text:
User:Chris 73/Archive 001

History of swimming
I wanted to express my appreciation for all the detail you added to History of swimming. I also want to ask you help limiting the number of redundant links. Duplicate links in an article add little or nothing for the reader but can make the article much harder to read. There is an on-going debate at Wikipedia talk:Make only links relevant to the context about the degree of linking that stikes the best balance for our encyclopedia. But regardless of your position in that debate, I think I can say with confidence that the overwhelming concensus is to link only the first occurence in each article. Thanks. Rossami 01:48, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * Thanks, Rossami. I am relatively new to Wikipedia, only here one month or so, and am still learning about the style. I will try to link only the first occurrence from now on. Thank you very much for fixing my entry. Chris 73 04:00, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Stutthoff
Articles about subcamps of Stutthoff are the beginning. Why you did remove any mention of being German? Cautious 10:56, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, I am looking forward to see more info in these terrible short stubs. About removing german: no particular reason, I though a concentration camp of the third reich makes it pretty clear that they are german. Plus, your link to german is a disambiguity page, and your stubs were overall quite bad both in content (nothing new) and formatting (ugh!). Please take more care (and use the link Germany or Nazi Germany, not German) -- chris_73 11:49, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Chris, it is nonsense. If there were a concentration camp in the place, it is worth mentioning. Especially, that in the 2nd stage it is possible to identify exactly, where those camps were located and add more info about each of them. As to Germanhood, during ww2 there were also other camps i.e. UstasheCautious 11:56, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * OK, it seems you are adding more info to the stubs (e.g. Graniczna Wies). Thank you. I was mainly trying to fix a number of identical badly formatted stubs. Keep on working. Regarding link to Germany: No problem with adding links. I would prefer a link to Nazi Germany over Germany, but I can live with either one. -- chris_73 23:44, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Abbreviations
Re: abbreviations. "Jap." is not an accepted or acceptable abbreviation for "Japanese." Generally it's not necessary to use abbreviations in articles (such as "lit." for "literally") anyway. Please use the standard "Japanese" instead. Also, please see Wikipedia is not paper. By the way, I've looked at a couple of the recent cooking-related pages you've started, and they frequently list a particular cookbook as a reference. If the things you're writing about are well-known or are common knowledge then they don't really need a reference, unless you've copied from your source. Exploding Boy 03:45, Mar 14, 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the comments. I just went through all the cooking pages and changed Jap.: into Japanese: and Lit.: into Literally:. I also removed the book reference, since I used it mainly for suggestions, but the info is otherwise common knowledge. Guess I am still too much used to paper and its abbreviations. -- chris_73 04:09, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * One more comment: it's not necessary to capitalize unless the word is at the beginning of a sentence (except for proper nouns, obviously), so you don't need to capitalize "literally" or the English translations of Japanese words, or the Japanese words you're using in the articles. Exploding Boy 04:22, Mar 14, 2004 (UTC)

 * Ok, I'll keep that in mind. Thank you for checking all the Japanese literal translations. I'll do a bit more work on the Tsukiji fish market now. -- chris_73 04:43, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Parasite singles and Freeter
Your parasite singles and freeter articles are excellent. -- Tlotoxl 11:57, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * THANKS! Took me a couple of hours to write, glad you liked em. -- chris_73 00:00, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thanks!
Dear Chris: Hi! I had never had the pleasure of talking with you before. Thanks for helping about the boxing articles and about the disambiguation page. As far as the Boxing photo I would also like to add that the fight is an amateur fight and professionals dont use the type of equipment seen in that photo. I think thats important to inform our readers of because many readers do not know that. Well, its a pleasure to meet people like you! Thats what makes Wikipedia a great site. Thanks and God bless you! Sincerely yours, Antonio Monster Ball Martin

Thanks! (2)
Tanx for the Google tip on Village Pump! Thats was right what I was looking for! Dobrowsky

Copyright Question
Hi Adam. I noticed you uploaded the image Image:Ac.deannekelly.jpg. This seems to be the mirror image of De-Anne Kelly's homepage. Since you didnt add copyright information to your upload, I was wondering if the image is copyrighted. Could you clarify the copyright info or source on the image page? Thanks a lot. -- chris_73 14:15, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * All the Member of Parliament photos come from the Parliament website and are not copyright. Adam 14:26, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the info. Best Regards -- chris_73 14:29, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Vocabulary Project
Hi there, I saw you are interested in Japan and Germany, and English is not your first language. I guess I could write this in German as well, but you never know. I thought you might be interested in a project I am trying to start with some people from here, Wikibooks and Wiktionary. Check my page and let me know what you think about it. Get-back-world-respect 10:00, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Sounds interesting, but almost all of my free time is taken by Wikipedia, and I am slowly learning my way around here. I'll check back every now and then and see how your project goes. Good Luck, and thanks for asking -- chris 73 | Talk 10:26, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

vfd tag
Re your list of mediawiki tags to use on your user page, should not be used as directed in the opening text of Votes for deletion. It should be replaced with. -- Graham :) | Talk 15:59, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice. I updated my boilerplate text. Best Regards -- chris 73 | Talk 16:08, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Burial at sea
Thanks a lot for featuring my article on the Did you know... section! Chris 73 | (New) Talk 01:31, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * It's a great article! Keep up the good work! jengod 01:33, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)

 * Ditto that! --mav 06:23, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Notations on Naming space poll
Good work calling out those fishy votes at the naming policy poll -- I was getting a little disturbed by the trend of people coming in and voting there when they obviously are not regular en.wikipedia contributors. →Raul654 06:53, Apr 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * It seems there is a small project going on at the uk.wikipedia.org, organizing people to come over here and vote for Naming_policy_poll. I cant read a thing, except the headline and the link at the bottom of this page. We'll see in a couple of hours, when the locals there go online during/after work. -- Chris 73 | (New) Talk 07:51, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * I noticed that too, but it was only one message on a user talk page, not a "project going on" as such. Likely nothing to worry about. Angela. 08:10, Apr 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * In crypto class today, I'll ask Dimitrij (a Russian friend of mine) if he can translate that for me. I'm also considering imposing voting minima on the Naming poll -- the same ones we use at requests for adminship. →Raul654 13:14, Apr 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * PS - unfortunately, he couldn't make it out either. →Raul654 16:51, Apr 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * I tried translating it with some links on the list with translation tools, but couldn't figure it out either. However, it seems that there was no ukrainian rush on Naming_policy_poll (yet). -- Chris 73 | (New) Talk 02:42, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Iraq casualties question
You recently edited the page on casualties in the Iraq conflict to say that there are numerous, widely varying estimates of the numbers of wounded U.S. troops, depending on definitions. Every source I've seen quotes (and seems to accept as accurate) the figures provided by the Pentagon. Could you cite any sources where you've seen differing estimates? And, by the way, thanks for adding that great photo. Neow 20:18, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Glad you liked the photo. I tried to pick one that shows how the remains are treated with respect. Regarding casualties:
 * states that more than 7,000 injured and ill service members from the Iraq have been treated at the ''military hospital in Landstuhl.
 * Toll on U.S. troops in Iraq grows as wounded rolls approach 10,000
 * (Note: Site is POV against war): Compares different counts, has links
 * I believe the pentagon has an interest to count low, both for wounded (now called injured) and dead (probably only combat, not accident, combat related accidents, or suicide), so i added the varying estimates. Come to think of it, the death toll also depends on the definition. Maybe if i have time i'll look it up. -- Chris 73 | (New) Talk 00:54, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the great citations - I've added some of this info to the casualties page. Neow 23:27, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship
Hi, I've nominated you for adminship. See Requests for adminship, and let us know if you'd accept a nomination. RickK 04:38, 1 May 2004 (UTC)

 * YES, I do! Thank you so much for nominating me. I hope to be a good admin, and this would help me fight vandalism. -- Chris 73 | (New) Talk 05:22, 1 May 2004 (UTC)

Andrew Zito
Could you please go to Requests for comment/Andrew Zito and sign your name to the "Users certifying the basis for this dispute (sign with RickK 19:55, 1 May 2004 (UTC)):" section? (And add anything else you think should be added.) Thanks. RickK 19:55, 1 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the notice. I went to Requests for comment/Andrew Zito and made some edits, mainly a copy from the Vandalism alert, and a notice on his self reference on Joey Gallo. I also signed the page. BTW, also thank you very much for nominating me for Admin! -- Chris 73 | (New) Talk 00:19, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

 * It was your work on reverting Zito and getting his vandalism noticed that brought you to my attention, since we hadn't crossed paths too often before. I saw your dedication to getting vandalism reverted, and checked out your contributions, and decided you were a valuable User.  RickK 00:22, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

Vandalism by 195.188.152.16
I have opposed your admission: User Chris 73 has alleged 195.188.152.16 Made a number of edits to musician sites, mainly adding a link to [5] and subpages, and removing some probably valid information from the pages.
 * '''This is a serious allegation of removing some probably valid information.

He should substantiate it.''' I do admit (stupidly and I regret) replacing modemacs page after he reversed all the edits that I had taken a long while (and carefully) to add, which are informative and useful, and which are not in violation of any wiki-pedia guidelines that I can discover. My contributions also cover several topics (as anyone can check). He is unsuitable for admission until he substantiates his words, and until he stops taking a God-like approach to other caring contributors. He caught no vandal !

 * Snippet of my answer on his User talk:Olive
 * First, I am glad that you got a login. This makes talking much easier. Secondly, I am also glad that you apologized to User:Modemac. Regarding vandalism: Adding links or content is no vandalism. Your actions as User:195.188.152.16 on the page of User:Modemac, however, was. That's why I alerted others of your actions, and you got banned for a short period of time. Back then you were a vandal. However, this does not mean that you will be a vandal in the future. Actually, I think your recent actions look very promising, and I am looking forward for your contributions. I removed the "caught vandal" notice from my User:chris 73 page.

 * Regarding the links you added: I didn't like an external link to a site with other links, so I removed it. I think that's what got you in trouble with User:Modemac in the first place,　who also did not like your link to a linklist. I just noticed the multiple reverts by User:Modemac, including your profanities, and tried to give him a helping hand, which got you banned and gave you some time to cool off. May I suggest that you pick one or two of the best links related to a topic on the linklist the rocksite, and add those to the article instead of the linklist?

 * I don't remember exactly. where I though you removed content. Sorry. I also checked some of your other contributions, and saw no problem with them, so I did not touch them (e.g. St James's Theatre and others). A few more notices: Do not edit the page of another user. Add comments only on the talk page. Also, if you would like your past contributions to your new username, you can do so on Changing attribution for an edit, although this may take some time. Finally: Welcome to Wikipedia, User Olive. -- Chris 73 | (New) Talk 15:04, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Chris 73,
 * Thanks for getting in touch. and for your concilatory words and encouagement.
 * My action against modemac was wrong and stupid and I acnowledge that. However it was only taken in retaliation for his reverts without consultation.
 * I had taken a lot of trouble, and often gone back to change typos etc. I had taken great care.
 * Finally, The RockSite has so many options (lyrics, photos, tour dates) that the users may wish to pursue on a given topic.
 * Another justification is that links (even very good ones) often disappear overnight. I do try to keep a eye on these on a cyclical (or reported basis). Valid links do enhance Wiki-pedia.
 * Is this against Wiki-pedia rules or protocol.I cannot find it after exhaustive searching.
 * I am trying to complement your excellent resource.
 * I will remove my objection. I just wish modemac had adopted a better approach, but I am sure we will mend that bridge.

 * It is difficult to discuss things with an anonymous user. Again thanks for getting a login. I have to admit that I also sometimes get a bit careless when reverting anonymous contributions, and your user:modemac edits propably put me in a negative mood towards your other edits. My apologies. Regarding the links to linklist: I am not aware of any special policy, It was just my feeling (and probably modemac's, too). Just out of curiosity: Are you affiliated with "the rocksite"? Again, I am glad that things are improving now. Best regards -- Chris 73 | (New) Talk 15:31, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Chris,
 * I run The RockSite. As I indicated in my posting to Modemac
 * '''Really you should not have been so high-handed and should have expressed your view-point in a more reasonable manner (in accordance with wiki protocol).
 * I believe that my site has photographs, content and informational web-links directly relevant to each page that I contributed to.
 * My site is a labour of love, not for profit, and not selling anything (other than a link to a posters and memorabilia site that is not run by me).
 * My links were directly to the page relevant for the particular musician or artist (not global).
 * I am not advertising my site in the manner you suggest, but providing complementary information that is not in conflict with wiki-pedia. I note that IMDb (The Internet Movie Database) has many such links and very useful they are too. You have not removed them (and I hope you never do otherwise Wiki-pedia will be the poorer. '''
 * It just like wiki-pedia - complimentary web info - not competition. You are welcome to take a look at www.rocksite.info
 * I will not move my earlier contributions, as I indicated some (those about NZ, Sky and tele-communications) were not mine. All future posts will be done under my user Olive.

 * Hi Olive. I am glad that things cooled down now. Thank you very much for removing your objections to my adminship. Regarding you adding links (as User:195.188.152.16) to your own site "The Rocksite": It's a nice site, but I still disagree with the links for two reasons:
 * a direct link to the most relevant subsites would be better
 * linking your own (non-commercial) site at Wikipedia can be seen as self-promotion
 * In any case, I will no longer remove links to "The Rocksite", so the situation between us does not escalate again. Some wiki users may agree with you, some with me, but I fear that the links will continue to give you some trouble. At least with a login this can be discussed before it comes to blows. Anyway, happy contributing and Best Regards -- Chris 73 | Talk 00:12, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

What about Steve Jackson Games
Wasn't the Steve Jackson Games Company a target of this operation or was that a different one?

 * Dear User:64.12.116.16: I have no idea what you're talking about. -- Chris 73 | Talk 02:31, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

Kosovo
Hi. Regarding the dispute about the name of the province in former yugoslavia, could you please not remove the poll on Talk:Kosovo and Metohia? The number of reverts alone should show that this is an important question, which, by the way, is all over wikipedia for similar problems. Check for example the Naming policy poll for a number of cities, Kiev/Kyiv being the hottest dispute. Also, on the Village pump you listed Naming conventions as a source, which recomends to use the most common name, not necessarily the local official name. IMHO this would be Kosovo. Others, of course, may have a different opinion, which is why there is a poll in the first place. Thanks -- Chris 73 | Talk 08:52, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Chris, I see that you are good-intentioned, but you have been tricked. Current name disputes are nothing like this. They revolve around which English variant of the name of a particular place (Kiev/Kyiv, Bombai/Mumbai, Mecca/Mekkah etc.) should be accepted and not about which placename should be accepted. To create a paralell with this case, it would be OK to discuss whether to name the article "Kosovo and Metohia", "Kosovo and Metohiya" or "Kosovo and Metohija". In a few cases (Sea of Korea/Japan) there is discussion about which of names should be accepted, but these are international entities, having different names in different states, which is not the case here. The fact that "Kosovo" is the most common name in English of "Косово" is correct but not quite important - the most common name of "Косово и Метохија" is "Kosovo and Metohia". I will not remove the poll again, but I have no intention of respecting it. Nikola 19:12, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, but to give you a counterexample, Germany is officially called Federal Republic of Germany, but the page is located at Germany, and is called Germany throughout the article, except for the intro and one sentence about the splitting into two germanies. Similarly, Switzerland would be Swiss Confederation, Bulgaria would be Republic of Bulgaria, etc. Pick a country, and you'll probably find an official version that differs from the common name. Besides, Kosovo and Metohia sounds to me like there are two provinces, like Texas and California. The poll also seems to be so far unanimous for Kosovo. I hope this won't turn into an edit war. -- Chris 73 | Talk 01:29, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

 * It's unimportant: Kosovo and Metohia is officially called "Autonomous province of Kosovo and Metohia". I hope that you realise the difference between these cases. There are more such cases: Serbia and Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Trinidad and Tobago etc. They all seem like two somethings, yet their names are preserved. Voting is unanimous because I refuse to lower to Dori's level. I could easily get a few Serbian users, Russian users and few more people I know to counter it and make it indecisive at best. I don't want to do it. If someone tries to move the page (and storm over disambig which is now at Kosovo) this will turn into an edit war. Nikola 06:07, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

 * (snipped some profanity by User:Andrew Zito)

 * Um, okay. ANYWAY, the practice of using a short form for a nation or a state in place of the full, given title has a long precedent. If you look at any entry in the the CIA's world factbook you'll notice that they include four versions of the name of each county.  In the case of Andorra:
 * Country name:
 * conventional long form: Principality of Andorra
 * conventional short form: Andorra
 * local short form: Andorra
 * local long form: Principat d'Andorra
 * and they always use the conventional short form for their entries. I know Wikipedia convention is to use the longest form possible for article titles, but in the cases of nation states using at least a redirect for the conventional short form is advisable. ~ clarknova

 * Clark, "Kosovo and Metohia" is the short form.
 * conventional long form: Autonomous province of Kosovo and Metohia
 * conventional short form: Kosovo and Metohia
 * local short form: Косово и Метохија
 * local long form: Аутономна покрајина Косово и Метохија
 * Nikola 00:41, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

Requested pictures cleanup
Great work on cleaning up Requested pictures! It's much nicer to have listed specific articles in need of illustration, rather than the catch-all requests that were there before. Thanks for taking the time to do so. -- Wapcaplet 04:19, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks. I actually enjoyed fixing that mess. -- Chris 73 | Talk 16:50, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I've changed the policy on requested pictures and made a note on the talk page that requests should be removed when they're fulfilled (and listed on fulfilled picture requests), for the sake of keeping the page as uncluttered as possible. Thoughts? -- Wapcaplet 03:15, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I was thinking that, too. My though was to leave the "fulfilled" note there for a few days, so people feel good about it, and then remove it later. There is also a page Fulfilled picture requests, but that looks pretty unused and unstructured. Either way is fine by me. -- Chris 73 | Talk 03:28, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

Sysop
Congratulations! You are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. Good luck. Angela. 07:07, May 8, 2004 (UTC)

 * Congratulations, Chris. Cribcage 07:15, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! I voted for you :) Avala 11:09, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Thank you very much, RickK, Maximus Rex, Dori, Cecropia, Angela, theresa knott, Meelar, Graham :), Danny, Decumanus, Guanaco, pir, Michael Snow, jengod, Warofdreams, Avala, and also to Olive and all other users for your support! -- Chris 73 | Talk 16:45, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

Anthony Lambton
As the two articles were empty/stubs with no pages linking to them I thought they were candidates for deletion, otherwise I wouldn't have bothered you and redirected myself. Sorry. garryq 18:52, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Hey, no problem at all. I thought the short forms may be useful as redirects, for exampel if somebody types in "Anthony Lambton" in the search box. Happy editing -- Chris 73 | Talk 01:49, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

Requested pictures: Hats
Thanks for all those great hat photos. :) fabiform | talk 14:04, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the appreciation. Just felt like cleaning up the Requested pictures page. It's amazing what you can find if you search Google for .gov sites for example for Hard Hats. Then you just have to pick a good one and check if it is public domain. -- Chris 73 | Talk 14:24, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks also for formatting the hat-pages. I just quickly put the pictures on the pages since i did not know if there is a special format. -- Chris 73 | Talk 03:47, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I always forget about those .gov sites, it still seems strange to me that the US government doesn't hold copyrights. Oh and the format isn't special exactly, it's just to shove the msg: box out of the way.  I'm looking forward to the category system, we'll be able to replace a lot of these boxes then and not have to mess around with the formatting all the time. :)  fabiform | talk 10:17, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

Kosovo 2
Hi Dori. I though you moved the Kosovo page. But a bit later it was back at Kosovo and Metohia, so I moved it again. Hope that was in your intention. Best regards, -- Chris 73 | Talk 15:35, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

 * The vote was for moving the article to Kosovo so that's where I moved it. Nikola is disregarding the community consensus and deciding it should stay at Kosovo and Metohia. Dori | Talk 17:40, May 9, 2004 (UTC)

 * Totally agree with you. Community consensus is for Kosovo. Did you have to move the page a third time now? Who is moving them back? Since Nicola is not an admin, he shouldn't be able to do that. -- Chris 73 | Talk 03:42, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I've moved it twice to Kosovo. I don't know who's moving it back, haven't checked. Dori | Talk 04:01, May 10, 2004 (UTC)

Deletion of User:24.45.99.191
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/User:24.45.99.191

Sorry, but it's not clear from that on what basis you deleted. Did I miss something? Martin 00:18, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Hi Martin. A lot of anonymous user pages were listed on Speedy deletions by user:Guanaco (see ), citing case #13 of the Candidates for speedy deletion rules. I also checked the What links here for MediaWiki:Delete, and deleted some other pages with msg:delete, including User:24.45.99.191. I assumed this was the right thing to do, but if I am mistaken then please do not hesitate to restore the page. I am not very familiar with the User:Paul Vogel issue, so I don't know if there is a special reason for the existence of the page. Let me know what you think. -- Chris 73 | Talk 01:03, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Ok, thanks for the clarification. I think I will request undelete on VfU.

Sweetheart
Did you remember a while ago when you put a brief description of a company called Sweetheart?? Note that Sweetheart is a dis-ambiguation page, and there is a ghost-link to the company. Do you know enough about the company to create a detailed article for it?? (I do not.) Just click on the ghost-link. 66.245.17.98 01:08, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't know much about the company except that it exists. The current status of the disambig page is fine with me. Thanks for the notice, though. -- Chris 73 | Talk 03:44, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

Cut and Paste to Move
I appreciate your recent work on Taurus, et al, and Kosovo, et al. I may have a high number of edits, but as I've said in other places, A) I think some people over-value that stat, and B) it is mostly because I'm currently unemployed (which changes, at least temporarily, 6/1 [yeah!]), and because I do a lot of reverts and cleanup doing RC patrol, and a lot of cleanup doing New Pages patrol. If there was a page listing WPian contribs by # of bytes, I'd be much lower. You've been here longer than me, which in my mind is a more significant factor. Niteowlneils 17:45, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

Massivly out of format, and I cannot fix it, speedy delete?
Hi Paulin. Regarding Irwin Shaw, Sieur de Maisonneuve, and Paul Chomedey, sieur de Maisonneuve (1612-1676), seem to be OK to me. I removed the speedy deletion notice. Maybe you can list similar pages at Cleanup? U-884 is borderline, and i am not sure if it should be deleted or rescued. Anyway, happy editing and best regards, -- Chris 73 | Talk 11:51, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I may have gone overboard on the speedy delete thing, but gee, EVERY SINGLE ONE of this contributor's articles are borderline gruesome. I appreciate your taking the time to look at them. PaulinSaudi 11:54, 12 May 2004 (UTC)]]

 * I agree, it's annoying if a newbie contributes totally unformatted stuff, but that's how most newbies start. In this case, however, the content seems to be stolen from all over the web. Irwin Shaw, for example, from. I will list most of the stuff from his contributions on Copyright problems, if it is not already there. Best regards, -- Chris 73 | Talk 12:04, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

Reverting Kosovo
Name dispute or not, but why have you reverted my revert of the Kosovo article? ChrisO's edits were erroneus, and I was right to revert them. I was apparently too hasty and rv'ed Dori's edits as well, but you could have reintroduced them, not' just revert back. Please don't involve so deeply in editing of topics that you don't know so much about.

I'll dissect you his edits:
 * ChrisO changed "rest of Serbia" to "Serbia proper" even though he knows, he's been told that this is offensive to Serbs. And he choose to change at this exact moment.
 * He also rewrote "Metohia is the large valley..." to "The large valley at the west of the province is referred to as the Metohija". Metohia is a redirect to this article, so previous wording, which defined the term, should be kept. Also he's trying to push POV that the valley isn't an established region but is only referred to as such.
 * Then he changed "The second largest region is Kosovo proper or Kosovo Polje (Kosovo Field)" to "Central Kosovo is a plain known as Kosovo Polje". This is incorrect, as the plain is in northern part of the province. By the way, even the previous version is incorrect.
 * He reworded definition as "Kosovo is an autonomous province of southern Serbia, known in Serbian as Kosovo i Metohija". Southern Serbia is not a political entity and has no provinces, and Serbia doesn't have any province with the name "Kosovo".

I don't know why, but I quite like you, so, please, don't do it again. Nikola 21:07, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Hi Nicola. Thanks for your message. I think I may have reverted more than necessary in this revert. My aim was to revert the "Kosovo and Metohia" and the disambiguity links in the first two changed paragraphs in the Difference between revisions. About your points:
 * "Serbia" and "Serbia proper": I don't know much about which version is the correct one. I also can't say if one or both are offensive to some people/groups. Either version is fine by me. A compromise could be to write that its called "Serbia" by GroupA and "Serbia proper" by GroupB.
 * >>Well, you can't but he can, yet he changes it. Nikola
 * "Metohia" and "Metohija", and "Kosovo proper": The first two names look the same to me, and I would believe that they are pronounced similarly. The previous edit seemed to contain more information, but - as you suspected - I do not know much about Serbia. BTW, is it possible that "Kosovo Proper" may be offensive to some similar to "Serbia proper"? Actually, your approach of listing both names seems to be better here.
 * >>You've missed my point, but it is too complicated for me to explain it. Nikola
 * "Kosovo is an autonomous province": This point is not entirely clear to me. From what I remember from the news is -and I might be quite wrong- that there was/is a lot of violence between Serbs and Albanians, and either one wants the province, but without the other ethnicity. As a result, Kosovo seems to be a very independent province of Serbia at best, and more under UN control than Serbian control. But then, I don't know much about it.
 * >>Again, that was not my point. United States of America have article on United States, yet it begins with "United States of America .. is...". United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has article at United Kingdom, yet it starts with "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland  is...". Same should be followed here. Nikola 11:05, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't object a change of the points you mentioned, simply because I don't know which one is the better way. In case of doubt, I usually prefer to include both versions. My concern is that the article and its references are called "Kosovo". I know you don't like that - and you don't have to - but it seems to be the majority view based on a vote, which I consider done properly, similar to other votes on Wikipedia. It was announced on the Village Pump, so it got proper exposure, and there was ample discussion of the points in the Kosovo talk page (with most Pro-K&M points coming from you). Excluding the vote of User:Kosovar, who has only two edits beside Talk page edits, there are still 9 people for Kosovo, and no votes against. I hope you will respect the majority view, even if you strongly disagree. As for me, I will continue to support the majority view of Kosovo. If the majority would change its view, then I would have no problems with naming the province any name the majority prefers.
 * >>I have summed up why the vote was invalid User talk:ChrisO. Nikola 11:08, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Back to your edits: because of the multiple move of the page back and forth, the page is now protected, and I am not allowed to make edits. You could request unprotection on Requests for page protection, maybe with a statement that you wont move the page. Anyway, thanks for not requesting de-adminship for Dori, and for having a civil tone in the discussions. (other users sometimes turn to profanity quickly if people don't agree with them). Best regards, -- Chris 73 | Talk 01:17, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Hi Nicola. Regarding the revert: Either way is fine by me (although I reserve the right to change my opinion in the future). Thanks for not going into detail about why and what, I wouldn't really know enough about the details to decide between e.g. "Metohia" and "Metohija". About the vote: I read your statement on User talk:ChrisO before I wrote my answer from 01:17, 14 May 2004, and still think the vote was proper. Even if it would have been an invalid vote, a result of 10:0 is pretty strong, and a new vote would probably give similar results. Nevertheless, feel free to start a new discussion or vote on the talk page, but based on the information from you and others on Talk:Kosovo I will continue to support the name Kosovo. BTW, I agree with you that Kosovar has not enough edits. I think Kosovar should have at least 10 article edits to have a valid vote. Best regards, -- Chris 73 | Talk 12:26, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I hold that, if Kosovar cannot vote, his dissent cannot be used to start a vote. I won't edit Talk:Kosovo because it insults me to have to edit that page. Nikola 12:44, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

You are an admin. You have rollback. Could you please go over your edits where you have removed Metohia from the link to the province and rollback them? It is much easier for you to do then it is for me. Nikola 13:13, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

And if you don't think that you should, OK, but at least don't devert. I have to go off the net now but would gladly explain about this later. Nikola 13:43, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Nicola, i do not object the comments you listed above about the page Kosovo. But i DO object against you linking everything to Kosovo and Metohija! I believe the vote is valid, and the province is called Kosovo in english. If you want to argue about a possible difference between Kosovo as a province of serbia, and Kosovo as a region, then you can add a page Kosovo (Region), but the serbian province is Kosovo, and I will continue to fix links from Kosovo and Metohija to Kosovo. Unfortunately, this means a lot of reverts of your reverts. Please accept the majority view. -- Chris 73 | Talk 06:42, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I believe that the vote is invalid, but even if it would not be, the only thing it decided is that article about Kosovo and Metohia would be located at Kosovo. It did not decide how the article should be linked from other articles. Nor a vote can decide what is the name of the province. You should not have done anything about this matter untill the dust has settled.
 * If you still believe that you are correct, you should go and fix all links to United States to USA (former has 13,000,000 Google hits, latter 138,000,000). If you don't, I can't consider your stance as anything but exclusively anti-Serb. Nikola 06:36, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Again, I consider the vote valid. I also believe that any other vote here on Wikipedia about this question will yield similar results. Do you want to tell all the people that voted that their opinion did not matter? In any case, the vote is the best thing we have until another vote comes along. If there is a vote about United States and USA, I would also follow the majority vote. The vote was about what to call the province, and it was decided for Kosovo. Hence it should be called Kosovo throughout Wikipedia with few exceptions (e.g. Political divisions of Serbia and Montenegro, or Project Rastko). You can start a new vote if you want to talk about it on Talk:Kosovo, and if you get the majority for your opinion, then I am all for it. Until then, please don’t call people anti-serb, name calling never helps. It is unfortunate that we have this argument, because except for your pushing of Kosovo and Metohia I had a good impression of you. -- Chris 73 | Talk 07:05, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Oh, and by the way, I am not pushing Kosovo and Metohia. I am keeping Kosovo and Metohia. You are pushing Kosovo. Nikola 07:23, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

 * The vote decided the URL of the article, not how that article would be referred to from other articles. My example about USA was maybe not a best one, but now I expect you to fix all links to Kyiv to point to Kiev, all links to Makkah to point to Mecca , and all links to Bombai to point to Mumbai . There were votes on these issues. Nikola 07:17, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * No problem. I am busy now, but I can start fixing links later today. Will take me some time, though, and there are always more redirects than time. -- Chris 73 | Talk 07:24, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

Image:Croatia flag large.png on Requested pictures
You discussed the coratian flag with User:Grendelkhan, and he placed a request on Requested pictures, so I thought I let you know too: I have downloaded the coratian flag from the CIA World Factbook, and corrected the coat of arms (COA) placement and 2:1 ratio using OpenOffice.org (Draw). I assumed with the incorrect placement you meant the horizontal lines of the COA aligned with the red/white/blue borders. I also trimmed the edges a bit to get the COA centered according to the previous low res version, and the flag into a 2:1 ratio. Now the only difference is a slighly different blue color in the top left, center, and right part of the coat of arms. Not sure which version is correct or if it needs correcting. Let me know and I can GIMP it. -- Chris 73 | Talk 04:56, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Ah, now Image:Croatia flag large.png is much better. There's a few more details to fix but I can fix them myself. (Also with Gimp :) Thanks. --Shallot 10:48, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

User:Jondel copyvios
Hi. You added User:Jondel to Copyright problems. Can you list any violations you have found seperately? In order for them to be evaluated each article must have the boilerplate copyright violation notice. Thanks - Tεx τ urε 23:19, 14 May 2004 (UTC)
 * 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)

title: User:Chris 73/Archive 001


text:
Jaimee Foxworth

Jaimee Monae Foxworth (born December 17, 1979) is an American actress, model, former pornographic actress and singer. She is best known for her role of Judy Winslow, the youngest daughter of Carl and Harriette Winslow on the ABC sitcom Family Matters, during the show's first four seasons.

Career
Foxworth, who began modeling at the age of five, soon appeared in national television advertisements, and ultimately landed the role of Judy Winslow, the youngest of the Winslow family's three children, on the long-running sitcom Family Matters. After the introduction of Steve Urkel (Jaleel White), Foxworth's scenes on the show were reduced significantly. The combination of the character having little to do on the show and budget cuts caused producers to eliminate her from the series after its fourth season. The character disappeared without explanation, with the Winslows acknowledging only two children: Eddie (Darius McCrary) and Laura (Kellie Shanygne Williams). Jo Marie Payton, who played matriarch Harriette Winslow, was particularly upset with Foxworth's dismissal, stating that producers had decided "nobody would notice" Judy was gone.

With very little acting work coming in the years after Family Matters, Foxworth formed an R&B musical group, S.H.E., with her two sisters (Tyren Perry and Jania Perry). They released their debut album 3's a Charm on July 1, 1997, through Shaquille O'Neal's T.W.IsM./Interscope Records. From 2000 to 2002, she worked in the adult industry, making pornographic films under the pseudonym Crave.

Personal life
Foxworth battled substance abuse and depression. It was rumored that this was prompted in part by a judge's ruling that her trust fund of more than $500,000 be used to save her family from bankruptcy, but she denied this in a 2009 interview, stating, "I think [that came] from the National Enquirer. We never filed for bankruptcy. We were almost to the point where we were just completely flat broke but we never filed for bankruptcy."

In December 2008, People magazine reported that Foxworth was pregnant. According to the report, she and longtime boyfriend Michael Shaw were expecting a child in early 2009. On May 29, 2009, People reported that Foxworth and Shaw's baby, a boy named Michael Douglas Shaw, Jr., had been born. He was 10 days overdue, and Foxworth shared the news of his birth via text message while still in the delivery room.

In Fall 2009, the TV One series Life After chronicled Foxworth's story, dealing with her departure from Family Matters, and her subsequent use of marijuana, which she claimed to have stopped smoking. Also, during the show, her newborn son was shown.

Filmography

 * Family Matters (1989–1993) TV series

Notable TV guest appearances

 * Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew
 * The Tyra Banks Show October 6, 2006
 * The Oprah Winfrey Show January 29, 2006
 * 20/20 April 29, 2005
 * TV 101 playing Whitney Hines in episode: "Home" (episode #1.4) December 20, 1988
 * Amen playing Choir in episode: "Your Christmas Show of Shows" (episode #1.11) December 20, 1986 Syress - 2018

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

title: Jaimee Foxworth


text:
Talk:Leviathan (Hobbes book)

Incorrect sentence
"He thus denied any right of rebellion toward the social contract, which would be later amended by John Locke and conserved by Jean-Jacques Rousseau."

This is wrong, wrong, wrong so I am deleting it. Hobbes thought you could rebel if the state failed to fulfil that reason for which you founded it: your self-preservation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.74.123.192 (talk) 01:32, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Comments
Yes, I disagree indeed. I came to this page interested in the book and greatly appreciated these quotes, which give judicious access to the flavor of the language and the thinking of Hobbes. Ten pages of quotes might be too much, but a page or two is not, given the luxury of space in Wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

I wouldn't want to undermine the original creator, but I think this would be more useful as a source of information if it relied less heavily on quotations from the text. Any disagreement? J.T.

(William M. Connolley 21:39, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)) Filling out the Leviathan page was a project of mine that has fallen by the wayside, sadly. I've now added something to part II - but it by no means covers it all. The problem I find is that Hobbes language is so wonderful I hate to replace it with boring paraphrase. However the section is too long (and there is much more to fit in). Its also almost entirely descriptive, rather than judgemental: perhaps that is a good thing. So what I have written needs to be cut and expanded. One day I will: but in the meantime feel free.

(William M. Connolley 08:23, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)) OK, I've done III and IV now too, rather better I hope. II needs finishing and tidying a lot. Rev+Conc needs doing. There is quite a bit on Lev on the TH page too - not sure if it should be merged in here.

I notice that Pepys says the book escalated in price because the Bishops would not allow it to be reprinted. That raises for me the absence of social context and impact of the book. I'd love to know more 203.219.121.148 (talk) 21:15, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Summary
I'm going to add a sentence to the introduction that summarizes the modern sense of the word leviathan, as derived from Hobbes. Tobacman 19:03, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The article uses way too much original text. It should be paraphrased so people will be able to understand exactly what Hobbes is saying versus illustrating how he is saying it.

 * (William M. Connolley 09:55, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)) I like Hobbe's language, and it was the fastest way of writing the article,. But it could probably be tidied up.

Hi there! Just to let you know that theres a mistake under "Diverse" it says "A quote from that book dfd;lskfjd;lsfjd;lskfj;salkf jd;lsaf j at one time used in the wikipedia logo."

Just thought i'd let you know, Neil B

Removed para: why
I removed:

 * The essence of Hobbes' description is that the state of nature (or God's original creation) is one of war. In this state of nature, man's condition is defined as misery. Man draws upon "passions that incline men to peace and fear of death," as well as some limited form of natural reason to create and agree upon a convent in which there exists articles of peace. These form the "Laws of Nature" which allow for the creation of a Sovereign who has absolute power and essentially solves the problem of the state of nature. The Sovereign is seen as a lesser evil in that it is the only solution to the worse outcome that is the state of nature. The presence of the Sovereign allows for the development and the support of man's higher reason which in turn allows for science. Science plays an important role in Hobbes' discourse, yet science is dependent upon the presence of the Sovereign. It is important to remember that the Sovereign is not defined as one individual, but as one absolute power. This absolute power may be composed of multipe individuals, i.e. in the form of government.

Some of this duplicates what is already there (the SoN bit). man's condition is defined as misery is wrong (or at least defined is wrong). But the quote above has already done that.

But the real mistake is the Sovereign bit - none of that is in part 1. Its in part 2. As the existing article already says :-) William M. Connolley 21:43, 15 February 2006 (UTC).

spellings
KP "fixed" a couple of spellings. Of those, Naturall should definitely stay "ll" cos its the text. "Civill" is a bit harder: in the frontispiece its Civil; in the subtitle on the title page its Civill. I prefer the ll; and "leave original spelling" hopefully applies William M. Connolley 22:47, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I noticed this myself when I picked up a copy of the book a couple days ago, and then went back to revert it but noticed someone beat me to it. From now on while reading articles on books written in archaic english, I'll try to control my sudden impulses to grammarize and spellify everything I see. Sorry about that. user:knowledgepirate 18:56, 2 March 2006

This should contain a section on the modern relevance perhaps
Its often stated that leviathan is relevant to modern politics

 * Yep, it underlies the US foreign policy. But it might prove just a teensy bit controversial to assert that :-) William M. Connolley 21:48, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm up for writing a section devoted to modern reevaluation of the writing, as well as a section devoted toward criticism of it. CapitalistOverlord (talk) 01:01, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Etching?
Is the frontispiece for Leviathan really an etching? I can't find any other sources that say so, and I've found a few that say that it's an engraving.

, Thomas Hobbes and the Title-Page of "Leviathan", Keith Brown, Philosophy, Vol. 55, No. 213 (Jul., 1980), pp. 410-411

Bosse was an etcher, but he also did engravings (or at least etching/engraving hybrids). Are we sure that this is an etching? I'm taking that out until someone proves otherwise. superlusertc 2007 September 27, 05:38 (UTC)

1 title or two?
Re. I think its two titles; after the "or" is a subtitle. Hence the edit should be reverted William M. Connolley (talk) 21:29, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

 * A fair question. My opinion is, of course, that it is one title, which is why I reverted it.  As to why, consider the following.

 * Or is capitalized, suggesting that it's part of the title, not a separate thing connecting two independent titles.
 * Every place that I see has it listed as part of the title.
 * Consider Dr. Strangelove, or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb and Twelfth Night, or What You Will. So spelt on the English Wikipedia.
 * The Chicago Manual of Style recommends the following treatments for Old-fashioned titles
 * England's Monitor; or, The History of the Separation
 * England's Monitor, or The History of the Separation
 * It's managed to remain unchanged for over a year. You'd think that the first sentence in a high-profile article like Leviathan would be changed if it were wrong.

 * I think we might be getting into a WP:LAME area, so I'm really amenable to either decision, but I do note that Wikipedia's style manual does not seem to provide any guidance on this issue. This means that what we decide here may eventually be used to come up with a policy on Wikipedia. superlusertc 2007 December 14, 06:27 (UTC)
 * Actually, I might just go ahead and add a category for "books with old-fashioned titles," not because I think it's particularly encyclopedic, but because I think that it would help in determining a policy. superlusertc 2007 December 14, 06:30 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I hadn't noticed yours was a revert, I thought it was a change. Anyway, I still think its called just L, with the rest as subtitle. But that may just be a personal preference; I'm not sure how we could decide this authoritatively William M. Connolley (talk) 21:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I've written a proposal at WP:SUBTITLES. If you have opinions (and it sounds like you do), I'd really like to hear them over there. superlusertc 2007 December 19, 00:51 (UTC)

Spare text
RJC edited Hobbes for summary style; I've dumped the excess text into the intro here. Perhaps it should be pared down somewhat, I'm not sure William M. Connolley (talk) 12:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

More headings
Needs more headings, especially the intro. -- TimNelson (talk) 02:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Scripture
I disagree with capitalising scripture. MOS says The names of major revered works of scripture like the Bible, the Qur'an, the Talmud, and the Vedas should be capitalized. That doesn't seem to be relevant to the issue William M. Connolley (talk) 07:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

 * When we use "Scripture" to refer to the Bible, we are using it as a name for a holy text.  RJC  TalkContribs 15:55, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Meaning of the title
Could someone clarify who or what Hobbes's "Leviathan" refers to, perhaps with a quoted passage from the book? Does the Leviathan refer to a state or a ruler, and is it used in an appreciative or pejorative sense? If it refers to a ruler, how does Hobbes's "Leviathan" differ from, say, Machiavelli's "Prince"? Hah, I realize that the preceding sounds like an essay prompt for a high school literature exam. I assure respondents I am well out of school and not seeking homework help. :-) Robert K S (talk) 17:50, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Update: I am directed to an article that notes: "In the cultural climate of the 1650s, with the legions of monster tropes in polemical literature, no text that describes the commonwealth as a Leviathan could fail to provoke and disturb. Hobbes was aware of the dreadful connotations of the name, as his autobiography demonstrates, and as the exchange with Bishop Bramhall shows, he was quite capable of deliberately unsettling his readers with associations between the monstrous and his text. The inference that Hobbes's Leviathan assumes its strange title at least in part to provoke and disturb is inescapable. From the patristics to Protestant commentators in the English tradition, the Leviathan is consistently interpreted as the symbol of the devil. Milton, for instance, opens Paradise Lost with Satan prone upon the lake of Hell as a Leviathan." But if Hobbes was unironically nostalgic for an absolute power system, it makes little sense that he would use a pejorative to symbolize an authority.  (I should add the disclaimer that I have not read Leviathan.) Robert K S (talk) 17:59, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Inalienable Rights
Hey guys, just made a little correction that people often miss, and I wanted to explain myself more clearly here so it doesn't get erased.

Thomas Hobbes, not John Locke, actually originated the concept of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness (or at least, he's the earliest thinker that I know to have iterated it explicitly). Check Chapter XIV pg. 93 in the Revised Student Edition, Ed. Richard Tuck:

And therefore there be some Rights, which no man can be understood by any words, or other signes, to have abandoned, or transferred [Inalienable Rights]. As first a man cannot lay down the right of resisiting them, that assault him by force, to take away his life; because he canot be understood to ayme thereby, at any Good to himself [Life]. The same may be sayd of Wounds, and Chayns, and Imprisonment; both because there is not benefit consequent to such patience; as there is to the patience of suffering another to be wounded, or imprisoned: as also because a man cannot tell, when he seeth men proceed against him by violence, whether they intend his death or not [Liberty]. And lastly the motive, and end for which this renouncing and transferring of Right is introduced, is nothing else but the security of a mans person, in his life, and in the means of so preserving life, as not to be weary of it [Pursuit of Happiness].

If you have any questions, please direct them to me.

Tethros (talk) 23:26, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Inalienable rights?
I'm not sure what this refers to. Hobbes certainly states that you can't give up your right to resist force, or imprisonment; but he certainly doesn't mean by this that you have a "right" not to be imprisonned William M. Connolley (talk) 23:33, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that is absolutely correct. Of course, neither does Locke deny that imprisonment is a sometimes necessary evil for violations of the social contract. The point of the passage is to clarify the epistemological heritage of the concept of an inalienable right, which while often attributed to Locke, can actually be traced back even further, to Hobbes. It refers to the passage that I included in my previous post.

Tethros (talk) 07:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Hmm, OK, I missed your comment above. So: However, Hobbes also posits a primitive form of the inalienable rights--which would later be rehashed by John Locke--implying that some covenants may be derived axiomatically, and consequently held to be universally true.  I don't think you can say "which would later be rehashed by John Locke". Possibly "more popularly expounded by" or somesuch. And I'm not sure that "some covenants may be derived axiomatically" is correct. Hobbes isn't deriving any covenants in that passage - he is explaining why some rights cannot be traded away William M. Connolley (talk) 10:09, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Technically, Locke doesn't speak of inalienable rights, either. The government is limited in what it can do by the fact that it can have no more authority than what was ceded to it and no one has the power to cede certain protections because they lack that power over themselves (not because they possess a right which they cannot cede).  A. John Simmons wrote an article on this in the mid 90s.  And for Locke, you can lose the right to life, namely, by committing a crime against the law of nature.  "Inalienable rights" implies limits on legitimate government, and I wouldn't put Hobbes in the "limited government" camp.  RJC  TalkContribs 16:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

more is needed
what happened to twelve rights of nature, self defense and determination, the golden rule, ect....the page is missing most of the main pionts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.156.62.9 (talk) 17:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

 * For self defence, do you mean "His first law of nature is that that every man ought to endeavour peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it; and when he cannot obtain it, that he may seek and use all helps and advantages of war. In the state of nature, every man has a right to every thing, even to one another's body "? Twelve rights... not sure what you mean? Can you quote chapter and verse. Etc William M. Connolley (talk) 20:18, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Galileo? Flat Earth?
I see problems in the text bellow:

''At the end of this comes an interesting section (darkness is suppressing true knowledge as well as introducing falsehoods), which would appear to bear on the discoveries of Galileo Galilei. "Our own navigations make manifest, and all men learned in human sciences now acknowledge, there are antipodes" (i.e., the Earth is round) "…Nevertheless, men… have been punished for it by authority ecclesiastical. But what reason is there for it?  Is it because such opinions are contrary to true religion? That cannot be, if they be true."''

 * First, knowledge about the spherical Earth has nothing to do with discoveries of Galileo. Educated people from the Middle Ages already knew very well that the Earth was round like a ball (see Flat Earth). Galileo had problems for arguing that the Sun (and not the Earth) was the center of the cosmos, but everyone involved in the dispute was in agreement that the Earth was spherical.
 * Moreover, to say that there are no "antipodes" is NOT (necessarily) to argue against a round earth. The term "antipodes" can mean: (1) the "lands on the opposite side of the world" or (2) "the people living in the opposite side of the world". For instance, this second meaning is the one adopted by Augustine in this quotation:
 * But as to the fable that there are Antipodes, that is to say, men on the opposite side of the earth, (...) that is on no ground credible. (...) although it be supposed or scientifically demonstrated that the world is of a round and spherical form, yet it does not follow that the other side of the earth is bare of water; nor even, though it be bare, does it immediately follow that it is peopled...

Since knowledge about the round shape of the Earth was uncontroversial among ecclesiastical authorities, it seems far more likely that Hobbes is using the second meaning in his alleged case of persecution. --Leinad-Z (talk) 14:42, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

 * The text is mine . But you may well have a point William M. Connolley (talk) 20:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Source?
The sentence "So we end up back at the first-born son, in practice" sounds like a conclusion that should be sourced. Patrilineality or Patrilineal_descent_of_Elizabeth_II seem relevant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.64.89.205 (talk) 19:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Needs revision
Hobbes wasn't happy for truth being suppressed, I believe it was just another instance to criticize the church. Civil authority means the people's faith, and Hobbes argues that only civil authority can "regulate the truth" opposing the power that the church had at the time, and which it used to abuse people's rights.

"Nevertheless, men… have been punished for it by authority ecclesiastical. But what reason is there for it? Is it because such opinions are contrary to true religion? That cannot be, if they be true." However, Hobbes is quite happy for the truth to be suppressed if necessary: if "they tend to disorder in government, as countenancing rebellion or sedition? Then let them be silenced, and the teachers punished" — but only by the civil authority."

The first is by extinguishing the light of scripture through misinterpretation. Hobbes sees the main abuse as teaching that the kingdom of God can be found in the church, thus undermining the authority of the civil sovereign. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.1.104.2 (talk) 16:22, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

What's up with the weird rant in the Commonwealth section?
What's up with the weird rant in the Commonwealth section? Definitely seems like it doesn't belong there. Not only is it screwing up the formatting of the page, but it seems to be some sort of semi-conspiracy theory babble about modern day society?...

it's here:

OLIGARCHY raises its head as a sea monster and its products have and can claim it is a form of commonwealth (synechdoche is of what's due to the English wording distributing encyclopedia information) the manufacture that is ostensibly shared freely enriching everyone equally though {this} noted by monopoly (software stimulation) and ownerships of products by consumers a wealth which becomes Sovereign according to Thomas Hobbes when he notes what is found Grant in the Leviathan the ownerships {scanned UCC] and solicitable there is the forcible entry by a monarch [that which] is not of democracy as Americans feared the writs of assistance and the bill of attainder and there are ex post facto laws defeating the self in monarchy though of the best chosen to govern an aristocracy need not hold in custody by the use of force in trespass those agreeable to know who and what becomes educated the best certainly not data entry internet of the convenience of aptitude as herein is noted offering to edit the words of a public domain publication enclopedic and verifiable ISBN 0-486-44794-4 numbers and deuteronomy to levitus and exodus of where the accretion parts waters in TRUST to the CONQUEST and the SUBMISSION the involvement daily not distracted adverstising submitting to rules and regulations in order to be comfortable as a commonwealth arraignement characterizes the Monarch and not the cunning Aristocrat both of large numbers a leviathan removing from what is at large criminal notable that each one self is found having been issued keys to the ignition the cognition is ancient and not modern to wit ... the steering of wheels is but metaphorical.

"I upholster the windshield" is not a form of government or commonwealth though the electronic display of the wording is identical to the manufacture what variance is why I herein apply the alternating current(often of coils wound around cores counting consoles) to do the keys of the computer typewriter projecting as were the papers inked bound and paginated wording onto the screen these sorts of statements wealthy as they are in common and I am not prevaricating to seventy Elders the airplane each then common as one's housing in wealth the wings only to trespass the houses with cockpits like a sea monster as there are tires treading below each fuselage and why govern nations of the jet engines an I noting the battery assaultive is not to have been accorded autonomy, Hobbes is quoting "Those Bodies made for the government of Men, or of Trafffique, (be) either perptuall ..." RE parking lots and airports ... terminals and plates to have been prescribed by writing ... and the commands to towns of Subjects and Deputies ... how are the People represented? There are not three forms of commonwealth ... the people to have assembled As SOVEREIGN is democracy without one REPRESENTATIVE SELF ... Aristocracy of numerous lives chosen the best capable

yeah. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.23.94.33 (talk) 03:26, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

 * Junk by EISNERS now removed William M. Connolley (talk) 08:04, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

However, Hobbes also posits a primitive form of the inalienable rights
M tagged:

 * However, Hobbes also posits a primitive form of the inalienable rights – which would later be restated by John Locke – implying that some covenants may be derived axiomatically, and consequently held to be universally true.

Looking back, this was added by so I don't much trust it. Re-reading the chapter, I think it might be referring to

 * Whensoever a man transferreth his right or renounceth it, it is either in consideration of some right reciprocally transferred to himself, or for some other good he hopeth for thereby. For it is a voluntary act; and of the voluntary acts of every man the object is some good ‘to himself.’ And therefore there be some rights which no man can be understood by any words or other signs to have abandoned or transferred. As first a man cannot lay down the right of resisting them that assault him by force to take away his life, because he cannot be understood to aim thereby at any good to himself.

though that doesn't fit the "implying" bit. I'd suggest the text stay out William M. Connolley (talk) 22:35, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Need for revision of "Part I: Of Man"
The content of the section "Part I: Of Man" is longwinded, undirected, and contains weasel words. Given the purpose of an encyclopedia article to introduce the subject at hand in a succinct and authoritative manner, this section should contain a focused statement about what Hobbes was doing in this first part of the book. The quoted passages are unnecessary and distracting (although they could be moved to footnotes, if deemed helpful by other editors), and the drawn out discussion of causes a bit tedious. Lastly, errors of syntax abound, e.g. "Hobbes attempts an analysis of society from first principles, beginning with Man and the Senses" (man and the senses is not an analysis of society). I propose the following:
 * In Part I, Hobbes begins his analysis with a view of the human and the capacity to know. He develops this in a sequence of definitions about the senses and the capacity to interpret the natural world, and the passions that humans use to navigate their social relations, such as hope and honor. He finds three basic causes of the conflict in the state of nature: competition, diffidence and glory. Without any mediating authority, these attributes force humans into warlike circumstances. In the state of nature, as Hobbes puts it, "every man has a right to every thing, even to one another's body." This leads to the formulation of Hobbe's second law: in order to secure the advantages of peace humans will form a contract of peace with each other, which affords each other the same liberties. This is the beginning of contracts/covenants, which is the third law of nature.

If more is required about concepts of the self, as proposed by user:RJC ("view of man as matter in motion"), I suggest those be incorporated into my proposed edit as it is certainly not clear in the current version--nor do I see this as a particularly important aspect that needs highlighting in the article. Socialtheorynow (talk) 21:18, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

 * You're a touch new to be so forceful. Play yourself in, there are plenty of areas where wiki can be improved where other people won't disagree, then come back William M. Connolley (talk) 21:42, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
 * So I get this welcome message that refers me to this link: WP:Bold, which makes me think that not only is it in the right of every Wikipedian to be assertive, but in fact encouraged. But let's be clear here, I am not making arbitrary changes based on a superficial reading of the text or whimsical copy editing, but rather reasonable suggestions to improve the article and clarify the meaning. I think these suggestions deserve to be taken seriously and not dismissed because I have only recently decided to take time to expand my academic expertise outside of the academy and to the public form of Wikipedia. If my suggestions are not legitimate then please say why. And if not, then please make the effort to make other suggestions in order to improve the article, for it is in dire need of consolidation and clarification, not to mention citation, in order to read as a concise encyclopedia entry. Socialtheorynow (talk) 06:35, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, and you're wrong as well. "man and the senses" is, indeed, not an analysis of society but his starting point or beginning for the analysis; so there is no syntax error William M. Connolley (talk) 21:43, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I think what is meant is that Hobbes begins his analysis of social organization from an inquiry into the individual and his sentiments. But again, this should be clarified. Socialtheorynow (talk) 06:35, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Leviathan (book). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20030218000757/http://oregonstate.edu:80/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-contents.html to http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-contents.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:48, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

What a literal joke
The citations and (in)'credible sources' completely misrepresent the essence of this text:

It is not calling for a strong, united sovereign. It's called for justice an equality above all. In several paragraphs, Hobbes makes evident the tendency of the King or the Aristocracy to pursue their own interests at the expense of the people and the Commonwealth. He's criticizing contemporary forms of government, and highlighting their excesses on purpose, in order to demonstrate what a sovereign ought NOT to be... I suppose the entire joke about 'The Beast is the King' eludes all these 'reliable sources' as well... Philosophy is in a sad state of affairs, being predominantly pro-Western and Aristocratic of late; the politics of power; how amusing.

Btw, I reverted my edit because I don't want to deal with this BS right now, but the quote is in reference to Revelation 13:4, which itself is a reference to Job 41, Isaiah 27 and Psalms 74,104: "Who is like the Beast? Who can fight against it?", because in Revelation 17:9-11, The Beast is the King... 69.158.177.108 (talk) 05:05, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Remove "citations required" tag?
Tnis article was tagged in February 2012 as requiring further citations. They have been substantially improved since then. Any objection to now removing the tag? Wikiain (talk) 21:53, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

 * Yes, I object. The citations are an utter joke. Most of them are references to the text of Leviathan itself, making much of the article original research. --ImVeryAwesome (talk) 03:20, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

False reference
The 1645 book by Downame doesn't contain any references to the word lavah and never cites any etyomologies for Leviathan:89.178.238.116 (talk) 09:34, 13 August 2019 (UTC) https://archive.org/details/annotationsupona00down/page/n17

title: Talk:Leviathan (Hobbes book)


text:
Samuel de Sorbiere

Samuel (de) Sorbière (1615–1670) was a French physician and man of letters, a philosopher and translator, who is best known for his promotion of the works of Thomas Hobbes and Pierre Gassendi, in whose view of physics he placed his support, though unable to refute René Descartes, but who developed a reputation in his own day for a truculent and disputatious nature. Sorbière is regarded often by his position on ethics and disclosure about medical mistakes. In 1672 Sorbière considered the idea of being honest and upfront about a mistake having been made in medicine but thought that it might seriously jeopardise medical practice and concluded that it "would not catch on".

Life
After relocating to the Netherlands, he published a French translation of Thomas More's Utopia in 1643. He arranged for the publication of Hobbes's De Cive in Amsterdam in 1647, published a French translation in 1649, published a French translation of Hobbes' De Corpore Politico, or the Elements of Law in 1652, and helped secure a publisher for Hobbes's own Latin translation of Leviathan in 1668. His collected Lettres et discours de M. de Sorbière, sur diverses matières curieuses, published in Paris, 1660, are imbued with the spirit of compromise, reconciling science and theology and separating science from metaphysics. His life of Gassendi was prefixed to the collected edition of Gassendi's writings, 1658. Besides Gassendi and Hobbes, he corresponded with Marin Mersenne, François de La Mothe Le Vayer and other prominent thinkers of the day.

In 1663–1664, Sorbière visited England, where in 1663 he was inducted into the Royal Society. In 1664 he published an account of his stay, Relation d'un voyage en Angleterre, où sont touchées plusieurs choses, qui regardent l'estat des sciences, et de la religion (L. Billaine, Paris), in which he offered his comments on how bad the food was, how bad the inns were and imputed to the Royal Society the intention of developing a library. This provoked Thomas Sprat (then spokesman for and historian of the Society) to publish Observations upon Monsieur de Sorbier's Voyage into England (London, 1665) as a reply to Sorbière's perceived insults against both English culture and the Society in particular. In order to avoid further international controversy, Sorbière was held under arrest for four months in France, and Charles II of England prohibited any further responses.

Sorbière's conversion from Calvinism to Catholicism, which opened a career to him, has been interpreted in a political light.

title: Samuel de Sorbiere


text:
Cagney & Lacey

Cagney & Lacey is an American police procedural drama television series that aired on the CBS television network for seven seasons from March 25, 1982, to May 16, 1988. The show is about two New York City police detectives who lead very different lives: Christine Cagney (Sharon Gless) is a career-minded single woman, while Mary Beth Lacey (Tyne Daly) is a married working mother. The series is set in a fictionalized version of Manhattan's 14th Precinct (known as "Midtown South"). The pilot movie had Loretta Swit in the role of Cagney, while the first six episodes had Meg Foster in the role. When the show was revived for a full-season run, Gless portrayed the role for six consecutive years. Each year during that time, one of the two lead actresses won the Emmy for Best Lead Actress in a Drama (four wins for Daly, two for Gless), a winning streak matched only once since in any major category by a show.

Development
Producer Barney Rosenzweig was influenced by the feminist movement through his then-girlfriend Barbara Corday, who recommended to him Molly Haskell's book From Reverence to Rape. After learning through Haskell that there had never been a female buddy film, Rosenzweig sought to make one, a comedy initially titled Newman & Redford (before changing the title for legal reasons). Corday & Barbara Avedon wrote the script. No studio wanted to make the film, so Corday considered taking it to television. Rosenzweig took the script, removed the main plot (leaving only the character development), and took it to all networks, but only CBS picked it up.

Original cast
Actress Loretta Swit played the role of Christine Cagney in the original television movie (October 1981), but was forced to decline the role in the series when the producers of M*A*S*H refused to let her out of her contract. When the movie was picked up as a series, first airing with six episodes as a midseason replacement in the spring of 1982, Meg Foster portrayed the character. When the show was picked up for a regular season in 1982, Foster was replaced with Sharon Gless because CBS deemed Foster too aggressive and too likely to be perceived as a lesbian by the viewers.

CBS executives hoped Gless would portray Cagney as more feminine and attempted to pressure the producers to remake Christine into a more "high-class", snobbish woman from wealthy parents. The pilot had portrayed Cagney as an ex-glamour model. Barney Rosenzweig and Barbara Corday initially refused to change Cagney from a tough, witty, working-class woman. Shortly into Gless's tenure on the program, Rosenzweig and Corday compromised with the network brass. They further developed Cagney's background, explaining gradually in a loose storyline that she may have been born to a somewhat well-to-do professional mother, Maureen, who had a relationship with police officer Charles Cagney (Dick O'Neill), who came from working-class roots. They separated soon after Christine and her brother Brian (David Ackroyd) were born. She was partially raised in an uptown Westchester world, which she appreciated; however, the trappings of the upper-middle social strata sometimes drove her to miss her father's lifestyle, and she and her father therefore established a special bond.

Cagney was a bit quieter and more reserved than her vivacious, talkative, loud partner Mary Beth Lacey, but could still relate to the world with attitudes that could be shared by people across the social spectrum.

Synopsis
Al Waxman co-starred as Cagney and Lacey's good-natured and sometimes blustery supervisor, Lt. Bert Samuels. Carl Lumbly and Martin Kove played, respectively, fellow detectives Marcus Petrie and Victor Isbecki. Sidney Clute played veteran detective Paul La Guardia. John Karlen co-starred as Mary Beth's husband, Harvey Lacey, and Tony La Torre and Troy Slaten played their sons, Harvey Lacey Jr. and Michael Lacey, respectively. Harvey Atkin played desk sergeant Ronald Coleman. Jason Bernard had the recurring role of Deputy Inspector Marquette during the first two seasons. When the show was brought back in March 1984, Marquette had been replaced by Dep. Inspector Knelman (Michael Fairman), who lasted the duration of the series. In the fourth season, Christine entered into a relationship with Sgt. Dory McKenna (Barry Primus), who battled a drug addiction. After a tumultuous courtship, Christine left him and soon after took up with a more stable suitor, David Keeler (Stephen Macht), a local attorney.

One of the most significant cast changes occurred early in the fifth season, upon the death of Sidney Clute from cancer on October 2, 1985, at the age of 69. Off-screen, Det. LaGuardia had retired from the 14th Precinct and moved to New Jersey with a new female companion less than half his age. Clute had completed filming a few episodes of the 1985–86 season prior to his death. In his honor, the producers kept Clute's name in the opening credits for the rest of the series.

LaGuardia's immediate replacement in the fifth season was Det. Jonah Newman (Dan Shor), a boyish ingenue with an elevated sense of himself. Newman, while popular with the guys, was not above stepping on anyone in order to get the coveted promotion of Detective Second Grade. As a result, Chris and Mary Beth had to force a strained relationship with him at best. Newman developed a crush on Chris but she never knew. Eventually, Newman was partnered with veteran Al Corassa (Paul Mantee), who became a regular midway through season five (Mantee had made three guest appearances in late 1985, in which his character's name was Det. Thomas in the first two episodes, and Corassa in the third) and officially took up the role of experience that LaGuardia had vacated. Their partnership met a sad end in May 1986, when Newman was killed from a random gunshot outside of the local district court, just after receiving his promotion to Second Grade.

The beginning of the sixth season saw the arrival of Manny Esposito (Robert Hegyes), a young, street-savvy detective who became Corassa's new partner. There was quite a clash between the two, as Esposito's freewheeling lifestyle (represented by his casual dress on the job, the desire to make a quick buck, and three ex-wives) put him in contrast with Corassa, the older, more conservative family man with a heightened sense of professionalism. Supporting characters added to the precinct at this time were rookie Officer Tom Basil (Barry Laws) and Officer Beverley Faverty (Beverley Faverty). The following year, Petrie was promoted to sergeant and then departed the 14th Precinct (Carl Lumbly had decided to leave the series). In his place, singer Merry Clayton joined the cast as Verna Dee Jordan, the first new female detective at the precinct since the additions of Cagney and Lacey. Jordan had joined law enforcement in middle age to better herself, after having been a single mother raising four children (now grown) on welfare.

Dick O'Neill played a recurring role as Cagney's alcoholic father, Charlie Cagney, a former NYPD officer who regaled her with stories of the old days; Christine later fought alcoholism as well. In the fourth season, Mary Beth becomes pregnant; she and Harvey welcome in a baby daughter, Alice Christine, in the fall of 1985. Alice Lacey was played by alternating twins Dana & Paige Bardolph from 1985 to 1987, with toddler Michelle Sepe taking over for the seventh season.

Cancellation and return
Cagney & Lacey premiered in March 1982 with high hopes from the industry, in the wake of the TV movie. Reviews of the series, however, with Meg Foster in place of Loretta Swit, were mixed. Critics praised the level of storytelling, but put emphasis on the aggressiveness that both Daly and Foster expressed with their characters. As soon as the six-episode order was finished in late April, CBS canceled the program due to poor ratings. Executive producer Barney Rosenzweig was determined to reverse the network's decision. Sharon Gless had been initially unavailable for the movie and series, which were produced by Orion, because of her long-running contract to Universal Television (she was the last actress ever to be signed to a long-term contract with a studio, in 1972). Gless was even actively utilizing her Universal contract at the time the series went into production, having taken over as female lead (from Lynn Redgrave who left the series in a dispute with producers) on the CBS sitcom House Calls. Rumors were also rampant that House Calls was getting the axe that spring.

Prior to the unveiling of that year's network upfronts, a CBS executive noted to the press that the cancellation of Cagney & Lacey was highly motivated by the jarringly tough nature of the female leads as well as low ratings. The official claimed in response to the strong portrayal of Daly and Foster that "we've perceived them as dykes". This remark set off massive protest, and put Rosenzweig into high gear in his dealings with CBS. The cancellation of House Calls was announced among insider circles just before upfronts, and Rosenzweig pressured CBS executives to relaunch Cagney & Lacey in the fall with Gless replacing Foster. Gless met with Cagney & Lacey producers again to consider the role, but while always having taken to the character, had doubts about joining for the fall of 1982 because, after House Calls, she "didn't want to make a career of replacing actresses".

Ratings were still low during the first year Daly and Gless co-starred on the series. Cagney & Lacey was canceled by CBS a second time in May 1983, but after almost a year of decreased buzz about the show, an ever-larger public outcry exploded upon the series's axing. Fans of the show, organized by Rosenzweig, staged a letter-writing campaign. At the same time, CBS switched its time slot for what was to have been its final three months on the air during summer reruns. This relocation resulted in the ratings suddenly rising. The viewer protest, coupled with the post-cancellation improvement in the Nielsens and the Emmy nomination that year (which Tyne Daly won in September), resulted in success for the public. That fall, CBS announced the return of Cagney & Lacey as a mid-season entry. The network would have wanted to return it sooner, but not long after the second cancelation came to pass, the sets at Orion had already been destroyed, and the cast had been let out of their contracts. One cast member, Tony La Torre, had already joined another series, the ABC sitcom 9 to 5. When nearly all of the Cagney & Lacey cast received new contracts in late 1983, La Torre returned as well after 9 to 5 was canceled by ABC just weeks into the 1983–84 season. Cagney & Lacey went back into production in January 1984 and returned to air on March 19 of that year.

TV Guide celebrated the show's return with the cover reading "Welcome Back, Cagney & Lacey – You want them! You've got them!". The show finished in the top 10 for the 1983–84 season, and went on to earn 36 Emmy Award nominations and 14 wins throughout its run until 1988, including six nominations each for stars Daly and Gless: four wins for Daly and two for Gless. The series itself won two consecutive Emmy Awards for Best Drama Series in 1985 and 1986. The show's ratings leveled out to where it hovered around 30th place in the Nielsens during seasons four to six, a period where many state the show to have been in its creative peak.

The series continued to air Monday nights at 10:00p.m. EST/9:00p.m. CST until the middle of the 1987–88 season, holding its own against ABC's Monday Night Football and NBC Monday Night at the Movies. Midway through its seventh season, Cagney & Lacey was moved to Tuesdays at 10:00p.m. EST/9:00p.m. CST, where it began to compete against Thirtysomething (ABC) and Crime Story (NBC). Cagney & Lacey lost viewers to the first-year critical success of thirtysomething, which, despite being the time slot winner, only ranked No. 45 overall. CBS' reason for relocating Cagney & Lacey was because it was believed that its Monday slot would further build an audience for Wiseguy, another new critical hit of the season that had average ratings at best. By the end of the season, Cagney & Lacey was left at 53rd place, and the 20-point drop from the previous season was enough for CBS to have doubts about renewing the show. With the final episode of the seventh season ending on a cliffhanger, CBS was considering bringing the show back, but when May 1988 upfronts were released, Cagney & Lacey's cancellation was confirmed. For the summer of 1988, the series moved one last time, not back to its familiar Monday time slot, but to Thursdays at 10 pm EST/9 CST. The series garnered considerable popularity internationally. It was originally shown in the UK on BBC1, where it regularly made the top 10.

Theme music
The main titles for the first season are accompanied by the theme song "Ain't That the Way" by Michael Stull, sung by Marie Cain, and shows the two lead characters being promoted to plainclothes detectives and later disguised as prostitutes. This was replaced the following season by an instrumental theme composed by Bill Conti set to a collage of action and comical scenes featuring the characters from the series. It is currently been used as the Closing theme music to the 'Afternoon Show ' on Irish Regional Radio Station, Shannonside Northern Sound.

Primetime Emmy Awards

 * 1983 Nomination for Outstanding Drama Series
 * 1983 Award for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series (Tyne Daly)
 * 1983 Nomination for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series (Sharon Gless)
 * 1984 Nomination for Outstanding Drama Series
 * 1984 Award for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series (Tyne Daly)
 * 1984 Nomination for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series (Sharon Gless)
 * 1985 Award for Outstanding Drama Series
 * 1985 Award for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series (Tyne Daly)
 * 1985 Award for Outstanding Directing in a Drama Series (Karen Arthur)
 * 1985 Nomination for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series (Sharon Gless)
 * 1985 Nomination for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series (John Karlen)
 * 1986 Award for Outstanding Drama Series
 * 1986 Nomination for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series (Tyne Daly)
 * 1986 Award for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series (Sharon Gless)
 * 1986 Award for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series (John Karlen)
 * 1986 Award for Outstanding Directing in a Drama Series (Georg Stanford Brown)
 * 1987 Nomination for Outstanding Drama Series
 * 1987 Nomination for Outstanding Directing in a Drama Series (Sharron Miller)
 * 1987 Nomination for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series (Tyne Daly)
 * 1987 Award for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series (Sharon Gless)
 * 1987 Nomination for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series (John Karlen)
 * 1988 Award for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series (Tyne Daly)
 * 1988 Nomination for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series (Sharon Gless)

Golden Globe Awards

 * 1983 Nomination for Best Actress in a Drama Series (Tyne Daly)
 * 1983 Nomination for Best Drama Series
 * 1984 Nomination for Best Actress in a Drama Series (Tyne Daly)
 * 1984 Nomination for Best Actress in a Drama Series (Sharon Gless)
 * 1984 Nomination for Best Drama Series
 * 1985 Nomination for Best Actress in a Drama Series (Tyne Daly)
 * 1985 Award for Best Actress in a Drama Series (Sharon Gless)
 * 1985 Nomination for Best Drama Series
 * 1986 Nomination for Best Actress in a Drama Series (Tyne Daly)
 * 1986 Nomination for Best Actress in a Drama Series (Sharon Gless)
 * 1986 Nomination for Best Drama Series
 * 1987 Nomination for Best Actress in a Drama Series (Sharon Gless)
 * 1988 Nomination for Best Actress in a Drama Series (Sharon Gless)

Directors Guild Awards

 * 1987 Nomination for Best Director in a Drama Series (Sharron Miller)

After the series
The series was followed by four television films which reunite the characters Christine Cagney and Mary Beth Lacey. In the storyline, Cagney has been promoted to Lieutenant, and is now working at the District Attorney's office as a special investigator. Lacey, meanwhile, has retired from the police force. However, at Cagney's urging (and partly due to Mary Beth's strained financial circumstances), Mary Beth agrees to work for the D.A.'s office as well, thereby reuniting the old partnership.

John Karlen appears in all four movies as Harvey Lacey, as does Molly Orr playing Harvey and Mary Beth's school-age daughter Alice (who was seen as an infant in various series episodes). Making cameos in the first movie only are series regulars Martin Kove as Isbecki, Al Waxman as Lt. Samuels, Carl Lumbly as Marcus Petrie, Vonetta McGee as Claudia Petrie, Robert Hegyes as Esposito, and Paul Mantee as Corassa. Also seen in the first two films are James Naughton as Christine's husband James Burton (they soon were divorced), and David Paymer as Deputy D.A. Feldberg.

 * Cagney & Lacey: The Return (1994)
 * Cagney & Lacey: Together Again (1995)
 * Cagney & Lacey: The View Through the Glass Ceiling (1995)
 * Cagney & Lacey: True Convictions (1996)

Following the conclusion of Cagney & Lacey, Tyne Daly and Sharon Gless have reunited onscreen three times: all three times playing different characters. Daly guest-starred in an episode of Gless's 1990 series The Trials of Rosie O'Neill; Gless then guest-starred in 2003 on an episode of Daly's TV series Judging Amy, while Daly appeared in 2010 in an episode of Gless's series Burn Notice.

In popular culture
In the television show Brooklyn Nine-Nine, Lieutenant Terry Jeffords' twin daughters are named Cagney and Lacey.

Home media
On May 8, 2007, MGM Home Entertainment and 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment released Season 1 of Cagney & Lacey on DVD in Region 1. The release coincided with the 25th anniversary of the series and it features the first full season of the show (which is actually the second season of the series) when Sharon Gless joined the cast as Cagney.

The quartet of TV movies entitled The Menopause Years was released in 2009 by S'more Entertainment. The deluxe set contains the complete collection of post-series TV movies. In addition, one of the features, Cagney & Lacey: The Return, was released separately on the same day. As of 2012, these releases have been discontinued and are out of print.

In November 2012, Visual Entertainment released Cagney & Lacey – The Complete Series on DVD in Region 1. The 32-disc set contains all episodes of the series featuring Tyne Daly and Sharon Gless (seasons 2–7). They also released a separate season 2 release on the same day.

A separate collection only available to purchase online, entitled Cagney & Lacey – 30th Anniversary Limited Edition was released on November 27, 2012. This 38-disc set contains all the content from the Complete Series set as well as the pilot episode, the complete first season with Meg Foster as Cagney and Tyne Daly as Lacey, all four post-series Cagney & Lacey: The Menopause Years made-for-TV movies and special bonus features exclusive to this collection, such as an autographed photo from Sharon Gless and Tyne Daly, an audiobook of Barney Rosenzweig's "Cagney & Lacey ... and Me" An Inside Hollywood Story OR How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Blonde, and footage of the British Film Institute's Cagney & Lacey 30th Anniversary Event from London. The Limited Edition DVD set is available through the official Cagney & Lacey website.

Downloads
Since October 2009, all 125 episodes of Cagney & Lacey have been available as a digital download on iTunes in the UK and North America and were also licensed to Netflix for American viewers via the streaming option, which expired in April 2012, and is no longer available. In 2011, the four post-series telefilms were also added to the streaming option after they were licensed to Netflix partner Starz. That partnership ended in February 2012, and the telefilms ceased to run on Netflix streaming.

 * Cagney & Lacey: The Lost Episodes — 6 episodes from Season 1
 * Cagney & Lacey: The True Beginning — 22 episodes from Season 2
 * Season 3 — 7 episodes from Season 3
 * Season 4 — 22 episodes from Season 4
 * Season 5 — all 24 episodes from Season 5
 * Season 6 — all 22 episodes from Season 6
 * Season 7 — all 22 episodes from Season 7

Aborted reboot
In January 2018, CBS ordered a pilot for a reboot of the series. In March, Sarah Drew and Michelle Hurd were cast as Cagney and Lacey, respectively, with Bridget Carpenter writing the pilot and Rosemary Rodriguez directing. Ving Rhames was cast in the role of police Captain Stark. CBS passed on the pilot on May 11.

title: Cagney & Lacey