title
stringlengths 1
251
| section
stringlengths 0
6.12k
| text
stringlengths 0
716k
|
|---|---|---|
George F. Lawton | '''George Field Lawton''' | George Field Lawton (October 17, 1845 – July 17, 1925) was an American jurist who was a justice of the Middlesex County, Massachusetts probate court from 1894 until his death in 1925. |
George F. Lawton | Biography | Biography
Lawton was born in Lowell, Massachusetts on October 17, 1845. He served in the 6th Massachusetts Militia Regiment during the American Civil War. He graduated from Williams College in 1868 and was a schoolmaster in Lowell for five years. He was admitted to the bar in 1877 and was city solicitor of Lowell from 1880 to 1882 and 1885 to 1886. In 1886, he was appointed superintendent of Lowell Public Schools. He succeeded George H. Conley, who took a position in the Boston Public Schools. Lawton declined reappointment in 1891 to return to the practice of law.
On September 13, 1894, he was appointed to the Middlesex probate court by Governor Frederic T. Greenhalge. He presided over the Russell will case, which lasted 118 days, saw 205 witnesses called and 346 exhibits presented, and produced a stenographic record of 11,400 pages. Lawton ruled that the claimant to the Russell estate was not the missing son of Daniel Russell, but instead an imposter named James D. Ruseau. Following the decision, a crowd of around 1,000 supporters of the claimant gathered in Melrose, Massachusetts and burned an effigy of Lawton outside of the Russell home.
On July 17, 1925, Lawton drowned in Herring Pond near his country estate in Eastham, Massachusetts. He is interred in the Lawton family mausoleum in Lowell Cemetery alongside his wife, daughter, and sister-in-law. |
George F. Lawton | References | References
Category:1845 births
Category:1925 deaths
Category:19th-century Massachusetts state court judges
Category:20th-century Massachusetts state court judges
Category:Burials at Lowell Cemetery (Lowell, Massachusetts)
Category:Judges of the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court
Category:Lawyers from Lowell, Massachusetts
Category:Lowell Public Schools superintendents
Category:Union army personnel
Category:Williams College alumni |
George F. Lawton | Table of Content | '''George Field Lawton''', Biography, References |
Taherestan | Short description | Taherestan () is a village in Khanandabil-e Sharqi Rural District of the Central District in Khalkhal County, Ardabil province, Iran. |
Taherestan | Demographics | Demographics |
Taherestan | Population | Population
At the time of the 2006 National Census, the village's population was below the reporting threshold. The following census in 2011 again counted a population below the reporting threshold. The 2016 census measured the population of the village as 53 people in 18 households. |
Taherestan | See also | See also |
Taherestan | References | References
Category:Populated places in Khalkhal County |
Taherestan | Table of Content | Short description, Demographics, Population, See also, References |
Category:Mesoregion of São José do Rio Preto geography stubs | WPSS-cat | *São José do Rio Preto |
Category:Mesoregion of São José do Rio Preto geography stubs | Table of Content | WPSS-cat |
Sadiavahy Rebellion | Short description | The Sadiavahy rebellion was anti-colonial uprisings that broke out in southern and western Madagascar between 1915–1917. These revolts, though smaller than the Menalamba rebellion, expressed widespread resistance to the French colonial system, particularly its heavy taxation, forced labor policies, and suppression of dissent. |
Sadiavahy Rebellion | Background | Background
The Sadiavahy movement emerged in the Southern Madagascar (Ampanihy, Ampotaka, Ambovombe) recently conquered by the French colonists. Most tribes of the South were independent from the Hova rule and not used to taxation and forced labour.Randrianja, Solofo; Ellis, Stephen. Madagascar: A Short History. University of Chicago Press, 2009, p. 92. It was primarily composed of peasants led by regional clan chiefs such as Fanolahy, Tsirikitsy, Masikavelo, and Mahatomby.Gueunier, Noël Jacques. Histoire de Madagascar. L’Harmattan, 1994, pp. 212–213. |
Sadiavahy Rebellion | Causes | Causes
The main grievances that triggered the uprisings included:
Famine
Excessive taxes imposed by the French colonial administration
Forced labor obligations (prestations)
Arrest and repression of those who criticized colonial policiesJulien, Charles-André. Histoire de l'Afrique contemporaine. Presses Universitaires de France, 1964, p. 188.
Such conditions created deep unrest, especially in rural communities where traditional leaders were increasingly marginalized.Mutibwa, Phares. African Protest Movements. Oxford University Press, 1977, p. 67. |
Sadiavahy Rebellion | Objectives | Objectives
The rebels sought to:
Expel the French colonizers from their tribal tertitory
Abolish colonial taxes and forced laborRaison-Jourde, Françoise. Bible et pouvoir à Madagascar au XIXe siècle. Karthala, 1991, p. 246. |
Sadiavahy Rebellion | Development | Development
Initially, colonial authorities considered the rebellion to be mere banditry or xenophobic violence. However, it evolved into a more organized armed resistance, with guerrilla warfare and ambush tactics becoming common.Randrianja & Ellis, op. cit., p. 93. |
Sadiavahy Rebellion | Aftermath | Aftermath
The French responded with a harsh military crackdown. The Sadiavahy rebels were poorly equipped compared to French troops, and their resistance was quickly crushed.Mutibwa, op. cit., pp. 68–69. Rebel leaders were captured, imprisoned, sentenced to forced labor, or exiled from their home regions.Julien, op. cit., p. 190.
The suppression was particularly brutal due to the context of World War I, during which the French colonial government could not afford internal unrest while facing external threats.Raison-Jourde, op. cit., p. 247. |
Sadiavahy Rebellion | See also | See also
Menalamba rebellion
History of Madagascar
French Madagascar |
Sadiavahy Rebellion | References | References |
Sadiavahy Rebellion | Table of Content | Short description, Background, Causes, Objectives, Development, Aftermath, See also, References |
Category:Lowell Public Schools superintendents | [[Category:School superintendents in Massachusetts | Lowell
Category:Lowell, Massachusetts |
Category:Lowell Public Schools superintendents | Table of Content | [[Category:School superintendents in Massachusetts |
2025 The Citadel Bulldogs baseball team | Short description | 2025 The Citadel Bulldogs baseball team represents The Citadel in the 2025 NCAA Division I baseball season. The Bulldogs play their home games at Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park in Charleston, South Carolina. The team is be coached by Russell Triplett, in his 1st season at The Citadel.
The Bulldogs completed the regular season with a 12–9 conference record, good for third place on the SoCon. The team won 30 games for the first time since 2013. |
2025 The Citadel Bulldogs baseball team | Previous Season | Previous Season
The Bulldogs finished 21–32 overall, and 3–18 in the Southern Conference in 2024. Head coach Tony Skole was not retained after the season. |
2025 The Citadel Bulldogs baseball team | Personnel | Personnel |
2025 The Citadel Bulldogs baseball team | Roster | Roster
2025 The Citadel Bulldogs baseball coaching staff Pitchers
7 - Ben Brash - Sophomore
9 - Maddox Webb - Sophomore
10 - Conner Cummiskey - Graduate Student
13 - George Derrick Floyd - Senior
14 - Chandler Anderson - Junior
17 - Fisher Paulsen - Senior
23 - Will Holmes - Senior
24 - Oliver Wood - Junior
25 - Manning Burgess - Freshman
28 - Anthony Hausner - Junior
29 - Aryan Patel - Junior
33 - CJ Van Slooten - Junior
35 - Zane Davis - Junior
36 - Andrew Stanley - Senior
37 - Nathan Landeck - Freshman
42 - Matthew Polk - Senior
44 - Yates Bland - Junior
55 - Jack Thunberg - Senior Catchers
4 - Garrett Fulmer - Sophomore
21 - Phillips Daniels - Junior
31 - Noah Cadiz - Redshirt Sophomore
Infielders
1 - Lane Tobin - Senior
6 - Landon Kahl - Sophomore
8 - Garrett Dill - Senior
19 - Robbie Lane - Junior
20 - Travis Elliott - Graduate Student
38 - McKane Cantrell - Freshman Outfielders
2 - Thomas Rollauer - Senior
3 - Tyler Christmas - Redshirt Junior
12 - Cole Canty - Freshman
16 - Maddox Floyd - Freshman
18 - Matthew Lively - Junior
22 - Chase Loggins - Senior
30 - Rhyder Poppell - Freshman
Utility
32 - TJ Anderson - Junior |
2025 The Citadel Bulldogs baseball team | Coaches | Coaches
2025 The Citadel Bulldogs baseball coaching staff Russell Triplett – Head Coach – 1st year
David Beckley – Assistant Coach – 17th year
James Reeves – Assistant Coach (Pitching) – 1st year |
2025 The Citadel Bulldogs baseball team | Schedule | Schedule
Legend The Citadel win The Citadel loss CancellationBoldThe Citadel team member * Non-Conference game
2025 The Citadel Bulldogs Baseball Game LogRegular SeasonFebruary Date Opponent Site/Stadium Score Win Loss Save Attendance Overall Record SoCon Record Feb 14 * Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 9–1 Holmes (1–0) Schueler (0–1) Stanley (1) 457 1–0 Feb 15 * Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC L 5–8 Benko (1–0) Davis (0–1) Mastrian IV (1) 577 1–1 Feb 15 Miami (OH)* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC L 1–16 Katskee (1–0) Brash (0–1) None 577 (DH) 1–2 Feb 17 UIC* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 10–4 Webb (1–0) Gould (0–1) None 439 2–2 Feb 21 * Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC L 2–4 Fitzgerald (1–1) Stanley (0–1) Lavigueur (1) 349 2–3 Feb 22 Maine* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC L 2–6 Holt (1–1) Bland (0–1) None 521 2–4 Feb 23 Maine* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 10–3 Brash (1–1) Gifford (0–1) None 405 3–4 Feb 25 * Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 4–2 Davis (1–1) Harrell (0–1) Hausner (1) 269 4–4 Feb 28 * Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 2–0 Holmes (2–0) Shaw (1–1) Anderson (1) 835 5–4 March Date Opponent Site/Stadium Score Win Loss Save Attendance Overall Record SoCon Record Mar 1 Yale* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 2–0 Yates (1–1) Cohen (0–1) Hausner (2) 619 6–4 Mar 2 Yale* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 6–2 Stanley (1–1) Lewis (1–1) None 433 7–4 Mar 5 South Carolina* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC L 1–9 Evans Jr. (2–0) Paulsen (0–1) None 4,937 7–5 Mar 7 * Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 4–2 Holmes (3–0) Wade (1–2) Hausner (3) 507 8–5 Mar 8 Northwestern* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 5–4 Webb (2–0) Kouser (2–1) None 609 9–5 Mar 8 Northwestern* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC L 1–4 Hlibocki (1–1) Bland (1–2) Macmillan (2) 651 9–6 Mar 9 Northwestern* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC L 7–10 Fornis (1–0) Brash (1–2) Grant (1) 417 9–7 Mar 11 at Presbyterian* Presbyterian Baseball Complex • Clinton, SC W 11–3 Wood (1–0) Saint (1–1) None 235 10–7 Mar 12 * Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC L 3–13 Lewis (1–0) Brash (1–3) None 519 10–8 Mar 14 * Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 4–3 Webb (3–0) Renfroe (2–1) None 427 11–8 Mar 15 Kennesaw State* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC L 4–9 Pinson (2–0) Hausner (0–1) None 689 11–9 Mar 16 Kennesaw State* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC Canceled Mar 18 at No. 7 Clemson* Doug Kingsmore Stadium • Clemson, SC L 4–6 Dvorsky (4–0) Bland (1–3) Mahlstedt (7) 4,478 11–10 Mar 19 at No. 7 Clemson* Doug Kingsmore Stadium • Clemson, SC L 1–11 Fitzgerald (2–0) Davis (1–2) None 4,415 11–11 Mar 21 Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 6–5 Hausner (1–1) Ackerman (1–2) None 393 12–11 1–0 Mar 22 Mercer Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 8–0 Floyd (1–0) Kersey (1–2) Bland (1) 679 13–11 2–0 Mar 23 Mercer Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC L 7–9 Busse (1–0) Hausner (1–2) None 415 13–12 2–1 Mar 25 Charleston* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 4–2 Davis (2–2) Thomas (1–0) Hausner (4) 1,029 14–12 Mar 28 Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC L 3–147 Little (4–2) Stanley (1–2) None 523 14–13 2–2 Mar 29 Wofford Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC L 0–7 Condon (1–0) Floyd (1–1) None 581 14–14 2–3 Mar 30 Wofford Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 7–1 Anderson (1–0) Rasmussen (2–1) Webb (1) 555 15–14 3–3April Date Opponent Site/Stadium Score Win Loss Save Attendance Overall Record SoCon Record Apr 2 at * Winthrop Ballpark • Rock Hill, SC W 7–5 Wood (2–0) Brodt (1–3) Webb (2) 1,006 16–14 Apr 4 at * Hyames Field • Kalamazoo, MI W 7–4 Stanley (2–2) McKinstry (1–6) Van Slooten (1) 273 17–14 Apr 5 at Western Michigan* Hyames Field • Kalamazoo, MI Canceled Apr 5 at Western Michigan* Hyames Field • Kalamazoo, MI W 11–3 Floyd (2–1) Wizceb (2–5) Brash (1) 178 18–14 Apr 6 at Western Michigan* Hyames Field • Kalamazoo, MI L 0–6 Gaber (2–3) Anderson (1–1) None 121 18–15 Apr 11 at Joe Lee Griffin Stadium • Birmingham, AL L 8–9 Steckmesser (3–1) Bland (1–4) None 317 18–16 3–4 Apr 12 at Samford Joe Lee Griffin Stadium • Birmingham, AL W 4–3 Floyd (3–1) Leersson (1–2) Hausner (5) 413 19–16 4–4 Apr 13 at Samford Joe Lee Griffin Stadium • Birmingham, AL L 5–8 Blasche (5–0) Anderson (1–2) None 377 19–17 4–5 Apr 15 at South Carolina* Founders Park • Columbia, SC L 0–4 Pitzer (4–0) Cummiskey (0–1) None 7,214 19–18 Apr 16 at Charleston* CofC Baseball Stadium at Patriots Point • Mount Pleasant, SC L 2–5 Lyon (6–1) Floyd (3–2) Aiken (7) 821 19–19 Apr 22 Charleston Southern* Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 3–1 Wood (3–0) Chalfant (3–3) Webb (3) 543 20–19 Apr 25 Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 5–0 Stanley (3–2) Spiegel (0–2) Webb (4) 817 21–19 5–5 Apr 26 VMI Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 4–2 Floyd (4–2) Hawley (1–1) Bland (2) 953 22–19 6–5 Apr 27 VMI Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC W 11–8 Bland (2–4) Plummer (4–3) None 591 23–19 7–5May Date Opponent Site/Stadium Score Win Loss Save Attendance Overall Record SoCon Record May 2 at UNCG Baseball Stadium • Greensboro, NC W 8–7 Webb (4–0) Thompson Jr. (2–2) None 168 24–19 8–5 May 4 at UNC Greensboro UNCG Baseball Stadium • Greensboro, NC W 8–7 Stanley (4–2) Miller (2–5) Hausner (6) 465 25–19 9–5 May 4 at UNC Greensboro UNCG Baseball Stadium • Greensboro, NC L 3–18 Chapman (5–1) Anderson (1–3) None 465 25–20 9–6 May 6 at College of Charleston* CofC Baseball Stadium at Patriots Point • Mount Pleasant, SC L 1–14 Eggert (2–1) Bland (2–5) None || 755 || 25–21 ||
|-bgcolor=ddffdd
| May 7 || Winthrop* || Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC || W 6–3 || Hausner (2–2) || Tompkins (2–2) || Webb (5) || 231 || 26–21 ||
|-bgcolor=ffdddd
| May 9 || at || Hennon Stadium • Cullowhee, NC || L 4–11 || Revis (5–5) || Floyd (4–3) || None || 768 || 26–22 || 9–7
|-bgcolor=ffdddd
| May 10 || at Western Carolina || Hennon Stadium • Cullowhee, NC || L 2–15 || Wright (4–6) || Webb (4–1) || None || 689 || 26–23 || 9–8
|-bgcolor=ddffdd
| May 11 || at Western Carolina || Hennon Stadium • Cullowhee, NC || W 9–7 || Bland (3–5) || Langley (2–1) || None || 732 || 27–23 || 10–8
|-bgcolor=ddffdd
| May 13 || at Charleston Southern* || Buccaneer Ballpark • North Charleston, SC || W 15–8 || Wood (4–0) || Chalfant (4–4) || None || 187 || 28–23 ||
|-bgcolor=ddffdd
| May 15 || || Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC || W 7–3 || Floyd (5–3) || Fink (6–4) || None || 435 || 29–23 || 11–8
|-bgcolor=ddffdd
| May 16 || East Tennessee State || Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC || W 7–3 || Stanley (5–2) || McCarley (3–1) || None || 521 || 30–23 || 12–8
|-bgcolor=ffdddd
| May 17 || East Tennessee State || Joseph P. Riley Jr. Park • Charleston, SC || L 2–11 || Frederick (7–1) || Hausner (2–3)''' || None'' 857 30–24 12–9Post-Season Date Opponent Seed Site/Stadium Score Win Loss Save Attendance Overall Record SoConT Record May 22 (6) UNC Greensboro or (7) Wofford (3) Fluor Field at the West End • Greenville, SC May 23 TBD (3) Fluor Field at the West End • Greenville, SC |
2025 The Citadel Bulldogs baseball team | References | References |
2025 The Citadel Bulldogs baseball team | Table of Content | Short description, Previous Season, Personnel, Roster, Coaches, Schedule, References |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 477 | talk archive navigation | |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 477 | my grandfather got navy cross and navy start throw not listed | my grandfather got navy cross and navy start throw not listed
my grandfather got navy cross and nevy star probem was not on his discharge papers how ever i have documents needed back up such clame,
https://www.tracesofwar.com/persons/108110/Boshears-James-Manual-Sr.htm
also note ogianal documents posted on google cloud drive here https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1svZBNpgy2olEqR3nZJYbFNf2Ex_vRVOe?usp=drive_link
there was two people who got navy cross who was never named reason was they was working on top secreat projects,
i am his grand son also handle his estate also i have same name
james m boshears lll i ask that with this proof that u update the page thanks u 74.215.230.135 (talk) 00:35, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
You would be better off posting to talk:List of Navy Cross recipients for World War II, as that's the page for discussing edits of that article. But looking into your edits you can't just copy the text from tracesofwar, that's copyright infringement. You have to put it in your own words. That whole page needs better referencing, doesn't the US government list who has been awarded the Navy Cross? I can find his pdf but it was lasted updated in 2021 and doesn't list anyone called Boshears.
I don't think the tracesofwar site is reliable for Wikipedia's purposes, it's run by enthusiastic amateur volunteers and it's relying on your grandfather gravestone rather than any official announcement. Your Google drive link is private, so I can't access it to give an opinion. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 10:18, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
i hold the documents and photos , he not listed as two people wich got navy cross was never named do to what they did , 74.215.230.135 (talk) 00:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
so data came from me so is the copy right from it 74.215.230.135 (talk) 00:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
You would need some sort of source for that claim for it to be included in wikipedia. Right now, its just you as a random editor making a statement of fact with some photos. Maybe it is true, but WP:ABOUTSELF may be relevant here. Wikipedia works off of WP:VERIFIABILITY. Ramos1990 (talk) 05:31, 15 May 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 477 | ''Prophet and Teacher'' by William R. Herzog | Prophet and Teacher by William R. Herzog
Concerns the lead of :Christ myth theory. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:37, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
"Common sources of bias include political, financial, religious, philosophical, or other beliefs. Although a source may be biased, it may be reliable in the specific context. When dealing with a potentially biased source, editors should consider whether the source meets the normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control, a reputation for fact-checking, and the level of independence from the topic the source is covering."
Herzog, William R. (2005), Prophet and Teacher: An Introduction to the Historical Jesus, Westminster John Knox Press
This book is firstly used in an incorrect way in the article, see reference number 3. The book doesn't actually says what the wiki article says that is says, something which I have brought up on the talk page but it is not corrected. Secondly it is a book published by a religious publisher, therefore heavily biased. I have suggested other sources such as Brittanica, but it seems that some editors prefer this book, even though it is not accurately referenced even. 58.99.101.165 (talk) 15:10, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
William R. Herzog II was formerly Sallie Knowles Crozer Professor of New Testament Interpretation, seems to make him a reputable source, as to verifiability, a different issue. Slatersteven (talk) 15:15, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
So he's not a historian. This is bout historical Jesus. And this wasn't written in a journal or similar. 58.99.101.165 (talk) 15:17, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Err, he is an expert of religion, Jesus is a religious figure. Slatersteven (talk) 15:20, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Are we going to ignore that it is not representative of whole mainstream historical scholarship? Are we going to ignore what he actually writes in the text to? 58.99.101.165 (talk) 15:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
The first few pages of the boom are available as a Google preview, it certainly seems to back up the idea that the historical Jesus existed in the first century CE and was crucified. As an academic in the specification field he is writing on he would appear to be a reliable source. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 15:28, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
This is what the wiki says:
"The mainstream scholarly consensus, developed in the three quests for the historical Jesus, holds that there was a historical Jesus of Nazareth who lived in 1st-century-AD Roman Judea"
In the book he doesn't mention anything about a "mainstream scholarly consensus," which is claimed on wiki. So it's incorrect. 58.99.101.165 (talk) 15:33, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a summary of sources not simply requoting them, and this is not the only source for that statement. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 15:38, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
But the only similarity to what is written is that he make claims about a historical Jesus but it cannot be referenced to make this generalised statement. 58.99.101.165 (talk) 15:40, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Why have you opened a second thread about the same exact topic? Simonm223 (talk) 15:45, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Which is the second thread? 58.99.101.165 (talk) 15:46, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Same article different source, I tried to rename this section to avoid this confusion but was reverted. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 15:48, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Multiple references can be used to back up a claim, with different references supporting different parts of the claim. This isn't the only reference for that statement, it is there in partial support of it. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 15:47, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
To be fair, this is a separate source. Slatersteven (talk) 15:48, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
It's also a different claim, the section headers have caused confusion. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 15:48, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
The first one is about whether the Christian myth theory is fringe, this one is about whether the Christian myth theory is theainstream view. These appear as different claims in the article. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 15:51, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
But the source is incorrectly referenced, please show support for the claims on wiki. 58.99.101.165 (talk) 15:49, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Not an RS issue. Slatersteven (talk) 15:50, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
IP needs to drop the stick. Simonm223 (talk) 15:55, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
It's not. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 15:56, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
The show where it says what is claimed. 58.99.101.165 (talk) 16:03, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
No, as I have said that is not required. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 16:10, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Misrepresenting sources is not correct. It should be required to be correct. 58.99.101.165 (talk) 16:12, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
It's not being misrepresented, it's one reference that is being used to support a larger claim. This is a standard practice on Wikipedia. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 16:20, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
But it doesn't make sense in relation to the source. It's wrong. Explain why this source is used in this way. The justification? 58.99.101.165 (talk) 16:29, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
There were three quests. Bssic knowledge, explained in the article. Jesus existed, three references, plus a long list of quotes in the notes. Why is it so long? Because some people think they know better than each and every expert, and don't notice when they WP:DONTGETIT. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:36, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
There are other sources that says Jesus existed. This book also says Jesus existed, although he doesn't make the claims that are made in the wiki article. It should be better adjusted.
I don't think I know better than experts, but it should be attributed correctly don't you think?
"Jesus existed, three references,"
This is not the dispute.
This is what wiki says now:
"The mainstream scholarly consensus, developed in the three quests for the historical Jesus, holds that there was a historical Jesus"
It just doesn't have support in the book. He doesn't mention mainstream consensus at all. Please make a narrow page reference then because 6 pages for that small sentence seems excessive. 58.99.101.165 (talk) 16:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
I understand it doesn't make sense to you but maybe if many different people, including people uninvolved in the article, are saying your wrong then maybe you are. WP:1AM has some useful thoughts non this situation.Of course maybe you're right and everyone else is wrong, but that won't help in this situation. Wikipedia is built on consenus amongst editors, and sometimes no matter how right you are that consensus will be against you. In that case all you can do is move on to a different subject. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 17:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
I agree with the OP, I don't think this is a proper reference to use, so there's not a consensus 2A02:AA1:1040:582C:9559:A103:5A92:D692 (talk) 05:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
I don’t think the source is reliable 114.46.147.190 (talk) 07:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
I don't think the source is reliable either, so there seems to be many who doesn't think it's reliable. 110.77.200.120 (talk) 07:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
This should probably be closed. It's clear the consensus is against the OP, but also, this noticeboard is for determining the reliability of sources. This appears to have been brought as an issue of whether the source supports the claim it is being cited for. That has nothing to do with reliability of the source, and is instead suited to discussion at the article's talk page regarding whether the source is appropriate for the claim is supposed to be supporting. Those are entirely different things. ButlerBlog (talk) 22:47, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
I agree with the OP, I don't think that it's a good reference to use in this context. So there's not a consensus. 2A02:AA1:1040:582C:9559:A103:5A92:D692 (talk) 05:47, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
The source should be deleted, it is biased since it's published by a religious publisher and more academic sources should be used 114.46.147.190 (talk) 06:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
I am a third party that have been following the debate and I've checked the source myself, it doesn't say what is claimed so it should be changed or deleted, otherwise there is a heavy bias 110.77.200.120 (talk) 07:22, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
Note as well that single-purpose IP's are not going to swing the issue. Second, a call to snow close. Slatersteven (talk) 09:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 477 | Primary source usage | Primary source usage
Can primary sources be used to represent an organisation's stated position? As I understand it, WP:PRIMARY allows the use of a primary source for "straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge". WP:ABOUTSELF states that self-published sources "may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities". I relied on these policies to present an organization's position with proper attribution in the section titled "Positions". I cited an official statement from SEGM to reflect their attributed opinion (not a statement of fact) that they believe puberty blockers should be limited to clinical trial settings: . This was removed citing WP:PRIMARY: But how else can an organization's official position be cited, if not from its own statements or documents? Since this is not the first time this happens, I would like to ask a third opinion on the matter. JonJ937 (talk) 09:35, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
This seems to be an appropriate use of a primary source. However, this relates to a topic that seems to be in flux… positions change frequently. Thus, the source might be outdated (you should check whether SEGM has any issued subsequent statements that might indicate a change in their position). Blueboar (talk) 10:08, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the comment. I checked their website and couldn't find any recent updates to their position. They normally state their stance with wording like 'It is SEGM's position that...'", or include a separate section titled "SEGM Position". JonJ937 (talk) 16:49, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Even for an organization's official position, it is usually best to have not just the primary source but also high-quality secondary sources to put it into the right context. The question is what is WP:DUE and whether it is reasonable to include (even attributed) medical misinformation in spite of WP:MEDRS. Our article on Andrew Wakefield does not go out and report claims from his pro-viruses activism as "opinion" either. —Kusma (talk) 12:46, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Seconding this. I believe that citations aren't just for verifying whether something is true, they're for verifying why it's relevant. If it's not covered in secondary sources, that calls its overall relevance into doubt. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 04:53, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
WP:ABOUTSELF details can come from primary sources, but remember that is a limited exception. As Kusma said we wouldn't rely on Wakefield for certain ABOUTSELF details because they would likely be self-serving or exceptional claims. SEGM is a contentious organisation, so relying on only it's self statements alone would likely be a NPOV issue. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 15:58, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. I'm working on editing the "Positions" section, which is meant to reflect the official views of the organization. I think the most accurate way to do that is by using the organization’s own statements, rather than relying on how others interpret them. In my understanding, WP:ABOUTSELF permits to use self-published sources to reflect the person's or entity's own opinions. SEGM’s official position is that the U.S. should limit the use of puberty blockers to clinical trials until there’s more evidence about their effectiveness and long-term safety. I linked their statement above. This is a widely debated topic, and medical organizations around the world have different views. However, there is a general international trend toward taking a more cautious approach, with the WHO acknowledging that "the evidence base for children and adolescents is limited and variable regarding the longer-term outcomes of gender affirming care for children and adolescents". Of course, if broader context on the ongoing international debate over the use of puberty blockers is needed, we can include that as well, along with the organization's official position. I have no issues with that. I just believe that the organization's own views need to be accurately reflected. JonJ937 (talk) 16:43, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
I think the problem you have is is simply not true. In all cases secondary sources are preferred. The article might include how an organisation describes itself, but if there are reliable secondary sources that also discuss the topic then they can't be ignored. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 17:48, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
With SEGM, absolutely not, per WP:FRINGE:
WP:FRIND:
WP:PROFRINGE:
Per WP:ABOUTSELF, the material must be and . This fails on both counts, not even including the fact RSN's last discussion on SEGM found
The quote you added was FRINGE nonsense put into wikivoice:
This puts in wikivoice, cited to SEGM with no RS, that there are "substantial uncertainties"
This puts in wikivoice, cited to SEGM with no RS, that treatments are "invasive and irreversible"
This puts in wikivoice, cited to SEGM with no RS, that they call for a "transparent informed consent process"
According to them, this means that informed consent because as they say earlier - which is a piece of misinformation known as the desistance myth
Every single WP:MEDORG in the US thinks this is bullshit
Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 17:22, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
What about MEDORGS outside the US? Springee (talk) 18:44, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
We are not discussing whether an opinion is fringe or mainstream; we are discussing whether it is appropriate to cite an organisation's stated position with proper attribution. I believe Wikipedia’s guidelines allow this, regardless of whether we personally agree with the opinion. Regarding the "substantial uncertainties," this debate is indeed not limited to the United States. I cited the WHO, the organization that usually reflects global medical consensus, which states that the evidence for gender-affirming care in children is variable and limited. The European Academy of Paediatrics has stated: "The fundamental question of whether biomedical treatments (including hormone therapy) for gender dysphoria are effective remains contested". Even in the United States, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons notes that "the existing evidence base is viewed as low quality/low certainty". The NHS in the UK also acknowledges uncertainty (the same word as SEGM uses) about the risks of long-term cross-sex hormone treatment and lists possible permanent complications. These are not fringe opinions, In fact, WP:MEDRS advises us to pay attention to positions of both the WHO and NHS. I could provide many more sources, but it is clear that SEGM’s position on puberty blockers aligns with a broader shift in international consensus. It has long been argued that the U.S. is becoming a global outlier in not taking a more cautious approach to the medical treatment of gender dysphoria: JonJ937 (talk) 07:44, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
The opinions of SEGM have already found to be fringe on this the WP:FRINGE/N board previously. We don't need to establish that again as it is established that they are a fringe group who publish fringe opinions. As such WP:FRIND most certainly does apply as per YFNS. Simonm223 (talk) 18:36, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
There was a strong consensus on the fringe board that opposition to puberty blockers is not a fringe position. So SEGM's opposition to them is not fringe either. This discussion is not about fringe theories, particularly since there is consensus that this specific view is not fringe, but about the use of primary sources to represent an organization’s stated views. JonJ937 (talk) 09:14, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
I think ActivelyDisinterested is correct here. I asked a similar question years back with respect to the NRA. The NRA's views on things like red flag laws shouldn't be viewed as factual views on the topic. However, they are the view of a gun rights organization and thus, within the NRA article, their aboutself stance on the topic may be quite relevant. Certainly if a claim from a source conflicts with the SEGM's stated position that should be noted. In this case, if a RS says, SEGM's stance is X but the SEGM's official position is !X then aboutself can be used. What shouldn't be done is if no RSs bring up a position SEGM has stated but we quote their position anyway. Springee (talk) 18:44, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Yes, this includes cases such as the WP:ADL when they describe something as antisemitic. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 05:12, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
As I mentioned above, SEGM's position that puberty blockers should be limited to clinical trials is consistent with the recommendations of international and national health authorities and medical organizations, particularly in the UK, Finland, Sweden, and others. So, can we include a sentence like "SEGM believes that puberty blockers should be limited to clinical trials", linking to their official statement? Also, since there is an ongoing international debate about the safety and effectiveness of puberty blockers, should we include an overview of that debate in the article? If so, what would be the best format? Should we follow SEGM’s position with the views of major international and U.S. medical organizations and point to the divergence in opinions? JonJ937 (talk) 08:04, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
The main concerns here about due weight and npov are not being satisfied by your belief that SEGM's views are similar to that of some national medorgs. I understand that you really want to show off SEGM's views, however if secondary rs don't write about them, why should we.LunaHasArrived (talk) 09:28, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
It is not my belief. This is what Undark Magazine writes:
On key issues, the organization’s views were increasingly aligned with those of several major European medical institutions, which were beginning to restrict access to puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.
SEGM advocates for similar restrictions. How does WP:WEIGHT prevent including an organization's own views in a section titled "Positions" in the article about that organization? The article exists to describe the organization's activities and viewpoints. If we leave out its main position, how is that neutral? JonJ937 (talk) 10:28, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Because it's a crackpot view per WP:FRINGE. Simonm223 (talk) 18:38, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
No, it is not, because the position held by health authorities in many countries cannot be considered fringe. This specific position was discussed on the fringe board (see above). Secondary sources also mention SEGM's position that puberty blockers and hormones should be limited until more evidence on their benefits becomes available. Undark Magazine:
So there are both primary and secondary sources on SEGM's position about puberty blockers. JonJ937 (talk) 09:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Again you are trying to re-litigate the recent RfC at WP:FRINGE/N that established that SEGM is a fringe advocacy group mostly known for spreading transphobic misinformation. That some authorities have fallen for their nonsense doesn't change that they're fringe.Simonm223 (talk) 15:35, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
People raise important points about WP:DUE that often militate against the use of primary sources as you describe. That said, there are definitely situations where those concerns are satisfied and it is appropriate to cite an advocacy organisation (that would not be RS in general) about its own opinion. In those situations, SEGM is reliable for its own position. The due weight debate can happen on the article talk page or WP:NPOV/N if needed. Samuelshraga (talk) 12:05, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
More sources.
Also --JonJ937 (talk) 08:54, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
I think it is appropriate to cite an organization's own statements when presenting its positions, in accordance with WP:ABOUTSELF. Some context about the global debate on the use of puberty blockers could also be provided. Quite frankly, it is a highly contested topic with no clear scientific consensus, and Wikipedia should aim to represent the views of all sides objectively and in a balanced way. Sean Waltz O'Connell (talk) 10:03, 15 May 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 477 | The Schlock Pit | The Schlock Pit
Hey, just wanted to get a look at this one. Long story short, The Schlock Pit is a genre website that tends to focus on Z grade horror films and the like. I saw it pop up while looking for sources for a somewhat obscure film and I wanted to see if this could be usable.
The site is run by two people, Matty Budrewicz and Dave Wain, who have been writing for the site for about 10 years. The two seem to be pretty well thought of in the horror genre - they were brought in to curate a box set for Arrow Films and were highlighted in this article by Slant Magazine and this one by Dread Central. It looks like Arrow has also brought them on for audio commentary for some of their movies - so far I can see that they did commentaries for Arrow's releases of The Wolf of Wall Street and Critters. They were also brought on for commentary on this boxset of I Know What You Did Last Summer by 88 Films. They have also been cited as a RS in books by the University of Zaragoza Press (by :es:Héctor Caño Díaz) and McFarland (by Joseph Maddrey). I think there are more, as their name comes up in relation to "It Came From the Video Aisle!: Inside Charles Band’s Full Moon Entertainment Studio" through Schiffer Publishing, but as it has no snippet view I can't tell what relation they have to the book. I've got a copy somewhere so I'll try and find it to see. Other than that, they seem to have run a video store that got covered by Fangoria.
I think this would establish the two (and more specifically their site) as a RS on Wikipedia. Arrow is a very well thought of company and given the lineup at their film festival FrightFest (it's the largest and most well known horror themed film festival in the UK), they can pick and choose as they please for commentary. That they would choose these two is pretty telling.
This passing as a RS probably won't save the article in question, but it would be extremely useful for some of the more obscure films out there, especially as the two tend to go into some depth with their reviews and commentary. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
Per WP:BLOGS: Budrewicz and Wain are recognized as subject-matter experts by other reliable publications; and they have contributed material to other projects because they are considered to be subject-matter experts. That meets the standard, IMO. ButlerBlog (talk) 15:10, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
I'd concur. This sounds like an expert SPS. I'm also familiar with the outlet through my work as an art critic and would personally support the idea this blog is made by people who know their stuff.Simonm223 (talk) 15:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
Sweet - I figured it'd be usable, but always good to get some consensus just to CYA. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:55, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
Just remember the limits on expert SPS means don't use them for any BLP statements. Simonm223 (talk) 15:55, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
Not a worry on my end - I'm going to use them more for themes and review sections in articles. But still good reminder to have, since of course some of those films are sometimes the focus of controversy. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 477 | Table of Content | talk archive navigation, my grandfather got navy cross and navy start throw not listed, ''Prophet and Teacher'' by William R. Herzog, Primary source usage, The Schlock Pit |
File:Sincerely Yours... (Robert Goulet album).jpg | Summary | Summary
|
File:Sincerely Yours... (Robert Goulet album).jpg | Licensing | Licensing |
File:Sincerely Yours... (Robert Goulet album).jpg | Table of Content | Summary, Licensing |
Draft:2025 New York City Marathon | Draft article | thumb|View of the 2024 New York City Marathon from an apartment balcony overlooking 81st St. and 1st Ave. in Manhattan
The 2025 New York City Marathon will be the 54rd edition of the annual marathon race in New York City that took place on Sunday, . The platinum-level race was the last of six World Marathon Majors events of the 2025 calendar year. |
Draft:2025 New York City Marathon | Background | Background
For the 2025 event... |
Draft:2025 New York City Marathon | Results | Results |
Draft:2025 New York City Marathon | External links | External links
Official website |
Draft:2025 New York City Marathon | Table of Content | Draft article, Background, Results, External links |
File:Kesha - Delusional (2025 single cover).png | ffd | |
File:Kesha - Delusional (2025 single cover).png | Summary | Summary |
File:Kesha - Delusional (2025 single cover).png | Licensing | Licensing |
File:Kesha - Delusional (2025 single cover).png | Table of Content | ffd, Summary, Licensing |
Jinling Arsenal | one source | thumb|Nanjing Jinling Arsenal 1865 built by Li Hongzhang
The Jinling Arsenal (simplified Chinese: 金陵兵工厂) was a military arsenal located in Nanjing, established in 1865. It existed throughout the Late Qing to the People's Republic. It was also referred to as the Nanjing Arsenal. |
Jinling Arsenal | History | History
See more: Changan Automobile |
Jinling Arsenal | Establishment | Establishment
Li Hongzhang initially established the Shanghai Foreign Gun Bureau as a military supply factory. In 1863, it was renamed the Suzhou Arsenal. By 1865, Li Hongzhang, now acting Governor-General of Liangjiang and with his office relocated to Nanjing from Suzhou, moved the Suzhou Arsenal to Nanjing. He then actively planned its expansion into what would become the Jinling Machine Manufacturing Bureau, which was, at the time, China's largest arsenal. Groundbreaking for the arsenal began on October 30, 1865, and construction was completed by August 1866, built on the former site of Xitian Temple. According to the Continued Compilation of Jiangning Prefecture Gazetteers (续纂江宁府志), the facility was extensive, including "a twelve-room official residence for commissioners; over eighty rooms for machinery and boilers, and more than fifty corridors." The architectural style of the buildings was modeled after Western designs. Following its completion, the arsenal began producing firearms, ammunition, and other military supplies, primarily to equip Li Hongzhang's Huai Army. The arsenal was making Hotchkiss, Maxim, and Nordenfeld guns by 1892. |
Jinling Arsenal | Republican Era | Republican Era
After the establishment of the Republic of China, the function of military production continued here. In 1928, Chenggan Li served as the director of the factory. With the aim of “saving the nation by industry”, he began to reorganize the factory. In June 1929, it was renamed the Jinling Arsenal (金陵兵工厂). Its factory emblem featured a swastika, a symbol associated with Buddhism. From 1934 to 1937, two large-scale land expropriation projects were carried out on the western and northeastern sides of Majia Mountain, which brought a new look to the factory. The factory area increased from 76,000 square meters to 224,700 square meters, and the newly built and renovated building area was about 50,000 square meters. The new construction included mortar factories, tool factories, heavy machine gun factories, equipment factories, iron-foundry factories, gas mask factories, iron factories, wood factories, power plants, material laboratories and office buildings of the factory headquarters, as well as staff dormitories, hospitals, residences, children’s schools, etc., which were fully functional. Moreover, its spatial layout had already demonstrated a clear idea of functional zoning, which separated the production space, office and living spaces.
In July 1937, the Jinling Arsenal was relocated westward to Chongqing. Its original site was occupied by invading Japanese forces until Japan's surrender. In September 1946, it was renamed the 60th Arsenal (六○兵工厂) and during this period, attempts were made to replicate the American M1 Garand rifle.
By the end of 1948, the arsenal moved to Kaohsiung, leaving behind its factory buildings and old equipment. In April 1949, it was taken over by the Chinese People's Liberation Army. |
Jinling Arsenal | References | References |
Jinling Arsenal | External links | External links
https://chiculture.org.hk/en/photo-story/133
Category:Nanjing
Category:Chinese military history articles by quality
Category:Arsenals
Category:Firearm manufacturers of China |
Jinling Arsenal | Table of Content | one source, History, Establishment, Republican Era, References, External links |
Ministry of Energy and Mines (Ontario) | # | redirect Ministry of Energy (Ontario) |
Ministry of Energy and Mines (Ontario) | Table of Content | # |
Category:Lawyers from Lowell, Massachusetts | [[Category:Massachusetts lawyers by populated place | Lowell
Category:People from Lowell, Massachusetts, by occupation |
Category:Lawyers from Lowell, Massachusetts | Table of Content | [[Category:Massachusetts lawyers by populated place |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Short description | The team tournament at the 2011 Asian Junior Badminton Championships took place from 30 June to 3 July 2012 at Gimcheon Indoor Stadium in Gimcheon, South Korea. A total of 15 countries competed in this event. Mongolia withdrew from the tournament. |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Group stage | Group stage |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Group A | Group A |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Malaysia vs Hong Kong | Malaysia vs Hong Kong |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | India vs Hong Kong | India vs Hong Kong |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Malaysia vs India | Malaysia vs India |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Group B | Group B |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Chinese Taipei vs Mongolia | Chinese Taipei vs Mongolia |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Indonesia vs Singapore | Indonesia vs Singapore |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Chinese Taipei vs Singapore | Chinese Taipei vs Singapore |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Indonesia vs Mongolia | Indonesia vs Mongolia |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Chinese Taipei vs Indonesia | Chinese Taipei vs Indonesia |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Singapore vs Mongolia | Singapore vs Mongolia |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Group C | Group C |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Thailand vs Sri Lanka | Thailand vs Sri Lanka |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | South Korea vs Uzbekistan | South Korea vs Uzbekistan |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Thailand vs Uzbekistan | Thailand vs Uzbekistan |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | South Korea vs Sri Lanka | South Korea vs Sri Lanka |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | South Korea vs Thailand | South Korea vs Thailand |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Sri Lanka vs Uzbekistan | Sri Lanka vs Uzbekistan |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Group D | Group D |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | China vs Vietnam | China vs Vietnam |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Japan vs Vietnam | Japan vs Vietnam |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | China vs Japan | China vs Japan |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Knockout stage | Knockout stage |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Bracket | Bracket |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Quarter-finals | Quarter-finals |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Hong Kong vs South Korea | Hong Kong vs South Korea |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Indonesia vs Japan | Indonesia vs Japan |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Malaysia vs Thailand | Malaysia vs Thailand |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Chinese Taipei vs China | Chinese Taipei vs China |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Semi-finals | Semi-finals |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | South Korea vs Japan | South Korea vs Japan |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Malaysia vs China | Malaysia vs China |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Final | Final |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Japan vs China | Japan vs China |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | References | References
Category:2012 in badminton
Category:2012 in South Korean sport
Category:Badminton Asia Junior Championships
Asian Junior Championships |
2012 Asian Junior Badminton Championships – Teams event | Table of Content | Short description, Group stage, Group A, Malaysia vs Hong Kong, India vs Hong Kong, Malaysia vs India, Group B, Chinese Taipei vs Mongolia, Indonesia vs Singapore, Chinese Taipei vs Singapore, Indonesia vs Mongolia, Chinese Taipei vs Indonesia, Singapore vs Mongolia, Group C, Thailand vs Sri Lanka, South Korea vs Uzbekistan, Thailand vs Uzbekistan, South Korea vs Sri Lanka, South Korea vs Thailand, Sri Lanka vs Uzbekistan, Group D, China vs Vietnam, Japan vs Vietnam, China vs Japan, Knockout stage, Bracket, Quarter-finals, Hong Kong vs South Korea, Indonesia vs Japan, Malaysia vs Thailand, Chinese Taipei vs China, Semi-finals, South Korea vs Japan, Malaysia vs China, Final, Japan vs China, References |
Category:April 1899 in Europe | MonthCategoryNav | |
Category:April 1899 in Europe | Table of Content | MonthCategoryNav |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.