text:
New Zealand National Airways Corporation

New Zealand National Airways Corporation, popularly known as NAC, established by the New Zealand National Airways Act, 1945, was the national domestic airline of New Zealand until 1978 when it amalgamated with New Zealand's international airline, Air New Zealand. The airline was headquartered in Wellington.

NAC was itself a government-led amalgamation of RNZAF 40 Transport Squadron, Union Airways and a number of other smaller operators, including the country's first commercial air service Air Travel (NZ) Ltd. At the time of its inception (1945), it was equipped with de Havilland Dragon Rapides, de Havilland Fox Moths, Douglas DC-3s, Lockheed Electras, Lockheed Lodestars, and one de Havilland Express which latter was returned to the RNZAF before the official 1947 inaugural start date. Although chiefly a domestic airline, in late 1947 NAC also provided international services to some nearby South Pacific countries, using converted ex-Royal New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF) Short Sunderland IIIs, as well as long-range Douglas DC-3Ds to Fiji via Norfolk Island.

By the time of the merger with Air New Zealand, the fleet consisted of 25 aircraft, Boeing 737s and Fokker F27s. Engineering workshops were set up at Christchurch, Whenuapai (Auckland), Palmerston North, Gisborne and Nelson.

Initial services
The NAC network started with the following destinations: Kaitaia, Kaikohe, Whangarei, Auckland, Tauranga, Gisborne, Napier, New Plymouth, Palmerston North, Wellington, Blenheim, Nelson, Christchurch, Westport, Greymouth, Hokitika, Whataroa, Waiho (Franz Josef), Haast, Dunedin and Invercargill previously served by the same aircraft and personnel under the pre-nationalisation names Union Airways and Air Travel (NZ) Ltd.

The destinations that formed the NAC Pacific Island Network were Norfolk Island, Fiji, Tonga, Samoa and the Cook Islands previously served by No. 40 Squadron RNZAF.

Domestic services
The initial network was based on destinations served by the airlines it was formed from. New destinations added between then and airline's merger with Air New Zealand included:

 * Rotorua in April 1948
 * Wanganui in November 1954
 * Timaru in April 1957
 * Whakatane in November 1962
 * Taupō and Oamaru in March 1966

In November 1956 the NAC services from Hokitika to South Westland were once again taken over by West Coast Airways. Other destinations removed from the network were Greymouth in 1951 and Kaikohe in August 1970.

Pacific Island services
NAC served the Pacific Islands in various capacities. Services began in 1947 using Douglas DC-3 aircraft and included Norfolk Island, Tonga, Samoa and the Cook Islands. Fiji was also served by NAC using Short Sunderland III's from the RNZAF. All services were withdrawn and taken over by TEAL on 15 October 1952, except for Norfolk Island which continued until September 1955.

In June 1975, Air New Zealand commenced Norfolk Island services with a chartered NAC Fokker F27-500 Friendship.

NAC wanted to return to the Pacific area in the late 1970s and began to lobby the NZ Government for a return of its international licence as it planned to equip with the larger Boeing 727-200. This was one of the catalysts for the forced merger with Air New Zealand in 1978, as the latter airline felt it could lose the Pacific Islands and charter market to NAC.

Piston power
After World War Two NAC continued to rely on prewar 'tailwheel' types of aircraft. Both the high-speed twin-engine 10 seat Lockheed Model 10 Electra and the 15 seat Lockheed Lodestar were used, along with the slower British built de Havilland Rapide/Dominie and single-engine Fox Moth. All three twin-engine types could operate into all airports while the Rapide and Fox Moth could land on remote beaches on the West Coast as well as some lighthouse station airstrips. The de Havilland Dominie operated until 1963.

Douglas DC-3
The Douglas DC-3 was the airline's major type right through to the mid-1960s with up to 27 being operated over time.

NAC operated a large airfreight network using dedicated DC-3 cargo planes under the 'Freightair' banner. These aircraft operated into airports that were not on the regular passenger network, such as Opotiki, Masterton, Alexandra and Roxburgh.

In the 1960s NAC's 12 best DC-3 "Douglas Liner" airframes were upgraded. This included better soundproofing, new interior fittings, and the fitting of larger windows. This was in response to competition in the provincial market from SPANZ, who operated DC-3s equipped with large double sized 'viewmaster' windows. NAC's upgraded aircraft were branded as 'Skyliners'. In 1954, NAC asked the government to encourage the development of airports so it could operate the Convair 440 or the Elizabethan airliner.

NAC continued using DC-3s into the 1970s. Kaikohe was permanently dropped as a destination in 1972. Passenger services to Timaru and Oamaru were operated with DC-3s until their runways were paved. One 'Skyliner' DC-3 renamed Waitaki was kept on for this service, until December 1974.

De Havilland Heron
NAC operated one tricycle landing gear type of piston-powered airliner in the 1950s, the de Havilland Heron 1. Being the first four Herons produced they had fixed undercarriages instead of the retractable undercarriage on later models. The original use for this aircraft was to keep Cook Strait services to Wellington operating while Rongotai airport was being rebuilt. The Herons operated mainly from Nelson in the South Island as well as to Blenheim, Rotorua, and Hamilton. Their heavy engines caused wing spar fatigue due to the light aluminium alloy used. Steel spars were substituted but with a weight penalty reducing passenger numbers to below economical levels. De Havilland did offer the Heron 2, a major improvement over the Heron 1 but this was not taken up. Heron ZK-BEQ was used as a royal aircraft when Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip visited New Zealand for the first time in 1953–54.

When the old Rongotai airfield closed in 1957, the Herons were considered for the Nelson-Christchurch-Invercargill route but the aircraft were sold off to private operators instead. By then, only the DC-3 and Rapide/Dominies made up the NAC Fleet.

The last type of piston engine airliner to be operated by NAC was a leased Mt Cook Airline Britten Norman BN2 Islander ZK-MCD, used during 1976–77 to operate a service on the Auckland – Whangarei – Kaitaia route. This was to allow services to operate while Kaitaia's compacted gravel runway was sealed for use by heavier aircraft. The Islander using an alternative grass strip. It was repainted in the "new" Wings of the Nation red and orange colour scheme.

Vickers Viscount 807
The pioneering turbo-prop powered Vickers Viscount first appeared in New Zealand in 1953 when an early model -700 was flown out for the London to Christchurch Air Race. In 1954, after the New Zealand Government encouraged the development of nationwide airports and with the promise of Wellington Airport being completed in 1958, NAC ordered four of the new larger 800 series type.

The Vickers Viscount 807s were introduced from 1958, three initially being purchased. The first was used as a training aircraft and operated alone for a year on the Christchurch-Auckland route, and to Palmerston North which substituted for a still uncompleted Wellington International Airport. Services to Wellington began the following year, after the major reconstruction of Wellington's Rongotai Airport was completed a year later, two more Viscounts had joined the first by then. Services to Dunedin began late in 1962 with the purchase of the fourth aircraft in 1960, after the closure of Taieri Aerodrome to airliners and the opening of the larger Momona Airport further down the Taieri Plain.

The famous 'Viscount Jump' effect saw passenger numbers swell. Powered by four Rolls-Royce Dart turboprops, the Viscount was two generations ahead of the DC-3. In 1966 NAC bought a second-hand aircraft, modifying it to 807 standards, bringing the fleet to five. This opened up Viscount services to Hamilton and Invercargill.

The Vickers Viscount continued on until the last was withdrawn in 1975 when the '807' type had started to develop wing spar fatigue. The end of the Viscount era also realised NAC's wishes to operate a two aircraft type fleet. Two extra Boeing 737-200s were purchased as replacements (see below).

It would be another twenty years before the Viscount's natural successor, the ATR 72-200, would take over the major provincial services.

Fokker F27 Friendship
For the growing provincial routes, it was a Dutch-built 30-seat airliner that would be the true successor to the DC-3. The Fokker F27-100 short-haul airliner suited the NAC provincial network perfectly and, like the Viscount, was Rolls-Royce Dart turboprop-powered would prove popular. The 'Friendship' had been flying since 1956. However, the British government attempted to force NAC's hand into purchasing the similar Handley Page Herald, reminding their New Zealand counterparts of possible trade tariffs being imposed on purchasing a 'foreign' aircraft. A British European Airways-owned Herald was flown out to New Zealand and participated in the opening of Wellington's rebuilt airport, putting on a short field and extreme manoeuvering air display. BEA management offered to leave the demonstration Herald with NAC for a year to trial on proposed routes. The New Zealand government intervened saying the Fokker aircraft had already proved itself while the Herald was still in test mode for its changed powerplants. The Fokker F27s were also Rolls-Royce powered while most of its electronic and mechanical components were made in the United Kingdom, thus negating tariff restrictions. So the Dutch built airliner won the day and a large order over time.

The Friendships began service with the first arriving in late 1960. Another seven arrived during 1961, launching provincial turbo-prop services to Hamilton, Napier, New Plymouth, Wanganui, Nelson, Blenheim, and Invercargill. They primarily operated to regional airports with sealed runways, and also on the main trunk route alongside the Viscounts, flying the off-peak services replacing the DC-3. They operated the first services to Dunedin's new Momona Airport in 1962 until traffic built up enough to use the Viscounts there. Four more secondhand -100s joined the fleet and five of the larger Fokker F27 Friendship Mk500s were purchased, three new and two secondhand, from 1973. NAC colours would return to the international Norfolk Island run, albeit under an Air New Zealand charter, with an Mk500 model flying the Auckland to Norfolk Is route.

The Friendships served New Zealand for thirty years, latterly under Air New Zealand ownership, progressively being rundown through the 1980s before the last of the fleet was withdrawn in 1990.

Jet power
As early as 1959, when the first Vickers Viscounts were entering service, NAC management discussed when to equip with pure jet aircraft. In 1963 NAC hired a de Havilland Comet 4 from Christchurch to Auckland covering the distance in 1 hour and 20 minutes. The decision to equip with jet aircraft was finally made by the NAC board of directors in 1965.

After a global tender was let, three twinjet aircraft were shortlisted, the BAC 1-11, Douglas DC-9 and the Boeing 737. The main criterion for the candidate aircraft was the ability to safely fly in and out of Wellington Airport's unique right-hand inner harbour circuit. When NAC management chose the new Boeing aircraft over the already proven BAC 1-11, the pro-British-leaning National Government promptly turned down the request for precious funds and told NAC to redo their sums again. NAC rebuffed the government's order and argued that the Boeing 737 was the best fit for the growing network. So confident was the airline that Boeing secured early delivery slots on the production line for NAC.

NAC won the Government over with the logic of simple economics: three 737-200s could do the job of four BAC 1-11s. The approval was given in late 1966 for the purchase of three 737-200s.

Boeing 737
The first Boeing 737, ZK-NAC, arrived from Seattle via Hawaii and Fiji into Wellington airport in the new livery of "National Airways" all-white body, blue titles, with a red cheatline and striking red 'Godwit' roundel on the tail. With the arrival of ZK-NAD and ZK-NAE, full services were introduced in 1968 on the "main trunk" (Auckland–Wellington–Christchurch–Dunedin). Later this extended to Invercargill, Palmerston North and Hamilton in 1975 as more aircraft were added, including ZK-NAM which had been the Boeing 737-200 prototype, N1359B. Viscounts were retired as demand for jet services grew and two more 737s joined the fleet as replacements.

NAC was one of Boeing's earliest 737 customers, the first outside the United States and West Germany. Some minor engineering tweaks to the 737 occurred during the first few years as the type developed. This included the changing of its engine's clamshell reverse thrusters over the exhaust pipes to the more familiar 'bucket' style that stayed with the 737-200 type to the end. This also helped with reducing soot emissions of the earlier model. Boeing changed the hydraulic and flap configuration of the 737 in 1973 and sold to the airline at a bargain price the last 737-200 in the original format, becoming ZK-NAJ.

Regional jet trials
The Boeing 737 had settled into routine service when NAC launched a small regional jet study to replace the Viscount. This included the Russian Yakolev Yak 40, Fokker F28 'Fellowship' and the still-experimental Hawker Siddeley HS146. When the country fell into an economic slump caused by the 1973 oil crisis and the United Kingdom joining the European Economic Community, the resultant drop in passenger numbers caused NAC to sell one of its new 737s after only six months in service. NAC quietly dropped the regional jet proposal and more F27-500s were purchased.

List of fleet survivors
Ex-NAC Dragon Rapides, Fox Moths, and DC-3s still fly in private and charter operator hands. Below is a list of known surviving NAC aircraft.

Uniforms
In 1965–66, Barbara Penberthy of Auckland was the first New Zealander to design the airline's uniform. Created as a departure from the 'uniform look', it was a high-fashion two-piece suit and blouse with matching coat and hat. The fabric was all-wool barathea, dyed to a colour named 'golden cloud' specially created for NAC; a name by which the uniform came to be known. The suit jacket would be removed before onboard aircraft duties. The blouse consisted of three-quarter sleeves, a self-pleated panel down the front, three decorative pearl buttons at the neck and double cuffs with pearl cuff-links. The new 9ct gold NAC staff hat-badge, designed by NAC staff, framed NAC's godwit symbol within a circle. Discarding sleeve braid, ranks were then denoted by the number of small silver stars on the bar of the jacket insignia also designed by airline staff. Stockings were in a colour specially created for the uniform and named 'cirrus'. The hat, from a New Zealand milliner, was nicknamed the 'Mustard Pot'.

One of the airline's most memorable outfits was designed by Babs Radon (Barbara Penberthy) in 1970, in vibrant colours to attract younger flyers. The uniform consisted of four different coloured frocks, complemented with either a red or green jacket and matching hat. Two white frocks contrastingly trimmed with red and green on the neck and tab front, and a green and a red dress trimmed with white, were semi-fitted with a slightly A-line skirt and short sleeves. The navy blue New Zealand wool top coat, a semi-fitting single-breasted style with gold and copper buttons, was worn with a white cravat. The hostess could choose to wear the uniform with shoes in different shades or white skin-fit boots.

Following consultation with hostesses and three years of development by a committee, which included three hostesses and specialist apparel industry advice, NAC introduced a new mix-and-match all-seasons hostess uniform in November 1976. Coordinated from six basic pieces, the uniform sought to provide the wearer with individual variety and climate suitability—a basic white polyester cotton shirtdress with a printed red and blue bold houndstooth pattern, navy blue street-length pinafore in double-knit washable wool jersey, red lambswool jumper with white banded neckline and cuffs, navy blue straight-cut slacks, navy blue short jerkin, navy blue tailored blazer, along with a red, blue and white beret for ground use. The classic navy blue coat, double-breasted and extended to mid-calf length, was retained. Relaxed uniform rules permitted hostesses to wear rings, small earrings and a silver, gold or pearl necklace.

Bay of Plenty Airways
NAC made a rare foray into the small airline business with the purchase in September 1961 of a one third shareholding in Tauranga based Bay of Plenty Airways. This was the only occasion NAC invested in another passenger airline but ironically it was two months before the airline's tragic loss of their Aero Commander on Mt Ruapehu. This directly led to Bay of Plenty Airways' demise. NAC took over the Wellington – Tauranga route outright shortly after.

Mount Cook Airlines
NAC entered an agreement in 1961 with the tourist route oriented Mount Cook Airlines, offering some of its light routes in both North and South Islands to Mount Cook with the latter airline staying away from the main trunk and larger provincial centre routes. One such route was the Christchurch to Timaru and Oamaru DC-3 service in 1966. NAC also provided Mount Cook with a 'guarantor' back up when the airline purchased its first Hawker Siddeley HS 748 airliner and later a de Havilland Twin Otter. In 1973 NAC took a minor shareholding in the Mount Cook Group, the parent company of Mount Cook Airlines; Air New Zealand would later absorb this share when merger amalgamated the airlines.

Safe Air
In September 1972, NAC acquired 100% ownership of freight company Safe Air Limited, formerly known as Straits Air Freight Express Limited (SAFE) established in 1951, with acquisition of Air Holdings Limited's 94% share holding. The airline operated Bristol Freighter and Armstrong Whitworth Argosy aircraft. It was to continue as a separate company based in Blenheim.

NAC Freight Air crash
NAC suffered its first fatal air crash on 9 August 1948 when DC-3 Freighter ZK-AOE Parera crashed above Port Underwood claiming the lives of Commanders Murdo MacLeod and RJRH "Dicky" Makgill. The DC-3 had taken off from Woodbourne Airport near Blenheim on a routine freight flight bound for Paraparaumu and entered cloud, crashing into Scraggy Ridge. A lack of radio navigation equipment was highlighted in the crash report. Some wreckage remains on the ridge.

Electra crash
On 23 October 1948, NAC Lockheed Model 10 Electra ZK-AGK Kaka crashed on the south-western slopes of Mt Ruapehu in the centre of New Zealand's North Island while flying in clouds. The aircraft was flying from Palmerston North to Hamilton, but drifted right off track after passing over Whanganui and collided with the mountain killing all thirteen people on board. The wreckage was located a week later near the summit. The accident highlighted the lack of air navigation radio beacons in New Zealand at the time.

Lodestar crash
On 18 March 1949, NAC Lockheed Lodestar ZK-AKX Keruru, crashed in the Tararua Ranges near Waikanae while approaching Paraparaumu Airport at the end of a flight from Auckland killing all 15 on board. The pilot was deemed to become disoriented in low cloud. Once again blame was given to a lack of navigational radio beacons in New Zealand. This crash was the worst aviation disaster in New Zealand until the Kaimai Range crash in 1963. The wreckage still remains at the crash site, with the exception of the tail section which was recovered intact in 1988 and taken to the Air Force Museum at Wigram Air Force Base in Christchurch, New Zealand to complete the restoration of Lockheed Hudson NZ2013 for static display.

Raumati Beach crash landing
On 22 May 1954, NAC Douglas DC-3 ZK-AQT Piere operating as Flight 152 from Christchurch crash landed on Kohutuhutu Rd in the beachside settlement of Raumati Beach when approaching Paraparaumu Airport on short finals. Of the 26 people on board, 23 survived. The pilot, Captain Bill Pettet, managed to get the passenger door open before the fire reached it. Three unaccompanied infant children died. NAC was subsequently ordered to have a stewardess on board all DC-3 flights with unaccompanied children under 12 years of age. The crash was caused by fuel starvation, the wrong fuel line cutover switch had been activated. The engines failed to restart, the aircraft hit macrocarpa trees and plunged onto the road below Dr. Stevenson-Wright's house. Miraculously the fuselage rested right in the middle of the road without further collision but the wreck burst into flames. The doctor and his visitors ran to the passengers' aid and all but the infants walked out relatively unharmed. The doctor and his visitors had been enjoying a coffee break while looking out to sea when they saw the plane heading straight for them. They were saved by the trees.

Kaimai disaster
On 3 July 1963, a NAC Douglas DC-3 crashed into the Kaimai Ranges in New Zealand's North Island while flying in clouds and turbulence. The aircraft was flying from Whenuapai, Auckland to Tauranga. The aircraft struck a vertical rock face after encountering a strong downdraft. The aircraft may also have commenced an early descent with the pilots unaware of the true position of the aircraft. All 23 people on board were killed. The wreckage remains on the hillside with a small memorial cairn beside it.

Other incidents

 * On 19 April 1948, Lockheed Model 10 Electra ZK-AGJ Kahu on a flight from Mangere – Tauranga – Gisborne was caught in a sudden heavy squall moments before landing at Tauranga. The sudden downburst forced the Electra into the lagoon in front of the runway threshold. The passengers were unharmed; ZK-AGJ, however, was written off as uneconomical to repair.
 * On 24 February 1949 Lockheed Model 10 Electra ZK-ALH Korere belly landed at Hamilton on a through flight from Auckland to Rotorua. The undercarriage collapsed, causing the Electra to slide across the airfield to a halt. Passengers were more bemused than shaken and continued their onward flight via bus.
 * On 14 January 1950, NAC de Havilland DH89B Dominie ZK-ALC Tiora was preparing to take off from Rotorua Aerodrome when a backfire from the port engine ignited dry grass under the aircraft. The aircraft's pilot, Commander Bill Rainbow, and passengers exited the aircraft leaving the starboard engine running while ground crews attempted to extinguish the fire. However, it was too late and by the time the Rotorua Fire Brigade arrived, they could only dampen down the wreckage. ZK-ALC was completely destroyed, along with the passengers' luggage.
 * On 12 November 1958, brand new Vickers Viscount ZK-BRD City of Wellington suffered an accidental wheels up landing at Whenuapai when Captain 'Johnny' Walker, co-piloting for Captain Peter Matheson, selected the undercarriage up lever instead of full flaps up. The Viscount slewed off the runway and onto the soft grass. Passengers were shaken and the aircraft suffered moderate superficial damage but was repaired in time for the Christmas season in December.
 * On 16 October 1961, Fokker F27-100 Friendship ZK-BXB Kotuku, moments from boarding passengers and crew at Invercargill airport suffered an undercarriage failure when the portside main leg retracted. Ground crew had just removed the safety locking pin when the leg retracted. It was discovered that an undercarriage selector valve had failed.
 * On 17 February 1963, Viscount ZK-BWO City of Dunedin on a flight from Auckland experienced wind shear just prior to touch down at Wellington. Towards the end of its landing run it veered off the runway embankment at the southern Moa Point Road end, none of the 37 passengers and four crew suffered injury. The aircraft was hauled back up and propellers replaced.
 * On 13 July 1974, Fokker F27-100 Friendship ZK-NAF Korimako while on a flight from Christchurch to Palmerston North developed a fault in its starboard undercarriage. The captain elected to land at Wellington where the undercarriage collapsed near the end of the landing run. Minor damage to the aircraft was sustained and was soon returned to service. This was the last incident involving aircraft under NAC ownership.

Last years
In 1975 the airline introduced a new "NAC Wings of the Nation" livery – a two-toned orange colour scheme with the 'Godwit' roundel on an orange tail fin. Air New Zealand DC-10s or DC-8s were often hired to move burgeoning holiday-maker numbers which brought about the idea of purchasing the larger Boeing 727-200. This would have also allowed the airline to challenge Air New Zealand on Trans Tasman and Pacific Island routes. Boeing offered to buy back NAC's three original 737 models as trade-ins to help purchase costs and approached NAC with the then proposed B757/767 family, opening up new markets. McDonnell Douglas also joined in with a DC-10 offer to NAC, re-igniting the merger debate within the New Zealand Government.

In the end, it was Air New Zealand that was threatened by the domestic market airline and the government acted.

Merger
On 1 April 1978, after thirty-one years in operation, NAC merged with Air New Zealand to form the domestic arm of the airline. The highly unpopular decision to join the airline with Air New Zealand was inevitable; with full deregulation of the commercial aviation industry in New Zealand was still eight years away. The NAC fleet at the time of merger consisted of 26 aircraft:

The Godwit tail livery was hurriedly covered over with a hybrid Air New Zealand title and Koru tail scheme still using the two-tone orange NAC final colours. Small Godwit symbols were placed beneath the cockpit side windows as a link to the past. These survived into the full repainted Teal Blue era, but by the 1990s they had been painted out.


text:
Talk:Valknut

Neopagan
Is the notion —
 * In these, it represents the interlinking of the nine worlds, and the spirit and power of Allfather that binds and pervades them all. and is worn by those who chose to give themselves to Odin.

— originally neopagan or traditional? I'd have thought the latter...

I'd removed the Neopagan section previously, because it contained this and the reference to Davidson (to which I'd added the actual quotation). Davidson was certainly talking about the traditional symbolism (although of course that may persist in neopagan use!).

So I'd rather move the neopagan sentence to the end... or add it to the "image stones" para?

--Ant 09:19, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Of course the Neopagans use the symbol as they imagine was the original significance. Therefore, attributed statements about the presumed original meaning are certainly admissible. They just cannot be made in an assertive voice by the article itself: Afaik, we only have the symbol drawn next to Odin on a couple of runestones. We have no idea about the actual thoughts behind that, binding, all-pervading, or what not. (or, if we do, I don't know it and will gladly be told otherwise. Maybe something in the Edda? Or what other sources do we have?) [[User:Dbachmann|dab ( T ) ]] 09:24, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

An interesting point! When does a notion cease to be an academic interpretation of the archeology and historical evidence and start to become a living belief? I guess there are three layers of neopagan belief:
 * 1) continuance of known traditional beliefs (known in the sense of attested by the evidence and accepted in the academic canon);
 * 2) assumption of beliefs that are academic best guesses (poor evidence, disputed);
 * 3) presumption of beliefs based on interpretations from other traditions - layered with ideas from modern disciplines such as psychology (e.g., Jung) - that have no academic support.

Davidson's quotation is clearly of the second type... but is this notion adopted by neopagans?

It would be good to be clear whether the "nine worlds" para. is type 2 or 3. As it stands the implication is that it's 3. --Ant 23:48, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Well, if a notion is a living belief, it is so regardless of whether or not it is also an academic interpretation of historical facts. I am not trying to slight living beliefs at all here, and of course they are worthy of inclusion. traditional beliefs are always syncretic, there was no "pure" Germanic paganism in the year 150 BC which started to degenerate from that point. Beliefs are always in flux. "Academic support" is restricted to the question whether a particular belief was commonly held at a specific time. For contemporary beliefs, this is a simple matter of checking. The special case of Neopaganism arises from the fact that some groups take academic notions of reconstructed beliefs, and decide to hold them as personal, contemporary beliefs. This completely changes the nature of the notion: While an academic reconstruction is in principle always subject to revision, it will be more difficult to give up a personal belief, just because academics decide that they were wrong, and things were really different. Other groups have less qualms of historical correctness, and consciously blend ancient beliefs with modern notions (Jung et al). Yes, it is our job here to describe the nature of the different associations of the Valknut symbol. So far, we have evidence of how the symbol is seen in Neo-pagan communities, and we should state it as such. If we can come up with academic notions of the symbol's status in the Viking Age, we will of course add those, too, and compare them to the modern notions. [[User:Dbachmann|dab ( T ) ]] 11:21, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

What I was looking for was some statement like one of the following –
 * 1) This is a neopagan practice (belief, etc.) based on established traditional practice
 * 2) This is a neopagan practice based on conjectural traditional practice
 * 3) This is a neopagan practice with no known basis in traditional practice
 * 4) ''This is a neopagan practice of unknown provenance.

Anything that's (1) or (2) should be firstly part of a "tradition" discussion. Only (3) or (4) should be first mentioned in a "neopagan" discussion.

I'll grant that the "nine worlds" quotation is in the right place... It's (4) until someone with the right knowledge comes along to move it. Which is what I did with Davidson: why the "neopagan" header before the quotation wasn't appropriate.

--Ant 18:33, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Wodanesdag press
What is it? does it deserve its own article? The link given was commercial ("VALKNUT PENDANT $33.30"), and we shouldn't link to commercial sites, or at least not directly to product placements. [[User:Dbachmann|dab ( T ) ]] 11:26, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Four-cornered variation?
Thanks to Dab for correcting my mistake - I got the Valknute mixed up with this symbol. Any known relation between the two?
 * I'm sorry, I only saw the "valiant" (val- means simply "battle", no connection with "valiant") addition when I reverted, I didn't even see the "firkant" part. Although you are right in that you were wrong :) The symbol? Why, it's the Apple key, of course :oP   (seriously, I don't know what it's called). dab (ᛏ) 13:54, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * The square version, if the center square isn't any bigger than the outer four, and it's rotated 45 degrees, is called a "cross fretty" in the traditional terminology of heraldry. I have no idea if it has any traditional significance. AnonMoos 19:02, 18 February 2006 (UTC) -- Article Saint John's Arms -- AnonMoos (talk) 04:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

 * The Apple key (⌘) is most generally known as a "clover". If you can speak US English you would be able to very accurately say that it was named "clover" by a plurality of speakers (by contrast with what speakers of British English would call a majority of speakers).
 * More information of its Viking origins, Apple usage history, and names at the Command key Wiki article. Lindsay658 01:37, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

A more general term?
no:Valknut has a definition that is both more general, and more specific: A figure with one line looping in round or square loops. I guess they should add a requirement for some symmetry to their definition. -- (unsigned and undated entry)
 * Yes, the meaning of Norwegian Valknute differs from the use of that word in other languages, including the neighboured Swedish valknut which resembles the English meaning. Thus, no:Valknute and en:Valknut are in fact "false friends". At least in Norwegian dialects, "valknute" even can denote some pretzel-like pastries. See here fig. 4 items #9 and #10: "a kind of combined pretzels with numerous loops" ("enslags kringler sammensatte av en hel del løkker"). -- Karl432 (talk) 16:26, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Berserker
I remember reading (a) that the Berserkers used this symbol, and (b) that members of the Nazi S.S. had it tatooed either in their armpit or inside the top of their upper arm. Is there any truth to this?129.94.6.28 05:46, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Where did you read this? bloodofox: 03:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I can not remember the source precisely. It was in an English language book, rather than a magazine article, that I read, as far as I can remember, somewhere around 1965. However, I have a very clear memory of the Valknut/Berserker/SS claim, precisely because, up to that time, I had never heard the term valknut before. As I distinctly recall, the valknut was represented as being connected with "Odin's power to bind and unbind" and that it was described as being "three interlocking triangles". It may have been another 20 years or so before I was ever able to view a valknut symbol.129.94.6.30 17:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That is not true, at least not the SS part, they had the german eagle, their service number and their bloodtype tattooed there. And I highly doubt the Berserkers had this as a "symbol", mainly because the vikings was not a structured society with distinct symbols per troop unit, nor were berserkers a specific troop type. And as Odin was the all father and god of death, while tyr and thor was gods of war, it is unlikely that warriors would use him as a symbol. Sneaking Viper (talk) 13:59, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Valknut argument from user talk pages
I really don't see what your edits added to article "Valknut", since (among other things), the word Borromean is always capitalized (being the adjective form of the name of the Borromeo family of italy), the word "Triquetra" has a highly-specific meaning in modern usage (and is not merely a vague equivalent of "Triskelion"), the form of the symbol shown in image Image:Valknut-Symbol-3linkchain-closed.svg seems to be used by some modern neo-pagans (even if it isn't ancient, as clearly indicated), and the three horns symbol on the Snoldelev stone is not equivalent to any form of a Valknut. AnonMoos 16:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:TriskelionValknut.jpg
If you made that image yourself, then it would have been nice if you had made it larger and clearer... AnonMoos 16:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I added responses on your talk page. Nagelfar 23:14, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but your edit replaces facts with non-facts. What does the Valknut being "topologically equivalent to a triskelion" even mean?? Nothing that I can determine... The Triskelion being topologically equivalent to a triquetra means that it is fundamentally the same as the 3_1 knot (external link to Knot Atlas), The Triskelion being topologically equivalent to the Borromean rings means that it is fundamentally the same as the L6a4 knot (external link to Knot Atlas), but it being equivalent to the Triskelion has no meaning. AnonMoos 23:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

 * It says "...depending on artists depiction" so it seems intelligible enough to me, though somewhat verbose. Though I don't know why you're bringing this point up against me; being as I had nothing to do with adding that line nor is it my wording; my edits were subsequent to that, I only added to the line. Nagelfar 23:43, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

 * The sentence had a highly-specific meaning before (as I explain in excruciating detail below); since you started "improving" it, it appears to have no meaning at all. AnonMoos 23:51, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Meaning into gibberish
Dude, in the article as of 22:58, 24 February 2007 (see here), there is the sentence which reads:

 * Geometrically, it is topologically equivalent to Borromean rings, a closed 3-link chain, a triquetra or a triskelion, depending on the particular artistic depiction

That sentence, as it left your keyboard (and therefore your responsibility, since you freely chose to edit the sentence) clearly says that a Valknut is sometimes topologically equivalent to a Triskelion, which is absolute meaningless gibberish, as far as I can determine.

Conversely, the sentence as it existed before you came along, read as follows:

 * Geometrically, it is topologically equivalent to the Borromean rings, a closed 3-link chain, or the triquetra, depending on the particular artistic depiction

Which meant that Image:Valknut-Symbol-borromean.svg is equivalent to an L6a4 knot, Image:Valknut-Symbol-3linkchain-closed.svg is equivalent L6n1 knot , and Image:Valknut-Symbol-triquetra.svg is equivalent to a 3_1 knot -- which is both meaningful and true.

I really wish you wouldn't meddle with things where you don't appear to know what you're talking about. AnonMoos 23:51, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

 * It makes the same amount of sense, as the last item in the delineation of the sentence, is also equivilent to a triskelion symbol, in the exact same delineation as the sentence was previously, with but one extra item. Your argument is moot. Nagelfar 23:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. You appear to have a large vocabulary of vague abstract conceptual terminology (though you don't always spell it correctly), but you appear to be rather deficient in knowledge of very basic facts of knot theory (a branch of mathematical topology), and in being able to understand or to decide when and why a sentence says something which is either mathematically true or mathematically false.  That being the case, it might have behooved you to take a less "bold" approach to the article.

 * Furthermore, you are responsible for the particular parts of an article you chose to edit, in the form in which they were left after you edited them. When you choose to edit a sentence, it's your corresponding duty to make sure that you don't change a sentence expressing a mathematical truth into a sentence expressing a mathematical falsehood (or expressing no clear meaning at all).  If you find that "fascistic", then maybe you should rethink your participation in Wikipedia. AnonMoos 00:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * There are no falsehoods, mathematical or otherwise, presented in my edit of the article. I challenge you to give details on the posited "falsehoods" Nagelfar 00:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * In your very latest version, you still have the Valknut as topologically equivalent to a Triskelion, which is gibberish. AnonMoos 00:51, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * That version of the Valknut is topologically equivalent to a triskelion. Isn't the triskelion known, as with everything else, by mathematical factors? Nagelfar 01:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * As I already explained elsewhere, Triskelions are (partially!) defined by symmetries, but not defined by topology. AnonMoos 22:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Knots are mathematics
I hate to break it to you, but as soon as you start comparing two sets of closed knotted and/or interlinked loops to each other, in order to decide whether they are the "same" or "different", then you're automatically entering into the realm of mathematics. In some of the simplest cases, common-sense and superficial visual inspection can tell you whether two knots or links are the "same" or "different" (without writing down any equations) -- but as soon as you encounter more complex knotted configurations, or someone asks you to prove that two knots or links are the "same" or "different", or someone asks you what is a general procedure (that will in apply in all cases) to determine whether two knots or links are the "same" or "different", then you'll need mathematics pretty quickly. AnonMoos 00:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Yes, mathematics are in everything. What is your point about how the artucle is wrong again? I don't see it. Nagelfar 00:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * In your very latest version, you still have the Valknut as topologically equivalent to a Triskelion, which is gibberish. AnonMoos 00:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

"Triskelion Valknut"

First off, Image:TriskelionValknut.jpg is not a triskelion, rather it includes a triskelion. And if you were intending to make statements about that image in article Valknut, but without actually adding the image to article Valknut, then that was extremely confusing and unclear (it certainly managed to confuse me). And no, what is shown in is not a knot -- that depiction doesn't properly interlace, for one thing. With proper interlacing, it's always clear that what goes under on one side comes back up on the opposite side, with no ambiguity about how things join up. In Image:TriskelionValknut.jpg, it's quite unclear how things are intended to be joined up in the center. AnonMoos 00:45, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * It seems a triskelion to me, if one considers it not to connect in the back, it is a triskelion that bends in on itself, I say it is definitely a triskelion two dimensionally (which is all it actually is). It doesn't have to literally be a "knot" to be the symbol it is associated with anyone, whether or not it has the word "knot" in it (the symbol clearly goes by other names and this example of the symbol has been used by certain organizations) It would be pointless to bifurcate the article into "hrungnirs heart" or etc just to post the other attested example of the valknut. Traditional name doesn't have to relate to particular classifications. (Let alone, "knut", is used from its Old Norse name, and doesn't conform with English name classifications technically) Nagelfar 00:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * If one considers it not to connect in the back, then it seems to be topologically equivalent to three line segments joined at a point, which is topologically equivalent to a zero-dimensional point. If one considers it to connect in back, then it seems to be topologically equivalent to three semicircles in three-dimensional space which all share the same endpoints (which is not a knot).  "Topologically equivalent to a Triskelion" is meaningless, because a triskelion is partly defined in terms of visual symmetry (i.e. having a three-fold rotational symmetry without any reflection symmetries), but not in terms of topology.

 * Furthermore, Image:TriskelionValknut.jpg would seem to be definitely modern-only (with no question-mark about it), since it violates the basic visual grammar of proper interlacing, which ancient artists generally must have been well-aware of. And also, if Image:TriskelionValknut.jpg is your own personal individual invention, then there's the question of whether it has any place on the Valknut article at all, according to Wikipedia policies.  It would have been nice if you had been able to consider some of these matters before you started taking up my time and your own with these discussions. AnonMoos 01:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * It was my creation based on a near exact duplicate of a symbol used by a neo-Odinist organization (I believe it was something like the WOT). It is not original work or original research, but an original rendering on an attested example of such work. I believe the webpage where I saw it originally does not exist anymore. Nagelfar 01:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Furthermore, Image:TriskelionValknut.jpg would seem to be definitely modern-only (with no question-mark about it), since it violates the basic visual grammar of proper interlacing, which ancient artists generally must have been well-aware of.

 * That may be so, but it is POV. Even in the way you state it; "...seem to be..." / "...generally must have been..." & "...definitely.../..no question-mark about it..." are mutually exclusive. Nagelfar 02:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Topology
Dude, topology is by no means confined to knots. Examples involving Toruses, Moebius strips and Klein bottles often figure prominently. AnonMoos 01:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Exactly, that's why I assume it makes sense in regard to a Triskelion, and why I left the wording as is. How can something that is visual not exist in terms of topology? Nagelfar 01:19, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Valknut argument from user talk page
the word Borromean is always capitalized (being the adjective form of the name of the Borromeo family of italy)

Fair enough.

the word "Triquetra" has a highly-specific meaning in modern usage (and is not merely a vague equivalent of "Triskelion")

No where did I claim such, I was indicating the difference. The line Geometrically, it is topologically equivalent to Borromean rings, a closed 3-link chain, a triquetra or a triskelion Is not saying they are all equivalent, rather that they are all different in how they are made. It isn't grammatically proper to write "or" after each line but rather put a comma & only add "or" after the last instance, am I wrong? Also, you're argument is moot, because the revert you went to had the exactly same wording only ending in a closed 3-link chain, or the triquetra, so if you're using that argument, your revert needs to go back further.

If you made that image yourself, then it would have been nice if you had made it larger and clearer

I made it a long time ago with on a different computer and have had it on my harddrive for ages. I don't have the means to make another at the time, maybe someone else could upload it and replace it, but as it stands, it is the only available image example of a valknut symbol that I've seen used in this capacity elsewhere.

the three horns symbol on the Snoldelev stone is not equivalent to any form of a Valknut

"See also" isn't required to only link to something equivalent, is it?; The Snoldelev stone is a Nordic tri-part symbol found on ancient runestones, what more is needed to require a "see also" link? That seems enough association to me.

Nagelfar 23:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I added the word "either" is that better? Or would you prefer a full rewrite? I personally can see what is meant, though, as I said, I did not write that nor is it my wording. Nagelfar 23:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually I think it was the part "depending on" that allowed me to understand what was meant. Nagelfar 23:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

.. That sentence, as it left your keyboard (and therefore your responsibility, since you freely chose to edit the sentence) ..

Please cite the wikipedia policy in which that is the case, I thought there was a 'be bold' policy, in terms of anyone being able to edit it to whatever extent they feel they can contribute. I didn't know there was a feudalistic policy where the last one to edit is held accountable for the entire content of the article. Nagelfar 23:55, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

''I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. You appear to have a large vocabulary of vague abstract conceptual terminology (though you don't always spell it correctly), but you appear to be rather deficient in knowledge of very basic facts of knot theory (a branch of mathematical topology), and in being able to understand or to decide when and why a sentence says something which is either mathematically true or mathematically false. That being the case, it might have behooved you to take a less "bold" approach to the article.''

''Furthermore, you are responsible for the particular parts of an article you chose to edit, in the form in which they were left after you edited them. when you choose to edit a sentence, it's your corresponding duty to make sure that you don't change a sentence expressing a mathematical truth into a sentence expressing a mathematical falsehood (or expressing no clear meaning at all). If you find that "fascistic", then maybe you should rethink your participation in Wikipedia. AnonMoos 00:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC) ''

 * The article says nothing about how the knots relate to mathematical concepts, and for a very good reason; it isn't a mathematics article. However, though the first three items pictured may be Valknuts as they relate to knots that are mathematically defined; the fourth is still "geometrically" and topographically a triskelion; regardless of whether or not it falls into a particular category which is mathematically a knot; this is an article on Valknuts and the section is on categories of Valknuts. Not on mathematical kinds of knots; but a traditional kind of knot which does not require a rigid classiciation; It is not a science article, but a symbolistic / historic / neo-pagan one. Nagelfar 00:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * But I don't even know if that was your argument. Are you arguing that the forth item added, the so labeled "triskelion valknut" is not a knot? It is still used as a Valknut, so it still is completely viable article addition. Nagelfar 00:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Geometrically, it is topologically equivalent to either Borromean rings, a closed 3-link chain, a triquetra or a triskelion, depending on the particular artistic depiction

Would a change of the above to something like;

''Geometrically, it is topologically equivalent to either Borromean rings, a closed 3-link chain or a triquetra. It is also found as a triskelion, depending on the particular artistic depiction:''

...Be of your approval? I can only assume that a triskelion doesn't somehow fit traditional topology. (Though I assume topology encompassing anything with form) Nagelfar 00:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

...

Ok, I added external links to the L6a4 knot, L6n1 knot & 3_1 knot from your knot wiki in accord to how they relate to the valknut symbols given in the article.

Maybe you have the knowhow to say how exactly this image I added is classed in terms of being a knot;

Two dimensionally, it doesn't connect; though theoretically it could be connected in three dimensions behind the back of the central "triskelion", does that qualify it as a knot? Let's work on this together; wikipedia would benefit as a whole because of it. You seem to be knowledgable on the technical aspect of knots. Nagelfar 00:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Whether or not it is "technically" a knot, I hold fast to the fact that it is a triskelion (it has one more arm bend than is commonly found, but this doesn't exclude it from the definition. Are all triskelions defined as having only two arm bends rather than three or four?) Nagelfar 00:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Also, I would agree with you if it had said "Geometrically, it is topologically equivalent as a knot to" but it doesn't use the qualifier "knot" in that sentence. So the argument as to whether or not it is a knot is a separate issue from the wording in this instance, in my opinion. Nagelfar 01:02, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

...

Starting over with a clean slate
I reverted to the previous condition of the article, and hopefully we can make slow incremental improvements to it (if necessary), which will not change mathematically correct sentences into meaningless gibberish, or introduce one person's own floundering improvised ad-hoc terminology ("with gaps between the knot links" etc. etc.) instead of standard accepted conventional terminology. Why don't you start by answering the following questions? --

1) Is the version of the symbol in Image:TriskelionValknut.jpg (which includes a Triskelion, but is not itself a Triskelion) your own personal individual invention? (The fact that it doesn't follow the standard artistic conventions or "grammar" of proper unambiguous interlacing means that it almost certainly isn't ancient.)

2) Is it used by any noteworthy individuals or groups (other than by you personally)?

3) If the answer to question 1 is "yes" and the answer to question 2 is "no", then why should it be included on Wikipedia at all? AnonMoos 22:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

If you had taken the time to read my responses on my own talk page I had answered all of these questions. I have been at wikipedia since Jan '04, I know all of this, I know all of the rules and regs. etc. etc. I contend that none of the lines written were "gibberish" at all whatsoever, and I will continue to contend so. This was NOT MY CREATION. I re-edited the image from a webpage logo as to not include wording from scratch maybe even as many as ten years ago. I also saw it reused in this style online around that time. If I am not mistaken, it was from the webpage of the WOT, which is now defunct. I cannot even find the image on archive.org, as I've looked for about an hour, but I remember it clearly as I took the time to retrace & save it; it existed, it was used on a highly trafficked website. I said as such in my talk page. So NO it is "NOT my own personal creation. As for 2; yes, it was used by the WOT & more. Secondly, you're past your three reverts on this issue, which you too quickly go to before proper editing. The wording was perfectly viable, not gibberish at all, any third party could read and understand such. Nagelfar 04:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

In addition, you're wrong, the image given is clearly a triskelion. The number of bends and length of them, are not defined to any degree; only that there are three bending arms from an outward point in a single direction; this is all that 'Valknut' variant consists of. Nagelfar 04:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

 * You certainly talk a lot, but you don't appear to excel in the ability to give clear answers to simple questions. What website was it that you saw this symbol on?  Furthermore, having three-fold rotational symmetry without reflectional symmetries is certainly a necessary condition for being a Triskelion, but it's by no means a sufficient condition for being a Triskelion -- otherwise many things (such as the Borromean rings and the Diana de Poitiers crescents emblem) which are not in fact usually called "triskelions" would then qualify.  And pretty much by your own admission, you don't have enough understanding of the relevant mathematical concepts to understand when you're writing a mathematically-true sentence and when you're writing mathematical gibberish. AnonMoos 06:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

 * The website is defunct, probably offline for nearly 10 years  (& I know some other pages). About the "definition" of a triskelion, this is POV on your part. Three part rotational symmetry, and a center emanating point (axis) is all that is quite logically by anyone standards needed for something to be a triskelion; this disqualifies true knots of any kind; and anything without a center axis (Borromean rings, emblem of Diane de Poitiers). Because I asked you for different technical terminology regarding knot variants does not mean I lack the common sense to understand what qualifies any other designs to be categorized by definitional standards. There is no reason for the Valknut article to be linked to "triskelion", only that there was a symbol variant used that forms a triskelion, and then that is covered in the article. About supposedly not "writing a mathematically-true sentence" (as if literariness or philology had anything to do with math structure), this page has nothing to do with needing to conform to mathematical terminology; just dictionary terminology; I don't see a "mathematics" category tagged to it; where it links and references mathematics it has always been true to them; always, on every edit of this page. Maybe it gave you the wrong taxonomical assumptions, but the structuring posed no actual logistically fallacious content. Nagelfar 16:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

And furthermore...
What is "In terms not of true knots" even supposed to mean??? The individual words are certainly English, but it really doesn't add up to a meaningful clause. AnonMoos 06:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

 * It means; in terms (that is, 'wordings' or 'labelings') which relate not to "true" (meaning; classicially taxonomical classifications of) "knots" (since Val'knut' is a name only). It is perfectly viable English in every sense. Nagelfar 16:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Why not confine yourself to what you know
You obviously know something about Scandinavian placenames etc., so why not concentrate your efforts in areas where you can make a useful contribution (as opposed to geometry, which does not seem to be one of those areas)? AnonMoos 07:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm making a useful contribution here but you seem to want to constantly fight it over what is in my opinion very weak arguments over spurious semantics. Nagelfar 16:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

And please; "or introduce one person's own floundering improvised ad-hoc terminology ("with gaps between the knot links" etc. etc.) instead of standard accepted conventional terminology." This is wikipedia reword it to conform to whichever way you think is best, rather than simply remove a truism about the topology & historic difference between instances of the image that the article is about. Reverting rather than editing comes across as lazy and it can quite frankly be destructive. Here is the line Besides these differences between variants of Valknuts, each of these can further be separated into Valknuts with gaps between the knot links (or just in the center), and closed contiguous Valknuts (c.f. for the former the Tängelgarda stone & c.f. for the latter the Lärbro stone.) I challenge you to better it, and add it to the article. Otherwise state your extact reasoning for continuing to remove it Nagelfar 17:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the dichotomy of our different approach to this article, AnonMoos, may be summed in you reverting the Snoldelev Stone internal link with that of the triskelion. You see the page from a purely symbolistic/mathematical angle, whereas I see it from a cultural importance angle. It's occurrence in popular culture, the meanings imbued to it etc. How it actually relates and our difference in vision for article has to be resolved on those terms. Nagelfar 17:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Images wrong?
I think the image for the Borromean rings and the image for the 3-chain should be switched. The gray and blue triangle in the present "Borromean rings" image are disconnected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.11.184.31 (talk) 09:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

 * None of the three loops in any Borromean rings configuration is ever "connected" in the sense of a Hopf link. See Borromean rings article... AnonMoos (talk) 02:09, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

ASCII art Valknut
 /\        /  \        / /\ \  /\       / /  \ \/  \      / / /\ \ \/\ \     / / /  \/\ \ \ \    / / / /\/ /\ \ \ \   / / / / / /\ \ \ \ \  / / / / / /\ \ \ \ \ \ / /_/ /_/_/__\ \_\ \ \ \ /___/ /________\ \___\ \ \   / / / /______\_\_____\ \  / / /____________________\ / /______________\ \ /____________________\

Just because I saved this from some time ago and thought it should live on in some form to someone or several (potentially) who perhaps maybe a use for it. Nagelfar (talk) 08:35, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Modern use.
How much stuff do you want here? Off the top of my head I can think of another two examples: the Swedish metal band Amon Amarth's 2006 album With Oden on Our Side has the valknut as the background of the album artwork, and the 'barbarian invasion' expansion to the computer game Rome Total War has it as the faction symbol for the Alemanni, but I don't know how important or relevant those are. If anyone's interested they could put them in I suppose130.216.234.125 (talk) 04:04, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Does it exist or not?
Can somebody please put informations from this source to the article? Dominikmatus (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Everything in that post has been covered here for around half a decade now The article's title is pure sensationalism and nothing in the post is news. :bloodofox: (talk) 20:36, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
 * As the author of the article in question I would like to just make a few points: This was not common knowledge in the general (English speaking) populace prior to my article (which has since become quite influential). I base it on the groundwork on Tom Hellers, and I was the first person as far as I know to present some of his points in English to a wider audience, though they were widely known in scholarly circles. So I can live with the fact that I am not cited (even though I do present things that have not been, as you say covered for "half a decade now"). What is inexcusable however is that Heller's work is not, and that the inaccuracies still standing in this article are corrected.
 * As for the title of the article: Obviously the symbol itself exists, but the name is purely a modern projection based on weak judgement by early scholarship who had no reason to believe their off-hand terminology would spawn entire interpretational paradigms reproduced here. Brutenorse (talk) 04:42, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: HUM 202 - Introduction to Mythology
— Assignment last updated by Berserkz (talk) 16:36, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: College Composition II
— Assignment last updated by Lindseybean28 (talk) 21:26, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Valknut


text:
Talk:The Moon in mythology

I would like to know wich cultures believed that the moon died each night??? I've never heard of this, other than on a few pages on the Internet.

 * My fault: I moved text here from Moon to get this stub going: In ancient times, it was not uncommon for cultures to believe that the Moon died each night, thus descending into the underworld; other cultures believed that the Moon chased the Sun (and vice-versa). If any of this can be corroborated, re-edit it into the article. --Wetman 00:00, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Disputed marginal text re: Great Goddess
I have removed here for discussion both versions of the following text:
 * A. "While the Great Goddess in prehistoric cultures of Anatolia and the Levant and in the Aegean (a figure taken up by Neopaganism) may have had links to the moon, her connections to Hera-Demeter-Athena are not simple equivalencies. Artemis is not simply a later Selene. It is important to note again that most of the oldest civilizations mentioned above had male lunar deities, and it was only later cultures — the classical ones most people are familiar with — that featured strong female moon goddesses."

 * B "While many Neopagan authors and feminist scholars claim that there was an original Great Goddess in prehistoric cultures that was linked to the moon and formed the basis of later religions, the Great Goddess figure is highly speculative and not a proven concept. It is important to note that most of the oldest civilizations mentioned above had male lunar deities, and it was only later cultures — the classical ones most people are familiar with — that featured strong female moon goddesses." (inserted by User:DreamGuy with the remark "It's not "neutral" to declare that the Great Goddess was an actual belief that influenced later ones, as it's an unproven theoretical concept, one that actually is contradicted by the evidence.")

The problems: the Great Goddess as an "unproven theoretical concept"; attributing the "concept" to "feminist scholars"; unnecessarily vague reference to "prehistoric cultures"; attributed linking "the basis of later religions" ( carefully eliminated in A); the unspecified "contradictory evidence".

The educated reader may detect a tone of caution in A, as I was careful to skirt all unpleasant encounters and include as much of DreamGuy's recent edits as absolutely possible. The reader must decide whether sufficient caution has accompanied the assertions that are made in A. From personal experience, I expect little rational discussion from this well-documented Problem User, whose manipulative usage of the phrase "NPOV" has debased it for the rest of us. --Wetman 23:22, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

(Wetman has dropped this entry from his Watchlist. Without an atmosphere of contention, User:DreamGuy, lacking authentic information or concerns, will quickly lose interest in this subject, experience has shown.) Unsigned comment from User:Wetman

 * Actually, experience has shown that User:Wetman has a long history of launching into personal attacks when changes are made to articles he controbuted to, and that it's actually when he takes it off his watch list and stops making reverts and childish insults that the contention goes away and progress can be made on an article. See Melusine for the example previous to this one where he threw a fit, tossed some insults and stomped off instead of trying to support his side with scholarly references. Yes, the Great Goddess is an unproven theoretical concept (and one, I might add, evidence is against). That's what NPOV is all about, not assuming that this one person is right and not mentioning any criticism and so forth. DreamGuy 16:59, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

Great Goddess paragraph inaccurate and possible NPOV-problem
The following paragraph, which I see has seen debates, contains a number of inaccuracies and false accusations. I don't think it complies with the NPOV policy. As a sort of outsider in the debate between the two users let me just quickly point out some of the problems with what is in the article right now.

The paragraph:
 * "While many Neopagan authors and feminist scholars claim that there was an original Great Goddess in prehistoric cultures that was linked to the moon and formed the basis of later religions, the Great Goddess figure is highly speculative and not a proven concept. It is important to note that most of the oldest civilizations mentioned above had male lunar deities, and it was only later cultures — the classical ones most people are familiar with — that featured strong female moon goddesses."

The problems with the paragraph:

1. The concept of the Great Goddess has not been simply "claimed" by some Neo-Pagans and feminist scholars (I would like to see some names to support this, for a start). There is a number of religious historians and scholars that have researched the topic, and their research can not be ignored saying they are not more than claims.
 * a. Just out of the respected academic researchers I know personally there are two who have spent years with the Great Goddess, notably Károly Falvay, who had released two books on the Hungarian mythological appearance of a Great Mother and how it links to other cultures of the world, which was based on decades of research. Whether or not his books are largely supported or not in the scientific community, they exist.
 * b. There is a number of archeological finds that the researchers of the Great Goddess argue with (just a few examples: the 22,000BC French cave-embossment with a Goddess-figure holding a bull's horn/waxing moon with 13 indentations, the even older moon calendar dug up in Hungary around 2003, a number of neolithic Goddess-statuettes from around Europe, etc.).

What I'm saying is not to argue that the Great Goddess existed, but it is to argue that there has been notable academic research that cannot be put aside.

2. Saying that the Great Goddess-concept is "highly speculative" or as an "unproven concept" is a POV, as this is not a universally decided academic stance. The reason for this, as one of the cultural anthropologers I've worked with tells me, is that the number of archeological finds from the neolithic era is so little that almost anything said is speculative. The truth is that based upon the findings up until this point we cannot determine whether there was a Great Goddess or not, and there is not enough evidence to support either claims, so the question should not be treated like that.

Conclusion:

There have been many debates over the figure of the Great Goddess and the aim of a Wikipedia article is not to stand on one of the sides based on three sentences of a paragraph. I believe that deciding the question whether the Great Goddess had existed or not is not to be carried out in this article. Rather, it would have to describe that there is such a notion and leave the debate to the experts -- the debate may be presented but not a conclusion like there is one now -- that is breaking NPOV.

-- AdamDobay 13:32, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Could someone here help with the page Moon?
I'm trying to improve the topic Moon, and one of the weak points is the discussion under the heading "Human understanding of the Moon". I think there needs to be more detail here, perhaps its own subsection, describing lunar mythology, etc. Is anyone here interested in writing a paragraph or two on this subject? Lunokhod 10:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Not Much Here
This page isn't very extensive. There is a list on Wikipedia of lunar deities, which I will add as a link. I'd like to do some research and come back later to improve the page. Cami Solomon (talk) 12:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Merge
I propose that this page be merged into Lunar deity. It seems to me to be about the same topic.Neelmack (talk) 20:20, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

title: Talk:The Moon in mythology


text:
Foxfire

Foxfire, also called fairy fire and chimpanzee fire, is the bioluminescence created by some species of fungi present in decaying wood. The bluish-green glow is attributed to a luciferase, an oxidative enzyme, which emits light as it reacts with a luciferin. The phenomenon has been known since ancient times, with its source determined in 1823.

Description
Foxfire is the bioluminescence created by some species of fungi present in decaying wood. It occurs in a number of species, including Panellus stipticus, Omphalotus olearius and Omphalotus nidiformis. The bluish-green glow is attributed to luciferin, which emits light after oxidation catalyzed by the enzyme luciferase. Some believe that the light attracts insects to spread spores, or acts as a warning to hungry animals, like the bright colors exhibited by some poisonous or unpalatable animal species. Although generally very dim, in some cases foxfire is bright enough to read by.

History
The oldest recorded documentation of foxfire is from 382 B.C., by Aristotle, whose notes refer to a light that, unlike fire, was cold to the touch. The Roman thinker Pliny the Elder also mentioned glowing wood in olive groves.

Foxfire was used to illuminate the needles on the barometer and the compass of Turtle, an early submarine. This is commonly thought to have been suggested by Benjamin Franklin; a reading of the correspondence from Benjamin Gale, however, shows that Benjamin Franklin was only consulted for alternative forms of lighting when the cold temperatures rendered the foxfire inactive.

After many more literary references to foxfire by early scientists and naturalists, its cause was discovered in 1823. The glow emitted from wooden support beams in mines was examined, and it was found that the luminescence came from fungal growth.

The "fox" in foxfire may derive from the Old French word, meaning "false", rather than from the name of the animal. The association of foxes with such lights is widespread, however, and occurs also in Japanese folklore.

title: Foxfire


text:
Talk:Chesil Beach

Tombolo?
"the largest tombolo in the world"? At 29 km long, 200 metre wide? The Aupouri Peninsula is a considerably bigger tombolo than this, for one. Nurg 09:26, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC) ---

i disagree because my geography teacher said it was a tombolo ---

I refer to a response I gave on Talk:Isle of Portland :- Some people also describe Portland as a tombolo (like my old High School Geography teachers from a good few years ago!), however this is also incorrect, as Chesil Beach is the tombolo, not Portland. A tombolo is defined as a sand or shingle bar which connects an island to the mainland, so hence that is what Chesil Beach is, not Portland.

Somewhat confusingly, the feature is still more unusual than that, however, as Chesil Beach is not a true tombolo (which formed by wave refraction) but is more likely to be a barrier beach or a bar, formed by sea level rise, which just happened to join onto Portland at one end.

There is also some evidence to show that the land to the immediate east of Chesil Beach, upon which Portland Beach road is built, may have been formed by a second tombolo, making Portland still even more unusual. This information can be found on http://www.soton.ac.uk/~imw/portharb.htm, along with any other information to clarify this quite complex and interesting subject.

It is always annoying when tourist guides write about Portland, and use phrases like ...'almost an island'... or ...'explore the 'island' of Portland'... Those people should do some research! (Rossportland 20:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC))

For views on what the second tombolo looked like 100 years ago go to www.chesilbeach.org/pictures/postcards. Regrettably all trace of this tombolo has now been submerged beneath the railway line and the heliport. 212.183.134.130 (talk) 19:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Template problem
The template that was in use on this article, "Infobox UK feature", was having problems properly wrapping text when images were involved, (images stacked immediately under the infobox should display underneath the box with the text to the left from the top of the page, but the text wasn't being displayed until the infobox ended, causing lots of whitespace), so I replaced it with "Infobox UK place". I put the old template into a comment and left it at the top of the page, in case the problem gets fixed, in which case theold template can easily be restored. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 20:46, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Problem identified and fixed. Due to positioning of {coord} - different in the two templates. Twiceuponatime (talk) 14:11, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikiproject Dorset assessment
I have just assessed this article as being of 'Mid' importance to the Dorset WikiProject, although I considered rating it as 'High', due to Chesil Beach being a landscape feature which is known internationally. Any comments? PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:50, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Chesil Beach. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091231080825/http://www.jurassiccoast.com:80/380/the-coast-uncovered-30/geo-highlights-226/chesil-beach-finest-barrier-beach-in-europe-616.html to http://www.jurassiccoast.com/380/the-coast-uncovered-30/geo-highlights-226/chesil-beach-finest-barrier-beach-in-europe-616.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:48, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Chesil Beach. 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/20030923131802/http://www.jncc.gov.uk:80/UKSPA/sites/England/UK9010091.htm to http://www.jncc.gov.uk/ukspa/sites/England/UK9010091.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:26, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chesil Beach


text:
Northern quoll

The northern quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus), also known as the northern native cat, the North Australian native cat or the satanellus is a carnivorous marsupial native to Australia.

Taxonomy
The northern quoll is a member of the family Dasyuridae, and is often stated to be the most distinctive Australian quoll. There are three other quoll species found in Australia, and another two species found on the island of New Guinea, all of which are currently placed in the genus Dasyurus. The northern quoll was first described in 1842 by naturalist and author John Gould, who gave it the specific epithet hallucatus, indicating that it has a notable first digit. This species has sometimes been placed in a separate genus, Satanellus.

Four distinct morphological forms of the northern quoll were recognised in the 1920s, however more recent population genomic analysis has shown that these forms do not conform to the underlying genetic differentiation shown across the species distribution .Three broad population genomic clusters are present in the species, which broadly correspond to populations in the regions of Queensland, Northern Territory and Western Australia. This population genomic structure conforms to known biogeographic barriers across northern Australia, including the Carpentarian Gap and Ord Arid Region. Finer scale population structure shows differentiation of the Groote Eylandt and Pilbara populations of quolls.

Life history
The northern quoll is the smallest of the four Australian quoll species. Females are smaller than males, with adult females weighing between 350 and 690 g and adult males 540 and 1120 g. Head and body length ranges from 27 – for adult males and 25 – for adult females. The tail length ranges between 20 and 35 cm.

Northern quolls feed primarily on invertebrates, but also consume fleshy fruit (particularly figs), and a wide range of vertebrates, including small mammals, birds, lizards, snakes, and frogs. They also scavenge on roadkills, around campsites, and in garbage tins.

A remarkable feature of this species is that the males show complete die-off after mating, leaving the females to raise the young alone. Females have eight teats in a pouch, but apparently give birth to more than eight young which must wriggle their way to the pouch and compete for a teat to survive. In a study in Western Australia's Kimberley region, the testosterone levels of males peaked in July, and females gave birth in July or August.

In the wild, males live for about one year, while the maximum recorded for a wild female was about three years of age. In rocky habitats, the lifespan of both sexes appears to be increased to two or three years, and individuals are larger than those living in savanna habitats, possibly due to better habitat and reduced predation.

A February 2023 study published in Royal Society Open Science found that "reduced resting behaviour among males could explain the post-breeding death as the deterioration in appearance reflects that reported for sleep-deprived rodents."

Range and habitat
The northern quoll occurs from the Pilbara region of Western Australia across the Northern Territory to south east Queensland. Their historical range extended uninterrupted from S.E Queensland to the Kimberley in Western Australia. There are several disjunct populations. This quoll species is most abundant in rocky ranges and open eucalypt forest. Analysis of occurrence records for the species shows that rocky areas are important for the species.

Northern quolls have declined substantially since European colonisation of Australia, with one study in the Northern Territory finding a roughly 60% contraction in their extent of occurrence. Of the nine species analysed, this decline was only exceeded by that of the brush-tailed rabbit-rat, the sole remaining species in the genus Conilurus. In the Northern Territory, northern quolls appear to be declining towards geographic areas of higher vegetation complexity, lower elevation, and milder temperatures, suggesting that, in these areas, threats may be mediated or better tolerated.

More geographically isolated populations, such as those on islands, have very small contributions to overall genetic diversity within the species, and also show relatively high levels of inbreeding compared to mainland populations.

Conservation status
The northern quoll is currently classified as Endangered by the IUCN.

The species is now absent from many parts of its former range, particularly the savanna country. In 2005 it was listed as Endangered under Australian Commonwealth legislation (EPBC Act). Threats are predation by feral cats, dingoes and foxes, particularly after fire or grazing has removed protective ground cover. Destruction, degradation, and fragmentation of the quoll's habitat due to land clearing, grazing, pasture improvement, and mining are also significant. Quolls are also susceptible to being run over on roads.

The current major threat to the northern quoll in the northern and western portion of its range is the spread of cane toads. Like many other native Australian species, northern quolls are poisoned after eating or mouthing cane toads. Cane toads were originally introduced in Queensland, but have now occupied the Top End of the Northern Territory, including Kakadu National Park and the Darwin area, and entered the Kimberley region of Western Australia, where they are established around Kununurra and Lake Argyle.

Immediately after cane toad invasion of Kakadu, quolls became extinct at one study site and declined from 45 individuals to five at another site. The northern quoll may cease to exist in most areas in the Top End once the cane toad population completely overlaps the northern quoll's range. However, remnant populations of northern quolls still persist in Queensland where cane toads have been present for decades. These persisting Queensland quoll populations are naturally toad averse (as observed on remote cameras). One of the northern quoll populations studied in Kakadu during the recent cane toad invasion, had a few individuals survive the invasion. These individuals were, likely similar to the Queensland quolls, genetically averse to the toads. In 2003, to help protect northern quolls, numerous quolls were transferred to the toad-free English Company Islands (Astell and Pobassoo Islands), off the coast of Arnhem Land. Quolls thrived on these islands, with an estimated population of 2193 female northern quolls on Astell Island by 2014. In 2017, quolls from Astell Island were collected, trained via conditioned taste aversion to avoid attacking cane toads and reintroduced to Kakadu National Park. This reintroduction attempt saw the release both toad-trained (22) and toad-naive (9) northern quolls to an area of Kakadu that previous had quolls but where they had recently gone locally extinct due to the invasion of cane toads. Although the toad-trained quolls survived longer than those that received no toad training, ultimately this reintroduction population rapidly went extinct because of dingo predation. Subsequently, research comparing antipredator behaviours of quolls from Astell Island and mainland Queensland determined that quolls conserved on this island had lost their ability to recognise and avoid both dingo and cats, predators they have co-evolved with on mainland Australia for at least 3500 and 150 years respectively. This study suggests that animals conserved in complete isolation from predators can rapidly lose evolved antipredator behaviours, in this case in only 13 generations, when they are no longer maintained via natural selection.

Research has shown that the conservation of a single population, or even several populations, will not prevent the loss of substantial amounts of genomic variation and adaptive capacity across the species. To conserve more than 90% of the genetic diversity of the species, at least eight separate populations of northern quolls need to be conserved, which requires conservation of populations in Queensland, the Northern Territory, and Western Australia.

In 2022, Territory Natural Resource Management (TRM) partnered with Australian Wildlife Conservancy, James Cook University, Gulf Savannah NRM, and Western Yalanji to trial conservation methods, including artificial dens for quolls, genetic research and controlled burn programs. The project received grant funding from the Australian Government’s Environment Restoration Fund.

In Aboriginal language and culture
The Northern Quoll is known as njanjma in the Indigenous Kundjeyhmi, Kundedjnjenghmi and Mayali languages, djabbo in Kunwinjku,  and wijingarri in Wunambal. The Kunwinjku people of Western Arnhem Land (Northern Territory) regard djabbo as "good tucker".

General references

 * Braithwaite, R.W. & R.J. Begg (1995), "Northern Quoll", in Strahan, Ronald, The Mammals of Australia, Reed Books
 * Oakwood, M. 2000. Reproduction and demography of the northern quoll, Dasyurus hallucatus, in the lowland savanna of northern Australia. Australian Journal of Zoology 48, 519–539.
 * Oakwood, M. and Spratt, D. 2000. Parasites of the northern quoll, Dasyurus hallucatus (Marsupialia: Dasyuridae) in tropical savanna, Northern Territory. Australian Journal of Zoology 48, 79–90.
 * Oakwood, M., Bradley, AJ., and Cockburn, A. 2001. Semelparity in a large marsupial. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B. 268, 407–411.
 * Oakwood, M. 2004. Death after sex. Biologist 51, 5–8.
 * Oakwood, M. 2004. Case of the disappearing spots. Nature Australia 26, 26–35.

title: Northern quoll


text:
Mérona

Mérona is a commune in the Jura department in Bourgogne-Franche-Comté in eastern France.

title: Mérona


text:
John McAuley Palmer

John McAuley Palmer may refer to:

 * John M. Palmer (politician) (1817–1900), American politician, governor of Illinois
 * John McAuley Palmer (general) (1870–1955), his grandson

title: John McAuley Palmer


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IQ scores

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

This is an unreliable compilation, starting with a hypothetical 250-300 IQ for Sidis, which is not credible or even meaningful. The original poster won't engage on the talk page, or via user talk. I think there is little factual content here; we could have an article about how people come up with 165 for Beethoven, but a list like this is below WP's standards. Just delete. Charles Matthews 09:34, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Coolgamer 00:33, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete --Blade Hirato 09:40, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not an encyclopedia article.   — Asbestos | Talk 14:06, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fantasy. (BTW, Watson and Crick had 120 and 110 IQ's.  There are so many weaknesses of the IQ test that it's not even funny, and, in particular, many of the great geniuses would absolutely not have had high IQ's, as they would have had biased intelligence ("special talent"), where they'd have pegged every verbal, for example, and been poor on the spatial relations, or pegged the math and been average on verbal, and that would have given them a 10/10 on their special section (with the potential to have gotten 50/50, but only 10 were asked) and 5/10 on another and, therefore, not the vaunted 200 or 185, etc.). Geogre 15:16, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what the current status of the research is, but I once read a book by a psychologist who had what he called a "structure of intellect model." He had worked out a 6 x 6 x 6 matrix of nameable mental-capability-thingies, and basically his whole program of research consisted of working through all 216 of these capabilities, devising tests for them, and showing that they actually measured something separate from and uncorrelated with all the others. At the time I read the book I think he had verified more than half of them; that is, he had tagged, isolated, and designed tests for over a hundred different, distinct uncorrelated mental abilities. All of which were clearly related to what people think of as "intelligence" (not "emotional intelligence" or anything). In other words, according to him, you'd need a couple of hundred separate scores to characterize someone's intelligence adequately. Not quite what Spearman had in mind. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 02:55, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Concur with Geogre.  [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 15:21, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Terminate with extreme prejudice Unencyclopaedic drivel. Sjc 15:27, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. [[User:Norm|Norman Rogers\talk]] 15:56, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect to IQ. --LeeHunter 16:22, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete as unverifiable, unless verifiable sources are provided for all included entries. Given that IQ scores are generally considered confidential, it is hard to believe that many of them could be verified. "Estimated IQ" is just silly. I believe the consensus view is that the IQ test truly does measure something, there's a whole subdiscipline of psychology devoted to statistical validation of test instruments. The debate is to whether what it measures should a) be called "intelligence," or b) is of any value whatsoever for anything. But it is meaningless to talk about the IQ of a person to whom the test has not been administered. It would make just as much sense to read biographies of Swedenborg, Newton, Voltaire etc. and tabulate their estimated penis lengths based on one's judgement of their virility. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 16:26, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC) P. S. Don't IQ tests have ceilings way below 200? I thought that psychologists didn't consider any score over a number specific to the test to be reliable, and that for most tests that number was surprisingly low, like 160. Is this a list of "what I think their IQ scores would be if IQ tests were different from what IQ tests actually are?" [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 16:35, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: The Stanford Binet tops at 145, I believe.  Most go to 150.  I think there was an innovative one that went to 180.  The "200" is for "off the chart."  There may be one IQ test somewhere that goes to 200, just like Spinal Tap's amps went to 11, but the same question applies:  why not have it go to 150 and have 150 be the top?  (Since it's supposed to be mental age vs. chronological age in one standard, one wonders what a person with a 200 IQ is supposed to be:  "I'm 30, but I have the mental age of someone who has been dead for 10 years.")  Geogre 17:48, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Disagreeing with comment, agreeing with deletion. IQ as mental age vs. chronological age only holds up to a certain age (14 years, 3 months or so). After that it's just a measure of how far someone is away from the mean - every 20 (or 30?) points is one standard deviation. - Andre Engels 02:25, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless evidence is provided that this is any more accurate than the U.S. Presidents IQ hoax. Susvolans (pigs can fly) 17:38, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete. Good catch by lister. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 19:15, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Madonna has a 140 IQ? Gimme a break. -- Scott $e^{i \pi} \,\!$ 20:29, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Without sources this is useless. DCEdwards1966 20:55, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, totally unverifiable. As far as scores over 200, the Guiness book of records (at least the 1989 edition I had as a kid) listed Marilyn vos Savant as having an IQ of 228, the highest ever recorded. So obviously there are some tests that go well above 200. Shane King 23:18, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete Madonna's IQ is pretty high, actually, but IQ scores are easily misinterpreted and a list with scores out of context and without verifiable sources is at best misleading. Wyss 23:36, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * If any of these numbers are valid, then it might be interesting to merge them into the IQ page, but I doubt they are, and the list itself isn't inspiring, so I vote delete. BTW I took a "high IQ test" when I was a child and recorded an IQ of 160. Sadly, my more recent tests results have been much less inspiring. [[User:GeorgeStepanek|GeorgeStepanek\talk ]] 00:28, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: fantasy. Hey, how about Madonna's GRE scores? Now that is something we all want to know about. Wile E. Heresiarch 01:36, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unverifiable and ultimately pointless list. Though I am curious about how well Aslee Simpson did on the New York State Bar Exam. --Calton 04:11, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect to IQ. On a side note, I find it hard to belive that Nathan Leopold is smarter than Ted Kaczynski and that Bill Clinton is smarter than Al Gore. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality/talk]] 04:28, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Unverifiable, and, in some cases, pretty clearly bogus. Delete or redirect to IQ (no merge, obviously). -R. fiend 08:11, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: even if it could be verified, it seems kind of biased Lectonar 13:47, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 19:25, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * delete but I am sure the Stanford-Binet test goes at least to 149 FWIW Pedant 00:30, 2004 Dec 11 (UTC)

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


text:
Sidis

Sidis may refer to:

 * Boris Sidis (1867–1923), psychologist, psychiatrist, and psychopathologist, father of William James Sidis
 * William James Sidis (1898–1944), eccentric genius and child prodigy, son of Boris
 * Sidis (genus), a genus of lady beetles, in the family Coccinellidae
 * The Sidi or Siddi, an Indian and Pakistani ethnic group of mainly East African descent
 * Semi-Inclusive Deep Inelastic Scattering, a process in high energy particle physics.

title: Sidis


text:
Talk:Seoul Women's University

Fair use rationale for Image:SWU-logo-small-106x89.gif
Image:SWU-logo-small-106x89.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

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

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

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:SWU-logo-small-106x89.gif
Image:SWU-logo-small-106x89.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

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

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

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Seoul Women's University. 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/20061230110436/http://swell.swu.ac.kr/e_swell/content/english/e_info01.asp to http://swell.swu.ac.kr/e_swell/content/english/e_info01.asp

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) 23:52, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Seoul Women's University