text:
BEEP

The Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol (BEEP) is a framework for creating network application protocols. BEEP includes building blocks like framing, pipelining, multiplexing, reporting and authentication for connection and message-oriented peer-to-peer (P2P) protocols with support of asynchronous full-duplex communication.

Message syntax and semantics is defined with BEEP profiles associated to one or more BEEP channels, where each channel is a full-duplex pipe. A framing-mechanism enables simultaneous and independent communication between peers.

BEEP is defined in independently from the underlying transport mechanism. The mapping of BEEP onto a particular transport service is defined in a separate series of documents.

Overview
Profiles, channels and a framing mechanism are used in BEEP to exchange different kinds of messages. Only content type and encoding are defaulted by the specification leaving the full flexibility of using a binary or textual format open to the protocol designer. Profiles define the functionality of the protocol and the message syntax and semantics. Channels are full-duplex pipes connected to a particular profile. Messages sent through different channels are independent from each other (asynchronous). Multiple channels can use the same profile through one connection.

BEEP also includes TLS for encryption and SASL for authentication.

History
In 1998 Marshall T. Rose, who also worked on the POP3, SMTP, and SNMP protocols, designed the BXXP protocol and subsequently handed it over to the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) workgroup in summer 2000. In 2001 the IETF published BEEP and BEEP on TCP  with some enhancements to BXXP. The three most notable are:

 * Using application/octet-stream as the default "Content-Type"
 * Support multi-reply for messages
 * Changing the name from BXXP to BEEP

BEEP session
To start a BEEP session, an initiating peer connects to the listening peer. Each peer sends a reply containing a greeting element. The greeting contains up to three different elements:

 * features: optional channel management profile feature tokens supported by the peer.
 * localize: optional preferred language tags for reporting and messages.
 * profile : profiles supported by the peer.

Example greeting and answer:

Profiles
Profiles define the syntax and semantics of messages and the protocol functionality based on BEEP. A single BEEP session can provide access to multiple profiles. To identify a profile, a unique string is assigned to it. This profile identifier has the format of a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) or Uniform Resource Name (URN). In the past, the URI format of the profile identifier lead to confusion, because it is similar to a web address. To avoid misunderstandings, newer profiles should use the URN format.

Example profile identifier:

Messages and frames
BEEP messages are structured according to the MIME standard. There are sometimes misunderstandings about BEEP using XML in messages, but only a small subset of XML is used by channel 0 and it is transparent to the profile designer (BEEP user). It's up to the profile designer which message content format is used. This can be any textual format like JSON or XML as well as binary data. XML is used in the channel management and the TLS standard profile defined with BEEP.

Example of a successful channel close message exchange from RFC3080.

Larger messages are split into multiple parts and distributed over a number of sequence frames.

Exchange types
BEEP defines 5 message types to allow most of the application protocol patterns needed:

Some of the most common application protocol patterns are implemented as follows:

 * Request-reply using MSG for request and RPY and ERR for replies
 * Single request-multiple replies using MSG, and a series of ANS replies ended by a NUL frame
 * Unacknowledged notification using MSG without a reply

Flow control
BEEP supports sequence frames (SEQ) to implement flow control at the channel level. Sequence frames are defined in RFC 3081 section 3.3. The Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) defines a sequence mechanism on the transport layer level and supports flow control related to the connection. BEEP needs flow control on the channel level to make sure no channel or big message monopolizes the connection. To that end, sequence frames are used to support quality of service (QoS) and to avoid starvation and deadlock.

title: BEEP


text:
User talk:Nonpareility

Welcome
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Lst27 20:26, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page; Editing tutorial; Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article; Naming conventions; Manual of Style

Criticisms of Mozilla Firefox
Thank you for working so hard on the article. Your dedication is appreciated :-) Captainktainer * Talk 05:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Silent Night (song)
Saying that something is in someone's hand is synonymous with saying it is in the person's handwriting. It's a common expression. Try Googling, for example, the quoted phrase "in Shakespeare's own hand". Robert K S 16:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Right, but it's not clear by the context. For a moment I thought they literally found it in his hand, as if he had been buried with it.--Nonpareility 17:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of What Lies Before Us

The article What Lies Before Us has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * No indication or evidence of notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  PK T (alk)  20:37, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Nonpareility


text:
Buick V8 engine

The Buick V8 is a family of V8 engines produced by the Buick division of General Motors (GM) between 1953 and 1981. All were 90° water-cooled V8 OHV pushrod engines, and all were naturally aspirated except one turbocharged version of the 215.

The Buick V8 family can be divided into two sizes, big-blocks and small-blocks (block size classification refers to the engine block's bore spacing and external dimensions, not displacement). The big-blocks evolved over three generations: the first (1953–1956) and second (1957–1966) generation "Nailheads", and the 1967–1976 "Big-blocks". The small-block was produced 1961–1981.

Some Buick V8s, such as the 350, 400, and 455, have the same displacements as V8s of other GM divisions, but they are entirely different designs. Buick Nailhead V8s can be distinguished by the top surfaces of their valve covers being horizontal (parallel to the ground). Later Buick small and big block V8s have a front-mounted distributor tilted to the drivers side (like Cadillacs), but siamesed center exhaust ports (unlike Cadillacs). Buick changed engine color over the years.

Buick big-blocks
All of the big blocks shared a 4.75 in bore spacing. They were produced from 1953 through 1976 in five displacements: 264, 322, 364, 401/400, and 425.

Nailhead-1 (NH1)
Buick's first generation V8 was offered from 1953 through 1956; it replaced the Buick straight-eight. While officially called the "Fireball V8" by Buick, it became known by enthusiasts as the "Nailhead" for the unusual vertical alignment of its small-sized valves (Originally it was known to hot-rodders as the "nail valve", because the engine's small heads contained valves with long stems, which made them look like nails.)

During this era, Buick ranked smoothness above most other marketing objectives, and the Dynaflow transmission's non-shifting design was demonstrably smoother than the other rough shifting automatics then available. With the Dynaflow, a high torque engine was needed to provide adequate acceleration, so that's what the Nailhead was designed to deliver.

Both the intake and exhaust valves were on the intake manifold side of a "pent-roof combustion chamber". To offset restrictive port diameters and the smaller-sized valves [1.75 in intake, 1.25 in exhaust], the Nailhead V8s used a camshaft with greater lift and duration. The small-diameter intake runners allowed these engines to develop high torque, with many exceeding 1 ft-lb/cu in (exceptional for the time).

First-generation Nailheads were painted "Late" Buick Green (also called Apple Green, used from 1953 to 1965).

264
The 264 CID produced in 1954 and 1955 was a direct replacement for the 263 straight-eight and the only engine available in Buick's economy "Special" series vehicles. The was the smallest displacement Nailhead, sharing stroke and deck height with the 322, but having its own smaller bore 3.625 in.

322
The larger 322 CID was the original Nailhead, used by Buick from 1953 through 1956 in the Roadmaster, Super, and Century models, and the Special in 1956. It has a bore and stroke of 4x3.2 in.

The 322 was also used in the 1956 through 1957 10,000-Series conventional-cab Chevrolet heavy duty trucks labeled as the Loadmaster.

Nailhead-2 (NH2)
Buick's second variation of the "Nailhead" was produced from 1957–1966. The "Fireball" name was dropped after 1957, but the 364 was very briefly called the "B-12000", referring to the 12,000 foot pounds generated by each piston. Second generation Nailheads were painted "Late" Buick Green, with the exception of those installed in the 1963 Riviera, which were silver, and the 1966 Riviera, which were red.

364
Buick, like most of its competitors, continued to expand their V8 engine to larger displacements. The 364 CID was introduced in 1957 and produced through 1961, with a 4.125 x (bore by stroke). The Special series cars came standard with the 250 hp two-barrel carburetor version, where all other models got the 300 hp four-barrel engine.

401 (400)
The 364 was enlarged to 401 CID and produced from 1959 to 1966. Originally a 401, it was later redesignated a 400 to meet 1960s GM directives for maximum allowable engine displacements in mid-size cars. Bore and stroke were enlarged to 4.1875 x respectively.

The 401/400 became Buick's muscle car powerplant of choice, used in the company's Skylark Gran Sport, Buick Sport Wagon and Buick Wildcat models, among others. The engine was variously designated the Wildcat 375, Wildcat 410, and Wildcat 445 depending on the torque each version produced. The Wildcat 410 was the two-barrel carbureted engine, standard on the 1962-63 LeSabre. The Wildcat 375 was a no-cost option for the 1962-63 LeSabre that used a lower compression ratio to run on lower-octane fuel. The various Wildcat engines had decals on their air cleaners indicating their version; however, the four-barrel edition of the 1966-67 small-block Buick 340 V8 was also labeled Wildcat 375 on its air cleaner, but was not a Nailhead.

The Wildcat 445, with a single four-barrel carburetor, was the standard engine in the Invicta, 1959-1966 Electra, 1962–1966 Buick Wildcat, 1963 Riviera, and 1965 Riviera (the 1964 and 1966 Riviera models used the 425 with a single four-barrel carburetor, labeled Wildcat 465, as standard equipment).

In an effort to overcome the restrictive exhaust-port design of the Nailhead, Buick drag racing enthusiasts in the 1960s adapted superchargers with a custom camshaft to feed intake air in through the exhaust ports; the larger intake ports became the exhaust outlets.

425
The 425 CID was produced from 1963 to 1966. Its bore and stroke measured 4.3125 x. The largest-displacement version of the Nailhead, it began as an option on the 1963 Riviera, and was later available on the Wildcat and Electra models. The 1964 and 1966 Rivieras used the 425 engine as standard equipment. Mounted on a trolley, Buick 425s were also used as starter motors for the SR-71 Blackbird supersonic jet.

Four-barrel carburetion was standard on the basic 425, called the Wildcat 465 for the torque (as measured in lb-ft) it developed. The Super Wildcat (Regular Production Option {RPO}-coded Y48) was available on the 1964 Riviera as a factory option (2,122 produced), 1964 Electras (any model, production numbers unknown), 1965 Riviera Gran Sport and 1966 Wildcat GS, which included two four-barrel carburetors and matching intake manifold. Coded "MW", these parts were delivered in the car's trunk for dealer installation. Toward the end of the 1966 model year, around May 1966, Buick offered the Super Wildcat 465 with factory-installed dual four-barrel Carter AFB carburetors as an "MZ" option. Only 179 of the 1966 Riviera GS cars were built with the MZ package.

Big Block Buick (BBB)
Buick introduced its "Big Block" V8 in 1967 to replace the largest displacement nailheads. It retained a 4.75 in cylinder bore spacing, and was produced in three displacements, 400, 430, and 455, through 1976.

400
The 400 CID was produced from 1967-1969. This engine has a bore and a stroke of 4.04x3.9 in. It was the only large V8 engine available for the intermediate-sized A-body Buicks due to the GM cubic inch limit restriction in effect through 1970. Most parts except the pistons interchange with the 430 and 455. This 400 engine had the distributor towards the front of the engine, as opposed to the 401/400 nailhead, which had its near the firewall.

430
The 430 CID was only produced from 1967 until 1969. This engine had a bore and a stroke of 4.1875x3.9 in. The 430 four-barrel engine was rated at 360 hp and 475 lbft of torque. This engine was used in large B-, C- and E-body Buicks. Most parts except the pistons interchange with the 400 and 455.

Applications:
 * 1967-1969 Buick Electra
 * 1967-1969 Buick Riviera
 * 1967-1969 Buick Wildcat

455
The 400-based 455 CID was produced from 1970–1976, with a bore x stroke of 4.31x3.9 in. Most parts (except pistons and heads) interchange between the 400 and the 430. The base model was rated at 350 hp, while the 455 Stage 1 equipped with a single 4-barrel Rochester Quadrajet carburetor was rated at 360 hp at 4600 rpm. The regular 455 produced a rated 510 lbft of torque at 2,800 rpm, more than any other muscle car engine. The horsepower was somewhat reduced in 1971 mainly due to the reduction in cylinder compression ratio, a change which was mandated by GM in order to cope with the introduction of new federal laws which would require new cars to use low octane gasoline in an effort to reduce exhaust emissions. Then, starting in 1972, the horsepower rating on paper would be reduced again due to a shift from SAE gross to SAE net, down to approximately 250 hp. Unleaded gasoline and catalytic converters came into play in 1975 for all US manufactured cars. Tightening emissions controls would cause the engine to drop in power still further, a little at a time, through 1976.

The 455 was one of the first "thin-wall casting" engine blocks at GM, and because of this advance in production technology, it weighs significantly less than other engines of comparable size (for example, 150 lb less than a Chevrolet 454 and only 25 lb more than a Chevrolet 350).

Applications:
 * 1970-1976 Buick Electra
 * 1970-1976 Buick Estate
 * 1970-1976 Buick LeSabre
 * 1970-1976 Buick Riviera
 * 1970-1972 Buick Skylark
 * 1970 Buick Wildcat
 * 1971-1973 Buick Centurion
 * 1973-1974 Buick Century
 * 1973-1974 Buick Gran Sport
 * 1973-1974 Buick Regal

Buick Small Block (BSB)
Buick introduced a "small block" V8 in 1961 with a 4.24 in cylinder bore spacing; it was produced in four displacements, 215, 300, 340, and 350, through 1976. This design also became the basis of a highly successful cast iron V6 engine, the Fireball. Design features include an external oil pump, a forward-mounted distributor, and an integrated aluminum timing cover which incorporates the oil pump mechanisms, leaving the oil filter exposed to oncoming air for added cooling.

With the exception of the silver 1964 300, Buick small-blocks were painted "Late" Buick Green through 1966. Buick engines were painted red from 1967-1974, medium metallic blue from 1975-1977, and light blue from 1978-1982.

The small-block was originally produced as an industry-first all-aluminum engine. Alas, after 3 years of production, persisting cylinder liner issues, trumped with new and cheaper thin-wall iron casting techniques, pushed a change to an iron block.

215

 * See also Rover V8 engine

GM experimented with aluminum engines starting in the early 1950s, when Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA) was pushing all automakers to use more aluminum. An early-development supercharged version of the 215 CID V8 was used in the 1951 Le Sabre concept car, and the 1953 Buick Roadmaster concept car.

GM designated Buick as engine design leader, and work on a production unit commenced in 1956. Originally intended for 180 CID displacement, Buick decided on a larger, 215 CID size, deemed ideal for the new Y-body cars introduced for 1961, like the Skylark.

Known as the Buick Fireball, the 215 had a bore and a stroke of 3.5x2.8 in, for an actual displacement of 215.51 CID. With its aluminum cylinder heads and cylinder block, at the time it was the lightest mass-production V8 in the world, with a dry weight of only 318 lb. Measuring 28 in long, 26 in wide, and 27 in high (same as the small-block Chevy), it became standard equipment in the 1961 Buick Special.

At introduction, Buick's 215 was rated 150 hp at 4400 rpm. This was raised soon after introduction to 155 hp at 4,600 rpm. 220 lbft of torque was produced at 2,400 rpm with a Rochester 2GC (DualJet) two-barrel carburetor and 8.8:1 compression ratio. A mid-year introduction was the Buick Special Skylark version, which had 10.0:1 compression and a four-barrel carburetor, raising output to 185 hp at 4,800 rpm and 230 lbft at 2,800 rpm.

For 1962, the four-barrel-equipped engine's compression ratio was increased to 10.25:1 and horsepower to 190 hp at 4,800 rpm and 235 lbft at 3,000 rpm. The two-barrel engine was unchanged. For 1963, the four-barrel was bumped to 11.0:1 compression and an even 200 hp at 5,000 rpm and 240 lbft at 3,200 rpm, undefined hp/cu in. The higher output "Power Pack" was equipped with higher lift camshaft .0.518" intake/ 0.523" exhaust with increased duration 305/310 and required 99 research octane fuel.

Pontiac usage
Pontiac used the Buick version of the 215 in its Y-body cars, the Tempest and LeMans. At that time the engine was closely associated with the Buick brand, and Pontiac sold few cars with it, using it only in 1961 and 1962.

Oldsmobile version
Although sharing basic architecture with the Buick, Oldsmobile developed its own all-aluminum 215, the "Rockette V8", to install in its F-85 Cutlass Y-body. Its angled valve covers were designed by Oldsmobile engineers to look like a traditional Olds V8. Olds also released a turbocharged version, the 215 hp Turbo-Rocket, in its 1962–63 Oldsmobile Jetfire. Together with Chevrolet's turbocharged 1962 Corvair Spyder, these were the first turbochargers ever offered in passenger cars.

Produced on a separate assembly line, the Olds 215 was somewhat heavier at 350 lb. Intended to alleviate a head-warping problem on high-compression versions, Oldsmobile added a sixth head bolt on the intake manifold side. This meant that the five-bolt Buick heads would fit on Oldsmobile blocks, but not vice versa. The Oldsmobile used wedge-shaped/quench combustion chambers/pistons that allowed larger valves, while the Buick had a 37-cc wedge combustion chamber and used "dished head" pistons. Altering the compression ratio on the Oldsmobile 215 required changing the heads, but on a Buick 215, only the pistons were changed, which was less expensive and simpler.

Discontinuation
Casting-sealing technology was not advanced enough at that time, and hidden porosity problems caused serious oil leaks, producing an abnormally high scrap ratio. The factory had to make extensive use of air gauging for leak checks, and was unable to detect leaks on blocks that were as much as 95% complete. This raised the cost of complete engines to more than that of a comparable all cast-iron engine, so aluminum blocks were cancelled after the 1963 model year. Another problem was clogged radiators from antifreeze mixtures incompatible with aluminum.

Racing
The 215's very high power-to-weight ratio made it immediately interesting for automobile and boat racing. Mickey Thompson entered a stock-block 215-powered car in the 1962 Indianapolis 500, the first stock-block engine since 1946 and the only non-Offenhauser-powered entry in the race. Rookie driver Dan Gurney qualified eighth and raced well for 92 laps before retiring with transmission problems.

Surplus engine blocks of the Oldsmobile F85 version formed the basis of the Australian Formula One Repco V8 used by Brabham to win the 1966 Formula One world championship, although only the earliest engines had any Oldsmobile components. The majority of Repco RB620 engines were cast and built in-house at Repco.

Sale to Rover
Rights to these engines were purchased by the British Rover Company and used in the 1967 Rover P5B that replaced the 3 L straight six Rover engined P5. Throughout the years, the Rover Company (which became part of British Leyland in 1968), and its successor companies constantly improved the engine making it much stronger and more reliable. Capacities ranged from 215 to 307 cuin. This engine was used for V8 versions of the MGB GT known as the GTV8. Rover also used the engine in the 1970 Range Rover. Morgan used the Rover version in its Plus 8. American 215s have also been engine swapped into countless other platforms, especially Chevrolet Vegas and later British cars including the MG RV8 in the 1990s, Triumph TR8, and various sports sedans and sports cars by the MG Rover Group and specialist manufacturers such as TVR. The engine remains well-supported by enthusiast clubs, specialist parts suppliers, and by shops that specialize in conversions and tuning.

300

In 1964, Buick replaced the 215 with an iron-block engine of very similar architecture. The new "small block" engine had a bore of 3.75 in and a stroke of 3.4 in for a displacement of 300 CID. It retained the aluminum cylinder heads, intake manifold, and accessories of the 215 for a dry weight of 405 lb. The 300 was offered in two-barrel form, with 9.0:1 compression, making 210 hp at 4600 rpm and 310 lbft at 2400 rpm, and four-barrel form, with 11.0:1 compression, making 250 hp at 4800 rpm and 355 lbft at 3000 rpm.

For 1965, the 300 switched to cast-iron heads, raising dry weight to 467 lb, still quite light for a V8 engine of its era. The four-barrel option was cancelled for 1966, and the 300 was replaced entirely by the 350 in 1968.

In 1964, while nearly all Buick engines were painted "Buick Late Green", the 300ci V8s were painted Silver instead. In 1966 Buick engines switched to "Buick Late Red", but until 1967 at least, the 300 V8 (and the 225) were still painted Buick Late Green. The Apollo 5000 GT sports car, (also sold as the Vetta Ventura) used this engine.

340
In 1966, the 300's stroke was increased to 3.85 in in a raised block to create the 340 (340 CID) as a replacement for the four-barrel-carbureted 300. The taller deck (raised by 0.5625 in compared to the 215/300's) meant the intake manifold was of a new design to bolt to the otherwise interchangeable cylinder heads.

It was offered with two- or four-barrel carburetion, the two-barrel with a 9.0:1 compression rated at 220 hp at 4,000 rpm and 340 lbft at 2,400 rpm, and the four barrel with 10.25:1 compression, rated at 260 hp at 4,000 rpm and 375 lbft at 2,800 rpm. It was only produced through 1967, being replaced by the new small block 350 CID in 1968.

350
Buick adopted the popular 350 CID size in 1968 for their final family of V8 engines, the 350, which was produced through 1980. Although it shared the displacement of the other GM small blocks, including the Chevrolet 350, Oldsmobile 350, and Pontiac 350, the Buick blocks were of a substantially different proprietary company design. The Buick 350 featured the same 3.8 in bore as the 231 CID version of the Buick 90° V6 and retained the 3.85 in stroke of the previous 340 CID V8. The exact displacement is 349.31 CID.

The major differences of the 350 in comparison to other GM V8s are Buick's "deep-skirt" engine block construction, the use of cast iron with increased nickel content, under-square cylinder bore sizing, 3 in crankshaft main journals, and 6.385 in connecting rods. Of all the GM "350s", the Buick has the longest piston stroke. This design characteristic made the engine significantly wider than the others — essentially the same as the Buick big-blocks, which have the shortest stroke of the GM big-blocks. The engine garnered a reputation as rugged and durable, and some of its design characteristics are found in other Buick-designed GM engines, such as the 231 CID V6 and its 3800 descendants.

The 350 was used by Kaiser-Jeep and AMC Jeep in the Jeep Gladiator and Wagoneer models from 1968–71; in these applications, the engine was billed as the Dauntless V8.

 * 1968-1972 Buick Skylark
 * 1968-1972 Buick Sport Wagon
 * 1968-1971 Jeep Wagoneer
 * 1968-1971 Jeep Gladiator
 * 1971-1973 Buick Centurion
 * 1971-1980 Buick Electra
 * 1971-1980 Buick LeSabre
 * 1973-1975 Buick Apollo
 * 1973-1977 Buick Century
 * 1973-1977 Buick Regal
 * 1975 Pontiac Ventura
 * 1975-1979 Buick Skylark
 * 1977-1980 Buick Estate
 * 1977-1978 Buick Riviera

Other GM V8s used in Buicks
In the mid-1970s Buick's 400/430/455 big blocks became unable to meet fuel economy/emission requirements and were phased out, with the Buick 350 remaining as a factory option until 1980. In their place were a variety of GM V8s were offered, both as standard equipment and factory options. These included:

Oldsmobile 260
The 260 CID was an Oldsmobile V8 engine shared with Buick:
 * 1975–1977 Buick Skylark

Pontiac 301
The 301 CID was a Pontiac V8 engine shared with Buick.

Chevrolet 305
The 305 CID was a Chevrolet V8 engine shared with Buick:
 * 1978–1987 Buick Regal
 * 1975–1979 Buick Skylark

Oldsmobile 307
The 307 CID was an Oldsmobile V8 engine shared with Buick:
 * 1980–1985 Buick Lesabre
 * 1980–1984 Buick Electra
 * 1980–1985 Buick Riviera
 * 1980–1990 Buick Estate Wagon
 * 1986–1987 Buick Regal

Oldsmobile 403
The 403 CID was an Oldsmobile V8 engine shared with Buick:
 * 1977 Buick Century estate
 * 1977–1979 Buick Riviera
 * 1977–1979 Buick Electra
 * 1977–1979 Buick Estate Wagon
 * 1977–1979 Buick LeSabre

title: Buick V8 engine


text:
George Simpson (sprinter)

George Sidney Simpson (September 21, 1908 – December 2, 1961) was an American sprinter. He competed at the 1932 Olympics and won a silver medal in the 200 m, placing fourth in the 100 m event. Simpson was the first to run 100 yards in 9.4 seconds, but because he used starting blocks, the record was never ratified. He won the 220 yd in both NCAA and AAU in 1930. He was also fourth in the 100 meters at the 1932 Olympics. In 1929 he unofficially equaled the 200 meters World Record 20.6 seconds. Simpson attended Ohio State and won a national title in 1929.

title: George Simpson (sprinter)


text: User talk:195.194.68.22

title: User talk:195.194.68.22


text:
Martin Ebon

Martin Ebon (May 27, 1917 – February 11, 2006) was the pen-name of Hans Martin Schwarz, an American journalist and author of non-fiction books and articles from the paranormal to politics, particularly as an anti-communist.

Background
Hans Martin Schwarz was born on May 27, 1917, in Hamburg, Germany.

Career
During the 1930s, Schwarz published in Israelitisches Familienblatt among other German-Jewish periodicals.

In 1938, Schwarz emigrated to the USA, lived in New York City from 1938 onwards, and changed his name from Hans Martin Schwartz to Martin Ebon.

During World War II, he served in the U.S. Office of War Information (formed June 1942), the U.S. Department of State (as an information officer), and by 1948 had joined the staff of Partisan Review magazine.

In January 1948, Ebon published his first book in English, World Communism Today. The book reviewed a century of Marxism, following the publication of the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in 1848. Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. praised the book as an "outstanding work on communist penetration and strategy." The book was cited as an expert source, e.g., 60,000 members in the Korean Communist Party as of 1949. In March 1948, he appeared on WMAL AM radio in Washington, DC, to discuss "Which Way America – Fascism, Communism, Socialism, or Democracy?" with Raymond Moley (Conservative), Norman Thomas (Socialist), and Leon Milton Birkhead (Unitarian). His July 1948 article "Communist Tactics in Palestine" in the Middle East Journal received a favorably review as "carefully documented" and "objective and non-partisan." In 1953, his book Malenkov: Stalin's Successor received mixed reviews as "short," quickly published (weeks after Stalin's death), and carefully appraising thanks to the author's previous book on world communism. It drew favorable comparison to Eugene Lyons' Our Secret Allies.

Ebon held various positions in book and magazine retailing, including:
 * Managing Editor of foreign language division, Overseas News Agency; U.S. Information Agency, New York City
 * Information Officer on Far Eastern desks, 1950–52; Hill & Knowlton, Inc. (public relations), New York City
 * Account Executive, 1952–53; Parapsychology Foundation, Inc., New York City, administrative secretary and editor, 1953–65, working closely with its founder, Eileen J. Garrett
 * Lombard Associates, Inc. (public relations and publications consultants), New York City, president, 1962–82
 * Consulting Editor, New American Library (publishers), 1966–83
 * Executive Editor of hardcover book division, Playboy Press, 1971–72
 * Lecturer in Division of Social Sciences, The New School, 1949–50, 1955–56, 1967
 * Consultant, Foundation for Research on the Nature of Man, 1966–67
 * Free-lance writer from 1967 on

Personal life and death
Ebon married Chariklia Baltazzi; they had one son.

Martin Ebon died age 82 on February 11, 2006, in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Legacy
The Center for Jewish History houses articles written by Ebon between 1934 and 1938 for German-Jewish newspapers, plus reviews of his German-language books.

Works
Ebon published dozens of books on world affairs and parapsychology.

 * Books in German
 * Einer wie Du und Ich (1937)
 * Heiteres, Besinnliches, Nachdenkliches (1937)

 * Books in English
 * World Communism Today (1948)
 * Malenkov: Stalin's Successor, McGraw-Hill, 1953
 * Svetlana: The Story of Stalin's Daughter, New American Library, 1967
 * Prophecy in Our Time, New American Library, 1968.
 * The Making of a Legend, Universe Books, 1969.
 * Lin Pao: The Life and Writings of China's New Ruler, Stein & Day.
 * Witchcraft Today, New American Library, 1971.
 * Every Woman's Guide to Abortion, Universe Books, 1971.
 * They Knew the Unknown, World Publishing, 1971.
 * The Truth about Vitamin E, Bantam, 1972.
 * The Devil's Bride: Exorcism, Past and Present, Harper, 1974.
 * The Essential Vitamin Counter, Bantam, 1974.
 * Which Vitamins Do You Need?, Bantam, 1974.
 * Saint Nicholas.- Life and Legend, Harper, 1975.
 * The Satan Trap: Dangers of the Occult, Doubleday, 1976.
 * What's New in ESP?, Pyramid, 1976.
 * The Relaxation Controversy, New American Library, 1976.
 * The Evidence for Life after Death, New American Library, 1977.
 * Miracles, Signet, 1981.
 * Psychic Warfare: Threat or Illusion, McGraw-Hill, 1983.
 * The Andropov File, McGraw-Hill, 1983.
 * Nikita Khrushchev, Chelsea House, 1986.
 * The Soviet Propaganda Machine, McGraw-Hill, 1987.
 * KGB: Death and Rebirth, Greenwood/Praeger, 1994

 * Books as "Eric Ward"
 * The President's Daughter with Ursala Russell, Bantam, 1973

 * Articles
 * "World Communism Has Passed Its Peak," American Mercury (January 1948)
 * "Communist Tactics in Palestine," Middle East Journal (July 1948)
 * "Psychic Studies: The Soviet Dilemma," Skeptical Inquirer (1985)

 * Miscellaneous
 * Letter to Joshua Lederberg (15 November 1985)

title: Martin Ebon


text:
Pindorama, São Paulo

Pindorama is a municipality in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. The name is Tupi (later Paulista General Language) for Land of the Palms, the natives name for Brazil. According to tradition, before colonisation "Pindorama" (Tupi for "Land of the Palms") was the native name of Brazil, given by the local indigenous peoples.

Location
The population is 17,216 (2020 est.) in an area of 184.8 km². The municipality contains the 533 ha Pindorama Biological Reserve, a strictly protected conservation unit created in 1986 from a former experimental agricultural station. Pindorama belongs to the Mesoregion of São José do Rio Preto.

Economy
The Tertiary sector corresponds to 57.86% of Pindorama's GDP. The Primary sector is 9.45% of the GDP and the Industry corresponds to 32.70%.

Media
In telecommunications, the city was served by Telecomunicações de São Paulo. In July 1998, this company was acquired by Telefónica, which adopted the Vivo brand in 2012. The company is currently an operator of cell phones, fixed lines, internet (fiber optics/4G) and television (satellite and cable).

title: Pindorama, São Paulo


text:
Talk:Art film

Untitled
CHHAILU SINGH HADA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.189.191.204 (talk) 01:01, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Definition
"They are generally not American, not with a large budget and usually not an English language film. "

Is this some kind of official definition? There are plenty of American and English language "art films". This article seems to imply that "art film" is synonomous with "non-American film". [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 20:35, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Further, this article's definition of 'noncommercial' film is not sustainable. Isn't the festival circuit commercial? There is a huge market for art cinema and these films are produced for that market. The art cinema tradition itself grew out arguably from the pressure of Hollywood films that forced the European producers into a niche market. Please weight your definition taking into consideration experimental and avant-garde traditions. These films could claim 'noncommercial' production mode. Absolutely not art film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.227.87.240 (talk) 10:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Time line of Great independent films
It would be best to not have more that 7 or 8 films per decade. !! please some one respond!!!Grosscha 20:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

This article needs even more additions to its list of Art film directors Paradiso 16:32, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi, I am concerned about this subtitle. The first part "Timeline" is good. But the second part "Great" i am worried about, because it is a subjective, vague term. I argue that the encyclopedia has to have a factual, balanced tone (therefore "notable" is a better term). And finally, I am concerned about the term "independent films". The article is about art movies. Yes, art movies and independent movies overlap, but they are not the same thing. If Kurosawa made a $100 million dollar movie produced by Sony, and it was all filled with bizarre hallucinogenic images, deep philosophical questions, and experimental montages of images and colour, it would probably qualify as an art movie EVEN though it was done through a major studio for lots of $$$. For these reasons, I suggest a more "neutral" title such as "Timeline of Notable Art Films"Nazamo 03:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

 * You guys also never mention Rainer Werner Fassbinder even though he was the main person involved with the German New Wave film movement for his entire working life. 60.242.249.235 (talk) 00:32, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

 * The German notion is "Programmkino", an article in German Wikipedia. Stephanie  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.128.45.239 (talk) 18:31, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Ill Conceived
The article itself is ill conceived. Art film is not a genre with specific characteristic, it's at best an umbrella term and at worse a characteristic like "emo", where it really does not define the works it represents but the perception of certain traits as part of a whole. To put it in another way, very few, if any, directors would claim to make art films. Instead of trying to define what an art film is, the article should acknowledge that its just an umbrella term, a perception of certain movies not perceived as traditional or Hollywoodesque. --Clementduval 23:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

The art film may not be a genre but not being a genre it is something more general. It can be defined in terms of narration and style; or by looking closely at various governments measures to protect their domestic market. If art film is 'at best an umbrella term' then what is it umbrella term of? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.227.87.240 (talk) 10:15, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

merge
One month passed with no comments at all. Obvious concensus in favor of a merge. --TheLimbicOne (talk) 16:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

removing link to life of a tenis ball; seems irrelevant to greater theme, and there are surely better art films than that to link to. cheers, --zachjones4 17:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Criteria
There seems to be a tendency to include films into the Examples section solely because they contain subjective realism, such as Adaptation, Annie Hall, and Barton Fink, none of which occur to me as art films (I've removed Annie Hall due to my convictions).

I think this page should distinguish between art avant-garde film (works by Barney, Brakhage, Deren, Warhol) and arthouse cinema (films with limited appeal that play to smaller audiences, including popular films released to foreign markets) which, while sometimes overlapping, are quite distinct. Jonathan F 02:25, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree they are distinct. Paradiso 06:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

--Jahsonic 08:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree too, and there was a page on arthouse films which was redirected to art film earlier this year. An art film is a film meant to be art. An arthouse film is any film that plays arthouse cinemas (but those are most likely to be foreign films, art films, cult films, controversial films, banned films and non-mainstream films). Although I have not read it, Sure Seaters: The Emergence of Art House Cinema - Barbara Wilinsky seems to be a good source for the arthouse film phenomenon. Overlap may occur in the pages on art film and experimental film . Two notable American arthouse theaters were the Elgin Theater and the Brattle Theater.

Zeroism 00:10, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I also agree, and I believe that there should (again?) be a seperate page for "art house". The term "art house" itself is in wider use than "art film" when describing the films and directors listed in this article, etc.  There is also a seperate and distinct history to the term "art house" (referring to art house cinemas or theaters as mentioned above).  An example of this would be the DVD boxed set to be released soon from Janus Films, containing 50 films and labeled "Essential Art House: 50 Years of Janus Films".  This boxed set contains a great number of the films listed in the examples section of this article.
 * Sure, art house could have its own page since the emergence and history of venues that play art films is of encyclopedic interest. Also, it would do to have this page finally focus on the art film (Bergman, Antonioni, whatever) to the exclusion of avant-garde film (Deren, yadayadayada), which has its own page (experimental film). Jonathan F 08:22, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Art House (type of films)
I have attempted to have the "art house" (from RIT) page link here. Should I have missed something in the format please do fix it up! Yottabite

Very Ill-Conceived
This is simply to reinforce the points made by Clementduval which seem to me entirely just. Cinema is an art. The notion of a non-art film is to say the least problematic and therefore the notion of an art-film similarly so. Any list of supposed "art films" presents immediate problems. Kubrick's 2001? Scorcese's Raging Bull? Lee's Brokeback Mountain? (but no Citizen Kane, one notes). If such popular mainstream Hollywood films are included, then why not the films of Ford? or Peckinpah? Why not Fantasia? Why not Bambi? There is no way in which one establish any kind of objective meaning for the term and I don't suppose there is a single film-director who would accept its validity. As Clementduval points out it is simply a convenience term with which says something only about popular perceptions of cinema. To attempt to display it as an objective criterion is confusing and misleading. The relationsip to the more critically respectable French term, widely used in Europe, "film d'auteur" is not made at all clear (and cross-reference to it produces a somewhat bizarre "List of auteurs"). As for "arthouse" this is surely something different. The term is a local American one with barely any currency outside the United Staes and, if I understand it rightly, refers to the cinematic fare provided (more or less exclusively) by certain kinds of movie theatres. Speaking as a non-American, to whom the word has little or no meaning, I would find a rather more specific and objective explanation of this phenomenon very welcome. Agantuk 17:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi Agantuk, thank you for your comments. First of all, I would like to remind you that this is an article "in progress." It still needs lots of work, additions, and research, preferably from editors with a MUCH greater knowledge of films and cinema than my own.................. You said "Cinema is an art." Sure, for Citizen Kane, but what about the Die Harder series or the Lethal Weapon movies? I think that you could argue that different films are on a continuum that runs from pure entertainment at one end and pure art at the other end. Let's say we pick Resident Evil: Apocalypse as a good example of pure entertainment (this movie has every mistake and misstep you could imagine...plot holes, poor acting, poor dialogue, etc....but a lot of stuff blows up, and there are some cool costumes and weapons, so if you put your mind in neutral, it is sort of fun), and then you could put a film such as Kurosawa's Dreams (1990), with its bizarre images, hallucinogenic sequences, etc, as a pure art film.................    You said "Any list of supposed "art films" presents immediate problems." I agree. The list was already here in the article when I first started trying to improve the article. The list is a crazy mixed bag of popular films, experimental films, auteur films, etc, reflecting the interests of different editors. Along with others, I have been trying to categorize the films by year/director. Now that this is done, I think that people interested in this article can vote/discuss on the talk page for which films/directors should be in, using references to external experts' opinions and reviews...........As far as there non being "any kind of objective meaning for the term," the new edits have tried to acknowledge this by showing that there have been varying definitions, some of which are very vague....... Now, as far as your comment "...I don't suppose there is a single film-director who would accept its validity."...this may be true, but a respected film theorist(cited in the article) has defined art films, in terms of how they are different from mainstream films..........The relationship with the "...critically respectable French term, widely used in Europe, "film d'auteur" is not made at all clear"... I agree. More work is needed. As far as your comment on "arthouse", this is a good point... the article should be clearer that this is a US term, which is used very loosely. Please contribute or edit, as you have many good points and ideasNazamo 19:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. My comments were not aimed at anyone in particular and we are not in fact as much in disagreement as might appear. I do not really dispute the continuum between films that have little artistry and those (in the case of Kurosawa's wretched Dreams - quite his worst film in my view) that arguably have too much. Hence the 'convenience' use of the term in a world where we all fight shy of using subjective words with relatively clear meaning like 'serious' and 'trivial' or 'entertaining' and 'thought-provoking'. In effect it is a purely judgemental term masquerading as an objective one - a sort of positive euphemism. But, whatever it is, 'art film' is clearly not any sort of fixed, determined category and the first thing that surely ought to go is the list because a list is totally inappropriate for a category that has no fixed sense. It's a bit like concocting a list of 'nice food' or 'beautiful women' or indeed 'serious films'. It seems to me the article should be reduced to a reasonable minimum that simply recognises the use of the term, explains the problems of definition with it, clearly indicates its relation to other related or similar terms and - here I am not in dispute with you - gives a brief account of critical attempts (however misguided) to give it an objective definition (on the lines of "For Critic X, an "art-film" is defined as....For critic Y...."). In effect to give a brief (and it only deserves 'brief') critical history of the term. I do not really want to meddle myself because I don't have sufficient knowledge of the critical history (which is the crucial thing) and also because I dislike the term too strongly and that is not a good basis for editing. "Arthouse" I think should be a separate entry. It has a meaning that is distinct and that is I would have thought, in its origin, even fairly objective (films shown by arthouse theatres)even if nowadays it is also used loosely as a synonym for "art film" (cue for cross-reference). This is not the case either with 'art film' or 'film d'auteur' (that's another list that ought to go) which are both inevitably matters of subjective judgement. Sorry to bore on like this, but it seems to me in its way quite a testing, if not test, case. I actually have no difficulty in imagining the sort of definition that would satisfy both of us and be useful to any enquirer (it would be extremely interesting to know for instance when people first started talking about 'art films' and what specific developments in cinematic history or perhaps rather in the history of film-advertising or film-distribution lie behind the fact that they did). The difficulty as ever is getting there. Agantuk 23:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

This professor of art history and film studies completely agrees that the term is itself contentious, too region-specific, and borders on being downright offensive. It is itself part of a particular discursive set up by film studies people like Bordwell who approach everything in terms of the film industry and economics and then plot the deviation from that. The variant term ART-HOUSE FILM at least made more sense, in that it specifically referred to the exhibitionary location in which this broad category of works would be shown. I wish I had the time to contribute more, but I just saw this and thought I'd add my two cents. Glad people are working on this though. The main point is that this is a contentious labelling. I recall one faculty hire at another school where someone was not hired specifically because he gave the WRONG answer to the question - is the avant-garde film a genre? The correct answer was no. Obviously, someone like Bordwell would probably disagree. Hence the problem. 98.14.118.111 (talk) 04:02, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Can we develop a consensus on how to trim the list of films?
Hi, Encyclopedias normally don't have long lists of examples, whether of types of books, types of movies, or examples of a genre. They explain the type or genre, and then give the most widely-recognized, widely cited examples. In the case of this article, though, there is a bit of a problem...The term "art film" is used in many different ways, and so there is no convenient top 10 list of films that all major critics/film writers have agreed upon. The term "art film" is often used to mean "underground film," "auteur film," "independent film," "experimental film," etc. This makes things tricky. One solution would be not to list ANY film names. This is appealing, but I think that it would be "throwing the baby out with the bathwater."...........I have tried to make the list a little more justifiable by putting a disclaimer at the top, saying that this isn't a definitive list, it's just a sample. As well, the disclaimer points out that these films MAY have SOME art movie characteristics...No one is claiming these are 100% pure art films (that is a joke : )........I argue that the list serves a valid purpose: it points people in the direction of films that have been called art films, so that they can learn more, and make their own decisions. To get to the main point: If we accept that the list is a necessary "evil", how can we trim it. I suggest that we only allow one entry per decade per director, preferably their most-acclaimed film. Ideas? Suggestions?Nazamo 21:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, the pruning of examples in the "Notable Films with Art Film qualities" section has started, since no other editors have given suggestions on how to proceed. As you can see from the "History" section, the approach has been to give each director one entry per decade. If a director had 2 or 3 films, the most influential or most-acclaimed (festivals,awards, etc.) film was picked, and the other films are listed in a footnote. In some cases, when a director had 2 or 3 films in a decade the one film that was picked was selected because it is the most well-known film to audiences (e.g., it had a wider distribution or more showings in festivals). The 2000s section arguably has too many examples. More concerning, though, is the large number of 2006 examples. Based on what i've read about "art films," the conferring of the status of "art film" is partly based on the content of the film (ambiguous moral qualities in protaganists, meandering plot, experimental shooting techniques, etc.), and partly on the judgement rendered by leading film critics and cultural commentators. If the film only came out in 2006, I argue that there has not been much time for professional critics to evaluate and debate the film. How do readers feel about waiting until a "critical mass" of reviews and columns are available on films before putting it in the list?Nazamo 17:21, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * P.S., another guiding principle which I am trying to use is to have a good representation of non-Western films in the lists (films from India, Iran, China, South Korea, Japan, etc).Nazamo 17:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposal to convert "notable films with art film qualities" lists into paragraphs (with discussion/context etc)
Hi, the lists of films with art film qualities are growing. This is a natural part of lists on Wikipedia. If you start a list of "Notable jazz guitarists" and it starts with Wes Montgomery and George Benson, pretty soon there are 100 names, some minor figures, some are obscure, and some are people's uncle who plays at the local wine bar. In the electric bass article, for example, a decision was made to eliminate ALL lists of notable people, because of their propensity for unchecked growth. I would like to propose that we convert the list of "notable films with art film qualities" to decade-by-decade paragraphs. That way, directors from the same "school" or continent can be grouped together, and general observations can be made about "French New Wave" directors or "Asian films". I argue that converting the lists to paragraphs of text will make the information more useful to readers. As well, it acts as a "brake" on unchecked growth, because then contributors have to integrate their new proposed films or directors into the text, which is harder than adding a bullet. Please indicate if you agree with this proposal, or give comments...Nazamo 14:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)P.S. I also propose that the list of directors, which will probably grow to 100 names if it is left as a list, be combined into the proposed "narrative timeline of films and directors".Nazamo 14:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * A week has passed without comment or input, which I will assume means that other editors concur with this proposal. Accordingly, the list of films and directors will now be converted into a paragraphs.Nazamo 01:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The Apu Trilogy.jpg
Image:The Apu Trilogy.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:24, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I Am Curious
The line - and especially the link to the pornography article - make the film sound like a pornographic film:

"In the 1970s, the term was used to describe sexually explicit European films with artistic pretensions such as I Am Curious (Yellow)".

I Am Curious is far from a porn film. It has some sex in it and broke ground for that but it isn't pornography and the US High Court even ruled that it was not pornography. _ Anon

Fair use rationale for Image:The Apu Trilogy.jpg
Image:The Apu Trilogy.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Rationale added to image article. Johnmc (talk) 11:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Kurosawasdreams.jpg
Image:Kurosawasdreams.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Rationale added to image article. Johnmc (talk) 11:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Last year marienbad.jpg
Image:Last year marienbad.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Rationale added to image article. Johnmc (talk) 11:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Removal of images
I have removed every image in this article for improper use of fair use images. In order for a fair use image to be used in this article, it would need to illustrate aspects of the genre. A screenshot of an iconic art house scene (and a description on why it is iconic) helps the reader understand the genre, but a poster of a iconic film does not. Also, free use images should be used instead of fair use images whenever possible. I'm sure there's some art house film that is public domain, use images from that.--SeizureDog (talk) 21:56, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tag on Kurosawa pic
Hi, I am wondering why there is a "speedy deletion" tag on the Kurosawa photo in the lede. The photo is a free, public domain image from the Wikimedia Commons. Thanks. OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 13:34, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Apu Pather1.jpg
The image File:Apu Pather1.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

 * File:Cremaster1.png

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --15:47, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

All films are art, so all films are art films
Hi, This idea has been proposed by several editors. The argument goes like this: "Film is art, therefore all films are art, therefore the term "art film" has no meaning." As was pointed out above by Nazamo, the claim that "all films are art films" would mean giving Resident Evil:Apocalypse the same status as Citizen Kane. Resident Evil had plot holes, poor acting, poor dialogue,, etc...Citizen Kane has been hailed by a large number of critics for its artistic qualities. Thus rather than arguing "all films are art films", it would seem that films are on some type of continuum of artistic-ness. Sure, it is hard to rank films and determine where they are on the continuum...the article acknowledges this several times. But just because there is a large grey zone between art films and non-art films it doesn't seem that the solution is to throw out the entire distinction. Anyway, this isn't a debate between two anonymous editors...this is Wikipedia so it is reputable cited source VS. reputable cited source...and let the reader decide which has the better argument. The article cites a number of film scholars and critics to explain the definition of art film and how inclusion in the category is determined. If those editors who wish to propose the "all films are art, therefore all films are art films" have a reputable source for this argument (a film scholar, film historian, cultural studies theorist, whatever, who has published an article on this topic), then put in your source and let the readers decide. Otherwise, if you don't have a source, then the "all films are art" is a personal theory, which could make it Original Research (an original theory),which is not suitable for Wikipedia (according to Wikipedia rules).OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 12:00, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Sean O'Casey and The Informer -- Correction
"In the 1930s and 1940s, Hollywood films could be divided into the artistic aspirations of literary adaptations like Sean O'Casey's The Informer (1935) and Eugene O'Neill's The Long Voyage Home (1940), and the money-making "popular genre films" such as gangster thrillers."

Sean O'Casey has no connection to The Informer. The film, directed by John Ford, is based on a story by Liam O'Flaherty.

Abenr Abenr (talk) 15:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Ari Folman
Hi, I am relocating this Ari Folman section here. It is sourced from IMDB, which is not a reputable enough source for WP. It is a user done source, like Wikipedia, so we can't rely on it. Please find a reputable source (e.g., a film journal, a magazine, a film critic) to include this, plus you need a stronger rationale for including it in this art film article. A stronger case for including it would be if a reputable film critic called it an art film, or if it won an award such as a Cannes Prize.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 04:10, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * In 2008 internationally unknown director Ari Folman released the animated feature Waltz With Bashir, which is about a veteran from the 1982 invasion of Lebanon. The documentary-style film mixes in real footage of the war using a dark, shadow-filled shooting process.

Albin H-L (talk) Despite the fact that most of the sources are based on the users own editings, it still gets checked very thoroughly. It can take up to two weeks until what you have added or corrected actually appears. Therefor, the chance of the material being feigned, is very small. Maybe we should reconsider if IMDB is an unreliable source... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Albin H-L (talk • contribs) 21:14, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Off point, I must say that the Cannes prize was a bad example. Most directors in this gengre are against these sorts of award-shows. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Albin H-L (talk • contribs) 21:18, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, Sorry, I did not mean to say that only a film with a Cannes prize deserves to be in the article. I just meant that I think that we should have some sort of standard. Perhaps this could be that the film has been given substantial coverage by a highly respected film journal? It is just that if we don't have some sort of reliable, third-party sources and standards, we will have cases where a guy will put in an article about non-notable films and non-notable filmmakers--- his cousin Bob's experimental home movie. This happens a great deal in other articles, such as in articles about bands, where many non-notable garage bands and teenage bands that have only played at a local pub want to have an article or be in articles. To my humble understanding of Wikipedia rules, Ari Folman would have to have articles about him and his films in mainstream, reputable publications before we can have include information about him or his films.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 21:39, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Satyajit Ray Picture
I changed Ray's picture, the other one was creeeeepy!TheZGDK (talk) 14:20, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Why 2 history sections..duplication???
Hi, if you are reading the article, you may have the impression that there are 2 history sections. Ideally, the 2 sections are supposed to have a different goal. The first section is supposed to describe, chronologically, the different film movements (Cinema Pur, French New Wave, etc), schools of cinema ("Parallel cinema", auteur film) and the reception and production of art films. The second section (the timeline of films) gives you a sense of the important films and the narrative, cinematographic, etc developments at the level of the film. These are the goals. In practice, I admit that there is crossover between the 2 sections. This can be corrected by volunteer Wiki-editors in the future.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 21:32, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Camille Paglia?
so the section on art film in 1980 - 2000 first speaks of a fairly US-centric conflation of independent film and art film, then goes on to cite a proclamation of death of art film by a certain Camille Paglia, who doesn't seem to be primarily a film critic and seems a controversial author. Being just a fan of good movies, I can hardly imagine a period where directors like Wenders, Kar Wai, Kiarostami, Haneke, von Trier to name a few, made significant works be defined merely by '"hyperactive" special effect-filled films' so surely this is just a provocative opinion of a colorful figure? Aryah (talk) 06:30, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, I am just a volunteer Wikipedia editor, and I do not have the time to go to libraries to look up film journals and film books and I can't afford to subscribe to film journals. All I have is mainstream newspaper and magazine articles that are available free on the Internet, and, in some cases, books that are available free on Google books. I have not tried to make a US-centric article with my contributions, and nor am I trying to create a soapbox for Ms. Paglia. I am just presenting what I find while searching Google with the keywords "art film", "art cinema" etc. I would be happy to add some balancing sources from European, Asian or African magazines if you could send the links to the articles. In a broader sense the weaknesses of my research approach (being limited to free Internet content in English) are part of a broader structural weakness for the overall Wiki project. Given that we are all volunteers with day jobs, families, and community responsibilities, etc., most of us are limited to using the materials that are free and in our language (There are some exceptions...some people such as academics have access to their university library and some editors can read several languages). A professional, paid researcher, of course, would do inter-library loans and get the best books from a number of libraries and get access to a broad range of subscription-only journal articles.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 00:30, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Recent edits
An IP has attempted to remove large sections with the only justification being that they do not align with one scholar's idea of what constitutes an art film. There's not much to say, really. The IP refuses to discuss it, the page is now protected and the original version restored. One scholar does not represent a universal understanding (obviously). If his ideas are contrary to established consensus, then a brief mention could be added, with caution. But the wholesale deletions are unwarranted and disruptive. This is clearly not an editor who wants to collaborate, just push his POV. Ray Carney is an established scholar certainly, but he is hardly "the world's foremost authority on film" as claimed by the IP. Of course, no one is and that essentially is the IP's problem. He or she is a bit immature and believes one man's scholarship represents some sort of universal idea of film. Carney mainly concentrates on American mainstream cinema and as well appears to be an expert on John Cassavetes. That hardly makes him the last word on what is or is not an art film, a difficult concept to begin with.  freshacconci  talk to me  16:26, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've been warning the IP of the same thing, but as you say, he's only interested in pushing his own view that Carney is the high authority of anything art film. I've given him another warning, and protected the page, FYI. Sergecross73   msg me   16:42, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd note that the same IP editor went through dozens of articles a couple of weeks ago removing the words "art film" and "arthouse" with no explanation, but presumably under the same undiscussed criteria of "Ray Carney doesn't think this is an arthouse film". I fixed a couple of obvious mistakes where removing the word didn't even leave a coherent sentence, but the rest are unchecked. --McGeddon (talk) 16:45, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * (I've now reverted the rest of these unexplained and arbitrary-seeming deletions.) --McGeddon (talk) 12:07, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I forgot about that. I should have done that after his first block... Sergecross73   msg me   12:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * And there you go...  freshacconci  talk to me  17:16, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Brief Encounter
….. a passionate love affair between an upper class man and a middle class woman …

Without questioning whether the film belongs to art or to commerce, this description seems misleading on two counts. First, though intense, the affair is unconsummated and that is what makes the story so resonant. Second, any class difference between the man and the woman is imperceptible and has no relevance to the story. --Hors-la-loi (talk) 15:41, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Relocated "Film form" section to talk page
I removed this section on film form from the "Related concepts" section. This material is very general and seems more suited for an article on film in general or an article on film structure. At least in its present form, this section does not elucidate the relationship between film form and art film. OnBeyondZebrax • TALK 01:47, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Film form
In general, film form is the total amount of relationships between the different elements within the entire film, and the way in which they interact with one another to create art and understanding. It includes the general concepts and principles that structure a film. Form plays a very important role in the audience’s experience using various elements that stem from the concepts and principles.

The concepts of film form are as follows: Structure, audience expectations, conventions and experience, formalized feeling, meaning, and evaluation. The structure of a film is the elements we perceive. Narrative is a very important element, as it creates the film’s overall, ongoing story. Narrative aids in the audience’s identification of the characters, the plot, understand significance of camera angles and movements, scene coloring, costumes, dialogue, mood, music, etc. It has a close relationship with all elements within the film, but the subject matter it addresses may become different depending on the preferences of each filmmaker.

Audience expectation, also referred to as formal expectation, is used to “guide the audience’s activity”. When a film begins, the audience starts to form their own perceptions and hypothesis’ for the ending which may or may not be accurate. Formal expectations also create “fresh ways of hearing, seeing, feeling, and thinking” that the viewers may not have come up with on their own. It is not uncommon for the story to go in otherwise unnatural ways. For example, if A is the first event in a series, the next event would be B. But in the case of film form, C would not necessarily come third. A viewer’s expectation limits the amount of possible outcomes, but film form does the opposite. When unexpected situation occurs in a film, the audience then begins to participate and formulate their own hypothesis.

Conventions and Experience is very much related to audience/formal expectation. It essentially states that any hypotheses or conjecture the viewers create, and any events the filmmakers plan, are based primarily on prior experience, either personal or derived from other popular works. This is why, in certain genres, films generally follow the same outlines, whether it is loosely or closely. For example, a mystery film would typically follow the pattern of DABC (where D is the end result and ABC is how they got there), and an average horror film would follow the pattern of ABABC (where AB are victims and/or events that occur, and C is how the issue is resolved). Each genre has its own set of rules, or conventions, as does each film. These conventions are learnt throughout the story when the audience is active and not passive.

Formalized feeling is the feelings and emotions displayed in the film by the characters. There are two types of feeling; consistent with character, or emotions represented, and consistent with genre, or emotional response felt. When a character cries, it is a represented emotion and it may evoke a similar feeling from the audience. But if the film is comedic in genre, then the audience may have a different emotional response, such as amusement. Emotions that are represented are very important to the narrative and audience expectations, they can tell us which characters we could assume to be evil, and which we could assume to be good based on their emotional reactions in different circumstances.

Alternatively, but just as important, formalized meaning is the meaning that is created by the audience. An active audience is always seeking a larger meaning when watching a film, and there are four different kinds of meaning they are able to find; referential, explicit, implicit, and symptomatic meaning. Referential meaning is tangible meaning that builds the plot. The audience would find their meaning in things like location, or time period, and would refer to facts that are already widely known. Explicit is the overall meaning and/or message of the plot. Taking into consideration the conflicts and hardships the main characters have to face throughout the film, it becomes easy to guess what the main message is supposed to be. Contrarily, implicit meaning is interpretative and metaphorical. Interpretations become different with each viewer based on their own personal beliefs and previous experience. Lastly, symptomatic meaning is derived from particular social ideologies and values.

Simply put, evaluation is based on personal taste, evaluative judgement, and whether or not the audience was satisfied with the form of the film. Evaluative judgement is typically based on a criteria created by the person evaluating the work in order to be objective and give an educated opinion.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Art film. 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:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.futurism.org.uk/cinema/cinema.htm
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.brynmawrfilm.org/08_French_Cinema_NEW.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.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 12:20, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Art film. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861685559/art_film.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120118070623/http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/archives/ficheFilm/id/2659/year/1969.html to http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/archives/ficheFilm/id/2659/year/1969.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.parajanov.com/main.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.filmjournal.com/filmjournal/reviews/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003639817

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) 18:28, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Art film. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861685559/art_film.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061216054527/http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/topten/poll/critics.html to http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/topten/poll/critics.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) 17:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Reads like an essay.
This article reads like somebody's essay, with several shoehorned quotes and other awkward things. I'd like some help with cleaning this up, if anyone's willing. OrangeYoshi99 (talk) 17:07, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Roma (2018)
I added a little paragraph under the "Timeline of Notable Films" because I believe the movie deserves to be here. Im not sure what belongs there amd what doesnt so if anyone could tidy up the paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:BA80:6A00:3:B5D5:AA6B:39B3 (talk) 01:35, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Alexander Sokurov
I think it's a shame that none of Alexander Sokurov's films are mentioned in this article. Previously, Russian Ark was mentioned, but not anymore. What's the reason? He has made films such as Mother and Son, Father and Son as well as Russian Ark that are pure art in my opinion. Taddah (talk) 07:37, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Language in Advertising
— Assignment last updated by Smulumba22 (talk) 20:52, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Art film


text: User talk:137.246.104.101

title: User talk:137.246.104.101


text:
Jim Turner (placekicker)

James Bayard Turner (March 28, 1941 – June 10, 2023) was an American football placekicker who played in the American Football League (AFL) and the National Football League (NFL) for the New York Jets and the Denver Broncos. He was a two-time Pro Bowl selection with the Jets and a member of their Super Bowl III championship team. Turner was chosen for the AFL All-Time Second-team and the Denver Broncos Ring of Fame.

Career
Turner was born and raised in Crockett, California. He graduated from John Swett High School in 1959. He played for the football team as a quarterback and was also a freestyle swimmer. Turner attended Utah State University, where he played college football for the Utah State Aggies as both a quarterback and placekicker.

The Washington Redskins of the National Football League (NFL) selected Turner in the 19th round of the 1963 NFL Draft. He signed with the Redskins, but failed a tryout with the Redskins and was released. Turner signed with the New York Jets of the American Football League (AFL) as a free agent in 1964. He set then-league records with single-season totals of 145 points and 34 field goals in 1968. Turner kicked for nine points, making two of three field goals, in the AFL Championship Game win over the Oakland Raiders. He had 10 points in the Jets' 16–7 defeat of the Baltimore Colts in Super Bowl III. He was named to the Pro Bowl in 1968 and 1969.

Following the 1970 season the Jets traded Turner to the Denver Broncos for Bobby Howfield. He scored four points in the Broncos' losing effort in Super Bowl XII against the Dallas Cowboys, connecting on a 47-yard field goal and an extra point following a touchdown run by Rob Lytle.

Turner finished his career with 304 of 488 (62%) field goals and 521 of 534 extra points, giving him 1,439 total points. Upon his retirement, he ranked second in field goals in NFL history, with only a fellow AFL veteran in George Blanda having more; Turner now ranks in the top 35 for kickers four decades after his career ended. He did not miss a game, playing in 228 consecutive contests. His single-season scoring record was broken by Mark Moseley in 1983, and Ali Haji-Sheikh broke Turner's field goal record the same season. He was inducted into the Denver Broncos Ring of Fame in 1988 and the Utah State University Athletics Hall of Fame in 2013.

Broadcasting career
In 1981, Turner joined NBC Sports as a color commentary sportscaster.

Personal life
Turner's wife, Mary Kay, is from El Sobrante, California. They had three daughters and lived in Arvada, Colorado.

Turner died in Arvada, Colorado from heart failure on June 10, 2023, at the age of 82.

title: Jim Turner (placekicker)


text:
It's a Long Way to Tipperary

"It's a Long Way to Tipperary" (or "It's a Long, Long Way to Tipperary") is an English music hall song first performed in 1912 by Jack Judge, and written by Judge and Harry Williams, though authorship of the song has long been disputed.

It was recorded in 1914 by Irish tenor John McCormack. It was used as a marching song among soldiers in the First World War and is remembered as a song of that war. Welcoming signs, in the referenced town of Tipperary, Ireland, humorously declare, "You've come a long way" in reference to the song.

Authorship
Jack Judge's parents were Irish, and his grandparents came from Tipperary. Judge met Harry Williams (Henry James Williams, 23 September 1873 – 21 February 1924) in Oldbury, Worcestershire at the Malt Shovel public house, where Williams's brother Ben was the licensee. Williams was severely disabled, having fallen down cellar steps as a child and badly broken both legs. He had developed a talent for writing verse and songs, and played the piano and mandolin, often in public. Judge and Williams began a long-term writing partnership that resulted in 32 music hall songs published by Bert Feldman. Many of the songs were composed by Williams and Judge at Williams's home, The Plough Inn (later renamed The Tipperary Inn), in Balsall Common. Because Judge could not read or write music, Williams taught them to Judge by ear.

Judge was a popular semi-professional performer in music halls. In January 1912, he was performing at the Grand Theatre in Stalybridge, and accepted a 5-shilling bet that he could compose and sing a new song by the next night. The following evening, 31 January, Judge performed "It's a Long Way to Tipperary" for the first time, and it immediately became a great success. The song was originally written and performed as a sentimental ballad, to be enjoyed by Irish expatriates living in London. Judge sold the rights to the song to Bert Feldman in London, who agreed to publish it and other songs written by Judge with Williams. Feldman published the song as "It's a Long, Long Way to Tipperary" in October 1912, and promoted it as a march.

Dispute
Feldman paid royalties to both Judge and Williams, but after Williams' death in 1924, Judge claimed sole credit for writing the song, saying that he had agreed to Williams being co-credited as recompense for a debt that Judge owed. However, Williams' family showed that the tune and most of the lyrics to the song already existed in the form of a manuscript, "It's A Long Way to Connemara", co-written by Williams and Judge back in 1909, and Judge had used this, just changing some words, including changing "Connemara" to "Tipperary".

Judge said: "I was the sole composer of 'Tipperary', and all other songs published in our names jointly. They were all 95% my work, as Mr Williams made only slight alterations to the work he wrote down from my singing the compositions. He would write it down on music-lined paper and play it back, then I'd work on the music a little more ... I have sworn affidavits in my possession by Bert Feldman, the late Harry Williams and myself confirming that I am the composer ...". In a 1933 interview, he added: "The words and music of the song were written in the Newmarket Tavern, Corporation Street, Stalybridge on 31st January 1912, during my engagement at the Grand Theatre after a bet had been made that a song could not be written and sung the next evening ... Harry was very good to me and used to assist me financially, and I made a promise to him that if I ever wrote a song and published it, I would put his name on the copies and share the proceeds with him. Not only did I generously fulfil that promise, but I placed his name with mine on many more of my own published contributions. During Mr Williams' lifetime (as far as I know) he never claimed to be the writer of the song ...".

Williams's family campaigned in 2012 to have Harry Williams officially re-credited with the song, and shared their archives with the Imperial War Museums. The family estate still receives royalties from the song.

Other claims
In 1917, Alice Smyth Burton Jay sued song publishers Chappell & Co. for $100,000, alleging she wrote the tune in 1908 for a song played at the Alaska–Yukon–Pacific Exposition promoting the Washington apple industry. The chorus began "I'm on my way to Yakima". The court appointed Victor Herbert to act as expert advisor and dismissed the suit in 1920, since the authors of "Tipperary" had never been to Seattle and Victor Herbert testified the two songs were not similar enough to suggest plagiarism.

Content
The song was originally written as a lament from an Irish worker in London, missing his homeland. Unlike popular songs of previous wars (such as the Boer Wars), it did not incite soldiers to glorious deeds, instead concentrating on the longing for home (as with the period song "Keep the Home Fires Burning").

Lyrics

 * Up to mighty London
 * Came an Irishman one day.
 * As the streets are paved with gold
 * Sure, everyone was gay,
 * Singing songs of Piccadilly,
 * Strand and Leicester Square,
 * Till Paddy got excited,
 * Then he shouted to them there:

 * Chorus
 * It's a long way to Tipperary,
 * It's a long way to go.
 * It's a long way to Tipperary,
 * To the sweetest girl I know!
 * Goodbye, Piccadilly,
 * Farewell, Leicester Square!
 * It's a long long way to Tipperary,
 * But my heart's right there.

 * Paddy wrote a letter
 * To his Irish Molly-O,
 * Saying, "Should you not receive it,
 * Write and let me know!"
 * "If I make mistakes in spelling,
 * Molly, dear," said he,
 * "Remember, it's the pen that's bad,
 * Don't lay the blame on me!"

 * Molly wrote a neat reply
 * To Irish Paddy-O,
 * Saying "Mike Maloney
 * Wants to marry me, and so
 * Leave the Strand and Piccadilly
 * Or you'll be to blame,
 * For love has fairly drove me silly:
 * Hoping you're the same!"

The parody "It's the Wrong, Wrong Way to Tickle Mary" was published (as sheet music) by J. Will Callahan and Charles Brown in the United States in 1915. The bawdy lyrics suggest the performances of concert parties on the front lines of the war:

 * Chorus
 * That's the wrong way to tickle Mary,
 * That's the wrong way to kiss.
 * Don't you know that over here, lad
 * They like it best like this.
 * Hoo-ray pour les français,
 * Farewell Angleterre.
 * We didn't know how to tickle Mary,
 * But we learnt how over there.

Reception
Feldman persuaded Florrie Forde to perform the song in 1913, but she disliked it and dropped it from her act. However, it became the hit song of 1913 and was widely popular when the First World War began the following year. British soldiers marching to Mons sang it. Daily Mail correspondent George Curnock saw the Irish regiment the Connaught Rangers singing this song as they marched through Boulogne on 13 August 1914, and reported it on 18 August 1914. Soon, every British newspaper had printed the lyrics to the chorus and it became a popular and patriotic tune amongst civilians. However, as soldiers lost their optimism for a quick end to the war they came to abhor the sentimental song and jeered down attempts to start it. F. T. Nettleingham, a veteran and anthologist of songs from the war, noted that the song was "never Tommy's song ... never greatly sung" though it was often the subject of parody. That civilians continued to hold it to be the soldiers' anthem illustrated a gap in understanding and alienated the fighting men.

In November 1914, it was recorded by Irish tenor John McCormack, which helped its worldwide popularity. There was also a popular recording by Mark Sheridan. In the United States, there were popular versions by Billy Murray, the American Quartet, Prince's Orchestra, and Albert Farrington.

The media of the time reported that the song was popular among soldiers despite (or because of) its irreverent and non-military theme, and was contrasted with the military and patriotic songs favoured by enemy troops. Commentators considered that the song's appeal revealed characteristically British qualities of being cheerful in the face of hardship. The Times suggested that "'Tipperary' may be less dignified, but it, and whatever else our soldiers may choose to sing will be dignified by their bravery, their gay patience, and their long suffering kindness... We would rather have their deeds than all the German songs in the world."

Later performances
The song was featured as one of the songs in the 1951 film On Moonlight Bay, the 1960s stage musical and film Oh! What a Lovely War, and the 1970 musical Darling Lili, sung by Julie Andrews. It was also sung by the prisoners of war in Jean Renoir's film La Grande Illusion (1937) and as background music in The Russians Are Coming, the Russians Are Coming (1966). It is also the second part (the other two being "Hanging on the Old Barbed Wire" and "Mademoiselle from Armentières") of the regimental march of Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry. Mystery Science Theater 3000 used it twice, sung by Crow T. Robot in Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie (1996), then sung again for the final television episode. It is also sung by British soldiers in the film The Travelling Players (1975) directed by Theo Angelopoulos, and by Czechoslovak soldiers in the movie Černí baroni (1992).

It is also featured in For Me and My Gal (1942) starring Judy Garland and Gene Kelly and Gallipoli (1981) starring Mel Gibson. It was sung by the crew of GS U-96 (1940) in Wolfgang Petersen's 1981 film Das Boot (the arrangement was performed by the Red Army Choir). Morale is boosted in the submarine when the German crew sings the song as they begin patrolling in the North Atlantic Ocean. The crew sings it a second time as they cruise toward home port after near-disaster.

The cast of The Mary Tyler Moore Show march off screen singing the song at the conclusion of the series' final episode, after news anchor Ted Baxter (played by Ted Knight) inexplicably recited some of the lyrics on that evening's news broadcast.

The song is often cited when documentary footage of the First World War is presented. One example of its use is in the annual television special It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown (1966). Snoopy—who fancies himself a First World War flying ace—dances to a medley of First World War-era songs played by Schroeder. The song is included, and at that point Snoopy falls into a left-right-left marching pace. Schroeder also plays the song in Snoopy Come Home (1972) at Snoopy's send-off party. Also, Snoopy is seen singing the song out loud in a series of strips about his going to the 1968 Winter Olympics. In another strip, Snoopy is walking such a long distance to reach Tipperary that he lies down exhausted and notes, "They're right, it is a long way to Tipperary." On a different occasion, Snoopy walks along and begins to sing the song, only to meet a sign that reads, "Tipperary: One Block." In a Sunday strip wherein Snoopy, in his World War I fantasy state, walks into Marcie's home, thinking it a French café, and falls asleep after drinking all her root beer, she rousts him awake by loudly singing the song.

In 1916, survivors of the sinking of HMS Tipperary (1915) in the Battle of Jutland were identified by their rescuers on HMS Sparrowhawk (1912) because they were singing "It's a Long Way to Tipperary" in their lifeboat.

In 1942, as the Japanese hell ship Lisbon Maru was sinking, Royal Artillery POWs trapped in the vessel are reported to have sung the song.

Other versions and adaptations

 * Around 1915, labour activist Joe Hill wrote It's a Long Way Down to the Soup Line using the tune of It's a Long Way to Tipperary. The song first describes the plight of poor workers before the formation of a nationwide labour union consisting of all workers. Then, it describes the improved financial state of workers after a general strike by the nationwide labour union. Lastly it describes the wealth of the workers and the demise of the capitalists after a future communist revolution.
 * In 1916, the Daily Mirror published the song in the languages of the Empire, including a version translated into Cornish by Henry Jenner.
 * A Rhodesian version of the song, called "It's a Long Way to Mukumbura", became popular among Rhodesian soldiers during the country's Bush War in the 1970s.
 * The University of Missouri uses a version of "It's a Long Way to Tipperary" as a fight song, renamed "Every True Son". It is usually played as part of a medley, followed by a cheer and then "Fight, Tiger."
 * The University of Oregon uses a contrafact of "It's a Long Way to Tipperary" as a fight song, renamed "Mighty Oregon".
 * "It's a Long Way from Amphioxus", a song parody written by Philip H. Pope, is sung by students and scientists as an affirmation of evolution. Originally recorded by Sam Hinton, it is the official song of the Biological Sciences Division at the University of Chicago.
 * The Club Atletico River Plate sports club from Buenos Aires, Argentina used the music from the song to create its hymn.
 * The song is referenced extensively in the 1917 Billy Murray song "The Further It Is From Tipperary, The Closer It Is To Berlin".
 * The song is sung several times throughout the 2021 The Simpsons Season 32 episode "The Man from G.R.A.M.P.A.".
 * Singer Tiny Tim has recorded a cover of the song twice, first in 1968 as a part of a medley with "There Will Always Be an England" and "Bless 'Em All", then in 1980 for his Chameleon album.
 * The song is a recurring motif in the film Six Minutes to Midnight, notably in the last scene, on the eve of WWII, when the German schoolgirls have been reunited with their beloved principal Rocholl (played by Judi Dench).
 * The song is referenced in the 1977 finale episode (”The Last Show”) of the American sitcom The Mary Tyler Moore Show in series 7, episode 24.
 * The Bill Caddick song "The writing of Tipperary / It's a Long Way to Tipperary" intersperses the story of Jack Judge's writing the song with a potted history of the run-up to the First World War, followed by the song itself. He sang it on his album "Sunny Memories" in 1977, and it was covered by June Tabor on her 1999 album "A Quiet Eye".
 * An adapted version of the song was the first anthem of the Brazilian football club, Fluminense Football Club in 1915

title: It's a Long Way to Tipperary


text: Category:Lipscomb County, Texas

title: Category:Lipscomb County, Texas