text:
File talk:ChristianityBranches.svg

'''ERROR! This diagram splits ancient Christianity into Orthodox and Roman Catholic whereas in reality, the Orthodox Church has not changed and Roman Catholicism split off from it.''' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.183.138.1 (talk) 13:25, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Untitled
While this might seem to be a useful depiction of common thought concerning Christian faiths, it is not NPOV as it favors Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy as being "closer" to the roots of early Christianity (the center), whereas Restorationism and Nestorians are depicted as being "further" from early Christianity.

Additionally, whereas in this depiction the gray line represents early Christianity, the line color does not change until it reaches Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, leading readers to believe that those are direct derivations, while the rest are not. In other words, were this a more neutral image, the line would change color from gray after the first departure, being Restorationism. Moogle 04:10, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * I have no problem with it, however, all doubt could be removed if we changed "Early Christianity" to "Early Orthodoxy". -- metta,  T he S unborn   ☸  05:47, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't like it either. Should be changed to a cladogram. -- Миборовский U 23:45, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Someone explain to me how Protestantism came out of the Church of England. --Tydaj 15:05, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I believe that you're looking at it wrong; the image shows both Protestantism and Anglicanism as coming directly from Roman Catholicism. --Funkaloyd 03:40, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Isn't it POV to assert that Anglicanism is not a subbranch of Protestantism? --Srleffler 07:03, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

 * No. In fact, "Anglicanism," per se, should be branched off of both the Oriental Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Church, as those are its true lineages. The "Ecclesia Anglicana" existed at least since Augustine founded the See at Canterbury, and the Church in the British Isles (Celtic and Orthodox) existed from about 47 or so, and British bishops were present at the early ecumenical Councils.  The English Church, during the Reformation, re-separated itself from Roman jurisdiction.
 * Nrgdocadams 06:52, 23 January 2006 (UTC)Nrgdocadams
 * Augustine of Canterbury was sent by Pope Gregory I to baptize England in a Gregorian mission. No "reseparation", only one separation, thanks to Henry VIII in 16 century. May we be one again. --Paxcoder (talk) 14:37, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Transparency & my revert
I'm using IE, and I think many readers are, but I can't read the text in yellow. The background is dark grey. This is a known issue with PNG transparency in IE, as far as I remember, so I found an older version that I could see properly, and hit 'revert', but no changes seem to have happened.

... I dunno what the problem is. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blacklite (talk • contribs) 02:30, 2 April 2005 (UTC).

maybe you have the picture cached? -- 11:01, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * I guess I did. I thought I'd tried every trick to get it to work again. It looks fine now, though. Blacklite 10:00, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Date of Council of Ephesus
The Council of Ephesus which condemned Nestorianism was in 431, not 413. ——Preost talk  contribs  July 8, 2005 16:20 (UTC)

 * I guess you want someone to fix it now? Just kidding. It should be an easy job of moving the number around. -- metta, The Sunborn  8 July 2005 18:32 (UTC)

 * I've made the appropriate fix. -- Vardion 21:02, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The Orthodox Churches, Roman Catholic Church, Anglicans, etc., no longer consider the Assyrian Church of the East to be followers of the Nestorian heresy, and this should be reflected in your chart, whcih now equates the Assyrian Church of the East with Nestorianism.
 * Nrgdocadams 06:45, 23 January 2006 (UTC)Nrgdocadams

Should the diagram extend further down the timeline?
I'm wondering whether or not it would be useful to continue the timeline further down so that we get a more comprehensive picture of the Christian family tree, including movements such as Weslyianism (sp?), Pentecostalism, Mormonism, etc. - Daniel Zylstra (Dec. 13, 2005)

 * If so, such a timeline should be a completely separate or new image, not an edit or replacement of the old one. -Silence 14:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Saying Mormonism is Christian is not NPOV. They may use the name of Jesus but this is never what has made someone a Christian. You would have to put any cult or religion which has somehow used Jesus as part of its belief system. With this criterion you could put Muslims and Buddhists since they have a place for Jesus too, and since Muslims technically can be traced back to OT and NT deviations. None of these have any place on this chart. --Ic2705 (talk) 01:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Oriental Orthodox
It is inaccurate to equate the Oriental Orthodox Churches with monophysites. The Oriental Orthodox are miaphysites, not monophysites. The Gnostics are monophysites. The Oriental Orthodox just wouldn't accept the Chalcedon diaphysitism. The chart should be change to reflect this. Nrgdocadams 06:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)Nrgdocadams

 * Correct. Can someone please change this, and perhaps make it a cladogram as stated above. At the very least the color should change from gray to something else beginning with the claimed lineage of Restorationism. — ዮም  |  (Yom)  |  Talk  • contribs • Ethiopia 21:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The term Monophysites is in quotation marks for precisely this reason. The article explains the relevant distinctions.  The reason why keeping Monophysites in the labelling is useful is because it's so very ubiquitous in English-language scholarship on the subject, but the addition of the quotation marks shows that it's a questionable label.  — Preost  talk contribs 21:24, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

 * However the "Miaphysite" is commonly used to describe "Oriental" Orthodox doctrine. So by putting "monophysite" in quotes it still seems POV when instead "nondiaphysites" or "miaphysite" would be better.  There is valid English language scholarship on the subject to use these terms.

 * "Monophysites" is no longer used in English-language scholarship because it is incorrect. "Miaphysite" is now more commonly used as it is the correct term, while the latter term is considered derogatory. Please change the name to reflect this. I'll see if I have the necessary image-editing tools to do it myself, but I doubt it. — ዮም  |  (Yom)  |  Talk  • contribs • Ethiopia 19:19, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

It is believed that the first country to adopt Christianity as a country was Armenia. Some people believe that these Christians are the forefathers of modern Gnostics. Gnosticism includes the practice of Meditation originally practiced in pre-Christian Israel and now still practiced in the Far East (China, India and so on..) where these traditons were kept.

Eastern Christians
The dotted line implying that the Eastern christians where all Orthodox then "united" with Rome is not accurate. Maronites for one (though there are others)) have always been both in communion with Rome and Eastern Christians. Furthermore Chaldeans where not in communion with Constantinople before then joined communion with Rome, which could be implied by the diagram.  It seems enough points of contention have been raised for someone to download rebuild and reupload into the same file a more correct flowchart.  Also the Assyrian Church of the East is at least, at this time, no longer, if it ever was, Nestorian.  See the 1994 agreement between the Church and the Vatican, which assigned an equivilant understanding of Christology.

Naming?
I see an issue with the Oriental Orthodox monophysite name too (they are miaphysite), as well as calling the Western Church post-1054 "Roman Catholicism," when clearly Roman is applied only to the Latin Rite, ignoring entirely the Eastern Rite Catholics; there is of course discussion of this on the Catholicism page, but the diagram needs to reflect the more universal-ness of the ("Roman") Catholic Church.

Also, is the "claim of seperate lineage" necessary? Lxx 03:00, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Response Best solution seems to be editing graph to remove eastern rite Catholicism. Should we also include Western Rite of Orthodoxy? Showing rites makes the graph imbalanced, unless we are making an effort to catalog all denominations and liturgical rites. The request to remove the Restorationism 'claim of separate lineage' is seconded. Evaluating the legitimacy of a claim of a religious tradition in this case can only be POV. Let's keep this graph simple and edit the articles it appears in when necessary.

Links in image
It looks like people have figured out a way to put hyperlinks on an image. This would improve this image a lot, and was the original motivation for the text version of this diagram, as I remember. Compare Australia Labelled Map and the tool Labelled Image Editor. -Colin MacLaurin 19:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Time to update, its not Roman Catholic Church but Catholic Church
Considering Wikipedia has made a decision to remove the Roman prefix as RCC does not represent Eastern Catholics (part of the world wide Catholisim, along with Latin/Western Catholism)...its time to make the clarification to this citation, and simply state: Catholic Church with perhaps Latin/Western and Eastern subdivisions (recongizing that Maronite and Italo-Albanian churches never left the universal Church. Micael (talk) 01:00, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I strongly disagree. The Anglican and Eastern and Oriental Orthodox also claim identity as Catholic, with linear succession from the ancient church.  Everyone has had to put up with a label that forces a slight inaccuracy (the Eastern Orthodox are not only Eastern, the Oriental Orthodox are what? more eastern? and Anglicans are neither necessarily English nor worship in English).  But yet, we need disambiguation in some fashion which avoids casting offense on other groups who claim and share the same labels.  The labels here are traditional, and the whole diagram is the result of carefully hard fought compromise.  The claim that "Roman" does not represent the Eastern Catholic Churches is incorrect; are they not in union with the See of Rome?  Is that not precisely what distinguishes them from the Eastern Orthodox, in the eyes of the See of Rome?  Remember that "Roman" is not the same thing as "Latin".  Nor can this diagram get into the details of the complicated history of various subdivisions of the Roman Catholic Church; it is already a complex enough diagram, and if we start listing the subhistory of each group, we are going to get an unreadable chart.  Tb (talk) 21:31, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * And is the Old Catholic Church not also a Catholic Church? Just because the Bishop of Rome broke communion with the See of Utrecht in order to declare himself infallible does not mean that he became thereby any more all-encompassing.--Bhuck (talk) 09:19, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Pope broke off from the bishopric XD --Paxcoder (talk) 21:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC).

Tb, much of your contributions here are mere opinion. I remind you that and encyclopedia is more than simply a public opinion poll. It is NOT inanccurate to ENTITLE Orthodox EASTERN & ORIENTAL because their descriptions are not merely geographically based as you confine them, they are historical. It is so important to them that it is part of their TITLE. The original-early church was made up of the Eastern Church based in regions with relatively established languages and cultures with the original patriarcates in Antioch(on todays Turkish/Syrian border), Alexandria, Egypt, and the see which "presides over love, & instructions enjoin[on others]" as eastern Church father Ignatius of Antioch describes the Church of the West- Rome. The West which was considerably less developed culturally and linguistically. These "Eastern" patriarchates would further be expanded to Constantinople as the Byzantine-Greeks as well as the a small patriarcate in Jerusalem in the 5th century. Therefore, the oxymoron calling the Eastern Catholic Church, ROMAN, its liturgically/historically absurd! The Eastern Church of the 1st century, was in communion with the see of  Rome, yet it was not considered the Roman Church. Conversely, the church of Rome, though Catholic was not considered Greek-Byzantine though certainly equally Catholic.

That said, I re-post my reply from the main article-discussion which I mis-posted there:

...Tb, the mere existence of a relative few churches considering themselves catholic does not remove the reality that there are objective facts involved historically and substantially...otherwise you water down the very essence of an encyclopedia. The bottom line is that there are acceptable general understandings as well as, objective, FACTUAL-historical ones. The point is that some things are applicable by more than mere subjective considerations. It is with such an understanding that Wikipedia (and the majority of worldwide encyclopedias) has accepted for the Catholic Church to call itself simply the "Catholic Church" as it is the most historical and objective TITLE for such a church, not to mention it truly is the most common title for the Church itself.(are you going to deny that the Wiki article for the Church appears as simply Catholic Church?) Also, the mere existence of churches that consider themselves catholic certainly DOES NOT obviate discussion of the issue. It's the equal of saying that multiple political parties disagree yet those parties that disagree represent a grand minority of the people. That is exactly what you are doing. Catholics represent over 1 billion of the world's Christians and call themselves as such. While on the other hand while there may exist a few that consider themselves catholic yet may or may not even entitle themselves as such, it is none-the-less but a miniscule minority ill representative of the Christian consensus. Thus, to say there is a mere existence.. of other parties/churches..., is an insincere alibi for providing a false-neutral POV in the name of appeasing a limited few while insulting the grand majority of over 1 billion Christians that proclaim themselves as members of what is ENTITLED globally and historically as simply the Catholic Church, besides the great many non-Catholics which accept and are not offended by Catholics calling their Church as such. I'm not even addressing the exaggerative preeminence of subjective opinionated views above historical objective evidence.

However, all this is well beyond the context of this citation. The citation is merely showing a generic breakdown (in large part) of the major Christian denominations and they are reflected and compared to from a historical perspective. It speaks of these churches as they are NOMIMALLY entitled, not merely what they consider themselves subjectively- but a TITULAR historical/objective context. Otherwise, why the dotted line for the Restorationalist, no objective evidence, only claimed evidence. I REMIND YOU Catholics also CLAIM/CONSIDER themselves orthodox, but do not bicker about the names whenever someone refers to the "Orthodox" Church. That said, I'm simply saying; Wikipedia and this citation should be consistent...1) if Wikipedia has, for the church described here as Roman Catholic is not named in such a manner in its article for the very church being discussed then it should be corrected. (an article is certainly more impacting that a mere visual image/table- therefore, why your intransigence?) 2) It is very much incorrect to call Eastern Catholic churches, Roman. The Roman or Latin church has always been understood as "the West”, hence the oxymoronic connotation to say Eastern Catholic Church, of the Roman Catholic Church. NO, it’s the Eastern and Latin/Roman churches, of the CATHOLIC Church. Micael (talk) 18:10, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

 * Can we have this conversation without the construction of seven-hundred word essays? The portion of your reply which is devoted to proving that only the Roman Catholic Church has the right to call itself Catholic, or that only the Roman Catholic Church stands in some kind of succession from the earliest church is, as you know, controversial.  It would be inappropriate for Wikipedia to adopt the view that only those in union with the Pope are truly Catholic.  The term "Roman" refers precisely to ecclesiastical union with the Bishop of Rome, and is not a synonym of Latin or Western.  It is, moreover, a term that Roman Catholics have used (including at the highest levels) to refer to the totality of the western and eastern churches in union with the Pope.  It is not a term which the church in question has rejected.  Tb (talk) 00:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, this claim is factually inaccurate: "if Wikipedia has, for the church described here as Roman Catholic is not named in such a manner in its article for the very church being discussed then it should be corrected." In that article, you will find, of course, "The Catholic Church, also known as the Roman Catholic Church" right there in the lead.  Tb (talk) 01:07, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * As for the dotted line for restorationists, I have formed no opinion on whether it should be there or not. It's complicated, but it is not the same issue, regardless.  For the restorationists, the question is not about naming, but about a disputed claim of origins.  Because the line is easy and does not clutter, it does not seem to raise the same problems.  By contrast, changing the name to "Catholic Church" would contain the inevitable conclusion that the other churches listed are not Catholic, and that is a POV we cannot be putting forth.  It is perfectly reasonable for the page at Roman Catholic Church to say "Catholic Church" over and over again, because of the context, but here, the same is not reasonable.  Tb (talk) 01:07, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

 * Please see the note in that same lead you quote. Where does Catholic Church ever call itself Roman Catholic Church? Ever? Many claim "catholicity" - heck even some protestants these days. But from st. Ignatius of Antioch to these days, only one Church calls itself simply - Catholic Church. There is a hint why that may be in what st. Augustine in his "Against the Manichaeans and Against the Donatists" said:
 * The succession of priests keeps me, beginning from the very seat of the Apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after His resurrection, gave it in charge to feed His sheep, down to the present episcopate. And so, lastly, does the name itself of Catholic, which, not without reason, amid so many heresies, the Church has thus retained;

 * One example is written in stone on a prominent church in Washington, D.C. Of course, it is the claim here that is exactly the point.  The Church of England also calls itself Catholic, for exactly the reason that Augustine says: because it has maintained the same succession of priests down to the present episcopate.  It is precisely this point which you don't seem to see: that the other claimants to the name claim it on the same basis and for the same reasons, and the notion that only those in union with Rome count as "Catholic" is 'http://www.vatican.edu/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/angl-comm-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_19770429_paul-vi-coggan_en.html'precisely the POV that is problematic.  Tb (talk) 22:19, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Does Innocent III count? Tb (talk) 22:27, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, in ecumenical contexts, the adjective is normal. See, for example,, or the very name "Anglican-Roman Catholic International Consultation".  Indeed, virtually all the documents at  use the adjective "Roman".  Tb (talk) 22:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Anyone remotely aware of Church history would like to claim catholicity. However, there is one, and always will be - Catholic Church. This is not a mere epithet, it's what it's called (exceptions are new "Blabla catholic church"es - but those are clearly not the Catholic Church, and they don't bear the name, it only resembles that which they split of). If others have their POV that says we're not the Catholic Church fine (their mistake). But we're the only ones *called* that (see Augustine's quote again). No denomination claims the same title (that i know of). Also, don't assume everyone takes "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church" as lightly as Anglicans do. We don't think those churches are catholic which Anglicans regard catholic, and neither do other churches who Anglicans would fit in the same category (specifically, the Orthodox).
 * Documents you mention (all named "Anglican-Roman Catholic blah") do seem to prove we - in one occasion - called ourselves "Roman Catholics", but I'd say this was an exception granted to the Anglicans for the sake of the document, and it's not a rule.
 * But since there's wiki-democracy that will be enforced her, instead of accuracy, I give up - partially because everyone understands what the graph is trying to say. However(!) let it be noted again, there is one Church that bears the title "Catholic Church". And it's the see of Peter that unites it. --Paxcoder (talk) 19:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Your words here express your point extremely well, and thus prove mine as well. This is a clear POV, and it is equally clear that to express it as such in Wikipedia would be a violation of Wikipedia's WP:NPOV policy, as well, of course, about being incorrect about your factual claim that the term is never used by the church in question itself.  Tb (talk) 20:31, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Alas, it's not merely my point of view, it's a fact. Catholic church is the only "Catholic church" on the face of the planet. It always was and always will be. If you spell it with a capital C, then it's unambiguous in all possible ways (it's NPOV) - even other's POV can't confuse it for "four marks of the church" or a "simply" universal(grk.) nature. Because it is the Church's name. Not "Roman Catholic", even though it is called that in joint statements as a provision to the other party (it's not a real title). So again, I reckon nothing will change, and all I'm saying now is that the graph is inaccurate. Many claim the property (some expand it to encompass their own communities even though the title doesn't fit), but only one bears the name. In short: If I say I'm a Catholic you know what I mean. The other guy can say he is catholic (and has to explain), but he doesn't say he's *a* Catholic. That's fact, not POV. --Paxcoder (talk) 23:49, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

 * And yet, the Anglicans, Orthodox, and others, also insist they are equally Catholic, complete with capital C. There is, of course, the Old Catholics as well.  And, whether you like the fact, or agree with it, lots of Anglo Catholics insist on referring to themselves as Catholic, complete with capital C.  You may dislike it, you may think it's wrong, but the fact is, that they do it, and they disagree with you about its propriety, and for exactly that reason it is inappropriate for Wikipedia to declare that one side is right and the other wrong in such a case.  Tb (talk) 06:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Feel free to compare any of the names listed in Catholic Church (disambiguation) with "Catholic Church". None of them match (match would be found had the Catholic church not been replaced with "Roman Catholic"). Noone of them has the said title. The claim of catholicism *embeded* in the name is irrelevant - it's still not their name. --Paxcoder (talk) 19:36, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I think this is becoming rather absurd special pleading. We were asked "Where does Catholic Church ever call itself Roman Catholic Church? Ever?" the answer is, lots of places. You cannot now pretend that that answer was not given, and say that somehow it has only one name. It has many, and the fact that one of them is "Catholic Church" does not prevent me from describing myself as a member of the Catholic Church, and regarding the claim of the Bishop of Rome to sole authority over that title as a ridiculous presumption. He and I have a religious difference on this matter. It is improper for Wikipedia to express the POV that the claim "Catholic" is more correct for that one than others. Most churches choose names which make it possible to sensibly distinguish them one from another; the fact that yours wants to claim some kind of "generic" name, which intrinsically works to unchurch everyone else is your theological problem, not mine, and Wikipedia need not accede to the imperialistic demand that only those in allegiance to the Bishop of Rome are really Catholic. You (plural) have chosen a ridiculously overbroad name for political reasons; you cannot complain when we notice those political reasons and add a qualifier--which the church in question itself freely uses without complaint in many many contexts such as this. Tb (talk) 20:54, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

 * No, that was not a "lot of places". And it's not an argument: The 4 documents of provision to another religious community don't change the real name of the Church - the one always reserved. You can say you're a member of the "Orthodox Church" because you believe some orthodox things (we claim orthodoxy as well) - but it won't make you a part of the (Eastern) Orthodox Church. And papal rule of the Catholic Church is historic (although besides the point now). I'll say it for the 10th time: no one else claims the name "Catholic Church" (alone) and it is most certainly not a generic name. A generic part of the title for some other community? Perhaps. But this is our name for almost 2000 years now, it is ridiculous that you think we should change it just because some others now thing they are Catholic too (once more, we're deviating from the point). I'd hate to repeat once more, so try to understand this time: Our Church's *name* is "Catholic Church" and no other church in whole time-space wears it. The title is thus an unambiguous identifier of our Church, which is a world-wide recognized fact. --Paxcoder (talk) 00:59, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not asking anyone to change anything. But, like it or not, the Church of England believes itself to be a part of the one Catholic Church just as much as the USCCB does. Go ahead and call yourselves what you want.  But since in actual fact you all use many names for yourselves, don't object when we pick one.  Indeed, if you agree that "Roman Catholic" is used in ecumenical contexts, shouldn't that settle the matter?  This is an ecumenical context..  Tb (talk) 01:14, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You're probably thinking four marks of the church again, and that's not capital C. In any case, I have already accepted that my attempts here are futile. I'm just stating that "Roman Catholic" isn't objective nor is it correct - just "for the record". To be honest, I fear that future shall not understand this because of what we do today. --Paxcoder (talk) 01:32, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Since the name "Catholic Church" is sometimes controversial, including here, the question is whether there is an uncontroversial alternate name. And there is: "Roman Catholic Church". Now you may say that it's not the real name, that it's not right, that it's improper, but can you please get your own house in order before ordering Wikipedia around? The Trappists and Jesuits identify themselves as "Roman Catholic", for example. I'm afraid that I'm going to take the word of the OCSO leadership above yours about whether "Roman Catholic" is an accurate or appropriate word. Tb (talk) 00:19, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

 * Oh really? Who contested the name and on what grounds? And even if someone did (they didn't, you did), that bears no effect to the *real name* of the Church - what part of this do you not understand? How many times do I have to repeat? Now if some refer to themselves as "Roman Catholics" or "Greek Catholics", or "Polish Catholics", it doesn't matter, because the name of the Church that encompasses all of the three terms is "Catholic Church". This is the one shown on the graph. I am not reverting the image, I'm simply saying that this is wikimockracy, not objectivity. btw, don't take this as an incentive to reply yet again (especially since it doesn't matter), but you didn't cite your sources this time. --Paxcoder (talk)

 * How about this. If the OCSO and the Jesuits describe themselves as Roman Catholic, and if the Vatican uses the term in official documents in ecumenical contexts (and this is one of those contexts) does that mean you'll agree I'm right?  Or are you saying instead that no matter how many Roman Catholics use the term Roman Catholic, it's still an unacceptable term?   Or is it that only "real names" must be used in the chart?  (And if so, have you noticed that none of the other names are the "real names" of any particular church?)  Tb (talk) 01:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

 * Your Ecumenical argument is good. Still, i would like to point out just one more reason "Roman Catholic" is incorrect: I doubt Greek Catholic (more correctly, and wider: "Eastern Catholic Churches") who are shown re-merging with the Church would qualify as "Roman", though they are Catholic - part of the same Church. However, as long as we acknowledge what's written is not real, official or correct *name* of my Church (though it may have a purpose in official ecumenical documents as you point out), I'm fine with it being there. I didn't ask for it to be changed, so I'm not sure why is it that we're still discussing this. --Paxcoder (talk) 12:29, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Change in Image
How come the image that was used from 2007 change all of a sudden. Now all the branches of christainity is shown as offshoots from Roman Catholic Church. Even Oriental Orthodoxy ?, What connection would the churches in Ethiopia, India, Armenia (Oriental Orthodox) have with Roman Catholic church, to depict these as offshoots from Roman Catholic Church in AD431. In AD431, the people of Rome, wouldnt even have heard of places like India and Ethiopia ????? Yethi (talk) 12:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Quite right; I'm reverting it now. The editor should not have done what was done. Tb (talk) 16:29, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I've made the change on the Wikimedia Commons. Tb (talk) 16:37, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Someone is playing with the chart. 117.97.56.104 (talk) 14:30, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

good new lines to apply
(claimed separate lineage) + (Wycliffe+Hus) + (Great Awakenings)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/8/8b/20070115073401!ChristianityBranches.svg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/ChristianityBranches-2.svg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/8/8b/20110107073927!ChristianityBranches.svg

--89.176.227.251 (talk) 17:33, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Rubbish
This diagram is too incomplete and biased to take seriously. People might really consider whether it should be incorporated in any article.Borgmcklorg (talk) 13:44, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * How so? What are the biases here...? Also, File talk: namespace is usually a difficult place to get a response. You might want to post to the talk of articles where this is included. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:13, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I see that posting a comment here is probably pointless, but thank you for the reply. Problems are many, as far as bias, the classification is centred on Anglicanism and Catholicism (and perhaps the Assyrian church, here given undue weight).
 * A few points.
 * The anabaptists are generally taken to pre-date the Reformation proper. I've never seen a direct connection with similar protestant denominations of today shown. Gibbon in Decline and Fall draws a line from the ancient Paulicians through the Cathari and Waldenses to the Hussites etc. It is an interesting (and possibly correct) argument but proof is scant or non-existent.
 * The Assyrian church has a separate line when it is not one church, but split in two long ago, and one branch has long been an Eastern-rite church under Rome.
 * The Great Schism was a political event that formalised a de-facto theological split which had happened much (about 600 years) earlier.
 * The Catholic policy of taking on eastern-rite churches unfolded over a long time, and did not happen at a single point where the reformation also happened.
 * Marcionite and Nestorian churches are dead as such but were both major for many centuries. For that matter, many protestant sects outdo the Arian church for heresy in terms of the Nicene creed.
 * Restorationism is not a universal term (and not the most common for what it appears to mean), and as a belief has generally been grafted onto existing protestant denominations, rather than being a separate current. The term is also poorly chosen, since it would normally refer to the restoration of a monarch or of a Catholic monarch after a protestant period. Its rise is also much later than is shown: late 19th century, not 15th or 16th.
 * Anglicanism is not a coherent system of anything except church governance. That is, it is not any form of theology or belief system, but rather encompasses others. Several are not even definable as Christian.
 * Protestantism is not one thing and can't be defined (as the graph implies it can) in opposition to Anglicanism, "Restorationism", and Anabaptism.
 * Only a few there.Borgmcklorg (talk) 15:22, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Untitled 2
Do not know where or how to put this. I am sure someone can put it in the right place.

The Early Christianity line should actually be Catholic and the Roman Catholic line should also be called Catholc. The Catholic Church was the first Christian Church. As you can see on wiki (List_of_popes) history has agreed that the Catholic Church go back to Jesus making the Apostle Peter the first Pope. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.118.72.190 (talk) 18:38, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Rubbish. I can also say that you can look on wikipedia and see the Patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem. They go down to the apostles as well, including Peter. In Constantinople, the first bishop was the Apostle Andrew the first-called, brother of Peter. In Alexandria, the first was Mark the Evangelist. In Antioch, (this one will be such a surprise!) the first was PETER THE APOSTLE. And guess what, he was bishop there before he was in Rome. Now, in Jerusalem, the first was James the Just, the brother of the Lord. Now, you go here and try to tell everyone that the Roman Catholic church is the "true church". Well then I should be able to counter you and say: "Why do you disobey the primacy of Peter, ignoring Antioch as they left the Roman Catholic Church?" If Peter's throne is truly the mark of infallibility, then a paradox occurs when Antioch and Rome disagree as they were both founded in large by Peter. So go away with your fanatical Roman Catholicism (perhaps it should not even be called that, esp after Vatican II... is it even a church anymore?) Anyway, don't bother with this junk you are imagining, I may as well go here and complain that Roman Catholic should be changed to "Papists".75.73.114.111 (talk) 14:30, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Arianism
Why Arianism is omitted here? -- Bojan   Talk  03:44, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Extinct It no longer exists today (except indirectly via, e.g. Jehovah's Witnesses.) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:29, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Church of the East
Would it be possible to rename Assyrian to Church of the East please for more neutrality? Not every Church in this branch considers itself Assyrian. Many Thanks. 2.101.110.79 (talk) 16:09, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Assyrian churches Can you provide some context for this claim? What do you have in mind? —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:21, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Certainly, for example, the Persian Church, Nestorian Church, and the Ancient Church of the East do not consider themselves Assyrian. Assyrian is quite a specifically nationalistic term associated with Assyrian nationalism. 2.101.130.173 (talk) 01:49, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Citation Do you have any proof for this? I've read about the Assyrian church and I don't know of any problem that schismatic churches have with the name. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:59, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, hope you are well. Syro-Malabar Church and Chaldean Church merged from the Church of the East (not Assyrian Church) to the Catholic Church. Assyrian Church distinguished itself from the Church of the East (by naming itself Assyrian) only in the 1800s. Other Churches of the East include Chaldean (now in communion with Rome), Syro-Malabar (also in Communion with Rome) Mar Thoma Church of the East in India (still independent) Ancient Church of the East (independent) Assyrian (independent), and some of the Dukhovny Christians (independent). Thank you. 2.101.114.105 (talk) 13:07, 29 November 2014 (UTC) By the way, all "Nestorian" Churches of the East accepted Chalcedonian Christology at the 544AD Synod of Mar Aba I. 2.101.114.105 (talk) 13:18, 29 November 2014 (UTC) I am very sorry, I forgot to include the Chaldean Syrian Church (in communion with the Asyrian Church) in India as well as the other 5 Church of the East denominations. 2.101.114.105 (talk) 10:26, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Personal Ordinariate
Should we add a merge line from Anglicanism to Western Rite Catholics? Some number of Anglican Churches have merged with the Roman Catholic Church in the recent past under Personal ordinariates.

Ittiz (talk) 21:16, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

title: File talk:ChristianityBranches.svg


text:
Central High School (Philadelphia)

Central High School is a public high school in the Logan section of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Founded in 1836, it is a four-year university preparatory magnet school.

About 2,400 students attend grades 9 through 12. Central High School is the only high school in the United States with authority, granted by an Act of Assembly in 1849, to confer academic degrees upon its graduates. This authority to grant academic degrees led Central to refer to the principal of the school as the “President” of Central High School. The current and fifteenth president of Central High School is Katharine S. Davis.

Central, rather than using a general class year to identify its classes (as in "class of 2023"), uses the class graduating number system (as in "280th" graduating class" or "280"). This tradition started shortly after the school's founding when it was common to have two graduating classes per year – one in January and one in June. In June 1965, semiannual graduations were replaced by annual graduations. As of the 2023–2024 school year, the current senior class is 283.

19th century
Central High School of Philadelphia was founded in 1836 as "the crowning glory" of Philadelphia's public school system, "the worthy apex to a noble pyramid", and the first "high" school in the state. Because city voters only reluctantly had been convinced of the need for a high school, the curriculum was carefully and publicly geared to the needs of taxpayers. Central's founders made an especially concerted effort to avoid educating students in the manner of private academies of the day, where classical languages and literature were of paramount importance.

The school was chartered by an Act of Assembly and approved on June 13, 1836. A site was purchased on the east side of Juniper Street below Market Street, and the cornerstone was laid on September 19, 1837. The school opened on October 21, 1838, with four professors and sixty-three students.

In November 1839, Alexander Dallas Bache, great-grandson of Benjamin Franklin, and Professor of Natural Philosophy and Chemistry at the University of Pennsylvania, was elected the first President of Central High School. President Bache resigned in 1842 to return to his professorship at the University of Pennsylvania, and was succeeded by John Seely Hart, who had been a professor of languages at Princeton University.

An Act of Assembly approved on April 9, 1849, provided that:

"The Controllers of the Public Schools of the First School District of Pennsylvania shall have and possess power to confer academic degrees in the arts upon graduates of the Central High School, in the City of Philadelphia, and the same and like power to confer degrees, honorary and otherwise, which is now possessed by the University of Pennsylvania." In accordance with this Act, the Board of Controllers on September 11, 1849, authorized the conferring of appropriate degrees upon graduates of Central High.

In September 1854, the school transferred to a new building, located at the southeast corner of Broad and Green Streets. In 1858, President Hart resigned and was succeeded by Nicholas Harper Maguire.

In October 1891 a Graduate Course in Pedagogy, later called the Philadelphia School of Pedagogy, was added to Central as a teacher training program for men. The School of Pedagogy was disbanded in 1918 due to numbers of enrollees dwindling as a result of World War I.

20th century
In September 1900, the school moved to its third location in a newer and larger building located at Broad, Green, Fifteenth, and Brandywine Streets. During the formal dedication on November 22, 1902, Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United States, addressed the students.

After 139 years of existence as an all-male public high school, Central's all-male policy was challenged by Susan Vorchheimer, who wished to be admitted to Central. On August 7, 1975, U.S. District Court Judge Clarence C. Newcomer ruled that Central must admit academically qualified girls starting in the fall term of 1975. The decision was appealed, and the Third Circuit Court ruled that Central had the right to retain its present status. The case eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court that, on April 19, 1977, upheld the Third Circuit Court's verdict by a 4 to 4 vote with one abstention. That Supreme Court case was called Vorchheimer v. School Dist. of Philadelphia.

In August 1983, Judge William M. Marutani of the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, ruled that the single-sex admission policy was unconstitutional. The Board of Education voted not to appeal the legal decision, thereby admitting girls to Central High School. In September 1983, the first six girls, all seniors, were admitted.

In October 1987, and again in September 2011, Central High School was officially named a Secondary school of National Excellence by the United States Department of Education and named a Blue Ribbon School. In March 1992, Redbook magazine named Central one of the best schools in Pennsylvania. Central was named "Best Secondary School in Pennsylvania" by the magazine each year since they began rating the nation's best schools.

Presidents of Central High School

 * Alexander Dallas Bache – 1839–1842
 * John Seely Hart – 1842–1858
 * Nicholas Harper Maguire. – 1858–1866
 * George Inman Riché – 1866–1886 (19th Class)
 * Franklin Taylor – 1886–1888
 * Henry Clark Johnson – 1888–1893
 * Robert Ellis Thompson – 1894–1920
 * John Louis Haney – 1920–1943 (100th Class)
 * William Hafner Cornog – 1943–1955 (146th Class)
 * Elmer Field – 1955–1962 (122nd Class)
 * William H. Gregory – 1962–1969
 * Howard Carlisle – 1969–1983 (162nd Class)
 * Sheldon S. Pavel – 1984–2012
 * Timothy J. McKenna – 2012–2022
 * Katharine S. Davis – 2022–present (264th Class)

Guide to class numbers
Since graduates are usually identified by class number, the year they graduated is not immediately apparent. This section explains the relation between class number and graduation date.

The first class graduated in June 1842. Through much of the school's history, there were two graduating classes per year, in January and June. However, there was only one graduating class in June in some years, including all years after 1965. The following list details the correspondence between class number and graduation date.

1 June 1842 2 June 1843 3 January 1844 4 June 1844 … 2 classes per year … 75 January 1880 76 June 1880 77 June 1881 78 June 1882 79 January 1883 … 2 classes per year … 95 January 1891 96 June 1891 97 June 1892 … 1 class per year … 116 June 1911 117 January 1912 118 June 1912 … 2 classes per year … 223 January 1965 224 June 1965 225 June 1966 … 1 class per year …

Thus, for classes graduating after 1965, if one knows the class number, one can determine the year of graduation by adding 1741. Conversely, if one knows the graduation year, one can determine the class number by subtracting 1741.

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

title: Central High School (Philadelphia)


text:
Roaster

Roaster may refer to:

 * A device for coffee preparation
 * A large chicken suitable for roasting
 * A device for roasting meat or vegetables, for example:
 * Corn roaster
 * Convection roaster
 * Pig roaster
 * Hot Jupiter, a type of extrasolar planet
 * One who participates in a roast

title: Roaster


text:
Imperium Galactica

Imperium Galactica is a 4X video game, developed by Digital Reality. The same company would later make its sequel, Imperium Galactica II, in 1999. Imperium Galactica was published and distributed by GT Interactive in 1997. The soundtrack is the work of Tamás Kreiner. Nexus: The Jupiter Incident, developed by the Hungarian-based Mithis Entertainment, was originally planned and designed as Imperium Galactica 3 but in development renamed and refocussed to a real-time tactics game. The game was re-released in 2016 on GOG.com with support for Windows.

Gameplay
Imperium Galactica has both the combat and resource management elements of a real-time strategy game and the vast research tree and colony-building aspects of traditional turn-based 'space-empire-building' 4X games such as the Master of Orion series.

The player, in the role of Dave Johnson, begins the game with command of a small capital ship - a Guardian-class Destroyer - and three Raptor-class Fighters (later in the game the player would command up to 28 capital ships and 180 fighters in one fleet), and three colonies, named Achilles, Naxos and San Sterling, unable to move beyond the boundaries of the small sector assigned for him to defend and expand. The story, concerning the Galactic Empire's current status in the 4th millennium, during the 3200's, serves as an entry point, gradually introducing the player to new concepts (planet management, space battles, ground battles, research, component & ship production, diplomatic functions) as he rises through the ranks from Lieutenant to Captain, Commander, Admiral and eventually Grand Admiral (where all functions are unlocked and the player has full control), all the while revealing through flashbacks, the character's shrouded past, that Johnson is the Galactic Empire's secret weapon that was created in desperation, an android.

Regardless of the player's actions, the galaxy outside his or her view continues to take shape even as they are completing the "training" ranks prior to being promoted to Admiral. In this way, a player who quickly defeats his initial enemies at early ranks might enter the larger galaxy before the other races have been too badly hurt by the antagonist species, the Dargslan Kingdom. A player might also take an excessive amount of time in these "training" missions and get promoted to find that the entire galaxy has been conquered, making the situation almost hopeless except by exploiting game bugs.

There are five research centers for five categories (Computer, Construction, A.I., Military, Machinery), but on each planet the player is only allowed one of these five categories, marked by a colored symbol on the system card. Each technology requires a certain amount of research centers in each of these five categories before it can be researched for trade goods or command counters (which require time and money). The player is forced to either demolish and rebuild research centers repeatedly, or gain new planets by either conquest or colonization (the latter becomes available relatively late into the game). A.I. players aren't bound to this limitation, because every A.I. has a fixed technology pool, which does not develop any further during the game. As a special exception, players may find in the beginning a single planet in Garthog space which has two research centers.

Reception
Next Generation rated the game four stars out of five, and wrote that "Imperium Galactica is an excellent choice for strategy-game fans because it goes beyond a simple strategy game. The progression of the character, the additional responsibilities, and the total immersion of the player combined to form a truly enjoyable title that will keep players entertained for a long time".

Legacy
The game spawned a sequel, Imperium Galactica II: Alliances. After GT Interactive's bankruptcy, the Imperium Galactica trademark was lost by Digital Reality and another Hungarian development studio called Philos Laboratories began work on Imperium Galactica 3: Genesis. Philos Laboratories lost the title when the lease expired and renamed the game Galaxy Andromeda. When the studio went bankrupt its successor, Mithis Entertainment, continued development and renamed the project Nexus: The Jupiter Incident. It has little to do with the Imperium Galactica franchise, and is a completely different type of game as well - what Mithis calls it a "Tactical Fleet Simulator". The game tells the backstory for the original Imperium Galactica title.

A Galactic Empire Mod project was produced for the open-source Spring RTS engine. This effort, like several prior attempts, remains mired in "development hell", due to few skilled developers having both the time and interest to work on the project. Another group of fans works on open-ig and received permission from Digital Reality to reuse the original artwork to create a remake.

title: Imperium Galactica


text:
Yinling

Yan Yinling ( or in Japanese, Inrin (インリン); born February 15, 1976) is a Taiwanese-born, Japan-based swimsuit model, race queen, singer, and former professional wrestler. She is called also Yinling of Joytoy (インリン・オブ・ジョイトイ), when she appears on television.

Career
She began modelling at 16 and started working with photographer Hiraokanovsky Kuratachenko at 19, forming the duo JOYTOY. Kuratachenko is suspected to be in fact Japanese, but he is often labeled a Russian photographer. Much of their work is politically themed, often infused with symbols and references to communism and the Soviet Union. JOYTOY's campaign has been noteworthy for being overly sexual and provocative in nature. A notable example was an exhibit that was hosted in the National Museum of History in 2004. The exhibit took the form of an anti-war and anti-prejudice art display of mildly erotic photography.

In 2008, Yinling published an autobiography by the title LOVE ERO-Terrorism/Yinling of JOYTOY. In that same year, she provided the voice for Libido Waterfall, a tertiary character in video game Ryū ga Gotoku Kenzan! who was modeled after Yinling.

Professional wrestling
Yinling also appeared for the professional wrestling promotion Hustle, a venture led by Nobuhiko Takada. She originally appeared under the heel alias "Yinling the Erotic Terrorist", but then appeared as a face, under the name Newling-sama (Mistress Newling), who was in storyline the Erotic Terrorist's daughter.

Personal life
In 2007, a scandal resulted in Yinling being accused of having ties to the yakuza. Her management has denied the accusations.

Yinling is a supporter of the Social Democratic Party of Japan which advocates for social welfare reform and alternatives to nuclear energy. In 2010, she attended a conference held Mizuho Fukushima and spoke of the party's policies.

In 2008, she announced her marriage to an anonymous employee of the ZERO1-MAX wrestling agency. In 2010, she revealed that she had given birth to her first child, a son. She currently lives in Taiwan.

Championships and accomplishments

 * Tokyo Sports
 * Topic Award (2005)

Discography

 * Gumin no Koi (2003)
 * Ai wa Maboroshi (2005)

title: Yinling


text:
User talk:JWLato

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Flockmeal 04:17, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

title: User talk:JWLato


text:
New Hamburg, Ontario

New Hamburg is a community of approximately 11,953 (2011 stats) in the township of Wilmot, Ontario, Canada. It is in the far western part of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, near the regional border with Perth County. It is adjacent to the community of Baden, which sits to its east and is also a part of the township of Wilmot. The nearest cities are Kitchener, Waterloo, and Stratford.

The Nith River winds throughout the town and flows through the downtown core, which is home to a 50-foot waterwheel built in 1990.

The weekly newspapers serving the community are the Wilmot-Tavistock Gazette and the New Hamburg Independent. The downtown has been designated a Heritage Conservation District.

History
Located on the Nith River just over 20 km from Berlin (now Kitchener) this settlement was in an area with rich soil. The settlement was laid out in 1832 and was settled primarily by Germans, both Mennonites and others, direct from Germany. A historical plaque honours Josiah Cushman, an Amish Mennonite from Germany. Likely to have been the first settler, Cushman arrived in the early 1830s. He dammed Smith's Creek and built a sawmill that helped attract others. The first name of the community was Cassel and then Hamburgh; by 1840, the name was changed to New Hamburg.

William Scott, (known as Lord Campfield in Scotland), arrived in 1838, after Cushman's death. He renamed Smith's Creek the Nith River, built a new dam, and constructed a new lumber sawmill. The mill continued to plane lumber until 1902 when it burned down; the replacement building was a feed mill, later known as B-W Feed and Seed. That entity still exists, now as a sales outlet for feed. Now considered to be the founder of New Hamburg, William Scott's career included work as a Justice of the Peace, Community School Commissioner, New Hamburg's first Postmaster, Wilmot Town Councillor, Reeve and the Lt. Colonel of the 5th Battalion of the Waterloo Infantry.

The New Hamburg post office was established by William Scott in 1851. At that time, the population was 500 and there was a pottery, a carriage works, and a foundry. The Grand Trunk Railway reached the area in 1856 and helped the village to establish milling and farm machinery manufacturing. By 1858, the population was 1,000; the settlement included many mills and factories, several general stores, and eight taverns.

New Hamburg was incorporated as a Village in 1857, with a population of about 1100. The river was an excellent source of power for two wool factories and two flour mills in 1864. There was also a foundry that manufactured agricultural implements. Several large companies made carriages, buggies and wagons. By that time there were three churches and a school with 100 students. In 1869 the population was 1,400.

New Hamburg became a town in 1966.

Notable people

 * NHL hockey analyst, Howie Meeker, was raised here. He was named a Member of the Order of Canada in 2010.

Notable landmarks

 * New Hamburg hosts the largest Mopar Festival in Canada (in July or August).
 * New Hamburg is home to the largest working wooden waterwheel in North America.

title: New Hamburg, Ontario


text:
Talk:Roberta Flack

Untitled
ATTENTION LORI LIEBERMAN DID NOT WRITE KILLING ME SOFTLY---CHARLES FOX DID source for birthplace:  "Singer Roberta Flack is Asheville Native", Asheville Citizen, June 1, 1972. she is still alive i belive she has children but i am not 100%shure. you should listen to her music.

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

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

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 03:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Roberta Flack and Mr. Henry's
I can personally vouch for Roberta Flack's "career" at Mr. Henry's, 601 Pennsylvania Ave SE, http://www.mrhenrysrestaurant.com/. She was the piano player in the cocktail lounge, and started spontaneously singing - one thing led to another, and the bar management started chasing people out between sets and having a cover charge for her shows. Paulburnett (talk) 05:16, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Additional Information on Flack
There is a lot of additional information about Roberta Flack in an article I found from Jet Magazine at http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_24_104/ai_111616849/ concerning her two marriages, her working  relationship with Donny Hathaway, and about her musical background.

I don't have time but perhaps somebody could incorporate some of this information into the wikipedia article.

Best Regards,

Hugh Pickens — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.147.72.19 (talk) 01:31, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Birth year is disputed, please include both 37 AND 39!
Some references say she was born on February 10, 1937, and others say she was born on the same date in 1939. Wikipedia has always just said she was born in 1937, as do some other references, but Dead or Alive?(http://www.deadoraliveinfo.com/dead.nsf/fnames-nf/Flack+Roberta) says she was born in 1939, as do some other references. Could we always make her page say that she was born in either 1937 or 1939, instead of just 1937? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.31.12.137 (talk) 11:44, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * This source claims she was born in 1940. —  37  (talk) 12:10, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

I always (at least since 30 years ago) known she born on February 10th 1939, the same day my father born!
 * I've added more sources which report 1939, I agree this should stay listed as both, especially as the Motown Encyclopedia source even states that there is discrepancy between sources on her birth year. I noticed that there has been some interest in changing it to one or another lately, and if you think that's best please explain your justification here, so as to avoid an endless back and forth with no discussion. Thanks! ElfLady64 (talk) 02:04, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

 * And  is not a good ref (mormon.org, with a login). Why not Scientology ? Seriously. --Eihel (talk) 00:21, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Roberta Flack. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140319065121/http://www.mrhenrysrestaurant.com/ordereze/Content/5/Summary.aspx to http://www.mrhenrysrestaurant.com/ordereze/Content/5/Summary.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140222003758/http://www.mrhenrysrestaurant.com/ordereze/1000/Page.aspx to http://www.mrhenrysrestaurant.com/ordereze/1000/Page.aspx

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) 22:45, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

son??
In the Personal Life section, it says "Between 1966 and 1972, she was married to Steve Novosel. Together, they had a son, Bernard Wright, who became a successful funk and jazz keyboardist and producer." However, if you follow the link for Bernard Wright, it says "In the liner notes to his debut album 'Nard, he states that his mother is Lessie Wright." in the Biography section. Sounds like a disconnect to me.
 * Article now states shw was godmother to Bernard (who died in 2022). David notMD (talk) 11:06, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Roberta Flack taught music at Rabut Jr High School in Washington DC.
Roberta Flack taught music at Rabut Jr High School in Washington DC 72.83.49.79 (talk) 09:23, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

“In Popular Culture” missing major aspect
“Killing Me Softly With His Song” plays a major role in the plot of the 2002 Hugh Grant/Toni Collette movie “About A Boy.” Please watch it and it to this section as is warranted. Thx AsburyDave (talk) 01:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

 * Watching the film isn't going to add that bit here. To get something added from pop culture, you must prove that uninvolved media have talked about it, showing that it is important to the topic. Take a look in WP:SECONDARY sources for media discussion of this role of the song in the film. Binksternet (talk) 02:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Photo of Roberta Flack
How do I change the photo of Roberta Flack? 71.202.233.19 (talk) 13:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Roberta Flack


text: User talk:68.147.180.40

title: User talk:68.147.180.40


text:
Ovation Guitar Company

The Ovation Guitar Company is a manufacturer of string instruments. Ovation primarily manufactures steel-string acoustic guitars (both 6 and 12-string versions) and nylon-string guitars, often with pickups for electric amplification. In 2015, it became a subsidiary of Drum Workshop after being acquired from KMCMusicorp.

The company's Ovation and Adamas guitars are known for their round backs, which gives them a recognizable shape. The latter are also well known for the use of carbon fiber tops (instead of the typically wood tops for acoustic guitars). Apart from guitars, the company currently produces acoustic basses, mandolins and ukuleles.

History
Founder Charles Kaman (1919–2011) developed the first prototypes of the Ovation guitar in 1965–1966. Kaman, an amateur guitarist from an early age, worked on helicopter design as an aerodynamicist at United. Eventually, he founded a helicopter design company, Kaman Aircraft, in 1945.

The Kaman Corporation soon diversified, branching into nuclear weapons testing, commercial helicopter flight, development and testing of chemicals, and helicopter bearings production. In the early 1960s, however, financial problems from the failure of its commercial flight division forced it to expand into new markets, such as entertainment and leisure. Charles Kaman, still an avid guitar player, became interested in making guitars.

From 1966 to 2007, Ovation guitars, and later on Adamas guitars, were a brand of KMCMusicorp, which itself was a subsidiary of Kaman Aircraft.

In 2008, KMCMusicorp (and with that the Ovation brand) was sold to the Fender Musical Instruments Corporation. In 2014, Fender announced that they were closing the Ovation guitar factory in New Hartford, Connecticut, leaving all production of Ovation guitars overseas. Before that announcement, Fender established a U.S. production of various acoustic guitars in the New Hartford factory. Alongside Ovation and Adamas guitars, which were produced there for decades, Fender started a U.S. production of other Fender-owned brands in that factory, as is known, Guild (Guild Guitar Company) and Fender Acoustic Custom Shop.

Shortly after closing the New Hartford factory on April 30, 2014, it was announced that the Ovation brand had been sold to the company Drum Workshop, alongside a few other previously Fender-owned brands. The announcement was made on January 7, 2015. In addition to the Ovation brand, Drum Workshop also opened a smaller New Hartford factory near the old facility and reinstated the previously ceased U.S. production of Ovation and Adamas guitars.

In 2022, the German-based GEWA company acquired the brand and assets of Ovation and Adamas from Drum Workshop and moved production to a smaller shop in New Hartford, Connecticut. In January 2024, Ovation and Adamas guitars were displayed at the NAMM Show in Anaheim, CA as part of the larger GEWA family of brands.

Research and development of first models
Charles Kaman put a team of employees to work to invent a new guitar in 1964. For the project, Kaman chose a small team of aerospace engineers and technicians, several of whom were woodworking hobbyists as well. One of these was Charles McDonough, who created the Ovation Adamas model. Kaman founded Ovation Instruments, and in 1965 its engineers and luthiers (guitar makers) worked to improve acoustic guitars by changing their conventional materials. The R&D team spent months building and testing prototype instruments. Their first prototype had a conventional "dreadnought" body, with parallel front and back perpendicular to the sides. The innovation was the use of a thinner, synthetic back, because of its foreseen acoustic properties. Unfortunately, the seam joining the sides to the thin back was prone to breakage. To avoid the problem of a structurally unstable seam, the engineers proposed a synthetic back with a parabolic shape. By mid-1966, according to Ovation, they realized that the parabolic shape produced a desirable tone with greater volume than the conventional dreadnought.

Once the engineers had settled on a parabolic shape, they turned their attention to developing a substance that could be molded into this bowl-like shape. Using their knowledge of high-tech aerospace composites, they developed Lyrachord, a patented material comprising interwoven layers of glass filament and bonding resin.

The first successful design, built by luthier Gerry Gardner, went into production soon after the company was established.

The first Ovation guitar made its debut in November 1966. Its Lyrachord body gave the instrument, according to the company, unprecedented projection and ringing sustain. Compared to modern Ovation Guitars, the initial instruments had a shiny bowl that was used again, for example, in the Balladeer 40th anniversary re-issue.

Initial marketing

The introduction and promotion of the first Ovation was closely associated with two performing artists, the blues-performer Josh White and the country-music singer Glen Campbell.

Josh White
In 1966–1967, the Ovation Guitar Company produced a signature guitar for Josh White, which was the first signature guitar made for an African American. White was the first official Ovation endorser.

Upon completion, the first Ovation guitar was called the "Josh White Model," which White played at the Hotel America (Hartford, Connecticut), November 14, 1966; at the same show, the Balladeers played Balladeer models. The show was witnessed by "300 representatives of the press and the music industry"

Glen Campbell, 1968
The Ovation Roundback Balladeer first caught national attention in 1968 when Glen Campbell hosted a variety show called The Glen Campbell Goodtime Hour on CBS, and in the following year, 1969, he became one of Ovation's first endorsers.

The Partridge Family, 1970
Ovation guitars and amplifiers, together with musical instruments distributed by another Kaman company, Coast Wholesale Musical Co., were featured on The Partridge Family musical sitcom TV series.

Design innovations
Ovation guitar design reflects its founder's engineering training and development of Kaman helicopters. Ovation guitars replace the instrument's conventional back and sides with composite synthetic bowls. Kaman felt there were structural weaknesses in the orthogonal joining of the sides, and that a composite material could provide a smooth body. Ovation claims the parabolic bowls dramatically reduce feedback, allowing greater amplification. Improved synthetics techniques from helicopter engineering control vibrations in the bowl. Ovation developed a thin neck, striving for the feel of an electric guitar's neck, but with additional strength from layers of mahogany and maple reinforced by a steel rod in an aluminum channel. The composite materials and thin necks reduced weight.

For its soundboards, Ovation uses Sitka spruce, a wood that Kaman engineers used in helicopter blades. In the 1970s, Ovation developed thinner soundboards with carbon-based composites laminating a thin layer of birch in its Adamas model. The Adamas model dispersed the sound-hole of the traditional soundboard among 22 small sound holes in the upper chamber of the guitar, which Ovation says yields greater volume and further reduces feedback during amplification (pioneered in the Adamas model in 1977). Although the area of the multiple sound holes is equal to the area of a single-soundhole, the altered position allows a new style of guitar bracing (e.g. Adamas Bracing). The design strengthens the soundboard, reducing the traditional design's bracing and hence weight. In the 1980s, Ovation introduced shallow-bowl guitars to appeal to electric guitarists.

In 1977–1978, Gypsy, an Ovation performing and recording artist, designed the first stereo pre-amplifier for the Adamas 12 string and used it on his album "Ladies Love Outlaws." At the same time, Ovation provided small doors that blocked the sound holes from the inside in order to dampen feedback in the presence of loud stage monitors. Gypsy had also requested the addition of a round hatch in the back of the body of pre-Adamas guitars to facilitate changing the on-board battery, a feature that was then adopted for all the "round holes." Before this time, the strings on the round-hole guitars had to be removed to do this. On-board electronics let guitarists move about the stage rather than stay in front of a microphone. On-board electronic tuning, availability, uniformity, and frugal costs facilitated performances by guitar ensembles like Robert Fripp's Guitar Craft students. Ovation has also produced solid-body electric guitars and active basses.

Ovations reached the height of their popularity in the 1980s, where they were often seen during live performances by touring artists, such as Rush's Alex Lifeson or Paul Simon in The Concert in Central Park. Ovation guitars' synthetic bowl-shaped back and early use (1971) of pre-amplifiers, onboard equalization and piezo pickups were particularly attractive to live acoustic musicians who constantly battled feedback problems from the high volumes needed in live venues.

Ergonomics
When he became one of Ovation Guitars' first endorsers, Glen Campbell suggested reducing the weight of the guitar, which he had discovered caused back strain. After that, Ovation reduced the weight of several models and pioneered "super-shallow" guitar bodies.

While it was produced, Ovation's super-shallow 1867 Legend was the recommended guitar in Robert Fripp's Guitar Craft. wrote that the acoustic 1867 Legend has "a gently rounded super-shallow body design that may be about as close to the shape and depth of an electric guitar as is possible without an intolerable loss of tone quality. Fripp liked the way the Ovation 1867 fitted against his body, which made it possible for him to assume the right-arm picking position he had developed using electric guitars over the years; on deeper-bodied guitars, the Frippian arm position is impossible without uncomfortable contortions."

Model overview
The Ovation Guitar Company produces guitars under the names Ovation and Adamas.

Ovation guitars have been also produced in China, South Korea and Indonesia. Import models generally have a wooden top. Recently, Ovation significantly reduced U.S. production. From 2010 on, better models—Legend, Elite, Custom Legend, Custom Elite—were made both in the U.S. and in Korea. Before that, these models were U.S. made. In recent years, many U.S. made are identifiable by "LX" in the product name (e.g., Legend 2077LX), whereas Korean versions have "AX" in the model name (e.g., Legend 2077AX). Ovation does not use this convention on all models (e.g., Ovation 1617ALE). Currently, Ovation produces only a few U.S. made models, mostly signature and limited edition models (e.g., Custom Legend 1769-ADII Al DiMeola). Production of the standard model range of Ovation guitars in the U.S. had been ceased under the ownership of Fender Musical Instruments Corporation, but is planned to be reinstated by the new owner Drum Workshop.

The Adamas name mainly stands for guitars with a carbon fiber top, although there are exceptions (one is the Adamas 2081WT - WT stands for woodtop). Until the closure of the New Hartford, Connecticut factory in June 2014, all Adamas models were produced in the U.S. LX does not only stand for U.S. made. Originally LX indicated an Ovation guitar that included new features not available on previous models.

Back in 2007 Ovation explained on its website that new features included the new OP-Preamp, an advanced neck system (lightweight dual-action truss rod, carbon fiber stabilizers), a patented pickup (made of 6 elements), inlaid epaulets, scalloped bracing, and a new hard composite Lyrachord GS body. Back then, there was no AX model line. The first AX models appeared on the Ovation-website in 2010. Based on the website's history, the LX features were introduced in 2004.

Upper-level guitars: Balladeer, Legend and Elite
There are mainly two lines:
 * Legend and Standard Balladeer models have one large sound hole as on most acoustic guitars (Standard Balladeer, Legend, Custom Legend - produced in Korea).
 * Elites have several smaller sound holes (Standard Elite, Elite, Custom Elite - produced in Korea).

The first Ovation guitar model was a Balladeer (later known as Standard Balladeer)

Entry-level guitars: Applause and Celebrity
Ovation has two lines of entry-level guitars. Applause, the lowest cost line, with mainly laminated tops, is imported from China. Celebrity models are imported from China or Korea, and range from entry- to medium-level laminated-top models, to high-end, solid-top models with much ornamentation.

Electric guitars: Semi-hollow and solid bodies
In 1967–1968, Ovation introduced its Electric Storm Series of semi-hollow archtop guitars and basses. The pickups for these instruments were manufactured by Schaller based in Germany. Production stopped in 1969.

In 1972, Ovation introduced one of the first production solid-body electric-guitars with active electronics, the Ovation Breadwinner. The model did not become popular, however, and production of the Breadwinner and the Ovation Deacon ceased in 1980. Ovation made several other solid-body models up until the mid-1980s. Since that time, the company has focused mainly on acoustic and acoustic-electric guitars.

Other instruments: acoustic bass guitars, ukuleles, mandolins
Apart from guitars, Ovation has manufactured other string instruments such as acoustic bass guitars, ukuleles, and mandolins.

title: Ovation Guitar Company


text:
User talk:Sccook

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Flockmeal 04:22, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Thanks for the 'hello'. I'm happy to be a member of the Wiki community.

SC, or CooCan

Adding Monty Python pages
Nice to see you're adding Monty Python pages. Please try to follow the format of the other pages. Also, at least add Category:Monty Python (with double square brackets around it  ) to the bottom of the page so that others know that the page exists. You can also use: for books: Category:Monty Python literature for albums: Category:Monty Python albums

There's a list of the categories I've made here:

Category:Monty Python

--[[User:Brian0918|brian0918 talk]] 00:23, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Talk:Battle of Brzesc Litewski
Sorry for letting you wait so long. I replied as fast as I could. Cheers! --Halibutt 23:44, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

Image:GrifDunn.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:GrifDunn.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -- nae'blis (talk) 20:15, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sccook


text:
Rob Corddry

Robert William Corddry (born February 4, 1971) is an American actor and comedian. He is known for his work as a correspondent on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (2002–2006) and for his starring role in the film Hot Tub Time Machine. He is the creator and star of Adult Swim's Childrens Hospital and has been awarded four Primetime Emmy Awards. He previously starred in the HBO series Ballers and the CBS comedy The Unicorn.

Early life and education
Corddry was born and raised in Weymouth, Massachusetts. He is the son of Robin (née Sullivan) and Steven Corddry, who was a Massachusetts Port Authority official. He is the older brother of actor Nate Corddry. Corddry and his brother are both Eagle Scouts from Troop 19, located in Weymouth.

After graduating from Weymouth North High School (1989), Corddry went to the University of Massachusetts Amherst (1989–93). According to an interview in the UMass Amherst alumni magazine, Corddry initially planned to major in journalism but changed his major to English. By his second year, he focused much of his attention on Drama classes and plays including Torch Song Trilogy, Ten Little Indians, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, Romeo and Juliet, and Reckless. While at UMass, Corddry pledged the Theta chapter of Theta Chi fraternity.

In January 1994, Corddry moved to New York City. His early paying jobs included working as a security guard at The Metropolitan Museum of Art and handing out menus for a Mexican restaurant. He eventually landed acting jobs, including a year-long tour with the National Shakespeare Company. He trained in improv at the Upright Citizens Brigade Theatre in New York City, performing regularly as a member of the sketch comedy group "The Naked Babies" (with John Ross Bowie, Brian Huskey, and Seth Morris); and he spent two years with the sketch comedy group "Third Rail Comedy". Corddry's first notable television appearances were on Comedy Central's Upright Citizens Brigade (1998–2000).

The Daily Show
In Spring 2002, he accepted an audition for The Daily Show. His pieces for The Daily Show frequently included references to Boston, Massachusetts, which he considers to be his hometown. On October 4, 2005, his younger brother Nate Corddry made his first appearance as a Daily Show correspondent. On January 12, 2006, Corddry's wife Sandra appeared with him on a Daily Show segment; they welcomed their first child, daughter Sloane Sullivan Corddry, on July 3, 2006. On February 9, 2006 Corddry hosted an episode of The Daily Show due to the absence of Jon Stewart (jokingly because the show's regular host was "in the shop", but in fact because of the birth of Stewart's second child).

On August 15, 2006, Corddry said "I've got like a week and a half left, all bets are off", and then on August 21, 2006, Stewart remarked that Corddry's last day on The Daily Show would be August 24, 2006. Corddry appeared throughout the week, once filing a report from inside a toilet bowl supposedly on board an aircraft transporting John Mark Karr, and another dressed up in a 1970s fashion; Stewart remarked, "It's his last week, and really, we're trying to come up with terrible things for him to have to do."

During that last show on August 24, Corddry aired a self-produced tribute to his four years on the show, going out, as Stewart said, with a "poop joke".

Stewart: That was a very fitting tribute, Rob. We're gonna miss you on the show. Corddry: Why thank you, Jon. But wherever I go and whatever I do, there'll always be a part of me here. Stewart: Wow...that's a really sweet thing to say. Corddry: No no no, I'm not kidding. It's in the second floor men's room, actually. That's what you get for not giving me a proper send off. Stewart: You're really gonna go out on a poop joke? Corddry: I have to stay true to myself, Jon.

Corddry cites Stewart as a profound influence on his comedy, crediting Stewart for teaching him how to focus on an idea in order to find the humor in it, and says that his The Daily Show pedigree earned him the clout to make Childrens Hospital.

Among the projects Corddry worked on after leaving The Daily Show was The Winner, a 2007 TV series.

Corddry has since made appearances on the show, both as a guest and as a correspondent.

Film roles
Corddry's played the title character in Blackballed: The Bobby Dukes Story (2004) and Mac, Ben Stiller's character's best friend in The Heartbreak Kid. He has also made appearances in Old School (2003, credited as Robert Corddry), Blades of Glory, Semi-Pro, I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry, Failure to Launch and The Ten.

He also appeared in Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay as Ron Fox, a neurotic and racist agent with the United States Department of Homeland Security, in W. as Ari Fleischer, and also in What Happens in Vegas. In 2010, he co-starred in the John Cusack film Hot Tub Time Machine and in 2013 he co-starred in Jonathan Levine's Warm Bodies as the zombie M.

Other work
Corddry hosted the 10th annual Webby Awards ceremony on June 12, 2006. He starred as the main character in the Fox mid-season comedy The Winner from March 4, 2007 until the series' cancellation. He described the show to Stuff Magazine as "sort of like a fucked-up Wonder Years."

Corddry has appeared in a Curb Your Enthusiasm episode entitled "The Seder" as a sex offender who moves into Larry David's neighborhood. He also appeared in two episodes of Fox's Arrested Development as Moses Taylor, an actor who plays "Frank Wrench", an obsessively by-the-books detective on a fictional television series Wrench. Corddry has also done some voice work as Gordon the animated Devil on Cartoon Network's Weighty Decisions (alongside fellow Daily Show correspondent Ed Helms). He also appeared in a commercial for Cartoon Network's Ed, Edd n Eddy series and a 2001 promotional ad as an anger management therapist to the Townsville Villains of the cartoon series The Powerpuff Girls.

Corddry's voice appears in the History Channel production World War II in HD. He is the voice of World War II soldier and jazz musician Roscoe "Rockie" Blunt.

Corddry wrote, directed, and starred in the web series Childrens Hospital for The WB on its online network at TheWB.com. After talks fell through with Comedy Central, Turner's Adult Swim picked up the series and began airing new episodes August 22, 2010.

On March 29, 2010, he was a co-guest host of WWE Raw with fellow cast member Clark Duke from Hot Tub Time Machine.

Corddry played an important role in proliferating Justin Halpern's Twitter account Shit My Dad Says. An early enthusiast of the quotes made by Halpern's father, Rob tweeted a link to Shit My Dad Says which "jump-started" the phenomenon, helping expose Halpern's Twitter feed to a larger audience.

Corddry also has starred in three commercials for the Holiday Inn in both 2010 and 2011. He appeared in three episodes of Community playing a lawyer, Alan Connor, an old acquaintance of Jeff Winger, who was also a lawyer.

In August 2011, Corddry appeared on episode 29 of the podcast Back to Work, distributed by the 5by5 podcast network, where he was interviewed by Merlin Mann about his writing and acting career.

In 2012, Corddry began a recurring role on the third season of Happy Endings, playing "The Car Czar", Jane's new boss at the car dealership. He also had a recurring role on the short-lived FOX series Ben and Kate, as Buddy, the boorish owner of the bar where Kate and BJ work, also BJ's on-and-off boyfriend.

As recently as October 2013, Rob appeared again as a recurring guest on The Jason Ellis Show. A talk show featured exclusively on SiriusXm Satellite Radio, Corddry accepted an invitation to host his own show airing on the soon to be launched "Jason Ellis Channel".

From 2015 to 2019, he starred in the HBO comedy-drama series Ballers.

He was the subject the episode #16, titled Rob, of Heavyweight (podcast) by Jonathan Goldstein.

On December 3, 2019, it was revealed that Corddry would be a host of the revived Top Gear America, which debuted on Motor Trend in January 2021.

Rob has also appeared in 2 episodes of the HBO Max series Bookie.

Music Videos

 * Ben Folds Five's "Do It Anyway": Plays sound engineer

Awards and honors
In 2009, Corddry was nominated for a Streamy Award Best Writing for a Comedy Web Series for Children's Hospital; in 2011, it won Best Sketch/Alternative Comedy in the first annual Comedy Awards.

title: Rob Corddry


text:
Category talk:Specification languages

Does this really fit in Category:Technical communication? —iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 04:24, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

Huh?
The contents of Specification language doesn't quite co-related with the contents of this category. Does it? I am not very well-informed on either of the two areas my confusion spans, so I would like someone else to chime in. —iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 05:04, Dec 1, 2004 (UTC)

Categories backwards?
Is Formal Methods really a subcategory of specification langauges? Shouldn't this be the other way around, with specification languages a subcategory of the formal methods category? Swapping it for now, someone can change it back if there's a good reason that it should be this way that I lack the knowledge to see. Leland McInnes 06:05, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Agree.—Ashley Y 08:04, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Disagree. Not all spec languages are formal methods (UML being a prime example), and not all "formal methods" are particularly useful a spec languages (although that doesn't prevent some folks from trying). I think they're better off as separate but parallel categories. --Allan McInnes (talk) 05:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Sounds fine. The nesting seeemed odd to me. Separate categories is a much better option. Leland McInnes 17:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

title: Category talk:Specification languages


text:
Nicaraguan Navy

The Nicaraguan Navy, officially the Naval Force of the Nicaraguan Army, (Fuerza Naval del Ejercito de Nicaragua) is the naval service branch of the Nicaraguan Armed Forces. The navy's mission is to ensure the defense and security of the islands, territorial waters and exclusive economic zone of Nicaragua in the Pacific Ocean and Caribbean Sea.

Founded on August 13, 1980, as the Sandinista Navy, it consisted of a few old patrol boats in the early 1980s. The Sandinistas acquired eight Soviet Yevgenya class minesweepers, of which seven remained in 1993. Three Soviet Zhuk-class patrol boats were believed to be seaworthy, out of seven that remained at the end of 1990. Also believed to be operational are three North Korean fast patrol boats as well as two Vedette-type boats built in France and armed with Soviet 14.5mm machine guns.

The primary mission was to discourage seaborne Contra attacks and to deter CIA-run operations such as the destruction of diesel storage facilities at Corinto in 1983 and the mining of Nicaraguan harbors in 1984. The Sandinista navy (Marina de Guerra Sandinista—MGS), which had reached a peak strength of 3,000 personnel in 1990, suffered a sweeping reduction to 800 by 1993.

The commander of the navy was a Sandinista Popular Army (Ejército Popular Sandinista—EPS) officer with the rank of major. The principal bases of the MGS are at the ports of Corinto on the Pacific and Puerto Cabezas on the Caribbean. Other installations are at El Bluff near Bluefields and San Juan del Sur on the Pacific.

Nicaragua ordered two additional patrol vessels based on the Damen Stan 4207 design in 2017. The vessels were commissioned as Soberanía I (409) and Soberanía II (411) in August 2019. Unlike many other nations vessels, which are designed solely for coast guard or environmental monitoring, these two have added a military sensor suite and a deck gun. Militarizing the vessels boosted their cost from US$20 million to US$65 million. The vessels are used, had previously been employed by Jamaica - HMJS Cornwall and HMJS Surrey.

title: Nicaraguan Navy