text:
Book of Baruch

The Book of Baruch is a deuterocanonical book of the Bible, used in many Christian traditions, such as Catholic and Orthodox churches. In Judaism and Protestant Christianity, it is considered not to be part of the canon, with the Protestant Bibles categorizing it as part of the Biblical apocrypha. The book is named after Baruch ben Neriah, the prophet Jeremiah's scribe who is mentioned at Baruch 1:1, and has been presumed to be the author of the whole work. The book is a reflection of a late Jewish writer on the circumstances of Jewish exiles from Babylon, with meditations on the theology and history of Israel, discussions of wisdom, and a direct address to residents of Jerusalem and the Diaspora. Some scholars propose that it was written during or shortly after the period of the Maccabees.

The Book of Baruch is sometimes referred to as 1 Baruch to distinguish it from 2 Baruch, 3 Baruch and 4 Baruch.

Although the earliest known manuscripts of Baruch are in Greek, linguistic features of the first parts of Baruch (1:1–3:8) have been proposed as indicating a translation from a Semitic language.

Although not in the Hebrew Bible, it is found in the Septuagint, in the Eritrean/Ethiopian Orthodox Bible, and also in Theodotion's Greek version. In 80-book Protestant Bibles, the Book of Baruch is a part of the Biblical apocrypha. Jerome, despite his misgivings about the Deuterocanonical books, included Baruch into his Vulgate translation. In the Vulgate it is grouped with the books of the prophets alongside Jeremiah and Lamentations. In the Vulgate, the King James Bible Apocrypha, and many other versions, the Letter of Jeremiah is appended to the Book of Baruch as a sixth chapter; in the Septuagint and Orthodox Bibles chapter 6 is usually counted as a separate book, called the Letter or Epistle of Jeremiah.

Basic structure
The basic outline of the book of Baruch:
 * 1:1–14 Introduction: "And these are the words...which Baruch...wrote in Babylonia.... And when they heard it they wept, and fasted, and prayed before the Lord."
 * 1:15–2:10 Confession of sins: "[T]he Lord hath watched over us for evil, and hath brought it upon us: for the Lord is just in all his works.... And we have not hearkened to his voice"....
 * 2:11–3:8 Prayer for mercy: "[F]or the dead that are in hell, whose spirit is taken away from their bowels, shall not give glory and justice to the Lord..." (cf. Psalms 6:6/5)
 * 3:9–4:14 A paean for Wisdom: "Where are the princes of the nations,... that hoard up silver and gold, wherein men trust? ... They are cut off, and are gone down to hell,..."
 * 4:5–5:9 Baruch's Poem of Consolation: messages for those in captivity, for the "neighbours of Zion", and for Jerusalem: "You have been sold to the Gentiles, not for your destruction: but because you provoked God to wrath.... [F]or the sins of my children, he [the Eternal] hath brought a nation upon them from afar...who have neither reverenced the ancient, nor pitied children..." "Let no one gloat over me [Jerusalem], a widow, bereft of many, for the sins of my children I am left desolate, for they turned from the law of God". "Look toward the east, O Jerusalem, and see the joy that is coming to you from God".
 * Chapter 6: see Letter of Jeremiah

Early evidence of use
No reference to the Book of Baruch is found in Rabbinic literature, nor is its text cited. A fragment of the Letter of Jeremiah in Greek has been excavated amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls, but no counterpart fragments survive of the Book of Baruch. It is generally argued that there are no references to, quotations from, or allusions to the Book of Baruch in the New Testament, although Adams proposes a general similarity between themes in the later parts of the book and some in the Pauline Epistles, particularly Galatians and 1 Corinthians. The earliest evidence for the text of the Book of Baruch is in quotations in the works of early Christian Church Fathers; the earliest citation being in the Legatio pro Christianis: 9 of Athenagoras of Athens, dated 177. Much the most extensive use of the Book of Baruch in patristic literature is in the Adversus Haereses: 5.35.1 (c. 180) of Irenaeus of Lyons; which draws extensively on Baruch 4:36 to 5:9. Both Athenagorus and Irenaeus cite these readings as being from the Book of Jeremiah. A brief quotation appears also in the Paedagogus by Clement of Alexandria. Increasingly from the 4th century onwards, however, Greek Fathers tend to cite such readings as from a 'Book of Baruch', although Latin Fathers consistently maintain the former practice of citing these texts as from Jeremiah, and where they do refer to a 'Book of Baruch' are to be understood as denoting the apocalyptic work, 2 Baruch.

Manuscripts
Both the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah are separate books in the great pandect Greek Bibles, Codex Vaticanus (4th century) and Codex Alexandrinus (5th century), where they are found in the order Jeremiah, Baruch, Lamentations, Letter of Jeremiah. In the Codex Sinaiticus (4th century) Lamentations follows directly after Jeremiah and Baruch is not found; but a lacuna after Lamentations prevents a definitive assessment of whether Baruch may have been included elsewhere in this manuscript. Neither of the two surviving early Latin pandect Bibles (Codex Amiatinus (7th century) and Leon palimpsest (7th century) includes either the Book of Baruch or the Letter of Jeremiah; the earliest Latin witnesses to the text being the Codex Cavensis (9th century) and the Theodulfian Bibles (9th century). Baruch is also witnessed in some early Coptic (Bohairic and Sahidic) and Syriac manuscripts, but is not found in Coptic or Syriac lectionaries.

Book of Baruch and Book of Jeremiah
The evident variation among early Christian divines as to whether a particular reading is to be cited from 'Baruch' or 'Jeremiah' is generally regarded as relating to the very different texts of the Book of Jeremiah that are found respectively in manuscripts of the Greek and Hebrew Bibles. The version of Jeremiah in the Greek Septuagint texts (Vaticanus, Alexandrinus) is a seventh shorter than that in the Hebrew Masoretic Text or the Latin Vulgate; and the ordering of the chapters is very different, with sections from the middle of the book in the Septuagint version (the Oracles against the Nations) found at the end of the book in the Masoretic text and Vulgate. As Hebrew fragments have been found in the Dead Sea Scrolls corresponding to both the Septuagint and Masoretic orders, it is commonly accepted that the two versions derive from two distinct Hebrew traditions, and that the Septuagint form of the text is likely the older. Benedictine scholar Pierre-Maurice Bogaert suggests that, if the Book of Baruch is appended to the Septuagint version of Jeremiah, it follows on as a plausible continuation of the Septuagint narrative (Chapter 51: 31–35 in the Septuagint, corresponding to the truncated Chapter 45 in the Masoretic text). A similar conclusion is proposed by Emanuel Tov, who notes characteristics of a consistent redactional revision of the Septuagint text of Jeremiah from Chapter 29 onwards (correcting readings towards the Hebrew), a revision that is then carried over into the Greek text of Baruch 1:1 to 3:8, suggesting that these once formed a continuous text. Bogaert consequently proposes that the gathering of sections from the end of Septuagint Jeremiah into a distinct book of 'Baruch' was an innovation of Christian biblical practice in the Greek church from around the 3rd century onwards; but that the version of Jeremiah in the Old Latin Bible preceded this practice, and hence did not designate the Book of Baruch as a distinct work of scripture, but included its text within the Book of Jeremiah. The text of Old Latin Jeremiah nowhere survives in sufficient form for this speculation to be confirmed, but Bogaert proposes that its characteristics may be recognised in the texts of Baruch in the early Theodulfian Vulgate Bibles; noting that Baruch in these manuscripts is continuous with Jeremiah, and that the end at Chapter 5:9 is marked by an explicit in Old Latin form, stating "Explicit hieremiae prophetae".

Authorship and date
Baruch 1:1–14 gives a narrative account of an occasion when Baruch ben Neriah reads the book of 'these words' before the Israelites in Babylon, and then sends that book (together with collected funds) to be read in Jerusalem. Where the Book of Baruch is considered to be a distinct work of scripture, it is commonly identified as the book that Baruch reads; and hence Baruch himself has traditionally been credited as the author of the whole work. However, the syntactical form of Baruch chapter 1 has been held rather to imply that 'these words' correspond to a preceding text – which might then be identified with Lamentations or with the Book of Jeremiah; in which case comparison may be made with a corresponding notice of Baruch writing down reading the prophecies of Jeremiah, recorded at Jeremiah chapter 36. These considerations underlie an alternative tradition (found for instance in Augustine) in which all four works (Book of Jeremiah, Baruch, Lamentations, Letter of Jeremiah) are credited to Jeremiah himself as author.

Critical scholarship is, however, united in rejecting either Baruch or Jeremiah as author of the Book of Baruch, or in dating the work in the period of its purported context; the Babylonian Exile. Rather they have seen clear thematic and linguistic parallels with later works; the Book of Daniel and the Book of Sirach. Many scholars have noted that the restoration of worship in the Jerusalem Temple following its pollution by Antiochus Epiphanes could provide a counterpart historical context in which the narrative of Baruch may equally be considered to apply; and consequently a date in the period 200–100 BCE has been proposed.

Language
The Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Arabic, Bohairic and Ethiopic versions of Baruch are all translated directly from the Greek; the text of which survives in Vaticanus and Alexandrinus, and is highly consistent. Jerome (5th century) states that no Hebrew text was in existence, and Origen (3rd century) appears to know of no Hebrew text in the preparation of the text of Baruch in the Hexapla Old Testament. Nevertheless, there are a number of readings in the earlier sections of Baruch (1:1 to 3:8) where an anomalous reading in the Greek appears to imply a mistranslation of a Hebrew or Aramaic source; as at chapter 3:4, where 'hear now the prayers of the dead of Israel' (מֵתֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל) is assumed to be a mistranslation of, 'hear now the prayers of the men of Israel' (מְתֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, from the plural word מְתִים 'men' as in biblical expressions like מְתֵי אָהֳלִי 'men of my tent', מְתֵי שָׁוְא 'men of vanity' or מְתֵי מִסְפָּר 'men of few [numbers]' ). Since the 19th century, critical scholars have assumed a Semitic original for these earlier parts of the book, and a number of studies, such as that of Tov, have sought to retrovert from the Greek to a plausible Hebrew source text. Whereas in the Revised Standard Version (1957) of Bible, the English text of Baruch consistently follows the Greek in these readings; in the New Revised Standard Version (1989) these readings are adjusted to conform with a conjectural reconstruction of a supposed Hebrew original.

Nevertheless, some more recent studies of Baruch, such as those by Adams and Bogaert, take the Greek text to be the original. Adams maintains that most of the text of Baruch depends on that of other books of the Bible; and indeed it has been characterised by Tov as a "mosaic of Biblical passages" especially in these early sections. Consequently, variations from the literal Hebrew text could have found their way directly into a dependent Greek version, without having to presume a Semitic intermediary stage. Moreover, Adams takes issue with the presupposition behind conjectural retroversions to conform to a supposed Hebrew text; that the author of Baruch understood the principle of literal translation, and aspired to follow that principle; and yet lamentably failed to do so.

Canonicity
In the Greek East, Athanasius (367 AD), Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 350 AD), and Epiphanius of Salamis (c. 385 AD) listed the Book of Baruch as canonical. Athanasius states "Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations, and the epistle"; the other Fathers offer similar formulations.

In the Latin West, Pope Innocent I (405 AD) identifies 16 prophets (4 major, plus 12 minor) as canonical, but does not specifically mention Baruch as associated with Jeremiah. The same is the case for the canons of the Synod of Hippo (in 393), followed by the Council of Carthage (397) and the Council of Carthage (419). All these canon lists otherwise include other Old Testament books that would later be classed as deuterocanonical. Later, Augustine of Hippo (c. 397 AD) would confirm in his book On Christian Doctrine (Book II, Chapter 8) the canonicity of the book of Jeremiah without reference to Baruch; but in his work The City of God 18:33 he discusses the text of Baruch 3: 36–38, noting that this is variously cited to Baruch and to Jeremiah; his preference being for the latter. In the decrees of the Council of Florence (1442) and the Council of Trent (1546), "Jeremias with Baruch" is stated as canonical; but the Letter of Jeremiah is not specified, being included as the sixth chapter of Baruch in late medieval Vulgate Bibles.

The Decretum Gelasianum, which is a work written by an anonymous Latin scholar between 519 and 553, contains a list of books of Scripture presented as having been declared canonical by the Council of Rome (382 AD). Again this list asserts the canonicity of Jeremiah without reference to Baruch. One early synodical decree that may mention Baruch is The Synod of Laodicea (c. 364); where a list of canonical books is variously appended to canon 59, in which Jeremiah, and Baruch, the Lamentations, and the Epistle are stated as canonical, although this canon list includes no other deuterocanonical works. This list is found in compendiums of the decrees of Laodicea circulating in the Ethiopic church, and in all later Greek compendiums; but is absent from counterpart compendiums of Laodicea circulating in the Latin, Coptic and Syriac churches; as too from some earlier Greek compendiums.

It is commonly accepted that the absence of specific mention of Baruch in canon lists circulating in the West cannot be interpreted as an assertion that the Book of Baruch was non-canonical, only that it is being assumed within Jeremiah ; although there was also an extensive body of pseudopigraphal Baruch apocalyptic literature ( 2 Baruch, 3 Baruch, 4 Baruch), which are frequently classed in Latin lists as apocryphal. The first Christian writer to reject the biblical Book of Baruch in its entirety (whether as a separate work, or as part of Jeremiah) is Jerome. Subsequently, because the Vulgate text of Jeremiah, following Jerome, now lacked both Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah, those Latin Fathers who favoured the Vulgate – Gregory the Great, Isidore of Seville and Bede – notably do not cite texts from either of these two books as scripture; and appear not to consider them canonical. Bogaert notes a preface to the Vulgate text of Jeremiah, likely dating from the 5th century, where the radical differences of the Vulgate and Old Latin texts are remarked upon. In this preface it is asserted that the contents of both the Old Latin Jeremiah (from the Septuagint) and the Vulgate Jeremiah (from the Hebrew) have apostolic authority and are to be considered canonical within their own contexts; but that a composite Jeremiah with elements of both should be condemned.

Catholic usage
In the Catholic Church, Baruch 3:9–38 is used in the liturgy of Holy Saturday during Passiontide in the traditional lectionary of scripture readings at Mass. A similar selection occurs during the revised liturgy for the Easter Vigil.

Baruch 1:14 – 2:5; 3:1–8 is a liturgical reading within the revised Roman Catholic Breviary for the 29th Week in Ordinary Time, Friday Office of Readings. The subject is the prayer and confession of sin of a penitent people:

"Justice is with the Lord, our God; and we today are flushed with shame, we men of Judah and citizens of Jerusalem, that we, with our kings and rulers and priests and prophets, and with our fathers, have sinned in the Lord's sight and disobeyed him. ... And the Lord fulfilled the warning he had uttered against us.... Lord Almighty, ... Hear... and have mercy on us, who have sinned against you... (Baruch 1:15–18; 2:1; 3:1–2)"

St. Augustine's reflection, which is paired with this reading, on this occasion speaks of prayer: "[S]ince this [that we pray for] is that peace that surpasses all understanding, even when we ask for it in prayer we do not know how to pray for what is right..."; from there he explains what it means that the Holy Spirit pleads for the saints.

Baruch 3:9–15, 24–4:4 is a liturgical reading for the Saturday of the same week. The theme is that the salvation of Israel is founded on wisdom: "Learn where prudence is, ... that you may know also where are length of days, and life, where light of the eyes, and peace. Who has found the place of wisdom, who has entered into her treasuries? ... She is the book of the precepts of God, ... All who cling to her will live... Turn, O Jacob, and receive her: ... Give not your glory to another, your privileges to an alien race." Paired with this on the same day is a reading from St. Peter Chrysologus, died AD 450, who quotes Paul the Apostle: "let us also wear the likeness of the man of heaven".

Anglican usage
Baruch is listed in Article VI of the Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England. In the Daily Office Lectionary for Christmas Eve, Baruch 4:21–29 is read; on Christmas day, Baruch 4:30–5:9; both of these are considered Messianic Prophecies in the Anglican tradition.

In the American 1928 Book of Common Prayer, the Daily Office lectionary includes the Book of Baruch for the First Lesson on several occasions: Baruch 4:21–30 on the Second Sunday after Easter; Baruch 3:14–15, 29–37 for the 21st Sunday after Trinity; and Baruch 5 for the 22nd Sunday after Trinity. In the American Book of Common Prayer (1979) Baruch 5:1–9 is the Old Testament reading for Advent II (Year C); and in the Daily Office (Year 2) Baruch 4:21–29 is prescribed for Advent IV, and Baruch 4:36–5:9 for Dec. 24.

Eastern
In the Eastern Orthodox Church and those Eastern Catholic Churches which follow the Byzantine Rite, a selection from Baruch (which is considered an extension of the Book of Jeremiah, and is announced in the services as "Jeremiah") is read as one of the eight Paroemia (Old Testament readings) during the Vesperal Divine Liturgy on Christmas Eve.

Use by theologians, Church Fathers, the Second Vatican Council
In Summa Theologiae III 4 4, Doctor of the Church Thomas Aquinas quotes Baruch 3:37 (3:38 in Vulgate) to affirm that "the Son of God assumed human nature in order to show Himself in men's sight, according to Baruch 3:38: Afterwards He was seen upon earth, and conversed with men. This statement, more properly rendered as Afterward he appeared on earth and lived with humankind. is part of his discussion of "the mode of union on the part of the human nature" III 4. He quotes the same passage of Baruch in III 40 1 to help answer "whether Christ should have associated with men, or led a solitary life" III 40. By switching the gender of the pronoun, this reading, which properly is discussing Divine Wisdom was widely re-interpreted in Christian discourse as a prophecy of the incarnation of Jesus Christ. Church Father St. Clement of Alexandria, d. AD 217, quoted Baruch 3:16–19, referring to the passage thus: "Divine Scripture, addressing itself to those who love themselves and to the boastful, somewhere says most excellently: 'Where are the princes of the nations...'" (see "Paean for Wisdom" example infra) (Jurgens §410a).

St. Hilary of Poitiers, d. AD 368, also a Church Father, quoted the same passage as St. Thomas, supra, (3:36–38), citing "Jeremias", about which Jurgens states: "Baruch was secretary to Jeremias, and is cited by the Fathers mostly under the name of Jeremias" (§864n). St. Hilary states: "Besides Moses and Isaias, listen now a third time, and to Jeremias, who teaches the same thing, when He says:..." (Jurgens §864).

Baruch 3:38(37) is referenced in the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation of the Second Vatican Council.

Use in the current Catechism of the Catholic Church
Baruch 6 is quoted in the Catechism of the Catholic Church as part of an exposition against idolatry. During the Diaspora the Jews lamented their lapse into idolatry, and their repentance is captured in the Book of Baruch.

In Popular Culture
The Book of Baruch by the Gnostic Justin is a sequence of 270 poems by the English poet Geoffrey Hill, published posthumously by Oxford University Press in 2019.

title: Book of Baruch


text:
Talk:Hot chocolate

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 February 2019 and 13 March 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wikigirl 0690.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

French Terminology
Is it really necessary to list the French translation, "chocolat chaud" in the first line? It's not another name for the subject, it is simply the subject's name in another language. I think it is not appropriate here. 153.31.113.20 (talk) 18:34, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

First Line
"Hot chocolate (also known as hot cocoa or just cocoa or chocolat milk) is a heated beverage typically consisting of shaved chocolate, melted chocolate or cocoa powder, heated milk or water, and sugar. Drinking chocolate is similar to hot chocolate, but is made from melted chocolate shavings or paste rather than a powdered mix that's soluble in water.[1]"

This doesn't really make sense. It states that hot chocolate can consist of "shaved chocolate" then says it's distinct. Which is correct? 94.14.191.115 (talk) 13:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Semi-Protection
Due to recent vandalism by unknown IP addresses. I suggest that the Hot Chocolate page should be semi-protected under the vandalism policy. A Raider Like Indiana 01:53, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Copyright
Is this a copyright violation. Much of it is lifted from the first external link. Rmhermen 04:21, May 13, 2004 (UTC)

 * I re-worded some parts of the article to make it more distinct. I also included a more explicit reference to the site's author.

 * Acegikmo1 05:50, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

Image
can we find a better image? that image has so much whipped cream in it, you can't exactly tell that it is hot chocolate. Kingturtle 03:37, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I have uploaded an image called Image:White hot chocolate.JPG that I think may be good to have under Place in modern society. If anyone thinks its relivent? The recipe for it is at here.--Hapenstance 14:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

The link redirects to a generalist site, no recipe. Can you please correct?--194.185.3.218 (talk) 13:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Marshmallow
Why are marshmallows placed into hot chocolates sometimes? I find that it makes no difference to the taste, and the only evidence that is was there is a white layer of liquid on top of the drink. Also, is the marshmallow supposed to melt so quickly? If so, why? Hugh Jass 03:31, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Marshmallows add extra sugar. Beau99 21:17, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It may not change the taste of the actual hot chocolate, but I for one like the marshmallows themselves when they're all gooey from being partially melted. Kinda like the cherry on top of an ice-cream sundae. It doesn't change the flavor of the ice-cream (except maybe for the tiny bit it touched), but it's yummy when you pluck it off and eat it! --Icarus 05:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * So could we have something on the history of adding marshmallows to hot chocolate? Because, to be honest, I'd never even heard of it until I read Calvin and Hobbes comics. I mean, why is it so common in America whereas the very idea, here in Europe, is strange? Crazy Eddy 20:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Idk, maybe they just like do it, idk man. 177.105.94.73 (talk) 15:55, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Hot chocolate as coffee?
I once had a teacher that drakn hot chocolate instead of coffee to stay awake. Can hot chocolate have enough power to keep someone aeake for a day? — Hurricane Devon  (  Talk  ) 12:08, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Probably not, one site a found listed 8 mg of caffeine in a cup of hot chocolate made from powdered mix (and a chocolate bar at 30 mg). A regular cup of coffee contains about 100 mg or the same amount as a caffeine pill. Rmhermen 18:12, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually Swiss Miss (a popular brand in the US) makes a hot chocolate with as much caffeine as a cup of coffee. Note this is a special type of hot chocolate, and typically hot chocolate does not contain that level of caffeine 184.60.10.67 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:13, 14 January 2011 (UTC).

 * Def not, however if you want to make a cup of coffee into hot chocalyte just mix a few tablespoons of canned pure holland chocalyate at your nearest market with simple coffee, not only will it taste better than every hot chocalyte brand out, but it will be a simple way of saying 'hey i'm better than you', because you wouldnt be using marshmellows with renett or even whey and other 'natural' ingredients added to the powder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.25.193 (talk) 05:00, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Chocolate fountains
I didn't even know something like chocolate fountains existed... thank you for pointing it out: I'm going to get one for Christmas! --Ithunn (talk) 13:21, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Hot chocolate vs. Hot Cocoa
In this article it is stated that some may make the distinction between whether the drink is instant (cocoa) or made from bar chocolate (hot chocolate). I wanted to know how verifiable this is, especially because different places have different names for things. I have always understood that hot chocolate is made from water (and thus includes all "instant" varieties as well as the original European version which was made with water) while hot cocoa is made with milk. Curious to know if others agree with changing the statements made in the article to be more general. strideranne 19:05, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Even if some do make your distinction, that doesn't mean that others don't make the distinction already noted in the article, which seems far more common. Note packages of instant "hot cocoa" and quotes like this "In the '50s, they added sugar and cocoa to their dry mixes and developed one of the first full-flavored dry cocoa mixes. Swiss Miss..." from the ConAgra site. Rmhermen 14:55, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * On the page you mention, Swiss Miss is self described as "America's preferred brand of hot chocolate." The description you have included is one that refers to the addition of actual cocoa powder and does not refer to the actual product. While doing Google searches on various combinations of keywords, these were my results. Hot Cocoa - lots of homemade recipes using cocoa or bar chocolate. Hot Chocolate - much more varied but I noticed more commercial brands mentioned, as well as Mexican hot chocolate which I think is closer to the original recipe. I also looked at labels of a bunch of different commercial brands, most are advertised as hot chocolate. Also wondering if the phenomenon is regional, I'm from NY but now live in Montreal, so maybe it is an East Coast thing. strideranne 19:05, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * A quick look at the ingredients list on containers of 'cocoa', 'drinking chocolate' and 'hot chocolate drink' of various UK brands reveals that 'cocoa' is always 100% cocoa powder (or 97% plus acidity regulator), while drinking chocolate (both Cadbury's and Tesco's) is only 25% cocoa powder (and the rest mostly sugar). Hot chocolate drink, on the other hand, seems to be mostly made from chocolate or from a mixture of chocolate and cocoa powder. (I'm guessing that drinking chocolate was originally considered 'hot chocolate' only after it was made up. After all, Tetley don't sell their teabags as 'hot tea'.) I would conclude that cocoa (the drink) and hot chocolate are different things.Grant (talk) 13:30, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, maybe Cocoa (the drink) be a Hot Chocolate's before-version, in fact, many things we know are "final versions" of early stuff, maybe this is one of the times, which makes sense considering that it gave rise to Chocolate –which in turn gave rise to Hot Chocolate (See: WP: Chocolate).
 * Either way, the fact is that although it appears to be the same thing, it may not be. 177.105.94.73 (talk) 16:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Cadbury's Drinking Chocolate
I removed the following excerpt:

 * Cadbury's Drinking Chocolate is probably the best known brand of hot chocolate, and as a result some people refer to hot chocolate as "drinking chocolate".

...because it mentions two facts that are unsubstantiated and, in the latter case, quite dubious. It's likely the other way around, unless a cited source shows otherwise. CGameProgrammer 18:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Good call. "Drinking chocolate", as far as I know, is an Italian thing not a Cadbury's thing, and is significantly different from what most people call "hot chocolate". — Saxifrage ✎ 00:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

 * "Drinking Chocolate" is without a doubt a Cadbury's thing, regardless of any Italian connection. The brand has been around for a very long time. But the edit is probably for the best, because it's certainly true that there's no proof of origin for the phrase, and it's clearly not just used by Cadbury's.  On the other hand, simply editing out "drinking chocolate" altogether is not a great fix, because currently the article doesn't make any reference to "drinking chocolate".  That was my aim in adding it in the first place.  Perhaps it should be added to the previous section, where it could be noted as a common synonym for hot chocolate. It seems likely that historically it came about as a way of distinguishing chocolate bars from chocolate drinks, but I haven't been able to find any evidence to confirm this.  Thorf 14:12, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

 * That's the thing, it seems to have different meanings depending on where you are. Obviously, where you are drinking chocolate is a Cadbury's brand name for hot chocolate. Where I come from I've never heard of that stuff, and "drinking chocolate" is a dense, intensely sweet and rich drink that comes in 1 cup doses so that you don't overdo it. Perhaps it means other things elsewhere. If it's going to be reinserted into the article, the fact that it has different meanings in different places is probably the thing to focus on for lack of any fixed definition to focus on. Some citations would be useful for that too. — Saxifrage ✎ 23:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Re-reading the article just now, I see that in fact "drinking chocolate" is mentioned quite a few times. I don't see how I could have missed it, really.  In any case, I would definitely be in favour of adding a paragraph about the different meanings for "drinking chocolate".  It seems that all three terms (hot chocolate, cocoa, drinking chocolate) have rather different meanings depending on area, and it would be nice to clarify this.  Of course, it would have to be a group effort, because I doubt that any one person knows all the variations. Thorf 10:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

 * It shouldn't actually be that hard for one or two people. If we have a section with sources for two meanings, we don't need to worry about getting all the rest because people will inevitably add them when they read the article. The trouble will be getting sources for these additions, but that's work that can be done later. :) — Saxifrage ✎ 17:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

 * According to Brett Moore the difference is that drinking chocolate is made from actual chocolate while hot cocoa is made from cocoa powder. I think someone more resourceful could find additional sources to back this up. I'm ASSUMING Cadbury's "drinking chocolate" is actually hot cocoa. I personally think that if drinking chocolate is something different it should technically have its own page. However, I think the page would probably end up being a stub and thus combined with the hot chocolate page. Bgramkow (talk) 04:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Whipped cream?
Isn't it common to top the chocolate with some whipped cream? or is it just me? eitherway, the article doesn't mention it. -- Frap 09:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It seems like I only get the choice of topping my hot chocolate with whipped cream if I go to a coffee shop. I think it's like a substitute for adding marshmallows. Or maybe it's the other way around? QueenStupid 16:35, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe someone should add something about this into the article. -- Frap 17:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

A Correction For This Page
The page says something about the "McDonalds" being the first to use hot chocolate, which is obviously vandalism. A much older page uses the "Olmecs" in its place. I don't actually know if this is truly correct either but I can't fix it anyway because of the semi-protection. Someone who can fix it should. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.145.153.92 (talk • contribs).
 * Done. Thanks for pointing it out. Femto 11:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hot chocolate in Argentina
In Argentina and Uruguay, what you would call hot chocolate (and in Belgium "warme chocolade" or "chocolat chaud") we call it a "submarine". When you go to a bar or cafe and you ask for a submarine, you get a tall jar or glass of hot milk, and a bar of chocolate that you sink into the milk youself - thus, a submarine (and then steer with a long spoon, and add sugar as you like it). Dunno if in the rest of latin america such concept exists. --200.70.117.22 05:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Changes to history section
This article sounds a bit repetitive, so I'm going to be bold and do some major edits. Also, I think some material can be included from the history of chocolate article, since chocolate was a drink for most of its life. -Flutefreek 19:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, I did a major revision. I incorporated some material from the history of chocolate article, the cacao article, and a few outside sources. It seems a lot more coherent to me. Feel free to improve it as you see fit.Flutefreek 21:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Anti-oxidants
the Chocolate page has some (cited) mentions of chocolate "containing more anti-oxidants". Fdskjs 10:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Name of the drink / article
I think it's poor choice to have "HOT" in the name, as it is in fact regulary served both boiling hot and ICE COLD (yes absolutely same drink, just the temperature changes). In fact proper and correct name would be simply "cocoa". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.248.159.240 (talk) 10:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

True, but "Hot Chocolate" seems to be the most common term in English, and otherwise it would just be "Chocolate" 218.168.162.241 (talk) 08:08, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

The title again
It appears that the only title difference between this and the music group is capitals. That should be fixed

216.57.220.248 (talk) 00:54, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Frozen Hot Chocolate
I think there should be a section here related to Frozen Hot Chocolate. If not, Frozen Hot Chocolate should be created as a separate page. Serendipity 3 in New York and Santa's Candy Castle in Santa Claus, Indiana, are two of the best-known sellers of this speciality -- but many, many others exist. Frozen Hot Chocolate has become so popular as to warrant inclusion somewhere in Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.107.132 (talk) 14:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Improves Sleep?
This sounds like marketing to me. How could something as caffeine-laden as chocolate improve sleep? I think that comment should be removed until it has a proper citation. Venice (talk) 16:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

 * And I would like proper citation that chocolate is "caffine-laden"

218.168.162.241 (talk) 08:11, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Hot chocolate/drinking chocolate/cocoa
I was trying to find an article on cocoa (the traditional bedtime drink) and arrived here. I would just like to say that I have never heard cocoa (the drink) called "hot cocoa", likewise, hot chocolate and drinking chocolate are the same as each other but not the same as cocoa, in the UK at least. DuncanHill (talk) 06:32, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

 * I think the terminology may vary even within the UK. To me, cocoa (which I've also never heard called 'hot cocoa') is a drink made from either (1) hot milk, cocoa powder, and sugar, or (2) hot milk and 'drinking chocolate' (which is itself just a mix of cocoa powder and sugar), while hot chocolate is a 'instant' drink made from hot water and hot chocolate powder (which contains milk powder, either chocolate or cocoa and sugar, and potentially other additives). Stephen Morley (talk) 20:26, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

This article baffles me. Cocoa is made of cocoa -a powder made from chocolate that may or may not be pure chocolate. Instant cocoa is powdered chocolate with sugar added (so one can just add water) and baking cocoa is fine ground chocolate that may or may not be Dutch processed, with no sugar added. 'Hot chocolate' is made from actual chocolate chunks melted in milk, similar to ganache. This distinction is a nit for me because I'm a pastry chef. I'm also strict about 'white confection' because it contains no chocolate liquor, only cocoa butter and should not be referred to as 'white chocolate'.The Red Queen (talk) 16:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

 * No, cocoa powder is made from cocoa beans. (Chocolate is made from cocoa – not the other way round.) Products sold as cocoa (for drinking) are pure (or nearly pure) cocoa powder. Drinking chocolate has extra ingredients. As far as I can see (when looking at the cocoa/chocolate drink section of Tesco last night) only those products sold as 'hot chocolate drink' have actual chocolate in them. Grant (talk) 13:43, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Definition of 'hot cocoa'?
I'm wondering if the drink made of hot milk and PURE cocoa powder, which you can sweeten with sugar to taste, qualifies as 'hot cocoa'. It seems to be the same as the drink that's just called 'cocoa' in the UK. But what's it called in other English speaking countries? The following sentence seems to imply that 'hot cocoa' is only the instant form of the cocoa drink;

"Hot cocoa is made from a powdered mix of cocoa, sugar and thickeners, without cocoa butter."

BTW, in the Netherlands both the instant form (e.g. Nesquick) and the drink made with pure cocoa powder (e.g. Droste) are called hot/warm chocolate milk (provided that heated milk/water is used). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.10.46.8 (talk) 12:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Would it be so wrong to change the introduction of the article to make it clear that the terms "hot chocolate" and "hot cocoa" are two terms commonly used interchangeably, but technically refer to two seperate drinks? Hot chocolate made from milk, melted bar chocolate and sugar and hot cocoa made from milk, sugar and cocoa powder. Then what instant cocoa/chocolate, chocolate drink and drinking chocolate are could be clarified seperately? These terms are aparently not specific across the english speaking world considering the lack of consensis. The clarifications in the first paragraph are very misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.209.78.71 (talk) 12:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Page numbers
I'm so glad you were able to find and use book sources for this article! It's already improved since last time I read it. One suggestion I have, however, is to use specific page numbers for book sources (Burleigh, for example) as per WP:CITE: "Page numbers should be included whenever possible in a citation that accompanies a specific quotation from, or a paraphrase or reference to, a specific passage of a book or article." Good work! María ( habla con migo ) 01:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * There are multiple citations from each book from many different pages. Because I didn't directly reference specific passages or pages in the books I used, these are not required.  Thanks for the suggestion! Malinaccier (talk) 01:04, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Origins
This was added, but it wasn't put in a good spot and it seems to be one theory in a book about one researcher. I'd like to see it discussed as far as who it should be included. Should it be given context that this is one researchers conclusion?
 * Hot Chocolate was actually originated from an Indian tribe in South Africa. Brett George Wood a European archeologist has found many cup like utensils that these groups drank this ritual beverage from. ref name="M&M's" cite book|last=Manson|first=Diane|title=The History and Works of Brett G. Wood|publisher=Hillroy Publishing|date=2001|isbn=1-57091-448-6 /ref ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:09, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I did the research for the rest of the article and as far as I can see, the creation of hot chocolate is attributed to Central and South Americans (and I believe cacao trees are indigenous to Central and South America so I don't see Africa being viable). Malinaccier (talk) 22:49, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Coca powder/Chocolate powder
Is there a diffrence? I was under the assumption that Hot Coca was made with Coca Powder, and sweetened to tase, while Hot chocolate was made from Chocolate OR Chocolate Powder, yet the wiki page says they are the same. As far as i know, Chocolate IS diffrent from Coca, correct? 218.168.162.241 (talk) 08:15, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Innaccuracies in History Section
The article asserts that chili pepper was "replaced" with vanilla in the european adaptation of drinking chocolate in this passage:

 "The first recorded shipment of chocolate to Europe for commercial purposes was in a shipment from Veracruz to Sevilla in 1585.[8] It was still served as a beverage, but the Europeans added sugar to counteract the natural bitterness and removed the chili pepper, replacing it with vanilla, cinnamon, and other spices."

however earlier in the article it is acknowledged that vanilla was part of the original aztec formula for this beverage:

'' "...when Montezuma (then tlatoani of Tenochtitlan) introduced Hernán Cortés, a Spanish conquistador, to xocolatl in the 16th century. What the Spaniards then called "chocolatl" was said to be a beverage consisting of a chocolate base flavored with vanilla and other spices that was served cold." ''

As vanilla is a spice indigenous to Mesoamerica, and there is a wealth of evidence that it was used in preparations of drinking chocolate for many centuries prior to the Spanish conquest, it seems clear that the phrasing of the passage concerning the European adaptation ought to be changed to clarify this. I have decided to replace this passage with the following text:

It was still served as a beverage, but the Europeans added cane sugar to counteract the natural bitterness and removed the chili pepper while retaining the vanilla, in addition they added cinnamon as well as other spices."

If anyone objects to this rephrasing please let me know. Thanks.

WaynaQhapaq (talk) 04:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Mayan picture
Can someone give advice on the picture added on February 5, 2010. It just looked suspicious to me and I didn't expect ancient Mayans to employ a gesture so similar to modern usage. Also, did Mayans drink out of cans? How do we know the story and people depicted in this situation? What temple or codex did it come from? What Mayanist gave us the interpretation we read here?

did not reassure me: low picture quality, original source is Blogspot, described as "A possible Mayan chief", dated at "Many thousand years ago". The author seems to make good contributions and also added it to the Danish Wikipedia. ——Rich jj (talk) 18:52, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Judging by its style and subject matter, It would appear that the picture is authentic, probably taken from the side of a mayan codex vessel from the Classic Era like the one at the right,[[Image:Jaguar vase.jpg|thumb|right|230px|A mayan codex vase]] although without the requisite context, this is difficult to ascertain. As I am not an expert in Mayan script, I cannot say what the inscription means, but it seems likely that the substance represented is indeed a preparation of hot chocolate as this activity was often depicted on such vessels. As for the Maya drinking chocolate from "cans", this is obviously anachronistic as the only metals the Maya used were small amounts of copper, gold  and bronze, most often for bells and ornaments.(in any case "cans" in the modern sense weren't invented until 1810 and didn't come into widespread use until the mid-19th century.) Taking into account that the contributor is Danish and claims (on his/her user page) to be able to contribute in an intermediate level of English, It would seem likely that "can" is simply a mistranslation of the Danish for "jar" or "vessel" which would be accurate as the Maya often stored hot chocolate in lidded tripod jars, before pouring the beverage into smaller cups. Pending attribution, I have decided to change the word to jar and post a request for context on the image page. WaynaQhapaq (talk) 16:02, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Caffeine
Per I removed the claim. The given source doesn't claim it's proven, in fact it doesn't discuss beneficial effects much at all. Claiming something like that is 'proven' is a rather extreme claim. And the source itself is CSPI an advocacy organisation so should be used with care. Mentioning possible benefical effects may be okay, but needs to be done in a different way and with a better source. Our article itself is somewhat reflective of the fact as with many dietary things, sayings it's definetily good or bad is not really possible. I considered rewording it myself to something like "Some studies have shown some beneficial effects from small amounts of caffeine." but that's what weasel wordish nor do I have a source. Nil Einne (talk) 16:16, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I can't find a scientific reference for the caffeine content of chocolate, cocoa, cacao, or any other chocolate products. The Wikipedia page for chocolate says nothing about caffeine. It might be the case that chocolate products do not actually contain any caffeine unless it is intentionally added. Searching the web for caffeine content of chocolate brings of several websites that list a caffeine content, but never cite a source for the data. Other websites say that it is a myth that chocolate contains caffeine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jraudhi (talk • contribs) 05:21, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Montezuma's court clarification
From 532073220: Montezuma's court[clarification needed] reportedly drank about 2,000 cups of xocolatl per day, 50 of which were consumed by Montezuma himself.

Which Montezuma was this? I have linked "Montezuma" which is a disambiguation page. Hence, I added the clarify tag.

Attys (talk) 13:10, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Seasonal Hot Chocolate Consumption
In Europe, particularly in countries where skiing is a popular winter sport, chocolate is regarded as the post exercise treat. While most adults will enjoy their hot wine, kids and adults with a sweet tooth will go for hot chocolate. And like most, hot beverages, hot chocolate consumption generally increases with colder temperatures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lnrod (talk • contribs) 20:37, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hot chocolate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050219115253/http://chocolate.org.uk/timeline/index.html to http://chocolate.org.uk/timeline/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:46, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hot chocolate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080702220326/http://www.middleboro.k12.ma.us/Middleboro/CHOC/Chocolate.htm to http://www.middleboro.k12.ma.us/Middleboro/CHOC/Chocolate.htm
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20120720072240/http://www.annamariavolpi.com/chocolate01.html to http://www.annamariavolpi.com/chocolate01.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:11, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

A study partially funded by the Mars Chocolate company?
A chocolate company funding research on the benefits of chocolate, even partially, might affect the methodology/results, since there could be Funding bias. Clovermoss (talk) 15:26, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Health section - opposition to chocolate by Catholic Church
The comment that chocolate was "opposed by the catholic church" is misleading given that Catholic religious played a great part in actually popularising chocolate amongst Europeans (see e.g. the Dominicans under Bartolomé de las Casas). Rather, it was considered by some Catholics to be incompatible with asceticism, but they were making these comments precisely because chocolate was popular in Catholic religious establishments. It was prohibited in certain Catholic monasteries/convents as they thought it went against religious abstinence, as the same might ban wine or rich foods, but that is not the same as the Catholic Church as a whole speaking against it. 37.182.93.217 (talk) 07:18, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

 * That'd be misnormal if you stop to reflect, since anyone can eat chocolate, regardless of whether you have religion or not, whoever said that, he rapidly need introduce a reliable source that remain it, because may have doubt in it. 177.105.94.73 (talk) 16:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Hot chocolate


text:
Jeparit

Jeparit is a town on the Wimmera River in Western Victoria, Australia, 370 km north west of Melbourne. At the 2016 census Jeparit had a population of 342, down from 394 five years earlier.

History
The area around Jeparit is originally home to the Gromiluk Aboriginal peoples prior to European settlement. The name Jeparit is believed to be derived from a Gromiluk word meaning "home of small birds". European settlement began in the 1880s when German Lutheran immigrants began to settle and grow wheat.

The town was surveyed in 1883 and gazetted in 1889, the post office opening on 31 August 1889 though known as Lake Hindmarsh until December 1889. Two earlier post offices called Lake Hindmarsh had existed in the area at various times since 1861 to serve a smaller population of graziers.

Jeparit's most famous son is former Australian Prime Minister and founder of the Liberal Party, Sir Robert Menzies, who was born in the town in 1894. He is commemorated with a spire and a memorial bust installed at the town square. The spire, topped with an ornament resembling a Scottish Thistle, is inscribed:

"This spire has been erected by the people of Jeparit and district, to honour Sir Robert Menzies. The spire symbolises the rise to world recognition of a boy who was born in Jeparit and who rose by his own efforts to become Australia's Prime Minister and a statesman recognised and honoured throughout the world."

Sport
With neighbouring townships Rainbow, Hopetoun, and Beulah, Jeparit has a football and netball club, the Southern Mallee Thunder, competing in the Wimmera Football Netball League.

Golfers play at the course of the Jeparit Golf Club on Nhill Road.

Jeparit is the setting for Peter Carey's 1985 novel Illywhacker.

title: Jeparit


text:
Sexton (office)

A sexton is an officer of a church, congregation, or synagogue charged with the maintenance of its buildings and/or an associated graveyard. In smaller places of worship, this office is often combined with that of verger. Larger establishments, such as cathedrals, may employ a team of sextons.

Historically in North America and the United Kingdom the "sexton" was sometimes a minor municipal official responsible for overseeing the town graveyard. In the United Kingdom the position still exists today, related to management of the community's graveyard, with such sextons usually employed by the town/parish or community council.

Origin of the name
The words "sexton" and "sacristan" both derive from the Medieval Latin word sacristanus meaning "custodian of sacred objects". "Sexton" represents the popular development of the word via the Old French "Segrestein".

Duties
Among the traditional duties of the sexton in small parishes was the digging of graves—the gravedigger in Hamlet refers to himself as sexton, for example. In modern times, grave digging and maintenance of the cemetery is usually done by an outside contractor. The general duties of a modern sexton may include:

 * Operation and maintenance of mechanical systems, such as: refrigerators, boilers, HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) units, hot water systems, kitchen equipment, electrical system, and piping systems (i.e., gas, water, fire protection, and sewer systems).
 * Liaison with any routine contract maintenance and supply companies (regarding: large maintenance projects, fire protection equipment, pest control, kitchen and worship materials, etc.)
 * Ordering and receiving supplies and equipment.
 * Stocking supplies (paper towels, toilet paper, soap, etc.)
 * Tasks involving security (locking doors, operating security system, etc.), and safety (emergency light/exit sign testing, first aid kit maintenance, etc.).
 * Logistics for regular services and events on church calendar (chairs and tables, decorating, lighting, acoustics, audio and video, etc.).
 * Emergency response during bad weather.
 * Small building repairs (painting, drywall/plaster work, replacing ceiling tiles, etc.).
 * Maintaining the grounds (grass mowing, hedge/shrub trimming and tree pruning, weed control, watering plants, snow removal, fall clean up, and other landscaping work).
 * Regular cleaning (vacuuming, dusting, sweeping, mopping, etc.)
 * Other maintenance tasks not handled by a contract service or church volunteers, such as: the replacement of light bulbs, returning premises to a neat and orderly state following services and events, disposal of trash (rubbish), running any local errands or trips that are needed by the church, and other miscellaneous tasks.
 * Following building code.
 * Report to supervisors (about tasks completion, mishaps, etc.).

In many UK churches nowadays, where neither a sexton nor a verger is employed, these duties are likely to fall to the churchwardens.

title: Sexton (office)


text:
Talk:Sexton (office)

verger
Text deleted in stubifying is already in the verger article. Andrewa 04:28, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

What to do with this article
Is anyone aware of the question mentioned at Talk:Sexton (artillery) about where this page should be?? 66.32.251.152 22:34, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Sexton as a public servant
The person in charge of the public (non-church) cemetery where I plan to be buried also has the title of "sexton". Can we add emphasis to the definition be one unaffiliated with a church or synagogue? More people are buried outside the churchyards than in them nowadays. --2600:6C48:7006:200:D84D:5A80:173:901D (talk) 22:47, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Wiktionary message
Check this article. Does it need a Wiktionary message?? 66.245.28.124 23:22, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Holocron?
Just looking at the history page here, not sure what Holocron means by "what's the problem?".

Didn't mean to do anything wrong! Hope everything's OK - sorry for the re-edits - I can't really get a feel for what it'll look like without viewing the live page!

I feel like a dumb @$$! I didn't bother to read the first sentence in the artical. I thought Sexton was some new form of church (like catholic, or protestant, or Lutheran). I just dicovered this myself, when you have changed something in an artical, instead of clicking save page, click "show preveiw". Good work on the artical, BTW.--Holocron 17:07, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip - that's good to know!

I don't know what it is, but there is something wrong. When I looked at your edits it says they were done on October 19, 2004. Are you having trouble with a certain vandal? I can take care of him for you if you are.--Holocron 18:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Once again I feel like a dumb @$$. I was looking at the wrong person.--Holocron 18:46, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

No worries, dude! I made quite a few blunders myself yesterday! I think it's the weather! Brianlacey 19:37, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Revisions
Let me start by saying specifically to Neutrality that I'm in no way interested in wheel warring! However, I have a significant problem with his revisions. No harm to non-Christians, but I don't think there's any need to change the description of a sexton as someone who maintains "churches" to "places of worship" as by definition a sexton is an official of ONLY a Christian Church. Supplementary to this, pointing out the jewish counterpart's title is like editing the article of Christian ministers to indicate that their jewish counterpart is called a Rabbi. I just don't think it adds anything useful to the article. But by all means, let's see a separate article written on the jewish version! 82.18.181.186 20:11, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

The origin of the name could be in a different article. However, I began to realize that those who typically bore the name Sexton, regardless of ethnicity, usually at some point in their ancestry, such as mine, did indeed have a family member who was employed as such. Furthermore, my ancestry and DNA is Jewish, of Haplotype E, of a jewish subclade. "Sexton", "Segrestein", "Sacristanus" as defined by Merriam-Webster Dictionary and by the Oxford Dictionary does seem to point out, or acknowledge this Jewish heritage "-stein", which many would unintentionally blot out or run roughshod over without such knowledge of doing so. For instance, there are blacksmiths of various heritages, yet each ethnicity could have a distinct name for such a profession with the same meaning. Perhaps a Jewish version of both sexton (office) as well as Sexton (name origin) would be appropriate? Written: September the 26, 2009 or Tishrei the 8th, 5770.

Duties
"Report all complete with supervisors"? - what is that? I can't figure it out. Is there a word missing? Ramseyman (talk) 18:23, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Possible merge suggestion
I have never heard of a "beadle", but it seems to me that perhaps that article should be merged into this one, or that this one should be merged into that, with appropriate redirects created. Any thoughts? Tomertalk 08:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sexton (office)


text:
Undulator

An undulator is an insertion device from high-energy physics and usually part of a larger installation, a synchrotron storage ring, or it may be a component of a free electron laser. It consists of a periodic structure of dipole magnets. These can be permanent magnets or superconducting magnets. The static magnetic field alternates along the length of the undulator with a wavelength $$\lambda_u$$. Electrons traversing the periodic magnet structure are forced to undergo oscillations and thus to radiate energy. The radiation produced in an undulator is very intense and concentrated in narrow energy bands in the spectrum. It is also collimated on the orbit plane of the electrons. This radiation is guided through beamlines for experiments in various scientific areas.

The undulator strength parameter is:
 * $$K=\frac{e B \lambda_u}{2 \pi m_e c}$$,

where e is the electron charge, B is the magnetic field, $$\lambda_u$$ is the spatial period of the undulator magnets, $$m_{e}$$ is the electron rest mass, and c is the speed of light.

This parameter characterizes the nature of the electron motion. For $$K\ll1$$ the oscillation amplitude of the motion is small and the radiation displays interference patterns which lead to narrow energy bands. If $$K\gg1$$ the oscillation amplitude is bigger and the radiation contributions from each field period sum up independently, leading to a broad energy spectrum. In this regime of fields the device is no longer called an undulator; it is called a wiggler.

The key difference between undulator and wiggler is coherence. In the case of an undulator, the emitted radiation is coherent with a wavelength determined by the period length and the beam energy, while in wiggler the electrons are not coherent.

The usual description of the undulator is relativistic but classical. This means that although a precise calculation is tedious, the undulator can be seen as a black box, where only functions inside the device affect how an input is converted to an output; an electron enters the box and an electromagnetic pulse exits through a small exit slit. The slit should be small enough such that only the main cone passes, and the side lobes of the wavelength spectra can be ignored.

Undulators can provide several orders of magnitude higher flux than a simple bending magnet and as such are in high demand at synchrotron radiation facilities. For an undulator with N periods, the brightness can be up to $$N^{2}$$ more than a bending magnet. The first factor of N occurs because the intensity is enhanced up to a factor of N at harmonic wavelengths due to the constructive interference of the fields emitted during the N radiation periods. The usual pulse is a sine with some envelope. The second factor of N comes from the reduction of the emission angle associated with these harmonics, which is reduced as 1/N. When the electrons come with half the period, they interfere destructively, the undulator stays dark. The same is true, if they come as a bead chain.

The polarization of the emitted radiation can be controlled by using permanent magnets to induce different periodic electron trajectories through the undulator. If the oscillations are confined to a plane the radiation will be linearly polarized. If the oscillation trajectory is helical, the radiation will be circularly polarized, with the handedness determined by the helix.

If the electrons follow the Poisson distribution a partial interference leads to a linear increase in intensity. In the free electron laser the intensity increases exponentially with the number of electrons.

An undulator's figure of merit is spectral radiance.

History
The Russian physicist Vitaly Ginzburg showed theoretically that undulators could be built in a 1947 paper. Julian Schwinger published a useful paper in 1949 that reduced the necessary calculations to Bessel functions, for which there were tables. This was significant for solving the design equations as digital computers were not available to most academics at that time.

Hans Motz and his coworkers at Stanford University demonstrated the first undulator in 1952. It produced the first manmade coherent infrared radiation. The design could produce a total frequency range from visible light down to millimeter waves.

title: Undulator


text:
Cota tinctoria

Cota tinctoria, the golden marguerite, yellow chamomile, or oxeye chamomile, is a species of perennial flowering plant in the sunflower family. Other common names include dyer's chamomile, Boston daisy, and Paris daisy. In horticulture this plant is still widely referred to by its synonym Anthemis tinctoria.

It is a short-lived plant often treated as biennial, native to Europe, the Mediterranean and Western Asia and naturalized in scattered locations in North America. It has aromatic, bright green, feathery foliage. The serrate leaves are bi-pinnatifid (= finely divided) and downy beneath. It grows to a height of 60 cm.

It has yellow daisy-like terminal flower heads on long thin angular stems, blooming in profusion during the summer.

It has no culinary or commercial uses and only limited medicinal uses. However, it produces excellent yellow, buff and golden-orange dyes, used in the past for fabrics.

Cota tinctoria is grown in gardens for its bright attractive flowers and fine lacy foliage; there is a white-flowering form. Under the synonym Anthemis tinctoria, the cultivar 'E.C. Buxton' has gained the Royal Horticultural Society's Award of Garden Merit. The popular seed-raised cultivar 'Kelwayi' has 5 cm wide, yellow flowers on 65 cm plants.

The species hybridizes with Tripleurospermum inodorum to form the hybrid × Tripleurocota sulfurea.

Subspecies

 * Cota tinctoria subsp. australis (R.Fern.) Oberpr. & Greuter
 * Cota tinctoria subsp. euxina (Boiss.) Oberpr. & Greuter
 * Cota tinctoria subsp. fussii (Griseb. & Schenk) Oberpr. & Greuter
 * Cota tinctoria subsp. gaudium-solis (Velen.) Oberpr. & Greuter
 * Cota tinctoria subsp. parnassica (Boiss. & Heldr.) Oberpr. & Greuter
 * Cota tinctoria subsp. sancti-johannis (Stoj. & al.) Oberpr. & Greuter
 * Cota tinctoria subsp. virescens (Bornm.) Oberpr. & Greuter

title: Cota tinctoria


text: Talk:Mount McLoughlin

title: Talk:Mount McLoughlin


text:
Talk:Philosophy of time

Removed text:

''The Reverse Time Theory is derived from Amazon Resident Dr. Neil Grant. Do not bother validating this article, for whoever writes anything about this will die within seven days (i dont wanna die!!) and their publication gets deleted by a mystical force!!!

''Actual Theory

''Here is the actual theory: ''What if fate exists, but time has reversed itself and is flowing backwards? What we perceive is not necessarily accurate, yet in backwards time motion, that means what we perceive is actually the opposite of what is occuring. I shall now leave you to ponder this...

''- The only, the infamous Soilguy

and replaced by minimal stub. Andrewa 04:41, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

Lest anyone think I'm being too hard on Dr. Grant and his followers, let me take you on a little thought experiment. I do have a little academic standing in Philosophy, only at a first degree major level I admit.

Imagine that we represent time by a strip of film running through a movie projector. Now is represented by the particular frame that is in the gate of the projector of course.

Now let's think of it from the point of view of a being in the scene we are projecting. We don't really need the projector for this. We can just have a strip of film and a light, and whichever frame is illuminated is now. The guy in the film doesn't know the difference, because all he can see at any time is the frame he's in.

Now let's run the film backwards. Again, the guy in the film doesn't notice any change, because as time runs backwards so does he. I think that might be what Dr Grant has discovered.

Let's go further. Let's turn the light on in all the frames at once. Again, the guy in the film doesn't notice any difference at all. Time still flows for him as it always has.

And one step further. The film is no longer going through a projector, so let's put a branch in it. Why not? The guy in the film doesn't see it as a branch, because he's in the film. He just sees whatever frame he's in. After a branch, there are two of him, one in each frame, each seeing a different result and with no way of ever knowing whether or not the other guy (the other him) is there at all in the other frame or what he sees there. If we consistently put in branches at some sort of decision, his physics will now contain uncertainty with respect to those decisions, exactly as ours does.

Food for thought? That's not very original or very earthshaking, all of these ideas were pretty standard undergrad stuff when I studied Philosophy. Andrewa 06:49, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Philosophy of time


text:
User talk:Crazyeddie

User talk:Crazyeddie/archive1

FNORD
Hi! This is Icarus!, being non-Wiki (I'm not logged in...), saying thanx for the work on the Discordianism page! Keep it up!24.176.20.60 16:50, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Disruption and Acharya S
Eddie, the only reaosn I am disruptive is because Acharya's followers have pegged me as " A covert Christain Zealot out to defame her." Its a ocnveneint excuse for them to say I am attakcign ehr for my rleiigous beleifas and you are all bendign over bakcwards to accomodate me. Be relaistic. Nohtign I have said is that offnesive. its blown out of proporion by Acharya's disiples to make the article seem liek a hit peice and hey the noble defenders of truth. They elarned I Administe a Christain baord and use that to prove Im somehow threatened by her ideas. ( Im no more threatened by them than ANASA is by Ralph Rene's book "NASA mooned America.")

Keepin mind, Ive not doen much wrong here. It may seem it, but Acharyas follwoers are just sayign so, and yes I knwo yoru view is no oen is unbiased, and Im as bad as they, a Troll. Im not. try to get ot know me first. Unliek Acharya S's disiples, Im here for a while, and do look into other articles.

 * I wouldn't say you are anywhere near as bad as they are. And I do appreciate the fact that you are not a single-topic contributor. And it might be as you say, that your presence is disruptive because the Acharyan's make it so. But, nevertheless, it is disruptive. I know it isn't fair to ask you to leave, but what is fair in this life? Regardless of the reason, it does seem that your presence is causing el Lobo to fly off the handle even more than usual. We seem to making some progress with him/her, although it is very slow. Of course, that might be wishful thinking. But I would rather not jeopardize what little progress we have made.

 * And it is true, I would lean over backward to accomodate you. I would also lean over backward to accommodate the Acharyans. I'm hoping the resulting posture will be a fully erect one - otherwise, I will have to consult a chiropractor.

 * So, even if you decide to follow my advice, I would appreciate it if you continue to observe the discussion, and perhaps give me a running commentary on my talk page. As I said, I like having people around to keep me honest.

 * As for your Christian beliefs, I definately agree that no Christian should feel threatened by the Acharyans (other than the possibility that they might leave a flaming sack of dog turds on your front porch - they seem like the kind of people who would do that). In fact, if I were a Christian, I would be glad to have them around - they make atheists look rather silly. They are living proof that Christianity has no monopoly on . crazyeddie 20:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

PS: to any Acharyan's who are offended by the "dog turd" comment: That's what you get for eavesdropping on a semi-private conversation!

Philosophy time w Sam Spade
I have replied here.

Cheers, Sam Spade 10:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

 * and then I replied some more.

 * Cheers, Sam Spade 11:51, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Nice Job on the Bud Dajo article
This is such a deep rich subject matter, an article like this could go all the way. I'm reading extensively on that era right now, so I'd like helping with the merge; the inclusion of some of the contemporary punditry seems absolutely necessary (the Moro Crater massacre article very much inspired my interest in the subject, so there's something about the existing article which is "right" somehow, belongs, and I hesitated to touch). We'll work it together if that's ok. Again, good job. BusterD 12:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * visit my sandbox this week. I'm working up the Juramentado article, and would like input. Be bold. BusterD 12:48, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your critique/feedback. I have some minor disagreements with your comments and judgements. A few issues:
 * while I did delete one "audacious," the term is being used in its literal sense--boldness, daring--and not intended to judge or compliment the subject in a colloquial way. In conjunction with the term audacity I later use to explain Moro tactics, the usage is correct, and I'll publish my version using that term. If it's removed/adjusted later, no sweat to me, as long as the intent stays clear.
 * in "The Real Glory" with Gary Cooper (the movie to which Hurley--who is one of my links--refers in his discussion of amuks), the Cooper character causes the Philippine constabulary to gain confidence by making a captured juramentado shriek and quiver in fear, threatening to bury him after death in a pigskin. If you didn't catch that film over Memorial Day weekend on TCM, you need to watch for it. The movie's a hoot, a Hollywood version of the Bud Dajo story. Instead of the Moros being beseiged, it's the four remaining Americans and the constabulary. The Moros are depicted as catapulting juramentado over the wall using great trees, and Gary Cooper rides down a swift river rapids in order to rescue the fort under attack from the villains. Novel of same name by Charles L. Clifford. Very cheesy, but worth seeing.
 * A head's up: "The Real Glory" is on TCM at 10:15am EDT this Sunday 10/15. BusterD 22:15, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * My introduction distinguishes the amuk who kills randomly, and the juramentado, who kills for specific religious reasons. In the introduction, that's exactly what needs be said. I believe the three paragraphs under "A Path to Paradise" will explain the Moro POV. The next two sections will show how non-Moros view and learn to fear the juramentado. In the last section "Legacy" I plan to briefly relate mag-sabil to beserks, amuks, and assassins--all humans who have committed to prepare themselves in some way for killing other humans.
 * given the Moros' relentless pragmatism and knowledge of poisons, the drug hypothesis makes sense, but I've seen zero evidence of this in my reading.
 * In the main, we both agree this is fascinating material, and deserves strong, well-considered treatment. I'm taking this somewhat slowly, but greatly admire the work you've put in. Expect some changes by me, but with consideration and respect. BusterD 00:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry if I haven't looked too productive. I've been doing work in other areas editing and sorting, writing some real-world stuff, plus just doing some reading about Vietnam and the Philippines. Here are a few sources which bear strong investigation: Najeeb Saleeby (Google the name and you'll see why I want to read him); Mandate in Moroland by Peter Gordon Gowing (1977 & 1983); Darangan Epic of the Maranao. This is truly fascinating stuff which crosses religion, economics, indigeneous peoples, slavery, current events, all in an ancient and well-(self)documented culture which is little discussed in this US. BusterD 15:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If you'd be so kind, please visit my user page and click on the mail link. I have a couple of pdf files you'd like, plus I have an off-topic question to ask. Thanks! BusterD 15:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Edits regarding North Korea-related articles
Just wanted to say thanks. In response to the 7-missile launch news, I've read that seven missiles were launched, and the first six, more short-range missiles or fell within the vicinity of their target (ie fairly accurate). The seventh, the Taepodong-2 missile, failed about 40 seconds after its launch. So I've read in newspapers anyway.

Also if you contribute consistently to North Korean related articles to ensure its NPOV then maybe later I should award you a barnstar :-) Jsw663 10:56, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

North Korea Government
I already did, then I got your message. "Communist State" is an oxymoron and makes no sense. If you must, call it Communist, but not a "Communist State". Respectfully, Ionius Mundus 04:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Just as long as it is not "Communist State" I will probably be okay with it. --Ionius Mundus 04:47, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I think we're just about to come to a stable agreement with The Way. Come take a look as soon as possible. --Ionius Mundus 05:43, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

FYI
I've contributed to the North Korea talk page. For your information. This message can be deleted once it has been read. --Bjornar 22:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Your message
the reason for my hostile feeling towards the united states does include disagreement with Mr. Bush, I also feel your electoral system is corrupt i.e an "elite electorate" hardly seems fair. Your county's constant hostility towards underdog nations, and some ammendments to your constitution, including the right to carry guns also anger me --Frogsprog 13:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

 * RE: my "beef" is the immorality of how you act, domestically and internationally, the only reason your government hates korea is because of the communism, nothing else. mr bush is trying to prove a point... --Frogsprog 17:11, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Korea
VILE REGIME?? take a look at your own government! North Korea is a socialist democracy where everyone is treated fairly! your information comes only from what your government tells you, and since your government is intent on imposing the "american way of life" on the entire world. they can't be trusted --Frogsprog 11:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

RE
1.)i mean the electoral college, a group of elites who elect the leader 2.)your gun laws have caused problems even here, I am a deputy manager at Manchester Airport, the amount of americans arrested for mistakenly bringing ammunition that they have left in their bags into the UK is unbelievable! not to mention the fact that allowing your citizens to carry weapons of death is obviously a bad idea!how could you not see that! --Frogsprog 19:36, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * in answer to your question, If you bring ammunition into the UK the armed police are immediately summoned and the ammuntion safely destroyed, you would then be detained at gunpoint inside the airport until you could be transferred to a police station. After trial you could be sentanced up to one year in jail for violating public safety statutes, or if you itend to use the ammunition in our country, up to 15 years under the terrorism and firearms acts of parliament. as you can see, we are much more sensible and safety concsious here in Europe, and we dont take risks with implements of death--Frogsprog 21:28, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * by the way, I am a subject of a feudal monarchy, and proud to be, her majesty would do a far better job of running the country than our "prime minister" --Frogsprog 21:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 14:36, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Re:Your two cents
First of all, let me just say that I am not an American, which is porobably why my views on Islam and its adherents are much stronger than yours. I have seen the true face of that religion and have come to three conclusions. The first one is that the idea of a "moderate Muslim" is a fallacy. They (to avoid being pulled up for personal attacks, let me say 99.99999% of them) are all fanatics, to a greater or lesser degree. Second, Muslims do not belong to any country. They (again, to avoid violating policy, let me say 99.99999% of them) are all traitors. If they have to choose between the land which nurtured them and the teachings of Islam, they will always choose Islam. Thirdly, Muslims (99.9999999% of them) cannot peacefully co-exist with other religions. From Aurangzeb to Osama, they have always oppressed us because we do not follow their faith. They will never let us live until we accept Islam. I have seen my share of "educated, moderate, non-jihadist, innocent" Muslim doctors, engineers etc, calmly and rationally explaining why American deserve to die. And that sickens me. Yes, I may be anti-Muslim. But there is a reason behind that. I cannot even read a newspaper (remember the Muhammad cartoons) in real-life without risking decapitation. Atleast let me talk freely on the internet. Cerebral Warrior 17:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Cerebral, just for fun: There are roughly one billion Muslims. 99.99999% of them would leave about a hundred Muslims that you think wouldn't slit your throat in a heartbeat. A hundred. And your second number, 99.9999999%? That would leave a single Muslim. Which one? Who's the one Muslim in the world that wouldn't lynch you? Do you know him? Does he have a name? Perhaps he's a she? Where does he live? Does he speak in generalizations as easily as you? Yeah, you're anti-Muslim. You can talk freely on the internet, but not necessarily on Wikipedia. --Golbez 17:54, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: Cerebral Warrior
Frankly, I'm not sure which policies would apply here, I'm not too keen on classifying everything - WP:IAR is the best rule there is. I guess his actions are a violation of Civility. Regarding his user page, WP:CSD would apply - i.e. attack pages can be speedily deleted in any namespace.--Konst.ableTalk 03:52, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your concerns. I have unblocked him now and restored his user page (though deleted the offedning statements).  Hopefully this can all end peacefully without him having to leave and without any ArbCom interference.--Konst.ableTalk 05:19, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Could you give your opinion at ? Thanks. yandman  07:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi. Why did you ask me to comment there and then delete my comment? --Guinnog 16:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * LOL, that makes perfect sense. I will have a look and see if I can come up with something more "nuanced"; my only worry is that we may make this user feel awfully important by spending so much time in critique and debate of something which seems obviously to offend many and to have no justification. I take your point though. --Guinnog 17:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Well said. I appreciate the patience you have brought to this. Best wishes --Guinnog 17:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with him having a statement that he'd been censored. He is merely being asked to adhere to the same standards you and I do. . --Guinnog 04:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * "You can say that you oppose Islamofacism and terrorism" I think the feeling was against the former. Even if were spelled correctly. --Guinnog 04:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Could you look at Al Gore III?
I've got a POV-pushing single user refusing to look at consensus. If you defer, I would certainly understand. BusterD 18:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * No need for you to get involved now. At the moment I sent out the message, I was getting a bit desperate, but after light was shined on the issue, the user in question scurried for the dark. If I can be of any assistance, I hope you know I can be counted upon. Thanks and all the best! BusterD 00:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Reply from THL
Yes, you would have my complete support. Censorship is a serious matter, and it should take at least a 2/3 majority to decide what should and shouldn't be allowed. However, I am concerned with what you mentioned about the Islamofacist statement. Though I do weakly oppose removing it, I am going to change my vote to delete for the good of the community. In the end, yes you will have my support when the time comes. --  T H  L  06:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Please consider looking at my editor review
If you could spare some time to give feedback I'd be mucho appreciativo. If you would rather not, I still love ya. Thanks! BusterD 02:17, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

YO
uplink.space.com ... .si????Kmarinas86 17:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

PVA
I never disrupted any wikipedia articles, I only posted my complaint on relevant talk pages. In no way did I disrupt wikipedia and in fact I think that they were legitimate points on the discussion page. Its not like I eidite a single main article page. If I did get close to the edge of breaking any rules, it was only because I was outraged at Johnsmith's sneaky methods of retalitaion after we had a legit debate about a particukar source.

PS About the book review I was just using it as a way to show Bevin's POV about the war without bias. --Gary123 07:15, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm looking at this article and it seems to duplicate a lot of the content on the Korean War article. What do you think about suggesting a merger, crazyeddie? Could just have a separate section on the PVA on KW page. Most of the PVA page isn't that great and there's little point into basically making it copy of the Korean War page. John Smith's 11:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, get back to me at your convenience. There's no rush, but I thought it would be a more economical way to improve both articles. John Smith's 18:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Considering your fiasco in helping Johnsmith delete a lowly insignificant public servant like Frank Hogan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Frank_Hogan you might want to lay off going after one of the most significant armies of 20th century conflict...--Gary123 15:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

 * eddie, I wouldn't mind Gary - I think he's been forgetting to take his medication. John Smith's 17:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Frank Hogan
Unfortunately I don't have the time to do that right now. If you could that would be great - otherwise I'll have to bustle on with my current work. :( John Smith's 01:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Ok, well never mind. I had no idea he was such a big cheese. If someone had suggesting putting a member of the CPS up on wikipedia I would have questioned it. I forget these people are often politicians as well. John Smith's 10:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Even though they may not be on the "100 year list," these people are notable. Did you know that JFK did not make the 100 year list? You know him, and you know that he was assainated. Hence notability. People do not necessarily have to be on the 100 year list to be notable people. One more thing, (as a suggestion) please do not use AfD to get an opinion poll on an article. If you want, you can ask an administrator. Anyway, we all appreciate your contributions on Wikipedia, and happy editing! Diez2 02:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

AMA
User:Gary has requested AMA assistance over a content dispute involving yourself. I am currently trying to get as much information on the dispute (as it spans many articles) as possible. Could you please give me an account of your disputes/relations with User:Gary anyone also involved and the particular articles in question. Thanks.  Culv e  rin  ?   Talk  03:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Crazyeddie/Acharya S compromise draft
User:Crazyeddie/Acharya S compromise draft, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Crazyeddie/Acharya S compromise draft and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Crazyeddie/Acharya S compromise draft during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Doug Weller (talk) 13:12, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Crazyeddie


text:
Glauber Rocha

Glauber de Andrade Rocha (14 March 1939 – 22 August 1981) was a Brazilian film director, actor and screenwriter. He was one of the most influential moviemakers of Brazilian cinema and a key figure of Cinema Novo. His films Black God, White Devil and Entranced Earth are often considered to be two of the greatest achievements in Brazilian cinematic history, being selected by Abraccine as, respectively, the second and fifth best Brazilian films of all-time. Rocha also the distinction of having the most films on Abraccine's list: 5 films.

Rocha's film possess a staunch avant-garde and experimental nature, making of him a seminal figure of the new wave. His works are noted for their many political overtones, often addressing the passive-aggressive situation of the Third World, which Rocha referred to both metaphorically and objectively as "hunger" in his essay Estética da Fome (The Aesthetics of Hunger). Rocha won the Prix de la mise en scène at the 1969 Cannes Film Festival for Antonio das Mortes and the 1977 Special Jury Prize for Best Short Film for Di. Three of Rocha's films were nominated for the Palme d'Or, including Entranced Earth, which was awarded the FIPRESCI at the 1967 Cannes Film Festival and the Grand Prix of the Locarno Film Festival of the same year.

Biography
Rocha was born in Vitória da Conquista, Bahia, Brazil and moved with his family to Salvador when he was only 9 years old, there studying in a well-known Presbyterian school.

During his adolescence, he developed great interest in arts, especially theatre and cinema, and even joined a drama group. He was also very active in politics, a trait that would be strongly influential in his works. A member of the Brazilian radical left, he helped start a political party in the late 1950s that called for an anti-capitalist people's revolution and, among other things, advocated the abolition of money.

By the age of 16 he started freelancing for a local newspaper and debuted as a movie reviewer. Later, he attended Law School for about two years and in 1959, after taking part in some projects as assistant, he finally directed his first short, "Pátio". After gaining some recognition in Bahia for his critical and artistic work, Rocha decided to quit college and pursue a journalistic career, as well as being a film-maker.

He is famous for his film trilogy, made up of Black God, White Devil (1964) - perhaps his most acclaimed movie, nominated for the Golden Palm - Entranced Earth (1967) and Antonio das Mortes (1969), award-winning for Best Director at Cannes. His films were renowned for their strongly-expressed political themes, often combined with mysticism and folklore, but also for their particular style and photography. Rocha is regarded as one of the best Brazilian directors of all time and leader of the Cinema Novo movement, as well as a full-time polemicist. He once said "I am the Cinema Novo", paraphrasing Louis XIV's famous quote. In an interview with Le Monde, Rocha said "My Brazilian films belong to a whole period when my generation was full of wild dreams and hopes. They are full of enthusiasm, faith and militancy and were inspired by my great love of Brazil."

In 1969 he was a member of the jury at the 6th Moscow International Film Festival. In the following year, Rocha made a brief appearance in the Dziga Vertov Group film Wind from the East. After refusing an invitation by Jean-Luc Godard to shoot a segment of the film, Rocha appeared as a man in a crossway pointing the direction of the political cinema, namely, the Cinema Novo.

In 1971, during the Brazilian military dictatorship, he left the country to a voluntary exile, dwelling in many places, such as Spain, Chile, and France, eventually relocating to the Portuguese Riviera, with the help of his friend, Portuguese filmmaker, Manuel Carvalheiro. He never completely returned home until his last days, when he was transferred from Lisbon, where he had been receiving medical treatment for a lung infection, to Rio de Janeiro. Rocha resisted in hospital for few days, but ultimately died on August 22, 1981, at the age of 42. He had been married three times and had five children. His daughter Ava is a singer-songwriter.

title: Glauber Rocha