text:
Streaking

Streaking is the act of running naked through a public area for publicity, for fun, as a prank, a dare, a form of protest, or to participate in a fad. Streaking is often associated with sporting events, but can occur in more secluded areas. Streakers are often pursued by sporting officials or the police.

Definitions and etymology
The word has been used in its modern sense only since the 1960s. Before that, to streak in English since 1768 meant "to go quickly, to rush, to run at full speed", and was a re-spelling of streek: "to go quickly" (c. 1380); this in turn was originally a northern Middle English variant of stretch (c. 1250).

In December 1973, a graduate of Carleton College in Northfield, Minnesota wrote to Time magazine that the term "streaking" was coined because the nude students ran primarily during the winter months of January and February, and "unless one appeared as a streak against the landscape, the Minnesota winter was triumphant and streaker became statue." The school's newspaper, The Carletonian, used the term "streaking" as early as 1967, but initially in negative terms: "Examples of [Carleton's social problems] are the large number of departing female students, the rise of class spirit, low grades, streaking, destruction, drinking, and the popularity of rock dances."

History
Historical forerunners of modern-day streakers include the neo-Adamites who travelled naked through towns and villages in medieval Europe, and the 17th-century Quaker Solomon Eccles, who went nude through the City of London with a burning brazier on his head. At 7:00 PM on 5 July 1799, a man was arrested at the Mansion House, London, and sent to the Poultry Compter. He confirmed that he had accepted a wager of 10 guineas (equal to £0 today) to run naked from Cornhill to Cheapside.

Fines of between £10 and £50 were imposed on streakers by British and Irish magistrates in the early 1970s. The offences used for prosecution were typically minor, such as the violation of park regulations. Nevertheless, the chief law in force against streaking in England and Wales at that time remained the 16th-century vagrancy law, for which the punishment in 1550 had been whipping.

In the United States
Not to be confused with the fad known as streaking, the first recorded incident of running naked in public by a college student in the United States occurred in 1804 at Washington College (now Washington and Lee University) when senior George William Crump was arrested for running naked through Lexington, Virginia, where the university is located. Crump was suspended for the academic session, but later went on to become a U.S. Congressman.

In June 1973, the press reported on a "streaking" trend at Michigan State University. In December 1973, Time magazine called streaking "a growing Los Angeles-area fad" that was "catching on among college students and other groups". A letter writer responded, "Let it be known that streakers have plagued the campus police at Notre Dame for the past decade", pointing out that a group of University of Notre Dame students sponsored a "Streakers' Olympics" in 1972.

In February 1974, the press began calling it a "streaking epidemic." By the first week of March, college campuses across the country were competing to set streaking records. On March 11, 1974, several Americans imported streaking to Japan, where a series of copycat incidents occurred over the next month.

The prominence of streaking in 1974 has been linked both to the sexual revolution and a conservative backlash against feminism and the campus protests of the late 1960s and early 1970s.

United States
Colleges and universities with documented traditions of campus streaking include the University of Chicago (Polar Bear run), Denison University (Naked Week), Oberlin College, Pennsylvania State University, Wellesley College, the University of Virginia (Streaking the Lawn), and Wheaton College (the "Kingdom Run").

Carleton College is home to the streaking traditions Week of Streak (founded spring 2020) and Nudegressive. The week before finals, students streak each night at dusk to sundown at various locations around campus. These streaking locations become increasingly ambitious, or public, as the week goes on. Week of Streak culminates with Nudegressive, an event that takes place at midnight on the eve of Rotblatt with around 200 participants who streak a 1 mile loop through Carleton's arboretum followed by a nude dance party at the Hill of Three Oaks bonfire. Many students choose to also take a dip in the Boliou fountain.

Dartmouth College has two streaking-related challenges: The Ledyard Challenge, in which students swim naked across the Connecticut River and run nude back across the bridge, and the Blue Light Challenge, in which streaking students attempt to press the alarm on every one of the campus's blue light emergency phones. As of 2005, a Thursday Night Streaking Club regularly streaked at various events and public places.

In 1986, the University of Michigan's Naked Mile celebrated the last day of class with a group streak across campus along an approximate one-mile path. At the height of its popularity in the late 1990s, between 500 and 800 students participated, including several hundred females. Over 1,400 students participated one year and well over one thousand during another year. However, due to enforcement of public indecency laws and pressure from administration officials concerned about increasing spectator crowds and videotaping, participation declined. By 2001, a mere 24 students participated, signaling the effective end of the Naked Mile. Students were warned by college administrators that streakers would be arrested and required to register as sex offenders for life under Megan's Law.

The students at Union College held midnight "Pajama Parade" events in 1862, 1914 and several times in the 1950s. The real streaking tradition, which was nationally popular since 1973, arrived at the campus in the 1990s in the form of a nocturnal lap around the Nott Memorial known as the "Naked Nott Run."

To celebrate the school year's first night of heavy rainfall, a well-known tradition called "First Rain" is enacted at the University of California, Santa Cruz by students who for the entirety of the day to midnight, run around campus nearly or completely nude. Beginning at Porter, the run proceeds throughout the other colleges.

At the University of Vermont, a Naked Bike Ride is traditionally held at midnight at the end of each semester. Participants run, bike, unicycle, carry kayaks, push shopping carts, or pull sleds. The topic of the Naked Bike Ride has been a touchy one among UVM police, who have tried several times to do away with it. In 2011, Interim President John Bramley ended school funding for the event. This resulted in the student body creating the UVM Green Caps, a group of student volunteers stationed around campus throughout the evening for the safety of students.

The Philippines
At the University of the Philippines, members of the Alpha Phi Omega fraternity streak around the campus in an annual event known as the Oblation Run. The run started in 1977 to protest the banning of the movie, "Hubad na Bayani", which depicted human rights abuses in the martial law era. The event continued to occur as a protest action.

Spain
In 2011, the first nudist race took place at the University of Alicante (Spain).

In sport
The first instance of streaking in English football took place on 23 March 1974. Prior to the start of the league match between Arsenal and Manchester City at Arsenal Stadium, a middle-aged man named John Taylor ran around the field. He was eventually caught by three policemen, forcibly made to wear trousers, and removed from the stadium. Taylor was fined £10 by the North London Court the next day.

In the sport of cricket, it is not uncommon for a male streaker to run out to the field purely for shock and entertainment value or political purposes. The first known instance of streaking in cricket took place on 22 March 1974, the first day of the third test between Australia and New Zealand at Auckland. Half an hour before the end of the day's play, while New Zealand was batting, "a dark-haired young man" ran from near the sightscreen, through mid-wicket and disappeared between the stands near the square-leg boundary. The incident occurred quickly and police did not have time to react. Reports differ on whether the man was completely naked, with some accounts stating that he may have been wearing a flesh-coloured T-shirt. On the evening of the second day, while Australian batsman Ian Redpath was on strike, an "athletic young man" was caught on television cameras running across the ground on the leg side. The streaker ran to the men's restroom and was chased by police. When police entered the restroom, they found 20 people inside—all of whom were clothed—and authorities were unable to identify the streaker. One of the best-known instances of streaking occurred on 5 August 1975, when former Royal Navy cook Michael Angelow ran naked across Lord's during an Ashes Test. This was the first instance of streaking during a cricket match in England, and commonly mistakenly believed to be the first-ever instance of streaking in cricket.

Another example was in the First Test of the Australia versus the I.C.C. World XI, when a rather drunken man darted out toward the field naked, shocking the Australian and World XI players, halting play until he was spear tackled to the ground by field personnel. In one notable incident in 1977, Australian test cricketer Greg Chappell spanked an invading streaker named Bruce McCauley with his cricket bat; McCauley then fell to the ground and was arrested by police.

Linsey Dawn McKenzie, an English glamour model, performed a topless streak at a televised England v. West Indies cricket match at Old Trafford in 1995. Wearing only a thong and a pair of trainers, she ran onto the field with the words "Only Teasing" written across her breasts.

In the 1970s, at the height of streaking's popularity, a male streaker who broke into the Augusta National golf course in Augusta, Georgia (albeit not while the Masters was in play), was shot with buckshot and slightly wounded. In 1999, a female streaker named Yvonne Robb was arrested for kissing Tiger Woods on the 18th hole at Carnoustie.

In 1982, a woman named Erika Roe ran across the pitch of Twickenham Stadium in London, England, during an England–Australia rugby union match, exposing her 40 in bust. It has been described by the BBC as "perhaps the most famous of all streaks."

Streaking became popular at Australian rules football matches in the 1980s, particularly Victorian Football League Grand Finals. The trend was a trend started by Adelaide stripper Helen D'Amico at the 1982 VFL Grand Final between Carlton and Richmond, in which D'Amico streaked while wearing only a Carlton scarf. At the 1988 VFL Grand Final, a fully naked woman streaked during the final quarter and was promptly arrested. In another Melbourne Demons grand final, the 2021 Grand final, held in Perth, a male streaker ran on to the ground wearing only his underwear. He was only on the ground for a few seconds before he was removed and arrested.

In Super Bowl XXXVIII, streaker Mark Roberts disrupted the game by running onto the field. He was eventually leveled by New England Patriots linebacker Matt Chatham, and was subsequently apprehended. Despite the worldwide audience, this event was largely overshadowed due to that game's infamous halftime show in which Janet Jackson's nude breast was revealed due to what was called a "wardrobe malfunction". Roberts would return in 2007 during the first NFL regular season game held in England between the Miami Dolphins and New York Giants, streaking during the game at Wembley Stadium.

In the 2006 Winter Olympics, Mark Roberts streaked again, this time interrupting the men's bronze medal curling match between the U.S. team and the UK team, wearing nothing but a strategically placed rubber chicken. For the 2008 Olympics in Beijing, officials warned visitors against streaking, among other forms of "bad behaviour".

Michael O'Brien was the first-known streaker at a major sporting event when, on 20 April 1974, he ran out naked onto the ground of an England–France rugby union match at Twickenham. The 25-year-old Australian was captured by a policeman, PC Bruce Perry, who covered his genitals with his police helmet. The photograph of O'Brien under arrest became one of the most reproduced photographs of a streaker.

On 22 March 2009, a female streaker ran onto the pitch brandishing a green flag during the televised match between London Irish and Northampton Saints. It was in front of the season's largest crowd away from Twickenham, with 21,000 fans bearing witness.

In a game against the Melbourne Storm at Olympic Park Stadium in 2007, a Brisbane Broncos fan streaked across the field waving his supporter jersey over his head. He was apprehended at the other side of the field to large applause.

During an NRL finals match between the Wests Tigers and the New Zealand Warriors at the Sydney Football Stadium on 16 September 2011, a streaker ran onto the playing field forcing the game to come to a halt as security guards attempted to apprehend the man.

During the final minutes of the third and deciding game of the 2013 State of Origin series, a streaker, Wati Holmwood, intruded naked upon the field, interrupting the play and possibly costing the Queensland team a try. He was tackled by security guards, escorted from the field and fined $5,500.

During the 3rd quarter of Super Bowl LVIII, a fan ran onto the field and was apprehended by security. The streaker was not shown on CBS.

In popular culture
The high point of streaking's pop culture significance was in 1974, when thousands of streaks took place around the world. A wide range of novelty products were produced to cash in on the fad, from buttons and patches to a wristwatch featuring a streaking Richard Nixon, in pink underwear that said "Too shy to streak." This is explored in an episode of the first season of That '70s Show.

Perhaps the most widely seen streaker in history was 34-year-old Robert Opel, who streaked across the stage of The Dorothy Chandler Pavilion in Los Angeles flashing a peace sign on national US television at the 46th Academy Awards in April 1974. Bemused host David Niven quipped, "Isn't it fascinating to think that probably the only laugh that man will ever get in his life is by stripping off and showing his shortcomings?" Later, evidence arose suggesting that Opel's appearance was facilitated as a publicity stunt by the show's producer Jack Haley Jr. Robert Metzler, the show's business manager, believed that the incident had been planned in some way; during the dress rehearsal Niven had asked Metzler's wife to borrow a pen so he could write down the famous line, which was thus not the ad-lib it appeared to be.

Ray Stevens wrote and performed "The Streak", a novelty song about a man who is "always making the news / wearing just his tennis shoes". The song reached number one on the Billboard Hot 100 in May 1974.

Parodied in a 6 May 1974 Peanuts comic strip, the character Snoopy, in his college big man on campus alter-ego Joe Cool; engages in the "latest campus fad" by removing his customary sunglasses and collar, then proceeds to go streaking by the fourth panel by appearing to be "naked" in doing so.

In 1981, Japanese coin-op manufacturer Shoei produced an arcade game called Streaking, a maze game in which a nude woman is being chased by police. It was distributed in the U.S. by Computer Games, Inc. as Streaker, and by Computer Kinetics Corp. as Stripper.

In 2014, Russian project ChaveZZZ Reality released a single "Naked Runner" and a same-titled video clip specifically dedicated to all streakers worldwide.

In Bruce Weber's 2014 account of a bike ride across America Life Is a Wheel he recounts a memory of his friend Billy streaking across the campus of Clark University at the age of 18.

Records
As of 2004, the record for the largest group streak was established at the University of Georgia with 1,543 simultaneous streakers on 7 March 1974.

title: Streaking


text:
Talk:Stone Mountain

Panoramic image
Could it be put somewhere else on the page? I don't feel the very top is an appropriate place. Spartan198 (talk) 08:43, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Better still, could that panorama simply be removed? It's a very poor-quality image. Whoever made it didn't know how to get things to line up properly (you really need to use a tripod), nor how to compensate for vignetting (the darker regions around the edges of the individual photos), and the blurriness near the edges of the individual photos suggests that a poor-quality lens was used. Craig418 (talk) 21:27, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

 * It was taken over 8-1/2 years ago, when the technology ordinary people had to do this was not as good as it is now. It should not be at the top of the article, but I think it is OK where it is now, until there is a better one.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 21:32, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

 * Since the carving depicts leaders of the evil Confederacy and its war to preserve the enslavement of human beings, is it not appropriate that the image shown be unattractive?

Natural history
This article could use a section on the geological and natural history of Stone Mountain. Under "Park" I added a blurb about the Georgia oak that should be moved to such a section whenever someone with the knowledge decides to add it. —Eoghanacht 16:17, 2005 Apr 4 (UTC)

Plane crash
I noticed this comment added to the article, so I moved it here. --Eoghanacht 2005 June 29 12:51 (UTC)
 * As a witness to the crash of the single engine airplane. I find it very hard to believe that the pilot had engine trouble.  When the airplane flew across my neighborhood (that directly borders the rear side of the park) it was so low that we could not see it because of the trees.  The airplane was moving fast, and the engine was strong and loud up to the moment of impact.  The impact with the mountain was extremely loud and followed by a large fire that could be easily seen.  Additionally, the private airport that was next to Stone Mountain Park had been closed for 3 years and had a line of telephone poles was installed down the runway by the new owners.
 * This could be an interesting anecdote, but would have to be supported by published, secondary sources to be an acceptable part of the encyclopedia. The park, itself might be interested in your conclusions, based on your memories.  I, personally, find them interesting, but they are more appropriate for a blog, unless there is at least one notable source.  As is, would be classified as WP:OR, original research.  rags (talk) 21:14, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

1929 photo
I have a photo of the monument in a 1929 US history textbook. The book is public domain (copyright never renewed). The photo credit is "Stone Mountain Association," and I think it's safe to assume that the photo's copyright was not renewed either. (Renewal records for photos for 1929+28=1957 are not online.) I haven't gotten around to scanning the photo yet. It shows a Greek-style temple in the foreground, with a rectangular pool of water. In the background is the mountain, with a carving in it, but the carving is not the same one as in the modern photo!?!? It appears to show a larger group of horsemen, and the carving goes all the way down to the horses' feet. Are there two carvings? Or was the older carving destroyed and replaced with the new one? I'm curious about whether any of this was there in 1915, when the second Klan was founded, or whether it was just a plain old mountain at that time. It's also interesting that the park's web site never mentions the mountain's, er, colorful history in any way.--Bcrowell 1 July 2005 15:54 (UTC)

 * Are you sure that it is an actual photo and not retouched? I'm not positive, but I think the original plan for the carving was as you describe.  It may have been retouched to show what it was planned to look like.  (Mount Rushmore was not doe as orignally planned either.)  There are not two carvings now, and I'm pretty sure there wasn't an older carving, and I'm pretty sure that none of it was there in 1915.   Bubba73 04:30, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

 * There were two separate carvings by different sculptors at different times. The first, by Gutzon Borglum, was started in the 1920s and never completed. The second was started in the 1960s and is the one currently seen. From my recollection of a book I don't have to hand right now, I believe the second completely replaced the first; and the article says it was dynamited three years after 1925. -- Chris j wood 10:10, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Could this be the picture (a model of the plan)

Bubba73 18:59, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * model

laser show started when?
Does anyone know when the laser show started? The reason is that "a laser show has been projected on the carving nightly for 20 years." will soon become obsolete, so it would be better to list the year it started.

I searched on Google and couldn't find it. I've emailed to try to find out. (I think it started in the med or late 1970s.) Bubba73 04:38, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

 * I got email back and they said that the first full season of the laser show was in 1983, so I'll put that date in the article. I think there might have been some sort of laser show earlier than that.  I didn't go but I remember a friend telling me about it. Bubba73 16:10, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

I know from personal experience that the current laser light show began in the spring of 1987 because I lived about 3 miles from the park at the time and went that first season. It was considered a great novelty of modern times. Thus the statement that "it has been projected on the carving nightly for 20 years" is an accurate one. I still live very close and go to the park once every 3 weeks. I will do a double check on the years and other research at the parks excellent museum. SMARTKiddy 01:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Well, I know from personal experience that I took dates to the laser show during high school, and I graduated in 1984. Neither of our personal experiences count for evidence here, but the 25th Anniversary reference below does. Shawn D. (talk) 19:42, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I remember going to the laser show as a kid and seeing the songs "Ghostbusters" and "Footloose". Both of those movies came out in 1984 so I doubt they would have had them in the show if it premiered in 87. I actually used to work at the Laser Show (doing pyro) but don't work there anymore so I don't have access to the info about it. Akubhai 01:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The Stone Mountain Park website says that this year they're celebrating the laser show's 25th aniversary which puts the start at 1983. I lived in Stone Mountain from 1984 to 1986 and understood 1983 to be the starting year, (apparently the tone of the show had to modified for 1984 because it upset a lot of Northerers, it being a tad too much pro-South). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.240.175.151 (talk) 15:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

more history
Under "history", how about adding: Things like that. Now the history contains only 3 items. Bubba73 03:06, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * when it was bought by the state
 * when it was opend as a park
 * when the skylift was built
 * when the carving was started and finished
 * when the laser show started

 * Most of what you listed is already in the article, just not in the history section. The organization is kind of a mess, though.--Bcrowell 03:33, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

earlier discussion about focus of article
I moved the following material from the top of the talk page down to here.--Bcrowell 17:45, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

I removed some links that were too trivial to help a reader. User:Wetman.

Does Jefferson Davis really count among the generals of the Confederacy? And if the present-day population of Stone Mountain is 70% black, isn't that quite normal in an urban Georgia setting? Why "ironically?" Wetman 01:38, 22 May 2004 (UTC)
 * It's ironic because the place is basically a holy site of the Ku Klux Klan.--Bcrowell 03:34, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * No, the place is basically a fantastic piece of geology, and has been so for millenia. Difficult to see that fact through all the Ku Klux Klan related info in this article though. Surely most of that belongs in a different article. -- Chris j wood 16:25, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Proposal
The volume of information in this article about the relationship between the carving and the Ku Klux Klan seems inappropriate in this article, which if its title means anything, is actually about a mountain. Clearly there are a number of editors who care deeply about the carving and its cultural history, but I'm not one of them. I'm sure there are many readers who are put off by this when they really want to find out about the place and its geology, flora and fauna, etc.

My proposal is therefore that we create a new article, say Confederate Memorial Carving at Stone Mountain, and move most of the carving/kkk stuff into that. Link both ways. Both articles to contain a short (1-2 paras) summary of the other. -- Chris j wood 16:36, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I think a better solution is simply to expand the information about the site's natural history. I object strongly to the idea of spinning off the memorial into a separate article, which would play into the current private management's efforts to rewrite history. I actually like the edits you've been doing, such as moving the detailed statistics about the monument out of the lead --- I only put them there as a side-effect of trying to make the article's organization make more sense, and you're right, it wasn't a good place to put them.--Bcrowell 17:44, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Ok. I've got some source material for that somewhere. I'll dig it out and give it a go. -- Chris j wood 19:28, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I think something along those lines would be good. Perhaps Stone Mountain should be about the mountain and a Stone Mountain Park article should be about the park, including the carving.  On the other hand, that would probably leave very little for the Mountin article proper.

 * One thing I'm wondering about is the line "and the Klan was intimately involved at all stages of the monument's construction. " Was the KKK intimately involved after the State of GA bought it for a state park?  I don't know one way or the other.   Bubba73 17:40, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

 * "and the Klan was intimately involved at all stages of the monument's construction." See the history section of the article. The Klan was involved from the beginning. On the other hand, that would probably leave very little for the Mountin article proper. I think this just points up the fact that nobody has written the necessary natural history material.--Bcrowell 17:50, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The article says that it was involve at all stages, but mentions only the early part. Was the KKK intimately involved all of the way to the completion in 1970?  Bubba73 18:29, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

 * Ah, I see what you mean, good point. I've reworded the lead appropriately.--Bcrowell 18:45, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Question on carving history
The first bit of the section 'History of the memorial and the Ku Klux Klan' confuses me. Until you read it in detail, and especially with the lead Ku Klux Klan activities at Stone Mountain are deep-rooted, it sounds like it is saying that the KKK played a major part in instigating the carving. But if you then look at the dates, you find that the original conception of the project predates the revival of the Klan by some 6 years, perhaps suggesting it was more a case of them being attracted to the mountain by the carving, rather than the other way around.

On the basis that wikipedia history sections are generally written in chronological order, shouldn't the second paragraph come before the first?. -- Chris j wood 19:36, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I've resorted the first two paragraphs. -- Chris j wood 10:53, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Good edits.--Bcrowell 15:37, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Another question on carving history.
The history contains the following statement:

 * The Klan held a major meeting at Stone Mountain in 1975, and at Venable's invitation, the Klan held annual Labor Day meetings on Venable's property, where 60-foot crosses were burned.

It isn't clear if the Venable's property referred to here is Stone Mountain or not. If it isn't, then the second part of the above sentence is not relevant to the article. If it is, then this must have been prior to 1958 (when the State acquired the mountain) and it is misleading to lump it together with a reference to something happening more than 17 years later in 1975; the statement should be moved up the chronology.

Anybody know which it is?. -- Chris j wood 19:54, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * As I read it, the first clause refers to something at Stone Mountain itself, and the rest discusses a continuing series of Klan meetings next door to the park or something. I could be wrong, though. You might want to figure out who initially wrote it, and ask that person for clarification. I googled, but didn't figure out a sufficiently finetuned google search to figure out any more than this.--Bcrowell 21:06, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Birth of a Nation
Chris deleted the words "KKK propaganda" describing Birth of a Nation, with the following explanation:
 * History of the memorial and the Ku Klux Klan - 'KKK Propaganda' is arguably POV, not asserted by our own article on the film, and causality challenged (predates KKK revival)

If you feel it's POVish, I don't have any problem with changing it to something else, but the film is mainly about the Klan (see the poster), and the article needs to explain that, because otherwise the reader can't understand the logic. I've changed the adjectival phrase to "Klan-glorifying." No, there is no causality problem. There was a first Klan, which was pretty much defunct by 1915. The film was glorifying the original Klan, and the film was a major factor leading to the creation of the second Klan in that year. I honestly don't think there's any dispute that the film is pro-Klan propaganda. I think the real debate would be that some people, e.g., Woodrow Wilson and D.W. Griffith, saw the first Klan, depicted in the film, as a good thing, a positive response to the excesses of Republican Reconstruction. Griffith did claim that people had misinterpreted the film (that's why he made Intolerance), but he never claimed that it wasn't glorifying the Klan.-Bcrowell 15:19, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm happy with those words, although I have changed the wording from 'film Klan-glorifying' to 'Klan-glorifying film', which I hope you agree reads better. -- Chris j wood 16:13, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Oops, thanks for the proofreading! I'm glad we could work that out. It's a pleasure working with you.--Bcrowell 16:27, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

natural history photos?
Is there anyone working on the article who is currently living in Atlanta, and could provide some photos to illustrate the natural history? I'm sure the park is beautiful this time of year. I added a photo of some Georgia oak leaves, but it's not exactly the most exciting image :-) It might be interesting to have a photo of the wooded landscape at the bottom, and maybe of the rock pools at the top as well.--Bcrowell 15:34, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

monolith envy
An anon recently edited the article's claim that Stone Mountain was the third-largest monolith in the world --- Haystack Rock's article lists it as the third tallest. "Tallest" clearly defines the criterion for measurement, while "largest" could refer to height, girth, mass, or volume. I've added some weasel language. Does anyone have a source for the "third-largest" claim that clearly defines what "large" means?--Bcrowell 01:20, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The claim is patently false. El Capitan in Yosemite is solid granite and rises 3,000 feet from the valley floor!  The article itself says that Stone Mountain only rises some 800 feet above the surrounding terrain.  I'm deleting the silliness about it being the largest granite monolith.  By height AND girth El Capitan is far larger. Tmangray 05:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Historical inaccuracy
"The Klan held a major meeting at Stone Mountain in 1975, and at Venable's invitation, the Klan held annual Labor Day meetings on Venable's property, where 60-foot crosses were burned. In reaction to this history, Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech includes the line "let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.""

How could MLK Jr. have given a speech about an event in 1975 considering he'd been dead since 1968?

I think you are confused, the speech was not referring to the 1975 event, the speech was referring to the November 1915 meeting which allegedly occurred at the base of the mountain.

Re-read the article it should become apparent to you. Overhere2000 03:31, 12 September 2007 (UTC)overhere2000

Local info
I used to work at the Laser Show and still have friends who do. Is anyone actively maintaining this article that would like more info? It looks like someone wants pictures. I'll try to see if I can get a picture of the yellow (confederate) daisy.

Akubhai 21:40, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Aviation and Navigation
Perhaps this is worth mentioning since the article contains information on airplane accidents. The FAA Atlanta Sectional Chart has a note that states: "Magnetic disturbance of as much as 10° exists at 4000 [feet] elevation in the vicinty of Stone Mountain." --Boone 05:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Conflicting information
This article says that the carillion has 732(!) bells, while the carillon article says that the carillion holding the record for most bells has only 77. I don't know how many bells the Stone Mountain carillion actually has, but I doubt that it's 732! -- Jack 22:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Numerous official and semi-official websites give the figure "732-bell carillon". Try Googling "Stone Mountain carillon" for samples. (It still may be wrong in fact!)--Wetman 22:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

 * This site indicates is not a real carillion: http://www.hinsonrisher.com/Stone%20Mountain%20Carillon/default.aspx --Akubhai 15:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Belated thanks. I just updated the article with a better description (732 bell-tone rods, electronically amplified through 60 speakers) and a newspaper ref. —173.68.139.31 (talk) 07:15, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Granite?
The article also currently states in the beginning "Stone Mountain is also a quartz monzonite rock when described in geologic terms and is therefore not technically granite. "   Yet throughout the article it frequently mentions it's composition being granite. This is quite confusing to the visitor like myself trying to read about the geology of Stone Mountain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.199.182.6 (talk) 17:50, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

laser show info
Shouldn't there be a little bit more info on the laser show?? Samphex 18:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Rock climbing history
Stone Mountain is currently closed to rock climbing. Is there a history of any rock climbing on Stone Mountain prior to its closure?--64.178.27.65 00:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Amusment Park?
Why is Stone Mountain tagged as an "Amuesment Park (in Georgia)"? I wouldn't consider it an amusement park at all. If it is to be tagged as such then it needs a tag as "Amusement Park in the United States" as well. But I believe the amusement park tag should just be removed. Others? --Mjrmtg 13:58, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I've been there; it's more than just the carving, they have a train, a bike trail, fairgrounds, historical re-ennactments, a riverboat, fireworks, a laser show, small rides for kids, camping, fishing, etc. However, it doesn't have the quantity of rollercoasters that more popular parks have... what are the Wiki standards for Amusement parks? --Anon, 6/26/08 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.69.212.113 (talk) 19:43, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

amsl?
The elevation is stated with the suffix "amsl" (above mean sea level). Is this necessary? I thought that was the default when speaking about elevation of geologic structures.James A. Stewart 00:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

The world's largest exposed piece of granite?
I suspect that El Capitan is much larger! If a source can't be found to back up that statement, it should be removed, or it should be reworded. Right now it's quite open to interpretation. "Largest" in what way? Stone Mountain might make it among the top 200 or so, but nowhere near the top. It can at least claim to be the largest in Georgia....;-) -- Fyslee/talk 19:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I've always heard largest in the world. I'll look for a source. Akubhai 22:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Here's one Akubhai 22:56, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

 * That's why the precise wording is important. Right now it's not good enough, and my comments are intended to point that out. The reference you cite states:

 * "freestanding piece of exposed granite"

 * which is not the same as

 * "largest exposed piece of granite"

 * which is the current wording. The article has that statement immediately before another one mentioning a monolith. Those two need to be merged to make it more accurate. -- Fyslee/talk 00:13, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, Fyslee, you're WRONG. Stone Mountain IS the largest exposes granite monolith in the world. First, El Capitan isn't really a monolith (i.e. Stone Mountain is really one large stone, formed at the same time). Second, El Capitan may be taller but Stone Mountain is more than just the face; it is several miles long. I suggest you do some research before making groundless claims.R Young {yak ł talk } 23:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

 * As you can see from my original comment and now following comments, I was not dealing with the "monolith" claim at all. The first claim is fuzzy. -- Fyslee/talk</b> 00:13, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

 * The article states that it is "the third-largest monolith in the world," but you claim it's the "largest exposes [sic] granite monolith in the world." I have nothing against Stone Mountain. It's been quite a few years since I was last on it, but the article needs to be more specific, that's all. -- <b style="color:#004000;">Fyslee</b>/<b style="color:#990099; font-size:x-small;">talk</b> 00:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I have always heard largest piece of exposed granite. I found the saying in passing in a few press releases from the park. But if the source says largest freestanding then the article should be changed to reflect the source, not OR. Amazingracer 03:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Also as Ryoung pointed out El Capitan is really just a rock face made of granite. In theory there are mountains bigger than El Capitan made of granite, so it would lose its claim. I think why people argue for Stone Mountain, is the fact that is not a mountain at all (wasnt formed like mountains), it is basically just a giant rock lying outside of Atlanta (only part of the entire rock is exposed, as Stone Mountain has veins running under the city of Atlanta and even as far south as Macon). The same way Ayers Rock is just a giant rock laying in the outback. Im trying to see if I can find a more valid source that home made climbing pages and obscure press release about an easter egg hunt. Amazingracer 16:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Here is a reliable source:

http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Multimedia.jsp?id=m-2099&adv=y <span style="font-family:arial, helvetica; color:#ff0000;">R <span style="color:#006688; font-family:arial, helvetica;">Young {<span style="font-family:arial, helvetica; font-size:x-small;">yak <span style="font-family:arial, helvetica;">ł <span style="font-family:arial, helvetica; font-size:x-small;">talk } 12:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

 * It's all a matter of what wording to use. There are of course many granite mountains larger than both El Capitan and Stone Mountain, so just what is a good way to describe Stone Mountain? It is indeed a remarkable formation, of that we can agree. El Capitan is just the name of the portion of the mountain with that exposed granite face, not even of a "mountain". It's actually a wall of the Yosemite Valley in the Sierra Nevada Mountains. -- <b style="color:#004000;">Fyslee</b>/<b style="color:#990099; font-size:x-small;">talk</b> 12:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Added the reference and reworded according to the reference. Amazingracer 04:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

If you read the El Capitan article, you'll note that it is made of several different types of granite. Stone Mountain, on the other hand, is a single igneous pluton that was formed at the same time of the same material. Also, El Capitan may be the 'highest' but 'highest' and 'largest' aren't the same thing:

http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Multimedia.jsp?id=m-2099&adv=y

As others have stated, Stone Mountain isn't really a 'mountain,' it's a single giant stone.Ryoung122 07:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Posh and nonsense. El Capitan and two other exposed granite monoliths in Yosemite are the three largest granite monoliths known on earth.  El Capitan's exposure, although mainly on the Valley side is nonetheless more extensive than Stone Mountain's all-around exposure. Stone Mountain isn't even in the top 100 worldwide.  And they're all "plutons".  There are "sugar loafs" in tropical areas that are larger.  C'mon guys, fess up.  What's really going on here is diehard Confederate boosterism.  This isn't even a debate among serious geologists. Tmangray 22:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

 * I must add, if you were to actually see both El Capitan and Stone Mountain, any doubt would be negated. El Capitan is huge.  Next to it, Stone Mountain is a mere hill. Tmangray 22:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Small Wooded Trail
This was in the Description section. Beginning at the top of the mountain is a small wooded trail. It starts of to the side of the main trail and leads down to the road and railroad tracks. The only acknowledgement of the trail is a hard to find carving on the edge of the mountain. Can anyone explain what bearing this information has?Amazingracer 21:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

KKK and the carving
This article has a significant amount of unsourced discussion about the role of the KKK and the carving on the mountain. It seemed plausible to me at first but now I am beginning to suspect it is urban legend. I propose to remove the material from the article altogether unless someone can properly source the information. --JodyByak, yak, yak 18:32, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Comment: the only "urban legend" is a comment like yours. You are spreading misinformation. It should be EASILY sourceable. For example,

http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-2145

Do you realize WHY this is called a "Confederate memorial"? Who do you think paid for it? Ryoung 122 10:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

 * I wouldn't remove it all together. I would instead shorten it down to just a few(1-2) sentences. Amazingracer 03:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * So can you offer any factual support? That's the problem - it is unsourced. If its true it can sure be there I just haven't found anything that's reliable. JodyByak, yak, yak 04:25, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately no. I guess you could take it all out. My thoughts, is that even it was true, it's a little long as it is. I'll see if I can dig up something, though it may be doubtful. This article is the first time ever I have seen KKK reference to the mountain. Amazingracer 20:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I stand corrected a simple google search revealed a few articles. like this one, we may have to rewrite that section around the factual information. Amazingracer 20:49, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

There is some remarkable research in this area: David B. Freeman Carved in Stone: The History of Stone Mountain Mercer University Press, 1997 Nancy MacLean, Behind the Mask of Chivalry: The Making of the Second Ku Klux Klan (New York: Oxford University Press I would also recommend Ball State University Archives American Radicalism section which have actual tape recordings of William Chaney talking about his support of the project.

You might be able to adjust the article so that it emphasizes the KKK and other private segregationist movements from that era during the 1916-1958 period (Lost Cause era). These organizations did not have the financial means to complete such a large scale construction project (in addition to the limitation of Pre-WWII technology)

The major push in funding came as a reaction to African-American activism during the 1950's. Segregationists hoped that the memorial would serve as a reminder of white supremacy. (esp after the 1954 Brown versus Board of Education). Herman Talmadge and SMMA supported the plans to emphasize Confederate imagery during this time. (additional advances in technology also allowed the project to proceed).

So I'd recommend breaking the origins section into two parts: 1. "Lost Cause" era (KKK, et al) and 2. State Segrationist/White Supremacy reactionary movement of 1950's --Overhere2000 04:34, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Note on "Carving" section
Text says it is recessed 42 feet into the mountain, then the deepest point of the carving is at Lee's elbow, which is 12 feet to the mountain's surface. What does this mean? That it's actually 54 feet deep? Very ambiguous.

 * This confused me too. Can anyone clarify? cmadler (talk) 14:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Landmark
I added it to the "natural landmarks" on the page Landmark page. -Walkingwith08 (talk) 16:50, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

"granite" vs granite
Why is granite in quotes over and over. It really is granite isn't it? If not then maybe that should be explained. Granite is not in quotes on the page describing what granite it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peatmanb (talk • contribs) 21:36, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the quotations around granite are inappropriate. The paper cited from 1954 does talk of Stone Mountain being a composite including quartz monzonite, but does not say that it is NOT granite. This bulletin of 1976 clearly marks Stone Mountain as Granite.

The statement "This misnomer is most likely a result of advertisement by granite companies and early park administration." Is clearly not a neutral statement. All sources, including those stated in the article, all claim Stone Mountain to be the largest piece of exposed granite. If the author of this article is going to claim this is a misnomer, then sources should be cited and disputes should be given on all Georgia government and geological papers stating so. (Snamuh (talk) 12:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC))

Size of Carving
Based on calculations carried out using Google Earth and other research I question the claimed size of the carving, which is said to be 190' x 90'. No source is provided. Whilst no indication is given as to what those measurements represent, one can assume that the width represents the distance from Davis' horse's nose to the RH tip of Jackson's cape.

The cape has two "RH tips". The upper one is clearly defined, the lower one fades into the rock. I am using the lower one to be generous.

The height is far less well defined since there is no clear-cut boundary at the bottom edge, where it simply fades into the rock. I emailed Stonemountainpark.com and put my doubts. They claimed categorically that their measurements and Wikipedia's were correct.

The first discrepancy is this (Georgia Government?) web page, which claims the size is 180' x 69' (a completely different ratio also).

The second discrepancy is this web page from the American Studies section of the University of Virginia. It claims in paragraph 11 that the size of the overall cut-out area is 305' x 190'. Photos of the carving show that the carving is around 45% of the width of the overall cut-out which would make the carving 138' wide.

Based on measurements from Google Earth I believe the carving is closer to 167' x 77' and that the overall cut-out is around 374' wide and around 1.7 acres. Pmolsen (talk) 02:29, 12 June 2011 (UTC) Pmolsen (talk) 04:47, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

 * Additional information: http://www.gearthblog.com/blog/archives/2011/08/just_how_big_is_the_stone_mountain.html --seav (talk) 14:28, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Panoramic View
Is this a suitable graphic? I believe that it is, while Ryan Vesey believes that it is not. I would ask others to offer their opinions, so that we can get a better idea of the community view on this. Gulbenk (talk) 08:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean by "suitable", but I do think that it's just sort of stuck in at the top of the page and doesn't really fit there from a layout point of view. 63.239.35.194 (talk) 15:50, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Split proposal
After reviewing this article, I believe that it may be time to consider restoring the separate articles that once existed regarding Stone Mountain. Currently, Stone Mountain Park is a redirect here, where at one time it was a separate article, although based on this diff, it looks like it was merged unilaterally into this article. I can't find a discussion thread where consensus was established to merge the two.

This current version is loaded with pictures detailing the attractions associated with Stone Mountain Park, and it kind of overwhelms the rest of the article, which details the history of the mountain itself. In my opinion, this article should be just about the physical mountain, its place in history, its geology, ecology, etc. Of course, a link should be provided to the attraction article, where readers would learn about the history of the various attractions that have been added to the mountain over the years. Discussion and opinions are welcome. -- McDoob AU  93  18:20, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

 * Interesting idea. However, an article about the park would have to contain nearly the same details presented in the current article, since the mountain is at the very heart of the attraction. Rather than a separate geologically-based article solely on Stone Mountain, why not consider an article about Stone Mountain, Panola Mountain, Arabia Mountain and other similar (related) features in Georgia. Something with the (somewhat unappealing) title of "Georgia Monadnocks"? Gulbenk (talk) 19:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

I think a very small amount of crossover would be expected. Many articles use the template to head up a summary about the associated subject. In the case of Stone Mountain Park, it should be almost exclusively about the use of the park as an attraction - details about the skyride, train, Crossroads, etc. Some history about why attractions were installed would be helpful, as well, if it could be found. For example, this is a rough idea of what I'd recommend:

Park features

The centerpiece of Stone Mountain Park is Stone Mountain itself, a quartz monzonite dome monadnock that rises 825 feet (251 m) above the surrounding terrain and bears upon its north face the world's largest bas-relief sculpture, depicting three figures from Georgia's Confederate period, Stonewall Jackson, Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis. The mountain and its environs also host a variety of rare flora and fauna.

Conversely, the mountain article would have a brief mention of the park, like so:

Stone Mountain Park

Stone Mountain is surrounded by Stone Mountain Park, which is owned by the State of Georgia and managed by the Stone Mountain Memorial Association. Stone Mountain Park includes a number of historical exhibits and attractions which are operated by Herschend Family Entertainment Corporation through a lease agreement with the Memorial Association.

I do see your point, but I think my main goal is to provide some distinction between the mountain, a physical formation with its own importance in history (and thus deserving of its own article), and the park that surrounds it, a combination historical park and recreational complex that borders on being considered an amusement park (although I'm sure the SMMA would have issues with that description). I will take a look at the articles you mentioned and see what I can make of them. Thanks! -- McDoob AU  93  20:30, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

 * Ah, yes. I think you have touched on the main sticking point. I doubt your idea would encounter much success if the proposal were viewed as advancing the concept of Six-Flags-Over-Stone-Mountain. Gulbenk (talk) 21:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

 * Which it wouldn't, because it isn't. In fact, I'd love to find the AJC articles from the late 1990s describing SMMA's disdain for amusement attractions and Herschend's work to convince them that they would do them properly. Such a proposal would have similarities to the amusement park articles, yes, but like the facility itself, it would be an entity unto itself. It would show no bias towards the facility's components that have been there for decades or just the last few years. -- McDoob  AU  93  23:20, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Lift and separate, separate but equal, whatever you want to call it, sounds, to me, like a good idea. Carptrash (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

 * There doesn't appear to be any significant material that could be split off to form a new article. By all means, create a new article when you have appropiate material, but there is no need for a split tag on this article at this time. Op47 (talk) 19:22, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Confederate Memorial Carving
Is "Confederate Memorial" or "Confederate Memorial Carving" an official name? If not, "memorial" and "carving" should not be capitalized. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 20:28, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know what the proper capitalization is.
 * But with all the heat that has happened, especially in the last year, over the Confederacy being honored and memorialized, it will be interesting to see if in the aftermath of astronaut John Young's death whether NASA will make an official statement regarding how they left a pro-slavery tribute up on the Moon.--Tdadamemd sioz (talk) 06:49, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Stone Mountain. 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/20070310191059/http://www.stonemountainpark.com:80/images/maps/hiking/smp_map_hiking_map.gif to http://stonemountainpark.com/images/maps/hiking/smp_map_hiking_map.gif

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

Cheers. —<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II <sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS"> Talk to my owner :Online 06:33, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Stone Mountain. 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/20080422013135/http://www.georgia.gov/00/photo_article/0%2C2091%2C4802_16275282_27560837_13713914%2C00.html to http://www.georgia.gov/00/photo_article/0,2091,4802_16275282_27560837_13713914,00.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.stonemountainpark.org/ecosystem.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070430040725/http://www.gaudc.org/founding.htm to http://www.gaudc.org/founding.htm
 * Added tag to http://www.damonledet.com/photos/stonemountainpark/

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) 07:29, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Order of sections
To have Geology - Natural History - Confederate Memorial - History is not a very logical sequence. I suggest putting Confederate Memorial first, as that’s what 99% of the people coming to the article will be looking for. Anyone have any problem with that? deisenbe (talk) 12:46, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

 * Wouldn't it make more sense to have it in chronological order? Most of the time when you read a biography you're interested what the person did later on in life, but most Wikipedia biographies start with "Early life". I would suggest:

 * Geology
 * History
 * Confederate memorial
 * The section entitled "Natural history" doesn't mention history at all, so rename it to "Wildlife" and move it below the chronologically ordered sections.

 * --ChiveFungi (talk) 13:57, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

ions
 * Natural history is biology, never history as we understand it. deisenbe (talk) 16:15, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

 * Exactly. Natural history is the history of biology. But the natural history section only talks in the present tense, so it's not really about natural history. --ChiveFungi (talk) 17:09, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Natural history is not the history of biology. It’s biology. “History” used to have a broader meaning than now. deisenbe (talk) 17:52, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Start of construction
So, when did initial construction on the project start?

That is not mentioned anywhere.

Just curious. 2600:8800:784:8F00:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 02:02, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

 * This has a pretty complete history. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:20, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

 * "Carving begins June 23, 1923". Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:23, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

History question
Did Lee and Davis ever physically meet? Were they ever in the same room together? I have done some research to this effect in the past, and I haven't been able to find any evidence that they ever did but I also haven't been able to find any authoritative statements to the effect that they did not. This bas-relief is described as the last meeting between Lee and Jackson, and Davis also happens to be in the depiction. It's possible that his inclusion is historically misleading and nonsensical on the face of it, but I would need something more solid on this.

173.118.54.119 (talk) 13:53, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Removing misleading, mislabeled, unsourced image
A user keeps re-adding an (unsourced) image whose caption claims that … Black Lives Matter, Anonymous, and 3%er's march in solidarity against the KKK at Stone Mountain, GA. The image is dated 10 July 2015, when Black Lives Matter did not yet exist. Another editor changed the caption to something that seems to make more sense, but that alone doesn’t authenticate the image. I am once again removing image and caption. Please carefully consider the veracity of the image before reverting. —ThorstenNY (talk) 14:19, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Wording out of context turns offensive
... was seen from the outset "as a memorial to the Confederacy."[5]... The outset of what? As the history section explains there were people at Stone Mountain long before any war or Confederacy. I'm not sure how to rephrase it, but as it is this phrase ignores use by Native Americans and early European settlers and makes it seem like the Memorial debate started when the mountain was first seen by human eyes. Which is misleading and IMHO offensive. This rock is much older and has many more peoples pass than that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:1C60:45E0:B531:4DBA:1E06:66F7 (talk) 07:01, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

AJC - Black bridgebuilder honored at Stone Mountain Park
Here is an article from The Atlanta Journal-Constitution about Black bridgebuilder honored at Stone Mountain Park (subscription required). Rjluna2 (talk) 15:12, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

chronological order

 * The single sentence fourth paragraph of the "Involvement of the Ku Klux Klan" section, In August 2017, the Klan was denied a permit for a mountaintop cross-burning needs to be relocated. Especially since the next paragraph begins with "Fundraising for the monument resumed in 1923". --  Otr500 (talk) 10:43, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Stone Mountain


text:
Talk:Canonical

Arabic etymology
This article had this sentence, 'the Arabic word "Qanuun" which essentially means "rule", "law", "standard", and has come to mean "generally accepted" or "authoritatively correct." ' This is in error.

The Arabic word qanuun (or قنن ) is itself directly derived from the Greek word canon. It loan word into Arabic. see page 24 here

Nwbeeson 19:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Wiktionary
This is a wiktionary entry, relating to the Wikipedia entry Canon. What other reading could be offered? User:Wetman (date added: 2003-11-11T21:33:43)

standard base is canonical
I disagree on the statement that the standard base of coordinate space would not be canonical. It is, because this is not just  a convenient choice, but a canonical choice. It is, btw, preferably called "canonical base" in many other languages ("base canonique" in French, "kanonische (Einheits-)Basis" in German,...). — MFH: Talk 17:34, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Did you mean standard basis? Michael Hardy 20:24, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Also note that the whole bit on vector spaces is confusing: first, it's not at all clear that "being canonical in mathematics is stronger than being a conventional choice" holds for this example, even in the case of Rn, since the "standard basis vectors" in this case are usually given as meaningless symbols — what, other than convention, leads one to prefer {e1, e2,. . ., en} over {f1, f2,. . ., fn}, say? A basis is merely a linearly independent spanning set, and category theory merely allows one to show the logical equivalence of ("non-canonical") choices. The only thing that's "special" about Rn and friends is that it's defined as a "formal linear combination of n meaningless symbols with real coefficients," while many other vector spaces are typically defined in terms of certain operations on a set, in which case the given set is typically not a basis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.184.125.61 (talk) 08:32, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

canonical redirects
What are canonical redirects? AndrewRH (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 22:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Paul Johnson (British historian) states in his "A history of the Jews" that, "The word canon is very ancient, the Sumerian for `reed', whence it acquired its sense of straight or upright; to the Greeks it meant a rule, boundary or standard." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.61.168.80 (talk) 03:53, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Organization
Shouldn't the organization canocial be mentioned here?
 * Jmans25 (talk) jmans25 Jmans25 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:41, 17 January 2010 (UTC).
 * If this is a disambiguation page (is a bit of a hybrid now), then I'd think the company of the same name would be appropriate. dtype (talk) 17:45, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm confused
What exactly does canonical mean when relating it to a religious text? Does that mean that the text is ruling or significant? Please explain, the article was not clear enough for me. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.93.39.26 (talk) 13:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

 * It means the text is accepted as part of an authoritative set of texts; see Biblical canon. —Tamfang (talk) 19:25, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorting of contents items desirable?
The contents currently displayed are Does this order has some specific meaning such that the word is mostly used in religious context, then literature, etc.? If not, is it not better to sort these items alphabetically? Sae1962 (talk) 12:24, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Religion
 * 2) Literature and art
 * 3) Mathematics
 * 4) Computer science
 * 5) Physics

Is this an encyclopedia article?
This article reads like a combination of a dictionary article with a disambiguation page. Remember, WP is not a dictionary, and so it is not organized around words (with their multiple meanings) but around things or concepts. I'd propose to put it more clearly into the disambiguation format. --Macrakis (talk) 16:09, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

 * Seeing no objections to the above, I recently put it in disambiguation format. An anon reverted.  As reverted, the article clearly violates the Wikipedia is not a dictionary, in the following ways:
 * It covers the meanings of a term in a variety of domains.
 * "Canonical" is an adjective, not a noun.
 * It covers various concepts in which "canonical" is just part of their usual name,
 * It covers topics which already have their own articles (some of them quite complete), which may include the word "canon" or "canonical" (e.g. canonical form in mathematics) or which have alternate names (e.g. conjugate variables in physics).
 * It even covers topics which are only tangentially related (canonization).
 * Strangely, it even covers content which is normally not described using the adjective "canonical", but the noun "canon".
 * Could anyone who objects to converting to a disambiguation page please discuss here? --Macrakis (talk) 21:54, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

 * Macrakis' conversion to a disambiguation page certainly makes sense to me: cf. Wikipedia disambiguation page Canon. Any editor logged in at Wiktionary might be good enough to transfer the current dictionary definitions text there.--Wetman (talk) 22:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

 * Adjectives don't make encyclopedia articles. --Wetman (talk) 17:06, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

A "split" tag was added to the article in December 2011, and has resulted in no objections. Given the above discussion, I say we move forward on the split. --Macrakis (talk) 19:43, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

illiterate
This page looks like something written by and for illiterates who don't know that words existed before they were used in the field of computer science. Five years ago it was much better. Michael Hardy (talk) 05:49, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The present content of this page makes it impossible to believe that it was not primarily written be dishonest persons who were deliberately being stupid. It's vandalism. Michael Hardy (talk) 05:52, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've posted on this currently imbecilic and criminally dishonest article at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. I'll be back. Michael Hardy (talk) 05:57, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

 * I've reverted back to a versions when it was a real article and not just a bad. Is it still illiterate?--Salix (talk): 18:13, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It shouldn't be an article at all - it should be a disambiguation page. What was wrong with this version? StAnselm (talk) 21:25, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I think there is an article there, because there is a story to tell: This is more than a dictionary definition, it is the evolution of an idea, mirroring the development of western society. A dab page does not capture this rich history. Yes I agree the page does not need to go into such depths short summary style sections would be ideal.--Salix (talk): 21:59, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) The word "canon" comes from the Greek "κανών", meaning "rule" or "measuring stick"
 * 2) It was used in reference to Christian scriptures
 * 3) This developed into the Biblical canon which became the authoritative scriptures.
 * 4) It was widened to refer to describing bodies of literature or art: those books that all educated people have supposedly read, or are advised to read, make up the "canon", for example the Western canon.
 * 5) It was then adopted by mathematics for a specific and very precise purpose
 * 6) Later its was adopted by biology, physics and computer science for the own specific needs.

The version cited by "StAnselm" is not bad. I might edit it to put it into something like chronological order, with "Religion" first and "Business" last, and the other stuff between those. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:11, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

This page needs cleanup
This page contains a lot of dictionary entries and further clarification that break the conventions detailed at MOS:DAB. They need to be removed, not changed or left alone. The current state of the page may reflect the fact that editors which added the excess information might have come from the French Wikipedia. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 22:59, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Not a dab page
This page is not really a disambiguation page at all. It's a laundry list of partial title matches. None of these are called "canonical" by themselves; they are used in phrases with the word canonical as an adjective. This is basically a list index article about things described as canonical. Other than simply deleting it outright, I would suggest converting this to a broad concept article and include a list of things canonical. Or just a link to All pages with titles beginning with canonical Coastside (talk) 17:02, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Hard cases make bad law: the dross needs to be cleared out. I have already done a few. It may be that there is a case for an article equivalent to Canon (basic principle) but we still have and should have canon (disambiguation). Feel free. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 23:32, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I found just one more misplaced link (which I have moved). Could you be more specific? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 23:37, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * There is one, and only one article where the topic can be called Canonical, and that is Canonical (company). Every other article listed in this page is a partial title match, meaning you wouldn't call it "canonical"; it simply begins with the word canonical.  Can you find an example in Wikipedia where an article refers to canonical by itself and where the word is used ambiguously and intended to mean one of the topics listed on this page?  I can't. Here's a search link: Search for Canonical.  Here's an example of where it might be considered ambiguous: Religious text.  In that example, the word simply links to Wiktionary. That's because the word by itself doesn't mean ANY of these topics listed on the disambiguation page. It's just a dictionary definition usage of the word by itself. Here's another example: Canonical basis. In that article the word canonical appears by itself in the first sentence, i.e.,  The use of the word there is once again the dictionary sense of the word. It's not one of these topics.  Every other reference to the word canonical in this article appears in the phrase canonical basis. These topics only have meaning when used as phrases. Coastside (talk) 00:58, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oddly enough, I came back here to say exactly the same thing because I had realised my error. I agree completely and withdraw my objection.
 * So where do we go from here? Write an article about the general principle and include the current catalog as a massive See Also? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 10:06, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Following on from the above discussion, I have just been bold and removed the invalid disambiguation template. I have written a one-sentence lead that no doubt can be improved. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:16, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Canonical


text:
Talk:Boris I of Bulgaria

Untitled
Quote: Boris was familiar with the work of Cyril and Methodius, the inventors of the Slavic alphabet, as early as 881-882.

The sentence was remained intact as I have no idea what Slavic alphabet the previous posters are referring to. Could it be Glagolitic alphabet or Cyrillic alphabet as mentioned several sentences later? kt2 02:38, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

There is not a single historical source claiming the Bulgarian monarch's title was Khan.The Bulgarians called their leader Kanasubigi(leader placed from God in old iranic) as we can see from their own stone inscriptions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BulgarEmperor (talk • contribs) 07:51, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

What is Boris I shown holding in his left hand?
I would very much appreciate input on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.50.230.128 (talk) 16:45, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

He holds a scroll representing the Knowladge and the law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nix1129 (talk • contribs) 21:26, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

There seems to be a major confusion of the terms Bulgar and Bulgarian in this article. The Bulgars were tribes that migrated into the Balkans in the 600s, where they allied and blended with the local and more numerous Slavic tribes and the older Thracian/Byzantine population, to produce the Bulgarian nation: Bulgars + Slavs + Byzantine population = Bulgarians The term "Bulgar" is limited only to the original Bulgar tribes. By the time of Boris it is appropriate to speak of Bulgarian nation, in which the Bulgars were only one of the composing ethnic elements. To prevent further confusion the term proto-Bulgars may be appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:C007:6D10:EC9E:D7FC:BE7B:C7EB (talk) 03:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Boris / Fine
User:165.225.32.70 has been editing warring over a passage clearly sourced to Fine. The user is up to four reverts in under six hours. The discussion from Fine is here. Contrary to the suggestion in the edit summary here, the text (and source) say that Boris was surprised by the attack and promised to convert. If you have contrary sources, please cite and discuss them before removing the content ante, per WP:BRD. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 21:23, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Which sources
" In the Bulgarian sources from that period, Boris I is called "Knyaz" " - Which sources state this?Jotaro97 (talk) 14:01, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Boris I of Bulgaria. 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/20110706143152/http://nauka.bg/forum/index.php?s=2dcf4432da1d34c13592d7aa4ad60d6c&act=attach&type=post&id=1611 to http://nauka.bg/forum/index.php?s=2dcf4432da1d34c13592d7aa4ad60d6c&act=attach&type=post&id=1611
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031008222419/http://www.bulgaria.com/history/rulers/boris1.html to http://www.bulgaria.com/history/rulers/boris1.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) 03:38, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Boris I of Bulgaria


text:
Douglas C-47 Skytrain

The Douglas C-47 Skytrain or Dakota (RAF designation) is a military transport aircraft developed from the civilian Douglas DC-3 airliner. It was used extensively by the Allies during World War II. During the war the C-47 was used for troop transport, cargo, paratrooper, for towing gliders and military cargo parachute drops. The C-47 remained in front-line service with various military operators for many years. It was produced in approximately triple the numbers as the larger, much heavier payload Curtiss C-46 Commando, which filled a similar role for the U.S. military.

Approximately 100 countries' armed forces have operated the C-47 with over 60 variants of the aircraft produced. As with the civilian DC-3, the C-47 remains in service in the present day, over 80 years after the type's introduction.

Design and development
The C-47 differed from the civilian DC-3 by way of numerous modifications, including being fitted with a cargo door, hoist attachment and strengthened floor - along with a shortened tail cone for glider-towing shackles, and an astrodome in the cabin roof.

During World War II, the armed forces of many countries used the C-47 and modified DC-3s for the transport of troops, cargo, and wounded. The U.S. naval designation was R4D. More than 10,000 aircraft were produced in Long Beach and Santa Monica, California, and Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Between March 1943 and August 1945, the Oklahoma City plant produced 5,354 C-47s.

The specialized C-53 Skytrooper troop transport started production in October 1941 at Douglas Aircraft's Santa Monica plant. It lacked the cargo door, hoist attachment, and reinforced floor of the C-47. Only 380 aircraft were produced in all because the C-47 was found to be more versatile.

Super DC-3 (R4D-8)

Large numbers of DC-3s and surplus C-47s were in commercial use in the United States in the 1940s. In response to proposed changes to the Civil Air Regulations airworthiness requirements that would limit the continuing use of these aircraft, Douglas offered a late-1940s DC-3 conversion to improve takeoff and single-engine performance. This new model, the DC-3S or "Super DC-3", was 39 in (0.99 m) longer. It allowed 30 passengers to be carried, with increased speed to compete with newer airliners. The rearward shift in the center of gravity led to larger tail surfaces and new outer, swept-back wings. More powerful engines were installed along with shorter, jet ejection-type exhaust stacks. These were either 1,475 hp (1,100 kW) Wright R-1820 Cyclones or 1,450 hp (1,081 kW) Pratt & Whitney R-2000 Twin Wasps in larger engine nacelles. Minor changes included wheel-well doors, a partially retractable tailwheel, flush rivets, and low-drag antenna. These all contributed to an increased top speed of 250 mph. With over 75% of the original DC-3/C-47 configuration changed, the modified design was virtually a new aircraft. The first DC-3S made its maiden flight on 23 June 1949.

The changes fully met the new FAR 4B airworthiness requirements, with significantly improved performance. However, little interest was expressed by commercial operators in the DC-3S. It was too expensive for the smaller operators that were its main target; only three were sold to Capital Airlines. The U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps had 100 of their R4D aircraft modified to Super DC-3 standards as the R4D-8, later redesignated the C-117D.

World War II
The C-47 was vital to the success of many Allied campaigns, in particular, those at Guadalcanal and in the jungles of New Guinea and Burma, where the C-47 and its naval version, the R4D, made it possible for Allied troops to counter the mobility of the light-traveling Japanese Army. C-47s were used to airlift supplies to the encircled American forces during the Battle of Bastogne in Belgium. Possibly its most influential role in military aviation, however, was flying "The Hump" from India into China. The expertise gained flying "The Hump" was later used in the Berlin Airlift, in which the C-47 played a major role until the aircraft were replaced by Douglas C-54 Skymasters.

In Europe, the C-47 and a specialized paratroop variant, the C-53 Skytrooper, were used in vast numbers in the later stages of the war, particularly to tow gliders and drop paratroops. During the invasion of Sicily in July 1943, C-47s dropped 4,381 Allied paratroops. More than 50,000 paratroops were dropped by C-47s during the first few days of the D-Day campaign also known as the invasion of Normandy, France, in June 1944. In the Pacific War, with careful use of the island landing strips of the Pacific Ocean, C-47s were used for ferrying soldiers serving in the Pacific theater back to the United States.

About 2,000 C-47s (received under Lend-Lease) in British and Commonwealth service took the name "Dakota", possibly inspired by the acronym "DACoTA" for Douglas Aircraft Company Transport Aircraft.

The C-47 also earned the informal nickname "gooney bird" in the European theatre of operations. Other sources attribute this name to the first aircraft, a USMC R2D—the military version of the DC-2—being the first aircraft to land on Midway Island, previously home to the long-winged albatross known as the gooney bird which was native to Midway.

Postwar era
The United States Air Force's Strategic Air Command had Skytrains in service from 1946 to 1967. The US Air Force's 6th Special Operations Squadron was flying the C-47 until 2008.

With all of their aircraft and pilots having been part of the Indian Air Force prior to independence, both the Indian Air Force and Pakistan Air Force used C-47s to transport supplies to their soldiers fighting in the Indo-Pakistan War of 1947.

After World War II, thousands of surplus C-47s were converted to civilian airline use, some remaining in operation in 2012, as well as being used as private aircraft.

Vietnam War
Several C-47 variants were used in the Vietnam War by the United States Air Force, including three advanced electronic-warfare variations, which sometimes were called "electric gooneys" designated EC-47N, EC-47P, or EC-47Q depending on the engine used. In addition, HC-47s were used by the 9th Special Operations Squadron to conduct psychological warfare operations over South Vietnam and Laos. Miami Air International, Miami International Airport was a USAF military depot used to convert the commercial DC-3s/C-47s into military use. They came in as commercial aircraft purchased from third-world airlines and were completely stripped, rebuilt, and reconditioned. Long-range fuel tanks were installed, along with upgraded avionics and gun mounts. They left as first-rate military aircraft headed for combat in Vietnam in a variety of missions. EC-47s were also operated by the Vietnamese, Laotian, and Cambodian Air Forces. A gunship variation, using three 7.62 mm miniguns, designated AC-47 "Spooky", often nicknamed "Puff the magic dragon", also was deployed.

Variants

 * C-47
 * Initial military version of the DC-3 had four crew (pilot, co-pilot, navigator, and radio operator) and seats for 27 troops alongside the fuselage interior. "Aerial Ambulances" fitted for casualty evacuation could carry 18 stretcher cases and a medical crew of three; 965 built (including 12 for the United States Navy as R4D-1).

 * C-47 with a 24-volt electrical system, 5,254 built including USN aircraft designated R4D-5
 * C-47 with a 24-volt electrical system, 5,254 built including USN aircraft designated R4D-5

 * RC-47A
 * C-47A equipped for photographic reconnaissance and ELINT missions

 * SC-47A
 * C-47A equipped for Search Air Rescue; redesignated HC-47A in 1962

 * VC-47A
 * C-47A equipped for VIP transport role

 * C-47B
 * Powered by R-1830-90 engines with two-speed superchargers (better altitude performance) to cover the China-Burma-India routes, 3,364 built

 * VC-47B
 * C-47B equipped for VIP transport role

 * XC-47C
 * C-47 tested with Edo Model 78 floats for possible use as a seaplane

 * C-47D
 * C-47B with second speed (high blower) of engine supercharger disabled or removed after the war

 * AC-47D Spooky
 * Gunship aircraft with three side-firing .30 in (7.62 mm) Minigun machine guns

 * EC-47D
 * C-47D with equipment for the Electronics Calibration, of which 26 were so converted by Hayes in 1953; prior to 1962 was designated AC-47D

 * NC-47D
 * C-47D modified for test roles

 * RC-47D
 * C-47D equipped for photographic reconnaissance and ELINT missions

 * SC-47D
 * C-47D equipped for Search Air Rescue; redesignated HC-47D in 1962

 * VC-47D
 * C-47D equipped for VIP transport role

 * C-47E
 * Modified cargo variant with space for 27–28 passengers or 18–24 litters

 * C-47F
 * YC-129 redesignated, Super DC-3 prototype for evaluation by USAF later passed to USN as XR4D-8

 * C-47L/M
 * C-47H/Js equipped for the support of American Legation United States Naval Attache (ALUSNA) and Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) missions

 * EC-47N/P/Q
 * C-47A and D aircraft modified for ELINT/ARDF mission, N and P differ in radio bands covered, while Q replaces analog equipment found on the N and P with a digital suite, redesigned antenna equipment and uprated engines

 * C-47R
 * One C-47M modified for high altitude work, specifically for missions in Ecuador

 * C-53 Skytrooper
 * Troop transport version of the C-47 that lacked the reinforced cargo floor, large cargo door, and hoist attachment of the C-47 Skytrain. It was dedicated for the troop transport role and could carry 28 passengers in fixed metal seats arranged in rows in the former cargo space; 221 built.

 * XC-53A Skytrooper
 * One testbed aircraft modified in March 1942 with full-span slotted flaps and hot-air leading edge de-icing. Converted to C-53 standard in 1949 and sold as surplus.

 * C-53B Skytrooper
 * Winterized and long-range Arctic version of the C-53 with extra fuel tanks in the fuselage and separate navigator's astrodome station for celestial navigation; eight built.

 * C-53C Skytrooper
 * C-53 with larger port-side access door; 17 built.

 * C-53D Skytrooper
 * C-53C with 24V DC electrical system and its 28 seats attached to the sides of the fuselage; 159 built.

 * C-117A Skytrooper
 * C-47B with 24-seat airline-type interior for staff transport use, 16 built.

 * VC-117A
 * Three redesignated C-117s used in the VIP role

 * SC-117A
 * One C-117C converted for air-sea rescue

 * C-117B/VC-117B
 * High-altitude two-speed superchargers replaced by one-speed superchargers, one built and conversions from C-117As all later VC-117B

 * C-117D
 * USN/USMC R4D-8 redesignated C-117D in 1962.

 * LC-117D
 * USN/USMC R4D-8L redesignated LC-117D in 1962.

 * TC-117D
 * USN/USMC R4D-8T redesignated TC-117D in 1962.

 * VC-117D
 * USN R4D-8Z redesignated VC-117D in 1962.

 * YC-129
 * Super DC-3 prototype for evaluation by USAF redesignated C-47F and later passed to USN as XR4D-8. Wright R-1820 engines uprated to 1425 hp.

 * CC-129
 * Canadian Forces designation for the C-47 (post-1970)

 * XCG-17
 * One C-47 tested as a 40-seat troop glider with engines removed and faired over

 * R4D-1 Skytrain
 * USN/USMC version of the C-47

 * R4D-3
 * Twenty C-53Cs transferred to USN

 * R4D-5
 * C-47A variant 24-volt electrical system replacing the 12-volt of the C-47; redesignated C-47H in 1962, 238 transferred from USAF

 * R4D-5L
 * R4D-5 for use in Antarctica. Redesignated LC-47H in 1962. Photos of this type show the removal of underslung engine oil coolers typical of the R-1830 engine installation; apparently not needed in the cold polar regions.

 * R4D-5Q
 * R4D-5 for use as special ECM trainer. Redesignated EC-47H in 1962

 * R4D-5R
 * R4D-5 for use as a personnel transport for 21 passengers and as a trainer aircraft; redesignated TC-47H in 1962

 * R4D-5S
 * R4D-5 for use as a special ASW trainer; redesignated SC-47H in 1962

 * R4D-5Z
 * R4D-5 for use as a VIP transport; redesignated VC-47H in 1962

 * R4D-6
 * 157 C-47Bs transferred to USN; redesignated C-47J in 1962

 * R4D-6L, Q, R, S, and Z
 * Variants as the R4D-5 series; redesignated LC-47J, EC-47J, TC-47J, SC-47J, and VC-47J respectively in 1962

 * R4D-7
 * 44 TC-47Bs transferred from USAF for use as a navigational trainer; redesignated TC-47K in 1962

 * R4D-8
 * R4D-5 and R4D-6 remanufactured aircraft with stretched fuselage, Wright R-1820 engines, fitted with modified wings and redesigned tail surfaces; redesignated C-117D in 1962

 * R4D-8L
 * R4D-8 converted for Antarctic use, redesignated LC-117D in 1962

 * R4D-8T
 * R4D-8 converted as crew trainers, redesignated TC-117D in 1962

 * R4D-8Z
 * R4D-8 converted as a staff transport, redesignated VC-117D in 1962

 * C-47TP "Turbo Dak"
 * Refit with two Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-67R turboprops and fuselage stretch for the South African Air Force

 * Basler BT-67
 * C-47 conversion with a stretched fuselage, strengthened structure, modern avionics, and powered by two Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-67R turboprops

RAF designations

 * Dakota I
 * RAF designation for the C-47 and R4D-1.

 * Dakota II
 * RAF designation for nine C-53 Skytroopers received under the lend lease scheme. Unlike the majority of RAF Dakotas, these aircraft were therefore dedicated troop transports, lacking the wide cargo doors and reinforced floor of the C-47.

 * Dakota III
 * RAF designation for the C-47A.

 * Dakota IV
 * RAF designation for the C-47B.

 * Airspeed AS.61
 * Projected conversion of Dakota I aircraft by Airspeed. None built.

 * Airspeed AS.62
 * Projected conversion of Dakota II aircraft by Airspeed. None built.

 * Airspeed AS.63
 * Projected conversion of Dakota III aircraft by Airspeed. None built.

 * BEA Pionair/Dart-Dakota
 * Conversion of Dakota to Rolls-Royce Dart power and used by BEA to prove turboprop engines prior to entry into service of Vickers Viscount.

Operators

 * Biafra
 * Democratic Republic of the Congo
 * undefined
 * Laos
 * undefined
 * undefined
 * Northern Rhodesia
 * 🇵🇭 Philippines
 * Rhodesia
 * 🇿🇦 South Africa
 * South Vietnam
 * (also as Lisunov Li-2)
 * West Germany
 * Democratic Republic of the Congo
 * undefined
 * Laos
 * undefined
 * undefined
 * Northern Rhodesia
 * 🇵🇭 Philippines
 * Rhodesia
 * 🇿🇦 South Africa
 * South Vietnam
 * (also as Lisunov Li-2)
 * West Germany
 * undefined
 * Laos
 * undefined
 * undefined
 * Northern Rhodesia
 * 🇵🇭 Philippines
 * Rhodesia
 * 🇿🇦 South Africa
 * South Vietnam
 * (also as Lisunov Li-2)
 * West Germany
 * undefined
 * Laos
 * undefined
 * undefined
 * Northern Rhodesia
 * 🇵🇭 Philippines
 * Rhodesia
 * 🇿🇦 South Africa
 * South Vietnam
 * (also as Lisunov Li-2)
 * West Germany
 * undefined
 * undefined
 * Northern Rhodesia
 * 🇵🇭 Philippines
 * Rhodesia
 * 🇿🇦 South Africa
 * South Vietnam
 * (also as Lisunov Li-2)
 * West Germany
 * Northern Rhodesia
 * 🇵🇭 Philippines
 * Rhodesia
 * 🇿🇦 South Africa
 * South Vietnam
 * (also as Lisunov Li-2)
 * West Germany
 * 🇵🇭 Philippines
 * Rhodesia
 * 🇿🇦 South Africa
 * South Vietnam
 * (also as Lisunov Li-2)
 * West Germany
 * 🇿🇦 South Africa
 * South Vietnam
 * (also as Lisunov Li-2)
 * West Germany
 * 🇿🇦 South Africa
 * South Vietnam
 * (also as Lisunov Li-2)
 * West Germany
 * (also as Lisunov Li-2)
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany
 * West Germany

Surviving aircraft
Large numbers of C-47s, C-117s and other variants survive, on display in museums or as monuments; operated as warbirds; or remaining in service.

As part of the 75th-anniversary commemoration in June 2019, 14 American C-47s and another group of 'Daks' from Europe retraced the route across the English Channel to Normandy taken by roughly 850 of these aircraft on D-Day. Among them were That's All, Brother, Betsy's Biscuit Bomber, Miss Montana, Spirit of Benovia, D-Day Doll, Boogie Baby, N47E Miss Virginia, and Whiskey 7.

title: Douglas C-47 Skytrain