Template:Excerpt/testcases3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Test cases 1 Test cases 2 Test cases 3

Sections[edit]

{{Excerpt|Science|Branches}}
Side by side comparison
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
This section is an excerpt from Science § Branches.[edit]

Modern science is commonly divided into three major branches: natural science, social science, and formal science.[1] Each of these branches comprises various specialized yet overlapping scientific disciplines that often possess their own nomenclature and expertise.[2] Both natural and social sciences are empirical sciences,[3] as their knowledge is based on empirical observations and is capable of being tested for its validity by other researchers working under the same conditions.[4]

This section is an excerpt from Science § Branches.[edit]

Modern science is commonly divided into three major branches: natural science, social science, and formal science.[1] Each of these branches comprises various specialized yet overlapping scientific disciplines that often possess their own nomenclature and expertise.[2] Both natural and social sciences are empirical sciences,[3] as their knowledge is based on empirical observations and is capable of being tested for its validity by other researchers working under the same conditions.[4]

{{Excerpt| Science | Branches }}
Side by side comparison
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
This section is an excerpt from Science § Branches.[edit]

Modern science is commonly divided into three major branches: natural science, social science, and formal science.[1] Each of these branches comprises various specialized yet overlapping scientific disciplines that often possess their own nomenclature and expertise.[2] Both natural and social sciences are empirical sciences,[3] as their knowledge is based on empirical observations and is capable of being tested for its validity by other researchers working under the same conditions.[4]

This section is an excerpt from Science § Branches.[edit]

Modern science is commonly divided into three major branches: natural science, social science, and formal science.[1] Each of these branches comprises various specialized yet overlapping scientific disciplines that often possess their own nomenclature and expertise.[2] Both natural and social sciences are empirical sciences,[3] as their knowledge is based on empirical observations and is capable of being tested for its validity by other researchers working under the same conditions.[4]

{{Excerpt|Eucalyptus|Eucalyptus as plantation species}}
Side by side comparison
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
Section 'Eucalyptus as plantation species' not found
Section 'Eucalyptus as plantation species' not found
{{Excerpt|Science#Branches}}
Side by side comparison
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
This section is an excerpt from Science § Branches.[edit]

Modern science is commonly divided into three major branches: natural science, social science, and formal science.[1] Each of these branches comprises various specialized yet overlapping scientific disciplines that often possess their own nomenclature and expertise.[2] Both natural and social sciences are empirical sciences,[3] as their knowledge is based on empirical observations and is capable of being tested for its validity by other researchers working under the same conditions.[4]

This section is an excerpt from Science § Branches.[edit]

Modern science is commonly divided into three major branches: natural science, social science, and formal science.[1] Each of these branches comprises various specialized yet overlapping scientific disciplines that often possess their own nomenclature and expertise.[2] Both natural and social sciences are empirical sciences,[3] as their knowledge is based on empirical observations and is capable of being tested for its validity by other researchers working under the same conditions.[4]

{{Excerpt| Science # Branches }}
Side by side comparison
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
This section is an excerpt from Science § Branches.[edit]

Modern science is commonly divided into three major branches: natural science, social science, and formal science.[1] Each of these branches comprises various specialized yet overlapping scientific disciplines that often possess their own nomenclature and expertise.[2] Both natural and social sciences are empirical sciences,[3] as their knowledge is based on empirical observations and is capable of being tested for its validity by other researchers working under the same conditions.[4]

This section is an excerpt from Science § Branches.[edit]

Modern science is commonly divided into three major branches: natural science, social science, and formal science.[1] Each of these branches comprises various specialized yet overlapping scientific disciplines that often possess their own nomenclature and expertise.[2] Both natural and social sciences are empirical sciences,[3] as their knowledge is based on empirical observations and is capable of being tested for its validity by other researchers working under the same conditions.[4]

{{Excerpt|Holodomor in modern politics|Recognition |references=no}}
Side by side comparison
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
This section is an excerpt from Holodomor in modern politics § Recognition.[edit]
Recognition of the Holodomor by country

Since 2006, the Holodomor has been recognised as a genocide by the Ukrainian parliament. Ukraine's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has run campaigns and lobbied the United Nations and the Council of Europe to recognise the Holodomor as a genocide internationally. Sovereign states to have recognized Holodomor as genocide include Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Czech Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland's senate, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Mexico, Moldova, Netherlands, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, the Holy See in Vatican City and Wales. As the United States Congress passed resolution of recognition through the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. Similarly, governments and parliaments of several other countries have also officially recognized the Holodomor as an act of genocide.

In November 2022, the Holodomor was recognized as a genocide by Germany, Ireland's senate, Moldova, Romania, and the Belarusian opposition in exile. Pope Francis compared the Russian war in Ukraine with its targeted destruction of civilian infrastructure to the "terrible Holodomor Genocide", during an address at St. Peter's Square. As of May 2024, 35 countries recognise the Holodomor as a genocide.

The following countries have recognised the Holodomor as a genocide:

Other political bodies whose legislatures have passed a resolution recognizing Holodomor as a genocide:

Many countries have signed declarations in statements at the United Nations General Assembly affirming that the Holodomor was as a "national tragedy of the Ukrainian people" caused by the "cruel actions and policies of the totalitarian regime".[a] Similar statements were passed as resolutions by international organizations[b] such as the European Parliament,[c] the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE),[d] the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and the United Nations Organization for Education, Science and Culture (UNESCO).[a]

Countries to have signed declarations for the United Nations on the Holodomor[e][f] include Albania,[g] Argentina, Australia,[g] Austria,[g] Azerbaijan,[g] Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Czechia, Croatia, Denmark, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Ukraine, and the United States.

This section is an excerpt from Holodomor in modern politics § Recognition.[edit]
Recognition of the Holodomor by country

Since 2006, the Holodomor has been recognised as a genocide by the Ukrainian parliament. Ukraine's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has run campaigns and lobbied the United Nations and the Council of Europe to recognise the Holodomor as a genocide internationally. Sovereign states to have recognized Holodomor as genocide include Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Czech Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland's senate, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Mexico, Moldova, Netherlands, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, the Holy See in Vatican City and Wales. As the United States Congress passed resolution of recognition through the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. Similarly, governments and parliaments of several other countries have also officially recognized the Holodomor as an act of genocide.

In November 2022, the Holodomor was recognized as a genocide by Germany, Ireland's senate, Moldova, Romania, and the Belarusian opposition in exile. Pope Francis compared the Russian war in Ukraine with its targeted destruction of civilian infrastructure to the "terrible Holodomor Genocide", during an address at St. Peter's Square. As of May 2024, 35 countries recognise the Holodomor as a genocide.

The following countries have recognised the Holodomor as a genocide:

Other political bodies whose legislatures have passed a resolution recognizing Holodomor as a genocide:

Many countries have signed declarations in statements at the United Nations General Assembly affirming that the Holodomor was as a "national tragedy of the Ukrainian people" caused by the "cruel actions and policies of the totalitarian regime".[a] Similar statements were passed as resolutions by international organizations[h] such as the European Parliament,[i] the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE),[j] the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and the United Nations Organization for Education, Science and Culture (UNESCO).[a]

Countries to have signed declarations for the United Nations on the Holodomor[k][f] include Albania,[g] Argentina, Australia,[g] Austria,[g] Azerbaijan,[g] Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Czechia, Croatia, Denmark, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Ukraine, and the United States.

Subsections[edit]

{{Excerpt|Science|Branches of science |sections=yes}}
Side by side comparison
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
Section 'Branches of science' not found
Section 'Branches of science' not found
{{Excerpt|Science|Branches of science |subsections=yes}}
Side by side comparison
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
Section 'Branches of science' not found
Section 'Branches of science' not found
{{Excerpt|Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters|Capitalization discussions ongoing (keep at top of talk page) |subsections=yes}}
Side by side comparison
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
This section is an excerpt from Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters § Capitalization discussions ongoing (keep at top of talk page).[edit]

Add new items at top of list; move to Concluded when decided, and summarize the conclusion. Comment at them if interested. Please keep this section at the top of the page.

Current[edit]

(newest on top) Move requests:

Other discussions:

Pretty stale but not "concluded":

Concluded[edit]

Extended content
2023
2022
2021
This section is an excerpt from Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters § Capitalization discussions ongoing (keep at top of talk page).[edit]

Add new items at top of list; move to Concluded when decided, and summarize the conclusion. Comment at them if interested. Please keep this section at the top of the page.

Current[edit]

(newest on top) Move requests:

Other discussions:

Pretty stale but not "concluded":

Concluded[edit]

Extended content
2023
2022
2021
{{Excerpt|Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters/Archive 30|Is "The Academy" a proper noun as used in [[Mountain State University]]?}}
Side by side comparison
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
This section is an excerpt from Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters/Archive 30 § Is "The Academy" a proper noun as used in Mountain State University?.[edit]

Can someone please look into the recent edit history of Mountain State University? An unregistered editor is insisting that "The Academy" is a proper noun and refuses to discuss the issue in Talk so it would be helpful to have the opinion of another editor. Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 04:32, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Nope. It's the same as "the university". The sub-institution is question has had proper names of: the Academy at Mountain State University, and later Mountain State Academy. But per WP:THE and MOS:THECAPS we should not even render the former as The Academy at Mountain State University. A possible exception: I have noticed over time that we've been ignoring this rule for cases in which the official acronym of the entity in question includes a capital-T for The in it. I recently codified this exception in the relevant section, to better reflect actual practice. TICA (which is never known as ICA) can properly be referred to as The International Cat Association, and it is also a case in which WP:THE would not be applied to remove the The from the article title. But almost every US college and university pretentiously capitalizes the leading "The" in front of their names in their own materials, while using acronyms that do not start with T for The. So, it's the University of Where-ever.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  01:16, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
This section is an excerpt from Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters/Archive 30 § Is "The Academy" a proper noun as used in Mountain State University?.[edit]

Can someone please look into the recent edit history of Mountain State University? An unregistered editor is insisting that "The Academy" is a proper noun and refuses to discuss the issue in Talk so it would be helpful to have the opinion of another editor. Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 04:32, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Nope. It's the same as "the university". The sub-institution is question has had proper names of: the Academy at Mountain State University, and later Mountain State Academy. But per WP:THE and MOS:THECAPS we should not even render the former as The Academy at Mountain State University. A possible exception: I have noticed over time that we've been ignoring this rule for cases in which the official acronym of the entity in question includes a capital-T for The in it. I recently codified this exception in the relevant section, to better reflect actual practice. TICA (which is never known as ICA) can properly be referred to as The International Cat Association, and it is also a case in which WP:THE would not be applied to remove the The from the article title. But almost every US college and university pretentiously capitalizes the leading "The" in front of their names in their own materials, while using acronyms that do not start with T for The. So, it's the University of Where-ever.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  01:16, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Files[edit]

{{Excerpt|Science |only=file}}
Side by side comparison
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
This file is an excerpt from Science.[edit]
This file is an excerpt from Science.[edit]
{{Excerpt|SpaceX Dragon#Crewed development program |only=file}}
Side by side comparison
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
Section 'Crewed development program' not found
Section 'Crewed development program' not found
{{Excerpt|Science |files=0}}
Side by side comparison
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
This section is an excerpt from Science.[edit]
Part of a series on
Science
Fields (Outline / List)
Intrascientific fields
Extrascientific fields
Scientific integrity
Instruments
This is a subseries on philosophy. In order to explore related topics, please visit navigation.

Science is a rigorous, systematic endeavor that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the world.[1][2] Modern science is typically divided into three major branches:[3] the natural sciences (e.g., physics, chemistry, and biology), which study the physical world; the social sciences (e.g., economics, psychology, and sociology), which study individuals and societies;[4][5] and the formal sciences (e.g., logic, mathematics, and theoretical computer science), which study formal systems, governed by axioms and rules.[6][7] There is disagreement whether the formal sciences are science disciplines,[8][9][10] as they do not rely on empirical evidence.[11][9] Applied sciences are disciplines that use scientific knowledge for practical purposes, such as in engineering and medicine.[12][13][14]

The history of science spans the majority of the historical record, with the earliest written records of identifiable predecessors to modern science dating to Bronze Age Egypt and Mesopotamia from around 3000 to 1200 BCE. Their contributions to mathematics, astronomy, and medicine entered and shaped the Greek natural philosophy of classical antiquity, whereby formal attempts were made to provide explanations of events in the physical world based on natural causes, while further advancements, including the introduction of the Hindu–Arabic numeral system, were made during the Golden Age of India.[15]: 12 [16][17][18] Scientific research deteriorated in these regions after the fall of the Western Roman Empire during the Early Middle Ages (400 to 1000 CE), but in the Medieval renaissances (Carolingian Renaissance, Ottonian Renaissance and the Renaissance of the 12th century) scholarship flourished again. Some Greek manuscripts lost in Western Europe were preserved and expanded upon in the Middle East during the Islamic Golden Age,[19] along with the later efforts of Byzantine Greek scholars who brought Greek manuscripts from the dying Byzantine Empire to Western Europe at the start of the Renaissance.

The recovery and assimilation of Greek works and Islamic inquiries into Western Europe from the 10th to 13th century revived "natural philosophy",[20][21][22] which was later transformed by the Scientific Revolution that began in the 16th century[23] as new ideas and discoveries departed from previous Greek conceptions and traditions.[24][25] The scientific method soon played a greater role in knowledge creation and it was not until the 19th century that many of the institutional and professional features of science began to take shape,[26][27] along with the changing of "natural philosophy" to "natural science".[28]

New knowledge in science is advanced by research from scientists who are motivated by curiosity about the world and a desire to solve problems.[29][30] Contemporary scientific research is highly collaborative and is usually done by teams in academic and research institutions,[31] government agencies, and companies.[32][33] The practical impact of their work has led to the emergence of science policies that seek to influence the scientific enterprise by prioritizing the ethical and moral development of commercial products, armaments, health care, public infrastructure, and environmental protection.

This section is an excerpt from Science.[edit]
Part of a series on
Science
Fields (Outline / List)
Intrascientific fields
Extrascientific fields
Scientific integrity
Instruments
This is a subseries on philosophy. In order to explore related topics, please visit navigation.

Science is a rigorous, systematic endeavor that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the world.[1][2] Modern science is typically divided into three major branches:[3] the natural sciences (e.g., physics, chemistry, and biology), which study the physical world; the social sciences (e.g., economics, psychology, and sociology), which study individuals and societies;[4][5] and the formal sciences (e.g., logic, mathematics, and theoretical computer science), which study formal systems, governed by axioms and rules.[6][7] There is disagreement whether the formal sciences are science disciplines,[8][9][10] as they do not rely on empirical evidence.[11][9] Applied sciences are disciplines that use scientific knowledge for practical purposes, such as in engineering and medicine.[12][13][14]

The history of science spans the majority of the historical record, with the earliest written records of identifiable predecessors to modern science dating to Bronze Age Egypt and Mesopotamia from around 3000 to 1200 BCE. Their contributions to mathematics, astronomy, and medicine entered and shaped the Greek natural philosophy of classical antiquity, whereby formal attempts were made to provide explanations of events in the physical world based on natural causes, while further advancements, including the introduction of the Hindu–Arabic numeral system, were made during the Golden Age of India.[15]: 12 [16][17][18] Scientific research deteriorated in these regions after the fall of the Western Roman Empire during the Early Middle Ages (400 to 1000 CE), but in the Medieval renaissances (Carolingian Renaissance, Ottonian Renaissance and the Renaissance of the 12th century) scholarship flourished again. Some Greek manuscripts lost in Western Europe were preserved and expanded upon in the Middle East during the Islamic Golden Age,[19] along with the later efforts of Byzantine Greek scholars who brought Greek manuscripts from the dying Byzantine Empire to Western Europe at the start of the Renaissance.

The recovery and assimilation of Greek works and Islamic inquiries into Western Europe from the 10th to 13th century revived "natural philosophy",[20][21][22] which was later transformed by the Scientific Revolution that began in the 16th century[23] as new ideas and discoveries departed from previous Greek conceptions and traditions.[24][25] The scientific method soon played a greater role in knowledge creation and it was not until the 19th century that many of the institutional and professional features of science began to take shape,[26][27] along with the changing of "natural philosophy" to "natural science".[28]

New knowledge in science is advanced by research from scientists who are motivated by curiosity about the world and a desire to solve problems.[29][30] Contemporary scientific research is highly collaborative and is usually done by teams in academic and research institutions,[31] government agencies, and companies.[32][33] The practical impact of their work has led to the emergence of science policies that seek to influence the scientific enterprise by prioritizing the ethical and moral development of commercial products, armaments, health care, public infrastructure, and environmental protection.

{{Excerpt|Augmented Satellite Launch Vehicle}}
Non-free image
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
This section is an excerpt from Augmented Satellite Launch Vehicle.[edit]

The Augmented Satellite Launch Vehicle or Advanced Satellite Launch Vehicle (also known as ASLV) was a small-lift launch vehicle five-stage solid-fuel rocket developed by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) to place 150 kg satellites into LEO.[1] This project was started by India during the early 1980s to develop technologies needed for a payload to be placed into a geostationary orbit.[2][3] Its design was based on Satellite Launch Vehicle.[4] ISRO did not have sufficient funds for both the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle programme and the ASLV programme at the same time and the ASLV programme was terminated after the initial developmental flights.[2] The payloads of ASLV were Stretched Rohini Satellites.[4]

This section is an excerpt from Augmented Satellite Launch Vehicle.[edit]

The Augmented Satellite Launch Vehicle or Advanced Satellite Launch Vehicle (also known as ASLV) was a small-lift launch vehicle five-stage solid-fuel rocket developed by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) to place 150 kg satellites into LEO.[1] This project was started by India during the early 1980s to develop technologies needed for a payload to be placed into a geostationary orbit.[2][3] Its design was based on Satellite Launch Vehicle.[4] ISRO did not have sufficient funds for both the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle programme and the ASLV programme at the same time and the ASLV programme was terminated after the initial developmental flights.[2] The payloads of ASLV were Stretched Rohini Satellites.[4]

{{Excerpt|U.S. News & World Report Best Colleges Ranking}}
Non-free image in infobox
{{Excerpt}}{{Excerpt/sandbox}}
This section is an excerpt from U.S. News & World Report Best Colleges Ranking.[edit]

The U.S. News & World Report Best Colleges Ranking is an annual set of rankings of colleges and universities in the United States, first published in 1983. It has been described as the most influential institutional ranking in the country.

The Best Colleges Rankings have raised significant controversy, and they have been widely denounced by many higher education experts.[1] Detractors argue that they rely on self-reported, sometimes fraudulent data by the institutions,[2][3][4][5] encourage gamesmanship by institutions looking to improve their rank,[6] imply a false precision by deriving an ordinal ranking from questionable data,[7] contribute to the admissions frenzy by unduly highlighting prestige,[8] and ignore individual fit by comparing institutions with widely diverging missions on the same scale.[9]

Columbia University was lowered from second to eighteenth in the 2022 rankings,[10] following a report by Columbia University mathematics professor Michael Thaddeus, which revealed that the administration had misreported data; the remaining "national universities" were not renumbered.[11]

This section is an excerpt from U.S. News & World Report Best Colleges Ranking.[edit]

The U.S. News & World Report Best Colleges Ranking is an annual set of rankings of colleges and universities in the United States, first published in 1983. It has been described as the most influential institutional ranking in the country.

The Best Colleges Rankings have raised significant controversy, and they have been widely denounced by many higher education experts.[1] Detractors argue that they rely on self-reported, sometimes fraudulent data by the institutions,[2][3][4][5] encourage gamesmanship by institutions looking to improve their rank,[6] imply a false precision by deriving an ordinal ranking from questionable data,[7] contribute to the admissions frenzy by unduly highlighting prestige,[8] and ignore individual fit by comparing institutions with widely diverging missions on the same scale.[9]

Columbia University was lowered from second to eighteenth in the 2022 rankings,[10] following a report by Columbia University mathematics professor Michael Thaddeus, which revealed that the administration had misreported data; the remaining "national universities" were not renumbered.[11]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ a b c d See the United Nations for a list of resolutions with references.
  2. ^ See United Nations section for details and references.
  3. ^ See European Parliament section for text and references for European Parliament resolution of 23 October 2008 on the commemoration of the Holodomor, the Ukraine artificial famine.
  4. ^ See Council of Europe for details and references.
  5. ^ For details on recognition, see National recognition.
  6. ^ a b Referenced are a list of nations which were co-author sponsors of the United Nations Declaration on 85th anniversary of Holodomor.
  7. ^ a b c d e f g h Nation has signed the United Nations Declaration on the Eighty-Fifth Anniversary of the Holodomor of 1932-1933 in Ukraine.
  8. ^ See United Nations section for details and references.
  9. ^ See European Parliament section for text and references for European Parliament resolution of 23 October 2008 on the commemoration of the Holodomor, the Ukraine artificial famine.
  10. ^ See Council of Europe for details and references.
  11. ^ For details on recognition, see National recognition.

References[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Excerpt/testcases3&oldid=1192522647"