text:
Authorship: why not just toss a coin?
if you are reading this commentary. the title probably irked your professional sensibilities. That's good. During 32 years of publishing, I've experienced two authorship disputes. Both of these problems have demonstrated to me that there is a disturbing and pervasive lack of understanding of what authorship on scientific papers means, of the responsibilities that it conveys, and of how it is determined. The goal of this article is to discuss the ethics and responsibility of authorship and to raise awareness of an issue that is fundamental to the health of our profession. I provide an overview of the extensive discussion of authorship that has been ongoing within the scientific community for over three decades, use personal experiences with authorship disputes to illustrate aspects of this discussion, and provide recommendations on how to resolve and prevent authorship problems. It is my hope that this commentary sparks debate and action that will help to minimize abusive and damaging authorship practices.
A Brief History of Scientific Authorship
The scientific enterprise expanded dramatically after World War II, ushering in what Jones (25 ) termed the "era of Big Science." This expansion was due in part to the increase of government funding for research, increases in science education, technological developments, and increased commercialization of scientific discoveries (11 ). As the scientific workforce expanded, so did the number of science publications (11 ) and the number of coauthors on those publications (8. 9. 19. 42 ). Science publishing became big business and today comprises a multibillion dollar a year industry (3 ). Along with the expansion of the science workforce came increased competition for jobs and funding, and publications thus became a valued currency of the scientific enterprise.
The Benefits and Responsibilities of Authorship
Scientists uniformly understand the benefits of authorship. If they didn't, authorship would not be something that was sought after and at times hotly contested. What is disturbing though are the varying standards that are applied in deciding authorship and the frequency of "promiscuous authorship," which is the awarding of authorship to someone who has not contributed in an intellectually significant way to the paper (14. 15 ). A distressing example of the varying standards applied to authorship came recently from a physician colleague. She had asked me about the definition of "senior author." Her understanding was that it was an individual who was one of the main contributors to a paper, which is an incomplete but still reasonable definition (see below). However, a coworker had informed her that the last or "senior author" position on a paper was given to a chairman or other senior person as a gesture of respect and didn't have any meaning. The case of Gerald Schatten discussed below is the quintessential example of how terribly misguided that notion is.
The following is an excerpt from The Guidelines for the Conduct of Research in the Intramural Research Program at NIH (39 ) that defines succinctly the importance of authorship on scientific papers: "Authorship refers to the listing of names of participants in all communications, both oral and written, of experimental results and their interpretation to scientific colleagues. Authorship is the fulfillment of the responsibility to communicate research results to the scientific community for external evaluation. Authorship is also the primary mechanism for determining the allocation of credit for scientific advances and thus the primary basis for assessing a scientist's contributions to developing new knowledge. As such, it potentially conveys great benefit, as well as responsibility."
Authorship obviously conveys professional benefit. Students in many biomedical research graduate programs cannot earn a Ph.D. without publishing one or more first-authored papers. Promotion and tenure at research institutions are determined in part by publication. External professional recognition, including extramural funding, requires publication as a demonstration of research innovation, productivity, independence, and expertise in a research area. Awarding authorship to someone who has not contributed significantly to a scientific investigation inappropriately and dishonestly conveys benefit to them. It can also reduce appropriate benefit to those who actually contributed to the work. For example, the perils to an independent junior investigator's career if he or she publishes with senior scientists are well known. In such instances, a common question asked on promotion committees and study sections is, who was intellectually responsible for the work?
Importantly, authorship also conveys responsibility. Authoring a scientific paper implies an unqualified endorsement of the quality and integrity of the work performed as well as the appropriate distribution of credit for that work. You can only assume responsibility if you were intellectually engaged in the work and in writing the manuscript. Assuming the responsibility that goes with authorship is not only an ethical obligation, but also a debt we owe for the patronage of taxpayers and private benefactors.
The Tactics of Authorship Abuse
Promiscuous authorship assumes many forms. "Coercive authorship" has been defined as authorship conferred to individuals in response to their exertion of seniority or supervisory status over subordinates and junior investigators (11. 29 ; see also 6. 33. 56 ). A department chair, for example, is using coercion when he/she requires authorship on all papers published from his/her department, but has little or no intellectual input into them. Kwok (29 ) has termed the attempt by senior individuals to force their way onto the publications of subordinates and junior investigators in the absence of appropriate intellectual contribution as the "White Bull effect" and has argued that such behavior is a form of fraud and scientific misconduct.
Authorship coercion does not occur exclusively between senior and junior investigators. Coercion tactics were used in my two authorship disputes. In the first dispute, a threat was made to university administrators to withdraw an in-press manuscript authored by one of my students if authorship was not granted. The second dispute deteriorated into, among other things, threats to remove graduate students from my laboratory. Both of these disputes involved demands by individuals who had not fulfilled key authorship criteria that are discussed in detail below.
Intimidation tactics can impact not only those who rightfully should be authors, but also individuals charged with helping to resolve authorship disputes. Unprofessional behavior leads some individuals to choose a path of expediency in an effort to make problems go away quickly and quietly. I learned of my first authorship dispute only after complaints had been made to two senior administrators. Both administrators urged me to put the name of the person demanding authorship on the paper "just this once." In exchange for this, I was told that they would write and get this individual to sign a letter stating that no demands for authorship would be made on any of my future publications.
Other forms of authorship abuse include "honorary," "guest," or "gift authorships," which are defined as the awarding of authorship out of respect or friendship, in an attempt to curry favor, and/or to give the paper a greater sense of legitimacy (11. 15. 45. 49 ). "Mutual support" authorships have been defined as an agreement by two or more investigators to place their names on each other's papers to give the appearance of higher productivity (11 ). "Duplication authorship" is the publication of the same work in multiple journals (13. 38 ). Reward systems that emphasize numbers of papers over quality foster "mutual support" and "duplication" authorship abuse.
"Ghost authors" are authors whose names are omitted from a paper (11. 18. 37. 41. 45 ). There can be numerous deceitful reasons for ghost authorship. For example, it is well known that some pharmaceutical companies hire professional writers to write papers favorably describing their products. A bona fide academic is then asked or hired to sign their name to the paper to give it and the product legitimacy (11. 37 ). Ghost authorship has figured prominently in the recent legal actions over the drug Vioxx (46 ). The well-publicized problems with Vioxx represent an example of how abusive authorship practices can directly impact human health.
A particularly serious form of ghost authorship is termed "denial of authorship" (25. 27 ). The most typical example of this involves individuals who participate in generating data for what they presume is a legitimate scientific collaboration. However, the other so-called "collaborators" publish a paper using these data without giving the investigators coauthorship or accurately acknowledging their contribution. I have unfortunately heard multiple stories about this type of authorship abuse. It should be stressed that denial of authorship can rightfully be considered a form of plagiarism and therefore scientific misconduct. Table 1 summarizes the forms of authorship abuse described above.
Types and descriptions of authorship abuse
The Consequences of Authorship Abuse
Inappropriately assuming authorship on scientific papers can and should have significant negative consequences for those who choose to do so. One of the most infamous examples of the consequences of promiscuous authorship is the "Darsee affair" (12. 25. 51 ). Dr. John Darsee was a clinician investigator who worked at Harvard Medical School and Emory University School of Medicine. From 1978 to 1981, Darsee authored or coauthored 18 full-length research papers and over 100 abstracts, reviews, book chapters, and short papers in the field of cardiology. In May 1981, Darsee admitted to fabricating data in a single paper. However, investigative committees at Harvard, Emory, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) ultimately concluded that more than 100 of his publications contained fabricated data (51 ). Many of the fraudulent publications listed authors who had made no contribution to the work. In some cases these authors became aware that their names were associated with the work only after publication, while in other cases, individuals knowingly accepted the "gift authorship" (25. 51 ). When the publications were shown to be fraudulent, the "gift authors" were placed in the disquieting position of proving that they had not participated in the fraud and rationalizing why they could take no responsibility for the work even though they had assumed authorship of it.
Another infamous case of fraud and promiscuous authorship is that of Robert Slutsky, a clinical investigator at the University of California at San Diego (UCSD). From 1983 to 1984, it was estimated that Slutsky published on average one paper every ten days (32. 35 ). An investigating committee at UCSD concluded that as many as 68 of Slutsky's publications were likely to be fraudulent or of "questionable validity" (35 ). As with Darsee, gift authorships were a common feature of Slutsky's publications. The UCSD report states that knowing acceptance of coauthorship by investigators who had made no significant contribution to the work made a "mockery of authorship of scientific manuscripts, and in this case may have contributed to the perpetuation of research fraud" (35 ).
A recent example of promiscuous authorship is the "Korean stem cell scandal." Dr. Woo Suk Hwang is a South Korean scientist who published two high-profile papers in Science in which it was claimed that embryonic stem cells could be generated by somatic cell nuclear transfer (22. 23 ). Both papers were shown to contain fabricated data and were retracted (28 ). Dr. Gerald Schatten, a scientist at the University of Pittsburgh, assumed senior authorship of one of these publications (22 ). When the work was revealed to be fraudulent, Schatten made significant efforts to distance himself from it (21. 34. 53 ). He was subsequently placed under investigation by the University of Pittsburgh. No evidence was found that Schatten had falsified any aspect of the Science publication, but he was found guilty of "scientific misbehavior" (21. 34. 53 ). The phrase "scientific misbehavior" is probably unfamiliar to most scientists. However, a recent paper in Academic Medicine defines "scientific misbehavior" as "problematic" or "questionable" behavior and is distinct from scientific misconduct, which is fabrication and falsification of data and plagiarism (4 ).
Schatten claimed that he had helped write the fraudulent manuscript. However, he had not participated in or overseen any aspect of the investigation and had little or no interaction with most of the scientists involved in the studies (21. 34 ). He therefore could not take responsibility for the integrity of the studies and could not ensure that the listing of the coauthors reflected correct distribution of credit (or discredit in this case). In addition, Schatten could not ensure that all coauthors had approved the manuscript for submission even though he stated in a signed cover letter that they had done so (21. 34 ). The University of Pittsburgh investigators concluded that Schatten's authorship of the paper was appropriate given the role he played in writing the manuscript, but they criticized his assumption of co-corresponding and senior authorship. A summary of the report stated that "Dr. Schatten's listing as the last author not only conferred considerable credibility to the paper within the international scientific community, but directly benefited Dr. Schatten in numerous ways including enhancement of his scientific reputation, improved opportunities for additional research funding, enhanced positioning for pending patent applications, and considerable personal financial benefit. However, these benefits are accompanied by responsibilities for the manuscript as a whole, approval of the manuscript by all co-authors, and the veracity of the data reported. Dr. Schatten shirked these responsibilities, a serious failure that facilitated the publication of falsified experiments in Science magazine" (53 ).
University of Pittsburgh investigators also examined a Nature paper coauthored by Hwang and Schatten (31 ) that described the cloning of a dog. The so-called "Snuppy paper" was not fraudulent, but the investigating committee questioned Schatten's assumption of coauthorship since his only contribution was to suggest "that a professional photographer be engaged so that Snuppy would appear with greater visual appeal" (53 ). Some scientists have questioned whether the University of Pittsburgh report went far enough in penalizing Schatten for his behavior (34 ).
How to Minimize and Prevent Authorship Abuse
Who gets to be an author?
Most scientists are unaware of the extensive discussion of authorship that has gone on in the scientific community for at least three decades and of the formalization of authorship criteria. The most prominent and widely utilized authorship guidelines are those established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The group first met in 1978 in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, to develop standards for publication of papers in biomedical journals and produced its first set of authorship guidelines, the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals, in 1979. These guidelines have been revised several times and have been adopted by hundreds of journals. The most recent version of the Uniform Requirements (24 ) states that "Authorship credit should be based on 1 ) substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2 ) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3 ) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3. Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group, alone, does not justify authorship. All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship, and all those who qualify should be listed. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content." Table 2 summarizes the ICMJE author requirements and outlines contributions that do not qualify for authorship.
ICMJE requirements for authorship and examples of contributions that do not qualify for authorship
A concern that has been raised about the Uniform Requirements and other authorship guidelines is the definition of "substantial contributions." What constitutes a "substantial contribution" to a scientific paper? Perhaps this will always represent a gray area in any set of authorship guidelines. However, I believe that the Uniform Requirements provides two important thresholds that must be met before a contribution is deemed significant enough for authorship. The first threshold is the requirement that all authors participate in the drafting or revising of the manuscript for "important intellectual content." Someone who has made a significant contribution to the work should at a minimum be able to draft or revise the portion of the manuscript in which that contribution is described. On the other hand, individuals who have made ancillary contributions will be unable to describe those contributions within the intellectual context of the manuscript. For example, imagine someone who demands authorship in exchange for providing funding, a reagent that has been described in a previous publication, or technical advice. Because there is nothing intellectually original or significant about such contributions, there is nothing that can be written about them in the manuscript. Providing funding, reagents, or advice deserves acknowledgement, not authorship.
The second threshold that needs to be met is the requirement that all authors must be able to take public responsibility for the contributions they have made to a paper. If you have done something significant for a paper, then you should be willing and able to take public responsibility for it. Individuals who have not participated in a significant way in the work are unable to take responsibility. Indeed, promiscuous authors are often the first to duck and hide when there are problems with a paper. Gerald Schatten's attempts to distance himself from the fraudulent stem cell paper (22 ) is a good example of this.
Numerous organizations, universities, and research institutions have also established formal authorship guidelines. These include the National Institutes of Health (39 ), the Society for Neuroscience (50 ), Harvard University (20 ), Yale University (58 ), the University of Michigan Medical School (52 ), and Washington University (57 ). In reading these and other guidelines, I found that there is broad consensus. Authors of scientific papers must have contributed in an intellectually significant way to the work, they must be able to take public responsibility for that contribution, and they must have participated in writing the manuscript.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Commission on Research Integrity recommended in 1995 that all research institutions, journals, and scientific societies establish and make public authorship policies (54 ). This recommendation has by no means been fully heeded. I have little doubt that the establishment of authorship policies and their inculcation into our scientific culture would lessen the frequency
of authorship abuse and contribute to more rapid resolution of authorship problems.
Should technicians be authors?
The answer to this question is, yes, as long as they have contributed to the paper in an intellectually significant way. Jones (26 ) describes authorship guidelines of Rush Medical College that specifically addresses the question of technician coauthorship. The guidelines state that "a technician…may be a co-author of a publication if, in the opinion of the Principal Investigator, the said individual has made a substantive contribution to the work over and above actually performing required tasks. If the technical staff (support) person has performed studies prescribed by the PI, but has not made contributions to the experimental design, data analyses, data interpretation, or rationale for the study, then co-authorship is not automatically earned."
My policy, which I discuss with all technician candidates during the interview process, is that simply performing routine experimental tasks does not qualify them for authorship. I encourage all technicians to engage themselves intellectually in their projects. Authorship is an incentive to do so. Technician contributions that I consider worthy of authorship include independent establishment of new, nonroutine methods essential for a project and participation in experimental design and data interpretation. I use the same thresholds for authorship with technicians as I would for any coworker. Their contribution must be significant enough such that it requires their participation in the drafting and revision of the manuscript, and they must be able and willing to take public responsibility for it.
Authorship order and its meaning.
Scientific papers were most commonly authored by single individuals from the late 1600s until the 1920s. However, in today's multidisciplinary research world, papers coauthored by multiple individuals are the norm (19 ). Appropriate assignment of credit and responsibility represents a critical challenge in multiauthor and multidisciplinary publications.
While there is good agreement on the minimum requirements for authorship of scientific papers, the benefit and responsibility conferred to a specific position on an authorship list seems to be somewhat more obscurely defined. With the exception perhaps of papers describing "big science" projects such as genome sequencing and analysis (e.g. 7) or particle physics (e.g. 1), where there can be literally dozens if not hundreds of coauthors, it is not clear why there should be problems with definitions of authorship order. In the case of most biomedical research publications, it is widely accepted that the first author is the person who has carried out a majority of the experimental work described in the paper (5. 17. 47 ). For example, Ph.D. students are obviously required to perform the bulk of their thesis work, and they must contribute significantly to the intellectual development of their project. It follows logically therefore that the student should be first author on at least one or more publications arising from that work. Indeed, many Ph.D. programs require publication of at least one first-authored paper for graduation.
As discussed above, there are some disturbing notions about the meaning of "senior author." Senior author is typically the last person on an authorship list. The Schatten case illustrates that senior authorship must never be awarded to someone simply because of their seniority, rank, or standing in the field. McKneally (36 ) defines senior authors as individuals who "generally direct, oversee, and guarantee the authenticity of the work reported" and "implicitly take responsibility for the work's scientific accuracy, valid methodology, analysis, and conclusions". Baerlocher et al. (5 ) define senior author in a similar way. I believe that the most important role of the senior author is to take responsibility for the project as a whole. You cannot do this if you were not actively engaged in all aspects of the study, including checking and analyzing the data and writing the manuscript.
Corresponding author is an individual charged with communicating with editors and readers. Callaham (10 ), in an editorial on publication policies of the Annals of Emergency Medicine. states that the corresponding author should also provide specific information on the contributions of all coauthors to the paper. Other journals have a similar requirement [e.g. PLoS Biology (43 )]. PLoS Genetics requires that the corresponding author "ensure that all authors are aware of and approve the submission of the manuscript, its content, authorship, and order of authorship" (44 ).
The corresponding author is typically the first or last author (5 ). However, corresponding authorship is frequently used as a way to "share" credit between senior individuals and is also assumed by others, typically the second to last author. Whether that credit is actually deserved is an important point. As with the senior author, the corresponding author needs to be extensively involved with the work to address the concerns/questions of editors, reviewers, and readers and to provide information on coauthor contributions. The position of corresponding author must be assumed only by someone who can fulfill these important obligations and responsibilities. Corresponding authorship should not be used simply to resolve conflicts over senior authorship.
"Middle" or "contributing" (5 ) authors of a paper are those individuals listed between the first and senior authors. The ordering of middle authors should reflect their relative contribution to the work. Ahmed et al. (2 ) suggest a scoring method that may be useful for assessing relative contributions in contentious situations. Table 3 summarizes the requirements and responsibilities of first, senior, corresponding, and middle/contributing authors.
Requirements and responsibilities of coauthors
Publication of author contributions.
Some journals such as the Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences require coauthors to publish their contributions to the work as a footnote in the paper. Nature journals encourage authors to do so. In a recent issue of Nature that I examined, 12 of the 16 articles and letters published included descriptions of coauthor contributions. Even an article coauthored by 68 investigators did so. In my opinion, publication of coauthor contributions, either in the printed text or as an online supplement to the paper, should be uniform policy for all journals. For publications from my laboratory, I now include this information in the acknowledgments section of the paper unless otherwise specified by the journal. As with the scientific content of a paper, the knowing falsification of published coauthor contributions should be viewed as a form of fraud and therefore scientific misconduct. Holding the publication of coauthor contributions to such a high level of accountability would undoubtedly reduce authorship abuse.
Keeping intra- and interlaboratory collaborations on track.
An important strategy for preventing authorship disputes is to choose and structure intra- and interlaboratory collaborations carefully. PLoS Computational Biology recently published an article entitled "Ten simple rules for a successful collaboration" (55 ). Many of these rules represent excellent strategies that would help avoid authorship problems. The rules that I think are particularly important are summarized below.
"Rule 1: Do Not Be Lured Into Just Any Collaboration." I suspect that many collaborations are "marriages of convenience." Someone needs you to do something for them or vice versa. One should enter a collaboration only because of a shared passion for the science. Everything else including ideas, reagents, and expertise should be shared without strings attached. Only assume authorship if you are truly intellectually engaged in the work and engage yourself intellectually only after working out an authorship agreement.
"Rule 2: Decide at the Beginning Who Will Work on What Tasks." I firmly believe that everything, including authorship, should be established in writing at the outset of a collaboration. The NIH Ombudsman and others have proposed the use of "collaborators' prenuptial agreements" or written guidelines when establishing scientific collaborations (16. 30. 48 ). Defining the parameters of a collaboration in writing is something I now do unfailingly, even with good friends with whom I've worked for years. Some might argue that the use of written agreements runs counter to the informal nature of science and that it can undermine collegiality and trust. However, collegiality and trust are undermined by unprofessional, unscrupulous, and opportunistic individuals, not by thoughtful hashing out of how a collaboration will be carried out and how the work will be published.
In addition to establishing written authorship agreements at the outset of a collaboration, I have now made it official laboratory policy to include an "authorship verification document" with all manuscript submission letters. This helps to underscore the importance and responsibility of authorship, particularly with students and fellows. The basic text of the document is as follows: "We the undersigned attest that the contributions outlined below of the co-authors of the manuscript describing THE RESEARCH are accurate. The senior author further attests that no individuals other than the undersigned contributed to the intellectual development of this project. Intellectual development includes proposing, designing, performing and supervising experiments, analyzing and interpreting data, formulating hypotheses and ideas described in the manuscript, and writing and approving of the final version of the manuscript. Individuals who have provided reagents or technical and financial support have been noted in the acknowledgments section."
"Rule 5: Feel Respect, Get Respect." The lack of mutual respect in a collaboration is a serious problem. Watch for and pay attention to seemingly little signs from "collaborators" such as "one-ups-manship," unwillingness to share information and reagents, failure to perform agreed upon tasks in a timely manner, and passive/aggressive behavior. These are strong indicators of possible bigger problems to come.
"Rule 6: Communicate, Communicate and Communicate." I don't believe that there is such a thing as overcommunicating when involved in a collaboration. The progress of a project should be discussed frequently to anticipate and correct problems in a timely manner and to ensure that everyone is holding up their end of the agreement. Very importantly, as the project develops, it may be necessary to renegotiate authorships and to redefine them in writing.
How to Resolve Authorship Problems
Once an authorship problem occurs, it can be exceedingly difficult to resolve. In my opinion, a principle of expediency should never be applied in addressing authorship disputes. Authorship should only be earned through significant intellectual contribution to the work, and the order of authorship should reflect the appropriate distribution of credit and, importantly, responsibility. Of course, when students are caught in the middle, careers and funding are at stake, and there is an imperative for rapid publication of important findings, authorship disputes can become a true test of one's willingness to adhere to high standards of professionalism, ethics, and responsibility. Ethical compromises are possible and reasonable solutions to some problems. For example, disputes over assignment of first author when multiple individuals have performed significant and critical amounts of work can potentially be resolved by assignment of co-first author with notation of such in the text.
When authorship disputes cannot be resolved by the authors themselves, the institution in which the work was performed needs to engage in some sort of conflict resolution. Importantly though, the institution, in my opinion, must never be allowed to insert itself into the publication process as a decision-making body. Repeated demands were made during one of my authorship disputes for the formation of committees to "decide" authorship order through a process of "binding arbitration."
I find the notion that an institution can decide the authorship of scientific papers and make such a decision "binding" extremely unsettling. The only people who should decide authorship, order of authorship, and content of a scientific paper are those who did the work. To allow others to make such decisions represents a dangerous precedent with considerable negative consequences for the research and publication process and academic freedom.
An institutional committee engaged in authorship conflict resolution should be fact seeking and advisory only. The committee's job should be to provide a fresh set of eyes on the problem and to assist the individuals involved in the dispute to arrive at an ethical and professional solution. Of course, arriving at such a solution requires adherence to well-established ethical and professional standards. As I argued previously, it is essential that all research institutions have in place well defined authorship policies. This would help resolve many authorship problems quickly and ethically, and it would limit the amount of politics and personal biases that individuals might bring to an advisory committee.
Another function of an authorship conflict resolution committee should be to recommend that disciplinary action be pursued if clear evidence of abusive authorship practices is uncovered. At a minimum, I believe that individuals who abuse authorship should be required to satisfactorily complete the same bioethics course that graduate students and postdoctoral fellows are required to take in NIH-funded institutions. Particularly serious forms of authorship abuse such as "coercion authorship" and "denial of authorship" (see Table 1 ) should be treated as scientific misconduct and referred to appropriate institutional bodies for further investigation and disciplinary action.
All research institutions should have in place a well-defined and well-recognized mechanism for addressing authorship disputes. Ad hoc development of such a mechanism while one is in the middle of a contentious dispute can be an uncomfortable task for all involved. During one of my authorship disputes, I found myself in the unenviable position of having to educate senior level administrators on what constituted authorship on scientific papers and what the institution could and could not do to address the problem.
Institutional committees charged with examining authorship problems should be composed of both senior and junior investigators. It might also be worthwhile to consider including senior graduate students and/or postdoctoral fellows on such committees as observers or even participants. This would help to increase awareness among trainees of the importance and responsibilities of authorship and of the consequences and difficulties of authorship disputes. It could also have a "clarifying effect" on individuals inappropriately demanding authorship. After all, no one wants to have a reputation with trainees as one who makes unethical and unprofessional authorship demands and thereby attempts to lessen credit rightfully deserved by others.
A serious concern with institutional involvement in resolving authorship disputes is the need to scrupulously ensure that such involvement is free of conflicts of interest and institutional and interpersonal politics. This can be an exceptionally difficult task and requires diligent and thoughtful effort by administrators charged with addressing the problem. The committee that was formed to review one of my authorship disputes included a member who had published several papers with the individual contesting authorship. It is critically important therefore that all members of an authorship dispute committee sign a declaration stating that their participation is free from real and perceived conflicts of interest.
What happens if a decision on authorship cannot be reached even with the help of an advisory committee? No reputable journal that I am aware of will publish a manuscript if there are disagreements over its authorship or content. Therefore, failure to agree on authorship effectively renders the manuscript unpublishable. This is a disturbing but unassailable conclusion and underscores the critical importance of working diligently to avoid authorship problems from the outset. My specific recommendations for minimizing and resolving authorship disputes are summarized in Table 4 .
Recommendations for minimizing and resolving authorship disputes
Summary and Conclusions
We all know that authorship is important. It dictates the course and success of a scientist's career and confers enormous responsibility. However, despite its importance, it is clear that authorship abuse is not an infrequent occurrence. Indeed, of the various forms of unethical scientific conduct, I suspect that authorship abuse is the most prevalent and most tolerated. Authorship is awarded promiscuously as an expedient solution to real or perceived problems and due to outright unethical and unprofessional behavior. It is essential that as scientists we work together with our institutions, our professional organizations, and the journals we publish in to establish uniform authorship policies and practices that will minimize authorship abuse and that we train our students and fellows in the highest standards of publication ethics.
Some might argue that the establishment of formal authorship policies and having written authorship agreements between investigators could hinder scientific progress. I disagree strongly. Hearing about and experiencing first-hand authorship problems has a chilling effect on one's willingness to enter into collaborations and creates a climate of distrust. Furthermore, it is not difficult to imagine how research integrity, quality, and productivity could be improved if all coauthors participated seriously in the work leading to publication. Anyone who desires authorship should be required to engage in research instead of abusing the reward system by holding the legitimate work of others hostage in exchange for reagents, technical advice, patient data, and other ancillary contributions or by using coercive tactics. In addition, tucked away in the minds of those who desire authorship, but who are unwilling to actively participate in the work, could be useful ideas and insights that might actually enhance an investigation or help to establish new lines of research. Finally, the harm that fraudulent papers of people like Darsee, Slutsky, and Hwang have on their fields and on the trust in and respect of science might be prevented or at least reduced if all coauthors were held to high standards of authorship responsibility.
Even with the establishment of well-defined authorship guidelines and mechanisms for resolving and preventing problems though, authorship abuse will still occur. Acquiring something of value is always going to be subject to unscrupulous and opportunistic behavior. However, ignoring or tolerating authorship abuse is unacceptable and dishonest. We owe it to our profession, our trainees, and the people who support our research to work diligently to ensure that authorship on scientific papers reflects the truthful distribution of credit and responsibility for the work. Those who clamor inappropriately for scientific recognition, whether out of a sense of desperation and/or because of bloated and overwrought egos, would do our profession a valuable service by following the advice articulated clearly in a recent Nature editorial entitled "Ethics and fraud" (40 ): "…no one should argue ever again that…promiscuous authorship on scientific papers…can be tolerated… Research ethics matter immensely to the health of the scientific enterprise. Anyone who thinks differently should seek employment in another sphere."
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health R01 Grants DK-51610, DK-61168, and GM-74229.Source: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Category: Bank
Similar articles:
How a Magnetic Card Reader Works
How does the Sun's magnetic field work?
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) - Body


text: On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Francesc Alted <firstname.lastname@example.com> wrote: > On Feb 14, 2012, at 1:50 AM, Wes McKinney wrote: > [clip] >> But: >> >> In [40]: timeit hist[i, j] >> 10000 loops, best of 3: 32 us per loop >> >> So that's roughly 7-8x slower than a simple Cython method, so I >> sincerely hope it could be brought down to the sub 10 microsecond >> level with a little bit of work. > > I vaguely remember this has shown up before. My hunch is that indexing in NumPy is so powerful, that it has to check for a lot of different values for indices (integers, tuples, lists, arrays…), and that it is all these checks what is taking time. Your Cython wrapper just assumed that the indices where integers, so this is probably the reason why it is that much faster. > > This is not to say that indexing in NumPy could not be accelerated, but it won't be trivial, IMO. > Given that __getitem__ and __setitem__ receive a 2-tuple of 1-dimensional integer arrays, should be pretty simple (dare I say trivial? :) ) to optimize for this use case? The abysmal performance of of __getitem__ and __setitem__ with 1d integer arrays is pretty high on my list of annoyances with NumPy (especially when take and put are so much faster), so you guys may see a pull request from me whenever I can spare the time to hack on it (assuming you don't beat me to it)! > -- Francesc Alted > > > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > email@example.com > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Ashley expecting return on Toon investment
Newcastle owner Mike Ashley has seemingly increased the pressure on Kevin Keegan by insisting his side should be capable of competing with the Premier League's top four.
Recent speculation has suggested Ashley is considering selling the club, while other reports claimed the sportswear magnate fell out with Keegan towards the end of last season after the manager insisted his side had no chance of competing with the so-called 'big four'.
Keegan has only signed Jonas Gutierrez and Danny Guthrie so far this summer but Ashley insists the likes of Newcastle should be able to put up a fight against Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool.
'The top four have enormous resources but over time it must be possible to compete with them,' Ashley is quoted as saying in The Sun.
'I've invested £250million in Newcastle and so that and European nights of football must be the dream.
'Compared with some of the other owners in the Premier League, I may be a middleweight taking on heavyweights but I'm building the boxer up.'
Use a Facebook account to add a comment, subject to Facebook's Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your Facebook name, photo & other personal information you make public on Facebook will appear with your comment, and may be used on ESPN's media platforms. Learn more.


text:
Netwest members - take advantage of this opportunity to attend a workshop with well-published Atlanta author, Patricia Sprinkle.Saturday, June 14 - Take individual classes, 10 - 1:00 and 2 - 5:00 p.m., or take both classes for $60. This writer speaks to large groups, teaches workshops and we are fortunate to have her come to our area. If you write fiction or nonfiction, you don't want to miss out on this one-time opportunity. We will have lunch together and you will have the opportunity to network with other writers and with Patricia.
Each class fee is $45 or both classes for $60.00 Netwest members - $40 for individual classes.
Light lunch included for those who register for all day session
Deadline for registration: Thursday, June 11
Call 828-389-4441 or email email@example.com
Visit www.glendacouncilbeall.blogspot.com for class description.


text:
Doubling Down With George Jones On A Two For Tuesday [VIDEO]
When you asked any of the current stars of country music who was a main influence in their career. the name that comes up almost every time is George Jones. He is certainly in my Top 5 country singers of all time.
On this day back in 2002 the George received the National Medal of Arts at the White House from then President George W. Bush.
He almost didn't make that date. On this day in 1999, Jones was seriously injured in a one car accident while on his way home. According to reports, he was trying to play his new song "Choices" on his cell phone for his stepdaughter.
Also, after years of being clean and sober, authorities found an open bottle of vodka in the car. He underwent treatment and not another like that has happened since.
On this "two for Tuesday", two of my favorite songs from Jones are "The Grand Tour" which went to Number One, and "He Stopped Loving Her Tdoay" that also was Number One and a song many consider the best country song ever recorded.
Check'em out.


text:
TAMPA — Charging stations for electric cars near apartment complexes. A charge that takes 10 minutes in a mall parking space. Affordable electric vehicles.
That's the dream — making electric vehicles an alternative to gas-powered vehicles. There's a long way to go, but the Tampa Bay region is getting a start.
NovaCharge, a Tampa-based distributor, gives the area its first charging unit for electric cars this week. To be installed outside Solar Source, 10840 Endeavour Way in Largo, the stand-alone unit provides a full charge in about four hours.
As manufacturers prepare to introduce new electric cars, more charging stations are starting to appear. The U.S. Energy Department recognizes two stations in the state, but a nonprofit organization has put in 25 more.
In Cocoa, for instance, three units each with three plug-in options wait for motorists at the Florida Solar Energy Center. Someone drives in for a charge about every two months.
It's slow, yes.
But the installation of charging stations needs to grow before car manufacturers release electric models in the next couple of years, said Ron Phillips, Solar Source's director of training and sales.
The Chevrolet Volt and the Nissan Leaf, both extended-range electric cars, are scheduled be released in more than a year.
"It's an egg thing," said Bill Young, a board member of the Energy Department's Florida Space Coast Clean Cities Coalition. "Which comes first, the chicken or the egg?"
That's the problem. And the Florida Electric Auto Association won't wait. The organization paid for 25 units and installations between the Florida Keys and New Smyrna Beach.
Charles Whalen, the group's charging director, said local politicians can't justify using tax money to put in the stations during a recession — especially when there are only 200 electric vehicles capable of driving on Florida's highways.
As more charging units appear, Whalen predicts affordable electric vehicles for a broader audience will develop in five years. He thinks it will take 30 years for electric vehicles to account for more than half of new car sales.
Offers for the free units and their installation at about $7,000 each have been welcomed except in Delray Beach.
The stations NovaCharge expects to start planting around the Tampa Bay area are manufactured in California by Coulomb Technologies and part of a global network tracked online. A map on the company's Web site shows real-time availability.
A consumer uses a subscription-based card or credit card for each plug-in session. An e-mail or text message announces the end of a charge hours later to a subscribing customer.
Unit owners can make money by collecting 80 percent of revenue on a unit. The rest goes for maintenance, said Helda Rodriguez, NovaCharge president.
"The first person who took a chance and put an ATM in Busch Gardens today is probably making a lot of money," Rodriguez said.
Unlimited monthly charges go for $50.
By the end of 2010, at least 600 charging units are expected to dot the Southeast from Washington to the Florida Keys.
Rodriguez wants to see 200 to 400 of those units in Florida.
There's big support.
President Barack Obama recently granted $2.4 billion in stimulus money for the development of electric vehicles, including $95.5 million for a cell and battery manufacturing company in Jacksonville, according to the Energy Department.
In time, technology developments will lead to cheaper cars and better batteries.
"It's just that this is going to take longer than flat-screen TVs and cell phones did," Whalen said.
Ileana Morales can be reached at email@example.com or (813) 226-3403.


text:
Accommodation options within 8km from Villa Afrikana Guest Suites include:
"Perfect Paradise" - spectacular new guest house located in picturesque Knysna, the heart of the Garden Route, South Africa. Elevated on Paradise hill, commanding breathtaking panoramic views of the famous Heads, lagoon, islands & town.
These fully equipped Carribean styled units are located in Paradise and have magnificent views across the lagoon to the Knysna Heads. Come home to relax on your private patio, have a barbeque, or just enjoy a sun downer and soak in the views.
Zauberberg - German for "Magic Mountain" lies in a quiet suburb with views over town and lagoon; a large indigenous garden with saltwater pool and a friendly welcome by your hostess Angela will invite you to stay and relax.
Accommodation in Knysna, Garden Route, South Africa: Paradise Found offers comfortable bed and breakfast or self catering accommodation with stunning view overlooking the Knysna lagoon, the Heads, Leisure Island, Thesen Island and the Waterfront.
Cambalala is a luxury guest house ideally situated in Paradise with magnificent views over the lagoon offers stylish and comfortable accommodation with the very best of service and hospitality.


text:
MMA Fights That Should Have Happened Already, but Never WillMarch 31, 2010
Mixed Martial Arts has started to become more and more like boxing over the last few years, with all the speculation of who would beat who or this guy would beat this guy. Over the last few years, there have been fights happening between some of the legends of the sport, but no matter who wins, there is always an excuse for one guy or the other.
This has happened with the fights involving Randy Couture against Minotauro Nogueira and Mark Coleman. When Randy beat Coleman, everyone said Randy is still a contender and Coleman is an old man who needs a walker. When Minotauro outclassed Couture, everyone said Nogueira is back to his old self and Couture needs to retire. In my opinion, if a guy is healthy enough to get a license to fight, the whole age question needs to stop being brought up time and time again.
These five fights either are or were the ultimate dream match of any mixed martial arts fans from about ten years ago to now. Let's look into more detail about the potential match ups.
1. Randy Couture vs. Fedor Emelianenko : Roughly 3 years ago, Randy Couture was on top of the world. He had just come out of retirement and became the heavyweight champion for a record 3rd time and beat his next challenge, top contender Gabriel Gonzaga.
After those two astonishing wins, everyone was wondering who was next, and the next fight everyone wanted Randy to have was against the number one heavyweight in the world, Fedor Emelianenko.
Fedor Emelianenko has been the number one heavyweight fighter on the planet ever since he took the heavyweight crown from Minotauro Nogueira in the Pride Fighting championships. He beat some tough opponents in Pride, but everyone questioned his legitimacy because he was fighting in "freak show" fights.
So once Randy Couture returned to fighting and took out the top two guys in the UFC, everyone was clammoring to see these two go at it. But after long contract disputes between the UFC and M-1 Global, Fedor never signed with the UFC and Randy went on a year long tirade, claiming he was "quitting" the UFC for good because of what happened.
Fedor went on to fight other opponents that weren't up to his level, and Randy lost the heavyweight title to the current champion, Brock Lesnar. This fight will most likely never happen, but if there is any hope, hopefully someday soon, it will happen.
2. Wanderlei Silva vs. Fedor Emelianenko: Wanderlei Silva was the King of the Middleweight Division in Pride for six years. That's a long time and Wanderlei deserves the respect he often commands. Over the last three years people are starting to think Wanderlei is washed up and not the fighter he was in Pride, mostly due to the damage he has suffered in fighting.
That argument is debatable, but to deny that Wanderlei is still a contender in the sport of MMA is a complete bold faced lie.
Fedor on the other hand has been the the best Heavyweight on the planet ever since he stripped Minotauro Nogueira of the Pride Heavyweight crown in 2003. I've never heard any talks of this fight ever happening, but it is definitely one that I would have enjoyed seeing.
Wanderlei's balls to the wall, do or die fighting style vs. Fedor's unorthodox striking and lighting fast Sambo submissions. Most likely, this fight would have been a knockout and will most likely never happen since Fedor continues to fight guys that aren't up to his talent level and Wanderlei is now fighting in the Middleweight division.
3. Randy Couture vs. Wanderlei Silva : About seven years ago, Randy Couture was the top of the light heavyweight division in the UFC and knocked off the likes of Chuck Liddell, Tito Ortiz, and Vitor Belfort.
Wanderlei Silva was on a rampage in Pride and just blowing through everyone the promotion threw at him. After Randy Couture "lost" to Vitor Belfort, the UFC set up an immediate rematch for the two fighters. The Rubbermatch between the two went as expected, with Randy Couture dominating Belfort to the point that Vitor quit.
After the fight, they let Wanderlei Silva enter the octagon with Couture for a photo op. A picture for the world to see, making the people wonder, could this be next?!?!?!?!?!?
Unfortunately, that fight never came to fruition, with the UFC and Pride industries fighting over where the fight would take place, whether it would be co-promoted, what weight class would it be in, etc.
Eventually, people lost interest after Randy Couture got KO'd twice by Liddell and retired for awhile and Wanderlei was stuck in Pride for the next few years. This fight will most likely never happen since Randy is nearing the end of his career and Wanderlei is fighting in the middleweight division now. But one can always hope.
4. Anderson Silva vs. Georges St. Pierre : This is one of the dream matches fight fans are clamoring for today. Anderson Silva vs. GSP. It seems like the ultimate fight that everyone wants to see. especially since both fighters have cleared out there own divisions.
A lot of people speculate this fight would be fought at a catch weight of like 180 lbs., but here's something a lot of people don't know. GSP cuts A LOT of weight to fight at welterweight, so its no wonder he is so much stronger than all the other welterweights.
He could easily make the middleweight division and beat up top contenders there. But, I get the feeling, he will get an immediate title shot at Anderson Silva if he decides to move up in weight. Let's all keep our fingers crossed with this one. This fight may happen within the next year or so.
5. Brock Lesnar vs. Fedor Emelianenko: Those two names say it all. This is the other dream match of the present day that everyone wants to see. Brock Lesnar, the new breed of heavyweight vs. Fedor Emelianenko, the reigning number one heavyweight on the planet. Anybody can argue who would win this fight.
Ya, I know, everyone thinks Fedor will win, but Fedor had never faced a guy like Brock before. A LARGE Heavyweight, with freakish speed, and some actual fighting talent. There was talk of Fedor signing with the UFC after Affliction collapsed, but his promotional company M-1 Global blew up that signing agreement.
Since then Fedor has been hammered by the media about not fighting top quality opponents and Brock has been slowly gaining momentum as the better heavyweight. Hopefully, Fedor will dump M-1 Global and sign with the UFC, that way we can see this incredible battle take place.
All of these fights are the greatest fights anyone could ever see in my opinion. Some of them are past their expiration date and will never happen. But a few of them have hope, and just might happen one day. All of these fights can still happen, but because of the timing, there will be someone out there who says one guy is the best and the other needs to retire, or one fighter was overrated, etc. A fight is a fight, no matter where or when it happens. It's a fight between two guys, and they are the only one's who will decide the outcome of their fight.


text:
Developers are working on a major project on Mockingbird Lane in that would bring big changes to the area near UT Southwestern Medical Center and Love Field.
Trammell Crow Co. is in the planning stages for the large mixed-use development that will include hundreds of new apartments and retail space, real estate brokers say.
The project at Mockingbird and Forest Park Road in Dallas would use land that's owned by a California partnership.
Balcones Realty Partners — a company that includes championship boxer Oscar de la Hoya — bought the land in 2009 and planned to do a major mixed-use development.
That was just as the recession was taking hold, and the deal never moved ahead.
view graphic on dallasnews.com
The more than 30-acre property is along a creek that's being rechanneled in a city flood control project.
Brokers who work in the area say that Crow's High Street Residential is planning the project to take advantage of redevelopment of the old commercial district.
In the last five years, apartment builders have completed more than 2,000 rental units in the area along Maple Avenue and Inwood Road near UT Southwestern.
And the expansion of nearby Love Field is causing a renewed focus on the area.
High Street Residential is Crow's urban apartment and condominium development company. Since 2000, High Street has developed more than $1 billion in projects comprising more than 4,100 housing units.
High Street built the transit-oriented apartment and retail project in downtown Carrollton. It's a partner in the 5th Street Crossing project in downtown Garland and developer of DeSoto Town Center.
The Mockingbird land is owned by a company set up by Balcones Realty Partners and De La Hoya's Golden Boy Partners. The El Segundo-based company was formed in 2005 to invest in real estate projects that would support community redevelopment.
Golden Boy has done a theater, retail and office project in Daly City, Calif. The company also invested in office buildings in Oakland and Anaheim.
When the investors bought the Mockingbird Lane property in 2009, they planned a $90 million retail, restaurant and residential village to be built in Spanish Mission style with a large central park.


text:
LOS ANGELES L.A. Live's Club Nokia debuted last Sunday with a performance by native Angeleno Beck, who took a moment to note the massive entertainment complex had so transformed the downtown landscape, most people who grew up in the city wouldn't be able to recognize it anymore.
Club Nokia features an interactive, high-tech lobby lined with 60 LED screens, where attendees can upload and share photos, texts, or videos with fellow concertgoers. Anyone can access content from past performances through touch or foot screens.
The 59,000-square-foot club holds 2,300, offering a comparatively more intimate space for live performances than L.A. Live's 230,000-square-foot Nokia Theatre. The venue expects to host 150 annual performances, including upcoming shows by the B-52s and Sarah Silverman, who will take the club's 40-by 30-foot stage this month.
Club Nokia is available for corporate events or private parties, and offers exclusive catering by Wolfgang Puck.


text:
MIAMI — For two days, Dwyane Wade heard the critics in the wake of his six-point showing in Game 4 Monday night.
In the final eight minutes in Game 5 last night, Wade showed he still has some gas left in his tank.
After checking in with 8:27 to go — and after a lengthy stay in the locker room — Wade hit all three of his shots in the fourth to help lead the Heat to a 94-91 come-from-behind victory over the Bulls to clinch the Eastern Conference semifinal in front of a sellout crowd of 20,025 inside AmericanAirlines Arena.
"Out of all of the games in the playoffs, this is the best I've felt," Wade said, who finished with 18 points, five rebounds and six assists, adding that he went back into the locker room to get his ailing knee re-taped before coming back in the game in the fourth. "So hopefully I'm headed in the right direction."
The Heat await the winner of Knicks-Pacers in the Eastern Conference Finals, which will begin here next week.
"It's a Catch-22," said LeBron James, who finished with 23 points, seven rebounds and eight assists, while sitting next to Wade on the podium afterwards. "If he doesn't play, you guys are like, 'Why are you not in uniform? It's a playoff game.' When he does play and he's not scoring 20 points, it's 'D-Wade shouldn't be out there. He should rest.'
"I really don't care for it too much. … He is a Hall of Famer. He has two rings. He doesn't have to prove himself to no one."
After Chicago took its biggest lead of the game on a pair of free throws by Richard Hamilton with 1:50 remaining in the third quarter to take a 75-64 lead, the Heat finally responded with an 18-6 run to take the lead for the first time in the second half when Norris Cole hit a jumper with 6:59 remaining.
Then, after a Cole dunk on the next possession put Miami ahead for good, Wade scored six of the next eight points for the Heat, including an emphatic tip-back slam dunk to give the Heat a 93-86 lead with 3:02 remaining.
"I know a lot of people were giving him that question mark," said Chris Bosh, who had 12 points and seven rebounds. "Even if he was going to play, they weren't really sure what he'd bring. We always know what he's capable of. He was really able to put his imprint on the game late.
"Without that spurt, we probably don't win."
Chicago had one last chance to tie the game when it had the ball down three with 26.9 seconds left, but missed two clean looks from behind the arc to tie the game — one from Nate Robinson with 15.9 seconds left, and another from Jimmy Butler with 1.8 seconds left — and the Bulls were sent home.
"You live with it," Bulls coach Tom Thibodeau said of the final possession.
"I knew that we would fight back. I knew we wouldn't go away."
Things never should've gotten that close for the Heat after they leapt out to an 18-2 lead in the first five minutes of the game. But, like they have throughout these playoffs, the Bulls just kept on coming.
Despite once again being without Derrick Rose, Kirk Hinrich and Luol Deng, the Bulls — who already fought their way past the Nets and took Game 1 of this series from the Heat despite being undermanned — somehow clawed their way back into the game, going on a 34-14 run to take the lead late in the second quarter on a Jimmy Butler 3-pointer, a lead they would hold all the way into the fourth, giving the Heat all they could handle before finally going home for the summer.
"I need at least 24 hours off after going against those guys," James said with a smile afterward. "They're very tough, mentally and physically."


text:
Search Local History Articles
- Architecture
- Arts
- Community Services
- Crime & Public Safety
- Cultural Diversity
- Disasters & Calamities
- Executive Order 9066 and the Residents of Santa Cruz County
- Films
- Government
- In the 19th Century
- In the 20th Century
- Libraries & Schools
- Making a Living
- People
- Places
- Recreation & Sports
- Religion & Spirituality
- Spanish Period & Earlier
- Tourism
- Transportation
- Unusual & Curious
- Weather & Pop. Stats.
- World War II
Santa Cruz County History - People
Old Soldiers: Santa Cruz County Civil War Veterans
by Robert L. Nelson
Santa Cruz Great Register (1892-1896)
W.H. Whipple indicated that he was 63 years old, a farmer and a native of New York and described as being 5'7" tall dark complexioned with Grey (Green?) eyes and grey hair residing in Soquel when he registered on September 10, 1892. He was registered in Soquel precinct #2.
Santa Cruz Great Register (1896-1899)
W.H. Whipple indicated that he was 67 years old, a farmer and a native of New York and described as being 5'7" tall dark complexioned with Grey (Green?) eyes and grey hair residing in Soquel when he registered on June 4, 1896. He was registered in Soquel precinct #2.
Civil War Veteran Pension Application File, US National Archives in San Bruno, CA
Henry W Whipple, Appl. # 141957, Cert # 112,320-, Co G 97th IL Inf.
Filing Date 04/08/1869.
Pensions on Role, Boone County MO (1883)
|Certificate #
|Henry W Whipple
|Post Office
|Burlington [MO]
|Cause for which pensioned:
|Necrosis r. leg
|Monthly Rate
|Orig Date
Santa Cruz County Hospital Record (December 27, 1898)
H.W. Whipple, a Native of N.Y. Occupation Farmer, Age 79, Widower, admitted December 27, 1898 With La Grippe (Influenza). Died Jan 1, 1899.
Santa Cruz Sentinel (August 2, 1898)
H Henry Whipple was arrested Monday for assault with a pistol on P.J. Americh a camper at New Brighton. His bail was fixed at $250 pending his trial in Justice Craghill's court.
Santa Cruz Sentinel (August 14, 1898)
H. Whipple was convicted Saturday in Justice Craghill's court of exhibiting a gun in a threatening manner. A motion was made for a new trial.
Santa Cruz Sentinel (January 2, 1899)
DIED: Whittle - In this city H.W. Whittle, a native of Missouri, aged 69.
Santa Cruz Surf (January 4, 1899)
The funeral of W.H. Whipple was held this afternoon under the auspices of Wallace Reynolds GAR.
Santa Cruz Sentinel (May 29, 1901)
List of Heroes Who Answered Their Country's Call
Comrades Will Honor Their Memories on Decoration Day-Flowers for the Brave
The following is a list of deceased veterans interred in cemeteries of this county, and whose graves will be covered with flower on Decoration Day [...] W.H. Whipple
Notes from the descendants of Henry W Whipple
Dan Matthews, great grandson of H.W. Whipple, shared the fact that he was born in New York State in 1820. He married his first wife Mary A. who was born in New York in 1836. They had a son Seth born in 1851 and two daughters Martha and Melinda. In the mid to late 1850s they moved first to Wisconsin and then to Missouri where they apparently settled. On the 1860 Morgan County Missouri census for Syracuse township, Henry is listed as being a 31 year old resident who was a stone mason by trade. Also listed was a wife, Polly, who died In 1861. Henry subsequently remarried a woman by the name of Mary. To that union a son Warren was born in 1863. Henry enlisted for service in the civil war. After the Civil war he moved to Clay Township, Harrison County, Iowa where Henry age 46, appears on the August 4th census of 1870, along with his wife Mary and children. In the census of 1880 conducted on June 11, he appears in township 106 (later named Madison) Lake County South Dakota. In 1885 he appears within the minutes of the General Shields Post #22 of Madison South Dakota as Quartermaster Sergeant. In approximately 1888 he migrated to Clovis, California and later moved with his son Seth and his family to Soquel. Henry was apparently somewhat of a wanderer and his residence in Santa Cruz may have been infrequent. As legend has it Henry Whipple appeared to enjoy drinking with members of the Porter family in Soquel. While he was welcome in Seth's home when Henry arrived intoxicated, he would be encouraged to leave. His visits were often unexpected and family members were not even aware of his final days at the county hospital.
Shirley Stanley, great granddaughter, indicated that she had been told that on Memorial Day Henry Whipple would put on his old soldier clothes and make his way out to the cemetery in an attempt to pick up as many "perks" as possible along the way. She also noted that chronological burial location in the GAR plot for Henry Whipple determined by the SUVCW, coincides with the area described by her father as being the grave location he remembers.
Robert Lincoln, a great grandson indicated that stories within the family made reference to Henry''s drinking problem and friendship with members of the Porter family. Henry may have made several trips back east according to Robert Lincoln; however he doesn't know where the funding for those excursions may have come from. He was also told that Henry had an unusual feature of having a double row of teeth. Like Shirley Stanley, he was told that Henry Whipple was buried in the front corner of the GAR plot.
>>Return to Home Page of Old Soldiers: Santa Cruz County Civil War Veterans
>>Return to "W" Index Page
It is our continuing goal to make available a selection of articles on various subjects and places in Santa Cruz County. Certain topics, however, have yet to be researched. In other cases, we were not granted permission to use articles. The content of the articles is the responsibility of the individual author. It is the Library's intent to provide accurate local history information. However, it is not possible for the Library to completely verify the accuracy of individual articles obtained from a variety of sources. If you believe that factual statements in a local history article are incorrect and can provide documentation, please contact the Webmaster.


text:
There is no mistake that this festival of jazz and improvised music took place in October 1987. After all, 23 years earlier the October Revolution took place across the ocean in New York and players such as Albert Ayler, Archie Shepp, Paul Bley, Sam Rivers, the Ornette Coleman Trio, and many others took over Greenwich Village and created the Free Jazz movement that changed the music forever. The Dutch Jazz Foundation sponsored the October Meeting, an eight-day festival under the direction of Huub van Riel. Musicians were allowed to pick their own collaborators and choose their own programs to perform -- dissimilar to the way most festivals work, especially the corporate-sponsored events in the United States. This disc highlights three collaborative performances: John Zorn with a quartet featuring Guus Janssen on piano, Mark Dresser on bass, and Martin von Duynhoven on drums; Janssen with a trio of trombonists including Walter Wierbos and Jonathan & Conrad Bauer; and finally, a duet between turntablist Christian Marclay and French reedist Louis Sclavis. The Zorn piece is of particular interest because it revisits three 1960s-era compositions by pianist Misha Mengelberg. The first is a standard blues called, appropriately enough, "Number One." Zorn plays in the manner he did on Voodoo with the Sonny Clark Memorial Quartet. His chops are raw, rough, and ready for the hard bop blues Mengelberg created. Janssen, however, extrapolates upon the piano solo, moving it into territory favored more by Herbie Nichols than anybody else, especially with his arpeggiated chords in the middle of the break. When he brings it back, Zorn reveals how he has slightly altered the harmonics in the tune and has the band sprawled out over a three-chord vamp while he nips and tucks at the intervals with angular, bleating lines and squeaky responses to Dresser's bass call. On "G-Blues," Zorn turns a standard blues into a modal workout for quartet. The sounds of the Miles Davis Quintet emanate from the band as Zorn does his best Jackie McLean during his solo, while Janssen creates an off-key modality with timbral shifts on the middle register flats, playing them against the major G blues. Janssen's original composition, "Et on t'a Fait Douter," is a variation on a theme by Yannis Xenakis that was originally conceived for one piano, two trumpets, and three trombones. He makes due with the trio of trombones and his own pianism. The interplay between the four instruments is fascinating, particularly in the places where the trombones have to speak among themselves -- often in one harmonic, timbral voice, sometimes bickering, sometimes complementing one another. The anchor is always Janssen's piano, even if he is the contrapuntal element in the conversation. His cadences and shimmering glissandi offer respites tonally and harmonically from the brassy raucousness. Finally, the Marclay/Sclavis improv steals the show because it's so weird, so completely out to lunch that it had no choice but to work. With Marclay providing atmospheres and textures as well as rhythmic shifts and turns, Sclavis is truly free to explore any tonal universe he chooses on all three of his instruments (the soprano saxophone, the clarinet, and the bass clarinet). The interesting use of dynamics by Marclay -- since he basically controls them with his mash of sounds and noises -- forces Sclavis to examine how timbral and microtonal changes in color and texture further sound as a universe, rather than as an elemental part of composition or improvisation. For almost half an hour this pair dance into sonic and musical terrains never imagined before that date and seldom visited since. Judging by this small offering from over eight days of sessions, the October Meeting was a tremendous success that produced startling and pleasurable revelations for both the musicians who participated and for the audiences that bore witness to these startling new directions.
Various Artists
October Meeting 1987, Vol. 1
Share this page
AllMusic Review by Thom Jurek
Track Listing


text:
PRZOOM - /newswire/ -
Pune, Maharashtra, India, 2007/01/07 - Elscint Automation, the leading ISO 9001 Certified Vibratory Bowl Feeder manufacturer from India has introduced a Sorting & Grading Unit for small Shims.
The Elscint Sorting and Grading Unit is designed to feed, sort and grade components like shims which require to be graded according to their thickness. This Unit operates at a speed in excess of 150 p.p.m., depending on the size of the components.
The system utilizes an Elscint Vibratory Bowl Feeder of suitable mode amongst the 6 Models of Elscint Vibratory Bowl Feeders. The Bowl Feeder feeds the parts to a set of powered gauge rolls. These are powered by an Elscint Geared Motor of suitable rating. The inclination of the rolls, plus adjustable roll spacing from one end to the other enables parts to move / travel easily and rapidly into the desired position, while moving them to the discharge point. Undersized parts are first separated, followed by those within tolerance.
Oversize and damaged or oversize parts continue to the end of the rolls and are discharged into a separate container.
An important feature is that the rolls being counter-rotating does not bind or grip the parts and are extremely sensitive to fine tolerances.
The basic unit works on a fixed speed, however, optionally Elscint can also offer Sensor and a variable speed AC or DC motor fitted with an Elscint Reduction Unit. This unit offers high flexibility for the user and can also be used for sorting and grading of Balls, Taper Rollers, Pins and similar components.
About Elscint Automation
ISO 9001 Certified manufacturers of Vibratory Bowl Feeders, Linear Vibrators, Small Parts Conveyor Feeders, Rotary Feeders, Worm Reduction Gear Boxes and Geared Motors. Vibratory Bowl Feeders are having CE Marking.
Agency / Source: Elscint Automation
Availability: All Regions (Including Int'l)
Traffic Booster: [/] Quick PRZOOM - Press & Newswire Visibility Checker
Distribution / Indexing: [+]


text:
Results 1 to 5 of 12
December 30th, 2010 09:25 PM #1Junior Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2010
- Posts
- 27
December 30th, 2010 09:33 PM #3Senior Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Location
- Olathe, KS
- Posts
- 229
Re: My mom said this name sounds like a fungal infection...
Your mom and my mom should have a drink together. Lol! Auden Aurelia is a beautiful name. Some people just can't handle originality. Auden is fine for a girl. My husband and I made the mistake when I was pregnant of sharing most names with our family. Every name was scrutinized by at least one person. Next time we might keep our choices to ourselves.Mama to Vincent Robert "Vince" Age 3. 5th Generation "V" and Henry Donovan "Hanky Pank" "Spanky" 10/27/11.
December 30th, 2010 09:34 PM #5Junior Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2010
- Posts
- 6
December 30th, 2010 09:40 PM #7
Re: My mom said this name sounds like a fungal infection...
Auden Aurelia is a lovely name! Auden is one of the few surnames that work for a girl due to its soft and somewhat feminine sound. Your mother will soon get on board when she sees her granddaughter for the first time.
Don't let anyone's negative comments dissuade you from choosing a name you love! Best wishes!All the best,
December 30th, 2010 10:14 PM #9Senior Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Posts
- 666
Re: My mom said this name sounds like a fungal infection...
Oh gosh, it is FAR from it. Auden Aurelia is gorgeous! It absolutely works on a girl, I adore the name Auden. Don't change a thing. From now on, I recommend telling your mom that you will be naming her "tinea capitis" (the name for ringworm/fungus of the scalp, lol) -- this will get her off your back and can be a running joke


text:
HAIFA (Jul. 19)
Eight members of an Israeli Arab juvenile spy ring were sentenced yesterday in Haifa Juvenile Court to prison terms. Their ages averaged 14 years. The ringleader, described as a 14-year-old boy who had been active in obtaining security information for Jordan prior to the June war, was ordered confined for six years.
The seven other youthful defendants were given terms ranging from one to three years.
Meanwhile, police reported the arrest of an adult from an Israeli Arab village near Haifa, who was charged with having participated in an espionage ring which was smashed two years ago. The suspect returned to Israel yesterday from a stay in Germany where he reportedly had contact with Syrian intelligence agents.


text:
Get an overview of this hotelPeaceful hotel close to bustling Kudamm
Popular property highlights
Near Berlin Zoo
This hotel faces a quiet street in the centre of Berlin's west half, three blocks from Berlin Zoo and four blocks from the city's main shopping area and restaurant area, Kudamm.
Attractions nearby
Guests can enjoy a full American breakfast buffet before strolling the area, which includes attractions like tours on the Spree River canal; there is a restaurant and a bar on-site.
Premium bedding, pillow menu
Wyndham Berlin Excelsior's contemporary air-conditioned guestrooms feature premium bedding, pillowtop mattresses, international Pay-TV, coffee and tea makers, free WiFi, safes and minibars.
Guest Highlights
- Good location
- Proximity to public transit and shopping
- Helpful staff
- Clean guestrooms
Wyndham Berlin Excelsior
Hotel Amenities
Hotel Amenities
A restaurant and a bar/lounge are featured at the Wyndham Berlin Excelsior. Guests can enjoy free newspaper in the hotel lobby with fireplace and TV, staffed around the clock. The concierge can help procure tickets to popular tours. There's a handy laundry facility, too.
Featured amenities include a library and a 24-hour business center with conference space. Guests can use the computer station to keep in touch with friends and family, and free WiFi is available in public areas. Self parking (surcharge) is available.
- Concierge services
- Free newspapers in lobby
- Babysitting or childcare (surcharge)
- Bar/lounge
- Restaurant
- Conference space
- 24-hour front desk
- Porter/bellhop
- Multilingual staff
- Safe-deposit box at front desk
- Elevator/lift
- Breakfast available (surcharge)
- Coffee/tea in common areas
- Express check-out
- Free WiFi
- Computer station
- Luggage storage
- Tours/ticket assistance
- Express check-in
- Laundry facilities
- Total number of rooms - 316
- Library
- Number of floors - 8
- Meeting rooms 5
- Conference space size (feet) - 3444
- Self parking (surcharge)
- Conference space size (meters) - 320
- Number of buildings/towers - 1
- Dry cleaning/laundry service
- Fireplace in lobby
- Year Built 1979
- 24-hour business center
- Television in common areas
Family Friendly Amenities
- Family Hotel
- Free Wi-Fi
- Soundproofed rooms
- Laundry facilities
- Babysitting or childcare (surcharge)
- In-room childcare (surcharge)
- Cribs/infant beds (complimentary)
Available in all rooms: Free WiFi
Available in some public areas: Free WiFi
Self parking (surcharge)
Room Amenities
- Pay movies
- Hypo-allergenic bedding available
- Premium bedding
- Room service (limited hours)
- In-room climate control (air conditioning)
- Air conditioning
- Blackout drapes/curtains
- Minibar
- Private bathroom
- Free toiletries
- Hair dryer
- In-room massage available
- Shower/tub combination
- In-room childcare (surcharge)
- Desk
- Iron/ironing board (on request)
- Phone
- Coffee/tea maker
- Cable TV service
- Flat-panel TV
- Free WiFi
- Soundproofed rooms
- Free newspaper
- Daily housekeeping
- Individually furnished
- Pillowtop mattress
- Pillow menu
- Free cribs/infant beds
- Connecting/adjoining rooms available
- Rollaway/extra beds (surcharge)
- In-room safe
Where to Eat
FRANKE Brasserie - Serves a hot and cold buffet breakfast (surcharge) each morning from from 6.30 AM to 10.30 AM.
FRANKE Bar and Lounge - Lobby bar open nightly for cocktails, espresso, cakes.
Nearby Things to Do
- Bicycle rentals nearby
If you have requests for specific accessibility needs, please note them at check-out when you book your room.
Hotel Policies
Minimum check-in age is 18
Check-in time ends at 5:30 AM
Check-in time starts at 3 PM
Special check-in instructions:
Check-out time is noon
Payment types
Children and extra beds
- Children are welcome.
- Kids stay free! Up to 2 children 12 years old and younger stay free when using existing bedding.
- Rollaway/extra beds are available for EUR 40 per night.
- Free cribs (infant beds)!
- Pets allowed for an extra charge of EUR 10 per pet, per night
- 2 per room
- Restrictions apply
- For more information contact the property at the number on the booking confirmation
You need to know
Extra-person charges may apply and vary depending on property policy.
- The name on the credit card used at check-in to pay for incidentals must be the primary name on the guestroom reservation.
- Deposit: EUR 50.00 per day
- A city tax is imposed by the city of Berlin. Business travelers with proof of business-related travel are exempt from this tax. For more details, please contact the property using the information on the reservation confirmation received after booking.
- Resort fee
Optional extras
- Fee for buffet breakfast: EUR 18.00 for adults and EUR 0 for children (approximately)
- Self parking fee: EUR 17.00 per day (in/out privileges)
- Pet fee: EUR 10 per pet, per night
- Early check-in fee: EUR 15.00
- Late check-out fee: EUR 50.00
- Rollaway bed fee: EUR 40 per night
Hotel Name
- Berlin Excelsior
- Berlin Wyndham Excelsior
- Excelsior Berlin
- Excelsior Wyndham Berlin
- Wyndham Berlin
- Wyndham Berlin Excelsior
- Wyndham Excelsior
- Wyndham Excelsior Berlin
- Wyndham Excelsior Hotel
- Wyndham Excelsior Hotel Berlin
- Wyndham Berlin Excelsior Hotel
We should mention
This property offers transfers from the airport. Guests must contact the property with arrival details before travel, using the contact information on the booking confirmation. A resort fee is included in the total price displayed. Up to 2 children 12 years old and younger stay free when occupying the parent or guardian's room, using existing bedding. The property has connecting/adjoining rooms, which are subject to availability and can be requested by contacting the property using the number on the booking confirmation. Guests can arrange to bring pets by contacting the property directly, using the contact information on the booking confirmation (surcharges apply and can be found in the Fees section).


text:
JOHANNESBURG (Oct. 21)
Deputy Mayor Allen Gorshel, a prominent member of the Jewish community here, is expected to succeed the present Jewish mayor of Johannesburg, Ian Malts, following next month's mayoralty election here. The Johannesburg City Council will nominate Mr. Gorshel for the post, it was learned today.
Mr. Gorshel's election is considered certain as minority groups are unlikely to propose a rival candidate. Both Mayor Maltz and Deputy Mayor Gorshel have won the respect of all sections of Johannesburg for their civic work.


text:
A REMINDER about the open evening for all existing and prospective parents of children aged from 2-5 years, which takes place on Friday between 5pm and 8pm in Tillingham village hall.
The committee will be there to talk to parents, and members of staff will also be on hand to explain what happens at preschool.
For those who already have children in the group it is an opportunity to discuss progress, and for those with children coming up for the age to attend it is a chance to see what is available in learning at this stage.
Some of the toys and activities will be on display.
THERE is, as yet, no opportunity for wandering among the trees and bluebells of Tillingham's own wood, but TWIG is quietly progressing very well with its ambitious project to plant an area for generations to come.
Information about this and the support being given by many organisations can be found on www.twigs.org.uk or by ringing 01621 778859.
In the meantime, for those who would like to enjoy a day out in an established wood and share the company of people who have already done so much to provide a new attraction in Tillingham, there is a free spring walk planned for Sunday, April 27.
It will be in Hazeleigh Wood, Lodge Road, Hazeleigh (follow the small signs into the lane, on the left of the A414 driving from Maldon's Morrisons towards the Woodham Mortimer roundabout).
This private woodland is normally closed, but in association with Twig and Essex Art the owners will open it that day and be on hand to show how it is managed, and give information about woodcrafts and the making of charcoal.
The bluebells will make ideal scenes for painters and photographers, and in the wood there will be a nature trail for youngsters.
Twig members will be there to help identify trees and explain their Tillingham woodland project, and also present will be the MDC tree officer and experts from Essex Art, a company that offers solutions to all tree problems.
Refreshments will be available, so come as a family and bring friends to have a spring walk through a well-managed mature wood and think about the one planned for Tillingham.
THE Tillingham Bowls Club, based in the clubhouse at the north west corner of the West Field behind the fine hedge, will be opening on Saturday at 2.30pm for the summer season.
There may be newcomers to the village who have wanted a chance to play this game, or others who have planned each year to take up the sport but never got round to it.
For this reason there will be a Bowls for Beginners course running on the first four Thursday evenings next month: May 1, 8, 15 and 22, from 6.30pm to 8.30pm.
Qualified instructors will give free tuition, all you need to do is bring a pair of flat-soled shoes as all other equipment will be loaned for the duration of the course.
Afterwards, you can discuss it all while enjoying a drink in the friendly bar, and find out more about the lively social scene at the club. Members greatly enjoy their sport and want others to enjoy it too.
If Thursdays are not convenient, please ring Pam or Alfie Burton on 01621 779575 to see if alternative times can be arranged.
IF you do not want to take up bowls, remember that the Tillingham handbell ringers are still looking for one or two new members to join their group of about seven people.
Everyone meets at Tony Batten's house at Bridgeman's Cottages on the last bend before the farm down at the end of the righthand branch in Marsh Road.
There is no need to be able to read music to join the handbell ringers, but if you turn up at 7.45pm on a Tuesday evening you are certain to enjoy a couple of hours with this informal group, and there is no commitment if you do not want to take it further.
Call John Barnes on 01621 779267 if you want more information, or if you are in need of a lift go get there.


text:
|low graphics version | feedback | help
|You are in: World: Africa
Friday, 22 September, 2000, 09:05 GMT 10:05 UK
Sierra Leone peacekeeping crisis
The Sierra Leone Government says it is disturbed by India's decision to withdraw its troops from the UN peacekeeping mission in the country.
Indian units make up a quarter of the 12,000-strong UN force and are the best-equipped.
Diplomats say Jordan has also been indicating that it does not want its troops to remain in Sierra Leone unless at least one Nato country can be persuaded to play a significant role in the force.
The Sierra Leone government says it is in discussions with the UN to make sure the Indian troops are replaced.
But UN spokesman Fred Eckhardt has admitted that this will not be easy.
Sierra Leone Information Minister Dr Julius Spencer told BBC's Focus on Africa programme that they would be pleased if a Nato country were to get involved "because it would send, we believe, a very positive moral message to the whole world".
And he said that they had discussed this possibility with the British Government, but refused to give any further details
Indian diplomats are presenting the decision as a routine rotation, following nearly two years of service by their military observers and peacekeepers in Sierra Leone.
But it is no secret that General Jetley's relations with other troop contributors, most notably Nigeria, have been extremely fraught.
And the timing of the withdrawal could hardly be worse for the UN as UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan is facing problems finding countries prepared to send extra soldiers to increase the size of the force to 20,500.
The Indian units are expected to leave Sierra Leone in phases, giving the UN time to find replacements.
But problems securing the extra troops has held up a Security Council vote to increase the force by an extra 7,500 soldiers.
See also:
22 Sep 00 | Africa
Analysis: Filling the void in Sierra Leone
23 Aug 00 | Americas
UN peacekeeping record
07 Sep 00 | Americas
UN reviews role in Africa
12 Sep 00 | Africa
Annan demands unity on Sierra Leone
07 Sep 00 | Americas
Africa: UN's 'strategic ghetto'
23 Aug 00 | Americas
UN peacekeeping under review
Internet links:
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites
Top Africa stories now:
Links to more Africa stories are at the foot of the page.
Links to more Africa stories
|^^ Back to top
News Front Page | World | UK | UK Politics | Business | Sci/Tech | Health | Education | Entertainment | Talking Point | In Depth | AudioVideo
To BBC Sport>> | To BBC Weather>>
© MMIII | News Sources | Privacy