text:
Edward Joris

Edward Joris (1876–1957) was a Belgian Flemish anarchist who was involved in the 1905 bombing in Constantinople known as the Yıldız assassination attempt, which was directed against the Sultan Abdul Hamid II as a retribution for the Hamidian massacres.

Through his anarchism, he took an interest in anticolonialism and became involved in the attempt after meeting two leaders of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF), Vramshabouh Kendirian and one of the founders of the organization, Christapor Mikaelian.

He was sentenced to death, which triggered a significant protest movement in Belgium, involving both the Walloons and the Flemish, drawing comparisons to the Dreyfus Affair in France, with numerous political interventions advocating for his release. Supporters of his release were referred to as "Jorisards" and, while connected to the French Dreyfusards, they managed to secure his release by exerting pressure on both French and Belgian authorities.

Edward Joris was sent back to Belgium a few years later. He died in 1957 in Antwerp.

Youth and move into the Ottoman Empire
Born in 1876, Joris lost his father when he was 4 years old.

He left school at 13 and worked as a shipping clerk. Engaging in left-wing politics, he was secretary of his local branch of the Belgian Workers' Party from 1895 to 1898, as well as for a trade union. He contributed to the anarchist newspaper Ontwaking under the pseudonym Edward Greene and defended an anarcho-syndicalist stance in his publications.

In 1901 he travelled to Constantinople, where he was briefly employed writing commercial correspondence in French and English and then found work at the Singer sewing machine company. In 1902 his fiancée, Anna Nellens, joined him in Istanbul and they got married, even if he seemed to have been somewhat reluctant to do so.

On August 14, 1902, he was dismissed by his employer and found employment again by the end of the year 1902 in a sewing company in Constantinople.

Mosque Yıldız Attack
The connections between anarchists and the Armenian national liberation movement were established in the 1890s, notably with Alexander Atabekian. In 1904, during an annual congress bringing together Armenian and Bulgarian representatives, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation decided to assassinate Sultan Abdul Hamid II in response to the Hamidian massacres. One of the French anarchist representatives sensitized to the Armenian issue, Pierre Quillard, attended the congress and reported to his anarchist colleagues that the Armenians intended to use 'extreme methods.' Edward Joris later said that it was the reading of Quillard's journal, Pro Armenia, that motivated his choice to support the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF).

In this context, Joris met a colleague named Vramshabouh Kendirian, nicknamed Vram. Vram introduced him to one of the leaders of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF), Christapor Mikaelian, representing the Marxist branch of the ARF. He sheltered two conspirators in his home, and his house served as a meeting place for discussions and storage of explosives and firearms. Both Vramshabouh Kendirian and Christapor Mikaelian die in 1905 in Sofia, Bulgaria, while experimenting with explosive devices.

His passport was found on Kendirian's body, and Joris expressed deep sorrow over Kendirian's death, referring to him as a "very good friend." In total, 39 individuals were involved in the plot, including his wife, Anna Nellens, and the self-proclaimed daughter of Christapor Mikaelian, Nadedja Datalian.

Joris enabled the organization to bypass customs, allowing the cart carrying the explosives to pass through, coming from Vienna. The explosives, consisting of 140 kilograms of picric acid, were conveyed by Bulgarian sailors.

The bombing was carried out on 21 July 1905, killing 26 and injuring 58 but failing to harm the sultan himself. Joris was arrested six days later. He was brought to trial on 25 November and sentenced to death on 18 December. Due to diplomatic pressure from Belgium, the sentence was never carried out. His wife was also sentenced to death, but in absentia, as she managed to escape before being apprehended by the Ottoman police. He spoke during his trial and declared: "About a year before the attempt I read a manifest in the Parisian paper Pro Armenia for the poor Armenians. This made a deep impression on me. It was my duty to make myself available to the Armenian committee. That is how I came to Constantinople."

Contestation, Jorisards and freedom
While he was imprisoned, awaiting his execution, a significant protest movement emerged in Belgium to support him. Its members, referred to as the "Jorisards," demanded his immediate release and were likened to the Dreyfusards of Belgium by historians. They received support from notable Dreyfusards, such as Georges Clemenceau, who published a letter from one of their leaders, Georges Lorand, a progressive Walloon deputy and leader of the Jorisards, in L'Aurore. The Human Rights League in France also demonstrated for Edward Joris' release. The movement quickly extended beyond the anarchist circle of Antwerp and spread throughout Belgian society, particularly among intellectual socialist and left-leaning elites, uniting both Walloons and Flemish. On June 22, 1907, in Les Temps Nouveaux, a French anarchist journal, Jean Grave and Segher Rabaud published two statements of support for Edward Joris. In these, they declared, among other things: "Our comrades remember Joris, accused in the plot against the Yldiz-Kiosk bandit, sentenced to death by the judges of the massacrer a year and a half ago. [...] The Armenians are arrested en masse, and Joris, the dangerous and terrible one, who from the depths of his cell makes the bombs dance, will suffer from closer surveillance due to the dirty exploits of the police scum."Due to diplomatic pressure from Belgium and France, the sentence was not carried out. A support committee was established by left-wing intellectuals in Belgium to maintain pressure on the Belgian government to work towards his release. Joris was kept in prison until 23 December 1907 and then returned to Belgium. His letters from prison formed the basis of a later book about his involvement in the plot.

After his return to Belgium, Joris worked as a bookseller and was secretary to the Antwerp branch of the Ligue des droits de l'homme. After the First World War he was convicted of supporting the occupying forces' Flamenpolitik, and sought refuge in the Netherlands. He returned to Belgium after an amnesty in 1929 and worked as a self-employed publicity agent. He died in 1957.

Anarchism and the Armenian national movement
The proximity between an anarchist internationalist and the Armenian national movement has been questioned, but Maarten Van Ginderachter believes that during that time, anarchist figures like Bakunin or Proudhon were open to supporting small anti-colonial national movements, such as the demands of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation:"Joris’s best friend Resseler explicitly mentioned Armenia in September 1901 as one example of bourgeois-capitalist violence toward the working class in a longer list: ‘Our whole bourgeois society is based on violence: all governments burn and kill in the Transvaal, in China, in the Congo, on Java, in Cuba and on the Philippines, in Armenia’. This was a clear example of the emphatic anarchist interest in anti-imperialism and anticolonialism.From this synopsis it is important to remember that there is no necessary theoretical or practical contradiction between socialism (be it anarchist or reformist), nationalism (be it cultural or political) and internationalism. In general, anarchists were more drawn to anticolonial struggles in the Third World than Marxists. We do know from contemporary sources that Joris held radically internationalist, cosmopolitan ideas, in favor of ‘worldly solidarity’ and ‘humanity’. Recounting the court proceedings to his wife in an undated letter from his Istanbul prison, he claimed to have said in court: ‘The whole Universe is my fatherland, the whole of humanity is my family and all those who suffer are my brothers. I do not recognize any borders.' At the same time, however, Joris clearly believed in the existence of separate peoples that had distinct national qualities. His writings on Armenia are a case in point."

title: Edward Joris


text:
unplumbed

Adjective

 * 1) Not measured for depth, with or as if with a plumb.
 * The unplumbed depths of the sea will remain a mystery to land-bound humans.
 * 1)  Not assayed or measured in any way.

source: wikimedia

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

title: unplumbed


text:
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/RemoteAccess

This entire conversation shouldn't even be happening...RA as well as ALOT of other BBS softwares are VERY important! There are still some people who run/use BBS's even now.. The BBS came before, AND led up to the internet. I feel as though people who don't know what a BBS is, what it is all about, should not even have a comment about this.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DarknessBBS (talk • contribs)
 * Oh dear god, please don't accuse me of that sort of thing, it's really unkind. I do know about BBS systems, one of my college professors created what was possibly the very first ones as part of a distance education program in the 60s.  I was just doing a new-article patrol when I came accross this RemoteAccess.  At the time, the page didn't assert anything notable about it(there have been lots of BBS systems, and lots and lots of software for DOS).  I added a prod template noting my concern, and it was removed without much explanation, thus I sent it to the community for consensus on the issue. i kan reed 14:10, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


text:
Bourges Foot

Bourges Foot was a football club based in Bourges in the Centre-Val de Loire region of France. The club was founded in 1983 as L'Amicale des Algériens de Bourges, was renamed in 2003 as Jeunes de Bourges Nord, and took the name of Bourges Foot at the start of the 2013–14 season. In 2021, it merged with Bourges 18 to create a new club, Bourges Foot 18.

The club climbed steadily through the amateur divisions, from the district division (level nine and below of the French football pyramid) in 2003 to the Championnat National 2 for the first time in the club's history in the 2019–20 season. They reached the 9th round of the 2018–19 Coupe de France, losing to Lyon.

Honours

 * Championnat National 3 Centre-Val de Loire: 2018–19

title: Bourges Foot


text:
Aubrey Baartman

Nevie Aubrey Baartman (born 4 October 1958) is a South African politician from the Northern Cape. He was the provincial leader of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and an EFF representative in the Northern Cape Provincial Legislature. He was previously a senior provincial African National Congress (ANC) member.

Political career
Baartman was formerly a member of the ANC. He joined the party in the 1990s and served on multiple party structures. He served as mayor of the Namakwa District Municipality and as regional secretary of the party's Namakwa region. Baartman was a member of the National Executive Committee of the South African Football Association (SAFA).

Baartman joined the EFF in 2013 when the party was formed. He became the inaugural provincial leader of the party. Prior to his election to the Northern Cape Provincial Legislature, he served as the municipal manager of the Nama Khoi Local Municipality. He took office as a member of the provincial legislature in May 2014.

In 2019, Baartman was re-elected for a second term as a member of the provincial legislature. On 2 October 2022, provincial secretary Shadrack Tlhaole was elected to succeed Baartman as provincial chairperson of the EFF. Baartman resigned from the provincial legislature on 31 October 2022.

Legal issues
In 2016, he was accused of committing fraud during his tenure as municipal manager. Baartman denied these claims. In 2024, Baartman was sentenced to three years of correctional supervision for failing to adhere to 'correct tender procedures' when awarding a tender during his time as municipal manager.

title: Aubrey Baartman


text:
Cookbook:Potato Curry (Aloo Masala)

| Indian recipes | Vegan

Potato masala (Tamil: uralai kizhangu masala) is a potato dish often served alongside roti or folded inside a dosa. The dosa and aloo masala combination, widely eaten in South India, is known as masala dosa. Coconut chutney is a common accompaniment.

Ingredients

 * 1 tablespoon oil
 * ½ teaspoon mustard seed
 * ½ tablespoon chana dhal (optional)
 * 5 curry leaves
 * 1 medium onion, chopped thin
 * 4-5 split green chillies
 * 4 large potatoes, cubed and par-boiled
 * 1 pinch of turmeric powder
 * ½ teaspoon salt

Procedure

 * 1) Heat oil.
 * 2) Sautée the mustard seed first, then add chana dhal, curry leaves, onion and chillies.
 * 3) Fry until the onions begin to change color.
 * 4) Add potatoes.
 * 5) Sprinkle the turmeric evenly and stir well to mix all the ingredients
 * 6) Cover and cook on a medium flame for about 5 minutes, stirring well, until the potatoes become very soft and somewhat mashed.
 * 7) Season with salt to taste.

title: Cookbook:Potato Curry (Aloo Masala)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cozido à Portuguesa

The result of the debate was transwiki. W.marsh 16:03, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Cozido à Portuguesa
Obvious case in which a transwiki is needed Icarus 19:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Wikirecipes Schzmo 20:01, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Transwiki per Schzmo -- T B C [[Image:Confused-tpvgames.gif|18px|]] ???  ???   ??? 09:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, it is a national dish of Portugal. Page Up 12:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Right now it's just a recipe. If an actual article can be written about it, then that would be fine.  But the proper place for recipes is in the Wikibooks cookbook, not wikipedia. --Icarus 21:55, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


text:
lyriikka

Etymology
(see 🇨🇬). Contains the suffix.

Noun

 * 1) lyric poetry
 * 2)  lyrics words to a song
 * 1)  lyrics words to a song

title: lyriikka


text:
Talk:Sirdar

Untitled
Sirdar is also a popular brand of knitting yarn in the UK http://www.sirdar.co.uk/ Should this be included in some way? Claudine McClean 14:30, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The "Sirdar (company)" article should be written. Quite notable. Thanks for pointing it out. mikka (t) 21:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose that Sirdar be merged into Sardar. The words are closely related cognates (Sirdar is Sanskrit, Sardar is Old Persian) indicating precisely the same concept - a head/chief of an Army.

I think that the content in the Sirdar article can easily be explained in the context of Sardar (which is more detailed)Bangalorebar (talk) 07:25, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree with the above proposal. This word too old to be Arabic, it is a Persian word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 02:20, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree, they do appear to be the same word. Farsi (Persian) script shows it written as seerdar or even omits the first vowel altogether. Vowel sounds tend to vary region by region, as indeed they do in English. <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 18:39, 31 December 2020 (UTC) Accipitus.

Sirdar
There is another title Sirdar سِردار meaning keeper of secrets. This is preserved in the last entry for this term in the Steingass Persian dictionary for Sirr-dar and was the title of Sirdar Ikbal Ali Shah. He translated his own title as that: a confident or literally keeper of secrets. (Sirr: secret). http://dsalsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/search3advanced?dbname=steingass&query=%D8%B3%D8%B1%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1&matchtype=exact&display=utf8 --Wool Bridge (talk) 20:57, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sirdar


text:
User:Jadebydalek/sandbox

In fashion design, primarily in ready-to-wear lines, boyfriend is any style of women's clothing that was modified from a corresponding men's garment. Examples include boyfriend jackets, boyfriend jeans, and boyfriend blazers, which are often more unisex or looser in appearance and fit than most women's jackets or trousers, though still designed for the female form.

Background of women in menswear
Back in the day around the 19th century women wearing anything but dresses, skirts, and corsets was considered absurd. Amelia Bloomer a woman's rights activist in the 1850’s was one of the first to change the stereotype, as she introduced the bloomer. In the 20's the fashion legend Coco Chanel started the menswear line, as she was really into the androgynous look. Other popular fashion icons such as Audrey Hepburn and Marlene Dietrich had menswear style fashion which made this style even more popular in the 30's. During the war when women took over the men's jobs they were free to wear more masculine clothes, however, when the war ended in the 50's the housewife went back to dresses and skirts. It was not until the late 60's and early 70’s that menswear inspired fashion was no longer considered a rebellious political statement. In the late 60's Marilyn Monroe wore boyfriend jeans, which started the popularity of the clothing item.

Women in menswear today
The origin of boyfriend fashion is borrowing and wearing a boyfriend's clothes—his distressed jeans, his band tees, his dress shirts, his blazers, his cardigan. The trend expanded when many brands such as Gap, Forever 21, H&M, and Urban Outfitters began to create boyfriend fashion products or men's-inspired fashion.

Boyfriend blazer
The boyfriend blazer has been featured in many of the spring 2010 walks such as Charlotte Ronson, Cynthia Rowley, and Elie Tahari, and the trend continued into 2011. There are two main important ways to wear the look: making it oversized, and rolling up the sleeves. The boyfriend trend is all about wearing clothes that look a size too big for the wearer. It is recommended to only go up one size. It balances it out while implying that the sleeves would be too long for the wearer's arms. The boyfriend blazer comes in many different shades, ranging from classic hues of black and gray to whites, pinks, and neons. They are very versatile because they can be worn with a cocktail dress, a skirt and blouse, or even leggings.

Boyfriend jeans
The boyfriend jeans is one of the hottest pieces of clothing on the market. From Marilyn Monroe to Kim Kardashian the boyfriend jeans have been popular for many years. The boyfriend jean is loose fitting, slouchy, and relaxed looking pants that's "borrowed from the boys". Now a days a huge majority of celebrity are wearing boyfriend jeans from Kendall Jenner to Reese Witherspoon to Rihanna. The boyfriend jean has been reinvented to be many fits, from more baggy and authentic, to a tighter more tapper version.

Future of fashion
The "borrowed from the boys" look is nothing new but the trend is currently in fashion, and will continue to go in and out of fashion. However, this style trend shows young girls and women that they can wear whatever they want. People are in a more open time, and men and women can wear what they want without being judged as much as one would back in the day. For example, fashion icon Jaden Smith wore a dress and a skirt in a Vogue, and people thought it was bold and revolutionary. Alicia Hardesty, a project runway competitor, has a line of clothing is called original tomboy, and is for both women and men interchangeably. She likes to describe her work as androgynistic, meaning that there is characteristics of both masculine and feminine. She believes that this is the future for fashion, and anybody should be able to wear these clothes. One day Alicia hopes to see a store with no womens section or mens section, but clothes everyone can wear just in different sizes.

Category:2000s fashion Category:2010s fashion Category:Fashion aesthetics

title: User:Jadebydalek/sandbox


text:
těšit

Etymology
, from.

Verb

 * 1)  to please, to make happy
 * 2)  to look forward to
 * 3)  to enjoy the benefits of something
 * 1)  to enjoy the benefits of something

title: těšit


text:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/zirakpurescort.in

Links

 * zirakpurescort.in resolves to [//<IP_ADDRESS> <IP_ADDRESS>]
 * Link is not on the blacklist.
 * COIBot domainredlist search for link zirakpurescort.in gives:
 * zirakpurescort.in (Automonitor: reported to en:MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (diff))
 * zirakpurescort.in (Automonitor: reported to en:MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (diff))
 * Link is not on the Monitorlist.
 * None of the mentioned users is on the blacklist.
 * Link is not on the whitelist.
 * Link is not on the monitor list.
 * Link is blacklisted by escort on [//nl.wikibooks.org/wiki/Mediawiki:Spam-blacklist nl.wikibooks.org]
 * Link is not on the whitelist.
 * Link is not on the monitor list.
 * Link is blacklisted by escort on [//nl.wikibooks.org/wiki/Mediawiki:Spam-blacklist nl.wikibooks.org]

Additions

 * Displayed all 2 additions.


text:
Talk:Bob Henriques

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Bob Henriques. 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/20100210141326/http://www.utexas.edu:80/opa/blogs/culturalcompass/tag/bob-henriques/ to http://www.utexas.edu/opa/blogs/culturalcompass/tag/bob-henriques/

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:39, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bob Henriques


text:
Stiphodon martenstyni

Stiphodon martenstyni, the Martenstyn's stiphodon or Martenstyn's goby, is a species of amphidromous freshwater goby endemic to the southwestern portion of Sri Lanka. The males of this species can reach a length of 3.4 cm SL.

Etymology
The specific name martenstyni is named in memory of Cedric Martenstyn, who was a leading naturalist of the country killed by the Tamil militant organization Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).

title: Stiphodon martenstyni


text:
Talk:John Duncan MacLean

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Duncan MacLean. 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/20110926001844/https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=A1ARTA0004976 to http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=A1ARTA0004976

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:John Duncan MacLean


text:
Wikipedia talk:Skill badges

Initial proposal
I support a proposal to give editors awards similar to the way high-quality articles are given Featured Article and Good Article status. Besides rewarding editors for their contributions, it also helps newcomers seek senior Wikipedians for help. However, there should be specific qualification criteria for the award and it should be retractable. In addition, the award should be a social construct and should not give the recipent any advantage on Wikipedia. We could have multiple levels (up to three) of awards, but must be careful to prevent a hierchary from emerging - therefore, we must keep the award system simple. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 15:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with most of your concerns. As I propose it, the badges will be retractable, and skill badges won't be a requirement for or provide an official advantage in anything. There will be specific requirements, and there will probably be no more than four levels in each badge. (I'm not sure whether I agree to limiting it to three levels; I guess we shall see when we start drafting the requirements in detail.)  Neon    Merlin   17:22, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Oppose since this proposal is completely useless for building a high quality encyclopedia. Joelito (talk) 15:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * One has to note that to build a high quality encyclopedia, one has to build a community. And community is always a matter of spirit and symbols rather than hard facts. -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  17:13, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

(above discussion moved from Village pump (proposals)  Neon    Merlin   17:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree but I believe its time to stop patting ourselves and others in the back for good work and its time to start generating ideas on how to improve the quality of articles. Too much effort and time is spent on areas which are not focused on building an encyclopedia. Joelito (talk) 17:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * So you say. But I hear some different things, see e.g. here. Quality contributors don't stay if the community is not high-quality. Personally, three quarters of my Wikipedia time and three quarters of my nerves are dedicated to writing articles, but if I don't get at least some encouragement, it can quickly become demotivating. Like Napoleon said about the Legion of Honor, "yes these are toys, but these toys are used to lead men." or something in that tune.
 * Also, just to be clear, the previous reply of mine is in no way an endorsement of the proposal, just a side remark. The present proposition might not be the best thing to achieve such an objective, I just don't know that, but it has the benefit of trying to. And it's just a proposal anyway.
 * As for the proposal itself, I'll think hard about it. :) Best, Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  17:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * These badges will promote Wikipedia as a place of "service learning." Eventually, they will be given consideration on resumés, scholarship applications, etc., because unlike barnstars, they have relevance in what narrow-minded people call the "real world." This, in turn, will provide incentives for more people to begin contributing, which in turn will generate more and better content.  Neon    Merlin   17:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I would not be so overly optimistic, but these, much like service awards proposed some time ago (WP:SERVICE), can give one a measure of how experienced the editor you're facing is. I'm not much fun of a lot of these badges though... And quite a few of them are covered by barnstars already...-- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  18:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Even if they are covered by barnstars, a barnstar doesn't indicate a specific level of skill, only that the starholder's work happened to sufficiently impress a fellow user who's sufficiently generous with barnstars. (Have you ever tried to apply to the community at large for a barnstar?) But if you could be more specific about which badges you'd like to change or scrap, and why, you're welcome to do that below without having to vote against the whole proposal.  Neon    Merlin   23:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

(below discussion moved from Barnstar and award proposals by  Neon    Merlin   18:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC)) Oppose Unfortunately they sound too similar to barnstars to me. Maybe if you could explain the difference I might change my mind. -- Will Mak  050389  15:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, the obvious difference seems to be that these would be granted by a community consensus rather than as a personal award; and that they could also be removed by consensus. Quite honestly, I don't know whether this particular proposal is necessarily the best approach; but it might be worthwhile to have a general discussion about whether we would want to have a more formal, community-based, system of awards/rankings/whatnot than barnstars currently provide. Kirill Lokshin 15:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

 * This may be a good way of adding more detail to WP:SERVICE (also still being proposed), but I don't think we need a separate category of awards like this. -- Will Mak  050389  15:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

(end of discussion moved from Barnstar and award proposals by  Neon    Merlin   18:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC))

 * But the current scheme of service awards isn't a good idea, IMO, because they imply that a specific edit count milestone is, itself, an achievement. These badges, on the other hand, focus on specific skills that might be demonstrated by someone with 10 edits or someone with 100,000 edits. Now what I might support is giving awards once an editor reaches a certain milestone number of total badge levels.  Neon    Merlin   20:25, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Off the track ... encyclopedia people
Another project that will take time off trying to write good articles in WP. There is absolutely no need for wikipedian categorization nor is there a necessity to know that him is better than him. There are actually plenty of things to do than to add more cruft to the personal pages and to create more process toward editing. Lincher 19:15, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * You don't seem to be addressing any of the potential benefits that I listed in the lead section.  Neon    Merlin   20:25, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Lincher there are many good editors who may be future adminn, that this badge would help them. --Zonerocks 05:52, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Request for badgeship?
The great thing about Barnstars (though many still hate them) is that they have no requirements for conferring them upon someone, and hence they have no value. Because they have no value, they have no procedures, and people won't exercise in futile edit wars over them. It's a good idea, but Barnstars already have the "make them feel appreciated" thing down, and formally ranking editors by 1337 sKiLlZ will only create more problems. Fagstein 17:03, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

 * The main point of skill badges is not to make them feel appreciated, but to:
 * Give editors credit for the skills they demonstrate, so that people will join Wikipedia in order to enhance their resumés, etc., with badges. This will increase the total rate of article creation/improvement. It will also tend to give us better input because, for instance, a student or out-of-work photographer, hoping to boost their resume with a Photography skill badge, will be likely to take better pictures than the amateurs who (I'm guessing) currently take most of our photos.
 * Show users who has what skills, and make it easier to find the right editors to approach for assistance.
 * Nonetheless, skill badges can be effective at making people feel appreciated in a way that barnstars cannot, because (a) they are from the community at large, rather than just one person; and (b) they can reach those diligent, but less-noticed, editors who don't naturally receive barnstars (like myself). The fact that barnstars, as you say, "have no value" severely limits their use as both positive reinforcement and as resumé credentials, and therefore as motivational tools. I suspect that there's, at best, a poor correlation (r < 0.5) between the number of barnstars a user has and the total value of their to-date or future contributions; with skill badges, I would expect a much stronger correlation (r > 0.8).  Neon    Merlin   01:37, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
 * You're making some serious assumptions here.
 * Employers aren't going to care what the anonymous Wikipedia community thinks of people's l33t skillz.
 * We already have complicated polling procedures for adminship requests, article deletion, approval of policies. Imagine having to run polls on whether User X is good at math.
 * I see no evidence that expert badges will increase the total rate of article creation and improvement. In fact, I would guess that it would decrease this rate, as people who would normally be editing articles would now be involved in flame wars over whether User X deserves Level 3 certification in basket-weaving or why User A gave User B a promotion but not User C.
 * The Wikipedia community does not have the necessary skills to judge users' level of competence at the tip of a hat. A lot of work would be required, which would waste a lot of time that could be used much more productively elsewhere. It's just too much of a logistical nightmare. Fagstein 18:29, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
 * All of those concerns will be addressed by having sufficiently specific requirements for each badge level. Such specificity would:
 * make the badgeworthiness of an editor more a matter of fact than opinion, thus deterring flamewars.
 * tell employers exactly what a badge meant an editor knew, and therefore what it was worth. Unlike a barnstar, the value of a badge would be the same regardless of who granted it.
 * make it easier for potential voters to decide whether an editor qualified for a badge or not, and make that decision uncontroversial most of the time, meaning that voting could happen much faster. I would expect most polls to last no more than a week for first-level badges, and maybe three or four weeks for top-level badges. We wouldn't need an editcount analysis or a detailed questionnaire for the nominee, just links to three or four pages to exemplify the skill being accredited. (Note, however, that I would expect many first-level badges to be granted unilaterally by those with high-level badges.)
 * As for how it would accelerate article creation/improvement: These badges would provide motivation, in terms of both simple positive reinforcement and resumé enhancement, for both existing and new editors to keep working and building their skills. AFAIK, the most common motivation for adult volunteer work is experiential education, and an accreditation system enhances our perceived value as a place of service learning. The Wikimedia Foundation's official social agenda is "Adult, Continuing Education," and this is one way to produce more valuable adult continuing education.  Neon    Merlin   19:47, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
 * But how can it be "more a matter of fact than opinion" if it's decided with a vote? Just how are we supposed to objectively determine an editor's skills and knowledge in a certain area? Things like this (with social value but little tangible value) are what causes the largest flame wars among editors, and I still don't see how this will be avoided if we're ranking some editors above others and pretending like it's objective. Fagstein 07:56, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The vote is just a matter of having people verify the factual accuracy of the statement, "User A has met the requirements for Badge X." If there is an accuracy dispute, then some discussion is needed. And we're not attempting directly to objectively determine an editor's skill, but instead determine whether certain edits (those being presented as evidence of the skill) would have required the editor to understand certain concepts and techniques (which together make up the skill).
 * For instance, if you know how to correct for dark and washed out photos, colour cast, noise, slight blur, and how to appropriately crop a photo, then you know the basics of photo editing. (More complicated tasks, such as removing objects and backgrounds from a photo, can be made parts of higher-level badges in that subject.) All you have to do is determine whether the editor in consideration has done each of those things properly with a list of specific photos.
 * Also, the badge system would not produce a long-term ranking of users, since one could train for the next badge level, complete the requirements, nominate oneself for it and get it, all in the space of one or two weeks (longer for the top-level badges).  Neon    Merlin   15:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I'm not buying it. The idea is quite tempting indeed, but because Wikipedia is anonymous, it would be impossible to implement. And like someone already said, the logistical issues would be tremendous. -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  17:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Granted, maybe the process will be too slow at first, maybe the badges won't be resumé-worthy at first, and maybe there will be problems with fraud and abuse for the first few months. However, once the system has been operating for a while, anti-fraud measures will be put in place, ways will be found to make things move faster without introducing significant error, and the badges will begin to build a reputation with colleges, universities and employers.
 * The great thing about wiki is that it doesn't have to be perfect from the start, because it's relatively easy to improve whatever's not working satisfactorily. We can always scrap the system if, given time, it turns out not to be viable (which doesn't appear to be the case); even then, the effort won't be wasted, because whatever lessons we learn will help Wikiversity with its long-term goal of creating a degree-granting system. Fagstein is clearly exaggerating the potential negatives, and ignoring this project's potential to do good.
 * If you're still not satisfied that it's worth the effort, why don't we start with a pilot project, granting badges in only two or three skills? That will mean investing less effort in drafting the badge requirements and designing the badge graphics. It will also initially mean fewer nominations and votes to oversee. In the unlikely event that Fagstein is right about the badges leading to flamewars, there should be fewer of those than if we cover the full range of editing skills. All I'm saying is give skill badges a chance.  Neon    Merlin   20:18, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Or have a l33t friend with higher sk1LlZ promote you. Fagstein 19:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * If someone suspected that Editor A had a badge they hadn't properly earned, and that badge had been granted unilaterally by Editor B, then they'd probably ask B for evidence that A met the requirements. If B couldn't provide satisfactory evidence, A's badge would be revoked or deleved, and if this happened repeatedly, so would B's.  Neon    Merlin   20:18, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

 * (decreasing indent) What could be nice would be badges based on real disciplines - if you write X Fa's about geography - you get a geography badge. Or something like that. Since FAC's and FA election is already an existing process that does not require any additionnal logistics, that might be OK. And FA standards are established and high as well.
 * And it is tougher to get than a barnstar. -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  17:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * But how do you determine who "wrote" the FA? Kinda goes against what Wikipedia is all about. Fagstein 19:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, did not sleep enough yesterday. Forget it... <_< -- Grafikm  (AutoGRAF)  19:10, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Fagstein, he just means "made a major contribution to."  Neon    Merlin   19:41, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * At first glance, that sounds like a reasonable plan, but it has two issues: First, contributing to several featured articles in geography doesn't necessarily indicate a complete knowledge of the basics of geography. One might be nearly an expert in some geography topics, and nearly clueless in others. Second, one can demonstrate extensive knowledge of a subject without being a major contributor to an FA. One can make minor contributions to high-profile articles or major contributions to lesser-known articles. (I do a bit of both.)  Neon    Merlin   19:41, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd add that real experts can often have only a small number of edits, while some highly motivated people with no higher education write good or even featured articles. Wikipedia is somewhat different from the real world. Should we make it closer? I think so. But, well, something in the idea of service badges makes me feel uncomfortable. Hello kitty editcountitty and so-calling-themselves "featured users". No, I think bureaucracy isn't good, and barnstars are enough.
 * Badge eligibility will have nothing to do with edit count (beyond, maybe, 10 or 20), and edit count will not be usable to justify voting for or against the granting of a badge. To receive a badge, one will have to have shown specific skills in one's edits. There will be a specific set of requirements for each badge, and edit count will not be among them. In fact, skill badges will tend to decrease editcountitis by providing an (eventually) more accurate, less manipulable, alternate method of quickly comparing users in terms of experience.
 * And how many people use their real names, are experts, but can't prove their skills outside Wikipedia? CP/Mcomm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 19:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm an example of a user with expert-level (or nearly expert-level) skills that I can't prove outside Wikipedia. That's because the skills are with HTML and CSS, and I can't prove them outside a wiki because I don't have any content for a personal website and am not ready to get a job (at least until next summer).  Neon    Merlin   23:43, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, interesting, but a wiki is a place with limited use of HTML and CSS.
 * Limited HTML, yes, but almost complete CSS (and possibly truly complete CSS in future versions of MediaWiki). For instance, I would say one of my best pieces of CSS work was making images overlap at Barnstar and award proposals/New Proposals.  Neon    Merlin   04:27, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * But let's get to the heart of the matter. Do we need to compare users, in the first place?
 * Yes, because if all editors are equal, no editors are distinct, and therefore no editors are distinguished, in which case (even with the possibility of adminship) there's not much for any Wikipedian to aspire to. And if they also won't get any accredited skills or references to put on their resumés, there's not much motivation to continue volunteering.  Neon    Merlin   03:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * And yet Wikipedia is one of the most popular websites in the world. Someone must be getting motivation somewhere. Fagstein 07:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * That's because we do compare and rank editors, using rudimentary systems of edit counts and barnstars.  Neon    Merlin   14:37, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Because we compare and rank editors??? It's extremely improbable, since I know a lot of excellent contributors, who lack numerous barnstars, sometimes don't display their editcounter, and sometimes even lack common good attitude. Remember, the most "cool" users are trustees, stewards, bureaucrats and admins. And since taking the admin duties many people become less and less writers. Edit counts can promote housekeeping, bernstars promote in-wikipedia socialization - actual writers don't get a lot of either. Remember, Wikipedia is an equality-based community, and most of the times people are compared solely by their words in the specific situation, not by their past. CP/Mcomm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 14:49, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * So if it's not broken, why are we fixing it? Fagstein 06:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

 * The editcountitis is already considered a bad thing, and someone showing it off in the open is likely to lose reputation.
 * That's an argument against the current system of service awards, and possibly against edit count userboxes, but not against skill badges which, as I say, have nothing to do with edit count. In fact, displaying skill badges could show a user's commitment to overcoming the inherent flaws of edit counts as an experience metric.  Neon    Merlin   03:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Badges... Well, a nice thing, but I'm concerned with procedural issues most of all. Someone can always state himself if he's an expert in some field. It's hard to determine it outside. Well, let's just test it. For instance, I've got not many edits, and would fit as a test subject; could you try to take an overall look at my contribs (better start from first 500) and just suggest what badge(s) I could be considered eligible for? CP/Mcomm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 00:50, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It will be a bit sketchy until the requirements are drawn up, and I'm not in a position to say what constitutes expertise in many of these areas (which is why I don't want to be the only one drafting the requirements), but I'll get back to you in the morning with my list.  Neon    Merlin   03:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Based on your work on templates, you could probably receive a first-level badge in HTML/CSS. Looking at some of your earliest and latest edits in the main namespace, you could probably also receive a second- or third-level badge in cleanup. I haven't had time to look over all your contributions, however. You'd probably be in a better position to do that than I would.  Neon    Merlin   19:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, you see it's difficult to determine specific editor's skills externally.
 * Most badge grants would probably be self-nominated; and peer nominations would be made only by those who had already seen evidence of the skills, e.g. because they were watching the pages where the contributions were made. I don't expect anyone to go exploring for skills in a fellow editor's contribs, because presumably the person who knows a contribution history best is the one who made it.  Neon    Merlin   22:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually most of my work in Wikipedia was connected with shipbuilding and weaponry (where I work IRL), then dispute resolution and wikiproject creation; cleanup being probably only tertiary. It's because most significant changes often take much less edits, since they need to be well-thought and made in one piece, and the smaller template corrections or article cleaning can look dominant while taking only a small time.
 * That's the problem with edit counts, and why we need a better system.  Neon    Merlin   22:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not exactly against the system, but it would better be kept simple (certainly without levels, for most part, and as condensed as possible), and, probably, with as small bureaucracy as possible. CP/Mcomm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 20:48, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Then how about in the pilot project I proposed above, we start out with only basic-level badges for the first while?  Neon    Merlin   22:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I would seriously consider removing levels overall. The problem with leveled badges is too much MMORPG-like detail and difficulty of judgment. It is easy to determine if one has professional skills in computer maintenance, or weapon construction, or professional writing, or whatever; but very hard to measure one's skills via wiki. Well, maybe not absolutely, and to mark exceptional participations, double badge could be used. That's because of the second problem: many contributors would not like to be represented as having only basic knowledge in a subject which in fact is their job for a decade. So, using a non-leveled badge would be better, and it would greatly reduce any disputes about the level. And, well, I'd suggest to further simplify the system, merging, for instance, all audio skills except vocal into sound engineering. Same with video, images, and some other subjects - don't forget, we aren't playing ADoM or URW, so we should keep all supplementary things simple.
 * P.S. If you support the idea and would like me to be more specific, I can explicitly state what I seem fitting, or just edit the page and simplify the details. CP/Mcomm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 00:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd like some more specifics please. Also, I do not agree with removing levels altogether. Here's why: As I said above, if you know how to correct for dark and washed out photos, colour cast, noise, slight blur, and how to appropriately crop a photo, then you know the basics of photo editing. However, there are also plenty more advanced photo editing tasks, such as increasing resolution, fixing red eye, recolouring objects, removing objects or the background, correcting uneven lighting, etc. A professional would need to be skilled at some of the more advanced jobs, but someone who knew only the basic tasks could still help in many workplace situations, could still make valuable improvements to photos on Wikipedia and Commons, and should still, IMO, get a badge.  Neon    Merlin   00:56, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, but how you can tell that a person who only does basic photo editing, does also have only basic skills? Most photos don't require anything beyond basic correction. The same goes to web design: only a small fraction of tools is allowed for use on Wikipedia. And, basically, same goes to most of the tasks. I know many people don't care, but many others would not like a badge stating they have basic skills, when they have professional. Let's avoid RPG elements; they are too tempting to implement, but too dangerous, because can substitute ends for the means. Well, maybe two levels would be appropriate, with the first being common (without notices of skill level), and second honorary, when very advanced skills are shown and used regularly. It's not easy to assess presence of skills, and even harder to measure levels without using tests - which we clearly shouldn't even think about.
 * Also, let's decide - are we speaking of in-wiki or real-world skills? I triet to reform it at User:CP\M/Sandbox, but seems like some of the skills are still completely useless outside specifically Wikipedia. --CP/Mcomm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 02:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm talking about wiki skills, but most of these transferable to the non-wiki workplace. The only skills I can think of that would not transfer well are Counter-vandalism, Multimedia research and the Text formatting/presentation group.
 * Also, I don't agree with some of your badge changes because:
 * One may be very skilled at sound cleanup or synthesis, and not even have a microphone. Similarly, one may be very skilled at editing photos and had little experience actually taking photos. (I consider myself to fall into both categories to an extent.)
 * Templates are definitely an area of skill distinct from the others, and they can get very complex (e.g. with parser functions).
 * Leadership is what we call the organization of people. Similarly, videography is video recording.
 * Multimedia research is definitely a skill in which one can have a very advanced level. It's not easy finding free-use images for Wikipedia on the web.
 * However, I would be happy to:
 * Support the renaming of Expansion into Writing and Prose editing into Copyediting.
 * Merge Tables into Copyediting (at the general level) and HTML/CSS (at the exceptional level).
 * Merge Sound synthesis into the exceptional level of Audio cleanup (but we should then rename it Audio editing).
 * Use your two-level system to start with, but call the levels "general" and "exceptional." (I may, however, propose additional levels later.)
 * Do you agree to this counter-proposal?  Neon    Merlin   17:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

No
This is not a good idea. It is just WP:SERVICE in a different form. I oppose any implementation of a policy such as this that divides wikipedians. pschemp | talk 03:43, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It is not WP:SERVICE. No matter what we do, Wikipedians are always going to be — as they have long been — sorted by experience. Skill badges are the fairest, most precise way to do that. Would you rather people keep using edit or barnstar counts?  Neon    Merlin   07:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

 * This plays to ego, divides the community, and reduces quality/complexity in editors to numbers. I don't think it can do anything good for us, and that it would do much harm. --Improv 04:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * We have to reduce these things to something that's easily handled on resumés and by users searching through categories. Some people just want to become distinguished one way or another, and it frustrates them if they can't tell how distinguished they are. If this proposal fails, Improv, remember this: The next time you're looking for a job, employers won't be able to easily quantify or evaluate your volunteer experience, so it probably won't count for as much as it otherwise would. In marginal cases, that could mean that the job goes to someone else.  Neon    Merlin   07:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure that any employer, except some dotcom offering a home job over Internet, wouldn't even bother to look at these awards. CP/Mcomm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 13:27, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Besides, the purpose of getting involved is not to push one's resumé. Putting an emphasison that would give people entirely the wrong idea, almost as if we should expect badges in real life for being sociable, throwing great parties, being a good cook, etc. Anyone wearing badges for such things around would swiftly make apparent the silliness of the idea. Not everything in life should be about your resumé, and stuff like this hurts community. --Improv 20:35, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No, but people still display certificates on their walls for completing cooking courses, even if they aren't professional cooks, and may still put them on their resumés. A skill badge can be thought of as a course certificate (see purpose 6 in the lead section), with the differences being that in true wiki spirit, (a) the course awards full experiential credit, and (b) the final performance tasks are marked by more than one person.  Neon    Merlin   03:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * If people can't tell how distinguished they are, having anonymous people vote about your skills on Wikipedia isn't going to change that. If anything, they'll probably make it worse.
 * In what way?  Neon    Merlin   03:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Because by assigning value to these badges you're inviting people to start fighting over them. People here are offended by their articles being deleted. Imagine how they'll feel once they get rejected for a skill badge. Fagstein 07:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * We're not assigning any particular value to these badges. The value, if any, will be set by the people that grant it: the employers who see them on resumés, the committees that see them on scholarship applications, the Wikipedians who use them as RFA criteria (which they're welcome not to do if they don't want to). Their only 'official' value is as (a) positive feedback when granted, (b) constructive criticism when not granted, and (c) a tool to help Wikipedians determine whom to approach for help. I don't really see how any of these things would tend to encourage fighting. And if someone can't handle being rejected for a skill badge, how will they manage in the non-wiki world when they get passed over for promotions, turned down for dates, etc.?  Neon    Merlin   18:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Barnstars have the advantage of being personal, and because there's no rules about giving them out, there's no bureaucracy about it and nobody's going to vote against awarding you one. Fagstein 06:40, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * But barnstars can't be used to measure value as a Wikipedian. I have no barnstars; does this mean my contributions to date have been unimportant or undistinguished, or that I haven't shown any particular skill? No; it just means my more meaningful contributions have yet to be noticed; or if they have been noticed, it's by someone who isn't very generous with barnstars. I'm content not having any barnstars, but I would like some form of acknowledgement, and skill badges would mean as much or more to me than barnstars. Arguing that skill badges will interfere with encyclopedia construction is like arguing that academic grades interfere with learning; the effects of grades might not be purely positive, but the prospect of straight As still gives students something measurable to strive toward.  Neon    Merlin   03:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Skills aren't the only measure of value to the project. I realize you would like acknowledgement, but this is not the way to do it. Having people argue over your skills may seem attractive to you, but it would be downright depressing to most of the people it would apply to. Wikipedia is not a school. You do not graduate from it, and you do not have any l337 goals to strive for. It's a volunteer wiki. You give what you can. Fagstein 07:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Certainly, having one's skills affirmed by consensus without dispute is far better than having them argued over. And in most cases, that's probably what will happen, because clear requirements will leave little room for controversy. But having them argued over means that at least a dissenting minority is willing to acknowledge them, rather than everyone (or almost everyone) ignoring or denying them. And yes, as Wikipedians we do have a goal to strive for: to contribute as much as possible to Wikipedia within our lifetimes, and thus to make the most important (and, thus, most skillful) contributions possible within the available time.  Neon    Merlin   18:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank Flying Spaghetti Monster that I am not a wikipedian! --CP/Mcomm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 23:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * How can you not be a Wikipedian, with your 1800 edits, your custom-formatted user page, and your regular posts to discussions such as this one?  Neon    Merlin   18:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, it's just that goal isn't exactly just to contribute as much as possible to Wikipedia :-). Different people have different goals, actually. I, for instance, aim to keep Wikipedia a good source of in-depth information, most importantly free of significant bias, both systemic and local, in all aspects. CP/Mcomm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 20:56, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how to make this work without introducing a vast apparatus to admininster it and I am not seeing the big benefits of it. ++Lar: t/c 10:49, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not a "vast apparatus" at all; it will be many times less vast than that used for WP:RFA, just because (a) fewer votes are needed, (b) clearly defined requirements will reduce the amount of controversy, making consensus easier to establish, and (c) each user can make a voting decision more easily.  Neon    Merlin   05:06, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * RFA is a vast apparatus, because we need RFA. We don't need skill badges. Fagstein 07:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * That's why the apparatus will be many times less vast; I agree that we don't want the awarding of skill badges to take too much effort, just to make sure that its motivational benefits outweigh the effort it consumes — just as we make sure RFA's benefits (both motivational and in terms of getting more admin work done) outweigh the effort it takes, compared to what would happen if only Wikimedia staff had admin privileges. But it's hard to argue about what we need and what we simply desire, given that Wikipedia doesn't truly need to exist at all.  Neon    Merlin   18:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Why this won't work
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Featured users pschemp | talk 04:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know how well I can comment on a proposal if the proposal itself is no longer available; however, please see my comments above.  Neon    Merlin   05:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Based on the time passed and lack of strong support, it's clear that it will never fly. It can be kept as a small volunteer initiative to acknowledge people who have shown remarkable skills, not more. That's why I from the very beginning suggested to simplify it and leave only high level. Anyway it's up to you, just a suggestion. CP/Mcomm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 07:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia talk:Skill badges


text:
Fractal (disambiguation)

A fractal is a mathematical set that has a fractal dimension that usually exceeds its topological dimension and may fall between the integers. There is also a fractal derivative, defined in fractal spacetime.

Fractal or Fractals may also refer to:
 * Fractal (EP), 2009 album by Swedish metal band Skyfire
 * Fractal (video game), 2011 puzzle game by Philadelphia-based studio Cipher Prime
 * Fractal art, form of algorithmic art
 * Fractal Audio Systems, an American guitar amplifier brand
 * Fractal Design, Swedish hardware company
 * Fractals (journal), scientific journal published by World Scientific
 * Fractal (software), an instant messaging client and collaboration software
 * The Baudelaire Fractal, a 2020 novel by Lisa Robertson

title: Fractal (disambiguation)


text:
Arbuzovka

Arbuzovka (Арбузовка) is a rural locality (a station) and the administrative center of Arbuzovsky Selsoviet, Pavlovsky District, Altai Krai, Russia. The population was 868 as of 2013. There are 15 streets.

Geography
Arbuzovka is located 35 km from Pavlovsk (the district's administrative centre) by road.

title: Arbuzovka


text:
CisLunarFreighter/User keyboard interface controller

User Keyboard Interface Controller

Responsibilities
Process keystrokes and pass commands to appropriate object. Ultimately should be configuration by user with a good default configuration for starters.

Collaborators

 * Menus

 * Ship
 * Thrusters, Weapons, Cargo Ejections, Dump Feul,

 * On Screen Cursor
 * position and click for no mouse operation

 * View Controller
 * Multiple views should be keyboard selectable

 * IRC Component
 * Ability to communicate with other players while accomplishing aforementioned tasks


text:
Cnoc Raithní

Cnoc Raithní ("hill of bracken") is a tumulus (burial mound) and national monument located on Inisheer, Ireland.

Location
Cnoc Raithní is located on the northern edge of Inisheer, overlooking the harbour.

History
The lower tier is dated to c. 2000–1500 BC, making this the earliest known settlement site on the island. The upper part is believed to be Early Christian (5th to 8th centuries AD).

The site was covered by sands before being exposed by a storm in 1885; in that year, it was excavated by D. Murphy and cordoned cinerary urns with cremated bones and a bronze awl were found.

Description
A circular sandy mound revetted by a drystone wall. About 27 slab-lined graves protrude above the south half. The north half is occupied by a kerbed platform with two limestone pillars.

title: Cnoc Raithní


text:
evenaar

Etymology
From. Equivalent to. The modern sense “equator” is a semantic loan from and may have been coined by.

Noun

 * 1) equator
 * 2)  scales, balance

title: evenaar


text:
Francis III, Duke of Brittany

Francis III (Frañsez; François; 28 February 1518 – 10 August 1536) was Dauphin of France and, after 1524, Duke of Brittany. Francis and his brother, Henry, were exchanged as hostages for their father, Francis I, who had been captured at the Battle of Pavia. They would be hostages for three years. Made duke of Brittany in 1532, this precipitated Brittany's integration with the Kingdom of France. Francis died 10 August 1536, possibly from tuberculosis.

Life
Francis was the first son of King Francis I of France and Duchess Claude of Brittany. His father said of Francis at birth, "a beautiful dauphin who is the most beautiful and strong child one could imagine and who will be the easiest to bring up." His mother said, "tell the King that he is even more beautiful than himself." The Dauphin was christened at Amboise on 25 April 1519. Leonardo da Vinci, who had been brought to Amboise by Francis I, designed the decorations.

One of the most researched aspects of the Dauphin's short life is the time he and his brother Henry (later Henry II of France) spent as hostages in Spain. The king had been badly defeated and captured at the Battle of Pavia (1525) and became a prisoner of Emperor Charles V, initially in the Alcázar in Madrid. In order to ensure his release, the king signed the Treaty of Madrid (1526). However, in order to ensure that Francis abided by the treaty, Charles demanded that the king's two older sons take his place as hostages. Francis agreed.

On 15 March 1526, the exchange took place at the border between Spain and France. Francis almost immediately repudiated the treaty and the eight-year-old Dauphin and his younger brother Henry spent the next three years as captives of Charles V, a period that scarred them for life.

During his confinement in Spain, the Dauphin displayed a notably subdued demeanor compared to his more aggressive brother and seemed "to have accepted the rationale for his imprisonment reasonably well." Nevertheless, the experience led him to become somewhat isolated, favoring black attire (like a Spaniard) and exhibiting a contemplative disposition seen as more Spanish than French.

Marriage arrangements
As the first son and heir of the King of France, the Dauphin was a marriage pawn for his father. There were several betrothals to eligible princesses throughout the Dauphin's life. The first was when he was an infant, to the four-year-old Mary Tudor (later Mary I of England), daughter of Henry VIII of England and Catherine of Aragon; this arrangement was made as a surety for the Anglo-French alliance signed in October 1518, but abandoned around 1521 when Mary was instead betrothed to Charles V.

Duchy of Brittany
In 1524, the Dauphin inherited the Duchy of Brittany on his mother's death, becoming Duke Francis III, although the Duchy was actually ruled by officials of the French crown. In 1532, after much discourse with the Breton deputies, demands were laid before the French crown. The Dauphin was to arrive at Rennes as duke and owner of the duchy, King Francis would be granted usufruct and management of it and, after the union with France, the Dauphin would sign an oath that respects the duchy's rights and privileges. Francis agreed to these demand and passed an edict annexing the duchy of Brittany to France. On August 14 1532, the Dauphin was crowned Duke Francis III in Rennes Cathedral.

Upon Henry's succession to the French throne in 1547, the Duchy and the crown were effectively merged, the Breton estates having already tied the succession of the Duchy to the French crown.

Death
The Dauphin Francis died at the Château de Tournon on 10 August 1536, at the age of eighteen. The circumstances of his death seemed suspicious, and it is believed by many that he was poisoned. However, there is ample evidence that he died of natural causes, possibly tuberculosis.

After playing a round of tennis at a jeu de paume court "pré[s] d'Ainay", the Dauphin asked for a cup of water, which was brought to him by his secretary, Count Montecuccoli. After drinking it, Francis collapsed and died several days later. Montecuccoli, who was brought to the court by Catherine de' Medici, was accused of being in the pay of Charles V, and when his quarters were searched a book on different types of poison was found. Catherine de' Medici was well known to have an interest in poisons and the occult. Under torture, Montecuccoli confessed to poisoning the Dauphin and was executed.

In an age before forensic science, poison was usually suspected whenever a young healthy person died shortly after eating or drinking. There was no way to pinpoint and trace the substance after death; therefore, it was considered a quick, easy and untraceable form of homicide. There have been several other suspected cases of political murder by poison in the French royal family throughout the ages.

title: Francis III, Duke of Brittany


text:
Nitro Rush

Nitro Rush is a Canadian action drama film, directed by Alain DesRochers and released in 2016. A sequel to his 2007 film Nitro, the film stars Guillaume Lemay-Thivierge reprising his role as Max, who is now in prison for murdering a police officer. One day a mysterious woman (Micheline Lanctôt) shows up to solicit his help in breaking up a criminal gang in which his son Théo (Antoine DesRochers) has gotten involved, leading him to break out of prison and join forces with gang leader Daphné (Madeleine Péloquin) to steal the formula for a new rave drug.

The film opened in theatres on August 31, 2016.

The film received four Prix Iris nominations at the 19th Quebec Cinema Awards in 2017, for Best Art Direction (Dominique Desrochers), Best Cinematography (Tobie Marier Robitaille), Best Makeup (Marlène Rouleau) and Best Sound (Stéphane Bergeron, Martin Desmarais and Marie-Claude Gagné).

title: Nitro Rush


text:
Johnny Ortiz

Johnny O (born Juan Ortiz in Brooklyn, New York ) is an American freestyle and dance-pop singer. He reached the Billboard charts in the late 1980s with the singles "Fantasy girl", "Memories" and "Runaway Love".

Studio albums

 * 1989: Johnny O
 * 1990: Like a Stranger
 * 1995: Call It Watcha Like
 * 2002: The Sounds of My Heart
 * 2007: Peace on Earth 2012
 * 2011: Remedy (Grace of God)

Compilation albums

 * 1993: The Remixes
 * 1997: Best of Johnny O
 * 2001: Johnny O's Greatest Hits
 * 2003: Famous Very Words: The Very Best of Johnny O
 * 2005: All the Hits and More!

title: Johnny Ortiz


text:
manina

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) ; small or delicate hand; child's hand
 * 2) backscratcher
 * 3) typographical index mark in the form of a hand

title: manina


text:
Morris Roberts Store

The Morris Roberts Store, located off U.S. 30 in Hagerman, Idaho, was built in 1892. It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1978.

It is a one-story building with three-foot-thick lava rock walls, with a gabled roof. It has a Western false front architecture facade, including a Mesker Brothers stamped metal cornice. It has two store areas, the west one built in 1892 and the east one built as a bank in 1905. The listing reports it as two contributing buildings.

title: Morris Roberts Store