text:
Aeolian Islands

The Aeolian Islands (Isole Eolie ; Ìsuli Eoli), sometimes referred to as the Lipari Islands or Lipari group after their largest island, are a volcanic archipelago in the Tyrrhenian Sea north of Sicily, said to be named after Aeolus, the mythical ruler of the winds. The islands' inhabitants are known as Aeolians (Eoliani). The islands had a permanent population of 14,224 at the 2011 census; the latest official estimate is 15,419 as of 1 January 2019. The Aeolian Islands are a popular tourist destination in the summer and attract up to 600,000 visitors annually.

There are seven significant islands: Lipari, Vulcano, Salina, Stromboli, Filicudi, Alicudi and Panarea, and a set of minor islands and rocks.

Geography
The Aeolian Islands are 30 to 80 km off the north coast of Sicily in the Tyrrhenian Sea. Vulcano is located closest to the Sicilian coast. Lipari and Salina follow to the north, Filicudi and Alicudi to the west, and Panarea and Stromboli to the northeast. In addition to these seven inhabited islands, there are a number of smaller, uninhabited islands and rocky cliffs, such as Basiluzzo, Strombolicchio, Dattilo, Sicily and Lisca Bianca.

The largest island is Lipari (37.5 km2), followed by Salina (26.8 km2), Vulcano (21.2 km2), Stromboli (12.6 km2), Filicudi (9.5 km2) and Alicudi (5.2 km2). The smallest island, at 3.4 km2, is Panarea. The highest elevation of the Lipari Islands is Monte Fossa delle Felci on Salina, which reaches a height of 962 m.

Geology
The seven Aeolian Islands, covering an area of 1600 km2, originated in the Tyrrhenian Basin, a great plain at the bottom of the Tyrrhenian Sea. Emissions of lava from depths of up to 3600 m resulted in the formation of the Aeolian Islands, together with Ustica and a series of submarine volcanoes named Magnani, Vavilov, Marsili and Palinuro, as well as two that are unnamed.

The present shape of the Aeolian Islands is the result of volcanic activity over a period of 260,000 years. There are two active volcanoes – Stromboli and Vulcano. Steaming fumaroles and thermal waters are on most of the islands. The volcanic activity has also left the islands with a very fertile soil that is beneficial in the growth of natural flora.

Geologically the archipelago is defined as a volcanic arc. The origin of the Aeolian Islands is due to movement of the Earth's crust as a result of plate tectonics. The African continental shelf is in constant movement towards Europe. Its subduction underneath the Eurasian plate generates magma, which rises to the surface to form the volcanoes. The "Aeolian Arc" extends for more than 140 km. It is a section of a larger area of geological instability across the Mediterranean region, caused by the collision of Africa and Europe, which includes Sicily, Calabria, and Campania together with Greece and the Aegean islands.

Administration
The islands form part of the Sicilian province of Messina. All the islands except Salina comprise the commune of Lipari within that province; Salina forms three separate communes: Malfa, Leni and Santa Marina Salina.

Architectural control
Curbing urban development has been a key in preserving the Aeolian islands in a natural state. New buildings are severely restricted. Existing residences can be bought and restored but they must be constructed to resemble its whitewashed houses. Traditional houses consist of modular cubes constructed from indigenous building materials like stone, lava, pumice, and tufo. Almost all houses have a huge outdoor terrace, usually shaded by grape and flowering vines.

Mythology
In Homer's epic poem, the Odyssey, Aeolus, son of Hippotes, was the divine keeper of the winds and king of the mythical, floating island of Aeolia. He kept the violent winds locked safely away inside the interior of his isle, releasing them only at the command of greatest gods to wreak devastation upon the world.

The hero of the epic poem, Odysseus, on his travels to return home from Troy, visited Aiolos' isle and was entrusted with a bag containing all of the winds to ensure a safe voyage home. However, during the trip, the hero's companions opened the bag and the escaping winds carried their ship all the way back to Aiolos' shore.

4000–2500 BC
The first evidence of Sicilian migration was in Lipari (Castellaro Vecchio culture). The manufacture and commerce of obsidian objects was highly developed until the introduction of metals.

1600–1250 BC
During the Bronze Age, the Aeolians prospered by means of maritime commerce in an area which extended from Mycenae to the British Isles, from where tin was imported. Villages on the Aeolian islands flourished on Capo Graziano (Filicudi), Castello (Lipari), Serro dei Cianfi (Salina), Capo Milazzese (Panarea), and Portella (Salina). All these settlements were destroyed by new Italic invasions in 1250 BC.

1240–850 BC
According to Diodorus Siculus, the Aeolian Islands were occupied by the Ausones led by Liparus. Liparus was succeeded by Aeolus whose house, according to the Odyssey by Homer, gave hospitality to Odysseus.

600–300 BC
In 580 BC, Greeks exiled from Rhodes and Knidos landed at Lipari and began a period of Greek domination, which was known for acts of piracy against Etruscan and Phoenician shipping. There was production of vases and other ceramics.

300 BC–AD 250
The islanders were allies of the Carthaginians against Rome during the Punic Wars. Although the Battle of the Lipari Islands in 260 BC led to a Carthaginian victory, the Romans later sacked Lipari and their domination led to a period of poverty.

AD 250–1000
At the fall of the Western Roman Empire, the Aeolian Islands came under the sway of the Visigoths, the Vandals and the Ostrogoths, followed by the domination of the Byzantine Empire. According to a Christian legend, in 264 a coffin which contained the body of Bartholomew washed up on the beach of Lipari, with the result that Bartholomew was immediately elected the patron saint of the Aeolian Islands. In 836 the Aghlabids of Ziyadat Allah I of Ifriqiya sacked Lipari, massacred most of the population, enslaved the survivors and annexed the Liparian Islands into the Emirate of Sicily.

1000–1600
The Norman conquest of Sicily from the Emirate of Sicily in 1061 resulted in the annexation of the islands. Roger II of Sicily sent the Benedictine monks to Lipari, which gave rise to considerable development on the islands. A cathedral dedicated to Saint Bartholomew was built, as well as the Benedictine monastery in the castle. In 1208 Frederick II of Swabia acceded to the throne of the Kingdom of Sicily. The period of prosperity which followed, ended with the domination of the Angevins and the rebellion of the Sicilians which culminated in the revolt of the Sicilian Vespers. The Aeolians however, remained loyal to Charles of Anjou, and commercial links were established with Naples, the capital of the Angevin kingdom. In 1337 Lipari opened its gates to the French fleet without resistance, and in return obtained various commercial and fiscal benefits. In the mid-15th century, Naples and Palermo united into the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies under the crown of Alfonso V of Aragon.

On June 30, 1544, a fleet of 180 Ottoman vessels under the command of the corsair Hayreddin Barbarossa occupied Lipari and laid siege to the castle. The defenders surrendered. Historically, it is said around 9,000 of the 10,000 citizens of Lipari were captured and enslaved although a couple of more recent scholars have questioned this number arguing for a lower population at the time of Barbarossa. A number of citizens were ransomed in Messina and returned to the islands but most of those captured never returned. Only after the tragedy did the Spanish authorities turn their attention to Lipari and repopulate the city with Sicilian, Calabrian and Spanish families. The city walls and houses were rebuilt and an Aeolian fleet was constructed which was able to successfully defend the Tyrrhenian Sea from the Ottomans.

1600–present
In 1693, an earthquake destroyed all the towns in eastern Sicily, causing around 60,000 deaths. After the population invoked the protection of Saint Bartholomew during prayers in the cathedral, there was not a single victim on the Aeolian Islands. The economic conditions of the islands improved greatly during the 17th century with agricultural progress (malvasia grapes), capers, and a variety of fruit, vegetables and fishing). With the Bourbons came the introduction of criminal and political prisoners to the islands. In 1916, the penal colony was closed, but the Fascist regime unsuccessfully tried to reopen it in 1926. The island population reacted by pulling down the remains of the ex-penitentiary in the castle. However, not long after, the castle was converted to accommodate anti-Fascist political prisoners in enforced exile. Liparians fraternised with these exiles until the Allies' liberation. After the war, the same room that had housed the opponents of Fascism became the Aeolian Archaeological Museum.

Towards the end of the 19th century, the Aeolian Islands were visited by Archduke Ludwig Salvator of Austria—a friend of the islands and also a man with a profound knowledge of the archipelago. Between the years 1893–96 he published a work of eight volumes on the Aeolian Islands.

In August 1888, the crater named Fossa on Vulcano erupted and caused many deaths in the sulphur mines. The eruptions continued for 19 months.

On New Year's Day in 1909, a rumour appeared in international newspapers that the Aeolian Islands had been "swallowed up by the sea" during a time of volcanic activity. While communication with the islands was interrupted for a time, they were not otherwise inconvenienced.

During World War II, all of the Aeolian Islands were captured by the Allies in August 1943, during the invasion of Sicily. The islands were then extensively searched by archeologists Madeleine Cavalier and Luigi Bernabò Brea after World War II.

UNESCO World Heritage Sites
The Aeolian Islands were listed by UNESCO in 2000 as a World Heritage Site for providing "an outstanding record of volcanic island-building and destruction, and ongoing volcanic phenomena". Status as a World Heritage Site was threatened by Italy's failure to close the pumice quarry as well as its failure to prevent the building of 4 new harbours. However,, it is still listed by UNESCO as a World Heritage site.

title: Aeolian Islands


text:
Talk:Franz Schubert

Birth and death place in infobox
Is the aim to show as little as possible for these? (... also no mention of Wilhelm August Rieder in the caption, I see, but lots of other detail?) Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:55, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

 * MOS:CREDITS discourages crediting the artist in infoboxes. I've also thought that that caption is quite wordy, I'd suggest getting rid of it completely and expanding the details on the image description page (MOS:CAPSUCCINCT). As for the birth and death locations, I have no idea why more detailed ones are getting reverted. Ligaturama (talk) 09:44, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

 * Yes, discourages, but not prohibits? I guess we are unlikely to get a whole new article for that painting (as we did for the lead image at Beethoven). But I honestly think the linked name of the artist with a date would be more useful. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:19, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Having the artist in an infobox works fine on The Firebird, if an FA example is needed MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:41, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * which infobox? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:35, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I meant that if consensus later comes to add an infobox, having the artist in the caption isn't banned, as seen on The Firebird's IB. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 12:22, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi everyone. I think adding an infobox to this article would be wonderful, now that they are more in fashion compared to many years ago. Would anyone strongly oppose this? Zingarese talk  ·  contribs  (please  mention me on reply; thanks!) 03:59, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Signature shows instead of portrait when hovering over Schubert on a different page
Is this because the portrait was made after Schubert died? If so, should we swap it with another portrait that was made during his lifetime? Wikieditor662 (talk) 22:42, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * An example of the problem is seen at Symphony No. 8 (Schubert). Hovering the mouse over "Franz Schubert's" in the first sentence displays the signature from the article as an image, followed by an extract of text from the lead. That is done by system software, see mw:Page Previews. The software magically chooses which image to use and it picked the signature rather than the portrait. I have no idea, but the problem is probably due to the strange wikitext used in the article. In summary it is:
 * The portrait includes the signature in the caption. We could experiment with the wikitext or ask for assistance at WP:VPT. Problem: After changing the wikitext, it is likely that the software will not update the image used in the page preview until a fair bit of time has passed (hours or days?). Johnuniq (talk) 03:41, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I still see the signature instead of his portrait when hovering over it, perhaps we should add an infobox? It would probably fix the problem Wikieditor662 (talk) 11:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I see the his image now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:48, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Weird, I still see the signature instead Wikieditor662 (talk) 02:12, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Weird, I still see the signature instead Wikieditor662 (talk) 02:12, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Request for an infobox
suggested that infoboxes are becoming more common with composers and that we should add it. Now there's another reason to do so, which is that there's a mistake in which hovering over Schubert's name in another article shows his signature instead of portrait. I believe adding an infobox will most likely fix this issue.

Please share your thoughts. If nobody responds to this request I will assume that nobody opposes it. Cheers. Wikieditor662 (talk) 02:12, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I can't replicate the mistake that you mention. If it's still an issue for you regardless, I don't imagine that your proposal would resolve it. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:52, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Can you clarify what you mean please? Are you saying you tested the infobox and it didn't work? Wikieditor662 (talk) 03:16, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I mean the present version works fine for me. If the present version doesn't work for you, it would be helpful to identify why that is, because without knowing that it's unlikely you could fix it. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:26, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * And when you hover over Schubert's name in another article (without actually clicking it!) his portrait is what shows up instead of his signature? Wikieditor662 (talk) 13:40, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes. If that's not what you're seeing, I'd suggest you try clearing your cache as a first step. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:37, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Please say what you see if you visit Symphony No. 8 (Schubert) and hover the mouse above "Franz Schubert's" at the start. As mentioned in the section just above, Page Previews is showing the signature for at least some of us. If you see the signature, please perform a dummy edit on the article (add a space to the end of a line and save the edit). Because page previews are cached on the servers, it may be a day or two before an edit to the article causes the preview to be updated. Also, as I speculated in the above section, the unusual wikitext might be causing Page Previews to mistake what is the first image. Johnuniq (talk) 05:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Well I added a space after the file, hopefully that'll fix it in a few days if I understood you correctly Wikieditor662 (talk) 14:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Swap main portrait of Schubert
Is it okay with everyone if I swap the main image of him for one that was made in his lifetime? On Mozart's page it was decided that accuracy was more important, so we should do the same here. Wikieditor662 (talk) 03:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Franz Schubert


text:
Moses Mendelssohn

Moses Mendelssohn (6 September 1729 – 4 January 1786) was a German-Jewish philosopher and theologian. His writings and ideas on Jews and the Jewish religion and identity were a central element in the development of the Haskalah, or 'Jewish Enlightenment' of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Born to a poor Jewish family in Dessau, Principality of Anhalt, and originally destined for a rabbinical career, Mendelssohn educated himself in German thought and literature. Through his writings on philosophy and religion he came to be regarded as a leading cultural figure of his time by both Christian and Jewish inhabitants of German-speaking Europe and beyond. His involvement in the Berlin textile industry formed the foundation of his family's wealth.

His descendants include the composers Fanny and Felix Mendelssohn; Felix's son, chemist Paul Mendelssohn Bartholdy; Fanny's grandsons, Paul and Kurt Hensel; and the founders of the Mendelssohn & Co. banking house.

Youth
Moses Mendelssohn was born in Dessau. His father's name was Mendel, but Moses and his brother Saul were the first to adopt the surname Mendelssohn ("Mendel's son"). Moses's son Abraham Mendelssohn wrote in 1829 (to Felix), "My father felt that the name Moses Ben Mendel Dessau would handicap him in gaining the needed access to those who had the better education at their disposal. Without any fear that his own father would take offense, my father assumed the name Mendelssohn. The change, though a small one, was decisive."

Mendel was an impoverished scribe—a writer of Torah scrolls—and his son Moses in his boyhood developed curvature of the spine. Moses' early education was provided by his father and by the local rabbi, David Fränkel, who, besides teaching him the Bible and Talmud, introduced to him the philosophy of Maimonides. In 1743 Fränkel received a call to Berlin, and a few months later Moses followed him. Moses, age 14, "entered Berlin at the Rosenthaler Tor, the only gate in the city wall through which Jews (and cattle) were allowed to pass." "Mendelssohn enrolled in Frankel's exacting seminary, where the program consisted of unending rote repetitions of early medieval texts, interpretations thereof, elaborations of Talmudic law, and copious commentary accumulated over the centuries."

A refugee Polish Jew, Israel Zamosz, taught him mathematics, and a young Jewish physician taught him Latin. He was, however, mainly self-taught. He learned to spell and to philosophize at the same time (according to the historian Graetz). With his scanty earnings he bought a Latin copy of John Locke's An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, and mastered it with the aid of a Latin dictionary. He then made the acquaintance of Aaron Solomon Gumperz, who taught him basic French and English. In 1750, a wealthy Jewish silk-merchant, Isaac Bernhard, appointed him to teach his children. Mendelssohn soon won the confidence of Bernhard, who made the young student successively his bookkeeper and his partner.

It was possibly Gumperz who introduced Mendelssohn to Gotthold Ephraim Lessing in 1754, who became one of his greatest friends. It is said that the first time Mendelssohn met Lessing, they played chess. In Lessing's play Nathan the Wise Nathan and the character Saladin first meet during a game of chess. Lessing had recently produced the drama Die Juden, whose moral was that a Jew can possess nobility of character. This notion was, in the contemporary Berlin of Frederick the Great, generally ridiculed as untrue. Lessing found in Mendelssohn the realization of his dream. Within a few months, the two became closely intellectually allied. Lessing also brought Mendelssohn to public attention for the first time: Mendelssohn had written an essay attacking Germans' neglect of their native philosophers (principally Gottfried Leibniz), and lent the manuscript to Lessing. Without consulting the author, Lessing published Mendelssohn's Philosophical Conversations (Philosophische Gespräche) anonymously in 1755. In the same year there appeared in Danzig (now Gdańsk, Poland) an anonymous satire, Pope a Metaphysician (Pope ein Metaphysiker), which turned out to be the joint work of Lessing and Mendelssohn.

Early prominence as philosopher and critic
Mendelssohn became the leading spirit of Friedrich Nicolai's important literary undertakings, the Bibliothek and the Literaturbriefe, and ran some risk by criticizing the poems of Frederick II, King of Prussia; Frederick’s good nature kept him out of trouble. In 1762 he married Fromet Guggenheim, who survived him by twenty-six years. In the year following his marriage Mendelssohn won the prize offered by the Berlin Academy for an essay on the application of mathematical proofs to metaphysics, On Evidence in the Metaphysical Sciences; among the competitors were Thomas Abbt and Immanuel Kant, who came second. In October 1763 the king granted Mendelssohn, but not his wife or children, the privilege of Protected Jew (Schutzjude), which assured his right to undisturbed residence in Berlin.

As a result of his correspondence with Abbt, Mendelssohn resolved to write on the immortality of the soul. Materialistic views were at the time rampant and fashionable, and faith in immortality was at a low ebb. At this favourable juncture appeared Phädon oder über die Unsterblichkeit der Seele (Phaedo or On the Immortality of Souls; 1767). Modelled on Plato's dialogue of the same name, Mendelssohn's work possessed some of the charm of its Greek exemplar and impressed the German world with its beauty and lucidity of style. Phaedo was an immediate success, and besides being one of the most widely read books of its time in German was speedily translated into several European languages, including English. The author was hailed as the "German Plato", or the "German Socrates"; royal and other aristocratic friends showered attentions on him, and it was said that "no stranger who came to Berlin failed to pay his personal respects to the German Socrates."

Lavater
So far, Mendelssohn had devoted his talents to philosophy and criticism; now, however, an incident turned the current of his life in the direction of the cause of Judaism. In April 1763, Johann Kaspar Lavater, then a young theology-student from Zurich, made a trip to Berlin, where he visited the already famous Jewish philosopher with some companions. They insisted on Mendelssohn telling them his views on Jesus and managed to get from him the statement, that, provided the historical Jesus had kept himself and his theology strictly within limits of orthodox Judaism, Mendelssohn "respected the morality of Jesus' character." Six years later, in October 1769, Lavater sent Mendelssohn his German translation of Charles Bonnet's essay on Christian Evidences, with a preface where he publicly challenged Mendelssohn to refute Bonnet or if he could not then to "do what wisdom, the love of truth and honesty must bid him, what a Socrates would have done if he had read the book and found it unanswerable." Mendelssohn answered in an open letter in December 1769: "Suppose there were living among my contemporaries a Confucius or a Solon, I could, according to the principles of my faith, love and admire the great man without falling into the ridiculous idea that I must convert a Solon or a Confucius." The ongoing public controversy cost Mendelssohn much time, energy and strength.

Lavater later described Mendelssohn in his book on physiognomy, Physiognomische Fragmente zur Beförderung der Menschenkenntnis und Menschenliebe (1775–1778), as "a companionable, brilliant soul, with piercing eyes, the body of an Aesop [who was traditionally considered ugly]—a man of keen insight, exquisite taste and wide erudition [...] frank and open-hearted"—ending his public praise with the wish of Mendelssohn recognizing, "together with Plato and Moses... the crucified glory of Christ." When, in 1775 the Swiss-German Jews, faced with the threat of expulsion, turned to Mendelssohn and asked him to intervene on their behalf with "his friend" Lavater, Lavater, after receiving Mendelssohn's letter, promptly and effectively secured their stay.

Illness
In March 1771 Mendelssohn's health deteriorated so badly that Marcus Elieser Bloch, his doctor, decided his patient had to give up philosophy, at least temporarily. After a short and restless sleep one evening, Mendelssohn found himself incapable of moving and had the feeling of something lashing his neck with fiery rods, his heart was palpitating and he was in an extreme anxiety, yet fully conscious. This spell was then broken suddenly by some external stimulation. Attacks of this kind recurred. The cause of his disease was ascribed to the mental stress due to his theological controversy with Lavater. However, this sort of attack, in milder form, had presumably occurred many years earlier. Bloch diagnosed the disease as due to 'congestion of blood in the brain' (a meaningless diagnosis in modern medical practice as such congestion is anatomically impossible), and after some controversy this diagnosis was also accepted by the famous Hanoverian court physician, Johann Georg Ritter von Zimmermann, an admirer of Mendelssohn. In retrospect, his illness might be diagnosed as a heart-rhythm-problem (such as atrial fibrillation) and/or a mild form of familial dysautonomia, a hereditary disease of Ashkenazi Jews, which often brings with it a curvature of the spine and epilepsy-like symptoms in times of stress.

Mendelssohn was treated with China bark, blood lettings on the foot, leeches applied to the ears, enemas, foot baths, lemonade and mainly vegetarian food. “No mental stress whatsoever” was ordered. However, although he remained subject to periods of setback, he eventually recovered sufficiently to write the major works of his later career.

Death
Mendelssohn died on 4 January 1786 as the result (it was thought at the time) of a cold contracted while carrying a manuscript (his reply to Jacobi, titled To Lessing's Friends (An die Freunde Lessings)) to his publishers on New Year's Eve; Jacobi was held by some to have been responsible for his death. He was buried in the Jewish Cemetery of Berlin. The translation of the Hebrew inscription on his gravestone (see picture to the right) reads: "H[ere] r[ests] / the wise R[eb] Moses of Dessau / born on the 12th of Elul 5489 [6 September 1729] / died on Wednesday the 5th of Shevat [4 January] / and buried the next morning on Thursday 6th/ 5546 [5 January 1786] / M[ay] H[is] S[oul be] B[ound up in the] B[ond of eternal] L[ife]". Although the cemetery was largely destroyed during the Nazi era, after German reunification, in 2007-2008, it was reestablished with monuments to its past, including a recreation of Mendelssohn's gravestone.

Works on religion and civil society
It was after the breakdown of his health that Mendelssohn decided to "dedicate the remains of my strength for the benefit of my children or a goodly portion of my nation"—which he did by trying to bring the Jews closer to "culture, from which my nation, alas! is kept in such a distance, that one might well despair of ever overcoming it". One of the means of doing this was by "giving them a better translation of the holy books than they previously had". To this end Mendelssohn undertook his German translation of the Pentateuch and other parts of the Bible. This work was called the Bi'ur (the explanation) (1783) and also contained a commentary, only that on Exodus having been written by Mendelssohn himself. The translation was in an elegant High German, designed to allow Jews to learn the language faster. Most of the German Jews in that period spoke Yiddish and many were literate in Hebrew (the language of Jewish scripture, liturgy, and scholarship). The commentary was also thoroughly rabbinic, quoting mainly from medieval exegetes but also from Talmud-era midrashim. Mendelssohn is also believed to be behind the foundation of the first modern public school for Jewish boys, "Freyschule für Knaben", in Berlin in 1778 by one of his most ardent pupils, David Friedländer, where both religious and worldly subjects were taught.

Mendelssohn also tried to better the Jews' situation in general by furthering their rights and acceptance. He induced Christian Wilhelm von Dohm to publish in 1781 his work, On the Civil Amelioration of the Condition of the Jews, which played a significant part in the rise of tolerance. Mendelssohn himself published a German translation of the Vindiciae Judaeorum by Menasseh Ben Israel.

The interest caused by these actions led Mendelssohn to publish his most important contribution to the problems connected with the position of Judaism in a Gentile world. This was Jerusalem (1783; Eng. trans. 1838 and 1852). It is a forcible plea for freedom of conscience, described by Kant as "an irrefutable book". Mendelssohn wrote: Brothers, if you care for true piety, let us not feign agreement, where diversity is evidently the plan and purpose of Providence. None of us thinks and feels exactly like his fellow man: why do we wish to deceive each other with delusive words?

Its basic thrust is that the state has no right to interfere with the religion of its citizens, Jews included. While it proclaims the mandatory character of Jewish law for all Jews (including, based on Mendelssohn's understanding of the New Testament, those converted to Christianity), it does not grant the rabbinate the right to punish Jews for deviating from it. He maintained that Judaism was less a "divine need, than a revealed life". Jerusalem concludes with the cry "Love truth, love peace!"—in a quote from Zacharias 8:19.

Kant called this "the proclamation of a great reform, which, however, will be slow in manifestation and in progress, and which will affect not only your people but others as well." Mendelssohn asserted the pragmatic principle of the possible plurality of truths: that just as various nations need different constitutions—to one a monarchy, to another a republic, may be the most congenial to the national genius—so individuals may need different religions. The test of religion is its effect on conduct. This is the moral of Lessing's Nathan the Wise (Nathan der Weise), the hero of which is undoubtedly Mendelssohn, and in which the parable of the three rings is the epitome of the pragmatic position.

To Mendelssohn his theory represented a strengthening bond to Judaism. But in the first part of the 19th century, the criticism of Jewish dogmas and traditions was associated with a firm adhesion to the older Jewish mode of living. Reason was applied to beliefs, the historic consciousness to life. Modern reform in Judaism has parted to some extent from this conception. In the view of the German writer Heinrich Heine, "as Luther had overthrown the Papacy, so Mendelssohn overthrew the Talmud; and he did so after the same fashion, namely, by rejecting tradition, by declaring the Bible to be the source of religion, and by translating the most important part of it. By these means he shattered Judaic, as Luther had shattered Christian, catholicism; for the Talmud is, in fact, the catholicism of the Jews."

Later years and legacy
Mendelssohn grew ever more famous, and counted among his friends many of the great figures of his time. But his final years were overshadowed and saddened by the so-called pantheism controversy. Ever since his friend Lessing had died, he had wanted to write an essay or a book about his character. When Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi, an acquaintance of both men, heard of Mendelssohn's project, he stated that he had confidential information about Lessing being a "Spinozist", which, in these years, was regarded as being more or less synonymous with "atheist"—something which Lessing was accused of being anyway by religious circles.

This led to an exchange of letters between Jacobi and Mendelssohn which showed they had hardly any common ground. Mendelssohn then published his Morgenstunden oder Vorlesungen über das Dasein Gottes (Morning hours or lectures about God's existence), seemingly a series of lectures to his oldest son, his son-in-law and a young friend, usually held "in the morning hours", in which he explained his personal philosophical world-view, his own understanding of Spinoza and Lessing's "purified" (geläutert) pantheism. But almost simultaneously with the publication of this book in 1785, Jacobi published extracts of his and Mendelssohn's letters as Briefe über die Lehre Spinozas, stating publicly that Lessing was a self-confessed "pantheist" in the sense of "atheist". Mendelssohn was thus drawn into a poisonous literary controversy, and found himself attacked from all sides, including former friends or acquaintances such as Johann Gottfried von Herder and Johann Georg Hamann. Mendelssohn's contribution to this debate, To Lessing's Friends (An die Freunde Lessings) (1786), was his last work, completed a few days before his death.

Mendelssohn's complete works have been published in 19 volumes (in the original languages) (Stuttgart, 1971 ff., ed. A. Altmann and others)

Family
Mendelssohn had six children, of whom only his second-oldest daughter, Recha, and his eldest son, Joseph, retained the Jewish faith. His sons were: Joseph (founder of the Mendelssohn banking house and a friend and benefactor of Alexander von Humboldt), Abraham (who married Lea Salomon and was the father of Fanny and Felix Mendelssohn), and Nathan (a mechanical engineer of considerable repute). His daughters were Brendel (later Dorothea; the wife of Simon Veit and mother of Philipp Veit, subsequently the mistress, and then wife, of Friedrich von Schlegel), Recha and Henriette, all gifted women. Recha's only grandson (son of Heinrich Beer, brother of the composer Giacomo Meyerbeer), was born and educated as a Jew, but died very young, together with his parents, apparently from an epidemic. Joseph Mendelssohn's son Alexander (d. 1871) was the last male descendant of Moses Mendelssohn to practice Judaism.

In popular culture

 * Dutch comic artist Typex drew a 2022 biographical graphic novel about Moses Mendelssohn, titled Moishe.

title: Moses Mendelssohn


text:
United Arab Republic

The United Arab Republic (UAR; الجمهورية العربية المتحدة) was a sovereign state in the Middle East from 1958 until 1961. It was initially a political union between Egypt (including the governance of Gaza) and Syria from 1958 until Syria seceded from the union following the 1961 Syrian coup d'état. Egypt continued to be known officially as the United Arab Republic until September 1971 when it was formally dissolved by Anwar Sadat.

The republic was led by Gamal Abdel Nasser as the Egyptian president. The UAR was a member of the United Arab States, a loose confederation with the Mutawakkilite Kingdom of Yemen, which was dissolved in 1961.

Origins
The United Arab Republic was established on 1 February 1958 as the first step towards a larger pan-Arab state, originally being proposed to Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser by a group of political and military leaders in Syria.

Pan-Arab sentiment traditionally was very strong in Syria, and Nasser was a popular heroic figure throughout the Arab world following the Suez Crisis of 1956. There was thus considerable popular support in Syria for union with Nasser's Egypt. The Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party was the leading advocate of such a union.

In mid-1957, Western powers began to worry that Syria was close to a Communist takeover; it had a highly organized Communist Party and the newly appointed army's chief of staff, Afif al-Bizri, was a Communist sympathizer. This caused the Syrian Crisis of 1957 after which Syrians intensified their efforts to unite with Egypt. Nasser told a Syrian delegation, including President Shukri al-Quwatli and Prime Minister Khaled al-Azem, that they needed to rid their government of Communists, but the delegation countered and warned him that only total union with Egypt would end the "Communist threat". According to Abdel Latif Boghdadi, Nasser initially resisted a total union with Syria, favoring instead a federal union. However, Nasser was "more afraid of a Communist takeover" and agreed on a total merger. The increasing strength of the Syrian Communist Party, under the leadership of Khalid Bakdash, worried the Syrian Ba'ath Party, which was suffering from an internal crisis from which prominent members were anxious to find an escape. Syria had a democratic government since the overthrow of Adib al-Shishakli's military government in 1954, and popular pressure for Arab unity was reflected in the composition of parliament.

On 11 January 1958, al-Bizri led a Syrian delegation composed of military officers to Cairo, and personally encouraged Syrian-Egyptian unity. Nasser opted for a quick merger. Only Syrian advocates of unity, including Salah al-Din Bitar and Akram El-Hourani had prior knowledge of this delegation; Quwatli and Azem were notified a day later and considered it tantamount to a "military coup".

Nasser's final terms for the union were decisive and non-negotiable: "a plebiscite, the dissolution of parties, and the withdrawal of the army from politics". While the plebiscite seemed reasonable to most Syrian elites, the latter two conditions were extremely worrisome. They believed it would destroy political life in Syria. Despite these concerns, the Syrian officials knew it was too late to turn back. The members of the elite in Syria viewed the merger with Egypt as the lesser of two evils. They believed that Nasser's terms were unfair, but given the intense pressure that their government was undergoing, they believed that they had no other choice.

A plebiscite was held on 21 February 1958, with Egyptians and Syrians voting in favor of the merger. The result was announced on 22 February and Nasser was declared the new president of the United Arab Republic.

Egyptian and Syrian leaders signed the protocols, although Azem did so reluctantly. Nasser became the republic's president and very soon carried out a crackdown against the Syrian Communists and opponents of the union. This included dismissing Bizri and Azem from their posts.

Early history
Advocates of the union believed that Nasser would use the Ba'ath Party for ruling Syria. Unfortunately for the Ba'athists, it was never Nasser's intention to share an equal measure of power. Nasser established a new provisional constitution proclaiming a 600-member National Assembly with 400 members from Egypt and 200 from Syria, and the disbanding of all political parties, including the Ba'ath. Nasser gave each of the provinces two vice-presidents, assigning Boghdadi and Abdel Hakim Amer to Egypt and Sabri al-Assali and Akram El-Hourani – a leader of the Ba'ath – to Syria. The new provisional constitution of 1958 was adopted.

Though Nasser allowed former Ba'ath Party members to hold prominent political positions, they never reached positions as high in the government as did the Egyptian officials. During the winter and the spring of 1959–60, Nasser slowly squeezed prominent Syrians out of positions of influence. In the Syrian Ministry of Industry, for example, seven of the top thirteen positions were filled by Egyptians. In the General Petroleum Authority, four of the top six officials were Egyptian. In the fall of 1958, Nasser formed a tripartite committee, consisting of Zakaria Mohieddine, al-Hawrani, and Bitar to oversee the affairs in Syria. By moving the latter two, both Ba'athists, to Cairo, he neutralized important political figures who had their own ideas about how Syria should be run within the UAR.

In Syria, opposition to union with Egypt mounted. Syrian Army officers resented being subordinate to Egyptian officers, and Syrian Bedouin tribes received money from Saudi Arabia to prevent them from becoming loyal to Nasser. Also, Egyptian-style land reform was resented for damaging Syrian agriculture, the Communists began to gain influence, and the intellectuals of the Ba'ath Party who supported the union rejected the one-party system. Mustafa al-Barudi, the Syrian Minister of Propaganda, stated that 'the smallest member of the (Egyptian) retinue thought that he had inherited our country. [Egyptians] spread "like octopuses" everywhere.' Nasser was not able to address problems in Syria completely, because they were new to him, and instead of appointing Syrians to run Syria, he assigned this position to Amer and Abdel Hamid Sarraj (a Syrian army official and Nasser sympathizer).

In Egypt, the situation was more positive, with a GNP growth of 4.5 per cent and a rapid growth of industry. In 1960, Nasser nationalized the Egyptian press, reducing it to his personal mouthpiece.

Foreign relations
The union was interpreted by the other nations of the world as a major threat to Jordan. Syria was seen as a source of instigation and shelter for Jordanian plotters against King Hussein. Egypt's own status as a state unfriendly to Western aggression in the region (and thus to the close relationship between the British, in particular, and the Jordanian and Iraqi monarchies) added to the pressure. Hussein responded by proposing to Faisal II of Iraq a Jordanian-Iraqi union to counter the UAR; such a union formed on 14 February 1958 as the Arab Federation. Jordan and Iraq agreed to establish a unified military command with a unified military budget, 80 per cent of which was to be provided by Iraq and the remaining 20 per cent by Jordan. Troops from both countries were exchanged in the arrangement.

In nearby Lebanon, President Camille Chamoun, an opponent of Nasser, viewed the creation of the UAR with worry. Pro-Nasser factions in the country were mostly Muslims and Druze, while the Christian Maronite population generally supported Chamoun. These two sides began clashing, culminating in a civil war by May 1958. The former favoured merging with the UAR, while the latter feared the new country as a satellite of Communism. Although Nasser did not covet Lebanon, seeing it as a special case, he felt obliged to back his supporters through giving Abdel Hamid Sarraj the task of sending them money and light arms, and training officers.

On 14 July 1958, Iraqi army officers staged a military coup and overthrew the Kingdom of Iraq – which had just previously united with Jordan to form the rival Arab Federation. Nasser declared his recognition of the new government and stated that "any attack on Iraq was tantamount to an attack on the UAR". The next day American marines and British special forces landed in Lebanon and in Jordan, respectively, to prevent the two countries from opening up to pro-Nasser forces. To Nasser, the revolution in Iraq opened the road for Arab nationalism. Although most members of the Iraqi Revolutionary Command Council (RCC) favoured joining Iraq with the UAR, the new prime minister Abdel Karim Qasim disagreed. Said K. Aburish states reasons for this could have included Nasser's refusal to cooperate with and encourage the Iraqi Free Officers a year before the coup – or Qasim viewed Nasser as a threat to his supremacy as leader of Iraq.

Later in July, the American government convinced Chamoun not to seek a second term. This allowed the election of Fuad Chehab as Lebanon's new president. Nasser and Chehab met at the Lebanese–Syrian border and Nasser explained to Chehab that he never wanted unity with Lebanon, but only that the country not be used as a base against the UAR. This meeting resulted in the end of the crisis in Lebanon, with Nasser ceasing to supply his partisans and America setting a deadline for retreating from the area.

After the overthrow of its Hashemite monarchy in 1958, Iraq became the Arab state most supportive of the UAR. Iraq sought to join the union; however, in 1959 Qasim cancelled the unity talks. After Qasim's overthrow in 1963 the union idea resurrected with the proposal of Egypt, Iraq, and Syria reforming the UAR. A new flag was proposed, with three stars symbolizing the three states constituting the proposed union. However, the plan for a tri-partite union never materialised. Iraq continued to use the three-star flag and later adopted it as the national flag. This three-star flag remained Iraq's national flag (with some modifications) until 2007.

Flag
The UAR adopted a flag based on the Arab Liberation Flag of the Egyptian Revolution of 1952, but with two stars to represent the two parts of the UAR. From 1980 this has been the official flag of Syria. In 1963, Iraq adopted a flag that was similar but with three stars, representing the hope that Iraq would join the UAR. The current flags of Egypt, Sudan and Yemen are also based on the 1952 Arab Liberation Flag of horizontal red, white and black bands.

Nationalization
In June 1960, Nasser tried to establish economic reforms that would bring the Syrian economy more in line with the strong Egyptian public sector. However, these changes did little to help either economy. Rather than shift growth toward the private sector, Nasser embarked on an unprecedented wave of nationalizations in both Syria and Egypt. These began in July 1961, without consulting top Syrian economic officials. The entire cotton trade was taken over by the government, as well as all import-export firms. Nasser announced the nationalization of banks, insurance companies, and all heavy industry, July 23, 1961. Nasser also extended his social justice principles. The land limit was reduced from 200 to 100 feddans. Interest rates for farmers were dramatically reduced to the point of elimination in some cases. A ninety percent tax was instituted on all income above £E10,000. Workers and employees were allowed representatives on management boards. They were also given the right to a twenty-five percent share in the profit of their firm. The average workday was also cut from eight hours to seven without a reduction in pay.

Culture
Upon accepting the 1960 Best Supporting Actor award given to Hugh Griffith for his "wonderfully humorous, human, and sympathetic characterization of an Arab sheik" in Ben-Hur (1959), director William Wyler expressed regret that the people of the United Arab Republic would not be permitted to see Griffith's performance.

Dissolution
Instead of a federation of two Arab peoples, as many Syrians had imagined, the UAR turned into a state completely dominated by Egyptians. Syrian political life was also diminished, as Nasser demanded all political parties in Syria to be dismantled. In the process, the strongly centralized Egyptian state imposed Nasser's socialistic political and economic system on weaker Syria, creating a backlash from the Syrian business and army circles, which resulted in the Syrian coup of September 28, 1961, and the end of the UAR. According to Elie Podeh, "... this unity scheme was successful in consolidating the shaky Syrian identity. In fact, once the Syrians lost their independence they suddenly realized that they did indeed possess a different identity than the Egyptians."

Despite the economic difficulties, what truly produced the demise of the UAR was Nasser's inability to find a suitable political system for the new regime. Given his socialist agenda in Egypt, the Ba'ath should have been his natural ally, but Nasser was hesitant to share power. Though Amer allowed some liberalization of the economy in order to appease Syrian businessmen, his decision to rig the elections of the National Union (the single party which replaced the Ba'ath), with the help of Colonel Abdul Hamid Sarraj (a Syrian army official and Nasser sympathizer), antagonized Ba'athist leaders. The Ba'ath Party won only five percent of the seats on the higher committees, while the more traditional conservative parties won a significant majority. Sarraj was appointed the head of the National Union in Syria, and by the spring of 1960 had replaced Amer as the chair of the Syrian Executive Council. Under Sarraj Syria was ruled by a repressive security force designed to suppress all opposition to the regime.

The immense increases in public sector control were accompanied by a push for centralization. In August 1961 Nasser abolished regional governments in favour of one central authority, which operated from Damascus February through May and from Cairo for the rest of the year. As a part of this centralization, Sarraj was relocated to Cairo, where he found himself with little real power. September 15, 1961, Sarraj returned to Syria, and after meeting with Nasser and Amer resigned from all his posts on September 26.

Without any close allies to watch over Syria, Nasser was unaware of the growing unrest of the military. On September 28 a group of officers staged a coup and declared Syria's independence from the UAR. Though the coup leaders were willing to renegotiate a union under terms they felt would put Syria on an equal footing with Egypt, Nasser refused such a compromise. He initially considered sending troops to overthrow the new regime, but chose not to once he was informed that the last of his allies in Syria had been defeated. In speeches that followed the coup, Nasser declared he would never give up his goal of an ultimate Arab union. However, he would never again achieve such a tangible victory toward this goal.

After Syria's withdrawal
After Syria's withdrawal from the union in 1961, Egypt retained its "United Arab Republic" name until 1971.

In the early 1960s, Nasser sent an expeditionary army to Yemen to support the anti-monarchist forces in the North Yemen Civil War.

From 5 to 10 June in 1967, Israel invaded Gaza, the West Bank, the Golan Heights, and the Sinai Peninsula during the Six-Day War. Egypt recovered partial sovereignty over the Sinai Peninsula in 1978, but only after agreeing to recognize Israel. Anwar Sadat, who reversed many of the socialist reforms enacted under Nassar, extended diplomatic recognition to Tel Aviv despite Israel’s ongoing occupation of lands illegally seized in 1967. Israel maintained a violent occupation of some territories and created illegal settlements. After 1994, the Palestinian Authority, created by the Oslo Accords, established a degree of Palestinian civil administration in Gaza. Israel retreated from Gaza in 2005 was not followed by resumption of control by Egypt. Since 2007, Gaza has been administrated by the Palestinian nationalist party Hamas.

Geography
If it existed today, the United Arab Republic would be the 25th largest nation on the planet (Egypt is 30th and Syria is 88th). It was comparable in size to South Africa, and twice the size of France. Following the dissolution of the All-Palestine Government, the United Arab Republic further exerted control over Gaza, until 1967.

title: United Arab Republic


text:
Talk:Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

8th Grade
I'm afraid to say that the whole of this article, commentary, and subsequent additions, including most of those on this discussion page are of a level suitable to an 8th grade student. This is not uncommon within Wikipedia. There are plenty of thoughtful and knowledgeable books, guides and cribs to Albee's play, to which it would be better to refer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User: (talk • contribs)
 * This is an old comment, but in the future it's good to show eamples and sources. Also the comment may have been made a long time ago when Wikipedia was less developed. WhisperToMe (talk) 08:26, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Dec 2006 and before commentary
This article deserves to be re-written; much of it appears to have been written by a person or persons who have only seen the movie once, and have not read the play. There is a serious lack of understanding contained in the article regarding the origin and meaning of the title and its reference to Virginia Woolf. It also contained factual errors regarding the text of the original play. There is very little discussion of the underlying dynamics of the play, mainly the issue of whether or not Martha and George actually had a son. Anyone who has seriously reviewed the play should realize that Martha and George "created" a fictional son. It would also be useful to analyze the effect this game had on their relationship. Additionally, there ought to be a discussion of why Martha, at the end of the play (upon being asked by her husband "Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf?") replies "I am, George." User:jlmurrel December 17, 2006

Note to WikiProject Broadway participants: Article needs information about the current Broadway production, and previous broadway productions. EvilPhoenix July 2, 2005 05:44 (UTC)

Wasn't this a book before it became a movie? -- April

Well it was a play by Edward Albee. Thanks, I forget things like that.

Should the film and play sections be separated into two different entries? -Markt3, 8/11/05
 * If the film section expands significantly, perhaps, but there's not really enough info to warrant a split right now. Dysprosia 09:48, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

"Plot summary" section
The Plot Summary section is just awful. It's meandering and unclear, and reads like someone who's mumbling to himself or herself. Can we do something about it? Moncrief 02:47, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Like what? Could you perhaps be more descriptive? Dysprosia 04:56, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Though the incorporation of important, respective lines is nice, I agree that the summary is unclear. Perhaps a more concise summary with emphasis on the crucial actions; then sections on themes, symbolism, brief character analysis, etc. -- Perrin

tone of Plot Summary
All of the critical analysis needs to be removed as well, per No Original Research. --Rajah (talk) 02:52, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

About the title
I think a couple of lines on why the play has been named "Who's Afraid of Virginai Woolf?" would be in order and make the description complete. --Gurubrahma 17:51, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I know that the phrase "who's afraid of Virginia Woolf?" was written in marker ink on the south west wall of the Figaro Café [corner of Bleeker and MacDougal Streets, NYC long before there was a play]I know because I saw it. I thought this was common knowledge. TRIKER (talk) 18:43, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I personally believe that the summary of the three 'games' has been written excellently. He does not speak as if rambling to him/herself but as if talking to someone that has a good understanding of the play or has at least viewed the production. I am studying the play as part of my A Level English Literature course and i must admit i found it extremely beneficial. Thanks

Someone, apparently not getting the joke, took Elizabeth Taylor's performance of Martha to be an unjust savaging of Virginia Woolf.

Internal consistency regarding meaning of the title
This article needs to find some internal consistency regarding the meaning of the title. One paragraph declares that it's a meaningless pun. Then, two paragraphs later, the article contradicts itself and declares that it's not a meaningless pun. The way the author of the second paragraph chose italicize the world "that" even suggests that he or she realized they were contradicting the previous statement in this article.

I've never seen the play and only have seen the movie once, many years ago. So I don't feel at all qualified to offer a determination regarding which interpretation is correct. But the article absolutely should not "argue with itself" like that.

If there is a consensus within the literary community on the point, then that is what this article should reflect. If there is not such a consensus, then both points of view should be reflected in the article, but neither should be stated as if it's an undisputed fact. It should be something more along the lines of "Certain critics say this about the title . . . Others interpret it as that . . ."

As I said, I'm not in any position personally to determine which of those two approaches should be adopted, but it would be nice if someone more familiar with the literary world's critical analyses of this play would make that determination and re-write the article accordingly (preferably providing citations, of course). Mwelch 20:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Oscar Levant, The Unimportance of Being Oscar, Pocket Books 1969 (reprint of G.P. Putnam 1968), p. 6 says that the title originated as graffiti. Which means that Albee himself may not have had one specific meaning in mind. - Jmabel | Talk 01:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the heads-up. With that lead from you, I also found an inteview with Albee discussing that graffiti origin of the title.  I'm going to update this article now. Mwelch 02:17, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

re: trivia
Is it at all relevant to the universe that some little band made a song that makes passing reference to the title? Do fans of William Blake stalk the biblical section pointing out every last place where he made reference to the topic at hand? Is the page on JFK's assassination filled with a list of every TV show that has an episode whose characters remember the event? Can we get some perspective, here?

2006 edition claims
I have tagged this as original research. Unless somebody comes up with citations backing it up, I will be deleting it next week. Jeffpw 06:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

The Latin in the play seems to be from a funeral mass but it is not the Deas Irae (at least not as it is transcribed in the wikipedia) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.59.196 (talk) 10:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Bipolar disorder / manic depression
There's a paragraph of the article that goes on and on about bipolar disorder (a.k.a. manic depression), and how the characters of the play seem to exhibit that disorder (in some sort of condensed or atypical form). It explicitly mentions this diagnosis at least five times – so much that I found it becoming annoying. That discussion starts with the bald unsourced assertion that "Both Martha and George exhibit signs of bipolar disorder" – so I checked the references to see how much emphasis the sources actually put on this diagnosis. Guess what? I looked up all four sources mentioned in that part of the article and found that none of the sources that talk about the play mention the bipolar diagnosis, and the one that talks about bipolar disorder doesn't mention the play. I'm afraid we have some sort of WP:Original research injected into the article here. —BarrelProof (talk) 10:14, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

I agree with BarrelProof. . . although I think the bipolar reference is spot on, the cited sources need to support that analysis. I'm afraid that this section looks like it needs to be deleted entirely or cut down to just a sentence or two. zuky79 (talk) 06:02, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Seconded, I agree that it's OR and should be deleted entirely. Vonbontee (talk) 03:18, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Actually, she has Borderline Personality Disorder, not Bipolar Disorder (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/i-hate-you-dont-leave-me/201103/borderlines-i-wish-i-would-have-known)

Act II: In the play, the men never leave the house. It is in the movie that theu are in the yard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.130.80.99 (talk) 00:08, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Critical Approaches
This section has some passages that smack of original research. Whoever wrote this appears to be writing their interpretation of the play. If the uncited assertions in this section are part of the published literary criticism on Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, then please cite the works, otherwise those opinion sections should be scratched. Some passages are cited, which is good, but others look like opinions of the author of this article. Chafe66 (talk) 05:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

 * I removed the uncited passages. Nandesuka (talk) 13:06, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110918131104/http://bluebridgetheatre.ca/plays-schedules/whos-afraid-of-virginia-woolf/ to http://bluebridgetheatre.ca/plays-schedules/whos-afraid-of-virginia-woolf/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:06, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

"Out of print" album is actually on iTunes
https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/whos-afraid-virginia-woolf-original-music-from-motion/669030287

Notable productions
The Bentley School production is redolent with notability, and is the only production for which a photo is provided, and it's a brilliant photo. (From what vantage point was it shot?) It is the only production in a theater-in-the-round format. Moreover, this entry is appropriate for its context and is a positive contribution to the article. Please discuss in Talk, and provide evidence that your edit improves the article, instead of spitefully redacting. The standard of merit for notability is low because it's almost purely subjective. Thanks. Yankeepapa13 (talk) 22:59, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Generally, the only student productions that are notable are those that have notable student actors - and likely not even then. For example, I very much doubt you'll find mentions of any of Benedict Cumberbatch's student roles. I think this production and its photo should be left out. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:30, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Film Link
Link to the film at the top of page just loops around back to this article. However, it’s only on mobile. I don’t know how to fix this on mobile since I am not that good at editing. Daankeo (talk) 22:45, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The link (For the 1966 film adaptation, see Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (film)) links to the article on the film, so it seems to be okay.- Åüñîçńøł (talk) 04:39, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Right now I’m on iPhone, and the film link goes back to the top of the play article. Sunnystreet (talk) 23:34, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

"Excessive detail" and "non-neutrality"?
Hello! To try to put an end to an unfortunate controversy and avoid wasting further time with asking a mediation (third opinion (3O)), I would like to clarify once and for all why my edits are neither "excessive detail" nor do they contain any "not neutral" statements. 1. After the "gun joke" Martha is not frightened (if not just for a moment), but very amused instead. 2. The article didn't explain correctly why George breaks a bottle in a rage. (The scene I referred to in which Martha deeply offends George's pride was missing.) 3. The article didn't explain the friend's accident of George's youth correctly. (A detail particularly important to understand the reference to this fact in the final part of the play). 4. It was not explained why George had furiously thrown the book against the chimes. (The reference to the intimate relationship between Nick and Martha was missing at that point.) 5. It is not true that "Martha and Nick had knocked in some bells", because it was George's book that did it. (An important detail because otherwise the reference, present before my modifications, to the "2005 production" would not be understood). 6. It is not true that "the description [of the car accident that happened to George and Martha's 'imaginary son'] matches that of the boy in the gin mill story". (My edits explain the difference). Since the editing work requires a lot of time and effort, I hope a constructive contribution from everyone, while I do not consider it correct or compliant with the Wikipedia regulation to delete the work of others with a single click. Thanks. NONIS STEFANO (talk) 09:30, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?


text:
Talk:Moses Mendelssohn

Mendelssohn's grave stone
May I ask a simple question here? What is written on Mendelssohn's grave stone? Could anybody translate this? (and maybe add it to the caption?) Thanks! Claude --92.75.111.209 (talk) 20:15, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

family poor or wealthy?
the 2nd paragraph says that he was born into a poor family, but then it says that "the Berlin textile industry, which was the foundation of his family's wealth."

was his family poor or wealthy?

2601:6:5600:BE9C:55A7:C9E1:F919:6B14 (talk) 13:44, 8 May 2015 (UTC) Michael Christian
 * Good question, and I would have to check it better again with a little more time. My guess, off the bat, is that the family was poor around the time he was born, but had become much wealthier by the time he started studying philosophy. I.e., the family acquired a certain wealth as he grew up, which allowed him to branch from the study of rabbinics and into European philosophy of the time. But with the appropriate sources at hand, the text could be clarified and improved regarding this issue. I'll keep it in mind for when I have the time... warshy (¥¥) 14:38, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

The article is correct. He was born into a very poor family. He became tutor to wealthy Jewish families in Berlin, then became a book-keeper to one of his employers Isaac Bernhard, then became a partner in the business, which was the source of his wealth. This is all in the article if you read it - you don't need to guess.--Smerus (talk) 16:22, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Good. Thanks! You just answered the anonymous editor's question above much better than me, by just reading the article itself. Kudos, both to you and to Wikipedia. warshy (¥¥) 16:35, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The article about MM is insufficient, not elaborating on his philosophy and how he contributed together the Haskalah and how his theories contributed to decision of many German Jews to convert to Christianity. 96.242.4.211 (talk) 03:42, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 00:28, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Zamoscz?
A refugee Pole, Zamoscz, taught him mathematics....
 * Who is this Zamoscz? I haven't found any references to him.
 * Zamość is of course a city in Poland that once had a significant Jewish community.
 * Sca (talk) 20:07, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Seek and ye shall find. I have added citations.--Smerus (talk) 12:05, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Haskalah
The lead of the article says, correctly imo, that MM was the source of many of the ideas of the Haskalah. But I think it is incrrect to credit him with being a member, or founder, of the 'Haskalah school' (and I have therefore reverted this reference in the infobox). The term Haskalah was only coined, retrospectively, in the 1860s. MM would have disagreed strongly with many of its "assimilationist" aspects (as he would have seen them). He had no 'school' of his own, although many Jewish philosophers of the enxt generation acknowledged his influence. That does not make him a member of the Haskalah movement. In passing, I would add that this is yet another example of the dangers of an infobox, which because it has not capacity to disucss detail risks passing on incorrect or misleading information to the reader--Smerus (talk) 08:01, 27 July 2020 (UTC).
 * I pretty much concur with the general gist of your remarks. Some scholars would definitely describe him as the "founder" or one of the the founders of the Haskalah (or the Jewish European 18th and 19th century "Enlightenment"). Or would perhaps rather argue that without the influence of his intellectual work the "school" might not have even started or existed in Judaism at all. But a "founder" cannot always be easily put on the ranks of the 'school' he founded, and in Mendelssohn's case this is probably true for the reasons you give. It is also true that infoboxes can be a simplistic, and as such misleading device, especially in cases of difficult philosophical nuances such as this one. But the main reason I agree with your removal of this specific line/tag in the infobox, is that in my view there is no rule that determines that a thinker must be put into a specifically named "school" in the infobox. In this particular case, I don't think the infobox suffers too much or becomes too incomplete or inappropriate by the lack of the "school" tag. warshy (¥¥) 18:23, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Pope and Metaphysics
Is Alexander Pope meant by Mendelssohn and Lessing? Stephphie (talk) 15:07, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't know. It is possible. But if you really want to check it, the material is referred to the 1911 edition on the Britannica. I'd check there first. warshy (¥¥) 15:18, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Moses Mendelssohn


text:
Mafioso

Mafioso may refer to:

 * A mafioso is a mobster that is a member (i.e. a "made man") of the Sicilian Mafia, Italian-American Mafia, or other Italian criminal organizations.
 * Mafioso (film), a 1962 Italian black comedy film
 * Mafioso rap, a hip hop music subgenre of gangsta rap

title: Mafioso