text:
Tony Todd

Tony Todd (born December 4, 1954) is an American actor who is best known for portraying the title character of the Candyman film series (1992–2021).

Todd made his debut as Sgt. Warren in the film Platoon (1986), and portrayed Kurn in the television series Star Trek: The Next Generation (1990–1991) and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (1996). He achieved stardom for his roles as Ben in the 1990 remake of Night of the Living Dead and achieved global recognition after starring in Candyman (1992) and its three follow-ups; Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh (1995), Candyman 3: Day of the Dead (1999), and Candyman (2021). He also portrayed William Bludworth in the Final Destination franchise (2000–2025) and Dan in The Man from Earth (2007) and voiced The Fallen in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009), Darkseid in the DC Animated Movie Universe, Zoom in The Flash and Venom in the Spider-Man 2 (2023) game.

Early life and education
Todd was born on December 4, 1954, in Washington, D.C., and grew up in Hartford, Connecticut, attending local schools including Hartford Public High School. He is also an alumnus of the Artists Collective, Inc. Todd attended the University of Connecticut and then went on to study theater at the Tony Award-winning Eugene O'Neill National Actors Theatre Institute, and the Trinity Repertory Company in Providence, Rhode Island. His sister is actress Monique Dupree.

Film
Todd has appeared in more than 100 theatrical and television films and has played opposite many major Hollywood stars. His film credits include: Platoon (1986), Night of the Living Dead (1990), Candyman (1992), The Crow (1994), The Rock (1996), Wishmaster (1997), the Final Destination series (2000–2011), Minotaur (2006), and Beg (2010). Todd was the voice of The Fallen in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009) and was also in the Rel Dowdell film Changing the Game. Todd was a special guest of the Weekend of Horror Creation Entertainment on May 23, 2010, and Screamfest LA. Todd portrayed Reverend Zombie in Hatchet II, which was released in a limited number of theaters on October 1, 2010. As Final Destination 5 returned to the series' roots, Todd returned as William Bludworth. His signature baritone voice has been featured in many documentaries, including the narration for the 2021 feature Invisible Threads - From Wireless to War.

Broadway
Todd has acted on and off Broadway. Among his many roles are August Wilson's King Hedley II, Athol Fugard's The Captain's Tiger, for which he received the Helen Hayes nomination. Others include No Place to be Somebody, Les Blancs, Playboys of the West Indies, Othello, Zooman and The Sign, award-winning playwright Keith Glover's Dark Paradise, Aida (on Broadway), and Levee James for the Eugene O'Neill Playwrights Conference and The New Dramatist Guild.

Television
Todd's other television appearances include a recurring role on Boston Public and guest appearances on Law & Order, Homicide: Life on the Street, Hercules: The Legendary Journeys, Xena: Warrior Princess as Cecrops, The X-Files, Smallville, Psych, 24, Charmed, Stargate SG-1, Andromeda, Criminal Minds, 21 Jump Street, and Chuck.

Todd is one of the few actors to have portrayed two different speaking roles on 24. He was initially cast as Detective Michael Norris in season three and four years later as General Benjamin Juma in both 24: Redemption and season 7. He also played a major role in the Babylon 5 TV film A Call to Arms.

He has portrayed several characters in the Star Trek universe: Worf's brother Kurn in Star Trek: The Next Generation and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, an adult Jake Sisko in the episode "The Visitor" in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, and an Alpha Hirogen in the episode "Prey" in Star Trek: Voyager. In 2017, Todd returned to the world of Star Trek as General Rodek in the MMORPG game Star Trek Online; Rodek was the persona taken on by Kurn after he lost the memories of his past life as Worf's brother in the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episode "Sons of Mogh".

Todd has also provided the voices of the Decepticon Dreadwing on Transformers: Prime, and Icon in Young Justice.

In 2015, Todd was cast as the disguised voice of Zoom (portrayed by Teddy Sears when undisguised) in the second season of The Flash. Todd would later reprise his role in the fifth season episodes "What's Past Is Prologue" and "Godspeed" (though the latter featured archive audio of Todd instead) and returned to the role one last time for the series finale, "A New World, Part Four".

On October 12, 2018, it was confirmed by Bloody Disgusting that Todd would star in a recurring role in Scream: Resurrection, the third season of the slasher television series Scream. The season premiered on VH1 on July 8, 2019.

Audio drama
Todd played the title character in Bleak December Inc.'s 2016 audio drama adaptation of Bram Stoker's Dracula.

On June 29, 2023, a spoken word version of The Silver Scream by Ice Nine Kills was released with Todd narrating the story.

title: Tony Todd


text:
Talk:The Double Helix

Rewritten paragraph
I've removed the following and replaced it with a shorter paragraph. It should be obvious why, but in outline: (1) The author of this piece clearly takes Sayre's side against Watson and Crick (POV); (2) it is full of editorializing and snide comments (Watson's book reads like a novel; perhaps he is missing an ethics gene) and bizarre psychologizing ("aggressive and unfeminine . . .perfect stereotype of aggressive female subordinate . . ." What?) (3) Much of it makes no sense, since the background details are not provided; it presupposes having read one or both books; (4) Too much data: it is absurd that an article on Watson's book, containing only a five-line summary of it, should also have a three-paragraph expression of one claim by one detractor.

The Double Helix and Rosalind Franklin:
In the book "Rosalind Franklin and DNA", author Anne Sayre is very critical of the characterization presented by James D. Watson in The Double Helix. According to sayre, "Rosy" was less an individual than a character, in the exact sense, that is, of a character in a work of fiction" (Franklin and DNA, 18). Indeed, the "Rosy" character that Watson portrays and the Rosalind Franklin of Anne Sayre contrast sharply.

Watson describes "Rosy" as characteristically belligerent, aggressive, and unfeminine. She was su pposed to be the assistant of Maurice Wilkins at King's College, London, but Watson provides us with the perfect stereotype of an aggressive female subordinate. The real Rosalind Franklin, however, was not the assistant to Maurice Wilkins at all, but shared a research position equal in stature in the labratory. Throughout the book, Watson consistently degrades Franklin and downplays her contributions to the discovery of the double helix. In spite of this, Watson's tone is almost blatantly sarcastic, so a close reading of the book should not cause any reader to disregard Rosalind Franklin's scientific prowess. Rosalind Franklin was a brilliant experimentalist and excellent scientist; nothing will ever change that.

Watson and Crick’s publication of their model does not represent an attempt to steal the work of others, but it was not fair to at least one scientist—Rosalind Franklin. Collaboration has always helped advance man’s understanding of the world around him. When Watson talked to Wilkins about his ideas, it was understood that he could use any of Wilkins’ information that they had discussed in his paper. If Watson and Crick were nicer people, they might have talked to Wilkins more about using his information before they published, or at least given him more credit in their paper. Their actions with concern to Wilkins, however, were neither unethical nor unfair.

Watson and Crick crossed the line between ethical and unethical when they used Franklin’s photograph in their paper. Of course, as soon as Watson saw the picture he understood its importance. The picture’s significance could not be erased from his mind, or from the paper—that is how important it was to their understanding of the structure of DNA. Knowing how important the picture was to them, Watson and Crick should have made an effort to tell Franklin how indebted they were to her. If they were afraid she would stop them from publishing if they told her beforehand, they could have at least given her much more credit in the paper, and expressed their thanks after its publication. Watson had had an argument with Franklin just before he saw her picture—it was quite clear that she would not have shown her work to him herself. That the photograph was seen without her knowledge is a key point in determining the ethics of Watson’s behavior. Maybe a gene expressing ethical action was missing from the genetic make-up of Watson and Crick, brilliant scientists though they were.

assistant
This edit introduced the idea of Franklin as the assistant of Maurice Wilkins. This is a bogus idea, and I regret not having noticed it sooner. Wilkins anticipated that Franklin would be a collaborator. This is discussed in great detail in Wilkins' autobiography. --JWSchmidt 17:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

seemingly
"with its author seemingly caring only about the glory of priority and willing to acquire data from other surrepticiously in order to get it." <-- I admit that it has been many years since I read the book, but I question if this is a fair statement of what the book is about. I This is more a statement of how some observers have interpreted the book, and as such it should be associated (by citations) with one or more specific critics. Is it spelled “surreptitiously”? --JWSchmidt 17:21, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Crick's lawsuit
There should be a note about Crick's threatened lawsuit against Watson for libel in the criticisms section. Crick was, of course, a major player in the saga this book tells and thus his opposition to the book should be mentioned. It also eliminates the problem of having only one critic listed. I was prepared to do it, but for the life of me I can't figure out how to make citations on Wikipedia :P

The Race for the Double Helix
This was originally made for the BBC, and is called Life Story in the UK. As it was originally a British film, shouldn't we be using the British title here? 81.158.2.225 14:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Dispute over publication
The article mentions that the publisher of The Double Helix had to be changed due to protests from Crick, Wilkins and others. It might be useful to include a citation to this: A pdf copy of a letter from Crick to Watson complaining about the contents of the book. The letter is in an online archive of Crick's papers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.16.200.118 (talk) 05:10, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Reverted category edits
I reverted the recent category changes. The article does fit better in

than in which doesn't even exist. Controversial books was deleted a long time ago as being too vague and broad a classification. See Votes_for_deletion/Controversial_books -- JoannaSerah (talk) 02:25, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

An Annotated and Illustrated Edition
"An annotated and illustrated version of the book was published by Simon & Schuster in November 2012, in association with Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. The edition was published to coincide with the fiftieth anniversary of the award of the 1962 Nobel Prize for physiology or medicine to Francis Crick, James D. Watson and Maurice Wilkins.  It contains over three hundred annotations on the events and characters portrayed, with facsimile letters and contemporary photographs, many previously unpublished. Their sources include newly discovered correspondence from Crick, the papers of Franklin, Pauling, and Wilkins, and they include a chapter dropped from the original edition that described Watson's holiday in the Italian Alps in 1952.  The edition was favorably reviewed in The New York Times by Nicholas Wade, who commented "Anyone seeking to understand modern biology and genomics could do much worse than start with the discovery of the structure of DNA, on which almost everything else is based. . This edition includes the unsympathetic review by the late Erwin Chargaff from the March 29, 1968 issue of Science, which he previously declined permission to reprint in the 1980 Norton Critical Edition of The Double Helix edited by Gunther Stent."

One wonders whether the person who re-wrote the above has actually read the new book? The NYT review contains a very specific criticism of the 'grey' illustrations, not mentioned above:

(quote) "Classic works of literature from Herodotus’s “Histories” to “Alice in Wonderland” and “The Waste Land” have received the honor of annotated editions. “The Double Helix” richly deserves admittance to this hall of fame. I have one cavil: The publisher, seemingly to economize on black ink, has printed the documents and photographs in such low-definition, smudgy gray that many are unreadable.  That aside, the edition produces much of the raw material out of which a masterpiece was created." [New York Times, November 12, 2012]

2.30.189.29 (talk) 08:15, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I finally printed off all six pages of Francis Crick's letter dated 13th April 1967, if anything I am even more amazed at the omission of pages 3/4/5 from the above! The other two main criticisms ['grey' illustrations/no 1953 press cuttings] are really insignificant by comparison. The letter is very, very critical of "The Double Helix".

I take the view that if something is available on the internet, then there is no excuse for not including it in a book; this letter should have been included in its entirety, and not cut in half by 3 pages.

2.30.187.188 (talk) 20:24, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Missing information
So would someone like to add a brief summary of the contents of the book? Lots of detail on the controversy around the text, but almost nothing about what's actually in it, such as events, places or descriptions of people. That would help the reader of this article immensely. -- llywrch (talk) 18:42, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Putting Crick in wikilinks
The name of Francis Crick is put in wikilinks in the third paragraph, but Crick is already mentioned in the first paragraph. It might be an idea to put Crick's name in wikilinks in the first paragraph, where his name is first mentioned in the article. Vorbee (talk) 16:55, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:The Double Helix


text:
Talk:Brighton hotel bombing

Requested move 11 June 2024

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

No consensus reached additional conversation is unlikely to result in constructive action. DisneyAviationRollerCoasterEnthusiast (talk) 22:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Brighton hotel bombing → Brighton bomb – Per WP:COMMONNAME. Sources overwhelmingly use the name ‘the Brighton bomb’ to deal with this event. While there is some use of ‘Brighton hotel bombing’, these are much less common. Support the move, of course. - SchroCat (talk) 02:32, 11 June 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 05:58, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose. No they don't. They often call it the Brighton bombing, but not the Brighton bomb. The current title is fine. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:21, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes they do, actually. While some sources call it the Brighton hotel bombing (as I’ve already said), the weight of sources is ‘Brighton bomb’. As I'm rewriting the article at the moment, I’m quite familiar with the sources. If you really don't believe me:
 * "Brighton Hotel bombing" gives 78 hits
 * "brighton bomb" gives "About 22,600 results"

 * It's clear on book refs too:
 * "brighton hotel bombing" for Google books: About 1,740 results
 * "Brighton hotel bombing" on Internet archive books: 261 Results
 * "Brighton bomb" for Google books: About 4,320 results
 * "Brighton bomb" on Internet archive books: 1,633 Results
 * COMMONNAME really is quite clear... - SchroCat (talk) 12:24, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Oppose - regardless of whether 'Brighton bomb' is the common name or not, a common name isn't the only criteria to decide on a title. Per WP:CRITERIA, a good title has five characteristics:
 * Recognisability - 'Brighton hotel bombing' is definitely more recognisable and easy to understand than simply 'Brighton bomb', which is quite ambiguous.
 * Naturalness - It is more common for titles about bombings to be titled as such, rather than just 'bomb' which sounds awfully unnatural.
 * Precision - As said before, there is no ambiguity about 'Brighton hotel bombing', however there is for just 'Brighton bomb'.
 * Concision - 'Brighton bomb' is too short to adequately identify the subject.
 * Consistency - 'Brighton hotel bombing' is more consistent with other articles than 'Brighton bomb' - see WP:NCE.
 * In conclusion, 'Brighton bomb' is just an unnatural name and there is no need to alter the current title. harrz  talk 20:18, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Recognisability: being the common name by a long stretch, it's much more recognisable by default. There is nothing ambiguous about "Brighton bomb", which is why so many sources use it.
 * Naturalness - Given so many sources use "Brighton bomb", it sounds more natural to me - "Brighton hotel bombing" sounds unnatural and forced to me. This point is down to personal choice, so it's a bit of De gustibus and all that
 * Precision: The title "Brighton bomb" is precise enough, without the unnecessary clutter of the superfluous noun
 * Concision - "Brighton bomb" is much more concise and is obviously sufficient to identify the topic, particularly given most sources use it as the COMMONNAME without any problems
 * Consistency - There’s no consistency in the naming approach at the moment. Category:Hotel bombings in Europe, for example, shows no common pattern that would support ‘Brighton Hotel bombing’.
 * In conclusion, 'Brighton bomb' is just a natural name, one used by the great weight of sources, making it the superior title and, of course, it's still the WP:COMMONNAME and aligns with WP:NCWWW (and WP:NOYEAR). - SchroCat (talk) 20:26, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Take a look at Category:Provisional IRA bombings in England which clearly shows the pattern for consistency. harrz  talk 07:39, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that even cherry picking categories doesn't show consistency, given the differing formats in this cat. Looking through the naming of events covered in the category Category:Terrorist incidents in the United Kingdom in the 1980s, again there is no consistency (Harrods bombing, Iranian Embassy siege, Altnaveigh landmine attack, Darkley killings, 1985 Newry mortar attack, Remembrance Day bombing, etc all show a wide range of formats). So of the five criteria, "Brighton bomb" is still ahead in all areas. Given there's no consistency, and given the lack of grounds on the other criteria, COMMONNAME is a particularly strong and relevant guideline. - SchroCat (talk) 07:43, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Support: I've had a good rummage in the online archives and it is clear to me that "the Brighton bomb" has been the usual way of referring to the atrocity. The term "Brighton hotel bombing" is much less to be found in newspaper reports at the time and since. I can imagine that as we get further and further away from the event the term "the Brighton hotel bombing" may in due course become more usual than "the Brighton bomb", but in this year of grace 2024 the latter is, I'm sure, the norm. I concur with SchroCat, above.  Tim riley  talk   21:09, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support: The sources generally use "Brighton bomb" to refer to the event, and so should we. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:22, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support - per WP:COMMONNAME as it is more common in the sources. -- DeFacto (talk). 21:42, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support per ngrams. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 21:49, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support An examination of articles and works on the subject supports the WP:COMMONNAME argument. ~ HAL  333  23:05, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose the article is about the event, not the explosive. But there is a reasonable argument that "Brighton bomb" is a set-phrase that should be in the title of the article about this event.  What about "IRA Brighton bomb attack"? Walsh90210 (talk) 20:47, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * As opposed to who else’s bomb? And what else is a bomb but an attack? "IRA Brighton bomb attack" isn’t a name used by anyone (possibly a description, but not a title). Two of the six documentaries are actually called “The Brighton Bomb”. - SchroCat (talk) 20:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose move to simply "...bomb". A perusal of Category:Provisional IRA bombings in London and similar categories shows the consistent title format would be "...bombing", so would support a move to Brighton bombing, which is equally common as "Brighton bomb". The guidance at WP:CRITERIA specifically states "The title is consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles", the vast majority of articles on IRA bombings use "...bombing" not "...bomb". Kathleen's bike (talk) 20:51, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Category:Terrorist incidents in the United Kingdom in the 1980s, shows no consistency (Harrods bombing, Iranian Embassy siege, Altnaveigh landmine attack, Darkley killings, 1985 Newry mortar attack, Remembrance Day bombing). CRITERIA has several criteria (discussed above), and while both bomb and bombing fit all the criteria, Brighton Bomb is one more commonly used in the reliable sources. - SchroCat (talk) 18:48, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Given that that Iranian Embassy siege was a hostage taking by gunmen, and the Darkley killings was a gun attack, it's hardly surprising that neither of the articles you are using as examples of supposed inconsistency in naming actually ends with "...bombing", since neither of them were bombings! Kathleen's bike (talk) 21:32, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Relisting comment: There is a rough consensus that "Brighton bomb" is the common name, but editors are concerned by WP:RECOGNIZABILITY. Relisting to get additional input, as well as to consider the alternative title "Brighton bombing". BilledMammal (talk) 05:58, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose Bombing is a more natural title and omitting the hotel part also works against the proposal. Killuminator (talk) 13:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support the move to "Brighton Bomb", as per the sources, COMMONNAME, and WP:CRITERIA.  Cassianto Talk  18:27, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose. "Brighton bomb" is just too vague and non-specific; "Brighton hotel bombing" carries exponentially more meaning, one immediately knows the event that is being referred to (rather than some other bomb in Brighton, historical ordnance found on the beach say, or maybe a local drag act?). Even if the reader is unfamiliar with the event, the title conveys that there was an explosion which the other does not. There is no gain only loss in changing the title, keep "Brighton hotel bombing". Cheers! Captainllama (talk) 17:42, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * "Vague and non-specific"? "Brighton bomb" is the flaming COMMONNAME for the specific event, referred to in countless reliable sources and used as the title of two of the six documentaries and as the sub-title of one of the books about it. "Local drag act"? What bloody nonsense, this vote shows zero grasp of the WP:CRITERIA or of the subject matter and the sources. - SchroCat (talk) 18:17, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support – appears to be the overwhelming common name. Some of the opposition arguments could be better considered if there was a plausible alternative actually used by a substantial amount of reliable sources, but that doesn't seem to be the case. –  Aza24  (talk)   19:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Brighton bombing in a perfectly plausible alternative that has been prooposed, one that is equally as common as "Brighton bomb" and has the added benefit of being consistent with similar articles (Category:Provisional IRA bombings in London, Category:Provisional IRA bombings in England, Category:Provisional IRA bombings in continental Europe, Category:Provisional IRA bombings in Northern Ireland and Category:Provisional IRA bombings in Belfast do not contain a single article with a title that ends in "...bomb", generally speaking it is "...bombing"). Kathleen's bike (talk) 20:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I would suggest that "Brighton bomb" is more common in the reliable sources than "Brighton bombing". There are five different criteria for naming, and consistency with other titles is just one of them, but 'bomb' is stronger everywhere else in the quality sources. It wouldn't be the worst title in the world (certainly better than the current one), but not as strong as 'bomb'. - SchroCat (talk) 20:34, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * If you look at WP:CRITERIA, "Brighton bomb" arguably only fits two of the criteria - recognisability and naturalness, which is due to the WP:COMMONNAME you keep referring to. Now, in my opinion, this really isn't a natural title, mainly because this article is about the event (bombing) rather than the device used to carry it out (bomb). There really is no issue with the current title, it is equally recognisable, more natural, consistent with other articles and perfectly concise and precise to avoid ambiguity which would likely relate to the Brighton Blitz article. harrz  talk 21:43, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * See my comments above. The current name is poor, whichever way you look at it. - SchroCat (talk) 02:42, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
 * You say that but can you give a good reason why the current name is poor? The only thing you've said in your comment above is that your proposed title is 'stronger' - something which is purely subjective and has no relevancy to Wikipedia's naming policy. harrz  talk 15:57, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It's much less common, both in general, and in the quality sources - it's less common than both 'Brighton bomb' and 'Brighton bombing', for example. By virtue of being of limited use, it's less recognisable and much more grammatically forced. - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but this feels like sticking with the rules to our own disadvantage. The "Brighton bomb" is the name of the event, not just the device: keeping the current title"Brighton hotel bombing"only because three conventions at AT would rather have it stretched out into an unnatural three words which arguably fits better with Wikipedia policy but is out of touch with reality and basic common sense is a poor argument. Titles must be "recogni[s]able, concise, natural, precise, and consistent": out of those five, I'd say all are fulfilled bar "consistent", but there is no consistency here as SchroCat has demonstrated. On another point: why "Brighton hotel bombing"? "Brighton Hotel bombing" or better "Grand Brighton Hotel bombing" would be an improvement (currently the lowercase "h" makes it sound like a generic hotel in Brighton). Tim O'Doherty (talk) 21:53, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * To anyone who actually has an interest in the subject, there is now a pre-FAC peer review open for comments on the article. - SchroCat (talk) 11:59, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Too easily confused with the Brighton Bombers (football team) and the Brighton bomber, who planted the bomb in the hotel. Also, Brighton was bombed on numerous occasions during the Brighton Blitz during WW2, so omitting the word "hotel" is imprecise. There are five criteria for an article title. However, using the most common name is not one of the naming criteria. While using a recognizable common name is a criterion, the title also needs to be precise and natural. The existing title meets these criteria. The proposed title is ambiguous and would suggest an article that is confined to just an explosive weapon called a "Brighton bomb", rather than the explosion of the IRA bomb in a Brighton hotel that killed people. Besides, the bomb itself is probably not really that notable, although the bombing is. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 14:57, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * See above: the current name does not fit the five criteria and is - at the very best - the third best suggestion in this thread. The proposed title is neither ambiguous (not only is it the COMMONNAME, it's used as or in book and documentary titles - with zero ambiguity). "Brighton bomb" (and less so, "Brighton bombing") is precise, common and much less clumsy and unnatural than the current version. - SchroCat (talk) 15:21, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @SchroCat: When it comes to naming notable events, there is a separate event-specific naming convention which sets out how to name the article, by including descriptors that answer the When, Where and What ... happened? questions. A bomb is not a happening, it is a thing. However the bomb exploding is a happening and one synonym for that is that a bombing occurred. Grammatically, the title needs to use the gerund form of the word bomb to make grammatical sense because the word bomb can be used as both a verb and a noun, while bombing is clearly the gerund form of the verb to bomb because it ends with "... ing". Also, to be consistent with other events where a weapon is used, the gerund form should be used in the title. Thus we have titles ending in ... shooting or ... stabbing, not ... gun or ... knife. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 23:17, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * And the convention says that when there is an established, common name for an even, ... use that name”. ‘Brighton hotel bombing’ is not an established common name: ‘Brighton bomb’ or in some cases ‘Brighton bombing’ are. - SchroCat (talk) 03:33, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I thought the purpose of this discussion was to establish a consensus on what the common name was. There doesn't appear to be a single established common name used by all sources, there appear to be at least two possibilities, if not more. The naming convention explains how to arrive at a workable common name in such a situation. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 03:51, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * No, it’s not to get a consensus on what a common name is, and the conventions don’t show how to get a workable common name. Both are to get to an article title. The cumbersome and clumsy ‘Brighton hotel bombing’ isn’t a good one. Using the common name ‘Brighton bomb’ (common name in the weight of the reliable sources), is a good title. - SchroCat (talk) 04:13, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * In your opinon. ... I disagree. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 04:22, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support "Brighton bombing". ie the name most people then alive then and in the aftermath would be familiar with. I don't really like "Brighton bomb", which although some US sources use it, seems as if the article is about the device. Ceoil (talk) 21:21, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose Brighton bomb as insufficiently precise, descriptive, or recognisable. As others have said, it's too easily confused with a specific device or other events such as WWII air raids. I'm ambivalent on "Brighton bombing" but it's certainly an improvement on "Brighton bomb". "Brighton hotel bombing" is imperfect but is still concise and is precise enough to clearly identify the subject, even to readers unfamiliar with the topic. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:16, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi Harry, I don't think "Brighton hotel bombing" identifies the subject at all to people. People are more likely to recognise the COMMONNAME for things (and the two most common names are "Brighton bomb" and "Brighton bombing"). 'BHB' is hardly used as the name - it's used as a description sometimes, but not really as a name. If we're after something that identifies the subject, even to the unfamiliar, then "Attempted assassination of Margaret Thatcher" would be far better than the current clumsy wording (and we have precedent for that form of wording too). - SchroCat (talk) 06:51, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I wonder if it's a generational thing? I'm not old enough to remember the press coverage in the immediate aftermath so my perception is based on what I've read in books and seen on TV years later. But I assumed BHB was a descriptive title, otherwise it would be at Brighton Hotel Bombing™, which I'd probably oppose. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:59, 8 July 2024 (UTC)}}

title: Talk:Brighton hotel bombing


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shindig

Shindig was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was no consensus, but article sensibly redirected. Cool Hand Luke  20:05, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Non-notable club, fanboy gushing. RickK 05:13, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Party. -- [[User:Bobdoe| Bob Doe ]] 06:15, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Common American (not sure about other English-speaking countries) slang for "party." Redirect to Party. --Slowking Man 07:18, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Move to wiktionary. WordNet defines Shindig as a large and noisy party of people. I don't think there is any good reason to redirect. Create disambiguation page with links to party and Shindig! created by Mike H. - utcursch 07:40, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * This word had more currency circa 1960, and I believe it was even used as the title of a TV show at that time, which would merit an article. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:45, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect until someone wants to write an article for the TV show, which I remember watching every week. Before MTV played music, and long before MTV stopped playing music, the only way people saw music was live (or "live") performances on TV shows.  I think "Shindig" was a lip synch one, which is bad, but there were some great shows.  (I remember seeing Tommy James and the Shondells and Tommy Roe on there.) Geogre 14:15, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Party. [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 18:17, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Throw out existing content, supply definition, and Move to Wikipedia. The word is interesting etymologically, if I remember well — although not that interesting, else I'da remembered more than that! — Bill 22:32, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete and let someone else recreate. - Ta bu shi da yu 08:12, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, clean and edit for NPOV. I did some rewriting to clean it.  --L33tminion 01:10, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, or very possibly redirect to Shindig!, as soon as someone writes an article on the very popular '60s music show. Mike H 03:27, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * I wrote the article for Shindig! now so it's much more wise to redirect this. Mike H 03:38, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

 * Create disambiguation page with links to party and Shindig!. ElBenevolente 03:50, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shindig


text:
Talk:National Day of Spain

Columbus?
I don't think Columbus' "finding" is ever mentioned. "Hispanic Day" is a relatively new term. Most peopel call the day "el Día del Pilar". El Pilar being the patroness of Spain. I think this page needs to be researched some more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gsaindon (talk • contribs) 02:12, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Any citations there? Someone brought this up at Public holidays in Spain and I did some cursory research -- which confirmed Columbus as being the central figure (main celebration at Plaza de Colon). Granted, my source was a couple Web sites and the Spanish Wikipedia. What little I've found is posted to Talk:Public_holidays_in_Spain, and certainly open to more additions by people better versed in this subject than me. ``` W i k i W i s t a h ``` 04:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge with Columbus Day
There's nothing that's reliably cited in this article that doesn't reappear at Columbus Day which discusses all Columbus celebrations in all countries. Perhaps some more material can be added over there, but there's no reason to keep this a separate article.--Cúchullain t/ c 06:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

 * Cited or not, this article has a different scope than that of Columbus Day. This article is about Spain's National Day (you know, like the 4th of July, but in Spain, the European country...just in case) while Columbus Day is more about Día de la Raza, The Americas, whatever. These are clearly separate concepts and celebrations and I can't see why someone should remove all this information and substitute it by a mere "it is Spain's National Day" while merging it with something only secondarily related, all because this article lacks citations which are a google search away and all without having even bothered to get anyone else's opinion....is that what administrators are taught these days? OMG... Mountolive   le déluge 03:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Merged
After nearly a year with no citations added, I have redirected the article back to Columbus Day, where all the international Columbus celebrations are discussed. One user above suggested that "Hispanic Day" has a different scope than the Columbus celebrations of the Americas, but there is nothing in the article to suggest this is the case (let alone any citation of a reliable source that would corroborate it). As the article says, Hispanic Day "commemorates the exact date of 1492 when Christopher Columbus first set a foot in America." If anyone is interested in expanding the article, they will need to track down reliable sources discussing the day, and explain why the material needs its own article.--Cúchullain t/ c 13:14, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

 * By the way, I would have merged some of the newer material into the Columbus celebrations article, but since nothing was sourced, there's nothing to merge.--Cúchullain t/ c 13:18, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

 * On a side note, there is something I dont get in your reasoning. Your insistence in quoting...what does it have to do with the merging? Which is your point in the equation unquoted=merge?

 * This said, I do not support this merge whatsoever. Columbus Day in Spain is not celebrated as such, but as Spain's National Day, so the focus is quite different. It is obviously a domestic holiday and as such it deserves its own article. Can't see what's the big problem with that, really...

 * In either case, you know you should not do this kind of drastic edits without consensus, let alone on the face of reasoned opposition.  MOUNTOLIVE  fedeli alla linea 02:21, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

 * The "insistence on quoting" is not mine, it's Wikipedia policy. From WP:V: "Any material lacking a reliable source may be removed." It goes on: "...how quickly this should happen depends on the material in question and the overall state of the article. Editors might object if you remove material without giving them enough time to provide references, especially in an underdeveloped article." It's been almost a year, that's plenty of time for others to find sources to back up the contention that "Hispanic Day" is different enough from the other Columbus celebrations to require its own article. But that hasn't been done. In the spirit of moving forward I (re-)affected the merge, which is quite a reasonable solution, I think. Nothing drastic - the same material can be found at the Columbus Day article. You disagree, but the burden of evidence is on you to back up your assertions with reliable sources.--Cúchullain t/ c 13:40, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

October 2009
I was bold and moved the page to Fiesta Nacional de España, as it was clear that the various problems I have raised are not going to be addressed. As I showed at the AfD, the name "Hispanic Day" is not only associated with Spain (or even October 12). If Spain's national day is to have its own article, that title is inappropriate. Of course this still leaves the glaring sourcing issues.--Cúchullain t/ c 20:33, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

A bit of a re-write
I've done a bit of a re-write, to clarify the link, or not, with the Columbus Day/Dia de la Raza celebration in Latin America. I think the Fuller comment about there being various national days in the past, and this being part of the reconciliation process in Spain today, would benefit with being expanded, but I can't find anything about it. Does anybody know any more? Moonraker12 (talk) 17:37, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

PS Should this be moved to "National Day (Spain)"? Moonraker12 (talk) 17:40, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I can't seem to access the Molina source via Google Books anymore, so I can't see what it says about previous days. There are a few things wrong here, though. The source says the name was changed to from Dia de la Raza to Dia de la Hispanidad in 1957 to emphasize the "Hispanidad" part, rather than to remove the word "Raza". I'll correct this. Also, I don't know how other articles on "national days" in non-English speaking countries handle the article titles, but it be instructive to check.--Cúchullain t/ c 18:07, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

 * I notice you undid my re-write of this, and the "Spain" section at Columbus Day. You objected to the phrase “to avoid the negative connotations of the term Raza”; which is fair enough ( I came across it when I looked into this, but can’t lay my hands on the source, so it’s best out ‘til I can find it again).
 * But what was the justification for the wholesale revert?
 * It is highly simplistic to say "Since 1987, Spain has celebrated the anniversary of Columbus's arrival in the Americas as its Fiesta Nacional or "National Day",Or “The day is held on the anniversary of Christopher Columbus's arrival in the Americas", as if that was the reason.
 * The people of Spain, and the Spanish Armed Forces, and the people of Aragon, all have their own reasons for celebrating October 12th;, and none of them primarily include Columbus’s arrival in America.
 * I believe my arrangement of the text explains this; If you do not agree, perhaps you could explain why not, rather than just deleting it outright. Moonraker12 (talk) 10:16, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Please don't be offended, I'm simply trying to improve the encyclopedia, as are you; it was nothing personal. I didn't "undo" your rewrite; most of the material was left entirely unchanged. I just rearranged some parts slightly to give some background on it, and corrected a few slight errors as I explained. As I said, I don't believe you were following the source in a few places. First, Spain's national day is not itself "celebrated widely across Latin America as Dia de la Raza". It is the Columbus anniversary that is celebrated in various places, including Spain; Spain simply chose this previously celebrated holiday to be its "national day" in 1981. And yes, according to the source, October 12 was chosen explicitly to be the national day because it was the anniversary of Columbus' arrival (and was already widely celebrated), and this bears saying.
 * Second, as I explained, the change TO Dia de la Hispanidad (or Fiesta de la Hispanidad) FROM Dia de la Raza was the part that was done to "[emphasize] the link to the Hispanidad, the international Hispanic community". "Dia de la Raza" doesn't have anything to do with Hispanidad. This is significant, as Hispanidad is a slightly different concept than la Raza. I don't know that Dia de la Raza was ever officially celebrated in Spain under that name. I also don't know where the 1957 date comes from; it's not in the source.
 * Now, your revert of my edits removed all of this, as well as removing some further sourced material I added.--Cúchullain t/ c 12:59, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

 * If I over-reacted, I apologize.
 * I take your first point (I've amended that bit): but it was the arrangement of the information that was the problem, rather than the content. As for the underlying assumption (here, and in an edit summary on the other page) "October 12 was chosen as "National Day" specifically because it was Columbus Day"; this is the point at issue. Spain did not choose Oct 12 “specifically because it was Columbus Day”; Columbus did not discover Spain! And Columbus Day is a US holiday, not a Spanish one. What Spain did have was a shared festival with Latin America (whose celebration is the Dia de la Raza, not Columbus Day) and which has changed its purpose to be a national day. To pose an analogy, the United States has a public holiday on December 25, which is the Christian festival of Jesus’ birth; but it would be pretty inaccurate (not to say contentious) to say “The US celebrates Jesus’s birthday, in line with other Christian countries”, wouldn't it?
 * As for the second, The change from Raza to Hispanidad is treated at length on the Spanish WP article, but I’m still looking for English sources. I’ll take another crack at it when I get back from holiday, if that's OK with you. Moonraker12 (talk) 12:45, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * As I said, according to the source, October 12 was chosen as the national day specifically because it was the anniversary of Columbus' arrival in the New World, and was already being celebrated as such. That's all the text said. The only mention of Columbus Day was to say that other countries celebrate the same day as Dia de la Raza or Columbus Day, which is true. A better analogy would be to say "Since 18xx, the United States has had a federal holiday on December 25, the Christian festival of Jesus' birth".
 * On the Hispanidad bit, again, the problem is that you've altered the sentences to tie "Spain's connection to the Hispanidad" to the name Dia de la Raza rather than Dia de la Hispanidad. The line was just in there originally to give some explanation for the name Dia de la Hispanidad. It's not really accurate to say the Spanish chose the name "Dia de la Raza" to emphasize the connection to the hispanidad, as the concept of hispanidad didn't exist at the time Dia de la Raza celebrations first arose, and was specifically different from the concept of la raza.
 * The further problem is that you've attributed material to the source that doesn't actually appear in it. I looked at the Spanish article, and unfortunately it has very few citations itself, so it won't be a lot of use to us here. I'm going to go ahead and remove the mis-cited material and add back the material I added that you removed. Once you find better sources we can incorporated them as well.--Cúchullain t/ c 15:03, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Also, the more I look into it the more it appears the 1957 date for Dia de la Hispanidad is just totally wrong. According to this it was first celebrated in 1935. I don't know how reliable that is, but obviously we can't be attributing to the Prakke book something it doesn't actually say.--Cúchullain t/ c 16:04, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

National Day of Spain
National Day of Spain is the literal translation of the Spanish festivity "Dia Nacional de Espana". In their national day, the Spaniards celebrate their existence, history and common future. The discovery of America is only a chapter in Spanish history. Getting Wikipedia's "National Day of Spain" to redirect it to "Columbus Day" is not just an unacceptable nonsense from any point of view but a serious manipulation of the content and meaning of the real festivity in Spain. Columbus Day is mainly celebrated by Italians and in the US to commemorate the Genovese navigator's exploit and give value to the Italian-Americans' contribution to the construction and development of the United States. Spain has never celebrated a "Columbus Day". The redirection of the National Day of Spain to Columbus Day shall stop and have its own content. Many thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.230.146.198 (talk) 16:48, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 2 November 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Consensus to move (non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs (talk) 13:18, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Fiesta Nacional de España → National Day of Spain – Most articles about foreign holidays are given their English titles here; see Public holidays in Spain, Public holidays in Italy, etc. National Day of Spain is currently a redirect to this article, but IMO it should be the article title. MelanieN (talk) 21:31, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

 * Support as nominator. I am making this nomination on behalf of a new user, User:PLUS ULTRA CARLOS, who has been trying to get this change made but did not know how to do it. I agree with him that the English title would be more comprehensible for our readers and more in line with usual practice here at the English Wikipedia. -- MelanieN (talk) 21:33, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

 * Support. Thanks for your support MelanieN. Even if Spanish is a popular language and many people can read or understand it, specially in the USA, this is an article in English intended to be read by English speaking people worldwide, not Spanish which for many is a VERY exotic language. I propose the title of this page to be modified into "National Day of Spain" which is the logical title and expectation for any person making such a research in English. Then, the indication of the official Spanish name (Fiesta Nacional de España), can be made as a content of the page, i.e. in the preamble/introduction. Many thanks --PLUS ULTRA CARLOS (talk) 23:25, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

 * Support per WP:USEENGLISH. 36.76.239.33 (talk) 07:31, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Issues with tone and neutrality
Apologies if this is incorrectly stated, I'm rather new to deep edits on Wikipedia. In its current status, the article in my opinion has serious issues with its tone both in terms of lack of neutrality when discussing Spanish colonialism, and a heavy domination of aesthetic writing, being written rather more like a travel blog than an impartial encyclopedia entry. The problem is particularly pronounced in the section "Spanish Culture". As an example of tone issues:

"Then, over two thousand years of viniculture are sure to harmoniously pair those meals with a good wine produced in virtually any corner of the Spanish countryside. Spanish people do know how to celebrate around the table, and they do so especially on October 12."

I'm unable to rewrite it at this time as I'm unfamiliar with the subject matter, but I wished to flag the topic. I'll place a mention on the main page as well to flag editors who might stop by. 213.55.221.88 (talk) 13:33, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I've cleaned the page a little bit: a lot of text wasn't particularly linked to October the 12th. There were also false statements, e.g. that the holiday is always 3 days long. --Jotamar (talk) 10:30, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Something that should probably be added to the page is that it is a favourite date for demonstrations by far-right organizations in Spain. --Jotamar (talk) 10:42, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:National Day of Spain


text:
Ding Dong Merrily on High

"Ding Dong Merrily on High" is a Christmas carol. The tune first appeared as a secular dance tune known under the title "Branle de l'Official" in Orchésographie, a dance book written by the French cleric, composer and writer Thoinot Arbeau, pen name of Jehan Tabourot (1519–1593). The words are by the English composer George Ratcliffe Woodward (1848–1934), and the carol was first published in 1924 in his The Cambridge Carol-Book: Being Fifty-two Songs for Christmas, Easter, And Other Seasons. Woodward took an interest in church bell ringing, which no doubt aided him in writing it. Woodward was the author of several carol books, including Songs of Syon and The Cowley Carol Book. The macaronic style is characteristic of Woodward's delight in archaic poetry. Charles Wood harmonised the tune when it was published with Woodward's text in The Cambridge Carol Book. More recently, Sir David Willcocks made an arrangement for the second book of Carols for Choirs.

Text and melody
Ding Dong! merrily on high In heav'n the bells are ringing Ding, dong! verily the sky Is riv'n with angel singing Gloria, Hosanna in excelsis

E'en so here below, below Let steeple bells be swungen And i-o, i-o, i-o By priest and people be sungen Gloria, Hosanna in excelsis

Pray ye dutifully prime Your matin chime, ye ringers May ye beautifully rime Your evetime song, ye singers Gloria, Hosanna in excelsis.

Recordings

 * Roger Whittaker album Tidings of Comfort and Joy (1984)
 * Maddy Prior album A Tapestry of Carols (1987)
 * The Chieftains album The Bells of Dublin (1991)
 * The Wiggles album Wiggly, Wiggly Christmas (1996)
 * Celtic Woman 7th album A Christmas Celebration (1998)
 * Charlotte Church album Dream a Dream (2000)
 * Cherish the Ladies album On Christmas Night (2004)
 * Blackmore's Night album Winter Carols (2006)
 * Linda Brava album Angels (2010)
 * O Holy Night (2012) by Millennial Choirs and Orchestras
 * Choir of King's College, Cambridge album 100 Years of Nine Lessons and Carols (2018)

title: Ding Dong Merrily on High


text:
African Party for the Independence of Cape Verde

The African Party of Independence of Cape Verde (Partido Africano da Independência de Cabo Verde, PAICV) is a democratic socialist political party in Cape Verde. It was formerly a Marxist–Leninist communist party and the sole legal party in the country from 1981 to 1990. Its members are nicknamed "os tambarinas" (the tamarinds) in Portuguese, and they identify themselves with the color yellow.

History
In 1956, its forerunner, the African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde (PAIGC), was founded by the Cape Verdean nationalist leader Amílcar Cabral (born in Guinea-Bissau). PAIGC fought to overthrow the Portuguese Empire, unify Cape Verde and Guinea-Bissau, and use its vanguardism to advance socialist revolution.

From 1961 on, the PAIGC fought a guerrilla warfare campaign in cooperation with its fraternal party umbrella group, the CONCP, during the Portuguese Colonial War. By 1973 the PAIGC controlled Guinea-Bissau, while Portugal's own Carnation Revolution in 1974 effectively dissolved the empire, relinquishing Cape Verde within the next year.

After the wars of national liberation, the PAIGC established a socialist state within both territories under Amilcar Cabral's brother, Luís Cabral.

Establishment
Following a military coup in Guinea-Bissau that ousted Cabral in November 1980, the Cape Verde portion of the party became the PAICV in January 1981; it was headed by the President of Cape Verde, Aristides Pereira. The PAICV was Cape Verde's sole legal party from 1981 until the abolition of the one-party state in 1990.

Multiparty democracy
At an extraordinary party congress in February 1990, the PAICV approved the introduction of multiparty democracy. Pereira stepped down as General Secretary of PAICV in July 1990, and Prime Minister Pedro Pires replaced him in August 1990. The PAICV won 23 of the 79 National Assembly seats in the January 1991 multiparty parliamentary election, losing to the Movement for Democracy (MpD). Pereira was subsequently defeated in the February 1991 presidential election, and PAICV again fared poorly in the December 1991 local elections. At a party congress in August 1993, Pires was replaced as General Secretary by Aristides Lima and was instead elected as President of PAICV.

The PAICV won 21 out of 72 National Assembly seats in the December 1995 parliamentary election. At a PAICV congress in September 1997, Pires faced José Maria Neves in a leadership contest, and Pires was elected with 68% of the vote. Pires stepped down as PAICV President in 2000 in preparation for a presidential bid in the next year's election and he was succeeded by Neves.

2001 election
In the presidential election held on 11 and 25 February 2001, PAICV candidate Pedro Pires, who won 46.52% of the vote in the first round, narrowly defeated the MpD's Carlos Veiga by a margin of only 12 votes in the run-off.

2006 election
In the parliamentary election held on 22 January 2006, PAICV won 52.28% of the popular vote and 41 out of 72 seats in the National Assembly.

In the presidential election held on 12 February 2006, Pedro Pires again narrowly defeated Carlos Veiga, winning 50.98% of the vote.

2011 election
In the parliamentary election held on 7 February 2011, the PAICV led by Jose Maria Neves won 52.68% of the popular vote and 38 out of 72 seats in the National Assembly.

In the presidential election held on 7 and 21 August 2011, Manuel Inocêncio Sousa lost to Jorge Carlos Fonseca (MpD) with 32.66% of the votes in the first round and 45.74% in the second round.

2016 election
PAICV lost 2016 presidential elections and president Jorge Carlos Fonseca was re-elected with very clear majority of the votes. PAICV even failed to forward a candidate. Before that PAICV had lost the 2016 parliamentary election. The main opposition party Movement for Democracy (MpD) won the parliamentary elections, taking back power after 15 years.

Ideology and affiliation
The PAICV describes itself as democratic socialist but began to trend towards social democracy in the 2010s. The party has been placed as left-wing on the political spectrum.

The party is a full member of the Socialist International.


text:
Index finger

The index finger (also referred to as forefinger, first finger, second finger, pointer finger, trigger finger, digitus secundus, digitus II, and many other terms) is the second digit of a human hand. It is located between the thumb and the middle finger. It is usually the most dextrous and sensitive digit of the hand, though not the longest. It is shorter than the middle finger, and may be shorter or longer than the ring finger (see digit ratio).

Anatomy
"Index finger" literally means "pointing finger", from the same Latin source as indicate; its anatomical names are "index finger" and "second digit".

The index finger has three phalanges. It does not contain any muscles, but is controlled by muscles in the hand by attachments of tendons to the bones.

Uses
A lone index finger held vertically is often used to represent the number 1 (but finger counting differs across cultures), or when held up or moved side to side (finger-wagging), it can be an admonitory gesture. With the hand held palm out and the thumb and middle fingers touching, it represents the letter d in the American Sign Language alphabet.

Pointing
Pointing with the pointer finger may be used to indicate or identify an item, person, place or object.

Around age one, babies begin pointing to communicate relatively complex thoughts, including interest, desire, and information. Pointing in human babies can demonstrate the theory of mind, or ability to understand what other people are thinking. This gesture may form one basis for the development of human language.

Non-human primates, lacking the ability to formulate ideas about what others are thinking, use pointing in much less complex ways. However, corvids, dogs and elephants do understand finger pointing.

In some cultures, particularly the Malays and Javanese in Southeast Asia, pointing using index finger is considered rude, hence the thumb is used instead.

Index finger in Islam
In Islam raising the index finger signifies the Tawhīd (تَوْحِيد), which denotes the indivisible oneness of God. It is used to express the unity of God ("there is no god but God").

In Arabic, the index or fore finger is called musabbiḥa (مُسَبِّحة), mostly used with the definite article: al-musabbiḥa (الْمُسَبِّحة). Sometimes also as-sabbāḥa (السَّبّاحة) is used. The Arabic verb سَبَّحَ - which shares the same root as the Arabic word for index finger - means to praise or glorify God by saying: "Subḥāna Allāh" (سُبْحانَ الله)

Index finger in archaeoastronomy
Before the advent of GPS and compass, early humans used index finger for pointing direction of objects with the help of stellar objects during night time.

Gestures in art
The index finger pointing up is a sign of teaching authority. This is shown in the depiction of Plato in the School of Athens by Raphael.

As a modern artistic convention, the index finger pointing at the viewer is in the form of a command or summons. Two famous examples of this are recruiting posters used during World War I by the United Kingdom and the United States.

title: Index finger


text:
Oregon Route 224

Oregon Route 224 is a state highway which runs through some of Portland's southeastern suburbs and ends in the Cascades.

Route description
The northwestern terminus is an interchange with OR 99E in Milwaukie, a suburb of Portland. It continues east as the Milwaukie Expressway, but is formally part of the Clackamas Highway No. 171 (see Oregon highways and routes). After crossing Interstate 205 in Clackamas, it becomes the Sunrise Expressway for about two miles. Then, the highway continues east as a four-lane arterial, resuming its designation as the Clackamas Highway, and which it shares with OR 212. East of Clackamas, OR 224 splits off OR 212, and continues south as the Clackamas Highway, passing through hilly farmland. About eight miles (13 km) north of Estacada, it overlaps OR 211. On the eastern edge of Estacada, OR 224 separates from OR 211, and heads southeast into the Mount Hood National Forest, here you are in the mountains heading to the small community of Ripplebrook, its southeastern terminus, where state highway maintenance ends. Drivers may continue along the paved United States Forest Service Road 46 to OR 22 in Detroit, though snow makes the road impassable approximately early November through early May. USFS Road 46 was formerly signed as a portion of OR 224, but was never a state-maintained highway.

History
This is the second route in Oregon with the designation 224. There was an earlier version of OR 224 connecting US 99W (modern Oregon Route 99W) 3 mi south of Monmouth to Oregon Route 223 near Lewisville following today's Elkins Rd. In those days, Oregon Route 223 followed today's Airlie Rd and Maple Grove Rd between Falls City and Pedee). This incarnation of OR 224 existed from the inception of the Oregon Route System in 1932 until sometime between 1942 and 1944.

The Clackamas Highway was realigned onto a section of I-205 in 1971.

The easternmost 19 mi of OR 224 in Mount Hood National Forest was closed to traffic during the 2020 Labor Day wildfires, which damaged pavement, guardrails, and nearby trees. It is reopened to traffic on May 1, 2022, 19 months after its closure.

Sunrise Expressway
The Sunrise Expressway (known as Sunrise Corridor during construction) is a limited-access highway in Clackamas. It serves as an extension of the Milwaukie Expressway portion of OR 224. Planning for the expressway started in the 1980s. Plans weren't approved until 2010, with construction starting in 2013. Costing $130 million, the expressway opened on July 1, 2016. A multi-use path for use by bicyclists and pedestrians was constructed along the highway. It is the newest highway constructed in the Portland metropolitan area since OR 213 bypassed Oregon City in 1989.

title: Oregon Route 224


text:
Krafft temperature

Krafft temperature is defined as the minimum temperature from which the micelle formation takes place. It is named after German chemist Friedrich Krafft. It has been found that solubility at the Krafft point is nearly equal to critical micelle concentration (CMC). Below the Krafft temperature, the maximum solubility of the surfactant will be lower than the critical micelle concentration, meaning micelles will not form. The Krafft temperature is a point of phase change below which the surfactant remains in crystalline form, even in an aqueous solution. Visually the effect of going below the Krafft point is similar to that of going above the cloud point, with the solution becoming cloudy or opaque due to the surfactant molecules undergoing flocculation.

Surfactants in such a crystalline state will only solubilize and form micelles if another surfactant assists it in overcoming the forces that keep it crystallized, or if the temperature increases, thus causing entropy to increase and encouraging the crystalline structure to break apart.

Structural effects
Surfactants are usually composed of a hydrocarbon chain and a polar head group.

Increasing the length of the hydrocarbon chain increases the Krafft temperature because it improves Van der Waals forces.

Moreover, since Krafft point is related to solid-liquid transition, better-packed polar heads within surfactant crystals increase Krafft temperature.

title: Krafft temperature


text: Category:Symbiosis

title: Category:Symbiosis


text:
Brenchley

Brenchley is a village in the civil parish of Brenchley and Matfield, in the borough of Tunbridge Wells, Kent, England.

All Saints Church is located in the village, and is a Grade I listed building.

History
The name is historically derived from Branca's Leigh. The village is located 8 mi east of Royal Tunbridge Wells, and 3 mi south of Paddock Wood, and includes the neighbouring village of Matfield. Brenchley & Matfield CoE primary school is located in Brenchley.

The village earns some historical fame by being one of the villages that was closely involved in post medieval iron making. The site of the furnace lies within the parish of Horsmonden now.

A Market formerly held in the churchyard at Brenchley was granted in 1230 to Hamo de Crevecoeur, to be held on his own land, and the day moved from Sunday to Wednesday. In 1233 this was readjusted to Saturday. By 1296 it belonged to Gilbert de Clare, who in 1312 claimed that his ancestors had held it 'from time out of mind'.

Notable people

 * George (b. 1600) and John Lewis (b. 1606), early colonists of the Massachusetts Bay Colony arriving aboard the Hercules of Sandwich, England in 1634/5.
 * John Browne, (d1651), the second holder of the office of King's Gunfounder.
 * Hamo de Crevecoeur (d 1263), Norman nobleman who possessed Brenchley and established a market.
 * Gordon Giltrap (b 1948), musician, was born in Brenchley.
 * Edward Martin (1814–69), English cricketer who was born in Brenchley.
 * Richard Philpott (1813–88), English cricketer who resided in Brenchley at the time of his death.
 * Sophie Rhys-Jones (b 1965), wife of Prince Edward, lived in Brenchley.
 * Thomas Thornycroft (1815–85), sculptor, lived in Brenchley at the time of his death.
 * Wat Tyler (1341–1381), leader of the Peasants' Revolt, is reputed to have been born in Brenchley.
 * Siegfried Sassoon.

title: Brenchley


text:
J. C. Tolmie

Reverend Major James Craig Tolmie (October 8, 1862 – May 15, 1938) was a Canadian politician, presbyterian clergyman, military chaplain and soldier.

He was born in Oxford County, Canada West as the son of another Presbyterian minister, Reverend Andrew Tolmie (1826–1907). His father had served in Oxford County at Innerkip Presbyterian Church and Ratho Church Blandford Township, since his graduation from Toronto's Knox College in 1852. Shortly after James' birth, the family moved to the shores of Lake Huron at Southampton, where his father became minister of the Canada Presbyterian Congregations in Southampton (merged in 1864), Tara (to 1874), and West Arran/Burgoyne (to 1891), and served until his retirement in 1897, and death in 1907.

James C. Tolmie, followed in his father's footsteps, graduating from University of Toronto in Arts and Law in 1885, and Knox College in 1888. He worked at St. Andrew's Church in London, Ontario, and was then ordained and inducted into First Presbyterian Church, Brantford in April 1889. In early 1894, he was called to Windsor, Ontario to the St. Andrew's congregation, where he resigned early in 1915.

He was first elected to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario in 1914 as the Liberal Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) for Windsor. He resigned from the Pastorate at St. Andrew's, and was appointed minister Emeritus.

During World War I, he also served as chaplain for the 99th Battalion of the Canadian Expeditionary Force. He was a candidate in the 1919 Ontario Liberal leadership convention, placing second, 37 votes behind Hartley Dewart on the second ballot. Tolmie ran for the leadership again in 1922, losing to Wellington Hay. He was defeated in June 1923, losing to the Conservative candidate Frank Worthington Wilson, and returned to Southampton, becoming involved in civic life in that community, and remained with the Presbyterian cause after Church Union in 1925, providing regular pulpit supply, and preaching at a number of Anniversary Services in the region. He was Reeve of Southampton at the time of his death, and had completed a three-year term on the Presbyterian Church's Committee on Church History.

In nearby Port Elgin (amalgamated into Saugeen Shores, Ontario in 1999), there is a Tolmie Memorial Presbyterian Church, a "minority group" who did not join Port Elgin United Church in 1925 and named in memory of the Tolmie Family.

title: J. C. Tolmie


text:
Majoli

Majoli is a surname. Notable people with the surname include:

 * Alex Majoli (born 1971), Italian photographer
 * Cesare Majoli (1746–1823), Italian priest and naturalist
 * Iva Majoli (born 1977), Croatian tennis player
 * Monica Majoli (born 1963), American artist
 * Simone Majoli (1520–1597), Italian canon lawyer, bishop, and author

title: Majoli


text:
Rosie the Riveter World War II Home Front National Historical Park

Rosie the Riveter World War II Home Front National Historical Park is a United States national historical park located in Richmond, California, near San Francisco. The park preserves and interprets the legacy of the United States home front during World War II, including the Kaiser Richmond Shipyards, the Victory ship SS Red Oak Victory, a tank factory, housing developments and other facilities built to support America's entry into World War II. In particular, the role of women and African-Americans in war industries is explored and honored.

The park is a partnership park, meaning that no land or buildings are actually owned by the National Park Service, which only administers the park. The historical park was established in 2000, and bus tours began in 2007.

Park attractions
A feasibility study was authorized under P.L. 105-355 (Sec. 505), sponsored by Rep. George Miller, to determine if the proposed park was suitable to be designated as a National Park Service affiliated site. The subsequent feasibility study concluded "the collection of historic structures and sites in Richmond is nationally significant" and recommended that a National Historic Park be established, citing multiple historic structures that remained intact including Atchison Village, the Maritime and Ruth C. Powers child development centers, Kaiser Permanente Hospital, Richmond Fire Station No. 67A, Richmond Shipyard #3, Ford Assembly Building, and Oil House. Subsequently, P.L. 106-352 established the Historical Park, granting the United States Secretary of the Interior power to establish cooperative agreements with the owners of the listed historic structures and nearby local parks, including the Shimada Peace Memorial Park, Westshore Park, Sheridan Observation Point Park, San Francisco Bay Trail, and Vincent Park.

The park's visitor center is in the Oil House, a small auxiliary building next to the restored Ford Assembly Building, with a number of permanent and temporary exhibits about the history of Richmond's wartime industries and workers. A film also illustrates the home-front battle. Rangers are available to answer questions, and also lead guided tours and conduct other interpretive programs.

A self-guided auto tour with optional walking tour is available for downloading. In the summer of 2007, preliminary bus tours began with a new guideless model, which instead filled half of the bus with residents who spoke of their experiences from the time to put what are otherwise everyday streets for residents into a greater historical perspective.

The Rosie the Riveter Memorial in Marina Bay Park is open year-round, dawn to dusk, as are the other Richmond city parks within the National Park's boundaries.

Rosie Memorial

The park's creation was spurred by the construction of a Rosie the Riveter memorial in Marina Bay Park along the city's shoreline, formerly Kaiser Richmond Shipyard #2. The memorial was intended to honor the "Rosies", women who made up much of the workforce at the shipyards, and started in 1997, three years prior to the creation of the national park. The effort behind the memorial was initiated by then-Councilwoman Donna Powers. It grew under Project Director Donna Graves to become the first national tribute to home front American women. A competition was held, selecting the final design in November 1998.

The four Richmond shipyards, with their combined 27 shipways, produced 747 ships, more than any other shipyard complex in the country. Richmond was home to the largest shipyard and 55 other war industries, more than any other city of its size in the United States. The city grew nearly overnight from 24,000 people to 100,000 people, overwhelming the available housing stock, roads, schools, businesses and community services.

The memorial was designed by landscape architect Cheryl Barton and visual artist Susan Schwartzenberg and dedicated on October 14, 2000, in a ceremony hosted by Donna Powers and attended by more than 100 "Rosies". It is the length of the keel of a Liberty ship, representing the skeletal form of a ship under construction. A simple metal pier serves as the stern at the south end, on the water's edge, proceeding north through a cylindrical framework as the smoke stack, and the bow as the main monument, made of prefabricated parts similar to those assembled by the shipyard workers. At the monument, there are 39 photographs, news clippings, and memorabilia. A timeline of World War II is presented in 25 panels laid along the Keel Walk, a 441 ft walkway running the length of the memorial. Interpretive signs and exhibits within the structures present information on women's history, labor history, and the home front.

Ford Richmond Plant
The Ford Motor Company Assembly Plant was the largest assembly plant to be built on the West Coast. One of only three tank depots in the entire country, approximately 49,000 jeeps were assembled and 91,000 other military vehicles were processed here. Ford employed thousands of workers at the site during World War II, many of them women who were entering the work force for the first time. "Rosie the Riveter" was a period song representing these women.

In mobilizing the wartime production effort to its full potential, Federal military authorities and private industry began to work closely together on a scale never seen before in American history. This laid the groundwork for what became known as the "military-industrial complex" during the Cold War years.

Noted architect Albert Kahn is credited with the design of the Ford plant in Richmond. After World War II, Ford moved its Northern California factory to Milpitas, which was known as the San Jose Assembly Plant; the building and site are now the Great Mall of the Bay Area.

The plant building has been restored and now houses a variety of private businesses along with the NPS visitor center.

Richmond Shipyards

The four Richmond Shipyards were part of the Kaiser Shipyards; construction started in early 1941 and the shipyards were completed by 1942. The construction of 747 ships during the war here is a feat not equaled anywhere else in the world, before or since. In 1997, the Richmond City Council began the effort to build the Rosie Memorial and passed Resolution 203-97, authorizing the submittal of Shipyard No. 3 for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places and as a California Historic Landmark. The park's Rosie memorial is located on the former grounds of Shipyard No.2. Shipyard No.3 was listed on the NRHP in April 2000.

Both Liberty and Victory ships were constructed here. These ships were completed in two-thirds the amount of time and at a quarter of the cost of the average of all other shipyards. The SS Robert E. Peary was assembled in less than five days as a part of a special competition among shipyards; but by 1944 it was only taking the astonishingly brief time of a little over two weeks to assemble a Liberty ship by standard methods.

SS Red Oak Victory
The SS Red Oak Victory is a Victory ship preserved as a museum ship. It was one of 414 Victories built during World War II (constructed at the Richmond Shipyards), but one of only a few of these ships to be transferred from the Merchant Marine to the U.S. Navy. The vessel issued cargo and munitions to various ships in the fleet throughout 1945. During a hazardous tour of duty in the Pacific, SS Red Oak Victory handled many tons of ammunition, supplying the fleet without a single casualty.

Atchison Village Housing Project
The huge influx of workers coming to live in cities like Richmond, caused intense strain on city infrastructure. One of these strains was the severe lack of housing. Workers arriving in these rapidly expanding urban centers were forced to find what they could. They slept in all night movie houses, shared "hot beds" (i.e. when one person got in bed, it was still hot from the last person getting out), or just camped out.

Atchison Village Housing Project is an example of the local-Federal collaboration that provided much needed housing and domestic support for defense workers and their families. The modest, wood-frame buildings clearly reflect the constraints (time, money and materials) placed on publicly funded housing construction during the period. Just prior to and during the war, the Lanham Act of 1940 provided $150 million to the Works Progress Administration, which built approximately 625,000 units of housing in conjunction with local authorities nationwide. These were highly sought after and company managers were the most likely to be able to procure housing in Atchison Village.

Due to racial discrimination, minorities fared very poorly in gaining housing. They often lived in shacks, in the crates that brought the raw materials to the city, in trailers, or in automobiles. They and other lower income earning workers were lucky when they were able to move to barrack-like dormitories constructed for the mass of World War II workers.

The Richmond Housing Authority was selected to be the first authority in the country to manage a defense project. Atchison Village represents one of 20 public housing projects built in Richmond before and during World War II. Constructed in 1941 as Richmond's first public defense housing project, it is the only project funded by the Lanham Act that still exists in Richmond, and one of the few in the nation not destroyed after the war.

Today, Atchison Village is a collection of privately owned houses managed by a cooperative of the homeowners. While most of the dormitories and other low income housing of World War II are gone, Atchison Village, built as permanent housing, remains.

Kaiser Richmond Field Hospital
Prior to the invasion of Europe in June 1944, more Americans were dying in Home Front accidents than on World War II battlefields. Henry J. Kaiser, founder of the Richmond Shipyards, recognized that only a healthy work force could meet his deadlines and construction needs. He institutionalized a revolutionary idea, pre-paid medical care for workers, which soon expanded beyond workers. For many workers, this was the first time they had seen a doctor.

The Kaiser Richmond Field Hospital for the Richmond Shipyards was financed by the U.S. Maritime Commission, and opened on August 10, 1942.

By August 1944, 92.2 percent of all Richmond shipyard employees had joined the plan, the first voluntary group plan in the country to feature group medical practice, prepayment and substantial medical facilities on such a large scale. By 1990, Kaiser Permanente was still the country's largest nonprofit HMO.

In part due to wartime materials rationing, the Field Hospital is a single-story wood-frame structure designed in a simple modernist mode. The Field Hospital operated as a Kaiser Permanente hospital until closing in 1995, after a new hospital was built downtown.

Maritime and Ruth Powers Child Development Centers

The Maritime and Ruth Powers Child Development Centers were two of approximately 35 nursery school units of varying sizes established in the Richmond area during World War II in order to provide child care for women working in the Kaiser shipyards. The Maritime center was funded and constructed by the Maritime Commission as part of a larger development that also included housing, an elementary school and a fire station. The temporary housing was demolished after the war but a larger permanent housing complex remains as do the other buildings.

The Maritime Child Development Center, a wood frame, modernist style building operated by the Richmond School District, incorporated progressive educational programming, and was staffed with nutritionists, psychiatrists and certified teachers. It had a capacity of 180 children per day. At its peak, with 24,500 women on the Kaiser payroll, Richmond's citywide child care program maintained a total daily attendance of 1,400 children. Unlike the federally funded WPA day care facilities implemented during the New Deal, the World War II centers were not intended for use by the destitute, but for working mothers.

The Kaiser-sponsored Child Care Centers, particularly those at Kaiser's industrial sites in Vanport, Oregon, and Vancouver, Washington, gained a reputation for innovative and high quality child care. The center is still in operation today.

Lucretia Edwards Shoreline Park
Lucretia Edwards Shoreline Park, named in honor of local community activist Lucretia W. Edwards, honors the wartime contributions made by the Bay Area Shipyards during World War II.

In addition to the local Richmond Shipyards, shipworker's bootprints with plaques set in the sidewalks and long low seating walls point visitors to the other Bay Area shipyards.

The following inscriptions are engraved into the concrete walls:
 * Bethlehem San Francisco – The only privately owned shipyard in the nation to operate a submarine repair base, this 16th Street yard overhauled 31 subs in two years.
 * Moore Dry Dock handled the difficult jobs of production, repair and conversion that slowed overall output in other yards.
 * Hunters Point Naval Dry Dock – Hunters Point repaired 600 fighting and support ships.
 * Mare Island Naval Shipyard – Mare Island built more than 400 vessels. Mare Island Naval Shipyard set a shipbuilding record for a destroyer that was never broken completing the USS Ward  in just 17$1/2$ days.
 * Marinship – The 75,000 Americans who poured into Marinship during the war years build 93 ships.

Nystrom Elementary School
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 added Nystrom Elementary School of the West Contra Costa Unified School District to the park. The building was built to accommodate families who moved to Richmond to work at the Kaiser Shipyards.


text:
Talk:B'nai B'rith

Odd concentration on the Canadian Wing?
It seems strange that only a brief summary of the American B'nai B'rith is present and followed by an extensive and somewhat random description of the Candian B'nai Brith which is around 3 times longer. Nothing wrong with Canadians, I am one myself, but this seems more than a little bit unbalanced and weird. Zabby1982 07:18, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Agreed. In particular, the Aptowitzer-Elmasry incident is really a digression from the main article.  Perhaps B'nai Brith Canada should have its own article, or (better) this article should be expanded to include more information about B'nai B'rith International and its member organizations in other countries. David Cohen 19:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

 * For other editors reading this, B'nai Brith Canada since became its own article. I.am.a.qwerty (talk) 11:10, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

bias
An organization which is involved in the "promotion of human rights" and is also "a vocal supporter of Israeli policies." Any sane person can see an overt contradiction on those two statements. For the sake of readers who are not familiar with these issues please review your article, or add a 'disputed neutrality' sign on it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.75.254.114 (talk • contribs) 09:18, 13 October 2005, UTC.

I have removed the "fighting racism" mention as the group actively supports Israel, and openly promotes anti-Arab views in the media every day. While I will maintain it does its part to combat anti-Semitism, it does not really seem to fit the definition of a group opposing racism. Nlsanand 00:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

My edit regarding the exclusion of the "racism" was reverted without any real explanation. I have eliminated it, as B'Nai Brith is really only a group that fights anti-Semitism. To say "what it considers to be racism" is really just saying that it fights against anti-Semitism, it cares primarily about Jews and not really other cultures. Furthermore, its promotion of Zionism is definitely an example of how it promoting "racism" through support of the Israeli. Therefore, to characterize it as anti-racist even with the correct provisos is still fundamentally misleading. I have changed it back here. Please address any comments on this in the Talk Page. Nlsanand 03:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Sorry, but I really opposed only removal of "what it considers". It is exactly the NPOV way of saying that. If that is the stated goal of this organization, it should be mentioned. Maybe even better would be "The stated goals of B'nai B'rith are: ..." --Magabund 09:49, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

misleading text
The following excerpt from the article page may be misleading and is not a direct quote of what Dr. Mohamed Elmasry actually said, rather it is an interpretation made by the author:

"Dr. Mohamed Elmasry insisted that all Israeli citizens over 18 years old were legitimate targets for Palestinian suicide bombers because they might join the Israeli army."

It is more accurate to state that it is a mandatory requirement that all Israeli citizens 18 years and over (with a few exceptions) must join the IDF. The use of "may join" is misleading because it implies that Israeli's are making a free will choice to join or not, which is simply untrue.

The transcript of what Elmasry said is available here, and should be referenced for completeness.

Partial transcript:

ELMASRY: I'm saying that it has to be totally innocent, OK? Totally innocent are the children, obviously, OK? But they are not innocent if the army [inaudible] in civilian clothes, OK?

COREN: What about women?

ELMASRY: The same, if they are women in the army...

COREN: Anyone over the age of 18 in Israel is a valid target.

ELMASRY: Anybody above 18 is a part of the Israeli army...

COREN: So everyone in Israel and anyone and everyone in Israel, irrespective of gender, over the age of 18 is a valid target?

ELMASRY: Yes, I would say.

 * easily fixed by changing "may join" to "may be in". Not everyone over 18 is in the Israeli army. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by David Cohen (talk • contribs) 18:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

Can someone in the know add B'nai B'rith in the International Phonetic Alphabet?
--Greasysteve13 07:19, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Done! [finally!] Tomertalk 07:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Controversies
I've seen many accusations leveled at an "Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith", ranging from the absurd (old blood libels) to the plausible (Mafia connections in New York City). Could some clarification be added if B'nai B'rith and ADLBB are separate? Or could some list of controversies be created? (Even if only to debunk looney accusations.) --64.232.164.38 23:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, I've heard of a lot of weird stories too. It's difficult to find sources for these stories though, and it's even more difficult to present them as valid, unbiased and accurate. ADM (talk) 02:36, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

They seem to be getting a lot of negative press in the Canadian press lately but shockingly (not), the main article is totally biased, its as if it was written by a member of this society and contains no mention of any controversy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.1.230.190 (talk) 07:27, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Role in Jewish-Christian dialogue
Certain scholars of inter-religious dialogue have written about the role that B'nai B'rith has played in the modern Jewish-Christian relationship. It would be a good thing if this could somehow be mentioned in the article. ADM (talk) 09:41, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

File:B'nai B'rith membership certificate 1876.jpg to appear as POTD soon
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:B'nai B'rith membership certificate 1876.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on October 13, 2010. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2010-10-13. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks!  howcheng  {chat} 21:01, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Criticism?
Why is there no criticism section? B'nai Brith is hyper-Zionist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mizanthrop (talk • contribs) 03:32, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * so? --129.11.249.211 (talk) 17:54, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

It does seem a little unlikely that an organisation such as this can last 170 odd years and not have endured any controversies or criticism worth noting in an encylopedia article. 202.78.155.203 (talk) 03:49, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Criticism must not be allowed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.104.160.57 (talk) 16:56, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

1977 Hanafi siege
What does the siege have to do with B'nai B'rith? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.163.139 (talk) 23:40, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

The relationship between the 1977 Hanafi siege and B'nai B'rith is obviously that it was the B'nai B'rith headquarters was one of the three targets seized by the N.O.I. terrorists. 96.244.74.253 (talk) 19:02, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on B'nai B'rith. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060819031400/http://www.bnaibrith.org.au/newsletterPopup.asp?NewsletterID=70 to http://www.bnaibrith.org.au/newsletterPopup.asp?NewsletterID=70
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060614052050/http://bnaibrith.org:80/pubs/pr/05172006_johnhoward.cfm to http://bnaibrith.org/pubs/pr/05172006_johnhoward.cfm

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 22:22, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Problem in the lead?
In the lead it states that "the organization's historic roots stem from a system of fraternal lodges and units in the late 20th century". The body of the article states that the original society was founded in New York in 1843 - in which case the lead should seemingly read "late 19th century". Is the lead correct please - does anybody know for sure? Wdford (talk) 17:10, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 18 one external links on B'nai B'rith. 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/20110527065712/http://www.jwi.org:80/Page.aspx?pid=272 to http://www.jwi.org/Page.aspx?pid=272
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110220233218/http://www.yivoinstitute.org:80/digital_exhibitions/index.php?mcid=69&oid=10 to http://www.yivoinstitute.org/digital_exhibitions/index.php?mcid=69&oid=10
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721104053/http://www.perlmancamp.org/all/about.shtml to http://perlmancamp.org/all/about.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110518051019/http://www.bnaibrith.org/prog_serv/museum.cfm to http://bnaibrith.org/prog_serv/museum.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110518051451/http://www.bnaibrith.org/prog_serv/sr_housing.cfm to http://bnaibrith.org/prog_serv/sr_housing.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110520082627/http://bnaibrith.org/centers/senior_services.cfm to http://bnaibrith.org/centers/senior_services.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120725094101/http://bnaibrith.org:80/prog_serv/diverse_minds.cfm to http://www.bnaibrith.org/prog_serv/diverse_minds.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120713032720/http://www.bnaibrith.org:80/prog_serv/enlighten_america.cfm to http://www.bnaibrith.org/prog_serv/enlighten_america.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120713032725/http://www.bnaibrith.org:80/prog_serv/saferkids.cfm to http://bnaibrith.org/prog_serv/saferkids.cfm
 * Added tag to http://archive.jta.org/article/1985/11/05/3002598/world-jewry-mobilizing-in-effort-to-repeal-un-zionismracism-resolution
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120713031351/http://www.bnaibrith.org:80/world/oas.cfm to http://bnaibrith.org/world/oas.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130525030708/http://www.civil-society.oas.org/Permanent%20Council/CP-doc-3210-99rev1.htm to http://www.civil-society.oas.org/Permanent%20Council/CP-doc-3210-99rev1.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120731122945/http://www.brothersbrother.org/02_argentina.htm to http://www.brothersbrother.org/02_argentina.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120712110411/http://israaid.co.il/Story.aspx?ID=145 to http://israaid.co.il/Story.aspx?ID=145
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120731142551/http://www.brothersbrother.org/08_earlymarch.htm to http://www.brothersbrother.org/08_earlymarch.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120226063816/http://www.bnaibrith.org/165/comm_ser.cfm to http://www.bnaibrith.org/165/comm_ser.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120423142003/http://bnaibrith.org:80/magazines/winter2008/Israeli_Embassy.cfm to http://www.bnaibrith.org/magazines/winter2008/Israeli_Embassy.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120201000208/http://www.bnaibrith.org/unbrokencovenant/5CovntBK_pgs15_22.pdf to http://bnaibrith.org/unbrokencovenant/5CovntBK_pgs15_22.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060614001255/http://magnes.org:80/collections/wjhc.html to http://www.magnes.org/collections/wjhc.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:44, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on B'nai B'rith. 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/20070306061922/http://oe1.orf.at/inforadio/58058.html?filter=1 to http://oe1.orf.at/inforadio/58058.html?filter=1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070306061822/http://oe1.orf.at/inforadio/58060.html?filter=3 to http://oe1.orf.at/inforadio/58060.html?filter=3
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090921055840/http://www.bnaibrith.org/centers/chrpp.cfm to http://bnaibrith.org/centers/chrpp.cfm

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) 19:31, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on B'nai B'rith. 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/20110505022234/http://www1.yadvashem.org/yv/en/remembrance/2011/every_person.asp to http://www1.yadvashem.org/yv/en/remembrance/2011/every_person.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130303132649/http://www.bnaibrith.org/--haiti.html to http://www.bnaibrith.org/--haiti.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:52, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on B'nai B'rith. 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/20120212225658/http://www.hillel.org/NR/rdonlyres/C5146418-3638-435A-8BB9-24592F5500F9/0/hillel_history.pdf to http://www.hillel.org/NR/rdonlyres/C5146418-3638-435A-8BB9-24592F5500F9/0/hillel_history.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130524231752/http://www.friendsfromasia.com/node/823 to http://www.friendsfromasia.com/node/823

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) 08:15, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

discrepancy in edit of 3 February 2012
I was reviewing the cited source for the claim that B'nai B'rith Women renamed itself to Jewish Women International, breaking off from B'nai B'rith, in 1988, but the source claims that the name change occurred in 1995. I located the edit which added this content: Revision of 18:09, 3 February 2012. While this could merely be an isolated discrepancy, but since there is no obvious change to the cited source that would explain this discrepancy, I feel that the entire edit is suspect and in need of review (or reversion). Any differing opinions, or hopefully, volunteers to help in reviewing this edit? Fabrickator (talk) 19:37, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:B'nai B'rith


text: Talk:Pietro Badoglio

title: Talk:Pietro Badoglio