text:
Scott Spiezio

Scott Edward Spiezio (born September 21, 1972) is an American former professional baseball infielder. He is well known for his time as a member of the Anaheim Angels, when he hit a three-run home run in Game Six of the 2002 World Series against the San Francisco Giants, sparking the Angels to a dramatic come-from-behind victory. He also played for the Oakland Athletics, Seattle Mariners, and St. Louis Cardinals, and is the son of former major leaguer Ed Spiezio.

In addition to Spiezio's pivotal moment helping the Angels win the World Series, 2002 was also his most productive full season, with a .807 OPS. Spiezio was a utility player on the St. Louis Cardinals 2006 World Series championship team.

Amateur career
Spiezio attended Morris High School in Morris, Illinois, and was a letterman in baseball. In baseball, he was named his league's MVP and was an All-State selection.

Spiezio played college baseball for the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign. He made the All-Big 10 Team in baseball in 1992 and 1993. In 1992, he played collegiate summer baseball with the Wareham Gatemen of the Cape Cod Baseball League, and returned to the league in 1993 to play for the Cotuit Kettleers.

Oakland A's
Spiezio was selected by the Oakland Athletics in the 1993 player draft and signed later that year. He made his debut with the 1996 A's and established himself as a classic utility player, making starts at first base, second base, and third base, and as a switch hitter with more power when batting left-handed.

Anaheim Angels
Spiezio signed as a free agent with the Anaheim Angels ahead of the 2000 season. During his years with the Angels, he made appearances in left field and right field, as well as first, second, and third base. In 2002, he had a career year. Playing every day, he set career highs in batting average, on-base percentage and RBI. It was in the postseason that he had his greatest success. Spiezio batted 18 for 55 (.327) for Anaheim in the playoffs that year. In Game 6 of the 2002 World Series, with Anaheim trailing three games to two in the series, trailing 5–0 in the seventh inning of the game, and facing a Series loss, Spiezio hit a three-run homer off of Félix Rodríguez to pull his team to within two runs. A lead off homer by Darin Erstad followed by a two-run double by Troy Glaus in the next inning won the game for the Angels by a 6–5 score, and the Angels would go on to win their first ever World Series championship 4–3. Spiezio tied Sandy Alomar Jr.'s postseason record with 19 RBI in one postseason that was set in 1997.

Seattle Mariners
After the 2003 season, Spiezio became a free agent and signed a contract with the Seattle Mariners. The next two seasons were the worst of his career. He tripped over a mound during 2004 spring training, resulting in a debilitating back injury. At one point, there were concerns the injury could threaten his career and potentially leave him paralyzed. He hit .215 that season and played only 29 games the next year (compiling an .064 average) before the Mariners released him on August 19, 2005.

St. Louis Cardinals
On February 18, 2006, Spiezio signed a minor league contract with the St. Louis Cardinals with an invitation to the club's spring training. Spiezio played well enough during the Cardinals' exhibition to secure a roster spot with the team as a reserve infielder entering the 2006 season. This move would reunite Spiezio with his former Angels teammate, shortstop David Eckstein.

Spiezio, used as a pinch hitter and all-around reserve player as well as the primary backup to Scott Rolen at third base, had his best season since 2002 for the 2006 Cardinals, hitting 13 home runs and driving in 52 runs despite only getting 276 at-bats. He would have another dramatic moment in the playoffs. With the Cardinals trailing, 6–4, in the seventh inning of Game 2 of the 2006 National League Championship Series, Spiezio hit a two-run triple to tie the score. The Cardinals went on to win the game and the series in seven games, then proceeded to win the 2006 World Series, earning Spiezio his second World Series ring.

On November 16, 2006, Spiezio signed a two-year contract to return to the Cardinals until the end of the 2008 season, with a club option for 2009. The deal was worth an estimated $4.5 million.

On June 15, 2007, Spiezio took the mound as a relief pitcher in the bottom of the eighth inning of a lopsided loss against the Athletics. His fastball was clocked as high as 87 mph. He pitched one inning, giving up one walk, no hits, no runs, and no strikeouts. After having pitched in one game, Spiezio played six positions in his career (seven counting designated hitter), missing catcher, shortstop, and center field.

Release
On August 7, 2007, Spiezio received IV fluids. He was described as being "irritable and anxious". Spiezio disconnected his IV and left the stadium rather than accept medical treatment. On August 9, 2007, the Cardinals placed him on the restricted list. The Cardinals stated that Spiezio would be seeking treatment for an unspecified substance abuse problem. On September 14, 2007, Spiezio was removed from the restricted list after 36 days and also reactivated to play in that evening's home game.

On February 27, 2008, the Cardinals released Spiezio after police in Irvine, California issued a warrant for his arrest. The warrant was issued on six charges relating to a car crash on December 30, 2007. According to Irvine police, a drunken Spiezio crashed his BMW into a fence, then ran from the scene. In April, he pleaded guilty to two misdemeanors and was sentenced to three years' probation and 80 hours community service. He was also ordered to undergo three months of alcohol treatment and attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings.

On March 31, 2008, Spiezio signed a minor league deal with the Atlanta Braves and was assigned to their top affiliate, the Richmond Braves. He showed signs of his old form, batting .333 in five games. However, he was released on April 12 for being unprepared to play in a game. Spiezio later said that while he was sober at the time, he was in a deep depression after being released by the Cardinals and wasn't ready to take the field. Combined with a strained relationship with his first wife and the prospect of not being able to see his kids for two months, he decided to go home for the year.

Independent leagues
Spiezio believed he was finished with baseball after his major league career, but decided to give it another shot in 2009. The Angels put him in touch with the Orange County Flyers of the independent Golden Baseball League. Flyers manager Phil Nevin, a former major leaguer, decided to sign Spiezio after letting him work out for a week and getting assurances he was mentally ready to play. Spiezio signed another one-year deal to play the 2010 season for the Newark Bears. He hit .279 with three home runs and 35 RBI while appearing in 52 games.

Personal life
Spiezio is the son of two-time World Series champion Ed Spiezio.

On April 7, 2015, at 2:30 AM, police in Ottawa, Illinois, responded to a call that Spiezio punched out a window at the apartment where his then-girlfriend and infant son lived. Spiezio fled police and was later found through the use of a K-9 tracker behind a building, resulting in him being tased in order to be brought into custody. No charges were immediately filed.

In a 2022 interview with The Athletic, Spiezio revealed that he had spent the better part of 13 years battling substance abuse. He traced his downward spiral to the 2004 spring training injury, when the strain of being sidelined led him to begin drinking heavily, eventually drinking as much as a gallon of vodka per day. Over the years, he also became a cocaine addict. He admitted that during his time with the Cardinals, he frequently drank during games. As early as 2006, he had alienated so many of his friends in his hometown that no one joined him to celebrate the 2006 World Series win; in contrast, his friends threw him a huge party after the 2002 Series. By 2022, he had 12 stints in rehab and five arrests. His drug habit cost him both of his marriages and strained relationships with his family. His parents did not speak to him at all from 2005 to 2007 and had only sporadic contact with him from 2007 to 2011. He finally bottomed out in 2018, when he went to the hospital with severe jaundice from a badly damaged liver. He has been sober since then.

title: Scott Spiezio


text:
Cheng Weishi Lun

Cheng Weishi Lun (, CWSL, Sanskrit reconstruction: *Vijñaptimātrāsiddhiśāstra, English: The Treatise on the Demonstration of Consciousness-only, Taisho Catalog number 1585), is a comprehensive treatise on the philosophy of Yogacara Buddhism and a commentary on Vasubandhu's seminal work, the Triṃśikā-vijñaptimātratā (Thirty Verses on Consciousness-only).

The CWSL was written by the early Tang dynasty monk Xuanzang (602–664), who drew on numerous Indian Yogacara sources and scholars as well as his experience of studying under Indian Yogacara masters like Nalanda's Śīlabhadra and Prasenajit.

Overview
When Xuanzang was studying Buddhism in India at Nālandā University masters Śīlabhadra and Prasenajit, he is said to have studied ten commentaries on Vasubandhu's Triṃśikā-vijñaptimātratā, those of: Dharmapala, Sthiramati, Nanda, Citrabhanu, Bandhusri, Suddhacandra, Jinaputra, Gunamati, Jinamitra, and Jñanacandra.

Back in China, Xuanzang drew upon his studies in India to write a detailed explanation of Vasubandhu's Triṃśikā-vijñaptimātratā. This synthetic commentary became the Cheng Weishi Lun. Kuiji claimed that the interpretations of Dharmapāla were the only correct ones found in the CWSL and that Xuanzang follows the views of Dharmapāla. However, modern scholars have found that Kuiji often attributes to Dharmapāla certain interpretations which are actually found in the works of Sthiramati. Some modern scholars like Dan Lusthaus suggest that it is actually more likely that the CWSL reflects the views of Xuanzang's teacher Prasenajit, as well as Xuanzang's broad studies in other sources like the Yogacarabhumi.

According to Francis Cook,"The theory of the Ch’eng wei-shih lun is that basic or fundamental consciousness (mula-vijñana) comes to appear naturally and spontaneously in the form of a seeing part (darsana-bhaga) and a seen part (nimitta-bhaga). The seeming reality of an inner self perceiving external events is nothing more than one aspect of consciousness perceiving itself in the form of images. A third part of consciousness, the manas, or thinking aspect, interprets the two parts as a self and an external world. This situation is also the basis for hatred, craving, fear, and other passions. In fact, the apparently real external world of things is nothing but internal images perceived by consciousness and grasped as a source of attachment by thought."

Influence and commentaries
The Chéng Wéishì Lùn became one of the key texts of East Asian Yogācāra, both by Chinese ("Faxiang") and Japanese ("Hossō") thinkers. It is a major doctrinal source and summa for this tradition, also known as the Consciousness Only School (Wéishí-zōng).

Kuiji, one of Xuanzang's key pupils, wrote a commentary on the CWSL, called the Chéng Wéishì Lùn Shuji (成唯識 論述記; Taishō no. 1830, vol. 43, 229a-606c). Kuiji's commentary relies on the epistemology of Dignāga and remains focused on an orthodox Yogacara interpretation.

The Korean monk Woncheuk, another influential pupil of Xuanzang, wrote his own commentary, the Chéng Wéishì Lùn Ceshu, which disagrees with several of Kuiji's positions. Woncheuk was a follower of the Shelun school (攝論宗) of Yogacara, which draws on the work of Paramārtha (499-569). This tradition defended Parāmartha's teaching that there was a ninth consciousness called the "pure consciousness" (amalavijñāna). This position had been rejected by Xuanzang and Kuiji.

Another student of Xuanzang, the Japanese monk Dōshō (道昭, 629–700 C.E.) brought the CWSL to Japan in 660, creating the doctrinal foundation for the Japanese Consciousness-only (Jp: Hossō) school at Nara's Gangōji Temple.

English translations
The Chinese scholar and philosopher Wei Tat translated the Chéng Wéishì Lùn into English for the first time in Hong Kong in 1973. He drew on various Chinese and Western sources for his research, especially the French translation of the CWSL by Louis de La Vallée Poussin. Poussin's translation also included numerous annotations and passages from Kuiji's commentary.

Francis Cook made a new English translation for the Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research's Taishō Tripiṭaka translation effort.

In 2017, a new translation closely based on Louis de La Vallée Poussin's French (along with many annotations) was published by Motilal Banarsidass as Vijñapti-mātratā-siddhi: A Commentary (Chéng Wéishì Lùn) on Vasubandhu's Triṃśikā by Xuanzang. It is the work of Lodrö Sangpo, Migme Chödrön and A. L. Mayer.

Peter Lunde Johnson has published a translation that is entitled "On Realizing There is Only The Virtual Nature of Consciousness" in 2019.

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

title: Cheng Weishi Lun


text:
La Cucaracha

La Cucaracha ("The Cockroach") is a popular folk song about a cockroach who cannot walk. The song's origins are unclear, but it dates back at least to the 1910s during the Mexican Revolution. The song belongs to the Mexican corrido genre. The song's melody is widely known and there are many alternative stanzas.

Structure
The song consists of verse-and-refrain (strophe-antistrophe) pairs, with each half of each pair consisting of four lines featuring an ABCB rhyme scheme.

Refrain
The song's earliest lyrics, from which its name is derived, concern a cockroach that has lost two of its six legs and struggles to walk with the remaining four.

 * La cu-ca- | ra-cha, la cu-ca-ra-cha
 * ya no pue-de ca-mi-nar
 * por-que no | tie-ne, por-que le fal-tan
 * las dos pa- titas "de" a-trás.—

 * ("The cockroach, the cockroach / can no longer walk / because she doesn't have, because she lacks / the two hind legs to walk"; these lyrics form the basis for the refrain of most later versions. Syllables having primary stress are in boldface; syllables having secondary stress are in roman type; unstressed syllables are in italics. Measure divisions are independent of text line breaks and are indicated by vertical bar lines; note that the refrain begins with an anacrusis/"pickup.")

Many later versions of the song, especially those whose lyrics do not mention the cockroach's missing leg(s), extend the last syllable of each line to fit the more familiar 6/4 meter. Almost all modern versions, however, use a 4/4 meter instead with a clave rhythm to give the feeling of three pulses.

Verses
The song's verses fit a traditional melody separate from that of the refrain but sharing the refrain's meter (either 5/4, 6/4, or 4/4 clave as discussed above). In other respects, they are highly variable, usually providing satirical commentary on contemporary political or social problems or disputes.

Historical evolution
The origins of "La Cucaracha" are obscure. The lyrics of the refrain make no explicit reference to historical events, so it is difficult, if not impossible, to date them. However, because the verses are improvised according to the needs of the time, and mention contemporary social or political conditions, a rough estimate of their age can be made.

Pre-Revolution lyrics
Several early (pre-Revolution) sets of lyrics exist, referring to historical events.

In his book Cantos Populares Españoles (1883), Francisco Rodríguez Marín notes lyrics referring to the then recent Hispano-Moroccan War (1859–1860), which were probably developed by the troops during the campaign to boost their morale, using an existing melody:

Some early versions of the lyrics refer to the confrontation between Spanish and Moroccan troops (popularly referred to as "Moors" by the Spanish) during the Hispano-Moroccan War, that reflect Spanish popular imagery during their development from 1859 to 1860.

One of the earliest written references to the song appears in the 1819 novel La Quijotita y su Prima, by Mexican writer and political journalist José Joaquín Fernández de Lizardi, in which it is suggested that:

Other early stanzas concern events such as the Carlist Wars (1833–1876) in Spain, and the French intervention in Mexico (1861).

The period of the Mexican Revolution, from 1910 to about 1920, saw the first major period of verse production for "La Cucaracha", because both rebel and government forces invented political lyrics for the song. Many stanzas were added during that period, today associated mostly with Mexico.

Revolutionary lyrics
The Mexican Revolution was a period of great political upheaval, during which the majority of the stanzas known today were written. Political symbolism was a common theme in those verses, and explicit and implicit references were made to events of the conflict, major political figures, and the effects of the war on the civilians in general. Today, few pre-Revolution verses are known, and the most commonly quoted portion of the song are the two Villist anti-Huerta stanzas:

That version, popular among Villist soldiers, contains hidden political meanings, as is common for revolutionary songs. The cockroach represents President Victoriano Huerta, a notorious drunk who was considered a villain and traitor due to his part in the death of revolutionary President Francisco Madero.

Due to the multi-factional nature of the Mexican Revolution, competing versions were also common, including the Huertist, anti-Carranza stanza:

An example of two Zapatist stanzas is:

"La Cucaracha" was a popular tune among Mexican civilians at the time, and there are numerous examples of non-aligned political verses. Many were general complaints about the hardships created by the war, and were often written by pro-Zapatistas. Other non-aligned verses contained references to various factions, in a non-judgmental manner:

La Cucaracha as a woman
Soldiering has been a profession for women in Mexico since pre-Columbian times. Among the nicknames for women warriors, and camp followers, were Soldaderas, Adelitas, Juanas, and Cucarachas.

Soldiers in Porfirio Diaz's army sang "La Cucaracha" about a soldadera who wanted money to go to the bullfights. In Mexican Military: Myth and History, Elizabeth Salas writes that, for the Villistas, "'La cucaracha' wanted money for alcohol and marijuana. She was often so drunk or stoned that she could not walk straight. Unlike corridos about male revolutionaries like Villa and Zapata, none of the well-known corridos about soldaderas give their real names or are biographical. Consequently, there are very few stanzas that ring true about women in battle or the camps."

Other verses
Apart from verses making explicit or implicit reference to historical events, hundreds of other verses exist. Some are new, and others are ancient, but the lack of references and the largely oral tradition of the song, makes dating the verses difficult, if not impossible. Some examples are:

Influences
In the novel Animal Farm by George Orwell, the animals' rebellion song, "Beasts of England", is described as a blend of the tunes of "La Cucaracha" and "Oh My Darling, Clementine".

FC Utrecht has a long history of playing the tune at homes games after the team has scored.

title: La Cucaracha


text:
Alison La Placa

Alison La Placa (born December 16, 1959) is an American actress best known for playing Linda Phillips on the sitcom Duet and its spin-off Open House, and the recurring role of Joanna, Rachel Green’s boss who dated Chandler Bing on the sitcom Friends.

Early life and career
Born in Lincolnshire, Illinois, a suburb of Chicago, La Placa is a graduate of Stevenson High School.

Shortly after moving to Hollywood, La Placa landed the role of Elyse in the sitcom version of Barry Levinson's dramedy movie Diner (1982). That pilot did not get picked up, and soon thereafter La Placa got a role in the made-for-TV movie Listen to Your Heart (1983).

Later career
The following year, La Placa earned a regular spot on the short-lived sitcom Suzanne Pleshette Is Maggie Briggs (1984). She had a small role in the movie Fletch (1985), and subsequently played the starring role of Linda Phillips on the sitcoms Duet (from 1987 to 1989) and Open House (from 1989 to 1990). La Placa played opposite Kirstie Alley in the comedy movie Madhouse (1990), with co-star John Larroquette.

La Placa has guest-starred on series including Family Ties, Cheers, ER and Desperate Housewives. She was a regular on Stat (1991), The Jackie Thomas Show (1992), Tom (1994), and the NBC sitcom The John Larroquette Show (from 1994 to 1996). La Placa has guest-starred on animated series such as Batman: The Animated Series and Johnny Bravo.

She played the character Andrea in the television series Boston Legal in two episodes in season 4 ("Glow in the Dark" and "Rescue Me"). She appeared in Malcolm in the Middle as Barbara in the episode "Convention" and in a recurring role in 'Til Death as Beth, Joy's co-worker. More recently, she guest starred in the CBS sitcom Mom.

Personal life
She has been married to television actor/director Philip Charles MacKenzie (her co-star on Open House) since 1992.

title: Alison La Placa


text:
Catherine Chidgey

Catherine Chidgey (born 8 April 1970) is a New Zealand novelist, short-story writer and university lecturer. She has published eight novels. Her honours include the inaugural Prize in Modern Letters; the Katherine Mansfield Fellowship to Menton, France; Best First Book at both the New Zealand Book Awards and the Commonwealth Writers' Prize (South East Asia and Pacific Region); the Acorn Foundation Fiction Prize at the Ockham New Zealand Book Awards on two occasions; and the Janet Frame Fiction Prize.

Early life and family
Chidgey was born in Auckland and grew up in the Hutt Valley. At Victoria University of Wellington she completed a BSc in Psychology, and a BA in German Language and Literature. In 1993 she was awarded a German Academic Exchange Service scholarship to study at the Freie Universität Berlin. She returned to Victoria University in 1997 to complete an MA in Creative Writing under Bill Manhire.

she lives in Hamilton with her husband and daughter. Chidgey has explained that the 13-year gap between her third and fourth novels was due to infertility issues keeping her from writing; she and her husband finally had their daughter in 2015.

Early novels
Her debut novel, In a Fishbone Church, was published in 1998 and was widely praised in New Zealand and overseas, winning the Hubert Church Award for Best First Book of Fiction at the New Zealand Book Awards in 1998. The writer Nick Hornby said "Catherine Chidgey is a wonderful new talent, and In a Fishbone Church marks the beginning of what promises to be a glorious literary career". Louis de Bernières called the novel "warm, subtle and evocative. You will be thinking about it long after you have finished reading". In 1999 In a Fishbone Church won Best First Book at the Commonwealth Writers' Prize (South East Asia and Pacific Region). It also won a Betty Trask Award for a first book (UK), and was longlisted for the Orange Prize for Fiction (UK).

Her second novel, Golden Deeds, was published in 2000, and was runner-up for the Deutz Medal for Fiction at the 2000 New Zealand Book Awards. It was published by Picador in the UK and by Henry Holt in the US (under the title The Strength of the Sun), where it was a 2002 Notable Book of the Year in The New York Times Book Review, and a 2002 Best Book in the LA Times Book Review. The Times Literary Supplement called it "magnanimous and merciless, a work reminiscent at times of darkest Atwood ... A witty and melancholy alchemy of heat and chill, a work of craft and fluency, which revitalizes the book in all its guises ... for those who love books, Catherine Chidgey is a find". The Sunday Express called it "a wonderful, gripping read. Human relations and needs are explored in all their complexity. Chidgey proves herself to be among that elite group of authors who possess a true grasp of the patterns of life". The Independent on Sunday said the novel "ensnares you, creeps up and snaffles you with its small, tense concerns. I could not stop thinking about it. I could not put it down ... I finished Golden Deeds with that delicious and rare feeling: that I was in the presence of a proper, grown-up storyteller who cared not a toss for gimmicks or manifestoes, but dared instead to put her case with real authorial power and verve".

The Transformation, Chidgey's third novel, was published in 2003, and that year she was named New Zealand's best novelist under forty by The New Zealand Listener. The book tells the story of a shadowy Parisian wig-maker who flees to Tampa, Florida in the 1890s. The Sunday Times said that "Chidgey spins a horror story which, miraculously avoiding easy sensationalism, is both troubling and haunting", and the New Zealand Herald said it was "her third and best so far ... Chidgey could tackle any subject and produce something wonderful from it. She has that gift of the imagination that finds metaphor, contiguity and paradox wherever she looks, and a seemingly innate feel for structuring events, times and historical detail to make one whole, satisfying narrative out of a myriad unexpected parts". The Sunday Express remarked, "This really is a novel to get lost in ... A highly original read, as beautiful as it is terrifying, which manages to be riotously chilling without ever going over the top".

Later novels
Her fourth novel, The Wish Child, set in Nazi Germany, was published in New Zealand in 2016 and was a bestseller, winning the 2017 Acorn Foundation Fiction Prize at the Ockham New Zealand Book Awards —the country's richest literary prize. Radio New Zealand called it "a brilliant, brilliant novel ... a masterpiece". The New Zealand Herald found it "meticulously crafted and superbly written ... provocative, haunting, intelligent and lyrical ... breath-taking... It will stay with you long after you finish the final page". The Sunday Star-Times commented "Right from the first sentences I was caught up in the exquisite lure of the writing: musical, clear, lovingly tended. Nothing seems forced ... I loved this book with its subterranean mysteries and spiky issues. I love the way, at this critical point in the world, when fundamental human values are violated, The Wish Child reminds us with grace and understated wisdom of a need to strive for universal good. I ached as I read. This novel is unmissable". It was published in the UK in July 2017 by Chatto & Windus, with The Times calling it "a remarkable book with a stunningly original twist". In October 2018 Counterpoint published it in the US as a lead Fall title.

Her fifth book was released in November 2017. A 'found' novel, The Beat of the Pendulum was written during 2016, with Chidgey drawing on newspaper articles, Facebook posts, emails, radio broadcasts, books, street signs and conversations to create an entry for every day of the year. Radio New Zealand selected it as a Best Book of 2017, calling it "Important in terms of its form as much as its content ... sensationally clever writing ... an enormously skilled writer who totally gets the craft". It was longlisted for the Ockham New Zealand Book Awards and was published in the UK by Lightning Books in 2019.

Chidgey's sixth book, Remote Sympathy, was published in 2020, and like The Wish Child is set in Nazi Germany. It was shortlisted for the 2021 Ockham New Zealand Book Awards. It was a Sunday Times Book of the Month, and was described by The Guardian as "immersive, profound and beautifully plotted". Publishers Weekly praised Chidgey's exploration of the intersecting stories of former Nazis and Holocaust survivors, concluding: "With its multiple registers and complex view of humanity, this marks a vital turn in Holocaust literature". It was one of New Zealand's top ten best-selling novels in 2021, was shortlisted for the 2022 International Dublin Literary Award, and was longlisted for the 2022 Women's Prize for Fiction. In 2022 it was named by The Guardian as one of the best books of the year.

In October 2022, her seventh novel, The Axeman's Carnival, was published. Set in Central Otago, the novel tells the story of the relationship of a farming couple and is narrated by a magpie called Tama. Chidgey drew from her husband's family's farming experiences in writing the novel. Rachael King, reviewing the book for Newsroom, described it as "remarkable, brilliant, a classic in the making", with Tama's voice providing "dark poetry, dramatic irony, startling wisdom and trickster delights". The book featured eighth on the list of New Zealand fiction bestsellers of 2022, and won New Zealand's top book award, the Jann Medlicott Acorn Prize for Fiction, at the 2023 Ockham New Zealand Book Awards.

In 2023, her eighth novel, Pet, a thriller about the relationship between a 12-year-old girl and her schoolteacher, was published in New Zealand, the UK and the United States. Ruth Franklin in The New York Times called it a "lingering, haunting book", and "a landmark in the small but potent canon of contemporary novels about unusual girls reckoning with themselves and the world around them".

Other works
, Chidgey is a senior lecturer of creative writing at the University of Waikato and has also taught at the Manukau Institute of Technology. In her role at Waikato she founded the Sargeson Prize, New Zealand's richest short story competition.

Chidgey has translated more than a dozen children's picture books from the German for Gecko Press. In November 2019, OneTree House published her first original picture book, Jiffy, Cat Detective, illustrated by Astrid Matijasevich. A follow-up, Jiffy's Greatest Hits, was published in 2022.

Awards and honours

 * 1997 Adam Foundation Prize for In a Fishbone Church
 * 1998 Todd New Writer's Bursary
 * 1998 Sargeson Fellowship
 * 1999 Betty Trask Award for In a Fishbone Church
 * 1999 Best First Book, Commonwealth Writers' Prize (South East Asia and Pacific Region) for In a Fishbone Church
 * 2001 Katherine Mansfield Memorial Fellowship to Menton, France
 * 2002 Prize in Modern Letters
 * 2003 Writer in Residence, University of Canterbury
 * 2005-6 Robert Burns Fellow, University of Otago
 * 2008 Rathcoola Residency, County Cork, Ireland
 * 2009 Writer in Residence, University of Waikato
 * 2010 University of Otago Wallace Residency, The Pah Homestead, Auckland
 * 2012 New Zealand Society of Authors Beatson Fellowship
 * 2013 Katherine Mansfield Short Story Award for 'Reverse Living'
 * 2017 Acorn Foundation Fiction Prize at the Ockham New Zealand Book Awards for The Wish Child
 * 2017 Janet Frame Fiction Prize
 * 2018 International Dublin Literary Award (longlisted) for The Wish Child
 * 2022 Women's Prize for Fiction (longlisted) for Remote Sympathy
 * 2022 International Dublin Literary Award (shortlisted) for Remote Sympathy
 * 2023 Jann Medlicott Acorn Prize for Fiction, Ockham New Zealand Book Awards for The Axeman's Carnival
 * 2024 International Dublin Literary Award (longlisted) for The Axeman's Carnival and Pet

title: Catherine Chidgey


text:
Talk:Easter Offensive

Untitled
This is the only place I have ever heard of this called the "Eastertide Offensive." By those who fought there it was known simply as "the Easter Offensive." Food for thought. Buckboard 08:49, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

FYI: Henry Kissinger is listed as Secretary of State in this article, but he did not become Secretary of State until 1973. He should be listed as National Security Advisor.

Trang Bang bombing
On 8 May, South Vietnamese planes dropped napalm on the village of Trang Bang, an incident recorded in the famous photo of Kim Phuc.

Wasn't it on 8 June ? Bukvoed 19:07, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Added citation needed tag regarding Gen.Giap's removal.Bharatveer 09:13, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the . 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.

PAGE MOVED per convincing argument from requester, other comments above, and apparent lack of opposition. I'm sure if someone has a good reason to call it the "Easteride Offensive", we'll be hearing from them before long. -GTBacchus(talk) 03:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Requested move
Eastertide Offensive → Easter Offensive — This is by far the more common name, as the Google test verifies. In fact, filtering out "wikipedia" indicates that most hits for "Eastertide Offensive" may be spread by Wikipedia itself! Groggy Dice 04:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

 * 28k Ghits
 * 7k Ghits
 * 26k Ghits
 * 2k Ghits

Survey

 * ''Add  * Support   or   * Oppose   on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~.

 * Support as nom. --Groggy Dice 04:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

 * ''Add any additional comments:
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

Who Won?
I've noticed some changes here, I think its misleading to state the NVA won. Discussion appreciated. Surfing bird (talk) 11:06, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The South Vietnamese won the 1972 easter offensive basically with Air support from the united states.

"Thanks to the inspired leadership of the ARVN 23rd Division commander, Colonel Ly Tong Ba, and the American regional chief, John Paul Vann, who were helped at several crucial points by precisely-delivered B-52 strikes, the communists were stopped. In all three areas, it had been a close thing. U.S. air power had been a major ingredient in the South Vietnamese victory, but it was only that. With few exceptions, the ARVN had fought well and in some cases brilliantly; the North Vietnamese had been repulsed with enormous casualties." "America in Vietnam" by Dr. John F. Guilmartin. --Hfarmer (talk) 14:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Please, use the head a little bit. If the South Vietnam won, why they could not reoccupied Dong Ha, Loc Ninh and some other territories ? Remember, they had better equipments and had the great support of the US Air Force, and they could not reoccupy everything they lost !! Thus this is certainly not a South Vietnamese victory !!! I am very sorry if I use vandalism, but if someone say this is a South Vietnam's victory, they only quibble, and who believe them are brainwashed idiot !!! 137.132.3.6 (talk) 14:20, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Though the North Vietnam's army suffered great casualties and only occupied, this can only count a limited or pyrrhic victory for them. Or if you want the informations to be neutral, just call that "both sides claimed victory". I repeat, there is no way that the South Vietnam won in this campaign !!! 137.132.3.6 (talk)

 * Both sides claimed victory. The Nazi's claimed victory in every battle until Berlin.  Let's look at the facts on the ground in 1973 to judge easter 72.  In 1973 the RVN still existed, and controlled ALL of it's territory.  They were able to lauch offensives into Cambodia (success), and Laos(defeat).  If the easter offensive had achieved it's objectives those would have been impossible.   The only way that any battle such as this could be cast as ARVN defeat is because the RVN fell in 1975.  If SVN still had it's own government noone would even consider calling this anything but ARVN victory.
 * When your on the defenseive all you have to do is survive, not conquer--Hfarmer (talk) 05:29, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

The ARVN managed to stop the PAVN and push them back and the PAVN failed to fully achieve their main goals. However the Easter Campaign is not reallly completey failure of the PAVN. If in 1968, the PAVN and Viet Cong were virtually pushed out of south Vietnam, in 1972 managed to retake a solid foothold here, and captured 20% of RVN's territory with 1.5 milion people. Tactically, this could be considered a limited victory for the PAVN. Furthermore, these limited victories could be magnify at the negotiating table and that was a good advantage of North Vietnam. 115.74.111.40 (talk) 15:08, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

The whole invasion fail but the North Vietnamese won so they take severals place in the North including Khe Sanh http://vietnamnews.vn/thumbnail/450/07a.jpg?url=Storage/Images/2013/9/29/07a.jpg http://imagevietnam.vnanet.vn/Upload//2013/9/23/11BaoAnh2392013172235654.jpg

The zones taken in 1972 were very important for the final 1975 invasion — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 14:03, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Casualties?
The battle summary lists American dead at an estimated 10,000, yet the Aftermath section says 1972 saw 300 American deaths, most of which came from the Easter Offensive. I believe the 300 figure to be more reliable, as 10,000 dead would have been significant percentage of the total US presence (all branches) in Vietnam, not to mention equal roughly 20-25% of total war deaths. Both numbers give references, but the 10,000 figure's reference is not robust enough to easily look up.

Someone with the means should independently look up and correct both numbers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.77.162.170 (talk) 15:01, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

 * The 10,000 number originates (traced back far enough) with North Vietnam. Its goes along with other figures from the same sources claiming that ARVN (south vietnam) losses were in the hundreds of thousands. Enemy casualty figures originating with the PAVN/North Vietnam are generally not considered trustworthy. The American number of 10,000 has been removed, but other numbers from similar sources remain all over the article. 75.17.127.178 (talk) 00:58, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Expanding on the US Navy's role
Speaking as a crewman from one of the ships involved, I'd like to see more details of just what our contribution was. I don't have access to the source material needed to do a proper job, but I would like to point out a few things. First, as the article does say, we provided artillery support during the opening stages of the battle, but it doesn't go on to say that we continued in that role (often with reverse-slope trajectories to fire over coastal mountains) all through the campaign. Second the Navy completely controlled the eastern flank of the battlefield at all times meaning that we could intervene anywhere we were needed on surprisingly short notice. Also, the NVA made almost no attempt to hinder us; my ship, the USS Ouellet (FF-1077) was only targeted twice by counter-battery in seven months and was never hit, and I have no reason to think that our experience wasn't typical. In fact, it could be argued that the NVA's failure to take naval shore bombardment into account was one of the reasons for their lack of success. If anybody feels qualified to write this up in the proper form I'm sure that everybody who spent time in Tonkin Gulf would be grateful. If you need more detail, feel free to ask either here or by email and I'll do what I can to assist.JDZeff (talk) 22:05, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Aftermath
The headlines of this article imply that the victor was US and ARVN forces. However, at the "aftermath" section, it write that Hanoi has success in gaining permanent control of half of the four northernmost provinces—Quảng Trị, Thừa Thiên, Quang Nam, and Quang Tin—as well as the western fringes of the II and III Corps sectors (around 10% of the country). And later in 1973-1974, the ARVN exhaust almost all of their reserves trying to get them back, which leading to the total collapse of the Saigon regime in 1975. So does it mean that DRV(North Vietnam) was actually the victor?--Zeraful (talk) 14:10, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, they were the victors but the victory was a hard one. Of course, the US biases here have made the article claim that both sides had a victory (US tactical and N. Vietnamese strategic) which is utter nonsense. Of course, if the victory is not as great for the enemies of the good Ol' USA, the US is given a victory too. Compare Tet, which is considered a victory for the US only, despite the fact that the US had to pretty much retreat from that moment onwards. These articles should be kept fair. If the US get a victory alongside the NVA here, then the NVA and VC should be given victory in many other battles which gave the US victories. The Mummy (talk) 12:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

 * US did not withdraw troops from that moment on (tet 68) they increased to exploit counter offensives notably Feb/March and April-June, by late summer and Autumn VC were a shadow of themselves and defunct in coastal plain and population centres, the NVA were battered trying to hold on in border areas.Successful US allied offensives in 1969/1970 Apache snow and Texas star to name but a few, then Jefferson Glenn in 1971 through actions of 3rd brigade combat team 1971 to early 72 (Bihn Dihn province) flushed enemy out of those areas and inflicted crippling losses. Troop numbers did not drop to below pre Tet levels until mid 1970 and continued to be significant into 1971. US ground combat role ended March 31st 1972 and after operational success.
 * The rush to the exit is a myth.
 * By the way the Easter offensive was an abject defeat for North Vietnam by any objective measure. 82.29.135.200 (talk) 18:59, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Don't make me laugh. The one and only way that Tet wasn't a complete disaster for North Vietnam was the fact that the anti-war movement used it as "proof" that we couldn't win and that there was no point in continuing. And, I'd like to point out, that was an accidental benefit to the NVA because it hadn't been part of their plans.JDZeff (talk) 21:42, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Troop Numbers
Is there seriously no better source for South Vietnamese strength? The current box just lists their entire military, including units that could not have possibly have had any participation in this campaign (such as most of the Regional Forces). It's a bit misleading.--Nihlus1 (talk) 03:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

 * There is no better sources and its not so easy coming up with better numbers. The scale of the battle was national. Three of the corps areas were involved. Trying to decide what constitutes participation is also not an easy question in a military situation of this scale. You could get better numbers for individual battles that made up the 1972 offensive, but trying to calculate the whole thing is probably futile. 75.17.127.178 (talk) 01:05, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with 75.17.127.178, this was a national battle and units were moved from Corps to Corps as needed. Mztourist (talk) 03:10, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Commie always win, even on wiki!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.113.166.19 (talk) 11:53, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Result
The previous result in the Infobox: ''South Vietnam repulsed the main assaults with U.S. support. North Vietnam gained significant territories'' is a perfectly balanced summary of the outcome and reference to the Aftermath section is not necessaryMztourist (talk) 03:32, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Easter Offensive. 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/20061105053444/https://www.airforcehistory.hq.af.mil/Publications/fulltext/aces_aerial_victories.pdf to https://www.airforcehistory.hq.af.mil/Publications/fulltext/aces_aerial_victories.pdf

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) 08:37, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Easter Offensive


text:
Nambu Line

The Nambu Line (南武線) is a Japanese railway line which connects Tachikawa Station in Tachikawa, Tokyo and Kawasaki Station in Kawasaki, Kanagawa. For most of its length, it parallels the Tama River, the natural border between Tokyo and Kanagawa prefectures. It lies along the Tama Hills. It is part of the East Japan Railway Company (JR East) network. The line forms part of what JR East refers to as the "Tokyo Mega Loop" (東京メガループ) around Tokyo, consisting of the Keiyo Line, Musashino Line, Nambu Line, and the Yokohama Line. The name refers to the southern (南) part of the ancient province of Musashi (武蔵) (now Tokyo and northern Kanagawa prefecture), through which the Nambu Line runs.

Basic data

 * Operators, distances:
 * Total: 45.0 km
 * Passenger: 39.6 km
 * Freight: 39.4 km
 * East Japan Railway Company (JR East) (Services and tracks)
 * Kawasaki – Tachikawa: 35.5 km
 * Shitte – Hama-Kawasaki: 4.1 km
 * Shitte – Shin-Tsurumi Signal Station – Tsurumi: 5.4 km (no regular service)
 * Japan Freight Railway Company (JR Freight) (Services only)
 * Shitte – Tachikawa: 33.8 km
 * Shitte – Hama-Kawasaki: 4.1 km
 * Shitte – Shin-Tsurumi Signal Station: 1.5 km
 * Stations: 29
 * Main line: 26
 * Branch line: 3
 * Double-tracking: Kawasaki – Tachikawa
 * Railway signalling: Automatic Block System

Main line
"Rapid" service trains (two trains per hour between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m) do not stop at Shitte, Yakō, Hirama, Mukaigawara, Tsudayama, Kuji, Shukugawara, Nakanoshima, Yanokuchi, Minami-Tama, Nishifu, Yaho, Yagawa, or Nishi-Kunitachi. All other trains except for some seasonal services are "Local" services, stopping at all stations.

Nambu Branch Line

 * All stations are located in Kanagawa Prefecture.
 * Trains can pass each other only at Kawasaki-Shinmachi.

Freight branch
The "Shitte crossover" (尻手短絡線) connects Shitte Station and Shin-Tsurumi Yard on the Tōkaidō Main Line (Hinkaku Line) and the Musashino Line. Freight trains operating between Tokyo Freight Terminal and northern Japan operate on both branch lines.

Rolling stock
the following fleet of electric multiple unit (EMU) trains is used on Nambu Line services, with all trainsets based at Nakahara Depot.
 * 205-1000 series 3 x 2-car EMUs (Nambu Branch Line services, since August 2002)
 * E127-0 series 2 x 2-car EMUs (Nambu Branch Line services, since September 2023)
 * E233-8000 series 35 x 6-car EMUs (since 4 October 2014)
 * E233-8500 series 1 x 6-car EMU (since 15 March 2017)

From 15 March 2017, the last remaining 209 series trainset, set 53, was replaced by a six-car Ome Line and Itsukaichi Line E233-0 series set 670 modified and renumbered to become E233-8500 series set N36.

Previously used

 * 72/73 series 4/6-car EMUs (from 1963 until 1978)
 * 101 series 4/6-car EMUs (from 1969 until January 1991)
 * 103 series 6-car EMUs (from 1982 until December 2004)
 * 101 series 2-car EMUs (Nambu Branch line services, until November 2003)
 * 205-0 series 6-car EMUs from (March 1989 until December 2015)
 * 205-1200 series 6-car EMUs (from 2004 until January 2016)
 * 209-0 series 6-car EMUs (from April 1993 until February 2015)
 * 209-2200 series 6-car EMUs (from 2010 until March 2017)

History
The private Nambu Railway opened the line in five stages between 1927 and 1930 (freight branches are omitted):
 * 27 March 1927: Kawasaki – Noborito
 * 1 November 1927: Noborito – Ōmaru (near Minami-Tama)
 * 11 December 1928: Ōmaru – Bubaigawara (then called Yashikibun)
 * 11 December 1929: Bubaigawara – Tachikawa
 * 25 March 1930: Shitte – Hama-Kawasaki

Passenger trains utilised electric multiple units (EMUs) from the beginning. Freight initially consisted primarily of gravel hauled from the Tama River. When the railway reached Tachikawa and made connection with the Ōme Electric Railway, limestone became one of the main freight commodities. The railway was controlled by Asano zaibatsu, which enabled the transport of limestone from its own quarry in Western Tokyo to its cement plant in Kawasaki without using the government railways.

On 1 April 1944, the railway was nationalised by the imperial government and became the Nambu Line of Japanese Government Railways. After the end of World War II, there were several calls for the privatisation of the line, but the line remained a part of the Japanese National Railways (JNR) until its privatization in 1987.

The postwar growth of the Tokyo urban area resulted in the conversion of most of the farmlands along the Nambu Line into residential areas and increased the passenger traffic on the line. Freight traffic reduced after the opening of the Musashino Line (parallel to the Nambu Line) in 1976 and the discontinuance of the limestone freight in 1998, except for the Nambu Branchline, which remains a major freight route.

Limited-stop "Rapid" services between Kawasaki and Noborito with stops at Musashi-Kosugi and Musashi-Mizonokuchi started on 15 December 1969, but were discontinued by the timetable revision on 2 October 1978. After 33 years, Rapid services between Kawasaki and Tachikawa with more stops started on 9 April 2011, postponed from the originally scheduled 12 March due to the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami.

On 20 August 2016, station numbering was introduced with Nambu line stations being assigned station numbers between JN01 and JN26. Numbers increase towards in the westbound direction towards Tachikawa. In addition, station numbers JN51 to JN54 were assigned to the branch line stations with numbers increasing in the direction of Hama-Kawasaki.

title: Nambu Line


text:
Water mass

An oceanographic water mass is an identifiable body of water with a common formation history which has physical properties distinct from surrounding water. Properties include temperature, salinity, chemical - isotopic ratios, and other physical quantities which are conservative flow tracers. Water mass is also identified by its non-conservative flow tracers such as silicate, nitrate, oxygen, and phosphate.

Water masses are generally distinguished not only by their respective tracers but also by their location in the Worlds' oceans. Water masses are also distinguished by their vertical position so that there are surface water masses, intermediate water masses and deep water masses.

Global water masses
Common water masses in the world ocean are:

 * Antarctic Bottom Water (AABW): Antarctic Bottom Water is a very important water mass. Antarctic Bottom Water is the left over part when sea ice is being made. It is very cold but, not quite freezing so the water moves down and along the ocean floor.
 * North Atlantic Deep Water (NADW)
 * Circumpolar Deep Water (CDW)
 * Antarctic Intermediate Water (AAIW)
 * Subantarctic Mode Water (SAMW)
 * Arctic Intermediate Water (AIW)
 * North Pacific Intermediate Water (NPIW)
 * The central waters of various oceanic basins
 * Various ocean surface waters.

Characteristics of water masses
Although there are many types of water masses, they all share characteristics. Water Masses are formed from regions of water having different temperatures. When ice is being formed in a cold climate like Antarctica, the cold temperatures separate the molecular bonds of the water causing it to become less dense. However, because water increases its volume by about 9% when frozen, this makes the ice less dense than the water which is why glaciers float. This also in turn causes the salinity of the water to decrease. The salinity of the water makes water freeze at lower temperatures than freshwater. Freshwater freezes at the standard 0 °C (32 °F), while saltwater freezes at an average of -2 °C (28.4 °F).

Temperature and salinity diagram
The best method of classifying a water mass is through using a T-S diagram. In the diagram pictured at the top, it categorises a water mass by the temperature and salinity of the water and is represented by a single point. However, water masses are not constant. Throughout time climates can change, seasons can drag out, or there could be less rainfall meaning that the water masses might change in temperature or salinity. To have a complete water mass classification, it requires the water type of the source and the standard deviations of the temperature and salinity. It can take many years to establish the standard deviations of the water mass and requires constant surveillance. Once all of the necessary measures are completed, the data will now determine what the current density of the water is and help further classify the water mass.

title: Water mass


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Little known facts about Hinton novels

The title says it all. Either delete these "facts" or move them somewhere appropriate. -- Jmabel 05:04, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete. I've copied the content and history to Talk:S.E. Hinton in case any of it can be used in the article. Andrewa 05:35, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Cyrius|&#9998 22:02, May 16, 2004 (UTC)
 * After a second look there really isn't anything useful to merge. Just delete it, it's trivial. --Starx 01:45, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete altogether. I can't imagine anyone typing in this title before simply typing "S.E. Hinton" - Lucky 6.9 16:25, 17 May 2004 (UTC)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ballerium

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled Ballerium.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to delete the article.

Something that doesn't even exist. RickK

 * Delete. Offbeat advert for website. Andrewa 05:39, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, useless ad. DO'Neil 09:04, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Can't people wait until they've released something before spamming Wikipedia to promote it? --Stormie 09:15, May 16, 2004 (UTC)
 * Is this RickK person some kind of vandal? There is already a very popular beta up for play at www.ballerium.com which claims to have 7,984 registered users. Do you folks know about google? Eric B. and Rakim 12:57, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * No, RickK is not "some sort of vandal" and calling him one is not calculated to enlist the sympathy of those of us familiar with his work. Vandals do not put their vandalism up for discussion on VfD and honor the resulting consensus. (Hey, that gives me an idea. How about an Approvals for Vandalism page on which vandals could submit proposals for vandalism and seek community consensus before committing same?) Dpbsmith 13:48, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * If he isn't, why is he trying to destroy Wikipedia? Eric B. and Rakim 22:01, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * He isn't, he's nominating pages for discussion and a vote. If the consensus is to delete, it'll be deleted. If not, it won't be. Since Wikipedia is about consensus, that isn't destroying Wikipedia. Average Earthman 08:25, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Deleting articles is still deleting articles. And if you look at this page, it certainly seems like the man wants to delete half of Wikipedia. Eric B. and Rakim 22:56, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking Wikipedia will survive the loss of the Bellerium article if it comes to that. MK 07:14, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikispam. I edited the article to tone down the breezy promotional language, and also to remove the issue of possible copyright violation (the previous text is a duplicate of that appearing at the ballerium site. It's still Wikispam nevertheless. Dpbsmith 13:48, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Ballerium gets quite a few hits on google. However, this article is an ad and possible copyvio. Delete. -- Cyrius|&#9998 22:05, May 16, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. When it's out of beta feel free to write up a decent stub, but until then non-notable. --Starx 01:49, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Non-notable. Delete. Beelzebubs 01:52, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

Why this page should not be deleted .... Since someone accused us of rudely defending it:
 * 41,500 google hits.
 * "ballerium mmorpg" - 14,600 google hits.
 * Featured on gamers hell: ,
 * Featured on MMORPG gamer:
 * Interview with CEO featured on The Wargamer:
 * Featured on Sacred Nemesis:
 * Featured on Tiscali games:
 * Interview with the musicians on The Wargamer:
 * Featured on Online Multiplayer Games Network:
 * Featured on Betawatcher:
 * Featured on UnknownPlayer:
 * Featured at PC Gameworld:
 * Featured at Frictionless Insight (Aug 2002):
 * Alexa directory:
 * Hebrew site:

And so on, and so on. Ballerium is as popular as betas get. Oh, and we didn't write the article. Eric B. and Rakim 22:56, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Frankly, I don't care how popular it is. As you said yourselves, it's a beta. I do not believe a beta can be encyclopedic. Let the product come out for release.  Then let it be for another 6 months.  If the product still has publicity and traction after 6 months live, then it might make the cut as encyclopedic.  (As someone else said, this is not like current events where we risk losing content by waiting.) Rossami 01:03, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * By the same token, should the following pages also be destroyed? Crystal Space, ScummVM, ZSNES, Tux Racer, Irrlicht, EMule, Xine, Fluxbox, Ogre, Ethereal, MediaWiki... and a lot more. To clarify: all those softwares are in beta, some even in alpha. It seems like your rules for what softwares that should have articles and what softwares that should not are either very inconsistent or very destructive. Eric B. and Rakim 02:13, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Clarify? May I correct you, MediaWiki is long out of beta test, in fact you're using a stable version right now to read this. I don't know about the others you mention. But I'd recommend you leave listing them to users with good contribution records, and the same with discussing this one. AFAIK all the many articles you have written so far have been listed for deletion and will be deleted as unencyclopedic. IMO you aren't entitled to vote on VfD. Sorry. Andrewa 14:28, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Wrong: . And please, take your personal opinion about us to some page where it belongs. May we suggest ? Eric B. and Rakim 21:24, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * If you'll notice that sourceforge link you provided lists both an unstable beta and a stable production version. --Starx 23:41, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Fluff. Delete. If you wikify and provide context, articles like these might even survive. But there've been lots of ads for games lately. JFW | T@lk  23:54, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Cabalamat 19:05, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue or the deletion should be placed on other relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XFree86 logfile

Huh? RickK 03:10, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete. Not appropriate for WP, take it to LinuxQuestions or something. Dysprosia 03:14, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ephemeral information. Neither content not format of the log are expected to live long. Mikkalai
 * Would RickK and Dysprosia please explain why they do not think that page belongs in Wikipedia? And Mikkalai you are just wrong - XFree86's logs today look very similar to how they did over five years ago. Eric B. and Rakim 12:51, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Sure. It isn't discussing anything encyclopedic.  I THINK it describes a file format, but I'm not really sure.  RickK 20:39, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * If you had taken time to read the article or even the title of the article, you would have realized that it describes the XFree86 logfile. That is, we think, unless whoever is reading it is a moron. Eric B. and Rakim 22:01, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * The Wikipedia is not the place to discuss logfiles, of all things. Wikipedia is not a help site, it aims to be an encyclopedia. Discussing the logfile format of one particular piece of software (which may not even live all that long - there's always talk of replacing X...) is not appropriate: are we to discuss the logfiles of every other software package out there? As I said, if you're interested in discussing X's logfiles, perhaps LinuxQuestions' Wiki is more for you. Dysprosia 23:05, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * We won't say what place is "more for you", but we're sure you can guess... Then, you do not have the authority to decree what should and what should not be in Wikipedia. We also note that you do not provide any rationale whatsoever to why descriptions of logfiles should be deleted. You are also wrong on your point about X's future, X will live on for a long time. However, XFree86 which is "a free and Open Source implementation of the X Window System", may or may not, continue to be developed. Newer implementations are likely to build upon XFree86 anyway. Why does that matter? XFree86 is installed on millions of computers. By the same logic, there can't be any articles on COBOL either? Right? And the "every other" argument is getting really crappy. "are we to discuss every city out ther?", "are we to discuss every star out there?", "are we to discuss every professional basket ball player out there?", "are we to discuss every disease out there?". No. Stop bashing us please, we just wanna right stuff and not have to deal with bullshit like this. It's obvious none of you have any interest in Linux (and you don't have to) but please stop trying to sabotage for those of us that have. Eric B. and Rakim 01:02, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * There can be (and is) and article on COBOL just like there is an article on XFree86 and on Linux. But there is no need to write articles on every file used by the Linux OS, that's what the man pages are for. --Starx 03:26, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Please note that I do not mean any ill-will about mentioning a project that may be more suitable and receptive for your interests.
 * First of all, noone is writing articles on every file used by the Linux OS. Second of all, Linuxnewbies like us, would think it would be awesome if someone did that. That most Linux programs have a man page is totally irrelevant. Most countries have a CIA Factbook entry and you can go down to the library if you want to read about those countries. The same argument that you are using against this page can be used against every page in Wikipeida! And the ill-will is, that beside that phony argument noone has offered any argument whatsoever as to why they want to destroy this page. Eric B. and Rakim 22:30, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * delete. Eric i'm at work and i almost exploded laughing. "wikipeida". lol. Be careful when writing, it could be offensive (sort off) in other languages. At least funny. cheers :p -- Pedro 13:57, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

 * No, I don't have the "authority to decree what should and what should not be in Wikipedia". I, like the rest of the contributors here, have stated their reasons why this page should or not be deleted. If it is argued that the article be kept, fine. I have no problem with a community decision about this.
 * "You are also wrong on your point about X's future, X will live on for a long time." There is always talk of reinventing X. It may not be pending at this moment, but it may happen in future. No one software product has lived on forever.
 * Re: '"every other" argument is getting really crappy'. The argument is pertinent. Discussing software products is fine - discussing the minutiae like their logfiles in a dedicated article is probably a little too much.
 * "It's obvious none of you have any interest in Linux" This is a bit presumptious, don't you think? And no one is trying to sabotage anything.
 * Dysprosia 04:32, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Regarding X's future, you are simply wrong but this is not the place to discuss that. Take it to XFree86 if you want to continue. And we have also clearly demonstrated that even if you were right, the argument would be irrelevant. Thing with the "community decision" is that it is this page's community that is taking the decision. And that is a community that in general isn't very well informed or is offering any reasonable arguments. So far it seems we are the only one doing the arguing. If you think that information about the XFree86 logfile is "too much" well damn! Noone is forcing you to read it. A simple Google search for "XFree86.0.log" tells us that the potential readership for such information is quite large. Eric B. and Rakim 22:30, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * You keep saying that users here are not informed. What basis do you have to make this assumption?
 * By the way, there are 11,200 Google hits for "/var/log/wtmp". Dysprosia 22:59, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Keep, just barely. Article itself looks pretty good. Suitability of topic for Wikipedia very debatable. Dpbsmith 22:17, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge anything worth merging with XFree86. --Starx 01:53, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not appropriate for Wikipedia. People aren't going to look for info on the X log file here, they're going to look somewhere else -- so my advice is to identify that "somewhere else" and put this article there. Wile E. Heresiarch 02:38, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Pure speculation. We wrote the page because we couldn't find concise information about the XFree86 log here. Eric B. and Rakim 22:30, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Who would search for that complex of a title?Beelzebubs 03:19, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: Perhaps Wikibooks would be a place for this? That's already been suggested for some detailed graphics articles by the same authors, see the debate on those articles. But, isn't there already good online doco on these things? If not, a Wikibook is a must IMO. Andrewa 04:37, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, but not before making sure it gets put somewhere else - Wikibooks, LinuxQuestions wiki, whatever. This is good stuff but not appropriate for an encyclopedia. --Stormie 06:27, May 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikibooks. Put a transwiki link to it from the main article if you like. Rossami 13:37, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. A very nice runthrough of a logfile. Just because you don't get it doesn't mean it should be deleted. This article helped me get it. Denni 21:23, 2004 May 18 (UTC)
 * THANK YOU Denni! You really made our day. :) Eric B. and Rakim 21:49, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. There's a difference between software documentation and a description of what a piece of software does with some history. IMO, only the latter is encyclopaedic. Compare the man page XFree86(1) and XFree86. Ambarish | Talk 05:25, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. An absolutely outstanding article. This sort of article promises to take the mystery out of Linux for all of us. If it and similar articles are to be moved to Wikibooks, the link should stay at the article title in any event. Fred Bauder 11:26, May 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. As Wikipedia grows, we will get more articles of this level of niche detail. In the online Wikipedia, they are certainly appropriate. We can filter these articles out from the top-level paper Wikipedia edition, whilst including them in the specialist Wikipedia editions.
 * Keep. Nuggets like this is what makes Wikipedia great. Abigail 12:12, May 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. As said above, a well-written, worth-having article. James F. (talk) 18:54, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Absolutely keep. Well written and informative, although the intro could could be clarified as to precisely what it is. -- Seth Ilys 01:13, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Cabalamat 19:05, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Everyking 01:59, 21 May 2004 (UTC)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russian military doctrine

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled Russian military doctrine.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to delete the article.

POV rant. RickK 23:28, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete. POV essay by anon, which is quite enough in itself IMO, but this one is largely speculation. It contains no useful material and some outright inaccuracies. Andrewa 23:59, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. No references.  It is not even about military doctrine as the term is used in military articles. Kd4ttc 02:57, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Doesn't correspond to its name. Mikkalai 03:26, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, for any one of several different reasons. MK 05:50, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete this total rant which has nothing to do with military doctrine or history in Russia or China or elsewhere. AlainV 21:19, 2004 May 16 (UTC)
 * Original research at best. Delete. -- Cyrius|&#9998 22:08, May 16, 2004 (UTC)
 * Speculation. Not terribly informed speculation, either. Isomorphic 02:13, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue or the deletion should be placed on other relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Talk:Cheers

The "missing episode" - "Uncle Sam Malone"
I am not a qualified editor so I'll just plant this idea for someone else to implement and give enough details to verify/research it. There was an additional episode, slightly abbreviated (12 run minutes), described at http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1104864/?ref_=ttep_ep1

It has the identical look and feel to the other show episodes; you can see that for yourself at https://www.metv.com/stories/watch-a-long-lost-cheers-episode-made-for-the-us-government-to-sell-bonds (a freely playable video using no plug-ins or executable downloads).

I gather that it did not run on the network, so wiki might stay with the episode count of 275 (but imdb includes it in their episode count). However it might merit mentioning here, and as a footnote on the wiki episode list page.76.185.10.9 (talk) 16:04, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I added the episode at Cheers (season 1) several years ago. --George Ho (talk) 19:47, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Coach's Bio
"especially ones that put the bar at stake" -- did that happen, let alone often enough to be worth putting in Coach's bio? In "Pick a Con... Any Con" there's a one-off threat against the bar, but it's not the main plot point (it's Coach's money, then the other characters' money). Are there any other examples? 69.73.92.126 (talk) 23:01, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I replaced that sentence with a more correct one, I hope. George Ho (talk) 23:15, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Image captions in the cast section
Cast of seasons one through three and Cast of Cheers since season six are both understandable, but misleading. The first photo shows the main cast as of season 2, although it might be the main cast of season 1 plus John Ratzenberger, who was the most prominent of the non-main recurring cast and first to join the main cast. The second shows the main cast of season 11, and only shows one character who was first introduced in season 6. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 09:39, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Added notes using "efn". --George Ho (talk) 10:28, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Cheers (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:04, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Cheers


text:
Entry (cards)

An entry, in trick-taking card games such as bridge, is a means of gaining the lead in a particular hand, i.e. winning the trick in that hand. Gaining the lead when some other player (including one's partner) led to the previous trick is referred to as entering one's hand; a card that wins a trick to which another player made the lead (except to the last trick) is therefore known as an entry card.

Example
If South declares this hand at notrump and the opening lead is a club, he will probably take just nine tricks with the top cards in his hand. Although the dummy holds the top six spades, they can win no tricks unless someone leads a spade; South has no spades, and so cannot do so and the opponents are unlikely to do so either. If South had just one spade (and one less card elsewhere), he could play it as a means of entering the North hand, enabling it to win six spades tricks.

On the same deal, if South declares with hearts as trump, he has a good chance of making 13 tricks on any lead. For example, if a club is led, he wins the ace in his hand, plays two rounds of trump and then leads the three of clubs which he ruffs in dummy - an entry play. Unless the defense can ruff one of the next three top spade leads from dummy, South's three small diamonds can be discarded on the three top spades. A diamond is subsequently lead from dummy to enter the South hand with the ace of diamonds, followed by the remaining trump and the king of diamonds.

title: Entry (cards)


text:
Triṃśikā-vijñaptimātratā

The Triṃśikā-vijñaptimātratā (Sanskrit; ), also known simply as the Triṃśikā or occasionally by is English translation Thirty Verses on Manifestation Only, is a brief poetic treatise by the Indian Buddhist monk Vasubandhu. It was composed in the 4th or 5th century CE and became one of the core texts for the Yogācāra school of Mahāyāna Buddhism. In it he touches on foundational Yogācāra concepts such as the storehouse consciousness, the afflicted mental consciousness, and the three natures, among others. Together with the Vimśatikā form a standard summary of Vasubandhu's understanding of Yogācāra.

Manuscripts and translations
The Triṃśikā was translated into Chinese by Xuanzang in 648 CE at Hongfu Monastery. It was also translated into Tibetan in antiquity. A version in the original Sanskrit also survives.

Commentaries
In India, the most influential commentary on the Triṃśikā was written by Sthiramati in the 6th century. According to Xuanzang, who studied the Triṃśikā at Nalanda in the 7th century under Śīlabhadra, there were 10 known prose commentaries on the text. These were by Sthiramati, Dharmapala of Nalanda, Nanda, Citrabhānu, Guṇamati, Jinamitra, Jñānamitra, Jñānacandra, Bandhuśrī, Śuddhacandra, and Jinaputra. Xuanzang initially intended to translate all of these, but on the advice of his students, especially Kuiji, Xuanzang instead chose to combine them into a single text that focused primarily on Dharmapala's commentary. He did so because his teacher Śīlabhadra was a student of Dharmapala, and thus Xuanzang believed Dharmapala's interpretation to be the most accurate. Among the others commentators, Xuanzang most often included excerpts from Sthiramati, Nanda, and Citrabhānu, but usually only to provide contrast with Dharmapala. The result of this work was the Cheng Weishi Lun, which became the most important text for the tradition of East Asian Yogācāra. Xuanzang's student Kuiji in turn created his own commentary on this text, the Cheng weishi lun shuji.

After Xuanzang's pilgrimage, Indian commentary on the Triṃśikā continued to be produced. In the late 7th century or early 8th century, Vinītadeva, also working at Nalanda, produced commentaries on both the Triṃśikā and the Vimśatikā which survive in Tibetan translation and some Sanskrit fragments.

title: Triṃśikā-vijñaptimātratā


text:
Talk:Ragged Ass Road (album)

Dead external links to Allmusic website – January 2011
Since Allmusic have changed the syntax of their URLs, 1 link(s) used in the article do not work anymore and can't be migrated automatically. Please use the search option on http://www.allmusic.com to find the new location of the linked Allmusic article(s) and fix the link(s) accordingly, prefereably by using the Allmusic template. If a new location cannot be found, the link(s) should be removed. This applies to the following external links: --CactusBot (talk) 10:07, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=Aidjb7ioog72r

Requested move 3 January 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Custom. Ragged Ass Road moved to Ragged Ass Road (album). Ragged Ass Road (street) moved to Ragged Ass Road (Yellowknife). DAB page for Ragged Ass Road (closed by non-admin page mover)  The Night Watch     (talk)   02:19, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

– I would've assumed that the road itself would be the primary topic, but instead it's Tom Cochrane's album. Since I don't wanna move pages around without consensus, I chose to open this RM. Liliana UwU (talk / contribs) 02:15, 3 January 2023 (UTC) Support: After I had expanded the article about the street to its present size and scope, I remember this coming up in some discussion somewhere, that since the album was named for the road it should come first. The response was that more Canadians apparently know the street as where the album got its name, so it should be the primary topic. That has never made sense to me. In my research for the road article that just did not come up ... Daniel Case (talk) 04:01, 3 January 2023 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Ragged Ass Road → Ragged Ass Road (album)
 * Ragged Ass Road (street) → Ragged Ass Road
 * Support 1, but move Ragged Ass Road (street) to Ragged Ass Road (Yellowknife), and make dabpage at Ragged Ass Road. 162 etc. (talk) 18:17, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Support this alternate suggestion, DAB should be at base name, no PRIMARY.--Ortizesp (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Support this alternative. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:46, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ragged Ass Road (album)


text:
Talk:Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence

Remaining issues after big copyedit
Hi, I thought we could have

thanks!--Aichik (talk) 13:58, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
 * A sentence about soundtrack sales to balance out the info about the film.
 * Also, if anyone knows whether LOCUS SOLUS is an acronym, that would be great. If it's not, all references should be changed to "Locus Solus" in the text. Finally,
 * Could someone correct this about the book prequel: "The English-language version was published by Viz Media in the US on October 2005. Viz media later released a four-volume Ani-manga boxset on April 2005" Are the dates right?

 * Perhaps Locus Solus is a reference to this. PizzaMan (♨♨) 00:40, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence. 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/20111012051856/http://www.tokuma.jp/bunko/dual-bunko/1176094619066 to http://www.tokuma.jp/bunko/dual-bunko/1176094619066
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120717154902/http://www.viz.com/product?id=5337 to http://www.viz.com/product?id=5337
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120119212923/http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/archives/ficheFilm/id/4200520/year/2004.html to http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/archives/ficheFilm/id/4200520/year/2004.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) 12:55, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence


text:
Jaz drive

The Jaz drive is a removable hard disk storage system sold by the Iomega company from 1995 to 2002.

Following the success of the Iomega Zip drive, which in its original version stores data on high-capacity floppy disks with 100 MB nominal capacity, and later 250 and then 750 MB, the company developed and released the Jaz drive. First shipping to OEMs in December 1995, the Jaz drive featured 1 GB capacity per removable disk. A new Jaz drive model, released in February 1998, increased the individual disk capacity to 2 GB.

The Jaz drive uses a SCSI interface, with both internal and external drive models. Iomega produced a Jaz Jet SCSI adapter PCI card for PCs. Iomega also produced a number of external adapters, including the Jaz Traveller interface that connected it to a standard parallel port, and, later, a SCSI-USB adapter and SCSI-Firewire adapter. An ATA version of the drive was planned but never released.

Reception
The Jaz never attained as much success or market penetration as the Zip drive. While the Zip drive was marketed as a high-capacity floppy disk for the home and small office/home office (SOHO) markets, the Jaz drive was originally advertised as a higher-end product. SCSI interfaces were standard in Apple Macintosh computers but were rare in the much larger market of end-user PCs, usually requiring an extra interface card to be bought and installed. The rising popularity and decreasing price of CD-R/CD-RW drives greatly hurt the success of the Jaz drive, offering a much lower price-per-megabyte and the convenience of the CD media being readable in almost any standard CD-ROM drive.

Problems
Earlier Jaz drives could overheat, and loading-mechanism jams could leave a disk stuck in the drive. This became known in the profession as the "click of death", because of clicking sound it made as it tried and failed to eject the disc. Forcibly ejecting a stuck disk could destroy both the drive and disk. Jaz drives are hard-disk technology, making them susceptible to contaminants in the drive; dust and grit could be introduced through a hole in the disk case where the motor drove the platters, and any dust built up on the external case could enter the drive with its next insertion. Additionally, the metal sliding door was capable of wearing the plastic, resulting in debris and head crashes.

Furthermore, the mechanism used to attach the platters to the spindle motor was complex and tended to vibrate noisily. Iomega implemented an anti-gyro device (much like an optical CD/DVD drive) within the cartridge to prevent vibration at spin-up, but this device lost effectiveness with age. As a result, the two platters could lose alignment, rendering the cartridge unusable. The plastic tabs attached to the bottom of a Jaz cartridge could become stripped or broken, rendering the inserted disk physically incapable of spinning up to operating speed. Some drives also had firmware problems.

Legacy
The later Iomega REV drive tried to use similar technology to address the same market segment that the Jaz drive had reached. The REV's design is derived partly from the IBM 2310's use of a "voice coil actuator (VCA) motor to improve the reliability and reduce the seek time of an HDD's read–write heads" in a removable media cartridge. It also is derived from the IBM 3340's use of "low-cost, low-load, landing read/write heads with lubricated disks". Neither the Jaz drive nor the REV drive copied the IBM 3340 in making the heads a part of the cartridge, although the REV drive moved the motor into the cartridge—which the IBM 3340 had not done. It was left to the RDX Technology drive to move the heads into the cartridge, which increased reliability by essentially making the cartridge an electro-mechanical duplicate of a modern external disk drive.

title: Jaz drive


text:
Talk:Catholic (term)

Term
By using the term "Roman" Catholic Church, then admitting that it was a term "once" used by early protestants makes the entire point ILLOGICAL. You state "Roman" was "once" used by Protestants "to disparge Catholic claims..", YET you clearly use the SAME "Roman Catholic Church" in your own discussion. Additionally, you continue to give anti-Catholic rhetoric by stating "many identify Roman Catholicism exclusively with the Latin or Western Church", proceeding to give names of numerous other non-Latin rites/Eastern churches ending with the statement "all in communion with the Pope". As if the very fact that they are in communion with the Pope makes them "Roman". Simple, sillyness brought about by uninformed bias. Its the equivalent to saying all Floridians are Marylanders or D.C.'ers since they are in "communion" with the President which resides in the US Capitol in the D.C. No, for just as Floro-Americans are American and are not D.C.-American, Byzantine Catholics ARE Catholic, but NOT Roman Catholic. Thus if you going to be CONSISTENT regarding the "Universal" Church, speak of Catholic in "In one widely used sense", then you should remove the tagged on term which you stated as used "ONCE"  or used "particularly in ..." ; removing the word ROMAN from the actual Catholic Church at large from this topic. It is improper to speak of something "in the widely used sense" then use the same term ("Roman") used "once" or in some particular region.

By using the term "Roman" Catholic Church, then admitting that it was a term "once" used by early protestants makes the entire point ILLOGICAL. You state "Roman" was "once" used by Protestants "to disparge Catholic claims..", YET you clearly use the SAME "Roman Catholic Church" in your own discussion. Additionally, you continue to give anti-Catholic rhetoric by stating "many identify Roman Catholicism exclusively with the Latin or Western Church", proceeding to give names of numerous other non-Latin rites/Eastern churches ending with the statement "all in communion with the Pope". As if the very fact that they are in communion with the Pope makes them "Roman". Simple, sillyness brought about by uninformed bias. Its the equivalent to saying all Floridians are Marylanders or D.C.'ers since they are in "communion" with the President which resides in the US Capitol in the D.C. No, for just as Floro-Americans are American and are not D.C.-American, Byzantine Catholics ARE Catholic, but NOT Roman Catholic. Thus if you going to be CONSISTENT regarding the "Universal" Church, speak of Catholic in "In one widely used sense", then you should remove the tagged on term which you stated as used "ONCE"  or used "particularly in ..." ; removing the word ROMAN from the actual Catholic Church at large from this topic. It is improper to speak of something "in the widely used sense" then use the same term ("Roman") used "once" or in some particular region.

re: etymology

forgive me, a bit off beat, but what is the relation between cathoulou and cthulu the h.p.lovecraft character? there must be one, i wonder if anyone knows... Natmanprime (talk) 21:09, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

merge proposal into Catholicism
See discussion at Talk:Catholicism
 * I'm closing the discussion for now, leaving the former "Catholic" page (now Catholic (Christian terminology)) as a sub-page of "Catholicism" --Zfish118 (talk) 18:02, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Solution to Roman/No Roman: Each Sect Gets their own h2 header and a h3 header for their view of as catholic and why and stick out of editting other's support so much
Solution: Each Sect Gets their own h2 header and a h3 header for their view of as catholic and why and stick out of editting other's support so much? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBGeorge77 (talk • contribs) 03:34, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Capitalization
The third word of this article "catholic" should be capitalized.

Please edit it to reflect this correction. Thank you65.8.142.136 (talk) 05:30, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

 * No, "catholic" should not be capitalised in this context as it isn't being used as part of a proper name or proper noun. It is being used in the same way in which was originally used in the creeds. Afterwriting (talk) 13:48, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Adjective/noun
Can someone write in the introduction when the term "Catholic" switched from an adjective (as in the Catholic Church) to a noun (as in, "I am a Catholic.")? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.170.135.100 (talk) 01:54, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I think there is no answer to this. In Latin and Latin-derived languages adjectives can be freely used as nouns and in English nouns can be used as adjectives (e.g. "the gypsy crew").  Esoglou (talk) 06:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Three marks
In the "Other Western Christians", each of the terms in the three marks clause ("one holy catholic and apostolic church") in the Nicene Creed were individually wiki-linked to a topic. I am concerned that these wiki links border on original research (for instance, does "Apostolic" only refer to "Apostolic succession", even when discussing Reformed churches?); this interpretation is certainly not sourced. I have replaced it with a link to the "Three Marks" article in its stead. --Zfish118 (talk) 13:05, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Universalism
The universalism template does not seem to fit here. "Catholic" literally means universal, but the context discussed throughout the article has little to do with "Universalism". --Zfish118⋉talk 05:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Focus
This article would seem to be more focussed on use of the term "Catholic", rather than a detailed description of beliefs (the Latter being the focus of the "Catholicism"/"Catholic" article). There was some long commented-out material that I removed, that another restored. I re-removed it because I had summarized some of that content into the remaining sections, and the restored seemed clunking and redundant. The article now discusses the history of the term, with a summary contemporary uses, with links to each main topic. --Zfish118⋉talk 17:52, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Catholic (term). 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/20130306113628/http://www.vatican.va:80/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100923233927/http://www.vatican.va:80/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121929_divini-illius-magistri_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121929_divini-illius-magistri_en.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120419021937/http://www.vatican.va:80/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:25, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Catholic (term). 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/20080527013838/http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=3356 to http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=3356

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) 15:42, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Merge from Catholicism (term)
Obviously heavily overlapping content. In regression, the article Catholicism (term) strictly refers to the Nicene Creed i.e. the term "Catholic (term)", as clearly indicated in its lead section. Neither original nor later included source(es) in that article deal with anything but the adjective term of said Nicene Creed and its percussions. Thus, nothing motivates two mirroring locations for essentially identical content/reflection of discussion. Compare also Roman Catholic (term) which lacks equivalent Roman Catholicism (term) for analoguous reasons. Furthermore, Catholicism (disambiguation) redirects to Catholic (disambiguation). Chicbyaccident (talk) 14:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment. Yes, that is true - significant sections of the article Catholicism (term) are indeed overlapping with the main content of the article Catholic (term), and those sections should be definitively merged with the main article, but the question remains - what to do with sections that are distinctively dedicated to the very relevant theological terms "catholicism" and "catholicity"? Those sections can not be simply merged with the article Catholic (term), since that would create quite a confusion. Major theological dictionaries and encyclopedias have separate articles on terms "catholic" and "catholicism" (catholicity), not to mention the common practice in scholarly literature, where clear distinction between those terms is always maintained. Are there any scholars who would argue that term "catholic" and "catholicism" (catholicity) are identical? That is a non-existing question among experts. And it is not even a denominational issue, since some of the most prominent Roman-Catholic scholars (including cardinals) have recently published several major works dedicated to the complex theological questions of "catholicism" and "catholicity". One of the key problems with the articles discussed here is that most of the main scholarly works on the subject are not even listed in our articles :) not to mention the fact that frequent editorial feuds and hasty structural changes are actually quite discouraging for editors with expert knowledge on the subject. Sorabino (talk) 16:38, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment When was the article "Catholicism (term)" written? I have never stumbled on it before.  It appears to overlap considerably with Catholicism, and should probably be merged there. –Zfish118⋉talk 12:41, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Catholic Church naming conventions RfC
There is currently an RfC at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(Catholic_Church) that may be of interest. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 23:47, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Request for comments - "Catholic (term)" to "History of Catholicity"
The article of this title is being discussed here. All are invited to participate. –Zfish118⋉talk 01:45, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Communion
I think 'communion' in the lede should be linked. Unfortunately I'm not familiar enough with the nuances to know precisely which wiki page would be the appropriate destination, since 'communion' itself is a disambig page. I think it would be Koinonia but someone better familiar should do it. cheers. Anastrophe (talk) 02:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Catholicity
I propose merging Catholic (term) into Catholicity. I think the Nicene content here overlaps with that there, and a merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Catholicity.FatalSubjectivities FatalSubjectivities (talk) 13:41, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

 * Please look into the archives. This has been discussed and rejected several times over the past decade. If you can provide a compelling reason not previously discussed, please do so. Otherwise I would encourage you to withdraw this name change proposal to avoid needless rehashing. –Zfish118⋉talk 14:27, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2023
In the first paragraph just before ref 5 and 6, change the English transliteration from okos to olos 2A02:C7F:5C94:D400:C9E7:9FCE:3D6B:2BD4 (talk) 06:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 15:27, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Defining “καθολικός”
The definition of the Greek "καθολικός (katholikos)" meaning "universal" is not entirely accurate. The Romans already had a word for "universal," and therefore no need of a Greek term, and in fact it is the root of the English word: Universalis. The Greeks likewise have the word "Οικουμενική" for "universal." "καθολικός," is, however, more accurately defined as "throughout the whole," which is how the ancient church was governed, in a conciliar manner, verging on a republic. The perpetuation of the loose translation into "universal," has been due to the influence of the Church of Rome to further their claims of "immediate, ordinary and universal control" of Christ's church on earth, and is a perversion of the original meaning. The definition in this article as is does not represent the views of the Eastern Orthodox and is therefore biased, unintentionally or otherwise. Koneill1977 (talk) 22:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Catholic (term)