text:
Talk:Othello

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): Datamna.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Lede image
An IP editor has twice changed the lede image, apparently motivated by a distaste for images depicting Othello acted in blackface. The original (and current) image and the second of the alternate images are included here (the first alternate is non-free with no valid fair use rationale, so I'm not including it here). I reverted the addition of the first alternate image, primarily because it is non-free and lacks a fair use rationale for this article. reverted the second with the rationale that the change in image should be discussed here first.

While I certainly think it would be reprehensible, in most cases, to put on a new production today with Othello acted by a white actor wearing blackface, the fact is the role has, for most of its history, been acted by white actors. Using the Stanislavski image is thus entirely representative of its history (and Stanislavski is famous, so a good candidate for a lede image). The Stanislavski image is also focused on Othello, unlike the alternates that have multiple characters in the frame, and so is more dramatic as a lede image.

All that being said, Paul Robeson is also famous (though not primarily for playing Othello, acting in general, or any particular connection with Shakespeare), and for more aestethic and thematic reasons it is preferable to use an image of a non-white actor in the role. Othello's otherness is a major factor in the plot and a theme in the play. And though less dramatic, this article is about the play rather than only the character, and so using an image with multiple characters is entirely appropriate. Othello and Desdemona can be argued to be the sentral pivot of the drama (I would disagree, personally, but it could be argued).

Long story short, I'm going to propose that we use the Robeson image in the lede until a better one can be found. And I would like to get some discussion here so that we have a consensus to rely on for the future. I'll ping the WikiProjects and invite comments. --Xover (talk) 18:01, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * An interesting conundrum. I very much doubt I shall be able to offer much in the way of suggestion, but for what it's worth, here's my one cent worth (I lost the other cent when I was logging in). Firstly, I think it's kind of funny in light of what you say above in relation to the article on the play featuring a picture showing only Othello himself. Fair point. But just out of morbid curiosity, have you cast a glance upon the actual Othello article (as in the character, not the play). The lede image is a picture of himself and Desdemona! No idea why, but I find that reasonably funny. But moving onwards, of the two images linked here, I much, much, much (much) prefer the Stanislavski one; it's a more striking picture, and it features Stanislavski. The other image is very generic, and could be from any kind of theatrical production. The vast majority of readers probably won't know Robeson and/or Hagen (not that that should really have anything to do with it...but the other one features Stanislavski!). Joking aside though, my vote would definitely by for the one currently there now. Finally, could not all of this be bypassed by simply doing what so many of the play articles do, and have the lede image be a picture of the text, whether a quarto/octavo, or the first page from the First Folio. Just an idea. Five Antonios (talk) 22:50, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for chiming in. Much appreciated! Yes, we could certainly use the Folio or Quarto image in the lede, but, frankly, I find that really dusty and boring compared having a good photo or painting there. However, if that's the way the consensus ends up the F/Q images are easily available. --Xover (talk) 05:15, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

 * I encourage anyone unhappy with the current lead image to go hunt down alternative ones we can actually use and present them here for the community's consideration. I would personally suggest a photographic image of a notable performance, showing either an iconic scene or at least multiple cast members, and preferably a colourful image that draws the reader's attention. A painting might be a reasonable second choice if it is by a notable painter. I would suggest that having the main character prominent in the image should be a priority, and preferably performed by a notable actor. And since that is what appears to be motivating the IP and SPA editors recently edit warring over this, it would be preferable if the image was not of a white actor playing Othello (like Patrick Stewart), and especially not one doing it in blackface (take your pick over the last century+). --Xover (talk) 12:20, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

 * I am an English teacher who teaches this play and would love to see a black actor pictured here instead! An alternative would be an image of Ira Aldrige, an African-American actor who played Othello in the 1850s in Europe. His success in the role was so incredible, that they had him playing some of Shakespeare's kings of England before his death. There are paintings and newspaper clippings that depict him from the time. You can read about him here too https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/ira-aldridge-black-actor-shakespeare-african-american — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.80.60.222 (talk) 17:42, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

 * Does anyone have any Avery Brooks? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:37, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

 * [[File:Théodore Chassériau - Desdemona (The Song of the Willow) - 2019.141.8 - Metropolitan Museum of Art.jpg|thumb]]

 * Théodore Chassériau - Desdemona.JPG

 * Christian Köhler Othello.jpg Untitled50reg (talk) 14:44, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

 * I have presumed consensus with Henry Perronet Briggs - Ira Aldridge as Othello - Google Art Project.jpg Untitled50reg (talk) 18:17, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 9 October 2019

 * 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. There is a clear consensus against doing so.  Calidum   20:04, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Othello → Othello (play) – To most people today, the primary meaning of Othello is the game whose article is at Reversi, but which has been known as Othello since 1971. I find it difficult to believe that despite having been nearly half a century since Othello became the game's common name, Wikipedia's article for the game is at Reversi, which is simply what the game was traditionally called. Georgia guy (talk) 19:59, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose, the play will probably always be primary per long-term significance. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:38, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose on grounds of long-term significance. Egsan Bacon (talk) 22:21, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak support proposed move, but also moving Othello (disambiguation) to Othello. If the play isn't the primary topic, there isn't a primary topic since the play is quite notable. Steel1943  (talk) 00:14, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose Going by the non scientific method of looking at Google news, search, and image results, the claim that "most people today" think of the board game isn't adding up. Happy to reconsider with more evidence, but right now the case isn't there.--Yaksar (let's chat) 04:21, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose for the same reason why I opposed at Talk:Hamlet (disambiguation). You are underestimating the significance of Shakespeare's plays. —Xezbeth (talk) 06:41, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose, hilarious never heard of the game, completely fails the "Othello is" test in Google Books by stratospheric proportions. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:42, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose as ridiculous. Srnec (talk) 14:09, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Opposed POV assertion, no RS. Mediatech492 (talk) 15:44, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose Really? A board game's secondary marketing name, that a marketing person picked in reference to the play in 1971, is primary meaning over a play that has been famous, performed, studied, and well known all over the world for over four centuries? A play about which one can count scholarly monographs and critical editions in numbers per year, every year, for most of the last century? For which there are more journal articles then I'd be able to reasonably list before this discussion was closed (JSTOR alone gives me 16,500 articles for the play; 13 for the board game as "othello" and 164 for the game as "reversi")? The play that is taught in everything from highshool to universities, all over the world, and which people write their doctoral thesis on? That has been adapted for TV and film 20+ times (including by Orson Welles and Kenneth Branagh)? A play that has inspired famous painters and composers across centuries, so much so that some of which works have acquired independent fame in their respective fields (and, frankly, would probably also have a better claim to primary meaning than the board game)?Let me put it this way… You're going to have to make some pretty darn impressive arguments to persuade me of this rather extraordinary claim. --Xover (talk) 18:43, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Neutral no clear primary topic given the large number of uses[|Othello_(character)|Othello,_Washington|Othello_(1951_film)|Reversi|Othello_(1995_film)|Othello_(Satomi_Ikezawa_manga)|Othello_(1980_film)|Othello_(1965_British_film)|Othello_Hunter]. However the play is likely primary by PT#2 so if a move takes place then move the DAB to the base name but don't redirect to the game.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 20:16, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose as clear nonsense. The play has been well known for over four centuries. I've never heard of the game, and there's no evidence to suggest that it's what "most people" are thinking of. PC78 (talk) 19:44, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I've played the game for years but I can't recall the play though I've probably heard of it years ago to me at last it means the game but given the fact that the play comes up 1st on Google and the name derives from the play, that points to the play being primary even today.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 20:43, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose. What a load of utter rubbish. To most people today the primary meaning is still the play, as it always has been. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:18, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I might be persuaded, if there were some evidence to persuade me, but I have seen none. William Avery (talk) 16:04, 16 October 2019 (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.

Clean-up tag
Is this really needed? And if so, is there anyone who can do it? Rwood128 (talk) 14:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , no it's not needed, neither is it useful. And it is particularly disruptive to to tag-bomb a large number of Shakespeare articles in the same way. No doubt all plot summaries can be improved, but simply stating "erroneous" as a clean-up reason gives editors no indication whatsover of where the alleged deficiencies lie. The template Cleanup is improperly used, in any event. According to the template page, it applies only to "spelling, grammar, typographical errors, tone, and other similar, non-content-focused changes". MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:01, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that was my first thought, MichaelMaggs. I will check and revert as necessary. Rwood128 (talk) 16:17, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Themes
I felt, Michael, that the expansion tag added by Untitled50reg was reasonable – unlike many other edits Untitled50reg has made. A quick survey also suggests that many of the articles on Shakespeare's plays are inadequate, especially in their treatment of themes.

Can you reconsider? Rwood128 (talk) 17:03, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , Yes, sure: make whatever change you think is needed. I'd be happier though if some reasons were given via the 'with' or 'for' parameter. Virtually all the Shakespeare play articles are inadequate and I'm not sure it helps much if everything is tagged indiscriminately. MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:17, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Orson Welles
Why does this article not mention anything about Orson Welles film adaptation of Othello? 2600:6C50:417F:BBCF:819C:8FA3:CC0E:B7CB (talk) 22:03, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Othello
DID ACTORS IN SHAKESPEARE'S DAY PORTRAY OTHELLO AS A BLACK MAN WITH HIS KNOWLEDGE AND CONSENT? 2607:FEA8:45E0:385A:48E9:1117:B72B:4773 (talk) 20:01, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Leading sentence?
What does this even mean? "Othello (full title: The Tragedy of Othello, the Moor of Venice) is a tragedy written by Aaryan, probably in 2022, set in the contemporary war." 67.80.161.21 (talk) 12:49, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

 * It was short-lived vandalism, now reverted MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:11, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Attaullah/Attallah
It is mentioned in p.248 of The Satanic Verses that ‘Othello’ is possibly a corruption of ‘Attaulah’. Is this likely to be true? Overlordnat1 (talk) 14:35, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Performance history 21st century
This play is over 400 years old and has been performed all over the world in many languages. For a single, recent production to merit inclusion, in the context of this broad history, it would have to be something truly noteworthy, otherwise it's WP:RECENT or even WP:PROMO. I propose a trim.--AntientNestor (talk) 09:30, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

 * I reversed your deletion of my contribution because I could not understand why you only deleted the production I added and not the many above. The production was considered important in Australia as it was performed in three languages (two of these local Indigenous languages), the two men who adapted the play are two noteworthy Indigenous Australians, and the play was set in the Torres Strait in World Word II. If the inclusion of this production of Othello is to be deleted then the whole section needs to be deleted.  I am curious as to why you selected this production for deletion (as not "notable") and not any of the other productions listed in this section. (My edit is certainly NOT WP:PROMO.) JelloMister (talk) 12:22, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the response. To answer just your immediate questions: your edit came after the page came on my watch list, and that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't an excuse.
 * My post, although indeed prompted by your edit, is referring to all the WP:CRUFT that has accreted here—it's not just directed at any one item. I'm proposing a careful sift of all of it. Most of it fails (by a large margin) the WP:NRV guideline: there must be independent sources to show that something is notable, important and of immediate relevance to the topic.  Without that, it doesn't have a place.
 * In some cases there are other pages where the material might be a better fit. For example, a very quick search with the instance you give above suggests that Australian Aboriginal languages or, perhaps, the pages for the languages themselves—Kalaw Lagaw Ya and Yumplatok—would provide an alternative home.
 * --AntientNestor (talk) 13:35, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Critically acclaimed productions that are reimagined by Tamil, Maori, Torres Strait Islander and Aboriginal directors, writers and actors have a rightful place on this page, and should not be shunted onto other pages. NOT WP:CRUFT. JelloMister (talk) 21:08, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Specifically, a reworking intended as a tribute to the wartime defenders of Horn Island —  thanks for the ref  —  may seem too distant from the subject of this Wikipedia article (that is: Shakespeare's actual play) but that's not my point. I'm proposing a review of the whole 21st century productions section to weed out cruft, as in my original post.
 * --AntientNestor (talk) 11:23, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

I’ve tagged the section for review. Suggestions from other editors as to implementation very welcome. Particularly I will be trying to apply WP:NRV "significant independent coverage or recognition, and that this was not a mere short-term interest" and WP:SUSTAINED "Notable topics have attracted attention over a sufficiently significant period of time.".--AntientNestor (talk) 07:17, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I've started with Michael Gambon and The Archers. Gradually, more to come.--AntientNestor (talk) 09:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * A 1998 Canadian play about deciphering a cryptic manuscript trimmed. Suggestions from other editors still welcome--AntientNestor (talk) 15:48, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @AntientNestor: I very much support a cleanup here. With the vast vast amounts of critical and scholarly attention anything Shakespeare gets, the bar for inclusion is pretty darned high; and since it's been getting such attention for ~400 years the RECENT bar is also very high. Anything in the 21st century is by default presumed to not meet that bar because only the early-century productions will have had a chance to demonstrate their longevity by, say, being included in the major critical editions (Arden, Oxford, etc.) or monographs on Shakespeare in performance or ... films.That being said, there's no harm in leaving a little wriggle room for the very recent stuff of news interest. So a production with a current media favourite actor (personally I'd love to see Kobna Holdbrook-Smith as Othello!), or, say, a rap artist playing Othello, or something that just gets a lot of news-of-the-day coverage even if it will be forgotten in a year or two. We can live with stuff like the Aboriginal production when it's fresh, get rid of it when it drops off the news cycle, and then re-include it a decade or two hence when it (very likely) starts appearing in the literature with some form of significance to the wider field of Shakespeare studies.In other words, I think the more pressing issue is to expand the coverage of 21st-century productions and adaptations with more details and context, instead of the current extremely list-y format. If the truly notable entries are covered in more depth it'll be easier to sort the WP:RECENT additions (and they will get added periodically whatever we do). Xover (talk) 07:43, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

 * That's a good point—we can't tell that something isn't going to be of sustained interest if it's recent. For notability we should certainly retain for the time being Chiwetel Ejiofor in 2007 and Adrian Lester in 2017 (because the performances received critical awards), but consider trimming the rest in due course. More context for each production, to demonstrate its importance, would indeed be helpful. Thanks for the steer.--AntientNestor (talk) 08:30, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm AndyJones, formerly of WP:BARD. I'm not altogether sure I'm back on Wikipedia for very long, but I'm here today so I thought I'd chime in on this conversation. For what my opinion is worth, I strongly agree with AntientNestor's suggestion that we trim very significantly the 21st-Century section. But the bigger issue, regarding weight, is not so much that that section is too long - which it is - but that the sections on previous centuries are too short (and the section on screen almost non-existent). Since it was me who wrote the first drafts of the equivalent sections at Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth, King Lear and The Tempest (the first two of which eventually became featured articles) it seems very likely that I'll have some sources from which I can expand those sections of this article. I'll take a look later on today, anyway, and do a spot of wikidragonning if I can find the time on the weekend. AndyJones (talk) 13:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * As suggested, I did take a quick look through my books and I've concluded there's definitely lots that can be used to expand the Legacy section of this article. There are about 70 references to Othello in the index to The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Stage, alone. I'm planning to have a go at incorporating some of it this weekend - I'll see how I get on. I might conclude that the 20th Century section is too long, although past experience is that that's easily fixed by removing things that are unsourced or poorly sourced, or where the article has nothing to say about a production except that it happened. AndyJones (talk) 13:39, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Taking a quick look at the stagings in New Zealand referenced here, I see sustained scholarly interest beyond WP:RECENT-ish citations to the details of their staging. This is a bit out of my field, but these academic articles describe the productions as significant to historical memory and cultural understanding in Aoteoroa/New Zealand (quoting extensively for people who want to use these texts to inform the article):
 * "Othello, which has been utilised in three different productions. This essay will explore the ways in which Shakespeare has been used to depict the New Zealand Wars, as well as the influence that the New Zealand Wars may have had on productions of Othello. The attraction of Othello is unsurprising given the popularity of the play as a means of interrogating the colonialism of the Victorian and Edwardian periods." (p. 91)
 * "The first of these Othello-themed productions was Theatre at Large’s Manawa Taua/Savage Hearts, written by David Geary, Chrstian Penny and Anna Marbrook. The play incorporated Othello as an intertext and was set at the time of the First Taranaki War (1860). The second production was a staging of Othello (2001) by the Court Theatre in Christchurch, set during the Waikato Campaign (1863-4). The most recent of the three was Downstage Theatre’s 2007 production in Wellington, which was set during the much earlier conflict of the Northern War (1845-6)." (p. 93)
 * "While the Court Theatre’s Othello was the first Shakespeare production with a New Zealand Wars setting, what really made it significant was the manner in which it was framed. …" (p. 95) "The Court Theatre’s production created a new frame, a back story, in which a Māori boy is adopted by missionaries, taken overseas where he receives a European education, and joins the British army to become a successful general. Played by Jim Moriarty, this Othello returns to New Zealand to lead the Empire’s armies against his native people. This Māori Othello is not the sole representative of Māori people on stage, however. There is also Bianca, a fiery and feisty Māori woman, who ‘questions [Othello’s] allegiances.’18 In this production, Bianca does not have a divided nature like Othello’s and therefore presents a positive alternative to the titular character’s linguistic and cultural trauma." (p. 96)
 * "While the Court Theatre’s Othello was the first Shakespeare production with a New Zealand Wars setting, what really made it significant was the manner in which it was framed. …" (p. 95) "The Court Theatre’s production created a new frame, a back story, in which a Māori boy is adopted by missionaries, taken overseas where he receives a European education, and joins the British army to become a successful general. Played by Jim Moriarty, this Othello returns to New Zealand to lead the Empire’s armies against his native people. This Māori Othello is not the sole representative of Māori people on stage, however. There is also Bianca, a fiery and feisty Māori woman, who ‘questions [Othello’s] allegiances.’18 In this production, Bianca does not have a divided nature like Othello’s and therefore presents a positive alternative to the titular character’s linguistic and cultural trauma." (p. 96)

 * "More recently,  and  closer  to  home,  there  have  been  a number  of  productions  of Othello with  well-known  Māori theatre artist, Jim Moriarty, in the title role … The Court Theatre production did not ask its audience to turn a blind eye to Moriarty’s Māori identity. Qui te the opposite. It was central to the way the production made meaning, and at the heart of Moriarty’s portrayal of the Moor – now Māori – especially as he gave way to his jealous rage, progressing from wiri to haka, and from English to te reo Māori. Moor or Māori, Shakespeare’s play strips the soldier of his courtly veneer to reveal the savage within. The violent murder of Desdemona retains its tragic inevitability. Othello’s suffering is existential, driven by the impulses deep within his racialised body, and as such inescapable. In witnessing such acts on the Court Theatre’s mainstage were we – the majority of us in the audience who were not Māori – to be provoked to think about our complicity in and the consequences of colonisation? Or were we simply, an d sentimentally, satisfyingly, supposed to be very sad to watch nature take its course? Further, and more troubling: in showing us an essentialised native Othello – not a white man blacked up so that we could see both the artifice and the social constructi on of the outsider, but a Māori man as himself – were we who are, most of us, not that not also party to the naturalisation of the otherness of the savage savage?" (p. 10)

 * Also features the relevant fact that: "In the mid 1940s, Dr Pei Te Hurunui Jones10 translated three Shakespeare plays into te reo Māori, (Othello, Julius Caesar and The Merchant of Venice)." (p. 94)

Perhaps it makes sense to group these A/NZ/Maori performances into a single paragraph while acknowledging their national importance.—Carwil (talk) 17:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Example: Orson Welles's 1951 movie
To me, the details of the production and financial problems Welles experienced while filming his Othello in 1951 are a good example of extraneous detail which has little bearing on the play itself. As WP:OFFTOPIC suggests, this is particularly true when it's already there in a separate article.

User:AndyJones makes a good point about "removing things […] where the article has nothing to say about a production except that it happened", but I'm not sure that padding out with stuff about difficult movie financing should count towards this.--AntientNestor (talk) 22:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

 * I'm afraid I don't see anything actionable in this feedback. I disagree that describing the conditions in which famous and notable productions of Othello are made is off-topic in an article about Othello. And I will be adding a lot more of it as I get into the stage history. It's certainly not "extraneous" or "padding". I tend to judge what's on-topic by what the reliable sources are saying about my subject, and in this particular case Brode tells the same story as Rosenthal. Besides WP:OFFTOPIC doesn't really say what you are suggesting (the drift of its advice is more that if you think you are going off-topic you could consider putting the information into a sub-article). Clearly it cannot work the way around you are suggesting, since everything you would want to say about (say) a particular film is likely to be there in the film's article.

 * My view is that it is the more colourful and discursive elements that make the page readable, capturing the reader's interest and giving them hooks to stay interested, especially where the prose becomes listy. And it is that which gives material for people to work with when the article is proposed as a featured article candidate and the prose needs to polished so as to be engaging and professional. The suggestion here seems to be "just list the facts".

 * And while I acknowledge there's an element of personal judgement in what to include and what not, I certainly won't be trying to second-guess what you think the limit of the topic is: I will use my own judgement as I go, being guided by where the sources take me. And I've no real intention of joining-in meta-discussions like this, as I go. (The use of "Example" in the heading of this section leads me to think there are a dozen or so other points we could discuss.) I'd remind you that I'm following a process which led to Featured Article status for Hamlet and Romeo and Juliet, something that hasn't happened to any Shakespeare play article in a decade. A conversation about whether we have too much detail will be an appropriate one to have if, and only if, the page reaches the point where it has enough detail, and that's a very long way off. But I am working on it. AndyJones (talk) 13:47, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

 * Replying to AndyJones: It's nothing to do with my own thoughts on what "the limit of the topic is"—I'm just trying to write a better article according to the guidelines. And it's not just blindly parroting the guidelines: Wikipedia's s recommended practices contain sound advice on how to keep articles readable, accessible and attractive for readers. Instead, you’re piling up irrelevance which is burying the material that’s important.

 * The considerable and obviously thoughtful effort you are making here certainly allows you to exercise your personal judgment but, as only one person's judgment, it may not coincide with those policies and guidelines and may for that reason at some point be deleted (not by me—I've no interest in a two-person edit war). I contend that the Othello article should discuss the work itself, its context, its literary and theatrical significance—the production history is necessary to illuminate theatrical significance, of course. There's certainly enough material upon which to base a comprehensive and satisfying article, without having to make it more entertaining with discursive elements about, for example, a certain producer’s difficulty in raising funds for his projects.

 * Emphasizing again accessibility and readability in an encyclopedia article, we will soon be nudging towards the upper limits of Wikipedia's WP:TOOBIG size rule: already (at about at 8000 words) it "[m]ay need to be divided[…]".   The guideline notes that such a course will “[…]require a consensus discussion on the talkpage.”.

 * I don’t want to sound too sententious here, but I genuinely think that your hard work here is likely to be wasted, because it will be trimmed back to match the WP:OFFTOPIC guideline.
 * --AntientNestor (talk) 11:36, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Othello


text:
National Labour Party (Ireland)

The National Labour Party (Páirtí Náisiúnta an Lucht Oibre ) was an Irish political party active between 1944 and 1950. It was founded in 1944 from a rebel faction of the Labour Party, inspired by the intransigence of the incumbent leadership of the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union (ITGWU) against the majority of the party on the basis that communists had infiltrated Labour at the turn of the 1940s.

History
The split in the Labour Party was preceded by divisions in the broader labour movement, specifically the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union under William O'Brien and the Workers' Union of Ireland under James Larkin. Larkin had rejoined the party in 1941, and two years later, he was nominated by the Dublin North-East branch of the Labour Party to contest the 1943 general election. The Administrative Council of the national party, with ITGWU members in the majority, refused to ratify this nomination. However, the Dublin party and Dublin-based candidates supported Larkin, as did Labour leader William Norton, and eventually Larkin was a victorious Labour candidate. When the ITGWU faction sought the expulsion of Dublin officials as revenge, it was routed. Two weeks later, the ITGWU disaffiliated from the Labour Party. Five of the eight TDs sponsored by the union resigned from the parliamentary party to form the National Labour Party in January 1944, led by William O'Brien and James Everett. Senator Thomas Foran was appointed chairman of the party. Foran was still recognised by other Labour senators as Leader of the Labour Party in the Seanad.

There was much bitterness between the two parties. The ITGWU claimed that communists had infiltrated the Labour Party. The ITGWU attacked "Larkinite and Communist Party elements" which it claimed had taken over the Labour Party. The split and the anti-communist assault put Labour on the defensive. Alfred O'Rahilly in The Communist Front and the Attack on Irish Labour widened the assault to include the influence of British based unions and communists in the ITUC. The National Labour Party juxtaposed itself against this by emphasising its commitment to Catholic Social Teaching. Presiding at a meeting of the provisional executive of the party in March 1944, Thomas Foran expressed its "unqualified support" of Irish neutrality and condemned a declaration of the Communist Party of Ireland "expressing approval of the attempt to force this country to abandon neutrality." Senator Michael Colgan, a National Labour candidate speaking of the party in May 1944, claimed that "they had broken away from the Irish Labour Party because it was not Irish, nor did it fulful the expectations that an Irish labour party should have for the people." Speaking after Mass, Cork general election candidate P.J O'Brien claimed that "with the dissolution of the Communist Party of Ireland, these people (communists) are endeavouring to get a foothold on the Irish Labour Party."

Speaking at a National Labour delegate conference in October 1944, Everett stated that the Labour Party's attitude to Peadar Cowan's new openly communist organisation "The Vanguard" demonstrated how "helplessly the party leaders were caught in the Communist web" and "the individuals running the Vanguard were the same people who crashed into the party in 1942, founded the notorious Dublin Central branch and caused the party constitution to be torn up."

The Catholic press supported the ITGWU's allegations, which were founded on James Larkin's communist activities in groups like the Irish Worker League. The number of communists in the movement had increased since 1941, when the Communist Party of Ireland had disbanded and its members had joined the Labour movement. Based on conservative labour support, the National Labour Party won four seats in the 1944 election. At a meeting in Rathdowney, Labour politician William Davin criticised the new party in the aftermath of the election, referring to them as "disruptionist" and told his audience that he strongly resented being called a communist by "certain persons who did not bother to go to church or chapel either on Sundays or weekdays." In response, National Labour stated that "Mr Davin and his colleagues short-circuited any kind of unbiased inquisition by setting up a tribunal of their own on which those very people charged with complicity in the Communist fusion sat as the judges and assessors." Continuing, they said that "Mr Davin is not a Communist; no one in the National Labour Party either thought or said that he was." A failed attempt by the Labour Party to end the split occurred in May 1944. In June 1944, the Donegal News wrote that "Mr. Norton and his colleagues may well reflect that the advent of a National Labour Party puts an end to future Labour hopes of a come-back".

In 1947, National Labour criticised Labour's renewed calls for unity and that "failure to maintain unity within the Party occurred in 1943 when some members of the Administrative Council of the Party allowed themselves to be frightened or fooled into handing over control to a self-styled Dublin Executive, from whom they took their orders." They also stated that "those who wrecked the Labour Party four years ago, and had previously, by their policy of intrigue sought to make it their mouthpiece for Communist propaganda, cannot be permitted to continue their activities under cover of a democratic political organisation." National Labour also condemned the alleged influence of British trade unions in the Labour Party. Seamus O'Farrell was General Secretary of the National Labour Party that year.

National Labour won five seats in the 1948 election. After the election, the National Labour Party entered the First Inter-Party Government, against the wishes of the ITGWU. The party was in government with four other parties, including the Labour Party. National Labour was represented at cabinet level by James Everett, now its leader, as Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. Co-operation in government, the retirement of O'Brien and the death of Larkin removed the causes of animosity from the labour movement. In 1950, the National Labour Party folded back into Labour. In 1951, James Ryan of Fianna Fail criticised National Labour's decision to re-join Labour.

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

title: National Labour Party (Ireland)


text: User talk:69.209.19.241

title: User talk:69.209.19.241


text:
Talk:Milan Rastislav Štefánik

Untitled
did Stefanik contribute in any way to the theft of russian golden treasure?

I have no idea, why ? Juro 03:54, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

can someone add a freaking picture? there must be a ton of them floating on the internet. --84.47.69.38 15:36, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Českoslovanská jednota
Českoslovanská jednota is translated as Czechoslovak Unity in the article. It seems to me that Czechoslavic Unity would be more precise translation. Does anybody know, whether this organization wanted to refer by its name particularly to unity with Slovaks or rather to unity with all Slavic nations, as the word "Českoslovanská" suggests? Jan.Kamenicek 20:52, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

French memorial
Since the 1980s, I have driven every year through the southern French town of Paulhan in the Hérault département, usually crawling in slow moving if not stationary holiday traffic. I always remarked on the statue of an airman, but never stopped to look. With the bypassing of Paulhan by the A75 motorway a few years ago, I have since visited the now quiet town and discovered that the statue is of Štefánik and, curiously, it is placed on top of the town's war memorial. Does anyone know why it is in Paulhan? Emeraude 09:23, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Naming conventions
I implemented a few changes according to the rules agreed on WP:HU-SK. Since Štefánik was obviously Slovak, the rule applies that in contexts before 1918, both the Hungarian and the Slovak names of places in present Slovakia should be mentioned at least once, and the Slovak name is the primary one. That means that the Hungarian name of Košariská should be mentioned once. For Ivanka pri Dunaji (his place of death in 1919) the Hungarian name doesn't have to be mentioned, I left it there once as a service to our readers. Pressburg was renamed Bratislava in March 1919, so I removed "Pressburg" in contexts after March 1919.

The WP:HU-SK rules don't apply to places in present Hungary. Since it is very unlikely to find Slovak names for towns in present Hungary in English literature, Sopron and Szarvas should be called by their Hungarian names, not Slovak. Markussep Talk 19:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * ok, thank you, but you have use for Szarvas slovak name, at this time was 90 % Slovaks in Sarvaš. --Nina.Charousek (talk) 20:00, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

 * According to the Szarvas article it was (maximum, if there were no other ethnic groups) 69% Slovak. Anyway, the Slovak name can be added IMO, but the Hungarian name must also be mentioned, since the place is most likely to be referred to as Szarvas in English. Markussep Talk 20:06, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

 * is ok --Nina.Charousek (talk) 20:13, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

from my diskussion
Szia!

Meg tudnád indokolni a szerkesztéseidet Milan Rastislav Stefániknál, és Szlovákiánál? Nmate (talk) 18:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

persze, hisz egyszeru: lasd User talk:Elonka/Hungarian-Slovakian experiment:
 * in biographies of clearly Slovak persons, the name should be used in the form "Prešov (Eperjes)" and later "Prešov" exclusively

ez azt jelenti, egyszer lehet emliteni a magyar nevet, de csak zarojelben, es 1918 utan ezt sem, biztos nem vita, hogy stefanik szlovak szemelyiseg, itt nalam sajnos nincs sok tolerancia, mert stefaniknak olyan tekintelye van mint magyarorszagon legfeljebb szent istvan kiralynak. --Nina.Charousek (talk) 18:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Képzeld, tudom ki volt Stefánik, épp ezért fontos hogy az Osztrák-Magyar monarchiában született, amelyből később Csehszlovákia lett (amelynek ő volt az egyik alapítója). A születési helyének kimondottan nagy jelentősége van az életrajzában. Ő az Osztrák-Magyar monarchiában született, és Kosariszka településnév, még nem létezett abban az időben. Az infoboxban is meg kell jelenni korhűen, hogy hol született.A pontos születési helyének nincsen ahhoz köze, hogy mekkora tekintélye van. Nmate (talk) 19:13, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

termeszetesen, hogy pontosan kell, hogy kovesd a szabalyt, egyszer es zarojelben, ez nem ovoda, hanem wikipedia, vilagos szabalyokkal. kulonben, honnan szarmazol? Nem ismerjuk egymast? --Nina.Charousek (talk) 19:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Jó, nincs értelme ezen vitatkozni. Talán az logikus lenne hogy én válasszam ki a helyét a cikkben, és én az infoboxot választom. A cikket majd holnap fogom korigálni. Az Sk-Hu koszenzust rosszul alkalmaztad Farkas Mihálynál, ugyanis Kassán elég sok magyar élt a harmincas években. Az a reverted amit Szlovákiánál csináltál, szintén vitatható; azt is meg kéne beszélnünk holnap. Egyébként budapesti vagyok, és ha valaha találkoztunk volna, a nevedre biztosan emlékeznék.Nmate (talk) 20:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Pilot to General in 2 years?
Hi there, It seems to me the most interesting aspect of his life was left out: how we went from a pilot to a French general in just 2 years, and as a new immigrant. Does anyone have more info on how this happened? The article doesn't really address it. 138.162.128.52 (talk) 12:31, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

 * I do, he was general a titré missión (or something like that). Basicly he was appointed as general, from the rank of lieutenant-colonel, of the French army at duration of the mission which was negotiation of retreat of Czechoslovak army from Russia (as during the time it was biggest army in there, much bigger than Polish during intervetion for example) and he was representing as Czechoslovakia, so interests of French government. However he died before mission was finished, hence kept his rank of Lt. General in French air force, and was promoted post mortem to rank of general in Czechoslovak army and later to Slovak army. EllsworthSK (talk) 00:53, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Milan Rastislav Štefánik. 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/20050518071456/http://uk.exil.sk/?tree_id=99600&id=612&alt_link=milan-rastislav-stefanik-1919-slovensky-kral to http://uk.exil.sk/?tree_id=99600&id=612&alt_link=milan-rastislav-stefanik-1919-slovensky-kral

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) 09:28, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Death section not objective and spreading conspiracy theories
The Death section does not properly address the numerous investigations and their finding that are currently our best guess as to what really happened, and instead dedicates a whole paragraph to a conspiracy theory, which starts with "As rumour had it". I managed to find the source of this rumour in "Slovenská Pravda", which was a magazine created by the political Slovak People's Party.

I do not have the knowledge of research to properly find sources for everything, but historians seem to agree that rumours such as these were started by the SPP (HSĽS) as political moves (here is one interview with a Slovak historian that discusses this issue, for example )

I unfortunately do not have the skills to fix these issues at the moment, so instead I've at least removed the least objective paragraph (which was all speculation without sources) and I added a disclaimer, which will hopefully guide people to be vigilant Lavodan (talk) 21:43, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Milan Rastislav Štefánik


text: User talk:12.11.143.225

title: User talk:12.11.143.225


text:
Talk:Chip Tsao

Conservative?
um, conservative by whose standards? in hk, supporting the republicans (of the usa) is considered "liberal", you know? --little Alex 09:29, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

Next magazine
Anyone can add To's acticles in Next Magazine. To started his column with Next in mid-2005. Investorjoe 18:55, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

need update
To Kit did not hide his apparent disgust with the current Hong Kong administration, especially Tung Chee Hwa, the first Chief Executive of Hong Kong. In his newspaper column, he once openly called for Tung to step down —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.103.196.51 (talk • contribs) 05:33, 10 September 2006

Chip Tsao or To Kit?
He writes in HK Magazine as 'Chip Tsao', so as that is both his real and a published name, shouldn't it be the name of the article? Earthlyreason (talk) 07:56, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * To Kit or not To Kit, that is the question. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 02:03, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

2009 Racist article on Filipinos
Please help me in expanding this section and the sources. Trane X 30 March 2009 (UTC)

He also called Barack Obama a "monkey president"?
Here's the link to the original CHinese article he wrote for the major Hong Kong newspaper, AppleDaily.

http://appledaily.atnext.com/template/apple_sub/art_main.cfm?iss_id=20080112&sec_id=38167&subsec_id=38173&art_id=10633455&cat_id=3530509&coln_id=3530511 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikelowrey888 (talk • contribs) 01:50, 2 April 2009 (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 moved -- Aervanath (talk) 17:44, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

To Kit → Chip Tsao — In English, he is more widely known by his real name, Chip Tsao, and not by some romanisation of his Chinese pen name, which he doesn't use in English. — cab (talk) 09:24, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

 * Support - it's his real name; it's the name he writes under. Seems obvious.  I suggest that if there is no substantial opposition within a few days, you go ahead and make the change.Earthlyreason (talk) 06:03, 8 April 2009 (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.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chip Tsao. 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/20090331051845/http://hk-magazine.com/feature/war-home to http://hk-magazine.com/feature/war-home

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) 10:09, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Chip Tsao. 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/20090402121239/http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article-eastasia.asp?parentid=31608 to http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article-eastasia.asp?parentid=31608
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090402083957/http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20090330-197052/HK-magazine-regrets-columnists-racial-slur to http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20090330-197052/HK-magazine-regrets-columnists-racial-slur
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090403080708/http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/news/view/20090401-197404/HK-writer-So-sorry-I-crossed-the-line to http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/news/view/20090401-197404/HK-writer-So-sorry-I-crossed-the-line
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140718131040/http://news.sina.com.hk/news/20130722/-2-3022564/1.html to http://news.sina.com.hk/news/20130722/-2-3022564/1.html

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) 22:30, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chip Tsao


text:
Battle of the Cedars

The Battle of the Cedars (Bataille des Cèdres) was a series of military confrontations in the early stages of the American Revolutionary War that occurred during the Continental Army's invasion of Quebec, which began in September 1775. These skirmishes, which involved limited combat, occurred in May 1776 at and around the Cedars, 45 km west of Montreal, Quebec. Continental Army units were opposed by a small British Army detachment leading a larger force of Haudenosaunee warriors and Canadian Militia.

Brigadier-General Benedict Arnold, commanding the American garrison at Montreal, had placed a detachment of his troops at the Cedars in April 1776, after hearing of rumors of British and Indian military preparations to the west of Montreal. The detachment surrendered on May 19 after a confrontation with a combined British-Haudenosaunee force led by Captain George Forster. American reinforcements on their way to the Cedars were also captured after a brief skirmish on May 20. All of the prisoners were eventually released after negotiations between Forster and Arnold, who brought a sizable force into the area. The terms of the agreement required the Americans to release an equal number of British prisoners, but the deal was repudiated by the Second Continental Congress and no British prisoners were freed.

Colonel Timothy Bedel and Lieutenant Isaac Butterfield, commanders of the American force at the Cedars, were court-martialed and cashiered from the Continental Army for their roles in the affair. After distinguishing himself as a volunteer, Bedel was given a new commission in 1777. News of the engagement included greatly inflated reports of casualties and often included graphic but false accounts of atrocities committed by the Haudenosaunee, who made up the majority of the Forster's force.

Background
The Cedars is on the north shore of the Saint Lawrence River, about 45 km from the center of modern Montreal, to the southwest of the western tip of the island of Montreal, from which it is separated by the Ottawa River. The nearby rapids in the Saint Lawrence required portage, making the Cedars a strategic landing point for anyone navigating the river to or from Montreal. Crossing of the Ottawa River was made between Fort Anne and Quinze-Chênes, now Vaudreuil.

Montreal
In September 1775, early in the American Revolutionary War, a Continental Army under the direction first of Major General Philip Schuyler, and later of Brigadier General Richard Montgomery, invaded the British Province of Quebec. Montreal was taken without a fight on November 13, following the siege of Fort St. Jean. Montgomery left a garrison of troops under the command of Major General David Wooster in control of Montreal before leading the rest of the army to Quebec City. The occupation of Montreal was poorly managed, and relations between the Americans and the population, including those supportive of the Americans, deteriorated for a variety of reasons. One major factor that contributed to the poor relations was the American interdiction of trade with the Indian populations on the upper St. Lawrence and the Great Lakes, since the trade goods might be used to support British garrisons in those areas. The fur trade was economically important to the city, and its interruption affected both supporters and opponents of the American cause.

Following the American losses at the battle of Quebec at the end of 1775, Wooster eventually led reinforcements to Quebec. He arrived early in April 1776, and the military administration of Montreal passed temporarily to Colonel Moses Hazen before going to Brigadier General Benedict Arnold, who had been in command at Quebec. The American forces occupying the city numbered about 500, with additional forces at posts outside the city. Wooster had reported to General Schuyler as early as March 5 of rumored scheming between British troops and Indians to the west of the city. In response to these alarming reports, as well as the unauthorized departures of two fur traders and Claude de Lorimier, a British Indian agent from Montreal, Hazen had sent 400 troops commanded by Colonel Timothy Bedel of Bedel's Regiment to occupy a strategic position at the Cedars in early April. Lieutenant Isaac Butterfield led an advance force that arrived at the Cedars on April 26 and began construction of a wooden stockade fort, fortifying it with two 4-pound cannons. Bedel and the rest of the detachment arrived on May 6.

British call to arms
The Indian agent Lorimier traveled west to Oswegatchie, where a company of the 8th Regiment of Foot under the command of George Forster had occupied Fort de La Présentation. Lorimier proposed recruiting a force of Indians to launch an attack on Continental forces at Montreal from the west. When Forster agreed, Lorimier went to Saint Regis, where he recruited 100 Mohawk men from Akwesasne. Word of these activities led the American rebels to fortify the Cedars.

At Fort Niagara in early May the Loyalist captain, John Butler, held a conference with several hundred tribesmen, primarily from the Six Nations of the Haudenosaunee, in which his goal was to break pledges of neutrality some of them had made in 1775. Butler, an experienced Indian agent, plied the natives with liquor and tales of combat; he convinced more than 50 Seneca, Cayuga, and Onondaga warriors to join the British cause, as well as some warriors from further west. Historians are uncertain whether any of these recruits participated in the action at the Cedars, but it appears unlikely. Stanley (1973) is of the opinion that Indian participation was limited to those recruited by Lorimier, who went as far as Gananoque to recruit. Lanctot (1967) and Smith do not identify any specific tribes participating in the action.

James Stanley Goddard, one of the fur traders who left with Lorimier, traveled further west in an ultimately unsuccessful effort to raise an Indian force to oppose the Americans occupying Quebec. He reached Fort Michilimackinac in June, where the British commander, Captain Arent DePeyster, sent him recruiting among the Menominee and Winnebago tribes near Green Bay. DePeyster also sent out Joseph Ainsse, a local Indian interpreter, to recruit from tribes closer to the fort. None of the Indians recruited by these men reached Montreal until well after the Americans had left the city.

Prelude
Once forces began assembling at Oswegatchie, Lorimier made arrangements with a sympathetic priest near the Cedars for the provisioning of supplies for the troops. With the assistance of some men of the 8th Foot, he strategically hid several shallow-draft boats, known as bateaux, near a point where the Saint Lawrence River could be crossed.

Forster left Oswegatchie on May 12 with about 40 regular troops, 10 British and French-speaking Canadien militia, and 160 Haudenosaunee. On May 14, they picked up 44 more Haudenosaunee at Saint Francis, and camped at the western end of Saint Francis Lake on May 16. On May 17, Forster received scouting reports about the troop strength at the Cedars. The Indians were concerned about the number of troops, but news that the Americans were in retreat from Quebec emboldened them to act.

On May 15, Bedel left the Cedars, leaving Butterfield in charge of the fort. Bedel later claimed that the reason for his departure was to meet with the friendly Caughnawaga Indians. In his court martial, the judges concluded this claim was suspect. He returned to Montreal and reported that a force of 150 British troops of the 8th Foot and about 500 Haudenosaunee commanded by Forster was approaching. On this news, Colonel John Paterson sent Major Henry Sherburne with 140 men from his regiment toward the Cedars. Arnold, who was meeting with the retreating Continental Army command at Sorel, returned to Montreal when the news reached him and set about organizing a larger relief force.

The Cedars
Forster's force landed near the American-occupied fort on May 18, and sent in a demand for surrender. Butterfield countered with a request to withdraw under arms, which Forster refused. The parties exchanged fire. During the course of the exchange, Forster received word that Sherburne had crossed the Ottawa River from the island of Montreal to Quinze-Chênes but, believing the Cedars to have fallen already, had retreated back across the river. This news caused the besiegers to redouble their efforts the next day. Additional help arrived for the British in the form of about 40 Canadiens under Jean-Baptiste Testard de Montigny; Forster sent them to harass Sherburne. Word then came to Forster that Sherburne had resumed his advance; Butterfield, unaware of this, surrendered the fort. The terms of capitulation included a guarantee of the personal safety of the captured men. The Haudenosaunee plundered the fort's stores, and denied some of the captives small pouches of sometimes valuable personal items.

Quinze-Chênes
Sherburne reached Fort Anne, across the Ottawa River from Quinze-Chênes, on May 17. A scout he sent across the river the next day was captured by Lorimier. The scout was allowed to notify Sherburne of his capture; in his message he included a claim that 500 Indians had surrounded the fort at the Cedars. Consequently, Sherburne decided to delay crossing the river, and sent word back to Montreal requesting further assistance.

Sherburne decided to advance on May 20. Some of his men were apparently suffering from the aftereffects of smallpox, so these were left behind. Sherburne landed about 100 of his men at Quinze-Chênes, about 16 km from the Cedars. When word of this crossing reached Forster, he ordered Lorimier to take 100 Indians and stop Sherburne. Lorimier was at first only able to raise 40 warriors, but was joined on the way by another 40. Sherburne, not realizing that Butterfield had already surrendered, marched his troops right at Lorimier's advancing force. They fought for about 40 minutes before Sherburne, believing he was being attacked by a much larger force, surrendered. The Haudenosaunee claimed these captives as war spoils, since they were not part of the fort's garrison, and prepared to kill some of them in retaliation for their own losses. Only the intervention of Forster, who paid a ransom, prevented this; it did not prevent the Haudenosaunee from stripping the prisoners of all but their clothes.

Arnold's relief
Following his successes, Forster moved his forces, including all of the prisoners, down to Quinze-Chênes, where more Loyalist militia had assembled. Leaving some of the prisoners there, he advanced on May 23 to Fort Senneville, a fortified works on the southwest tip of Montreal Island that was owned by Montigny. In the meantime, Arnold gathered most of the few remaining forces in Montreal, and sent requests to the outposts around the city for additional troops. By May 24, he was entrenched at Lachine, south of the city, and his force had reached 450 men. Forster began to advance on Lachine, but decided to retreat back to Quinze-Chênes when his scouts notified him of Arnold's position. He also received intelligence from Montreal that Arnold's force was going to be massively reinforced—the reported number of reinforcements was 1,500 to 2,000 men, more than Arnold had available in the area.

Once his scouts reported Forster's retreat, Arnold gave chase. He reached Fort Senneville (which he burned) on May 26, just as Forster's men were landing on the far shore at Quinze-Chênes. Arnold decided to send a group of Caughnawagas, who were friendly to the Americans, with a demand that Forster release his prisoners and a threat that he would destroy area Indian villages if any of the prisoners were harmed. Forster countered that he would permit his Indians to kill the prisoners if Arnold attacked. Arnold attempted to cross the Ottawa River with some of his men in bateaux, but Forster used the four-pounders captured at the Cedars to drive them back.

[[File:BattleOfTheCedarsPhase2.svg|right|thumb|upright=1.0|Movements after the battle:

·A,B: British move to Fort Senneville, May 20–23

·C: British retreat, May 24–25

·D,E: American advance to Ottawa River crossing, May 26]] Arnold called a war council so the Americans could consider their options. He wanted to mount a surprise attack the next morning; Hazen, who had acquired significant experience fighting Indians in the French and Indian War, argued against the idea. The disagreement between the two men was severe enough that it nearly provoked Arnold to file charges of insubordination against Hazen. The council decided not to act, voting Arnold's proposed attack down. Early in the morning of May 27, a boat crossed the river carrying Sherburne and Forster's deputy, Lieutenant Parke. Forster, whose forces were somewhat reduced as some of the Indians had returned to their homes, had negotiated a prisoner exchange with Sherburne and Butterfield. After further negotiations, both Arnold and Forster agreed to terms. The American prisoners were returned to Arnold at Fort Anne on May 30, after being delayed for two days by high winds on the river.

Aftermath
The Americans never held up their side of the prisoner exchange. Formally repudiating the agreement over the protests of George Washington, Congress accused Forster of mistreating American prisoners by turning them over to the Indians. In a breach of etiquette, the letter containing the repudiation was delivered to Lieutenant General John Burgoyne, instead of the British commander-in-chief and governor of the province, Guy Carleton. The Congressional action may have been tainted by overly lurid accounts of the action—Charles Carroll, part of a Congressional delegation that was in Montreal at the time, reported that "a hundred or more [American troops] were barbarously murdered by savages." Arnold's report of the incident included otherwise unsubstantiated allegations that two prisoners were killed by Forster's Indians. Some histories of the action (for example, the 1882 history by Jones) include accounts of significant atrocities committed by the Indians, but little supporting evidence has been found. The Congressional repudiation complicated an attempted prisoner exchange in 1781 involving Burgoyne and Henry Laurens, a congressman from South Carolina whom the British were holding in the Tower of London; Laurens was eventually freed in exchange for a promise to help negotiate Lord Cornwallis's release.

Arnold initially blamed Bedel for the defeat. He removed both Bedel and Butterfield from command and sent them to Sorel for court-martial. Due to the army's retreat, the two men were not tried until August 1, 1776, at Fort Ticonderoga. Both were convicted and cashiered from the army. Bedel continued to volunteer his services, and following Burgoyne's surrender at Saratoga in October 1777, he was given a new commission by Congress.

The site of some of the skirmishes was designated a National Historic Site of Canada in 1928.

title: Battle of the Cedars


text:
Barrera vs. Morales trilogy

The Barrera versus Morales trilogy is one of boxing's most famous fight trilogies, involving two of Mexico's most revered boxers, Marco Antonio Barrera (nicknamed "The Baby Faced Assassin") and Erik "El Terrible" Morales.

Background
Barrera had been the WBO super bantamweight champion in the mid 1990s. Morales, from his part, was undefeated and he had won the WBC super bantamweight title, knocking out Daniel Zaragoza (being the first person to do so) in eleven rounds in 1997. Promoters soon began arrangements for a bout between the WBC and WBO super bantamweight title holders.

First bout
The first bout took place on February 19, 2000, at the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino, in Las Vegas and was televised on HBO Boxing. Morales was declared winner by split decision, with scores of 115-112, 114-113 and 113-114 and captured the WBO Super Bantamweight title. Many believed that Barrera deserved the decision. This bout was named as Ring Magazine's Fight of the Year for 2000, before being named as the best fight of all time in the same year.

Second bout
The second bout took place on June 22, 2002, in MGM Grand Garden Arena, Las Vegas. After the impact their first fight had on many of those that saw it, their second fight was made a Pay Per View event.

This is often described as the most tactical fight of the trilogy. Nevertheless, there were plenty of punches, but with Barrera fighting a more technical approach, Morales opted to use heavier punches, dropping Barrera to the canvas in the 7th with a blow to the abdomen, which was subsequently ruled a trip by referee Jay Nady. Barrera was nonetheless declared the winner by unanimous decision, with scores of 116-112 and 115-113 and captured the WBC Featherweight title. Many believed that Morales deserved the decision.

Third bout
The third and final bout of the trilogy was fought at the Super Featherweight division. Morales had gone on to win the WBC title in that division after defeating Jesús Chávez and Barrera had lost recognition as world boxing champion after being defeated by Filipino boxer Manny Pacquiao, so he moved up to the Super Featherweight division. The fight took place on November 27, 2004, at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas. Barrera was declared the winner and new WBC Super Featherweight champion by majority decision, with scores of 115-113, 115-114, and 114-114. This bout was named Ring Magazine's Fight of the Year for 2004.

Afterwards
Barrera and Morales later became friends. The two hosted a show on YouTube, named "Un Round Mas" ("One More Round") where they spoke about boxing fights, entertainment, politics and other topics. However, the show was promptly cancelled and the two now claim to have only a professional relationship.

On late March of 2022, the podcast was restarted since then

title: Barrera vs. Morales trilogy


text:
User talk:Rdavid01

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

 * Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try How to edit a page.
 * To sign your posts (for eg. on talk pages) use 	 ~  (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type (3 tildes).
 * You can experiment in the Sandbox.
 * For help, see Where to ask a question.
 * Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Five pillars, Neutral point of view, Civility, What Wikipedia is not
 * You can contribute in many ways: write a great article, fight vandalism, upload pictures, perform maintainance tasks, contribute to existing projects...

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop us a note at New user log.

-- utcursch | talk

title: User talk:Rdavid01


text:
Ma Sanli

Ma Sanli (Xiao'erjing: ﻣَﺎ صً لِ, ; 1914 – 11 February 2003) was a Chinese comedian in the traditional Xiangsheng or "crosstalk" style.

Biography
Ma was born in Beijing; he was of the Hui ethnic group, and the son and grandson of practitioners of Xiangsheng. He was apprenticed to Zhou Deshan in 1929. Ma was a Chinese Muslim, his faith being Islam.

He came to be noted for avoiding complication in a way that kept his performances accessible to a mass audience. He pursued his art in Tianjin.

He became a widower in 1984. In December 2001, Ma retired from the Xiangsheng trade.

On 11 February 2003, he died in Tianjin after a long battle with cancer.

Works

 * Nonsense
 * Drunken old man
 * Chasing
 * Car horn
 * Health check
 * The charm of the comic
 * Recipe
 * Eat dumplings
 * Sloppy
 * Eighty-one floor
 * Write Pair
 * Meeting the fans
 * Physiognomy
 * Emotional and health
 * Xijiangyue
 * Boast Residential
 * Remedies
 * Pairs
 * Three Character Classic
 * Pull foreign films
 * Buying Monkeys
 * Meeting Fiend
 * Yellow Crane Tower

title: Ma Sanli


text:
Kvarken

Kvarken (Kvarken, Norra Kvarken (as opposed to South Kvarken); Merenkurkku) is the narrow region of the Gulf of Bothnia separating the Bothnian Bay (the inner part of the gulf) from the Bothnian Sea. The distance from the Swedish mainland to the Finnish mainland is around 80 km, while the distance between the outermost islands is only 25 km. The water depth in the Kvarken region is only around 25 m. The region also has an unusual rate of land rising at almost 10 mm a year.

Several attempts to cross the strait swimming have been made, but cold water and currents have usually been insurmountable obstacles. The first successful crossing was carried out by Lennart Flygare, Pavio Grzelewski and Tore Klingberg, who on 24 July, 2018, swam from Valassaaret (Valsörarna) on the Finnish side to Holmöarna in Sweden. It took them 12 hours 2 minutes to cross the strait.

Kvarken Archipelago
On the Finnish side of Kvarken, there is a large archipelago, the Kvarken Archipelago, which includes the large islands Replot, Björkö and over 5,600 smaller islands. Most of it belongs to the municipality of Korsholm. Most of the small islands are inhabited. The archipelago is smaller on the Swedish side of the region, and the islands, part of Umeå Municipality, have much steeper shores. The Kvarken region was historically important also, because mail was delivered across Kvarken when the sea was completely frozen from the Swedish to the Finnish coast. This mail route was used frequently during the period when Finland was a part of Sweden.

During the Ice Ages, the Kvarken region was located underneath the Fennoscandian ice sheet. When the ice sheet retreated from the area around 9,600 years ago, the land, which had been compacted under the weight of the ice, rapidly expanded in a process known as isostatic rebound. The Kvarken region is known for having some of the fastest rates of this uplift on Earth, having risen 285 meters since glacial retreat. It continues to rise, demonstrating the effects of deglaciation on flat and shallow archipelagos. The Kvarken Archipelago is also notable for its unique moraine formations (called de Geer moraines), which form regular clusters that are parallel to the ice front. It is estimated that within about 2,000 years, the seafloor in this area will rise above water, splitting the Gulf of Bothnia into a southern gulf and northern lake.

In 2006, parts of the Kvarken Archipelago were added as an extension to the World Heritage Site of the High Coast (located on the western shore of the Gulf of Bothnia) in Sweden, because of its outstanding demonstration of isostatic uplift, and the influence of glacial retreat on the evolution of landforms and topography. The most Finnish parts of the High Coast/Kvarken Archipelago World Heritage Site are situated in the Korsholm municipality.

In the group of islands in the “middle” of the Kvarken region, in Swedish called Valsörarna – Finnish Valassaaret, is a 36 m lighthouse designed by Henry Lepaute who worked for Gustave Eiffel's engineering bureau. The structural similarity between the lighthouse (built in 1885) and the Eiffel Tower (built in 1889) is quite obvious. The lighthouse is now automated as are most lighthouses in Finland.

Bridge
There have been proposals for a bridge across the strait, at a cost of about 1.5 to 2 billion euros. There are islands in the strait, and the sum of the lengths of the probably three bridge parts would be about 40 km. The Swedish minister of finance has said it is an interesting idea, but the idea is still decades from being brought to fruition. There is a debate in the coastal cities on both sides, like Umeå and Vaasa. The official view from the Swedish and Finnish governments is that it is much too expensive, also put in regard that the cities are very small by European standards, as compared to Copenhagen and Malmö between the Oresund fixed link. The natural values of the area also make a bridge dubious.

title: Kvarken


text:
Bending

In applied mechanics, bending (also known as flexure) characterizes the behavior of a slender structural element subjected to an external load applied perpendicularly to a longitudinal axis of the element.

The structural element is assumed to be such that at least one of its dimensions is a small fraction, typically 1/10 or less, of the other two. When the length is considerably longer than the width and the thickness, the element is called a beam. For example, a closet rod sagging under the weight of clothes on clothes hangers is an example of a beam experiencing bending. On the other hand, a shell is a structure of any geometric form where the length and the width are of the same order of magnitude but the thickness of the structure (known as the 'wall') is considerably smaller. A large diameter, but thin-walled, short tube supported at its ends and loaded laterally is an example of a shell experiencing bending.

In the absence of a qualifier, the term bending is ambiguous because bending can occur locally in all objects. Therefore, to make the usage of the term more precise, engineers refer to a specific object such as; the bending of rods, the bending of beams, the bending of plates, the bending of shells and so on.

Quasi-static bending of beams
A beam deforms and stresses develop inside it when a transverse load is applied on it. In the quasi-static case, the amount of bending deflection and the stresses that develop are assumed not to change over time. In a horizontal beam supported at the ends and loaded downwards in the middle, the material at the over-side of the beam is compressed while the material at the underside is stretched. There are two forms of internal stresses caused by lateral loads:
 * Shear stress parallel to the lateral loading plus complementary shear stress on planes perpendicular to the load direction;
 * Direct compressive stress in the upper region of the beam, applicable mostly to cement concreted elements and,
 * Direct tensile stress, applicable to steel elements, and is at the lower region of the beam.

These last two forces form a couple or moment as they are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction. This bending moment resists the sagging deformation characteristic of a beam experiencing bending. The stress distribution in a beam can be predicted quite accurately when some simplifying assumptions are used.

Euler–Bernoulli bending theory

In the Euler–Bernoulli theory of slender beams, a major assumption is that 'plane sections remain plane'. In other words, any deformation due to shear across the section is not accounted for (no shear deformation). Also, this linear distribution is only applicable if the maximum stress is less than the yield stress of the material. For stresses that exceed yield, refer to article plastic bending. At yield, the maximum stress experienced in the section (at the furthest points from the neutral axis of the beam) is defined as the flexural strength.

Consider beams where the following are true:
 * The beam is originally straight and slender, and any taper is slight
 * The material is isotropic (or orthotropic), linear elastic, and homogeneous across any cross section (but not necessarily along its length)
 * Only small deflections are considered

In this case, the equation describing beam deflection ($$w$$) can be approximated as:
 * $$\cfrac{\mathrm{d}^2 w(x)}{\mathrm{d} x^2}=\frac{M(x)}{E(x) I(x)}$$

where the second derivative of its deflected shape with respect to $$x$$ is interpreted as its curvature, $$E$$ is the Young's modulus, $$I$$ is the area moment of inertia of the cross-section, and $$M$$ is the internal bending moment in the beam.

If, in addition, the beam is homogeneous along its length as well, and not tapered (i.e. constant cross section), and deflects under an applied transverse load $$q(x)$$, it can be shown that:

EI~\cfrac{\mathrm{d}^4 w(x)}{\mathrm{d} x^4} = q(x) $$ This is the Euler–Bernoulli equation for beam bending.

After a solution for the displacement of the beam has been obtained, the bending moment ($$M$$) and shear force ($$Q$$) in the beam can be calculated using the relations

M(x) = -EI~\cfrac{\mathrm{d}^2 w}{\mathrm{d} x^2} ~; Q(x) = \cfrac{\mathrm{d}M}{\mathrm{d}x}. $$

Simple beam bending is often analyzed with the Euler–Bernoulli beam equation. The conditions for using simple bending theory are:
 * 1) The beam is subject to pure bending. This means that the shear force is zero, and that no torsional or axial loads are present.
 * 2) The material is isotropic (or orthotropic) and homogeneous.
 * 3) The material obeys Hooke's law (it is linearly elastic and will not deform plastically).
 * 4) The beam is initially straight with a cross section that is constant throughout the beam length.
 * 5) The beam has an axis of symmetry in the plane of bending.
 * 6) The proportions of the beam are such that it would fail by bending rather than by crushing, wrinkling or sideways buckling.
 * 7) Cross-sections of the beam remain plane during bending.

Compressive and tensile forces develop in the direction of the beam axis under bending loads. These forces induce stresses on the beam. The maximum compressive stress is found at the uppermost edge of the beam while the maximum tensile stress is located at the lower edge of the beam. Since the stresses between these two opposing maxima vary linearly, there therefore exists a point on the linear path between them where there is no bending stress. The locus of these points is the neutral axis. Because of this area with no stress and the adjacent areas with low stress, using uniform cross section beams in bending is not a particularly efficient means of supporting a load as it does not use the full capacity of the beam until it is on the brink of collapse. Wide-flange beams (I-beams) and truss girders effectively address this inefficiency as they minimize the amount of material in this under-stressed region.

The classic formula for determining the bending stress in a beam under simple bending is:
 * $$\sigma_x = \frac{M_z y}{I_z} = \frac{M_z}{W_z}$$

where
 * $${\sigma_x}$$ is the bending stress
 * $$M_z$$ – the moment about the neutral axis
 * $$y$$ – the perpendicular distance to the neutral axis
 * $$I_z$$ – the second moment of area about the neutral axis z.
 * $$W_z$$ - the Resistance Moment about the neutral axis z. $$W_z = I_z / y$$

Plastic bending
The equation $$\sigma = \tfrac{M y}{I_x}$$ is valid only when the stress at the extreme fiber (i.e., the portion of the beam farthest from the neutral axis) is below the yield stress of the material from which it is constructed. At higher loadings the stress distribution becomes non-linear, and ductile materials will eventually enter a plastic hinge state where the magnitude of the stress is equal to the yield stress everywhere in the beam, with a discontinuity at the neutral axis where the stress changes from tensile to compressive. This plastic hinge state is typically used as a limit state in the design of steel structures.

Complex or asymmetrical bending
The equation above is only valid if the cross-section is symmetrical. For homogeneous beams with asymmetrical sections, the maximum bending stress in the beam is given by

 * $$\sigma_x(y,z) = - \frac {M_z~I_y + M_y~I_{yz}} {I_y~I_z - I_{yz}^2}y + \frac {M_y~I_z + M_z~I_{yz}} {I_y~I_z - I_{yz}^2}z$$

where $$y,z$$ are the coordinates of a point on the cross section at which the stress is to be determined as shown to the right, $$M_y$$ and $$M_z$$ are the bending moments about the y and z centroid axes, $$I_y$$ and $$I_z$$ are the second moments of area (distinct from moments of inertia) about the y and z axes, and $$I_{yz}$$ is the product of moments of area. Using this equation it is possible to calculate the bending stress at any point on the beam cross section regardless of moment orientation or cross-sectional shape. Note that $$M_y, M_z, I_y, I_z, I_{yz}$$ do not change from one point to another on the cross section.

Large bending deformation
For large deformations of the body, the stress in the cross-section is calculated using an extended version of this formula. First the following assumptions must be made:

 * 1) Assumption of flat sections – before and after deformation the considered section of body remains flat (i.e., is not swirled).
 * 2) Shear and normal stresses in this section that are perpendicular to the normal vector of cross section have no influence on normal stresses that are parallel to this section.

Large bending considerations should be implemented when the bending radius $$\rho$$ is smaller than ten section heights h:

 * $$\rho < 10 h.$$

With those assumptions the stress in large bending is calculated as:

\sigma = \frac {F} {A} + \frac {M} {\rho A} + {\frac {M} {{I_x}'}}y{\frac {\rho}{\rho +y}} $$

where
 * $$F$$ is the normal force
 * $$A$$ is the section area
 * $$M$$ is the bending moment
 * $$\rho$$ is the local bending radius (the radius of bending at the current section)
 * $${{I_x}'}$$ is the area moment of inertia along the x-axis, at the $$y$$ place (see Steiner's theorem)
 * $$y$$ is the position along y-axis on the section area in which the stress $$\sigma$$ is calculated.

When bending radius $$\rho$$ approaches infinity and $$y\ll\rho$$, the original formula is back:
 * $$\sigma = {F \over A} \pm \frac {My}{I} $$.

Timoshenko bending theory
In 1921, Timoshenko improved upon the Euler–Bernoulli theory of beams by adding the effect of shear into the beam equation. The kinematic assumptions of the Timoshenko theory are: However, normals to the axis are not required to remain perpendicular to the axis after deformation.
 * normals to the axis of the beam remain straight after deformation
 * there is no change in beam thickness after deformation

The equation for the quasistatic bending of a linear elastic, isotropic, homogeneous beam of constant cross-section beam under these assumptions is

EI~\cfrac{\mathrm{d}^4 w}{\mathrm{d} x^4} = q(x) - \cfrac{EI}{k A G}~\cfrac{\mathrm{d}^2 q}{\mathrm{d} x^2} $$ where $$I$$ is the area moment of inertia of the cross-section, $$A$$ is the cross-sectional area, $$G$$ is the shear modulus, $$k$$ is a shear correction factor, and $$q(x)$$ is an applied transverse load. For materials with Poisson's ratios ($$\nu$$) close to 0.3, the shear correction factor for a rectangular cross-section is approximately

k = \cfrac{5 + 5\nu}{6 + 5\nu} $$

The rotation ($$\varphi(x)$$) of the normal is described by the equation

\cfrac{\mathrm{d}\varphi}{\mathrm{d}x} = -\cfrac{\mathrm{d}^2w}{\mathrm{d}x^2} -\cfrac{q(x)}{kAG} $$ The bending moment ($$M$$) and the shear force ($$Q$$) are given by

M(x) = -EI~ \cfrac{\mathrm{d}\varphi}{\mathrm{d}x} ~; Q(x) = kAG\left(\cfrac{\mathrm{d}w}{\mathrm{d}x}-\varphi\right) = -EI~\cfrac{\mathrm{d}^2\varphi}{\mathrm{d}x^2} = \cfrac{\mathrm{d}M}{\mathrm{d}x} $$

Beams on elastic foundations
According to Euler–Bernoulli, Timoshenko or other bending theories, the beams on elastic foundations can be explained. In some applications such as rail tracks, foundation of buildings and machines, ships on water, roots of plants etc., the beam subjected to loads is supported on continuous elastic foundations (i.e. the continuous reactions due to external loading is distributed along the length of the beam)

Dynamic bending of beams
The dynamic bending of beams, also known as flexural vibrations of beams, was first investigated by Daniel Bernoulli in the late 18th century. Bernoulli's equation of motion of a vibrating beam tended to overestimate the natural frequencies of beams and was improved marginally by Rayleigh in 1877 by the addition of a mid-plane rotation. In 1921 Stephen Timoshenko improved the theory further by incorporating the effect of shear on the dynamic response of bending beams. This allowed the theory to be used for problems involving high frequencies of vibration where the dynamic Euler–Bernoulli theory is inadequate. The Euler-Bernoulli and Timoshenko theories for the dynamic bending of beams continue to be used widely by engineers.

Euler–Bernoulli theory
The Euler–Bernoulli equation for the dynamic bending of slender, isotropic, homogeneous beams of constant cross-section under an applied transverse load $$q(x,t)$$ is

EI~\cfrac{\partial^4 w}{\partial x^4} + m~\cfrac{\partial^2 w}{\partial t^2} = q(x,t) $$ where $$E$$ is the Young's modulus, $$I$$ is the area moment of inertia of the cross-section, $$w(x,t)$$ is the deflection of the neutral axis of the beam, and $$m$$ is mass per unit length of the beam.

Free vibrations
For the situation where there is no transverse load on the beam, the bending equation takes the form

EI~\cfrac{\partial^4 w}{\partial x^4} + m~\cfrac{\partial^2 w}{\partial t^2} = 0 $$ Free, harmonic vibrations of the beam can then be expressed as

w(x,t) = \text{Re}[\hat{w}(x)~e^{-i\omega t}] \quad \implies \quad \cfrac{\partial^2 w}{\partial t^2} = -\omega^2~w(x,t) $$ and the bending equation can be written as

EI~\cfrac{\mathrm{d}^4 \hat{w}}{\mathrm{d}x^4} - m\omega^2\hat{w} = 0 $$ The general solution of the above equation is

\hat{w} = A_1\cosh(\beta x) + A_2\sinh(\beta x) + A_3\cos(\beta x) + A_4\sin(\beta x) $$ where $$A_1,A_2,A_3,A_4$$ are constants and $$ \beta := \left(\cfrac{m}{EI}~\omega^2\right)^{1/4} $$

Timoshenko–Rayleigh theory
In 1877, Rayleigh proposed an improvement to the dynamic Euler–Bernoulli beam theory by including the effect of rotational inertia of the cross-section of the beam. Timoshenko improved upon that theory in 1922 by adding the effect of shear into the beam equation. Shear deformations of the normal to the mid-surface of the beam are allowed in the Timoshenko–Rayleigh theory.

The equation for the bending of a linear elastic, isotropic, homogeneous beam of constant cross-section under these assumptions is

\begin{align} & EI~\frac{\partial^4 w}{\partial x^4} + m~\frac{\partial^2 w}{\partial t^2} - \left(J + \frac{E I m}{k A G}\right)\frac{\partial^4 w}{\partial x^2~\partial t^2} + \frac{J m}{k A G}~\frac{\partial^4 w}{\partial t^4} \\[6pt] = {} & q(x,t) + \frac{J}{k A G}~\frac{\partial^2 q}{\partial t^2} - \frac{EI}{k A G}~\frac{\partial^2 q}{\partial x^2} \end{align} $$

where $$J = \tfrac{mI}{A}$$ is the polar moment of inertia of the cross-section, $$m = \rho A$$ is the mass per unit length of the beam, $$\rho$$ is the density of the beam, $$A$$ is the cross-sectional area, $$G$$ is the shear modulus, and $$k$$ is a shear correction factor. For materials with Poisson's ratios ($$\nu$$) close to 0.3, the shear correction factor are approximately

\begin{align} k &= \frac{5 + 5\nu}{6 + 5\nu} \quad \text{rectangular cross-section}\\[6pt] &= \frac{6 + 12\nu + 6\nu^2}{7 + 12\nu + 4\nu^2} \quad \text{circular cross-section} \end{align} $$

Free vibrations
For free, harmonic vibrations the Timoshenko–Rayleigh equations take the form

EI~\cfrac{\mathrm{d}^4 \hat{w}}{\mathrm{d} x^4} + m\omega^2\left(\cfrac{J}{m} + \cfrac{E I}{k A G}\right)\cfrac{\mathrm{d}^2 \hat{w}}{\mathrm{d} x^2} + m\omega^2\left(\cfrac{\omega^2 J}{k A G}-1\right)~\hat{w} = 0 $$ This equation can be solved by noting that all the derivatives of $$w$$ must have the same form to cancel out and hence as solution of the form $$e^{kx}$$ may be expected. This observation leads to the characteristic equation

\alpha~k^4 + \beta~k^2 + \gamma = 0 ~; \alpha := EI ~, \beta := m\omega^2\left(\cfrac{J}{m} + \cfrac{E I}{k A G}\right) ~, \gamma := m\omega^2\left(\cfrac{\omega^2 J}{k A G}-1\right) $$ The solutions of this quartic equation are

k_1 = +\sqrt{z_+} ~, k_2 = -\sqrt{z_+} ~, k_3 = +\sqrt{z_-} ~, k_4 = -\sqrt{z_-} $$ where

z_+ := \cfrac{-\beta + \sqrt{\beta^2 - 4\alpha\gamma}}{2\alpha} ~, z_-:= \cfrac{-\beta - \sqrt{\beta^2 - 4\alpha\gamma}}{2\alpha} $$ The general solution of the Timoshenko-Rayleigh beam equation for free vibrations can then be written as

\hat{w} = A_1~e^{k_1 x} + A_2~e^{-k_1 x} + A_3~e^{k_3 x} + A_4~e^{-k_3 x} $$

Quasistatic bending of plates

The defining feature of beams is that one of the dimensions is much larger than the other two. A structure is called a plate when it is flat and one of its dimensions is much smaller than the other two. There are several theories that attempt to describe the deformation and stress in a plate under applied loads two of which have been used widely. These are
 * the Kirchhoff–Love theory of plates (also called classical plate theory)
 * the Mindlin–Reissner plate theory (also called the first-order shear theory of plates)

Kirchhoff–Love theory of plates
The assumptions of Kirchhoff–Love theory are
 * straight lines normal to the mid-surface remain straight after deformation
 * straight lines normal to the mid-surface remain normal to the mid-surface after deformation
 * the thickness of the plate does not change during a deformation.

These assumptions imply that

\begin{align} u_\alpha(\mathbf{x}) & = - x_3~\frac{\partial w^0}{\partial x_\alpha} = - x_3~w^0_{,\alpha} ~;\alpha=1,2 \\ u_3(\mathbf{x}) & = w^0(x_1, x_2) \end{align} $$ where $$\mathbf{u}$$ is the displacement of a point in the plate and $$w^0$$ is the displacement of the mid-surface.

The strain-displacement relations are

\begin{align} \varepsilon_{\alpha\beta} & = - x_3~w^0_{,\alpha\beta} \\ \varepsilon_{\alpha 3} & = 0 \\ \varepsilon_{33} & = 0 \end{align} $$

The equilibrium equations are

M_{\alpha\beta,\alpha\beta} + q(x) = 0 ~; M_{\alpha\beta} := \int_{-h}^h x_3~\sigma_{\alpha\beta}~dx_3 $$ where $$q(x)$$ is an applied load normal to the surface of the plate.

In terms of displacements, the equilibrium equations for an isotropic, linear elastic plate in the absence of external load can be written as

w^0_{,1111} + 2~w^0_{,1212} + w^0_{,2222} = 0 $$ In direct tensor notation,

\nabla^2\nabla^2 w = 0 $$

Mindlin–Reissner theory of plates
The special assumption of this theory is that normals to the mid-surface remain straight and inextensible but not necessarily normal to the mid-surface after deformation. The displacements of the plate are given by

\begin{align} u_\alpha(\mathbf{x}) & = - x_3~\varphi_\alpha ~;\alpha=1,2 \\ u_3(\mathbf{x}) & = w^0(x_1, x_2) \end{align} $$ where $$\varphi_\alpha$$ are the rotations of the normal.

The strain-displacement relations that result from these assumptions are

\begin{align} \varepsilon_{\alpha\beta} & = - x_3~\varphi_{\alpha,\beta} \\ \varepsilon_{\alpha 3} & = \cfrac{1}{2}~\kappa\left(w^0_{,\alpha}- \varphi_\alpha\right) \\ \varepsilon_{33} & = 0 \end{align} $$ where $$\kappa$$ is a shear correction factor.

The equilibrium equations are

\begin{align} & M_{\alpha\beta,\beta}-Q_\alpha = 0 \\ & Q_{\alpha,\alpha}+q = 0 \end{align} $$ where

Q_\alpha := \kappa~\int_{-h}^h \sigma_{\alpha 3}~dx_3 $$

Dynamics of thin Kirchhoff plates
The dynamic theory of plates determines the propagation of waves in the plates, and the study of standing waves and vibration modes. The equations that govern the dynamic bending of Kirchhoff plates are

M_{\alpha\beta,\alpha\beta} - q(x,t) = J_1~\ddot{w}^0 - J_3~\ddot{w}^0_{,\alpha\alpha} $$ where, for a plate with density $$\rho = \rho(x)$$,

J_1 := \int_{-h}^h \rho~dx_3 ~; J_3 := \int_{-h}^h x_3^2~\rho~dx_3 $$ and

\ddot{w}^0 = \frac{\partial^2 w^0}{\partial t^2} ~; \ddot{w}^0_{,\alpha\beta} = \frac{\partial^2 \ddot{w}^0}{\partial x_\alpha\, \partial x_\beta} $$

The figures below show some vibrational modes of a circular plate.

title: Bending