text:
Talk:Socialist state/Archive 5

Talks and archives of talks of pages redirected to this article:

Talk:Marxist-Leninist government/archive 1 -- Talk:Marxist-Leninist government

Stan's mention of what he perceived to be a pro-communist bias (by omission) isn't "silly". 172 has asserted that "the near-elimination of poverty and the doubling of life expectancy...were undoubtedly witnessed in the two largest Communist states, China and the Soviet Union." (Talk:Communist government). (I don't understand why, if he believes it was undoubtedly witnessed, that he doesn't want it included in Wikipedia.) I guess Mervyn Matthews must be a right-wing nutjob and UNDP China a waste of everyone's time and money. --The Cunctator

--- Once again, I'm still being slandered and misrepresented, despite my decision to stop editing articles. I said that somebody could note that trend if he were coming from a pro-Communist slant. I wrote the comment in a piece describing how propagandists can manipulate history like statistics and the dangers of sweeping generalizations. Noting that trend was an example of how misleading propaganda can be based on accurate historical facts. Like those propagandists, you completely misrepresented my statements by quoting a selected portion out of context.

So please stop slandering me. You've already won. I'm not touching your POV-reverts anymore. I will not create or edit ANY article anymore. So you no longer have to direct these misrepresentations against me. 172

I've not seen or editted this article before, but for what its worth it seems to me to be as balanced a view as is possible on this inevitably controversial subject. jimfbleak 06:10 May 11, 2003 (UTC)

There's clearly an edit war over Communist state, with both sides claiming to be NPOV. (I'm not involved) --Evercat

The article is about a simple straight-forward political science definition of the term Communist state (ie, a system of government). It is NOT about communism which is discussed in detail elsewhere. Fred Bauder refuses to accept that (even though everyone else on the page does) and continually introduces anti-communist POV amendments which no-one but himself accepts. (He tried the same antics on the China page.) Even if his facts were NPOV (and that is highly debatable) they are as irrelevant on a page on a system of government as a discussion on Prince Charles' sex life would be on the page defining what a constitutional monarchy in constitutional terms is, or adding into a page defining federal republic a discussion on George W. Bush's linguistic deficiencies. But no amount of telling Bauder that this is purely a page on a system of government, not the rights and wrongs of communism, seems to get through. Paragraphs taking about concentration camps and liquidations belong in a page on communism, where their validity or otherwise can be discussed. But this is only a page about a political science definition of the political science term Communist state. This argument here and elsewhere has been going on for days but Bauder still will not cop on what this page is actually about and what it isnt about. Help gratefully accepted to stop this nonsense and tell this guy the difference between an article on communism and one merely about a system of government. ÉÍREman

Could it be resolved to everyone's satisfaction with something like "for a discussion of communist states in practice, see Communism"? (or whatever the page that discusses it is) --Evercat

It is a useful suggestion. I will leave it to people who have more detailed knowledge of the complex nature of articles on communism, China, the USSR to decide which are the best links to make. (I was drafted in with my political science hat on to contribute to the creation of a political science page on Communist state.) The only problem is that the user in question has already been in edit wars elsewhere trying to add in the views he is now trying to add on to this page. I suspect it is a case of finding somewhere to get these Donald Rumsfeld-ish view expressed, so that may not necessarily stop the attempts here. :-(. But we'll hope for the best. ÉÍREman 06:09 Apr 27, 2003 (UTC)

 * So far there has had to be eleven or twelve revertions to remove Fred Bauder's additions to the Communist state and even he admits his contribution is 'unbalanced'. But as so many people have commented at this stage (see Tannin on the relevant talk page and on my talk page, also 172, etc) even if it was balanced and NPOV (and it is miles off it at the moment) it still would be completely the wrong page on which to put the information. Everyone but Fred (and also the person who is the latest reincarnation of Lir) accept that. Given that there has had to have been 11 or 12 revertions of his POV vandalism by a number of people, nobody (except 'Lir' - surprise surprise! Some things never change!) agrees with what he had doing, and I presume his revertions to his own version must have taken place at least 11 or 12 times, which means more than 20 revertions in the last few days, with a couple already today. So please will someone protect this page to stop this ungoing nightmare. It is unfair on all the people who worked on this page and produced a quality contribution that one person for his own POV agenda is able to continuously screw it up. It is unfair on Tannin, on 172 on myself and now others that we have to waste our time undoing his damage when we could be doing other articles. And it is unfair on wiki that one person's right wing obsession is allowed to destroy a balanced page by littering it with highly POV opinions which even if NPOV belong on a different page, not that one. So please, someone, protect that page and let the rest of us do other things besides having to clean up Fred Bauder's mess on Communist state all the time. ÉÍREman 15:00 Apr 27, 2003 (UTC)

The reversion number by people removing Bauders' POV rant is now climbing towards 20. No-one but Lir has come out to support him. Everyone agrees (and he does himself) that his add-ins are "unbalanced". Everyone but him are agreed that even if balanced he is putting them on the wrong page. How many times does this user have to flout the will of all the people who worked on the page, all the people who have visited the page, all the users (bar Lir) who have commented on his actions and who have condemned his bahaviour, before someone with authority decides to act and prevent Fred Bauder from continuously vandalising this page? ÉÍREman 10:55 Apr 28, 2003 (UTC)

Jtdirl/172/Tannin and others keeps reverting Mr. Bauder's contribution which roughly states:

 * Typically a communist state is characterized by a command economy...such a state is characterized by the division of the population into two castes, party members and the rest of the population. Only a small group, the politbureau, typically hold any real power. In such states, a large secret police apparatus tends to closely monitor the population. Likewise, concentration camps and other facilities are used to incarcerate and "liquidate" political dissidents.
 * There have been two major communist states, The Soviet Union and its satellites and the People's Republic of China. Minor states include Albania, Yugoslavia, Cuba, Viet Nam and North Korea.
 * A communist state typically arises during a time of general international unrest as a result of a communist revolution lead by a national communist party.
 * The application of orthodox communist doctrine to development of a country and building of socialist institutions has historically proven to be problematic.

I know that jtdirl, mav, 172, and others view me as an "mongrel asshole-idiot cockroach troll from hell"; however, here I am once again vandalizing the wikipedia by asking what is so wrong with the above statements. I feel that statements to this effect should be part of the article.

I once again re-iterate that I do not feel it is appropriate for jtdirl and 172 to advocate banning Mr. Bauder simply because they have some (from the POV of myself and Mr. Bauder) insifficiently explained issue with Mr. Bauder's work, nor is it appropriate for them to slander him by saying that he has a "totalitarian mindset". I hope that, at some point, the wikipedia will add a chatroom so that we can all discuss issues such as this, in a "real-time format".

I know that jtdirl and 172 feel that they have explained this issue and "beat the bush to death", so to speak, but the fact remains that nobody has actually taken Mr. Bauder's contribution and explained why each and every sentence is 100% unacceptable. I feel this must be done, in all fairness to Mr. Bauder.

Like a Virgin

Number 1.: The below refers to communism and the politics of communism. The article is about a political science term communist state, a different thing as everyone but Fred and Adam's creatures understand and totally accept. Those bits that are somewhat relevant are already covered in much greater detail and in better english in the article.

*Typically a communist state is characterized by a command economy...such a state is characterized by the division of the population into two castes, party members and the rest of the population. Only a small group, the politbureau, typically hold any real power. In such states, a large secret police apparatus tends to closely monitor the population. Likewise, concentration camps and other facilities are used to incarcerate and "liquidate" political dissidents.
 * There have been two major communist states, The Soviet Union and its satellites and the People's Republic of China. Minor states include Albania, Yugoslavia, Cuba, Viet Nam and North Korea.
 * A communist state typically arises during a time of general international unrest as a result of a communist revolution lead by a national communist party.
 * The application of orthodox communist doctrine to development of a country and building of socialist institutions has historically proven to be problematic.

Putting a line through the text hardly qualifies as an explanation of what is wrong with the text. Like a Virgin

Number 2. User Like a Virgin said I know that jtdirl, mav, 172, and others view me as an "asshole idiot cockroach troll from hell"; Actually Mav has been nothing but polite. So has 172. Zoe had hardly heard of this user and I left a welcoming note on their talk page responding to an earlier one from another person suggesting that Like A Virgin is the latest Adam troll by saying that I did not care if it was Adam again once they worked well with people and was constructive. What is missing the above weird line is one word, 'Jimbo'. For their original draft, he too was mentioned, then censored out, (they drafted this bit on the talk page to Communist state, then made a muck up and blanked the page. I found the blank page, went to look at the earlier versio and came across all of this, which when reinstated by LaV a few minutes later was found to be sans Jimbo!)  presumably because they realised that if they were a brand new user, they would not have heard of jimbo, let alone have himcalling them a troll. (And how did a new user know we even used the word 'troll'?)

 * Lol, yes mav and 172 are nothing but polite...lol...that's why mav has a "Im not nice because Im an INTJ" disclaimer on his page...yes...and 172 is nice too...mmm...Jimbo, unlike some people, hasn't resorted to any personal attacks that I am aware of. That is why he was removed. BTW, troll is a internet term, not a wiki term.

As has been mentioned by others on the wiki list, this user's edit pattern is almost identical to the various earlier Adam creations, and Shino Baku. They use of language is the same. The OTT paranoia is the same. And they like all of the Adam family share a hatred of the same people; 172, Zoe, Mav, Jimbo and myself. Like a Virgin let the cat out of the bag by declared her hate list before anyone had even noticed she existed, let alone had a row with her over anything. So as with Susan Mason/Dietary Fiber, Adam's new strategy seems now to be to launch his troll attack in waves of two. It is a sad day for Fred when the only people defending him are Shino Baku and Like a Virgin, the latest wave of Adam's trolls to hit wiki. ÉÍREman 11:52 Apr 28, 2003 (UTC)

 * ITS IDENTICAL! Lir, unlike Jtdirl, has never once taken a user's multi-paragraph insert, and deleted it. NEVER. Yes, it is easy to spot a Lir. Next time Lir plans to use a three-pronged pincer attack and simultaneously add information on German aircraft of World War II, information on Israeli Supreme Court Cases, and information on the flora of central China, ALL while disagreeing with Jtdirl on whether regime is a POV term. Oh, the horror continues... Like a Virgin

Will someone please put a 'protect' on the Communist state page. A compromise was worked out, in which I moved Fred Bauder's controversial additions to his own page, called Communist government. Fred is working on his text there. But The Cunctator is determined to ignore that compromise and keeps putting in the text from the second page back into Communist state and ignores appeals not to do so. The result is a screwed up Communist state page with text in it that (a) is not relevant to that page and belongs elsewhere, and (b) is now elsewhere, where Fred is happily working on it. Please please stop this mayhem. Leave the Communist state page in a protected state so that people can get on to work on the second page and other things, rather than constantly having to undo The Cunctator's mucking around. ÉÍREman 05:22 May 11, 2003 (UTC)

Above moved from Current disputes over articles. WikiLove to all. Martin

The term "communist state" is not the formal title for a political system. It is a generic term, and is nowhere a formally adopted title. It is written with lower case letters and not capitals. I cite Fowler on the matter: "socialist, republican, conservative, democratic, etc., as normal adjectives when not party titles". In opposition to this there are only one individual's ex cathedra pronouncements as Pope of Political Science. ☮ Eclecticology 20:36 17 May 2003 (UTC)

I pointed out that China and the Soviet Union largely alleviated poverty, that is provided almost everyone with the bare essentials for survival, and that life expectancy had roughly doubled under these regimes from 1917 to 1991 in the case of the Soviet Union and from 1949 to today in the case of Communist China. But I was making the point that a history cannot simply notice some kind of correlation like what I've just mentioned and infer causation. Nor can he notice a seemingly positive objective trend, stop there, and just praise the ruling regime.

For instance, the Soviet Union built up its economy, defeated an invader at the cost of 27 million lives greatly improved living standards, and won respect globally. However, it still achieved all this in the wrong manner. The structure of its economy and political bureaucracy couldn't handle the modernized society that it created, failing to meet it commitment with its citizens, which took the form of the money overhang and hidden-inflation that could no longer be ignored by its citizens. Every ruble represented a liability of the Soviet government and the economy, which was the government for that matter, could not respond with the real growth to match the wages of its citizens with real goods and services. The well-educated middle class that it reared also grew tired of the autocracy, which was too much of a reemergence of Czarist absolutism, the kind of Czarist absolutism that helped to unite the intelligentsia with basically all urban popular sectors against the old order during a period of economic crisis, which almost always brings up pent-up conflict, brings dislocation to the forefront of discussion, and brings up a reformist or revolutionary drive in response. While I'm not an enthusiast of the modernization theory, this middle class was ready to engage in a real civic society, not something restrictive controlled from above. It's far easier for an autocracy to over an country of peasants, and autocratic government in such societies has its historical place. And It has done wonders for East Asia, namely Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, later Malaysia, and now China and Vietnam over the past 50 years or so. China especially. I have no problem admitting that I've long argued that China's development since the Communist revoluion has been the most encouraging trend of the second half of the 20th century. But its path has been quite diffrent from Russia's despite the superficial similarities.

The Stalinist centrally planned economy, in contrast, was a victim of its success that the stage for its collapse, and Russia now is paying that cost with the sheer misery opened up by Russia's transition. The collapse of Communism rendered hundreds of millions impoverished and destitute in a such rapid period of time that still has me shocked. But the Soviet economy helped to lay the groundwork for that, creating a system that influential segments of its population would be willing to dismantle and replace with something with ultimately more potential, but at the expense of inhuman misery.

Industrializing the Soviet Union also wasn't a pleasant process. While its economy was quite good at extensive growth, essentially the mobilization of resources, it did so in a very brutal manner, with which I'm sure you're aware. The economy was built by the amazing increases in output of natural resources, minerals, fuels, and so forth during the Stalinist years, but to understand why the Stalinist era was so costly in terms of causalities take into consideration that those industries were extracted in remote regions where few lived. That's where prison labor came in and I doubt that I need to say any more.

So I don't think that it was appropriate to add those kinds of trends that I listed because they would require the proper context to help understand them. The same was the case with Fred Bauder's sweeping generalizations. They simply do not work for explaining China's path of development or the development of any other Communist state other than the Soviet Union and perhaps North Korea. His edits also don't explain anything in context. He points out that Communist states have starved their economies to develop their military sectors. But this has nothing to do with what Communists have seen as a desirable path of development. States like the Soviet Union, North Korea, and Vietnam prior to reunification had many reasons to become militaristic that had little to do with the structures of the Communist state or ideology. The Soviet Union had to deal with civil war from 1917-1921, then World War II, and finally the Cold War, which I've longed argued stalled attempts for reforms and ultimately left Soviet Communism impossible to reform from within, which would've probably been possible had it not been engaging in a Cold War with the entire Western world, with the world's largest economies (US, W. Germany, Britain, France, Japan, etc.), which combined accounted for a far greater productive capacity. The Soviet Union was left devoting up to a quarter of its economy (probably more when you consider how military-sectors industries were related to the civilian sector, paying the wages for instance that workers would use to buy goods from the civilian sector. The West, with a combined economic capacity far larger did not have its economy bogged down in such a manner. China today, however, does not have an economy bogged down by the military sector. His comments thus were confusing, conflating correlation seen in a few Communist states with an inborn "characteristic".

Communist states often provoke hostility from the West (threatening global markets and using their resources for their development and not the development of core countries is their historical duty after all). So they're often militaristic in response. China, with relatively good relations with the West has avoided that trap, and thus avoided the trap of starving its consumer economy for the military. 172, from Talk:The Cunctator

 * This is an interesting analysis. There is often far more than just communism involved in the collapse of a communist state.  A severely backward economy cannot hope to become affluent without a serious injection of economic discipline to insure that the return on capital is reinvested in infrastructure.  Unfortunately, foreign investors prefer to export profits to pay dividends to shareholders back home where there is no such desparate need for new infrastructure.  A real communist dictatorship in Congo would be an improvement over the prevailing situation, which has earned that country the distinction of having the conflict with the highest death toll since World War II.   ☮ Eclecticology 18:33 20 May 2003 (UTC)

 * For what I know of West Africa the legacy of communist experiences is somewhat better that the legacy of authoritarian pro-west regimes.
 * Ericd 05:32, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

--- So how many communist states still remain? I can think of Cuba, North Korea, China, Vietnam for sure, but are Laos, Mongolia or any of the others still communist states?

Hopeless Confusion
Impossible to seperate Marxist propaganda from fact. Have to start over.

The distinction between Communist (Big C) and communist (small c) has been hopelessly blurred -- in my not so humble opinion, purposely!

We should present the POV of Western analysts on the Big/Little distinction AND ALSO SEPARATELY try to describe the POV of Marxists (assuming it's even comprehensible) on the distinction.

In my 35+ years study of Marxism, I've found confusing terminology to be one of their chief propaganda weapons. I hope this article can straighten out some of the confusion. --Uncle Ed 16:50, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * It's also impossible to separate anti-Marxist propaganda from fact.

 * The big C/little c distinction needn't be so blurred if people stick to a definition. Big C refers to parties; little c to theory and doctrine.  Human nature on both sides, and its lack of intellectual rigor has more to do with this confusion than any intentional act by anybody.  For Wikipedia a part of the problem is the forced capitalization (no pun intended) of the first letter in a title so that the link communisim invariably leads to the article Communism.  It would be nice if our technical people could find a way atound that.  A definition is a tool; it is not a provable hypothesis.

 * What evidence is there that the POV of "Western analysts" would be any more comprehensible than a Marxist one? It's more to the advantage of the anti-Marxists to create confusion and misinformation.  It's more to the advantage of anti-Marxists to link communism with such outrages as Stalin's pogroms, when such events had more to do with Stalin than Marxism.

 * 35+ years of study -- Wow! My study only goes back to 1961.  It is interesting to note that the 1888 translation of the Communist Manifesto which has been added at Wikisource follows the German original.  Big C is used for the noun, and little c is used for the adjective.  Big C is also used when the adjective is a part of a proper name.  Marx himself should not be held responsible for that confusion.   ☮ Eclecticology 18:14, 2004 Feb 9 (UTC)

 * I bow to your 43 years of study, sir! Anyway, I took lots of breaks -- all those murders were too depressing :-(

 * Shall we work on the distinction between (a) Political parties which controlled countries (Big C) and (b) "the stage of society which Marx predicted would inevitably follow capitalism and socialism"? --Uncle Ed 19:16, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * This is an agreeable basis. (Unfortunately, the software engendered part of the problem won't go away that easily.)  (C/c)ommunist state remains a problem, because it can be interpreted to mean either a state run by a Communist Party or a state run on communist principles whether or not the ruling party calls itself Communist.  Of course too there can be states which claim to be run on Marxist principles, which a living Marx would quickly disclaim.

 * Both left and right can agree that the topic is a mess. I suspect too that a solution for dealing with it depends on a global treatment of the term (C/c)ommunist in all of its contexts.  There are strongly held POV's on both sides of this issue with each side seeing its POV as more neutral than that of its opponents.  To say that either side sets about to purposely create confusion is to start off on the wrong foot, when in reality both sides are equally confused.  Is there enough collective intellectual will to deal with this issue fairly?   ☮ Eclecticology 18:40, 2004 Feb 10 (UTC)

Merging with Marxist-Leninist government
It is very strange see the two articles speaking basically about the same to develop independently. I took the liberty to put both onto one basket. The resulting article possibly needs splitting, but after some better merging them first. Mikkalai 23:58, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Comparison with Nazism
The comparison is between the things which actually occur when the idea is carried into practice, and the degree and comprehensiveness of force necessary to do so. The section therefore belongs in the government article, not in theoretical articles like the old Communist state article which sets forth the formal organization of a typical Communist governement nor in the Communism article which sets forth the theoretical basis of Communism (and communism). Merging Marxist-Leninist Dictatorship which deals with practical consequences like the Gulag, the Red Terror, the Great Purge, the famines, etc into Communist State is a poor idea if there is a notion that these verifiable consequences are to be excluded from the article. You are just setting yourself up for a terrific edit war. I concede the material could also be included in other articles like totalitarianism, but it belongs here too, at least until we put the criminals who killed all those people on trial as the Nazis were at Nuremberg. No one should ever read about the history of practical Communism without coming to grips with the realities of that history and imagine that it can be carried into practice without risk. Fred Bauder 03:49, Apr 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * Please don't forget that communist state is actually not communist state is actually oxymoron. Don't get lost in the buzzword wordplay here. There never was such thing as "practical communism" exept for from under pens of the cold war warriors. Moreover, it was not the state (suppose it was communist) i.e., an implementation of the idea, that went bad, it was the idea itself wrong. From comparison of nazism and communism one may safely derive only one idea: modern technology makes a charismatic dictator a menace for the whole mankind, rather than "in one country" (I am alluding to socialism in one country :-). As for putting on trial, aren't you too late? What about putting Nero or French Revolution on trial? What about Gengis Khan? Napoleon? Butchers, I'd say. And neither nazists, nor communists. Mikkalai 06:40, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I don't understand what the following sentence was supposed to mean:
 * There has never been a leader of a state who has called his state communist (lower case 'c'). In these states the distinctions between state and party become blurred and there is usually a command economy.

Please, anyone who has a clue about the intended meaning, fix it.

title: Talk:Socialist state/Archive 5


text:
Moses Sofer

Moses Schreiber (1762–1839), known to his own community and Jewish posterity in the Hebrew translation as Moshe Sofer, also known by his main work Chatam Sofer, Chasam Sofer, or Hatam Sofer (trans. Seal of the Scribe, and acronym for Chiddushei Toiras Moishe Sofer), was one of the leading Orthodox rabbis of European Jewry in the first half of the nineteenth century.

He was a teacher to thousands and a powerful opponent of the Reform movement in Judaism, which was attracting many Jews in the Austrian Empire, and beyond. As Rav of the city of Pressburg, he advocated for strong communal life, first-class education, and uncompromising opposition to Reform and radical change.

Sofer established a yeshiva in Pozsony (Pressburg in German; today Bratislava, Slovakia), the Pressburg Yeshiva, which became the most influential yeshiva in Central Europe, producing hundreds of future leaders of Hungarian Jewry. This yeshiva continued to function until World War II; afterward, it was relocated to Jerusalem, under the leadership of the Chasam Sofer's great-grandson, Rabbi Akiva Sofer (the Daas Sofer).

Sofer published very little during his lifetime; however, his post-humously published works include more than a thousand responsa, novellae on the Talmud, sermons, biblical and liturgical commentaries, and religious poetry. He is an authority who is quoted extensively in Orthodox Jewish scholarship. Many of his responsa are required reading for semicha (rabbinic ordination) candidates. His chiddushim (original Torah insights) sparked a new style in rabbinic commentary, and some editions of the Talmud contain his emendations and additions.

Early years
Sofer was born in Frankfurt am Main on September 24, 1762. His father's name was Shmuel and his mother's was Reizel, the daughter of Elchanan. Shmuel's mother, Reizchen was a daughter of the Gaon of Frankfurt, Shmuel Schotten.

Education
At the age of nine, Sofer entered the yeshiva of Rabbi Nathan Adler at Frankfurt, a kabbalist known for its strict and unusual ritual practices. He was a pupil of Pinchas Horowitz of Frankfurt for one year, leaving in 1776 for the yeshiva of another rabbi, David Tebele Scheuer, in the neighboring city of Mainz where he studied in 1776 and 1777, then returned to his native city.

First positions and marriage
In 1782 Nathan Adler became rabbi of Boskovice, Moravia, and on Adler's advice Sofer went to Prostějov, Moravia.

There, on 6 May 1787, Sofer married Sarah, the daughter of Moses Jerwitz, the rabbi of Prostějov. Sofer became a member of the Chevra Kadisha, and eventually became head of the yeshiva in Prostějov.

In 1794 Sofer became rabbi of Strážnice after he had received government permission to settle there. In 1797, he became rabbi of Mattersdorf, one of the seven communities (known as the Siebengemeinden, or Sheva Kehillot) of Burgenland, where he established a yeshiva. His pupils there included Meir Ash, the rabbi of Uzhhorod.

Pressburg (Bratislava)
Sofer declined many offers for the rabbinate, but in 1806, he accepted a call to Pressburg (Pozsony in Hungarian; today Bratislava, capital of Slovakia). There, he established a yeshiva, which was attended by as many as 500 pupils. Hundreds of these pupils became the rabbis of Hungarian Jewry. Among them were:

For a short period of time during the Napoleonic War in Pressburg in 1809, Moses Schreiber retreated to a small vineyard town, Svätý Jur, where he organised a charity for his fellow citizens affected by the war.

Second marriage and children
Sofer's first wife Sarah died childless on 22 July 1812.

In 1813 (23 Cheshvan 5573), he married for the second time, to Sarel (Sarah) (1790–1832, d. 18 Adar II 5592), the widowed daughter of Rabbi Akiva Eiger, Rav of Poznań. She was the widow of Rabbi Avraham Moshe Kalischer (1788–1812), Rabbi of Piła, the son of Rabbi Yehuda Kalischer, author of Hayod Hachazoka.

With his second wife, Sofer had three sons and eight daughters. All three of his sons became rabbis: Avrohom Shmuel Binyamin Sofer (known as the Ktav Sofer or Ksav Sofer); Shimon Sofer (known as the Michtav Sofer), who became the Rav of Kraków; and Yozef Yozpa Sofer.

Sofer's descendants named their works after the Hebrew translation of Schreiber (scribe), Sofer's civil surname, along the lines of Sofer's work Chasam Sofer; as, for instance, Michtav Sofer (son), Ktav Sofer (son), the Shevet Sofer (grandson), the Chasan Sofer (grandson), the Yad Sofer (great-grandson), the Daas Sofer (great-grandson), the Cheshev Sofer, and Imrei Sofer (2x great-grandson).

Sofer and his family lived at the end of Zamocka Street, where the Hotel Ibis is now located.

Influence against changes in Judaism
Sofer led the community of Pressburg for 33 years, until his death in 1839. It was his influence and determination that kept the Reform movement out of the city. From the late 18th century onwards, movements which eventually developed into Reform Judaism began to develop. Synagogues subscribing to these new views began to appear in centres such as Berlin and Hamburg. Sofer was profoundly opposed to the reformers, and attacked them in his speeches and writings. For example, in a responsum of 1816, he forbade the congregation in Vienna to allow a performance in the synagogue of a cantata they had commissioned from the composer Ignaz Moscheles, because it would involve a mixed choir. In the same spirit, he contested the founders of the Reformschule (Reform synagogue) in Pozsony, which was established in the year 1827.

For Sofer, Judaism as previously practiced was the only form of Judaism acceptable. In his view, the rules and tenets of Judaism had never changed — and cannot ever change. This became the defining idea for the opponents to Reform, and in some form, it has continued to influence the Orthodox response to innovation in Jewish doctrine and practice.

Sofer applied a pun to the Talmudic term chadash asur min haTorah, "'new' is forbidden by the Torah" (referring literally to eating chadash, "new grain", before the Omer offering is given) as a slogan heralding his opposition to any philosophical, social or practical change to customary Orthodox practice. He did not allow the addition of any secular studies to the curriculum of his Pressburg Yeshiva.

Universal Israelite Congress
The Universal Israelite Congress of 1868-69 in Pest was influential in affecting the direction of Judaism in Europe. To try to unify all streams of Judaism under one constitution, the Orthodox offered the Shulchan Aruch and surrounding codes as the ruling code of law and observance. The reformists dismissed this notation and in response, many Orthodox rabbis resigned from the Congress to form their own social and political groups. Hungarian Jewry split into two major institutionally sectarian groups, Orthodox and Neolog. Some communities refused to join either of the groups and called themselves Status Quo.

Actions of students and descendants
Sofer's most notable student, Rabbi Moshe Schick, together with Sofer's sons, the rabbis Shmuel Binyamin and Shimon, took an active role in arguing against the Reform movement. They showed relative tolerance for heterogeneity within the Orthodox camp. Others, such as the more zealous Rabbi Hillel Lichtenstein, supported a more stringent position in orthodoxy.

In 1877, Rabbi Moshe Schick demonstrated support for the separatist policies of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch in Germany. His son studied at the Hildesheimer Rabbinical Seminary, which taught secular studies and was headed by Azriel Hildesheimer. Hirsch, however, did not reciprocate. He was surprised at what he described as Schick's halakhic contortions in condemning even those "status quo" communities that clearly adhered to halakhah. Hillel Lichtenstein opposed Hildesheimer and his son Hirsh in their speaking German to give sermons and their tending toward Modern Zionism.

In 1871, Shimon Sofer, Chief Rabbi of Kraków, founded the Machzikei Hadas organisation with the Hasidic Rabbi Yehoshua Rokeach of Belz. This was the first effort of Haredi Jews in Europe to create a political party; it was part of the developing identification of the traditional Orthodoxy as a self-defined group. Rabbi Shimon was nominated as a candidate to the Polish Regional Parliament, under the Austrian emperor Franz Joseph. He was elected to the "Polish Club", in which he took an active part until his death.

Another notable group is Satmar, which was founded by Rabbi Moshe Teitelbaum (Ujhel), who was a Hasid who paid homage to the Chasam Sofer and had similar views to that of Rabbi Hillel Lichtenstein. His descendant Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum headed the Edah HaChareidis for many years, living in Israel and later in the United States, where he influenced Orthodox Jewry.

Starting in 1830, about twenty disciples of Sofer settled in Palestine, almost all of them in Jerusalem. They joined the Old Yishuv, which comprised the Musta'arabim, Sephardim, and Ashkenazim. They also settled in Safed, Tiberias, and Hebron. Together with the Perushim and Hasidim, they formed an approach to Judaism reflecting those of their European counterparts.

Notable disciples of the Pressburg Yeshiva who had major influence on mainstream Orthodoxy in Palestine were Rabbi Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld (student of Ktav Sofer) and Rabbi Yitzchok Yerucham Diskin (son of Rabbi Yehoshua Leib Diskin, from Brisk, Lithuania), who, together, in 1919, founded the Edah HaChareidis in then-Mandate Palestine.

In 1932, Sonnenfeld was succeeded by Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, a disciple of the Shevet Sofer, one of Sofer's grandchildren. Dushinsky founded the Dushinsky Hasidic dynasty in Israel, based on Sofer's teachings.

Death and burial place

Sofer died in Pressburg on 3 October 1839 (25 Tishrei 5600).

Today, a modern Jewish memorial, containing Sofer's grave and those of many of his associates and family, is located in Bratislava. It is situated underground below Bratislava Castle, on the left bank of the Danube. The nearby tram and bus stop is named after him.

The preservation of these graves has a curious history. The Jewish cemetery in Bratislava was confiscated during the regime in 1943, to build a roadway. Negotiations with the regime enabled the community to preserve the section of the cemetery including Sofer's grave, enclosed in concrete, below the surface of the new road. The regime complied, possibly as a consequence of a large bribe (according to one story), foreign pressure (according to another story), or for fear of a curse if the graves were destroyed (according to yet another story).

Following the declaration of independence by Slovakia in 1992, new negotiations were undertaken to restore public access to the preserved graves. In the mid-1990s, the International Committee for Preservation of Gravesites of Geonai Pressburg was formed, to support and oversee relocation of tram tracks and building of a mausoleum. Construction of the mausoleum was completed after overcoming numerous technical and religious issues, and opened on 8 July 2002. Access to the mausoleum can be arranged through the local Jewish community organisation.

Legacy
Many synagogues and yeshivas worldwide bear the name and follow the legacy of the Chatam Sofer.

Erlau yeshiva and community

The most notable recent living descendant and heir to the Sofer legacy was Rabbi Yochanan Sofer. Yochanan was a direct descendant and fifth generation to the Chatam Sofer. He was the leader of the Erlau movement, whose progenitor was his grandfather, Rabbi Shimon Sofer of Erlau, a grandson of the Chatam Sofer, and son of the Ktav Sofer.

Yochanan's father, Rabbi Moshe Sofer (II) (Dayan of Erlau), and grandfather, Rabbi Shimon (Av Beth Din of Erlau), perished in the Holocaust, together with most of their families. After the Holocaust, Rabbi Yochanan re-founded the Chasam Sofer Yeshiva in Pest, together with Rabbi Moshe Stern (the Debretziner Rav) and his brother, Avraham Shmuel Binyamin (II). He then returned to Eger (Erlau) to re-establish his grandfather's Yeshiva.

In 1950, he immigrated to Israel, together with his students, and, for a short while, merged his yeshiva with the Pressburg Yeshiva of Rabbi Akiva Sofer (Daas Sofer). In 1953, he founded his own Yeshiva in Katamon, Jerusalem, as well as the Institute for Research of the Teachings of the Chasam Sofer. The Institute researches and deciphers hand-written documents penned by the Chasam Sofer, his pupils, and descendants, and has printed hundreds of sefarim.

Over the years, Rabbi Yochanan founded many synagogues, chederim, and kollelim, which he named after his ancestors. The Ezrat Torah Campus in Jerusalem is named Beth Chasam Sofer, as is the Erlau Synagogue in Haifa. The chederim are named Talmud Torah Ksav Sofer, after the Chasam Sofer's son; the kollelim and synagogues are named Yad Sofer, after Rabbi Yochanan's father; and the main yeshiva campus in Katamon is named Ohel Shimon MiErlau, after his grandfather. He has authored numerous Torah commentary works, naming them Imrei Sofer.

The Erlau community is considered Hasidic style, though strictly follows Ashkenaz customs, as did the Chasam Sofer. It has branches in Jerusalem, Bnei Brak, Beitar Illit, El'ad, Haifa, Ashdod, and Boro Park (New York).

The Pressburg Yeshiva of Jerusalem
The Pressburg Yeshiva of Jerusalem (ישיבת פרשבורג) is a leading yeshiva located in the Givat Shaul neighborhood of Jerusalem, Israel. It was founded in 1950 by Rabbi Akiva Sofer (known as the Daas Sofer), a great-grandson of Rabbi Moses Sofer (the Chasam Sofer), who established the original Pressburg Yeshiva in the Austrian-Hungarian Empire in 1807. , the rosh yeshiva is Rabbi Simcha Bunim Sofer.

The yeshiva building includes a Yeshiva Ketana, Yeshiva Gedolah, and kollel.

The main beis medrash doubles as a synagogue where some neighborhood residents also pray on Shabbat. The complex also includes a general neighborhood synagogue which functions as Givat Shaul's main nusach Ashkenaz synagogue.

Chasan Sofer Yeshiva, New York
The Chassan Sofer Yeshiva in New York is considered the American yeshiva of the Chasam Sofer legacy. It was founded by Rabbi Shmuel Ehrenfeld, who was born and raised in Mattersdorf, Austria. His father, Simcha Bunim Ehrenfeld, the rabbi of Mattersdorf, whose father, Rabbi Shmuel Ehrenfeld (the Chasan Sofer), was a grandson of the Chasam Sofer.

Rabbi Shmuel was rabbi of Mattersdorf from 1926 until 1938, when the congregation was dispersed by the Nazis. He escaped to America, and immediately re-established the Chasan Sofer Yeshiva in the Lower East Side, from where it was later relocated to Boro Park. After his death, he was succeeded by his son, Rabbi Simcha Bunim Ehrenfeld.

The yeshiva currently enrolls over 400 students in kindergarten through twelfth grade, and operates a Head Start Program and rabbinical seminary.

Chug Chasam Sofer, Bnei Brak
During the 1950s and 1960s, many synagogues in Israel were built by Hungarian Jewry, and named Chug Chasam Sofer. This network of synagogues were founded in Tel Aviv, Bnei Brak, Jerusalem, Petach Tikva, Haifa, and Netanya. These synagogues still operate, but have been integrated into the larger community, with no distinct character of their own, besides for that of Bnei Brak, founded by Rabbi Yitzchak Shlomo Ungar, and that of Petach Tikva, founded by Rabbi Shmaryahu Deutch.

Rabbi Ungar, a descendant of the Chasam Sofer, founded a yeshiva named Machneh Avraham, and a kashrut organization named Chug Chasam Sofer, which are both very active and well known. After Rabbi Ungar's passing in 1994, the yeshiva appointed Rabbi Altman as rabbi and rosh yeshiva, with Rabbi Shmuel Eliezer Stern remaining the head of the kashrut organization.

Pressburg Institutions of London
The Pressburg institutions in London, England, are headed by a descendant of the Chasam Sofer, Rabbi Shmuel Ludmir (who has published some of his work).

Dushinsky, Jerusalem
The Dushinsky community considers itself a continuation of the Chasam Sofer dynasty – not by genealogy, but, rather, by school of thought.

The founder of the Dushinsky dynasty was Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky (1865–1948), who was a disciple of Rabbi Simcha Bunim Sofer (the Shevet Sofer), the son of the Ksav Sofer at the Pressburg Yeshiva. The Dushinsky dynasty has been more integrated into the Hasidic community, with many of their customs derived from Nusach Sefard, but still remains true to the teachings of the Chasam Sofer. This is mainly due to Rabbi Yosef Tzvi's appointment as Chief Rabbi of the Edah HaChareidis, and the Dushinsky alignment with the teachings of Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum of Satmar.

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

title: Moses Sofer


text:
Maven (wrestler)

Maven Huffman (born November 26, 1976) is an American former professional wrestler and YouTuber. He is best known for his time with World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) under his first name, where he is known for co-winning the inaugural season of Tough Enough alongside Nidia Guenard. He also became a three-time WWE Hardcore Champion.

Early life
Maven Huffman was born on November 26, 1976, in Tennessee but raised in Crimora, Virginia. According to a MyHeritage DNA kit test, he has Northern European, Western European, British and West African ancestry. After his father left the family, his mother committed suicide the day after Christmas. He was adopted by his maternal uncle and his aunt, who began rearing him at 2 years old. His aunt died from cancer in 2004. Huffman graduated from Wilson Memorial High School in Fishersville, Virginia before attending Eastern Mennonite University in Harrisonburg, Virginia.

In 1999, he moved to Portland, Oregon, where he began playing baseball for the Aloha Knights team. Prior to becoming a professional wrestler, Huffman was a middle school teacher at Twality Middle School in Tigard, Oregon for two years.

Tough Enough and Hardcore Champion (2001–2003)
Huffman began his professional wrestling career in 2001 upon being selected to participate in the inaugural season of Tough Enough, a reality television show used by the World Wrestling Federation (WWF) to find new WWF stars. Ultimately, Maven would become the co-winner of the competition alongside Nidia Guenard, and he was sent to the Heartland Wrestling Association (HWA) to receive further training.

On the October 4 episode of SmackDown!, Maven made his in-ring debut against Tazz, one of his Tough Enough trainers, who forced him to submit to the Tazzmission. Following the match, Tazz helped Maven to his feet before clotheslining him, thus starting a feud between the two. After losing to Tazz via submission in a rematch the following week on SmackDown!, Maven clotheslined Tazz following the match. On the October 18 episode of SmackDown!, Maven won his first wrestling match as he defeated Tazz with assistance from Tough Enough co-winner Nidia Guenard. Following this brief feud, Maven began a feud with The Undertaker after he eliminated Undertaker from the 2002 Royal Rumble by dropkicking him from behind; Undertaker responded in turn by returning to the ring, eliminating Maven. He proceeded to hit him with a steel chair, and beating him all the way back to the concession stand area.

On the January 28, 2002, episode of Raw, Maven was awarded a title bout by WWF co-owner Ric Flair against Chris Jericho for the Undisputed WWF Championship by virtue of never actually being eliminated from the Royal Rumble, but lost after submitting to the Walls of Jericho. After the match, Maven was attacked by The Undertaker. On the February 7 episode of SmackDown!, Maven faced Undertaker for his WWF Hardcore Championship, and after interference from The Rock and his Tough Enough trainer Al Snow, Maven defeated Undertaker to win the Hardcore Championship, the first championship of his career. Their feud ended after The Undertaker defeated Maven and Al Snow in a 2-on-1 handicap match when The Undertaker made Maven submit to the Dragon Sleeper. At WrestleMania X8, Maven lost the Hardcore Championship to Spike Dudley during a match with Goldust due to the title's unique 24/7 rule, but won the title back the same night from Christian due to the same rule. The following night on Raw, Maven was attacked by a debuting Brock Lesnar during his Hardcore Championship defense against Al Snow and Spike Dudley. Maven was the tenth pick for SmackDown! in the WWF draft due to being the Hardcore Champion, but he was punished by Vince McMahon after he lost the title to Raven on the March 28 episode of SmackDown!. Maven was traded to the Raw brand on November 4, 2002, where he confronted Christopher Nowinski with his former trainer Al Snow.

Various feuds and departure (2003–2005)
Maven entered the 2003 Royal Rumble. He attempted to eliminate The Undertaker by using a dropkick like he did the previous year, but failed and was eliminated by The Undertaker. Maven fought World Heavyweight Champion Triple H on the March 10 episode of Raw, but lost. In 2004, Maven received the biggest push in his career, even gaining a victory over then-Evolution member Batista. Maven then took part in an Elimination Match at Survivor Series, teaming with Randy Orton, Chris Benoit, and Chris Jericho to face Triple H, Batista, Gene Snitsky, and Edge for the power to control Raw for one month. Maven was attacked backstage by Snitsky prior to the match, but after Benoit was eliminated, Maven arrived to join his teammates. He was eventually eliminated by Triple H. Orton was the sole survivor and as a result, he and his team had control of Raw for one month.

Maven was the first to control Raw, booking himself in a World Heavyweight Championship match against Triple H on the November 15 episode of Raw, who tried to get out of it by offering Maven a place in Evolution. He declined, but despite interference from Jericho, Benoit, and Orton, Triple H retained the title due to interference from Snitsky and Ric Flair.

On the November 29 episode of Raw, Maven competed in a battle royal to determine the number one contender for the World Heavyweight Championship, but was eliminated by Eugene. The following week on Raw, Maven faced Eugene in a singles match, which he lost by disqualification after attacking Eugene's injured knee during the match before choking him out. After the match, Maven attacked Eugene's tag team partner William Regal as Regal came to help him, thus turning heel in the process.

Following this, Maven began feuding with Shelton Benjamin over Benjamin's Intercontinental Championship, culminating at New Year's Revolution in a singles match for the title. Before the start of the match, Maven proceeded to blast the Puerto Rican crowd before Benjamin quickly defeated him in just a matter of minutes by using a roll-up. Maven then cut a promo on Benjamin, stating that the match "didn't count", and challenged him to a re-match. Benjamin accepted, and Maven was defeated in only seconds yet again following the T-Bone Suplex.

Following his feud with Benjamin, Maven formed a tag team with Simon Dean, where he acted as a dedicated user of Dean's "Simon System" brand of nutritional products. After beating jobbers for a month, at Backlash, Maven and Simon Dean competed in a Tag Team Turmoil match for the World Tag Team Championship which was won by The Hurricane and Rosey. The team came to an end when Dean was traded to the SmackDown! brand, while Maven was subsequently released by WWE on July 5, 2005. According to Huffman, Vice President of Talent Relations John Laurinaitis explained he was let go for not having progressed to the level the company was expecting, especially after having been advised to put more focus on honing his ring-work prior to shows.

In October 2023 in his YouTube video, Huffman revealed that Laurinaitis had offered him to return to WWE in 2008, saying that Huffman had been gone long enough and he will not be known as the "Tough Enough kid" anymore if he returned. Huffman declined due to the guaranteed money he was making in his Home Shopping Network role, a decision he said he regretted. In a December video, Huffman revealed that WWE was ready to offer him to be trained as an announcer at the WWE Performance Center in 2020. The deal fell through as his interview with WWE was on March 11, 2020, the day when the World Health Organization announced that COVID-19 became a pandemic.

Total Nonstop Action Wrestling (2006–2007)
On February 10, 2006, Maven joined United Wrestling Federation Live and teamed alongside Jeff Jarrett to defeat Team 3D. On March 31, 2006, Maven wrestled his first match for Total Nonstop Action Wrestling, where he and Jarrett lost to Jeff Hardy and Kip James in a tag team match. After wrestling sporadically for the UWF and on house shows for TNA throughout the year, Maven wrestled his final match on October 5, 2007, where he lost to Test in a match for Full Throttle Wrestling.

Independent circuit (2015–present)
On July 11, 2015, Maven announced his return to pro wrestling. His return match took place at Brian Myers' Create A Pro Wrestling Academy in Long Island, New York on July 19, 2015. Maven teamed with Johnny Clash to defeat The Warren Cousins (Mikey Warren and TJ Warren) in his first match since 2007.

On September 26, 2015, Maven teamed with Brian Myers in a losing effort against The Cam-An Connection (Anthony Greene and Cam Zagami).

On April 16, 2016, Maven teamed with Myers and Pat Buck in a six man tag team match losing to Aesthetic Males (Beefcake Charlie, Damian Gibbs and Mike Del) in a match for the WrestlePro promotion.

Maven would return to wrestling in 2021. He defeated Matt Cardona for the vacated FWF Tough Enough Trophy Street Fight title on October 9, 2022. On July 23, 2023, Maven won a 26-man battle royal for Dropkick Diabetes 7 in Youngstown, Ohio. On April 27, 2024, Maven entered Reality of Wrestling’s 30 Man Last Stand Rumble at number 21, eliminating Inferno Tiger before being eliminated by Quentin Winters in the same way that Maven eliminated The Undertaker in the 2002 Royal Rumble Match.

Television career
In July 2005, Huffman was featured in episode three of MTV's The 70s House where he and other WWE wrestlers competed in a game of dodge ball.

In March 2006, it was announced by VH1 that Huffman would be a participant in The Surreal Life season 6. On the first episode, he was picked by the existing castmates as the seventh and final cast member in a "15 More Minutes of Fame Reality Hunk Pageant," beating four other reality "hunks", including former American Idol contestant Corey Clark.

Subsequently, Huffman was a host for a show on BET J called BET's J List. He also appeared on the Home Shopping Network's weekday morning show, HSN Today, as its exercise and wellness expert as well as the co-host of HSN's NFL Pro Football Fan Shop. He was terminated from HSN after his arrest.

Maven also has a popular YouTube channel where he discusses his WWE career and offers insights into life as a WWE superstar.

Personal life
According to fellow professional wrestler Konnan, Huffman is his nephew. On July 29, 2021, Maven stated during an interview with Chris Van Vliet that he’s not related to Konnan.

On April 2, 2012, Huffman was arrested in Florida. Police revealed that he was doctor shopping due to an addiction to oxycodone and hydrocodone. He was released on a $2,000 bond and faced up to 5 years in prison, if convicted. On April 11, Huffman revealed that he was seeking help for his addiction and underwent WWE's former talent rehabilitation program.

After his 2012 arrest, Huffman worked as a bouncer in New York City. Maven was an account executive with the Brooklyn Nets basketball team until September 2019. On July 29, 2021, Maven stated during an interview with Chris Van Vliet that he now works in finance, specifically on Wall Street.

Beginning in July 2023, Huffman began uploading videos to YouTube, talking about his experiences within WWE. On his channel, Huffman has been transparent about his use of anabolic steroids during his time with WWE.

Championships and accomplishments

 * Pro Wrestling Illustrated
 * PWI Rookie of the Year (2002)
 * PWI ranked him #88 of the Top 500 singles wrestlers in the PWI 500 in 2003
 * World Wrestling Federation
 * WWF Hardcore Championship (3 times)
 * Tough Enough I – with Nidia Guenard

title: Maven (wrestler)


text: Category:Grammatical aspects

title: Category:Grammatical aspects


text:
User talk:PPGMD

Regarding your Mediation case
The case page has been moved to Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-10-05 Bowling for Columbine, but no mediator has been selected yet. Please feel free to use the case page to discuss possible solutions with eachother. Good luck to all the involved parties. ~Kylu ( u | t )  21:38, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Glider image
I am trying to get gliding up to featured article standard. One of my reviewers has pointed out that the copyright on is not up to current standard. (Personally I find the whole business of copyright tags really tedious.) It seems that you loaded it when Wikipedia wasn't as fussy. Is it possible to reload this image with one of the approved tags? Since the owner wanted the copyright preserved, may I suggest CopyrightedFreeUse or, if you took it, CopyrightedFreeUse-User. I guess you have been around long enough to know that basically this means saying that anyone can use it for any purpose anywhare provided the copyright are credited. Since the photo is already on the internet, where most users are less worried, this will probably make little difference. If this is a problem, I can get another image, but using this one might be quicker. Would you let me know if you can get permission ASAP because gliding has been a featured article candidate for a while. Thanks JMcC 07:51, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the new tag for your image. Yes, there are 3000 Blaniks and 750 K21's. Although the K21 is sexier, I suppose the venerable Blanik illustrates this section better.  If you would like to add your support to gliding becoming a featured article, you can put your comments on Featured_article_candidates.  Thanks again. JMcC 20:47, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Books on Navigation
> Bowditch's book and Maury's book <

Sir, you stated and I replied --

Revision as of 14:08, October 11, 2006 (edit) PPGMD (Talk | contribs) (Rv - Maury is not notable on a page about Bowditch)

← Older edit Current revision (07:58, October 12, 2006) (edit)

MAURY (Talk | contribs) (True but his WORK is and especially since Bowditch himself agreed.)

 * I see your point but I am not focused upon Matthew Maury in that area. I am looking to Bowditch and his book just as Matthew Maury did when he wrote his book that ended up as a standard textbook for midshipmen in the US Navy. I included the sources that Matthew Maury studied and included the statement that Bowditch himself made. Since the USN had considered Bowditch's book to be "as Holy Writ" (source: Williams, Frances Leigh 1969 Scientist of the Sea) to have the work replaced is an important concern that shouls, in some manner, be inculcated to that area of work regarding "Navigation" and the other topics the two books included. If Commander M F Maury's own book that replaced Bowditch's book cannot be inculcated in that area then where should it be since that area is about the Navy's use of books on navigation? The navigation area alone does not look appropriate. So, again, how do we inculcate what, in history, that is factual, to that area and or subject. I await your response.

 * Kindest regards to you,

 * --MAURY 08:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

junk category
What's wrong with an american defeat category?? --Sugarcaddy 19:36, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

The bowling matter
I personally think Kopel's website is an acceptable source for his views, since there is no evidence that it is not authentic. Otherwise I endorse what you said to me completely. Mangoe 02:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Glider dispute
Thanks for helping sort out the "dispute" on Glider. I added the 'disputed' tag rather than having the (one) user who objects adding prose indicating a dispute. FWIW, I agree with you and the FAA! --Ghewgill 18:22, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Military defeats
Please withdraw your nomination. There are many articles that would fall under this category such as Pearl Harbor, Alamo, etc. None of these battles has any POV issues as it is obvious who lost --Sugarcaddy 19:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

battle of mogadishu
Thanks for all your hard work reverting the vandalism on that page. I just wanted you to know that it's appreciated. ⇒   SWAT Jester    Ready    Aim    Fire!  03:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Bowling for Columbine
Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Bowling for Columbine. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Bowling for Columbine/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Bowling for Columbine/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Arbitration Committee Clerk, FloNight 17:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Glider & Proberts
Thanks for trying to help in Talk:Glider but I don't think Proberts is capable of admitting his pre-conceptions are wrong. I have decided that replying to him only encourages him. He now has convinced himself that there are six forces on a glider and would doubtless tie himself into further knots if he had to explain how it moved at all. If you look back at his postings, he has contradicted himself but it is not possible to point this out to him. Good luck if you decide to continue. JMcC 16:08, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Kodachrome
Regarding this edit, are you aware that a large proportion of current DSLRs (although clearly designed with a 35mm-film-SLR-style form factor) aren't full-frame 35mm? Many of them use APS or similar-sized sensors. (I don't know if you had them in mind, or you genuinely meant 35mm-frame-sized (24 x 36) digital sensors). Fourohfour 14:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Airbus A340
I just want the assessor to give reasoning and suggestions as stated in the template itself. Do you not want that too? Paul Beardsell 03:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Bowling for Columbine
This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

Schrodinger82 is banned from Bowling for Columbine and related pages and talk pages for one year. This may be repealed if the Arbitration Committee feels that his editing of other topics demonstrates significantly improved understanding of Wikipedia's core principles. Violations of the article ban shall be enforced by brief blocks, up to a week in the event of repeat violations. After 5 blocks the maximum block period shall increase to one year. Blocks and bans are to be logged at Requests for arbitration/Bowling for Columbine.

For the Arbitration Committee --Srikeit 05:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:XP PAaD.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:XP PAaD.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — —  Jigs41793  Talk 11:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

CopyrightedFreeUse template
Please do not use the CopyrightedFreeUse template. It has been deprecated since February of last year. To release all rights, use PD-release or PD-self instead. Thanks. Kaldari 22:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Please see my response to your concerns at Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_January_4. If you do not want your image released to the public domain, please describe what what type of licensing you would like this image released under. Relenquishing all rights to an image is the same as releasing it to the "public domain". If you would like to use a more restrictive license, please state that on the image description page. Using CopyrightedFreeUse is not an option as that template has been officially deprecated since February (that's why it says "This template should not be used for new images.") If you want to use a template that is extremely similar, but approved for use on new images, try NoRightsReserved. Sorry for the confusion, we are trying to clean up all the licensing templates so that confusion will be minimized in the future. Kaldari 22:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The image desciption page of Image:Blanik 3 a.jpg indicated that it was for noncommercial use only. That's a Criteria for speedy deletion. Jkelly 03:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for revising the licensing on your images. And sorry again about the trouble and confusion. Hopefully at some point in the future the image licensing on Wikipedia won't be such a mess. Kaldari 07:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Blanik image
The picture of the Blanik has vanished. From what I can deduce, with very short notice. To zap an image for a minor thing is very odd. I have replaced the Blanik with a K13 until you can reinstate it. JMcC 01:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I've restored the image per your release, and removed the noncommercial statement on the image description page. If you have such a statement on any other images you have uploaded, please remove it. Jkelly 03:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Commons Picture of the Year competition
Voting is now open at Commons to choose the finalists for Picture of the Year 2006. The voting page is at Picture of the Year/2006. All editors having at least 100 edits either here or on any Wikimedia Wiki are welcome to participate. --MichaelMaggs 07:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Outlook 2003.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Outlook 2003.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 16:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Manfrotto Group and Bogen Imaging
I see that you added the sentence "Manfrotto also owns Bogen Imaging..." to the Manfrotto Group article. I read the company profile pages on both Manfrotto's site and Bogen's site and neither says that Bogen is owned by Manfrotto. My understanding is that Bogen is the exclusive distributor of Manfrotto's products in the US, but I see no evidence of any other relationship. Do your have a reference that shows that Manfrotto is the parent of Bogen? Thanks. --rogerd 03:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * This page: PPGMD 22:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I added that as a reference to the Manfrotto Group article --rogerd 22:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bowling for columbine.jpg
Hello, PPGMD. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Bowling for columbine.jpg) was found at the following location: User:PPGMD/BFC Sandbox. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or    media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 07:05, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

List of notable glider pilots
There is a proposal to delete the List of notable glider pilots. Please register your opinion on Articles for deletion/List of notable glider pilots. I think it is an interesting list and useful when publicising the sport. JMcC 09:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Vol2-10.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Vol2-10.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Beech_1900D_Simulator.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Beech_1900D_Simulator.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 03:39, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Fsshot0037.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Fsshot0037.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:23, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:TabletPC 2004.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:TabletPC 2004.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Alexfusco5 00:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:TabletPC 2004.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:TabletPC 2004.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Sakebottle 08-11-2006.jpg
File:Sakebottle 08-11-2006.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Sakebottle 08-11-2006.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 05:57, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:PPGMD


text:
Vernon Louis Parrington

Vernon Louis Parrington (August 3, 1871 – June 16, 1929) was an American literary historian, scholar, and college football coach. His three-volume history of American letters, Main Currents in American Thought, won the Pulitzer Prize for History in 1928 and was one of the most influential books for American historians of its time. Parrington taught at the College of Emporia, the University of Oklahoma, and the University of Washington. He was also the head football coach at the College of Emporia from 1893 to 1896 and Oklahoma from 1897 to 1900. Parrington founded the American studies movement in 1927.

Early life and education
Born in Aurora, Illinois, to a Republican family that soon moved to Emporia, Kansas, Parrington attended the College of Emporia and Harvard University, receiving his B.A. from the latter institution in 1893. He did not undertake graduate study. He was appalled by the hardships of Kansas farmers in the 1890s, and began moving left. He began his career teaching English and coaching football at the College of Emporia, which awarded him a master's degree in 1895 "for work completed 'in course.'"

Career
Parrington moved to the University of Oklahoma in 1897, where he taught British literature, organized the department of English, coached the football team, played on the baseball team, edited the campus newspaper, and tried to beautify the campus. He published little and in 1908 he was fired due to pressures from religious groups who wanted all "immoral faculty" fired. From there he went on to a distinguished academic career at the University of Washington.

Parrington was the second head coach of Oklahoma Sooners football team and first University of Oklahoma faculty member to hold the position. He is credited with bringing a Harvard style of play and better organization to the football program. During his four-year stretch from 1897 to 1900, Parrington's teams played only 12 games, compiling a record of 9–2–1. Parrington's span as head football coach was the longest of any of Oklahoma's first five coaches.

Parrington moved to the University of Washington in Seattle, Washington in 1908. He recalled in 1918, "With every passing year my radicalism draws fresh nourishment from large knowledge of the evils of private capitalism. Hatred of that selfish system is become the chief passion of my life. The change from Oklahoma to Washington marks the shift with me from the older cultural interpretation of life to the later economic."

Founder of American Studies
Parrington founded the interdisciplinary American studies movement with his 1927 work Main Currents in American Thought, a three-volume history of American letters from colonial times. The movement was expanded in the 1920s and 1930s by Perry Miller, F. O. Matthiessen, and Robert Spiller. The elements that these pioneers considered revolutionary were Parrington's interdisciplinarity, consideration of cultural analysis, and a focus on the uniqueness of North America.

From the introduction to Main Currents of American Thought:

"I have undertaken to give some account of the genesis and development in American letters of certain germinal ideas that have come to be reckoned traditionally American—how they came into being here, how they were opposed, and what influence they have exerted in determining the form and scope of our characteristic ideals and institutions. In pursuing such a task, I have chosen to follow the broad path of our political, economic, and social development, rather than the narrower belletristic."

Main Currents in American Thought
The book won the 1928 Pulitzer Prize for History. Parrington defined the three phases of U.S. history as Calvinistic pessimism, romantic optimism, and mechanistic pessimism, with democratic idealism as the main driving force.

Parrington defended the doctrine of state sovereignty, and sought to disassociate it from the cause of slavery, claiming that the association of those two causes had proven "disastrous to American democracy," removing the last brake on the growth of corporate power in the Gilded Age as the federal government began shielding capitalists from local and state regulation.

For two decades Main Currents in American Thought was one of the most influential books for American historians. Reising (1989) shows the book dominated literary and cultural criticism from 1927 through the early 1950s. Crowe (1977) calls it "the "Summa Theologica of Progressive history." Progressive history was a set of related assumptions and attitudes, which inspired the first great flowering of professional American scholarship in history. These historians saw economic and geographical forces as primary, and saw ideas as merely instruments. They regarded many dominant concepts and interpretations as masks for deeper realities.

His progressive interpretation of American history was highly influential in the 1920s and 1930s and helped define modern liberalism in the United States. After receiving overwhelming praise and exerting enormous influence among intellectuals in the 1930s and 1940s, Parrington's ideas fell out of fashion before 1950. Richard Hofstadter says "the most striking thing about the reputation of V L Parrington, as we think of it today, is its abrupt decline....during the 1940s Parrington rather quickly cease to have a compelling interest for students of American literature, and in time historians too began to desert him." Hofstadter shows how Parrington's ideas came under heavy assault in the 1940s and 1950s, naming Lionel Trilling as especially influential in the attack. Harold Bloom says: "Parrington was, in turn, condemned to obscurity by critics like Lionel Trilling, who sharply criticized his literary nationalism and his insistence that literature should appeal to a popular constituency." Liberal historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., in his autobiography, says that the progressive histories of the 1920s such as Main Currents, "are little read and their authors largely forgotten." He adds that, "Main Currents impoverished the rich and complex American past. Parrington reduced Jonathan Edwards, Poe, Hawthorne, Melville, Henry James to marginal figures, practitioners of belles lettres, not illuminators of the American experience."

Death and legacy
Parrington died suddenly, on June 16, 1929, in Winchcombe, England.

Hall finds that in the 1940s and 1950s English professors dropped Parrington's approach in favor of the "New Criticism" and focused on the texts themselves rather than the social, economic, and political contexts that intrigued Parrington. Meanwhile, historians shifted to a consensus model of the past that considered Parrington's dialectical polarity between liberal and conservative to be naive. During the 1950s the book lost its popularity, and was largely ignored by scholars. While dismissing its thesis, some commentators were still captivated by Parrington's politically committed writing style, as historian David W. Levy noted:
 * Readers and scholars of the rising generation may not follow Parrington's particular judgments or point of view, but it is hard to believe that they will not still be attracted, captivated, and inspired by his sparkle, his breadth, his daring, the ardor of his political commitment.

The Parrington Oval at the University of Oklahoma and Parrington Hall at the University of Washington are named for Parrington.

Books

 *  The Connecticut Wits (1926)
 * Main Currents in American Thought (1927)
 * Sinclair Lewis, Our Own Diogenes (1927)

title: Vernon Louis Parrington


text:
The Burial Mound

The Burial Mound (Kjæmpehøjen) was Henrik Ibsen's second play and his first play to be performed. It is a one-act verse drama, written in 1850 when Ibsen was 22 years old. The play was first performed at the Christiania Theater on 26 September 1850, under Ibsen's pseudonym Brynjolf Bjarme.

The play was re-written in 1954 for a new performance at "Det Norske Theater" in Bergen, where Ibsen at the time worked as a writer, producer and director.

title: The Burial Mound


text:
User talk:Nick5000

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Follow the Simplified Ruleset
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Subpages
Please note that for Subpages you use a / and not a :, for example: User:Nick5000/Subpage Q  T C 01:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nick5000


text: User:Modargo

title: User:Modargo


text:
The Wild Duck

The Wild Duck (original Norwegian title: Vildanden) is an 1884 play by the Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen. It explores the complexities of truth and illusion through the story of a family torn apart by secrets and the intrusion of an idealistic outsider. It focuses on the Ekdal family, whose fragile peace is shattered by Gregers Werle, an idealist who insists on exposing hidden truths, leading to tragic consequences. The play was written in a realistic style, but literary scholars have pointed out the play's kinship with symbolism. It blends themes such as deception, betrayal, and the disillusionment of modern life with moments of comedy and satire, and is considered the first modern masterpiece in the genre of tragicomedy. The Wild Duck and Rosmersholm are "often to be observed in the critics' estimates vying with each other as rivals for the top place among Ibsen's works".

Themes of visibility and recognition permeate the narrative, featuring characters struggling to be seen while metaphorically and literally blind to each other's true selves, symbolized through motifs such as blindness, photography, and the wounded wild duck. Like other Ibsen plays, it is rich in references to Ibsen's family, with "Old Ekdal" widely considered one of the most famous literary portraits of the playwright's father Knud Ibsen. The character "Gregers Werle" represents the spirit of the Paus family and Upper Telemark, a broader theme that is found in many of Ibsen's plays.

Characters

 * Håkon Werle, a wholesale merchant
 * Gregers Werle, his son
 * Old Ekdal, the former business partner of Håkon Werle
 * Hjalmar Ekdal, Old Ekdal's son, a photographer
 * Gina Ekdal, Hjalmar Ekdal's wife
 * Hedvig, Hjalmar Ekdal's daughter, aged fourteen
 * Mrs. Sørby, housekeeper and fiancée of Håkon Werle
 * Relling, a doctor, lives below the Ekdals
 * Molvik, formerly a student of theology, lives below the Ekdals
 * Pettersen, servant to Håkon Werle
 * Jensen, a hired waiter
 * Mr. Balle, a dinner guest
 * Mr. Flor, a dinner guest

Plot
The first act opens with a dinner party hosted by Håkon Werle, a wealthy merchant and industrialist. The gathering is attended by his son, Gregers Werle, who has just returned to his father's home following a self-imposed exile. There, he learns the fate of a former classmate, Hjalmar Ekdal. Hjalmar married Gina, a young servant in the Werle household. The older Werle had arranged the match by providing Hjalmar with a home and profession as a photographer. Gregers, whose mother died believing that Gina and Håkon had carried on an affair, becomes enraged at the thought that his old friend is living a life built on a lie.

The remaining four acts take place in Hjalmar Ekdal's apartments. The Ekdals initially appear to be living a life of cozy domesticity. Hjalmar's father makes a living doing odd copying jobs for Werle. Hjalmar runs a portrait studio out of the apartment. Gina helps him run the business in addition to keeping house. They both dote on their daughter Hedvig. Gregers travels directly to their home from the party. While getting acquainted with the family, Hjalmar confesses that Hedvig is both his greatest joy and greatest sorrow, because she is slowly losing her eyesight. The family eagerly reveals a loft in the apartment where they keep various animals like rabbits and pigeons. Most prized is the wild duck they rescued. The duck was wounded by none other than Werle, whose eyesight is also failing. His shot winged the duck, which dived to the bottom of the lake to drown itself by clinging to the seaweed. However, Werle's dog retrieved it, and despite its wounds from the shot and the dog's teeth, the Ekdals nursed the duck back to good health.

Gregers decides to rent the spare room in the apartment. The next day, he begins to realize that there are more lies hanging over the Ekdals than Gina's affair with his father. While talking to Hedvig, she explains that Hjalmar keeps her from school because of her eyesight, but he has no time to tutor her, leaving the girl to escape into imaginary worlds through pictures she sees in books. During their conversation, Gregers hears shots in the attic, and the family explains that Old Ekdal entertains himself by hunting rabbits and birds in the loft, and Hjalmar often joins in the hunts. The activity helps Old Ekdal cling to his former life as a great hunter. Hjalmar also speaks of his 'great invention', which he never specifies. It is related to photography, and he is certain that it will enable him to pay off his debts to Werle and finally make himself and his family completely independent. In order to work on his invention, he often needs to lie down on the couch and think about it.

During a lunch with Gregers and Hjalmar's friends Relling and Molvik, Håkon arrives to try to convince Gregers to return home. Gregers insists that he cannot return and that he will tell Hjalmar the truth. Håkon is certain that Hjalmar will not be grateful for Gregers' intervention. After he leaves, Gregers asks Hjalmar to accompany him on a walk, where he reveals the truth about Gina's affair with his father.

Upon returning home, Hjalmar is aloof from his wife and daughter. He demands to handle all future photography business by himself with no help from Gina. He also demands to manage the family's finances, which Gina has traditionally done. Gina begs him to reconsider, suggesting that with all his time consumed he will not be able to work on his invention. Hedvig adds that he also will not have time to spend in the loft with the wild duck. Embittered by Gregers' news, Hjalmar bristles at the suggestion and confesses that he would like to wring the duck's neck. Indulging his mood, Hjalmar confronts Gina about her affair with Håkon. She confesses to it, but insists that she loves Hjalmar intensely.

In the midst of the argument, Gregers returns, stunned to find that the couple are not overjoyed to be living without such a lie hanging over their heads. Mrs. Sørby arrives with a letter for Hedvig, and the news that she herself is marrying Håkon. The letter announces that Håkon is paying Old Ekdal a pension of 100 crowns per month until his death. Upon his death, the allowance will be transferred to Hedvig for the remainder of her life. This news sickens Hjalmar even further, and it dawns on him that Hedvig may very well be Håkon's child. He cannot stand the sight of Hedvig any longer, and leaves the house to drink with Molvik and Relling. Gregers tries to calm the distraught Hedvig by suggesting that she sacrifice the wild duck for her father's happiness. Hedvig is desperate to win back her father's love, and agrees to have her grandfather shoot the duck in the morning.

The next day, Relling arrives to tell the family that Hjalmar has stayed with him. He is appalled at what Gregers has done, and he reveals that he long ago implanted the idea of the invention with Hjalmar as a "life-lie" to keep him from giving in to despair. The pair argue as Hjalmar returns to gather his materials to work on the invention. He is overwhelmed by the number of details involved in moving out of the apartment. Hedvig is overjoyed to see him, but Hjalmar demands to be "free from intruders" while he thinks about his next move. Crushed, Hedvig remembers the wild duck and goes to the loft with a pistol. After hearing a shot, the family assumes Old Ekdal is hunting in the loft, but Gregers knows he has shot the wild duck for Hedvig. He explains the sacrifice to Hjalmar who is deeply touched. When Old Ekdal emerges from his room, the family realizes he could not have fired the gun in the loft. They rush in to see Hedvig lying on the ground. No one can find a wound, and Relling has to examine the girl. He finds that the shot has penetrated her breastbone and she died immediately. Given the powder burns on her shirt, he determines that she shot herself. Hjalmar begs for her to live again so that she can see how much he loves her. The play ends with Relling and Gregers arguing again. Gregers insists that Hedvig did not die in vain, because her suicide unleashed a greatness within Hjalmar. Relling sneers at the notion, and insists that Hjalmar will be a drunk within a year.

Analysis and criticism
Guided by a fervent strain of idealism, Gregers endeavors to reveal the truth to Hjalmar, and thereby free him from the mendacity which surrounds him. To that end, Gregers takes up residence in the Ekdal home.

He meddles in the affairs of a strange family, producing disastrous results. Figuratively speaking, he lives in a house whose closets are full of skeletons. Over the course of the play the many secrets that lie behind the Ekdals' apparently happy home are revealed to Gregers, who insists on pursuing the absolute truth, or the "Summons of the Ideal". This family has achieved a tolerable modus vivendi by ignoring the skeletons (among the secrets: Gregers' father may have impregnated his servant Gina then married her off to Hjalmar to legitimize the child, and Hjalmar's father has been disgraced and imprisoned for a crime the elder Werle committed) and by permitting each member to live in a dreamworld of his own—the feckless father believing himself to be a great inventor, the grandfather dwelling on the past when he was a mighty sportsman, and little Hedvig, the child, centering her emotional life on an attic where a wounded wild duck leads a crippled existence in a make-believe forest.

To the idealist all this appears intolerable. To him as to other admirers of Ibsen it must seem that the whole family is leading a life "based on a lie"; all sorts of evils are "growing in the dark". The remedy is obviously to face facts, to speak frankly, to let in the light. However, in this play the revelation of the truth is not a happy event because it rips up the foundation of the Ekdal family. When the skeletons are brought out of the closet, the whole dreamworld collapses; the weak husband thinks it is his duty to leave his wife, and the little girl, after trying to sacrifice her precious duck, shoots herself with the same gun (overhearing the fatal words from Hjalmar: "Would she lay down her life for me?"). One of the famous quotes from the doctor Relling who built up and maintained the lies the family is founded on is "Deprive the average human being of his life-lie, and you rob him of his happiness."

Different translations use different words for the "life-lie". In Eva le Gallienne's translation, Relling says "I try to discover the Basic Lie – the pet illusion – that makes life possible; and then I foster it." He also says "No, no; that's what I said: the Basic Lie that makes life possible."

On a symbolical level, Gregers and Relling seem to be opposites (the virtue of truth against the "basic lie"). The two seem to have confronted each other at several cross-roads, and the play ends with an exchange, almost a wager between the two over the possibilities of Hjalmar and his future. In this respect, Relling is a cynic who is not able to think Hjalmar will ever change, while Gregers still thinks there is hope for his eventual "redemption".

Before the play starts, Gregers worked on a plant in the mountains, and is accused by Relling (present there as well), of "intriguing" with the local serfs (actually commoners). Thus, there is a social criticism in the play, where Gregers is trying to get in touch with common men, whilst his father is mingling with high society figures – a setting in which his friend Hjalmar Ekdal is a stranger, and his father, disgraced by old Werle, is ignored by his son amongst his betters. From a social rather than a symbolic point of view, Gregers is trying to root out an unhealthy system, arguing that "truth shall set you free". In that respect, Relling, plotting with old Werle, is an advocate for the same system, and initially the opposite of Gregers.

One could argue that Gregers would feel responsible for the Ekdal family and their plight, as this is an apparent consequence of his father's manipulations and schemes. Early on, he mentions that his mother obviously died from neglect, or was driven into alcoholism by her husband's actions. As old Werle points out: "you see me with the eyes of your mother". In this respect, the Ekdal family are helpless victims, and so is Hedvig.

Background

Robert Ferguson notes that The Wild Duck did not come easily to Ibsen. During the writing process, Norway was characterized by political turmoil, and from his voluntary exile in Rome, Ibsen was concerned that "the strength of an intimate, personal play such as The Wild Duck might drown in the political debate over the introduction of parliamentarism in Norway". In the spring of 1884 a young relative, Count Christopher Paus, paid Ibsen an extended visit to Rome. Jørgen Haave wrote that "Ibsen had not been this close to his own family since he left his hometown over 30 years ago;" it fact it was the only meeting between Ibsen and his family during Ibsen's decades in exile. Ibsen was eager to hear news regarding the family in Skien. Shortly after the meeting Ibsen declared that he had overcome a writer's block and that he "writes with full force." In the summer of 1884 he completed the play in Gossensaß.

As in many of Ibsen's plays, characters are based on or named after his family members to a greater or lesser extent. The character Old Ekdal is regarded by most Ibsen scholars as one of Ibsen's most important literary portraits of his father Knud Ibsen. Ibsen had previously portrayed his father as the characters "Jon Gynt" and "Daniel Hejre", where the son's judgment of his father's wastefulness was both harsh and bitter. In old Ekdal's character, however, the poet looks at his father, "the forlorn Knud Ibsen, in a conciliatory and compassionate way".

According to Ibsen scholar Jon Nygaard, the character Gregers Werle represents the spirit of the Paus family and Upper Telemark, a broader theme that is found in many of Ibsen's plays; Nygaard points out that Høydalsverket, where Werle lived for years, is an obvious reference to Upper Telemark and especially Høydalsmo; Ibsen's ancestor Paul Paus owned Høydalsmo Stave Church.

The character Hedvig is named after the Paus family, where the Hedvig name had been passed on for generations, and more specifically after Ibsen's grandmother Hedevig Paus and sister Hedvig Ibsen.

Ibsen's model for Hedvig, especially her outward appearance, was a 13-year-old Italian-resident German girl he met in Gossensaß in the summer of 1884, Martha Kopf (born 1870), daughter of the sculptor Joseph von Kopf, who lived in Rome. Ibsen wrote in a letter to his son Sigurd Ibsen: "The German sculptor, Professor Kopf from Rome, has with him a 13-year-old daughter, who is the most excellent model for Hedvig that I could wish for; she is beautiful, has a serious face and personality, and is a little greedy." There is a bust of Martha Kopf by her later husband Hugo Berwald.

Premiere
The Wild Duck premiered on 9 January 1885 at Den Nationale Scene, Bergen, Norway.

On 8 November 1894, the first English translation of The Wild Duck by William Archer was performed at the Novelty Theatre in London, England. The play's first performance in the UK was well-received, and it further contributed to Ibsen's growing reputation as a prominent playwright in English-speaking countries.

Broadway
Produced by Arthur Hopkins, the first English-language production of The Wild Duck opened on March 11, 1918, at the Plymouth Theatre in New York City. The three-act drama ran through April 1918.

 * Dodson Mitchell as Werle
 * Harry Mestayer as Gregers Werle
 * Edward Connelly as Old Ekdal
 * Lionel Atwill as Hjalmer Ekdal
 * Amy Veness as Gina Ekdal
 * Alla Nazimova as Hedvig
 * Norah Lamison as Mrs. Sorby
 * Lyster Chambers as Relling
 * St. Clair Bayfield as Molvik
 * Adelbert Knott as Graberg
 * A. O. Huhn as Pettersen
 * Frederick Gibbs as Jensen
 * Walter C. Wilson as A Flabby Gentleman
 * J. H. Wright as A Thin-Haired Gentleman
 * George Paige as A Short-Sighted Gentleman

West End
In October 2018, Almeida Theatre staged a new adaptation of the play, created by Robert Icke.

Adaptations
In 1926 the play was adapted into a German silent film, The House of Lies.

In 1963 the play was made into a motion picture by Tancred Ibsen, Henrik Ibsen's grandson.

On 7 March 1968, Irish national public television, Raidió Teilifís Éireann, broadcast a new production starring Ann Rowan, Marian Richardson, Christopher Casson, T. P. McKenna, Blánaid Irvine, Geoffrey Golden, and Maurice Good.

In 1971, a television adaptation by Max Faber, directed by Alan Bridges, was broadcast in the BBC's Play of the Month series.

In 1976, a film version in German, written and directed by Hans W. Geißendörfer, was released.

A 1983 film version in English by Tutte Lemkow, directed by Henri Safran, with the characters' names completely anglicized, starred Jeremy Irons and Liv Ullmann.

In 1989 Bo Widerberg directed a three-part Swedish TV series starring Tomas von Brömssen, Pernilla August and Stellan Skarsgård.

In 2015, an Australian film adaptation The Daughter, directed by Simon Stone, was released.

title: The Wild Duck