text:
Talk:American comic book

Comment
This article was created to address concerns that the comic book article was too US-centric. See the discussion on that 'talk' page if interested ike9898 16:48, May 17, 2004 (UTC)

Discussion RE: This paragraph
The comic book saw a decline from a World War II high but has increased drastically during the last 30 years. This has been caused by a number of factors, including the advent of the underground comics, the influence from and rise in popularity of manga and the recognition of the comic medium among academics and literature critics not just as trivial childrens' entertainment, but as a serious form of literature and art.

I'm not sure the facts hold up above, and in any case they're not given or cited. From my understanding, there is only a core of about 100,000 readers, and this is down from even the early 1990s when a comic could still sell a million copies. I'm not sure there's been a million-seller in a while, so this seems a decrease rather than an increase.

The advent of of underground comics was 40 years ago, not 30, and either number of years makes me wonder how relevant their influence is to present recognigition as literature/art. Wouldn't the rise of naturalistic works such as Harvey Pekar's, the Hernandez Bros. and "Ghost World", from about the '80s on, be the more relevant influence?

Lastly, and as much as I like and respect manga, I'd have to question whether it contributes or actually takes away from the literature/art equation. Even a technical and aesthetic breakthrough like "Akira" has had mixed critical response on its story, and the overwhelming majority of manga titles I believe are aimed at youngsters, along the lines of "Sailor Moon". (Certainly I've read that's true in Japan.) I wonder if it's the European works ("Dylan Dog", Moebius. et al.) that might be more relevant here. Could we discuss? -- Tenebrae 13:41, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

I think that point about naturalistic artists' influence is significant. I recall that Pekar and Los Bros Hernandez were referenced in most of the articles I read about indie comics in the 1980s. Both brought in new readers by "crossing over" into literary, jazz, and punk subcultures, putting the comics artform within other contexts. LBH aren't mentioned, either, and they were some of the most popular artists back then. Also, Spiegelman, LBH, and Pekar were all self-conscious about their work as related to literature, and they would discuss it as such, and to different degrees, strove to expand the artform. They also saw themselves as the next stage in underground comix. (Crumb also did a number of autobiographical stories at the time. Joe Sacco also influenced the form with his journalism.)

Manga's influences were on two fronts. There were a number of works that were naturalistic and got popularized as reprints in America, however, they aren't really considered mainstream. The "anime" style was far more popular, but what it seemed to bring to the form was more complex storytelling and some new twists fantasy and science-fiction themes. I think, in Japan, there's a division between these two types of manga.

Finally, the public perception of comic books isn't "trivial children's entertainment" but as a fantasy genre for young boys. Manga hasn't changed that very much, if at all. The comic "words-and-pictures" artform, however, has a measure of respect in the art world and in the academic spheres. It's holding its own, and the proponents have been doing their work. This should be recognized. -johnk 66.245.193.131 09:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

In Japan, manga titles like Weekly Young Jump, Business Jump, Weekly Young Sunday, Big Comic Spirits, etc. are all written for and marketed to adult men. Most of the strips contained therein probably have not been translated and sold in the west, so I don't know if this has had an impact in the U.S., but adult manga are a largish segment of the market in Japan. 108.161.114.16 (talk) 12:14, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Ref for influence of manga on American comic books. Tho 15 years on from beginning of this conversation perhaps less in question? Dakinijones (talk) 16:00, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Bronze Age
I added a Bronze Age section which I'm surprised didn't already exist. Unfortunately, some of it ended up being redundant with the Silver Age article, but I felt the Bronze Age was too important to just omit. Other people can fix the redundancy if they wish. Ken Arromdee 30 June 2005 02:34 (UTC)

 * Having a look, it appears the bronze age does exist, however on wikipedia its discussed as the modern age of comics. Do people think the modern age should be broken out into the bronze age and the modern age, or should the bronze age remain a part of the modern age in discussion here? If it is decided to break it out, then the articles need to be better edited to reflect that, particularly Modern Age of Comic Books Hiding 30 June 2005 07:16 (UTC)

Even this article pretty much associates the Modern Age with the mid-1980's, except for that paragraph about the direct market. I've never seen 'Modern Age' or any variations used to describe the period from the 1970s to the present. Ken Arromdee 30 June 2005 14:07 (UTC)

 * Um, did you actually have a look at the article Modern Age of Comic Books, to which Bronze Age of Comic Books redirects? It looks to me, especially in this article, that here on wikipedia the consensus so far has been to define the silver age and the golden age, but to leave any periods afterwards to be defined as the modern age.  Whether that consensus is right or wrong I do not know, but I think there should at least be consistency across all the articles that refer to this period. Hiding 30 June 2005 15:43 (UTC)

I did a Google search and it does seem that Modern Age can be used for the post-1970 period. On the other hand, much of this is use by dealers, who have less motivation to distinguish the Bronze and Modern Ages because they don't differ in price much. (On the gripping hand, most Google pages dealing with comics seem to be related to dealers.)

Even then, redirecting Bronze Age to Modern Age doesn't make sense if you're also defining Modern Age as 1970 to present. If Modern means post-1970 then Modern includes Bronze, but Modern isn't the same as Bronze.

On Google, "Modern Age" -"bronze age" "comic books" gives me 11100 references and "Bronze Age" "comic books" gives me 32100. Ken Arromdee 30 June 2005 20:54 (UTC)

 * All this talk of "XXX ages" though they were set terms accepted by a consensus really isn't a serious treatment of the topic of comic history. First off, searching Google for just the words contained in the title doens't prove anything. If you want to use these kinds of names, you need to show that there is a very clear consensus among serious comic historians about these terms. I've looked at serious literature about comics and so far I can't find a trace of agreement with the terminology. Secondly, all this "Gold" and "Platinum" and whathaveyou really smacks of peacock terms and it makes the articles look a lot less serious than they really are.
 * Mind you, I'm not criticizing the content, which looks great, it's just that this kind of era naming isn't compatible with serious history writing whether it be about medieval castles or comics. You need to give these article more neutral and less whimsical names that reflect more than just your own views on the topic.
 * Peter Isotalo 06:45, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Perhaps you'd care to peruse Superhero Comics of the Golden Age: The Illustrated History (Taylor History of Comics S.) or  The Comic Book Heroes: From the Silver Age to the Present or 	 The Silver Age of Comic Book Art or  The Silver Age of Comic Book Art for starters. Hiding talk 16:58, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

 * One book does not make a consensus. There are "Golden Ages" of pretty much every aspect of history, but very few of them are set terms in themselves. You need to show that a majority of comic historians agree on this term. The same most certainly goes for "Platinum" and "Silver" ages.
 * Peter Isotalo 17:16, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Whilst I can, and would normally be willing to provide more sources, there seems to be little point as you seem unwilling to accept or consider them. Please also advise me as to where in Wiki policy it specifies that a consensus of sources is required before one can input datum. Hiding  talk 16:03, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

 * We're talking past each other here. I'm not trying to ignore that some or even a lot of sources use this kind of terminology, but I just am very skeptical that it should be considered encyclopedic. There's a problem of POV, since "Golden Age" implies very distinct connotation of superiority; an age that is undisputably better and more prestigious than previous or following periods. While it's certainly valid to explain that many refer to certain periods as "a golden age" or even "the Golden Age", it's an entirely different matter to actually name articles this way. And where does "Platinum Age" come from? Is this used in any literature at all and what is it supposed to mean? Are all comic book periods per definition better the older they are?
 * What I'm asking for here is wide consensus among experts and aficionados about terminology. You don't need to start counting source or Google hits, just give a proper thought to how this affects the neutrality of the articles.
 * Peter Isotalo 18:23, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

 * See, I object to the point about encyclopedic. There doesn't seem to be an agreed standard of encyclopedic, it simply equates to POV, yours or mine.  As to using the names themselves in section headers and articles, your best bet is to RFC then.  They are established terms, but I can see your point and would not personally object to section headings which use dates with the terms mentioned in the text as used by [insert sources].

 * Per Platinum age, I'll give you three Platinum age cites, google would give you more but I'm sure you know that:
 * Beerbohm, Robert L. 1997. The American Comic Book: 1897-1932. The Beginning: The Platinum Age. in The Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide, 27th ed. by Robert M. Overstreet, New York: Avon Books and Timonium, MD: Gemstone Publishing: 1-15
 * Star Collector: Robert Beerbohm - Platinum before gold. Diamond Dialogue (January): 48-49
 * Collectortimes.com
 * It's a recent term Beerbohm has coined but seems to have become adopted by comics scholars, if you need further confirmation your best bet is to join and ask at the comics scholars mailing list.
 * If you need to cite terms, the comics research bibliography will probably be useful to you. Yes the naming conventions are based upon being superior. Bronze Age and Platinum Age are recent terms, I'm not sure of the coining of the first two terms though.  Hiding  talk 19:31, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

 * The first reference I ever saw of Bronze Age was in Wizard magazine when I talked about modern horror titles (some of which go all the way back to the mid 60's) Glad to see that Jamie Coville (History Of Comic books) is not the only one to use Platinum age as a reference for the 1897-1938 period. The Modern Age beginning tends to be marked by Crisis and Secret Wars and some have come up with a host of names for it- Iron Age, Gimmic Age, etc.--BruceGrubb 12:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

 * By the way, to what do you refer when you say you have access to serious comics literature? Be aware Sabin for one is thought sloppy in places. Do you have access to any Kunzle, his work is reputedly the best, but sadly out of print. Hiding  talk 19:35, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

 * My vote goes to have a standalone Bronze Age entry. 1976 is 30 years ago; that's far more than separates the Golden from the Silver, and there's a highly recognizeable difference in style, theme, conventions, and accepted industry standards between the post-Silver Age '70s, and today. Here's an example: An interracial romantic kiss was never done to my knowledge pre-1970s. It's common today in the Modern Age. What was in-between? Its controversial first occurrance in the Bronze Age, when Don McGregor and P. Craig Russell pioneered it in the "Killraven" feature in Marvel's Amazing Adventures. I give just this one of many possible examples by to indicate the demarcated step-process between Silver Age and now:  Between taboo and commonplace, there's a distinct territory where boundaries are tested, and conventions redefined.

 * Related to this change and distinction is the early-70s updating of the Comics Code, the first since its inception in 1954. The subsequent initial blossoming of creators newly liberated in certain respects — testing what these new liberties meant — marks a different era than today, when standards are much more established.

 * The Bronze Age, I'd suggest, also has a pantheon distinct from the Silver and Modern Age. Creators such as Gerber, Englehart, McGregor, Gulacy, etc., while certainly active and producing good work, had the same resonance, fan-following, etc., that Bendis, Millar, Moore, etc. do today. While there's a cycle to audience likes and dislikes, you can compare this to the movies following the start of MPAA ratings in 1968 -- there were 1970s stars and directors like Burt Reynolds, Peter Bogdanovich, Bob Rafelson, Faye Dunaway, etc., who are still around and doing quality quieter work, but the feel of movies in the 1970s, just after the studio system broke down and filmmakers were newly liberated in certain respects — testing what these new liberties meant — and marking a different era than today. -- Tenebrae 15:10, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

 * As someone who grew up and started reading comics in the 1970's, I definitely believe there is a distinction between Bronze age and "modern" age comics. The writing and characterization changed rather drastically in the mid/late 80's, from a more naturalistic/realistic style, which showed both the highs and lows of the characters, to a stylized, grim and gritty, joyless, almost cyberpunk style, with many "heroes" revealed as either corrupt or as tortured victims of abuse. Compare the Dark Phoenix Saga, or the early New Teen Titans, to something like The Dark Knight Returns or Grendel. Now, of course, this is all my own subjective opinion; but then so is the difference between the other comic Ages. I don't agree that "serious comic historians" should be the only ones to define the terms or ages used in the article; this smacks of non-neutral POV, by rendering a value judgement on who is Serious and who isn't. The terms Golden, Silver and (to a lesser extent) Bronze Ages are in frequent use among comic book professionals and comic dealers; is their use less valid than armchair historians?

Noclevername 17:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Your point would be better take if you weren't an anonymous IP. Not registering can be perceived as a way of avoiding accountability. But read on through the last paragraph; this isn't as bad a posting as it sounds.
 * Comics scholarship does exist, in that professors teach it in colleges, and in that journalist/authors such as Ron Goulart and Les Daniels are hardly "armchair" historians. I could be wrong, but I detect an anti-intellectualist bias in your statements. Yes, someone who studies and writes or teaches about a topic is more authoritative than someone who doesn't. And in any case, the phrase we usually find is "during the period that fans and historians called the Golden Age of comic books", etc., so fan opinion is note.
 * And in any event, the point is moot. If the term Bronze Age is in common useage — and, yes, personally, I very much think it is, so I do agree with your in principle — then it won't be hard to find citations. Simple as pie, everybody goes home happy and verified! --Tenebrae 02:48, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * (Yeah, I'd typed in the dashes and then forgot the tildes! 30 seconds later ... I was too late!) -- Tenebrae 02:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Nope. Not anti-intellectual bias (there's too much of that these days), just not wanting to eliminate pragmatic sources as opposed to scholarly ones. This is essentially a pop-culture subject, and the common usages of dealers (and, yes, fans) should be taken into account, I believe. Sorry if I didn't make my emphasis clear before; I'm not denigrating historians, I just wasn't aware of the extent of comic book scholarship. Noclevername 09:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

 * All good; and yeah, I agree with you completely. If you haven't already got it, ask for Gerard Jones' Men of Tomorrow: Geeks, Gangsters, and the Birth of the Comic Book (Basic Books, 2004; trade paperback ISBN 0-465-03657-0) for a present. What a great read!
 * Now let's find us some cites, brother!--Tenebrae 16:47, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

In The Encyclopedia of Comic Books and Graphic Novels, (2010 ISBN 978-0-313-35746-6 edited by M. Keith Booker), there is an article on ages of comic books by Tim Bryant, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Buffalo who teaches about Alan Moore's Watchmen in one of his courses. He writes that historians refer to Golden, Silver, Bronze and Modern (or Iron) Ages, and that the era before "the rise of the superhero in the 1930's is often referred to as the Platinum Age. ... Some commentators label the period between the mid-1940's and the mid-1950's as the Atomic Age because of comics writers' preoccupation with nuclear proliferation and the burgeoning arms race."(p.12-13) Dongord (talk) 12:59, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

 * So he's saying that historians' consensus is Golden, Silver, Bronze and Modern (or Iron) Ages, and that some uncited, unspecified commentators — who may be fans posting on forums and other non-WP:RS sources; he doesn't specify, so we don't know — are making a fringe claim of an era that a consensus of historians doesn't include. That's exactly what I'm I've been saying. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:35, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Those who are following this discussion might want to check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Golden_Age_of_Comic_Books#Putting_this_Age_in_Context as well. Dongord (talk) 06:11, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Italic2ثظ - 37.237.238.9 (talk) 17:43, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Merge/Consolidate with "History Of"
If someone familiar with the two main articles on American comics could clarify to me why they both have gigantic "history" sections… Someone needs to either merge the articles or reduce the "history" on this page to a summary. --Honestly, Bodhi 21:53, 4 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bodhi Peace (talk • contribs)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on American comic book. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041109021729/http://www.dereksantos.com/comicpage/pregold2.html to http://www.dereksantos.com/comicpage/pregold2.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:00, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Were is the general article about American comics?
This article was linked on Wikidata with general articles about Comics in the United States in various language (as Comics). I corrected the mistake by creating a new Wikidata item for articles about the comic book form in the US. I'm nevertheless astonished by this lack of a general article about American comics (currently a disambiguition page) on this Wikipedia (even if History of American comics does exist). Kokonino (talk) 18:10, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Comic book advertisement
I think a link somewhere for comic book advertisement would be good. I added a link with a bit of conent but it was reverted. Rather than reverting, how about modifying it to keep the content with the link? Ping User:JasonAQuest.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:55, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

 * Taking out the inaccurate guessed-at details would've just left a statement that comic books "had" advertising at some unspecified past time, which wouldn't have been particularly informative. I've added a "see also". -Jason A. Quest (talk) 01:09, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

 * Sounds fine to me. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:13, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:American comic book


text:
Talk:Tim Montgomery

A bit POV
I dunno, the first line, though hard to argue with, seems a little too strong ("POV" if you will) to be kept the way it is.ProfessorFokker 09:14, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I edited it a little bit, I think it's slightly more NPOV now. "Disgraced" has a very negative connotation but I think it's accurate in this case. -Big Smooth 18:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I edited a bit here and there just clear up the Steroid Scandal section and created the Personal Life. Guess some of the personal life will include some time spent behind bars now.--Daydreamer302000 18:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

"He was stripped of his records.."
How about mentioning the records on the previous sentence? I would suggest "... a former American athlete and 100 m world record holder". Agreed? Thanks 77.125.18.122 (talk) 05:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

"He has four children, including one son, ..."
Ahem.. Why mention only the boy? Either list all the children or none at all. Thanks. 77.125.18.122 (talk) 06:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually the son is specifically mentioned due to his importance of being conceived by Marion Jones. No disrespect to the mother(s) of the other three, but they are not as famous as Jones herself. For that reason, Tim junior is singled out.  A Prodigy   ~In Pursuit of Perfection ~ 20:00, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Questions
I'm wary of editing since I'm not that knowledgeable about the American justice system. Firstly, shouldn't the lead be updated? It merely says that Montgomery has been "charged", whereas he's now been found guilty and sentenced to jail time. Secondly, what does "He was sentenced until May 16, 2008 to 46 months in prison" mean? It doesn't make sense to me. Loganberry (Talk) 15:52, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to agree and have now updated the lead to reflect this. As for your second point, I think that was just a poor choice of words, since May 16th was the day he was sentenced and I've now rectified this.--Simon KHFC (talk) 17:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Tim Montgomery


text:
Suze Rotolo

Susan Elizabeth Rotolo (November 20, 1943 – February 25, 2011), known as Suze Rotolo, was an American artist, and the girlfriend of Bob Dylan from 1961 to 1964. Dylan later acknowledged her strong influence on his music and art during that period. Rotolo is the woman walking with him on the cover of his 1963 album The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan, a photograph by the Columbia Records studio photographer Don Hunstein. In her book A Freewheelin' Time: A Memoir of Greenwich Village in the Sixties, Rotolo described her time with Dylan and other figures in the folk music and bohemian scene in Greenwich Village, New York. She discussed her upbringing as a "red diaper" baby; a child of Communist Party USA members during the McCarthy Era. As an artist, she specialized in artists' books and taught at the Parsons School of Design in New York City.

The Freewheelin' years, 1961–1964

Rotolo, of Italian-American descent, was born at Brooklyn Jewish Hospital, New York, and raised in Sunnyside, Queens. Her parents were Joachim and Mary (née Pezzati) Rotolo, who were members of the American Communist Party. In June, 1960, she graduated from Bryant High School.

At about the time she met Dylan, Rotolo began working full-time as a political activist in the office of the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), and the anti-nuclear group SANE. She and her sister Carla had also entered the Greenwich Village folk scene. Rotolo first met Dylan at a Riverside Church folk concert in July 1961. They were introduced by Carla, who at that time was working as an assistant to folklorist Alan Lomax. Describing their meeting in his memoir, Chronicles, Volume One, Dylan wrote: "Right from the start I couldn’t take my eyes off her. She was the most erotic thing I’d ever seen. She was fair skinned and golden haired, full-blood Italian. The air was suddenly filled with banana leaves. We started talking and my head started to spin. Cupid’s arrow had whistled past my ears before, but this time it hit me in the heart and the weight of it dragged me overboard... Meeting her was like stepping into the tales of 1001 Arabian Nights. She had a smile that could light up a street full of people and was extremely lively, had a kind of voluptuousness—a Rodin sculpture come to life."

It was not until they met that Dylan's writing began to address issues such as the civil rights movement and the threat of nuclear war. They started living together in early 1962, much to the disapproval of her family. As Dylan's fame grew, Rotolo found the relationship increasingly stressful. She wrote: "Bob was charismatic: he was a beacon, a lighthouse, he was also a black hole. He required committed backup and protection I was unable to provide consistently, probably because I needed them myself. ... I could no longer cope with all the pressure, gossip, truth and lies that living with Bob entailed. I was unable to find solid ground. I was on quicksand and very vulnerable."

Rotolo left New York in June 1962, with her mother, to spend six months studying art at the University of Perugia in Italy. She was known there as Justine Rotolo, having used an invented middle name to register as "S. Justine Rotolo". Dylan's separation from his girlfriend has been credited as the inspiration behind several of his finest love songs, including "Don't Think Twice, It's Alright", "Tomorrow Is a Long Time", "One Too Many Mornings", and "Boots of Spanish Leather".

Rotolo's political views were widely regarded as having influenced Dylan's topical songwriting. Dylan also credited her with interesting him in the French poet Arthur Rimbaud, who heavily influenced his writing style. The influence of Bertolt Brecht on Dylan's songwriting has also been acknowledged by Dylan as stemming from Rotolo's participation in Brechtian theater during their relationship. In Chronicles, Dylan describes the impact of the song "Pirate Jenny" while attending a Brecht show on which Rotolo worked. Dylan's interest in painting can also be traced back to his relationship with Rotolo, who had emphasized her shared values with Dylan in an interview with author Robbie Woliver: "People say I was an influence on him, but we influenced each other. His interests were filtered through me and my interests, like the books I had, were filtered through him ... It was always sincere on his part. The guy saw things. He had an incredible ability to see and sponge—there was a genius in that. The ability to create out of everything that's flying around. To synthesize it. To put it in words and music.'"

Rotolo became pregnant in 1963 by Dylan and had an abortion. Their relationship failed to survive the abortion, Dylan's affair with Joan Baez, and the hostility of the Rotolo family. Suze moved into her sister's apartment in August 1963. She and Dylan broke up in 1964, in circumstances which Dylan described in his "Ballad in Plain D". Twenty years later he apologized for the song, saying: "I must have been a real schmuck to write that. I look back at that particular one and say, of all the songs I've written, maybe I could have left that alone."

Later life and death, 1964–2011
Rotolo traveled to Cuba in June 1964, with a group, although it was unlawful for United States citizens to do so. She was quoted as saying, in regard to opponents of Fidel Castro that, "These gusanos are not suppressed. There can be open criticism of the regime. As long as they keep it to talk they are tolerated, as long as there is no sabotage."

Rotolo married Enzo Bartoccioli, an Italian film editor who worked for the United Nations, in 1967. Together they had one son, Luca, who is a guitarist in New York. In New York, Rotolo worked as an illustrator and painter, before concentrating on creating book art, things resembling books but incorporating found objects. Remaining politically active, Rotolo joined the street-theater group Billionaires for Bush and protested at the 2004 Republican National Convention in Manhattan.

Rotolo avoided discussing her relationship with Dylan for decades. In July 2004, she was interviewed in a documentary produced by New York PBS Channel 13 and The New York Daily News. In November 2004, she made an unannounced appearance at the Experience Music Project, on a panel discussing Dylan's early days in Greenwich Village. She and her husband also were involved in putting on a memorial event for Dave Van Ronk after the singer's death in 2002. Rotolo made an appearance in Martin Scorsese's documentary film, No Direction Home: Bob Dylan, which focused on Dylan's early career from 1961 to 1966. This film was broadcast as part of the American Masters series on PBS public television in September 2005. Rotolo was also interviewed nationally in 2008 by Terry Gross on NPR's Fresh Air to promote her book, A Freewheelin' Time: A Memoir of Greenwich Village in the Sixties, which was published by Broadway Books on May 13, 2008. Rotolo recounted her attempts not to be overshadowed by her relationship with Dylan. She discussed her need to pursue her artistic creativity and to retain her political integrity, concluding: "The sixties were an era that spoke a language of inquiry and curiosity and rebelliousness against the stifling and repressive political and social culture of the decade that preceded it. The new generation causing all the fuss was not driven by the market: we had something to say, not something to sell.'"

The image of Rotolo walking with Dylan on the cover of The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan proved impossible to shake off, but equally difficult to accept. The New York Times, reviewing her book, observed that "Even 40 years later, she seems uncomfortable delving into her time with Dylan. Perhaps an inherent contradiction is the problem: she’s writing about her unwillingness to be defined by her relationship to a famous man, in a book with Dylan on the cover."

The Guardian, too, notes that Rotolo is defined as "the girl with the wistful eyes and hint of a smile whose head is resting on the suede-jacketed shoulder of a nice-looking young man as they trudge through the snow on the cover of 1963's The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan." The review agrees with the New York Times's comment ("a disconnected list") that the book is "oddly organised", but at once adds "though not as random as it seems". Nathalie Rothschild, writing in The Guardian after Rotolo's death, noted that Rotolo had worked hard to escape the epithets of "Bob Dylan's muse" and "the girl on the front cover of The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan", insisting in her memoir that she had been more than "a string on Dylan's guitar".

Rotolo died of lung cancer at her home in New York City's NoHo neighborhood on February 25, 2011, aged 67.

Film portrayals
In the 2007 film I'm Not There, a fictional account of Bob Dylan's life, there is a version of Rotolo's relationship with Dylan. Heath Ledger plays Robbie Clark, one of six Dylan-based characters in the film. Charlotte Gainsbourg plays Claire, the wife of Robbie. This character has been described as a combination of Sara Dylan, Dylan's first wife, and Suze Rotolo. In the film, Robbie meets Claire in a Greenwich Village diner and they fall in love. The scene in which Robbie and Claire run romantically through the streets of New York re-enacts the cover of the 1963 album The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan.

title: Suze Rotolo


text:
Friends Provident

Friends' Provident Insurance was a banking institution founded in 1832 to serve the needs of the Society of Friends (Quakers). Based in Bradford, Yorkshire, it concentrated on sickness and annuity policies until its life fund acquired Century Insurance in 1918, expanding into general insurance. The restriction to Quaker membership was an increasing constraint but the ties were substantially reduced by the Friends' Provident Institution Act 1915 (5 & 6 Geo. 5. c. xlv). Although Century's branch network enabled FPI to expand, the periodic underwriting losses strained the life fund's capital base and Century was sold in 1975. In the year 2000, Friends Provident demutualised and listed on the FT100 Index. After abortive takeover negotiations, Friends accepted a takeover bid from Resolution Limited in 2009.

The early years
Samuel Tuke and Joseph Rowntree first mooted the ideal of a friendly society in 1829, to serve the needs of the Society of Friends (Quakers). Tuke, who was a prominent leader in the Society and a city councillor in York, took the lead and was the insurer's first chairman. No capital was initially subscribed; "solvency was guaranteed by a bond entered into by several trustees" chiefly of noted Quaker families. Funds were subsequently raised from 45 prominent Quakers and, with a board of 20 directors, Friends' Provident Insurance [FPI] was launched in 1832. There was only one member of staff, Benjamin Ecroyd the Secretary, a conveyancer in Bradford, and the FPI opened in a room above a confectioner's shop in Market Street Bradford. The office remained until 1862 when the FPI bought the old county court building at Darley Street.

The first classes of business were annuities for members aged over 55 and children's deferred policies. After its initial ten years, when life funds had reached £150,000, FPI was able to declare its first bonuses on life policies. Agencies were gradually appointed, all through the offices of the Society of Friends and by 1862 there were 42 in England, one each in Wales and Scotland, and eight in Ireland. Life funds increased progressively to £1m. in 1870, £2m. in 1889, and £3m. in 1902. As FPI grew in size it, increasingly found itself constrained by the Friendly Society Acts and especially its confinement to members of the Society of Friends. By the 1890s this was regarded as serious impediment to growth The restriction on investment powers was resolved by the (62 & 63 Vict. c. lv) but the Quaker constraints took longer to resolve. There was little scope to increase agents as these were tied to Quaker meetings and had been fully exploited; there were no branches except London. Poor results in 1908 and 1909 led to a search for solutions and there were abortive negotiations for Royal Exchange Assurance to take over FPI in 1912. In 1914, FPI agreed to accept non-Quakers for non-profit policies only but the major change came with the (5 & 6 Geo. 5. c. xlv). This incorporated FPI as a mutual life assurance office free from the remaining restrictions of the Friendly Society Acts and accepting all the provisions of the Companies Act. It was no longer necessary to appoint trustees to hold property or exercise other legal functions. Under new rules membership still primarily required membership of, or association with. the Society of Friends; however, the directors were given power to admit any appropriate person. The directors now recognised that new leadership was required if FPI was to expand and in 1916 Henry Tapscott, the branch manager of Royal Exchange at Birmingham was appointed the first general manager; as a sign of the changes underway, he was not a Quaker.

The Century acquisition
A central part of Tapscott's strategy was to move FPI into general insurance but there were no powers to do so under the Friends' Provident Institution Act 1915. However, there was nothing to prevent it investing in a company and in 1918 FPI's life fund bought the Century Insurance Company of Edinburgh at a cost of £507,000, 15 per cent of the life fund's assets. Century was founded in 1885, as Sickness and Accident Assurance but as the general insurance business expanded it changed its name to Century Insurance Co. in 1901. Unlike FPI, Century had well-established branches with five in Scotland, 13 in England, one in Wales and two in Ireland and these were intended to be the vehicle for FPI's expansion. Century had also developed significant overseas interests. By 1914, agencies had been opened in eight European countries, two in Australia and three in India. A shred underwriting agreement had also been made with Henry W Brown, which operated in most states of the United States.

Following the Century acquisition, the FPI head office was moved from Bradford to Kingsway, London; the head office of Century remained in Edinburgh but its general insurance business was moved to London. The Century agents were used to expand FPI's life business. In recognition of the changes, in 1920 the name of the company was changed to Friends' Provident and Century Life Office although legally Century remained owned by the FPI life fund. Apart from losses in marine insurance, the combined business made good progress. Through Century, the Pacific Coast Fire Company of Canada was also bought in 1920 and there was a further significant increase in the fire business when in 1926 it bought Liverpool Marine & General Insurance. The growth in business required larger premises and in 1928 a new office at 7 Leadenhall Street was bought. However, the expansion of Century's business, particularly in North America was causing strains that would eventually lead to its disposal.

By the late 1920s, the growth in Century's business was requiring an equivalent increase in capital and this put a strain on the resources of the FPI life fund. A new holding company, Century Insurance Trust, was formed to hold all the general insurance companies and this was able to raise its own loan capital. Worse was to come in the form of the Wall Street Crash of 1929 and the subsequent depression. The Group was more heavily invested in U.S. and Canadian stocks than most life companies and those investments fell by more than 50 per cent. More than 60 per cent of Century's general insurance business was written in the U.S. and Canada; its premium income fell by 25 per cent over the two years 1929 and 1930 and underwriting results were also poor. By the end of 1930, FPI 's life fund assets were valued at five per cent less than its liabilities. FPI even cancelled its planned centenary bonus. Substantial cost reductions and better fund revaluations allowed the life business to grow. Friends Provident began writing pensions business in 1934 and this became large enough to form a group life and pensions department in 1937. By the end of the 1930s, life premium income was double that of 1929.

The End of Century
Post-war growth was encouraging, prompting a further move of head office. In 1954, Friends' Provident bought 43 acres outside Dorking in 1954 and a new headquarters was opened in 1958. However, the position in North America began to worsen. US and Canada made losses in fire and motor between 1951 and 1957 and Century made heavy trading losses in 1957, once again impacting on the value of the life fund. In 1963 Century withdrew entirely from the US fire and accident market and consolidated its position in Canada. Century suffered fire losses in 1973and 1974 and recognised that in accident and marine it was hard to match the expense ratios of the larger companies. At the same time, the need for increased solvency and regulatory changes had reduced the life fund's value of Century to less than half its written down value. It was agreed that on 1 January 1975, Phoenix Insurance would buy all of Century Insurance worldwide for shares in the enlarged group. The official announcement stated that "This agreement is in the best interest of both companies with the advantages of a greater volume, well distributed"

A Life Office once again
The company; now known as Friends' Provident Life, was once again a life-only mutual company. Despite the problems of Century, it been expanding. In 1957 it had entered the life market in Canada by buying 90 per cent of Fidelity Life Assurance of Regina, Saskatchewan and in 1960 it opened a life branch in Australia. By the 1970s it had been agreed that the life business and the general business of Century should not be operated out of the same office and a separate branch structure was established for the life office. The sale of Century was followed by (c. xiv) to update the rules, ending the requirement that a majority of the directors had to be Quakers. The new rules allowed for at least five out of a Board of ten to twenty directors to be Quakers. That year also saw Phoenix sell its Australian life business to Friends' Provident. By 1981, a league table of British life offices listed Friends' Provident as fifteenth by assets.

In 1986 Friends merged with UK Provident. In 1992 it became a foundation partner in the Eureko Alliance in association with AVCB (The Netherlands), Topdanmark (Denmark) and Wasa (Sweden). As part of this alliance, Friends Provident passed all of its then non UK subsidiaries (primarily in Australia and Canada) into Eureko.

In 1993 it acquired the UK operations of National Mutual of Australia and in 1998 it acquired London & Manchester Assurance.

In November 1997, Friends Provident announced that it would merge its asset management business with Ivory and Sime, in a deal worth £132 million, thereby creating Friends Ivory & Sime. Following the transaction, Friends Provident owned 67% of the combined entity.

Demutualisation and the Resolution acquisition
In the year 2000, Friends Provident demutualised and listed on the FT100 Index, raising £1.6m. Its two main businesses were life and pensions, and asset management through its 67% holding in Friends Ivory and Sime. As part of the demutualisation the Friends Provident Foundation was endowed as an independent charity. The asset management was enlarged by the purchase of Royal Sun & Alliance's asset business and then again in 2004 by the merger with F&C Asset Management. This left Friends Provident with 51% of the enlarged F & C, managing £125 billion funds. In July 2007, Friends announced an agreed "merger of equals" with insurer Resolution plc but this collapsed in November as a result of shareholder opposition. This prompted a strategic review, including cost cutting and a proposed demerger of F & C. In January 2008 Friends received an informal £4.1 billion offer by JC Flowers, later aborted. In 2009 a newly formed Resolution Limited returned with a fresh approach and in August a bid of £1.86 billion was accepted. In the November, Friends Provident duly became a subsidiary of Resolution.

Operations
The UK Life and Pensions business marketed a range of life protection, income protection, pensions and investment products for individual customers and corporate clients throughout the UK.

The International Life and Pensions business operated throughout Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.

Ethical stance
Friends Provident was the first investment house in the UK to offer a fully ethical investment fund called the Stewardship fund.

Members of the Friends Provident Group

 * Friends Provident Life and Pension Limited - Provides life, pension and investment services within the UK
 * Friends Provident Life Assurance Limited - Provides life and investment services worldwide under English and Guernsey law.
 * Friends Provident International Limited - Formerly Royal and Sun Alliance International but was taken over in 2003. Provides life and investment services worldwide and operates under the law of the Isle of Man.

Offices
Friends Provident had large offices in a number of locations including Manchester, Clyst St. Mary in Exeter and Dorking, and was the second largest employer in Salisbury. There are also a few smaller area offices such as those in Bristol and Preston.

Internationally Friends Provident had offices in Luxembourg, Hong Kong, Singapore and Dubai.

Sports sponsorships
In 2009 the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) announced that Friends Provident would be the title sponsor for the new Twenty20 competition, the Friends Provident T20.

In 2007 Friends Provident signed a three-year deal to sponsor the domestic one-day cricket competition, The Friends Provident Trophy.

Friends Provident were the main sponsor of Southampton F.C. from 1999 to 2006 and also sponsored the St Mary's Stadium, from its construction in 2001 until 2006. During this time, the venue was officially known as the Friends Provident St. Mary's Stadium.

title: Friends Provident


text:
Talk:Oregon Petition

Biased
This article is astonishingly biased. How can Wikipedia allow it to remain up? It demeans Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.185.13.29 (talk • contribs)

 * Which way? William M. Connolley (talk) 12:11, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

The article is overtly hostile to the petition. Very bad form. Not encyclopedic at all, just a nasty opinion piece.

 * The entire "Criticism to the Oregon Petition" section needs to be removed. It's filled with nothing more than OR and Op/Ed snippets that are outdated and unsourced. Every petition is going to have duplicate names and some fraud, but to single it out in this particular article shows bias of the author. For example:

"Scientific American took a random sample of 30 of the 1,400 signatories claiming to hold a Ph.D. in a climate-related science."

 * The number of PhDs now stands at 9,029, the sample size used in the Scientific American is too small to make any sort of conclusion as to the validity of the signatures. Even their own results were not conclusive. So why is it in there?

 * They are really grasping at straws. I will remove it at the end of the day. 75.150.245.241 (talk) 16:20, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

 * Agreed, the article as it stands is biased. The article is supposed to be talking about a petition.  By definition, a petition has a statement, and people can choose to sign it.  The article should talk about the statement of the petition, which is concise.  The article should also talk about the people who signed the petition.  Unfortunately, the article is engaged in Ad hominem attacks some people who were involved with the petition, and against web sites which talk about the petition.  This article is not "web sites which talked about XYZ petition".  This article is about the petition.  Assuming wiki editors think there is merit to criticisms of the petition, then a separate section of proportionate size should be created and all criticism belongs there.  This article shouldn't, and couldn't, be a place where all arguments as to the fundamental theories of AGW or measured results are argued.  This article needs to be about the petition. -- Knowsetfree (talk) 02:38, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

 * I find the above comments in support of deletion for the "30 of 1,400" text, but no deletion was made? Did we decide to delete that content only to forget later the actual deletion? Kyle(talk) 03:33, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes it is biased and an insult to readers, but not compared to a few years ago. I visited this today to test whether to recommend boycotting the panhandling drive. Some years ago the article read like a National Socialist critique of Jewish science--basically a harangue licking the blacking off of bureaucratic jackboots and a panegyric for the initiation of force in the name of half-baked political pseudoscience. As long as the Wikipedia lends itself to burning individual rights at the stake of superstition I will feel ethically bound to urge contributors to donate to more honest causes instead. translator (talk) 16:23, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

change article name to Global Warming Petition Project

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No Consensus - Page Not Moved - Sadly there appears to be only a very few editors who are willing to support/oppose at this time, although there has been a lot of discussion. The move has now been open for well over two weeks and I don't think another relist will gain enough consensus. The Alternative name does redirect here, so there's no problem with people not finding the page. One of the leading web pages (http://www.oism.org/pproject/) appears to be using the Alternative name as it's title, so maybe, with time, the "commonname" may well change, and a move can be requested again  Ron h jones (Talk) 23:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Oregon Petition → Global Warming Petition Project —

The name of the article should match the name of the petition. Of course, putting in a f/k/a or "originally called" certainly makes sense. Does any editor know how this is done? I think it is possible to do it in such a way that there are no orphaned links within wikipedia. - Relisting.  Ron h jones (Talk) 23:01, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

-- Knowsetfree (talk) 02:41, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * See earlier discussions. The name most people know this petition by is the Oregon petition. (see WP:COMMONNAME). --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 07:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * What verified source established the name, as known, by "most people"? --Knowsetfree (talk) 17:50, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Kim D. Petersen, thanks for the reference to WP:COMMONNAME. In accordance with that wiki policy, I'll update the name of the petition to the name they have been using for themselves for several years.  And just to be sure, I performed a google search like it says in the wiki policy.  In fact, the top four hits are accurate so Google already knows.  So after researching how, I'll do the page move and then the actual name and the page name will match.  Thanks again for your help.  --Knowsetfree (talk) 05:09, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well that is almost a surprise. Apparently the article was correctly named, and someone already moved it to the obfuscatory nickname "Oregon Petition".  Time to get some admin involvement.  Here are the reasons to move the article back:

--Knowsetfree (talk) 05:26, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The official name of the petition at their web site is "Global Warming Petition Project".
 * Google search on "Global Warming Petition Project" correctly identifies the petition on the first 4 hits.
 * The current Wiki article calls it the "Global Warming Petition Project" but the page name is using the perjorative name
 * The article was originally moved from "Global Warming Petition Project" to the Oregon Petition against logic and wiki policy. It appears the original move may have been motivated to obfuscate and reduce the visibility of the petition.
 * The commonly known name that this petition is know under, is the Oregon Petition - and WP:COMMONNAME is what WP goes by. That is not "against logic and wiki policy" nor does it make it an "obfuscatory nickname". Google searches for "Oregon Petition" correctly identifies the site in the first hit (just as yours does). "Oregon Petition" gets us 2.8 million hits on google - which "Global warming petition project" gives rather few (somewhere between 9 thousand and 137 thousand - depending on using "" or not). So: Most reliable sources use "Oregon petition", almost none use "Global warming petition project" - and thus "Oregon petition" is the articles name. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 04:14, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Kim. The question still stands, do you have a reliable source establishing that "most people" know the petition by the nickname "Oregon Petition"?  If not, your argument does not carry weight.  The title is misleading on several levels, as the petition is neither about nor conducted by the State of Oregon.  The only arguably positive for the name "Oregon Petition" is for those who would like to obfuscate the meaning of the petition, or to continue ad hominem attacks because some of the founders, and at most six of its 31,000+ signatories, have were also members of OISM. --Knowsetfree (talk) 06:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Please do not impute prejudicial motives (obfuscation, ad hominem attacks, etc) to others without proof. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 06:09, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Short Brigade Harvester Boris. I can only guess you are suggesting that I had implied prejudicial motives, though it is unclear to whom.  Did you review the article or any of the recent Talk page?  The issue at hand is that the "Global Warming Petition Project" has been renamed "Oregon Petition".  Yet, despite prior inquiry there is no reliable reference to establish that "most people" know this name.  In fact, user Kim D. Petersen makes one of the best arguments for changing the name.  "Oregon Petition" is inherently ambiguous, returning just now over 4 million hits, nearly 4 million of them wrong.  "Global Warming Petition Project" is not just more specific, it is the actual name of the petition, as you can see from the first line of the article.  --Knowsetfree (talk) 10:27, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Knowsetfree, your confrontational style is becoming a problem; please fix it. You may have a legitimate position to argue for.
 * I don't claim any special expertise on this subject, but my search for ["Oregon Petition" climate] yields 19,000 results, while ["Global Warming Petition Project"] yields under 10,000. To me this suggests that "Oregon Petition" is the name in more common use. I agree that it would be good to have another method for making this determination, but don't have a suggestion about what that could be. However, in the absence of something coming from reliable secondary sources, I find the Google results sufficiently compelling to keep the name as it is.
 * Knowsetfree, what's the basis for your assertion that 4 million hits on O.P. are "wrong?" Would you say that using the string ["Oregon Petition" climate] addresses those incorrect results? -Pete (talk) 16:52, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Pete. Answering you in three parts.  1) Confrontational style: If you wish to discuss this further, Please go to my talk page if you'd like to address the civility on this page, even if you just want to address mine.  At the same time, if you think my participation warrants review by administrators please do not hesitate to draw their attention to my discourse. 2) Common Use and web hits:  I just typed into Google the search "oregon petition" and got:

Results 1 - 10 of about 3,040,000 for oregon petition. (0.10 seconds) In summary:
 * It was 4 million hits yesterday. The point is, there are not 4, or even 3 million websites by or about the "Global Warming Petition Project".  Of course, most links will resolve to entirely different petitions or topics related to Oregon, .  That is what I mean by "most of them are wrong".  Going further, I believe there is little if any conclusion that can be drawn from the number of page hits for a given term.  I've never seen wiki policy hold otherwise.  Obviously, a google link is what it is, nothing more nothing less.  In my opinion, if the real name resolves to the correct subject in the first couple of pages, the real name should be used for the wiki article.  It seems frivolous to weigh the number of hits when the purpose is using the appropriate name.  Google's methods are not engineered to provide a hit total that is proportional to the relevance of the name for the first hit.  The number of hits is a function of Google's proprietary methods and is weighted heavily towards the sum total of the frequency which individual words of the search term appear in the lexicon formed by all web pages.  That is why the word "Oregon" returns so many hits, there is so much having to do with the state of Oregon.  It is another reason why "Oregon" is confusing, unclear, obfuscatory.  For example: "Politician" returns 20 Million hits and the first hit identifying a person is Percy E. Sutton, Politician and Malcolm X Lawyer.  Obviously, Mr. Sutton should not be name "Politician", nor is he the most relevant politician.  3) The real issue:  If we are looking to the internet for the appropriateness/commonality of using "Oregon Petition" as the name - we should recognize that it is detractors of the Global Warming Petition Project, as well as AGW skeptics in general, who are using and may have first defined the nickname.  A casual perusal of these internet opinion sites depict derogatory talk about the volunteers who started the petition, and the employer OISM of at least one of them.  I've never seen any reliable source that shows that "Oregon Petition" was ever used by the petition originators, though it clearly is not used now.  It seems that "Oregon Petition" is a nickname assigned early on by many of the opinion sites on the internet which deride the petition.  You can see how sites, and opinion forums, that attack the petition and those associated with it blatantly assign the "Oregon Petition" nickname: "your referring to the Oregon Petition" [ http://askville.amazon.com/referring-Oregon-Petition-impressive-proponents-make/DiscussionPost.do?requestId=64517863&commentId=64526236&commentNumber=0&pageNumber=1 ], using the nickname in quotes [], ignoring the real name used in a TV broadcast and renaming it .  We can't regulate the language of opinion sites outside of wikipedia, nor should anyone.  But we need not adopt their terminology, and wiki articles can adhere to the NPOV standard, especially for politically sensitive topics.

 * "Global Warming Petition Project" is the actual name, as is actually stated currently in the wiki article.
 * Google reflects the actual name by a first hit on a search of the quoted name.
 * There has been no reliable reference shown establishing that "Oregon Petition" is or was the official name.
 * The only argument presented so far in favor of the name "Oregon Petition" is "most people know it by that name" with the only proof being the number of Google Search hits. My opinion is that argument is fundamentally flawed, and extremely weak.

 * In my opinion the nickname "Oregon Petition" is at a minimum, obfuscatory. The nickname's use outside of wiki on the internet seems to be associated with and concentrated on POV opinion sites, many of which are blatantly uncivil and unreliable.--Knowsetfree (talk) 21:38, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Google reflects the actual name by a first hit on a search of the quoted name. This seems rather unremarkable. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 21:47, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Comment - Hi. I'm here from requested moves, and I would make a couple of comments about the conversation so far. Our general policy is to use a name that will be recognized by most readers; that's what the COMMONNAME page is about. In my experience with thousands of moves, there is almost never a source saying "X is the most common name". The determination of most common name is made instead by editors here, based on the same reliable sources that we use to write the article. If credible sources generally call it the "Oregon Petition", then we go with "Oregon petition" (assuming nothing else of equal or greater notability is also known by that name). If credible sources generally call it the "Global Warming Petition Project", then that's what we go with. It's not clear to me from the above discussion which name is used in our sources. Can someone address that question? -GTBacchus(talk) 00:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Most sources call it the "Oregon petition" (both credible and non-credible ones). The website changed the name recently from the "petition project" to the "global warming petition project" but neither of these names are widely used. Knowsetfree's argument is that since the petition changed its name we should as well - and the counter-argument is exactly that OP is the most widely used name. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 21:16, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note Could someone please address the comment above by User:GTBacchus, otherwise this Requested Move is going nowhere  Ron h jones (Talk) 19:41, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support based on a brief, quick survey of the references given in the article. One note here though is that many of the references seem to refer to it as simply "The Petition", but I only actually noticed "Oregon Petition" once. Anyway, I'm just here from WP:RM to provide a 3O, so please dont' go trying to drag me into the current climate change hoopla here on en.wiki. Thanks. — V = I * R (talk to Ohms law) 06:07, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * OK - I'll move this page in 24h unless we get a wave of noes. Note that the comparison of Google above is not that valid - one must add "-wikipedia" to the line to stop all the sites that copy content from here - e.g. "Oregon Petition" -wikipedia and "Global Warming Petition Project" -wikipedia .  There are 17000 for the first at 5300 for the second, However in both cases the main site that comes up as the number one hit is http://www.oism.org/pproject/ - of which the web page title (that's what shows in Google and in the bar the very top of IE/FF) is "Home - Global Warming Petition Project"  Ron h jones (Talk) 22:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Objection - Say what? You are moving the page based on what? Sorry, but that simply is ignoring all the commentary already here, and basing it solely on one outside comment. If this is (as Ohm's law indicates) solely a problem with a lack of references on the page that call it the Oregon petition, then that is rather easy to change. If you take a simple check on Google Scholar, then you'd find that ("Oregon petion" +climate"), climate added here to ensure that we do not get false positives, returns a total of 15,800 references - whereas "Global warming petition project" (the proposed new title) gives 14. Notice that even if we consider the first result as consisting of 90% false positives - the current name is still (by a magnitude) the most common name. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 22:56, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

False statement attributed to a "petition website" - citation shows otherwise.
It is a given that there are people who do not believe the declarations made in the petition. However, the petition speaks for itself. This false text was removed: The text of the petition often is misrepresented. For example, until recently the petition's website stated that the petition's signatories "declare that global warming is a lie with no scientific basis whatsoever" and t The "petition's website" said no such thing. I examined the provided citation, which was a web page which was merely talking about the petition. The website designated in the citation was an editorial. In fact, it was clear that the website referred to the actual petition website as "This Page", which was a direct link to the actual website. The quote "global warming is a lie with no scientific basis whatsoever" appears on the review website, but appears nowhere on the actual petition's website. Just because there might be some people who arguably "misrepresent" the text of the Global Warming Petition Project doesn't mean that Wiki should repeat such errors. That is to say, it was a lie that was just removed, a lie that was misrepresenting the text of the petition. -- Knowsetfree (talk) 18:30, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

 * You're wrong William M. Connolley (talk) 18:57, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

 * Hi William. Just saw your quick reply, but moments ago I just working on a complete explanation of the error on a talk section above.  Why don't you read the explanation as to why the content deleted in the article, as well as your commentary above, is a falsehood and a misrepresentation of the petition.  After reviewing my comments, and your own citation, By all means talk here about what you were thinking.  If you made an honest mistake, please let us know because I would always want to retain the assumption of good faith associated with your name.  Of course, if in fact I'm "wrong", maybe you can clearly describe the specific simple point in question:  Whether the petition site ever held the words as you have asserted. -- Knowsetfree (talk) 19:18, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Editor William M. Connolley is oddly brisk in the speed of his responsiveness when he has "content" on wikipedia which he desires to protect. He has quickly reverted several edits of mine.  Only one of my edits dealing with the specific issue of the falsehood I identified, the others primarily being grammatical improvements.  William, I've gone to great lengths to clearly and concisely document your falsehoods.  Perhaps you could act as quickly to address them?  While I'm still trying to assume that you are acting in good faith you must admit that your simple declaration "you're wrong" hardly constitutes a reasonable attempt to discuss, or even explain, your interpretation of the facts.  I'll invite you to revert your recent deletions that are not covered by the "your wrong" explanation absent clear and specific reasons therefore, and to elaborate on the "your wrong" explanation.  Let me politely make it clear, your falsehood is easily verified by reading the very same archived citation that you provided. --Knowsetfree (talk) 21:53, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I have too much respect for grammar to say "your wrong". As for the rest; well, so you are. Lets see what others have to say; we're not likely to agree, it seems William M. Connolley (talk) 23:06, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Sadly, your respect for grammar is greater than your respect for truth and logic. But I'll give you credit.  Perhaps only my first quotation of your flimsy reply included the apostrophe, so technically speaking you were misquoted.  Notwithstanding that your meaning was not misrepresented, I apologize.  Now, please remove your falsehoods which misrepresent the petition, to which so many honorable academics have subscribed.  Don't 31,000 people deserve at least as much respect as you deserve?  Or you can let wiki editors know that you concede to a nullification of your revert.  --Knowsetfree (talk) 19:28, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * So you contend that the text that used to be at http://www.oism.org/oism/s32p31.htm cannot be held against the organisers of the petition that is hosted at http://www.oism.org/pproject/ ? That idea would be more convincing if the organisers didn't consist of a full quarter of OISM's faculty. Or if the passage in question had been there only for a couple of weeks rather than 8 1/2 years from approximately April 1999 till September 2007. Hans Adler 00:16, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Hans. Thank you for joining the discussion.  You might not realize it, but you are embracing  a logical fallacy.  In fact, the flawed logic is so old that long ago philosophers gave it a name: ad hominem.  And Thank you for proving the point, for establishing that the website that William M. Connolley (and perhaps another user in the article) falsely tells us as the source of a quote is in fact from somewhere else.  Do you ever see a commentator on NBC news who gives his own opinion, then a newscaster purportedly gives the full news?  Of course not.  Another example could help: Even if every musician of the New York Philharmonic purchased their morning coffee at Starbucks, it wouldn't mean that the New York Phiharmonic endorsed Starbucks, or was owned by Starbucks.  You are trying to attack specific people and then use that attack of those persons to try to disparage an idea.  There are 31K degreed people on the petition, perhaps it has doubled from 4 years ago.  Furthermore, User William M. Connolley engaged in another wikipedia misdeed besides the ad hominem logic flaw.  So the two issues are: 1) William has falsehoods on wiki, and 2) ad hominem attacks don't belong on wiki.  Just to clarify the ad hominem issue, there are over 31,000 degreed people with a scientific background, and that includes over 9,000 PhDs.  The significance of the Global Warming Petition Project is its simplicity in the few sentences, and the volume of degreed Phd's and other scientists who have aligned with it.  Since a strong, if not the strongest, argument by the AGW community for drastic changes in law and policy is that the "Science" of Global Warming is "settled", and has reached a "scientific consensus", and that "2,500 of the Worlds Top Scientists" believe in it - the existence of the petition is newsworthy.  9K is much greater than 2.5K.  31K is over an order of magnitude greater than 2,500.  Surely, if Global Warming is really so obvious and well settled, surely there must be something that the highly funded AGW professionals can do to address the Global Warming Petition Project besides irrelevant pointless ad hominem attacks.  --Knowsetfree (talk) 19:15, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you condense this down into one or two focused points? Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 17:54, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi User:Short Brigade Harvester Boris. My first posting would be best, but here's two:
 * 1) The wiki article is falsely attributing POV statements made by a third party to the actual petition itself. One or more editors either disagree as to the falsity or believe an exception should be made, it's not clear which.
 * 2) Content from a POV source does not belong on wiki.
 * --Knowsetfree (talk) 21:57, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Article probation
Please note that, by a decision of the Wikipedia community, this article and others relating to climate change (broadly construed) has been placed under article probation. Editors making disruptive edits may be blocked temporarily from editing the encyclopedia, or subject to other administrative remedies, according to standards that may be higher than elsewhere on Wikipedia. Please see General sanctions/Climate change probation for full information and to review the decision. -- ChrisO (talk) 19:36, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Much Better
I wrote the original comment that the article was biased. I see now that it has been cleaned up, the POV removed, and it is much better. Well done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.185.10.90 (talk) 18:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Oregon Petition. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120601110230/http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/2009/pdf/Appendix%204%20Petition.pdf to http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/2009/pdf/Appendix%204%20Petition.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe/globehtml/309/Scientists_don_t_agree_on_global_wa.shtml
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19980501&slug=2748308
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-grandia/the-30000-global-warming_b_243092.html?view=print
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070603094408/http://naturalscience.com/ns/forum/forum01b.html to http://naturalscience.com/ns/forum/forum01b.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:39, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

"Disinforming and Confusing"
NPV – by Appeal to Motives Logical Fallacy Re summary: “It is commonly considered to be a political petition designed for disinforming and confusing the public about the scientific results and the consensus of climate change research.” This headline summary statement violates Wikipedia's foundational NPV (NPOV) policy. It commits the Logical Fallacy of “The Argument from Motives (also Questioning Motives)”. See Master List of Logical Fallacies #18 This NPV should best be corrected by 1) Deleting it from the summary and at best editing and putting it further down. OR 2) Correct it to: “Others assert it disinforms the public about climate science and a consensus on climate change.” This removes Wikipedia from making the logical fallacy assertion imputing moral turpitude, to noting that others have made this illogical Argument from Motives.DLH (talk) 22:47, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * So you disagree with the reliable source quoted in the article. Tough. Your own thoughts on the matter are not relevant here. See WP:OR. If you publish those thoughts in a reliable source, that is another matter. Do that, and we can quote you contradicting. --Hob Gadling (talk) 23:15, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * My disagreement is the breach of NPOV committed by the sentence having Wikipedia make the illogical fallacy "Argument from Motives" rather than noting the article author states it. PS How is an author committing an obvious logical fallacy a "reliable source"? DLH (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DLH (talk • contribs) 00:35, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

As above, the disagreement is clearly NOT with 'the reliable source quoted in the article' but the biased presentation of the quote. This is far from the first article that contains this sort of arrogantly dismissive, falsely positioned brush off by some editor forcing misleading views into an article. One can see that Wikipedia's dishonesty is hidden away in the Talk pages where obfuscation and dissembling rhetoric are used to hide the bias of the editors in justifying their flawed and propagandist viewpoints. What a tragedy for a once great idea. --Diolution (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.60.3.76 (talk • contribs) 13:35, 28 July 2019 (UTC) 122.60.3.76

Oregon Petition.
I believe the sole purpose of this entry was meant not to provide a straight forward unbiased description of the petition and other relative facts but to add his own spin to discredit a petition which the author vehemently disagrees with. The author has carefully phrased sentences and inserted passive aggressive verbiage to influence the readers opinion on the subject matter. A proper encyclopedic entry should not so clearly convey the beliefs of the author. 98.114.241.198 (talk) 03:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * There is no "the author". The article is based on reliable sources and reflects their stance. Their stance is the the Petition is pseudoscientific bullshit. --Hob Gadling (talk) 10:00, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Oregon Petition


text:
Roger Sheaffe

Roger Sheaffe may refer to:

 * Roger Hale Sheaffe (1763–1851), Loyalist general in the British Army
 * Roger Sheaffe (politician) (Roger Hale Sheaffe, 1838–1895), pastoralist and member of the Queensland Legislative Assembly

title: Roger Sheaffe


text:
Osmo Soininvaara

Osmo Heikki Kristian Soininvaara (born 2 September 1951 in Helsinki) is a Finnish politician and writer, former party leader and cabinet member.

Personal life
Soininvaara has a licentiate degree in statistics. Before his political career he worked as a statistician.

Soininvaara is married to Anna-Maria Soininvaara and they have three children: Ohto (born 1990), Ilppo (born 1991), and Helmi (born 1997).

Political life
Soininvaara was elected in Helsinki city council in 1985 and has served in various positions of trust in the city administration since then. He was elected in Eduskunta in 1987 and again in 1995 and was a member of parliament until 2007, when he chose not to stand for re-election. After a break he was elected to the parliament again in 2011, serving until 2015.

He served as Minister of Social Services in Paavo Lipponen's second cabinet between 14 April 2000 and 19 April 2002. He was the leader of the Finnish Green League party from 2001 to 2005.

Basic income proposal
Soininvaara is a long-time advocate of a basic income and has published several books and reports on this topic. In Hyvinvointivaltion eloonjäämisoppi, awarded as the best economics book of 1994, he proposed a detailed basic income scheme differentiated for household composition.

title: Osmo Soininvaara


text:
Six Nations of the Grand River

Six Nations (or Six Nations of the Grand River, Réserve des Six Nations, ) is demographically the largest First Nations reserve in Canada. As of the end of 2017, it has a total of 27,276 members, 12,848 of whom live on the reserve. These nations are the Mohawk, Cayuga, Onondaga, Oneida, Seneca and Tuscarora. Some Lenape (also known as Delaware) live in the territory as well.

The Six Nations reserve is bordered by the County of Brant, Norfolk County, and Haldimand County, with a subsection reservation, the New Credit Reserve, located within its boundaries. The acreage at present covers some 46000 acre near the city of Brantford, Ontario. This represents approximately 8% of the original 550000 acre of land granted to the Six Nations by the 1784 Haldimand Proclamation.

History
Many of the Haudenosaunee people allied with the British during the American Revolutionary War, particularly warriors from the Mohawk, Cayuga, Onondaga and Seneca nations. Some warriors of the Oneida and Tuscarora also allied with them, as warfare was highly decentralized. These nations had longstanding trade relations with the British and hoped they might stop European-American encroachment on their territories. These allies were from the Six Nations of the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Confederacy.

After the colonists' victory, the British government ceded all of its territory in the colonies to their new government under a peace treaty, including that belonging to the Six Nations without consulting them or making them party to treaty negotiations. The Crown worked to resettle native Loyalists in Canada and provide some compensation for lands lost in the new United States. The Crown also hoped to use these new settlers, both Native Americans and European Americans, to develop agriculture and towns in areas west of Quebec, the territory later known as Upper Canada.

The new lands granted to Six Nations reserves were all near important Canadian military targets and placed along the border to prevent any American invasion. The growth of the Six Nations community was also hampered. Land, especially in the 17th and 18th centuries, granted a certain measure of power to their owners. Influential leaders such as Joseph Brant and Deseronto were prevented from granting land to business owners who could have brought industry and agriculture to their lands.

After the war, Mohawk leaders John Deseronto and Joseph Brant met with the British officer Frederick Haldimand to discuss the loss of their lands in New York. Haldimand promised to resettle the Mohawk near the Bay of Quinte, on the northeast shore of Lake Ontario, in present-day Ontario, Canada. Haldimand purchased from other First Nations a tract 12 mi by 13 mi on the Bay of Quinte, which he granted to the Mohawk. (There are of course questions about First Nations understanding of such purchase). About 200 Mohawk settled with Deseronto at what is now called the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory, Ontario. The group of Mohawk originally led by John Deseronto, who died in the town named after him, settled on the Bay of Quinte known as Tyendinaga. These were primarily Mohawk of the Lower Castle (of New York).

Six Nations at Grand River
Brant decided that he preferred to settle on the Grand River north of Lake Erie. Mohawk of the Upper Castle joined him in settling on the Grand River, as did bands of the other Six Nations. By the Haldimand Proclamation of October 25, 1784, the government granted a tract of land to the Mohawk Nation and Six Nations bands in appreciation of their support for The Crown during the revolution. The Crown had purchased the lands previously from the Mississauga on May 22, 1784 as part of the Between the Lakes Treaty. Joseph Brant led a large group of Iroquois to settle in what is now referred to as "Six Nations of the Grand River."

A 1785 census recorded 1,843 Natives living on the Grand River reserve, including 548 Mohawk, 281 Cayuga, 145 Onondaga, 262 Oneida, 109 Tuscarora, and 98 Seneca. There were also 400 persons from other tribes, including Lenape, and others from southern territory, such as the Nanticoke, Tutelo, and some Creek and Cherokee. African-American slaves were also brought to Six Nations and Brantford by Joseph Brant. Brant encouraged members of his family to marry local Blacks, absorbing them into the population on the reserve. From the 1830s to the 1860s many runaway slaves, escaping through the Underground Railroad, were received and absorbed into the population of Six Nations. Along with the African-Americans who settled largely in the area around Cainsville, Joseph Brant invited several Anglo-American white families to live on the grant, particularly veterans of Brant's Volunteers and Butler's Rangers from New York, who had fought with him during the war. To encourage his loyalist friends to settle there, Brant gave them larger grants than the government had given other loyalists in other areas of Upper Canada. Some Canadians objected to Brant giving such land grants to whites in the reserve area.

As the government did for European Americans, the Indian department provided the Haudenosaunee with some tools and other provisions for resettlement, including such items as saws, axes, grindstones, and chisels. They received help in establishing schools and churches, and in acquiring farm equipment and other necessities. Conditions were extremely difficult in the first years on the frontier, as the government did not provide enough supplies or assistance to any of the resettled loyalists, neither Native Americans nor European Americans. They had to create new settlements out of woodlands. In 1785, the government built the first Protestant church in Upper Canada (now Ontario) on the reserve; it was known as Her Majesty's Royal Chapel of the Mohawks. The Crown maintained its support of this chapel, and it is among only twelve Chapels Royal in the world.

The main town developed at what is now Brantford. It was first called Brant's Town after Joseph Brant, who built his residence there. In 1798, it was described as a large and sprawling settlement. Brant's home was a two-story house, built in a European-American style. In 1797, Brant founded one of the earliest Masonic Lodges in Upper Canada; he achieved the rank of its Worshipful Master.

Governor John Simcoe confirmed the Grant with a limited deed on January 14, 1793. Also, this deed forbade them to sell the land to anyone but each other and the king. Led by Joseph Brant, the chiefs rejected the deed. In 1795, the Grand River chiefs empowered Joseph Brant to sell large blocks of land in the northern section, which the Haudenosaunee were not using at the time. They set terms of no money down because they wanted to take their payment entirely in future years as annual interest. At this time, the population on the reserve was declining; some Haudenosaunee left the Grand River for traditional native communities in New York. After Brant's land sales started in 1795, the population began to increase again. He and the chiefs insisted on annuities to help the Six Nations community survive.

According to the Haldimand Proclamation, the original tract of land stretched from the mouth of the Grand River on the shores of Lake Erie to the river's head, and for 10 km (6 mi) from either bank. However, the grant of land included land around the source that the Crown had not purchased from the Mississauga. A purchase from the Mississauga was later arranged, but not carried out. Between 1795 and 1797, Joseph Brant sold 381480 acre to land speculators; the property comprising the northern half of the reserve was sold for £85,332. This was the highest price paid to Haudenosaunee up to this time for undeveloped land.

Governor Simcoe opposed the land sales. The interest on the annuity promised an income to the people of £5,119 per year, far more than any other Iroquois people had received. The land speculators were unable to sell farm-size lots to settlers fast enough. By 1801, however, all the land speculators had fallen behind in their payments. Because of the lack of payments, Brant was determined to sell more land to make up for the missing payments.

In 1796, Lord Dorchester issued another deed for the land. This empowered the Haudenosaunee to lease or sell their land, provided they offered it first for sale to the government. Brant rejected this deed, partly because the deed named the Six Nations as communal owners of the land. He believed the deed should be limited to the current persons living on the land.

By 1800, two-thirds of the Haudenosaunee had not yet adapted to the style of subsistence agriculture maintained by separate households that the Canadian government encouraged. Brant had hoped that sales of land to European Americans would help them develop the frontier, but conditions were difficult for such agriculture.

In 1813, the chiefs and councillors of the Six Nations residing in the state of New York would declare war on the provinces of Upper and Lower Canada.

In 1828, chief John Brant was appointed resident superintendent for the Six Nations of the Grand River.

The Six Nations people were originally given 10 km (6 miles) on either side of the entire length of the Grand River, although much of the land was later sold. The ongoing Grand River land dispute is the result of disputes over the sale process. The current reserves encompass 184.7 km2 (71 sq mi), all but 0.4 km2 (100 acres) in Six Nations reserve No. 40.

In the late 19th century, the Scottish doctor Joseph Bell excavated skulls of indigenous people in the six nations. These skulls reached Berlin through the mediation of the doctor William Osler, where they were considered untraceable for decades. In 2020, the journalists David Bruser and Markus Grill, supported by the ethnologist Nils Seethaler, succeeded in finding the skulls in the anatomical collection of the Berlin Society for Anthropology, Ethnology and Prehistory. A return of the skulls to the care of the community of origin was suggested in this context.

Communities
Several named communities exist within the Six Nations reserve:
 * Beavers Corner
 * Longboat Corners
 * Medina Corners
 * Millers Corner
 * Ohsweken
 * St. Johns
 * Sixty-Nine Corners
 * Smith Corners
 * Smoothtown
 * Sour Spring
 * Stoneridge

Members
They later welcomed to the reserve a group of Lenape, who speak Munsee, an Algonquian language.

Six Nations of the Grand River is the most populous reserve in Canada. As of March 2023, there were 28,520 band members, of whom 11,688 lived on the reserve. The population consists of the following bands:

*

Government
The Six Nations of the Grand River Elected Council is a governing body established to run the affairs of the reserve in 1924, formed under the Indian Act. The Elected Council has, since its foundation, been the primary government of Six Nations recognised by the Government of Canada. However, the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council has maintained a presence on the reserve despite the establishment of the elected council, representing a continuity with the traditional government of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy.

Education
Prior to colonization, education in Haudenosaunee communities took place in "unstructured and non-coercive ways." This continues to this day alongside state education.

Members of the Six Nations attended the Mohawk Institute, a residential school which was the subject of numerous abuse allegations. Upon closure of the institute in 1972, the residential school was replaced by the Woodland Cultural Centre.

Day schools were also operated on the reserve under the Six Nations School Board (1878–1933), the first Indigenous school board in Ontario. While the official colonial curriculum was taught and many non-Indigenous teachers taught on the reserve, Indigenous influence on the board allowed for the hiring of many Six Nations teachers, many of them women as was and continues to be the case at the elementary level in Ontario. Teachers on the reserve also formed their own association for professional development, the Six Nations Teacher's Organization.

title: Six Nations of the Grand River


text:
Il re pastore

Il re pastore (The Shepherd King) is an opera, K. 208, written by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart to an Italian libretto by Metastasio, edited by Giambattista Varesco. It is an opera seria. The opera was first performed on 23 April 1775 in Salzburg in the Rittersaal (knight's hall) of the Residenz-Theater in the palace of the Archbishop Count Hieronymus von Colloredo.

In 1775 the opera was commissioned for a visit by the Archduke Maximilian Francis of Austria, the youngest son of Empress Maria Theresa, to Salzburg. Mozart spent six weeks working on the opera. It consists of two acts and runs for approximately 107 minutes.

Metastasio wrote the libretto in 1751, basing it on a work by Torquato Tasso called Aminta. The libretto was picked up when Mozart (just 19 at the time) and his father saw a performance of it set to music composed by Felice Giardini – Mozart's version, however was two acts rather than Giardini's three, and has a few substantial changes. Each act lasts for around an hour in performance. The Salzburg court chaplain Varesco was largely responsible for this editing of Metastasio's libretto.

It is often referred to not as an opera, but as a serenata, a type of dramatic cantata. The appearance of a quartet of lovers (Aminta and Elisa, Agenore and Tamiri) of somewhat dubious fidelity automatically puts a modern audience in mind of Così fan tutte. The principal psychological theme of the opera is, however, the demands of love against the demands of kingship, as Aminta, the shepherd-king, tussles with his conscience, and in this Il re pastore is closer in theme to Idomeneo than any other of Mozart's operas. Indeed, Idomeneo was the next completed opera that Mozart wrote after Il re pastore, after his six-year-long break from the stage. Furthermore, the theme of qualities for kingship appears in another opera, La clemenza di Tito, his last one.

Synopsis
The king of Macedonia, Alessandro, has overthrown Stratone, the tyrant of Sidon, but aims to find the rightful king.

Act 1
''In a meadow. The city of Sidon can be seen from a distance.''

Elisa is with her lover Aminta, the shepherd. She assures him that the war between King Alessandro and Stratone, the tyrant of Sidon, will not affect their love for each other. Having deposed Stratone, Alessandro searches for the rightful heir to Sidon. He thinks that Aminta is the rightful heir. He comes to Aminta in disguise and offers him to take him to Alessandro. Aminta wants to remain a shepherd. Meantime, Agenore encounters his beloved Tamiri, daughter of Stratone. Tamiri is comforted to learn that Agenore still loves her.

Elisa gets permission from her father to marry Aminta. Aminta tells Elisa that he is the rightful heir to the throne and that his father was driven out by Stratone when he was a baby. Aminta promises to return to Elisa after claiming his throne. Aminta loves Elisa but Alessandro suggests that when Aminta is hailed king, royal duties take precedence over love. Alessandro suggests that Tamiri marry Aminta in order to ascend her father's throne. Aminta disagrees.

Act 2
Macedonian Camp.

Elisa is prevented by Agenore from seeing Aminta. He also discourages Aminta from pursuing her. Alessandro tells Aminta to dress like a king so he can be presented to his subjects. He also decides that Tamiri marry Aminta. Aminta is distraught. Agenore is upset. He breaks the news to Elisa. Tamiri does not want to marry Aminta. Agenore, too, is tormented by the planned marriage. Tamiri tells Alessandro that she and Agenore are in love. The women throw themselves onto Alessandro's mercy. Elisa begs him to give her back Aminta who declares his love for Elisa ("L'amerò, sarò costante" / I shall love her, I shall be constant). Realizing the potential injustice he was about to inflict, Alessandro tells Aminta to marry Elisa and Tamiri to marry Agenore. Aminta is crowned king of Sidon.

Noted arias
Act 1
 * "Intendo, amico rio" – Aminta
 * "Alla selva, al prato" – Elisa
 * "Aer tranquillo e di sereni" – Aminta
 * "Si spande al sole in faccia" – Alessandro
 * "Per me rispondete" – Agenore
 * "Di tante sue procelle" – Tamiri

Act 2
 * "Barbaro! oh Dio mi vedi" – Elisa
 * "Se vincendo vi rendo felici" – Alessandro
 * "L'amerò, sarò costante" – Aminta
 * "Se tu di me fai dono" – Tamiri
 * "Sol può dir come si trova" – Agenore
 * "Voi che fausti ognor donati" – Alessandro

Recordings

 * 1952 – Agnes Giebel (Aminta), Käthe Nentwig (Elisa), Hetty Plümacher (Tamiri), Albert Weikenmeier (Alessandro), Werner Hohmann (Agenore), Stuttgarter Tonstudio Orchester, Gustav Lund (Period Records).
 * 1967 – Reri Grist (Aminta), Lucia Popp (Elisa), Arlene Saunders (Tamiri), Luigi Alva (Alessandro), Nicola Monti (Agenore), Orchestra of Naples, Denis Vaughan (RCA Records).
 * 1974 – Edith Mathis (Aminta), Arleen Augér (Elisa), Sona Ghazarian (Tamiri), Peter Schreier (Alessandro), Werner Krenn (Agenore), Mozarteum-Orchester Salzburg, Leopold Hager (Deutsche Grammophon).
 * 1989 – Angela Maria Blasi (Aminta), Sylvia McNair (Elisa), Iris Vermillion (Tamiri), Jerry Hadley (Alessandro), Claes H. Ahnsjö (Agenore), Academy of St. Martin in the Fields, Sir Neville Marriner (Philips Classics).
 * 1995 – Ann Murray (Aminta), Eva Mei (Elisa), Inga Nielsen (Tamiri), Roberto Saccà (Alessandro), Markus Schäfer (Agenore), Concentus Musicus Wien, Nikolaus Harnoncourt (Teldec).
 * 2001 – Johannette Zomer (Aminta), Francine van der Heyden (Elisa), Claudia Patacca (Tamiri), Alexei Grigorev (Alessandro), Marcel Reijans (Agenore), Musica ad Rhenum, Jed Wentz (Brilliant Classics).
 * 2006 – Annette Dasch (Aminta), Marlis Petersen (Elisa), Arpiné Rahdjian (Tamiri), Kresimir Spicer (Alessandro), Andreas Karasiak (Agenore), Balthasar-Neumann-Ensemble, Thomas Hengelbrock (DVD; Deutsche Grammophon).

title: Il re pastore


text:
Northern black flycatcher

The northern black flycatcher (Melaenornis edolioides) is a small passerine bird in the flycatcher family, Muscicapidae.

Range
This is an insectivorous species which is a resident breeder in tropical Africa from Senegal to Ethiopia and south to Zaire and Tanzania.

Habitat
The northern black flycatcher is found in moist wooded areas and cultivation. It nests in a hole or reuses the old nest of another species, and lays two or three eggs. Breeding takes place in the wet season.

Description
The northern black flycatcher is 20 cm long. It is a large upright long-tailed flycatcher. The adult is uniformly black. Juveniles are blackish-brown with buff scaling.

The long square-ended tail helps to distinguish this species from two other all-black insectivores, the fork-tailed drongo and the shorter-tailed and red-eyed common square-tailed drongo.

Song
This flycatcher has a simple musical song and a thin tsee-whee call.

title: Northern black flycatcher