text:
(UTC)
 * I agree that the action of deleting a post to which there had been multiple replies was inappropriate. However, I agree with Baseball Bugs, and think that Medeis will have to explain why she thought it was necessary to remove the post after a lengthy reply.  Even if the post was a troll post, and I do not think that it was a troll post, just a question with seriously wrong assumptions, I do not think that removal of the question and its answers was in order; Medeis caused a Streisand effect by deleting the post and all of the replies.  Medeis was asked to offer her opinions on guidelines for the Reference Desks, and I thought that her reply declined to help us.  I, for one, want an explanation beyond an admission that it was inappropriate, which appears to mean that Medeis gives herself the right to respond randomly to posts at the Reference Desks.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:56, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for restoring it friends This link confused me... I'll discuss it in the original post if required... -- (Angelos|Angelus (talk) 18:49, 15 February 2015 (UTC))

 * As a matter of good practice, I'd like to also request a good clear edit summary for any removal. The omission of an edit summary gives the appearance of trying to be inconspicuous in the page history. The "trolling" comment that was added and then removed one edit later (why?) could have been the edit summary. ― Mandruss  ☎  01:08, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

 * That contradicts what has been said here many times in the past - that trolling should be removed with a minimum of feeding the troll. To me, if you say "rv trolling", you're feeding the troll. So what's the solution? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:23, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

 * That's correct, the only ways to combat trolls are to ignore them (thus starving them and making them mad) or out-troll them (somewhat more effective and kind of fun if you have time for such things/are apathetic enough). Unfortunately, you can't really point out trolling without looking like it's getting to you (thus feeding trolls) and that would include edit summaries. Other than having a discussion in the talk page each time there's an obvious troll about and then deleting/hatting sans mention of trolling, I don't really see any way to deal with it that doesn't feed the troll. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 27 Shevat 5775 04:53, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Semi-protecting the page is good way to choke them off, but us mere mortals aren't allowed to do that. We have to go through a troll-feeding process to try to get it done. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:57, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

 * It's also somewhat disruptive as IPs can't ask questions then. Counter-trolling is also effective, but can border on disruptive and kind of mean itself as one the best ways to do it is to 1-UP the troll. So within the bounds of what's acceptable, hatting and such with minimal shows of annoyance or caring (as if a fly is being swatted away) and the troll might lose interest as they and go elsewhere. I speak as a former troll of some considerable skill years back (once enraged an entire chan for instance). Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 27 Shevat 5775 05:08, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

The only way to really effectively deal with a troll is to make them feel completely invisible, and there is no way to do that within the functionality of our current software. Therefore we have to accept some small level of feeding and hope it's not enough to sustain them. The reason for the removal is already clear enough to the troll, and the removal itself feeds them. In many cases, the individual won't know about page histories, so they won't see the edit summary anyway. Note that the method used in this particular case, inserting a temporary comment in the page content, is based in the assumption that the troll knows how to read a page history but not a diff within it! ― Mandruss  ☎  06:52, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Aside: formatting of ref links
see reflist-talk. DMacks (talk) 05:24, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Aha! Thanks for fixing it, DMacks. ---Sluzzelin talk  05:42, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Thought I'd let you no, "it wasn't me" - automatic occurrence... -- (Angelos|Angelus (talk) 07:18, 16 February 2015 (UTC))
 * Theres more than a few talk pages that need that. Thank you! Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 27 Shevat 5775 14:03, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Reference Desk Guidelines. Let's fix this properly.
I'd like to suggest that we make a serious effort to solve this problem. We waste FAR too much energy on re-re-re-debating this.

My proposal is to split the decision-making in to two chunks.

 * CHUNK #1: What things are violations of our guidelines that rise to the level where some action has to be taken?
 * CHUNK #2: What are the procedures that respondents should follow in the event of problems with a question?

...with the clear understanding that "Be Bold" and "Ignore All Rules" will certainly apply here - at least in cases which are not clear-cut or simply not covered here. SteveBaker (talk) 00:10, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

CHUNK #1: What things are violations?
I'm thinking that we imagine a few formalized classes of problem:

 * CLASS A: Questions that are perfectly OK.
 * CLASS B: Questions that are phrased badly, but can be answered with care.
 * CLASS C: Questions that require discussion and consensus here before any action should be taken.
 * CLASS D: Questions that we'd prefer that nobody answer ("Don't feed the troll")
 * CLASS E: Questions that demand immediate 'hatting' of the question and all of the answers.
 * CLASS F: Questions that demand immediate removal of the question, the title and all of the answers.

We could say that (for example) overt personal attacks are CLASS F and should be removed on sight. Maybe we decide that questions relating to medical advice are CLASS D or maybe E. Maybe requests for relationship advice are CLASS D, but requests for advice on car repair are class B.

Can we come to some consensus as to what kinds of questions fall into which categories?

To be clear, we would not expect our OP's to understand these distinctions...and if a question falls into classes E or F, we'd have some standard templates explaining why we're declining to answer. SteveBaker (talk) 00:10, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

COMMENTS BELOW HERE PLEASE
Class A should be the complement of Classes C-F, in my opinion. What perfectly acceptable questions have in common is that they have nothing wrong with them, so I don't think it makes sense to try to give this class a positive definition. Whether a question is silly or offensive or ignorant shouldn't affect its acceptability here. Not only are these very subjective attributes, but one of the whole points of the Ref desk is to combat ignorance and reward curiosity!

Class F for me is simply threats and hate speech. Even "personal attacks" probably shouldn't be outright removed without notice, because many people here don't see the distinction between attacking a position and attacking a person. E.g. "That argument is nonsense" might be slightly rude, but it's not a personal attack.

I think the best way to proceed is to start with the minimal attributes and examples that we can get consensus for. For instance, I hope everyone agrees on threats and hate speech. But I expect some disagreement with me on the personal attack issue. So we should just put the threats etc. in class F, and hold off on debating/discussing the harder bits until we have a core settled on. Thanks for starting this up, SemanticMantis (talk) 16:00, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

 * I agree that the union of Classes C through F is the complement of the union of Classes A and B. That is, every question either belongs to Classes A&B or to Classes C through F.  With Class B, we should restate/reword the question to put it in Class A and answer it.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:41, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Class F is, in my opinion, very small. The only questions that should be deleted are questions by banned users or trolls.  A question containing hate speech should not be deleted but hatted, because it is easier for the blocking admin not to have to go into the history to see the hate speech.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:51, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I will revise my comment about hate speech. Non-admin editors should not remove hate speech.  Removing it makes it necessary for an admin to view the history to identify the offense.  However, non-admin editors should request that administrators redact the hate speech and block the offending editor.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:15, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I think that what is important for us collectively at the Reference Desk is to be cautious in acting on questionable questions. In particular, deleting a question with answers is disruptive, and if the question was by a troll, that is exactly what the troll wants.  Also, even if a question should have been deleted before being answered (because the user was banned), it is better to hat the question and its answers than to delete it afterward.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:51, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

 * For sure, we can add a procedure (see discussion below) that when we get a Class B question, one of us should simply re-state it in the form of a new Class A question, then have everyone answer the restated version. That might actually be useful because it would help to train our OP's into what forms of question they are allowed to ask.  Heck, we could even have a "RESTATED AS:" template that would put some fancy language in there.

 * "Your question (as stated) could not be answered directly because (yadda yadda guideline) but perhaps restating it gives you what you needed to know: (yadda yadda?)"

 * So:

 * Can you give me advice about how I could throw a baseball faster?
 * Your question (as stated) could not be answered directly because it's a request for personal advice, but perhaps restating it gives you what you needed to know:
 * What techniques are available to throw baseballs faster?

 * But my point is that if it's our policy to do that, then we need to know when something is Class B in order that we have solid grounds for restating it and not cause huge arguments here about people who do that unnecessarily - or who fail to do it when needed. SteveBaker (talk) 16:50, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I would support a "restated as" template. IMO, nearly every question can be rephrased to suit our guidelines. The baseball example is innocuous. The more contentious case is requests for medical advice. I'm personally fine with restating and giving some WP links for medical information, as well as linking the medical disclaimer. But I suspect not everyone will be on board with that. I also want to bring up the idea of removing responses that give medical advice, rather than questions that seek it. But I'm not sure where that fits in with this discussion, or how many would support that change to our procedures. SemanticMantis (talk) 17:43, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd support that, but I think I'd want a mandatory mention here so that the deletion doesn't simply vanish without trace. SteveBaker (talk) 17:52, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I would suggest removing the answers and hatting the original question, stating that we do not provide medical advice and that answers that may provide medical advice have been deleted. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:13, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * What types of requests for advice other than medical or legal advice must be declined? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:43, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * If some kid shows up and asks for advice on how to "get girls" (always loved that phrase), we shouldn't launch into an essay about respect and personal hygiene (which would likely become a debate about the best way to "get girls", since there's little consensus on that subject). We should link to one or two websites about that sort of thing and be done with it. I think we should provide links rather than our own advice wherever that's possible. We could also provide gentle hints about learning to make effective use of a search engine, a la teach a man to fish, lest the person become dependent on Reference Desk for all information about the world. We're not here as Google operators. ― Mandruss  ☎  06:37, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok, so that has nothing to do with declining a request, which was your question. So it's out of place, but I'm not removing it. I spent too much time writing it. :) ― Mandruss  ☎  06:57, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I think that there are a few questions that can reasonably be ignored, and how to "get girls" may be one of those. Requests for legal and medical advice should be formally declined.  We can work out the details of how they are declined.  A few questions should simply be ignored, and Mandruss has a good example.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:11, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Yes, that's why I've tried to separate out the classification question (above) from the procedure question (below). The reason (I think) that these discussions so often get derailed is the muddying of those two things.   We may agree that "getting girls" is an issue we don't want to answer but don't wish to punish either (so Class C or D maybe)...but there are deeper questions...should we also actively prevent (by deleting) or discourage (eg by hatting or templating) people who answer the question anyway?

 * I feel that if we could agree to a set of classifications - "getting girls" being Class X, "veternary advice" being Class Y - then that would be progress.  In my ideal world, we'd have this set of buckets - and we'd drop each problematic situation into one of them.   When new problems come up ("How can I sabotage the brakes on my wife's car?  (This is for a novel I'm writing!)"), all we have to debate is "Is this kind of question Class X or Class Y?"...and having done that and obtained some sort of consensus, we'd already know what the procedure is in terms of hatting, ignoring, or deleting - and whether we do that to the answers and/or the question and/or the title.

 * If we can debate the procedures and the classification matters separately, then I think this will go more smoothely.
 * SteveBaker (talk) 21:41, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

 * I personally think that, although splitting the classification questions from the procedure questions seemed like a useful approach, it isn't helping. I think that the classification should, in general, determine what the procedure is.  If the question is hattable, the question should be hatted.  I think that the split was a useful idea but has proved to make work.  Anyone else?  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:41, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * We can come up with archetypical examples for the classes, but there's just know way to build a rigorous ontology of all questions we might get here. Even one person would have a very hard time of it, let alone our consensus process. My opinion is that "how to get girls" is totally valid, there are gallons of ink spilled on the topic, and we can give refs for that. I thought the classification and procedure separation was mostly to help keep track of the conversation here, and in practice, the former should determine the latter, as you say. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:09, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Classes E and F, as defined above, already have answers implied in their definitions (hat or delete). So does Class B (restate and answer).  Do we really think that we need to answer classification and procedure separately?  I don't.  I think that the separation was a good try, but is not helping.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:09, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, point taken Robert & Semandic. I kinda crossed my own line there didn't I?!  I still want to separate out classification from procedure - but my problem in creating the 'Class' list was that I implied procedure.  Let me have think about it and see if I can write a list of classes without reference to procedure or consequences.  I think that coming up with a set of examples may be the only way...but then I'm probably giving the answer as a part of the question.  Tricky.  SteveBaker (talk) 19:09, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

 * As to "how to get girls", I disagree that it is "totally valid". The question, when asked without context, is objectifying and dehumanizing to girls, implying that the poster thinks that other editors can provide magic guidance on how to "get" them.  That is probably why Steve mentioned it.  It certainly isn't a totally valid question at this Wikipedia reference desk.  I personally think that it should just be ignored, but that is my opinion.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:09, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I agree the phrasing is demeaning, but I see our goal here as being to help people find information, even if they are bigots or sexist or whatever. So sure, some people might post refs to crappy PUA sites, and other users can post refs to how that is silly and dehumanizing, etc. Sure, you're free to ignore such questions, but I'd like to have the opportunity to give the hypothetical asker some literature that might help them better understand human interactions (and not have my responses removed or hatted). Depending on the phrasing of the hypothetical question, I might indeed ignore because the case seems hopeless, but I also might want to try to help. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:43, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

CHUNK #2: What is the procedure for answering questions?
Again, I'm suggesting that since this is a process rather than a linear set of rules, we have a simple flow-chart, such as the one I've promoted before.

Perhaps the box labelled "Does the question violate our guidelines?" can be broken out for CLASS A through F question classes? Perhaps you don't agree with the set of procedures that this diagram encapsulates?

What should this flow-chart look like? SteveBaker (talk) 00:10, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

COMMENTS BELOW HERE PLEASE
Jokes in small type is good, ignoring trolls is good. I believe that our discussions here of potential trolls are more "troll feeding" than any good faith answers we might give them. Ask a high school teacher - if a student asks about e.g. masturbation in a trolling manner, the best thing to do is give a good answer and keep a straight face. If you get flustered and tell them they can't ask the question, the whole class gets disrupted. Also, there's the notion that many of us share - that our answers/refs aren't just for OPs, they also serve a wide range of readers and future searchers. So good answers to a question asked in bad faith can still be good for the desks. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:05, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

 * The problem is not with a one-off question on an off-color topic. Sure, feel free to either ignore questions that upset you...or provide a straight-up answer.  Fine.

 * The problem lies with the persistent troll...planet-colors-guy or how-to-import-car-X-into-country-Y-guy, for example.

 * Giving straight answers is OK for a while...it's actually necessary because for a while, we have no way to know that this is a troll. But pretty soon it gets ridiculous.  Sure, the first time planet-colors-guy asked how such-and-such planet would look if you were in orbit around it, we gave it our best shot at a good answer...it was actually a very interesting question...the second time, it seemed like he was just confused by out first answer...by the third time, I think we were all losing patience and WP:AGF became challenging.  But after the 5th or 6th variation on the same damned question, it became clear that we were being trolled - and that continuing to provide answers was not the correct strategy.  For many trolls, who seem to crave attention more than anything, even coming here to discuss the problem gives them some sort of weird kick.  So WP:DFTT becomes the only way forward.   That means that we need a policy to deny answers, deny discussion, deny, deny, deny.  Just don't talk to them or about them or delete them or do anything that shows that we've noticed them.  That's the only proven strategy against a determined troll.

 * Of course we also have clever trolls who ask a decent question to get us on-board...but if the only way they can continue to get our attention is to keep asking good/interesting questions, then they are no longer trolls.

 * SteveBaker (talk) 16:33, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

 * I honestly have no problem with the car importer guy. He posts rarely, signs with the same username, and is very easy to ignore. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:21, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

 * I would like to hear, either in this paragraph or the one above, from User:Medeis, who has been a critic of how we respond to questionable questions. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:42, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

 * I haven't got much to say that I haven't said before: We shouldn't be giving advice of any sort that licensed professionals give, such questions should be removed or hatted. There's an intractable faction here that insists obvious trolls deserve more respect than established users.  I found the immediate criticisms of my recent "swing obsession" question at the science desk quite amazing.  Had I said the same things to an anonymous "new" user (like the one who asked who to sort users by race and whether they are historians) I'd have been castigated for biting the newby.  Basically I am busy in the real world, and at this point I am coming here mostly to relax, not get in circular policy debates.  I suggest and suspect we will deal with trolling as we always have, on an as it occurs basis, because no policy on that matter will be respected by all editors here.  BTW, I prefer a quick note on my talk page saying, "you might want to comment on this discussion" rather than being summoned like Barbara Eden by having my lamp rubbed. :) μηδείς (talk) 19:00, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Since you, Medeis, sometimes appoint yourself as the policewoman for this Reference Desk, I would have appreciated some input as to what you think is and is not acceptable, because some of us don't like being jerked to WP:ANI either. Unfortunately, my conclusion, and Medeis is welcome to provide me with other information, is that Medeis simply reserves the right to pull us to ANI if she doesn't like the way that we answer questions.  We can't do anything about that unless she will clarify.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:02, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Aside from threats and hate speech, I'm thinking that a focus more on removal of responses that violate our guidelines than removal of questions would be more welcoming, and put the burden of good behavior on us, where it belongs. IMO providing refs (like the name of a medical condition) is fine even if a question asks for medical advice. We can even suggest/ demand that all informational responses to advice-seeking questions also include a clear link to the medical disclaimer.
 * But if a respondent gives medical advice (defined by Kainaw), then we zap that response and politely notify the respondent, WP:BRD style. I know full well we aren't a physical library reference desk, but in that case the onus is on the staff, not the asker (again, with exceptions for dangerous or highly disruptive behavior). Seriously, I think some of us should go to a library desk and ask for medical advice about abdominal pain. I'll bet a good trouting that you won't be escorted to the door. I'll also wager that they will not give you medical advice. I suspect they'll show you to some books and possible some contact information for local medical clinics. We have many differences from those desks, but I think we can follow their model on how to deal with advice-seeking questions. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:21, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I will say again that I am not convinced that threats and hate speech need a special category that should be deleted, unless we explicitly state that they should be deleted and redaction requested immediately. I would prefer to leave them standing if we expect a blocking and redacting administrator to be quick to block and redact.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:58, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think they need a special category, I'm just listing them as examples that (so far) we seem to all agree are definitely a problem that we need to deal with. The idea was to start with examples that we could all agree on. Actually they are really rare in my experience, so perhaps they aren't the best examples in that regard. I don't especially care if they are hatted/revdel, ignored, etc. Hatting is sort of a nice compromise between doing nothing and deleting, but it's also fairly toothless, imo, and in many cases even attracts attention due to the way they are displayed. SemanticMantis (talk) 22:03, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

 * None of this is likely to address the real problem, which is disagreement over where the line is between "information" and "advice". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:01, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * That recent response where you said excessive teeth grinding is called bruxism? That's medical information. The question was seeking advice, if I recall correctly, but you just gave info with reference, and that is fine by me. Most of us seem happy to agree that we can apply User:Kainaw/Kainaw's_criterion] to decide if a question is seeking advice. I think it works equally well to decide if a response is giving advice. The terms "diagnosis, prognosis, or treatment" all have very clear descriptions in their articles. It seems that Medeis is one of the few regulars here that frequently removes questions on grounds of advice and the removal is questioned/challenged by others. Most of the other editors who remove posts don't seem to cause problems when they do it. These are just my general impressions, of course I botched that restoration of a question by a blocked user recently, and occasionally non-Medeis users remove things and are later disputed. SemanticMantis (talk) 20:18, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I told him to see a doctor and/or dentist to find out more. What I objected to there was some autocratic (NOT Medeis, FYI) deciding that it should be zapped. I favor hatting rather than censoring, in most cases. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:31, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I thought you had included a link to bruxism, perhaps I was mistaken. I couldn't find a working link to that question and response. As to the removal, Reference_desk/Guidelines/Medical_advice says that removal is discouraged, and that "Generally speaking, answers are more likely to be sanctioned than questions." -- this is what I've been talking about for a while now, that we should police responses more than questions. SemanticMantis (talk) 22:07, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I linked to bruxism, because he talked about teeth-grinding, and bruxism is a more technical term for teeth-grinding, and in my opinion the OP needed to be aware that bruxism can have bad long-term effects and he should see a doctor/dentist about it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:15, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

 * I agree with the flow-chart. It's so common sense that it's difficult to imagine a serious argument against it.
 * However, the guidelines step is the weak link. I think a more strict guidelines document needs to exist.
 * As much as I hate rules creep, irregular enforcement is a 100x worse. Vague guidelines give people an opening to be bullies whenever they like, without anybody being able to say for sure that they shouldn't have.
 * I think the way to generate such a doc would be for someone to come up with a draft, and then debate the fine points until there's a consensus. Trying to generate a consensus from whole cloth is too much of an uphill battle.
 * Aside from that, I'd be strongly in favor of any new rules that limit the back and forth side conversation, nitpicking, and other "easy" replies that allow people to feel like they're participating without actually providing information that answers the question. I feel like that's a much more severe problem than the occasional stupid drama about what should or should not be censored. APL (talk) 23:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Comments below "COMMENTS BELOW HERE PLEASE"
As I've said before, this is a Jonathan Wild situation. Rather than putting together elaborate rules which aren't going to be read or followed (as we have no effective means of enforcement), we should address the real issue: Tevildo (talk) 19:38, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Is there any sanction short of a topic ban which will prevent Medies' hatting and deleting of threads?
 * If not, should Medies be topic-banned?
 * If not, are we agreed that Medies' behaviour is in fact acceptable, and that we should stop discussing it here?
 * The issue is that nobody can answer those questions with any authority.
 * Not only to we not have the authority to ban Medies simply because we think it would make the ref-desk better or more useful, there will surely be some people who disagree with that assessment.
 * With no rules, or rules so expansive they can mean anything, we can't easily make any arguments along the lines you're proposing. For or against. APL (talk) 23:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

 * I don't want to make this be about individuals - but since you brought it up...Medeis believes she IS following the rules. Many other people do not believe that's the case.  That's happening because the rules are not well spelled-out.  Fix the rules so that they can clearly be explained, easily followed, and modified as needed over time - and I'm fairly sure that Medeis will follow them.  This would allow people who wish to be wiki-cop to do the job with full community backing.  Instead of objecting to what Medeis does, we'd be able to thank her for upholding our rules.  People who violate a clearly laid out set of rules are much easier to sanction than people who are merely applying slightly 'off' interpretations of vague rules.

 * If we can do what I'm trying to make happen, then I firmly believe that we'll have a rapid sorting out of people. Those who believe that they are following the rules, will actually follow the rules.  People who used to object on grounds of differing interpretations of rules would have less need to do that.  And those who truly do wantonly ignore the rules will very clearly have infracted them and that makes it much easier for us to correct their behavior or (eventually) kick them out with a topic ban.

 * I'm increasingly of the belief that the problem here is the vague rules and the vague procedures for following them. Clarify them - and I firmly believe that we'll fix at least 90% of these bust-ups.

 * SteveBaker (talk) 23:37, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Hopefully true, and I would support implementation of your flowchart. However - and this is a big however - the problem will arise with the "Is the OP an annoying troll?" decision box.  I agree with your suggested action (or lack of action) in this sort of case, but how do we enforce it?  What steps can we take (not "should we take" - what official procedures are available to us?) to sanction users who hat and delete posts merely because the question is annoying?  "Covenants, without the Sword, are but Words, and of no strength to secure a man at all."  (Hobbes). Tevildo (talk) 22:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

 * I never did respond to this, but I'm thinking no, just no. The flowchart should be more like: Is this a question I can answer? Then answer.  Otherwise, is it answerable?  Then wait and let somebody answer.  Otherwise, does it have some meaning?  Then explain why it's unanswerable.  Otherwise, you can ponder why you're being trolled, and if you're sure, you can hat it if you feel like it.  After whatever you write, look and see if somebody's going to gripe about guidelines.  If so, make your best case that it's OK by the guidelines to answer, and if that happens to be right, so much the better. :)  And try not to forget to Just Edit The Friendly Article to avoid confusing the next person. Wnt (talk) 00:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

On semi-protecting the desks
Is it true that the Miscellaneous desk is now protected until Feb 18 (and since Feb 11)?

If so, I would like to point out that a lot of the people asking genuine questions here as well as a number of helpful volunteers are not registered. Semi-protections of this length really won't help the desks survive. I even believe it's actually feeding the trolls, in any event it's damaging the desks, not protecting them.

What do others think? ---Sluzzelin talk  05:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Hadn't thought of it, but you're right. There's probably a fellow somewhere who feels very successful as he thinks he's broken the ref desks and denied its use to many people. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 27 Shevat 5775 05:12, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

 * And if you don't semi-protect the page, the trolls will win. There is one solution: Give registered users who aren't admins the ability to issue temporary blocks. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:26, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I find it hard to believe that anyone who'd been here for more than a year or two would suggest that!  We have enough problems with disagreement over when questions should be hidden or deleted - can you just imagine the chaos if we gave those very same people the power to block people?!  Hell no! SteveBaker (talk) 05:32, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The semis are a bigger win as they catch a lot of innocent bystanders, whereas the trolling posts just catch whomever responds and gets taken along. Surely you don't mean blocking rights for every registered user! Personally, I wouldn't want that ability. Do you mean like mini-moderators who are specially chosen and have fewer privileges than admins? That's a bit better provided the ability isn't abused. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 27 Shevat 5775 05:35, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * It could be like rollback - abuse it and you lose it. And it would be limited to 24 hours or maybe 31, with anything longer still requiring an admin's approval. But that won't happen. So semi-protection still seems like the best option for dealing with a persistent troll. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:49, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I will point out that the theoretical capability for non-admins to block the IPs won't help much, because the IP addresses change. Notice in particular how the IP who either is or is not Alex Sazonov has multiple IP addresses.  As a result, it would be whack-a-mole.  Given the limited value of that functionality, it wouldn't be worth the cost.  It's either semi-protection, or nothing.  Neither the argument for semi-protection nor the argument against semi-protection strikes me as strong.  On the one hand, the stupid questions asked by the IPs cause only minimal disruption, and may not be worth the effort of stopping them.  On the other hand, I don't go along with the idea that semi-protection is denying the Reference Desks to valuable users.  I for one don't see much value to posts from unregistered editors.  Unregistered editors are of great importance as readers of Wikipedia, but I don't see their importance as editors.  (That is my opinion.)  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:59, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Most any website which allows input requires registration. Why Wikipedia continues allowing IP's to edit is anybody's guess. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:10, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * It's many people's idea of an online Utopia, as I understand it. The encyclopedia that anyone can edit ... immediately. It's a noble idea that disregards the sizable downside. If I wanted to avoid any accountability, any need to build and maintain a reputation, I'd make sure my only identity consisted of a series of numbers that only Raymond Babbitt could remember from one encounter to the next. Better yet, I'd make it so the numbers kept changing! But I suspect this has been said many times, to deaf ears. ― Mandruss  ☎  03:26, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * It may have been a good idea at the time, when Wikipedia was small, but now it's just a royal pain for everyone. I expect the WMF doesn't care, as long as money keeps flowing in. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:54, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree with the above posters that allowing unregistered editors is problematic, but getting rid of them is considered to be a "perennial proposal" that is proposed over and over again and does not pass. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:08, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * "Perennial proposal", another Wikipedia scourge. As if the community has spoken and its judgment will never change, despite the fact that it is continually being remade as people drop out and join. It also presumes that the few dozen voices in each discussion are representative of the entire community of 130,000 active editors, which is a silly notion on its face. ― Mandruss  ☎  04:28, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Wherever it is that those perennial proposals get considered and, so far, rejected, is where those with an interest in the matter should take their perennial complaints and argue it out. Having a regular whinge about it here is guaranteed to achieve precisely nothing.  --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  04:23, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh I don't know. I feel a little better for having said it, and that's not precisely nothing. And it's nice to see my feelings validated, too. Sure, you could say it's a misuse of the space in the strict sense, but less so than a debate about the correct etiquette when one is late for a banquet, which was vigorously defended by multiple experienced editors at VPP. ― Mandruss  ☎  04:33, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I would like to put forward an alternative solution to the problem; close the reference desk. I think it has past its usefulness and is becoming a dead weight, distracting editors from the mainspace and causing more problems than it solves. The reference desks were created at a time when typing a random question into google produced no results. So people came to Wikipedia and posted their questions into articles instead, causing "good faith" disruption. The desks were created to funnel that disruption somewhere it would be less disruptive. But with the rise of Yahoo Answers, Reddit, Stackoverflow, and other sites were people can post questions about anything, the number of people coming to Wikipedia for that purpose has greatly dropped off. There is no justification for the continued existence of the reference desks on Wikipedia as the problem they were created to solve no longer exists. The existence of the reference desk itself has now become the problem. Perhaps editors interested in continuing the work of the desks can set up their own wiki and police it as they see fit, but for Wikipedia I think the desks have reached the end of the line and will be close, if not sooner than definitely later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by InqusitiveOnion (talk • contribs) 17:12, 16 February 2015 (UTC) — InqusitiveOnion (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * I strongly disagree with this. The quality of answers you find on those sites is usually pitiful compared to what you get at the refdesks. They're also still pretty active. I don't see activity on the refdesks as being all the disruptive save for the occasional troll (which can and do turn up frequently in mainspace as well). On top of that, a lot of editors also enjoy helping out with the refdesks along with their edits in mainspace, and given the fact Wikipedia has also been haemorrhaging active users for years, it's probably best not to alienate people by removing a big part of the project just like that. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 27 Shevat 5775 17:38, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd add that such a major proposal, if serious, belongs in a separate RfC rather than as a tangent in the middle of a discussion about semi-protection. ― Mandruss  ☎  02:42, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The operative word there being "if serious", given that it's the first and only edit of that account. Also, a serious version of that proposal was discussed here at some length, not too long ago, and nothing came of it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:45, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Smells like this would be a potentially RottenOnion if we were going by WP:DUCK then. Though this is getting us away from the matter at hand. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 28 Shevat 5775 02:52, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The duck test really only applies if we know what egg the duck hatched out of. I don't know if ducks eat onions.  Robert McClenon (talk) 04:06, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Possibly a rotten one, though it doesn't make sense when a full-grown duck would be much more effective here (unless it were a loon), not to mention tastier if it did in fact eat onions. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 28 Shevat 5775 04:15, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * It sounds like you folks are gengineering the duckatrice. Though no substitute for the Doomsday Duck, I could be interested in this.  But  semi-protection, troll-fighting and all that... not so useful.  Just count the goofier questions as roughage, part of a healthy diet, and let them flow through the system. Wnt (talk) 00:19, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Every duck hatched from an egg. My question was an obscure joke about the duck test.  The duck test has to do with sock-puppetry.  The duck test permits blocking an account if it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, without the need for checkuser.  What egg the duck hatched from was a question of who, if anyone, is the puppet-master.  It was an obscure joke that didn't amuse.  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:14, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Nonsense, I was amused by it (hence the rotten egg comment), but I wanted to take it one step further and think my joke was lost on everyone, sadly. Also, I feel there is nothing wrong with eating with quacking accounts provided it is within the bounds of civil behaviour (proper flatware must be used). Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 29 Shevat 5775 02:30, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

source: wikimedia

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

title: Wikipedia talk:Reference desk/Archive 112


text:
User:Bethakneedeep/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.

 * Name of article: (Hibernation)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I have chosen this article to evaluate because it is an aspect of animal behaviour that interests me. It is also a phenomenon that has been relatively well studied and documented, so there should be plenty of information in the article for me to look over and consider.

Lead

 * Guiding questions:

I am choosing to edit this and assign numbers to these questions in an attempt to remain organized.

 * 1) Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * 2) Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * 3) Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * 4) Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

 * 1) The lead is concise and clear, and uses the appropriate scientific terms (e.g. metabolic inactivity, endotherms) which are themselves linked for further comprehension.
 * 2) The lead provides an overview of what the general process of hibernation is, with a couple examples and contrasts made. It does not touch on every major section, but I believe this is because there are too many and would make the lead overlong.
 * 3) Other than specific animal examples of hibernation, no, there is no information in the lead that is not further explained in the article.
 * 4) For a behaviour that is seen in many animals in many forms, I believe the lead is concise and of appropriate length. It gives an overview of the topic, touches on the fact that it can be displayed in different ways in different animals, and even makes it clear that true hibernation is seen only in endotherms, though some ectothermic animals display similar states (I did not know this prior to reading the article!).

Content

 * Guiding questions:

 * 1) Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * 2) Is the content up-to-date?
 * 3) Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

 * 1) The article's content is relevant to the topic, covering the differences in hibernation states seen in mammals, and again in birds.
 * 2) The content appears to be up-to-date, with many of the articles 28 sources coming from the last 10-15 years.
 * 3) I do not believe there is content missing, though some points could have used a little more elaboration. For example, the article mentions that one bird known to truly hibernate is the common poorwill, but then the article does not say whether the bird is an obligate or faculative hibernator, as it does for the mammal examples.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

 * 1) Is the article neutral?
 * 2) Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * 3) Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * 4) Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

 * 1) The article is neutral and scientific.
 * 2) There do not appear to be biased claims.
 * 3) There are no true viewpoints, only facts from scientific sources with no room for personal interpretation.
 * 4) The article does not attempt to persuade or convince the reader of any stance or opinion.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

 * 1) Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * 2) Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * 3) Are the sources current?
 * 4) Check a few links. Do they work?

 * 1) The article is well sourced, with no facts lacking citations.
 * 2) The sources are very thorough, and there is a wide selection of them. They are very specific to the fact currently being discussed, as opposed to a few sources stretched to cover all topics.
 * 3) The sources are current, with a few coming from the 90's and 80's, but the majority coming from the 2000's and 2010's.
 * 4) A quick browse through the links showed them all to be working.

Organization

 * Guiding questions

 * 1) Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * 2) Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * 3) Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

 * 1) I believe the article is well written and easy to read and understand.
 * 2) There were no grammar or spelling errors evident.
 * 3) The article is organized and broken down into sections reflecting the different types of hibernation and differences between species.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

 * 1) Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * 2) Are images well-captioned?
 * 3) Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * 4) Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

 * 1) The article has a few images that are relevant to the topic.
 * 2) The images are captioned and and linked to further articles.
 * 3) The images do not violate any copyright regulations, as far as I can ascertain.
 * 4) The images are laid to the right of the information presented, with a couple in the lead that give an idea of what an animal looks like in hibernation, and another of bears that is lined up with the bear section of the article. They do not interfere with the flow of the article and add a nice visual touch.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

 * 1) What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * 2) How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * 3) How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

 * 1) There have been extensive conversations about this article, which lead me to think it was a bit of a mess before some serious editing happened. The article contained spelling mistakes, pointless anecdotes, factual errors, and other issues before being revised by many others.
 * 2) The article is rated as level-4 vital article in biology, start-class. It is part of two projects: WikiProjects Animals and WikiProjects Mammals/Bats Task Force.
 * 3) This topic is not one we have discussed in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

 * 1) What is the article's overall status?
 * 2) What are the article's strengths?
 * 3) How can the article be improved?
 * 4) How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

 * 1) The start-class rating of the article means that more information is going to be needed for this article to improve, as it is only one step above the stub rating.
 * 2) The strengths of the article are it's current organization, and the lead which is well-written.
 * 3) More information and examples about true hibernating birds would be useful. More information about facultative hibernators would also improve the article, as there is only a brief definition of the phenomenon, followed by an example of two species that enter different types of hibernation, with no elaboration on why this difference occurs or why it is important.
 * 4) I would put the article in the under-developed category. My initial assessment of the article changed after a few readings, I realized that a well-written lead and nicely laid out organization are being undermined by a lack of information in some sections.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~

 * Link to feedback:

I am choosing not to do this part, as I now would like to see if this is an article I would be allowed to work on as part of our term assignment, and would like to save my ideas on improvement so that they aren't all done when I come back to it. If it is the case that I am not allowed to choose this article, then I will leave some of the aforementioned ideas for improvement behind :)

title: User:Bethakneedeep/Evaluate an Article


text:
Tarucus quadratus

Tarucus quadratus is a butterfly in the family Lycaenidae. It is found in Yemen (Socotra) and Somalia.

title: Tarucus quadratus


text:
Sayed Ali Babaci

Sayed Ali Babaci (born 12 March 1915, date of death unknown) was an Afghan field hockey player, who competed at the 1936 Summer Olympic Games and played in both games.

title: Sayed Ali Babaci


text:
uilleann pipes

Etymology
, literally "elbow pipe".

Noun

 * 1) The bagpipes of Ireland, which have a bellows strapped around the wrist and arm to inflate the bag rather than the player blowing to do so.

Translations

 * Czech: irské dudy
 * Finnish: irlantilainen säkkipilli
 * Irish: píb uilleann
 * Russian: ирландская волынка
 * Scottish Gaelic: pìob-shionnaich, pìob-uilne
 * Spanish: gaita irlandesa

title: uilleann pipes


text:
Kyaikhtisaung Sayadaw

The Kyaikhtisaung Sayadaw (ကျိုက်ထီးဆောင်းဆရာတော်; 19 April 1928 – 25 July 2015) was a prominent Buddhist monk and weizza from Myanmar. Throughout his life, he restored nine Buddha Hair Relic Pagodas across the country, most of which were in Mon State.

Early life
The third of four siblings, the Venerable Paññādīpa was born on 19 April 1928 in Bilin’s Zoke Thoke Sanpya village. His name at birth was Aung Nyein. His father was San Pe and his mother was Saw Kyin. When he was five years old, he was sent to the Nyaungthaya monastery in Zoke Thoke. There he received a monastic education as per Burmese Buddhist tradition. The abbot of the monastery was Sayadaw U Gandama. At the age of twenty, he set off for Yangon, then called Rangoon. He studied mechanics and began to work for A War Shin, Co. as a driver mechanic.

Marriages
After working for three years as a driver mechanic, Aung Nyein married Hnin Myaing, the daughter of an auto parts shop owner. Together they had one child, a son. They were married for two years before they divorced due to pressures from their family. Their son was only six months old at the time.

He married again, this time to Tin Kyi, the sister of one of his intimate friends. Together they had three children. He eventually worked and saved enough to buy his own taxi car and began working as an owner/driver. In his spare time, he worked as a mechanic. It was at this time that he began observing the Buddhist Sabbath and following nine precepts. He provided transport free of charge to monks, the sick, and the elderly.

First Phase: White-Robed Religious Devotee
Beginning in the summer of 1963, Aung Nyein began to study occult science from Manomaya Saya Khine. He practiced spiritual development at Naungdawgyi Pagoda, Shwedagon Pagoda, Shinmahti Pagoda, and Kyaikkasan Pagoda. He wore the clothes of a layman and continued this path continuously until 1965. He began to study manomaya, a form of mind cultivation. He was said to have gained psychic power at this time and referred to it as his "Sovereign Stage, Master of Sovereign Stage, White Robe Religious Devotee Stage".

Second Phase: Mystic
From 1966 to 1968, Aung Nyein kept his hair long, remained barefoot, and wore traditional white clothes to associate himself as a mystic seeker. He studied in ancient and historical pagodas and religious sites around the country. He concentrated on personal spiritual development by observing internal signs, external signs and astrology. He referred to this as his "Lunatic Stage." At this time he did not ask for donations.

The Third Phase: Ascetic
In 1969, Aung Nyein made a decision to continue his practices in the future and arranged for the living of his family. He donned the robes of a hermit and became a recluse. He began to study the way of the weizza, a type of wizardry consisting of the study of alchemy, astrology, mystical signs and meditation. He was said to have gained psychic and supernatural power, including the ability to turn water into medicine. At this time he earned the reputation as Moemakha recluse because it was said that he could keep dry during rain. This period lasted until 1971.

After the third phase was complete, he was known as the Hermit Naga Weizza Bho Sacca or Recluse Nagavijja Bothitsa.

The Fourth Phase: Meditation
Aung Nyein had spent nine years practicing and gaining proficiency in the aforesaid arts. In 1971, he went back to Zoke Thoke village. On the 1st Waxing Day of Kason 1333 ME, he was fully ordained to monkhood at 7:50 am on Thursday (25 April 1971) at Khanda Sima (ordination hall). He was then named U Pannadipa. His preceptor for ordination was U Indasabha of Naungdawgyi Monastery of Zoke Thoke. His father San Pe and mother Saw Kyin were present and supported him by providing his four requisites: clothing, food, shelter, and medicine.

He took up residency at Kyaikhtisaung Pagoda. The old pagoda was in disrepair and hidden under heavy growth. He organized his disciples and local villagers to clear the area. Once the area was cleared, he rebuilt and renovated the old pagoda and old laterite hillock.

The Fifth Phase: The Dipa Stage and His Exertions
Soon after becoming a monk, U Pannadipa began to teach the Five Precepts, the Five Great Infinities, and the Five Forbidden Meats. He urged his followers to abstain from beef, pork, buffalo, horse, and elephant meat. This became known by his followers as the "Triple Five"' or "5-5-5". He discussed these matters nightly during Dhammapalin (nightly sermons), which lasted from 9:00pm, until 2:00am the next morning. These were open talks where he often received and answered questions from his devotees.

For the next forty years, he set about restoring nine sacred pagodas throughout Myanmar, each claimed to contain preserved hair from Gautama Buddha. It is said that Buddha himself mentioned this in a prophecy when he gave strands of his hair to hermits and belus during a trip to the area. The claim is that he prophesied that after his hairs would be placed in nine pagodas, then abandoned for 2,500 years. After that, the pagodas would be found and restored. He further said that his teachings would then be observed zealously for another 2,500 years. Since the Kyaikhtisaung Sayadaw started his project 2,515 years after Buddha's death, he is said to be the one to fulfill the prophecy.

Notable work
The Kyaikhtisaung Sayadaw went on to improve the areas and villages around the pagoda. Under his care, rural roads and bridges were built and local schools were renovated. He provided free vegetarian meals to those who assisted in the restoration projects, guests from afar, and anyone who was seeking shelter at the pagoda for religious study. He distributed money, prayer books, meditation rosaries, and amulets to seekers who visited him. As a result of his charities, the region became a more developed area.

Stone Inscriptions of U Khanti
On 3 March 2011, the Kyaikhtisaung Sayadaw had 135 of the stone inscriptions made by the Hermit U Khanti brought to the Kyaikhtisaung compound from Mandalay Hill.

The Dhammazedi Bell
In 2013, Myanmar Tycoon Khin Shwe worked together with the Kyaikhtisaung Sayadaw to try to raise the Dhammazedi Bell from the Yangon River. The bell had been commissioned by King Dhammazedi in 1484 as a gift to the Shwedagon Pagoda of Dagon (Yangon).

Honorary Titles
Ashin Pannadipa was given the title "Agga Maha Saddhammajotikadhaja" by the Myanmar Ministry of Religious Affairs in 1992 in recognition of his service. This title is reserved for those who have contributed outstanding service to the propagation of the Sasana around the world. Later, in 2004, the ministry again conferred the honorary religious title of "Abhidhaja Agga Maha Saddhammajotikadhaja".

In May 2014, when he was eighty-six years old, he was awarded an Honorary Doctorate Degree in Buddhist Studies by the Mahachulalongkon Rajavidyalaya University in Thailand.

Resolute Aspirations of Venerable Kyaithisaung Sayadaw

 * 1) "May the Suvannabhumi Sasana, the Golden Land of Myanmar, exist extensively, akin to the sun and moon."
 * 2) "May human beings all over the world be able to develop and share great loving kindness."
 * 3) "May Buddhism of the Golden Land of Myanmar brighten the world like the light of the sun and moon."
 * 4) "May the Buddha’s teachings have lasting significance, achieving the fulfillment of 5,000 years."

Death
The Kyaikhtisaung Sayadaw died on 25 July 2015 at the age of 87 at Yangon's 1000-bed military hospital in Mingaladon Township. Four days prior, he had been admitted due to heart problems and difficulty breathing. Upon his death, the Kyaikhtisayadaw was succeeded by the abbot Bhaddanta Nargadipa.

title: Kyaikhtisaung Sayadaw


text:
Wikiversity:Research ethics

The ethical guidelines for scientific research in the developed world are well established by governmental agencies, professional societies, universities, and journal publishers.

Research ethics try to answer what actions are good, and what actions are bad. The key issues for research published on Wikiversity are:

 * Verifiability - Research projects must fully document the methods, original motivations, and hypotheses. Research in progress must be clearly labeled as such.
 * Honesty - Research results are always honestly reported and without omissions, even if the results are undesirable, don't fit predetermined beliefs, or proposed hypotheses. Don't lead participants into drawing specific conclusions.
 * Transparency - Research reports must clearly explain everything done in the course of the research in a open and transparent manner so that other participants can draw their own independent conclusions.
 * Objectivity - Strive to conduct and report research in a way that allows experts to independently test, verify and confirm the validity of the research.
 *  Subjectivity - You are free to express your views and opinions, but they should be clearly identified as such.
 * Disclosures - Any biases or potential conflicts of interest must be declared at the start of research projects. This fosters trust, and helps the community to understand your point of view.
 * Sources - When sources of previous knowledge, data or other information is relied on cite your sources. This allows examination of those works too. Be clear to distinguish previous knowledge from new knowledge.
 * Safety - Research must be conducted in a safe and lawful manner. Do no harm.
 * Review process - The peer-review process contributes to quality control and is an essential step to ascertain the standing and originality of a research project.

Institutional review boards
The ethics of research have partly been institutionalized in the United States and some other countries. If you wish to do research involving humans, you are often required to get research approval from an institutional review board (IRB) or institutional ethics committee (IEC). If research hasn't gone through an IRB, you can't get funding, and most co-authors and journals won't touch the research. Research involving the use of animals typically goes through another board review called an institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC).

Protecting humans, animals and nature
The role of the IRB is to protect research subjects by ensuring that researchers respect and consider the autonomy (independent decision-making through informed consent), benificence (benefits and costs--such as maintaining confidentiality whenever personal information is obtained), and respect for persons (relating to social justice issues) that may become research subjects. These are the foundations of the protection of research subjects as outlined in the Belmont Report.

IRB Exemptions
There are exceptions to the need for IRB review. One example is research on classroom activities, if there is no intent for publication of findings. The use of aggregate data (without any personal information being obtained) may be exempt. For exempt kinds of research, one may still need to state to an IRB the nature and intent of one's research.

Wikiversity and research ethics
Wikiversity can do various things in relation to research ethics review requirements. Wikiversity can:

 * collect and facilitate discussions of ethical issues in research, especially topics not addressed by Institutional Review Boards (IRBs).
 * present IRB guidelines to the general public.
 * provide researchers with detailed information about IRB processes
 * connect researchers with IRB services
 * provide descriptions of research guidelines to the developing world. Moving research that couldn't possibly get approval in the developed world to the developing world is a major problem.
 * create an IRB (which would be necessary for any Wikipedia sponsored research involving gathering personal information from research subjects).

Unethical research is not allowed on Wikiversity. This includes any and all research of Wikimedia projects and user activities without prior community approval.

References for researchers on human subjects
Recommended for researchers - take one of these courses:

These are free, online course with information about the rights and welfare of human participants in research. Anyone who is concerned with the ethics and good practice of research involving human subjects, and who has not taken similar courses, can benefit from taking one of these online courses.
 * Research Ethics Training Curriculum prepared by Family Health International (FHI).
 * National Cancer Institute Human Subjects Research Tutorial. (If you are not involved with research that involves medical treatment and have not take a similar course, you can benefit from the coverage here of some of the general issues relating to all research involving human subjects.)

More ethics links:
 * Wikimedia Research Network Privacy Policy
 * Institutional review board
 * Scholarly ethics

title: Wikiversity:Research ethics


text:
How to Find a Book

How to Find a Book depends on how much information you have about the book and whether you want to buy it or simply read it.

Acquiring information about the book
Normally, title and name of the author of a book is enough to locate more information about it. You can then use online bookstores or online library catalogs to identify publisher, publication date, edition and ISBN; these items are sometimes required by libraries or bookstores to order the book.

Occasionally, the author's name is misspelled, especially with foreign authors. In this case try searching for the title alone, until you find the proper spelling of the name.

If you only have the book's ISBN, you should be aware of the fact that different editions as well as hardcover and soft-cover versions of a book have different ISBNs. It is possible that the version of the book with your ISBN is already out of print, while another version is still available. It is therefore best to use an online service to get the author and title information, and then proceed with that information.

Locating a book is much more difficult if you want to educate yourself about a topic but don't have a particular author or title in mind. Library shelves are organized by subject; learn the system used by your library, go to the relevant shelve and browse the books about your topic. Some of this can also be done online: library catalogs allow subject and keyword searches and the Library of Congress permits browsing by call number, which can often locate closely related materials. For an effective subject search, you need to know which subject words are being used; this is contained in the "Library of Congress Subject Headings", a red five-volume work that many libraries have but can not be found online (most library subjects can be searched and browsed on ISBNdb.com's subject search).

Most topics have one or two "standard references", the generally acknowledged best treatments of the subject. To find these, you need to talk to a specialist in the field. A Usenet posting to a relevant newsgroup, asking about good books, also often yields excellent results. Closely reading the user-supplied book reviews on amazon.com will also often point you to standard references: they are often only identified by author and everyone seems to know them.

Acquiring the book
You have to decide whether you want to buy the book or just read it. If you want to buy it, you have to decide whether to buy it new or used (the only option if no version of it is in print, unless you can find a new after-market copy or a remaindered book).

To buy used books, you can try a local used book store. These can also often help you buy books that they don't have. You may also go to a professional book finder with connections in the used-book markets. These used-book markets are now open to everyone with a web browser and a credit or debit card, and books can also be found via auction websites. The three best sites for used-books, which between them cover countless thousands of sellers are: Abebooks, eBay and Amazon (on an Amazon book entry look for the link to "new and used books", which takes one to many sellers of used books).

A book in print can be ordered at any bookstore and can also be ordered online; several price comparison services exist. By ordering online, you typically save sales tax but you have to pay shipping and handling costs.

Depending on what you need, you may be able to find a book at a public library or a good local college or university library. These can be used by non-students for free or for a small fee.

If your reading interest is general, or if you want to read a popular novel, a public library is the place to go. Membership is usually free. If you cannot find the book on your own, you should visit an information desk because many libraries offer the ability to place "holds" on materials so you can get them when you return.

At college and university libraries, Research librarians can help you locate books and journal articles of academic interest quickly. On campus, you can often use expensive databases such as LexisNexis for free. Libraries are connected by an Inter Library Loan network: if the book exists, and is held by a library willing to loan it, you will have it in as little as a week or so.

Most libraries also offer an Inter-library loan service. This means that items that do not appear in their catalog can be requested from libraries elsewhere. Depending on the library and how far the book has to travel, there may be charges for this service.

Libraries use WorldCat at OCLC in order to find books at other libraries. It is by far the most extensive database of library holdings. Some libraries allow access by their patrons; ask your librarian how to access WorldCat. Unsuccessful ABEbooks searches are directed to WorldCat as unsuccessful WorldCat searches are to ABEbooks. WorldCat attempts to restrict use of its data but such terms are not legally valid under US copyright law, since only the specific and creative original expression, if any, can be protected by copyright and the right to use public domain works cannot be restricted by contract (see Feist v. Rural and Assessment Technologies v. WIREdata)
 * "WorldCat® records, metadata and holdings information ("Data") may only be used by Users (individuals accessing WorldCat via OCLC Web interfaces) solely for the personal, non-commercial purpose of assisting such Users with locating an item in a library of the User's choosing. Users acquire no ownership rights to any Data or portions thereof provided in any form by WorldCat. No part of any Data provided in any form by WorldCat may be used, disclosed, reproduced, transferred or transmitted in any form without the prior written consent of OCLC except as expressly permitted hereunder. Use of WorldCat for cataloging purposes is expressly prohibited. User may not resell or otherwise transfer WorldCat. User shall not omit or obscure any notice of a limitation of warranty, disclaimer, copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, usage limitation or any logo, splash screen or any other terms and/or conditions intended to be displayed in WorldCat by OCLC or any supplier thereto."

Library catalogs

 * COPAC, combined catalog of the British Library and UK and Irish research libraries
 * California Digital Library, combined catalog of the University of California schools
 * Library of Congress catalog
 * Access Pennsylvania Database, provides a catalog in database form for the entire Pennsylvania library system
 * WorldCat

Digital libraries
There are also digital libraries, where you can find books in electronic form (mostly scanned paper books). The most famous digital library is Project Gutenberg.

Digital databases

 * Google Books, searches books Google has scanned

title: How to Find a Book


text:
Swimming at the 2008 Summer Paralympics – Men's 50 metre freestyle S3

The men's 50 metre freestyle S3 event at the 2008 Paralympic Games took place on September 7, at the Beijing National Aquatics Center.

Two heats were held, with eleven swimmers in total. The swimmers with the eight fastest times advanced to the final; there, they all competed in a single final heat to earn final placements.


text:
Wikiversity:Wikiversity browsers

Wikiversity Browsers Many visitors will arrive at Wikiversity with the basic point-and-click skills of an internet surfer. Many will come by way of Wikipedia and they will be familiar with the idea of finding and reading Wikipedia articles. Wikiversity does host "learning materials" and links to online "learning resources". Some Wikiversity "Browsers" may be satisfied to just point and click.

Wikiversity is devoted to the idea of active learning. Learning within Wikiversity is meant to come from interactions with other members of the Wikiversity community and participation in Wikiversity Learning Projects. Full participation in Wikiversity requires that participants edit wiki pages.

Wikiversity "Browsers" should be encouraged to register, describe their learning objectives on their user page, and participate in Introduction to Wiki.

title: Wikiversity:Wikiversity browsers


text:
The King's Academy (California)

The King's Academy is a private, Christian junior and senior high school in Sunnyvale, California, US. It is a member of the Association of Christian Schools International and the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. It was founded in 1991 and is housed on the former campus of Sunnyvale High School.

Student Body
Total enrollment is just over 950 students, about 60% high school students and 40% junior high. In the 2016–2018 school year, about 42% of students were Asian, 36% White, 12% Multi-Racial, 5% Hispanic/Latino, 2% Black and 1% Other. There were also 22 international students.

Courses
The school offers 18 Advanced Placement courses.

The King's Academy has 9 departments.

 * 1) Bible
 * 2) Computer Science & Engineering
 * 3) English
 * 4) Mathematics
 * 5) Physical Education
 * 6) Science
 * 7) Social Studies
 * 8) Visual and Performing Arts (which includes)
 * 9) Art
 * 10) Dance
 * 11) Music
 * 12) Theater
 * 13) World Languages

Music
The King's Academy offers the following music courses:

 * Choir / Concert Choir
 * Percussion Ensemble
 * Wind Ensemble
 * Strings / String Ensemble / String Orchestra
 * Jazz

Language courses
The King's Academy offers the following language courses: (An H Indicates it as an honors class)

 * French (1, 2, 3, 4, AP)
 * Mandarin (1, 2, 3, 4, AP Chinese Language)
 * Spanish (1, 2, 2H, 3, 3H, 4, AP)
 * American Sign Language (Year 1, Year 2)

Sports
, the school has programs in baseball, basketball, cross country, dance, diving, drill team, flag football, football, golf, soccer, softball, squash, swimming, tennis, track and field, ultimate frisbee, volleyball, water polo, and weightlifting. In the mid-2010s, the head football coach was Michael Johnson, former assistant coach of the San Francisco 49ers. In 2017, former professional Canadian football player, Pete Lavorato took over as head football coach. Relief pitcher, Joe Biagini played at the school in the mid-2000s.

title: The King's Academy (California)


text:
Talk:Anthony & Joseph Paratore

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anthony & Joseph Paratore. 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/20140527220518/http://www.rheingau-musik-festival.de/rmf%2Cen%2C236%2Ccompanions-along-the-way%2Cmusik.html to http://www.rheingau-musik-festival.de/rmf%2Cen%2C236%2Ccompanions-along-the-way%2Cmusik.html

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:34, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Anthony & Joseph Paratore


text:
Category:Wikipedia articles published in peer-reviewed literature (J2W)

This category is for Wikipedia articles initially written for an academic journal before being copied to Wikipedia under a CC BY license (WP:J2W).

Pages are added to this using the template.


text:
Rasmus Jensen (speedway rider)

Rasmus Jensen is a Danish motorcycle speedway rider. He was the 2022 champion of Denmark.

Career
Rasmus Jensen's career began in the year 2001. His first season in British racing was with Plymouth in 2013; at the end of the season, his official average was 7. At the end of the following 2014 Premier League season, his average was 6.14, and he was in fourth place among the Plymouth Devils riders' averages. Jensen completed 2016 with a 6.14 average and completed 2018 with a 6.59 average.

He spent 2019 with the Second Division club Glasgow Tigers and reached an official average of 8.34, making his average the second highest on the team, behind Craig Cook. In 2019, he won the SGB Championship Pairs partnering Craig Cook, during the SGB Championship 2019 season. Jensen scored a total of three race wins on the night. The Speedway Star stated, "Cami [Brown] also heaped praise on Cookie's race partner Jensen and can be well satisfied that he insisted on chasing his signature during the build-up to the new season last winter.

During 2019, the Premiership club Swindon brought in Jensen following a guest performance. He achieved a Premiership average of 7.7, third highest on the team. The Speedway Star rated Rasmus Jensen Premiership "Rider of the Week" and stated, "at this stage the introduction of Jensen must stand as the biggest and best move of 2019."

Jensen re-signed for Swindon in 2020 but he chose not be a part of the Glasgow Tigers team in 2020 due to Grand Prix commitments.

Jensen finished in 17th place following just one appearance during the 2022 Speedway World Championship, he securing 12 points during the Danish Grand Prix as part of the 2022 Speedway Grand Prix. However, his biggest success of the season and his career to date came in June 2022, when he won the 2022 Danish Individual Speedway Championship. In 2023, he was part of the Danish team that won the bronze medal in the 2023 Speedway World Cup final; he topped scored for the Danish team in the final. In October 2023, he paired up with Mads Hansen to win a silver medal at the European Pairs championship.

In 2024, he helped Denmark reach the final of the 2024 Speedway of Nations in Manchester.

World individual Championship

 * 2022 Speedway Grand Prix - 17th
 * 2023 Speedway Grand Prix - =19th
 * 2024 Speedway Grand Prix - tbd

World team Championships

 * 2023 Speedway World Cup - 3rd
 * 2024 Speedway of Nations - 6th

title: Rasmus Jensen (speedway rider)


text:
Charles R. Robertson

Charles Raymond Robertson (September 5, 1889 –February 18, 1951) was a U.S. Republican politician.

Robertson was born to Scottish immigrants on a farm in Arlington, Wisconsin and attended Poynette High School. He attended Parker College in Winnebago, Minnesota, where he studied commerce, and he moved to Mandan, North Dakota in 1917. He was elected as a Republican to the United States House of Representatives from North Dakota and served from January 3, 1941, to January 3, 1943. He failed to be renominated to the House in 1942. He was elected to the House in 1944 and again in 1946 and served from January 3, 1945, to January 3, 1949. He died of a heart attack in Bismarck, North Dakota.

Legacy
The Robertson Lignite Research Laboratory in Grand Forks, North Dakota was named after Robertson in 1951.

title: Charles R. Robertson


text:
User:Rsperryarts/sandbox

Randall Perry has produced many art works, mostly painting and wall constructions. Recently shown in the Vanda Project.

RS Perry Vanda art pages. 231-240. Vanda project  6th edition “Flux”paintings and wall constructions.

title: User:Rsperryarts/sandbox


text:
USA-49

USA-49, also known as GPS II-5 and GPS SVN-17, was an American navigation satellite which formed part of the Global Positioning System. It was the fifth of nine Block II GPS satellites to be launched, which were the first operational GPS satellites to fly.

Background
It was part of the 21-satellite Global Positioning System (GPS) Block II series that provides precise position data (accurate to within 16 m) to military and civilian users worldwide. Its signals could be received on devices as small as a telephone. The GPS II satellites, built by Rockwell International for the Air Force Space Systems Division, each have a 7.5-year design life. The Air Force intends to launch a GPS II every 2 to 3 months until the constellation of 21 operational satellite and 3 spares is aloft. The GPS Block II join 7 operational Block 1 satellites.

Launch
USA-49 was launched at 18:10:01 UTC on 11 December 1989, atop a Delta II launch vehicle, flight number D190, flying in the 6925-9.5 configuration. The launch took place from Launch Complex 17B (LC-17B) at the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), and placed USA-49 into a transfer orbit. The satellite raised itself into medium Earth orbit using a Star-37XFP apogee motor.

Mission
On 11 January 1990, USA-49 was in an orbit with a perigee of 20009 km, an apogee of 20357 km, a period of 718.0 minutes, and 54.9° of inclination to the equator. It operated in slot 3 of plane D of the GPS constellation. The satellite had a mass of 840 kg, and generated 710 watts of power. It had a design life of 7.5 years, and ceased operations on 23 February 2005.

title: USA-49


text:
Euphonium

The euphonium is a conical-bore, tenor-voiced brass instrument. It derives its name from the Greek word euphonion, meaning "beautiful-sounding" or "sweet-voiced" ("eu" means "well" (understood as "good" or "pleasant") and "phonium" means "voice"). The euphonium is a valved instrument, and nearly all models are piston valved, though German rotary valved models do exist (e.g. Miraphone).

The euphonium has a fundamental pitch (all valves open) of Bb, but sounds in the key of C (relative to the piano). The technique involved in playing the euphonium is quite similar to that of the trumpet, in that they fingerings and partials are more or less the same—disregarding register and transposition. However, the embouchure is much more comparable to a trombone embouchure and oftentimes the mouthpieces are used interchangeably. In the United States, the Bass Clef is generally accepted as the norm, while in Europe it is much more common to read music in Bb Treble Clef (as is written for the trumpet).

Instructor: Jonathan Chasteen
If you are not already acquainted with elementary musical notation, please review the Wikipedia page on Music Notation. I will not be going over certain things, e.g. the basics of musical notation, so it will behoove you to know at least the elements of the musical staff. Lesson 1 - Embouchure and breath Lesson 2 - First notes

Links

 * Euphonium on Wikipedia

title: Euphonium


text:
GCSE Science/Electricity multiple choice practice question 3 answer 3

I'm sorry but this is the wrong answer. Remember that each branch has the entire voltage across it.

Applying Ohm's law to the top branch:

I=V/R

=6/4 A

=1.5A

The lower branch has a combined resistance of 4Ω because the two resistirs are in series.

Applying Ohm's law to the bottom branch: I=V/R

=6/(2+2) A

=1.5A

On to the next question>>


text:
Puzzles/Logic puzzles/Hats

Puzzles | Logic puzzles | Hats

3 men are buried in the sand all facing the same way with only their heads above ground. Each man has a hat placed on his head which is either red or blue, but they can't see it. The men know that their hats were selected from a bag containing 3 red hats, and 2 blue hats. The man at the back (who can see the hats of the two men in front of him) is asked what hat he is wearing. He answers: "I don't know". The middle (who can see the hat of the man in front of him) man is asked what hat he is wearing. He also replies: "I don't know". Finally, the man at the front is asked what hat he is wearing. He answers: "I am wearing a red hat".

How did he know?

Solution

title: Puzzles/Logic puzzles/Hats


text:
Érik Canuel

Érik Canuel (1961 – June 15, 2024) was a Canadian film and television director from Montreal, Quebec.

Canuel, the son of actor Yvan Canuel, began his career in the mid-1980s making music videos for such artists as Paul Piché, Sass Jordan, Norman Iceberg, Vilain Pingouin and Sylvain Cossette. After shooting a number of TV commercials, several of them award-winners, he worked as a director on the television series Big Wolf on Campus, for the Fox network, and The Hunger, broadcast on Showtime and The Movie Network.

In 2000, his IMAX film Hemingway: A Portrait won a Genie Award for best short documentary, as well as the Maximum Image Award for best 2D film at the Miami Aventura Imax Days. Canuel also directed Matthew Blackheart: Monster Smasher in 2000, The Pig's Law (La Loi du cochon) in 2001, Red Nose (Nez rouge) in 2003, The Last Tunnel (Le Dernier Tunnel) in 2004, The Outlander (Le Survenant) in 2005, and Bon Cop, Bad Cop in 2006, receiving numerous nominations and awards.

In 2010, Canuel directed the episode "Fa la Erica" (season 3, ep. 11) of the TV series Being Erica. In 2016, he directed a segment of the collective film 9 (9, le film).

In 2020, Canuel directed the last four episodes entitled "Collapse", "Orphans", "Relapse" and "The Only Way Out Is Through" of the first season of the TV series Transplant.

He often made cameo appearances in his own films.

Canuel died of plasma cell leukemia on June 15, 2024, at the age of 63.

title: Érik Canuel


text:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/Local/musicworxmedia.com

Links

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

Selected additions

 * Displayed 1 additions out of 1 total.	 For more info see WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/musicworxmedia.com

Entry
Log entry for the MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist:

\bmusicworxmedia\.com\b     # ADMINNAME # see  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam/Local/musicworxmedia.com ]]

Discussion
See COIBot report for more details.

New data reported. Autostale: very old local report (>7 days). No links left in here mentioned edits. Marked stale. --COIBot (talk) 06:29, 18 September 2017 (UTC)


text:
Talk:David Boyd (artist)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on David Boyd (artist). 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/20060618070355/http://www.mup.unimelb.edu.au:80/catalogue/0-522-84871-0.html to http://www.mup.unimelb.edu.au/catalogue/0-522-84871-0.html

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:37, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on David Boyd (artist). 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mup.unimelb.edu.au/catalogue/0-522-84871-0.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060402234306/http://stateart.com.au/ to http://www.stateart.com.au/

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:26, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on David Boyd (artist). 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/20060505000825/http://www.artema.com.au/Boyd/aus_nz/david.htm to http://www.artema.com.au/Boyd/aus_nz/david.htm
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20060829215423/http://www.evabreuerartdealer.com.au/cv/boyd_david_bio.html to http://www.evabreuerartdealer.com.au/cv/boyd_david_bio.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060505000825/http://www.artema.com.au/Boyd/aus_nz/david.htm to http://www.artema.com.au/Boyd/aus_nz/david.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060820055155/http://www.stateart.com.au/sota/reviews/default.asp?fid=2946 to http://www.stateart.com.au/sota/reviews/default.asp?fid=2946

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:24, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:David Boyd (artist)


text:
Portal:Music/Beginner

 * Introduction to Music
 * Understanding music
 * Introduction to Chords
 * The Physics of Music
 * Triads
 * Beginners Music Theory
 * Key Signatures
 * Scales
 * Intervals
 * Aural Training

title: Portal:Music/Beginner


text:
William Gaminara

William Gaminara (born 1956) is a Rhodesian-born British actor, screenwriter and playwright, probably best known for playing pathologist Professor Leo Dalton on the television series Silent Witness, from 2002 to 2013. His plays include According to Hoyle, The Three Lions and The Nightingales.

Early life and education
Gaminara was born in 1956 in Lusaka, Northern Rhodesia. He was educated at Winchester College, Hampshire, England, and Lincoln College at the University of Oxford.

Actor and narrator
Gaminara had a minor role in the 1986 film Comrades, directed by Bill Douglas. His early television credits include Dr Andrew Bower in Casualty (1989–92) and Will Newman in Attachments (2000–02).

His most notable television role was Professor Leo Dalton in the BBC crime drama series Silent Witness. He played Dalton from 2002 until 2013, and reprised the role in 2017 in the final episode of series 20. The role was at first subsidiary to Sam Ryan, played by Amanda Burton, but when Burton left the series and Gaminara's character Dalton headed the laboratory, the drama evolved into a three-hander between Dalton, Harry Cunningham (Tom Ward) and Nikki Alexander (Emilia Fox).

After leaving Silent Witness, Gaminara appeared in several theatrical roles. In 2014, he played the photojournalist Paul Watson in Dan O'Brien's The Body of an American, a two-hander with Damien Molony. Gaminara describes the play as a "challenging and unconventional script which makes challenging and unconventional demands of an actor". Lyn Gardner, writing in The Guardian, describes the acting as "knockout", with the "muscular quality of a contest" whilst being "scrupulously generous"; she highlights the way in which the two actors each embody a large number of characters and are required to swap between roles abruptly. The production was also praised by Dominic Maxwell in The Times for "superb" acting on the part of both leads.

The following year, he played the lead character, Pastor Paul, in Lucas Hnath's The Christians at the Traverse Theatre during the Edinburgh Festival, giving a "superbly controlled performance", which "nails the slow, measured but warmly faux-colloquial rhetoric of the American church", according to a review in The Independent. Gardner, in The Guardian, describes Gaminara as "suggesting both the charisma and the arrogance" of his character, and Dominic Maxwell, in a review for The Times, considers that Gaminara "propels it all with conviction". Also in 2015, Gaminara took the supporting role of General Groves in the premiere of Tom Morton-Smith's Oppenheimer by the Royal Shakespeare Company at The Swan in Stratford-upon-Avon. Michael Billington, in a 5-star review for The Guardian, highlights "outstanding performances" from Gaminara among others, as does Kate Kellaway, in a later Guardian review.

In 2016, he appeared in Ibsen's An Enemy of the People at the Chichester Festival Theatre, directed by Howard Davies; Gaminara plays the principal antagonist Peter Stockmann "chillingly", according to Christopher Hart's review for The Sunday Times. Susannah Clapp, in a review for The Observer, describes Gaminara's performance as "finely slippery", and Ann Treneman in The Times praises his "small-town fury".

Since his time on Silent Witness, Gaminara has taken occasional television roles, including in The Trial of Christine Keeler (BBC One; 2019–20), the crime drama Honour (ITV; 2020), as well as guest appearances in the sitcom Catastrophe (Channel 4) and the crime drama Death In Paradise (BBC One; 2022). He plays Dr Richard Locke in the long-running radio soap opera, The Archers. He also voices audiobooks, including Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe novels and John Christopher's The Tripods.

Playwright and screenwriter
Gaminara's first play, Back Up the Hearse and Smell the Flowers (1992), about water-purifier salesmen, is influenced by David Mamet's Glengarry Glen Ross. Michael Billington, in a review of a 1992 production at Hampstead Theatre for The Guardian, praises its encapsulation of the "guile, bluster and conviction" of a "perfect pitch" but criticises its "heavy-handed tendency to moralise". The director Dominic Dromgoole describes it as "smoothly accomplished, but unambitious".

His second play, According to Hoyle (1995), takes a comedic approach to male identity and the relationships between men using the setting of a poker game. Dromgoole describes it as "quite wonderful", but overshadowed by the success of Dealer's Choice, a play on the same topic by Patrick Marber, which came out at almost the same time. Lyn Gardner, in a review of a 1995 production at Hampstead Theatre for The Guardian, describes it as a "feisty, sharply entertaining comedy" with a "rather nifty construction" employing interleaved timelines, and praises the "whiplash severity" of its dialogue. Benedict Nightingale, in a review for The Times, writes that Gaminara has a "gift for funny dialogue" and considers the play's conclusion to demonstrate the independence of his viewpoint. During this period Gaminara also wrote episodes for the television series This Life (1997) and The Lakes (1999), as well as the screenplay for the BBC adaptation of Rachel Morris's novel, Ella and the Mothers (2002).

His play The Three Lions was performed at the Pleasance Courtyard at the Edinburgh Festival in 2013, produced by Philip Wilson. A comedy about the unsuccessful English bid for the 2018 World Cup, it brings together David Beckham (Sean Browne), David Cameron (Dugald Bruce-Lockhart) and Prince William (Tom Davey). Lucinda Everett, writing in The Daily Telegraph, describes it as a "gleefully irreverent glimpse 'behind the scenes'" with a "zingy script". A reviewer for The Independent writes that the "neat script combines light satire with good, old-fashioned farce".

In 2018, his comedy–drama The Nightingales was produced at the New Theatre in Cardiff, directed by Christopher Luscombe and starring Ruth Jones. Jones, an acquaintance of Gaminara's, describes the play as "gripping" and "really funny", saying that Gaminara has a "wonderful ear for naturalistic dialogue" and "has tuned in with such insight to human nature and the ways we behave in groups and also how we relate to each other and what we choose to reveal about ourselves." Sam Marlowe, in a critical review for The Times of a production at the Theatre Royal, Bath, describes the play as "an inconsequential, darkish comedy" with "cardboard" characters and dialogue reminiscent of a "dated sitcom".

Personal life
Gaminara is married to Kate Lock, also an actor; they have two sons.

title: William Gaminara


text:
User:Mr Music

Hello. I am here to learn music theory, fundamentals, etc. since I want to major in Music Ed. I am more commonly known as [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Viva_La_Vie_Boheme%21 Viva La Vie Boheme! on Wikipedia].

Mr Music play a note

title: User:Mr Music


text:
Talk:Electromagnetic testing

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Electromagnetic testing. 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/20120904181446/http://www.asnt.org/publications/handbook/third/thirdedition.htm to http://www.asnt.org/publications/handbook/third/thirdedition.htm

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:30, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Electromagnetic testing


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Logan Randolph

The result was   delete. As notability has not been established through significant coverage in reliable sources. Davewild (talk) 09:16, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Logan Randolph

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable individual lacking non-trivial support. Most references do not even mention subject and includes press release. No in-depth coverage or support. red dogsix (talk) 04:45, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:47, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This article should not be deleted because multiple independent, reliable sources have provided significant coverage WP:GNG. The individual's work has been noted elsewhere on Wikipedia and is sufficient to establish notability.Wikitam331 (talk) 08:57, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. "Multiple independent, reliable sources have provided significant coverage" for this 23-year-old? Really? I don't see even one. The first two cites in the article don't mention the subject; the third is one sentence in a press release from his then-college; fourth is some local blog; fifth is a short event listing in a free weekly paper. Not much else to be found on the web, beyond subject's personal blog: "I'm an entrepreneur, student, climber and hustler." WP:NOTPROMOTION. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 04:59, 22 February 2015 (UTC)


text:
Trombone

The trombone is a brass instrument that, like many other instruments, comes in several variations. The most common types are variations of the tenor and the bass trombones.

Types of Trombones:

 * Tenor Trombone
 * Bass Trombone
 * Contrabass Trombone
 * Alto Trombone
 * Soprano Trombone
 * Sopranino and Piccolo Trombones
 * Valve Trombone

The trombone is an instrument where the trombonist moves the slide between positions, each of which progressively lengthens the air column, and produces a lower pitch on the same partial. Positions range from first (almost all the way pulled in, but not all the way) to seventh, with first being the higher within each partial. The basic tenor trombone's fundamental note is Bb.

The trombone is mostly a non-transposing instrument with music written in the bass, tenor, alto, and treble clefs.

Technique
Playing on the trombone is similar to other brass instruments in the method of moving from partial to partial. The trombonist moves their lips tighter and allows air pressure to allow the instrument to increase in partials, the opposite is done to play down partials.

Sometimes music will require the use of a mute. Mutes will alter the sound of the note by somehow attaching to the bell of the trombone. There are a variety of mutes available, and it is important to ensure you purchase the correct type.

title: Trombone