text:
Ansonia, Connecticut

Ansonia is a city in New Haven County, Connecticut, United States. Located on the Naugatuck River, it is immediately north of Derby, and about 12 mi northwest of New Haven. The city is part of the Naugatuck Valley Planning Region. The population was 18,918 at the time of the 2020 census. The ZIP code for Ansonia is 06401. The city is served by the Metro-North Railroad. Ansonia Station is a stop on the railroad passenger commuter service's Waterbury Branch connecting to New York's Grand Central Terminal. Ansonia also is served by the Connecticut Transit bus carrier. Connecticut Route 8 serves Ansonia (Northbound, Exit 18; Southbound, Exit 19).

Ansonia was founded in 1844 by merchant and philanthropist Anson Green Phelps. Also referred to as "The Copper City", is recognized for its history of heavy machine manufacturing industry in the lower Naugatuck Valley. Production included copper, brass, rubber and plastics processing, molding and tubing, iron castings, sheet metal, electric, automatic screw machine, textiles, and foundry products. The well-known Ansonia Clock Company was founded here in 1851.

Ansonia is the birthplace of David Humphreys, a diplomat and colonel in the American Revolutionary War.

History
The area along the Naugatuck River, comprising the present Elm Street section of Ansonia and Derby Avenue section of Derby, was first settled by English colonists in 1652; it was originally a part of the township of Derby. Early settlers developed subsistence farming, and used the river for sawmills and gristmills.

In 1844, Anson Green Phelps (1781–1853), a merchant and philanthropist, wanted to expand the old borough of Birmingham (the present downtown of the city of Derby) to the north along the west side of the Naugatuck River to enable industrial development. Unable to purchase the land from its owner, in 1844 Phelps acquired land along the east side of the river; today this is Ansonia's downtown section. A canal was dug for river power to drive the factories and businesses in the new industrial village, which Phelps named "Ansonia". He wanted to name the industrial village as "Phelpsville", but learned there was another village in the region by that name. As suggested by a friend, Phelps used his first name as a root instead, resulting in "Ansonia".

As industry developed, soon Ansonia became the most populous area of Derby, boasting many factories. The state chartered Ansonia as a borough of Derby in 1864 and amended it in 1871, granting full municipal privileges. In 1888, a petition was circulated in the borough of Ansonia for the purpose of becoming a separate township from Derby. In 1889 the State General Assembly granted the separation, constituting the Borough, Hilltop, West Ansonia, and Elm Street areas as a separate town known as Ansonia. This was the 168th township in the state of Connecticut. In 1893, Ansonia was incorporated as a city, consolidating with the coterminous Town and the old borough.

By the end of the 19th century, the city had manufacturers of heavy machinery, electric supplies, brass and copper products, and silk goods. Ansonia, Derby, Shelton, Seymour, and Beacon Falls formed one of the most important industrial communities in the state.

Invention of America's first bicycle
In 1866, while residing in Ansonia, inventor Pierre Lallement, a native of Pont-a-Mousson, France, submitted a patent application for the first pedaled (rotary crank mechanism) bicycle.

20th century to present

Ansonia suffered grievous damage in the Flood of 1955 on August 19, when the Naugatuck River flooded due to heavy rain from Hurricane Diane. Submerging the land along the river, the flood destroyed many houses and businesses. The high river waters swept away Maple Street Bridge, one of two bridges linking the east and west sides of Ansonia. After the inundation, the authorities erected a flood wall along the east bank of the river to protect the city's factories and Main Street. On the west bank, federal public housing was built to replace blocks of destroyed homes and businesses on Broad Street, now known as Olson Drive.

In the decades following the flood and suburbanization, Ansonia's Main Street fell into decline as retail shoppers decamped to the Ansonia Mall at its far end. (This was replaced with the Ansonia Shopping Center in the 90's) Later other malls attracted shoppers to nearby Milford, Trumbull, and Waterbury. Since the late 20th century, Main Street has been enlivened by the opening of several antique stores, a wine bar, a coffee shop, a Polish delicatessen, and other retail businesses.

For years, Ansonia had a daily newspaper, the "Evening Sentinel", that enjoyed a wide readership throughout the Naugatuck Valley. However, the parent company of the Connecticut Post bought the Sentinel in the 1980s and quickly closed it, despite their promises not to do so. Allegedly, the "Post" wanted to consolidate their position as the region's main newspaper. To provide an alternative, a non-profit, online-only news site, named The Valley Independent Sentinel in honor of the historic paper, has been organized and launched June 22, 2009.

In the early morning hours of November 6, 1960, Senator John F. Kennedy's presidential campaign motorcade stopped on its way to Waterbury for the candidate to make an appearance and brief address in front of City Hall. He drew thousands to downtown, many with transistor radios tuned to live reports on WADS of Senator Kennedy's progress towards Ansonia. President Kennedy returned to Ansonia on October 17, 1962, while on his way to Waterbury, but did not stop here.

President George H. W. Bush paid a visit to Ansonia by helicopter during the 1992 presidential election campaign. He was running far behind schedule due to severe weather damage to a large area of New Jersey. He arrived late and delivered a truncated speech, causing many residents in this heavily Democratic area to feel he had slighted their city.

In 2000, the Lower Naugatuck Valley, which includes Ansonia, was named an "All America City" by the National Civic League.

Rubber plant fire
In May 2001, a wind-driven fire destroyed the Latex Foam Company building, a very large rubber plant along the Naugatuck River in downtown Ansonia. The fire gutted the 284000 sqft building, which was the workplace of 250 people. Firefighters from multiple counties fought the fire tirelessly for five days. Lingering clouds of foul-smelling smoke spread over the city and nearby communities, and chemical runoff produced by the fire unbalanced the ecosystem of the nearby river. The aforementioned Target store was constructed on the empty lot, opening in July 2007. Following the fire, the Latex Foam Company purchased a vacant plant off Route 110 in nearby Shelton and resumed production.

Geography
According to the United States Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 16.0 sqkm, of which 15.6 sqkm is land and 0.4 sqkm, or 2.72%, is water. The city is bisected by the Naugatuck River and spreads out from the river's banks up the hills—some quite steep—of the river valley. On the west side of the river, the city abuts Derby and Seymour along Silver Hill. On the east side, the city's Hilltop neighborhood meets Woodbridge.

The land along the river is mostly given over to factory sites (both operational and defunct), with an area of wooded land on the west bank close to the city's northern boundary that belongs to the American Brass Company. In the early 1990s, this site was proposed by Texas company American Ref-Fuel for a solid waste-to-electric energy cogeneration plant. The proposal was controversial, and protests by residents resulted in its defeat.

Residential housing occupies most of the land in Ansonia, chiefly one- or two-family houses on plots of a 1/4 acre up to an acre. Larger houses on larger plots are found in the Hilltop neighborhood. The Ansonia Nature Center on Hilltop preserves some open fields and woodlands.

An airport once operated on Hilltop on a grass field, at the eastern edge of the city. During the Cold War, the United States military deployed Nike missiles in silos at the airport. Since the military released the airport grounds for other uses, developers have built residential housing there. The Nike base is now adapted as a horse farm with riding stables; few reminders of its former operations remain.

Neighborhoods
Downtown – The original industrial village and later borough of Ansonia. Includes the area stretching between the factories at the north side of down town to the newer shopping plazas on the south side of downtown (Big Y, Target, etc.)

Library District – The neighborhood surrounding the Ansonia Library. Just east of downtown on top of the cliff. Includes the residential neighborhood between State Street and Beaver Street including South Cliff Street, North Cliff Street, Mott Street and Cottage Avenue. Contains mostly single-family historic Queen Anne Victorian homes. While now predominantly middle class, this area was settled early in Ansonia's history and was once home to many of the wealthy industrial families of Ansonia.

North End – The area comprising the North Main Street corridor stretching from Downtown to the Seymour town line.

Reservoir – The area comprises the area of the Beaver, North Prospect, and Prospect Street corridors. It is along the Quillinan Reservoir.

Derby Hill – The area surrounding the Elm Street and Jewett Street area on the east side. Elm Street is also the town's historic district and was part of the original 1654 settlement of Derby. The name of this section of the town is sometimes disputed.

Hilltop – The area of the city that comprises the area of Prindle Avenue, Pulaski Highway and Ford Street corridors. This section was mainly farm land in the early days of the town. After World War II, it was developed as the largest residential area of the city.

West Ansonia – The residential village that comprised the west side of the Naugatuck River across from Ansonia (downtown). The original West Ansonia neighborhood consisted of High, Maple, and Jersey streets (the latter somewhat redirected and now known as 'Olson Drive'), and later its name was synonymous with the entire present west side of the city.

Windy Hill – A section of West Ansonia centered around Murray, May, and Francis street. This area is considered to encompass the territory from the Derby town line to Grove Street.

Silver Hill – The section of West Ansonia along the Silver Hill Road corridor. Parts of this section are shared with Derby.

Climate
The climate in this area is characterized by warm to hot, humid summers and generally cool to cold winters. According to the Köppen Climate Classification system, Ansonia has a humid continental climate, abbreviated "Dfa" on climate maps. Alternatively, it can be classified as humid subtropical ("Cfa") depending on which temperature isotherm for January is used.

Demographics
As of the 2010 census, the population of Ansonia was 19,249. The racial composition of the population was 77.6% white, 11.6% black or African American, 0.3% Native American, 1.9% Asian, 5.3% reporting some other race and 3.2% from two or more race. 16.7% of the population was Hispanic or Latino of any race.

As of the census of 2000, there were 18,554 people, 7,507 households, and 4,977 families residing in the city. The population density was 3,076.3 PD/sqmi. There were 7,937 housing units at an average density of 1,316.0 /sqmi. The racial makeup of the city was 85.52% White, 8.42% Black or African American, 0.34% Native American, 1.13% Asian, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 2.22% from other races, and 2.37% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 7.42% of the population.

There were 7,507 households, out of which 31.4% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 46.1% were married couples living together, 15.6% had a female householder with no husband present, and 33.7% were non-families. 28.5% of all households were made up of individuals, and 12.3% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.46 and the average family size was 3.03.

In the city, the population was spread out, with 24.2% under the age of 18, 8.2% from 18 to 24, 31.5% from 25 to 44, 20.7% from 45 to 64, and 15.5% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 37 years. For every 100 females, there were 90.6 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 86.9 males.

The median income for a household in the city was $43,026, and the median income for a family was $53,718. Males had a median income of $30,747 versus $28,517 for females. The per capita income for the city was $20,504. About 6.2% of families and 7.6% of the population were below the poverty line, including 12.3% of those under age 18 and 5.3% of those age 65 or over.

Economy
Pulitzer Prize-winning author Theodore H. White referred to the Naugatuck Valley "as the seedbed of Yankee ingenuity" in his work The Making of the President, 1960. The city hosted the world headquarters of the Farrel Corporation, a leading producer of plastics and rubber processing equipment including the Banbury International Mixer. Ansonia Copper & Brass, which supplied metal rod, wire and tube products to manufacturers of finished commercial products, also was located in the city.

The Ansonia Clock Company started manufacturing Ansonia clocks in the city in 1851. The company moved to Brooklyn, New York in 1878 but retained its home city's name.

Since the late 20th century, much of the heavy industry has moved out, with jobs going overseas. The former factories sat vacant. In the late 1980s, the city began development of the Fountain Lake Commerce Park in the northwest border.

As a result of economic growth and plentiful employment in southwestern Connecticut, driven by corporate relocations from the New York City and Fairfield County metropolitan areas to nearby towns, Ansonia's housing market improved in the early 2000s.

Mayors
Total number of mayors:

 * Democrats: 19 (66%)
 * Republicans: 10 (34%)

Total number of years:

 * Democrats: 95 (75%)
 * Republicans: 32 (25%)

Superlatives:

 * Longest-serving Democrat: James DellaVolpe, 14 years (1999–2013)
 * Longest-serving Republican: David S. Cassetti, years (2013–present)

Transportation
Ansonia is a station stop on the Waterbury Branch of the Metropolitan Transit Authority's Metro-North Railroad system. Trains on the Waterbury Branch run from Waterbury in the north to Bridgeport in the south, allowing Ansonia residents access to New York City via transfer to the main line at Bridgeport. Travel time from Ansonia to Grand Central Terminal in New York City is approximately two hours.

Bus
Ansonia is also served by buses of the 255 route of Connecticut Transit New Haven, connecting the city to New Haven.

Public safety
Ansonia is protected by three municipal public safety agencies. It operates an Office of Emergency Management-based out of City Hall and the A.R.M.S building on West Main Street.

Police department
The Ansonia Police Department was founded around 1880 when Ansonia was a borough in the Town of Derby and Daniel Hayes was appointed the first police chief of the department. Chief Hayes died in 1882 after he succumbed to his injuries day after when he was shot while making an arrest.

The Police Department has 42 sworn officers and 12 civilian personnel. The Police Department is split between the patrol and detective divisions. The Police Department headquarters is located in the renovated former headquarters of the Farrel Corporation on Main Street.

Landmarks

In addition to the Farrel Corporation and Ansonia Copper & Brass facilities along the banks of the Naugatuck River in the center of the city, Ansonia's landmarks include its public library (Ansonia Library), the Anna Sewell Memorial Fountain (honoring the author of "Black Beauty"), in front of the Library YMCA, National Guard Armory and many Victorian and Queen Anne houses. The prominent Ansonia Opera House is the oldest opera house in Connecticut built in 1870.

Ansonia is noted for its many churches and places of worship, including those forming five Catholic parishes, each historically associated with a particular ethnic group: Saint Joseph (Polish), Holy Rosary (Italian), Saint Anthony (Lithuanian; now combined with Holy Rosary), Our Lady of the Assumption (Irish), and Saints Peter and Paul (Ukrainian). There are also Congregationalist, Methodist, Episcopal, African Methodist Episcopal, Baptist, Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Pentecostal and other Christian denominations, as well as a Buddhist temple.

In the mid-1930s, after its original high school that was located on Prospect Street (now a City park) burned down, a new one was built on Howard Avenue. This is notable in that the building was designed by William Lescaze, one of the pioneers of modernism in American architecture. When it opened in 1936, it was one of the first "modern" high school buildings in the country. The former high school became Ansonia Middle School in 1999 when a new Ansonia High School was built at 20 Pulaski Highway in the Hilltop section of the city.

Notable people

 * Ralph Beardsley (1891–1920), racing driver
 * Tom Condon, attorney, National Football League agent, and former professional football player, Kansas City Chiefs and New England Patriots
 * John Cooke (1937–2005), gold medal in rowing, 1956 Summer Olympics
 * William J. Cousins (1924–2013), sociologist
 * Joseph P. Flynn, chief judge, Connecticut Appellate Court
 * AR Fox, professional wrestler
 * Samuel B. Gould (1910–1997), educator and innovator
 * Lorenzo Greene (1899–1998), historian, African-American history pioneer, and the first African-American graduate of Ansonia High School
 * Caitlin Hale (born 1991), actress, singer, and writer
 * David Humphreys (1752–1818), George Washington's aide-de-camp, diplomat, legislator, and the nation's first presidential speechwriter
 * Vincent R. Impellitteri (1900–1987), Mayor of New York City from 1950 to 1953
 * General Samuel Jaskilka (1919–2012), former assistant commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps
 * Loosey LaDuca, drag queen
 * Pierre Lallement (1843–1891), inventor of the first pedaled rotary crank mechanism bicycle
 * Sandy Osiecki, professional player
 * Anson Greene Phelps (1781–1853), founder of Phelps, Dodge mining and copper company, and Ansonia's founder
 * Nick Pietrosante (1937–1988), former professional football player, Cleveland Browns and Detroit Lions, and former NFL Rookie of the Year
 * Pincus "Pinky" Silverberg (1904–1964), boxer and 1927 flyweight world champion
 * Bob Skoronski, former professional football player, Green Bay Packers and member of Super Bowl I and Super Bowl II championship teams
 * Al Tinney (1921–2002), jazz pianist
 * Reuben Henry Tucker III (1911–1970), U.S. Army colonel during World War II referenced in Cornelius Ryan's A Bridge Too Far

On the National Register of Historic Places

 * Ansonia Library – 53 South Cliff St. (added September 23, 1985)
 * Gen. David Humphreys House – 37 Elm St. (added April 17, 1972)
 * Richard Mansfield House – 35 Jewett St. (added April 11, 1971)
 * Upper Main Street Historic District (Ansonia, Connecticut) – 36–100, 85–117 Main St. (added 1982), which includes the Ansonia Opera House (built 1870)
 * United States Post Office–Ansonia Main – 237 Main St. (added 1985)

title: Ansonia, Connecticut


text:
Talk:A Canticle for Leibowitz

It has been compared favorably with the works of Evelyn Waugh
Oh, dear. So what? So 'it has been'. By whom? And why is their opinion important? And why is Waugh important? And how he is even remotely relevant to a dystopic novel? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.94.86 (talk) 22:28, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

 * Agreed, that is a remarkably strange comparison. CfL is not remotely a satirical social comedy, even if it contains a few pages of wry humor. 104.6.64.197 (talk) 17:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh wow! I so agree with the first sentence and so totally disagree with the second. You might not realize that the Catholic Church still exists in our society and arguably was an even greater presence in America in 1959 (when mass was still spoken in Latin around the world). Did you miss that part? Such as the comparison of a shopping list to a holy relic? The canonization of a saint?(that's still going on, too!) and the Catholic "saint's" name being categorically Jewish? CfL is deeply social satire, it's just social satire of a thousand year-old institution rather than contemporary British class structure. In comparison, Waugh wrote books with "a few pages of wry humor", while CfL defines "satirical social commentary"! Sheesh! Cuvtixo (talk) 19:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Discussion of other languages used in the book?
I think a fair number of people will come to this article looking for assistance with the Latin/Hebrew/German in the book. How much (if any) of that should be covered here? Can anybody take a stab at

for example? Thanks,
 * Tarheelcoxn 09:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

 * It says "Shema Yisrael, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai Echad" which means "Hear, O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One." Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 05:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Ergo, the single most famous sentence in Judaism.132.181.160.42 (talk) 04:44, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

 * Interesting rendition of the Name, though. A daled and a slashed line? 192.12.88.7 (talk) 02:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Not Your Father's Shemah
One would think so (see above). I don't have my copy here, but the Hebrew graphic does not quite say SHEMA YISROEL ADONAI ELOHEINU ADONAI ECHOD.

It says SEMAH [sin for shin] YISDOEL [daleth for resh] then the daleth+apostrophe ["chupchik"] in lieu of the usual letters for the ineffable name (said, when said, as the circumlocution "adonai" or "adonoi," "lord" ("adon")--I think, "their lord" or to the orthodox, except during legal prayer, "adeshem," not unrelated to "hashem," "the name"), which I don't know to comment on; then ELOKAINU, which would be the orthodox circumlocution for "eloheinu," "our God" ["el," god, as in beth-el, etc.]; then the daleth+chupchik again for the ineffable name/adonai, then ESOD [sof for ches].

the daleth+apostrophe is a standard way of referring to the ineffable name in writing, as is a hey+apostrophe. Mezukak (talk) 23:19, 5 June 2017 (UTC)mezukak 6/5/17

The mistaken letters, sin for shin, daleth for resh, and sof for ches are copying "mistakes," "typos"; the wrong letters resemble the right ones that they replace.

The qof (had to look up) for the heh (k for h) in "elokeinu" is not a "typo" but a transcription of someone saying the common circumlocution in a recitation outside of prayer; the transcriber misses the point or has some other reason that I can't fathom. The orthodox don't write "God" in magazine articles or correspondence; they write "G-d." Elokeinu with a quf is also a standard way of writing; see previous comment--Mezukak (talk) 23:19, 5 June 2017 (UTC)mezukak 6/5/17

The Brothers' of St. Leibowitz mission is to preserve sacred documents, not unlike Torah scribes, but they have to work with what they have; the story is about the destruction of culture and its loss for lack of maintenance. In my day, you would get xerographic copies unto the tenth generation, speckled and decayed; in this generation (2009), the copying machines are digital perfectionists, but we get viral emails unto the hundredth, yea ten-thousandth generation, whose intellectual content is speckled and decayed. Stuart Filler (talk) 12:35, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

 * Um, the Hebrew is written by the Wandering (or Old) Jew, not the Brothers of St. Leibowitz. Then again, Hebrew letters may themselves change, as they have. I notice the "tav" in the word representing "echad"; that's supposed to be a "heh" (as it is in the 1997 edition of A Canticle for Leibowitz) That edition also gets the "resh" in Yisrael right. 192.12.88.7 (talk) 02:33, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, exactly. which makes it purposefully not an Orthodox Jewish prayer, rather than a mistake by the monks of Saint Leibowitz. Because it doesn't quite fit in either tradition, but does bring across the essential idea in a "secular" manner. Cuvtixo (talk) 20:51, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

This is all insightful, although it's a shame it is put in a separate section from the comments above. The sentence echoes the start of the Hebrew Decalogue("ten words"), which was turned by Christians into the first commandment of the Ten Commandments by adding "thou shalt not put other gods before me"(and various other similar translations). In the Jewish tradition it is not a commandment, rather just a straightforward truth. Which brings us up to The Name, because this variation of the Tetragrammaton here makes it unacceptable as a prayer in Orthodox Judaism(I'm not sure about "heh" and "resh", if they are just real typos in some texts). It therefore neither fits into Catholic nor Jewish orthodoxy, but it is a theological statement, a non-traditional one. In other words I think it is very purposefully ambiguous, ultimately requiring interpretation of the reader Cuvtixo (talk) 20:51, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Rachel alive?
In the Analysis section, it talks about the Rachel interaction with Zerchi possibly being in his mind. I think that the article needs to note the fact that Brother Joshua thought he saw Rachel smile (or was it nod?) well before this incident. Not sure where it fits in, though.

 * It's sad that any analysis section has been deleted, along with the very major element of Rachel. This is a great example of that quote: "Wikipedia isn't attempting to get better; it's attempting to get smaller.  The ultimate goal is to make it a site that nobody ever has to visit because all it will contain are things everybody already knows."  68.83.72.162 (talk) 02:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Translations
I have seen the sequel even translated in bookshops. It should be mentioned that it was continued or published. -- Error 02:22 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * Done. If you know who finished it, please add this info to the article.

Oh, Christ, that's a future tense. Gah! Meelar 05:28, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Black comedy
Ahoy everyone I silently dropped the "black comedy" link, on the grounds that I thought that calling ACfL a "black comedy" was such a bizarre statement that it had been made in error. I see it's been restored, which means that someone disagreed.

In support of my position, I'd like to cite the blurb text on my copy, which calls ACfL "shocking", "powerful", and "striking", with nary a word about humor, black or otherwise. I think that ACfL is a very important work in the canon of SF--one, I think, of the very first post-apocalyptic novels--but that it is not funny nor intended to be funny.

What do you all think? Nightsky 11:11, 10 May 2004

 * It's not a ha-ha comedy, but there is a lot of humor in Canticle. E.g. the shopping list as sacred relic, the circuit diagram of "doohickii, squiggles, quids, laminulae, and thingumbob", the Poet, the Abominable Autoscribe, etc.
 * "Their philosophers demonstrated by unaided reason alone that the Supreme Cathartes aura regnans had created the world especially for buzzards. They worshipped him with hearty appetites for many centuries."
 * --wwoods 18:28, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Nightsky, have you read the book? It *is* a dark comedy - think Dr. Strangelove. (yes, several parts did make me laugh out loud :]). On the back of my copy, the review from the Chicago Tribune describes it as "richly comic". On Amazon, several other top reviewers said the same thing. →Raul654 19:49, May 10, 2004 (UTC)

 * Not all works that contains comic elements are comedies. 68.83.72.162 (talk) 02:36, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

 * From memory, "Forgive me Father, I ate a lizard". I laughed out loud. HairyWombat 01:49, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

 * I am currently re-reading this, last when it was 1st published. I am only 80 pages in and have laughed out loud a number of times at the obvious humor and the sarcasm. It is funny and all the humor is not dark.

Kernos (talk) 16:23, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

The case for canonization
"Eventually, approximately a decade after the discovery of the shelter, Leibowitz is canonized, based mostly on the evidence discovered in the shelter."
 * I disagree about the "based mostly". The positive case for sainthood was based on Leibowitz's post-conversion career as a knowledge-saver (and post-mortem career as a miracle-worker). The evidence of the shelter addressed an argument that he hadn't adequately established that his wife was dead before taking holy orders. The evidence didn't actually add anything to what was known about what he knew and what he did, but at least it showed reasonably convincingly that his wife had died in the war.
 * --wwoods 06:41, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Right, but his candidacy would not have gone forward without the evidence discovered there. →Raul654 06:44, Jun 8, 2004 (UTC)

 * Sure it would. The case for canonization had gotten stuck and buried in the files, but apparently all the opposition had was a lame-ass argument about Mrs. Leibowitz. The discovery of the shelter gave the Leibowitzians a way of getting the hierarchy to take some action on the case, by presenting it with something that had to be investigated immediately. Inertia works both ways -- having gotten the case reactivated, they could keep it moving forward to a final decision. But sooner or later that would have happened, with, presumably the same result.

 * The actual evidence didn't figure in the decision. The first advocate let go of "miracle number seven" without much regret, and the second dismissed it as "so trivial it's silly".
 * --wwoods 22:34, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * I interpreted the entire episode as satirical commentary on how Catholic saints often seem to be canonized for political reasons rather than from reasons given to the public. Trying to read into what really the decision was based on would be besides the point. It's true that the candidacy might not have gone forward without the discovery, not because it was convincing evidence, but because it happened at a time when the Pope saw it to be politically advantageous to go forward with the canonization. I mean, yes it might have happened sooner or later, but I think it was equally likely it would not have happened until whatever Pope was in position at the time saw it as advantageous. The reasons for going forward were just as lame as the argument against Cuvtixo (talk) 00:05, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

"Eventually, approximately a decade after the discovery of the shelter, Leibowitz is canonized, based mostly on the evidence discovered in the shelter." - this could only have been written by someone who didn't read the book. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.94.86 (talk) 22:32, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Black comedy reprise
I read the article and was also struck by "dark comedy" as being inappropriate -- but obviously it's been discussed here. I have inserted a proposed compromise, that acknowledges the book's dark comedy while not confining it to that genre (I would argue that much of the final third, especially the interactions of the abbot with Mrs. Grales and the woman who is eventually euthanized, is far too serious for it to have been intended as satire or comedy by Miller). I think dark comedy is appropriate in describing many scenes in the book, but saying it is a dark comedy is an inadequate description of the book. If my compromise is insufficient, can we agree on another wording that at least removes the bald assertion that the novel fits perfectly into that category? Jwrosenzweig 19:13, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I think your edit is perfect. I've read the book several times over the years, beginning 40 years ago, I suppose, and although it has some *moments* of dark comedy in it, it certainly was not conceived as such, ie, an Evelyn Waugh or Thomas Pynchon-type book.  I was bothered by this term in the introduction a couple of weeks ago when I read it but was too lazy to try to come up with the perfect edit for it.  You've done a great job.Hayford Peirce 19:28, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * In general, I like the changes to the intro, but not some of the phrasing. I have reworked it, both for phrasing and to add a much-needed plot information (setting/location). →Raul654 19:43, Jul 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Actually, Raul, the phrasing you object to has been there a while -- you didn't change anything I'd added. :-) I prefer your intro to the one left after my edit, of course: it's a much nicer structure.  Thanks for taking the time to put it in tip-top shape. Jwrosenzweig 22:05, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I've responded to earlier comments that I think this deeply satirical, but I'd also like to explain "dark comedy", because I don't think any of the 2004 editors here had really considered what or why an American Catholic author would write this in 1959(date of publication). Firstly, Duck and Cover was still being taught in American schools and right wing demagogues were talking about full-scale nuclear war being winnable. The general public was generally unaware that the "hydrogen bombs", from as early as 1952, produced the energy equivalent of about 10 megatons — or 10 million tons of TNT compared to 16 kilotons(16,000 tons) of Little Boy on Hiroshima. Shortly after publication of ACfL, Soviet Union in 1961 dropped the Tsar bomb which created a 50 megaton explosion — nearly 1,500 times more powerful than the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. So, I think that pretty "dark", from a scientifically literate writer, and not simply *moments* of dark comedy. As far as satire, firstly the title itself juxtaposes a term for a very Christian liturgical psalm-like song, a Canticle, with a typically Jewish name, "Leibowitz". The contrast is absurd if not outright humorous, without denigrating either. Also the book was published ten years before Vatican II, so that all Catholic masses would be spoken in Latin, and the majority of American Catholics would listen and repeat phrases and prayers in Latin with little comprehension. The misunderstanding of liturgy was a contemporary problem, not just an issue for Catholic monks of medieval times, nor just abstract speculation of what clergy might face 600 years after a nuclear apocalypse. As Miller was an American Catholic convert, I believe he was being satirical, as misinterpretations and misunderstandings were an everyday part of his faith. Also the Fact that Leibowitz had to give up looking for his wife, Emily, who dies while being kept from the interior of a fallout shelter, which collapses in a cave-in: pretty f'n darkly humourous, no? I guess in the 21st century, that the collapse of civilization after nuclear war is common sense, the distance of old Catholic tradition from American life, etc, makes this seem not so dark and not satirical. But this was published in 1959 America, not the 21st century. Cuvtixo (talk) 02:10, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Quotation duplicate?
One of the quotations includes this line: "Sending at least three Bishops, at least." Is the duplication in the original, or did it get added when the quotation was imported to the article? My copy of the book isnt' readily accessible so I can't volunteer to check it. JamesMLane 07:46, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The Abbey was not in Utah.
Brother Francis was from Utah, but that actually implies that the Abbey is not. Other points about the location, it's within striking distance of Denver, which puts it east of the Rocky Mountains (not Utah), and close enough to the plains that the nomads aren't travelling through other individuals territories much. My suspicion is that it’s actually near Albuquerque, but somewhere in New Mexico is probably all we can definitively say.

 * The map in St. Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman, I believe, clearly places the monastary in Utah. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 19:14, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

 * This is incorrect. The map places it just west of the Rio Grande, in northern New Mexico.Minguo 04:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

 * The textual clues in the book seem to indicate that it is near somewhere like Los Alamos or White Sands, and that it is near a Junction of two major highways one of which would eventually (maybe via another highway) take you to Salt Lake City, but not on what would be considered a straight line. IIRC, the book made a comment along the lines that for some reason the route was the easiest way to get to Salt Lake City. Plbogen (talk) 04:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

 * The abbey is clearly in New Mexico. It's on a major ancient highway leading from El Paso north toward Utah, and the third book indicates that it's within audible distance of a missile range -- to all appearances, a revival of the White Sands Proving Ground. The implication is that it's not far from Las Cruces. RandomCritic (talk) 20:47, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

White Sands has nada to do with it. This is 1000s of years later. However, the geography clearly places it in NM. Anyone who places it in UT hasn't read the book. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.94.86 (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

 * firstly, the first part of the first book places it 600 years after the nuclear armageddon, not thousands of years (good grief, you accuse others of not reading the book?) Also I think Miller also wants to point out that the previous civilization was so thoroughly wiped out that geography in relation to those annihilated cities is moot. Perhaps with the exception that Leibowitz and his wife Emily were completely separated and died with no knowledge of what happened to each other. In other words, the geography is purposefully left vague. Cuvtixo (talk) 21:08, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Euthanasia
"The third section, Fiat Voluntas Tua, takes a strong stance against euthanasia (assisted suicide)" - is this really true? The main character (the abbot) certainly does, but the book itself seems to be rather objective.

 * I think you can tell that the author himself is against euthanasia, as the abbot wins the intellectual debate with the girl. She only does the act because of the police officer's intervention. Lord Rama 04:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

 * He did not win anything -- he bullies the poor girl to get his way. 134.161.227.84 (talk) 21:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Indeed. She clearly wanted to get out of the car repeatedly, and it was only when the police stopped the abbot from preventing her from getting out that she was allowed to. From the writing, it seemed like the author was *for* euthanasia, as he did not present any strong arguments against it, and many arguments for it -- and then used the one single character that was not only unlikable, but actually detestable to present the anti-euthanasia case. 67.212.105.36 (talk) 03:45, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I think you miss the point either way by calling Miller pro-euthanasia or anti-eutanasia; he simply isn't engaging in that debate. I think it's very clear that he believes that euthanasia is a sin or perhaps rather that someone who 'offers up their pain to God' is admirable in their courage and devotion. But he isn't interested in condemning those who practice it. He is doing something more like recording his sorrow over the fallen condition of human beings, sorrow both over the woman who takes her child to be killed and sorrow over the abbot and his folly and his impotent rage. In any case, you cheapen what is going on by reducing it to a position in the contemporary legal debate. TheLambtonWorm (talk) 11:45, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Plot summary
The Plot summary section is way too long. Despite what appears to have become a common practice in WP synopses for novel and film articles, WikiProject Novels explicitly states that plot summaries "should be short and an integral part of the article" and "should be no more than three or four paragraphs." A good example of this per the Project is seen in Atlas Shrugged. Consequently, I propose CfL's summary be similarly condensed. —  Jim Dunning  talk  : 03:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Jim Dunning | talk  02:45, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I finally get around to it. The plot background and Lux Fiat have been streamlined. I'm working on the other two parts.

I really think the Poet should be mentioned in both the summarary and character list. He was in two of the three sections of the book, and a major driving force of Fiat Lux. Czolgolz 22:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Jim Dunning | talk  22:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I was trying to think of a way to insert the Poet, but it was tough keeping the treatment relatively small. I've got an idea on how to do it concisely, though. By the way, two of the three parts? I recall only Lux Fiat (although his eye is mentioned in Voluntas). Glad there's someone else out there interested in this article.
 * In the third part, the monks read the works of the fabeled 'St. Poet' and ponder on whether he was a real person or just a legend. Nice work on the summaries. Czolgolz 07:39, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Article restructuring
This article has some of good material in it, but suffers significantly from disorganization (it reads as a hodge-podge of random thoughts). WikiProject Novels has some excellent ideas for article content and structure at WikiProject Novels/Style guidelines that may help us out in improving the article further.

Here's some of the relevant structure suggested by the guidelines and comments vis-a-vis the article as it stands now:
 * Lead section — seems fine given the article's current content, although not everything in the current Lead is supported by the content of the Body of the article. This will expand as more content is added to the Body (reference to Saint Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman should be added for example).
 * Publication history — should be added since this is significant. Started 12/2/07.
 * Plot introduction & summary — as mentioned above, this should be drastically condensed . Done 12/1/2007.
 * Characters — could be added . Added 12/02/2007.
 * Major themes — some of this exists already in the Literary significance & criticism section, but the existing copy appears to be WP:OR. Although interesting to read it is virtually unsourced. It would be great to expand this to cover a discussion of themes. OR removed and sourced material added. 12/2/07
 * Style — there's little reference to this area now.
 * Film, TV or theatrical adaptations — I don't know if there are any, but this should be checked out and added if appropriate. — Added!
 * Reception — obviously this is a key area since CfL's won a few awards, including the Hugo. Perhaps the Allusions/references from other works section could be merged into this, but that section is completely unsourced and looks like OR. Most of Allusions removed and Reception section started 12/2/07.
 * Footnotes and/or References — reformat cites so they are consistent with those of other articles, like so —
 * References All set.
 * Footnotes and citations All set.
 * — Done!
 * 1. ^ Bisson, Terry (1997). "A Canticle for Miller; or How I Met Saint Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman but not Walter M. Miller, Jr.". www.terrybisson.com.

 * Also, much of this article is unsourced and that needs to be fixed as soon as possible. Most unsourced material either reffed or removed. 12/2/07.

Finally, the current Quotations section should go. It is unencyclopedic and is just a form of trivia. It might be of interest if CfL had famous quotes that had migrated into mainstream culture (like "grok" from Stranger in a Strange Land), but there is nothing. — Removed!
 * As I review this some more, isn't this whole section WP:OR? The contributor decided what to put in — it doesn't reference third-party sources for selection of the quotes as noteworthy. This whole section should be removed unless someone can come up with a source. —   Jim Dunning  talk  : 04:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to start working on this, but others please jump in with changes and thoughts. —  Jim Dunning  talk  : 04:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Jim Dunning | talk  19:11, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The Plot summary has been drastically streamlined, cutting the word count almost in half. Not every plot twist and turn is needed, per Novel Style Guidelines, leaving only the higher level events and characters. Ideally, the story line should be condensed further, however, material can be added if it's needed to support copy in other sections, such as Major Themes, Style and Reception.

GA Nomination
I think this article is ready to move to GA status and am soliciting help from any skilled editors. A number of revisions have been made in the past few weeks to position it for a successful nomination process. Any assistance in making changes and/or suggestions will be appreciated. Thank you. Jim Dunning | talk  03:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

GA Review
Hi, I will be GA reviewing A Canticle for Leibowitz . I have not read the article yet so expect about two days before I write my review. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 15:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

GA Pass
I really enjoyed reading this - so much so that I'm going to hunt down the novel. Unless I'm missing something, this article meets Good article criteria, Manual of Style (writing about fiction), and Writing better articles. I suggest trying to take it to Featured articles as I think it would stand a chance; of course, I could be wrong on that. Really good job. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments and suggestions
This sounds like a fascinating article; Science Fiction isn't really my thing, so when I mentioned it to my boyfriend he threw his hands up and said "I can't believe you've never heard of it!" Sigh. :) Anyway, in preparation for PR and possibly FAC, here are some suggestions to think on:

 * I'm not a big fan of mentioning the novel's reception ("Since then A Canticle for Leibowitz has had new editions and reprints issued in paperback and hardcover more than 40 times..." etc) and its sequel before the plot summary. I would rather see it go straight from background/inspiration (including minor, initial publication history) to the plot summary.
 * The plot summary is huge. Ideally, each "section" of the novel would only be two or three paragraphs long.  The first paragraph of "Fiat Homo" could be cut down drastically, for example.  Not much would be lost in the narrative if it were to say something like "In the 26th century, Brother Francis Gerard discovers the entrance to an ancient fallout shelter containing "relics", such as handwritten notes on crumbling memo pads bearing cryptic texts resembling a 20th century shopping list.  He soon realizes that these notes appear to have been written by Leibowitz, his order's founder."  The how isn't as important as the what.  This way the wanderer, mentioned in the last sentence of the section, doesn't need to be mentioned at all, and the irony that today's shopping list = tomorrow's relic is stated rather than implied.  Leibowitz's canonization and its process also takes a long time to describe; that it was delayed by the discovery of the relics but eventually completed is all that is needed.
 * The second section of the plot is okay, but it's the third section that tries to stuff too much in. Is the "mercy camp" and the "battle of wills" integral to the plot?  It's mentioned later on in "Themes", after all.  What about the long description of Zerchi's death -- working free the skull, etc?  It's fascinating and beautifully recounted, but can it be cut down?
 * I'd be interested in seeing a more comprehensive and fleshed out "Themes" section. I'd move this bit: "Scholars and critics have explored the many themes encompassed in the novel, frequently focusing on its motifs of religion, recurrence, and church versus state" to the Themes section and work from those examples, especially in regards to religion.
 * Expansion and/or integration of the "Latin phrases in the text" could be interesting. Would this work in a "Symbolism" section, perhaps?  I'd leave "Adaptations" and info about the sequel for last since it is of less importance than Themes, Literary Significance, etc.

I think that's it for now. As for picky MOS-ness, everything seems to be formatted quickly from what I can see, including the refs. The images all contain proper documentation. The lead section will need updating when more thematic elements are added to the article, and you should also consider adding the sequel and adaptation there to satisfy WP:LEAD. Thanks for the interesting read! Let me know if you need any clarifications or further comments. María ( habla con migo ) 17:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

 * There is already a (rather silly) article on the Latin: List of Latin phrases in A Canticle for Leibowitz dbw (talk) 19:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

 * Good suggestions, Maria. Bear with me as I editorialize. Canticle is the greatest American novel to come out of the Cold War. (Its British counterpart is Nineteen Eighty Four.) It is very curious that it has yet to be filmed. You under 40s out there, it is very important that your generation educate itself on how the USA and the USSR were armed to the teeth for 50 consecutive years, with enough firepower to extinguish civilisation everywhere. Walter Miller served on bomber crews in WWII, and was revolted by what he was a part of. Part of his revulsion led him to convert to Roman Catholicism, but that did provided no solace. He could not complete another novel, and committed suicide last decade.132.181.160.42 (talk) 04:42, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Texas
I've removed this article from inclusion in WikiProject Texas since none of the story's events takes place in Texas. The question was raised on the project's Talk page about a month ago, and although there has been only a single response since then, it appeared to be in agreement. Jim Dunning | talk  10:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

"none of the story's events takes place in Texas" - LOL. Have you read the book?

An image on this page may be deleted
This is an automated message regarding an image used on this page. The image File:A Canticle For Lebowitz.jpg, found on A Canticle for Leibowitz, has been nominated for deletion because it does not meet Wikipedia image policy. Please see the image description page for more details. If this message was sent in error (that is, the image is not up for deletion, or was left on the wrong talk page), please contact this bot's operator. STBotI (talk) 14:46, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

editing reference
the link to Terry Bisson's article (reference 18) is a dead link. I tried editing it - but couldn't find the right place (sorry, a bit of a wiki novice). If someone could enter the new link it would be great. Here it is: http://www.sff.net/people/TBisson/miller.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.228.182.147 (talk) 17:36, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Major Themes
No one has mentioned one of the most intriguing themes, that the story parables the bible. Leibowitz is the false prophet while Mrs. Grales is Mary (mother of Christ) and Rachel is Christ returned to earth for the apocalypse.69.159.66.38 (talk) 22:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sources? That strikes me as a possible reading, but certainly not the only one. I certainly wouldn't say Leibowitz is the false prophet. Anyway, you need reliable sources to back such a claim up. TallNapoleon (talk) 00:43, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Err, "to back up such a claim". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.94.86 (talk) 22:40, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Age of the Wandering Jew "Lazarus" or "Benjamin"
I notice that the Wandering Jew claims (in the year 3174) to be 3209 years old (well, via the Leibowitzian monastery's abbot, anyhow). 3209-3174= 35: that dates this Wanderer's birth to 34 BCE, well before Jesus was born and well before the Second Temple was destroyed. (See 1997 edition, page 139). In another paragraph, a couple of pages later, the Old Jew's age is boosted by another 2199 years, kicking his birth back to 2233 BCE. That suggests that the Old Jew is not just the Wandering Jew of Christian lore, but a personification of the Jewish people, perhaps all the way back to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Unfortunately, Miller sees the Jew from a Christian point of view, and he has him mentioning his seeing of the Messiah once before (a Christian interpretation of the Messiah!) (see page 174, 1997 edition), and thus fails to quite grok Judaism. An actual Jewish wanderer would probably have insisted that he had not seen "Him" just yet. But other than that, interesting dialogue between representatives of Christianity and Judaism in Fiat Lux. 192.12.88.7 (talk) 02:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Some folks appear to have dated the births of Noah's children to the 23rd century BCE using the Bible, which is before Abraham. 192.12.88.7 (talk) 02:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Miller(who converted to Catholicism before writing this) is writing from a Catholic(not just Christian) background and the Wandering Jew is not named as such, and not described as being a religious Jew as opposed to just ethnically of Jewish decent, so "grokking Judaism" is really besides the point. There's no basis for assuming he's a "personification of Jewish people", as opposed to just "a fictional character of Miller loosely based on Christian legend" Also notably the Wanderer also calls himself Lazarus, which suggests a separate Christian legend, no matter how far back the contradictory birthdays go. In fact, someone "divinely" cursed to live until the Second Coming of Jesus, couldn't be a religious Jew in any sense, because if Jesus weren't the "Messiah", the Jew would die after a normal span of years, right? Or else (or in addition?) to being the "Lazarus" raised from the dead by Jesus from the New Testament. He is a (fictional)"believer" from experience rather than "an actual Jewish wanderer", no "unfortunately" about it. Furthermore there is the initial gossip that the figure Brother Gerard met was Leibowitz himself, who was also a former Jew who converted to Catholicism and became a priest, post-nuclear-apocalypse. Yet another associated legend of someone born Jewish, but converted to belief.
 * This is a Catholic writer, writing in 1950s, about a speculative, fictional future in post-nuclear-war Catholic(and pagan) America. What reason should be be politically correct about Judaism? It's somewhat disrespectful of the author's actual faith, and right to write about his own religious belief. For the record though, he does seem to be critical, if not outright satirical, about Catholicism, but in a way that's knowledgeable of the faith(as a convert). Cuvtixo (talk) 02:53, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Time scale
Long time scale scenarios are worth comparison and contrast with other works that exist in long time scales. Such works have a unique sensitivity to fine energy gradients, in the time and energy trade-off under the action. It is probably no coincidence that Miller set "A Canticle for Leibowitz" 600 years after 20th century destruction. After all, the Koran devolved to the Islamic prophet Mohammed 600 years after Rome fell. That number of centuries is distinct: it is the atomic number of carbon, six. It implies the Koran is in a sense an update of the religions that emerged from Rome, including the Christian. At a shrewd guess, the Koran brought the revelation, now understood in depth, that even tiny molecular interactions take place in the stellar cosmology, which we call the electrodynamics, and the long-run penalties for ignoring that can be extinction.

Going backward, earlier works exist dating back to the Papyri of Ani, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and others. Subsequent works too, fit into such analysis. Magna Charta is an example. Since the printing press, though, such works are too numerous to count.SyntheticET (talk) 00:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I would strongly advise reading WP:TALK and WP:NOR. TallNapoleon (talk) 00:23, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

600 years after Rome fell - on which planet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.94.86 (talk) 22:43, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Characters
Looking at articles about novels that attained FA on this list, I notice that Uncle Tom's Cabin separates out info about its major characters from the plot summary. I think doing that here would improve this article. Sub-sections about Leibowitz, Benjamin, and Mrs. Grales/Rachel would be particularly useful. Sharktopus talk  19:18, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I'm in the process of doing this for two other articles at the moment, one of which is a novel.  I'm hoping we can all work together on this. Viriditas (talk) 08:33, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Early edition dates and covers
We should confirm or correct some first edition data including the cover image. If we confirm then ISFDB needs correction for it displays a different cover image (whose own description does not adequately ID it) and gives pub date October 1959 with some support. (See the Notes field of .) --P64 (talk) 22:01, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Hebrew errors?
Years after having heard bits of the story on NPR, I finally read the book. It is a good book, and the truth is I'm probably more prepared to understand it than I would have been thirty years ago. But right from the start I came across an intriguing error--or not--that has me thinking. The characters that the wandering "pilgrim" makes on the rock are (in the library edition I've read) clearly a "lamedh" and an "ayin." Later the Abbot identifies them as a "lamedh" and a "sadhe." Neither one of these interpretations would lead one to anything like "Liebowitz," which would have to end in a "tsamekh." The visual difference between "ayin" and "tsamekh" are enough to drive me nuts--but the Abbot's definitely wrong.

Which leads to a weird question: Whose error is this? Miller's? It's possible: these could be amateur Hebrew mistakes, and he makes another one later when he puts a definite "tsamekh" in the middle of the name Eleazar (which I'm guessing would be a "zayin"--confused yet?). Ah, but what if it's deliberate? What if the Abbot's mistake is intentional in the author? The monks of the order don't know everything about the texts in their keeping and misunderstand much of it. Witness Francis' discovery regarding blueprints! Maybe the Abbot is perpetuating an error about Hebrew orthography. Maybe the order would have made more progress faster if they had gotten their pronunciation correct!

Or maybe I just have better lighting. Without access to a monk-powered arc lamp, I had to hold the book up to the sunlight (horrors!) to make sure I was seeing what I thought I saw. Or perhaps the best explanation is the simplest one: the editor got it wrong in this edition.

I haven't found anybody dealing with this discrepancy. Any comments? KJPurscell (talk) 15:13, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

 * There's no such letter as "tsamekh". The letter ס is called samekh, and -- at least in relatively recent centuries -- has been pronounced [s]. The letter צ (finally ץ) is transcribed by modern scholars ṣađe, but it is in Ashkenazic style pronounced [ts] and pronounced tsade. The name Leibowitz would be transcribed לייבאוויץ. RandomCritic (talk) 20:56, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

 * How are you pronouncing Leibowitz? /liboʊwɪt͡s/ – ליבוויץ. 70.29.63.164 (talk) 17:25, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Yiddish pronunciation, Yiddish spelling: [leibɔvɪts]. RandomCritic (talk) 17:21, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

 * They must be Miller's mistakes, because the errors are different in my edition than in yours (and others who've talked on this page). 70.29.63.164 (talk) 17:25, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Definition and etymology of "Thon"
The hyperlinked note #15 displays a definition of "Thon" as equivalent to "professor". I never got that out of the text of the novel, so I was curious about the source of that definition. I had always imagined that "Thon" was rather a corruption of or derivative of the Spanish "Don", some thing that seemed reasonable, given the centuries that had passed and the Spanish cultural influence on the Southwest. Miller includes an anecdote that illustrates a similar etymological development, in the story about the catfish "B'dollos" inhabiting a lake where another monk was martyred.

TheBaron0530 (talk) 03:47, 15 October 2012 (UTC)TheBaron0530 23:46 ET 14Oct12

Dons are academics in English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.94.86 (talk) 22:45, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Link to Albertus Magnus?
I have noticed that the reference to the "Albertian Order" includes a link to the Albertus Magnus article, but I don't see the connection between this person who happened to be called Albertus (there is a disambiguation page including several other notable people of that name) and this book - I had imagined that, perhaps, the "Albertian Order" was a reference to Albert Einstein, whose name may have been preserved in the 26th century as a figure of importance PaulHammond (talk) 15:37, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

 * According to this site it's his connection with science and learning. It sounds like original research (even if Albertus Magnus was the allusion, and the Einstein theory sounds more likely; aren't monastic orders technically named after their founders rather than a patron saint too?) so I'd say tag it with fact and unlink it if there's been no response in a week or two. -- xensyria T 18:14, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

 * I added the Category Category:1960s science fiction novels Transcendentalist01 (talk) 16:42, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
 * As the article makes no reference to Einstein, nor to the significance of "Albertian", I have removed the links to Albertus Magnus and to Einstein for now. It's been too long since I read the book. It would be helpful if someone could cite a place in the book where the name is explained. Eric talk 11:38, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Description of "Pope's Children"
Two things: Firstly, what is the difference between being subhuman in capacity for reason and intelligence? Couldn't we just say, "capacity for reason" and leave it at that? Secondly, were the mutants also physically very different than regular humans? Looked very different?--Jrm2007 (talk) 12:46, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

 * I wish I had the relevant page numbers, but at one point "some were not outwardly effected, but in the heart and head (or was it "mind"?) My point anyways is that from the text, the mutations ranged a very wide spectrum and were commonplace. The people didn't have technology to examine DNA or anything close to that, so really there was no way of knowing what mutations were from radiation and which might be "natural". Using separate terms for "intelligence" and "capacity for reason" just emphasizes that there was no definitive standard to prove any differences. The point was that ALL euthanasia of children, whatever their defects, was pronounced unacceptable by recent popes of that future time (as it would be in "real world" contemporary Catholicism as well). Whether any one "subhuman" fit into any particular category, or even whether "human" or "subhuman" at all! did not matter as regards to the Church. So the point is moot Cuvtixo (talk) 21:29, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on A Canticle for Leibowitz. 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/20100310082317/http://www.crazydogaudiotheatre.com/fame.php to http://www.crazydogaudiotheatre.com/fame.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930165533/http://www.sff.net/people/tbisson/miller.html to http://www.sff.net/people/TBisson/miller.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:29, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Error
Fome the "Background" sectoin: " Eventually, whether by Leibowitz' intention or simply through the sanctification of repetition, his supporters and followers became a monastic order, the "Albertian Order of Leibowitz", dedicated to preserving knowledge." This implies that it is not know how the AOL was founded, which is incorrect.

In the book it clearly states that Leibowitz originally sought shelter from the mobs by hiding out at a Christian monastary. Then, when he became convinced that his wife was really dead, he took monastic orders, and became a priest, at which point he sought and received permission from the Church to found the new order in the southwestern desert.

The monastary has no reason to be uncertain of its own origin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.89.176.249 (talk) 21:45, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

 * The assertion may be that, even in an institution founded on knowledge, knowledge itself can be forgotten or simply replaced by legend.

 * The Church itself has promulgated the myth of the Petrine Succession, and a founding myth of St Peter in Rome. Even though there is no historical evidence for it at all.

 * Nuttyskin (talk) 10:35, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Fiat Voluntas Tua
"As Zerchi tries to conditionally baptize Rachel..."

Rachel? Who the hell is Rachel? Mrs. Grales secret identity? Or is her name Rachel Grales? And if she's married, Why would she need to be baptized? Very unclear from the context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.253 (talk) 01:22, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:A Canticle for Leibowitz


text:
Talk:History of Byzantium

Shouldn't this page be incorporated into the Byzantine Empire article? As it is right now, it's incomplete anyway. And it's not wikified at all (though I am itching to do so, of course :)). Adam Bishop 02:27 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I think I will just restore the redirect to Byzantine Empire here...I guess some of the info could be moved to Byzantine Empire article (assuming it's not copied directly from somewhere else), but I think it's already mentioned either in that article or on the articles on the various emperors. No other pages link here either. Anyone have any objections to that? Adam Bishop 18:56 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)

title: Talk:History of Byzantium


text:
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers/Archive 6

Just some responses:

I have no intention to revert articles wholesale to use any particular style. As I have made quite clear before, however, when I edit an article I will try to bring it in line with whatever the current Manual of Style convention is. As was written here before: "NB: the Manual of Style is not mandatory. However, copyeditors will change entries to match the manual of style".

If we, the community, decide that both styles can be used, in different situations or arbitrarily, then I will obviously respect that decision. I won't like it, of course, so in the meantime, I will try to argue for a solution that favors consistency throughout Wikipedia. As for compromises like automated conversion, I'm willing to use that as well. Let's just agree on what to do and then do it.

James is turning this into a huge British vs. American thing. I don't view it like this at all -- as a German I'm used to writing "22. Juni", not "22 June" or "June 22". But James has clearly demonstrated (thanks!) that the "June 22" variant is vastly preferred within Wikipedia. It is preferred by me also, but I could accept any other variant, so James' suggestion that I am hell bent on "americanising" entries is completely ridiculous. I am, however, very concerned about having Wikipedia look like a professionally edited encyclopedia, with consistent style throughout. The Encyclopedia Britannica has agreed to use the Month Day format -- it's fine with me if we agree to use another format, as long as we agree to use one.

Some UK-English writers have, in the last months, managed to sneak in not through a comunity process but through backdoor discussions, the privilege to use their date style on "their pages". It is one of Wikipedia's biggest virtues that "pages are not owned by anyone." Yet Mav proposes exactly that. Editors will first have to

 * 1) Check: article has dates in it? Yes: Use that style - No: Proceed
 * 2) Check: article is about a British subject? Yes: Use British style - No: Proceed

 * 1) Use "American" style

Any newbie who doesn't get that complicated process and uses what he is used to will find a long, insulting essay on his personal talk page. Not consistently, of course: On some pages the original authors will just not care whatever is used, so any change will go unnoticed. What we get is the situation we have now: The vast majority uses the "American" style, but some articles, both about UK and about non-UK subjects, use a different one for no discernible reason. If you care about the professional look of Wikipedia, this is a prime example of how to look unprofessional. So are the edit wars that will inevitably result.

Mav and others will keep their mouths shut about this because they are afraid to lose valuable contributors. James et al. get their way not because they are right, but because they are louder than everyone else. And of course he's trying to blame me for bringing the issue up again, after he and others have so successfully managed to subvert the open decision making process in favor of a proprietary one.

James has repeatedly asserted (without any evidence, of course), that the world majority prefers the BE style (which, as has been pointed out, is silly anyway, since billions use different calendars altogether). Not only this, he states that "most of the rest of the world finds wiki's pre-occupation with american english, and with americanising anything and everything irritating." Whatever James does, he can always be sure to have "most of the rest of the world" on his side. ;-)

He is not willing to change his position by a millimeter. To tolerate "US"-style dates because British spelling is used in some articles? How could you ask such a terrible thing! He will have nightmares for days because I brought this up.

Well, what "most of the rest of the world" thinks doesn't really matter anyway -- we don't write in Chinese either. And, frankly, James is only one of thousands of Wikipedians. If he can't get his way and leaves because of it, then I will find this very unfortunate, but not very surprising given how easily he gets aggravated. What matters is what most of the contributors to this wiki think, and I am one of them. I have expressed my opinion, you get your chance to express yours. If there are objections to the vote as it is currently set up, I am very much in favor of letting Martin set up a new one.

Always remember: There is no Wikipedia cabal. And the one strategy that would be effective in establishing such a cabal is to let some highly valued long time contributors like James get their way simply through long, loud complaints and threats to leave Wikipedia if everyone else doesn't comply. After all, we never want to lose a contributor. But I'm not willing to drop the established community process because a small clique thinks they can get away with doing so. --Eloquence 16:11 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * Having copyedited eight articles in the last hour based on a 1911 Brittanica, I think we have bigger professionalism issues than dates. (Modern) Brittanica uses AE style, because, like many commercial products, the US market is overwhelmingly important to them. I don't see that a free encyclopedia has to addopt US style. You (Eloquence) seem quite blase about losing contributors over such a minor issue, whereas I would rather have more contributors of good quality articles. This is a voluntary activity none of us are paid for, and I think you are losing sight of that in a desire for unbending conformity.    jimfbleak 16:23 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)
 * You mean jaded? lysdexia 00:01, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * The "bigger professionalism issues" is a red herring and the fact that people keep waving it confirms that I am correct: the date style inconsistency is unprofessional. Just because we have deficits in one area doesn't mean we shouldn't fix our deficits in another area. Problems like this tend to accumulate and get worse. We are setting a precedent for segregating Wikipedia into different parts which are governed by different rules. This can cause many, many problems in the long term -- inconsistency only being one of them, confusion and frustration of newbies being another. But as I said, I'm willing to accept whatever solution is favored by most users. --Eloquence 16:41 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * Eloquence claimed "Some UK-English writers have, in the last months, managed to sneak in not through a comunity process but through backdoor discussions" - that is absolute rubbish. All edits were carried out openly and with the full agreement of everyone. Such an accusation is an insult to all the many people who in good faith and with no opposition used the format used in most of the world. In 4 months, only Eloquence has seen this as a 'problem' and elevated himself to our edit god, who has decided that, though no-one else has a problem with using the international-used dating system, he has and so he is entitled to ignore the consensus acceptance of using both systems and enforce what he wants.

 * Regarding the use of 22.Juni - has Eloquence forgotten that this is english wiki, concerned with the use of english, not german?

 * The Encyclopedia Britannica has agreed to use the Month Day format Britannica is a professionally edited published book written by a small group of paid contributors. Wiki is an international text written by people the world over and so has to accomodate writers from all over the world, many of whom use American english, many of whom don't, many of whom use American dating, many of whom don't. There is no comparison.

 * I never suggested, nor has anyone else, that everyone be forced to write in BE or use the dating form used by most of the planet. We have had a situation where for months both dating systems have been used. It has been universally accepted and respected by most people. One person has decided that he wants to force all wiki contributors to use one dating system, even though it is actually the system used by a minority of english speakers (a small minority of english speaker worldwide) and as part of his campaign decided to americanise the dating system used in articles on non-american topics. And if he had his way, he would americanise the language too. As I have said, if he wants an american english wiki, he can always create one. But this is english wiki, a wiki in the english language, that belongs or should belong to all english speakers, whereever they live and whatever form of english they use. There are two basic forms of english. Wiki needs to be able (as it has been in recent months openly and honestly) to accept articles in either, using either of the dating systems used. For wiki to order users to use one form is unacceptable, whether the ordered version be one used by the majority of english speakers (BE, dd/mm/yy) or the minority one (AE, mm/dd/yy.). Users of BE have shown courtesy and respect to those who use AE. Users of dd/mm/yy have shown the same respect to users of mm/dd/yy. And most AE users and users of mm/dd/yy have shown the same respect in return. But a small minority haven't and in the case of Eloquence, have attempted to force their preference on everyone else. That is the crux of the problem. All I have advocated is a continuation of the current policy of respecting difference. Mav endorses that. Many others do to. One person doesn't and has caused this row; Eloquence. FearÉIREANN 23:20 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * The problem, James, is that there was an ongoing vote on the subject, and that the vote result did not favor the inconsistent standard which you want to use throughout Wikipedia. Mav argues or has argued that this doesn't matter, and that because the two leading options would both scare off contributors, one of the lower ranking options has to be used. This is, of course, illogical, ignores that the lower ranking options are in themselves divisive because they promote inconsistency, and makes the whole voting exercise pointless.

 * Pretty much everyone in this discussion admits that this kind of inconsistency looks unprofessional. Some say that it has to be accepted since we're such a big project. I do not agree. We are a big project, true, but this simply means that everyone has to change their habits at least somewhat if consistency is to be maintained.

 * You are right about one thing: it is quite possible that you would have gotten away with what you were doing if I had not complained. That does not mean that people would not have disagreed, it does not mean that these actions would not have been in violation of our community process, and it does not mean that the outcome would be in any way desirable. You wrote to me in this discussion: "One user (I won't use the language I described him by when I saw it. Suffice to say it cast doubts on the marital status of their parents) a couple of days ago not merely sought to turn an article on an Irish topic into American english, using American spelling and American capitalisation, but even went so far as to americanise my comments on the talk page. (His changes were reverted, and a rather strong message left on his talk page.)" If that is how you approach all users who disagree with your interpretation of the MoS, it's no surprise that few have the patience and motivation to argue with you. Your aggressiveness helps you to get your way most of the time. In this whole discussion you have substituted facts with rhetoric. None of this will work.

 * The correct way to proceed now is to use the open process to arrive at a conclusion, set a deadline, and then implement whatever is agreed upon. Like any decision we make, it may make some people unhappy, quite probably including myself. But there is no alternative -- subverting the community process and letting a few people push through their preferred style is not an option. --Eloquence 23:50 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * Amen to JT's comment; "[Wikipedia] is an international text written by people the world over and so has to accommodate writers from all over the world, many of whom use American english, many of whom don't, many of whom use American dating, many of whom don't. There is no comparison." We cannot force either AE or BE standards down anyone's throats here since we allow anyone to edit any page using there own words (so long as they are in English). We are not a publishing house and our editors are not paid so we can't be too anal about the style of English they use so long as it is correct in some major dialect of English.

 * I also find it odd that Eloquence is mentioning "unprofessionalism" as a reason to have one style; this is comparing us to a closed shop with editors who are paid to do things in a very specific way (the Cathedral), but Wikipedia is the Bazaar (some would say "bizarre" ;-) where everyone is welcome and where we do not check credentials. A bazaar can never be considered to be a professional enterprise. Sure some shop keepers are professionals in their own areas but they may not be working in those areas while in the bazaar (like me most of the time!). Same is true for Wikipedia.

 * I do forsee us becoming much larger and a much better and accurate resource in time but unless we make some really drastic changes (like adopting Nupedia's standards and editing process) we will never be professional (at least Wikipedia itself; a separate "Sifter" project with approved static articles could be considered professional). In short, most Wikipedians often work outside their own area of professional expertise because it is fun. That doesn't mean the articles are bad - many are very good - but it does mean that the product cannot objectively be called "professional" no matter how consistent the whole encyclopedia is as a whole. --mav 00:14 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * These are all weak arguments which I have already addressed -- there are no good reasons not to make our style consistent throughout Wikipedia in this instance. --Eloquence 00:19 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * Oh that is a real convincing non-reply. --mav

 * As you said, conciseness is a virtue. :-) There is no point in prolonging this discussion endlessly. Let's just implement the vote result on June 30 and then move on. --Eloquence 00:46 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I suggest a deadline of June 30 for the vote. After that deadline, the option with the most votes will be implemented (Sean Barrett has written a script that allows us to convert all pages to another date format if necessary). Should the laissez faire option or the Month Day, Year option win, no mass conversion will be required. Are there any objections to this? --Eloquence 23:59 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * All of which ignores the plain fact that after extensive discussion, a satisfactory solution was arrived at 4 months ago. It was not broke, so why on earth start "fixing" it? What a waste of time and effort. Tannin 00:13 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * This is incorrect, as I have already explained in my response to James above. --Eloquence 00:19 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Why are you bothering writing conversion scripts? Just write PHP code to automatically convert either <nowiki<month day, year or day month, year to the user's preference, as the page is rendered. I'll do it if no-one else will. Even for someone with my low level of PHP prowess, it's not a hard task. There's no need for special markup, the current format is distinctive enough to avoid false positives. The default rendering could be whatever the result of the vote is. If we vote for "lack of preference" then it will just be displayed as entered. -- Tim Starling 01:48 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Since Eloquence loves professionalism, has he got a time in mind for the 30th June? Votes cast by 9am (by his watch of course!) Can people who don't use American english user nics vote? This whole argument is absurd. As Tannin correctly explained, a satisfactory solution was arrived at 4 months ago. It has worked satisfactorily since then. Users of AE and BE, of american dating and international dating have worked perfectly happily together. Everyone has been able to understand the other's dating system. Nobody has been confused. From Alaska to New South Wales, Scotland to South Africa and further afield, everyone has been able to follow the arrangement, nobody has been treated like second class contributors, ordered to abandon their own form of english and write a form they never use. Good quality articles (and the occasional not so good quality article) have been written. No-one had a problem until Eloquence set himself up as the Wikipedia Language Policeman, there to force his form of dating on the english speaking world, even though the majority of the english speaking world does not use his choice of language.

I am all for professionalism on wiki, for getting names right (as I have shown in my work on the naming conventions), for getting a uniform layout of pages, for getting grammar right. But there is no such thing as right dating, and British english is no more right than American english, American english no more right than British english. But in the wonderful world of wilki, Eloquence wants us to treat one form of english as acceptable, the other as unacceptable, one form of date structure as acceptable, one form as unacceptable. Wiki is not based on such a principle but on the principle of consensus. The consensus was shown in the original vote, in which it was clear that many people wanted dd/mm/yy, many others mm/dd/yy; neither side had anything like a consensus behind the exclusive usd of its version. It has been shown in the comments here, in which the vast majority have been asking the question 'what is wrong with what is being done now?' It has been shown in the working of the current system. There is not a consensus on the use of AE and american dating and all the evidence suggests there never will be. The consensus has been (and however Eloquence might wish it otherwise will continue to be) to respect difference and avoid using exclusive language that tells any bunch of english speakers "yes the language you speak and you write in is correct but we are not allowing you to use in on wikipedia. And indeed such is our determination not to accept your language, we reserve the right even to rewrite what you write on talk pages to suit our approved version." That isn't consensus and it sure as hell isn't democracy. It is simply a regrettable and avoidable form of linguistic apartheid. FearÉIREANN 01:56 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * I must say that I find your rants highly amusing, especially the part: "The consensus was shown in the original vote .. ; neither side had anything like a consensus .. There is not a consensus on the use of AE  .. The consensus has been .."  Of course, this all doesn't beat your original statement that we have a clear and unambiguous 100% consensus (your bold, not mine). And how do you determine such a consensus? By counting heads? No, that would be too trivial. Instead, we let James judge. His finding: "Users of AE and BE, of american dating and international dating have worked perfectly happily together." Wolves and sheep sleeping together, yay! This I call empirical research :-).

 * Sorry, James, but no matter how big a rhetorical smokescreen you try to create, the simple fact is that the number of votes for one of the compromise options, one of which you are supporting, is/was lower than the number of votes for one of the exclusive options. You and others ignored that result. That's OK, we all make mistakes. Now it's time to correct that mistake. I for one will wait for the outcome of the vote. As a time, I suggest 15:00 UTC. --Eloquence 02:12 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I'm just going to quietly slip in here and say that I endorse the ISO standard method (YYYY-MM-DD). Not only is it completely unambiguous (in the MSB computery sense), but being neither "American" nor "British" I think it sort of sidesteps much of whatever controversy there is. I've been using it exclusively for years, it takes teachers and the like perhaps ten seconds to get used to, and its unambiguousness keeps /me/ from getting confused when I write dates. It can be easily transformed into a 'full' style, such as "2001 September 11", if people feel that "September 11, 2001" and "11 September 2001" are too biased. Phil Bordelon 02:32 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * The only problem is that very few people outside of the computer sciences use ISO when writing prose. Nobody would be happy and all current articles would have to be changed. That is why tolerating the two dominant styles is a Good Thing (TM). But there is no compelling reason (other than server performance) to not have the software parse Month Day or Day Month any of several different ways based on user settings (whatever style the WikiText is in would be unchanged and the default would work the way things do now and base the display directly on the WikiText). --mav

 * I understand all of that. While I'd like Wikipedia to be progressive here, I'm also not at all attached to "date format" for anything other than my personal writing (journals and the like.)  Whatever standard is chosen, whether American or not, is fine by me, and I'll abide by it; I realize that most people don't like the ISO standard, and there are much better things in this world for me to worry my big head about than date ordering.  So I stand by my choice, but won't mind much at all when it doesn't "win." :)  As a note, the whole 'dynamic date' thing is cool; for the time being, though, I'd steer clear of dynamic dates, if only because the server is slow enough as is. :/ Phil Bordelon 03:49 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

That format could also be supported by my proposed PHP addition. -- Tim Starling 02:50 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * Phil said:Not only is it completely unambiguous (in the MSB computery sense)

Ahh, so you're a big-endian man. I'm more accustomed to the Intel standard myself. -- Tim Starling 04:13 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

 * I'm not so much a big-endian man (although yes, I prefer big-endian) but, well, it's the way digits work in Arabic numerals, so it's good enough for me. ;) Phil Bordelon 04:16 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

About dynamic dates slowing the server: rendering pages for logged in users already requires loading the user preferences into RAM. The only overhead is the string processing, which should be negligible because the text is already processed character by character in PHP. It should be just a minor modification to the link rendering function. -- Tim Starling 04:42 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Okay, I've written up a proposal. See Dynamic dates -- Tim Starling 15:05 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Fantasy/Images

With London Eye panorama, now I can cross one destination off the of my London tour list. I wanna pet your whippet for 20 minutes non-stop or until he gets tired of me and slide away from me! And why did you have to remind us city-dwellers around the world what we'll never possess with that window view? Why? WHY!?!? *joke* -Menchi 02:32 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * Hi Menchi, thanks for this comment! It's nice to wake up in the morning and first thing to read something like this.
 * Try to see it the other way around:

 * Now your know why you absolutely have to go onto the London Eye
 * If you come one day near South Tyrol, you can have a coffee with this view and later have a walk with my dog ;-)
 * How does that sound to you? Fantasy 05:48 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * Great! Now if we can just add Marilyn Monroe and salmon into this somehow... --Menchi 06:13 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)

title: User talk:Fantasy/Images