text:
OU812

OU812 (pronounced "Oh You Ate One Too") is the eighth studio album by American rock band Van Halen. It was released in 1988 and is the band's second album to feature vocalist Sammy Hagar. Van Halen began work on the album in September 1987 and completed it in April 1988, one month before its release.

Like its predecessor 5150, OU812 hit number 1 on the Billboard 200 chart, the second of four consecutive #1 studio albums for the band. Spurred by four Billboard Hot 100 top-40 singles ("Black and Blue", #34; "Finish What Ya Started", #13; "When It's Love", #5; and "Feels So Good", #35), the album eventually sold over 4 million copies.

The album was remastered by Donn Landee and released on October 6, 2023 as part of The Collection II; the four studio albums with Hagar, plus an extra disc of eight rarities from this era.

Production
Once the 5150 tour concluded, Eddie Van Halen had some riffs he had been working on and Hagar "had a bunch of lyrics in notebooks that I had been thinking about and writing", so they decided to work on another album soon. While the album acknowledges Van Halen for writing and performing and Landee for recording, there was no production credit because according to Hagar, "the band pretty much produced the album ourselves. And we weren't producers, in the sense that we went in with an idea and told everybody what to do and took control. There just wasn't a producer." The only cover song on the album, Little Feat's "A Apolitical Blues", was coincidentally also done by former Van Halen producer Ted Templeman and Landee, to the point the engineer used the same setup to record Van Halen's version.

When Hagar was brought to the studio, Eddie showed a piano and drums demo he recorded with Alex Van Halen, which the band soon developed into the song "When It's Love". Given the musical parts were finished quicker than the lyrics, Hagar took some weeks off and travelled to his Mexican house at Cabo San Lucas to work on more songs. There he found the inspiration for the song "Cabo Wabo", which borrowed the melody of "Make It Last", a song Hagar composed for his previous band Montrose, and whose title later named Hagar's nightclub in the city. The last song to be developed was "Finish What Ya Started", which Eddie and Hagar composed one night late into the production. However, the last track to which Hagar recorded his vocals was the eventual album opener "Mine All Mine", as he felt unsure about the lyrics. The deeper metaphysical lyrics to "Mine All Mine" were rewritten seven times, with Hagar saying "it was the first time in my life I ever beat myself up, hurt myself, punished myself, practically threw things through windows, trying to write the lyrics." Although it was considered a joke song, "Source of Infection" was written about Eddie's hospitalization with dengue fever during his vacation in Australia in April 1988, celebrating his seventh wedding anniversary with Valerie Bertinelli.

The working title was Bone, which Alex hated. Hagar then decided on OU812 after seeing this on the side of a delivery truck on the freeway and finding it funny (rumors persist, though, that the title was a disguised response to the title of David Lee Roth's 1986 solo album, Eat 'Em and Smile). OU812 is seen in "Cheech and Chong's Next Movie" (1980) on the license plate of the car given to Cheech at the "Comedy House" when he was leaving. It was also scribbled on the cinderblock column on which is mounted the payphone that the cab drivers used in the TV sitcom Taxi (1978–1983). The album's front cover is a homage to the classic cover of With the Beatles. The cover features a black and white photo of the band member's faces partly hidden in shadows, and is also similar to that of Blue Cheer's Vincebus Eruptum (1968) and King Crimson's Red (1974). Album artwork for the back cover is Hugo Rheinhold's statuette Affe mit Schädel.

The track listing on the back cover is arranged in alphabetical order, instead of in sequence on most releases.

The album is dedicated to Eddie and Alex's father, Jan, who died on December 9, 1986, at the age of 66. The inner linings of the album include the words, "This one's for you, Pa". Jan had previously appeared playing clarinet on one track, "Big Bad Bill (Is Sweet William Now)", on Van Halen's 1982 album, Diver Down.

Critical reception
Reviews for OU812 were initially mixed. Robert Christgau rated the album a C in The Village Voice, which signifies "a record of clear professionalism or barely discernible inspiration, but not both." He noted that "trading Dave for Sammy sure wrecked their shot at Led Zep of the '80s--master guitarist, signature vocalist, underrated rhythm section." However, he stated: "Eddie's obsessed with technique, Roth's contemptuous of technique, rhythm section's got enough technique and no klutz genius. But Sammy . . . like wow. If I can't claim the new boy owns them [...], you can't deny he defines them." Rolling Stone's David Fricke rated the album three-and-a-half out of five stars. He said of "Source of Infection": "While Eddie Van Halen sprays you with a machine-gun succession of speed-metal-guitar arpeggios, Sammy Hagar sends out the party invitations with his usual savoir-faire — "Hey! All right! Whoo!" Alex Van Halen and Michael Anthony, of course, take him at his word, shooting into hyper-beat space before you can say, 'Jump'." He noted that "Van Halen, contrary to purist grumbling, did not wimp out when Diamond Dave hit the bricks. Nor did the band go — ugh! — pop: the 5150 ladies' choice "Why Can't This Be Love" wasn't really a ballad; it was more like Big Rock Melancholia. In fact, all the 5150-model Van Halen did was replace one mighty mouth with another and trot out some hip, new songwriting tricks." Still, he stated that "the curve balls [...] don't always hit the strike zone. "Finish What Ya Started" is an unexpected turn into wheat-field-rock country." Despite this, he concluded that "maybe Eddie and company haven't been pushing the envelope, so to speak, far enough in terms of songwriting. But "Mine All Mine" is a good teaser for the future, the slow stuff is classy radio fare, and at its best, OU812 is a veritable feast of great white rock & roll wow." Xavier Russell of Kerrang! was more enthusiastic and called OU812 "loud, rude, dirty and very much a Van Halen album".

A retrospective review from AllMusic's Stephen Thomas Erlewine was fairly positive. Erlewine stated that "when David Lee Roth fronted the band, almost everything that Van Halen did seemed easy – as big, boisterous, and raucous as an actual party – but Van Hagar makes good times seem like tough work here." Still, he stated that "the riffs are complicated, not catchy, the rhythms plod, they don't rock, and Sammy strains to inject some good times by singing too hard." However, he concluded that "if it isn't as good as Fair Warning (even if it's nearly not as much fun), it's nevertheless the best showcase of the instrumental abilities of Van Hagar." Canadian journalist Martin Popoff defined OU812 music as "cynical corporate rock" and found the album "over-produced and actually more commonplace" than its predecessor 5150, implying that "the philosophical soul and warmth" of Van Halen "evaporated when David Lee Roth packed it in."

In a music magazine interview published a few years after the release of the album, Eddie Van Halen expressed his opinion that the record was not mixed as well as he would have liked: "Sonically it was shit." Some criticism of the album noted the bass guitar parts are of a low level in the mix compared to the vocals and other instruments. There has been speculation that the thin presence of bass guitar in the mix may be related to the Van Halen brothers' rumored growing animosity towards bassist Michael Anthony. In later years, Anthony would be forced out of the band and his songwriting credits removed or altered.

Track listing
Note
 * "A Apolitical Blues" was absent from the cassette and vinyl pressings.

Van Halen

 * Sammy Hagar – lead vocals, rhythm guitar
 * Eddie Van Halen – lead guitar, keyboards, backing vocals
 * Michael Anthony – bass, backing vocals
 * Alex Van Halen – drums, percussion

Production

 * Donn Landee – producer, engineer, remastering (2023)
 * Van Halen – producers
 * Ken Deane – assistant engineer
 * Bobby Hata – mastering (1988)
 * Jeri Heiden – art direction
 * Maura P. McLaughlin – art direction
 * Eika Aoshima – photography
 * Stuart Watson – photography

title: OU812


text:
Talk:Łódź

Untitled
PLEASE COULD SOMEONE MOVE IT BACK TO LODZ??? THX!!! SORRY THOUGHT IT WORKS :o( ...Sicherlich 12:11, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Note that some of the pictures form this article may be deleted soon due to copyright issues. See Portal:Poland/New_article_announcements.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:32, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Population density
What? 13,280 people per sq. km? That has got to be wrong...is 280 meant to be after the decimal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.220.65.123 (talk) 06:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

More on the "liberation"
 There are several witness reports on how Red Army soldiers beheaved in the area of Lodz. --Molobo 17:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Famous people from Łódź
I'm not sure about the meaning of having "Famous people from Łódź" and "others" mentioned separately. Are the "others" not famous ? Then why they ar mentioned at all ? --Lysytalk 10:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Torino??
Why the reference to Torino in the first paragraph. I don't even get it, coat of arms are by definition symbolic, you could list dozens of other entities with CoA elements derived from their names.

Tank parade photo
The basic problem with that photo is that it is completely generic. It simply shows some Soviet-produced tanks, a completely anonymous crowd, and some cobblestones. No Lodz landmark is visible. A photo like this could have been taken anywhere in Poland in 1944-1945 during the entry of the Soviet army. In short, the photo contributes nothing to this article, and should not be here, especially since we have better images related to World War II, which are recognisable as being taken in Lodz.Balcer 14:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

It should also be mentioned that when the Lodz Ghetto was liquidated in August, 1944 and its 70,000 remaining inhabitants were sent to their deaths, the Soviet army was a mere 120 km away. If the political decision had not been made to stop the Soviet summer 1944 offensive on the Vistula (to let the Germans crush the Warsaw Uprising and to send the Red Army into the Balkans before the war was over), much of Lodz's prewar Jewish population might have survived. This is one more reason to avoiding presenting the Soviet entry into the city as a glorious liberation. Balcer 14:10, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Related discussion: Talk:History_of_Poland_%281939%E2%80%931945%29.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 05:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Update: considering the controversial nature of the photo, I do think that the best solution would be simply to remove it from the article. I am sure we can find non-controversial WWII photos from Łódź if needed.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:44, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Is the picture controversial itself, or your interpretation of it? Dr. Dan (talk) 14:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * What is this all about? The picture is a documentary chronicle, thankfully preserved in the archives. It's opposer never brought any sources disputing its authenticity, while the source is reliable. Labeling it "propaganda" as done by Lysy is nothing but, again, unreferenced personal opinion. If we allow removal of information per WP:IDONTLIKEIT we could strip the Wikipedia from entire content. --Irpen 18:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

No answer here, Piotrus and Molobo? Just reverts. Is Gadu Gadu involved by any chance? --Irpen 23:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

title of this article
Why is this article titled "Łódź"? Shouldn't the article title be what the city is called in the English language? For example, compare Florence (not Firenze), Montreal (not Montréal), or for that matter Warsaw (not Warszawa). Certainly I understand that in its own language the name of the city is Łódź, but in English it is called Lodz, so shouldn't that be what the article is called? See Naming conventions (geographic names). --Mathew5000 19:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Please learn the history first before throwing around with guidelines just for the sake of formality! The form "Lodz" is heavily linked to Nazi Germany and is therefore discouraged in today's usage. --2001:16B8:2E2D:1000:2906:EB5:A350:DC8D (talk) 03:22, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Why are scholary
Resources removed ? --Molobo 04:31, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

New Edit War?
The recent flak over the photo of the Red Army entering Lodz seems strange to say the least. Is it really propaganda? If so, just how was Lodz "liberated" from the Nazis? Was it by the AK or the Armia Ludowa?thumb|200px|[[Red Army enters Łódź January 1945]] How's this caption? Dr. Dan (talk) 02:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * No answer? OK, I am restoring the picture and I hope there would be no more removals based I WP:IDONTLIKEIT. --Irpen 22:05, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Very important and interesting photo. Why exactly is it being removed? Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 22:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation of "Łódź"
The last sound in the word "Łódź" is a voiceless affricate, so the aproximate English phonetic transcription should be "wootch", not "woogde"! You pronounce the word "łuć" not "łudź", if you are a Pole it is obvious. Pippirrup (talk) 13:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

That's true. The sound file included in the article is wrong, too. The final sound should be devoiced (Polish has final devoicing), so the pronunciation of the city's name with a voiced consonant in the end is a case of hypercorrectness. Oddtail (talk) 22:36, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. The IPA is also wrong in that sense. --我輩は犬である (talk) 18:35, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Skin Hunters
"In 2002 the city came to national attention due to the "Skin Hunters" scandal: doctors and paramedics in one of the city's hospitals were caught murdering patients and selling their details to funeral homes for them to contact the relatives."

Actually "scandal" took place not in the hospitals but in the ambulance cars. It was a really great scandal but, still, I'm not sure is it import information to put in such article... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.151.115.9 (talk) 21:16, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Name of Lodz Ghetto in English
The Wikipedia article on the Lodz Ghetto is entitled Ghetto Litzmannstadt. See. Surely, in English the name is Lodz Ghetto. An advanced Google search (English language sites) yields:
 * Lodz Ghetto - 88,600 pages
 * Litzmannstadt Ghetto - 6,640 pages

The difference is certainly striking. I have also raised the matter on the talk page at. The use of Litzmannstadt as the place-name seems anomalous and POV. The word order, with Ghetto placed first, is German and is contrary to English usage. Norvo (talk) 18:13, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Please suggest a move at Talk:Ghetto Litzmannstadt. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

 * noted change to city article with addition of "(commonly rendered Lodz)" In ictu oculi (talk) 03:17, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

completely unwarranted move
There is no reason to move to the non existing "Lodz". And yes, "Łódź" is used in English, for example, Ghettostadt: Łódź and the making of a Nazi city, or Łódź Ghetto: a history. Use of "Łódź" is no different then including the accent in "Vendée", the use of umlauts in Düsseldorf and many other places. Why is it that Polish cities or names always get singled out for this treatment? Please move it back.radek (talk) 22:03, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I also believe this move to be misguided.
 * In this case the difference in pronunciation between 'Łódź' (roughly 'Wudz') and 'Lodz' is significant
 * Using Lodz is IMO increasing the potential for confusion and inaccuracy in the encyclopaedia.
 * I second the motion to move it back. User:Marek69 .     22:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

 * I have moved it back. An editor had requested that the page be moved (tagging the redirect as G6). From reading WP:PLACE, it was my understanding that "Lodz" indeed would be the best title since that was the term mainly used in English, so I moved the page. Following the cycle of WP:BRD, I've reverted the move. Sorry folks, and best of luck :) Jamie  S93  22:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I am not sure that (due to GBooks poor handling of diacritics) we can indeed judge whether Lodz is more or less popular than Łódź. See also m y comments on Jamie's talk - and thank you Jamie for reverting your changes. Feel free to continue this discussion here. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I came here from what is (possibly) an irrelevant reference in the rugby union world. However, I would suggest that it (sorta) demonstrates how it is almost impossible to manage Polish diacritics in English.  Therefore, anyone who would like to make references to this city (as a concept, not this article as an independent thing...), while speaking English will be far more likely to type in "Lodz" than ... I can't type it in but you know what I mean AshleyMorton (talk) 01:42, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe, but people are also more likely to type in "Dusseldorf" rather "Düsseldorf" or "Bernauer Strasse" rather than "Bernauer Straße" but that's not an argument for a move.radek (talk) 01:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I get your point (well taken), and you might be right - this is not something close to my heart, and I would be happy to be wrong, but I've got to be convinced first! :) So - I will argue that the names of cities, towns, other things that would reasonably used while speaking English should be presented as an English speaker would type them - That's why the concept of a Voivodship (which, really, only exists in Polish) should hold as many diacritics as you feel like, while Lodz, Warsaw and other cities that would commonly be typed without diacritics by English speakers (because they have already been an element of the English language, before anyone built an airport or formed a voivodship, should contain only English-typable characters.AshleyMorton (talk) 02:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "As an English speaker would type them" - well, I'm an English speaker and I type in Łódź. More importantly I don't think this is the criteria that Wikipedia uses for what title articles should be under - it is not used for German, Czech, Serb, Slovak, Slovenian, Hungarian, Lithuanian, Estonian etc. So this is a WAYYYYY major and controversial move.radek (talk) 06:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't doubt that most people will type in Lodz rather than Łódź (whatever language they speak), but that's irrelevant - we have a redirect anyway, so if you type in Lodz you get to the same article. If you look around Wikipedia, you'll see that diacritics from foreign alphabets are almost universally used, except in cases where there's an undoubtedly established English form as with Aragon or Napoleon. It provides extra information without making it any more difficult to find the article.--Kotniski (talk) 10:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, I think that really I should be taking this up at the page where naming conventions are discussed, in general. There needs to be some more systematic way to handle names that do not have "English versions", yet cannot be represented by English letters.  I disagree with the conclusion you folks have clearly come to, but I also clearly understand that I am in the minority, and won't continue the fight over this specific entry until / unless we can come to a different consensus, either here, or at a more general location. AshleyMorton (talk) 20:22, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This was discussed in the past, and the end result of those discussions was the conclusion presented above. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:24, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * As I said, I would like to take this up more generally - Piotrus, you say that this was discussed in the past, and I've found three proposed policies: Use diacritics, Usage of diacritics and Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics) - but every one says in big letters across the top "This proposal has failed to attain consensus within the Wikipedia community." Is there a policy that I'm missing somewhere? ...because I can't conclude that there was/is an "end result". AshleyMorton (talk) 03:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * There's always been a lot of opposition to these spellings, though it has never been concentrated or energetic enough to prevail (in contrast to the activities currently under review at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern_European_mailing_list). Łódź is a word with four letters, only one of which can be typed from a normal keyboard in the English-speaking world. No-one in English is gonna write that unless they have some dedication to "accuracy". I don't personally mind too much ... users from Poland seem to think the diacritics are important, so I just normally respect that. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 00:19, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * To get to this page, use standard letters 'Lodz' and Wikipedia redirects here, as Kotniski has already stated.
 * In order to type the name in correctly, just use copy/paste, as I suspect everyone who has 'typed' Łódź on this page has done.
 * I am also British and I don't see the problem. -- User:Marek69 .     02:37, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The problem isn't really whether someone gets here by typing "Lodz" or not, or whether we could copy-paste the diacritics in - it's whether these diacritics are English. We all agree that we're supposed to Use English - that's the easy part.  The tough part is reaching any sort of consensus about what the "English name" of a place that's not frequently discussed in English is.  This is complicated by the fact that many editors here of Polish articles have familiarity with Polish, and thus see "Lodz" as not only "anglicised", but explicitly wrong (I understand the problem - I see "Alesund" and "Bodo" as "wrong", too, because I speak Norwegian.  However, are Ålesund and Bodø (correct spellings in Norwegian) English?  I would say "no", but as I've agreed above, it's a discussion for another place... AshleyMorton (talk) 03:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

<-- I would actually think that Ålesund and Bodø are the "correct" forms in English. Part of this has to do with the fact that there is no "official" English, unlike say French - it's a language governed by convention. Which is part of what makes it so flexible and adoptable. So I wouldn't say that an "Ł" or a "ø" are "not English" - they're just rarely used in English. But that makes a lot of difference, particularly when reliable sources use these.radek (talk) 03:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * In most of the cases of significant Polish place names, there is no question that the non-diacritic version is more popular in English. But as I've argued elsewhere, it shouldn't overcome issues of accuracy (Lo and Ło are different sounds) so long as there are redirects. English has no authentic name for Łódź, and if we were in pre-mass literacy days with no German influence it would probably emerge as something like Wodge or Woodge. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 13:55, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I would like to refer to another example, Ełk, another town in Poland. Would it be of benefit to the encyclopaedia to rename/move it to Elk or, (as I as suspect) would that just create more ambiguity? -- User:Marek69 .     17:43, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, that would be Elk (Poland). Hmmm, we can just move Łódź to Boat (Poland)... :> --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Piotrus, surely you mean Łoś (Poland)? ;-) -- User:Marek69 .     21:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I dislike any diacritics, be it Polish, Czech, or German, and in articles written by me, I never use them. However, as Piotrus wrote, since google automatically redirects us after typing Lodz, I do not think this redirect is needed. If we create a precedent, then we will have to move almost all Polish cities. Tymek (talk) 16:55, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually we'd have to move many German, Finnish, Swedish, Norwegian, etc etc etc cities and names too. It just doesn't make any sense at all. The situation as it is now is the best possible solution. Loosmark (talk) 17:13, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I totally agree with you. Tymek (talk) 18:56, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * In fact, that is the most effective argument, really, against removing diacritics - that it would be so bloody much work to actually 'implement' the policy - work of the most mundane, bureacratic type, which could have been used adding content to Wikipedia. The thing that worries me with that argument is the degree to which Wikipedia is used as an authority on English names for things.  It's a way more reliable translator than almost anything else for place names and technical terms - go to the place name you know in your own language (say, "Venise" in French), then click the interwiki for your language of choice (Say, Danish), and "poof" (we now know that they call it "Venedig").  We on the English wiki always talk as if we are slaves to common usage (and most of us try to be, most of the time), but more and more we are in fact the arbiters of what common English usage is.  that means that if we're getting it wrong, we should be fixing it, even if it's a lot of boring work. AshleyMorton (talk) 20:12, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the Elk argument above is fairly frivolous. All Polish place-names will usually be spelled without diacritics in English, irrespective of any amusement side-effects it may occasionally have to Polish speakers, and the idea that such anglicization necessitate "translating" the names is complete straw man, as this never happens by principle. Inbhir Nis is Inverness, not Nessmouth. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 09:11, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * In the Elk example, I was simply trying to use a little ‘humour’ to illustrate my point, i.e. that using diacritics is simply more accurate, and will avoid much confusion. (as well as disambiguation pages)
 * The main reason, historically, why diacritics have not been more widely used in the English language, is that English typefaces did not contain them before the advent of the computer. (with the exception, maybe, of the é)
 * As this created a difficulty in printing them, they were simply left out and not used. This is however changing with the introduction of computers with international typefaces. Words such as née, fiancée, façade and déjà vu are becoming more commonly spelt with their appropriate accents. (maybe this is happening more in the UK than in the US?)
 * Now we have the ability to use diacritics relatively easily, I see no reason why we shouldn’t. -- User:Marek69 .     18:13, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

B-class review failed
This article does not meet B-class criteria, due to missing key sections (ex. culture) and insufficient inline referencing (there are entire sections unreferenced). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:47, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Article layout

 * I have redesigned the layout from scratch to make Łódź article look more like a metropolitan city (which it is). I have used Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Settlements: Article structure as a guideline. Stacks of photographs were moved to gallery → more info available at Picture tutorial. Some of the World War II info was slightly rearanged according to subject, and the population template (with proper title) moved to the right. If you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Thanks. Poeticbent  talk  22:14, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Constituency
Someone please edit the constiutuency details - the MPs are from before the 2011 elections! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.79.243.35 (talk) 09:03, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just added archive links to 7 one external links on Łódź. 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: When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110723000342/http://www.weser-kurier.de/Artikel/Ratgeber/Reise/36989/Neues+Leben+in+alten+Fabriken:+Lodz+baut+auf+Kultur.html to http://www.weser-kurier.de/Artikel/Ratgeber/Reise/36989/Neues+Leben+in+alten+Fabriken:+Lodz+baut+auf+Kultur.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160222063938/http://www.uml.lodz.pl/_plik.php%3Fid%3D1968 to http://www.uml.lodz.pl/_plik.php%3Fid%3D1968
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160222045840/http://www.rzeczpospolita.pl/dodatki/plus_minus_010728/plus_minus_a_4.html to http://www.rzeczpospolita.pl/dodatki/plus_minus_010728/plus_minus_a_4.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120525040047/http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jfg1UcJtfo3IzRq-Dne3j2H1cSoA to https://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jfg1UcJtfo3IzRq-Dne3j2H1cSoA
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140302181123/http://www.dzienniklodzki.pl/artykul/702615,cmentarz-zydowski-w-lodzi-zdewastowany-zdjecia-film,1,1,id,t,sm,sg.html?cookie=1 to http://www.dzienniklodzki.pl/artykul/702615,cmentarz-zydowski-w-lodzi-zdewastowany-zdjecia-film,1,1,id,t,sm,sg.html?cookie=1#galeria-material
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120517163340/http://www.studenckinobel.pl:80/index.php/historia-konkursu to http://www.studenckinobel.pl/index.php/historia-konkursu
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130313232244/http://www.halolodz.pl/wiadomosci/wiadomo%C5%9Bci/artykul,9369,m%C5%82ody-dziennikarz-zn%C3%B3w-pretenduje-do-nobla.html to http://www.halolodz.pl/wiadomosci/wiadomo%C5%9Bci/artykul,9369,m%C5%82ody-dziennikarz-zn%C3%B3w-pretenduje-do-nobla.html

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:47, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 7 external links on Łódź. 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: When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.weser-kurier.de/Artikel/Ratgeber/Reise/36989/Neues%2BLeben%2Bin%2Balten%2BFabriken%3A%2BLodz%2Bbaut%2Bauf%2BKultur.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.halolodz.pl/wiadomosci/wiadomo%C5%9Bci/artykul%2C9369%2Cm%C5%82ody-dziennikarz-zn%C3%B3w-pretenduje-do-nobla.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090719003816/http://www.lyon.fr/vdl/sections/en/villes_partenaires/villes_partenaires_2/?aIndex=1 to http://www.lyon.fr/vdl/sections/en/villes_partenaires/villes_partenaires_2/?aIndex=1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090422161628/http://www.klgd.ru/city/twins/ to http://www.klgd.ru/city/twins/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090214183503/http://www.tel-aviv.gov.il/Hebrew/Cityhall/TwinCities/Index.asp to http://www.tel-aviv.gov.il/Hebrew/Cityhall/TwinCities/Index.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090727165113/http://www.orebro.se/2444.html to http://www.orebro.se/2444.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051024093811/http://www.mapa.lodz.pl/eng/ to http://www.mapa.lodz.pl/eng/

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:15, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Subtitle under photo compilation is not correct
I looked at the compilation picture above the article, and it has little to do with the subtitle under it. I found the "Manufactura" building on the second row on the right, while it should be the first from left to right. The number of subjects does not correspond with the number of photo's. What happened here? Has the photo been changed? Could not find anything in the history. 77.250.88.234 (talk) 19:23, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The answer is (better late than never...?) there actually was a change made to the photo montage on 31 August 2017 – see Special:Diff/798235517. Reverted 15 September Special:Diff/800719516. --CiaPan (talk) 21:38, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Song
There is an old song "about" Lodz that has a version that was very popular a few decades ago. It is "Theo, wir fahr'n nach Lodz" (pronounced with an L and written with no diacriticals). is this worth mentioning? Information about the song can be found on the German Wikipedia. Kdammers (talk) 15:29, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it should: WP DE and PL have it pl:Theo_wir_fahr%27n_nach_Lodz Zezen (talk) 10:32, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It should be described if it is notable, and it is notable if it has a decent coverage in reliable sources. Wikipedia (dewiki & plwiki) is not a source reliable enough for Wikipedia (enwiki). What is well known or even important for Polish or German culture may be of no meaning for the English-speaking part of the world. So seek appropriate sources and if you find them, then add information here.  --CiaPan (talk) 18:28, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Nah, us are too lazy. Just FYI that there are sources in the PL/DE/* wikis. Bows Zezen (talk) 21:51, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Lazy but not tooo lazy. Here are some sources: https://www.kulturforum.info › de › beitrag › 181-1000175-theo-wir-fahr-n-nach-lodz, https://sachsen-net.com › veranstaltungen › Sonderausstellung-Theo-Wir-Fahr-N-Nach-Lodz-Sachsen-96672.ht

 * Sorry, but I do not see how this is central to this article. It's largely trivial. Merangs (talk) 22:43, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree that it is not central to the article, but it is relevant. (There is a lot of content to the article that is not central.) The song is fairly significant in German pop music history and very significant in the career of the singer.  Pop culture references are common in Wikipedia articles. Kdammers (talk) 01:42, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
 * There is even an entire section on the city in literature and film. I think that is practically an invitation to add information about it in other art forms. Kdammers (talk) 01:44, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 5 December 2021

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

The result of the move request was: Snow closure: there is consensus against moving the article to the proposed name; see also WP:DGUIDE, which mentions the usage of Łódź/Lodz in dictionary and encyclopedia entries. (non-admin closure) Szmenderowiecki (talk) 21:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Łódź → Lodz – The proposed name is the WP:COMMONNAME for this city. This is shown by the use of the broad usage of the proposed name in agencies such as Bloomberg, Reuters, the Guardian, BBC, and Aljazeera. Spekkios (talk) 22:17, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

 * I see that you’ve created at least four of these RMs. The whole issue of WP:DIACRITICS has been discussed to death on Wikipedia and spamming these requests can become disruptive at some point.  Volunteer Marek   02:19, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You have continued to state that without providing any evidence that the issue of diacritics has been decided by consensus, especially because WP:DIACRITICS states The use of modified letters (such as accents or other diacritics) in article titles is neither encouraged nor discouraged; when deciding between versions of a word that differ in the use or non-use of modified letters follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language (including other encyclopedias and reference works). The policy on using common names and on foreign names does not prohibit the use of modified letters, if they are used in the common name as verified by reliable sources. As per the reliable sources presented "Lodz" is the name we should use, so WP:DIACRITICS supports a move. To claim that these RM's are disruptive is absurd as I am not "spamming" them at all: I have created four. That is hardly spamming. --Spekkios (talk) 04:45, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Oppose - per comments here --> - GizzyCatBella  🍁  02:56, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * As per your comment there, please show that reliable sources use the current name, because as per my move request it appears they do not. --Spekkios (talk) 04:45, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Oppose. There are four similar proposals currently active — Talk:Zürich, Talk:Kraków, Talk:Wrocław and Talk:Poznań. All of these propose to strip diacritics from the names of European cities that use the Latin alphabet — a matter that has already been decided in favor of accents and diacritics during previous such discussions. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 03:22, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * As in the Poznan discussion, I note that no policy-aligned reason has been provided here, with the only reason being a vague nod at a single informal discussion from 2009 about a bold move, and even if that discussion was sufficient to demonstrate consensus at the time then WP:CCC and WP:LOCALCONSENSUS would apply. BilledMammal (talk) 03:28, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You have provided no policy reason to oppose a move nor provided any evidence that the matter of accents and diacritics has been decided, especially because WP:DIACRITICS clearly says to use the WP:COMMONNAME as provided in reliable English-languages sources. --Spekkios (talk) 04:45, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Support, for the same reasons as at the Wroclaw discussion; per the sources provided in the nomination and my own search, it is the clear WP:COMMONNAME.
 * In regards to GizzyCatBella's !vote, if this were the Polish Wikipedia then they would be correct - "Łódź" would be the correct spelling, and "Lodz" would be inaccurate. However, this is not the Polish Wikipedia, this is the English Wikipedia, and in English, per reliable sources, "Lodz" is the correct name for the city. I would also note that no policy justification has been provided for their position, while "Lodz" is supported both by WP:COMMONNAME, by WP:UE, which states that "The choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage", and by WP:DIACRITICS, which states that the use of diacritics should "follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language". If they, or other editors, disagree with this, then I would suggest that they seek to change WP:UE or WP:DIACRITICS, rather than trying to overrule it with a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. BilledMammal (talk)

 * Oppose (as I do oppose similar move votes, I've noticed there are quite a lot of them taking place these days). If there is no clear standard name, we should prefer the Polish versiuon with diacritics, otherwise it would seem kinda like mutilating the real name.Polska jest Najważniejsza (talk) 06:47, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * There is a clear standard name as per the sources I've provided. --Spekkios (talk) 06:55, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Opposeas per established rules.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 07:35, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Which rules are you refering to? WP:DIACRITICS and WP:COMMONNAME both support this move. --Spekkios (talk) 07:53, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Oppose per the rationales presented at Talk:Kraków.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 08:46, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * oppose Per the Wrocław and Kraków discusions—blindlynx 14:31, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I note that in the discussions you reference, you base your position solely on Ngrams. While I personally find such a limited basis insufficient, you have appear to find it sufficient, and so I have to ask why you oppose this proposed move, when Ngrams suggests that "Lodz" is the common name? BilledMammal (talk) 14:59, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * True, i admitedly did not check the ngrams for this one, but that said articles should be titled consistently across polish citiesnamely with diacritics. Moreover, based on the current sate of the ngrams it is likely that 'Łódź' will soon be most used in the English corpus the same way that others have become more common in the last few year—blindlynx 16:50, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Oppose For languages using the Latin alphabet, it is preferable (and frankly more respectful) to use the existing names, as long as no established English alternative name exists (such as Venice, Rome, Gothenburg, Copenhagen etc.). Jeppiz (talk) 18:55, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The established English name is Lodz as per the sources provided. "Respect" does not play into article title decisions. --Spekkios (talk) 22:05, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Spekkios, there is no need for you to jump in and argue with every user who opposes your proposals, as you are currently doing across several talk pages. Another user already pointed out to you earlier today that your behavior is veering towards becoming disruptive (see WP:BATTLEGROUND). You've made the proposed moved request, other users are perfectly free to disagree. As the starter of this thread, you are not the person to judge other users' motives. Period. Jeppiz (talk) 22:43, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * In their defence, while others are free to disagree, they are supposed to disagree with a policy based arguments, supported by evidence if necessary, which doesn't appear to have been done here; the closest you came to a policy based argument is the assertion that there is "no established English alternative name", but that seems contrary to all the evidence so far, and you failed to present evidence refuting that evidence. BilledMammal (talk) 22:46, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * As already explained, my argument is that (1) there are no established alternative English forms (a spelling without diacritics is not an alternative name, such as Copenhagen or Gothenburg are), (2) there is no need to transliterate names already in the Latin alphabet, and (3) I do think that respect for local usage is relevant. Jeppiz (talk) 22:54, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Unless there is a policy I am not aware of, neither of those arguments seem to align with policy. (1) and (2) go against WP:DIACRITICS, which establishes that our use of diacritics should follow the use in common sources, while (3) seems to be a WP:RGWs argument. If I am mistaken and their are policies in support of your position, could you please cite them? BilledMammal (talk) 23:19, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are mistaken on several accounts. Your most serious mistake is your adherence to WP:PETTIFOG, adapting a very narrow and legalistic reading of policies to push your own view, while displaying little understanding of said policies. Second, your assumption that WP:DIACRITICS and WP:COMMONNAME favor a move is your interpretation. For example, Encyclopedia Britannica uses Łódź and, with all due respect, I dare say the editors of Britannica are far better versed in English usage than you are (or than I am, for that matter). Jeppiz (talk) 23:28, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Jeppiz, I am responding to each of these opposition statements because none of them cite any sources for their common use claim nor cite any policy or guidelines. That is not disruptive nor is it turning into a battleground. I am not being uncivil in any of these discussions, nor am I judging the motives of anyone anywhere. That claim is simply absurd. I find it quite curious that instead of supporting your statement with relevant policy, guidelines, or sources, you have resorted to an ad hominem.
 * In response to your claim that this is WP:PETTIFOG, I have already quoted the relevant portion of WP:DIACRITICS above. Is there something wrong with my interpretation, and if so, what is it? I don't see how follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language} and if they are used in the common name as verified by reliable sources can be interpreted any other way. As for WP:COMMONNAME, that clearly states that Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources) as such names will usually best fit the five criteria listed above. Can you also explain how that does not support a move in this case? --Spekkios (talk) 23:53, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Comment Encyclopedia Britannica (by far a better source than those presented above) uses Łódź, showing that Łódź is indeed English usage. Jeppiz (talk) 23:30, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Britannica is an data point towards establishing that "Łódź" is the name that "follows the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language" required by WP:DIACRITICS. By itself, however, it doesn't establish "general usage". What does is a systematic review of reliable sources, as has been conducted by the nominator, a review that is backed up by the less direct evidence provided by Ngrams. BilledMammal (talk) 23:42, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * This is a bit beside the point, but being an academic I must point out that 'systematic review' has a precise meaning (see systematic review) and nothing even resembling a systematic has been presented here. We have seen a few references to some media usage, and I am happy to agree that that is already relevant, but it doesn't even begin to constitute a systematic review. And while the likes of Bloomberg and Al Jazeera are relevant, their usage isn't even nearly as relevant as Encyclopedia Britannica (in case you're new to Wikipedia, it's been standard practice for over a decade to look at Britannica's usage in cases related to English usage for foreign names). Jeppiz (talk) 23:52, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You make a good point; I don't know how the nominator selected their sources. As such, I will conduct an actual systematic review, by using this list to select my sources, removing aggregators and those that are considered unreliable by WP:RSP. Examples are provided solely for purpose of example, but are representative of the overall result.
 * BBC - Lodz
 * MSN - Lodz
 * CNN - Lodz
 * NYT - Lodz
 * Fox News - Lodz
 * The Guardian - Łódź
 * India Times - Lodz
 * NDTV - Lodz
 * Washington Post - Lodz
 * CNBC - Lodz
 * News18 - Lodz
 * Times of India - Lodz
 * ABC - Lodz
 * NY Post - Lodz
 * The results are not unanimous, but with just a single exception the results are clear that "Lodz" is the term that "follows the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language". As for Britannica's usage, I think it has been standard practice to check what they use, but we don't blindly follow them if doing so is out of line with general usage, as to do so would violate policy which requires we follow "general usage". BilledMammal (talk) 00:23, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * How about UNESCO? --> They seem to spell Łódź correctly  GizzyCatBella  🍁  03:21, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think providing singular examples is very helpful, as we are required to follow "general usage" and singular examples do not help us with that; a broad overview of neutrally chosen sources, as I provided, is what we need. I would also note that UNESCO is inconsistent, and I am uncertain whether they prefer "Lodz" or "Łódź". BilledMammal (talk) 03:32, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * And here is BBC page using Łódź... and here's a CNN one . Here's The Guardian: . I am sure we an find examples for more publishers from your list, I just chose three at random and all can be seen using both Lodz and Łódź without much consistency. Some journalists are lazy and don't use diacritics, some are more true to the original. Fortunately, at Wikipedia, we don't have to be lazy and dumb things down. Diacritics are a thing, and we use them. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:04, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * If you actually read my list, you would see that it classifies the Guardian as using "Łódź".
 * And yes, there are occasional articles using the other form. For instance, when I reviewed sources from the Guardian, I found that for every five articles using "Łódź", three would use "Lodz". I would note that this was the closest split I found; every other example showed a considerably greater preference for their chosen form. For instance, I found that for every three BBC articles using "Lodz", there was one using "Łódź" - if you believe it would be useful, I can provide the ratio for every source listed above? I did think I made it clear that not every source used "Lodz" or "Łódź" every time, with "representative of the overall result", but in retrospect I could have been clearer. BilledMammal (talk) 10:18, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @BilledMammal - In 1939, the Jewish community of Łódź numbered nearly 200,000 people, roughly 30% of the city’s population. Does the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum count? Do you like this source?  GizzyCatBella  🍁  10:50, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @BilledMammal - Look at this --> - I believe we should spell Łódź accurately and not duplicate errors from newspapers around the world Billed Mammal. - GizzyCatBella  🍁  10:57, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It is interesting that you bring up the Lodz Ghetto, as I actually looked into it earlier in this discussion to determine whether in connection to the Ghetto "Lodz" or "Łódź" was preferred. I consider this slightly off topic, so I won't present the full evidence unless requested, but this Ngrams is reflective of the overall result; in connection to the Ghetto, "Lodz" is preferred over "Łódź" even more than it is in general.
 * This brings me to what I mentioned before; that while the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum is a reliable source, it is a singular source, and one that based on the above appears to be selected because it uses "Łódź" rather than selected and then checked, and so is no more useful in this discussion than if I pointed at Yad Vashem, the Israeli Holocaust memorial and museum, who uses Lodz. This is because we can both provide sources that back the position we are arguing for until this RM is closed by some unfortunate editor, and so what we need is to do what I did above - conduct a systematic review by finding a suitable list of sources and then checking whether they prefer "Lodz" or "Łódź", as this method will show us which name is in "general usage", and thus which name we are required to use by WP:DIACRITICS. BilledMammal (talk) 11:32, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Look BilledMammal you would have to move 100’s of other Polish cities, villages, counties etc. as well if you get your way. Cites such as Gdańsk, Białystok, (and Białystok Ghetto) Łomża, Toruń, Rzeszów, Giżycko, Gorzów, Zielona Góra, Chorzów, Płock, Racibórz, Wieluń, Wyszków, Wałbrzych, Słubice, Ełk, Pruszków, Sokółka, Tuchów, Wrocławek, Świdnica, Piątnica, Elbląk, Świnoujście, Piła, Przemyśl, Ostrołęka, Chełm (and Chełmno Concentration Camp) etc.etc.etc..- I can keep going and going. What’s the point of doing that for Christ Sake ? Those are all correct spellings. Neee, I don’t think so. -  GizzyCatBella  🍁  12:18, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * And these too - Łódź Voivodeship, Łódź Film School, Łódź Władysław Reymont Airport, Łódź insurrection, Łódź Cross-City Line, Łódź Ring Road, Łódź East County, Łódź Circular Line, Łódź Voivodeship (1919–1939) etc. - no way, sorry - GizzyCatBella  🍁  12:26, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * If you believe the current policies are flawed, then could I suggest opening an RfC to change WP:DIACRITICS? Alternatively, if you want a more limited change, could I suggest proposing a new naming convention for Polish locations, that would state that in cases where the difference between the common English name and the Polish common name is diacritics, the Polish common name should be used?
 * Until then, policy is unambiguous on this, and I don't believe it would be appropriate to overrule them with a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. BilledMammal (talk) 12:31, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * O yeah, and let’s not forget about this one Łódź Ghetto - GizzyCatBella  🍁  12:31, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * ... and the consensus seems to be here, let me see, let me look again... o yeah. Stays as Łódź. - GizzyCatBella  🍁  12:35, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Oppose. Wikipedia is not dumbed down and WP:DIACRITICS are ok. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:57, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Support This is the English language Wikipedia and so we should be using the English alphabet, not the Polish one. Łódź is as inappropriate as München or Москва would be.  The slashed L is especially bad as this is quite unknown in English and so will be confused with other symbols like strikethrough or £.  This is why we have different Wikipedias for the different languages. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:28, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no policy support at all for that, no policy tells us to "use the English alphabet". Jeppiz (talk) 16:40, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:ESTABLISHED states that "If a particular name is widely used in English-language sources, then that name is generally the most appropriate, no matter what name is used by non-English sources." The evidence above is that Lodz is established in English and the other form isn't. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:09, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose and snow close this obviously is not going to happen just because two editors are not familiar with the consistent and universal use of full Latin fonts on the en.wp. To keep the RM open is pointless and byte wasting. Close and get back to more productive activity 17:18, 7 December 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by In ictu oculi (talk • contribs)

Pronunciation guide
I can see there has been much discussion along these lines. But not having any pronunciation guidance in this article currently is a big fail, IMO. This is an English-language article, and it ought to offer some guidance for how to say "Łódź" in English; even if there are disagreements about that, those can be part of the guidance. Lobosolo (talk) 16:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Łódź


text:
William Craig (Northern Ireland politician)

William "Bill" Craig (2 December 1924 – 25 April 2011) was a Northern Irish politician best known for forming the Unionist Vanguard movement.

Early life
From Cookstown, County Tyrone, Craig was educated at Royal School Dungannon, Larne Grammar School and Queen's University Belfast.

After serving in the Royal Air Force (as a Lancaster bomber rear gunner) during World War II, he became a solicitor.

Politics
He was active in the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) and led the Ulster Young Unionist Council. He was elected to the Stormont Parliament in a by-election in 1960 for Larne, and became a Minister in 1963. He held several portfolios under Terence O'Neill, eventually as Minister for Home Affairs. His most notable action while in this office was to ban the march of the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association on 5 October 1968. He also accused the civil rights movement of being a political front for the IRA.

On 11 December 1968, O'Neill dismissed Craig when he suspected Craig was a supporter of Ulster nationalism. Craig began to build a power base for himself within unionism, becoming head of the Ulster Loyalist Association. The UUP withdrew the whip from him in May 1970; Craig then began to make plans to form his own political party. The Ulster Vanguard movement was formed on 9 February 1972 under Craig's leadership (the Deputy Leaders were the Reverend Martin Smyth and Captain Austin Ardill).

Ulster Vanguard advocated a semi-independent Northern Ireland. Vanguard held a large rally on 18 March 1972 in Belfast's Ormeau Park at which Craig said "We must build up the dossiers on the men and women who are a menace to this country, because one day, ladies and gentlemen, if the politicians fail, it may be our job to liquidate the enemy". Vanguard also staged a two-day strike in protest at the prorogation of the Stormont Parliament.

In April 1972, Vanguard issued a policy statement "Ulster – A Nation" which said that Northern Ireland might have to consider independence. In October, he spoke at a meeting of the Conservative Monday Club, a group of right-wing Conservative MPs at Westminster. He told them he could mobilise 80,000 men to oppose the UK Government, adding: "We are prepared to come out and shoot and kill. I am prepared to come out and shoot and kill, let's put the bluff aside. I am prepared to kill, and those behind me will have my full support." In March 1973, the Ulster Vanguard became the Vanguard Unionist Progressive Party.

The Vanguard Unionists under Craig formed part of the United Ulster Unionist Council which opposed the power-sharing Sunningdale Agreement. Craig was elected to the Northern Ireland Assembly created under the Sunningdale Agreement, and he won a seat in the UK Parliament at the February 1974 general election for East Belfast. However, in the Northern Ireland Constitutional Convention in the mid-1970s, Craig broke with the majority of his party to support voluntary power-sharing with the Social Democratic and Labour Party. The Vanguard Unionists fell apart, with one section forming the United Ulster Unionist Party. Craig led the remains of Vanguard in rejoining the Ulster Unionist Party in 1978, but lost his seat at the 1979 general election.

Craig subsequently broke with the Ulster Unionists once more. When elections were held for the new Northern Ireland Assembly in 1982, Craig revived the name Vanguard for his candidacy in East Belfast. However, he failed to be elected. That marked the effective end of Craig's political career.

After a long period away from public life, he died on 25 April 2011. He had suffered a stroke the previous month. Many historians have agreed that Craig found it difficult to accept that Northern Ireland had to make social and economic reforms. Craig led opposition to those proposals throughout the premierships of Terence O'Neill, James Chichester-Clark and Brian Faulkner. Although he showed few intentions when he became the leader of the Unionist Vanguard movement, he showed public intention to form a Northern Ireland Executive in 1975 with the Social Democratic and Labour Party, along with the Alliance Party and Ulster Unionist Party. That is mainly overshadowed due to his early political beliefs and refusal to accept reform and change to Northern Irish society.


text:
Cooler Heads Coalition

The Cooler Heads Coalition is a politically conservative "informal and ad-hoc group" in the United States, financed and operated by the Competitive Enterprise Institute. The group, which rejects the scientific consensus on climate change, made efforts to stop the government from addressing climate change.

Operation
The Coalition operates a website, and published a blog and e-newsletter Cooler Heads Digest (last issued in 2012). It was founded by Consumer Alert.

The Cooler Heads Coalition describes itself as "an informal and ad-hoc group focused on dispelling the myths of global warming by exposing flawed economic, scientific, and risk analysis".

Reception
The Washington Post described the group as "in the vanguard of efforts to cast doubt on the gravity of climate change and thwart government efforts to address it." The New Yorker has described the Cooler Heads Coalition as "an umbrella organization operated by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a nonprofit that prides itself on its opposition to environmentalists."

According to The Washington Post, the group was for "long dismissed as cranks by mainstream scientists and politicians in both parties" until the group was embraced by Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign. The Cooler Heads Coalition has been criticized for ties to energy industries that would be affected if the United States enacted any legislation targeted at reducing CO2 emissions.

Membership
Notable members of the Coalition have included:
 * 60 Plus Association
 * Alexis de Tocqueville Institution
 * Americans for Prosperity
 * Americans for Tax Reform
 * American Legislative Exchange Council
 * Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow
 * Competitive Enterprise Institute
 * Fraser Institute
 * FreedomWorks
 * George C. Marshall Institute
 * The Heartland Institute
 * Independent Institute
 * Istituto Bruno Leoni
 * JunkScience.com
 * Lavoisier Group
 * Liberty Institute
 * National Center for Policy Analysis
 * National Center for Public Policy Research

title: Cooler Heads Coalition


text:
Total derivative

In mathematics, the total derivative of a function $f$ at a point is the best linear approximation near this point of the function with respect to its arguments. Unlike partial derivatives, the total derivative approximates the function with respect to all of its arguments, not just a single one. In many situations, this is the same as considering all partial derivatives simultaneously. The term "total derivative" is primarily used when $f$ is a function of several variables, because when $f$ is a function of a single variable, the total derivative is the same as the ordinary derivative of the function.

The total derivative as a linear map
Let $$U \subseteq \R^n$$ be an open subset. Then a function $$f:U \to \R^m$$ is said to be (totally) differentiable at a point $$a\in U$$ if there exists a linear transformation $$df_a:\R^n \to \R^m$$ such that

 * $$\lim_{x \to a} \frac{\|f(x)-f(a)-df_a(x-a)\|}{\|x-a\|}=0.$$

The linear map $$df_a$$ is called the (total) derivative or (total) differential of $$f$$ at $$a$$. Other notations for the total derivative include $$D_a f$$ and $$Df(a)$$. A function is (totally) differentiable if its total derivative exists at every point in its domain.

Conceptually, the definition of the total derivative expresses the idea that $$df_a$$ is the best linear approximation to $$f$$ at the point $$a$$. This can be made precise by quantifying the error in the linear approximation determined by $$df_a$$. To do so, write
 * $$f(a + h) = f(a) + df_a(h) + \varepsilon(h),$$

where $$\varepsilon(h)$$ equals the error in the approximation. To say that the derivative of $$f$$ at $$a$$ is $$df_a$$ is equivalent to the statement
 * $$\varepsilon(h) = o(\lVert h\rVert),$$

where $$o$$ is little-o notation and indicates that $$\varepsilon(h)$$ is much smaller than $$\lVert h\rVert$$ as $$h \to 0$$. The total derivative $$df_a$$ is the unique linear transformation for which the error term is this small, and this is the sense in which it is the best linear approximation to $$f$$.

The function $$f$$ is differentiable if and only if each of its components $$f_i \colon U \to \R$$ is differentiable, so when studying total derivatives, it is often possible to work one coordinate at a time in the codomain. However, the same is not true of the coordinates in the domain. It is true that if $$f$$ is differentiable at $$a$$, then each partial derivative $$\partial f/\partial x_i$$ exists at $$a$$. The converse does not hold: it can happen that all of the partial derivatives of $$f$$ at $$a$$ exist, but $$f$$ is not differentiable at $$a$$. This means that the function is very "rough" at $$a$$, to such an extreme that its behavior cannot be adequately described by its behavior in the coordinate directions. When $$f$$ is not so rough, this cannot happen. More precisely, if all the partial derivatives of $$f$$ at $$a$$ exist and are continuous in a neighborhood of $$a$$, then $$f$$ is differentiable at $$a$$. When this happens, then in addition, the total derivative of $$f$$ is the linear transformation corresponding to the Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives at that point.

The total derivative as a differential form
When the function under consideration is real-valued, the total derivative can be recast using differential forms. For example, suppose that $$f \colon \R^n \to \R$$ is a differentiable function of variables $$x_1, \ldots, x_n$$. The total derivative of $$f$$ at $$a$$ may be written in terms of its Jacobian matrix, which in this instance is a row matrix:
 * $$D f_a = \begin{bmatrix} \frac{\partial f}{\partial x_1}(a) & \cdots & \frac{\partial f}{\partial x_n}(a) \end{bmatrix}.$$

The linear approximation property of the total derivative implies that if
 * $$\Delta x = \begin{bmatrix} \Delta x_1 & \cdots & \Delta x_n \end{bmatrix}^\mathsf{T}$$

is a small vector (where the $$\mathsf{T}$$ denotes transpose, so that this vector is a column vector), then
 * $$f(a + \Delta x) - f(a) \approx D f_a \cdot \Delta x = \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{\partial f}{\partial x_i}(a) \cdot \Delta x_i.$$

Heuristically, this suggests that if $$dx_1, \ldots, dx_n$$ are infinitesimal increments in the coordinate directions, then
 * $$df_a = \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{\partial f}{\partial x_i}(a) \cdot dx_i.$$

In fact, the notion of the infinitesimal, which is merely symbolic here, can be equipped with extensive mathematical structure. Techniques, such as the theory of differential forms, effectively give analytical and algebraic descriptions of objects like infinitesimal increments, $$dx_i$$. For instance, $$dx_i$$ may be inscribed as a linear functional on the vector space $$\R^n$$. Evaluating $$dx_i$$ at a vector $$h$$ in $$\R^n$$ measures how much $$h$$ points in the $$i$$th coordinate direction. The total derivative $$df_a$$ is a linear combination of linear functionals and hence is itself a linear functional. The evaluation $$df_a(h)$$ measures how much $$f$$ points in the direction determined by $$h$$ at $$a$$, and this direction is the gradient. This point of view makes the total derivative an instance of the exterior derivative.

Suppose now that $$f$$ is a vector-valued function, that is, $$f \colon \R^n \to \R^m$$. In this case, the components $$f_i$$ of $$f$$ are real-valued functions, so they have associated differential forms $$df_i$$. The total derivative $$df$$ amalgamates these forms into a single object and is therefore an instance of a vector-valued differential form.

The chain rule for total derivatives
The chain rule has a particularly elegant statement in terms of total derivatives. It says that, for two functions $$f$$ and $$g$$, the total derivative of the composite function $$f \circ g$$ at $$a$$ satisfies
 * $$d(f \circ g)_a = df_{g(a)} \cdot dg_a.$$

If the total derivatives of $$f$$ and $$g$$ are identified with their Jacobian matrices, then the composite on the right-hand side is simply matrix multiplication. This is enormously useful in applications, as it makes it possible to account for essentially arbitrary dependencies among the arguments of a composite function.

Example: Differentiation with direct dependencies
Suppose that f is a function of two variables, x and y. If these two variables are independent, so that the domain of f is $$\R^2$$, then the behavior of f may be understood in terms of its partial derivatives in the x and y directions. However, in some situations, x and y may be dependent. For example, it might happen that f is constrained to a curve $$y = y(x)$$. In this case, we are actually interested in the behavior of the composite function $$f(x, y(x))$$. The partial derivative of f with respect to x does not give the true rate of change of f with respect to changing x because changing x necessarily changes y. However, the chain rule for the total derivative takes such dependencies into account. Write $$\gamma(x) = (x, y(x))$$. Then, the chain rule says
 * $$d(f \circ \gamma)_{x_0} = df_{(x_0, y(x_0))} \cdot d\gamma_{x_0}.$$

By expressing the total derivative using Jacobian matrices, this becomes:
 * $$\frac{df(x, y(x))}{dx}(x_0) = \frac{\partial f}{\partial x}(x_0, y(x_0)) \cdot \frac{\partial x}{\partial x}(x_0) + \frac{\partial f}{\partial y}(x_0, y(x_0)) \cdot \frac{\partial y}{\partial x}(x_0).$$

Suppressing the evaluation at $$x_0$$ for legibility, we may also write this as
 * $$\frac{df(x, y(x))}{dx} = \frac{\partial f}{\partial x} \frac{\partial x}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial f}{\partial y} \frac{\partial y}{\partial x}.$$

This gives a straightforward formula for the derivative of $$f(x, y(x))$$ in terms of the partial derivatives of $$f$$ and the derivative of $$y(x)$$.

For example, suppose
 * $$f(x,y)=xy.$$

The rate of change of f with respect to x is usually the partial derivative of f with respect to x; in this case,
 * $$\frac{\partial f}{\partial x} = y.$$

However, if y depends on x, the partial derivative does not give the true rate of change of f as x changes because the partial derivative assumes that y is fixed. Suppose we are constrained to the line
 * $$y=x.$$

Then
 * $$f(x,y) = f(x,x) = x^2,$$

and the total derivative of f with respect to x is
 * $$\frac{df}{dx} = 2 x,$$

which we see is not equal to the partial derivative $$\partial f/\partial x$$. Instead of immediately substituting for y in terms of x, however, we can also use the chain rule as above:
 * $$\frac{df}{dx} = \frac{\partial f}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial f}{\partial y}\frac{dy}{dx} = y+x \cdot 1 = x+y = 2x.$$

Example: Differentiation with indirect dependencies
While one can often perform substitutions to eliminate indirect dependencies, the chain rule provides for a more efficient and general technique. Suppose $$L(t,x_1,\dots,x_n)$$ is a function of time $$t$$ and $$n$$ variables $$x_i$$ which themselves depend on time. Then, the time derivative of $$L$$ is
 * $$\frac{dL}{dt} = \frac{d}{dt} L \bigl(t, x_1(t), \ldots, x_n(t)\bigr).$$

The chain rule expresses this derivative in terms of the partial derivatives of $$L$$ and the time derivatives of the functions $$x_i$$:
 * $$\frac{dL}{dt}

= \frac{\partial L}{\partial t} + \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{\partial L}{\partial x_i}\frac{dx_i}{dt} = \biggl(\frac{\partial}{\partial t} + \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{dx_i}{dt}\frac{\partial}{\partial x_i}\biggr)(L).$$

This expression is often used in physics for a gauge transformation of the Lagrangian, as two Lagrangians that differ only by the total time derivative of a function of time and the $$n$$ generalized coordinates lead to the same equations of motion. An interesting example concerns the resolution of causality concerning the Wheeler–Feynman time-symmetric theory. The operator in brackets (in the final expression above) is also called the total derivative operator (with respect to $$t$$).

For example, the total derivative of $$f(x(t),y(t))$$ is

 * $$\frac{df}{dt} = { \partial f \over \partial x}{dx \over dt} + {\partial f \over \partial y}{dy \over dt }.$$

Here there is no $$\partial f / \partial t$$ term since $$f$$ itself does not depend on the independent variable $$t$$ directly.

Total differential equation
A total differential equation is a differential equation expressed in terms of total derivatives. Since the exterior derivative is coordinate-free, in a sense that can be given a technical meaning, such equations are intrinsic and geometric.

Application to equation systems
In economics, it is common for the total derivative to arise in the context of a system of equations. For example, a simple supply-demand system might specify the quantity q of a product demanded as a function D of its price p and consumers' income I, the latter being an exogenous variable, and might specify the quantity supplied by producers as a function S of its price and two exogenous resource cost variables r and w. The resulting system of equations
 * $$q=D(p, I),$$
 * $$q=S(p, r, w),$$

determines the market equilibrium values of the variables p and q. The total derivative $$dp/dr$$ of p with respect to r, for example, gives the sign and magnitude of the reaction of the market price to the exogenous variable r. In the indicated system, there are a total of six possible total derivatives, also known in this context as comparative static derivatives: $dp / dr$, $dp / dw$, $dp / dI$, $dq / dr$, $dq / dw$, and $dq / dI$. The total derivatives are found by totally differentiating the system of equations, dividing through by, say $dr$, treating $dq / dr$ and $dp / dr$ as the unknowns, setting $dI = dw = 0$, and solving the two totally differentiated equations simultaneously, typically by using Cramer's rule.

title: Total derivative


text:
Phoebus cartel

The Phoebus cartel was an international cartel that controlled the manufacture and sale of incandescent light bulbs in much of Europe and North America between 1925–1939. The cartel took over market territories and lowered the useful life of such bulbs, which is commonly cited as an example of planned obsolescence.

Corporations based in Europe and the United States, including Tungsram, Osram, General Electric, Associated Electrical Industries, and Philips, incorporated the cartel on January 15, 1925 in Geneva, as Phœbus S.A. Compagnie Industrielle pour le Développement de l'Éclairage (French for "Phoebus plc Industrial Company for the Development of Lighting"). Although the group had intended the cartel to last for thirty years (1925 to 1955), it ceased operations in 1939 with the outbreak of World War II.

Following its dissolution, light bulbs continued to be sold at the 1,000-hour life standardized by the cartel.

History
Osram, Philips, Tungsram, Associated Electrical Industries,, Compagnie des Lampes, International General Electric, and the GE Overseas Group created and joined the Phoebus cartel, holding shares in the Swiss corporation proportional to their lamp sales.

Osram founded a precursor organisation in 1921, the Internationale Glühlampen Preisvereinigung. When Philips and other manufacturers entered the American market, General Electric reacted by setting up the "International General Electric Company" in Paris. Both organisations co-ordinated the trading of patents and market penetration. Increasing international competition led to negotiations among all the major companies to control and restrict their respective activities in order not to interfere in each other's spheres.

The Phoebus cartel's compact was intended to expire in 1955, but it was instead nullified in 1940 after World War II made coordination among the members impossible.

Purpose
The cartel lowered operational costs and worked to standardize the life expectancy of light bulbs at 1,000 hours (down from 2,500 hours), while raising prices without fear of competition. The reduction in lifespan has been cited as an example of planned obsolescence, but this has been called into question by UK government regulators and some independent engineers because there are some good engineering reasons to reduce the lifespan of a bulb. A longer life bulb of a given wattage puts out less light (and proportionally more heat) than a shorter life bulb of the same wattage. Nevertheless, both internal comments from cartel executives and later findings by a US court suggest that the direct motive of the cartel in decreasing bulb lifespan was to increase profits by forcing customers to buy bulbs more frequently.

The cartel tested their bulbs and fined manufacturers for bulbs that lasted more than 1,000 hours. A 1929 table listed the amount of Swiss francs paid that depended on the exceeding hours of lifetime. Anton Philips, head of Philips, said to another cartel executive, "After the very strenuous efforts we made to emerge from a period of long life lamps, it is of the greatest importance that we do not sink back into the same mire by paying no attention to voltages and supplying lamps that will have a very prolonged life."

In 1951, the Monopolies and Restrictive Practices Commission in the United Kingdom issued a report to Parliament, which disputed the idea that the Phoebus cartel engaged in planned obsolescence, stating that "there can be no absolutely right life [of light bulbs] for the many varying circumstances to be found among the consumers in any given country, so that any standard life must always represent a compromise between conflicting factors".

In 1949, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey found General Electric to have violated the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, in part because of their activities as part of the Phoebus Cartel. As part of the decision, while acknowledging that "it should be borne in mind that the life of a lamp is inextricably related to the power of its light", it nonetheless found that because of General Electric's dominant industry position and lack of competition it had the power to determine bulb lifespan across the entire industry, and that General Electric's main consideration in setting the lifespans of bulbs was profit. The court used this as one of the factors for ultimately determining that General Electric had violated the Act.

In popular culture
In Gravity's Rainbow (1973), Thomas Pynchon wrote about "Byron the Bulb", an anthropomorphic eternal lightbulb who fights against the Phoebus Cartel. Pynchon's novel has been credited with bringing the Phoebus Cartel to the public eye.

title: Phoebus cartel


text:
Van Halen III

Van Halen III is the eleventh studio album by American rock band Van Halen, released on March 17, 1998, by Warner Bros. Records. Produced by Mike Post and Eddie Van Halen, it was the band's first studio album in three years after Balance (1995), the band's only studio album to feature Extreme lead vocalist Gary Cherone, and the last to feature bassist Michael Anthony, who only appears on three of the album's songs while the rest of the bass parts are played by Eddie Van Halen; his son Wolfgang replaced Anthony on subsequent tours and recordings. Eddie Van Halen's extensive involvement in the album's production, instrumentation and writing have led some, including Anthony, to consider Van Halen III more of a solo project than a collective band effort. Clocking in at over 65 minutes, Van Halen III is their longest album.

The album reached No. 4 in the United States and achieved Gold status, but was a relative commercial disappointment for the band, whose previous four albums had all been chart-topping, multi-platinum sellers, though the lead single "Without You" performed well on radio. Critical and fan reaction was also largely negative, with criticism directed at its songwriting, production, band performances and length. The lukewarm reception prematurely halted work on a follow-up album with Cherone, who departed soon after. Van Halen III was the band's last studio album for fourteen years until their 2012 comeback A Different Kind of Truth.

Production
The album's title refers to Van Halen's third recorded line-up, and to the band's first two album titles, Van Halen and Van Halen II. None of its material is featured on The Best of Both Worlds, the band's 2004 compilation.

As a producer, Eddie brought his friend Mike Post. The album's final track, "How Many Say I", was an unusual acoustic piano ballad featuring Eddie on lead vocals, and Cherone on backing vocals: Eddie declared he was forced into singing, and added harmonies so he would not perform alone.

Van Halen III makes minimal use of Michael Anthony on bass guitar. Anthony only played bass on "Without You", "One I Want" & "Fire in the Hole"; Eddie Van Halen recorded bass for the rest of the album tracks that feature bass. After Michael Anthony's departure from Van Halen, he confirmed that Eddie Van Halen dictated to him how to play bass on this record. Anthony also said by the time of making this album, Eddie was playing the bass more as well as drums. "I don't know if Eddie was basically making a solo record, which is what Van Halen III seemed like to me." In recent years, it has been revealed that Alex Van Halen was absent from sessions on the album due to personal problems at the time and did not play on any tracks.

A track entitled "That's Why I Love You" was dropped at the last minute in favor of "Josephina", with "Fire in the Hole" featuring on the Lethal Weapon 4 film soundtrack.

"I would have preferred to tour with them and then put out a record," Cherone told KNAC. "It would have been a better idea to establish myself first and then hit the studio with the band… There were some great ideas and some little gems but it was not a great record. I had fun but at times it was like being a stranger in a strange land."

The album cover is a still picture from stock footage of Frank "Cannonball" Richards, a vaudeville and sideshow performer known for his act of getting shot in the gut with a cannonball.

Commercial performance
Van Halen III debuted on the Billboard 200 at number 4, with 191,000 copies sold. The album has sold over 800,000 copies as of 2022. The album's only significant radio hit was "Without You", which reached No. 1 on the Mainstream Rock Tracks chart on the March 7, 1998, issue of Billboard, and remained there for six weeks. Other songs receiving airplay on rock radio were "Fire in the Hole" and "One I Want".

Critical reception
Reception for Van Halen III was mostly mixed to negative. Stephen Thomas Erlewine from AllMusic stated the album fails to break away from the formula that Van Halen had exhausted over 20 years and "suffers from the same problems as Hagar-era Van Halen – limp riffs, weak melodies, and plodding, colorless rhythms." Entertainment Weekly gave it a B grade rating, saying, "judging from the renewed intensity of Eddie’s guitar playing throughout much of III, having a merely competent, relatively ego-free singer seems to have reinvigorated his muse" but goes on to say "How Many Say I", a song Eddie sang lead vocals on, was "cringeworthy" and "unintentionally hilarious". Greg Kot from Rolling Stone gave it 2 stars out of 5 noting, "Cherone sounds disconcertingly like Hagar, full of spleen-busting bluster and incapable of understatement", and "When the band plays it heavy, it mires itself in a Seventies tar pit, with only the chorus of 'Without You' achieving any sort of pop resonance." Kot compliments Eddie's vocals saying, "'How Many Say I' finds the guitarist singing in a disarmingly appealing, nicotine-stained voice over a moody piano melody." Billboard reviewer Paul Verna summed up III as "a wasted opportunity to breathe life into a now-tired formula".

Track listing
All songs credited to Eddie Van Halen, Michael Anthony, Gary Cherone and Alex Van Halen.

Van Halen

 * Gary Cherone – lead vocals, backing vocals (track 12)
 * Eddie Van Halen – guitars, bass (tracks 4–6, 8, 9 and 11), keyboards, electric sitar (tracks 1 and 10), backing vocals, lead vocals (track 12), drums (uncredited), production, engineering
 * Michael Anthony – bass (tracks 2, 3 and 7), backing vocals
 * Alex Van Halen – drums, percussion

Additional personnel

 * Mike Post – piano on "Neworld", production

Production

 * Florian Ammon – programming
 * Dan Chavkin – photography
 * Ian Dye – programming
 * The Edward – mixing, mastering
 * Erwin Musper – engineers
 * Robbes – mixing, mastering
 * Ed Rogers – programming
 * F. Scott Schafer – coloring
 * Eddy Schreyer – mastering
 * Stine Schyberg – art direction
 * Paul Wight – programming

title: Van Halen III


text: Category:Biologists by nationality

title: Category:Biologists by nationality


text:
Lockheed JetStar

The Lockheed JetStar (company designations L-329 and L-1329; designated C-140 in US military service) is a business jet produced from the early 1960s to the 1970s. The JetStar was the first dedicated business jet to enter service, as well as the only such airplane built by Lockheed. It was also one of the largest aircraft in the class for many years, seating ten plus two crew. It is distinguishable from other small jets by its four engines, mounted on the rear of the fuselage, and the "slipper"-style fuel tanks fixed to the wings.

Development

The JetStar originated as a private project within Lockheed, with an eye to winning a United States Air Force (USAF) requirement that was later dropped due to budget cuts. Lockheed decided to continue the project on its own for the business market.

The first two prototypes were equipped with two Bristol Siddeley Orpheus engines, the first of these flying on 4 September 1957. The second of these was also equipped with the wing-mounted "slipper tanks", which was originally to be an option. Lockheed attempted to arrange a contract to produce the Orpheus in the US, but when these negotiations failed it re-engined the second prototype with four Pratt & Whitney JT12s in 1959. The outer engines were mounted beside the inner ones, an arrangement that was later used on the Vickers VC10 and Ilyushin Il-62 airliners. The slipper tanks were removed and placed on the first prototype. The JT12 fit proved successful and was selected for the production versions, the first of which flew in mid 1960. These versions entered commercial service in 1961.

Noise regulations in the United States and high fuel consumption led to the development of the 731 JetStar, a modification program which added new Garrett TFE731 turbofan engines with a number of detail changes. It has redesigned larger external fuel tanks that sit with their upper surfaces flush with the wing, rather than being centered on it. The cockpit area has a somewhat more "modern" looking nose and window arrangement. The 731 JetStar modification program was so successful that Lockheed produced 40 new JetStars, designated the JetStar II, from 1976 to 1979. The JetStar IIs were factory-new aircraft with the turbofan engines and revised external fuel tanks. Both 731 JetStars and JetStar IIs have greatly increased range, reduced noise, and better runway performance compared to the original JetStars.

JetStar production totaled 204 aircraft by final delivery in 1978. Most original JetStars have been retired, but many 731 JetStars and JetStar IIs are still flying in various roles, mainly as corporate and private jets.

Design

The JetStar has a fairly typical business jet design layout, with a swept wing and a cruciform tail. The wing has a 30° sweepback and features large fuel tanks at about half-span, extending some distance in front and behind the wing. The wings hold 10,000 pounds of fuel, and each slipper tank holds 4,000 pounds of fuel for a total fuel load of 18,000 pounds. The wing also includes leading edge flaps (not slats) along the front of the wing outboard of the tanks (these leading edge flaps reduce the stalling speed by an additional three knots), while double-slotted trailing edge flaps span the entire rear surface inboard of the ailerons. The wing incorporates inflatable rubber deicing boots for the removal of ice accumulated in flight. The horizontal stabilizer is mounted nearly halfway up the fin to keep it clear of the engines' jet blast. One feature is that the horizontal stabilizer is trimmable by pivoting the entire tail fin and stabilizer assembly, which has a distinctive unpainted area at the base of the fin that is noticeable in most pictures. The JetStar does not have any tail deicing capability, nor was it required for certification. A speed brake is located on the underside of the fuselage to aid deceleration for landing. The original prototypes used a tricycle landing gear with one wheel per leg, but after an accident in 1962 the nose gear was modified with two tires.

The JetStar is a relatively heavy aircraft for its class, at 44,500 lb (19,278 kg). Maximum cruising speed is Mach 0.8, or 567 mph (912 km/h) at 21,000 ft (6,401 m). Range is typically quoted as 2,500 mi (4,023 km) with a 3,500 lb (1,588 kg) payload. Typically, interiors feature seating for eight with a full-sized lavatory, or a slightly denser arrangement for ten. The JetStar is one of the few aircraft of its class which allow a person to walk upright in the cabin, although to do this the aisle is sunk slightly so that the seats are raised on either side. The windows are relatively large.

Operational history
The first prototype served as the personal transport of Lockheed's Vice President of Advanced Development Projects Kelly Johnson for some time. Elvis Presley owned two JetStars at different times; the second was named Hound Dog II and is on display at Graceland. Frank Sinatra also owned one. Additionally, one JetStar belonged to U.S. President Richard Nixon, then to the Shah of Iran and finally, to Puerto Rican boy band Menudo.

Sixteen JetStars were produced for the USAF; five C-140As were flight inspection aircraft for the Air Force Communications Service and were used to perform airborne testing of airport navigational aids (navaids) from 1962 onwards. They began service during the Vietnam War and remained in service until the early 1990s. The "Flight Check" C-140As were combat-coded aircraft that could be distinguished from the VIP transport version by their distinctive paint scheme. The C-140As were deployed to southeast Asia during the Vietnam War, where, in addition to their more usual navaid testing, they would loiter off the coast and act as communications relays between the Pentagon and the battlefield. The last C-140A to be retired was placed on static display at Scott AFB, Illinois.

An additional eleven airframes were designated C-140B, although the first of these predated the C-140As when it was delivered in 1961. The C-140Bs were used to transport personnel by the Military Airlift Command. Six of the aircraft (tail numbers 61-2488, 61-2489, 61-2490, 61-2491, 61-2492 and 61-2493) were operated as VIP transports by the 89th Military Airlift Wing at Andrews Air Force Base. These VIP aircraft were designated as VC-140Bs. During the presidency of Jimmy Carter, he used a dedicated VC-140B extensively for short trips and it was known within the Special Air Missions Wing as "Peanut One." Upon retirement, one airframe (#89001) was placed on a static pedestal in front of the Joint Base Andrews air terminal. Members of the VIP transport fleet occasionally served as Air Force One during the 1970s and 1980s. Several other countries, such as Germany and Canada, have used military JetStars as transports for their heads of state, heads of government, and other VIPs.

The last operational JetStar (N313JS) was retired in December 2019, and is now preserved at the Aviation History & Technology Center in Marietta, GA. However, in November 2020, a Jetstar II (N700RM) was flown from Texas to Oregon. That particular aircraft will be disassembled in Klamath Falls. In December 2020, another Jetstar II (N710RM) was also ferried from Conroe, Texas to Klamath Falls, Oregon.

Variants

 * JetStar I
 * Business, executive transport aircraft, with accommodation for a crew of two and ten passengers, powered by four 3,300 lbf (14.7 kN) thrust Pratt & Whitney JT12A-8 turbojet engines.

 * JetStar II
 * New production version, powered by four 3,700 lbf (16.5 kN) thrust Garrett TFE731-3 turbofan engines, and fitted with revised external fuel tanks, 40 built.

 * JetStar 731
 * Modified version, fitted with four Garrett TFE731-1 turbofan engines, and equipped with redesigned external fuel tanks.

 * C-140A
 * Flight inspection aircraft for the US Air Force, similar to the JetStar I, five built.

 * C-140B
 * Passenger, cargo transport aircraft for the US Air Force, similar to the C-140A, five built.

 * VC-140B
 * VIP transport aircraft for the US Air Force, similar to the C-140B, six built.

 * C-140C
 * Two JetStar 6s were ordered by the United States Navy, originally designated UV-1, but not delivered.

 * T-40
 * US military designation for a proposed trainer version of the C-140 for evaluation, not built.

 * AAI FanStar
 * Conversion by American Aviation Industries with two General Electric CF34 engines in place of the four JT12 turbojets or TFE731 turbofans which first flew on 5 September 1986. Only one aircraft was converted. The work on the interior of the demonstrator was the subject of litigation in federal court in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

Civil operators

 * Algeria
 * Air Algérie
 * Iraq
 * Iraqi Airways
 * Mexico
 * TAESA
 * Puerto Rico
 * Menudo
 * United States
 * Eastern Airlines
 * Great Northern Railway registration N968GN, re-registered as N968BN and N7954S.
 * Elvis Presley (this JetStar is currently on static display in Graceland in Memphis, TN)
 * Southern Air Transport
 * Trans World Airlines (TWA)

Military and government operators

 * Canada
 * Transport Canada former operator
 * West Germany
 * German Air Force former operator
 * Indonesia
 * Indonesian Air Force former operator
 * Iran
 * Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force
 * Iraq
 * Iraqi Government
 * Kuwait
 * Kuwait Government
 * Libya
 * Libyan Arab Air Force
 * Libyan Government
 * Lithuania
 * Lithuanian government (operated by Lithuanian Airways) in early 1990's
 * Mexico
 * Mexican Air Force
 * Saudi Arabia
 * Royal Saudi Air Force
 * United States
 * Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
 * National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
 * United States Air Force (USAF)

Accidents and incidents

 * On 25 March 1976, a Jetstar taking off from Chicago Midway Airport overran runway 13R and crashed killing all 4 occupants onboard.
 * On 29 March 1981, a Lockheed JetStar inbound from Nigeria overran runway 08 at London Luton Airport. The co-pilot suffered severe spinal injuries but the commanding pilot and seven passengers escaped with only minor injuries.
 * On January 5, 1995, an Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF) JetStar crashed during an emergency landing, killing all 12 on board including General Mansour Sattari, commander of the IRIAF.

Aircraft on display

 * Canada
 * C-FDTX (c/n 5018) L-1329 Jetstar 6 – The Canada Aviation and Space Museum in Ottawa, has an L-1329 Jetstar 6 that the Department of Transport used to carry government officials and foreign dignitaries.
 * C-FDTF (c/n 5088) L-1329 Jetstar 6 – The Atlantic Canada Aviation Museum has a Jetstar that was used by the Canadian Prime Minister and other government officials.

 * Indonesia
 * A-9446 (c/n 5046) L-1329 Jetstar 6 – Used as VIP aircraft of Indonesian government, nicknamed "Sapta Marga". On display at Garuda Indonesia Training Centre (GITC) in Duri Kosambi, Cengkareng
 * A-1645 (c/n 5059) L-1329 Jetstar 6 – Used as VIP aircraft of Indonesian government, nicknamed "Pancasila". On display at Dirgantara Mandala Museum in Yogyakarta

 * Mexico
 * 3908 (c/n 5144) L-1329 Jetstar 8 - On display at the Museo Militar de Aviación at Santa Lucía Air Force Base.

 * United Kingdom
 * N25AG (c/n 5202) L-1329-25 JetStar II - fuselage preserved for guest accommodations at Apple Camping in Redberth, Pembrokeshire, Wales.

 * United States
 * N329J (c/n 1001) L-1329 JetStar – The prototype JetStar is undergoing restoration at the Museum of Flight's Restoration Center in Everett, Washington. This aircraft is one of only two JetStars with only two engines.
 * N711Z (c/n 1002) L-1329 JetStar - On pylon display in false USAF marking as 89-001 near Base Operations and the AMC Air Terminal at Andrews AFB, Maryland.
 * N814NA (c/n 5003) L-1329 JetStar 6 - Former NASA JetStar is on display at the Joe Davies Heritage Park, Palmdale, California.
 * N777EP (c/n 5004) L-1329 JetStar 6 - Owned by Elvis Presley in his later years and named Hound Dog II, on display at Graceland, Memphis Tennessee. This is one of two Jetstars owned by Elvis Presley and/or his family.
 * 59-5958 (c/n 5010) C-140A - Displayed at the Travis Air Force Base Heritage Center in Fairfield, California.
 * 61-2488 (c/n 5017) VC-140B – The Museum of Aviation next to Robins Air Force Base has a VC-140B on display.
 * 61-2489 (c/n 5022) VC-140B – Pima Air and Space Museum, adjacent to Davis-Monthan AFB in Tucson, Arizona.
 * 61-2490 (c/n 5024) VC-140B - President Lyndon Johnson's JetStar is on display at the Lyndon B. Johnson National Historical Park.
 * 59-5959 (c/n 5026) C-140A - In the Scott Field Heritage Air Park at Scott AFB, Illinois.
 * 61-2492 (c/n 5031) VC-140B - In the Presidential Aircraft collection of the National Museum of the United States Air Force, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio.
 * 59-5962 (c/n 5032) C-140A - Preserved at Edwards Air Force Base in Edwards, California.
 * 62-4197 (c/n 5041) C-140B - Pima Air and Space Museum, adjacent to Davis-Monthan AFB in Tucson, Arizona. Aircraft has been given an artistic paintjob, named "Spy Tiger" by artist Andrew Schoultz.
 * 62-4200 (c/n 5044) C-140B - Pima Air and Space Museum, adjacent to Davis-Monthan AFB in Tucson, Arizona. Aircraft has been given an artistic paintjob, named "Back to Supersonica" by artist Kenny Scharf.
 * 62-4201 (c/n 5045) C-140B - Hill Aerospace Museum, Hill Air Force Base, Ogden, Utah, this was confirmed by former members of the 89th SAM from Andrews Air Force Base to have carried President Johnson and his wife.
 * N428DA (c/n 5058) L-1329 JetStar 8 - On display at the Aviation History and Technology Center adjacent to Dobbins Air Reserve Base in Marietta, Georgia.
 * N313JS (c/n 5086) L-1329 JetStar 731 - Preserved for display at the Aviation History and Technology Center adjacent to Dobbins Air Reserve Base in Marietta, Georgia.
 * N33SJ (c/n 5087) L-1329 JetStar 731 - Forward fuselage preserved at the Planes of Fame Museum in Chino, California. Painted in false US Air Force colors.
 * N511TD (c/n 5145) L-1329 JetStar 8 - On display at the Greater Saint Louis Air & Space Museum, Cahokia, Illinois.
 * XB-DUH (c/n 5157) L-1329 JetStar 8 - At the entrance to Dodson International Parts in Rantoul, Kansas with false registration N001DI.
 * N175MD (c/n 5215) L-1329-25 JetStar II – The Miami Auto Museum in North Miami, Florida has a complete JetStar on display inside the museum.
 * N377SA (c/n 5229) L-1329-25 JetStar II - On display at the Pacific Coast Air Museum in Santa Rosa, California.
 * N77C (c/n 5232) L-1329-25 JetStar II - On display at the TWA Museum at Charles B. Wheeler Downtown Airport, Kansas City, Missouri.

title: Lockheed JetStar


text: Category:German biologists

title: Category:German biologists