Cancer is a group of diseases involving abnormal cell growth"

Is the use of the word disease appropriate? Isn't cancer more appropriately called a condition, as cancer itself is not a pathogen (even if it may be caused by them). — Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 02:10, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Tobacco use and supposed weasel words
"I just reverted an edit that removed the source (WHO) for the claim that tobacco use causes 22% of cancer deaths (I don't mean removing the reference, just the text in the article itself). I'm not disputing the claim at all, I just think that when the wording goes like "is thought to cause" as opposed to "causes", we should name the source in the article text. Recent reverts are all done by experienced editors, so I think it's best to get a consensus here." - Jason Fortenberry (▀̿Ĺ̯▀̿)Pinging, and. byteflush Talk 23:28, 6 June 2018 (UTC) (▀̿Ĺ̯▀̿)

 * Also, I don't have a strong opinion about this either way, it just seemed more logical to me that if we have the word thought in the sentence, we should specifiy thought by whom (I really hope that's the correct use of whom =))  byteflush Talk 23:34, 6 June 2018 (UTC) . (▀̿Ĺ̯▀̿)
 * "Thought to cause" is about as far as you are going to get with any such hugely broad epidemiological statement - nobody can say what caused even a single probably smoking-related cancer case with certainty. This isn't research by the WHO, just their summation of all the masses of actual research, so it is rather misleading to attribute it to them. Note from WP:WEASEL "The examples given above are not automatically weasel words. They may also be used in the lead section of an article or in a topic sentence of a paragraph, and the article body or the rest of the paragraph can supply attribution. Likewise, views that are properly attributed to a reliable source may use similar expressions, if they accurately represent the opinions of the source." Johnbod (talk) 23:55, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Fair point. Didn't think of that. However, 22% is still a pretty accurate number, it could be lower or higher, depending on the research cited. Are the more numbers from reliable sources, so we can make it i.e. 20%-30% in wikipedia's voice? I'm pretty bad at finding good WP:MEDRS. byteflush Talk 00:09, 7 June 2018 (UTC) . (▀̿Ĺ̯▀̿)

 * Okay have restored it to "causes" were it stood initially. This is not a disputed fact so we can state it as fact. If we were to begin every sentence with "The BMJ says" The Lancet says" etc etc etc our articles would become unreadable. No reason to do it here. We already have "about" meaning that this is an estimate. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 00:13, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with that. It does read a lot better this way. byteflush Talk 02:19, 7 June 2018 (UTC) . (▀̿Ĺ̯▀̿)

Prevention
There are at least two places in the article where it is asserted that various kinds of cancer can be 'prevented' by appropriate lifestyle choices. In both cases the claim is cited to printed literature that I am unable to check.

"It is my understanding that almost any cancer attributable to lifestyle choices could also be caused by radiation or random mutation. I do appreciate that the great majority of cancers are in fact the result of lifestyle choices; but surely it is incorrect to claim that by not making those choices, one has actually prevented the cancer - i.e. that it is guaranteed not to occur?" - Jason Fortenberry JasonFortenberry (talk) 08:42, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Prevention refers to decreasing risk not necessarily eliminating it. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 12:21, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Can someone add this to the article?
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/new_study_finds_that_most_cancer_mutations_are_due_to_random_dna_copying_mistakes — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnDoe30001 (talk • contribs) 16:55, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

 * User:JohnDoe30001 Typically we stick with sources described at WP:MEDRS. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:12, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

2nd article sourced
how exactly is linking to an article that MENTIONS its source as another article and dosent link to said article, a legitimate way of sourcing anything? especially considering said article itself is quite difficult, if at all possible, to actually find? not to mention the website links some of its sources yet chooses which ones to not actually source. so if these claims cannot be PROVEN, only cited to random examples that nobody can find, why are they here?<IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 21:54, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

 * Not sure what precisely your point is. Is this a general concern about WP:MEDRS? JFW | T@lk  08:37, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Free cancer charts, maps, stats
I suggest putting some of this at the top of the talk section so that it is not archived. It is near-useless once archived. Maybe create a banner for it.

Resources:
 * Cancer - Our World in Data. Many free charts and maps. At the bottom of every page on the site is this: "Our World in Data is a creative commons publication about human civilization at a global scale." CC link is to CC-BY-SA which is accepted by Wikipedia and the Commons.

The tabs below the images provide sources, chart data, SVG, and PNG downloads.

You may have to upload the charts and maps you want to the Commons of course:
 * Commons:Special:UploadWizard

Check these categories first to see if the images are already uploaded: --Timeshifter (talk) 02:58, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * commons:Category:Cancer statistics
 * commons:Category:Cancer maps

 * I added this to the external links section. It does not make the page longer since the other stuff is on the right side. --Timeshifter (talk) 17:30, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

 * I was wondering how to combine them. Someone else combined them. Can position the combined one to the left.

 * --Timeshifter (talk) 01:42, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

 * I noticed that a space in front of the template prevented some weird problem with extra indentation being added to lines and section headers that followed here on the talk page.

did not help. --Timeshifter (talk) 01:49, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

 * Unindent.   - easier to remember and use.

 * --Timeshifter (talk) 10:05, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Article Evaluation
Everything is relevant to the topic being discussed but could use some improvement in terms of the amount of information. In the first paragraph rather than stating, “While these symptoms may indicate cancer, they may have other causes” the writer should also specify which other causes they can have. Another section that needs improvement is the “Causes” section because it fails to elaborate on the given information. The overall tone of the article is neutral which helps eliminate any bias. Rnp2w (talk) 00:40, 15 September 2018 (UTC)Rnp2w

Article Evaluation
The article did not go off topic and it seemed to cover a lot of different subjects about cancer. I also checked some of the article's sources and they seemed to be up to date and reliable. The article does need more detail though; many topics were covered, but they were broad. The article needs a little more detail about how cancer cells are produced and how they spread throughout the body. More statistics and facts would be helpful for a topic like cancer. It informs the audience how cancer can affect them and what the chances of survival are for different types and stages of cancer. Rachelv37 (talk) 02:24, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Evaluate
I really enjoy this article and how it was laid out, it was very informal but not over whelming. This article gives you facts and also give pictures to help show what cancer looks like. I am a son that his mom had cancer, so I know a good amount about it too, unfortunately, but this article was a good read and I enjoyed it. It was not to harsh but it let you know the facts, whys, and what to expect. For someone that maybe has been diagnosed this might give them a general and better idea in what to expect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isaaccc 11 (talk • contribs) 15:45, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Disease or condition?
The introductory sentence describes cancer as a disease. It is not contagious. Is it not a condition? — Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 11:49, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 November 2018
Add more about the cell cycle and mitosis <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 13:19, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * ❌. What text should be removed and what is the verbatim copy of the text that should replace it? The request must be of the form "please change X to Y" and suggest a reference. Cell cycle and mitosis as WP articles both have discussions about cancer within. --Zefr (talk) 13:27, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Add a lifetime risk of developing cancer
I believe this is an extremely relevant information to the article. According to cancer.org, the risk of developing cancer during lifetime is 39.66% for males and 37.65% for females, so it is as big as 1 in 3 to 1 in 2. Was searching for this information in Wikipedia, could find it only on an external site. Jack who built the house (talk) 14:22, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

 * For this we'd need international data, including from developing countries. Perhaps the Global Burden of Disease study could provide such information. JFW | T@lk  22:12, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Ketogenic Diet / Fasting as a Cancer Management Strategy
Continuation of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fasting#Uses_in_cancer_treatment_or_prevention

https://www.aging-us.com/article/101382/text “The Ketogenic Diet (KD), a high-fat/low-carbohydrate/adequate-protein diet, has recently been proposed as an adjuvant therapy in cancer treatment [1]. KDs target the Warburg effect, a biochemical phenomenon in which cancer cells predominantly utilize glycolysis instead of oxidative phosphorylation to produce ATP. Furthermore, some cancers lack the ability to metabolize ketone bodies, due to mitochondrial dysfunction and down-regulation of enzymes necessary for ketone utilization [2]. Thus, the rationale in providing a fat-rich, low-carbohydrate diet in cancer therapy is to reduce circulating glucose levels and induce ketosis such that cancer cells are starved of energy while normal cells adapt their metabolism to use ketone bodies and survive. Furthermore, by reducing blood glucose also levels of insulin and insulin-like growth factor, which are important drivers of cancer cell proliferation, drop.”

The Warburg Effect: How Does it Benefit Cancer Cells? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4783224

--7henix (talk) 07:02, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

No response. So everyone approves of inclusion? --7henix (talk) 10:25, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * {u|7henix}}, are there any more sources to support this? Nigos (t@lk • Contribs) 10:26, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Already covered at Ketogenic diet, in some detail. Would be undue here. So not to be included - and in fact on closer inspection the Aging piece is just an editorial, so is not WP:MEDRS in any case. Furthermore, the ketogenic diet is the locus for quite a bit of cancer quackery so we need to be very careful about how this topic is approached on Wikipedia. Alexbrn (talk) 10:27, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * "Aging" is a journal with doubtful editorial policies.
 * Your support for KD as quackery is a blog post without citations. The aging-us site is a peer reviewed journal with an editorial board: https://www.aging-us.com/editorial-board.  The authors are: Daniela D. Weber 1, Sepideh Aminazdeh-Gohari 1 , Barbara Kofler 1 (1 Research Program for Receptor Biochemistry and Tumor Metabolism, University Hospital for Pediatrics of the Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg 5020, Austria) --7henix (talk) 01:42, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

 * I think rather than discussing one diet, I think we should discuss all diets in context. PMID 30474102 is a source. JFW | T@lk  11:42, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Good idea. Now I remember, we have a whole article: Diet and cancer. Alexbrn (talk) 11:51, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I think, that only those diets that are being used for treatment should be discussed in the cancer management section. User JFW mentioned PMID 30474102 which says a bit about KD. --7henix (talk) 01:28, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * "Not supported by strong scientific evidence" seems to sum it up. These diets are not being "used for treatment". Alexbrn (talk) 04:45, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Is NPR quackery too? https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/03/05/468285545/fighting-cancer-by-putting-tumor-cells-on-a-diet --7henix (talk) 00:45, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not a reliable source for medical content. The quackery aspect is well covered by the Gorski piece I linked above, should we wish to cover it. Alexbrn (talk) 04:39, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Your support for KD as quackery is a blog post without citations. The aging-us site is a peer reviewed journal with an editorial board: https://www.aging-us.com/editorial-board.  The authors are: Daniela D. Weber 1, Sepideh Aminazdeh-Gohari 1 , Barbara Kofler 1 (1 Research Program for Receptor Biochemistry and Tumor Metabolism, University Hospital for Pediatrics of the Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg 5020, Austria) --7henix (talk) 01:42, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Nobody has cast "KD as quackery". But there is a strong quackery aspect to the way that some people promote it, as is obvious from the Gorski source (or just some trivial Googling). This is maybe an aspect Wikipedia should cover somewhere, though probably not in this article. As to general cancer-treatment efficacy, taking this diet - as with others - is "not supported by strong scientific evidence"; that is probably all we can say here. Alexbrn (talk) 18:07, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll leave it to you to add the ketogenic diet, that is currently being used in cancer centers (such as UCSF) as an adjunctive therapy. I'll probably stick to working on another wiki.  This one doesn't suit me.  Anyone reading this, I recommend you try out Everipedia.  It's has a novel concept to apply fairness and keep tyranny from forming, as it has at Wikipedia.  --7henix (talk) 21:00, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

update figures
info box replace deaths total 2015 with 2018 of 9.6million https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/cancer — Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 03:32, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 October 2019
I would like an edit authorization and access because I have found that other users have added deceitful information therefor i would like access so when I am skimming over information and find some false i can simply change it so others can find this as a secure website with accurate information <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 17:17, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Only use this template to request edits for which consensus has already been reached here. To gain editing privileges start an account and start making some decent edits. Alexbrn (talk) 17:19, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Does cancer affect plants and insects?
Does cancer affect plants and insects? If not, why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 05:39, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes Hjoker4 (talk) 00:56, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 February 2020
I would like to see the addition of this article under "additional reading". Thank you for your consideration.

Association of financial toxicity (FT) with depression, anxiety, and quality of life (QoL) in older patients with advanced cancer: An analysis of 544 patients from 31 practices in the University of Rochester NCI Community Oncology Research Program (UR NCORP). Asad Arastu, Joseph Ciminelli, Eva Culakova, Lianlian Lei, Huiwen Xu, David W. Dougherty, Mostafa R. Mohamed, Megan Wells, Paul Duberstein, Marie Anne Flannery, Gary R. Morrow, Charles Stewart Kamen, Chintan Pandya, Jeffrey L. Berenberg, Valerie Aarne, and Supriya Gupta Mohile Journal of Clinical Oncology 2018 36:15_suppl, e22037-e22037 Valerie210 (talk) 15:23, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * See WP:MEDRS - this is a primary study, so sorry, but no. Johnbod (talk) 15:55, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * In addition, I would like to add that the topic is rather ancillary to the subject of cancer. If the study qualified for Wikipedia as a secondary or tertiary source, it would be cited in an article dealing with the downstream social and psychological consequences of cancer, if such an article exists in en.wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 16:42, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Update cancer prevalence from 2015 numbers to 2017 numbers
Cancer prevalence is currently given as 90.5 million for 2015 based on a paper in the Lancet from 2016. There is a Lancet paper from the same group published in 2018 for 2017 (see prevalence 2017, neoplasm) that puts prevalence at 100.5 million. This should be updated. Next Lancet paper for 2019 will probably be published in late 2020. Update will be needed then too.

Update: Deaths should also be updated to 2017 numbers and the same citation number should be used for both. Currently citation 6 and 7 are identical.

<IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 15:59, 2 March 2020 (UTC) Dr. Matthieu J. Miossec, 15:55, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 June 2020
Add “not to be confused with Cancer_(astrology)” <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 03:31, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
 * ❌. Such confusion is improbable given the "group of diseases" in the first sentence and the CT scan infobox image. Larry Hockett (Talk) 03:54, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

The Greek etymology is wrong
It's not 'crab and tumor', καρκίνος means just 'crab', in ancient Greek. Please change that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MavropaliasG (talk • contribs) 14:33, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Non-Ionising radiation
Where is the evidence to suggest that non-ionising radiation can cause cancer? It isn't stated in the citation used for that line so I have good reason to believe it is simply not true and is spreading misinformation. SeanKirk (talk) 13:18, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

 * @SeanKirk, UV light is non-ionizing and causes skin cancer.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:55, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2019 and 15 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rcadet1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jenjhayashi.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:39, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2020
I believe that the use of viruses to kill cancer should be documented in imunotherapy, or in its own subsection under management. Deathisaninevitability,soifearitnot-1234 (talk) 20:02, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

 * Not currently part of standard management. It may be suitable for interventions under investigation only. JFW | T@lk  21:18, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

It's possible that it could be mentioned in the ==Research== section. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:57, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 September 2021
Please replace this: "The benefits of screening in breast cancer are controversial" with this: "The benefits of screening for breast cancer are controversial".

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk • contribs) 10:03, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅  Mel ma nn   11:32, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 February 2022
<a href="https://newsbharti01.blogspot.com/2022/02/max-hospital-saket-dispatches-ai-based.html" rel="dofollow">cancer</a> Rks8059 (talk) 09:07, 7 February 2022 (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. Cannolis (talk) 10:36, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

"Malignancies" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Malignancies and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 27 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:42, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Breakthrough miricle cure Dostarlimab
A "looks promising" potential miricle cure for Rectal Cancer (and at least theoretically all and every single other cancers as well) has been discovered in the Clinical trial of the Drug Dostarlimab with 18 patients over a period of 6 months. If confirmed by further trials, it is an uttermost strong contender for the Nobel Prize for Medicine. Currently Cancer is responsible for about 1 in 6 deaths amongst the 7.8 Billion Total Population worldwide, and this is quantum leaps by more the uttermost brilliant breakthrough in the fight by all Professional Doctors and Researchers against this very serious De Facto Death Sentence in most patients. According to Dr. Luis A. Diax III it is "the fist time it has happened in the history of Cancer". As part of the Professional Medical Trial of 18 patients by a team of Doctors and Professional Medical Scientific Researchers, the Drug Dostarlimab was administered to 18 Clinical Trial Rectal Cancer Patients every three weeks for the Clinical Trial Period of six months. At the end of the Six Month Trial Period every single one of the 18 Patients participating in the trial witnessed one of the uttermostly astounding Miricles in the history of Mankind as far as the Medical Profession is concerned, A COMPLETE CURE OF DETECTABLE CANCER , and certainly the most astounding Miricle in the History of Cancer Research.Dostarlimab is a Drug with laboratory produced molecules and act as , once administered to the patient , as substitute antibodies in the human body. <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 12:05, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Cancer/Archive 7


text:
Template:WikiProject Christianity/rater-data.js

{	"taskforces": { "partsuf": "", "items": { "bible" : "Bible", "biblical-criticism" : "Biblical criticism", "jesus-work-group" : "Jesus", "theology-work-group" : "Theology", "history" : "Christian history", "indian-work-group" : "Christianity in India", "holidays" : "Holidays", "christmas" : "Christmas", "halloween" : "Halloween", "saints" : "Saints", "religious-texts" : "Religious texts", "christian-music" : "Christian music", "christian-metal" : "Christian Metal", "contemporary-christian" : "Contemporary Christian music", "southern-gospel" : "Southern Gospel", "urban-contemporary" : "Urban Contemporary Gospel music", "christian-albums" : "Christian music albums", "christian-songs" : "Christians songs", "catholicism" : "Cahtolicism", "catholic-canon-law" : "Canon law", "eastern-orthodoxy" : "Eastern Orthodoxy", "oriental-orthodoxy" : "Oriental Orthodoxy", "syriac-work-group" : "Syriac Christianity", "messianic-judaism" : "Jewish Christianity", "anglicanism" : "Anglicanism", "lutheranism" : "Lutheranism", "anabaptist" : "Anabaptist", "calvinism" : "Calvinism", "unitarian-universalism" : "Unitarian Universalism", "baptist-work-group" : "Baptist", "arminianism" : "Arminianism", "quakers" : "Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)", "methodism-work-group" : "Methodism", "latter-day-saint-movement" : "Latter Day Saint movement", "holiness-movement" : "Holiness movement", "seventh-day-adventist-church" : "Seventh-day Adventist Church", "jehovah's-witnesses" : "Jehovah's Witnesses", "charismatic-christianity" : "Charismatic Christianity", "china-work-group" : "China", }	} }

source: wikimedia

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


text:
Bill Cardoso

William Joseph Cardoso (September 24, 1937 - February 26, 2006) was an American journalist who was known for coining the term "gonzo journalism".

Cardoso was born in Cambridge, Massachusetts and raised in Somerville, Massachusetts. He was the youngest of three brothers and had one daughter, Linda Cardoso.

He studied journalism at Boston University and in 1967 he joined The Boston Globe and shortly thereafter became editor of the Globe Sunday magazine. He eventually settled in California. While not as well known as his literary friends, he wrote for many publications in the 1960s and 1970s such as Crawdaddy!, Harper's Weekly, New Times, Ramparts, and Rolling Stone. He was also a good friend of Hunter S. Thompson and was present for the legendary Rumble in the Jungle.

His work was collected in a 1984 volume called The Maltese Sangweech and Other Heroes. He also fondly shared his memories of Hunter S. Thompson with E. Jean Carroll for her 1993 biography, Hunter.

Cardoso died of heart failure in the early morning of February 26, 2006, at his home in Kelseyville, California, aged 68.

title: Bill Cardoso


text:
condylus

Etymology
Borrowed from.

Noun

 * 1)  condyle, knuckle; the joint at the end of a bone
 * 2) node in the culm of a reed

title: condylus


text:
Talk:Rochelle, Illinois

Map
Nobody cares about a local horse that wears reeboks. Although it is strange, overall it's a little ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 20:56, 19 January 2010 (UTC) The map is unacceptable; it makes it look as if the bulk of the town is in Lee County, rather than Ogle. HuskyHuskie 01:15, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know what map you are looking at, but to me only a small portion of the bottom of the dot is in Lee. So the map is acceptable.--Kranar drogin 01:39, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's because I moved it. Go back a few edits and look. HuskyHuskie 21:07, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Gotchya now. The GPS that were inputted where the ones that were already existing on the page. May have to keep a better eye out on this in the future.--Kranar drogin 03:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

The coords were correct. If they are changed then the aerial photo links are messed up and anyone attempting to locate the city with them will be lost. The problem is probably in the map / geobox code and that is what needs to be fixed, not changing coords. --Dual Freq 03:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I tinkered with the X Y variables instead of the coords. Click these two links and hit Aerial photo on a map program and you'll see why the coords should not be changed.

 * Original: 41.92333°N, -89.06556°W
 * 4 minutes North:41.99°N, -89.06556°W
 * Don't change the coordinates. --Dual Freq 03:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

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

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Hub Image
The fine editor, User:Drmies, has just done some edits to this article, all but one of which I endorse. However, his last edit was a (very understandable) mistake. He removed an image he termed "trivial"; in fact, it's anything but.

When I added that photo more than four years ago, I did so after conducting a long search for an appropriate image. The word "hub" does not immediately bring up the same image in everyone's minds, and in fact, few people would think of this image when they first hear the word "hub". But this is what Rochelle denizens mean by the term, and this is the same image used by the sports teams on their banners. A reader could very well be confused by the use of the term Hub City, even after reading the article, but upon seeing the image with the text, the meaning becomes much clearer. So I'm respectfully reverting and putting the image back. HuskyHuskie (talk) 05:04, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rochelle, Illinois. 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/20160602200744/http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html to http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html
 * Added tag to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1215/is_8_204/ai_108114495

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:45, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rochelle, Illinois


text:
DistrRTgen

Distributed Free Rainbow Tables (or DistrRTgen) was a volunteer computing project for making rainbow tables for password cracking. By using the Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing (BOINC) software platform, DistrRTgen was able to generate rainbow tables that are able to crack long passwords. DistrRtgen was used to generate LM, NTLM, MD5 and MYSQLSHA1 rainbow tables.

All of the rainbow tables are downloadable at Free Rainbow Tables.

title: DistrRTgen


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Willet

The result was speedy deleted. ➨  ЯEDVERS  14:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

David Willet
Not Notable. Can't find any reference to anyone named David Willet in Slipknot, and that would be his only claim to fame as it seems, if such a person really exists. Wildnox 01:13, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Isn't the idea that Slipknot performers are known by numbers, rather than names?BigHaz 01:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete —  Being in Slipknot doesnt make you notable. And you have a point there BigHatz, the article is supposed to go with the common usage of the name. SynergeticMaggot 01:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - There is hardly any reference and not notable enough -- |  Shishir Rane  | talk | 05:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete —  per all above.  Kalani  [talk] 05:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - NN. --Chris Griswold 06:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete A1 (very short article, no context), so tagged. NawlinWiki 14:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


text:
أما

Etymology 1
, the original thought being “that this matter be touched”, “be it that”, or just a dialectal variant of disjunctive as  can well be used for positing two alternatives.

Conjunction

 * 1) as for;

Usage notes

 * It doesn't affect the case of the noun that follows:

Descendants

 * Hindustani:
 * Hindustani:
 * Hindustani:
 * Hindustani:
 * Hindustani:
 * Hindustani:
 * Hindustani:
 * Hindustani:
 * Hindustani:
 * Hindustani:

Etymology 2
From.

Particle

 * 1) verily, truly, indeed, oh yes!

Etymology
From.

Conjunction

 * 1) as for
 * 2) but

Etymology
From.

Conjunction

 * 1) whereas, as for, but

Usage notes

 * Note that can only be used in the third sense before an elative adjective, whereas  is more flexible. Although  could be used before an elative adjective, it is most commonly seen before a nominal phrase introduced by.

title: أما


text:
retection

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1)  Disclosure or detection of something concealed.
 * 2)  Detection through a concealing layer. (Note: this use is somewhat specific to electrical engineering and related fields investigating the uses of T-Ray Sensing.)

title: retection


text:
User:Conrad Kershaw/Books/Conrad Kershaw 27

Conservative Concepts

 * Bloody Baptism
 * Edith Stein
 * Viktor Frankl
 * Maximilian Kolbe
 * Dietrich Bonhoeffer

 * Divine Mystics
 * Henry Suso
 * Meister Eckhart
 * Johannes Tauler
 * John of the Cross
 * Johannes Scotus Eriugena

 * Mindful Men
 * Russell Kirk
 * Ezra Levant
 * Irving Babbitt
 * Thomas Merton
 * David Brooks (journalist)

 * Science and Religon
 * Mystical Theology
 * Jesus Prayer
 * Mystical theology
 * Apophatic theology
 * Christian mysticism
 * Divinization (Christian)
 * The Cloud of Unknowing


text:
User:Sarfarazthephoenix/sandbox

Bamrauli

A place situated approximately 12 kms. away from Allahabad head quarter on Kanpur Allahabad Highway. There is Indian Air Force Station, and Air Port at Bamrauli, Allahabad

title: User:Sarfarazthephoenix/sandbox


text:
Wikiversity talk:What is Wikiversity?

Changed names from people to processes. I'd like to get rid of the class system that underlies most universities by labelling actions rather than people. Roadrunner 01:59, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

-

 * Wikiversity is not a degree-granting institution. It does not have professors or staff or registered students. There are simply people here teaching learning and discussing in many different subjects.

Wikiversity is also not steam shovel and is not useful for toasting bread. Is there any particular reason to describe what Wikiversity is not?

Roadrunner 02:04, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

wikiversity is a cyber-collegium where learning happens, and where teaching, schools, educational burocracies, knowledge factories and corporations, and power-relations may hopefully be disrupted, dismantled, changed and even, re-made.

--<IP_ADDRESS> 18:40, 19 August 2006 (UTC)professor chaos --- Wikiversity is  is intended for the creation and use of free learning materials and activities. The mission of Wikiversity is to empower people to achieve their educational goals using resources produced by the free culture movement. The goal is to create a community of people who support each other in their educational endeavors.

USSER: JOICEBAE 06:55, 02 AUGUST 2022 Wikiversity is a platform that gives assistance to learning communities with learning tools and teaching aids. One can be able to ask questions on Wikiversity and be provided with accurate information to that question that can be useful and shared with the next person. USSER: ROXYMAYA 04 October 2022,21:32

Wikipedia article on Wikiversity

 * 1) The Wikipedia article on Wikiversity is still pretty anemic in terms of the very topic of this page, and could use some help.
 * 2) At w:Talk:Wikiversity, someone has written an essay that perhaps better belongs somewhere on Wikiversity; I don't know my way around this well enough to know where it might go. - Jmabel 04:00, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks Jmabel, I've moved the essay above to User:Morley/Clarifying the Wikiversity proposal for now - where it may be used to discuss, strengthen, or make Wikiversity policy. I might get around to developing the Wikipedia article one day - though the truth is that different people have different views on what Wikiversity is (imagine that: an edit war over a Wikimedia project!). But no, that's probably overstating it - we could at least have a good overview - but please note, we're still trying to do that here :-). Cormaggio 10:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Differences
Can any one tell that is there any guideline-article here related to the differece between Wikipedia and Wikiversity. If not it's better to add a guideline as Difference between Wikipedia and Wikiversity. - Vaikunda Raja 21:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I would say Wikiversity is almost the same as Wikibooks. Its like 2 alternate sets of the same thing - learning material. Check any well-known thing on both of them(eg violin) and admit that there is no point in keeping them seperate.

 * Wikibooks hosts textbooks. Wikiversity does not host textbooks. Wikiversity started at Wikibooks and was kicked out of that project. Wikiversity is for learning materials that are not hosted by other Wikimedia projects.

 * "..... the idea here is to also host learning communities, so people who are actually trying to learn, actually have a place to come and interact and help each other figure out how to learn things. We're also going to be hosting and fostering research into how these kinds of things can be used more effectively." (source)

 * Wikiversity participants can learn about a topic and then use what they have learned to improve textbooks at Wikibooks or encyclopedia articles at Wikipedia. Take a look at Category:Learning activities. --JWSchmidt 20:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

 * One of the problems was that about half of the stuff hosted here was orginally hosted on wikibooks, thus anything that was moved over was orginally writen FOR wikibooks. Those pages you won't be able to see any difference betweeen the two.--Rayc 21:51, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks for explaining.

Ideological explorations from roots for answering this question above
Hello, dear friends:

Thanks very much that your discussions have made me settle myself here. I think this question is quite great and needs to be solved from the roots' differences between the two, then to the details.

'Wikiversity' is a new created term combining both 'wiki' and the word-root of 'University' - 'versity'. Therefore, its creation and development need to maintain both the two categories' requirements, targets, developing zones and sustainability.

If it came to 'Wiki', as it was stated 'without any defined owner or leader, and wikis have little implicit structure, allowing structure to emerge according to the needs of the users'[], I thought 'freedom for commons, world-wide expressions, explicit descriptions' can be highlighted as three very important features for the making-out of all wiki-members voices'. Alongside this logical line, then, compared with other virtual 'universities' or 'online learning websites', wikiversity's weight-centre is much easily centralized upon ‘postmodernist learners and creators' self-reflexivity from certain learning materials’ freely. (Here, the definition of 'postmodernist learners' are different from merely 'students' - learners' definitive extensions are much widely distributed upon any persons in any stages of life who have the desires to get knowledge and skills; meanwhile, contribute their own knowledge and skills in particular subjects or generally overall). If you want to share knowledge and skills, or identify them clearly, or classify them freely, and or systematically conclude them with the internal structures, you can all come to Wikiversity for helps or give your helps to others. In order words, Wiki gave universities much more freedoms to popularize their knowledge and skills explicitly with diverse peoples all around the worlds - 'no leaders and little implicit structure' but full of explicit universal truths, principles, laws and truths exchanged among different 'mind-sparks'. Wiki also gave commons and universities the opportunities to make the communications between each others. Universities can get the nutrition from talking with commons about certain societal or natural topics under the background of globalization; meanwhile, commons (especially for some young generations who are far away from the civilizational core areas of our worlds and desire to get more knowledge and skills but hardly; and for some teachers who have the strong motivations to teach people surrounding them but feel very hard to collect even one piece of teaching materials in some places 'far away') can gain multiple-disciplinary knowledge from Wikiversity to better their life-level sustainably.

Following it, if it came to '-versity', it means Wikiversity needs to have some basic functions as University ( Wiki introduction:[] ). This is a continuously developing 'channel' for wikiversity to take. Wikiversity needs to be compared with a real university but constructed totally upon virtual environment. In the future, it needs to have the functions as educational administrations, essays' submission and assessment, lectures' organizations and presents, learning and teaching communities (we have already gotten), diverse subjects and schools' arguments and defences, project' design and practice, field-investigations, philosophical regressions (to roots), cultural exchanges, the explorations of universal reasonability, research-results' reports and the predictions for future's peace. However, rather than 'the Latin universitas magistrorum et scholarium, which roughly means "community of teachers and scholars' stated in Wikipedia, it is without leaders and means the 'community of all the postmodernist learners for commons'. To be here, I has been thinking for long time - which painting can directly and explicitly give us the feelings in terms of wikiversity's possible future in 'Postmodernist Regression' -

The School of Athens []

That's quite right - the academic freedom, the diversity of academic schools, various approaches for exploring the universal truths and for all the peoples with equality. I thought: by hand in hand, if we can together construct this 'university' virtually, but of reality, upon the boundaries of Times and Spaces, how beautiful our mutual future will be!

Finally, I would like to talk a little bit about the summarized differences between Wikiversity and Wikipedia. Indeed, through reviewing the information above in terms of Wikiversity, we can already self-find the differences between. 'Internet encyclopedia' - the statement of Wikipedia's introduction in Wikipedia [] clearly account the differences - the developing tendencies are quite different - Wikiversity is for producing new knowledge in some creative approaches compared with the root from University's cultivation and education; however, Wikipedia is focusing on making the reports, current statements of articles, researching questions and interests, clarifications and identifications of the knowledge, which have already been existing from the past into the structured encyclopedia books for reviewing and storing. Can Wikipedia produce new knowledge? Yes, it should be able to, through the repeated modifications of knowledge's structures, the supplements of world-wide advanced researches' outcome-reports and the descriptions of some inventions and fresh phenomena; but this is through another approach like historical writing not university's.

Friends, more and more discussions can all be argued under this topic. Here above, there are some my personal ideas through researching this topic, which, as others, I would like to share here. If you thought they are helpful, it would be my pleasure.

Sincerely Regards Best Wishes Jason M. C., Han

Jason M. C., Han (discuss • contribs) 16:09, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikibooks and Wikiversity
I really want to know the different between Wikibooks, Wikipedia and Wikiversity. Wikiversity for learning? Are there any article for example? If you answer me, please talk in my talk page except for answer me here. --Chaplin
 * Please take a look at the section of this page just above this section. --JWSchmidt 15:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hopefully Wikipedia can tell you what Wikiversity is and what Wikibooks is. --Devourer09 02:59, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

=emphasis= There needs to be greater emphasis on this project's being about teaching and research. As it is (and looking at some pages), it is being used by some contributors as a place for publishing encyclopedic material which, of course, belongs on Wikipedia. There need to be two types of material: courses and research-projects. The site would thus fulfil the twin purposes of a university: teaching and research. It would not simply be a place to post encyclopedic material and, more importantly, it would function as a real educational facility for the people of the world. It could be that pages on w'versity are already doing this and I would be very interested to see them.
 * Course-material should not just be presentations of facts; it needs to attain educational objectives. One way to ensure this would be to require contributors to state such objectives before they can start posting text or pictures. Such course-pages would usefully include opportunities for students to produce work in response to the educational material and to have that work assessed by tutors.
 * University faculty should be publishing their research-work through the site; it could be tied-in to the courses they are giving, and peergroup comment and review should be encouraged.

 * Wikiversity does not duplicate other Wikimedia Foundation projects. It is true that some Wikiversity pages need improvement and some Wikiversity editors need help in learning how to create learning resources that do not duplicate the content of other projects. Suggestions are welcome at Content development. You might be interested in the proposed Wikiversity Research guidelines. --JWSchmidt 20:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

=progress= I think this page should include a record on the progress that has been made and what kind of quality and completeness the users should expect.
 * Hello,
 * quality is a subjective matter, everybody has a different understanding of the term. But here is one thing which could be of interest: Quality. Progress news you could observe in the Colloquium and also in the Recent changes list. Completeness - probably never - everything evolves. This is a wiki.
 * But perhaps you could give some examples what you would like to have, then we could help build this.
 * What do you say ? Erkan Yilmaz ( evaluate me!, discussion ) 20:44, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

=All ages?= I noticed when browsing that the discussion area for 'what wikiversity isn't' mentions that wikiversity is meant for all ages, but the "schools" seem laid out for more advanced materials. My interest (at present) would be in primary school level material, helping parents wishing to teach their children, providing additional resources for students who wish to explore subject areas, or to assist a parent in helping children with homework. I can't see how one can easily fit topics like kindergarten science (concept of food chains, life cycle of a seed, identifying animals as birds, reptiles and mammals), in the same categories as synaptic signalling, pharmacodynamics, or indeed anything on the List_of_Major_Topics_and_Concepts_in_Biology. I might contribute to higher level topics in mathematics or neuroscience, but have 3 children under 5 years old and am more concerned with creating resources for people to use to supplement (or replace, in the case of home-schooling) the public education system, and to create lists of activities that can be done by parents or children. Feel free to engage me on my talk page. --Epinephrine 19:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Please see Pre-tertiary portal and Main Page/Draft version 0.2. If you decide on the name for a new protal, I'll start it and we can link to it from the main pages where people start browsing for content. --JWS 19:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

The /En in the page name
Why is this necessary? It looks funny as well, so I feel as though if we are going to emphasize we are talking about the English language Wikiversity it should look like En.Wikiversity. I don't see the point really since it's assumed we are talking about the English language Wikiversity. --Devourer09 03:17, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

 * ✅ - I have redirected the page "Wikiversity:What is Wikiversity/En" to Wikiversity:What is Wikiversity? --Draubb (discuss • contribs) 20:54, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Essay discussion
Essays needs to be discussed. We have a category for essays. On the other hand there is the section "podium" under What Wikiversity is not.
 * "A podium: Wikiversity resources and activities should promote learning above any personal opinions, beliefs, or biases that you may have. If you wish to express your personal take on someone or something, please do so in a way that is open, respectful, inclusive of academic participation, and informs participants on the issues that matter to you. Critical analyses and academic lectures are two possible ways to do this."

So essays are allowed if they are critical analyses or otherwise educational, without emphasis on personal matters. The issue is clarifying and the inclusion on this community page. - Sidelight12 Talk 11:14, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Sharing ideas / Discussion forum
I was wondering if the Discussion forum section is redundant. After the section on sharing ideas, it's fairly obvious, at least to me, that Wikiversity is a place for discussion. What's limiting in that paragraph is that the sharing of ideas is about how to teach and how to learn. Perhaps this needs to be expanded to include content understanding and application. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 01:59, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

 * It seems like it, but it would be nice to make discussion forum stand out. The idea needs polishing. As the mainspace pages are a refined presentational version of the discussion. While the talk-pages and irc can be used together for the main discussion. The idea of discussion forum may need expanding. - Sidelight12 Talk 02:50, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

 * I like the latest update. Good work!  -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 03:05, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Script error: No such module "Navbox". Script error: No such module "Navbox". Script error: No such module "Navbox".
Please fix this. <IP_ADDRESS> (discuss) 10:48, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

What's wikiversity and how a teacher can use it in the classroom
Wikiversity -is a learning community, meaning you can get information,edit ,also ask information on any subject.It offers tutorials and other materials for the fostering of learning

How a teacher use wikiversity in his/her classroom. A teacher can use wikiversity in the classroom as by downloading summaries from the websites ,print them out and handout to the learners.The teacher can also use wikiversity as when using a projector and show wikiversity tutorials to the learners.It can be used as self study.It act as a researcher host,learners can as well use wikiversity for research based on what the teacher has instructed them to do.Teacher can research for any range content to teach the learners ,same information can as well be used for later preference.The teacher can print the information from wikiversity and use them to easy teaching and learning in the classroom 123poppy (discuss • contribs) 13:01, 30 September 2022 (UTC) It's advisable for learners to use computers in a classroom because it makes the lesson much easier. https://youtu.be/zLu1HBkIaKI

title: Wikiversity talk:What is Wikiversity?


text:
Vossa Senhoria

Vossa Senhoria, a monthly newspaper first published in 1935 in Brazil, measures 1.4 in. x 1 in. (3.5 cm x 2.5 cm), making it the world's smallest newspaper in terms of size. Each issue has up to 16 pages, and includes photographs, illustrations and advertising space.

The publisher Leônidas Schwindt "saw the small size as a solution for creating a quality low-cost newspaper."

title: Vossa Senhoria


text:
Kazyonnaya Zaimka

Kazyonnaya Zaimka (Казённая Заимка) is a rural locality (a settlement) in Barnaul, Altai Krai, Russia. The population was 2,769 as of 2013. There are 55 streets.

Geography
Kazyonnaya Zaimka is located 16 km northwest of Barnaul by road. Gonba is the nearest rural locality.

title: Kazyonnaya Zaimka


text:
Talk:David Magee

Other people named David Magee
(content copied here from main article)

Another David Magee (born 1965) website is host of the nationally syndicated television and radio program, The David Magee Show. He's a non-fiction author of 12 books, including How Toyota Became #1; The Education of Mr. Mayfield; Jeff Immelt and the New GE Way; MoonPie; and Playing to Win: Jerry Jones and the Dallas Cowboys about NFL owner Jerry Jones. His television program is broadcast daily by the Biz Television Network, live for two hours each day from a studio in downtown Chattanooga, Tennessee. The two hour program, airing under the tagline Live. Loud. Clear. airs on television in markets including Los Angeles, Pittsburgh, Denver and Salt Lake City and on radio stations from Greenwich, CT to Spokane, Washington. His book How Toyota Became #1 was named a top ten business book of the year by Booklist (American Library Association) and his book The Education of Mr. Mayfield won the IPPY Gold Medal for Best Non-Fiction Book in the South. David Magee's books have been translated into more than a dozen languages and have sold more than 200,000 copies worldwide. He has been a frequent guest on CNBC and Fox Business and was featured in the BBC documentary Total Recall. He is also the metro columnist for the Chattanooga Times Free Press and is a journalism graduate of The University of Mississippi. He currently lives in Lookout Mountain, Tennessee, but formerly lived in Oxford, Mississippi, serving in the 1990s served as a city councilman for the college town's Ward VI.

David Magee (born 1965) is also a non-fiction author of nine books, including How Toyota Became #1 and Playing to Win: Jerry Jones and the Dallas Cowboys about NFL owner Jerry Jones. In 2009 he wrote the book Jeff Immelt and the New GE Way: Innovation, Transformation and Winning in the 21st Century, (McGraw-Hill Professional, ISBN 978-0-07-160587-8). He lives in Lookout Mountain, Tennessee.

David Magee is an author of alternative health books, such as The Lifeforce Maximizer : The World's Mini-Encyclopedia of Life Survival for Conquering Heart Disease.

Tatum Cloete
Hi good morning can't i please what the little marmaid

title: Talk:David Magee


text:
Talk:Wallace Reid filmography

The asterisks
Why do so many (all?) of the shorts have an asterisk before the word 'short'? Is it a signal that they're lost?

I see that this has been the case since the article was created. Is it a sign the data was copied from elsewhere? Lovingboth (talk) 22:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Wallace Reid filmography


text:
Dickinson Center, New York

Dickinson Center is a hamlet in Franklin County, New York, United States; located in Dickinson, New York. The community is 15.6 mi southwest of Malone. Dickinson Center has a post office with ZIP code 12930, which opened on February 3, 1842.

title: Dickinson Center, New York


text:
User:Divinewa

Ewa is a word that simply means Beauty in Yoruba, a dialect in Nigeria, a country of the beautiful continent of Africa.

I have come to realize that every woman is a Beauty in the eyes of God; it doesn’t matter her shape, race, style, etc. She herself has to discover that inner beauty only a relationship with God can reveal.

title: User:Divinewa


text:
Portal talk:Practical Arts and Sciences

If you want to experiment with a radical new version of Portal:Practical Arts and Sciences you can work at Portal:Practical Arts and Sciencesnew.

If you update featured content on this portal, make sure that you update Portal:Practical Arts and Sciences/Featured.

is this school necessary?
I want to question the relevence of this school. I may be well be wrong but why should we make a confusing seperation between subjects that a 'have practical application to everyday life' and thoses that don't? Most feild of study will most likey fall under both and this school seems like it will only confuse the catorgarising of subjects. m_dentonNZ 08:42, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, but there is a problem with some subjects. For example, where would you classify the studies of a pilot? Some subjects are multidisciplinar and gather many fields. I'm studiying Aeronautical Management and I have subjects as Medicine, Economics, Counting, Maths, Physics, Psychology, Geography, Meteorology, Computing, Law and everything needed for being a pilot (Navigation, Communication, Procedures, Performances, Intrumentation...). So, where do I classify my degree? That is why I consider this school is needed. Pbolgiani 11:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Pbolgiani. The distinction between "practical" and "academic" is real and relevant as illustrated by the divergence in focus and method between Trade Schools and Universities. For instance, I intend to create a welding course. While there is a certain amount of metallurgy and mathematics involved, the bulk of the craft can only be learned by carefully guided and exhaustive physical repetition. This sets it entirely apart, pedagogically, from even closely related "impractical" schools like engineering or construction management. Unless you mean to exclude traditional trade-related, hands-on courses, then this dichotomy cannot be ignored. Lordcorvid 23:03, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Foreign Languages as a division?
I think foreign languages should at least be a school, if not a faculty. Within most Western universities, languages have their own faculty. Davymast 20:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

New page format
Use Portal:Practical Arts and Sciencesnew for design of new versions of Portal:Practical Arts and Sciences. My main goal was to include featured content and links to other Wikiversity content about Practical Arts and Sciences. --JWSchmidt 19:24, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Picture on portal
By the way, the building on the picture on the Portal (Astra brewery office building in Hamburg, Germany by architect von Bassewitz, no longer exists. The building was shaped after a beer glass. If that was good architecture is disputed. The people who broke it down thought no :-)Nannus 21:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

School of Agriculture
The School of Agriculture has been founded. So far there is some interest in Pomology, Permaculture and Agricultural Engineering. -- CQ 23:44, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

title: Portal talk:Practical Arts and Sciences


text:
temática

Noun

 * 1) themes, collectively; the argument; the themes or subjects contained in a literary or artistic work
 * 2) a type of thematic lecture

Noun

 * 1) subject, topic, theme

title: temática


text:
Yasnaya Polyana, Biysky District, Altai Krai

Yasnaya Polyana (Ясная Поляна) is a rural locality (a settlement) in Pevomaysky Selsoviet, Biysky District, Altai Krai, Russia. The population was 374 as of 2013. There are 4 streets.

Geography
Yasnaya Polyana is located 25 km northeast of Biysk (the district's administrative centre) by road. Beryozovaya Gorka is the nearest rural locality.


text:
User:<IP_ADDRESS>/sandbox

Article Evaluation Article Evaluated: Maya Ceramics

1. Everything in the article is relevant to the topic. The first thing I noticed as distraction was the occasional grammar mistake or wordy sentence. There is someone mentioned in the article (Prudence M Rice) but the author does not state who they are nor is there a cited source with that name. The section on form and function is a little bare, and could probably be improved upon by talking about the form of the ceramics as opposed to just the function.

2. There's a phrase in the article that describes the ceramics as wonderful, however besides that the article is neutral.

3. There aren't any viewpoints that are over or under presented in this article

4.The one URL in the notes section leads to a page that no longer exists, the other note references a book. The references are all books, most of which appear to be textbooks.

5. No, there are only two places in the article (the two tables) where references are included. I don't know if these are reliable sources because one does not exist anymore and the other is a book I do not have and cannot find any reviews for online. 6. Nothing seems out of date, however if they are going to call the first section "Form and Function" they should add information about the form of the ceramics in addition to what's there about the function.

7. There are some pictures that a user is hoping to eventually integrate into the article. Another user does not think that one of the sources is a reliable one, because it is a tourist booklet published in 1984. There is also some talk of newly discovered pottery that will likely be added however there aren't enough references on them yet.

8. This is a start class article, and is not part of any Wikiprojects, but is of importance to these Wikiprojects: WikiProject Mesoamerica, WikiProject Mexico, WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, and WikiProject Visual arts.

9. As of yet, we have not discussed Maya ceramics in class.

title: User:131.151.252.122/sandbox


text:
File talk:SAMHS logo.svg

Flag and seal be on public domain and Wikimedia Commons
With all due respect, when will the flag and seal be on public domain and Wikimedia Commons? FireDragonValo (talk) 18:45, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

title: File talk:SAMHS logo.svg


text:
CACS/Glossary/Assembler

An Assembler is:
 * 1) a software program that creates an executable module from assembly source language source code.
 * 2) a software component that creates a machine level executable program module from an interim work product produced by a higher level compiler.
 * 3) a shorthand reference for Assembly Language Code.

title: CACS/Glossary/Assembler


text:
Talk:Assembly language

My experience is primarily with IBM 360/370 Assembly Language. It might be noted that we should change the name from Assembler to Assembly Language. An assembler takes assembly language and turns it into machine code. -- I just registered. Mark-roberts 03:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm thinking I'll proceed from here as follows: Introduction to Assembly Language Assembly Language Basics Flow Control (Comparison and Branch/Jump) Specific Architectures (Possibly their specific operations and any peculiarities, implementations of the same example algorithm in each assembly language. Suggestions on the algorithm in question?  Preferably not something overly complex, so as not to lose the forest for the trees.)
 * Virtual Machines
 * IBM 360/370
 * Motorolla
 * Intel x86
 * (etc)

I think the algorithm that I'm going to use will be to generate the first N numbers of the Fibonacci series and stuff them into an array. def Fibo(num, array): x=1 y=2 n=0 while n < num: array[n]=x n+=1 array[n]=y n+=1 x+=y y+=x Mark Roberts 20:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Assembly language


text:
Floyd Breeland

Floyd Breeland (August 5, 1933 – August 11, 2020) was an American politician who served in the South Carolina House of Representatives from the 111th district from 1992 to 2008.

Early life and education
Breeland was born in St. George, South Carolina and graduated from Williams Memorial High School. He served in the United States Army. He received his bachelor's degree from Allen University in 1955 and his masters of science degree in secondary school education from Indiana University Bloomington in 1967.

Career
He was a high school teacher and principal.

He died on August 11, 2020, in Charleston, South Carolina at age 87.

title: Floyd Breeland


text:
User:Rileyjmurray

I have a PhD in mathematical optimization from Caltech.

My website: rileyjmurray.com

My thesis: https://thesis.library.caltech.edu/14169/

title: User:Rileyjmurray


text:
User:Shalor (Wiki Ed)/ABS

{db-spam|help=off}} Art Beyond Sight (ABS) is a non-profit organization that works with museums to increase the accessibility of their exhibits and facilities for blind and low-sighted patrons, as well as patrons with other disabilities. The organization also works with schools that have a focus on museum studies.

Background
ABS was founded in 1987 in New York City, New York by Elisabeth Salzhauer Axel as the Art Education for the Blind group. This move was prompted by Axel's grandmother, an art lover, beginning to lose her sight and Axel realizing how few accommodations there were for the blind.

Teaching Modules
ABS’ work and research conducted in conjunction with museums is separated into 6 teaching modules:

 * Module 1 – State of the Field: Museum Accessibility
 * Module 2 – Understanding Our Stakeholders: The Disability Community
 * Module 3 – Communicating and Interacting with People with Disabilities
 * Module 4 – Museum Access: Universal Design
 * Module 5 – Museum Access: Multimodal Engagement
 * Module 6 – Museum Access: Inclusive Practices in Museums

Module 1 - State of the Field: Museum Accessibility
Module 1 first goes into the laws that are in place in America that are the driving force behind museums making accessible features more widespread - the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (ABA), and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The ADA in particular made accessibility requirements for museum and other public facilities stricter and more in depth.

Museums must balance modern accessibility features without affecting exhibit authenticity.

Module 2 - Understanding our Stakeholders: the Disability Community
According to the 2010 census data, 56.7 million Americans are living with a disability. In particular, the module describes visual, hearing, and mental impairments. The module proceeds to discuss other artists that had visual impairments and how their sight may have affected their work. The module demonstrates how the artist may have seen their work through an interactive simulation. Finally, the module discusses an art exhibit titled “EveryBody: An Artifact History of Disability in America” at the Smithsonian.

Module 3 - Communicating and Interacting with People with Disabilities
The five main disabilities that museum staff (Visitor Services, Educators, Security, Docents, Volunteers) will come in contact with most are: Blind or Visually Impaired, Deaf or Hard of Hearing, Mobility Impairments, Cognitive Impairments, and Invisible Impairments. ABS strongly recommends that museums use People-First Language. “People-First Language emphasizes the person, not the disability. A disability is not the primary, defining characteristic of an individual, rather just one of several aspects of the whole person.”

Blind or visually impaired visitors should be asked if they “would like assistance” and directed to admissions desk staff. Admissions should have braille or large print versions of museum guides handy, and should be equipped with the proper training to address these patrons in a respectful manner. For these visitors, audio-equipped guides may be the most useful when traveling independently around a museum.

Module 4 - Museum Access: Universal Design
For more information, visit the Universal Design page. Universal design in general refers to building practices that make structures universally accessible by all - and can include wheelchair ramps, textured walking surfaces, or color coded steps.

Module 5 - Museum Access: Multimodal Engagement
In this module, the idea of having a multimodal engagement philosophy is discussed. “Multimodal refers to the diverse formats available for delivering content and communicating messages. “ The museum must approach the idea of content and message delivery through different formats in order to reach patrons with different accessibility needs. In particular, the module focuses on physical accessibility, cognitive accessibility, social access, and emotional access. Multimodal engagement can be achieved through making guide-led tours more dynamic, more interactive museum exhibits, and larger and more easily readable museum literature, among others.

Module 6 - Museum Access: Inclusive Practices in Museums
This module specifies how each individual department in a museum can assist in making a museum more accessible. For example, museum leaders are in charge of making sure all exhibits and the structure are accessible, while educators are more in the frontline and should be the first worker to speak out when a visitor has need for accessibility. Volunteers can orient visitors towards the proper building spaces as well as provide guidance. Conservators and curators focus on the idea of physical and programmatic access, and exhibition designers must follow government guidelines for accessibility for visitors with disabilities. The technology department is responsible for adapting and deploying new technology, such as self-guided audio tours, that would allow for visitors to access the exhibits more easily.

Major Contributions
Art Beyond Sight has in recent years pioneered a series of museum accessibility studies and research. Research is conducted in conjunction and in collaboration with large metropolitan museums, university museums and historic sites - partners have included the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, Seattle Art Museum, and the Guggenheim Museum. Major developments from these studies include conducting the first ever focus group of blind and low-sight visitors, as well as the development of informational tools for museums to improve their accessibility programs. In general, conducting focus groups revealed some visitors' dissatisfaction with current states of museum accessibility and staff training, as some were made to feel unwelcome. These studies provided valuable insight and data into how museums could improve.

title: User:Shalor (Wiki Ed)/ABS