text:
Pitta

Pittas are a family, Pittidae, of passerine birds found in Asia, Australasia and Africa. There are 44 species of pittas, all similar in general appearance and habits. The pittas are Old World suboscines, and their closest relatives among other birds are in the genera Smithornis  and Calyptomena. Initially placed in a single genus, as of 2009 they have been split into three genera: Pitta, Erythropitta and Hydrornis. Pittas are medium-sized by passerine standards, at 15 to(-) in length, and stocky, with strong, longish legs and long feet. They have very short tails and stout, slightly decurved bills. Many have brightly coloured plumage.

Most pitta species are tropical; a few species can be found in temperate climates. They are mostly found in forests, but some live in scrub and mangroves. They are highly terrestrial and mostly solitary, and usually forage on wet forest floors in areas with good ground cover. They eat earthworms, snails, insects and similar invertebrate prey, as well as small vertebrates. Pittas are monogamous and females lay up to six eggs in a large domed nest in a tree or shrub, or sometimes on the ground. Both parents care for the young. Four species of pittas are fully migratory, and several more are partially so, though their migrations are poorly understood.

Four species of pitta are listed as endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature; a further nine species are listed as vulnerable and several more are near-threatened. The main threat to pittas is habitat loss in the form of rapid deforestation, but they are also targeted by the cage-bird trade. They are popular with birdwatchers because of their bright plumage and the difficulty in seeing them.

Taxonomy and systematics

The first pitta to be described scientifically was the Indian pitta, which was described and illustrated by George Edwards in 1764. Carl Linnaeus included the species in his revised 12th edition (1766–1768) of the Systema Naturae based on Edwards' descriptions and illustrations as well as other accounts, placing it with the Corvidae as Corvus brachyurus. Ten years later Statius Müller moved it and three other pittas to the thrush family Turdidae and the genus Turdus, due to similarities of morphology and behaviour. In 1816 Louis Pierre Vieillot moved it to the new genus Pitta. The name is derived from the word pitta in the Telugu language of South India meaning "small bird".

The family's closest relatives have for a long time been assumed to be the other suboscine birds (suborder Tyranni), and particularly the Old World suboscines; the broadbills, asities and the New World sapayoa. These arboreal relatives were formerly treated as two families, and are now either combined into a single taxon or split into four. A 2006 study confirmed that these were indeed the closest relatives of the pittas. The clade they form, the Eurylaimides, is one of the two infraorders of suboscines, which is one of three suborders of the passerine birds. With regards to their relationship within the Eurylaimides, another 2006 study placed the pittas as a sister clade to two clades of broadbills and asities. This same study postulated an Asian origin for the Eurylaimides and therefore the pittas.

Two DNA studies, from 2015 and 2016, came to a different conclusion, finding that the Eurylaimides were divided into two clades and that the pittas formed a clade with the broadbills of the genera Smithornis  and Calyptomena, with the remaining broadbills and asities in the other clade. The 2016 study also disputed the earlier claims about the origin of the group, and concluded that the most likely ancestral home of the pittas and the Eurylaimides was Africa (the sapayoa having diverged before the core clades had reached Africa). The study found that the pittas diverged from the Smithornis and Calyptomena broadbills 24 to 30 million years ago, during the Oligocene. The pittas diverged and spread through Asia before the oscines (suborder Passeri) reached the Old World from Australia.

The number of pitta genera has varied considerably since Vieillot, ranging from one to as many as nine. In his 1863 work A Monograph of the Pittidae, Daniel Elliot split the pittas into two genera, Pitta for the species with comparatively long tails and (the now abandoned) Brachyurus for the shorter-tailed species. Barely two decades later, in 1880/81, John Gould split the family into nine genera, in which he also included the lesser melampitta (in the genus Melampitta) of New Guinea, where it was kept until 1931 when Ernst Mayr demonstrated that it had the syrinx of an oscine bird. Philip Sclater's Catalogue of the Birds of the British Museum (1888) brought the number back down to four – Anthocincla, Pitta, Eucichla, and Coracopitta. Elliot's 1895 Monograph of the Pittidae included three genera split into subgenera Anthocincla, Pitta (subgenera Calopitta, Leucopitta, Gigantipitta, Hydrornis, Coloburis, Cervinipitta, Purpureipitta, Phaenicocichla, Monilipitta, Erythropitta, Cyanopitta, Galeripitta, Pulchripitta, Iridipitta), and Eucichla (subgenera Ornatipitta, Insignipitta).

Modern treatments of taxa within the family vary as well. A 1975 checklist included six genera, whereas the 2003 volume of the Handbook of the Birds of the World, which covered the family, placed all the pittas in a single genus. Writing in 1998, Johannes Erritzoe stated that most contemporary authors considered the family to contain a single genus. Before 2006 the family was not well studied using modern anatomical or phylogenetic techniques; two studies, in 1987 and 1990, each used only four species, and comparisons amongst the family as a whole had relied mostly on external features and appearances.

A 2006 study of the nuclear DNA of the pittas was the first to examine most representatives of the family, and found evidence of three major clades of pitta. Based on the study the pittas were split into three genera. The first clade, using the genus name Erythropitta, included six species that had previously been considered closely related based on external features. They are all generally small species with small tails, extensive amounts of crimson or red on the underparts, and greenish or blueish backs. The second genus, Hydrornis, includes variable Asian species. These species are unified morphologically in exhibiting sexual dimorphism in their plumage, as well as in possessing cryptic juvenile plumage (in all the species thus-far studied). This genus includes the eared pitta, which had often been placed into its own genus, Anthocincla, on account of its apparently primitive characteristics. The third genus, Pitta, is the most widespread. Most species in this genus have green upperparts with a blue wing-patch, dark upperparts and cinnamon-buff underparts. This clade contains all the migratory pitta species, and it is thought that many of the pitta species from islands are derived from migratory species. This division of the pittas into three genera has been adopted by the International Ornithological Congress' (IOC) Birds of the World: Recommended English Names, the Handbook of the Birds of the World's HBW Alive checklist, and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (which follows the HBW Alive checklist).

As with genera, there has been considerable variation in the number of accepted pitta species. The checklists of Sclater and Elliot at the end of the 19th century contained 48 and 47 species respectively. More recent checklists have had fewer than this, one from 1975 listing just 24 species. Since the 1990s, the figure has been between 30 and 32 species; the 2003 Handbook of the Birds of the World recognised 30. One species not recognised by the handbook is the black-crowned pitta, which it treated as a subspecies of either the garnet pitta or the graceful pitta. Since the publication of the handbook, further splits to pitta species have been made; in 2010 the banded pitta was split into three species, one endemic to Java and Bali, one endemic to Borneo and one found in Sumatra and the Thai-Malay Peninsula. A 2013 study found that the red-bellied pitta, a widespread species found from Sulawesi to Australia, was actually a species complex. The study divided it into 17 new species; some authorities have recognised fewer, for example the IOC have recognised only 10.

Description

The pittas are small to medium-sized passerines, ranging in size from the blue-banded pitta at 15 cm to the giant pitta, which can be up to 29 cm in length. In weight they range from 42 to(-). Pittas are stout-bodied birds with long, strong tarsi (lower leg bones) and long feet. The colour of the legs and feet can vary dramatically even within a species. This may be a characteristic used by females in judging the quality of a prospective mate. The wings have ten primaries that are generally rounded and short; those of the four migratory species are more pointed. There are nine secondaries with the tenth being vestigial. Anatomically, pittas have large temporal fossae in the skull unlike typical perching birds. The syrinx is tracheo-bronchial and lacks a pessulus or intrinsic muscles. Pittas are behaviourally reluctant to fly, but are capable and even strong fliers. The tails range from being short to very short, and are composed of twelve feathers.

Unlike most other forest-floor bird species, the plumage of pittas is often bright and colourful. Only one species, the eared pitta, has entirely cryptic colours in the adults of both sexes. In the same genus, Hydrornis, are three further species with drabber than average plumage, the blue-naped pitta, blue-rumped pitta and rusty-naped pitta. Like the other Hydrornis pittas they are sexually dimorphic in their plumage, the females tending towards being drabber and more cryptic than the males. In general the sexes in the family tend to be very similar if not identical. Across most of the family the brighter colours tend to be on the undersides, with patches or areas of bright colours on the rump, wings and uppertail coverts being concealable. Being able to conceal bright colours from above is important as most predators approach from above; four species have brighter upperparts.

Distribution and habitat
The pittas are generally birds of tropical forests, semi-forests and scrub. Most species need forests with much cover, a rich understory, and leaf litter for feeding, and they are often found near waterways as well. Some species inhabit swamps and bamboo forests, and the mangrove pitta, as its name suggests, is a mangrove specialist. Several species are lowland forest specialists. For example, the rainbow pitta is not found above 400 m. Other species may occur at much higher elevations, including, for example, the rusty-naped pitta, which has been found up to 2600 m. The altitudinal preferences varies in the fairy pitta across its range, it can be found up to 1300 m in Taiwan but stays at lower altitudes in Japan. As well as natural habitats, pittas may use human-altered spaces. For example, migrating blue-winged pittas and hooded pittas use parks and urban gardens in Singapore. The greatest diversity of pittas is found in South-east Asia. Of the three genera, the large genus Pitta is the most widespread. The two species found in Africa, the African pitta and green-breasted pitta, are from this clade, as is the most northerly species (the fairy pitta) and the most southerly (the noisy pitta, Pitta versicolor). The most remote insular endemics are in this group as well, including the black-faced pitta, which is endemic to the Solomon Islands. The pittas of the clade Erythropitta are mostly found in Asia. with one species, the Papuan pitta, reaching the north of Australia. The Hydrornis pittas are exclusively Asian. Some pittas have large distributions, like the hooded pitta, which ranges from Nepal to New Guinea, while others have much smaller ones, like the superb pitta, which is endemic to the tiny island of Manus in the Admiralty Islands.

The movements of pittas are poorly known and notoriously difficult to study. Bird ringing studies have not shed much light on this. One study in the Philippines ringed 2000 red-bellied pittas but only recaptured ten birds, and only one of these recaptures was more than two months after the initial capture. Only four species of pitta are fully or mostly migratory, all in the genus Pitta: the Indian pitta, the African pitta, the fairy pitta and the blue-winged pitta. As well as these four, the northern subspecies of the hooded pitta is a full migrant. Other species make smaller or more local, and poorly understood, movements across small parts of their range, including the noisy pitta of Australia. The migration of pittas is apparently nocturnal, and pittas migrate in small loose flocks that use the same resting and foraging sites each year.

Sociality and calls

Pittas are diurnal, requiring light to find their often cryptic prey. They are nevertheless often found in darker areas and are highly secretive, though they will respond to imitations of their calls. They are generally found as single birds, even young birds not associating with their parents unless they are being fed. The only exception to their solitary lifestyle is small groups that have been observed forming during migration.

The pittas are strongly territorial, with territories varying in size from 3000 m2 in the African pitta to 10000 m2 in the rainbow pitta. They have also been found to be highly aggressive in captivity, attacking other species and even their own; such behaviour has not been observed in the wild. Pittas will perform territory-defence displays on the edges of their territories; fights between rivals have only been recorded once. One such territorial display is given by the rainbow pitta, which holds its legs straight and bows to a rival on the edge of its territory, while making a purring call. Displays like this are paired with calls made out of sight of potential rivals; these territorial calls are frequent and can account for up to 12% of a bird's daylight activity. Migratory species will defend non-breeding feeding territories as well as their breeding ones.

The vocalisations of pittas are best described as calls, as they are generally short, mono or disyllabic, and often fluting or whirring. They are made by both sexes and throughout the year. One species, the black-and-crimson pitta, was also described making a mechanical noise (sonation) in 2013. The sonation, a clapping sound, was made in flight and is hypothesised to be made by the wings.

Diet and feeding

Earthworms form the major part of the diet of pittas, followed by snails. Earthworms can become seasonally unavailable in dry conditions when the worms move deeper into the soil, and pittas also take a wide range of other invertebrate prey, including many insects groups such as termites, ants, beetles, true bugs, and lepidopterans. Freshwater crabs, centipedes, millipedes, and spiders are also taken. Some species, such as the fairy pitta and rainbow pitta, have been recorded feeding on small vertebrate prey. This including skinks, frogs, snakes and, in the case of the fairy pitta, shrews. There are also records of some pittas taking plant food, such as the Carpentaria palm fruits or maize seeds.

Pittas feed in a thrush-like fashion, moving aside leaves with a sweeping motion of the bill. They have also been observed to probe the moist soil with their bills to locate earthworms. They have a keen sense of smell, and it has been suggested that they are able to locate earthworms this way. This suggestion was supported by a study which found that the Indian pitta has the largest olfactory bulb of 25 passerines examined. Eight species have been recorded using stones as anvils on which to smash open snails to eat, and the rainbow pitta has been observed using the root of a tree to do so.

Breeding
Like most birds, pittas are monogamous breeders, and defend breeding territories. Most species are seasonal breeders, timing their breeding to occur at the onset of the rainy season. An exception to this is the superb pitta, which breeds almost year-round, as the island of Manus on which it breeds remains wet all year. The courtship behaviours of the family are poorly known, but the elaborate dance of the African pitta includes jumping into the air with a puffed-out breast and parachuting back down to the perch.

Pittas build a rudimentary nest that is a dome with a side entrance. The structure of the nest is consistent across the whole family. The nest is as large as a rugby ball, and is usually well-camouflaged amongst vines or vegetation of some kind. The nest's appearance is also difficult to distinguish from a heap of leaves pushed together by the wind; a few species create a "doormat" of sticks (sometimes decorated with mammal dung ) by the entrance. The nests can either be placed on the ground or in trees. Some species always nest in trees, like both African species, others nest only on the ground, and others show considerable variation. Both sexes help to build the nest, but the male does most of the work. It takes around two to eight days to build a new nest; this probably varies depending on the experience of the birds involved. A new nest is constructed for each nesting attempt, and work on building a nest for a second brood may start while the chicks from the first brood are still being fed.

The clutch size varies by species. Typically three to five eggs are laid, but two is typical for the garnet pitta, whereas six is more common for the blue-winged pitta and the Indian pitta. It is thought that species with higher levels of predation tend to have smaller clutches, as smaller clutches involve fewer provisioning trips that might alert a predator to the presence of a nest, and smaller clutches are easier to replace if lost. Clutch size may vary within a species depending on latitude. A study of noisy pittas found that birds in the tropics had smaller clutch sizes than those in more temperate environments. The eggs of pittas are slightly pointed at one end, and generally smooth (the deeply pitted eggs of the superb pitta being the exception to this). The size of eggs varies by species, smaller-sized species laying smaller eggs. There is also some variation in egg size within a species in species with large ranges. For example, the eggs of noisy pittas are smaller closer to the tropics. Eggs are typically white or creamy, and usually slightly glossy.

Both parents incubate the clutch, the period between laying and hatching being between 14 and 18 days (14 to 16 being more typical). The chicks usually hatch asynchronously, over several days, but in some species the hatching is synchronous. On hatching the Gurney's pitta parents are reported to consume the eggshells. This behaviour ensures that the calcium used to create the eggs is not lost. It is unknown if other species do this, but it is a common behaviour among birds. As with the incubation, both parents are involved in rearing the chicks. The chicks of pittas are entirely altricial, hatching both naked and blind, and dependent upon their parents for warmth, food and nest sanitation. Young chicks are brooded continuously, the female brooding alone in some species and sharing responsibilities with the male in others. The males and females make regular feeding trips to the chicks; one study of Gurney's pittas found a pair made 2300 feeding visits to the nest, traveling an estimated 460 km over the nestling stage. Earthworms are important food items for many species, and the dominant item in the nestling diet of some. 73% of the parental visits of fairy pittas, 63% of rainbow pitta's, up to 79% of Gurney's pitta's visits involved bringing earthworms. Parents can and do carry more than one item in their bills during visits; in a study of breeding fairy pittas, as many as six items were observed being brought in a single visit; less than four was more typical. When the chicks are small, prey may be broken up before being fed to the chicks, and larger prey items like skinks and snakes are only fed to chicks who are old enough to manage them.

Relationship with humans
The brilliant plumage of many pittas has resulted in considerable interest in pittas from people living within their range, scientists, aviculturists and birdwatchers, and has led to the colloquial name jewel-thrushes. Such is their attractiveness that, in Borneo, even the body of a dead pitta can be a favoured toy for local children. They have proven difficult to maintain and breed in captivity, requiring large amounts of space, humidity and sufficient vegetation of the right kind. Pittas are a very popular group of birds with birdwatchers, due to the dazzling plumage of many species and the relative difficulty of seeing these retiring birds in dark forests. Their desirability as birdwatching targets was the subject of the book The Jewel Hunter (2013), in which the writer Chris Goodie recounted his attempt to see every species of pitta.

Status and conservation

Pittas are generally forest birds and, as such, are vulnerable to habitat loss caused by rapid deforestation. They can also be difficult birds to survey and are easily overlooked. Four species are assessed to be endangered, and a further nine are listed as vulnerable by the IUCN. Eight species are listed as near-threatened, and one, the Louisiade pitta, is too poorly known to be assessed and is listed as data deficient.

The Gurney's pitta was not seen for 34 years between 1952 and 1986, before a small population was discovered in southern Thailand. This small population declined after its rediscovery, and, by 2000, it had reached a low of 10 pairs, and was listed as critically endangered. In 2003, the species was found in Burma for the first time since 1914, and in large numbers, between nine and thirty five thousand pairs. The species was considerably less threatened than thought, but it is still of considerable conservation concern, as deforestation of the habitat in Burma continues. The rapid rate of deforestation in Borneo has pushed the blue-headed pitta, considered common and secure as recently as 1996, into the list of species considered vulnerable.

Pittas have been targeted by poachers for the illegal wild-bird trade. They are not targeted because of their song, as many songbirds are, and may simply be captured as bycatch from collecting other species, and because of their attractive plumage. According to some trappers, they also may end up being eaten for food. On Manus, locals report that predation by snakes, including the brown tree snake, is responsible for the rarity of the endangered superb pitta, but the snake, the introduction of which is responsible for several extinctions of island birds across the Pacific, is native to the island, and is therefore likely a natural threat.

Species of pitta
There are 44 species of pitta in three genera according to the International Ornithological Congress' (IOC) Birds of the World: Recommended English Names.

title: Pitta


text:
Wikipedia talk:Press releases/Wikipedia surpasses Britannica

This is silly bragging. It is also false; if you add eb.com then we still lose. Wait until we are substantially and consistently ahead. --mav

 * This is not really true, b/c britannica.com is not britanica online, it is britanica's website. So in a sense, we passed britanica online (i.e. eb.com) a long time ago in hits.  Additionally, when you add the 1 week averages of eb.com and britanica.com together, we are still ahead by 73 reach per million users (which I assume is a measure of hits?)  I really have no idea what reach is honestly.  But you can't add the ranks together, b/c those are based on actual hits (I assume).  Maybe you could explain to me how we lose when adding eb.com?  MB 17:30 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * OK the eb.com thing was wrong (for some reason I thought they went to the same website). But that doesn't change the fact that we are "ahead" by only 42 points. That isn't anything solid or anything at all worth bragging about, in and of itself, except among ourselves. It is also not a very fair comparison since EB online is a pay closed service and we are fully open to Google. This type of press release makes us look like we are begging for media attention and the last thing we need is negative coverage (or much more traffic for that matter ; have you noticed how slow everything is?). So we should only have press releases when there is really something major to report. A 42 point lead doesn't cut it. Wait at least until the Wikimedia Foundation is fully operational and able to accept donations and grants. By that time our lead can be casually mentioned along with our article count in our press release about the Wikimedia Foundation. --mav 17:41 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * Sounds sensible to me. But not really a good reason to delete the press release, some of it can be used later when writing the other press release.  MB 17:44 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * It will still be there in the revision history, just not visible for all the world (and Google) to see. -- The Anome 18:16 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Yep. Give it another three to six months. See this graph -- The Anome 17:22 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Perhaps when Wikipedia hits a three-month average rank of 2000, or rank 1000? Looking at the graph, and very crudely extrapolating on this log-linear daily rank plot, neither of these is too far away. -- The Anome 17:24 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)

btw Alexia.com is not accurate. they even say themselves its not accurate. -fonzy

Yeah, I think being in the top 1000 alone would be enough. Then we can casually mention that we are three times as popular as Britannica. The current margin can easily disappear and is therefore not something worth bragging about - all it is good for is an interesting entry on the Announcements page. This page should be blanked. --mav 17:29 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)

"There is no such thing as bad publicity." Pulling even with britannica.com is not a huge deal, but companies routinely issue press releases for much less, and if just a handful of news orgs pick it up because it's a slow news day, that's still likely to generate another couple dozen contributors out of people who hear about Wikipedia for the first time because of the news reports. The only downside would be if several more important press releases were expected within the next 2-3 weeks, wouldn't want to have those ignored by news orgs because "we just did a Wikipedia story". Stan 18:00 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * I would think that the forthcoming Wikipedia Foundation press release would be that story. Perhaps this info can be tacked on to that? -- The Anome 18:14 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * "we just did a Wikipedia story" is exactly why we should wait so that we get the biggest media bang for the buck (sic server slowdowns). Another very important thing is for us to have the ability to accept donations and grants when we do have our next press release. By that time we should be clearly more popular than Britannica (for the past several weeks we have been leapfrogging each other). In short; wait until we have something solid to report on and we are able to accept donations so that we can buy a faster webserver and maybe even a separate server to perform searches on. --mav

 * Where is this so called "forthcoming Wikipedia Foundation press release" being worked on (link please)? MB 18:20 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * Use this press release, our 2003 Press Release and Wikimedia as guides to write one. I think it is a good time to start (maybe doing so will prompt Jimbo to finish the 501c IRS application). Hm. I wonder if there is a Europe-wide tax-exempt classification.... --mav

Some mention should be done to the fact that a substantial part of Wikipedia was taken from 1911 EB (How much?).

 * A Wikipedia Google search of 1911 Encyclopedia yields 3,220 results, 1911 Encyclopaedia gets 315 and 1911 Encyclopædia gets 57. So I would say that we have between 3,000 to 4,000 EB 1911 articles (as far as I know EB 1911 text is almost always attributed here). --mav

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


text:
Acid jazz

Acid jazz (also known as club jazz, psychedelic jazz, or groove jazz) is a music genre that combines elements of funk, soul, and hip hop, as well as jazz and disco. Acid jazz originated in clubs in London during the 1980s with the rare groove movement and spread to the United States, Western Europe, Latin America and Japan. Acts included The Brand New Heavies, Incognito, James Taylor Quartet, Us3, and Jamiroquai from the UK, and Guru, Buckshot LeFonque and Digable Planets from the U.S. The rise of electronic club music in the middle to late 1990s led to a decline in interest, and in the twenty-first century, acid jazz became indistinct as a genre. Many acts that might have been defined as acid jazz are seen as jazz-funk, or nu jazz.

Etymology
The genre's name was likely coined by Gilles Peterson, and the label was started by Bangs, Eddie Piller, and Gilles. The name refers to the acid house genre, which was popular in UK clubs in the 1980s. However, DJs Femi Williams and Marco Nelson from Young Disciples claimed in a recently unearthed 1992 TV interview that they coined the term because they had a club with acid playing downstairs and jazz upstairs, so they thought it would be amusing to name the upstairs room "The Acid Jazz Room". The veracity of this claim predating Peterson's is dubious, as the interview in question took place five years after the Acid Jazz label was created, and Young Disciples were first active three years after the formation of the label.

Evolution
Acid jazz consisted of two related movements. The first was based on records by disc jockeys and music producers who added percussion and electronic dance beats to jazz tracks from the 1960s and 1970s. The second movement included groups who were influenced by these recordings and who emphasized a groove. Acid jazz borrowed from jazz, funk, and hip-hop. Because it relies heavily on percussion and live performance, it is sometimes associated with jazz, but its emphasis on groove aligns it more with funk, hip hop, and dance music. The style is characterized by danceable grooves and long, repetitive compositions. Acid jazz bands usually include horns, a rhythm section (drum set and additional percussion), a vocalist who may sing or rap, and a DJ.

Origin
Acid jazz has its origins in the 1950s, 1960s, when psychedelic styles were being incorporated into other musical genres, jazz being one of these. Acid jazz became popular in London clubs during the 1980s when disc jockeys associated with the rare groove movement played obscure jazz records. Their interests were in the fringe of jazz fusion, jazz funk, and the soul jazz of 1960s. Particularly significant were records from the Blue Note catalogue. These DJs included Gilles Peterson, who had residencies at several London clubs in the 1980s. Peterson began in a small pirate radio station and then moved to the larger Kiss-FM. In 1988 with producer Eddie Piller he formed the label Acid Jazz Records. The first release from the company was the compilation Totally Wired, which contained obscure jazz funk tracks from the 1970s with updated new tracks.

In 1990 Peterson left to start the label Talkin' Loud at Phonogram. The company signed Galliano, Young Disciples, and Urban Species. Another British record label, Fourth and Broadway Records, was formed in 1990 and began a compilation series with the title "The Rebirth of Cool". The label's roster included Pharoah Sanders, Stereo MCs, MC Solaar, and Courtney Pine.

In 1991 acid jazz broke into the mainstream with the success of Brand New Heavies. After one self-titled album (1990) with Acid Jazz Records, the group signed with FFRR Records and had the hit singles "Never Stop" and "Dream Come True". Other bands included Incognito and Us3, whose "Cantaloop (Flip Fantasia)" (1993) was the biggest hit in the genre. Also successful was Jamiroquai, an early act for Acid Jazz Records that signed with Sony, which released Travelling Without Moving (1996) and the hit single "Virtual Insanity". Other live acts included Stereo MCs and the James Taylor Quartet. The mainstream success of acid jazz was followed by many compilations which left the public confused about the genre.

Acid jazz in the US
Acid jazz spread to the United States in the early 1990s. It reached New York City in 1990 when British promoter Maurice Bernstein and his South African partner Jonathan Rudnick opened Groove Academy as a party at the Giant Step club in the basement of the Metropolis Café in Union Square. Groove Academy turned into a record label and media company. Acid jazz musicians in New York City included Brooklyn Funk Essentials, DJ Smash, and Jerome Van Rossum. In San Francisco acid jazz was released by Ubiquity Records, by Solsonics in Los Angeles, and The Greyboy Allstars in San Diego.

A Tribe Called Quest borrowed from jazz for their album The Low End Theory (1991). Under the name Buckshot LeFonque, Branford Marsalis and Digable Planets won a Grammy Award for the 1993 single "Rebirth of Slick (Cool Like Dat)".

Formed in New York in 1990, Groove Collective produced their self-titled debut in 1993. The rapper Guru released a series of albums recorded with jazz musicians as the Jazzmatazz series.

Stemming from Chicago in 1993, Liquid Soul achieved a national profile in 1996 when their self-titled debut LP was re-released by Ark21. In 2000 their album Here's the Deal was nominated in the Grammy Award for Best Contemporary Jazz Album category.

Around the world
Acid jazz soon gained an international following, including in Japan, Germany, Brazil and Eastern Europe. From Japan, United Future Organization gained an international reputation, signing an American record deal in 1994. Other acts from Japan included Mondo Grosso, and Gota Yashiki Skalpel came from Poland.

Decline
The rise of electronic club music in the mid- to late-1990s led to a decline in interest in acid jazz among the record buying public, although the genre continued to have a reduced worldwide following. In the twenty-first century the movement became so intertwined with other forms that it became indistinct as a genre and many acts that might have been defined as acid jazz are now seen as jazz funk, neo soul or jazz rap.

Q magazine stated "Acid jazz was the most significant jazz form to emerge out of the British music scene". One major legacy of the genre is its influence on the jam band movement, with acid jazz proving a suitable medium for extended improvisation for acts such as Medeski, Martin and Wood and The Greyboy Allstars.

title: Acid jazz


text:
Talk:Bird of prey

Humans
Do they attack people? Kids? --202.47.49.189 (talk) 04:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Basically, no. Some will attempt to defend their nests, but most are too scared of humans even to attack then. None will attack otherwise. The only real risk is from owls, if their nests are threatened. Large owls can be ferocious in defending their young, often aim for the face, and have a silent flight, so you can't hear them coming. It's never a good idea to poke around in a owl's nest. jimfbleak (talk) 10:59, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Falcons
Needs to be merged with Raptor Mintguy 16:38 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * I'm currently working on completing those bird families still without articles, while Tannin sorts out the existing articles for a consistent layout, so in the fullness of time, it will be done. jimfbleak 05:53 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I'm leary of the statement that no falcons build nests. The recent uproar over the eviction of "Pale Male" in New York City seems like a counter-example. Perhaps Pale Male is not a falcon???

 * This Pale Man bit is meaningless to me, as a Brit, so can't help with that. Falcons need somewhere to nest, be it on a cliff, a ledge on a building, or an old crow's nest, so they can still be rendered homeless. That's not the same as building a nest. jimfbleak 17:58, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Not all hawks belong to the genera Accipiter
Maybe we should change the line:

Hawks are medium-sized birds of prey that belong to the genera Accipiter. They are mainly woodland birds that hunt by sudden dashes from a concealed perch. They usually have long tails and high visual acuity.

to read most hawks belong to the genera Accipiter.

(see red-tail hawk for an example)

 * Corrected. Dysmorodrepanis 06:18, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

 * But red-tailed hawks don't count for anything because they are actually a species of buzzard. --The High Fin Sperm Whale (talk) 04:47, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Owls
"Nocturnal birds of prey—the owls—are separate from the diurnal families, and are in the order Strigiformes. Although the term "raptor" is sometimes used more broadly, in general it includes owls."

Does or doesn't? --Sambostock 11:23, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

 * my personal (but i think informed) opinion is that "raptor" (literally: plunderer or robber) and "bird of prey" (lit. a predatory bird) are general terms that are meant to capture a 'family resemblance' (in a Wittgensteinian sense); they share similar broadly similar lifestyles, and so as result of similar selection pressures share particular adaptations). for instance, we in the western hemisphere picture a member of the Cathartidae when we see vultures circling; and tho these birds have excellent vision, prey mostly (but not exclusively!) on animal flesh, and are masterful fliers, they may in fact be closer relatives of the storks than of falconiform birds like kestrels, eagles, or even gryphon vultures. the owls may or may not be related to the falconiforms, but they share their taste for flesh and the equipment for capturing it: sharp beak and grasping talons, superior senses and powerful flight. but depending upon the degree of specialization or generalization in day/night activity, acuity and even degree of color vision may vary from genus to genus. and though there are exceptions, most owls are ambush predators, dashing silently from out of view to capture prey, and so are relatively slow fliers with great control. most birds are visually sensitive to movement, and these are no exceptions. however, as most if not all information in this article will be redundant, i suggest that Bird of prey should be turned into a Disambig page with links to Falconiformes, Strigiformes, and Cathartidae. - Metanoid (talk, email) 04:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

PBS Nature Special, and technical facts
PBS has a new episode of Nature about raptors, lots of cool facts about their anatomy and skills.

One neat thing they mention is that many dive hunters have a peak vision angle ~45deg off of centerline, and dive in a spiral to keep an eye on prey. Nature states that the indirect flight path is to avoid the drag of cocking the head to one side to watch the target. What I think is actually happening there is that the stereo vision is useless for common ranges; the raptor instead spirals to sweep it's view back-and-forth. By comparing how much the prey appears to move against the backdrop, the predator should gauge very useful range information. It's just like how astronomers use the Earth's orbit to range out a distant galaxy; the wider a range of views used, the better.

68.0.226.163 04:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I think there are a fair number of papers on raptor vision; it's an interesting subject. You might want to check up on Google Scholar. Dysmorodrepanis 06:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

 * 68.0.226.163 - Thanks for the google scholar pointer, I found interesting info there, but not the answer. There were 3 ok hits; a 2000 article by VA Tucker in the Journal of Experimental Biology, a 2004 by IR Schwab in Br. J. Opthalamol, and a meaty 1971 paper from George E Goslow Jr. (though I've only had the time to skim it so far). The 2000 article only mentions the drag issue, and skirts the "why" of the fovea design in the first place. The '04 only quotes the '00 article on the issue. I'll e-mail what authors I can find about this; this feels like one of those little discoveries where the existing research just needed to be phrased and rearranged to put two and two together.

Religion and Birds of Prey
Previously I added some information regarding the spiritual and religious aspects of birds of prey amongst many Native American tribes in North America. This information was removed and the person removing them deemed the inclusion of this information "parochial." Many birds of prey are viewed as religious or spiritual objects to numerous tribes and tribal members in the U.S. This is not a parochial argument but a matter of fact. For references supporting this, see, for example, these government sources:

Clinton, William J. Executive Memorandum: “Policy Concerning Distribution of Eagle Feathers for Native American Religious.” 59 F.R. 22953 (1994). Retrieved December 10, 2007 (http://www.animallaw.info/administrative/adus59fr22953.htm)

Saenz v. Department of Interior, D.C. No. 99-21-M (2001). Retrieved December 10, 2007 (http://ca10.washburnlaw.edu/cases/2001/08/00-2166.htm)

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001. “Native American Activities: Migratory Bird Feathers.” Retrieved November 21, 2007 (http://library.fws.gov/Pubs2/nativeamerican01.pdf)

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “Eagle Parts for Native American Religious Purposes Permit Application and Shipping Request.” Retrieved August 6, 2006 (http://www.fws.gov/permits/forms/eaglereligious.pdf).

These referenes are not presented so as to suggest that every tribe necessarily believes every bird of prey is religious or spiritual in nature or that tribal members "worship" birds of prey. None of these are the case. Instead, as was attempted to be shown, many birds of prey have a religious or spiritual use, meaning or import to many tribes and their members. Removing information demonstrating this religious and spiritual relationship between many Native American tribes and birds of prey (eagles, hawks, owls, etc.) is a disservice to wikipedia visitors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.197.203.230 (talk) 05:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Here's a nice picture
http://prime.lavalife.com/pictures/plus45/2008/03/24/15/1206385386636.jpeg

Can you tell me what kind of bird it is? The picture was taken in Mongolia, about an hour out into the steppes from Ulanbatar. And you can use the picture as an illustration of whatever kind of bird it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.145.5.68 (talk) 14:42, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hard to tell, but you should check the local guides and see species that are confusable with the Steppe Eagle. Shyamal (talk) 10:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

can you tell me if any birds have a sense of smell — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.194.7.217 (talk) 23:50, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Article name/content agreement
There appears to be some work needed on this article. The lead is probably a bit too long, and could be broken up slightly, and even expanded, and the first line doesn't match the article title ("bird of prey" as of writing this). I tried to rewrite it, but I'm not sure I got it quite right. The problem is that Owls have their own article, and this one, which seems like it should cover all birds of prey, seems to have been written originally about raptors only (excluding owls, though I seem to recall often hearing Owls called "raptors" as well). The infobox certainly doesn't match the article title. I'm not quite sure how best to resolve all this. --Fru1tbat (talk) 18:29, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal
the entry hawk isn't dong very much in and of itself. what say we make it a section in this entry, a related term? - Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 06:55, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

see also Talk:WikiProject_Birds#Merge_proposal. - Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 07:23, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Weak oppose - There is a lot more which could be added to the entry 'hawk', including etymology and regional variations eg. NW Hawk = OW buzzard etc. If we merge hawk, then eagle, kite, kestrel, vulture etc. should follow. However, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it if everyone else thought it a good idea. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:41, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose bird of prey can also include owls, eagles and other familes apart from being more of a literary term. Hawk is loose as well but a smaller category and it is fine as it stands like a disambiguation for taxonomic groups. Shyamal (talk) 07:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose nope, hawk does not cover all the same terms. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  08:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose as per Shyamal and S's S jimfbleak (talk) 09:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak support but good points all. i'm not stuck on the idea. - Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 03:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose-I agree with Shaymal. Birds of Prey usually include the Owls, which clearly aren't Hawks.  A better fit, I think, would be to merge Hawk into Accipitridae, but Accipitridae includes Eagles, Falcons and Kites, which also are not "hawks", but much closer in behavior and relationship.  How do people feel about that merge?......Pvmoutside (talk) 19:02, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * i see Shyamal's and Casliber's points, but i think their concerns can by and large be addressed if Hawk were developed as a section of [Bird of prey]]. i realize that Bird of prey encompasses non-hawk-like species (owls, in particular); but there are certainly a very large number of birds of prey called hawks/buzzards, and i think there would be little confusion if readers were redirected to the (slightly) more inclusive article as i suggest... however, i also think that Pvmoutside's idea has some merit; Hawk as a section of Accipitridae? hmm. - Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 19:20, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * In fits and starts I am developing Accipitridae and I would strongly object to that particular article having sections based on vague descriptors like "hawk", "kite" or "eagle". I mention in the intro these names, and when the article is substantial it might be good to redirect some of these terms in this way, but a merge would make a for a really clumsy article. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  19:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * ach, well, i guess i can deal with that. again, i think that Bird of prey would be a good place to put such a broad, general entry as Hawk (as a section); but i will respect the consensus view. - Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 20:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Buzzard, too, could be easily adapted as a section of Bird of prey, as it is little more than a list.... - Μετανοιδ  (talk, email) 22:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Weak oppose. Perhaps rather scrap the taxobox and make the article a prettied-up but straightforwaed disambiguation? (Bit more text, 4-picture gallery, as per grass frogs). Then, after Accipitridae is brought into better state, decide what to do with it. Arguably, folk taxonomy = form taxonomy, so people will go looking for info on "hawks". Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 04:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose: There are other birds of prey other than hawks. Bird of prey refers to a wide variety.  swannie  talk  02:33, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose per article size after merge and all above. Stuff can still be added here.  Sawblade05  (talk to me undefined my wiki life) 08:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose: Hawks are part of birds of prey but Bird of Prey are not only about Hawks. Instead of merging the articles, I recommend improving the Hawk article instead.  10014derek  Ӂ  14:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Bird of prey is collaboration for September/October 2008
Nominated June 2 2008;

Support:

 * 1) . Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) . Snowman (talk) 17:36, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) . Vultur (talk) 23:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

 * Would be great to get a simple introductory page like this up to at least GA standard, with a concise, easy-to-read definition, features and latest on taxonomy. I was blown away recently that maybe Elanidae diverged earlier than pandionidae (whoa). Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes, a basic topic like this needs more expansion. Vultur (talk) 23:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Given the taxonomic problems would it be worthwhile removing the taxobox and treating it the same way as seabird? Sabine's Sunbird  talk  00:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Me too jimfbleak (talk) 05:50, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Help
I've had a quick run through and cleaned up a bit, but we need an agreed outline. The list of types of birds of prey which is the second section seems very northern hemisphere to me, and either needs to be rethought or rewritten. It introduces vague terms which add more confusion. Perhaps better to discuss by Accipitridae subfamilies and the other small families?
 * 1) A clear definition of what is a bird of prey. Are owls included? What about the Cathartidae?
 * 2) Typical characteristics - will depend on previous. Structure, vision etc
 * 3) Hunting/feeding techniques
 * 4) breeding strategies?
 * 5) conservation
 * 6) fossil record
 * Elaninae
 * Aegypiinae
 * Buteoninae
 * Circinae
 * Milvinae
 * Accipitrinae
 * Circaetinae
 * Pandionidae
 * Sagittariidae
 * Falconidae
 * Cathartidae

jimfbleak (talk) 07:35, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Not to forget some giant fossil Phorusrhacidae ! Shyamal (talk) 09:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Could we use more images on the article (can supply more, if there is felt to be a need) Aviceda  talk  04:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Wrong definition
I think the article has the wrong definition of a bird of prey. It says "Birds of prey are birds that hunt for food primarily on the wing, using their keen senses, especially vision." However, I am quite sure that the definition is a bird that kills other animals using its talons. But then, why would a Vulture be a raptor? --The High Fin Sperm Whale (talk) 18:22, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree, Birds of Prey are birds that kill their prey with their talons and as a result vultures aren't actually birds of prey —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.62.4.10 (talk) 15:20, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I have added a section on the "definition" using two rather old second-hand books. I wonder if any of the terminology that I have added needs bringing up-to-date. Comments and copy-editing welcome. Snowman (talk) 18:59, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

"raptor" origin
Isn't "raptor" an older Greek or Latin word? Thus it would predate the French word "rapiere." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.217.32.79 (talk) 11:42, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Adding needed, rather than editing
instead what is missing (more than editing) is to expand it a bit more. it IS an interesting subject, and area in general. and i am sure there is more RELEVANT-INTERESTING material that can be added.
 * I have stumbled across, and read, a few times the bird of prey article, which was brought to me using the "getting started" search for me to clarify. it seems to me it doesnt really need clarifacation, and is mostly phrased in a good manner.
 * i suggest for qualified editors to remove this article from the "clarify" cycle of the "getting started".
 * i will try to find more material to the subject and expand with a referances base

Chronomaster5779 (talk) 16:17, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Reader feedback: I found much of what I was l...
75.144.124.13 posted this comment on 29 July 2013 (view all feedback).

"I found much of what I was looking for, except an overview of the more distant ancestry of birds and their descent from dinosaurs."

i have put therfore a link to "origin of birds" page, in the "see also" category Chronomaster5779 (talk) 03:41, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

 * The main bird article has origins  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  05:47, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

recommandation and declaration of putting "bird" article link in the "see also" section
a user who is reading 'birds of pray', is most likely that he would not search "bird" to find the evoulution of 'birds of prey', and would not choose to "go back"(in an association concept) to 'bird' article to search for it. a person who already chosen "birds of prey" article is either not interested in "bird" article, or came from the "bird" article(with or without reading about evolution), or want to know the specific evolutionery phase of 'birds of pray'. in that case, the current user either already read the summerized evolution in 'bird' page(or even read the main article on dinosours and birds) or searching for it from 'birds of prey' article and on. therefore i think it answers better and more directly, if an "origin of birds" will be put. there it will also be point out that dinosours and evolution regard only to birds in general and not to birds of prey in particular, in which case what IS relevant is the "recent" evolution which is their ancestors. (am i correct?)

for common sense, in linking pages concept, it is conceivable that user WILL be interested to "surf" from 'birds of pray' to the generalized article of 'bird'. so im adding "bird" too... Chronomaster5779 (talk) 15:56, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * There's already a link to the article Bird, in the very first sentence. Howicus (talk) 16:00, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

yes but not everyone is aware of every single link. you also exclude a possibility that someone searches very swiftly towards the "see also" section, to find a referance to bird evolution, rather than reading thorouhly the article.

more over, if it has a link inside the article, and it is a main related article, it should defenetely also be in the obvious "see also" section. it is not about how inteligent readers are, it is about ease of relevant article assosiation and search for public.

Chronomaster5779 (talk) 16:07, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Cathartidae
Cathartidae (new world vultures) were removed from this article in August 2013 by an unsigned user, claiming that they don't belong here because they are related to storks.

However, this is an article about the common term "bird of prey" as traditionally understood, not about a phylogenetic clade.

Many authors, whilst acknowledging the Sibley & Alquist taxonomy, continue to group the new-world vultures with the other diurnal birds of prey. Also, is the relation of cathartids to storks undisputed?

If we are going to remove Cathartidae from the family list, then we also need to remove mention of condor from the introduction, and possibly other clean-up.

And if we remove new-world vultures on the basis of them not taking live prey, then we also need to exclude the old-world vultures, plus other acciptrids that are heavily reliant on carrion.

I'm putting the Cathartidae back; please discuss here their ex/inclusion if you feel strongly about this decision.

Pelagic (talk) 02:19, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Sexual Dimorphism Section Peer Review
Overall your section on sexual dimorphism was very well written. I would watch out when using scientific terms that are not common to the general public because it makes some concepts hard to understand. For example, you wrote “This is due to the fact that the ecological model is less parsimonious, making it more complex than sexual selection.” Perhaps it would be better to use the sentence “This is due to the fact that explanations based on ecological factors involve more evolutionary steps/processes, making the matter more complex than hypotheses based on sexual selection.

In terms of actual edits, I removed the word “also” from your first sentence because it was not necessary, seeing as it’s an intro sentence for a new section. For the section on kestrels, you should define which sex of the species is the smaller one. The flow of the sentence makes the reader feel as if both sexes would respond to harsh environments by decreasing in size. I added a semicolon to a sentence because it felt like a run on. Overall, you shared great information and it looks good!Daisuke 780 (talk) 06:56, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I have responded to the critiques you guys have posted, and I also added a section on a potential third theory as to why sexual dimorphism has evolved in raptors as well. In addition, I have made my section more conclusion based rather than listing the results of a single experiment. Leflame123 (talk) 01:33, 9 November 2015 (UTC) Leflame123

Overall this section of the article flows very well. I fixed a couple sentences to not specifically reference experiments and just summarize instead. The only other thing that I can think of to add would be maybe adding smaller subheadings (=== heading ===) for each different explination in order to break up the big chunk of text. Besides that great work! Adowney31 (talk) 16:43, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Sexual Dimorphism Section Peer Review Pt. 2
In terms of edits, I changed the wordings of some sentences to avoid repetitious phrases. I also tried to make sentences with scientific phrases a little bit easier to understand (for example, the sentence with the definition of parsimonious in it). I changed the phrase “in addition” to “additionally” because I felt it improved the flow of the sentence. Also, I changed “much more data” to “a significant amount of data”. For the part about kestrels, I broke the sentence into two because it was a lot of information to digest in one take. Overall, I like how you explain why sexual selection hypotheses are more accepted than ecological hypotheses. Plus, the use of the kestrel species was a good way to give imagery to the subject. For this section, “Dimorphisms can also be the product of intrasexual selection between males and females. It appears…” I think that the order of this sentence can be fixed along with wording choice. I tried to change the order but I do not want to change the meaning of what you are trying to say. Finally, the last sentence feels like an introductory sentence. I think it would be good to add some extra information to give the section a good closing.Daisuke 780 (talk) 01:33, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Bird of prey. 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/20070114171742/http://www.peregrinefund.org:80/explore_raptors/index.html to http://www.peregrinefund.org/explore_raptors/index.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100505032119/http://www.thearb.org:80/visit_birds-of-prey.php to http://www.thearb.org/visit_birds-of-prey.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:03, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Cladogram
What are folks' thoughts on adding this cladogram to the Classification section?

This cladogram is my best effort for visually depicting how different clades of birds are considered birds of prey vis-a-vis polyphyletic assemblages.

Heavily borrowed from Telluraves.

― Aidan ⦿ (talk) 03:56, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Stoop
From Stoop: "the high-speed attack dive of a bird of prey (most usually a hawk, eagle, falcon or owl)" - how to include here in birds of prey? Hyperbolick (talk) 19:23, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Seriemas
Seriemas should be considered birds of prey, as there's no good reason to exclude them. --2607:FEA8:2900:8B7:DD7C:4453:E6CE:F133 (talk) 15:27, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I read this too a while back. I can investigate it some more and see what I come up with. ApproximateLand (talk) 23:45, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

 * I'm still reading material on this. ApproximateLand (talk) 23:26, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Seriemas are not typically considered birds of prey
In fact, no one considered them birds of prey until 2019. And even now, it seems like a fringe idea. Traditionally, seriemas were classified in Gruiformes. So I'm not sure this article should be calling them birds of prey anymore than it should call ravens or shrikes birds of prey. --Grey Clownfish (talk) 01:50, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bird of prey


text:
Genni Gunn

Genni Gunn is a Canadian novelist, poet, and translator.

Born in Trieste, Italy, she currently resides in Vancouver, British Columbia. Gunn has a B.F.A. and an M.F.A. from the University of British Columbia. She is chair of Public Lending Rights, a member of The Writers' Union of Canada and the Literary Translators' Association of Canada and PEN International.

Her 2020 short story collection Permanent Tourist was shortlisted for the 2021 ReLit Award for short fiction.

Novels

 * Thrice Upon a Time (1990), ISBN 0-919627-81-1
 * Tracing Iris (2001), ISBN 1-55192-486-2
 * Solitaria (2010), ISBN 1-897109-43-1

Short stories

 * On the Road (1991), ISBN 0-88750-840-5
 * Hungers (2002), ISBN 1-55192-566-4
 * Permanent Tourists (2020)

Short stories in multiple-author anthologies

 * "Stones" (2008), Exotic Gothic 2 (ed. Danel Olson), ISBN 978-1-55310-109-3 hardbound, ISBN 978-1-55310-110-9 paperback
 * "Water Lover" (May 2012), Exotic Gothic 4 (ed. Danel Olson), ISBN 978-1-84863-300-1 hardbound, ISBN 978-1-84863-301-8 slipcased & signed edition
 * "Beached" (2012), Room Magazine

Poetry

 * Mating in Captivity (1993), ISBN 1-55082-067-2
 * Faceless (2007), ISBN 1-897109-16-4
 * Accidents (2022) ISBN 978-1-773240-98-5

Translations

 * Devour Me Too, by Dacia Maraini (1987)
 * Traveling in the Gait of a Fox, by Dacia Maraini (1992)
 * Text Me, by Corrado Calabrò, 2014

Opera libretto

 * Alternate Visions (2007) (music by John Oliver) Produced by Chants Libres, Montreal.

Travel memoir

 * Tracks: Journeys in Time and Place (2013), ISBN 978-1-927426-32-6

title: Genni Gunn


text:
McJob

"McJob" is a slang term for a low-paying, low-prestige dead-end job that requires few skills and offers very little chance of advancement. The term "McJob" comes from the name of the fast-food restaurant McDonald's, but is used to describe any low-status jobregardless of employerwhere little training is required, staff turnover is high, and workers' activities are tightly regulated by managers.

History
"McJob" was in use at least as early as 1986 — it appears in an article by sociologist Amitai Etzioni — and the Oxford English Dictionary defines it as "[a]n unstimulating, low-paid job with few prospects, esp. one created by the expansion of the service sector." Lack of job security is common.

The term was popularized by Douglas Coupland's 1991 novel Generation X: Tales for an Accelerated Culture, which described a "McJob" as a "low-pay, low-prestige, low-dignity, low benefit, no-future job in the service sector. Frequently considered a satisfying career choice by people who have never held one."

In the face of objections from McDonald's, the term "McJob" was added to Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary in 2003. In an open letter to Merriam-Webster, McDonald's CEO, James Cantalupo denounced the definition as a "slap in the face" to all restaurant employees, and stated that "a more appropriate definition of a 'McJob' might be 'teaches responsibility'". Merriam-Webster responded that "[they stood] by the accuracy and appropriateness of [their] definition."

On 20 March 2007, the BBC reported that the UK arm of McDonald's planned a public petition to have the OED's definition of "McJob" changed. Lorraine Homer from McDonald's stated that the company feels the definition is "out of date and inaccurate". McDonald's UK CEO, Peter Beresford, described the term as "demeaning to the hard work and dedication displayed by the 67,000 McDonald's employees throughout the UK". The company would prefer the definition to be rewritten to "reflect a job that is stimulating, rewarding ... and offers skills that last a lifetime".

These comments run counter to the principle that dictionaries simply record linguistic usage rather than judge it, and that dropping the entry for "McJob" would be a precedent for bowdlerising definitions of other derogatory terms. McDonald's attempted to get all of its workers to sign the petition but many refused on the grounds that the current definition is accurate despite the company's complaint.

During the aforementioned arguments that broke out when Merriam-Webster included "McJob" in its new edition, McDonald's officials implied the company might bring a lawsuit against the dictionary based on this trademark issue, but never did so. McDonald's disputes that its jobs are poor, because the company has been nominated for employee awards that are created by employers. However, this was contradicted in the outcome of the UK McLibel court case, in which the judges ruled that it was fair to say that McDonald's employees worldwide "do badly in terms of pay and conditions".

The term "McJOBS" was registered as a trademark by McDonald's in 1984 as a name and image for "training handicapped persons as restaurant employees". The trademark lapsed in February 1992, and was declared canceled by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Following the October 1992 publication of Generation X in paperback, McDonald's restored the trademark.

Accuracy of the term
There are often wide variations in how workers are actually treated depending on the local franchise owner. Some employees start out in entry-level McJobs and later become assistant managers or managers, continuing to work at the same franchise for many years; however this is the exception rather than the norm. McDonald's advertises that its former CEO, Jim Skinner, began working at the company as a regular restaurant employee, and that 20 of its top 50 managers began work as regular crew members.

According to Jim Cantalupo, former CEO of McDonald's, the perception of fast-food work being boring and mindless is inaccurate, and over 1,000 of the people who now own McDonald's franchises began behind the counter. Because McDonald's has over 400,000 employees and high turnover, Cantalupo's contention has been criticized as being invalid, working to highlight the exception rather than the rule.

In 2006, McDonald's undertook an advertising campaign in the United Kingdom to challenge the perceptions of the McJob. The campaign, developed by Barkers Advertising and supported by research conducted by Adrian Furnham, professor of psychology at University College London, highlighted the benefits of working for the organization, stating that they were "Not bad for a McJob". The advertisements ran at London's Piccadilly Circus.

title: McJob


text:
Anna Elizabeth Dickinson

Anna Elizabeth Dickinson (October 28, 1842 – October 22, 1932) was an American orator and lecturer. An advocate for the abolition of slavery and for women's rights, Dickinson was the first woman to give a political address before the United States Congress. A gifted speaker at a very young age, she aided the Republican Party in the hard-fought 1863 elections and significantly influenced the distribution of political power in the Union just prior to the Civil War. Dickinson was the first white woman on record to summit Colorado's Longs Peak, Lincoln Peak, and Elbert Peak (on a mule), and she was the second to summit Pike's Peak.

Early life
Dickinson was born on October 28, 1842, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to Quakers and abolitionists, John and Mary Edmundson Dickinson. Her Edmundson and Dickinson ancestors immigrated to the United States from England and with other Quakers settled at Tred Avon, or Third Haven, near Easton, Maryland, in about the 1660s. She had three older brothers—John, Edwin, and Samuel—and an older sister, Susan.

Dickinson's father died in 1844 when she was two years old after giving a speech against slavery. Left in poverty, Mary opened a school in their home and took in boarders to support the family. Dickinson was educated at Friends Select School of Philadelphia and for a short time, until age 15, at Westtown School. A hardworking student, she spent any money she earned on books, having acquired an interest in literary classics from her mother. At the age of 14, she converted to the Methodist Church, and remained active in the church throughout her life.

Early years
The Liberator, a newspaper owned by abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison,  published an essay on February 22, 1856, about the abuse received by an abolitionist schoolteacher in Kentucky. She was not yet 14. She went to work at the age of 15, about 1857, as a copyist. In 1859 and 1860, she was a teacher in Berks County, Pennsylvania, during which time she lived with the John and Elizabeth Longstreth family in Bristol, Pennsylvania. In May 1861, she obtained a clerkship for the United States Mint; she was one of the mint's first female employees. Dickinson was removed in December of that year for saying that General George McClellan's poor performance at Battle of Ball's Bluff amounted to treason at a public meeting.

Lecturer
Unlike other Americans, Quakers encouraged women to speak in public. She toured the country on behalf of the Sanitary Commission. Encouraged to speak by Lucretia Mott and Dr. Hannah Longshore, she gave impassioned speeches on abolition, reconstruction, women's rights, and temperance. Her success led the way for future women speakers.

She spoke publicly first in 1857 when she addressed a man who derided women at a Progressive Friends meeting. After that, she spoke regularly about temperance and abolition. In 1860, she spoke in Philadelphia at the Friends of Progress meeting at Clarkson Hall about The Rights and Wrongs of Women and then she addressed the Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society in the fall of that year. She gave her first major speech, a two-hour discussion of The Rights and Wrongs of Women, on February 27, 1861, in Philadelphia. Lucretia Mott, who delivered abolitionist speeches for decades in Quaker meetinghouses, provided leadership to sell 800 tickets for the Concert Hall event. Mott arranged for a lecture tour, sponsored by the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society, for the 19-year-old, who quickly became a popular speaker. The series of speeches helped lead the Emancipation movement.

Having heard her speak, Garrison arranged for her to speak in 1862 in the Palmer Fraternity Course of lectures at the Boston Music Hall. Named "The Girl Orator" by Garrison, she spoke about The National Crisis. She visited hospitals and camps during the war to speak to the soldiers. In 1862, she visited soldiers wounded in the war, and then gave a lecture about "Hospital Life" in New England.

During the 1863 United States Senate elections, with the deepening of the Civil War, Dickinson campaigned for several pro-Union Republican candidates in New York, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, and Connecticut to audiences that included people who did not support the war. She spoke eloquently and powerfully in support of the Radical Republicans' anti-slavery platform and for the preservation of the Union. She spoke to coal miners in Pennsylvania soon after draft riots in the area and converted men who had not previously supported abolition. Dickinson was named the "Civil War's Joan of Arc" for her promotion of the Union. She was ardent in her condemnation of the Copperheads and other Democrats. She was interviewed in 1863 by Whitelaw Reid, who was a supporter and often wrote about her speaking engagements in the New York Tribune.

When she spoke at Cooper Institute in New York City, more than 5,000 people attended the event. It was reported that she "could hold her audience spellbound for as much as two hours. She gave the impression of being under some magical control." She earned a standing ovation in 1864 for an impassioned speech on the floor of the United States House of Representatives. In attendance were President Abraham Lincoln and civic and military leaders. Invited by Republican leaders, she was the first woman to speak to Congress.

After the Civil War, she remained one of the nation's most celebrated lyceum speakers for nearly a decade. She made as much as $20,000 a year, making a speech every other day on average,  and gave most of her earnings away to charity, friends, and relatives. She also maintained a townhouse in Philadelphia, with expensive personal possessions, for her mother and sister.

She spoke about reconstruction, African-Americans' rights, women's right and other issues, like venereal disease in Between Us Be Truth, and polygamy in her speech "Whited Sepulchers" in Utah. Although she called for women's rights, she was not a speaker for the suffrage movement. Some of her well-received post-war lectures include For Yourself and Platform and Stage and she frequently spoke about Joan of Arc.

"She talks fast, uses no notes what ever, never hesitates for a word, always gets the right word in the right place, and has the most perfect confidence in herself. Indeed, her sentences are remarkably smoothly-woven and felicitous. Her vim, her energy, her determined look, her tremendous earnestness, would compel the respect and the attention of an audience, even if she spoke in Chinese—would convince a third of them, too, even though she used arguments that would not stand analysis."

As audiences preferred to be entertained rather than lectured on serious subjects, and after she campaigned for Horace Greeley, a Democratic presidential candidate in 1872, her career as a lecturer declined. In 1873, she and her manager, James Redpath, disagreed and parted company. By 1875, she was unable to support herself by speaking engagements alone. She gave a speech for Republicans for the 1888 presidential election in many states, during which she called Grover Cleveland the "hangman of Buffalo" and vigorously waved a bloody shirt. Due to the performance, they stopped booking her for speaking engagements. Newspapers questioned her sanity. The Republicans filed a breach of contract suit in 1891 and she was never hired by the party again.

Mountaineering
As her popularity as a lecturer waned, she was invited to Colorado by Ralph Meeker. She arrived in Colorado in 1873. Over the course of three weeks she climbed Pikes Peak, Mount Lincoln, Grays Peak, and Mount Elbert, often using horses or mules. She joined the Hayden survey for a climb of Longs Peak. Dickinson had hoped the publicity would revive her career. Boulder County News reported the at the time scandalous detail that Dickinson had worn trousers for the ascent. Dickinson was the first white woman on record to summit Colorado's Gray's Peak, Lincoln Peak, and Elbert Peak (on a mule), and she was the second to summit Pike's Peak. She was the third white woman on record to climb Colorado’s Longs Peak, in 1873, and was certainly the first well-known woman to do so.

Author and actress
As another means of support, she began writing. She published the novel What Answer? (1868), that tackled negative viewpoints about interracial marriage. It is considered her most radical work. She argued for technical training for workers, better treatment of prisoners, assistance for the poor, and compulsory education for all children in A Paying Investment, a Plea for Education (1876). Dickinson wrote A Ragged Register of People, Places and Opinions in 1879.

Her plays included The Crown of Thorns (1876), in which she played the role of Anne Boleyn and the play and her acting was unfavorably received in New York. She appeared in the title role of Mary Tudor (1878). Her plays included Aurelian (1878) and An American Girl (1880), which was successfully acted by Fanny Davenport. She performed as Hamlet on Broadway, but she did not have critical success as an actress.

Personal life
She was a friend of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Quaker lecturers Lucretia Mott and Susan B. Anthony. In her letters, Anthony sometimes addressed Dickinson as "Chickie Dickie". Benjamin F. Butler, a Civil War general and a politician, pursued her romantically. He remained her friend, a legal advisor, and source of money over many years. Unpublished correspondence from a woman named Ida appears to show at least one intimate episode with another woman during her life, referencing Dickinson "tempting [Ida] to kiss her sweet mouth," which historian Lillian Faderman included in her history of lesbian life in America.

In 1870, she was the wage-earner and head of the household of her mother, older sister Susan, and a servant. In 1883, she moved to West Pittston, Pennsylvania, to live with her sister. Over the next years, her health began to fail as she aged and due to many years of poverty. On May 12, 1889, her 95-year-old mother Mary died in West Pittston, Pennsylvania. She was said to have been an invalid for years and cared for by her daughters, writer Susan and lecturer Anna. Mary's only living son, Rev. John Dickinson, was a professor of Geology at the University of California at the time.

Dickinson began to exhibit signs of paranoia in 1891 and she was committed against her will to a mental hospital, the Danville State Hospital for the Insane, by her sister Susan Dickinson. She was transferred to a private hospital in Goshen, New York, under the care of Dr. Seward and with support of her friends, due at least in part to newspapers having reported false information about her care. Dickinson, who was taken to Danville in February 1891, stayed at the Interpines sanitarium and was giving lectures by late August that year. She filed suits against the newspapers who claimed she was insane and the people who had her committed. After protracted legal battles, she won the case of illegal kidnapping and three libel suits in 1898. She lost many supporters and friends due to her antagonistic behavior.

Sometime after she was released from Danville, she lived in Goshen, New York, with George and Sallie Ackley, and continued to do so for more than forty years. Dickinson and Sallie Ackley were lovers, according to correspondence between Dickinson and Sallie Ackley and interviews with George Ackley and his sisters. George also said she was a heavy drinker.

When Sallie died, she left $7,000 to Dickinson, with the understanding that upon her death, the remainder would be left to George. Dickinson died in 1932 of cerebral apoplexy. Since she did not leave a will, the remaining $6,000 inheritance went to her distant cousin, rather than to George. Dickinson is buried at Slate Hill Cemetery in Goshen, near George and Sallie's headstone.

Legacy and honors

 * The World War II Liberty Ship SS Anna Dickinson was named in her honor.

title: Anna Elizabeth Dickinson


text:
John Stapp

John Paul Stapp (July 11, 1910 – November 13, 1999) was an American career U.S. Air Force officer, flight surgeon, physician, biophysicist, and pioneer in studying the effects of acceleration forces on humans. He was a colleague and contemporary of Chuck Yeager, and became known as "the fastest man on earth". His work on Project Manhigh pioneered many developments for the US space program.

Early years
Born in Salvador de Bahia, Brazil, Stapp was the eldest of four sons of Reverend Charles Franklin Stapp and Mrs. Mary Louise Shannon, Baptist missionaries. He studied in Texas at Brownwood High School in Brownwood and San Marcos Baptist Academy in San Marcos.

In 1931, Stapp received a bachelor's degree from Baylor University in Waco, an MA from Baylor in 1932, a PhD in Biophysics from the University of Texas at Austin in 1940, and an MD from the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, in 1944. He interned for one year at St. Mary's Hospital in Duluth, Minnesota. Stapp was later awarded an honorary Doctor of Science from Baylor University.

Military career

Stapp entered the U.S. Army Air Forces on 5 October 1944 as a physician and qualified as a flight surgeon. On 10 August 1946, he was assigned to the Aero Medical Laboratory at Wright Field as a project officer and medical consultant in the Biophysics Branch and transferred to the U.S. Air Force when it became an independent service in September 1947. His first assignment included a series of flights testing various oxygen systems in unpressurized aircraft at 40,000 ft (12.2 km). One of the major problems with high-altitude flight was the danger of "the bends" or decompression sickness. Stapp's work resolved that problem as well as many others, which allowed the next generation of high-altitude aircraft and the HALO insertion techniques. He was assigned to the deceleration project in March 1947.

In 1967, the Air Force loaned Stapp to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to conduct auto-safety research. He retired from the U.S. Air Force in 1970 with the rank of Colonel.

Work on effects of acceleration
As early as 1945, service personnel realized the need for a comprehensive and controlled series of studies into the effects of deceleration on the human body. This led to fundamental concepts that could be applied to better safeguard aircraft occupants during a crash. The initial phase of the program, as set up by the Aero Medical Laboratory of the Wright Air Development Center, was to develop equipment and instrumentation. This was so aircraft crashes might be simulated, and to study the strength factors of seats and harnesses. Human tolerance to the deceleration encountered in simulated aircraft crashes could also be simulated.

The first run on the rocket sled took place on 30 April 1947 with ballast. The sled ran off the tracks. The first human run took place the following December. Instrumentation on all the early runs was in the developmental stage, and it was not until August 1948 that it was adequate to begin recording. By August 1948, sixteen human runs had completed, all in the backward-facing position. Forward-facing runs started in August 1949. Most of the earlier tests ran to compare the standard Air Force harnesses with a series of modified harnesses. This was to determine which type gave the best protection to the pilot.

By June 8, 1951, 74 human runs had been made on the decelerator, 19 with the subjects in the backward position, and 55 in the forward position. Stapp, one of the most frequent volunteers on the runs, sustained a fracture of his right wrist during the runs on two separate occasions, also broke ribs, lost fillings from his teeth and developed bleeding into his retinas that caused temporary vision loss; in one run he survived forces up to 38 g.

Stapp's research on the decelerator had profound implications for both civilian and military aviation. For instance, the backward-facing seat concept, which was known before, was given great impetus by the crash research program. It proved beyond a doubt that this position was the safest for aircraft passengers and required little harness support, and that a human can withstand much greater deceleration than in the forward position. As a result, many Military Air Transport Service (MATS) aircraft in USAF and carrier on-board delivery aircraft in USN were equipped or retrofitted with this type of seat. Commercial airlines were made aware of these findings, but still use forward-facing seats. The British Royal Air Force also installed it on many of their military transport aircraft.

As a result of Stapp's findings, the acceleration requirement for fighter seats was increased considerably up to 32 g (310 m/s²). His work showed that a pilot could walk away from crashes when properly protected by harnesses if the seat does not break loose.

The "side saddle" or sideways-facing harness was also developed by Stapp. The new triangular-shaped harness gave vastly increased protection to fully equipped paratroopers. It was made of nylon mesh webbing, fit snugly over the shoulder facing the forward part of the aircraft. It protected the wearer from the force of crash impacts, takeoffs and landing bumps. It withstood a crash force of approximately 8000 lbf of force and was developed to replace the old-fashioned lap belts, which gave inadequate protection to their wearers.

By riding the decelerator sled, in his 29th and last ride at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico, Stapp demonstrated that a human can withstand at least 46.2 g (in the forward position, with adequate harnessing). This is the highest known acceleration voluntarily encountered by a human, set on December 10, 1954. Stapp reached a speed of 632 mph, which broke the land speed record and made him the fastest man on Earth. Stapp believed that the tolerance of humans to acceleration had not yet been reached in tests. He believed it is much greater than thought possible. He said "I felt a sensation in the eyes, somewhat like the extraction of a molar without anesthetic," but his survival without any permanent injuries supported the development of further safety technologies including the ejection seat.

Also developed by Stapp as an added safety measure was an improved version of the currently used shoulder strap and lap belt. The new high-strength harness withstood 45.4 g (445 m/s²), compared to the 17 g (167 m/s²), which was the limit that could be tolerated with the old combination. Basically, the new pilot harness added an inverted "V" strap crossing the pilot's thighs added to the standard lap belt and shoulder straps. The leg and shoulder straps and the lap belt all fastened together at one point, and pressure was distributed evenly over the stronger body surfaces, rather than on the solar plexus, as was the case with the old harness.

Wind-blast experiments
Stapp also participated in wind-blast experiments, in which he flew in jet aircraft at high speeds to determine whether or not it was safe for a pilot to remain with his aircraft if the canopy should accidentally blow off. Stapp stayed with his aircraft at a speed of 570 mph with the canopy removed, and suffered no injurious effects from the wind blasts. Among these experiments was one of the first high-altitude skydives, executed by Stapp himself. He also supervised research programs in the field of human factors in escape from aircraft.

Stapp's law
Stapp was an inveterate collector of aphorisms and adages, kept a logbook of such, and the practice spread to his entire working group. He published a collection of these in 1992. Stapp is credited with being the popularizer, as well as the author of the final form of the principle known as Murphy's law, "Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong."

Stapp is credited with creating Stapp's Law (or Stapp's Ironic Paradox) during his work on the project. It states: "The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle."

Awards
In 1957, he was presented with the Gorgas Medal from the Association of Military Surgeons of the United States (AMSUS).

In 1973 Stapp was awarded the Franklin Institute's Elliott Cresson Medal.

In 1979 Stapp was inducted into the International Space Hall of Fame. The New Mexico Museum of Space History, which houses the International Space Hall of Fame, includes a John P. Stapp Air & Space Park which holds Sonic Wind No. 1, a rocket sled ridden by Stapp.

In 1985, Stapp was inducted into the National Aviation Hall of Fame for his work in aviation safety.

In 1991, Stapp was awarded the National Medal of Technology, "for his research on the effects of mechanical force on living tissues leading to safety developments in crash protection technology".

In 2012, 13 years after his death, Stapp was awarded the Air Force Space and Missile Pioneers award. The award recognizes individuals for their significant role in the history of Air Force space and missile programs.

Later life
In the years before his death, Stapp was president of the New Mexico Research Institute, headquartered in Alamogordo, New Mexico, as well as chairman of the annual Stapp Car Crash Conference. This event meets to study car crashes and determine ways to make cars safer. In addition, Stapp was honorary chairman of the Stapp Foundation, which is underwritten by General Motors and provides scholarships for automotive engineering students.

Stapp died peacefully at his home in Alamogordo at the age of 89.

Video

 * Col John Stapp Takes a Lot of G's – History Channel
 * "Space Men" at American Experience on PBS
 * "Space Men" at American Experience on PBS

title: John Stapp


text:
Talk:Paul Erdős

Jewish
User:D.Lazard reverted my edit, saying "Unsourced religion (the article says that he was atheist)". When I said that both his parents were Jewish according this article he changed his argument saying now that "Asserting that someone with jewish parents is necessarily jewish is racism". I say there is a whole Category:Jewish atheists and Jewishness is a nationality as well as religion and that it's strange to hide the fact that Erdos was Jewish. Farthermore, this source says that he was "forced to leave Hungary because he was Jewish". By the way, he was also buried in the Jewish cemetery in Budapest. How more Jewish can you be? I'd like having more opinions about that. עמירם פאל (talk) 11:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

 * Please don't be ridiculous: anyone who wants to know his religion can find it discussed, and anyone who wants to know his parentage or ancestry can also find it discussed. Both are given appropriate weight in the biography.  --JBL (talk) 11:43, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Edit: actually I don't care about the category at all; given the totally absurd content of your comment here I assumed you were trying to add it to the lead. --JBL (talk) 11:45, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * JBL, sorry, but I didn't quite understand, does that mean you're for or against adding the Category:Jewish Hungarian mathematicians to this article? עמירם פאל (talk) 11:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:EGRS says explicitly that a categorization such as Category:Jewish Hungarian mathematicians must be avoided as "a cross-section of a topic with an ethnicity, gender, religion, or sexual orientation". Moreover WP:NONDEF excludes also this categorization. See also WP:OCEGRS and Categories for discussion/Log/2007 May 14. So Category:Jewish Hungarian mathematicians goes against many standard Wikipedia guidelines. D.Lazard (talk) 13:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry. To clarify: I have no opinion about the category.  (Generally, I find the questions of categorization on Wikipedia arcane and tedious, so I don't care to involve myself in them much.  Certainly it is true that Erdos was of Jewish ethnicity, Hungarian nationality, and was a mathematician.) --JBL (talk) 02:17, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Drugs
Surprised there is zero on his amphetamine drug abuse which was central to his being so prolific. 2A00:23C7:F486:A00:B56D:F4E1:799F:4221 (talk) 13:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

 * This is covered in three sentences in the section "Personality". --JBL (talk) 14:41, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Why no mention of the Erdos-Bacon number?
It's a little lighthearted, perhaps fun-loving powers that be consider if frivolous, but at the point that both have their own Wikis it seems like it would be worth a sentence.96.240.128.124 (talk) 05:34, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It's mentioned at Erdős number. There are articles for Bacon number and Erdős–Bacon number. At one time there was an article Erdos-Bacon-Sabbath number, but it was deleted by consensus as being not notable. Erdos-Bacon number has been proposed for deletion several times but has survived. Sundayclose (talk) 14:58, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Sexism?
An editor objected to including, under Erdos's vocabulary: 'Women were "bosses" who "captured" men as "slaves" by marrying them. Divorced men were "liberated".' I think this should stay in. First of all, it's true. Second, lots of folks of his era were sexist, and removing sexist quotes won't help that. Finally, it's a comment on marital dynamics, not math, so there is no reason to assume his is an expert opinion.

Erdos did not appear to be sexist where it counted to him, which is with women in mathematics. Dorothy Stone said: "When I came to the Institute for Advanced Study, as a shy post-graduate student, I expected to be ignored, and that everyone would assume that I had been admitted as a pretty face. My graduate education had been scanty — my advisor had been ill while I was developing my thesis. So I persisted in staying quiet, not wanting to breathe a word about any mathematics I was doing. Paul Erdos absolutely insisted on bringing me out, pulling from me to the work I had done, and discussing it with me. When I had new results, he (and Kakutani) went around to the other mathematicians there..." and among his close collaborators was Vera T. Sós.

Other opinions are of course welcome. LouScheffer (talk) 02:45, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The issue is this edit. The problem is that in today's culture, such words mark the speaker as a misogynistic buffoon. Unless the source asserts that Erdős was a misogynistic buffoon, it is cherry-picking WP:SYNTH to include that quote which might have been what was an acceptable joke at that time but which now conveys a strong message. Wikipedia is not the place to record quotes to "let the reader decide". Johnuniq (talk) 03:40, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree this comment is now considered misogynistic.  However, this quote is not cherry-picking - many other sources about Erdos's vocabulary include this.  See this, for example or this.  And I think it is correct to "let the reader decide".  Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - it is not our place to decide which side of a person to present.  LouScheffer (talk) 12:44, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

In an attempt to be more balanced while not being revisionist, I included a reference to his support and encouragement of women mathematicians. LouScheffer (talk) 13:47, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

 * ... in a way that left the section incoherent; I have reverted. JBL (talk) 17:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

 * What is your suggested course of action? LouScheffer (talk) 22:13, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I am content with the status quo, personally -- the article content seems to appropriately reflect reliable sources. JBL (talk) 20:19, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Institute for Advanced Study
> He was living in America and working at the Princeton Institute for Advanced Study at the time.

While the IAS is in Princeton, New Jersey, it is not part of Princeton University. 2600:1700:5438:E10:8E4E:6CF:C39C:4285 (talk) 18:00, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Paul Erdős