text:
Template talk:GFDL

Discussion
I wrote out GFDL, because that's good practice.

The "see copyrights" I removed, because it's not a helpful link - it just says "uh, images can be under lots of licenses. Hope this helps!". Rather, we should say "see later on this page", where there'll be vital details, such as *what* version of the GFDL, if any, who owns the copyright, etc. Martin 21:39, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

How did this get so bloated? I suggest we go back to this:

 * Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.

The disclamer thing has been covered elsewhere, we dont have to reapeat it all the time. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 18:03, 2004 Jun 25 (UTC)

I would like the GFDL template to look exactly as the text above. I have no idea why does it now have unlinked GNU Free Documentation License text and another sentence with the only purpose of linking to FDL text. Everything is subject to disclaimers, yet only GFDL template seems to repeat it. See also pd message is unclear section on Image copyright tags talk page. Rafał Pocztarski 21:03, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Would it be possible to make the license text more visible by adding a frame to it? For instance I like the layout the German Wikipedia is using: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorlage:GFDL -- mkrohn 23:47, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Do that, i like the german one, but skip the "Copyright ©" thing. -- Ævar Arnfjörð [ Bjarmason]   10:26, 2004 Sep 10 (UTC)
 * I thought exactly the same about the "copyright" thing. Only problem with changing is that the template is - btw in contrast to the German one - protected, which is understandable. Any sysop around? :-) -- mkrohn 17:44, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Well i am, just post the thing here and i'll update it ( i would unprotect it, but i do not know the specific reasons for it so i wont to not step on anyones toes, guess these copyright messages are protected now ) Make sure you get it right the first time though as obsoleting the proxy for everything that links to it will cause some DB load. -- Ævar Arnfjörð [ Bjarmason]   17:50, 2004 Sep 10 (UTC)

-

O.k. let's see: this is the one from "de" (without adjusted links, that's why they are red atm):

this is the one from "en":

 * Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.
 * A copy of the license is included in the section entitled "Text of the GNU Free Documentation License".
 * Subject to disclaimers.

and this is the new one for "en":

The original "en" source code additionally includes a category link, please don't miss that!!! I have not copied it to this page. -- mkrohn 19:35, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Updated it. -- Ævar Arnfjörð [ Bjarmason]   21:10, 2004 Sep 10 (UTC)

How's this? It's more in line with the cc by sa template.

--Jiang 08:18, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Doesnt look that good, first the logo is too wide and too small and it's not an official logo unlike the CC logos, if you look at the GFDL page you'll see that the official one is the GNU head. -- Ævar Arnfjörð [ Bjarmason]   15:37, 2004 Sep 11 (UTC)

Comments
I made a new version which uses a wikified link to the licence and removed the following text: "A copy of the license is included in the section entitled "Text of the GNU Free Documentation License"" -- Ævar Arnfjörð [ Bjarmason]   21:25, 2004 Sep 11 (UTC)

Cool, I like it. It's more streamlined. --Sonjaaa 21:33, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC):Ia
 * I agree. -- mkrohn 12:31, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The white box bothers me. Can it be made transparent? --Farside 12:42, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Category
I have removed the category from this template. The text was. This category is approaching an unmanagable size. --ssd 12:25, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Categories may one day have a use other than for listings in the category: namespace - this page was never going to be small, but you don't break the back-end of a system, just because the front-end is working. ed g2s  •  talk  15:43, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Could someone add a blank line to the top?
Otherwise it breaks code like: This is my summer photo.

-->

This is my summer photo.

And also Template:PD-USGov, Thanks, — Matt 13:33, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Since User:Mfc opposes the use of on all his GFDL-licensed image description pages (because it is too obtrusive and too much legalese), I created a slimmed , which can be used in such cases. The template includes the GFDL images category. Discuss this on Template_talk:GFDL-small. — David Remahl 17:37, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't see the need for two different versions. Either the one or the other, but not both. If the smaller one is legally sufficent, which I can't judge, than it's fine with me to replace this template with the small one. Otherwise I object introducing a second one--what happens if another user wants another template for his images? Also it makes automatic classification of content more difficult. -- mkrohn 19:25, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Presumably, the checking of the GFDL box when submitting a work for which you hold copyright is legally sufficient, which is what User:Mfc argues. I also want to limit the number of copyright tags; however, if someone _definitely_ does not want the GFDL template on his/her image description page, then automatic classification becomes _impossible_. Personally, I find the verbose copyright status blobs informational, and I think that the image description pages should be used mostly for book-keeping. In contrast, Mfc thinks that they take up too much space and detract from the information about the images. — David Remahl 19:36, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Oh, and I believe the category system should be the main way of extracting lists of images with certain licensing properties, not the tags in and by themselves. — David Remahl 20:02, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Modification of the GFDL is prohibited, so adding the disclaimers to the license invalidates the license. Fortunately, the license grant is really GFDL and it's just the template which is wrong, so it's not really a mass copyright infringment. But it's nice to accurately describe the license, as required by it. Alternatively, a new, non-GFDL (and inherently incompatible with the GFDL), license could be created which incorporates the disclaimers. Jamesday 03:04, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I should clarify this a little: Warranty disclaimers are fine in association with the GFDL. However, the Wikipedia site disclaimers which the GFDL notice currently links to appear to exceed a warranty disclaimer and hence appear to be an attempt to modify the GFDL. A GFDL-specific disclaimer, limited to only what fits in a warranty disclaimer, would be fine. Jamesday 12:13, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Could you please comment my reasoning at User talk:Rfl on the additional restrictions added to the GFDL (“the author demands that his name be quoted under the image wherever it is posted”) in the User:Halibutt/GFDL template? Can those images be included in the Category:GFDL images? Thanks. Rafał Pocztarski 13:13, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Probably not what you expected.:) Here's the reply for him from the talk page for that template: You should probably modify this so that it makes what you're asking more clear in GFDL terms. I suggest:
 * That you use a copyright notice, which the GFDL says must be preserved and distributed with the work. A notice of the form (c in a circle character) 2004 (your name) would suffice in most countries. If you want a valid copyright notice in the two minor countries which require it for a valid copyright notice, also include "All rights reserved".
 * You may also use moral rights and require that in moral rights jurisdictions your name be associated with your work. In those jurisdictions that is a right distinct from copyright and does not interfere with the license.

''In general, it's also good on Wikipedia to identify photographers in a standard photo credit identifying the photographer. If you see an image for which we don't have the photographer properly credited, please add the appropriate credit.''

In addition, in a moral rights jurisdiction for text, I expect that all authors of any substantive part of an article may exert their moral rights to require that their name be associated with their work. Typo corrections aren't the sort of thing which is usually substantive. Jamesday 22:57, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * To be precise, it was not a reply from me, but a comment from you ;) . Also, I agree with your ideas, but I still have no idea how to include them in the comment. Any suggestions as to the wording? [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 14:16, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Doesn't matter now, I hadn't noticed that you inserted the remark in my tag. Thanks for your help! Halibutt 14:24, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

Sharp GNU Head
I have uploaded a different version of the GNU Head logo which doesn’t look blurry after downscaling, like the one used currently:

old→ ←new

just have to be changed to  but I don’t have privileges to do it myself. Please see Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. Rafał Pocztarski 05:44, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * It has already been changed by Quadell. Thanks. Rafał Pocztarski 05:51, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

is the better option as far as commons is concerned. I'm just wandering around replacing the other GNU heads with it right now. Janizary 02:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Image and category removed
Acting as a developer I've removed both the image and category from this template until MediaWiki 1.4 is in service on this wiki. Their presence caused a denial of service attack warning and mass query kill on the main database server for the sites at a low traffic time. Mediawiki has some changes which should make it possible to add them back without DOSing the sites. Jamesday 11:35, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Things which *do* have invariant sections
I've noticed at least one image that had an invariant section on it, but was tagged with this template (Image:AsimovOnThrone.png). Since this template specifically says that there are no invariant sections or cover texts, I created a new template, Template:Non-free GFDL-invariants, which seemed more appropriate. This seemed like the best solution to me, but if there's another way that people want to handle this, I'm very open to suggestions. -- Creidieki 13:38, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Subject to disclaimers!?
I think is a nonsense to merge the GFDL license whit a note about diclaimers. The license must be alone, with no modification. Does the GFDL allow this think? I say NO.

Please remove this message from the template, the GFDL must be the same here, at Commons and all the Wikimedia projects.

See also: commons:MediaWiki_talk:Licenses

Thanks. --Sanbec 08:23, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with you that the disclaimer should be removed. It's already on the bottom of every page. Superm401 | Talk 22:17, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I have removed the disclaimer. The GFDL is not subject to Wikipedia's disclaimers, only users of Wikipedia are. Also removed from GFDL-self-Splash talk 17:19, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

The GFDL specifically states
 * "The Document may include Warranty Disclaimers next to the notice which states that this License applies to the Document. These Warranty Disclaimers are considered to be included by reference in this License, but only as regards disclaiming warranties: any other implication that these Warranty Disclaimers may have is void and has no effect on the meaning of this License."

and that you must
 * "Preserve any Warranty Disclaimers."

I'm not sure, but I think that means you can't remove the silly disclaimers from this template. Life would be much simpler if that bit had never been added to this template, but it's too late to remove it now. dbenbenn | talk 22:30, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok, that's fairly persausive. You didn't to roll me back like a common vandal, though. An edit summary takes approximately 5 seconds. -Splash talk 22:59, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

My eyes! The goggles do nothing!
No offense, but I think that the old version looked better. --Ixfd64 20:21, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Interwiki link to vi:
Please add an interwiki link to the Vietnamese version of this template:

vi:Tiêu bản:GFDL

Thanks.

– Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 01:42, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. -Splash talk 01:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

"Subject to disclaimers" leads to compability issues
The "subject to disclaimers" lead to compability issues when transferring images to other Wikipedia projects or to Commons. I thought all material on Wikipedia was released under GFDL, not under GFDL-en? Should other Wikipedia projects change their license to "GFDL-en " too? Can other Wikipedia projects also write their own "GFDL-en"? How do you treat works released on other Wikipedia projects without disclaimers when moved to Commons and used on English Wikipedia?

Fred-Chess 11:46, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:GFDL-en redirection
Is an identical version and I propose that this page be redirected to it. This is a first step in gradual conversion of GFDL to GFDL-no-disclaimers. The disclaimer needs to be preserved as per GFDL, but any newer image does not have to have the license (and if it does there will be a template for it). -- Cat out 16:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Interwiki link to bs
Can someone add interwiki link to bs:Šablon:GFDL? --Emx 19:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

eu interwiki
Please, add the next interwiki if it is possible: eu:Txantiloi:GDFL. Thanks. --81.39.61.206 09:48, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]] Done --  Netsnipe  ►  12:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Spanish Interwiki
please add es:Plantilla:GFDL, thanks, --Cacuija (my talk) 15:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. -Splash - tk 21:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Interwiki request
Please add the interwiki for Interlingua:

ia:Patrono:GFDL

 * Change made per your request. -- Renesis (talk) 00:35, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Vetting
The images covered by this template need to be thoroughly vetted. I have noticed several images that are either copyrighted by corporations (and thus may be covered by promotional or fair use. However, the most common scenario I have found is that people are too lazy to tag U.S. government images properly, and so public domain images that belong in PD-USGov-Military-Navy (for example) are tagged with GFDL because someone didn't want to do the work. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 15:04, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki changes and fixes
I have a series of interwiki edits to propose: Jesse Viviano 02:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Please move the Spanish interwiki (es:Plantilla:GFDL) and the Interlingua interwiki (ia:Patrono:GFDL) to Template:GFDL-no-disclaimers. The Spanish and Interlingua templates have no disclaimers on them, so Template:GFDL is the wrong place for them.
 * Please fix the Basque interwiki. It points to eu:Txantiloi:GDFL, which is a clear character transposition. It should be eu:Txantiloi:GFDL.
 * Add bs:Šablon:GFDL, as proposed above.
 * Add zh-min-nan:Template:GFDL. This one has disclaimers.
 * Done. Luigi30 (Taλk) 13:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

It looks like my first request was misinterpreted. I meant that the Spanish and the Interlingua interwikis should be removed from this template because they have no disclaimers, and should be placed on. Now, the interwikis go to nonexistent pages. Jesse Viviano 20:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I've applied WP:DOC here. Please edit the doc page to adjust the interwikis. --Ligulem 13:06, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Untitled
Please add these interwikis. They have no disclaimers. Jesse Viviano 02:25, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * als:Vorlage:Bild-GFDL
 * cs:Šablona:GFDL
 * de:Vorlage:Bild-GFDL
 * fr:Modèle:GFDL
 * pt:Predefinição:CopyrightGFDL
 * sv:Mall:GFDL
 * Please edit the doc page to adjust the interwikis. --Ligulem 13:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Please update to include more interwiki links like the ones included on the commons version of the template. Thanks, Yonatan (contribs/talk) 00:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ Done. — M ETS 501 (talk) 21:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Heh, I suppose it doesn't *really* matter but there are two instances of a spanish interwiki in the template and the link to he (hebrew wikipedia) is in the wrong place. Yonatan (contribs/talk) 22:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

✅ Done - Harryboyles 03:13, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Icon Size
I couldn't help but notice that (at least in my browser) our friend Heckert's head is a little smaller on this template than on the others. I recommend fixing the icon size for consistency's sake. MithrandirMage 03:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What size are you suggesting? John Reaves (talk) 07:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I have changed the image size from 48px to 64px, same as the images on GFDL and GFDL-with-disclaimers and all the others I could find. James086 Talk  09:27, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I fear there was a reason for that. For those of us with sufficiently wide screens that the text takes up two lines or fewer, the icon now pokes out of the bottom of the box. The best way to fix this is probably to add a "height" attribute to the div, rather than just making the icon smaller again – Qxz 07:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * editprotected The edit appears to already be made. This template has the same appearance as the other two GFDL templates. CMummert · talk 14:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes. It wasn't a problem for me, the div box was just stretched to fit the image (the text only takes up 2 lines on my screen). I changed the min-height value to 64px so that it will never be shorter than the image, has it worked? see diff . James086 Talk 09:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Code updates
I've added the protection tag and changed the template to use tables instead of div's for stack-ability purposes. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:49, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Imbox standardization
Please change the template code to the following for purposes for Imbox standardization. Kelly hi! 23:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

GFDL 1.3
Because of some changes in GFDL 1.3 shouldn't this template be updated to warn about externally sourced GFDL images uploaded after Nov 1st 2008?. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

How to use without the CC-BY-SA box?
How do you use this template without showing the box below saying "If this file is eligible for relicensing, it may also be used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license."? It is redundant when there already is an additional template. Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:17, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 *   --Denniss (talk) 18:15, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Mikael Häggström (talk) 18:18, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Images of non-free works
I've implemented a tweak in the sandbox version, namely instead of coding free media directly. Specfiying dw=yes will supress the categorisation in Category:All free media, for derivative works where the subject shown is non-free, and thus can't be moved to Commons.

It would be appreciated if this straightforward change was implemented in the main template. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:11, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done. Please remember to update the docs as well. Thanks — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 11:53, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Dw param to migration code
Sandbox has updated version which needs review to ensure dw param passed to additional templates added by the migration code.Sfan00 IMG (talk)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: This isn't necessary - all the dw parameter would do would be to add the free media template in the daughter template, and that is already done in this template with the present code. If you would like the dw parameter to have different functionality in the daughter template code in the future, I might understand, however. Feel free to reactivate the request if that is the case. Best — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 02:29, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

 * The dw param is passed to the daughter template (and down the template stack), otherwise the added cc-by-sa tag added by license migration complete won't know to suppress the relevant categorisation. That's why it was being passed down the template stack. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 07:30, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Deprecating GFDL
GFDL is not good for media per File:BD-propagande colour en.jpg and WMF decided in 2009 to stop using GFDL as a sole license. WMF did not forbid GFDL for media files but encourages people to use other licenses than GFDL.

English Wikipedia have removed GFDL from MediaWiki:Licenses and MediaWiki:Licenses/en-ownwork but it is still possible for users to add it manually.

WMF suggested that wikis restrict the use of GFDL and in september 2018 is was suggested to deprecate the GFDL license the same way Commons did. There was not concensus to forbid GFDL on English Wikipedia at that time.

As I understand it the 2 main arguments against was:
 * 1) If a website or a book is licensed GFDL then we can't copy it to Wikipedia
 * 2) We have a lot of non-free files so why should we not allow GFDL?

The counter arguments agains that was:
 * 1) Noone but Wikipedia uses GFDL so the GFDL files are only uploaded by wikipedians that uses the GFDL as a sort of non-commercial license
 * 2)

Does anyone know a more recent discussion of the topic? --MGA73 (talk) 19:17, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
 * you were very active in the discussion do you know any more recent discussion? I was thinking perhaps to try again in a modified version where there is an exception that allow GFDL if it is allready published as GFDL somewhere else (as a book or on an official website). That should meet the first argument against. --MGA73 (talk) 08:42, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm unaware of other discussions about it. That exception was also included on Commons and should include (like on Commons) a deadline. On Commons that deadline was 15 October 2018. The reason for that is that otherwise a photographer could easily tag on a GFDL license to the photos on their own website or add a note to their Flickr profile. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 09:04, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * thank you. Yes I agree that there needs to be a deadline when/if a new proposal is made. I also know that users can try to get around it by first uploading it to a website. That could perhaps be prevented by the way the proposal is worded. I think if we want to change policy we need to take it in small steps to get concensus. --MGA73 (talk) 10:32, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

GFDL restriction have now been added to Image_use_policy as a result of the discussion/proposal. --MGA73 (talk) 15:30, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

title: Template talk:GFDL


text:
Connecticut Colony

The Connecticut Colony or Colony of Connecticut, originally known as the Connecticut River Colony or simply the River Colony, was an English colony in New England which later became the state of Connecticut. It was organized on March 3, 1636 as a settlement for a Puritan congregation, and the English permanently gained control of the region in 1637 after struggles with the Dutch. The colony was later the scene of a bloody war between the colonists and Pequots known as the Pequot War. Connecticut Colony played a significant role in the establishment of self-government in the New World with its refusal to surrender local authority to the Dominion of New England, an event known as the Charter Oak incident which occurred at Jeremy Adams' inn and tavern.

Two other English settlements in Connecticut were merged into the Colony of Connecticut: Saybrook Colony in 1644 and New Haven Colony in 1662.

Leaders
Thomas Hooker delivered a sermon to his congregation on May 31, 1638, on the principles of government, and it influenced those who wrote the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut later that year. The Fundamental Orders may have been drafted by Roger Ludlow of Windsor, the only trained lawyer living in Connecticut in the 1630s; they were transcribed into the official record by secretary Thomas Welles. The Reverend John Davenport and merchant Theophilus Eaton led the founders of the New Haven Colony, which was absorbed into Connecticut Colony in the 1660s.

In the colony's early years, the governor could not serve consecutive terms, so the governorship rotated for 20 years between John Haynes and Edward Hopkins, both of whom were from Hartford. George Wyllys, Thomas Welles, and John Webster, also Hartford men, sat in the governor's chair for brief periods in the 1640s and 1650s.

John Winthrop the Younger of New London was the son of the founder of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, and he played an important role in consolidating separate settlements into a single colony on the Connecticut River. He also served as Governor of Connecticut from 1659 to 1675, and he was instrumental in obtaining the colony's 1662 charter which incorporated New Haven into Connecticut. His son Fitz-John Winthrop also governed the colony for 10 years starting in 1698.

Major John Mason was the military leader of the early colony. He was the commander in the Pequot War, a magistrate, and the founder of Windsor, Saybrook, and Norwich. He was also Deputy Governor under Winthrop. Roger Ludlow was an Oxford-educated lawyer and former Deputy Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. He petitioned the General Court for rights to settle the area, and he led the March Commission in settling disputes over land rights. He is credited as drafting the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut (1650) in collaboration with Hooker, Winthrop, and others. He was also the first Deputy Governor of Connecticut.

William Leete of Guilford served as president of New Haven Colony before its merger into Connecticut, and he also served as governor of Connecticut following Winthrop's death in 1675. He is the only man to serve as governor of both New Haven and Connecticut. Robert Treat of Milford served as governor of the colony, both before and after its inclusion in the Dominion of New England under Sir Edmund Andros. His father Richard Treat was one of the original patentees of the colony. Roger Wolcott was a weaver, statesman, and politician from Windsor, and he served as governor from 1751 to 1754. Oliver Wolcott was a signer of the Declaration of Independence and also of the Articles of Confederation, as a representative of Connecticut and the nineteenth governor. He was a major general for the Connecticut Militia in the Revolutionary War serving under George Washington.

Religion
The original colonies along the Connecticut River and in New Haven were established by separatist Puritans who were connected with the Massachusetts and Plymouth colonies. They held Calvinist religious beliefs similar to the English Puritans, but they maintained that their congregations needed to be separated from the English state church. They had immigrated to New England during the Great Migration. In the middle of the 18th century, the government restricted voting rights with a property qualification and a church membership requirement. Congregationalism was the established church in the colony by the time of the American Civil War.

Economic and social history
The economy began with subsistence farming in the 17th century and developed with greater diversity and an increased focus on production for distant markets, especially the British colonies in the Caribbean. The American Revolution cut off imports from Britain and stimulated a manufacturing sector that made heavy use of the entrepreneurship and mechanical skills of the people. In the second half of the 18th century, difficulties arose from the shortage of good farmland, periodic money problems, and downward price pressures in the export market. In agriculture, there was a shift from grain to animal products. The colonial government attempted to promote various commodities as export items from time to time, such as hemp, potash, and lumber, in order to bolster its economy and improve its balance of trade with Great Britain.

Connecticut's domestic architecture included a wide variety of house forms. They generally reflected the dominant English heritage and architectural tradition.

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

title: Connecticut Colony


text:
User talk:Verit

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. You can introduce yourself on the new user page.

Here's some tips:
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.
 * If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page.

Other useful pages are: how to edit, how to write a great article, naming conventions, manual of style and the Wikipedia policies.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Angela. 21:40, Feb 20, 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Verit


text:
The Best of Both Worlds (Jay-Z and R. Kelly album)

The Best of Both Worlds is the first collaborative album by Jay-Z and R. Kelly. It was released on March 19, 2002 through Roc-A-Fella, The Island Def Jam Music Group, Rockland Records and Jive Records. The production on the album was primarily handled by R. Kelly and Poke and Tone, but also features production by Megahertz and Charlemagne. The album also features guest appearances by Beanie Siegel, Lil' Kim and Devin the Dude.

The Best of Both Worlds was supported by three singles: "Honey", "Get This Money" and "Take You Home with Me a.k.a. Body". The album debuted at number two on the US Billboard 200 chart, selling 223,000 copies in its first week. Despite this, critical reception was generally mixed.

Singles
The album spawned three singles from its songs. The first single, "Honey" was released on January 16, 2002 as the lead single for the album. It was produced by R. Kelly and Poke and Tone. The song contains a sample of "Love You Inside Out" by the Bee Gees. The single failed to chart on the US Billboard Hot 100 but managed to peak at number 35 on the UK Singles Chart. The second single, "Get this Money" was released in March 2002. The third single, "Take You Home with Me a.k.a. Body" was released on May 21, 2002. Both of which failed to chart.

Critical reception
The album received generally mixed reviews from music critics. Some critics praised the album while others gave it poor reviews. Jason Birchmeier of AllMusic stated that "while the idea of a collaborative album was a reasonable one, the album falls terribly short of both artists' high standards". He also called the album uninspired and claims it "rates among the poorest efforts -- arguably the poorest -- in either Kelly's or Jay-Z's catalog to date." He gave the album a two star rating out of five.

Steve Jones of USA Today gave the album a better review, calling the album "falls short of genius". He claims "The two charismatic hitmakers mesh well and represent for their respective genres." In addition, he also believes that "They don't, however, really push each other to the next level or break the ground you might expect from this kind of meeting of the minds." He gave the album three out of four stars.

In retrospect, Jay-Z said: "I think the first The Best of Both Worlds is amazing".

Commercial performance
The Best of Both Worlds debuted at number two on the US Billboard 200 chart, selling 223,000 copies in its first week. This became Jay-Z's fifth US top-ten album and R. Kelly's fifth on the chart. In its second week, the album dropped to number four on the chart, selling an additional 137,000 copies. In its third week, the album dropped to number six on the chart, selling 82,000 more copies. On May 14, 2002, the album was certified platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) for shipments of over one million copies. In 2002, The Best of Both Worlds was ranked as the 99th most popular album in the US. As of November 2004, the album has sold 875,000 copies in the United States.

Track listing
Notes
 * undefined signifies a co-producer


text:
Virtua Fighter 4

Virtua Fighter 4 (バーチャファイター4) is a fighting game by Sega. It is the fourth game in the Virtua Fighter series.

The game was first released in arcades on the NAOMI 2 board in 2001. A console port of Virtua Fighter 4, as well as that of Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution appeared on the PlayStation 2 under the budget-priced "Greatest Hits" label in 2002 and 2003, respectively.

Gameplay
Virtua Fighter 4 became much more streamlined and user friendly than its predecessors, while expanding on old ideas and adding new techniques. The evasion system was revamped from Virtua Fighter 3, the evade button was removed, and evades were split into two types, successful and unsuccessful. When evades were not performed with the proper timing, they were unsuccessful leaving the fighter vulnerable. The evade + throw escape option select, which was an advanced technique discovered in Virtua Fighter 3, was expanded upon. Virtua Fighter 4 allowed the player to escape as many throws as they could, and lengthened the window for performing a successful throw escape during an [unsuccessful] evade. A new move type called a Sabaki was added; an attack that also doubles as a reversal versus one or more move types.

The two new characters, Vanessa Lewis and Lei-Fei, had moves that employed these properties significantly more than the returning cast, and were quite experimental for Virtua Fighter characters. Vanessa Lewis is a black Vale Tudo/Muay Thai kickboxer with two completely separate moves sets that can be switched between on the fly, and Lei-Fei, a Shaolin monk, employs many stances that flow into one another.

Taka-Arashi, one of the new characters added to Virtua Fighter 3, was omitted, apparently due to the developers not being able to make him work properly with the Virtua Fighter 4 system mechanics.

The fighting arenas reverted to the old Virtua Fighter style of flat and square, as opposed to Virtua Fighter 3's wild and undulating stage designs. The reason behind this was to make the game less random, and more balanced and competitive in nature. Walls, however, were kept and expanded upon with a wall stagger/juggle system and several wall types including high + unbreakable, low + breakable, and low + unbreakable + open corners. Some stages’ walls can be broken by knocking down the opponent while the latter is behind the wall and at low health, with the next round permanently leaves the stage's without a fence that have been broken.

Virtua Fighter 4 introduced a comprehensive training mode. The mode consisted of an encyclopedia of fighting game terms, complete character command list walkthroughs, tips on all of the game's mechanics, recommended character combos, alternative options for failed combos, detailed command input timings, slow motion for frame counting and timing, and other useful training tips.

VF4's training mode consists of three sections: "Free Training", "Trial Mode", and "Command Training", A complete run through each move, one-by-one. The command for the move is displayed and the player executes the command—moving to the next one. VF4 allows the option to skip the current command, view the move (computer controlled), enable advice.

A unique feature in Evolution was the ability to play in a tournament quest mode, where the concept was that the player was competing by traveling to various arcades, as opposed to role-playing as the player's chosen fighter. This mode was very popular due to the ability to buy cosmetic items to customize a character, as well as the ability to name a character. Many players of fighting games have unique styles; with the combination of various items allowing for vastly differing appearances a new depth of uniqueness was added. In addition, Sega took the top tournament players from the arcade version, and captured their style of play for the AI of a player's opponents for this mode. For example, playing against one Wolf character would be very different from playing another, because the actual player that character's AI was programmed to mimic had a unique play style.

Characters
New characters are marked below in bold: • Akira Yuki

• Aoi Umenokoji

• Brad Burns

• Dural

• Goh Hinogami

• Jacky Bryant

• Jeffry McWild

• Kage-Maru

• Lau Chan

• Lei-Fei

• Lion Rafale

• Pai Chan

• Sarah Bryant

• Shun Di

• Wolf Hawkfield

• Vanessa Lewis

Plot
Virtua Fighter 4 and Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution have a two-part storyline. VF4 started out with thirteen fighters entering the tournament for their own personal reasons, while Judgement Six used them for gathering data for Dural. Evolution adds two more fighters to the mix, one of them works for Judgement Six who is ordered to kill everyone in the tournament.

It was also revealed that for the Dural project, Judgement Six targeted Sarah Bryant as their next volunteer for a new Dural model. Akira fell short during the third tournament. In order to find out what the "real power" was within him, he enters the fourth tournament to find that answer. Pai discovers that her skill was close to her father's despite her loss in the third tournament. After hearing that Lau was looking for a successor and has a terminal illness, she enters the tournament to prove that she is a worthy successor to master her father's style. Lau suffered a terrible illness that cannot be cured after losing to Kage-Maru in the third tournament. He enters the tournament to find a worthy successor to Koen-Ken. Wolf still has reoccurring nightmares since the end of the second tournament. After losing in the third tournament, he ignored the dream but it kept coming back. He enters the fourth tournament to find out what that meant. Jeffry finally gained enough money to repair his boat, but there was only one problem: the Satan Shark mysteriously disappeared. He enters the tournament to invest in a sonar device for the shark.

Kage-Maru won the third tournament and found a part from the new Dural model that would cure his mother. It result in his mother transforming into Dural once again and attacking him. Since Judgement Six saved her, Kage enters the tournament to kill Dural once and for all. Sarah regained her memories and lived a quiet life with her brother, until she had flashbacks of the time where she was brainwashed by Judgement Six and attempted to kill Jacky. She enters the tournament to defeat him and resolve the matter. Jacky turned his focus to racing after the end of the third tournament, where he formed his own racing team. However, Judgement Six killed one of his sponsors and they will continue unless Jacky enters the fourth tournament. He decides to enter the tournament to once again take down Judgement Six. Shun was unsuccessful on finding his missing student during the third tournament. It was revealed that his student was trying to escape from Judgement Six, but he was recaptured by the evil organization. He enters the fourth tournament to find more information about the missing student.

Lion enters the fourth tournament in order to once again try to win the title. Aoi did not last long in the first round of the third tournament. She enters the fourth tournament to try her new skills in parrying and counterattacking. Lei-Fei entered the fourth tournament to become the successor to Lau's Koen-Ken style of martial arts. His true intention is to kill Lau after he learned his style under the clan's orders. Vanessa joins the fourth tournament to protect Sarah from Judgement Six, and to avenge the murder of her mentor, Lewis. Brad entered the fourth tournament after dominating the Muay Thai Kickboxing world. Goh infiltrated the fourth tournament under Judgement Six orders to kill everyone. The 4th tournament had come down to one final fight between Kage-Maru and Shun Di, but as Kage was about to deliver the final blow to Shun, the glowing, silver form of Dural interrupted the match. Kage is the winner, but he discovers that the Dural he fought is not his mother.

Development
Like previous Virtua Fighter titles, the game's development was led by Yu Suzuki.

The Naomi 2 arcade version uses about 12,000 polygons per character, and 50,000 polygons for the backgrounds. It also reportedly uses 128 MB of texture data. For the PlayStation 2 port, the graphical detail was reduced, particularly in terms of texture details.

In Japan, Virtua Fighter 4 is famous for spearheading and opening the market for internet functionality in arcades. VF.NET started in Japan in 2001, and since companies have created their own arcade networks, e-Amusement by Konami, NESiCAxLive by Taito and Square Enix, and ALL.Net by Sega.

Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution
Evolution was an updated version of Virtua Fighter 4. The game introduced two new characters and adjusted every other character as well. The two new characters were the Judoka-assassin Goh Hinogami and the Muay Thai boxer Brad Burns. With the addition of Brad Burns, Vanessa Lewis's alternate Muay Thai style from Virtua Fighter 4 was removed and replaced with a Vale Tudo "Offensive" style; making her a solely Vale Tudo brawler. In the US, the PlayStation 2 version was only released as part of the Greatest Hits budget range.

All of the stages were adjusted. For example, Lei-Fei's stage in Virtua Fighter 4 previously took place during sunset, in Evolution it takes place during the morning.

Features:
 * Improved graphics: better anti-aliasing.
 * New item store in Quest Mode.
 * Currency system in Quest Mode.
 * Opponent tracking log in Quest Mode: kept track of which opponents were fought in Quest Mode.
 * Increased number of character items.
 * Improved ranking system.
 * Special gameplay modes (i.e. Hyper Fighter, See-Saw, Wrestler's, etc.).
 * Emblem collecting: placed special incentive to defeat certain opponents or to avoid being defeated by certain opponents.
 * New ring type; Semi-open/semi-walled.
 * In Quest Mode, one of the tournaments is called the Sonic Cup. Its logo shows Sonic surrounded by rings.

In the US, Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution for PlayStation 2 also included Virtua Fighter 10th Anniversary as a bonus.

Virtua Fighter 10th Anniversary
With the 2003 PlayStation 2 release of Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution arriving in time for the series' 10th anniversary, a remake of Virtua Fighter, Virtua Fighter 10th Anniversary, was released exclusively on the PlayStation 2. While the music, stages and low-polygon visual style were retained from the first game, the character roster, animations, mechanics and movesets were taken from Evolution. In the previous PS2 release of Virtua Fighter 4, a button code would make the player's character look like a VF1 model. In Japan, the game was included as part of a box set with a book called Virtua Fighter 10th Anniversary: Memory of a Decade and a DVD. The box set was released in November 2003 and was published by Enterbrain. In North America, the game was included within the home version of Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution, and in Europe it was only available as a promotional item; it was not sold at retail.

Virtua Fighter 4: Final Tuned
Final Tuned is the final update to Virtua Fighter 4. This version of the game was released only into Japanese arcades, and it made some gameplay fixes and added new stages. Also, new customization items were added.

Arcade
In Japan, Game Machine listed Virtua Fighter 4 on their September 15, 2001 issue as being the most-successful arcade game of the month.

In July 2001, IGN's Anthony Chau praised the graphics of the arcade game, stating it is "one of the finest looking video games I've laid my eyes on" and "demonstrates the highest quality in visuals I've seen."

PlayStation 2
In Japan, the PlayStation 2 version sold 500,000 units during its first weekend on sale in early 2002, making it Sega's fastest-selling game of that generation. The PlayStation 2 version went on to sell 541,973 units overall in Japan by the end of 2002. Worldwide sales of the PS2 port exceeded 1.5 million by June 2002. By July 2006, Virtua Fighter 4 had sold 630,000 copies and earned $23 million in the United States. Next Generation ranked it as the 97th highest-selling game launched for the PlayStation 2, Xbox or GameCube between January 2000 and July 2006 in that country. Combined sales of the Virtua Fighter 4 line reached 1 million units in the United States by July 2006.

On release, Famitsu magazine scored the PlayStation 2 version of the game a 37 out of 40. The game received universal critical acclaim (Metacritic 94/100), with perfect scores from GMR Magazine, PSX Nation, Hot Games, GamePro, G4 TV, Official PlayStation Magazine, Into Liquid Sky, and Cinescape. G4 TV called it "The best fighting experience available on home consoles." Writing for the Chicago Tribune, Levi Buchanan hailed Virtua Fighter 4 as "the greatest fighting game since Street Fighter II." Game Informer gave the PS2 release a 9.75/10, opining that "Underneath its silky shine is a feast of fighting goodies that will change everything you have ever come to expect from this genre." Game Informer later named Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution one of "The Top 50 Games of 2003," calling it "absolutely ingenious" and "the most balanced and challenging fighting game the world has ever seen." GameSpot named Virtua Fighter 4 the best video game of March 2002, and Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution the best PlayStation 2 game of August 2003. During the 6th Annual Interactive Achievement Awards, the Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences (AIAS) nominated Virtua Fighter 4 for "Console Fighting Game of the Year", which ultimately lost to Tekken 4. At the following year's awards ceremony, AIAS also nominated Evolution for "Console Fighting Game of the Year" as well; however, it would ultimately lose out to Soulcalibur II.

Edge noted in retrospect that "Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution was unchallenged in having the best tutorial in fighting game history."

title: Virtua Fighter 4


text:
Newburg, Michigan

Newburg is the name of two places in the U.S. state of Michigan:

 * Newburg, Lenawee County, Michigan:
 * Newburg, Shiawassee County, Michigan

title: Newburg, Michigan


text:
Lavra

A lavra or laura (Λαύρα; Cyrillic: Ла́вра) is a type of monastery consisting of a cluster of cells or caves for hermits, with a church and sometimes a refectory at the center. Lavra monasteries operate within the Orthodox and other Eastern Christian traditions; the name is also used by some Catholic communities. The term in Greek initially meant a narrow lane or an alley in a city.

Byzantine laura/lavra
From the fifth century the Greek term laura could refer specifically to the semi-eremitical monastic settlements of the Judaean Desert, where lauras were very numerous. The first lauras of Palestine were founded by Chariton the Confessor (born 3rd century, died c. 350): the Laura of Pharan (now Wadi Qelt) northeast of Jerusalem, the Laura of Douka on the Mount of Temptation west of Jericho, and Souka Laura or Old Laura in the area of Tuqu' in Wadi Khureitun.

Saint Euthymius the Great (377–473) founded one of the early lauras in fifth-century Palestine. The Lavra of Saint Sabbas the Sanctified (†532) in the Kidron Valley (known in Syriac as Mar Saba), is one of the most ancient and almost continuously functioning monasteries in the Christian Church.

Gerasimus of the Jordan established a similar system in the Jordan Valley in the middle of the fifth century, with 70 cells surrounding a cenobium and with monks progressing into the cells after time spent in the cenobium. Weekdays were spent in the cells, accompanied only by a rush mat, a small amount of food and palm blades with which to make ropes and baskets. On Saturdays the monks would bring their handiwork to the cenobium and receive the Eucharist together, returning to their cells on Sunday evening. Cells were left open, and those in need could take whatever they wished from a cell if it were found empty. The lavra had a priest, the lavra's contact with the outside world, and at least two ordained deacons.

The Great Lavra founded by Athanasius the Athonite in 963 is the oldest monastery on Mount Athos in Greece.

Coptic tradition
Some modern Coptic authors, and they alone, already apply the specific Greek term lavra to even earlier monastic settlements from the Wadi El Natrun and even attribute the writing down of the formal rules of a lavra to the Egyptian sanctified monk Macarius of Egypt in AD 330. Unless proven otherwise by future scholarship, this opinion seems to be theirs alone.

Their claim is that the lavrite style of living has its origins in the early fourth century, by equating the creation of the first lavras with the founding of a settlement of cells in the Nitrean desert at a site known as Nitria, named for the nearby town of the same name (near Alexandria in Egypt). It was a community of 600 hermits who lived scattered over the area, reliant on the town of Nitria for bread, but with their own priest and church.

Russian lavras
The largest and the most important Russian Orthodox monasteries have been called lavras and became subordinated directly to the Patriarch of Moscow. In 1721 they became subordinated to the Most Holy Synod.

Some notable lavras
A list of lavras of different types.

 * Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople:
 * Great Lavra, Mount Athos (10th century):
 * Georgian Orthodox Church:
 * David Gareja monastery complex (since 1505)
 * Church of Greece:
 * Agia Lavra (since 961)
 * Greek Orthodox Church of Jerusalem:
 * Mar Saba (532)
 * Polish Orthodox Church:
 * Supraśl Orthodox Monastery (since 1505)
 * Romanian Orthodox Church:
 * Neamț Monastery (since 15th century)
 * Russian Orthodox Church:
 * Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius (since 1744)
 * Alexander Nevsky Lavra (since 1797)
 * Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church:
 * Pochaiv Lavra (since mid-18th century )
 * Univ Lavra (since 1898)
 * Ukrainian Orthodox Church:
 * Kyiv Pechersk Lavra (since 1051)
 * Pochaiv Lavra (since 1833)
 * Sviatohirsk Lavra (since 2004)

title: Lavra


text:
The Satanic Bible

The Satanic Bible is a collection of essays, observations, and rituals published by Anton LaVey in 1969. It is the central religious text of LaVeyan Satanism, and is considered the foundation of its philosophy and dogma. It has been described as the most important document to influence contemporary Satanism. Though The Satanic Bible is not considered to be sacred scripture in the way that the Christian Bible is to Christianity, LaVeyan Satanists regard it as an authoritative text as it is a contemporary text that has attained for them scriptural status. It extols the virtues of exploring one's nature and instincts. Believers have been described as "atheistic Satanists" because they believe that God and Satan are not external entities, but rather projections of an individual's personality—benevolent and stabilizing forces in their life. There have been thirty printings of The Satanic Bible, selling over a million copies.

The Satanic Bible is composed of four books: The Book of Satan, The Book of Lucifer, The Book of Belial, and The Book of Leviathan. The Book of Satan challenges the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule, and promotes Epicureanism. The Book of Lucifer holds most of the philosophy in The Satanic Bible, with twelve chapters discussing topics such as indulgence, love, hate, and sex. LaVey also uses the book to dispel rumors surrounding the religion. In The Book of Belial, LaVey details rituals and magic. He discusses the required mindset and focus for performing a ritual, and provides instructions for three rituals: those for sex, compassion, or destruction. The Book of Leviathan provides four invocations for Satan, lust, compassion, and destruction. It also lists the nineteen Enochian Keys (adapted from John Dee's Enochian keys), provided both in Enochian and in English translation.

There have been both positive and negative reactions to The Satanic Bible. It has been described as "razor-sharp" and "influential". Criticism of The Satanic Bible stems both from qualms over LaVey's writing and disapproval of the content itself. LaVey has been criticized for plagiarizing sections, and accusations have been made that his philosophies are largely borrowed. Attempts have been made to ban the book in schools, public libraries, and prisons, though these attempts are somewhat rare.

History
There are multiple stories of the birth of The Satanic Bible. In the introduction to the 2005–present edition, High Priest Peter H. Gilmore describes LaVey as having compiled The Satanic Bible on his own from monographs he had written about the Church of Satan and its rituals. Gilmore lists a number of people who influenced LaVey's writings: Ayn Rand, Friedrich Nietzsche, H. L. Mencken, the members of the carnival with whom LaVey had supposedly worked in his youth, P. T. Barnum, Mark Twain, John Milton, and Lord Byron.

LaVey's daughter Zeena Schreck, in an exposé about both her father's religion and past, attributes the birth of The Satanic Bible to a suggestion by Peter Mayer, a publisher for Avon. According to Schreck, Mayer proposed that LaVey author a Satanic Bible to draw from the popularity of the 1968 horror film Rosemary's Baby, which had caused a recent rise in public interest in both Satanism and other occult practices. Schreck states that, aided by Diane Hegarty, LaVey compiled a number of writings he had already been distributing: an introduction to Satanism, a number of short essays, a guide to ritual magic, and articles he had previously published in The Cloven Hoof, a Church of Satan newsletter.

Either to meet length requirements set by the publisher or out of agreement with the ideas, LaVey and Hegarty borrowed heavily from writings by other authors. These included a social Darwinist book published in 1890 entitled Might Is Right by Ragnar Redbeard, as well as Dee's Enochian keys from Aleister Crowley's The Equinox, modified to replace references to Christianity with those to Satan. Some accuse LaVey of paraphrasing the Nine Satanic Statements from Rand's Atlas Shrugged without acknowledgement, though others maintain that LaVey was simply drawing inspiration from the novel. LaVey later affirmed the connection with Rand's ideas by stating that LaVeyan Satanism was "just Ayn Rand's philosophy, with ceremony and ritual added".

Importance
The Satanic Bible, has been described as the most important document to influence contemporary Satanism. The book contains the core principles of Satanism and is considered the foundation of its philosophy and dogma. Petersen noted that it is "in many ways the central text of the Satanic milieu", with Lap similarly testifying to its dominant position within the wider Satanic movement. David G. Bromley calls it "iconoclastic" and "the best-known and most influential statement of Satanic theology." Eugene V. Gallagher says that Satanists use LaVey's writings "as lenses through which they view themselves, their group, and the cosmos." He also states: "With a clear-eyed appreciation of true human nature, a love of ritual and pageantry, and a flair for mockery, LaVey's Satanic Bible promulgated a gospel of self-indulgence that, he argued, anyone who dispassionately considered the facts would embrace."

Publication history
Originally published in paperback by Avon in 1969, The Satanic Bible has had thirty printings and has never gone out of print. A hardcover edition was published by University Books that same year but has now been out of print for decades. In 2015, William Morrow published a new hardcover edition of the book combined in a single volume with its companion work, The Satanic Rituals, and marketed under a special arrangement by Rabid Crow Arts and Graphics. The main content has not changed throughout the editions, although the dedication was removed after several printings and the introduction has changed several times. The Sigil of Baphomet has been printed on the cover since the original publication. The Satanic Bible has sold over one million copies since its initial release. It has also been translated into Danish, Swedish, German, Spanish, Finnish and Turkish.

Content
Some of the teachings of the bible, according to the Washington Post, are
 * "Hate your enemies with a whole heart, and if a man smite you on one cheek, SMASH him on the other";
 * "Say unto thine own heart, I am mine own redeemer' ";
 * "There is no heaven of glory bright, and no hell where sinners roast."

Dedication
Though it is no longer included in current printings of The Satanic Bible, early printings included an extensive dedication to various people whom LaVey recognized as influences. LaVey's primary dedication was to Bernardino Nogara (misprinted as "Logara"), Karl Haushofer, Grigori Rasputin, Basil Zaharoff, Alessandro Cagliostro, Barnabas Saul (John Dee's first scryer), Ragnar Redbeard, William Mortensen, Hans Brick, Max Reinhardt, Orrin Klapp, Fritz Lang, Friedrich Nietzsche, W. C. Fields, P. T. Barnum, Hans Poelzig, Reginald Marsh, Wilhelm Reich, and Mark Twain. The secondary dedication named Howard Hughes, James Moody, Marcello Truzzi, Adrian‐Claude Frazier, Marilyn Monroe, Wesley Mather, William Lindsay Gresham, Hugo Zacchini, Jayne Mansfield, Frederick Goerner, C. Huntley, Nathanael West, Horatio Alger Jr., Robert E. Howard, George Orwell, H. P. Lovecraft, Tuesday Weld, H. G. Wells, Sister Marie Koven, Harry Houdini, Togare (LaVey's pet lion), and the Nine Unknown Men from The Nine Unknown.

Introductions
Throughout the various printings of The Satanic Bible, it has included introductions by various authors. The first edition (in print from 1969 to 1972) included an excerpt from an article by Burton H. Wolfe, an investigative journalist and biographer of LaVey, entitled "The Church that Worships Satan". Wolfe provides an extensive biography of LaVey and a history of the Church of Satan. He mentions Rosemary's Baby as contributing to the popularity of Satanism, though he does not claim LaVeyan Satanism to have directly influenced its creation. From 1972 until 1976, the introduction to The Satanic Bible was a piece by Michael A. Aquino, who later went on to found the Temple of Set with a number of members of the Church of Satan. He gives a detailed analysis of the Satanic philosophies, and dispels myths about LaVeyan Satanism. He explains that it is not "devil worship", and that LaVeyan Satanists in fact reject the worship of external gods completely. He too provides a brief background on LaVey, explaining how LaVey brought some of the knowledge he had acquired while working with the circus to his religion. Wolfe again wrote the introduction for the 1976 to 2005 editions of The Satanic Bible. It included some of the same content as the 1969 version, with an expanded biography of LaVey and more information on the various conflicts between other religions and LaVeyan Satanism. Since 2005, The Satanic Bible has contained an introduction written by Gilmore, High Priest of the Church of Satan. In this introduction, he discusses his discovery of LaVeyan Satanism and his relationship with LaVey. He then goes on to provide a detailed biography of LaVey and addresses allegations that LaVey falsified much of the story of his own past. The introduction also provides a history of The Satanic Bible itself, as well as that of two other books by LaVey: The Satanic Witch and The Satanic Rituals.

Preface
LaVey explains his reasons for writing The Satanic Bible in a short preface. He speaks skeptically about volumes written by other authors on the subject of magic, dismissing them as "nothing more than sanctimonious fraud" and "volumes of hoary misinformation and false prophecy". He complains that other authors do no more than confuse the subject. He mocks those who spend large amounts of money on attempts to follow rituals and learn about the magic shared in other occult books. He also notes that many of the existing writings on Satanic magic and ideology were created by "right-hand path" authors. He tells that The Satanic Bible contains both truth and fantasy, and declares, "What you see may not always please you, but you will see!"

Prologue
The prologue to The Satanic Bible begins by discussing the concept of gods, good and evil, and human nature. It includes the Nine Satanic Statements: "#Satan represents indulgence, instead of abstinence!
 * 1) Satan represents vital existence, instead of spiritual pipe dreams!
 * 2) Satan represents undefiled wisdom, instead of hypocritical self-deceit!
 * 3) Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it, instead of love wasted on ingrates!
 * 4) Satan represents vengeance, instead of turning the other cheek!
 * 5) Satan represents responsibility to the responsible, instead of concern for psychic vampires!
 * 6) Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his 'divine spiritual and intellectual development,' has become the most vicious animal of all!
 * 7) Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification!
 * 8) Satan has been the best friend the church has ever had, as he has kept it in business all these years!"

The Nine Satanic Statements outline the basic ideology of LaVeyan Satanism, and have become some of the guiding principles of LaVeyan Satanism. They also served as a template for later publications by LaVey, such as his 1987 "Nine Satanic Sins". Ayn Rand's influence on LaVeyan Satanism is apparent in the Nine Satanic Statements, leading some, namely Nikolas Schreck, to assert that the Statements are simply unacknowledged paraphrase of Rand's thoughts. These accusations have been disproved, however. He also inverts the typical blessings found in the Gospel of Matthew."‘Blessed are the strong, for they shall possess the earth; Cursed are the weak, for they shall inherit the yoke! . . . Blessed are the iron-handed, for the unfit shall flee before them; Cursed are the poor in spirit, for they shall be spat upon!’"

The Book of Satan
Much of the first book of The Satanic Bible is taken from parts of Redbeard's Might Is Right, edited to remove racism, antisemitism, and misogyny. It challenges both the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule, advocating instead a tooth-for-tooth philosophy. LaVey, through Redbeard, strongly advocates social Darwinism, saying, "Death to the weakling, wealth to the strong!" Humans are identified as instinctually predatory, and "lust and carnal desire" are singled out as part of humans' intrinsic nature. The Book of Satan suggests a hedonistic outlook, saying, "I break away from all conventions that do not lead to my earthly happiness." Indulgence is endorsed, and readers are encouraged to make the most of their lives. It criticizes both law and religious principles, instead suggesting doing only what makes one happy and successful. LaVey continues to denounce other religions, and he rails against what he considers to be arbitrary definitions of "good" and "evil". Religion is criticized as a man-made construct, and the reader is urged to question everything and destroy any lies that he or she uncovers. Long-standing lies that are believed to be irrefutable truths are identified as the most dangerous. The last part of The Book of Satan is an adaptation of the Christian Beatitudes, changed to reflect the principles of LaVeyan Satanism.

The Book of Lucifer
The Book of Lucifer contains the majority of the philosophy of The Satanic Bible. It details how Christianity has taught that God is good and Satan is evil, and presents an alternate view. It describes that the concept of Satan, used synonymously with "God", is different for each LaVeyan Satanist, but that to all it represents a good and steadying force in their life. Believers have been called "atheistic Satanists" because of this lack of belief in external gods, but others identify as antitheistic. Satan is seen to LaVeyan Satanists not as "an anthropomorphic being with cloven hooves, a barbed tail, and horns", but as a force of nature that has only been described as evil by other religions. Satan is viewed as a metaphor or a symbol, not as a being to be worshipped.

LaVey rejects the idea of prayer, instead urging Satanists to take action to fix a situation instead of asking for a solution. The seven deadly sins are advocated, on the basis that they all lead to personal pleasure. He says that Satanism is a form of "controlled selfishness", in the sense that doing something to help another will, in turn, make one happy. The Golden Rule is again mentioned, and LaVey suggests altering it from "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" to "Do unto others as they do unto you" so that if someone is treated poorly, he or she can respond viciously. The Book of Lucifer also contains a list of "The Four Crown Princes of Hell" (Satan, Lucifer, Belial, and Leviathan) and of seventy-seven "Infernal Names", representations of Satan from various cultures and religions. They are the names that, according to LaVey, are most useful in Satanic rituals.

The Book of Lucifer contains a long chapter titled "Satanic Sex", discussing Satanism's view on sexual activity as well as misconceptions surrounding these views. He denies the belief that sex is the most important element in LaVeyan Satanism, and that participation in orgies or other promiscuous behavior is forced. He explains that sexual freedom is encouraged, but only in the sense that believers should be free to explore their own sexualities as they please, without harming others. Along with the rumors regarding Satanic views on sex, LaVey also addresses those about animal and human sacrifice. He explains that the only time a LaVeyan Satanist would perform a human sacrifice would be to accomplish two goals: to "release the magician's wrath" as he or she performed a curse, and to kill someone who deserved to die. He considers the action of hurting another person a request to be destroyed and explains that the Satanist is morally required to grant this request in the form of a curse. LaVey also says that a Satanist would never sacrifice a baby or an animal, as they are pure carnal beings and considered to be sacred. In The Book of Lucifer, LaVey outlines LaVeyan Satanism's views on death. He explains that one who has lived a full life will dread death and that this is the way it should be. He also does not agree with the idea of reincarnation. He encourages a strong will to live, comparing it to animals' instincts to fight viciously for their lives. Suicide is discouraged except in cases of euthanasia, where it would end extreme suffering. Because the Satanist is considered their own god, birthdays are celebrated as the most important holidays. Following one's birthday in importance are Walpurgisnacht and Halloween. Solstices and equinoxes are also celebrated.

The Book of Belial
The third book of The Satanic Bible describes rituals and magic. According to Joshua Gunn, these are adapted from books of ritual magic such as Crowley's Magick: Elementary Theory. The Satanic Rituals, published by LaVey in 1972, outlines the rituals more precisely, and contains the entire text of the Black Mass. LaVey begins The Book of Belial by defining magic as "The change in situations or events in accordance with one's will, which would, using normally accepted methods, be unchangeable." He explains that some of the rituals are simply applied psychology or science, but that some contain parts with no scientific basis.

LaVey explains that, in order to control a person, one must first attract their attention. He gives three qualities that can be employed for this purpose: sex appeal, sentiment (cuteness or innocence), and wonder. He also advocates the use of odor. In the Book of Belial, he discusses three types of rituals: those for sex, compassion, and destruction. Sex rituals work to entice another person; compassion rituals work to improve health, intelligence, success, and so on; destruction rituals work to destroy another person. LaVey advocates finding others with whom to practice Satanic rituals in order to reaffirm one's faith and avoid antisocial behavior. He particularly advocates group participation for destruction rituals, as compassion and sex rituals are more private in nature. LaVey goes on to list the key components to successful ritual: desire, timing, imagery, direction, and "The Balance Factor" (awareness of one's own limitations). Details for the various Satanic rituals are explained in The Book of Belial, and lists of necessary objects (such as clothing, altars, and the symbol of Baphomet) are given.

The Book of Leviathan
The final book of The Satanic Bible emphasizes the importance of spoken word and emotion to effective magic. An "Invocation to Satan" as well as three invocations for the three types of ritual are given. The "Invocation to Satan" commands the dark forces to grant power to the summoner, and lists the Infernal names for use in the invocation. The "Invocation employed towards the conjuration of lust" is used for attracting the attentions of another. Both male and female versions of the invocation are provided. The "Invocation employed towards the conjuration of destruction" commands the dark forces to destroy the subject of the invocation. The "Invocation employed towards the conjuration of compassion" requests protection, health, strength, and the destruction of anything ailing the subject of the invocation. The rest of The Book of Leviathan is composed of the Enochian Keys, which LaVey adapted from Dee's original work. They are given in Enochian and also translated into English. LaVey provides a brief introduction that credits Dee and explains some of the history behind the Enochian Keys and language. He maintains that the translations provided are an "unvarnishing" of the translations performed by the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn in the 1800s, but others accuse LaVey of simply changing references to Christianity with those to Satan.

God and Satan
The Satanic Bible often uses the terms "God" and "Satan" interchangeably, except when referring to the concepts of these as viewed by other religions. LaVey also occasionally uses the term "God" to refer to other religions' views of God, and "Satan" or synonyms to refer to the idea of god as interpreted by LaVeyan Satanism, as when he writes, "When all religious faith in lies has waned, it is because man has become closer to himself and farther from 'God'; closer to the 'Devil.'" Throughout The Satanic Bible, the LaVeyan Satanist's view of god is described as the Satanist's true "self"—a projection of their own personality—not an external deity. Satan is used as a representation of personal liberty and individualism. Satan is also used as a metaphor for the ideas connected with the early Christian view of Satan or the serpent: wise, defiant, questioning, and free-thinking. LaVey discusses this extensively in The Book of Lucifer, explaining that the gods worshipped by other religions are also projections of man's true self. He argues that man's unwillingness to accept his own ego has caused him to externalize these gods so as to avoid the feeling of narcissism that would accompany self-worship. "If man insists on externalizing his true self in the form of "God," then why fear his true self, in fearing "God,"—why praise his true self in praising "God,"—why remain externalized from "God" Man needs ritual and dogma, but no law states that an externalized god is necessary in order to engage in ritual and ceremony performed in a god's name! Could it be that when he closes the gap between himself and his "God" he sees the demon of pride creeping forth—that very embodiment of Lucifer appearing in his midst?"

Though at some points LaVey refers to Satan as a physical being, this is intended to encourage the Satanist's "rational self-interest."

Science
Many of the ideas in The Satanic Bible suggest a secular, scientific view of the world. However, some of these ideas continue beyond present-day secularism by implying that various occult forces are not supernatural, but rather thus far undiscovered by science. These forces are said to be manipulable by the practitioner of LaVeyan Satanism, a trait of the religion that has been compared with Christian Science and Scientology.

James Lewis argues that scientific themes are so prevalent in The Satanic Bible because LaVey was appealing to the authority of science to legitimize Satanism as a religion.

Human nature and social Darwinism
Social Darwinism and the concept of "human nature" are ideas that are prevalent throughout The Satanic Bible. LaVey describes Satanism as "a religion based on the universal traits of man," and humans are described throughout as inherently carnal and animalistic. Each of the seven deadly sins is described as part of human's natural instinct, and are thus advocated. Social Darwinism is particularly noticeable in The Book of Satan, where LaVey plagiarizes portions of Redbeard's Might Is Right, though it also appears throughout in references to man's inherent strength and instinct for self-preservation. LaVeyan Satanism has been described as "institutionalism of Machiavellian self-interest" because of many of these themes.

Influence
The Satanic Bible is recognized as one of the key texts of modern Satanism. The Church of Satan requires that people accept "LaVey's principles" before becoming members of the church. Many other Satanist groups and individual Satanists who are not part of the Church of Satan also recognize LaVey's work as influential. Many Satanists attribute their conversions or discoveries of Satanism to The Satanic Bible, with 20% of respondents to a survey by James Lewis mentioning The Satanic Bible directly as influencing their conversion. In Gilmore's introduction, he lists a number of novels and films supposedly influenced by The Satanic Bible and LaVeyan Satanism. These include the novels Rosemary's Baby by Ira Levin and Our Lady of Darkness by Fritz Leiber, as well as films such as Rosemary's Baby, The Devil's Rain, The Car, and Dr. Dracula. Others have lauded The Satanic Bible as heavily influential on metal and rock bands, such as Black Sabbath, Venom, Slayer, King Diamond, and Marilyn Manson.

Reception
Richard Metzger describes The Satanic Bible as "a razor-sharp, no-bullshit primer in natural and supernatural law." David G. Bromley calls it "iconoclastic" and "the best-known and most influential statement of Satanic theology." Eugene V. Gallagher says that Satanists use LaVey's writings "as lenses through which they view themselves, their group, and the cosmos." He also states: "With a clear-eyed appreciation of true human nature, a love of ritual and pageantry, and a flair for mockery, LaVey's Satanic Bible promulgated a gospel of self-indulgence that, he argued, anyone who dispassionately considered the facts would embrace." The philosophy it presents has been described as "strident libertarianism" and "an obvious distillation of ideas common among members of the United States counter-culture in the 1960s." Joshua Gunn argues that the significance of The Satanic Bible as an occult item owes to its status as a "totem or a fetishized object in popular culture", not the philosophy contained within. He argues that many erroneously categorize the content of The Satanic Bible as evil and depraved from the minimalist, dark cover design (composed of a purple Sigil of Baphomet and white text on the front, and a photo of LaVey superimposed over the Sigil of Baphomet on the back), the verbose, overblown style of the text, and the presence of the word "Satan" in the title. Contrary to this belief, he says, the philosophy presented by LaVey is "neither offensive nor surprising."

Other observers have been more critical. Zeena Schreck has criticized The Satanic Bible as a financial endeavor suggested by Avon publisher, Mayer. She maintains that it contains large amounts of falsified information about LaVey's past, and that much of the book is plagiarized from Redbeard's Might Is Right, Dee's Enochian Keys, and Rand's Atlas Shrugged. Chris Mathews, in Modern Satanism: Anatomy of a Radical Subculture, describes The Satanic Bible as "hastily prepared" and cynical. Both Mathews and a 1971 article in Newsweek compare the ideologies presented in The Satanic Bible to Nazism: containing "unremitting focus on social elitism, appeals to force, and scorn for egalitarian principles". Israel Regardie criticized LaVey's alteration of the Enochian Keys in The Book of Leviathan as stupid and of lower quality than the original Keys. Gabriel Andrade calls LaVey's plagiarism "massive" and asserts that without it, the bible "would have fallen into oblivion."

The Satanic Bible has also received a large amount of criticism from people and organizations who find its content to be dangerous. Much of this criticism came during the period of "Satanic panic," when Satanic ritual abuse was feared to be epidemic. Much of this media coverage, however, has been denounced as "uncritical and sensationalized." Tom Harpur condemns the book as "blasphemous" and "socially seditious," and blames it for causing an increase in gruesome violence, ritual abuse, and other obscene acts. Critics have also accused The Satanic Bible of encouraging violence and murder, particularly in young people considered to be impressionable. Dawn Perlmutter criticizes it for providing adolescents with bad messages and messages that can be easily misinterpreted. Possession of The Satanic Bible has been used by some studies to identify adolescents who are antisocial, and some warn that possession of the book is a warning sign of emotional issues. The Council on Mind Abuse took a very negative view of The Satanic Bible. Former Executive Director Rob Tucker warned parents to look for The Satanic Bible in their children's bedrooms, saying, "You have to help the child fight this obsession like any other addiction" and "It's like giving drugs to a kid who is already on the edge." Attempts to ban the book from schools and public libraries have been made in various places around the world, and bans or limitations on the book in prisons have been repeatedly challenged in court. However, opposition to The Satanic Bible has rarely led to its removal; these bans are rare. The book was banned in South Africa from 1973 to 1993.

title: The Satanic Bible


text:
Talk:List of accidents and incidents involving commercial aircraft

Number of page views in the past 30 days

Table?
This would be easier to extract information if it was a sortable table. Tom Ruen (talk) 22:23, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * What do you mean by sortable table; could you elaborate a little? [ Dinosaurs are cool 03:40, 5 January 2019 (UTC) ] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinosaur330 (talk • contribs)
 * I think like the one here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_populationSqueakSquawk4 (talk) 20:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I too want a table for easy sorting. Any objections?SqueakSquawk4 (talk) 20:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:52, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * 2019 Saha Airlines Boeing 707 crash 03.jpg

Bold face
There is no need for every link in the article to be in bold face. MOS:BOLD describes the cases where bold face should be used. None of them apply here. It has no obvious significance and it looks horrendously ugly. So, I removed it all. 80.189.156.156 (talk) 20:55, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, no, it's been replaced. The significance is that in each sentence, the main target article is in bold, just like the Main Page.  Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:04, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Separate Article
I think this article should be separated by year like this. -- Si Gam (talk) 01:32, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * What would be your reasoning for that? Is it because this article is getting unfeasibly long these days? There might be an argument for separating by decade, that would at least break it into about ten separate subarticles. Rodney Baggins (talk) 15:20, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Joy, 10 or more subarticles for me to put on watchlist so as to revert entries of accidents without articles....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:50, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

List of accidents and incidents on commerical airliners grouped by year listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of accidents and incidents on commerical airliners grouped by year. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Colonies Chris (talk) 18:57, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Explicit inclusion criteria
It's not obvious to all users that the page List of accidents and incidents on commercial aircraft/Guideline for inclusion criteria and format exists. There is a link to this page above the edit box when editing with a conventional computer, but mobile edits don't see this notice. The MOS suggests adding direct statements about list criteria in the lede (WP:SALLEAD), and so I have proposed changing the lede to This list of accidents and incidents involving commercial aircraft includes relevant events that have a corresponding Wikipedia article, and conform to the inclusion criteria. The list is grouped by the year in which the accident or incident occurred.. But now I seem to be finding myself in an edit war. I think a summary of the inclusion criteria in the lede would reduce ineligible entries, and help to communicate that this list is not all-inclusive of every aviation mishap. Hadron137 (talk) 18:25, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Does anybody have a justifiable reason to support or oppose the inclusion of a link to the list criteria page in the lede, as stated above? Hadron137 (talk) 05:32, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I've asked twice that you please discuss this matter. I'm going to go ahead and make the change I've described above, following the guidance in WP:DISCUSSFAIL. If you revert without responding here, then I'm going to have to file a complaint against you at ANI for disruptive editing by reverting without discussing.— Hadron137 (talk) 02:26, 25 August 2019 (UTC).
 * Oppose per MOS:LINKSTYLE, Do not create links to user, WikiProject, essay or draft pages in articles, except in articles about Wikipedia itself. — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 10:17, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your thoughts, BillHPike. Do you know of a better way for an editor on a mobile device (cell phone, tablet) to know this page's inclusion criteria? These editors never see an edit box or the notice above this article's edit box. Hadron137 (talk) 02:43, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose List criteria aren't explained in the lede part of articles....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:40, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

 * @WilliamJE Please read WP:SALLEAD. It states A stand-alone list should begin with a lead section that summarizes its content and ... makes direct statements about the list criteria... Hadron137 (talk) 01:33, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

It seems that the point of contention is the use of a wikilink to the project page. I have updated the lede with inclusion criteria, but omitted this link. Hadron137 (talk) 02:54, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
 * For about the fifth time, you have no consensus for this. What you're doing isn't done around here....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:33, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply, WilliamJE, but I disagree. What I'm doing is supported by WP:SALLEAD and MOS:BOLDAVOID. Adding inclusion criteria to the lede is very common on many Wikipedia lists. Including this information will communicate to readers that this list isn't alll- inclusive of every aviation mishap. And it will likely reduce the number of ineligible entries submitted - especially by users of mobile devices, who cannot see the notice above the edit box. Hadron137 (talk) 01:26, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

RfC inclusion criteria

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This list has its inclusion criteria in a separate project page. For editors using conventional computers, a notice appears above the edit box with a link to the project page. But for mobile editors, there is no edit box, so they never see this notice. How should the inclusion criteria be referenced in a way that is accessable to all readers, and editors who are using mobile devices? Hadron137 (talk) 02:13, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Could comments not be used at the top of each year (so users editing a section see them) using, or placed where a commonly misinserted item would be inserted, with something like -    OxonAlex    - talk  06:58, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The criteria are more than just having a WP article. Aircraft size and that it is a commercial flight are also criteria. Notable people sections (of town or city articles) have at the top but editors routinely ignore them, don't read it etc....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 09:51, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Summoned by bot. Yes, the inclusion criteria should definitely be explained in the lead. No article should be dependent on projectspace for context. No problem with the stylistic instructions there, or for an edit notice to emphasize certain practical elements (e.g. it has an article), but the context to understand what's in the article should be in the article. It's not like there's a big lead here already. If it takes a couple paragraphs to explain (preferably with an explanation of why), that seems ok to me. — Rhododendrites  talk \\ 13:11, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Summoned by bot. I agree with what Rhododendrites said, and can't improve on how they said it. Thryduulf (talk) 09:49, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks everybody for the feedback. I have (for the fifth time) added the inclusion criteria to the lede. I think we have consensus from this discussion and from WP:SALLEAD that the inclusion criteria should indeed be in the lead. Hadron137 (talk) 21:39, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Your close is improper per WP:RFCCLOSE. You're an involved editor....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:51, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks WilliamJE. I have restored the RfC tag. Hadron137 (talk) 03:39, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

 * (Invited by the bot) I agree with Rhododendrites & Thryduulf including Rhododendrites's comments.  I would add that projects don't own articles and can only influence, not dictate anything regarding articles.  North8000 (talk) 12:33, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:22, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Photo of McDonnell Douglas DC-10-30 LN-RK, Feb 1984.jpg

The rules in this list is mismatched with the Portuguese list
If you have a look of the Portuguese list, you will notice that the rules are different and this can cause confusion, I think this is terrible for Wikipedia since the lists are translation but conceptually different and if so, must be renamed. Please have a look: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lista_de_acidentes_aéreos

...William Could you please have a look? I don't think it makes sense.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pp.amorim (talk • contribs) 20:55, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

 * The rules here are quite clear. A aircraft must be able to seat 10 to be included on this list. You know something? The criteria, which have been in place over a decade, weren't even drawn up by me. Save your time for something else....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 21:06, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Enjoy your list. Pp.amorim (talk • contribs) 20:55, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

 * Portuguese Wikipedia and English Wikipedia operate independtly from each other. There is zero need for the Portuguese and English lists to have the same criteria. SSSB (talk) 10:30, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:22, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Wreckage of the ill-fated Dana Flight 992 on the 3rd of June 2012.jpg

inclusion criteria
While the requirement for modern accidents to have their own standalone article makes sense due to the media intense environment that surrounded those incidents, this doesn't make any sense whatsoever for accidents prior to WW2, where the amount of detail, both for the aircraft itself (to justify splitting the page), and the media coverage available is significantly less, and isn't in the least way indicative of the significance of the accident. That has given this page an enormous bias toward modern accidents, belying the reality that 95% of all the significant accidents are missing, being deliberately excluded from here, but only because they fail to meet an incredibly pointless and artificial threshold. Perhaps for older aircraft it should be possible to link to a section of a page devoted to said accident? Alternatively, we split this page at 1945, and have less onerous criteria for incidents prior to then. Indeed, looking through most of the earlier accidents - most of those pages are barely even stubs, and should never have been made into separate articles, especially given the small size of almost all of the parent pages. - NiD.29 (talk) 17:05, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

 * What changes to the inclusion criteria do you propose? More specifically, you write that ...the media coverage available [for these accidents] is significantly less, and isn't in the least way indicative of the significance of the accident.. In the absence of media coverage, how do you propose to gauge the significance of such an accident? (For what it's worth, media coverage often exists, it's just harder to find on the Internet without access to academic databases.) Lastly, perhaps Wikipedia talk:List of accidents and incidents on commercial aircraft/Guideline for inclusion criteria and format would be a better forum for discussion of this topic. Cheers. Carguychris (talk) 13:57, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Trust that the discussion isn't even on the page it applies to - thank you for the link.
 * Your unnecessarily condescending reply that completely ignored what I wrote suggests a lack of reading comprehension. I already made suggestions as to what to do, above, and I also did NOT say there was no media coverage, or that there wasn't enough to determine significance, or that I had difficulty in finding it, but rather that there isn't enough to justify more than a paragraph, and thus an entire stand alone page for the accident, and yes, I do know where to look. Massive difference.
 * As I said, in many cases, there isn't sufficient detail for both the accident and the aircraft type to justify a stand-alone page, least of all for aircraft whose entire entry won't EVER be much longer than a stub (and I know because I have expanded or written dozens of such pages), regardless of the actual importance of the event. You can see this in almost every accident listed prior to the 1930s - the accident should never have been split on any of them, except perhaps of the Fokker F.VII losing its wings. - NiD.29 (talk) 07:40, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Raleigh-Durham Airport CASA C-212 fatal incident
This one seems to be missing. I would add it, with a source citation, but the article meta editing text says not to do it without a full blown Wiki article in place. "Raleigh-Durham International Airport and the pilot of a stricken CASA C-212 twin-engine turboprop light cargo plane involved in a fatal incident on July 29" Cheers. N2e (talk) 13:42, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

TLDR - parse out and reduce length suggestions
We have articles which will pare down this "too-long" listing. See List of aircraft hijackings and List of airliner shootdown incidents. Every “incident” need not include the hijackings or war-time events. Hat-notes can direct the readers to the pertinent lists. – S. Rich (talk) 18:56, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

I have added more crashes to 2023
There are more than a few more plane crashes in 2023 that yall have missed, so I am adding them. The entries are based on Category:Aviation accidents and incidents in 2023. 113.210.92.159 (talk) 14:29, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Past tense needed for past events
This article is full of present tense statements, as if these accidents and incidents are ongoing. MOS:TENSE says, "Generally, use past tense only for past events..." Present tense is generally favored in articles (e.g., "Obama and Trump are former US presidents," not "Obama and Trump were US presidents"), but not when describing events that have already happened. In the case of air crash articles, they are always in the past. (We don't learn about them until they've happened. If they haven't happened, we don't know that they will happen, so it's a WP:Crystal ball issue.) This article needs a bit of fixing. I've done 2022-present. Dcs002 (talk) 01:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

 * 2024 had a mix of items in past and present tense, but the farther back I look, the more uniform the present tense becomes. Why is that? Historical events are in the past, not the present, and writing about them in the present tense affects readability and goes against the MOS. Am I missing something? I know some history buffs like to write in the present tense about battles and such, and that's fine, but we have a standardized Manual of Style here. I've changed 2022-now, and I'm going to pause here. If someone can justify this deviation from the MOS, I'll revert my own tense edits. Dcs002 (talk) 01:36, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Dhc-8 and Cessna 172 mid air collision in Kenya
￼add 2001:B07:A3B:23C1:B4AC:DB68:316D:43CB (talk) 14:36, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Add 727 safe air crash in South Sudan
https://avherald.com/h?article=516d7275&opt=1

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/378591 SignorPignolini (talk) 18:36, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Add Cetraca Aviation Service March 17 2024 Disaster.
Okay Guys, you completely forgot a passenger plane crashed in March 17th, so guys, if you are reading this, make a new article about this plane, this plane overran a runway. Type of the plane is a Let L-410UVP. CarterCart (talk) 08:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)