text:
Syriac Christianity

Syriac Christianity ( / Mšiḥoyuṯo Suryoyto or Mšiḥāyūṯā Suryāytā) is a branch of Eastern Christianity of which formative theological writings and traditional liturgies are expressed in the Classical Syriac language, a variation of the old Aramaic language. In a wider sense, the term can also refer to Aramaic Christianity in general, thus encompassing all Christian traditions that are based on liturgical uses of Aramaic language and its variations, both historical and modern.

Along with Greek and Latin, Classical Syriac was one of the three most important languages of Early Christianity. It became a vessel for the development of a distinctive Syriac form of Christianity which flourished throughout the Near East and other parts of Asia during Late Antiquity and the Early Medieval period, giving rise to various liturgical and denominational traditions, represented in modern times by several Churches which continue to uphold the religious and cultural heritage of Syriac Christianity.

Syriac Christianity comprises two liturgical traditions: the East Syriac Rite and the West Syriac Rite. The East Syriac Rite (also known variably as the Chaldean, Assyrian, Sassanid, Babylonian or Persian Rite), whose main anaphora is the Holy Qurbana of Saints Addai and Mari, is that of the Chaldean Catholic Church, the Assyrian Church of the East (including the component Chaldean Syrian Church), the Ancient Church of the East, and the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church. The West Syriac Rite (also called Antiochian Syriac Rite), which has the Divine Liturgy of Saint James as its anaphora, is that of the Syriac Orthodox Church (including the component Jacobite Syrian Christian Church), the Maronite Church, the Syriac Catholic Church, and the Indian Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church, Syro-Malankara Catholic Church, and Malabar Independent Syrian Church. Protestant forms of this rite are used by the Malankara Mar Thoma Syrian Church and the St. Thomas Evangelical Church of India.

In India, indigenous Eastern Christians (Saint Thomas Christians) of both liturgical traditions (East and West Syriac) are called Syrian Christians. The traditional East Syriac community is represented by the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church and the Chaldean Syrian Church of India. The West Syriac liturgical tradition was introduced after 1665, and the community associated with it is represented by the Jacobite Syrian Christian Church (a part of the Syriac Orthodox Church), the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church (both of them belonging to the Oriental Orthodoxy), the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church (an Eastern Catholic church in the Catholic Church), the Mar Thoma Syrian Church (part of the Anglican Communion), and the Malabar Independent Syrian Church (an independent Oriental Orthodox Church not part of the Oriental Orthodox Communion).

The Syriac language is a variety of Aramaic language, that emerged in Edessa, Upper Mesopotamia during the first centuries AD. It is related to the Aramaic of Jesus, a Galilean dialect. This relationship added to its prestige for Christians. The form of the language in use in Edessa predominated in Christian writings and was accepted as the standard form, "a convenient vehicle for the spread of Christianity wherever there was a substrate of spoken Aramaic". The area where Syriac or Aramaic was spoken, an area of contact and conflict between the Roman Empire and the Sasanian Empire, extended from around Antioch in the west to Seleucia-Ctesiphon, the Sasanian capital, in the east and comprised the whole or parts of present-day Syria, Lebanon, Israel/Palestine, Iraq, and parts of Turkey and Iran.

Name
In modern English, the term "Syriac Christianity" is preferred over the alternative form "Syrian Christianity", that was also commonly used in older literature, as a synonym, particularly during the 19th and the 20th centuries. Since the latter term proved to be very polysemic, a tendency occurred (firstly among scholars) to reduce the term "Syrian Christianity" to its primary (regional) meaning, that designates the Christianity in Syria, while more specific term (Syriac Christianity) came to be used as preferred designation for the entire Syriac branch of Eastern Christianity. That distinction is not yet universally accepted, even among scholars. It is gradually introduced in most of the English speaking world, with some notable exceptions. Churches of Syriac tradition in India still self-identify, in Indian English, as "Syrian" Churches, both for sociolinguistic and legal reasons.

Modern distinctions between "Syrian" and "Syriac" (Christianity) are observed in English language as a partially accepted convention, but such distinctions do not exist in most of the other languages, nor on the endonymic (native) level among adherents of Syriac Christianity. Native terms (ethnonyms, demonyms, linguonyms) that were derived from the name of Syria did not possess a distinctive formal duality that would be equivalent to the conventional English distinction between terms Syrian and Syriac. Since the proposed distinction is not yet universally accepted among scholars, its individual and often inconsistent application has created a complex narrative, that is additionally burdened by older problems, inherited from terminological controversies that originated much earlier, within Syriac studies in particular, and also within Aramaic studies in general.

The use of Syrian/Syriac labels was also challenged by common scholarly reduction of Syriac Christianity to the Eastern Aramaic Christian heritage, and its offspring. Such reduction was detaching Syriac Christianity from Western Aramaic Christian traditions, that were enrooted in the very homeland of Christianity, encompassing ancient Aramaic-speaking communities in Judea and Palestine, with Galilee and Samaria, and also those in the regions of Nabatea and Palmyrene to the east, and Phoenicia and Syria proper to the north. Since Western Aramaic Christians did not fit into narrow scholarly definition of Syriac Christianity, focused on Eastern Aramaic traditions, various researchers have opted for an additional use of some wider terms, like "Aramaic Christianity", or "Aramaic Christendom", thus designating a religious, cultural and linguistic continuum, encompassing the entire branch of Christianity that stemmed from the first Aramaic-speaking Christian communities, formed in apostolic times, and then continued to develop throughout history, mainly in the Near East and also in several other regions of Asia, including India and China.

In English language, the term Aramaic Christianity should not be confused with term Aramean Christianity, since the first designation is linguistically defined and thus refers to Aramaic-speaking Christians in general, while the second designation is more specific and refers only to Christian Arameans.

History

Christianity began in the Near East, in Jerusalem among Aramaic-speaking Jews. It soon spread to other Aramaic-speaking Semitic peoples like Aramaic pagan peoples along the Eastern Mediterranean coast and also to the inland parts of the Roman Empire and beyond that into the Parthian Empire and the later Sasanian Empire, including Mesopotamia, which was dominated at different times and to varying extents by these empires.

The ruins of the Dura-Europos church, dating from the first half of the 3rd century are concrete evidence of the presence of organized Christian communities in the Aramaic-speaking area, far from Jerusalem and the Mediterranean coast, and there are traditions of the preaching of Christianity in the region as early as the time of the Apostles.

However, "virtually every aspect of Syriac Christianity prior to the fourth century remains obscure, and it is only then that one can feel oneself on firmer ground". The fourth century is marked by the many writings in Syriac of Saint Ephrem the Syrian, the Demonstrations of the slightly older Aphrahat and the anonymous ascetical Book of Steps. Ephrem lived in the Roman Empire, close to the border with the Sasanian Empire, to which the other two writers belonged. However, another source claims there is a significant amount of evidence from the fourth century and before about liturgical practices.

Other items of early literature of Syriac Christianity are the Diatessaron of Tatian, the Curetonian Gospels and the Syriac Sinaiticus, the Peshitta Bible and the Doctrine of Addai.

The bishops who took part in the First Council of Nicea (325), the first of the ecumenical councils, included twenty from Syria and one from Persia, outside the Roman Empire. Two councils held in the following century divided Syriac Christianity into two opposing parties.

East-West theological contrast

Syriac Christianity is divided on several theological issues, both Christological and Pneumatological.

In 431, the Council of Ephesus, which is reckoned as the third ecumenical council, condemned Nestorius and Nestorianism. That condemnation was consequently ignored by the East Syriac Church of the East, which had been previously established in the Sasanian Empire as a distinct Church at the Council of Seleucia-Ctesiphon in 410, and which at the Synod of Dadisho in 424 had declared the independence of its head, the Catholicos, in relation to "western" (Roman Empire) Church authorities. Even in its modern form of Assyrian Church of the East and Ancient Church of the East, it honours Nestorius as a teacher and saint.

In 451, the Council of Chalcedon, the fourth ecumenical council, condemned Monophysitism, and also rejected Dyoprosopism. This council was rejected by the Oriental Orthodox Churches (among which is the Syriac Orthodox Church) that use the West Syriac Rite. The Patriarchate of Antioch was consequently divided between two communities, pro-Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian. The Chalcedonians were often labelled as 'Melkites' (Imperials), while their opponents were labelled Monophysites (those who believe in the one rather than two natures of Christ) and Jacobites (after Jacob Baradaeus).

In 553, the Council of Constantinople, the fifth ecumenical council, anathematized Theodore of Mopsuestia, and also condemned several writings of Theodoret of Cyrus and Ibas of Edessa (see: Three-Chapter Controversy). Since those three theologians were highly regarded among Eastern Syriac Christians, further rifts were created, culminating in 612, when a major council of the Church of the East was held in Seleucia-Ctesiphon. Presided by Babai the Great (d. 628), the council officially adopted specific Christological formulations, using Syriac term qnoma (ܩܢܘܡܐ) as designation for dual (divine and human) properties within one prosopon (person) of Christ.

Theological estrangement between East Syriac and West Syriac branches was manifested as a prolonged rivalry, that was particularly intensive between the Church of the East and the Maphrianate of the East (Syriac Orthodox Church), with each branch claiming that its doctrines were not heretical while also accusing the other of teaching heresy. Their theological estrangement has persisted through the medieval and early modern periods and into the present era. In 1999, the Coptic Orthodox Church, a sister-church of the Syriac Orthodox Church, blocked admittance of the Assyrian Church of the East to the Middle East Council of Churches, which has among its members the Chaldean Catholic Church, and demanded that it remove from its liturgy the mention of Diodorus of Tarsus, Theodore of Mopsuestia and Nestorius, whom it venerates as "the Greek doctors".

East-West liturgical contrast

The liturgies of the East and West Syriacs are quite distinct. The East Syriac Rite is noted especially for its eucharistic Qurbana of Addai and Mari, in which the Words of Institution are absent. West Syriacs use the Syro-Antiochian or West Syriac Rite, which belongs to the family of liturgies known as the Antiochene Rite.

The Syriac Orthodox Church adds to the Trisagion ("Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal, have mercy on us") the phrase "who were crucified for us". The Church of the East interpreted this as heretical. Patriarch Timothy I of the Church of the East declared: "And also in all the countries of Babylon, of Persia, and of Assyria, and in all the countries of the sunrise, that is to say, among the Indians, the Chinese, the Tibetans, the Turks, and in all the provinces under the jurisdiction of this Patriarchal See, there is no addition of Crucifixus es pro nobis".

Among the Saint Thomas Christians of India, the East Syriac Rite was the one originally used, but those who in the 17th century accepted union with the Syriac Orthodox Church adopted the rite of that church.

Further divisions

A schism in 1552 in the Church of the East gave rise to a separate patriarchate, which at first entered into union with the Catholic Church but later formed the nucleus of the present-day Assyrian Church of the East and Ancient Church of the East, while at the end of the 18th century most followers of the earlier patriarchate chose union with Rome and, with some others, now form the Chaldean Catholic Church.

In India, all of the Saint Thomas Christians are still collectively called "Syrian Christians". The majority of the Saint Thomas Christians, who initially depended on the Church of the East, maintained union with Rome in spite of discomforts felt at Latinization by their Portuguese rulers and clergy, against which they protested. They now form the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church. A small group, which split from these in the early 19th century, united at the beginning of the 20th century, under the name of Chaldean Syrian Church, with the Assyrian Church of the East.

Those who in 1653 broke with the Catholic Church as dominated by the Portuguese in India and soon chose union with the Syriac Orthodox Church later split into various groups. The first separation was that of the Malabar Independent Syrian Church in 1772. At the end of the 19th century and in the course of the 20th, a division arose among those who remained united with the Syriac Orthodox Church who insisted on full autocephaly and are now called the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church and those, the Jacobite Syrian Christian Church, who remain faithful to the patriarch.

A reunion movement led in 1930 to the establishment of full communion between some of the Malankara Syrian Orthodox and the Catholic Church. They now form the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church.

In the Middle East, the newly enthroned patriarch of the Syriac Orthodox Church, Ignatius Michael III Jarweh, declared himself a Catholic and, having received confirmation from Rome in 1783, became the head of the Syriac Catholic Church.

In the 19th and 20th centuries many Syriac Christians, both East and West, left the Middle East for other lands, creating a substantial diaspora.

In modern times, several Churches of Syriac tradition are actively participating in ecumenical dialogue.

Terms for Syriac Christians

Indigenous Aramaic-speaking communities of the Near East (, سُريان) adopted Christianity very early, perhaps already from the first century, and began to abandon their three-millennia-old traditional ancient Mesopotamian religion, although this religion did not fully die out until as late as the tenth century. The kingdom of Osroene, with the capital city of Edessa, was absorbed into the Roman Empire in 114 as a semi-autonomous vassal state and then, after a period under the supremacy of Parthian Empire, was incorporated as a Roman province, first in 214, and finally in 242.

In 431 the Council of Ephesus declared Nestorianism a heresy. Nestorians, persecuted in the Byzantine Empire, sought refuge in the parts of Mesopotamia that were part of the Sasanian Empire. This encouraged acceptance of Nestorian doctrine by the Persian Church of the East, which spread Christianity outside Persia, to India, China, Tibet and Mongolia, expanding the range of this eastern branch of Syriac Christianity. The western branch, the Jacobite Church, appeared after the Council of Chalcedon's condemnation of Miaphysitism in 451.

Churches of Syriac traditions
West Syriac Rite
 * Oriental Orthodox
 * Syriac Orthodox Church (Syriac Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch and all the East, based in Damascus, Syria)
 * Jacobite Syrian Christian Church (Syriac Orthodox Church in India, Catholicosate, based in Kochi, Kerala, India)
 * Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church (Indian Orthodox Church, Catholicosate, based in Kottayam, Kerala, India)
 * Malabar Independent Syrian Church (Independent Oriental Orthodox Church, based in Thozhiyur, Kerala, India, not part of the Oriental Orthodox Communion)
 * Eastern Catholic Churches of the West Syriac Rite
 * Maronite Catholic Church (Syriac Maronite Patriarchate of Antioch and all the East, based in Bkerké, Lebanon)
 * Syriac Catholic Church (Syriac Catholic Patriarchate of Antioch and all the East, based in Beirut, Lebanon)
 * Syro-Malankara Catholic Church (Malankara Syrian Catholic Church, Catholicosate, based in Trivandrum, Kerala, India)
 * Eastern Protestant Churches
 * Malankara Mar Thoma Syrian Church (In full communion with the Anglican Communion, based in Thiruvalla, Kerala, India)
 * St. Thomas Evangelical Church of India (based in Thiruvalla, Kerala, India)

East Syriac Rite East Syriac Christians were involved in the mission to India, and many of the present Churches in India are in communion with either East or West Syriac Churches. These Indian Christians are known as Saint Thomas Christians.
 * Church of the East
 * The Assyrian Church of the East, traditionalist continuation that emerged from the Shimun line of patriarchs of the Church of the East that took this name in 1976
 * The Chaldean Syrian Church an archbishopric in India of the Assyrian Church of the East
 * The Ancient Church of the East, split from the Assyrian Church of the East in the 1960s.
 * Eastern Catholic Churches of the East Syriac Rite
 * The Chaldean Catholic Church, an Eastern Catholic Church that emerged from the Elia line of patriarchs of the Church of the East following splits in 1552, 1667/1668 and 1779
 * The Syro-Malabar Church, an Eastern Catholic Church based in Kerala that is independent from the Chaldean Catholic hierarchy since the Synod of Diamper in 1599.

In modern times, even apart from the Eastern Protestant denominations like Mar Thoma Syrian Church of Malabar and St. Thomas Evangelical Church of India, which originated from Churches of the West Syriac Rite, various Evangelical denominations continue to send representatives among Syriac Christians. As a result, several Evangelical groups have been established, particularly the Assyrian Pentecostal Church (mostly in America, Iran, and Iraq) from East Syriac Christians, and the Aramean Free Church (mostly in Germany, Sweden, America and Syria) from West Syriac Christians. Because of their new (Protestant) theology these are sometimes not classified as traditional Churches of Syriac Christianity.

title: Syriac Christianity


text: User talk:70.26.16.242

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

title: User talk:70.26.16.242


text:
User talk:Exidin

Image copyrights
Thanks for uploading Image:Papadopoulos.jpg. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use if you release it under the GFDL, or  if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much,   — Edwin Stearns | Talk 20:47, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Exidin


text:
The Cricket on the Hearth

The Cricket on the Hearth: A Fairy Tale of Home is a novella by Charles Dickens, published by Bradbury and Evans, and released 20 December 1845 with illustrations by Daniel Maclise, John Leech, Richard Doyle, Clarkson Stanfield and Edwin Henry Landseer. Dickens began writing the book around 17 October 1845 and finished it by 1 December. Like all of Dickens's Christmas books, it was published in book form, not as a serial.

Dickens described the novel as "quiet and domestic [...] innocent and pretty." It is subdivided into chapters called "Chirps", similar to the "Quarters" of The Chimes or the "Staves" of A Christmas Carol. It is the third of Dickens's five Christmas books, preceded by A Christmas Carol (1843) and The Chimes (1844), and followed by The Battle of Life (1846) and The Haunted Man and the Ghost's Bargain (1848).

Plot
John Peerybingle, a slow but honest carrier, lives contentedly with his beloved wife Dot and their infant son. A teenage nursemaid, Tilly Slowboy, provides intermittent help with the child. Dot is still an attractive young woman, much younger than her husband, but she loves him dearly and is perfectly content with her life and her home. A cricket chirps cheerfully on the hearth, reflecting the family's happiness.

One night, John gives a lift in his cart to a mysterious elderly stranger who invites himself to lodge with the family for a few days. John is surprised at the alacrity with which Dot agrees.

The Peerybingles are friends with Caleb Plummer, a poor toymaker who lives with his blind daughter Bertha. Caleb is employed by the stern and ill-natured toy merchant Tackleton who announces that he intends to marry one of Dot's old schoolfriends, May Fielding. Some years earlier, May had been the sweetheart of Caleb's son, Edward, before his presumed death in South America, but now with few prospect May has little option but to concede to her mother's insistence that she should marry the wealthy Tackleton.

Tackleton draws John's attention to an assignation between Dot and the lodger, and they watch unobserved through a window as the lodger, now seen to be a young man in disguise, clasps Dot around the waist. John is devastated at his wife's betrayal, and that night as he sits before the fire he contemplates murdering the young man. Suddenly, the cricket on the hearth begins to chip, and in fairy shape shows John visions of his wife's history from her school days onwards, always emphasising her goodness and loyalty. After a sleepless night, John's desire for revenge fades, and he convinces himself that Dot could never have been truly happy with him, and that he must for her own sake release her from her marriage vows.

But before John can say anything, the mysterious lodger is revealed to be Caleb's son, Edward, who has unexpectedly returned. Having heard that May was to marry Tackleton, he disguised himself as an old man in order to discover whether his former sweetheart had forgotten him. Dot recognised him straight away, and fell in with the deception for fear that her honest but clumsy husband might accidentally tip-off Tackleton, allowing him to wed May quickly before anybody had a chance to prevent him. Now, all is revealed and Edward marries May himself. Dot has never been unfaithful to John, and she reminds him that she loves him with all her heart.

Initially peeved at having missed the opportunity to marry May, Tackleton relents and send gifts to the happy couple. That evening he joins the wedding dance, and the cricket on the hearth joins in with its own chirps.

Principal characters

 * John Peerybingle, a carrier; a lumbering, slow, honest man
 * Mary ("Dot") Peerybingle, John's wife
 * Tilly Slowboy, family nursemaid
 * Dot and John's infant son
 * Tackleton (called "Gruff and Tackleton"); a stern, ill-natured, toy merchant
 * Caleb Plummer, a poor toymaker in the employ of Tackleton
 * Bertha Plummer, Caleb's blind daughter of Caleb Plummer
 * Edward Plummer, Caleb's son
 * May Fielding, an old friend of Dot's
 * Mrs Fielding, May's mother; a peevish, querulous old lady

Background
In July 1845, Dickens contemplated forming a periodical focusing on the concerns of the home. It was to be called The Cricket, but the plan fell through, and he transformed his idea into a Christmas book in which he abandoned social criticism, current events, and topical themes in favour of simple fantasy and a domestic setting for his hero's redemption, though some have criticised this notion. The book was released on 20 December 1845 (the title page read "1846") and sold briskly into the New Year. Seventeen stage productions opened during the Christmas season 1845 with one production receiving Dickens's approval and opening on the same day as the book's release. Dickens read the tale four times in public performance. It has been dramatised in numerous languages and for years was more popular on stage than A Christmas Carol. Cricket is less explicitly Christian than some of Dickens's other Christmas books, and it has been criticised for its sentimentality, but contemporary readers were attracted to its depiction of the Victorian ideal of the happy home.

Literary significance and criticism
The book was a huge commercial success, quickly going through two editions. Reviews were favourable, but not all so. In an unsigned piece in The Times the reviewer opined, "We owe it to literature to protest against this last production of Mr. Dickens [...] Shades of Fielding and Scott! Is it for such jargon as this that we have given your throne to one who cannot estimate his eminence?" However, William Makepeace Thackeray enjoyed the book immensely: "To us, it appears it is a good Christmas book, illuminated with extra gas, crammed with extra bonbons, French plums and sweetness [...] This story is no more a real story than Peerybingle is a real name!"

Dickens's portrayal of the blind girl Bertha is significant. Victorians believed disabilities were inherited, and thus it was not socially acceptable for the blind to marry (although they often did in reality). In fictional courtship plots, the blind were often used to build tension since it was assumed they must be kept from marrying. The fictional portrayal of Bertha is similar to Dickens's description in American Notes (1842) of the deaf and blind girl Laura Bridgman, whom he saw on a visit to the Perkins Institution for the Blind in Boston, Massachusetts.

Modern scholars have given the story little attention, but Andrew Sangers has argued it contains similarities to Shakespeare's comedies and should be seen "both as a significant indication of the tastes of the 1840s and of Dickens himself."

Vladimir Lenin left during a performance of the Cricket play in Russia, as he found it dull and the saccharine sentimentality got on his nerves. This incident might be little remembered if George Orwell had not mentioned it in his essay on Dickens.

Adaptations
Stage adaptations include the successful The Cricket on the Hearth by Albert Richard Smith produced at the Surrey Theatre in 1845, and Dion Boucicault's Dot, A Drama in Three Acts (or simply Dot), first performed at New York's Winter Garden in 1859. It was staged repeatedly in Britain and America for the remainder of the 19th century, starring, at times, John Toole, Henry Irving, and Jean Davenport. The play helped launch the career of American actor Joseph Jefferson (1829–1905).

The novella was the basis for at least two operas: Karl Goldmark's Das Heimchem am Herd with a libretto by A. M. Willner (premiere: June 1896, Berlin; New York 1910), and Riccardo Zandonai's Il grillo del focolare with a libretto by Cesare Hanau (premiere: November 1908, Turin). Goldmark's opera was performed in Philadelphia in November 1912 with the Cricket sung by American soprano Mabel Riegelman (1889, Cincinnati – 1967, Burlingame, California).

Film, radio, and television adaptations include three American silent film versions: one, directed by D.W. Griffith (1909) starring Owen Moore, another directed by L. Marston (1914) starring Alan Hale, and one directed by Lorimer Johnston (1923). A silent Russian version, Sverchok na Pechi (1915) was directed by Boris Sushkevich and Aleksandr Uralsky and starred Maria Ouspenskaya. A silent French version, Le Grillon du Foyer (1922), was directed and adapted by Jean Manoussi and starred Charles Boyer as Edouard. A 25-minute NBC radio play adaptation aired on 24 December 1945.

In 1967, Rankin/Bass Productions produced a 50-minute animated television adaptation of the story for NBC. Told in the Cricket's own words, it featured the voices of Roddy MacDowall as the Cricket, and father and daughter Danny Thomas and Marlo Thomas as Caleb and Bertha, with various other characters voiced by Paul Frees and Hans Conried. This adaptation cuts several characters, including the central pair of John and Dot, focusing solely on Caleb and Bertha. Television Corporation of Japan (now Eiken) provided the animation for the special, while its seven original songs were written and composed by Maury Laws and Jules Bass. Rankin/Bass later produced their adaptations of Dickens's other holiday stories for television: A Christmas Tree (1850) as the ninth episode of their 1972–73 syndicated television series, Festival of Family Classics, and A Christmas Carol (1843) as the 1978 animated remake of the 1956 live action musical special, The Stingiest Man in Town.

title: The Cricket on the Hearth


text:
Briesen

Briesen may refer to the following places:

In Brandenburg, Germany

 * Briesen (Spreewald), in the Spree-Neiße district
 * Briesen (Mark), in the Oder-Spree district
 * A part of Friesack, in the Havelland district
 * A part of Halbe, in the Dahme-Spreewald district

German alternates

 * An older name of Brezno, Slovakia
 * An older name of Brzeźno, Człuchów in Poland
 * An older name of Wąbrzeźno, Poland
 * An older name of Brzeżno, Poland

Old district

 * An old district in West Prussia

title: Briesen


text:
User:Dennis Schmitz

Became a Wikipedia User December 2004.

I have:

 * Expertise in Computer Architecture, Digital Design, Signal Integrity and various electronics topics.
 * Fair expertise in many science related topics
 * No self-control regarding running off my mouth in philosophy and politics so I'll probably use an alias to save embarrassment.

title: User:Dennis Schmitz


text:
User talk:What's the sound of a goat?

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Stop it. If you repeat this troll, you will be blocked. Going to rollback all the testn templates now. Pakaran (ark a pan) 20:50, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Signing talk with a wrong username is a bannable offense. One more time and you're out. andy

title: User talk:What's the sound of a goat?


text:
Dragon Fli Empire

Dragon Fli Empire (abbreviated DFE) is a Canadian hip hop duo formed in 2002 from Calgary, comprising Tarik Robinson, also known as Teekay (MC/producer), and Adam Hicks, also known as DJ Cosm (DJ/producer).

DFE's first album, Conquest, was released in August 2004. It was followed by Invasion in 2005, Intermission EP in 2008 and Redefine in 2009. Their music is inspired by classic hip hop beats like those of Pete Rock, Large Professor and Prince Paul.

History
Dragon Fli Empire formed in May 2002. They released the original version of their debut album Conquest locally in the summer of 2002 as a limited edition CD-R.

The song "Mount Pleasant", a track about observations while riding Calgary Transit received airplay on CJSW-FM, CKUA and CBC Radio 3. An official version of Conquest was pressed and independently released in August 2004. The album was re-mastered and three tracks from the CD-R version were replaced with newer ones, including the DFE theme song "D-E-F".

Their second album, Invasion, was independently released in May 2005. Reaching number five on the !earshot Canadian campus radio charts, it showcased a progression in the group's sound, and featured the tracks "Headphones", "Our Way", "Invasion" and "Tight Spot". The group collaborated with several other Canadian indie hip hop artists on the album, including Ndidi Cascade, More or Les, Epic, Mindbender and Touch and Nato plus live musicians like Kirby Small and Tariq.

In 2007, an album featuring tracks from Invasion and Conquest (Inquest) was released in Japan through P-Vine Records. The same year, a 12" vinyl release of the Invasion song "Roc the Crowd" featuring Ohmega Watts was released worldwide on Calgary-based label Bigfoot Records.

DFE released an EP entitled Intermission in May 2008 prior to their third full-length album Redefine. The EP reached number three on the !earshot and Chart Attack hip hop charts. Intermission also reached number three on The R3-30 on CBC Radio 3. Two tracks from Intermission were nominated for Radio 3's 2008 Bucky Awards.

The group's third full-length album, Redefine released in Japan on P-Vine Records in October 2008 and in North America on Makebelieve Records in January 2009. Redefine featured collaborations with a number of high-profile artists including Cadence Weapon, Masta Ace, Ohmega Watts, Josh Martinez, Moka Only and Raashan Ahmad. It reached number one for two weeks on the !earshot and Chart Attack hip hop charts, and was number three for several weeks on the CMJ hip hop charts. The video for "Outside Inn" was the group's first to receive rotation on MuchMusic and MuchVibe. Redefine was also nominated for Best Rap / Hip Hop Recording at the 2009 Western Canadian Music Awards.

The Ride On EP vinyl was released via Finnish label Traveller Records in September 2009, featuring four songs from Redefine.

Dragon Fli Empire was the first hip hop group featured on the annual MUCH does Calgary talent showcase on MuchMusic in 2005. They have also appeared on CBC-TV's ZeD and The National. The group has toured across Canada, Europe and parts of the U.S., and played festivals like Shambhala, Montreal's Under Pressure, Ottawa's Alberta Scene and Yellowknife's Folk on the Rocks. DFE has also played select dates of Warped Tour and Rock the Bells as well as showcasing locally at JunoFest, Sled Island, the Calgary International Spoken Word Festival and the Calgary Folk Music Festival.

Their music has been featured on the MTV Canada series Peak Season as well as the OLN/National Geographic Adventure travel show Word Travels.

Discography

 * Conquest - 2004 - Makebelieve Records
 * Invasion - 2005 - Makebelieve Records
 * Intermission EP - 2008 - Makebelieve Records
 * Redefine - 2009 - Makebelieve Records
 *  Mission Statement - 2013 - Makebelieve Records
 *  Banff Avenue - 2020 - Makebelieve Records

Japanese discography

 * Inquest - 2007 - P-Vine Records
 * Redefine - 2008 - P-Vine Records

Vinyl discography

 * Abstrakt Vinyl Compilation - 2005 - Makebelieve Records (features "Headphones")
 * Roc the Crowd EP feat. Ohmega Watts - 2007 - Bigfoot Records
 * Ride On EP - 2009 - Traveller Records
 * Hold Down the Fort b/w Right on Time ft. Von Pea 7" - 2018 - Beats House Records / Radio Krimi Records
 * Record Store ft. J-Live b/w Fli Beat Patrol 7" - 2020 - Ill Adrenaline Records

Compilation appearances

 * New Music Canada, Vol. 1 (2004, CBC Records) - "Mount Pleasant"
 * Up North Trip Vol. 4 (2006, Audio Research Records) - "Invasion"
 * Underground Hip Hop Vol. 4 (2006, URBNET Records) - "Tight Spot"
 * Mellow Beats, Rhymes and Vibes (2007, P-Vine Records) - "Beauty Full"
 * Beat Studies: Lesson Two (2008, P-Vine Records) - "Headphones"
 * Mellow Beats, Sunshine and Twilight (2009, P-Vine Records) - "Paradise", "Speak to Me"
 * Underground Hip Hop Vol. 5 (2010, URBNET Records) - "Rise"

title: Dragon Fli Empire


text:
Talk:Mirko Cro Cop

Untitled
Needs work, the intro section is almost entirely fanboyish POV textHistoryFightFan (talk) 21:39, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Mirko Filipović. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080209002548/http://mmajunkie.com:80/2007/02/01/performifys-picks-ufc-67/ to http://mmajunkie.com/2007/02/01/performifys-picks-ufc-67

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 13:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

BRD
The reach figure is unsourced. If Cro Cop fought through 2016, what's the point in writing "2015, 2016"? Chris Troutman ( talk ) 13:36, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

 * Because he retired in 2015 and then came out of retirement in 2016. Not complicated, really. TBMNY (talk) 15:35, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Mirko Filipović. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080306115103/http://www.gambling911.com/Fedor-Emelianenko-040707.html to http://www.gambling911.com/Fedor-Emelianenko-040707.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091108012100/http://mmajunkie.com/news/16742/ben-rothwell-and-mirko-cro-cop-filipovic-likely-to-meet-at-ufc-110.mma to http://mmajunkie.com/news/16742/ben-rothwell-and-mirko-cro-cop-filipovic-likely-to-meet-at-ufc-110.mma
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100222195720/http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=news.detail&gid=78621 to http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=news.detail&gid=78621
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150320222722/http://www.muaythaiauthority.com/2014/03/glory-14-results-and-recap.html to http://www.muaythaiauthority.com/2014/03/glory-14-results-and-recap.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.blackbeltmag.com/archives/719

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:43, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 29 July 2017

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Mirko Cro Cop. No such user (talk) 13:47, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Mirko Filipović → Mirko Cro Cop – Per WP:COMMONNAME, I don't think I can remember anytime ever when he was not refered to as Cro Cop. Evertonfc13 (talk) 02:08, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Support This had been brought up years ago, but was never acted upon. Mirko Cro Cop and Mirko Crocop have both been redirects to here since 2006 and even then he was known as Cro Cop. I don't why this is but I agree with COMMONNAME. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 02:28, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

 * Support This has long ago gone well beyond a nickname to a prominent stage name. He, his promotions and the media recognize it, Wikipedia should finally. Same deal as Volk Han or Renan Barão. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:24, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

 * Support Most fans, media, promoters and websites recognize him as Mirko Cro Cop. Just as we know who CM Punk is but not his birth name Phillip Jack Brooks.CASSIOPEIA (talk) 07:37, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per common name GuzzyG (talk) 23:43, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose As mentioned above, this gets brought up every few years in regard to popular fighters (Rampage, Cro Cop, Minotauro, Minotouro, Babalu, etc.). It creates precedent for every time someone wants to change names. Per past discussions and consensus from MMA project, Leave as redirect to his given name. Ppt1973 (talk) 17:24, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Out of the fighters you listed, besides cro cop, the only fighter that is listed by that name on their official ufc.com profile is Rampage. Evertonfc13 (talk) 02:54, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Mirko Cro Cop. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090614040208/http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=news.detail&gid=20391 to http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=news.Detail&gid=20391
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927222647/http://www.nokaut.com/?id=12&solo_news=985&lang=e&cur=eur to http://www.nokaut.com/?id=12&solo_news=985&lang=e&cur=eur
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150516064706/http://www.mirko-crocop.com/ to http://www.mirko-crocop.com/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090422200957/http://www.mirko-crocop.com/?id=4&solo=86 to http://www.mirko-crocop.com/?id=4&solo=86
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090620231431/http://mmajunkie.com/news/15242/report-ufc-snubber-mirko-cro-cop-filipovic-meets-mighty-mo-at-dream-10-in-july.mma to http://mmajunkie.com/news/15242/report-ufc-snubber-mirko-cro-cop-filipovic-meets-mighty-mo-at-dream-10-in-july.mma
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111004221010/http://www.fightersonlymagazine.co.uk/news/viewarticle.php?id=2700 to http://www.fightersonlymagazine.co.uk/news/viewarticle.php?id=2700
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100329175805/http://www.fightersonlymagazine.co.uk/news/viewarticle.php?id=3973 to http://www.fightersonlymagazine.co.uk/news/viewarticle.php?id=3973
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111115134821/http://www.fightersonlymagazine.co.uk/news/viewarticle.php?id=5077 to http://www.fightersonlymagazine.co.uk/news/viewarticle.php?id=5077
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120701042147/http://www.bjpenn.com/mmanews/2012/05/28/333-cro-cop-finds-his-groove-kos-jorge-last-weekend-26767.html to http://www.bjpenn.com/mmanews/2012/05/28/333-cro-cop-finds-his-groove-kos-jorge-last-weekend-26767.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160810131648/http://liverkick.com/index.php/item/2935-sergei-kharitonov-out-of-cro-cop-bout-at-glory-17 to http://liverkick.com/index.php/item/2935-sergei-kharitonov-out-of-cro-cop-bout-at-glory-17
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160810103644/http://liverkick.com/index.php/item/2954-jarrell-miller-vs-mirko-cro-cop-ii-set-for-glory-17 to http://liverkick.com/index.php/item/2954-jarrell-miller-vs-mirko-cro-cop-ii-set-for-glory-17
 * Added tag to http://www.mmabay.co.uk/2013/10/24/aleksander-emelianenko-arrested-by-police-after-allegedly-beating-up-a-man-at-a-cafe
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150626134636/http://www.fightersonlymag.com/content/news/20065-aleks-pulled-from-crocop-rematch-dropped-by-legend-organization to http://www.fightersonlymag.com/content/news/20065-aleks-pulled-from-crocop-rematch-dropped-by-legend-organization
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150626134649/http://www.fightersonlymag.com/content/news/20081-crocop-gets-new-opponent-to-replace-aleks-emelianenko to http://www.fightersonlymag.com/content/news/20081-crocop-gets-new-opponent-to-replace-aleks-emelianenko
 * Added tag to http://www.mmafighting.com/2007/01/01/mmafightingcom-2006-year-end-aw
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100313170353/http://www.k-1.co.jp/en/fighter/player.php?index=mirko to http://www.k-1.co.jp/en/fighter/player.php?index=mirko

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:04, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mirko Cro Cop. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://sports.media.daum.net/nms/general/news/mma/view.do?cate=23791&type=&newsid=291103&cp=mfight
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150324152926/http://liverkick.com/index.php/item/3345-mirko-cro-cop-finishes-satoshi-ishii-in-japan/3345-mirko-cro-cop-finishes-satoshi-ishii-in-japan to http://www.liverkick.com/index.php/item/3345-mirko-cro-cop-finishes-satoshi-ishii-in-japan/3345-mirko-cro-cop-finishes-satoshi-ishii-in-japan

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:36, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mirko Cro Cop


text:
Salt Lake 2002 (video game)

Salt Lake 2002 is the official video game of the XIX Olympic Winter Games, hosted by Salt Lake City, Utah, United States in 2002. Developed by Attention to Detail and published by Eidos Interactive (DC Studios/Ubi Soft for the Game Boy Advance version), it was released for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 2 and Game Boy Advance. An Xbox version was also planned but cancelled.

Competition
There are four game modes: Olympic, Tournament, Classic and Time Trial. The Olympic Mode returns to the simplistic direct-to-competition mode, unlike Sydney 2000 that forced the player to qualify for the Olympics. Each players' victories are logged, and trophies/medals can be seen in a trophy room. Gameplay-wise, the events are unevenly done. While the downhill/slalom events are reasonably simulated and playable (one can play downhill in first person view, and at easier levels missing a gate in the slalom does not disqualify the player), in ski jump and bobsleigh results are generally hard to predict or control.

Playable nations
There is a total of 16 playable countries in the game. They are:

Events

 * Men's Alpine Skiing Downhill
 * Women's Alpine Skiing Slalom
 * Women's Freestyle Skiing Aerials
 * Men's Ski Jump K120 Individual
 * Men's Two-man Bobsleigh
 * Men's Snowboard Parallel Giant Slalom
 * Curling

Reception
The Game Boy Advance version of Salt Lake 2002 received "mixed" reviews, while the PC and PlayStation 2 versions received "generally unfavorable reviews", according to the review aggregation website Metacritic. In Japan, where the PS2 version was ported for release on 28 February 2002, Famitsu gave it a score of 25 out of 40.

title: Salt Lake 2002 (video game)


text: Template:UK-geo-stub

title: Template:UK-geo-stub


text:
Talk:Shotgun formation

Changes
12/15/04 edit made in view of, for instance, Northwestern U.'s varsity, offense built around a running option between tailback & running back. But let's not reference particular current teams, as such info goes stale too quickly.

robgood@bestweb.net 12/15/04

In every level of football I have ever seen the ball is snapped to the Quarterback in the Shotgun, not the tailback. In variations of the Singlewing, the ball may be snapped to the Tail(or half)back. If we're talking of the "Shotgun" then the ball is snapped to the QB. In other similar formations (singlewing as mentioned above) the ball is commonly snapped to a tail/half back. It is sometimes directly snapped to a tail/half back in the shotgun, but on the vast majority of plays the ball is snapped to the QB. 22:55, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Quarterback?
Sorry, but if you're standing several yards back of center, by definition you're not quarterback. Perhaps you ordinarily take the snap right from under center, in which case you're QB, but if you instead take the snap in shotgun formation, in that formation you're not QB, but are probably (there might be another back behind you) tailback. There is no quarterback in a shotgun formation. -- robgood@bestweb.net 2/2/05

No, actually the position you are playing is quarterback. Regardless of where he lines up a widereciever is a widereceiver. Whether he is lined up at split end, flanker, in the slot, where ever he is a widereceiver. No matter what the playbook decides to denote you as (H-back, z, x, y, flanker, split end, etc) you are playing a certain position.

["Position" means "place". -- RG]

It's semantics, but in common usage, meaning 99% of the time that player is a quarterback. Since it's your article, I'll leave it like it is. Take it and run with it.

 * Heh...or PASS with it. But seriously, here's someone who uses it correctly: http://members.atlantic.net/~gilbertr/b-9703ax.htm -- robgood@bestweb.net 3/23/05

for robgood
Perhaps, historically(1950's or 60's perhaps), by definition the recipient of the snap in the shotgun formation was called "tailback" or more properly "halfback", but today on offense, the positions are defined by what role the player has, not by where he stands. So a player who is listed as a quarterback on the roster who normally passes the ball does not magically become a halfback when he is in shotgun formation. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's still a duck even if it's out of the water. On defense, if a safety cheats up to the line of scrimmage before the snap and blitzes, he's not a defensive end rushing the passer, he is a safety who is blitzing.

Furthermore, in the official NFL rules, the position a player has is designated by the number range. 1-19 is either a quarterback, punter, or kicker. 20-49 is reserved for backs other than quarterbacks (offensive and defensive). Jcam 01:53, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Tailback
At least as late as the 1970s there was a fictional TV program concerning children playing touch football, and because they all used a deep snap they referred to the position as tailback.

I recognize but deprecate the naming of positions by role rather than geometry, because it leads to confusion. See the Wikipedia article I wrote on position names. Coaches at low levels have been flagged because they thought they could put a tight end in motion, because that's how it was described when a team shifted a tight end to wingback, and put the wingback in motion -- or had someone who usually played tight end play in the backfield.

And if the NFL says 1-19 is for a quarterback or punter, that's consistent with the player taking the thrown snap in short punt formation, isn't it? ;-) Besides, there is no penalty as long as an interior line player is wearing 50-79, and all other players are wearing 1-49 or 80-99.

And I would say that if a safety did come up to the line and assume a 3- or 4-point stance, then indeed that safety had shifted to DL.

What I've concluded is that it makes sense to have one position listed in a roster, but in describing a formation (as for radio), then the position occupied by the player at that instant is what applies. If someone who usually plays guard is switched to tackle, you'd say that person is playing tackle, no?

In 2000 the New York Sharks used a lot of double wing formation, in which the quarterback crouches low and at an angle to the center, and the ball is usually snapped to another back about 5 yards behind center (although it is sometimes handed to the quarterback). How are you going to name that player's position? "Quarterback", because she usually took the snap and did most of the passing from that formation? Then what are you going to call the actual quarterback? BTW, the actual quarterback in that formation was usually one who also played the more conventional quarterback position in their wing T and pro sets, and who took the snap when they played shotgun formation. - robgood@bestweb.net

leg up
can someone please explain to me why the qaurterbacks always put their leg up before the snap in shotgun formation? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.34.110.211 (talk) 23:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC).

They hike there leg up for a silent snap. the center will count apre determend number of seconds and then hike the ball —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

Huh?
"In recent years, fewer and fewer teams use the shotgun since the two-deep (or Tampa 2) zones allow effective defense against offenses that don't or can't run the ball. Most NFL teams only use the shotgun on obvious passing downs or when they are behind and need to pass almost every down to catch up."

The average NFL team used the shotgun 27 percent of the time in 2007, up from 19 percent in 2006. The trend is up, not down. Can someone cite a source proving the shotgun is used less now than in the past? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Future2008 (talk • contribs) 06:40, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I also dispute the quoted statement above. It seems to me that the shotgun is being seen more and more, not less and less, along with the increased use of variations of the "spread" offense. Further more, the Tampa 2 zones seem to be less common. For example, the Eagles were a team that rarely if ever used the shotgun early in the 2000's but by 2009 they used it the majority of snaps. InsultComicDog (talk) 11:30, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Linemen
I think I should be noted that the offensive linemen are in the two-point stance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vaultsuit (talk • contribs) 17:35, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Miami Dolphins used the formation with a single back in 1966
Here's the footage...They even have a slow motion replay of the formation in use.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p90IYODrQQM

2601:648:8400:20D4:2DE0:10AB:2986:23CE (talk) 00:19, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Shotgun formation


text:
Michael Lupo

Michael del Marco Lupo (19 January 1953 – 12 February 1995) was a serial killer originally from Italy, who was active in the UK. He operated from the Yves Saint Laurent boutique in Brompton Road, London during the 1980s.

History
On 15 March 1986, the body of a 37-year-old murder victim named James Burns, a railway worker originally from Edinburgh, was found in a derelict flat in Kensington, London. The investigation made little progress because there was no obvious link between a perpetrator and the dead man.

On 6 April that year, the corpse of Anthony Connolly, 24, was found on a railway embankment in Brixton. He had been strangled with his own scarf. Because Connolly had been sharing a flat with a man who was HIV positive, there was a long delay between the discovery of the body and the post mortem because the coroner wanted to make sure Connolly was not himself infected with HIV. This created serious tensions between the authorities and the gay community, the latter accusing the former of dragging their heels and not taking the death of a gay man seriously.

Trial and imprisonment
Six weeks later, on 18 May, Michele del Marco Lupo was arrested and charged with the murders of Connolly and Burns. Lupo, who ran a flower shop in Chelsea, was originally from Italy and a former soldier. He apparently called himself "The Wolf Man" ("lupo" means "wolf" in Italian) and boasted of having had 4,000 lovers.

On 21 May, Lupo was charged with two other recent killings, those of a young hospital worker named Damien McCloskey, who had been strangled in West London, and an unidentified man, who was murdered near Hungerford Bridge over the Thames. In addition to these four murders, Lupo was charged with two attempted murders.

In July 1987, at the Old Bailey, Lupo was sentenced to four life sentences, plus 14 years. Lupo had pleaded guilty to all charges. There were investigations in cities Lupo had visited in the early 1980s, such as New York City, Berlin and Los Angeles, to see if he was responsible for unsolved homicides in those locations, although no evidence of any further crimes committed by Lupo came to light.

In February 1995, Lupo died in Frankland Prison, County Durham from an AIDS related illness. He had contracted the disease shortly before murdering his first victim and told the police that discovering his medical condition had led to a loathing of fellow homosexuals with him developing a "callous rationale" and an "urge to kill". He spent the last years of his life in a prison hospital.

title: Michael Lupo


text:
User:March 7

It says I'm March 7?

I meant Mach 7. Damn.

title: User:March 7


text:
Talk:New town

Opening comment

 * Not convinced there is a strong case for it (although there is a case). New Town is the term in common usage - even the French term translates directly to new town. The term planned city does feel more 'generic', but is not used outside academia in the UK (and, speaking as a planning graduate, rarely there) and, I suspect, most of Europe. Looking at 'What links here' the vast majority seem to come via the term 'new town' - random example Tung Chung - ( although a significant minority use other terms). The suggestion has merit, but I don't think the case is strong enough. Icundell 00:50, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I vote to keep the article here. All towns are of course at some point "new", but many fewer are new recently, since most towns have now been around for a long while. The "New town movement" was a specific program, and all cities start as towns. It may be reasonable to have two articles at some point, but the terms are largely interchangeable in planning community. BTW, you could move the articles by hand (i.e. copying all the text from one to the other and then redirect New town to planned city). If you feel like fussing with it, it might be better to have specific articles on Planned communities in the United States, Planned communities in Poland, etc. dml 03:58, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't know a lot about the "new town" movement, but I think that the majority of the cities currently in the article are called "planned communities" or "planned cities" and not called "new towns". So if this page doesn't get moved, I guess someone will have to split the article up, but I think it makes more sense to keep it all together and just move it to planned city.  ~leif ☺ HELO 01:42, Dec 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * Do not move the whole article by hand by cutting and pasting: that separates it from its edit history. Either use the "Move this page" link or (if that doesn't work) ask on Requested moves.  As far as I am aware, the new towns and the "new town movement" is pretty UK specific, but planned cities occur all over the place.  There is an argument to have specific articles on each. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:29, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Thank you for educating more wikipedians about why not to do copy+paste moves! It is important that people are made aware that they shouldn't do that. ~leif
 * Thanks - it is also worth mentioning that the only way to split an article into two or more new article is cutting and pasting, but then it best practice is to record the fact in the edit summary so the previous edit history can be tracked back. -- ALoan (Talk) 09:31, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Although I se where you are coming from, I think that would be unwarranted fragmentation (at this stage, at least - maybe the time will come). Icundell 09:43, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

So the latest concensus now is to diffrentiate between new towns and planned cities? I see that as an excellent move, coming from an geographic/urban planning background. In fact, the definition of a new town in this page is hardly complete or accurate. I plan to write a more complete definition, but shall I do this now, or until the page is split up?--Huaiwei 18:53, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

"Dormitary"?
In the subsection on Ireland, it says The area is now mostly a dormitary town for Belfast. I was unable to find a definition for the word "dormitary" in any of my dictionaries and a Google search reveals many misspellings of "dormitory", which based on the context I don't think is the case here. Any ideas on what was intended? [[User:Livajo|Ливай | ☺]] 09:21, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Try searching under dormitory town. Loads of links (note the spelling). Icundell 09:40, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I have fixed the spelling in the article Icundell
 * Aha. I didn't know what a dormitory town was, or that there was such a thing. It seems to be a primarily British term which is probably why. [[User:Livajo|Ливай | ☺]] 10:11, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Note that Wikipedia also has articles for both dormitory town and bedroom community. ~leif
 * They are sometimes known as commuter towns. People live there, but don't work there. Icundell 10:41, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Planned settlement
I concur that New town is a bit problematic, but think Planned city and Planned community are also, because 'city' and 'community' are both imprecise terms, just as 'town' is.

How about Planned settlement? A settlement is where people settle - town, city or village. It also has the advantage that things like the US Model cities program could be comfortably encompassed.

Thoughts? Icundell 10:48, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * No. One of the wikipedia rules is to put things where people will find them.  People will not look for an article on planned settlements.  They might look for New town or planned city or possibly planned community.  Redirect should take care of anyone's problems finding stuff, but planned settlement seems awfully jargony and academic. dml 18:22, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * What part of the word 'settlement' is jargony or academic? Icundell 18:40, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Maybe settlement is just to ambiguous. The word, afaik, can refer to a township, a colonial settlement, a farm, a housing estate, a fief, etc. Anywhere people settle is a settlement. Therefore, though the word is not jargony (sic) or academic it is not useful as a descriptive term for the purposes of the article. jggouvea 14:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Request for Move discussion
The following discussion is being moved from WP:RM. There is no consensus to move the article.

New town → Planned city

 * See note on Talk:New town  ~leif ☺ HELO 21:01, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
 * Like some of the participants on the discussion on the Talk:New town page, I see no pressing reason or urgency for the move. Any confusion over the popularity of terms are solved by the redirects. The redirects work, directing anyone who wants Planned city and Planned community to New town.  As the old adage goes, if it ain't broke... In agreement with a few of the comments left by participants on the talk page, the term "new town" seems more prevalent than the more academic/ivory tower "planned city."  Ergo, objection'. —ExplorerCDT 20:00, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. "New town" is quite ambiguous, whereas "planned city" refers quite clearly to what the article is about. I'm not sure I've ever heard "new town" used to refer to the idea of a planned city; a ridiculous number of settlements in the world are named something like "new town" or "new city" in some language, most of which are not planned cities.  (Novgorod immediately springs to mind...) —Tkinias 22:43, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * To make it 'official', Oppose (object seems so confrontational), because I see no pressing need for it. 'New town' is in common usage, the redirects get the job done and a substantial majority of links into the page come via that term or very similar terms. Further, since the concept as it is used today came out of the New town movement, it more accurately reflects its theoretical roots. I would also strongly oppose breaking the article up, as suggested on its talk page. The time might come, but it's not here yet. Icundell 01:22, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Thinking on it further, if it is moved I would argue that Planned settlement is much the best option, since that covers any form of place created from scratch - city, town or village. It is a properly generic term, free of any sort of bias. I maintain opposition to this proposal and to breaking up the article (as unwarranted fragmentation), but would probably back a move to Planned Settlement (also the re-directs would be a lot more straightforward, wouldn't they?) Icundell 11:29, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Oppose. As per previous post, although I think probably a situation of having both a new town and planned city page would be best (they are different concepts really, though related. See motorway and freeway for example). zoney ♣ talk 03:19, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Oppose too - I've said on the talk page that there could be two separate articles. -- ALoan (Talk) 09:49, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Maybe "New Town" is used by some people, but here in Canada, I have never heard it used. Ever. SECProto 15:57, Dec 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: Folks, I think what we have here is another US-UK thing, just with Canada coming down on the US side for a change ;). I just reread the article and realized that "New Town" is an official usage in the UK (New Towns Act). I still maintain that the term is ambiguous, but I think we need to recognize that the reason for the disagreement has a lot to do with differing trans-Atlantic usage.  I like Icundell's proposal of Planned settlement as the best, most generic term. The first city cited is Washington, D.C., which (by U.S. standards *grin*) is not a particularly new town; it also mentions colonial-era American cities, which would be the oldest ones in the hemisphere.  Therefore New town is a bit misleading.  The article does not, BTW, currently have enough "meat" to warrant fragmentation IMO. —Tkinias 19:22, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The term is used in the UK exclusively to refer to sub-city level  towns run by a planning committee or (in the case of Cramlington and perhaps one or two others) a local borough council, developed after WWII to deal with population overspill from large cities.  There is a lot of room for organic growth--the history of the New Towns in the UK at least is a very significant part of the urbanization of the English countryside.  There is no need for a move.  Keep the section of the article that applies to these developments in its present place and pop the other, conceptually different, material into Planned city instead of the current redirect to New town. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 12:57, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I was born in a New Town and although some of the London overspill 'New Town's were planned, not all of them were (mostly it was a designation) and they certainly weren't 'cities'. The term also has legal sense in that there was a commission for the New Towns which chose where they should be, etc. --[[User:VampWillow|Vamp:Willow]] 18:18, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Oppose for many of the reasons said above. To reiterate, a new town is actually a reference to a planning concept which can be (and has been) applied to urban areas on either sides of the Atlantic and elsewhere. It is not so much on whether the urban area is "new" or not, or whether the urban area is a "town" or a "city". This page might be of some use to those unfamiliar with the term "new town" as a concept: The Garden City and New Town Movements--Huaiwei 18:59, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * ✅ Move it! "new" is a useless adj in this case, as all towns were new at some point new, but only a select amount were planned. Or move it to Town (formation) or something. I'm just against New * it sounds stupid and never tells you anything. New as in current, New as in what happened at the beginning, New as in not old? This is not a new or interesting debate. EvanCarroll 05:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Support When I hear "new town" the thought of a planned city does not spring to mind, instead the idea of a small settlement, planned or not, does. Calling it "Planned City" explains exactly what the article is about.
 * The Oxford reports both "planned city" and "new town". There should be only one article, with suitable links. At present, "Planned city" is strictly a subset of "New town", moreover, it completely misses America (!!). By the the way, listing some small (no upper) middle-class suburbia of Milan, built by Berlusconi, as examples of new towns, is grossly misleading: they were just real estate speculation, with no serious urbanistic planning behind them.Yougeeaw (talk) 07:30, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Car plant in East Kilbride?
Not sure what the reference here was meant to be - there has never (as far as I know) been a car manufacturer in East Kilbride. Is this confusion with another New Town (though I don't think any of the other Scottish New Towns have a car plant), or confusion about the Rolls Royce plant in East Kilbride (which is for aero engines)? Also implies East Kilbride is a second generation New Town rather than first generation (1947). Reference removed as inaccurate.

Brazil
Rio de Janeiro was not the former capital of Brazil. Salvador was it. --200.234.90.64 21:36, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Of course it was. Brazil has had three different capitals over its history: Salvador, from 1554 to 1808, Rio de Janeiro from 1808 to 1960 and Brasilia, since 1960. Check History of Brazil. jggouvea 14:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, Brasilia was very much itself a planned city. It should certainly be included in this list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.221.222.76 (talk) 17:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

New Towns (planned cities) in India
Sorry if this is not relevant to the wiki, just wanted to vent my frustration at the lack of planned cities in India. Its ironic that Indus valley civilization had planned cities, good sewage system etc. There is urgent need of planned cities in India, because existing cities suffer following problems

- Systematic planning and law enforcement (lack of)

Perhaps, many city municipalities never expected that so many people will own automobiles (because they are not invented in India). This is evident from lack of enough parking spaces in front of shops, restaurants, government offices, railway stations. People have NO choice but to park on the streets, adding to the road congestion. The market places are overcrowded due to narrow roads and insufficient space, with high risk of stampedes.

Why are small shops are allowed on two sides of roads, thats so stupid. Small shop owners cannot afford to have parking space for their customers, so they should come together in a mall with enought parking space.

- Environment

Rivers have becomes sewage channels, pollution levels are high due to congested traffic, lack of parks.

- Sewage system

Many roads do not have required share (inverted V), so water just accumulates

- Roads

No concern for pedestrians, and bicycle riders. Roads are too narrow.

I do NOT want to generalize, so above comments are only based on my experiences in following cities:

- Pune [See Swargate bus stand, Pune railway station, pune municipal corp office, river mula, muta]

- Kolkata [See sector 5, Salt lake, road are too narrow compared to number of buildings]

- Chennai [Tirumai Pillai road]

- Mumbai [See news reports about casualities last year due to heavy rain and lack of sophisticated sewage system ]

To be fair there are few planned cities, some of them are mentioned in the article. I would be glad to hear about new town (planned cities) projects in India. Ideas, suggestions are welcome.

Useless
This article doesn't even talk about the King Abdullah Economic City, arguably the largest planned city ever. Scott 110 03:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I also notice that this article focuses on past planned cities, and there is very little mention of future cities or new towns that are planned on being built or under construction 172.130.58.83 (talk) 23:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Further examples
Like to add following hints for future amendments:
 * Sweden: Jonsered (created by Gibson)
 * Spain: Nuevo Baztán, Tres Cantos —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xauxa (talk • contribs) 06:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Cycling & UK new towns
I'm concerned that the article gives an incorrect impression about the history of cycle tracks in UK new towns. It says:

''All the new towns featured a car-oriented layout with many roundabouts and a grid-based road system unusual in the old world. The earlier new towns, where construction was often rushed and whose inhabitants were generally plucked out of their established communities with little ceremony, rapidly got a poor press reputation as the home of "new town blues". These issues were systematically addressed in the later towns, with the third generation towns in particular devoting substantial resources to cycle routes, public transport and community facilities, as well as employing teams of officers for social development work.''

That implies to me that the third-generation towns innovated in provision of cycle tracks and further that the first-generation towns made no such provision. But that's not the case. Stevenage does indeed have a lot of roundabouts - it was designed to have no cross-roads or traffic lights at all and all the roundabouts had no speed restrictions because they were designed to promote sensible speeds. Speed limits and traffic lights have only been introduced in recent years. But Stevenage also has a complete and separate system of cycle tracks and footways that cross roads via underpasses. So later towns were simply building on what had already been done in Stevenage. Dave Howorth 91.84.180.210 17:20, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Soviet Union
Why is there nothing on the numerous Soviet new towns of the northern USSR and Siberia? I know some of these were glorified gulags, but others are genuine towns which are still in existence. --MacRusgail (talk) 15:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Alphabetical order
Hello, could someone please put the countries listed in the article in alphabetical order? That would be much appreciated! 24.232.237.191 (talk) 12:56, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

 * Erm... they are, aren't they? Tafkam (talk) 20:43, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Canberra
The sentence: 'Prior to this time the land that Canberra is found on was nothing more than farming land and forest.' implies they were no Aboriginal people living in the area. This is very discriminatory and racist statement and one that was adopted prior to the rights that were given to the Aborigines (1967). 'No man's Land' was a formula used by the British to take over all of the land in Australia without any consideration for the indegenious people. In Canberra region Aborigines were first living around 21,000 years ago. The land for Canberra city was basically stolen from them (as it happened with the rest of the land in Australia). Neglecting their presence in the area is highly unacceptable. I recommend you change this sentence - and do not use old sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.78.39.219 (talk) 03:20, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't see how it's discriminatory, but it is irrelevant anyway, because Canberra is not a New Town. Si Trew (talk) 11:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Northern Ireland
This appears to be treated under the heading of Ireland, and then again mentioned in the UK section. My personal view is that it ought to be listed under UK, since it is part of the UK, not part of the nation of Ireland. But is there a historical reason for this, before I go chopping and changing bits about?

[[File:Headline text]]
well i think you should just treat any town any better than the others you like

 * I am not sure what you mean here, but if a town is in the United Kingdom, it should say so, if it is in the Republic of Ireland, it should say that. Maybe some people woould prefer it to be in a united IOreland, but as it stands, it is not. Si Trew (talk) 12:01, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus for move. – Juliancolton  | Talk 19:56, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

New town → Planned city — New Town is an odd read for many. These places are commonly called Planned cities and this term is commonly used in the article. As a part of this, it might be necessary to split off some of the UK stuff that clearly relates to a name used there for specific places. I'll add that new is a rather confusing term for places that have existed for hundreds of years. I'll add that the proposed name matches what is used on commons, Category:Planned cities. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:13, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Seems to be a clear WP:ENGVAR case but I have to say that "planned city" is a bit clearer that "new town" to the uninitiated. "New town" could have the general meaning of "a (i.e., any) new town" to an American whereas "planned city" doesn't appear to have this problem.  —   AjaxSmack   02:32, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Thank you for making this proposal. As a US-English speaker, I also find the "new town" name to a bit odd. As AjaxSmack points out, it's easier to guess the meaning of "planned city" than it is to guess the meaning of "new town." However, instead of renaming the article, I wonder if it would be better to split in two: make Planned city and New town into two separate articles. I have a notion that this is not purely a matter of WP:ENGVAR, because the term "new town" has a more specific (narrower) meaning than "planned city." According to this notion of mine, "a new town" is separate and distinct from any existing towns, and all aspects of the community are thoroughly planned, whereas "planned city" might simply mean (for example) that the streets are laid out in a defined pattern and some land is set aside for certain public amenities. (I could easily be wrong about this notion of mine.) --Orlady (talk) 02:55, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * However we do the split, it is going to be a mess to cleanup. My reasoning for moving first is that the bulk of the article and links is not for the UK new town, but rather for the planned settlement aspect. So the move would do the best job of preserving the edit history in the main article.  If anyone wants to do the split before this closes, I'll withdraw the nomination.  Links will need cleaning up.  In fact, I'll probably start cleaning up the US ones to planned something so that a split at any time will have fewer remaining links that need to be cleaned up. Vegaswikian (talk) 17:53, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * In checking the links, it is clear that the UK usage is a significant percentage of the inbound links. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:25, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Rename to Planned community, since these things need not be cities or towns. Further, IIRC, there are actual places called "New town" 70.29.210.242 (talk) 05:31, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * No objection to this name if that is where consensus lies. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:13, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Agree with move to Planned community and suggest that some of the UK content be relocated to make a proper article of New towns in the United Kingdom. Tafkam (talk) 18:28, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Do New towns in Hong Kong, New towns in Ireland and New towns in Singapore also need to be created as articles? They have categories which is why I'm asking. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:28, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose - Wikipedia is not a US-centric website. Moving this would be a clear violation of WP:ENGVAR, New Town is no less common than planned city which already redirects here. For reference, there is another failed RM above. Jeni  ( talk ) 19:05, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: While I agree that there is a US-UK difference in terminology, what is clear from this whole article is that in most cases around the world 'New Town' is not an entirely appropriate label. Here in the UK New Town is generally the most appropriate term, but has a rather specific meaning, which requires a more specific article. I would support a new 'New Town' article which dealt specifically with the formal meaning of the term in the UK (and perhaps other places), with an opening statement along the lines of "New Towns are a form of Planning community..." Tafkam (talk) 20:00, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * That article is already there as New towns in the United Kingdom. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:57, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose, per Jeni. Chrisieboy (talk) 20:37, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Comment I have just undone Vegaswikian's split of UK information from this article. The move was a jumping the gun a little bit, this discussion is still ongoing. Jeni  ( talk ) 20:47, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Oppose It is not only settlements with city status that were planned, so if the article were to be moved it would need to be to a broader title than "planned city". Something along the lines of planned settlement; although someone above has suggested planned community, this may refer to groups of people rather than settlements. The commons category needs changing too. Furthermore, the definition of this article's scope is "A new town, planned community, or planned city is a city, town, or community that was carefully planned from its inception and is typically constructed in a previously undeveloped area. This contrasts with settlements that evolve in a more ad hoc fashion. Land use conflicts are uncommon in new towns as new towns are planned carefully" (taken from the lead). What is being proposed is to give the article as predominantly US-slant. There are planned settlements all over the place, for example in medieval Europe. Nev1 (talk) 21:43, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Yes, planned settlements do exist all over the place and during many periods of history. For me, that's a reason to change the title, not a reason to keep the existing title. It has seemed odd that the generic topical discussion of planned settlements has been shoehorned under the title "new town". --Orlady (talk) 22:49, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * My oppose relates to moving the article to planned city, which is the proposal. If the proposal was to change to move the article to planned settlement, I would support it for the reasons I've outlined above. Nev1 (talk) 22:56, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Oppose original proposal as an unnecessary Americanisation, but would support "planned community" as it is all encompassing.--Simple Bob (talk) 21:53, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Support. The current title is very anglo-centric; the rest of the world does not have this 'city status' hangup.  Wikipedia is international.  As for historic planned cities/towns, it would be an easy MoS statement that it is reserved for cities (towns) founded after 1900.  Otherwise we shall end up with a fork - New Town for UK and New City for everyone else. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:55, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed we already have New towns in the United Kingdom which seems to solve the UK problem. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:57, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The proposed title is very US-centric, so how is it any better? Jeni  ( talk ) 22:00, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. I'd be concerned over too much changing of the title with regards to 'new towns' in the United Kingdom. I refer you all to this - [] which is rather self explanatory as to why we call them New Towns here, as that is the legal paperwork they are created under. Therefore, if anything is done, I suggest a whole new page that covers the specifics of the UK's New Town planning of the 1940s-70s. Also, new towns in the UK were designed and operated by New Town Development Corporations. The phrase is very specific to the UK so should have greater prominence in its own article. Bryn666 (talk) 22:11, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Support move to Planned community, with split-off (and expansion) of one or more articles focused on "new towns". I discussed my reasoning earlier, and I definitely prefer "community" over "city" as more generic. --Orlady (talk) 22:43, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Community is ambiguous as it could refer to a group of people, what about planned settlement (which currently redirects here)? Nev1 (talk) 22:48, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Planned settlement would work for me, too. Either "settlement" or "community" would avoid potential issues related to the standard nomenclature for municipal governments. --Orlady (talk) 17:10, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Oppose Totally unnecessary attempt to Americanise things. Lenzar (talk) 22:55, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Strong Oppose WP:ENGVAR. Towns are not cities. This is quite simple - the topic is notable. So is 'planned city'. If anyone wishes to develop the latter, go ahead. The historic origins, e.g. New Towns Act 1946, means that the term represents a specific type of development. There is nothing wrong with the status quo; the term is in common use, redirects are cheap. The previous contributors have donated their efforts to the development of an article about New Town, not about planned cities.  Chzz  ►  01:36, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * P.S. An "odd read"? Sidewalk, freeway and apartment are odd reads to me, but I love it. Vive le différence.   Chzz  ►  01:44, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Interesting discussion. Perhaps some previous contributors were focused on writing about "new towns", but back in 2002 someone created Planned city as a redirect to New town. Since then, contributors who wanted to write about the topic of "planned city" have been diligently adding content to this article, and other contributors (like me) who have contributed articles about planned cities have linked those articles to this one, because this is where those other terms pointed. Over the years, although a few related topics got their own articles (e.g., New Urbanism), additional redirects to this article were created for terms that relate more to "plannedness" than to "new-town-ness", including planned settlement, planned community, planned village, planned town, model city, master planned community, master-planned subdivisions, and variations on these names. Comments here confirm my impression that "new town" and "planned city" (or "planned settlement" or "planned community") are not just different names for the same concept, but are conceptually distinct. This suggests that the article needs to be split into at least two pieces. I say "at least two pieces" because I think that master-planned subdivisions and master-planned mixed-use developments like Tellico Village, Tennessee, Greenway Plaza, Houston, Southern Trails, and Sun City Summerlin, Nevada are distant cousins (at most) to topics like Garden city movement or planned/new towns/cities/settlements/communities such as Canberra, Norris, Tennessee, or Milton Keynes, and should not be lumped together with them. --Orlady (talk) 02:53, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * So you're suggesting moving this article to a new title and to keep it as broad as possible, but to create new articles for regional variations, which would presumably still be linked or summarised in the main article? Nev1 (talk) 14:38, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes. --Orlady (talk) 17:10, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Comment. Although my copy of the Penguin Dictionary of Human Geography (first published 1987) says that the term 'new town' is primarily associated with post-1945 developments in Britain, it is clearly also used elsewhere in Europe. e.g. here and here. Interestingly the dictionary includes an entry for 'planned village' but nothing on 'planned cities' or 'planned communities'.--Pondle (talk) 15:53, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Planned city is too specific to certain territories, and certain periods of time. Planned settlement has far too strong Israel/Palestine connotations, and although it sounds an inclusive term, I don't see it in the literature. Planned community, is a term that appears in both the US and UK planning literature. Crucially, it accurately describes the planners' notion that lay behind these developments, the idea that you could, through the physical form, plan a community of people. So in summary, oppose as nominated, recommend move to planned community. MRSC (talk) 12:36, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Support a change to something more neutral. The suggestions to use either Planned community (first choice) or Planned settlement strike me as very practical, here. — V = IR  (Talk • Contribs) 07:14, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose: "planned community" would be the best alternative title of the ones given. Sceptre (talk) 17:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Planned community
Given the above discussion and the codified meaning for New Town in the UK, I'll likely create an article under Planned community pulling information from here. Still unanswered is how much of the material here belongs in New towns in the United Kingdom. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:10, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Hi. I just noticed the link switch on the page Washington, D.C. I am a little late to conversation here, but it really does seem like all the information you added to Planned community should really be included under one article. A "new town" and a "planned community" are, in my mind, the same thing. Even if the term "New Town" has special distinction in the UK, that doesn't mean that a single article cannot discuss all types of similar settlement communities. May I suggest merging the information you added to PLanned community into this article? Best, epicAdam(talk) 14:12, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

 * As explained in the above section, planned community could refer to a group of people, so it should be planned settlement. Nev1 (talk) 14:48, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Well, it's not really important to me what the article is named; only that the information be found in a single place to aid readers. It seems that a second article was created simply to get around the fact that there was no consensus to change the name of this article. Best, epicAdam(talk) 15:35, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is definitely a POV fork. Jeni  ( talk ) 21:55, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * No progress since March 2010. If no one objects, I'm going to merge. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 17:35, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

 * There is a large overlap between this article and the Planned community article. The UK concept of a new town is distinct and needs (and has) its own article.  An article intermediate between New towns in the United Kingdom and Planned community does not seem to me to serve a demand.  Example towns/cities are listed in both this and the Planned Community article, in a haphazard fashion.  US cities that were carefully planned, not just on street layout, buy location and types of businesses and recreation areas (e.g., Reston, VA and Columbia, MD) are only in the Planned Community article, while Washington, DC, which only had its street layout planned is mentioned here.  No distinction between the meaning of "new town" and "planned community" is made clear.  This article describes a "new town" as "a specific type of a planned community, or planned city, that was carefully planned from its inception and is typically constructed in a previously undeveloped area."  The Planned Community article describes a "planned community" as "any community that was carefully planned from its inception and is typically constructed in a previously undeveloped area."  The text is the same.  The current situation clearly (imho) calls for a merge.  I did not go back to compare the 2010 articles to determine if there was a difference at that time. Merge.  Dfoxvog (talk) 16:11, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

United Kingdom
The United Kingdom section is muddled and confusing (perhaps the result of a large number of edits), and needs a wholesale reorganisation and rewrite. Skinsmoke (talk) 22:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

 * Welcome to Wikipedia, the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit. Si Trew (talk) 22:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Discussion to merge or differentiate
See Talk:Planned community. Contribute there please. -- Jayron  32  04:40, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

United States
There is no section for the United States.

On July 16, 1790, the Residence Act provided for a new permanent capital to be located on the Potomac River, the exact area to be selected by President Washington.[b] As permitted by the U.S. Constitution, the initial shape of the federal district was a square, measuring 10 miles (16 km) on each side, totaling 100 square miles (260 km2). During 1791–92, Andrew Ellicott and several assistants, including Benjamin Banneker, surveyed the border of the District with both Maryland and Virginia, placing boundary stones at every mile point. Many of the stones are still standing.[10] A new "federal city" was then constructed on the north bank of the Potomac, to the east of the established settlement at Georgetown. On September 9, 1791, the federal city was named in honor of George Washington 67.166.155.113 (talk) 03:10, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

 * At some point, User:Vegaswikian moved all of the Americas to planned community. I was myself confused my this as well and suspect that either the two should be merged in some way, or some indication should be given that that's where that continent has been moved to. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:47, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:New town


text:
Briesen (Mark)

Briesen (Mark) is a village and a municipality in the Oder-Spree district, Brandenburg, Germany. It is situated east of the capital Berlin, between the towns Fürstenwalde and Frankfurt an der Oder. Briesen was first mentioned in 1403.

History
From 1815 to 1947, Briesen was part of the Prussian Province of Brandenburg, from 1947 to 1952 of the State of Brandenburg, from 1952 to 1990 of the Bezirk Frankfurt of East Germany and since 1990 again of Brandenburg.

Local government
Since 2014 the municipality Briesen consists of the villages Alt Madlitz, Biegen, Briesen, Falkenberg and Wilmersdorf. It is part of Amt Odervorland. Its governing council, dealing with local affairs, consists of 12 seats.

Notable people

 * Werner E. Ablaß (born 1946), German politician

title: Briesen (Mark)


text:
Igor Olshansky

Igor Olshansky (born 3 May 1982) is a Ukrainian-born former American football player who was a defensive end in the National Football League (NFL). He played college football at Oregon and was drafted by the San Diego Chargers in the second round of the 2004 NFL Draft. He also played for the Dallas Cowboys and Miami Dolphins.

Early life
Olshansky was born in the industrial city of Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine, Soviet Union. His father Yury had played basketball for the Red Army. Shortly before the break-up of the Soviet Union, he and his family moved to San Francisco in 1989, when he was seven years old. His maternal grandfather, Abraham Rubshevsky, fought in World War II for the Red Army, and was injured 11 times.

Olshansky is Jewish and he acknowledged that, "It's who I am; my culture; my roots". During his youth he attended the Lisa Kampner Hebrew Academy in San Francisco, headed by Rabbi Pinchos Lipner, an Orthodox Jewish day school. He then attended St. Ignatius College Preparatory on a basketball scholarship, and – already 6' 5" in the 10th grade – played basketball for the school until his junior year, while concurrently playing basketball in the Maccabiah Games in St. Louis and Milwaukee. After two years, he also began playing football in his junior year in high school.

College career
At the University of Oregon, where he majored in psychology, Olshansky was honorable mention academic All-Pac-10 in his freshman year, and picked for Sports Illustrated's All-Bowl Game team at the end of the season. He was honorable mention All-Pac-10 as a sophomore, second-team All-Pac-10 as a junior, and recipient of the Joe Schaffeld Trophy as the Ducks' top defensive lineman after both his sophomore and junior seasons. He was used at all defensive line positions.

In his career at Oregon he had 146 tackles (89 solos), 11.5 sacks, 3 blocked kicks, and one 37-yard interception return in 38 games. Olshansky left school following his junior season, with one year of eligibility remaining.

He set a team record with a 505-pound bench press, and also holds team records in the clean and jerk and squat.

2004 NFL Combine
In early try-outs for the draft, he bench-pressed 102.1 kilograms (225 lbs) 41 times on one try, two presses short of the rookie record. He ran the 40-yard dash in 4.9 seconds and jumped 33.5 inches from a stationary position. A National Football Conference scouting director observed: "He can play both end and tackle, he can control the point and rush the passer, he's a very good athlete."

San Diego Chargers
In the second round (35th overall) of the 2004 NFL Draft, the San Diego Chargers selected Olshansky out of the University of Oregon. In August 2004, Olshansky and the Chargers agreed on a 6-year contract, with the final year being voidable. The contract called for a $2.25 million signing bonus and had a value of $5.2 million over five years, through the 2008 NFL season. He became the NFL's first Soviet-born player.

In his rookie season in 2004, he started all 16 of the team's games.

Olshansky was ejected from a game against the Denver Broncos on 19 November 2006. He punched Broncos center Tom Nalen after what appeared to be Nalen trying to cut block Olshansky on a clock-stopping spike play. Olshansky had recently had knee surgery when Nalen went after Olshansky's knees. Two days later, the NFL fined Nalen $25,000 for the cut block, more than double the $10,000 fine Olshansky received for the punch.

With the Chargers, he had 151 tackles and 11 sacks in 75 games, starting all but 5 of them.

Dallas Cowboys
Olshansky signed a four-year contract with the Dallas Cowboys on 6 March 2009. The deal was worth $18 million, with $8 million of it guaranteed. He finished the season with 76 tackles (seventh on the team), 2 tackles for loss, 1.5 sacks, 12 quarterback pressures and 3 passes defensed.

In 2010, he started 14 games, registering 38 tackles (tenth on the team), one tackle for loss, 4 quarterback pressures and 2 passes defensed. He was released on 3 September 2011.

Miami Dolphins
Olshansky was signed by the Miami Dolphins on 20 September 2011. He was waived on 30 November.

Personal life
He has many tattoos, including two Stars of David on his neck. He is regularly featured in Jewish news publications.

Olshansky is married to Liya Rubinshteyn, whom he met at the Lisa Kampner Hebrew Academy in San Francisco. They live in San Rafael, CA and have two sons.

He was detained on Thursday, 1 December 2011, for marijuana possession as part of an undercover bust that resulted in 280 arrests. The Broward County Sheriff's Office went to Olshansky's condo in Fort Lauderdale to investigate Olshansky's friend, but ended up detaining both men. He was never charged with possession of 19 grams of marijuana.

title: Igor Olshansky


text:
Talk:Methylsulfonylmethane

Life of msm?
What is the life of msm? I have some in a container which was packed 09/19 and it look as new, pure white, not caked etc. Is it still ok to take? 58.6.247.167 (talk) 23:06, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Bias
This is a chemical with no known legitimate medical use, and yet the article is almost entirely about those dubious claims. Even the name of the article is affected: the standard chemical name is definitely dimethyl sulfone, not MSM which is largely the name used by quacks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.188.172.95 (talk) 22:28, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Methylsulfonylmethane