text:
Jenny Gear

Jenny Gear (born April 23, 1982) is a Canadian singer and former Canadian Idol contestant.

On Canadian Idol
Gear auditioned for Season One of Canadian Idol in St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador in 2003, bringing the panel of judges (which included Jake Gold, Sass Jordan, Farley Flex and Zach Werner) to tears with her rendition of "God Bless the Child".

She next completed the Toronto rounds and earned herself a spot in the semi-finals. There, she performed "Tower Of Song" by Leonard Cohen and received mixed reviews from the judges. Some of the judges' comments include "In true Newfoundland style I can't help but feel that you are slightly a fish out of water in all of this," from Zach Werner and "When I get a sense you're enjoying yourself, I enjoy myself. And that's all it boils down to," from Farley Flex. The next night, she garnered enough votes to earn herself the fifth seat in the Top 11.

On August 4, the Top 11 performed Canadian hits. Gear excelled with her version of Sarah McLachlan's "Possession", showing off her incredible range and pitch-perfect control, and after all the voting, was safe from elimination. Some of the judges' comments include "You do put the Canadian in Canadian Idol," from Zach Werner and "It never fails to amaze me the amount of control you have when you're singing. This unbelievably emotional stuff," from Sass Jordan.

The next theme, Motown, proved to be a challenge for Gear. She sang "Sir Duke" by Stevie Wonder and although she received mediocre comments from the judges, she was safe and without a trip to the bottom three. Some of the judges' comments include "This girl can really sing," from Zach Werner and "You get up there and you just have this vibe about you, and you be Jenny. You can't judge Jenny Gear.  It's just impossible," from Jake Gold.

For the Top 6, Jenny performed an amazing rendition of "Summertime" and remained safe from elimination. Some of the judges' comments include "Jenny, that was a really beautiful interpretation," from Sass Jordan and "Jenny I gotta say, I feel vindicated. You've just shown Canada what we first saw in St. John's.  That was riveting," from Farley Flex.

The next theme night was Elton John and Jenny chose to sing "Rocket Man." Her performance earned her a mediocre response from the judges with comments that included "With the song selection and the arrangement and how level your performance was it was sort of like the words you don't want to hear your surgeon say... whoops," from Zach Werner and "I think you took a song that's extremely hard to sing and you did a damn fine job," from Sass Jordan. The next night, she had her first and last trip to the bottom two along with eventual Canadian Idol winner Ryan Malcolm. When the results were announced the crowd was shocked to find Jenny eliminated.

Post-Idol
After the show, Idol judge Jake Gold signed Gear to his talent agency, but they eventually parted ways due to creative differences.

Jenny Gear's debut album "Jenny Gear and The Whiskey Kittens", which was recorded entirely in her grandmother's kitchen, was actually recorded before she appeared on Idol. The CD was released in late 2004 and has been the top seller on Atlantic Music Online for the last two and a half years.

She has appeared on many TV shows including "Breakfast Television", "MuchMusic's Going Coastal", "Live at 5", and "Out of the Fog"." She also appeared in her own special on CBC in 2004 before the release of her album. Jenny Gear is currently playing clubs around the St. John's area and working on her 2nd CD.

Jenny Gear and The Whiskey Kittens
Jenny Gear and The Whiskey Kittens, the band on Jenny's first CD, are no longer performing together. Most of the members are now pursuing solo careers. Accompanying Jenny at most of her gigs lately is the well known St. John's guitarist Sandy Morris.

Trivia

 * Jenny Gear appears in the Great Big Sea video for "Captain Kidd" from The Hard and the Easy album.

title: Jenny Gear


text:
Sheldon Vanauken

Sheldon Vanauken (August 4, 1914October 18, 1996) was an American author, best known for his autobiographical book A Severe Mercy (1977), which recounts his and his wife's friendship with C. S. Lewis, their conversion to Christianity, and dealing with tragedy. He published a sequel in 1985 titled Under the Mercy.

Early life
Vanauken was born Sheldon Frank Van Auken in Auburn, Indiana, the elder of two sons of a wealthy attorney, (Robert) Glenn Vanauken, and his wife Grace Merle (Hanselman) Vanauken. His parents were of German and Dutch descent, their grandparents having migrated to Indiana from eastern Pennsylvania and Columbiana County, Ohio. Vanauken was named for his two grandfathers, Frank Vanauken, a teacher, and Sheldon Fitch Hanselman, an attorney. His father was a self-made lawyer who became influential in local politics, served as a state senator, and owned the Indiana Broadcasting Company.

Vanauken grew up at the family home, "Glenmerle", (a composite of his parents' middle names) located on the south side of Carmel, Indiana; He attended Culver Military Academy, Staunton Military Academy and, for one year, Miami Military Academy in Florida. He earned his undergraduate degree from Wabash College in 1938, where he was a member of Phi Gamma Delta fraternity, and later attended Yale and Oxford Universities. He was interested in flying, and had his own small plane at Wabash which his father bought for him.

While at college, he dropped the "Frank" from his name. In later life, he was known to friends simply as "Van".

Marriage and religious conversion
Van met Jean "Davy" Palmer Davis during his junior year at Wabash. She was born in Hackensack, New Jersey, on July 24, 1914, the daughter of Reverend Staley Franklin Davis (1877–1926), a prominent Methodist minister, and his wife Helen Larter (Fredericks) Davis (1885–1950), a teacher. Staley Davis was a native of Pataskala, Ohio, and Helen Davis of Newark, NJ. Davy's sister Helen Marjorie (1908–1991) was six years older and her brother Donald three years younger.

When Davy was fourteen years old, two years after her father's death, she became pregnant by an unknown man. She gave up the baby girl, whom she called Marion, for adoption but never forgot her.

Davy had been educated at Troy Conference Academy, a Vermont boarding school, but had to withdraw due to lack of funds after her father's death. After finishing school, she worked in New York City for a time before moving to Indianapolis to enter Butler University. Shortly after beginning her studies there, she met Sheldon Vanauken at the Indianapolis department store where she worked hand-tinting photographs to earn her tuition.

Van and Davy soon fell deeply in love and made a vow they called the "Shining Barrier". In brief, they promised to share everything in life, including all their interests, friends, and work, in order to tie themselves so closely together that nothing could ever separate them. Their devotion to this idea was so complete that they decided never to have children, as they felt that motherhood would be an experience which could not be shared equally. Both were agnostics at this time.

They were married secretly (due, according to A Severe Mercy, to Van's father's objection to early marriages) on October 1, 1937, ten months after they met. They apparently kept their secret for some years, as they are both listed as "single" in the 1940 census, and are living apart—Van with his parents in DeKalb County, and Davy in a boarding house in Indianapolis, where she is listed as working as a bank teller.

The couple announced their marriage to Van's family in the winter of 1940. Shortly after, Van was called up for naval duty and stationed at Pearl Harbor. Davy joined him there some months later and took a job working with the navy. Van's father died suddenly on July 31, 1943 during World War II. Vanauken inherited a substantial amount of money and used some of it to have a boat built which they named Grey Goose, for the bird which remains true to one mate throughout life. Following Van's studies in history at Yale, from which he received a master's degree in 1948, and a stint in the Navy stationed in Hawaii, the young couple spent considerable time sailing Grey Goose around Chesapeake Bay, the Florida Keys, and the Caribbean.

In 1948, Vanauken took a teaching position at Lynchburg College. However, when postwar travel to Europe became possible again, he took a sabbatical and he and Davy moved to England so that he could study at Oxford University (where he was awarded a BLitt in 1957). While they were there, they became friends with a circle of young Christian students. Eventually, Davy "crossed the room" to become a devout Anglican Christian herself; she had reexamined her life and views on the nature of sin after a thwarted attempt by a stranger to assault her. Her conversion was also partly owing to the friendship and influence of C. S. Lewis, who was teaching at Oxford at the time. In the spirit of the "Shining Barrier", Van followed her, but with less conviction and even with some resentment.

Upon their return to Lynchburg, Van continued teaching history and literature at Lynchburg College. They joined a local congregation and explored their faith further. It was eventually to be tested severely. Davy contracted a virus which attacked her liver, possibly picked up during their years of travel. At the time of her diagnosis in the summer of 1954, Vanauken had just resigned to accept a job offer from his alma mater, Wabash College, but asked Lynchburg to rehire him in order to stay near Davy's doctors, which they did. Davy died of her illness soon after, at Virginia Baptist Hospital in Lynchburg on January 17, 1955. She was 40 years old, and they had been married for over seventeen years.

A great part of A Severe Mercy concerns how Van came to grips with losing his beloved wife with the help of his increasing faith and his correspondence with Lewis, who soon was to face the loss of his own terminally ill wife. Vanauken later called the "Shining Barrier" he and Davy had created a "pagan love, invaded by Christ." He never remarried, and eventually converted to Roman Catholicism in 1981.

A Severe Mercy won a National Book Award in the one-year category Religion/Inspiration.

Later life
Many years after Davy's death, Vanauken went looking for the daughter Davy had given up for adoption as a young girl. The story of his search, their 1988 meeting, and how it affected his beliefs is related in The Little Lost Marion and Other Mercies, which was written shortly before his death. "Marion", who had been given another name by her adoptive parents, had become a nurse and had three children with her husband, a physician.

Van continued to teach at Lynchburg College to the end of his career. In the 1960s, he was an outspoken critic of the Vietnam War and a supporter of the feminist movement, although he eventually abandoned the latter in the belief that it had become too radical. The Oxford English Dictionary credits him as one of the earliest users of the word sexist, in the pamphlet "Freedom for Movement Girls Now", published by the Southern Student Organizing Committee (a progressive student organization in the southern United States), wherein he was active during the 1960s. He is sometimes falsely claimed to have coined the word sexism, but in fact it was most likely coined by Pauline M. Leet, and first appeared in print in Caroline Bird's speech "On Being Born Female", which was published on November 15, 1968 in Vital Speeches of the Day. He was also a candidate for public office on the Peace and Freedom Party ticket in Virginia.

After his conversion to Catholicism, he was a contributing editor of the New Oxford Review and a frequent contributor to Crisis and Southern Partisan magazines, as well as to other periodicals and newspapers. He expressed sympathy for the Confederacy in his 1985 book, The Glittering Illusion, although he was always critical of racism and slavery.

He remained an ardent Anglophile all his life, and often used British spelling and expressions in his writing.

Sheldon Vanauken died of lung cancer on October 28, 1996. His ashes were scattered in the churchyard of St. Stephen's Episcopal Church in Forest, Virginia, as those of his wife Davy had been forty years previously. Some were also scattered in a churchyard in Binsey near Oxford, where a friend, Edmund Dews, had scattered some of Davy's ashes after her death. (Lewis' letter agreeing to scatter the ashes was lost in the mail, so Vanauken asked Edmund to do it.)

A movie version of A Severe Mercy was in development in 2013 by Origin Entertainment, who had optioned the film rights in late 2012.

Works

 * Encounter With Light (booklet, 1960)
 * A Severe Mercy (1977)
 * Gateway to Heaven (novel, 1980)
 * Under the Mercy (1985)
 * The Glittering Illusion: English Sympathy for the Southern Confederacy (1985)
 * Mercies: Collected Poems (1988)
 * The Little Lost Marion and Other Mercies (1996)

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

title: Sheldon Vanauken


text:
Talk:Braničevo District

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Braničevo District. 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/20140811224233/http://pod2.stat.gov.rs/ObjavljenePublikacije/Popis2011/Nacionalna%20pripadnost-Ethnicity.pdf to http://pod2.stat.gov.rs/ObjavljenePublikacije/Popis2011/Nacionalna%20pripadnost-Ethnicity.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) 19:11, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Braničevo District


text:
Šumadija District

The Šumadija District (Шумадијски округ / Šumadijski okrug, ) is one of eight administrative districts of Šumadija and Western Serbia. It is located in the central parts of the country. According to the 2022 census results, it has a population of 269,728 inhabitants, and the administrative center is the city of Kragujevac. The district is named after the geographical region of Šumadija.

Municipalities
The Šumadija District is divided into 6 municipalities and the city of Kragujevac. The municipalities of the district are:
 * Aranđelovac
 * Topola
 * Rača
 * Batočina
 * Knić
 * Lapovo

Demographics
According to the last official census done in 2011, the Šumadija District had 293,308 inhabitants. 64.9% of the population lived in urban areas. The ethnic composition of the district:

Culture and history
In the vicinity of Kragujevac stand several medieval monasteries, including the Annunciation monastery Divostin from the thirteenth century; the St. Nicholas monastery, believed to have existed at the time of the Battle of Kosovo in 1389; and the Drača monastery from unknown times.

In 1833 the Kragujevac Grammar School, the first Serb-language grammar school south of the Sava and Danube rivers, was founded in Kragujevac. Over the last fifty years this city of Serbian schooling has borne a symbol of grief: in the Memorial Park in Šumarice stands a monument to the pupils and teachers of this grammar school who were executed in World War II. Seeking to set a frightening example for all Serbia, German fascists executed 7,000 citizens in Kragujevac over the course of a single day, October 21, 1941. Among them were about 300 pupils and 18 teachers, including 15 boys from the ages of 8 to 15.

title: Šumadija District


text:
Wikipedia talk:How to archive Current Events/Archive 1

Should the previous month's articles be displayed on the Current Events page? Just saw it today and it looked a bit strange. Lan3y 14:52, Jun 1, 2004 (UTC)

 * Well... That's what I believe is Standard Practice (actually, given that I'm very often the guy archiving CE, it'd probably be more truthful to say that that is what I do) - to leave a few days of last month's news to be still edited and then folded back into the main month-article. Also, having a blank CE page would look a little odd, IMO.
 * Some other editors (well, two, in particular) have expressed... concern that this is perhaps a Bad Thing, in that people won't both folding in the efforts expended, and that it forks our efforts, but I'm not sure whether this is what others think - is it? Should we change how we generally archive CE?
 * James F. (talk) 15:36, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * I think you're right, makes sense to have recent news displayed. As it's only a few days, I don't think it'll be a major issue to consolidate two versions of the same data. I was just a little bit concerned that it seemed to be at odds with How to archive Current Events, specifically points 2/4. It's entirely possible that I'm mistaken, however. Either way, it's no big deal.
 * Lan3y 18:24, Jun 1, 2004 (UTC)

 * It seems like a real hack situation that wikipedia doesn't have some way of automatically handling date related things and everything has to be done manually. I imagine the only reason it works at all is because there are so many users in general and specific users who have worked out a consistant way of coding these things. Will a future version include a more automatic way of dealing with dates such as it already has of dealing with categories? -- Jackdavinci 16:23, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

What the heck am I doing removing sources?
I was recently blasted for removing sources from [[April 2005] in an attempt to reduce the page size. Here's what happened on my talk page:

What the heck are you doing?
What the heck are you doing to April 2005 Trevor? Month pages always have links to stop people adding in phoney unsourced stories. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 02:31, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
 * You certainly shouldn't start doing something like that without putting something up on the talk page first to see if anyone has any objections. Average Earthman 12:11, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Whoa, ok, I guess I touched a nerve here. I thought I was doing right by paring down an oversized, bloated page. I suppose sources are good for verifying facts on a page but this is certainly not the standard. If you look to previous months, the further back you go the less individual items are sourced. Does that mean that everything on April 2003 should be removed as unproven hearsay? I don't think so. Does that mean that we need to go back and find external web pages that show that everything on April, 2005, 2000s, and 21st century is proven fact. No. The way wikipedia works is: people post whatever they want and the edits either stays or is changed/removed if someone finds a problem. I think the reason these month pages look the way they do is because they were original the Current events page, and people treat that page as a "Breaking news" repository. Thats what Wikinews is for!

Take these sourced events for example:

April 29
 * The death toll in the Amagasaki rail crash in Japan totals 106. Rescue efforts are over and police begin the crash investigation. (Japan Today)

April 28
 * The death toll in the Amagasaki rail crash in Japan rises to 104. Rescuers find the body of the train's driver. (Japan Today), (Reuters AlertNet)

April 27
 * The death toll in the Amagasaki rail crash in Japan exceeds 91, and may increase to over 100. (Japan Today) (Asahi Shimbun) (Reuters) (Bloomberg) (Reuters)

April 26
 * The death toll in the Amagasaki rail crash reaches 73. Police searches the offices of West Japan Railway Co looking for clues for the cause of the crash. (Japan Today) (Reuters) (Bloomberg) (Reuters AlertNet)

April 25
 * Amagasaki rail crash: In Japan, a Fukuchiyama Line train derails and crashes into an apartment building in the city of Amagasaki, near Osaka. At least 55 people are dead and around 400 are injured as a result of the accident, Japan's worst rail crash since 1963.  (Japan Today) (Reuters) (BBC)

Five sourced items for the same event! And if you look at the souce it's 26 lines long (on my screen). I can barely read it if I want to edit it. I didn't even look into May 2005 but I bet there are more there.

Or how about this:

April 28
 * Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez visits Cuba to foster cooperation between the countries. (BBC) (Periodico26) (Reuters)

A lot of leader visit a lot of countries, why is this noteworthy?. Does the source say?

Or:

April 26
 * British Labour Party member Brian Sedgemore moves to the Liberal Democrats. (Independent) (Times) (BBC)

Is this the first time this has happened? The last? Did the outside world even notice?

April 22
 * Rumors abound that a nuclear test by North Korea may be imminent, and that the United States is urging the People's Republic of China to pressure North Korea not to do so. (Reuters) (The Hindu) (Washington Post) (Drudge Report)

Rumors abound? This is a fact is it. Well, rumors abound that this page is way too big and it needs a reduction.

My proposal:

1. After it is no longer the current events page remove sources from the page.

2. Remove multiple enteries from the page. The event is notable. The slow increase in casualty counts is not. Put the final count at the originating entry when its final, or update it accordingly.

Start with this and the page may get down to a reasonable size (135 KBs! Come on!).

Trevor macinnis 14:28, 31 July 2005 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Šumadija District

Note: ''All official material made by Government of Serbia is public by law. Information was taken from official website.

title: Talk:Šumadija District


text:
A Severe Mercy

A Severe Mercy is an autobiographical book by Sheldon Vanauken, relating the author's relationship with his wife, their friendship with C. S. Lewis, conversion to Christianity, and subsequent tragedy. It was first published in 1977. The book is strongly influenced, at least stylistically, by the Evelyn Waugh novel Brideshead Revisited. It was followed by a sequel, Under the Mercy, first published in 1985.

The book is, in a sense, made up of two distinct parts: the first chronicles the love story of Vanauken and his wife, a love which he refers to as pagan. The couple pledged always to put their love before all else, and the intensity of their devotion to one another and their exclusivity makes up the early chapters. However, Vanauken (or "Van") and his wife Jean Davis (or "Davy") explore Christianity and are gradually converted, and the primacy of their love for one another comes into question for both of them—though Vanauken's conversion is somewhat slower and more reluctant.

His analysis is aided by a correspondence with C.S. Lewis, then an Oxford Don, and some of Lewis's letters are reprinted in the book. Vanauken's circle of Oxford acquaintances includes other recognizable names as well, including Catholic priest Julian Stead, who went on to author books of religious poetry and a noted text on St. Benedict's rule of life.

A Severe Mercy is undoubtedly Vanauken's best known and most successful book. However, his first published work was a small booklet called "Encounter with Light", written about 1960 and available only from Wheaton College in Illinois today. Vanauken's only novel, Gateway to Heaven, was published by Harper & Row in 1980.

A Severe Mercy won a Gold Medallion Award from the Evangelical Christian Publishers Association in 1977.

A Severe Mercy won a 1980 U.S. National Book Award in the one-year category Religion/Inspiration.

The 1985 sequel Under the Mercy spans many years after the death of Vanauken's wife, years during which he first fell away from "the obedience" and then returned and eventually converted to Catholicism.

In May 2013, Origin Entertainment purchased the rights to begin development on the screenplay by Barbara Nicolosi (Fatima (2020)) with plans of taking the film into production in 2021.

title: A Severe Mercy


text:
Gateshead F.C.

Gateshead Football Club is a professional association football club based in Gateshead, Tyne and Wear, England. The club competes in the, the fifth level of the English football league system, as of the 2023–24 season. The team play their home matches at the Gateshead International Stadium.

Established in 1977 after Gateshead United folded, the club are known as the "Tynesiders" or the "Heed". There had been a Gateshead A.F.C. in the Football League from 1930 to 1960, which had folded before Gateshead United had been established. The current incarnation of the club began life in the Northern Premier League, winning Premier Division titles in the 1982–83 and 1985–86 seasons. However they were relegated from the Football Conference in 1984 and 1987. They secured promotion back to the Conference at the end of the 1989–90 season, though would remain there until another relegation in 1998. The club were further relegated from the Northern Premier League Premier Division in 2003. They won the First Division play-offs in 2004 and the Premier Division play-offs in 2008, before winning promotion from the Conference North with a second-placed finish in 2008–09. Gateshead spent the next decade in the top-flight of English football's non-League system, losing a play-off final in 2014, before they were demoted into the National League North in 2019 due to financial irregularities. They returned to the National League after winning the National League North in 2021–22. They won their first FA Trophy title in the 2023–24 season having finished as runners-up in the previous competition.

History
The original Gateshead club was formed in 1899 as South Shields Adelaide and became members of the Football League in 1919. In 1930 financial problems saw the club moved to Gateshead, where they adopted the name of their new town. However, the club was voted out of the Football League in 1960 and folded in 1973. History repeated itself as the South Shields club formed to replace the original one was also moved to Gateshead, becoming Gateshead United in 1974. However, they were dissolved at the end of the 1976–77 season. A new club was established, taking over from United in the Northern Premier League. After three seasons in the bottom half of the table, they finished eleventh in 1980–81, also reaching the first round of the FA Cup for the first time, losing 1–0 at Lincoln City. The club finished fourth in the league the following season.

The 1982–83 season saw Gateshead win the Northern Premier League with a record points tally (100), scoring 114 goals in the process. As a result, the club were promoted to the Alliance Premier League. After a sixteenth-place finish in their first season in the league, they finished second-from-bottom in 1984–85 and were relegated back to the Northern Premier League. The following season saw the club win the Northern Premier League title and the league's Challenge Shield, earning an immediate return to the (now renamed) Football Conference. However, they lasted only one season in the Conference, and were relegated back to the Northern Premier League after finishing bottom of the table.

With the Northern Premier League having gained a second division, Gateshead became members of its Premier Division upon their return to the league. They finished eighteenth in 1987–88 and second-from-bottom the following season, but avoided relegation to Division One as no team was relegated to the league from the Conference. After this reprieve, the club were runners-up in 1989–90 and were promoted back to the Conference, as champions Colne Dynamoes were ineligible for promotion. The following seven seasons saw them in mid-table every season, but after finishing in the relegation zone in 1997–98, they returned to the Northern Premier League.

After two top-five finishes following their return, Gateshead finished in mid-table in 2000–01 and 2001–02. Although they were relegated to Division One at the end of the 2002–03 season, a sixth-place finish in 2003–04 was sufficient to secure a return to the Premier Division due to the creation of the Conference North and South leading to many clubs leaving the Premier Division. A third-place finish in the Premier Division in 2007–08 saw the club qualify for the promotion play-offs, and after defeating Eastwood Town 4–0 in the semi-finals, they beat Buxton 2–0 in the final to earn promotion to the Conference North.

In the 2008–09 season, Gateshead were Conference North runners-up. In the subsequent play-offs, they beat Southport 2–1 on aggregate in the semi-finals, before a 1–0 win over AFC Telford United in the final saw them promoted to the Conference National. The club adopted a full-time squad for the first time for the 2010–11 season. In 2013–14, the club finished third in the league, qualifying for the promotion play-offs. They beat Grimsby Town 4–2 on aggregate in the semi-finals, setting up a Wembley final against Cambridge United, which they lost 2–1. In the following season the club reached the third round of the FA Cup for the first time; wins over Norton United in the first round and Warrington Town in the second led to a third-round tie with Premier League side West Bromwich Albion, with Gateshead losing 7–0. The club were suspended from the National League in May 2019 due to financial irregularities, and were demoted to the National League North the following month.

The curtailed 2019–20 season saw Gateshead finish seventh (with the league table calculated on points-per-game), qualifying for the play-offs. However, after beating Brackley Town on penalties after a 1–1 draw in the first round, they lost 5–3 to Boston United in the semi-finals. In 2021–22 Gateshead were National League North champions, earning promotion back to the National League. The 2022–23 season saw them reach the final of the FA Trophy at Wembley Stadium, where they lost 1–0 to FC Halifax Town. After finishing sixth in the National League in 2023–24, the club were barred from competing in the play-offs after failing to meet the entry criteria for the Football League due to not obtaining a "10-year security of tenure" for their stadium. They also reached a second successive FA Trophy final, this time defeating Solihull Moors on penalties following a 2–2 draw to win the competition.

Colours and crest
The club initially played in all red strip with a white and blue vertical slash on the shirt. Gateshead continued to play in odd-coloured variations until the mid-1980s, when the club changed to the colours of the previous Gateshead incarnation – white shirt, black shorts and socks – and have played in these same colours ever since. Since 2011, Gateshead has adopted their original colours of claret and blue as the club's away strip.

The club's crest incorporates an image of the statue the Angel of the North.

Stadium
The club have played at the Gateshead International Stadium since their establishment. The record attendance of 11,750 was set in a 1995 friendly match with Newcastle United.

On 28 October 2009, Gateshead unveiled plans for a new 8,000 capacity stadium to be built in the town centre, opposite the Gateshead Civic Centre, formerly the home of North Durham Cricket & Rugby Club. However, after the failure of England's bids to host the World Cup in 2018 or 2022, the stadium, which would have acted as a training base for teams playing at nearby St James' Park, was put on hold indefinitely. In 2014, it was reported that chairman Graham Wood "no longer considers a new purpose-built football ground vital to the future of Gateshead Football Club". In December 2015, the club's new owner, Richard Bennett, announced that the club had restarted the search for a new stadium location, although he described the International Stadium as "fabulous". Despite Gateshead qualifying for the National League play-offs in 2023–24, they were excluded due to Gateshead Council failing to grant the club a ten-year security of tenure for the International Stadium, which is required for all teams that apply for EFL membership from the National League.

Honours

 * FA Trophy
 * Winners 2023–24
 * National League
 * National League North champions 2021–22
 * Northern Premier League
 * Champions 1982–83, 1985–86
 * Challenge Shield winners 1985–86

Records

 * Best FA Cup performance: Third round, 2014–15
 * Best FA Trophy performance: Winners, 2023–24
 * Record attendance: 11,750 vs Newcastle United, friendly match, 7 August 1995
 * Biggest win: 8–0 vs Netherfield, Northern Premier League
 * Heaviest defeat: 9–0 vs Sutton United, Football Conference, 22 September 1990
 * Most appearances: James Curtis, 596 (2003–2016)
 * Most goals: Paul Thompson, 130 (1995–1997, 1999–2004, 2005–2008)
 * Record transfer fee paid: £9,000 to Dagenham & Redbridge for Paul Cavell, 1994
 * Record transfer fee received: £250,000 from Peterborough United for Marcus Maddison, 2014

title: Gateshead F.C.


text:
Elachistidae

The Elachistidae (grass-miner moths) are a family of small moths in the superfamily Gelechioidea. Some authors lump about 3,300 species in eight subfamilies here, but this arrangement almost certainly results in a massively paraphyletic and completely unnatural assemblage, united merely by symplesiomorphies retained from the first gelechioid moths.

In fact, most of these moths appear to be either closer to the Oecophorinae and are hence nowadays usually included in the Oecophoridae (Depressariinae, "Deuterogoniinae", Hypertrophinae, Stenomatinae and perhaps the enigmatic Aeolanthes), or constitute quite basal lineages of gelechioids, neither closely related to Elachista nor to Oecophora, and hence best treated as independent families within the Gelechioidea (Agonoxenidae, Ethmiidae). The genus Coelopoeta is sometimes still placed here, but probably belongs in the Oecophorinae.

Consequently, the Elachistidae are essentially identical to the subfamily Elachistinae in the family's wide circumscription. The Agonoxenidae might perhaps belong here regardless, but even this is doubtful. Nonetheless, a considerable number of genera remain in the present family, and eventually it is likely that subdivisions will again be established (e.g. by raising some or all of the tribes proposed for the former Elachistinae to subfamily status).

A significant reduction of genera has been proposed, from the current mass of 20 genera to 3. The proposition was made on the premise of several distinguishing classifications, all of which are synapomorphies. Those include genital size and presence of digitate, adult abdomen segments without dorsal spines, absence of maxillary palpi and fronto-clypeal suture, and immobile abdominal segments in pupae and larvae. Various tribes were considered within the proposition, with most differentiation coming from genital structure.

In the modern, reduced description, the Elachistidae are small to very small moths (wingspans usually around 1 cm). Their wings appear feather-like due to the fine hair covering the wings' fringes, and the hindwings can be significantly reduced in area, essentially consisting of a small strip with a wide hairy fringe. The caterpillars are typically leaf miners or stem miners on Poales.

Genera
The genera of Elachistidae are:

 * Elachistinae
 * Elachista
 * Eretmograptis Meyrick, 1938
 * Mylocrita Meyrick, 1922
 * Myrrhinitis Meyrick, 1913
 * Perittia Stainton, 1854
 * Stephensia Stainton, 1858
 * Urodeta Stainton, 1869

Several small genera colored by some authors are here included in Elachista, as it would otherwise be liable to be non-monophyletic. As noted above, Aeolanthes may also belong here, as the only genus of a subfamily Aeolanthinae. Also possibly included is the Peruvian species Auxotricha ochrogypsa, described by Edward Meyrick in 1931 as the sole member of its genus.

 * Parametriotinae Capuse, 1971
 * Agonoxeninae Meyrick, 1925 (alternatively treated as a separate family)

Fossil record
Some prehistoric genera of Elachistidae, known only from fossils, have been described:
 * †Elachistites Kozlov, 1987
 * †Microperittia Kozlov, 1987
 * †Palaeoelachista Kozlov, 1987
 * †Praemendesia Kozlov, 1987

Former genera

 * Annetennia Traugott-Olsen, 1995
 * Aristoptila Meyrick, 1932
 * Atmozostis Meyrick, 1932
 * Atrinia Sinev, 1992
 * Austriana Traugott-Olsen, 1995
 * Atmozostis Meyrick, 1932
 * Bradleyana Traugott-Olsen, 1995
 * Calamograptis Meyrick, 1937 (Tineidae)
 * Canariana Traugott-Olsen, 1995
 * Cryphioxena Meyrick, 1921 (Bucculatricidae)
 * Dicasteris Meyrick, 1906
 * Dicranoctetes Braun, 1918
 * Elachistoides Sruoga, 1992
 * Eupneusta Bradley, 1974
 * Gibraltarensis Traugott-Olsen, 1996
 * Habeleria Traugott-Olsen, 1995
 * Holstia Traugott-Olsen, 1995
 * Illantis Meyrick, 1921
 * Kumia Falkovich, 1986

 * Kuznetzoviana Traugott-Olsen, 1996
 * Mendesina de Joannis, 1902
 * Microplitica Meyrick, 1935
 * Ogmograptis Meyrick, 1935 (Bucculatricidae)
 * Paraperittia Rebel, 1916
 * Perittoides Sinev, 1992
 * Petrochroa Busck, 1914
 * Phaneroctena A.J.Turner, 1923 (Cosmopterigidae)
 * Phthinostoma Meyrick, 1914
 * Polymetis Walsingham, 1908
 * Proterochyta Meyrick, 1918 (Scythrididae)
 * Sineviana Traugott-Olsen, 1995
 * Sruogania Traugott-Olsen, 1995
 * Symphoristis Meyrick, 1918
 * Whitebreadia Traugott-Olsen, 1995

title: Elachistidae


text:
Clovis culture

The Clovis culture is an archaeological culture from the Paleoindian period of North America, spanning around 13,050 to 12,750 years Before Present. The type site is Blackwater Draw locality No. 1 near Clovis, New Mexico, where stone tools were found alongside the remains of Columbian mammoths in 1929. Clovis sites have been found across North America. The most distinctive part of the Clovis culture toolkit are Clovis points, which are projectile points with a fluted, lanceolate shape. Clovis points are typically large, sometimes exceeding 10 cm in length. These points were multifunctional, also serving as cutting tools. Other stone tools used by the Clovis culture include knives, scrapers, and bifacial tools, with bone tools including beveled rods and shaft wrenches, with possible ivory points also being identified. Hides, wood, and natural fibers may also have been utilized, though no direct evidence of this has been preserved. Clovis artifacts are often found grouped together in caches where they had been stored for later retrieval, and over 20 Clovis caches have been identified.

The Clovis peoples are thought to have been highly mobile groups of hunter-gatherers. It is generally agreed that these groups were reliant on hunting big game (megafauna), having a particularly strong association with mammoths, and to a lesser extent with mastodon, bison, camel, and horse, but they also consumed smaller animals and plants. The Clovis hunters may have contributed to the Late Pleistocene megafauna extinctions in North America, though this idea has been subject to controversy. Only one human burial has been directly associated with tools from the Clovis culture: Anzick-1, a young boy found buried in Montana, who has a close genetic relation to some modern Native American populations, primarily in Central and South America.

The Clovis culture represents the earliest widely recognised archaeological culture in North America (though in western North America, it appears to have been contemporaneous with the Western Stemmed Tradition). While historically, many scholars held to a "Clovis first" model, where Clovis represented the earliest inhabitants in the Americas, today this is largely rejected, with several generally accepted sites across the Americas like Monte Verde II being dated to at least a thousand years earlier than the oldest Clovis sites.

The end of the Clovis culture may have been driven by the decline of the megafauna that the Clovis hunted as well as decreasing mobility, resulting in local differentiation of lithic and cultural traditions across North America. Beginning around 12,750–12,600 years BP, the Clovis culture was succeeded by more regional cultures, including the Folsom tradition in central North America, the Cumberland point in mid/southern North America, the Suwannee and Simpson points in the southeast, and Gainey points in the Northeast–Great Lakes region. The Clovis and Folsom traditions may have overlapped, perhaps for around 80–400 years. The end of the Clovis culture is generally thought be the result of normal cultural change over time.

In South America, the widespread similar Fishtail or Fell point style was contemporaneous to the usage of Clovis points in North America and possibly developed from Clovis points.

Discovery
On August 29, 1927, the first evidence of Pleistocene humans seen by multiple archaeologists in the Americas was discovered near Folsom, New Mexico. At this site, they found the first in situ Folsom point with the bones of the extinct bison species Bison antiquus. This confirmation of a human presence in the Americas during the Pleistocene inspired many people to start looking for evidence of early humans.

In 1929, 19-year-old Ridgely Whiteman, who had been closely following the excavations in nearby Folsom in the newspapers, discovered the Clovis site near the Blackwater Draw in eastern New Mexico. Despite several earlier Paleoindian discoveries, the best documented evidence of the Clovis complex was collected and excavated between 1932 and 1937 near Clovis, New Mexico, by a crew under the direction of Edgar Billings Howard until 1935 and later by John L. Cotter from the Academy of Natural Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania. Howard's crew left their excavation in Burnet Cave, the first professionally excavated Clovis site, in August 1932, and visited Whiteman and his Blackwater Draw site. By November, Howard was back at Blackwater Draw to investigate additional finds from a construction project.

The American Journal of Archaeology, in its January–March 1932 edition, mentions Howard's work in Burnet Cave, including the discovery of extinct fauna and a "Folsom type" point 4 ft below a Basketmaker burial. Reference is made to a slightly earlier article on Burnet Cave in The University Museum Bulletin from November 1931.

The Dent site in Colorado was the first known association of Clovis points with mammoth bones, as noted by Hannah Marie Wormington in her book Ancient Man in North America (4th ed. 1957). Gary Haynes, in his book The Early Settlement of North America, suggested the type of fluted point thereafter associated with megafauna (especially mammoths) at over a dozen other archaeological sites in North America would have been more appropriately named "Dent" rather than Clovis, the town near Blackwater Draw that gave the type of point its name.

Material culture
A feature considered to be distinctive of the Clovis tradition is overshot flaking, which is defined as flakes that "during the manufacture of a biface are struck from prepared edges of a piece and travel from one edge across the face", with limited removal of the opposite edge. Whether or not the overshot flaking was intentional on the part of the stoneknapper has been contested, with other authors suggesting that overface flaking (where flakes that travel past the midline but terminate before reaching the opposite end are removed) was the primary goal. Other elements considered distinctive of the Clovis culture tool complex include "raw material selectivity; distinctive patterns of flake and blade platform preparation, thinning and flaking; characteristic biface size and morphology, including the presence of end-thinning; and the size, curvature and reduction strategies of blades". It has long been recognised that the definition of the Clovis culture is to a degree ambiguous, the term being "used in a number of ways, referring to an era, to a culture, and most specifically, to a distinctive projectile point type", with disagreement between scholars about distinguishing between Clovis and various other Paleoindian archaeological cultures.

Clovis point

A hallmark of the toolkit associated with the Clovis culture is the distinctively shaped lithic point known as the Clovis point. Clovis points are bifacial (having flakes removed from both faces) and typically fluted (having an elongate flake removed from the base of the point ) on both sides, with the fluting typically running up a third or a half of the length of the point, distinct from many later Paleoindian traditions where the flute runs up the entire point length. Clovis points are typically parallel-sided to slightly convex, with the base of the point being concave. Although no direct evidence of what was attached to Clovis points has been found, Clovis points are commonly thought to have served as tips for spears/darts likely used as handheld thrusting or throwing weapons, possibly in combination with a spear thrower, for hunting and possibly self-defense. Wear on Clovis points indicates that they were multifunctional objects that also served as cutting and slicing tools, with some authors suggesting that some Clovis-point types were primarily used as knives. Clovis points were at least sometimes resharpened, though the idea that they were continually resharpened "long-life" tools has been questioned. The shape and size of Clovis points varies significantly over space and time; the largest points exceed 10 cm in length. The points required considerable effort to make and often broke during knapping, particularly during fluting. The fluting may have served to make the finished points more durable during use by acting as a "shock absorber" to redistribute stress during impact, though others have suggested that it may have been purely stylistic or used to strengthen the hafting to the spear handle. The points were generally produced from nodules or siliceous cryptocrystalline rocks. Clovis points were thinned using end-thinning ("the removal of blade-like flakes parallel to the long-axis"). They were initially prepared using percussion flaking, with the point being finished using pressure flaking.

Blades
Clovis blades—long flakes removed from specially prepared conical or wedge-shaped cores—are part of the global Upper Paleolithic blade tradition. Clovis blades are twice as long as they are wide and were used and modified to create a variety of tools, including endscrapers (used to scrape hides), serrated tools, and gravers. Unlike bifaces, Clovis blade cores do not appear to have been regularly transported over long distances, with only the blades typically carried in the mobile toolkit.

Bifaces
Bifaces served a variety of roles for Clovis hunter-gatherers, such as cutting tools, preforms for formal tools such as points, and as portable sources of large flakes useful as preforms or tools.

Other tools
Other tools associated with the Clovis culture are adzes (likely used for woodworking), bone "shaft wrenches" (suggested to have been used to straighten wooden shafts), as well as rods, some of which have beveled (diagonally cut) ends. These rods are made of bone, antlers, and ivory. The function of the rods is unknown and has been subject to numerous hypotheses. Rods that were beveled on both ends are most often interpreted as foreshafts to which stone points were hafted, with a pair of rods surrounding each side of the point, while rods that are beveled on only one end, with the other being pointed, are most often intepreted as projectile points. The rods may have served other purposes, such as prybars. Clovis people are also known to have used ivory and bone to create projectile points.

Caches
A distinctive feature of the Clovis culture generally not found in subsequent cultures is "caching", where a collection of artifacts (typically stone tools, such as Clovis points or bifaces) were deliberately left at a location, presumably with the intention to return to collect them later, though some authors have interpreted cache deposits as ritual behavior. Over twenty such "caches" have been identified across North America.

Art and ritual practices
A few Clovis culture artifacts are suspected to reflect creative expression, such as rock art, the use of red ochre, and engraved stones. The best-known examples of this were found at the Gault site in Texas and consist of limestone nodules incised with expressive geometric patterns, some of which mimic leaf patterns. Clovis peoples, like other Paleoindian cultures, used red ocher for a variety of artistic and ritual purposes, including burials, and to cover objects in caches. Clovis peoples are known to have transported ocher 100 km from its original outcrop. They are also suggested to have produced beads out of animal bones.

Lifestyle
Clovis hunter-gatherers are characterized as "high-technology foragers" who utilized sophisticated technology to maintain access to resources under conditions of high mobility. In many Clovis localities, the stone tools found at a site were hundreds of kilometers away from the source stone outcrop, in one case over 900 km away. The people who produced the Clovis culture probably had a low population density but with geographically extensive cultural networks. The Clovis culture is suggested to have heavily utilized hides, wood, and natural fibres, though no direct evidence of this has been preserved. Clovis culture artifacts have often been found associated with big game, including proboscideans (Columbian mammoth, mastodon, and the gomphothere Cuvieronius ) bison, equines of the genus Equus, and the extinct camel Camelops. A handful of sites possibly suggest the hunting of caribou/reindeer, peccaries (Platygonus, Mylohyus), ground sloths (Paramylodon), glyptodonts (Glyptotherium), tapirs, and the llama Hemiauchenia. Proboscideans (especially mammoths) are the most common recorded species found in Clovis sites, followed by bison. However, the Clovis culture is not exclusively associated with large animals, with several sites showing the exploitation of small game like tortoises and jackrabbits. It is generally agreed that the people who produced the Clovis culture were reliant on big game for a significant portion of their diet (while also consuming smaller animals and plants), though to what degree they were reliant on megafauna is disputed, with some authors arguing for a generalist hunter-gatherer lifestyle that also involved the occasional targeting of megafauna. The effectiveness of Clovis tools for hunting proboscideans has been contested by some authors, though others have asserted that Clovis points were likely capable of killing proboscideans, noting that replica Clovis points have been able to penetrate elephant hide in experimental tests, and that groups of hunter-gatherers in Africa have been observed killing elephants using spears.

In the Southern Plains, Clovis people created campsites of considerable size, which are often on the periphery of the region near sources of workable stone, from which they are suggested to have seasonally migrated into the plains to hunt megafauna. In the southeast, Clovis peoples created large camps that may have served as "staging areas", which may have been seasonally occupied, where a number of bands may have gathered for social occasions. At Jake Bluff in northern Oklahoma, Clovis points are associated with numerous butchered Bison antiquus bones, which represented a bison herd of at least 22 individuals. At the time of deposition, the site was a steep-sided arroyo (dry watercourse) that formed a dead end, suggesting that hunters trapped the bison herd within the arroyo before killing them.

Megafauna extinction
Beginning in the 1950s, Paul S. Martin proposed the "overkill hypothesis", suggesting that the Late Pleistocene megafauna extinctions in North America were driven by human hunting, including by Clovis peoples, with the hunting and extinction of large herbivores having a knock-on effect causing the extinction of large carnivores. This suggestion has been the subject of controversy. The timing of megafauna extinction in North America also coincides with major climatic changes, making it difficult to disentangle the effects of various factors. In a 2012 survey of archaeologists in The SAA Archaeological Record, 63% of respondents said that megafauna extinctions were likely the result of a "combination of factors".

Genetics
The only known Clovis burial is that of Anzick-1, an infant boy who was found near Wilsall, Montana in 1968. The body was associated with over 100 stone and bone artifacts, all of which were stained with red ochre. The individual dates to approximately 12,990–12,840 years Before Present. Sequencing of his genome demonstrates that he belonged to a population that is ancestral to many contemporary Indigenous peoples of the Americas, particularly those from Central and South America, and less related to those from contemporary North America, including Northern Mexico, though there is considerable variability in the genetic closeness of Central and South American indigenous peoples to Anzick-1, with older ancient South American remains generally more closely related to Anzick, suggesting that the Native American population had already diverged into multiple genetically distinct groups by the time of the Clovis culture, followed by subsequent migration of these populations later in the Holocene. Like other Native Americans Anzick is closely related to Siberian peoples, confirming the Asian origin of the Clovis culture. He belongs to Y chromosome Haplogroup Q-L54, which is common among contemporary Native Americans, and to mitochondrial haplogroup D4h3a, which is rare among contemporary native Americans (occurring in 1.4% of contemporary Native Americans, primarily along the Pacific coast), but is more common in the very earliest Indigenous Americans.

Distribution and chronology
Some authors have suggested that the Clovis culture lasted for a relatively short period of a few centuries, with a 2020 study suggesting a temporal range based on 10 securely radiocarbon dated Clovis sites of 13,050 to 12,750 calibrated years Before Present (BP), ending subsequent to the onset of the Younger Dryas, consistent with the results obtained in a 2007 study by the same authors. Other authors have argued that some sites extend the range of the Clovis culture back to 13,500 years Before Present, though the dating for these earlier sites is not secure. Some scholars have supported a long chronology for Clovis of around 1,500 years.

Historically, many authors argued for a "Clovis first" paradigm, where Clovis, which represents the earliest recognisable archaeological culture in North America, were suggested to represent the earliest inhabitants of the Americas south of the Laurentide Ice Sheet. However, since the beginning of the 21st century, this hypothesis has been abandoned by most researchers, as several widely accepted sites, notably Monte Verde II in Chile (c. 14,500 years BP) as well as Paisley Caves in Oregon (c. 14,200 years BP) and Cooper's Ferry in Idaho (c. 15,800 years Before Present) are suggested to be considerably older than the oldest Clovis sites. Historically, it was suggested that the ancestors of the people who produced the Clovis culture migrated into North America along the "ice free corridor", but many later scholars have suggested that a migration along the Pacific coast is more likely.

The Clovis culture is known from localities across North America, from southern Canada to northern Mexico and across the east and west of the continent. The area of origin of the Clovis culture remains unclear, though the development of fluted Clovis points appears to have occurred in North America south of the Laurentide Ice Sheet, and not in Beringia. The Clovis culture may have originated from the Dyuktai lithic style widespread in Beringia. While some authors have suggested that the Clovis culture resulted from diffusion of traditions through an already pre-existing Paleoindian population, others have asserted that the culture likely originated from the expansion of a single population. In Western North America, the Clovis culture was contemporaneous with and perhaps preceded by the Western Stemmed Tradition, which produced unfluted projectile points, with the Western Stemmed Tradition continuing in the region for several thousand years after the end of Clovis.

The end of the Clovis culture may have been driven by the decline of the megafauna that the Clovis hunted, as well as decreasing mobility resulting in local differentiation of lithic and cultural traditions across North America. The end of the Clovis culture is generally considered to be the result of normal cultural change through time. There is no evidence that the disappearance of the Clovis culture was the result of the onset of the Younger Dryas, or that there was a population decline of Paleoindians following the end of the Clovis culture.

The Clovis culture was succeeded by various regional point styles, such as the Folsom tradition in central North America, the Cumberland point in mid/southern North America, the Suwannee and Simpson points in the southeast, and Gainey points in the northeast-Great Lakes region. The Clovis and Folsom traditions may have overlapped, perhaps for around 80-400 years.

A number of authors have suggested that the Clovis culture is ancestral to other fluted point producing cultures in Central and South America, like the widespread Fishtail or Fell point style.

title: Clovis culture


text:
Talk:Vercingetorix

This is ridiculous
Ive tried to edit this article 4 times and you keep reverting my edits. I'm a PhD and lecturer of European history! The only vandalism is the from the mod on a powertrip preventing me from improving this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.30.8.96 (talk) 06:12, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

 * According to the article's history no one has edited it since 26 April. I'm not sure why you're unable to edit the article. What changes did you have in mind? Nev1 (talk) 11:51, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

 * He he. This made me laugh at least, so laughable is spot on. ;-) What was that edit you wanted to make then? You sure you tried on the English WP? Trigaranus (talk) 19:48, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Cause of Death
The article says that

 * "He ws probably strangled shortly after Caesar's triumph..."

and then later (of the theory that he was beheaded):

 * "...but this theory has as little support as that of strangulation."

So the article says that it is probable that he was strangled, but then dismisses the beheading theory as being no more likely than strangulation. This is internally inconsistent.

My knowledge of Vercingetorix comes entirely from reading Asterix books, so I don't know the right way to resolve this inconsistency. Molinari 01:45, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * The tale I believe is the one that he was taken to Rome, paraded thru the city and was ritually killed during major festivities some years later. I got this one from the Discovery Channels documentary on Julius Caesars conquest of the Celts... Not changing, someone should fact check it to be sure… Golf

 * Caesar's triumph (the parade) actually occurred several years after the actual conquest of Gaul and Vercingetorix. In fact, the refusal of the Senate to allow him to triumph AND stand for consul in absentia (since if he crossed the Pomerium to stand for Consul, he'd become a privatus, losing his right to triumph) was a precipitous cause of his civil war. Because of this, his Gaul triumph was delayed until 46 BC, during his dictatorship. Additional, Vercingetorix wasn't held in the Tullianum the entire time. It wasn't a prison as we know it, but a temporary holding facility. He would, in all likelyhood, have been held in house arrest at one or many homes of prominent citizens. Txvoodoo (talk) 16:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

As to cause of death, Roman tradition was to parade defeated leaders, whether kings or great tribal leaders, in the triumphal parade ending in the Lower Forum for the prisoner. The prisoner was then led into a small building known as the Tullianum where he was ritually strangled. His body was then thrown into a lower chamber of the Tullianum. Exceptionally, the Numidian King Jugurtha was thrown alive into the lower chamber in Marius' triumph of 104 B.C. and left to starve to death. Beheadings were usually reserved for Roman citizens, except if they were traitors, in which case they were thrown from the Tarpeian Rock located somewhere atop the Capitoline to their deaths below. (User: Cole, 30-Sep-06) I had thought Vercingetorix was beheaded or decapitated but am not sure, and think this was seven or ten years later.

Etymology
The problem with any 'etymology' of Gaulish surely is that it is the least attested of any of the Celtic languages. There are Welsh and Irish texts going back to the Middle Ages, and some (Welsh/Irish?) runic inscriptions of uncertain date and provenance whose 'translations' are highly speculative. But there are at most a few thousand isolated words and phrases in what we assume is 'Gaulish'? I mean there were a number of tribes living in what we know as Gaul at the time... Did they all speak Gaulish or some version of it...? Just as today 'everyone speaks French in France or some version...?', except for those who speak Breton and Basque, totally unrelated to Latin descended languages. So Gaulish (whatever that was) may have been one of many different languages spoken there 2,500-3,000+ years ago. Secondly the name. I agree with the query: is it a personal name or a title? Is it a first name, family, clan, tribal name? or is it a title? Or a description? Playing with parts of the name tells us precisely nothing as we know not what language it comes from. We assume 'Gaulish', but can we be sure? No. So much speculation and argument with so little basis of any sort. I am aware that a Proto-Celtic Etymological Dictionary has been published. Personally I think this is academia venturing into fantasy land. As no Celtic culture has written sources more ancient than the Middle Ages how can we possibly go into proto-Celtic except on the most general assumptions of Indo-European historical Linguistics? Does not help with specifics like names. It's just too general and speculative a field. Khananel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khananel (talk • contribs) 01:22, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

- To the person who wrote the part about the Actual Meaning of Vercingetorix’s name, where exactly did you get that translation from? I ask for two reasons (1) I have seen an alternate Translation of the name "Vercingetorix (or in Gallic possibly "Fearcuincedorigh", "Man who is chief of a hundred heads")" from this Website: http://www.unrv.com/fall-republic/vercingetorix.php (2) Why do you translate the word "wer" to mean "Super", It was my impression that "Wer" means Man? (i.e. the other source I used interprets it that way). Hibernian

'wer' does mean man, but only in Germanic languages, i.e. Anglo-Saxon "Werewolf" - "Man-Wolf"

- Not Necessarily only in Germanic Languages, "*wíro-" means man in Proto-Indo-European and there are many languages that use or used this root for man.

i.e. Common Celtic *viro-, *vero- (a man) > Gaulish uiro- (a man), Old Irish fer, Irish and Scottish Gaelic fear, Manx Gaelic fer, Old Welsh gur, Welsh gwr, Cornish gur, Breton gour

(Got all that from this site) http://indoeuro.bizland.com/project/phonetics/word8.html

 * however, its incorrect. VER means 'over' or 'great' in Gaulish. --Nantonos 19:17, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

So as far as I can see the Alternative translation there of "Man who is King of a Hundred Heads" seem possible, so what do you all think, should it be added to the Article as a possible meaning of his name? Hibernian

I had seen, at least twice, that "Vercingetorix" meant "King/Leader of the Marching Men", where "Marching Men" would be translated as "Infantry" today. A few classical writers have also commented on the uncanny similarities between Latin and the common Gaulish language at the time. The strangulation issue is usually resolved by citing the number of Roman sources that attest to the Romans' more-frequent use of this method of execution; decapitation is much less frequently written about. Also, the one link to the Gaulish language now returns a 404 error -- Page Not Found. A more thorough search, which I regret I do not have the time right now to do, would turn up more supporting evidence. (I am also new to this -- my apologies for any errors I've made -- mea culpa!)

I suppose that would fit snugly with the 'Hundred Heads' explanation as well - that could well be a fighting unit, such as the Saxon Hundred, commanded by a Hundredman.

Well I'm glad that someone has edited it, but there is still no explanation of the direct translation of the name. What where the Gaulish words making up the name and what do they translate to Directly?. What do the words "wer-king-gheto-rīks" actually translate to, because there have so far been two totally different interpretations of these words on this page, 1. "Super-Warrior-King" and 2. "king of the marching men", I'd like to know why these translations are given and where they came from. Also I think it has to be stated that any meaning of the name given, is reconstructed and Theoretical and not known for sure (unless of course the translation is academically accepted as fact).Hibernian

 * I will add a reputable and referenced etymology. Its actually very straightforward. VER - over CINGETOS warriors RIX king. So, great warrior king or king of the warriors. There is no refernce to "a hundred' or to 'foot soldiers' in this name. And yes, its pretty well attested academic fact; Gaulish studies have advanced greatly in the last 25 years.
 * However, it might be worth retaining the 'foot soldiers' and 'hundred soldiers' pseudo-etymologies, if only to mention that they are incorrect. --Nantonos 19:17, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Not that the movie of him ("Druids") can be used as evidence, but there it says numerous times that Vercingetorix means "leader of great warriors", which seems from all these comments to be a plausible translation.

Jean Markale translates it as Great King of One Hundred Battles, similar to the Irish Conn Cetcatach (Conn of the Hundred Battles).

Jean Markale also believes in survivors from Atlantis, so you should take all he says with a fistful of salt. ;-) Trigaranus 17:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

The comments above (and this one, below) look more like speculation than conjecture ... at any rate, here's another: for a translation, try "chairman of the high council", where the council means a body that makes decisions by consensus, and where chairman is more appropriate to modern meaning than king.

This at least has simplicity on its side, whereas the hero-ific definitions above (which allude to omnipotent leaders of mighty warriors) give the definition a flavor of blood lust. This comes from Gaulish "ver" and "rix" (as in comments above), and Welsh "cyngat", meaning harmony (ie, a council that rules by consensus).

By the time of Vercingetorix, the Gauls were fighting for their lives, trying to avert cultural extermination. How best to deal with the Roman menace, among disparate peoples who must now act together? The practical solution is a high council, with someone to lead it. It really does not make sense that they would (somehow) set up a poetic "Knights of the Round Table".

For an analogy to the situation that the Gauls faced, consider the similar circumstances surrounding the emergence of Wovoka in the face of US military policy. American Indians were as independent and honor-bound as the Gauls, and facing a similar fate. Their leaders and councils were concerned with the survival of their peoples, and they are remembered in that light.

The more mundane name translation is consistent with Vercingetorix's difficulty in implementing a scorched-earth policy (he could not get consensus from those whose earth would be scorched, a problem that a mighty king of mighty warriors would not have had). And a mighty king of mighty warriors would not have tried to establish a scorched earth policy. On the other hand, in an atmosphere of "what can we do to stop this Roman military behemoth", a scorched earth policy is a practical approach likely to arise in a council setting. Consider, too, that Vercingetorix was able to appeal for help at Alesia, and all of Gaul responded ... this is in the vein of Gaulish reaction to their council and its leader at this most desperate time; but it doesn't really fit well with the translation of Vercingetorix as an omnipotent leader of mighty warriors.

24.178.228.14 (talk) 19:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

 * You seem to be speculating there quite a bit, when trying to translate the name we aren't really concerned with what Vercingetorix’s actual political position was, just what the word(s) mean. Weather Vercingetorix was a leader of a loose tribal confederacy with only nominal powers, or an all powerful king is up for debate, but he definitely has the word King in his name (Rix is about the only part that no one would contest the meaning of), so presumably he thought of himself as some kind of King. By the way, I hope you didn't just add your own speculative translation to the article, if you have info about this "chairman of the high council" translation then you need to state where you're getting it from, and if it comes from a credible source. --Hibernian (talk) 05:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

 * For that "harmony" issue, there are two or three things I would like to note here (apart from a caution not to wax too excursive on political philosophy):

 * 1) Where do you have this suggestion from? If you can quote a decent source, we'd better leave it in, if it's your suggestion or the suggestion of a self-declared pseudo-linguist (in the style of Jean Markale), it would better be taken out of the official article. The leap from "harmony" to "council that rules by harmony" is something that certainly does not happen in traditional IE élite names.
 * 2) Where do you have this "cyngat" word from? For all I know, the word for "harmony" in Welsh is "cynghanedd" or "cytgord", not "cyngat". And "council" would be "cyngor". Granted, my Welsh sucks, but still, there you go.
 * So, give us a source, please, otherwise I'd say we move that translation to a different place. Trigaranus (talk) 22:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

As no clarification of the "Harmony King" seems to have been forthcoming, I've cleaned up the etymology section. I've kept the fact that the etymology is contested in there, but I've removed those etymologies that smack'd and pong'd of OR or were inspired by a video game site or an Irish baby names site. If you can quote another etymology by a scholar on the subject, feel more than free to contribute. Trigaranus (talk) 06:38, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

In so-called primitive Irish (such as found in Ogham inscriptions from 1st century CE) "Ver Cinn gCetor Rix" would mean "Man at the head of four kings" or, if you like, "King of four kings". More speculation! And that would have to assume that he came from, or at least was named by, speakers from a Q-Celtic part of Gaul. But as an Irish speaker this meaning always jumped out at me when I saw the name. It's tempting, since he was said to have united several warring kingdoms. I've never seen this interpretation anywhere else.--Scalesa (talk) 17:42, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * As pointed out in Ogham, the oldest Ogham inscriptions do not date to before the 4th century, and Ver Cinn gCetor Rix (rīχs? rí?) cannot be Primitive Irish, because the endings are all completely missing (for example, the word for man would be  /wʲerah/ > Old Irish fer /fʲer/ > Modern Irish fear /fʲarˠ/), and gc- is a modern orthographic convention (it was certainly not used in Old Irish, though I cannot vouch for its absence in Middle Irish).
 * A general piece of advice: Don't try to reconstruct Primitive Irish forms (or anything else, if you can help it) unless you are a true specialist. Reconstruction is a highly technical endeavour which harbours countless pitfalls even for experts. No matter how recent the stage in question is, or if it is even an attested one, it is utterly common to miss some details and get it wrong. Even reconstructing Modern English forms "forward" from given Old English forms is hard because there are so many sound changes involved, several of them quite obscure.
 * Also, whether there ever was a Q-Celtic part of Gaul is very uncertain. Ireland was probably settled from Britain, rather than directly from Gaul, anyway, and anything closely resembling Primitive Irish, much less Old Irish, was certainly not spoken at the time when the first speakers of a direct precursor of Irish arrived in Ireland. One would rather expect a generic Old Celtic dialect, close to Old British. So your scenario rests on several far too unlikely assumptions to take it seriously. No surprise it hasn't been contemplated anywhere else. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 15:46, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The initially mentioned Fearcuincedorigh, too, is not even close to Gaulish, but patently cobbled together from Modern Irish words (fear "man", cinn "heads", céad "hundred", Scottish Gaelic rìgh "king", with a quite un-Gaelic connective vowel -o- thrown in for good measure). Correct Gaulish would probably be closer to Canto-penno-viro-rīx. See the difference? The hybris to pretend to be able to reconstruct Gaulish as a complete linguistic amateur is classic Dunning–Kruger syndrome, but the audacity to pass off bastardised Modern Irish as Gaulish is just malicious.
 * By the way, my favourite translation of Ver-cingeto-rīx is "super-hero king". It's surprisingly literal, and the comic-book associations are a specifically contemporary-pop-culture-influenced phenomenon: the translation wouldn't have sounded funny to earlier generations. As for cingeto-, this must have been a t-stem on account of Old Irish cing (stem cingeth-) "warrior", hence we can reconstruct nominative *cinges, genitive *cingetos, stem *cinget- (see Stifter's textbook for Old Irish). The original meaning of *kenget- may have been "someone who struts, strides, walks with a rolling gait", as proud ancient warriors were supposedly prone to do, to signal "don't you dare take me on!". As a final point, it has been suggested is that -rīx was originally only used as part of root compounds of the type Vedic havir-ád- "eating sacrificial food", i. e., for example, Dumnorīx < Proto-Celtic *dubno-rīχ-s < quasi-PIE *dʰubno-rēgʰ-s "ruling the (nether) world", and only later interpreted as a stand-alone noun meaning "ruler, king". One should be cautious with the reconstruction of a noun *rēgʰ- "king" to PIE ... --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:57, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

I think it's notable that 'ver kinge' is 'our king' in well attested languages from the region (which Gaulish is not), and 'to rix' is plausibly just the Latin 'tu rex', meaning 'your majesty' with an accent. Thus, at the very least, the name is a bilingual pun, 'our king and yours' which in the context of the political situation he was in, effectively means 'Master of the Universe'. I feel this is particularly poignant since Vercingetorix was all about fighting Rome. 2600:8800:7B87:1300:95C0:B0AC:D6DD:CE91 (talk) 17:19, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Unclear Antecedent

 * The next major battle at Gergovia resulted in a victory for Vercingetorix because Caesar was too anxious and had attacked instead of besieging and starving the city in standard Roman fashion. When Vercingetorix thought Caesar was in retreat (which he did not intend because it might have ruined his career) he abandoned the cautious tactics he had adopted before and attacked head on. Due to losses he had to retreat and moved to another stronghold, Alesia.

It's a bit confusing to me. -rayluT 02:13, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Images from other wiki sites
There is a good image on the French site http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Coin_Vercingetorix.jpg Is it usualtocopy itto the encommons, or to link - (and if so, how is it linked?) --Nantonos 12:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

 * That's a great Image, I've added it in. I don't know where is the best place to put it, but for the moment I've just stuck it in the History section. Thanks for finding the picture Nantonos. --Hibernian 02:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

 * There is a lot of text content that could be brought across (translated) from the French article too. Google Translate tool can assist this.  --Peter Campbell Talk! 01:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

inappropriate text on page
I´ve just created my account and due to my lack of experience dare not touch the actual page yet, but someone could take the "YOUSUCkYOUSUCKYou SuCK" texts of the article. They appear at the moment between "History" and "memorial"

HraHattu 07:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Yeah that's just Vandalism (happens all the time), someone has already fixed it. --Hibernian 18:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

They should have done that to George W. Bush and Richard Cheney instead —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.83.138.179 (talk) 22:29, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

pronunciation
the article states that [] is how it was pronounced in Gaulish... did Gaulish really have [] instead of [r]? --Krsont 03:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[wɜːɹkɪŋˈɛtoɹɪks] I agree that this supposedly phological rendering of the name is inapropriate. Both vocalism and ɹ seem to represent US-English pronunciation. There are no reasons for us to assume that Gaulish had the approximant ɹ as the phonological realisation of 'r'. It is also unnecessary to enter a ɜː (lengthened shwa, cf. turn [tɜːɹn]) as the first vowel; this is an English sound law, not a Celtic one. The same is true for the equation "short i -> ɪ", which is not an universal rule, but again a primarily English sound law. However, as far as we can reconstruct Celtic phonology (and it's representation in the Latin alphabet), it is very likely that the w, the k and the ŋg/ŋ are correct. For other sounds (especially vowel colour), one should opt for the most neutral graphemes, as it is almost impossible to determine how exactly an Arvernian would have rendered the name. So I am going to be bold and change it into [werkiŋgˈetoriks], which enters "neutral" vowel sounds where we could only guess the true phonetic value. To put it in the words of stark raving mad Queen Bess: "Hope you're not too miffed." ;-) Trigaranus 16:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Edits of Introduction
Hope no one minds, I just added a touch to the introduction as that it seemed to need a few words to sum up the article a bit more. --24.20.118.184 00:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

History
While this is a good article, it seems to somewhat begin in the middle of an idea, almost as if it was clipped from an article about good ol' Gaius. This is completely understandable as that he really only exists in historic contexts as a foil to Caesar, but I suggest that perhaps we edit this by mentioning Vercingetorix from the get go.

 * Isn't there anything we know about his early life as a Gaulish nobleman? This article seems only to jump in where Caesar crops up then follows his extremely short life from there. Would it not be better renamed to a more fitting title. Maybe something like The Rebellion of Vercingetorix? Rick-Levitt Talk Contribs 21:46, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Translation of French Text on Memorial
Perhaps my french isn't as strong as I think it is, but I think the translation in the article can be improved as follows:

Sorry to be picky; but it is a published article, after all. =P --ross613 talk 02:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

2009 tag at top
I'm removing this tag. Reason: the tag in that location implies the whole article needs verification. Although you could not delete the whole article without consensus, nevertheless it gives the wrong impression. The article has references now. The 2009 situation is not true. Some of the article is referenced. Some I believe is accurate. You can of course dispute some of it. It seems to me more proper to place tags on specific statements you wish to dispute. You may also ask for clarifications or expansions. If it is unbalanced you can mark it as unbalanced. To leave the 2009 tag at the top is to invite an administrative deletion. I believe the article should be modified where necessary. The question is, will you do it?Branigan 12:09, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 19 December 2015
FYI not involved in edit-war: simply desire to offer alternate functioning ref_links for broken proto-celtic etymology URLs under Vercingetorix eg http://www.scribd.com/doc/61167870/An-Etymological-Lexicon-of-Proto-Celtic#scribd and/or http://www.wales.ac.uk/resources/documents/research/celticlanguages/englishprotocelticwordlist.pdf

n.b. FWIW, historicity of cognates indisputable: ubiquitous v/b consonant shift links W.caucasian Slavic / Sorbian tongues with E.caucasian Soghdian via Syriac/Aramaic - think Greek hero "Paris"; "Parisi" tribe; Persian "Pharsi/Farsi" speakers and Varingian/Pharingi/Franci Pontic-Volga boatmen. Cultural hegemony is fluid, v.subjective across time and space; no modern ethnic hegemony ought be inferred.

May I respecfully suggest a related pIE non-Latin alphabet example for "cingeto-" /protoCeltic 'kengo' : Uyghurjin: ᠴᠢᠩᠭᠢᠰ ᠬᠠᠭᠠᠨ (čingis haan) Persian: چنگیزخان (Čangiz-xân) or Ghengis Khan (Lord of the House of Khan, from Persian خان • (xân) meaning "inn," a hostel on the Soghdian Silk Routes, via Mongolian script derived from Roman era Aramaic-Syriac; with Asian 正 • (Zheong, jeong) cognates meaning "5", ie cinq, symbolizing the perfection of (ie domination over) the '4" cardinal directions, a common conquest-patronym, see Ἀχαιμενίδης, literally 'lords of all they survey.'

Indeed familiar English terms such as king from 'konig' (related Lithuanian 'kunigaikščiai' Chinese 王 Wang "King" 'ruler' vertical stroke superimposed over 3 horizontal strokes signifying Heaven, Men, Earth; similarly Greek Ξέρξης from Persian 𐏋 [xšāyaθiya] whence Caesar/Tzar/Shah) and hegemony from 'hegumen' (Ukrainian Ігумен Georgian იღუმენი  Coptic- Aegyptos - Ⲕⲟⲙⲙⲟⲥ Al-Kommos Arabic غوميز gomes, whence perhaps Iberian 'Gomez', derivation of Greek Ighoumenos, meaning abbot or dean of a Byzantine Orthodox monastery; and rank of hetjman гетьман of Zaporizhian Cossacks under Ottomans) came down to us via this very same culture of encounter between groups acquiring a shared language in obeisance to whatever ritual contemporaneously prevailed, in an anthropology of subjective economic value at the margins, as proposed by 19th C sociologist Carl_Menger vs the rigid Prussian utilitarianism of the German Kaiser that metastacized into full-blown fascism in the century that followed.

MrsKrishan (talk) 20:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I feel sure that your suggestions are very good, but having read the above I have no idea what you are actually asking for! Could you explain more clearly and preferably attempt to get consensus for your proposed changes? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:27, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

How far back does the spelling "Vercingetorix" attest to?
When was the first known use of the word "Vercingetorix" - wouldn't be surprise if the spelling "Vercingetorix" doesn't go back very far. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.71.1.254 (talk) 21:48, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Julius Caesar. Old enough?

Why does it read: "This depiction is idealized and/or symbolic" under the picture of the Gold sater of Vercingetorix
Why not write: "This depiction is idealized and/or symbolic" even moreso under all the other article captions of Vercingetorix? - especially as they are much later dipictions. Why pick on the Gold sater showing a dipiction of Vercingetorix much nearer to when he was alive. Latterday Vercingetorix dipictions favoured by Francophones seem overly Germanic-like rather than Gallo-Roman. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.71.1.254 (talk) 22:01, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * That's what the source says about coins bearing his image. clpo13(talk) 22:08, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Revolt
Vercingetorix's defense of Gaul, or France, should not be classified as a "revolt" because France and Rome were two separate nations at the time. A revolt occurs when people take up arms against their own government. In this case, Vercingetorix was defending his own country against foreign invasion. Even the Roman government recognized the sovereignty of Gaul until Caesar defied the Senate's order not to attack. Ctmuva2000 (talk) 19:08, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Vercingetorix war against Rome began with him deposing his uncle Gobanitio, King of Gergovia. Gobanitio was one of the Gaulish chiefs who had submitted to Caesar. Therefore Vercingetorix's revolt was against both Gaulish and Roman authorities. Mediatech492 (talk) 19:30, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Aedilia Paullias
I was thinking of adding a section to the page about Aedilia Paullias, Vercingetorix's daughter, as there is no wikipedia article on her though she witnessed the invasion of Gaul by Julius Caesar. WVGman 11:59, 9 October 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WVGman (talk • contribs)
 * I don't know how much information is available on her; but if there is enough to make her notable, then it might be better to create a separate article for her. Mediatech492 (talk) 16:53, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Contradiction in death section
"Vercingetorix was imprisoned in the Tullianum in Rome for almost six years before being publicly displayed in the first of Caesar's four triumphs in 46 BC. He was ceremonially strangled at the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus after the triumph. A plaque in the Tullianum indicates that he was beheaded in 49 BC."

These two sentences contradict each other. How about this rewording: "sources differ with regard to when he was killed.....However, a plaque...."? Dhalamh (talk) 08:59, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Vercingetorix


text:
User:Lumos3/monobook.css

/* standard link colors */ a { color: #0000FF; } a:visited { color: #7F007F; } a:active, a.new { color: #FF0000; } a.interwiki, a.external { color: #3366BB; } a.stub { color: #772233; } a.mw-userlink[title="User:YOUR_NAME"] { background-color: #ff7700; color: #ffffff; }

Lumos3 (talk) 16:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

title: User:Lumos3/monobook.css


text:
User:VampWillow/Images

Images by Vamp Willow on wikipedia include:

Suggested concept for new wikisource logo (to replace iceberg logo given that the Project Sourceberg has been superceded)

title: User:VampWillow/Images


text:
User:Pqs

http://quintanasegui.com

title: User:Pqs