text:
Lidocaine/prilocaine

Lidocaine/prilocaine is a eutectic mixture of equal quantities (by weight) of lidocaine and prilocaine. A 5% emulsion preparation, containing 2.5% each of lidocaine/prilocaine, is marketed by APP Pharmaceuticals under the trade name EMLA (an abbreviation for Eutectic Mixture of Local Anesthetics). As a spray, it is marketed under the name Tempe (topical eutectic-like mixture for premature ejaculation) (PSD502) that can be used by men to help with premature ejaculation. The spray is manufactured by Plethora Solutions and branded as Fortacin in the UK and Recordati in the EU.

Eutectic mixture
Separately, lidocaine and prilocaine are solid bases. When mixed in equal quantities by weight, however, they form a eutectic mixture – that is the melting point of the mixture is lower than the melting points of the individual components. The lidocaine/prilocaine eutectic mixture is an oil with a melting point of 18 °C, and can be formulated into preparations without the use of a non-aqueous solvent. This allows higher concentrations of anaesthetic to be formulated into the preparation and maintained during application.

Indications
The lidocaine/prilocaine combination is indicated for dermal anaesthesia. Specifically it is applied to prevent pain associated with intravenous catheter insertion, blood sampling, superficial surgical procedures, and topical anaesthesia of leg ulcers for cleansing or debridement. Also, it can be used to numb the skin before tattooing as well as electrolysis and laser hair removal. It is also sometimes used in advance of injected local anaesthetics for minor surgery and biopsies.

A topical spray consisting of an aerosol formulation of lidocaine and prilocaine was evaluated under the name PSD502 for use in treating premature ejaculation. The spray is applied on the penile skin prior to intercourse. While this formulation was not approved by the FDA, a similar product, Promescent, is available over-the-counter in the U.S.

Dosage forms
Lidocaine/prilocaine eutectic mixture is marketed as a 5% oil-in-water emulsion incorporated in a cream base (EMLA cream) or a cellulose disk (EMLA patch). The cream is applied under an occlusive dressing, while the patch incorporates an occlusive dressing to facilitate absorption of lidocaine and prilocaine into the area where anaesthesia is required. Local dermal anaesthesia is achieved after approximately 60 minutes, whereupon the occlusive dressing (or patch) is removed. The duration of anaesthesia is approximately two hours following removal of the occlusive dressing.

E. Fougera & Co., makers of the generic cream widely used in the United States as Lidocaine and Prilocaine Cream, 2.5%/2.5%, recommends different timing for application of the cream as well as length of anesthesia. They state the cream must be applied at least one hour before the start of a routine procedure and for two hours before the start of a painful procedure. Additionally, they state that the duration of effective skin anesthesia will be at least one hour after removal of the occlusive dressing.

Circumcision
Lidocaine/prilocaine eutectic mixture has been used during circumcision in newborn boys and has been considered efficacious and safe to lessen pain from circumcision.

The European Medicines Agency concludes in its latest (2014) statement on Emla: "Safety and efficacy for the use of EMLA on genital skin and genital mucosa have not been established in children younger than 12 years. Available paediatric data do not demonstrate adequate efficacy for circumcision."

The Patient Information Leaflet of EMLA in the UK states: "EMLA Cream should not be applied to the genital skin (e.g. penis) and genital mucosa (e.g. in the vagina) of children (below 12 years of age) owing to insufficient data on absorption of active substances."

Tempe
The spray is a combination of local anaesthetics lidocaine and prilocaine in a metered-dose aerosol that is sprayed directly on the penis to numb sensations. It was developed by the same group that invented the erectile dysfunction drug sildenafil. The drug was approved in Europe and was released in the UK market in November 2016 and within the EU will be marketed by, early in 2017 In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is expected to approve the drug in 2018.

Compendial status

 * United States Pharmacopeia 31

title: Lidocaine/prilocaine


text:
Prenatal testing

Prenatal testing is a tool that can be used to detect some birth defects at various stages prior to birth. Prenatal testing consists of prenatal screening and prenatal diagnosis, which are aspects of prenatal care that focus on detecting problems with the pregnancy as early as possible. These may be anatomic and physiologic problems with the health of the zygote, embryo, or fetus, either before gestation even starts (as in preimplantation genetic diagnosis) or as early in gestation as practicable. Screening can detect problems such as neural tube defects, chromosome abnormalities, and gene mutations that would lead to genetic disorders and birth defects, such as spina bifida, cleft palate, Down syndrome, trisomy 18, Tay–Sachs disease, sickle cell anemia, thalassemia, cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy, and fragile X syndrome. Some tests are designed to discover problems which primarily affect the health of the mother, such as PAPP-A to detect pre-eclampsia or glucose tolerance tests to diagnose gestational diabetes. Screening can also detect anatomical defects such as hydrocephalus, anencephaly, heart defects, and amniotic band syndrome. Prenatal screening focuses on finding problems among a large population with affordable and noninvasive methods. Prenatal diagnosis focuses on pursuing additional detailed information once a particular problem has been found, and can sometimes be more invasive. The most common screening procedures are routine ultrasounds, blood tests, and blood pressure measurement. Common diagnosis procedures include amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling. In some cases, the tests are administered to determine if the fetus will be aborted, though physicians and patients also find it useful to diagnose high-risk pregnancies early so that delivery can be scheduled in a tertiary care hospital where the baby can receive appropriate care.

Prenatal testing in recent years has been moving towards non-invasive methods to determine the fetal risk for genetic disorders. The rapid advancement of modern high-performance molecular technologies along with the discovery of cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) in maternal plasma has led to new methods for the determination of fetal chromosomal aneuploidies. This type of testing is referred to as non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) or as non-invasive prenatal screening. Invasive procedures remain important, though, especially for their diagnostic value in confirming positive non-invasive findings and detecting genetic disorders. Birth defects have an occurrence between 1 and 6%.

Purpose
There are three purposes of prenatal diagnosis: (1) to enable timely medical or surgical treatment of a condition before or after birth, (2) to give the parents the chance to abort a fetus with the diagnosed condition, and (3) to give parents the chance to prepare psychologically, socially, financially, and medically for a baby with a health problem or disability, or for the likelihood of a stillbirth. Prior information about problems in pregnancy means that healthcare staff as well as parents can better prepare themselves for the delivery of a child with a health problem. For example, Down syndrome is associated with cardiac defects that may need intervention immediately upon birth.

Maternal serum screening
First-trimester maternal serum screening can check levels of free β-hCG, PAPP-A, intact or beta hCG, or h-hCG in the woman's serum, and combine these with the measurement of nuchal translucency (NT). Some institutions also look for the presence of a fetal nasalbone on the ultrasound.

Second-trimester maternal serum screening (AFP screening, triple screen, quad screen, or penta screen) can check levels of alpha fetoprotein, β-hCG, inhibin-A, estriol, and h-hCG (hyperglycosolated hCG) in the woman's serum.

The triple test measures serum levels of AFP, estriol, and beta-hCG, with a 70% sensitivity and 5% false-positive rate. It is complemented in some regions of the United States, as the Quad test (adding inhibin A to the panel, resulting in an 81% sensitivity and 5% false-positive rate for detecting Down syndrome when taken at 15–18 weeks of gestational age).

The biomarkers PAPP-A and β-hCG seem to be altered for pregnancies resulting from ICSI, causing a higher false-positive rate. Correction factors have been developed and should be used when screening for Down's syndrome in singleton pregnancies after ICSI, but in twin pregnancies such correction factors have not been fully elucidated. In vanishing twin pregnancies with a second gestational sac with a dead fetus, first-trimester screening should be based solely on the maternal age and the nuchal translucency scan as biomarkers are altered in these cases.

Advances in prenatal screening
Measurement of fetal proteins in maternal serum is a part of standard prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy and neural tube defects. Computational predictive model shows that extensive and diverse feto-maternal protein trafficking occurs during pregnancy and can be readily detected non-invasively in maternal whole blood. This computational approach circumvented a major limitation, the abundance of maternal proteins interfering with the detection of fetal proteins, to fetal proteomic analysis of maternal blood. Entering fetal gene transcripts previously identified in maternal whole blood into a computational predictive model helped develop a comprehensive proteomic network of the term neonate. It also shows that the fetal proteins detected in pregnant woman's blood originate from a diverse group of tissues and organs from the developing fetus. Development proteomic networks dominate the functional characterization of the predicted proteins, illustrating the potential clinical application of this technology as a way to monitor normal and abnormal fetal development.

The difference in methylation of specific DNA sequences between mother and fetus can be used to identify fetal-specific DNA in the blood circulation of the mother. In a study published in the March 6, 2011, online issue of Nature, using this non-invasive technique a group of investigators from Greece and UK achieved correct diagnosis of 14 trisomy 21 (Down syndrome) and 26 normal cases. Using massive parallel sequencing, a study testing for trisomy 21 only, successfully detected 209 of 212 cases (98.6%) with 3 false-positives in 1,471 pregnancies (0.2%). With commercially available non-invasive (blood) testing for Down syndrome having become available to patients in the United States and already available in China, in October 2011, the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis created some guidance. Based on its sensitivity and specificity, it constitutes an advanced screening test and that positive results require confirmation by an invasive test, and that while effective in the diagnosis of Down syndrome, it cannot assess half the abnormalities detected by invasive testing. The test is not recommended for general use until results from broader studies have been reported, but may be useful in high-risk patients in conjunction with genetic counseling.

A study in 2012 found that the maternal plasma cell-free DNA test was also able to detect trisomy 18 (Edwards syndrome) in 100% of the cases (59/59) at a false-positive rate of 0.28%, and trisomy 13 (Patau syndrome) in 91.7% of the cases (11/12) at a false-positive rate of 0.97%. The test interpreted 99.1% of samples (1,971/1,988); among the 17 samples without an interpretation, three were trisomy 18. The study stated that if z-score cutoffs for trisomy 18 and 13 were raised slightly, the overall false-positive rates for the three aneuploidies could be as low as 0.1% (2/1,688) at an overall detection rate of 98.9% (280/283) for common aneuploidies (this includes all three trisomies: Down, Edwards and Patau).

Prenatal genetic testing
The goal of prenatal genetic testing is to identify pregnancies at high risk of abnormalities, allowing for early intervention, termination or appropriate management and preparation measures. Prenatal genetic testing is done by means of different screens and diagnostic tests. A screen informs an individual of the potential for certain abnormalities occurring, whereas, the diagnostic testing is used to confirm/diagnose specific abnormalities exist within the fetus. Prenatal screens are typically less invasive than prenatal diagnostic tests. They come with much lower risk, however, the results are not as definitive as diagnostic tests. Providers often recommend following up with a diagnostic test upon receipt of a positive result from a specific screen.

Medically invasive techniques are those in which a tool is used to access something inside the body. There are varying degrees of invasiveness, depending on what specimen is required to complete the test. The typical blood draw administered by a healthcare professional is one of the most common invasive medical practices. Since it causes minimal discomfort and there is very low risk associated with the sample collection, a blood draw is considered less invasive. Chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and Amniocentesis are the most invasive prenatal tests because there is greater associated risk and the sample is more difficult to access. These procedures are done via needle insertion into the abdomen in order to collect a sample within the uterus, meaning exceptional care/precision is required. Prenatal genetic testing can identify various chromosomal abnormalities, autosomal conditions, various birth defects, and some fetal blood disorders.

Chromosomal abnormalities result from an abnormal number or structuring of chromosomes. This includes chromosomal deletions, duplications, inversions, and translocations. Some examples of chromosomal abnormalities include:

- Prader-Willi/Angelman syndrome
 * Down syndrome (trisomy 21)
 * Edwards syndrome (trisomy 18)
 * Patau syndrome (trisomy 13)
 * Turner syndrome (monosomy X)
 * Klinefelter (XXY) syndrome
 * Trisomy X (XXX) syndrome
 * XYY syndrome
 * Pallister–Killian syndrome
 * Wolf–Hirschhorn syndrome
 * Cri-du-chat syndrome
 * WAGR syndrome
 * DiGeorge syndrome
 * Fragile X syndrome

Autosomal recessive conditions occur when both parents pass on a mutation within an autosomal (non-sex) chromosome. Some examples of autosomal recessive conditions are:

 * Cystic fibrosis
 * Sickle cell anemia
 * Tay–Sachs disease
 * Spinal muscular atrophy
 * Autosomal recessive polycystic kidney disease
 * Phenylketonuria

Neural tube defects are a type of birth defect that occurs when the neural tube of a fetus does not form/close properly, potentially effecting other systems throughout the body. Some examples of neural tube defects are:

 * Spina bifida
 * Anencephaly
 * Encephalocele
 * Tethered spinal cord syndrome

Abdominal wall defects are a type of birth defect that occur when the abdominal wall of a fetus does not form properly, potentially effecting other organs throughout the body. Some examples of abdominal wall defects are:

 * Gastroschisis
 * Omphalocele
 * Bladder exstrophy
 * Cloacal exstrophy
 * Ectopia cordis
 * Pentalogy of Cantrell
 * Body-stalk anomaly

Blood disorders can occur from a negative interaction between the maternal blood and the fetal blood. An example of a fetal blood disorder is Hemolytic disease of the fetus.

Ultrasound imaging and serum markers as indications for genetic testing
Ultrasound imaging provides the opportunity to conduct a nuchal translucency (NT) scan screening for chromosomal abnormalities such as Down syndrome (trisomy 21), Edwards syndrome (trisomy 18), and Patau syndrome (trisomy 13). Using the information from the NT scan the mother can be offered an invasive diagnostic test for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. Serum markers are utilized in a similar fashion to identify gestations that should be recommended for further testing. When the NT scan or serum markers arouse suspicion for chromosomal abnormalities the following genetic tests may be conducted on fetal or placental tissue samples: Interphase-fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), quantitative PCR and direct preparation of chromosomes from chorionic villi.

Carrier screening
Carrier Screening is a general DNA test that uses a blood or cheek swab sample to determine if the parents carry certain genetic conditions. This test can be done anytime, whether the individual(s) are considering starting a family or have already become pregnant. Various types of carrier screens are available that test for progressively more genetic abnormalities. The single gene/condition screen will test for a specific condition, whereas, the expanded carrier screen will test for hundreds of different abnormalities that can be inherited by a fetus. There are also three gene/condition and ethnic specific carrier tests. In the case of a positive test result, further testing is often recommended, as the carrier test only determines if the parent(s) is a carrier, not if the gene has definitively been passed to the fetus.

Placental acellular DNA (pa-DNA)
Placental acellular (fetal cell-free) DNA testing (pa-DNA) allows for the detection of apoptotic placental cells and placental DNA circulating in maternal blood for the noninvasive diagnosis of fetal aneuploidy. A meta-analysis that investigated the success rate of using placental acellular DNA from maternal blood to screen for aneuploidies found that this technique detected trisomy 13 in 99% of the cases, trisomy 18 in 98% of the cases and trisomy 21 in 99% of the cases. Failed tests using placental acellular DNA are more likely to occur in fetuses with trisomy 13 and trisomy 18 but not with trisomy 21. Previous studies found elevated levels of acellular placental DNA for trisomy 13 and 21 from maternal serum when compared to women with euploid pregnancies. However, an elevation of acellular DNA for trisomy 18 was not observed. Circulating placental nucleated cells comprise only three to six percent of maternal blood plasma DNA, reducing the detection rate of fetal developmental abnormalities. Two alternative approaches have been developed for the detection of fetal aneuploidy. The first involves the measuring of the allelic ratio of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the mRNA coding region in the placenta. The next approach is analyzing both maternal and placental DNA and looking for differences in the DNA methylation patterns.

First/Second/Third trimester Screen
The first, second, combined, and third trimester screens typically consist of an ultrasound (abdominal and/or transvaginal) and maternal blood/serum testing. The ultrasound is used to visually assess the growth, development, and activity of the fetus through imaging observations and measurements. The ultrasound portion of the first trimester screen can include a nuchal translucency screen and a fetal nasal bone determination screen. The available blood tests from the first trimester screen can test for plasma protein A and human chorionic gonadotropin. The second trimester screen looks at specific blood markers, to include the estriol, inhibin and human chorionic gonadotropin hormones and often consists of Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) screening. Any abnormal results from these screening tests can indicate the possibility of abnormal conditions such as Trisomy 18, Trisomy 21 (Down syndrome), and spina bifida.

Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP)/multiple marker test
The AFP test is often done in the second trimester using the serum from the maternal blood draw. This test looks at a specific protein that is formed in the liver of the fetus and released into the fluid contents of the womb, which is then absorbed into the mother’s blood stream. Multiple determinations stem from the results of AFP testing. Genetically, it can expose chromosomal and neural defects.

Chorionic Villus Sampling (CVS)
CVS is an invasive diagnostic test that can be done during the first trimester of pregnancy for individuals that are looking to identify or are at higher risk of passing chromosomal abnormalities. A tissue cell sample of the placenta is obtained abdominally via needle or via vaginal insertion of a catheter/syringe into the cervix in combination with ultrasound to guide the procedure. Positive results from CVS require blood testing for confirmation.

Amniocentesis
Amniocentesis is an invasive diagnostic test that can be done during the second trimester of pregnancy for individuals that are looking to identify or are at higher risk of passing chromosomal and/or neural tube abnormalities. The procedure is typically done via needle, in combination with ultrasound for guidance, to obtain a sample of the amniotic fluid surrounding the fetus.

Cordocentesis/Percutaneous umbilical blood sampling (PUBS)
PUBS is an invasive diagnostic test that can be done during the second trimester of pregnancy for individuals that are looking to identify or are at higher risk of passing chromosomal and/or blood abnormalities. The demand for cordocentesis tests is diminishing because it has been replaced with CVS and Amniocentesis, which carry less risk. The procedure is typically done via needle into the mother’s abdomen, in combination with ultrasound for guidance, to obtain a blood sample from the umbilical cord of the fetus.

Digital PCR
Recently, it has been proposed that digital PCR analysis can be conducted on fetal cell-free DNA for detection of fetal aneuploidy. Research has shown that digital PCR can be used to differentiate between normal and aneuploid DNA.

A variation of the PCR technique called multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA), targeting DNA, has been successively applied for diagnosing fetal aneuploidy as a chromosome- or gene-specific assay.

Shotgun sequencing
Fetal cell-free DNA has been directly sequenced using shotgun sequencing technology. In one study, DNA was obtained from the blood plasma of eighteen pregnant women. This was followed by mapping the chromosome using the quantification of fragments. This was done using advanced methods in DNA sequencing resulting in the parallel sequencing of the fetal DNA. The amount of sequence tags mapped to each chromosome was counted. If there was a surplus or deficiency in any of the chromosomes, this meant that there was a fetal aneuploid. Using this method of shotgun sequencing, the successful identification of trisomy 21 (Down syndrome), trisomy 18 (Edward syndrome), and trisomy 13 (Patau syndrome) was possible. This method of noninvasive diagnosis is now starting to be heavily used and researched further.

Other techniques
Microarray analysis, karyotyping, and different genome sequencing techniques are also used to detect abnormalities. Fetal components in samples from maternal blood plasma can be analyzed by genome-wide techniques not only by total DNA, but also by methylated DNA immunoprecipitation (with tiling array), microRNA (such as with Megaplex) and total RNA (RNA-sequencing).

By invasiveness
Diagnostic prenatal testing can be performed by invasive or non-invasive methods. An invasive method involves probes or needles being inserted into the uterus, e.g. amniocentesis, which can be done from about 14 weeks gestation, and usually up to about 20 weeks, and chorionic villus sampling, which can be done earlier (between 9.5 and 12.5 weeks gestation) but which may be slightly more risky to the fetus. One study comparing transabdominal chorionic villus sampling with second trimester amniocentesis found no significant difference in the total pregnancy loss between the two procedures. However, transcervical chorionic villus sampling carries a significantly higher risk, compared with a second-trimester amniocentesis, of total pregnancy loss (relative risk 1.40; 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.81) and spontaneous miscarriage (9.4% risk; relative risk 1.50; 95% confidence interval 1.07 to 2.11). Non-invasive techniques include examinations of the woman's womb through ultrasonography and maternal serum screens (i.e. Alpha-fetoprotein). Blood tests for select trisomies (Down syndrome in the United States, Down and Edwards syndromes in China) based on detecting cell-free placental DNA present in maternal blood, also known as non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), have become available. If an elevated risk of chromosomal or genetic abnormality is indicated by a non-invasive screening test, a more invasive technique may be employed to gather more information. In the case of neural tube defects, a detailed ultrasound can non-invasively provide a definitive diagnosis.

One of the major advantages of the non-invasive prenatal testing is that the chance of a false positive result is very low. This accuracy is very important for the pregnant woman, as due to a high sensitivity and specificity of the testing, especially for Down syndrome, the invasive testing could be avoided, which includes the risk of a miscarriage.

Testing guidelines and qualifying risk factors for invasive testing
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) guidelines currently recommend that anyone who is pregnant, regardless of age, should discuss and be offered non-invasive prenatal genetic screening and diagnostic testing options. Non-invasive prenatal genetic screening is typically performed at the end of the 1st trimester (11–14 weeks) or during the beginning of the second trimester (15–20 weeks). This involves the pregnant woman receiving a blood draw with a needle and a syringe and an ultrasound of the fetus. Screening tests can then include serum analyte screening or cell-free fetal DNA, and nuchal translucency ultrasound [NT], respectively. It is important to note that screening tests are not diagnostic, and concerning screening results should be followed up with invasive diagnostic testing for a confirmed diagnosis. Invasive diagnostic prenatal genetic testing can involve chronic villus sampling (CVS) or amniocentesis. The ACOG recommends genetic screening before pregnancy to all pregnant women planning to have a family. After comprehensive counseling and discussion that acknowledges residual risks, it is important to respect the patients' right of choosing whether or not to pursue any component of genetic testing.

The following are some reasons why a woman might consider her risk of birth defects already to be high enough to warrant skipping screening and going straight for invasive testing:
 * Increased risk of fetal aneuploidy based on personal obstetric history or family history affected by aneuploidy
 * Increased risk for a known genetic or biochemical disease of the fetus
 * Maternal transmissible infectious disease such as rubella or toxoplasma
 * Parental request in the context of acute parental anxiety or under exceptional circumstances

Patient acceptance
Research was conducted to determine how women felt about noninvasive diagnosis of fetal aneuploid using maternal blood. This study was conducted using surveys. It was reported that eighty-two percent of pregnant women and seventy-nine percent of female medical students view this type of diagnosis in a positive light, agreeing that it is important for prenatal care. Overall, women responded optimistically that this form of diagnosis will be available in the future.

Pre-conception
Prior to conception, couples may elect to have genetic testing done to determine the odds of conceiving a child with a known genetic anomaly. The most common in the Caucasian population are: Hundreds of additional conditions are known and more discovered on a regular basis. However the economic justification for population-wide testing of all known conditions is not well supported, particularly once the cost of possible false positive results and concomitant follow-up testing are taken into account. There are also ethical concerns related to this or any type of genetic testing.
 * Cystic fibrosis
 * Fragile X syndrome
 * Blood disorders such as sickle cell disease
 * Tay-Sachs disease
 * Spinal muscular atrophy

One or both partners may be aware of other family members with these diseases. Testing prior to conception may alleviate concern, prepare the couple for the potential short- or long-term consequences of having a child with the disease, direct the couple toward adoption or foster parenting, or prompt for preimplantation genetic testing during in vitro fertilization. If a genetic disorder is found, professional genetic counseling is usually recommended owing to the host of ethical considerations related to subsequent decisions for the partners and potential impact on their extended families. Most, but not all, of these diseases follow Mendelian inheritance patterns. Fragile X syndrome is related to expansion of certain repeated DNA segments and may change generation-to-generation.

First trimester
At early presentation of pregnancy at around 6 weeks, early dating ultrasound scan may be offered to help confirm the gestational age of the embryo and check for a single or twin pregnancy, but such a scan is unable to detect common abnormalities. Details of prenatal screening and testing options may be provided.

Around weeks 11–13, nuchal translucency scan (NT) may be offered which can be combined with blood tests for PAPP-A and beta-hCG, two serum markers that correlate with chromosomal abnormalities, in what is called the First Trimester Combined Test. The results of the blood test are then combined with the NT ultrasound measurements, maternal age, and gestational age of the fetus to yield a risk score for Down syndrome, trisomy 18, and trisomy 13. First Trimester Combined Test has a sensitivity (i.e. detection rate for abnormalities) of 82–87% and a false-positive rate of around 5%.

Cell-free fetal DNA is also available during the first trimester of pregnancy.

Second trimester
The anomaly scan is performed between 18 and 22 weeks of gestational age. The International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) recommends that this ultrasound is performed as a matter of routine prenatal care, to measure the fetus so that growth abnormalities can be recognized quickly later in pregnancy, and to assess for congenital malformations and multiple pregnancies (i.e. twins). The scan can detect anencephaly, open spina bifida, cleft lip, diaphragmatic hernia, gastroschisis, omphalocele, congenital heart defect, bilateral renal agenesis, osteochondrodysplasia, Edwards syndrome, and Patau syndrome.

A second-trimester Quad blood test may be taken (the Triple test is widely considered obsolete but in some states, such as Missouri, where Medicaid only covers the Triple test, that's what the patient typically gets). With integrated screening, both a First Trimester Combined Test and a Triple/Quad test is performed, and a report is only produced after both tests have been analyzed. However patients may not wish to wait between these two sets of tests. With sequential screening, a first report is produced after the first trimester sample has been submitted, and a final report after the second sample. With contingent screening, patients at very high or very low risks will get reports after the first-trimester sample has been submitted. Only patients with moderate risk (risk score between 1:50 and 1:2000) will be asked to submit a second-trimester sample, after which they will receive a report combining information from both serum samples and the NT measurement. The First Trimester Combined Test and the Triple/Quad test together have a sensitivity of 88–95% with a 5% false-positive rate for Down syndrome, though they can also be analyzed in such a way as to offer a 90% sensitivity with a 2% false-positive rate. Finally, patients who do not receive an NT ultrasound in the 1st trimester may still receive a Serum Integrated test involving measuring PAPP-A serum levels in the 1st trimester and then doing a Quad test in the 2nd trimester. This offers an 85–88% sensitivity and 5% false-positive rate for Down syndrome. Also, a patient may skip the 1st-trimester screening entirely and receive only a 2nd-trimester Quad test, with an 81% sensitivity for Down syndrome and 5% false-positive rate.

Third trimester
Third-trimester prenatal testing generally focuses on maternal wellbeing and reducing fetal morbidity/mortality. Group B streptococcal infection (also called Group B strep) may be offered, which is a major cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. Group B strep is an infection that may be passed to an infant during birth. Vaginal screening for GBS is performed between 34 and 37 weeks of gestational age, so that mothers that are positive for the bacterium can receive treatment before delivery. During the third trimester, some institutions may require evaluations of hemoglobin/hematocrit, syphilis serology, and HIV screening. Also, before delivery, an assessment of fetal position and estimated fetal weight is documented.

In Europe
Prenatal diagnosis (DPN) is permitted throughout Europe, with the exception of Ireland. Eight (8) countries have no legislation on this matter. However, there are differences between states. For instance, in Poland, the deadline for DPN is 22 weeks. In Malta, the Parliamentary Social Affairs Committee specified in its 2005 report that DPN should only be allowed for conditions for which therapeutic options exist. Nevertheless, all countries prohibit DPN for non-medical purposes (such as sex selection), for example.

In France
Article L2131-1 of the Public Health Code, stemming from the July 2011 bioethics law, states that "prenatal diagnosis refers to medical practices, including obstetric and fetal ultrasound, aimed at detecting, in utero, a particularly severe condition in the embryo or fetus." The law requires that pregnant women receive clear information about these techniques in order to "assess the risk that the embryo or fetus may have a condition that could alter the course or management of the pregnancy.

Non-genetic prenatal testing
Parents need to make informed decisions about screening, diagnosis, and any actions to be taken as a result. Many screening tests are inaccurate, so one worrisome test result frequently leads to additional, more invasive tests. If prenatal testing confirms a serious disability, many parents are forced to decide whether to continue the pregnancy or seek an abortion. The "option" of screening becomes an unexpected requirement to decide. See wrongful abortion.

In some genetic conditions, for instance cystic fibrosis, an abnormality can only be detected if DNA is obtained from the fetus. Usually an invasive method is needed to do this.

Ultrasound of a fetus, which is considered a screening test, can sometimes miss subtle abnormalities. For example, studies show that a detailed 2nd-trimester ultrasound, also called a level 2 ultrasound, can detect about 97% of neural tube defects such as spina bifida. Ultrasound results may also show "soft signs," such as an Echogenic intracardiac focus or a Choroid plexus cyst, which are usually normal, but can be associated with an increased risk for chromosome abnormalities.

Other screening tests, such as the Quad test, can also have false positives and false negatives. Even when the Quad results are positive (or, to be more precise, when the Quad test yields a score that shows at least a 1 in 270 risk of abnormality), usually the pregnancy is normal, but additional diagnostic tests are offered. In fact, consider that Down syndrome affects about 1:400 pregnancies; if you screened 4000 pregnancies with a Quad test, there would probably be 10 Down syndrome pregnancies of which the Quad test, with its 80% sensitivity, would call 8 of them high-risk. The quad test would also tell 5% (~200) of the 3990 normal women that they are high-risk. Therefore, about 208 women would be told they are high-risk, but when they undergo an invasive test, only 8 (or 4% of the high risk pool) will be confirmed as positive and 200 (96%) will be told that their pregnancies are normal. Since amniocentesis has approximately a 0.5% chance of miscarriage, one of those 200 normal pregnancies might result in a miscarriage because of the invasive procedure. Meanwhile, of the 3792 women told they are low-risk by the Quad test, 2 of them will go on to deliver a baby with Down syndrome. The Quad test is therefore said to have a 4% positive predictive value (PPV) because only 4% of women who are told they are "high-risk" by the screening test actually have an affected fetus. The other 96% of the women who are told they are "high-risk" find out that their pregnancy is normal.

By comparison, in the same 4000 women, a screening test that has a 99% sensitivity and a 0.5% false positive rate would detect all 10 positives while telling 20 normal women that they are positive. Therefore, 30 women would undergo a confirmatory invasive procedure and 10 of them (33%) would be confirmed as positive and 20 would be told that they have a normal pregnancy. Of the 3970 women told by the screen that they are negative, none of the women would have an affected pregnancy. Therefore, such a screen would have a 33% positive predictive value.

The real-world false-positive rate for the Quad test (as well as 1st Trimester Combined, Integrated, etc.) is greater than 5%. 5% was the rate quoted in the large clinical studies that were done by the best researchers and physicians, where all the ultrasounds were done by well-trained sonographers and the gestational age of the fetus was calculated as closely as possible. In the real world, where calculating gestational age may be a less precise art, the formulas that generate a patient's risk score are not as accurate and the false-positive rate can be higher, even 10%.

Because of the low accuracy of conventional screening tests, 5–10% of women, often those who are older, will opt for an invasive test even if they received a low-risk score from the screening. A patient who received a 1:330 risk score, while technically low-risk (since the cutoff for high-risk is commonly quoted as 1:270), might be more likely to still opt for a confirmatory invasive test. On the other hand, a patient who receives a 1:1000 risk score is more likely to feel assuaged that her pregnancy is normal.

Both false positives and false negatives will have a large impact on a couple when they are told the result, or when the child is born. Diagnostic tests, such as amniocentesis, are considered to be very accurate for the defects they check for, though even these tests are not perfect, with a reported 0.2% error rate (often due to rare abnormalities such as mosaic Down syndrome where only some of the fetal/placental cells carry the genetic abnormality).

A higher maternal serum AFP level indicates a greater risk for anencephaly and open spina bifida. This screening is 80% and 90% sensitive for spina bifida and anencephaly, respectively.

Amniotic fluid acetylcholinesterase and AFP level are more sensitive and specific than AFP in predicting neural tube defects.

Many maternal-fetal specialists do not bother to even do an AFP test on their patients because they do a detail ultrasound on all of them in the 2nd trimester, which has a 97% detection rate for neural tube defects such as anencephaly and open spina bifida. Performing tests to determine possible birth defects is mandatory in all U.S. states. Failure to detect issues early can have dangerous consequences on both the mother and the baby. OBGYNs may be held culpable. In one case a man who was born with spina bifida was awarded $2 million in settlement, apart from medical expenses, due to the OBGYN's negligence in conducting AFP tests.

No prenatal test can detect all forms of birth defects and abnormalities.

Prenatal genetic testing
Another important issue is the uncertainty of prenatal genetic testing. Uncertainty on genetic testing results from several reasons: the genetic test is associated with a disease but the prognosis and/or probability is unknown, the genetic test provides information different than the familiar disease they tested for, found genetic variants have unknown significance, and finally, results may not be associated with found fetal abnormalities. Richardson and Ormond thoroughly addressed the issue of uncertainty of genetic testing and explained its implication for bioethics. First, the principle of beneficence is assumed in prenatal testing by decreasing the risk of miscarriage, however, uncertain information derived from genetic testing may harm the parents by provoking anxiety and leading to the termination of a fetus that is probably healthy. Second, the principle of autonomy is undermined given a lack of comprehension resulting from new technologies and changing knowledge in the field of genetics. And third, the principle of justice raised issues regarding equal access to emerging prenatal tests.

Availability of treatments
If a genetic disease is detected, there is often no treatment that can help the fetus until it is born. However, in the US, there are prenatal surgeries for spina bifida fetus. Early diagnosis gives the parents time to research and discuss post-natal treatment and care, or in some cases, abortion. Genetic counselors are usually called upon to help families make informed decisions regarding results of prenatal diagnosis.

Patient education
Researchers have studied how disclosing amniocentesis or chorionic villous sampling (CVS) results on a fixed date versus a variable date (i.e. "when available") affects maternal anxiety. Systematic review of the relevant articles found no conclusive evidence to support issuing amniocentesis results as soon as they become available (in comparison to issuing results on a pre-defined fixed date). The researchers concluded that further studies evaluating the effect of different strategies for disclosing CVS results on maternal anxiety are needed.

Concerns from disability rights activists and scholars
Disability rights activists and scholars have suggested a more critical view of prenatal testing and its implications for people with disabilities. They argue that there is pressure to abort fetuses that might be born with disabilities, and that these pressures rely on eugenics interests and ableist stereotypes. This selective abortion relies on the ideas that people with disabilities cannot live desirable lives, that they are "defective," and that they are burdens, while disability scholars argue that "oppression is what's most disabling about disability." Marsha Saxton suggests that women should question whether or not they are relying on real, factual information about people with disabilities or on stereotypes if they decide to abort a fetus with a disability.

Societal pressures
Amniocentesis has become the standard of care for prenatal care visits for women who are "at risk" or over a certain age. The wide use of amniocentesis has been defined as consumeristic. and some argue that this can be in conflict with the right to privacy, Most obstetricians (depending on the country) offer patients the AFP triple test, HIV test, and ultrasounds routinely. However, almost all women meet with a genetic counselor before deciding whether to have prenatal diagnosis. It is the role of the genetic counselor to accurately inform women of the risks and benefits of prenatal diagnosis. Genetic counselors are trained to be non-directive and to support the patient's decision. Some doctors do advise women to have certain prenatal tests and the patient's partner may also influence the woman's decision.

Legal
August in 2023 Iranian government banned import and manufacture of tests kits required for first screening trimester tests, it will plague the population according to society of medicine in genetic انجمن ژنتیک پزشکی ایران. Iranian state welfare organization had a genetics condition program since 1997.

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

title: Prenatal testing


text:
Horseshoe Curve (Pennsylvania)

The Horseshoe Curve is a three-track railroad curve on Norfolk Southern Railway's Pittsburgh Line in Blair County, Pennsylvania. The curve is roughly 2375 ft long and 1300 ft in diameter. Completed in 1854 by the Pennsylvania Railroad as a way to reduce the westbound grade to the summit of the Allegheny Mountains, it replaced the time-consuming Allegheny Portage Railroad, which was the only other route across the mountains for large vehicles. The curve was later owned and used by three Pennsylvania Railroad successors: Penn Central, Conrail, and Norfolk Southern.

Horseshoe Curve has long been a tourist attraction. A trackside observation park was completed in 1879. The park was renovated and a visitor center built in the early 1990s. The Railroaders Memorial Museum in Altoona manages the center, which has exhibits pertaining to the curve. The Horseshoe Curve was added to the National Register of Historic Places and designated as a National Historic Landmark in 1966. It became a National Historic Civil Engineering Landmark in 2004.

Location and design
Horseshoe Curve is 5 mi west of Altoona, Pennsylvania, in Logan Township, Blair County. It sits at railroad milepost 242 on the Pittsburgh Line, which is the Norfolk Southern Railway Pittsburgh Division main line between Pittsburgh and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Horseshoe Curve bends around a dam and lake, the highest of three Altoona Water Authority reservoirs that supply water from the valley to the city. It spans two ravines formed by creeks: Kittanning Run, on the north side of the valley, and Glenwhite Run, on the south. The Blair County Veterans Memorial Highway (SR 4008) follows the valley west from Altoona and tunnels under the curve.

Westbound trains climb a maximum grade of 1.85 percent for 12 mi from Altoona to Gallitzin. Just west of the Gallitzin Tunnels, trains pass the summit of the Allegheny Mountains, then descend for 25 mi to Johnstown on a grade of 1.1 percent or less. The overall grade of the curve was listed by the Pennsylvania Railroad as 1.45 percent; it is listed as 1.34 percent by Norfolk Southern. The curve is 2375 ft long and about 1300 ft across at its widest. For every 100 ft, the tracks at the Horseshoe Curve bend 9 degrees 15 arc minutes, with the entire curve totaling 220 degrees.

The rise of a westbound train through the curve can be described in several ways. One measurement is from the point where the rails north of the curve start to bow out to a point on the line directly south, across the original Kittanning Reservoir: across this north–south distance of 1119 ft, a train rises from 1601 ft above sea level to 1660 ft. Another measurement is from the point where the rails coming west out of Altoona make their first detour north to the curve, to a point across Lake Altoona where the rails begin their one-mile straight run south before turning west to the Gallitzin Tunnels; this measurement encompasses the entire Curve structure, including both reservoirs built in its bounds to protect the curve from flooding. Across this north-south distance of 1006 ft, a westbound train rises from 1473 ft to 1706 ft. This latter rise—133 vertical feet in 1,006 linear feet—is a 13.2% grade, completely unascendable by conventional railroads, which usually stick to grades of 2.2% or less.

Each track consists of 136 lb/yd, welded rail. Before dieselization and the introduction of dynamic braking and rail oilers, the rails along the curve were transposed—left to right and vice versa—to equalize the wear on each rail from the flanges of passing steam locomotives and rail cars, thereby extending their life.

Origin
In 1834, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania built the Allegheny Portage Railroad across the Allegheny Mountains to connect Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, as part of the Main Line of Public Works. The Portage Railroad was a series of canals and inclined planes and remained in use until the mid-19th century. The Pennsylvania Railroad was incorporated in 1847 to build a railroad from Harrisburg to Pittsburgh, replacing the cumbersome Portage Railroad.

Using surveys completed in 1842, the state's engineers recommended an 84 mi route west from Lewistown that followed the ridges with a maximum grade of 0.852 percent. But the Chief Engineer for the Pennsylvania Railroad, John Edgar Thomson, chose a route on lower, flatter terrain along the Juniata River and accepted a steeper grade west of Altoona. The valley west of Altoona was split into two ravines by a mountain; surveys had already found a route with an acceptable grade east from Gallitzin to the south side of the valley, and the proposed Horseshoe Curve would allow the same grade to continue to Altoona.

Construction
Work on Horseshoe Curve began in 1850. It was done without heavy equipment, only men "with picks and shovels, horses and drags". Engineers built an earth fill over the first ravine encountered while ascending, formed by Kittanning Run, cut the point of the mountain between the ravines, and filled in the second ravine, formed by Glenwhite Run. The 31.1 mi line between Altoona and Johnstown, including Horseshoe Curve, opened on February 15, 1854. The total cost was $2,495,000 or $80,225 per mile ($49,850 /km).

In 1879, the remaining part of the mountain inside the curve was leveled to allow the construction of a park and observation area—the first built for viewing trains. As demand for train travel increased, a third track was added to the curve in 1898 and a fourth was added two years later.

From around the 1860s to just before World War II, passengers could ride to the PRR's Kittanning Point station near the curve. Two branch railroads connected to the main line at Horseshoe Curve in the early 20th century; the Kittanning Run Railroad and the railroad owned by the Glen White Coal and Lumber Company followed their respective creeks to nearby coal mines. The Pennsylvania Railroad delivered empty hopper cars to the Kittanning Point station which the two railroads returned loaded with coal. In the early 1900s, locomotives could take on fuel and water at a coal trestle on a spur track across from the station.

A reservoir was built at the apex of the Horseshoe Curve in 1887 for Altoona; a second reservoir, below the first, was finished in 1896. A third reservoir, Lake Altoona, was completed by 1913. A macadam road to the curve was opened in 1932 allowing access for visitors, and a gift shop was built in 1940.

Horseshoe Curve was depicted in brochures, calendars and other promotional material; Pennsylvania Railroad stock certificates were printed with a vignette of it. The Pennsylvania pitted the scenery of Horseshoe Curve against rival New York Central Railroad's "Water Level Route" during the 1890s. A raised-relief, scale model of the curve was included as part of the Pennsylvania Railroad's exhibit at the 1893 World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago. Pennsylvania Railroad conductors were told to announce the Horseshoe Curve to daytime passengers—a tradition that continues aboard Amtrak trains.

World War II and post-war
During World War II, the PRR carried troops and materiel for the Allied war effort, and the curve was under armed guard. The military intelligence arm of Nazi Germany, the Abwehr, plotted to sabotage important industrial assets in the United States in a project code-named Operation Pastorius. In June 1942, four men were brought by submarine and landed on Long Island, planning to destroy such sites as the curve, Hell Gate Bridge, Alcoa aluminum factories and locks on the Ohio River. The would-be saboteurs were quickly apprehended by the Federal Bureau of Investigation after one, George John Dasch, turned himself in. All but Dasch and one other would-be saboteur were executed as spies and saboteurs.

Train count peaked in the 1940s with over 50 passenger trains per day, along with many freight and military trains. Demand for train travel dropped greatly after World War II, as highway and air travel became popular.

During the 1954 celebration of the centennial of the opening of Horseshoe Curve, a night photo was arranged by Sylvania Electric Products using 6,000 flashbulbs and 31 mi of wiring to illuminate the area. The event also commemorated the 75th anniversary of the incandescent light bulb. Pennsylvania steam locomotive 1361 was placed at the park inside the Horseshoe Curve on June 8, 1957. It is one of 425 K4s-class engines: the principal passenger locomotives on the Pennsylvania Railroad that regularly plied the curve. The Horseshoe Curve was listed on the National Register of Historic Places and was designated a National Historic Landmark on November 13, 1966. The operation of the observation park was transferred to the city of Altoona the same year. The Pennsylvania Railroad was combined with the New York Central Railroad in 1968. The merger created Penn Central, which went bankrupt in 1970 and was taken over by the federal government in 1976, as part of the merger that created Conrail. The second track from the inside at the Horseshoe Curve was removed by Conrail in 1981. The K4s 1361 was removed from the curve for a restoration to working order in September 1985 and was replaced with the ex-Conrail EMD GP9 diesel-electric locomotive 7048 that was repainted into a Pennsylvania Railroad scheme.

Starting in June 1990, the park at the Horseshoe Curve underwent a $5.8 million renovation funded by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and by the National Park Service through its "America's Industrial Heritage Project". The renovations were completed in April 1992 with the dedication of a new visitor center. In 1999, Conrail was divided between CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern, with the Horseshoe Curve being acquired by the latter. The Horseshoe Curve was lit up again with fireworks and rail-borne searchlights during its sesquicentennial in 2004 in homage to the 1954 celebrations. It was designated a National Historic Civil Engineering Landmark by the American Society of Civil Engineers in 2004.

Current operations
The curve remains busy as part of Norfolk Southern's Pittsburgh Line:, it was passed by 51 scheduled freight trains each day, not including locals and helper engines, which can double the number. Coupled to the rear of long trains, helper engines add power going up and help to brake coming down. For some years before 2020, Norfolk Southern used SD40Es as helpers; since then, 4300 hp EMD SD70ACU locomotives are used. In 2012, Norfolk Southern said annual traffic passing Horseshoe Curve was 111.8 e6ST, including locomotives. Amtrak's Pennsylvanian between Pittsburgh and New York City rounds the curve once each way daily. Maximum speeds for trains at Horseshoe Curve are 30 mph for freight and about 35 mph for passenger trains.

Trackside attractions
The Railroaders Memorial Museum in Altoona manages a visitor center next to the curve. The 6800 sqft center has historical artifacts and memorabilia relating to the curve and a raised-relief map of the Altoona–Johnstown area. Access to the curve is by a 288 ft funicular or a 194-step stairway. The funicular is single-tracked, with the cars passing each other halfway up the slope; the cars are painted to resemble Pennsylvania Railroad passenger cars. A former "watchman's shanty" is in the park.

Horseshoe Curve is popular with railfans; watchers can sometimes see three trains passing at once. In August 2012, the former Nickel Plate Road (NKP) steam locomotive No. 765 traversed Horseshoe Curve: the first steam locomotive to do so since 1977, while deadheading to and from Harrisburg as part of Norfolk Southern's 21st Century Steam program. NKP 765 returned to the curve in May 2013 with public excursion trains from Lewistown to Gallitzin.

title: Horseshoe Curve (Pennsylvania)


text:
Vallès Oriental

Vallès Oriental is a comarca (county) in the Barcelona region in Catalonia (Spain). Its capital is Granollers. Along with Vallès Occidental it forms the historical Vallès region.

In May 2015, Vallès Oriental lost four municipalities - Castellcir, Castellterçol, Granera, Sant Quirze Safaja - to the new comarca of Moianès.

Vegetation
The natural vegetation of Vallès Oriental is typically Mediterranean, with a predominance of Holm oak, cork oak, and Aleppo pine. There are some oaks (in the narrow sense of the word) at Montnegre and Montseny. The latter also features European beech and silver fir woods.

title: Vallès Oriental


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Business analysis

'''This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled Business analysis.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to delete the article.'''

Original research, signed by someone probably not the author, reads like a copyvio (note that the original poster posted a copyvio at Business Analyst). RickK 00:32, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Most of the article is taken up with a list of job descriptions. (By the way, none of them describe what I do and, yes, this year my title is Business Analyst). There might be the kernel of a usable article here but I don't see it. The term is just too broadly used to be definable. You would have to include all of business. Tentative delete. Rossami 01:18, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
 * There may be room in wiki for an article about Business analysis, but I doubt it will stem from this one. I agree with RickK, reads like an obvious copyVio.  Delete. --Starx 02:22, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete. User appears to be on something of a rampage, actually, posting job descriptions of various sorts. I've posted to his talk page asking him politely to look into how he might edit the articles to be a better fit for this project. We'll see what, if anything he does. That said, an admin might want to keep an eye on him and see if he's responsive to criticism or if he's just single-mindedly going to add these articles no matter what we say. In any case, let's get this one sorted out sooner, rather than later, before we have another 43 article mess a la the Xena vandal from a few days back? Snowspinner 06:13, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm now fairly convinced we're dealing with copyvio. He's creating new articles at a breathtaking rate. If it's not sorted by tomorrow, I'll deal with getting these all on VfD. Snowspinner 06:16, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I consider this vandalism and have listed it as such on Vandalism in progress - hopefully all these pages he has created will be speedily deleted. --Stormie 06:23, May 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete, including all the poor job descriptions linked from that page. An article on business analysis would be fine, but not this non-encyclopedic text and copying of meaningless job titles and descriptions. Lupo 06:46, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Blocked for one hour, with a message. I am speedy deleting the spam. silsor 07:17, May 11, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Alcarillo 14:58, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
 * This article needs a major rewrite, otherwise, delete. mydogategodshat 09:10, 12 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Awful. -- EuroTom 23:38, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree with Lupo totally. -- Stevietheman 01:16, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

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


text:
USS Wasp (1807)

USS Wasp of the United States Navy was a sailing sloop-of-war captured by the British in the early months of the War of 1812. She was constructed in 1806 at the Washington Navy Yard, was commissioned sometime in 1807, Master Commandant John Smith in command. In 1812 she captured HMS Frolic (1806), but was immediately herself captured. The British took her into service first as HMS Loup Cervier and then as HMS Peacock. She was lost, presumed foundered with all hands, in mid-1814.

US Service
In 1808 Wasp was heavily involved in supporting Jefferson's Embargo, including delivering an army garrison from New York City to Passamaquoddy in June, patrolling Casco Bay, Maine, in the winter of 1808–1809, and remaining at Portland until May, 1809. Until 1809 she was commanded by Master Commandant John Smith. In the final weeks of 1810, she was operating from the ports of Charleston, South Carolina, and Savannah, Georgia, presumably patrolling the waters along southern Atlantic coast. In 1811, she sailed to Hampton Roads, Virginia, where she and the brig USS Nautilus (1799) joined frigates USS United States (1797) and USS Congress (1799) in forming a squadron commanded by Commodore Stephen Decatur.

On 9 March 1812 Wasp sailed from New York for France to deliver an Anglo-Irish mercenary named John Henry who had sold intelligence to President Madison indicating Britain's interest in determining if the New England states wished to secede from the union. The correspondence, known as the Henry Papers, helped build outrage in Congress against Britain that led to the declaration of war, however the documents are now widely believed to have been a forgery. Wasp, under the command of Master Commandant Jacob Jones continued to operate along the coast of the middle states after the United States went to war with Britain in June 1812. On 13 October, she sailed from the Delaware River, two days later she encountered a heavy gale that tore away her jib boom and washed two crewmen overboard. The following evening, Wasp encountered a squadron of ships and, in spite of the fact that two of their number appeared to be large men-of-war, made for them straight away. She finally caught the enemy convoy the following morning and discovered six merchantmen under the protection of a 22-gun sloop-of-war, HMS Frolic.

At half past eleven in the morning of 18 October, Wasp and Frolic closed to do battle. The engagement would be the first and only time Wasp saw combat. The two ships commenced fire at a distance of 50 to 60 yd. In a short, sharp, fight, both ships sustained heavy damage to masts and rigging, but Wasp prevailed over her adversary by boarding her. The victory was short lived however. Unfortunately for Wasp, a British 74-gun ship-of-the-line, HMS Poictiers (1809), appeared on the scene. Frolic was crippled and Wasp's rigging and sails were badly damaged. At 4:00 PM Jones had no choice but to surrender Wasp; he could neither run nor fight such an overwhelming opponent.

British service
Wasp was briefly given the name Loup Cervier on her capture. She was commissioned in 1813 on the Halifax station under Captain Charles Gill. Captain William William Mends succeeded Gill, taking command on 26 February 1813.

In June Loup Cervier was off New London, where she helped blockade the squadron under Commodore Stephen Decatur. James Biddle, who had been first lieutenant of Wasp, had become captain of USS Hornet (1805 brig). He issued a challenge to Mends that their two vessels meet in an engagement. Decatur forbade the engagement until he was sure that it would be an even match. The day after he gave his assent Loup Cervier left New London to patrol elsewhere.

Thereafter Loup Cervier captured or recaptured four vessels. On 27 June she captured the schooner Little Bill, John Roach master, which had been sailing from St Bartholomew to North Carolina. She was carrying a cargo of sugar and molasses. Little Bill was restored. Another report gives the vessel's name as Little Bell.

Then on 28 August Loup Cervier captured the ship Hope, of 468 tons (bm), J. Emery master. Hope was sailing from Lisbon to Newport, Rhode Island, with a cargo of salt. She too was restored.

On 29 October Loup Cervier recaptured the brig John and Mary, T. Collins, master. Lastly, Loup Cervier was one of four British warships that shared in the capture of the sloop Emeline, of 44 tons (bm), O. Adams, master. Emeline was sailing from New York to Rhode Island with a cargo of 240 barrels of flour.

At some point Loup Cervier was renamed Peacock, Hornet having captured and sunk the Cruizer-class brig-sloop HMS Peacock (1806) in February 1813. Mends was appointed to command of HMS Terpsichore (1785) on 23 March 1814. Peacock may then have been briefly under the command of Captain G. Donnett. In April or shortly thereafter Commander Richard Coote of HMS Borer (1812) was promoted to post captain and transferred to Peacock.

Peacock was one of the five British warships that on 21 April 1814 captured the Swedish brig Minerva. Then on 15 May, Peacock recaptured the Swedish ship Providentia, of four guns, 400 tons, and 17 men. She had been sailing from Amelia Island to Lisbon with a cargo of pine, cedar, etc. when an American privateer had captured her. That same day, Peacock recaptured the Russian ship Hendrick, of eight guns, 80 tons, and 13 men. She had been sailing from Amelia Island to Amsterdam with a cargo of pine and cotton when captured.

Fate
Peacock was under Coote's command when she disappeared off the Virginia Capes. She apparently had foundered on 23 July 1814.

title: USS Wasp (1807)


text:
Half-space (geometry)

In geometry, a half-space is either of the two parts into which a plane divides the three-dimensional Euclidean space. If the space is two-dimensional, then a half-space is called a half-plane (open or closed). A half-space in a one-dimensional space is called a half-line or ray.

More generally, a half-space is either of the two parts into which a hyperplane divides an affine space. That is, the points that are not incident to the hyperplane are partitioned into two convex sets (i.e., half-spaces), such that any subspace connecting a point in one set to a point in the other must intersect the hyperplane.

A half-space can be either open or closed. An open half-space is either of the two open sets produced by the subtraction of a hyperplane from the affine space. A closed half-space is the union of an open half-space and the hyperplane that defines it.

The open (closed) upper half-space is the half-space of all (x1, x2, ..., xn) such that xn > 0 (≥ 0). The open (closed) lower half-space is defined similarly, by requiring that xn be negative (non-positive).

A half-space may be specified by a linear inequality, derived from the linear equation that specifies the defining hyperplane. A strict linear inequality specifies an open half-space:
 * $$a_1x_1+a_2x_2+\cdots+a_nx_n>b$$

A non-strict one specifies a closed half-space:
 * $$a_1x_1+a_2x_2+\cdots+a_nx_n\geq b$$

Here, one assumes that not all of the real numbers a1, a2, ..., an are zero.

A half-space is a convex set.

title: Half-space (geometry)


text:
User talk:Nat Krause/Archive1

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~

snoyes 22:17, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Good work on the Buddhism article. I largely agree with your changes - you might want to include Tibet, the USA and Europe as places where the Mahayana is practiced though. Also I'm not sure that referring to the Theravada as synonymous with the Shravakayana (what is mostly still called Hinayana) is accurate. For instance all Gelugpa's still practice the Sarvastavada vinaya. Since a schism in Buddhism is defined purely as a difference of opinion about matters of praxis (ie vinaya) the Gelupga's are technically a Hinayana school (to use that horrible term). mahābāla 10:29, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks -- I'm not done with Buddhism. There's a lot of little things to fix, and some of the prose is frankly awful.  As for your specific points, I will consider the issue of where Mahayana is practiced -- I'm not sure if mentioning the West here would confuse more than inform.  Nowadays, one can find practitioners of every kind of Buddhism in just about every country.  As for Theravada, to be clear, I didn't say that Theravada is synonymous with Shravakayana historically, although I suppose I did say, not in so many words, that they are synonymous vis a vis modern adherents.  I can't agree that all Buddhist schisms are based on vinaya rather than dharma -- one need only look at the (rather questionable) sections of certain Mahayana sutras where the Buddha is portrayed denouncing Hinayana doctrine by name.  Therefore, I think its fair to include the Gelugpas out of Shravaka/Hinayana.Nat Krause 11:10, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Three Jewels
Hi Nat, When we're talking about the three refuges/jewels then Sangha does refer only to the Arya-Sangha. We don't go for refuge to the monks and laypeople, but to the Arahants, Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, and actually to anyone from Stream Entrants up - ie those who have "seen things as they really are". I think this distinction is important, and you could easily mention that Sangha also has a broader, more general use. mahābāla 14:29, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Good job on the three jewels stuff. -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽ 01:54, May 9, 2004 (UTC)

Hey, which part of China are you in? I'm in Qingdao, just moved here from Shanghai about two weeks ago. Will be staying at least one year. You're welcome to come and visit in summer if you like! prat 01:08, 2004 Apr 7 (UTC)

I agree
But I like talking about stuff, and I REALLY like properly defining terms. Socialism can refer to reality, as well as anarcho-communist pipe dreams. Sam Spade 21:19, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Re: "Research and vindicate as necessary the thinking of Herbert Spencer in the Herbert Spencer and social darwinism articles."

Thanks for the warning. 172 12:39, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Anarcho-Capitalist Critique
I still appreciate your concerns about that page, but unfortunately, I'm not in a position right now to help with it much... That's cool, I was just wanting to generate discussion. It seems people have complained but haven't done much about it. I've been spending too much time on the talk pages of articles that are already substancial, and, in the process, not contributing as much as I could... millerc 22:12, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

Neofeudalism
I must say this article has some apparent crackpots orbiting it. I was amused by being told to "wake up and smell the coffee". Anyway, if it's a real term, I guess we can have a neutral article about it, which means dumping a good deal of what's there. That may be hard though, with serious assertions by Mike Church and others that neofeudalism is not even pejorative and Bush is an archetypal example. I wonder if it will survive VfD. -- VV 11:41, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

baimasi
yeah, basically i read some page that said it wasnt, then i happened to go there last week and find out that all current literature at the site itself says that it is. im sure there's a case to be made otherwise, so i left an also on the White Horse Temple page. prat 13:19, 2004 May 10 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nat Krause/Archive1


text:
HMS Achates (H12)

HMS Achates was an A-class destroyer (1929) destroyer built for the Royal Navy during the late 1920s. Completed in 1930, she initially served with the Mediterranean Fleet. She was sunk on 31 December 1942 during the Battle of the Barents Sea.

Design and description
In the mid-1920s, the Royal Navy ordered two destroyers from two different builders, HMS Ambuscade (D38), built by Yarrow, and HMS Amazon (D39), built by Thornycroft, incorporating the lessons learned from World War I, as prototypes for future classes. The A-class destroyers were based on Amazon, slightly enlarged and carrying two more torpedo tubes. They displaced 1350 LT at standard load and 1773 LT at deep load. The ships had an overall length of 323 ft, a beam of 32 ft and a draught of 12 ft. Acasta was powered by a pair of Brown-Curtis geared steam turbines, each driving one shaft, using steam provided by three Admiralty 3-drum boilers. The turbines developed a total of 34000 shp and gave a speed of 35 kn. During her sea trials, she reached a maximum speed of 35.5 kn from 34596 shp. The ships carried enough fuel oil to give them a range of 4800 nmi at 15 kn. The complement of the A-class ships was 134 officers and ratings and increased to 143 by 1940.

Their main armament consisted of four QF 4.7-inch (120 mm) Mk IX guns in single mounts, in two superfiring pairs in front of the bridge and aft of the superstructure. For anti-aircraft (AA) defence, they had two 40 mm QF 2-pounder Mk II AA guns mounted on a platform between their funnels. The ships were fitted with two above-water quadruple mounts for 21 in torpedoes. Carrying the minesweeping paravanes on the quarterdeck limited depth charge chutes to three with two depth charges provided for each chute. The A-class destroyers were given space for an ASDIC system, but it was not initially fitted.

Modifications
As a result of experience from the Norwegian campaign, the Royal Navy launched a programme of modifying its destroyers by adding high-angle anti-aircraft guns, with the A-class replacing the aft set of torpedo tubes with a single 12 pounder (3-inch (76mm)) gun, with all of the A-class modified by October 1940, although the lack of any fire control equipment meant that the gun was of limited use. Early in the Second World War, a depth charge outfit of 35 charges was carried, but this had increased to 42 charges, which could be dropped in a five-charge pattern, by April 1941. In late 1941, Y gun (the furthest aft 4.7-inch weapon) was removed to accommodate a heavier depth charge armament, with additional depth charge throwers and rails fitted to allow a ten-charge depth charge pattern to be dropped, with 60 depth charges carried, while A gun (the furthest forward 4.7-inch gun) was replaced by a Hedgehog anti-submarine weapon.

Ship history
Achates was ordered on 6 March 1928, and was laid down on 11 September 1928 at John Brown & Company's Clydebank shipyard, launched on 4 October 1929 and completed on 27 March 1930.

Following commissioning, Achates joined the 3rd Destroyer Flotilla, part of the Mediterranean Fleet. In early 1931, Achates accompanied the aircraft carrier HMS Eagle (1918) on a visit to Buenos Aires, Argentina to support a British Empire Trade Exhibition, also visiting Montevideo and Rio de Janeiro. In October 1931, rioting in Cyprus led to the Royal Navy sending warships to the British protectorate, with Achates, sister ship HMS Acasta (H09) and the cruisers HMS London (69) and HMS Shropshire ordered to Cyprus from Crete on 22 October. On 4 April 1932, Achates and the destroyer HMS Active (H14) collided off Saint-Tropez, with Active requiring repair at Malta. The ships of the 3rd Flotilla were refitted in British dockyards in the summer of 1932, with Achetes completing her refit at Devonport in October 1932, before returning to the Mediterranean, leaving for Gibraltar on 4 November 1932. The flotilla, including Achates again left the Mediterranean for home ports on 22 April 1935, with Achates recommissioning with a new crew at Devonport on 23 July before returning to the Mediterranean later that month, with the flotilla expected to work up and train at Gibraltar for a month before transferring to Malta.

On 13 January 1937, Achates collected the crew of the Spanish steamer Aragon, which had been seized by the GERMAN CRUISER Admiral Graf Spee in retaliation against Spanish Republican actions against the German ship Palos, and repatriated Aragon's crew to Málaga. Achates, with the rest of the A-class, which was replaced in the 3rd Flotilla by the ships of the I-class, returned to Britain in March 1937 and was paid off at Devonport. In October 1937, Achates replaced the destroyer HMS Woolston (1918) as parent ship of the 1st Anti-Submarine Flotilla based at Portland. In July 1938, Achates was relieved by Woolston as parent ship of the 1st Anti-Submarine Flotilla, and relieved HMS Wolverine (D78) as emergency destroyer at Devonport. By May 1939, Achates was attached to the 6th Submarine Flotilla, based at Portland.

Second World War
At the start of the Second World War in September 1939, Achates joined the 18th Destroyer Flotilla of Portsmouth Command, carrying out anti-submarine patrols and convoy escort duties in the English Channel. In July 1940, Achates joined the 16th Destroyer Flotilla, based at Harwich, operating on patrol and escort duties in the North Sea. On 2 August 1940, the Home Fleet reorganised its destroyer flotillas, with Achates joining the 12th Destroyer Flotilla. In November 1940, Achates joined the 4th Escort Group. On 2 November 1940, the German submarine GERMAN SUBMARINE U-31 attempted an attack on the destroyer HMS Antelope (H36), part of the escort for Convoy OB 237, but Antelope detected the submarine and attacked with depth charges, while sending out an alert which brought up Achates. Achates's sonar was out of service, however, but continued depth charge attacks from Antelope badly damaged U-31, which surfaced and scuttled herself. Achates was still a member of the 4th Escort Group on 30 December 1940. She joined the 3rd Destroyer Flotilla, part of the Home Fleet, during 1941.

Battle of the Denmark Strait
On 22 May, just after midnight, Achates sailed along with the destroyers HMS Electra (H27), HMS Antelope (H36), HMS Anthony (H40), HMS Echo (H23), and HMS Icarus (D03), escorting the battlecruiser HMS Hood (51) and the battleship HMS Prince of Wales (53) to cover the northern approaches against a breakout into the Atlantic by the German battleship GERMAN BATTLESHIP Bismarck and the cruiser GERMAN CRUISER Prinz Eugen. The intention was that the force would watch the Denmark Strait, providing support for the cruisers HMS Norfolk (78) and HMS Suffolk (55).

On the evening of 23 May, weather started getting bad, with the destroyers struggling to keep pace with Hood and Prince of Wales. At 0203 on the morning of 24 May, the destroyers were ordered to continue to search to the North while the two capital ships turned to the south. At about 0535, the German forces were sighted by Hood, and shortly after, the Germans sighted the British ships. Firing commenced at 0552. At about 0600, Hood suffered a massive explosion, sinking the ship within three or four minutes.

Following the loss of Hood, Admiral Wake-Walker, aboard Norfolk, ordered the destroyers to search for survivors, with the two cruisers continuing to shadow the German ships. The first destroyer, Electra arrived about two hours after Hood went under. They were expecting to find many survivors, and rigged scrambling nets and heaving lines, and placed life belts on the deck where they could be quickly thrown in, but only three survivors were found. Electra rescued these survivors, and continued searching. No more were found, only driftwood, debris, and a desk drawer filled with documents. After several hours searching, they left the area.

Kirkenes to Torch
On 23 July 1941, while the task force to take part in a carrier raid on Kirkenes and Petsamo was assembling off Iceland, Achates struck a British mine and was severely damaged, blowing off the destroyer's bow, including "A" gun, and killing 63 of her crew and injuring 25 more. Achates was towed to Seyðisfjörður by Anthony and after temporary repairs, left Iceland under the tow of the tug Assurance on 7 August, but a storm on 10 August caused further damage, with longitudinal members fracturing and cracking of upper deck plating, and the ships had to put into Skaglefjord in the Faroe Islands, where further temporary repairs were made. Achates eventually reached the Tyne on 24 August 1941.

Achates remained under repair for eight months before recommissioning. On 23 May 1942, Achates joined Arctic convoy PQ 16, remaining with the convoy until 30 May, when the convoy had reached Russian waters with the loss of seven out of 36 merchant ships. Achates returned to British waters as part of the westbound convoy QP 13, which left Arkhangelsk on 26 June. Achates remained with the convoy until 7 July 1942. In September 1942, Achates formed part of the Ocean Escort for Arctic Convoy PQ 18, joining on 7 September and remaining with it until the convoy reached Arkhangelsk on 21 September. In total, 13 merchant ships were sunk by German submarines and air attacks, with the convoy's escort sinking three submarines.

In November 1942, Achates took part in Operation Torch, the Anglo-American invasion of French North Africa. She formed part of an assault convoy, and was then detached to escort aircraft carriers during the landings at Oran, Algeria. On 8 November 1942, while deployed off Oran, Achates detected, and attacked a Vichy French submarine, which had sortied to contest the Allied landings in the area. Achates' attack saw the rise of oil to the surface of the sea and huge air bubbles, as well as debris from both inside, and outside the submarine. Two submarines were sunk by Achates and the destroyer HMS Westcott (D47) off Oran that day, FRENCH SUBMARINE Argonaute and FRENCH SUBMARINE Actéon.

Battle of the Barents Sea
On 25 December 1942, Achates joined the escort of Convoy JW 51B en route from Loch Ewe to Murmansk. On 31 December 1942, the convoy was attacked by the German heavy cruisers GERMAN CRUISER Admiral Hipper and Lützow together with six large destroyers in the Battle of the Barents Sea. The German plan was to divide the attacking force, with Hipper and three destroyers attacking the convoy from the northwest, drawing the escort off, so that Lützow could attack the convoy unhindered from the south.

When the German attack began at about 9:15 hr, Achates, following standing orders, positioned herself to lay smoke screens to obscure the convoy from attacking forces while the more modern destroyers of the escort would intercept the enemy force. Achates was damaged by a near-miss from Hipper early in the action, with shell splinters causing flooding, but the destroyer continued to lay smoke. At 11:15 hr Achates was ordered to join the badly damaged HMS Onslow (G17), but as she pulled clear of her own smoke screen, was spotted by Hipper and badly hit, killing 40 men, including Achates' commanding officer, Lieutenant-Commander A. H. T. Johns, and causing increased flooding. Command was assumed by the destroyer's second in command, Lieutenant Loftus Peyon-Jones. Despite the damage, Achates continued to lay smoke to protect the convoy, while flooding and the resultant list gradually increased. At about 13:00 hr, power was lost, and Achates signalled the trawler HMT Northern Gem to come to her assistance. However, at 13:30 hr, as Northern Gem approached, Achates suddenly capsized. Northern Gem rescued 81 of Achates' crew, one of whom later died on the trawler. A total of 113 of Achates' crew were killed.

Despite being heavily outgunned the escort, under the command of Captain R. St. Vincent Sherbrooke, VC, held off the attacks until the covering cruisers HMS Sheffield (C24) and HMS Jamaica (44) came to the escort's aid. Sheffield damaged Hipper and sank the German destroyer GERMAN DESTROYER Z16 Friedrich Eckoldt, causing the Germans to break off the attack. No merchant ships were sunk. Peyton-Jones was awarded the Distinguished Service Order for his role in the battle, with other awards to Achates crew including a Conspicuous Gallantry Medal, a Distinguished Service Cross and seven Distinguished Service Medals. Sixteen men were Mentioned in dispatches, eleven, including Johns, posthumously.

title: HMS Achates (H12)


text:
Talk:Roger III of Sicily

Untitled
Roger? That's an Italian/Sicilian name? Brooklyn Nellie (Nricardo) 01:21, May 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * No, Roger was a Norman. Adam Bishop 01:23, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Roger III of Sicily


text:
Talk:Schönebeck

This is another occasion where the town article and the district article should have been merged. There is very little point in keeping town and district apart as, to take just one example, the River Elbe connects both and the flood meadows being part of the district villages take up a lot of the high-water volume when flooding does occur in and around the town as did happen two years ago. This aspect should be brought out, it is part of the story of Schönebeck. --Dieter Simon 01:23, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

I shall mark it as a Wiki:Duplication article, not tonight though as it's late (o). The town part needs developing, too. It is a spa, after all. Dieter Simon

 * I strongly disagree - the city and the district aren't identical, and thus shouldn't be covered the same article. The only things where the two articles might partially overlap is the history. Don't forget 90% of the area of the district does not belong to the town, but are politically separate entities with their own history, geography, coat of arms etc. Of course the stub we have for the town needs enlargement, but not by throwing together things which don't belong together. andy 21:05, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Schönebeck


text:
Talk:Chess (musical)

2018 Revival plot summary incorrect
The third paragraph of 2018 Revival is currently as follows (no citations):

 * The new script reorders the show once again, reviving many elements of the original London production (including returning the first act to Merano, Italy and the second act to Bangkok, returning Florence's background to Hungarian with a lost/imprisoned father, and featuring a single chess match between the protagonists in act one), while introducing new elements including an expanded role for the Arbiter as narrator, and the reimagining of the Walter character to be not a TV executive but a ruthless CIA agent who colludes with the KGB to interfere with the chess matches for the purpose of keeping Soviet leadership engaged in nuclear arms reduction talks with the Americans.

Having watched the show three times, this is not what ended up in production. I'd like to change to:

 * The new script reorders the show once again, reviving many elements of the original London production (including returning the first act to Merano, Italy and the second act to Bangkok and returning Florence's background to Hungarian with a lost/imprisoned father), including the popular "Someone Else's Story" from the 1988 American version, removing the Walter character, and dropping the final twist of Florence's father never having been found after all. It ends instead on the bittersweet parting of Florence and Anatoly amidst the triumphant crescendo of You And I.

As with the previous version, I can provide no citations to back this up, so am posting it here first for discussion -- Alice Purcell (talk) 14:22, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Revival
Why some revivals haven't been shown here, like for example South Korea? EricaJ4416 (talk) 10:11, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Norwegian Version
I've noticed a couple times people have added a 2020 production of a revised version of Chess på svenska that was done in Oslo to the "Major Differences" section. I deleted it the first time, as I didn't think it was notable enough to really be considered a different "version" to the Swedish production (it is "Differences between the major versions," after all). Obviously this is subjective, so maybe I made the wrong choice, but, since the plots are so similar (the description of the differences even admits that it's "mostly similar to the Swedish version"), and it's not really as notable as, say, the concept album and the British version, I still question that it's included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kanji dc (talk • contribs) 19:56, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

 * After no response, I've gone ahead and removed the Norwegian production from the table of differences. Kanji dc (talk) 18:00, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

2018 Revival --- Which Version?
So I've been doing some research on the more recent revivals, and we've confusingly noted both the London Coliseum production from 2018 and the Kennedy Center revival from 2018 as the same revival. Having read synopses and listened to recordings of both shows, the scripts are actually very different, and it's ambiguous to which the plot summary refers.

This has in fact been addressed before: according to this talk page, the current passage, which reads:

 * The new script reorders the show once again, reviving many elements of the original London production (including returning the first act to Merano, Italy and the second act to Bangkok and returning Florence's background to Hungarian with a lost/imprisoned father), including the popular "Someone Else's Story" from the 1988 American version, and dropping the final twist of Florence's father never having been found after all. It ends instead on the bittersweet parting of Florence and Anatoly amidst the triumphant crescendo of You And I.

Was changed from:

 * The new script reorders the show once again, reviving many elements of the original London production (including returning the first act to Merano, Italy and the second act to Bangkok, returning Florence's background to Hungarian with a lost/imprisoned father, and featuring a single chess match between the protagonists in act one), while introducing new elements including an expanded role for the Arbiter as narrator, and the reimagining of the Walter character to be not a TV executive but a ruthless CIA agent who colludes with the KGB to interfere with the chess matches for the purpose of keeping Soviet leadership engaged in nuclear arms reduction talks with the Americans.

The current one is the plot of the London Coliseum production, whereas the old one is the plot of the Kennedy Center production.

This needs to be addressed, as it's just false that the two are the same. Kanji dc (talk) 18:42, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Why no subsequent collaboration?
I'd like to see a discussion of why Benny Andersson, Björn Ulvaeus, and Tim Rice never collaborated again on another musical. Greg Lovern (talk) 00:49, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chess (musical)


text:
Talk:Performative utterance

Untitled
OK, now I've shifted this page to Performative speech act and back again. I recall that Austin used this term himself, so it should stay here. This is really a bit of an unfortunate page though - I can see why we want this as a page of its own (especially for the WikiProject Critical Theory), but please keep this separate from a potential page on performativity. This page can hint at the Derridean discussion, but the concept of performativity as used by theorists such as Derrida and Butler really merits a page of its own. Pteron 01:23, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

 * The plan was to talk about the term as Austin and Eve Sedgwick use it. I'll leave the Derrida stuff to the deconstructionists.  -Seth Mahoney 06:49, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

 * The page on performativity has stated gathering stuff on the use of the notion in gender studies and science and technology studies. As suggested by Pteron. -- Typewritten 16:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Sedgwick's account of performatives
This section is in dire need of citation(s). If it is a summarization of her discussion of the periperformative in chapter two of Touching Feeling then it needs to be noted as such. This author has provided an incomplete and unethical account of Sedgwick's words as they relate (especially) to the rest of this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.131.79.2 (talk) 20:07, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Distinguishing Performative Utterances
"There is a most thorough and accurate study of how "performatives" might be defined following Austin by Jan S. Andersson, "How to define 'Performative'". (However, unfortunately it has been almost completely ignored by the scholarship of the Anglo-American tradition -- perhaps because it is both very densely written and accurately worked out, and thus not easy to read.)" Umm, weasel words a little. I mean, that is blatantly biased not to mention that there's more than a hint of original scholarship when the author draws a causal connection between the style of prose and analytic philosophy.

agreed. I just delved into editing for the first time, and not being terribly familiar with the author in question nor with how to handle this, I did the weak thing and added the template for No_original_research and some of the specific sections that seemed most egregious-but-correctible. I'm not even sure how to tackle the style, though. Alas, for lack of a background in mid-20th-century language theory.Dizzyjosh (talk) 05:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Quote: 'Austin found great difficulty in drawing a completely clear distinction between "performatives" and "constatives"; among other things he came to the conclusion that to state something is to perform an illocutionary act, which renders all constatives as performatives;'

The 2nd sentence is accurate (Austin, pp. 148-149). However, by saying that Austin "found great difficulty in drawing a completely clear distinction," it suggests that Austin was in fact trying to make a clear distinction in the first place. Considering that Austin resolved his so-called "difficulties" in lecture 12, it seems unlikely that he was ever truly trying to make a such a distinction in the first place. Rather, he was challenging long-held assumptions in philosophy and linguistics, and in order to render his lecture series more persuasive, he had to address counterarguments.

Hypothetically, he could have put lecture 12 first and just cut to the chase, but then his piece would have come across as a manifesto, which he explicitly stated he did NOT wish to do (Austin, p. 164). Rather, he seems to have adopted the strategy of slowly easing the audience into what at the time must have been a very radical notion, namely that everything, including constative utterances (aka statements of fact) could be described as illocutionary acts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shawn 06:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Excellent Job!
So clear and brief, yet accurate, that I could assign it to nonmajor Fr. and Sophs. In my multicultural school, I have to worry about many excellent students who are already doing their best to read English as a second language. I don't want to inflict another twenty dollar book on them for the sake of five or six key concepts. A fine use for Wiki. Thanks so much. George J. Leonard, Prof of Interdisciplinary Humanities, San Francisco State University Profhum (talk) 21:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Reference Mistake
Could someone who knows how to edit this page correct the reference to "Jackobson" The correct reference is "Jacobsen Klaus" and its Philosophy Quarterly vol. 21 no. 85 (not 1985) but 1971. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.1.106.75 (talk) 16:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. --Wikiain (talk) 04:02, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Go.
"Go" is listed as an example of a performative utterance. I don't think this is right. It seems to me that saying "I order you to go" would be a performative utterance, whereas simply saying "Go" would be the performance of a speech act, but not a performative. Let me know if I'm mistaken. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cailean8 (talk • contribs) 01:22, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree and, there being no other comment, have made that change.Wikiain (talk) 00:33, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Buying butter
So, I'm reading along, and I see examples of performative sentences such as this:
 * "I give and bequeath my watch to my brother"

Fine. Farther down in the article:
 * Words on a list can be either descriptive or performative. 'Butter' on a shopping list implies that "I will buy butter" (a promise to yourself).  But 'Butter' printed on your till receipt means "you have purchased butter" (simply a description).

Hang on! That cash register receipt is de facto saying "I give and bequeath thee this stick of butter" and if you don't believe this, trying walking out of Frye's Electronics without that receipt in your hand. You'll have store security all over you in no time. The whole point of receipts is that they are performative; you don't otherwise need one, because you already know what you bought. It's not like you go home and say to yourself "gee, I wonder what I bought? Let me look at the receipt." It's not descriptive in any way, shape or form. WTF. Why are we just making stuff up for Wikipedia articles? 67.198.37.16 (talk) 21:03, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I added a "citation needed" tag, but, on second thought, that paragraph is so insane that it seems simplest to just delete it outright. I can't begin to imagine a rational, coherent defense of it. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 21:11, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Performative utterance


text:
Talk:Lazarillo de Tormes

Don Quixote

 * Miguel Cervantes, author of the great classic, Don Quixote, said that his book was inspired by Tractado 3 in which Lazarillo serves an eccentric old squire who thought he had been a great knight.

I doubt this. Can somebody reference this? -- Error 01:26, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

Removed:
 * Miguel Cervantes said Don Quixote was inspired by Tractado 3 in which Lazarillo serves an eccentric old squire who thought he had been a great knight.

I find a study of the influence of Lazarillo on Cervantes, but it doesn't mention such a direct acknowledgement.

However, I find that at least someone thinks that Lope de Vega would have a direct or indirect influence:
 * Bibliography: López Navío, José: I. "El entremés de los romances, sátira contra Lope de Vega, fuente de inspiración de los primeros capítulos del Quijote". II. "Cide Hamete Benengeli: Lope de Vega". III. "Los d os autores del Quijote: primer autor, Cide Hamete (Lope), segundo autor (Cervantes)". ACer, 8 (1959-60), 151-239.

--Error 00:25, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Removed
This is an impressionistic comment that is not very relevant. --Error 00:25, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * "Vista de Toledo" por Lazarillo de Tormes
 * Agreed. It's pretty irrelevant, so I removed it again. - Taxman Talk 11:18, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Advice
The following information should be added: We have four ancient editions of this book (Alcalá, Amberes...), Rosa Navarro Duran (I have requested (and submitted) the creation of an article with her name) has investigated about the authory and she has found that its author was Alfonso de Valdes.
 * As far as I know nobody supports that theory besides her. Anyway, you can edit the article yourself.--Rataube 17:35, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Importance as a novella
I think that whoever said "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" was an example probably meant "The Adventures of Tom Sawyer". Tom Sawyer is a rogue; Huck Finn isn't. But then the issue becomes that Huckleberry Finn is a moralistic novel, while Tom Sawyer isn't, as far as I can recall. I wouldn't use either as an example. But Huckleberry Finn isn't a picaresque at all. It's a Bildungsroman, a story of coming-of-age and personal growth. It has a central plot. It isn't especially satirical. Most importantly, rather than an outsider acting immorally, Huck is an outsider acting more morally than society. Philgoetz (talk) 19:36, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lazarillo de Tormes