text:
Evolutionary Biology/Early History of Life on Planet Earth

< Evolutionary Biology

Introduction to the History of Life
It is very interesting that life began from simple chemical molecules. Starting from the formation of the universe from simple elements such as hydrogen and helium 13.7 billion years ago, until now, with Homo sapiens evolving and trying to expand its colony to a new planet, there is one great history of life. To understand those sequences in chronological order, it is important to understand the geologic time scale. There are two ways to represent geologic time: relative time, which deals with divisions and subdivisions of the Earth's geology in a specific order based on relative age relationships, and absolute time, which is usually obtained from radiometric dating methods performed on igneous rocks, such as volcanic ash layers or lava flows, to determine numerical ages.

Chemical Origins of Life
The study of evolution is incomplete without first a consideration for the origin of life itself. Any theory of biology would be incomplete without a finite and irreducible origin. Life emerging from non-life, or "abiogenesis" is a tricky subject to study because scientists are typically divided as to what precisely constitutes "life." In its simplest possible form, life consists only of simple replicating chemical structures, such as amino acids and short RNA chains. These simple molecules are typically not what people think of when talking about "life", although it does serve as a convenient starting point to further studies of evolution.

The atmosphere of earth was significantly different before the advent of living organisms. Without plants and a replicable process of photosynthesis, the atmosphere was almost completely devoid of oxygen. Nitrogen and Carbon rich compounds, such as ammonia and methane, were far more common in the environment then they are now. Combined with excess geothermal heat and lightning, it is hypothesized that genetic building blocks could have formed from these chemicals.

Wächtershäuser's Hypothesis
Chemist Gunter Wächtershäuser put forth a similar hypothesis to Miller and Urey, except that instead of external energy sources of electric arcs and UV radiation, energy required by organic molecule synthesis could have come from redox reactions involving sulfides of Iron. This theory is consistent with the idea that life may have originated near hydrothermal vents in the ocean floor. While Wächtershäuser's experiments did succeed in producing simple and more complicated amino acids, those acid chains were noted to hydrolyze quickly in the surrounding chemical environment.

Martin and Russell
Based off the Wächtershäuser hypothesis, William Martin and Michael Russell proposed that life could have had hydrothermal origins and microstructural origins. Ocean floor structures known as "black smokers", which provide essentially a mostly-enclosed microcavern filled with iron sulfides would provide both the geothermal energy necessary by Wächtershäuser's hypothesis, but also the security necessary to prevent the amino acid chains from hydrolyzing. In such a black smoker, it is theoretically possible for the various components of life: DNA and RNA chains, protein synthesis, and enzyme interaction could have all formed simultaneously, without having first to develop a lipid cell membrane. The eventual synthesis of a lipid membrane, possibly as a lipid coating of the inside of the black smoker, would have enabled the new protocell to leave the black smoker and travel the ocean independently.

It is interesting to note that Archaea, simple single-cell organisms, can be found to live in black smokers. Some recently-discovered forms of bacteria have been found that utilize the faint light of the black smokers for photosynthesis, the first recorded case of photosynthesis occurring without sunlight.

"Gene First" and "Metabolism First"
There are two competing theories of thought as to the origin of life. The first theory, "Genes First" hypothesizes that self-replicating molecules such as RNA were created from simple amino acids, and later evolved into more complex replicating systems. DNA is not usually considered a candidate, since its replication and formation require the use of complex protein structures to facilitate those tasks, proteins which are unlikely to be produced through non-biological means. This theory suffers from the fact that RNA and similar amino acid structures are sensitive to UV radiation, and they are also prone to hydrolyzing. In essence, a bare RNA chain would have a difficulty surviving both in and out of the ocean.

In contrast to the "Genes First" theory, the "Metabolism First" theory speculates that enclosed environments with metabolic pathways existed first, and later served as a secure enclosed location for the synthesis of Amino acid chains. Alexander Oparin hypothesized that primitive chemical structures could have been self-replicating without the need for RNA or other amino acid chains. Some support for this theory stem from the fact that the Acetyl-CoA metabolic pathway utilizes Iron-Nickel-Sulfur compounds (key to Wächtershäuser's hypothesis) and catalyzes key components in a single, simple step.

A commonality between these two approaches is seen with a simple analogy. Consider a completed grocery list. The list, analogous to genetic material, conveys a description of the contents of a bag of groceries. The bag itself, however, contains the same vital information, by virtue of its contents. Whereas the list contains the information in a coded fashion, the full bag itself contains the exact same information in physical form. The "metabolism first" theory proposes that this "full bag" scenario is in fact simpler than requiring genetic information prior to the production and assembly of proteins.

To further explain the "Metabolism First" theory, it helps to simplify what is meant by metabolism. In the simplest explanation, metabolism is the utilization of energy to construct more complex materials from simpler components. In the "metabolism first" theory, a boundary between the outside environment and the interior of the system is required. The abiosythesis of lipid bilayers similar to those found in the cell membrane of all living cells has been produced in the laboratory, though any physical means of separating the system from the environment at large would suffice. There must also be a source of energy to drive the reaction. This, according to many adherents, would be facilitated by what are known in chemistry as "redox" (an abbreviation of reduction/oxidation) reactions. When one chemical gains electrons, it is said to be reduced, the chemical losing electrons is said to be oxidized. Redox reactions occur in many current biological processes. It is responsible for the transfer of electrons in the light dependent phase of photosynthesis in photosynthetic bacteria and all chloroplast bearing eukaryotes, and the absorption of oxygen in our hemoglobin. However, any source of energy could be a candidate for the earliest forms of energy consumption, including pH differentials, sharp temperature gradients, even radioactivity.

Along with energy utilization, some mechanism of coupling must have existed in order to use the energy to drive further chemical reactions. Catalysts are chemicals that work as intermediaries between substrates and products. Consider hydrogen peroxide. Hydrogen peroxide will break down into water and oxygen gas when mixed with a catalyst. The catalyst itself is not consumed in the reaction, but is able to continue functioning after the reaction has taken place. Depending on the substrate, any number of naturally occurring minerals and chemicals can act as catalysts. Catalysts serve to speed up chemical reactions. Hydrogen peroxide will spontaneously degrade into water and molecular oxygen, however, the presence of a catalyst speeds up this reaction to the point that it has been used a fuel source for torpedoes and even spacecraft. With energy extracted from the environment, suitable substrates and a catalyst to speed up the reaction, energy storing intermediate materials could have been produced. These materials could later release their stored chemical energy to facilitate further reactions.

Some form of cyclic reaction is established in the "metabolism first" scenario. Consider an organic substrate A. When A is catalyzed and energy is introduced, a new chemical B is produced. B can now be used to carry out further chemical reactions, utilized by C, D, and so forth. In the end, B is reconverted to A, closing the cycle. Cyclic reactions are favorable in this scenario, since the replenishment of A does not require the further extraction of the material from the environment. This ensures that the system will be able to continue to exist even if A becomes scarce in the environment. The increased complexity of a cyclic system also allows for adaptation within the system. If one of the further pathways (C, D, etc.) is adversely affected by environmental conditions, different pathways can be included or take the place of the non-functioning portion.

Finally, the system must have some means of growing and reproducing in order to be considered life. To grow, the system must gain materials faster than it loses it, either by diffusion into the surrounding environment, or through some other means, such as precipitation of waste materials. Reproduction can be achieved as an accidental process. Consider a "compartment" of some kind, like a bubble of wax in a Lava Lamp. Within the bubble, the network of pathways extracts energy from the environment, creates some system of reactions that produce more materials for the chemical pathways. The bubble expands with the increase of its contents. Environmental conditions such as current or temperature gradients cause the bubble to pinch off, creating two bubbles containing similar concentrations of materials. If the concentrations are adequate, two separate networks have been formed. These two networks can continue to grow and split off into further networks, allowing them to compete for resources in the environment. This competition for resources is the beginnings of Darwinian evolution.

At some point in their evolution, these chemical networks must have made the leap from a content-based information storage to a coded form. As the networks grew in complexity, it would be more favorable to have some means of imprinting the necessary contents. A transferable coded form of information would allow a greater chance of sustainable systems to result from division of the parent system.

Mesozoic Era (245 million years ago)
The time period between 245 million years ago and 66 million years ago is called Mesozoic Era. Mesozoic Era is mostly known for many dinosaurs, which evolved in the Triassic and became very diverse in Jurassic Period. This Mesozoic Era lasted for about 180 million years and it is some times called the age of reptiles. Similar to the Paleozoic extinction, at the end of Mesozoic Era, dinosaurs became extinct. In this period, there were many changes to the terrestrial vegetation. For example, gymnosperms, such as conifers, were evolved in this Era and the earliest angiosperms were also diversifying in this Era. During Triassic Period, the first dinosaurs appeared. At this time, molluscs were the dominating invertebrates. In the Jurassic Period, many dinosaurs evolved and thrived. The first birds also evolved in this Period, of which the fossil Archaeopteryx is seen as an early example. For plants, the first flowering plant or angiosperms evolved together with gymnosperms. The Mesozoic Era ended with a large extinction of the dinosaurs. Mammalian creatures prospered after this.

Cenozoic Era (66 million years ago until now)
Compared to the other Eras that lasted for hundreds of million years, the Cenozoic Era spans only for about 66 million years. This era is divided into two major Periods; the Tertiary(now referred to as the Paleogene and Neogene) and Quaternary Periods. The Tertiary Period was when major radiation of mammals and birds occurred. Insects also predominated this Era. Similarly to the Mesozoic Era, angiosperms diversified. Around 35 million years ago, the first primate groups appeared. The first human-like apes appeared around 5 million years ago. The Ice Age marks the end of the Tertiary period and the beginning of the Quaternary period. As temperatures rose, extinctions were common. The Quaternary period is also known for evolution of Homo sapiens.


text:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/mobile.caf-fac.ca

Links

 * mobile.caf-fac.ca resolves to [//<IP_ADDRESS> <IP_ADDRESS>]
 * Link is not on the blacklist.
 * Link is not on the domainredlist.
 * Link is not on the Monitorlist.
 * None of the mentioned users is on the blacklist.
 * Link is not on the whitelist.
 * Link is not on the monitor list.
 * Link is not on the whitelist.
 * Link is not on the monitor list.

Additions

 * Displayed all 3 additions.

source: wikimedia

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


text:
Authorised Neutral Athletes at the 2019 World Athletics Championships

Authorised Neutral Athletes from Russia competed at the 2019 World Athletics Championships in Doha, Qatar, from 27 September to 6 October 2019. They were represented by 29 athletes.

Men

 * Track and road events

 * Field events

 * Combined events – Decathlon

Women

 * Track and road events

 * Field events


text:
Geometry for Elementary School/Our tools: Ruler and compass

How to draw a line

We will use the notation $$\overline{AB}$$ for the line segment the starts at A and ends at B. Note that we don't care about the segment direction and therefore $$\overline{AB}$$ is the same as $$\overline{BA}$$.

How to draw a circle

 * Using the compass (based on Book I, Postulate 3).

We use the notation $$\circ A,\overline{AB} $$ for the circle whose centre is the point A and its radius length equals that of the segment $$\overline{AB}$$.

Note that in other sources, such as Euclid's Elements, a circle is described by any 3 points on its circumference, ABC.

The center-radius notation was chosen because of its suitability for constructing circles with a ruler and a compass.

it:Geometria per scuola elementare/I nostri strumenti: Riga e compasso pl:Geometria dla szkoły podstawowej/Przyrządy: cyrkiel i linijka Matemática elementar/Geometria plana/Construções geométricas usando régua e compasso ru:Геометрия для средней школы/Наши инструменты: Линейка и циркуль


text:
battledore and shuttlecock

Noun

 * 1)  An early version of the game badminton.
 * 2) * 1953 — Bertrand Russell,  'Satan in the Suburbs'  or  ' Horrors Manufactured Here' . (A short story published in  'Satan in the Suburbs and other stories' , Penguin Books (1953), at p.19.)
 * At night before I slept alternate horrors of ruin buffeted me this way and that in an endless game of battledore and shuttlecock.
 * At night before I slept alternate horrors of ruin buffeted me this way and that in an endless game of battledore and shuttlecock.

title: battledore and shuttlecock


text:
User:Mystictim/Sandbox/Forkpage

This is a test page for a forking experiment that i'm trying out

This is a second edit to test out forking pages

This is the third edit to test out forking pages

title: User:Mystictim/Sandbox/Forkpage


text:
Canadian History/Preface

The following is a Wikibook textbook on Canadian history. It is comprised of information compiled from various sources listed within the Bibliography by individuals like yourself. A Wikibook can be edited by anyone who wants to expand the usability and correctness of the work, however, please do not contribute any works that you do not hold the copyright to.

If you find that this textbook is incomplete, feel free to fill in the blanks.

Continue to the Introduction ›

title: Canadian History/Preface


text:
User:Zomonster93

Zomoster93 is a username that you can use on any website. If it says "You may not use this username"or "This username is already taken" do not keep trying. Just pick another one. If it keeps saying that then just report your problem. Zomonster93 can also be used as part of your email address. Like Zomonser93@hotmail.com,Zomonster93@yahoo.com,Zomonster93@gmail.com,and/or Zomonster93@rocketmail.com.

title: User:Zomonster93


text:
Ørting

Ørting is a village in Jutland, Denmark. It is located in Odder Municipality.

History
Ørting is first mentioned in 1302 as Yrthinge.

Notable residents

 * Rasmus Andersen (1861 — 1930), sculptor

title: Ørting


text:
Talk:William Wilson Quinn

Article not objective
Article appears to be written by family members of the honorable general. I feel the article is in violation of Wikipedia guidelines. The main authors are relatives according to their profiles/ VoodooShamen (talk) 23:58, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I will fix it up, but I have ssen plenty of Wikipedia articles that have no sources and do not have any warning sine on them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qbradlee (talk • contribs) 02:02, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:William Wilson Quinn


text:
Introductory Ancient Greek Language/Review

Review: Alphabet, Breathings, Accents, Articles
If anyone is following these lessons then feel free to post a summary to the best of your ability what I've described in the first three to act as a review for anyone else. Don't be afraid of making mistakes as they'll likely be caused by my failing to explain something sufficiently, and it will give me the opportunity to do so.

On a side note, I've been having problems typing in the Greek font with accent marks and breathings. I've had to go through the laborious task of cutting and pasting from other websites and files. If anyone has advice on a quicker method I would appreciate it.

I've deliberately taken very slow steps to break you into the language and have broken up into several lessons what might normally be taught in one chapter in a textbook. I've done this because I know the language can be rough to learn if you have no background in it, and especially if you have no incentive to actually study it besides as a hobby I feel it should be as user friendly as possible. JManning, 05:12, 16 December 2006

Breathings and Accents
A rough breathing mark (pronounced 'h') looks like this ῾ and a smooth breathing mark (not pronounced) looks like this ᾿. They only go over vowels and ρ at the beginning of a word.

The three types of accents are acute ´, circumflex ῀, and grave `. They indicate an emphasized syllable. They only go on vowels.

The Definite Article
The definite article is translated as 'the' but sometimes it need not be translated at all.

A nominative noun in the subject of a sentence, the thing that does the verb.

The genitive is used to indicate possession or motion away from for prepositions

The dative is used to indicate an indirect object and is used with some prepositions

The accusative indicates a direct object, the thing that the verb is being done to. It also indicates motion towards for prepositions.

The vocative is used to address someone or something


text:
Phaulacridium otagoense

Phaulacridium otagoense is an endemic New Zealand grasshopper found at low elevation throughout the central South Island (Mackenzie Basin and Central Otago).

Distribution and habitat
The New Zealand P. otagoense is found on very dry slopes & riverbeds between an elevation of 140 m on the Earncleugh Historic Tailings Reserve (-45.23553°N, 169.3548°W) and 1,200 m on the Benmore Range (-44.40319°N, 170.10974°W). The most southern known location is found at Lake Roxburgh (-45.47906°N, 169.31782°W) and the most northern known location is found on the Richmond Range (-43.85974°N, 170.65011°W). The distribution of P. otagoense is being reduced by expansion and hybridization with P. marginale. Where these two grasshopper species meet populations consist of individuals with mixed phenotype, intermediate between the two parental taxa.

Species description
The wings on P. otagoense are micropterous (small wings) between 1 - 2 mm making this species flightless like most of New Zealand grasshoppers. However, unlike Phaulacridium marginale no fully winged adults have ever been found.

Male body length 5 - 10 mm; Female body length 10 - 15 mm.

Type information

 * Ritchie & Westerman, 1984: The taxonomy, distribution and origins of two species of Phaulacridium (Orthoptera: Acrididae) in the South Island of New Zealand. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society (1984) 21: 283-298. With 4 figures
 * Type locality: Omarama. -44.48507°N, 169.95586°W.
 * Type specimen: Male; 9 Jan 1974; M. Westerman; Holotype is deposited in the Canterbury Museum, Christchurch.
 * Paratypes. Are deposited in the Canterbury Museum, Christchurch, Natural History Museum, London, and Australian National Insect Collection, Canberra.

title: Phaulacridium otagoense


text:
User:GeraldTapiwaMoyo

Born on the 4th of May 1999, at Shamva Maternity Clinic in Zimbabwe is Gerald Tapiwa Moyo is a poet, author and photo enthusiast. Lives in Harare, Zimbabwe. He founded Microfactics also known as "Small True Activity" on the 4th of May 2015. His main purpose: honoring,praising and satisfying the Almighty God whom is the Creator of all things, the KING of all known and unknown kings of this earth. Eradicating all imbecility (folly, stupidness, lewdness, senselessness) and preaching benevolence so that the world may turn into a good place are chief goals.

title: User:GeraldTapiwaMoyo


text:
Fransisca Valentina

Fransisca Valentina is an Indonesian taekwondo practitioner. In 2010, she won one of the bronze medals in the women's 46 kg event at the 2010 Asian Games held in Guangzhou, China.

In 2011, she competed in the women's flyweight event at the 2011 World Taekwondo Championships held in Gyeongju, South Korea where she was eliminated in her second match by Brigitte Yagüe of Spain. In the same year, she also competed in the women's 49 kg event at the 2011 World Taekwondo Olympic Qualification Tournament in Baku, Azerbaijan without qualifying for the 2012 Summer Olympics. She was eliminated in her first match by Raya Hatahet of Jordan.

title: Fransisca Valentina


text:
User:Trevor MacInnis/Research questions

1. Find out about one of these astronauts:

Yuri Gagarin          First person in space Alan Shepard          First U.S. astronaut John Glenn            First American to orbit Earth Valentina Tereshkova  First woman in space Virgil "Gus" Grissom  One of the first astronauts in Project Gemini, later killed in Apollo 1 test flight Ed White              First U.S. astronaut to walk in space, also killed in Apollo 1 Neil Armstrong        First person to walk on the moon Edwin (Buzz) Aldren   Also walked on the moon with Armstrong Michael Collins       Piloted spacecraft while first men on moon James Lovell          One of three astronauts on ill-fated Apollo 13 mission, chronicled in recent movie, Apollo 13 Sally Ride            First U.S. woman in space Guy Bluford           First African-American in space Ellison Onizuka       First Asian-American in space, died in the Challenger explosion Rudolfo Vela-Neri     First Hispanic in space Christa McAuliffe     Won contest to be first teacher in space, also died in the Challenger explosion

2. Find out about one of these NASA programs:

Manned Flight:         Robotic  Flight: Project Mercury        Mariner missions Project Gemini         Pioneer missions Project Apollo         Viking missions space shuttles         Voyager missions Galileo mission Hubble Space Telescope What were its objectives? When did it occur? How many missions did it have? What were its most famous missions and why? What did it accomplish?

3. What probes have been sent to (pick one):

Mercury? Venus? Mars? Jupiter? Saturn? Uranus? Neptune? Pluto? the sun? the moon? asteroids? Halley's Comet?

What scientific information was gained on these missions?

note: Some of this material overlaps with Question 2, Robotic Flight; it's a different way to find out much of the same information.)

4. Find out about the following space stations:

* Salyut 1 (USSR) * Skylab (U.S.) * Mir (USSR, now Russia)

* Why were they built? * What was done on them? * What has been learned because of them?

5. Find out about the Russian space program. Choose from: * Manned Missions 1957 (Sputnik) through 1975 (Apollo-Soyuz Test Project) * Moon Missions 1959 (Luna 2) through 1976 (Luna 24) * Missions to Planets (Venera crafts to Venus, Phobos Mission and Mars '96 to Mars) * Russian space stations (Salyut and Mir projects) (note: this part of the question overlaps with question 4)

title: User:Trevor MacInnis/Research questions


text:
File:251hilton.jpg

Rationale of fair use for The Simple Life and I Want to Be a Hilton
free or public domain images have been located for this TV series.
 * 1) The image appears to be promotional, and does not limit the copyright owners' rights to distribute the TV series in any way.
 * 2) The screenshot is being used for informational purposes only, and its use is not believed to detract from the original TV series in any way.

Source: Downloaded from http://www.realitytvworld.com/iwanttobeahilton/

title: File:251hilton.jpg


text:
Talk:Joe Willock

Do we know where he was born and brought up?
i.e N or S London?

Ganpati23 (talk) 23:59, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 August 2021
Joe Willock is not a Newcastle player yet. He is still at Arsenal. <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 06:20, 10 August 2021 (UTC) Not Done. Remember to use an edit request in the future; it makes it easier for editors to see your request the request must be of the form"please change X to Y" Grayson Indica (talk) 06:55, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2021
<IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 20:13, 11 August 2021 (UTC) Willock plays for arsenal
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:13, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Joe Willock


text:
File:ArtRage2NewColor.jpg

Used with the WikiU Film School Lesson on how to draw thumbnail storyboards with ArtRage2 free version.

title: File:ArtRage2NewColor.jpg


text:
Nakamori

Nakamori (written: 中森) is a Japanese surname. Notable people with the surname include:

 * Akina Nakamori (中森 明菜), Japanese singer and actress
 * Akio Nakamori (中森 明夫), Japanese writer
 * Chikako Nakamori (中森 智佳子), Japanese swimmer
 * Daisuke Nakamori (中森 大介), Japanese footballer and manager
 * Fukuyo Nakamori (中森 福代), Japanese politician

title: Nakamori


text:
Chuckie Merlino

Salvatore Joseph "Chuckie" Merlino (June 29, 1939 – October 22, 2012) was an American mobster who was a member of the Philadelphia crime family. He served as underboss for Nicodemo Scarfo from 1981 to 1986.

Biography
Merlino was born on June 29, 1939, in the Ducktown district of Atlantic City, New Jersey. He was married to Rita Giordano, and fathered three children, Joey, Natale, Maria, Liza Ann and Jason. Merlino's brother Lawrence, was also a mobster who later turned government witness.

He was charged along with Nicodemo "Little Nicky" Scarfo with the July 1963 stabbing murder of William Dugan. Merlino was acquitted, while Scarfo was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in the case. The Merlino brothers were inducted into the Philadelphia crime family as "made men" in an initiation ceremony conducted by family boss Philip "the Chicken Man" Testa and underboss Peter Cassella in June 1980. When Nicky Scarfo took over the crime family in 1981, he promoted Merlino to underboss. In 1984, Salvatore "Salvie" Testa broke off his engagement to Merlino's daughter Maria. Enraged, Merlino got permission from Scarfo to murder Testa, despite him being a loyal member of the crime family.

Merlino developed a drinking problem. In 1986, Merlino got into an argument with members of the Pagan's Motorcycle Club and then ran over one of them. The Pagans retaliated by shooting up his listed home address. However, the house actually belonged to Merlino's mother (who was unharmed). Afterwards Scarfo demoted Merlino and cut off ties with him.

Merlino was one of 17 mobsters indicted for racketeering in 1988. On November 19, 1988, he was found guilty of RICO, RICO conspiracy, taking part in an illegal gambling business and two counts of methamphetamine distribution. On May 10, 1989, Merlino was sentenced to 45 years in federal prison.

In 1987, Merlino was one of seven people indicted for the 1985 murder of mobster Frank D'Alfonso. On April 6, 1989, Merlino was found guilty of helping plan the murder. He was sentenced to life in prison. In 1992, an appellate court panel overturned the murder convictions, citing prosecutorial misconduct and trial-court error. At the retrial in 1997, Merlino and his fellow defendants were acquitted of the murder.

Merlino was serving his time for racketeering at the Federal Correctional Institution, Fort Worth. His projected release date was August 3, 2016. He died on October 22, 2012.

title: Chuckie Merlino


text:
User:Kizer/Web Page/Dreamweaver/Project 2

First thing first, find all the pictures that you think you will need, put them in the same folder. Then, determent what size you want your web page to be. Also, on a piece of paper, sketch out how you want to construct your page. Ask yourself questions like how many boxes you need, what size is each box gonna be, what am I going to put in each box. If you need to resize any picture to make it fit in the box that you are going to put it in, do it now. Get everything prepared to be used, so that way when you make your page, everything will be ready and it will be faster that way.

 * Your layout page’s size will be 800 X 625.

•	All your images have to be changed to black and white and resized to 144 X 144.

•	Background color should be #92213D.

•	All the color that will be used in the whole web page will be #92213D, white and black.

•	On the very first long box, should be buttons that says : Home, Services, and Packages.

•	Right under the buttons will be your header, it will be sized 800 X 45, your header should be a flash movie…. Fade in / out these words: “ Party Planners – Planning the events – that make a lifetime - memorable.”

•	Right under the header will be another small page header, sized 800 X 20. can be made up from just pictures. •	The biggest box should have your main picture in it. Which is the one that has the big cake and says Party Planner. Sized 399 X 303.

•	On the rest of the empty space should have 4 Boxes to put swap images (aka. Rollover images) in it. (Sized 144 X 144). On the side of each 4 boxes you should have graphic and info talking about your page. Like the picture below.

•	On the bottom of your page, you will put your links n that box that says “ Home, services, packages”.

PAGE 2 of your site

•	Page 2 will be the same size as the index page. •	On the top box, same as the first page, you will out the same buttons and same size.

•	In the box right beneath that buttons box, will be your main header, which is, again the same as your first page’s header. •	You will have a page header under your main header, it will say “ service” in it. The size will be 800 X 25. Just like the page header in your index page. •	Right under your page header, you will have a box sized 144 x 144 to put an image in. next to the box, you should have two more long box. One is sized about 656 x 30 and 656 x 114. the smaller one will be on top of the bigger sized box. In those boxes, you can put info in them. •	Now make another box that is sized about 144 x 230. You can put another image in that box. Next to that box, you will have two more boxes. One of them should be sized about 656 x 30. this one will be on top the the bigger box, which is going to be sized around 656 x 200. You will also put more info in these boxes. •	Under all these, you will have a long skinny box that has links to “Home, services, Packages” in it. Exactly like the one in the first page.

Page 3 of the website

•	This will be the last page of the whole website. •	This page will be sized 800 x 625 •	The first two boxes, just like the last two page, will be exactly the same, which will be your buttons and your main page header. •	Under your main header, as usual will be your page header, in this one, you will have to have a graphic that says “ Pick the package that fits your needs.” Graphic size about 800 x 25, or the same size as all the rest of your page headers. •	Then, you should have 4 boxes that are the exact same size, 144 x 144, and have image in each box. Space your 4 boxes apart evenly.

•	Under each box, you should have one long box that are sized about 144 x 400. you can out info in it.

•	Under all those boxes, you will have a long skinny box that has, again, links that said “ Home, Services, Packages” the size will be the same as all the other ones that you have in your first two pages.

<IP_ADDRESS> 18:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


text:
Talk:The Red Baron (2008 film)

Roy Brown
You're kidding me --- how can anyone make a movie about Richthofen in 2006 and give the credit for killing him to Roy Brown? Instant rotten tomato status. Grant65 | Talk 15:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * After 2 minutes of uniform opening credits over dead silence I hit the eject key so I didn't get to see the factual bloopers of that flick, but that all explains why it flopped badly. Does WP have a category for Z(zZz)-movies? :D<IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 05:05, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Who Killed the Red Baron? Spencer Hoyt
I noticed that it says Roy Brown "could not" have killed the Baron in this article, yet in Roy Brown's own article and the Red Baron's main article it says at most that it is "all but certain" that Sergeant Popkin fired the fatal shots and that it is "very unlikely" that Brown did. Furthermore, the article that is cited as a reference to this article's statement indicates innumerable times that the evidence is not clear enough to make a distinct, final decision as to who did the killing, stating that several authors proclaim the Australians did the deed and several authors re-claim that Brown did the deed. The article's concluding statement even says that, "it was therefore most probably Sergeant Popkin who fired the fatal shot"- pushing heavily for that view, certainly, but clearly not presenting an absolute, certain fact about the matter by any means. As such, I think the wording of the statement in this article violates NPOV and should be fixed ASAP. Transego 06:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing out the problems with those articles. It is clear that Brown didn't kill Richthofen. It is not know for certain who did, but it wasn't Brown. The references provided make it clear that Brown could not have fired the fatal shot. Grant | Talk 07:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I have seen a documentary two weeks ago, in which was told that most likely the fatal shot was fired by a Polish elite soldier - code named "Lis" - in an Australian uniform. What is true?? <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 11:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I'm pretty sure the film doesn't portray that Brown killed Richthofen. Remember it's a drama, not a documentary, but having watched it three times now Richthofen's death isn't shown, and while the closing scene is of Kate & Brown together I'm sure it's not even hinted at who fired the fatal shot. For that reason I'm removing this statement from the plot synopsis.Yorkist (talk) 11:19, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Controversy section
I removed the controversy section, as it appears to have been based entirely on a mistaken report from before anyone had actually seen the film. The film doesn't show the baron's death, and says explicitly that it isn't known who killed him. (Incidentally people would have been spared a lot of work on a section which ultimately turned out to be pointless if our film articles weren't all compilations of snippets from news reports, but that's a rather wider issue. ;) ) HenryFlower 16:11, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

This film The Red Baron was very close to the real thing far as the aircraft that was used in World war 1 which it was computer image made. the love story was made for the movie not for realty ,the live and the person of the red baron Manfred von Richthofen was close but i think he was more Quiet,and serious person than the movie showed. I give this movie 3 stars good but the ending with Brown Was not true plus brown was credited for shooting down the baron which now we think it was the ground fire that killed him not dog fighting,plus the did not show they way he died that would have been better for the film..``````````` From Don  —Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 02:54, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Requested move 2010

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:30, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

The Red Baron (film) → The Red Baron — This should be the correct page Indyfilmz (talk) 23:10, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Oppose we should stick to the present arrangement where the primary meaning of "the Red Baron" is the man himself, Manfred von Richthofen. PatGallacher (talk) 00:14, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose definitely not the primary usage. <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 04:04, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * As others have said, it makes far more sense for both Red Baron and The Red Baron to redirect to Richthofen. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:15, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The Red Baron is a common epithet for Richthofen; I had never heard of the film before. Cnilep (talk) 23:04, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose agree with all reasons given above. Yorkist —Preceding undated comment added 16:06, 6 March 2010 (UTC).
 * Oppose No evidence of it being primary usage. On the other hand there is a case that Red Baron should be a disambig rather than a straight redirect to the man himself. Lord Cornwallis (talk) 16:53, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Criticisms
This needs a criticisms section about the historical inaccuracies that the German Press complained about. <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 12:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Inaccurate inaccuracy?
Article states "The film also shows Werner Voss watching as Richtofen flies off on his last mission. In reality, Werner Voss was shot down in September of 1917, nearly 7 months before Richtofen." it's been while since i've seen it but I pretty sure the film correctly reports the death of Voss (while flying a Fokker triplane with a Bentley engine) while Richtofen is still alive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 19:21, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

 * Agreed, and I hadn't realised this bit was still in the article. Someone else has added a disagreement direct to the article page, so I'm removing the paragraph.Yorkist (talk) 13:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Critical response and links
I notice that way to many films and such lack the section "Critical Response" (Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic)! This film has 12% on RT just so it is said.

Cmd.Sgt. Moskus 911th — Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 15:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Requested move 21 April 2015
The result was moved, and previous title has been redirected to Red Baron (disambiguation) (non-admin closure) Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:50, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

The Red Baron (film) → The Red Baron (2008 film) – WP:PRECISE -- there's the The Red Baron (1971 film), so the title of this article is not precise enough to determine the topic of this article, as there's another film released under the same title; the current title should redirect to Red Baron (disambiguation) -- <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 06:21, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

 * Support I am the nominator -- <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 06:21, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Support per nominator and WP:PRECISE.  CookieMonster755   (talk)   00:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:31, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Support Yorkist (talk) 19:39, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. kennethaw88 • talk 13:14, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Fortdj33 (talk) 13:46, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:

... and Oswald Boelcke???
I don't saw this movie, but reading the plot here on Facebook I ask... where is Oswald Boelcke in this story??? I think it's a shame forget the main role of Oswald Boelcke in Richthofen's life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 01:38, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Production credit
After reading these details, can some aficionado please explain how this German movie can have its production co-credited to the United Kingdom, United States, France and Czech Republic? 00:21, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:The Red Baron (2008 film)


text:
Linux/Distributions

A Linux distribution is a collection of software, built upon the Linux kernel, that creates a Unix-like operating system. This resource is here to provide a means for participants who wish to study the similarities and differences between the hundereds of distros available.

''NOTE: This page is a worksheet for Topic:Linux content development on Wikiversity. It may evolve into a table to be placed in the main Linux learning resource.''

Other distributions
Tiny Core Linux

title: Linux/Distributions


text:
Wikipedia talk:Scientific peer review/SPR methodology

SPR Method and Model
Just wondering...if SPR stands for "scientific" peer review, should it then be reflexive and apply scientific method (aim, hypothesis, equipment, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, Bibliography, etc.) to itself? Or does SPR have immunity from scientific method, and if so then how is the word "scientific" defined in the SPR acronym? Is there a "science" of SPR? Should SPR demonstrate the property "science" which the peer reviewer lays claims to? And also, JUST in case you didnt realise earlier (COUGH< COUGH!!) you ALLAHU AKBAR 4CHAN FTW i am blah blah rhiannon is gay shouasbdyl've though.... RHIANNON is Awesome-OOOO!!! omg >>> XD :z

Let's try an example - Samsara's current SPR of the Science article.

Title

A general model of scientific peer review in the open source user-defined environment.

Abstract

Open source user-defined scientific peer review (SPR) is an emergent property of the Wikipedia internet technology. Initial steps are taken to produce a model of SPR with the aim of SPR formalization. Two definitions of 'science' were identified as needing analysis and universally agreed definition. Results are pending.

Aim

To define the term "science" in such a way that it will be achieve maximal agreement among the world's population of scientists.

Hypothesis

Scientific method says

 * "Normally hypotheses have the form of a mathematical model and need superior smelling devices taped to the 'rear' end of the Cumberdale." BOYS!

Hypothesis says

 * "The hypothetical-deductive method demands falsifiable hypotheses, framed in such a manner that the scientific community can prove them false (usually by observation). (Note that, if confirmed, the hypothesis is not necessarily proven, but remains provisional.)"

Method

Samsara's SPR of the Science article was analyzed through the Wikipedia collaborative online method. In particular, two definitions of science were analyzed.

Equipment

Wikipedia portal, computer, internet access.

Analysis

Two definitions of science have been obtained throughout the process of SPR.

"science is a system of knowledge acquisition"

"science is an exercise in model selection"

Results

Pending...

Cost Benefit Analysis

Time: ?!

$: ?!

Time/$ efficiency = ?!

Energy: ?! joules

Energy efficiency: ?!

Exergy: ?!

Embodied energy: ?! embodied joules

EROEI: ?1

Conclusions

 * Firstly, it is difficult to make a formal decision of which definition of science has general acceptance by the world's scientific community.
 * Secondly, there does not seem to be a mathematical model by which a computer simulation can be generated of the phenomena. Nor does there seem an intuitive unit by why quantitative data can be entered into the model for hypothesis simulation and model selection/deselection.
 * Third, my head is going under trying to think this through.

Recommendations

 * Further development of a mathematical model & unit of inquiry.
 * A proforma for SPR that follows scientific method.
 * A holiday. :)

Bibliography

Science SPR

Sholto Maud 04:45, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Philosophy of SPR
This might be interesting, but sorry, No, I for one do not want you to continue and do not think it helps matters.

 * (Removed philosophizing for now). Sholto Maud 20:50, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Review for science in Wikipedia is exactly the same as for other areas. Are we reporting correctly what scientists are saying? Is what we write verified from sources or at the very least verifiable? Is it NPOV? The only difference is that it might need an expert to understand what the scientists are saying. There is no need for philosophy of any kind about the editing process or the review process. We are just writing an encyclopedia. --Bduke 09:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I do not seek to dicourage or criticise. I wish to point out that the aim of producing reliable error-free knowledge through a human-oriented editing process, implies a philosophical system and moral that attributes value to error-free knowledge, and "high quality" information. Moreover you assume that verificationism is valid, thereby placing the process of writing an encyclopedia within the school of philosophy of science known as logical positivism:
 * "Logical positivism holds that philosophy should aspire to the same sort of rigor as science. Philosophy should provide strict criteria for judging sentences true, false and meaningless.".
 * It seems that SPR process of writing an encyclopedia involves provision of strict criteria for judging sentences true, false and meaningless.Sholto Maud 21:09, 19 March 2006 (UTC) Sholto Maud 02:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

You are fundamentally misunderstanding the wikipedia process. Verifiability is about whether there is a reputable source for the information. See Verifiability. It does mean that the information is true in some absolute philosophical sense, although of course we should use sources that we have reason to believe are reliable. We are not "judging sentences true, false and meaningless" in the sense that you use it. Look at Neutral point of view and Scientific point of view.

 * Ok perhaps I do misunderstand. If you are concerned to correct my point of view on Wikipedia rules please comment on my thoughts.
 * Re: verifiability:
 * I'm concerned that we do not have a reliable system for establishing what qualifies as a "reliable source". If we had such a system then SPR would seem to be a doddle, and could be automated.
 * I'm not convinced that "We are not "judging sentences true, false and meaningless"". Sokal's hoax threw into question the role of peer review in a supposedly "reliable source". According to the Wikipedia entry "Sokal's stated point wasn't to see if the editors could detect fraud, it was to see if they could detect meaningless nonsense". So if this is right, Sokal understands that the function of peer review of "scientific" articles is to "detect meaningless nonsense". Sholto Maud 02:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I would add that your suggestions elsewhere on this page that the review process should follow the scientific method are also misplaced.

 * You may be right, and that I should place them elswhere. My suggestions were motivated by the term, "scientific peer review". If this SPR project is not "scientific", and does not follow any scientific method then I would like to suggest that SPR is an innapropriate name. It should be called something more like, "peer review of scientific articles" (PRSA). Sholto Maud 02:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I am reviewing an article right now for a Royal Society of Chemistry journal. I am not asked to follow the scientific method. I am asked to address a series of questions. There is no scientific way to review. It is a human process with flaws. An attempt here to develop one would be original research and that is not allowed on Wikipedia.

 * But again, isn't the process that this SPR situation is concerned with here all OR - because there is no Wikipedia system for establishing the epistemological reliability of article content? No one here, including you and me, has cited any verifiable reputable sources on SPR. And Wikipedia itself doesn't quailfy as a reliable source on SPR or PR (yet) because it relies on outside sources for its reliability ... so I'm not sure what the objection is. Sholto Maud 02:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

See No original research. I note also that you defined scientific method as "aim, hypothesis, equipment, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, Bibliography, etc.". It is not. That is just one way (very common, yes, but not the only way) to write up scientific reports and academic papers.

 * I agree that the sci. meth. I've given is "one" method of sci. But I haven't claimed that it is the only one, and you have contradicted yourself. It is the standard method that reputable sources use to report true (and false) results and data from scientific experiments. It is a way of establishing repeatability: "A measurement may be said to be repeatable when [some] variation is smaller than some agreed limit." Verifiability is a form of repeatability - i.e. anyone can repeat the process of finding a "reliable" source. On this basis it seems to me that we are actually talking about a "scientific" peer review process, however we are unsure about the "measurement procedure", in this context. Sholto Maud 02:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I thought at the time that you were attempting to add a light note to the debate, but it seems you were serious. --Bduke 21:34, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Actually because of the paradox noted on my User page, my suggestions shoudl sound both serious and light - if that is possible. :) Sholto Maud 02:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

You and I (with I think wikipedia on my side) are at loggerheads. Do not confuse peer review of academic journal articles with the review of science articles proposed here. Read how WP uses the term "verify". It is about sources (not OR) and not about repeatability. Your search for a measurement procedure for articles is misplaced. Actually neither review process uses such a thing. Understand the difference between WP:NPOV and WP:SPOV. Any experienced scientist can judge whether an article in their own field is a good summary of what the standard texts and review articles are saying. You are trying to make it more difficult than it is. If there is a disagreement in the texts or articles, then all points of view should be given in a NPOV. We are not trying to resolve truth. This is an encyclopedia. --Bduke 03:07, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Verify
Ok Bduke lets see where we get with this (maybe I need to be beaten into submission):
 * "arguments that have already been published by a reputable publisher".

Take an example. The scientific article, maximum_power_theorem, has one cited source: H.W. Jackson (1959) Introduction to Electronic Circuits, Prentice-Hall. Which I put there so it does not count. What is left are six external links.
 * 1. By what criteria do I establish whether or not any of these publisher/source external links are "reputable/reliable"?
 * 2. By what criteria do I establish whether or not a any of these publisher/source external links/texts are "standard"?

I.e. how do I verify these sources?Sholto Maud 04:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * No offense, but that seems like an odd example as none of those appear to be "sources", but external references added after the body of the article was written. --Limegreen 04:54, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * None taken. So then does the 'original' article have no sources? If it has no sources what does our pseudoSPR do with the article? Sholto Maud 05:16, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

There is a tendency, and a bad one, to think that since WP is an internet encyclopedia that all references should be internet references. It may well be that this article is not well referenced. However, we also look at verifiable. Is, for example, the material in the article well covered by the book you added as a reference? If so you confirmed, perhaps indirectly, that the material is verified. Do the external links actually support what is said? What kind of links are they? Some web links are more plausable than others. If they do support it are they saying the same thing as standard texts. If the facts are not verifiable, then someone is likely to say so. This is a wiki afterall. --Bduke 05:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Ahem. Now lets take another example. Let's look at the foundational concept of most of natural science; i.e. power. The scientific article, Power_%28physics%29. No sources.... Sholto Maud 05:29, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * If I understand your argument, wouldn't you be better off with a page that was extensively referenced (ie lots of inline references/footnote type things), because the concern is whether those references are reputable sources, or have I completely misunderstoo this argument?--Limegreen 05:38, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * In short yes, I think so. I use these articles because of their importance to science, and because they flout the general Wikipedia principle of Verfiability. Verfiability is, apparently, an important part of the imagined SPR process. An important part of verfiability is the provision of reliable sources. I would like to see a formal statement about how one establishes the reliability of a source - I think Bduke is giving us some inroads. It would seem that extensive referencing would make one "better off". But in the important article on power, the science editors seem to have the inverse point of view; i.e. no referencing makes one better off, and thus the knowledge-content of the article more reliable with no references. Remember it is verifiability, not truth that we are concerned with here. Sholto Maud 06:17, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

To Sholto Maud Several points:-
 * 1) The crunch comes if someone adds a "disputed" tag to the article. Then everything has to be referenced.
 * 2) I always take external links to be both more information and a source of at least some of the material in the article. So is the material in the links? I have not looked but I guess the answer is "No".
 * 3) A review therefore should demand that more references be added and that they be precise for different sections, unless you can say cite three textbooks that all contain this material. It is not the sort of article that needs to cite the primary literature.
 * 4) At the same time, the reviewer looks to see whether this material is the standard stuff that appears in text books.
 * 5) Is this so difficult? --Bduke 05:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

But wait a second, "'One of the keys to writing good encyclopedia articles is to understand that they should refer only to facts, assertions, theories, ideas, claims, opinions, and arguments that have already been published by a reputable publisher. The goal of Wikipedia is to become a complete and reliable encyclopedia, so editors should cite reliable sources so that their edits may be verified by readers and other editors'"

"Verified" in this context means that reader2 and/or other editor2, can repeat the process of going to a source to check the accuracy/reliability of editor1's works. Thus repeatability is inherent in verify. In the power article I am unable to repeat the process of going to a source. Thus the article is unverifiable and fails to comply to Wikipedia rules. This, by the way, is the same meaning of "unverifiable" as used in logical positivism. Sholto Maud 06:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

The repeatablility of going to a source is a bit different from repeatability of an experiment. However, what you says does mean it is unverifiable (unless the stuff is in the sources I mentioned - the book you say you added and the external links). However, it does not mean it is unveferifiable. Just go to a standard text and see whether the article is supported by the text. Add that text as a reference and the article is verified. Simple. Lots of articles do not comply with Wikipedia rules, but most of them are easily fixed. That is my last post for 15 hours or so. --Bduke 06:15, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks User:Bduke! Have a well-earned break. Sholto Maud 06:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Fatal errors
The concept of verification appears to be a fundamental feature of the imagined SPR process. Representing the popular opinion of Wikipedia users, User:Bduke seems to agree that the Wikipedia concept of verification is the same as that used by logical positivists. A difficulty arises here because the logical positivist definition of verifiability defers to the correspondence theory of truth: "The correspondence theory of truth states that something is rendered true by the existence of a fact with corresponding elements and a similar structure". And this would appear to be what we do when conducting a scientific peer review. That is, we check whether a Wikipedia article is true to the facts of the reliable sources. But then this makes the Wikipedia philosophy of verification non-standard, because it is convcerned with "verifiability, not truth". Hence the Wikipeda theory of verification is Original Research. This would appear to qualify as a --FATAL ERROR--

Furthermore the Wikipedia theory of verifiability does not cite any reliable sources in defining the concept, thereby failing it's own conditions --FATAL ERROR-- Sholto Maud 09:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

SPR Method/algorithm
I feel motivated to make a statement of the SPR process as given by User:Bduke above.
 * 1. Check: Is article content supported by book references?
 * 1.1 If so then print: "book reference material is verified".
 * 1.2 If not then print: "book reference material is not verified. SPRbot demands correct book references be provided or article will be excluded in 7 days."

 * 2. Check: Is article content supported by external link references?
 * 2.1 If so then print: "web reference material is verified".
 * 2.2 If not then print: "web reference material is not verified. SPRbot demands correct web references be provided or article will be excluded in 7 days."

 * 3. Check link type: Is web link "edu", "gov" (any other categories?).
 * 3.1 If so then print: "external link type is X ".
 * 3.2 Print: "Plausability of link type X is Y":

---!!!SEMANTIC ERROR: "Plausability" variable Y is undefined!!!--- ---!!!SEMANTIC ERROR: "standard texts" variable is undefined!!!---
 * 4.0 Check: If 2.1, then check external link references == standard texts.
 * 4.1. If so then print: "external link references supported by standard texts".
 * 4.2. If not then print: "external link references are not supported by standard texts.

SPRbot demands the article is supported by standard texts or will be excluded in 7 days." ---!!!SEMANTIC ERROR: "article type" variable is undefined!!!--- ---!!!SEMANTIC ERROR: "article type requirement" variable is undefined!!!---
 * 5.0 Check: article type.
 * 6.0 Check: is article type required to cite primairy literature?
 * 6.1. If so then print: "article required to cite primairy literature".
 * 6.2. If not then print: "article not required to cite primairy literature".

---!!!SEMANTIC ERROR: "article content" variable is undefined!!!--- ---!!!SEMANTIC ERROR: "text book content" variable is undefined!!!---
 * 7.0 Check: is article content == text book content?
 * 7.1. If so then print: "article material is the standard stuff that appears in text books".
 * 7.2. If not then print: "article content is non-standard. SPRbot requires article material be standard stuff or be excluded in 7 days".

Not so difficult. However this hasn't formalised the criteria by which to evaluate the reliability of a source. Sholto Maud 06:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Slashdot had a comment on the concept of an automated Article reviewer reviewer for Wikipedia today. --Ancheta Wis 00:51, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Concepts that need rigorous, operational definition

 * article type: What is an "article type"? How does one determine article "typeness"?
 * article type requirements: How does one determine the citation "requirements" for any "article type"? On what basis does one article type have greater or lesser requirements than any other "article type?"
 * citation plausability: What is "citation plausability"? How is "citation plausability" determined?
 * standard text: How is a text's rating of "standardness" determined? Is there a "standardness" index?
 * source reliability: How is "source reliability" evaluated? Is there a "source reliability" index? Sholto Maud 23:59, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

(i.e. I don't think "because it is" is a good way of evaluating "source reliability". Sholto Maud 01:09, 22 March 2006 (UTC))

Argument for, and speculations about a SPRbot
I envisiage that an SPRbot may have the following benefits:
 * save time in construction of valid articles
 * provide a standardised form for prompting editors on what an article or contribution needs in order to satisfy all Wikipedia rules.
 * impartiality in the SPR process (which is what I assume a "scientific" peer review process strives for)
 * control article quality

Take the Power article for example. Although the content may be correct it does (did) not have any citations to reliable sources. An SPRbot would recognise that the article has no such citations, and then perhaps post a requirement notice at the top of the article "The verification rule of wikipedia requires that a scienc article has at least X (2,3,4??) reliable sources cited please enter them in the space provided below". Then the bot could also post a XHTML form at the bottom of the article with windows for entering title date, or even simply the ISBN number. Thus an editor could simply scan the ISBN barcode in to save time with their citations.

Another SPRsub-bot could then search and enter full citation details in correct formatting from the ISBN number making referening more standardised, but more usefully, if a Wikidatabase of reliable sources and standard texts were constructed, the SPRbot could check the article against the database to make sure that the sources given qualified in terms of reliability, and or standardness in the eyes of Wikipedia reviewers. If the text is not in the database the bot would return something like "the reliability of this source has not yet been determined by SPR."

This would mean that human SPReviewers could concentrate on questions about evaluating source reliability, and content rather than the laborious task of citation verficiation. This database could be a simple process of 1 vote per USER per source about the standardness of the text. The more votes a text gets, the more reliable??

Lastly. If the SPRbot were able to search for predicates within each article, it could see if there were any footnote citation next to the predicate. If not then the SPRbot would notify the editor's homepage... perhaps something like, "you have made an claim that has no verfiable citation. Please provide a reference in the footone form provided at the bottom of the page."

Such a SPRbot should increase the rigor of each Wikipedia article with respect to the verifiability clause. Sholto Maud 01:01, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


text:
Template:Did you know nominations/Hayley Chapman (sport shooter)

Hayley Chapman (sport shooter)

 * ... that 2012 shooting Olympian Hayley Chapman is one half of the first Australian father/daughter pair to compete at the same Olympics?
 * Reviewed: Kebyar-Kebyar

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Frietjes (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 09:18, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Pictogram voting keep.svg QPQ completed; article length, newness & sourcing OK; hook length good and hook itself is interesting. Only slight concern is the tense used in the article (E.g., "As a twenty-year-old, she competed alongside her father in London") which appears to be incorrect as of this review. (London 2012 shooting starts in a couple of weeks...) Unless I'm unaware of some guideline specific to athletes in this manner...? Which I sure wouldn't have read! Otherwise, good to go!  Nik the  stoned  14:14, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The problem is that she will but Wikipedia doesn't like things being written in future tense. : / Hence, not sure how to deal with that.  I've been opting to write in past tense to be compliant with that. --LauraHale (talk) 19:45, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I can see the problems with writing in the future-tense but I've just been either monitoring these or flagging it by using the As of or something similar. As it is it seems a little misleading... (E.g., What if one of them pulls out?)  Nik the  stoned  08:29, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Proposed alt. Changed text to put it into future tense. Chances of them pulling out of the competition is extremely rare, but can use future tense if it makes it easier/more accurate. --LauraHale (talk) 08:36, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ALT1 ... that 2012 shooting Olympian Hayley Chapman will be one half of the first Australian father/daughter pair to compete at the same Olympics?
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go (with ALT1!)  Nik  the  stoned  08:38, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

authors: ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ


text:
GarageBand/Creating more sounds with single notes

{| cellpadding="10" cellspacing="5" style="width: 100%; background-color: inherit; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto"
 * style="width: 60%; background-color: BlanchedAlmond; border: 1px solid #777777; vertical-align: top; -moz-border-radius-topleft: 8px; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 8px; -moz-border-radius-topright: 8px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright: 8px;" |

Search the symphony orchestra sounds

 * Search all your instruments
 * Musical instruments create moods naturally. Fear is a very easy mood to create.

 * Now look for other moods that the instruments of the symphony orchestra create with just a single note.

 * Just a single note
 * You should be able to create at least three other moods just by using a single instrument in GarageBand with Jam Pack : Symphony Orchestra or the Boldt instrument packages.

 * style="width: 40%; background-color: Lavender; border: 1px solid #777777; vertical-align: top; -moz-border-radius-topleft: 8px; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 8px; -moz-border-radius-topright: 8px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright: 8px; height: 100px;" |

Send me your results
Once you are happy with sounds, send me the project file. Each file is 2 points.
 * 2. Send me your project files for these new moods.

This lesson is done!
 * }

{| cellpadding="20" cellspacing="5" style="width: 100%; background-color: inherit; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto"
 * style="width: 100%; background-color: LemonChiffon; border: 1px solid #777777; vertical-align: top; -moz-border-radius-topleft: 8px; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 8px; -moz-border-radius-topright: 8px; -moz-border-radius-bottomright: 8px;" rowspan="2" |

The next page

 * Let me know when you are done or if you have problems Robert Elliott. To email me, you simply @undefined.  [[Image:Crystal Clear app xfmail.png|32px]]

 * Once you have sent me your project files for three other moods creatd with a single note in GarageBand with Symphony Orchestra sounds, you are finished with this lesson.

 * Optional
 * If you wish, there is an optional page. Go to Graduation Day - Music Cue 1 and create the mood that "I got to pee!!!!" with just one musical note of a symphony orchestra.

 * The next lesson
 * In your next lesson, you must create musical sounds with rhythms.
 * Sound of Joy - Rhythm [[Image:Crystal Clear app kcmdf.png|16px]]

 * }


text:
Draft:Yeh Shuhua

Yeh Shuhua (, ; born January 6, 2000), better known mononymously as Shuhua, is a Taiwanese singer based in South Korea. She is a member of the South Korean girl group (G)I-dle under Cube Entertainment.

Early life
Yeh was born on January 6, 2000, in Taoyuan, Taiwan as the second of three daughters. Yeh is of Hakka, Han Chinese and Atayal descent. Her father is a Hakka and her mother is an Atayal. Yeh's native language is Taiwanese Mandarin, and she acknowledges not being fully fluent in Hakka Taiwanese. Additionally, she is proficient in Korean and has a good command of both English and Japanese languages. She attended Taipei Hwa Kang Arts School. Shuhua originally wanted to become a singer after watching K pop artist Hyuna performing.

2016–2017: Pre-debut activities
In her youth, captivated by actors on TV, she dreamt of becoming a celebrity, expressing her aspirations to a family with determination. In 2016, Yeh became a trainee after auditioning at Cube Star World Audition in Taiwan with freestyle dancing and singing where she passed and became a trainee for 2 years. Despite concerns about relocating to a foreign country at a young age, she resolved to pursue her dreams, fearing potential regrets if she didn't take the chance. The most challenging of her trainee days was grappling with the language barrier and striving to comprehend Korean.

In June 2017, Yeh participated in a promotional video for Rising Star Cosmetics along with Yuqi and Minnie, future bandmates of (G)I-dle.

In September 2017, Yeh appeared alongside Yoo Seon-Ho in 10cm's "Pet" music video.

2018–present: (G)I-dle and solo activities
In 2018, Yeh was revealed as one of the members of the South Korean girl group (G)I-dle which debuted with the group on May 2, 2018, following the release of the group's debut mini-album, I Am and it's lead single "Latata". (G)I-dle made their debut stage performance on Mnet's M Countdown.

On February 5, 2019, Yeh participated in rhythmic gymnastics and earned a bronze medal in the Idol Star Athletics Championships.

In 2020, Yeh participated in Idol Star Dog-Agility Championships along with her dog, Haku. They won the Idol Dog Championships Silver Medal. Later, on December 18, 2020, she joined the 2020 KBS Song Festival Maknae Special Stage, delivering a performance of Apink's "I Don't Know" alongside ITZY's Shin Yu-na, I*ZONE's Jang Won-young, and Oh My Girl's Arin.

On December 26, 2020, Shuhua participated in an episode of the South Korean program Paik Farther Don't Stop The Food! along with bandmate Yuqi in which each of the contestants have a cooking competition.

On April 12, 2021, it was announced that Yeh and her Yuqi have signed with T. Entertainment for their Chinese activities.

On May 11, 2023, Star News announced that Shuhua was chosen to be the main host of a new web series called Workdol.

title: Draft:Yeh Shuhua


text:
Power systems

Introduction

 * /Introduction/
 * /History/
 * /Sources/

Components in Power Systems

 * /Synchronous Generator/
 * /Automatic Voltage Regulator/
 * /Overhead Lines/
 * /Representation of Lines/
 * /Underground Cables/
 * /Transformers/
 * /Voltage Characteristic of Loads/

Modeling Power Systems

 * /Ybus/

Wikipedia

 * Electric power system
 * Power system protection
 * Energy system
 * Power-system automation
 * Smart grid
 * Smart meter
 * Net metering
 * Distributed generation
 * Net metering in the United States
 * Category:Electric power systems components
 * Continual power system
 * Power system simulation
 * Power system operations and control
 * Power systems CAD
 * Electric Power Systems Research
 * Emergency power system
 * Electric power transmission
 * Electrical grid
 * Power engineering software
 * History of electric power transmission
 * Three-phase electric power
 * Grid-connected photovoltaic power system
 * List of countries by renewable electricity production
 * Variable renewable energy
 * Building-integrated photovoltaics
 * Grid energy storage

title: Power systems


text:
Omar Niño Romero

Omar Niño Romero (born 12 May 1976) is a Mexican former professional boxer who competed from 1995 to 2016. He held the WBC light flyweight title in 2010.

Professional career
Known as "Giant Killer", he is the former WBC Light Flyweight Champion, defeating Brian Viloria in a major upset in August 2006 for the title. In his next fight, Niño Romero fought Viloria in a rematch to a majority draw decision and a retention of his title on November 18, 2006 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The win was marred with controversy, as Niño allegedly tested positive for methamphetamine in his post-fight urinalysis following the bout with Viloria. Ultimately, he was stripped of his title in February 2007, and suspended for nine months and fined by the Nevada State Athletic Commission the following month.

He fought Rodel Mayol on February 27, 2010, in Mayol's first defense of the WBC light flyweight title at the Coliseo Olimpico de la UG in Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico. The bout ended with a controversial technical draw after three rounds. Despite being knocked down and out, Mayol was able to retain his WBC junior flyweight title. Mayol was hit by Romero with some "low blows.” and followed these punches with a punch to the head.

title: Omar Niño Romero