text:
Edward MacDowell

Edward Alexander MacDowell (December 18, 1860 – January 23, 1908) was an American composer and pianist of the late Romantic period. He was best known for his second piano concerto and his piano suites Woodland Sketches, Sea Pieces and New England Idylls. Woodland Sketches includes his most popular short piece, "To a Wild Rose". In 1904 he was one of the first seven Americans honored by membership in the American Academy of Arts and Letters.

Studies
Edward MacDowell was born in New York City to Thomas MacDowell, a Manhattan milk dealer, and Frances “Fanny” Mary Knapp. He received his first piano lessons from Juan Buitrago, a Colombian violinist who was living with the MacDowell family at the time. He also received music lessons from friends of Buitrago, including the Cuban pianist Pablo Desverine and Venezuelan pianist and composer Teresa Carreño. MacDowell's mother decided to take her son to Paris, France, where in 1877 he was admitted to the Paris Conservatory after receiving a competitive scholarship for international students.

After two years of studies under Antoine François Marmontel and being at the top of his class, he continued his education at Dr. Hoch's Conservatory in Frankfurt, Germany, where he studied piano with Carl Heymann and composition with Joachim Raff. When Franz Liszt and Clara Schumann visited the conservatory in early 1880 and attended a recital of student compositions, MacDowell performed Robert Schumann's Quintet, Op. 44 along with a transcription of a Liszt symphonic poem. Next year, he paid a visit to Liszt in Weimar and performed some of his own compositions. Liszt recommended MacDowell's First Modern Suite, Op. 10 to Allgemeiner Deutscher Musikverein for performance and also introduced him to Leipzig music publishers at Breitkopf & Härtel.

After finishing his studies in 1881, MacDowell remained for a while in Germany, where he composed, performed on stage and gave piano lessons. He taught piano at various places in Darmstadt during 1881–1884, including the Schmitt's Akademie für Tonkunst (now known as the Akademie für Tonkunst), and in Wiesbaden, 1884–1888.

Marriage and family
In 1884, MacDowell married Marian Griswold Nevins, an American who had been one of his piano students in Frankfurt for three years. About the time that MacDowell composed a piano piece titled Cradle Song, Marian suffered an illness that resulted in her being unable to bear children.

Career
In Germany, the MacDowells settled first in Frankfurt, then in Darmstadt, and finally, in Wiesbaden. From 1885 to 1888 MacDowell devoted himself almost exclusively to composition. That brought financial difficulties, and he decided to return to the United States in the autumn of 1888. He made Boston his new home, where he became well known as a concert pianist and piano teacher. He performed in recitals with the Boston Symphony Orchestra and other American musical organizations.

The MacDowells lived in Boston until 1896, when Edward was appointed professor of music at Columbia University, the first music professor in the university's history. He was personally invited to Columbia University by its president Seth Low to create a music department. He stayed at Columbia until 1904. In addition to composing and teaching, from 1896 to 1898 he directed the Mendelssohn Glee Club. MacDowell composed some music for the group to perform.

In 1896, Marian MacDowell purchased Hillcrest Farm, to serve as their summer residence in Peterborough, New Hampshire. MacDowell found his creativity flourished in the beautiful rural setting. His compositions included two piano concertos, two orchestral suites, four symphonic poems, four piano sonatas, piano suites, and songs. He also published dozens of piano transcriptions of mostly 18th century pre-piano keyboard pieces.

From 1896 to 1898, MacDowell also published 13 piano pieces and 4 part songs under the pseudonym of Edgar Thorn. These compositions were not mentioned in Lawrence Gilman's 1909 biography of MacDowell. They were listed without opus numbers in MacDowell's Critical and Historical Essays (1912) and in John F. Porte's Edward MacDowell (1922). They were listed with opus numbers in Oscar Sonneck's Catalogue of First Editions of Edward MacDowell (1917).

MacDowell was also a noted teacher of the piano and music composition. His students included James Dunn, E. Ray Goetz, Frances Tarbox and John Pierce Langs, a student from Buffalo, New York, with whom he became very close friends. Langs was also close to noted Canadian pianist Harold Bradley, and both championed MacDowell's piano compositions. The linguist Edward Sapir was also among his students. MacDowell was often stressed in his position at Columbia University, due to both administrative duties and growing conflict with the new university president Nicholas Murray Butler around a proposed two-course requirement in fine arts for all undergraduate students, as well as creation of combined Department of Fine Arts overseeing music, sculpture, painting and comparative literature. After Butler stripped the academic affairs voting rights of Columbia faculty members in the arts and accused MacDowell of unprofessional conduct and sloppy teaching, in February 1904, MacDowell abruptly announced his resignation, raising an unfortunate public controversy.

After stepping down from Columbia professorship, MacDowell fell into depression and his health rapidly deteriorated. E. Douglas Bomberger's biography notes that MacDowell suffered from seasonal affective disorder throughout his life, and often made decisions with negative implications in the darkest months of the year. Bomberger advances a new theory for the sudden decline of MacDowell's health: bromide poisoning, which was sometimes mistaken for paresis at the time, as was the case with MacDowell's death certificate. Indeed, MacDowell had long suffered from insomnia, and potassium bromide or sodium bromide were the standard treatment for that condition, and in fact were used in many common remedies of the day. MacDowell also was in contact with bromides through his avid hobby of photography.

A 1904 accident in which MacDowell was run over by a Hansom cab on Broadway may have contributed to his growing psychiatric disorder and resulting dementia. Of his final years, Lawrence Gilman, a contemporary, described: "His mind became as that of a little child. He sat quietly, day after day, in a chair by a window, smiling patiently from time to time at those about him, turning the pages of a book of fairy tales that seemed to give him a definite pleasure, and greeting with a fugitive gleam of recognition certain of his more intimate friends."

The Mendelssohn Glee Club raised money to help the MacDowells. Friends launched a public appeal to raise funds for his care; among the signers were Horatio Parker, Victor Herbert, Arthur Foote, George Whitefield Chadwick, Frederick Converse, Andrew Carnegie, J. P. Morgan, New York Mayor Seth Low, and former President Grover Cleveland.

Marian MacDowell cared for her husband to the end of his life. In 1907, the composer and his wife founded MacDowell (artists' residency and workshop) (formerly known as The MacDowell Colony) by deeding the Hillcrest Farm to the newly established Edward MacDowell Association. MacDowell died in 1908 in New York City and was buried at his beloved Hillcrest Farm.

Legacy and honors
In 1896, Princeton University awarded MacDowell an honorary degree of Doctor of Music. In 1899, he was elected as the president of the Society of American Musicians and Composers (New York). In 1904, he became one of the first seven people chosen for membership in the American Academy of Arts and Letters. After this experience, the MacDowells envisioned establishing a residency for artists near their summer home in Peterborough, New Hampshire.

The MacDowell (artists' residency and workshop), a multidisciplinary artists' retreat, continued to honor the composer's memory after his death by supporting the work of other artists in an interdisciplinary environment. With time, it created an important part of MacDowell's legacy. Marian MacDowell led the Edward MacDowell Association and Colony for more than 25 years, strengthening its initial endowment by resuming her piano performances and creating a wide circle of donors, especially among women's clubs and musical sororities and around 400 MacDowell music clubs. The Edward MacDowell Association backed many American composers, including Aaron Copland, Edgard Varese, Roger Sessions, William Schuman, Walter Piston, Samuel Barber, Elliott Carter, and Leonard Bernstein, in the beginning phases of their careers by awarding them residencies, fellowships, and the Edward MacDowell Medal. Between 1925 and 1956, Copland received a fellowship eight times; in 1961 he was awarded the Edward MacDowell Medal, and he served himself for 34 years on the board of Association and Colony. Amy Beach was at MacDowell on fellowships from its beginning for many summers while she was in her middle to later career.

After his death, MacDowell was considered as a great, internationally known American composer. In 1940, MacDowell was one of five American composers honored in a series of United States postage stamps. The other four composers were Stephen Foster, John Philip Sousa, Victor Herbert, and Ethelbert Nevin. However, as the twentieth century progressed, his fame was eclipsed by such American composers as Charles Ives, Aaron Copland, and Roy Harris. In 1950s, Gilbert Chase, an American music historian and critic, wrote, "When Edward MacDowell appeared on the scene, many Americans felt that here at last was 'the great American composer' awaited by the nation. But MacDowell was not a great composer. At his best he was a gifted miniaturist with an individual manner. Creatively, he looked toward the past, not toward the future. He does not mark the beginning of a new epoch in American music, but the closing of a fading era, the fin de siecle decline of the genteel tradition which had dominated American art since the days of Hopkinson and Hewitt." In the 1970s, John Gillespie reaffirmed Chase's opinion by writing that MacDowell's place in time "accounts for his decreasing popularity; he does not belong with the great Romantics, Schumann and Brahms, but neither can be regarded as a precursor of twentieth century music." Other critics, such as Virgil Thomson, maintained that MacDowell's legacy would be reconsidered and regain a place proper to its significance in the history of American music.

As romantic tradition in music never lost its relevance and importance, the twenty-first century brought a reassessment of MacDowell's legacy not only as a talented piano virtuoso and piano composer, but also as one of America's preeminent composers. On February 14, 2000, he was inducted into a national Classical Music Hall of Fame. MacDowell's two concertos are now perceived as the "most important works in the genre by an American composer other than Gershwin." His four sonatas, two orchestral suites and multiple solo piano pieces are performed and recorded.

Works
The following lists were compiled from information in collections of sheet music, Lawrence Gilman's Edward MacDowell: A Study (1908), Oscar Sonneck's Catalogue of First Editions of Edward MacDowell (1917), and John F. Porte's Edward MacDowell (1922).

Published compositions for piano, a complete listing

 * Op. 1 Amourette (1896) (as Edgar Thorn)
 * Op. 2 In Lilting Rhythm (1897) (as Edgar Thorn)
 * Op. 4 Forgotten Fairy Tales (1897) (as Edgar Thorn)
 * Op. 7 Six Fancies (1898) (as Edgar Thorn)
 * In 1895, an "Op. 8 Waltz" for piano by MacDowell was listed by Breitkopf & Härtel, but no price was shown, and the piece was not published.
 * Op. 10 First Modern Suite (1883)
 * Op. 13 Prelude and Fugue (1883)
 * Op. 14 Second Modern Suite (1883)
 * Op. 15 Piano Concerto No. 1 (1885)
 * Op. 16 Serenata (1883)
 * Op. 17 Two Fantastic Pieces (1884)
 * Op. 18 Two Compositions (1884)
 * Op. 19 Forest Idylls (1884)
 * Op. 20 Three Poems (1886) duets
 * Op. 21 Moon Pictures (1886) duets after Hans Christian Andersen's "Picture-book without Pictures"
 * Op. 23 Piano Concerto No. 2 (1890)
 * Op. 24 Four Compositions (1887)
 * Op. 28 Six Idylls after Goethe (1887)
 * Op. 31 Six Poems after Heine (1887,1901)
 * Op. 32 Four Little Poems (1888)
 * Op. 36 Etude de Concert (1889)
 * Op. 37 Les Orientales (1889)
 * Op. 38 Marionettes (1888,1901)
 * Op. 39 Twelve Studies (1890)
 * Op. 45 Sonata Tragica (1893)
 * Op. 46 Twelve Virtuoso Studies (1894)
 * Op. 49 Air and Rigaudon (1894)
 * Op. 50 Sonata Eroica (1895) "Flos regum Arthurus"
 * Op. 51 Woodland Sketches (1896) (for Robert La Fosse's ballet, see Woodland Sketches (ballet))
 * Op. 55 Sea Pieces (1898)
 * Op. 57 Third Sonata (1900)
 * Op. 59 Fourth Sonata (1901)
 * Op. 61 Fireside Tales (1902)
 * Op. 62 New England Idylls (1902)

MacDowell published two books of Technical Exercises for piano; piano duet transcriptions of Hamlet and Ophelia for orchestra (Op. 22); First Suite for orchestra (Op. 42); and a piano solo version of Op. 42, No. 4, The Shepherdess' Song, renamed The Song of the Shepherdess. MacDowell composed his First Piano Concerto in the key of A minor in 1885 and published it as his Op.15. It is in three movements: Maestoso - Allegro con fuoco, Andante tranquillo, and Presto

Published compositions for orchestra (complete)

 * Op. 15 Piano Concerto No. 1 (1885)
 * Op. 22 Hamlet and Ophelia (1885)
 * Op. 23 Piano Concerto No. 2 (1890)
 * Op. 25 Lancelot and Elaine (1888)
 * Op. 29 Lamia (1908)
 * Op. 30 Two Fragments after the Song of Roland (1891) I. The Saracens - II. The Lovely Alda
 * Op. 35 Romance for Violoncello and Orchestra (1888)
 * Op. 42 First Suite (1891–1893) I. In a Haunted Forest - II. Summer Idyl - III. In October - IV. The Shepherdess' Song - V. Forest Spirits
 * Op. 48 Second ("Indian") Suite (1897) I. Legend - II. Love Song - III. In War-time - IV. Dirge - V. Village Festival

Published songs

 * Op. 3 Love and Time and The Rose and the Gardener, for male chorus (1897) (as Edgar Thorn)
 * Op. 5 The Witch, for male chorus (1898) (as Edgar Thorn)
 * Op. 6 War Song, for male chorus (1898) (as Edgar Thorn)
 * Op. 9 Two Old Songs, for voice and piano (1894) I. Deserted - II. Slumber Song
 * Op. 11 and 12 An Album of Five Songs, for voice and piano (1883) I. My Love and I - II. You Love Me Not - III. In the Skies - IV. Night-Song - V. Bands of Roses
 * Op. 26 From an Old Garden, for voice and piano (1887) I. The Pansy - II. The Myrtle - III. The Clover - IV. The Yellow Daisy - V. The Blue Bell - VI. The Mignonette
 * Op. 27 Three Songs, for male chorus (1890) I. In the Starry Sky Above Us - II. Springtime - III. The Fisherboy
 * Op. 33 Three Songs, for voice and piano (1894) I. Prayer - II. Cradle Hymn - III. Idyl
 * Op. 34 Two Songs, for voice and piano (1889) I. Menie - II. My Jean
 * Op. 40 Six Love Songs, for voice and piano (1890) I. Sweet, Blue-eyed Maid - II. Sweetheart, Tell Me - III. Thy Beaming Eyes - IV. For Love's Sweet Sake - V. O Lovely Rose - VI. I Ask but This
 * Op. 41 Two Songs, for male chorus (1890) I. Cradle Song - II. Dance of the Gnomes
 * Op. 43 Two Northern Songs, for mixed chorus (1891) I. The Brook - II. Slumber Song
 * Op. 44 Barcarolle, for mixed chorus with four-hand piano accompaniment (1892)
 * Op. 47 Eight Songs, for voice and piano (1893) I. The Robin Sings in the Apple Tree - II. Midsummer Lullaby - III. Folk Song - IV. Confidence - V. The West Wind Croons in the Cedar Trees - VI. In the Woods - VII. The Sea - VIII. Through the Meadow
 * Two Songs from the Thirteenth Century, for male chorus (1897) I. Winter Wraps his Grimmest Spell - II. As the Gloaming Shadows Creep
 * Op. 52 Three Choruses, for male voices (1897) I. Hush, hush! - II. From the Sea - III. The Crusaders
 * Op. 53 Two Choruses, for male voices (1898) I. Bonnie Ann - II. The Collier Lassie
 * Op. 54 Two Choruses, for male voices (1898) I. A Ballad of Charles the Bold - II. Midsummer Clouds
 * Op. 56 Four Songs, for voice and piano (1898) I. Long Ago - II. The Swan Bent Low to the Lily - III. A Maid Sings Light - IV. As the Gloaming Shadows Creep
 * Op. 58 Three Songs, for voice and piano (1899) I. Constancy - II. Sunrise - III. Merry Maiden Spring
 * Op. 60 Three Songs, for voice and piano (1902) I. Tyrant Love - II. Fair Springtide - III. To the Golden Rod
 * Summer Wind, for women's voices (1902)
 * Two College Songs, for women's voices (1907) I. Alma Mater - II. At Parting

Selected recordings

 * Piano Concerto No. 2: Van Cliburn, Chicago Symphony Orchestra, Walter Hendl (1960)
 * Piano Concerto No. 1 and Piano Concerto No. 2: Donna Amato, London Philharmonic Orchestra, Paul Freeman (1985)
 * Woodland Sketches, Op.51, Sea Pieces, Op.55, Fireside Tales, Op.61, New England Idyls, Op.62: James Barbagallo (1993)
 * Piano Sonata No.4 "Keltic", Op.59, Forgotten Fairytales, Op.4, Six poems after Heine, Op.31, Twelve Virtuoso Studies, Op.46 : James Barbagallo
 * Étude de Concert, Op.36, Second Modern Suite, Op.14, Serenata, Op.16, Two Fantasy Pieces, Op.17, Twelve Études, Op.39 : James Barbagallo
 * Piano Music by Edward MacDowell, Sandra Carlock (2005)
 * Heroic Tales: Piano Music of Edward MacDowell, Fred Karpoff (2002)

title: Edward MacDowell


text:
Antisymmetric tensor

In mathematics and theoretical physics, a tensor is antisymmetric on (or with respect to) an index subset if it alternates sign (+/−) when any two indices of the subset are interchanged. The index subset must generally either be all covariant or all contravariant.

For example, $$T_{ijk\dots} = -T_{jik\dots} = T_{jki\dots} = -T_{kji\dots} = T_{kij\dots} = -T_{ikj\dots}$$ holds when the tensor is antisymmetric with respect to its first three indices.

If a tensor changes sign under exchange of each pair of its indices, then the tensor is completely (or totally) antisymmetric. A completely antisymmetric covariant tensor field of order $$k$$ may be referred to as a differential $k$-form, and a completely antisymmetric contravariant tensor field may be referred to as a $k$-vector field.

Antisymmetric and symmetric tensors
A tensor A that is antisymmetric on indices $$i$$ and $$j$$ has the property that the contraction with a tensor B that is symmetric on indices $$i$$ and $$j$$ is identically 0.

For a general tensor U with components $$U_{ijk\dots}$$ and a pair of indices $$i$$ and $$j,$$ U has symmetric and antisymmetric parts defined as:

Similar definitions can be given for other pairs of indices. As the term "part" suggests, a tensor is the sum of its symmetric part and antisymmetric part for a given pair of indices, as in $$U_{ijk\dots} = U_{(ij)k\dots} + U_{[ij]k\dots}.$$
 * $$U_{(ij)k\dots}=\frac{1}{2}(U_{ijk\dots}+U_{jik\dots})$$ || || (symmetric part)
 * $$U_{[ij]k\dots}=\frac{1}{2}(U_{ijk\dots}-U_{jik\dots})$$ || ||(antisymmetric part).
 * }
 * $$U_{[ij]k\dots}=\frac{1}{2}(U_{ijk\dots}-U_{jik\dots})$$ || ||(antisymmetric part).
 * }

Notation
A shorthand notation for anti-symmetrization is denoted by a pair of square brackets. For example, in arbitrary dimensions, for an order 2 covariant tensor M, $$M_{[ab]} = \frac{1}{2!}(M_{ab} - M_{ba}),$$ and for an order 3 covariant tensor T, $$T_{[abc]} = \frac{1}{3!}(T_{abc}-T_{acb}+T_{bca}-T_{bac}+T_{cab}-T_{cba}).$$

In any 2 and 3 dimensions, these can be written as $$\begin{align} M_{[ab]} &= \frac{1}{2!} \, \delta_{ab}^{cd} M_{cd}, \\[2pt] T_{[abc]} &= \frac{1}{3!} \, \delta_{abc}^{def} T_{def}. \end{align}$$ where $$\delta_{ab\dots}^{cd\dots}$$ is the generalized Kronecker delta, and the Einstein summation convention is in use.

More generally, irrespective of the number of dimensions, antisymmetrization over $$p$$ indices may be expressed as $$T_{[a_1 \dots a_p]} = \frac{1}{p!} \delta_{a_1 \dots a_p}^{b_1 \dots b_p} T_{b_1 \dots b_p}.$$

In general, every tensor of rank 2 can be decomposed into a symmetric and anti-symmetric pair as: $$T_{ij} = \frac{1}{2}(T_{ij} + T_{ji}) + \frac{1}{2}(T_{ij} - T_{ji}).$$

This decomposition is not in general true for tensors of rank 3 or more, which have more complex symmetries.

Examples
Totally antisymmetric tensors include:

 * Trivially, all scalars and vectors (tensors of order 0 and 1) are totally antisymmetric (as well as being totally symmetric).
 * The electromagnetic tensor, $$F_{\mu\nu}$$ in electromagnetism.
 * The Riemannian volume form on a pseudo-Riemannian manifold.

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

title: Antisymmetric tensor


text:
High North Alliance

The High North Alliance (Høge Nord Alliansen) is an umbrella organisation of several fishing, whaling and Nordic municipal councils. The organisation objectives are, it says, "to protect the rights of whalers, sealers and fishermen to harvest renewable resources in accordance with the principle of sustainable management."

The alliance was founded in 1991 in response to calls from environmentalists to prohibit completely commercial whaling, and, from more radical groups, calls to prohibit the killing of marine mammals for any purpose. The alliance is organised by a governing committee of six members, three from Norway, and one each from the Faroe Islands, Greenland and Iceland. The alliance is funded by membership fees, and from grants from organisations such as the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (founded by Norway, Iceland, Greenland, and the Faroe Islands in 1992) and the Regional Development Committee for Northern Norway.

Activities of the Alliance include lobbying the largely sympathetic Norwegian government for increases in Norway's whaling quota, promoting studies into methods of more humane whaling, lobbying the International Whaling Commission into relaxing the whaling moratorium, and responding to campaigns from anti-whaling groups such as the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society and Greenpeace.

title: High North Alliance


text:
Talk:Grand Slam (tennis)

NCYGS mutating into CYGS...makes sense?
I feel I have a legit question. The way these terms (ncygs and cygs) are understood and applied here in Wikipedia would suggest that ncygs can be achieved, but then could also mutate into CYGS and cease to exist? I don't feel such approach makes sense. If something is achieved as an accomplishment, how can it be erased? So my question would be, is this logical? Budge won 4 slams in a row from 1937 Wim until 1938 French and that was obviously NCYGS. He won another one, 1938 Wim to make it 5 in a row. What was that? Nothing? Ok. He then won 1938 USO, his 6th in a row. And since 4 were aligned in 1938, it's a CYGS in 1938 and then nothing else is talked about, but is it really accurate to disregard his wins at 1938 French and 1938 Wim? When he won trophies there, on both occasions he was the holder of all 4 slam titles and was credited with NCYGS at the 1938 French. And yet that is taken away from him? I understand the logic which would say that we shouldn't do double counting and have overlapping streaks but OTOH it's true that Budge was the holder of all 4 slam titles on 3 occasions and one of those was 1938 US which is CYGS. The way NCYGS is assumed here is that it is kinda standalone streak that you can achieve but also that can "disappear" once more prestigious streak (CYGS) is completed? So what would this mean is that a hypothetical CYGS winner, who won 4 in a row, would be equally praised as Budge, despite Budge being the holder of all slam titles on 3 occasions, his own 1938 US triumph but also earlier French and Wim wins. I feel the meaning of NCYGS should be more in line with "holder of all 4 titles". Imo Laver won 2 CYGS, Budge 1. Cygs should mean "holding all 4 slams by winning last slam in a season". And when it comes to NCYGS, Budge won 2 and Djokovic 1, you hold them all, regardless of calendar. By applying this logical principle we could also have a direct comparison between cygs and ncygs. Statistical probability to achieve ncygs to cygs is 3-1 so cygs is by definition 3 times more prestigious. It would entail "3 pts" for CYGS and "1 pt for NCYGS" scheme so Laver would have 6 pts, Budge 5 pts and Djokovic 1 point. That's really a proper comparison of their cygs related achievements. 93.142.155.12 (talk) 10:52, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * IMO either all instances of overlapping NCGS are included, or none are. No middle ground here. There was a dicussion about it before, and it was agreed that the latter option was better for the article. I'm fine either way, honestly. ABC paulista (talk) 16:33, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I understand the issue of double counting but ultimately I think you made a wrong decision. You have double counting in other categories. E.g. number of slam titles at AO/FO/Wim/USO and then next to that, you put all-time slam list which is the situation of double counting. Is it not?
 * NCYGS in itself isn't the ultimate goal, it can be a subachievement of CYGS. It should just mean "holding all 4 slam titles but not in the same season".
 * Otherwise by you create a situation in which any NCYGS made of 4 slams and NCYGS made of 7 slams are worth exactly 1 NCYGS, being the same value? imo that is iinaccurate. One is 75% bigger, they can't be the same. aand ifyou have a streak of 7 slams, who gets to decide which slam are part of the NCYGS streak? Why are 1-2-3-4 part of the streak yet 4-5-6-7 are not? Seems quite arbitrarily. Also ncygs being achieved and then de-achieved is totally absurd, the Budge situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.142.138.8 (talk) 07:59, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The objectve is not to "qualify" or to "compare values" between achievementes, we don't tally ourselves the achivementes except some reliable sources do. The objective isn't to "give points" to the achivements in order to "quantify their worth", is jsut to inform who achieved what and in which way it was done. You could use some logic to state that something has more worth than the other, but unless some souces back-up such distinction, it won't be nothing more than WP:OR and WP:POV. ABC paulista (talk) 16:30, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

 * I would reall like to know the logic behid this approach you employ here regarding cygs and nygs. I have two questions I hope they get answered.
 * 1. How is it possible that certain achievement (such as Budge's 1938 FO ncygs, and 1938 Wim extended ncygs) gets "de-achieved" once he completes cygs in 1938? Isn't that absurd? There would (at least in modern times) newspaper headlines about him doing ncygs and then after he does even better, winning CYGS, the ncygs is erased? Imo there is no basis in reality for this. It's like counting finals, but then if a player wins the title, you don't count the finals he made. It's logical absurdity. Makes zero sense.
 * 2. Achievements need to be equal. Each and every CYGS is the same, we know what it is stands for, all 4 slams in a season, usually (but not necessarily) ending with USO. Fine. But is every ncygs the same? This page credits Navratilova with ncygs for her 6 titles, it credits Djokovic for his 4, and it's somehow the same? How can 4 and 6 be the same? Isn't that Original research or personal opinion? Someone in Wikipedia deciding that it sometimes takes 4 and so sometimes 6 slam for ncygs. Imo ncygs is every instance you hold all 4 slam titles (other than year end which is CYGS). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.143.121.15 (talk) 12:33, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * About the first point, it's not about "de-achieving" something, but about one bigger achievement being contained inside a lesser one. It's not like their NCGS is being forgotten, but since the CYGS takes precedence overall, it was deemed that excluding these cases from the NCGS subsection, while citing the instances that achieved a NCGS streak alongside a CYGS on its subsection would better clarify to the readed the distinction between the NCGS and the CYGS.
 * About the second point, we are only following what the sources state, and the majority of the sources don't make the distinction between the size between the NCYGS streaks, not even ITF itself does so. So actually, differentiating the disticnt NCGS streaks could be considered as WP:OR or WP:POV since there's no relevant sourcing doing so. ABC paulista (talk) 17:22, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Allison Danzig
According to his article, "He is credited with popularizing the term "Grand Slam", ...".

Worth a mention here? --  Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  01:14, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * No, because the blurb on his article was not sourced properly. The Hall of Fame only mentions the term "Ace." Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:33, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Alan Gould first used the term Grand Slam on July 18, 1933, not Danzig. https://www.newspapers.com/clip/3052793/moberly-monitor-index/ Tennishistory1877 (talk) 11:22, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Grand Slam article, not a lesser tournament article
We have to be a little careful on wording here. This is an article on the term "Grand Slam" which of course has a couple different meanings. But historically, contemporarily, and by sourcing, the French Championship got it's international major label in 1925 (agreed to in 1923). The other three events since inception by sourcing. Yes, the ITF finally persuaded the US to join in 1923, but it didn't change those other three events. It basically added the French to the same level by getting it to abandon it's "French Only" entry. So "official" by the ITF but the US Nationals was always official to most, as was the Australasian and Wimbledon. And todays sourcing shows as much. Leaving in the lead of Grand Slam (tennis) the lesser French event's date and not mentioning the start of its Grand Slam status is not correct and misleads readers. I fixed things but it was reverted and I brought it back with this post. If they ever added something like the China Open as a fifth Grand Slam event, we wouldn't be talking about players like Marat Safin winning a Major in 2004. We would say in the lead that the China Open event became a Major in 2030. And the background on the pre-Grand Slam French Open is actually off-topic in this article but I didn't change that aspect. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:19, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * First of all, you can't just "bring it back", because the WP:BRD policy states that the article must stay on its original state (pre-WP:BOLD, reverted state), until the issue is solved. Second, in my opinion you're wrong there because all four torunaments were designated as "official championships" by the ITF at around the same time in the 20s, and that designation eventually "evolved" to become known as "Grand Slam tournaments" nowadays. The major designation wasn't given to these tournaments since their inception because this concept didn't existed back them, but was retroactively attributed to their previous editions, except for the French one since their previous editions were for members-only. Regardless, Roland Garros themselves consider the current competition to be a direct continuation of the members-only French Championship, so it's part of Roland Garros history regardless of its Major designation, and this fact must be properly acknowledged. Third, if the China Open become a Major in 2030, we would have to cite its history pre-Major desgnation, because the Tournaments' section exist to inform this timeline, regardless of when they received the Major designation. And who knows, maybe the Major designation would be retroactively attributed to the previous editions of this competition, like what happened to the US Championships, Australian Championships and Wimbledon. We can only speculate. ABC paulista (talk) 02:36, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes it was retroactively given, of course. But's it's universally sourced as to when it started and this article is dead wrong in the lead and is POV. The US, Australian, and Wimbledon are completely different. I don't know how you can think that they weren't. They were Majors before the ITF brought them into its fold. And this isn't an article about French Open history, it's an article about Grand Slams, which the French Open became in 1925 per every source imaginable. It's why our article at List of Grand Slam men's singles champions is the way it is.. with a listing of past winners as a curtesy but labeled as non-Grand Slam Tournament winners. If you want to keep the article this way because this is how you truly believe it to be, then we do have a huge issue. It is wrong as it is written. It is misleading to our readers, especially with regards to the lead. I haven't tagged it as such because I figure some compromise could be reached with Tennis Project members. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:40, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The US, Australian, and Wimbledon hold a high prestige since their inception, but they couldn't be considered as "majors" because this concept didn't exist back then. It was just "invented" (in tennis standardads and glossary) when the ITF designated them as "official championships" in the 20s, and no amount of retroactivity is able to change this fact, so it must be acknowledged since the sources do so. And, by recognizing that all current majors were designated as majors by ITF on the 20s, it automatically includes Roland Garros so it's not necessary to say that it became a major after opening for international players in every single section. Just once is enough.
 * When talking about the tournaments, especilally on the proper section, it's necessary to talk about their inception and history to contextualize their prestige and upbringing, and for Roland Garros this means talking a little about the pre-1925 French Championships, because officially the current tournament is a continuation of that one that was created on 1981, and the inaugural year is one important piece of information that cannot be left out, so the pre-1925 French Championships must be contextualized regardless of its current prestige.
 * If you want to acknowledge in this article that the US, Australian, and Wimbledon were always prestigious and that the major designation was retroactively awarded to all pre-1925 editions of them, I support this. But stating that they always were considered as majors is not true at all, and stating such is misleading. Prestigious ≠ being Majors, especially in the Grand Slam context. ABC paulista (talk) 16:40, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * My original changes did just that. I didn't remove anything I just added that info to the French. And in actuality, Wimbledon was downgraded in 1923/1925. It lost status. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:46, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Your original changes included info that's already stated on the article. The phrase for the French Open is already covered by the phrase  (the term "they" already includes Roland Garros). And the phrase  you included on the French Open subsection is already covered by a whole paragraph on the same section: . So, both your inclusions were unnecessary redundancies. About Wimbledon's status, that's another discussion for another day, it's not pertinent right now. ABC paulista (talk) 21:57, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Fyunck(click): In this edit you changed "but they were not all officially designated majors until 1925" to "but some were not officially designated majors until 1925." It is my understanding that all four championships were designated 'ILTF Official Championships' i.e. official majors in 1923, but that Wimbledon had already been an official major as the 'World Grass Court Championships' before then. The French Championships was the last of these tournaments to have the designation come into effect, in 1925, as the US Championships and Australian Championships had had their first editions as 'ILTF Official Championships' in 1924. So, "they were not all officially designated majors until 1925" would be correct, not "some were not", which implies more than one wasn't a major until 1925. Letcord (talk) 10:47, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * That time period is a bit jumbled. "Official major" is iffy at best. We have sources that have said none of them were "official" even in 1925 but that they morphed into the top four events over five or six years. And the US National Championships was considered the top of the heap by US tennis from it's inception... the ILTF had no power there. As the ILTF was out of money and losing countries hand over foot, they once again pretty much begged the US to join and solidify tennis. Compromises were made for no official world championships, that everything must always be in the English language, and that power need to be more evenly shared. Those changes were made in 1923, even for the French Championships. However the French Championships had an off year and didn't play in 1924 because Paris Olympic tennis took it's place. France didn't have to sign something different at another time... it was already done, just delayed because of the Olympics. So all were designated in those 1923 accords but France was simply not implemented until 1925 because of the Olympics. The wording can be a bit tricky with all these factoids. It could be written that "It wasn't until 1925 that all four events were being played as ILTF major tournaments." Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:38, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * That chronology seems correct, but yes hard to convey in half a sentence. Using "ILTF" in the lead when one paragraph above we use "ITF" would confuse people I think. How about "it wasn't until 1925 that all four were played as officially sanctioned majors."? Letcord (talk) 06:58, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm cool with that. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:32, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Fyunck(click), how's it going? I hope you enjoyed the Nadal show this morning: it was impressive, and Ruud spoke like a champ, and no doubt will play like one in the future. Anyway, you may have seen my bold edits to the lead and to the article: there was WAY too much information on the individual tournaments, which is silly since those have articles, and I am glad ABC paulista didn't revert those, but they did reinstate an entire full paragraph to the lead, with spurious bold print and excessive irrelevant information. Phrasing about "the greatest strength and size of field" etc. really have nothing to do with the Grand Slam per se, and obviously such claims require much more and better sourcing than this. But bigger than sourcing is of course the problem that all this info is just not relevant to this article. "The tournaments are overseen by ..."--who cares? That's not for here. ABC, you keep talking about BRD, but you have to start with WP:NPOV and WP:RS, and then WP:LEAD, which dictates that the lead summarizes relevant content from the main article. As I suggested in an edit summary, you would be much better off writing up a short article like Majors (tennis), where you can talk about that stuff, independent of the separate idea of the "Grand Slam", which isn't even a thing about tennis, or rules, or the game; it's an honorific that in no way compares to the UEFA Cup or the Ryder's Cup or the World Cup or whatever. Drmies (talk) 18:25, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * there were lots of discussions on what this article should comprise, since when the Grand Slam is talked about externally, it's either about the achievement or the tournaments, so it's interchangeably used to describe both (it could be argued that nowadays it's more commomly used to describe the latter that the former). Also, ITF itself state that The Grand Slam titles are the championships of Australia, France, Wimbledon and the United States of America and that they're Known collectively as “The Grand Slam Tournaments” or individually as a “Grand Slam Tournament, and both ATP and WTA use the Grand Slam as a tier for these tournaments on their calendar, so it's clear that the Grand Slam concept is used to describe several things that are too interconnected to the tournaments to be separated, thus WP:NPOV is respected because the article gives proper coverage for all the ways that the concept is used (I'd argue that the coverage about the Grand Slam-tier on the tours could be expanded, but I digress).
 * With all that said, I'm actually not totally against a split, but I doubt that we have enough content for such for now. We've came from a recent split, where all tables specific to some disciplines were moved to their respective disciplines' lists, so I believe that this article shoud be further expanded before thinking of splitting it. And of course, your blunt removal of content is not justifiable under a possible split proposal. If they have to be split, so be it, but the removal without an alternative option is not acceptable IMO. ABC paulista (talk) 20:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * ABC paulista, there is no "split"--there is only you reinserting material that is about the major tournaments, or Majors (tennis), into an article on "winning all four major tournaments". And I also want to note that you are NOT addressing the other problems I mentioned with your reinstatement of that fat and distracting paragraph in the lead, containing unsourced and POV material. I'm sorry, but you're really deflecting here with your answer. No, there is no need for expanding any of this: at heart, it needs to explain, in a paragraph, what a "Grand Slam" is, and a list of people who got it. The rest is all gravy. Drmies (talk) 23:30, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * you are assuming that the "Grand Slam" term is only about the achievement itself, which was originally true but that's not the case nowadays, since it also refers to the tournaments themselves and thus this also must be addessed, so I disagree with your opinion that those info you removed is not necessary/pertinent, and disagree that this article have significant unsourced and POV material, and even the ones that do exist should be resolved instead of being outright eliminated.
 * Your POV that this article should "at heart, it needs to explain, in a paragraph, what a "Grand Slam" is, and a list of people who got it", it goes against some guidelines such as WP:NOTPLOT and WP:NOTSTATS. Remeber that WP:CONTEXTMATTERS, so explaining why and when the "Grand Slam" concept was created, how it originated and evolved along the years, what tournaments comprise it and why they do, is just as important as listing the ones who "winning all four major tournaments". ABC paulista (talk) 00:06, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

"Pro Slam" in the history section
The history section in this article is for the history of the Grand Slam tournaments collectively, and the history of the Grand Slam achievement. The "Pro Slam" is an invented retrospective term that the players at the time never used, or indeed knew that they were "achieving". This is outlined in Major professional tennis tournaments before the Open Era: ""A player who won all three in a calendar year was considered in retrospect by later tennis writers to achieve a "Professional Grand Slam", or "Pro Slam""

And in this article itself in the Pro Slam section: ""From 1927 to 1967 ... three pro events later [were] considered by some tennis journalists to have been the "majors" of the pro tour""

Taking this into account, while we should (and do) have a section on the "Pro Slam" as a derived term from the Grand Slam, the retrospective history of the "Pro Slams", being not an official categorization or term used by players/authorities, is not relevant to the history of the Grand Slam/tournaments. Letcord (talk) 07:09, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I would think that in a history of the terminology it might be a good thing to mention the history of the pro majors also. Nothing massive, but a mention of the three tournaments. The history is a bit of a summary of later prose in the article. I was thinking it could be in the lead but the history section might be a better fit. A Grand Slam is also an invented retrospective term when used prior to the 1930s. But we use it just the same. I see also mentioned this in his summary. I do see your point, but I think I'd lean to keep it in. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:23, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * , the fact that the concept of the "Pro Slams" was retroactively inferred into these tournaments doesn't change the fact that they were seen as the premier events of the pro tour, akin to the Grand Slams in the amateur tour. The phrase could be rewritten to give less emphasis on the "Pro Slam" concept, but it's still important to cite them as professional equivalents to the then-amateur majors. ABC paulista (talk) 20:17, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Letcord, c'mon man, the section is not solely about the term of "Grand Slam", it's more of a short summary about a bit of everything and what you removed is not even about the "Pro Slam" term. It's there so readers can get the full picture that even though the professionals were banned for the amateur majors, they had something similar (major events) in their tours. It's just a simple sentence at the end of a relevant paragraph, it fits there. And I don't think it needs to be rewritten, it's perfect as it is. ForzaUV (talk) 01:28, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * My position remains the same but I'm outnumbered, so fine, re-add it if you wish. I'll be rewriting the "This status quo changed..." paragraph because way too much emphasis is put on the Wimbledon Pro, which while maybe being the straw that broke the camel's back for the LTA's position on amateur/pro status, was certainly not the sole reason they decided to rebel from the ITF and allow open tournaments; that decision was the result of years (decades) of building tensions around the issue, shamateurism etc. Letcord (talk) 02:06, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, that paragraph could benefit from expanding a bit, please do. ForzaUV (talk) 04:44, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Those two paragraphs are in good shape now I think, a pretty comprehensive summary of the amateur/professional → open history from the various encyclopedias/books referenced, and greater detail than the History of tennis section (what Open Era links to). Letcord (talk) 13:40, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks Letcord for you contribution, all looks good. With your and paulista's additions, I really think this is now one of the best tennis articles we have in Wikipedia. It's comprehensive, focused, well sourced and organized. There is a good chance it gets promoted to a featured article if nominated and I might do it in the future.ForzaUV (talk) 10:53, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Order of importance
Similar to what we have in seasonal tournament pages where the tournament winners are listed below the lead section, I propose the list of current champions section, located at the bottom of the page, be placed at the top of the page for ease of access and relevance for the readers.

Instead of having to go through the slams' descriptions and various tournament win combinations just to get to the list of reigning champions at the bottom, the readers can find it at the top for convenience. Qwerty284651 (talk) 14:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Grand Slam
In the article Grand Slam there is a subsection called "Grand Slam" (I changed the title of the subsection but that was reverted). If the subsection would be about "Grand Slam" then the other sections of the article would obviously be about something else and should therefor be deleted. So something is wrong here. Bob.v.R (talk) 03:47, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I see your point here. I changed the subsection title, but differently than your suggestion. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:12, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Grand Slam (tennis)


text:
HNA

HNA may refer to:

Companies and organizations

 * HNA Group, a Chinese conglomerate
 * Hainan Airlines, a Chinese airline

 * Hafslund (company), a Norwegian power company
 * Harry N. Abrams, Inc., now Abrams Books, an American publisher
 * High North Alliance (Norwegian: Høge Nord Alliansen), an organization of fishing, whaling, and Nordic municipal councils
 * Hilti North America, a building support and maintenance company

Transportation

 * Hanamaki Airport, serving Iwate Prefecture, Japan (IATA code HNA)
 * Hawks Nest Airport, airport near Hawk's Nest Creek, The Bahamas
 * Hinton Admiral railway station, in Hampshire, England

Other

 * Hereditary neuralgic amyotrophy
 * Hexose nucleic acid, synthesized by xenobiology researchers
 * Heeresnachrichtenamt, the Austrian Army Intelligence Office
 * Heslar Naval Armory, constructed in 1936 in Indianapolis, Indiana
 * Hessische/Niedersächsische Allgemeine, a German regional newspaper
 * Hina language, a Chadic language spoken in Northern Cameroon
 * Holy Names Academy, in Seattle, Washington
 * Hoosier Nationals ABA, race that is a part of the American Bicycle Association racing schedule
 * Human Neutrophil Antigen
 * Wright etch and other etching techniques that use Hydrofluoric, Nitric and Acetic acid (HNA)

title: HNA


text:
John Beatty (illustrator)

John R. Beatty (born May 6, 1961, in Whitesburg, Kentucky) is an American illustrator who has worked for Marvel Comics and DC Comics, primarily as an inker.

Biography
Beatty was born in Letcher County, Kentucky; he lived there for less than a year when his family moved to Holly Hill, Florida, a small city located between Daytona Beach and Ormond Beach.

As a child, I discovered and fell in love with the comic strips Dennis the Menace and Peanuts. It wasn't until later that Beatty discovered superhero comic books when a friend who lived up the street sold him a box of comics for $20.00. Beatty's goal was to become a comic book artist.

By the time he was 15 years old, Beatty had made his first "professional sell," as Camelot Publishing hired him to do cartoons for computer instruction manuals. This gig turned into after-school employment during Beatty's high school years. He graduated from Mainland Senior High School in 1979.

Not long after he discovered the world of fanzines, Beatty wrote and drew a short comic story starring the hero "Crime Smasher," which was printed in Tim Corrigan's Super Hero Comics. Jerry Ordway had a story published in the same issue, and Ordway was also starting up his self-published comic book, titled OK Comics! Soon Beatty and Ordway began communicating through the mail. Beatty also connected with artist Mike Zeck, through the "pro-zine" Rocket's Blast Comicollector. Zeck encouraged Beatty, and even sent xeroxed pencils of his work to Beatty, so he could ink samples for practice and critiques.

Beatty had, for a couple of years, been going to OrlandoCon, an annual comic book convention held in Orlando, Florida. Beatty and his long-time friend Craig Zablo (creator of Stallonezone, a Sylvester Stallone fansite), would go to OrlandoCon and make a weekend of it. On this particular occasion, Beatty took some art samples to show professional attendees, comics artists such as Pat Broderick and Bob McLeod (who were living on the west coast of Florida in Tampa). This was also the con where Beatty met AC Comics publisher and artist Bill Black. Beatty showed samples to Black and was offered ink work on the spot; he would get to ink Black's pencils at a rate of $7.00 per page.

Beatty's career began to take shape: Bob McLeod tagged him to start doing some assistant work, such as filling in blacks and erasing pages; he also occasionally drew backgrounds for McLeod's pages.

It was now 1980. Beatty went to the annual MiamiCon and showed Marvel Comics' editor-in-chief Jim Shooter new samples of his work. (Shooter had reviewed Beatty's work the previous year and said Beatty was not quite ready.) Shooter looked over Beatty's art and said: "If you can come up to New York, I'll give you a paid tryout to work on." In July 1980, Beatty made the journey, and with the help of Mike Zeck got some gigs from both Marvel and DC.

Beatty spent twenty years inking titles such as Captain America, The Punisher, Secret Wars, The Nam, The Adventures of Superman, Batman, JLA, and many more.

Beatty has also worked for the DC Comics Licensing Department, where style guide art is created. This art is used for many things, including package design, clothing, and other licensed products that DC supplies its vendors.

title: John Beatty (illustrator)


text:
Category:Nordic countries

The Nordic countries is a term used collectively for five countries in Northern Europe, plus the Faroe Islands. The Nordic countries have an aggregate population of about 24 million. The Nordic Countries are also the member countries of the Nordic Council: Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden.

title: Category:Nordic countries


text:
User:64.247.205.130

18:14, 1 Jun 2004, Infrogmation blocked 64.247.205.130 (expires 18:14, 3 Jun 2004) (vandalism spree)

title: User:64.247.205.130


text:
Category:Scandinavia

The term Scandinavia in traditional usage covers the three kingdoms of Denmark, Norway and Sweden.

title: Category:Scandinavia


text:
Pagan Kennedy

Pagan Kennedy (born c. 1963) is an American columnist and author, and pioneer of the 1990s zine movement.

She has written ten books in a variety of genres, was a regular contributor to Boston Globe, and has published articles in dozens of magazines and newspapers. In 2012–13, she was a The New York Times Magazine columnist.

Early life and education
Born Pamela Kennedy around 1963, she grew up in suburban Washington, D.C. She graduated from Wesleyan University in 1984, and later spent a year in the Masters of Fine Arts program at Johns Hopkins University.

Career
Kennedy's autobiographical zine Pagan's Head detailed her life during her twenties.

In 2007, Kennedy wrote a biography called The First Man-Made Man about Michael Dillon, a British physician and author who in the mid-1940s became the first successful case of female-to-male sex change treatment that included a phalloplasty (the surgical construction of a penis).

In July 2012, Kennedy was named design columnist for the The New York Times Magazine. Her column, "Who Made That", detailed the origins of a wide variety of things, such as the cubicle and the home pregnancy test. Kennedy resigned from the column after signing a contract with Houghton Mifflin Harcourt to write a book, Inventology.

In 2020, Kennedy's investigation into the history of the first rape kit written for The New York Times, "The Rape Kit's Secret History", received national media attention. It led to a revival of interest surrounding Marty Goddard's story, including the auction of an early rape kit at Sotheby's.

Teaching
Kennedy was a visiting professor of creative writing at Dartmouth College, and taught fiction and nonfiction writing at Boston College, Johns Hopkins University, and many other conferences and residencies.

Personal life
An ovarian cancer survivor, Kennedy currently lives in Somerville, Massachusetts with her partner, Kevin Bruyneel. She previously lived with filmmaker Liz Canner, in a relationship she has described as similar to a Boston marriage.

Awards
Kennedy was a 2010 Knight Science Journalism fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and she was named the 2010/2011 Creative Nonfiction grant winner by the Massachusetts Cultural Council. She has also been the recipient of a National Endowment for the Arts fellowship in fiction, a Sonora Review fiction prize, and a Smithsonian Fellowship for science writing.

 * Spinsters: Barnes & Noble Discover Award winner, shortlisted for 1996 Orange Prize for Fiction
 * Black Livingstone: New York Times Notable list and Massachusetts Book Award honors

Collections

 * Stripping, and other stories (Serpent's Tail, 1994 ISBN 9781852423223)

Nonfiction

 * Platforms: A Microwaved Cultural Chronicle of the 1970s (St. Martin's Press, 1994 ISBN 9780312105259, reprinted by SFWP 2015)
 * Zine: How I Spent Six Years of My Life in the Underground and Finally...Found Myself...I Think (St. Martin's Press, 1995; reprinted by SFWP 2014 ISBN 9781939650108)
 * Pagan Kennedy's Living: Handbook for Ageing Hipsters (1997, reprinted by SFWP 2015, ISBN 9781939650504)
 * Black Livingstone: A True Tale of Adventure in the Nineteenth-Century Congo (2002, reprinted by SFWP 2013, ISBN 9780988225268)
 * The First Man-Made Man: The Story of Two Sex Changes, One Love Affair, and a Twentieth-Century Medical Revolution (Bloomsbury, 2007 ISBN 9781596910157)
 * The Dangerous Joy of Dr. Sex and Other True Stories (SFWP, 2008 ISBN 9780977679935)
 * Inventology: How We Dream Up Things That Change the World (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2016 ISBN 9780544324008)

Anthologies

 * The Year's Best Fantasy and Horror Eighth Annual Collection (1995)
 * The Best Creative Nonfiction Volume 2 (2008)

Short stories

 * Elvis's Bathroom (1989)

title: Pagan Kennedy


text:
Talk:Perfect game (baseball)

Requested move 12 November 2019

 * 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 section.

– WP:NOPRIMARY with the bowling term. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:38, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Perfect game → Perfect game (baseball)
 * Perfect game (disambiguation) → Perfect game
 * Makes sense. -- MelanieN (talk) 05:46, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose.--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 08:49, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Your reason being? I don't see how a "Perfect game" in baseball is the primary topic compared to the same concept in bowling, or various other types of perfect games like a nine dart finish.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 09:43, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

 * Support per nom. This is clearly a situation where for one group or sport fans, the term would be a primary, and for others, the other. Dab page is the best solution. --Gonnym (talk) 11:23, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. No primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:29, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose Perfect game is definitely a thing in contexts other tha baseball. That doesn't mean that the application in baseball isn't a primary topic. By any measure I can come up with (search results - baseball bowling and the similar trends, total book mentions for the last 100+ years, and scholar baseball bowling) the evidence, at least for me, points to baseball being the primary topic. I would suggest our current arrangement follows WP:PTOPIC. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:48, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. A mostly ambivalent support, for whatever that's worth, but the current page views show perfect game isn't outstripping perfect game (bowling) by a significant amount (it's 65% for perfect game this year, if my calculation is correct, and IMO 75+% is the sweet spot for a primary topic). So it seems a disambiguation page in this case probably doesn't hurt. Nohomersryan (talk) 22:25, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose. A simple google search directs to baseball. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:26, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Support...bowling is far more superior.--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 09:43, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Support no clear primary topic given that the bowling term gets around as many views most of the time [|Perfect_game_(bowling)|Perfect_Game_(2011_film)|Perfect_Game_(2000_film)|Perfect_Game_(Thompson_Twins_song)].  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 18:58, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Careful: over the longer term, the same graph |Perfect_game_(bowling)|Perfect_Game_(2011_film)|Perfect_Game_(2000_film)|Perfect_Game_(Thompson_Twins_song) shows a different story. 20:15, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Even still you get nearly a 3rd as many views which probably doesn't pass the "much more than any other". In addition there's also Solved game which its a bit surprising that "Perfect game" doesn't go to the generic meaning.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 22:26, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose per my page views over the long term (above). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:15, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll just point out that guideline on this suggests page views are only one of several metrics to be considered which is why I linked to others above in saying why I oppose it. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:17, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Yep. Several editors responding to this spate of RMs by Zxcvbnm have been incorrectly asserting pageviews as a be-all-and-end-all rationale when it definitely is not. Most often this is a WP:RECENTISM failure, but in this case it's an encyclopedic-significance failure, as neither sport is more important than the other. While baseball is heavily commercialized and makes more money for corporations, bowling is actually engaged in on a regular basis by at least an order of magnitude more people, even in the US, and baseball is only significant at all in a few countries, while bowling in one form or another is common worldwide. (That said, I'm not certain how many countries use this phrase or a direct translation of it with any regularity, and it might actually be a North Americanism. The point being, we have no actual research before us to make a case either way, so this is another reason that disambiguation is the proper solution.)  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  18:45, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Support, per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 19:33, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Support per nom and per Gonnym, who is of course exactly right about this being a pissing match between fans of different sports.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  18:39, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Support, per nom. Hyperbolick (talk) 19:49, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

2020 perfect games
While there will be fewer opportunities for perfect games to occur this season, given the reduced schedule, Major League Baseball posted an article regarding the criteria for no-hitters and perfect games during the 2020 season. In the article, MLB's official stats group, the Elias Sports Bureau, stated that when a game is a part of a doubleheader, seven innings won't qualify as an official no-hitter/perfect game; the game must go into extra innings and the ninth inning must be completed. The article further states that the placed runner on second base in extra innings won't count against a pitcher because "A perfect game is a game of at least nine innings where no batter reaches base safely. In the case of a runner on second to start the inning he is not a batter to reach safely. Therefore it is a perfect game.”

While not meant to treat this like a forum, in the situation where the home pitcher completes seven perfect innings, yet the score is 0-0 after the home team bats, then the game would go to extra innings. He completes the top of the eighth inning perfect, and his team still fails to score in the bottom half. In the ninth he gives up two sacrifice flies, allowing the placed runner to advance to third, and then to home. He strikes out the last batter to end the top of ninth inning. In the bottom of the ninth his teammate hits a walk-off two-run home run to win the game.

Does this article from MLB postulate that, for the 2020 season, perfect games can have the losing team score runs? No-hitters allow for this and have already happened in prior seasons; I'm not aware of any such allowance for perfect games in the non-COVID ravaged seasons. If this is to be that case that a perfect game is not spoiled by the placed runner, since he was never a batter, then it might be worthy of some sort of note in the article. While potentially trivial, other articles state rules used during different seasons that do not necessarily apply to all seasons (walks counting as hits in 1887, for example).2601:205:4100:B40:A828:D07C:9771:2526 (talk) 20:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Perfect Game
In 2020 since in extras a runner starts on 2nd base, could a pitcher throw a perfect game this year. If so could a pitcher lose a perfect game because of a few passed balls.Would it still be a perfect game since technically it’s still 27 up 27 down. Chisfoostair (talk) 02:54, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's still a perfect game. If they retire all 30 batters in a 10-inning perfect game, it would still be a perfect game even with man on second base at start of the inning. It would need to allow a batter to reach base in order to spoil a perfect game. Planet  Star  03:48, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It could have happened to Harvey Haddix in his notorious 1959 game. He retires the first 27 batters. With the score 0-0, he pitches the bottom of the 10th with the freebie runner at second. A bunt and a sac fly, and he loses the game, despite 29 consecutive outs. WHPratt (talk) 17:06, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Umpire errors
Shouldn’t umpire errors be added to one of the requirements for a perfect game? 96.75.44.74 (talk) 23:12, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

 * When you only have one umpire I believe no errors apply or just one umpire behind the plate and the other one just standing around by second base the whole game with his hands in his pockets. 2601:2C5:201:75D0:D5C2:4A1C:9820:8D7A (talk) 15:23, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Perfect game (baseball)


text: Category:Poetry

title: Category:Poetry


text:
User talk:Texture/Archive-2004 May

Welcome to my newly formed talk/user page. It is still a work in progress with the same old junk just thrown in different corners. I'll clean up the piles later on. - Tεx τ  urε 04:09, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

List of famous virgins
Should you remove Template:vfd from List of famous virgins? -- 24.217.211.99 05:24, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, thanks - Tεx τ urε 12:39, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

ack!
Hey,

I appreciate you moving my Forkbat page to User:Forkbat -- it needed to be moved -- but you scared me. When no "edit history" came up so I could find my removed changes, I started frantically searching through my browser cache trying to find an old copy.

You nearly gave me a heart attack.

Please, if you do so in the near future, post some sort of note on a user page that you move. Thanks.

- Fork

 * Did you check User talk:Forkbat where I left you a message on April 8th?  (I only moved User:Forkbat/EMDG.  User:Muriel Gottrop moved your user page on November 25.) - Tεx τ urε 12:57, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Admin Nomination
Hello, I would appreciate your help by earning your vote as an admin. I have been here about 5 months now and have been nominated. I have made many contributions and have improved on my editing and behavior. I take this seriously, that is why I have gotten into it with Anthony so much. You can look at my user page yourself and see my contribtions. I would appreciate a vote in the yes column if you agree. Again, thanks for your time and help. ChrisDJackson 02:29, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Mr. Boyer
Check out the last couple edits on International Union of Mail Artists and tell me that he isn't self-promoting himself there, too. He's the one who originally put his name there, and from the description, it appears that we'd have just as much justification to list ourselves. He's listed nowhere on the official site for this "group". Is there a "line-item veto" equivalent of VFD for getting rid of particular article content? I really don't want to keep up an edit war with this self-important, self-promoting egoist. Postdlf

baiting Paul
I don't think its entirely fair the way you are searching about for paul to call you a name, in order to use it against him. He is clearly uncertain of what label to give you, and any lable he did use is apt to be offensive ("jew", "commie" "wanker", etc.. ;). IMO paul is a salvagable nutter, who is a resource to the wikipedia on the pages where he makes his 'home'. Yes, he is awkward/unpleasent on talk pages, but wiki-punishments for wiki-crimes only work on sane wiki's, who don't have aol. Paul appears to have aol, and besides, crazy wikis can use http://anonymization.net/ or whatever to inflict us with their wackiness. Paul has shown me that he is able to compromise, and is at least vaguely interested in producing a quality article. This combined with his extensive hate group wisdom tells me that he should be worked with, or around, but never provoked. The last thing we need is to turn him into a bona fide troll, which he is not, btw. Thanks for your time, Cheers Sam Spade 02:52, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I actually do not believe in "labels" for any people, only for "behaviors" and "mentalities".

If that makes me a "nutter" than so be it. :D

I am neither a "vandal" nor a "troll" and I will "compromise" with those that are "reasonable" and "fair" and that behave with "personal integrity", meaning to me that they mean what they say and they say what they mean. I was "provoked" by being falsely accused of being a "vandal" and a "troll" and being "banned" and "censored" by a mob of "unreasonable" bigots.-PV

 * Next time you come to my talk page I would like you to try something for me. Ask a question.  Don't tell me what I think or what I am doing in any encounter.  Ask me what I think or ask me what I am doing. Thank you. - Tεx τ urε

 * In this case you could have asked what I am looking for in my exchange with Paul. (Rather than a very accusatory claim that I am "baiting Paul".) The answer to the question would be that Paul seems to have a preconceived notion of what I am. You don't even seem to know what category I fit in.  I do want him to use some label on me.  If he calls me a "jew" or "communist/commie" or "wanker" then I will either agree, correct him, or tell him he's wrong.  The labels you have listed are not offensive.  I just want to know what label he is dancing around so I can clear the issue.  I have spent the last few days defending Paul's addition of critical links to Judaism.  In response he has ranted at me and I am going to back off and let him fight the world by himself.  While fighting to have his links kept on the page he attacked me and my 'ilk" despite my attempts to help him in that fight.  He made a valid point that Judaism is not above critical links.  The talk page there has convinced me that jewwatch is not appropriate but his other link has been kept and remains.  I think if he can find less inflammatory links that give clear criticism that they can make it on that page.  I am done helping Paul.  The last thing he did after my repeated attempts to get his links included was to rant at "me and my 'ilk'".  I tried to draw out what he was including me in and since he won't say I can only assume it is because it is intentionally hurful and irrational.  I will not negotiate for him any more. - Tεx τ urε 03:28, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

"I think if he can find less inflammatory links that give clear criticism that they can make it on that page."

The links to the 4 criticisms of cosmotheism are very "inflammatory" and "slanderous" and "false", so why can "they make it" on that page?-PV

 * If you find me talking to you offensive, you can delete me and write "remove trolling" in the summary, as some admins do ;) Otherwise, you can take what I am saying as what I am trying to say, and not expect me to say stuff that I'm not saying. I think your a nice guy, and I agreed w you about the link to judaism, and likewise changed my mind (as you prob. know from talk:Judaism). Unlike you, I have not given up on paul, but thats part of my character. I have under-dog syndrome, wherein I defend the fringe elements amongst us, as far as I can, and despite their objectionable qualities. I feel it is important that ALL major (and almost every really) POV's be expresed. I defend racists for the same reason I defend hustler magazine, or drug users, or gun rights, etc... because these are people testing the limits of freedom. I think people need to be free to express their racism, so that we can be aware of them, and help them to understand that their are good jews (pakis, palis, darkies, what-have-you etc...) too. And its important to have porn and guns, because freedom of press and defense (much like the freedom of thought/speech involved in racism)are necessary. I think paul has a valid POV, AND I think paul is a nutter ;) I think you a nice person who might have taken me the wrong way. I do think you were baiting paul, and I do think he is uncertain of what to lable you ;) he sez ilk alot. On the other hand, you are prob right to be offended, because he might well say something rude if you let him know more about you. He also might grow a bit as a person. I can't claim to have personally "cured" a racist, but I have seen it done. Its all about understanding that their are good people (and bad, and sterotypical) in every group. And when it comes down to it, its the people w the most in common (Indians/pakistanis, jews/palistinians, greeks/turks, etc..) who hate each other the most, alot the same as how we tend to dislike individuals who are alike, but different in some seemingly vital way, to ourselves. Anyways, I think your o.k., and if me communicating w you is overly upsetting, just delete this whole thread, and write "remove trolling" in the summary ;) Sam Spade 04:31, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

"I think paul has a valid POV, AND I think paul is a nutter ;)"

Thanks Sam! LOL! :D

Although, if my standing up for what I believe to be the TRUTH is "nutty" then so be it! :D

I don't have any problems with most "individuals", only with certain "groups" of "individuals" and that only when they act like a "mob" of pov bigots and pov censors and falsely label "others" as opposed to their own "behaviors" and "mentalities". "Malignant Narcissism" is the spiritual and mental illness of our modern age and some "religions" and "cultures" and "dogmatisms" do promote and encourage it and do make our own continued survival and conscious advancement as a Species as a Whole over the long haul quite unlikely.-PV

Fractional electrodynamics vfd discussion
Hello. I notice that you removed fractional electrodynamics from vfd and did not delete the page. I wonder what your reasoning is here. I count 10 for delete (8 definite -- Dori, Charles Matthews, Denni, Wile E. Heresiarch, William M. Connelly, Decumanus, Cyrius, and Andris; 1 "lean towards delete" -- Niteowlneils; 1 provisional delete -- Cribcage), and 3 for keep (Kevin Baas, Bensaccount, and 130.39.154.50). I've counted Cribcage for delete since he/she wrote "Revise or delete" and the article has not been revised. Isn't 10 to 3 enough? Does the anonymous vote count? If not, that's 10 to 2. Isn't that sufficient? Thanks for any light you can shed here. Wile E. Heresiarch 20:52, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Got distracted and missed it. Should be deleted now per the vote. - Tεx τ urε 21:05, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * OK, thanks for the info. Thanks for taking the time to respond. Happy editing, Wile E. Heresiarch 00:46, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

T-6 Texan copyvio
If you look at the edit history, that's what I did. Tim706 did the subsquent edit. As for the rest, I didn't know about it and won't attempt to police anymore copyright violations. Geoff/Gsl 00:52, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for supporting my nomination as an admin...
...I appreciate it. Dpbsmith 10:20, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

: to User: redirects
I've noticed that you've deleted some of these User:Tim Starling/Redirects from : to User:. In the old software there was only one namespace and userpages were stored in the same place as encyclopedia articles. Before you delete these redirects please disambiguate them (that is change OldTimeUser to OldTimeUser ). Otherwise the deleted redirect will appear on Most wanted articles and break links. Thanks, Maximus Rex 17:54, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks. I'll work on correcting that. - Tεx τ urε 15:10, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Banned user reincarnated?
I'm fairly new here and wasn't around for the discussion of banning JOR (and puppets), but I just came across something that made me think. I was reading Requests for comment/Everyone using a username which is against policy and noticed that JOR, JoR, Jor, Ior, Jqr and IOR had been banned (apparently for something to do with the name?). That name sounded familiar. I checked and sure enough I found Jor. Is this a re-incarnation? Why was the original banned in the first place? There was no explanation on the page, just the list of names that had been banned. Thank you. SWAdair | Talk 08:54, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * It just occurred to me - were those names banned for attempting to impersonate the real Jor? SWAdair | Talk  09:44, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Article-to-user redirects
Thank you for cleaning these up. I have seen them for some time as an obstacle to proper redistribution of the encyclopedic content. UninvitedCompany 23:16, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Meenakshim
All of Meenakshim's copyvios have been rewritten, I believe. None should have the copyvio tag on them anymore. Tuf-Kat 17:54, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)

Copyrighted material
Can you please explain where I'm advising people to delete copyrighted material from text? RickK 22:37, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Korova Milk Bar
''Hi. In regards to your posting of Korova Milk Bar on Wikipedia:Copyright problems, you did right to add a copyvio notice and list the violation. Do not just remove copyright text from the article. It must be deleted to avoid leaving it in page history. If you want to recreate teh article before it is deleted, follow the directions and allow copyright violations to be deleted. For Korova Milk Bar, you would have recreated a new article at Korova Milk Bar/Temp until the violation is deleted. (It has now been deleted and you can recreate directly at: Korova Milk Bar - Tεxτurε 15:18, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC) ''

Since I have no idea how to delete an article, and did not realize that it should have been sent to VfD as well as CopyVio, that's why it didn't happen like that. I'm taking it from reading the above you're a sysop or admin (if there's a difference - I still don't know) - I've been a WikiPeasant now for several months and still keep (a) finding out things I never knew before, and (b) running into things I have no idea how to deal with. Is there some kind of little downloadable users' manual anywhere?

Oh, and why is Tεxτurε not watching 'Devil's Advocate'? I liked it a lot better than Stigmata. Denni 02:30, 2004 Apr 24 (UTC)

 * I own it! You're right!  But if I log every God and Devil movie I own we'd run out of disk space... :)  Know any other good one's I've missed? - Tεx τ urε 03:25, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

image
Photos of Australian MPs from the parliamentary website are not copyright. Adam 02:53, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I repeat: Photos of Australian MPs from the parliamentary website are not copyright. Ring them and ask (612-62777111), as I did. Adam 03:57, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hey I dunno exactly, thanks for your interest, I suggest contacting Fred Bauder about it on the arbitration committee. GrazingshipIV 03:44, Apr 24, 2004 (UTC)

Vogel
Vogel is in arbitration. If you have any comments go to Requests for arbitration/Paul Vogel AndyL

Texture, according to the page above any outside party can just go to that page and make a heading for themselves and contribute an argument and recommendation for punishment (relief). Also go to the evidence page Requests for arbitration/Paul Vogel/Evidenceand list specific pages. AndyL 05:32, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

AndyL is correct. You were a participant in the events which occured on Judaism and thus may request relief if you wish and offer evidence if you have any. Fred Bauder 10:36, Apr 24, 2004 (UTC)

Epitome
I reviewed the new article, and have changed my vote on VfD. Thanks for pointing it out! Cribcage 15:26, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

quick request
Hi. Could you delete Anne-Lise Tessier? It's patent nonsense, and I've already deleted several similar articles by the same author. For some reason, I can't get my delete button to work on this one... it just keeps returning a blank page, and the article is still there. Isomorphic 15:58, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * This somehow seems humorous. It's the junk article that just won't die. Isomorphic 16:12, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * How about redirect to patent nonsense? And I suppose we should mention the glitch to a developer.  Do you know where to report such things?  Isomorphic 16:59, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

P.S. I don't know the unicode for a dash, I just know the wiki – and —. Sorry.

pv
I wanted to compliment you on your fine work arguing against paul. I'm almost swayed myself, I have to say. To be honest, the only reason I am probably defending paul at this point is that he hasn't been rude to me yet, and he has made improvements, which gives me hope about his character, for whatever reason. Cheers, Sam Spade 04:14, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hans Küng
Isn't removing the image rather a strict measure? I added the source and asserted that fair use is likely to apply here. What more can I do to meet your very high demands? All the best,  16:59, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

 * See my talk page for further details.  17:17, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing up the Vogel edits to the arbcom page. Martin 18:50, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

George Bush
Why the reversion of the As of link? Troll Silent, Troll Deep 19:18, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * It is a redirect to 2001. There is no point in changing to a redirect that ends at the same article. - Tεx τ urε 19:25, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Take a look at Wikipedia talk:As of - it is a time sensitive marker - you can use the 'what links here' to tell which articles contain info that needs updating. Troll Silent, Troll Deep 19:30, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

It's pretty common on many articles - As of will tell you how to access the list of articles that are linked to it. The purpose of keeping the same text is so that the reader doesn't need to worry about it. An editor looking for statements made in 2001 (or any year) like 'Is President' that will change in the future, can just look at the list of what links there to tell what needs to be updated. If you disagee with it, I suggest you take up the issue on the talk pages rather than start reverting folks who are putting in an accepted marker. Thanks, Troll Silent, Troll Deep 19:47, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * (My replies to the last two paragraphs can be found on your talk page.) - Tεx τ urε 19:51, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

No, I'm not sure whether it is accepted policy - it seems that, rather than one group going round putting the links in, and another removing them, a more productive approach would be to work out whether we would do it. We are bold in making edits that there is not necessarily any policy for, and these links seem to provide a benefit, without causing harm. I am not going to start a revert war if you indist on removing them, but I find it anti-social, and think it undermines a group who are trying to make updating time sensitive pages easier. Troll Silent, Troll Deep 19:55, 4 May 2004 (UTC) PS Baffled by respiration image too! HAND, Troll Silent, Troll Deep 19:55, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * You are implementing an unaccepted policy change. That is what I find anti-social.  I find it best to get consensus before insisting on those blanket changes.  You have to expect a revert when you fail to explain your plan before implementing it.

 * I like your suggestion: "a more productive approach would be to work out whether we would do it " - Yes! - Before you go around implementing this plan of yours poll the community and get a consensus agreement. At that point everyone will be aware of your plan and (if accepted) that the community wants it.  I suggest you follow up on your idea to work our whether we should do it before implementing it. - Tεx τ urε 20:00, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

Well, its not my plan, and to be honest, I thought that the spirit of the Wikipedia was that people should go ahead and make improvements. Its not something radical or potentially disruptive that should need permission from the broader community to do any more than adding any other text. I'm disapointed that you feel initiatives like this should need permission to go forward. Troll Silent, Troll Deep 20:03, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I feel that global initiatives that are intended for use across a wide swath of articles do require community support. You (by your desired implementation of the concept) aren't suggesting a change that will only be made to George Bush.  Be bold.  Take up the suggestion that isn't yours but that you support.  Post it on Current polls and get your consensus to make this global change to Wikipedia articles.  The guidance to "be bold" does not mean to take independent action regardless of community input.  Rather it is to spark community discussion, effort and support. - Tεx τ urε 20:10, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, it's been on here for a while, Avoid statements that will date quickly. To be honest, I was just adding things that I found in the style guide to pages that the style guide implied needed them. I'm not interested in making a huge issue of it, and feel that you are simply slapping down users who are trying to contribute. I had no idea this was so contentious. Troll Silent, Troll Deep 20:12, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I was trying to encourage you to take it forward since it is not widely used or accepted. I don't agree but thought you might like to gather support.  You don't have to. - Tεx τ urε 20:15, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

User:
In what order are you fixing the : to User: links and how far are you? Maximus Rex 22:44, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm following it alphabetically unless a sub-page redirect jumps out at me and can be easily removed. I'm at Ed Poor and finding out that if we took his name out we'd have room for the Library of Congress.  I plan to return to the start again to find crossovers between old users whose names became actual articles since many talk pages are pointing to the real articles. - Tεx τ urε 22:49, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * LOL! -- :user Ed Poor

 * Theory is that since I am changing all names lacking "user:" in the talk pages I clear that it will go faster as I get near the middle and end of the list. - Tεx τ urε 22:52, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Ok. If I get bored I'll try to help and start at Z and work backwards (to try to minimize the duplication of effort). Maximus Rex 00:20, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

Schnorrer
Do I intend to revert? Probably not, unless I suddenly feel in the mood to get in a pointless edit war over nothing. I thought the compromise might work, but as it didn't, there seems little point restoring it. There's not much point protecting it either. Wik's only allowed three reverts a day anyway, and as soon as it unprotected, he will revert again, so I don't see protection solving anything. Maybe there needs to be a vote to settle it once and for all, but I have a feeling that no-one really cares about the issue. Cantus, and previously Anthony, appear to be reverting just to annoy Wik, not because they actually have some great desire for Karl Schnörrer to be included in the page. I'm tempted to redirect the page to the sandbox and let them play there instead. ;) Thanks for the compliment on my user page by the way. Angela. 22:47, May 4, 2004 (UTC)

deletions
All those albums you're deleting... You planning on merging the material into the Wolfsheim article or otherwise preserving it? I had listed the problem on Cleanup figuring someone would get around to cleaning up the anon's formatting mess at some point. Doesn't seem nice to just delete it out from under him while he's writing. Isomorphic 23:18, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I saw your message after following up when someone started tagging them for deletion. A list is not an article so I thought I'd delete them before the rest of them get tagged  .  Your explanation might spawn him to recreate the articles in depth but I doubt it. What would be the content of the article?  If they get recreated with even an introductory sentence they would survive without someone tagging it for speedy deletion.  Since you have listed them on cleanup I'll undelete them and allow for that process to take place. - Tεx τ urε 23:24, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing the combining work. Seemed a shame to throw out information.  I was planning to do the cleanup work myself if noone else jumped on it, but I'm rather glad you got there first as I hadn't figured out quite what to do with it.  Your one-page discography looks like the best solution.  Isomorphic 23:59, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I was depressed at the thought of undeleting them just and have them sit out there until they all got tagged for delete and some other admin finished the job. Three columns seem like they'd fit most computers.  He hasn't finished yet but maybe he'll be able to follow the table format.  - Tεx τ urε 00:06, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

Speedy deletions page
Thank you for asking your question at Speedy_deletions, somebody had removed it and my request before I had a chance to see it; but I have copied it back to that page and tried to answer your question as clearly as possible.Daeron 06:34, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

Icebreaker Lenin
Nice fix on the article. It looked like total gibberish in its original form, and I was unware as to what the Icebreaker Lenin actually was, so I tagged as Speedily Delete on the grounds of no meaningful content, and lack of meaningful context. The article is fine since you've fixed it. Snowspinner 15:45, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

Admin review
Thanks Texture, I just feel that people should be confident of getting a meaningful response, even to a spurious request, otherwise the whole process will not appear to be credible. Yours, Mark Richards 17:31, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

No
I did not read your comment. I was responding to the comment Viajero left me (above your comment), and it just happens to be generic enough to bear some resemblance to a response. Regard, -Stevertigo 17:29, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

User:Jondel copyvios
When I added the user, i also added a 5 individual copyvio contributions in a new sub-section ===User:Jondel===. For the relevant page history see here. Somebody made the subsection for user:Jondel into a bullet, and subsequently it was no longer clear that the following bullets belong to the User:Jondel entry. As the copyvio articles are now deleted, this bullet is no longer needed. I think i will no longer use subsections on the Copyright problems, but just use only bullets (see also: User:Avala on the same page). Thank you for cleaning up the copyvio page, that was needed. -- Chris 73 | Talk 00:23, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

Your kind advice
Hi Texture (sorry I don't know how to write your name in the funky way you do),

Thank you for alerting me about my ready use of the {msg:delete} header. I have spent some months browsing and anonymously editing some articles and thought I should start with an account. I was trying to be helpful, but I will make sure that I reread the pages you cited and not make more mistakes. Although it is lucky that there are users like you to advise (and inspire) newcomers!

Thanks for the photo advice too

jazbell 16:54, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

VfD Vandalism
Thank you for reverting that. He was throwing a hissy fit over his vanity page being put on VfD --Starx 20:25, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

Justin King
I also added a note on User talk:Thirteen 13, suggesting he look at the speedy-delete policy. Thanks for catching the tag. Meelar 20:34, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

User:66.185.84.80
You were involved in blocking this user previously on the grounds that it was a Vogel IP, you might want to look into it again. I'm still not sure he's actually Vogel (He appears to have bold new methods of vandalism), but he's now vandalizing pages with links to www.benbest.com, which is a non-notable site by someone in the field of cryogenics. (Most of the articles it's being added to have nothing to do with cryogenics, but even if they did, he doesn't seem all that notable) It's a new problem for him (As it's not personal attacks, excessive reverting, or possibly being Paul Vogel), but it's very definitely a problem, and it's not the first problem.

Thanks for looking into it. Snowspinner 14:40, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

This account just began adding links to benbest.com back into articles - Free will most recently. Snowspinner 00:46, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

hi texture
Hi Texture,

Thanks for working to keep the article space clean - you erased some junk I created earlier as I was reading about how to mark it for deletion. I'll be sure to add some useful content so I'm not wasting your time - keep up the good work! --Blick 23:47, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

Maryland
Funny how none of the darts ever land in Chesapeake Bay. :) -- Seth Ilys 00:56, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Speedy deletes
Hi...got your message.

I'd posted something on the VfD page recently, and "Ben Brockert" e-mailed me suggesting that small articles lacking content were best put on the "speedy delete" page, thus saving a "wiki page."

Did I boo-boo?

Thanks, Lucky 6.9 22:56, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Not really. It's a judgement call but something that is a sub-stub on a real topic can grow into something.  If you find one of those throw a  on the bottom and it may grow into something.  If you find one that you can't ever imagine becoming an article throw the  and it'll get reviewed by the admins.

 * Fédération Internationale de Motocyclisme is a good example of an article that started out small (more than just a link but less than an article) but was a world-wide organization that could become worthwile as an article. - Tεx τ urε 23:00, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

My next mission! :^)
Ah, ha! I thought the only ones who could blank a copyvio were sysops. I tossed on the speedy delete to try and get some attention drawn toward this article. Mucho thanks. - Lucky 6.9 03:27, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

Deleting {msg}
Hey!

Sorry about deleting the deletion message.

I was in the middle of creating the page and it just appeared so i deleted it without knowing what it was.

I also agree that it probably isn't appropriate for this encyclopedia. I deleted the content, but I was wondering if there is a way to delete the page itself. Seeing as I am the creator of the page I thought you might know of a way I can do this.

Thanks!

 * Skankfest, at your request I have deleted Ashley-Anne Rios. - Tεx τ urε 18:08, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

Gave me a scare
I just flipped over to RC after eating dinner, and saw "User:Moron moved to User:MyRedDice". For a moment, I thought you had gone on a rampage, until I figured out what was going on ;) Yours, Meelar 23:34, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

Remember what you wrote...
Remember what you wrote at Talk:Cowboy?? Can you try to allow other Wikipedians to be aware of the text at this article?? 66.245.24.217 13:20, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I'll help out however I can. What help would you like? - Tεx τ urε 14:11, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Try to inform various registered Wikipedians about this. Please start out by trying some who you edit the User talk pages of often. 66.32.81.85 16:49, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

Well, I don't know why it blanked; it took 10 minutes to post and then when it did, it had blanked the page. Everyking 16:20, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm having similar problems getting anything to post today. In my case it doesn't blank but instead I end up making the same post 4 or 5 times to one article. - Tεx τ urε 16:28, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

Do not create nonsense articles or vandalize even in retaliation
Okay, I won't... I just wanted to poke fun at Wik... my bad... However, I wonder why Wik did redirect vandalism. What's the point of redirecting for vandalism? Rickyrab 01:32, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

What does your edit summary "removing vanity link to someone's individual newsgroup discussion (temporary format in Google)" mean, at MySQL? The linked discussion was reasonably informative, especially since we don't have a good side-by-side comparison of the two yet. --FOo 12:23, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

 * It is hardly a side-by-side comparison or even an informative textual comparison. If you found anything useful in that long, and not direct, thread I think it would be better if you or the contributor added it to the article. Very few are going to find scrubbing through newsgroup threads to be useful when coming to an online encylopedia.  If they wanted to do that they could have used a google newsgroup search.  It appears that the anon contributor was particularly happy with his contribution and wanted to make it public.  I don't see it as a useful link, and definitely not worth starting a section of newgroup links in the article.  Did you see any content that could be added to the article?  I did not. - Tεx τ urε 16:03, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

Talk:Cowboy
I wrote a response at Talk:Cowboy. Do you still have any comments?? 66.32.97.243 21:29, 29 May 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Texture/Archive-2004 May


text: Category:Poetic forms

title: Category:Poetic forms


text: Category:Estonian people

title: Category:Estonian people


text:
Eatonia

Eatonia is a town in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan with a population of 449 people (according to the Canada 2006 Census). The town's economy is based almost exclusively on agriculture. Eatonia is in southwest Saskatchewan at the crossroads of Highways 21 and 44, approximately 44 kilometres southwest of Kindersley and 72 kilometres from the provincial boundary with Alberta. The town is served by Eatonia (Elvie Smith) Municipal Airport.

History
Eatonia was founded in 1919 as a station on the Canadian National Railway and was named after Timothy Eaton, founder of the Eaton's department store chain and catalogue, and to honour his son and heir, John Craig Eaton. The station was originally simply called "Eaton", but there was confusion with nearby Eston, so the name was changed to Eatonia in 1921 ("Eatonia" was the name of an Eaton's brand for clothing and other goods, and "Eatonian" was the name given to long-serving Eaton's employees).

Eatonia was incorporated as a town in 1954. In 1955, the year of Saskatchewan's Golden Jubilee, Eatonia's train station was featured on the cover of the Eaton's catalogue, thus resulting in a classic local image finding its way into homes across the country. The former CN train station is now home to the Wheatland Regional Library (Eatonia Branch). The former station, along with a train caboose and a wood-frame house ordered from the Eaton's catalogue in 1917, comprise the Eatonia Heritage Park, a 0.6 ha Municipal Heritage Property located at the south end of Main Street.

Demographics
In the 2021 Census of Population conducted by Statistics Canada, Eatonia had a population of $498$ living in $205$ of its $253$ total private dwellings, a change of NaN% from its 2016 population of $524$. With a land area of 1.6 km2, it had a population density of in 2021.

Education
Eatonia is home to a kindergarten to Grade 12 public school, Eaton School, which has been home to many successful volleyball, basketball, and football teams throughout its history. It is located within the Sun West School Division.

title: Eatonia