text:
Bugs Bunny Gets the Boid

Bugs Bunny Gets the Boid is a 1942 Merrie Melodies cartoon, directed by Bob Clampett, produced by Leon Schlesinger, and released to theatres by Warner Bros. Pictures. It marks the first appearance of Beaky Buzzard (named "Killer" in this story) in a Warner Bros. short.

The title is a Brooklyn-accented way of saying "gets the bird", which can refer to an obscene gesture, or as simply the "Bronx cheer"; in this case, it is also used metaphorically, as Bugs "gets" the bird (Beaky) by playing a trick.

Plot
A shy and slow buzzard named Killer is tasked by his mother to catch dinner, specifically a rabbit. Killer spots Bugs Bunny and attempts to catch him, but Bugs outsmarts him, causing Killer to crash and become unable to move or speak. Bugs, emerging from his rabbit hole, engages in playful banter with Killer, who eventually reveals his intention to have Bugs for dinner. Bugs, in a playful disguise, teases and embarrasses Killer, leading to a chase.

During the chase, Killer briefly captures Bugs but is tricked into releasing him. Bugs, using clever tactics, makes it appear as though he has died, leading Killer to believe he has killed Bugs. Bugs plays along, pretending to sob and then revealing himself unharmed. The two characters engage in a playful dance, jitterbugging together. After a spin, Beaky ends up in the same predicament Bugs initially feigned, buried in the ground. Killer's mother arrives, initially thinking Bugs harmed her son, but Bugs reassures her and pulls Killer out, revealing he is unharmed.

Relieved and grateful, Beaky's mother abandons her plan to eat Bugs and instead declares him a hero, kissing him. Bugs, mimicking Beaky's shyness and embarrassment, blushes in response.

Voice cast

 * Mel Blanc as Bugs Bunny and Young Buzzards
 * Kent Rogers as Killer
 * Sara Berner as Mama Buzzard

Reception
Charles Carney, former Warner Bros. writer and editor, writes, "Clampett, one of the midwives of Bugs's deepening character, proceeds at his trademark breakneck speed... Bugs would go on to outwit a catalog of adversaries throughout the years, from the merely dumb to the diabolical. But his struggles with Killer... remain a classic of two memorable young characters in a comic battle for survival."

A contemporary review in The Film Daily said, "More hilarious adventures of Bugs Bunny are recorded herein to the complete satisfaction of young and old... This Technicolor cartoon is loaded with solid laughs."

Home media
Bugs Bunny Gets the Boid was released on DVD in 2003 as part of Looney Tunes Golden Collection: Volume 1, the first Spotlight Collection and Looney Tunes Platinum Collection: Volume 2.

Having been theatrically released alongside the 1942 film Yankee Doodle Dandy, it has been also included on that DVD.

title: Bugs Bunny Gets the Boid


text:
World Wrestling All-Stars

World Wrestling All-Stars (WWA) was a professional wrestling promotion founded by Australian concert promoter Andrew McManus in 2001. The promotion was operated by McManus' International Touring Company. WWA was one of several promotions to come into existence shortly after the closings of Extreme Championship Wrestling (ECW) and World Championship Wrestling (WCW). The company was in existence from October 2001 to May 2003.

History
WWA recruited former WCW ring announcer Jeremy Borash as booker and head of talent for its shows. He also acted as ring announcer and commentator for their shows. Borash was recommended to the WWA by Vince Russo, who was not able to work with the company as originally planned. WWA focused on signing the wrestlers that did not get signed by the World Wrestling Federation (WWF) after the WWF-WCW merger. They aimed to fill the gap left by the demise of World Championship Wrestling and Extreme Championship Wrestling and provide an alternative to the World Wrestling Federation (now known as World Wrestling Entertainment).

Many popular former WWF and WCW wrestlers wrestled for the company during its nearly two-year existence. These included Jeff Jarrett, Road Dogg, Scott Steiner, Sting, Psicosis, Devon Storm, Juventud Guerrera, Rick Steiner, Jerry Lynn, Shane Douglas, Buff Bagwell, Lex Luger, Stevie Ray, Sabu and Disco Inferno.

They also brought in relatively unknown wrestlers, many of whom went on to make names for themselves for other promotions like TNA. These included Low Ki, A.J. Styles, Christopher Daniels, Frankie Kazarian, Shark Boy, and Nathan Jones (known as "the Colossus of Boggo Road). Further big names like Kevin Nash, Scott Hall, and Randy Savage were scheduled to appear for WWA at some point but their appearances did not happen. The promotion had three in ring commissioners during its time, namely Bret Hart, Sid Vicious and Mike Sanders.

First Tour and the Inception PPV
The WWA held its first tour in October 2001, covering dates across Australia. During this time the Road Dogg defeated Jeff Jarrett to become the first WWA World Champion. However, the title was then vacated to allow for it to be competed for during a title tournament at their first PPV, the Inception. This tournament involved 4 quarterfinals matches (one of which was a battle royal), 2 semi-finals and a final held inside a steel cage.

This debut PPV was held inside a full-sized arena in Sydney and production values were of a decent standard. However, the event was universally panned by the critics for being short at 2 hours overall and various matches being too short to be able to run to their full potential. The use of WCW style comic story lines also did little to endear themselves to the viewing public as a serious alternative to the WWF.

Some such comic storylines involved Australian kids TV performers, The Fruits in suits (who were a parody of The Bananas in Pyjamas), interfering in matches and former WCW joke team Lenny Lane and Lodi being allowed to compete in the semi-final after an injury forced Juventud Guerrera to withdraw. The final of the title tournament saw the Road Dogg face Jeff Jarrett. Commissioner Bret Hart was at ringside for the match and interfered on a number of occasions to prevent anyone winning the match using his sharpshooter move. In the end Jarrett won the match with his trademark guitar shot and became the champion.

UK and Ireland Tour
Next the WWA toured the UK and Ireland in December 2001. This tour largely included the same line up as the Inception PPV tour. Additions to the card were former WCW World Heavyweight Champion Scott Steiner and former WWF tag team competitor Brian Christopher. Although the events drew several thousand fans at times the WWA failed to consistently draw large crowds. The main event on this tour was usually Jeff Jarrett versus Road Dogg versus Scott Steiner for the title in a three-way dance. Jarrett successfully defended his title each time.

Revolution PPV
On 24 February 2002, the WWA held its second PPV, The Revolution. It was the promotion's first and only event to take place in the USA.

This event took place in the Aladdin Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada. This was a smaller venue, which reflected upon the look and style of the show.

Months before the event, initial advertisements plugged the reunion of Scott Hall and Kevin Nash. However, this did not happen due to both men signing contracts to return to the WWF. Then Randy Savage was advertised to be appearing in the main event against Jeff Jarrett for the WWA Heavyweight Championship. Savage backed out of the event during the weekend and this wasn't announced until the pre-show where a big red "X" and the text "NOT APPEARING" was overlaid on all images of Savage. Road Dogg, also heavily advertised for this show, did not appear either although this was not told to the fans during the pre-show. Andrew McManus opened the show with a prepared statement in his office, confirming that Savage would not be appearing, leading to some fans feeling cheated. Bret Hart appeared after the opening match as the WWA Commissioner. He announced to the live crowd that Randy Savage was not at the show and was being replaced in the main event by Brian Christopher.

An amount of significant talent was arguably underutilized on the show. Former WCW World Tag Team Champions KroniK wrestled an unknown Native-American gimmick tag team called Native Blood and defeated them in less than five minutes. Former WCW World Heavyweight Champion Scott Steiner showed up, only to cut a quick promo and beat Disco Inferno in a two-minute match. Former ECW World Heavyweight Champion Jerry Lynn also made an appearance in a promo. This was a genuine surprise, as few knew he had been released from his WWF contract before his appearance on this show. Rick Steiner and Ernest Miller defeated Lenny and Lodi in a match that only lasted 58 seconds. Larry Zbyszko showed up to cut a promo on Vince McMahon challenging him to a fight and talking about Chris Jericho, who was WWF Champion at the time, saying that he stole Zbyszko's "Living Legend" moniker. He mocked Jericho by accusing him of "being too short to be a world champion", despite Zbyszko actually being shorter in height than Jericho himself.

Jarrett defeated Christopher in the main event to retain the title. Eddie Guerrero became the WWA International Cruiserweight Champion by defeating Juventud Guerrera and Psicosis.

Eruption PPV and Australian Tour
In April the WWA returned to Australia for a tour and to film its third PPV, The Eruption. During this tour Nathan Jones won the WWA title after winning a 4 corners match against Jeff Jarrett, Scott Steiner and Brian Christopher.

The Eruption PPV was held at the Rod Laver Arena in Melbourne, Australia. The show started with Jeff Jarrett being escorted away from the building proclaiming he would be back (Jarrett never appeared after this). It presumed this was prerecorded earlier in the week. A new Cruiserweight Champion was crowned at the show after Eddie Guerrero had returned to the WWF. A.J. Styles defeated Jerry Lynn in the tournament final to win the title. Another match of note was a cage match between Sabu and Devon Storm. Sabu won the match after leaping from the top of the cage onto Devon Storm, who was laid on top of a double deck of tables. In the main event Scott Steiner defeated Nathan Jones to win the title. He would later give up the title to sign with the WWF.

A further UK and European tour was planned for after this event. The WWA postponed the tour from May 2002 to November 2002, citing injuries to its major stars as the reason. However, it is believed that poor ticket sales may be the true reason.

Retribution PPV and European Tour
The WWA toured the UK in December 2002, filming The Retribution PPV in Glasgow Scotland. The WWA title remained vacant for the first half of the tour, with it being held up to be decided at the PPV. Mike Sanders took over as commissioner for this tour and fought Joe E. Legend each night. Memorable matches on this tour included a three-way hardcore match including Sabu, Perry Saturn and Simon Diamond.

Retribution was broadcast in February 2003. The card included nine matches and two title matches (WWA and TNA), but only ran for 1 hour 45 minutes. This was fifteen minutes shorter than the house show in Newcastle the night before, which only included six matches and no title matches.

This tour included an infamous dispute with a seemingly badly out of shape Lex Luger. He reportedly missed shows due to illness and refused to wrestle for more than five minutes in matches, despite being in the main events. He faced Sting for the vacant WWA title at the PPV. This match was poorly received and only lasted about 7 minutes, which largely involved Luger pacing around and avoiding wrestling. Luger won this match and became WWA Champion after an interference from Jeff Jarrett with his guitar. He lost this title to Sting a few days later at a house show in Zurich, Switzerland.

Final Tour and The Reckoning PPV
In May 2003, the WWA embarked on its final tour. This visited Australia and New Zealand. The Reckoning PPV was held in Auckland in front of a vocal crowd. It was the first to include replays and split screen shots. Before the PPV the decision had been made to fold the WWA, hence the titles were to be unified with the NWA and TNA titles. Chris Sabin won a four corners cruiserweight match to unify the TNA X Division and WWA Cruiserweight titles. In the main event, Sting was defeated by NWA World Heavyweight Champion Jeff Jarrett to unify the NWA and WWA World titles.

Championships

 * WWA World Heavyweight Championship – last held by Jeff Jarrett; unified with Jarrett's NWA Worlds Heavyweight Championship
 * WWA International Cruiserweight Championship – last held by Chris Sabin; unified with Sabin's TNA X Division Championship
 * WWA Hardcore Championship – Devon Storm defeated Danny Dominion in a tables match to win the title on October 25, 2001 in Wollongong, Australia. Title was then abandoned.

Male Wrestlers

 * A.J. Styles
 * Brian Adams
 * Brian Christopher
 * Bryan Clark
 * Buff Bagwell
 * Chris Sabin
 * Christopher Daniels
 * Chuckie Chaos
 * Crowbar
 * Danny Dominion
 * Disco Inferno
 * Eddie Guerrero
 * Ernest Miller
 * The Funkster
 * Gangrel
 * Ghost Walker
 * Jeff Jarrett
 * Jerry Lynn
 * Joey Legend
 * Johnny Swinger
 * Juventud Guerrera
 * Kazarian
 * Konnan
 * Lenny Lane
 * Lex Luger
 * Lodi
 * Low Ki
 * Malice
 * Mark Mercedes
 * Mike Sanders
 * Nate Webb
 * Nathan Jones
 * The Navajo Warrior
 * Norman Smiley
 * Nova
 * PCO
 * Psicosis
 * Reno
 * Rick Steiner
 * Road Dogg
 * Sabu
 * Saturn
 * Scott D'Amore
 * Scott Steiner
 * Shane Douglas
 * Shark Boy
 * Simon Diamond
 * Stevie Ray
 * Sting
 * Tony Mamaluke

Female Wrestlers

 * Adara James
 * Luna Vachon
 * Midajah
 * Queen Bea
 * The Nitro Girls
 * Violet Terossi

Non-Wrestling Performers

 * Bill Alfonso - Manager of Sabu
 * Bret Hart - 1st WWA Commissioner
 * Hiroyoshi Tenzan - Sat ringside at the WWA Revolution pay-per-view, later attacking Disco Inferno.
 * Larry Zbyszko - Made an appearance at WWA Revolution, challenging Vince McMahon to a street fight.
 * Sid Vicious - 2nd WWA Commissioner

Broadcast Team

 * David Penzer - Ring announcer
 * Mark Madden - Color commentator
 * Jeremy Borash - Play-by-Play commentator (also booker)
 * Jerry Lawler - Color commentator (also occasional wrestler)
 * Rove McManus - Interview correspondent

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

title: World Wrestling All-Stars


text:
User talk:163.41.16.249

January 2014
Hello, I'm Epicgenius. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Burns Paiute Tribe because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Epicgenius (talk) 18:38, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Klamath people. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators can block users from editing if they repeatedly vandalize. K6ka (talk | contribs) 13:41, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Burns Paiute Tribe, you may be blocked from editing. Fai zan  18:11, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This is your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Burns Paiute Tribe. -- El Hef  ( Meep? ) 18:13, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2020
Hello, I'm Everedux. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Cotton gin—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks.  Everedux  (talk)  21:59, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

May 2021
Hello, I'm Ferien. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Lassen Peak—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. --Ferien (talk) 17:55, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

September 2021
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Bethel School District (Oregon), did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Serols (talk) 17:31, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Bethel School District (Oregon). Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Serols (talk) 18:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

title: User talk:163.41.16.249


text:
Maitreya-nātha

Maitreya-nātha (c. 270–350 CE) is a name whose use was pioneered by Buddhist scholars Erich Frauwallner, Giuseppe Tucci, and Hakuju Ui to distinguish one of the three founders of the Yogachara school of Buddhist philosophy, along with Asanga and Vasubandhu. Some scholars believe this Maitreya to be a historical person in India who authored various Yogachara texts. The traditions themselves have held that it is referring to the bodhisattva Maitreya, the future buddha.

Academic views
Scholars are divided in opinion whether the name refers to a historical human teacher of Asaṅga or to the bodhisattva Maitreya. Frauwallner, Tucci and Ui proposed this as a possibility, while Eric Obermiller and Fyodor Shcherbatskoy doubted the historicity of this figure.

Modern scholars argue that many of the various texts traditionally attributed to Maitreya (and supposedly revealed to Asanga) like the Abhisamayalankara and the Ratnagotravibhaga are actually later post-Asanga texts. However, some scholars like Gareth Sparham use the name Maitreya to refer to the author of "three Maitreya texts": the Mahāyānasūtrālamkāra and its commentary, the Dharmadharmatāvibhāga, and the Madhyāntavibhāga, all which seem to be by the same author. Paul Williams writes that "it is quite possible that these other three [texts] do have a single author" and cites Frauwallner who also thought these three texts were similar. Mario D'amato dates these three "Maitreya" texts to a phase after the completion of the Bodhisattvabhumi, but before the composition of Asanga's Mahāyānasaṃgraha (which quotes the Mahāyānasūtrālamkāra as an authoritative text).

Traditional view

The Buddhist traditions themselves have always held that Asaṅga received the "Maitreya" texts from the bodhisattva Maitreya directly. Asaṅga is said to have spent many years in intense meditation, during which time tradition says that he often visited Tuṣita to receive teachings from the Maitreya. Heavens such as Tuṣita are said to be accessible through meditation. Xuanzang tells the account of these events: "In the great mango grove five or six li to the southwest of the city (Ayodhyā), there is an old monastery where Asaṅga Bodhisattva received instructions and guided the common people. At night he went up to the place of Maitreya Bodhisattva in Tuṣita Heaven to learn the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra, the Mahāyāna-sūtra-alaṃkāra-śāstra, the Madhyānta-vibhāga-śāstra, etc.; in the daytime, he lectured on the marvelous principles to a great audience."

Confusion over the idea of "supernaturally" visiting heavens may be due to the unfamiliarity of scholars with the Indian concept of heavens as being accessible through samādhi. Other advanced meditators recorded similar experiences of visiting Tuṣita Heaven at night. One such example of this is Hanshan Deqing during the Ming dynasty. In his autobiography, Hanshan describes the palace of Maitreya in Tuṣita, and hearing a lecture given by Bodhisattva Maitreya to a large group of his disciples.

Attributed works
The number of works attributed to him vary in the traditions of Tibetan Buddhism and Chinese Buddhism. In the Tibetan tradition the "five Dharmas of Maitreya" are: The Chinese tradition meanwhile maintains that the five revealed scriptures are: the Yogācārabhūmi, *Yogavibhāga [now lost], Mahāyānasūtrālamkārakā, Madhyāntavibhāga and the Vajracchedikākāvyākhyā.
 * the Yogācārabhūmi śāstra, the encyclopedic and definitive text of the Yogacara school
 * the Mahāyānasūtrālamkārakārikā, which presents the Mahāyāna path from the Yogācāra perspective
 * the Dharmadharmatāvibhāga, a short Yogācāra work discussing the distinction and correlation (vibhāga) between phenomena (dharma) and reality (dharmatā)
 * the Madhyāntavibhāgakārikā, 112 verses that are a key work in Yogācāra philosophy
 * the Abhisamayalankara, which summarizes the Prajnaparamita sūtras, which the Mādhyamaka school regards as presenting the ultimate truth
 * the Ratnagotravibhāga, also known as the Uttāratantra śāstra, a compendium of the Buddha-nature literature

title: Maitreya-nātha


text:
FM- and TV-mast Hosingen

The FM- and TV mast Hosingen is a 300-metre (985') high guyed radio mast outside the town of Hosingen, Luxembourg used for FM and TV broadcasting. It has a diameter of 2 metres (6') and was built in 1970. The FM- and TV-mast Hosingen is the tallest construction in Luxembourg and property of RTL.

Constriction
The FM- and TV-mast Hosingen carries antennas at a height of 285 metres (935'), pointed toward Germany. These antennas are used for transmitting the German-speaking program of RTL on 97,0 MHz with an ERP of 100 kW. The antennas for the transmission of the native radio station on 92,5 MHz with an ERP of 50 kW are mounted at a height of 237 metres (778'). As transmission device for both frequencies, Telefunken S 3217 transmitters with an output power of 10 kW is used. For each frequency there is also a backup transmitter installed, with an output power of 10 kW, a Telefunken S 3152.

title: FM- and TV-mast Hosingen


text:
File:Riders on the Storm.JPG

Summary
Self made.

title: File:Riders on the Storm.JPG


text:
Talk:English auxiliary verbs

Centrality
The table "English auxiliary verb paradigm" (atop the section "Auxiliary verbs versus lexical verbs") seems odd to me. For one thing, it puts auxiliary verbs ought, need and dare among the non-modal auxiliaries. For another, its distinction between "central" and "peripheral" is not accompanied by any explanation of what this "centrality" is.

The first is plain wrong. They're modal auxiliaries (or anyway they are when need and dare are auxiliary verbs at all). Easy to fix that. As for the second, whoever decided that ought, need and dare were "peripheral" auxiliary verbs may have had a reason for doing so but I don't know what it was.

I'm thinking of replacing the table with something better; however, as I dislike editing tables, I want to reduce the risk that I'll be forced to backtrack. Any objection to the removal of the "central"–"peripheral" distinction?

Incidentally, one problem faced by anyone hoping to improve this article is that while it (reasonably enough) refers to the article English modal auxiliary verbs, the latter article is horribly confused, seeming to be about English auxiliary verbs that are used for modality (a superset of English modal auxiliary verbs). Thus (just to take one example) use /jus/ (in some varieties of Standard English, a highly defective non-modal auxiliary verb, and one whose absence from the article English auxiliary verbs surprises me) is listed in English modal auxiliary verbs as a modal auxiliary verb, which it isn't. -- Hoary (talk) 08:53, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

 * No objection from me. Now I see what you meant about /just/. Somehow totally missed the fact that this was phonemic transcription.--Brett (talk) 13:40, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

 * My comment above now seems to me at least as confused as what it complains is confused. And, following CamGEL and CompGEL, I've brought back "central" as a term distinguishing the modal auxiliary verbs can, may, must, shall and will (together with their preterites) from the other modal auxiliary verbs. ("Prototypical" wouldn't be right: CamGEL points out that only can and will are prototypical.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

"Contractions and inversion"
The section "Contractions and inversion" looks like a respectable attempt to describe odd syntactic behavior -- or rather, behavior that would seem odd to anyone who hasn't realized that "negative contractions" such as haven't or wouldn't are instead negative inflected forms of the verb. For haven't and wouldn't are indeed inflected forms of have and would respectively, as explained on page 91 of The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language and as hurriedly written near the top of the section currently titled "Contracted forms" (a section that itself needs further revision and perhaps retitling).

And therefore I propose to delete the section "Contractions and inversion". Any objections to this? -- Hoary (talk) 10:02, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

 * I've deleted it. -- Hoary (talk) 07:35, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

bain't
The article tells us:
 * Bain't or bain't, apparently from "be not", is found in a number of works employing eye dialect, including J. Sheridan Le Fanu's Uncle Silas.[source] It is also found in a ballad written in Newfoundland dialect.[source]

And there are eight examples of it in this thing alone. But does the article benefit from entries for minor and obsolete dialect words? -- Hoary (talk) 12:47, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

 * I'd meant to ask whether it benefited from material about words that (i) never spread beyond nonstandard dialects and also (ii) have been obsolete for decades even in those nonstandard dialects. -- Hoary (talk) 07:39, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Contractions in the big table
"English auxiliary verb paradigm" is a handsome table, but its two columns headed "Contr." (i.e. contractions) don't and can't say as much as is said in "Unstressed and contracted forms of individual verbs". I propose to delete the two columns. Comments? Incidentally, I'm not at all confident of "Unstressed and contracted forms of individual verbs": I have a certain knack for dumb mistakes in this kind of material. -- Hoary (talk) 13:22, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

 * Tables never can say that much. But that's not their purpose. I think the contracted columns provide useful and easily accessible information without running a significant risk of confusing or misleading folks. I say keep.--Brett (talk) 17:41, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

 * Certainly the unstressed/contracted versions of the modals would need to be written up first. (English modal auxiliary verbs is currently a less than stellar article....) As for English auxiliary verbs, more needs to be added, notably the matter of how a difference between lexical and auxiliary verbs emerged. (I mean, how it emerged diachronically. But come to think of it, I start to wonder about how the difference might emerge during first language acquisition.) Perhaps I should concentrate more on needed additions to the article before looking for possible subtractions. -- Hoary (talk) 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Choices among rival "standards"
I've plonked two templates atop this article. First, Template:Use British English Oxford spelling (which I now notice redirects to Template:Use Oxford spelling, and by whichever name refers to Oxford spelling). It later occurred to me that Template:Use Canadian English (for Canadian English) might have been (and might be) more appropriate. (The two "standards", Oxford and Canadian, seem to be pretty much the same.)

Secondly, Template:Use dmy dates (which should be self-explanatory).

Hope they're both OK. -- Hoary (talk) 21:58, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:English auxiliary verbs


text: User talk:165.138.140.248

title: User talk:165.138.140.248


text:
File:MoonrakerMovieNovel.jpg

Summary
James Bond 007 - James Bond and Moonraker

© 1979 Triad/Panther (paperback).

Source: Image scanned and uploaded by 23skidoo.

Rationale for "fair use" in the article Moonraker :

No free or public domain images have been located for this book.

This image is used on various websites, and has been published in several books, so use on Wikipedia does not make it significantly more accessible or visible than it already is. It does not detract from the original and is used for information purposes only.

title: File:MoonrakerMovieNovel.jpg


text: User talk:193.136.33.221

title: User talk:193.136.33.221


text:
Mel Hurtig

Mel Hurtig (June 24, 1932 – August 3, 2016) was a Canadian publisher, author, political activist, and political candidate. He was president of the Edmonton Art Gallery. He described himself as a Canadian nationalist, while he also wrote several books critical of Canadian government policy.

Early life and education
Hurtig was born in Edmonton, Alberta, on 24 June 1932. His parents were Jewish immigrants: his father from Romania and his mother from Russia. An alumnus of the Edmonton Talmud Torah, he grew up in Edmonton and graduated from high school there.

Businessman, publisher and author
In 1956 at the age of 24 he opened a book store, Hurtig Books, on Jasper Avenue and 103rd street which later grew into a large retail book operation with three locations. His stores featured staging of plays, poetry readings, encouraged social interaction, and unusually, permitted drinking coffee.

After selling his stores in 1972, he established Hurtig Publishers Ltd. with $30,000 in borrowed money. It became "one of the liveliest book publishing companies in Canada." In 1980, he started work on The Canadian Encyclopedia, spending $12 million on a comprehensive three-volume national encyclopedia first published in 1985. A second edition, which took four years to complete and cost $8.5 million to produce, appeared in four volumes in 1988. Much to the surprise of the publisher, the second edition was unexpectedly sold at up to a 55 per cent discount by national companies, roiling the market.

In September 1990, Hurtig published the five-volume Junior Encyclopedia of Canada, the first encyclopedia for young Canadians. He sold the company to McClelland & Stewart in May 1991.

Hurtig was an Officer of the Order of Canada, was granted honorary Doctor of Laws degrees from six Canadian universities, and was the recipient of the Lester B. Pearson Man of the Year Peace Award.

Politics
In 1967 Hurtig became interested in politics when the Liberal Party was looking for a new leader in the wake of Prime Minister Pearson's impending retirement. He ended up supporting Justice Minister Pierre Trudeau's successful bid for Liberal leadership. In 1972 he ran as a Liberal in the federal riding of Edmonton West. He finished second to longtime Progressive Conservative incumbent Marcel Lambert.

In 1973, he left the Liberal Party and joined with other nationalists including Walter Gordon, Jack McClelland, and Claude Ryan to establish the Committee for an Independent Canada (CIC), which lobbied against foreign ownership of Canadian economic assets and cultural imperialism. He served as Chair for the first year of the CIC.

In 1985, Hurtig established the Council of Canadians, another nationalist organization, five years after the demise of the CIC. The primary purpose of this organization was to lobby against a perceived rising tide of support for free trade. He considered his establishment of the Council as the act he was "most proud of." He would leave in 1992 but the council survives to this day, albeit with a mission of social, environmental, and economic justice rather than nationalism.

In 1992, Hurtig was elected leader of the National Party of Canada and led it in the 1993 federal election. He ran in the riding of Edmonton Northwest, but with 4,507 votes and 12.8 per cent of the popular vote, finished a distant third to Liberal Anne McLellan. It was nonetheless the best showing of the National Party candidates in that election—notably, Hurtig was the only National Party candidate to finish ahead of an incumbent MP, namely Tory Murray Dorin.

Death
In 2005, Hurtig moved from Edmonton to Vancouver, British Columbia, in order to be closer to his four daughters. On 3 August 2016 he died there at a hospital, from complications from pneumonia. On the day of his death, one daughter, Leslie Hurtig, read him "newspaper headlines about the launch of the inquiry into murdered and missing women"; he responded, "Bravo", and died that afternoon, surrounded by family. In addition to his daughters, Hurtig was survived by four grandsons.

Recognition

 * Canadian Book Publisher of the Year, 1974 and 1981
 * Made an Officer of the Order of Canada, (1980)
 * Honorary LL.D degrees from York University (1980), Wilfrid Laurier University (1985), University of Lethbridge (1986), University of Alberta (1986), Concordia University (1990), University of British Columbia (1992)
 * Eve Orpen Award for Publishing and Literary Excellence, 1985
 * Silver Ribbon Award, City of Edmonton, 1985
 * Centenary Medal, Royal Society of Canada, 1986
 * Alberta Achievement Award, 1986
 * Toastmasters International Communications and Leadership Award, 1986
 * President's Award, Canadian Booksellers Association, 1986
 * Quill Award, Windsor Press Club, 1986
 * Speaker of the Year Award, Canadian Speech Communicators Association, 1986
 * Corporate Citizen of the Year Award, Community of Business and Professional. Associates of Canada, 1988
 * Lester B. Pearson Man of the Year Peace Award 1988
 * 125th Anniversary of the Confederation of Canada Medal (1992)
 * Canadian Version of the Queen Elizabeth II Golden Jubilee Medal (2002)
 * Canadian Version of the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal (2012)

Selected works

 * Nationalism and Continentalism, 5 November 1981 speech at the Empire Club of Canada
 * The Betrayal of Canada, 1991
 * A New and Better Canada, policy statement for the National Party of Canada
 * How to solve Canada's economic mess without raising personal taxes or increasing the debt (National Party of Canada official platform document in 1993 election).
 * At Twilight in the Country/Memoirs of a Canadian Nationalist, 1996
 * Pay the Rent or Feed the Kids, 2000
 * The Vanishing Country, 2002
 * Rushing to Armageddon, 2004
 * The Truth About Canada, 2008
 * The Arrogant Autocrat: Stephen Harper's Takeover of Canada, 2015

title: Mel Hurtig


text:
Hillcrest, KwaZulu-Natal

Hillcrest is a town in the KwaZulu-Natal province of South Africa that forms part of the eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality and is situated approximately 32 km (20 mi) north-west of Durban and 53 km (33 mi) south-east of Pietermaritzburg.

History
Hillcrest was formerly a sleepy village, governed by its own Town Board on the outskirts of Durban that has now become a booming suburb incorporated into the eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality. Hill Crest (as the town's name was variously spelt until 1969) was founded on a rise in the main road from Durban to Pietermaritzburg in 1895 as a farming or "weekend" village, then a good distance from what was the emerging port of Port Natal. The village was laid out as leasehold sites on a portion of the farm Albinia owned by William Gillitt, one of the main pioneer families of the area and after which the nearby suburb of Gillitts is named.

One of the other early families to set up in the area was the Acutts who had already established the well known in Durban estate agents firm of that name. In 1903 the first school in the village was established in a wood and iron cottage in Hospital Road leased to a Mrs McMillian, the principal of the first Highbury School, by Horace Acutt.

When the first Hillcrest Health Committee was established in 1943, the total all-race population was 1135 persons and only the Main Road was hardened. Nkutu Road was hardened with klinker in 1947 and this was followed in 1951 with the hardening of the first portion of Inanda Road. In 1962 blacktopping of selected roads in the central area began, followed by further roads in 1965. By 1971, when Town Board status was obtained, the total population had grown to 2799 persons.

The Hillcrest Waste Water Treatment Plant was established in the 1990s, then serving only the central commercial area of the village with phased extensions planned in time, with other areas continuing on septic tanks.

Prior to 1 December 2023, vehicle registration plates in Hillcrest started with NU - N for Natal, U for Upper Highway which covered the suburbs within the Upper Highway Area such as Kloof, Gillitts, Botha's Hill, Assagay, Waterfall and Everton as well as New Germany and Queensburgh just outside the Upper Highway.

Hillcrest today
Hillcrest lost its independent Town Board status in 1996 and was made subject to administration by the Outer West Local Council - a substructure council of the then Durban Unicity. In 2000, the Outer West Local Council, along with other local councils, was disestablished and were replaced by the single eThekwini Municipality encompassing the entire Durban metropolitan area.

With rural origins, Hillcrest has been swept up in Durban's urban sprawl and experienced a building boom in the late 1990s and 2000s with the construction of many shopping centres and gated communities such as Cotswold Downs, Camelot and Plantations.

Geography
Hillcrest is situated in the Upper Highway Area of Durban, approximately 32 kilometres (20 mi) north-west of the city and is bordered by Gillitts and Everton to the east, Waterfall to the north-east and Botha's Hill and Assagay to the north-west. It lies at an altitude of approximately 680 m (2231 ft) above sea level in the Valley of a Thousand Hills, just above Durban.

Suburban areas
Source:

 * Albany (Residential)
 * Albina (Residential)
 * Belvedere (Residential)
 * Belvedere Ext 1 (Residential)
 * Cotswold Downs Golf and Country Estate (Residential)
 * Hilldene (Residential)
 * Plantations (Residential)
 * West Riding (Residential)

Retail
Old Main Road is the main retail thoroughfare of the central business district, lined by a number of local shops, restaurants and shopping centres such as Hillcrest Corner, which is the largest in Hillcrest, Christians Village, The Colony, Hillgate, Hillcrest Centre, Lillies Quarter and Oxford Village Centre.

Education
A public school system is provided in Hillcrest including Hillcrest High School and Hillcrest Primary School, with Winston Park Primary School in nearby Winston Park.

Private schools include Highbury Preparatory School, Curro: HCA and Waterfall Schools with Kearsney College and the Roseway Waldorf School in nearby Botha's Hill and Alverstone respectively.

Healthcare
Hillcrest is served by two hospitals, namely the Hillcrest Hospital, a specialised public hospital for chronically ill patients and the Busamed Hillcrest Private Hospital, owned by major South African private health group, Busamed, located just outside Hillcrest.

Roads
Hillcrest lies just off the M13 (King Cetshwayo Highway) heading south-east to Durban (via Gillitts, Kloof, Pinetown and Westville) and the N3 (Mariannhill Toll Route) connecting Durban and Pietermaritzburg.

However, the main route through the town is the R103 (Old Main Road) which heads north-west to Botha’s Hill and Inchanga, forming part of the old main road between Durban and Pietermaritzburg. Heading north-west, the M33 (Inanda Road) connects to Waterfall. Heading south-west, the M46 (Kassier Road) connects to Assagay and Shongweni.

Notable residents

 * Dale Benkenstein, Nashua Dolphins cricket player
 * Wayne Fyvie, former Sharks and SA national rugby player
 * Ian McIntosh, former Rhodesian, Sharks and SA national rugby coach
 * Shaun Pollock, former Dolphins and SA national cricket player and captain
 * Terence Parkin, Olympic medalist
 * Heather Hamilton, Miss South Africa 1999, Miss Universe top 10 1999, Miss World contestant 2000
 * Megan Coleman, Miss South Africa 2006, Miss Universe 2007, Miss World contestant 2007
 * Harold 'Tiger' Wright, South African Champion Jockey
 * Sir Liege Hulett, Founder of Kearsney College, founder of Hulett's Sugar.
 * Horace Smethurst, Springbok Soccer Captain, Australia New Zealand Tour 1947, soccer player

title: Hillcrest, KwaZulu-Natal


text:
File:Monty Norman John Barry - Dr. No OST album cover.jpg

Summary
007 - Dr. No soundtrack cover


text:
Ratnagotravibhāga

The Ratnagotravibhāga (Sanskrit, abbreviated as RGV, meaning: Analysis of the Jeweled Lineage, Investigating the Jewel Disposition) and its vyākhyā commentary (abbreviated RGVV to refer to the RGV verses along with the embedded commentary), is an influential Mahāyāna Buddhist treatise on buddha-nature (a.k.a. tathāgatagarbha). The text is also known as the Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra (The Ultimate Teaching of the Mahāyāna). The RGVV was originally composed in Sanskrit, likely between the middle of the third century and no later than 433 CE. The text and its commentary are also preserved in Tibetan and Chinese translations.

The Ratnagotra focuses on the buddha nature present in all sentient beings, which is eternal, blissful, unconditioned and originally pure. This buddha nature is obscured by defilements, but when they are removed, the buddha nature is termed dharmakaya, the ultimate Buddha body. The buddha nature is what is referred to as the "jewel disposition" or "jeweled lineage" (ratnagotra) of the Buddhas. The RGVV often quotes from various tathāgatagarbha sutras and comments on them. The Ratnagotravibhāga is an important and influential text in Tibetan Buddhism and was also important for the Huayan school.

The authorship is of the text is uncertain. Chinese sources state it was written by a certain Indian named Suoluomodi 娑囉末底 (or Jianyi 賢慧, Sanskrit reconstruction: *Sāramati) while Tibetan tradition (as well as later Indian sources) state that it was taught by the bodhisattva Maitreya and transmitted via Asanga. Modern scholarship favors the Chinese attribution.

Ratnagotravibhāga
The Sanskrit gotra is a figurative term for family or lineage, while ratna means jewel or precious stone. In Yogacara Buddhism, gotra has the meaning of certain "dispositions" or "innate potential for spiritual achievement" that sentient beings have and which place them in five "families" corresponding to the three vehicles, undefined and icchantikas (deluded hedonists). The Ratnagotravibhāga focuses on the family lineage and inner disposition (gotra) which allows all beings to become Buddhas, and thus is compared to a precious jewel (ratna). This is the unchanging buddha-nature that is present in all beings.

Uttaratantraśāstra
A secondary title for this work is Uttaratantraśāstra (The Treatise on the Ultimate Teaching) or Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra (The Treatise on the Ultimate Teaching of the Mahāyāna), indicating how it considers itself to be the highest and ultimate teaching of Mahayana Buddhism.

This title has also been translated as Treatise on the Supreme Continuum. Tantra can mean both "doctrine" or "teaching" as well as "continuum". The second way of interpreting the title refers to the fact that buddha-nature is an "everlasting continuum of the mind" (as noted by The 14th Dalai Lama) or a "continuous flow" (as Rongtön Sheja Kunrig and Go Lotsawa gloss the title). This pure continuum may be covered over by fleeting stains, but nevertheless remains as a continuity through many lives and into Buddhahood.

History
A Sanskrit RGVV was brought to China by Ratnamati (勒那摩提) in 508 CE where he translated the text to Chinese. This shows the whole text was available in India in the early 6th century. According to Kazuo Kano, no Indian texts quote the RGVV from the 7th to the 10th century, but it is cited in a significant number of Indian texts from the 11th to the 13th century.

Structure and textual layers
According to Brunnhölzl, "the text known as RGVV consists of three parts: (1) basic verses, (2) commentarial verses, and (3) prose commentary." Brunnhölzl also notes that most scholars agree that the text is "a compilation of different elements" and they have "made attempts to identify the “original” core verses of the text".

In certain textual transmissions, the Ratnagotravibhāgavyākhyā (RGVV) commentary has become integrated with the RGV verses through the passage of time, even though there are also distinct standalone editions of the RGV and RGVV. Takasaki provided a valuable textual analysis of the Sanskrit critical edition edited by Johnston with those versions preserved in certain editions of the Chinese and Tibetan canon. Takasaki identified a textual core of the RGV with the most ancient verses of this core being extant in the Chinese. Extensive analysis of the critical Sanskrit text edited by Johnston (1950) with the Tibetan and Chinese versions, identified that the verses actually comprise two separate groups: a core set of 27 ślokas and 405 additional or supplementary verses of explication (Skt. kārikā). The work of Takasaki and Johnston has been critiqued by the extensive reviews of such scholars as De Jong and Lambert Schmithausen. Schmithausen disagrees with Takasaki's opinion that the earliest core of the RGV consists of 27 verses and instead opines that "the original RGV is constituted by the totality of basic verses. But this original RGV seems to have made use of several (perhaps only partly remodelIed) older materials."

Authorship
The text is attributed to the Indian Jianyi (賢慧, Sanskrit reconstruction: *Sāramati or *Sthiramati) in the earlier Chinese tradition, a claim first found in the work of the sixth century scholar Zhiyi.

The Tibetan tradition considers the verse portion to have been composed by the bodhisattva Maitreya and the prose commentary by Asanga. The attribution of both the root verses and commentary to bodhisattva Maitreya is found in some late Indian sources (post 11th century). The discovery of a Sanskrit fragment of the Ratnagotravibhāga in Saka script (dated to the 9th century by Kazuo Kano) which mentions Maitreya bodhisattva as the author of the 'root' (mūla) verses also shows that Central Asian Buddhists also attributed the work to bodhisattva Maitreya. Meanwhile, the Sanskrit manuscript found in Tibet contains no attribution.

Several scholars have suggested that the Chinese and Tibetan traditions may be reconciled if perhaps Sāramati was also given the epithet of "Maitreya" (or if, vice versa, Sāramati was an epithet of the bodhisattva Maitreya), but Kazuo Kano notes that there is no evidence to support this.

According to Karl Brunnhölzl, modern scholars have varying opinions on the authorship of the RGV: "the main positions include a total denial of a historic person named Maitreya, the author of these texts being someone called Maitreya but not the great bodhisattva Maitreya, and these works being com posed by Asanga or other persons" The Japanese scholar Takasaki Jikido is certain that the author of the commentary is Sāramati through his comparison of the RGVV with the Chinese translation of the Dharmadhātvaviśeṣaśāstra (Dasheng fajie wuchabie lun 大乘法界無差別論) which is also said to have been authored by the same figure. Jonathan Silk also argues that both texts were by the same author.

Peter Harvey also finds the attribution to Maitreya / Asanga less plausible than the Chinese attribution. According to Shenpen Hookam, most modern scholars favor Sāramati (c. 3rd-4th century CE) as the author.

Sanskrit
The critical edition of the RGVV in Sanskrit was first published by Johnston, et al. (1950). This critical edition of Johnston is founded on two manuscripts discovered by Rev. Rāhula Sāñkṛtyāyana (1893–1963) in Tibet.

Of the complete extant Sanskrit [Johnston, et al. (1950) ], Tibetan and Chinese manuscript versions, recension or interpolations of the text (according to perspective), Takasaki (1966) considered the Chinese translation of a no longer extant Sanskrit text to be the oldest manuscript in existence, though it may not represent the original Sanskrit perfectly.

Chinese
According to Takasaki (1966: p. 7), the Chinese Canon retains one translation of the RGVV, which is titled Jiūjìng yìchéng bǎoxìng lùn (究竟一乘寶性論, which can be back-translated into Sanskrit as: Uttara-ekayāna-ratnagotra-śāstra). Its Taisho Daizokyo canon location is No. 1611, Vol.31. The work was translated by Ratnamati at Luoyang in 511 CE.

According to Zijie Li, "there are major differences" between the Chinese version of the RGVV and the Sanskrit version. Li writes that "in comparison to the surviving Sanskrit text, the Chinese version of the Ratnagotravibhāga downplays the significance of the expression gotra and instead reflects a strong interest in zhenru 真如 (Skt. tathatā) and foxing 佛性 (Buddha-nature) – for instance,  'zhenru foxing'  becomes the foundation or reason for transmigration in the world. In this context, reality (Skt. tathatā) acts like a conditioned dharma, an idea that deeply influenced later understanding of Buddha-nature in East Asian Buddhism."

Tibetan
Takasaki holds the Tibetan Tanjur to retain two versions of the RGV:
 * Theg-pa-chen-po rgyud-bla ma'i bstan-bcos (Mahāyāna-uttaratantra-śāstra), Tohoku Catalogue No. 4024;
 * Theg-pa-chen-po rgyud-bla-ma'i bstan-bcos rnam-par-bsad-pa (Mahāyāna-uttaratantra-śāstra-vyākhyā), Tohoku Catalogue No. 4025.

Both of these versions were translated in Srinagar (Kashmir) by Matiprajña (Sanskrit, 1059–1109, also known as Ngok Loden Sherab) under the guidance of Kashmiri Pandits 'Ratnavajra' (Wylie: Rin-chen rdo-rje) and Sajjana, towards the close of the 11th century CE.

Shenpen Hookham affirms that there are precious few records of the RGV or RGVV in India and that their traditional recorded history commences with their 'rediscovery' by the 11th century yogin Maitripa (who was also named Maitreyanātha). According to Hookam, there is no evidence that the work was associated with the bodhisattva Maitreya before the time of Maitripa. However, Klaus-Dieter Mathes has shown that Maitripa's teachers, Jñanasrimitra (980-1040) and Ratnākaraśānti, must have had access to the RGV, RGVV and/or their extracts, since it is quoted and paraphrased in Jñanasrimitra's Sākārasiddhiśāstra and Sākārasamgraha, as well as in Ratnākaraśānti's Sūtrasamuccayabhāṣya.

Tsering Wangchuk has examined the intellectual history of the RGV in Tibet from the 12th century to the early 15th century.

English Translations
Eugène Obermiller (1901–1935) pioneered the research into the Ratnagotra literature through his translation of the Tibetan RGVV under the name of the Uttara-tantra-shastra in 1931. Obermiller interpreted the text as an example of monism. The verse portion of the RGV has been translated several times into English, including by E. Obermiller (1931) and Rosemary Fuchs (2000).

The English translations by Takasaki Jikido (1966, from Sanskrit, with reference to the Chinese) and Karl Brunnhölzl (2015, from Tibetan) are the only English translations of the complete RGVV, which includes the commentary.

Doctrinal content
The text consists of about 430 Sanskrit verses with a prose commentary (vyākhyā) that includes substantial quotations from tathāgatagarbha oriented sutras (amounting to up to one third of the RGVV).

The seven vajra topics
The RGV structures its doctrinal content through seven main topics, which it calls the seven "vajra points" or "adamantine topics".

These seven topics are:

The basic relationship among these topics is explained in RGV I.3: From the Buddha [comes] the dharma and from the dharma, the noble saṃgha.
 * Vajra topic one is the Buddha, here described as without beginning, middle and end. Buddha is also described as peace and as the uncompounded (asamskrta), and spontaneous (anabhoga) dharmakāya. The Buddha is further described as self-enlightened and as self-arisen wisdom (jñana) which is "not awakened by a condition other than itself" (aparapratyayabhisambodhi). Buddha is further described as wisdom, compassion and power for the benefit of others.
 * Vajra topic two is the Dharma, which is described as cessation. This cessation is described as neither existence nor non-existence. It is a non-conceptual reality, as well as the reality of the path which consists of luminous and stainless jñana that removes all defilement. It is also equated with the dharmakaya and compared to the sun which is unspoiled by clouds and removes all darkness.
 * Vajra topic three is the Sangha, meaning those beings who realize: the true luminous nature of the mind (prakrtiprabhasvarata), not-self, the unreality of the defilements, and "the full extent of what is" (yavad bhavikataya) which is seeing their own true nature in all beings (this is also related to compassion). "Sangha" also refers to the supreme qualities that make them a refuge. Bodhisattvas are like the crescent moon moving to the full moon of the Buddha.
 * Vajra topic four is the dhātu, i.e. buddhadhātu (buddha-nature), described as the stained suchness (tathata) i.e. the dharmakaya covered over by defilements. This is the "seed of Supramundane Dharma." This topic also teaches bodhicitta and its object, which is the welfare of all sentient beings. According to Brunnhölzl, "since “others” refers to sentient beings as the objects for whose sake bodhicitta is generated, this teaches suchness with stains."
 * Vajra topic five is bodhi (awakening), also known as the nirvana-dhātu, i.e. the Buddha's dharmakaya fully uncovered by defilement.
 * The sixth vajra topic refers to the buddha qualities (guṇāḥ) which promote the welfare of all beings and are innumerable as the sands of the Ganges. The RGVV compares the dharmakaya to the ocean which contains a vast amount of jewels and water (wisdom and compassion). The RGVV describes various sets of buddha qualities like the ten powers, four fearlessnesses, the eighteen exclusive properties and the 32 marks of a great person.
 * The seventh topic is the Buddha activity (karma) which teaches Dharma to all sentient beings. It is an effortless, non-conceptual and spontaneous awakened activity for the good of all. Despite being effortless, it always "acts with perfect appropriateness to the time, place, aspirations, and capacities of beings." Buddha activity is also said to be without end.

Within the saṃgha, the [tathāgata] heart leads to the attainment of wisdom.

The attainment of that wisdom is the supreme awakening that is endowed with the attributes such as the powers that promote the welfare of all sentient beings. (RGV I.3)

Buddha-nature
The Ratnagotravibhāga is notable for its exploration of the doctrine of the buddhadhātu ("buddha nature", "buddha source" or "buddha essence", Chinese: 佛性, pinyin: fóxìng), also called buddhagarbha, jinagarbha and tathāgatagarbha (Wylie: 'de bzhin gshegs pa'i snying po; Chinese: 如来藏 rúláizàng). According to the RGV, all sentient beings have this permanent Buddha element within even though it is covered over by defilements (which are fully absent in a buddha). The buddha-nature is the common element shared by sentient beings, bodhisattvas and buddhas and as the RGV states "all corporeal beings are said to contain a Buddha" (Sanskrit: sarve dehino buddhagarbhāḥ).

The RGV verses describe buddha nature as follows:"Always, by nature, unafflicted; like a clear jewel, the sky, or water; it follows from faith in the dharma, superior insight, concentration and compassion (30); [its] results are the perfected qualities of purity, selfhood, bliss, and permanence, with the functions that are aversion to suffering and the appetite and aspiration for the achievement of peace (35); like the ocean, being an inexhaustible store of treasured qualities, and like a lamp, being naturally conjoined with qualities that are inseparable from it (42). What is taught by those who perceive reality is the distinction between ordinary persons, noble persons and Buddhas in terms of reality (tathatā): hence is it taught that this womb/chamber for a victor exists in sentient beings (sattveṣu jinagarbho ’yaṃ) (45); [depending on whether this reality is] impure, impure yet pure or perfectly pure, it refers to the realm of sentient beings, the bodhisattva or the Tathāgata [respectively] (47). (RGV 1.30, 35, 42, 45, 47)."According to the RGV, this essence or basic element (dhātu) is always present in all beings and is the true essence of every living being and the source of all virtuous qualities, including Buddhahood. The RGV states:"This [dhātu] is of unchanging character, due to its conjunction with inexhaustible qualities; it is the refuge of the world, due to it having no limit ahead of it; it is always non-dual, due to being without discrimination; it is also characterized as indestructible, as its nature is uncreated. (RGV 1.79)."The RGV teaches that buddha nature has three main characteristics: (1) dharmakaya, (2) suchness, and (3) disposition, as well as the general characteristic (4) non-conceptuality.

Regarding the main function of buddha nature, the RGV states that it is what causes sentient beings to seek an escape from samsara, and to aspire to nirvana.

The RGV also describes buddha nature as “the intrinsically stainless nature of the mind” (cittaprakṛtivaimalya). The RGV thus equates the tathāgatagarbha with the luminous mind, stating: "the luminous nature of the mind Is unchanging, just like space." It also describes it as the pure Buddha wisdom (buddhajñāna) which is said to be all pervasive. This all pervasiveness is compared to space that is the same everywhere, whether it is the space within an ugly vase or a beautiful one.

Furthermore, according to the Ratnagotra, there are three reasons why it can be said that all sentient beings have buddha nature: (1) the Buddha's dharmakāya permeates all sentient beings; (2) the Buddha's thusness (tathatā) is omnipresent (avyatibheda); (3) the Buddha's gotra (lineage/disposition) is in all sentient beings.

The dharmakāya, the purified buddha nature

The RGV equates buddha nature with dharmakāya, liberation and with the Buddha (the Tathāgata):"Hence [the dhātu] is the dharmakāya; it is the Tathāgata; it is the truth of the noble ones; it is the ultimate liberation (paramārthanivṛtti). Hence, it not being separate from its qualities—in the manner of the sun and its rays—there is no liberation apart from buddhahood. (RGV 1.84)"Thus, in the Ratnagotravibhāga, buddha-nature is ultimately the same as the dharmakāya (the ultimate buddha body, the 'body' of ultimate reality). While the tathāgatagarbha is enclosed in the defilements, the dharmakāya is the same phenomenon free of the defilements. This is compared to how the sun (dharmakāya) is not tainted by clouds (defilements), only obscured by them. The dharmakāya is held to be originally pure (prakṛtipariśuddha), unconditioned (asaṃskṛta), unborn (ajāta), unarisen (anutpanna), eternal (nitya), changeless (dhruva), and permanent (śāśvata). These elevated qualities make also elevate the Buddha to a supreme status that is worthy of extensive devotion.

The four perfected qualities
An important schema in which the RGVV (as well as buddha nature sutras like the Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda) present the dharmakāya (the buddha nature freed of defilement) is through its four perfected qualities (guṇapāramitā) of eternity (nitya), bliss (sukha), Self (ātman) and purity (śuddha). These qualities are described as results (phala) of the tathāgatagarbha. The four qualities are also explained as being reversals of the four misperceptions (viparyāsā), that is, perceiving samsaric phenomena as being pure, self, blissful and unchanging. The RGVV explains that when applied to samsaric phenomena, these are indeed misperceptions, but when applied to the dharmakaya, they are actually correct perceptions.

The four perfect qualities are said to be revealed through four “causes of purification” (śuddhihetu). These are the ways in which the tathāgatagarbha can be “cleansed” to reveal the dharmakāya, and they are: (1) faith in the dharma (dharmādhimukti), (2) superior insight (adhiprajñā), (3) concentration (samādhi), and (4) compassion (karuṇā).

Furthermore, the RGVV also lists various obstructions to the path, such as hostility to the dharma, false views of the self (ātmadarśana) and indifference to sentient beings. The RGVV makes it clear that the dharmakāya as “supreme self” (paramātman), is not the self of the non-buddhists or a self amid the five aggregates, but rather is something that is realized after understanding the absence of self in all phenomena (dharmanairātmya). The RGVV echoes the Prajñāpāramitā sutras by stating that the right view is to let go of all views and it even states that all affirmative statements about the Buddha’s self ultimately refer to the absence of self. However, as Jones notes, the earlier Chinese version of the RGVV instead states that ātman as "absence of self" means absence of "erroneous notions of selfhood to which non-Buddhists remain attached" and it also states that ātman can refer "to the achievement of a “powerful” or “sovereign” self (zizaiwo 自在我)."

The four inconceivables
According to RGV (RGV 1.24, 1.25) there are four points about buddha nature which are inconceivable:

 * 1) The buddha nature is pure and yet it is also associated with afflictions.
 * 2) Awakening has never been defiled and yet it also becomes purified (at the moment of realization).
 * 3) The Buddha qualities (of buddha nature) are inseparable (from the basic buddha element in all beings). The Buddha wisdom is in all sentient beings, but it does not manifest because of their defilements.
 * 4) Buddha activity is spontaneous, effortless, unlimited and non-conceptual.

The RGVV is clear that only high level bodhisattvas and Buddhas can realize the true meaning of these.

Why all beings have buddha nature
The RGV gives three widely quoted reasons why "all sentient beings always possess the buddha nature": Because the Perfect Buddha body (buddhakaya) radiates, because the Tathata (Suchness) is inseparable,

Because the gotra (disposition, lineage) is present, all beings have the essence (garbha) of Buddha.

Because Buddha wisdom (buddhajñana) is present in the mass of beings, because the stainless nature (svabhava) is non-dual,

Because the Buddha gotra is named after its fruit, it is taught that all beings have the Buddha Essence (garbha).

Why buddha nature is taught
The Ratnagotravibhāga also seeks to explain the relationship between the emptiness teachings and the buddha nature teaching. According to the RGV, buddha nature is taught because there are "five defects" which can only be remedied by this teaching.

The five defects are:

 * The depressed mind or faintheartedness, that is, feeling inadequate and unable to aspire to Buddhahood. Buddha nature teachings provide confidence to those who feel like this.
 * Contempt for inferior sentient beings - knowing that all beings are of the lineage of the buddhas corrects the arrogance of some bodhisattvas.
 * Attachment to what is unreal - this refers to beings who think that their faults and defilements are their true nature.
 * Criticism of the real dharma or denial of what is real - this refers to those who overlook the fact that all beings have the buddha wisdom within and thus do not know the truth.
 * Excessive self-cherishing and not loving others as one's self - when one knows that all beings have the buddha nature one naturally identifies with other beings as if they are oneself.

C.V. Jones also argues that these five defects show that the Buddha-nature teaching is seen as a corrective by the RGV to the view that only teaches emptiness or to certain miscomprehensions about emptiness.

Emptiness and buddha nature
The RGV also uses the term "empty" to refer to how the buddha nature is empty of defilements, however it also claims that buddha nature is not empty of its innate buddha qualities:"There is nothing to be removed from it and nothing to be added. The real should be seen as real, and seeing the real, you become liberated. The [buddha] element is empty of adventitious [stains], which have the defining characteristic of being separable; but it is not empty of unsurpassable qualities, which have the defining characteristic of not being separable. (RGV I.157-58)"To support this, the commentary quotes the Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda which states that "Buddha nature is empty of the sheath of all defilements, which are separable and recognized as something disconnected. It is not empty of inconceivable buddha qualities, which are inseparable..."

The supreme teaching
The secondary title for this work, Uttaratantraśāstra, highlights the text's claim that buddha-nature teachings represent the final, definitive and highest (Sanskrit: uttara) teachings (tantra) of the Buddha, in contrast to the earlier teachings on emphasizing emptiness, such as those contained in the Prajñāpāramitā sutras.

The Uttaratantra claims that its teachings include and yet go beyond the Prajñaparamita doctrine of emptiness. It emphasizes a more positive metaphysical doctrine than the apophatic emptiness teachings. The Uttaratantra sees this cataphatic teaching as complementary to the Prajñaparamita emptiness teaching. Since the Uttaratantra claims its teachings as supreme, it holds that without this teaching, the emptiness of Prajñāpāramitā remains an incomplete teaching that must be completed by the higher and final (uttara) teaching of buddha nature.

Indian tradition
Various commentaries were written on the RGVV, some by Indian Sanskrit authors. The three Indian works on the RGVV which have been preserved are:

Late Indian Buddhist scholars like Jñānaśrīmitra (fl. 975-1025 C.E.), Ratnākaraśānti (c. 10th-century CE) and Jayānanda (late 11th – early 12th century) also cited and commented on passages of the RGV.
 * Mahāyānottaratantraśāstropadeśa (Pith Instructions on Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra, Tibetan: theg pa chen po'i bstan bcos rgyud bla ma'i man ngag), a synopsis of the RGVV by Sajjana which "outline a contemplative system based on the seven vajra points."
 * Mahāyānottaratantraśāstraṭippanī, a short commentary by Vairocanarakṣita which provides some glosses on RGVV terms
 * A full commentary by Ratnavajra

Jñānaśrīmitra interprets the RGV teaching of buddha nature in line with his sākāravada yogacara view which holds that the Buddha-body is represented by images (ākāras) that exist ultimately. According to his interpretation of the three bodies (trikaya) doctrine, the sambhogakaya and its accompanied true image (ākāra) is the ultimate reality that truly exists, and the dharmakaya is a conventional quality of the sambhogakaya. For Jñānaśrīmitra, the buddha nature is the emptiness of this ultimate reality, i.e. the sambhogakaya, and this emptiness is synonymous with dharmakāya and dharmadhātu.

Ratnākaraśānti disagrees with this view, since for him it is the dharmakāya (which lacks any images or forms) that is the ultimate reality, and this gives rise to the saṃbhogakāya as its outflow (niṣyanda). Ratnākaraśānti does accept the existence of a unchangeable pure nature which resides in some sentient beings, as is taught in the RGV. However he also equates buddha-nature with the Yogacara theory of bodhisattvagotra, and thus, for him, only those beings that have the disposition to become a bodhisattva have buddha-nature. This is said to be rare and thus he does not accept that all beings have buddha nature. According to Brunnhölzl, Ratnākaraśānti also equates buddha nature with the perfected nature and argues that it is empty of both the imaginary and the dependent natures. Brunnhölzl sees this as an Indian precedent for the Shentong view.

Maitripa, a student of both Jñānaśrīmitra and Ratnākaraśānti, is closely associated with the RGV by the Tibetan tradition, though he wrote no work on it and only quotes it twice in his corpus.

Meanwhile, the Kashmiri pandit Jayānanda sees buddha-nature as a way of attracting inferior people and as a provisional teaching (as stated in the Lankavatara sutra).

Tibetan tradition
An early Tibetan commentary is A Commentary on the Meaning of the Words of the “Uttaratantra”. This text claims to preserve the teachings of Marpa Lotsawa on the RGV and may have been compiled by a student of Marpa Dopa Chökyi Wangchuk (1042 - 1136, a student of Marpa Lotsawa and Rongzom). The text contains Mahamudra like meditation instructions as well as more scholarly material that draws on Yogacara thought. It also often makes use of Dzogchen terminology like kadag (original purity) and rigpa.

Another important commentary is Dashi Oser's (15th-16th century) Heart of the luminous sun, which is based on the Third Karmapa's (1284–1339) topical outline of the RGV. Other notable Tibetan exegetes of the Ratnagotravibhāga have been Ngok Loden Sherab, Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen, Gö Lotsawa Zhönnu-pel, Gyaltsab Je, Mikyö Dorje (8th Karmapa), Jamgon Kongtrul and Jamgon Ju Mipham Gyatso.

Various interpretations and understandings of the RGVV have developed in Tibetan Buddhism, such as the view that buddha-nature is a non-implicative negation (influenced by Madhyamaka), the Shentong (empty of other) view and the Dzogchen view.

Buddha nature as a nonimplicative negation
Various Tibetan Buddhist scholars (especially those of the Gelug and Sakya schools) follow the RGVV tradition of Ngok Loden Sherab which "identifies the tathagatagarba as the factor of the natural purity of all phenomena, which pervades all knowable objects and is a space-like nonimplicative negation." This interpretation generally understands buddha-nature to be just a term for emptiness as it is explained in the Madhyamaka treatises of Nagarjuna and Candrakirti. These authors see emptiness and buddha nature as the lack of an independent nature in all phenomena.

Shentong
According to the Shentong view, buddha nature refers to "the naturally pure wisdom, luminous by nature, that pervades [everyone] from buddhas to sentient beings." This non-dual Buddha wisdom is empty of defilements and samsara (what is other than wisdom), but it is not empty of its own nature. As such, it is an "implicative negation", that is, a negation which implies that there is something (that is, wisdom) that remains after analyzing what buddha nature is not. Shentong is associated with figures like Dolpopa, Mikyo Dorje, 8th Karmapa and Jamgon Kongtrul.

The Nyingma Dzogchen view
In the Dzogchen system of the Nyingma school, the three jewels of Sangha, Dharma and Buddha are identified as the three vajras (body, speech and mind). According to Namkhai Norbu, the three vajras along with the Buddha qualities and Buddha activities, constitute the 'continuum' or Mindstream of either a sentient being (with adventitious obscurations) or a buddha (without adventitious obscurations). In Dzogchen, buddha nature, the 'everlasting' continuum, is often explained as the unity of "primordial purity" (Wylie: ka dag) and "natural perfection" or "spontaneous presence" (lhun grub). An important Dzogchen doctrinal view on buddha-nature (also called sugatagarbha) is how it explains it in terms of the 'basis' (gzhi) and its three aspects: 'essence' (i.e. purity, emptiness), 'nature' (rang bzhin, i.e. natural perfection) and 'compassionate energy' (thugs rje).

The Nyingma commentary of Ju Mipham from a Dzogchen view has been rendered into English by Duckworth (2008). Khenchen Namdrol Rinpoche (2008/2009) commenced the Rigpa Shedra teachings on Mipham's view of Buddha Nature which has been followed by Khenpo Dawa Paljor (2009) of Rigpa Shedra's oral word by word commentary of Ju Mipham's exegesis of RGV in Tibetan with English translation.

East Asia
The Chinese RGVV remains lesser known in East Asian Buddhism. No commentaries on it were written in Chinese and thus scholars have assumed it was less influential than other Buddha nature works. However, the RGVV was an important work for the southern Dilun school of Ratnamati and was also highly esteemed by Fazang (法藏 643-712), a key patriarch of the Huayan school. According to Zijie Li, Fazang's theories of zhenru 真如 (Skt. tathatā), Huayan xingqi (華嚴 性起 Arising of nature on Huayan) and zhongxing 種姓 (Skt. gotra) thoroughly relies on the RGVV.

The RGVV also impacted other East Asian scholars, traditions and texts, including Paramārtha 真諦 (499-569), the Mahayana Awakening of Faith (Dasheng qixin lun 大乘起信論), the Sanjie school (三階教), Wonhyo 元曉 (617-686) and the Japanese authors Juryō (寿霊) and Chikei (智憬) of Nara Japan (710-784).

title: Ratnagotravibhāga


text: Category:Houses in the United States

title: Category:Houses in the United States


text:
Hot Cross Bunny

Hot Cross Bunny is a 1948 Warner Bros. Merrie Melodies theatrical animated short directed by Robert McKimson. The short was released on August 21, 1948, and features Bugs Bunny. The title is a play on the nursery rhyme Hot Cross Buns as well as a punny allusion to the basic plot premise.

Plot
Bugs is "Experimental Rabbit #46" in the Eureka Hospital Experimental Laboratory, Paul Revere Foundation. Bugs lives a pampered life, oblivious to the fact that a scientist plans on switching his brain with that of a chicken.

After giving Bugs an examination, the scientist brings him out to the operating theater, in front of an audience of fellow doctors. Bugs thinks he's been brought out to perform. Upon finishing each act, he looks around to see the unimpressed, stern-faced doctors in exactly the same frame position each time. When he learns the scientist's intentions, Bugs runs and a chase ensues.

Finally, Bugs is rendered helpless with laughing gas and placed on the table, with metallic mind-switching caps placed on him and the rather uninterested-looking chicken. At the last minute, he switches the electrodes and the scientist ends up clucking like a chicken, while the chicken (with the scientist's mind) states in plain English he hopes that the experiment can be reversed.

Home media

 * VHS/DVD: Stars of Space Jam: Bugs Bunny (Unrestored)
 * DVD/Blu-Ray: Treasure of the Sierra Madre (Unrestored, as a bonus feature)
 * Blu-Ray: Bugs Bunny 80th Anniversary Collection (Restored, with the original opening and ending titles)
 * Streaming: HBO Max (Restored, with the original opening and ending titles)

title: Hot Cross Bunny


text:
Template talk:Maths-stub

mathematics/mathematical
AllyUnion changed mathematics-related article to mathematical-related article. I don't think he/she is correct: I think a noun has to precede -related. Compare odor-related article to odorous-related article, or vision-related article to visual-related article: doesn't the noun sound better? It certainly does to my ears. (But I'm a native American English speaker; perhaps it's different in Ukogbani or elsewhere.)

Note that Googling mathematics-related yields "about 26500" results; mathematical-related, "about 652".

So unless someone presents a good argument for mathematical, I'd like to revert the change.  —msh210 18:06, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Msh210/ms template
That was so funny, I forgot to laugh... JB82 22:03, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I'm not so sure I like this stub. I mean, it's clever, and good for a chuckle, but it's also out of line with other stub notices and not very encyclopedic. Plus someone not well-versed in math wouldn't "get" it and would wonder what the hell is going on. PenguiN42 12:59, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't think that someone who wouldn't get it would wonder what's going on. (Although I do grant that many people won't get it, I don't think they'll wonder about it.) After all, it's perfectly good English.  —msh210 19:32, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

That's really cute. --Christopherlin 08:06, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Why this should be a redirect
Ha ha ha! We have almost nothing on this topic! Our encyclopedia sucks! But at least we're punny about it. How about adding "please hit it with weapons of math instruction" while we're at it? I appreciate the joke, but I don't think our readers are best served with encyclopedias that use in-jokes to laugh at their own incompleteness. Should Star Wars stubs talk in Yoda-speech? One template that did just that was rightfully deleted. I've joined two other editors in reverting this to a redirect. If you want, we can take it to Templates for deletion. That'll probably brand me a humourless spoilsport, but so be it. There is a place for clever mathematical puns, and Wikipedia isn't it. JRM 16:44, 2005 Jan 30 (UTC)
 * As you say, you join two others. I'll leave it alone. —msh210 (who did the reverts recently from an IP address) 01:05, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Addendum: another very compelling reason why this should be a redirect is that "maths" is the abbreviation used in the UK for mathematics, while "math" is what Americans use. Is there any justification for making math-stub and maths-stub different in content? At best you could argue that both should contain the joke text. If so, I expect a lot more people to see and oppose this. JRM 16:49, 2005 Jan 30 (UTC)

title: Template talk:Maths-stub


text:
Talk:Dennis Lee

-

Untitled
I thought it was "sat in the middle and played with string". I had that book; if I knew where it was I'd look. Kwantus 20:52, 2004 Dec 6 (UTC)

Minor error corrected
I have removed the mistake about one Dennis Lee being an inventor. There is no such person known. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Desertphile (talk • contribs) 14:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

removed

title: Talk:Dennis Lee


text:
Corry Brokken

Cornelia Maria "Corry" Brokken (3 December 1932 – 31 May 2016) was a Dutch singer, television presenter and jurist. In 1957, she won the second edition of the Eurovision Song Contest with the song "Net als toen", representing the Netherlands. Throughout her career, she scored a number of hits, sang in the popular Sleeswijk Revue with Snip en Snap, and had her own television show. She was also the presenter of the Eurovision Song Contest 1976, which was held in The Hague, Netherlands, following the victory of Teach-In the year before. She ended her career as a singer in 1973 to study law, after which she became a lawyer and ultimately a judge.

Eurovision Song Contest
In 1956, Brokken won the Nationaal Songfestival 1956 with the song "Voorgoed voorbij", which gave her the right to represent the Netherlands in the first edition of the Eurovision Song Contest alongside runner-up Jetty Paerl. In 1957, she won the Nationaal Songfestival for the second time in a row, and represented the Netherlands again in the Eurovision Song Contest 1957. Her entry "Net als toen", written by Willy van Hemert and composed by Guus Jansen, received most points from the international juries and gave the Netherlands its first win in the competition. In 1958, Brokken won the Nationaal Songfestival once again, this time with the song "Heel de wereld". In the international final, held in Hilversum, Netherlands, her entry finished in last place with only one point. In the book The Eurovision Song Contest – The Official History, John Kennedy O'Connor notes that Corry is the only singer ever to have finished both first and last in the contest.

After Eurovision
Brokken was one of the most popular female singers in the Netherlands during the 1950s and 1960s, performing in the Sleeswijk Revue alongside Snip en Snap and scoring hits, some of which were translated chansons by Charles Aznavour.

In 1976, Brokken served as the presenter of the Eurovision Song Contest, and in 1997, she announced the results of the Dutch vote for that year's contest. By that time she was no longer active as a singer. She had ended her musical career in 1973 to study law, after which she became a lawyer. She was later installed as a judge in 's-Hertogenbosch. In the 1990s she returned to the entertainment industry, performing on stage and recording a new album. She also wrote a column for the weekly women's magazine Margriet.

Brokken died on 31 May 2016 at the age of 83.

Personal
Brokken was married three times and has a daughter, Nancy Sleeswijk.

Singles

 * "Voorgoed voorbij" (1956)
 * "Net als toen" (1957)
 * "Heel de wereld" (1958)
 * "Milord" (1960)

title: Corry Brokken


text:
Sir Sackville Crowe, 1st Baronet

Sir Sackville Crowe, 1st Baronet (7 December 1595 (baptised) – 27 October 1671) was an English politician.

He was born in Brasted Kent in around 1595. He later married one of the daughters of the Earl of Rutland; he had one son, also named Sackville, born around 1636 and who died in 1706. Early in 1617 he secured a reversionary lease of the former Perrot lordship of Laugharne from Charles, Prince of Wales which grant fell in on the death of the countess of Northumberland in April 1619 and he took up residence there.

He was a Member of Parliament for Hastings in the 1625 Parliament (the "Useless Parliament") and for Bramber in the 1628-9 Parliament. He was Treasurer of the Navy from 5 April 1627 to 21 January 1630; on 8 July 1627 he was created a baronet. The King nominated Sir Sackville to be ambassador at Constantinople on 19 November 1633 during the personal rule. Royal instructions were delivered on 14 July 1638.

In 1636 he obtained a share of a lease on the Crown's ironworks in the Forest of Dean for twenty-one years, which he later tried to sell; this caused some great legal trouble, and had to be brought before Parliament. Nonetheless, it did not prevent Sir Sackville sailing for Constantinople in October 1638.

He later served as the Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire; it is not recorded when he was sent to Constantinople, but in April 1642 the records of the House of Commons already mention objections being made to his "meddling" by the Levant Company. By 1646 they had progressed to formally requesting a letter of withdrawal be sent, citing his "seizing the Estates, and imprisoning the Factors and Servants, of the said Company, at Constantinople and Smyrna". Crowe was recalled after nearly a decade by Parliament in January 1647. Perhaps the ambassador had not received news of Royalist defeat because he did not finally depart until 23 November.

He was brought back in April 1648, as a prisoner in the ship Margaret and consigned to the Tower of London to await trial. In March 1652 he was bailed on a £2000 bond; by September 1658 the Levant Company had dropped all charges and he petitioned the Lords to annul his restraints.

title: Sir Sackville Crowe, 1st Baronet


text:
User talk:Spp~enwiki

If you are a newbie -welcome to wikipedia -please don't vandalise our articles though. Go to the talk page if you have something to say. If you are a sockpuppet - please note that the autoblocker blocks the IP's of sockpuppets - so if you are trying to evade the three revert rule you will be unsuccseful. Theresa Knott (The snott rake) 20:56, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Also please do not unilaterally remove the image from the Clitoris article and various closely related articles; see discussion on that article's talk page. Pakaran (ark a pan) 21:04, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Spp. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Spp~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 02:50, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:09, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Spp~enwiki


text:
FM- and TV-mast Zygry

The FM- and TV-mast Zygry is a 346 metre tall guyed mast for FM and TV situated at Zygry in Poland. The FM- and TV-mast Zygry is since the collapse of the Warsaw radio mast the third tallest structure in Poland. FM- and TV-mast Zygry was built between 1970 and 1975.

title: FM- and TV-mast Zygry


text:
Talk:Rape/temp1

"There is even widespread disagreement on what the published FBI statistics of false reporting of rape are, though this is a matter of public record: lawyer Alan Dershowitz has claimed that the FBI statistics show rape to be the most frequently falsely reported crime, at a rate of 8.6 percent; yet in numerous places one can find it listed as a "myth" that rape is falsely reported with any frequency, and claims that FBI statistics show it to be falsely reported at 2%, no more often than any other violent crime, or even less often. "

This entire section is questionable. There is no primary source being cited here, and even though it states right in the first sentence that this is a matter of public record this passage is not providing any material from that record. I don't see any justification for it until someone can cite the FBI records directly, until then it is nothing more than speculation and turns wikipedia into a chat forum used by partisans on both sides. Kev 20:56, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I believe you are entirely misunderstanding the thrust of the passage. We have no unimpeachable source, no 'oracle' which would tell us, unequivocally and without possibility of error, just exactly how many reports each year are false.  On the other hand, the FBI publishes its statistics, and those statistics, their estimates, are a matter of public record.  One can strongly dispute whether the FBI got it right when they said false reporting happened at a rate of X%, but what the FBI said X% was is a matter of public record; even if they were wrong, the fact that they said it is an inalterable fact.  Now when even the inalterable facts on a subject are quoted by one source as this, and by another source as that, both sources fairly clearly being sincere, it shows you how hard it is to be sure you have hold of the absolute facts on this issue.  If anyone is coming to this article with an iron-clad faith that they know exactly what the facts are, because someone told them the "facts" and assured them that they were true, and Wikipedia points out how many people are claiming to have the facts, and we disabuse them of that certainty that they already know it all, I think we've done a valuable service. -- Antaeus Feldspar 22:08, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm a little lost here. I don't recall saying or at any time implying that there was an oracle or sublime or perfect source we could cite to know "the truth(tm)", nor would I given my various philosophical positions on skepticism.  What I did say, and what I find perfectly reasonable, is that if this article is going to refer to the FBI records being a matter of public record (and thus a hard fact that can be presented with proper citation) it ought to actually cite that record instead of getting lost on a tangent of how many people have a different conception of what that statistic is.  How hard is that?  If we can't come up with the public record to cite, I don't see why we should be wasting the reader's time with speculation on what that statistic just might be.  As you can see, someone else seems to think it is inappropriate to list a broad range of speculative statistics and has simply removed the passage, bypassing this sandbox altogether.  I don't blame them, but I was hoping wiki editors could actually supply the data they are claiming before someone found it necessary to remove the fluff.  Kev 22:31, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't know how it can be made clearer. To fully discuss the subject, it is not sufficient to clear away all the erroneous guesses which you can find every place, each one claiming their answer to be the accurate one straight from the source, and say "Here are the facts, instead."  Part of the subject is the fact that every place you go, you can find all sorts of erroneous guesses, contradicting each other, all claiming to be the accurate one straight from the source.  Calling it speculation without facts on the part of Wikipedia editors is inaccurate:  What Wikipedia editors are noting is speculation without facts on the part of other sources which are claiming to be distributing the facts.  What part of warning people how prevalent misinformation on the subject is is "fluff"?

 * The part after the delcaration is already made that, "Figures vary wildly on the issue of false reporting, with no apparent consensus." After that, it is just saying the exact same thing with numbers.  Kev 05:01, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * You know what's going to happen if someone looks up the FBI's statistics and says "Ah, it's N.N%" and puts that in the article, clearing away any reference to how many people are claiming different figures? The next person who comes along and reads the article who happens to have heard a different figure will say "Oh, they got it wrong; it must have been a POV-pusher who deliberately put in the wrong figure; I'll edit it and put in the correct figure." -- Antaeus Feldspar 23:34, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Which is why the FBI source needs to be cited directly, so that anyone else coming along deciding to change it will find themselves stonewalled if their source is indirect and thus the number incorrect. If their source is direct, then the number for the same year will be the same.  Is this unreasonable somehow?  Regardless, this is only one of many changes I am proposing, if this sticks to you somehow then we can leave it be for the time as there are much more important changes in this sandbox version that need to be made as quickly as possible, like the revealing of the entire Carol Wallace quote for example. Kev 05:01, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"or even that they are impossible"

The claim here was that "many" public voices claim false reports are impossible. I already changed that to some, but I would like evidence of this supposed fact before it is retained. Kev 20:56, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"being interviewed by the newspaper regarding a UMass student who had made a false report of being assaulted in a parking lot by a man who had grabbed her and cut her face with a knife (a wound that the student herself had inflicted). The student provided a description of the nonexistent assailant to the police before admitting a few weeks later that the incident had never occurred.  Despite the fact that the false report took police resources away from investigating a series of actual sexual assaults that had taken place on campus, the district attorney failed to hold the student accountable for the false complaint, stating "If anyone is prosecuted for filing a false report, then victims of real attacks will be less likely to report them."

The relevance of going in detail on this? Got me, and the second half is just more POV being shoved into the mouth of wikipedia. BTW, someone was trying to play very naughty by only providing half the quote from Carol Wallace. Kev 20:56, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"Some feminist commentators have accused Western society of encouraging sexual assaults by not pursuing them vigorously enough or punishing them severely enough. If this is so, then the logical consequence is that false reports are encouraged by announcing beforehand that they will not be prosecuted, and in some cases, actually rewarding them when they occur.  In many instances, false reports of "hate crimes", sexual assault included, are actually praised even after they are revealed to be false, for bringing attention to the issues."

Wikipedia is being used here once again as a sound-board, not appropriate. Kev 20:56, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Victim Blaming
"It has been proposed that one cause of victim blaming is the so-called "Just World Hypothesis"."

Who has proposed this? We need a citation here not just wiki editor proposals that would indicate original research.

"Some people even attribute all incidents of false reporting, no matter how well-documented the falsity, to victim blaming."

Again, who are these people?

"It has been suggested that vitcim blaming many be one explaination for the low reporting rate for sexual assault."

I charged this sentence from "a commonly held belief" to the more NPOV "it has been suggested", but a source would still be nice.

"Many commentators emphasise that victim blaming in rape cases justifies the restriction of women's freedoms and encourages the under reporting of the crime."

Who? Again and again, we have weasel words like "many commentators" replacing substantive facts on both "sides" of this issue. Kev 21:12, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Temp page still needed?
Does this temp page still serve a purpose? If there is useful material here it should be merged into the main article. -Willmcw 22:33, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

 * I created this temp page on the advice of someone on the main article that didn't want me to change a number of biased statements in that article. I've since given up on the whole thing, so this page no longer serves any purpose from my end.  Kev 23:36, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Then if there is no objection I'm going to blank it. That's not to deny the value of its contents, or the correctness of the main article, neither of which I've read. It's just that this subpage is inappropriate to leave in the main article space. FYI, temp pages do serve legitimate purposes, but they should be made as subpages of the Talk page, not the main article. Cheers, -Willmcw 23:48, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rape/temp1


text: Category:Casinos in the United States

title: Category:Casinos in the United States


text:
Mahayana-sutra-alamkara-karika

Mahāyāna-sūtrālamkāra-kārikā (Verses on the Ornament of the Mahāyāna Sūtras) is a major work of Buddhist philosophy attributed to Maitreya-nātha which is said to have transmitted it to Asanga (ca. 320 to ca. 390 CE). The Mahāyāna-sūtrālamkāra, written in verse, presents the Mahayana path from the Yogacara perspective. It comprises twenty-two chapters with a total of 800 verses and shows considerable similarity in arrangement and content to the Bodhisattvabhūmiśāstra, although the interesting first chapter proving the validity and authenticity of Mahāyāna is unique to this work. Associated with it is a prose commentary (bhāṣya) by Vasubandhu and several sub-commentaries by Sthiramati and others; the portions by Maitreya-nātha and Vasubandhu both survive in Sanskrit as well as Tibetan, Chinese, and Mongolian translations.

Overview
According to Richard K. Payne, the Mahāyāna-sūtrālamkāra is structured as follows:"The text is organized into five unequal parts, and it is the progress of topics through these five that constitutes the author’s discursive intent. The first step is to convince readers of the text that the Mahāyāna teachings are valid, that they are buddhadharma (Part One: Chapters 1 and 2). Next, the intent is to convince readers of the superiority of the Mahāyāna, so as to instill enthusiasm for it (Part Two: Chapters 3, 4, 5 and 6). The authors explain the meaning of the key concepts as part of the intellectual grounding of the Mahāyāna (Part Three: chapters 7, 8 and 9). Then the result of practice, the goal of perfected full awakening, is described (Part Four: Chapter 10). And finally, the path of practice is described in full (Part Five: Chapters 11 through 21)."

In English translation
The Mahayanasutralamkara has been translated into English three times.

 * 1) In 2004 as Universal Vehicle Discourse Literature by Lobsang Jamspal, Robert Thurman and the American Institute of Buddhist Studies translation committee.
 * 2) In 2014 as The Ornament of the Great Vehicle Sutras by the Dharmachakra Translation Committee, in particular Thomas Doctor.  This includes the Tibetan Nyingma scholar Mipham Rinpoche's commentary as well as Khenpo Shenga's annotations.
 * 3) In 2018 as The Feast of the Nectar of the Supreme Vehicles by the Padmakara Translation Group.  It includes the commentary of Mipham Rinpoche as well as extensive footnotes.

title: Mahayana-sutra-alamkara-karika


text:
User:Spp~enwiki

Hello Antonio

title: User:Spp~enwiki