text:
Immunization (finance)

In finance, interest rate immunization is a portfolio management strategy designed to take advantage of the offsetting effects of interest rate risk and reinvestment risk.

In theory, immunization can be used to ensure that the value of a portfolio of assets (typically bonds or other fixed income securities) will increase or decrease by the same amount as a designated set of liabilities, thus leaving the equity component of capital unchanged, regardless of changes in the interest rate. It has found applications in financial management of pension funds, insurance companies, banks and savings and loan associations.

Immunization can be accomplished by several methods, including cash flow matching, duration matching, and volatility and convexity matching. It can also be accomplished by trading in bond forwards, futures, or options.

Other types of financial risks, such as foreign exchange risk or stock market risk, can be immunised using similar strategies. If the immunization is incomplete, these strategies are usually called hedging. If the immunization is complete, these strategies are usually called arbitrage.

History
Immunisation was discovered independently by several researchers in the early 1940s and 1950s. This work was largely ignored before being re-introduced in the early 1970s, whereafter it gained popularity. See Dedicated Portfolio Theory for details.

Redington
Frank Redington is generally considered to be the originator of the immunization strategy. Redington was an actuary from the United Kingdom. In 1952 he published his "Review of the Principle of Life-Office Valuations," in which he defined immunization as "the investment of the assets in such a way that the existing business is immune to a general change in the rate of interest." Redington believed that if a company (for example, a life insurance company) structured its investment portfolio assets to be of the same duration as its liabilities, and market interest rates decreased during the planning horizon, the lower yield earned on reinvested cash flows would be offset by the increased value of portfolio assets remaining at the end of the planning period. On the other hand, if market interest rates increased, the same offset effect would occur: higher yields earned on reinvested cash flows would be offset by a reduction in the value of the portfolio. In either scenario, with offsetting effects on each side of the balance sheet, the shareholders' equity value of the business would be immunized from the effect of changes in interest rates.

Fisher and Weil
In 1971, Lawrence Fisher and Roman Weil framed the issue as follows: to immunize a portfolio, "the average duration of the bond portfolio must be set equal to the remaining time in the planning horizon, and the market value of assets must be greater than or equal to the present value of the liabilities discounted at the internal rate of return of the portfolio."

Applications
Pension funds use immunization to lock in current market rates, when they are attractive, over a specified planning horizon, and to fund a future stream of pension benefit payments to retirees. Banks and thrift (savings and loan) associations immunize in order to manage the relationship between assets and liabilities, which affects their capital requirements. Insurance companies construct immunized portfolios to support guaranteed investment contracts, structured financial instruments which are sold to institutional investors.

How portfolios are immunized
Immunization theory assumes that the yield curve is flat, and that interest rate changes are parallel shifts up or down in that yield curve.

Cash flow matching
Conceptually, the easiest form of immunization is cash flow matching. For example, if a financial company is obliged to pay 100 dollars to someone in 10 years, it can protect itself by buying and holding a 10-year, zero-coupon bond that matures in 10 years and has a redemption value of $100. Thus, the firm's expected cash inflows would exactly match its expected cash outflows, and a change in interest rates would not affect the firm's ability to pay its obligations. Nevertheless, a firm with many expected cash flows can find that cash flow matching can be difficult or expensive to achieve in practice. Once, that meant that only institutional investors could afford it. But the advent of the Internet and the personal computer relieved much of this difficulty. Dedicated portfolio theory is based on cash flow matching and is being used by personal financial advisors to construct retirement portfolios for private individuals. Withdrawals from the portfolio to pay living expenses represent the stream of expected future cash flows to be matched. Individual bonds with staggered maturities are purchased whose coupon interest payments and redemptions supply the cash flows to meet the withdrawals of the retirees.

Mathematically, this can be expressed as follows. Let the net cash flow at time $$t$$ be denoted by $$R_t$$, i.e.:

 * $$R_t = A_t - L_t \text{ for } t = 1,2,3,\ldots,n$$

where $$A_t$$ and $$L_t$$ represent cash inflows and outflows or liabilities respectively.

Assuming that the present value of cash inflows from the assets is equal to the present value of the cash outflows from the liabilities, then:

 * $$P(i) = 0$$

Duration matching
Another immunization method is duration matching. Here, a portfolio manager creates a bond portfolio with a duration equal to the duration of the liabilities. To make the match actually profitable under changing interest rates, the assets and liabilities are arranged so that the total convexity of the assets exceed the convexity of the liabilities. In other words, one can match the first derivatives (with respect to interest rate) of the price functions of the assets and liabilities and make sure that the second derivative of the asset price function is set to be greater than or equal to the second derivative of the liability price function.

Rebalancing
Immunization requires that the average durations of assets and liabilities be kept equal at all times. This makes it necessary to rebalance the portfolio investments regularly, because the years remaining in the planning period grow shorter with each passing year. Coupon income, reinvestment income, proceeds from maturities and sales proceeds must be reinvested in securities that will keep the portfolio's duration equal to the remaining years in the planning period.

Immunization in practice
An immunization strategy is designed so that as interest rates change, interest-rate risk and reinvestment risk will offset each other. However, as Dr. Frank Fabozzi points out, the Macaulay duration metric and immunization theory are based on the assumption that any shifts in the yield curve during the planning period will be parallel, i.e. equal at each point in the term structure of interest rates. But when a non-parallel shift in the yield curve occurs, there is a risk that the portfolio will not be immunized even if its duration matches the liability duration. Immunization risk can be quantified so that a portfolio that minimizes this risk can be constructed.

A principal component analysis of changes along the U.S. Government Treasury yield curve reveals that more than 90% of yield curve shifts are parallel shifts, followed by a smaller percentage of slope shifts and a small percentage of curvature shifts. Using that knowledge, an immunized portfolio can be created by creating long positions with durations at the long and short end of the curve, and a matching short position with a duration in the middle of the curve. These positions protect against parallel shifts and slope changes, in exchange for exposure to curvature changes.

Immunization can be done in a portfolio of a single asset type, such as government bonds, by creating long and short positions along the yield curve. It is usually possible to immunize a portfolio against the most prevalent risk factors.

title: Immunization (finance)


text:
Sympathetic

Sympathetic may refer to:

 * Sympathy, in psychology, a feeling of compassion or identification with another
 * Sympathetic detonation, a detonation, usually unintended, of an explosive charge by a nearby explosion
 * Sympathetic magic, in religion, magic, and anthropology, the belief that like affects like, that something can be influenced through its relationship with another thing
 * Sympathetic nervous system, in neurology and neuroscience, a part of the autonomic nervous system
 * Sympathetic resonance, a harmonic phenomenon wherein a body responds to external vibrations
 * Sympathetic strings, in music theory, strings on a musical instrument that resonate without contact
 * "Sympathetic", a song by Seether from Disclaimer II

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

title: Sympathetic


text:
Rao Shekha

Maharao Shekhaji (1433–1488) was a Rajput ruler in 15th-century India. He is the namesake of the Shekhawati region, comprising the districts of Sikar, Churu and Jhunjhunu in the modern Indian state of Rajasthan. His descendants are known as the Shekhawat.

Birth
On Rao Mokal's Death in AD 1445, the twelve year old Maharao Shekhaji Succeeded his father's estates at Amarsar. His parents are said to have sought prayers from a pir Sheikh, after whom Shekhaji was named.

Shekhaji succeeded as the head of the Nayan and Barwada estate, along with 24 more villages, at the age of 12, as a result of the untimely death of his father Mokal Ji in 1445.

Life
When Shekhaji inherited his father's estate, his reputation and power attracted the jealousy of the Lord Paramount of Amber. He was attacked, but by the aid of the Punnee Pathans he successfully withstood the reiterated assaults of his suzerain lord. Up to this period they had acknowledged the Amber princes as liege lords, and in token of the alliance paid as tribute all the colts reared on the original estate. A dispute on this point was the ostensible cause (though subordinate to their rapid prosperity) of intermittent separations of the Shekhawat colonies from the parent state, which lasted until the reign of Sawai Jai Singh, who brought submission and pecuniary relief from them. Shekhaji left a well-established position to his youngest son Raimal. . After Rao Raimal, Rao Lunkaran (1548-1584) was made the Head of Amarsar. After is Death, the Ancestral seat of Amarsar was succeeded by his Son Rao Manohar. Later Shahpura, became the capital of Old Amarsar - Manoharpur line of Shekhawats.

Death
Shekhaji died in 1488 fighting the Gaur Rajputs in the war of Ghatwa defending the modesty and self-respect of a newlywed lady. Shekhaji took his last breath at Ralawta. A cenotaph (Chhatri) was built where he died. A statue of Shekhaji was also inaugurated in the same place by the President of India Smt. Pratibha Patil.

title: Rao Shekha


text:
Super Robot Wars

Super Robot Wars, known in Japan as Super Robot Taisen, (スーパーロボット大戦) is a series of Japanese tactical role-playing video games produced by Bandai Namco Entertainment, formerly Banpresto. Starting out as a spinoff of the Compati Hero series, the main feature of the franchise is having a story that crosses over several popular mecha anime, manga and video games, allowing characters and mecha from different titles to team up or battle one another. The first game in the franchise was released for the Game Boy on April 20, 1991. Later spawning numerous games that were released on various consoles and handhelds. Due to the nature of crossover games and licensing involved, only a few games have been released outside Japan, and in English. The franchise celebrated its 25th anniversary in 2016, and its 30th anniversary in 2021.

Games
Most are standalone games, whose background stories may involve the plots of the included series, but no other Super Robot Wars titles. However, there are several main continuities existing with a large Multiverse:

 * Classic
 * Consists of the 2nd, the 3rd, EX, F and F Final games (in that order). F and F Final replaced the 4th, while 2G is not considered canon, due to its non-inclusion in the Complete Box set. The side-story Masō Kishin - The Lord Of Elemental is divided into two parts: "Part One" occurs before the 2nd and "Part Two" after the 4th (4th was released before F and F Final). The primary antagonist organization of this series is known as DC (Divine Crusaders).

 * Masou Kishin
 * Consists of Gaiden: Masou Kishin - The Lord of Elemental, OG Saga: Masou Kishin 2 - Revelation of Evil God, OG Saga: Masou Kishin 3 - Pride of Justice and OG Saga: Masou Kishin F – Coffin of the End (in that order). Gaiden: Masou Kishin - The Lord of Elemental for the SFC was ported as a remake for the NDS (with a series first use of the OG Saga prefix replacing Gaiden.) and later as a remake of that DS version in a limited edition bundle with part 2 of this series, named OG Saga: Masou Kishin I & II, for the PSP. The last two titles in this series were released for the PS3 (the former also was ported to the PS Vita).

 * Alpha
 * Consists of Alpha, Alpha Gaiden, Alpha 2 and Alpha 3 games (in that order). "Part One" of Masō Kishin - The Lord Of Elemental also provides relevant information, taking place before Alpha.

 * Compact
 * Consists of Compact, Compact 2 and Compact 3 games for the Wonderswan (in that order). The first series game on WS Compact was remade as Compact for WonderSwan Color for the Wonderswan Color. Compact 2 was released as three chapters for the WonderSwan; the trilogy was later compiled with updated visuals, sound and new content as Impact for the PS2.

 * Impact
 * Consists of Impact and MX games for the PS2. Previously, Compact 2 was released as three chapters for the WonderSwan; the trilogy was later compiled with updated visuals, sound and new content as Impact for the PS2. Despite the sharing of gameplay mechanics between all of the Wonderswan games, and the similarities between Impact and MX, Compact 2 and Impact are not tied to any other games in the series. MX for the PS2 is seen as a direct sequel to Impact as it reuses several of the same series of the latter and has similar gameplay elements and much of its soundtrack remixed from the one in Impact. MX was ported to the PSP with minor adjustments and additions.

 * Original Generation
 * This series does not feature any manga or anime characters at all, instead starring the "Banpresto Originals", original characters made specifically for previous games in the series. This timeline draws upon from all previous continuities. Both Original Generation games for the GBA which were released in the US were compiled with updated visuals and sound as Super Robot Wars Original Generations, followed by the sequel Super Robot Wars Original Generation Gaiden, the remake version of Masō Kishin - The Lord Of Elemental, Masō Kishin 2: Revelation of Evil God, 2nd Super Robot Wars Original Generation, Masō Kishin 3: Pride of Justice, Masō Kishin F: Coffin of The End and Super Robot Wars Original Generation: The Moon Dwellers. Also part of the Original Generation series is the Endless Frontier series, composing of Endless Frontier and Endless Frontier Exceed, which is set after Original Generation Gaiden. This continuity was the only one to have had titles officially released in the West. The Moon Dwellers is one of the first in the series that has an English translation for the Japanese market.

 * Z
 * This continuity consists of Z, Z Special Disk, Z2, and Z3 in that order. The story focuses on the Twelve Spheres, which play an important part in the game's story line. This timeline is well-known for introducing an extremely large amount of debuting series, on a scale that previous SRW titles have never reached. In addition, Z3 was the first SRW game to have HD sprites.

 * International Era
 * Consists of V, X, T and 30. This continuity is commonly named this due to SRW V being the first mainline game to receive official translation and release outside of Japan. Using the engine utilized in Z3, these games are independent of each other plot-wise.

 * Mobile games
 * Consists of X-Omega and DD. X-Omega is a departure from SRW's usual turn-based strategy formula, and is more similar to a defense-type game, where units are placed and commanded to defend against invading enemies. It is known to have an extremely large number of debuting series, and also have non-mecha anime crossovers.
 * DD returns to the usual SRW turn-based strategy formula, and battles are much more reminiscent of normal SRW games. However, players are only allowed to deploy 4 of their own units at a time, and instead of mechs being pulled from the gacha, attacks are instead.

Story
In most games, the player selects or is given a Banpresto original character and machine, who is connected to the overarching storyline which ties together the events of the constituent anime for the game. Some featured anime also has their plots intertwined: in Super Robot Wars Alpha, the White Fang from New Mobile Report Gundam Wing allies with Paptimus Scirocco's rebellion from Mobile Suit Zeta Gundam, resulting in the two enemy forces working together. The stories play out the events of the anime, albeit altered to make room for characters, settings, and plot elements from other shows. It is said that the events of each game are caused by incursions known as Dimension Quakes that started several years prior with the explosion of a "dimensional bomb", thereby constantly merging and separating the various universes without anyone knowing, and ensuring canonicity with both the other games and the properties they adapt.

One of the most notable recurring changes in the series is the near-complete absence of character death. Whenever the game gets to a point that a character died within their anime, the games will frequently use an element from another series to ensure the character's survival. This is likely done in order for the games to appeal to a broader audience.

Gameplay
Battles in Super Robot Wars are turn-based. The player usually gets to move their forces first, one at a time, then control switches to the game's AI. When a unit attacks, the target reacts by blocking (increasing defense against the attack), evading (reducing the attack's chance to hit), or countering (striking back with their own attack). Once chosen, the battle animation is played out. If the player unit is not destroyed and successfully damaged the enemy, then the unit gains experience points. All battles are carried out either the terrain of land, air, sea or space, which affects the performance of machines, pilots and weapons in various ways. The battlefield also contains objects which grant various effects. For example, besides providing repair and energy refill, a military base also provides land units with defense bonus but will hinder them from moving freely. In addition to standard mecha and vehicle units, the player often has one or more "Battleships", air- or spacecraft units that in addition to powerful long-ranged attacks, can also dock other units to refill energy, repair damage.

Units in-game are generally separated into two categories: "super-type" and "real-type". Super robots are heavy units with exceptionally high hit points and armor, and powerful, close-range weapons with high energy cost. On the other hand, real robots are light units which are faster and more agile, but have less armor and hit points, relying instead on dodging attacks. Their weapons have longer range and better accuracy at the cost of doing less damage per hit. Some units are treated as "support units", regenerating hit points and/or energy to allies, while battleships and carriers serve as transports or to resupply all units, while also providing powerful fire support. Though every unit takes a single grid on the tactical map and has little visual difference in battle animations, a larger unit gains defensive and offensive bonus against smaller units, but carry a disadvantage to evasion and accuracy. In later titles, certain attacks can bypass the size attribute, nullifying the effect of size in combat. Some units have other unique characteristics: for example, Getter Robo can transform into different forms with new weapons and different attributes.

Weapons carry various attributes other than range, accuracy modifier and attack power. All weapons can be divided into melee and shooting categories that determine its effectiveness by pilots' status. Other attributes can be affected by terrain or a target's defensive ability. In addition, some units make use of "MAP Weapons" which affect multiple squares at once, with some damaging everything in the area and others, such as Cybuster's Cyflash, ignoring allies. Some games feature weapons which inflict status effects on enemies that drain their energy, weaken their armor or damage the pilot's stats.

Origins and development
In 1990, Japanese video game developer Banpresto released SD Battle Ōzumō: Heisei Hero Basho, the debut entry in its Compati Hero series, for the Family Computer (Famicom). A crossover between "super deformed" versions of Kamen Rider, Ultraman, and Mobile Suit Gundam, it was created as a congratulatory gift for Yukimasa Sugiura, who at the time had been promoted president of Banpresto. SD Battle Ōzumō enjoyed a commercial success in Japan, prompting Banpresto to create a more mature-oriented successor, Super Robot Wars, for the Game Boy in 1991. The original game borrowed several concepts from SD Battle Ōzumō, most notably its usage of characters from other Japanese entertainment properties. Its creation was also in part due to the popularity of both the Game Boy and Famicom in Japan, which continued to dominate the Japanese video game market. Banpresto turned the concept of Super Robot Wars into a franchise following its commercial success, beginning with 2nd Super Robot Wars several months later for the Famicom.

Banpresto outsourced development of earlier Super Robot Wars games to Japanese studio Winkysoft. Beginning with Super Robot Wars Complete Box in 1999, the company moved production in-house, with Banpresto's consumer game division Banpresoft handling development of future installments. Sugiura intended for 4th Super Robot Wars to be the final entry, however the franchise's lasting popularity prompted the creation of further sequels to meet demand. The company placed Takanobu Terada in the role of series producer; he at first showed little interest in its super-deformed character designs and gameplay structure. As Super Robot Wars sequels added more original character designs and its scope expanded, Terada showed more appreciation and embraced his role. Sugiura hoped the series could help introduce its players to the anime and manga series featured in each installment, commenting that he hoped it would "sell more and more for 20 years".

In 2005, Banpresto's parent company Bandai merged with Namco, creating Namco Bandai Holdings and subsequently Namco Bandai Games. Banpresto became a subsidiary of Namco Bandai Holdings in 2006, where it continued to develop Super Robot Wars games in addition to other projects. On April 1, 2008, Banpresto's video game operations were absorbed by Namco Bandai Games, with Banpresto being reorganized into a toy and prize machine developer. Terada and other Banpresto employees were transferred to Namco Bandai Games, as the company assuming control of the property. In 2011, Banpresoft and BEC (Bandai Entertainment Company) merged to form B.B. Studio, a subsidiary of Namco Bandai Games that would handle further production of the series.

Localization
Many mecha titles included are released only in Japan and the number of titles involved within a single game make for complicated rights and licensing issues releasing it elsewhere. Before Super Robot Wars 30, only Original Generation games were officially released for the English market by Atlus USA. The titles of the games are given as Super Robot Taisen. The games do not have the licensing problems other games may have since only original creations not from any anime or manga series are used in the lineup, thus making it the first game in the series to be released outside of the Asian market. Atlus also released Super Robot Taisen OG Saga: Endless Frontier for the Nintendo DS on April 28, 2009.

In early 2016, Bandai Namco have announced that Super Robot Wars OG: Moon Dwellers and Super Robot Wars V will be given an English release for the Southeastern Asian version along with a Chinese translation. In December 2017, Bandai Namco announced that Super Robot Wars X would be released in English for Southeast Asia market in 2018. In November 2018, Bandai Namco announced that Super Robot Wars T will be released in English for Southeast Asian market in 2019. Super Robot Wars 30 has had a global release on the Steam platform in all regions, marking the first time in about 13 years that a Super Robot Wars game was released in such a manner.

Reception and sales
As of April 2014, the Super Robot Wars series has exceeded 16 million copies across all platforms. The debut entry sold a combined	190,000 units and became a best-seller for the Game Boy during its first few weeks on the market. The best-selling entry is Super Robot Wars α on the PlayStation, having sold over 715,000 copies. Super Robot Wars games have become consistent best-sellers for both Banpresto and Bandai Namco, having regularly appeared on top sales charts in Japan as late as 2019. As of 2022, the series has shipped over 20 million copies worldwide.

Ollie Bardner, a writer for Eurogamer, described Super Robot Wars as "one of Japan's most enduring mecha series", showing appreciation towards its turn-based gameplay and large roster of mecha series and characters. Bardner believes part of the franchise's success is introducing its players to older mecha anime series: "Originally intended as a mere mecha anime crossover vehicle, Super Robot Wars has become something else. Not only has it facilitated new generations of gamers to discover brilliant anime from times long past, but also birthed unique games and anime in their own right." USgamer's Kat Bailey stated that the series serves as an "extremely faithful tribute" to the mecha genre and its history, writing that it "beautifully [remixes] everything from Mobile Suit Gundam to Voltron."

The games' main influence is the creation of animated shows influenced by original units and characters created for the games. The best examples are Getter Robo Armageddon, Shin Getter Robo vs Neo Getter Robo and the Mazinkaiser OVA, released in the United States in 2002. Shin Getter Robo first appeared in Ken Ishikawa's manga for Getter Robo Go, then became by its apparition in various Super Robot Wars games until receiving its aforementioned OVAs. Mazinkaiser appeared for the first time in Super Robot Wars F Final, released for the Sega Saturn and the Sony PlayStation in 1998, as an upgrade to the original Mazinger Z in order to allow the Mazinger franchise to compete with other super robots such as Shin Getter Robo. Mazinger Z writer and illustrator, Go Nagai, eventually implements it into his manga as the prototype of the other Mazinger machines, and the aforementioned OVA was also created.

The series was certified by the Guinness World Records for the "most intellectual property licenses used in a role-playing video game series".

Music
JAM Project, consisting of veteran anime theme musicians, like Hironobu Kageyama, Rica Matsumoto, Eizo Sakamoto, Masaaki Endoh, Hiroshi Kitadani, Masami Okui and Yoshiki Fukuyama have also contributed to many Super Robot Wars soundtracks, usually providing the opening theme song and the song played over the closing credits. The series also spawned a set of concerts and albums called "Super Robot Spirits", where veteran vocalists—some of whom would go on to form JAM Project—sing covers of popular mecha anime openings, and in some cases, live versions of songs they themselves originally sang.

Anime
Masō Kishin Cybuster is a loose adaptation on the story of the first original Banpresto mecha in Super Robot Wars into a 26-episode series, featuring characters inspired by the allies of the Cybuster's pilot Masaki Andoh and original characters created for the anime. In May 2005, Banpresto released the animated OVA Super Robot Wars Original Generation: The Animation, a 3-part non-canonical sequel to the second Original Generation game. In 2006, the OVA was followed up by Super Robot Wars Original Generation: Divine Wars, a retelling of the plot in the first Original Generation game. A variety of drama CDs, manga and model kits accompany the Original Generation lineup. In Fall 2010, Banpresto followed up with Super Robot Wars Original Generation: The Inspector, which is a retelling of the plot of Original Generation 2.

Manga
There have been several Manga adaptations that retell the stories of the Super Robot Wars series. Super Robot Wars Divine Wars (スーパーロボット大戦OG ディバイン・ウォーズ) by Akihiro Kimura tells the story of the Divine Wars anime over 6 volumes published from 2006 to 2009. Meanwhile, Super Robot Wars Divine Wars - Record of ATX (スーパーロボット大戦OG ディバイン・ウォーズ Record of ATX) is manga series by Tatsunosuke Yatsufusa that tells a similar story but from the ATX Team's perspective. Super Robot Wars OG Chronicle (スーパーロボット大戦OGクロニクル) is a series of short stories that take place across the Original Generation timeline, written and drawn by various authors, some of the stories from OG Chronicle were incorporated into the video game Super Robot Wars Original Generation Gaiden. Chokijin RyuKoOh Denki (超機人 龍虎王伝奇), is a 2 volume series by Masaaki Fujihara tells the background story for the original machines known as the Chokijin.

Net radio
SRWOG Net Radio - Umasugi Wave (スパロボOGネットラジオ うますぎWAVE) began to air to go along with the release of the Divine Wars anime. The show has been airing since January 2007 with four regular hosts, Tomokazu Sugita, Masaaki Endoh, Mai Aizawa and Rie Saitou. The show often features series' producer Takanobu Terada as a special guest. After Divine Wars ended, the show carried on and was often used to regularly feature and promoted up and coming video game titles.

title: Super Robot Wars


text:
Talk:Authorship of the Pauline epistles

Statistics
I wonder where this figure came from? ''A majority of scholars (about 2/3) consider that Colossians is not written by Paul. '' Sound as if it came from a particular survey of the field of scholars; if so, that would be a helpful citation. Thanks. Wesley 04:35, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Its one of the references in the references section of the page. Unfortunately I have forgotten which, although it will be one of Richard Heard, Udo Schnelle, Norman Perrin. The exact statistic expressed in the reference is 60% (2/3 is 66.66666(etc.)%). CheeseDreams 18:16, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Excuse me. But that makes it 2/3 of all the scholars you mentioned. So write it as such. You haven't written about every scholar who has ever published someting about the Pauline Epistles!!!! - Ta bu shi da yu 00:02, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * You don't seem to have understood my response. The statistic is mentioned by one of the authors I refer to above, I didn't mean that the statistic was the authors I referred to above. It is in fact a 2/3 of ALL biblical scholars everywhere statistic, which is, I believe, how I wrote it in the article. CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Then cite who believes it. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:32, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Wesley, Raymond E. Brown in his An Introduction to the New Testament offers percentages of the "critical scholarship" who believe whether Paul wrote which Epistle. For the ones where there is serious doubt, here are Brown's numbers:

 * 2 Thessalonians -- "evenly divided"
 * Colossians -- 60%
 * Ephesians -- 70 to 80% (with Erasmus mentioned as one)
 * Titus -- 80 to 90%
 * 1 Timothy -- 80 to 90%
 * 2 Timothy -- 80 to 90%
 * Hebrews -- almost all scholars, with Origen & Tertullian being 2 early sceptics.

Brown's book is an excellent guide to the issues (both textual & of content) of the NT, & should be consulted by everyone who wants to contribute to New Testament articles. Although he admits at the beginning of this book that he is a Catholic scholar (& wrote extensively about the Johannine books before his death), he makes his own POV very clear, & provides intelligent discussions of POVs opposing his. -- llywrch 23:45, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * llywrch, thank you very much for the source. Can I assume that those percentages of "critical scholarship" that do not believe that Paul wrote the book in question? Also, I presume based on the fact that ranges are given, that these figures are not the result of an actual survey but rather Brown's general impression of what "critical scholarship" thinks. Is this a fair assessment? Wesley 03:07, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Wesley, I'm not sure I understand your question, so forgive me if I don't properly answer it.

 * Nowhere in his book does Brown explain how he arrived at these numbers; I would assume, for lack of better evidence that it was based on his extensive reading of the secondary literature & years of associating with other NT scholars. In other words, these numbers are not hard & verifable, but provide a useful gauge of just how likely Paul wrote each one of these works. I find his numbers a better tool than the usual Wikipedia practice of either stating something along the lines of "a concensus", "many people believe", "some people believe", or "an articulate minority believe" -- plus we're quoting the opinion of an acknowledged expert, rather than an anonymous Wikipedian's unverifiable impression.

 * And these numbers only tell one piece of the story -- which is why I made the pitch to read his book. (And do -- I believe that it has something of value for every student of the NT, despite her/his beliefs.) Brown spends a chapter explaining the complex issue of authorship at the time these works were written: while admitting that it is possible that some of these works were not the direct work of Paul -- either by his hand or a scribe by dictation -- he emphasizes that they were very likely written by his own followers who wanted to preserve some of his ideas that had not been set down in writing. In other words, very much like the difference between a professor's own essay & a student's paraphrase based on that professor's works. -- llywrch 20:15, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you, you answered my question. I agree that Brown's general impression is probably far more accurate than most based on his involvement in the given field, as you say. I'm sure it's a fine book, but I can't be sure when I'll get to it, as I'm already behind on my personal reading list. Thanks for the recommendation though. Wesley 17:02, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Tags

 * I dispute the merge.

This article, like Authorship of John, is about textual criticism, and is fairly seperate to the main article on these epistles. This is also quite a large page, as is the Pauline epistles page, merging them would push the page quite high. Further, this page is linked from many textual criticism pages, it would be quite odd to be directed to a page discussing the content, in the same way as merging Markan priority with Gospel of Mark would be really quite odd. I have no issue with a small summary being placed there though. CheeseDreams 18:34, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Why is this page totally disputed? Try it yourself. Seperate the two sets of epistles (the 7 undisputed, vs. those that are not the 7 undisputed). Read one whole set, then read the other. It is really quite different.
 * I totally dispute it because you are pushing a POV. See the next section that I wrote below. Oh, and btw. The Authorship of John article is pretty NPOV, even if it has got stuff I don't agree with in there. You should read NPOV. - Ta bu shi da yu 23:58, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Totally disputed requires npov AND factual accuracy disputes. CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I have altered this. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:32, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

You can check the epistles yourself if you want, the points made in the article are true. The language is different, the greek does have large differences, the theology and style does have large differences. The vast majority of most scholars do consider that Paul did not write the pastorals. Most do not think that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians. CheeseDreams 18:34, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * What factual accuracy do you dispute?

 * How interesting that you are still making sweeping statements. There are many, many Christian Bible scholars who believe that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians. So that proves your assertion false. Also, you haven't given me sources for your claims. Do you expect me to wade through all your books? If this was submitted as a college paper you'd fail. Why should we treat you any differently here? - Ta bu shi da yu 23:57, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Not really. I didn't assert that they were Christian. Christians are only a subset of the set of all Biblical scholars. If it was submitted as a college paper, my college would wonder what I was doing submitting academic work to them rather than to the university. CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Sigh. I thought Americans called Univeristy college. I must have been wrong. Still, this would most definitely fail as a university paper. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:35, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Perhaps we could compromise by saying that most non Christian scholars believe that the evidence of textual criticism indicates that Paul did not write some of these epistles? As for reading them for myself, it's easy to imagine that someone might adopt a different style when writing to a bishop or apostle, then when writing to a congregation; this alone would easily explain the pastorals. As for different phrasings, perhaps he dictated his letters and some scribes didn't write down his words precisely word for word, altering the style or grammar slightly. I'm no expert so I won't make these suggestions in the text, but let's at least agree that we are not likely to convince each other, and also agree for the sake of civility that the other person's beliefs about this are not completely without merit. Wesley 13:20, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Not really, the Pastorals are particularly extreme in their differences. (This is somewhat obscured by translation though). It is as likely as George W. Bush, with his standard and style of english, writing The Remains of the Day, with its. That's the level of difference in the pastorals. Which is basically the reason that virtually all scholars who do not let their religion get in the way of their objectivity are totally convinced that the pastorals are fakes. It is essentially easier to prove that George Bush wrote one of the most eloquent pieces of english ever written (the aforementioned book) than it is to show that Paul wrote the pastorals. CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Right. I'm pulling out of this one (as suggested by Dr Zen). Let the article be written the way you want it. Let it remain a blight on Wikipedia, at least it'll be clear that you are pushing a POV. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:35, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Let me say this a little bit differently. We need to agree that we subscribe to different theories about the authorship of the Pauline epistles, and more importantly, agree that scholars also disagree about their authorship. My favorite theory, your favorite theory, and whoever else's favorite theory need to be presented neutrally, and objectively. This is how NPOV works on wikipedia. CheeseDreams, do you agree with this approach? If not, can you be specific about the flaws you see in this approach? Wesley 06:34, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This is the majority opinion. But the text still contains the counter arguments. What is not neutral? CheeseDreams 18:34, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Why does this not appear neutral?
 * It's not neutral because you don't even bother to present the opposing view!!!! - Ta bu shi da yu 23:57, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * That is why other editors exist. Put the opposing case, Ta bu. If CheeseDreams reverts it without good reason, I will support you. But what you put in must be of an equivalent standard to be fair. Dr Zen 02:45, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree, listing some opposing views will help the article. It would also be helpful to further qualify "majority of scholars" as to which scholars are really intended. You probably don't want to include every monk and priest among this group of scholars, for instance, even though many of them spend a great deal of time studying the Bible and related early texts. However, they don't all employ the tools of textual criticism. So how could we neutrally describe "most scholars" to indicate the scholars you do mean? Wesley 13:20, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * There must be some opposing scholars surely. For Collosians, it only just scrapes close to 2/3 so there must be a sizable minority (1/3) who think it genuine. CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * "Non-religious" scholars? I'm not sure it's all that controversial that Paul might not have written some of the epistles though, even among religious scholars who are not fundamentalists (literalists, if you prefer -- sorry, evangelicals just doesn't work for me!), just as we accept that the gospels were not necessarily the work of the apostles.Dr Zen 23:13, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Most religious scholars accept that Paul did not write the (anonymous) epistle to the Hebrews. CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Merging and POVness
I think that this would be better merged with Pauline Epistles. Firstly, this is a general article that has to do with authorship, however this should be covered in the main article! It should be merged. As it is, this piece is a gigantic POV piece by one author. The central thesis of the piece is that the epistles weren't written by Paul and that most if not all scholars agree with this. No attempt at giving an opposing POV has been written although there is plenty of it around, especially amongst Christian scholars.

It sounds like an interesting debate and it would be great if you could fill in the other side!

Cheesedreams uses phrases such as the following: "For this reason, authorship of many of the epistles traditionally attributed to Paul have been in doubt for many centuries by critical scholars. By the end of the 20th century, the majority of scholars had rejected all but 7 as genuinely by Paul (consequently these 7 are known as the undisputed epistles)." and also "The pastorals were subjected to the level of computer analysis used in criminal trials for similarity of authorship, and failed that analysis." I have removed these comments as they are unsubstantiated and POV.

''You what? My understanding is that this is absolutely correct. Only seven of the epistles are considered to be undisputed. That doesn't mean that the others definitely weren't written by Paul, but that only these seven are accepted by all to have been. I'm no Biblical scholar but I do know that the provenance of much of the New Testament is contested. I know this is difficult ground for believing editors, but please, try to get it into perspective.''

More POV words are "weaker" and "stronger" arguments. We should not be calling them this, as we don't make value judgements!

Edit them out.
 * I have :) Ta bu shi da yu 06:39, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This is a basic tenant of Wikipedia, and CheeseDreams would do well to read about NPOV. Regrettably, no attempt at reading of this policy has obviously been made, and she's been busy stinking up many articles to do with Christianity. As it says on her user page "I edit controversial articles. They are usually more controversial after I start editing them."

''They ought to be more controversial though. They should not present a Christian POV as if it were neutral.''
 * They should not be more controversial. They should be well referenced, and they should fairly state all points of view. This article doesn't even come close. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:39, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Look, if an article does not present at all anywhere, even the existence of a critical case against Jesus' existence, and suddenly it does, to say that isn't controversial, even if it is NPOV, is nonsense. CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Say that again? I didn't understand any of that. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:36, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The 2/3rd argument has been removed also. There is no source for this, and it seems dubious at best. I have changed it to "Other arguments rely on the polemical content of the letter, certain concepts, and false-teacher arguments, not expressed by other Christian writers until the end of the first century, making an appearance in Colossians." You'll notice I've removed "However, such before their time issues can be explained by Paul being the source of these concepts, rather that merely a redistributer of them (although this can also be used to argue that Paul made them up himself, rather than reflecting the faith)." because this appears to be original research. I've also marked this section as dubious as it now employs weasel words (I was forced to because of the dubiousness of CheeseDreams claims).

''I agree that CheeseDreams must source the 2/3rds assertion. Hit the books, CheeseDreams, because you know that that will be contentious enough to need referencing.''
 * Its referenced in the references section, as I mentioned right at the start of this talk page.
 * Maybe so. But which particular reference were you referring to? We need to know who said it, and where you got that information from. Something in the form of (Author last name, [publication] (optional), [year]). - Ta bu shi da yu 02:56, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I've also removed any reference to "disputed" and "undisputed" epistles as this seems to be the POV of CheeseDreams.

No. This is common enough that even I've heard of it.
 * But where? I'd not be disputing this if I had a reference to the dispute, but I don't have any. Until then, can we agree to keep them out? If you or CD can give me references, then go ahead and put them in. After all, by the very nature of a dispute, then there must be parties who disagree over the authenticity. So let's say who they are! - Ta bu shi da yu 06:39, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

If an epistle is disputed, we should mention it in the section that talks about the epistle, we shouldn't be confirming or denying the status of the epistle as this statement in itself is disputed by many Christians.

''I have to disagree. Saying something is "disputed" simply describes it as being under dispute. It doesn't make a judgement about whether it should be disputed etc. It distinguishes those epistles that are agreed by all to be written by Paul from those that are disputed; no more, no less. I think that if you were able to step back and look at that idea from a more neutral standpoint, you'd see that it's not as bad as you seem to think. I can fully understand your sensitivity though. I imagine the outrage of Moslems if it were suggested that some of the Koran was of disputed authorship. Trying to convince them that saying it's true that it's disputed is different from saying that it *should be* disputed would be a very difficult task.''
 * It has been. Actually, many liberal Muslims are open to the idea. You see, Uhlman (not sure how to spell that), who collected together the Koran from the various different versions of it, and unified it (very very early on in its history), himself writes of passages no longer in the Koran. Uhlman (or whatever his name is) may have (intentionally or otherwise) not chosen all the true verses, or added others. For example, the Satanic Verses. Many liberal Muslims are not sure about the validity of all of this collation process, and wonder whether certain parts are dubious, though it happened earlier in its history, than did Christianity (within about 50 years), so has a greater chance of being accurate (as there is less time to produce myths/counter-myths and forgeries, as well as rival lists of texts). CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * It is true. I'm a bit sensitive about this topic. I don't like being misrepresented. Noone does. That's why I've always tried to write from a NPOV on Islam, even though I totally disagree with it. I don't think I'm a POV pusher. But again, as I've said above, can we find sources please? And say who the parties who dispute these facts are? If only because I'd like to look up those references and verify them. Which I will most likely do. After all, that's one of the reasons why this place is meant to be so good: we treat each side fairly and from a neutral POV. Part of that process is that we must give a reference to those points of view!!! And we don't make up our own material. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:39, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * The references section. Read the references section. Why do you think I put it in? CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Oh wow! the reference section. You expect me to trawl though all of those books to find certain bits of information? Try doing that with a Univeristy essay. And that's the quality we expect on this site. So if you don't provide it, then expect to have people question your work. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:56, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I notice quite a few claims have not been substantiated. For instance: "Those who contest Paul's authorship state that such parallels are merely due to a careful forger, deliberately introducing unnecessary additional greetings for the purpose of making the text appear more genuine." Who contested Paul's authorship?

''This guy wrote a book about the "undisputed epistles". This implies he at least thinks the rest are "disputed".''
 * Well, this is a start. See, if we could add this material, then I'll not dispute it! Only... who is he disputing against? - Ta bu shi da yu 06:39, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * He is disputing against the orthodoxy (due to tradition) of the idea that Paul did write them CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I have moved the "(possibly forged)" because this is not substantiated and appears to be the view of the author. Again this is a POV statement. However, now the paragraph reads:

"The extensiveness of the development of the theology in the epistle compared to that of other epistles has led many scholars to the opinion that if it is genuine, then it must be very late. However, due to the apparant consideration of the letter as genuine by the author of the Ephesians, then most scholars think that if Colossians is forged, it is very early."

Again, no scholars are quoted and it is made out like this is an accepted fact, which it is not, especially amongst Christians.

''There were quite a few "facts" in there. Which one in particular don't Christians accept? I've run out of time. I think some of your points are valid, Ta bu, and I agree that this article can be much improved. But *work with* CheeseDreams, hey? This antagonistic approach doesn't help at all.''
 * I don't accept unattributed facts. Why don't I just write: most Biblical scholars accept the veracity of the Bible? You think I'd get away with this? - Ta bu shi da yu 06:39, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Then attribute your talk page, and Quills and Motor Car and Harry Potter and Mobile Phone and Path Integral Formulation and Pythagorus and Leonardo Da Vinci and Mormonism and Kibo and Australia and LIBOR and Inflation and Privy Council and Court and Paper and Qin dynasty and Cheese.....
 * CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * CheeseDreams, I do not have to attribute my user page!!!! Good grief women, the user page is an introduction on who you are and resides in the User space. Not in the main article space! And as for those other article: yes, they should all be attributed. Read No original research. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:41, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * The "facts" in that paragraph seem to be:

Ben Standeven 21:52, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) The theology in that epistle is extensively developed, compared to the other ones.
 * 2) Many scholars believe that, if it is genuine, it must be very late. They do so because of the supposed development.
 * 3) The author of Ephesians thinks it is genuine.
 * 4) Most scholars believe that, it it is forged, it must be very early. They do so because of the latter reference.

Now we get to Ephesians. It says that "Ephesians bears a strong similarity to Colossians, to the extent that over 40 areas of the text can be identified in Colossians which Ephesians reproduces, expands upon them and adding." No attempt at telling us any of the 40 areas of text are identified! So marking this as dubious. However, the rest of the paragraph reads: "It is for this reason that almost all scholars think that Ephesians is an edited reworked reproduction of Colossians, though whether this is due to Paul seeking to emphasise particular meanings, or whether it is down to a forger trying to alter perception of Paul's teachings, is a matter of more dispute, about 2/3 of scholars choosing the latter." almost all scholars think that? great, what a POV sweeping statement. So I've also rephrased this to "many scholars", however this now means I've had to add a weasel word. I also dispute the "about 2/3 of scholars choosing the latter." bit, so I've removed it. So now it reads:
 * You should add it back, because they do. Removing it suggests a POV motive for suppressing the fact that most scholars (2:1 margin) consider it true, and instead implying that a number of them, which is sizable, do. CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * If you add it back in again, then you need to cite who says this. In a format like "such and such says that two thirds of all scholars believe..." - Ta bu shi da yu 02:41, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"It is for this reason that many scholars think that Ephesians is an edited and reworked reproduction of Colossians, though whether this is due to Paul seeking to emphasise particular meanings, or whether it is down to a forger trying to alter perception of Paul's teachings, is a matter of more dispute."

Yet this is still not very good, because a) no scholars are mentioned (you expect me to take this on faith?!) b)no sources are given c) I have no way of verifying this information and how to rebutt it or provide an alternative POV. So this is totally POV still. So again, I've marked is as dubious.

"Many terms found in parts of the new testament which are considered to have been written after Paul's death are found within Ephesians, though not in other epistles, and for terms that are, the author makes a different choice of usage, for example linking pistis with kurios rather than just christos." I don't even know where to start with this paragraph. Firstly, you'll notice that I've removed the "disputed" bit. Its almost impossible for me to understand what is being said in this sentence because it's so convuluted! I've attempted a copyedit, but I don't know how well I've suceeded. Hint for CheeseDreams: Greek has a capital letter. So does New Testament. Part of my copy edit to the paragraph was to change it to "Such variations occur to the extent that many scholars think that, though Paul's authorship is not impossible, if Paul did write such a letter, someone else rewrote it." Funny however that no scholars are given and we're just expected to accept what is written here.

"One of the more noticable differences between Ephesians and other epistles is the distinct lack of any reference to an impending occurrance of the day of Christ. Also, the image of marriage as an heavenly union between the church and Christ contrasts noticably with 1 Corinthians' suggestion that marriage is to be avoided if possible."

No source. Original research.

"The general nature of the epistle itself, unlike those of the undisputed, is more a general homily, than anything directed at a particular community (such as the Ephesians themselves). To textual critics, such as Richard Heard, such variations are suspicious, in particular phrases such as holy apostles seeming completely out of place, except to a writer from a more developed church (such as that of the second century)."

And now we get to the absolutely beautiful bit. This bit kills me.

"2 Thessalonians is considered by scholars, such as Udo Schnelle, to be significantly different in style to the undisputed epistles, being whole and narrow rather than a lively and abrupt discussion on a range of issues. Neither does 2 Thessalonians have significant open or deep questions unlike much of the remainder of Paul's writing, and, according to scholars, such as Alfred Loisy,  seems to reflect knowledge of the synoptic gospels, which had not been written when Paul wrote his epistles. Further reason for scepticism, such as that of Bart Ehrman{{nowiki> ,  derives from the insistence of genuineness within it, and the strong condemnation of forgery at its start (a ploy commonly used in forged documents)."

We have two comments in the text (I notice not on talk!) "do we really have to put in "supported by X" it just looks sloppy and unreadable, it's in the bibliography" and "again, I object to "according to X" on grounds of poor style" Allow me to be the first to point out to you that all statements on Wikipedia must be qualified. Allow me to be the first to point out to you that we loathe weasel terms. So, yes! you need to include these in the text! And please don't discuss "style". So far I've noticed the poor style that this article has been written in. No wonder this article is so disputed! Sheesh.

Now, does Bart Ehrman argue that it is (a ploy commonly used in forged documents)? This isn't clear. Want to substantiate this further? Sounds dodgy, but if he says this then we should make it clear.

"Another issue often raised is that of context, for example, in the time of Paul, prayer usually treated God (the Father) as ultimate judge, rather than Jesus (as Christians nearer the end of the first century started to), which to scholars, such as Norman Perrin, suggests that 2 Thessalonians stating may the Lord direct your hearts to ... the steadfastness of Christ unlike 1 Thessalonians' may establish your hearts unblamable ... before God and Father, implies it having been written during times after Paul's death."

No, CheeseDreams, it doesn't look ridiculous. It's part of NPOV and a part of removing weasel words. It stops disputes.

 * It does look ridiculous, since "Some people, including X, believe" is redundant. I've rewritten these paragraphs to fix this; "X believes". We still need to say where these people claim these things, though ("in a book" isn't good enough). That's a pretty basic rule of attribution. Ben Standeven 21:52, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Honestly, this is one of the worst written articles I've read on Wikipedia, and I've read a few. - Ta bu shi da yu 23:44, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

''That's not nice. -- Dr Zen in italics''Dr Zen 03:01, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Maybe so, but its also the truth. The POV hits you like you would not believe. I'll try to play nicer though. It's just that I've been sorely tried by CheeseDreams, who does not appear to be writing from a NPOV. I'll go to Moore Theological College and do some digging. Regrettably they are closed for the Christmas holidays. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:30, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Now you said to me that you had copied in my responses to the above from my talk page, so where are they? CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Sorry? Where did I say this?! - Ta bu shi da yu 02:56, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * For what it's worth, I've never liked hiding commentary or questions in HTML comments. I think it's poor style. If the comment is complaining about something being poor style, then change it, or discuss it here on the Talk page where others can agree or disagree. If there's a question to ask, ask it here where a reply can be posted. Replying in the HTML comments would be especially poor style, for instance. Wesley

 * The interpretation of 1 Corinthians being completely against marriage is but one way to read it, considering the same book also vigorously defends the right of apostles to be married. I agree with Ta bu shi da yu that this, and other parts, appear to be original research, which is inappropriate. Wesley 23:15, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * The standard interpretation of Paul amongst non-Christians is of a self-hating (possibly gay, Timothy being one of his boyfriends) prude, or, as someone expressed to me, a self-loathing old queen. This is precisely because Paul is seen by them as SO against marriage and SO pro celibacy. CheeseDreams 02:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * P.s. it should be noted that the standard intepretation by non-Christians is not that that the gnostics held - they explained the apparant loathing of the flesh as the gnostic ideal that the flesh is intrinsicly evil (being created by the devil), thus hatred of sexuality, and anything else like that.
 * Rather, created by the demiurge. Who they believed to be a lesser God who got it wrong and thus created the physical world: a pale shadow of the spiritual realm. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:56, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

If Paul were completely against marriage, then surely he would have criticized Peter for being married, rather than defend his marriage? He certainly wasn't shy about criticizing Peter on other grounds, when he felt it was warranted. But really, if that's the standard interpretation among gay non-Christians, that's fine. As always, all I ask is that such interpretations be attributed appropriately rather than stated as fact. So, what would be the most appropriate attribution? Wesley 23:29, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

would you like a real Biblical scholar's opinion?
I am a seminary student and actually have studied with one of the foremost Pauline scholars in the Biblical scholarship world. Are you interested in my comments? I think that a lot of the arguments presented here show a demonstrated lack of understanding of the field of Biblical scholarship. There is so much here though, that I'm not sure where to start. Where could my skills and knowledge best be put to use? --Shanneranner 01:32, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Excellent. This is just what I've been waiting for! Please, go ahead and edit this. Just remember to adhere to NPOV :-) Also, don't take away opposing viewpoints, just back up your own and note when opposing viewpoints are disputed. Ta bu shi da yu 02:27, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, it would be welcome, although I express reservations about the fact that you are a seminary student, and therefore not neutral (and not meant to be, otherwise it would be hard to see how you could pass through the seminary).
 * Start wherever you think is best. CheeseDreams 19:22, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, I also wish to express my reservations that you are a secular atheist and therefore are not neutral. I mean BIG DEAL! - Ta bu shi da yu 06:34, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Just want to chip in briefly here. The scholarly website Early Christian Writings contains clear links to pages on the various Pauline letters, and discussion of their contents and possible authorship presented clearly and concisely, with numerous references to the scholars advocating the positions, and links to further offsite resources. It should hopefully be useful to those here complaining about the lack of citable sources for various agruments.

For example, the entry for Colossians not only mentions that it was Raymond Brown who supplied the 60% statistic discussed at the top of the page, but also mentions that it features on page 610 of his "An Introduction to the New Testament"--MockTurtle 03:06, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Pseudograph versus pseudepigraph
This sentence is from the second paragraph of the opening section:

"The latter three, the 'Pastoral Epistles', are widely regarded as pseudographs,"

The word "pseudographs" is made a hyperlink to the Pseudepigraph article. The Pseudepigraph article doesn't mention pseudograph.

There are three issues here I think:

 * 1) The pseudepigraph article doesn't mention the word pseudograph and perhaps it should.  A comparison of the meaning of the two terms would be helpful.
 * 2) The link to the pseudipigraph article should probably be removed if the pseudipigraph article doesn't mention pseudograph.
 * 3) Was psedipigraph or pseudograph the intended word?  Pseudograph means that the three epistles so described were intentional fakes intentionally misrepresented by their originator as being written by Paul.  That might be the intent of the sentence but the hyper link to pseudipigraph suggested that the author of this sentence meant to only say that the works have been incorrectly attributed to Paul by people other than the author of the epistles in question.

Ehrman says Paul didn't write 2 Corinthians
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEGa3BgHPwo

Watch from 2:50. He clearly says Paul did not write 2 Corinthians. Further he says it is widely agreed in scholarship.

Your claim that 2 Cor being written by Paul is rarely disputed is wrong.

You should remove it or site a scholarly claim supporting it. 73.234.251.117 (talk) 16:07, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

 * By your standard, there are no authentic Pauline epistles, there's just the collection. Ehrman does not agree with you. tgeorgescu (talk) 18:16, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * This is taking Ehrman out of context. He's not saying here he has a problem with Pauline authorship, but with the unity of 2 Corinthians. StAnselm (talk) 19:26, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

The article does not acknowledge that many have a contrary opinion to that stated, i.e., many do accept the genuine authorship of all the Pauline letters. Several letters are stated as non-Pauline as fact, whereas in reality they are merely disputed. 95.229.8.162 (talk) 02:14, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

 * WP:FRINGE. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:21, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Some agree on all letters
The article states as fact that some of the letters are not written by Paul. However, many accept the genuine authorship of all these letters. Therefore, the only correct statement is that they are disputed. 95.229.8.162 (talk) 02:21, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

 * ❌ See WP:FRINGE. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:20, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Authorship of the Pauline epistles


text:
Watauga

Watauga can refer to:

 * Places
 * Watauga, Kentucky
 * Watauga County, North Carolina
 * Watauga, South Dakota
 * Watauga, Tennessee
 * Watauga, Texas

 * Bodies of Water
 * Watauga Lake in Tennessee
 * The Watauga River in North Carolina and Tennessee

 * Ships
 * USS Watauga (1864), a steam frigate planned for the United States Navy during the American Civil War that was never built

 * Other
 * The Watauga Association, a pre-revolutionary autonomous American government
 * The Watauga Democrat, a newspaper published in Boone, North Carolina
 * Watauga College, a residential college at Appalachian State University in Boone, North Carolina
 * The Watauga Dam, on the Watauga and Elk Rivers in Carter County, Tennessee

title: Watauga


text: User talk:216.174.143.6

title: User talk:216.174.143.6


text:
Paul Phillips

Paul Phillips may refer to:
 * Paul Phillips (baseball) (born 1977), Major League Baseball catcher
 * Paul Phillips (guitarist) (born 1975), lead guitarist for the band Puddle of Mudd
 * Paul Phillips (singer), English singer-songwriter
 * Paul Phillips (poker player) (born 1972), American software engineer, entrepreneur and poker player
 * Paul Phillips (conductor) (born 1956), American conductor, composer and music scholar
 * Paul Phillips (bodhran) (1959–2007), Irish bodhrán player and teacher
 * Paul L. Phillips (1904–1975), American labor union leader
 * Paul Phillips, pilot of DHL Flight 611, which crashed into Bashkirian Airlines Flight 2937 in mid-air

title: Paul Phillips


text:
Common Rider

Common Rider was an American ska punk band, formed in 1999 by Jesse Michaels (guitar, vocals), Mass Giorgini (bass) and Dan Lumley (drums). The band's name is taken from a Japanese TV show, Kamen Rider (Kamen Rider means "Masked Rider" in Japanese.)

History
Michaels was formerly the lead vocalist for Operation Ivy, 1987 to 1989.

The band released two full-length albums and one EP. Last Wave Rockers was released in 1999 on Lookout! Records. Thief In a Sleeping Town EP was also released on Lookout! Records in 2001 and featured Billie Joe Armstrong of Green Day (guitar/backing vocals). The band released This Is Unity Music on Hopeless Records in 2002. The band toured the US extensively the same year, including the 2002 Plea For Peace tour, sponsored by Asian Man Records. On the tour, Phillip Hill (from Teen Idols and also a major contributor on the album This is Unity Music) played guitar, along with Joe Mizzi. The band's last release was a split with Against All Authority in April 2005, containing outtakes from 2002's This Is Unity Music.

The band broke up in 2003. In 2005, bassist and producer Mass Giorgini went to Australia to record an album for Brisbane-based reggae/ska outfit Scarred Hope; he has also performed with Dan Lumley in the band Squirtgun. Michaels has continued to perform sporadically and to produce art. In late 2008, Michaels emerged with a new band named Classics of Love, after the Common Rider song.

title: Common Rider


text:
Talk:Passion and Warfare

Page needs to be cleaned a little.
The tracks portion of the page is a little messy, the tracks don't all have pages made for them, so they appear red and i think it's a little ugly. The song tracks need to appear in regular black text. --7deadlysins12 (talk) 15:42, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Web pages non existent.
Some things written on the page do not have web pages making them a horrible ugly red, i simply took out the  to make them just plain text. --7deadlysins12 (talk) 15:59, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Passion and Warfare. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://theultrazone.com/articles3.cfm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080319091720/http://everyhit.com/ to http://everyhit.com/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:32, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Passion and Warfare


text: Category:Steve Vai albums

title: Category:Steve Vai albums


text:
Israeli rock

Israeli rock (רוק ישראלי, Rok Yisra'eli) is rock music created by Israeli bands and singers.

1960s
Israel's initial attitude towards rock music was mixed, with the genre gaining popularity amongst the youth but receiving condemnation from the press and government, most notably in 1965 when the minister of education Hanoch Rinot prevented the funding for a possible concert in Ramat Gan by The Beatles, labeling their music as holding "no artistic value". Israeli musicians of the time believed that it was a fad that would soon pass. The first Israeli rock bands began performing in the mid-1960s in nightclubs and discos, first in Ramla and later on HaMasger Street in Tel Aviv. These bands mainly performed cover versions of popular rock songs by bands like The Beatles and The Shadows. Rock culture, in the social and political sense, was nowhere in sight. Bands that stood out in the first wave of Israeli rock were Yarkon Bridge Trio, The Churchills, The High Windows, The Lions (aka The Lions of Juda), The Styles (aka Uzi and the Styles), The Fat and the Thins, The Blue Stars, The Goldstars, The New Stars, The Generals, The Monks, The Spiders, The Electric Stage, The Seventh Radiance, and The Sing-Sing.

In the euphoria that followed the Six-Day War, the performing groups of the Israel Defense Forces rose in status with a steady stream of songs about victory, bereavement and loss. Rock became part of the alternative music scene that was played mostly in clubs such as "Hakarish" and "Calypso", formerly known as drug dens.

Near the end of the decade rock and roll gained legitimacy. Western musicians arrived in Israel, and influences of the pop revolution permeated local culture. Some of the local bands added English musicians to their ensemble, creating several new bands that were based on the original rhythm bands. In the second wave of rhythm bands, three main bands led the local rock scene. The first was The Churchills, which consisted of five musicians including Canadian singer Stan Solomon, and British guitarist Robb Huxley. These were the most creative of the Israeli rock bands; they played innovative combinations of psychedelic rock mixed with Mediterranean Arab music. In 1970 the Israeli composer Noam Sheriff initiated a concert played by the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra and The Churchills, and their shared work with Arik Einstein, Oshik Levi and other artists from the mainstream Israeli pop music scene granted the Israeli rock scene a public stamp of approval. The second band, The Lions, was considered to be the first Israeli band to experiment with reggae music.

The third prominent Israeli band of those years was the supergroup Uzi and the Styles, created by the former lead singer of The Fat and the Thins, Uzi Fox. The band's varied style was derived from British pop and American soul music and was characterized by the compound-rich processings of wind instruments that resembled Blood, Sweat & Tears, Chicago, etc.

By 1969, Arik Einstein had taken The Churchills under his wing as a backup band, and with their help he would record the groundbreaking album "Poozy", which is often considered the mainstream breakthrough of the genre. The followup to the album would be the first of several fruitful collaborations with Shalom Hanoch with "Snail" and "Plastilna" both in 1970.

1970s
In the early 1970s, Israel had a burgeoning progressive rock scene. One of the first performers was Shlomo Gronich, whose 1971 debut was Why Didn't You Tell Me?. Danny Ben Israel's Bullshit 3$1⁄4$ was released in 1970, but overlooked for some thirty years. Other 70s prog bands included The Churchills, Zingale, and Sheshet.

Many bands formed in this decade. The rock band Tamouz gained much success in the 1970s. The most successful Israeli Rock band of the seventies was Kaveret which combined rock music and a unique sense of humor. The (consecutive 1st prize) winners of the 1976, 1977, and 1978 Chassidic Song Festival was the band that invented Jewish Rock, The Diaspora Yeshiva Band, who made several albums, had many hits (Hafachta, Malchutcha, Ivdu), and toured worldwide including Carnegie Hall and Lincoln Center. At the end of the decade, singers who wrote and performed rock oriented music became very popular and very successful, including Shalom Hanoch (who previously collaborated with Arik Einstein), Ariel Zilber (formerly of Tamuz), Svika Pick (in combination with pop music and disco music), Efraim Shamir, Yitzhak Klepter (formerly of Kaveret and the Churchills) and Gary Eckstein.

1980s
During the 1980s a few rock bands became popular. Notable rock bands of the decade were The Click, Benzin, T-Slam, and Mashina which became the most successful Israeli rock band of the decade.

1990s
In 1991 Israeli alternative rock bands and singers broke through, led by Rami Fortis, Berry Sakharof and Aviv Geffen, and young bands like Eifo HaYeled, The Elders of Zfat, Rockfour and Dr. Kasper's Rabbits Show who became very popular. An essential role in the rise of these bands and artists was the former Roxanne club in Tel Aviv, which hosted known artists and emerging artists of rock and alternative rock, exposing new bands to a growing audience. Since then, most of those bands have disbanded, but their members still continue to act in various music projects and mostly constitute the community of the Israeli music of the 2010s.

Notable in the field of Glam metal and Heavy metal was the band "Stella Maris" from Haifa, which began performing in the early 1990s. Stella Maris later integrated in the mainstream Israeli music scene and its vocalist, Pavlo Rosenberg, launched a solo career of his own.

Israel also developed a new style of rock/metal named Oriental metal, a crossover between death metal and doom metal, influenced by ancient Jewish traditions and the oriental culture both in lyrics and melody.

Two mid-1990s crises led to the decline of that early 1990s rock boom: First was the Arad festival disaster of July 1995, after which the popularity of these events declined. Then the nationally traumatic murder of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in November that year, is largely considered to have shifted the whole cultural atmosphere of the country, and the prominence and success of the "kicking" rock of the early 1990s was replaced by more mellow directions. Yet, until the end of that decade, Israeli rock music kept its place as a central musical style, and important bands such as Hamachshefot and Monica Sex formed.

2000s
Although Israeli rock became less popular in the 2000s, being edged out by Israeli pop, many new rock artists and bands emerged. Among the most prominent Israel rock bands of the 2000s are Beit HaBubot, playing melodic rock which focused on acoustic guitar, and Synergia, which had a melodic nu metal sound. Among the other successful emerging Israeli rock bands and artists of this decade were Girafot, Sheygets, Habiluim, Yoni Bloch, Hadag Nahash, Shy Nobleman, Vaadat Charigim and many more.

Many disbanded Israel rock bands began playing again during this decade, including T-Slam, Mofa Ha'arnavot Shel Dr. Kasper, Mercedes Band, Eifo HaYeled, Monica Sex, Mashina, etc.

At the end of the 2000s Mizrahi music gained massive popularity in Israel, further weakening the popularity of Israeli rock.

2000-2010
In the second decade of the 2000s, the creators of the classic rock style dwindled and songs that combine rock with pop and oriental music appeared. Prominent creators in this field are Dudu Tassa, who succeeds in combining the Iraqi folk music he grew up with at home with the alternative rock of the 90s, Keren Peles, who combines personal and exposed writing with rock arrangements alongside moving ballads, Hanan Ben Ari who broke out in this decade with rock songs of faith.

Also, the well-known rock artists continued to create - Aviv Gefen, with the albums "Psifas" (2012) and "Sdakim" (2014), Mosh Ben Ari with the albums "Tistakel li Ba'enayim" (2011) and "As in Life". Avitar Banai released two successful albums in this decade - "Yafa Kalevana" and "Leshonot Shel Esh", which were played a lot on the radio stations, and also had a successful collaboration together with Aviv Gefen in a joint show.

title: Israeli rock


text:
Rope trick effect

Rope trick is the term given by American nuclear physicist John Malik to the curious lines and spikes which emanate from the fireball of nuclear explosions under certain conditions, just after detonation.

Description
The adjacent photograph shows two unusual phenomena: bright spikes projecting from the bottom of the fireball, and the peculiar mottling of the expanding fireball surface.

The surface of the fireball, with a temperature over 20,000 Kelvin, emits huge amounts of visible light radiation, more than 100 times the intensity at the Sun's surface. Anything solid in the area absorbs the light and rapidly heats. The "rope tricks" that protrude from the bottom of the fireball are caused by the heating, rapid vaporization and then expansion of guy wires that extend from the shot cab —the housing at the top of the bomb tower that contains the explosive device—to the ground. Malik observed that when the guy wires were painted black, spike formation was enhanced, and if it were painted with reflective paint or wrapped in aluminium foil, no spikes were observed – thus confirming the hypothesis that it is heating and vaporization of the rope, induced by exposure to high-intensity visible light radiation, which causes the effect. Because of the lack of guy wires, no "rope trick" effects were observed in surface-detonation tests, free-flying weapons tests, or underground tests.

The cause of a surface mottling is more complex. In the initial microseconds after the explosion, a fireball is formed around the bomb by the massive numbers of thermal x-rays released by the explosion process. These x-rays cannot travel very far in standard atmosphere before reacting with molecules in the air, so the result is a fireball that rapidly forms within about 10 m in diameter and does not expand. This is known as a "radiatively driven" fireball.

Inside the radiative fireball, the bomb itself is rapidly expanding due to the heat generated by the nuclear reactions. This moves outward at supersonic speeds, creating a hydrodynamic shock wave at its outer edge. After a brief period, this shock front reaches and then passes the initial radiative fireball. The shock wave contains so much energy that the compression heating created in the air causes it to glow. At the point in the explosion captured in the adjacent photo, the shock front has passed the original radiative fireball and has about twice its size.

In the first few microseconds after detonation, the bomb casing and shot cab are destroyed and vaporized. These vapors are accelerated to very high velocities, several tens of kilometers per second, faster than the shock front. However, this acceleration happens in a short period, so the material is trapped behind the shock front, even though it eventually travels faster than the shock front. The various light and dark patches are caused by the varying vapor density of the material splashing against the back of the shock front. The irregular variations in mass distribution around the bomb core create the mottled blob-like appearance.

Sounding rockets
After a few milliseconds, the energy of the shock front will no longer be great enough to heat the air into incandescence. At that point, the shock front becomes invisible, a process known as "breakaway". This makes the shock wave difficult to diagnose beyond this boundary.

Photographs of nuclear tests often show numerous vertical rope-like lines to one side. These are typically created by small sounding rockets launched a few seconds before the firing, leaving smoke trails. The purpose of these trails is to record the passing of the now invisible shock wave, which causes an obvious visual effect on the smoke by compressing the air into a lens. This is not necessarily related to the rope trick effect in any physical way, but it is possible to confuse the two in some photographs. In the photograph of the Tumbler-Snapper test, the vertical lines in the lower-right corner are blast line poles not smoke trails.

Camera recording
The photo was shot by a rapatronic camera (a high-speed camera invented by Harold Edgerton and colleagues) built by EG&G. Each camera was capable of recording only one exposure on a single sheet of film. To create time-lapse sequences, banks of four to ten cameras were set up to take photos in rapid succession. The average exposure time was three microseconds.

title: Rope trick effect


text:
Indian Beach

Indian Beach may refer to:
 * Indian Beach (Marin County, California), a beach within Tomales Bay State Park in Marin County, California
 * Indian Beach (Oregon), a beach within Ecola State Park in Oregon
 * Indian Beach, Delaware
 * Indian Beach, Florida, a historical neighborhood in Sarasota
 * Indian Beach, North Carolina
 * Old Home Beach (also known as Indian Beach), a beach in Trinidad, Humboldt County, California

title: Indian Beach


text:
Amity

Amity may refer to:

United States

 * Eagar, Arizona, a town, formerly named Amity
 * Amity (New Haven), Connecticut, a neighborhood
 * Amity, Georgia, an unincorporated community
 * Amity, Illinois (disambiguation)
 * Amity, Indiana, an unincorporated community
 * Amity, Maine, a town
 * Amity, Missouri, a village
 * Amity, New York, a town
 * Amity, Orange County, New York, a hamlet
 * Amity, Knox County, Ohio, an unincorporated community
 * Amity, Madison County, Ohio, an unincorporated community
 * Amity, Montgomery County, Ohio, an unincorporated community
 * Amity, Oregon, a city
 * Amity, Bucks County, Pennsylvania, an unincorporated community
 * Amity, Washington County, Pennsylvania, an unincorporated community
 * Amity, Texas, an unincorporated community
 * Amity Hills, Oregon, range of hills northeast of Amity
 * Amity Township (disambiguation)

Australia

 * Amity, Queensland, a town on North Stradbroke Island, Redland City

Schools

 * Amity University (disambiguation), university in India
 * Amity College, school in New South Wales, Australia
 * Amity High School (disambiguation), several schools
 * Amity International School (disambiguation)
 * Amity School, in Lincolnton, Georgia
 * Brooklyn Amity School, a private school in Brooklyn, New York, United States
 * AEON-Amity, a chain of private English schools in Japan

Other uses

 * Amity Blight, character in the Disney animated series The Owl House
 * Amity (1801 ship), a merchant ship, Royal Navy sloop and whaler
 * Amity (brig), a ship used in Australia in the early nineteenth century
 * Amity (given name), a list of people with the name
 * Amity, New Farm, a heritage-listed house in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
 * Amity Church Settlement, settlement house in New York City
 * Amity Foundation, a charity in China
 * Amity Street, Amherst, Massachusetts
 * Amity Island, a town and the island in the Jaws franchise
 * Amity, one of the five factions in the Divergent series

title: Amity


text:
Katashi Ishizuka

Ishizuka Katashi (石塚堅) is a Japanese voice actor who is affiliated with Aksent.

Notable anime and video game voice roles

 * Ryu in Street Fighter Zero, Street Fighter Zero 2, Street Fighter EX series
 * Dan Hibiki in Street Fighter Zero
 * Yamada in Revolutionary Girl Utena
 * Milluki Zoldyck in Hunter × Hunter (1999)
 * Arias in Read or Die
 * Koji Mori in Strawberry Eggs
 * Tamanian Kid in Beast Wars Second
 * Masatsugu in Grander Musashi RV
 * Rodrigo in Hungry Heart: Wild Striker
 * Ninja Tottori and Yamagishi in Papuwa

title: Katashi Ishizuka


text:
Navajo Bridge

Navajo Bridge is the name of twin steel spandrel arch bridges that cross the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon National Park (near Lees Ferry) in northern Coconino County, Arizona, United States. The newer of the two spans carries vehicular traffic on U.S. Route 89A (US 89A) over Marble Canyon between Bitter Springs and Jacob Lake, allowing travel into a remote Arizona Strip region north of the Colorado River including the North Rim of Grand Canyon National Park.

Prior to completion of the first Navajo Bridge, one of the only Colorado River crossings between Arizona and Utah was located about 5 mi upstream from the bridge site, at the mouth of Glen Canyon where Lees Ferry service had operated since 1873. The ferry site had been chosen as the only relatively easy access to the river for both northbound and southbound travelers. By the 1920s, automobile traffic began using the ferry, though it was not considered a safe and reliable crossing due to adverse weather and flooding regularly preventing its operation.

The bridge was officially named the Grand Canyon Bridge when it was dedicated on June 14–15, 1929. The state legislature changed the name to Navajo Bridge five years later in 1934. The original bridge was closed to vehicular traffic after the new span opened in 1995. The old span is still open for pedestrian and equestrian use.

The dual spans of Navajo Bridge are tied at ninth place among the highest bridges in the United States with nearly identical heights of 467 ft for the original span, and 470 ft for the second span.

History

Construction of the original Navajo Bridge began in 1927, and the bridge opened to traffic in 1929. The bridge was paid for by the nascent Arizona State Highway Commission (now the Arizona Department of Transportation) in cooperation with the United States Department of the Interior's Bureau of Indian Affairs, as the eastern landing is on the Navajo Nation. The steel spandrel bridge was designed and constructed by the Kansas City Structural Steel Company. During construction, worker Lane McDaniels died after falling 467 ft to the Colorado River below. Supervisors had rejected the idea of rigging safety netting, believing that it would catch on fire from falling hot rivets.

The original bridge is 834 ft in length, with a maximum height of 467 ft from the canyon floor. The roadway offers an 18 ft surface width with a load capacity of 22.5 tons (although the posted legal weight limit was 40 tons). During the design phase, a wider roadway was considered, but ultimately rejected, as it would have required a costly third arch to be added to the design, and the vehicles of the time did not require a wider road. When the Bridge officially opened on January 12, 1929, the Flagstaff paper proclaimed it "the biggest news in Southwest history."

By 1984, however, Arizona Department of Transportation officials decided that the traffic flow was too great for the original bridge and that a new solution was needed. The sharp corners in the roadway on each side of the approach had become a safety hazard due to low visibility, and deficiencies resulting from the original design's width and load capacity specifications were becoming problematic. The bridge had also become part of US 89A.

Deciding on a solution was difficult, due to the many local interests. Issues included preservation of sacred Navajo land, endangered plant species in Marble Canyon, and the possibility of construction debris entering the river. The original proposal called for merely widening and fortifying the 1928 bridge, but this was ultimately rejected as not sufficient to meet contemporary federal highway standards. Replacement became the only option, and it was eventually decided to entirely discontinue vehicular traffic on the original bridge. A new bridge would be built immediately next to the original and have a considerably similar visual appearance, but would conform to modern highway codes.

The new steel arch bridge was commissioned by the Arizona Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration, and was completed in May 1995, at a cost of $14.7 million. A formal dedication was held on September 14, 1995.

The original Navajo Bridge is still open to pedestrian and equestrian use, and an interpretive center has been constructed on the west side to showcase the historical nature of the bridge and early crossing of the Colorado River. The original bridge has been designated as a Historic Civil Engineering Landmark, and was placed on the National Register of Historic Places on August 13, 1981.

California condors were reintroduced to the area in 1996 and can sometimes be seen on and around Navajo Bridge.

Original bridge (1929)
Construction started June 30, 1927 Bridge opened to traffic January 12, 1929 Total length: 834 ft Steel arch length: 616 ft Arch rise: 90 ft Height above river: 467 ft Width of the roadway: 18 ft Amount of steel: 2400000 lb Amount of concrete: 500 cuyd Amount of steel reinforcement: 82000 lb Construction cost: $390,000 (equivalent to $ million in )

New bridge (1995)
Total length: 909 ft

Steel arch length: 726 ft

Arch rise: 90 ft

Height above river: 470 ft

Width of the roadway: 44 ft

Amount of steel: 3900000 lb

Amount of concrete: 1790 cuyd

Amount of steel reinforcement: 434000 lb

Construction cost $14.7 million (equivalent to $ million in )

title: Navajo Bridge


text: User talk:24.6.7.120

title: User talk:24.6.7.120


text:
Cheesymite scroll

A cheesymite scroll is a savoury Australian baked food commonly found at Bakers Delight and Brumby's bakeries, as well as at Australian supermarkets. It consists of a spiral of baked bread similar to a pain aux raisins with Vegemite and cheese in place of raisins. Cheesymite scrolls are also home-baked. The cheesymite was first made in 1994.

title: Cheesymite scroll


text:
Indian Hills

Indian Hills may refer to:

Places in the United States

 * Indian Hills, Colorado
 * Indian Hills, Indiana
 * Indian Hills, Wichita, Kansas
 * Indian Hills, Kentucky
 * Indian Hills, Nevada
 * Indian Hills, New Mexico
 * Indian Hills, Texas
 * Indian Hills, Wisconsin

Other uses

 * Indian Hills Community College, Ottumwa and Centerville, Iowa
 * Indian Hills Theater, Omaha, Nebraska

title: Indian Hills


text:
Indian Point

Indian Point may refer to:

 * Places
 * Indian Point, Missouri, a village in Stone County, Missouri, United States
 * Indian Point, Nova Scotia, Canada
 * Indian Point, Bay d'Espoir, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
 * Indian Point, a National Historic Site of Canada on Red Indian Lake, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
 * Indianola, Texas, a ghost town in the United States; called Indian Point before 1849
 * Cape Chaplino, a cape on the Bering Sea coast of Siberia sometimes referred to historically as "Indian Point"

 * Other uses
 * Indian Point Energy Center, a nuclear power plant in New York, United States

title: Indian Point


text:
Cleveland, Washington

Cleveland is a community in Klickitat County, Washington. It is located within the Bickleton CDP.

Cleveland was first settled in 1879 by Ripley Dodge, who named it for the city of his native state of Ohio.

Cleveland contains an old cemetery and a rodeo. The rodeo, the oldest in the state, has been completely refurbished. Also on the rodeo grounds is a 100-year-old Spillman carousel that has been completely refurbished thanks to grants and private funds. The closest town is Bickleton. An annual rodeo is held the 2nd weekend in June along with Pioneer days in which the carousel is restored to operating conditions as it was back in 1907, with the original carousel horses which are housed in the Museum in Bickleton.

Cleveland is home to a carousel. Per R. Bollinger, former owner of The Oaks amusement park and benefactor of the Oaks Park Association (the non-profit he set up to perpetuate The Oaks), the carousel was one of the few rides owned by The Oaks when it opened May 30, 1905. It was sold to the Bickleton/Cleveland group in 1928 along with the band organ and ticket booth. Over the years, the method used to turn this machine was modified from using donkeys or small horses to a steam engine and, later, a tractor engine. The communities of Bickleton and Cleveland have kept the carousel maintained throughout the years.

Cleveland's most famous resident was William O. Douglas, the longest sitting member of the U.S. Supreme Court. Douglas's father was a Presbyterian minister, and moved the family to Cleveland from California in order to serve the local residents, but when he died, the family moved to Yakima.

title: Cleveland, Washington


text:
American Gramaphone

American Gramaphone is an American record company based in Omaha, Nebraska. It is best known for releasing Chip Davis' new age solo and Mannheim Steamroller albums.

History
American Gramaphone was formed in 1974 by Chip Davis.

American Gramaphone is also a music publisher affiliated with SESAC, publishing all of Davis' compositions (including his work with Bill Fries (C. W. McCall)).

American Gramaphone has also released solo albums by Mannheim Steamroller musicians Jackson Berkey and Ron Cooley, as well as by the bands Checkfield and America.

title: American Gramaphone


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A New World Utopia

A New World Utopia was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE

Original Research. --fvw *  04:48, 2004 Dec 19 (UTC)
 * more rant than research, but the verdict remains DLeeet Wolfman 05:15, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete essay. - Vague | Rant 05:23, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete eek. Rant, essay. Wyss 19:05, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

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


text:
Indian Springs

Indian Springs may refer to:

Places in the United States

 * Indian Springs, California, a town in Nevada County
 * Indian Springs (Colorado), a hot spring in, and previous known as, Idaho Springs, Colorado
 * Indian Springs, Florida, a community in Jacksonville
 * Indian Springs, Georgia, a census-designated place in Catoosa County
 * Indian Springs, Indiana, an unincorporated place in Martin County
 * Indian Springs, Maryland, an unincorporated community in western Washington County
 * Indian Springs, Nevada, a town in Clark County
 * Indian Springs, Ohio, an unincorporated place (formerly a city) in Butler County
 * Indian Springs, Texas, a census-designated place in Polk County
 * Indian Springs Metropark, a park in Oakland County, Michigan
 * Indian Springs Village, Alabama, a town in Shelby County

Institutions

 * Indian Springs Mall, also known as the Indian Springs Shopping Center, was an American enclosed mall in Kansas City, Kansas
 * Indian Springs Middle School, a middle school in Columbia City, Indiana
 * Indian Springs School, a boarding and day school in Indian Springs Village, Alabama

Other uses

 * Treaty of Indian Springs (1821) and Treaty of Indian Springs (1825), two treaties between the Creek Indians and the United States
 * Indian Springs State Park, a state park in Georgia at the site of the treaties
 * Indian Springs Park (Davenport, Iowa), a contributing property in the Village of East Davenport Historic District

title: Indian Springs