text:
Victory over Japan Day

Victory over Japan Day (also known as V-J Day, Victory in the Pacific Day, or V-P Day ) is the day on which Imperial Japan surrendered in World War II, in effect bringing the war to an end. The term has been applied to both of the days on which the initial announcement of Japan's surrender was made – 15 August 1945, in Japan, and because of time zone differences, 14 August 1945 (when it was announced in the United States and the rest of the Americas and Eastern Pacific Islands) – as well as to 2 September 1945, when the surrender document was signed, officially ending World War II.

15 August is the official V-J Day for the United Kingdom, while the official US commemoration is 2 September. The name, V-J Day, had been selected by the Allies after they named V-E Day for the victory in Europe.

On 2 September 1945, formal surrender occurred aboard the battleship USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay. In Japan, 15 August usually is known as the "memorial day for the end of the war" (終戦記念日); the official name for the day, however, is "the day for mourning of war dead and praying for peace" (戦没者を追悼し平和を祈念する日). This official name was adopted in 1982 by an ordinance issued by the Japanese government.

Events before V-J Day
On August 6 and 9, 1945, the Allies dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, respectively. On August 9, the Soviet Union declared war on Japan. The Japanese government on August 10 communicated its intention to surrender under the terms of the Potsdam Declaration.

The news of the Japanese offer began early celebrations around the world. Allied soldiers in London danced in a conga line on Regent Street. Americans and Frenchmen in Paris paraded on the Champs-Élysées singing "Don't Fence Me In". American soldiers in occupied Berlin shouted "It's over in the Pacific", and hoped that they would now not be transferred there to fight the Japanese. Germans stated that the Japanese were wise enough to—unlike themselves—give up in a hopeless situation, and were grateful that the atomic bomb was not ready in time to be used against them. Moscow newspapers briefly reported on the atomic bombings with no commentary of any kind. While "Russians and foreigners alike could hardly talk about anything else", the Soviet government refused to make any statements on the bombs' implication for politics or science.

In Chongqing, Chinese fired firecrackers and "almost buried [Americans] in gratitude". In Manila, residents sang "God Bless America". On Okinawa, six men were killed and dozens were wounded as American soldiers "took every weapon within reach and started firing into the sky" to celebrate; ships sounded general quarters and fired anti-aircraft guns as their crews believed that a kamikaze attack was occurring. On Tinian island, B-29 crews preparing for their next mission over Japan were told that it was cancelled, but that they could not celebrate because it might be rescheduled.

Japan's acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration
A little after noon Japan Standard Time on August 15, 1945, Emperor Hirohito's announcement of Japan's acceptance of the terms of the Potsdam Declaration was broadcast to the Japanese people over the radio. Earlier the same day, the Japanese government had broadcast an announcement over Radio Tokyo that "acceptance of the Potsdam Proclamation [would be] coming soon", and had advised the Allies of the surrender by sending a cable to U.S. President Harry S Truman via the Swiss diplomatic mission in Washington, D.C. A nationwide broadcast by Truman was aired at seven o'clock p.m. (daylight time in Washington, D.C.) on Tuesday, August 14, announcing the communication and that the formal event was scheduled for September 2. In his announcement of Japan's surrender on August 14, Truman said that "the proclamation of V-J Day must wait upon the formal signing of the surrender terms by Japan".

Since the European Axis powers had surrendered three months earlier (V-E Day), V-J Day was the effective end of World War II, although a peace treaty between Japan and most of the Allies was not signed until 1952, and between Japan and the Soviet Union until 1956. In Australia, the name V-P Day (Victory in the Pacific) was used from the outset. The Canberra Times of August 14, 1945, refers to V-P Day celebrations, and a public holiday for V-P Day was gazetted by the government in that year according to the Australian War Memorial.

Public celebrations
After news of the Japanese acceptance and before Truman's announcement, civilians began celebrating "as if joy had been rationed and saved up for the three years, eight months and seven days since Sunday, Dec. 7, 1941" (the day of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor), Life magazine reported. In Washington, D.C. a crowd attempted to break into the White House grounds as they shouted "We want Harry!"

In San Francisco two nude women jumped into a pond at the Civic Center to soldiers' cheers. More seriously, thousands of drunken people, the vast majority of them Navy enlistees who had not served in the war theatre, embarked in what the San Francisco Chronicle summarized in 2015 as "a three-night orgy of vandalism, looting, assault, robbery, rape and murder" and "the deadliest riots in the city's history", with more than 1,000 people injured, 13 killed, and at least six women raped. None of these acts resulted in serious criminal charges, and no civilian or military official was sanctioned, leading the Chronicle to conclude that "the city simply tried to pretend the riots never happened".

The largest crowd in the history of New York City's Times Square gathered to celebrate. The victory itself was announced by a headline on the "zipper" news ticker at One Times Square, which read "OFFICIAL *** TRUMAN ANNOUNCES JAPANESE SURRENDER ***"; the six asterisks represented the branches of the U.S. Armed Forces. In the Garment District, workers threw out cloth scraps and ticker tape, leaving a pile five inches deep on the streets. The news of the war's end sparked a "coast-to-coast frenzy of [servicemen] kissing . . . everyone in skirts that happened along," with Life publishing photographs of such kisses in Washington, Kansas City, Los Angeles, and Miami.

Famous photographs
One of the best-known kisses that day appeared in V-J Day in Times Square, one of the most famous photographs ever published by Life. It was shot on August 14, 1945, shortly before the announcement by President Truman occurred and when people were beginning to gather in celebration. Alfred Eisenstaedt went to Times Square to take candid photographs and spotted a sailor who "grabbed something in white. And I stood there, and they kissed. And I snapped four times." The same moment was captured in a very similar photograph by Navy photographer Victor Jorgensen (right), published in the New York Times. Several people have since claimed to be the sailor or the female, who was long assumed to be a nurse. It has since been established that the woman in the Alfred Eisenstaedt photograph was actually a dental assistant named Greta Zimmer Friedman, who clarified in a later interview that "I was grabbed by a sailor and it wasn't that much of a kiss, it was more of a jubilant act that he didn't have to go back, I found out later, he was so happy that he did not have to go back to the Pacific where they already had been through the war. And the reason he grabbed someone dressed like a nurse was that he just felt very grateful to nurses who took care of the wounded.".

Another famous photograph is that of the Dancing Man in Elizabeth Street, Sydney, captured by a press photographer and a Movietone newsreel. The film and stills from it have taken on iconic status in Australian history and culture as a symbol of victory in the war.

Japanese reaction

On August 15 and 16, some Japanese soldiers, devastated by the surrender, committed suicide. Well over 100 American prisoners of war were also murdered. In addition, many Australian and British prisoners of war were murdered in Borneo, at both Ranau and Sandakan, by the Imperial Japanese Army. At Batu Lintang camp, also in Borneo, death orders were found which proposed the murder of some 2,000 POWs and civilian internees on September 15, 1945, but the camp was liberated four days before these orders were due to be carried out. Japanese forces remained in combat with Soviet forces on several fronts for two weeks following VJ-Day.

Ceremony aboard USS Missouri
The formal signing of the Japanese Instrument of Surrender took place on board the battleship USS Missouri (BB-63) in Tokyo Bay on September 2, 1945, and at that time Truman declared September 2 to be the official V-J Day.

Chronology

 * April 1 – June 21, 1945: Battle of Okinawa. 82,000+ US military casualties, and 117,000+ Japanese and Okinawan. Approximately one-fourth of the Okinawan civilian population died, often in mass suicides organized by the Imperial Japanese Army.
 * July 26: The Potsdam Declaration is issued. Truman tells Japan, "Surrender or suffer prompt and utter destruction."
 * July 29: Japan rejects the Potsdam Declaration.
 * August 2: The Potsdam Conference ends.
 * August 6: The US drops an atomic bomb, Little Boy, on Hiroshima. In a press release 16 hours later, Truman warns Japan to surrender or "expect a rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this earth."
 * August 9: The USSR declares war on Japan, and invades several Japanese-held territories. The US drops another atomic bomb, Fat Man, on Nagasaki.
 * August 10: At the direction of the Emperor, the Japanese Foreign Ministry notifies the Allies (via Swiss diplomatic channels) of Japan's intention to surrender unconditionally in accordance with the terms of the Potsdam Declaration, providing the Emperor be permitted to remain in place.
 * August 11: The Allies notify the Japanese government (again via Swiss diplomats) of their willingness to accept Japan's surrender as offered.
 * August 14: Allied governments announce the surrender of Japan, and the Emperor informs his people of the fact in an unprecedented radio broadcast. The date is described as "V-J Day" or "V-P Day" in newspapers in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada.
 * September 2: Official surrender ceremony is held aboard USS Missouri (BB-63) in Tokyo Bay; President Truman declares September 2 as the official "V-J Day".
 * November 1: Scheduled commencement of Operation Olympic, the planned Allied invasion of Kyushu.
 * March 1, 1946: Scheduled commencement of Operation Coronet, the planned Allied invasion of Honshu.
 * September 8, 1951: 48 countries including Japan and most of the Allies sign the Treaty of San Francisco
 * April 28, 1952: The Treaty of San Francisco goes into effect, formally ending the state of war between Japan and most of the Allied countries.

Post war:
 * Some Japanese soldiers continued to fight on isolated Pacific islands until at least the 1970s, with the last known Japanese soldier surrendering in 1974.

Australia
On 15 August 1945 Australian Prime Minister Ben Chifley announced on radio that Japan had unconditionally surrendered to allied forces. This day, which has become known as VP Day, was marked with jubilant celebrations across the nation as citizens looked towards a future free of conflict and fear of invasion. To manage celebrations authorities closed pubs, as they had on VE Day. However, this did not dissuade individuals from partying, with crowds gathering in streets and strangers dancing together in city squares.

In Australia, many use the term "VP Day" in preference to "VJ Day", but in the publication The Sixth Year of War in Pictures published by The Sun News-Pictorial in 1946, the term "VJ Day" is used on pages 250 and 251. Also an Australian Government 50th Anniversary Medal issued in 1995 has "VJ-Day" stamped on it.

Amateur radio
Amateur radio operators in Australia hold the "Remembrance Day Contest" on the weekend nearest VP Day, August 15, remembering amateur radio operators who died during World War II and to encourage friendly participation and help improve the operating skills of participants. The contest runs for 24 hours, from 0800 UTC on the Saturday, preceded by a broadcast including a speech by a dignitary or notable Australian (such as the Prime Minister of Australia, Governor-General of Australia, or a military leader) and the reading of the names of amateur radio operators who are known to have died. It is organized by the Wireless Institute of Australia, with operators in each Australian state contacting operators in other states, New Zealand, and Papua New Guinea. A trophy is awarded to the state that can boast the greatest rate of participation, based on a formula including: number of operators, number of contacts made, and radio frequency bands used.

China
As the final official surrender of Japan was accepted aboard the battleship USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay on September 2, 1945, the Nationalist Government of the Republic of China, which represented China on the Missouri, announced three-day holidays to celebrate V-J Day, starting September 3. Starting from 1946, September 3 was celebrated as "Victory of War of Resistance against Japan Day", which evolved into the Armed Forces Day in 1955. September 3 is recognized as V-J Day in mainland China.

Hong Kong
Hong Kong was handed over by the Imperial Japanese Army to the Royal Navy on August 30, 1945, and resumed its pre-war status as a British dependency. Hong Kong celebrated the "Liberation Day" on August 30 (later moved to the Saturday preceding the last Monday in August) annually, which was a public holiday before 1997. After the transfer of sovereignty in 1997, the celebration was moved to the third Monday in August and renamed "Sino-Japanese War Victory Day", the Chinese name of which is literally "Victory of War of Resistance against Japan Day" as in the rest of China, but this day was removed from the list of public holidays in 1999. In 2014, the Chief Executive's Office announced that a commemoration ceremony would be held on September 3, in line with the "Victory Day of the Chinese people's war of resistance against Japanese aggression" in mainland China.

Korea
The day is celebrated as a public holiday in both North and South Korea, and is the only public holiday shared by the two countries. The day has particular significance to Korea, as it is the day that it was liberated from its status as a colony of the Empire of Japan. In North Korea, it is referred to as Liberation Day, and in South Korea it is referred to as Gwangbokjeol, (meaning "the day the light returned").

Mongolia
Victory over Japan Day is celebrated with duality in Mongolia. It also celebrates the victory of Soviet and Mongolian forces in the Battles of Khalkhin Gol. The anniversary of the battle was first celebrated in 1969, and was periodically celebrated on a massive scale every 5 years until its 50th anniversary in 1989, after which it dwindled in importance and was reduced to the level of academic debates and lectures. It was only recently that the anniversary made a resurgence in Mongolian history. It is jointly celebrated by the Mongolian Armed Forces with the Russian Armed Forces. During the 70th, 75th and 80th anniversaries in 2009, 2014 and 2019 respectively, the President of Russia has taken part in the celebrations alongside the President of Mongolia as part of the former's state visit to the Mongolian capital.

Netherlands

The Netherlands has one national and several regional or local remembrance services on or around August 15. The national service is at the "Indisch monument" (Dutch for "Indies Monument") in The Hague, where the victims of the Japanese occupation of the Dutch East Indies are remembered, usually in the presence of the head of state and the government. In total, there are about 20 services, also in the Indies remembrance center in Bronbeek in Arnhem. The Japanese occupation meant the twilight of Dutch colonial rule over Indonesia. Indonesia declared itself independent on August 17, 1945, just two days after the Japanese surrendered. The Indonesian War of Independence lasted until 1949, with the Netherlands recognizing Indonesian sovereignty in late December of that year.

Vietnam
On the day of the surrender of Japan, Hồ Chí Minh declared an independent Democratic Republic of Vietnam.

Vietnam celebrated 19 August as V-J Day, because of the victory of August Revolution against the Japanese forces.

Philippines
In the Philippines, V-J Day is celebrated annually on September 3 and is called the "Surrender of General Tomoyuki Yamashita Day". The province of Ifugao has observed every September 2 as "Victory Day", commemorating the valor of Philippine war veterans and the informal surrender of General Yamashita to the joint Filipino-American troops led-by Cpt. Grisham in the municipality of Kiangan on September 2, 1945.

Russia/Former USSR
It was introduced as a holiday by decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union on September 3, 1945 (the day after the surrender of Japan). The only celebration that was held in the days that followed was a parade of the Red Army in Harbin. In 1945 and 1946, this day was a national holiday. In subsequent years, it became a working day and no celebrations were held on this occasion. In modern Russia, Victory over Japan Day (День победы над Японией) is considered a memorable date and is celebrated as one of many Days of Military Honour. In recent years such as in 2017, bills in the State Duma have proposed making it a national holiday.

A military parade of the Eastern Military District is annually held in the cities of Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk or Khabarovsk, being one of the only parades being held on this day. Parades have also been held on September 2 in the federal subjects of Russia that celebrate the anniversary of the Battles of Khalkhin Gol, such as Buryatia, Yakutia and the Altai Republic. In the breakaway Moldovan-republic of Transnistria, Victory over Japan Day is jointly celebrated with their Republic Day celebrations, which take place on the same day.

United States
Although September 2 is the designated "V-J Day" in the entire United States, the event is not an official federal or state holiday. Rhode Island celebrates the ending of WW2 as "Victory Day", and it is observed on the second Monday of August.

V-J Day was initially commemorated throughout the United States every year on September 2, beginning in 1948, but as the war faded from memory so has the holiday. According to WPRI-TV, the reason for abolishing V-J Day was economic, because workers got a paid day off. There was even a debate over whether or not even Rhode Island would abolish their own Victory Day celebrations. Some towns in various states still celebrate V-J day. Moosup, Connecticut holds an annual V-J day parade on the 2nd Sunday in August, and holds the distinction of being the oldest continuous parade celebrating V-J day since the actual surrender of the Japanese in 1945. Arkansas was the only other state to make the holiday official statewide, but it abolished it in 1975, leaving Rhode Island as the only remaining state.

World Peace Day
It was suggested in the 1960s to declare September 2, the anniversary of the end of World War II, as an international holiday to be called World Peace Day. However, when this holiday came to be first celebrated beginning in 1981, it was designated as September 21, the day the General Assembly of the United Nations begins its deliberations each year.

title: Victory over Japan Day


text:
James Pennington

James Pennington, also known as Suburban Knight, is a DJ and producer with Underground Resistance (UR), an independent record label based in Detroit, United States. Music by Pennington and other UR members was featured in the video game Midnight Club 3: Dub Edition, which is set on the streets of Detroit.

Pennington pioneered the Detroit techno scene since the mid-1980s with moody tracks like "The Art of Stalking" and "The Groove".

With the rise of Detroit's second wave in the early 1990s, Pennington became a mentor for Mike Banks and the Underground Resistance crew. With Underground Resistance, he released the singles "Nocturbulous Behavior" and "Dark Energy". He also featured on the Submerge label compilation Depth Charge, Vol. 3, and produced tracks for Underground Resistance's 1998 full-length Interstellar Fugitive. James' debut album My Sol Dark Direction was released to critical acclaim including both classics and new, unreleased productions.

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

title: James Pennington


text:
Government and binding theory

Government and binding (GB, GBT) is a theory of syntax and a phrase structure grammar in the tradition of transformational grammar developed principally by Noam Chomsky in the 1980s. This theory is a radical revision of his earlier theories  and was later revised in The Minimalist Program (1995) and several subsequent papers, the latest being Three Factors in Language Design (2005). Although there is a large literature on government and binding theory which is not written by Chomsky, Chomsky's papers have been foundational in setting the research agenda.

The name refers to two central subtheories of the theory: government, which is an abstract syntactic relation applicable, among other things, to the assignment of case; and binding, which deals chiefly with the relationships between pronouns and the expressions with which they are co-referential. GB was the first theory to be based on the principles and parameters model of language, which also underlies the later developments of the minimalist program.

Government
The main application of the government relation concerns the assignment of case. Government is defined as follows:

A governs B if and only if
 * A is a governor and
 * A m-commands B and
 * no barrier intervenes between A and B.

Governors are heads of the lexical categories (V, N, A, P) and tensed I (T). A m-commands B if A does not dominate B and B does not dominate A and the first maximal projection of A dominates B, where the maximal projection of a head X is XP. This means that for example in a structure like the following, A m-commands B, but B does not m-command A:

In addition, barrier is defined as follows: A barrier is any node Z such that
 * Z is a potential governor for B and
 * Z c-commands B and
 * Z does not c-command A

The government relation makes case assignment unambiguous. The tree diagram below illustrates how DPs are governed and assigned case by their governing heads:

Another important application of the government relation constrains the occurrence and identity of traces as the Empty Category Principle requires them to be properly governed.

Binding
Binding can be defined as follows:

 * An element α binds an element β if and only if α c-commands β, and α and β corefer.

Consider the sentence "Johni saw hisi mother", which is diagrammed below using simple phrase structure trees.

The NP "John" c-commands "his" because the first parent of the NP, S, contains "his". "John" and "his" are also coreferential (they refer to the same person), therefore "John" binds "his".

On the other hand, in the ungrammatical sentence "*The mother of Johni likes himselfi", "John" does not c-command "himself", so they have no binding relationship despite the fact that they corefer.

The importance of binding is shown in the grammaticality or ungrammaticality of the following sentences:

 * 1) * Johni saw himi.
 * 2) Johni saw himselfi.
 * 3) * Himselfi saw Johni.
 * 4) * Johni saw Johni.

Binding is used, along with particular binding principles, to explain the ungrammaticality of statements 1, 3, and 4. The applicable rules are called Binding Principle A, Binding Principle B, and Binding Principle C.

Since "himself" is not c-commanded by "John" in sentence [3], Principle A is violated.
 * Principle A: an anaphor (reflexive or reciprocal, such as "each other") must be bound in its governing category (roughly, the clause).

In sentence [1], "him" is bound by "John", violating Principle B.
 * Principle B: a pronoun must be free (i.e., not bound) within its governing category (roughly, the clause).

In sentence [4], the first instance of "John" binds the second, violating Principle C.
 * Principle C: an R-expression must be free (i.e., not bound). R-expressions (e.g. "the dog" or "John") are referential expressions: unlike pronouns and anaphora, they independently refer, i.e., pick out entities in the world.

Note that Principles A and B refer to "governing categories"—domains which limit the scope of binding. The definition of a governing category laid out in Lectures on Government and Binding is complex, but in most cases the governing category is essentially the minimal clause or complex NP.

title: Government and binding theory


text:
Butt rot

Butt rot is a disease of plants, mostly trees, caused by fungi. The fungus attacks the moist, poorly protected undersurface of tree trunk's thickest part (the "butt" above the root, as opposed to "top"), where the end of the stem makes contact with the soil. It may affect the roots as well, causing a disease known as root rot. It then moves up into the interior of the plant, producing a roughly conical column of dead, rotted plant matter, up to one and a half meters long in severe cases. Such an infection is likely to impair the transport properties of the xylem tissue found at the center of the stem. It also weakens the stem and makes the plant more vulnerable to toppling. One particularly virulent species of fungus associated with butt rot is Serpula himantioides.

title: Butt rot


text:
The Marvelous Land of Oz

The Marvelous Land of Oz: Being an Account of the Further Adventures of the Scarecrow and the Tin Woodman, commonly shortened to The Land of Oz, published in July 1904, is the second book in L. Frank Baum's Oz series, and the sequel to The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (1900). This and the following 34 books in the series were illustrated by John R. Neill. It was followed by Ozma of Oz (1907).

The story features the Scarecrow and the Tin Woodsman, and introduces Princess Ozma and Jack Pumpkinhead to the Oz mythos.

Plot summary
The events are set shortly after the events in The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and after Dorothy Gale's departure back to Kansas. The protagonist of the novel is an orphan boy called Tip.

For as long as he can remember, Tip has been under the guardianship of a cruel Wicked Witch named Mombi and lives in the northern quadrant of Oz called Gillikin Country. Mombi has always been extremely mean and abusive to Tip. As Mombi is returning home one day, Tip plans to get revenge and frighten her with a simulacrum that he has made with a large Jack-o'-lantern he carves for a head, tree branches for a body, pegs for joints, and old clothes from Mombi's chest. Tip then named him Jack Pumpkinhead. To Tip's dismay, Mombi is not fooled by this trick, and she takes this opportunity to demonstrate the new magical "Powder of Life" that she had just obtained from another sorcerer. Mombi tells Tip that she intends to transform him into a marble statue to punish him for his mischievous ways.

To avoid being turned into a marble statue, Tip runs away with Jack that very same night and steals the Powder of Life. He uses it to animate the wooden Sawhorse for Jack to ride. The Sawhorse runs so quickly that Tip is left behind. Walking alone, he meets General Jinjur's all-girl Army of Revolt which is planning to overthrow the Scarecrow (who has ruled the Emerald City since the end of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz after the Wizard of Oz left).

Meanwhile, Jack and the Sawhorse arrive at the Emerald City and make the acquaintance of His Majesty the Scarecrow. Jinjur and her crew invade the Emerald City, terrorize the citizens, and loot the city, causing great havoc and chaos. Tip joins Jack and the Scarecrow in the palace and they escape on the Sawhorse's back.

The companions arrive at the tin castle of the Tin Woodman (who now rules the Winkie Kingdom following the Wicked Witch of the West's demise in the first book) and plan to retake the Emerald City with his help. On their way back, they are diverted by the magic of Mombi (whom Jinjur recruited to help her apprehend them). They are joined by the "Highly Magnified and Thoroughly Educated" Woggle-Bug, and aided by the loyal field mice and their Mouse Queen. The Queen of the Field Mice allows the Scarecrow to take twelve mice concealed in his straw.

When the party reaches the Emerald City, Jinjur and her soldiers imprison the group and lock them away. However, the female soldiers are scared by the field mice and leave the city's palace. However, they still occupy the grounds of the city and the palace is surrounded. The travelers are imprisoned in the palace. The Scarecrow proposes manufacturing a clever flying machine with a Gump's stuffed head to direct it. Tip uses the Powder of Life to animate this machine, which is assembled from two sofas, palm tree leaves, a broom, and tied together with clotheslines and ropes. Then they fly off, with no control over their direction, out of Oz. They land in a nest of jackdaws, which is full of all of the birds' stolen goods. The flying Gump's wings are damaged in the landing.

The jackdaws return to their nest and attack the travelers, carrying off the Scarecrow's straw. The nest contains a large amount of paper money, with which the Scarecrow can be re-stuffed. Using Wishing Pills they discover in the container holding the Powder of Life, Tip and his friends escape and journey to the palace of Glinda the Good Witch in Oz's southern quadrant, the Quadling Country. They learn from Glinda that after the fall of Oz's mortal king Pastoria decades ago, a long lost princess named Ozma was hidden away in secrecy when the Wizard of Oz took the throne. She also informs them that Ozma is the rightful ruler of the Emerald City and all of Oz in general, not the Scarecrow (who did not really want the job anyway). Glinda therefore accompanies Tip, Jack, the Sawhorse, the Scarecrow, the Tin Woodman, the Wogglebug, and the Gump back to the Emerald City to see Mombi. The crooked woman tries to deceive them by disguising a chambermaid named Jellia Jamb as herself (which fails), but manages to elude them as they search for her in the Emerald City. Just as their time runs out, the Tin Woodman plucks a rose to wear in his lapel, unaware that this is the transformed Mombi.

Glinda discovers the deception right away and leads the pursuit of Mombi, who is finally caught as she tries to cross the Deadly Desert in the form of a fast and long-running griffin. Under pressure from Glinda, Mombi confesses that the Wizard brought her the infant Ozma, whom she transformed into... the boy Tip. At first, Tip is utterly shocked and appalled to learn this, but Glinda and his friends help him to accept his duty and Mombi performs her last spell to undo the curse, turning him back into the fairy princess Ozma.

The restored Ozma is established on the throne after defeating Jinjur and her army. The Tin Woodman invites the Scarecrow to return with him to the Winkie Country along with Jack Pumpkinhead. The Gump is disassembled at his request (though his head was a hunting trophy that can still speak), Glinda returns to her palace in Quadling Country, the Wogglebug remains as Ozma's advisor, and the Sawhorse becomes Ozma's personal steed. The forgotten prophecy is finally fulfilled and Oz is politically whole once more, with Ozma in her rightful position as the child Queen of Oz.

Themes
Women's rights is a primary theme of the book. The kingdom that Princess Ozma and Glinda establish is a fictional manifestation of the "matriarchate" that is described in the written works of activist Matilda Joslyn Gage (Baum's mother-in-law), who has also been cited as a major influence on the Oz stories.

Stage
The Wonderful Wizard of Oz had been transformed into a stage play in 1902, and several elements of the sequel book were clearly incorporated with an eye to it also being adapted for the stage. The Marvelous Land of Oz was dedicated to David C. Montgomery and Fred Stone, the comedians "whose clever personations of the Tin Woodman and the Scarecrow have delighted thousands of children throughout the land..." in the popular stage adaptation. Following the Tin Woodman's and the Scarecrow's importance to the play, a similar importance is given to them in the second novel, where neither Dorothy nor the Cowardly Lion appear.

The Marvelous Land of Oz was also influenced by the story and vaudevillian tone of the stage play. The character of the Wizard was in the book a good man though a bad wizard but in the play, the villain of the piece; this is reflected by the evil part he is described as having played in the backstory of The Marvelous Land of Oz.

The two armies of women, both Jinjur's and Glinda's, were so clearly intended as future chorus girls that even reviews of the book noted the similarity. One early reviewer of The Marvelous Land of Oz noted that some details in the book clearly appeared to be designed for stage production—in particular, "General Jinjur and her soldiers are only shapely chorus girls." Since the stage adaptation of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz had been a huge hit, with two companies still touring the country as the second book was published, the reviewer's suspicion was both natural and accurate.

It has also been suggested that the twist of Tip being the Princess Ozma also reflects stage traditions, as Tip would have likely been played by a woman in drag.

Baum had wanted Fred Stone and David Montgomery to reprise their roles as the Scarecrow and Tin Woodman for the second show, but the two refused, fearing typecasting, and the characters were omitted completely from the play. Instead, Baum adapted the book for the stage as The Woggle-Bug, produced in Chicago the summer of 1905. The musical score was composed by Frederic Chapin, and Fred Mace played the Woggle-Bug. The play was not successful and has not been published, though it has been preserved on microfilm. Its songs were published, and a collected volume was published by Hungry Tiger Press in 2001.

Film
In addition to being part of the basis for Baum's The Fairylogue and Radio-Plays, Land of Oz is the final 1910 Selig Polyscope Oz film, and has been brought to the screen several additional times.

The Land of Oz, a Sequel to the Wizard of Oz is a two-reel production by the Meglin Kiddies made in 1931 and released in 1932. The film was recovered, but the soundtrack of the second reel is missing.

The Wonderful Land of Oz (1969) is a studio-bound production from independent filmmaker Barry Mahon and stars his son, Channy, as Tip. Mahon had previously produced nudie films; however, those films were made in New York, while Oz was made in Florida, and neither Caroline Berner (as General Jinjur) nor the rest of her army were drawn from his former casts.

Filmation's Journey Back to Oz (1972) is essentially an uncredited retelling of The Marvelous Land of Oz, replacing the army of revolt with green elephants and Tip with Dorothy, voiced by Judy Garland's daughter, Liza Minnelli.

Elements from this novel and the following one, Ozma of Oz, were incorporated into the 1985 film Return to Oz featuring Fairuza Balk as Dorothy.

Television
The story was dramatized on the TV series The Shirley Temple Show in a one-hour program, The Land of Oz, broadcast on September 18, 1960, with a notable cast including Shirley Temple as Tip and Ozma, Agnes Moorehead as Mombi the witch, Sterling Holloway as Jack Pumpkinhead, Ben Blue as the Scarecrow, Gil Lamb as the Tin Woodman, and Mel Blanc as the voice of the Saw-Horse. Although the adaptation was faithful overall, much of the plot had to be sacrificed to fit the story into a one-hour time slot, and Dr. Nikidik was added to the storyline and refashioned into a lord (played by Jonathan Winters).

The 1983 stop-motion cartoon W krainie czarnoksiężnika Oza (In the Land of the Wizard of Oz) combined the adaptation of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and The Marvelous Land of Oz in 13 episodes.

The novel was adapted in the 1986 TV series Ozu no Mahōtsukai.

The Land of Oz was also adapted as two episodes of the 2000 Russian animated series Adventures of the Emerald City: The intrigues of old Mombi and Princess Ozma.

Elements of the 2007 Sci Fi miniseries Tin Man also borrow from this book as much as it did The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. The protagonist, like Tip/Ozma, is a lost princess sent away from The O.Z. and magically altered to forget much of her previous existence.

Audiobook
Ray Bolger recorded an audio adaptation of The Land of Oz. This was the third in a series of four audiotapes, The Oz Audio Collection, recorded by Bolger and issued by Caedmon Audio from 1976-1983.

Comics
The story was also adapted in comic book form by Marvel Comics; once in 1975 in the Marvel Treasury of Oz series, and again in an eight issue series with the first issue being released in November 2009.

Game
In 1985, the Windham Classics text adventure game The Wizard of Oz adapted much of the plot of this book, however it did not include the bespelled Ozma. At the story's conclusion Tip is crowned King of Oz.

Later novel
Gregory Maguire's novel Out of Oz (fourth and final volume of The Wicked Years) incorporates many plot elements of The Marvelous Land of Oz.

title: The Marvelous Land of Oz


text:
New Jersey Route 184

Route 184 is a state highway in New Jersey, United States. It is an old section of Route 440 that was rerouted. Route 184's western end is at an intersection with the Garden State Parkway in Woodbridge Township; its eastern end is at an intersection with Route 35 in Perth Amboy. The highway passes several local landmarks along the highway, but is less populated than the surrounding area. Except for the easternmost section between Route 35 and Route 440, the highway is concurrent with County Route 501, but is not county-maintained.

The route originated as Route S4, which became Route 440 on January 1, 1953. In 1974, a part of Route 440 was bypassed and rerouted, and the New Jersey State Highway Department reassigned the former alignment as Route 184.

Route description
Route 184 begins at an interchange with the Garden State Parkway's exit 129 and County Route 501 (CR 501) in Woodbridge Township. The route, immediately concurrent with CR 501 is known as King Georges Road, which turns to the north near Fords Park. Just after the split from King Georges Road, Route 184 enters a partial cloverleaf interchange with US 9 and passes south of Hopelawn Park. After passing the local cemetery, the route crosses a junction with CR 655 (Florida Grove Road). Continuing east, the route becomes known as Pfieffer Boulevard and crosses an interchange with Route 440 in Perth Amboy.

Just east of Route 440, the route continues northward until reaching an intersection with Route 35 (Convery Boulevard), marking the eastern terminus of Route 184.

History
Route 184 originated as a prefixed spur of Route 4 (currently an alignment of U.S. Route 9), New Jersey State Highway Route S-4, first defined in 1927. The highway was an alignment from the new Outerbridge Crossing to Route 4. It was eventually extended from Route 4 to the recently built Route 4 Parkway (now the Garden State Parkway) in 1951. In the 1953 renumbering on January 1, 1953, Route S-4 was decommissioned and renumbered to Route 440 to match up with New York State Route 440 in Staten Island.

title: New Jersey Route 184


text:
Talk:Butt rot

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Carii 12.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion
Contrary to popular belief, butt rot is not a snide attempt at vandalism. The following is copied from talk:Fungus, where this term first appeared. Some erroneous material has been excised. -Smack 18:43, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Is "butt rot" a real fungi disease or vandalism? Crusadeonilliteracy 13:41, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * Apparently it's real [says Google]! --Menchi 02:55, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * It is very much real. While doing research for a biology paper, I dug up a study of windfall trees in Denmark, and that's how I learned of this phenomenon.  -Smack 05:46, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)

 * Only 38 edits to this article in 10 years. I'm surprised the title hasn't attracted more vandalism and reversion. I'm still giggling over the title (but am mildly interested in it as serious subject). Going on my watchlist. Plantdrew (talk) 06:06, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Butt rot


text:
Talk:Battle of Cape St. Vincent (1780)

Untitled
"coppered ships": presumably copper-bottomed?? Presumably not, "full of policemen", but will somebody please elucidate or define? orthogonal 18:44, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * Copper plates all over below the waterline, protects against ship worms and keeps speed up by preventing weed growth. One of these days I hope to get around to writing wooden ship construction that explains all this. Stan 23:00, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * I've changed "coppered" to "copper-bottomed"; I hope this meets with your aproval. orthogonal 01:29, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * Either way is fine. Stan 04:26, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

the usual term is "coppered".

Order of battle?
The article Juan de Lángara claims the Spanish had "11, mostly smaller ships-of-the-line" and the British "21 battleships and 11 frigates". (Other accounts give other numbers.) What were these ships?

Spanish: Santo Domingo (exploded), Fénix, 80 (flagship, captured, renamed Gibraltar), Monarca, 70 (captured), San Julian (captured, but sank two days later), Princesa, 74 (captured), Diligente, 68 (captured), Guispuscoano, 64 (captured, renamed Prince William), ...?

British: Sandwich, 98 (flagship), Invincible, 74, Defence, 74, Bedford, Resolution, 74, Edgar, 74, Bienfaisant, 64, Prince George, 98, Monarch, 74, ...?

Sources: Gdr 18:46, 2004 Dec 23 (UTC)

Prince George, as well? Shimgray 17:34, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Fénix (the Spanish flagship) and Monarca are listed as captured here. mentions Santo Domingo as blowing up, and also mentions the Prince William - it isn't clear if this was part of the fleet or not, though. suggests the Monarch may have been present, but is unclear.

Monarch confirmed by. is a useful source for launch dates and number of guns. Gdr 18:46, 2004 Dec 23 (UTC)

Must have been confusing, with the Monarch and the Monarca kicking around after the battle... It looks like the Prince William, on further reading, was sent back as a prize, so not her. As the fleet was that being sent to the West Indies (about which plenty is written), perhaps it would be useful to see what ships were present in that squadron a few months later? Shimgray 19:19, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Not an uncommon experience... at Trafalgar there were three Neptunes... Gdr 21:40, 2004 Dec 23 (UTC)

The San Julian is mentioned here, which adds another ship to the Spanish list. Shimgray 23:15, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC) And suggests Montagu may have been present? It's unclear and an assumption, though. And I think at this point I've dredged out everything I can without a real reference... Shimgray 23:54, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

suggests several ships. Colledge, Ships of the Royal Navy confirms Monarca, Diligente, Fénix and gives Guispuscoano as the original name of Prince William. Gdr 23:30, 2005 Jan 5 (UTC) check the Battleships throughout history page ->spanish

I thought I would clarify things by adding a full list to the page. The only uncertainty is that British accounts mostly say that two of the captured ships, San Julian and San Eugenio, were lost, but Spanish records say that they continued in service -- implying that they were recaptured. JimmyTheOne Oct05

American War of Independence
The article and infobox both mention this, but if this battle really did have anything to do with America it needs to be explained. The same is true for several other articles covering British naval battles of this period - just because Britain was fighting the American War of Independence at the time doesn't automatically make every battle part of it. Riedquat (talk) 22:12, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

 * I agree. What on earth does this have to do with the American Revolution other than taking place at the same time (big deal!)? I'm editing it to erase any evidence linking it to the American Revolution to mitigate confusion.65.215.94.13 (talk) 21:53, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

This battle was NOT a part of the American Revolution and had nothing to do with it, period, whatsoever. Pleas stop including it as a part of the American Revolution series of articles. Do not undo my changes, and stop altogether or you will be warned for vandalism.65.215.94.13 (talk) 00:29, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

 * I've re-added the reference to it being part of the war. To take the first source I could find - David Syrett's The Royal Navy in European Waters in the American Revolutionary War - includes the battle in several of its chapters. What is your source that says it is not part of this war? And if so, what war is it part of?
 * You don't need a reference to say something is NOT something else.  Stop reverting reference to American Rev. War or you'll be warned and banned.65.215.94.13 (talk) 18:27, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

 * To examine another war in the eighteenth century - the War of the Spanish Succession was fought in several European countries, and in colones around the globe - much of which had little to do with the Spanish Crisis that started it. Similarly after 1778 a number of countries joined the American War of Independence who had only a limited connection to America - and very little interest in its independence. Lord Cornwallis (talk) 04:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

 * An even more extreme example of the name of a war having little to do with where it was actually fought (or over what) is the War of the Polish Succession, most of which was fought in Italy, without the involvement of any Polish forces (and there was exactly one significant action in Poland itself). To say this battle "has nothing to do with" the American Revolution is beside the point.  It's part of the war that has been given the name "American Revolutionary War" or "American War of Independence".  If you don't like that, talk to the people who give names to wars, and publish books using those names.  If you disagree that it is part of the so-named war, you should provide evidence rather than bluster and threats to support your argument (like, what war is it part of, and who says so?).  Magic ♪piano 15:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

 * As long as our anonymous IP editor refuses to talk beyond his edit comments, editors reverting him/her/it should place warnings of increasing severity on the talk pages of the offending IPs (see Uw-vandalism1 through Uw-vandalism4). (When the level 4 warning is given, the IP should be reported to WP:AN3.  While he's not technically violating WP:3RR, this should be sufficient to throttle the behavior.)  Magic ♪piano 12:56, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not 'vandalism' just because one wikipedian see it one way over another's. Once and for all, this battle has NOTHING to do with the American Revolution; please stop changing words in the article to even attempt to link it.  This battle is NEVER taught in schools as being part of the rev. nor is it even considered to be a part of this anywhere else but Wikipedia.Tatumstevens2 (talk) 15:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

 * It's vandalism if all you are doing is edit warring and not discussing the issue. I note that there has been no substantive response by anyone to the comments LordCornwallis and I made above.  Perhaps you would like to address them (since your argument that the battle has nothing to do with the American Revolution is beside the point, as I note above)?
 * To address your argument that this battle is not taught in school: I don't recall being taught about the Battle of St. Louis or the Battle of Klock's Field in school. Does that mean they have nothing to do with the revolution, or shouldn't be mentioned as such?  Magic ♪piano 15:57, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It is not vandalism if my points are more valid than another user's. Additionally, 'he said/she said' is not how to play the game here- you say my edits are vandalism; I say yours are.  Your examples are also weak in that they are inextricably part of the Revolution and are rightfully taught as such.  Having been born and raised about 10 minutes from Klock's Field, I'm very familiar with the event and the plaque designation indicating such a link between that British attack on US soil during the Revolution, far from the case of the Battle of St. Vincent faught in another continent with a belligerent not even involved in the Revolution.Tatumstevens2 (talk) 16:47, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

 * It's not a question of "I said, you said", it's a question of reliable sources. This is why your assertion (presented without any supporting evidence whatsoever) isn't worth much.  (In fact, it's worth just as much as my intentionally lame assertion that because I didn't learn about the Battle of Klock's Field, it must not have been part of the war.)  Sources (one listed above, but reasonable searches of Google Books should turn up additional examples) mention this action in connection to the American Revolutionary War.  Your argument is not with me per se, it is with the sources that claim the connection.  We can get specific and dissect particular sources if you want to do that.

 * The Battle of St. Louis was fought between nominally British and Spanish forces (most of the British force were Indians) on Spanish territory -- i.e. "with a belligerent not even involved" in the war, and on soil not then American. What is it about its location or other features that privileges its inclusion in the canon of the revolution over this action?

 * The page at the NMM describing the painting at the top of the article explicitly says the battle is part of the War of American Independence. May I suggest you take this argument up with their curators? Or present some evidence here that someone other than you doesn't think it's part of said war?

 * To follow up on your reasoning: should I remove Siege of Capua (1734) (and in fact much of the military activity normally classified as part of that war) from the War of the Polish Succession? It was fought between two belligerents that sent practically* no troops into Poland, and not on Polish soil.  (* A small French force was in fact landed at the Siege of Danzig, but it was wiped out fairly quickly and played no significant role in the proceedings.  No Austrian troops crossed into Poland; the Austrians did not want to be seen as aggressors there for diplomatic reasons.)  Magic ♪piano 17:53, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

(undent) Here are some target sources; feel free to attack them: From the first page of http://books.google.com/books?lr=&q=%22American+Revolution%22+rodney+langara&btnG=Search+Books
 * a 19th century history
 * modern reference
 * another modern reference
 * Markham/Mahan specifically arguing that control over ocean waters was important to the British war effort against America
 * Jared Sparks, John Adams writing about the incidents with Spain
 * 1805 American history of the revolution
 * a modern rev war naval history

Searches involving other possible designations for the war this battle might be a part of:
 * This search returned 3 results
 * This search returned none

Ball's in your court.  Magic ♪piano 18:41, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Cape St. Vincent (1780). 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/20070927003243/http://www.ospreypublishing.com/title_detail.php/title%3DS9770 to http://www.ospreypublishing.com/title_detail.php/title%3DS9770

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) 00:55, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Number of ships of the line
In the introduction paragraph there was "about 20 ships of the line", however in the second paragraph of the background section, there is a sourced comment saying there was specifically 19. I don't have access to the source to double check it's correct, but should the intro be edited to make the number consistent throughout the article? Give me a shout if I've got the wrong idea here :) --IrnBruFan7 (talk) 09:29, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Battle of Cape St. Vincent (1780)


text:
Talk:Monty Python's Life of Brian

Sound quality of main theme
Every time I've watched this film on various DVDs over the last couple of decades, the main Shirley Bassey-esque theme has had awful phasing effects. Does anyone have any info that can shed light on this? Was it done deliberately, or has the soundtrack suffered degradation at some stage? I don't remember the phasing being there when I watched the cinema release. There are no obvious phase errors on the rest of the soundtrack. Ef80 (talk) 10:21, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Edit war?Inspiration from The Life of Jesus
The film imho was inspired by an important scholarly book which concludes that Jesus was an unremarkable Jew…

I changed the wording to “likely” inspired by the book. It is clearly more than a coincidence.

If all WP assertions were sourced, there would be little in WP.

I am checking with the Monty Python team. X Riskit 4 a biskit (talk) 20:24, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

When asked what the inspiration of the film was, palin responds that they read up about JC see vid @ 6:02 This would certainly have included the book I mention. Coincidence? Ok, now, to say “likely” inspired?? See YouTube “life of Brian debate 1979” Riskit 4 a biskit (talk) 20:58, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

“ Craveri concluded that the claims to divinity made by the historical Jesus were strictly limited and not unusual for a Jew of that generation. “ Riskit 4 a biskit (talk) 21:00, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh, hang on, the WP Craveri article isn’t sourced, so better delete it?? Riskit 4 a biskit (talk) 21:03, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

 * can I add an email as a source? Or a telephone convo? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riskit 4 a biskit (talk • contribs) 14:26, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Your opinions are irrelevant for Wikipedia. WP is based on reliable sources. Read WP:RS. Your supposition re Palin is irrelevant. You need to find a secondary source that supports your assertions. Do the research in finding a reliable source, present it here and maybe your information can be included if there is WP:CONSENSUS Robynthehode (talk) 14:39, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * warning: This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Monty Python's Life of Brian article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riskit 4 a biskit (talk • contribs) 15:23, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Your warning is not appropriate. I have not been uncivil WP:CIVIL just a bit terse. Please read the protocols and guidelines for contributing to Wikipedia. You can start with WP:5P but also read the other links I provided. Also please sign your posts by ending the post with four tildes 'Robynthehode (talk) 16:57, 17 February 2023 (UTC)'. Thanks

Failed verification re: decades-long ban on Italy
I added a tag to the line in the third paragraph of the introduction which currently reads: "Some countries, including Ireland and Norway, banned its showing, and in a few of these, such as Italy, bans lasted decades." The citation links to a newspaper article on an Italian website titled "L'equivoco su Brian di Nazareth dei Monty Python quarant'anni dopo" ("The misunderstanding of "Brian di Nazareth" by Monty Python forty years later"). I don't speak much Italian but from what I can tell, even a cursory glance over it and running it through a couple of translators makes it clear nowhere in the short two-paragraph article does it say how long Italy banned it for, let alone that it was for "decades"; merely that Italy banned it for some amount of time alongside several other countries: "Parte di tanta fama è dovuta all’accanimento della censura, che proibì il film in varie nazioni fra cui l’Italia: era il 1978 e più che uno scandalo fu un malinteso." (Google Translate: "Part of so much fame is due to the fury of the censorship, which banned the film in various countries including Italy: it was 1978 and more than a scandal it was a misunderstanding.") This sentence is in the first paragraph of the article and a variation of it is in the article's subtitle at the top of the page. But nowhere else does any variation of the words "proibita" or "proibì" (banned) appear, or the word "Italia" or any variation of it, so it seems pretty obvious the article doesn't make any such claims about Italy banning the film for decades, or for any specific amount of time at all. According to "Life of Brian"s IMDb entry, Life of Brian first premiered in the USA on August 17, 1979, and first premiered in Italy on March 28, 1991, so although the Italian ban technically spanned 3 decades, it was only banned for 11 years, 7 months, and 11 days at most. According to the website Original Film Art, they are selling a copy of the Life of Brian movie release from its original Italian premiere, which they say was in 1991 and 12 years after the film first came out. The site says it has a certificate of authenticity but I can't view it, and it doesn't offer dates. But this all seems more reliable than the Il Foglio article currently cited, which has no dates or amount of time at all and certainly doesn't say Italy's ban lasted decades. I think we should: --VolatileChemical (talk) 12:06, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * A) rewrite that sentence in the intro so that it says something like, "and in a few of these, such as Italy, bans lasted decades", or "bans lasted into the 1990s", "bans lasted more than a decade", or "bans lasted up to 12 years", because that seems to be more accurate;
 * B) include one of those other sources (IMDb, Original Film Art.com etc, if they are acceptable), or find new sources, to put in addition to and/or in lieu of the Il Foglio article;
 * C) maybe also just find a different place in the wiki entry for the Il Foglio article, which is not an irrelevant source about Life of Brian and the censorship response, just a bad source for backing up a specific claim about durations of the Italian ban. I'm not sure if that article ever had a longer or different form in 2019 when it was published which had information about those things at the time, but the current iteration does not.
 * D) Instead of the Italy example we could add after it, or replace it with, an example of a country where the ban did actually last multiple decades, e.g. Chile (21 years), or so according to IMDb's Certification ratings guide entry for "Life of Brian".

No mention of controversy over Stan/Loretta scene
So there was a scene in Monty Python's Life of Brian where Stan expressed her desire to be a woman called Loretta and to have babies, and other characters made fun of her for this. In the 21st century, this has been quite controversial among trans people, but there's no mention of it in the 21st century section. Think we should add a section on that? MarchRain (talk) 05:54, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Monty Python's Life of Brian


text:
Talk:List of dances

A note was in page's main body:

 * Shag  (store the different flavors of this in the Swing section, shall we? e.g. Balboa [already there] is a Shag.)
 * Absolutely!
 * mikkalai

To put into list: [done]
 * - Mikkalai 23:49, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

How about synchronised swimming? User:Palefire
 * What about it? I guess, the same as gymnastics and catwalk walking: they all have elements of dance, but they are not "dances" in the strict sense. Mikkalai 21:36, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

Ceroc / Modern Jive
Should the various UK franchises that teach 'Ceroc' / 'modern jive' be listed as seperate dances? I am talking about 'Ceroc' 'Blitz' 'leJive' and 'leRoc', thery are really just buisness names, as it is widely considered that the dance they teach is the same. Also a widely used alternative name in the UK is 'French Jive'. (written by (user:Ianbolland) Have left in Ceroc, Leroc, & Modern Jive, as they are colloquially used to describe the dance form, whereas "Blitz", "Mo'Jive", "LeJive", etc... are purely used as company names.

 * Why not? If the the name is used, it is OK to be listed: people might want to look it up. The Modern Jive article lists them. mikka (t) 19:48, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Wikibooks
Somebody needs to make more how-to guides for dances on Wikibooks. Just go to List of dances and make some articles so people can learn new dances from the Internet. (unsigned comment from anon).

 * Care to start us off? - jredmond 20:20, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Crowd Surfing
A form of dance? --Cammoore 01:34, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * hmmm... at the very least it is dance related. Mathmo Talk 08:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Capitalization
Many edits to this list consist of "properly" capitalizing or decapitalizing everyone's favorite dance. However, there is generally not consensus on whether a dance should or should not be capitalized. See here and here for full treatment, but word from the Wikipedia help desk has it that dances should not be capitalized unless their name is based on a proper noun. Good luck!--Will.i.am 04:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Someone please check the wikifying
I have removed ara kurdish folk dance groupara artistic and cultural group badly formated wikilink and put Ara as the name of the dance. Hopefully haven't mistaken. Biblbroks 16:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Table at "E"
Does anyone have an opinion on the table I created under "E"? I was thinking it might be nice to have the information laid out more uniformly. On the other hand, it doesn't really work to have "ethnic dance" (and other such broad genres) listed, because adding a "type" and "origin" isn't applicable. Thoughts? This article is perhaps more accurately titled "List of dances and dance genres". --Fang Aili talk 18:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

One Step wrong footed...
There is a broken link on this page - the entry for "One Step" goes to some Austrian pop song of that name, not a description of the dance in question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.95.135 (talk) 03:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Lendler
Clicking on this dance produces a page that says Wikipedia does not have an article with this name. There is however an article under "ländler" could someone please redirect it there? Thanks. Maggiedj (talk) 23:48, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect done & link replaced here as well. `'Míkka>t 00:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Physically integrated dance
Does physically integrated dance belong on this list? It is dance involving people with various disabilities - not a particular style of dance. The article is currently a very brief stub. Roger (talk) 08:18, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Why is FINE listed under section Q?
Does it belong here?

FINE (United States of America) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.156.145 (talk) 06:14, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Should be removed from list

 * Dubstep - is a musical genre, not a dance style.
 * Jabbawokeez - is a dance group

Tripleblade (talk) 12:56, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:List of dances


text:
New Jersey Route 187

Route 187 is a state highway in the state of New Jersey, in the United States. The route is only 0.40 mi long, running along Brigantine Boulevard in Atlantic City. The route's southern terminus is at the Atlantic City–Brigantine Connector (Route 446X) off-ramp to U.S. Route 30 and terminates at its parent, New Jersey Route 87 nearby. Route 187 is not maintained by the New Jersey Department of Transportation, but instead the South Jersey Transportation Authority, which maintains the Brigantine Connector nearby.

Route 187 originates as an alignment of State Highway Route S-4-A, designated in the 1927 renumbering of highways. After Route S-4-A's extension from Ocean County was canceled, Route S-4-A along this alignment became State Highway Route S-56, as a spur of Route 56. Route S-56 became Route 87 in the renumbering, and by the 1980s, Route 87 was realigned off of Brigantine Boulevard and onto Huron Avenue. The route was later renumbered Route 187. During construction of the Brigantine Connector in 2001, Route 187 was severed from its former southern terminus at U.S. Route 30 and truncated back to its current alignment.

Route description
Route 187 begins at an intersection with an off-ramp for U.S. Route 30 from the Atlantic City–Brigantine Connector (Route 446X) in Atlantic City. The highway heads northward along Brigantine Boulevard, passing by fields along the Connector and to the west of local townhouses. Intersecting with North Carolina Avenue, a dead-end connector, Route 187 continues along Brigantine Boulevard through Atlantic City, passing a large baseball field before intersecting with West Maryland Avenue. A short distance after West Maryland Avenue, Route 187 terminates at an intersection with New Jersey Route 87 (Huron Avenue) while Brigantine Boulevard continues a short distance, merging into the Connector soon after.

History
Route 187 originates as a former alignment of State Highway Route S-4-A dating back to the 1927 state highway renumbering. State Highway Route S-4-A was proposed to be an extension along Great Bay Boulevard from Tuckerton to Atlantic City. Route S-4-A was never constructed across the waterway and in 1945, the route was changed from State Highway Route S-4-A to Route S-56. Route S-56 remained intact until the 1953 state highway renumbering, when it was renumbered to Route 87. Route 87 ran along Brigantine Boulevard until the 1970s, when the route was realigned onto Huron Avenue. The route later became Route 187, running from U.S. Route 30 to Route 87. However, the southern terminus was truncated when the Atlantic City–Brigantine Connector was constructed in 2001, which severed Route 187 from Route 30. Route 187 now ends at the off-ramp to U.S. Route 30.

title: New Jersey Route 187