text:
Talk:Scientific celebrity

IMO, the recent changes to 'bring in line with reality' detract a lot from this article. I propose to put back the last well written version and add to that the comments included in more recent versions. --Dan|(talk) 20:29, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

from VfD:

Scilebrity
This seems to attempt to be a DicDef but I can find no trace of the usage of the word via the usual channels, thus must conclude that it is a vanity-type attempt to create the word and usage. It would be a candidate for a speedy except that a number of minor edits have been made. --[[User:VampWillow|Vamp:Willow]] 17:22, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC) Note: article was created by User:Dmb000006 aka Dan

 * Delete. Neologism. Wikipedia is not a book of neologisms. --Wikimol 17:35, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

As it is not on Google it is not real. All hail Google [--82.9.92.105]
 * Indeed this is a very new (and not yet widely known term), but it has been used on the TV in the UK. It aptly describes the (very new) phenomenon of the scientific celebrity. --Dan 18:02, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Given that it doesn't show up on Google or other engines, and even the OED won't accept non-print usage I'm not sure we should start creating otherwise untraceable neologisms. --[[User:VampWillow|Vamp:Willow]] 18:46, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * But I don't thik wikipedia should ignore very new things / social trends. Naturally an encyclopedia has a historical bias, but not by definition
 * for info, the above unsigned comment is by User:Dmb000006, the creator of the article. I'd re-iterate that whilst I think we'd all agree that WP should ignore something new we shouldn't be creating it in the first place! --[[User:VampWillow|Vamp:Willow]] 19:14, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Sorry I forgot to sign the info. I don't understand what you mean "WP should ignore something new we shouldn't be creating it in the first place" I get the point about the word usage, see my comment below --Dan 13:55, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Don't Delete. Valid, Wikipedia should be valid. --Dan 18:03, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Put it into Wiktionary and delete from here. iMeowbot~Mw 18:37, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't think this is a dictionary term, as it is very much a cultural phenomenon --Dan 19:08, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * There is nothing new about outspoken telegenic scientists, and there is a distinct absence of popular usage (and there would be evidence of usage for an inherently populist phenomenon, if it was real). iMeowbot~Mw 22:17, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I've never heard this term, so since I'm in the same country as it is alleged to have emerged from, I'd really need to have some cite for its use that we can verify. Average Earthman 19:54, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: No evidence of the term on Google. DCEdwards1966 21:12, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete as neologism. Jeltz talk  22:24, 2004 Dec 21 (UTC)

 * Maybe there is a way - the phenomenon itself is not so new, what's new is only the word "scilebrity". If the article is expanded to be more than a dicdef + list opf examples (history of the phenomenon, references...), it can be than moved to a title consisting of old ordinary words and "scilebrity" kept as harmless redirect. Generally the topic of scientists who become "celebrities" even for general media is notable.
 * 2Dan - Wikipedia is here only to reflect existing reality, not to promote new ideas, words, trends, websites or punk-metal bands. Even if it's deleted, you can save the page in your userspace and wait for while. If the word catches, it will certainly soon appear on many sites on the web and get indexed by Google. If not, there is no reason to include it in an ecyclopedia. --Wikimol 23:20, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Just a note that the original author has now posted three first-level 'votes' on this; clearly only one will be noted... --[[User:VampWillow|Vamp:Willow]] 19:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge. The subject of scientific celebrities is encyclopedic, and this word could be mentioned in context somewhere else.  Tomato 23:41, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Rewrite and move to Celebrity scientists or something. Kappa
 * Delete, neologism.  --fvw *  03:24, 2004 Dec 22 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to Notable scientists who have appeared on TV, or other appropriate page. Alphax (talk) 03:59, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful article. Megan1967 05:35, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete it. *sniff sniff* Smell that?  Dirty sockpuppets again.  —[[en:RaD Man|RaD Man (talk)]] 07:50, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I just learned what this means, and I resent the accusation. You think I am that petty? I don't know who User:Megan1967 is, but it ain't me babe. Stray accusations have consequences. The atmosphere gets bad and new users get scared. People don't want to talk for fear of being shouted at. It isn't good.
 * move - Lets rename this article as scientific celebrity. "A good compromise is when both parties are dissatisfied" - Henry Clay --Dan 13:49, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Sincere apologies for voting more than once - this is all a bit confusing to me. Thanks very much for being patient with me. --[[User:Dmb000006|Dan|(talk)]] 00:21, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC) And thanks to Mgm for my new nice looking sig :)
 * After enquiry Dan posted the following on my talk: I heard the term Scilebrity on the 'late review' or whatever which is a part of news night on channel 4. It was that female presenter. --Dan 13:57, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC), and I agree that a move might work. [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 19:04, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete this nonsense before some journo sees it. Wyss 22:51, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Move to scientific celebrity; scilebrity is, at best, a neologism. EventHorizon 19:54, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Dan i have read their words and I have read your words. They have greater words I am afraid. We must continue the fight against all forms of pseudo-science especially in this newly evolved whore of the science world but Wikipedia is cannot aid us yet. --Sgt Howie 18:22, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Move After reflection and after rereading the article in question i have changed my mind and it should be keep. It is a well written article and informative, unlike some of the other ramblings from Dan this one even has historical basis.  The Victorian era in many was created a modern type of self promoted celebrity in many fields especially medicine, natural sciences and engineering with great men (and great self publicists) such as Isambard_Kingdom_Brunel.  This phenomenon exists and has for some time, this page would allow us collectively to identify between scientists, media presenters and the Scilebrity, who for ever drifts further away from science and the explanation of science in order to become celebrities (soon to be appearing in a jungle near you).  Perhaps the only 'crime' that Dan suffers on this page is that he has identified a term before it has appears on the all knowing portal of Google.  But I ask you is it crime to speak before the Oracle of Google has spoken.  My scorn is instead reserved for those who consider that Wikipedia and Encyclopaedias in general can only be there to record meaning instead of creating meaning, foolish ones.  This is a useful article and should be kept.  Just because Wikipedia may help give a phenomenon a name in the popular consciousness must we run scared? --Sgt Howie 18:22, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Nobody is denying that the concept exists, just that the word doesn't, and it is not the place nor practice of Wikipedia to create, only to document. This word 'may' have been used the once, the details are unclear and it may have been a slip of the tongue. Encyclopedia do not create, they record. --Vamp:Willow 15:23, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Cheers Sgt.Howie, your cheque is in the post! ;) Seriously, I am glad you like the article. With your permission (and if it makes any difference) I would like to change your vote to a Move, as that seems to be the best compromise. If and when the term Scilebrity permiates the collective concience of the mass media, we can add it to an existing Scientific Celebrity article. Perhaps here you could add your musing on the victorian era and the genesis of the celebrity propper via the medium of science. --Dan|(talk) 15:41, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I still disagree, Encyclopaedias create, despite the fact that is the aim of an encyclopaedia just to record I do not believe it is possible. Even if the encyclopaedia does create a new word it at least takes an assumption as to what it is and then attempts to fix it in time.  You cannot just observe because the action of observing alters the subject.  I do not wish to rubbish the concept of an encyclopaedia just accept its limitations.  But as it is the considered opinion of the people out there that Scilebrity has not entered the common lexicon then i flip flop my position like a Democratic Presidential candidate and go for the move to Scientific Celebrity motion.--Sgt Howie 18:22, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree Sgt Howie (at least I think I do). People say - that is POV, but all encyclopedia entries are POV. Please show me the entry which isn't POV? Encyclopedia is about documenting, and documenting is done by documenters, and they are human with ideas, beleifs, prejudice, preconception and failings. Just because a certain 'truth' is the most widely beleived version of events does not qualify that truth above other versions of events, it is a quantative scale. We have dicussed enough here, but I would like to compose an article called an open letter to wikipedia. Any comments in the discussion tab of that page. --Dan|(talk) 13:21, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Note re above: There is a possibility that Sgt Howie is a sockpuppet of Dan aka User:Dmb000006 (or vice-versa) as shows that one user has edited entries supposedly by both in the one visit. --Vamp:Willow 13:27, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Note re above: I am no ones sockpuppet I can tell you (is a sockpuppet like a ringer then. Why have you people come up with this stupid term?). Although I may have made the acquaintance of the boy-faced-man-called-Dan I can swear to exist separately from him. If you look over my discussion you could tell that started out by disagreeing with him (unless this is part of my super sockpuppet plan). I changed my story from delete to move, after meditating on the toilet over the nature of Wiki and Encyclopaedias NOT because of my knowledge of the Dan Troll. --Sgt Howie 16:37, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)Sgt Howie

 * Note re above: Now I see what sockpupet means :) Sorry for the confusion (and I know this makes me sound guilty as hell), but I shifted around Sgt Howies reply to keep the discussion style indenting more consistent after he had replied to you after I had replied to him. This way we could keep all talking along different 'threads' indented appropriatly. I have done some sick things in my time let me tell you, sick sick things that I am not proud of. Pretending to be my own best friend (in public) isn't one of them. I swear on my print copy of wikipedia. --Dan|(talk) 13:47, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * nods however (as I found out to my cost once) except on your own talk and user pages to edit someone else's comments, no matter how much their spelling, grammar or content may offend you is an *absolute* no-no on wp. (and, uh, there isn't yet a print copy...) Adding a ':' to manage an indentation is even frowned upon by some (though I did it to your reply just now to ensure threading, it is really the maximum you can do) --Vamp:Willow 13:53, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Cheers VampWillow, I am making mistakes all over the place... Can I ask is it bad form to disguise you username in your sig as I do? I just did it without thinking.

 * I felt the issue over your sig (which you forgot above, btw) wasn't that you've 'covered it up' per se, but that you use both the 'uncovered' and 'covered' versions at the same time (at least in this discussion you have) which means that if someone doesn't look at the wiki text they might think you are two people (and when they do note it that you have something to hide). imho/opmmv --Vamp:Willow 14:06, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Sorry dude, please see above "thanks to Mgm for my new nice looking sig". You must think me a troll, but I am trying to learn :) --Dan|(talk) 18:21, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete. Neologism. Jayjg  | Talk 23:30, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

Source
A possible source for this article is: Hyunsung D. Kang, Jeongsik J. Lee: Scientific celebrity, competition, and knowledge creation: The case of stem cell research in South Korea. In: Journal of Engineering and Technology Management. Vol. 39, 2016, p. 26–44, doi:10.1016/j.jengtecman.2016.01.001 (englisch, sciencedirect.com). The article focuses on the impact of Hwang Woo-suk on stem cell research. Especially chapter 2 "What is a scientific celebrity?" can be used as a base. --Christian140 (talk) 11:35, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Scientific celebrity. 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 http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20100202163649/http://www.billnye.com/about-bill-nye/biography/ to http://www.billnye.com/about-bill-nye/biography/

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) 23:29, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Suggested removal of refimprov tag
This article is undergoing significant upgrades and most of the article is supported by suitable references. I suggest removal of the refimprov tag. Nolabob (talk) 13:36, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I removed the refimprove tag, since the article is now well-supported with references. Nolabob (talk) 22:22, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Scientific celebrity


text:
Category:Kagawa Prefecture

Kagawa Prefecture (香川県; Kagawa-ken) is a prefecture located in the Shikoku region on Shikoku island, Japan. The capital is Takamatsu.

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

title: Category:Kagawa Prefecture


text:
Talk:Noise pop

To be perfectly honest, Im not sure how Noise pop was a mutation on Ska. Velvet Underground is definitely an influence and I can see how Birthday Party, Pop Group and The Smiths might be an influence, but Madness? Motown Junkie 17:23, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I agree
...noice pop is just that--pop music covered in noise, like Sonic Youth or, more recently, Pavement. ==== in my opinion, "noise pop" was a term created solely to describe Psychocandy. to me, sonic youth, pavement, dinosaur jr et. al. are simply good examples of alternative/indie in general. it's hardly a real genre, really. Joeyramoney 21:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I think sonic youth, pavement, dinosaur jr have some noise pop songs, but not all of their songs are, I put them in because they're the ones pointed out on AMG, and genres are hard to define anyway --Surachit 15:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Yeah, Noise Pop is more of a descriptive term for "noisy" indie music like JMC. It's not really easy to recognise what is so-called "noise pop" once you get outside of that small number of bands. Please don't get this article mixed up with Noise Rock either; that stuff is much more chaotic and closer to a mix of "noise" music and extreme punk, metal and hardcore. I'm not even sure Sonic youth should be in that category, as they are compose mostly fairly recogniseable songs. Check out noise-rock bands like Boredoms and Gore Beyond Necropsy and you'll probably hear the difference between noise rock and so-called noise pop.

Definitely don't merge this page with Noise rock. Two distinct styles of music. Noise rock is closer to experimental music at times (which is what Allmusic.com places the genre under) and derives mainly from punk rock and No Wave. Noise pop primarily derives from the Jesus and Mary Chain. WesleyDodds 08:40, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

 * As with a lot of genres, there is a deviation between the orgin and actual usage, for instance Rites of Spring hardly resembles the modern "emo" music genre. This, too, seems to be the case, and compounding the problem is the fact that only a handful of bands from a decade or so could safely fall into this genre. So, I feel to fully improve this article, we must identify what "noise pop" is definitively. Could the warm, ethereal hum of the "You Made Me Realise" EP by My Bloody Valentine fall into the noise pop domain? What are the cliche or stereotypical elements to noise pop; i.e. is it heavy distortion and sugary pop lyrics? This movement in music is influential, if not on it's own standing, but as it relates to modern indie and alternative rock, and of course shoegaze. FerventDove 18:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Good discussion here. I'll say and agree that noise pop and noise rock really have nothing to do with each other. AMG is just mistaken on that one. Also agree there's never been any actual scene for this music, either. 'Noise Pop' is just a descriptive term for small number of rock bands. -- Andy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.228.26 (talk) 01:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Sample
I really think the sample needs to be changed from the MBV song. Though MBV are noise pop, in addition to other things, most noise pop is usually a little lighter in tone and not as suffocating as that MBV song, or even most shoegaze-MBV. I suggest either something from 'Psychocandy', something from The Wedding Present's 'Seamonsters', or something from the first Velocity Girl ep. I'd do it, but I don't know how to. Other than that though, this is a good entry. -- Andy

Deerhoof and JAMC are good examples of varieties of Noise Pop
The list of bands is otherwise largely meaningless. This is not a catch-all term for shoegaze, alt rock or any modern electronic acts with ambient "noise" atmospheres and a female singer. Harshmustard (talk) 21:00, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from editing genres you know nothing about
There is no progressive/art rock influence in Noise Pop Harshmustard (talk) 21:13, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

 * Please so not personalise issues. Is there some reason that you do not consider Velvet Underground to be art rock, as stated on their article page? Their influence is supported by reliable sources.--''' SabreBD  (talk ) 21:16, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

 * I'm not going to debate to how much of a degree the VU were an art rock band or not (and they're clearly not prog which was in your first few edits) as I can see where this argument will head. The article only states their feedback + pop-orientation was an influence, nothing to do with art rock or prog. Any further inference suggests a misunderstanding of how genres work.
 * There is no personalising of this- it is a good rule. Do not edit what you do not understand.
 * I appreciate your other cleanups but this is a frustrating part of where Wikipedia's genre articles start to go wrongHarshmustard (talk) 21:27, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

 * Lets stick to the issues. Are you disputing that VU are art rock or that they were an influence on noise rock?--''' SabreBD  (talk ) 21:33, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

 * I believe I made it clear. The elements of their sound referred to as an influence does not fall under art rock nor prog. Classifing VU as art rock or prog does not necessarily imply all their recorded output falls under those genres. It's upon you to prove elements of progressive rock influenced noise pop artists, not the traits of one band tenuously associated with said genre, otherwise please revert your insertion. Harshmustard (talk) 21:41, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

 * So how would you define them?--''' SabreBD  (talk ) 21:42, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

 * "I'm not going to debate to how much of a degree the VU were an art rock band or not (and they're clearly not prog which was in your first few edits) as I can see where this argument will head. The article only states their feedback + pop-orientation was an influence, nothing to do with art rock or prog. Any further inference suggests a misunderstanding of how genres work."
 * Unless you can demonstate any specific art/prog rock stylistic influence outside elements unique to the Velvet Underground please stop attempting to debate this. Harshmustard (talk) 21:54, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

 * If I understand your argument correctly it is that noise pop was influenced by a key art rock band, but not by art rock itself. I have to say it seems a strange distinction. It seems entirely legitimate to not this in the infobox so that the influence is clear. On those grounds we would have to remove the rest of the influence entries (and in just about every article), since we only have evidence of the taking of partial influences from bands. This clearly was a major part of the sound, as multiple reliable sources indicate. I am open to suggestions as to how this should then be recorded in the influences section, as it clearly needs to be. Perhaps you can suggest another solution.--''' SabreBD  (talk ) 09:17, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

 * VU may have elements of art rock but feedback is not a characteristic of art rock or at all common. Characteristics of art rock listed on the Wikipedia page are in most cases directly opposing those of noise pop.
 * I'm going to add Art Punk as an influence in its place as it partly descended from these aspects of the Velvets, relates to noise rock itself and may have some overlap particularly with later waves of noise pop, but which is another kettle of fish entirely. My main objection was with prog initially.
 * Ps Seeing as how you check this a lot you most likely saw I opened a new discussion point on the art rock talk page prior to all this, which would be a good place to discuss some of these genres. Will be adding another post to it shortly. Harshmustard (talk) 23:59, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

 * OK I am fine with the Art Punk description as I think that covers the influence. The only other option I could come up with is Experimental rock. I will take a look on the art rock talkpage. Thanks.--''' SabreBD  (talk ) 01:25, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Is noise pop a current name from what was called noisy pop in the past?
Seeing this page, I wonder if the real name is not noisy pop. In the 1980's/1990's, it was called noisy pop, not noise pop, no? In Goodgle, there is 826 000 results for "noise pop", 1 790 000 for "noisy pop" 2A01:E0A:BAB:17F0:1850:32CB:C1FB:C619 (talk) 15:28, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Noise pop


title: File:Collectivesoul7evenyearitch.jpg


text:
Feilian

Feilian or  is a Chinese wind spirit from a southern tradition, later identified with and subsumed under the primary wind deity Fengbo. Feilian has also been identified with a late Shang dynasty minister as well as with the mythical phoenix bird, and retained a separate identity as a mythical creature after losing its status as master of the wind.

Southern origin
Feilian is first attested in the influential poem Li sao by Qu Yuan, wherein Feilian assists the poet in part of his mystical journey. This work comes from Chu, a Zhou dynasty state which was on the periphery of the Zhou cultural sphere, and is typically dated to the 300s or 200s. Wang Yi, who collated and annotated the transmitted Chu ci collection centuries later, annotates this mention of Feilian with the text "Feilian is Fengbo", which demonstrates that the various wind spirits were already being systematised under a single identity. Wang Yi goes on to explain that in order to ride a dragon through the clouds as the Li sao narrator does, one must borrow the strength of "jifeng". This term jifeng acts as a gloss for Feilian in the Shiji. According to Deng Xiaohua (鄧曉花), fēilián (Old Chinese: ZS *pɯl-ɡ·rem; B&S *Cə.pə[r]*(k-)[r]em), might be a dialectal variant of (OC: ZS *plum; B&S *prəm) "wind". This same relationship was explored by Tôdô in 1959. Sun Zuoyun's (孫作雲) influential 1943 study of Feilian argues that the term feilian was an alternative written representation of the sound in Old Chinese that was the pronunciation of. Feilian appears twice more in the Chu ci collection: once in Jiu bian and once in Yuan you, each time as a helpful spirit assisting the narrator.

Evolution
Early Chinese wind spirits were many. The Shang had the masters of the four directions, an eastern tradition had the naturalistic "Great Wind" (大風), another tradition considered the winnowing basket constellation (箕星, comprising four stars in Sagittarius) as the controller of the winds, the south had Feilian, and theorists have speculated that a number of named mythical birds from early Chinese culture – including the phoenix and the great peng bird (鵬) of the Zhuangzi – should be considered originally to have been wind spirits. The Zhou culture had two competing wind spirits: Fengshi and Fengbo, the latter of whom would end up subsuming all these traditions, and lives on in the Taoist pantheon as Fang Daozhang (方道彰).

In Feilian's identity as Fengbo, he carries wind with him in a bag and stirs up trouble. Feilian is kept in check by Houyi, the heavenly archer and Shang legendary culture hero. Feilian has become attached to the later mythology of the Yellow Emperor, against whom he contended under the leadership of Chiyou.

Before consolidation into the Fengbo entity, Feilian was also thought to be able to grant immortality. Emperor Wu of Han (141–87 ) believed this sufficiently to order the construction of several buildings dedicated to Feilian worship in pursuit of this gift of eternal life. In the Huainanzi, Feilian is mentioned as a creature one can ride astride into the world of spirits where nothing perishes.

As an individual
In histories of the consolidation of the Zhou conquest of Shang, the Duke of Zhou pursued Shang king Di Xin's minister Feilian to the seacoast and killed him there. This episode is narrated in the Mengzi as well as the excavated text Xinian, part of the Qinghua University bamboo slips collection, a product of Chu provisionally dated around 370. According to the Shiji, which carries a not dissimilar account, Feilian's descendants would later found the state of Qin. Various theories have attempted to explain how the name Feilian was attached both to an individual minister at the end of the Shang dynasty and a Chu cultural wind spirit.

Form
Modern English language sources state Feilian is a winged dragon with the head of a deer and the tail of a snake. Hawkes states Feilian is commonly depicted as a winged deer, but it can encompass a multiplicity of different winged creatures.

Commentary to the Shiji provide earlier textual depictions. Where Emperor Wu of Han ordered the construction of buildings dedicated to Feilian worship, Eastern Han commentator Ying Shao defined Feilian as a sacred beast, able to control the winds. Jin dynasty commentator Jin Zhuo provided a more detailed description, saying Feilian had a deer's body with a bird's head, horns, and a snake's tail, with markings like a leopard's spots. Similarly, in the Huainanzi, where Feilian is ridden like a horse in the world outside the world, Eastern Han commentator Gao You states that Feilian is the name of a winged beast with long fur. Western Han rhapsodist Sima Xiangru's Shang lin fu (上林賦) mentions Feilian next to another mythical creature, the xiezhi (獬豸). In annotation, Eastern Jin dynasty commentator Guo Pu equates Feilian with the "dragon sparrow" (龍雀), saying it has the head of a deer and the body of a bird, in a neat inversion of Jin Zhuo's roughly contemporaneous description.

As other mythical creatures
Sun Zuoyun expanded upon his reconstruction of feilian as an alternative written representation of the word, using the fact that it was often used to write the word since the graphical forms had not yet differentiated, to identify Feilian with the mythical phoenix. He went on to claim that several Han dynasty stone mortuary figures from Luoyang and Ya'an, all with wings, horns, claws, and feathers, should be understood as representing the Feilian. During the Shang dynasty, the word for "phoenix" was sometimes written using the words for "deer" and "long-tailed bird" squished together into a single glyph; a direct reflection of the Feilian's chimeric appearance.

Lin Tongyan argues that given the first character of the term feilian means "flying", and the second character  is pronounced similarly to, Feilian should be conceptualised as a type of qilin capable of winged flight.

title: Feilian


text: User talk:66.31.29.139

title: User talk:66.31.29.139


text:
Talk:That's So Raven

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on That's So Raven. 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/20060725132733/http://z.about.com/d/boardgames/1/0/f/G/tf06-raven_girl_talk.jpg to http://z.about.com/d/boardgames/1/0/f/G/tf06-raven_girl_talk.jpg
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070325082435/http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamemain?cid=1951020519&tab=&page+0&eid=-1 to http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamemain?cid=1951020519&tab=&page+0&eid=-1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150923173736/http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/life-style/future-perfect/135964.html to http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/life-style/future-perfect/135964.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100530080904/http://www.thegracies.org/2004-grace-awards.php to http://www.thegracies.org/2004-grace-awards.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100714233225/http://www.namic.com/events/awards/downloads/VA_Winners_Noms_2003-2005.pdf to http://www.namic.com/events/awards/downloads/VA_Winners_Noms_2003-2005.pdf
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6IEnbOzJE?url=http://www.thegracies.org/2005-grace-awards.php to http://www.thegracies.org/2005-grace-awards.php
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130718052055/http://www.nickkcapress.com/2006KCA/hostnomsrelease.php to http://www.nickkcapress.com/2006KCA/hostnomsrelease.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140224183127/http://www.namic.com/namicdev/events/awards/downloads/VAWinnersPressRelease041806.pdf to http://www.namic.com/namicdev/events/awards/downloads/VAWinnersPressRelease041806.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140224182420/http://www.namic.com/namicdev/events/awards/img/VAwinners.jpg to http://www.namic.com/namicdev/events/awards/img/VAwinners.jpg
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150630174856/http://williammccray.sevenyards.com/?p=1969 to http://williammccray.sevenyards.com/?p=1969
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140706063803/http://allieiswired.com/archives/2008/03/nickelodeon-kids-choice-awards-2008-winners-list-pictures-and-video/ to http://allieiswired.com/archives/2008/03/nickelodeon-kids-choice-awards-2008-winners-list-pictures-and-video/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140225162452/http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/2008/4/16/hbo_leads_all_networks_at_namic.htm to http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/2008/4/16/hbo_leads_all_networks_at_namic.htm

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) 04:24, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Deep Situations
Overview currently states "... when in deep situations." I'm not a native speaker. What does that mean? Can you replace it with something more intelligible for a large audience? Thanks.--95.222.168.66 (talk) 12:14, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

"Dikembe the Ambassador" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dikembe_the_Ambassador&redirect=no Dikembe the Ambassador] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. BD2412 T 03:36, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

"Lynn Thomas (That's So Raven)" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lynn_Thomas_(That%27s_So_Raven)&redirect=no Lynn Thomas (That's So Raven)] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:That's So Raven


text:
Vijay Kichlu

Vijay Kichlu (16 September 1930 – 17 February 2023) was an Indian classical singer. He studied Dhrupad with the Dagar Brothers and Khayal with Latafat Hussain Khan, whose style had a strong connection with Dhrupad. He and his brother, Ravi Kichlu, formed a famous classical vocalist duo.

Kichlu was the founder and head of the ITC Music Academy for 25 years until he decided to retire due to change in management at the ITC headquarters.

Kichlu founded Sangeet Research Academy for patronising and nurturing upcoming talents in Indian classical music. In 2018, he was bestowed with the civilian award Padma Shri by the Government of India.

Kichlu died on 17 February 2023, at the age of 93.

title: Vijay Kichlu


text:
Talk:Nondenominational Christianity

Barna Group
I added in the url, http://www.barna.org/, and a brief discription of this Research Organization that was referenced in the History section. But when I searched their website for information on megachurches, what I found doesn't quite go with a fact that was cited. http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=49, published in March 2000, states that a megachurch is defined to have at least 1000 adults in weekly attendance.

POV
This article is too Christian-centric - going so far as defining beliefs of typical non-denominational churches solely in terms of non-denominational Christian churches. The article also overlooks the the application of the term to people - which is often another way people self-identify without saying "secular" --JimWae 06:49, 2005 August 13 (UTC)

What the bible says
I would not like to say that some person does strictly what the Bible says. That is most likely contested by someone. A true way of saying it in NPOV way is: what they believe the Bible to say. This credits both the sincere belief of these persons and gives the idea that they do not have the absolute authority to interpret Bible. I am quite sure that the Pope tries to do what he believes the biblical way, but I am quite as sure that any Fundamentalist Evangelist from Bible Belt does the same. However, their views may be quite different.

Relation to Evangelicalism
We have a sentence here that begins, "Nondenominational churches are recognizable from the evangelical movement…" can't even tell what "recognizable from" is intended to mean. Are we simply saying that some nondenominational churches fall within the evangelical movement? Asserting that all do? Or are we saying that the movement has, in some sense "recognized them"? Or something else entirely? Whatever this means, the wording should be changed to make the meaning clear. - Jmabel | Talk 03:49, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

The phrase seems to have entered the article in this major edit by User:Nathan B2, which also appears to have removed a fair amount of cited material without any explanation of why it was removed, and which seems to me to amount to a change in the scope of the article. It does not look like this was discussed at all. - Jmabel | Talk 03:58, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Having received no answer, I have asked a related question at Reference_desk/Humanities. - Jmabel | Talk 22:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

 * That related question (and responses) is now archived at Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2023 September 16. - Jmabel | Talk 04:11, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Edit, moving forward
I'm not expert here, so on the whole I expect to raise questions rather than give answers.

1) Is there really a single subject here? I particularly wonder when I compare this article against the French and Spanish articles linked to the same Wikidata item. In particular, this article currently begins, "Nondenominational Christianity … consists of churches [emphasis mine] which typically distance themselves from the confessionalism or creedalism of other Christian communities…" So are we saying that Nondenominational Christianity refers specifically to a stance of individual churches, not of individual people or of any other sort of institution?

2) I suspect the article should take up comparison between nondenominationalism and such other concepts as ecumenicism, small-c congregationalism (which it already does seem to address in some degree), and Protestantism and Evangelicalism. Is non-denominationalism necessarily a subset of any of these? Do authorities even agree on these answers?

3) The French-language Wikipedia article seems to date the original nondenominationalism earlier than this article, someone may want to look into their sources.

4) "In Asia, especially in Singapore and Malaysia, these churches are also more numerous, since the 1990s." More numerous than what? Is that last comma just superfluous and is this just saying that they've grown since the 1990s, or (given context) is it saying that since the 1990s these churches are more numerous than other churches (previous sentence was about how they compared in numbers to various denominations in the U.S.).

5) "Nondenominational churches are particularly visible in the megachurches": I have little idea what this means, partly because it is entirely unclear what "visible" means here. What is the objective, factual statement here?

6) Almost half of the article consists of criticism of nondenominational Christianity (note: not criticism of the concept as a tool in analyzing churches, but criticism of nondenominationalism as a movement). None of the article consists of any positive statement of this approach to Christianity by its advocates. This seems very imbalanced.

Jmabel | Talk 21:37, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

 * User:Jmabel, I agree this article needs some work.
 * In answer to #1, the topic of this article should refer to churches and members of those churches that do not claim membership in any specific denomination. For example"
 * First Baptist Church of Whoville is Baptist (a denomination)
 * Community Church of Whoville (which is also a member of the Southern Baptist Convention) is Baptist (a denomination) but is trying to downplay its denominational background by leaving "baptist" out of the name
 * New Hope Church of Whoville was founded in 1999 by Bob, a former Southern Baptist pastor who left the SBC in 1998. New Hope Church has never been part of the SBC or any other denomination. It is therefore a truly non-denominational church.
 * In answer to #2, that is probably a good idea to explore how these different terms relate to each other. Is non-denominationalism necessarily a subset of any of these? Do authorities even agree on these answers? Non-denominational churches may follow congregational polity, or they could give all authority to the pastor. It depends on the church. N-D churches are overwhelmingly Protestant. It would be difficult to embrace Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy while also eschewing any broader authority beyond the local church (though maybe a non-denominational church could try it). A N-D church could be evangelical or not. However, I suspect most in America are probably evangelical.
 * For #5, I think this just means that many mega-churches are non-denominational - meaning they are not members of any denomination. Ltwin (talk) 00:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
 * if you think you can do something with this, great. I would recommend looking at the French-language article, if only for its scope and its sources. Not that I'd suggest aping it, but there may be material there worth incorporating.
 * Yes, I would agree that non-denominational Christianity is generally at least implicitly Protestant. But what's important is what actual scholarly sources say.
 * For #5 you are probably right. Without citation, though, it is just so much blather. As it's worded now, it's just so much incoherent blather. - Jmabel | Talk 05:29, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Nondenominational Christians and Baptists
In 2018, political scientist and Baptist minister Ryan Burge wrote on his blog about a study that shows the similarities between Southern Baptists and nondenominational Christians. He noted that the two groups are very similar, but nondenominational Christians are more moderate theologically.

https://religioninpublic.blog/2018/03/07/nondenominational-protestants-are-basically-southern-baptists-with-a-few-caveats/

To add to this, NewSpring in South Carolina started out as church plants by Southern Baptists but its members claim their church is nondenominational. In fact, it is a bit hard to find mentions of the Southern Baptist Convention on their website. This seems to be something of a trend of mega churches to hide their affiliation to denominations. 159.117.174.98 (talk) 19:31, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Nondenominational Christianity


text: Category:Extinct cephalopods

title: Category:Extinct cephalopods


text:
Sukhona

The Sukhona (Су́хона) is a river in the European part of Russia, a tributary of the Northern Dvina. The course of the Sukhona lies in Ust-Kubinsky, Sokolsky, Mezhdurechensky, Totemsky, Tarnogsky, Nyuksensky, and Velikoustyugsky Districts of Vologda Oblast in Russia. It is 558 km long, and the area of its basin 50300 km2. The Sukhona joins the Yug near the town of Veliky Ustyug, forming the Northern Dvina, one of the biggest rivers of European Russia.

The biggest tributaries of the Sukhona are the Vologda (right), the Lezha (right), the Pelshma (left), the Dvinitsa (left), the Tolshma (right), the Tsaryova (left), the Uftyuga (left), and the Gorodishna (right).

Etymology
According to the Max Vasmer's Etymological Dictionary, the name of the river originates from the Russian and most likely means "a river with a dry (hard) bottom".

Physical geography
The river basin of the Sukhona comprises vast areas in the central and eastern parts of Vologda Oblast, in the south of Arkhangelsk Oblast, and in the north of Kostroma Oblast. In particular, the city of Vologda is located in the river basin of the Sukhona. The basin also includes Lake Kubenskoye, one of the biggest lakes of Vologda Oblast. The river basin is bounded from the south by the western part of the Northern Ridge, which separates the basins of the Sukhona and the Kostroma. From the north, the Sukhona river basin is bounded in the western part by the Kharovsk Ridge hill chain which separates it from the river basin of the Vaga.

The towns of Sokol, Totma, and Veliky Ustyug, as well as the villages and district centers Shuyskoye and Nyuksenitsa, are located on the banks of the Sukhona.

The source of the Sukhona is in the south-eastern part of Lake Kubenskoye. The Sukhona flows out in the south-eastern direction, accepts the Vologda and the Lezha from the right and turns northeast. Most of the river course runs over hilly landscape with tall banks. The Sukhona freezes up in late October - November and stays under the ice until late April - early May.

Navigation and canals
The Sukhona is navigable, but there is no passenger navigation except for ferry crossings. The lower course of the Kubena and Lake Kubenskoye are navigable as well. The northern part of Lake Kubenskoye, which belongs to the basin of the Sukhona, is connected by Northern Dvina Canal with the town of Kirillov and the Sheksna, thus connecting the basins of the White Sea and the Volga. In the 19th century, the canal and Lake Kubenskoye were the main waterway connecting the Volga with the White Sea. However, in the 1930s the White Sea – Baltic Canal was built, and the Northern Dvina Canal lost its significance. The canal is still in operation, serving cargo traffic and occasional cruise ships, which then proceed to Lake Kubenskoye.

History
The area was populated by Finnic peoples and then colonized by the Novgorod Republic, with the exception was Veliky Ustyug, which was part of Vladimir-Suzdal Principality. Totma has been first mentioned in the chronicles in 1137, and Veliky Ustyug — in 1207. In the 13th century the Novgorod merchants already reached the White Sea. The area was attractive in the first instance because of the fur trading. The main waterway from Novgorod into the Northern Dvina was along the Volga and its tributary, the Sheksna, along the Slavyanka into Lake Nikolskoye, then the boats were taken by land to Lake Blagoveshchenskoye, from there downstream along the Porozovitsa into Lake Kubenskoye and further to the Sukhona and the Northern Dvina.

Until the 1700s, Arkhangelsk was the main trading harbour for the sea trade of Russia and Western Europe, and the Sukhona was on the main trading route connecting the central Russia with Arkhangelsk. Peter the Great drastically changed the situation, by founding Saint-Petersburg in 1703, thus opening the way for the Baltic Sea trade, and by constructing the highway between Saint-Petersburg and Arkhangelsk via Kargopol. The river quickly lost its role as the leading trading route, which was accelerated by the construction of the railway between Vologda and Arkhangelsk between 1894 and 1897.

title: Sukhona


text:
Ravi Kichlu

Ravi Kichlu (रवि किचलू (Devanagari), راوی کچلو (Nastaleeq)) (December 24, 1932 – September 1993), popularly known as Pandit Ravi Kichlu,  was a prominent classical Hindustani vocalist of Agra gharana, who formed a well-known duo with his brother Vijay Kichlu. He studied Dhrupad under the Dagar Brothers, Ustad Moinuddin and Ustad Aminuddin Dagar and was later a 'shagird' of Ustad Latafat Hussain Khan, a doyen of the Agra Gharana. He thus imbibed a unique style, a mix of 'Dagar Bani' and Agra 'Gharana'. Pandit Ravi Kichlu was well known not only as a classical vocalist, but as a leading exponent of semi classical and folk forms - such as Thumri, Dadra, Kajri, Chaiti - and a collection of Ghazals, the music of which he composed himself.

title: Ravi Kichlu