text:
Kenneth Snelson

Kenneth Duane Snelson (June 29, 1927 – December 22, 2016) was an American contemporary sculptor and photographer. His sculptural works, exemplified by Needle Tower, are composed of flexible and rigid components arranged according to the idea of 'tensegrity'. Snelson preferred the descriptive term floating compression.

Snelson said his former professor Buckminster Fuller took credit for Snelson's discovery of the concept that Fuller named tensegrity. Fuller gave the idea its name, combining 'tension' and 'structural integrity.' Kārlis Johansons had exhibited tensegrity sculptures several years before Snelson was even born. The height and strength of Snelson's sculptures, which are often delicate in appearance, depend on the tension between rigid pipes and flexible cables.

Biography
Snelson was born in Pendleton, Oregon, in 1927. He studied at the University of Oregon in Eugene, at the Black Mountain College, and with Fernand Léger in Paris. His sculpture and photography have been exhibited at over 25 one-man shows in galleries around the world including the structurally seminal Park Place Gallery in New York in the 1960s. Snelson also did research on the shape of the atom. Snelson continued to work in his SoHo studio, occasionally collaborating with animator Jonathan Monaghan. He lived in New York City with his wife, Katherine.

He held five United States patents: #3,169,611: Discontinuous Compression Structures, February 1965; #3,276,148: Model for Atomic Forms, October 1966; #4,099,339:  Model for Atomic Forms, July 1978; and #6,017,220: Magnetic Geometric Building System; and most recently, #6,739,937: Space Frame Structure Made by 3-D Weaving of Rod Members, May 25, 2004.

Snelson was a founding member of ConStruct, the artist-owned gallery that promoted and organized large-scale sculpture exhibitions throughout the United States. Other founding members include Mark di Suvero, John Raymond Henry, Lyman Kipp and Charles Ginnever. Snelson was also a pioneer of digital art, using a Silicon Graphics machine to produce artistic images in the 1980s.

After suffering from prostate cancer, Snelson died on December 22, 2016, at the age of 89.

Honours and awards

 * (1999) Lifetime Achievement in Contemporary Sculpture Award, International Sculpture Center.

Alabama

 * Mora Terry II, Birmingham Museum of Art, Birmingham

California

 * City Boots, 1968, J. Patrick Lannon Foundation, Los Angeles
 * Mozart I, 1982, Stanford University, Palo Alto

District of Columbia

 * Needle Tower, 1968, Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Washington
 * Untitled Maquette, 1975, Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Washington

Florida

 * Newport, 1968, M. Margulies, Coconut Grove
 * Double City Boots, 1967, MDC Wolfson Campus, Miami
 * X-Planar Tower, John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art, Sarasota

Iowa

 * Four Module Piece, 1968, Riverfront Crossings Park, Iowa City

Louisiana

 * Virlane Tower, 1981, Sydney and Walda Besthoff Sculpture Garden at NOMA, New Orleans

Maryland

 * B-Tree, 1981, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda
 * Easy Landing, 1977, City of Baltimore, Baltimore
 * Six Number Two, 1967, Annmarie Sculpture Garden (Smithsonian partner/annex site), Solomons, Maryland

Massachusetts

 * Mozart III, 2008, Science Center, Wellesley College, Wellesley,

Michigan

 * Indexer II, 2001, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
 * B-Tree II, 2005, Frederik Meijer Gardens & Sculpture Park, Grand Rapids

Missouri

 * Triple Crown, 1991, Hallmark, Inc., Kansas City, Missouri, just north of 27th Street between Main Street and Grand Blvd, at the South end of the Crown Center complex. The sculpture consists of 30–40 aluminum tubes held together and apart by steel cables.  The entire assembly is roughly 23 meters on each of three sides and roughly that tall, with the low point being roughly 5 meters above the ground.

Nebraska

 * Able Charlie, 1983, Joslyn Art Museum, Omaha

New York

 * Coronation Day, 1980, City of Buffalo, Buffalo
 * E.C. Column, 1969–81, Albright-Knox Art Gallery, Buffalo
 * Four Chances, 1982, Albright Knox Museum, Buffalo
 * Fair Leda, 1969, Nelson Rockefeller Estate
 * Free Ride Home, 1974, Storm King Art Center, Mountainville
 * Mozart II, 1982, Donald M. Kendall Sculpture Garden at Pepsico, Purchase
 * Sun River, 1967, Whitney Museum of American Art, New York
 * One World Trade Center antenna/spire, 2006, One World Trade Center, New York

New Jersey

 * Northwood II, 1970, Compton Quad, Graduate College, Princeton, Mercer

North Carolina

 * Northwood II(maquette), 1970, Asheville Art Museum, Asheville

Pennsylvania

 * Forest Devil, 1975–77, Museum of Art, Carnegie Institute, Pittsburgh

Ohio

 * Forest Devil, 1975, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati
 * V-X, 1968, Columbus Museum of Art, Columbus

Oklahoma

 * Sleeping Dragon, 2002–03, Kirkpatrick Oil Company Building, Oklahoma City

Tennessee

 * Dragon II, 2005, Knoxville Museum of Art, Knoxville
 * V-X-II, 1973-4, Hunter Museum, Chattanooga

Texas

 * Northwood, 1969, Northwood Institute, Cedar Hills

Vermont

 * "Hard Wired", Bennington (College)

Wisconsin

 * Northwoods III, 1970, Milwaukee Art Museum, Milwaukee

Germany

 * Soft Landing, 1975–77, Berlin Nationalgalerie, Berlin
 * Avenue K, 1968, City of Hannover

The Netherlands

 * Easy-K, 1970, Sonsbeek ‘70, Arnhem
 * Needle Tower II, 1969, Kröller Müller Museum, Otterlo

Japan

 * Osaka, 1970, Japan Iron & Steel Federation, Kobe
 * Needle Tower II, 1989,Shiga Prefecture Museum,Shiga
 * T-Zone Flight, 1995, JT Building, Toranomon, Tokyo
 * Landing, 1970, Wakayama Prefecture Museum, Wakayama

Location unknown

 * Audrey I, 1966, Private Collection
 * Audrey II, 1966, Private Collection
 * Equilateral Quivering Tower, 1973–92
 * Tri-Core Column, 1974
 * Wing I, 1992; Ed. 4, Private collection : University of Puerto Rico – Mayaguez
 * Rainbow Arch, 2001, Private collection displayed at Seltzer Sculpture Garden, Cleveland, OH
 * Dragon, 2000–03

title: Kenneth Snelson


text: User:Hemanshu/Main page snapshot

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

title: User:Hemanshu/Main page snapshot


text:
List of rulers of the Gurma Mossi state of Nungu

List of Rulers of the Nungu Kingdom sometimes referred to as the Gurma Kingdom or Empire. The state was created by the Gurmanche people who are closely related to the Mossi people and was centred on the city of Fada N'Gourma.

This territory located in present-day Burkina Faso.

Nunbado = Ruler


text:
List of rulers of the Gurma Mossi state of Piela

This is a list of rulers of the Gurma Mossi state of Piela, located in present-day Burkina Faso.

List of Rulers of the Gurma Mossi state of Piela
Territory located in present-day Burkina Faso.

Pielabedo = Ruler


text:
Dov S. Zakheim

Dov S. Zakheim (born December 18, 1948) is an American businessman, writer, and former official of the United States government. In the Reagan administration, he held various Department of Defense positions. In 2000, Zakheim was a member of "The Vulcans", a group of foreign policy advisors assisting George W. Bush's presidential campaign. From 2001 to 2004 he was Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and Chief Financial Officer of the Department of Defense.

Early life and education
Zakheim was born in Brooklyn and graduated from Yeshiva University High School in Brooklyn in 1966. He earned his Bachelor of Arts degree Summa Cum Laude in government from Columbia University in 1970 and D.Phil. in economics and politics from the University of Oxford in 1974. He is Jewish.

Career
Zakheim joined the United States Department of Defense in 1981 after serving as a principal analyst in the Congressional Budget Office. He served in various Department of Defense posts during the Reagan administration, including Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Planning and Resources from 1985 to 1987. There was some controversy in both the U.S. and Israel over Zakheim's involvement in ending the Israeli fighter program, the IAI Lavi. He argued that Israeli and U.S. interests would be best served by having Israel purchase F-16 fighters, rather than investing in an entirely new aircraft. He left government service in 1987 and joined the technology and analysis firm System Planning Corporation as its corporate vice president.

From 1987–2001, Zakheim was CEO of SPC International, a subsidiary of System Planning Corporation, a high-technology analytical firm. During that period, he served as a consultant to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and sat on a number of major Department of Defense panels, including its Task Force on Defense Reform (1997) and the Department of Defense first Board of Visitors of Overseas Regional Centers (1998–2001).

Zakheim was an adjunct professor at the National War College, Yeshiva University, Columbia University, and Trinity College, where he was presidential scholar. Zakheim was an adjunct scholar of The Heritage Foundation, a senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and has published over 200 articles and monographs on defense-related issues.

Zakheim signed a letter to Bill Clinton about Iraq. During his term as comptroller, he was tasked to trace the Pentagon's 2.3 trillion dollars' worth of unaccounted transactions. He also played an active role in the Department's system acquisition, strategic planning, programming, and budget process. He was succeeded by Tina W. Jonas as the top budget official at the DoD.

In 2008, he was appointed by President Bush as a member of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan. He subsequently served as a Commissioner on the Congressionally-mandated Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission. He currently is a Commissioner on the Congressionally-mandated National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology, appointed by Senator Jack Reed.

Zakheim retired as a senior vice president of Booz Allen Hamilton in 2010. He is a senior fellow at the CNA Corporation and a senior advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies

Zakheim is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the International Institute for Strategic Studies, and the United States Naval Institute, and Chatham House. He is a fellow of the Royal Swedish Academy of War Sciences.

Zakheim is a member of the editorial boards of the journal The National Interest and Naval War College Press. He is vice chairman of the board of trustees of the Foreign Policy Research Institute, a trustee of the American University of Iraq, and a member of the Atlantic Council's board of directors,. on the Board of the Friends of the Jewish Chapel of the United States Naval Academy and on the Board of Control of the Naval Academy Athletic Association. He publishes a regular column in The Hill.

He is a three-time recipient of the Department of Defense's highest civilian award, the Distinguished Public Service Medal, as well as other awards for government and community service. He is also co-vice chair of Global Panel America with Malcolm Rifkind.

His 2011 book, A Vulcan’s Tale: How the Bush Administration Mismanaged the Reconstruction of Afghanistan, discusses the Bush administration's missed opportunities and struggles to manage two wars, particularly the seemingly endless conflict in Afghanistan.

In the 2020 presidential election, Zakheim, along with over 130 other former Republican national security officials, signed a statement that asserted that President Donald Trump was unfit to serve another term, and "To that end, we are firmly convinced that it is in the best interest of our nation that Vice President Joe Biden be elected as the next President of the United States, and we will vote for him."

Books

 * Congress and National Security in the Post-Cold War Era (Nixon Center, 1998)
 * Toward a Fortress Europe? (Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2000)
 * A Vulcan's Tale (Brookings Institution Press, 2011)
 * Nehemiah: Statesman and Sage (Koren Publishers, 2016)
 * Nehemiah: Statesman and Sage (Koren Publishers, 2016)

title: Dov S. Zakheim


text:
University of Puerto Rico at Aguadilla

The University of Puerto Rico at Aguadilla (UPRAG or UPR-Aguadilla) is a public university campus in Aguadilla, Puerto Rico. It is part of the University of Puerto Rico.

In 2010 the campus went on strike as part of the  2010–2011 University of Puerto Rico strikes. In 2017 in response to budget cuts to the university system by the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico the campus students voted to have an intermittent strike as part of the University of Puerto Rico strikes, 2017.

Academics
Located in northwestern Puerto Rico, the University of Puerto Rico at Aguadilla (UPRAg) offers Associate and Baccalaureate Degrees. Some programs are unique in the University of Puerto Rico:

 * Bachelor of Science in Environmental Technology
 * Bachelor of Arts in Education with a concentration in English and multimedia technology.
 * Bachelor of Business Administration with concentrations in Human Resources, Computerized Information Systems, Accounting, Marketing and Finances. This program is accredited by the ACBSP.
 * Bachelor of Science in Biology with emphases in Bioinformatics, Biomedical Sciences, Genetics, Quality Systems Assessment, and Biology.
 * Associate degree in Aeronautics and Aerospace Technology.

The UPRAg has cooperation agreements with neighboring industry and business and design courses, programs and projects that respond to changing needs that occur in the region.

Departments
UPRAG has eight academic departments: Humanities, English, Pedagogy, Electronics, Business Administration, Office Systems, Natural Sciences, and Social Sciences.

title: University of Puerto Rico at Aguadilla


text: File:NASA Cavalli-Sforza.gif

title: File:NASA Cavalli-Sforza.gif


text:
Roots (1977 miniseries)

Roots is a 1977 American television miniseries based on Alex Haley's 1976 novel Roots: The Saga of an American Family, set during and after the era of slavery in the United States. The series first aired on ABC in January 1977 over eight consecutive nights.

A critical and ratings success over the course of its run, Roots received 37 Primetime Emmy Award nominations and won nine. It also won a Golden Globe and a Peabody Award. It received unprecedented Nielsen ratings for the finale, which holds the record as the third-highest-rated episode for any type of television series, and the second-most-watched overall series finale in U.S. television history.

A sequel, Roots: The Next Generations, first aired in 1979, and a second sequel, Roots: The Gift, a Christmas television film, starring LeVar Burton and Louis Gossett Jr., first aired in 1988. A related film, Alex Haley's Queen, is based on the life of Queen Jackson Haley, who was Alex Haley's paternal grandmother.

In 2016, a remake of the original miniseries, with the same name, was commissioned by the History channel and screened by the channel on Memorial Day.

Colonial times
In the Gambia, West Africa, in 1750, Kunta Kinte is born to Omoro Kinte, a Mandinka warrior, and his wife, Binta. He is raised in a Muslim family. When Kunta reaches the age of 15, he and other boys undergo a semi-secretive tribal rite of passage, under the Kintango, which includes wrestling, circumcision, philosophy, war-craft and hunting skills.

Meanwhile, Captain Thomas Davies meets Villars, the owner of a cargo ship named the Lord Ligonier, and is given command of the vessel in order to trade goods between England, Africa and America. Only at the last minute is he informed that part of his cargo will consist of African slaves, to his dismay.

During the early voyage, Mr. Slater, one of the ship's officers, pontificates to Davies about slavery. After learning that Slater is an expert in the field, having undertaken many similar voyages previously, Davies eventually grants him total authority and control over all procedures for ensuring their safe and secure passage to America.

When the ship docks in Africa, Slater introduces Davies to the trader and negotiator, Gardner, who is tasked with the capture or purchase of 170 Africans.

Back in Juffure, while still in training, Kunta is instructed to catch a bird unharmed. The bird escapes from the safety of the training area, and during the chase, Kunta crosses paths with Gardner's small party of European slave hunters and their captives.

Shortly after his ceremonial return, while fetching wood outside his village to make a drum for his younger brother Lamin, Kunta is captured by Gardner and four black collaborators. He is then sold to a slave trader and placed aboard the slave ship for a three-month journey to Colonial America. The ship eventually leaves Africa with 140 Africans.

During the voyage, Kunta bonds with a Yoruba wrestler who was part of his manhood training, as well as a Mandinka girl named Fanta whom he met shortly before his kidnapping. An insurrection among the human cargo fails to take over the ship, but results in the death of Mr. Slater, several crew members and several Africans, including the wrestler.

The ship eventually arrives in Annapolis, Maryland, in 1767, with 98 Africans still living. The captured Africans are sold at auction as slaves. John Reynolds, a plantation owner from Spotsylvania County, Virginia, near Fredericksburg, buys Kunta and gives him the Christian name Toby. Reynolds assigns an older slave, Fiddler, to teach Kunta English and train him in the ways of servitude. Although Kunta gradually warms up to Fiddler, he wants to preserve his Mandinka (and Islamic) heritage, and he defiantly refuses to eat pork or accept his Christian name.

Kunta makes several unsuccessful attempts to escape, first breaking his ankle chain with a broken tool blade he finds half buried in a field. After this attempt the overseer, Ames, gathers the slaves in the barn, and directs another slave, James, to whip Kunta until he acknowledges his new name "Toby." Fiddler comforts the bloody-backed Kunta and uses his Mandinka name for the first time, assuring him "there will be another day."

Late 18th century
In 1776, the adult Kunta Kinte, still haunted by his Mandinka roots and desire for freedom, tries again to escape. He makes it to a nearby plantation where his boyhood friend Fanta is enslaved, although he discovers after spending the night with her that she has turned away from her African name and heritage in the name of survival. A pair of slave-catchers track him there and hobble him by chopping off almost half his right foot with a hatchet. Exasperated, John Reynolds decides to sell Kunta, which will also settle a debt with his brother Dr. William Reynolds, the local physician. John also transfers several of his other slaves, including Fiddler, to William as well.

Bell, the cook for William's family, successfully treats both Kunta's mangled foot and wounded spirit. A trusted member of the Reynolds household, she arranges for Kunta to become Dr. Reynolds' driver. Eventually Kunta submits to a life of servitude, although he never entirely renounces Africa, his faith in Islam, nor his hope of returning home. He marries Bell, in a ceremony which includes jumping across a broom, although his talk of Africa frustrates her. Bell bears a daughter in 1790, to whom Kunta gives the name Kizzy, which means "stay put" in the Mandinka language (in hopes of ensuring that she will never be sold away). Fiddler continues to mentor Kunta, and dies an old man shortly after Kizzy's birth.

Turn of the 19th century
An adulterous relationship between Dr. William Reynolds and John Reynolds' wife produces a daughter, Missy Anne, whom John believes is his own. Missy Anne and Kizzy become playmates and best friends despite the social confines of Southern plantation culture. Missy Anne secretly teaches Kizzy to read and write, a skill forbidden to slaves. In 1806, Kizzy falls in love with Noah, a spirited slave who attempts to flee North with a "traveling pass" forged by Kizzy from a pass given to her by Missy Anne.

Dr. Reynolds, although amiable and compassionate toward his slaves, regards the pass and escape to be such an egregious breach of trust that he separately sells both Noah and Kizzy, much to the horror of Bell and Kunta. Missy Anne, who had offered Kizzy a place as her companion and maid, watches dispassionately as Kizzy is dragged away. Tom Moore, a planter in Caswell County, North Carolina, with a sexual appetite for young female slaves, becomes Kizzy's new owner, and rapes her the night of her arrival. Kizzy becomes pregnant from the assault and gives birth to their son, George, nine months after her arrival.

Early 19th century
In 1824, the cheerful and confident George, under the tutelage of an older slave named Mingo, learns much about cockfighting. By direction of Moore, George takes over as the chief trainer, the "cock of the walk." George befriends Marcellus, a free black man, and fellow cockfighter, who informs him about the possibility of buying his own freedom. At the same time, he believes Moore to be a close friend.

Meanwhile, the adult Kizzy is wooed by Sam Bennett, a fancy carriage driver whose master is visiting the Moores. Seeking to impress Kizzy, he takes her for a short visit to her former home on Dr. Reynolds's plantation, in the hope that she can see her parents. Kizzy learns that Bell has been sold away and that Kunta died two years earlier. Kizzy sees her father's grave and his wooden marker; using a small stone, she scratches over the name Toby and writes below it "Kunta Kinte," and promises him that his descendants will be free one day.

In 1831, George realizes his master's true feelings when he and his family are threatened at gunpoint by Moore and his wife, as a result of Nat Turner's Rebellion. Although none of Moore's slaves are personally involved in the rebellion, they become victims of the paranoid suspicions of their master, so they start planning to buy their freedom, although Moore tells George he will never allow it. Kizzy finally tells George that Moore is his father.

George, having become an expert in cockfighting, earns for himself the moniker "Chicken George." Squire James, Moore's main adversary in the pit, arranges for a British owner, Sir Eric Russell, and twenty of his cocks to visit and to participate in the local fights. Moore eventually bets a huge sum on his best bird, which George has trained, but he loses and cannot pay.

Under the terms of a settlement between Moore and Russell, George goes to England to train cocks for Russell and to train more trainers and is forced to leave behind Kizzy, his wife Tildy, and his sons, Tom and Lewis. Moore promises to set George free on the latter's return and to keep the family together in his absence. However, a now-broke Moore then sells all of his remaining slaves except Kizzy.

Later in life, Kizzy and Missy Anne Reynolds meet by chance one last time. Missy Anne denies that she "recollects" a "darkie by the name of Kizzy." Kizzy then spits into Missy Anne's cup of water without Missy Anne realizing it.

The Civil War
George returns in 1861, shortly before the start of the Civil War. He proudly announces that Moore, after some reluctance on Moore's part and some persuasion on George's part, has kept his word by granting George his freedom. He learns that Kizzy has died two months before, and that Tildy, Tom and Lewis now belong to Sam Harvey. Tom has become a blacksmith on the Harvey plantation and has a wife, Irene, and two sons.

George is welcomed warmly and learns that his relatives have spoken well of him during his absence. He further learns that according to a law in North Carolina, if he stays 60 days in that state as a freed slave, he will lose his freedom, so he heads northward, seeking the next stage in his career as a cockfighter and awaiting the end of the war, the emancipation of the slaves, and another reunion of his family. Meanwhile, Tom meets harassment at the hands of two brothers, Evan and Jemmy Brent.

While the war continues to its inevitable end, a hungry and destitute young white couple from South Carolina, George and Martha Johnson, arrive and ask for help, and the slave family take them in. George Johnson is given a job as overseer of the plantation, but has no experience with slaves and balks at the expectation that he mistreat them. Martha soon gives birth, but the child is stillborn. The couple stays on with Tom and his wife, becoming a part of their community.

Eventually, a month before the surrender by the South, Jemmy deserts the Confederate Army, and he shows up at Tom's blacksmith shop. Tom reluctantly runs an errand for him but, on returning, he finds Jemmy trying to rape Irene, and in the resulting fight Tom drowns him in the quenching tub. Later Evan, now an officer in the Confederate cavalry, arrives at the shop, demands to know about Jemmy, gets no answer, and angrily tells Tom that he has not yet finished with him.

Postwar
After the war, the former owner of the farm Tom works on, Sam Harvey, is forced to surrender all of his property to Senator Arthur Justin, a local politician intent on acquiring as much land as possible. Under the terms of the surrender, his former slaves are allowed to stay on as sharecroppers, with eventual rights to own a part of the land. However, because no written deed has been filed, the senator deems the agreement void and imposes heavy debts on the black farmers as a legal pretext to keep them from leaving the county. He later gives oversight of the farm to Evan Brent, who reinstates George Johnson as overseer, believing whites should not farm alongside blacks.

One night, several local white men, led by Evan and wearing white hoods (made from fabric sacks from Evan's store) begin to harass and terrorize Tom, his family, and other members of his community. Tom emerges as the leader among his group, while tensions arise between the white Johnsons and Tom's brother Lewis. As the local blacksmith, Tom devises a horseshoeing method to identify the horses involved in the raids by the hooded men. But when Tom reports his suspicions and his evidence to the sheriff, who sympathizes with Evan and knows every member of the white mob, the sheriff tips off Evan.

Evan's mob leads another raid against Tom, during which Tom is whipped. George Johnson intervenes and reluctantly volunteers to whip Tom, in order to save his friend's life. Lewis emotionally reconciles with the Johnsons as the family treats Tom's injuries, unsure of their future. Chicken George then unexpectedly returns, raising the spirits of his relatives and friends, and begins to plot their next step. He reports that he has bought some land in Tennessee.

Using some cunning and deception of their own, the black farmers make preparations for their move away. The group eventually lures Evan and his gang to the farm and overpowers them, jubilantly departing for Tennessee. Chicken George and his group arrive on his land in Henning, Lauderdale County, Tennessee, to start their new life. Once there, George and Tom retell part of the story of Kunta Kinte in Africa to his grandchildren in Tennessee.

Cast
Number in parentheses indicates how many episodes in which the actor/character appears.

Main cast

 * John Amos – Older Kunta Kinte (3)
 * Maya Angelou – Nyo Boto (1)
 * Ed Asner – Capt. Davies (2)
 * Lloyd Bridges – Evan Brent (2)
 * Georg Stanford Brown – Tom Harvey (2)
 * LeVar Burton – Young Kunta Kinte (2)
 * Macdonald Carey – Squire James (1)
 * Olivia Cole – Matilda (3)
 * Chuck Connors – Tom Moore (2)
 * Scatman Crothers – Mingo (1)
 * Ji-Tu Cumbuka – Wrestler (2)
 * Brad Davis – Ol' George Johnson (2)
 * Sandy Duncan – Missy Anne Reynolds (2)
 * Lynda Day George – Mrs. Reynolds (3)
 * Louis Gossett Jr. – Fiddler (3)
 * Lorne Greene – John Reynolds (2)
 * Moses Gunn – Kintango (1)
 * George Hamilton – Stephen Bennett (1)
 * Hilly Hicks – Lewis (2)
 * Burl Ives – Sen. Arthur Justin (1)
 * Lawrence Hilton-Jacobs – Noah (1)
 * Carolyn Jones – Mrs. Moore (2)
 * Doug McClure – Jemmy Brent (1)
 * Ian McShane – Sir Eric Russell (1)
 * Lynne Moody – Irene Harvey (2)
 * Vic Morrow – Ames (2)
 * Thalmus Rasulala – Omoro (1)
 * Robert Reed – Dr. William Reynolds (4)
 * Harry Rhodes – Brima Cesay (1)
 * Richard Roundtree – Sam Bennett (1)
 * John Schuck – Ordell (1)
 * Paul Shenar – John Carrington (1)
 * O. J. Simpson – Kadi Touray (1)
 * Madge Sinclair – Bell Reynolds (3)
 * Cicely Tyson – Binta (1)
 * Leslie Uggams – Kizzy Reynolds (2)
 * Ben Vereen – Chicken George Moore (3)
 * Ralph Waite – Third mate Slater (2)
 * William Watson – Gardner (1)
 * Ren Woods – Fanta (2)

Also appearing

 * Lane Binkley – Martha Johnson (2)
 * Tanya Boyd – Genelva (2)
 * Todd Bridges – Bud (1)
 * Grand L. Bush – Captured runaway slave (1)
 * Gary Collins – Grill (1)
 * Charles Cyphers – Drake (1)
 * Thayer David – Harlan (2)
 * Richard Farnsworth – Trumbull (1)
 * Tracey Gold – Young Missy Reynolds (1)
 * Brion James – Slaver (1)
 * Macon McCalman – Poston (1)
 * Richard McKenzie – Sam Harvey (2)
 * John Quade – Sheriff Biggs (1)
 * Roxie Roker – Malizy (1)
 * Lillian Randolph – Sister Sara (1)
 * Raymond St. Jacques – Drummer (1)
 * Austin Stoker – Virgil (2)
 * Ernest Lee Thomas – Kailuba (1)
 * Beverly Todd – Older Fanta (1)
 * Zack Fisher as Abraham Lincoln

Production
The miniseries was directed by Marvin J. Chomsky, John Erman, David Greene and Gilbert Moses. It was produced by Stan Margulies. David L. Wolper was executive producer. The score was composed by Gerald Fried, and Quincy Jones for only the first episode. Many familiar white TV actors, such as Ed Asner (from The Mary Tyler Moore Show), Chuck Connors (The Rifleman), Lorne Greene (Bonanza and later Battlestar Galactica), Robert Reed (The Brady Bunch), and Ralph Waite (The Waltons), were cast against type as slave holders and traders. ABC television executives "got cold feet" after seeing the brutality depicted in the series and attempted to cut the network's predicted losses by airing the series over eight consecutive nights in January in one fell swoop. The Museum of Broadcast Communications recounts the apprehensions that Roots would flop, and how this made ABC prepare the format:

"Familiar television actors like Lorne Greene were chosen for the white, secondary roles, to reassure audiences. The white actors were featured disproportionately in network previews. For the first episode, the writers created a conscience-stricken slave captain (Ed Asner), a figure who did not appear in Haley's novel but was intended to make white audiences feel better about their historical role in the slave trade. Even the show's consecutive-night format allegedly resulted from network apprehensions. ABC programming chief Fred Silverman hoped that the unusual schedule would cut his network's imminent losses—and get Roots off the air before sweeps week."

Musical score and soundtrack
The majority of the miniseries' score, including the main "Mural" theme heard during the opening credits, was by veteran composer Gerald Fried. Quincy Jones contributed music for the first episode, however, and he and Fried each earned an Emmy for their work on that installment.

An album titled Roots: The Saga of an American Family, featuring music from and inspired by the program and re-arranged and conducted by Jones, became a hit for A&M in 1977. The original soundtrack was released the following year.

In explaining the impetus for Jones' version, AllMusic critic Richard S. Ginell noted that the composer "has been threatening to write a long tone poem sketching the history of black music for decades now, and he has yet to do it. This project, rushed out in the wake of the 1977 TV miniseries Roots, is about as close as he has come. A brief (28 minutes) immaculately produced and segued suite, Roots quickly traces a timeline from Africa to the Civil War, incorporating ancient and modern African influences (with Letta Mbulu as the featured vocalist), a sea shanty, field hollers and fiddle tunes, snippets of dialogue from Roots actor Lou Gossett, and some Hollywood-style movie cues. ... Though some prominent jazzers turn up in the orchestra, there is not a trace of jazz to be heard. This is a timely souvenir of a cultural phenomenon, but merely a curiosity for jazz fans".

Track listing
All compositions by Quincy Jones except where noted.
 * 1) "Motherland" − 0:29
 * 2) "Roots Mural Theme" (Gerald Fried) − 2:12
 * 3) "Main Title: Mama Aifambeni" (Quincy Jones, Caiphus Semenya) − 0:59
 * 4) "Behold the Only Thing Greater Than Yourself (Birth)" (Jones, Semenya) − 1:30
 * 5) "Oluwa (Many Rains Ago)" (Jones, Semenya) − 2:28
 * 6) "Boyhood to Manhood" (Jones, Zak Diouf, Bill Summers) − 0:55
 * 7) "The Toubob Is Here! (The Capture)" − 1:01
 * 8) "Middle Passage (Slaveship Crossing)" − 1:15
 * 9) "You in Americuh Now, African" − 0:33
 * 10) "Roots Mural Theme Intro (Slave Auction)" (Fried) − 0:16
 * 11) "Ole Fiddler" (Lou Gossett Jr.) − 1:12
 * 12) "Jumpin' de Broom (Marriage Ceremony)" (Jones, Bobby Bruce) − 0:42
 * 13) "What Can I Do? (Hush, Hush, Somebody's Calling My Name)" (Jones, James Cleveland) − 2:16
 * 14) "Roots Mural Theme Bridge (Plantation Life)" (Fried) − 1:00
 * 15) "Oh Lord, Come By Here" (Jones, Cleveland) − 3:36
 * 16) "Ole Fiddler/Free at Last? (The Civil War)" (Gosset/Jones) − 2:24
 * 17) "Many Rains Ago (Oluwa) [African Theme/English Version]" (Jones, Semenya) − 4:53

Personnel

 * Conceived, produced, arranged and conducted by Quincy Jones
 * Bobby Bryant, Buddy Childers, John Audino − trumpet
 * Bill Watrous, Dick Nash, Maurice Spear − trombone
 * Alan Robinson, David Duke, James Decker − French horn
 * Tommy Johnson − tuba
 * Ernie Watts, Jerome Richardson, Ted Nash, Terry Harrington, Bill Green − woodwinds
 * Dave Grusin, Ian Underwood, Mike Boddicker, Pete Jolly, Richard Tee − keyboards
 * David T. Walker, Lee Ritenour − guitar
 * Catherine Gotthoffer, Dorothy Remsen − harp
 * Alton Hendrickson − banjo
 * Chuck Rainey, Ed Reddick − electric bass
 * Arni Egillson, Milt Kestenbaum − bass
 * Bill Summers, Bobbye Hall, Caiphus Semenya, Emil Richards, King Errison, Milt Holland, Paul Bryant, Shelly Manne, Tommy Vig, Victor Feldman, Zak Diouf − percussion
 * Bobby Bruce − fiddle (track 12)
 * Bobby Bruce, Erno Neufeld, Gerald Vinci, Harry Bluestone, Irv Katz, Janice Gower, John Santulis, Joseph Livoti, Joe Stepansky, Ralph Shaeffer, Bob Sushell, Sheldon Sanov, Bill Nuttycomb − violin
 * Alex Nieman, Marilyn Baker, Bob Ostrowsky, Rollis Dale − viola
 * Jeff Solow, Jesse Erlich, Paul Bergstrom, Ronnie Cooper − cello
 * The Wattsline Choir conducted by Reverend James Cleveland – vocals (tracks 3, 5, 8, 13, 15 & 17)
 * Charles May, David Pridgen, Mortonette Jenkins, Rodney Armstrong, Sherwood Sledge
 * Letta Mbulu − vocals (tracks 3–5 & 17)
 * Lou Gossett − vocals, dialogue (tracks 9, 11, & 16)
 * Stan Haze − dialogue (track 10)
 * Zak Diouf − vocals (track 6)
 * Alex Hassilev − vocals (track 8)
 * Alexandra Brown, Caiphus Semenya, Deborah Tibbs, Jim Gilstrap, John Lehman, Linda Evans, Paulette McWilliams, Reverend James Cleveland, Stephanie Spruill – vocals
 * Bill Summers, Caiphus Semenya, Dave Grusin, Herb Spencer, John Mandel, Reverend James Cleveland, Dick Hazard, Tommy Bahler – arrangers
 * Tommy Bahler − choir arranger and conductor (tracks 5 & 17)

Reception
The series received positive reviews. Review aggregator website, Rotten Tomatoes later rated it 76% "fresh" based on 32 reviews, with the critic's consensus stating "Roots may shave off the nuances of Alex Haley's landmark book for the sake of slicker storytelling, but excellent performances and the intrinsic power of this generational tale make for revelatory television." Variety reviewed it positively, summarizing, "The production and performances are strong, with newcomer LeVar Burton effective as the African youngster trapped into slavery. Edward Asner, as he did in Rich Man, Poor Man a year ago, dominates the screen in his opening scenes." In 2023, Variety ranked Roots as the #10 greatest TV show of all time.

Episode lists
Roots originally aired on ABC for eight consecutive nights from January 23 to 30, 1977. In the United Kingdom, BBC One aired the series in six parts, starting with parts 1 to 3 over the weekend of April 8 to 11, 1977. The concluding three parts were broadcast on Sunday nights, from April 15 to May 1. The six-part version screened by the BBC is the version released on home video.

U.S. television ratings
The miniseries was watched by an estimated 130 million  and 140 million  viewers total (more than half of the U.S. 1977 population of 221 million—the largest viewership ever attracted by any type of television series in US history as tallied by Nielsen Media Research) and averaged a 44.9 rating and 66% to 80% viewer share of the audience. The final episode was watched by 100 million viewers and an average of 80 million viewers watched each of the last seven episodes. Eighty-five percent of all television homes saw all or part of the miniseries. All episodes rank within the top-100-rated TV shows of all time.

On February 16–18, 2013, in honor of Black History Month and the 36th anniversary of Roots, cable network BET aired both Roots and its sequel miniseries, Roots: The Next Generations. Celebrating the 35th anniversary of Roots, BET premiered the miniseries on a three-day-weekend showing in December 2012, which resulted in its being seen by a total of 10.8 million viewers, according to Nielsen ratings, and became the number-one Roots telecast in cable-television history. As for the BET network, its 35th-anniversary airing of Roots became its best "non-tentpole" weekend in the network's history. On Sunday, October 18, 2015, TV One rebroadcast Roots in high definition.

Home media
Warner Home Video, which released a three-disc 25th-anniversary DVD edition of the series in 2002, released a four-disc (three double-sided, one single-sided) 30th-anniversary set on May 22, 2007. Bonus features include a new audio commentary by LeVar Burton, Cicely Tyson and Ed Asner, among other key cast members, "Remembering Roots" behind-the-scenes documentary, "Crossing Over: How Roots Captivated an Entire Nation" featurette, new interviews with key cast members and the DVD-ROM "Roots Family Tree" feature.

In 2016, Warner released a 40th anniversary Blu-ray, restoring the eight-episode format, completely remastered from the original elements.

The miniseries has also been released in the digital format for streaming, although in the edited six-episode format.

Roots is not available on Warner Bros. Discovery's streaming service, Max.

Remake
The History channel produced a remake of the miniseries after acquiring rights from David L. Wolper's son, Mark Wolper, and Haley's estate. The new eight-hour miniseries, with Mark Wolper as executive producer, drew on Haley's novel and the original miniseries albeit from a contemporary perspective. It was additionally simulcast on Lifetime and A&E. Will Packer, Marc Toberoff, Lawrence Konner and Mark Rosenthal also serve as executive producers, with LeVar Burton and Korin Huggins as co-executive producers.

The four-night event series premiered on Memorial Day, May 30, 2016. The ensemble cast includes Forest Whitaker as Fiddler, Anna Paquin as Nancy Holt, Jonathan Rhys Meyers as Tom Lea, Anika Noni Rose as Kizzy, Tip "T.I." Harris as Cyrus, Emayatzy Corinealdi as Bell, Matthew Goode as Dr. William Waller, Mekhi Phifer as Jerusalem, James Purefoy as John Waller, introduces Regé-Jean Page as Chicken George and Malachi Kirby as Kunta Kinte, with Laurence Fishburne as Alex Haley.

title: Roots (1977 miniseries)


text:
Talk:Praxeology

Synthethic a priori?
Differentiations such as synthetic a priori have long been dismissed by wittgenstein. Not even Mises clearly uses that definition to the contents of praxeology (sometimes referring to it as analytical, or whatever), since he mostly dismissed the question as irrevelant. So, what i mean is, i don't think it's proper to state praxeology as synthetic a priori. For a better view on the basis of the logic of action see this: http://mises.org/journals/scholar/long.pdf I will erase that part now, if that's ok.

By the way, about the criticisms i read here regarding if praxeology is science or not. It is, of course. Even using criterials from Popper, a well-known neo-positivist (or almost that, anyway), praxeology passes the test. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.26.15.167 (talk) 07:52, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Praise
Quite an excellent article! --ShaunMacPherson 07:05, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Criticisms
What about any criticisms of von Mises and his praxeology? --Kiwibird 13:14, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard38.html footnote 5: For a typical criticism of praxeology for not using mathematical logic, see George. J. Schuller, "Rejoinder," American Economic Review 41 (March 1951): 188. enjoy. 128.128.98.46 (talk) 18:23, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

 * It says in the article that people exchange goods or services that they both appraise to be of equal value. If this is true, then why would they exchange them at all?  If a newspaper sells for 50 cents, does this mean that I hold the value of this newspaper at 50 cents?  If so, why would I buy it?  Inversely, if the printer values the paper at 50 cents, why would THEY sell it?  They wouldn't.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.4.24.181 (talk) 20:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Delete recent additions?
Some of the recent additions like those referring to the "PostKantian base" don't seem to add anything. Consider deleting? Rjljr2 01:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Missing something?
It seems to me that the biggest thing missing in this article is the reason why neoclassical economics has become mainstream instead of this method. Until that information is added this article isn't of very much use. --Jayson Virissimo 05:40, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Lacking objectivity
I think objectivity is missing from this article. Even the introduction is extremely dubious stating it is the "science of human action". Clearly this page is very pro-Austrian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.79.65.97 (talk) 09:27, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Err, Praxeology is a big part of Austrian economics isn't it? (and vice versa) Rjljr2 (talk) 04:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Articles about a part of an economic belief shouldn't be pro- that belief Rowan9 (talk) 17:01, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Can praxeology be considered a science?
I have edited the definition to avoid defining it as a science. The subject is highly academic in nature and it is therefore proper that it be subjected to the academic definition of a science, which it does not meet. "Framework" is a more appropriate title. Nyopallo (talk) 17:30, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

 * You may have touched a nerve. As I understand it, there has been a controversy raging for decades about whether or not the study of human action requires empirical testability to be considered legitimate or "scientific". After all, no legitimate or truly meaningful testing can be conducted on human behavior in markets, etc. Some hints of this controversy are found in the discussions of positivism and scientism. While the term "framework" sounds ok to me, others more versed in Austrian praxeology may wish to weigh in here. --RayBirks (talk) 00:32, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * My justification here is outlined in the article and is more compelling when you consider the need for consistency between articles. Praxeology does not use data as an empirical science, and is therefore not one.  Formal sciences, like mathematics and statistics, begin with very rigid and rigorous frameworks that are wholly predictable and can be broken down into their component parts.  Praxeology, on the other hand, states in its very foundation that human action is too complex to be broken down into its component parts.  I think that it would be acceptable to include the controversy in the article if there is someone who feels that is important enough, however I still feel that making any outright statement that praxeology is a science would be incorrect.  Being a framework does not prevent it from also being a science, which is while I feel that it's a good term to use. Nyopallo (talk) 00:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd also like to point out that this deals with a previous issue raised on this talk page, namely that defining it as a science violates NPOV. Nyopallo (talk) 00:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

 * I have slightly changed the "misnomer" sentence to leave room for judgment about the use of the term "science". Separately, there is a further wiki page about the positivism controversy at Positivism dispute. At this writing, it is rather brief. --RayBirks (talk) 20:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks more like a meme than a science. It is something you will hear from well edjucated libertarians when you present them an argument about the objectivity of economics. To my eyes looks more like the "scientific" and existentialistic arguments of young-earth creationists.--92.118.191.48 (talk) 18:13, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

 * In mathematics, one is guided by real-world observation and adopts axioms and uses symbolic manipulations to develop theorems. In von Mises' praxeology, one is guided by real-world observation and adopts axioms (for example, "people value leisure") and uses verbal argumentation to develop theorems. Assuming the axioms in use at the time apply to the real world problem in question (say, the operation of a market economy, or perhaps criminals engaging in coercion), then the theorems will also apply. In this sense, praxeology is formally a science just as mathematics is a science (in fact, the "queen of the sciences" according to Gauss). These fields remain sciences even if you don't agree with the axioms; e.g. the axiom of choice remains a contentious axiom.

 * I don't know about other styles of praxeology ("or "praxiology"?) though, only von Mises'.

 * Doubledork (talk) 18:55, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

 * See the edit I made under the pseudoscience heading. Praxeology is not, and will never be, a science, unless praxeology changes or science does.

 * does NOT follow the scientific method; nothing is proven empirically. Instead, a load of assumption are made, and passed off as fact. Of course, many argue that science makes assumptions all the time (praxeologists and fans like to aim this criticism at maths in particular). This is false. Every theory in every science (including maths) can be traced back to stuff you can repeatedly prove for yourself, with your own eyes, time and time again, stuff that has been proven in the real world. Praxeology, instead, just starts with a load of statements, and goes from there. Nothing is proven, and there isn't even an attempt at falsification. Maths isn't like this at all: If something mathamtical fails in the real world, maths changes.

 * Another reason is because the "science of human action" is already covered by psychology. And don't even think about giving me that BS that I've heard before, about "psychology studies the mind, not human action". Human action is governed by the mind.

 * So yeah. That is why praxeology is most definitely not a science, and until people stop selling it as such, it will only be a pseudoscience at best.

 * P. S. And don't try to handwave any of this by claiming it only applies to some styles of praxeology, in case anyone was thinking it. Until praxeology starts its own, scientific journal, it can even begin to be a science. And that goes for all of it.The Talking Toaster (talk) 21:53, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Lacking objectivity 2
The sentence "It is commonly referred to as a science, however this may be a misnomer because it does not appear to meet the guidelines for either empirical or formal sciences." should either be removed, or moved from the ingress to a separate section (Criticism?) and should be discussed seriously, and not used as mockery. They argue that it is a science because... Critics argue that... and so on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.165.67.8 (talk) 07:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Classical economists and observation
The article says, "Like other Austrian and classical economists, he rejected the use of observation...". I'm not aware of classical economists rejecting observation. Of course, I'm not aware of lots of things. Anyway, I'd like a reference for that. C RETOG 8(t/c) 04:19, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

What about Alfred Espinas
The article acknowledges that the term was first coined by Alfred Espinas, but doesn't even mention him in the main thrust of the article, let alone go into any details of his coining. I don't know anything about Espinas, so maybe he just coined the term and never did anything with it. Even if this is the case, it should be noted the context and intent of his coining. —Memotype:: T 16:07, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

What is Praxeology?
That's the one question this page doesn't answer. Oh, I know it's "a framework for modeling human action", and "The science of human action". Does this mean that Praxeology involves throwing balls (scientifically, of course)? I can also infer that it has something to do with economics. Maybe throwing money then? Yes, that's sarcasm, but I still have no idea what Praxeology is. If someone who knows that would amend the article, that would be useful. -- TimNelson (talk) 12:41, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

 * No one knows, not even the self-professed praxeologists. This is evidenced by the fact that there does not exist a proper, academic summary of praxeology. Trust me, I've searched high and low. Go ahead, ask your friendly neighborhood praxeologist to provide you with such a summary; even if you offer to pay for it (even in gold!), there will be no summary forthcoming. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.218.107 (talk) 00:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

 * praxeology basically means that there are statements that 1, tells relevant things about the world, and 2, are self evident, and needs no proof. for example: "men make choices". it is obviously not a tautological statement, it is a real statement about the real world. on the other hand, one can say that it needs no evidence, it is obvious. positivist philosophy excplicitely denies such statements, claiming that any statement is either merely a consequence of the definitions, or it is about the world. the latter kind must be falsifiable, that is, it must proven true or false with observations. i would like to see that in the article some way. more details in this lecture: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiXcO3pcR8I Krisztián Pintér (talk) 18:45, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

 * "there does not exist a proper, academic summary of praxeology"

 * IMHO the best-known praxeology "bible" is von Mises's Human Action. It's available free online. There are some other people that have used the term "praxeology" though, who aren't connected with von Mises. I don't know much about them though.

 * "positivist philosophy excplicitely denies such statements, claiming that any statement is either merely a consequence of the definitions, or it is about the world. the latter kind must be falsifiable, that is, it must proven true or false with observations"

 * Unfortunately, the metaphysical statement you gave is either not about the world, or it's self-contradictory because it is itself not falsifiable. This point is noted in von Mises's "The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science". I would like to see this kind of thing in a critcisms & rebuttals section in the article.
 * Doubledork (talk) 19:10, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Good question, since most "praxeologists" don't seem to know either. That's the short answer. The long answer?

 * Praxeology is whatever it wants to be. It is said, by it's founder (and many leading "praxeologists"), to be based on the action axiom, "human action is purposeful behavior", which reduces to "humans act". From this, you can go nowhere, unless you add in a load of unproven assumptions. Praxeologists like to call these "deductions" instead, because that implies they're necessarily based on tied & tested principles, which they aren't.

 * So basically, as long as you can rationalise a connection to something praxeological (like the action axiom, at the most basic level), praxeology can technically be a anything you want it to be, and you don't have to prove a damn thing--as long as it sounds convincing. Of course, the catch with this blind faith approach is that people have to believe you (at least, the majority, anyway. And since the majority of "praxeologists" seem to be libertarians, any praxeological breakthroughs need to be vetted by them.

 * So, in short: Praxeology is a libertarian mouth-piece.The Talking Toaster (talk) 21:53, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * To the first poster: Good question, since most "praxeologists" don't seem to know either. That's the short answer. The long answer?

 * To Doubledork:

 * "Unfortunately, the metaphysical statement you gave is either not about the world, or it's self-contradictory because it is itself not falsifiable."

 * What are you talking about? I saw no metaphysical statement in his reply, and there was no element of unfalsifiability to it.The Talking Toaster (talk) 22:03, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

"That's the one question this page doesn't answer. Oh, I know it's "a framework for modeling human action", and "The science of human action". "

You're right, praxeology is the science of human action but not any action, only the purposeful action, what it really tries to do is to understand WHY people behaves the way they do, this is important since economics is not a natural science but a social science, it depends on human behavior, therefore its crucial to the study of economics to understand why the economic agents move the way they do using logic and reasoning. 201.241.227.67 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:28, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Praxeology in sociology
I'm not sure the terminology translates well into English language, but at least in Germany "praxeology" would also refer to a sociologial school of thought oriented along social practices (reaching maybe from Garfinkel to Bourdieu). This should be disambiguated. -- 132.230.104.57 (talk) 16:23, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

 * It looks like the difference may be that in Germany (and elsewhere in Europe?), praxeology just refers to the sociology of social practices, but in the English-speaking world, it only refers to Misesian praxeology, with all its unique assumptions. Mporter (talk) 08:45, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

rank transform
I scrapped the sentence about rank transform as it was still redlinked. Don't know what he was talking about (maybe Friedman test?). kostmo (talk) 19:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Hoppe
@BigK HeX

What is now POV? Of course, you are right about OR. But it needs hunderts of scienists in the same field to write a well summary about such a topic. Hoppe's resource is only an important one. But "Primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them." What you are calling POV now, is not clear for me. --Haberecht137 (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

 * While Hoppe is respected in Austrian circles, so that his Austrian work can be considered worthy of note, I'm not so sure about using Hoppe's opinions on mainstream economics. Discussion of mainstream economic history is pretty abundant in the common academic venues, so I'm fairly skeptical of using Hoppe's opinion in describing the work of Say, et al., when a more noted authority almost certainly can be found easily and would likely be more appropriate. BigK HeX (talk) 14:04, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

 * You have changed the sentence to: "Austrian economist Hans-Hermann Hoppe describes Mises's position on economic methodology as "essentially in full agreement" with earlier mainstream economists such as Jean Baptiste Say, Nassau Senior, and John E. Cairnes though these economists did not use the term "a priori".[neutrality is disputed]"
 * I take the issue with you, but why do you change it from OR to POV?
 * The other point is that we are speaking about very old common academics which is out of the scope of modern academics. It is no wonder when there is no reception about it by today mainstream economics. When it is OR then there is always the danger that it could be wrong. When you can't believe it, then you must delete it. But Hoppe is a systematic scientist and gives citations of Say, Senior, and Cairnes. He doesn't make many errors in his area. --Haberecht138 (talk) 14:50, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

 * I changed it from "OR" to "POV" because there wasn't a citation on the paragraph and the weasel words made it look like WP:OR. However, apparently, the weasel wording is quoted from Hoppe [i.e., "essentially in full agreement"].
 * I tagged it as POV because Hoppe's opinion on Say is probably not among the most notable. BigK HeX (talk) 15:28, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * probably? How do you know? Even if so, why should it be wrong? You are rather questining the relevance now. --Haberecht138 (talk) 15:46, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * "Probably", because the source given is not from a widely peer-reviewed venue. BigK HeX (talk) 15:51, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Of course not. I had already admited that it is a primary source. --Haberecht138 (talk) 16:08, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

"pseudoscience"
Removed the term from the headline as it's obviously biased. Calling Praxeology a pseudoscience would make psychology and sociology pseudosciences as well; something I think anyone will find it hard to argue in favor of. I suggest calling it a Social science as seems to be the result of the argument on the Sociology article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipedianamepolicysucks (talk • contribs) 03:05, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

 * Psychology and Sociology are indeed pseudo-sciences. In the same way, Praxeology, as it is conveyed in von Mises and others, is not a science.  Every practitioner of these pseudo-sciences has a different theory, a different terminology, and a different politico-economic world view.  How could these purely mental concepts be Sciences?  They fail to explain history and have no predictive power.  The Vienna Circle, of which Ludwig was not a member, although his brother Dick was, have been very clear about this.  In order to maintain Science as a viable method of discovery and aggregation of knowledge, and to keep Science from sliding back into the darkness of metaphysics, we must fight diligently to keep its enunciation clinical, experiential, and intersubjectively confirmable by discreet measurement.  If it cannot be measured more than once and by reasonable means, then it is not science.  What are the yardsticks we use to measure Human Action?  Economics, politics, morality, ethics, religion, cosmology, and rational self-interest are humanitarian metaphysics, not Science.  Chemistry, Physics, Biology, Electronics, Mechanics, and a small part of Astronomy not dominated by cosmological imperception are examples of Sciences.  The test tube, the wave tank, the microscope, multi-meter, fulcrum and telescope are the tools of observation and measurement that make these studies scientific.  Medicine is a psuedo-science.  Think about it.  Medicine is taught in liberal arts colleges.  That is reason enough to declare it unscientific.  My reasoning is that we still live in the Dark Ages.  Medicine is no more effective than bloodletting by the Barbers.  Our technologies are vastly successful, as long as we do not apply them to human action.  Human action is currently the exclusive domain of the pseudo-sciences.  We cannot raise our heads above our religious, political, and institutionalized cultural brainwashing and obediences.

 * I must also say a few words about mathematics and theoretical physics. The Vienna Circle came the closest to unshackling Science toward the development of a theory of human interaction, but they ran off the track in development of theoretical physics and mathematics.  These constructs are not scientific, they involve no measurement, and make up incredibly wacky concepts like space-time and dark energy.  One of the tip-offs to a metaphysic is that it is concentric in its construction and is always true regardless of any new knowledge (like the atmosphere of the Sun does not affect the relativistic perturbations of the orbit of Mercury; inter-galactic gas and dust does not affect redshift, etc.).

 * Mathematics is a language. It does not convey any reality whatsoever and can be used to describe totally irrational and unreal concepts.  Reality is not accurately described by mathematics.  In reality, 2 + 2 is usually 3.99842... or 4.00519..  In reality, things tend to bleed, smear and cross-contaminate.  This makes Science difficult, but not impossible.

 * I have been trying to advance a scientific theory of human action for decades, but I must invent a new vocabulary. The advancement of computers and the internet should now make this new Science possible and practical.  Engineers and scientists must be given the keys to the development of civilization and replace the brutal and ignorant control by elite militarists.  Would anyone be interested in helping me in this endeavor?  Danarothrock (talk) 05:09, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

 * No.

 * Psychology and sociology are NOT pseudosciences, and medicine definitely isn't. The definition of a science is something about which can make testable predictions and explanations about the universe. Science is the postulation of hypotheses, and the confirmation of falsification of these hypostheses via experimentation. All of these things can be accomplished in psychology, sociology and medicine. You can't just declare something "unscientific" because it's sometimes taught in somewhere that specialises in something else (i.e. liberal arts colleges), that's irrelevant. Of course, this is assuming I believe that claim, since you've provided no source to back it up.

 * Oh, and for the record, You say there're no instruments of measurements for sociology & psychology? You're wrong. Lots of different means of testing have been employed in these disciplines, otherwise they wouldn't be able to test any of their hypotheses (generating theories), and hence would not be science. Examples include the EEG and MRI (both used in psychology and medicine), and questionnaires/surveys, used in sociology (and the other two, along with maths) as part of statistical-quantitative research.

 * Theoretical physics can also, naturally, be tested and proven (and falsified, obv.) to prodice valid theories. Some more famous examples include Conservation of Energy, the Standard Model, and electromagnetism, all of which are products of the science of theoretical physics. Maths, however, is a strange case. Still, it does can adhere to the scientific method, and the general consensus amongst mathematicians is that, whilst not entirely the same as the rest of science, it is still a part of it, and hence can be considered a science.

 * Praxeology, though, absolutely refutes the scientific method, and hence one can't even claim it to be a science. However, it proposes to have theories and is otherwise presented as science. Therefore, it is pseudoscience.The Talking Toaster (talk) 13:22, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

 * P. S. With regards to 2+2 = 3.whatever, I fail to see your point. Are you trying to say that a quantity of value "2" often does not equal 2 exactly? Because this depends on your definition of "2". Two oranges are always two oranges (at least, in base ten) if you define 1 orange simply by virtue of it being an orange. If you define one orange as a very specific mass, however (such as the average mass of an orange i.e. an "ideal" orange) then yes, you will often have two real oranges that add up to slightly more or less than 2 ideal oranges, hence making two real oranges plus two more real oranges add up to slightly more or less than 4 ideal oranges.The Talking Toaster (talk) 13:22, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

 * P. P. S. Oh, and stop capitalising "science", like it's this big, mysterious thing.

 * P. P. P. S. The term "liberal arts" is a complicated term associated with a number of sciences, including medicine, sociology and maths, making it somewhat misleading. Originally, it referred to the following subjects considered essential for citizens to engage in civic life & public debate. This initially comprised only grammar, rhetoric & logic (the Trivium), but later came to include the Quadrivium: geometry, musics, maths and astronomy (the latter also covering astrology). Altogether, these consisted of seven liberal arts. Nowadays, however, many subjects related to these may be termed liberal arts, including medicine, law and architecture. So, not all liberal arts are arts in the modern sense.The Talking Toaster (talk) 14:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Actually psychiatry doesnt use testable analysis (lab data) to reach its conclusions (EEG is required for epylepsy but that IS NOT A PSYCHIATRIC CONDITION)in turn it uses statistical data to determine the "mean" of human behaviour, thats it.

By the way medicine and physisc belong to the natural sciences, its absurd to critize praxeology under that terms because praxeology doesnt belong to the natural sciences but to the social sciences, since it pretends to study and analyze the basis of human behaviour. 201.241.227.67 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:16, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

The science of human action?
If praxeology treats the ends as neutral and applies analysis to the effect which the means have towards the ends then it isn't the full picture and psychology is another part of human action. Is the science of physics about the effects of physics (Like the effect of action) or does it also include the reasons behind physics (reasons behind actions)? This is where "the science of human action" could confuse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.218.116.95 (talk) 23:17, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Austrian School approach
Von Mises writes that action axiom is the basis of all praxeology, and it is the basic proposition that all specimens of the species Homo sapiens, the homo agens, purposefully utilize means over a period of time in order to achieve desired ends. In his magnum opus Human Action, Von Mises defined “action” in the sense of the action axiom by elucidating:

"Human action is purposeful behavior. Or we may say: Action is will put into operation and transformed into an agency, is aiming at ends and goals, is the ego's meaningful response to stimuli and to the conditions of its environment, is a person's conscious adjustment to the state of the universe that determines his life. Such paraphrases may clarify the definition given and prevent possible misinterpretations. But the definition itself is adequate and does not need complement of commentary."

Von Mises argues that praxeology is not concerned with the individual's definition of end satisfaction, just the way he sought that satisfaction and that individual's increase of their satisfaction by removing sources of dissatisfaction or "uneasiness". In his theory, an acting man is defined as one capable of voluntary and conscious behaviour—to be otherwise would be to make one a mere creature who simply reacts to stimuli by instinct. Similarly, an acting man must have a source of dissatisfaction which he believes can be changed, otherwise he cannot act.

Von Mises writes that economics, the study of human choice under conditions of scarcity, can be treated as a specialization of praxeology, the study of all human action. Like other members of the Austrian School, von Mises rejected the standard scientific approach of relying upon empirical observation in the study of economics, and instead, favored the use of logical analysis, a logic which is influenced by Immanuel Kant's analytic–synthetic distinction. Von Mises writes that the empirical methods used in the natural sciences cannot be applied to the social sciences because the principle of induction does not apply. In essence, he believed that a theory constructed to predict how humans will act (what ends they will seek) in a "complex" situation could not arise from studying how they acted in "simple" situations. Furthermore, there are limits to how much can be learned from even a "simple situation". As a criticism to empirical studies seeking to find justification in the economic action of individuals, von Mises proposed that only the human actor knows the ends toward which he acts.

Another conclusion that von Mises reached was that decisions are made on an ordinal basis. That is, it is impossible to carry out more than one action at once, the conscious mind being capable of only one decision at a time—even if those decisions can be made in rapid order. Thus man will act to remove the most pressing source of dissatisfaction first and then move to the next most pressing source of dissatisfaction. Additionally, von Mises dismissed the notion that subjective values could be calculated mathematically; man can not treat his values with cardinal numbers, e.g., "I prefer owning a television 2.5 times as much as owning a DVD player." As a person satisfies his first most important goal and after that his second most important goal, then his second most important goal is always less important than his first most important goal. Thus, the satisfaction, or utility, that he derives from every further goal attained is less than that from the preceding goal. This assumes, of course, that the goals are independent, which is not always the case—for example, acquiring the television may enable one to pursue the goal of watching a documentary on biology, which may make one decide to study biology, which opens the goal of writing a research paper, and so on. In human society, many actions will be trading activities where one person regards a possession of another person as more desirable than one of his own possessions, and the other person has a similar higher regard for his colleague's possession than he does for his own. This assertion modifies the classical economic view about exchange, which posits that individuals exchange goods and services that they both appraise as being equal in value. This subject of praxeology is known as catallactics.

Pseudoscience Accusation
Seems enough to justify link, without stating praxeology is pseudoscience:. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SPECIFICO (talk • contribs)

 * List of topics characterized as pseudoscience. Not listed. Would need RS to be listed. – S. Rich (talk) 01:47, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Lack of objectivity 3
I'm pretty sure the sentence "Praxeology also provides insights for the field of ethics" is incredibly non-neutral; as I understand the term, it can't be an "insight" unless it's true, and claiming that true moral beliefs come from a particular place is about as far from a neutral point of view as you can get.

Current text "Praxeology...is the deductive study of human action... What is the source of this definition? Praxeology is usually presented as a philosophy that seeks to explain the past and future evolution of society, never to my knowledge as an explanation of human action.  Human action in praxeology is as far as I know never something to be discovered for its own sake, but rather something to be observed in order to discover something more general.

Mark.camp (talk) 00:57, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Bourdeau and Fayol
I added an interwiki link to Praxéologie (in the French-language Wikipedia), and I noticed that the French-language article says nothing about Frenchman Louis Bourdeau, who appears prominently in this English-language article, but the French-language article instead prominently mentions Henri Fayol, about whom this English-language article says nothing. Biogeographist (talk) 01:03, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Polish School mention
Any reason why the Polish school is introduced but not explained in the article? I think it could have a short section with the Austrian school, but I am not well-versed enough in the topic area to make that decision yet. Assopwill (talk) 16:04, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

 * The presence of a section about the Austrian school but not the Polish school is likely due to the greater diffusion of Austrian-school ideas in the English-speaking world combined with the much larger number of English speakers than Polish speakers in the world. Look at the Polish version of this article, pl:Prakseologia, and you will notice that there is no separate section on the Austrian school (although the Austrian school is mentioned). In contrast, the German version of the article, de:Praxeologie (Wirtschaftswissenschaft), does not even mention the Polish school. I don't know if that is because the Polish-school sources have not been translated into German? Polish-school sources have been translated into English, so they deserve a place in the English article. Biogeographist (talk) 17:04, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Let's make this article less confusing
According to the lead, praxeology "is the study of human action." But that characterization is dissonant with much of what follows it. For instance, the article goes on to quote Thomas Mayer as asserting that praxeology "constitutes nothing less than a rejection of the scientific method." Imagine a claim that all, say, meteorologists were, by the fact of their investigations, rejecting the scientific method. Or that the study of human allergies amounted to a rejection of the scientific method. Or the study of Shakespeare.

For one thing, the opening sentence should have the prepositional phrase, "In philosophy," prepended. Or whatever set of disciplines would be appropriate. But that would do little to resolve the dissonances. As another example, the article reports that "Austrian School economists continue to use praxeology and deduction, rather than empirical studies, to determine economic principles." Thus our blameless readers—i.e., those for whom Wikipedia exists—are led to conclude that we're trying to convince them that the study of human action cannot admit an empirical component.

I don't intend these remarks as an attack, but as a call to improve the article. Consider them empirical data, collected during the study of one human's actions (namely attempting to understand the concept of praxeology). I'd fix it myself, had I the competence to do so.—PaulTanenbaum (talk) 19:57, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your comment. I think you've expressed well some of the ways that readers might misunderstand praxeology after reading this article. Note that this article is currently start-class, so it is underdeveloped by definition.

 * Starting from the top of your comment: You find the definition of praxeology as "the study of human action" to be confusingly dissonant with what follows. I suspect the word "study" is unhelpfully vague. I changed "study" to "theory" in the lead, since praxeology today refers to theory, not to field research. Praxeology does not refer to social scientists going out into the world and doing an inventory of human actions, for example.

 * There is no universal consensus about what the content of praxeology should be. Some have criticized the uses of praxeology of Mises and his followers as insufficiently empirical and scientific (Mayer) or insufficiently integrated with ethics and science (Bunge). The criticisms imply that the critics think that praxeology should be more empirically oriented and better integrated with science. (Bunge likely believed that his own praxeology, which is integrated as one part among many other parts of his systematic scientific philosophy, was a good counterexample to the praxeology of Mises in this respect.)

 * As you've correctly pointed out, this article would need much work to go from start-class to C-class and then to B-class. Such improvement would require an editor who is familiar with a wide range of different approaches to praxeology, or a group of editors who are familiar with different thinkers' approaches and can work together to improve the article. I don't think that someone who is only a disciple of Mises would know enough to provide a sufficiently neutral and comprehensive point of view. Also, "Austrian School" in the context of praxeology should be understood as referring to Mises and his followers, not to some other Austrian economists who were not interested in praxeology or may have rejected it entirely. Biogeographist (talk) 15:50, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Rename to History of the word Praxeology?
As it stands, this article has precisely one half-sentence describing praxeology itself, and continues with a few pages of historical trivia around the use of the word.

Suggesting that the article be renamed 'History of the word Praxeology' is the most neutral critique I can make of it.

62.78.247.108 (talk) 20:22, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

 * No, the subject of this article is praxeology, not history of the word praxeology; but, as you can see at the top of this talk page, it is a "start"-class article. That means it's just a beginning and the content has yet to be filled out by an eager army of volunteer editors that has so far failed to appear. Biogeographist (talk) 21:58, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Secondary sources needed for removed section
I reverted your edit for a very important and valid reason: It is referenced to primary sources, and Wikipedia is based on secondary sources per WP:PSTS, which says: "Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and to avoid novel interpretations of primary sources." I have not been able to locate secondary or tertiary sources that indicate that a section on Evgeny Yegorov's view is significant enough for a section in this article and is not undue weight per WP:UNDUE.

In this edit summary you said: "It is surprising that there is a reluctance to delve into the essence of the ideas of the Russian School of Praxiology and conduct a scientific discussion." This statement may evince a misunderstanding of the role of Wikipedia. The point of the policy of no original research is that Wikipedia merely reports the scientific discussion that is already published in reliable secondary sources; Wikipedia does not conduct its own scientific discussion. Wikipedia is not for publicizing views that have not already been discussed in reliable secondary sources. Biogeographist (talk) 20:53, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Much of the "Origin and etymology" section closely paraphrases a published article
While tracking down a reference for the most recent edit, I discovered that much of the Praxeology section closely paraphrases a published article:

I tagged the section as close paraphrasing. Biogeographist (talk) 18:16, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Praxeology


text: User talk:63.232.132.59

title: User talk:63.232.132.59


text:
Superchick

Superchick, originally known as Superchic[k], was an American Christian rock/alternative pop band that debuted in 1999 and disbanded in 2013. Their music incorporated various styles such as pop, punk, rock, rap, and R&B. Their sound has been compared to mainstream artists like No Doubt and Avril Lavigne only with a heavier sound. Superchick has had five songs reach No. 1 on music charts, and their song "Stand in the Rain" held the No. 1 spot for nine weeks on R&R Christian Hit Radio (CHR) chart in 2006/2007.

1999: Debut
Superchick made their debut in 1999 at an Audio Adrenaline concert in front of an audience of 5,000. They continued to perform at live events throughout that year.

Early 2000s: Karaoke Superstars and Last One Picked
Superchick self-released their first album in 2000. The album was re-released with three added remix tracks after they signed to Inpop Records, and became their first official album: Karaoke Superstars. Since then, their music has appeared in several movies and television shows, including the 2001 movie Legally Blonde, the 2002 made for TV Disney movie Cadet Kelly, and the 2009 movie To Save a Life. Last One Picked was released on October 8, 2002.

Mid-2000s: Beauty from Pain
Superchick signed with mainstream record label Columbia Records to promote their 2005 album Beauty from Pain, resulting in their 2006 mainstream debut Beauty from Pain 1.1. The re-release album contains their signature hit "Stand in the Rain". Their music has received favorable reviews in both Christian and mainstream publications.

Late 2000s: Grammy nomination and Rock What You Got
On December 4, 2008, Superchick was nominated for their first Grammy Award. The group was recognized in the category of "Best Rock Or Rap Gospel Album" for their 2008 album, Rock What You Got which was featured on ABC Family's Make It or Break It. The band launched their "Hey! Hey! (That's Freedom You Hear)" Tour on April 3, 2009.

2010s: Temporary hiatus and death of Lovelace
On June 7, 2011, lead singer Tricia Brock released her debut solo album entitled The Road.

The group announced that former member Chase Lovelace had died. The memorial took place on May 11, 2013. Matt Dally confirmed that "he [Lovelace] is on the new record". On May 28, 2013, the band posted "This is the Time" written in memory of Lovelace.

2013: Disbandment
On August 11, 2013, Superchick announced on their Facebook page that the band had reached its closing chapter.

In the post, Max Hsu stated: "Everyone has new stories to write: Tricia has another solo record coming out, Dave is touring with Audio Adrenaline, Melissa started Rosebuds East, Matt is busy being a realtor/songwriter/daddy daycare and I've got plenty of projects to finish up, including a ThumpMonks record years in the making". He also confirmed the release of five new tracks in the future featuring Chase Lovelace.

2016: Reunion
On June 27, 2016, a photo was posted of the band rehearsing for an upcoming reunion show. The band then performed at Lifest on July 9, 2016, which featured the line-up of Tricia Brock, Max Hsu, Dave Ghazarian, Matt Dally, Andy Vegas and Brandon Estelle. In an interview at the show posted on YouTube, Brock said that they were asked to perform one last show at the site of their first show. The show was a one-off and also considered as a final concert for the band. It was later posted on Facebook Live.

Members
Final line-up
 * Tricia Baumhardt – lead vocals (1999–2013, 2016)
 * Dave Ghazarian – lead guitar (1999–2013, 2016)
 * Matt Dally – bass guitar, rap vocals, keyboards (1999–2013, 2016)
 * Max Hsu – DJ, keyboards (1999–2013, 2016)
 * Andy Vegas – percussion (1999–2001, 2016)
 * Brandon Estelle – drums (2004–2009, 2016)

Former members
 * Justin Sharbono – guitar (1999–2002)
 * Ben Dally – drums (1999–2001)
 * Brian Fitch – drums (2002–2003)
 * Aaron Tosti – drums (2004)
 * Clayton Hunt – drums (2009–2010)
 * Chase Lovelace – drums (2010–2012, died 2013)
 * Dave Clo – bass guitar, acoustic guitar (2002–2003, 2012)
 * Melissa Brock – rhythm guitar, harmony vocals (1999–2011, 2013)

Discography
Studio albums
 * Karaoke Superstars (2001)
 * Last One Picked (2002)
 * Beauty from Pain (2005)
 * Rock What You Got (2008)

title: Superchick


text: User talk:66.227.192.185

title: User talk:66.227.192.185


text:
Doha International Airport

Doha International Airport (مطار الدوحة الدولي) is an airport in Doha, Qatar. It was Qatar's commercial international airport until Hamad International Airport opened on 27 May 2014. While all scheduled commercial traffic ceased, the airport site and existing runway are still used by Qatar Emiri Air Force, Qatar Amiri Flight, Rizon Jet, Gulf Helicopters and Qatar Aeronautical College. It also acts as a state/diplomatic airport catering to both Qatar Amiri Flight (which is based at the airport) and state-visit flights. The airport welcomed commercial flights again on 15 September 2022 for selected airlines to handle increased traffic for the 2022 FIFA World Cup that Qatar hosted in November.

History
Doha International Airport opened in 1959 replacing Dukhan Airport, which was built in the 1930s. That had been the secondary hub for the Bahraini-based Gulf Air, and was located 80 km west of Doha, and 5 km south-west of Dukhan.

The airport suffered from overutilization, even though it had been expanded numerous times. Before the opening of the new airport, the capacity stood at 12 million passengers per year. Its 14993 ft runway was one of the longest at a civil airport. It was the main base of Qatar Airways. In the past, the airport was mostly used by Qatari holiday makers and foreign workers coming for the oil and gas sector. As Qatar Airways expanded rapidly, the airport grew and attracted more people such as holiday makers and transit travelers. In 2010, it was the world's 27th busiest airport by cargo traffic. The control tower and ancillary buildings were designed by Curtis W. Fentress, FAIA, RIBA of Fentress Architects.

All scheduled commercial air traffic serving this airport moved to the new Hamad International Airport on 27 May 2014. The new airport is located 4 km east of the former facility. It covers 2200 ha of land and was able to handle 29 million passengers per year on opening day. The old airport was [originally] planned to be demolished, but it was refurbished and reopened for the 2022 FIFA World Cup.

Departure and Transfer Terminal
This was the main terminal at Doha and handled all economy class Qatar Airways flights, as well as all other airlines using the airport. This terminal was expanded several times in order to cope with the increasing number of passengers using the airport each year. The terminal had 44 satellite gates, as well as seating areas and a large duty-free area. There were 3 lounges in this terminal, including the Oryx Lounge, which was used by all foreign airlines' premium passengers, the Qatar Airways Gold Lounge, which was used by Qatar Airways Gold Privilege Club members, and the Qatar Airways Silver Lounge, used by Qatar Airways silver privilege club card holders. This terminal had been expanded as the old Arrivals Terminal was integrated into the departures terminal, while a new arrival terminal was opened. All departing and transferring passengers used this facility, as passengers arriving into Doha used the new Arrivals Terminal. The Departure and Transfer Terminal opened an additional 12 boarding positions located between the terminal and the Premium Terminal gates, as well as a revamped Oryx lounge to cater for the increase in passenger numbers. The passenger facilities featured 60 check-in counters, 42 parking bays for aircraft and 15 baggage claim belts.

Terminal A
Terminal A of the Departure and Transfer Terminal was the check-in area used by the airport's biggest user, Qatar Airways, as well as Cathay Pacific, which operated a codeshare with Qatar Airways to Hong Kong under a strategic partnership agreement.

Terminal B
In June 2011, Terminal B, built on the location of the former arrivals terminal at Doha International Airport, was dedicated to more than 30 foreign airlines operating services from Doha. The terminal included an enlarged check-in area with 35 counters and a new baggage handling system, as well as food outlets. All foreign airlines were moved to Terminal B.

All terminals have been renovated recently and will be operational by the end 2021 or early to mid-2022 for the FIFA football World Cup that will be held in Qatar.

Arrivals Terminal
On 19 December 2010, a new Arrival Terminal was opened in the western apron, in the site of the former Asian Games (which Doha hosted in 2006) temporary terminal. The terminal had a capacity of 2,770 passengers per hour. The 32000 m2 Arrivals Terminal replaced the arrivals hall of what became the Departure and Transfer Terminal. The Arrivals Terminal had 22 immigration counters, eight e-gates, eight baggage carousels, 36 concierge desks for hotel transfers, car rental and other services, as well as 746 parking spaces. The former arrivals hall was merged with the departing hall, adding extra valuable space and capacity to the airport. These changes were part of the multimillion-dollar expansion of Doha Airport to cope with the increasing traffic of Qatar Airways and other airlines before the new Hamad International Airport opened in 2014.

Qatar Airways Premium Terminal
The Qatar Airways Premium Terminal was opened in 2006 and handled all Qatar Airways first and business class passengers. There are 6 gates in this terminal.

Airlines and destinations
The airport shut down for commercial traffic on 27 May 2014 when all airlines relocated to its successor, Hamad International Airport. The last commercial flight departing from Doha International Airport was a Lufthansa plane returning to its home base of Frankfurt at 00:30 on 28 May 2014.

On 14 September 2022, the airport was temporarily reopened for passenger traffic to relieve congestion at Hamad airport due to the 2022 FIFA World Cup. At least 13 airlines, including Etihad Airways, Flydubai, Pegasus Airlines, Jazeera Airways, and SalamAir moved their regular scheduled flights to the airport until shortly after the end of the World Cup. Designated Match Day Shuttle flights used the newer Hamad airport instead. All flights to the older airport came to a halt after the World Cup was over.

Statistics
Since 1998, the number of passengers and total cargo load increased significantly.

Accidents and incidents

 * On 13 March 1979, an Alia Royal Jordanian Boeing 727 operating Flight 600 crashed following a missed approach. Three crew members and 42 passengers were killed. The aircraft was written off.
 * In 2000, an Iraqi hijacker hijacked a Qatar Airways plane and demanded that the pilot fly to Saudi Arabia. The passengers and crew escaped unharmed when the man surrendered at Hael.

title: Doha International Airport


text: User talk:61.144.54.58

title: User talk:61.144.54.58


text:
Talk:Theory of value (economics)

Implausible citation
The intro refers to "a pamphlet" published in 1738 re. labor theory of value, but give no citation. I added "citation needed", then went to look for it -- I could not find any trace of such a pamphlet or article. The nearest I could find was Daniele Bernoulli, "Specimen Theoriae Novae de Mensura Sortis" (https://archive.org/details/SpecimenTheoriaeNovaeDeMensuraSortis), but it's not clear that's what someone intended. Recommend deleting this reference entirely unless someone can find the/a relevant source. Caveat: I am not an economist. Perhaps the reference is obvious to an actual economist -- if you are that economist, please add a specific citation.

 * Sounds bogus. Let's just delete it and let the original author improve it if they ever revisit it Palehose5 (talk) 02:15, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Missing Marginal Theory of Value
Missing the marginal theory of value, which is the dominant theory of value today. Also, pet peeve of mine, why are articles like this always awash in marxist and post-modernist information. Shouldn't LTV and ETV be in a section headed "Classical Theories of Value"? Where is Smith's 'adding up of costs' theory of value? Why are there four marxist theories of value here, zero modern theories of value, no non-marxist classical theories, and no random weird competing theories of value like Sraffian? 73.163.178.158 (talk) 16:55, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Definitely a glaring omission, and Sraffa as well deserves to be included. I would say at least some of the Marxist theories of value are "modern" in the sense that they have a renewed relevance and growth in popularity in recent years, but they themselves aren't well or completely explained. Perhaps the book: would serve as a good launching-pad for a reconfiguration of this page. Amkoir (talk) 03:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

India Education Program course assignment
This article was the subject of an educational assignment supported by Wikipedia Ambassadors through the India Education Program.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 19:56, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Theory of value (economics)


text:
Michel du Cille

Michel du Cille (January 24, 1956 – December 11, 2014) was a Jamaican-born American photojournalist who won three Pulitzer Prizes. He shared the 1986 Pulitzer Prize for Spot News Photography with fellow Miami Herald staff photographer Carol Guzy for their coverage of the November 1985 eruption of Colombia's Nevado del Ruiz volcano. He won the 1988 Feature Photography Pulitzer for a photo essay on crack cocaine addicts in a Miami housing project ("photographs portraying the decay and subsequent rehabilitation of a housing project overrun by the drug crack"). The Washington Post received the 2008 Pulitzer Prize for Public Service for his work, with reporters Dana Priest and Anne Hull, "in exposing mistreatment of wounded veterans at Walter Reed Hospital, evoking a national outcry and producing reforms by federal officials."

Du Cille was a photo editor for The Washington Post from 1988 until June 2005, when he became the Post's senior photographer. He credited his initial interest in photography to his father, who worked as a newspaper reporter in Jamaica and the United States. He held a Bachelor of Journalism from Indiana University and a Master's in Journalism from Ohio University. Du Cille was born in Kingston, Jamaica, in 1956. He worked as a photojournalism intern at The Louisville Courier Journal/Times and The Miami Herald in 1979 and 1980 and joined the Herald staff in 1981.

In October 2014, the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications at Syracuse University disinvited du Cille from appearing at a workshop because he'd returned three weeks earlier from covering the Ebola outbreak in Liberia. Du Cille said at the time, "It's a disappointment to me. I'm pissed off and embarrassed and completely weirded out that a journalism institution that should be seeking out facts and details is basically pandering to hysteria."

Du Cille died December 11, 2014, from an apparent heart attack at the age of 58 while on assignment in Liberia.

title: Michel du Cille


text:
University of Puerto Rico at Arecibo

The University of Puerto Rico at Arecibo (UPRA or UPR Arecibo) is a public college in Arecibo, Puerto Rico. It is part of the University of Puerto Rico. UPR-Arecibo was previously the Colegio Regional de Arecibo (CRA, 'Arecibo Regional College') and Colegio Universitario Tecnológico de Arecibo (CUTA, 'Arecibo Technological University College').

The college is located in the north of the island, next to the largest pharmaceutical and biotechnology complex in the Caribbean, agricultural areas of intense commercial activity and near the site of the Arecibo Observatory. It is accredited by the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools.

History
The campus was founded in 1967 and after thirteen years became known as Colegio Universitario Tecnológico de Arecibo (CUTA). The campus gained autonomy in 1998 based on the UPR board's Law 16 of June 16, 1993.

In 2010 the campus went on strike as part of the 2010–2011 University of Puerto Rico strikes. These events resulted in the firing of the university's rector and subsequently the resignation of all the deans. In 2017 in response to budget cuts to the university system by the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico the campus students voted to join the University of Puerto Rico strikes, 2017.

Academics
UPRA offers Associate and Baccalaureate Degrees. Unique programs on this campus of the University of Puerto Rico include:

 * Bachelor of Science in Microbiology
 * Bachelor of Social Science with concentration in Industrial Organizational Psychology
 * Bachelor of Social Science with concentration in Latin American Studies (includes Latin American Studies Center and agreements with institutions in Latin America)
 * Bachelor of Industrial Chemical Process Technology
 * Associate Degree in Veterinary Technology.
 * Bachelor of Business Administration including Accounting, Finance, Marketing and Management degrees.

UPRA is the alma mater of many communications professionals currently working in local and international media and independent producers who graduated from the Bachelor of Communication program ("Tele-Radial").

Greek life
The University of Puerto Rico at Arecibo has two fraternities, members of the Inter-Fraternity Council of Puerto Rico.

 * Phi Omega Sigma
 * Phi Sigma Alpha

Notable alumni

 * Suheill Michelle Urdaz Montano, radio reporter at SuperK 106.
 * Normando Valentín, news reporter, anchor and journalist at WAPA-TV
 * Bad Bunny, singer/rapper
 * Nelson Quinones, journalist at CNN en Español
 * Carlos Robles, meteorologist at Telemundo

title: University of Puerto Rico at Arecibo


text:
List of rulers of the Mossi state of Gurunsi

Territory located in present-day Burkina Faso.