text:
Talk:Secession

UNPO
The UNPO is probably not a reliable source. So, don't overemphasis on it. According to page " UNPO Membership" :, every group that pays the application fee, possessing the will to be identified as a Nation or People , will be a member of this group. That is not a reliable organization or source .It seems to represent extreme minority positions and also appears to be a questionable source. It does not appear to be received as credible or widely acknowledged as a credible organization.--Larno Man (talk) 15:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

 * My concern really just to show that such alliances exist. Actually it did occur to me later that there are a number of alliances of such groups and maybe a short section mentioning that fact and the most prominent groups would be best thing to do. Remember under the right conditions even a small group of 20 people can inspire and mobilize a whole people to secede, so as long as a group remains functioning it should be acknowledged somewhere -if only in one of the list of groups articles, not necessarily here which probably is getting too long. Carol Moore 13:08, 14 August 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc {talk}

 * This is a minor entry and no reasons to delete it, especially since a couple different editors (3?) have put it in, including me. Secession groups are by nature small to start and without much credibility. The organization exists and is a place where real secessionist/separatist groups network. I'm going to beef up its article with a few more references. CarolMooreDC (talk) 01:36, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

 * I have a feeling there's something more going on with constant deletion of one sentence about UNPO with two reliable sources. The best thing to do is get a third opinion. As a start of WP:dispute resolution. CarolMooreDC (talk) 14:10, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Tamil
Can someone add something about Tamil secessionist movement in Sri Lanka? I don't know enough about to write the section by myself. M.Campos (talk) 13:14, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Do a little research on the wikipedia or the net and put it in there. That's what we all do, even when we are experts in a field :-) Carol Moore 01:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc {talk}

HI! I belong to the SoCal Republic for a new Southern California State! But the ultimate goal is Southern California Republic! I Understand there is a place (see Google search) for Secession movements. Maybe Vermont will be the first US State to "revolt" and get out of the New American Nation we now have?! I Know that there is also great secessionist feelings in Catalonia (Spain they hate being called Spanish there by the way!) To Secession whereever it may be! Andre'Andreisme (talk) 23:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

 * Hello, You are a member of an activist movement calling for secession of all or Southern California from the state or federal governments. Good luck to you then, because the U.S. government and state capital will block all secession efforts. There are some county and city secession proposals in Southern California I knew of, so the new proposed nation will have to create regional states, provincial counties, districts to act like smaller units and city boroughs like Los Angeles becomes Hollywood, San Fernando Valley, San Pedro, South-Watts or Westside. Mike D 26 (talk) 15:31, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposal
I propose that the (very long) list of secession movements be removed. We already have links for the lists of historical and active autonomist and secessionist movements, so why list all those countries here? This article should concentrate on arguments for and against secession and the history of the idea. Furthermore, the see also section is entirely too long. Many of those concepts or examples should be discussed in the article and the repetition removed. As it stands currently, this article is mostly made up of lists. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive' 02:40, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Why not create an article called secessionist movements? Then just talk about the secessionist movements that are commonly used by WP:RS as examples of various types. CarolMooreDC (talk) 03:03, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you mean instead of the list articles or in addition to them? ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive' 14:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm. The list should remain populated by links as it is. But the information in the list of groups also is of interest, though it's less a complete list than whatever people personally were interested in adding. Maybe if we a) make sure every movement on this page is in either the historical or active and then b) decide what categories of secession movements we might create to illustrate the article. For examples:
 * Successful past secession movements
 * Unsuccessful past secession movements
 * Current movements pushing for full secession
 * Current movements using secession as a pressure strategy
 * Or whatever. Then those who just want to add their favorite one will have to think hard about whether to bother to add it in future. Just a thought. CarolMooreDC (talk) 12:34, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Misuse of term
The terms "secession" and "secede" are being misused by this article. They correctly refer to withdrawal from a federation, not to independence from a unitary state such as France nor a unitary (albeit devolved) state such as the United Kingdom. 86.176.119.146 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC).

 * And your source for that assertion is? I didn't notice other sources making that distinction.
 * However, it is true that all info should be ref'd and such refs should have someone calling the action secession, so that it is not WP:OR on part of editor. CarolMooreDC (talk) 13:42, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it is accurate to portray the Scottish independence movement as a "secessionist" one. What the Scots want is an end to the jointly agreed Act of Union of 1707 between England and Scotland. Scotland did not surrender its sovereignty to England nor England to Scotland, they agreed to pool it. Scotland is not therefore breaking away from the United Kingdom, because the United Kingdom in its original form (1707) would no longer exist after the termination of the Union.

What remains of the "United Kingdom" would be a new state, not (not) its successor entitled to the assets and representation in international forums and organizations. Freedom1968 (talk) 20:06, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

"National Secession"?
Couldn't a national government "secede" from the union of states by blatantly ignoring their limits in the federal constitution? Or is that another term? - FreedomWorks! (talk) 13:43, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's called corruption. --Khajidha (talk) 19:12, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Or coup. CarolMooreDC (talk) 02:52, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Or the vague but no less unsettling term used often in American politics, "extraconstitutional action." Such action is no less unconstitutional than a coup, and no less illegal than corruption, but it is often used to justify such things as (rumored though allegedly classified) emergency preparedness procedures which consolidate all government power to a single employee of the executive branch.Professor Storyteller (talk) 18:42, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * THat's the opposite of secession - consolidation of power. -- Beland (talk) 07:04, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Czechoslovakia
I would not call the dissolution of Czechoslovakia a secession, because both arising states agreed on it. — Petr Matas 09:37, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

I agree. Indeed the same could be said of Scotland were it to vote for independence. Freedom1968 (talk) 20:52, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

 * Secession often is threatened as a means to bring other parties to negotiation on independence. So it really depends on if there are RS mentioning that factoid on the topic. Obviously this whole article doesn't have sufficient RS. I haven't really worked on it much since I became more hip to policy. So many articles, too little time. Carolmooredc  (Talkie-Talkie) 21:12, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

 * Ok, I removed the entire unsourced sentence. — Petr Matas 06:30, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Ukraine section is total POV
, the section is written as a blog with one-sided of point of view. There are major faulty statements Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 15:07, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * "toppled" Yanukovych; Yanukovych was not toppled, he ran away. Party of Regions issued a statement accusing him in that.
 * numerous regions, traditionally sympathetic; which exactly regions, what is numerous? what is "traditionally sympathetic"? This totally stereotypical statements that are completely groundless.
 * When did the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol "removed" existing ministry? Did it imply ministers? What exactly is the purpose of the statement and where are supporting references? Were the ministry really "removed" or simply renamed?
 * Due to presence of Russian forces in Crimea, Ukrainian forces have not made a military effort to annex.... There is no evidence of intention to "annex" back. There are intentions to reinstate state integrity. That fact is supported by the UN Security Council.
 * Confrontation between government forces and militants did not end up in government forces failing, but rather due to the invasion of the Russian Armed Forces (unmarked units).
 * Other areas in the Eastern part of the countries have also floated the idea of secession. What kind of statement is that? What regions, what ideas??? It is completely off the wall.
 * In the time it took you to write this detailed criticism, you could have fixed all those individual problems yourself. I wonder why you didn't do so in the first place instead of blanking most of the section. —Psychonaut (talk) 15:38, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * While I do not agree with blanking, I don't think there is anything wrong with an editor who chooses to explain his or her concerns on the talk page, especially when potentially controversial issues are involved. ETA: It would have been nice, however, had Aleksandr not personalized his issues in his first sentence, and had remembered WP:AGF.  --Skeezix1000 (talk) 16:02, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, don't get me wrong—it's great that, after some prodding, he's described the real problems with the section. I agree with the criticisms and have actually gone ahead and removed all these contentious claims (or attributed them with sources).  My concerns are actually that the initial removal was part of a long-term pattern of him indiscriminately removing content about political organizations whose legitimacy he questions.  Over the last few days he's tried several times to blank, delete, or speedy-delete content on secessionist groups, and given completely bogus reasons for doing so.  (And some months ago he was up to shenanigans like categorizing political opponents as terrorists, fugitives, and murderers in violation of WP:BLP.)  If this behaviour continues I will suggest a topic ban. —Psychonaut (talk) 16:18, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * and, the reason for blacking was the fact that the section was written as a blog and did not even supported by references as if it was created off the wall. Issues like that qualify for immediate elimination. AGF is fine if it is in fact AGF, however, the section was written in complete ignorance of all mentioned facts in wikipedia. And, as I mentioned does not have not a single reference even to follow. When you check related articles on Yanukovych, Party of Regions, Euromaidan, there are completely other interpretation of the section. 16:33, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * , your last statement sounds like a personal issue (or grudge) with rather than a constructive solution. Now, I request from to support your claims of "my bogus reason" or take your words back. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 16:33, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * , good job on rewriting the section. It does look fine. There are some issues that still exist. The section claims that the Donetsk Oblast does not exists by calling it "former". How true is that fact? Is that one of my previously mentioned bogus reasons? Since when Donetsk Oblast became former??? Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 16:42, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, secession of Crimea is not officially recognized except of Russia and its two or three satellites. Autonomous Republic of Crimea continues to exist as a free economic zone due to difficulty of providing full control over it. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 16:47, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

 * The political process with Autonomous Republic of Crimea was not secession, but annexation by another country. It should not be here. Speaking about LPR and DNR, their "secession" from the Ukraine (if any) is not complete: there are no stable borders; and they are rightly not included even in the List of states with limited recognition. Therefore, I believe they must also be removed. My very best wishes (talk) 05:24, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * If Yanuk would not run away, he would share the fate of Gadaffi, he was likewise betrayed by West, West also funded far-right extremists, who raided police for weapons. Yanuk also traveled through several cities until final decision to move through Crimea. He also authorized Russia to deploy troops in order to restore constitutional order (see Yanukovich letter). What Rada published afterwards is irrelevant, because Rada itself is unconsitutional: it ceased his privileges using "ran off" as argument, however no such option exists in he constitution; it also dismissed constitutional court, which it has no right to. The rest of your talk are subjective fantasies. Travel to Crimea and DPR/LPR or at least talk to its citizens in video chat. 87.79.134.201 (talk) 23:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Latin origin
In my research, I found a source (ISBN:9780754677024) that state the origin of the secession term is the Latin words se (apart) and cedere (to go). I hope there are those who know Latin who could help explain the difference (if there is) to the term secessio used in the article. Darwin Naz (talk) 00:03, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Belgium and The Netherlands
is the link to the Partition of Belgium relevant? I believe it is a different case from the session of Belgium and the NeTherlands. The hypothetical split of Belgium is not the same as the Belgian Revolution of 1830.

Is this split even part of "secession", and does it deserve a separate mention, or should it be deleted? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.11.213.100 (talk) 20:48, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

The American Revolution was a Secession
Not only that, it was perhaps the 'most significant secession in modern times. This is was a secession according to philosophers and historians, and also according to the Wiki list of secessions. Not to mention, the article's own list of types of secession has "Colonial wars of independence from an imperial state" as type #2. The only 'argument' against mentioning the American Revolution as a secession is ... some USAmericans are offended with this usage. Lame! PhilLiberty (talk) 23:22, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

 * Then make sure the article about the American Revolution describes it that way, as only then should we add this here. And you need academic sources, the RealClear stable isn't a good source for much. And of course your lack of good faith doesn't impress (and what are "USAmericans"?). Doug Weller  talk 08:46, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

 * there are several thousand scholars who have studied, taught and published on the American Revolution in recent decades. Is ther a single one who calls it a secession? I think not.  In this case the Stanford def it assumes that the "orignal state" (Great Britain = British Empire)--and thus was a very strange "original"  entity that changed size and shape every decade for centuries. The Stanford Encyclopedia names countries in terms of secession but does NOT include 1776--no one does. Rjensen (talk) 08:54, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

 * You couldn't say that the U.S. seceded from the U.K., since the one was never a part of the other. You could say, by the dictionary definition, that the U.S. seceded from the British Empire or British North America, but I guess that's not a country, per se, which may explain why people don't talk about it that way. It's nice to have comprehensive lists of all events that involve national breakups; the American Revolution is listed on and Decolonization and Unilateral declaration of independence and those are linked from this article. That seems reasonable to me, though I suppose these could all be collected into a mega list if that would be helpful for readers? -- Beland (talk) 07:22, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

 * That Stanford Encyclopedia definition supports calling the American Revolution a secession. The SEP gives examples, not a complete list, so the omission of mentioning the American Secession means nothing, Rjensen. Beland, the American colonies were part of the British Empire. India also seceeded from the British Empire. PhilLiberty (talk) 17:58, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Rjensen, there are many historians who refer to the American Revolution as secession. Here is a quote and article discussing the distinction.

Nowhere is the under-theorized character of secession and the confusion that results from failure to distinguish it from revolution more evident than in the habit of describing the conflict with Britain and the North American colonies as the “American Revolution.” It is true that there were whiggish themes from the ideology of 1688 about restoring the rights of Englishmen, and there were Lockean themes about self-government. But the act of the British colonists in America was an act of secession. It was neither whiggish, nor Lockean, nor Jacobin revolution. The colonists did not seek to overthrow the British government. Commons, Lords, and Crown were to remain exactly as before. Indeed, many of the colonial leaders, such as Adams and Hamilton, admired the British constitution and government, and sought to imitate its best features. They wished simply to limit its jurisdiction over the territory they occupied. They wished to be let alone. PhilLiberty (talk) 18:12, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
 * better find a more reliable source in a refereed scholarly journal-- since 2010 the article given has been cited SIX times according to google scholar. One deals with the US Civil War, four deal with current European movements and #6 actually does take it seriously regarding the Am Revolution--it is by an undergraduate in Louisville. Rjensen (talk) 18:49, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Donald W. Livingston is a fringe neo-Confederate activist. Rjensen (talk) 18:49, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

The American Revolution article now begins: "The American Revolution was a colonial revolt for secession from the British Empire which occurred between 1765 and 1783. ..." PhilLiberty (talk) 18:44, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

 * No it doesn't. Changing the lead of that article in such a major way in order to use your change here might be considered disruptive/tendentious editing. Doug Weller  talk 19:36, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

 * User:PhilLiberty has been blocked as a sockpuppet; this dispute seems to be resolved. -- Beland (talk) 04:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Russia, Chechnya
Chechnya fought and lost the war.Xx236 (talk) 08:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Moldova

 * Pridnestrovian Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic
 * Gagauzia Xx236 (talk) 08:22, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Georgia

 * Abkhazia
 * South OssetiaXx236 (talk) 08:24, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Secession and the principle of nationality
Explain secession and the principle of nationality ? 196.189.240.103 (talk) 12:00, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Secession


text:
Talk:Spinal anaesthesia

Untitled
Analgesia is the correct name, as anaesthesia includes loss of consciousness.--TheEgyptian 17:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid you are quite wrong. "General anaesthesia" does indeed require loss of consciousness, but local and regional anaesthesia do not. The correct title for this article should be Spinal anaesthesia. Preacherdoc (talk) 18:49, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kz0190. Peer reviewers: Cwwweeden.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Current usage of this technique is waning in the developed world...
Not sure this is true. Certainly spinal anaesthesia became much less popular in the UK after Woolley & Roe, but since the late 80s it has become established as the modal form of anaesthesia for Caesarian section, displacing epidural anaesthesia. I think it is still under-used, for a variety of reasons - plenty of scope for wider application of a safe and effective technique.Moletrouser (talk) 19:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Incidence of failed intubation in obstetrics
I think spinal vs general for Caesarean is primarily in order to have Mom awake for bonding with her baby as soon as possible after delivery. The justification of providing spinal anesthesia for Caesarean based on a high rate of failure of intubation seems anachronistic to me, based on data before the advent and widespread use of indirect visualization (Glidescope) techniques. In their review, Rucklidge et al. state that the widely quoted failure rate is probably an over-estimate:

"The incidence of failed obstetric intubation is widely reported to be around 1:300. It has been suggested that failure rate may be associated with the frequency with which general anaesthesia is provided for Caesarean section within different institutions. A recent retrospective audit from the UK found no cases of failed intubation in 3430 general anaesthetics for Caesarean section and the authors partly attributed this low incidence to the higher than average rate of obstetric general anaesthesia at their hospital resulting in greater experience of the technique." Matthew Rucklidge, Claire Hinton; Difficult and failed intubation in obstetrics, Continuing Education in Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain, Volume 12, Issue 2, 1 April 2012, Pages 86–91. Tomelwood (talk) 21:39, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Wikiproject Medicine Student Workplan
Greetings: Hi, this is Kai Zhang, a medical student from the UCF College of Medicine. I will be working to edit this article as part of the WikiMedicine elective.

Intro- I will expand on the intro, adding information about and giving a summary of the highlights of the different sections

Medical uses- I will update the current indications for the use spinal anesthesia. I will also discuss and update some the contraindications for the procedure and alternative methods

Risks and complications- I will expand on the major and common complications of spinal anesthesia and discuss approaches for handling these complications

Technique- I will expand on the technique and incorporate some basic anatomy and discuss different patient positioning

 * In reply to all of your work so far:
 * All of the work you have done is great! The article is very relevant, neutral, representing every viewpoint, and containing many appropriate and reliable sources.
 * It seems as though the introduction does its role, and you have adequately expanded the medical uses portion to include indications. According to WikiProject guidelines, you might consider changing the name to "Indications" or adding a specific indication subsection should you see fit.
 * The editing on the "Risks and complications" is very thorough and expansive. You might consider adding a couple more sources or citing the sources that you used in creating this section.
 * The expansion of the technique section to include sections on "Anatomy" and "Positioning" was a good idea. It correlates with the WikiProject guidelines and provides applicable information. Similarly to the "Risks and complications" section, you might consider adding more sources or citing sources that you believe to be applicable for these sections.
 * Overall, great job and continue the good work!
 * Cwwweeden (talk) 01:35, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

English image
Is there any chance that "File:Prinzip der Spinalanaesthesie.png" could have an English translation version? Dogman15 ( talk ) 10:52, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Spinal anaesthesia


text:
Bles Bridges

Bles Bridges (22 July 1946, in Viljoensdrif, Orange Free State – 24 March 2000, near Bloemhof, North West), born Lawrence John Gabriel Bridges, was a South African singer. He became known as Bles Bridges, as his Irish grandfather called him "Bles" (meaning "bald" in Afrikaans), due to his very thin hair from an early age.

Married to Leonie Bridges from 1969 until his death on 24 March 2000, he also had a long-term relationship with Marietjie van Heerden in the 90s. He made his 1st album in 1972 under the nickname, Morné with a lady called Mimi van Heerden, called, Adios, my skat. He released his first solo album in 1982, Onbekende Weermagman (Unknown Soldier). His professional career began in 1984, with the release of his second album, Bles, which went gold in under a month (25,000 copies) and included Maggie, one of his better-known songs. The album had sold twice that by the time his third album was released. At the time of his death, Bles had sold more than 2.6 million albums (records and CDs). Up to 2016, he sold over 3 million records, making him the biggest selling male singer in the Afrikaans Music industry.

Soon Bles Bridges began alternating between Afrikaans and English language albums, to great acclaim. He also began working with Eurovision South Africa. In 2000, he began recording an album with his friends in the music industry. The first song - a duet with Patricia Lewis (and his last song as it turned out, as he died within a week of finishing it) - was "The First Kiss Goodnight" by Dennis East; it was recorded on 21 March 2000. His biggest hit was "Ruiter van die Windjie" (Rider of the Wind), which was released in 1986.

In the 1980s, he held a concert in support of the Volkshulpskema (People's Help Scheme) of the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging, a far right paramilitary organisation, which raised R10,000.

He had cancer during the 1980s and gave generously to charity for cancer research after his recovery. His wife Leonie was his sound engineer and the composer and/or songwriter of most of his songs, including most of his biggest hits, including "Maggie" and "I am the Eagle, you're the Wind", among others. It was his custom to hand out roses to some of the female audience members in the front row at his concerts.. This was also the basis for a Leon Schuster skit, in the hit movie, Oh Schucks ..... It's Schuster! (1989). In the skit, Shuster, dressed as an Afrikaner lady, became irate when Bridges refused to give her a rose. Chaos ensued.

His career highlight was when he performed to a soldout 8,000-seater Super Bowl at Sun City, five times on one weekend, becoming the first and only artist to do so, as feature artist on 14 and 15 November 1987. He actually managed to draw a bigger crowd than Frank Sinatra did when he opened the Super Bowl in 1982.

Bles died in a motorcar accident on 24 March 2000, leaving behind his wife, Leonie, and children Sunette and Victor. More than 20,000 mourners turned up for his funeral.

On 26 January 2020, Bles was also inaugurated as a living legend in the South African Legends Museum. He was one of only 20 legends from whom a bust was also made.

Albums & Cd's Released.
 *  Morne en Marie Sing - 1972
 * Onbekende Weermagman - 1982
 * Bles - 1984
 * Uit die Boonste Rakke - 1985
 * Vir een en Almal - 1986
 * I Am the Eagle, You're the Wind - 1986
 * Reik Na Die Sterre - 1987
 * Fight For Love - 1987
 * Laat My Lewe, Laat My Liefhê - 1988
 * Ons Eerste Ontmoeting - 1989
 * Nog 'N Nuwe Dag - 1989
 * The Devil and the Song - 1989
 * Let Me Love You - 1990
 * Back on My Feet Again - 1991
 * Soos Nooit Tevore - 1992
 * Am I That Easy To Forget - 1993
 * One Dance With You - 1994
 * Grootste Treffers - 1994
 * Sproetjies Kom Terug - 1995
 * Love and Roses - My Greatest Hits - 1996
 * Die Hart Van My Moeder - 1997
 * Sweef Soos 'N Arend - 1998
 * Classics My Way - 1998
 * Country my Way - 1999
 * Goue & Platinum Treffers Deur Die Jare Heen - 2000
 * Môre Bring 'N Nuwe Dag - 2000
 * Goue & Platinum Treffers Deur Die Jare Heen (Vol II) - 2000 (released 26 September 2000)
 * Net Vir Jou (10 Jaar Huldeblyk) - 2010
 * Die Bekroonde Kunstenaas - 2011

Released videos

 * In Search of Love
 * Op Toer Met Bles (On Tour with Bles)

Movie
He starred in a 1989 movie called The Devil and the Song.

title: Bles Bridges


text:
List of Korean car makers

List of Korean car makers may refer to:
 * Automotive industry in North Korea
 * Automotive industry in South Korea
 * List of automobile manufacturers of South Korea

title: List of Korean car makers


text:
User:Pookleblinky

Me
After bold and tentative edits, I realized I am an inept ass at it. But, thankfully, there are myriads of people waiting to pounce on any stupid thing I do. So I trust their vigilance to remove my idiocies.

 * Hang on in there Pookle-mate; Wikipedians are kind and supportive - keep trying it gets easier! :) Brookie 15:38, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Trust me, it will get better. I was the same way. --Bratsche 17:13, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

title: User:Pookleblinky


text:
Jef Van der Veken

Josephus Maria Van der Veken (also spelled Vander Veken; 1872 – 1964) was a Belgian art restorer, copyist, and art forger who mastered the art of reproducing the works of early Netherlandish painters.

Early life
Jef Van der Veken was born in Antwerp, where his parents operated a crystal and porcelain ware business. From a young age, Van der Veken nourished artistic ambitions. While performing his compulsory military service, he attended drawing classes at the Academy of Fine Arts in Antwerp. Here he learned the art of painting by copying photographs and making free adaptations of the old masters. He completed his academic training at the top of his class. Van der Veken then started to make pastiches on order and established himself as an antique dealer in Brussels in 1908. He became so skilled in mimicking the style of the old masters that his works were taken for originals and some were even sold as such. For instance, at the 1927 London exhibition on Flemish and Belgian Art between 1300 and 1900 a work by his hand was exhibited as an original old master. Van der Veken had to convince the organizers to remove the painting that he had made on the basis of a badly damaged original, provoking a scandal.

The start of World War I marked a change in his professional and artistic career as Van der Veken shifted his interest to restoration work and perfected his own restoration process, the "hyperrestauration". This process consisted in the recovery of an old, damaged or modest work, which served as the support for a new creation. He was passionate about the Flemish Primitives, particularly Rogier van der Weyden and Jan van Eyck, and prided himself on having rediscovered the technique of painting with eggs which according to him had been used by early Netherlandish painters. It has been demonstrated since that the basis of the technique of early Netherlandish painters was not the use of eggs but the use of oil-based paint.

Association with Renders

Van der Veken's association with started in the early 1920s. Renders was a wealthy banker and mecenas from Bruges who had the necessary funds to buy damaged or modest works which he asked Van der Veken to restore through the hyperrestoration process. Van der Veken restored 16 paintings acquired by Renders using this method. The works restored by Van der Veken thus accounted for an important portion of the collection of old masters that Renders built up and which was referred to as the Renders Collection. The Renders Collection came to be regarded as one of the principal private collections of Early Netherlandish paintings and had a prominent place in the 1927 London exhibition of Flemish old masters.

On the strength of the reputation of his collection, Renders profiled himself as an informed connoisseur of Flemish old masters. He published studies in which he cast doubt on the existence of Hubert van Eyck and identified the Master of Flémalle with Rogier van der Weyden (current scholarship identifies the Master of Flémalle with Robert Campin, the teacher of Rogier van der Weyden). These publications aroused lively polemics with reputed art historians.

At the 1935 World Exhibition in Brussels, three works, of which the visible surface had been executed mainly by Van der Veken, where exhibited under the name of Rogier van der Weyden: one as an original work by van der Weyden (the Madonna with Child or 'Renders Madonna', now in the Museum of Fine Arts in Tournai) and two as works by van der Weyden's workshop.

Recognition as restorer
Van der Veken's reputation as a restorer was such that internationally renowned art historians Leo van Puyvelde and Georges Hulin de Loo recommended him to the Royal Museum of Fine Arts of Belgium. He worked there for many years as a restorer using methods of restoration that were less controversial and more in line with contemporary ideas and insights in the field of restoration. He was soon recognized as a renowned expert and was invited to take on the restoration of the finest panels of Hans Memling held by the Old St. John's Hospital and the Groeningemuseum in Bruges. Van der Veken considered his restoration of Jan van Eyck's Virgin and Child with Canon van der Paele in 1934 as his most honorable commission.

Copy of The Just Judges
In 1934 the panel of The Just Judges, which formed the lower left panel of the Ghent Altarpiece, by Jan van Eyck or his brother Hubert Van Eyck was stolen and had not been recovered. Van der Veken decided in 1939 to make a copy of the panel using a two centuries old closet shelf as the support. He made the copy of the missing painting on the basis of a copy that Michiel Coxie (1499-1592) had produced in the mid-sixteenth century for Philip II of Spain and was kept at the Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium. He interrupted his work during the Second World War and resumed work in 1945, this time in the Saint Bavo Cathedral in Ghent where the Ghent Altarpiece had been moved to the Vijdtkapel. In order to harmonize his copy with the appearance of the other panels of the Ghent Altarpiece he applied a layer of wax to create a similar patina. Van der Veken subtly indicated that his work was a copy by giving one of the horsemen the facial features of the then Belgian king Leopold III.

The local authority in charge of managing religious property, called the 'Kerkfabriek', had become interested in acquiring the copy to replace the stolen panel. The Kerkfabriek and Van der Veken were initially not able to agree on the fee payable. Van der Veken asked 300,000 Belgian francs for his work - a large sum in those days - but the Kerkfabriek did not agree to pay this fee. In the end after much discussion, an agreement was reached in 1957: the Kerkfabriek would pay 75,000 francs, the Belgian State 150,000 francs.

Following Van der Veken's completion of the copy, there have been persistent rumours that the original of the work lies beneath his copy. Undeniably, the high quality of the copy plays a major role in this remarkable assertion. Technical research has shown that the copy was made out on a wooden carrier, which is entirely unrelated to that of the original.

Legacy
Van der Veken continued to work for the Central Laboratory of the Museums of Belgium after the Second World War. Despite the onset of blindness he remained active until the end of his life, and his son-in-law, Albert Philippot, who had been trained by Van der Veken, gradually took over his restoration tasks. It is Albert Philippot who commenced the restoration of the Ghent Altarpiece in 1950. Van der Veken died in Ixelles in 1964.

Controversies surrounding the Renders Collection
While during the Second World War, Van der Veken continued his restoration work for the Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium, Renders took the opportunity to sell the 20 early Netherlandish paintings in the Renders Collection, including the hyperrestored works on which Van der Veken had worked, to the German Nazi leader Hermann Goering for the price of 300 kilograms of gold.

After the war, the Belgian state claimed the 20 works back as looted art. Only half of the works were recovered. Renders commenced judicial proceedings against the Belgian state claiming that he had never been paid for the paintings. The truth was, however, revealed when letters were discovered in the archive of Goering that showed that Renders had negotiated with Goering on the sale of his Gothic sculptures.

More controversy and accusations of forgery
The role played by Renders as an art collector and his relationship with Jef Van der Veken were finally questioned at the end of the 20th century. The discussion was initiated as a result of studies on three of the paintings that had belonged to the Renders Collection, had been sold to Goering and were subjected to modern scientific research decades after the war. The paintings are referred to as the Renders Magdalena, the Renders Madonna and the Renders Man of Sorrows.

The Renders Magdalena
The Renders Magdalena is a portrait of Mary Magdalene, that was claimed to be a copy of the right panel of the Braque Triptych by Rogier van der Weyden, the original of which hangs in The Louvre. The Renders Magdalena started as a bad old copy, which was acquired by a collector in Antwerp around 1885 and then bequeathed to the museum of Ghent in 1914. The museum refused the painting because of its mediocrity and put it up for sale in Ghent in 1920. It was bought by an antique dealer in Dendermonde from whom Renders acquired it. Renders asked Van der Veken to restore the painting. When the painting reappeared 6 years later at an exhibition in Bern, the painting had been drastically changed. What had appeared a mediocre copy had become a masterpiece that was attributed to the entourage of Hans Memling. However, not all contemporary art experts were impressed by this metamorphosis and they raised doubts about the work's authenticity.

Acquired by Goering from Renders, the panel was brought to Spain by Alois Miedl, an agent of Goering, after World War II. In 1966 he sold the panel to a Scandinavian collector. When the collector died, his heirs wanted to have an expert opinion on its value and in 2004 they sent the panel to the Royal Institute for Cultural Heritage in Brussels.

Based on its research findings, the institute concluded that the painting was painted on top of an older painting, which had been scraped off to the preparation layer. The institute also found that modern paints had been used in the restoration and that the restorer had made new underdrawings and used various techniques to recreate the craquelure of the painting. The institute also discovered that Van der Veken had made some minor changes to the back of the panel, probably in an attempt to make the work appear more similar to the original van der Weyden and increase its appearance of authenticity. All of these interventions by Van der Veken can be qualified as amounting to an intention to create a forgery.

The Renders Magdalena was not returned to the owners as it was claimed by the Belgian state.

The Renders Madonna
The second controversy involves the Renders Madonna which Renders had sold to Goering and after its return to Belgium has been part of the collection of the Museum of Fine Arts of Tournai where it is attributed to the 'School of Rogier van der Weyden'.

Originally, the Renders Madonna panel had been part of a diptych attributed to Rogier van der Weyden. The other half is a portrait of the donor Jean Gros, which has been located in the Art Institute of Chicago since 1933. The diptych was probably separated in 1867, the year in which the portrait of Jean Gros was shown at an exhibition in Bruges, organized by the historian James Weale. It was probably the deplorable material condition of the Madonna which led to the decision to separate the two panels of the diptych. A German photo from World War I shows the battered state of the panel at that time.

When he was asked by Renders to restore the Madonna, Van der Veken endeavored to reconstruct all that had been irretrievably lost and damaged. He used his very 'radical' hyperrestoration method. His intervention still determines the present condition of the painting, and there is no visible aging.

Research carried out in 1999–2000 by the Laboratoire d’étude des œuvres d’art par les méthodes scientifiques (French: Laboratory for the Scientific Examination of Artworks) of the Université Catholique de Louvain made it possible to determine the extent of the restoration and to describe the restoration process in detail. The research showed that Van der Veken had literally scraped off the bottom part of the painting, thereby removing the original painting in that area. He must have felt that it would be more efficient to start over than to preserve the remaining original paint residue. He proceeded in the same manner in other areas of the painting, especially in the image of the Child, where he entirely repainted the lower part of the face and shoulders. Van der Veken also painted several areas with new paint probably because they were worn. In addition, he painted over entire surfaces, rather than execute multiple, small retouches to integrate the whole picture. Like in the restoration of the Renders Magdalena, he again mimicked the craquelure through various methods. Radiographic recording showed how little is left of the original paint layers.

The Renders Man of Sorrows
Another painting of the Renders Collection, a 15th-century Man of Sorrows owned by the Metropolitan Museum in New York was submitted to testing in 1992. It had already been relegated to the museum's storage in 1974 after experts from the Courtauld Institute of Art deemed it to be a completely modern forgery. The 1992 tests came to the conclusion that the painting was based on an original painting of the second half of the 15th century to which a later restorer deceptively had added new elements such as the background and the figure of the angel. The suspicion is that this restorer was Jef Van der Veken.

Conclusion
The conclusion of the recent scientific findings is that both Van der Veken and Renders appear to have engaged in intentional art forgery. Since these revelations, all the works that had belonged to the Renders Collection or had been handled by Van der Veken and even his son-in-law Albert Philippot, many of which hang in major museums in Belgium and abroad, are viewed with suspicion.

title: Jef Van der Veken


text:
Jack Keever

Jack Keever (c. 1938 – July 18, 2004) was an American journalist and author, best known his coverage of Charles Whitman's 1966 shooting spree.

Personal
Keever collected books and memorabilia that were associated with the history of Texas. In his free time, he volunteered as a member of the author-selection committee for the Texas Book Festival.

Education
Keever graduated from the University of Texas at Austin in 1960. He later received his master's degree in journalism.

Career
Keever began his career as the managing editor of The Daily Texan in 1959. He joined the Associated Press in 1961, where he would remain for thirty years. In addition to his coverage of the tower shooting, he also wrote sports columns for the University of Texas Longhorns, as well as local legislative sessions and governor's races. After transferring to the AP's Austin bureau, he reviewed articles before they were distributed through the wire service. In 1992, he retired from The Associated Press. He then later taught courses in journalism at Austin Community College until 2000.

Books
He also wrote several books, and was co-author of a biography of John Connally, called "Portrait in Power".

Awards
Keever received a number of awards, which include:
 * 6 Charles E. Green journalism awards
 * Honorable mention in the Paul Tobenkin Memorial Award for Columbia University
 * 2000– Excellence in teaching from the National Institute for Staff and Organizational Development

Death
Keever died from cancer at the age of 66 at his home in Austin, Texas.

Family
Keever was married to his wife Cynthia Keever and together they had a son and daughter, Erin and Graham.

title: Jack Keever


text:
Ernst Wigforss

Ernst Johannes Wigforss (24 January 1881–2 January 1977) was a Swedish politician and linguist (dialectologist), mostly known as a prominent member of the Social Democratic Workers' Party and Swedish Minister of Finance. Wigforss became one of the main theoreticians in the development of the Swedish Social Democratic movement's revision of Marxism, from a revolutionary to a reformist organization. He was inspired and stood ideologically close to the ideas of the Fabian Society and guild socialism and inspired by people like R. H. Tawney, L.T. Hobhouse and J. A. Hobson. He made contributions in his early writings about industrial democracy and workers' self-management.

Early life and education
Born in the town of Halmstad in Halland in southwestern Sweden, Wigforss studied at Lund University from 1899, and published writings on political issues in this period. He completed a doctorate in 1913 with a dissertation on the dialect of south Halland, becoming docent in Scandinavian languages at the university the same year. He taught at the gymnasium in Lund (Lunds högre allmänna läroverk) 1911-1914 and as lecturer of German and Swedish at the Latin gymnasium in Gothenburg from 1914.

Political career
In 1919 Wigforss was elected as a Social Democratic member of the First Chamber of the Swedish Parliament, representing Gothenburg, and he became a member of various committees. He was appointed a member of the third cabinet of Hjalmar Branting in 1924, and after Branting's resignation in January 1925, became a member of Rickard Sandler's cabinet. He was made temporary Minister of Finance on 24 January 1925 when Fredrik Thorsson fell ill, and succeeded him on 8 May of the same year, following his death. The Sandler cabinet resigned on 7 June 1926.

He was again Minister of Finance in the cabinets of Per Albin Hansson and Tage Erlander from 1932 to 1949.

Wigforss became Gunnar Myrdal's main political opponent with respect to the currency crisis of 1947. Swedish historians tend to interpret this crisis as Myrdal's political failure, while the historian Orjan Appelqvist argue that it is Wigforss and Axel Gjöres who hold primary responsibility for this political fiasco.

Some say that Wigforss' economic policies were strongly influenced by John Maynard Keynes, but he may have anticipated Keynes, because he proposed counter-cyclical economic policy before becoming minister of finance in 1932. But it is perhaps most accurate to claim that his main economic influences came from Knut Wicksell. He inspired younger economists like Gunnar Myrdal and the Stockholm school, who worked in the same direction as Keynes at the same time. John Kenneth Galbraith writes that it "would be more fair to say 'The Swedish Economic Revolution' than the 'Keynesian revolution' in economics, and that Wigforss was first in this transformation of thinking and practice about economy".

In his pamphlet [http://www.folkrorelser.org/rorelsemapp/dokument/wigforss.html ''Har vi råd att arbeta? (Can we afford to work?)''], widely believed to have won the 1932 elections for the Social Democrats, he made fun of the Liberal theory that budget cuts are the proper remedy for economic downturns. Although he is considered the creator of the Swedish social democratic economy, controversies with Minister for Social Affairs Gustav Möller (who would have preferred graduated taxation to have been higher) prevented both from being elected party chairman and Prime Minister at the death of Hansson.

Later life
After his resignation, Wigforss continued until his death to write and speak on political issues and was considered one of the most innovative and daring Social Democratic politicians. He supported the anti-nuclear movement of the 1950s and contributed to the discontinuation of the Swedish nuclear arms programme in 1962.

In popular culture
In the Swedish television movie, Four Days that shook Sweden - The Midsummer Crisis 1941, from 1988, he is played by Swedish actor Helge Skoog.

title: Ernst Wigforss


text:
User talk:Sharksandwich999

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: PrimeBOT (talk) 23:28, 4 October 2021 (UTC).

Best of luck, and have fun!

User:ClockworkSoul 07:54, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Question on Sharon Sheeley article
Hi, I added a question to the talk page of the Sharon Sheeley article. You seem to have written much of it; perhaps you can clarify the answer to my question there since you may have more reference information than I do on this subject. (A very interesting subject; I didn't know about her before reading your article, thanks.) In fact, if you could cite sources at the end of the article too, it would help a lot for the wikipedia fact checking project and for those of us trying to copy edit without distorting the meaning (sometimes I have to read about a subject before I try to correct a sentence for style). thanks, Bebop 13:34, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Mahmoud al-Zahar
Sorry, I've seen nothing to suggest Mahmoud al-Zahar was by any means "opposed to homosexuality", certainly not enough to merit putting him in a 'gaybasher' category =\ I'd appreciate if you'd either cite some sources, or else I'll remove the category listing. Sherurcij 03:17, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Garza.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Garza.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. feydey 02:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Joefathertime.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Joefathertime.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 16:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Theexciters.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Theexciters.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 14:25, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Aberfeldy.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Aberfeldy.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 82.83.98.101 09:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Dwtuo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Dwtuo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 08:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:MatthewRyan.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:MatthewRyan.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self-no-disclaimers tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Garion96 (talk) 18:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Fallingsickness.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Fallingsickness.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 09:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Cobblestonerunway.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Cobblestonerunway.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Eastautumngrin.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Eastautumngrin.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cobblestonerunway.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Cobblestonerunway.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Supercharger (band)
A tag has been placed on Supercharger (band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Hoponpop69 (talk) 16:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Supercharger (band)
A tag has been placed on Supercharger (band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. --Michael WhiteT·C 22:24, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Supercharger (band)
A tag has been placed on Supercharger (band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Hoponpop69 (talk) 23:11, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Supercharger (band)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Supercharger (band), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Elonka 23:33, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Alan Freed Big Beat Show Cincinnati.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Alan Freed Big Beat Show Cincinnati.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:06, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

February 2019
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 6ix9ine. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Koyyo (talk) 11:46, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. G M G talk  13:31, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

June 2020
There was clear consensus not to include the Libertarian party in the infobox. I agree with you that it should, but we must listen to consensus.Nojus R (talk) 02:04, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Drmies (talk) 02:06, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

It was pointed out that you were edit warring, and that's what I blocked you for. That's good for you, because if I had seen all those OR/NPOV/FORUM violations in your edit summaries, I might have blocked you for longer, for pushing some personal opinion, or I could have considered a topic ban for violating... well I'll leave a template below. Drmies (talk) 02:08, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

January 2021
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Paul Gilley, you may be blocked from editing. Binksternet (talk) 06:52, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Paul Gilley for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul Gilley is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Paul Gilley until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Tom Reedy (talk) 02:34, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sharksandwich999


text:
User talk:Pookleblinky

First Message
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

User:ClockworkSoul 07:55, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for welcoming me
'''Posted on User_talk:ClockworkSoul

Thanks for welcoming me. I have fallen in love with Wiki, and hope I don't do anything stupid. But I trust that you and many other people are waiting to attack any mistakes I make. Pookleblinky 08:05, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Not at all! With the exception of a few rough personalities, the large majority of Wikipedians are more than patient, especially with newcomers. :) Once again, welcome, and don't be afraid to be bold! -- User:ClockworkSoul 08:11, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

LOL! Cute edit regarding the trivial entries. Unfortunately, it's a nonsense listing and a speedy delete candidate. Thanks for the laugh! - Lucky 6.9 23:13, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Welcome!
Welcome, Pookleblinky! I'm responding to your comments that you posted on Clueless newbies. My advice is to be bold! While I'm not encouraging just writing random junk, if you think an article can be improved, do it! If you write something incorrect by accident, don't worry about it- most likely another Wikipedian will correct it soon. Just enjoy your time at Wikipedia! Once again, welcome and have fun! Flcelloguy 22:16, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pookleblinky


text:
User talk:Tlacaelel

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

User:ClockworkSoul 07:55, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Joe Prince Wolfe (March 24)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by I dream of horses were:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Joe Prince Wolfe and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Joe_Prince_Wolfe Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:I_dream_of_horses&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Joe_Prince_Wolfe reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 00:10, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Joe Prince Wolfe
Hello, Tlacaelel. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Joe Prince Wolfe, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:04, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tlacaelel


text:
User talk:Dosorio~enwiki

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this:  Ron h jones (Talk) 22:51, 10 June 2011 (UTC).

Best of luck, and have fun!

User:ClockworkSoul 07:56, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Proposed Image Deletion
A deletion discussion has just been created at Category talk:Unclassified Chemical Structures, which may involve one or more orphaned chemical structures, that has you user name in the upload history. Please feel free to add your comments.  Ron h jones (Talk) 22:51, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

All files in category Unclassified Chemical Structures listed for deletion
One or more of the files that you uploaded or altered has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it/them not being deleted. Thank you.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of MGA73 (talk) at 17:50, 28 November 2011 (UTC).

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

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

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:30, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 12:16, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dosorio~enwiki


text:
Century Garden

Century Garden (Taman Century) is one of the earliest housing development in Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia. The housing ranges from expensive bungalow houses built at the top of the valley to older, more modest single-storey terrace houses built in the 1960s. It was developed by a visionary and prominent Johor Bahru businessman, Yap Siew Cheng (1918–1970). Ambitious and daring at that time because its location was considered quite far out of Johor Bahru town and surrounded by rubber estates.

The Holiday Plaza shopping centre is in the estate. Its strategic location, close to the city's central business district makes it a sought residential area with facilities and amenities and hotels close at hand.

It is also unique and notable for its neighbourhood watch program started in 1999 by long-term resident, Suzie Yap. The ongoing neighbourhood watch program is staffed and funded purely by the residents themselves on a voluntary basis and has succeeded in reducing crime in the area significantly. It was also noted that another old male resident helped to set up road blocks along Jalan Wijaya to control traffic inflow. However, such measures were ridiculed by some residents for there were few automobiles travelling along Jalan Wijaya long before the road blocks were set up.

Jalan Dato Abdullah Tahir connects Tebrau Highway with Jalan Dato Suleiman, the estate's ring road. In addition to Holiday Plaza, other notable landmarks located in Taman Abad include Metropolis Tower, Menara MAA, New York Hotel and DNP plaza, all of which are located along Jalan Dato Suleiman.

title: Century Garden


text:
User talk:Robohit

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

User:ClockworkSoul 07:56, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

User Categorisation
You were listed on the Wikipedians/Ontario page as living in or being associated with Ontario. As part of the User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Ontario for instructions.--Rmky87 04:08, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Robohit


text:
User talk:Rustcellar

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

User:ClockworkSoul 07:56, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rustcellar


text: Category:Johor Bahru housing estates

title: Category:Johor Bahru housing estates


text:
User talk:Scipiocoon

Your user name
Hello. You seem to have an interest in and knowledge of old minstrel shows. Your contribution Haverly's Ragged Tambo Men is a good example. However, some of the other articles make me hesitate. Because of the nature of the topics you write about, your user name could easily be offensive to many. I understand that "darkie" "nigs" and "coon" (all words you have used in the articles you've written) may have been in common use before the civil rights movement, today many would be offended by those terms, especially when the article was written by someone with the word "coon" in their user name. Would you be willing to consider voluntarily changing your user name to something less offensive? Thank you. SWAdair | Talk 09:55, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for de kind words. Please give me advice on how to change my user name. I do not want to offend anyone, only shed some light on this dark time in American history. I think there is a tendency to white-wash over the Minstrel Man's era, but the subject isn't all black-and-white. While I say - let's call a spade a spade - if this information cannot reach modern audiences, we should tone it down.

Thanks, Scipio

 * That information can be found at Changing username. Thank you.  SWAdair | Talk  09:55, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Haverly's Ragged Tambo Men
Hello, Scipio.

I'm having some difficulty verifying the information in your recently submitted Haverly's Ragged Tambo Men article. Others have had similar trouble, and the article is currently listed on the Votes for deletion page.

I was wondering if you might be able to provide some supporting data for this article?

Many thanks. -- User:ClockworkSoul 22:08, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

When a gentleman of your standing in the Wiki's-pedia cannot understand the Truth he had best consult the wise proverb Do that which thou Canst understand and Comprehend for thy good. I would recommend that Such Gentleman Change his business And appropriate his time and attention to a Sunday School to Learn what he Could and keep the Little Children from durting their Close.

With Sincere feelings of Gratitude for your weakness and Inability, I am Sir your superior in Scholarship

Scipio Coon

title: User talk:Scipiocoon


text:
Galician–Volhynian Chronicle

The Galician–Volhynian Chronicle (GVC) (Галицько-Волинський літопис, called "Halicz-Wolyn Chronicle" in Polish historiography), also known as Chronicle of Halych–Volhynia and The Dynastic Chronicle of the Romanovichi, is a prominent work of Old Ruthenian literature and historiography covering 1201–1292 in the history of the Principality of Galicia–Volhynia (in modern Ukraine).

Textual witnesses
The original chronicle completed in the late 13th century did not survive. The oldest known copy is part of the early 15th-century Hypatian Codex, discovered in the Hypatian Monastery of Kostroma by the Russian historian and essayist Nikolay Karamzin. He also found the second codex of the Galician–Volhynian Chronicle, the 16th-century Khlebnikov Codex (which is considered the principal one).

In 1973, five copies were known: Hypatian (Ipatiev), Khlebnikov (X), Pogodin (P), Cracow (C), and Ermolaev (E). As of 2022, seven codices/manuscripts that have been preserved are known to contain a paper copy of the Galician–Volhynian Chronicle.
 * Hypatian Codex (c. 1425) – contains a faulty chronology inserted by a later copyist
 * Khlebnikov Codex (c. 1575) / Ostroz'kyj – contains no chronology
 * Pogodin/Chetvertyns'kyj text – contains no chronology
 * Cracow text (late 18th century in Latin script) – poorly copied from the Pogodin text
 * Bundur/Iarocki text
 * Ermolaev (Yermolayev) text – similar to Khlebnikov, but greatly abbreviated and distorted

Contents
The Galician–Volhynian Chronicle has two parts:
 * The Galician section (1201–1260)
 * The Volynian section (1261–1292)

The compiler of the Galician–Volhynian Chronicle explained Galicia's claim to the Principality of Kiev. The first part of the chronicle (Daniel of Galicia chronicle) was written in Kholm, possibly by a boyar named Dionisiy Pavlovich. Several scholars think that the entire GVC could have been written by eleven unique authors, after which it was compiled together into a single text.

Studies and translations
While the 1843, 1908 and 1962 editions of the GVC published in the Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles (PSRL) and the 1871 Archaeographical Commission edition were still primarily based on the Hypatian text and only included Khlebnikov for variant readings, A. Klevanov's 1871 Russian paraphrase was the first work – albeit a very flawed one – to take the Khlebnikov text as the foundation for reconstructing the GVC. The first linguistic studies of the entire Hypatian Codex were published by Makarushka (1896) and Nikolskij (1899). Compared to the Primary Chronicle and Kievan Chronicle, relatively little attention was given to the Galician–Volhynian Chronicle until the 1890s, when Ukrainian historian Mykhailo Hrushevsky stimulated historical and literary interest in it. Hrushevsky established the first reliable chronology of events in the GVC. He demonstrated that the faulty chronology found in the Hypatian GVC text was inserted by a later copyist. Although it was clear that the original author had intended to write his text in imitation of the events-based – rather than years-based (annalistic) – Greek chronographs, he never got around to dating the events he had been writing about, and so a later copyist inserted dates, albeit incorrectly. In addition, Hrushevsky translated certain passages from it with historical and literary commentary.

Panov published a modern Russian translation of the Galician–Volhynian Chronicle in 1936, which according to Daniel Clarke Waugh (1974) contained "occasional blunders". Waugh suggested that Teofil Kostrub's modern Ukrainian translation, also released in 1936, was "more faithful to the original" than the English one produced by Perfecky in 1973.

The first English translation of the Galician–Volhynian Chronicle was published with an index and annotations by La Salle professor George A. Perfecky in 1973. It was part of a large-scale project to produce critical editions of the entire Hypatian Codex in modern English under the guidance of professor Omeljan Pritsak (who founded the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute that same year). Perfecky sought to establish a "free (but faithful) rather than a literal interpretation of the chronicle." Pritsak cautioned the reader "that these are pioneer steps toward a comprehensive study of this work", and that a revised edition would be prepared "upon the completion of the whole project, which is estimated to take at least ten years". Waugh reviewed this edition, pointing out some flaws in translation, saying it "will need revision", and suggesting "that its publication was a bit premature."

In 2006, Bulgarian historical linguist Daniela S. Hristova (1962–2010 ) demonstrated that there was a clear linguistic and stylistic boundary in the middle of column 848, between the end of the entry for the year 1260 (6768) and the year 1261 (6769). She concluded that this was where the Galician part ended, and the Volhynian part began. She and Petro Tolochko (2003) also supported the hypothesis of Mykola F. Kotlyar (1993) that the Galician part consisted of six different narratives by separate authors, and that the Volhynian part compiled five different narratives into one, so that the whole GVC was probably written by eleven different people.

title: Galician–Volhynian Chronicle