text:
Talk:Great Learning

"Qin min" versus "Xin min"
The earliest texts present the second part of the way of the great learning as "by loving the people" (zai qin min), and indeed this is still the received version of the text. Starting in the Song Dynasty, a tradition arose that "qin min" was a mistranscription of the original "xin min," i.e. "making the people anew." (The difference is one radical.) Since then, most published editions of the text include the scholium asserting the "xin min" reading below the main text. This interpretation became orthodoxy for a few hundred years, but was later rejected by other Confucians. (For cultural context: imagine that Thomas Aquinas asserted that "political animal" was a typo and Aristotle originally wrote "ballitical animal," i.e. an animal that likes to play ball games, and then this opinion become orthodoxy.)

Anyway, it doesn't matter which reading you prefer. The article has the correct character for "qin min", but underneath it says "renovating the people". That's just wrong. You can write the character for "xin min" and translate as "renovating the people", or you can translate "qin min" as "loving the people."

I fixed the English to match the Chinese. I prefer the "qin min" reading (among other things, you won't find a Chinese text which puts "xin min" in the main body of the text: they always put "qin min" in the text, and mention "xin min" in the scholium underneath it), but the other way is fine too. Just make sure the Chinese matches the English.

Untitled
There is a problem with the redirect on this page... Specifically, it redirects from Zhong Yong, which is a totally different text (the "Doctrine of the Mean"). I'm not sure how to fix this problem, so I thought I'd just make a note of it. 71.17.191.16 20:19, 5 January 2007 (UTC)Chris

Added some stuff. Also changed the translation. I don't think that Legge translates "tian xia zhi ping" correctly, and not translating it was world peace, leaves out a lot of the power and vision of the passage.

Also its really important to point out that the first passage uses the term dao which is the same character as Daoism. Confucianism understands dao to mean something quite different from Daoism, and one of the points of the Great Learning is to define exactly what dao means to Confucians.

Roadrunner

 * Yes, you made a good editing job here, thanks. One litlle thing: I would state somewhere that the translation is adapted from Legge's one, and I would say "Way" instead of "path", but you surely know more than I do. gbog 15:36, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

On the Translation
I'm not sure what the policies on adapting translations are, so hopefully someone will help out here. In learning this text recently, I was taught that 明明德 ought to be translated here as making your bright virtue shine- more literal than the translation (which I assume is from the Legge mentioned earlier in the article) provides with manifesting virtue. Also, this translation is rather abridged from what I see, omitting several segments. Maybe I'm just splitting hairs here, but I really prefer the Mueller translation linked at the bottom of the page (and here ). Of course, I'm not about to go and flat out replace what we have here, but I think it should be discussed. Mendaliv (talk) 22:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm good with replacing what we have here. I'm coming to think that any article including a bibliography section needs to have it deleted and then be rebuilt from the ground up. — LlywelynII  06:40, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

There are a lot of false or misguiding facts in many articles concerning China or Chinese philosophy...
Every kid knows Confucius never wrote, edited or compiled anything himself, yet many articles about the Confucian classics or post Confucian writings are misguiding, because they contain information that is historically incorrect or which stands in direct contradiction to other related articles or even the text passage above within one article. Please do NOT write that Confucius wrote something himself. Try to study and learn something thoroughly, before you lecture about it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.142.9.159 (talk) 17:57, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it'll be much better to say that Zhu Xi claimed this and that, rather than this and that. It's more WP:NPOV. - Anonymous coward 129.199.192.5 (talk) 11:59, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * There's POV & then there's simple factual incorrectness.

 * In any case, it's important to note that the Chinese are traditionally taught that he composed them himself and then follow that up with discussion of how that was almost certainly not the case. — LlywelynII  06:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

error
The text currently states:
 * Literary analyses have suggested that the text dates back to the Song Dynasty.

That's a terrible mistake. Existence of the text was well attested in other books long before the Song dynasty. It appears in the Li Ji, which is much earlier than the Song. I'm not sure whether there has been any recent work that pins things down more narrowly, but it has to be sometime after Mencius and no later than the early part of the Han dynasty. The article on Li Ji may have references for the dates of that compilation. P0M (talk) 06:18, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I just noticed that nobody has fixed this mistake, so I will do it now. It is an entirely groundless assertion. P0M (talk) 22:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm all fine with deleting unsourced assertions, but you do know it's not an error, right? The fact that there was a Great Learning before the Song doesn't mean that the one we still have predates it in form or syntax. Or even content. — LlywelynII  06:50, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The version that was commented upon by Zhu Xi has the same form, syntax, and content as that present in earlier dynasties. That is true except for one section that was added by Zhu Xi. He declares in the text and commentary that he produced that he has written that one section because he believed that there had to be a missing block of text. He says that the version that came down to scholars of his time in the Li Ji must have been corrupted at some time, and that since then the original text has been unavailable.
 * Generation after generation of Chinese scholars have worked to maintain what is correct in the ancient texts that have come down to them, and to correct mistakes when they have been detected. Usually scholars left the "received text" as it was, but appended (in smaller print) the variant versions of a text, where it was found, details regarding dating, and why they thought that the text should be emended. Typically that kind of commentary will quote a variant that appears as a quotation in a slightly less ancient text. Sometimes the variant text makes sense in context whereas the received text does not make sense, and the commentator can explain why the error in copying may have occurred. It's a highly technical task and it requires scholars with great training and clear thinking. To ignore the work of those generations of serious scholars who have been well respected by the authorities of their own times and later times would be highly disrespectful.
 * The majority of top rate Chinese scholars regard both the Great Learning and Doctrine of the Mean as having been written after the time of Mencius. Text coming earlier than that often have many points that are still murky.
 * The top rate Chinese scholars who do not agree that the Great Learning and the Doctrine of the Mean came after the Mencius argue that they came before the Mencius. The two books have their value to Chinese scholars because they are believed to reflect, at least at one or two removes, the teachings of Confucius. They would not have the same prestige if they had been fabricated in the Song dynasty, and if they had been fabricated then they would have easily been discovered.
 * It would be interesting to see the citations for the "literary analyses'' that say that the texts "date back to" such a late time. The fact is that quotations in other texts will show that both these books date back to a much earlier time.P0M (talk) 16:32, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Rewrite
Working on other stuff, but the article still needs more revision.

Among other things,
 * The article writes in POVy ways about the Neoconfucians and the "support" or "improvement" they provided, rather than simply noting their wholesale revision of Confucius's ideas and points. It also drones about completely unrelated philosophers without connecting them to the text, to its development, or to the attached glosses (which go unexplained).
 * Inline citations need to be reformatted using tags that include the full name of the cited text, then the extraneous bibliography should go.
 * The article repeats highly dubious points – e.g. about Chinese respect for their teachers as though they were parents – without any critical analysis whatsoever and glosses obtruse language in completely uncritical and unhelpful ways. Providing a citation does not mean that in fact introspection (and even there introspection of what aspect of personality or truth?) leads to complete understanding of human relationships and particle physics.
 * The article uses pointy gender neutral language to describe a culture and philosophy that was – while not considering itself misogynistic – hardly credulous of women's capability at rational or virtuous thought. Every single instance of "person" should be replaced with man &c. or there should be a sourced discussion of the gender relations and in particular, how "ordering one's family" was established in practice & why – if women were considered capable of virtue – they were banned from the Imperial Examinations that gave people any interest in this text.

&c. — LlywelynII  06:50, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
 * This article needs serious work, especially attention from an editor with good sources who knows how to use tags. Most of your ideas are good, but the last point (about reflecting premodern cultural biases against women via gender-biased language) isn't a good idea. It is very common in English to assume that premodern philosophies and ethical systems can and should be applied to women, even if the writers of those philosophies may not have, and I do not believe that this text explicitly discusses its relevance to women. Please do not edit the article this way without further discussion.Ferox Seneca (talk) 20:45, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Ma
mother is best fighter in the world 2409:4088:8780:6327:0:0:157F:68AC (talk) 18:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Great Learning


text: User talk:216.20.1.218

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

title: User talk:216.20.1.218


text: User talk:213.139.192.139

title: User talk:213.139.192.139


text:
Mike Castle

Michael Newbold Castle (born July 2, 1939) is an American lawyer and politician who served as the 69th Governor of Delaware from 1985 to 1992 and as the U.S. representative from DE's at-large congressional district from 1993 to 2011. He is a member of the Republican Party.

The district includes the entire state of Delaware and is the oldest intact surviving district in the nation. He was the longest-serving U.S. Representative in the state's history. Before his election to Congress, Castle served as a member of the Delaware General Assembly, starting in the State House of Representatives from 1966 to 1967 and then in the State Senate from 1968 to 1976. He was the 20th lieutenant governor of Delaware from 1981 to 1985, and the 69th governor of Delaware from 1985 to 1992.

On October 6, 2009, Castle announced his candidacy in the 2010 special election for the seat in the United States Senate held by Democrat Ted Kaufman. Kaufman, appointed by Governor Ruth Ann Minner to fill the vacancy created by Joe Biden (who resigned to become vice president of the United States), was not a candidate in the election. The election determined who would fill the balance of Biden's term, which ended on January 3, 2015. In one of the most surprising election results of 2010, Castle lost the Republican primary to Christine O'Donnell. He would have been heavily favored in the general election against Democrat Chris Coons, who defeated O'Donnell by 17 percentage points. Castle is the most recent Republican to represent Delaware in Congress.

Castle is a member of the ReFormers Caucus of Issue One.

Early life and education
Castle was born in Wilmington, Delaware, the son of Louisa Johnston (née Bache) and James Manderson Castle, Jr. One of his maternal great-great-grandfathers was Virginia Senator John W. Johnston, and Castle's fifth great-grandfathers were founding fathers Benjamin Franklin and Daniel Carroll. Castle's father was a patent lawyer for DuPont, a firm so central to the city that it was long known in Wilmington simply as "the company." After graduating from Tower Hill School in 1957, he attended Hamilton College in Clinton, Oneida County, New York. He earned a Bachelor of Science degree in economics from Hamilton in 1961. While at Hamilton, Castle was a brother of the Alpha Delta Phi fraternity.

In 1964, he earned a Juris Doctor degree from Georgetown University Law Center in Washington, D.C. He was admitted to both the Delaware Bar and the Washington, D.C. Bar that same year.

Family
Michael Castle and Jane DiSabatino married on May 23, 1992; they have no children. Both are Roman Catholics.

Professional and political career
Following his admission to the bar, Castle returned to Wilmington and joined Connolly, Bove and Lodge, working as an associate (1964–1973) and later partner (1973–1975). A Republican, he served as Deputy Attorney General of Delaware from 1965 to 1966, and was elected to the Delaware House of Representatives in 1966. He served as a state representative for two years before winning a seat in the Delaware Senate, where he remained for eight years. He also served as minority leader from 1975 to 1976.

In 1976, Castle left the state legislature and returned to the full-time practice of law, founding his own firm with Carl Schnee (who was later nominated as U.S. Attorney for the District of Delaware by President Bill Clinton in 1999). He returned to politics in 1980, when he was recruited to run for Lieutenant Governor of Delaware by Governor Pete du Pont. He defeated Democratic state senator Thomas B. Sharp, with 59% to 40% of the vote. He served from 1981 to 1985, and headed panels on education and drunk driving.

Governor of Delaware
As the hand-picked choice of the popular Governor du Pont, he easily won election as Governor of Delaware, defeating former Delaware Supreme Court Justice William T. Quillen. In the campaign, Castle was criticized for being a shadow of his mentor and only promising an extension of du Pont's program. Delaware voters however elected him to another term in 1988 when he defeated Democrat Jacob Kreshtool by a wide margin, and is the last time a Republican won a governor election in the state. Castle served two terms, cutting the second one slightly short when he resigned to begin his first term as U.S. Representative.

Committee assignments

 * Committee on Education and Labor
 * Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education (Ranking Member)
 * Subcommittee on Higher Education, Lifelong Learning, and Competitiveness
 * Committee on Financial Services
 * Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government-Sponsored Enterprises
 * Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
 * Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology

In 1992, Castle could not run again for Governor, due to constitutional term limits. The result was what became known as "the Swap." Castle ran for the seat of U.S. Representative Tom Carper and Carper ran for Governor. Delaware's political leadership had quietly worked out the arrangement and retained the services of two very popular office holders.

Castle was first elected U.S. Representative in 1992, defeating former Lieutenant Governor Shien Biau Woo. Since then, he won election by wide margins eight times, defeating Democrats Carol Ann DeSantis in 1994, Dennis E. Williams in 1996 and 1998, Michael C. Miller in 2000 and 2002, Paul Donnelly in 2004, Dennis Spivack in 2006, and Karen Hartley-Nagle in 2008.

Castle was the co-chair of several Congressional caucuses, including the Diabetes Caucus, the Community College Caucus, the Biomedical Research Caucus and the Passenger Rail Caucus. He was also considered one of the most moderate Republicans in the U.S. House. In the wake of Tom DeLay's indictment in September 2005, liberal columnist E.J. Dionne named Castle as one of four lawmakers capable of leading an anticorruption reform of the Republican Party. Castle was a member of various liberal Republican Organizations, such as Republicans For Environmental Protection, The Republican Majority For Choice, Republicans For Choice, and Christine Todd Whitman's Its My Party Too. He is pro-choice and supports some gun control measures. He voted against a constitutional amendment that would have banned same-sex marriage. The non-partisan National Journal gave Mike Castle an ideological composite score of 59% conservative and 41% liberal.

Castle's centrist positions served him well in a state that trended increasingly Democratic during his tenure in the House. Delaware had long been reckoned as a bellwether, but has voted Democratic in every presidential election since 1992, due almost entirely to heavily Democratic New Castle County. At the same time, his centrist record made him the target of conservative groups such as Club for Growth, who ranked him the least conservative Republican in the U.S. House in 2008, and RemoveRINOs, who, in April 2010, named him the Ace of Spades on its most-wanted list.

In February 2004, Castle sponsored H.R. 3831 to reauthorize the assault weapons ban of 1994. The bill was co-sponsored by 11 Republican colleagues and 129 Democrats. In June 2008, Rep. Mark Kirk, R-IL, introduced H.R. 6257 to reinstate the ban, and Castle was one of the bill's four Republican co-sponsors. Both bills died in committee.

Castle cosponsored the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. The bill proposed expanding the number of embryonic stem cell lines that are eligible for federally funded research, expecting that this funding would generate more research and ultimately greater progress in developing new treatments for a wide range of medical conditions. Presently, the only embryonic stem cell lines eligible for federal funded research were derived before August 9, 2001. This legislation removes that date restriction, along with proposing stronger ethical requirements. After successfully passing both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House, it received U.S. President George W. Bush's first presidential veto in July 2006.

In December 2010, Castle was one of fifteen Republican House members to vote in favor of repealing the United States military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ban on openly gay service members.

During his term in Congress, Castle was known for his interest in numismatics. In 1995, he authored the legislation that created the American Platinum Eagle platinum bullion coin. He later sponsored the legislation that created the 50 State quarters, Sacagawea dollar, presidential dollar coins, and America the Beautiful quarters programs, and several commemorative coins. His activity led the Numismatic Guaranty Company to deem him "The Coinage Congressman." Castle drafted one sentence of the 1997 Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act: "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of the Treasury may mint and issue platinum coins in such quantity and of such variety as the Secretary determines to be appropriate." His intent was to make it easier for the Treasury to mint platinum coins for the coin collector market, but the sentence allows the Treasury Department to mint platinum coinage in any denomination. In the event that Congress refused to raise the U.S. debt ceiling, the Treasury could thus mint a trillion-dollar coin to avoid default. This maneuver has been proposed by some commentators, but has never been done.

Castle suffered two minor strokes during the 2006 campaign, but fully recovered. Considering the general Democratic sweep of other offices, he won the election comfortably, but with a greatly reduced margin over previous years. Despite the increased Democratic sweep of the 2008 election, he, unlike many Republicans, managed to increase his margin of victory, winning over Democratic challenger Karen Hartley-Nagle by 23 points. Considering his moderate profile, popularity, and long history of service to the state, his victory was not considered surprising. Castle appeared in the documentary, Keeping the Peace, which focused on Michael Berg's 'anti-war' campaign for Castle's congressional seat in 2006. It premiered at the Philadelphia Independent Film Festival in 2009 and won the Audience Award.

On November 9, 2009, Congressman Castle's District was profiled by Stephen Colbert in his segment "Better Know a District."

2010 Senate campaign
In 2010, Congressman Castle ran to be the Republican candidate to fill the seat of former Senator Joe Biden, who had become Vice President on January 20, 2009. Castle was defeated in the Republican primary on September 14, 2010, by Christine O'Donnell, the Tea Party favorite. The primary drew 57,000 voters, a small slice of the overall electorate. After the primary, Fairleigh Dickinson University's PublicMind twice polled Delaware voters, running a hypothetical match-up between Castle and the Democratic candidate, Chris Coons; in it, Castle beat Coons by a 21-point margin (54%–34%) and also had a favorable rating of 48% compared to O'Donnell's 34%. Castle refused to support O'Donnell in the Senate campaign against Coons. Coons went on to defeat O'Donnell decisively in the general election.

In June 2010, Castle was one of only two Republicans to vote in favor of the DISCLOSE Act, intended to limit spending on political campaigns by corporations in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The bill requires added disclosure for political spending by corporations and prohibits some corporate political spending.

Town hall
A town hall style meeting organized by Castle to discuss health care reform with constituents was featured on the Drudge Report with the headline "VIDEO: Congressman's town hall erupts over Obama birth certificate ...". The story was linked to a tape documenting a few minutes of the event and hosted on YouTube. The incident sparked discussion of the topic in relation to the moderate Republican congressman and commentators' surprise at the audience reaction. Castle was heckled and booed after calmly responding to a protester, "If you're referring to the President there, he is a citizen of the United States."

Reporting in the international press on the explosion of interest in the subject focused on the central role of the Castle incident. The British newspaper The Guardian reported:"But the real impact has been a video that has garnered hundreds of thousands of hits on the web (in which Congressman) Mike Castle, address(es) a town hall meeting on health care in Delaware last month when a woman suddenly stands up waving a bunch of papers ... The encounter was a warning to Republican officials how far the conspiracy theory has permeated parts of their party."

Almanac
Elections are held the first Tuesday after November 1. Members of the Delaware General Assembly take office the second Tuesday of January. State Senators have a four-year term and State Representatives have a two-year term. The Governor and Lieutenant Governor take office the third Tuesday of January and have four-year terms. U.S. Representatives take office January 3 and have a two-year term.

Images

 * Profile, Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress; accessed June 16, 2017.

title: Mike Castle


text:
Zaandijk

Zaandijk is a town in the municipality of Zaanstad, province of North Holland, Netherlands. It lies about 11 kilometres (6.8 miles) northwest of Amsterdam and had a population of 8,686 in 2017. Zaandijk is one of the smallest villages in Zaanstad, having a surface area of 209 hectare.

History
The Pietersz family moved into "de Lage dijk" (The Lower Dike) in 1494 and became the first residents of Zaandijk. In Zaandijk, De Lagedijk is still extant. In 1570 the town consisted of 19 houses. These dwellings were burned by the Spaniards in 1572, during the Eighty Years' War. The town began to prosper and grow following the return of the populace.

Zaandijk was a separate municipality until 1974, when it became a part of the new municipality Zaanstad.

Notable people

 * Anna Maria Tobbe (1838–1886) was one of the first female Dutch pharmacists.

title: Zaandijk


text:
User talk:Secretlondon/Archive 1

Hello, no offense, but you need to understand the wikipedia conventions on article titling more before you change any. If something is the title of a specific work, like Ten Key Values of the Green Party, it is referred to in italics, and ideally, should also be italicized in the article so it's clear that it is the title of a specific work. Capitalization only belongs in titles if it was there in the original work's title. One cannot for instance rename such an article Ten Key Values of the US Green Party as if you had the power to retitle the work, but would have to rename it Key values of American Greens or something if one wanted it to be more specific to the USA, etc.

Hi :) Good work on abating junk and so forth, keep it up! Dysprosia 22:49, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hi! I thought you ought to know that the picture in VW Beetle was far too wide. It was 547 pixels across, which is fine for a 1024 by 768 screen (or larger) but no good for the 800 by 600 screen that some people still use. The resulting text squeeze on the left hand side is particularly bad if you have a menu frame down the left hand side of the screen as I do (this is one of the choices of “skin” in the Wikipedia preferences).

I've cut it back to the max you should ever use for the thumbnail which is 300 pixels wide. Also it was sloping and a little dark, I've corrected both of those.

I’ve now illustrated about 600 articles so I can confidently say that the biggest size you should use is 300 pixels wide. I also do a 750 pixel wide pic linked from the thumbnail. To see the code I use have a look at Egyptair and steal it for your future work. Best Wishes, Adrian Pingstone 10:05, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Yeah I know. I already undeleted it. Sorry, too hasty on the delete button. It looked like absolute nonsense and then I checked the author's other contributions and saw that it was for real so I added in some stuff to make it make a bit more sense. Next time I shall check and then delete, not delete and then check. Angela 22:55, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Why did you blank Tokumasa Yamashita? --Jiang 23:28, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)

If you don't think it belongs, you need to list it on Votes for deletion so we know about it. If a consensus can be reached after 7 days, then it will deleted (as opposed to just blanking). --Jiang 19:39, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)

About Live Through This: actually, lots of albums have articles in Wikipedia. You can find a ton on List of musical events. Cheers, Cyan 07:17, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

No need to apologize. You can't know unless someone tells you. Cheers, Cyan 07:23, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I have to ask. What does Reptilian humanoid have to do with antisemitism? DJ Clayworth 19:14, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)
 * OK, I understand. Well, I don't, but I think I understand enough. Thanks. DJ Clayworth 19:48, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Hello! Just to compliment you on the patience to write on political parties :) Muriel Gottrop 14:09, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Re: Reptilian humanoid. Actually having read User:Khranus' rant on the Talk:Reptilian humanoid page I now fully understand why Jews might want to protest these idiots. DJ Clayworth 14:26, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi, Secretlondon. I've been impressed with your contributions, and I've nominated you to be a Wikipedia adminstrator. See: Requests for adminship. Put a note there if you accept the nomination. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 19:16, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)

You're now an administrator. -- Tim Starling 23:52, Nov 9, 2003 (UTC)

Sorry about the "looks like this should be deleted" entry on the talk page for Schreyer Honors College Excellence in Teaching Award. I was just trying to draw the vandalism to the attention of an administrator who could do something about it. Markcollinsx 12:19, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC) I reverted vandalism from the Sex guy. I thought it was your user page. Maybe you want it here?... You can always revert me. Cheers, Muriel

Welcome to the [Vietnamese Wikipedia]. Hopefully you can contribute to the site as well as to the English one. Regards, Joakim Löfkvist

Quick note to say thank you for reverting the vandalism on the Farey sequence page yesterday. As the originator of the article, I have to admit to feeling a little protective towards it, and it was sad to see it getting wiped out in such a mindless way. But you resurrected it so promptly ! So thank you again -- Gandalf61 12:43, Nov 15, 2003 (UTC)

RE: Image:Cpankhurst300.jpg I know I sometimes forget so I'm sure you did did too but its probably a good idea to insert the copyright info for usage, i.e. pre 1923, fair use, or whatever. Thank you. NightCrawler 13:19, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Just trying to avoid the newbie-chomping that will almost certainly result. I can already hear them calling, "Vanity! Delete!" -- Cyan 23:55, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)

---

Hi secretlondon, while the work you've been doing on the Underground is great, don't you think an article, a stub to be exact, is nessecary? Just have descripts of each station in the article for its parent line, maybe. - user:zanimum Hi, why did you revert my correction? The former article I corrected was heavily biased. Please consider the NPOV. Der Eberswalder 17:31, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for the save on the Japan article, bud. JCB 03:44, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

deleted "Daisy (television commercial)" (content was: 'daisy commercial from johnson compaign')

Very famous political ad in the US (many consider it the most controversial ever), implying candidate Goldwater would start a nuclear war. Perhaps you should have left it as a stub.

see it at: http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/candidates/ad.archive/daisy_long.mov

read transcript here (page down): http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~eagleton/e-gov/e-politicalarchive-1964.htm orthogonal 23:26, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC) ---

mydogategodshat
I would like to express a heartfelt thanks to: Κσυπ Cyp, Cimon Avaro on a pogostick, snoyes, Adam Bishop , Secretlondon, Hephaestos , 207.189.98.44 , Jamesday, Pakaran for nominating me and supporting me. It is encouraging to know that my efforts over the past 6 months have been appreciated. I prize your actions all the more knowing that many of you were not familiar with my work and had to do some research to decide whether to support me or not (because I limit my contributions to the 750 business/economics articles). Thank you for the time, the effort, and the confidence.

There was a minority that did not support me because of my name. It seems that half have a problem because they read “shat” into it and half because of the word “god”. I find this amazing. The people that read “shat” into the character string had to ignore the commonly used word “hat” and pick out a word that has not been in common use for more than a century. My spell checker is currently telling me that the word dosn’t exist. One complainant insisted on converting “Monad” into “gonads” and “Excrescent” into “excrement”. Another saw “a dog eating a bone” as a sexual act. All I can say to these people is “Get professional help”.

As for changing my name, I have decided not to do that for two reasons. One is a philosophical reason. For an explanation, read The Crucible, particularly where John Proctor declares the importance of your name. The price of adminship is too high. The other reason is a practical one. I find it useful to use the same name on all my online activities. It is interesting that two universities and several commercial sites don’t have a problem with my name. Maybe it is not all that surprising since they are not inhabited by trolls trying to forward their cause.

Hope to see you around the business/economics pages in the future. mydogategodshat 03:09, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Would it be worth someone nominating Mydogategodshat again? I was thinking of writing something along the lines of "Excellent contributions, and this user has now shown that he will not give up his ideals (submission to seemingly irrational orders to change username) in order to gain more power (adminship). This demonstrates that he is unlikely to abuse or be corrupted by admin powers.". But I decided a potential second nomination would probably be better by someone other than me, though. (Asking a few people this.) Κσυπ Cyp  13:11, 29 Nov 2003 (UTC) about disambiguation pages. If they are disambiguation pages, yes, the template should be used. But when the abbreviation is the common identity for something, (IBM for example is better known as IBM than as International Business Machines), then the purpose of the page with the abbreviation is no longer solely to disambiguate. :) Thanks for keeping me on my toes Christopher Mahan 10:02, 7 Nov 2003 (UTC)

France during WWII
Yep, in a couple of minutes. I just thought that an empty article on such a nice History of France series was unfortunate. --Alex S 21:54, 23 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Sorry for snapping at you about Economy of East Germany. It's just that I've seen too many people dump huge slabs of material into Wikipedia that needs to be completely rewritten, and then not do it. I'm glad to hear you're not one of them! --Robert Merkel 22:52, 23 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting my bad language in the Norway election article. - Mendalus 12:01, 1 Dec 2003 (GMT).

About links in Austronesian languages - I think you are correct. My mistake. - Nilmerg 11:29, 3 Dec 2003 (UTC)

A suggestion
Please don't get mad if I suggest a redirect, instead of a deletion, for this one page:

 * The Juvenile Deliquency article could say: #REDIRECT juvenile delinquency

--Uncle Ed 22:39, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The reason why the 'tube' stations in question were incorrect, is because the term 'tube' wasn't used for the London underground until long after these stations went into disuse. They were Victorian and Edwardian stations, 'tube' was a much later (sixties I think) term. I have been a Buckinghamshire historian for 15 years and I have never heard any of the respective terminuses referred to as tube stations in all that time, irrespective of the fact that none of them are in London, nor are they underground. Graham :) 23:20, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

She thanked a fellow wikipadeit (!) very quickly for adding stuff about Soutwark.

Man, you're fast Secretlondon. I just added ROSS to the vfd. Anthropos 12:53, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I've had a go at improving what is now Nag's Head, Holloway. -- The Anome 13:31, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Re Jayne Bryleigh etc, can you do a find for that name here and see what you think?

You wrote ''I don't understand where you are coming from. I don't have time to look through the last month's deletion logs at the moment. If you have found that it was previously deleted please say so. If you want to check to see if it's accurate try google.'' I was trying, badly I admit, to indicate that my nose was telling me that there was something 'wrong' with these pages. It would have been better to do all the digging first, but I wanted to avoid a big debate on VfD. I made a mess of that. I'm as keen as the next man pardon the possibly sexist pun to promote overlooked women writers/thinkers/scientists/whatever (why I started List of women poets, but just felt in my water that these were suspect. A man's intuition? No ill will, I hope? Going home now. Bmills 17:30, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC) - Hello Secretlondon. I would suggest that Warwickshire (administrative) should be protected as well, seem as that has turned into an edit war G-Man 15:40, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thanks G-Man 15:47, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Deletion
Please read Deletion policy, in particular the section on what pages may be deleted without being listed on Vfd for five days. -- Oliver P. 20:42, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * Oops. My mistake. Sorry about that. -- Oliver P. 20:46, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

---

Book of Mormon Controversies Page
Your changes to the heading hierarchy of the Book of Mormon Controversies page seem to have increased the entropy of the page. Please explain what you are trying to accomplish. Hawstom 18:03, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for the explain, Secretlondon. I will fix the page if you have not already done so. Also, great pointer to the layout page. Hawstom 22:33, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC) ---

Conflicts between users
Where or what is "Conflicts between users" ? Andy Mabbett 19:26, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

--- Thank you for fixing my German accent marks. Paul, in Saudi ---

You're so quick
I think I'll giive up on Recent changes and trust you to catch everything. Great work and just ignore the moron vandals. Bmills 12:02, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The decision to unlink the dead links was difficult; I will, however, revert the page. --Merovingian 15:13, Dec 16, 2003 (UTC)

Thanks: I had remembered 142 as someone else (can't remember who now) who wasn't hard-banned. I appreciate all the work you do fighting vandals...makes it seem less awful that I always manage to bungle it somehow. :) Best wishes, Jwrosenzweig 22:07, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hiya Secret London. I think my stubbification of Jones Act hit at the same time as your deletion of the earlier nonsense. It now shows in the delete log and as a new page creation by me. No problem, except it now looks as if I created this rather thin article from scratch, which I did not. Oh well. That's life. Anjouli 18:08, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC) Hiya,

I should be working on my paper rather than editing WP, so I'll keep this short.

I already listed Bistromatic Drive on vfd, you might want to merge the listings - I feel I gave reasons why it should be deleted even if not a copyvio. Pakaran 18:24, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC) Ok, I think between us we've warned 144.217 enough times. Just thought I'd ask your opinion though... Pakaran 21:48, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thank you for supporting my request for adminship. Bmills 08:56, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Don't delete useful stuff from Wikipedia. Pls verify what you delete before actually doing so.ThanksRoger

Bartolomé de Las Casas
Hi, please take your time before deleting something. There is an article on that guy, so a redirect would have been MUCH better. All the best, KF 12:11, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Soccer chants
I added them to VfD around the same time you put them on Cleanup. Which is most appropriate? Bmills 15:45, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Diaphorectic
Dear Secretlondon. A diaphorectic is a drug that increases perspiration! Why did you delete it? Cheers, Muriel Victoria 16:20, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * It's ok, i sometimes get a bit anxious too! Maybe you need to relax :) I'll join this side of the channel. Muriel

Emotional Americans
I just found ANOTHER article about Rachel soon after I wrote mine. It was located at Rachel Joy Scott WhisperToMe 23:15, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * "Just added "Her favorite colors were yellow and lavender". Please no. This is ludicrous. Secretlondon 23:10, Nov 26, 2003 (UTC)" - I added information just like that to the Megan Kanka and Polly Klaas articles quite some time ago. WhisperToMe 23:49, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)

After that, I thought about making a "child favorites" table for things like that. WhisperToMe 23:56, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hank Eskin
Hello Secretlondon... just for the record, I did not create this page about me Hank Eskin to advertise my services...someone from my website created the page with personal and private information. And as I whole-heartedly agree with you, I would very much like to have this page and its page history deleted. Thank you.

title: User talk:Secretlondon/Archive 1


text:
Koog

A koog (plural: köge) or groden is a type of polder found on the North Sea coast of Germany that is established by the construction of dykes enclosing the land which is then drained to form marshland. This type of land reclamation is also used along rivers. In general, a koog is protected by embankments known as dykes (Deiche).

Etymology
Unlike the meaning in modern German, Ingvaeonic *kāg, Old Dutch *kōg, modern Dutch koog and West Frisian Dutch kaag all designate "land outside the dike". In the Netherlands, it primarily survives in place names (e.g. De Koog, Koog aan de Zaan, Kaag). From the Dithmarschen word koch (15th and 16th centuries), it went into Danish as kog. In North Frisian it is kuch. The spelling koog was used by the poet Michael Richey in 1755 and around 1700, what is now the port of Cuxhaven was still called Koogshaven.

Polders
In the Netherlands and in the adjacent regions of East Frisia the word polder (Low German: Poller) is used for land enclosed by embankments from where the water is artificially drained. The etymology of the word polder/poller is unclear but it is probably related to English pool.

Groden
The term groden (c.f. the English verb "to grow") used in Lower Saxony, particularly in the eastern part of East Frisia and in the Oldenburg Land, refers to new areas of land washed up by the sea. Sediments are deposited by the sea on mud flats when the tides change. After reaching a certain height, the land is dyked. Dyked land becomes innengroden. As a result of draining the fertile soil compacts and, over time, can sink until it is below sea level. The rising sea level in front of the dyke and the sinking of the old, now drained, sea areas behind the dyke leads to further dykes being built at an ever-higher level to enclose the newly dyked areas of marsh. In this way a so-called "polder staircase" is formed.

The name groden is found for example in the borough of Wilhelmshaven in the villages of Altengroden, Neuengroden and Fedderwardergroden, the Heppenser, Voslapper and Rüstersieler Groden, and in the surrounding area are the Cäciliengroden, Petersgroden and Adelheidsgroden. All these areas, whether they emerged more recently (i.e. in the 20th century) or in older times, were formed as a result of dyke enclosure and Aufspülung, as is often the case with polders.

 * → See also salt marsh

Drainage
Because a koog often lies below the level of the adjacent sea or river, it has to be continually drained. This is carried out with the aid of soakaways, sluices, pumping stations and water pumps.

Today the pumps are powered by engines, in pre-industrial times and sometimes even into the period of intense industrialisation, they were driven by wind power (wind pumps). The groups of wind mills on the dykes of the Rhine delta - a symbol of the Netherlands - are old water pumps.

Riparian köge
As well land reclaimed from the sea, a koog may also refer to land reclaimed alongside rivers. These are usually wet areas that are now used for agriculture. This entails creating a completely new ecosystem from a river meadow or a carr. Often its name will recall its original situation, for example, the Oderbruch.

On the Rhine, Elbe and Oder rivers these areas are also used for flood protection. Once the flooding has subsided, water is pumped out again and the land can be used for farming until the next flood.

Until the 1950s, köge were mainly created to reclaim land for farming; since then coastal defence has been the main aim.

North German köge
On the western coast of Schleswig-Holstein and on the shores of the Lower Elbe over 230 koogs have been created over the centuries. The oldest ones are in the borough of Eiderstedt; they date to the 11th century. After the Burchardi flood of 1634, an increasing number of "octroi" koogs were built. Well known koogs include:
 * County of Dithmarschen
 * Christianskoog
 * Delver Koog
 * Dieksanderkoog (formerly Adolf Hitler Koog)
 * Friedrichsgabekoog
 * Friedrichskoog
 * Hedwigenkoog
 * Kaiser-Wilhelm-Koog
 * Karolinenkoog
 * Kronprinzenkoog
 * Neufelderkoog
 * Preiler Koog
 * Speicherkoog in the Bay of Meldorf
 * Wesselburenerkoog
 * Westerkoog
 * County of Nordfriesland
 * Augustenkoog
 * Beltringharder Koog
 * Hauke-Haien-Koog (named after the lead character of the novella The Rider on the White Horse by Theodor Storm)
 * Friedrich-Wilhelm-Lübke-Koog – in 1954 the last koog reclaimed for settlement in Schleswig-Holstein.
 * Gotteskoog
 * Tümlauer-Koog (formerly Hermann Göring Koog)
 * Norderheverkoog (formerly Horst Wessel Koog)
 * Bottschlotter Koog (Dagebüll)
 * Kleiseerkoog (Galmsbüll)
 * Herrenkoog
 * Former island of Nordstrand
 * Elisabeth-Sophien-Koog
 * Alter Koog
 * Osterkoog
 * Trendermarschkoog
 * Neukoog
 * Morsumkoog
 * Pohnshalligkoog
 * Municipality of Reußenköge
 * Cecilienkoog
 * Desmerciereskoog
 * Louisen-Reußen-Koog
 * Reußenkoog
 * Sönke-Nissen-Koog
 * Sophien-Magdalenen-Koog
 * County of Pinneberg
 * Hetlinger Neuerkoog

Literature

 * Harry Kunz, Albert Panten: Die Köge Nordfrieslands. Mit Karte. Nordfriisk Instituut, Bräist/Bredstedt, 1997, ISBN 3-88007-251-5 (Nordfriisk Instituut 144).

title: Koog


text:
Talk:Tincture (heraldry)

Rule of Tincture
Concerning this paragraph:

 * The rule of tincture has had an influence reaching far beyond heraldry. It has been imposed on flags, or perhaps it should be put, applied to the design of flags, so that the flag of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach was modified to conform to the rule.[26] The rule of tincture has also influenced World Wide Web design with respect to what colour font should be placed on what colour background. Almost all license plates and traffic signs, intentionally or unintentionally, follow it.

Is it really fair to say that the choice of font color on Web pages and the color of license plates and traffic signs all stem directly from the rule of tincture, or would it be more correct to say that these things all stem independently from the same kind of universal design sense about maximizing contrast? -- Skaraoke 01:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

 * The "universal design sense about maximizing contrast" is the rule of tincture. --EncycloPetey 01:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

 * This is absolutely false. The rule of tincture is a technical rule, not a practical rule.  Sable a lion rampant pean is a perfectly acceptable coat as far as the rule is concerned (furs being amphibious), though it is essentially invisible.  --Daniel C. Boyer 18:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 * If furs are amphibious I will eat toadfeathers.2604:2000:C682:B600:FC9C:4C2:2514:9A8F (talk) 17:06, 19 July 2016 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson

 * What about rewriting the paragraph so it acknowledges some kind of indirect relationship between the Rule of Tincture and modern signs and license plates without asserting that they are direct descendants of the RoT (which seems to be untrue)? --Skaraoke 21:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

 * But it's not untrue. Modern highway signs, at least, were developed with a conscious knowledge of the rule of tincture.  --Daniel C. Boyer 14:46, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Perhaps, but only with regard to the general rules of contrast as discussed above. I doubt that everyone who designed road signs had a working knowledge of heraldry in general and the rule of tincture in particular. -- B.D.Mills  (T, C) 01:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Speaking as a web designer, and computer scientist here, this is clearly a case of independently evolved rules. The web design rules of contrast were developed from a distinctly modernist perspective, influenced by a long history of computing before the web, which I might point out, was for a very long time dominated by green text on black (vert on sable), a violation of tincture.  Current web design is entirely modernist in its approach, with very little regard to design traditions like Heraldry.  (Although the more I learn about it, the more I want to apply it, for instance in regards to logos and even icons). -- Deadwisdom (talk) 10:18, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

By the way, it's customary to add to the bottom of Talk pages, to make archiving easier. —Tamfang 06:18, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Daniel, modern signs were developed specifically with conscious knowledge of reflective white light, which is not bound by any metal nor color rule by any name, you could even say it while spitting tobacco tinctured saliva and it'd still be true as the only thing Luminescent White does not contrast with is another luminescent white. Perhaps you are thinking not of tinctured rules but mistaking the ways everything exists? There are no "rules" as things exist because they are either real or they are not, there is no rule of the greatest having less worth than the least in an lower to hierarchy, it is just the way everything exists. Matters of grave import are not left to depend on whether or not anyone and everyone will follow rules. Language does not serve it's purpose except when it labors so that others can share thoughts that there might be understanding, for instance "Or"  being written as any word other than "Ur" or "Ore" goes against the very nature of The Word itself when spelled the same as a conjunction. Dirtclustit (talk) 00:29, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Questions from 2003-2004
Should there even be a category "later tinctures"? Some of these are quite old. --Daniel C. Boyer 15:35, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I wonder about the illustration for ermine spots. It gives the impression that there are but two forms (or close to this) when really there is an unbelievable variety of forms of representation. --Daniel C. Boyer 20:16, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * If Fox-Davies The Art of Heraldry is out of copyright, I could scan a pageful of ermine spots (and another page of fleurs-de-lis). — Tamfang 03:03, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure that it's out of copyright yet, but there isn't a need to sacn them. I'm currently creating a set of images for the ermine (heraldry) page including the four basic named ermine variants, as well as a non-standard one (gules ermined argent) for illustrative purposes. --EncycloPetey 05:11, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm not talking about ermines, erminois, pean and erminites (as far as I'm concerned they can all be swept under the rug) – I'm talking about fig.60, p.49, showing forty-odd versions of the ermine-tail. — Tamfang 06:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Ah, gotcha! Something like that would certainly be worth having around, though I think an image like that might be better placed in the ermine article, with a smaller selection available as a picture in the tincture article section on furs. I'll dig around to see if someone I know is certain what the copyright restrictions on images are from Fox-Davies, or else see if one of my heraldic artist friends is willing to do an original drawing based on the Fox-Davies plate. Let me know if you come up with something before I do. --EncycloPetey 07:47, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Regarding "Malcolm of Applecross" (SCA) is that really a violation of the tincture rule as it is usually understood? —Ashley Y 00:01, Dec 21, 2003 (UTC)

 * Well, if it were blazoned as one chevron on another, ("on a chevron vert, another of the field") this clearly would not violate the tincture rule. But I think the fimbriation blazon does.  I am open to proof that this is wrong, however.  --Daniel C. Boyer 16:21, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

 * Firstly, I think the blazon is poorly worded, I would have preferred "argent, on a chevron voided vert...", which clearly does not violate the rule. But I also think, for instance, "argent, a chevron or fimbriated vert" does not violate the rule whereas "argent, a chevron vert fimbriated or" does. —Ashley Y 01:55, Jan 4, 2004 (UTC)

 * An entirely unrelated issue but I would have picked "pomes" (i.e. roundels vert) rather than actual apples if I'd been designing this coat. —Ashley Y 01:55, Jan 4, 2004 (UTC)

Methods of hatching have been invented for other tinctures than the ones shown. Should this be gotten into? --Daniel C. Boyer 19:47, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

In the case of the Borough of Richmond upon Thames supporters the light blue and dark blue oars are not that significant to this article as they are blazoned as proper. But perhaps this should be kept to show the historical development. --Daniel C. Boyer 16:27, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * The only copy of the blazon I can find has "On either side a Griffin Gules armed and beaked Azure each supporting an Oar proper the blade of the dexter Dark Blue and that of the sinister Light Blue." So the oars themselves are unexceptional but it's the blades that are tinctured unusually. Marnanel 00:13, Apr 4, 2004 (UTC)

 * O.k. You're right.  Mea culpa.  --Daniel C. Boyer 15:38, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Split furs out
According to the article, furs are distinct from tinctures. The article should therefore be split and the sections about furs be moved to fur (heraldry). --Phil | Talk 11:37, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

 * Actually, they aren't distinct from other tinctures, though you're right that articles should probably exist for ermine and vair, with variants. --EncycloPetey 06:17, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

 * This is absolutely wrong. Furs are tinctures, as are metals, colours (including staynard colours), and proper is a tincture as well.  --Daniel C. Boyer 19:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Resurrecting this: While I agree that furs are a type of tincture, they are complex enough that it makes sense to split out the elaboration on details and variations of furs to Fur (heraldry). A short section with depictions of the three most-standard furs and a link to the Fur page with the details seems correct. --157.131.199.198 (talk) 23:39, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Improvement drive
Heraldry has been nominated to be improved by This week's improvement drive. Vote for this article there if you want to contribute. --Fenice 19:56, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Heraldric name of orange

 * 1) Red = Gules
 * 2) Orange = ?
 * 3) Yellow = Or
 * 4) Green = Vert
 * 5) Blue = Azure
 * 6) Purple = Purpure

Georgia guy 18:51, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

 * The heraldic name for orange is orange, but it is not regarded by heraldic writers as one of the basic tinctures. There are only seven tinctures recognized by English heralds, and the list has been quite stable since the oldest known heraldic treatises in English. Orange appears as an extremely rare oddity, and the term tenné is more commonly used for an orangey colour, though it is not the same as Crayola orange. Orange as a noble colour is a relatively modern concept, and I can't think of any uses off the top of my head earlier than the period of the Dutch Revolt (late sixteenth century). In that case, the choice was made to pun off the name of William of Orange, who was a leader of the movement. --EncycloPetey 06:15, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

 * But does orange appear in arms in this context? I know there are some extremely unusual usages in South Africa and the Netherlands.  --Daniel C. Boyer 19:53, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * In the English language, orange was not considered a separate colour to yellow until about the 1700's. Before then, orange and yellow were not distinguished, in much the same way that light blue and dark blue are both considered shades of blue. In Russian, light blue and dark blue have separate names in much the same way that we give separate names to red and pink (which themselves were not distinguished in Shakespeare's time). -- B.D.Mills  (T, C) 01:21, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Renaissance gemstone/planet blazoning, and problems with individual tincture pages
There was a Renaissance practice of sporadically blazoning colors with symbolic names of gemstones or planets. It's not of extreme significance in itself (and a number of late 19th century / early 20th century authors of heraldic reference works deprecated it), but it's a facet of heraldic history, and should probably be included in this article. Here are tables boiled down from a table posted by User:David H. Flint on Talk:Gules --

What's currently a problem is that the individual tincture articles (such as Gules, Vert, etc.) now include problematic listings of claimed associations of colors with jewels, planets, zodiac signs, Greek classical elements, days of the week, months, metals, trees, flowers, birds, and virtues with each of the tinctures.

Unfortunately, the associations of planets with colors given in these articles often contradict the well-documented historical heraldic associations given in the table above (for example, Vert is listed as associated with Mercury, not Venus), and the associations of metals with colors given in the article contradict the well-known old "alchemical" assignments of different metals to the seven classical planets (which a broadly-educated Renaissance scribe who was interested in this kind of symbolism would have been well-aware of) -- for example, Gules is listed as associated with Mars (as is traditional), but then is given a non-traditional association with the metal copper.

And all the rest of it (zodiac signs, Greek classical elements, months, trees, flowers, birds, and virtues) seems to be undocumented, and not likely to be documentable with a reliable heraldic source.

I propose changing all the individual tincture pages so as to include the historical gemstone / planet associations listed in the tables above (as documented in the sources given on Talk:Gules), and possibly also the corresponding metal associations according to article Classical planets in western alchemy (I am not sure this association was ever made by heraldic writers, but such an association between colors and metals was made by historical alchemists / occultists), and junking everything else. AnonMoos 03:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I should note that what AnonMoos says makes sense. I support the proposal. David H. Flint 11:24, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Done
I added the tables to this article page, and trimmed and revised the seven individual tincture article pages accordingly (hopefully completely consistently!). AnonMoos 23:14, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation?
I noticed there's no pronunciation guide for the tincture terms - for example, when talking in English, does 'Vert' have a silent 't', like the French 'vert', or not? Ditto for 'Argent', ...? 82.46.233.129 13:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You can find this information on the corresponding Wiktionary entries, if you're curious. --EncycloPetey 17:36, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

de interwiki
If is it correct link, why links to en:Rule of tincture ? If is it correct, please replace links in the de: article. Else will my bot remove it in the next time too.JAn Dudík 19:34, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Please ask the editors on de WP to correct this. Their links are not our responsibility.  Please do not assume that de in right and en is wrong. --EncycloPetey 19:46, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

vair
Any objection to moving most of #Vair and its variants to Vair? —Tamfang (talk) 23:03, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Absolutely not, please do it someone, also Tincture (heraldry) . → User: Perhelion 14:24, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * You're bumping a 9-year-old discussion about something that was done ages ago. Nobody here is still participating in that discussion.  There's already a stand-alone article on Vair, and you deleted the link to it in this article.  There's also an article on Ermine, and you deleted the link to that as well.  P Aculeius (talk) 17:26, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The split didn't actually remove the excessive detail from this page when it moved, so no, I don't think it was "done ages ago"; it was half-done ages ago, perhaps, but never finished. Also, it would make much more sense to have a Fur (heraldry) page with both of them and the more minor furs included. 157.131.199.198 (talk) 23:45, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Tincture (heraldry). 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/20050308160755/http://www.caliescali.com:80/simbolos.php3 to http://www.caliescali.com/simbolos.php3#escudo
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060208135825/http://heraldrysociety.us:80/forum/viewtopic.php?t=541 to http://heraldrysociety.us/forum/viewtopic.php?t=541

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 15:59, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

nouns
I'm intrigued to learn that the English College capitalizes tinctures because they are nouns. In French blazon they definitely are nouns (as shown by the de before each), but what's an example of an English blazon in which it's clear from the syntax that they're not adjectives? — The only difference between English and French in the names of the (principal) tinctures is English vert vs French sinople; in French vert is an adjective, so you can't say de vert. —Tamfang (talk) 09:01, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

 * I don't believe they're nouns in English. If anyone claims that they are, they're committing a serious grammatical error.  Most of the authoritative treatises in English don't capitalize tinctures, although there are two conventions that are often excepted: or is often capitalized in order to distinguish it from the conjunction "or", although if carefully blazoned there should be no confusion; and some writers hold that the first tincture mentioned in a blazon should be capitalized, probably deriving this rule from the habit of capitalizing the first word in a blazon, which was usually a tincture.  However, many writers follow neither of these conventions, and capitalize only the first word in the blazon.  Note that capitalization was not standardized in English until the end of the 18th century, so older blazons often capitalized any word the writer considered "important".  To some extent people still do this to this day (hence the persistence of "title case").  In decorative calligraphy, such as that used in patents of arms by the College of Arms, it's normal to do this, both to make what might otherwise look like a wall of text look more interesting, and also to draw attention to important points.  However, the fact that the College of Arms currently uses one manner of capitalization or, for that matter, omits most punctuation, has no bearing on the actual arms or for that matter, how anybody else would blazon them.  Capitalization and punctuation are not part of a coat of arms, and like the shade of paint used to portray a particular tincture, are entirely up to the artist.  On a side note, it looks as though vert is used in some French heraldry instead of sinople, but it may be considered archaic.  P Aculeius (talk) 15:18, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

 * I'm not very well versed in French grammar, but I'm not sure you can infer that tinctures are nouns in French merely because de is used with them. It simply means "of", and at least in English you can certainly say, "of green" or "of gold" without the colours becoming nouns.  In a French blazon, "de sinople" literally translates as "of vert" or "of green", where we would certainly consider the tincture an adjective.  Of course, we wouldn't say "of" in an English blazon, but that's purely a matter of convention.  So unless French categorizes adjectives and prepositions differently than English, I'd say that tinctures are still adjectives in French blazons.  P Aculeius (talk) 03:48, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

 * Although boundaries between parts of speech are more fluid in English, we don't generally use "of" before adjectives. I'd be amazed to learn that anyone has ever described me as a man of bulky or of clever.  In my opinion "of gold" means made of the metal; "of green" (offhand I can't think of an example other than describing a garment) is elliptical for "of green cloth", I guess.  —Tamfang (talk) 04:31, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

 * Whether it's elliptical or not, it occurs regularly with colours and patterns (cloth of plaid, sea of green, explosion of yellow). Gold isn't an exception, notwithstanding the fact that it can also be a noun.  A field of gold isn't the same as a ring of gold.  But if you think of these as words normally considered adjectives being used as though they were nouns, couldn't the same thing be happening in French?  I suppose, grammatically, we could say that "green" can be a noun used to describe the concept of greenness, even in English, but in the phrase, "a lion rampant vert", "vert" is clearly an adjective.  Does that change if we say "a lion of green" instead of "a lion green"?  Maybe.  But even if we suppose that tinctures are used as nouns in French blazon, they're clearly not in English.  Perhaps some heraldic authority has reasoned that "if they're nouns in French, and English heraldry uses the terminology of Norman French, then they must be nouns in English too."  But that's a rather pedantic analysis.  Normally I'm rather friendly to reasoning from etymology, but in the phrase "a lion green", the word "green" is indisputably an adjective in English grammar, and the fact that such a phrase has heraldic significance can't simply convert one part of speech into another.  I note that the grammatical distinction between nouns and adjectives isn't really relevant for capitalization purposes in French blazon, since common nouns aren't capitalized in French; in German all nouns are capitalized, but in English only proper nouns are, and tinctures aren't proper nouns.  So whatever's going on with capitalization in current grants of arms has nothing to do with English or French grammar.  It's purely a stylistic or decorative convention currently used by some heralds, but with no binding force, since "argent, a lion vert reaping wheat or" blazoned in 1780 or 1890 is exactly the same as "Argent, a Lion Vert reaping Wheat Or" blazoned in 2000.  P Aculeius (talk) 13:20, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

lede
March 6:
 * Undid revision 708505593 by P Aculeius (talk) - poor writing style; see WP:MOS

I don't see what about it is poorer than its replacement, and I'm not willing to read the whole MOS; couldn't you point to the relevant section? —Tamfang (talk) 02:00, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

 * This has already been threshed out between the editors involved. The only thing that the MOS arguably applied to was the placement of the word "tincture" in the first sentence.  EncycloPetey felt that the MOS demanded it come at the beginning of the sentence; but because the term is somewhat ambiguously used by different authorities, and the original meaning is not the one used in the article, I wrote the sentence beginning with the things included and ending with the word "tinctures", which I thought was a better way of introducing the term.  In other words, I wrote, "Heraldry uses a palette of A and B, usually known as tinctures", which he revised to read "tinctures provide a palette of A and B".   The other things described as "poor writing style" were my failure to link the word "palette" to the disambiguation page by that title, and my failure to describe the heraldry involving tinctures as "European heraldry", to distinguish it from all the other heraldries.  When I reverted his changes, he reverted me back and carried the discussion over to my talk page.  Rather than getting caught in an edit war, we threshed out the issue and I more or less left his changes alone and focused on other parts of the article until I ran out of steam.  I mean to get back to the unfinished parts soon.  But before restoring the paragraph the way I wrote it, I'd like to hear from EncycloPetey or any other editors who might want to comment on the matter.  P Aculeius (talk) 03:36, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 08:52, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Sinople
I read many years ago that in French heraldry, vert was green and sinople was yellow-green, used as a metal rather than a color. I don't know French; can anyone address this point? J S Ayer (talk) 00:59, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

 * I can't recall any sources describing sinople as merely one variety of green, and I'm certain I've never seen it used as a metal. Most sources that mention it simply say that it's used instead of vert; but I think I've seen vert used as well, so my feeling is that they're synonymous, but vert seems to be archaic.  I suspect that if you found a book that describes sinople as yellow-green rather than green in general, and calls it a metal, then the author was merely suggesting his own ideas for how sinople and vert could both be used and ought to be distinguished; or perhaps perpetuating an earlier author's ideas that don't ever seem to have caught on.

 * A bit like erminites; it's mentioned everywhere, but found nowhere (unless someone's recently used it after finding it in heraldic textbooks), and probably never existed as a distinct fur except in the imagination of heraldic writers. That's not to say that nobody ever depicted ermine in the manner that erminites describes; but if they did, it probably wasn't meant to be a distinct fur, and the style never caught on.  I think that distinguishing between vert and sinople probably falls in the same category: a writer seeking an explanation for the use of sinople when vert must have been the original (and more natural) term, and concluding that they might have been distinguishable from one another, and only later did one displace the other.  A clear reason for what's probably a very muddled process in reality.  Sorry I can't definitively prove or disprove it, but I very seriously doubt that what you read was ever widely accepted in French heraldry.  P Aculeius (talk) 03:32, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! J S Ayer (talk) 00:43, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Was "Sable" ever a fur as its name implies?
The only color that is hard to see against sable is blue. I think heraldry uses a light purple but if it doesn't then okay that's hard to see too. But white/silver, yellow/gold, green, and red show up just fine. If sable had ever been a fur as its name implies the a few of the famous "violations" such as Albania would be legal.2604:2000:C682:B600:FC9C:4C2:2514:9A8F (talk) 17:06, 19 July 2016 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson
 * Sable was never a heraldic fur; it's simply the name assigned to "black" in French and English heraldry. The concept of the furs as a distinct class of tinctures presumably dates to a much later period (bear in mind that the word tincture has an ambiguous meaning; it's not even clear that there was a rigidly-defined concept of tincture in the modern sense [meaning, the collection of metals, colours, and furs as equal things of the same basic kind] until long after the formative period of heraldry).  The rules respecting the use of tinctures developed over time, initially out of a desire for maximum visibility.  A prominent black charge on a red field has some visibility in bright light, but in dark or grimy battlefield conditions it may not have had, and smaller details would have been hard to work out.  Note that road signs adhere somewhat loosely to heraldic principles (at least in the U.S. and countries that follow U.S. sign conventions); red signs (STOP, YIELD, WRONG WAY, DO NOT ENTER, NO PARKING) all feature white lettering or backgrounds, never black; black lettering only appears on signs that are white or yellow.  Now, the rule against colour on colour is rather strictly adhered to in the west, but in Eastern Europe it's much less so, hence the Albanian arms.  Black or occasionally blue or green on a red field are found, but much less so than white or gold.  Legality doesn't really enter into it, though.  The "laws of heraldry" aren't laws in the sense we usually use that word, and aren't generally enforced against anyone who already bears arms, except in very limited circumstances.  And as Albania is a sovereign state, nobody can make it change its arms.  Albania can set its own rules for what tinctures can appear together, and when!  P Aculeius (talk) 17:31, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

split-section "Counterchanging"?
I suppose this may just as well go under division of the field or heraldic charge as under "tincture" (as it is a combination of the three concepts), and it's getting long enough to become a standalone page. --dab (𒁳) 08:05, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but your revisions and expansions to a section that's already perfectly clear and quite thorough aren't helping. It has no business being a stand-alone article; most mentions of it even in heraldic manuals are considerably shorter than the section is now.  It's a simple concept and doesn't need to become tedious in detail and examples.  Nobody cares what the date of the Fenwick arms is; it was cited as an example of arms that used an unusual term.  We don't need a date, which then requires a citation (according to you) that is unlikely ever to be produced.  There's no point in adding an unimportant fact that will forever have a "citation needed" tag attached to it.  Your insistence on discussing whether the various terms are precisely equivalent in each language or "correct" also veers into unnecessary detail, and varies from the established format of this article in mentioning terms as they occur in French and German heraldry.  The section already has more detail and more examples than many of the other, more important sections of this article; it doesn't need more examples or technical details.  As for moving it because it's related to partitioning, it's really not.  Counterchanged charges are only partitioned when they straddle partition lines; otherwise they merely exchange colours with the field.  The other sections of the article need to come before this one, which is really a minor detail and a very simple principle, although it risks being expanded out of all proportion for no particularly good reason.  P Aculeius (talk) 14:18, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * " It's a simple concept and doesn't need to become tedious in detail and examples. Nobody cares what the date of the Fenwick arms is" -- said no-one on Wikipedia, ever. It's almost as if you believed that "nobody cares" what the date of the counterchanged coa of Tänzl (Tyrol) would be, but of course serious works on heraldry will convey such information. Presumably because the field of heraldry has a history, and some people have been known to pursue the scholarly study of the history of individual fields of knowledge.
 * In seriousness, you are displaying signs of article ownership here. Material growing "out of all proportion" to the page topic is precisely why we do WP:SS splits. I guess I will just restore the content you blanked and create the WP:SS subpage, as I do not believe I need your permission for that, I was merely using the talkpage in the hope there could be bona fide collaboration. --dab (𒁳) 11:15, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

 * You might want to check your policies again. Accusing other people of bad faith is definitely not collaborative.  But more to the point, going into tedious detail on points of minute and tangential relevance is not what this article is for.  If there were special rules for counterchanging or it were the subject of considerable detail in heraldic manuals, then a lengthy section or even an independent article might be warranted.  But that's not the case here.  The sections of this article correspond roughly with major chapters or subchapters in heraldic manuals.  Counterchanging is usually more of a footnote.  For instance, in A Complete Guide to Heraldry discussion of counterchanging occupies one third of a paragraph in the chapter on blazoning (sharing with the distribution of multiple charges and marks of cadency), and is only mentioned in passing in the chapter on partitioning (with respect to distinguishing a field barry with one containing a large number of bars).  Counterchanging requires a single sentence in the glossary of the Oxford Guide to Heraldry.  Slater's discussion in The Complete Book of Heraldry has four paragraphs, although only one of them is devoted to the theory, and the other three discuss the application of the concept by a group of three families with similar arms.  Franklyn's Heraldry has one paragraph on counterchanging, and mentions it again briefly in the two following sentences for examples of counterchanging along different partition lines.

 * In each of these works, the dates of various arms is only given when directly relevant to the text in which they are mentioned; if arms are mentioned only for an example of a particular figure, rather than a particularly early or precedent-setting example, then no date is given. As it happens, none of the aforementioned discussions on counterchanging provide any dates for any of the arms used as examples.  Why we would insist that a date be added for every example as a parenthetical to break up an otherwise straightforward expression, and only to tag such examples with "date needed" followed by "citation for date needed" when there's very little chance that either will be forthcoming, is a complete puzzlement.  So when I characterize adding such details as unnecessary and not particularly helpful to the reader, particularly when you don't even have those details and will likely never have them, it's not a personal attack.  It's simply explaining why they weren't kept.  P Aculeius (talk) 13:19, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Tincture (heraldry). 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/20030910033209/http://www.heraldry-scotland.co.uk/Forum/ShowMessage.asp?ID=2700 to http://www.heraldry-scotland.co.uk/Forum/ShowMessage.asp?ID=2700
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120314015244/http://pages.ripco.net/~clevin/gemarms.html to http://pages.ripco.net/~clevin/gemarms.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:11, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

 * Checked sources; second one seems okay; first one does not appear relevant, and search for similar information on the current web site failed for multiple reasons (common search terms, forums not browsable by non-registered users, registration not available to certain users, further information about registration locked to non-registered users), but forums not likely to be an authority anyway. Deleting reference, but not statement (seems to be a logical inference; another reliable source can probably be found).  P Aculeius (talk) 12:23, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Astronomical Symbols
The symbols for ascending node and ascending node appear to be incorrect. They are both showing the symbol for Leo. Should they be: ascending node ☊ U+260A, and decending node ☋ U+260B, not ♌ U+264C? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.211.114.71 (talk) 08:34, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tincture (heraldry)