text:
1995 Rugby League World Cup

The 1995 Rugby League World Cup (officially known as Halifax Centenary World Cup for sponsorship reasons) was the eleventh World Cup for mens national rugby league teams. It was held between 7-28 October and hosted by England and Wales and was won by Australia who beat England at Wembley Stadium, their eighth World Cup win and fifth in succession.

Organised to celebrate the sports centenary, ten nations were invited to participate. The tournament had been preceded by doubts and pessimism; many feared that it would produce one-sided-matches that would be unattractive to supporters. The forthcoming Super League war also hung over the tournament, with the Australian Rugby League refusing to select players who had signed for the rival competition. Those fears proved unfounded, and the tournament was acclaimed a great success.

Although some early matches did prove as one-sided as feared, fans still flocked to see newer rugby league nations such as Fiji, Tonga, Western Samoa and South Africa. Large home crowds for the group involving Wales proved particularly encouraging for the sport.

For the 1995 tournament, a £10,000 cup was made by Tiffanys to celebrate the centenary of the game.

Teams
Ten teams competed in the Centenary World Cup: Australia, England, Fiji, France, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, South Africa, Tonga, Wales and Western Samoa. It was the first time since the 1975 World Series that England and Wales competed, rather than Great Britain. Fiji, South Africa, Tonga and Western Samoa all made their World Cup débuts. Scotland and Ireland took part in the Emerging Nations Tournament that was held alongside the World Cup.

Australia was missing some of their best players, a number of whom had been part of the 1994 Kangaroos squad, due to the Super League war and the ARL's refusal to select Super League-aligned players. Australia's win in the end, with what many considered to be a second-string side, was seen as a blow to the Super League organisation, with which every other nation was aligned.

Canberra Raiders players Laurie Daley, Ricky Stuart, Bradley Clyde, Steve Walters and Brett Mullins, won a court order against the ARL making Super League players eligible for representative games. Despite assurances from the ARL that all players were considered, only ARL loyal players were selected for the Kangaroos World Cup squad.

Venues
The games were played at various venues in England and Wales.

Wembley Stadium in London was the host stadium for the opening ceremony and match featuring hosts England and defending champions Australia. Wembley, England's national stadium, would also host the Final of the tournament.

Semi-finals
England as expected defeated reigning European Champions Wales in their semi-final at Old Trafford. The other Semi at Huddersfield almost produced a boil over. After defeating New Zealand 3–0 in the Trans-Tasman Test series earlier in the year, and with the Kiwis lackluster form in their Group B games, Australia was expected to easily account for Frank Endacott's side, but the Kiwis found form and the game ended 20–all at the end of 80 minutes (following a missed sideline conversion attempt by the Kiwis Matthew Ridge and a missed left foot drop goal attempt by the same player - both in the last few minutes of regular time). However, 20 minutes of extra time saw Australia skip away to a 30–20 win to book their place in the Final at Wembley.

Final
The Australians had reached the final after a hard-fought 30–20 Semi-final win over New Zealand at the McAlpine Stadium which had gone into extra time after the score was locked at 20-all after 80 minutes. Their opponents and tournament host England, had an easier time defeating Wales 25–10 in their semi at Old Trafford. Even though they were favoured to win, Australia went into the final having lost three of their past four games at Wembley (the only win being the World Cup final of 1992), and had already lost the opening match of the tournament there to the English. Also, due to the ARL's policy of not selecting Super League aligned players, the Kangaroos went into the game with 11 of their 17 players under the age of 24. Although considered mostly a 'second string' team without the likes of Laurie Daley, Ricky Stuart, Andrew Ettingshausen, Steve Renouf, Steve Walters and Glenn Lazarus, most of the Kangaroos had played in the 3–0 whitewash of New Zealand in the Trans-Tasman series earlier in the year. Kangaroos captain and five-eighth Brad Fittler and fullback Tim Brasher were the only members of Australia's 1992 World Cup final win over Great Britain at Wembley, with both players in the same positions as they had been three years previously.

England's captain Shaun Edwards ruled himself out of the final with an infected knee. Despite almost being ruled out of the tournament with pneumonia, St Helens centre Paul Newlove was selected by coach Phil Larder for starting line-up in the final. Larder also handed the captaincy to veteran test forward Denis Betts. With the former Wigan back rower now playing for the Auckland Warriors in the Australian premiership, his selection as captain created history as he became the first player to captain England while not currently playing in the British competition.

After winning in 1992, Australian coach Bob Fulton became just the second coach (after Harry Bath) to win two Rugby League World Cups. It was Fulton's 5th World Cup win after also winning in 1968, 1970 and 1975 as a player. Coincidentally, Fulton's coach in the 1968 and 1970 World Cup finals was Harry Bath.

Status Quo performed the pre-match entertainment, performing When You Walk in the Room and Rockin' All Over the World.

First half

England won the coin toss and Australia's Andrew Johns kicked off the match. In England's first set with the ball Australia were penalised for their skipper Brad Fittler's high tackle on Andrew Farrell. From the resulting good field position England were able to force a line drop-out and get another set of six in Australia's half of the field. At the end of the set, Radlinski put up a high kick, which Australia's fullback Tim Brasher failed to secure and Australia were penalised for regathering the ball when off-side. Bobbie Goulding kicked the penalty goal from fifteen metres out, giving his side a 2–0 lead. From Australia's resulting kick-off, the English players couldn't secure the ball and it was regathered by the Kangaroos deep in the opposition half. On the last tackle of the ensuing set, Johns at first receiver put a chip kick into the left-hand corner of England's in-goal area where winger Rod Wishart dived in and got a hand on it, giving Australia the first try of the match in the seventh minute. Johns then converted the try from the touch-line and the Kangaroos were leading 6–2. A few minutes later England were penalised around the centre of the field and Johns attempted the kick at goal but missed. With the game now swinging from end to end, Johns conceded a penalty close to the goal posts and Goulding's kick bounced off the uprights but went in, so England were trailing 6–4 by the eighteenth minute. A few minutes later England conceded a penalty in front of their goal posts and Johns kicked Australia to an 8–4 lead. Shortly after that England winger Martin Offiah made a break down along the left sideline and was contentiously ruled to have been taken over the sideline by a desperate Tim Brasher tackle as he threw the ball back into the field for Paul Newlove to toe ahead and dive on, though television replays suggested that Offiah had managed to release the ball before he went into touch. After a high shot from Andy Farrell on Mark Carroll, Johns kicked another penalty giving Australia a 10–4 lead at the 30-minute mark. Just before the half-time break England conceded another penalty in the ruck but Johns' kick missed so the score remained unchanged at the break.

Second half

After making their way into good attacking field position, England played the ball ten metres out from Australia's goal-line where centre Paul Newlove at dummy-half ran the ball at the defence forced his way through to score in the left corner. The sideline conversion attempt by Goulding missed so England trailed 10–8 after five minutes of the second half. Around the ten-minute mark the game was interrupted by a topless female streaker. The play continued swinging from one end of the field to the other, with neither team able to capitalise on their scoring opportunities for the next twenty minutes. Australian interchange player Jason Smith was blood binned and had to return to the bench. A few minutes later the Kangaroos had made their way deep into England's half when, on the last tackle, the ball was moved through the hands and eventually flicked passed back from Johns as he was being tackled to the feet of Brasher who kicked it ahead to the try-line. Both fullbacks then scrambled to get to the ball and the referee ruled that Brasher had grounded it, awarding Australia a try. Johns converted the try so Australia lead 16–8 with just over 10 minutes remaining. England forward Karl Harrison then had to come off the field with an injured arm. A few minutes from full-time Australian forward Mark Carroll was sent to the sin-bin for an infringement in the ruck. The remainder of the match extended into additional injury time but was played with no further points so Australia retained the World Cup with a 16–8 victory and their fifth consecutive world title.

21-year-old Andrew Johns was named man-of-the-match. Kangaroos coach Bob Fulton had named the young half as the team hooker, and he did indeed pack into the scrums. However Johns played at halfback in general play with Geoff Toovey having the dummy-half duties, necessary because Toovey had actually injured his neck during the tournament and simply could not pack into the front row in the scrums.

Following the match Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex presented Kangaroos captain Brad Fittler with the Cup and each of the players with medals. During the 1990 Kangaroo Tour, an 18-year-old Fittler had reportedly broken protocol when he had said "G'day dude" to Prince Edward's father, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh when the team had met the Duke as part of the tour. History allegedly repeated itself as Fittler was heard to say "Thanks dude" to Prince Edward when receiving the World Cup on the Wembley balcony.

Team of the tournament
The following players were selected as the 1995 World Cup "Team of the Tournament"

Try scorers

 * 6 tries
 * 🇦🇺 Steve Menzies

 * 5 tries

 * 🇦🇺 Robbie O'Davis

 * 4 tries

 * 🇦🇺 Tim Brasher
 * 🏴 Paul Newlove
 * 🏴 Anthony Sullivan

 * 3 tries

 * 🇦🇺 Brett Dallas
 * 🇦🇺 Terry Hill
 * 🇦🇺 John Hopoate
 * 🏴 Jason Robinson
 * 🇳🇿 Richie Blackmore
 * Vila Matautia

 * 2 tries

 * 🇦🇺 Mark Coyne
 * 🇦🇺 Andrew Johns
 * 🇦🇺 Paul McGregor
 * 🇦🇺 Danny Moore
 * 🏴 Paul Broadbent
 * 🏴 Simon Haughton
 * 🏴 Martin Offiah
 * 🏴 Nick Pinkney
 * 🏴 Kris Radlinski
 * 🏴 Tony Smith
 * Fili Seru
 * Waisale Sovatabua
 * 🇳🇿 Sean Hoppe
 * Tony Tatupu
 * Va'aiga Tuigamala
 * 🇹🇴 Awen Guttenbeil
 * 🇹🇴 Una Taufa
 * 🇹🇴 Willie Wolfgramm
 * 🏴 Iestyn Harris

 * 1 try

 * 🇦🇺 Jim Dymock
 * 🇦🇺 Brad Fittler
 * 🇦🇺 Nik Kosef
 * 🇦🇺 Gary Larson
 * 🇦🇺 Aaron Raper
 * 🇦🇺 Jason Smith
 * 🇦🇺 Rod Wishart
 * 🏴 John Bentley
 * 🏴 Denis Betts
 * 🏴 Phil Clarke
 * 🏴 Andrew Farrell
 * 🏴 Bobbie Goulding
 * 🏴 Chris Joynt
 * 🏴 Dean Sampson
 * Joe Dakuitoga
 * Samuela Marayawa
 * Noa Nadruku
 * Kalaveti Naisoro
 * Ian Sagaitu
 * Savenaca Taga
 * 🇫🇷 Didier Cabestany
 * 🇫🇷 Pierre Chamorin
 * 🇫🇷 Patrick Torreilles
 * 🇳🇿 Richie Barnett
 * 🇳🇿 Kevin Iro
 * 🇳🇿 Tony Iro
 * 🇳🇿 Tony Kemp
 * 🇳🇿 Hitro Okesene
 * 🇳🇿 Matthew Ridge
 * 🇵🇬 Marcus Bai
 * 🇵🇬 David Buko
 * 🇵🇬 Stanley Gene
 * 🇵🇬 Adrian Lam
 * 🇵🇬 Elias Paiyo
 * 🇵🇬 Lucas Solbat
 * Brian Laumatia
 * Apollo Perelini
 * Willie Swann
 * Paki Tuimavave
 * Gideon Watts
 * 🇹🇴 Salesi Finau
 * 🇹🇴 Phil Howlett
 * 🇹🇴 Tau'alupe Liku
 * 🇹🇴 Jimmy Veikoso
 * 🏴 John Devereux
 * 🏴 Kevin Ellis
 * 🏴 Rowland Phillips

title: 1995 Rugby League World Cup


text:
Talk:Anatolian rock

= Comments =

Rock festivals??
What does rock n coke have anything to do with anatolian rock? The title and the subheadings have inconsistencies.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.198.223.162 (talk) 11:40, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Clean up
I have just tidied this up a bit. No idea if Anatolian Rock Music even exists! Anjouli 11:19, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * You are ridiculous, of course it exists.. Just because you are ignorant, doesn't make things dissappear lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.106.142.38 (talk) 09:27, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

 * Well the musicians listed seem to exist, as does the genre - but not much on English websites. Anjouli 11:26, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * That means we have a marketing problem.-- Doktor Gonzo 13:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Dr.Tomy Eigen

The Princeton University

The History Art, "The evolution of Music"

Is this a reference ? theresa knott 11:20, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Could not make any sense of this so I removed it. (Tomy Eigen yields no Google hits.)Anjouli 11:25, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Minor copy editing and request for additional info
I fixed some minor typos and tried to streamline the text in order to make it more readable. I also created the history subsection and moved one paragraph from the lead into that area in addition to adding a paragraph of information I ran across.

This topic is interesting...does anyone know any more about it? For instance, the article mentions "Progressive Anatolian Style"--does anyone know what that is? I'd love to know. Lazulilasher (talk) 02:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

 * Nice work, it actually looks like something now. About progressive Anatolian style, honestly I have no idea. I recommend you to listen to Mezarkabul (aka Pentagram in Turkey) for some more modern examples of Anatolian rock, that's what I've been doing for the last couple of days ;).-- Doktor Gonzo 11:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm listening to Mezarkabul right now. They're pretty (very) good--but then I'm a sucker for gang vocals. Here's a YouTube clip of their song |"Anatolia". I'm going to do some searching today for some more history of the movement to see what I can find. Hopefully we can flesh out the page a bit--it's pretty cool stuff and I never even know it existed until I stumbled on this page. Lazulilasher (talk) 12:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

 * I realized that you removed the Omega and Status Quo in order to make it short, but these two have important influence on the progressive Anatolian style. Regards. E104421 (talk) 16:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, I added Omega and Status Quo back. Lazulilasher (talk) 01:02, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for re-introducing them, and for notifying me in my talk page. Actually, the first five albums by Status Quo had an influence on the bands at the beginning, since at that time there was a motion in Turkish bands towards Psychedelic music (especially, Erkin Koray's albums), mainly Psychedelic rock. Later, the motion changed to progressive modes (for example, Mavi Işıklar). The Hungarian band Omega (especially, the album Ejszakai Orszagut) influenced the early bands of Anatolian rock towards progressive rock. Regards. E104421 (talk) 11:05, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Awkward title?
The title is a bit awkward? Anatolian rock is a genre of music - some of these bands subsequently signed with foreign labels, etc so the scope of the title is too narrow. Also, Anatolian rock music is the common term used by WP:RS. Would there be objections to moving this? Seraphim System ( talk ) 13:11, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

 * The article is about all kinds of rock music, not just Anadolu rock. Anadolu rock is just a subgenre/precessor. Arved (talk) 07:55, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Then the lede sentence should be rewritten and we can set up a separate article for Anatolian rock? Seraphim System  ( talk ) 13:35, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Just moved the page. Rjrya395 (talk) 19:48, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Anatolian and Turkish rock
I suggest creating a new article called "Turkish rock" and move the part which is under "The Era of Turkish rock" title to the new article because Anatolian rock and Turkish rock are not the same things.-- Hustle77 ¿aquí estás?💬  15:16, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

 * Makes sense. Colaheed777 (talk) 19:06, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:37, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Baris Manco gitar.jpg

"Related musicians and bands" section
This section is clearly a mess. About half of the artists mentioned are already in the article, and they can be safely removed. I suggest either inserting the rest into the main article or, at worst, putting them in See also. Colaheed777 (talk) 19:09, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Anatolian rock


text:
Talk:Corinth

St. Paul
Since much of St. Paul's most important and best-known writing is in his First Epistle to the Corinthians (c. 55 A.D.) -- such as the famous "when I was a child, I spoke as a child" -- it is very helpful to anyone trying to understand the Pauline theology to understand that Corinth was considered a very wicked place and that the verb "to Corinthianize" in St. Paul's day (and later) had come to mean "imitating the corruption, greed, sexual depravity and dishonesty of the Corinthians." The legendary bad reputation of Sodom may be more well known, but the bad repuation of Corinth is not legendary. It was very real and can seen discussed in the contemporary writings of historians like Strabo.

Page move
This article has been renamed after the result of a move request:

Corinth, Greece → Corinth
I moved the content of Corinth (a link to Corinth, Greece and a list of insignificant US towns without articles) to Corinth (disambiguation), and I want to move this article to Corinth. I suggested this idea at the beginning of December 2004 (on talk:Corinth), and there was no response, so I'm getting on with it. As Corinth already exists I cannot move Corinth, Greece there without this process. — Gareth Hughes 21:23, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Support - reasons stated above. Gareth Hughes 21:23, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Obvious case for the most common meaning disambiguation. zoney ♣ talk 21:26, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Support 'Insignificant' might be a tad harsh, but the Hellenic original carries the vast bulk of the meaning of the name.  Alai 21:32, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Most of insignificant towns in the U.S. were named during the popularization of "Greek Revival" architecture and the frenzy for all things classical during the mid-19th century. —ExplorerCDT 21:33, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. —Lowellian (talk) 02:36, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Neutralitytalk 02:27, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support.--Astavrou 18:49, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Kalamaki
The Corinth article refers to Kalamaki as a nearby town. I don't think it refers to either of the towns listed on that page. I would be grateful for advice as to whether it does apply to the town listed in Thessalia as the other town is on the island of Zakynthos or is about another Kalamaki not listed on the current article. I would also be grateful for any references you can give me. Could you please drop me a line on my talk page if you can assist me in this matter? Capitalistroadster 09:14, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Kalamaki in this article is irrelevant with the two settlements you mention.

Caesar's Refounding
What is this word: "laus" ?? I have never seen that before as part of a colony and it is certainly not part of Caesar's name. Anyone? Also, I havent come across it, what is the source for Caesar's refounding the city? Cjcaesar 18:22, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

 * It means "praise", so I guess "Colonia laus Iulia Corinthiensis" could mean "Corinthian colony, the Julian praise", in the sense of a colony founded in honour of Caesar. I don't know about Roman colonial naming patterns but I have never seen that as part of a colony name either. Adam Bishop 03:20, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks. Laus...duh.  I shouldve seen it.  Anyway, I would still like the source for that name, be it inscriptionary or otherwise.  It is possible, if the former is the case, that the mason misspelled something.  --Cjcaesar 18:25, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Turkish vs Greek names
I don't think that Turkish names are appropriate in an English language article. English speakers need the Greek name since it is the original name and western languages are often based on Greek. While I can't argue, nor should they be argued here, Greek names on "Turkish" cities are appropriate in English articles for the same reason. Those were the original names. Greeks often inhabited these cities through Ottoman times, until the Turkish nationalists expelled them. However, Turkish names on these cities are also appropriate. Turks have recently begun rethinking the erasing of these ancient names, e.g. Bodrum for Halicarnassus. The latter name would do a world of good for tourism. What significance does "Bodrum" have other than it's non-Greek? Student7 (talk) 17:51, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

 * It would be relevant to mention the Turkish name in the history section of the article, but not at the beginning. As Student7 said, we like to know the original Greek names of places in Turkey because English owes so much to classical Greece. But we don't really care what the Turks called Corinth, because it was always Corinth for us. Adam Bishop (talk) 17:29, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Articles about cities in Turkey (in english language) have greek names on it. Thus, cities in Greece must have the turkish names in articles about them. That's an equal and friendly solution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.133.129.16 (talk) 14:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

 * This is not about chauvanism or nationalism. It is about understandability. English speakers do not generally understand Turkish. It has no relevancy to an English speaker. City names were changed by Turks when they expelled the Greeks. That's fine, but English is still has a Latin/Greek base. We've used the Greek names "forever."

 * We call some European places by English names though they don't have the same names at all! Florence instead of Firenz. Germany instead of Allemand. Austria instead of Oesterich (or whatever). Best of all, we don't have to argue with Italians or Germans or Austrians that we've hurt their feelings! Student7 (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Category:Pauline churches
This category got erased from here and a bunch of other Pauline-founded churches. Anyone know why? Student7 (talk) 21:52, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Destroyed 2000 BC?
A lot of non-scholarly (travel) websites have picked up the same "factoid" that Corinth "may" have been destroyed (by what? earthquake? invasion?) in 2000 BC. They give no citation of course. All seem to have copied each other. Be nice to get a scholarly source for this assuming one exists. Student7 (talk) 14:49, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Sister Cities
Abilene, Texas lists Corinth as a sister city, while Corinth does not list Abilene as a sister city, is this just an overlooked fact or vandalism on either page? Blah42b10 (talk) 21:08, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Time to split this article between Ancient and (Nea/New) Corinth
I'm a resident of (modern/Nea/New) Corinth and find the scope of this article highly problematic. The modern-day city of Corinth has nothing to do with Ancient Corinth, expect that it shares the same name. Modern-day Corinth was a completely new city, founded shortly after the 1858 earthquake, on a site 5km away from (Ancient Corinth). For decades, it was known as "Nea Korinthos" or New Corinth, to distinguish it from the village around the ruins of ancient Corinth, which is still known as Ancient or Archaia Korinthos to this day.

The Greek version of Wikipedia is clear: the entry for Corinth relates to the modern-day city only, while a fork atop the page directs visitors to the article on Ancient Corinth.

I think we need to differentiate the two on the English-language Wikipedia as well. Any thoughts?--Damac (talk) 17:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

 * I went ahead and made the changes, especially when I realised that much of the material on the Corinth article was identical in content and length with the material on the Ancient Corinth article. I believe my changes reflect the reality that the modern city of Corinth has little or nothing to do spatially with Ancient Corinth and that modern Corinth was founded in 1858, a fact recognised by the city council, which celebrated the city's 150th anniversary in 2008.

 * However, a new user of no more than four days on Wikipedia, Georalex1/79.42.37.197, has reverted much of my effort, arguing, in quite a rude tone, that I have "destroyed" the disambiguation between the two articles and, more seriously, that my edits have been "antiscientific". For his rationale for essentially reverting all of my changes, see User_talk:Damac.

 * I would appreciate the views of other contributors and would ask Georalex1 to continue the discussion here.--Damac (talk) 23:02, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

 * I'd say that most of the material concerning Corinth before 1858 could go in the Ancient Corinth page, but that it should still be summarized here. The current section contains material from the intervening centuries as well as classical times, and readers wouldn't necessarily expect to find that under "Ancient Corinth", even if that might be as appropriate a place to put it as this page.  As long as it's relatively brief, as much of it is, it's probably fine here, but the detailed chronology of ancient Corinth probably should be moved to a different page.

 * It occurs to me, however, that as most references to Corinth will be to ancient Corinth, that this title should refer to that page, instead of this one, and that this one might be better filed under "Modern Corinth" or "Corinth (modern city)". P Aculeius (talk) 12:53, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

 * I guess anything to get rid of or merge the awful histories. They need work. Work in one spot would help considerably. Student7 (talk) 13:24, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I took some parts fro my discussion with Damac (User_talk:Damac) and I put it here. There is not any place in Greece which is called "Nea Korinthos" as Damac wrote! The official name of the city was ever Korinthos and still is! In fact They were four exact locations for Korinthos: a)Prehistoric, Mycenean, Archaic, Classic in Acrokorinthos, b)Roman and early Byzantine for the place where St. Paul preached (in fact just in the edge of Modern Korinthos), c) Middle Ages (again Akrokorinthos) d) Ottoman (near Isthmus) and e) Modern which in fact is identical with Roman Korinthos. Which is ancient and Modern Corinth for you??? Anyway for a better understanding of what the rest of the world is doing for the history of any location look at wikipedia on Montreal, London and History of London, Moscow and History of Moscow, Kyoto, Vilnius, Paris, Jericho, Amman, Jerusalem, Mexico City etc. etc. (thousands times)!!!!! Only the Greek edition for example and some Greek writers (I suppose) distinguish between Sparta and Sparti, a fact very strange for me. I don’t have any problem with the continuity between past and present but as a reader I would like to be objectively informed about the history of a name or a locality. The way "student 7" solved the problem in some way satisfies me…, although that I would rather comment that "Ottoman Corinth" is not exactly Ancient Corinth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georalex1 (talk • contribs) 05:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Damac you created here a huge problem for the readers of WIKIPEDIA, as I am one of them... For example go to Second Epistle to the Corinthians, the link to Corinth takes you to the modern municipality! All the thousands links indicating the section Corinth in WIKIPEDIA and are reffering to the so called Roman Corinth are leading the readers towards the Modern Municipality... Any bible reader or a researcher of Proto-Christian era is going to be confused because you personally have the strange philosophy to cut out the historical past from a location. This is absolutely antiscientific and creates a huge problem which has nothing to do with an academic classification but is purely ideology! Not Science! Your way in intervening in ths article is scientifically obscure! If you have any objection that Ancient Corinth has something to do with Modern Corinth, then point it out but in the section Corinth. Splitting, Merging and Diversifying is purely a scientific method and not a method of ideology or fair personal opinion! You have not the right to create a mess for the readers of WIKIPEDIA who from Syracuse, Sicily are redirected not to "Corinth" (as it was indicated) but to the Modern Town. This is someway a fictionic intervention. You have not any right to create a chaos to the readers! If you just dare do the same, as you did to "poor" Corinth, to Montreal, London and History of London, Moscow and History of Moscow, Kyoto, Vilnius, Paris, Jericho, Amman, Jerusalem, Mexico City and then we shall see together the reaction of the readers and the academics. Please be rational, don't mix science with fiction, personal ideas and ideology. And please answer to me with your scientific objections to my arguments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georalex1 (talk • contribs) 21:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC) Georalex1 (talk) 22:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)--Georalex1 (talk) 22:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

 * So much hyperbole from such a new member of Wikipedia. Please tell me how much space is given to Ancient Rome in the article on Rome? How many links are their to "main articles" providing detailed articles on different aspects of Rome's history? How much information is given on the modern city? How much direct replication is there of material on ancient Rome in the Ancient Rome and (modern) Rome articles?
 * The many directs from historical articles to Corinth is a problem that can be easily recified through redirects, which I will start on once I've time.--Damac (talk) 09:31, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

 * I agree with Georalex on two points. The difference in location between various Ancient Corinths should be indicated, but in that article, not here. If discussion is needed, it needs to be done there as well.
 * I did wonder when I changed whether we should have "Corinth" as dab, pointing to two Corinths (or more, God help us!) with our Corinths as "Ancient Corinth" and "Corinth (modern)". That would flummox the vague linkages that everyone will not only have now but will happen in the future as well. New biblical (or anything else) references are always going to be " Corinth ". Nobody will ever check first.
 * I can resolve the current problems, probably extensive BTW, but what about the hundreds that will arise? I think we should dab "Corinth" and move this article to "Corinth (modern)." Student7 (talk) 20:10, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I think that Rome, you referred to, Damac, is Exactly a nice example! "Corinth", as Rome, must be a general presentation of all... Corinths (from Neolithic era to modern times, including ancient Greek, the Roman destruction by Lucius Mummius Achaicus, the Roman town and the Byzantine, Medieval and Ottoman periods -AND the modern town- and a special cover of Biblical Corinth. Ancient Corinth is another article specializing in more historical and archaeological points of the history of the Ancient Greek Town; and "Corinth (modern)" as "Student 7" and "P Aculeius" pointed out, must refer extensively in the modern city. One real problem is that ancient Greek Corinth as a state and a city ends it's life with Mummius and his Romans (146 BC). The "next Corinth" is re-established as a colony by the Romans. But for the moment the classification of the Greek state city and the Roman colony (not Byzantine, Medieval, Ottoman and post-revolutionary) can easily be done under the term "Ancient Corinth" but with the indication that the referance is for both periods. Anyway the internationally accepted historiography, literature, philology and geography recognises ONE Corinth. The terms Ancient and Modern must be redirections from the respective chapters of this "one" Corinth! There is not any populated place in the world which has been called by it's contemporary (era's) people (and historians and geographers) as "Ancient Corinth" or "New Corinth" except New Corinth in Tennessee and the exact excavated unpopulated enclosured archaeological site (ruins) of Corinth which has been named for scientific and touristic purposes as "Ancient Corinth". That's why even "Corinth" as a dab doesn't reflect the scientific reality. The example of Rome is the best to follow--Georalex1 (talk) 22:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

 * I hate to say it since I've done a lot of editing, but this makes sense. (Alas). The old city state probably did include what is now "new" Corinth. And "new" Corinth carefully encompasses the old/ancient city. The renaming of the "old" city will have to be done carefully. Whatever happens, I would like to continue to "integrate" the old history with what is now Ancient Corinth. After I am finished, it will still need a heck of a lot of work. But will try to discuss that problem there. Would like to hear from Damac on the proposals. Student7 (talk) 19:27, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

 * Just on the first issue, whether the old city state "included" what is now the city of Corinth. The archaeologists and knowledgeable locals I've spoken too say "no". The two entities are 5-6km away from each other, and in 1858, the site that would become the new city was nothing but reeds. As far as I am aware, there have been little or no archaeological finds in the present-day city.
 * I accept Georalex's point about Ancient Corinth being too broad a term to encompass all the material currently in that article. For example, we have Hellenistic Corinth in with Ottoman Corinth. However, what concerned me at the very beginning was that in the article on Corinth, there was hardly anything about the present-day city. The article was awash with material cut-and-pasted from the Ancient Corinth article, and from my experience on Wikipedia, there is no reason to have material - and some of it was badly written - duplicated over two articles. I live in Corinth and would like to see that city properly described on Wikipedia, while at the same time making readers aware of the importance of Ancient Corinth.
 * Ideally, as the article on the history of the cities/settlements called Corinth throughout history develops and expands, we can create even more specialised articles, such as Hellenistic Corinth, Roman Corinth, Byzantine Corinth and Ottoman Corinth, while maintaining Ancient Corinth as the page providing the overview of the whole history of the place.
 * And on Georalex' argument that Corinth was never called Nea Korinthos. The historical evidence would suggest otherwise, I'm afraid. Whether it was official or not, after 1858, the locals here referred to the village/ancient ruins as Palaia Korinthos (this was officially renamed Archaia Korinthos in the 1920s/30s) and the new city as Nea Korinthos. They had to differentiate the two, especially as they were located a few km apart.
 * To illustrate: here is a postcard of "Nea Korinthos" from 1910, here is a local book that talks about Palaia and Nea Korinthos since 1850, here is the text of a history of the modern city, entitled ΝΕΑΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΟΥ ΙΣΤΟΡΟΥΜΕΝΑ, that used the term "Nea Korinthos" throughout. If you scroll down, you'll find the text of the royal decree, signed by Otto of Greece on the 19 March 1858, ordering the construction of the "νέας των Κορινθίων".
 * I would also like to quote from the 1911 edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica:
 * "The modern town of New Corinth, the head of a district in the province of Corinth (pop. 71,229), is situated on the Isthmus of Corinth near the southeastern recess of the Gulf of Corinth, 32 m. N.E. from the site of the ancient city. It was founded in 1858, when Old Corinth was destroyed by an earthquake."
 * and the The Americana (1913):
 * "New Corinth (Nea Korinthos) stands about three miles to the northeast on the coast of the gulf, on the railway from Athens to Patras. It is a small town built since 1858 ..."
 * and The Greece I Love, by Robert Descharnes and Michel Déon (1961):
 * "Since the opening of the canal the modern port of Nea Korinthos has vegetated ..."
 * and the Handbuch für Heer und Flotte (1913):
 * "Das heutige K[orinth], auch Neu-Korinth (Nea-Korinthos) hat 5000 Einwohner u. liegt an der Nordküste des Peloponnes ..."
 * and last but not least, the American School of Classical Studies, which has been excavating Ancient Corinth since the 1890s, also refers to Old and New Corinth on its website:
 * "The city of New Corinth celebrated its sesquicentennial anniversary with a conference held 26-28 September ...".
 * More references on request!
 * Georalex, when can I take up your kind offer, made some days ago, to show me around Corinth, the city in which I live?--Damac (talk) 23:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

 * Well, this could give us the option of dab-ing Corinth and forking to Ancient, Byzantine, New, etc. What I like about dab-ing, is that it forces people automatically linking to Corinth (usually biblical) to link to the correct one, eventually. Otherwise they could wind up with the modern one, usually not useful for their intended link.
 * If you branch to the map in Roman Corinth, there is a blue splotch between Attica and Peloponnesia. I am guessing that this was the old Corinthian city-state. There really is no other title for that stretch of land. It was "Corinth." "City limits" really didn't apply for what we are talking about in the ancient world. We bind ourselves more strictly today, having a more lucid understanding of political boundaries than our forefathers. Student7 (talk) 13:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Οὐ παντὸς πλεῖν εἰς Κόρινθον, for the moment, dear Damac! But one of the times I’ll come there, as long as you live there, I suppose I shall find the time and the pleasure to meet each other. Your arguments are quite impressive but not at all enough. Let’s make a hypothesis that your arguments are enough. Then you must create a new entry (article) about Nea Korinthos, referring to a period during the reign of King Otto, and point out there your arguments. I am not sarcastic at all! Why I disagree with you supporting that your arguments are not enough? Because in the international bibliography this term “Nea Korinthos” is not existing, as an Academic fact. The signifier of “Nea” here is not passing to the signified “New” but to “Rebuild”. You pointed out Encyclopedia Brittanica (1911 edition), but I found just the entry “Corinth”, which presents the history of city as: “''CORINTH, a city of Greece, situated near the isthmus (see Corinth, Isthmus Of) which connects Peloponnesus and central Greece, and separates the Saronic and the Corinthian gulfs on E. and W. The ancient town stood 12 m. from the latter, in a plain extending westward to Sicyon. The citadel, or Acrocorinthus, rising precipitously on the S. to a height of 1886 ft. was separated by aravine from Oneium, a range of hills which runs E. to the isthmus entrance. Between this ridge and the offshoots of Geraneia opposite a narrow depression allowed of easy transit across the Isthmus neck. The territory of Corinth was mostly rocky and unfertile; but its position at the head of two navigable gulfs clearly marked it out as a commercial centre. Its natural advantages were enhanced by the "Diolcus" or tram-road, by which ships could be hauled across the Isthmus. It was connected in historic times with its western port of Lechaeum by two continuous walls, with Cenchreae and Schoenus on the east by chains of fortifications. The city walls attained a circuit of 1 o m.” and then follows the history from “Mythology''”. This is how all Encyclopedias presents “Corinth” : The current day Brittanica presents as : “''Corinth, Greek Kórinthos, an ancient and a modern city of the Peloponnesus, in south-central Greece. The remains of the ancient city lie about 50 miles (80 km) west of Athens, at the eastern end of the Gulf of Corinth, on a terrace some 300 feet (90 metres) above sea level. The ancient city grew up at the base of the citadel of the Acrocorinthus—a Gibraltar-like eminence rising 1,886 feet (575 metres) above sea level. The Acrocorinthus lies about 1.5 miles (2.5 km) south of the Isthmus of Corinth, which connects the Peloponnese with central Greece and which ...''” The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition | 2008 | (just one entry: Corinth) presents as : “''Corinth or Kórinthos, city (1991 pop. 27,412), capital of Corinth prefecture, S Greece, in the NE Peloponnesus, on the Gulf of Corinth. It is a port and major transportation center trading in olives, tobacco, raisins, and wine. Founded in 1858 after the destruction of Old Corinth by an earthquake, it was rebuilt after another earthquake in 1928. It formerly was known as New Corinth. Old Corinth, just southwest of modern Corinth, is now a village. Strategically situated on the Isthmus of Corinth and protected by the fortifications on the Acrocorinthus, Corinth was one of the largest, wealthiest, most powerful, and oldest cities of ancient Greece. Dating from Homeric times, it was conquered by the Dorians. In the 7th and 6th cent. BC, under the tyrants Cypselus, his son Periander, and their successors, it became a flourishing maritime power. Syracuse, Kérkira, …''”. The Jewish Encyclopedia mentions only ancient Corinth but just as “Corinth” : “''A city in ancient Argos, Greece, and the center of the cult of Aphrodite. Jews lived here, as in the other cities of Greece (Philo, "Legatioad Caium," § 36), although little is known of their history. The apostle Paul preached Christianity in the synagogue of Corinth for eighteen months, and baptized the archisynagogue Crispus (I Cor. i. 14); but he was reviled by the other Jews and accused before the governor, Junius Annæus Gallio (53C.E.)….''” The “Le Petit Larousse (Grand Format), 1996” points out in one entry both ancient and modern city: “''Corinthe, en gr. Kórinthos, cité grecque, rivale d’Athènes et de Sparte, qui fut la métropole marchande et industrielle la plus riche de la Grèce archaïque (VII-VI s.)… – C’est auj. un port sur le golf de Corinthe…''”. Now coming to your arguments. It is true that some sources indicate the difference of the two sites (old and modern) pointing out that the new city was built in 1858 from Queen Amalia in a different site from the old. The most characteristic is that of “Encyclopedia of Helios, 1956 (ΝΕΩΤΕΡΟΝ ΕΓΚΥΚΛΟΠΑΙΔΙΚΟΝ ΛΕΞΙΚΟΝ Εκδόσεις «ΗΛΙΟΣ», τομ. ΙΑ, σελ. 238) “''ΚΟΡΙΝΘΟΣ (Γεωγραφία).” : “Πόλις τῆς Πελοποννήσου, πρωτεύουσα τοῦ νομοῦ Κορινθίας καὶ ἓδρα τῆς ὁμωνύμου ἐπαρχίας καὶ τοῦ δήμου Κορίνθου… Συνεπῶς ἡ θέσις τῆς συγχρόνου πόλεως οὐδόλως συνάπτεται πρὸς τὴν τῆς αρχαίας, οὐδέ κἄν πρὸς τὸν ἕτερον τῶν δύο λιμένων τῆς ἀρχαίας Κορίνθου. Πράγματι ἡ σύγρονος πόλις τῆς ἀρχαίας Κορίνθου μέχρι πρὸ τινος ἀκόμα ἐκαλεῖτο «Νέα Κόρινθος», πρὸς διάκρισιν ἀπό τὴν «Παλαιάν Κόρινθον», ποὺ ἒκειτο εἰς ἀπόστασιν 8 χλμ. περίπου, παρὰ τοὺς πρόποδας τοῦ Ἀκροκορίνθου, εἰς τὴν θέσιν τῆς ἀρχαίας Κορίνθου. … Ἡ Ἀρχαία Κόρινθος. Ἡ ἀρχαία Κόρινθος ἦτο μία τῶν σημαντικοτέρων πόλεων τῆς ἀρχαίας Ελλάδος…. Ἡ Κόρινθος κατὰ τοὺς μέσους καὶ νεωτέρους χρόνους… Ὁ Πολιτισμὸς τῆς Κορίνθου…''” etc. This source, which is quite unique in Greek encyclopedias because it declares it absolutely, as the ones you have indicated Damac, speak of an “Old” and a “New” Corinth as matters of urban planning and memory : The town before the earthquake and the town after! But there is not any reference that indicates we have to deal with different entities which have nothing to do with each other. In fact they were the habitants of Old Corinth that inhabited the newly created (or rather re-built) town, just 8 Km far away (not in another state as Greece and Turkey e.g. Smyrna and Nea Smyrni or Ialyssos and Nea Iallyssos). That’s why even “Helios” presents a single article about “all” Corinths and doesn’t dare to diversify them, and that’s why the rebuilt town took the official name “Kόρινθος” (Corinth), as it is just known officially in Greece and elsewhere. It’s also true that exists a sort of dab in encyclopedic presentation of “Corinth”. The Great Soviet Encyclopedia (Большая Советская Энциклопедия, 1973 г., том 13, стр.177) was a unique exception in the Academic world, it mentions “Corinth” (as dab) with two entries, the first  : “''Коринф (Kórinthos), др.-греч. город-государство (полис) на Коринфском перешейке (в 6 км к Ю.-З. от современного г. Коринф). Раскопками на месте К. обнаружены следы поселения 2-го тыс. до н.э. ... Был разграблен и разрушен готами в 395 г. н.э., потом в 521; восстановлен при Юстиниане. ...”  The second, about the modern city, has the same exactly name and entry as the first and goes as  : “ Коринф (Kórinthos), город и порт в Греции, на Коринфском перешейке, у Коринфского канала. ... Осн. в 1818. В 1858 и 1928 подвергался разрушениям в результате землетрясения. Близ К. (в 6 км к Ю.-З.) остатки древнего К. ...''”. It is still obvious here that there is not any reference to “Old” or “New” City. This classification (as a dab) is rather not have been followed by the world academics and has been considered as ideological propaganda (as the whole encyclopedia which was admired widely but still it’s classifications were considered –for better or for worse– as propaganda). Anyway both …”Corinths” have been presented there as just “Коринф (Kórinthos)” and even if Soviet Encyclopedia points out that the city has been established in 1858 still as you see (concerning all it’s earthquakes 1818, 1858, 1928) it refers to the second “Коринф (Kórinthos)” as one with the first not mentioning any difference in Corinth of 1818 or Corinth of 1928. Don’t forget that it was me who wrote in Wikipedia that “Unofficially” it was called “New Corinth”. But this is just to point out a memory and not to diversify the Corinth before of 1858 and the Corinth after 1858. I insist that Corinth is Just ONE entry and article. If there will be an entry of “Palaia Korinthos” or “Nea Korinthos” these must redirected from ONE "Corinth" and will be done as indications (with all references) to the unofficial names who diversify the sites of the one city before and after the earthquake of 1858. The old town and the new rebuild town after the event just 8 km ahead that time… It’s up to the contributors to decide for the good reliability of WIKIPEDIA.--Georalex1 (talk) 22:19, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

 * Let's talk about a Georalex structure only. You want Corinth as now. It forks to (and therefore summarizes) several histories (hopefully not geographies) "Ancient Corinth", "Roman Corinth", "Byzantine Corinth", and (what?) Ottoman Corinth (?). Whatever the split, I think the two of you agree on that (the split itself). The only disagreement is the name of the lead article. I hope you can work that out!  :)  But I think the structure of the rest is apparent and (hopefully) non-controversial.
 * With due respect for your scholarly and research talents, may I suggest shortening your discussion entries? They are a bit hard to follow. Maybe pointers would do?
 * Once I merge all that stuff in Ancient Corinth. I will re-merge into the agreed-upon subarticles. And (gulp) bring the summaries back to the lead article (but they will be true summaries, not copies like before). That way we will only have one sublevel below this one instead of the current two. This will take a week or two I'm afraid. I'm sure there will be plenty of editing work to be done after the merges. Student7 (talk) 22:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

O.k. Student 7, thanks--Georalex1 (talk) 22:56, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I have to point even though that I disagree with the split. But the way you've done it it's quite acceptable but if you point out in the beginning: and point out the same in the chapter "History" as: For the Ancient Greek, Roman, Byzantine, Medieval and Ottoman periods of the city, see Ancient Corinth! Thanks Student 7.--Georalex1 (talk) 23:18, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

 * Okay. Not sure this is correct, but it is certainly easier for me! So I will (only) do what Georalex has just suggested. Everything stays as is with the appropriate comments. Damac, do you concur?
 * If the "Ancient Corinth" contains all histories, they must be better summarized and I will try to do that. Nothing will be summarized in this article from those histories. Student7 (talk) 20:47, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

 * If I follow you correctly, I would be in agreement. My whole point at the start was that the article on Corinth had barely any information on the city of that name. Rather, it was swamped with material cut and pasted from the Ancient Corinth article. When I removed that, Georalex1 reverted it and so the debate started.
 * Unlike all the cities he mentioned, Corinth has not been continuously settled in history. If it was, it would be on the List of cities by time of continuous habitation.
 * Georalex1, however, did make a valid point about the usage of the term "Ancient Corinth". Of course, there was never a place called that in history, well not before the 19th century, but nowadays it has almost become a byword for everything to do with premodern Corinth, regardless of historical period. But if we can strive to create dedicated articles for each of the major historical periods, all the better, but I would still think that the place to summarise these articles would be on the Ancient Corinth rather than the Corinth page.
 * I will try and contribute as best I can. I've been redirecting links away from Corinth to Ancient/Roman/Byzantine Corinth manually, but there are so many of them.--Damac (talk) 21:38, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, this solution works easily now, but there will be mis-links in the future to the modern city when the ancient one was intended. But no worse than mis-linking to a dab, I suppose. I will try to confine further remarks to the Ancient Corinth discussion. Thanks to both of you for straightening this out! Student7 (talk) 20:02, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

 * An editor, new to these articles, wants to move pic of Cathedral and Byzantine fort to this article. Seems to me that they go into older article. Are we now forced to break "Ancient Corinth" into two parts, "Ancient Corinth" and "Byzantine Corinth"? What should this new article be called? I think we don't want material from pre-19th century in here, right? Student7 (talk) 20:09, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

History
There have been a large number of additions to the history. This subsection, which was supposed to be a summary of the main article, is around 7 pages. The entire article on Ancient Corinth is only 8 including footer material. Okay, this article includes modern history as well. Anyway they seem to have suddenly diverged dramatically. These need to be brought into sync, with in-line footnotes in both places, not just one, and the article here a "summary" which I would assume would be about 1/3 of the main article, or 2-3 pages. Student7 (talk) 14:59, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

 * 6 79.125.235.66 (talk) 10:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Famous authors
A new section lists "famous authors" and what they have said about Corinth. While there is nothing wrong about using these references, the article is about Corinth. Yes, we can "claim fame" because of these authors, but Corinth must be featured more than the authors themselves. Student7 (talk) 15:13, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Industry
Is there REALLY a Corinthian leather industry?! 68.199.97.145 (talk) 07:58, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Don't think so, at least not a notable one:

"Did you know that Corinthian leather does not actually come from Corinth? In fact, Corinthian leather never existed before an ad guy thought it up. First appearing in a 1974 ad for the Chrysler Imperial, the phrase really hit its stride when spokesman Ricardo Montalbán used it in 1976 to describe the leather interior of the new Chrysler Cordoba" from http://www.affinityxm.com/rich-corinthian-leather/ Wgfcrafty (talk) 02:24, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Demonym
I tried to add the demonym Corinthian to the infobox, but couldn't get it to display. I haven't any idea why, is that the correct demonym? Or just the English word for the people of Corinth? I also noticed it was already listed in the actual page, but not displaying. *shrug* Wgfcrafty (talk) 02:22, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Corinth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100723000059/http://www.paskorinthos.gr:80/2006-2007.html to http://www.paskorinthos.gr/2006-2007.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:58, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Corinth. 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/20150921212047/http://dlib.statistics.gr:80/Book/GRESYE_02_0101_00098%20.pdf to http://dlib.statistics.gr/Book/GRESYE_02_0101_00098%20.pdf

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) 21:43, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Corinth. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://dlib.statistics.gr/Book/GRESYE_02_0101_00098%20.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070602022252/http://www.korinthos.gr/%23 to http://www.korinthos.gr/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070602022252/http://www.korinthos.gr/%23 to http://www.korinthos.gr/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:36, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Corinth
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Corinth's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "census11": From Athens:  From Thessaloniki:

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:13, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Corinth


text:
Talk:Infrared spectroscopy

Untitled
The 'Typical Method' section of this article needs an edit to bring it out of the 1970s. The sort of non-FT method that's described isn't used by anyone anymore, and that type of machine hasn't even been available commercially for many years. You would be hard-pressed to find such a machine anywhere, except perhaps in the back of a university chemistry department's storage closet. In my opinion it should be eliminated entirely, or at least moved to the bottom of the article and placed in some sort of 'history of the technique' section. -July 1, 2005

It's probably useful for helping to explain what happens? Perhaps we could add a paragraph which says something like, "In practice, modern techniques use [fourier transform] techniques in order to determine the absorption spectra more precisely. At much lower frequencies detectors exist that can give the electric field over time, which may be transformed directly into a frequency spectrum.  However at infrared frequencies (>600GHz) detectors cannot react fast enough, and so an [interferometer] (similar in principle to the one used in the [Michelson-Morley] experiment) must be used - this allows the signal to be recorded in the length domain.  This signal may then be converted into the usual frequency spectrum." A source I had to hand for this is Modern Spectroscopy, 2nd Ed, J. Michael Hollas, ISBN: 0-471-93076-8 Grj23 (talk) 13:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I guess rather than precision, the advantages of the FT method is that it detects a broad band of radiation all the time (the multiplex or Fellgett advantage) and that a greater proportion of the source radiation passes through the instrument because of the circular aperture rather than the narrow slit used for prisms or diffraction gratings (known as the Jacquinot advantage) (with the same source as my post above) 131.111.74.86 (talk) 14:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

It might be helpful to add the equation for IR absorption frequency.

-- I agree. I'm brand new here, how does one add equations? I could write then up in MathType or MathCAD.

--nmathew

To add an equation just use the math tag or click on the $$\sqrt n$$ button when editing. I'd put that equation in myself but I've but limited myself to editing only after at least 8 hours sleep the night before! Afn 09:27, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

IR-activity for symmetric CH2 stretch vibration
To my knowledge, the CH2 symmetric stretch vibration is IR-active. The reason is, that the dipole moment changes while the chemical group is oscillating. See e.g. Therefore, the gif-animation, which states also that the methylene vibration is IR-inactive, should be changed.

 * The designations were added by an anonymous person five months ago. . I think they should all be deleted: I know for sure that many are wrong right now, but there are a couple where I'm unsure what's correct (and I can't find a reference). The sentence before the animation implies that each mode is either IR-active or Raman-active but not both. This sentence should be deleted too. It is false for non-centrosymmetric situations like this. --Steve (talk) 12:01, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

 * I agree that those activity assignments cannot be generalized, see |this site for a counter example to some of the previous labels. I've removed the activity assignments and hopefully clarified the discussion about the number of modes. ronningt (talk) 15:56, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

value for carboxylic acid
The article puts the values for carboxylic acids as: carboxylic acids/derivates 	saturated carboxylic acids 	1710 cm-1 unsat./aromatic carb. acids 	1680-1690 cm-1 esters and lactones 	1735 cm-1 (influence of conjugation and ring size like with ketones) anhydrides 	1760 and 1820 cm-1 (both!) halogenides 	1801 cm-1 amides 	1650 cm-1 (associated amides) carboxylates (salts) 	1550-1610 cm-1 (goes for aminoacid zwitterions as well)

but this site (http://www.chem.ucla.edu/~webspectra/irtable.html) puts it as 2800-300 cm-1

so which is it?

Thank you.

The first values you've quoted were for the C=O adsorption in carboxylic acids. The ones you refer to from the other site seem to be for the O-H adsorption region, although that would be more around 3000-3500cm-1. A carboxylic acid has both groups, but the article has categorised their adsorptions separately, corresponding to the individual bonds, for simplicity. krebbe 15:09, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

IR spextroscopy on inorganic molecules
Since the article said that IR spectroscopy is also helpful or used in inorganic compounds, it is OK to include the fundamental vibrations of such inorganic compounds in the correlation table and the visual representation as well. --Aeron Valderrama 00:37, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Sample Prep
Took out: "These salts do not absorb infrared light, so spectral lines will only appear from the analyte." Mediums such as KBr are used because they do not absorb IR light in the region most organic chemists are concerned with, but they do absorb IR light.

This section also needs a make over so it at least sounds like someone with a degree wrote it. Use of low/no prep diamond tip devices.

IR Correlation Table
The IR correlation table ought to be moved back into this article. The greatest reason is that one cannot find the article unless you look in the history of this article. Searching for "Infrared Specroscopy Correlation table" (the name of the article) doesn't find it at all. And in every book (that I've seen, and I've seen a few) covering IR spectroscopy for those intent on using it, a detailed table can be found.

I just think not including the correlation chart is like talking about a country without including a political map of its borders, it leaves out something of importance.

theory
I don't want to be nitpicky, but isn't it "antisymmetrical" instead of "asymmetrical" stretching?

Lothar —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.224.243.13 (talk) 17:39, 2 February 2007 (UTC).
 * It's usually asymmetric but 'antisymmetric'' can also be used. --Kkmurray 16:07, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Wavenumber
If this article is to be read by non-spectroscopists (and what is the point otherwise?) would it not be better to give the wavelength of the radiation used, instead of just its wave number? (maybe like this: ...(approx. wavenumber 400-10 cm-1, wavelength 25µm to 1mm) lying adjacent to the microwave region, has low energy and may be used for rotational spectroscopy. The mid- infrared (approx. wavenumber 4000-400 cm-1, wavelength 2.5µm to 25µm) may be used to study the fundamental vibrations and associated rotational-vibrational structure, whilst the higher energy near-IR (wavenumber 14000-4000 cm-1,  wavelength 700nm to 25µm))... Moletrouser 06:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

example calculations
I think adding an external link to http://www.spectralcalc.com/ would be beneficial for this page. It's a site where one can simulate molecular spectra for any common molecular species, and view or download complete databases of molecular absorption line parameters. Access is free (subscriptions are needed for some advanced things). Visualizing infrared spectra in this way is very instructive, and I think appropriate here. What do you think? --Martin McHugh 17:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing anyone from linking to them from all of Wikipedia. ''Seriously, stop linking to your website. Its a conflict of interest and SPAM.'' Chuck Sirloin 18:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Can we discuss this? I honestly don't think this is spam. The site is all about infrared spectroscopy and remote sensing. It's substantive and pertinent to the topic, and adds a great deal of depth and value I think. The fact that I've been associated with the site seems to be the problem, but that seems rather simplistic as a criterion. In discussion with the Wikipedia Administrators, it was requested that I post any external links to the talk pages first. I did this, and came back one month later to find that nobody voiced any objections. Exactly what guideline does this violate? --mm 19:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

 * I concur that Martyjmch tried to do the right thing here. If now editors don't think the link belongs, it's certainly discussable, same as any other content, but there were no objections when explicitly asked, so spam (or other) user-conduct warnings about adding it seem inappropriate. DMacks 19:35, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I gave the warning because this user has been caution before by other editors about adding the link. Under conditions of COI, it was my understanding that the appropriate method was to post the link on the talk page, and if other editors thought the link was appropriate, they would add it, not the person with the COI.  As I responded on User_talk:Martyjmch, my problem is with the link being a subscription site.  That being said, if a consensus is reached by other editors that the link is needed, then so be it. --Chuck Sirloin 20:41, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

 * I'd lean against inclusion as it doesn't look like a unique external resource and doesn't seem to add much to the article here. There are multiple databases and calculators with various subscription models on the web (NB: this one does appear to have a free mode, I don't think "sign up for free account to use" is too commercial-like by itself, but there does need to be substantial quallity & quantity of free stuff), and Wikipedia is not DMOZ. What specifically is the unique content here? DMacks 20:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, there are two unique things here, I think: 1) interactive online calculation and visualization of infrared gas-phase spectra, and 2) the display and access to the line parameters (e.g. HITRAN). Both seem appropriate to an article on infrared spectroscopy. To my knowledge, this is the only place you can do the former, and the easiest place to do the latter. Chuck Sirloin is correct -- I have a conflict of interest here (I am affilliated with the company that owns the site, and helped design the radiative transfer algorithms), so I will leave it to other editors if they would like to include it.--mm 15:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Fingerprint Region
It appears that this page contains nothing about the so-called "fingerprint region" (~1500-1000 cm^-1). The part where it talks about "4000-400 cm-1 ... may be used to study ... rotational-vibrational structure" vaguely hints at it. I would be inclined to find some decent sources and add this information possibly next week, but can someone confirm that this topic is not discussed on some other page? Also, I think I could add a quantity of information roughly equal to the "theory" section in page length. I have never made an article before, so is it best to make something like this a separate article or added to this one?Dwr12 (talk) 02:56, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I would think it should be added into this article, since it is an important part of IR spectroscopy. And something about the difference between stretching wavelengths and bending ones. If I can find my Spec book I will help... but I'm afraid I'm a newbie to editing so I'm not sure how much "help" I'd be. Should there also be something about the distinctive ortho, meta, para wavelengths? Hwinnian (talk) 05:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Subpages
In the subsection "Two-dimensional infrared spectroscopy", there are two "Main article" links, both of which are redlinked. Best I can tell, they've never gone to an actual subpage. Could someone look into where these are supposed to go? If there isn't an existing page, I think we can probably remove the links, at least until a substantial article is written. -- 128.104.112.85 (talk) 20:03, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Quantum vibration
Quantum vibration links here, but the introduction does not give any hint of why. Someone needs to add some detail in this area. 161 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.161.54.63 (talk) 07:49, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

 * Certainly, it's a problem that "quantum vibration" redirects to this article which does not even mention the word "quantum" anywhere! I suggest changing it to link to Molecular vibration. That's not perfect, but it's an improvement IMO. Any other ideas? :-) --Steve (talk) 09:22, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

 * Good question. Aside from the Molecular vibration article, I would suggest the Harmonic oscillator (quantum) article. The latter is more general and goes into greater depth on the quantum mechanics. I ran a Google search, though, and a recent spurt of news stories was definitely using quantum vibration to refer to molecular vibrations, so either link may be appropriate. ronningt (talk) 12:30, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Polarity
How about a section or at least some mention of how the polarity of a substance affects its wavenumber?

Jojojlj (talk) 03:10, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Observations and Edit
There was mention of monochromator (interferometer) in picture but not in general article, that caused me pause to edit. Since the article appears to be about instrumentation then it needs to include explanations and issues (or references to issues) with instrumental analysis. My experience starts pre 60's to some post 90's, and not just Organic Chemistry, which focus makes this a substandard article.

Although Infrared spectroscopy has traditionally been used for Qualitative Analysis of Organic Chemistry products, it CAN be used for Quantitative analysis as well. Standard Additions method can be applied to most analytical methods and works well with Infrared as well. Infrared Spectroscopy has been used for analysis of Portland Cement ("Concrete"), minerals with H-O bonding, Gemstones, Carbon Nanotubes, and other industrial materials. Ceramics, q.v. Rare Earth containing Ceramics can re-emit (Fluoresce) Infrared at lower frequencies. This an issue in article Spectroscopy. Perhaps it is article quality, but the top level Spectroscopy does not reference Infrared Spectroscopy.

IR source linearity and stability is crucial. For far infrared, the low intensity of Blackbody can be augmented by using Silicon Carbide or other conducting ceramic that skews emission to lower frequencies. For analytical purposes, e.g. moisture detection (O-H stretching)), Light Emitting Diodes have been used as a source. Heating effects in sample and detector necessitate a narrow bandwidth monochromator after the emitter. Often windows of Germanium or other IR transparent material are used to exclude ambient radiation.

An Infrared detector is used and must respond evenly in the range to be measured. Far Infrared detectors typically respond slowly; they may need to be cooled because they respond to Room Temperature Infra Red also. Although newer instruments use semiconductor detectors, Thermocouples have been used and are still in use to detect infra red.

Shjacks45 (talk) 06:45, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Infrared spectroscopy. 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/20110904091402/http://www2.dq.fct.unl.pt/qoa/jas/ir.html to http://www2.dq.fct.unl.pt/qoa/jas/ir.html

typo? - Longitudal
Is Longitudal a word? Or should it be Longitudinal?

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) 17:15, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

 * Fixed. Does one say thank you to a bot?? Dirac66 (talk) 01:53, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

IR spectroscopy is an active area: Chemical Abstracts report
So far in 2021, 2941 papers have appeared on IR spectroscopy. Roughlyy 16 papers per day. Conclusion: WP:SECONDARY at least, WP:TERTIARY preferrably.--Smokefoot (talk) 04:16, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

What is the measurement of the spectrum of of background / thermal or more generally any infrared radiation called?
The first sentence states "Infrared spectroscopy (IR spectroscopy or vibrational spectroscopy) is the measurement of the interaction of infrared radiation with matter by absorption, emission, or reflection."

This article assumes that the name Infrared spectroscopy only applies to the measurement of matter. If this is the case, what would be the name for the spectroscopy of background or thermal infrared spectroscopy be called. E.g. the measurement of the spectrum of the thermal radiation in a room or spectrum of infrared from space.

Or is this an error of omission in this article?

Surely, when considering the name, according to the Wiki Spectrometer article, a spectrometer is defined as "A spectrometer (/spɛkˈtrɒmɪtər/) is a scientific instrument used to separate and measure spectral components of a physical phenomenon." Therefore an infrared spectrometer would be "A device for measuring the spectral components of infrared light." and the more specific measurement of properties of matter using infrared would be something else or a sub category of this article? Lkingscott (talk) 11:25, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Infrared spectroscopy


text:
Linn Records

Linn Records is a Glasgow-based record label which specialises in classical music, jazz and Scottish music. It is part of Linn Products.

History
While Linn engineers were testing their flagship product, the Sondek LP12 turntable, they became frustrated with some of the specialist test LPs they were using. Work began on an LP cutting lathe as a research product to improve testing for the LP12.

The first albums to be cut and subsequently released was A Walk Across the Rooftops by The Blue Nile. They also released Carol Kidd's debut album.

Linn Records is an audiophile label, specialising in classical, jazz and Celtic music, and won the Record Label of the Year award at the 2010 Gramophone Awards. Release formats include CD, SACD, HDCD, vinyl and digital downloads.

Between 1995 and 2011 Linn artwork was designed by John Haxby. Since September 2013, all artwork has been designed by GM Toucari.

High resolution downloads
As of February 2013 all 'Studio Master' downloads from linnrecords.com are available in FLAC format, ALAC (Apple Lossless Audio Codec.) and MP3.

In 2008, Linn Records started to host music for other labels and now offers a library of more than 700 Studio Master Quality albums from 96 different labels. The start of 2012 saw the label form a partnership with Universal to sell a range of their back catalogue.

Artists
Classical artists include:
 * Avison Ensemble
 * Alfie Boe
 * Boston Baroque
 * Katherine Bryan
 * John Butt (musician)
 * Dunedin Consort
 * Ingrid Fliter
 * James Gilchrist
 * Peter Harvey (baritone)
 * Ruthie Henshall
 * Yuniko Kato
 * Kebyart
 * Sir Charles Mackerras
 * Sivan Magen
 * Nigel North
 * Martin Pearlman
 * Phantasm (music group)
 * Trevor Pinnock
 * Artur Pizarro
 * The Prince Consort
 * Profeti della Quinta
 * Robin Ticciati
 * Scottish Chamber Orchestra
 * Trio Sonnerie
 * Willard White
 * Benjamin Zander

Jazz artists include:
 * Liane Carroll
 * Ray Gelato
 * Barb Jungr
 * Carol Kidd
 * Claire Martin
 * Ian Shaw
 * Martin Taylor

Other artists include:
 * Amy Duncan
 * Emily Barker
 * Fiona Mackenzie
 * Maeve O'Boyle
 * William Orbit

title: Linn Records


text:
Passerina

The genus Passerina is a group of birds in the cardinal family (Cardinalidae). Although not directly related to buntings in the family Emberizidae, they are sometimes known as the North American buntings (the North American Emberizidae are colloquially called "sparrows" although they are also not closely related to these birds).

The males show vivid colors in the breeding season; the plumage of females and immature birds is duller. These birds go through two molts in a year; the males are generally less colorful in winter. They have short tails and short slim legs. They have smaller bills than other Cardinalidae; they mainly eat seeds in winter and insects in summer.

The blue grosbeak (P. caerulea) was once placed in the monotypic genus, Guiraca.

Taxonomy and list of species
The genus Passerina was introduced by the French ornithologist Louis Pierre Vieillot in 1816. The type species was designated in 1840 as the indigo bunting (Passerina cyanea) by the English zoologist George Robert Gray. The genus name is from the Latin passerinus meaning "sparrow-like".

The genus contains 7 species:

title: Passerina


text:
Talk:Cetacea

Environmental stresses Suggestion Comment
@Waughd and @Deantifanizer have been undoing each other's edits on whether climate change (mentioned in summary) is supported as a threat. It's appropriate in the summary, since the sections on Strandings and Environmental hazards both address climate change, through its effects on currents and acidification. Those sections are where the citations belong, not in the summary. Maybe they could be better organized. Kim9988 (talk) 17:32, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Anatomical issues
In the dolphin anatomy diagram used in this article why does the anus connect to the stomach, and the intestine go off on a different path? Is it just mislabelled?Regularuk (talk) 13:22, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

 * Well spotted, yes it's just wrong. It looks like the oesophagus connects to what is labelled kidney then to anus... It is more than a labelling issue though as the urogenital opening should be anterior to the anus. I need to find a reliable source as the internet has spread this one far and wide. Are you any good at editing SVGs? |→ Spaully ~talk~ 09:02, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I've had a go at improving it. Any suggestions/comments welcome. |→ Spaully ~talk~ 10:33, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Brain size
There's a line that has a clarification request. The line reads: "Allometric analysis indicates that mammalian brain size scales at approximately two-thirds or three-quarter exponent of the body mass." I agree it's a mouthful. I believe what it is saying is that larger species generally have larger brains, but at less than a 1:1 ratio. How about this? "Allometric analysis of species body mass to brain size indicates that species with greater body mass tend to have brains that are larger than those of species with lower body mass, but the increase in species body mass only translates to an increased brain size between the square of the cube root of the body mass and the cube of the fourth root of the body mass." Anyone want to take a stab at saying that more clearly than me? :) - UtherSRG (talk) 13:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC) What do you think, ? Does that clarify? - UtherSRG (talk) 13:57, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

It's not the easiest concept to get across. How about:

 * There have been studies of the relationship between brain mass (weight) and body mass for different species of mammals. They show that larger species generally have larger brains, but the increase is not fully proportional. Typically the brain mass only increases in proportion to somewhere between the two-thirds power (or the square of the cube root) and the three-quarters power (or the cube of the fourth root) of the body mass.

 * mbrain ∝ (mbody)k

 * where k is between two-thirds and three-quarters.

 * Thus if Species B is twice the size of Species A, its brain size will typically be somewhere between 60% and 70% higher.---Speminallium (talk) 05:40, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok. I massaged your text into the article and removed the cn tag. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:40, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Reading level
The lexical level and language of much of the anatomical description, such as ears, is well above a university level to the point only a Ph.D could decipher it. Wikipedia is a reference and if readers need another reference to understand it, the purpose is lost. 2001:CE8:143:8CEE:59AD:BA25:7415:3257 (talk) 20:32, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

 * Yes it was pretty ridiculous. I've rewritten the Ear section at a more normal level. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:52, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Sentence regarding sperm whales is missing two nouns.
A sentence in the article currently reads, “The sperm whale has a particularly pronounced melon; this is called the and contains the eponymous, hence the name "sperm whale".

The missing first noun appears to be ‘junk’ per an article in the Encyclopedia Brittanica. The missing second noun appears to be ‘spermaceti’. 2A00:C280:101:41:6800:6D10:2028:38 (talk) 11:18, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

 * Both appear to be in the text, please try clearing your cache. CMD (talk) 11:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Cetacea


text:
Music for Pleasure

Music for Pleasure may refer to:

 * Music for Pleasure (record label), a United Kingdom record label that issued budget-priced albums
 * Music for Pleasure (band), a new wave band from Leeds, England
 * Music for Pleasure (The Damned album), the second album by punk rock band The Damned
 * Music for Pleasure (Monaco album), the first album by synthpop band Monaco
 * Late Night Tales: Music For Pleasure, a DJ mix album by Tom Findlay
 * Music for Pleasure, a classical music radio program presented by John Cargher in Australia

title: Music for Pleasure


text:
User talk:212.219.56.244

November 2018
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Jamie Vardy, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Daiyusha (talk) 11:58, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

December 2021
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to attempt to make unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. 2601:240:CD08:3952:F48A:67E8:ED64:7A22 (talk) 15:01, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

title: User talk:212.219.56.244


text:
Gadulka

The gadulka (гъдулка) is a traditional Bulgarian bowed string instrument. Alternate spellings are "gǎdulka", "gudulka" and "g'dulka". Its name comes from a root meaning "to make noise, hum or buzz". The gadulka is an integral part of Bulgarian traditional instrumental ensembles, commonly played in the context of dance music.

The gadulka commonly has three (occasionally four or five Mincho Minchev) main strings with up to sixteen sympathetic resonating strings underneath introduced by the legendary Mincho Nedyalkov. Only the main melodic strings are touched by the player's fingers and the strings are never pressed all the way down to touch the neck. The gadulka is held vertically, with the bow held perpendicular in an under-hand hold.

There is a smaller variant of the instrument in the Dobrudja region with no sympathetic strings at all.

Gadulka's possible origin may be the lira, the bowed Byzantine instrument of the 9th century AD and ancestor of most Western European bowed instruments. Similar bowed instruments and lira descendants have continued to be played in the Mediterranean and Southeast Europe until the present day, for example the similar in construction Gusle from Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, Albania; also the lyra of Crete and the Dodecanese, Greece; the Lira Calabrese of Calabria; Italy and the Classical kemence in Istanbul, Turkey.

Construction
The body and neck of the instrument are carved out of one piece of wood, the body forming a bowl or gourd like a lute. The top (soundboard), of straight-grained softwood is also carved, with a shallower arch. The overall construction is quite heavy compared to, say, a violin, though some gadulkas are exquisitely built. (The instrument generally lacks any real decoration or ornamentation, apart from the design of the peghead.) The bridge, placed between the two roughly D-shaped soundholes, has one foot placed on the top, while the other foot rests on top of the soundpost which contacts the inside of the back. The vibration of the strings is thus directly transferred to both the top and back of the instrument. Unlike many other stringed instruments, there is no nut at the top of the strings: the strings are simply stretched between a tuning peg at the top and the tailpiece at the bottom, passing over the bridge (the playing strings) or through holes in the bridge (the sympathetics). The tailpiece is typically made out of bone, and secured to the carved projecting "endpin" by stout steel wire. The endpin also serves to hold the bottom of the instrument to a strap or belt worn by the player. Gadulka strings are steel, either plain in the smaller gauges or wound with steel or bronze in the larger ones; they are basically guitar strings. The strings are secured to the tailpiece by their ball ends.

Tuning
While various tunings are (and have been) used, the standard tuning for the gadulka is A-E-A for the three playing strings; the sympathetics (resonating strings) are tuned chromatically to cover all notes besides A and E (depending on the number of sympathetics).

Regional variations of Galdulka tuning

 * Thrace:
 * 1st string – A1, 2nd string –E1, 3rd string – A

 * Dobrudja:
 * 1st string – A1, 2nd string – A, 3rd string – E1

 * Lingourie:
 * 1st string – A1, 2nd string – E1, 3rd string – D1

 * Another variant:
 * A, E, D

1st string-G2, 2nd string-C2, 3rd string-G1, 4  string-D1, 5  string-GM,
 * SELIGRA-MINCHEV 5strings

title: Gadulka


text:
Qualiton Records

Qualiton is a frequently used record-label name in different countries. There have been and there still are several labels known as Qualiton, in particular the Hungarian state-owned corporation during the post-World War II years in Europe. The company changed its name to Hungaroton in the mid-1960s, but the Qualiton label remained for gypsy music and operetta repertoire. Other records labels bought the Qualiton license from Hungaroton and eventually became their own labels. Discos Qualiton and Qualiton South Wales are examples of the latter.

Qualiton, South Wales
Qualiton Records was a small record label which produced shellac and vinyl records in the 1950s until at least 1963 at Pontardawe, in the Swansea Valley in South Wales. It was subsequently purchased by Decca and renamed Qualiton Records (1968) Ltd, and the losses associated with the company used by Decca for tax reasons.

Discos Qualiton, Argentina
Discos Qualiton was an independent record label own by Fonema S.A. in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

title: Qualiton Records


text:
2000 Rugby League World Cup

The 2000 Rugby League World Cup was the twelfth World Cup for men’s national rugby league teams, held between 28 October and 25 November and hosted between the United Kingdom, Ireland and France. Australia won their ninth title by beating New Zealand 40-12 in the final at Old Trafford.

Following the success of the previous tournament, the World Cup was expanded to 16 teams and for the first time featured qualification rounds before the finals.

Summary
Following the success of the 1995 Rugby League World Cup, organisers decided to expand the 2000 tournament to 16 teams, 15 were invited while seven emerging nations were invited into a qualifying tournament to determine the 16th place.

The millennium World Cup attracted a record sponsorship of over £1 million from title Lincoln Financial Group, who had also sponsored Great Britain's Tests against New Zealand the previous year. The tournament also made a £2 million profit, despite attracting small crowds.

Despite its financial success the 2000 World Cup was seen as a failure, with too many blow out score lines and the inclusion of New Zealand Māori team being invited alongside the New Zealand National team. Despite being the only team to have to qualify to play in the World Cup, Lebanon were criticised for consisting entirely of Australians of Lebanese origin, which led to derisory comments in the media. The tournament also attracted criticism of its lack of marketing and poor crowds.

France performed creditably and had healthy attendances in games they hosted, while the much-derided Lebanon team also proved the catalyst for domestic competition in that country.

Qualifying
Six countries –, the , , , and  – competed for one available place in the tournament. Lebanon defeated the United States 62–8 in the final play-off match.

Teams
The 2000 World Cup tournament featured 16 teams:

Venues
The games were played at various venues in England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, France.

The Twickenham Stadium in London, the home of the English rugby union was the host stadium for the opening ceremony and match featuring hosts England and defending champions Australia.

Knockout stage
The top 2 teams from each pool advanced to the quarter-finals.

Try scorers

 * 10
 * 🇦🇺 Wendell Sailor

 * 9
 * 🇳🇿 Lesley Vainikolo

 * 6
 * 🇦🇺 Ryan Girdler
 * 🏴 Jamie Peacock
 * 🇳🇿 Richie Barnett
 * 🇳🇿 Willie Talau

 * 5
 * 🇦🇺 Bryan Fletcher
 * 🇦🇺 Adam MacDougall
 * 🇳🇿 Robbie Paul

 * 4

 * 🇦🇺 Trent Barrett
 * 🇦🇺 Brad Fittler
 * 🇦🇺 Matthew Gidley
 * 🇦🇺 Nathan Hindmarsh
 * 🇦🇺 Mat Rogers
 * Lote Tuqiri
 * 🇫🇷 Pascal Jampy
 * 🇳🇿 Tonie Carroll
 * Brian Leauma
 * 🇹🇴 Tevita Vaikona
 * 🏴 Lee Briers
 * 🏴 Kris Tassell

 * 3

 * 🇦🇺 Andrew Johns
 * 🇦🇺 Ben Kennedy
 * 🇦🇺 Darren Lockyer
 * 🏴 Kevin Sinfield
 * 🏴 Tony Smith
 * Atunasia Vunivialu
 * 🇫🇷 Claude Sirvent
 * Michael Withers
 * 🇱🇧 Hazem El Masri
 * 🇱🇧 Hassan Saleh
 * 🇳🇿 Nigel Vagana
 * 🇳🇿 Ruben Wiki
 * Shane Laloata
 * Laloa Milford
 * 🇹🇴 Fifita Moala

 * 2

 * 🇦🇺 Jason Croker
 * 🇦🇺 Scott Hill
 * Steve Berryman
 * 🏴 Andy Hay
 * 🏴 Sean Long
 * 🏴 Darren Rogers
 * 🏴 Paul Rowley
 * 🏴 Chev Walker
 * 🏴 Paul Wellens
 * 🇫🇷 Frédéric Banquet
 * 🇫🇷 Jean-Emmanuel Cassin
 * 🇫🇷 Rachid Hechiche
 * Brian Carney
 * Ryan Sheridan
 * 🇳🇿 Brian Jellick
 * 🇳🇿 Stacey Jones
 * 🇳🇿 Stephen Kearney
 * 🇳🇿 Ali Lauiti'iti
 * 🇳🇿 Tasesa Lavea
 * 🇳🇿 Quentin Pongia
 * 🇳🇿 Logan Swann
 * 🇳🇿 David Vaealiki
 * Boycie Nelson
 * Clinton Toopi
 * 🇵🇬 David Buko
 * 🇵🇬 Stanley Gene
 * 🇵🇬 John Wilshere
 * Henry Fa'afili
 * David Solomona
 * 🇹🇴 Duane Mann
 * 🇹🇴 Willie Mason
 * 🏴 Iestyn Harris
 * 🏴 Wes Davies

 * 1

 * 🇦🇺 Craig Gower
 * 🇦🇺 Brett Kimmorley
 * 🇦🇺 Gordon Tallis
 * 🇦🇺 Shane Webcke
 * Kevin Iro
 * Leroy Joe
 * Meti Noovao
 * Karl Temata
 * Tiri Toa
 * 🏴 Paul Deacon
 * 🏴 Andy Farrell
 * 🏴 Scott Naylor
 * 🏴 Leon Pryce
 * 🏴 Kris Radlinski
 * 🏴 Keith Senior
 * 🏴 Francis Stephenson
 * 🇫🇷 Patrice Benausse
 * 🇫🇷 Yacine Dekkiche
 * 🇫🇷 Arnaud Dulac
 * 🇫🇷 Jean-Marc Garcia
 * 🇫🇷 Jérôme Guisset
 * 🇫🇷 Julien Rinaldi
 * 🇫🇷 Gael Tallec
 * Tabua Cakacaka
 * Jone Kuraduadua
 * Eparama Navale
 * Waisale Sovatabua
 * David Barnhill
 * Martin Crompton
 * Michael Eagar
 * Mark Forster
 * Chris Joynt
 * Tommy Martyn
 * Steve Prescott
 * Luke Ricketson
 * 🇱🇧 Michael Coorey
 * 🇱🇧 Travis Touma
 * 🇳🇿 Richie Blackmore
 * 🇳🇿 Nathan Cayless
 * 🇳🇿 Henry Paul
 * 🇳🇿 Tony Puletua
 * 🇳🇿 Matt Rua
 * 🇳🇿 Craig Smith
 * David Kidwell
 * Wairangi Koopu
 * Steve Matthews
 * Paul Rauhihi
 * Hare Te Rangi
 * 🇵🇬 Eddie Aila
 * 🇵🇬 Marcus Bai
 * 🇵🇬 Raymond Karl
 * 🇵🇬 Alex Krewanty
 * 🇵🇬 Adrian Lam
 * 🇵🇬 Michael Mondo
 * 🇵🇬 Elias Paiyo
 * 🇵🇬 Lucas Solbat
 * 🇷🇺 Matt Donovan
 * 🇷🇺 Robert Ilyasov
 * 🇷🇺 Joel Rullis
 * Monty Betham
 * Willie Swann
 * Danny Arnold
 * Geoff Bell
 * David Maiden
 * Lee Penny
 * Scott Rhodes
 * Adrian Vowles
 * 🇹🇴 Daniel Foster
 * 🇹🇴 Paul Fisiiahi
 * 🇹🇴 David Fisiiahi
 * 🇹🇴 Lipina Kaufusi
 * 🇹🇴 Talite Liava'a
 * 🇹🇴 Nelson Lomi
 * 🇹🇴 Esau Mann
 * 🇹🇴 Martin Masella
 * 🇹🇴 Willie Wolfgramm
 * Leon Barnard
 * Brian Best
 * Coenraad Breytenbach
 * Quinton De Villiers
 * 🏴 Paul Atcheson
 * 🏴 Jason Critchley
 * 🏴 Keiron Cunningham
 * 🏴 Anthony Farrell
 * 🏴 Mick Jenkins
 * 🏴 Paul Sterling
 * 🏴 Ian Watson

title: 2000 Rugby League World Cup


text:
User:Gragfox

Grag Fox is a Movie Director in Spokane,The U.S.A. He mostly teaches in Motion Picture and Filming College.

title: User:Gragfox