The result of the move request was: histories switched back to their original places. I'm not sure why Anthony has done a swap here, as several people have noted it is definitely not standard practice to swap out 10+ years of editing history for a draft. If people wish to work on improvements to an article in a draft or user sandbox they are welcome to, but it comes at the expense of having to just copy/paste the finished product in. I will hist-split as much as I can (basically post-April 2016) so that none of the edits since Anthony's swap are lost. The old draft history will be moved back to Draft:Dodge Tomahawk in order to make the history more comprehensible. Jenks24 (talk) 16:34, 2 May 2016 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-05-02T16:34:00.000Z","author":"Jenks24","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Jenks24-2016-05-02T16:34:00.000Z-Requested_move_8_April_2016","replies":[]}}-->
Dodge Tomahawk → ? –
Nobody voiced any objections to the new version, except an editor who is banned from responding to my edits. He should have ben blocked for his posts on your talk page about me. He is supposed to be blocked immediately without warning if he posts about me, my edits, or responds to me anywhere on Wikipedia.
Aside from editors who should not be houndng me, the new version is uncontroversial, and more to the point: it is obviously a much better, well-sourced article, citing dozens of experts in the subject. Per WP:PEACOCK, it replaces vague generalizations about the importance and impact of the subject with specific cited ratings, awards and expert commentary, as it says: "Instead of making unprovable proclamations about a subject's importance, use facts and attribution to demonstrate that importance". It quotes well-known publications and expert reviewers, and discusses points of disagreement, criticism, and praise in a balanced way. There are no obvious problems with the version created by User:Vintagent, User:Brianhe and me. It should be kept unless anyone has reasonable objections. The interference on your talk page should be ignored, and the expanded version belons in the article namespace now. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:56, 8 April 2016 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-08T22:56:00.000Z","author":"Dennis Bratland","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Dennis_Bratland-2016-04-08T22:56:00.000Z-Anthony_Appleyard-2016-04-08T20:44:00.000Z","replies":["c-Clpo13-2016-04-08T23:13:00.000Z-Dennis_Bratland-2016-04-08T22:56:00.000Z"]}}-->
Regarding the copy/paste move, I had thought a copy/paste was acceptable if you follow it with a {{Histmerge}} request. If I'm mistaken about that, then let's go live with the draft version with whatever the technically correct procedure is. I don't know if the histories can be merged perfectly but we should do whatever it is we do in these cases and move on, unless anyone else is objecting. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:53, 8 April 2016 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-08T23:53:00.000Z","author":"Dennis Bratland","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Dennis_Bratland-2016-04-08T23:53:00.000Z-Requested_move_8_April_2016","replies":["c-70.51.45.100-2016-04-09T04:23:00.000Z-Dennis_Bratland-2016-04-08T23:53:00.000Z","c-Anthony_Appleyard-2016-04-09T07:54:00.000Z-Dennis_Bratland-2016-04-08T23:53:00.000Z"]}}-->
@Anthony Appleyard: I don't see any justification for this swapping in of an entirely new version of an article, in the process also replacing the original editing history. The original article was recently discussed and agreed upon by several editors as balanced and accurate, as the Talk history indicates (including an RfC). Changes, including addition of new material, should be made incrementally as is our normal practice, allowing all editors easy access to the entire editing history and participants. That is the basic Wikipedia approach. --Tsavage (talk) 00:28, 10 April 2016 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-10T00:28:00.000Z","author":"Tsavage","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Tsavage-2016-04-10T00:28:00.000Z-Requested_move_8_April_2016","replies":["c-Tsavage-2016-04-10T00:58:00.000Z-Tsavage-2016-04-10T00:28:00.000Z","c-Anthony_Appleyard-2016-04-11T21:45:00.000Z-Tsavage-2016-04-10T00:28:00.000Z","c-Anthony_Appleyard-2016-04-11T22:22:00.000Z-Tsavage-2016-04-10T00:28:00.000Z","c-Anthony_Appleyard-2016-04-11T22:39:00.000Z-Tsavage-2016-04-10T00:28:00.000Z","c-Anthony_Appleyard-2016-04-11T23:00:00.000Z-Tsavage-2016-04-10T00:28:00.000Z","c-Diego_Moya-2016-04-14T05:50:00.000Z-Tsavage-2016-04-10T00:28:00.000Z"]}}-->
The edits you want restored consist of wholesale deletions of well-cited facts. Several editors objected to your deletions, while you and a few others stonewalled and refused every compromise you were offered by a group of us expanding the article with reliable sources. You dug your heels in and left us at an impasse. That is not stable and there is no consensus for that.
I think the next step is to take this to the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard if you really think all that stuff you don't like has to be deleted. Going to that noticeboard with this is the fastest, cleanest way to show how policy applies here. The idea that WP:UNDUE disallows critical reaction to a car company's product, or debunking of outlandish speed claims, will be laughed out of there in no time, and we can all move on to doing something productive. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:56, 10 April 2016 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-10T03:56:00.000Z","author":"Dennis Bratland","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Dennis_Bratland-2016-04-10T03:56:00.000Z-Tsavage-2016-04-10T00:58:00.000Z","replies":["c-Tsavage-2016-04-10T04:59:00.000Z-Dennis_Bratland-2016-04-10T03:56:00.000Z"]}}-->
Discussion about better technical ways of handling this sort of thing could be taken up at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) or similar noticeboard. The history and merge stuff does not in any way urgently require reversion back. One editor says he doesn't like it, but his only substantive objection was that the history can't be seen, and Anthony pointed out that in fact it can, and there is a prominent link to it at the very top of the article. Immediate problem solved.
Regarding the other issue -- a completely separate issue -- that Tsavage thinks some or all of the content violates WP:UNDUE, we have gone round and round in circles on that. The time has come for the next stage in dispute resolution. As I said, Tsavage, please go to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard and detail which content you want deleted (I assume your goal is still only deletion of some content, because you have nothing to add, right?) and then enumerate the specific reasons why the content you want to delete violates the WP:NPOV policy. The NPOV noticeboard will quickly resolve it. This is a fast, easy, non-distruptive way to end this standoff. Given that Tsavage has rejected again and again every other compromise that has been offered to him, it would be disruptive editing to insist that the article simply revert to his preferred version when he will not take any steps to move us closer to a solution to the content dispute.
If Tsavage refuses to speak for himself at the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard, then in a week or so I will start a new thread where I will do my best to describe what I think are his POV issues here, and ask for a resolution. But really, the best thing is for Tsavage to speak for himself. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:59, 12 April 2016 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-12T00:59:00.000Z","author":"Dennis Bratland","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-Dennis_Bratland-2016-04-12T00:59:00.000Z-Tsavage-2016-04-12T00:48:00.000Z","replies":["c-Brianhe-2016-04-12T02:38:00.000Z-Dennis_Bratland-2016-04-12T00:59:00.000Z"]}}-->
You are citing Wikipedia rules that nobody but you has ever heard of. If you do decide to go to AN/I (and I think that's not the right noticeboard, and you'll very likely get no conclusive result from a long discussion there), please try to stay focused on one issue at a time. I gather you object to Anthony's history merge solution (I'd start a discussion at Village Pump (technical), if I were you), and (separately) you think some of the content violates WP:UNDUE. AN/I is definitely not the right board for the second issue. WP:NPOV/N is the place for the second one. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:18, 12 April 2016 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-12T22:18:00.000Z","author":"Dennis Bratland","type":"comment","level":7,"id":"c-Dennis_Bratland-2016-04-12T22:18:00.000Z-Tsavage-2016-04-12T21:41:00.000Z","replies":["c-Brianhe-2016-04-12T22:37:00.000Z-Dennis_Bratland-2016-04-12T22:18:00.000Z"]}}-->
Why did the article undergo such a major change from [1] to [2]? I assumed this article was the work of multiple editors who gained consensus over time for the current version, but I was wrong. You took it upon yourself to copy/paste your own version of the article, wow. I guess that is BOLD. It's also totally unacceptable. I wasn't so wrong when I suggested you might think you own this article. Sennen Goroshi ! (talk) 21:33, 7 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-07T21:33:00.000Z","author":"Sennen goroshi","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T21:33:00.000Z-There_was_no_consensus_for_major_changes","replies":["c-Bri-2019-12-07T22:14:00.000Z-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T21:33:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Sennen Goroshi\u00a0!"}}-->
Dennis made that edit not you. This article is suffering from WP:OWN issues and no amount of targeted harassment against me will change that. Sennen Goroshi ! (talk) 22:31, 7 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-07T22:31:00.000Z","author":"Sennen goroshi","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T22:31:00.000Z-There_was_no_consensus_for_major_changes","replies":["c-Dennis_Bratland-2019-12-07T22:39:00.000Z-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T22:31:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Sennen Goroshi\u00a0!"}}-->
I think we edit and interact in different ways, Dennis. While you find constant disputes and visits to various admin report boards to be productive, I prefer discussion and respect. I find the idea that someone would try to get someone blocked for merely forming an attachment to an article to be ridiculous. Sennen Goroshi ! (talk) 22:48, 7 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-07T22:48:00.000Z","author":"Sennen goroshi","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T22:48:00.000Z-There_was_no_consensus_for_major_changes","replies":[],"displayName":"Sennen Goroshi\u00a0!"}}-->
I'd suggest going to WP:UNDUE and carefully reading all of it. The issue throughout is not giving disproportionate weight to minority views. So this section blanking by Sennen goroshi doesn't seem to take the sources overall into consideration. The importance of its speed isn't found only among the minority; it's the overwhelming majority. The Tomahawk's speed is covered as the first and often only topic. If one was going to remove content because only a minority of sources discuss it, then the main targets would be the development process, the design, the aesthetic reviews, the Detroit Auto Show. Speed is the one topic virtually every source covers. The extreme speed claims are in fact the only reason this concept vehicle can even be considered notable. Take that away and the topic probably wouldn't survive an AfD. — Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:40, 5 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-05T23:40:00.000Z","author":"Dennis Bratland","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Dennis_Bratland-2019-12-05T23:40:00.000Z-Speed_and_undue_weight","replies":[]}}-->
Devoting 50% of the article to some petty squabble over tongue in cheek comments regarding hypothetical top speeds of a vehicle that never made it past the concept stage, is undue weight. End of story. Sennen Goroshi ! (talk) 08:16, 7 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-07T08:16:00.000Z","author":"Sennen goroshi","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T08:16:00.000Z-Speed_and_undue_weight","replies":["c-Dennis_Bratland-2019-12-07T16:56:00.000Z-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T08:16:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Sennen Goroshi\u00a0!"}}-->
Read the sources yourself any show me how this topic isn't this significant. Since you don't base your claims on sources, to me it appears that you just don't like it. But you liking it isn't a factor. —Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:56, 7 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-07T16:56:00.000Z","author":"Dennis Bratland","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Dennis_Bratland-2019-12-07T16:56:00.000Z-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T08:16:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
Look, I understand that you have made a lot of edits on this article and feel that gives you some form of control over it, but I'm afraid that isn't how Wikipedia works. I agree that the article needs to mention the top-speed and the fact that it has never been proven. But, it's highly delusional to expect 50% of the article to be spent on that bullshit. Take a look at similar articles, for example the Bugatti Veyron article which far more press concerning its top speed, now look how much space is devoted to the highly publicized and discussed top speed of the Veyron - not 50% buddy. Sennen Goroshi ! (talk) 17:29, 7 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-07T17:29:00.000Z","author":"Sennen goroshi","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T17:29:00.000Z-Speed_and_undue_weight","replies":["c-Dennis_Bratland-2019-12-07T18:02:00.000Z-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T17:29:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Sennen Goroshi\u00a0!"}}-->
Second, do not use accusations of editor behavior offenses to get your way in an content dispute. If you think I have violated the Ownership of content policy, then go to an appropriate noticeboard and make your complaint there, not here. Casting aspersions is not acceptable, so quit while you're ahead.
The Tomahawk is not remotely similar. First, 420 mph!!! Not remotely comparable to 250 mph, not remotely comparable to the speeds any similar bike could do. And experts are pretty sure the bike couldn't even go 100 mph without crashing; it's slower than a Kawasaki Ninja 250. If experts were saying Bugatti Veyron couldn't even go 100 mph, it would be a big deal, and much attention would be given to the controversey.
The reason this article needs to spend that much space explaining it is that the details are specific to the Tomahawk. On other cars, you don't need to explain how an engine works or how speed tests are done. We have other articles on that and they apply to all relevant cars. Bugatti Veyron can just link to those articles. This is a case of the sources (not me) spending a great deal of time asking could the bike ever possibly go 420mph? How do we know? Why would the even say such a thing? Dodge Tomahawk can't link to any other articles explaining why the Dodge Tomahawk's speed claims were questioned or what suppositions were made about the subject by various experts.
The bottom line is other stuff exists. It's great that other articles are what they are, but this topic is this topic. I'm beginning to suspect you haven't even looked at the sources at all. You're stubbornly refusing to mention them at all. Your entire argument is based on WP:UNDUE and the undue weight policy is all about sources. What do the sources give weight to? An undue weight NPOV violation means giving more weight to something than the sources do. When I say we are giving a proportionate amount as the sources, I'm referring to the citations in the current, stable version of the article. When you claim we are not doing that, then your job is to show how the sources don't devote that much weight to the speed dispute.
So. Take your WP:OWN crap elsewhere. Take the WP:OSE crap elsewhere. Talk about sources or stop wasting our time. Sorry to be short with you but you popped up out of nowhere and blanked half the article with a snide, dick edit summary. If you now want a collegial discussion, don't be a dick.
"First, I know you know how to indent a comment." That's good to hear, now indent your own comments and leave mine alone. "it's slower than a Kawasaki Ninja 250" that's great original research, can I use you as an official source on the article? "The idea that the car could possibly reach 250+ mph was never disputed" Did you read the article? The Guinness book of records disqualified and then reinstated the Veyron's record, there was considerable controversy about the Veyron's top speed, so it's a very good article to compare to this one. "Sorry to be short with you" no, I don't think you're sorry in the slightest, but it's okay - I understand you are taking this personally, so I won't hold it against you, buddy. " If you think I have violated the Ownership of content policy, then go to an appropriate noticeboard and make your complaint there, not here." why should I? Are you unwilling or incapable of holding a polite and productive discussion here? Talk pages are where we can solve issues like reasonable adults, rather than wasting the time of admins on various noticeboards. Sennen Goroshi ! (talk) 19:48, 7 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-07T19:48:00.000Z","author":"Sennen goroshi","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T19:48:00.000Z-Speed_and_undue_weight","replies":["c-Dennis_Bratland-2019-12-07T21:15:00.000Z-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T19:48:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Sennen Goroshi\u00a0!"}}-->
As an uninvolved party, albeit a former content contributor, I feel the balance is good in the status quo revision (Special:permalink/917800467). There was a lot of industry observers asking questions not only about speed but about industrial design and marketing generally, and the former motivates the latter. What was Chrysler's goal? Publicity. How did they get it? By making outrageous claims and presenting an interesting-looking prototype. Sources definitely back this interpretation. In the end, this is an article both about the artifact and about the human behavior before and after its creation: namely, design and development engineering, and marketing. Leaving out details concerning the latter would be a mistake. Quoting myself (January 2016, talk Archive 3): What makes this vehicle notable (and you'll find this in virtually every source) is partly the styling, partly the place an outside-the-box halo vehicle has to play in modern auto shows, and partly the specific performance claims. These are all well covered in the draft and poorly covered in the mainspace article, to its detriment. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-07T20:22:00.000Z","author":"Bri","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Bri-2019-12-07T20:22:00.000Z-Uninvolved_party","replies":[]}}-->
What makes this vehicle notable (and you'll find this in virtually every source) is partly the styling, partly the place an outside-the-box halo vehicle has to play in modern auto shows, and partly the specific performance claims. These are all well covered in the draft and poorly covered in the mainspace article, to its detriment
A quick search of the edit history casts a little doubt on your claim to be uninvolved, but that won't affect my comments. I agree that the article should most certainly reflect the performance claims made and the reaction to those claims, I don't however think that should take 50% of the article. In the article's current state it reads as if it was written by a fanboy who got personally offended by this bike and decided to go on some form of crusade against it. There needs to be balance in the article, which right now it is sorely lacking. Sennen Goroshi ! (talk) 20:34, 7 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-07T20:34:00.000Z","author":"Sennen goroshi","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T20:34:00.000Z-Uninvolved_party","replies":["c-Dennis_Bratland-2019-12-07T21:11:00.000Z-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T20:34:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Sennen Goroshi\u00a0!"}}-->
You did also blank the critical reception section, but that doesn't cover the speed claims at all. The article is about a design exercise, a corporate statement of its vision, and yet you don't want any weight given to the reaction to that? Zero space given to any discussion of the merits of the design, or how it succeeds or fails at enhancing Chrysler's image? When that's the whole point of making the Tomahawk in the first place? Did you blank the critical reception section by mistake? The only way we can even reach this magic 50% threshold you're claiming is to confound the speed claims with the reactions to the design and the branding value, yet you've made no argument for why that's even relevant. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:11, 7 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-07T21:11:00.000Z","author":"Dennis Bratland","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Dennis_Bratland-2019-12-07T21:11:00.000Z-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T20:34:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
Let me ask something really nicely, please don't indent, edit or change my talk page comments in any way. No threats, no insults, just a politely worded and respectful request, thanks in advance. The critical reception section is as much of a hatchet job as the speed claims section, but as we are attempting to compromise, I guess a little of it can stay, for example the first paragraph. Sennen Goroshi ! (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-07T21:25:00.000Z","author":"Sennen goroshi","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T21:25:00.000Z-Uninvolved_party","replies":["c-Dennis_Bratland-2019-12-07T22:45:00.000Z-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-07T21:25:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Sennen Goroshi\u00a0!"}}-->
"Persistently formatting your comments on a talk page in a non-compliant manner, after friendly notification by other editors, is a mild form of disruption. After you have been alerted to specific aspects of these guidelines (such as indentation, sectioning, and signatures), you are expected to make a reasonable effort to follow those conventions. Other editors may simply ignore additional posts that flagrantly disregard the talk page formatting standards."
My comments are perfect legible, the fact that you have been able to reply to each and every one makes it abundantly clear that they do not "render material difficult to read". Your constant reformatting of my comments (along with constant "take it to ANI" comments) just demonstrate a combative and disruptive attitude. Sennen Goroshi ! (talk) 07:53, 8 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-08T07:53:00.000Z","author":"Sennen goroshi","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-08T07:53:00.000Z-Uninvolved_party","replies":["c-Dennis_Bratland-2019-12-10T16:30:00.000Z-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-08T07:53:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Sennen Goroshi\u00a0!"}}-->
If you don't wish to interact with me on this article, then it's your call not mine. I will just proceed with my edits in line with Wikipedia rules. Sennen Goroshi ! (talk) 21:58, 10 December 2019 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2019-12-10T21:58:00.000Z","author":"Sennen goroshi","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sennen_goroshi-2019-12-10T21:58:00.000Z-Uninvolved_party","replies":[],"displayName":"Sennen Goroshi\u00a0!"}}-->
Regarding designer Mark Walters, himself not a "motorcycle guy": I recently reverted a change made by an anonymous editor. However this might be a mis-quote. Cycle World quotes Kirt Bennett saying "I'm not a motorcycle guy...". ☆ Bri (talk) 17:55, 24 April 2020 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2020-04-24T17:55:00.000Z","author":"Bri","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Bri-2020-04-24T17:55:00.000Z-Walters_not_a_\"cycle_guy\"?","replies":[]}}-->
designer Mark Walters, himself not a "motorcycle guy"
هينكه أوزينجا معلومات شخصية الميلاد 25 ديسمبر 1969 (54 سنة) دوكوم مواطنة مملكة هولندا الحياة العملية المدرسة الأم جامعة خرونينغن المهنة رياضياتية مجال العمل نظام تحريكي موظفة في جامعة أوكلاند الجوائز زمالة الجمعية الملكية في نيوزيلندا [لغات أخرى]R…
St. Benediktus menyusun peraturan, lukisan (1926) karya Hermann Nigg (1849–1928) Peraturan Santo Benediktus atau Regula Santo Benediktus (bahasa Latin: Regula Bededicti), adalah sebuah kitab dari abad ke-6 yang berisi peraturan-peraturan tertulis bagi para rahib yang hidup bersama dalam suatu komunitas di bawah otoritas seorang abbas. Sejak sekitar abad ke-7 kitab ini diadopsi oleh komunitas-komunitas biarawati. Selama 1500 tahun eksistensinya, kitab ini menjadi sumber petunjuk utama dalam…
هذه المقالة يتيمة إذ تصل إليها مقالات أخرى قليلة جدًا. فضلًا، ساعد بإضافة وصلة إليها في مقالات متعلقة بها. (ديسمبر 2020) تيموثي تايلور ميروين معلومات شخصية تاريخ الميلاد 22 أغسطس 1807 تاريخ الوفاة 15 يناير 1885 (77 سنة) مواطنة الولايات المتحدة الحياة العملية المدرسة الأم كلي…
У Вікіпедії є статті про інші географічні об’єкти з назвою Дюмес. Місто Дюмесангл. Dumas Координати 34°38′04″ пн. ш. 88°50′52″ зх. д. / 34.634444444471775171° пн. ш. 88.84777777780578845° зх. д. / 34.634444444471775171; -88.84777777780578845Координати: 34°38′04″ пн. ш. 88°50′52″ зх. д.&…
Former Italian political party For the party with the same name which was active from 1994 to 2002, see Italian People's Party (1994). Italian People's Party Partito Popolare ItalianoGeneral SecretaryLuigi Sturzo(1919–1923)Alcide De Gasperi(1923–1925)Founded18 January 1919Dissolved5 November 1926Merger ofUECI, FUCI, CC, PPTSucceeded byChristian Democracy[1]HeadquartersRomeNewspaperIl PopoloCorriere d'ItaliaIdeologyChristian democracyPopularism[2]Political posit…
Banjar AgungKampungNegara IndonesiaProvinsiLampungKabupatenTulang BawangKecamatanBanjar AgungKodepos34682Kode Kemendagri18.05.08.2001 Luas8,48 km²[1]Jumlah penduduk4.157[1]Kepadatan5 jiwa/km²[1]Dusun5 Banjar Agung (aksara Lampung: ) adalah kampung yang berada di kecamatan Banjar Agung, Kabupaten Tulang Bawang, Lampung, Indonesia. Kampung Banjar Agung merupakan ibukota kecamatan Banjar Agung Sumber ^ a b c Kecamatan Banjar Agung Dalam Angka 2022. www.tulangbawangkab…
كريستوفر ديتChris Date معلومات شخصية الميلاد 1941 (العمر 81–82)واتفورد، إنجلترا الجنسية بريطاني الحياة العملية المدرسة الأم جامعة كامبردج المهنة مؤلف ومحاضر وباحث، ومستشار متخصص في نظرية قاعدة بيانات المترابطة. اللغات الإنجليزية موظف في آي بي إم (حتى 1983) سبب الشهرة نظرية قاع
Election in New Jersey Main article: 1920 United States presidential election 1920 United States presidential election in New Jersey ← 1916 November 2, 1920 1924 → Nominee Warren G. Harding James M. Cox Party Republican Democratic Home state Ohio Ohio Running mate Calvin Coolidge Franklin D. Roosevelt Electoral vote 14 0 Popular vote 611,541 256,887 Percentage 67.65% 28.42% County Results Harding 50-60% 60-70% 70-8…
Non-legalistic exegetical texts in the classical rabbinic literature Rabbinic literatureTalmud Readers by Adolf Behrman Talmudic literature Tannaitic Mishnah Tosefta Amoraic (Gemara) Jerusalem Talmud Babylonian Talmud Later Minor Tractates Halakhic Midrash Exodus Mekhilta of Rabbi Ishmael Mekhilta of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai Leviticus Sifra (Torat Kohanim) Numbers and Deuteronomy Sifre Sifrei Zutta on Numbers (Mekhilta le-Sefer Devarim) Aggadic Midrash Tannaitic Seder Olam Rabbah Alphabet of Rabb…
هذه المقالة تحتاج للمزيد من الوصلات للمقالات الأخرى للمساعدة في ترابط مقالات الموسوعة. فضلًا ساعد في تحسين هذه المقالة بإضافة وصلات إلى المقالات المتعلقة بها الموجودة في النص الحالي. (يناير 2019) تحوي هذه المقالة أو هذا القسم ترجمة آلية. فضلًا، ساهم في تدقيقها وتحسينها أو إزال…
International airport serving Kochi, Kerala, India For the regional airport in Kōchi, Japan, see Kōchi Airport. Cochin International AirportIATA: COKICAO: VOCISummaryAirport typePublic-Private Partnership (PPP)Owner/Operator Cochin International Airport Limited (CIAL) (68.58%) Government of Kerala (32.42%) ServesKochiLocationNedumbassery, Kochi, Kerala, IndiaOpened10 June 1999; 24 years ago (1999-06-10)Hub for Air India Express IndiGo Focus city for Air India SpiceJet Elevati…
German physiologist and pediatrician (1830-1909) Heinrich von Ranke (1830–1909) Heinrich von Ranke (8 May 1830, Rückersdorf – 13 May 1909, Munich) was a German physiologist and pediatrician. He was the son of theologian Friedrich Heinrich Ranke (1798-1876) and the brother of anthropologist Johannes Ranke (1836-1916). Famed historian Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886) was his uncle. Biography Ranke studied at the Universities of Berlin, Leipzig, Erlangen, and Tübingen. At Erlangen, he was a …
Турнір другої ліги Восьмого чемпіонату України з футболу 1998—1999 проводився з 6 серпня 1998 по 27 червня 1999 року. Зміст 1 Учасники турніру 2 Група А 2.1 Підсумкова таблиця 2.2 Найкращі бомбардири 2.3 Результати матчів 3 Група Б 3.1 Підсумкова таблиця 3.2 Найкращі бомбардири 3.3 Результат…
6 Korpus Strzelecki6-й стрелковый корпус Historia Państwo ZSRR Sformowanie 1922,1942,1943 Rozformowanie 1941, Działania zbrojne II wojna światowa Organizacja Rodzaj sił zbrojnych Wojska lądowe Formacja Armia Czerwona Rodzaj wojsk piechota Podległość 13 Armia6 Armia Piechota Armii Czerwonej około 1930 roku. 6 Korpus Strzelecki (ros. 6-й стрелковый корпус) – wyższy związek taktyczny Armii Czerwonej. 6 Korpus Strzelecki (6 KS) sformowany zos…
1955 film noir directed by William Wyler For the 1990 remake, see Desperate Hours. The Desperate HoursThe Desperate Hours film posterDirected byWilliam WylerScreenplay byJoseph HayesJay DratlerBased on1954 novel The Desperate Hours1955 play The Desperate Hoursby Joseph HayesProduced byWilliam WylerStarringHumphrey BogartFredric MarchCinematographyLee GarmesEdited byRobert SwinkMusic byGail KubikDaniele Amfitheatrof (uncredited)Distributed byParamount PicturesRelease dateOctober 5, 1955Running ti…
تفتقر سيرة هذه الشخصية الحيّة إلى الاستشهاد بمصدر موثوق به يمكن التحقق منه. فضلاً، ساهم في تطويرها من خلال إضافة مصادر موثوقة. في سير الأحياء، يُزال المحتوى فوراً إذا كان من غير مصدر يدعمه أو إذا كان المصدر المُستشهد به مشكوكاً بأمره. (فبراير 2016) أليسن هانيغان (بالإنجليزية: Alys…
Evangelisches Gymnasium und Werkschulheim Schulform Gymnasium Schulnummer 911036 Gründung 1996 Adresse Erdbergstraße 222A Ort Wien-Simmering Bundesland Wien Staat Österreich Koordinaten 48° 11′ 11″ N, 16° 25′ 18″ O48.18642716.421708Koordinaten: 48° 11′ 11″ N, 16° 25′ 18″ O Träger Evangelisches Schulwerk A. B. Wien – Diakonie Bildung Leitung Elisabeth Sinn Website www.evgym.at Das Evangelische Gymnasium Wien ist…
Obóz Narodowo-RadykalnyNationaal-Radicaal Kamp Geschiedenis Opgericht 14 april 19341935 Opheffing 10 juli 1934Ca. 1939 Algemene gegevens Actief in Polen Hoofdkantoor Warschau] Aantal leden 3.0000 Richting Extreemrechts Ideologie FascismeNationalismeNationaal-conservatismeIrredentismeAnticommunismeAnti-LiberalismeAntisemitisme Kleuren Groen Vlag Portaal Politiek Het Nationaal-Radicaal Kamp (Pools: Obóz Narodowo-Radykalny, ONR) was een nationalistische, fascistische en antid…
此條目需要擴充。 (2007年9月26日)请協助改善这篇條目,更進一步的信息可能會在討論頁或扩充请求中找到。请在擴充條目後將此模板移除。 察合台汗国Dumdadu Mongγol Ulus1224年—1570年(直系)/1700年(支系) 察合台汗国国旗 察合台的塔木加 察合台汗国领域(绿色), c. 1300.察合台汗國, 13世纪晚期地位蒙古帝国的一部分(1226-1266)游牧汗国(1266-1342)穆斯林苏丹国(1342-1487)首都…
American mathematician Alston Scott HouseholderBorn5 May 1904Died4 July 1993 (1993-07-05) (aged 89)Alma materUniversity of ChicagoKnown forHouseholder operatorHouseholder transformationHouseholder's methodScientific careerFieldsNumerical Analysis Linear Algebra[1]InstitutionsOak Ridge National Laboratory[2]ThesisThe Dependence of a Focal Point Upon Curvature in the Calculus of Variations (1937)Doctoral advisorGilbert Ames Bliss[3] Alston Scott Hou…
Lokasi Pengunjung: 3.138.113.248