text:
Selective laser sintering

Selective laser sintering (SLS) is an additive manufacturing (AM) technique that uses a laser as the power and heat source to sinter powdered material (typically nylon or polyamide), aiming the laser automatically at points in space defined by a 3D model, binding the material together to create a solid structure. It is similar to selective laser melting; the two are instantiations of the same concept but differ in technical details. SLS (as well as the other mentioned AM techniques) is a relatively new technology that so far has mainly been used for rapid prototyping and for low-volume production of component parts. Production roles are expanding as the commercialization of AM technology improves.

History
Selective laser sintering (SLS) was developed and patented by Dr. Carl Deckard and academic adviser, Dr. Joe Beaman at the University of Texas at Austin in the mid-1980s, under sponsorship of DARPA. Deckard and Beaman were involved in the resulting start up company Desk Top Manufacturing (DTM) Corp, established to design and build the SLS machines. In 2001, 3D Systems, the biggest competitor to DTM Corp. and SLS technology, acquired DTM Corp.. The most recent patent regarding Deckard's SLS technology was issued January 28, 1997 and expired January 28, 2014.

A similar process was patented without being commercialized by R. F. Housholder in 1979.

As SLS requires the use of high-powered lasers it is often too expensive, not to mention possibly too dangerous, to use in the home. The associated expense and potential danger of SLS printing due to lack of commercially available laser systems with Class-1 safety enclosures means that the home market for SLS printing is not as large as the market for other additive manufacturing technologies, such as Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM).

Technology
An additive manufacturing layer technology, SLS involves the use of a high power laser (for example, a carbon dioxide laser) to fuse small particles of plastic, metal, ceramic, or glass powders into a mass that has a desired three-dimensional shape. The laser selectively fuses powdered material by scanning cross-sections generated from a 3-D digital description of the part (for example from a CAD file or scan data) on the surface of a powder bed. After each cross-section is scanned, the powder bed is lowered by one layer thickness, a new layer of material is applied on top, and the process is repeated until the part is completed. [[Image:SLS_schematic.svg|center|780px|thumb| Selective laser sintering process 1 Laser 2 Scanner system 3 Powder delivery system 4 Powder delivery piston 5 Roller 6 Fabrication piston 7 Fabrication powder bed 8 Object being fabricated (see inset)

A Laser scanning direction B Sintered powder particles (brown state) C Laser beam D Laser sintering E Pre-placed powder bed (green state) F Unsintered material in previous layers ]]

Because finished part density depends on peak laser power, rather than laser duration, a SLS machine typically uses a pulsed laser. The SLS machine preheats the bulk powder material in the powder bed somewhat below its melting point, to make it easier for the laser to raise the temperature of the selected regions the rest of the way to the melting point.

In contrast with SLA and FDM, which most often require special support structures to fabricate overhanging designs, SLS does not need a separate feeder for support material because the part being constructed is surrounded by unsintered powder at all times. This allows for the construction of previously impossible geometries. Also, since the machine's chamber is always filled with powder material the fabrication of multiple parts has a far lower impact on the overall difficulty and price of the design because through a technique known as 'Nesting', where multiple parts can be positioned to fit within the boundaries of the machine. One design aspect which should be observed however is that with SLS it is 'impossible' to fabricate a hollow but fully enclosed element. This is because the unsintered powder within the element could not be drained.

Since patents have started to expire, affordable home printers have become possible, but the heating process is still an obstacle, with a power consumption of up to 5 kW and temperatures having to be controlled within 2 °C for the three stages of preheating, melting and storing before removal.

Materials
The quality of printed structures depends on the various factors include powder properties such as particle size and shape, density, roughness, and porosity. Furthermore, the particle distribution and their thermal properties affect a lot on the flowability of the powder.

Commercially-available materials used in SLS come in powder form and include, but are not limited to, polymers such as polyamides (PA), polystyrenes (PS), thermoplastic elastomers (TPE), and polyaryletherketones (PAEK). Polyamides are the most commonly used SLS materials due to their ideal sintering behavior as a semi-crystalline thermoplastic, resulting in parts with desirable mechanical properties. Polycarbonate (PC) is a material of high interest for SLS due to its high toughness, thermal stability, and flame resistance; however, such amorphous polymers processed by SLS tend to result in parts with diminished mechanical properties, dimensional accuracy and thus are limited to applications where these are of low importance. Metal materials are not commonly used in SLS since the development of selective laser melting.

Powder production
Powder particles are typically produced by cryogenic grinding in a ball mill at temperatures well below the glass transition temperature of the material, which can be reached by running the grinding process with added cryogenic materials such as dry ice (dry grinding), or mixtures of liquid nitrogen and organic solvents (wet grinding). The process can result in spherical or irregular shaped particles as low as five microns in diameter. Powder particle size distributions are typically gaussian and range from 15 to 100 microns in diameter, although this can be customized to suit different layer thicknesses in the SLS process. Chemical binder coatings can be applied to the powder surfaces post-process; these coatings aid in the sintering process and are especially helpful to form composite material parts such as with alumina particles coated with thermoset epoxy resin.

Sintering mechanisms
Sintering in SLS primarily occurs in the liquid state when the powder particles forms a micro-melt layer at the surface, resulting in a reduction in viscosity and the formation of a concave radial bridge between particles, known as necking, due to the material's response to lower its surface energy. In the case of coated powders, the purpose of the laser is to melt the surface coating which will act as a binder. Solid state sintering is also a contributing factor, albeit with a much reduced influence, and occurs at temperatures below the melting temperature of the material. The principal driving force behind the process is again the material's response to lower its free energy state resulting in diffusion of molecules across particles.

Applications
SLS technology is in wide use at many industries around the world due to its ability to easily make complex geometries with little to no added manufacturing effort. Its most common application is in prototype parts early in the design cycle such as for investment casting patterns, automotive hardware, and wind tunnel models. SLS is also increasingly being used in limited-run manufacturing to produce end-use parts for aerospace, military, medical, pharmaceutical, and electronics hardware. On a shop floor, SLS can be used for rapid manufacturing of tooling, jigs, and fixtures.

Advantages

 * The sintered powder bed is fully self-supporting, allowing for:
 * high overhanging angles (0 to 45 degrees from the horizontal plane)
 * complex geometries embedded deep into parts, such as conformal cooling channels
 * batch production of multiple parts produced in 3D arrays, a process called nesting
 * Parts possess high strength and stiffness
 * Good chemical resistance
 * Various finishing possibilities (e.g., metallization, stove enameling, vibratory grinding, tub coloring, bonding, powder, coating, flocking)
 * Bio compatible according to EN ISO 10993-1 and USP/level VI/121 °C
 * Complex parts with interior components can be built without trapping the material inside and altering the surface from support removal.
 * Fastest additive manufacturing process for printing functional, durable, prototypes or end user parts
 * Wide variety of materials with characteristics of strength, durability, and functionality
 * Due to the reliable mechanical properties, parts can often substitute typical injection molding plastics

Disadvantages

 * parts have porous surfaces; these can be sealed by several different post-processing methods such as cyanoacrylate coatings, or by hot isostatic pressing.

title: Selective laser sintering


text:
USS Tortuga

Two dock landing ships of the United States Navy have been named USS Tortuga, after the Dry Tortugas, islands off Florida.

 * The first USS Tortuga (LSD-26) was commissioned in 1945, in action during the Korean War and the Vietnam War, and decommissioned in 1970.
 * The second USS Tortuga (LSD-46) was commissioned in 1990 and is on active service as of 2016.

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

title: USS Tortuga


text:
Talk:Soviet anti-Zionism

Bias
This article is so biased it should be removed completely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Conv (talk • contribs) 02:15, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

 * See WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Dunutubble (talk) 00:47, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

I agree this article should be removed, most of the claims it makes are lacking any citation (as the citation needed brackets note). It reads like Zionist propaganda against the Soviet Union, lacking again any sources.Historylover4 (talk) 03:22, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

The bias is in some of the drive-by editing. "Removing links to deleted file File:Iudaism bez prikras 63-7.gif" removed an image of the original cover image from Soviet commissioned and owned "Judaism Without Embellishment" http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JX-ig9p6WFM/T3JoLCWNtpI/AAAAAAAAASU/NZ4rTv7_qiQ/s1600/iudaism_without_embellishment.png with the excuse that it was copyrighted material by some unnamed artist. In reality, it was a book produced by a collectivist country that no longer exists. JohnTagliaferro (talk) 23:44, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Origin of the Term
Could somebody please insert something about the origin of the term "Zionology" -- I understand that the user Yms (see the bottom of the talk page) has written here a while back that, while being a Soviet (Jewish) citizen (and student and Komsomol member) in the '70s and '80s he never heard the term.

I am also Russian-speaking, have a personal interest in the subject, and am Jewish and decently educated, but I was wholly unfamiliar with the term prior to finding this article. Hence, while it's indisputable that the Soviet Union espoused anti-Zionist political currents, which it certainly promoted through academia, it's difficult to see at this point whether the term is in fact a Soviet one (I'm sure that, if so, it would have been a very obscure one), or whether it was coined in the West, possibly as a term emerging in the USSR critical scholarship during Glasnost, in Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union, or even elsewhere, to refer to these anti-Zionist doctrines. If anybody has information on the origin or coinage of the term, it'd really help out the information provided here, and I'd personally appreciate your effort.

Thanks, 209.183.32.47 (talk) 04:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Zionology
I'd never heard of "Zionology" when I happened upon this article. From the viewpoint of someone ignorant of the subject, who comes to Wikipedia seeking knowledge of it, I must tell the people who do know something about it that this article in its current state does a poor job of explaining it. Perhaps too much background knowledge is being assumed. Near the beginning there should be a clear, succinct statement of the underlying principle. Is it basically a form of biased history, blaming Jews for everything and attributing all sorts of evil motives to them? Does it get the "pseudoscience" tag because it espouses racial theories that address scientific subjects (heritability of particular traits) but does so unscientifically (e.g., claiming on little or no evidence that Jews have a genetic predisposition toward violence or avarice or whatever)? My personal opinion is that some classical forms of anti-Semitism (the Jewish conspiracy to take over the world or whatever) are rubbish but are not pseudoscience. That term relates only to a particular subcategory of all the rubbish that's out there. Anyway, I'd really appreciate some clarification in this article. JamesMLane 05:04, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * It was exactly that: rubbish presented as having solid scientific base, thus -logy. Unfortunately, this was not the only pseudoscience promoted by the authorities in the USSR. In general, totalitarian regimes often fall into this trap by politicizing everything and the lack of checks and balances. I agree, the article needs improvement.  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 06:09, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Even with the additional material you've added, I don't see how this qualifies as a pseudoscience. For example, racist views in the U.S.: (1) "The Negro has a smaller brain than the Caucasian and is therefore inherently less intelligent" -- pseudoscience; (2) "The civil rights movement is a Communist plot to take over America" -- not pseudoscience. This article makes Zionology sound much more like the second than the first. The truth or falsity of such statements is not something one would attempt to determine using the scientific method (reproducible experimental results, double-blind testing, quantitative prediction, etc.). Did Zionology address any questions that would fall within the realm of science, as opposed to history, ideology, etc.? If not, the tag should come off. JamesMLane 18:37, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Of course it was not any kind of science, but it was called a science and was presented as such. Backed by the state-sponsored "research", "scientific" symposiums, dissertations, etc. The efforts were made to make it distinguishable from pure propaganda. Are you saying the history is not a science?  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 19:58, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I would have no hesitation in saying that history is not a science. It follows that biased history is merely a form of bad history, not of pseudoscience. The scientific method (with controlled experimentation, etc.) simply isn't available to solve most historical questions, although techniques like radiocarbon dating can sometimes illuminate particular points. As for Zionology, if a field calls itself a science, while not only rejecting true scientific method but also speaking to questions that aren't even susceptible to scientific inquiry in the first place, I think it's a close question whether that's a pseudoscience. I've lodged the query on Talk:Pseudoscience in the hope that others will chime in here. JamesMLane 20:22, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree this is a weird case. Thank you.  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 20:30, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I think the line gets complicated with the Soviets because under their definition, Marxism itself was a "science." In fact throughout much of the Soviet period an entirely different philosophy of science was utilized (dialectical materialism). I think what makes this "psuedoscience" is the same thing that makes various Soviet applications of Marxism a psuedoscience as defined by non-Soviet/non-Marxist standards. In other words, the belief that history itself -- and not history in the sense of academic history, but in the sense of Marxist "history", the great wheel of time seen purely as the clash of interested forces and labor -- is a "science"; could be "psuedoscience."; At least, that's how I'm intepretting this -- it looks like a conspiracy theory more than a psuedoscience in the traditional sense of the word. But the Soviets had a lot of conspiracy theories they labeled as "science," so I suppose that makes them psuedoscientific? .... maybe that's a somewhat helpful attempt to figure out what's going on, maybe not (I'm coming to this as someone who has done some work with Soviet philosophy of science, but knows nothign about Zionology). I think what this would require to sensibly be in the psuedoscience category would be an addition to the entry on Psuedoscience which explains the above, perhaps, because as it is, Zionology doesn't jive at all with the current definition as given by the page. --Fastfission 20:38, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Perhaps we could reconcile this by creating a subcat. Marxist pseudoscience?  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 20:46, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't know if a full subcat is needed, but if someone else out there knew more about Soviet Marxism's claims to being "scientific", something along those lines might be useful... I don't recall enough off-hand to write anything good up, and don't really have the time to trawl through my books at the moment. Not to mention I wouldn't be looking forward to the inevitable edit wars which would come with labeling Marxism in any form a psuedoscience. ;) --Fastfission 20:54, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Fastfission, why do you say it doesn't meet the definition as per Wikipedia? The current definition at Pseudoscience is: "A pseudoscience is any body of knowledge purporting to be either both factual and scientific, or of an even higher standard of knowledge, but which fails to comply with scientific method." That seems to apply to Zionology, Marxism and most organized religions. In other words, it's too broad. I realize there's been a great deal of discussion of definitional issues on Talk:Pseudoscience, which I haven't yet read. JamesMLane 03:23, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Most organized religions (except Scientology, perhaps) don't pretend to be scientific. Zionology clearly was. Even the 1963 book was published by the Academy of Sciences. Fastfission is correct in that the Soviets curriculum taught that Marxism (Diamat, Political economy, etc) are all social sciences. How does subcat:Social pseudoscience sound? Not sure whether Marxism also belongs there.  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 03:49, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I just meant that it doesn't necessarily appear the meet the definition, that's all -- it's not obvious, because the whole "social science is hard science" Soviet Marxism thing isn't really covered anywhere. Maybe what I'll do is just add a heading to Psuedoscience which talks about the use of social sciences or ideologies as hard sciences in the Soviet Union, and then it will make more sense. --Fastfission 16:55, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I said that organized religions met the current Wikipedia definition of "pseudoscience" because, even though they don't pretend to be scientific, they claim to be "of an even higher standard of knowledge." The suggestions of a subcat for "Social pseudoscience" (or maybe it should be separate from and parallel to "Pseudoscience," not under it), and/or of adding a discussion of Soviet practices to the Pseudoscience article, are worth considering. The problem in dealing with Marxism is that, even though Marxism isn't a science in the form of chemistry or some such, Marx did have some valuable insights. It's precisely because he was addressing topics that aren't susceptible to scientific method that his observations, like those of any other political economist, can have merit though they're unscientific. That seems to me to be an important distinction between Marxism (or, for that matter, Zionology), on the one hand, and astrology, on the other. Therefore, I'd be more inclined to narrow the definition of pseudoscience, to call it something like "an attempt to address scientific topics in unscientific ways." Then there could be a separate discussion, perhaps in the Pseudoscience article, about the attempts by Soviets and others to give scientific trappings to ideological points of view that don't even qualify as pseudosciences. I'll admit, though, that the distinction wouldn't always be easy to draw. JamesMLane 17:39, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I would remove the pseudoscience reference without hesitation. I find that most of its uses are pejorative and ignorant.  I would prefer that its use be rigorously restricted to situations where the definition has itself been scientifically applied.  There are many who would argue that all of "Political Science" is pseudoscience; thus applying the term to any particular political theory does not serve to distinguish it from any other aspect of political science.  I appreciate that Karl Marx himself was sincere in his efforts to put economics on a scientific basis; he sought proofs that would substantiate his theories.  If his theories proved to be miserable failures a century after his death that does not result in his efforts retroactively becoming pseudoscience.  Such judgement must reflect the times in which he lived.

 * It is significant that the writer of this muddled article credits the origins of "Zionology" to a propaganda department. With that alone I abandon all hope that science is at issue, and without science there is no pseudoscience.

 * I would attach no weight to the -ology argument that suggest that such a suffix implies a science. That kind of thinking would render ideology into a science.  There is an unfortunate tendency in these "Jewish" issues that is practised by both sides:  that is to perpetuate the confusion between words such as Jewish or Semite on one side and Zionist or Israeli on the other.  It is very frustrationg for those of us who prefer clear distinctions between these terms.  Eclecticology 22:34, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * It is only natural that Jews have full spectrum of opinions about any subject and don't hesitate to discuss them in public, as they have long standing polemics traditions. OTOH, anti-Semites prefer to suspect Jewish conspiracy, in addition it has become politically incorrect to admit being an anti-Semite.  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 02:52, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * It is totally wrong for an anti-Zionist to extrapolate his anti-Zionism into an excuse for blaming all Jews for everything that's wrong in the world. Eclecticology 22:34, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Of course it is wrong, but this accusation is NOT anti-Zionism, it is garden-variety anti-Semitism. Let's get our terminology straight.  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 02:52, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * It is equally wrong for Jewish extremists to draw inferences of anti-semitism when someone is severely critical of the Israeli state. Eclecticology 22:34, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Criticizing a particular policy of Israeli government does not automatically constitute anti-Semitism. OTOH, there is a big difference between being a) "severely critical of the Israeli state" policies and b) questioning the legitimacy of the existence of the Jewish state or advocating its destruction.  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 02:59, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The trouble with ruling out anything a propaganda department says is that some of it is "genuine" pseudoscience. For example, there might be a false claim that DNA analysis shows some inferiority in the genes of a disfavored ethnic group. That seems to me to be pseudoscience. A false claim that the group is being funded by foreign enemies is not pseudoscience. I'm not applying a definition here. These are just my gut reactions about the meaning of the term. I do agree with you that the "-ology" suffix is not, by itself, enough. JamesMLane 02:40, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * "Genuine pseudoscience" seems to be an oxymoron. :-) The DNA example could be more a matter of lying with statistics.  Propagandists aren't "doing" any science, real or pseudo; they're just taking the data and putting a particular spin on them.  Propagandists and advertisers are paid to promote a certain point of view, the truth of which may be no more than coincidental.  The kind of situation that you describe was at the centre of the bell-curve controversy a few years ago.  Some people were able to draw some inappropriate inferences from the statistical material, and a public that was just as unschooled in statistics was equally quick to condemn these results.  Statistics from IQ tests may very well have ended up with one racial group having a median score lower than another group.  From there the hypothesis that one group is inferior to the other is a testable one, which may be proven false in the testing, or which may lead to additional factors to explain the data.  At this point we do not yet have pseudoscience.   Eclecticology 03:54, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * For the n-th time: the whole thing was nothing but propaganda presented as a science. As such it was supposed to serve as a ground, or basis for propaganda. The post-Soviet sources refer to it as pseudoscience or quasiscience. Do we have a good category for it?  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 02:52, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, "propaganda"! Eclecticology 04:26, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Although I believe that the article also has other POV problems, I have too little background in the subject to attempt a revision. My involvement in this article is thus confined to the misuse of the term "pseudoscience". Eclecticology 04:42, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

"I would attach no weight to the -ology argument that suggest that such a suffix implies a science. That kind of thinking would render ideology into a science." Eclecticology 22:34, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Sorry you are wrong here. The suffix "-logy" means science, theory or study. See your favorite dictionary. (funny I should write it to someone whose nickname ends with it). Particular ideologies usually end with "-ism".  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 19:31, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * The meaning of the suffix is broader than "science". For example, speaking of the USSR, the phrase "Kremlinologist" was commonly used to describe the people who tried to figure out the power relationships among the secretive Soviet leaders, using such clues as who was standing where on the reviewing stand at a parade.  It was a legitimate field of study but it wasn't a science.  Beyond that, the way a field is referred to by its adherents is not dispositive as to its true nature.  The name is one example of the way the proponents tried to give their bigotry the veneer of a science, but calling it so doesn't make it so. JamesMLane 05:09, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree.  ←Humus sapiens←Talk 06:57, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hmmm
I was born in Moscow, Soviet Usion and live in Moscow now. And I NEVER heared such term as "Zionology" from any source except this article.--Nixer 13:41, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Please take a look at the refs and ext. links. ←Humus sapiens ну? 22:02, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I took a look, one source states that Yuri Ivanov was a founder of "Zionology" but Ivanov's book of 1969 never mentions this word. Can you give at least one native Russian source of 60-70s which uses it? --Yms 04:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

A very obscure term, if ever existed
I lived in the USSR in the 70-80s, being in Komsomol in the 80s, studied in a university, heard a lot of "anti-Zionist" propaganda, remember a lot of Party documents we had to read and hear in the mass media, but I never heard of this word. The most complete Russian dictionaries in http://gramota.ru find only синология (sinology). You cand hardly find it in any Russian dictionary published in the Soviet times. The only explanation for this is that it's a very obscure word not used in practice by Soviet anti-Zionists. It may be very convenient to say "Zionology" instead of "Soviet anti-Zionism", but it does not reflect the real state of things. At least, obscurity of this term must be reflected in this article. The article itself should be probably renamed to "Soviet anti-Zionism" because it is its real subject. --Yms 04:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Suggest merge to Soviet Union and the Arab-Israeli conflict
This article overlaps substantially with Soviet Union and the Arab-Israeli conflict, and a merge seems to be indicated. --John Nagle 19:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Nope. Zionism and Israel are not only about the Arab-Israeli conflict, nor was the Soviet Union's opposition to them. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 23:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Comment
OK, just looking at (edit summary), it tells: "bring a conspiracy amongst the Soviets to spread antisemitism" ??? Of course there was no conspiracy. That was simply an official ideology and policy of Soviet state. Yes, sure, there are already some sources and one can bring a lot more. My very best wishes (talk) 05:56, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

What a garbage article
The Soviets were extremely philosemitic and even had laws against anti-Semitism as well as being the first country to recognize Israel. This wiki reads like some Leftist pseudo-intellectual blog. 80.6.70.42 (talk) 03:06, 17 April 2015 (UTC)Alan

 * well, you might want to look at Doctor's Plot, Night of the Poets, and the rest of Category:Antisemitism in the Soviet Union  DGG ( talk ) 03:32, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Doctor's plot is nonsense. 24.112.163.59 (talk) 03:04, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Soviet Anti-Zionism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120130141738/http://www.cfr.org/un/un-general-assembly-resolution-3379-racial-discrimination/p11284 to http://www.cfr.org/un/un-general-assembly-resolution-3379-racial-discrimination/p11284
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/17/world/un-repeals-its-75-resolution-equating-zionism-with-racism.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:38, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Major issues
The coverage of the subject suffers from two major drawbacks: it misses two vital points:
 * Zionism was strongly opposed by the Bolsheviks from the very onset of Bolshevism, since it was allegedly in contradiction of their theory of "Proletarian internationalism" and masqueraded the interests of the bourgeoisie under the guise of misleading concept of "national unity". After Stalin's brief stint of support of Israel (which, in Stalin's words, was supposed to be "an awl in ass of the Arabs which will make them to turn away from Britain"), the Soviet anti-Zionism simply returned to the preexisting "party line". In particular, the phrase in the lede "While the Soviet Union initially pursued a pro-Zionist policy " was grossly misleading (I added a minimal fix right now).
 * In addition to the above, the Soviet andti-Zioniosm can be markedly split into two phases: before Stalin's support of Israel and post- Arab–Israeli conflict.
 * In the first phase Bolshevist anti-Zionism was purely ideological, and I summarized above
 * In the second one it became a kind of straw man argument: The Soviets invented their own definition of "Zionism" and tirelessly fought it.

I am not an expert in political science, but maybe later I will add a sentence of two to fix the above, but others are very invited. Loew Galitz (talk) 19:21, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Abbas not relevant
When the article was called Zionology, it made sense to have Mahmoud Abbas here, but the article is called "Soviet" anti-zionism, not anti-zionism in general. This section should be deleted or moved to another page. Abbas's antisemitic conspiracy theories have no connection to the USSR in this article, and if there are some, they should be included. Regardless, this section is undue weight even if it is tangentially related. Catboy69 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:30, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Soviet anti-Zionism


text:
Utica School of Commerce

Utica School of Commerce was a for-profit business college with three locations in upstate New York. Its main campus was in Utica, New York and it had branch campuses in Canastota, New York and Oneonta, New York. The college was founded in 1896 and closed at the end of 2016.

History
The Utica School of Commerce was founded by Thomas J. Risinger in 1896 in response to an early demand for specialized training in commerce and finance. His son, William S. Risinger, joined him in 1904 and, in 1919, became the head of the school. He retained this position until his retirement on March 1, 1966, at which time a new partnership was formed by Eleanor P., granddaughter of the founder, and Roger L. Williams. On July 1, 1976, they incorporated the school under the laws of New York. Philip M. Williams and John L. Crossley, sole stockholders of the Utica School of Commerce, Inc., were two of the Trustees on the Board of Trustees of the Utica School of Commerce, Inc.

At its founding in 1896, the school was located on the third floor of the Oneida National Bank Building on the corner of Genesee and Bleecker Streets. In 1915, the school expanded its facilities and moved to the Mayro Building in which it had its facilities for 63 years. On September 11, 1978, the Utica School of Commerce moved to its final location at 201 Bleecker Street. In February 1985, the Utica School of Commerce opened its Madison County Branch at the Washington Avenue Community Center in Oneida, and in March 1986, moved to the New York State Jaycees' Building on Route 5 in Canastota. The college opened its new campus adjacent to its former location in September 1992. USC opened its Oneonta Branch in September 1985 in the Verizon Building at 17 Elm Street, Oneonta.

Enrollment peaked in the 2009-2010 school year and declined afterwards. Before its closing, the school had two-year and certificate programs for business administration, administrative specialist, health service management, non-profit agency management, and information technology. USC closed on December 23, 2016, due to low enrollment numbers. Students were given the option to transfer to Bryant and Stratton College in Syracuse or to make arrangements with local community colleges.

title: Utica School of Commerce


text:
Talk:Heathenry (reconstructionism)

Article move?
Should heathen be moved to? —Ashley Y 05:10, 2004 Jul 19 (UTC)

This was long overdue - think that both heathen and heathenry can stand, as the term is getting used in quite specific ways - e.g. often more 'animist' than Asatru. Seidkona 15:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, merge. Take all the best bits. FK0071a 12:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Additions
I have today added more material on rituals etc. Seidkona 12:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Suggested categories
Other than Neopaganism? Oh, redirects from heathen and heathenism now point to article. --139.80.123.3 23:00, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I've put in a few more - had problems editing this evening. Any suggestions - I've put Shamanism and Animisn and North European Paganism - though last has as yet no entries.. Seidkona 01:23, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Changed above to Germanic paganism Seidkona 12:35, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Looks good. Links to the article from Paganism and the Heathenry definition included in that need sorting out, too. --139.80.123.3 19:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I've put one link in - that article needs serious sorting out, basically. There is some under-researched/disputed etymology there, and a lot of repetition. But I'm out of time for doing this in.. Seidkona 23:42, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

article scope
the intro itself states that Heathenry as intended here is used as the equivalent of Germanic neopaganism. Therefore the articles should be merged. This article is fine, but it will not do to have two independent articles on the same topic for terminological reasons. Also, it is apparently implied that "heathen" refers to polytheistic reconstructionism while "pagan" includes "rituals from other sources". This seems idiosyncratic. Obviously, without the "neo-", "heathen" and "pagan" both generically refers to traditions, not reconstructions or inventions. dab (ᛏ) 14:47, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree that these articles conflict, but I have some other concerns. I have expressed them over at Talk:Germanic Neopaganism. WeniWidiWiki 20:07, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

the article has been left lying for two months now; I will go ahead and merge it when I have time. dab (ᛏ) 13:15, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

---

The article does not cover the same ground as the discussion on 'Germanic neopaganism': nor does the term 'Heathenry' as used in the UK necessarily imply the kind of identification that I have seen in the US. This article was written specifically to give access to meanings and understandings that were not covered elsewhere. In particular, the association of Heathenry with LandWights and 'local gods' is important.

Further, not all Heathens restrict their deity-affiliations to 'Germanic' deities. (I dislike the first line, btw, which has changed considerably from earlier versions. Heathenry as practiced today is not necessarily either revival or 'modern', and could be said to be closer to animism than to a specific 'Germanic paganism'.)

I hope that these articles will not be merged. Also, the permission to use copyright material was given specifically for an article on 'Heathenry'.

Seidkona 10:39, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Seidkona, by submitting the material to Wikipedia, you agreed to license it under the GFDL. If you are not the copyright holder, then the submission violated copyright and must be remmoved. If you are the copyright holder, you may not attach any requirements to its use beyond those specified in the GFDL. It may be "edited mercilessly" and "redistributed by others". –RHolton ≡ – 18:30, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The material is quoted from a specified article (by me). It needs to be kept togeher and the citation kept with it. It is about Heathenry. Seidkona 09:58, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

 * What it sounds like you're saying is that the material falls under fair use. However, in that case, your permission is not required. That's the point of fair use. Under fair use, you as the original author of the material have no more control than any other Wikipedia editor over what portion of that material is used in which article or articles, or under which titles. Unless what you're saying is that the material does not fall under the fair use criteria, in which case the solution is to reduce the quantity until it does. The point is, if it's not fair use, it's either released under the GFDL, or it's a copyright violation. But that determination has nothing to do with which article title it's used in, or what other content is in that article. –RHolton ≡ – 10:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't see it as a copyright issue, more as a relevancy one. The material was written about Heathenry. If the Heathenry article merges with German Neopaganisn, then the material is perhaps longer relevant. I think Germanic neopaganism and Heathenry should be left separated. Merging will make for a large, unwieldy article. --202.61.138.217 20:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't see them as the same at all having read the 'germanic neopaganism' article. 'Germanic Neopagan' certainly contains Heathenry as it contains Asatru and Odinism, so Heathenry is not it's equivalent. I don't think it's appropriate to merge the two as Heathenry seems to be a distinct category.

Luvlymish 12:18, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Shadowlance 01:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)== Beyond the Germanic ==

I wish to expand on an issue which Seidkona touched upon earlier. That being the understanding of Heathenry as being strictly Germanic in nature. I have long considered myself a Heathen, though certainly bot as described in this article. The understanding I have long held of Heathenry (and don't ask me to site some source as I learned from another human being, a woman in a small book store), is that a Heathen seeks to bring the beliefs and practises of his-her ancestors (be they physical, cultural, spiritual, etc.) into his/her own life. This can take the form of syncreticism, or even totally adopting what you understant to be the religion of your forebears.

In this manner by own practise of Heathenry involved elements of Anglicanism (the religious tradition in which I was raised), ancient Celtic and Germanic beliefs, and some African gods and folk magic/shamanism. I also plan to research First Nations beliefs and se what I can incorporate into my practise (though I have no first nations ancestry, I consider that as a Canadian I owe the first people of this land my respect and I wish to honour their ways).

I don't know how widely held this view of Heathenry is but it is my own and I consider it to be a valid one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.61.138.217 (talk • contribs)

as it is, this article describes a certain subset of UK Germanic neopaganism. It is fair enough to have an article about that, but "Heathenry" as a term has a wider scope. If people think it will not do to just merge, we will at least have to do some disambiguation, say move this to Heathenry (UK neopaganism) and make Heathenry a redirect to Heathen which may be a disambiguation page. I hope this would be a solution acceptable to everybody. I have no intention to belittle UK Heathenry, it is simply a matter of ambiguous usage of the term: "Heathenry" can and does refer to Paganism in a much more general sense. dab (ᛏ) 07:54, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

It is my opinion that the notion that shamanism is something other than the traditional religions of Siberians, Mongols, and Turkic tribes of Central Asia should be confronted, and that the term neoshamanism should be used in its place. The word animism should be revived as the proper term to describe generally the majority of religions which are now described inaccurately as "shamanism" due to the contributions of New Age writers. 65.65.156.86 13:44, 2 October 2006 (UTC) Bryant Holman

 * Shamanism has been considered by many anthropologists, to be related to a universal Spiritual role, involving altered states of consciousness. To limit the term that has been accepted by the relivent scientific community to define this role to the origin of that term, is way beyond the scope this single article and is something that the anthropolical community would need to address rather than us. --Lextori 07:07, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I've disambiguated, but I still strongly suggest a merge. As it turns out, the practices described here are not any more "reconstructionist" than your average Germanic neopaganism. Especially the section "Practices and discourses (what Heathens do and say)" has exactly the same scope as Germanic_neopaganism and can easily be merged there. We do not need two discussions of the same thing in slightly different lingo. I think the main reason the articles are still separate is personal dislike of the term "neopaganism". While I appreciate the feeling, I would like to stress that the term is in no way intrinsically derogatory, and is simply used as the most universal referrer for the topic, since all other terms are subject to idiosyncratic use. It is part of the Germanic neopagan aesthetic to try and use "native" terminology, if possible antiquated or old-sounding, which depending on the user's erudition may turn out in varying shades of philological accuracy. It is not our fault that terminology is fuzzy. This is a direct consequence of the lack of central organization of the movement. This absence of a "church" is a good thing, and desired by adherents, but it necessarily leads to terminological confusion, and we need to pick the term that is least ambiguous. "Heathenry" is simply the term that some adherents pick to refer to what in encyclopedic tone should be called "Germanic neopaganism". My personal favourite is "Forn Sidhr"/"Forn Sed"/"Alte Sitte", adapted to the local dialect, but I wouldn't dream of suggesting that Wikipedia's discussion of the phenomenon as a whole should be so titled. dab (𒁳) 08:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of this Dab. The main difference I note, is that Germanic neopaganism entry seems to dwell more on the organizational and political aspects, and Heathenry (reconstructionism) seems to be primarily concerned with the praxis. This is a phenomenon which makes the Germanic neopaganism entry more representative of the USA rather than the rest of the world. For example, animism and land veneration is mentioned nowhere in the Germanic neopaganism entry, but it comes up a few times here. Also the old "tar them all with the neonazi brush" has not appeared at this entry, and I think undue weight is given to it at the other entry. I honestly think this entire entry has good content which is more cohesive and representative of the religion, and would like it worked into the other entry as the primary material if merging is the consensus. Currently Germanic neopaganism is very fragmenented, and is therefore somewhat lacking. - WeniWidiWiki 16:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Heathenry (reconstructionism)


text:
Celebrate

Celebrate may refer to:

Albums

 * Celebrate (Bonnie Tyler album), UK title of Wings, or the title song, 2006
 * Celebrate (James Durbin album) or the title song, 2014
 * Celebrate – Live, by the Archers, or the title song, 1980
 * Celebrate!, by Kool & the Gang, 1980
 * Celebrate: The Greatest Hits, by Simple Minds, or the title song (see below), 2013
 * Celebrate: The Three Dog Night Story, 1965–1975 or the title song (see below), 1993
 * Celebrate, by Hi-5, 2002
 * Celebrate, by Tiny Moving Parts, 2016
 * Celebrate, by Twice, 2022

EPs

 * Celebrate (EP), by Highlight, or the title song, 2017
 * Celebrate – The Night of the Warlock, by Doro Pesch, or the title song, 2008
 * Celebrate, by JoJo Siwa, 2019

Songs

 * "Celebrate" (CeCe Peniston song), 2012
 * "Celebrate" (Empire of the Sun song), 2014
 * "Celebrate" (Mika song), 2012
 * "Celebrate" (Three Dog Night song), 1969
 * "Celebrate" (Whitney Houston and Jordin Sparks song), 2012
 * "Celébrate", by Miki Núñez, 2019
 * "Celebrate", by Alex O
 * "Celebrate", by Alexandra Stan from Unlocked, 2014
 * "Celebrate", by An Emotional Fish, 1989
 * "Celebrate", by Black Eyed Peas from Translation, 2020
 * "Celebrate", by Brass Construction, 1978
 * "Celebrate", by DaBaby from Baby on Baby, 2019
 * "Celebrate", by Daria Kinzer, representing Croatia in the Eurovision Song Contest 2011
 * "Celebrate", by Dirty Heads from Swim Team, 2017
 * "Celebrate", by DJ Khaled from Father of Asahd, 2019
 * "Celebrate", by Ingrid Michaelson from It Doesn't Have to Make Sense, 2016
 * "Celebrate", by Lake from Ouch!, 1980/1981
 * "Celebrate", by Little Dragon from Season High, 2017
 * "Celebrate", by Metric from Pagans in Vegas, 2015
 * "Celebrate", by Piero Esteriore & The MusicStars, representing Switzerland in the Eurovision Song Contest 2004
 * "Celebrate", by Pitbull from Globalization, 2014
 * "Celebrate", by Simple Minds from Empires and Dance, 1980
 * "Celebrate", by Wiz Khalifa from Khalifa, 2016
 * "Celebrate!", by Jonas Brothers from The Album, 2023

Other uses

 * Celebrate! Tokyo Disneyland, a 2018–2019 nighttime show
 * Celebrate, a Christian magazine edited by Peter Youngren

title: Celebrate


text:
Aelius Herodianus

Aelius Herodianus (Αἴλιος Ἡρωδιανός) or Herodian (fl. 2nd century CE) was a Greek historian and one of the most celebrated grammarians of Greco-Roman antiquity. He is usually known as Herodian except when there is a danger of confusion with the historian also named Herodian.

Herodian was the son of Apollonius Dyscolus and was born in Alexandria. From there he seems to have moved to Rome, where he gained the favour of the emperor Marcus Aurelius, to whom he dedicated a work on prosody.

Works
Herodian was held in very high esteem by subsequent grammarians; Priscian describes him as maximus auctor artis grammaticae ("the greatest creator of grammatical art"). He wrote many works, but they are mostly fragmentary and it is very difficult to compile an accurate list of them. In numerous instances it is impossible to tell whether the titles given by writers who quote from his works are distinct treatises, or only portions of larger works. In addition, there are ongoing debates over which works were written by him and which were not. Some works by lesser-known figures are known to have been reattributed to Herodian, presumably in order to increase the prestige of the works.

In total some fifty titles are known in connection with Herodian's name. The main works attached to his name (both rightly and wrongly) are as follows (the most usual way of citing each title is highlighted in bold):

 * On peculiar style (περὶ μονήρους λέξεως). Probably the only complete work of Herodian's to have survived.
 * Categories (ἐπιμερισμοί, Partitiones). Devoted to explanations of difficult words found in Homer; many important quotations from the Partitiones are found in the scholia on Homer.
 * General prosody (ἡ καθ' ὅλου προσῳδία, or καθολικὴ προσῳδία, or μεγάλη προσῳδία; De prosodia catholica), in twenty books. Herodian dedicated this work to Marcus Aurelius. It covered prosody and etymology. Two epitomes and an index survive. It is possible that several other titles known to us were in fact parts of the Prosody: namely the Homeric prosody (Ὁμηρικὴ προσῳδία); Attic prosody (Ἀττικὴ προσῳδία); and Anomalous prosody (ἀνώμαλος προσῳδία). A work entitled On accents (περὶ τόνων), attributed to Arcadius of Antioch but compiled by a later grammarian, Theodosius of Byzantium, seems to be an extract from Herodian's Prosody.
 * On figures (περὶ σχημάτων, De figuris). This work is known to be spurious, i.e. it is transmitted under Herodian's name but was not written by him. The author is referred to as "pseudo-Herodian".
 * Philetaerus (φιλέταιρος). This work is also known to be spurious; it has been suggested that it was in fact by Cornelianus.

Editions

 * General edition. August Lentz and Arthur Ludwich 1879 [1867-70], Herodiani Technici reliquiae, reprint (Hildesheim, orig. Lentz); cited by volume and page number.
 * Scholia on the Iliad. Erbse, H. 1969–1988, Scholia Graeca in Homeri Iliadem, 7 vols. (Berlin).
 * De figuris (spurious). Kerstin Hajdú 1998, Ps.-Herodian, De figuris: Überlieferungsgeschichte und kritische Ausgabe (Berlin, New York). ISBN 3-11-014836-6

Earlier publications:
 * Partitiones. Boissonade, J.F. 1963 [1819], Herodiani Partitiones, reprint (Amsterdam).
 * De prosodia catholica. August Lentz 1965 [1867], Grammatici Graeci vol. 3.1, reprint (Hildesheim).
 * Epitome of De pros. cath. Moritz Schmidt 1983 [1860], Epitome tes katholikes prosodias'', reprint (Hildesheim).
 * Works reconstructed from Iliad scholia. Lehrs, K. 1857 [1848], Herodiani scripta tria emendatiora, 2nd ed. (Berlin).
 * Philetaerus (spurious). Johann Pierson et al. 1969 [1830-31], Moeridis Atticistae Lexicon Atticum, reprint (Hildesheim); Philetaerus ed. Georg Aenotheus Koch.

title: Aelius Herodianus


text: Category:Germanic paganism

title: Category:Germanic paganism


text:
Talk:Greek letters

Shouldn't this page be merged with Greek Alphabet?

title: Talk:Greek letters


text:
Talk:Apollonius Dyscolus

Untitled
OCD has most of a column on this guy, and says nothing about him being "careless". What's the source for that claim? Stan 05:33, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Hi Stan, it comes from the Penguin Dictionary of Ancient History, details here. It doesn't go into further detail however, and given that it also describes Apollonius' pedantic nature, I too was a bit confused. By all means nix it if you like, I only did a quick article after wanting to do something on the two Herodians. adamsan 08:03, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Wikiquote
The article says "Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Apollonius Dyscolus" but when you click it, there is nothing at Wikiquote. Anybody know why that link is there? -- MithrasPriest (talk) 14:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks like the one edit by some anon (see ), so no way to know for sure what they were thinking. Sometimes people pre-emptively cross-link projects with the idea that if the other project ever got content, then the link would magically start being useful. (The idea would make more sense if the cross-link changed color, no way to tell beforehand whether it's worth clicking on.) Stan (talk) 15:59, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Can someone remove whatever
is causing the source section to assert that 'This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Apollonius". Encyclopædia Britannica. 2 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.'?Nishidani (talk) 15:09, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Apollonius Dyscolus


text:
James Wilson (Archdeacon of Manchester)

James Maurice Wilson (6 November 1836, Castletown, Isle of Man – 15 April 1931, Steep, Hampshire ) was a British priest in the Church of England as well as a theologian, teacher and astronomer.

Early life
Wilson and his twin brother, Edward Pears Wilson, attended King William's College on the Isle of Man from August 1848 to midsummer 1853 (his twin died in December 1856). Their father Edward, vicar of Nocton in Lincolnshire, had earlier been headmaster there. According to his autobiography, Wilson had a rather unhappy time at King William's College. He later studied at Sedbergh School.

Wilson entered St John's College, Cambridge, in 1855, where he was Senior Wrangler in 1859. He received a Master of Arts degree in 1862 and was a fellow from 1859 to 1868.

Career
Wilson was a major figure in the development and reform of Victorian public schools and promoted the teaching of science, which had until then been neglected. He was maths and science master at Rugby School from 1859 to 1879 and headmaster of Clifton College from 1879 to 1890.

He made astronomical observations (particularly of double stars) at Temple Observatory at Rugby with his former student George Mitchell Seabroke. Temple Observatory was named after Frederick Temple, headmaster of Rugby School, who later became Bishop of Exeter and Archbishop of Canterbury.

Wilson was encouraged by Temple to write the textbook Elementary Geometry, which was published in 1868. Until that time, Euclid's Elements had remained the standard textbook used in British schools.

With Joseph Gledhill and Edward Crossley, Wilson co-wrote Handbook of Double Stars in 1879, which became a standard reference work in astronomy. His astronomical observations seem to have come to an end after he left Rugby and went to Clifton.

While at Clifton, he successfully pushed for the creation of St Agnes Park in Bristol, as part of a plan to improve the lives of the urban poor.

In April 1890, he addressed girls at St Leonards School, stressing the connection of religion with their possible role as university students and social workers whilst  assisting women such as Octavia Hill to alleviate the plight of the "labouring masses, and in particular the (poor) women and girls of England".

After his teaching career, he became Vicar of Rochdale, Archdeacon of Manchester from 1890 to 1905, a canon of Worcester Cathedral from 1905 to 1926 and vice-dean of the cathedral. He was Hulsean lecturer at Cambridge in 1898; Lady Margaret Preacher at Cambridge in 1900; and Lecturer in Pastoral Theology at Cambridge in 1902.

He wholeheartedly accepted the theory of evolution and its implications for the literal interpretation of the Bible. He gave two lectures in 1892 in which he accepted Darwinism and argued that it was compatible with a higher view of Christianity; the lectures were published by the Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge, which had a few years earlier strongly opposed Darwinian ideas.

In 1921, he served for one year as president of The Mathematical Association of the UK.

In 1925 he wrote an essay entitled "The Religious Effect of the Idea of Evolution". He wrote a number of books, including Life after Death "with replies by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle" in 1920. In addition to spiritual works, he co-wrote an astronomy book on double stars (mentioned above) and mathematical books on geometry and conic sections. He contributed the article "On two fragments of geometrical treatises found in Worcester Cathedral" to the Mathematical Gazette (March 1911, p. 19).

Family
In 1868 he married his first wife, Annie Elizabeth Moore. Their first child was the leading civil servant Mona Wilson. His first wife died after giving birth to their fourth child in 1878. She was a cousin once removed of Arthur William Moore, a proponent of the Manx language.

In 1883 he married his second wife, Georgina Mary Talbot. Their sons included Sir Arnold Talbot Wilson, who became a British colonial administrator in Baghdad and was killed in action in World War II; 2nd Lt. Hugh Stanley Wilson (1885–1915), who died in World War I and is buried in the military cemetery at Hébuterne, Pas de Calais; and the tenor Sir Steuart Wilson. From his notes, Arnold and Steuart published the posthumous James M. Wilson: An Autobiography (London, Sidgwick & Jackson, 1932)

title: James Wilson (Archdeacon of Manchester)


text:
Fish finder

Fish finder may refer to:
 * Fishfinder, a sonar device attached to a boat, used to measure the amount of fish at various depths underneath the boat
 * Fish identifier, an identification key used in fishing to identify the species of a caught fish

title: Fish finder


text: Template:Writer-stub

title: Template:Writer-stub


text:
Kinetic art

Kinetic art is art from any medium that contains movement perceivable by the viewer or that depends on motion for its effects. Canvas paintings that extend the viewer's perspective of the artwork and incorporate multidimensional movement are the earliest examples of kinetic art. More pertinently speaking, kinetic art is a term that today most often refers to three-dimensional sculptures and figures such as mobiles that move naturally or are machine operated (see e. g. videos on this page of works of George Rickey and Uli Aschenborn). The moving parts are generally powered by wind, a motor or the observer. Kinetic art encompasses a wide variety of overlapping techniques and styles.

There is also a portion of kinetic art that includes virtual movement, or rather movement perceived from only certain angles or sections of the work. This term also clashes frequently with the term "apparent movement", which many people use when referring to an artwork whose movement is created by motors, machines, or electrically powered systems. Both apparent and virtual movement are styles of kinetic art that only recently have been argued as styles of op art. The amount of overlap between kinetic and op art is not significant enough for artists and art historians to consider merging the two styles under one umbrella term, but there are distinctions that have yet to be made.

"Kinetic art" as a moniker developed from a number of sources. Kinetic art has its origins in the late 19th century impressionist artists such as Claude Monet, Edgar Degas, and Édouard Manet who originally experimented with accentuating the movement of human figures on canvas. This triumvirate of impressionist painters all sought to create art that was more lifelike than their contemporaries. Degas’ dancer and racehorse portraits are examples of what he believed to be "photographic realism";. During the late 19th century artists such as Degas felt the need to challenge the movement toward photography with vivid, cadenced landscapes and portraits.

By the early 1900s, certain artists grew closer and closer to ascribing their art to dynamic motion. Naum Gabo, one of the two artists attributed to naming this style, wrote frequently about his work as examples of "kinetic rhythm". He felt that his moving sculpture Kinetic Construction (also dubbed Standing Wave, 1919–20) was the first of its kind in the 20th century. From the 1920s until the 1960s, the style of kinetic art was reshaped by a number of other artists who experimented with mobiles and new forms of sculpture.

Origins and early development
The strides made by artists to "lift the figures and scenery off the page and prove undeniably that art is not rigid" (Calder, 1954) took significant innovations and changes in compositional style. Édouard Manet, Edgar Degas, and Claude Monet were the three artists of the 19th century that initiated those changes in the Impressionist movement. Even though they each took unique approaches to incorporating movement in their works, they did so with the intention of being a realist. In the same period, Auguste Rodin was an artist whose early works spoke in support of the developing kinetic movement in art. However, Auguste Rodin's later criticisms of the movement indirectly challenged the abilities of Manet, Degas, and Monet, claiming that it is impossible to exactly capture a moment in time and give it the vitality that is seen in real life.

Édouard Manet
It is almost impossible to ascribe Manet's work to any one era or style of art. One of his works that is truly on the brink of a new style is Le Ballet Espagnol (1862). The figures' contours coincide with their gestures as a way to suggest depth in relation to one another and in relation to the setting. Manet also accentuates the lack of equilibrium in this work to project to the viewer that he or she is on the edge of a moment that is seconds away from passing. The blurred, hazy sense of color and shadow in this work similarly place the viewer in a fleeting moment.

In 1863, Manet extended his study of movement on flat canvas with Le déjeuner sur l'herbe. The light, color, and composition are the same, but he adds a new structure to the background figures. The woman bending in the background is not completely scaled as if she were far away from the figures in the foreground. The lack of spacing is Manet's method of creating snapshot, near-invasive movement similar to his blurring of the foreground objects in Le Ballet Espagnol.

Edgar Degas
Edgar Degas is believed to be the intellectual extension of Manet, but more radical for the impressionist community. Degas' subjects are the epitome of the impressionist era; he finds great inspiration in images of ballet dancers and horse races. His "modern subjects" never obscured his objective of creating moving art. In his 1860 piece Jeunes Spartiates s'exerçant à la lutte, he capitalizes on the classic impressionist nudes but expands on the overall concept. He places them in a flat landscape and gives them dramatic gestures, and for him this pointed to a new theme of "youth in movement".

One of his most revolutionary works, L’Orchestre de l’Opéra (1868) interprets forms of definite movement and gives them multidimensional movement beyond the flatness of the canvas. He positions the orchestra directly in the viewer's space, while the dancers completely fill the background. Degas is alluding to the Impressionist style of combining movement, but almost redefines it in a way that was seldom seen in the late 1800s. In the 1870s, Degas continues this trend through his love of one-shot motion horse races in such works as Voiture aux Courses (1872).

It wasn't until 1884 with Chevaux de Course that his attempt at creating dynamic art came to fruition. This work is part of a series of horse races and polo matches wherein the figures are well integrated into the landscape. The horses and their owners are depicted as if caught in a moment of intense deliberation, and then trotting away casually in other frames. The impressionist and overall artistic community were very impressed with this series, but were also shocked when they realized he based this series on actual photographs. Degas was not fazed by the criticisms of his integration of photography, and it actually inspired Monet to rely on similar technology.

Claude Monet
Degas and Monet's style was very similar in one way: both of them based their artistic interpretation on a direct "retinal impression" to create the feeling of variation and movement in their art. The subjects or images that were the foundation of their paintings came from an objective view of the world. As with Degas, many art historians consider that to be the subconscious effect photography had in that period of time. His 1860s works reflected many of the signs of movement that are visible in Degas' and Manet's work.

By 1875, Monet's touch becomes very swift in his new series, beginning with Le Bâteau-Atelier sur la Seine. The landscape almost engulfs the whole canvas and has enough motion emanating from its inexact brushstrokes that the figures are a part of the motion. This painting along with Gare Saint-Lazare (1877-1878), proves to many art historians that Monet was redefining the style of the Impressionist era. Impressionism initially was defined by isolating color, light, and movement. In the late 1870s, Monet had pioneered a style that combined all three, while maintaining a focus on the popular subjects of the Impressionist era. Artists were often so struck by Monet's wispy brushstrokes that it was more than movement in his paintings, but a striking vibration.

Auguste Rodin
Auguste Rodin at first was very impressed by Monet's 'vibrating works' and Degas' unique understanding of spatial relationships. As an artist and an author of art reviews, Rodin published multiple works supporting this style. He claimed that Monet and Degas' work created the illusion "that art captures life through good modeling and movement". In 1881, when Rodin first sculpted and produced his own works of art, he rejected his earlier notions. Sculpting put Rodin into a predicament that he felt no philosopher nor anyone could ever solve; how can artists impart movement and dramatic motions from works so solid as sculptures? After this conundrum occurred to him, he published new articles that didn't attack men such as Manet, Monet, and Degas intentionally, but propagated his own theories that Impressionism is not about communicating movement but presenting it in static form.

20th century surrealism and early kinetic art
The surrealist style of the 20th century created an easy transition into the style of kinetic art. All artists now explored subject matter that would not have been socially acceptable to depict artistically. Artists went beyond solely painting landscapes or historical events, and felt the need to delve into the mundane and the extreme to interpret new styles. With the support of artists such as Albert Gleizes, other avant-garde artists such as Jackson Pollock and Max Bill felt as if they had found new inspiration to discover oddities that became the focus of kinetic art.

Albert Gleizes
Gleizes was considered the ideal philosopher of the late 19th century and early 20th century arts in Europe, and more specifically France. His theories and treatises from 1912 on cubism gave him a renowned reputation in any artistic discussion. This reputation is what allowed him to act with considerable influence when supporting the plastic style or the rhythmic movement of art in the 1910s and 1920s. Gleizes published a theory on movement, which further articulated his theories on the psychological, artistic uses of movement in conjunction with the mentality that arises when considering movement. Gleizes asserted repeatedly in his publications that human creation implies the total renunciation of external sensation. That to him is what made art mobile when to many, including Rodin, it was rigidly and unflinchingly immobile.

Gleizes first stressed the necessity for rhythm in art. To him, rhythm meant the visually pleasant coinciding of figures in a two-dimensional or three-dimensional space. Figures should be spaced mathematically, or systematically so that they appeared to interact with one another. Figures should also not have features that are too definite. They need to have shapes and compositions that are almost unclear, and from there the viewer can believe that the figures themselves are moving in that confined space. He wanted paintings, sculptures, and even the flat works of mid-19th-century artists to show how figures could impart on the viewer that there was great movement contained in a certain space. As a philosopher, Gleizes also studied the concept of artistic movement and how that appealed to the viewer. Gleizes updated his studies and publications through the 1930s, just as kinetic art was becoming popular.

Jackson Pollock
When Jackson Pollock created many of his famous works, the United States was already at the forefront of the kinetic and popular art movements. The novel styles and methods he used to create his most famous pieces earned him the spot in the 1950s as the unchallenged leader of kinetic painters, his work was associated with Action painting coined by art critic Harold Rosenberg in the 1950s. Pollock had an unfettered desire to animate every aspect of his paintings. Pollock repeatedly said to himself, "I am in every painting". He used tools that most painters would never use, such as sticks, trowels, and knives. He thought of the shapes he created as being "beautiful, erratic objects".

This style evolved into his drip technique. Pollock repeatedly took buckets of paint and paintbrushes and flicked them around until the canvas was covered with squiggly lines and jagged strokes. In the next phase of his work, Pollock tested his style with uncommon materials. He painted his first work with aluminum paint in 1947, titled Cathedral and from there he tried his first "splashes" to destroy the unity of the material itself. He believed wholeheartedly that he was liberating the materials and structure of art from their forced confinements, and that is how he arrived at the moving or kinetic art that always existed.

Max Bill
Max Bill became an almost complete disciple of the kinetic movement in the 1930s. He believed that kinetic art should be executed from a purely mathematical perspective. To him, using mathematics principles and understandings were one of the few ways that you could create objective movement. This theory applied to every artwork he created and how he created it. Bronze, marble, copper, and brass were four of the materials he used in his sculptures. He also enjoyed tricking the viewer's eye when he or she first approached one of his sculptures. In his Construction with Suspended Cube (1935-1936) he created a mobile sculpture that generally appears to have perfect symmetry, but once the viewer glances at it from a different angle, there are aspects of asymmetry.

Mobiles and sculpture
Max Bill's sculptures were only the beginning of the style of movement that kinetic explored. Tatlin, Rodchenko, and Calder especially took the stationary sculptures of the early 20th century and gave them the slightest freedom of motion. These three artists began with testing unpredictable movement, and from there tried to control the movement of their figures with technological enhancements. The term "mobile" comes from the ability to modify how gravity and other atmospheric conditions affect the artist's work.

Although there is very little distinction between the styles of mobiles in kinetic art, there is one distinction that can be made. Mobiles are no longer considered mobiles when the spectator has control over their movement. This is one of the features of virtual movement. When the piece only moves under certain circumstances that are not natural, or when the spectator controls the movement even slightly, the figure operates under virtual movement.

Kinetic art principles have also influenced mosaic art. For instance, kinetic-influenced mosaic pieces often use clear distinctions between bright and dark tiles, with three-dimensional shape, to create apparent shadows and movement.

Vladimir Tatlin
Russian artist and founder-member of the Russian Constructivism movement Vladimir Tatlin is considered by many artists and art historians to be the first person to ever complete a mobile sculpture. The term mobile wasn't coined until Rodchenko's time, but is very applicable to Tatlin's work. His mobile is a series of suspended reliefs that only need a wall or a pedestal, and it would forever stay suspended. This early mobile, Contre-Reliefs Libérés Dans L'espace (1915) is judged as an incomplete work. It was a rhythm, much similar to the rhythmic styles of Pollock, that relied on the mathematical interlocking of planes that created a work freely suspended in air.

Tatlin's Tower or the project for the 'Monument to the Third International' (1919–20), was a design for a monumental kinetic architecture building that was never built. It was planned to be erected in Petrograd (now St. Petersburg) after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, as the headquarters and monument of the Comintern (the Third International).

Tatlin never felt that his art was an object or a product that needed a clear beginning or a clear end. He felt above anything that his work was an evolving process. Many artists whom he befriended considered the mobile truly complete in 1936, but he disagreed vehemently.

Alexander Rodchenko
Russian artist Alexander Rodchenko, Tatlin's friend and peer who insisted his work was complete, continued the study of suspended mobiles and created what he deemed to be "non-objectivism". This style was a study less focused on mobiles than on canvas paintings and objects that were immovable. It focuses on juxtaposing objects of different materials and textures as a way to spark new ideas in the mind of the viewer. By creating discontinuity with the work, the viewer assumed that the figure was moving off the canvas or the medium to which it was restricted. One of his canvas works titled Dance, an Objectless Composition (1915) embodies that desire to place items and shapes of different textures and materials together to create an image that drew in the viewer's focus.

However, by the 1920s and 1930s, Rodchenko found a way to incorporate his theories of non-objectivism in mobile study. His 1920 piece Hanging Construction is a wood mobile that hangs from any ceiling by a string and rotates naturally. This mobile sculpture has concentric circles that exist in several planes, but the entire sculpture only rotates horizontally and vertically.

Alexander Calder
Alexander Calder is an artist who many believe to have defined firmly and exactly the style of mobiles in kinetic art. Over years of studying his works, many critics allege that Calder was influenced by a wide variety of sources. Some claim that Chinese windbells were objects that closely resembled the shape and height of his earliest mobiles. Other art historians argue that the 1920s mobiles of Man Ray, including Shade (1920) had a direct influence on the growth of Calder's art.

When Calder first heard of these claims, he immediately admonished his critics. "I have never been and never will be a product of anything more than myself. My art is my own, why bother stating something about my art that isn’t true?" One of Calder's first mobiles, Mobile (1938) was the work that "proved" to many art historians that Man Ray had an obvious influence on Calder's style. Both Shade and Mobile have a single string attached to a wall or a structure that keeps it in the air. The two works have a crinkled feature that vibrates when air passes through it.

Regardless of the obvious similarities, Calder's style of mobiles created two types that are now referred to as the standard in kinetic art. There are object-mobiles and suspended mobiles. Object mobiles on supports come in a wide range of shapes and sizes and can move in any way. Suspended mobiles were first made with colored glass and small wooden objects that hung on long threads. Object mobiles were a part of Calder's emerging style of mobiles that were originally stationary sculptures.

It can be argued, based on their similar shape and stance, that Calder's earliest object mobiles have very little to do with kinetic art or moving art. By the 1960s, most art critics believed that Calder had perfected the style of object mobiles in such creations as the Cat Mobile (1966). In this piece, Calder allows the cat's head and its tail to be subject to random motion, but its body is stationary. Calder did not start the trend in suspended mobiles, but he was the artist that became recognized for his apparent originality in mobile construction.

One of his earliest suspended mobiles, McCausland Mobile (1933), is different from many other contemporary mobiles simply because of the shapes of the two objects. Most mobile artists such as Rodchenko and Tatlin would never have thought to use such shapes because they didn't seem malleable or even remotely aerodynamic.

Despite the fact that Calder did not divulge most of the methods he used when creating his work, he admitted that he used mathematical relationships to make them. He only said that he created a balanced mobile by using direct variation proportions of weight and distance. Calder's formulas changed with every new mobile he made, so other artists could never precisely imitate the work.

Virtual movement
By the 1940s, new styles of mobiles, as well as many types of sculpture and paintings, incorporated the control of the spectator. Artists such as Calder, Tatlin, and Rodchenko produced more art through the 1960s, but they were also competing against other artists who appealed to different audiences. When artists such as Victor Vasarely developed a number of the first features of virtual movement in their art, kinetic art faced heavy criticism. This criticism lingered for years until the 1960s, when kinetic art was in a dormant period.

Materials and electricity
Vasarely created many works that were considered to be interactive in the 1940s. One of his works Gordes/Cristal (1946) is a series of cubic figures that are also electrically powered. When he first showed these figures at fairs and art exhibitions, he invited people up to the cubic shapes to press the switch and start the color and light show. Virtual movement is a style of kinetic art that can be associated with mobiles, but from this style of movement there are two more specific distinctions of kinetic art.

Apparent movement and op art
Apparent movement is a term ascribed to kinetic art that evolved only in the 1950s. Art historians believed that any type of kinetic art that was mobile independent of the viewer has apparent movement. This style includes works that range from Pollock's drip technique all the way to Tatlin's first mobile. By the 1960s, other art historians developed the phrase "op art" to refer to optical illusions and all optically stimulating art that was on canvas or stationary. This phrase often clashes with certain aspects of kinetic art that include mobiles that are generally stationary.

In 1955, for the exhibition Mouvements at the Denise René gallery in Paris, Victor Vasarely and Pontus Hulten promoted in their "Yellow manifesto" some new kinetic expressions based on optical and luminous phenomenon as well as painting illusionism. The expression "kinetic art" in this modern form first appeared at the Museum für Gestaltung of Zürich in 1960, and found its major developments in the 1960s. In most European countries, it generally included the form of optical art that mainly makes use of optical illusions, such as op art, represented by Bridget Riley, as well as art based on movement represented by Yacov Agam, Carlos Cruz-Diez, Jesús Rafael Soto, Gregorio Vardanega, Martha Boto or Nicolas Schöffer. From 1961 to 1968, GRAV (Groupe de Recherche d’Art Visuel) founded by François Morellet, Julio Le Parc, Francisco Sobrino, Horacio Garcia Rossi, Yvaral, Joël Stein and Vera Molnár was a collective group of opto-kinetic artists. According to its 1963 manifesto, GRAV appealed to the direct participation of the public with an influence on its behavior, notably through the use of interactive labyrinths.

Contemporary work
In November 2013, the MIT Museum opened 5000 Moving Parts, an exhibition of kinetic art, featuring the work of Arthur Ganson, Anne Lilly, Rafael Lozano-Hemmer, John Douglas Powers, and Takis. The exhibition inaugurates a "year of kinetic art" at the Museum, featuring special programming related to the artform.

Neo-kinetic art has been popular in China where you can find interactive kinetic sculptures in many public places, including Wuhu International Sculpture Park and in Beijing.

Changi Airport, Singapore has a curated collection of artworks including large-scale kinetic installations by international artists ART+COM and Christian Moeller.

Selected kinetic sculptors

 * Yaacov Agam
 * Uli Aschenborn
 * David Ascalon
 * Fletcher Benton
 * Mark Bischof
 * Daniel Buren
 * Alexander Calder
 * Gregorio Vardanega
 * Martha Boto
 * U-Ram Choe
 * Angela Conner
 * Carlos Cruz-Diez
 * Marcel Duchamp
 * Lin Emery
 * Rowland Emett
 * Ivana Franke
 * Arthur Ganson
 * Nemo Gould
 * Gerhard von Graevenitz
 * Bruce Gray
 * Ralfonso Gschwend
 * Rafael Lozano-Hemmer
 * Chuck Hoberman
 * Anthony Howe
 * Irma Hünerfauth
 * Tim Hunkin
 * Theo Jansen
 * Ned Kahn
 * Roger Katan
 * Starr Kempf
 * Frederick Kiesler
 * Viacheslav Koleichuk
 * Gyula Kosice
 * Gilles Larrain
 * Julio Le Parc
 * Liliane Lijn
 * Len Lye
 * Sal Maccarone
 * Heinz Mack
 * Phyllis Mark
 * László Moholy-Nagy
 * Alejandro Otero
 * Robert Perless
 * Otto Piene
 * George Rickey
 * Ken Rinaldo
 * Barton Rubenstein
 * Nicolas Schöffer
 * Eusebio Sempere
 * Jesús Rafael Soto
 * Mark di Suvero
 * Takis
 * Jean Tinguely
 * Wen-Ying Tsai
 * Marc van den Broek
 * Panayiotis Vassilakis
 * Willem van Weeghel
 * Lyman Whitaker
 * Ludwig Wilding

Selected kinetic op artists

 * Nadir Afonso
 * Getulio Alviani
 * Marina Apollonio
 * Carlos Cruz-Díez
 * Ronald Mallory
 * Youri Messen-Jaschin
 * Vera Molnár
 * Abraham Palatnik
 * Bridget Riley
 * Eusebio Sempere
 * Grazia Varisco
 * Victor Vasarely
 * Jean-Pierre Yvaral
 * Romano Rizzato

title: Kinetic art


text: Category:Elections in Djibouti

title: Category:Elections in Djibouti


text: Category:Elections in Dominica

title: Category:Elections in Dominica


text:
Talk:Ray Kurzweil

Ray Kurzweil Singularity Superintelligence and Immortality On The War in Ukraine
This contemporary interview can be included on the page:

Ray Kurzweil Singularity Superintelligence and Immortality On The War in Ukraine Lex Fridman Podcast 321 September 17, 2022 - 439,132 views https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykY69lSpDdo&t=2650s

On The War in Ukraine:

53:51

Lex Fridman: So you mentioned nuclear weapons. I'd love to hear your opinion about the 21st century and whether you think we might destroy ourselves and maybe your opinion if it has changed by looking at what's going on in ukraine that we could have a hot war with nuclear powers involved and the tensions building and the seeming forgetting of how terrifying and destructive nuclear weapons are. Do you think humans might destroy ourselves in the 21st century and if we do how do we avoid it?

Ray Kurzweil: I don't think that's going to happen despite the terrors of that war. It is a possibility but it's unlikely. Even with the tensions we've had with this one nuclear power plant that's been taken over. It's very tense but i don't actually see a lot of people worrying that's going to happen. i think we'll avoid that we had two nuclear bombs go off in 1945 so now we're 77 years later. We're doing pretty good we've never had another one go off through anger

Lex Fridman: But people forget people forget the lessons of history.

Ray Kurzweil: I am worried about it i mean that that is definitely a challenge.

Lex Fridman: But you believe that we'll make it out and ultimately super intelligent AI will help us make it out as opposed to destroy us.

Ray Kurzweil: I think so but we do have to be mindful of these dangers and and there are other dangers besides nuclear weapons.

55:54

May1787 (talk) 10:31, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Annilation of the human species
I added the following to the article:

On a Lex Fridman September 17, 2022 YouTube Podcast Kurzweil explained his worries about technology being used for violence. When asked about nuclear armaggedon and the Russo-Ukrainian War, Kurzweil stated: " I don't think (nuclear war) is going to happen despite the terrors of that war. It is a possibility but it's unlikely. Even with the tensions we've had with (the Zaporizhzhia) nuclear power plant that's been taken over. It's very tense but i don't actually see a lot of people worrying that's going to happen. I think we'll avoid that we had two nuclear bombs go off in (1945) so now we're 77 years later....we've never had another one go off through anger...there are other dangers besides nuclear weapons."

May1787 (talk) 10:43, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

 * I mildly oppose the addition, as it seems to me wp:NOTNEWS.Shajure (talk) 04:18, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Need help editing this page. I’m an official / employee to Ray Kurzweil acting on his behalf.
Hello, I would truly appreciate if somebody could point me in the direction of how I make a set of small edits to this page because all my edits being deleted — all edits being made at the behest of Ray Kurzweil personally. I’m his staff and in charge of his official materials, library, and conduct topical research for his books. Les-chouettes (talk) 16:09, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

 * Follow the instructions (including clicking on the links) in the message on your personal talk page. Note, though, that neither Ray Kurzweil nor his staff own this Wikipedia article - we may or may not go along with your suggestions depending on how they agree with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. - MrOllie (talk) 16:16, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * thank you for replying to my request I'm going to attempt to follow your instructions. I'm not exactly sure what they mean. Les-chouettes (talk) 18:19, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The photo is not legal we don't have the right to use it. We have gotten complaints about the photo on this page. I submitted an official photo of way a portrait that we do have the rights to use and it was deleted five times. I don't know how to make this change permanent. Les-chouettes (talk) 18:20, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * ☝🏻typo: photo of Ray Les-chouettes (talk) 18:20, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * — Sarah Black
 * SarahBlack@ KurzweilTech.com
 * library editor | the Kurzweil Library
 * researcher to Ray Kurzweil
 * staff :: employee since 1999
 * -:-: thank you !  :-:- Les-chouettes (talk) 18:22, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * another change Ray would like he was not born in New York City. Les-chouettes (talk) 18:23, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

 * The photo was uploaded to the Wikimedia commons project (related to but not quite the same as Wikipedia) in 2008 under a Creative Commons Attribution 1.0 Generic license. That project received an email from the copyright holder confirming the license to use that photo. If that was some kind of an error, you'll have to contact the Wikimedia commons project about it. I cannot help you with that, I don't have much to do with the images project. It is a larger issue than this particular article, since it is used in several places across the Wikimedia projects. - MrOllie (talk) 18:26, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * OK thank you. Is there another way to get the image replaced just by suggesting the edit and providing (again) the Kurzweil official photo that we use now. Or should I have the legal firm contact Wikipedia in any way possible. Also for basic edits like PoB. It's nice of you to put so much time into your communications and teaching me, this is way over my head. Nobody knows how to make basic edits to Wikipedia even if official and apparently coming from Kurzweil team directly has zero value. I understand this page is handled as a trash content and that it's not valued as being endorsed by the celebrity it's about. To be clear, I'm not attempting to remove criticisms or alter anything controversial. I'm willing to provide my credentials. I undestand Jimmy Wales who Ray has done panels with is not reachable and not involved in these decisions as there's not executive office. I do really appreciate that this is volunteer. Unfortunately as an official with Kurzweil for 24 years means nothing. And the page isn't supposed to be endorsed by Ray himself or have his backing or support. I will let him know that it's impossible to make edits. I submitted the required disclaimer and my edits and nothing is happening to see those edits made because they're not valued as an improvement. My only avenue is probably going to see if there's a legal angle to get the heirarchy of volunteers to express an interest in changing these 2 extremely minor edits. The portrait and the PoB and a few typos. I also have the vital data on his new upcoming book to be released and its details. I made the wrong assumption that the volunteers controlling this page were fans. I see now that's not the case, I apologize for having bothered you. Les-chouettes (talk) 00:37, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Or should I have the legal firm contact Wikipedia in any way possible. and My only avenue is probably going to see if there's a legal angle <- these can easily be construed as a legal threat, which are strictly prohibited on Wikipedia, see WP:LEGAL. You should retract these or clearly clarify that you and/or your 'legal firm' do not intend to sue anyone, or you can expect that an admin will block your account for as long as the legal threat is outstanding. MrOllie (talk) 00:46, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Obviously, there are reasons that facts should be corrected. it is possible to achieve legal advice on activities online especially social sites to understand the best avenue it is not a legal threat. Wikipedia has no recourse. Wikipedia is a website that you use at your own risk.
 * Anyone can post a fan page on Wikipedia. Les-chouettes (talk) 02:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
 * How could I possibly have a legal threat when there's no legal recourse possible? why is this even coming up as a discussion? it's a Saks should be corrected for safety reasons. There is no way to get through the gauntlet of volunteer labor. what constitutes a legal threat is there documentation on this? How could it be a threat if there's no legality involved. Les-chouettes (talk) 02:10, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I am not an editor I'm not looking to become an editor. I am not allowed to make changes in anyway any change I make will be deleted even though I filled out the required form the best I could. Thank you for that advice. Les-chouettes (talk) 02:11, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
 * why would you block me? when you deal with a celebrity and the fan page is a celebrity fan page that attracts controversy it's important to know how to cope with FAQs and how the editing process functions so that anything that comes up in the future can be dealt with for safety reasons. Les-chouettes (talk) 02:12, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
 * thank you kindly for giving me the answers I needed, which is that editing is impossible even with disclosure. it's important for me as a professional to understand what my avenues are so I can report to Ray what is possible and what is not possible now and in the future. Les-chouettes (talk) 02:12, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing in Peragine
This article contains close paraphrasing / plagiarism to text contained in: I added exact quotes from the source to the relevant references. The book is self-published, so it seems more likely to me that Peragine plagiarized Wikipedia than that Wikipedia plagiarized Peragine, but we should look into the history of these phrases to be sure. Daask (talk) 12:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

The Singularity is Nearer
Start of the book page:

{stub}} The Singularity is Nearer is an upcoming 2024 book by futurist Ray Kurzweil. ref>

[Category:Future]]

Ironcurtain2 (talk) 05:24, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ray Kurzweil


text:
Category:Writer stubs

The perfect article about a writer gives both a (possibly short) biography and a list of books or other major publications they have written. Also, appropriate categories should be added, especially those listed in Category:Writers by genre and Category:Writers by nationality.

The booklist should be sorted in the order that it would be best to read their books. This might include splitting them into categories by genre, or series. It should indicate if they are listed in the order they were written or in chronological ordered.

title: Category:Writer stubs


text:
User talk:TigerZukeX

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Here are some links I thought useful:

 * Tutorial
 * Help desk
 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Neutral point of view
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text
 * IRC channel
 * Mailing lists
 * Current polls

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~.

Be Bold!

Sam [Spade] 05:40, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Vandalism
Vandalism will get you blocked from editing. RickK

title: User talk:TigerZukeX