text:
Wikipedia talk:About

Renewing videos
Yes. I mean, its just old at first. The video contents should be remolded, as the main page is now COMPLETELY different from what was yeas back. So, please remake them.

Thank You!

Utkarsh555 (talk) 05:08, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Opening sentence
"Wikipedia is an online free content encyclopedia project helping to create a world in which everyone can freely share in the sum of all knowledge."

Hmm, sounds like a load of marketing wank and not the introduction to a worthwhile encyclopedia article. MinorProphet (talk) 03:49, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

 * I've suggested this revision—which seems a bit more accurate, fixes a bit of punctuation ("free-content" is an adjective here), and may be sufficiently less vainglorious (😉) :
 * Wikipedia is an online free-content encyclopedia helping to create a world where everyone can freely share and access knowledge.
 * – AndyFielding (talk) 02:29, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Isn't that the uncyclopedia's motto? Deven McEwen (talk) 17:29, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The page About is an encyclopedia article. Note the prefix   in the page's name – it's a page in the project namespace. —andrybak (talk) 13:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Project links?
In the Exploration section (at " Related projects include..."), I've added embedded links to each described WF project except: – AndyFielding (talk) 02:20, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * "manuals" (couldn't find—does it still exist?)
 * "scientific reference sources" (does it refer to Wikisource, which is much more general?)

Redesigning the About page
Please see discussion at the idea lab at Village_pump_(idea_lab). Interstellarity (talk) 15:43, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

 * As the discussion is now archived, not sure where else to post this. The new version is (bluntly) a miserable shadow of its former self. While the former had visually interesting media and statistical information, the new version is just a boring plain wall of text and links. I honestly initially took the changes for vandalism given how awkwardly the page ends. Given the size and radical effect of the change, I'd recommend a RfC. SchizoidNightmares (talk) 01:40, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow!
This has been at the bottom of the page for awhile. I don't know why it says "bugs", and how are they shallow. I may be missing something in thinking this is a good Zen mind twister but has no other meaning (generational gap? is it a meme?). Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:19, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

 * Randy Kryn, this phrase is Linus's law. —andrybak (talk) 14:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, first I've heard of that. It seems a little inside-baseball to act as the "big finish" of the Wikipedia:About article, and I'd guess it tends to confuse more than just me if someone doesn't know the term. Still seems a slightly confusing way of ending the introduction of the site to newcomers. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:29, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Then again, computer people will know its meaning and recognize the term, so I'm just reacting as a non-computer savvy user. Thanks again for the education. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I went to add a wisdom of the crowd link to further explain the point of the Linus's law quote and ended up editing and reordering the last paragraph for concept flow and brevity, and then put in a paragraph break. Seems to work. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:41, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Outdated
The version is true for the period 2001-19. In 2019, however, it was resolved that all active porn actors will be gradually eliminated from Wikipedia claiming insufficient notability. Thus, one "branch of knowledge" is blocked, the branch accounting for half of internet traffic.

Since 2019, Wikipedia's purpose is usually "to satisfy" and sometimes to frustrate curious minds by acting as a widely accessible and free encyclopedia that contains information on many branches of knowledge and avoids information on selected branches. The opening citation should be adjusted too, as much changed since Sanger said it:

“Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to most of human knowledge and devoid of access to some of this knowledge. That's what we're doing.” --Maxaxa (talk) 21:44, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

 * @Maxaxax Could you clarify your position on the issue further? CactiStaccingCrane 14:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Since 2019, there is at least one branch of knowledge de facto censored from Wikipedia - active porn actors. Officially, they fail notability; in practice, the notability is made high enough for total deletion of porn actors who rose to prominence ever since.
 * The issue passed long discussion and request for comment and the arbitration request was speedy declined. Since 2019, Wikipedia factually has a new policy - no longer all branches of knowledge. I think this page must be adjusted to the new policy. Maxaxa (talk) 16:28, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Maxaxax I think you you go to the WP:Village pump and discuss about the issue, which I think it is far more effective than trying to make a WP:POINTY proposal at this page. I think more people will listen to you if you raise your complaints in a more respectful manner. CactiStaccingCrane 00:12, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * It does not matter how many people would listen, this policy is from above and it disregarded many counter-arguments by other people. It would be more respectful if Wikipedia honestly announced changes in its policy and adjusted related pages instead of abusing the rules of notability. Maxaxa (talk) 02:27, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * It does not matter how many people would listen, this policy is from above and it disregarded many counter-arguments by other people. It would be more respectful if Wikipedia honestly announced changes in its policy and adjusted related pages instead of abusing the rules of notability. Maxaxa (talk) 02:27, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Why you blocked me
What kind of mistake I have done from my side. Please explain Rahulsoman (talk) 17:24, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

 * @Rahulsoman you are not blocked, and if you do have a block message it surely shouldn't be pointing you to this talk page. — xaosflux  Talk 17:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia talk:About


text:
Barchester Towers

Barchester Towers is a novel by English author Anthony Trollope published by Longmans in 1857. It is the second book in the Chronicles of Barsetshire series, preceded by The Warden and followed by Doctor Thorne. Among other things it satirises the antipathy in the Church of England between High Church and Evangelical adherents. Trollope began writing this book in 1855. He wrote constantly and made himself a writing-desk so he could continue writing while travelling by train. "Pray know that when a man begins writing a book he never gives over", he wrote in a letter during this period. "The evil with which he is beset is as inveterate as drinking – as exciting as gambling".

In his autobiography, Trollope observed "In the writing of Barchester Towers I took great delight. The bishop and Mrs. Proudie were very real to me, as were also the troubles of the archdeacon and the loves of Mr. Slope". When he submitted his finished work, his publisher, William Longman, initially turned it down, finding much of it to be full of "vulgarity and exaggeration". Recent critics offer a more positive opinion: "Barchester Towers is many readers' favourite Trollope", wrote The Guardian, which included it in its 2009 list of "1000 novels everyone must read".

Plot summary
Barchester Towers concerns the leading clergy of the fictional cathedral city of Barchester. The much loved bishop having died, all expectations are that his son, Archdeacon Grantly, will succeed him. Owing to the passage of the power of patronage to a new Prime Minister, a newcomer, the far more Evangelical Bishop Proudie, gains the see. His wife, Mrs Proudie, exercises an undue influence over the new bishop, making herself as well as the bishop unpopular with most of the clergy of the diocese. Her interference, leading the Bishop to veto the reappointment of the universally popular Mr Septimus Harding (protagonist of Trollope's earlier novel, The Warden) as warden of Hiram's Hospital, is not well received, even though she seeks to have the position given to a needy clergyman, Mr Quiverful, who has a wife and 14 children to support.

Even less popular than Mrs Proudie is the bishop's new chaplain, the hypocritical and sycophantic Mr Obadiah Slope, who decides it would be expedient to marry Harding's wealthy widowed daughter, Eleanor Bold. Slope hopes to win her favour by interfering in the controversy over the wardenship, in favour of Mr Harding. The Bishop, or rather Mr Slope under the direction of Mrs Proudie, also orders the return of the prebendary Dr Vesey Stanhope from Italy. Stanhope has been in Italy recovering from a sore throat for 12 years and has spent his time catching butterflies. With him to the Cathedral Close come his wife and their three adult children. The younger of Dr Stanhope's two daughters causes consternation in the Palace and threatens the plans of Mr Slope. Signora Madeline Vesey Neroni is a disabled flirt with a young daughter and a mysterious Italian husband, whom she has left. Mrs Proudie is appalled and considers her an unsafe influence on her daughters, servants and Mr Slope. Mr Slope is drawn like a moth to a flame, and cannot keep away from the Signora. Dr Stanhope's artistic son Bertie is skilled at spending money, but not at making it; his sisters think marriage to rich Eleanor Bold will help.

Summoned by Archdeacon Grantly to assist in the war against the Proudies and Mr Slope is the Reverend Francis Arabin. Mr Arabin is a considerable scholar, Fellow of Lazarus College at the University of Oxford, who nearly followed his mentor John Henry Newman into the Roman Catholic Church. A misunderstanding occurs between Eleanor and her father, brother-in-law, sister and Mr Arabin, who think that she intends to marry Mr Slope, much to their disgust. Mr Arabin is attracted to Eleanor, but the efforts of Grantly and his wife to stop her marrying Slope interfere with any relationship that might develop. At the Ullathorne garden party held by the Thornes, matters come to a head. Mr Slope proposes to Mrs Bold and is slapped for his presumption; Bertie goes through the motions of a proposal to Eleanor and is refused with good grace, and the Signora has a chat with Mr Arabin. Mr Slope's double-dealings are now revealed and he is dismissed by both Mrs Proudie and the Signora. The Signora drops a delicate word in several ears and with the removal of the misunderstanding, Mr Arabin and Eleanor become engaged.

The Dean of the Cathedral having died, Mr Slope campaigns to become the new Dean but Mr Harding is offered the preferment, with a beautiful house in the Close and fifteen acres of garden. Mr Harding considers himself unsuitable and with the help of the archdeacon, arranges that Mr Arabin be made Dean. With the Stanhopes' return to Italy, life in the Cathedral Close returns to normal and Mr Harding continues his life of gentleness and music.

Structure
The literary scholar John Sutherland observes that Trollope suspended work on the novel (having reached the end of Chapter VIII) between February 1855 and May 1856, turning instead to his posthumously published The New Zealander. During this time he changed his idea of writing a short novel (similar in length to The Warden) to a longer one, and that from this hiatus there arise a number of inconsistencies in the text. In the first chapter Trollope says that Bishop Grantley is dying in "the latter days of July" and that Proudie became bishop "just a month after his [Grantly's] demise". At the beginning of Chapter IX, Sutherland observes that Trollope has Proudie three months onto his term as Bishop - effectively late November. However at the beginning of Chapter XII Slope is writing a letter dated 20 August, and in Chapters XXXIII and XXXV it is made clear that Miss Thorne's fête champêtre takes place on the last day of September. In Chapter XLVIII Arabin proposes to Eleanor on "a beautiful afternoon in the beginning of October".

Sutherland points out that in the early chapters Trollope describes the Proudies as intending to spend as much time as possible in London, leaving the field clear for Slope to act on his own in Barchester with the action easily contained in a single-volume novel: in Chapter IV, Slope thinks to himself that, in the Proudies' anticipated absences in London, "he, therefore, he, Mr Slope, would in effect be bishop of Barchester". But when Trollope resumed the composition of Barchester Towers in May 1856, planning the eventual three-volume novel as a result of the unexpectedly increasing sales of The Warden in late 1855, he expanded the text by keeping the Proudies in Barchester and introducing a number of new characters who had not appeared in the earlier chapters - the Stanhopes, Mr Arabin, and the Thornes among others.

And although Sutherland notes that Trollope was "often indifferent to minor inconsistencies in his narratives", he regards these lapses as showing the point at which Trollope conceived the idea of the novel series which would eventually become the hugely successful Chronicles of Barsetshire.

High Church faction

 * Mr Septimus Harding is the meek, elderly precentor of Barchester and Rector of the church of St. Cuthbert's near the Cathedral Close. He was formerly Warden of Hiram's Hospital but resigned in The Warden.
 * Archdeacon Grantly, Dr Theophilus Grantly, is the son of the former Bishop of Barchester, Dr Grantly senior, who dies at the start of the novel. Married to Susan Grantly, originally Susan Harding, he has three sons (Charles James, Henry, and Samuel) and two daughters (Florinda and Griselda) and lives at Plumstead Episcopi. His sister-in-law is Mrs Eleanor Bold, née Harding.
 * Mrs Susan Grantly, Mr Harding's elder daughter and the Archdeacon's wife.
 * Mr Francis Arabin, vicar of St Ewold, Old Wykehamist, Fellow of Lazarus College and former professor of poetry at the University of Oxford. He is a former follower of John Henry Newman and adheres to the High Church faction of the Anglican Church. Arabin is sought out by Dr Grantly as an ally against the evangelical faction of Bishop Proudie, his wife and chaplain Obadiah Slope.
 * Dr Gwynne, Master of Lazarus College, another ally.

Low Church faction

 * Bishop Proudie, apparently henpecked, weak-willed and under the influence of his wife Mrs Proudie and chaplain Obadiah Slope concerning the matters of the see.
 * Mrs Proudie, a proud, vulgar, domineering wife, who promotes evangelical causes such as Sunday schools and is zealous in eliminating high-church rituals.
 * Mr Obadiah Slope, a wheedling, oleaginous chaplain who has much influence over Bishop Proudie. Midway through the novel Slope decides that he will marry Mrs Eleanor Bold. Formerly Mrs Proudie's ally, he comes into conflict with her over the wardenship of Hiram's Hospital and she regards him as a traitor. The narrator speculates that he is a lineal descendant of Doctor Slop from the novel Tristram Shandy. He has been described as a significant sycophant: "[epitomizing] the lick up/kick down sycophant — fawning with the powerful, tyrannical with subordinates".

Others

 * Mrs Eleanor Bold, widow of Doctor John Bold, with an infant son; she is the younger daughter of Mr Septimus Harding. She has three potential suitors, Mr Obadiah Slope, Mr Bertie Stanhope and Mr Francis Arabin.
 * Miss Mary Bold, sister of John Bold and therefore Mrs Bold's sister-in-law.
 * Dr Vesey Stanhope is the rector of Crabtree Canonicorum and of Stogpingum, in the diocese of Barchester, and a prebendary of Barchester Cathedral. He and his family lived for twelve years in Italy before being recalled by Bishop Proudie on Mr Slope's advice. He has two daughters, Charlotte and Madeline, and a son, Ethelbert (Bertie).
 * Signora Madeline Vesey Neroni née Madeline Stanhope is the beautiful younger daughter of Dr Vesey Stanhope, given to inflation of her own status- "her father had been christened Vesey as another man is christened Thomas, and she had no more right to assume it than would have the daughter of a Mr Josiah Jones to call herself Mrs Josiah Smith, on marrying a man of the latter name"; her card bears "a bright gilt coronet", despite the fact that her husband, Paulo Neroni, "had had not the faintest title to call himself a scion of even Italian nobility". Lamed by her abusive Italian husband, she is disabled and needs to be carried around the house on a sofa, although this does not stop her constantly flirting with men. She has a young daughter, Julia, whom she calls “the last of the Neros.”
 * Ethelbert "Bertie" Stanhope is the only son of Dr Vesey Stanhope. An idling, carefree man who never settles down, he is a gifted artist, who borrows and spends a great deal and earns nothing. His sister Charlotte advises him to woo the rich and beautiful widow Eleanor Bold.
 * Charlotte Stanhope is the polymath elder daughter of Dr Vesey Stanhope; she challenges Eleanor Bold to comment on the theological arguments concerning intelligent life on other worlds as presented by William Whewell and David Brewster. She is the manager of the family and a good friend of Eleanor Bold until Eleanor realises Charlotte is the primary instigator of her brother wooing her.
 * Mr Quiverful, a poor clergyman with 14 children who becomes the new Warden of Hiram's Hospital.
 * Mrs Letty Quiverful, his wife.
 * Wilfred Thorne, the squire of St Ewold's. A bachelor of about fifty who comes under the charms of Signora Neroni.
 * Miss Monica Thorne, Wilfred's spinster sister of about sixty, who is an extreme traditionalist. She holds a garden party at their family residence, Ullathorne, for the notables of Barsetshire.

Adaptations
The Warden and Barchester Towers were filmed by the BBC as The Barchester Chronicles in 1982. This starred Donald Pleasence as Septimus Harding, Geraldine McEwan as Mrs Proudie, and launched the career of Alan Rickman as Obadiah Slope.

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

title: Barchester Towers


text:
Why Man Creates

Why Man Creates is a 1968 animated short documentary film that discusses the nature of creativity. It was directed by Saul Bass, who co-wrote it with Mayo Simon. It won the Oscar for Best Documentary Short Subject. An abbreviated version of it ran on the first broadcast of CBS' 60 Minutes on September 24, 1968.

Why Man Creates focuses on the creative process and the different approaches taken to that process. It is divided into eight sections: The Edifice, Fooling Around, The Process, Judgment, A Parable, Digression, The Search, and The Mark.

In 2002, the film was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant."

Saul Bass started thinking about creativity in the mid-1950s when he participated in a New York Art Directors Club "Visual Communications Conference on Creativity (1958). In 1966 he was hired by the Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Company to produce what was essentially  a recruiting film for scientists and engineers from the East Coast, which then financed Why Man Creates with a budget of $200,000, which eventually exceeded $400,000.

Summary
The Edifice begins with early humans hunting. They attempt to conquer their prey with stones, but fail, so they begin to use spears and bait. They kill their prey and it turns into a cave painting, upon which a building begins to be built. Throughout the rest of the section, the camera tracks upward as the edifice grows ever taller.

Early cave dwellers begin to discover various things such as the lever, the wheel, ladders, agriculture, and fire. It then cuts to clips of early societies and civilizations. It depicts the appearance of the first religions and the advent of organized labor. It then cuts to the Great Pyramids at Giza and depicts the creation of writing.

Soon an army begins to move across the screen chanting, "Bronze", but they are overrun by an army chanting, "Iron". The screen then depicts early cities and civilizations.

This is followed by a black screen with one man in traditional Greek clothing who states, "All was in chaos 'til Euclid arose and made order." Next, various Greek achievements in mathematics are depicted as Greek columns are built, around which Greeks discuss items, including, "What is the good life and how do you lead it?" "Who shall rule the state?" "The Philosopher King." "The aristocrat." "The people." "You mean all the people?" "What is the nature of the Good? What is the nature of justice?" "What is happiness?" A man in a bird costume then attempts to fly, a possible reference to Icarus.

The culture of ancient Greece fades into the armies of Rome. The organized armies surround the great Roman architecture as they chant, "Hail Caesar!" A man at a podium states, "Roman law is now in session", and when he bangs his gavel, the architecture collapses. Dark soldiers begin to pop up from the rubble and eventually cover the whole screen with darkness symbolizing the Dark Ages.

The Dark Ages consist of inaudible whisperings and mumblings. At one point, a light clicks on and an Arab mathematician says, "Allah be praised. I've invented the zero." at which point his colleague responds, "What?" and he says "Nothing, nothing." Next come cloistered monks who sing in Gregorian Chant: "What is the shape of the Earth? Flat. What happens when you get to the edge? You fall off. Does the earth move? Never."

Finally the scene brightens and shows a stained glass window. Various scientists open stained glass doors and say things such as, "The Earth moves." "The Earth is round." "The blood circulates." "There are worlds smaller than ours." "There are worlds larger than ours." Each time one opens a door, a large, hairy arm slams the door shut. Finally, the stained glass breaks in the wake of the new enlightenment.

Next, Michelangelo and da Vinci are depicted. The steam engine is invented, and gears and belts begin to cover everything. The light bulb and steam locomotive are created. Darwin is referred to as two men hit each other with their canes arguing whether man is an animal. The telegraph is invented and psychology created. Next, a small creature hops across the screen saying, "I'm a bug, I'm a germ, I'm a bug, I'm a germ... [indrawn breath] Louis Pasteur. I'm not a bug, I'm not a germ..." The musicians Tchaikovsky and Beethoven are depicted. Alfred Nobel invents dynamite.

Next, the cartooning shows the great speeches and documents on government and society from the American Revolution onward with quotes such as, "All men are created equal...", "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", "And the government, by the people,...", etc. and ends with "One world."

Finally, the building stops and the Wright brothers' plane lands on top of it. It is quickly covered in more advanced planes, in cars, in televisions, and finally in early computers. At the top is a radioactive atom which envelops a man in smoke. The edifice ends with that man yelling, "Help."

Fooling Around displays a random series of perspectives and the creative ideas which come from them.

The Process displays a man who is making artwork from a series of geometrical figures. Each time he attempts to keep them in place, they move and rearrange themselves, or collapses altogether on the man. He tries many different approaches to the problem. In between, there are three quotations from Thomas Edison, Ernest Hemingway, and Albert Einstein on what one has to do to solve problems. Finally he accepts a working configuration and calls his wife to look at it. She says, "All it needs is an American flag."

Judgment is a series of reactions, presumably to the creation from The Process. It displays their criticisms of it, such as "It represents the decline of Western culture...", and only a very few support it. A cowboy is the human target. A lady (voice veteran June Foray) voices a sound of approval.

A Parable begins at a ping-pong ball factory. Each ball is made in exactly the same way, and machines test them to get rid of anomalies. As the balls are being tested for their bounce levels, one bounces much higher than the rest. It is placed in a chute which leads to a garbage can outside the factory. It proceeds to bounce across town to a park, where it begins to bounce. Quickly, a cluster of ping-pong balls gather around it. It keeps bouncing higher and higher, until it doesn't come back. It concludes with the comment: "There are some who say he’s coming back and we have only to wait ... There are some who say he burst up there because balls were not meant to fly ... And there are some who maintain he landed safely in a place where balls bounce high ..."

Digression is a very short section in which one snail says to another, "Have you ever thought that radical ideas threaten institutions, then become institutions, and in turn reject radical ideas which threaten institutions?" to which the other snail replies "No." and the first says dejectedly, "Gee, for a minute I thought I had something."

The Search shows scientists who have been working for years on projects such as solving world hunger (James F. Bonner), developing a cure for Cancer (Renato Dulbecco), or questioning the origin of the universe (Jesse Greenstein). Then it shows a scientist, who has worked on a project for seven years, which did not work out. He is asked what he will do next, and he replies that he does not know. (Note: each of the scientists shown was working on something which still has not been solved to date, even though each one expected solid results in only a few years. This forwards the concept shown in this session far better than the creators could have known in 1968.)

The Mark asks the question, Why does man create? and determines that man creates to simply state, "I Am." The film ends by displaying "I Am" written in paint on the side of a building.

Production
Although uncredited, George Lucas, who was studying film at University of Southern California (USC) at the time, was the second unit cameraman on this film. Portions of this film also appear in the Saul Bass pitch video for the Bell System logo redesign.

Why Man Creates today
the film was distributed by Pyramid Media. They offer English and Spanish versions, DVD and VHS versions, and also offer two differently-priced versions (one for an educational/institutional license, and one for a personal-use license). Why Man Creates was restored by the Academy Film Archive in 2011.

title: Why Man Creates


text:
Folly

In architecture, a folly is a building constructed primarily for decoration, but suggesting through its appearance some other purpose, or of such extravagant appearance that it transcends the range of usual garden buildings.

Eighteenth-century English landscape gardening and French landscape gardening often featured mock Roman temples, symbolising classical virtues. Other 18th-century garden follies imitated Chinese temples, Egyptian pyramids, ruined medieval castles or abbeys, or Tatar tents, to represent different continents or historical eras. Sometimes they represented rustic villages, mills and cottages, to symbolise rural virtues. Many follies, particularly during times of famine, such as the Great Famine in Ireland, were built as a form of poor relief, to provide employment for peasants and unemployed artisans.

In English, the term began as "a popular name for any costly structure considered to have shown folly in the builder", the Oxford English Dictionary's definition. Follies are often named after the individual who commissioned or designed the project. The connotations of silliness or madness in this definition is in accord with the general meaning of the French word folie; however, another older meaning of this word is "delight" or "favourite abode". This sense included conventional, practical buildings that were thought unduly large or expensive, such as Beckford's Folly, an extremely expensive early Gothic Revival country house that collapsed under the weight of its tower in 1825, 12 years after completion.

As a general term, "folly" is usually applied to a small building that appears to have no practical purpose or the purpose of which appears less important than its striking and unusual design, but the term is ultimately subjective, so a precise definition is not possible.

Characteristics
The concept of the folly is subjective and it has been suggested that the definition of a folly "lies in the eyes of the beholder". Typical characteristics include:

 * They have no purpose other than as an ornament. Often they have some of the appearance of a building constructed for a particular purpose, such as a castle or tower, but this appearance is a sham. Equally, if they have a purpose, it may be disguised.
 * They are buildings, or parts of buildings. Thus they are distinguished from other garden ornaments such as sculpture.
 * They are purpose-built. Follies are deliberately built as ornaments.
 * They are often eccentric in design or construction. This is not strictly necessary; however, it is common for these structures to call attention to themselves through unusual details or form.
 * There is often an element of fakery in their construction. The canonical example of this is the sham ruin: a folly which pretends to be the remains of an old building but which was in fact constructed in that state.
 * They were built or commissioned for pleasure.

History
Follies began as decorative accents on the great estates of the late 16th and early 17th centuries, but they flourished especially in the two centuries which followed. Many estates had ruins of monastic houses and (in Italy) Roman villas; others, lacking such buildings, constructed their own sham versions of these romantic structures.

However, very few follies are completely without a practical purpose. Apart from their decorative aspect, many originally had a use which was lost later, such as hunting towers. Follies are misunderstood structures, according to The Folly Fellowship, a charity that exists to celebrate the history and splendour of these often neglected buildings.

Follies in 18th-century French and English gardens
Follies (fabriques) were an important feature of the English garden and French landscape garden in the 18th century, such as Stowe and Stourhead in England and Ermenonville and the gardens of Versailles in France. They were usually in the form of Roman temples, ruined Gothic abbeys, or Egyptian pyramids. Painshill Park in Surrey contained almost a full set, with a large Gothic tower and various other Gothic buildings, a Roman temple, a hermit's retreat with resident hermit, a Turkish tent, a shell-encrusted water grotto and other features. In France they sometimes took the form of romantic farmhouses, mills and cottages, as in Marie Antoinette's Hameau de la Reine at Versailles. Sometimes they were copied from landscape paintings by painters such as Claude Lorrain and Hubert Robert. Often, they had symbolic importance, illustrating the virtues of ancient Rome, or the virtues of country life. The temple of philosophy at Ermenonville, left unfinished, symbolised that knowledge would never be complete, while the temple of modern virtues at Stowe was deliberately ruined, to show the decay of contemporary morals.

Later in the 18th century, the follies became more exotic, representing other parts of the world, including Chinese pagodas, Japanese bridges, and Tatar tents.

Famine follies
The Great Famine of Ireland of 1845–1849 led to the building of several follies in order to provide relief to the poor without issuing unconditional handouts. However, to hire the needy for work on useful projects would deprive existing workers of their jobs. Thus, construction projects termed "famine follies" came to be built. These included roads in the middle of nowhere, between two seemingly random points, screen and estate walls, piers in the middle of bogs, etc.

Examples
Follies are found worldwide, but they are particularly abundant in Great Britain.

Australia

 * Eastlink hotel, in Victoria

Austria

 * Roman ruin and gloriettes, in the park of Schönbrunn Palace, Vienna

Belgium

 * Hassenspark toren in the Hassenspark in Vilvoorde, Flemish Brabant

Canada

 * Dundurn Castle in Hamilton, Ontario

Czech Republic

 * Series of buildings in Lednice–Valtice Cultural Landscape (UNESCO World Heritage Site)
 * Chinese Pavilions in chateau gardens in Vlašim, Děčín Krásný Dvůr

France

 * Chanteloup Pagoda, near Amboise
 * Désert de Retz, folly garden in Chambourcy near Paris, France (18th century)
 * Parc de la Villette in Paris has a number of modern follies by architect Bernard Tschumi.
 * The Ideal Palace of Ferdinand Cheval in Hauterives, seen as an example of naive architecture.
 * Hameau de la Reine, in the park of the Château de Versailles
 * The Grottoes of Ferrand, in Saint-Hippolyte, Gironde

Germany

 * Bergpark Wilhelmshöhe water features
 * Lighthouse in the park of Moritzburg Castle near Dresden
 * Mosque in the Schwetzingen Castle gardens
 * Pfaueninsel artificial ruin, Berlin
 * Ruinenberg near Sanssouci Park, Potsdam

Hungary

 * Bory Castle at Székesfehérvár
 * Taródi Castle at Sopron
 * Vajdahunyad vára in the City Park of Budapest

India

 * Overbury's Folly, Thalassery, Kerala
 * Rock Garden of Chandigarh

Ireland

 * Ballysaggartmore Towers, County Waterford
 * Carden's Folly
 * Casino at Marino
 * Conolly's Folly and The Wonderful Barn on the same estate
 * Killiney Hill, with several follies
 * Larchill in County Kildare, with several follies
 * Powerscourt Estate, which contains the Pepperpot Tower
 * Saint Anne's Park, which contains a number of follies
 * Saint Enda's Park, former school of Patrick Pearse, contains several follies
 * The Jealous Wall at Belvedere House near Mullingar, County Westmeath
 * Waterloo Round Tower near Blarney, County Cork

Italy

 * La Scarzuola, Montegabbione
 * The Park of the Monsters (Bomarzo Gardens)
 * Il Giardino dei Tarocchi near Capalbio

Jamaica

 * Three follies were built on Folly Estate, Port Antonio, in 1905. They are now in ruins.

Malta

 * Lija Belvedere Tower

Poland

 * Roman aqueduct, Arkadia, Łowicz County
 * Temple of the Sibyl in Puławy

Romania

 * Iulia Hasdeu Castle

Russia

 * Ruined towers in Peterhof, Tsarskoe Selo, Gatchina, and Tsaritsino
 * Creaking Pagoda and Chinese Village in Tsarskoe Selo
 * Dutch Admiralty in Tsarskoe Selo

Spain

 * El Capricho, Comillas (Cantabria)

Ukraine

 * Ruins in Oleksandriia, Bila Tserkva

England
• Ashton Memorial, Lancaster

• Beckford's Tower, Somerset

• Blaise Castle, Bristol

• Broadway Tower, The Cotswolds

• Bettison's Folly, Hornsea

• Black Castle Public House, Bristol

• Brizlee Tower, Northumberland

• Browne's Folly, Bathford, Somerset

• The Cage at Lyme Park, Cheshire

• The Castle at Roundhay Park, West Yorkshire

• Chilton Priory, Somerset

• Clavell Tower, Dorset

• Conygar Tower, Dunster, Somerset

• Cranmore Tower, Cranmore, Somerset

• Culloden Tower, Richmond, North Yorkshire

• Faringdon Folly, Faringdon, Oxfordshire

• Flounders' Folly, Shropshire

• Forbidden Corner, North Yorkshire

• Freston Tower, arguably England's oldest folly, near Ipswich, Suffolk

• Garrick's Temple to Shakespeare, Hampton

• Gothic Tower at Goldney Hall, Bristol

• The Great Pagoda, Kew Gardens, London¨

• Hadlow Tower, Hadlow, Kent

• Hardwick Hall Country Park, County Durham contains several restored follies

• Hawkstone Park, follies and gardens in Shropshire

• Hiorne's Tower, Arundel Castle, West Sussex

• Horton Tower, Dorset

• King Alfred's Tower, Stourhead, Somerset

• Lund's Tower, Sutton-in-Craven, North Yorkshire

• Luttrell's Tower, Fawley, Hampshire

• Mow Cop Castle, Staffordshire

• Old John, Bradgate Park, Leicestershire

• Painshill, Cobham, Surrey, an 18th-century landscape garden with several follies, some modern reconstructions

• Penshaw Monument, Penshaw, Sunderland

• Pelham's Pillar, Caistor, North Lincolnshire

• Perrott's Folly, Birmingham

• Pope's Grotto, Twickenham, South West London

• Prospect Tower, Calstock, Cornwall

• Racton Monument, West Sussex

• Rogers' TowerLudgvan

• The Ruined Arch at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, London

• Rushton Triangular Lodge, Northamptonshire (16th century)

• Severndroog Castle, Shooter's Hill, south-east London

• Sham Castle, Bathwick Hill, Bath, Somerset

• The Sledmere Cross takes the form of an Eleanor Cross and is a true 'folly' that was 'converted' to a World War I Memorial

• Solomon's Temple, Buxton, Derbyshire

• Stainborough Castle, South Yorkshire

• Two of the follies in Staunton Country Park have survived until the present day

• Stowe School has several follies in the grounds

• Sway Tower, New Forest

• Tattingstone Wonder, near Ipswich, Suffolk

• Wainhouse Tower, the tallest folly in the world, Halifax, West Yorkshire

• Wentworth Woodhouse, Wentworth, South Yorkshire

• Williamson Tunnels, probably the largest underground folly in the world, Liverpool

• Wilder's Folly, Sulham, Berkshire

Scotland

 * The Caldwell Tower, Lugton, Renfrewshire
 * Captain Frasers Folly (Uig Tower) Isle of Skye
 * Dunmore Pineapple, Falkirk
 * Hume Castle, Berwickshire
 * Kinnoull Hill Tower, Perth
 * McCaig's Tower, Oban, Argyll and Bute
 * National Monument, Edinburgh
 * Shaw Monument, Prestwick
 * The Temple near Castle Semple Loch, Renfrewshire

Wales

 * Clytha Castle, Monmouthshire
 * Derry Ormond Tower, Ceredigion
 * Folly Tower at Pontypool
 * Paxton's Tower, Carmarthenshire
 * Portmeirion, known as the setting for several television productions including The Prisoner series
 * Gwrych Castle, Conwy County Borough

United States

 * Bancroft Tower, Worcester, Massachusetts
 * Belvedere Castle, New York City
 * Bishop Castle, outside of Pueblo, Colorado
 * Coral Castle, Homestead, Florida
 * Hofmann Tower in Lyons, Illinois
 * Kingfisher Tower, Otsego Lake (New York)
 * Körner’s Folly, Kernersville, North Carolina
 * Lawson Tower, Scituate, Massachusetts
 * The Parthenon in Nashville, Tennessee
 * Summersville Lake Lighthouse, Mount Nebo, West Virginia
 * Vessel, New York, New York
 * Watts Towers, Watts, Los Angeles

title: Folly


text:
Talk:Monarchy of Belgium

Untitled
Whats the native language of the Belgian kings? --P

French. Erwin 08:58, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)

 * I believe Albert II is bilingual in French & Flemish (and probably speaks some English & German) -- if only for political reasons. The Queen is a native of Italy, but also speaks French. --Michael K. Smith 22:20, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

 * My great-uncle, Professor Ferdinand Massart, as a Belgian Senator was one of the most stalwart defenders of the interests of the French Language politico-geographic groupings in the great debates of the 1960s. In the 1940s, he was teacher of natural sciences to the two princes at Laeken, the future Kings Baudoin and Albert, and evidently taught them in the medium of French, their mother tongue according to my mother, who played with them on the beach as children. However, the 1960s also made it very clear that the future monarch would be bilingual, and every effort was made to preserve that balance in Prince Phillip. It should however be noted that his military education was in the Francophone wing, and has married a francophone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.25.40.112 (talk) 20:09, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Timeline
I changed the timeline so that the names of the monarchs are now set inside their respective bars. My reason for this: I initially misunderstood the representation. I wondered how Leopold II. could have reigned that late, checked on his page, and was wondering... then realized I had missed the small stubby bar for Erasme, and had attributed the names to the bars below instead of left of them. I think the way I changed it makes it clearer for a person that just glances at the timeline for a second or two. The colors are definitely a matter of taste, and I encourage people with better feeling for colors to change them if necessary -- I just chose what was a readable background for blue text, and still easily distinguishable between king and regent.

History of Belgian Monarchy?
This article does not contain anything about how Belgium came to have monarchs, or even a link to its history so you can find out what came before.

It also does not refer to the probably best-known historical period associated with the Belgian monarchy, namely the atrocities committed in the Belgian Congo and the steps taken to change the Congo from a personal possession of the Belgian king Leopold to a Belgian colony.

No picture of the king and queen? If anyone has a picture it should be uploaded here...Mikeonatrike 16:03, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

 * The article is factually incorrect in stating that the National Congress chose a Monarchy: it was forced on them by the Chairman of the Société Générale, Frederic Meeus, as part of his conditions for taking the finances of the State in charge. The crisis arose when Civil Service salaries fell due at the end of the month, as they had previously been paid by the expelled Netherlands administration: the only taxation easily recoverable was due from the Société Générale, but the Chairman initially refused, arguing that if the Revolution failed because of financial difficulties, he would have to pay the tax again! This is why Leopold I became a shareholder of SG, as the company owned (and during the next ten years sold off at a pittance to its major shareholders in their personal capacity) the Austrian Ducal Estates, a third of the Country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.25.40.112 (talk) 20:12, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * This seems to be a conspiracy theory. Even if some of it was true, something else was crucial. It is undisputed among historians that Leopold I was put on the throne due to British insistance. They wanted to find a new job for the widower of the late British Crown Princess, who was sitting idle in London. And make sure that English, not French, influence prevails in Brussels. They were later all the more disappointed by the king's marriage to a French king's daughter. Equord (talk) 21:50, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Polical involovment
Army - official  BUT Administrative - non official

petition -> write : Peoples petition rather the parliament.--Ymulleneers 14:36, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

it says that the powers of the King have been under public debate and that they have continued to lessen under each successive King. As well it says that there has been some debate over reducing the role of the King to a purely ceremonial role. This is all without citation, I have little doubt that this could be true, but if so citations shouldn't be difficult to find. A public bebate should have newspaper articles and the like arguing the issue, otherwise its just a pet theory and a POV. Colin 8 22:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Comparisons with other monarchies
The article is full of comparisons with the British monarchy. Is this necessary? The Belgian Monarchy can stand alone without being compared with its peers, and I'm sure that people can understand the article without constantly wondering "is that the same as the do it in the UK?". Unless there is a consensus for keeping these references, I'll take them out soon.

--Chrisfow 16:57, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree completely. Surtsicna (talk) 09:50, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't agree with that. The Belgian monarchy had been modelled on the Bristih monarchy, a constitutional monarchy, but this Belgian monarchy, as Arango explained it, was nevertheless not truly a constitutionnal monarchy. The comparison with these other monarchies is very important. I recall that the title of this para is Its origins and about these origins, it is absolutely important to say (as Arango explained it but also Fusilier who made comparisons with the other monarchies), that this monarchy has not the same evolution as the other monarchies (in the Modernity). So, the Belgian monarchy was never an absolute monarchy, yes, ok, but this monarchy was not truly constitutionnal, having on this way some traits of an absolute monarchy even if it is closer the constitutionnal monarchies. There are relevant sources on these topics (mainly Arango and Fusilier), and there is a whole chapter of Arango explaining how Leopold IIi had a vision of the Belgian monarchy closer the absolute monarchies. The Belgian monarchy is (or was until 1950 but may be until Baudouin Ier died) very different from the other european monarchies.  Perhaps in other words that I wrote. But I am going to put some elements coming from Arango, Fusilier, other authors... Sincerely, José Fontaine (talk) 11:24, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

 * I think the argument is the inverse: not so much the effect of the British on Belgium as Belgium's on Britain starts in the status of Leopold I as widower of the British Crown Princess Caroline. Under the prevalent Catholic doctrines of the time, the absence of a strong heir to the British Throne (the future Queen Victoria being a mere 11 years old at the time, and under the tutellage of her mother, Léopold's sister) meant that had the newly-enthroned King William IV, already elderly and without issue, died, then her mother might have opted for the rule of her brother, an experienced warrior with a more direct claim, albeit through marriage, rather than her daughter.
 * Leopold had already refused the Greek monarchy, and his acceptance of the Belgian monarchy resolved a knotty problem which was one of the starting points for Victoria's displacement of her mother when she eventually came to the throne. This was complicated by British embarrassment over the creation of Belgium, as Castlereigh had created the pressures by refusing the Belgian approach through Prussia in the 1814 Congress of Vienna, asking for independence after Austria denounced its territorial claims, a historical oddity left outstanding in the wake of the Wars of the Spanish Succession. Claiming the country was too economically feeble to stand alone, Castlereigh eventually overcame William Prince of Orange's qualms about taking on what he considered to be a rabidly Catholic country by persuading him that he would far rather be King of both than Prince of the one, and advising him that he could finance it from the Austrian Ducal Estates. The Belgians reciprocated the feeling and the cashflow dried up, so William created the Société Générale with one of the more flintier-hearted Belgian financiers in charge, Frederic Meeus. Seen as the Dutch King's stooge, Meeus' town house in Brussels was burned by the mob in the 1830 Revolution, while he was actually leading an impromptu militia cavalry unit chasing the Dutch troops back across the border. On his return, Louis de Potter was in the serious financial straits I describe above, but had the Premiership passed to Meeus, the Maroliens would have destroyed the lot. However, he was able to take the title of Count de Meeus and with it the Ministry of Finance.
 * The integrality of the Meeus faction's subversion of the Belgian political system is described in the Royal Archivist Pierre-Alain Tailler's private monograph Ces Terres qui Firent Les Domaines Ducales, in which he substantiates his unpublished claim that the following ten years were "le plus grand vol de l'histoire de la Belgique" (text is in the National Archives, Rue de Bodenbroeck, 1000 Brussels). That set the precedent for Léopold II's private acquisition of the Congo.
 * The Netherlands reaction to the Belgian secession was to appeal to the Great Powers, who convened in London in December 1830, recognising Belgian independence. Léopold I's training as a constitutional monarch at British hands therefore established a certain precedent in his relationship with Meeus, but their increasing individual wealth took different turns under Leopold II, the King finding the Congolese wealth while the Argenteuil clan "invested in children". Under Albert I, the Belgian Monarchy reached its apogee, in holding the line against the German race to the sea in the Battle of the Yser: the monarchic relationship was recognised in the German declaration of war on Belgium in 1914 and in the UK's defence of its quasi-protectorate. It was in this time that my great-grandfather established the family relationship, being awarded the Chevalier of the Ordre de Léopold with oak-leaf clusters on the battlefield by the direct order of the King - the family went on to establish the Massart-Guiot press empire which maintained Belgian resistance in WWII. I can supply a link to a Tribunal de Commerce document establishing my own relationship with de Potter d'Indoie, the Cour de Cassation, de Pret Roose de Calesberg and Argenteuil.
 * The nadir of the Belgian monarchy was, evidently, the monarchy of Leopold III's subjugation during this period. However, his children's conduct as moderators of the sometimes fractious Belgian political system has obviously recovered that loss of reputation, and now we see the next generation moving up. Princess Elizabeth another Queen Victoria? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.25.40.112 (talk) 21:45, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Origins
I have spent some time editing the sub-headings under Origins even though I feel they are poorly constucted and un-neccesarily "wordy". I always attempt to work with the existing article...to collaborate with the editors that have come before me. I would suggest further changes but at a later time.Buster7 (talk) 00:09, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The official Belgian federal website is not the best source. It is impssible to write (only) what it is said in this site. The monarchy in Belgium is a political problem and good authors as Fusilier and Arango said this monarchy was not truly constitutional. OK, this monarchy was never an absoute monarchy but at the time when Arango and Fusilier wrote, it was not truly a constitional monarchy. We must also put that in the page. Remember that the Belgian Royal Question was the worst politcal problem in the history of Belgium. Sincerely, José Fontaine (talk) 18:48, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You wrote Since he is bound by the Constitution (above all other ideological and religious considerations, political opinions and debates and economic interests). I repeat I don't agree with that for several reasons: 1. It is not said in the Belgian Constitution. 2. The first king of the Belgians became quickly the richest man of Belgium and he was since 1835/1840  the most important shareholder of the Société Générale de Belgique. It is famous he was actually the Foreign minister of Belgium. And the actual political leader of Belgium (he was efficient in the vocabulary of Bagehot). Henri Pirenne wrote that very well... 3. Albert I of Belgium, also according to Pirenne, was not bound (de facto) by the Constititution.   4. Leopold III of Belgium was not above political opinions, his  brother Prince Charles, when he was the Regent said about him to Jean Duvieusart (June 1950) his brother was l'homme d'un parti, the man of a political party. I will put all these remarks based on relevant sources. Sincerely José Fontaine (talk) 21:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC)( I agree with the fact the king was a kind of a referee, but sometimes yes, sometimes no).
 * Dear Buster, simply thank you for your help. Sincerely, José Fontaine (talk) 19:26, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I am so thrilled that we are working together...for the good of the article. Can it be? A Walloon and a Fleming working toward the same result? Your additions of today make the article flow much better. (I must admit that, at first, I felt we would be at odds). Hij sij bedankt. Buster7 (talk) 20:47, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Ik ben ook zeer gelukkig. Im a also very happy. But i am only able to speak ABN (and not very well even if - af een toe - I translate short texts from Flemish fiends). Hartelijk, José Fontaine (talk) 19:26, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Family Tree section
Anybody know how to fix tha section's appearance? GoodDay (talk) 13:26, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Bias in "A hereditary and (theoretically) constitutional system"
Starting with the "scare perenthesis" in the section header, this section appears to be a one-sided response to a consensus understanding of the Belgian monarchy -- and the consensus understanding itself hasn't been presented! Moreover, most of the citations and viewpoints are from one particular author. This needs serious work to conform to the Neutral point of view guideline, and it's actually difficult to read without trying to make guesses at the context. -- SCZenz (talk) 23:09, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

 * You'll have to research the Press for the relevant clippings concerning King Albert II's position during the protracted formation of the 2011 Government, as his exasperation concerning the constitutional untenability of the interim government as a democratic structure reflected on his position as Head of State. It might be worth considering whether the fear of a repeat of that experience in 2014 led to his abdication now - vide Elio di Rupo's somewhat tongue-in-cheek comments about his laying down his post before the new King! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.25.40.112 (talk) 23:01, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Family name/surname
I am not sure that in 1920 their 'family name' was changed... If I recall correctly, there existed a time where the Belgian king's children were actually not officially "of Belgium" (this was an oversight in statutes regulating the titles and styles of the royal family). I don't think that the royal family has a surname in the regular sense. They just have a territorial designation in three languages. Saxe-Coburg and Gotha wasn't a surname to change anyway. It is and was a territorial and dynastic designation. 99.246.46.229 (talk) 21:53, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

 * The 1920 date was contemporary with a review of the Belgian Legal Code's objectivity, producing for example the codification of ASBL Law in 1921. Given that the English ditched everything German including the Saxe-Coburg name during WWI, an option not available to the Belgian House, the same seems eminently likely in Belgium. Technically, the name of a noble house is normally toponymic, although sometimes this can be lost in the mists of antiquity (I'm thinking here of the one instance Desmarez got it wrong, describing de Montfort as parvenu in his Rue Isabelle, on the basis of their slot's location in the angle between that road and the Rue Terarken: in fact, it's visible on the 1567 Braun and Hogenburg map of Brussels, and the surviving tower, buried in the revetment wall of the Hotel Errara and accessible from the Bozar patio, is clearly far older, supporting the hypothesis that de Montfort is yet another cadet line of Koudenburg, as specified in the recent discovery of its roots in Judith of Cambrai's second son.
 * Parallels exist in ecclesia, where an Archbishop signs with his see ("Cantua") even though he may move on later, and established nobility ("Durham"). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.25.40.112 (talk) 23:19, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

List of Kings of the Belgians
That section is incomplete. How does one edit it? GoodDay (talk) 22:12, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Not "truly" constitutional?
If it is worth mentioning in the text that some historian named Ramon Arango thinks that the Belgian monarchy is not "truly" constitutional, it ought to be explained what he means by that. John Tatebury (talk) 01:13, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Monarchy of Belgium. 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/20080512134150/http://www.expatica.com/be/articles/news/what-role-for-a-belgian-monarch-28879.html to http://www.expatica.com/be/articles/news/what-role-for-a-belgian-monarch-28879.html/

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) 04:04, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Split proposal
I would suggest that the sections and  be split into a separate article called Belgian royal family. I've already created a draft article (Draft:Belgian royal family). For reference, the every other European monarchy of kingly (or queenly) rank has a separate article for the royal family from that of the monarchy, safe for the Netherlands (which I will most likely propose a similar split of). estar8806 (talk) ★ 01:41, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Monarchy of Belgium


text:
RMS Queen Elizabeth

RMS Queen Elizabeth was an ocean liner operated by Cunard Line. In tandem with RMS Queen Mary both ships provided a weekly luxury liner service between Southampton in the United Kingdom and New York City in the United States, via Cherbourg in France.

Whilst being constructed in the mid-1930s by John Brown and Company at Clydebank, Scotland, the build was known as Hull 552. Hull 552 was launched on 27 September 1938 and named in honour of Queen Elizabeth, the wife of King George VI. With a design that improved upon that of RMS Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth was slightly larger being 12 feet longer than her sister ship, She was the largest passenger liner ever built at that time and for 56 years thereafter. She entered service in March 1940 as a troopship in the Second World War, and it was not until October 1946 that she made her first commercial voyage in her intended role as an ocean liner.

With the decline in popularity of the transatlantic route, both ships were replaced by the smaller, more economical Queen Elizabeth 2, which made her maiden voyage in 1969. Queen Mary was retired from service on 9 December 1967, and sold to the city of Long Beach, California. Queen Elizabeth was retired after her final crossing to New York, on 8 December 1968. She was moved to Port Everglades, Florida, and converted to a tourist attraction, which opened in February 1969. The business was unsuccessful, and closed in August 1970. Finally, Queen Elizabeth was sold to Hong Kong businessman Tung Chao-yung, who intended to convert her into a floating university cruise ship called Seawise University. In 1972, whilst she was undergoing refurbishment in Hong Kong harbour, a fire broke out aboard under unexplained circumstances, and the ship was capsized by the water used to fight the fire. The following year the wreck was deemed an obstruction to shipping in the area, and in 1974 and 1975 was partially scrapped on site.

Design and construction
On the day RMS Queen Mary sailed on her maiden voyage, Cunard's chairman, Sir Percy Bates, informed his ship designers, headed by George Paterson, that it was time to start designing the planned second ship. The official contract between Cunard and government financiers was signed on 6 October 1936.

The new ship improved upon the design of Queen Mary with sufficient changes, including a reduction in the number of boilers to twelve instead of Queen Mary twenty-four, that the designers could discard one funnel and increase deck, cargo and passenger space. The two funnels were self-supporting and braced internally to give a cleaner-looking appearance. With the forward well deck omitted, a more refined hull shape was achieved, and a sharper, raked bow was added for a third bow-anchor point. She was to be twelve feet longer and 4,000 tons greater displacement than the Queen Mary.

Queen Elizabeth was built on slipway four at John Brown & Company in Clydebank, Scotland, Great Britain. During her construction she was more commonly known by her shipyard number, Hull 552. The interiors were designed by a team of artists headed by the architect George Grey Wornum. The staircases, foyers and entrances were constructed by H.H. Martyn & Co. using these designs. Cunard's plan was for the ship to be launched in September 1938, with fitting-out intended to be complete for the ship to enter service in the spring of 1940. Queen Elizabeth herself performed the launching ceremony on 27 September 1938. Supposedly, the liner started to slide into the water before the Queen could officially launch her, and acting sharply, she managed to smash a bottle of Australian red over the liner's bow just before it slid out of reach. The ship was then docked for fitting out. It was announced that on 23 August 1939 King George VI and Queen Elizabeth were to visit the ship and tour the engine room and that 24 April 1940 was to be the proposed date of her maiden voyage. Due to the outbreak of the Second World War, these two events were postponed and Cunard's plans were cancelled.

Queen Elizabeth sat at the fitting-out dock at the shipyard in her Cunard colours until 2 November 1939, when the Ministry of Shipping issued special licences to declare her seaworthy. On 29 December the engines were tested for the first time, running from 0900 to 1600 with the propellers disconnected to monitor her oil and steam operating temperatures and pressures. Two months later Cunard received a letter from Winston Churchill, then First Lord of the Admiralty, ordering the ship to leave Clydeside as soon as possible and "to keep away from the British Isles as long as the order was in force".

Second World War
At the start of the Second World War, it was decided that Queen Elizabeth was so vital to the war effort that she must not have her movements tracked by German spies operating in the Clydebank area. An elaborate ruse suggested to any German observers that she would sail to Southampton to complete her fitting-out. Another factor prompting Queen Elizabeth's departure was the necessity to clear the fitting-out berth at the shipyard for the battleship HMS Duke of York (17), which was in need of its final fitting-out. Only the berth at John Brown could accommodate the King George V-class battleships.

One major factor that limited the ship's departure date was that there were only two spring tides that year that would see the water level high enough for Queen Elizabeth to leave the Clydebank shipyard, and German intelligence were aware of this fact. A minimal crew of four hundred were assigned for the trip; most were transferred from RMS Aquitania and told that this would be a short coastal voyage to Southampton. Parts were shipped to Southampton, and preparations were made to move the ship into the King George V Graving Dock when she arrived. The names of Brown's shipyard employees were booked to local hotels in Southampton to give a false trail of information, and Captain John Townley was appointed as her first master. Townley had previously commanded Aquitania on one voyage, and several of Cunard's smaller vessels before that. Townley and his hastily signed-on crew of four hundred Cunard personnel were told by a company representative before they left to pack for a voyage where they could be away from home for up to six months.

By the beginning of March 1940, Queen Elizabeth was ready for her secret voyage. The Cunard colours were painted over with battleship grey, and on the morning of 3 March, the ship quietly left her moorings in the Clyde and proceeded out of the river to sail further down the coast, where she was met by a King's Messenger, who presented sealed orders directly to the captain. While waiting for the messenger, the ship was refuelled, and adjustments to the compass and some final testing of equipment were also carried out before she sailed to her secret destination. Captain Townley discovered that he was to take the ship directly to New York, in the neutral United States, and not to stop or even slow to drop off the Southampton harbour pilot who had embarked on at Clydebank, and he was to maintain strict radio silence. Later that day, at the time when she was due to arrive at Southampton, the city was bombed by the Luftwaffe. Queen Elizabeth zigzagged across the Atlantic to elude German U-boats and took six days to reach New York at an average speed of 26 knots. In New York she found herself moored alongside both Queen Mary and the French Line's SS Normandie, the only time all three of the world's largest ocean liners were ever berthed together. Captain Townley received two telegrams on his arrival, one from his wife congratulating him, and the other from Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth thanking him for the vessel's safe delivery. The ship was then secured so that no one could board her without prior permission, including port officials.

Queen Elizabeth left the port of New York on 13 November 1940 for Singapore to receive her troopship conversion. After two stops to refuel and replenish her stores in Trinidad and Cape Town, she arrived in Singapore's naval docks, where she was fitted with anti-aircraft guns, and her hull repainted grey.

As a troopship, Queen Elizabeth left Singapore on 11 February, and on 23 February 1942 Queen Elizabeth secretly arrived in Esquimalt, British Columbia, Canada. She underwent refit work in drydock adding accommodation and armaments, and three hundred naval ratings quickly painted the hull. In mid-March, carrying 8,000 American soldiers, Queen Elizabeth began a 7,700-mile voyage from San Francisco to Sydney, Australia. Initially she carried Australian troops to theatres of operation in Asia and Africa. After 1942, the two Queens were relocated to the North Atlantic for the transportation of American troops to Europe.

Queen Elizabeth and Queen Mary were both used as troop transports during the war. Their high speeds allowed them to outrun hazards, principally German U-boats, usually allowing them to travel outside a convoy. Nevertheless, Queen Elizabeth was the target of U-704, which fired four torpedoes at her on 9 November 1942. The commander, Horst Wilhelm Kessler, heard a detonation and Nazi radio propaganda claimed she was sunk. In reality, one of the torpedoes detonated prematurely and the Queen Elizabeth was unharmed.

During her war service as a troopship, Queen Elizabeth carried more than 750,000 troops, and she also sailed some 500000 mi.

Post-Second World War
Following the end of the Second World War, Queen Elizabeth was refitted and furnished as an ocean liner, while her running mate Queen Mary remained in her wartime role and grey appearance except for her funnels, which were repainted in the company's colours. For another year, her sibling did military service, returning troops and G.I. brides to the United States while Queen Elizabeth was overhauled at the Firth of Clyde Drydock, in Greenock, by the John Brown Shipyard. Six years of war service had never permitted the formal sea trials to take place, so they were now finally undertaken. Under the command of Commodore Sir James Bisset, the ship travelled to the Isle of Arran and her trials were carried out. On board was the ship's namesake, Queen Elizabeth, and her two daughters, Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret. During the trials, Queen Elizabeth took the wheel for a brief time, and the two young princesses recorded the two measured runs with stopwatches that they had been given for the occasion. Bisset was under strict instructions from Sir Percy Bates, who was also aboard the trials, that all that was required from the ship was two measured runs of no more than 30 knots and that she was not permitted to attempt to attain a higher speed record than Queen Mary. Queen Elizabeth's engines were capable of driving her to speeds of over 32 knots. After her trials Queen Elizabeth finally entered passenger service, allowing Cunard White Star to launch the long-planned two-ship weekly service to New York. Despite specifications similar to those of Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth never held the Blue Riband, for Cunard White Star chairman Sir Percy Bates asked that the two ships do not try to compete against each other. The ship ran aground on a sandbank off Southampton on 14 April 1947, and was re-floated the following day.

In 1955, during an annual overhaul at Southampton, England, Queen Elizabeth was fitted with underwater fin stabilisers to smooth the ride in rough seas. Two fins were fitted each side of the hull. The fins were retractable into the hull to save fuel in smooth seas and for docking. On 29 July 1959, she was in a collision with the American freighter American Hunter in foggy conditions in New York Harbor and was holed above the waterline.

Together with Queen Mary and in competition with the American liners SS United States and SS America, Queen Elizabeth dominated the transatlantic passenger trade until their fortunes began to decline with the advent of the faster and more economical jet airliner in the late 1950s. As passenger numbers declined, the liners became uneconomic to operate in the face of rising fuel and labour costs. For a short time the Queen Elizabeth, now under the command of Commodore Geoffrey Trippleton Marr attempted a dual role in order to become more profitable; when not plying her usual transatlantic route, which she now alternated in her sailings with the French Line's SS France, the ship cruised between New York and Nassau. For this new tropical purpose, the ship received a major refit in 1965, with a new Lido deck added to her aft section, enhanced air conditioning, and an outdoor swimming pool. With these improvements, Cunard intended to keep the ship in operation until at least the mid-1970s. However, the strategy did not prove successful, owing to the ship's deep draught, which prevented her from entering various island ports, her width, which prevented her from using the Panama Canal, and also her high fuel costs.

Cunard retired Queen Mary in 1967 and Queen Elizabeth completed her final Atlantic crossing to New York on 5 November 1968. The two liners were replaced with the new, more economical Queen Elizabeth 2.

Final years
In late 1968, Queen Elizabeth was sold to the Elizabeth Corporation, with 15% of the company controlled by a group of Philadelphia businessmen and 85% retained by Cunard. The new company intended to operate the ship as a hotel and tourist attraction in Port Everglades, Florida, similar to the planned use of Queen Mary in Long Beach, California. Elizabeth, as she was now called, arrived in Port Everglades on 8 December 1968 and opened to tourists in February 1969, well before Queen Mary, which opened two years later, in 1971. The vessel was sold to Queen Ltd of Port Everglades on 19 July 1969. However, Queen Elizabeth's retirement in Florida was not to last. The climate of southern Florida was much harder on the ship than the climate of southern California was on Queen Mary. There was some talk of permanently flooding the bilge and allowing Queen Elizabeth to rest on the bed of the Intracoastal Waterway in Ft. Lauderdale harbour (Port Everglades) and remain open, but the ship was forced to close in August 1970, after losing money and being declared a fire hazard. The vessel was sold at auction in 1970 to Hong Kong tycoon Tung Chao Yung.

Tung, the head of the Orient Overseas Line, intended to convert the vessel into a university for the World Campus Afloat program (later reformed and renamed as Semester at Sea). Following the tradition of the Orient Overseas Line, the ship was renamed Seawise University, as a play on Tung's initials (C.Y.'s).

The ship was now under Hong Kong ownership, and she sailed to Hong Kong on 10 February 1971. This proved to be problematic, for the ship's engines and boilers were in poor condition after several years of neglect. The now retired Commodore Marr and a former chief engineer of the ship were hired by Tung as advisors for the journey to Hong Kong. Marr recommended that Seawise University be towed to the New Territories, but Tung and his crew were convinced that they could sail the ship there using just the aft engines and boilers. The planned several-week trip turned into months as the crew battled with boiler issues and a fire. An unplanned lengthy mid-voyage stopover allowed the new owners to fly spare parts out to the ship and carry out repairs before resuming the course to Hong Kong Harbour, where she arrived in July 1971. With the £5 million conversion nearing completion, the vessel caught fire on 9 January 1972. These fires were set deliberately, as several blazes broke out simultaneously throughout the ship and a later court of inquiry handed down a cause of arson by person or persons unknown. The fact that C.Y. Tung had acquired the vessel for $3.5 million, and had insured it for $8 million, led some to speculate that the inferno was part of a fraud to collect on the insurance claim. Others speculated that the fires were the result of a conflict between Tung, a Chinese Nationalist, and Communist-dominated ship construction unions.

The ship was destroyed by the fire, and the water sprayed on her by fireboats caused the burnt wreck to sink in Hong Kong's Victoria Harbour. The vessel was finally declared a shipping hazard and dismantled for scrap between December 1974 and 1975. Portions of the hull that were not salvaged were left at the bottom of the bay. The keel, boilers and engines remained at the bottom of the harbour, and the area was marked as "Foul" on local sea charts, warning ships not to try to anchor there. It is estimated that around 40–50% of the wreck was still on the seabed. In the late 1990s, the last remains of the wreck were buried during land reclamation for the construction of Container Terminal 9.

After the fire, Tung had one of the liner's anchors and the metal letters "Q" and "E" from the name on the bow placed in front of the office building at Del Amo Fashion Center in Torrance, California, which had been intended as the headquarters of the Seawise University venture; they later went on display with commemorative plaques in the lobby of Wall Street Plaza, 88 Pine Street, New York City. Two of the ship's fire warning system brass plaques were recovered by a dredger, and were displayed at The Aberdeen Boat Club in Hong Kong in an exhibit about the ship. The charred remnants of her last ensign were cut from the flagpole and framed in 1972, and still adorn the wall of the officers' mess of marine police HQ in Hong Kong. Parker Pen Company produced a special edition of 5,000 pens made from material recovered from the wreck, each in a presentation box; today these are highly collectible.

Following the demise of Queen Elizabeth, the largest passenger ship in active service became the 66,343 GRT SS France (1961), which was longer but with less tonnage than the Cunard liner. Queen Elizabeth held the record of largest passenger ship ever built until the 101,353 GT Carnival Sunshine (formerly Carnival Destiny) captured the record in 1996. To date, Queen Elizabeth still holds the record as the largest passenger ship for the longest period of time: 56 years.

In fiction
In 1959, the ship made an appearance in the British satirical comedy film The Mouse That Roared, starring Peter Sellers and Jean Seberg. While a troupe of invading men from "Grand Fenwick", a fictional European micro-nation, cross the Atlantic to 'war' with the United States, they meet and pass the far larger Queen Elizabeth, and learn that the port of New York is closed due to an air raid drill.

Ian Fleming set the climax to his 1956 James Bond novel Diamonds Are Forever on Queen Elizabeth. The 1971 film version starring Connery used the P&O liner SS Canberra for the sequence.

The wreck was featured in the 1974 James Bond film The Man with the Golden Gun, as a covert headquarters for MI6.

title: RMS Queen Elizabeth


text:
Wild and Woolly (1917 film)

Wild and Woolly is a 1917 American silent Western comedy film which tells the story of one man's personal odyssey from cowboy-obsessed Easterner to Western tough guy. It stars Douglas Fairbanks, Eileen Percy, Walter Bytell and Sam De Grasse. The film was adapted by Anita Loos from a story by Horace B. Carpenter and was directed by John Emerson.

Plot
As described in a film magazine review, Jeff Hillington, son of railroad magnate Collis J. Hillington, tires of the East and longs for the wild and woolly West. He has his apartment and office fixed up in his understanding of the accepted Western style, which he has gleaned from dime novels. A delegation from Bitter Creek comes to New York City seeking financial backing for the construction of a spur line, and go to Collis to explain their proposition. Collis sends Jeff to investigate. The citizens of Bitter Creek, Arizona, realizing that a favorable report from Jeff is necessary, decide to live up to Jeff's idea of a Western town. They set up a program with a wild reception for Jeff, a barroom dance, and a train holdup. Steve Shelby, a grafting Indian agent, knowing that he is about to be caught by the government, decides to do "one more trick" and enters into the plan to rob the train, turning it into a real scheme. Events turn earnest and Shelby kidnaps Nell Larabee, with whom Jeff has fallen in love. The entire crowd has been trapped in the dance hall, which is surrounded by Indians, and Jeff's revolver loaded with blanks. When the situation is finally explained to Jeff, by superhuman efforts (and typical Fairbanks surprises) he rounds up the Indians, rescues the girl, completely foils the scheme of Steve, and becomes the hero of the hour, getting to marry Nell.

Cast

 * Douglas Fairbanks as Jeff Hillington
 * Eileen Percy as Nell Larabee
 * Walter Bytell as Collis J. Hillington
 * Joseph Singleton as Judson, the Butler
 * Calvert Carter as Tom Larabee, the Hotel Keeper
 * Forrest Seabury as Banker
 * J. W. Jones as Lawyer
 * Charles Stevens as Pedro
 * Sam De Grasse as Steve Shelby, the Indian Agent
 * Tom Wilson as Casey the Engineer
 * Ruth Allen
 * Edward Burns
 * Wharton James

Production
Wild and Woolly was filmed in Manhattan and the Paragon Studio in Fort Lee, New Jersey, where many early film studios in America's first motion picture industry were based at the beginning of the 20th century. The scenes of the Arizona town were shot over a week's time in Burbank, California. Joseph Henabery served as an assistant to director John Emerson.

Reception
Like many American films of the time, Wild and Woolly was subject to cuts by city and state film censorship boards. The Chicago Board of Censors required cuts of the intertitle "Say, that's a chance for us to clean up big," all scenes of the Indian Agent and Indians with a basket containing flasks of liquor, the three intertitles "Whoop it up and all you capture is yours," You watch every door of the hotel and after I get the girl you kill," and "They can't hurt you, their guns are loaded with fake bullets," scene where Fairbanks is shot, an Indian shoots a man, four scenes of Indians falling after being shot, and the shooting of the express messenger, taking his keys, and the rifling of the express box.

Fairbanks biographer Jeffrey Vance, writing in 2008, believes Wild and Woolly "is the finest of the surviving Fairbanks-Emerson-Loos collaborations and perhaps the best of the thirteen films he made for Artcraft. It was also one of Fairbanks's personal favorites."

Preservation status
Copies of Wild and Woolly are preserved in several film collections and archives, and it has been released on DVD. In 2002, this film was deemed "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" by the United States Library of Congress and selected for preservation in the National Film Registry.

title: Wild and Woolly (1917 film)