text:
Talk:Books of Chronicles

Evanh2008 Revert - Singular and Plural
Identified as vandalism? That was a little harsh. As I mentioned in the edit summary, throughout the article, Chronicles is repeatedly referred to in the singular, thus (also mentioned in the edit summary) there is probably a need to discuss the plural vs singular question in Talk (I guess this thread will do). If we change the (grammatical) number in the lede, we would need to go through the entire article and change the number throughout. This (reading throughout the article) being needed has been demonstrated by both your initial edit, changing that lede sentence, as well as your revert to my edit (identified as vandalism??? that still stings). In both cases, you changed "it" to "they" but kept the verb "appears" in singular form (id est "they appears" — an ungrammatical construction). Even further, with both that first edit and with all your subsequent revert and edits, you left the word "book" — in the very same sentence — in the singular. Thus, a simple "it"»"they" mass change would not be sufficient. Thus, part of the reason why I edited it back after your initial edit, and part of the reason for the edit summary I gave for it. — al-Shimoni  (talk) 23:38, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The "vandalism" revert was a totally accidental application of Twinkle's rollback function; I reverted my own rollback and did it manually to make that clear. I never thought your edit was any type of vandalism whatsoever, so let me offer you my apologies for that. My preferred solution would be to refer to Chronicles in the singular throughout the article, if possible. I propose we make those changes to the article and then move to Book of Chronicles rather than the current title. Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 23:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * "Book of Chronicles" would work well, I would support that. The article already mentions that it is found in both a single book form (notably among Jewish versions) and as a double book form (with Christian versions, but not always), so changing the body of the article wouldn't be much of an issue. However, this would also suggest that Books of Samuel and Books of Kings may want to do likewise; I notice the use of singular in those articles, as well, and are found in single book forms. Each of those, as well as this one, would each need some kind of consensus on a move (possibly not an easy thing, some folks are passionate about the form they grew up with). :) — al-Shimoni  (talk) 00:23, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Samuel and Kings would certainly need to be moved as well, if we establish a precedent here. If it's an issue of whether the singular (one-book) or plural (two-book) form is used most often, the standard Christian two-book division probably wins out there. However, as far as I know, the practice of dividing them into two books each originated with the LXX, so historically, the one-book form is more true to how the text originated. I'll have to do some reading on titling procedures in cases like this. If you're open to getting one or more move discussions rolling, don't feel you have to wait for me. :) Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 08:53, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I am in favor of the singular. If a book is too large and we have to divide it into two parts, these are called "Title" part 1 and "Title" part 2. So the title is still "Title". Debresser (talk) 10:28, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Support merge move though it probably should have been done through WP:RM. Book of Kings needs to be moved to Book of Kings (disambiguation). But the singular designation is the most common approach in scholarship and few people would say "Books of Samuel" anyway - "1 and 2 Samuel" is more common. StAnselm (talk) 02:15, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * For Evan2008 or Imeriki al-Shimoni. Please continue, which English language Bible/Tanakh translations/versions have only 1 book of Chronicles? In ictu oculi (talk) 17:42, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move - jc37 12:22, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

– These are all the most commonly-used names in the majority of the available scholarly works. In addition, the standard of dividing the works into two parts each derives from a Hellenist tradition (originating with the Septuagint) which post-dates the original Hebrew manuscripts by multiple centuries. relisted --Mike Cline (talk) 15:27, 7 May 2012 (UTC) Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 05:49, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Books of Chronicles → Book of Chronicles
 * Books of Samuel → Book of Samuel
 * Books of Kings → Book of Kings
 * Book of Kings → Book of Kings (disambiguation)

 * Comment - I can find no section of policy which addresses the naming of articles on religious texts directly, but I believe this section and this one are relevant. Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 05:50, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Support move, as above. The singular designation is the most common approach in scholarship and few people would say "Books of Samuel" anyway - "1 and 2 Samuel" is more common. StAnselm (talk) 08:03, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose - the comment about the Septuagint is true, but then the Septuagint has been more influential down the centuries and till today than Hebrew. And the JPS Tanakh divides 1 Chronicles 2 Chronicles. In GS usage "Book of Samuel" is still the minority usage, even though in recent GS since 1990 the gap is narrowing:
 * "Books of Samuel" 1,630,000 GS, 2,810 since 1990
 * "Book of Samuel" -"First Book" -"Second Book" 2,140 GS, 1,260 since 1990
 * GS searches on the others will show the same result. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:11, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * As St Anselm says the majority usage will be plural "First and Second x" "I and II x". On a slightly less comfortable note I see that at least one of the article ledes Books of Chronicles has been rigged in preparation for the move (in an innocent way, since Evanh2008 has honestly and openly noted it in edit summary). We don't normally do that. Or at least a lede change is let sit for days and discussed before a RM. This basically makes this RM null in my view. Even if GS weren't against it, this isn't the way to do an RM. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * As for scholarly usage SBLHOS has "1-2 Samuel" etc. http://wwwlibe.ces.org.tw/library/download/The%20SBL%20Handbook%20of%20style.pdf and Neusner refers to "Books of Chronicles" "..Samuel" plural. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Just a comment regarding the lede change -- I had done that before I realized that the page Book of Chronicles already existed as a redirect, and as a non-admin I wouldn't have been able to move this page there myself. I had to meant to revert that edit once I noticed, but it was late in the night and it slipped my mind. I'll do some more GS research (including at Books, which WP:Article titles mentions) and get back with you. Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 22:34, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Might as well close this one, I guess. The new titles are still the most accurate, historically speaking, but my comment on them being the most common in scholarly works may have been premature. Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 19:41, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem. If you can come up with an English Bible that has a single "Book of Samuel" etc. be interested to see in section above. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:56, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Try The Books of the Bible. Andrewa (talk) 16:01, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * One of the reasons why Wikipedia does not support the usage of Google search result popularity is because they are extremely error prone because context is not taken into account. For example, your search for " " would include any page that contains sentences such as "The books of samuel and kings are considered part of the deuteronomistic history." as well as the sentence "The books of Samuel Harris have challenged the faith of some of these Bible believers." (neither of these sentences help in answering the popularity of "Books of Samuel" as related to the question at hand). A problem with your search for " " with " [...]" and "  [...]" usage excluded from results eliminates all pages which use both the phrase "book of samuel" (used on its own) with parallel usage of "first book of samuel", but the question of using "first" and "second" designation isn't what is in question, but the very usage of "book of samuel" with or without the "first" and "second" usage. Such a popularity test can't be google-searched with Google's current search tools. Google is a very blunt tool, one that wasn't designed for a precise usage popularity test, thus a reason why Wikipedia has shunned its usage. Other reasons can be found at WP:GNUM. The question is not whether the book is more commonly divided into two books, but what the title of the two books is the most usual usage. Many sources use "Book of Samuel" as the title, even when divided into two books, and while at the same time also using the terms "First Book of Samuel" and "Second Book of Samuel" (which is mandated by the old christian book:chapter:verse system created for locating particular verses, even in Jewish publications which consider it a single, undivided book). I would assert that "Book of Samuel" is the most common usage (at least in scholarly publications which is the 'world' I am most involved in) for both divisions. It may be divided in two for mapping purposes, but scholars tend to view the work as a singular (ignoring, of course, any redactional process in its original composition). The Jewish view is definitely in the "Book" category. It seems Christian view is that way also since I have rarely — but occasionally — seen "Books" being used (but I could be wrong on this point). Apologies for the long comment. —  al-Shimoni  (talk) 07:40, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * This isn't the case - conduct the search in Google Scholar and you will see that usage of "Book of Samuel" (singular) does not outweigh "First Samuel" + "Second Samuel" + "Books of Samuel" (plural variations). Because there are so many plural variation vs only one singular variation each of the various plural mentions needs to be toted up. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:52, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I was away for a few days; sorry. Anyway, as far as Bibles go, just about any Jewish translation you can find is going to list the three/six books as three volumes, and not divide them into two each. They will have chapter and verse numbers adjusted for reference, but in the table of contents they will be listed as a single work; the JPS and NJPS versions in particular, I believe . As Imeriki said, scholars consider the works as individual books, not pairs of books. The GS evidence isn't evidence at all, as policy states they are to be avoided in determining common names. I would refer you again to our policy on not writing articles from a religious majority viewpoint. Modern Christian translations consider the works as pairs, but that has no bearing on the fact that the books were originally (barring redaction, as mentioned above) individual works, and that scholars consider them as such. I've said my part, I guess. I wish we could get some more outside input on this one. Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 01:21, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Evan2008
 * You say "I believe" but I'm sorry if you check Amazon you'll see that's not the case:
 * Oxford New Jewish Publication Society Jewish Study Bible 2004 has 1st and 2nd Samuel listed separately 0195297512
 * NJPS 1985 has 1st and 2nd Samuel listed separately 0827603665
 * JPS 1917 has 1st and 2nd Samuel listed separately
 * Even the Stone Chumash lists 1 and 2 Samuel separately 0899060145
 * As regards what Imeriki says, it'd be fair if it was correct but it's incorrect. As I said please do a Google Scholar (not Google Books) search for yourself. Delimit since 1980, add in all the various plural variations and compare with the single "Book of Kings" "Book of Samuel" "Book of Chronicles". In ictu oculi (talk) 22:52, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Support - As mentioned in above section — al-Shimoni  (talk) 06:47, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Support all. Agree that these are now the more commonly used titles in reliable sources. The current titles are traditional but old-fashioned. Andrewa (talk) 15:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Except that they aren't, the information presented above by Evan2008 per "I believe" is incorrect. See below In ictu oculi (talk) 06:25, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Except they are, see below. Andrewa (talk) 03:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I really cannot see turning a plural title into a singular title for any Biblical work. If the plural title is used by any religious groups, Jewish, Christian, Muslim maybe, or even some, um, original NRMs, it is probably a reasonable idea to keep the plural title, to avoid being seen as being non-neutral to the group that does divide up the works in question. Also, honestly, except perhaps for some books, there is probably enough reasonably includable content for each separate book to give each potential subarticle a separate article. With all the information out there on these topics, and the occasionally wide variety of opinions on them, I don't see cause to not only keep them in an article with a singular title, but I could even see spinning out child articles on the various individually-named books, if there is sufficient content for such as I am all but certain there is. John Carter (talk) 21:33, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - interesting suggestion on having separate articles on, for example, 1 Kings and 2 Kings. But this article is about the whole work (or works). Andrewa (talk) 20:36, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Relist? unless this is simply closed as no consensus this really hasn't had enough input for a move. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:11, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and requested closure for these RMs. I've been around long enough to know when I've been beat, and I see no constructive purpose to continue this discussion anymore. Good discussion all around. : ) Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 18:19, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Comment, English versions, SBL, Google Scholar
Hi Evan2008 No evidence has been produced that any English Bible version exists, Christian or Jewish (or even a Messianic Jewish Bible version) which doesn't follow the standard "First Samuel" "First Kings" distinction, and the same usage is still current in mainstream scholarly texts and SBS style:

I'm sorry but this is a very major rename on WP. Even if there are twenty supports here it shouldn't be done on the basis of users agreeing with claims made in the proposal which are demonstrably incorrect by simple checks on Amazon.com and Google Scholar. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:52, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No need to be sorry, but have you read this, and can you disprove Imeriki's statement about the unreliability of Google results when it comes to establishing the common names of the books in question? If you can't do that, then we will go by consensus regardless of what you happen to think is true.
 * Here are Google Scholar results for "Book of Kings", excluding individual terms (note the references to "Persian Book of kings" and "A king's book of kings". As near as I can tell, it's next to impossible to remove the results pertaining to the extra-biblical texts without otherwise compromising the results. If I'm entering these wrong, let me know.
 * I'm more than open to being proven wrong; you successfully proved me wrong regarding the NJPS (though I have yet to determine why my copy of the same work lists it differently), so keep them coming. If you know how to make Google Scholars results workable in spite of Imeriki's comments and our own policy on the matter., then please let me know. And I don't mean that sarcastically or facetiously; if I'm wrong, I genuinely want to know. Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 23:39, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Evan2008
 * Good to be open :) I like your attitude.
 * What is the ISBN of your copy of NJPS?
 * With Google Scholar the trick is that you need to put in the variables using quote marks in the third box of Advanced Search named: "[with at least one of the words:           ]," hence "books of kings" OR "first kings" OR "second kings" OR "1 kings" OR "2 kings" OR "I Kings" OR "II Kings" OR "first book of kings" OR "second book of kings". Compare:
 * "Book of Kings" Bible -First -Second 58x since 1980
 * 1 Kings First Kings First book of kings variants 17,000 since 1980
 * In any case, even without Google Scholar results above this still would not really be a tenable move without a single English Bible version in support of "Book of Samuel" rather than "I Samuel" "I Kings" "I Chronicles" separated out. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 06:22, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The usage of First Kings or First Chronicles isn't what is contested. This usage is even used among Jewish publications because it is a handy way of locating a verse, chapter, et cætera, in a almost unanimously standard way (there is some variation in actual verse numbering in places, but nothing too drastic). But among Jews and many scholars, Chronicles (First and Second) is considered a single book, and is referred to as such. Consider, for example, a non-precise comparison with Frank Herbert's "Dune" which Herbert divides into 3 books (within the book). "Dune" is not referred to as his "books of Dune" (which would instead refer to the entire book series) but rather his "book, Dune."
 * With Google Scholar you are still getting results with non-related phrases, as well as eliminating pages which would be related (the same commentary I gave on Google Search applies to Scholar). Also, your search terms still conflict with what is actually contested ("First" and "Second" usage isn't disputed, it's the use of "Book" or "Books" when speaking of the entire work of Chronicles, the topic of this article).
 * Something I think has also been lost in this discussion is that in each of the articles (Kings, Chronicles, Samuel), the singular form of verbs/nouns/pronouns/etc is the most (almost consistently) used rather than the plural. It was this matter which originally raised the question about the titles of these articles. If we agree that the plural title be kept, we would be required (consistency per mos) to go through each article and adjust the words (not just a couple nouns such as "book") to match the title. The text of an article not being consistent with its title would be a significant inconsistency. — al-Shimoni  (talk) 02:53, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Imeriki
 * Out of interest, do you own an English language Bible? Does it divide the books?
 * I don't know about Imeriki, but I own many English Bibles (they don't wear out very quickly even with much use), and the most recently published and purchased of all of these is The Books of the Bible.

 * I don't think that there's any question that most Bibles divide these books, and that putting them back together is a recent trend. However note that WP:AT reads in part If the name of a person, group, object, or other article topic changes then more weight should be given to the name used in reliable sources published after the name change than in those before the change. This article topic is in exactly that position. Andrewa (talk) 04:10, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * As mentioned before, the question isn't whether the book gets divided (first/second chronicles), the question is how the entire work (the topic of this article) is most commonly referred, id est "The Book of Chronicles" or "The Book s of Chronicles". Requesting bible versions is pointless since few non-ceremonial versions will lack the common verse mapping system, and (except for maybe a study bible) probably won't speak of the entire work of Chronicles (thus it would be hard to see how they refer to themselves). Scholastic and religious documents of a scholastic nature, which comment or discuss the entire work of Chronicles, are the primary source from which we'll find how the entire work is referred, so this is where we should be likely looking.
 * In short, whether they are divided or not is not the issue, it is the Common Name (of the entire work — the topic of this article) that is the issue. — al-Shimoni  (talk) 01:21, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, good point. Andrewa (talk) 03:42, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Re the search, no, afraid not, sorry I did various searches, fine-tuning it to reduce the random readings. There's no search that produces perfectly clean results on this. 58x since 1980 vs 17,000x from 1980 was a fair result. You can duplicate it if you like.
 * As regards Users having put "the Book of Chronicles" in wp articles, I hadn't noticed, but there's so many other problems with the Bible articles on wp that fixing a minor issue like that isn't a big priority - besides it isn't "wrong" as text, text doesn't have to abide by WP:COMMONNAME. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:59, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * That wasn't what I was referring to, but rather sentences throughout the article speak of it in the singular with words such as "it" or "book" et cætera. For example "In most printed versions it is the last book in Ketuvim [...]" (the three bold words are my emphasis). We would have to figure out how to address that, whether to change it to plural forms (a lot of work, which would also introduce confusing phrases such as "[...] Chronicles are a part of the third part [...]"; if not for the capitalization this could be confused with the general word "chronicles"). If we go with the plural title, I think we will need to discuss how to approach the rest of the article regarding this issue. — al-Shimoni  (talk) 01:30, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Try The Books of the Bible. Andrewa (talk) 15:59, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll put that next to my Hello Kitty Version :). In ictu oculi (talk) 21:59, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Droll. I was of course replying to your comment No evidence has been produced that any English Bible version exists... which doesn't follow the standard "First Samuel" "First Kings" distinction. I hope you will accept this as proof that such English Bibles do exist. Andrewa (talk) 02:22, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * English-language version exist that treat them as a single work, and the move demonstrably comports with policy. Are there any objections that don't involve cartoon characters? Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 04:36, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Andrew,
 * When I said that no evidence had. In fact a claim about NJPS had been made which was incorrect. But credit where credit is due, I'm impressed you managed to find a special edition of the TNIV that doesn't. But it's clearly a gimmick, just read the blurb about no chapter and verse numbers... :)
 * Clearly a gimmick? Come on, admit it, you were guessing that it didn't exist. Bad guess, it does and there are others. But the more important point is that such guesswork is not helpful, and you're still guessing. And it's another bad guess. TBotB is a very serious project.
 * But is this latest guess of yours even worth debunking? It seems to have zero relevance to the matters under discussion. Andrewa (talk) 03:20, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Andrewa
 * I am not sure what exactly you mean by "latest guess of yours". What was the first? Please read what I said above. I said very clearly what I said, not what you appear to have read. Please, look again.
 * Your first guess was that The Books of the Bible did not exist. Andrewa (talk) 19:19, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * As regards expecting that it wouldn't exist. On the contrary I was pretty certain that it would exist, though I was expecting it to be in one of the various Messianic Jewish versions out there, I wasn't expecting to see it as a marketing gimmick.
 * In other words, you guessed that TBotB didn't exist.
 * Have you any evidence that it is a marketing gimmick? I'm sorry if this seems harsh, but your rhetoric has now descended to the ridiculous. Andrewa (talk) 19:19, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

 * PS If I thought I'd shelled out $14.95 (AUD) on a marketing gimmick I'd be a bit peeved, but TBotB is a very useful volume and I recommend it. One thing that has puzzled me over the years has been that many Christians say they believe in the inerrancy of the Scriptures in the original manuscripts but seem to make no effort to find a Bible that is as close as possible to these original manuscripts. (Personally I have several problems with the whole concept of inerrancy, but that's another story.) Anyway, given that inerrancy is a current doctrine adopted by many Christians, TBotB fills an obvious need. But on the other hand, the verse numbers etc are extremely useful, so I'll continue to use them and expect most others will too. Andrewa (talk) 01:50, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * This proposal completely fails the test of WP:COMMONNAME and the information in the proposal is misleading.
 * In ictu oculi (talk) 14:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It may be premature, and we should give regard to scholars like Walter Brueggemann who does refer to The books of Chronicles as late as 2003 (An Introduction to the Old Testament - The Canon and Christian Imagination, ISBN 0664224121, 9780664224127). But let's discuss issues and evidence. Andrewa (talk) 19:19, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Evan2008
 * As above, this isn't an an "English-language version" this is a special edition (limited print run?) of the TNIV which does have 1 and 2 Samuel. You said you had a version of NJPS that did. What is the ISBN?
 * As for the move, seriously, this move doesn't go anywhere near being supported by WP:COMMONNAME - there is no mainstream Bible version that does this, Google scholar doesn't do this, Google Books don't do this. So what exactly is the argument for moving counter common usage and counter all English Bible versions (including TNIV), Jewish and Christian? In ictu oculi (talk) 09:57, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * For the record, my copy is of the JPS. It is an electronic text and as far as I can tell doesn't have an ISBN or other identifying mark. There's a screenshot of the thing here if you want to see it.
 * But more importantly, since when is this an article about an English text, anyway? I realize we have to go by secondary data, but when did secondary data start overriding reality? Presumably this article is about the same Book of Chronicles that originated in the Hebrew language as a single text, so why does the fact that translations divide the material have any bearing on what the text was originally? As an example, the Lord of the Rings is a novel that was originally (and is still very often) released in three separate volumes as a trilogy. If you asked an average person off the street, or a casual fan of the films, they would probably tell you that Tolkien's work was a trilogy, but our article does not reflect this misconception. The fact that various publishers (and foreign translators, as well) have decided to divide the work for convenience's sake has no bearing on the fact that it was composed as a single work. I'm not even going to address GS again, as the results are clearly compromised. Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 21:03, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * In case others didn't notice, there's also The Modern Reader's Bible (at Google Books here), which combines Chronicles with Ezra-Nechemiah and presents Samuel and Kings as a single narrative. I think this is peripherally relevant to the subject at hand. Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 21:24, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * With the two comments I today added to this thread above in mind, I think I'll also comment on the combined versions you just mentioned. While Ezra-Neḥemia is known to have been a combined work, I'm not sure about Ezra-Neḥemiah combined with Chronicles, although I do know these two (Ch & Ez-Ne) are thought to probably come from the same author or school of authors. However, Ezra-Neḥemia is found on Wikipedia in three articles Book of Ezra, Book of Nehemiah, and Ezra-Nehemia where the latter discusses the two divisions as the whole work. To have the equivalent for Chronicles would add a separate page each for First Book of Chronicles and Second Book of Chronicles (currently these two pages redirect to the combined "Books of Chronicles" rather than discussing those divisions on their own). There's nothing wrong with discussing each division on its own as long as the division is significant enough to have its own section. Division is not the issue with the title of this article, it is what is the most common name for the entire work of Chronicles (the subject of this article). — al-Shimoni  (talk) 03:38, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Ignoring any redactional history, "combined" may not be the appropriate word for me to use above since they are considered to have been a single work. — al-Shimoni  (talk) 03:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Is there any question that they are a single work? The division was originally simply a matter of the work being too long to fit on a single scroll. The five scrolls were similarly short enough to fit on one scroll, but we don't consider them a single work just because of that. Andrewa (talk) 03:53, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Evan2008, that is not an accurate copy of JPS, that is a Messianic Jewish believer's website, and he is almost certainly breaking US copyright, depending on when the authors died, even without chopping the JPS about.
 * Hi Imeriki al-Shimoni, the most common name is "1 and 2 Chronicles" or "Chronicles I and II" as St Anselm said. But Evan2008 hasn't proposed those names.
 * Hi Andrewa, 1 and 2 Chronicles were once 1 work, yes. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi IIO, is that change of tense intentional? Surely the issue here is the current situation? Is there any reason to think that they somehow became two works at some stage, as your use of the past tense subtly assumes?

 * The volume numbers, like the chapter and verse numbers, are just used to help to locate particular passages. Similarly, in a reference to a printed multi-volume encyclopedia, we will give a volume number and a page number.

 * At the risk of labouring a point, you don't seem to have addressed the question: Is there any question that they are a single work?. That surely is relevant? Andrewa (talk) 19:25, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't quite know what you mean. Yes 1 and 2 Chronicles were once 1 work, yes. Since 300BCE they've been numbered as separate books. It'd be relevant if we the majority of GS sources had corrected modern usage to reflect that. But they haven't. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Again you are playing with words. There is no dispute that they were once 1 work. The question here (which is itself peripheral to the discussion but which you yourself raised) is, what is the situation now? Are they (note the present tense, please) one work or two? Or don't you see it as relevant? Andrewa (talk) 20:31, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Mechon Mamre is absolutely not a Messianic organization. They're very much Orthodox, and do not hold to any beliefs concerning anyone, particularly Jesus, being the Jewish messiah. They address the concept of Jesus as Messiah quite specifically on their site, stating that "Jews know that Jesus could not possibly have been the mashiach. Assuming that he existed, and assuming that the Christian scriptures are accurate in describing him (both of which are debatable), he simply did not fulfill the mission of the mashiach as Jews have always understood it." I have no clue where your claim guess of them being Messianic comes from.
 * I'm not sure about copyright. But at any rate, it's clear that the JPS divided the books originally, so your point is now moot. At what point did the Book of Chronicles cease to be a single work? Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 02:32, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You're correct. I incorrectly assumed they were Messianic Jews from having seen Messianic Jews in the past use it. It is however still a fringe website which has chopped about JPS.
 * And yes, maybe it's a shame that something as ahistorical as 1 and 2 Chronicles was introduced by the Septuagint, and perpetuated by the majority of English sources. But WP doesn't have a "WP:correct usage back to 300BCE" guideline. Lots of ancient books have modern names. This RM is never going to pass because the majority of GS sources and all mainstream versions have plural books. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Agree that the RM above (which this section is discussing but of which it is not part so far as I can see, by your choice of formatting above) is unlikely to pass, there is no consensus to move likely so far as I can see, and there are policy based arguments both ways... but that's not my call. I wouldn't be confident that the the closing admin will even read this section, there seems no reason that they need to.

 * But several things about your arguments still fascinate me. Elsewhere, n the matter of diacritics, it is often argued that including them makes the name more accurate. You often participate in these discussions, and I can't off-hand recall whether you have ever proposed this argument yourself, but you certainly have not supported my many appeals to either abide by the policy or (preferably) change it.

 * Is the accuracy of those diacritics in the article titles an issue? If so, isn't that also a consideration here, in that any suggestion that Kings is two works is both inaccurate and misleading? And if not, shouldn't the same apply to the many discussions on diacritics? Andrewa (talk) 20:31, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

There are several differences between a living person, such as François Hollande, and a 2,600 year old religious text. The vast majority of wp Users interpret "We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high quality sources" "German for German politicians" and so on, to mean that anglicizing a living persons name because it gets anglicized in English trash-sources, tabloids, websites and so on, isn't encyclopedic. But as regards restoring a 2,600-2,300 BCE name for a book, that's an issue of religious correctness, something that has to be driven/led by modern source usage. Otherwise we'd be going over every religion restoring what was religiously correct. And we'd have a 101 different POVs as to what was. If the Book of Chronicles was a living person I for one would view the issue differently, yes. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Of course, if we really wanted to be accurate, the title of this article wouldn't be "Books of Chronicles" or "Book of Chronicles", but "דברי הימים" (or, to use the plural, דברים הימים), but that would violate our naming convention on books. Shouldn't we be as accurate as possible within the constraints of policy? I have yet to see a response to either of these policies, and would be interested in how you might think about their relevancy here.
 * Religion doesn't appear to be a policy, it has been labelled a working draft for over a year, and there are some active discussions at Wikipedia talk:Religion. Andrewa (talk) 07:35, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll ask again: why does the fact that translations divide the work mean that it ceases to be a single work? Why do you believe that we have a different standard for accuracy in titling BLP articles? Why is the most common anglicization of Hollande's name not relevant for the purposes of his article, but the Hellenization and anglicization of דברי הימים is for this one? Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 22:49, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Matters of religious belief or correctness do not come into it, any more than matters of musical taste affect the title of the noise music article. Many would dispute that this is music at all, but the authorities call it music, and we follow this usage. Andrewa (talk) 07:36, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Much ado about nothing, in my view. The article treats the book(s) as the single work that it is, and in any event, both a "Book" version and a "Books" version would have to redirect to the same place anyway. Handle this issue in the lede, if you absolutely must. But I'd personally save editing energy for articles that really need work. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

revision needed
Can anyone please revise the last three sentences of the section ORIGINS, because the logic does not make sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.197.47 (talk) 15:27, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

BC or BCE
I notice that an IP editor has changed the occurrences of "BCE" to "BC". Now, that's fair enough, because the article originally had "BC" - see WP:ERA. Looking through the edit history, it's not really anyone's fault - content was added with "BCE", and then the BCs were changed to make the article consistent. But it means we should discuss it here in order to get consensus. StAnselm (talk) 03:05, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Dubious statement
Under Composition > Sources, it says: 'There is also the question of whether the author of Chronicles used sources other than those found in the Bible: if such sources existed, it would bolster the Bible's case to be regarded as a reliable history.'

This sounds like opinion rather than fact, and it doesn't logically follow. If two people wrote synopses of a Harry Potter book, it wouldn't make it more likely that Harry Potter is a factual story, merely that two people had read the same text.--Jcvamp (talk) 12:02, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

yY
@Zhomron Where is that policy? What's another page that uses this? GordonGlottal (talk) 23:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Books of Chronicles


text:
Channel-Port aux Basques

Channel-Port aux Basques is a town at the extreme southwestern tip of Newfoundland fronting on the western end of the Cabot Strait. A Marine Atlantic ferry terminal is located in the town which is the primary entry point onto the island of Newfoundland and the western terminus of the Newfoundland and Labrador Route 1 (Trans-Canada Highway) in the province. The town was incorporated in 1945 and its population in the 2021 census was 3,547.

Port aux Basques is the oldest of the collection of villages that make up the present-day town, which consists of Port aux Basques, Channel, Grand Bay and Mouse Island. The town is called "Siinalk" in the Miꞌkmaq language.

History
Channel was settled by fisher-folk from the Channel Islands in the early 1700s. Port aux Basques refers to the harbour that was a favoured sheltering and watering place for Basque whalers who hailed from the Basque region of the Pyrenees of France and Spain during the early 16th century. After leaving the harbour the whalers either proceeded to the main whaling grounds off southern Labrador, or headed home to the Basque country. They almost certainly took on fresh water from Dead Man's Brook, which flows into Port aux Basques harbour, during their stopovers.

Port aux Basques is first seen on a 1687 Johannes van Keulen map of the area. Permanent settlement came from French fishermen who overwintered on this, the French Shore, using rights given under the 1713 Treaty of Utrecht which saw France cede its claims in Newfoundland to Great Britain in exchange for right of use of coastal lands for the fishery. With the fishery being the economic mainstay for both French and British settlers in the area, Channel-Port aux Basques appeared destined to remain a collection of small fishing villages.

In 1856, an underwater telegraph cable was successfully laid between Newfoundland and Cape Breton Island, making landfall nearby. This was the first step in the race to complete a trans-Atlantic telegraph cable. A telegraph station was opened in Port aux Basques in 1857.

In the 1880s, the Government of Canada erected a lighthouse at nearby Cape Ray which, despite being in the then-separate British colony of Newfoundland, was considered a navigation hazard for vessels bound for Canadian ports in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence.

In 1893, it was decided to extend the western terminus of the Newfoundland Railway (then under construction west from the Avalon Peninsula by Robert G. Reid) from St. George's to Port aux Basques harbour. By 1897 the tracks reached Port aux Basques, although the harbour facilities had not been built at that time to handle the steamer Bruce, which had been built in Scotland and had arrived in Newfoundland several months earlier. While the required docks were constructed, the Bruce operated between Little Placentia Sound and North Sydney, Nova Scotia from October, 1897 until June, 1898.

On June 30, 1898, the first passenger train arrived in Port aux Basques, and Bruce departed for North Sydney shortly afterward. Over the years, the narrow gauge Newfoundland Railway expanded both the number of trains and vessels which called at Port Aux Basques. In 1925 the steamer SS Caribou began service. She was attacked and sunk by the German submarine U-69 (1940) on 14 October 1942 with a loss of 137 lives, some from the Port aux Basques area. There were 20 widows from Caribou sinking in the Port aux Basques area.

The town of Channel-Port aux Basques was incorporated in 1945 with Samuel (Sam) Walters as the first mayor. In 1964 the community of Mouse Island was annexed.

On March 31, 1949, Newfoundland entered into Confederation and the railway was transferred to Canadian National Railway. Under Term 32 of the Terms of Union between Canada and Newfoundland (1949), the ferry service between North Sydney, Nova Scotia and Port aux Basques, Newfoundland was guaranteed, first under the British North America Act and after 1982 under the Constitution of Canada.

Upon CNR's assumption of the railway and ferry service, the 1950s saw extensive construction at Port aux Basques with expansion of new dock facilities and the arrival of newer and larger ships such as the MV William Carson. Extensive blasting of rock created space for large rail yards with extensive dual gauge trackage. The excess rock was then used as fill to create the required docks. By the mid-1960s, new railcar-capable ferries such as the MV Frederick Carter permitted the exchange of standard gauge railcars, requiring further expansion at the Port aux Basques terminal facilities.

The mid-1960s also saw the completion of the Trans-Canada Highway across Newfoundland, an event which eventually led to the closure of the railway by 1988, but which made Port aux Basques into an even more important gateway to the island of Newfoundland, given the increased number of tourists visiting the province, and the rising amount of truck traffic. New Ro-Pax-capable vessels were commissioned and/or chartered during the 1960s-1980s to meet the growing demand, such as Marine Nautica, Marine Atlantica, Marine Evangeline, Ambrose Shea, and John Hamilton Gray.

With the abandonment of the railway, extensive rebuilding of Port aux Basques terminal resulted in expansive marshaling areas for waiting motor vehicle traffic. A plant disease inspection station operated by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency is located on site, as well as a modern rebuilt railway station now used as a passenger terminal for the ferry service operated by Marine Atlantic, which was renamed from CN Marine in 1986. Port aux Basques harbour used to host the arrival of the two largest icebreaking ferries in Canada at the time, the MV Caribou and MV Joseph and Clara Smallwood both of which were retired and decommissioned in 2011.

Hurricane Fiona
In September 2022, the town was partially evacuated due to Hurricane Fiona. Over 100 homes were reportedly washed away from the wind and storm surge in Newfoundland with a bulk of the homes being from the town. Many locals of the town claimed that it was the worst storm they’ve ever seen, and a community changing event. The town declared a state of emergency on September 24, 2022. On September 26, 2022, RCMP confirmed a 73-year-old Port aux Basques woman was killed after being swept out into the ocean. Newfoundland and Labrador is the only province with a confirmed loss of life directly related to the storm.

Demographics
In the 2021 Census of Population conducted by Statistics Canada, Channel-Port aux Basques had a population of $3,547$ living in $1,652$ of its $1,814$ total private dwellings, a change of NaN% from its 2016 population of $4,067$. With a land area of 38.84 km2, it had a population density of in 2021.

Transportation
Both the Trans-Canada Highway and the Trans Canada Trail have their Newfoundland and Labrador start and end points in Port aux Basques.

Ferries
In 2009, a larger and more modern vessel, the MV Atlantic Vision, was added to the fleet. With a larger carrying capacity and an equivalent ice class to the MV Caribou, the MV Atlantic Vision was introduced as the new flagship for Marine Atlantic. Following the retirement of the MV Caribou and the MV Joseph and Clara Smallwood, two more new ships were acquired on a 5-year charter from Stena Line. These two new ships, the MV Blue Puttees and MV Highlanders currently round out the Marine Atlantic fleet. Marine Atlantic announced in May 2015 that it would be purchasing both ships for C$100 Million each.

College of the North Atlantic
The Port aux Basques campus of the College of the North Atlantic first opened as the District Vocational School in September 1963. The school was constructed by MR Chappell of Nova Scotia because Lundrigans Ltd of Corner Brook who was constructing the other District Vocational Schools in Newfoundland couldn't move their equipment and supplies over the uncompleted road from Corner Brook to Port aux Basques. The Trans-Canada Highway from Corner Brook to Port aux Basques was completed in 1965.

Climate
Channel-Port aux Basques experiences a maritime-influenced subarctic climate that has the Köppen climate classification code of (Dfc). The location has strong seasonal lag as well as being cold for the latitude. This is since it is being influenced by the Icelandic Low and the Labrador Current, which renders a rare combination of cold and snowy winters along a seacoast at 47°N. In summer the warmup is strongly delayed by the cold waters and westerly winds from the interior of Canada are very cold in winter, further delaying the warming of the water. As a result, August is clearly warmer than July, and even September is more than 2 C-change warmer than June is. Winter precipitation often falls as snow, for a high annual yield, but rainfall even in the coldest of February is still quite common, which lowers the snow cover to average about 55 cm at its annual peak.

Sports
Port aux Basques placed second in the top five communities for Kraft Hockeyville 2008, and won $20,000 for its local arena. Its sports arena, Bruce I, burned down in 1995, just prior to the hockey season. It was located on top of Army Hill on a road named Stadium Road down in Channel. The new arena, Bruce II Sports Centre, was opened on November 23, 1996.

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

title: Channel-Port aux Basques


text:
St. Lunatics

St. Lunatics were an American hip hop group formed in St. Louis, Missouri, in 1993. The group consisted of childhood friends Nelly, Ali, Murphy Lee, Kyjuan, City Spud, and Slo Down.

Their first hit, "Gimme What U Got", gained popularity in 1996. In 2000, the group signed with Universal Records. Their debut album, Free City, was released after Nelly's solo breakthrough, achieving Platinum status in the U.S. Members of St. Lunatics pursued solo careers, and Nelly opened a music production school. An anticipated album in 2009, City Free, was never released. City Spud served a prison term for a robbery-related crime and later performed with Nelly at the 2023 Grammy Awards.

History
After graduating from high school, the band members were working day jobs in the service industry or attending college. St. Lunatics' first local independent hit was "Gimme What U Got", released in 1996. In 1997, DJ Kut on the Beat FM started playing the single locally, generating interest in the group. In 2000, Nelly was signed to Universal Records, followed by the rest of the group. While Nelly was working on his solo album Country Grammar, City Spud was arrested and sentenced to ten years in prison for robbery. After Nelly's breakthrough success in 2000, St. Lunatics released their debut album, Free City. In 2001, the singles "Summer in the City" and "Midwest Swing" were released. Free City was certified Platinum in the United States and Gold in Canada.

In 2002, Ali issued his solo album Heavy Starch while Murphy Lee published Murphy's Law in 2003. Murphy later launched his own label, UC ME Entertainment. Nelly went on to have a successful solo career and in 2011, he partnered with St. Louis-based Vatterott College to open a music production school in downtown St. Louis, called Ex'treme Institute (E.I.).

In 2009, St. Lunatics were reportedly working on a new album, City Free, to be released that summer. The record was later postponed until 2011. A song titled "St. Lunatics" was leaked in early March 2009, along with "Get Low 2 Da Flo", which was produced by Play-N-Skillz. The first official single released from the album was "Money Talks", featuring rapper Birdman. The second single was "Polo". The record was never released, however.

After his release from prison, City Spud issued the solo mixtape Twelve-12, in 2010.

In 2023, City Spud performed "Hot in Herre" with Nelly at the 2023 Grammy Awards for the 50 Years of Hip-Hop' showcase.

City Spud's legal issues
Lavell Webb, known as City Spud, was a small-time marijuana dealer as a young adult. After quitting his job at a McDonald's in St. Louis County, he had little money. Webb and a conspirator came up with the plan to pretend to sell marijuana to someone, intending to rob them instead.

On the night of April 15, 1999, during a robbery, their victim ended up getting shot five times in the back, though he survived. Webb was charged with first-degree robbery, one count of first-degree assault, and two counts of armed criminal action. Despite only being a first-time offender, he was sentenced to ten years in prison.

title: St. Lunatics


text:
Escaflowne (film)

Escaflowne (エスカフローネ) is a 2000 Japanese animated adventure dark fantasy film produced by Sunrise and animated by studio Bones. Directed by Kazuki Akane, the film is a re-telling of the 26-episode anime television series The Vision of Escaflowne. The film was licensed for Region 1 release by Bandai Entertainment, which gave the film a theatrical release in January 2002.

A soundtrack and two drama CDs have also been released in Japan by Victor Entertainment in relation to the series. There was also a novelization written by Ryota Yamaguchi published in 2000 by Kadaokawa Sneaker Bunko.

Plot
Hitomi Kanzaki is in crisis. Her life has lost its meaning, and she is plagued by unusual dreams. She is depressed and wants nothing more than to disappear. After falling out with her only friend, she is mysteriously summoned to another world, Gaea, where she finds herself inside Escaflowne, a doomsday weapon destined to come to life at the appearance of a prophesied "wing goddess". The world of Gaea is facing its own crisis: relentless conquest by the Black Dragon Clan, the rebels against which become convinced that Hitomi is the prophesied goddess who will revive Escaflowne. Never certain of her identity in Gaea, Hitomi finds her destiny as she becomes closer to the rebel leader, Lord Van, and helps to bring about the fall of his vengeful brother Lord Folken, the master of the Black Dragon Clan.

Production
Escaflowne varies greatly from the original The Vision of Escaflowne series. With character re-designs by Nobuteru Yūki, the film focuses on the relationship between Van and Hitomi and their personal issues. The characters themselves are also given different personalities, with the film Hitomi changing from a cheerful girl in love to a depressed, suicidal schoolgirl who is suffering from self-induced feelings of loneliness and alienation. Van is also depicted as being more lonely and emotionally reserved, as well as being far more aggressive and willing to slay any perceived enemies than his more pacifistic series counterpart. Although the Vision of Escaflowne series had been produced by Sunrise, the animation for the film was handled primarily by studio Bones, a company founded by a number of ex-Sunrise staff. It was the first Bones feature film production. Studio co-founder Hiroshi Ōsaka and character designer Nobuteru Yūki split the animation director duties, with Ōsaka heading up production at Bones. Some of the film's action sequences were assigned to the studio's animators as talent showcases, notably including Yutaka Nakamura (who animated nearly a minute and a half of the opening sword fight without assistance). The soundtrack was, as with the Vision of Escaflowne series, composed mostly by Yoko Kanno in collaboration with Hajime Mizoguchi.

While the plot of the film has some similar elements to the original television series, the characters differ in varying degrees from the television counterparts, with many completely redesigned and bearing little resemblance to the originals. The world of Gaea has a more Asian design than the heavily European influenced television series.

Release
Escaflowne was released in Japan on June 24, 2000; while the first European presentation was on January 19, 2001, during the Future Film Festival in Bologna. The North American theatrical premiere was on January 25, 2002, in select cities, including Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco, Dallas, Chicago, and Vancouver. The North American television premiere was on September 10, 2005, on the programming block Adult Swim, after airing on [adult swim] on demand.

Home media
Bandai Visual released the film to DVD in a two-disc limited edition set on April 25, 2001. Packed in a limited edition art box, the release included a 36-page booklet on history of the film, as well as on-disc interviews with staff and cast and the theatrical trailers and television commercials. The film was released to Blu-ray disc on January 28, 2008. Formerly licensed by Bandai Entertainment, Escaflowne was first released to Region 1 DVD on July 23, 2002, in "Standard" and "Ultimate" editions. The Ultimate Edition included premium packaging, the CD soundtrack, an exclusive Maaya Sakamoto music video, interviews from the theatrical premiere events, and interviews with the staff and cast. On September 13, 2005, the film was re-released as part of Bandai's "Anime Legends" line, including many of the extras from the Ultimate Edition, including the CD soundtrack and interviews. The film was given another re-release on February 6, 2007 under Bandai's "Anime Movie Classics" label. Unlike the "Anime Legends" release, this version uses the same cover art and CD as the original standard DVD release. Bandai Entertainment also included the Ultimate Edition release of the movie in its 2004 "Perfect Collection" DVD set of the original Vision of Escaflowne anime series. Bandai released a Blu-ray version of the film on October 20, 2009. At Otakon 2013, Funimation Entertainment had announced that they have rescued both The Vision of Escaflowne and the movie. Both the movie and The Vision of Escaflowne were re-released in 2016 with a new English dub.

Soundtrack
The Escaflowne OST was released on July 5, 2000 and contains twenty-six tracks, including the movie's full opening and ending themes. Yoko Kanno and Hajime Mizoguchi composed and produced the movie's musical themes and backgrounds. Vocal performers include Maaya Sakamoto, Shanti Snyder, Midori, Children of Adom — Vocals and the Warsaw Chorus.

In North America, the soundtrack was released with the Ultimate Edition Region 1 DVD release on July 23, 2002 and with the "Anime Legends" re-release on September 13, 2005. The CD has not, however, been given an individual release.

Drama CDs
Victor Entertainment released two drama CDs: Escaflowne Prologue 1: Earth and Escaflowne Prologue 2: Gaea were both released on October 21, 2000 and originally broadcast as part of the Bunka Hoso radio show. Both drama CDs are out-of-print in Japan.

title: Escaflowne (film)


text: User talk:4.8.239.215

title: User talk:4.8.239.215


text:
Oral candidiasis

Oral candidiasis (Acute pseudomembranous candidiasis),which is also known as oral thrush, among other names, is candidiasis that occurs in the mouth. That is, oral candidiasis is a mycosis (yeast/fungal infection) of Candida species on the mucous membranes of the mouth.

Candida albicans is the most commonly implicated organism in this condition. C. albicans is carried in the mouths of about 50% of the world's population as a normal component of the oral microbiota. This candidal carriage state is not considered a disease, but when Candida species become pathogenic and invade host tissues, oral candidiasis can occur. This change usually constitutes an opportunistic infection by normally harmless micro-organisms because of local (i.e., mucosal) or systemic factors altering host immunity.

Classification
Oral candidiasis is a mycosis (fungal infection). Traditionally, oral candidiasis is classified using the Lehner system, originally described in the 1960s, into acute and chronic forms (see table). Some of the subtypes almost always occur as acute (e.g., acute pseudomembranous candidiasis), and others chronic. However, these typical presentations do not always hold true, which created problems with this system. A more recently proposed classification of oral candidiasis distinguishes primary oral candidiasis, where the condition is confined to the mouth and perioral tissues, and secondary oral candidiasis, where there is involvement of other parts of the body in addition to the mouth. The global human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) pandemic has been an important factor in the move away from the traditional classification since it has led to the formation of a new group of patients who present with atypical forms of oral candidiasis.

By appearance
Three main clinical appearances of candidiasis are generally recognized: pseudomembranous, erythematous (atrophic) and hyperplastic. Most often, affected individuals display one clear type or another, but sometimes there can be more than one clinical variant in the same person.

Pseudomembranous
Acute pseudomembranous candidiasis is a classic form of oral candidiasis, commonly referred to as thrush. Overall, this is the most common type of oral candidiasis, accounting for about 35% of oral candidiasis cases.

It is characterized by a coating or individual patches of pseudomembranous white slough that can be easily wiped away to reveal erythematous (reddened), and sometimes minimally bleeding, mucosa beneath. These areas of pseudomembrane are sometimes described as "curdled milk", or "cottage cheese". The white material is made up of debris, fibrin, and desquamated epithelium that has been invaded by yeast cells and hyphae that invade to the depth of the stratum spinosum. As an erythematous surface is revealed beneath the pseudomembranes, some consider pseudomembranous candidiasis and erythematous candidiasis stages of the same entity. Some sources state that if there is bleeding when the pseudomembrane is removed, then the mucosa has likely been affected by an underlying process such as lichen planus or chemotherapy. Pseudomembraneous candidiasis can involve any part of the mouth, but usually it appears on the tongue, buccal mucosae or palate.

It is classically an acute condition, appearing in infants, people taking antibiotics or immunosuppressant medications, or immunocompromising diseases. However, sometimes it can be chronic and intermittent, even lasting for many years. Chronicity of this subtype generally occurs in immunocompromised states, (e.g., leukemia, HIV) or in persons who use corticosteroids topically or by aerosol. Acute and chronic pseudomembranous candidiasis are indistinguishable in appearance.

Erythematous
Erythematous (atrophic) candidiasis is when the condition appears as a red, raw-looking lesion. Some sources consider denture-related stomatitis, angular stomatitis, median rhomboid glossitis, and antibiotic-induced stomatitis as subtypes of erythematous candidiasis, since these lesions are commonly erythematous/atrophic. It may precede the formation of a pseudomembrane, be left when the membrane is removed, or arise without prior pseudomembranes. Some sources state that erythematous candidiasis accounts for 60% of oral candidiasis cases. Where it is associated with inhalation steroids (often used for treatment of asthma), erythematous candidiasis commonly appears on the palate or the dorsum of the tongue. On the tongue, there is loss of the lingual papillae (depapillation), leaving a smooth area.

Acute erythematous candidiasis usually occurs on the dorsum of the tongue in persons taking long term corticosteroids or antibiotics, but occasionally it can occur after only a few days of using a topical antibiotic. This is usually termed "antibiotic sore mouth", "antibiotic sore tongue", or "antibiotic-induced stomatitis" because it is commonly painful as well as red.

Chronic erythematous candidiasis is more usually associated with denture wearing (see denture-related stomatitis).

Hyperplastic
This variant is also sometimes termed "plaque-like candidiasis" or "nodular candidiasis". The most common appearance of hyperplastic candidiasis is a persistent white plaque that does not rub off. The lesion may be rough or nodular in texture. Hyperplastic candidiasis is uncommon, accounting for about 5% of oral candidiasis cases, and is usually chronic and found in adults. The most common site of involvement is the commissural region of the buccal mucosa, usually on both sides of the mouth.

Another term for hyperplastic candidiasis is "candidal leukoplakia". This term is a largely historical synonym for this subtype of candidiasis, rather than a true leukoplakia. Indeed, it can be clinically indistinguishable from true leukoplakia, but tissue biopsy shows candidal hyphae invading the epithelium. Some sources use this term to describe leukoplakia lesions that become colonized secondarily by Candida species, thereby distinguishing it from hyperplastic candidiasis. It is known that Candida resides more readily in mucosa that is altered, such as may occur with dysplasia and hyperkeratosis in an area of leukoplakia.

Associated lesions
Candida-associated lesions are primary oral candidiases (confined to the mouth), where the causes are thought to be multiple. For example, bacteria as well as Candida species may be involved in these lesions. Frequently, antifungal therapy alone does not permanently resolve these lesions, but rather the underlying predisposing factors must be addressed, in addition to treating the candidiasis.

Angular cheilitis

Angular cheilitis is inflammation at the corners (angles) of the mouth, very commonly involving Candida species, when sometimes the terms "Candida-associated angular cheilitis", or less commonly "monilial perlèche" are used. Candida organisms alone are responsible for about 20% of cases, and a mixed infection of C. albicans and Staphylococcus aureus for about 60% of cases. Signs and symptoms include soreness, erythema (redness), and fissuring of one, or more commonly both the angles of the mouth, with edema (swelling) seen intraorally on the commissures (inside the corners of the mouth). Angular cheilitis generally occurs in elderly people and is associated with denture related stomatitis.

Denture-related stomatitis
This term refers to a mild inflammation and erythema of the mucosa beneath a denture, usually an upper denture in elderly edentulous individuals (with no natural teeth remaining). Some report that up to 65% of denture wearers have this condition to some degree. About 90% of cases are associated with Candida species, where sometimes the terms "Candida-associated denture stomatitis", or "Candida-associated denture-induced stomatitis" (CADIS), are used. Some sources state that this is by far the most common form of oral candidiasis. Although this condition is also known as "denture sore mouth", there is rarely any pain. Candida is associated with about 90% of cases of denture related stomatitis.

Median rhomboid glossitis

This is an elliptical or rhomboid lesion in the center of the dorsal tongue, just anterior (in front) of the circumvallate papillae. The area is depapillated, reddened (or red and white) and rarely painful. There is frequently Candida species in the lesion, sometimes mixed with bacteria.

Linear gingival erythema
This is a localized or generalized, linear band of erythematous gingivitis (inflammation of the gums). It was first observed in HIV infected individuals and termed "HIV-gingivitis", but the condition is not confined to this group. Candida species are involved, and in some cases the lesion responds to antifungal therapy, but it is thought that other factors exist, such as oral hygiene and human herpesviruses. This condition can develop into necrotizing ulcerative periodontitis.

Chronic multifocal oral candidiasis
This is an uncommon form of chronic (more than one month in duration) candidal infection involving multiple areas in the mouth, without signs of candidiasis on other mucosal or cutaneous sites. The lesions are variably red and/or white. Unusually for candidal infections, there is an absence of predisposing factors such as immunosuppression, and it occurs in apparently healthy individuals, normally elderly males. Smoking is a known risk factor.

Chronic mucocutaneous candidiasis
This refers to a group of rare syndromes characterized by chronic candidal lesions on the skin, in the mouth and on other mucous membranes (i.e., a secondary oral candidiasis). These include Localized chronic mucocutaneous candidiasis, diffuse mucocutaneous candidiasis (Candida granuloma), candidiasis–endocrinopathy syndrome and candidiasis thymoma syndrome. About 90% of people with chronic mucocutaneous candidiasis have candidiasis in the mouth.

Signs and symptoms
Signs and symptoms are dependent upon the type of oral candidiasis. Often, apart from the appearance of the lesions, there are usually no other signs or symptoms. Most types of oral candidiasis are painless, but a burning sensation may occur in some cases. Candidiasis can, therefore, sometimes be misdiagnosed as burning mouth syndrome. A burning sensation is more likely with erythematous (atrophic) candidiasis, whilst hyperplastic candidiasis is normally entirely asymptomatic. Acute atrophic candidiasis may feel like the mouth has been scalded with a hot liquid. Another potential symptom is a metallic, acidic, salty or bitter taste in the mouth. The pseudomembranous type rarely causes any symptoms apart from possibly some discomfort or bad taste due to the presence of the membranes. Sometimes the patient describes the raised pseudomembranes as "blisters." Occasionally there can be dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), which indicates that the candidiasis involves the oropharynx or the esophagus, as well as the mouth. The trachea and the larynx may also be involved where there is oral candidiasis, and this may cause hoarseness of the voice.

Species
The causative organism is usually Candida albicans, or less commonly other Candida species such as (in decreasing order of frequency) Candida tropicalis, Candida glabrata, Candida parapsilosis, Candida krusei, or other species (Candida stellatoidea, Candida pseudotropicalis, Candida famata, Candida rugosa,  Candida geotrichium, Candida dubliniensis, and Candida guilliermondii). C. albicans accounts for about 50% of oral candidiasis cases, and together C. albicans, C. tropicalis and C. glabrata account for over 80% of cases. Candidiasis caused by non-C. albicans Candida (NCAC) species is associated more with immunodeficiency. For example, in HIV/AIDS, C. dubliniensis and C. geotrichium can become pathogenic.

About 35-50% of humans possess C. albicans as part of their normal oral microbiota. With more sensitive detection techniques, this figure is reported to rise to 90%. This candidal carrier state is not considered a disease, since there are no lesions or symptoms of any kind. Oral carriage of Candida is pre-requisite for the development of oral candidiasis. For Candida species to colonize and survive as a normal component of the oral microbiota, the organisms must be capable of adhering to the epithelial surface of the mucous membrane lining the mouth. This adhesion involves adhesins (e.g., hyphal wall protein 1), and extracellular polymeric materials (e.g., mannoprotein). Therefore, strains of Candida with more adhesion capability have more pathogenic potential than other strains. The prevalence of Candida carriage varies with geographic location, and many other factors. Higher carriage is reported during the summer months, in females, in hospitalized individuals, in persons with blood group O and in non-secretors of blood group antigens in saliva. Increased rates of Candida carriage are also found in people who eat a diet high in carbohydrates, people who wear dentures, people with xerostomia (dry mouth), in people taking broad spectrum antibiotics, smokers, and in immunocompromised individuals (e.g., due to HIV/AIDS, diabetes, cancer, Down syndrome or malnutrition). Age also influences oral carriage, with the lowest levels occurring in newborns, increasing dramatically in infants, and then decreasing again in adults. Investigations have quantified oral carriage of Candida albicans at 300-500 colony forming units in healthy persons. More Candida is detected in the early morning and the late afternoon. The greatest quantity of Candida species are harbored on the posterior dorsal tongue, followed by the palatal and the buccal mucosae. Mucosa covered by an oral appliance such as a denture harbors significantly more candida species than uncovered mucosa.

When Candida species cause lesions - the result of invasion of the host tissues - this is termed candidiasis. Some consider oral candidiasis a change in the normal oral environment rather than an exposure or true "infection" as such. The exact process by which Candida species switch from acting as normal oral commensals (saprophytic) state in the carrier to acting as a pathogenic organism (parasitic state) is not completely understood.

Several Candida species are polymorphogenic, that is, capable of growing in different forms depending on the environmental conditions. C. albicans can appear as a yeast form (blastospores), which is thought to be relatively harmless; and a hyphal form associated with invasion of host tissues. Apart from true hyphae, Candida can also form pseudohyphae — elongated filamentous cells, lined end to end. As a general rule, candidiasis presenting with white lesions is mainly caused by Candida species in the hyphal form and red lesions by yeast forms. C. albicans and C. dubliniensis are also capable of forming germ tubes (incipient hyphae) and chlamydospores under the right conditions. C. albicans is categorized serologically into A or B serotypes. The prevalence is roughly equal in healthy individuals, but type B is more prevalent in immunocompromised individuals.

Predisposing factors
The host defenses against opportunistic infection of candida species are
 * The oral epithelium, which acts both as a physical barrier preventing micro-organisms from entering the tissues, and is the site of cell mediated immune reactions.
 * Competition and inhibition interactions between candida species and other micro-organisms in the mouth, such as the many hundreds of different kinds of bacteria.
 * Saliva, which possesses both mechanical cleansing action and immunologic action, including salivary immunoglobulin A antibodies, which aggregate candida organisms and prevent them adhering to the epithelial surface; and enzymatic components such as lysozyme, lactoperoxidase and antileukoprotease.

Disruption to any of these local and systemic host defense mechanisms constitutes a potential susceptibility to oral candidiasis, which rarely occurs without predisposing factors. It is often described as being "a disease of the diseased", occurring in the very young, the very old, or the very sick.

Immunodeficiency
Immunodeficiency is a state of reduced function of the immune system, which can be caused by medical conditions or treatments.

Acute pseudomembranous candidiasis occurs in about 5% of newborn infants. Candida species are acquired from the mother's vaginal canal during birth. At very young ages, the immune system is yet to develop fully and there is no individual immune response to candida species, an infants antibodies to the fungus are normally supplied by the mother's breast milk.

Other forms of immunodeficiency which may cause oral candidiasis include HIV/AIDS, active cancer and treatment, chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

Corticosteroid medications may contribute to the appearance of oral candidiasis, as they cause suppression of immune function either systemically or on a local/mucosal level, depending on the route of administration. Topically administered corticosteroids in the mouth may take the form of mouthwashes, dissolving lozenges or mucosal gels; sometimes being used to treat various forms of stomatitis. Systemic corticosteroids may also result in candidiasis.

Inhaled corticosteroids (e.g., for treatment of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), are not intended to be administered topically in the mouth, but inevitably there is contact with the oral and oropharyngeal mucousa as it is inhaled. In asthmatics treated with inhaled steroids, clinically detectable oral candidiasis may occur in about 5-10% of adults and 1% of children. Where inhaled steroids are the cause, the candidal lesions are usually of the erythematous variety. Candidiasis appears at the sites where the steroid has contacted the mucosa, typically the dorsum of the tongue (median rhomboid glossitis) and sometimes also on the palate. Candidal lesions on both sites are sometimes termed "kissing lesions" because they approximate when the tongue is in contact with the palate.

Denture wearing
Denture wearing and poor denture hygiene, particularly wearing the denture continually rather than removing it during sleep, is another risk factor for both candidal carriage and oral candidiasis. Dentures provide a relative acidic, moist and anaerobic environment because the mucosa covered by the denture is sheltered from oxygen and saliva. Loose, poorly fitting dentures may also cause minor trauma to the mucosa, which is thought to increase the permeability of the mucosa and increase the ability of C. albicans to invade the tissues. These conditions all favor the growth of C. albicans. Sometimes dentures become very worn, or they have been constructed to allow insufficient lower facial height (occlusal vertical dimension), leading to over-closure of the mouth (an appearance sometimes described as "collapse of the jaws"). This causes deepening of the skin folds at the corners of the mouth (nasolabial crease), in effect creating intertriginous areas where another form of candidiasis, angular cheilitis, can develop. Candida species are capable of adhering to the surface of dentures, most of which are made from polymethylacrylate. They exploit micro-fissures and cracks in the surface of dentures to aid their retention. Dentures may therefore become covered in a biofilm, and act as reservoirs of infection, continually re-infecting the mucosa. For this reason, disinfecting the denture is a vital part of treatment of oral candidiasis in persons who wear dentures, as well as correcting other factors like inadequate lower facial height and fit of the dentures.

Dry mouth
Both the quantity and quality of saliva are important oral defenses against candida. Decreased salivary flow rate or a change in the composition of saliva, collectively termed salivary hypofunction or hyposalivation is an important predisposing factor. Xerostomia is frequently listed as a cause of candidiasis, but xerostomia can be subjective or objective, i.e., a symptom present with or without actual changes in the saliva consistency or flow rate.

Diet
Malnutrition, whether by malabsorption, or poor diet, especially hematinic deficiencies (iron, vitamin B12, folic acid) can predispose to oral candidiasis, by causing diminished host defense and epithelial integrity. For example, iron deficiency anemia is thought to cause depressed cell-mediated immunity. Some sources state that deficiencies of vitamin A or pyridoxine are also linked.

There is limited evidence that a diet high in carbohydrates predisposes to oral candidiasis. In vitro and studies show that Candidal growth, adhesion and biofilm formation is enhanced by the presence of carbohydrates such as glucose, galactose and sucrose.

Smoking
Smoking, especially heavy smoking, is an important predisposing factor but the reasons for this relationship are unknown. One hypothesis is that cigarette smoke contains nutritional factors for C. albicans, or that local epithelial alterations occur that facilitate colonization of candida species.

Antibiotics
Broad-spectrum antibiotics (e.g. tetracycline) eliminate the competing bacteria and disrupt the normally balanced ecology of oral microorganisms, which can cause antibiotic-induced candidiasis.

Other factors
Several other factors can contribute to infection, including endocrine disorders (e.g. diabetes when poorly controlled), and/or the presence of certain other mucosal lesions, especially those that cause hyperkeratosis and/or dysplasia (e.g. lichen planus). Such changes in the mucosa predispose it to secondary infection with candidiasis. Other physical mucosal alterations are sometimes associated with candida overgrowth, such as fissured tongue (rarely), tongue piercing, atopy, and/or hospitalization.

Diagnosis
The diagnosis can typically be made from the clinical appearance alone, but not always. As candidiasis can be variable in appearance, and present with white, red or combined white and red lesions, the differential diagnosis can be extensive. In pseudomembraneous candidiasis, the membranous slough can be wiped away to reveal an erythematous surface underneath. This is helpful in distinguishing pseudomembraneous candidiasis from other white lesions in the mouth that cannot be wiped away, such as lichen planus, oral hairy leukoplakia. Erythematous candidiasis can mimic geographic tongue. Erythematous candidiasis usually has a diffuse border that helps distinguish it from erythroplakia, which normally has a sharply defined border.

Special investigations to detect the presence of candida species include oral swabs, oral rinse or oral smears. Smears are collected by gentle scraping of the lesion with a spatula or tongue blade and the resulting debris directly applied to a glass slide. Oral swabs are taken if culture is required. Some recommend that swabs be taken from 3 different oral sites. Oral rinse involves rinsing the mouth with phosphate-buffered saline for 1 minute and then spitting the solution into a vessel that examined in a pathology laboratory. Oral rinse technique can distinguish between commensal candidal carriage and candidiasis. If candidal leukoplakia is suspected, a biopsy may be indicated. Smears and biopsies are usually stained with periodic acid-Schiff, which stains carbohydrates in fungal cell walls in magenta. Gram staining is also used as Candida stains are strongly Gram positive.

Sometimes an underlying medical condition is sought, and this may include blood tests for full blood count and hematinics.

If a biopsy is taken, the histopathologic appearance can be variable depending upon the clinical type of candidiasis. Pseudomembranous candidiasis shows hyperplastic epithelium with a superficial parakeratotic desquamating (i.e., separating) layer. Hyphae penetrate to the depth of the stratum spinosum, and appear as weakly basophilic structures. Polymorphonuclear cells also infiltrate the epithelium, and chronic inflammatory cells infiltrate the lamina propria.

Atrophic candidiasis appears as thin, atrophic epithelium, which is non-keratinized. Hyphae are sparse, and inflammatory cell infiltration of the epithelium and the lamina propria. In essence, atrophic candidiasis appears like pseudomembranous candidiasis without the superficial desquamating layer.

Hyperplastic candidiasis is variable. Usually there is hyperplastic and acanthotic epithelium with parakeratosis. There is an inflammatory cell infiltrate and hyphae are visible. Unlike other forms of candidiasis, hyperplastic candidiasis may show dysplasia.

Treatment
Oral candidiasis can be treated with topical anti-fungal drugs, such as nystatin, miconazole, Gentian violet or amphotericin B. Surgical excision of the lesions may be required in cases that do not respond to anti-fungal medications.

Underlying immunosuppression may be medically manageable once it is identified, and this helps prevent recurrence of candidal infections.

Patients who are immunocompromised, either with HIV/AIDS or as a result of chemotherapy, may require systemic prevention or treatment with oral or intravenous administered anti-fungals. However, there is strong evidence that drugs that are absorbed or partially absorbed from the GI tract can prevent candidiasis more effectively than drugs that are not absorbed in the same way.

If candidiasis is secondary to corticosteroid or antibiotic use, then use may be stopped, although this is not always a feasible option. Candidiasis secondary to the use of inhaled steroids may be treated by rinsing out the mouth with water after taking the steroid. Use of a spacer device to reduce the contact with the oral mucosa may greatly reduce the risk of oral candidiasis.

In recurrent oral candidiasis, the use of azole antifungals risks selection and enrichment of drug-resistant strains of candida organisms. Drug resistance is increasingly more common and presents a serious problem in persons who are immunocompromised.

Prophylactic use of antifungals is sometimes employed in persons with HIV disease, during radiotherapy, during immunosuppressive or prolonged antibiotic therapy as the development of candidal infection in these groups may be more serious.

The candidal load in the mouth can be reduced by improving oral hygiene measures, such as regular toothbrushing and use of anti-microbial mouthwashes. Since smoking is associated with many forms of oral candidiasis, cessation may be beneficial.

Denture hygiene
Good denture hygiene involves regular cleaning of the dentures, and leaving them out of the mouth during sleep. This gives the mucosa a chance to recover, while wearing a denture during sleep is often likened to sleeping in one's shoes. In oral candidiasis, the dentures may act as a reservoir of Candida species known as denture stomatitis   which continually reinfects the mucosa once antifungal medication is stopped. Therefore, they must be disinfected as part of the treatment for oral candidiasis. There are commercial denture cleaner preparations for this purpose, but it is readily accomplished by soaking the denture overnight in a 1:10 solution of sodium hypochlorite (Milton, or household bleach). Bleach may corrode metal components, so if the denture contains metal, soaking it twice daily in chlorhexidine solution can be carried out instead. An alternative method of disinfection is to use a 10% solution of acetic acid (vinegar) as an overnight soak, or to microwave the dentures in 200mL water for 3 minutes at 650 watts. Microwave sterilization is only suitable if no metal components are present in the denture. Antifungal medication can also be applied to the fitting surface of the denture before it is put back in the mouth. Other problems with the dentures, such as inadequate occlusal vertical dimension may also need to be corrected in the case of angular cheilitis.

Prognosis
The severity of oral candidiasis is subject to great variability from one person to another and in the same person from one occasion to the next. The prognosis of such infection is usually excellent after the application of topical or systemic treatments. However, oral candidiasis can be recurrent. Individuals continue to be at risk of the condition if underlying factors such as reduced salivary flow rate or immunosuppression are not rectifiable.

Candidiasis can be a marker for underlying disease, so the overall prognosis may also be dependent upon this. For example, a transient erythematous candidiasis that developed after antibiotic therapy usually resolves after antibiotics are stopped (but not always immediately), and therefore carries an excellent prognosis—but candidiasis may occasionally be a sign of more sinister undiagnosed pathology, such as HIV/AIDS or leukemia.

It is possible for candidiasis to spread to/from the mouth, from sites such as the pharynx, esophagus, lungs, liver, anogenital region, skin or the nails. The spread of oral candidiasis to other sites usually occurs in debilitated individuals. It is also possible that candidiasis is spread by sexual contact. Rarely, a superficial candidal infection such as oral candidiasis can cause invasive candidiasis, and even prove fatal. The observation that Candida species are normally harmless commensals on the one hand, but are also occasionally capable of causing fatal invasive candidiases has led to the description "Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde".

The role of thrush in the hospital and ventilated patients is not entirely clear, however, there is a theoretical risk of positive interaction of candida with topical bacteria.

Epidemiology
In humans, oral candidiasis is the most common form of candidiasis, by far the most common fungal infection of the mouth, and it also represents the most common opportunistic oral infection in humans with lesions only occurring when the environment favors pathogenic behavior.

Oropharyngeal candidiasis is common during cancer care, and it is a very common oral sign in individuals with HIV. Oral candidiasis occurs in about two thirds of people with concomitant AIDS and esophageal candidiasis.

The incidence of all forms of candidiasis have increased in recent decades. This is due to developments in medicine, with more invasive medical procedures and surgeries, more widespread use of broad spectrum antibiotics and immunosuppression therapies. The HIV/AIDs global pandemic has been the greatest factor in the increased incidence of oral candidiasis since the 1980s. The incidence of candidiasis caused by NCAC species is also increasing, again thought to be due to changes in medical practise (e.g., organ transplantation and use of indwelling catheters).

History
Oral candidiasis has been recognized throughout recorded history. The first description of this condition is thought to have occurred in the 4th century B.C. in "Epidemics" (a treatise that is part of the hippocratic corpus), where descriptions of what sounds like oral candidiasis are stated to occur with severe underlying disease.

The colloquial term "thrush" is of unknown origin but may stem from an unrecorded Old English word *þrusc or from a Scandinavian root. The term is not related to the bird of the same name.

Society and culture
Many pseudoscientific claims by proponents of alternative medicine surround the topic of candidiasis. Oral candidiasis is sometimes presented in this manner as a symptom of a widely prevalent systemic candidiasis, candida hypersensitivity syndrome, yeast allergy, or gastrointestinal candida overgrowth, which are medically unrecognized conditions. (See: Alternative medicine in Candidiasis)

title: Oral candidiasis