text:
1830s in Western fashion

1830s fashion in Western and Western-influenced fashion is characterized by an emphasis on breadth, initially at the shoulder and later in the hips, in contrast to the narrower silhouettes that had predominated between 1800 and 1820.

Women's costume featured larger sleeves than were worn in any period before or since, which were accompanied by elaborate hairstyles and large hats.

The final months of the 1830s saw the proliferation of a revolutionary new technology—photography. Hence, the infant industry of photographic portraiture preserved for history a few rare, but invaluable, first images of human beings—and therefore also preserved our earliest, live peek into "fashion in action"—and its impact on everyday life and society as a whole.

General trends
The prevalent trend of Romanticism from the 1820s through the mid-1840s, with its emphasis on strong emotion as a source of aesthetic experience and its recognition of the picturesque, was reflected in fashion as in other arts. Items of historical dress including neck ruffs, ferronnières (jeweled headbands worn across the forehead), and sleeves based on styles of earlier periods were popular.

Innovations in roller printing on textiles introduced new dress fabrics. Rich colors such as the Turkey red of the 1820s were still found, but delicate floral prints on light backgrounds were increasingly popular. More precise printing eliminated the need for dark outlines on printed designs, and new green dyes appeared in patterns of grasses, ferns, and unusual florals. Combinations of florals and stripes were fashionable.

Overall, both men's and women's fashion showed width at the shoulder above a tiny waist. Men's coats were padded in the shoulders and across the chest, while women's shoulders sloped to huge sleeves.

Overview
In the 1830s, fashionable women's clothing styles had distinctive large 'leg of mutton' or gigot sleeves, above large full conical skirts, ideally with a narrow, low waist, achieved through a combination of corsetry to restrict the waist and full sleeves and skirts that made the waist appear smaller by comparison. Heavy stiff fabrics such as brocades were fashionable after the aesthetic simplicity of fashion from 1795 to 1820, and many 18th-century gowns were cut up into new garments. There was an emphasis on sloping shoulders and large, full sleeves over much of the arm, with a small cuff at the wrist, which are distinctive to day dresses of the 1830s.

Pelerines, tippets, or lace coverings draped over the shoulders, were popular (one of several garments, along with full upper-arm sleeves and wide necklines, to emphasize the shoulders and their width).

Gowns
The fashionable feminine figure, with its sloping shoulders, rounded bust, narrow waist and full hips, was emphasized in various ways with the cut and trim of gowns. To about 1835, the small waist was accentuated with a wide belt (a fashion continuing from the 1820s). Later the waist and midriff were unbelted but cut close to the body, and the bodice began to taper to a small point at the front waist. The fashionable corset now had gores to individually cup the breasts, and the bodice was styled to emphasize this shape.

Gowns had very wide necklines and short, puffed sleeves reaching to the elbow from a dropped shoulder, and were worn with mid-length gloves. The width at the shoulder was often emphasized by gathered or pleated panels of fabric arranged horizontally over the bust and around the shoulders.

Morning dresses generally had high necklines, and shoulder width was emphasized with tippets or wide collars that rested on the gigot sleeves. Summer afternoon dresses might have wide, low necklines similar to gowns, but with long sleeves. Skirts were pleated into the waistband of the bodice, and held out with starched petticoats of linen or cotton.

Prior to 1835, fashionable skirts could be worn at ankle-length, but as the decade continued this fell out of fashion.

Hairstyles and Headgear
Early 1830s hair was parted in the center and dressed in elaborate curls, loops and knots extending out to both sides and up from the crown of the head. Braids were fashionable, and were likewise looped over either ear and gathered into a topknot. Bonnets with wide semicircular brims framed the face for street wear, and were heavily decorated with trim, ribbons, and feathers.

Married women wore a linen or cotton cap for daywear, trimmed with lace, ribbon, and frills, and tied under the chin. The cap was worn alone indoors and under the bonnet for street wear.

For evening wear, hair ornaments including combs, ribbons, flowers, and jewels were worn; other options included berets and turbans.

In the Río de la Plata cities of Buenos Aires and Montevideo, the fashion for peinetones—which was unique to the region—became immensely popular. Although its origin can be traced back to the traditional Spanish peineta comb, the peinetón derived into a different headpiece altogether, both for its physical characteristics as well as for the symbolic meanings around its use. They were defined by their extravagant size, measuring up to 120 cm in height and width at the height of their popularity. The use of the peinetón was a local addition to the over-the-top fashion of the Romantic era that characterized Western fashion of the period.

Undergarments
Women's undergarments consisted of a knee-length linen chemise with straight, elbow length sleeves. Corsets compressed the waist and skirts were held in shape by layers of starched petticoats, stiffened with tucks and cording. The full sleeves were supported by down-filled sleeve plumpers.

Outerwear
Riding habits consisted of a high-necked, tight-waisted jacket with the fashionable dropped shoulder and huge gigot sleeves, worn over a tall-collared shirt or chemisette, with a long matching petticoat or skirt. Tall top hats with veils were worn.

Shawls were worn with short-sleeved evening gowns early in the decade, but they were not suited to the wide gigot sleeves of the mid-1830s.

Full-length mantles were worn to about 1836, when mantles became shorter. A mantlet or shawl-mantlet was a shaped garment like a cross between a shawl and a mantle, with points hanging down in front. The burnous was a three-quarter length mantle with a hood, named after the similar garment of Arabia. The paletot was knee-length, with three cape-collars and slits for the arms, and the pardessus was half or three-quarter length coat with a defined waist and sleeves.

For evening, voluminous mantles of velvet or satin, with fur trim or fur linings in cold climates, were worn with the gown.

Footwear
Low, square-toed slippers were made of fabric or leather for daytime and of satin for evening wear. Low boots with elastic insets appeared in this decade.

Style gallery 1830–1835

 * Fashion plate from Mercure des Salons
 * Sophie Guillemette, Grand Duchess of Baden wears a white gown that just skims her ankles and a tawny-colored shawl. Her flat shoes have ribbon laces and square toes. 1831.
 * Therese von Schenk wears long sheer oversleeves over short puffed sleeves and an elaborate fabric-covered hat with plumes, 1831.
 * Lucia Carranza de Rodríguez Orey, elite woman from Buenos Aires, wears a peinetón and a pale dress with large sleeves, a small waist and a leather cord around her neck.
 * Manuela Suárez Lastra de Garmendia, elite woman from Buenos Aires, wears a gown with gigot sleeves and a small waist, multiple jewelry and an elaborate hairstyle.
 * Mrs. Edward Kellogg wears the frilled indoor day cap of a married woman with a wide ribbon bow tied under her chin. Her simple dark gown has gigot sleeves and a modestly broad neckline, filled in with a ruffed chemisette.
 * Fashion plate from Wiener Moden, in which anatomical accuracy gives way to the desire to present a trendy fashion silhouette. The day dress has a wide, low neckline and long sleeves.
 * Julie von Woyna wears a blue silk dress, with sheer sleeves and sheer lace trimmings . Her plaited hair is setup in an elaborate hairstyle.
 * Marquise Irene of Pallavicini of 1834 with echoes of the Renaissance: a wide-necked black gown features a tight belt at the raised waistline. Hair is worn in elaborate curls and knots.
 * Caroline, Countess of Holnstein wears her hair severely parted in the center front and across the top of her head. Her long hair is braided, and the braids are looped over either ear and wound into a knot at the crown of her head.  She wears a white gown with a wide belt and gathers at the front to emphasise the bust under a pink satin coat with a fur collar and fur trim.  German, 1834.
 * Fashion plate from Wiener Zeitschrift shows the fashion for fabrics printed with combinations of stripes and floral designs.
 * Eugénia, Duchess of Palmela wears a black gown with short, puffed sleeves and mid-length gloves. Her hair is dressed in elaborate curls and a looped braid is gathered into a topknot.
 * Isabella Colbran, wife of Gioachino Rossini wears a brown silk dress with puffed sleeves, and low square-toed slippers.
 * Undergarments, corset, petticoat and dressing gown, ca 1835.

Style gallery 1835–1839

 * 1830s Riding habits with fashionable full sleeves.
 * Marie Lafont-Porcher's hair is styled in a high knot with wide side-curls; her gauzy gown has a neck ruff and a wide collar, and she wears a fur piece similar to that in the Gazette des Salons fashion plate above, 1835.
 * Conservative, middle-class fashion: Eliza Clarke Cory Clench wears a white cap with a large striped ribbon bow that contrasts with her bright green dress. Canada, 1834–36.
 * Portrait of Ada Lovelace in British court dress. She wears a red train over a white satin gown. Note her square-toed satin slippers, 1836.
 * 1) African-American trans woman Mary Jones, 1836.
 * 2) Painting by Henri S. Benoit Darondeau depicting the typical evening wear of a woman from Montevideo, including a pale blue dress with large, voluminous sleves and decorated with ribbons. She has the typical peinetón on her head and covers her face with a hand fan.
 * Viennese fashion plate for February 1837 shows front and back views of the newly fashionable dangling clusters of curls on the sides worn with an ornate knot of hair at the crown. A headband is worn for evening. The waist is still defined by a wide belt, but it sits lower on the body.
 * By 1837, fullness was dropping from just off the shoulder to the middle of the arm. The bonnet is smaller than those worn earlier in the decade, and black lace mitts (fingerless gloves) are worn with the white day dress. Hair is worn in wide clusters of short sausage curls. French.
 * Mathilde, Gräfin Lynar wears a brown velvet gown with snug shoulders and lower sleeves, and fullness at the middle of the arm. The waist is darted to fit and comes to a small point in front.  Hair is smoothed above the ears and wound into a braided crown.  German, 1837.
 * Adélaide d'Orléans wears a heavily decorated straw bonnet over a frilled cap, 1838.
 * Young woman in riding habit inspired by contemporary men's fashion, 1839.

Overview
In this time, men's fashion plates continue to show an ideal silhouette with broad shoulders, and a narrow, tightly cinched waist.

Coats and waistcoats
Frock coats (in French redingotes) increasingly replaced tail coats for informal day wear. They were calf length, and might be double-breasted. Shoulder emphasis fell lower on the arm; shoulders were sloped and puffed sleeve heads gradually shrank and then disappeared. Waistcoats or vests were single- or double-breasted, with rolled shawl or (later) notched collars, and extremely tight through the waist. Waistcoats were sometimes worn two at time, in contrasting colors. Corsets or corset-like garments were worn by many men to draw in the waistline. The most fashionable coats had padded shoulders and chests, a feature that disappeared after about 1837.

Trousers
Full-length trousers began to have the modern fly-front closure, replacing the earlier fall-front. Breeches remained a requirement for formal functions at the British court (as they would be throughout the century). Breeches continued to be worn for horseback riding and other country pursuits, especially in Britain, with tall fitted boots.

Outerwear
Cloaks were worn with evening wear. Overcoats with wide sleeves were worn with day wear; these were often called greatcoats.

Hats and hairstyles
The crowns of tall hats were less curvy than in the previous period. Hair was generally parted to one side. Curled hair and sideburns remained fashionable, along with moustaches.

Style gallery

 * 1830s fashion plate shows the small, high waist that was the ideal of French fashion in the 1830s. Frock coat (left) and morning coat (right).
 * 1) Frederik Sødring wears a brocade waistcoat with a high black velvet shawl collar. The front flap of his fall-front trousers can be seen clearly in this 1832 portrait.  Note the taper of the waistcoat toward the tight waist.
 * Antoine Julien Meffre-Rouzan of New Orleans painted in Paris, 1833, in evening wear. The puffs at the shoulder of his coat are smaller than those worn in the 1820s, and his waistcoat has a slight point at the front waist.
 * 1834 portrait of Davy Crockett shows the fashionable dark cravat worn with a wide turn-over collar.
 * Portrait of John C. Calhoun in a sheer white formal cravat, dark coat, and fur-collared or lined overcoat, 1834.
 * Portrait of Hans Christian Andersen shows the depth and breadth of fashionable coat collars, 1836.
 * A gentleman of the Wilkes Family, 1838–40, wears a dark cravat. His tall coat collar is notched and spreads onto his shoulders.  The sleeve has just a hint of fullness at the sleeve head.
 * Zoo proprietor Edward Cross wears a red and black patterned waistcoat with brown trousers and a black tailcoat, cravat, and top hat, 1838.

Children's fashion
In this period, small boys wore sashed tunics over trousers, sometimes with a round-collared shirt underneath. By the 1830s the skeleton suit had fallen out of fashion. Older boys wore short jackets and trousers with round-collared shirts.

Girls wore simplified versions of women's fashion.

title: 1830s in Western fashion


text:
Jill Sobule (album)

Jill Sobule is the second album by the American singer-songwriter Jill Sobule, released on April 7, 1995. The disc contained the singles "Good Person Inside", "Supermodel" and "I Kissed a Girl". The album sold 100,000 copies in the US, making it her most commercially successful record.

Track listing
The first release of the album does not contain "Supermodel". After "Supermodel" appeared on the Clueless film soundtrack and was released as a single, the album was reissued with the song.

Personnel

 * Jill Sobule – guitar, sound effects, vocals, background vocals, tambo drums
 * Sam Bacco – percussion, tympani
 * Richard Barone – vocals, background vocals
 * Pat Bergeson – harmonica
 * J.D. Blair – snare drums
 * Chris Carmichael – violin, cello
 * Sue Davis – background vocals
 * Robin Eaton – bass guitar, guitar, vocals, background vocals
 * Buddy Emmons – pedal steel guitar
 * Mac Gayden – banjo
 * Byron House – bass guitar
 * Brad Jones – organ, synthesizer, bass guitar, flute, guitar, mandolin, piano, keyboards
 * Wayne Kramer – bass guitar
 * Craig Krampf – drums
 * Viktor Krauss – bass guitar
 * Kenny Malone – percussion, drums
 * Jerry Dale McFadden – accordion, sound effects
 * Eric Moon – keyboards
 * Al Perkins – pedal steel guitar
 * Ross Rice – drums, electric piano
 * Kirby Shelstad – drums, talking drum
 * Jim Wizniewski – flute

Production

 * Production: Brad Jones & Robin Eaton
 * Engineering: Brad Jones
 * Mixing: Roger Moutenot
 * Mastering: Greg Calbi

Charts
Album

Singles

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

title: Jill Sobule (album)


text:
Pauline Holdstock

Pauline Holdstock is a British-Canadian novelist, essayist and short fiction writer with a focus on historical fiction. Born and raised in England, she came to Canada in 1974, and resides in Victoria, British Columbia. After a ten-year teaching career in the UK, the Caribbean, and Canada, she wrote her first novel. The Blackbird's Song (1989) launched her professional full-time writing career when it was shortlisted for the Books in Canada/W.H. Smith Best First Novel Award and subsequently reviewed favourably in the UK. She is the author of ten works of fiction and non-fiction in addition to reviews and articles for national newspapers and for websites. Her books have been published in the UK, the US, Portugal, Brazil, Australia and Germany as well as in Canada. Her novel Beyond Measure brought Holdstock's work to a wider audience, being a finalist for both the Giller Prize and the Commonwealth Writers' Prize and winning the BC Book Prizes Ethel Wilson Fiction Award. Her novella The World of Light Were We Live, as yet unpublished in book form, was the winner of the Malahat Review Novella Contest 2006. Into the Heart of the Country, the story of Samuel Hearne's surrender of Prince of Wales Fort, was published in 2011 and longlisted for the Giller Prize. Her most recent novel, The Hunter and the Wild Girl, listed as a best book for 2015 by both the CBC and the National Post, was a finalist for the BC Book Prizes in 2016 and went on to win the City of Victoria Butler Book prize. Holdstock's other literary activities include presentations, sessional teaching (University of Victoria), mentoring (Banff Centre for the Arts), adjudicating arts awards and co-producing a literary reading series.

Fiction

 * The Blackbird's Song (1987), ISBN 0-88924-191-0
 * The Burial Ground (1991), ISBN 0-921586-25-6
 * House (1994), ISBN 0-88878-353-1
 * Swimming from the Flames (1995), ISBN 0-88801-182-2
 * The Turning (1996), ISBN 0-921586-53-1
 * Beyond Measure (2003), ISBN 1-896951-49-X (published in the U.S. as A Rare and Curious Gift)
 * Into the Heart of the Country (2011), ISBN 978-1-55468-634-6
 * The Hunter and the Wild Girl (2015), ISBN 978-0864928627 and pb (2018), ISBN 9781773100449

Non-fiction

 * Mortal Distractions (2004), ISBN 1-894345-66-5

Anthologies

 * 2016: Best Canadian Stories: 16, Oberon (ed. John Metcalf), 'Release'
 * 2014: Best Canadian Stories: 14, Oberon (ed. John Metcalfe), 'Perfect Obedience'
 * 2011: Framing the Garden, Ekstasis (ed. Linda Rogers), 'If', ISBN 9781897430743, ISBN 1897430744
 * 2008: Great Expectations, Anansi (eds Dede Crane, Lisa Moore), 'Animalia'
 * 2008: Imagining British Columbia, Anvil Press (ed. Daniel Francis) 'Ship of Fools'
 * 2007: Apples Under the Bed, Hedgerow Press (ed. Joan Coldwell) 'From the Trestles of the Green Knight'
 * 2006: radiant danse uv being: a poetic portrait of bill bissett, Nightwood Editions (eds Pew & Roxborough), 'Considering bill'
 * 2003: Reading The Peninsula, CACSP (ed. Sara Dowse), 'The Turn of the Year', ISBN 0-9733471-0-4
 * 2002: Brothers, Borders and Babylon, Jervis Distributors (ed. M. Florczak), 'Untitled: Heathrow', ISBN 0-9733471-0-4
 * 2001: Young Blood, Exile Editions (ed.Barry Callaghan), 'Fractured Symmetry'
 * 2000: Valentine's Day, Duckworth, London, UK (ed. Alice Thomas Ellis), 'Sitting Pretty'
 * 2000: Going Places, Coteau (ed. Lynne Van Luven), 'Of Remnants and Riches'
 * 2000: Moosemilk: The Best of..., DC Books (ed. P. Sontag, G.Loewen), 'Finding The Body', ISBN 978-0919688520, ISBN 0919688527
 * 1997: The Moosehead Anthology, DC Books (ed. Robert Allen), 'Fall of Angels', 'Behind Glass', 'Finding The Body' 1997, ISBN 0-919688-37-3
 * 1992: Snapshots : The New Canadian Fiction,   Black Moss Press  (ed. K Russelo) 'Catching The News',  'He's All Right But His Wife', 'The We-Must-Be-Crazy Birthday Sale,' 'Waiting For Margot', ISBN 978-0-88753-256-6
 * 1984: True North/Down Under, Eleftheria (ed. Kevin Roberts), 'Burning Bright'

Short Fiction Canada

 * 'Hanged Man' The Puritan, online, 2017
 * 'Mirror, Mirror', FoundPress, online and e-Pub, 2013
 * 'Maternity Suit', Joyland, online, 2012
 * 'What Endures', FoundPress, online and e-Pub, 2011
 * 'Release', Blood & Aphorisms, Spring, 1998
 * 'In This Country' Geist, May 1997
 * 'The Twelve Twists Of Christmas', Monday Magazine, 12/25/97
 * 'Something Untoward', Matrix. Spring 1994
 * 'The Devil and the Deep' NeWest Review, Jan/Dec 93/94
 * 'Finding The Body', Malahat Review, January 1993
 * 'Faces', Exile, Vol.15/4 1992
 * 'Samson's Wife', Exile, Vol.31/3 1989
 * 'The Spirit Who Longed To Be Mortal', Event, Summer 1989
 * 'Lost and Found', Grain, Spring 1988
 * 'Bloody Dog', NeWest Review, December 1986
 * 'The Fabric of Bridges', New Quarterly, 1986
 * 'The Turn of the Year', Event, Summer  1986
 * 'Hagar' Malahat Review, March 1986
 * 'Secluded Setting, Close Beach', New Quarterly, Fall 1985
 * 'Memento' Antigonish Review 62-63 1985
 * 'A Fairy Tale', Waves, Fall  1985
 * 'Blind Spot', Pierian Spring Autumn 1985
 * 'Only Yesterday', Grain, February 1985
 * 'Sitting Pretty', This Magazine, December  1984
 * 'The Swimming Story', Grain, August 1984
 * 'Burning Bright', Waves, Spring 1984
 * 'The Circle of Hemlock', Pierian Spring, 1984
 * 'Going Back', Event, June 1983
 * 'May Wine', Flare, August 1982

Short Fiction U.K.

 * 'The Terminal', Iron, 1993
 * 'Samson's Wife', Critical Quarterly, Vol 31/3 1989
 * 'Faces', Iron, June 1991
 * 'And Songs Into Lamentations, Acumen, Spring 1991
 * 'The Master's Bedroom', Ambit, 120 1990

Poetry
'If', Framing the Garden, Eksatasis, Victoria, 2011; Fall of Angels, Moosehead #6, 1997; 'Mouths of the Amazon', Matrix, Number 46; Mouths of the Amazon chapbook, fingerprinting inkoperated, 1995; 'Fractured Symmetry', Exile Vol. 12/3, 1988; 'Canticle' Rampike, Vol 6 /2, 1988; 'Transpositions', Rampike, Vol.4 2-3, 1985;

Reviews and essays
Review of Eimear McBride's The Lesser Bohemians, The National Post, 29/09/16; Review of Muriel Barbery's The Life of Elves, The Globe & Mail, 13/02/16; 'Finding Time', essay, online mysmallpresswritingday.blogspot, Apr 2018 'Enter at Your Own Risk', essay, online Margin, May 2006; Review of Michel Faber's The Courage Consort, The Globe & Mail, 12/18/04; Review of Alison Watt's The Last Island, Wordworks, Fall 2004; 'Catch', essay, online, opendemocracy, January 2004; Review of Trezza Azzopardi's Remember Me, The Globe & Mail 04/17/04; Review of Patrick McCabe's Call Me the Breeze, The Globe & Mail 12/03/04; 'Truth To Tell', essay, online, dooneyscafe.com, June 2004; Review of Lynn Coady's Saints of Big Harbour, The Vancouver Sun, 3/9/02; Review of Blanche Howard's Penelope's Way, The National Post, 6/2/02; Review of Melissa Hardy's The Uncharted Heart, The National Post, 7/14/01; Review of Barbara Hodgson's Hippolyte's Island, Vancouver Sun, 9/1/01; 'An Estate Held In Socage', photo essay, Matrix, Jan 2001; 'It's My Idea', essay, The National Post, 01/27/01; 'Flying Down to Reno', essay, CBC, Nov 2001; 'You Must Remember This', essay, Vancouver Sun, 11/11/00; 'Ship of Fools' winner Personal Essay Prize, Prairie Fire,  Fall 2000; 'The Wicked Queen Lurks...', essay, Vancouver Sun, 10/16/93;

title: Pauline Holdstock


text:
Talk:Jill Sobule (album)

The Glitterati reference appears broken, going to a parked page containing nothing but useless adds. New citation needed or possibly it should be removed entirely? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.197.191.204 (talk) 05:37, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I Kissed A Girl
The "I Kissed A Girl" single and video should get an article or a large section, since it was fairly controversial and garnered alot of press. 70.51.8.75 (talk) 10:34, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Way better version than kat perry's rip off! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.231.184.62 (talk) 08:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

title: Talk:Jill Sobule (album)


text: Category:Semi-automatic pistols

title: Category:Semi-automatic pistols


text:
Division of Calwell

The Division of Calwell is an Australian Electoral Division in the state of Victoria.

Calwell contains the outer north-western fringe of Melbourne. It includes the suburbs of Broadmeadows, Dallas, Coolaroo, Greenvale, Meadow Heights, Roxburgh Park, Craigieburn and Mickleham.

Calwell has been a safe Labor seat since it was created in 1984. Calwell has had only two members, Dr. Andrew Theophanous, from 1984-2001, and the current MP Maria Vamvakinou, since 2001. Both are members of the Australian Labor Party.

History
The division was created in 1984 and is named for Arthur Calwell, who was Minister for Immigration 1945–1949 and Leader of the Australian Labor Party 1960–1967.

Calwell has been a safe Labor seat since it was first contested. The seat's first MP elected in 1984 was Andrew Theophanous. After failing to retain Labor preselection due to issues of criminality, Theophanous unsuccessfully contested the 2001 election as an Independent, polling 9.6% of the vote. The current Member for Calwell, since the 2001 federal election, is Maria Vamvakinou, a member of the Australian Labor Party. Calwell is currently Labor's second safest seat, with 68.80% on the 2PP.

At the 2011 Census, Calwell had the nation's most stable population, with only 25.6% of residents having moved in the last five years. The electorate had the nation's third highest proportion of Catholics (38.5%) and the third highest proportion of residents of Islamic faith (16.8%), the highest in Victoria.

In 2017, Calwell had the highest "no" vote for marriage equality in Victoria, with 56.8% of the electorate's respondents to the survey responding "No".

Boundaries
Since 1984, federal electoral division boundaries in Australia have been determined at redistributions by a redistribution committee appointed by the Australian Electoral Commission. Redistributions occur for the boundaries of divisions in a particular state, and they occur every seven years, or sooner if a state's representation entitlement changes or when divisions of a state are malapportioned.

The division is located in the north-western suburbs of Melbourne. It covers an area of approximately 265 km2 from in the north to  in the south and from  in the west to  in the east. Localities include, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and ; as well as part of , ,  and.

Demographics
Calwell is a diverse and socially conservative electorate. Calwell includes Victoria's largest Iraqi community along with Turkish and Lebanese diaspora. While a stronghold for the centre-left Labor Party, the religious migrant community rallied against same-sex marriage in 2017, with 17.7% of the electorate from an Islamic background, six times the state average, while 34% are Catholic, 12% higher than the rest of the state.

The incumbent MP, Maria Vamvakinou, is herself a migrant from the Greek island of Lefkada and her parents migrated to Melbourne when she was four. She is fluent in Greek and taught the language in her time as a teacher.

Election results
{{legend|#DE3533|Labor}} {{legend|#0047AB|Liberal}} {{legend|#00A651|Greens}} {{legend|#FFCD00|Australian Democrats}} {{legend|#F36C21|One Nation}} {{legend|#FFED00|Palmer United/United Australia Party}} {{legend|#888888|Independent}}

title: Division of Calwell


text:
Hark! The Herald Angels Sing

"Hark! The Herald Angels Sing" is an English Christmas carol that first appeared in 1739 in the collection Hymns and Sacred Poems. The carol, based on, tells of an angelic chorus singing praises to God. As it is known in the modern era, it features lyrical contributions from Charles Wesley and George Whitefield, two of the founding ministers of Methodism, with music adapted from "Vaterland, in deinen Gauen" of Felix Mendelssohn's cantata Festgesang (Gutenberg Cantata).

Wesley had written the original version as "Hymn for Christmas-Day" with the opening couplet "Hark! how all the Welkin (heaven) rings / Glory to the King of Kings". Whitefield changed that to today's familiar lyric: "Hark! The Herald Angels sing, / 'Glory to the new-born King. In 1840—a hundred years after the publication of Hymns and Sacred Poems—Mendelssohn composed a cantata to commemorate Johannes Gutenberg's invention of movable type, and it is music from this cantata, adapted by the English musician William H. Cummings to fit the lyrics of "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing", that is used for the carol today.

Textual history
The original hymn text was written as a "Hymn for Christmas-Day" by Charles Wesley, included in the 1739 John Wesley collection Hymns and Sacred Poems. The first stanza (verse) describes the announcement of Jesus's birth. Wesley's original hymn began with the opening line "Hark how all the Welkin rings". This was changed to the familiar "Hark! the Herald Angels sing" by George Whitefield in his 1754 Collection of Hymns for Social Worship. A second change was made in the 1782 publication of the Tate and Brady New Version of the Psalms of David. In this work, Whitefield's adaptation of Wesley's hymn appears, with the repetition of the opening line "Hark! the Herald Angels sing/ Glory to the newborn king" at the end of each stanza, as it is commonly sung today.

Mendelssohn melody
In 1855, British musician William Hayman Cummings, organist at Waltham Abbey Church, adapted Felix Mendelssohn's secular music from Festgesang to fit the lyrics of "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing" written by Charles Wesley. Wesley had originally envisioned the words being sung to the same tune as his Easter hymn "Christ the Lord Is Risen Today".

"Hark! The Herald Angels Sing" was regarded as one of the Great Four Anglican Hymns and published as number 403 in The Church Hymn Book (New York and Chicago, 1872).

In Britain, "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing" has popularly been performed in an arrangement that maintains the basic original William H. Cummings harmonisation of the Mendelssohn tune for the first two verses, but adds a soprano descant and a last verse harmonisation for the organ in verse three by Sir David Willcocks. This arrangement was first published in 1961 by Oxford University Press in the first book of the Carols for Choirs series. For many years it has served as the recessional hymn of the annual service of Nine Lessons and Carols at King's College Chapel, Cambridge.

Advent adaptation
Mendelssohn's melody has been used for a 1990 Advent song in German, "In das Warten dieser Welt" (Into the waiting of this world) by Johannes Jourdan. It is part of regional sections of the common Catholic hymnal Gotteslob and songbooks.

Handel melody
An uncommon arrangement of the hymn to the tune "See, the Conqu'ring hero comes" from Handel's Judas Maccabaeus, normally associated with the hymn "Thine Be the Glory", is traditionally used as the recessional hymn of the Festival of Nine Lessons and Carols at St Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin. This is broadcast live each year on Christmas Eve on RTÉ Radio 1. The usual (first) three verses are divided into six verses, each with chorus. The arrangement features a brass fanfare with drums in addition to the cathedral organ, and takes about seven and a half minutes to sing. The Victorian organist W. H. Jude, in his day a popular composer, also composed a new setting of the work, published in his Music and the Higher Life.

title: Hark! The Herald Angels Sing


text:
Schmaltz

Schmaltz (also spelled schmalz or shmalz) is rendered (clarified) chicken or goose fat. It is an integral part of traditional Ashkenazi Jewish cuisine, where it has been used for centuries in a wide array of dishes, such as chicken soup, latkes, matzah brei, chopped liver, matzah balls, fried chicken, and many others, as a cooking fat, spread, or flavor enhancer.

Etymology
Schmaltz is a noun derived from the German verb schmelzen, meaning "to melt". The verb can be traced back to the West Germanic root smeltan, which survives in the Modern English verb smelt. The term entered English usage through Yiddish-speaking Ashkenazi Jews who used schmaltz to refer to kosher poultry fat; the Yiddish word שמאַלץ shmalts refers to rendered chicken fat. The English term schmaltz is derived from Yiddish and is cognate with the German term Schmalz, which refers to any rendered fat of animal origin, including lard (more precisely Schweineschmalz) and clarified butter (Butterschmalz). English use tends to follow Yiddish, which limits its meaning to rendered poultry fat.

History
Historically, chicken and to a lesser extent other poultry have been the most popular meat in Ashkenazi Jewish cuisine due to restrictions on Jews who often were not allowed to own land in Europe, and thereby were not able to tend to any livestock requiring pasture. Among kosher domestic animals, only chickens and other fowl could be raised without pasturage. Schmaltz originated in the Jewish communities of north, west, and central Europe as it was an economical replacement for olive oil that typically was not available in these areas. Olive oil previously had an important role in Jewish culture. It had been used by the ancestors of the Ashkenazi Jews in their Ancient Israelite cuisine prior to the forced exile of Jews from Roman Israel, and it remained popular in Sephardic and Mizrahi cuisines.

As olive oil and other vegetable oils (e.g. sesame oil, which Jews had used in Mesopotamia) were unavailable in northwestern Europe, Ashkenazi Jews turned to animal sources, like their Gentile neighbors. However, kashrut prohibited Jews from using the most common cooking fats in northern Europe, namely butter and lard. Butter, being derived from milk, cannot be used with meat under the Jewish prohibition on mixing meat and dairy, while lard is derived from pork, a meat not considered kosher. Furthermore, even among the less common fats available, tallow derived from beef or mutton would have been uneconomical, particularly given that virtually all suet (the raw material for tallow) is chelev and its consumption is forbidden. Thus Ashkenazi Jews turned to poultry fat as their cooking fat of choice. This fat, which they called schmaltz, became the most popular cooking fat used in the shtetls (Jewish villages) of central and eastern Europe. It was commonly used in a multitude of dishes served with, or containing, meat in accordance with kosher dietary laws.

At the turn of the twentieth century, as the Ashkenazi Jews fled escalating antisemitism and persecution in Europe and sought refuge in the United States and other countries, they brought with them their traditional foods, including schmaltz. It remained popular in American Jewish cuisine until it fell out of common use over the course of the second half of the century due to the inconvenience involved in its preparation, health concerns regarding its saturated fat content, various diet trends, and aggressive marketing by Crisco of their vegetable shortening (which is pareve, i.e. suitable for use with both milk and meat dishes) to the Jewish community of New York.

Over time, schmaltz was replaced with what often were vegetarian alternatives that were perceived to be healthier, such as the aforementioned vegetable shortening, then readily available olive oil, and margarine. Despite this, schmaltz remained in common use at Jewish delicatessens and Jewish restaurants as well as among those in the Haredi community.

Beginning in the twenty-first century, however, schmaltz regained much of its former popularity as various celebrity chefs such as Anthony Bourdain, Alon Shaya, Michael Solomonov, Joan Nathan, and others began to incorporate it into various dishes and recipes as part of emerging food trends popularizing long-forgotten Jewish foods. Schmaltz also began being used in various non-traditional ways, such as cornbread, chicken pot pie, and other foods as a flavor enhancer.

Process
The manufacture of schmaltz involves cutting the fatty tissues of a bird (chicken or goose) into small pieces, melting the fat, and collecting the drippings. Schmaltz may be prepared by a dry process where the pieces are cooked under low heat and stirred, gradually yielding their fat. A wet process also exists whereby the fat is melted by direct steam injection. The rendered schmaltz is then filtered and clarified.

Homemade Jewish-style schmaltz is made by cutting chicken or goose fat into small pieces and melting in a pan over low-to-moderate heat, generally with onions. After the majority of the fat has been extracted, the melted fat is strained through a cheesecloth into a storage container. The remaining dark brown, crispy bits of skin and onion are known in Yiddish as gribenes.

Another simple method is as a by-product of the making of chicken soup. After the chicken is simmered in the pot or crock-pot, the broth is chilled so the fat rises to the top. Then the fat can be skimmed off, at once providing schmaltz to set aside for other uses and a lower-fat soup that is heated before serving.

Uses
Schmaltz typically has a strong aroma, and therefore, often is used for hearty recipes such as stews or roasts. It is a key ingredient in Jewish soups such as chicken soup, as well as in matzo ball soup and some cholent. Sometimes it is used as a bread spread, where it may be salted. Generally, this is consumed on Jewish rye or challah breads. It may be used to prepare foods served as part of fleishig (meat) meals such as latkes, matzah brei, or potato kugel, or instead of butter when pan-frying potatoes, onions, or other foods.

Vegetarian schmaltz
Various vegetarian (and consequently pareve) versions of schmaltz have been marketed, starting with Nyafat (U.S., Rokeach and Sons, 1924), which is largely coconut oil with some onion flavoring and color. Vegetable shortening also is used as a substitute.

Vegetarian schmaltz was manufactured in South Africa from 1951 under the brand Debra's Schmaltz, with Debra referring to Debora Bregman, who founded Debras Manufacturers. The slogan "Even the chicken can't tell the difference" was added later. Chef Oded Schwartz discusses Debra's Schmaltz in his book In Search of Plenty — A History of Jewish Food.

Derived meanings

 * Schmaltz herring means 'fatty herring' and refers to the stage of development in the life cycle of herring when the fish contains the most fat, popular in Ashkenazi Jewish cookery, but it does not contain schmaltz.
 * In American English, via Yiddish, schmaltz (adj. schmaltzy) also has an informal meaning of 'excessively sentimental or florid music or art' or 'maudlin sentimentality', similar to one of the uses of the words corn or corny. Its earliest use in this sense dates to the mid-1930s. In German, schmalzig also is used in the same sense.
 * Schmaltz and Schmalz are rare last names amongst people of German and Austrian descent. Schmaltz was used as a metonymic occupational name for a chandler.

title: Schmaltz


text:
Happy Town (album)

Happy Town is the third album by the American singer-songwriter Jill Sobule, released in 1997. The album contains the singles "Bitter" and "When My Ship Comes In" as well as "Half a Heart" and the satirical social commentary "Soldiers of Christ", where Sobule sings from the point of view of a Christian Conservative to illustrate the existence of homophobia in religion. The album sold 24,000 copies in the US within the first year of its release.

"Bitter" peaked at No. 74 on the Australian ARIA singles chart in June 1997. The album peaked at No. 83 on the Australian ARIA albums chart during the same month. Sobule was dropped by Atlantic after the release of Happy Town.

The album cover illustration, which initially featured a Prozac pill, was changed to show a pair of test tubes when Wal-Mart refused to carry the album in its stores. The company asserted that the original image promoted drug abuse.

Critical reception
The Spokesman-Review called the album "a bold step forward for a creatively expansive artist." Trouser Press called it "a record to respect rather than appreciate," writing that "many of the songs are fine, and she’s one of contemporary pop’s better observational songwriters, but the tone is unremittingly hostile." The Deseret News deemed it "fun, liberal, spunky and sarcastic." The Baltimore Sun wrote that "the title tune's shift from cheesy, low-key organ to bright, power-pop guitar make it easy to understand the difference between the dull old world and life in that new, prozac-ed 'Happy Town'."

Track listing

 * 1) "Bitter" (Richard Barone, Sobule) – 3:30
 * 2) "Happy Town" (Goldenberg, Sobule) – 3:46
 * 3) "Barren Egg" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:37
 * 4) "Half a Heart" (DeMain, Sobule) – 3:47
 * 5) "When My Ship Comes In" (Eaton, Marvin Gaye, Ivy Jo Hunter, Sobule, William Stevenson) – 3:50
 * 6) "Clever" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:18
 * 7) "I'm So Happy" (Eaton, Sobule) – 2:43
 * 8) "Little Guy" (Sobule) – 3:24
 * 9) "Underachiever" (Sobule) – 3:42
 * 10) "Love Is Never Equal" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:15
 * 11) "Soldiers of Christ" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:20
 * 12) "Attic" (Sobule) – 2:10
 * 13) "Sold My Soul" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:35
 * 14) "Super 8" (Galdston, Sobule) – 2:26

Musicians

 * Jill Sobule – vocals, acoustic guitar, bass guitar, guitar, percussion, drums, keyboards, ebo, vibraphone
 * Sam Bacco – percussion
 * George Bradfute – electric guitar
 * Louis Brown – tuba, cornet
 * Chris Carmichael – strings
 * Steve Earle – electric guitar, vocals
 * Robin Eaton – guitar
 * Phil Galdston – keyboards
 * Mark Goldenberg – guitar, keyboards, vocals
 * Mickey Grimm – percussion, drums
 * Jim Hoke – clarinet, flute, harmonica, autoharp, bass clarinet, soprano saxophone
 * Byron House – upright bass
 * Brad Jones – organ, bass guitar, piano, harmonium, keyboards, Moog synthesizer, vibraphone
 * Viktor Krauss – upright bass
 * Roger Moutenot – Moog synthesizer
 * Al Perkins – pedal steel
 * Ross Rice – bass guitar, piano, drums, harmonium, Wurlitzer

Production

 * Producers: Robin Eaton, Mark Goldenberg, Brad Jones
 * Engineers: Brad Jones, Dominick Maita, Elijah Shaw
 * Mixing: Roger Moutenot
 * Mixing assistants: Rich Cohan, Sandy Jenkins, Chris Stone
 * Programming: Mark Goldenberg
 * Photography: Annette Aurell
 * Arranger: Phil Galdston
 * Production Coordination: Barbara Moutenot
 * Cover design: Brad Talbott
 * Illustrations: Brad Talbott
 * Background vocals: Bob, Jim, Mary Ellen and Matthew Sobule

title: Happy Town (album)


text: Talk:Happy Town (album)

title: Talk:Happy Town (album)


text:
Kingston, New Zealand

Kingston is a small town at the southernmost end of Lake Wakatipu, just north of the border of Otago and Southland, in New Zealand's South Island. It is 47 kilometres south of Queenstown by a road, "The Devil's Staircase", which winds between the lake to the west and The Remarkables mountains to the east. It is 70 kilometres north of Lumsden, and close to the headwaters of the Mataura River.

History
Kingston was originally named 'St Johns' after police commissioner St. John Branigan.

Demographics
Kingston is described by Statistics New Zealand as a rural settlement. It covers 0.60 km2 and had an estimated population of as of  with a population density of  people per km2. It is part of the much larger Kingston statistical area.

Before the 2023 census, Kingston settlement had a larger boundary, covering 2.78 km2. Using that boundary, Kingston had a population of 306 at the 2018 New Zealand census, an increase of 108 people (54.5%) since the 2013 census, and an increase of 159 people (108.2%) since the 2006 census. There were 135 households, comprising 156 males and 150 females, giving a sex ratio of 1.04 males per female. The median age was 37.5 years (compared with 37.4 years nationally), with 51 people (16.7%) aged under 15 years, 45 (14.7%) aged 15 to 29, 186 (60.8%) aged 30 to 64, and 24 (7.8%) aged 65 or older.

Ethnicities were 92.2% European/Pākehā, 5.9% Māori, 2.0% Pasifika, 2.9% Asian, and 2.0% other ethnicities. People may identify with more than one ethnicity.

Although some people chose not to answer the census's question about religious affiliation, 61.8% had no religion, 20.6% were Christian, 1.0% were Hindu, 1.0% were Buddhist and 3.9% had other religions.

Of those at least 15 years old, 66 (25.9%) people had a bachelor's or higher degree, and 33 (12.9%) people had no formal qualifications. The median income was $49,600, compared with $31,800 nationally. 54 people (21.2%) earned over $70,000 compared to 17.2% nationally. The employment status of those at least 15 was that 201 (78.8%) people were employed full-time, 24 (9.4%) were part-time, and 3 (1.2%) were unemployed.

Kingston statistical area
The Kingston statistical area covers 1012.54 km2 and had an estimated population of as of  with a population density of  people per km2.

The statistical area had a population of 348 at the 2018 New Zealand census, an increase of 111 people (46.8%) since the 2013 census, and an increase of 147 people (73.1%) since the 2006 census. There were 144 households, comprising 180 males and 168 females, giving a sex ratio of 1.07 males per female. The median age was 35.4 years (compared with 37.4 years nationally), with 57 people (16.4%) aged under 15 years, 60 (17.2%) aged 15 to 29, 201 (57.8%) aged 30 to 64, and 27 (7.8%) aged 65 or older.

Ethnicities were 92.2% European/Pākehā, 6.0% Māori, 1.7% Pasifika, 4.3% Asian, and 1.7% other ethnicities. People may identify with more than one ethnicity.

The percentage of people born overseas was 25.9, compared with 27.1% nationally.

Although some people chose not to answer the census's question about religious affiliation, 62.9% had no religion, 20.7% were Christian, 0.9% were Hindu, 0.9% were Buddhist and 4.3% had other religions.

Of those at least 15 years old, 78 (26.8%) people had a bachelor's or higher degree, and 36 (12.4%) people had no formal qualifications. The median income was $49,000, compared with $31,800 nationally. 60 people (20.6%) earned over $70,000 compared to 17.2% nationally. The employment status of those at least 15 was that 228 (78.4%) people were employed full-time, 30 (10.3%) were part-time, and 3 (1.0%) were unemployed.

Transport
The Kingston Flyer historic railway service is closely associated with the town. It operated over a 14 kilometre long preserved section of the former Kingston Branch, which provided a rail link from the city of Invercargill to Kingston for over a century, opening in 1878 and closing in 1979 after a section of track between Garston and Athol was washed out in a storm.

title: Kingston, New Zealand


text:
Pink Pearl

Pink Pearl is the fourth album by American singer-songwriter Jill Sobule, released in 2000.

The record, whose name is both a model of pencil eraser by Eberhard Faber and a slang term for the clitoris, contains the singles "One of These Days" and "Rainy Day Parade". The album peaked at No. 10 on CMJ's Triple A radio airplay chart, and at No. 75 on CMJ's Radio 200 chart in May 2000.

The album includes the satirical "Heroes", which suggests that every potential hero turns out to be deeply flawed:

 * William Faulkner drunk and depressed
 * Dorothy Parker mean, drunk and depressed
 * And that guy in Seven Years in Tibet turned out to be a Nazi
 * The founding fathers all had slaves
 * The explorers slaughtered the braves
 * The Old Testament God can be so petty

The album's "Mary Kay" is a joking yet sympathetic take on Mary Kay Letourneau, the teacher who had sex with a 13-year-old student. "Lucy at the Gym" is a portrait of anorexia.

The song "Mexican Wrestler" was later covered by Emma Roberts on the Nickelodeon TV series Unfabulous, for which Sobule writes the music, and also appeared on Roberts' 2005 album Unfabulous and More: Emma Roberts. The track "Rainy Day Parade" was featured on the soundtrack to the Ben Stiller film Mystery Men.

The track "Rock Me to Sleep," co-written with Richard Barone, was featured on the television shows Felicity, Dawson's Creek, and The West Wing. It was also covered by Sally Timms of the Mekons on her 1999 album, Cowboy Sally's Twilight Laments for Lost Buckaroos.

Track listing

 * 1) "Rainy Day Parade" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:04
 * 2) "One of These Days" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:53
 * 3) "Lucy at the Gym" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:46
 * 4) "Claire" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:39
 * 5) "Mexican Wrestler" (Eaton, Sobule) – 4:15
 * 6) "Heroes" (Eaton, Sobule) – 2:57
 * 7) "Mary Kay" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:25
 * 8) "Somewhere in New Mexico" (Galdston, Sobule) – 4:29
 * 9) "Guy Who Doesn't Get It" (Galdston, Sobule) – 3:39
 * 10) "Someone's Gonna Break Your Heart" (Mastro, Sobule) – 3:12
 * 11) "Loveless Motel" (Sobule) – 2:48
 * 12) "Rock Me to Sleep" (Barone, Sobule) – 2:21

Personnel

 * Jill Sobule – synthesizer, guitar, drums, keyboards, vocals, omnichord
 * Chris Carmichael – violin
 * Charlie Chadwick – bass guitar
 * Molly Felder – background vocals
 * Mickey Grimm – drums, cajon
 * Tommy Hannum – pedal steel
 * Brad Jones – organ, bass, guitar, piano, harmonium, Moog synthesizer, arp, pump organ
 * Michael Rhodes – bass
 * Neal Rosengarden – percussion, drums

Production

 * Producers: Jill Sobule, Robin Eaton, Brad Jones
 * Engineers: Jill Sobule, Robin Eaton, David Henry, Brad Jones, Jason Lehning
 * Mixing: Jill Sobule, Robin Eaton, Brad Jones
 * Mastering: Steve Hall
 * A&R: Randy Nicklaus
 * Art direction: Susan McEowen
 * Photography: Tom Schierlitz
 * Design: James Victore

title: Pink Pearl


text: Talk:Pink Pearl

title: Talk:Pink Pearl


text: Category:Norwegian actors

title: Category:Norwegian actors


text:
Underdog Victorious

Underdog Victorious is the sixth studio album by American singer-songwriter Jill Sobule, released in 2004. (see 2004 in music). As of February 2005, the album had sold 7,300 copies. Her first record in four years, the album contains the single "Cinnamon Park" (which borrows the piano hook of the 1972 single "Saturday in the Park" from the band Chicago).

The CD contains a hidden track, "I Saw a Cop."

"Nothing Natural" appeared on an episode of the FX drama series Nip/Tuck, and a live, acoustic rendition of "Freshman" appeared in the film Mind the Gap.

Tim Cain of the Herald & Review named the album the 3rd best of 2004.

Track listing

 * 1) "Freshman" (Eaton, Sobule) – 2:21
 * 2) "Jetpack" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:03
 * 3) "Cinnamon Park" (Eaton, Lamm, Sobule) – 3:23
 * 4) "Tender Love" (Demain, Eaton, Sobule) – 2:46
 * 5) "Underdog Victorious" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:31
 * 6) "Under the Disco Ball" (Sobule) – 1:31
 * 7) "The Last Line" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:56
 * 8) "Tel Aviv" (Eaton, Sobule) – 3:32
 * 9) "Joey" (Demain, Sobule) – 3:55
 * 10) "Nothing Natural" (Eaton, Sobule) – 2:28
 * 11) "Angel/Asshole" (Sobule) – 2:59
 * 12) "Strawberry Gloss" (Sobule) – 3:45
 * 13) "Thank Misery" (Eaton, Sobule) – 2:16
 * 14) "I Saw a Cop" [hidden track] (Sobule) – 2:31
 * 15) "Almost Fell" [Borders Bonus Track] – 3:33

Personnel

 * Jill Sobule – organ, guitar, drums, sound effects, Moog synthesizer, omnichord, Casio
 * Patrick Buchanon – guitar
 * Rob Burger – piano, Casio
 * Chris Carmichael – violin, viola
 * Bill DeMain – electric piano, background vocals
 * Dennis Diken – drums
 * Robin Eaton – bass guitar, harmonica, background vocals
 * Mickey Grimm – percussion, drums
 * David Henry – cello
 * Jim Hoke – clarinet, flute
 * Brad Jones – organ, bass, piano, rhythm guitar, electric piano
 * Will Kimbrough – slide guitar
 * Marykate O'Neil – background vocals
 * Al Perkins – pedal steel
 * Michael Rhodes – bass
 * Ross Rice – piano
 * Neal Rosengarden – trumpet, classical guitar

Production

 * Producers: Robin Eaton, Brad Jones, Roger Moutenot
 * Engineer: Chris Woods
 * Mastering: Jim DeMain

title: Underdog Victorious


text:
Talk:International humanitarian law

Violations and punishment
I disagree with some information published under this heading

1) Regarding the definition of reprisals it should be added that it is forbidden to use reprisals against protected persons and objects.

2) Regarding whether a soldier is still entitled to POW status in case he violates IHL, I totally disagree with your interpretation of the law.

Additional Protocol I (Art. 43 and 44) makes it clear that all members of the armed forces are combatants and that all combatants upon capture are entitled to POW status and treatment. "While all combatants are obliged to comply with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, violations of these rules shall not deprive a combatant of his right to be a combatant or, if he falls into the power of an adverse Party, of his right to be a prisoner of war" (Additional Protocol I, Art. 44§2).

The notion of "unlawful combatant" does not exist in IHL (nor in LoW); it is a by-product of the so-called war against terrorism. person is either a combatant (if they fill all the criteria of the definition) or a civilian. There is nothing in between such as "unlawful combatants"

3) "Terrorist" do not exist under IHL; I mean that there is no definition as to what is terrorism and what is not. There is more than 20 international treaties about terrorism each providing its own definition of terrorism.

4) IHL makes it an obligation to prosecute war crimes "without any delay" (Additional Protocol I, Art. 80§1, see also Geneva Convention III, Art. 129) and not only at the end of hostilities. Ppolar 14:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. This section is unclear and potentially misleading as to the uncertainty/controversy over this area of the law - although perhaps more of a political issue. Pob1984 (talk) 12:48, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Basic rules of IHL
num 4 is just wrong. If A enemy civilian merchant ship is carrying war supplies for an enemy, then it is a civilian object s on the one hand, and military objective s on the other. So Its back to the drawing board with that one.Philip Baird Shearer 01:58, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * This is simply an overview of an interpretation of the IHL corpus as a whole. It is not meant to detail exceptions such as the one you described. GuloGuloGulo 08:51, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

 * The point of that example is that as "International Humanitarian Law" IHL does not even begin to make qualify its introductory section to make allowances for such things. Perhaps you should rewrite it so that it does if you think they are the same thing. In the Falklands War the cargo ship MV Atlantic Conveyor was carrying British war supplies and was hit by an air launched Exocet with civilians sailors on board. No one would have suggested after the conflict that as it was private property that the Argentinian pilot who launched the missile was a war criminal which the current "overview 4" suggests that he was. If he had hit the liner Canberra, which was carrying troops it would have lead to a large loss of life of civilians as well at troops, but it would not have been a war crime either although she was a civilian ship with civilians on board. Philip Baird Shearer 11:37, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * As you can see, the overview is attributed. The analysis comes from a reputable legal adviser and was found on the IHLRI, "based at the Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research (HPCR) at the Harvard School of Public Health." #4 says civilian people and objects can't be targeted. In the examples you provided the objects are obviously military in nature, therefore legitimate targets. It doesn't need the qualification you suggest, at least not in the overview. GuloGuloGulo 18:54, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

But the ships contained civilians and they were civilian ships. So now it is not ALL civilian people and objects, can't be targeted it is just some of them. This is starting to get complicated. I'm not sure, but it is likely that these civilian ships refulled at the Ascension Island. The civilian tanker which delivered the oil there might have been targeted and sunk, in which case would the Argetinian crew have commited a war crime? What is the limit in the chain? Trouble is as soon as one admits that some civilans and property are legitimate targets, one has to decide where to stop, the devil is in the detail, which is what the LoW about. Philip Baird Shearer 23:16, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

LEt's just go back to definitions, shall we!!! IHL provides that

 * "military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage" (see 1977 Additional Protocol I, Art. 52§2)

AND

 * "Civilian objects are all objects which are not military objectives as defined in paragraph 2" ( Additional Protocol I, Art. 52§1)

These two definitions are considered part of customary law.

Therefore, a civilian merchant ship which transports military equipment definitely falls into the definition of "military objective" and can be the object of an attack although this attack might cause damage to the civilians on board the ship. The question whether the civilians on board the ship are still protected depends on the interpretation given to the following rule:

 * "Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this section, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities." (Additional Protocol I, Art. 51§3)

If these civilians are considered to take DIRECT part to hostilities, then they can be directly attacked; if not, they will be considered as collateral damage provided the principle of proportionality is respected.Ppolar 14:28, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

IHL and Laws of War reconciliation
I've gotten comments that my merge of laws of war into IHL was inappropriate. Specifically, that "there is overlap in the subjects but they are not the same thing. The Laws of War have a long and complex history and cover more than the modern modern concept of IHL." It is, or at least was, my understanding that IHL is the modern equivalent of Laws of War; that they are basically the same thing, that International Humanitarian Law is just a neologism. I'd like to know specifically what the differences are, and suggestions on how best to differentiate in the articles. GuloGuloGulo 08:51, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

 * English speaking countries used to have "Ministry of War Now" they have "Ministries of Defense". This is not a neologism it is an euphemism. But I do not think that "International Humanitarian Law" (IHL) and "Laws of War" (LoW) are either a neologism or a euphemism because they are different things.

 * There is an overlap between the LoW and IHL but they are not the same thing in all cases. For example a person can commit genocide without going to war to do it. But the laws on Mercenaries has little to do with IHL {although there is a definition in the Geneva Conventions additional Protocol I (1977)} Philip Baird Shearer 11:37, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Genocide and mercenaries are both covered under the corpus, which includes the Geneva conventions. I think the LoW are fully contained within IHL. That IHL is LoW, but also covers peacetime human rights violations. GuloGuloGulo 19:04, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

 * GGG, why do you feel it appropriate to encompass more than a century of written law, and millennia of military tradition and custom into the definition put forth by an organization found in 2002? Going to their website, I see that the most basic error in trying to indicate Lws of War=IHL is that they base their concepts on the Geneva Conventions (some of which are not universally ratified even by major powers) with only a peripheral glance at the Hague Conventions, which define issues of the definitions of combatants and civilians, privileged and unprivileged belligerency, and the conduct of warfare. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 20:26, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

so GGG now you do not think "IHL is the modern equivalent of Laws of War" you think it is a super set of LoW. That is a big change in just 24 hours. To quote Cromwell "I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken." Philip Baird Shearer 23:16, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't know what constitutes a "peripheral glance" to the Hague Conventions. It is very possible that I am mistaken and I'm completely open to differentiating between the two. I just have yet to see a good explanation of their differences. GuloGuloGulo 08:43, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)

Some kind of merger seems appropriate to me. If IHL and LoW are "not the same thing," someone who contends that needs to fix the introductory paragraph of this article, which states that IHL is "also known as the law of war," and defines IHL in such a way that it is very difficult to distinguish the two. IHL is a little broader than LoW, but the overlap is so extensive that it would seem to make sense to bring the LoW article into this one, or merge them both into a "law of armed conflict" article, since "armed conflict" is broader than "war." PubliusFL 19:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

RfC?
I came here from RfC. Does this article still have a dispute? Maurreen 05:16, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * There hasn't been any recent activity here, so I suppose the dispute isn't very active. The dispute arose mainly from redirecting already existing redirects such as Law of war here under the contention that IHL is a neologism for the terms Law of war, Laws of land conflict, etc., while other (including myself) pointed out how these concepts have overlap, but are not the same thing. -- Cecropia | explains it all'' ® 18:04, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * OK, I'll remove the listing. Maurreen 05:02, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Non-uniformed guerrillas and Protocol 1
In the first sentence of the section "Non-uniformed guerrillas and Protocol 1", I think something is missing (gramatically). I'm having trouble understanding. Are points a-d the criteria for determining if a person has lawful combatant status? Lex 17:28, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Curtailment of declaration of war
The article states "the UN charter (1945) Art 2, and some other Arts in the charter, curtails the right of member states to declare war..." Article 2 of the UN Charter deals with the responsibilities of UN members to seek peaceful means for the solution of international disputes and the avoidance of the threat or use of force against any state. But Article 2 does not prevent the use of force in cases of breaches of the peace and acts of aggression as indicated in Chapter 7 and member nations can be required to assist the Security Council in its efforts to restore peaceful conditions. The proper reading seems to be that member nations defer to the Security Council when hostile circumstances arise but this does not prevent a member from acting in self-defense while the Security Council is considering matters. There is nothing in Article 2 or Chapter 7 that would prevent a Security Council declaration concerning the use of force. --Jbergquist 07:02, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Merge
I see above that there was some controversy before, but I fail to understand why this article exists. User:Cecropia had said over three years ago that it's not the same thing as the laws of war, but the opening line of this article includes the phrase "also known as the law of war".

That means they're the same. In fact, the sole reference to this article says IHL and the laws of war are the same thing.

Unless someone can say differently, these two articles need to be merged. -- Randy2063 (talk) 16:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I am definitely against merger, the case is well-explained by Philip Baird Shearer above.Joel Mc (talk) 01:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

 * That was almost four years ago. A lot of this stuff is more clear now.
 * Besides that, Philip Baird Shearer is wrong (on a number of things). If you read this article, it only talks about the laws of war, not genocide when war is not involved.  If you read the ICRC source, it says, "International humanitarian law applies to armed conflicts."
 * If you don't agree then please find more sources that back up what you want this article to say. You may then need to find a different title, as "International humanitarian law" means the laws of war.
 * -- Randy2063 (talk) 01:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

 * (Sorry for such a late reply, but I am traveling in and out reach of Wikipedia links )You are right that most sources use the terms IHL and Laws of War interchangeably, often stating: IHL also known as the Laws of War or Laws of War, also known as IHL. However, a quick look indicates places where they are in fact distinguished, i.e. in the judgement of ICJ re: the case concerning the application of the convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro) 26 Feburary 2007. " that Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) has violated and is continuing to violate its legal obligations toward the People and State of Bosnia and Herzegovina under the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, their Additional Protocol I of 1977, the customary international laws of war including the Hague Regulations on Land Warfare of 1907, and other fundamental principles of international humanitarian law;" p.17 (cf. also p. 5) ICJ But my reluctance to combine the two articles is based on the view that there are quite different approaches to the issue:  Military training to the best of my knowledge focuses on the Laws of War whereas the humanitarian community, including the ICRC, talks about IHL.  It is my impression that military training focuses on the reciprocal basis, i.e. if you treat POWs badly, then you can expect to be treated badly if you get taken prisoner.  Whereas humanitarians tend to explain the importance of IHL on safeguarding the life and dignity of persons not participating directly in hostilities based on the principle of humanity. Moreover, most intergovernmental political discussions (see numerous UN resolutions and documents) refer to IHL rather than the Laws of War.  Perhaps this a recent result of a growing view which sees a certain convergence between IHL and International Human Rights Law. Having said all of this, I find that neither article is very good and that both are poorly referenced.  It might be useful to see the Law of War as a major subset of IHL--it really can't be the reverse.  I would be reluctant to have IHL subsumed under the Law of War and there are probably those who feel the same about the Law of War.  At the minimum the two pages should be coordinated and rewritten even if it risks some duplication. Joel Mc (talk) 11:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I know what you're saying but I think this is the wrong article for that. As far as that reference goes it says IHL is same thing as the laws of war.  The laws of war already do include the treatment of civilians.
 * Even for what you're saying (which would require a different title), it's still only applicable during wartime for wartime offenses.
 * International human rights law already has its own article.
 * -- Randy2063 (talk) 19:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I am sorry for not being clearer. I was only trying to explain why I would be opposed to combining the articles under Law of War.  I have already given a reference which implies that there are differences in some cases, given a little more time I can give more.  While there may be some convergence, I would not argue that IHL is the same as IHRL.  Perhaps we could replace in the first sentence "also known" with "often referred to" and have short section farther down which would explain the different approaches.Joel Mc (talk) 10:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I think that reference is a bare sliver, but it does show that somebody thinks the same way you do. It would go a long way toward clearing it up if we make that change to the lead, and then somebody finds more references at some point in the future.
 * In any case, you've said enough that I'm not in any hurry to ask for a merge.
 * -- Randy2063 (talk) 19:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

References and Historical Convergence
As promised I have begun to do some work on this. I hope the para on convergence helps understand the terminology. I have added references, and rewrote the basic rules using the direct ICRC refs. More is to be done, but I put this in now so that others might also pick up the baton. Work also needs to be done on the Laws of war site. --Joel Mc (talk) 10:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Suggestions for Extension
I think the article is missing a section on humanitarian law (its developments) pre-Geneva Conventions and WWII). I did some work on War rape and the section "Humanitarian law prior to World War II" might provide some inspirations. It appears that some of the great philosophers and jurists that helped establish humanitarian law, as well as some of the pre-Geneva Conventions War Codes already have their own Wikiarticles, so a pre-Geneva Conventions section in the humanitarian law article would pull this all together nicely...--SasiSasi (talk) 12:33, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Good idea. I hope to have some time in the next week or so to do some work on this article. --Joel Mc (talk) 15:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite and reorganization
As I indicated above, I have been wanting to do some work on this. I hope that that the organization makes sense. I also hope that I have thrown any of the baby out with the bathwater. I have focused on the the law of geneva since there is a separate article on the law of war. I have removed parts such as extensive discussion of the ICRC which are more extensively covered on subject pages; the discussion on non-uniformed guerillas etc is of course important but belongs elsewhere. Punishments and particularly examples need more work, etc.--Joel Mc (talk) 16:42, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

recent image
I cannot see why this is appropriate for this article. We really shouldnt be starting to get into a battle on this page with images of whatever side says something about the other, the image placed adds no value whatsoever to the article. I was reverted when removing the image so I ask mbz1 to justify its inclusion. Nableezy (talk) 04:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

 * I don't see anything wrong with it. It highlights a region which absorbs the vast majority of international law attention, so the inclusion makes sense. Wikifan12345 (talk) 04:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That image highlights one specific thing, one that has not been given as much weight as many other violations of international law. It is meant to bring attention to one side of an issue, something that I would hope we could avoid at these articles and instead seek something resembling an encyclopedia article. You are not going to see me adding pictures of any number of violations by Israel. We just shouldnt be doing this pushing of an agenda at every single article. Nableezy (talk) 05:29, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add images of Israel violating x law. Crying children/grandmother's don't count. :D Wikifan12345 (talk) 05:50, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You dont get my point, this article isnt about Israel vs Palestine, this article in no way benefits from turning it into Israel vs Palestine. I dont want to add those images, they are not needed here. Nableezy (talk) 05:52, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * They illustrate a critical point in the subject of international humanitarian law. Nobody wants this to be an Israel vs Palestine editing war. I truly am tired of this tit-for-tat mentality, where everything critical of the Palestinians must be balanced with an equal criticism of Israelis, and vice-versa. If you can find a picture of the Israeli military violating x law (not allegation), feel free to include it. Pictures are very valuable in these sorts of articles. Wikifan12345 (talk) 06:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * expand on 'not allegation'. and of all the possible violations in the whole world, this is really representative of anything? Nableezy (talk) 06:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * As in, lobbying groups/theocracies/angry activists demanding blood. A picture illustrating the Israeli military violating international humanitarian law. Not speculation, conjecture, or accusations. It would be better if there was a section detailing x countries of violating international humanitarian law. Wikifan12345 (talk) 06:16, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * But every violation is somebody arguing it is a violation. Who has to say that this is a violation of international law? And I dont think there should be a section on countries violating it, this article should just be about the actual law. Nableezy (talk) 06:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * And I would like a source saying that this is against international humanitarian law, not just a violation of international law. And also one saying that this rocket was fired from a 'civilian' area in Gaza to a 'civilian' area in southern Israel. Nableezy (talk) 06:29, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Lol: Hamas bears legal responsibility for the harm to civilians in areas from which it fires is enshrined throughout international law, he said: "In the general principles of customs binding on nations, in the specific international law of armed conflict also called international humanitarian law, in the Fourth Geneva Convention, in decisions of the International Court of Justice and the international criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda - it's all set out there." Wikifan12345 (talk) 07:06, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * So you dont want me to use an image of a violation according to AI or HRW or such groups but according to a Canadian lawyer is good? Gotta love the consistency. Nableezy (talk) 07:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * An image illustrating Israel violating international humanitarian law? Such as, deliberately targeting civilian residencies. Not bombing Hamas stations/infracture/etc... and in the process killing x civilians. Though I don't think we use images by AI or HRW unless it is sourced from reliable media (like the UN). Destroyed buildings, hospitals, etc... don't count. Honestly, after further researching it would be difficult to actually prove the rocket is aimed at civilians, but through deductive reasoning we can assume. From what I understand, most rocket attacks qualify under spray-and-pray, with the intention to inflict harm on any Israeli - civilian or not. I don't know, kind of leaning towards removing the images due to lack of source, but then we can obviously use the hundreds of pictures displaying rocket attacks that have been aimed intentionally at the Sderot to kill civilians. Wikifan12345 (talk) 07:18, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * This image is not from a RS if that is your concern with images detailing accounts of violations according to AI or HRW. Nableezy (talk) 07:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I try to start out by assuming good faith but when I saw the image, I could only think "provocation". (Can there be provocation in good faith?) Why this particular image among thousands of cases? Does the image really give insight into the subject at hand. I have spent a fair amount of time on this page because I believe that it is an important topic for the general public. The idea is to have a place where somebody can go to answer the question: "What is IHL?" It could obviously be improved, but introducing disputed cases doesn't really clarify. The debates about violations of IHL by the Israelis or Palestinians is certainly important, but it doesn't belong here. Unless I see a convincing reason for including the image within the next day or so, I will delete it--unless somebody has already done so.--Joel Mc (talk) 10:44, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Is the image a provacation or a firing rockets from civilians toward civilians is a  provacation? You're asking why this particular image among thousands of cases. Because the image shows a double violation of IHL firing rockets from civilians toward civilians.  It provides a very good example. IMO the article will benefit from more images. The case is not disputed. It is proven beyond the reasonable doubt - hamas fires rockets tovard Israel from civilian neighborhoods in Gaza. If you have any other images in mind please add them to the article too. The way you said " Unless I see a convincing reason for including the image within the next day or so, I will delete it..." without even seeking consensus  shows a good faight on your part I guess.--mbz1 (talk) 12:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Consensus isnt a vote, you need to provide a valid reason for the image. Nableezy (talk) 18:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The reason is that the image shows not just one, but doube violations of IHL. The facts depicted in the image are proven. The image was posted in the section of the article that calls "Violations and punishment". Do I have to provide any other reason?--mbz1 (talk) 19:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, because there are countless other pictures of violations that could be put to use, and that is not really a representative example of violations of international humanitarian law. Nableezy (talk) 23:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The article will benefit from the images. Please tell me what image is better for the article and why, but I doubt that you will tell me anything. You're mostly running single purpose account discussing only certain articles. You took the image off without waiting for the dicussion to end and by doing this showed your "good faith"--mbz1 (talk)
 * I really dont care what you think about me, so feel free to voice your opinion. If you want images of violations, well there is the West Bank wall (legally recognized as a violation of international humanitarian law) or really any image from the Holocaust article, or My Lai Massacre, or images from any number of atrocities that have been committed in Africa or Europe over the last 30 years. Though I think the image that would be most fitting for that section would be the logo of the international court of justice, which you can see here. That or the image of the Nuremberg trials, image at International court Nableezy (talk) 00:32, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Please add pictures Nab. I believe I should reiterate your statement on the Israeli West Bank barrier. The UN condemned the wall as "illegal" under a resolution supported by 150 countries. But UN resolutions such as those tend to be non-binding since it is basically a popularity contest - with every member state, regardless of position or state agenda, receiving an equal vote. The resolution passed of course and the International Court of Justice was asked for an advisory opinion, which IS NOT the same as a trial or court hearing. They decided the barrier violated international law.

According to wikipedia, Advisory opinions are not binding nor do they carry the same "official" weight as an actual trial. They are however "widely respected". It is my opinion they are done to circumvent the standard procedures of courting, perhaps to avoid a potentially undesired ruling. But the West Bank barrier has yet to be ruled as violating IHL, which is part of the general topic of international law. I'm honestly sick the half-truths and misinformation being propagated on the internet so I feel obligated to inform you. :D I have a sneaking suspicion you've been browsing one of the most notable propaganda articles on wikipedia. Wikifan12345 (talk) 02:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Havent read that article in some time, but it isnt quite on the level of propaganda as quite a few others (my personal favorite is the mt hebron article which makes the wild claim that Mt Hebron is in the Samaria region of Israel. Israel doesnt even say that, but somehow wiki does). More to the point, the 'advisory opinion' of the CIJ and rulings by the Israeli Supreme Court said that the wall as currently constructed is a violation of international humanitarian law. And if the standard you are holding this to is a binding ruling by the CIJ then the rockets do not qualify either. have some consistency in your arguments, or better yet lets keep these arguments in our little corner of mayhem in wikipedia, no need to put this everywhere like the Kindergarten article of here. I will upload the CIJ logo and place it, as I think that is the best picture to use here as it fits well with the rest of the article. Nableezy (talk) 05:33, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Doesn't say "international humanitarian law." Wrong again, this time about the Israeli supreme court. Straight from "accurate" wiki: . They've ordered injunctions/limitations on the construction of the wall (which is why 40% of it isn't completed), but content that the fence is motivated by security concerns and not motivated by political reasons (i.e, stealing land). They also declared the ruling by the ICJ is not legally binding to ISrael. Supreme Court has become concerned regarding the position the barrier places on Palestinians and believes the government should re-fence or find a move back the wall to the green line. Whatever the case may be, it's certainly more complex than the a sinister government stealing land from helpless civilians. Wikifan12345 (talk) 05:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * From the advisory opinion by the CIJ: "All States are under an obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction; all States parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 have in addition the obligation, while respecting the United Nations Charter and international law, to ensure compliance by Israel with international humanitarian law as embodied in that Convention" Nableezy (talk) 06:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * And: "As regards international humanitarian law, the Court refers to the provisions of the Hague Regulation of 1907, which have become part of customary law, as well as the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 1949, applicable in those Palestinian territories which before the armed conflict of 1967 lay to the east of the 1949 Armistice demarcation line (or "Green Line") and were occupied by Israel during that conflict." And this is just in the press release, if you really want me to go through the whole opinion and point out to you where you are incorrect in your assertion that the court did not find this to be a violation of international humanitarian law i will. Nableezy (talk) 06:21, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep digging the hole Nab. Wikifan12345 (talk) 06:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

The UN 2000 and W
Isn't the Bush Doctrine more relevant than the war over who gets the state? Northern Ireland falls into the same category of civil unrest as the Israel vs Palestine conflict. This article is specific to military conflicts & POW treatment per Geneva. Isn't it?

The United Nations Millennium Declaration states, "Human beings must respect one other, in all their diversity of belief, culture and language. Differences within and between societies should be neither feared nor repressed, but cherished as a precious asset of humanity."http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N00/559/51/PDF/N0055951.pdf?OpenElement] That should be law, but it's just hope. :) Romanfall (talk) 10:51, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

New section suggestion - Continued Relevance?
Nitpicking to find violations committed by western countries is ridiculous.

How about a section that discusses efforts on what to do with the non-compliant countries? Most of Africa, nearly the entire Middle East, some parts of Asia and South America don't strike me as particularly conforming when it comes to adhering to the IHL. Regardless of whether they signed on to any of the IHL versions or not.

Opinions on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krigsmakten (talk • contribs) 19:48, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Merge discussion
I'd suggest that Customary International Humanitarian Law is merged here as it seems a needless fork of this page. An effective discussion of the corpus of material that makes up the Law of Armed Conflict requires both customary and treaty law to adequately cover the subject and there doesn't appear to have been justification for the fork. ALR (talk) 19:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Support Merge - unfork away... Buckshot06 (talk) 20:36, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I lean weak oppose as what is customary international law has a status beyond what is treaty law as customary international law is binding on all states, regardless of their having signed a treaty. But I dont feel too strongly about this.  nableezy  - 21:15, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's a couple of years since I was last at Staff College so my understanding may be a little rusty, but I'd suggest that if anything Customary Law is not binding. It is, on the other hand, considered in the Hague when addressing war crimes.
 * My concern is that from the perspective of a practitioner the two areas of LOAC are interdependent rather than being distinct and where one is making a targeting decision one considers both treaty and customary.
 * Notwithstanding that neither article is particularly informative at the moment, particularly if a reader reviews both.
 * ALR (talk) 22:23, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The statutes of the Permanent Court of International Justice already drawn up in December 1920 indicate inter alia three sources of international law: treaties, customary international law, and the general principles of law recognised by civilized nations. Although there has been much learned discussion about the sources, I am unaware that the basis has changed. I would support the merger.Joel Mc (talk) 11:34, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

It is true that customary and treaty laws are interrelated, but they also remain very distinct sources of international legal obligations. Therefore I suggest cross-references in both articles but no merge of the two articles. Comonline (talk) 15:22, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * they are more than just interrelated, but are two different sources of international law, or two sub-sets, if you will. In that case, the fork doesn't really make sense. I still vote for the inclusion of the sub-set (Customary International Humanitarian Law) within the overall piece International Humanitarian Law which already includes the sub-set international humanitarian treaty law. As is clear in Art. 38 of the statutes of the ICJ (it was the same article, I believe, for the PCIJ) States can have obligations under both treaty law and customary law.Joel Mc (talk) 17:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

 * it may be helpful to consider the following text from the ICRC introducing their work on customary international humanitarian law:

International law comes from both treaty law and rules of what is known as customary international law. Treaties are written conventions in which States formally establish certain rules. Customary international law, on the other hand, is not written but derives from "a general practice accepted as law". To prove that a certain rule is customary, one has to show that it is reflected in state practice and that the international community believes that such practice is required as a matter of law.

Customary IHL continues to be relevant in today’s armed conflicts for two main reasons. The first is that, while some States have not ratified important treaty law, they remain nonetheless bound by rules of customary law. Joel Mc (talk) 17:27, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

 * And it is also possible for treaty law to become customary law if enough states agree to the provisions and have put into practice such provisions. Eg the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals' decision on the treatment of POWs. Also customary law can go the other way. Eg as everyone bombed civilians in World War II it was the custom so no crime was committed even if before WWII it was thought to be a war crime, and because of the precedent set then it is not at all clear if it is a crime today (see the ICJ opinion over the use of Atomic Weapons) -- PBS (talk) 04:21, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

There is also the article Laws of war which should be thrown into the mix if a merge is being talked about. Laws of war is the more common name for IHL hence the term "war crime" rather than "international humanitarian crime". -- PBS (talk) 04:21, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I would not agree to merging IHL into the article on Laws of war. I am not so sure that laws of war is the more common name for IHL although that may still be the case in the military.  At least it is my impression that in the humanitarian and human rights communities, IHL is more commonly used.  In the past, the two terms referred to two traditions: the Laws of the Hague and the Laws of Geneva. (see Pictet 1985  p. 49  )  Probably since 1949, at least, law of war or armed conflict is "usually  called international humanitarian law." ICRC: War and International Humanitarian Law Joel Mc(talk) 12:07, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd not be comfortable about merging the Laws of War article, although would prefer to re-name it towards Law of Armed Conflict. Whilst intimately related it's more about the application.  I'd suggest that merging the two risks ending up with an unwieldy and unhelpful article.
 * From a practitioner perspective reference to LOAC is very firmly present in the diplomatic, and military communities as well as amongst those humanitarian practitioners who operate in areas of medium intensity conflict. Bluntly the only people I've ever heard refer to this as IHL were academics.  Even ICRC reps on the ground talk about LOAC.
 * The LoW cf LOAC debate is for another time although "Armed Conflict" covers much more than "war", given the broad applicability of the conventions.
 * ALR (talk) 12:34, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Since we are referring to personal experience, might I add that I have had little contact with academics, but during more than 20 years involvement in humanitarian response, I have used and heard the term IHL in discussions with diplomats, UN officials, and ICRC delegates in the field in such far-flung places as Kigali, Kabul, and Pristina. Joel Mc (talk) 12:57, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. And similarly more than 20 years; Balkans, West Africa, Iraq, Afghanistan, Indonesia and Horn of Africa.
 * Most recently Rule of Law implementation in Afghanistan and RoL planning for Somalia, although I'm not on the delivery side of that.
 * ALR (talk) 13:13, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Well it seems that the majority of opinion supports merging the two IHL articles. I'm afraid I've been a bit busy since I suggested doing it but should have some bandwidth in the next week or so to try to get some of that done.

Personally I'm not intending on suggesting a merge with the Laws of War article but there is scope for a section discussing the implementation impact, particularly where military/ security operations impact on the ability of the development community to operate.

Rough thoughts in terms of structure would be along the lines of:
 * Outline of IHL and the use of statutory and customary instruments within that.
 * Discussion of the history and relationships between the various contributing threads.
 * Identification of the issues of implementation.
 * Touch on enforcement and the courts system.

It's probably pretty clear now that I'm coming at this as a military practitioner, so other expertise around shaping the article would be very useful.

ALR (talk) 13:40, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

 * Looks like a good idea to me. I would only add where military operations impact on the ability of the humanitarian and development communities to operate.Joel Mc (talk) 13:42, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Jericho
The article currently lists the Battle of Jericho as a violation of the IHL: "the massacre of the inhabitants of Jericho by the Israelites under Joshua ( Most scholars agree that the book of Joshua holds little of historical value on this )" Given the dubious historicity of this event (see Dever 46 ), it should be removed as an example.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on International humanitarian law. 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/20100419104833/http://ihl.ihlresearch.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.viewpage&pageid=2083 to http://ihl.ihlresearch.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.viewpage&pageid=2083

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) 10:16, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Just war theory
I just want to offer a technical correction: jus ad bellum and jus in bello are philosophical components of the Just war theory. They might find themselves encapsulated in various laws, but they are not the laws themselves, or even the legal frameworks. Best regards, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 06:24, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Jus in bello may or may not be a component of “Just War” theory, but it is primarily “the body of legal norms governing battle and occupation - the 'conduct of individuals and units toward combatants, non-combatants, property, and the environment.' Violations are punishable under customary international law and international legal instruments.” In this case, jus means a right, not justice. Joel Mc (talk) 16:27, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, “Just War philosophers”(whoever they are) might use the term jus in bello. the concept was formulated and extensively developed by international jurists in the 20th century, Josef Kunz being if not the first, was at least an early user. --Joel Mc (talk) 15:26, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:International humanitarian law