text:
Talk:Tathāgatagarbha sūtras

Capitalisation?
Why is "Doctrine" capitalized here? Mathematical theorems wuch as Maxwell's theorem and physical laws such as Gauss's law conventionally are not capitalized in Wikipedia article titles. Michael Hardy 22:26, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The term 'Template:A' keeps appearing where the original author obviously intended some special character to show.

Removal
I removed:
 * Note: This article needs to be redone by a professional scholar, as it contains vagueness and inaccuracy. To begin with, tathagatagarbha is not directly equivalent to Buddha-nature.

This is a POV remark that is inappropriate for the start of the article. The contributor who added this should either make the changes himself/herself, discuss the changes in the talk page, or use one of the standard template disclaimers. --Decumanus 23:26, 2004 Nov 17 (UTC)

_____________________________________

Further refinement is needed for this article

The mention of Yogacara in "The Tathagatagarbha doctrine arose mainly within Mahayanists who were associated to some degree or another with Yogacara studies" should be removed. Though Tathagata-garbha doctrines were convergent at a later stage with Yogacara, resulting in "syncretic" texts like the Lankavatara-sutra and the Ghana-vyuha-sutra, the origins of Tathagata-garbha have no connection with Yogacara. In fact, the origins of the Tathagata-garbha doctrine may not even be Mahayana. Moreover, a distinction should be made between the two meanings of Tathagata-garbha which depend on whetehr one interprets it as a tat-puru.sa or a baahu-vrihi compound -- in other words, a being may be "tathagata-garbha" (an embryonic Buddha)or have "tathagata-garbha" (contain the embryo of a Buddha). The orgin of the Tathagata-garbha doctrine should possibly be sought in concepts that arose around the presence of the Buddha in a stupa (see various articles by Gregory Schopen which discuss this). Garbha was a technical term for the contents of a stupa. The same context can be seen with the term "Buddha-dhatu" (Buddha-nature) where "dhatu" is a similar concept referring to the enshrined relics. --Stephen Hodge 20:02, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * The Tathagatagarbha interpretation of shunyata is most certainly a continuation and perfection of the Yogacara criticism of Nagarjuna and MMK. Regardless of where its beginnings lie exactly, there is a very clear relation between Yogacara and Tathagatagarbha views (see "What remains in shunyata" by Gadjin Nagao). Also, the claim that Tathagatagarbha is not Mahayana is completely unfounded, as there is a clear and distinct emphasis on Bodhisattva practice and a strong criticism of "Hinayana" Arhat and Pratyekabuddha practices.

--- Is "ultimate, pure, ungraspable, irreducible, invulnerable, true and deathless Essence of the Buddha's liberating Reality" comparable to the Hindu Atman?

 * Thanks for your interesting question. There are indeed some similarities or comparabilities between certain elements of Hindu "descriptions" of the Atman and the Buddhist teaching on the Tathagatagarbha or hidden Buddhic Essence (particularly as it is presented in the Mahaparinirvana Sutra). For example, both are said to be unperishing, ungraspable and immortal. But the two doctrines are not identical, as there are also distinctions and divergences: the "Katha Upanishad", for instance, asserts:

"A person the size of the thumb in the Atman always resides within the hearts of men".

The Buddha in the Mahaparinirvana Sutra specifically denies this view. The Buddha's Atman cannot be reified, located and measured in such a way. The Buddha's doctrine of the Tathagatagarbha is, it seems to me, more abstract than that of the Atman presented in some Upanishads. Whereas the Upanishadic Self is on occasion described as containing all actions and desires, the Buddhic Atman or Essence is beyond all such things. Is this of help to you? All good wishes. Tony  TonyMPNS 08:05, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Tathagatagarbha is NOT atman
The Srimala Sutra, a classic of Buddha-nature literature, makes that very clear: "The Tathagata embryo is not a self, a personal identity, a being, or a life". Why then does the article claim that Tathagatagarbha is in fact atman? It should in fact state that it is merely the opinion expressed in the Nirvana Sutras. Not all Buddha-nature sutras agree on the exact meaning of the TG. To present the teaching of one sutra as the accepted consensus is misleading, I think, especially to someone who is ignorant of the larger Mahayana context of this doctrine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.156.170.99 (talk) 20:40, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Golden Germ, the World Womb-Egg (Hiranyagarbha)
"...said to have originated in the primeval waters, as the Golden Germ, the World Womb-Egg (Hiranyagarbha) containing all the other gods in the world..." (drawn from an article of Visvakarman)

It would be sapient to chart the cultural context of garbha as Hiranyagarbha has flowed into Tathagatagarbha.

The womb of sentience/sapience
 * Lindtner, Christian (1999). 'From Brahmanism to Buddhism'. Asian Philosophy, Volume 9, Issue 1 March 1999. Source: (accessed: March 7, 2009)

Ah

B9 hummingbird hovering (talk • contribs) 07:28, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

moved section: "Texts"
I have moved this section, which is quite short, from the end of the article, where it did not seem to make any conclusion to it, to near the beginning. This seems to enhance coherence, since these texts are subsequently mentioned again in the article. Moonsell (talk) 23:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Ridiculously biased view
Hey, how about more emphasis on the orthodox view? This is wikipedia for god's sake. Tathāgatagarbha refers to the POTENTIAL to become a Buddha like milk can become butter. Thigle (talk) 23:20, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

 * Whose "orthodox view " ?  Any presentation should be based on an accurate reporting of what the Tathagata-garbha group of texts say -- these are ambivalent, some supporting the view presented predominantly in the article while others, equally valid, clearly do NOt view the tathagata-garbha as a  mere potential.  Thus it is not said that milk can BECOME butter, but that the butter pre-exists in the milk as butter but concealed by the excess, as it were, of milk.

-- अनाम गुमनाम  03:02, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

 * Anam Gumnam speaks correctly. The early Tathagatagarbha sutras (such as the Tathagatagarbha Sutra itself) do not at all say that the Tathagatagarbha is ONLY a potential (although it certainly bears the power within itself to transform a being into a Buddha, annd so to that extent it is a potency or force of potential transformation); rather, those early, foundational texts speak (certainly the Nirvana Sutra does, as does the Angulimaliya Sutra) of a Buddhic presence within each being which is already Awakened and only needs to be 'unwrapped', as it were, from the surrounding 'klesas' (mental and moral afflictions). As Anam Gumnam has pointed out, the image of the milk is an interesting one: in the early versions of the Nirvana Sutra, butter is said to be the inherent essence of the milk, already there, already existing - but it is not yet visible. There are also innumerable references in that same sutra to a very real Essence that is uncreated and deathless existing in every living being. It always strikes me that the people on Wikipedia (as elsewhere) who complain most about an 'uninformed presentation' of the tathagatagarbha doctrine (i.e. a cataphatic one) are nearly always persons who reveal themselves to have a very limited knowledge-base regarding the primary tathagatagarbha sutras (for example, I would like to bet that User Thigle has never, ever, read the Mahayana Angulimaliya Sutra - a very important scripture in this context). I can say from previous observation over the years that User Anam Gumnam has more knowledge of these primary texts than all of us who have recently commented (including myself) put together. Regards - Suddha (talk) 04:46, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

 * I think the only sources that claim Tathagatagarbha is just a "potential" which is obscured, has been scholarship. Sadly, scholars often spend very little time reading the sutras themselves, and instead tend to rely on the writings of their peers. The outcome of this is that oftentimes their theories contradict the sutras they are attempting to understand. However, for awhile now, scholarship has been coming to terms with the fact that such a representation of Tathagatagarbha is not upheld by the Tathagatagarbha sutras themselves. Finally, their conclusion is realigning with what Buddhist traditions have been saying all along. Someone should be keeping score of the number of major doctrinal misperceptions and corrections that have been necessary in Buddhology. Tengu800 12:45, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

 * Excellent points, Tengu. There is a huge mismatch, as you suggest, between what Western scholars started saying about the tathagatagarbha doctrine back in the 1970s and 1980s (when these texts began to break surface in a major way in the West), and what the sutras themselves actually teach. It was evident that when the tathagatagarbha sutras started to become somewhat better known in the 1970s and 1980s, a lot of Western Buddhists and scholars were rather caught on the hop: they could not believe that such 'essentialist' teachings could truly be part of non-Self / Emptiness Buddhism. So they had to try to explain them away: 'oh, they really are only positive words about the same old Buddhist notions that we've always had - a mere dressing-up of familiar Buddhist concepts of Emptiness and Conditioned Co-arising in an attractively positive vocabulary', or 'Oh, these teachings are only metaphorical - they simply express a way of encouraging people to think that they too can become Buddhas - they can reach that goal - but certainly they don't have Enlightenment within them already, here and now', etc., etc. To be fair, though, not only Westerners expressed such views: the Gelukpas of Tibet have always argued that the tathagatagarbha is not any kind of essence, but is merely a 'potential' and nothing more - and indeed is only a second-level doctrine (not Highest Truth). This, of course, constitutes an egregious and shocking contradiction of what the sutras themselves state again and again and again (e.g. 'The essence of the self is the subtle Tathagatagarbha'; 'the tathagatagarbha is the Buddha'; 'The Buddha Nature is not impermanent, not non-bliss, not non-Self, not impure' - Nirvana Sutra). But there are none so blind as those who refuse to see what is plainly before their eyes, or those who are excessively and blindingly attached (yes, attached - even Buddhists can be perversely attached!) to a twisted form of ideation (reading 'white' as 'black', etc.). Fortunately, as you indicate, Tengu, things are perhaps beginning to change now, with scholars like Stephen Hodge, Professor Shimoda and even Professor Paul Williams acknowledging that the cataphatic, 'positive' approach of the tathagatagarbha sutras is more than just verbal decoration, more than just skin deep: it really represents a step forward into a different envisioning of what the Dharma can be and can mean. Best wishes - Suddha (talk) 13:09, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

 * I don't know why you guys keep talking about these "tathagatagarbha sutras". The article refers to the tathagatagarbha doctrine as a whole.  If you want to RENAME this article "tathagatagarbha sutras" go for it.   The tathagatagarbha doctrine as you guys posit, is not compatible with Mādhyamaka or Yogacara.  But such a simple point is obviously too much for your brains to compute.  Bottomline either a) rename the article b) make it more unbiased.  Is this article about the tathagatagarbha sutras or tathagatagarbha doctrine?  Anyway why is such a marginal view represented in the buddhism main article.  This is why wikipedia is a total joke.  Read a real Sakya loppon's comments here.  He goes by Namdrol:  http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=4042Thigle (talk) 18:18, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * In Tibetan Buddhism, according to the Sakya school, tathāgatagarbha is the union of the clarity and emptiness of one's mind. According to the Gelugpa school, it is the potential for sentient beings to awaken since they lack inherent existence; according to the Jonang school, it refers to the innate qualities of the mind which expresses itself in terms of omniscience, etc, when adventitious obscurations are removed. In Nyingma, tathāgatagarbha also generally refers to union of the clarity and emptiness of one's mind. There is only one Indian commentary on this issue -- the Uttaratantra and its commentary by Asanga. In Chinese Buddhism it is interpreted more literally, in texts such as Awakening of Faith in Mahāyāna, and in some currents of Sino-Japanese Buddhism it is indistinguishable from Advaita. The Chinese had no experience with Hindus, really, and did not guard as well as the Tibetans against eternalism creeping into their Buddhism.Thigle (talk) 18:43, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

 * Perhaps we talk about the Tathagatagarbha sutras because they are the primary sources for the Tathagatagarbha doctrine. For example, much of the Tathagatagarbha doctrine of the Zen school is drawn from the Lankavatara Sutra and the Surangama Sutra, both of which contain Tathagatagarbha teachings. As far as I have seen, the East Asian interpretations of Tathagatagarbha are quite in line with the basic teachings of the Tathagatagarbha sutras. It seems very condescending to regard the Chinese as naive, falling prey to "creeping Hinduism." The ancient Chinese interpretations of Tathagatagarbha teachings were after all more accurate to the original Tathagatagarbha texts than was western scholarship for decades, and this point should not be ignored. In the view taken in Chinese Buddhism and Zen, even a pig has the same nature as a buddha, and cultivation is not a gradual process of accumulating the qualities of a buddha, but rather letting go of attachments so as to see what was there all along. As for Gelugpa teachings, the Gelug school never really adopted the Tathagatagarbha outlook as far as I have seen, except for perhaps in certain contexts of practice. This probably had something to do with Je Tsongkhapa's own outlook which was closer to that of the Yogacara texts. It was probably also related to the issues facing Tibetan Buddhism during this time, and the specific emphases that were needed. In any case, the Gelug school is circa 14th century at earliest, around 1000 years after the first Tathagatagarbha sutras were circulating in India, and 800-900 years after they were circulating in China.

 * As for your assertion that Tathagatagarbha is incompatible with Madhyamaka and Yogacara, this is your own interpretation of these doctrines. Personally, I don't think that these doctrines are fundamentally different in any way. It is notable that the Tathagatagarbha sutras themselves never say that this is something essentially different, just the highest exposition of the same truths. For example, in works such as the Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra, the Tathagatagarbha is positively identified with many other Mahayana concepts which were viewed as the ultimate in prior teachings, such as Prajnaparamita, the Surangama Samadhi, the Vajrasamadhi, true nature of the mind, etc. Also, your use of Gelugpa, Nyingmapa, etc., explanations is assuming that these views are mutually incompatible with the explanations given in the Tathagatagarbha sutras themselves, which is not established. The same goes for your view that Chinese Buddhism is adopting views that are the same as those of Advaita Vedanta. For example, the Lankavatara Sutra explicitly teaches that this "Self" is not the same as the Self taught by Hindu philosophers. Tengu800 21:32, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You are plainly saying that you don't want to have a broad overview, and want the entry solely defined to Tathagatagarbha sutras. Why can't all viewpoints be discussed impartially?  This is what is wrong with wikipedia.  The purpose of wikipedia is to give a brief overview of everything, not to fight doctrinal battles.   Thigle (talk) 22:47, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

 * When did I plainly say that I don't want a broad overview? You merely asked why the Tathagatagarbha sutras are so important, and I answered you: because they are the basic primary source materials establishing the Tathagatagarbha doctrine. You came here accusing others of being "ridiculous", "biased", and not following the "orthodox" view (I guess "orthodox" = "Tibetan"), and now you are complaining that viewpoints can't be discussed impartially? Tengu800 23:44, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually the orthodox view is by Asanga. How come Asanga is not mentioned in this article, except for what I contributed???  You guys are a total joke.  Uttaratantra is the only Indian commentary on the tathāgatagarbha sutras we have we have.  By not even referencing it, you guys are either biased on uneducated.  The rūpakāya is clearly presented in Uttaratantra as a result of efforts and aspiration.  Thigle (talk) 00:13, 9 May 2011 (UTC)Thigle (talk) 23:51, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Who says that Asanga represents the "orthodox" view? Since when is he the Tathagatagarbha authority? I don't think any scholars of Tathagatagarbha literature would consider him to have such a role. Again, you seem to be taking very late Tibetan views of Tathagatagarbha doctrine as the source of Tathagatagarbha "orthodoxy." Could you produce a reference from academia citing Asanga as an authority on "orthodox" Tathagatagarbha doctrine? Tengu800 01:05, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You are a funny guy. Thigle (talk) 01:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll take that as a "no." Tengu800 10:57, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Why was this article renamed?
"Tathagatagarbha doctrine" is not the same subject as "Tathagatagarbha Sutras." The new title does not use IAST diacritics correctly either. The addition of controversial material or debatable material in the intro rather than a more appropriate section below, is also problematic. Tengu800 12:25, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * What is the controversial material? There are two references to actual academic works by Professor Paul Williams, who is used throughout the Buddhism pages. That is about as NON-controversial as it gets. If you want me to provide full quotes here I will.  Also keep in mind there are two different articles....the "Buddha-nature" article and this one. LhunGrub (talk) 15:20, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

 * I agree with you, Tengu800. I, too, was surprised and perplexed as to why the article, 'Tathagatagarbha Doctrine', should be restricted to the 'tathagatagarbha sutras' rubric. Also, emphasising the Gelukpa interpretation of the Buddha-nature /tathagatagarbha in the Intro of the 'Buddha-nature' article is not entirely appropriate, as the Gelukpa 'take' on this subject is something of a minority viewpoint (their idea that even the Buddha-nature or TG has no inherent reality to it is, in a sense, an extreme view that would not be shared by many Buddhists from other Tibetan or Chinese Buddhist traditions). I also agree with your implicit feeling, Tengu, that the article should be restored to its former form and title. Best wishes. Suddha (talk) 12:35, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed some of your objections. LhunGrub (talk) 15:20, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

 * Thank you, LhunGrub, for addressing some of the concerns. I think it would be better if we defined in the Intro what the 'unique model' of Buddha nature is - i.e. that it is 'the unconditioned and deathless Buddhic essence of all beings'. In fact, I've added something along those lines to the Intro. Additionally, I think it might be more accurate to write that these sutras present 'the original vision of Buddha nature' (rather than 'a unique model' - as though these seminal sutras came later and somehow missed the point of the Buddha-nature concept!): in a sense, what came after the TG sutras can be viewed, on occasion (certainly in the Gelugpa 'explication' of these ideas), as a deviation from the doctrines clearly enunciated in those first Buddha-nature sutras. I don't know what Tengu feels about this? Best wishes. Suddha (talk) 00:44, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't forget that the meat of the entry follows the lead. That explains exactly what these texts are. Just scroll down.LhunGrub (talk) 01:36, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

 * Thanks again, LhunGrub, for your comments. I think the article is OK now (more or less). Let's see what other editors think. All the best. Suddha (talk) 01:44, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * As I mention on the Buddha-nature discussion page, I revised that entry to avoid extreme redundancy with this entry.LhunGrub (talk) 02:47, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the Wiki-links - that certainly is a useful improvement. Suddha (talk) 02:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

This situation is still very confusing. For example, if this page is about Tathagatagarbha sutras while the other page is about the Tathagatagarbha doctrine, then why does the other page have "Buddha-nature" as its title, rather than Tathagatagarbha? These terms are more or less synonymous, but the relationship between these pages becomes ambiguous due to the inconsistent naming. Additionally, this page contains much material about Tathagatagarbha doctrines and regional interpretations of the doctrine, rather than material relating directly to the sutras. A lot of work is still required, and I will be willing to do some of that. One of the problems that these changes currently face, however, is that redirects are blocking renaming to more appropriate titles. Tengu800 17:12, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I fixed one of your objections. Check Buddha-nature. By the way, I totally disagree with your assessment of this page. This page always was primarily about the Tathagatagarbha Sutras.  For God's sake, every other sentence mentions a specific sutra title.  It should have been renamed to the current title long ago. LhunGrub (talk) 20:12, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The problem is not so much the rename, but the inconsistency and incompleteness of the changes. For example, if I type in "buddha-nature", I get the Buddha-nature page. If I type in tathagatagarbha, I get the "Tathagatagarbha Sutras" page. I don't completely disagree with having a name change here, but more that the change was done (1) not following naming standards, and (2) without making the necessary changes to go along with this, as well as (3) the addition of marginalization and judgement of the subject in the introduction where such material does not belong. Tengu800 02:32, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * (1) Ok I fixed all the redirects. Now try typing in "tathagatagarbha". (2) I have no idea what you mean by marginalization and judgement. Wikipedia is supposed to adhere to academic historical facts by professors and NPOV. To say that France was invaded by the Germans during World War II is NOT a marginalization or judgement of France. It is an academic historical fact upheld by scholars.LhunGrub (talk) 04:46, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Tathāgatagarbha sūtras. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.shabkar.org/download/pdf/On_the_Eschatology_of_the_Mahaparinirvana_Sutra_and_Related_Matters.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:47, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tathāgatagarbha sūtras


text:
User talk:Nathan Hamblen

I have deleted the page you tagged for deletion (the one named Nathan Hamblen). Which account will you be using? This one or User:Nhamblen? - Texture 22:26, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Check out Changing attribution for an edit for changing your edits to your new account. Hope this helps. - Texture 22:33, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Regarding Frankish language in Wallonia: I believe it is mentioned in Picard language because the German dialects of Eupen and Malmedy are Franconian dialects, although not Frankish. I've added a note to Frankish language that the term Frankish may be applied to all Franconian dialects. — Jor (Talk) 11:57, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi Nathan.

An official website says nothing about Aranese/Gascon. On the other hand this document says "El Valle de Arán es el único territorio de Occitania donde la lengua occitana tiene un reconocimiento legal que podríamos considerar de oficialidad (o cooficialidad). Hemos de advertir a priori que la oficialidad de la que goza el aranés no es equiparable, ni mucho menos, a la del catalán, el gallego o el vasco en sus respectivas comunidades autónomas.".

I read in Ethnologue that Aranese has only 3,814 speakers.

As a compromise solution I think that the note in Spain should be respected, but in Spanish Language the sentence "there are several languages spoken and officially recognized in the country (Basque, Catalan, and Galician)" could also be left untouched.

Pablo.cl 23:29, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

Basque Country
Please, when you turn a substantive article into a redirect, make sure you merge the material. I have no problem with Euskal Herria being redirected to Basque Country, but I have a lot of problem with losing half the content of the former. If you feel that material (which I have now merged into Basque Country) is wrong or inappropriate, let's argue that case on its merits in the discussion page, not by one virtually uncommented edit. -- Jmabel 17:40, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Jmabel, everything that I left out (and that you added back) is in the Basque people article. That article is prominently linked to at the beginning of Basque Country. Other info is in the linked to Kingdom of Navarre and Henry of Navarre articles. Why tell the whole story about his Huguenot to Catholic conversion again here?

 * Secondly (and similarly), I see you've added in Basque names for everything. Those names are already available at the beginning of each linked article. It is Wikipedia policy to use other languages sparingly. As French and Spanish are by all accounts closer to English than Basque is, they are the ones we use first. Reminding everyone what the Basque name is, every time the word shows up on a page, is just annoying. Nathan 18:49, May 31, 2004 (UTC)

Peafowl
I've written Indian Peafowl and Green Peafowl, mainly to try to tidy a confused article and messy taxobox. status is in each article Jim

 * Ah, I didn't see that those are now their own articles instead of redirects back to Peafowl. Thanks for tidying that confused mess. Nathan 16:29, Jun 1, 2004 (UTC)

Learning Project
Hi Nathan, I found you when I read your insightful comment at the vote regarding Pro-American sentiment. On your user page I see that you are a programmer, a quite gifted photographer, and into language teaching. So I think you would be the optimal guy to work with on a project I started. It is about learning, mainly vocabulary. Some guys discussed it with me on my user page, if you are interested please let me know there as well. Get-back-world-respect 19:26, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Millau viaduct
Sorry to be so lazy getting back to you, but I notice that I'm not getting "new messages" flags as often as I did in the past. Three new messages I didn't know about!

Anyway the article on Millau viaduct looks fine. My only question is about the use of the term "metallic roadbed". I know that in England "metalled" can mean what most people call "asphalt", so this was a little unclear to me. Is the road built from steel? Or is it paved concrete?

Neat bridge by the way!

Maury 12:10, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for looking over it! I've looked into the metallic roadway issue and apparently it is made of metal (what kind exactly I'm not sure). I'll see if I can find out some more info. Nathan 21:57, Jun 24, 2004 (UTC)

translation
There is an enormous backlog at Translation into English, more than for all other languages combined. I see you are signed up at Translators_available. Would you be at all interested in taking on one of these articles? (Full disclosure: this is a bit of a "mass mailing", I'm working my way down the whole list of French-to-English translators.) -- Jmabel 00:07, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the " " template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace " " with "  ". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Translation
I notice that about 2 months ago you left a note on WP:TIE that you were working on the translation Occitan ==> Occitan language. Could you update the status of that work? Thanks. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:33, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Our Lady of Lourdes Basilica.jpg
File:Our Lady of Lourdes Basilica.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Our Lady of Lourdes Basilica.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 19:21, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of DailyCandy

A tag has been placed on DailyCandy, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Gbawden (talk) 14:21, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Nathan Hamblen


text:
User talk:Nhamblen

I have deleted the page you tagged for deletion (the one named Nathan Hamblen). Which account will you be using? This one or User:Nathan Hamblen? - Texture 22:26, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nhamblen


text:
Battlefleet Gothic

Battlefleet Gothic is a naval miniature wargame that was produced by Games Workshop from 1999 to 2013 with Andy Chambers as the primary developer. A spin-off of the science-fantasy setting of Warhammer 40,000, the game has players command fleets of large spaceships belonging to one of several spaceborne factions. Although the wargame's miniatures and rulebooks are no longer supported by Games Workshop, two video game adaptations have been made since its cancellation in 2013.

As in other miniature wargames, players use miniature models to represent warships. The playing field is usually a 4'x4' area that represents an area of space, upon which players place miniature models of planets, asteroids, and other obstacles. Players take turns to manoeuvre their fleets around the playing field with different objectives that help inform decision making. Cunning, strategy, and luck of the dice determines the winner.

Set roughly 38,000 years in the future, the name of Battlefleet Gothic is taken from an in-universe spacefleet of the galaxy-spanning Imperium of Man, assigned to protect the eponymous Gothic Sector from a variety of alien and supernatural foes.

Overview
While the base game of Warhammer 40,000 simulates battles between planet-bound armies and squads expanded upon in other extensions such as Necromunda, Epic, or Aeronautica Imperialis, Battlefleet Gothic instead consists of space battles within the same setting. Players select spaceships from a variety of fleets representative of the various Warhammer 40,000 races. The game as packaged includes rules and background for space fleets of the following factions:

 * The Imperial Navy of the Imperium of Man
 * Chaos Warfleets, treasonous fleets worshipping the villainous Chaos Gods
 * Alien pirate fleets belonging either to the brutish Orks or Elf-like Eldar.

Subsequent additions and expansions published in numerous Games Workshop sources expanded the game to include fleets for:

 * Ork "Waaagh!" fleets
 * Eldar fleets belonging to either the isolationist "Craftworld" Asuryani or the cruel and despotic Drukhari
 * Tau Empire fleets, encompassing both the Tau's own Air Caste and the fleets of their multispecies allies
 * Hive-minded Tyranid Hive Fleets
 * Undead Necron Raiders

There are also numerous factions of humans that have ships represented in Battlefleet Gothic such as the Space Marine chapters, the Inquisition, Adeptus Arbites, Adeptus Mechanicus, Rogue Traders etc. as well as numerous types of transports that are represented using current Battlefleet Gothic models, Forge World models and the old space fleet models.

Battlefleet Gothic ships are represented by 2-10cm long models. The rules and miniatures were originally available in Games Workshop stores, although reclassification as a "Specialist Game" meant the rulebook was at one time available in PDF format from the official home page. Additionally, Forge World has produced numerous lines of miniatures for Battlefleet Gothic, ranging from models to replace ordnance markers to entirely new vessels.

Gameplay
Every race has a selection of ships to choose from to construct their fleet, and each ship in the game has statistics that cover its capabilities, from its size class and defensive abilities to the various weapons and hangars it has. Each ship is assigned a point cost based on these capabilities; generally a battle will be between fleets of equal total point costs, though more complex multi-game campaigns may have an overarching narrative where individual battles may occur between unequal forces, with varying objectives for players to accomplish.

Players take turns moving their ships and shooting, as well as undertaking more advanced manoeuvres such as ramming, boarding, or disengaging. Each player may perform actions with all of his ships before the turn ends. The turns are divided into 4 phases, the Movement Phase, Shooting Phase, Ordnance Phase, and End Phase.

During the Movement Phase, the player can move his ships across the tabletop. Different ships move at different speeds, and turn at different rates. Smaller escorts (frigates and destroyers) are typically the fastest ships in a fleet. Ships can also choose to go into "Special Orders" at the start of the Movement Phase. Special Orders allow ships to move/turn faster, reload their ordnance, or increase the efficiency of their firing, at the cost of being less able to perform other functions later in the turn (or in other turns); for example, if a ship uses a Special Order to increase power to the engines to turn, the ship's firepower is halved that turn.

During the Shooting Phase players fire their ships' weapons. Weapons are divided into two broad categories: weapon batteries and lances. Weapon Batteries represent massed broadsides of a variety of (relatively) smaller weapons that target an area of space to bracket and hit enemy ships, rather than being precision weapons. Lances represent larger, more precise weapons consisting primarily of massive lasers or plasma beams, and target the enemy ships directly. Ships are protected from incoming fire by layers of void shields, and armour. Enemy fire stopped by a ship's shields generates "blast markers" at that location, a general term to simulate debris, energy discharges and clouds of energised gas. Blast markers disrupt shooting, and slow down ships moving through them. They also temporarily bring down the Shields of any ship in contact with them. Once shields are down, incoming fire strikes a ship's armour. Attacks can also cause critical damage, which covers a wide range of debilitating effects. Among other consequences, weapons can be taken offline, engines damaged, etc. Sufficient damage can reduce a ship to a derelict hulk, or cause it to explode spectacularly if its reactors are breached.

During the Ordnance Phase ships deploy certain types of weapons and attacks that move and fight independently of the capital ships. This typically includes torpedoes, but also includes squadrons of fighters, bombers, and assault boats. Once launched, Ordnance will be represented by separate counters on the board, that act independently once they have been launched from a ship, though some types (such as fighters and bombers) have more freedom to act than others (such as torpedoes). Different types of Ordnance have different abilities and roles, for example bombers can attack enemy capital ships, while fighters are intended to intercept bombers and other fighters. Ordnance ignores shields, but can be stopped by point-defence turrets mounted on most ships. Ordnance can also be targeted by a ship's main weapons; although fragile, they are very difficult to hit, to simulate their small size and high speeds. Ordnance must be reloaded between each use by using a Special Order, before another wave can be launched again.

The End Phase is when damage control occurs. Each ship which is suffering from critical damage can attempt to repair itself. A variable number of blast markers are also removed during each End Phase.

Other advanced rules that are included also allow more complicated actions, such as ramming attacks, Hit and Run attacks and Boarding Actions, through the use of assault boats, teleporters and boarding torpedoes. Boarding can result in fights between crewmen and boarding parties within a boarded vessel, and when successful can cause critical systems in a boarded ship to be destroyed by the boarders. Other advanced rules intended for Campaign play include planets, as objectives upon which attacking troops must be landed, or bombardment (or even planet-destroying Exterminatus) must be performed.

Battlefleet Gothic: Invasion (supplement)
In 2002, Games Workshop released a 36 page supplement which included scenarios, how to make terrain, painting, conversions, a painted ships showcase from the Games Workshop US HQ, boarding actions and a miniatures catalog. USB 0 83746 00021 3. Product code 0021.

Battlefleet Gothic: Armada (supplement)
Games Workshop published the Battlefleet Gothic Annual once a year after the game's release, with the exception of 2003, where the Annual was replaced by a 160-page supplement, Battlefleet Gothic: Armada. Among others, Armada introduced four new Imperial fleet rosters (Battle Fleet Armageddon, Bastion Fleets, Battle Fleet Cadia and the Reserve fleets of Segmentum Obscurus), as well as gathering the fleets previously mentioned into an official rulebook with updated fleet lists.

Battlefleet Gothic: Leviathan (digital version)
A digital version of the boardgame for Android and iOS was developed by Grand Cauldron and released in 2016. It featured singleplayer skirmish (single battle) and campaign modes, as well as player vs. player mode. The game was discontinued in 2017.

Battlefleet Gothic: Armada (video game series)
A real-time strategy video game adaptation, called Battlefleet Gothic: Armada, developed by Tindalos Interactive and published by Focus Home Interactive, was released on April 21, 2016.

The sequel, titled Battlefleet Gothic: Armada 2, was released in January 2019, and includes all 12 factions from the tabletop. The sequel is set after fall of Cadia during the 13th Black Crusade, more than seven hundred years after the Gothic War.

title: Battlefleet Gothic


text:
Wisconsin Senate

The Wisconsin Senate is the upper house of the Wisconsin State Legislature. Together with the Wisconsin State Assembly they constitute the legislative branch of the state of Wisconsin. The powers of the Wisconsin Senate are modeled after those of the U.S. Senate.

The Wisconsin Constitution ties the size of the State Senate to that of the Assembly, by limiting its size to no less than 1/4, nor more than 1/3, of the size of the Assembly. Currently, Wisconsin is divided into 33 Senate Districts (1/3 of the current Assembly membership of 99) apportioned throughout the state based on population as determined by the decennial census, for a total of 33 senators. A Senate district is formed by combining three Assembly districts. Similar to the U.S. Senate, in addition to its duty of reviewing and voting on all legislation passed through the legislature, the State Senate has the exclusive responsibility of confirming certain gubernatorial appointments, particularly cabinet secretaries and members of boards and commissions. Senators are elected for four-year terms, staggered so that approximately half of the Senate is up for election every two years. If a vacancy occurs in a Senate seat between elections, it may be filled only by a special election. The Senate chamber is in the south wing of the Wisconsin State Capitol, in Madison. In February 2024, the legislative maps of the Senate, along with the State Assembly, were redrawn following a court decision that found them to be unconstitutionally gerrymandered in favor of Republicans.

Salary and benefits
The salary of all legislators serving in the 2023 Wisconsin Legislature is $57,408, which is an increase of 4% from the previous biennium. In addition to salaries, senators outside Dane County may receive a per diem up to $115 to cover living expenses while they are in Dane County on state business. Members of the Dane County delegation may receive a per diem of half the amount to cover expenses.

Notable past members

 * C. Latham Sholes (1848–1850; 1856–1858), invented the QWERTY keyboard
 * Angus Cameron (1863–1864; 1871–1872), former U.S. Senator from Wisconsin (1875–1885)
 * Gaylord Nelson (1949–1958), former Governor of Wisconsin (1959–1963) and U.S. Senator from Wisconsin (1963–1981)
 * Henry Maier (1951–1960), former Mayor of Milwaukee (1960–1988)
 * James B. Brennan (1959–1962), former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin (1962–1969) and Milwaukee City Attorney (1972–1984)
 * William Bablitch (1972–1983), former Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court (1983–2003)
 * Tom Petri (1973–1979), former U.S. House Representative (1979–2015)
 * Jim Sensenbrenner (1975–1979), former U.S. House Representative (1979–2021)
 * Russ Feingold (1983–1993), former U.S. Senator from Wisconsin (1993–2011)
 * John Norquist (1983–1988), former Mayor of Milwaukee (1988–2004)
 * Tom Barrett (1989–1993), former U.S. House Representative (1993–2003) and former Mayor of Milwaukee (2004–2021)
 * Gwen Moore (1993–2005), current U.S. House Representative (2005–present)
 * Glenn Grothman (2005–2015), current U.S. House Representative (2015–present)
 * Tom Tiffany (2012–2020), current U.S. House Representative (2020–present)
 * Scott Fitzgerald (1995–2021), current U.S. House Representative (2021–present)

title: Wisconsin Senate


text:
User:Xwu

Xiaodi Wu

title: User:Xwu


text:
Imperial Prize of the Japan Academy

The Imperial Prize of the Japan Academy (恩賜賞) is a prestigious honor conferred to two of the recipients of the Japan Academy Prize.

Overviews
It is awarded in two categories: humanities and natural sciences. The Emperor and Empress visit the awarding ceremony and present a vase to the awardees.

Laureates

 * 2019 — Makoto Fujita (109th)
 * 2018 — Takeshi Matsuura, Chikashi Toyoshima (108th)
 * 2017 — Akira Hasegawa (seismologist) (107th)
 * 2016 — Kazutoshi Mori (106th)
 * 2015 — Hideo Hosono
 * 2014 — Isamu Akasaki
 * 2013 — Jun Matsuura, Yoshinori Tokura
 * 2012 — Kazuyoshi Yoshikawa, Keiichi Namba
 * 2011 — Akira Satake, Hideaki Miyata (101st)
 * 2010 — Akira Omote, Shinya Yamanaka (100th)
 * 2009 — Tetumi Murakami, Toru Eguchi (99th)
 * 2008 — Keiji Morokuma (98th)
 * 2007 — Senzo Hidemura, Shizuo Akira (97th)
 * 2006 — Shuh Narumiya (96th)
 * 2005 — Kazuya Kato (95th)
 * 2004 — Chikahi Suma, Takeshi Yasumoto (94th)
 * 2003 — Mitsuhiro Yanagida (93rd)
 * 2002 — Takahiro Fujimoto (Scientist), Sumio Iijima (92nd)
 * 2001 — Fumio Hayashi, Makoto Asashima (91st)
 * 2000 — Tsugitaka Sato, Shigekazu Nagata (90th)
 * 1999 — Susumu Fuma, Yoshito Kishi (89th)
 * 1998 — Toshio Yanagida (88th)
 * 1997 — Shigetada Nakanishi (87th)
 * 1996 — Tasuku Honjo (86th)
 * 1995 — Toru Mineya, Yoshio Fukao (85th)
 * 1994 — Makoto Kumada, Hideki Sakurai (84th)
 * 1993 — Issei Tanaka, Yasuo Tanaka (83rd)
 * 1992 — Chushichi Tsuzuki, Tadamitsu Kishimoto (82nd)
 * 1991 — Yoshinori Kobayashi (linguist), Akira Tonomura (81st)
 * 1990 — Koji Nakanishi (80th)
 * 1989 — Tomi Saeki, Yorio Hinuma (79th)
 * 1988 — Susumu Nishimura (78th)
 * 1987 — Toshio Fukuyama, Toshimitsu Yamazaki (77th)
 * 1986 — Masao Ito (76th)
 * 1985 — Ryo Sato (75th)
 * 1984 — Seizen Nakasone, Gakuzo Tamura (74th)
 * 1983 — Teruaki Mukaiyama (73rd)
 * 1982 — Kokiti Hara, Shizuo Kakutani (72nd)
 * 1981 — Yasuiti Nagano (71st)
 * 1980 — Yoshio Okada (cellular biologist) (70th)
 * 1979 — Yoshihide Kozai (69th)
 * 1978 — Kiyoshi Itō (68th)
 * 1977 — Shinji Takahashi (scientist) (67th)
 * 1976 — Takashi Sugimura (66th)
 * 1975 — Jikido Takasaki, Minoru Oda (65th)
 * 1974 — Tsugio Mikami, Kimishige Ishizaka (64th)
 * 1973 — Takuichi Takeshima, Jun Kondo (63rd)
 * 1972 — Tadashi Matsushita, Setsuro Ebashi (62nd)
 * 1971 — Mataji Miyamoto, Chushiro Hayashi (61st)
 * 1970 — Hidetaka Nakamura, Seizo Okamura (60th)
 * 1969 — Ryogo Kubo (59th)
 * 1968 — Tatsuo Nishida (58th)
 * 1967 — Kōsaku Yosida (57th)
 * 1966 — Egaku Mayeda (56th)
 * 1965 — Noriyuki Kojima (55th)
 * 1964 — Kiyoshi Mutō (54th)
 * 1963 — Takeo Nagamiya (53rd)
 * 1962 — Tomoichi Sasabuchi (52nd)
 * 1961 — Shigeo Okinaka (51st)
 * 1960 — Osamu Takata, Takuji Ito, Kazuo Yamasaki, Aki Uyeno, Taka Yanagisawa, Tsugio Miya (50th)
 * 1959 — Isao Imai (49th)
 * 1958 — Ryozo Niizeki (48th)
 * 1957 — Hajime Nakamura (47th)
 * 1956 — Masuzo Shikata, Isamu Tachi (46th)
 * 1955 — Yoshio Fujita (45th)
 * 1954 — Jitsuzo Tamura, Yukio Kobayashi (44th)
 * 1953 — Tomizo Yoshida (43rd)
 * 1952 — Seiichi Mizuno, Toshio Nagahiro (42nd)
 * 1951 — Yoshiyuki Toyama (41st)
 * 1950 — Shoichi Sakata (40th)
 * 1949 — Kakuji Goto (39th)
 * 1948 — Saburo Ienaga (38th)
 * 1947 — Takeo Matsumura (37th)
 * 1946 — Hakaru Masumoto (36th)
 * 1945 — Tokuhichi Mishima, Kyôji Funada, Takahiro Okuno (35th)
 * 1944 — Tomosaburo Ogata (34th)
 * 1943 — Junpei Shinobu, Tanemoto Furuhata, Hitoshi Kihara (33rd)
 * 1942 — Enku Uno (32nd)
 * 1941 — Eiichi Matsumoto (politician), Kinjiro Okabe, Yas Kuno (31st)
 * 1940 — Asaji Nose, Hideki Yukawa, Juro Horiuti (30th)
 * 1939 — Ken Ishikawa (Historian), Ken Kure (29th)
 * 1938 — No award (28th)
 * 1937 — Shinkichi Horiba, Yasujiro Niwa (27th)
 * 1936 — Hisayosi Ogawa, Takaoki Sasaki, Tomizo Yoshida (26th)
 * 1935 — Shimpei Ogura, Shinsho Hanayama (25th)
 * 1934 — Noboru Niida, Seitaro Tsuboi (24th)
 * 1933 — Ziro Tuzi, Bunsuke Suzuki (23rd)
 * 1932 — Kyōsuke Kindaichi, Kiyoo Wadati (22nd)
 * 1931 — Katsutada Sezawa (21st)
 * 1930 — Buntaro Adachi (20th)
 * 1929 — Toshi Shida (19th)
 * 1928 — Masao Kambe, Sōichi Kakeya (18th)
 * 1927 — Shigeru Kato, Yuji Shibata (17th)
 * 1926 — Yorisuke Numata, Yoshiaki Ozawa (16th)
 * 1925 — Keiki Yabuki, Nagaho Mononobe (15th)
 * 1924 — Kuniji Yashiro, Takaoki Sasaki (14th)
 * 1923 — Iichiro Tokutomi, Shigematsu Kakimura, Yasuhiko Asahina, Suekichi Kinoshita (13th)
 * 1922 — Toshio Takamine, Usaburo Yoshida (12th)
 * 1921 — Zennosuke Tsuji, Gennosuke Fuse (11th)
 * 1920 — Kaneyuki Miura, Mitsumaru Tsujimoto (10th)
 * 1919 — Jun Ishiwara (9th)
 * 1918 — Hidematsu Wada, Taiken Kimura, Keita Shibata (8th)
 * 1917 — Torahiko Terada, Sasaki Nobutsuna (7th)
 * 1916 — Toru Oya, Taisuke Hayashi, Ryokichi Inada, Yasushi Ido (6th)
 * 1915 — Hideyo Noguchi (5th)
 * 1914 — Sunao Tawara (4th)
 * 1913 — Ryosuke Muraoka, Kumakatsu Kosaka (3rd)
 * 1912 — Nagao Ariga, Yu Fujikawa, Sakugoro Hirase, Seiichiro Ikeno (2nd)
 * 1911 — Hisashi Kimura (1st)

title: Imperial Prize of the Japan Academy


text:
User:Fuzzy Bunny

Scribo ergo sum!

I write therefor I am!

U know latin?

S.P.Q.R.

Est fatus

SEDET

title: User:Fuzzy Bunny


text:
Heather Couper

Heather Anita Couper, (2 June 1949 – 19 February 2020) was a British astronomer, broadcaster and science populariser.

After studying astrophysics at the University of Leicester and researching clusters of galaxies at Oxford University, Couper was appointed senior planetarium lecturer at the Royal Observatory, Greenwich. She subsequently hosted two series on Channel 4 television – The Planets and The Stars – as well as making many TV guest appearances. On radio, Couper presented the programme Britain’s Space Race as well as the 30-part series Cosmic Quest for BBC Radio 4. Couper served as president of the British Astronomical Association from 1984 to 1986 and was Astronomy Professor in perpetuity at Gresham College, London. She served on the Millennium Commission, for which she was appointed a CBE in 2007. Asteroid 3922 Heather is named in her honour.

Early life
Born on 2 June 1949 in Wallasey, Cheshire, Couper was the only child of George Couper and Anita Couper (née Taylor). At the age of seven or eight, she was watching planes in the night sky because her father was an airline pilot when she unexpectedly witnessed a bright green meteor. Her parents said there was no such thing; but a newspaper headline the next day referred to a "green shooting star," and Couper then determined to become an astronomer.

She attended St Mary's Grammar School (merged with St. Nicholas Grammar School in 1977 to become Haydon School) on Wiltshire Lane in Northwood Hills, Middlesex. At the age of 16, she wrote to British television astronomer Patrick Moore asking if she would be able to take up a career in astronomy, and received the reply "being a girl is no problem at all"!

Astronomy
After two years as a management trainee, with the Peter Robinson fashion store and its Top Shop division (now Topshop), Couper joined Cambridge Observatory as a research assistant in 1969, becoming a Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society in 1970. She graduated from the University of Leicester in 1973 with a BSc in Astronomy and Physics. At Leicester, she met fellow astronomy student Nigel Henbest; they formed a working partnership – Hencoup Enterprises – that focuses on astronomy popularisation. She then researched at the Department of Astrophysics at the University of Oxford, whilst a postgraduate student at Linacre College, Oxford.

From 1977 to 1983, Couper was Senior Lecturer at the Caird Planetarium of the Old Royal Observatory at Greenwich (superseded in 2007 by the Peter Harrison Planetarium), leaving to become a freelance writer and broadcaster. In 1984, she was elected President of the British Astronomical Association, the first woman and the second-youngest person to hold the position. Couper served as President of the Junior Astronomical Society (now the Society for Popular Astronomy) in 1987–9. The London Planetarium invited Couper to write and present its major new 1988 public show, Starburst!

Couper was appointed Professor of Astronomy at Gresham College in 1993 – the first female professor in the 400-year history of the college – and held the position until 1996.

Books and other publications
From 1978, Couper wrote over 40 popular-level books on astronomy and space, many in collaboration with Henbest. According to one reviewer, Couper and Henbest are 'great storytellers with an eye for a colourful character'.

Her articles appeared in leading astronomy and science magazines, including BBC Sky at Night, BBC Focus and New Scientist. She was a columnist for The Independent online newspaper.

Eclipses
In 1999, the Royal Astronomical Society and La Société Guernesiaise invited Couper to deliver keynote lectures on the forthcoming total solar eclipse, the first visible from the British Isles since 1927. Couper also led expeditions to view total eclipses of the Sun in Sumatra (1988), Hawaii (1991), Aruba (1998), Egypt (2006), China (2009) and Tahiti (2010).

Public appearances
Couper's international lecture tours and public speaking engagements ranged from the US to China; Colombia to New Zealand. She was the chief guest celebrity speaker on the maiden voyage of the P&O cruise ship Arcadia and gave presentations on Cunard's Queen Mary 2 and Queen Victoria. In 1986, Couper was aboard Concorde on its first flight from London to Auckland, New Zealand, as the astronomer responsible for showing passengers Halley's Comet while flying at 18,000 metres over the Indian Ocean.

Couper appeared at many festivals, including the Brighton Festival, the Cheltenham Science Festival and The Sunday Times Oxford Literary Festival. Her corporate work included keynote presentations to British Gas, AXA SunLife and IBM.

Radio
Couper presented many programmes and series on BBC Radio 4, including the live Starwatch series, Worlds Beyond and The Modern Magi. She won the 2008 Sir Arthur Clarke Award for Britain's Space Race on Radio 4's Archive Hour.

She also made numerous appearances on BBC Radio 2, Radio 4 and Radio 5Live, as well as regional and local radio stations across the UK. In 2008 Couper presented the 30 x 15-minute Radio 4 series Cosmic Quest, on the history of astronomy.

Her major series for BBC World Service Radio ranged from A Brief History of Infinity and The Essential Guide to the 21st Century, to the long-running Seeing Stars (presented with Nigel Henbest).

Outside astronomy, Couper was a guest presenter on the Radio 4 flagship programmes Woman’s Hour, the John Dunn Programme, and Start the Week. She showcased her interests in literature and local history in presenting episodes of Radio 4’s With Great Pleasure and Down Your Way, and in classical music by selecting her "pick of the Proms" for In Tune on BBC Radio 3.

Television appearances
Couper appeared as an astronomy expert on news and current affairs programmes, and presented many series and programmes, mainly on Channel 4.

Her first TV appearances were as a guest on The Sky at Night, a long-running series hosted by Patrick Moore. Couper (with Terence Murtagh) presented the 1981 children's series Heavens Above, produced by Yorkshire Television for the ITV network.

In 1985, Couper presented the seven-part series The Planets for Channel 4, followed in 1988 by the six-part The Stars. Her television presentational roles included The Neptune Encounter (ITV), A Close Encounter of the Second Kind (Horizon, BBC2) and Stephen Hawking: a Profile (BBC4).

She narrated many factual TV programmes, ranging from Ekranoplan: The Caspian Sea Monster (Channel 4) to Raging Planet (Discovery Channel).

Television production
Couper, along with Henbest and Stuart Carter (director of her series The Stars), founded Pioneer Productions, an independent UK TV production company creating factual programming, in 1988. Couper presented the company’s first documentary, The Neptune Encounter, in 1989, covering Voyager 2's flyby of Neptune. As producer, Couper's TV credits for Channel 4 include the award-winning Black Holes and Electric Skies, along with the series Universe: Beyond the Millennium. Couper left Pioneer Productions in 1999 to concentrate on more general radio and TV appearances.

Millennium Commission
In 1993, Couper was invited to join the newly created Millennium Commission, as one of nine commissioners responsible for distributing money from the National Lottery to projects that would celebrate and commemorate the new millennium. She was one of only two commissioners (along with Michael Heseltine) who stayed in post from the commission’s inception until it was wound up in 2009.

For her work on the Millennium Commission, as well as her promotion of science to the public, Couper was appointed a CBE in the Queen's Birthday Honours List in 2007.

Death
Couper died at Stoke Mandeville Hospital on 19 February 2020 at the age of 70 after a short illness.

Awards

 * Times Educational Supplement Senior Information Book Award 1987
 * Honorary Doctor of Letters, Loughborough University 1991
 * Honorary Doctor of Science, University of Hertfordshire 1994
 * Honorary Doctor of Science, Leicester University 1994
 * Gold Medal, New York Festivals 1993, 1995, 1998
 * Banff Rockie Award 1995
 * Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) 2007

Radio presentation

 * With Great Pleasure, 1987, BBC Radio 4
 * Down Your Way, 1989, BBC Radio 4
 * Seeing Stars (monthly series), 1990–2001, BBC World Service
 * The Modern Magi, 1995, BBC Radio 4
 * Starwatch (6-part series), 1996, BBC Radio 4
 * Naming the Universe (5-part series), 1999, BBC Radio 4
 * The Essential Guide to the 21st Century (5-part series), 2000, BBC World Service
 * Red Planet (3-part series), 2003, BBC Radio 4
 * Worlds Beyond (3-part series), 2004/5, BBC Radio 4
 * Arthur C. Clarke: the Science and the Fiction, 2005, BBC Radio 4/BBC World Service
 * A Brief History of Infinity (2-part series), 2006, BBC World Service
 * Britain’s Space Race, 2006, BBC Radio 4, winner of the 2008 Sir Arthur Clarke Award
 * Cosmic Quest (30-part series), 2008, BBC Radio 4

title: Heather Couper


text:
Borough of Newcastle-under-Lyme

The Borough of Newcastle-under-Lyme is a local government district with borough status in Staffordshire, England.

It is named after the town of Newcastle-under-Lyme, where the council is based. The borough also includes the town of Kidsgrove and several villages and surrounding rural areas lying generally to the west of Newcastle itself. Most of the borough's built-up areas form part of The Potteries Urban Area.

The neighbouring districts are Staffordshire Moorlands, Stoke-on-Trent, Stafford, Shropshire and Cheshire East.

History
The town of Newcastle-under-Lyme was an ancient borough, established in the twelfth century. It is known to have been granted a charter (since lost) around 1173 by Henry II. The earliest surviving charter dates from 1235. The borough was formally incorporated in 1590 under a new charter from Elizabeth I.

The borough was reformed in 1836 to become a municipal borough under the Municipal Corporations Act 1835, which reformed many boroughs across the country. The municipal borough was enlarged several times, notably in 1932 when it took in what had been the Wolstanton United Urban District, covering the parishes of Chesterton, Silverdale and Wolstanton, and at the same time also absorbed the parish of Clayton from Newcastle-under-Lyme Rural District.

The modern district was created on 1 April 1974 under the Local Government Act 1972 covering three former districts, which were all abolished at the same time: The new district was named Newcastle-under-Lyme after its largest town. The district was granted borough status from its creation, allowing the chair of the council to take the title of mayor, continuing Newcastle's series of mayors dating back to 1318.
 * Kidsgrove Urban District
 * Newcastle-under-Lyme Municipal Borough
 * Newcastle-under-Lyme Rural District

Governance

Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council provides district-level services. County-level services are provided by Staffordshire County Council. Parts of the borough are also covered by civil parishes, which form a third tier of local government.

Political control
The council has been under Conservative majority control since 2021.

The first elections to the enlarged borough council were held in 1973, initially operating as a shadow authority alongside the outgoing authorities until the new arrangements came into effect on 1 April 1974. Political control of the council since 1974 has been as follows:

Leadership
The role of mayor is largely ceremonial in Newcastle-under-Lyme, with political leadership provided instead by the leader of the council. The leaders since 1974 have been:

Composition
Following the 2022 election and a subsequent change of allegiance in November 2023, the composition of the council was:

The next election is due in 2026.

Elections
Since the last boundary changes in 2018 the council has comprised 44 councillors representing 21 wards, with each ward electing one, two or three councillors. Elections are held every four years. The wards are:

 * Audley
 * Bradwell
 * Clayton
 * Crackley & Red Street
 * Cross Heath
 * Holditch & Chesterton
 * Keele
 * Kidsgrove & Ravenscliffe
 * Knutton
 * Loggerheads
 * Madeley & Betley
 * Maer & Whitmore
 * May Bank
 * Newchapel & Mow Cop
 * Silverdale
 * Talke & Butt Lane
 * Thistleberry
 * Town
 * Westbury Park & Northwood
 * Westlands
 * Wolstanton

Premises
The council is based at Castle House on Barracks Road in the centre of Newcastle. The building was purpose-built for the council as a shared facility with Staffordshire County Council and the police, and opened in 2018. Prior to that the council was based at the Civic Offices on Merrial Street which had been completed in 1967 for the old borough council.

Demography
In the 2001 census, the borough was recorded as having a population of 122,030 with 51.5% being female. 78.% identified themselves as Christian, 13.1% having no religion, 0.5% Muslim, 0.2% Hindu or other and 0.1% stating Jewish or Sikh. 61.2% were classed as economically active, with 22.6% working in manufacturing, 18.5% in wholesale or retail, 11.6% in health/social work and 11.6% in financial and other business related activities.

Education
Newcastle-under-Lyme was chosen for the campus of University College of North Staffordshire, established in 1949 at Keele Hall in the village of Keele, two miles from the town centre, and which was granted full university status as Keele University in 1962. Keele University Medical School is based in the grounds of the University Hospital of North Staffordshire at Hartshill in Stoke-on-Trent, about a mile from the centre of Newcastle-under-Lyme.

Media
In terms of television, the area is served by BBC West Midlands and ITV Central broadcasting from Birmingham. Television signals are received the Sutton Coldfield TV transmitter and the Fenton relay transmitter. However, Kidsgrove is served by BBC North West and ITV Granada, broadcast from Salford. Television signals in the town are received from the Winter Hill TV transmitter.

Radio stations for the area are BBC Radio Stoke, Signal 1, Greatest Hits Radio Staffordshire & Cheshire, 6 Towns Radio and HitMix Radio, a community based station that broadcast from Newcastle-under-Lyme.

The Sentinel is the local newspaper that covers the area.

Towns and parishes
An area roughly corresponding to the pre-1974 municipal borough of Newcastle-under-Lyme (less the parish of Silverdale, created in 2002) is an unparished area; over half the borough's population live in this area. The rest of the borough is divided into eleven civil parishes. The parish council for Kidsgrove has declared that parish to be a town, allowing it to take the style "town council".

The parishes are:

 * Audley Rural
 * Balterley
 * Betley
 * Chapel and Hill Chorlton
 * Keele
 * Kidsgrove
 * Loggerheads, Staffordshire
 * Madeley
 * Maer
 * Silverdale
 * Whitmore

Freedom of the Borough
The following people, military units and organisations and groups have received the Freedom of the Borough of Newcastle-under-Lyme.

Individuals

 * Gordon Banks: 23 February 2018.

Military units

 * The Staffordshire Regiment: 1973.

Organisations and Groups

 * The Royal Stoke University Hospital: 22 May 2021.

title: Borough of Newcastle-under-Lyme


text:
Talk:Japanese grammar

Adjectival Noun vs. Nominal Adjective
For the sake of consistency, can we please stick to just one of these terms throughout the article? It's okay to have a parenthetical mention such as, "Also called X," but after that we should be consistent in our usage and not flip-flop between the two terms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.120.205.101 (talk) 23:52, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Cases
From the article:

Grammatical cases in Japanese are marked by particles placed after the nouns. A distinctive feature of Japanese is the presence of two cases which are roughly equivalent to the nominative case in other languages: one representing the sentence topic, other representing the subject. The most important case markers are the following:

 * Nominative - が (ga) for subject, は (wa) for the topic
 * Genitive - の (no)
 * Dative - に (ni)
 * Accusative - を (wo)
 * Lative - へ (e), used for destination direction (like in "to some place")
 * Ablative - から (kara), used for source direction (like in "from some place")
 * Instrumental - で (de)

Although some authorities seem to describe particles in this way, personally I don't think it is helpful. I wouldn't call "noun + に" the "dative case" of a noun, any more than I would "to + noun" in English. Article Grammatical case says "Case is based fundamentally on changes to the noun to indicate the noun's role in the sentence. This is not how English works; instead, word order and prepositions are used to achieve this." I would say also "this is not how Japanese works". What do other people think? 109.145.59.124 (talk) 20:56, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The particles make much more of a difference than the word order does. In the English, "The dog bites the man," the word order is what determines who is biting whom. In the Japanese, 「犬は人を噛む」, it's the particles doing the work. 「人を犬は噛む」 means the same thing. "The man bites the dog," does not. 107.4.45.152 (talk) 03:56, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Word order is really irrelevant. Particles in Japanese are not normally described as "cases"; the stuff at Grammatical case is almost totally unsourced, but I do not have access to the Takahashi grammar book: does anyone know exactly what he says? The case article claims that English does not have cases except remnants of the case system in pronouns; it is also claimed that the English possessive "'s" is not a case marker because it attaches to a syntactic constituent, as for example in "The King of Peru's nose", or "The King and I's closing scene" (not "The King and my closing scene"). Exactly the argument shows that Japanese particles are not case markers, because they attach to constituents. 説明するのが難しい: there is no cased noun (or any other part of speech). I have long contemplated just removing Japanese and Korean from the case article, because there is no evidence for the claims. Imaginatorium (talk) 13:11, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

What source says that Japanese doesn't have cases? I'm not aware of any. It's true that case inflection doesn't exist in Japanese, but the existence of case is universally acknowledged by linguists. Ga and wo are always referred to as case particles in both Japanese and English precisely because they denote case. For example, as Natsuko Tsujimura writes in An Introduction to Japanese Linguistics, "Japanese case particles resemble the case systems in other languages in that they mark the grammatical functions of accompanying nouns in a sentence, but they also exhibit a unique set of properties that are not commonly observed in other case systems." I could list hundreds of books on the uses of case in Japanese, but I don't know of any linguists who deny the existence of case in Japanese. What linguist denies that Japanese uses cases? Tikisim (talk) 03:22, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I accept your quote that Tsujimura calls them "case particles", but do not believe that this is universal. The problem is that she is probably simply using "case" to refer to the nom-acc-dat arrangment of three possibilities for first ("subject-y") argument, direct ("object") argument and indirect ("object") argument. If this means that Japanese "has case", then exactly the same argument shows that English "has case", but everyone seems to agree that it doesn't. (Or if you like, "If 's is a clitic, then が is a clitic.) And while distinguishing these three sorts of "grammatical" argument maps to the standard cases, the particles have none of the standard properties of case-marking. They do not apply to nouns, adjectives, or any other part of speech, they attach to nominal phrases. And if you are allowed to lump in semantic words like から, English must have at least 15 cases, formed with "from", "under", "below" and so on and so on. Do any of the linguists answer any of my questions above? 説明するのが難しい: what does "case" apply to here? Imaginatorium (talk) 19:10, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Case particles are understood as a particular grammatical feature of Japanese intended to mark the case of various parts of speech. This view is, as far as I know, universal. There isn't a part of speech in English for the specific purpose of denoting case. If there is a linguist that doesn't call them Japanese case particles (kaku-joshi), I wouldn't mind including that view, but I'm not sure it actually exists. Ga, for instance, is universally recognized as denoting nominative case, including in the nominalized clause you created above. As Gisaburo Kiyose writes in Japanese Grammar - A New Approach: "A noun-substantive being in the nominative case with the suffix-ga indicates that the noun is the subject of the sentence. In written language, the nominative case suffix -ga must be added to the grammatical subject." Tikisim (talk) 03:23, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Black cats
There is an example of a noun phrase for "black cat", given as 黒猫 (kuroneko). "Adjective" is essentially undefined w.r.t. Japanese, and you could argue that this is a compound noun rather than a noun phrase, but it is head-final, which is the point of the paragraph. An IP has repeatedly changed this to "黒い猫" (kuroi neko), which would not be wrong (kuroi is the "true adjective" form) but glossing it kuro no neko which demonstrates a failure to know hiragana. Imaginatorium (talk) 03:48, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

I suppose that the IP is aiming at a Japanese version of the English examples above this. But the first two of these English examples are screwy -- or anyway they are for me, who hasn't read anything by Greenberg. Here they are, after markup-stripping:
 * genitive phrase, i.e., noun modified by another noun ("the cover of the book", "the book's cover");

I'm unfamiliar with the concept of "genitive phrase"; I don't see any of what I'd call modification; and at least one in each of these pairs is not a noun but instead a noun phrase.
 * noun governed by an adposition ("on the table", "underneath the table");

These aren't nouns; they're noun phrases. And I'm puzzled by "governed by"; rather, I'd say they're complements. I'll skip the third; so the fourth one is:
 * noun modified by an adjective ("black cat").

Well, the most straightforward example, for expository purposes, of this in Japanese would be 黒い猫, I suppose. Which is commoner, that or 黒猫? The answer is perhaps complicated by the 宅急便 trademark. But I note that Google shows 赤パンツ (in quotation marks) as about half as common again as 赤いパンツ (in quotation marks). -- Hoary (talk) 04:52, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

 * Well, the article is not very good. But this is partly due to a WP:axiom which happens to be false: if you collect together various bits of writing each of which is coherent, the whole will be. But there is no generally agreed set of terminology for Japanese grammar, so an article could only be written by starting with a description of the terminology and conventions which will be used in this article. This would be argued as being "WP:OR", and people would add new bits in using completely different conventions, so sadly it's hopeless. But the section above is quite understandable, I think. Which one do you want me to expound on? Imaginatorium (talk) 07:56, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I can share something I learned about い. The question is 黒い猫 vs. 黒猫 and/or 赤いパンツ vs. 赤パンツ. Has thought been given to spoken word vs. written word? Many times い is omitted during casual speech. Dialect can also play a role in this. This may or may not apply to the concerns listed here. I am a student, not a teacher. Thank you. David Spalding Irish (talk) 20:35, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * This is not a difference between written and spoken, nor between levels of formality.
 * When including the い, for these color words, the grammar is explicitly  +.
 * When omitting the い, for these color words, the grammar is explicitly  +.
 * The "basic" Japanese color words, those that can take い, become nouns when that い ending is missing. Thus, 黒 (kuro) doesn't mean "black (adjective)", it means "black (noun)", as in, "the color black".  Likewise for 赤 (aka, "red"), 白 (shiro, "white"), 青 (ao, "blue / green").  The distinction is subtle and doesn't carry much nuance, so in translation, there really isn't any appreciable difference between 黒い猫 (kuroi neko, "black cat") and 黒猫 (kuroneko, "black cat").  Certain things that are very commonly black might usually or idiomatically be called kuro  as a compound noun, while things that are less commonly black will take the adjectival phrase form as kuroi  .
 * HTH, 205.166.76.242 (talk) 18:44, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Lead section is too specialized/jargon-y
"" "Japanese is a synthetic language [...] with both productive and fixed elements..." ""

Does anyone know what "productive and fixed elements" is referring to? After a cursory search through the references and a few linguistics resources online, I can't find any usage of these terms. Are they commonly accepted in the field? The closest I could find is Productivity (linguistics), but I'm not sure how the phrase "productive elements" arises from this definition.

In general, I feel that this article's lead section is too filled with jargon to be useful to anyone outside the field of linguistics. In comparison, the leads on Spanish grammar and English grammar are much more informative. I plan to rewrite this lead accordingly; let me know if any changes are too drastic. — Shitakunai (talk) 02:18, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

 * As someone with some knowledge in linguistics, that is a pretty vague statement. I think it meant to say that some grammatical processes are productive and some... aren't. Just like every other language. You're free to remove it.

 * An even bigger problem is its length; it doesn't come close to summarizing the article. Nothing is said about verbs or particles, for example.--Megaman en m (talk) 06:54, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your input, I've removed it and rewritten the lead. Also added a few sentences about verbs and particles. Shitakunai (talk) 01:06, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Small change
I know this matter doesn't have to do with Japanese grammar, but I think it could use clearer terminology:

"The conjugation of i-adjectives has similarities to the conjugation of verbs, unlike Western languages where inflection of adjectives, where it exists, is more likely to have similarities to the declension of nouns. Verbs and adjectives being closely related is unusual from the perspective of English, but is a common case across languages generally, and one may consider Japanese adjectives as a kind of stative verb."

By "Western", does that paragraph technically mean Indo-European? Uralic languages like Hungarian and Finnish, which aren't Indo-European, can be considered "Western", but that doesn't necessarily mean that they have similarities aside from loanwords spread via geographic proximity. It gets even more ambiguous since Turkic or Afro-Asiatic (such as Semitic) languages would definitely be considered Western from a Japanese perspective, but aren't really considered Western in the usual sense.

ThighFish (talk) 04:09, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Module nihongo3 ≠ Module Nihongo krt
entirely removed the module "nihongo krt" from the article, with the following comment:
 * "replaced nihongo krt with nihongo3, as they essentially do the same thing, and honestly, when I have the time, I'll likely submit krt to TfD."

However, to say that 'a different order of words is the same thing' is to ignore that there may be deliberate choices in word order that improve the experience for the reader. That is exactly what the difference between nihongo3 and nihongo krt is supposed to achieve. nihongo shows English first; nihongo3 shows romaji first; nihongo krt shows kanji/kana first. So in your edit, by replacing all nihongo krt with nihongo3, you are redirecting the focus in every context away from the original Japanese script toward the romanised transliteration. I'm not sure that is the best way for every context, especially on articles that explicitly describe or explain Japanese language. Perhaps, from a stylistic point-of-view, the article could take an entirely "romaji-first" approach; however you must check each and every replaced occurrence where you've changed the word order from "krt" (kanji-romaji-transliteration) to "tkr" (transliteration-kanji-romaji) to make sure that you haven't introduced confusion where it wouldn't have existed otherwise. If you have introduced confusion from the change of word order, then you can either revert the change or re-word the context to eliminate the confusion.

Secondly, there are currently 39 transclusions of nihongo krt, within less than 1 year of its introduction on Wikipedia. That's not bad, and I wouldn't say that it's grounds for removal (or discussion to be removed). But it serves a very strong purpose, mainly on the Japanese verb conjugation page (where it's transcluded 536 times). In that article, the kana is essential to notice the patterns within the context of conjugation. However, discussing the future of nihongo krt is best done on it's talk page, not here (or in the comments of edits on this page either).

But back to the main point: Did you verify if the change of word order (from krt to tkr) was the best choice for each instance in the article? — JKVeganAbroad (talk) 17:12, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

 * To give an example of what I believe a poor choice of removing nihongo krt from every instance within the article, there were some sentences about particles which are now more confusing by changing the word order. For example (there are many more):
 * Previously: In this function it is interchangeable with.
 * Currently: In this function it is interchangeable with e (へ).
 * Discussing particles really ought to use kana first, thus the former usage (with へ first) makes more sense in that context. Please consider reverting your changes on the situations where the former word order was more logical for the reader. — JKVeganAbroad (talk) 17:26, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * - I'll have to respond to this properly later, but I'll direct you to this ongoing discussion - I think you're right, and I probably got overzealous in clearing up some very peripheral templates.
 * At present, we're discussing a single template, similar to lang-zh, that covers all functions and orders an editor could need, with the inclusion of named parameters in-template to avoid (what at present is a lot of) instances of editors filling out parameters incorrectly. I do cover all six existing nihongo templates within this discussion - please chime in if you have suggestions.
 * However, it's unlikely that any sort of bot is gonna be introduced to replace these templates, as they would violate WP:COSMETICBOT. If you see any instances where kanji should come first, could I please ask that you use lang and follow it up with transl? Again - I'm sorry for causing issues; but we are staring down the barrel of replacing 97,000 instances of nihongo and 12,000 instances of nihongo2 by hand. It's unlikely that individual templates are going to get kept; there's no reason not to roll them into one. Please let me know if there are instances throughout the article where the presentation of kanji and transliterations is prominent and needs replacing, and I can have a look at fixing it.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 17:53, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your understanding. I'm definitely in support of a unified module; however, for fear of vaporware, I'd prefer not to avoid using krt until the better solution actually exists. Until then, would you mind if I revert your edit to restore the original word order in the article? — JKVeganAbroad (talk) 02:49, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I've just noticed that in some of your edits, your edit summaries don't match your edits. Specifically, you switched a lot of perfectly functional nihongo krt modules into nihongo or nihongo3 modules in many of your edits without stating the fact that you are doing so. In fact, many of your edits are entirely uncommented with no information in the edit summary. Furthermore, you've conflated the edits of nihongo krt with other miscellaneous (but very useful and well needed) edits.
 * In future, it would be much more helpful to do big changes in single-step edits. For example, when adding content—only add content, when fixing errors—only fix errors, when changing modules—only change modules. As it stands, there is no easy way to manually revert your nihongo krt without manually going through the whole article—which has over 125000 bytes worth of information—and identifying where kana should be written first. I'm a little annoyed about it, because I've already done this to the whole article and it took me days to change the raw untagged Japanese text into optimally parsed HTML tagged text (via the entire library of nihongo modules). During that time, I preserved the order of the editors who preceded me, selecting the appropriate nihongo module to not change the word order at all. There were only a few cases where I changed the kana ordering where it was glaringly obvious. The point is, I was very careful. Your conflated edits, on the other hand, could use a little more care (by commenting every edit summary accurately, and by publishing different types of edits separately, and by not applying a "one-size-fits-all" search and replace on code that actually changes the word order).
 * Actually, I agree with many of your edit choices where you've changed the prose to be English or rōmaji first. Reverting is not an option. But, absolutely, the article needs to be re-analysed from beginning to end, and reconsider the best word order for every kana moment (and every romaji–English moment). — JKVeganAbroad (talk) 15:25, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * - I'm sorry. My edits have been rushed, and I haven't been in the best of minds lately; lockdown has proven a relatively shitty living situation for me.
 * I should've gone through and conducted edits in more steps - heaven knows I've been on the receiving end of large-scale edits of muddled overall quality before, and I don't envy the task of having to dig through that. I will have a look over myself and fix the order where necessary; again, I apologise.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 16:50, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Section titled Controversy over the characterization of nominal adjectives
This section seems to require, for any kind of understanding, knowledge that is not to be found anywhere on this page. Could it perhaps be moved to the Japanese adjectives article, for example? Or else, could extra information about these adjectives be included in this page, to make that section meaningful? Or perhaps both? W. P. Uzer (talk) 21:38, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Capitals for romanization of katakana
Many (but not all) of the example sentences in the "Particles" section have capitalized words in the romanization, apparently reflecting the fact that those words are written in katakana (which seems to me irrelevant to the topic of that section). Is this standard? necessary? W. P. Uzer (talk) 07:12, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * It is neither standard, nor necessary, and not in any obvious way helpful at all. Though it is the sort of thing you see quite often. Like John being called "JON", instead of the more natural "Jon-san" in the later examples. Imaginatorium (talk) 05:41, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Japanese grammar


text:
Oneida County

Oneida County is the name of three counties in the United States:

 * Oneida County, Idaho
 * Oneida County, New York
 * Oneida County, Wisconsin

title: Oneida County


text:
User talk:Fuzzy Bunny

Hello Fuzzy Bunny, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have a lot of fun here. There are lots of resources around to help guide you. be sure to check out:

 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you want add any images check out:

 * image use policy
 * How to keep image file sizes as small as possible

If you need any help try:

 * Help
 * Village pump
 * Or ask me at my talk page User_talk:Theresa knott

Don't be afraid of making the odd mistake, there are any number of others eagerly waiting for a chance to correct it!

title: User talk:Fuzzy Bunny


text:
Bridgettines

The Bridgettines, or Birgittines, formally known as the Order of the Most Holy Savior (Ordo Sanctissimi Salvatoris; abbreviated OSsS), is a monastic religious order of the Catholic Church founded by Saint Birgitta (Bridget of Sweden) in 1344 and approved by Pope Urban V in 1370. They follow the Rule of Saint Augustine. There are today several different branches of Bridgettines.

History
The first monastery of the order was founded in 1369 at the former royal castle of Vadstena. St. Bridget's granddaughter, Lady Ingegerd Knutsdotter, was Abbess of Vadstena from 1385 to 1403. Upon her death on 14 September 1412, direct descent from St. Bridget became extinct. This opened the medieval concept of "Bridget's spiritual children", members of the order founded by her, to be her true heirs.

The order spread widely in Sweden and Norway, and played a remarkable part in promoting culture and literature in Scandinavia; to this is to be attributed the fact that the motherhouse at Vadstena, by Lake Vättern, was not suppressed till 1595 even though the Protestant Reformation had been widespread in Scandinavia. By 1515, with significant royal patronage, there were 27 houses, 13 of them in Scandinavia. Bridgettine houses soon spread into other lands, reaching an eventual total of 80.

In England, the Bridgettine monastery of Syon Abbey at Isleworth, Middlesex, was founded and royally endowed by King Henry V in 1415, and became one of the richest, most fashionable, and influential religious communities in the country until its Dissolution under King Henry VIII. Elizabeth Sander was imprisoned on a mission in England and one of the monks of the community, Richard Reynolds, O.Ss.S., was among the first members of the English clergy to be executed as traitors for his refusal to accept the Oath of Supremacy. He was canonized as a martyr by Pope Paul VI in 1970.

Syon Abbey was among the few religious houses restored during Queen Mary I's reign (1553–1558), when nearly twenty members of the old community were re-established there in 1557. Upon the accession of Queen Elizabeth I and the ensuing conflict between Catholics and the English Crown, the Bridgettine monastic community left England, first for the Low Countries, then, after many vicissitudes, to Rouen in France, and finally, in 1594, to Lisbon. The community remained in Lisbon (where the last monk of the community died), recruiting new members from England, until 1861, when they returned to England.

Syon Abbey in Devon continued as the only English religious community that had existed without interruption since pre-Reformation times. In 2004 the surviving medieval books of the monastic library were entrusted for safekeeping to the University of Exeter. Among the texts preserved was the Showing of Love by Julian of Norwich and The Orcherd of Syon, which translated Catherine of Siena's Dialogue. Syon Abbey's Tudor gatepost in marble, on which parts of St Richard Reynolds' body were placed, was brought by the nuns into their exile, and then returned with them to England. This was later given to the Church of the Blessed Sacrament in Exeter.

Virtually all the Northern European Bridgettine monasteries (the bulk of the order) were destroyed during the Reformation.

Currently active branches
As of 2013 there were 800 members. The distinctive part of the Bridgettine veil for the professed sisters is the crown, called the "Crown of the Five Holy Wounds". It has five red marks, one at each joint, to recall the Five Wounds of Christ on the Cross. The monks wear a red cross with the image of a Eucharistic host at the center on the right breast of their cloak. The order has its own proper Rite for the Canonical Hours, called the Office of Our Lady. Most houses of the order support themselves by providing bed and breakfast hospitality to guests at standard industry rates.

Medieval branch
The original medieval branch today consists of four independent monasteries:

 * Maria Refugie Abbey in Uden, Netherlands
 * Syon Abbey in Isleworth, England (abandoned in 2011)
 * Birgittakloster in Altomünster Germany (abandoned in 2017)
 * Pax Mariae Abbey in Vadstena, Sweden

Spanish branch
Marina de Escobar founded a Spanish branch in the 1630s, consisting only of nuns, following a slightly modified version of the St Bridget's Rule. It currently consists of four independent monasteries in Spain, four in Mexico and one in Venezuela.

Swedish branch
The largest branch of the Bridgettines today is the one founded by Saint Elizabeth Hesselblad, a nurse, on 8 September 1911, and consisting of religious sisters dedicated to providing hospitality for those in need of rest. It was fully approved by the Holy See on 7 July 1940, and currently consists of convents in Europe, Asia and North America.

The motherhouse of the order is located on the Piazza Farnese, Rome, Italy, the house where Birgitta had once lived (see Santa Brigida in Rome). On 28 October 2016, Fabia Kattakayam was selected as the order's new Abbess General. She is the first person of Indian descent to serve in this position. As in all the houses of the order, this convent offers accommodation. Protestant services also are held in the crypt, as the sisters have ecumenical outreach as part of their charism. After the Reformation a printshop was set up to print Swedish-language Catholic works.

Controversy arose in 2002 over the treatment of the Indian sisters who form a large percentage of the order. This became public in 2002 when six Indian sisters from different houses of the order in Italy fled and approached the Benedictine Abbot of Subiaco. At the abbot's request, Bishop Silvio Cesare Bonicelli of Parma issued a special decree, permitting the fugitive sisters enter a monastery of Benedictine nuns. As a consequence, the abbot, was subsequently required to resign from office by the Holy See, a highly unusual event.

UK branch
Iver Heath, in Buckinghamshire, was the first foundation of the new branch of the Bridgettine Order in the UK and has been a house of prayer and provided hospitality since 1931. In 1999 Bridgettine sisters took up residence in a newly built convent at the Maryvale Institute in Birmingham.

St Bridget's Rule
The original Bridgettine Order was open to both men and women, and was dedicated to devotion to the Passion of Jesus Christ. It was a "double order" each monastery having attached to it a small community of monks to act as chaplains, but under the government of the abbess.

St Bridget's Rule stipulated: "the number of choir nuns shall not exceed sixty, with four lay sisters; the priests shall be thirteen, according to the number of the thirteen apostles, of whom Paul the thirteenth was not the least in toil; then there must be four deacons, who also may be priests if they will, and they are the figure of the four principal Doctors, Ambrose, Augustine, Gregory and Jerome, then eight lay brothers, who with their labors shall minister necessaries to the clerics, therefore counting three-score sisters, thirteen priests, four deacons, and the eight servitors, the number of persons will be the same as the thirteen Apostles and the seventy two-disciples."

The nuns were strictly enclosed, emphasizing scholarship and study, but the monks were also preachers and itinerant missionaries. The individual monasteries were each subject to the local bishop, and, in honor of the Virgin Mary, they were ruled by an abbess.

Brigittine monks
An innovative community of Brigittine monks is located in Amity, Oregon, at the Monastery of Our Lady of Consolation. Founded on 16 March 1976, by Brother Benedict Kirby, O.Ss.S., it is the only Brigittine monastery of men in the world and the first since the nineteenth century when they were dispersed, largely due to the European wars. The monks here do not ordinarily receive Holy Orders, following the original pattern of monasticism. The monastery has the canonical status of a priory sui juris (one which is autonomous) and is supported mainly through sales of their chocolate fudges and truffles.

Anglican Brigittines
The Most Holy Saviour Fraternity was founded in Mexico on 14 September 2012, and was confirmed by the bishop of the Anglican Diocese of the West, Mexico on 26 August 2013, in the city of San Luis Potosí.

title: Bridgettines


text:
Talk:Big coalition

I think Grand coalition would be a better translation -- at least I remember the term being used during the Kiesinger chancellorship. Arwel 22:39, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Big coalition


text:
Onalaska

Onalaska may refer to:
 * Onalaska, Texas
 * Onalaska, Washington
 * Onalaska, Wisconsin
 * Onalaska (town), Wisconsin
 * Lake Onalaska, a lake in Wisconsin

title: Onalaska