text:
Talk:List of city name changes

Change in jurisdiction
Many cities changed jurisdiction and thus official language, Gdansk has always been Gdansk for the Poles and Danzig for the Germans, no name change actuall occurred. see: Names of European cities in different languages. And how about Bozen-Bolzano that was simply Bozen before WWI? There are hundreds of cities that changed name in this way in Upper Silesia, Macedonia, and elsewhere. Andreas 00:03, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Greece
Many place names were officially renamed in the 1920's, especially in Macedonia and Thrace, but also in the rest of the country. This concerns mainly villages and small towns, whereas cities always had a Greek population and therefore Greek names that were used alongside Slavic, Turkish and other names.

The name changes were sanctioned by the Government and are documented in the Greek Government Gazette of the time. A n d r e a s   (T) 19:12, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Salonica certainly didn't always have a (majority) Greek population. At any rate, you should add these if you can find evidence. john k 21:46, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Original Name of York, England
"Efrawg → Eboracum/Eburacum → Eoferwic → Jorvik → York" Someone obviously doesn't understand anything about the origins of Celtic language. The name the Romans used 2000 years ago can't possibly be derived from a Modern Welsh form. The Latin name actually represents an original Brittonic 'Eburacon' Pictonon (talk) 05:27, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on List of city name changes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090310171720/http://pandektis.ekt.gr:80/dspace/handle/123456789/38101 to http://pandektis.ekt.gr/dspace/handle/123456789/38101

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 13:43, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Scope of this page
This page has a serious scope problem. It was originally created in 2004 as a list of "cities who [sic] changed their name over the course of history" – a description so vague it could lead to the addition of pretty much every place on earth that is older than a century or two (since every toponym on earth is subject to natural language change). In 2005 somebody attempted to clarify by linking the words "changed their name" to Geographical renaming, which is a different, much narrower concept. Finally, in July 2011, somebody changed the lead sentence to restrict coverge to places "whose names were officially changed at one or more points in history. It does not include gradual changes in spelling that took place over long periods of time." However, it seems nobody ever made any attempt at actually enforcing this restricted scope. Editors before and after have been happily adding names that are examples of exactly what the page is supposedly not for: trivial cases of natural phonological change. And the list has been growing on and on and on.

So, can we get a consensus here what the scope of this page is meant to be, and then actually weed out those entries that don't belong? Currently, all of the following types are included indiscriminately:
 * 1) Placenames that have simply been undergoing natural phonological change (Placentia/Piacenza)
 * 2) Placenames where natural phonological change co-occured with borrowing or calquing from one local language to another (Eboracum/York)
 * 3) Places where an official decision of change was triggered by a change in administration, where one language community imposed their own (pre-existing) name variant over that of another (Danzig/Gdansk)
 * 4) Places where an official decision of change merely concerned which of two (pre-existing) language-specific variants was to be regarded as official (Bangalore/Bengaluru)
 * 5) Places where a change affected only the rendering (e.g. Romanization method) in foreign languages, but the local name remained the same (Tientsin/Tianjin)
 * 6) Places that were actually renamed, i.e. where the same local speech community and authorities started to use an entirely new name as the result of a deliberate political decision (Leningrad/St Petersburg)

Which of these should be in, which should be out? Personally, I'm for restricting it to #6 alone. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:02, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Since nobody has been responding here, I'll go ahead and start removing at least clear instances of types #1-2. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:37, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with your proposal. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 18:02, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of city name changes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090116054250/http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/info.cfm?top=52&pg=703 to http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/info.cfm?top=52&pg=703
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130202083425/http://www.ballarat.com/history.htm to http://www.ballarat.com/history.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of city name changes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120120011844/http://sagns.dac.gov.za/PlaceNameSearch.aspx to http://sagns.dac.gov.za/PlaceNameSearch.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160106225619/http://www.ekt.gr/en/index.html to http://www.ekt.gr/en/index.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:38, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of city name changes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110723010523/http://www.sabcnews.co.za/portal/site/SABCNews/menuitem.5c4f8fe7ee929f602ea12ea1674daeb9/?vgnextoid=c1ef6134bbc54210VgnVCM10000077d4ea9bRCRD&vgnextfmt=default to http://www.sabcnews.co.za/portal/site/SABCNews/menuitem.5c4f8fe7ee929f602ea12ea1674daeb9/?vgnextoid=c1ef6134bbc54210VgnVCM10000077d4ea9bRCRD&vgnextfmt=default

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:08, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Indian listing
Currently for India there are at least three lists. The info here should be over at Renaming of cities in India. There is also a list at List of renamed places in India.

There should be only one list. Especially as India has rampant mania for renaming itself far outstripping anywhere else it would seem.

This is crazy. One list would cut down a lot on administration and make the whole process of cataloguing more efficient.

The list here, is not even in order, and it contains some items that don't appear on the other lists I mentioned. I would propose we do away with this section and set it up as a redirect elsewhere to Renaming of cities in India.

In addition we should think of formatting this list in a way that would lend itself to downloading onto a spreadsheet. Broichmore (talk) 11:45, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Vancouver was never known as Wu'muthkweyum
This article states that Vancouver, Canada changed it's name from Wu'muthkweyum. I do not think this was the case. Wu'muthkweyum is not the same as Vancouver, rather just occupied the same geographic area. Vancouver did formerly used to be called Granville, though. I will change it if no one objects Zacharycmango (talk) 17:40, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

=shamefully eurocentric= re australian placename changes we urgently need a list of all the aboriginal names that were replaced by colonial names. or are we going to complain that they were not all necessarily officially recorded in the first place? we need a hyperlink to indigenization and for context, 'see also' Africanization, Zimbabwe, etc. also the 'Australian place names changed from German names', 'geographical renaming' and 'naming disputes'. NotPedanticReally (talk) 08:42, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Move texts to Main articles if they exist
Otherwise we are creating WP:REDUNDANTFORKs. I'll do that now. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:49, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:List of city name changes


text:
John Chamberlain (sculptor)

John Angus Chamberlain (April 16, 1927 – December 21, 2011), was an American sculptor and filmmaker. At the time of his death he resided and worked on Shelter Island, New York.

Early life and career
Born in Rochester, Indiana as the son of a saloonkeeper, Chamberlain was raised mostly by his grandmother after his parents divorced. He spent much of his youth in Chicago. After serving in the U.S. Navy from 1943 to 1946, he attended the Art Institute of Chicago (1951–52) and Black Mountain College (1955–56). At Black Mountain, he studied with the poets Charles Olson, Robert Creeley, and Robert Duncan, who were teaching there that semester. The following year, he moved to New York, where for the first time he created sculpture that included scrap-metal auto parts. Over the course of his prolific career, he had studios in New York, New Mexico, Florida, Connecticut, and finally Shelter Island.

Work
Chamberlain is best known for creating sculptures from old automobiles (or parts of) that bring the Abstract Expressionist style of painting into three dimensions. He began by carving and modelling, but turned to working in metal in 1952 and welding 1953. By 1957, while staying with the painter Larry Rivers in Southampton, New York, he began to include scrap metal from cars with his sculpture Shortstop, and from 1959 onward he concentrated on sculpture built entirely of crushed automobile parts welded together. Far more than just another wrinkle on assemblage Shortstop and subsequent works completely reinvented modeling, casting, and volume, altering Marcel Duchamp's notion of the readymade and using the car as both medium and tool. In 1962 Donald Judd wrote, "The only reason Chamberlain is not the best American sculptor under forty is the incommensurability of 'the best' which makes it arbitrary to say so."

By the end of the 1960s, Chamberlain had replaced his signature materials initially with galvanized steel, then with mineral-coated Plexiglas, and finally with aluminum foil. In 1966, he began a series of sculptures made of rolled, folded, and tied urethane foam including sofas. After returning in the mid-1970s to metal as his primary material, Chamberlain limited himself to specific parts of the automobile (fenders, bumpers, or the chassis, for example). In 1973, two 300-pound metal pieces by Chamberlain were mistaken for junk and carted away as they sat outside a gallery warehouse in Chicago.

In the early 1980s, Chamberlain moved to Sarasota, Florida, where an 18,000-square-foot warehouse studio on Cocoanut Avenue enabled him to work on a much grander scale than he previously had. Many of the subsequent works Chamberlain made in Florida revert to more volumetric, compact configurations, often aligned on a vertical axis. As seen in the so-called Giraffe series (circa 1982–83), for example, linear patterns cavort over multicolored surfaces—the results of sandblasting the metal, removing the paint, and exposing the raw surface beneath. In 1984, Chamberlain created the monumental American Tableau created for display on the Seagram Building's plaza.

Assembling intricately cut, painted metal parts, Chamberlain made his first mask, A Good Head and a Half (1991), for a benefit auction for Victim Services in 1991, providing aid to victims of sexual assault. He continued to produce masks throughout the 1990s in his studio on Shelter Island, titling many of them with opus numbers.

Chamberlain also made abstract colour paintings from 1963, and from 1967 he made several films, such as "Wide Point" (1968), and "The Secret Life of Hernando Cortez" (1968), filmed in Mexico with Warhol regulars Taylor Mead and Ultra Violet. He also made the film "Black Cherry No-Cal" (1971), a short black and white experimental film about a man and a woman that meet in Central Park on a bench. In the last decade of his life, the artist expanded his work to large-format photographs.

Exhibitions
Chamberlain's first major solo show was held at the Martha Jackson Gallery, New York, in 1960. His singular method of putting discarded automobile-body parts together led to his inclusion in the paradigmatic exhibition "The Art of Assemblage", at the Museum of Modern Art in 1961, where his work was shown alongside modern masters such as Marcel Duchamp and Pablo Picasso. His works have since been exhibited around the world and have been included in the São Paulo Art Biennial (1961, 1994), the Whitney Biennial (1973, 1987) and Documenta, Kassel, Germany (1982) and he has had over 100 solo shows, including Dia Art Foundation (1983); Staatliche Kunsthalle Baden-Baden and Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden (1991); Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam (1996); and Menil Collection, Houston (2009). Chamberlain represented the United States at the Venice Biennale in 1964. He had his first retrospective in 1971, at the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York. A second retrospective was organized in 1986 by the Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles. From February 24 to May 13, 2012, shortly after the artist's death, the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum showcased "John Chamberlain: Choices", a comprehensive exhibition of the artist's work. The exhibition examined the artist's development over his sixty-year career, exploring the shifts in scale, materials, and techniques informed by the assemblage process that was central to his working method.

A special exhibition of Chamberlain's foam sculptures and photographs was on view at the Chinati Foundation in 2005–06. Chamberlain supposedly has a work of art on the moon in the Moon Museum.

Collections

 * Centre Pompidou, Paris
 * Chinati Foundation, Marfa, Texas
 * Dia:Beacon, Beacon
 * Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Moderna, Rome
 * Hyde Collection, Glens Falls, NY
 * Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Washington, D.C.
 * Kunstmuseum Winterthur, Switzerland;
 * Menil Collection, Houston
 * Minneapolis Institute of Art, Minneapolis
 * Moderna Museet, Stockholm
 * Museum Brandhorst, Munich
 * Museum Ludwig, Cologne
 * Museum Moderner Kunst, Vienna
 * Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia
 * Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, Kansas City
 * Saint Louis Art Museum, St. Louis, Missouri
 * Scottsdale Museum of Contemporary Art, Scottsdale, Arizona
 * Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York
 * Tate Modern, London
 * Vanderbilt University Fine Arts Gallery, Nashville
 * Walker Art Center; Art Department Hamline University, Minneapolis
 * Whitney Museum of American Art, New York

Quotes
Speaking about the "meaning" of his work he has said "Even if I knew, I could only know what I thought it meant."

In allusion to how he worked he has said "When a sculpture is nearly done, you can put things on and you take them off and it doesn’t make any difference…"

And, "Stopping is the key; you have to know when to stop. If I feel so glad that a sculpture is here, and I don’t care who did it, then I figure it's a good piece."

Art market
In 2011, Chamberlain's Nutcracker (1958) from the Allan Stone Estate sold at auction for $4.7 million, more than twice its high $1.8 million estimate and a record price for the artist at auction.

The John Chamberlain Estate has been represented by Xavier Hufkens and Hauser & Wirth since 2019. Prior to that it was represented by Gagosian Gallery. The artist's earlier gallery representation includes The Pace Gallery from 1987 to 2005 and Leo Castelli from 1962 to 1987.

Personal life
In 1977 Chamberlain married Lorraine Belcher in New York City on New Year's Eve. They maintained residences and studios in NYC, Essex, Connecticut, and Sarasota, FL. They divorced in 1986. John had three sons by his former wife, Elaine, who died in New Mexico after their divorce, in the early 70s. The boys, Angus, Jesse and Duncan then moved to NYC to live with their father. His middle son, Jesse, died in Sag Harbor in 1998.

In 1996, Chamberlain married art executive Prudence Fairweather, Dan Flavin's former assistant. In 2000, he built a 72-by-82-foot studio on Shelter Island.

In her memoirs, Warhol superstar Ultra Violet claims that during the 1960s she and Chamberlain shared a romantic relationship which ended when first he crashed her car, then when told that she had become pregnant by him he responded, “That’s your problem”.

Recognition

 * John Chamberlain received a John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation Fellowship in both 1966 and 1977.
 * 1990: Member of the American Academy and Institute of Arts and Letters, New York
 * 1993: Skowhegan Medal for Sculpture by the Skowhegan School of Painting and Sculpture, Maine
 * 1993: Lifetime Achievement Award in Contemporary Sculpture from the International Sculpture Center, Hamilton, NJ
 * 1997: The National Arts Club Artists Award, New York
 * 1999: Distinction in Sculpture Honor from the Sculpture Center, New York.
 * 2006: Elected into the National Academy of Design
 * 2010: Doctor of Fine Arts, honoris causa, from the College for Creative Studies, Detroit

Filmography

 * "Wide Point" (1968)
 * "The Secret Life of Hernando Cortez" (1968)
 * "Black Cherry No-Cal" (1971)

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

title: John Chamberlain (sculptor)


text:
Employee of the Month EP

Employee of the Month EP is the third EP released by Relient K. Tracks 1 and 2 are from the band's subsequent third album, Two Lefts Don't Make a Right...but Three Do. Track 6 is from the band's second album, The Anatomy of the Tongue in Cheek.

The packaging depicts each member of Relient K as an employee of the month. Matt Thiessen, Matt Hoopes, Dave Douglas and Brian Pittman for May, June, July and August accordingly. The album cover shows Aaron Marrs, a friend of the band, as the Employee of the Month for September.

Marrs was a part of the design and/or layout of many of the album covers for the band, including this EP's cover and the cover of Two Lefts Don't Make a Right...but Three Do. He passed K away in January 2005, and therefore, Relient K dedicated the Apathetic EP to him.

Track listing
All songs written by Matt Thiessen

 * 1) "Trademark" – 4:00
 * 2) "In Love With the 80s (Pink Tux to the Prom)" – 3:09
 * 3) "Wit's All Been Done Before" – 3:30
 * 4) "A Penny Loafer Saved, A Penny Loafer Earned" – 2:25
 * 5) "For the Band" – 4:23
 * 6) "Failure to Excommunicate" – 3:37

Credits

 * Matt Thiessen – lead vocals, guitar, piano
 * Matt Hoopes – guitar, backing vocals
 * Brian Pittman – bass guitar
 * Dave Douglas – drums, backing vocals

title: Employee of the Month EP


text:
Ferrari 250 GTO

The Ferrari 250 GTO is a grand tourer produced by Ferrari from 1962 to 1964 for homologation into the FIA's Group 3 Grand Touring Car category. It was powered by Ferrari's Tipo 168/62 Colombo V12 engine. The "250" in its name denotes the displacement in cubic centimeters of each of its cylinders; "GTO" stands for Gran Turismo Omologato, Italian for "Grand Touring Homologated".

Just 36 of the 250 GTOs were manufactured between 1962 and 1964. This includes 33 cars with 1962–63 bodywork (Series I) and three with 1964 (Series II) bodywork similar to the Ferrari 250 LM. Four of the older 1962–1963 (Series I) cars were updated in 1964 with Series II bodies.

When new, the 250 GTO cost $18,000 in the United States, with buyers personally approved by Enzo Ferrari and his dealer for North America, Luigi Chinetti. This model has since become highly desired by automobile collectors and sales have repeatedly set price records. The current record for world's most expensive Ferrari was set in June 2018 when a 1963 250 GTO (chassis 4153GT) was sold in a private sale for $70 million.

In 2004, Sports Car International placed the 250 GTO eighth on a list of Top Sports Cars of the 1960s, and nominated it the top sports car of all time. Similarly, Motor Trend Classic placed the 250 GTO first on a list of the "Greatest Ferraris of All Time". Popular Mechanics named it the "Hottest Car of All Time".

Design and development

The 250 GTO was designed to compete in Group 3 GT racing, where its rivals would include the Shelby Cobra, Jaguar E-Type and Aston Martin DP214. The development of the 250 GTO was headed by chief engineer Giotto Bizzarrini. Although Bizzarrini is usually credited as the designer of the 250 GTO, he and most other Ferrari engineers were fired in 1962 due to a dispute with Enzo Ferrari. Further development of the 250 GTO was overseen by new engineer Mauro Forghieri, who worked with Scaglietti to continue development of the body. The design of the car was a collaborative effort and cannot be ascribed to a single person.

The mechanical aspects of 250 GTO were relatively conservative at the time of its introduction, using engine and chassis components that were proven in earlier competition cars. The chassis of the car was based on that of the 250 GT SWB, with minor differences in frame structure and geometry to reduce weight, stiffen and lower the chassis. The car was built around a hand-welded oval tube frame, incorporating A-arm front suspension, rear live-axle with Watt's linkage, disc brakes, and Borrani wire wheels. The engine was the race-proven Tipo 168/62 Comp. 2953 cc V12 as used in the 250 Testa Rossa Le Mans winner. An all-alloy design utilizing a dry sump and six 38DCN Weber carburetors, it produced approximately 300 PS at 7500 rpm and 30 kgm at 5500 rpm of torque. The gearbox was a new 5-speed unit with Porsche-type synchromesh.

Bizzarrini focused his design effort on the car's aerodynamics in an attempt to improve top speed and stability. The body design was informed by wind tunnel testing at Pisa University as well as road and track testing with several prototypes. The resulting all-aluminium bodywork had a long, low nose, small radiator inlet, and distinctive air intakes on the nose with removable covers. Early testing resulted in the addition of a rear spoiler. The underside of the car was covered by a belly pan and had an additional spoiler underneath formed by the fuel tank cover. The aerodynamic design of the 250 GTO was a major technical innovation compared to previous Ferrari GT cars, and in line with contemporary developments by manufacturers such as Lotus. The bodies were constructed by Scaglietti, with the exception of early prototypes with bodies constructed in-house by Ferrari or by Pininfarina (in the case of s/n 2643 GT). Cars were produced in many colours, with the most famous being the bright red "Rosso Cina". The minimalist interior of a 250 GTO reflects the car's racing intentions. There is no speedometer, seats are cloth-upholstered, and neither carpeting nor a headliner was installed. Cockpit ventilation is via exterior air inlets. The exposed metal gate defining the shift pattern became a Ferrari tradition maintained in production models until replaced by steering column-mounted paddle shifters in the 2000s.

Prototypes
As the 250 GTO was heavily derived from the earlier 250 GT Berlinetta SWB, Ferrari engineers constructed two 250 GTO prototypes in 1961 by converting existing chassis of this type.

The first prototype, designated in official photos as the 1961 Ferrari 250 GT Le Mans Berlinetta Sperimentale, was constructed from chassis 2643GT, originally a 1961 250 GT SWB. It was built to competition specification, which included a reinforced chassis, a competition gearbox and a Tipo 168/61 3.0 L engine tuned to 300 bhp, equipped with dry sump lubrication and six Weber 38 DCN carburetors. Pininfarina constructed a new lightweight aluminium alloy body for this prototype, which resembled that of the 400 Super America coupe. 2643GT was entered by Scuderia Ferrari in the 1961 24 hours of Le Mans, driven by Fernand Tavano and Giancarlo Baghetti. Although they were running as high as 8th overall, they were forced to retire at 4:45 am on Sunday morning due to engine failure. During the course of the race, Ferrari engineers gathered information about the performance of the car which was used to modify and improve it, including the addition of a rear spoiler. During the Le Mans race, 2643GT suffered from high-speed instability, possibly due to the front end design. Following Le Mans, 2643GT returned to the factory, where it was used for more testing. The prototype raced again at the 1962 Daytona Continental 3 hours, where it placed 4th overall and 1st in the GT class driven by Stirling Moss. Subsequently, it was sold to N.A.R.T. and a succession of private owners.

The second prototype was also constructed from a donor car, although sources disagree on the chassis number and type. Several older sources mention the donor as a 1960 250 GT SWB, chassis 2053GT. Alternatively, other sources have claimed that a 250 GT Boano (0523GT) or a 1959 250 GT SWB (1791GT) was used as the donor car. This prototype was created entirely by the Ferrari factory's racing department under the oversight of Giotto Bizzarrini, including the bodywork. The original chassis was extensively modified, including relocation of the engine mounts lower and further back in the frame. A competition-specification engine was fitted, including six Weber 38 DCN carburetors. The bodywork seen on the second prototype in period photos was rough, unfinished aluminium. The body's ungainly appearance lead the Ferrari team to nickname it "Il Mostro" (the Monster) and the press to call it "The Anteater". Hammer marks, weld beads and bolted or riveted panels could be seen throughout, evidence of the continual modifications performed during factory testing in 1961. Although the body was crudely formed, it displayed features that would be seen in the production 250 GTO, including the overall profile of a low hood and high rear, triple front air intakes, engine bay cooling slots in the front fenders and plexiglass-covered headlights. The interior was hastily constructed and even more minimal than in the production 250 GTO, with scattered instrumentation and a bare aluminium dashboard.

The second prototype was tested at Monza in September 1961 by Stirling Moss. Results were promising, as the prototype was able to lap the circuit faster than a 250 GT SWB. However, the high speed stability issues seen during testing of the first prototype remained. Shortly after this test, construction of the first production 250 GTOs began in late 1961 with chassis 3223GT and 3387GT.

As the prototype was no longer needed for testing, the experimental body was scrapped. Regardless of the identity of the chassis, sources are in agreement that the second GTO prototype was either partially or entirely scrapped and is no longer extant in its 1961 form. If 2053GT was indeed the chassis, it was then given a 250 GT SWB style body and sold to Jacques Swaters. 2053GT crashed during the 1962 Nürburgring 1000 km and was then rebodied by Carrozzeria Sports Cars. Subsequently, 2053GT was totally destroyed in an accident at the 1964 Spa 500km.

Variants and related models
Handbuild production, updates, and repairs throughout each car's competition history result in differences both visible and invisible between individual 250 GTOs. Variance in air intake/vent configuration is common among cars. Modifications to the original bodywork were performed by the factory, Scaglietti, or other body shops, usually after crashes or according to a racing team's wishes. In 1964, Ferrari tasked Mauro Forghieri and Mike Parkes with redesigning the 250 GTO's bodywork, resulting in what became known as the GTO '64 (or Series II). Three new cars were produced to the 1964 specification, and four earlier 250 GTOs were retrofitted to it by the factory. This redesign was intended to maintain the GTO's competitiveness for one more year, as the FIA decided to not approve the 250 LM for GT-class racing during the 1964 season. The Ferrari engineers incorporated many of the 250LM's aerodynamic features into the 1964 GTO. This resulted in a visual similarity between the two models, even though the GTO does not share the 250LM's mid engine rear wheel drive layout. The factory also made minor modifications to the engine, gearbox, chassis, suspension and interior. Despite these changes, the overall performance improvement was slight. The GTO '64 still saw some racing success with factory and privateer teams, including an overall win at Daytona in 1964 by Phil Hill and Pedro Rodriguez driving for NART.

Three 330 GTO specials were made using the 250 GTO chassis and body fitted with 400 Superamerica 4.0-liter motors. Distinguished by a larger bonnet bulge, these cars were used briefly for racing and testing by Scuderia Ferrari before being sold to private customers. Some sources include these cars in the total number of 250 GTOs produced, increasing that number from 36 to 39.

The 330 LMB is sometimes considered a GTO variant. These cars used a 4.0-liter 330 motor and a modified 250 GT Lusso chassis/body. Four were produced in 1963.

Three 275 GTB/C Speciales were built in 1964/65. Despite their origins as competition versions of the 275 GTB, they are sometimes considered developments of the 250 GTO due to similarity of configuration and bodywork.

The Ferrari 250 GT SWB Breadvan was a one-off racing car designed for Scuderia Serenissima by Bizzarrini after his departure from Ferrari. It was developed specifically to compete against the then-new 250 GTO. Although based on the earlier 250 GT Berlinetta SWB, the Breadvan provided an opportunity for Bizzarrini to develop the ideas he had first explored with the GTO, such as lower and more aerodynamic bodywork, incorporation of a dry sump, and radical lightening of the entire car.

Racing

The 250 GTO's racing debut was at the 1962 12 Hours of Sebring, driven by American Phil Hill (the Formula One World Driving Champion at the time) and Belgian Olivier Gendebien. Although originally annoyed that they were driving a GT-class car instead of one of the full-race 250 Testa Rossas competing in the prototype class, the experienced pair impressed themselves (and everyone else) by finishing second overall behind the Testa Rossa of Bonnier and Scarfiotti.

Ferrari would go on to win the over 2000cc class of the FIA's International Championship for GT Manufacturers in 1962, 1963, and 1964, the 250 GTO being raced in each of those years. 250 GTOs also won the 1963 and 1964 Tour de France Automobile, marking Ferrari's nine year dominance of that race.

During the 1962-1964 racing seasons, only a few other GT-class models were consistently competitive with the 250 GTO. These were the Jaguar E-type, Aston Martin DB4 GT Zagato, DP212, DP214, and DP215, and the AC Cobras. In addition to official Scuderia Ferrari entries, many 250 GTOs were also raced by independent racing teams and private drivers. During this time it was therefore common for 250 GTO drivers to compete against other 250 GTOs. The 250 GTO was one of the last front-engined cars to remain competitive at the top level of sports car racing.

The 250 GTO gradually passed into obsolescence following the 1964 season. Scuderia Ferrari withdrew the 250 GTO from its racing activity by 1965, leaving only a few independent teams and private owners to campaign it in endurance races, rallies and hillclimbs. By 1967, the 250 GTO was almost entirely absent from international racing, with only a few rally and hillclimb results during that year. Prior to the development of the 250 GTO collector market and associated vintage racing and show events, some of the surviving 250 GTOs were used in regional races, while others were used as road cars.

Homologation
FIA regulations in 1962 required at least one hundred examples of a car to be built in order for it to be homologated for Group 3 Grand Touring Car racing. Ferrari built only 36 250 GTOs (33 of the 1962-design Series I cars and three 1964-design Series II cars, with revised bodywork). The additional three "330 GTO" cars with the four-litre 330 engine —recognizable by the large hump on the bonnet— are sometimes included in the overall production number, bringing the total to 39. It became a popular myth that when FIA inspectors showed up to confirm that 100 examples had been built, Enzo Ferrari shuffled the same cars between different locations, thus giving the impression that the full complement of 100 cars was present. In reality, no deception was required, as the production of the 250 GTO was covered by the homologation of the earlier 250 GT Berlinetta SWB model. These homologation papers were issued in 1960, but extensions were applied for and accepted multiple times between 1961 and 1964, allowing Ferrari to add modifications not covered under the original specification, including changes to the engine, transmission, and suspension. Additionally, since more than 100 bodies had been built according to the earlier 250 GT SWB specification, FIA regulations allowed a new body to be designed, leading to the development of the new 250 GTO body style. This method of homologation was not unique to Ferrari, as similar methods were used to homologate the Aston Martin DB4 GT Zagato and the Jaguar E-Type Lightweight.

Collectibility
While the GTO is now arguably the most valuable collector car in the world, it was merely a no-frills used race car in the late 1960s and very early 1970s. Many of the vehicles were offered at or acquired for four-figure (USD) sums. In contrast, restored Duesenberg Model J's often sold for about $50,000 around 1970.

From the late 1970s to the late 1980s, classic car values rose rapidly and the 250 GTO became the most valuable Ferrari model, touted as the Ferrari that most completely embodies the characteristics of the manufacturer. Prices fell substantially during the car market crash of the early 1990s, resulting in lows of $2,700,000 in September 1994 and $2,500,000 in May 1996. Prices began to climb again in the late 90s and have continued to rise through the present day. 250 GTOs have repeatedly broken records for most expensive car ever sold at auction or private sale. The current record for world's most expensive Ferrari was set in June 2018 when a 1963 250 GTO (chassis 4153GT) was sold to David MacNeil in a private sale for $70 million. On 25 August 2018, RM Sotheby's sold Greg Whitten's 250 GTO 3413GT at their Monterey auction. The final price inclusive of buyer's fee was $48,405,000, representing a new record for most expensive car ever sold at auction. The previous record was also held by a 250 GTO, 3851GT, which was sold at the Bonhams Quail Lodge auction in 2014.

Scarcity and high prices led to the creation of several replica 250 GTOs on more common Ferrari chassis. Misrepresentations of the original cars, offered for sale at full market value, have been reported.

title: Ferrari 250 GTO


text:
Cocoa butter

Cocoa butter, also called theobroma oil, is a pale-yellow, edible fat extracted from the cocoa bean (Theobroma cacao). It is used to make chocolate, as well as some ointments, toiletries, and pharmaceuticals. Cocoa butter has a cocoa flavor and aroma. Its melting point is slightly below human body temperature. It is an essential ingredient of chocolate and related confectionary products. Cocoa butter does not contain butter or other animal products; it is vegan.

Extraction and composition
For use in chocolate manufacture, the cocoa beans are first fermented and then dried. The beans are then roasted and separated from their hulls to produce cocoa nibs. About 54–58% of the cocoa nibs is cocoa butter. The cocoa nibs are ground to form cocoa mass, also known as cocoa liquor or chocolate liquor. Chocolate liquor is pressed to separate the cocoa butter from the non-fat cocoa solids. Cocoa butter is sometimes deodorized to remove strong or undesirable tastes.

Cocoa butter contains a high proportion of saturated fats also with the monounsaturated oleic acid in each triglyceride. The predominant triglycerides are POS, SOS, and POP, where P = palmitic, O = oleic, and S = stearic acid residues. Cocoa butter, unlike non-fat cocoa solids, contains only traces of caffeine and theobromine.

Adulterants and substitutes
Some food manufacturers substitute less expensive materials in place of cocoa butter. Several analytical methods exist for testing for diluted cocoa butter. Adulterated cocoa butter is indicated by its lighter color and its diminished fluorescence upon ultraviolet illumination. Unlike cocoa butter, adulterated fat tends to smear and have a higher non-saponifiable content.

Owing to the high cost of cocoa butter,  substitutes have been designed to use as alternatives. In the United States, 100% cocoa butter must be used for the product to be called chocolate. The EU requires that alternative fats not exceed 5% of the total fat content.

Substitutes include: coconut, palm, soybean, rapeseed, cottonseed and illipe oils; and shea butter, mango kernel fat and a mixture of mango kernel fat and palm oil, and PGPR.

Uses
Cocoa butter is a major ingredient in practically all types of chocolates (white chocolate, milk chocolate, and dark chocolate). This application continues to dominate the consumption of cocoa butter.

Pharmaceutical companies use cocoa butter extensively. As a nontoxic solid at room temperature that melts at body temperature, it is considered an ideal base for medicinal suppositories.

Personal care
For a fat melting around body temperature, cocoa has good stability. This quality, coupled with natural antioxidants, prevents rancidity – giving it a storage life of two to five years. The velvety texture, pleasant fragrance and emollient properties of cocoa butter have made it a popular ingredient in products for the skin, such as soaps and lotions.

Physical properties
Cocoa butter typically has a melting point of around 34–38 C, so chocolate is solid at room temperature but readily melts once inside the mouth. Cocoa butter displays polymorphism, having different crystalline forms with different melting points. Conventionally the assignment of cocoa butter crystalline forms uses the nomenclature of Wille and Lutton with forms I, II, III, IV, V, and VI having melting points 17.3 ,, respectively. The production of chocolate aims to crystallise the chocolate so that the cocoa butter is predominantly in form V, which is the most stable form that can be obtained from melted cocoa butter. (Form VI either develops in solid cocoa butter after long storage or is obtained by crystallisation from solvents). A uniform form V crystal structure will result in smooth texture, sheen, and snap. This structure is obtained by chocolate tempering. Melting the cocoa butter in chocolate and then allowing it to solidify without tempering leads to the formation of unstable polymorphic forms of cocoa butter. This can easily happen when chocolate bars are allowed to melt in a hot room and leads to the formation of white patches on the surface of the chocolate called fat bloom or chocolate bloom.

title: Cocoa butter


text:
Talk:Roman Catholic Communion

Just out of idle curiosity, where does the name "Catholic Communion" come from? As a lifelong, practicing Roman Catholic, it's not a term I've ever heard. The Church refers to herself as a whole as "the Universal [i.e., Catholic] Church," with the individual sui juris Churches having more specific names (e.g., Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, Maronite Catholic Church, &c.). Traditionally the name of the Universal Church might be considered "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church," from the Nicene Creed. I notice that reference to the "Catholic Communion" is being inserted into other articles, but I reiterate that we should first clearly establish where this name comes from. Is this a Wikipedia invention? If so, it should be clearly stated in the page. Publius 04:06, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * It is true that the whole communion calls itself the "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church" or the "Universal Church." However, so does, officially, the Eastern Orthodox churches, Anglican churches, the Coptic Church, the Lutheran churches, the Methodist churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and so forth.  See the bottom of Talk:Catholicism for more of this discussion.

 * The name is not quite a Wikipedia invention. It is used in non-Catholic theological circles to identify all the churches in full juridical communion with Rome without having to say "The Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Catholic Churches" all the time.  After seeing it used in a few instances, as well as seeing the communion of Anglican churches being titled Anglican Communion in this encyclopedia, I decided to use similar terminology in this article, as using just "Roman Catholic Church" is inadequate and the titles "Catholic Church" and "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church" are claimed by almost every Christian denomination.

 * Someone should, though, put in some of the communion's ecclesiology, which claims that it is indeed the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, although this I think is already done in Catholicism. Anyway, that's the reasoning behind the title. Pmadrid 06:29, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I understand your reasoning on establishing a separate page for the Universal Church per se as opposed to the hodgpodge page “Catholicism,” which discusses a large number of issues. Unfortunately, I cannot really agree that “Catholic Communion” is the appropriate measure; it is not a term in actual use beyond certain limited sources, and does not accurately reflect the manner in which people actually discuss the subject. Especially, I disagree with the insertion of the term into other articles as though it were an actual technical term.

 * It was and remains my contention that an entity as complex and socially/historically significant as the Catholic Church deserves its own entry in any serious encyclopedia, independent of other related subjects; it is a disservice to relegate her to merely one subject considered by the article “Catholicism.” I submit that the appropriate step is to make “Catholic Church” the article for the Universal Church and “Catholicism” the article for discussing the concept of Christian universality, with appropriate annotations made to both.

 * As noted, there are other denominations which consider themselves part of the Catholic Church but are not part of the Ecclesiastical federation over which the Pope presides. However, as the Catholic Encyclopedia once noted, most churches like to think of themselves individually as Christ’s orthodox, catholic, and apostolic church – but it is simply not workable to acknowledge each of those claims when speaking about them in general, because the names rapidly cease to clearly and specifically identify one particular church.

 * By general convention, the term “Orthodox Church” refers to the Ecclesiastical federation over which the Ecumenical Patriarch presides – but this certainly does not mean that no other churches claim to be orthodox! In just the same manner, the term “Catholic Church” is generally understood to mean the Pope’s Ecclesiastical federation. When people want to read about that church in the encyclopedia, that is what they will most probably look for.

 * A search for “Catholic Communion” on Google returns about 492,000 results; most of these results, however, refer to the Sacrament of Eucharist, not to the Universal Church. “Catholic Church” returns 4,030,000 results, some eight times more results. I move that the article on the Universal Church per se be (including both its hierarchical constitution and its doctrines) “Catholic Church” with an appropriate preface noting other usages and directing toward “Catholicism” as a discussion of Ecclesiastical universality (and limited to that -- doctrinal beliefs of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Catholic Churches belong on the Universal Church's page).

 * Note also that the articles on the individual sui juris Churches should not unnecessarily duplicate information more appropriate to the Universal Church’s article. Special attention should be given such that the Universal Church’s page does not become a quasi-duplicate of “Roman Catholic Church.” Publius 19:39, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Publius, I totally agree with you on the name being a Catholic myself. Unfortunately, I don't think given the contentious nature of this subject that changing this article's title to "Catholic Church" is going to work.  It'll be reverted in two days, and mainly because we Catholics believe that we are the Universal Church, whereas the rest of Christianity believes that we are a mere subset of that church.

 * I chose "Catholic Communion" because of that. The only reason I started inserting it into articles was that those articles linked to Roman Catholic Church when their subject matter applied to all the churches.  If you would like to rename this article as "Catholic Church," be my guest, because that's what I originally wanted to have: an article on the communion of churches led by the Pope which among its members, non-Christians, and the media is refered to as the "Catholic Church" and which you and I believe is the Universal Church.  This was my compromise to get such an article in here.

 * By the way, the idea here was for the "Whole Church" page to have the common elements and constitution of the churches and then to have specific history and info in the particular church's pages. I certainly don't want to duplicate Roman Catholic Church but at the same time the subjects in that page which apply to all the churches should go in the "Whole Church" page, i.e. doctrine, sacraments, universal government, etc.

 * But yeah, if you think that calling this article "Catholic Church" will go over with the rest of the community, have at it. I won't stop you.  Pmadrid 12:15, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Remove this article
Pmadrid (who calls himself a Catholic, but not a Roman Catholic) says that, in some non-Catholic theological circles, “Catholic communion” is used in the narrow sense he attaches to it. An inadequate reason for insisting that those who see the phrase as misleading should accept it.

Comparison with “Anglican communion” is inapt. Having no figure corresponding to the Pope, Anglican Churches do not see themselves as a single Church.

The (Roman) Catholic Church does see itself as a single Church, and also decidedly as a communion, two of the most essential aspects of its constitution. It is a communion, in a single Church, not only of particular/autonomous Churches or rites, but also of particular or local Churches (dioceses of whatever rite) and of individual Catholics (of whatever rite).

The dogmatic constitution Lumen gentium of the Second Vatican Council considers the Church (the Church of those in full communion with the successor of Peter) as a communion of particular/autonomous Churches or rites in section 13 alone; but much more often as a communion of particular or local Churches (dioceses), headed by individual bishops (sections 8, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25).

The Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on some aspects of the Church understood as communion (28 May 1992) of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, also does not see the Catholic Church (which it neither limits to the Latin Church nor extends beyond those in full communion with the Bishop of Rome) as a communion merely of particular/autonomous Churches or rites. Part II (“Universal Church and Particular Churches”) opens by considering the Church as a communion of particular or local Churches (dioceses), each of them “entrusted to a bishop“.

Section 9 of the same letter contains the following text: "One must bear in mind above all that the particular Churches, insofar as they are 'part of the one Church of Christ', have a special relationship of 'mutual interiority' with the whole, that is, with the universal Church, because in every particular Church 'the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church of Christ is truly present and active'. For this reason, 'the universal Church cannot be conceived as the sum of the particular Churches, or as a federation of particular Churches'."

It is not worthwhile commenting on the various inexact statements in the article, such as the alleged existence of “Apostolic Delegates” in the sense indicated. The article in itself is misleading. It should be removed. The subject it deals with is much more adequately and accurately treated in the article Roman Catholic Church.

Lima 04:40, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * It was never my intention to try to make the Roman Catholic Church seem to be a "federation" of churches. Initially, in the Roman Catholic Church article, that was the terminology used, and I replaced it due to your reasons illustrated above.  I have always held the belief that the particular churches are truly one church, and I agree in retrospect that this seperate article is confusing people.  Your comments and criticisms concerning the comparison with the "Anglican Communion" are well-received and a mistake on my part.

 * However, most of this article is taken directly from the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, promulgated by John Paul II in 1990, and is factual. There are "Apostolic Delegates" for sui juris churches without a metropolitan according to canon 175 of that code.  The governmental structure set forth in this article is taken almost word-for-word from that text as well.  The assumptions I make concerning the Latin Church are reasonable considering that the Pope is also Patriarch of the West and the Latin Church along with the other Patriarchal Churches have similar structures in place.

 * To igore this part of the constitution of the Roman Catholic Church is to assert a naive understanding of canon law and the ecclesiological reality of the church. The information contained in this article is necessary for an accurate depiction of Roman Catholicism.  I will not delete.  I will merge. Pmadrid 03:02, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

After considering various arguments and exploring the matter myself, I am posting a request to have this article merged with Roman Catholic Church. This article was an attempt to explain the existence of sui juris churches within the Roman Catholic Church. While there are indeed five rites (with one containing three subrites), there are under canon law twenty-four particular churches praticing these rites, and at the time of creating this article there was no page which explained this concept at all.

Now that the Roman Catholic Church article is less Latin-based, I would like to merge the contents of this article with that one, deleting this one. Using the Roman Catholic Church as the title for the church which the Pope leads in retrospect makes much more sense. However, Wikipedia could probably use an article on the Latin Rite or the Latin Catholic Church at some point in the future.

For the time being, I am going to change the title of the patriarchal Roman Church from "Roman Catholic Church" to "Latin Catholic Church" and put up a request for merging. Pmadrid 02:03, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Canon 175 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches says: “These Churches (i.e. autonomous Churches that are neither patriarchal, nor major-archiepiscopal, nor metropolitan) depend directly from the Apostolic See; as for the rights and obligations dealt with in canon 159, 3-8, these are exercised by a Hierarch whom the Apostolic See delegates.” Canon 159 concerns a Metropolitan’s relations with the eparchies (other than his own) that are linked with him. It is natural to entrust to an outside Hierarch these few limited rights and obligations of oversight; but the governance of these single-eparchy (in practice) autonomous Churches is in the hands of the Eparch himself.

An Apostolic Delegate is a quite different figure. See canon 364 of the Code of Canon Law for his functions. He differs from an Apostolic Nuncio only in not being accredited to a government and so not having the functions outlined in canon 365 of the same Code.

Lima 09:24, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Perhaps we are having translation/interpretation issues.

 * Canons 174-176 deal with the other sui juris churches. Canon 174 contemplates a Hierarch who presides over the church sui juris, viz:

 * A Church sui juris, which is neither patriarchal, major episcopal nor metropolitan is entrusted to a hierarch who presides over it according to the norm of common law and particular law established by the Roman Pontiff.

 * Canon 175 then enumerates the rights and privileges of both the church and the hierarch, viz:

 * These Churches immediately depend on the Apostolic See; however, the hierarch exercises the rights and obligations mentioned in can. 159, nn. 3--8, as a delegate of the Apostolic See.

 * That was from the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches as compiled by the Canon Law Society of America. The Latin seems to correspond, though I admit this is my first semester of Latin studies, so I am no expert.  Here's the Latin from both:

 * 174-Ecclesia sui juris, quae neque est patriarchalis nec archiepiscopalis major nec metropolitana, concreditur Hierarchae, qui ei praeest ad normam juris communis et juris particularis a Romano Pontifice statui.
 * 175-Hae Ecclesia immediate a Sede Apostolica dependent; jura et obligationes vero, de quibus in can. 159, nn. 3--8, Hierarcha a Sede Apostolica delegatus exercet.

 * We can probably guess that Hierarcha is first declension, especially considering that it is used in the dative in 174 and its form Hierarchae corresponds with first declension dative singular.  So, Hierarcha would either be ablative or nominative.  I agree with you that it is the subject of exercet, so "hierarch exercies" is an appropriate reading.  Delegatus, though, is the perfect participle of delego, delegare: "to assign".  Thus, delegatus expresses a condition of already having been assigned.  A more accurate reading of the sentence is "The Hierarch, having been assigned by the Apostolic See, exercises the rights and obligations in can. 159 nn. 3--8."

 * The point, though, is that the Hierarch is the same person in both canons. There is no mention of another hierarch, just the same one from the previous canon.  In the single eparch churches, the eparch is the delegate of the Apostolic See.  The Latin does use delegatus when refering to him, which is different from legatus.  Legati are dealt with in canons 362-367 of the Codex Juris Canonici, and I am well aware of the functions of legates and nuncios.  Perhaps his official title isn't "Apostolic Delegate," but since the code  gives no other title besides "hierarch" (which is "high priest" in Greek, aka bishop), I felt justified in using it.

 * I'm certain my reading is correct. What edition of the code are you using?  Perhaps we have translation errors somewhere.  Pmadrid 11:35, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I have only the original Latin text of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches. I made a rapid, not word-for-word, but fully accurate translation.

You are right: “Hierarcha” in canon 175 is nominative case, the subject of “exercet”. But the hierarch in question is not the one mentioned in canon 174.

Canon 175 deals with exceptions to canon 174. Note the word “verum”. The translation you are using renders this word correctly by “however”. Look up canon 159, and you will see it deals, not with the authority the hierarch of each eparchy has over his eparchy, but instead with the oversight that the metropolitan exercises over the other bishops of his autonomous Church and their eparchies. If this is not immediately obvious to you, just ask yourself how, if the hierarch of canons 174 and 175 is the same, he is to carry out a canonical visitation of the eparchy, should the eparchial bishop fail to do it (canon 159, 5).

Canon 175 provides for the appointment of another hierarch to exercise the necessary external oversight of the work of the hierarch who is in fact in charge of an unattached eparchy, as stated in canon 174 (“praeest”, presides over). This other hierarch is designated, assigned, delegated by the Apostolic See.

(By “unattached eparchy” I mean one that is dependent, not on any metropolitan, major archbishop or patriarch, but instead directly on the see of the Apostle Peter.)

By the way, I am grateful for the message Neutrality sent to me to indicate that I should use four, not five, tildes to sign and date my messages.

Lima 18:38, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I still don't see a necessary indication of a different hierarch in the canons. 174 says the hierarch presides over the church.  175 says the hierarch, who by the way is appointed by the Holy See, exercises some of the rights and duties of a metropolitan.  The perfect participle delegatus indicates this.  If it was talking about a second hierarch, instead of the hierarch alraeady indicated in 174, they would have used a different qualifier.

 * I would be inclined to say, though, that if indeed the hierarch is different from the eparchial bishop (you have a very good point about how in the world the eparch is going to do a canonical visitiation), I would still say that the hierarch is the same hierarch in 174 and 175. This would mean, though, that neither the hierarch in 174 nor the hierarch in 175 is the eparch.  I think this would be an acceptable interpretation: there's already an eparch or eparchs in that church and then the Holy See appoints a hierarch, who presides over the church sui juris, not the eparchy/eparchies, and functions as a quasi-metropolitan.

 * If what you say is correct and the eparch and hierarch are different persons, then the reading should still assume that the hierarch is the same person in 174 and 175.Pmadrid 21:08, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * By the way, the use of verum is for the previous clause, i.e. "The church depends immediately on the Apostolic See; however, the hierarch exercises metropolitical rights" as opposed to "The hierarch presides over the church ... However, the church depends on the apostolic see ..."  I would need a reason to assume that the vero in canon 175 is supposed to be differentiating that clause from 174 and not the immediately preceding clause. The semicolon makes it clear that it is for the immediately preceeding clause.  Are you seeing something that I am not? Pmadrid 21:12, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Sorry for posting three times in a row, but here's another question. Let's assume for the present that we are both partially right: the eparch and the hierarch are different persons and the hierarch in 174 and the hierarch in 175 are the same person.  What should we call the hierarch?  As I've said before, hierarch is too general to be acceptable here.  Perhaps I went too far with Apostolic Delegate.  Should I use instead "quasi-metropolitan"?  I am open to suggestions. Pmadrid 21:48, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

If “Hierarcha a Sede Apostolica delegatus” meant “a/the hierarch, who by the way is delegated by the Holy See”, the phrase “a Sede Apostolica delegatus” would be marked off with commas. As it stands, the phrase “a Sede Apostolica delegatus” defines the hierarch in question. The English translation you are using is regrettably inaccurate.

Over whom does the delegated hierarch of canon 175 exercise rights and duties of a metropolitan? Surely over the presiding hierarch of canons 174 and 176. So they are not the same person.

Consider canon 159 again. The presiding hierarch does not need delegation in order to have the right and duty to be on the watch that faith and ecclesiastical discipline are kept with care (canon 159, 4) within his own eparchy. But an outside hierarch does need to be delegated, if he is to have that right and duty for the eparchy of the presiding hierarch.

The presiding hierarch, though dependent directly on the Apostolic See (and not on any metropolitan, major archbishop or patriarch), is still subject to supervision by a delegated hierarch. Hence the “however”. (Sorry for mistyping “verum” for “vero” earlier.)

Lima 22:25, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Hey, don't worry about typing mistakes. We all do that, and I knew what you meant.

 * I see where you are coming from. I'm no longer going by the English version as I realized it was inaccurate.  However, I realize now that it still might be a bias on my attempt at translation.  Here's the text of 175 again:

 * Hae Ecclesia immediate a Sede Apostolica dependent; jura et obligationes vero, de quibus in can. 159, nn. 3--8, Hierarcha a Sede Apostolica delegatus exercet.

 * Since delegatus is a perfect participle modifying Hierarcha, then the canon could read "The hierarch having been delegated by the Apostolic See exercises ..." It also could read "a Hierarch delegated by the apostolic see exercises ..."  I saw that it could be translated the first way and thus affirmed the English translation, but in retrospect, if I had been translating the Latin first, I probably would have done it the second way like you did.  If they were trying to say that the same hierarch is delegated by the Holy See, they would have done that in 174, but they didn't.  This way makes much more sense in context.  Thanks for pointing that out and helping me realize the mistake.

 * So, what we have now is this:
 * An unattached sui juris church is headed by a hierarch.
 * An outside hierarch appointed by the Holy See does some things for the unattached sui juris church that a metropolitan would normally do.

 * I'm guessing that hierarch here is the Eastern equivalent of prelate, which would suggest that some of these sui juris churches may not be full eparchies. Is this a valid assumption?
 * I will update the article accordingly. Thanks.  Pmadrid 00:15, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I have not studied the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches enough to state the following decidedly, but I do believe that “Hierarcha” in that Code corresponds to “Ordinarius” in the (Latin) Code of Canon Law.

With regard to your query about entities that are not full eparchies, I would distinguish. There are certainly Eastern-rite particular Churches, in the local sense, that are not full eparchies: the exarchates, which doubtless hope to grow in numbers of clergy and faithful, so as to be raised to eparchies. But you ask about “sui iuris” Churches, and I do not think that an exarchate would qualify as an autonomous Church, since it is headed by a titular bishop, as are Latin-rite apostolic vicariates.

By the way, I have just discovered that I need to make a distinction about something I myself have written, probably more than once. The 1990 Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches did not in fact introduce the term “sui iuris” in reference to particular Churches in the sense you are specially interested in, since the term already appeared in the 1983 Code of Canon Law (canons 111 and 112). What the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches introduced was the term “Ecclesia sui iuris”, without further qualification; the Code of Canon Law had “Ecclesia ritualis sui iuris”. Some Wikipedia articles may need correction on this point.

Lima 06:37, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

A thought has just struck me: shouldn’t you merge this article, not with the article on the Roman Catholic Church, but with the(?) article on the Eastern Catholic Churches, since that’s the topic it concentrates on?

Lima 06:49, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Good point. The majority of this article would go either in sui juris or Eastern Rite or both, as we probably don't want to bog down Roman Catholic Church. However, as it is an important part of the juridical structure of the RCC, I'd at least mention it in the RCC article.  To what extent I'd include material from here, I am not certain.  If I go about putting the majority of the governmental content in Eastern Rite, then I would in turn put the specific Latin Rite governmental structure in Latin Rite, keeping the RCC article confined to the supreme government.  Pmadrid 00:34, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure if the concepts ecclesia sui juris and ecclesia ritualis sui juris are different. I know there is a difference between sui juris and Rite: while both are particular churches Rite has no juridical structure save that Rites have component sui juris churches.

 * Making Rite equivalent to ecclesia ritualis sui juris, however, is a problem: it would imply that a Rite is a juridic person since it would thus have been expressly recognized as a sui juris church (can 27 CCEO) and sui juris churches have automatic personality (can 921 part 2 CCEO & canon 114 CJC). However, there is no juridic structure designated in either code for any of the Rites as a whole (save for the Latin Rite Church).  Could I sue ecclesially the Church of the Byzantine Rite?  If so, who would represent them, the Melkite Patriarch?  Who are the legislators of the Byzantine Rite, and how do they assemble and promulgate laws?  This is more problematic with the Church of the Antiochean Rite.  If I could sue it, which of the patriarchs of Antioch would represent the Rite as a whole?

 * I think since Rite is treated as a tradition canonically (can 28 CCEO), Rites as aggregates of persons are not the subject of rights and duties under canon law, just the tradition is (sui juris churches have a duty to preserve and follow their Rite (can. 39 & 40 CCEO)). Perhaps a Rite is more akin to a moral person like the Church as a whole and the Holy See (can. 113 CJC, but perhaps not of "divine origin" like those are).  Thus, I would guess ecclesia ritualis sui juris is just another way of saying ecclesia sui juris, with perhaps emphasizing the transfer between Rites which that passage in the CJC contemplates. Pmadrid 03:00, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

“Ecclesia sui iuris”, “Ecclesia ritualis sui iuris”, “particular Church” (in this sense), “rite” (in this sense) are all names for the same reality. Before the Second Vatican Council, the only term in common use was “rite”; the Council used “particular Church” not only of local Churches, but also of rites (in this sense); the 1983 Code of Canon Law avoided ambiguity by coming up with the term “Ecclesia ritualis sui iuris” to refer to what the 1917 Code called “ritus” (canon 98 of that earlier Code); then the 1990 Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches decided that “Ecclesia sui iuris” was sufficient.

The word “rite” can, of course, refer to more than one reality. “The Latin rite” can mean the Latin Catholic Church, or it can mean one of the liturgical rites of the Latin Catholic Church. So too, “the Ukrainian rite” can mean the Ukrainian Catholic Church, or it can mean the form of the Byzantine (liturgical) rite used by the Ukrainian Catholic Church. On the other hand, “the Byzantine rite” (singular) is univocal: it can only mean a liturgical rite, since there is no such thing as the Byzantine autonomous Church, autonomous ritual Church, particular Church (as distinct from local Churches), or whatever other term people may come up with for that kind of entity.

Law texts must endeavour to avoid ambiguity. That is why the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches chose to use the term “ritus” in only one sense (extending it outside the liturgical field), and for the other sense to employ the term “Ecclesia sui iuris”. That does not mean that the word “rite” may never be used, outside that Code, in this latter sense, a sense in which it has in fact been used by, for instance, the 1917 Code of Canon Law and the Second Vatican Council.

Lima 21:11, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Roman Catholic Communion


text:
Talk:Ray Ryan (businessman)

Untitled
See for articles from the Evansville Courier & Press which appear to be relevant to the subject of this article and which could be the basis for expanding it beyond this stub.

I'm not comfortable with a 'rumors' section, especially when they are unreferenced. RJFJR (talk) 16:59, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Rumors about Ryan
Move here from article space as unreferenced RJFJR (talk) 17:57, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

 * According to John Scarne, Ryan cheated Nick The Greek out of over $1 Million in a gin rummy game involving a radio cue hidden underneath his bathing suit in 1951. When some of Nick's friends tried to get the money back, he successfully sued them for extortion, resulting in 10 year prison sentences for those involved.  It is said because of this loss, Nick The Greek became broke and his career took a turn for the worst.
 * Some have said that Mr. Ryan initiated the Palm Springs golf tournament now known as the Bob Hope Chrysler Classic.
 * It has also been said that Ryan put up the money for the first Dean Martin/Jerry Lewis movie.
 * Ray also developed the property and marina at Salton Sea near Palm Springs.
 * Ray Ryan was also involved in the early development of Las Vegas with involvement in early casinos often controlled by the Mafia. At one time he was the top gin rummy player in Vegas and often won and lost large amounts at a time (not just at the table, but on the golf course).
 * Book in the making with a national publisher on Ray.
 * Ray and wife Helen were close friends with the Martins and the Lewis'as well as many other very well known stars and stayed close in touch until Helen's death a few years ago. Palm Springs basically happened because of Ray and his fellow investors, thus the stars he knew began building their "get away" homes there. Ray was also invested heavily in many film endeavors and prize fighting.

title: Talk:Ray Ryan (businessman)


text:
Talk:Man-of-war

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 17 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jbasel1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Disputed 1
The revised phrasing implies that "man of war" has/had a rather precise definition, which is news to me. What's the authority for that? Stan 04:10, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I have seen the term "man of war" used many times to refer to any fighting naval vessel. For example, Daniel V. Gallery and several others call the German submarine, U-505, a "man-of-war". Websters' Dictionary agrees. I changed this page to reflect that but Gdr removed my addition. I have revised it again, I hope in a way that is accepable to all. Rsduhamel 08:29, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Disputed 2: Man of War vs. Galleon, etc
This article claims that the Galleon evolved out of the Man of War by way of the carrack, while the Galleon article claims that the Man of War succeeded the Galleon as the standard warship. Which is it?

The "man o' war" is a very general term. There's not one ship type that can be precisely labeled as the man of war. If it's a purpose-built warship, it's a man of war. 152.23.196.162 00:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Plural Please?
Please, does anyone know the plural form of the word, man of war? If so, pray tell.

Men of War. Just like Commanders in Chief. And other terms like that. =) 152.23.196.162 05:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

(Organism) Man of War
So the Man of War, e.g. Portuguese man of war is named after the this naval vessel? May someone please help me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gouki88 (talk • contribs) 13:04, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Categories
The article states: "As two more centuries passed, the man-of-war became even more popular. It became so popular that it was separated it into eight classes, the battleship, the 6th-rate, The 5th-rate, the 4th-rate or Monitor, The 3rd-rate, 2nd-rate, 1st-rate, and the ship of the line. The frigate and man-of-war are the same except that the man-o'-war is slightly larger."

I'm pretty sure this is wrong. Everything from a 4th-rate to a 1st-rate was considered a ship of the line, and 5th-rates and 6th-rates were considered frigates. Battleships are just big warships. I am referring to the Ship of the Line article and the Battleship article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.87.229.138 (talk) 18:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Yeah, that's pretty much nonsense. I've replaced most of the text with a See also link to the Royal Navy rating system. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

yeah it is nonsense. besides, there was only 6 classes, not eight, plus the frigate only has two decks. the 5th a d 6th rates were mainly used for war purposes. the frig and galleon are around 3rd rate, but there are the war version's which are rates 5 and 6.

Are sailors also "men-of-war"?
Does man-of-war also refer to the sailors of naval ships? I ask this because I had read Master and Commander recently, and I think it had mentioned the sophies as men-of war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.158.1.218 (talk) 03:06, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, since O'Brian's Aubreyad is technically fiction, we can't use it as a source for this article, BUT he was generally quite careful about these things, so if he says it, it's probably true. --Badger151 (talk) 18:25, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Yes, a sailor was occasionally (according to the Oxford English Dictionary) called a man of war.
 * The OED provides two sources that document the usage—from 1599 and 1884.
 * "Hee is first broken to the Sea in the Herring mans Skiff ... once hartned thus, hee will needs be a man of warre ... and weare a siluer Whistle."
 * — Thomas Nashe, Nashe's Lenten Stuffe, (London: 1599), p. 27. [Page 19 of Nina Green's 2001 modern spelling edition (linked).]
 * "My father ... led the way to the library, with the skipper following. ... When the man-o-war rejoined us, the first thing he did was ..."
 * — Harry Collingwood (nom de plume of William Joseph Cosens Lancaster), Under the Meteor Flag, (London: Sampson Low, Marston & Co. Ltd., 1884), 24:258. [Chapter 24, page 322 of the BiblioBazaar 2008 edition (linked).]
 * Hope that helps clear things up. Friedrich Müller (talk) 03:39, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

NOTE: French WP has an incredible site to borrow from
The French WP has a great entry on Man O War. --Smilo Don (talk) 03:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Contradiction
The intro states the man-of-war was developed in the Mediterranean in the 15th century, however, the section Development states, "The man-of-war was developed in England in the mid-16th century." Also of note, the article Warship has that the man-of-war developed in the 16th century, but no country is given.

This is a point-of-fact contradiction which needs to be resolved. It would be greatly appreciated if those who are in the know would either discuss the issue here and come to consensus, or fix the error and then remove the contradiction tag. Thanks so much Kjnelan (talk) 17:48, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

 * I actually live just moments away from the college where I work so I went to the library and found: Seamanship in the Age of Sail: An Account of the Shiphandling of the Sailing Man-Of-War 1600-1860, Based on Contemporary Sources by John H. Harland (Hardcover - Aug 1984), which states it was British developed in the 1600's. I will change the article to reflect this information. Kjnelan (talk) 18:09, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

 * I beg to differ. In British context Harland is mostly right that the (British) class of "Man-Of-War" ships was developed in Britain in the 1600's. However in the international context this term was used almost a century before to designate Portuguese patrol vessels. From what I gather, the term was more that anything else a synonym for today's word "warship". (ihosama) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.151.217.133 (talk) 00:05, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

 * This looks like it needs an authoritative source on English language usage.
 * From the Oxford English Dictionary:
 * Man-of-war (mæ:nəvwōˈɹ). Pl. men-of-war. 2. A vessel equipped for warfare; an armed ship belonging to the recognized navy of a country.
 * "As he cam to Callez wardd ij men of warre of Frensche mett wt hym and fawght with hym."
 * — Wylliam Cely [1484], The Cely Papers, (New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1900), p. 144.
 * "In sight of the King of Spaynes men of warre, which were twenty two sayles."
 * — Edward Glenham [1594], "Newes from the Levane Seas", in John Payne Collier, Illustrations of Old English Literature, 2 volumes, (London: 1866), 1:4.
 * "It [Tangier] will always, be Serviceable, as well for our Men of War to resort to ... as for the protection of our Merchant-men."
 * — [1680], Debates in Parliament, (1681), 120. [I've been unable to reproduce the OED's source for this.]
 * Clearly, English sources refer to French and Spanish men-of-war as early as the 15th and 16th centuries.
 * Friedrich Müller (talk) 04:32, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Delete Man-of-war article
It is clear from the discussions above (see 'Contradiction' and 'Disputed 2:Man of War v Galleon, etc' above) that the term man-of-war is simply an obsolete expression for "warship" and does not refer to a specific warship design. This article is therefore another "Warship" article under a dated label. The term "man-of-war" belongs in a dictionary and therefore this article breaks the WP:not a dictionary rule. This article should be deleted.Provocateur (talk) 00:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * (also noted at WikiProject Ships) I would agree. A quick usage "reference grab" just in U.S. terms at NHHC reveals A SHORT ACCOUNT OF THE Several General Duties of Officers, OF SHIPS OF WAR; FROM AN ADMIRAL, DOWN TO THE MOST INFERIOR OFFICER in which "Thus a first-rate man of war has twenty-four [midshipmen], and the inferior rates a suitable number in proportion" in context of "ships of war" (warships). In The Reestablishment of the Navy, 1787-1801 with "on 27 April 1798 Congress authorized the President to acquire, arm, and man no more than twelve vessels, of up to twenty-two guns each. Under the terms of this act several vessels were purchased and converted into ships of war. One of these, the Ganges, a Philadelphia-built merchant ship, became "the first man-of-war to fit out and get to sea" we see the same mixed use. It has been a while since I really looked at the history of the term but my recollection is that it originated in context of a "king's" (national) ship, as opposed to a private ship, equipped and intended purely for combat, as opposed to the also common armed merchant ships. If I recall correctly, in English it was generally reserved in technical use to rated ships, "sloop of war" for example used for the small unrated sloops, though in popular usage it might be applied to any warship. If someone up on Wiki procedure proposes a merge, with a useful paragraph noting the archaic usage, I would support the term being redirected. Palmeira (talk) 12:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Man-of-war


text:
Two Lefts Don't Make a Right...but Three Do

Two Lefts Don't Make a Right...but Three Do (often called Two Lefts) is the third full-length album released by Christian rock band Relient K. The album was nominated for a Grammy for Best Rock Gospel Album, but the award that year ended up being won by Worldwide by Audio Adrenaline. This album was initially released with four different covers, each one depicting a separate car wreck. In November 2003, a fifth cover was released, which showed all four cars in a junkyard. That is now the only version of the CD still in print, although a very small amount the four original covers can still be found. It was also released as a combo pack with Deck the Halls, Bruise Your Hand for a few years around Christmas time. The album peaked at No. 38 on the Billboard 200.

Two Lefts Don't Make a Right...but Three Do was certified Gold on March 21, 2005 by the RIAA for sales in excess of 500,000 in the United States. It has currently sold around 518,000 in the United States. A Gold Edition of this album was released on October 31, 2006. The idea for a Gold Edition of this album came from Gotee Records, who also released a Gold Edition of The Anatomy of the Tongue in Cheek on the same day. The Gold Edition of this album has remixed and remastered sound similar to Mmhmm (the album was remixed by the same people who mixed Mmhmm) and it is also enhanced with a music video for the song "Chap Stick, Chapped Lips, and Things Like Chemistry".

Singles
All singles released for Christian radio.

 * "Chap Stick, Chapped Lips, and Things Like Chemistry"
 * "Forward Motion"
 * "In Love With the 80s (Pink Tux to the Prom)"
 * "I Am Understood?"
 * "Getting Into You"

Personnel
Relient K
 * Matt Thiessen – lead vocals, guitars, acoustic piano
 * Matt Hoopes – guitars, backing vocals
 * Brian Pittman – bass guitar
 * Dave Douglas – drums, backing vocals

Additional musicians
 * DJ Manuel – programming (11)
 * Rob Roy Fingerhead – occasional guitars, backing vocals
 * Ryan Watts – additional vocals (4, 10, 14)
 * Adam Grimm, Jake Gridgeway, and Ryan Nutter – "Kids on the Street" (12)

Production

 * Joey Elwood – executive producer
 * Toby McKeehan – executive producer
 * Mark Lee Townsend – producer, recording
 * Matt Thiessen – co-producer
 * F. Reid Shippen – mixing at Recording Arts (Nashville, Tennessee)
 * Dan Shike – mix assistant
 * Randy LeRoy – mastering at Final Stage Mastering (Nashville, Tennessee)
 * Grant Harrison – A&R
 * Eddy Boer – creative direction
 * Aaron Marrs – design, layout
 * Todd Francis – cover illustration
 * David Johnson – photography


text:
Look Forward to Failure

Look Forward to Failure is an EP released on November 10, 1998 by The Ataris on Fat Wreck Chords. This was the first album released to feature fan favorite "San Dimas High School Football Rules", a song that would later appear on Blue Skies, Broken Hearts...Next 12 Exits. The band also intended on putting the song "That Special Girl" on Blue Skies, Broken Hearts as well but it didn't make the cut. The song features Mark Hoppus of Blink-182 on backing vocals. The version of "My Hotel Year" that appears on this EP is the electric version and contains an extra verse at the end. The version that ended up on Blue Skies was acoustic and shortened.

Band members

 * Kris Roe – vocals, guitar
 * Patrick Riley – guitar
 * Michael Davenport – bass
 * Chris Knapp – drums

Additional personnel

 * Backup vocals were provided by Mark Hoppus and Chad Price.
 * Tracks 2, 3, 4, and 6 were recorded and mixed at The Blasting Room in Fort Collins, CO on September 14–18, 1998. They were produced and engineered by Bill Stevenson and Stephen Egerton and mixed by Jason Livermore.
 * Tracks 1 and 5 were recorded at Orange Whip Studios in Santa Barbara, CA. They were produced by Joey Cape and engineered by Angus Cooke.

title: Look Forward to Failure